Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 1226. (Read 3314316 times)

Uh-oh.  Running out of XMR again. 

Benevolently under your miraculous omen, new enterprises rightfully open.

I see what you did there. Cute.

I tend to think it wont happen for any prolonged period ever. If it happens it would be a flash crash.

Many have now margin long positions? At least bitcoin loans are taken within a heartbeat (is the demand originated from Monero or some other coin?)

Of course LN isn't 100% orthogonal to blocksize (TANSTAAFL).  The point is payment channels decouple tx from Layer One's linear scaling.

180x is a good start; we may discover more optimizations as the tech develops.

Sidechains (and payment channels on sidechains) also provide additional tps capacity without proportionate blockchain bloating.

Agree with your Edit.  Actual Widespread Adoption could force this obscure issue into the limelight (currently occupied by "immutability").

One of the most common misconceptions is that Lighting Network type payment channels are orthogonal to the blocksize issue. They are not. This by the way is made clear in the Lighting Network paper itself. https://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf. The following quote from section 12 page 55 of the above paper illustrates this.


The Lighting Network paper authors propose a 180x gain in efficiency over the same transactions on the actual blockchain. My take is that this is very optimistic, since it presumes that individuals would only open one payment channel per year, and these channels are open with a limited number of centralized providers. Yes even with these highly optimistic assumptions we are still looking at 133 MB blocks. Technologies such as the Lighting Network have their place and could very well prove very useful for certain applications, but they are not a substitute to
addressing blocksize scaling on the main chain in a manner that does not presume beforehand a particular fixed cost over time in real terms of computing power, digital storage and bandwidth.  

Assuming a particular fixed cost over time for computing power, digital storage and bandwidth, and then designing a business model based on these assumptions is the fundamental error that companies such a Diner's Club and even American Express made in the 1950s. It is also the reason they are not the leaders in the  payment card industry today. Another way to look at this issue is to consider how one would accommodate VISA's peak transaction rate of 47000 Transactions per second, using the technology of 1949 namely tabulating machines and punched cards. 1949 is after all when the Diner's Club was conceived as a payment method.

Edit: Monero's adaptive blocksize limit and tail emission are a hidden gem in Monero that is very much under appreciated. This creates a market based solution to the blocksize issue that is not dependent upon any future assumptions of the cost in real terms of computing power, digital storage and bandwidth.

The smooth increase in prices gives a greater probability of entry of the investor.

For mass market use - no. Too small. For small things - yes. I'm already paying for my vpn with monero directly.

The primary aim of monero is privacy and anonymity. Thus, services that provide anonymity and privacy for its users would be first to accept monero, e.g., vpn companies, or private email companies, etc.

Bitcoin has a potential 3000-50,000x increase at 1MB, because the market values demonstrated stability, immutability, scalability, and antifragility above all else.

I'd like to be wrong here but it seems AM is casually/causally linking tx/sec with blocksize, which constitutes a fundamental type error.

Given the fairly orthogonal relationship between Layer 1 and Layer 2 tps (courtesy of Lightning-type payment channels) that purported linkage may prove to be invalid, and a worse-than-useless metric of utility/utilization.

EG, a mere 3x or 5x Layer 1 blocksize increase would move us approximately 0% of the way forward to 10k/sec Visa-scale goal.

Yes, Monero is ready to be used commercially. It functions as a currency. If you were selling something right now I could buy it with monero. The question is whether I want or need to buy the thing that you're selling, and if Monero provides any advantages over some other payment option.
A lot of privacy oriented people would care. If you're selling something that Bob wants but Bob doesn't want other people to know that Bob bought the thing that you're selling, Monero is the *only* provably cryptographically private means to do that (well, ok, you could become a master of bitcoin private operating procedures, but that, at best, will get you some percentage of Monero's privacy).

