Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 1975. (Read 3314330 times)

99.999% (maybe even more 9s) of people in the world haven't even assigned a value to Bitcoin yet, let alone considered substituting it for something better. Is there a Big Mac index for Bitcoin? How many places that accept Bitcoin aren't converting straight to their native currency because we are still in the "is it worth thousands of $$$$ or is it worth nothing" phase? 21% of tips given through changetip on reddit go unclaimed and a lot of people still think it's just used for buying drugs or it went bankrupt. You gotta admit that it has a bad rep right now. Litecoin looks like it is going on a straight path to zero but you have to realize that Bitcoin has been following the same path which began at the same time and it offers no technological improvements over litecoin so why should it succeed when litecoin shouldn't?

I will add the disclaimer that I am another one of the people that no longer owns any Bitcoin unless they are used to purchase Monero or to use for sports betting because they don't take monero yet. There are some fundamental flaws in Bitcoin that make me think it will not succeed and some that make me not want to use it at all. Biggest is lack of privacy and the other is lack of scalability. If Bitcoin can address those two issues I would jump back in but it seems like there are too many cooks in the kitchen now to come to agreements on major issues. Two years ago I would have aggressively defended Bitcoin to someone saying the things I say now but I am losing faith.

 

this is nonsense. if you believe there will always be a better crypto then there is no use investing in them other than speculation and day trading.

there is such a thing as network effect. and bitcoin's own dwarfs monero's by a couple order of magnitudes.

protocols don't need to be perfect, they just need to be good enough and all signs point to Bitcoin being good enough.

Monero is unique from most other alts in that it does present a use case that the market demands and that can not (yet?) be filled by Bitcoin but I believe it is too little too late for Monero to supplant Bitcoin on technological merits alone

Yeah I still can't find it. Maybe I'm mixing up a bias with the common aphorism. Though I could've sworn...

I don't remember anyone saying these exact words, what we like to say to each other is: "don't invest more than you can afford to lose".

 

this is nonsense. if you believe there will always be a better crypto then there is no use investing in them other than speculation and day trading.

there is such a thing as network effect. and bitcoin's own dwarfs monero's by a couple order of magnitudes.

protocols don't need to be perfect, they just need to be good enough and all signs point to Bitcoin being good enough.

Monero is unique from most other alts in that it does present a use case that the market demands and that can not (yet?) be filled by Bitcoin but I believe it is too little too late for Monero to supplant Bitcoin on technological merits alone

In my mind it is much simpler why Monero can overtake Bitcoin; it fulfills the cypherpunk dream of an e-cash. I just use bitcoin as a tool to buy monero and it's because i want e-cash and nothing short of this will do. It's weird for me to think that an intellectual dream/problem could be abandoned because an "almost there" enjoys market share. Bitcoin is a nice attempt (entry point), but it failed the fundamental mission (exit point). I believe Satoshi understood Bitcoin as the start and not the end, so he's probably enjoying Monero's rise with the rest of us.

do we really, as the smartest kids in the room, discuss about a cryptocurrency replacing bitcoin?

no fuckin way this will happen in the near future - money and value is an institution

when we say monero is worth 0.004 you may get a hint about what I am talking.

the comparison to any utility spending technology is complete nonsense - you simply do not substitute value for a slightly better technology, imagine what level of stress it would be to change the way we exchange value every 2-3 years .

the reason why monero is so special is because it can fill the biggest existing niche namely privacy - this alone given makes it better than every other coin despites bitcoin.

+1

There's no way you can suggest Monero will replace Bitcoin in public and not get laughed out the room.

No POW coin has any fighting chance against Bitcoin. As it stands right now anyway.

do we really, as the smartest kids in the room, discuss about a cryptocurrency replacing bitcoin?

no fuckin way this will happen in the near future - money and value is an institution

when we say monero is worth 0.004 you may get a hint about what I am talking.

the comparison to any utility spending technology is complete nonsense - you simply do not substitute value for a slightly better technology, imagine what level of stress it would be to change the way we exchange value every 2-3 years .

the reason why monero is so special is because it can fill the biggest existing niche namely privacy - this alone given makes it better than every other coin despites bitcoin.

True but I'm not sure how quickly that level of standard gets adopted in the first place. Are we into the TCP era yet or are we back in the Appletalk/netbios frames/ipx/etc. era still?

