Topic: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency - page 728. (Read 4671575 times)

I never told anyone to sell CLAM. I once made a comment about it being undervalued (something I rarely do but after analyzing the situation I felt the evidence was compelling). It doubled in price the next day, so anyone who believed my comment did extremely well (better than I expected when I made the comment), but please try to stay on topic. This is the Monero thread.

You have been fooled many investors. For example the clam investors. You told them to sell low to buy back cheap and pump. That is not ok.

How can I give you a negative feedback point as well?

XMR is a scamcoin because dev has the premine.

I doubt it

What the f.......

There are rumpours of a hidden back door. That could be the end of the coin.

Imagine if dev team could access the private keys of other users. I think that has allready happened.

eh?

I don't see what they have to do with Monero at all.

None to my knowledge.


See above




I don't follow this National Front thing.


Thank you for your opinion.

So that's OK with you that they are fascists OR communists?  Lord help this moron Earth.

Bolded one quote to show you're full of crap. They're fucking proto fascists. Never mind Icebreaker's retarded opinions.

Shucks, and here I thought maybe you would post some truth, but you don't have the password, bummer.

I have some questions about the secret backdoors in the code for monero, and the developers were laughing that people are stupid and won't ever know about it? Is that a feature of monero?  Undocumented? What about the instamine?  How about the fact that "National Front" is a communist leaning organization?  Are you afraid people will find out? You are in some deep doo doo. I'd sell right now if I were you.

You are right, it should be clarified in the OP (by adding a clarification, but leaving the original there for reference). I lost the password or I would do it myself.


That statement was left over from the very beginning, before the minimum block subsidy was implemented last year, but you are right it should be clarified. I'm not sure how you interpret it as cutting, but you are right it is not as clear as it should be.

About that "may be implemented" - i still find that very vague and strange and not good from an investor view.

If i remember right one of your arguments against DASH was the change of the supply, and on the other hand there is still that vague statement about perhaps cutting the supply of XMR in the future.

I already have pointed out that a while ago, and after we are talking again about the supply i thought it would be time to post that concern again.

(I know last time the argument was - it's not like DASH, because XMR told upfront that the supply may be limited in the future. But from an investor perspective that's even worse!!)

But i as an investor are still very unhappy with that "may be", perhaps we can change it this time to something more tangible?

(And before someone throws the DASH troll word at me, here is why i as an investor am more concerned about the XMR phrase then the supply cut of DASH.
As an investor i'm quite happy with a supply cut, because my goal as an investor is to grow my investment (so the DASH cut was definitely something good for me, even if it was not announced right at start and some people call that a "scam", because they missed the investment opportunity before the cut, but you can't scam someone with a supply cut, because everyone invested already is quite happy and everyone investing after knows about the fact that the supply is cut, because it is already cut!).
Cutting the supply limit is something that makes my investment more valuable -> so i as an investor are quite happy with a supply cut, i don't care if it was announced before it was done or not, because i could only profit from it.
On the other hand i'm quite unhappy with that "may be" statement of XMR, it is suggesting something like "better invest now, because the supply may be cut later and so it's better to invest now, before the supply is less and XMR is more valuable" - and if i base my decision as an investor on that i speculate on that supply cut, and so if the supply is not cut in the end, i'm not very happy - and it sounds like a scam because that "may be" tricked me into the investment.)

See bold.

They are referring, I think, to the tail emission of Monero. It solves a problem that bitcoin faces down the road when the incentive to mine is no longer there, because of no reward. 

So when we hit the point where Monero isn't allowing any more coins to be mined, there is a tail emission curve that takes place that allows a very slow inflation rate to start taking place... I think it goes something along the lines of 1% -> .5% ->.25% and so on... I could be totally wrong, and probably need someone who actually knows the correct percentages, but this is what it is in theory.

I understand that there is concern for this, because having a fixed amount of XMR for enternity is beneficial from an economical stand point, but without miners wanting to mine down the line, then the security of transactions will plummit... also, think of it this way.. with the tail emission we are still slowly but surely working our way to 21 million in the far distant future, we only have 18.4 million right now on for the "short term".

Well, then someone has some explaining to do since in the first post it states 18.4 million coins.  So which is it?

From original post:

•Max supply: ~18.4 million [2]
•Block reward: Smoothly varying [3]
•Block time: 60 seconds
•Difficulty: Retargets at every block

[1] CPU + GPU mining (about 1:1 performance for now). Memory-bound by design using AES encryption and several SHA-3 candidates.
[2] Actual number of atomic units is M = 264 - 1. A minimum subsidy may be implemented in the future with <1% annual inflation to preserve mining incentives.

Monero people like to spend their time talking lies in the DASH thread.  Gui will be done probably never.  Look into who these people are.  I'll just tell you.  They are communists.  They want all the power and money while you starve.  Look at what they support.  They want the power, you are a plebe to them.  They have backdoors in their code. Look into it.  They instamined by releasing a crippled miner for you to use to mine while they got coins quick and easy.  I hope they rot for their sins.

We should closely watch and send members to these developing (cryptocurrency-related) standardisation & specifications-groups [1] and (open) collaborative projects [2].

[1] E.g like: Web Payments Interest Group at http://www.w3.org/Payments/IG/
[2] E.g like: The Open Ledger Project at https://blockchain.linuxfoundation.org


Why this is important?

- We will have no voice in these "big bank and government"-controlled organizations/projects like R3CEV, that are getting created now. Plus, these groups are going to work against our values and ideales. So it is even more important, to support consortiums/projects, that support open, fair, decentralised crypto currency and allow true privacy.
It is a good place to show Moneros existence, involvement & strengths to other industry members, decision makers, researchers, press, ...

- All these standardization and technical collaboration efforts, to foster Crypto Currency ATM are brand new and unorganized. It is not predetermined in which direction, they gonna develope. Obvious, only in this current industry pre-phase, it will be possible to influence every aspect & detail of these groups (be it: org structure, decision making process, official guide lines, philosophy ...)in a good way for us/everybody.
Its an window of opportunity.

- As trivial as its sound: we have to participate in these interest group and industry wide technical discussions, to identify & leverage the conditions for greater uptake and wider development of Monero especially and other fair, decentralized and egalitarian crypto currencies generally. Standardization, industry-specific framework, practice related specification are fundamentale needed to achieve: interoperability, real world benefits for users, based on design and feature-set of our coin, having an efficient network, ...



The way I see it
Monero is skill and community driven. So unlike other coins, we have more then enough (outspoken) members & supporters with the required research-, dev- and industry-background/orientation. We should be able, to give to the required input (RFCs) & send the best fitting ambassador, for Monero to have a voice and some influence in these groups. Even more, if we organize & manage our participations and collaborate on the amount of work (where needed).


From my POV, this is a big potential (driver) for Monero to reach acceptance, get users, find partners, leading to a success and a future for the project.
(The best techology and code is not enough, a coin can only survive and be successful with users, servers, some exchange & usage volume and an ecosystem around it.)


Discuss.
Annotation    1) We should/can be selective here, we should only participate in efforts/groups/work groups, if they are useful and benefical for Monero. No need to do them all and be everywhere.
Annotation 2) I am not sure, if my 2 examples (W3, Open Ledger) above are perfect. I am sure there are more and maybe even better approaches, that fit Monero even more. I just wanted to suggest, that from my POV, it would be a good decision to explicitly raise Moneros voice and work for Moneros success in this emerging industry.

Did you forfeit your commit access, and grow a beard?