Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 195. (Read 3314309 times)

Great! You know how to do it to. You're the man! 

^  You mean those two random people on the Twitters with fake followers drawing random lines on an XMR chart?  Any 4 year old can do that.  Lmao.

Edit:  Skillz.

I'm not spreading FUD, but has anyone seen this price projection?

XMR @ <0.007 BTC

https://twitter.com/ezbrahBTC/status/1070664392876875777
https://twitter.com/MeatTC_/status/1020783981925732353

As I understood a month ago when I listened 3 interviews and podcasts about BisQ they said that when there is a case of dispute, then solving that is still centralized and is done  by original developers. They dont trust anyone else. But that they plan to solve that in future differently.  They lack of developers to move forward as fast as they would love to.  Although Monero had so much volume they could not put all their focus into Monero fiat pair integration. They even made a bounty for people to help them. Propose how to integrate Monero wallet into Bisq https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq/issues/1863

As I see this is that we now have v0.9.0.  When we will get to v1.0.0  , that will mean that we got somewhere. It could take long time. But we cant have super huge expectations before that happens.

Potential flaws exist in most systems - even in Bitcoin, where exchanges in particular are hardly flawless, I think the effort to offer decentralised exchange is at the very least worthwhile.  

Superficially it looks better than buying drugs on the street - so I guess in the absence of evidence, I must do my own research and find out if there is evidence of absence (of security of transactions) in my own case.

Unless anyone else with any credibility has an account of an issue actually personally experienced.

Do you have evidence that the software doesn't work as advertised? Presuming all opensource software doesn't work as advertised is shrugging the community's responsibility to vet software, which may be fine for you, but in the case of a decentralized exchange would be disastrous--even if it just the exchange getting caught, as unlike you, most people want the exchange to actually be decentralized and would cease using it if it was revealed as otherwise.

How does their arbitration process work? If it isn't being used, or even better, can't be used in most circumstances, I don't think many would have a problem with it. Like most things in technology, decentralization is spectrum, so unless there's a single point of failure, I'd say it's still decentralized--especially if the majority of the processes are out of anyone's hands once they issue their order.

Not sure that quoting their own definitions is valid.
Take bisq and their arbitration process: trust and centralisation around the 2 fellows.
Or their software: you have to trust whatever is on their repository unless you've read and agree with every line of the code, because as we were reminded recently, 'open source' does not get nearly enough eyes on it.

Did I miss something?

There are already other decentralized exchanges. How is Bisq different?

Currently no other project fits our definition of a decentralized bitcoin-to-fiat exchange. Open Bazaar stands alone in mirroring Bisq’s principles, but they’re a full market place, not a specialized currency exchange. Most exchanges claiming to be decentralized are either not supporting fiat exchange or operate with a server architecture and do not fit our definition. And of course there are a lot of ICO projects with whitepapers but they have not proven yet that they can deliver any working software.

To be properly decentralized, one must avoid single points of failure:

*Bisq does not hold any bitcoins. All are held in multisignature addresses rather than a Bisq-controlled wallet.
*Bisq does not hold any national currency. National currency is transferred directly from one trader to the other.
*Bisq uses a Peer-to-Peer network over Tor. This means there are no servers to be hacked or DDoS’d.
*Bisq does not know the traders. No data is stored on who trades with whom.
*Bisq does not require registration. This means privacy is maintained, there are no “approval” wait times, and identity theft becomes impossible.
*Bisq is not a company. It is an open source project organized as a Decentralized Autonomous Organization (DAO).

From: https://bisq.network/faq/#How_is_Bisq_different

Only thing I know about bisq is it's run by these 2 blokes.
Never heard a bad thing about them.
It's not a 'decentralised exchange', and thank goodness for it, because that wouldn't make any sense.

Thanks for that (and to Febo), I will check it out, it's something I have never tried - I have stuck to more regular exchanges for years, about time I tried a decentralised one.  I love the idea of selling Monero in as close to an OTC as poss.  If it's for cash (and relatively safe) that could be an interesting plus...

It’s a similar concept to localbitcoins, but with “honest” peers acting as mediators (who make a small percentage of the trade), and have the options to use zelle, cash deposits, face to face, etc.

You should really check them out if you don’t know someone else to OTC trade with. Even when I used it 2 years ago or so it was really nice and my transactions went through flawlessly

Apparently they just made the biggest in history update yesterday: https://github.com/bisq-network/bisq/releases/tag/v0.9.0

I haven't ever used a decentralised exchange, but I will check Bisq out, I would like to support the concept at least.  But does it sort the fiat/crypto issue?

That's why I'm so happy to see a lot of people doing OTC trading/bisq usage from Monero people.  Seems like it's always the highest volume trading pair on bisq at least.  As long as someone is willing to sell and you are willing to buy, there will always be a market and decentralized exchanges will be in need. 

Even though I haven't used it in a while, bisq and other decentralized exchanges will have to be the answer if there is a ban on all KYC exchanges

Hmm... to force exchanges to avoid privacy coins is feasible, but it would look as it is - overly authoritarian. 

If they try, it cannot be a global ban very easily, either.  I hope they won't try. I do think people would fight an overt 'ban' in most countries.  In an age where real money-laundering by massive banks is 'normal' - it would seem total hypocrisy to try to ban a coin with a transaction level such as that of Monero's. 

And if it becomes much bigger, I doubt it will be possible to try to ban it - as they may simply fail and create a coin that ONLY works underground and in illegal ways. 

Anyone feel that Monero is likely to be 'made illegal'?

Thoughts here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/a2p8cq/the_clock_is_ticking/

Is this based on a subjective view, objective data, or both?

It's interesting that my simple question of whether the bitcoin codebase precludes dynamic blocksize due to technical reasons would spark this debate here. I guess it's still a real hot button topic. One which I never wanted to get involved in as I personally see Bitcoin as a stepping stone that has moved into a different space of a store of value and cannot evolve to fulfill its initial role. But I also see that as a good thing, we need a safe dependable chain that is completely safe from the fuckery of TPTB.

I never understood the hate for alternate chains for alternate roles, it seems obvious to me to use different tools for different tasks.



There were quite a few questions I would have preferred to answer "I have no fucking clue" but here is what I came up with my best guesses.


I think that means I am in disagreement with myself.


Only right if you decouple it from tail emission which it should not be but apparently if you try to have that discussion people stick their fingers in their ears and yell to not hear you. But seriously there are tradeoffs and currently there is no way bitcoin will ever be used for everyone to buy their morning coffe so it's already moot.

It seems to me this is a good thing as it distances Bitcoin even farther from Monero as the spaces they are in are growing wider by each decision being made and therefore make them complimentory. now all we need is a immutable decentralized crosschain solution and I'd be happy as a pig in shit.

Monero have tail emission. This cant work without one. So yes theymos is totally right.

The mining rewards debate seems like a waste of keystrokes given none of us (barring some incredible advancements--fingers crossed) will live to see it happen and there's an argument to be made that a superior quantum money will exist long before mining rewards becomes an issue. I just don't see us or BTC lasting long enough to find out.