Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 1940. (Read 3314330 times)

Is there any thoughts about changing the hash algorithm to minimize botnet mining?

Deleted one spam post promoting another coin which contained zero content relevant to Monero (and not even any relevant to the promoted coin), along with one reply to it

It's the difference between short and long term thinking.

To open up, I will share my latest price/scenario analysis for Monero. I did it for the following 32 months (the remainder of this year, and the 2 following years). As it was price scenario, the only variable actually mapped was price, the reasons why the price might go up, down or stay the same, were all approximated as part of the probabilities.

The scenarios had 6 possible prices: 1000, 100, 10, 1, 0.1 and 0 USD, and 0 was considered a terminal failure after which no recovery could happen. Each timepoint (end of year 2015, 2016, 2017) and price were assigned with a conditional probability based on the price in the previous timepoint.

It was always possible to go to 0, the probability that it would happen in a given period ranged from 5-24%. Also every lower price point was always possible. The increase in price was only deemed possible to be 10-200x per period though, excluding black swans. (Much larger price increases are not even uncommon in crypto - BTC had 6400x in less than a year in 2010-2011, and some premined coins have had even larger).

The complete table of conditional probabilities used (expressed in full %) is as follows:

When calculated, it yielded the following price scenario probability table for the end of 2017:


It looks like that an investment in Monero will return a loss of 80% or more in 61% probability, which is not promising. Also the probability of a rise to 1000 USD or more (reaching the historical peak in BTC marketcap, in about 2/3 of the timeframe that BTC reached it from launch) is at less than 1%, a reality check confirming the conservative assumptions.

Yet the EV of XMR in the end of the period (the sum of the partial EV in the above table) is 19.29 USD, a 38x gain in 32 months, with an annual expected return of 293%. When we evaluate this result, it is notable that 3/4s of the EV is produced from scenarios where XMR achieves the current size of BTC, or more. It is these scenarios that must exist to make the coin a stellar investment.

Now I don't want to bash Dash, but I haven't seen evidence that it could realistically (<1% (above) is still realistic, 0% is not) achieve such a prominent long-term position.

To create a fat tail probability distribution, there must be few flaws in the system. Dash has too many:
- single developer
- premine
- lying about the premine
- masternodes
- deficient anonymity.

It is like physically reaching the moon. The spacecraft does not need to be high-end, but if there are 5 large holes in its different systems, it soon tilts the odds of actually reaching the moon to become slim.

Monero, on the other hand, seems quite antifragile. The only problem that is as severe as the ones listed above for Dash, is
- botnet mining.

The developers have correctly understood that the potential and payoff for Monero is not in the order of 10-100x the current price, but 1000x or more. The priorities of development are set accordingly.

If Monero and Dash are mooncraft, Monero's design philosophy is to maximize the probability of hitting moon, and the resulting payoff, while Dash concentrates on getting as many people on board as possible.

well there you have it... and now the developers pick up money a second time by creating lots of masternodes... devteam isn't trustworthy imo so the coin isn't either...

best regards

Not "stories" but well documented fact

http://www.devtome.com/doku.php?id=a_massive_investigation_of_instamines_and_fastmines_for_the_top_alt_coins#darkcoin

I'll take them too...

Why would it be Dash? The way I see it, it works just like coinjoin with a few adaptations... Everyone who has more than 1000 DASH can start a masternode. These masternodes can form the masternode-network which takes care of the mixing of transactions... That sounds like a kind of centralisation, if there is eavesdropping on your masternodes you can forget about anonimity...
And because these masternodes give extra servicing to the network (processing power, bandwidth, ...) they also get paid, not only the miners, but also the masternodes. As a consequence most people will put their masternode on an always online server. Which is the most used kind of server for masternodes, you guessed it, Amazon... Yup, you're reading it right, the biggest part of the anonymous transactions are mixed via American servers... That's great news for the NSA...

and about the 1000 DASH-limit... only people with 1000+ DASH can start a masternode and get paid... this leads inevitably to a DASH-aristocracy... and then there's also the stories about the instamine etc...

Do what you want, but I'm staying away from this one!

I'll take it, please PM.

mhh thinking about to sell all my moneroj. It looks like dash will become the leader of anon

That's the best summation I've found.

Crypto-Kingdom is a significant parameter, but you ought to admit that XMR has a soul of itself. Look at the community, devteam, missives and perspective so far. No other alt-coin has had so much progress in so little time. Sure there's a strong userbase of individuals belonging to the primary BTC adopters but that couldn't say anything really. How many of us possess DOGE or LTC for example?

Plus, if I may, I see great similarities with the price fluctuations in the early years of BTC. That means nothing of course, but it could mean a lot when you see it as a primary paradigm. History tends to repeat itself; when you least expect it. We must be ready for such a contingency; also as for the contrary as well.

As I frequently wrote around this thread: "Own as much as you don't regret it" (for both possibilities)

I've had a hunch (purely speculation) that some of the recent upswing was driven by individuals mixing (potentially stolen) BTC from recent scams/hacks through multiple anonymous altcoins. Bytecoin's marketcap went up substantially, then Monero's, then Dash's (not necessarily in that order).

Oh buddy what happened to the moneroj price?

You also said I must be holding DRK because I said DRK probably isn't crashing to its death.

I agree with dreamspark that this line of reasoning is a bit annoying.

Yes, it's reasonable to assume that someone is bearish when they talk bearish or bullish when they talk bullish. If people are putting their money where their mouths are, then their posts may reflect their positions. We don't need to constantly remind each other of that fact. And it's not necessarily a bad thing. I prefer this circumstance to one where trolls are just yelling "BUY!" or "SELL!"

I'm not sure why you keep butting into general speculation talk with injections that are just pure trolling, this is twice in the last week that you've tried to place me in a certain market position based upon 0 knowledge. I've said for the past fucking year that I have a big bag of XMR and only trade with a very small percentage of it. I'd appreciate it if you stopped with the childishness. In regards to your "just another altcoin" quote, maybe if you quoted me in full "MOST PEOPLE (not necessarily I ) think this is just another altcoin" there might even be some context to your post.

There is the scenario there of course, but right now/in the near future I'm not so sure. Most people see this as just another alt coin that will see no real world use. To be fair why wouldn't they? There is always new innovation, new ways of doing the same thing that are better. I firmly believe (maybe wrongly) that there will be a coin that grabs my attention on the privacy/anon front just as hard as XMR did in the near future. NO alt can ever replace btc's first mover advantage and network effect in this capacity. We are so young in the space of crypto that it would be naive to think that a coin that is born around this time will ever be in use or the best choice in years to come.

I don't know, in the non-crypto world there is pretty good evidence for the underground economy, defined broadly (but in such a way that Bitcoin's full- or near-full transparency is neither useful nor desired), being extremely large. Much of that at some point, along with portions of the entirely-above-ground economy, could conceivably move to Monero.

That reminds me of the Bourne films. In the beginning, Bourne looks into his bag and sees that he has tons of cash. He checks bank deposit boxes all around Europe and has more cash. Of course, this would be much more efficient with untraceable cryptocurrency. In 2030 spy thriller films, I think we'll see a scene with someone using XMR.  

And we can sit back and think: "I was there in 2014 chatting with smooth and fluffypony when this was being developed."

They'll use it to store their slush funds and bribe money while publicly issuing concern about illicit use.

I suppose that depends on your definition of "real." If you see money as a representation of output (work, GDP, whatever), then crypto is as real as anything else in this universe.

Thanks for the support. If others are also feeling the same way, it must mean that we are getting close to the point where nobody sells anymore coins (unless they do so for a loss, which is unfortunate but also possible).