Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 1682. (Read 3313576 times)

An important feature! With Zerocash I believe this is not the case. Not being able to verify the circulation of a currency is a scary thing.

Idk, it really becomes a question at first if people who are transacting payments in the crypto world value privacy more than the big entity that bitcoin is as of right now... It would take a whole lot more people who are in Monero for the long run (more than just a pump and dump tactic) to make those prices become a reality.  Unfortunately, I can only see those prices become a reality if the dark market accepts it as it's second "most favorable" payment method...

The reality is, is that people aren't going to see what monero brings to the table unless it is put into action... and what better way to show it's true anonymity powers than in the world of .onion sites?  I personally don't care for such things or drugs of any kind, but a lot of people in the world does... this is how bitcoin got it's name from the get go, personally I can see this type of thing helping Monero, even though we would probably have to deal with the implications of a "bad rep" just like bitcoin had to get over.

Try rephrase it in ounces of gold or acres of land. For all we know 1 trillion $ might only buy a loaf of bread in those years.

   

Really? Your government doesn't give you the right to free speech, assembly the formation of militia and the power to change it by committee?  Which one is it? Was it formed by the blood of patriots in a revolution against a oppressive dictatorship by any chance?

I am tired of price speculation now. It is too early to expect a stable rise as a result of a wider user adoption. We miss a lot of things to make Monero a usable currency.

+ A well-funded development team although I like decentralized teams more
+ An usable layman-friendly desktop wallet
+ A BitPay-like payment processor
+ Set of libraries that could help expand Monero ecosystem like CoPay in Bitcoin world.

I support the ideas of platform-first. 0.9 release can be a big milestone. Then please think about which features should be included into 1.0 release and how we can fund developers to have those features implemented. Short iteration is a good thing.

I have no expectations one way or the other.   Thank you for your concern.

My interest here in the speculation thread has more to do with Monero's long term prospects.

I am more impressed as time goes on by both Monero's devs and community after first being here for the basic idea of Monero.

 
  
   Some of us openly have government jobs (despite being small potato peons) and have security clearances to worry about, so as a matter of record I personally would strongly disagree with all of those statements.  Call it whatever you like though, fortunately math is not a matter of opinion.    
  
I personally believe we will see $2,000 Moneros by 2020, possibly a little higher.  I think $20,000 Moneros come before 2025, and $200,000 Moneros come before 2030.  These time tables might move a lot faster depending on a variety of factors.  I think that I can see what Monero's 'fractal shape' might be though... and well,  

Monero is only the vehicle for the next phase of the cypherpunk/crypto-anarchist/radical capitalist/anti-authoritarian r3VOLution.

If Monero fails, other means of implementation may be used.

But I don't believe it will.  The CT modifications are raising expectations and hopes, while diminishing fears of competition from Zerocash.  Every passing day contributes additional Lindy effects, and we have secret weapons...

You don't think you will be alive in 5 years?

I believe it is based on the pattern that when btc goes down Monero is priced higher in btc and when btc goes up Monero is priced lower in btc.  

Is this pattern correct?  Several people say they have observed it.  If it exists, will it continue?  Don't try this at home  It seems most people hold a large % of their coins and trade a small %.


If I make it to 2020 I'll be pleasantly surprised

I think even 10,000 players would do, since if they deposit only 1/10 of the amount per person as the Ancients have done, it means 1M XMR in the depositories and a major boost to XMR as the result.

Of course it is not a trivial task to get such a number, but our next task is to develop the game to appeal to a wider audience of intelligent players.

There is always the possibility for major success - a million players will move the exchange rate of XMR to a whole new level.

(The game currently has 100 players)

The in game exchange is a really nice feature and should encourage spending of in game currency. How many players would it take for you to define the game as a success?

I feel the most important thing is the community. The technology is good already, and its progress is slow for the reasons we know.

My understanding is that the core part of the community is in it with the proper "Venture Capital" mindset, meaning that they are unaffected of the fluctuations of the exchange rate, and just want to "call to the end". This lessens the risk that all fold at the same time, and even if that happened, the development would just continue as it is not motivated nor dependent on the exchange rate.

Tbh, I think that the risk that Monero would be abandoned is negligible. At the worst, the exchange rate would continue its descent, with the result that the ownership of coins becomes even more concentrated to the strong hands. I don't think extreme concentration is good but we just have to deal with it. I believe the current owners will release a good part of their coins when the price rises the next magnitude.

A number of XMR was already bought by "the company" but it has more powder in the reserve. I have personally spent my best to further CK which is already in a pretty impressive condition including having a functioning ingame exchange for all items. CK is unlikely to have a major impact on the exchange rate in the next 3 months due to the low absolute number of players, but in the next 12 months it is likely to have a significant impact if successful as a game.

Just going to throw out that if Monero makes it to 2020 it's going to be trading at much higher prices. Probably 200-1000 usd per coin.

I don't even know. Quite possibly I misremembered or it was a typo on my part.

Oh, I thought it was a 2600k, but what's 0.1Ghz among friends?

So for fun:

http://www.supermicro.com/products/system/5U/5086/SYS-5086B-TRF.cfm

Throw in 8x http://ark.intel.com/products/84685 @ a per-unit price of $7174.

Ignore other components (who needs 'em?).

Let's assume that the per-clock "tx checking" performance of these Haswells are the same as Sandy Bridge (unlikely, should be better). That's ~286 Tx's / sec / core.

286 * 18 * 8 = 41,142 TPS

BAM, we're VISA.



I should find something better to do.

And of course the black-robed whores of the court system will wink at this obvious logical contradiction and the equity it destroys.

"Take it up with Congress" they'll say.  "Executive overreach is somebody else's problem; sorry about that" they'll deflect.

Checks and balances between branches of .gov are not very hot right now.  



Coming soon to a decentralized Turing-complete blockchain near you...

Many reasons. For once, monero is non existent in darkweb: https://i.imgur.com/e4FI4Vh.png

Second, darknet markets are about making money. No darknet cleaner, tumbler, mixer, scammer will ever introduce xmr, as they will lose their mixing fees. The lack of anonymity and fungability is perfect for darnet. Do you think scams like this would made sense if bitcoin was fungible:


And I personally dont think monero needs any headlines talking how monero is used to buy drugs, guns or any other bullshit you can find in the darknet.

But, having said that, I think monero should have presence in darknet. Not for markets, but for privacy oriented ppl. Some onion websites about xmr, current exchange rate, block viewer, online wallet, etc.

I agree with this.  Bitcoin was the "good enough" version I guess.

I'm nearly 100% certain that a transparent blockchain for currency would not exist if non-transparent blockchains were developed first. (Possibly, blockchains for things like land title records might be made transparent, if those things make sense at all.)

First mover advantage does exist though.