Whatever crypto really makes it big (and it may well not be Bitcoin or Monero) will likely be dominant for decades if not longer.

technology choice game

I want to share a different approach from the more or less empirical driven approach by risto why monero could be the special one. It is more in the tradition of evolutionary economics and game theory. I think it is quite a helpful approach to make sense of these uncertain markets and should be easy to understand even without an education as economist - I taught it to m.a. students which did not have a background in economics. probably even a guidance regarding development can be derived by it.

we need a few assumptions:

1.) the success of cryptoprotocols especially currencies is driven by network effects

2.) there is a niche for a decentralized private ledger and this niche cannot be filled by bitcoin (otherwise we could stop here)

3.) there is a competitors on the market, existent, or coming in the future

4.) the utility of a network grows with the number of participants



5.) we have two competing technologies, in this case monero and zerocash and three different agents

6.) we assume that zerocash is even superior to monero (zerocash is a placeholder for all coming superior private decentralized ledger)

7.) we assume that two agents coordinated on the inferior technology (in this case monero) get the same utility as the one coordinated on the superior technology, whereas three agents coordinated on the inferior technology get as much as two on the superior technology



8.)
T1 = Zerocash > T2= Monero

9.) utility: numerical example 1T1=2, 2T1=3 3T1=4; 1T2=1 2T2=2 3T2=3

10.) 3T1 with the utility of 4,4,4 is obviously a nash-equilibrium, what is more important is that 3T2 with 3,3,3 is a nash-equilibrium as well, in this case the utility of the network outweights the superiority of the technology


What is important to understand is that we should make very sure that we get the second agent, if we reached this stadium and the rest is relatively sound the war is won. The guidance is obviously that we need a gui to include more people of the agent 2 case. At this point there is no serious competitor, but this will probably change in the future. We do not need to be feared as long as we manage to get agent 2.

This illustration also shows why bitcoiners do not need to be feared of any altcoins - the war over the transparent ledger is won.

The weaknesses of this approach are obviously its simplifications - how do we measure utility of privacy etc. pp, but as an illustration, I guess it is sound

 









 

the comparison to any utility spending technology is complete nonsense - you simply do not substitute value for a slightly better technology, imagine what level of stress it would be to change the way we exchange value every 2-3 years .

Yet the internet is still running on top of TCP/IP as it was when you were a kid.

This is a fundamental error, that many people here make. Sure, there's a surge when the bull run occurs, but during the whole bear-trend last year BTC user base has grown bigger (https://blockchain.info/charts/my-wallet-n-users). Tying BTC/USD price to the user base is utterly wrong, IMHO. Under the current circumstances (ie: unregulated exchanges, gray legal area) it's very easy for somebody with big cash to control the BTC/USD price.

Of course, the same goes for XMR...

You do not need fundamental shift to make things better.
Monero can also be considered as a cryptocurrency and so can bitcoin.

Bitcoin network will work just fine as long as 21 million coins will be mined but the community will not grow unless the price doesn't restart bull trend. Chances are, bitcoin will start having negative network effect and this is the golden opportunity for Monero to claim the first place among the crypto currency.

I used to have most of my cryptos in bitcoin but as the price does nothing but goes down I am not interested in holding it anymore.
I am not saying bitcoin has nothing use but personally I see Monero having more use. It can be used as a everyday currency (once the infrastructure is ready - other than xmr.to - I am refering to things like merchant tools, direct fiat exchange etc).

Monero is useful for me personally and for many others, in a way to keep my funds private.
Who want to expose one's funds to the whole earth? At least not me.

Yet the internet is still running on top of TCP/IP as it was when you were a kid.

Yes, tech tends to go forward.
When I was kid internet was introduced, and it was with modems that made the noise. And it was expensive, charge was 0.10 usd per minute.  
Now we are having pretty fast internet connections as a human right almost.
When new crypto is introduced, we simply buy us into it. Obviously the one who gets in first will get best price. The last pays the equilibrium price. Same as Monero.

 

this is nonsense. if you believe there will always be a better crypto then there is no use investing in them other than speculation and day trading.

there is such a thing as network effect. and bitcoin's own dwarfs monero's by a couple order of magnitudes.

protocols don't need to be perfect, they just need to be good enough and all signs point to Bitcoin being good enough.

Monero is unique from most other alts in that it does present a use case that the market demands and that can not (yet?) be filled by Bitcoin but I believe it is too little too late for Monero to supplant Bitcoin on technological merits alone

Yep, pretty useless. Of course I have grand visions of the future just like the rest of us, but cryptocurrency hasn't reached the point where it offers anything of value to the average joe. But, as I stated in my last comment, that could change at any moment.

Watching the price and beating out other coins is fun for sure But we'll never get closer to real-world adoption until we start thinking outside of our circle. Even the great Bitcoin isn't really doing that.