Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 196. (Read 3313076 times)

Can you elaborate on this or link me to a discussion that does? I know your quite familiar with the bitcoin codebase and appreciate the time you spend explaining this.
I have no time nor skillset left to do so anymore.


Nice observation but the two are not mutually exclusive.


I would think the onus would become the responsibility of the holders to secure their own reserves. I am not sure of what arguments there are i this regard.

Why would anyone pay a fee with an unlimited blocksize? Where is the economic scarcity?

Edit: What one gets is either a race to the bottom if there is real competition among miners or a cartel that may support fees for a while.

USA had 8 such years in past 56.

If by "acceptable" you mean "bloody awesome" then I agree with you! If only we had an exponentially increasing supply, say one percent or so, then we'd really be cookin'!

Do even mature economies not grow by at least one percent per year?

Mmh... let's think in a world where there is no longer any block reward.

Why would the total fees go to zero?

Miners would add as much transactions as they can, adding highest fee transactions first. So I don't see how you end up with "there is no more incentive for the POW".

As I mentioned above. If there is competition between miners then as the block reward goes to zero so do the total fees per block since the "penalty" in terms of block reward is less than that in Monero. At this point there is no incentive for the POW and the coin becomes insecure. The alternative is a mining cartel or monopoly that sets minimum fees. Quite apart from the centralization involved I have serious doubts  such a cartel will be sustainable in the long term since individual members will cheat.

A good current example is Bytecoin which is for the time being is secured by the Bitmain ASICs. The question in my mind is how long will this last as the block reward continues to fall.  The current block reward in Bytecoin per block is ~1200 BCN if one applies the 10^4 factor that would be equivalent to ~0.12 XMR or about 20% of the tail emission in Monero. By the way I prefer to see Bytecoin as the canary in the coal mine for falling block rewards as opposed to the scam in the pre or ninja mine.

Hi ArticMine, Bitcoin SV just want to increase the number of transactions and transaction fees without a blocksize limit. What do you think is wrong with this approach?

The fundamental problem with Bitcoin's so called fee market to replace the block reward is that there is zero justification for the above statement in Bitcoin whitepaper. The fact that this statement was embedded into what is otherwise a work of genius does not make the statement true. It also does not provide any justification for the game theory that statement implies. In fact there are many arguments that this fee market will not work in the absence of a block reward or where fees become the dominant source of revenue for miners.  

One very interesting argument for the failure of the Satoshi fee market is actually in Monero itself. If one looks at a miner acting in her best interests adding transactions to a Monero block, the miner will add the highest paying transactions first. This can be approximated by the highest fee per byte transaction first if the individual transaction weight is very much less than the effective median block weight.  When the penalty free portion is used up our miner will continue to add transactions until the incremental penalty paid for adding a transaction exceeds the fees paid by the transaction. Since the incremental penalty is proportional to the block reward it follows that the total fees per block paid are also proportional to the block reward. Competition between miners will ensure that. Furthermore the total fees per block are independent of the block weight. The net result of this is that if the block reward goes to zero the total fees paid per block also goes to zero. One conclusion is that in a Bitcoin like coin with a falling block reward in order for the Satoshi fee market to even have a chance of working the penalty in terms of the block reward for increasing the block size (weight) must be stiffer than that in Monero. One can then see the rationale for Bitcoin core's strict block weight limit.

Edit: One interesting anecdote: Fees in Monero are actually based upon the above.

yeah, thats the fundamental concept of transaction fees set out in the bitcoin whitepaper

in bitcoin, yeah, there is now a 1 mb block size limit, and in general the incentive to keep it that way is to create a fee market. If you want to get into the next 1 MB block, then your gonna pay for it.

That’s interesting... Never thought of it like that before. So the 1mB block size is a hard set rule and the miners will always hit that (considering how many txs there always are ) and aren’t dissuaded somehow against ever going above 1 mB due to some game theory?

XMR is a project I trust a lot. Now I'm going to review my capital if I can make a proper budgeting. In the future I think there will be much higher prices.

Amino, if current ~$60 price is half the fundamental PQ=MV price, for full XMR DNMs transactions denomination Q has to double, so that M follows, doubling to ~$120, or ~2B market cap. That implies that there's a billion dollar of transactions leftover to be denominated in XMR. What data get you to that figure?

Rational agency implies that at some point DNM shops will be forced to transact exclusively in XMR, but for that to happen major blockchain-analysis driven busts must happen. What is the current maturity of such tech?

