Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 1741. (Read 3313576 times)

Thats good:-) thx

Nom nom, i luff this thred sew mush!  <3  <3  <3

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3mea6b/bitpay_is_blacklisting_certain_bitcoins_rejecting

Here, use this to turn your bad bitcoins into good bitcoins

smooth already did.  http://joinmarket.org/

So could you give some links to exchanges or sites that offer this? They would be useful examples of problems associated with non-fungibility of bitcoin.

You really think Mint Exchange is the only place where people buy new coins at premium prices?  Wow, that's adorable.

joinmarket is superficially similar in that you have to pay a premium to induce others to mix with you. However, you have no control over the taint status of the other coins, so what should happen rationally is that only heavily tainted coins would be offered, still with a liquidity premium.

Unfortunately this is not the case any more (the bold part). I think  you mean here the Mint Exchange mentioned in this article. The Mint Exchange is no more. I dont know what has happened with it. Maybe it it failed because no one was interested in fresh bitcoins, feds closed it down, or some technical issues lead to its disappearance.

The Mint Exchange was perfect example of what non-fungible bitcoin means, and what would never happen with monero. But there is no Mint Exchange now, nor any similar service I'm aware off.

Zero cash is still in the whitepaper phase.  Its fundamentals involve some undesirable, possibly intrinsic/unavoidable trade-offs and compromises (ie, a trusted third party and bloat-prone tx|blockchains).

The BIP process is healthier than ever before.  It has been reinvigorated thanks to stimulus provided by the Fork of July, and perhaps even XT's lulzy failed governance coup. Please stop Buttcoining just because you Gavinistas didn't get your way, despite copious amounts of hand-wringing melodrama.

The results of #ScalingBitcoin will be eventual agreements about (if not blocksize) stealth addresses, coinjoin, and a slew of other features (ie sidechains|CT).  Those non-controversial new featues cannot be directly compared to the universal contention necessarily involved in hard forks which risk catastrophic consensus failure occurring at the exact moment the socioeconomic ecosystem bifurcates into civil war.

Confidential Transactions on sidechains represent a medium-term possibility of a (possibly near-perfect or superior) substitute good for Monero.  Let's not dismiss ridicule notion because it doesn't suit the Monero 4evar narrative, or dismiss the challenge because of butthurt at Blockstream/Theymos/p2pool/etc.

Competition is a good stream for us end-users.  The possibilities of leisurely cross pollination in peacetime and horizontal gene transfer in emergencies strengthen both systems.

As for the narrow speculative POV, XMR's sort-of-first mover advantage may be neutralized by transfer of Bitcoin's undisputably-first mover status to its sidechains.

But sidechains and CT are unproven so a significant period of time, to accumulate Lindy effects appropriate to wealth storage, is required.

Then there is the possibility of adapting SC/LN for XMR, so our favorite mustang can become the opaque Father to complement Bitcoin's transparent Mother of All Settlement Chains.

That will take some new crypto, or at the least a novel arrangement of existing primitives.  We can't do it yet, but may not have to endure such heavy lifting alone.  The Cryptonote people are still Out There Somewhere and if anyone knows how to scale 100% trust-free 100% anon blockchains, it's probably Nick Szaborhagen's group.

My point is that it paved the way.  I think the landscape would be vastly different and adoption of cryptocurrencies nowhere near where it is if the first one created wasn't a public ledger.

There are other paths though, and it isn't necessary for the first to even succeed at all. For example, Napster -> blah blah -> Bittorrent. Arguably in this case it didn't as we had digicash and others that failed earlier. Bitcoin was the minimum viable product that could resist being quickly destroyed by centralization (and that it was conceived as an improved successor to those earlier failures was explicitly stated by satoshi)

Let's refactor that declaration into a spec, by substituting in Sztorc's Scythe:


This appears to be a valid instance of Ranvier's Razor:


This kind of philosophical clarity is useful for defending crypto's ramparts from XT-type Bad Ideas.   

Given the lack of agreement about blocksize, stealth addresses, coinjoin and a slew of other features it seems rather unlikely that BTC would achieve parity with Monero anytime in the near future.

Because there is still a demand for such services regardless of regulatory blessing or not.  I don't think the issues Bitcoin is having will make it go away nor would I want it to.  I believe it has its place in the financial ecosystem as does Monero.

I think we are very fortunate that the first crypto currency that came to be and served as an introduction to the world was a public ledger rather than a private one because the regulatory and legislative leeway Bitcoin has received would not have been possible with a private ledger IMHO.

CORRECTION: Bitcoin went from $0.05 to $1 to $0.60 then to $32.

I would say in terms of pure time we are in 2010 times. (1.5 years after launch).

True, well what I meant was no OFFICIAL GUI.

As more bitcoins get stolen or scammed the fungibility issue will become more and more to the forefront of people's attention.

Right now it is block size debate (which after much thought to me is a waste of time).  <----- so much time, money, and talk wasted on discussing such a small issue that there is no demand for really. Not many new players are willing to PAY (i.e. Hire bitcoin as trace mayer says it) to have a larger block size.

Eventually the FUNGIBILITY issue of bitcoin will make headlines and will be in article titles in the press. <--------------- Smoothie Prediction 

XMR is at the same stage as BTC after its first moon to $5 and retrace to 50 cents.  I think that was 2011 or 12.

And we do have a GUI.  More than one, in fact.

The fact that freshly mined BTC enjoy a 10% premium over 'used' ones demonstrates beyond a shadow of doubt that, absent an opaque complementary blockchain like XMR, BTC is the dictatorship-enabling "bad digital cash" PanoptiCoin Chaum warned us about.

At this point, worse-than-cash-or-gold fungibility is the elephant in bitcoin's living room.  Sidechains (and thus CT) are moving forward and will take the taint issue to the forefront of public concern as deployment plays out.

Then what would make you think people would want to create MONERO businesses/services that governments would not support essentially?

1. If bitcoin implements features that match monero's then monero would probably be irrelevant.

2. But I doubt they will implement anything on a substantial level of development (or change) to the code base.

3. Zero cash doesn't exist yet right?

Agreed. I contend that a big part of bitcoin's relatively easy pathway into mainstream consciousness and potential use (eg, merchants don't have to do KYC when accepting a btc payment) is because of its transparent nature. As I've probably noted in this thread before, Lawsky even mused during the early-2014 hearings that "maybe we should require all crypto currencies to have a transparent blockchain".

So, Bitcoin may layer in partial, especially opt-in, measures (eg, confidential transactions), but I doubt it'd ever implement un(trace|link)ability at the protocol level by default. And that's the key reason monero has lasting value whereas nearly every other alt does not: properties for which there's demand that bitcoin will (probably) never fill. Properties which also make it more "pure" from a monetary-theory point of view, which I find interesting.

That said, I do question whether monero's ultimate value is capped due to resistance it'll likely run into, but that wouldn't happen before another few orders of magnitude in price.