Topic: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency - page 1954. (Read 4670562 times)

what is the best method of converting bitcoin to usd.

I see that there are methods to buy bitcoin. but the methods to convert bitcoin to usd are wire transfer and that costs too much money.

I dont own any bitcoin and would like to buy some mro. hate all these conversion stuff. thanks.

Cryptonote exchange is def the way to go, I always get my coins and they do "not host funds in hotwallets." Plus I think MRO is cheaper on there if I'm not mistaken.

if you happen to mine booberry and monero on same machine, your hash rate on monero will be cut in half.
4 cores mining monero only 110 and 4 cores idle
4 cores minining monero  63  and 4 cores mining boolberry.

just to let you know.

People tend to forget there is a market (and a huge one) for traceable transactions.
- Public spending
- Donations

I have the feeling people are implying anonymity is better than transparency. Fact it is one is not superior to another. They are different. And, dare I say, complementary.

And it is not even a matter of good guy and bad guy. Just read about sousveillance and you will understand how traceability may help the society as a whole as much as anonymity can.

Usually stick to minerpool.org. What one are you using?

Cool take your time hmm wanna buy more before the booom

sure, the gui will be just an alternative good to have but not a must have.

I kinda like it the way it is to be honest. It just kinda offers a delicate balance and offers to teach others how to actually compute.

Work on  a _native_ QT wallet has been started.

Any news about the GUI?

Thread name is fine, its just a headline before you get into details. I mean privacy is vague term too, compared to say "unlinkable transactions" which can at least potentially have a precise definition.

I don't agree that one-time addresses are enough for privacy and/or anonymity (as those terms are loosely used). Without ring signatures or some substitute such as mixing, the recipient of a payment can trace backwards, even if third parties can't. If I receive my salary payment and then pay my rent, the landlord can trace that payment back and see how much I was paid in salary.

These are all correct points. Tacotime wanted the thread name and OP to use the word privacy instead of anonymity, but I made the change for marketing reasons. Other coins do use the word anonymous improperly, so we too have to play the marketing game. Most users will not bother looking at details to see which actually has more privacy; they'll assume anonymity > privacy. In a world with finite population, there's no such thing as anonymity. You're always "1 of N" possible participants.

Zero knowledge gives N -> everyone using the currency, ring signatures give N -> your choice, and CoinJoin gives N -> people who happen to be spending around the same amount of money as you at around the same time. This is actually the critical weakness of CoinJoin: the anonymity set is small and it's fairly susceptible to blockchain analysis. Its main advantage is that you can stick to Bitcoin without hard forking.

Another calculated marketing decision: I made most of the OP about ring signatures. In reality, stealth addressing (i.e. one-time public keys) already provides you with 90% of the privacy you need. Ring signatures are more of a trump card that cannot be broken. But Bitcoin already has manual stealth addressing so the distinguishing technological factor in CryptoNote is the use of ring signatures.

This is why I think having a coin based on CoinJoin is silly: Bitcoin already has some privacy if you care enough. A separate currency needs to go way beyond mediocre privacy improvements and provide true indistinguishably. This is true thanks to ring signatures: you can never break the 1/N probability of guessing correctly. There's no additional circumstantial evidence like with CoinJoin (save for IP addresses, but that's a problem independent of cryptocurrencies).

bitcoin may evolve and innovate more features in the future and will very well be the no1 crypto for quite some time.

BUT bitcoin wont adopt any anon-technology, at least not decentalized in the qt-wallet. bitcoins main goal at the moment is to seek law compliance and to become truly legal in important economies. no way they will adopt anon-tech and shoot themselves in the foot.

bitcoin will stay anon-tech free for quite some time and another (illegal) crypto will emerge and fill that gap. maybe drk, who knows.

im getting about 2-3 mro an hour at minergate

Please see the Monero economy thread if you can contribute to a discussion of the fundamental present value of MRO:

You can pretty much forget about anything significant being added to BTC, unless there is a major change of leaders and philosophy. BTC in the year 2100 will look about the same as BTC of 2014. Maybe the side chains thing will go in, but even that seems questionable.

This is normal, and probably healthy. Technological progress often happens by leapfrogging, not evolution. The idea that "we can just merge the features" don't work once something because mature and (often well-founded) conservatism sets in.

What pool, I get about 3-4 a day with 300h/s

about 2.7 yesterday

Unless minerd is giving me the wrong hash rate

Check back in a few weeks on the solo mining. 2.8 MRO per day means roughly one block per week. You might get two in a week or go two or more weeks with none. You can't look at solo mining (on one computer) as something that will throw off coins regularly on a daily basis.

Found our first block! Our hashrate is growing rapidly, come join us!

 www.extremehash.com

https://i.imgur.com/JhaPi3r.jpg

This is what Pliskov, the developper of the Cryptonote technology, just said regarding its integration within the code of bitcoin:


source: https://forum.cryptonote.org/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=192