A lot of people outside of Moneroworld or cryptocurrency universe would probably not care. For 1, very little people have heard about bitcoin, let alone monero. Yeah, there are payment services out there that will allow anyone to accept Bitcoin, but most of them just convert straight to fiat money.


It will change when people like you, who have something to sell and need to pay people, do so in Monero. This is the catch 22 of all cryptocurrencies really - people need to use it as a currency in order for it to be used as a currency.

Cryptocurrencies are created with the idea of being useful, and Monero is really useful. Whether or not people use it depends on whether or not people use it. This is the paradox. Governments and central banks have the advantage of mandating that their currency is used for all things. No one is demanding that your company pays its bills in bitcoin / monero - its all opt in. And because its all opt-in, there needs to be a large number of people opting in, otherwise your point is exactly right - it won't be really used.

This certainly occurs, but in general, today, XMR sees first-order use as a speculation (store of value), second-order use as a transmission channel (medium of exchange), and only third-order use in denominating commerce (unit of account). Due to being the most fungible of all currencies, many proponents deem, and I among them, that it is better suited to many commercial uses than any other candidate currency - specifically, those use-cases in which deviations from perfect fungibility impose cost or risk.


I would, and would be quite pleased.  Certainly I would be more inclined to do business with you on that basis than otherwise.

All unbound currencies (informational commodities) have a value bootstrapping challenge.  Fiat currencies derive value from taxation, but free-market currencies gain utility from being valued, and gain value from their utility.  Inevitably, this is a cycle: when the technology is apt, a virtuous one; otherwise, a vicious one.

Yes accepting monero for goods or services will add to its perceived utility. It is a self-feeding cycle.

some people (like me) buy things with monero using xmr.to to keep annonymaty, but the majoraty are or bag holders just hopping to have 100000x return or expeculators to make a quick buck...
You have some people ofering to sell things for moneros, I think there is a painting somewhere, and there are some mining machine that was sold to fluffypony I think...
Some people want to put theyr moneros to use, so it depends what you want to sell and how do you advertise it

Hi there,

So I've been following the evolution of Monero for some time now, only project in crypto that actually gets my attention.

There are lots of speculations in this thread, but I have registered to encourage some speculation about actual use of Monero as currency.

Is Monero ready to be used commercially? and by ready I don't mean technically possible to use it, but if people who hold Monero would use them to buy services or products.

For example, I own a business totally internet based, let's say from today I accept Monero to pay for services, and I accept to pay my workers or other businesses/providers in Monero too.

Would anyone care? If not, why not and when could this change? Does it depend?

I guess crypto-currencies are created with the idea of being useful, I would like to know what are your ideas about Monero being really used.

 

That last point is certainly true, but I am not sure the inference is sound.  For example, if the price is lagging the value eggregiously, then the correction may be eggregious as well.  Of course, overshoot is typical, and then, yes, the greater fool is rearing its belled tassels.

Anyhow, I think it will be the width of the money pipe that drives the next serious BTC bubble, from one or two new ETFs - have thought so for years, now - continue to do so.  Throw that fiat on the fire, baby.

Gold being so hot right now, while USDJPY is tanking, has got to be good for all crypto.  Notice that SPX is locally correlated with Gold (and soon oil?).  What with the overheated job market, that screams inflation.  With CB balance sheets over the moon, and negative rates everywhere, ugh.  The apocalypse is good for crypto.  When those excess reserves get knocked loose -- c'est l'deluge.

I think that whenever the price goes up 10x in the span of 8 weeks or so, there's a greater fool theory at work. The real world transactional use never suddenly jumps 10x in a month.

Without a 3x or 5x increase in the 1 MB blocksize limit I do not see the fundamentals to support that; nevertheless It is quite possible we see a manifestation of the "greater fool theory" driving such a move.

Does bitcoin have a 3x or 5x move left in it? I've given up completely on a 10-20x parabola.

I have continued nibbling this week.  Looking forward to the time when our lost Monero is worth enough so that we can hire Robert Ballard to recover it.