Author

Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 1953. (Read 3313084 times)

hero member
Activity: 655
Merit: 500
April 14, 2015, 10:05:57 AM
I am sorry that your explanation did not inspire confidence to invest in it. Despite my totally non-tech background, I know reasonably well how Monero operates, and it should not be impossible to gain the same understanding from emunie, although not from that explanation  Tongue

Yes, I would not recommend anyone make investment decisions from random forum posts, but I suspect you already know that Smiley Everyone needs to do their own research and make their own mind up. I was skeptical of emunie for a long while, but I am excited by their attempt to use the basic truth of the Quantity Theory of Money (MV=PQ) within a P2P network where all vaiables are known in real time, to achieve a worthwhile goal of price stability. Whether they achieve that is uncertain, but if they do then things will change quite a bit.
member
Activity: 95
Merit: 10
April 14, 2015, 10:00:03 AM
but you can't explain how monero works in detail either.

Actualy
https://letstalkbitcoin.com/blog/post/ltb-e202-understanding-monero

If you still have questions after earing this podcast come back here and the comunity will explain the rest Smiley
donator
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1036
April 14, 2015, 09:46:19 AM
I am sorry that your explanation did not inspire confidence to invest in it. Despite my totally non-tech background, I know reasonably well how Monero operates, and it should not be impossible to gain the same understanding from emunie, although not from that explanation  Tongue
hero member
Activity: 655
Merit: 500
April 14, 2015, 09:41:54 AM
variable emission depending on need=eMunie

which is just about to launch

How does it work (mods - again please allow 10 lines)?

It doesn't. So far just vapourware.

Let him explain Smiley

It's not for me to explain how emunie works. I have done my research over 18 months or so, and from what I've read and learnt using the various beta versions I believe eMunie is a serious project with merit, and its chief goal is exactly what you mentioned in your post, elastic supply based on the needs of the system with the aim of keeping EMU price relatively stable, and thus , more useful as a currency.

In 2007 most people dismissed the possibility of distributed consensus on a P2P network, but bitcoin showed that it was possible. The key point is people had to see it work before they would believe it was possible. With eMunie P2P network, ALL conditions of demand and supply within the EMU ecosystem are known in real time, and new supply of EMU created via hatchers can be adjusted up or down to match needs, over time. Obviously that description will satisfy nobody, and as emunie is still closed source nobody will be able to verify the exact details of the economic system parameters until after its launched. Investing in emunie has high risks, especially for non tech people who require others to verify the details for them. You have faith in XMR devs (and so do I), I also have some confidence in Dan Hughes, who is easily researched as a dev on the internet, but yes, you have me toast, I can't explain how emunie works, but you can't explain how monero works in detail either. In the end the average user does some research and makes a judgement. Bitcoin, monero, emunie may all be found to have fatal flaws in the future.
member
Activity: 95
Merit: 10
April 14, 2015, 09:30:33 AM
variable emission depending on need=eMunie

which is just about to launch

How does it work (mods - again please allow 10 lines)?

It doesn't. So far just vapourware.

Let him explain Smiley
Im curious too
donator
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1036
April 14, 2015, 05:46:27 AM
variable emission depending on need=eMunie

which is just about to launch

How does it work (mods - again please allow 10 lines)?

It doesn't. So far just vapourware.

Let him explain Smiley
full member
Activity: 231
Merit: 100
April 14, 2015, 04:05:15 AM
variable emission depending on need=eMunie

which is just about to launch

How does it work (mods - again please allow 10 lines)?

It doesn't. So far just vapourware.
donator
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1036
April 14, 2015, 02:53:33 AM
variable emission depending on need=eMunie

which is just about to launch

How does it work (mods - again please allow 10 lines)?
donator
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1036
April 14, 2015, 02:51:25 AM
Obviously, CKG would be a comparison, but its infancy would likely not yield enough information.

I like it when a soon-1-year-old plays so bossy towards a more-than-1/2-year-old  Grin
legendary
Activity: 3836
Merit: 4969
Doomed to see the future and unable to prevent it
April 13, 2015, 09:23:46 PM
Quote
Quote

So no economic reasoning whatsoever to the choice of approx 0.9% inflation?

There is plenty of economic reasons, first being to secure the network,[/b] without network no transactions, like rpietila said its close to what gold is now. 1% is bellow the long-run ideal inflation on a large scale economy (believed to be 2%). 1% runs of the risk of deflation with eventual lost coins it will become de-facto deflationary in the long run.

I didn't say tail emission was a bad idea. I agree with it. It just shouldn't be a "magic number" value. And Monero is NOT gold. Most everything about it is quite different than gold. There seems to be no logical reason to choose that value based on "that's how gold is".

It wasn't logical, it was indeed a magic number (at least 1% was; 0.3 coins/minute is derived from the 1%/year) chosen at the start more or less arbitrary manner based on subjective views of what was useful to do. If it turns out to be a disastrous choice with horrible consequences, then Monero will fail. This is an experiment.



I really like the way you don't sugar coat shit. Smiley

...
You mean he's busy pumping litecoin with the crappiest arguments you can find even in the deep bitcointalk mud?
(watch at 1'10): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLu1yAeWNtw


Well to be fair it was before ASIC's for Scrypt and the doggie explosion which really fueled the alt race. Which really was what killed LTC. Well that and the lack of Dev support.
legendary
Activity: 1596
Merit: 1030
Sine secretum non libertas
April 13, 2015, 08:16:27 PM
No worries. My monkey says BTC has strong support at 126usd.
sr. member
Activity: 453
Merit: 500
hello world
April 13, 2015, 07:51:45 PM
what is price doing? will 280 hold another time or time for some doom?
resistance still there, 30k on the books until 280 and who knows what else is hidden, lets see.
buy side very passive for now, just absorbing everything.

looks like bitcoin will crash one more time, some move out of alts and out of btc, a wise move?
full member
Activity: 231
Merit: 100
April 13, 2015, 06:34:30 PM
Quote
Quote

So no economic reasoning whatsoever to the choice of approx 0.9% inflation?

