It's rather silly to make claims about what Monero will be in the future. It is what it is today. Tomorrow, it will be what participants cause it to become in the intervening time. There are no insoluble problems of significance on the horizon. There are numerous very soluble problems, which need work.
For example, naive timing analysis is a pretty easily solvable problem, technically. Claiming that those solutions will not be applied in a suitable time-frame is just nattering negative nabobery. It is quite suitable and appropriate to solve that problem after the mix-net is working. In our neighborhood of space-time, things happen in a well-defined partial order. If you try to get ahead of that order, you might get a speeding ticket from God.
For every measure, there is a counter-measure. When the cost of measure and counter-measure is consistently and overwhelmingly asymmetric, a nimble defender can hold much ground. That's sort of fundamental to most crypto. I see no reason to believe that Monero cannot be evolved into a state of sufficient privacy to make it infeasible for any real entity to defeat its functions at at level which makes it unusable for a substantial minority of actual candidate users. Monero can take advantage of numerous force multipliers, and hold much ground, despite its present diminutive stature. As its stature grows, it will be able to hold more yet.
Everything will always be vulnerable, because you can't even know the rules of the game. The laws of physics are not at all certain or clear, except in statistical terms. Thus every real system, implemented in physical reality, has some unknown, unknowable, potential to violate your assumptions. Chasing after a perfect system is a complete and utter snark hunt. It's good math, but bad engineering. Systems are only ever either good enough or not good enough, for any well-defined purpose and criterion of evaluation. Pretending that illusory criteria are normative is either Bad Faith or folly.
TL;DR: Monero has deficiencies. They are being addressed by development. If you want it to go faster, try submitting a pull request. The boogeyman is not likely to kill us any time soon.
Topic: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency - page 1661. (Read 4670972 times)
In its present form it won't really scale much better or worse than bitcoin. The constant factor of increased size won't really matter.
That all blockchain based coins have scaling issues is a better argument.
That all blockchain based coins have scaling issues is a better argument.
The scaling issue ties in holistically with mining centralization (wherein one or two pools now control > 50% of Bitcoin's hashrate), but avoiding a full client is not the only reason for the use of pools, it is also to deal with variance.
Agreed if you assume mostly only pools are running the full client, then the constant factor of bloat isn't really a difference from Bitcoin because large pools can handle the resource requirements.
However if ever pools were to be decentralized too such that we end up with many smaller pools each running from a users home computer over a fast DSL or cable connection, Monero's larger constant size factor could present an obstacle.
All Monero clients need enough transaction history in order to find transactions to mix with for each of the fractional amounts. So this might be more heavyweight than Bitcoin lite clients, but I haven't run the calculations to see if this is significant in any facet.
Lets be honest here, its not going to scale well enough for that. Its going to be for people who want to buy drugs on the internet and people who want to hide from the irs 
The police state will be coming after both such uses.
Dude. what the fuck is your point? that this currency is not able to be untrackable by the fucking nsa? Da fuq - go copy it out and write your own coin mr. expert programmer. stop dumping on innovation you retard.
have a nice life, loser!
have a nice life, loser!
Your bruised personal pump and dump aspirations aside, sober analysis is useful for those who are serious. Analysis is part of the process of innovation.
I may be biased so I am interested to read analytical rebuttals. Ad hominem rebuttals add nothing.
Monero might turn out to be the equivalent of Bitcoin, but for those who want private transactions like private companies(dell etc), and ordinary people who want privacy.
Lets be honest here, its not going to scale well enough for that. Its going to be for people who want to buy drugs on the internet and people who want to hide from the irs
In its present form it won't really scale much better or worse than bitcoin. The constant factor of increased size won't really matter.
That all blockchain based coins have scaling issues is a better argument.
Monero might turn out to be the equivalent of Bitcoin, but for those who want private transactions like private companies(dell etc), and ordinary people who want privacy.
Lets be honest here, its not going to scale well enough for that. Its going to be for people who want to buy drugs on the internet and people who want to hide from the irs
I think my 1 block chain per city and a blockchain to facilitate trades between city currencies answers the scalability problem atleast well enough.