At the moment, it also seems that XMR has been removed from Dream Market. Why? Does anyone have an estimate how much has that hurt current price?

Why would they implement stealth addresses in bitcoin, then they would not be able to track you

Thanks for the lengthily reply Ginger. So basically the answer is nothing but the lack of a consensus to adapt an emission. I have heard people mention that there is a game theory behind this but have never had that explained, could you give that a shot?

The dynamic blocksize in Monero has a cost - it uses more real world resources to process larger and larger blocksizes. Therefore, the monero protocol puts a throttle on this adaptation - if a miner wants to create a block that is greater than the median of the past 100 blocks, the miner has to sacrifice some of the block reward. So say the block reward is 3 XMR. If the miner goes over 20% in size, the block reward is reduced to something like, i dunno, 2.7 XMR. I forget the exact numbers. So the miner has to choose transactions that have enough fees that would push the total reward over 3 XMR even with the penalty.

Now, when monero finishes its primary emission, it has a tail emission. 0.6 XMR per block ( or 0.3 XMR per block minute, to keep in mind the case that we increase blocktime targets for whatever reason again). This tail emission keeps in place the ability to penalize blocksize expansion. Otherwise, if there's no way to penalize blocksize increases, miners would just grow the blocksize to get more fees.

So, IMO, its not really a BTC codebase issue, its a social covenant issue - that being that bitcion will only ever have 21 million coins. Its easy to put a tail emission in bitcoin code and make an adaptive blocksize possible.

Now, there are some that have conjectured that one could eat into the fees in the absence of a tail emission. I think the math on this doesn't work out, or it may screw with the game theory incentives. In any case, tail emission also provides continued and guaranteed rewards for mining, so it has the nice benefit of providing security to the blockchain regarding immutability in the long future. Not a single cryptocurrency exists today that is secured by a fee market. Granted, 15 years ago, not a single cryptocurrency existed. Bitcoin is a grand experiment to see if a cryptocurrency network ( a new form of money ) can be bootstrapped. Thats phase 1. Phase 2, the existence of that network / money with only network fees, in the absence of any bootstrapping, is still an experiment that has not been performed. 

Basically, the blockreward can be seen like a set of training wheels that keeps bitcoin up and running.

Long ago it was decided that Monero would take an alternative route, wherein having those wheels available to prevent the bicycle from falling over is good, and the tradeoff of having an infinite supply of monero is acceptable.

Tiny wheels, tiny infinity.

Yup, just put another buy in myself. Funny thing is I am probally one of the only regulars that also prefers a bear due to getting caught with my pants down before alphabay. W00ps!

That left a big mark.

Bad timing has been my thing in life.




Can you ELI5 for us why the BTC codebase cannot adopt a dynamic blocksize?

Monero offers something else that Bitcoin does not; namely an adaptive block weight and tail minimum emission that allows for scaling on the main chain. This lack of on chain scaling lies at the heart of the BCH split from XBT and the further split of BSV from BCH. When something as simple as increasing the transactions per second that a blockchain requires a a highly controversial and political hard fork it is hardly surprising to see the splits, wars and personality clashes we have in Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin Satoshi Vision.

On another note Bitcoin has already failed since it cannot meet the design purpose in the Satoshi paper namely a peer to peer cash like digital currency. This is primarily due to the fixed block size.

Edit: Litecoin has the same problem as Bitcoin with scaling; namely the fixed block size and falling lock reward.

Heh... ook ook!!  🙉🙈🙊






Yeah that's basically what I meant by saying I'd rather leave a little of the bottom on the table versus try to time it perfectly.

Plenty of upside to be realized more comfortably to the next true PEAK, even from as late as, say, the MIDDLE of the next up-slope... once it's very clearly gotten underway.

Meantime just MOAR POPCORN I guess  🍿  LOL

https://coinatmradar.com/bitcoin_atm/6356/bitcoin-atm-dobi-atm-tokyo-bit-point-japan-co-ltd/


I am not really sure if this ATM works, because sometimes there are listed coins here that are not really installed on the ATM. But if it works we got answer on how banned is Monero in Japan.

Something weird happened to me yesterday. I told a buddy at the casino about monero and he jumped on his tablet and did a search for the price and first thing he did is start asking me about Zcrap. I'm not sure how he got there as I was distracted but it was almost immediate so it must have popped up on his initial search. I wonder if there is some fuckery going on.