Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 1620. (Read 3313576 times)

Most people here still buy alts with BTC so I continue to feel that BTC pricing is more appropriate than any fiat currency for measure gains and losses.

If people were primarily using fiat to buy alt coins then my opinion would be different.

For perspective, I think the low was 0.215 USD in January, since when XMRUSD is up ~100%, while XBTUSD is up ~165%.

Very much so. Quoting Nick Szabo:


The rest of his post is an interesting read.

VItalik's response to your shitpost on reddit :
https://www.reddit.com/r/tech/comments/3wgcrz/the_ethereum_computer_securing_your_identity_and/cxwubpw

Sounds like a great way to celebrate (and leverage) the 0.9 release!


OK, time to start a Masternode pool service.  Deposits <1000 DRK get 1000 get more.

Another way to get 1000s of DRK for our fun-time games is with a (spoofed) dice service/casino offering competitive rates for its "bankroll."   

Amplify attack by setting a floor on Dash interest rates >Masternode return, so Masternodes are taken offline and moved to Polo lending accounts.

Time attack to coincide with Masternode voting on controversial, arguably wasteful proposals designed to divide the community, such as sponsoring a NASCAR/blimp/athlete/charity/politician, website/forum/logo/wallet redesign, etc. and malicious proposals like "send 100% of block reward to iCEBREAKER" or "burn the instamine coins."

Use Sybil Masternodes to tilt votes in favor of slightly unpopular proposals (and overstate popularity of unalterable ones), in order to alienate maximum number of participants, waste resources, and encourage (perception of) dumping.

If it's truly a DAO, nobody can stop it.   

Oh wait, Evan and Otoh control 99% of Masternodes thanks to the instamine and pump/dump market manipulations.

TIL "distributed" and "autonomous" means 'totally controlled by two people.'

Nevermind.   

I am not familiar with the attack on Novacoin. There are various attacks against POS coins that have been discussed at length. The attack I formulated, the Second Pirate Savings and Trust, https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10182752 is based entirely on borrowed stake, which the coin network simply cannot detect. The borrowed stake is generated with the model of the infamous First Pirate Savings and Trust.

With Dash such an attack is actually a lot simpler since there is no need for a bear raid / ponzi to generate the borrowed stake. One simply offers to borrow Dash, from those with less than 1000 Dash, and pay a rate somewhat below the net masternode return. The proceeds are then used to set up a large number of masternodes all with borrowed stake. The attacker could then for example put up a large amount of Monero as collateral to short Dash while at the same time unleashing the rouge masternode attack on the Dash network. Monero is actually a good choice here because the DASH/XMR rate has been very stable over the last few months and the current development vs lack of updated binaries dynamic in Monero.

Edit 1: There is simply no way that the Dash network or the attacker for that matter can detect when the Monero developers are going to release version  0.9 of Monero.
Edit 2: In this case the attacker is playing the DASH/XMR spread (short DASH long XMR) so sudden rise in the price of XMR before the rouge Dash masternode network is set up would likely derail the attack.

100% PoW is the only way to be safe.

Even PoS+PoW hybrids don't work.  Novacoin (PoS + scrypt) just got hacked.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.13168415

Can't wait to find out if Dash's PoS + X11 scheme is susceptible to the same technique!  

Fractional reserve is not going to go away. This is why proof of stake coins do not work.

The greater cryptocurrency community should establish a day where everyone withdraws all of their crypto into their own wallets. Large holders will have to start early because of the daily withdrawal limits.

The idea would be to have an organized bank run every year to destroy the excess money supply created by exchange operators and derivatives.

Some exchanges would collapse. There'd be tons of volatility. Could be fun.

Here are the definitions for the United States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_supply. What I called M0 is more properly called  Monetary Base or MB in the USD equivalent.

1) Notes and coins in circulation (outside Federal Reserve Banks and the vaults of depository institutions) (currency)
Monero equivalent examples: Monero in an active personal wallet
2) Notes and coins in bank vaults (Vault Cash)
Monero equivalent examples: Monero held by an exchange (actual amount held by the exchange in thier wallets) Monero in an offline wallet stored in a bank vault on some other secure place etc.
3) Federal Reserve Bank credit (required reserves and excess reserves not physically present in banks)
Monero equivalent examples: Not applicable.

M1 and higher. Some kind of fractional reserve backed in whole or part by promises to pay. Bitcoin example: Goxcoin. Contract for difference with a broker such as AvaTrade (partially baked by USD) etc.  Monero example. Promises to pay Monero by a short on Poloniex partially backed by Bitcoin, Dash etc

Relevant:

This approach is in contrast to DASH's 'fail fast' vapid scamcoin chipmunk paradigm.

There are many things that can go in the womb.  

Price looks like it will hold in the range its in. May dip a bit.

Monero is not going to the tomb as it's still very much in the womb!

crypto currency is very resilient, it doesn't need microsoft or risto to survive...it is only a matter of price..monero is not going to the tomb 

He said it was more illiquid (less liquid).

M1+ refers to monetary substitutes. So someone promising to pay you coins instead of owning (as in full possession) the actual coins.

Sorry for possibly sounding stupid, but what are you guys talking about in regards to M0, M1, and M2? Why does this make monero more liquid than Bitcoin?

Actually in this case it would be Monero, which at this point is way more illiquid than Bitcoin. The effect is to force delivery of M0 so if the exchange does not have 100% M0 reserves it places further upward pressure on the price. Even if the exchange has 100% reserves there are critical factors related to delay in delivery such as the time it takes to clear the funds on the blockchain (number of confirmations), retrieving the moneroj from a cold wallet, synchronising the node and wallet, if it has not been actively used and last but not least the emotions of the prospective seller. It is easier to sell if the moneroj are already on the exchange than if the seller has to jump over a set of hoops in order to get the moneroj to the exchange in the first place.

On a more practical note the current Monero lending market on Poloniex has not been stress tested during an actual real market short squeeze on Monero, particularly one where the margins of the shorts are completly wiped out and the short squeeze continues.

I think the default assumption is that all exchanges are running fractional reserves and that bitcoin, like any other currency, will have an M0 and an M1 and M2 and so on because of deposits, futures, and other derivatives.

You never really know do you?

Curious about what you mean by this? Are you implying that exchanges are running fractional reserve and that taking delivery forces them to buy XMR instead of crediting you with phantom reserves?