There is plenty of economic reasons, first being to secure the network,[/b] without network no transactions, like rpietila said its close to what gold is now. 1% is bellow the long-run ideal inflation on a large scale economy (believed to be 2%). 1% runs of the risk of deflation with eventual lost coins it will become de-facto deflationary in the long run.

I didn't say tail emission was a bad idea. I agree with it. It just shouldn't be a "magic number" value. And Monero is NOT gold. Most everything about it is quite different than gold. There seems to be no logical reason to choose that value based on "that's how gold is".

It wasn't logical, it was indeed a magic number (at least 1% was; 0.3 coins/minute is derived from the 1%/year) chosen at the start more or less arbitrary manner based on subjective views of what was useful to do. If it turns out to be a disastrous choice with horrible consequences, then Monero will fail. This is an experiment.




Sure, we can just say "hey it is an experiment". But wouldn't it be nicer to have a logical economic reasoning with maybe not precisely predictable results, but at least an intelligently planned results? I already see interesting brain storming in the last few posts. Generally the less magic numbers, the better. Something for Monero Research Labs maybe...



EDIT: If I'm dragging this on in the wrong thread just ask and I'll happily move it elsewhere.

I think it is befitting to realise that "intelligently planned results" does not just happen, especially in such an inherently wishy-washy subject as economics. It's akin to hubris to believe we can "fix" it with the "perfect formula", because the world and the economy is such a dynamic place. There are too many variables inflicting upon that little special reward percentage for THAT to be the 'magic number'.

I can get behind the "let's experiment based on a finger in the air" approach as a 'better than' solution. Especially because no currency is eternal, and eventually something else and better comes along and Gresham's Law applies.

With a low percentage of 0.9% I do believe that coins lost will be larger than the emission.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 502
April 13, 2015, 06:18:49 PM
\
variable emission depending on need=eMunie

which is just about to launch

lol, emunie. Best running joke in crypto.

Longest running joke, I would say Wink
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1012
Still wild and free
April 13, 2015, 06:07:27 PM
eMunie

which is just about to launch

About to launch like since 2 years, or even more about to launch?
hero member
Activity: 655
Merit: 500
April 13, 2015, 06:05:14 PM

I repeat my thesis that the inflation should mimic gold, so that new currency could be created at a variable rate depending how much need there is, preserving both the first-mover advantage without which it has no chance to take off, and the late-mover fairness, without which it has no chance to fly.

AFAIK, only CKG has this emission formula. To implement it in a P2P distributed software, might require solving challenges.


variable emission depending on need=eMunie

which is just about to launch
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
April 13, 2015, 05:24:57 PM
I'd like to make the suggestion that possibly getting in contact with any game developers, likely MMORPG game developers might be a good route to pursue if you're looking to study the effects of various inflations on the value of simulated currencies revolving around simplistic economic models.

Obviously, CKG would be a comparison, but its infancy would likely not yield enough information.

Anyone know anyone that works at Blizzard?

I don't know about Blizzard but the Valve economist guy is somewhat busy right now



You mean he's busy pumping litecoin with the crappiest arguments you can find even in the deep bitcointalk mud?
(watch at 1'10): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLu1yAeWNtw

Wow worst call ever. LTC in December 2013. LOL


legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1012
Still wild and free
April 13, 2015, 05:17:49 PM
I'd like to make the suggestion that possibly getting in contact with any game developers, likely MMORPG game developers might be a good route to pursue if you're looking to study the effects of various inflations on the value of simulated currencies revolving around simplistic economic models.

Obviously, CKG would be a comparison, but its infancy would likely not yield enough information.

Anyone know anyone that works at Blizzard?

I don't know about Blizzard but the Valve economist guy is somewhat busy right now



You mean he's busy pumping litecoin with the crappiest arguments you can find even in the deep bitcointalk mud?
(watch at 1'10): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLu1yAeWNtw
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
April 13, 2015, 05:11:18 PM
I'd like to make the suggestion that possibly getting in contact with any game developers, likely MMORPG game developers might be a good route to pursue if you're looking to study the effects of various inflations on the value of simulated currencies revolving around simplistic economic models.

Obviously, CKG would be a comparison, but its infancy would likely not yield enough information.

Anyone know anyone that works at Blizzard?

I don't know about Blizzard but the Valve economist guy is somewhat busy right now

legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
April 13, 2015, 05:03:21 PM
This is getting a bit off topic but one idea that has been proposed is to simply emit one unit per hash of proof-of-work. (No magic numbers at all!)

The bold part is sarcastic, right?

No, not really. 1 hash = 1 unit removes the magic numbers from things like inflation rate, coin supply, etc. That doesn't make it a good approach necessarily.



It sounds as abritrary as anything else to me. Has the "advantage" of being a round number, but that's all.

EDIT: I mean arbitrary as "magic number".

The growth rate is tied directly to a physical property. Advantage? Disadvantage? I'm not sure, but it is different from just setting a mathematical growth rate as with Bitcoin or Monero.
Jump to: