Topic: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency - page 965. (Read 4671924 times)

this is 17 pages, but you won't read it, but its needed in response to your cryptonote "history" chart:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/blowing-the-lid-off-the-cryptonotebytecoin-scam-with-the-exception-of-monero-740112

Regarding other cryptonote coins, I think monero is "truly" fungible because most of the others are scams wherein small numbers of individuals hold lotsa coins, therefore compromising the strength of ring signatures.

Regarding other cryptocurrencies, I think monero is "truly" fungible because it uses ring signatures to provide its fungibility.

ok.. for me that's missing any reason as to why Monero is the only truly fungible crypto, or how Monero is and other cryptonote coins are not.  Maybe there isn't a reasson, but I am open to finding out. It's taking quite a long time though......

I don't know, but i'm guessing it's not possible to describe it in one sentence, instead I have to read more pages of text?

So far I got this:

Monero is the only truly fungible cryptocurrency

...

BCN free float is about 0.1%. Revi siitä huumoria 

Which CryptoNote cryptocurrencies have even discovered the issues we found in MRL-0001 or MRL-0004, much less fixed them? Without that how can they even pretend fungibility?

I already explained that, but I will again.

It's "truly" fungible because it's proven to be untraceable and unlinkable.

Bytecoin isn't fungible because they own almost every coin that you don't.

But I have seen you spending a lot of time on the Dashcoin thread trying to help them resurrect that, which is also Cryptonote, is that a scam too??

Sure I'll go down the list for those reading along:

1. Bytecoin - obvious fraud
2. Budhacoin, Paladincoin - obvious frauds that didn't exist before a month or so ago, but claim to be from 2012-2013
3. Monero - no comment
4. Boolberry - not an obvious fraud but the developer has some unknown apparent tie to the original Bytecoin fraud. Apparently intended as a non-fraudulent project, but no open process and a month late, so never got much traction. Also some questionable "innovations" that don't necessarily improve anything (for example the developer is apparently dropping his PoW "improvement" in his new project).
5. Darknote - possibly tied to the original Bytecoin fraud, but not proven. Totally opaque process, late, and little traction. Also the launch with an absurd name followed by a rename after the bulk of fast mining was pretty shady.
6. Quazarcoin, Mountcoin, Fantomcoin. All likely tied to Bytecoin. Late, no transparency, purchased dev accounts, no traction
7. rest - very late clones with no traction. Some may be tied to Bytecoin, unclear.

The technical value of Monero is 90% cryptonote (plus some other smaller things we done that are very popular with users such as deterministic wallets, or Monero-specific external projects such as MyMonero) and is 100% unique to the cryptonote ecosystem. The maturity, community, and development process value of Monero is 100% non-cryptonote and is entirely unique within the cryptonote ecosystem.

The obvious question would be, how can Monero be the 'only truly' fungible cryptocurrency, if there are other cryptonote coins with the same tech?  (and obviously there are other coins that claim to be fungible so 'truly' is subjective)

I agree it's my responsibility to prove my claims. The only reason I asked you to prove me wrong is because you showed up in this thread asking us to prove you wrong. It's amusing how you instantly become the reasonable guy when you're own tactics are redirected at you  

Monero is fungible because it's proven to be cryptographically untraceable and unlinkable. And I know you've seen the proofs because you've directly replied to comments on another thread that pointed them out.

Bytecoin isn't fungible because its creators own 4/5ths of the entire supply, making the ring signatures somewhat useless.

So the value proposition remains: Monero is the only truly fungible cryptocurrency.

Any more rebuttals?

The "competition" is in your imagination.

There provably are people who are interested in Dash, but of all the CN coins (except Monero), combined, fit in a room.



ADD: Only now saw the timestamps in the chart.  
(I like good stories -- why not more pre-2014 currencies?? )

so all the cryptonote coins (aka competitors) are 'frauds' except Monero??

Because the question is a setup. In open source, anything can be and usually is copied, so there is no such thing as "unique" value, aside from attributes outside the code such as the community, maturity, process, etc.

It is not that you have a divine right to claim anyone's time that's why.

Grab a coffee and read the last 2 pages, there are plenty of reasons. Pick the one you like. Move on.

I agree. Nothing would have made me happier than to see Bytecoin not be a fraud and Monero not even exist.

I am still waiting for an inteligible answer to how does Monero have any unique value - other people have been a lot more helpful, you fluffy just post walls of text and marketing pictures.  Even Smooth said 'it's because everything else is a scam' which is good for him.

Why is it so hard for you to write a single sentence saying why Monero has unique value?

You're not actually confused, you are just advocating, because it has been explained to you before. But for others who may be reading and perhaps new to all this:

Bytecoin was enormously innovative (by unknown anonymous parties operating under the name "cryptonote") but launched in a fraudulent manner. Monero was created to take that same innovation, launch it in a non-frudulent manner, and continue development with a public and open development process, which is exactly what we have done.

Some of the other cryptonotes are indeed also frauds also launched by the original Bytecoin team (but in all cases lacking a credible public and open development process), but that's not really the point.

Who said we were going to overtake Bitcoin? I've never said anything of the sort.

We've literally told you the real innovation, both in written form and in pretty graphics, and you refuse to acknowledge the answers...so I guess here they are again. We can keep doing this all day.

Ok so we are getting somewhere...

but few problems with your valuable proposition - first, when you make a claim, the onous is on you to prove it, not for others to 'prove you wrong'.  

So generally you wouldn't put subjective opinions in your value proposition like 'truly', it sounds noobish because that's what you would say.  Like 'Bob's best fruit and veg stall'.

But then the problem is there are other coins that claim to be fungible, so your claim to be the 'only cryptocurrency' being fungible is also negated.  Unless you can convince investors otherwise.

Also, isn't Monero just a cryptonote clone without any real innovative changes for real world users, and there are other cryptonote coins, so how can Monero be the only fungible coin when all other cryptonote coins are too?

I also think it's kinda sad that Bytecoin failed so totally.