There are numerous problems with that, but I don't time to go off on that technical tangent right now. Apologies I know that isn't really fair, but sorry I must choose to be unfair with my time allocation at the moment.
Ultimately no blockchains scale well. Its just a product of their decentralized nature.
As an expert programmer I know to be very wary of over generalizing. Having studied some of the details of the solutions (e.g. see the mini-block chain posts and even the posts about orphan rate vs. block period I've made), I believe you are mistaken. But I can't concretely prove you are (yet).
But yes you are right i didn't address any criticisms you may have with i2p. How i would argue against that is to say that while you may be right, and even if i accept arguendo that you are, masking the ip address origin of a transaction is an entirely distinct problem and one with a much larger scope.
Obfuscating the IP address for all internet activities has a different set of technical parameters than obfuscating it for interacting with the crypto-currency network. For example, Tor and I2P require low-latency (which makes them susceptible to timing analysis), but crypto-currencies don't. I told them that in August 2013 and still nobody has acted.
As a person who knows about the Dunning Kruger Effect I tend to be wary of people who tell me they are experts.
With that said i understand that one must budget his time. If you actually can make truely scalable blockchains than for christ sake please dont waste your time on me responding to my comments. I have a reasonable objective assessment of my own value and i am not valuable enough to be worth consuming the time of someone who knows how to solve that problem. Please just go solve it now. Before you get hit by a bus or something.
I think my 1 block chain per city and a blockchain to facilitate trades between city currencies answers the scalability problem atleast well enough.
There are numerous problems with that, but I don't time to go off on that technical tangent right now. Apologies I know that isn't really fair, but sorry I must choose to be unfair with my time allocation at the moment.
Ultimately no blockchains scale well. Its just a product of their decentralized nature.
As an expert programmer I know to be very wary of over generalizing. Having studied some of the details of the solutions (e.g. see the mini-block chain posts and even the posts about orphan rate vs. block period I've made), I believe you are mistaken. But I can't concretely prove you are (yet).
But yes you are right i didn't address any criticisms you may have with i2p. How i would argue against that is to say that while you may be right, and even if i accept arguendo that you are, masking the ip address origin of a transaction is an entirely distinct problem and one with a much larger scope.
Obfuscating the IP address for all internet activities has a different set of technical parameters than obfuscating it for interacting with the crypto-currency network. For example, Tor and I2P require low-latency (which makes them susceptible to timing analysis), but crypto-currencies don't. I told them that in August 2013 and still nobody has acted.
Dude. what the fuck is your point? that this currency is not able to be untrackable by the fucking nsa? Da fuq - go copy it out and write your own coin mr. expert programmer. stop dumping on innovation you retard.
have a nice life, loser!
Monero might turn out to be the equivalent of Bitcoin, but for those who want private transactions like private companies(dell etc), and ordinary people who want privacy.
I think my 1 block chain per city and a blockchain to facilitate trades between city currencies answers the scalability problem atleast well enough.
There are numerous problems with that, but I don't time to go off on that technical tangent right now. Apologies I know that isn't really fair, but sorry I must choose to be unfair with my time allocation at the moment.
Ultimately no blockchains scale well. Its just a product of their decentralized nature.
As an expert programmer I know to be very wary of over generalizing. Having studied some of the details of the solutions (e.g. see the mini-block chain posts and even the posts about orphan rate vs. block period I've made), I believe you are mistaken. But I can't concretely prove you are (yet).
But yes you are right i didn't address any criticisms you may have with i2p. How i would argue against that is to say that while you may be right, and even if i accept arguendo that you are, masking the ip address origin of a transaction is an entirely distinct problem and one with a much larger scope.
Obfuscating the IP address for all internet activities has a different set of technical parameters than obfuscating it for interacting with the crypto-currency network. For example, Tor and I2P require low-latency (which makes them susceptible to timing analysis), but crypto-currencies don't. I told them that in August 2013 and still nobody has acted.
It can work for 99% of people, if those people just use it as a form of savings account, a tax haven in the cloud if you will. Obviously not if they are trying to use it for all of their expenditures. But no blockchain will ever scale to that point. Certainly bitcoin will never be able to be used by average joe for day to day transactions. Atleast not in a reasonably decentralized form.
the point is that monero is perfect for "survive the coming global police state" Large amounts in and large amounts in and large amounts out. Put 10,000 dollars in, and when ever you need some cash, withdraw atleast 1000 of it at a time.
the point is that monero is perfect for "survive the coming global police state" Large amounts in and large amounts in and large amounts out. Put 10,000 dollars in, and when ever you need some cash, withdraw atleast 1000 of it at a time.
You are conflating two orthogonal issues:
1. Whether Monero's ring signatures can scale.
2. Whether the I2P+ring is secure against the global police state.
Even if you are correct that limited transactions would allow #1 to scale, it doesn't diminish the fact that #2 is not secure against the global police state.
Personally I want an anonymous coin that I can also transact in, not just a saving account. Because without transactions, the coin won't survive or have network effects value. Again see the mathematical analysis of valuations that we did.
I think my 1 block chain per city and a blockchain to facilitate trades between city currencies answers the scalability problem atleast well enough. Ultimately no blockchains scale well. Its just a product of their decentralized nature.
But yes you are right i didn't address any criticisms you may have with i2p. How i would argue against that is to say that while you may be right, and even if i accept arguendo that you are, masking the ip address origin of a transaction is an entirely distinct problem and one with a much larger scope. It is not specifically a problem of how do you hide the source of transactions that are broadcast, its how do you avoid revealing the source of any information that is being communicated over a large network. I dont think it is the responsibility of cryptocurrency developers to solve this problem. I dont think its reasonable to expect cryptocurrency developers to also tackle this problem. If they did than that would be awesome, and it would have much wider reaching implications than just cryptocurrency.
FYI, rpietila wrote that perhaps it was intended that Monero's first priority is not be the NSA-blinded coin.
Basically, just take this one step at a time. NSA stuff can come after the fundamentals are done imo
You are not a programmer? Programmers understand that holistic design can cascade into the fundamentals.
Edit: if you see my first post in this thread today, I quoted myself from August 2013 wherein I made the point to the anoncoin and I2P developers the issue that low-latency Chaum mix-nets (e.g. Tor and I2P) are not blinding to the NSA. That is almost a year and still nothing accomplished on this fundamental issue (caveat that Zerocash in theory doen't need to blind your IP address, but I enumerated some severe tradeoffs, and this doesn't apply to Zerocoin).
I have to point out that Cryptonite would scale to that point <...>
Sorry, what difference between Cryptonote & Cryptonite? Few times saw this note->nite, trying to understand ... Is it typo error [I/O is near], or what? I just learning English everyday, but then i comes to crypto o0I have to point out that Cryptonite would scale to that point with its "mini-blockchain", but it doesn't help much if you want anonymity. Maybe next there will be a scalable currency with anonymity. I doubt there will be one cryptocurrency for all uses...
The creator of the mini-block chain, bitfreak!, and I had a private message exchange about this recently as follows.
Very interesting. Do you think cryptos will thrive or die during this episode?
Thrive!
but it will, I2P will close the last hole
Er. No. Try rereading my post that started this discussion today. Follow the link in that post. I even quoted the I2P website which admits it doesn't protect against a global adversary.
Basically, just take this one step at a time. NSA stuff can come after the fundamentals are done imo
As long as the NSA aren't doing the fundamentals....
Basically, just take this one step at a time. NSA stuff can come after the fundamentals are done imo
May be too late to wait to add real protection that I2P and Tor don't provide. ETA for global sovereign debt collapse starts Oct. 2015.
P.S. note I edited my post to change "useless" to "not sufficient".
P.S. note I edited my post to change "useless" to "not sufficient".
Why Oct. 2015?
See the last slide on the post that I had linked to.
Armstrong's A.I. computer model (which was fed all the data of the history of the world, $million of data collected from ancient coins, manuscripts, even for example pulling up all the data from old newspaper archives around the world) made those predictions in 1992 and they have all come true. The last item on that slide is the Oct 2015 target date for the "big bang" of the global sovereign debt crisis.
You may read chronologically (not right-to-left lol) backwards in that Mad Max thread (see also the Dark Enlightenment and Economic Devastation threads too) to get my detailed analysis and discussion. I can't summarize it for you.
Note everything won't go to hell exactly on Oct 2015. That is when the gears of acceleration will be set in motion, because the USA's current economic bounce due to capital inflows from abroad will have peaked.
Edit: Armstrong managed the $1+ trillion Japanese sovereign (Postal) fund in the past. This is the largest hedge fund manager ever.
Very interesting. Do you think cryptos will thrive or die during this episode?
2. Whether the I2P+ring is secure against the global police state.
Even if you are correct that limited transactions would allow #1 to scale, it doesn't diminish the fact that #2 is not secure against the global police state.
Who really needs to be secure against "global police state", must have full-anon internet connection anyway.Even if you are correct that limited transactions would allow #1 to scale, it doesn't diminish the fact that #2 is not secure against the global police state.
Everyone who has large wealth that they don't want confiscated by the bankrupted western socialism.
Agreed it requires some way to fully anonymize our interaction with the crypto-currency, but if you are implying that every aspect of the internet must be anonymous, then I disagree.
For example, some may wish to use the fully anonymous crypto-currency with mostly offline activities, so only their interaction with the coin's network needs to be protected. There are many other online scenarios as well.
Monero alone doesnt have to be 100000% secure against any theoretical risk. Who needs this security level,...
Snowden's revelations means it is not theoretical. Also I provided documentation that the G20 are actively ramping up their plans.
Again, "Everyone who has large wealth that they don't want confiscated by the bankrupted western socialism".
...most combine different techniques and systems (anyway).
Dont act like a privacy coin must include its own anonymity network as new network layer.
Dont act like a privacy coin must include its own anonymity network as new network layer.
I know of no set of techniques for mining and or transacting on a crypto-currency that is nearly always anonymous to the NSA, except perhaps using an unregistered connection to the internet (which can't scale for most).
2. Whether the I2P+ring is secure against the global police state.
Even if you are correct that limited transactions would allow #1 to scale, it doesn't diminish the fact that #2 is not secure against the global police state.
Who really needs to be secure against "global police state", must have full-anon internet connection anyway.Even if you are correct that limited transactions would allow #1 to scale, it doesn't diminish the fact that #2 is not secure against the global police state.
Monero alone doesnt have to be 100000% secure against any theoretical risk. Who needs this security level, most combine different techniques and systems (anyway).
Dont act like a privacy coin must include its own anonymity network as new network layer.
May be too late to wait to add real protection that I2P and Tor don't provide. ETA for global sovereign debt collapse starts Oct. 2015.
P.S. note I edited my post to change "useless" to "not sufficient".
P.S. note I edited my post to change "useless" to "not sufficient".
Why Oct. 2015?
See the last slide on the post that I had linked to.
Armstrong's A.I. computer model (which was fed all the data of the history of the world, $million of data collected from ancient coins, manuscripts, even for example pulling up all the data from old newspaper archives around the world) made those predictions in 1992 and they have all come true. The last item on that slide is the Oct 2015 target date for the "big bang" of the global sovereign debt crisis.
You may read chronologically (not right-to-left lol) backwards in that Mad Max thread (see also the Dark Enlightenment and Economic Devastation threads too) to get my detailed analysis and discussion. I can't summarize it for you.
Note everything won't go to hell exactly on Oct 2015. That is when the gears of acceleration will be set in motion, because the USA's current economic bounce due to capital inflows from abroad will have peaked.
Edit: Armstrong managed the $1+ trillion Japanese sovereign (Postal) fund in the past. This is the largest hedge fund manager ever.
This is useless against the hunt for wealth coming from the bankrupt socialism in the G20 countries:
Dude..Even bitcoin is not immune to the NSA. thats too far fetched now imo....NSA and Quantam Compute immunity that so many people want, comes with time, implementing I2P is still a great start for any coin, NSA immunity and such can come after.....May be too late to wait to add real protection that I2P and Tor don't provide. ETA for global sovereign debt collapse starts Oct. 2015.
P.S. note I edited my post to change "useless" to "not sufficient".
Why Oct. 2015?
Jump to: