Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 1994. (Read 3313076 times)

I'm commenting on the pattern of behavior with respect to the peculiar omission of a very interesting subset of footnotes not being referenced in the text, twice.

The "oops, sorry, mistake" defense is very popular in crypto circles. Sometimes it is perfectly honest. Sometimes it is not. People will have to make up their own minds.

As far as the technology, direction, etc. people can evaluate that best by looking at the actual project, not what you or I have to say about it.

As for calling you a dumb shit, here's the context:

No the explanation is that they have better things to do than write perfect whitepapers.  The code speaks for itself.  The zerocoin reference is obvious to anyone reading the whitepapers on tokens. They are building towards a direction where they would like to go in the hopes of being able to slot in zkSNARKS. Funny how before you called me a dumb shit for saying that there are similarities between the minting of tokens in ShadowCash as well as Zerocoin.  Yet now you are admitting their is "minimal" relation. So which is it? No relation or minimal relation? You called me a liar before for saying there was relation.  So now you are saying you only disagreed on the amount of relation? Interesting.  Obviously you are a FUDDer trying to protect yourself from competition.  It doesn't make people want to buy your coin.

So the explanation is that they made the exact same accidental error twice, including a footnote for the thing they copied but not referencing it in the text, even after this was pointed out to them the first time?

While at the same time referencing things like zerocoin (somehow they didn't forget that one), which have minimal relation to the actual technology used, but a lot of value as something that can be hyped?

I'm not buying (coins or story).

I think the whitepapers were rushed out, so they could focus on coding.  The crypto space is a competitive race, and I suppose the code was more important than the whitepaper.

Over 35 days since the Feb 18 low, XMR has been appreciating relatively stably at ~2.7% per diem.

Probably just reimplemented by something that would replace it, like maybe LTC would have actually passed it instead of just coming within a factor of 20.

satoshi wrote something about this with licenses. Paraphrasing: If you make something closed source you encourage an open source reimplementation. If you do GPL you encourage the same with an MIT-style license. So why not just start with an MIT license and avoid all the unnecessary reimplementation. Same with premines.

This is one of my concerns with the fast-ish Monero emission curve BTW. If we get too far into it without a lot of adoption then some clone or reimplementation will replace it (assuming that still is worthwhile at the time), although maybe the tail emission helps with that somewhat. Not really an issue if you're more interested in the technology than investment though.

Isn't this the exact same thing they did with the cryptonote white paper and ShadowSend? Seems to be a pattern of behavior.


Indeed

Well I agree their whitepapers could have been more professionally done and been more in depth.  But I do like what they have delivered so far.

Pline it was around 2 weeks; not one - and not 3. Eizh was correct.

Here i exposed the copying of bitmessage:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8156416

That was the reason they closed the thread and now have a self-moderated one.


When i asked about their zk-snarks promises i was referred to google.com and called a cryptonote bagholder Fudster and that cryptonote is not going to last -  since then they copied cryptonotes ringsigs - lol.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.8156886


Stay away - shady as shit.

From my understanding it was a 3 week POW period.  Any source showing it was only 7 days?  The ShadowChat whitepaper sources bit-message, and has many similarities from what I read.  That is no secret.  The ShadowChat whitepaper is here: http://www.shadow.cash/downloads/shadowcoin-p2p-em.pdf  You can link to the bitmessage paper at the end in the citations.

I am not worried about a too short mining period.  The price of SDC has been so cheap that it appears most of the miners dumped their coins cheaply.  You can still scoop like 1% of the total supply of SDC for about 20 BTC.  If anyone was cornering the market the price would be a lot higher.  As the price goes up, larger holders will sell some of their stack, resulting in better distribution.

As for being actively developed.  The team seems very large, which is why DRK's Evan Duffield tried to acquire the ShadowCash team in the early days with their merger proposal. The devs are constantly putting out updates, fixing bugs, adding improvements.  They now have an in-wallet block explorer for example that was added in the last couple of weeks.  They are also working on updating the Android wallet now. They just released the designs of the soon to be implemented decentralized marketplace. I urge you to come into the IRC chat and see that the devs are very active.  You can see the IRC chat logs here and see for yourself: http://shadowcash.io/

Premined, Instamined, coins have no future. Had Bitcoin been instamined to the extent that the actual block reward and coin supply was highly diminished through centralized acts of the developer/s, it would be even far less popular than it is today(Quite possibly dead even).

Oh.  I was unaware of any such implementation.

A time locked premine would be a great way to fund the development of a crypto project. Like a 10 year long lock. Good luck getting away with a 10 year long pump not adding anything of value to the project.

I would say that the incentive is merely to achieve one good pump.  No value required.

I picked up 10 dollars worth today just in case . I like the rhetoric, im a big fan of proof of stake, pow is clearly the best way to distribute stake (though 2 weeks is disturbing), on the off chance they deliver on it 10 dollars with this early will likely be sufficient. Part of the nice thing about instamines is that the devs have a lot of incentive to make their project valuable.

It was one week, after a few days they capped the mining to 7 days or so.
They also killed the thread where i explained how they stole the bitmessage whitepaper.

I think it boils down to, you can technically be an ass if you really want to, but that doesn't mean it necessarily is a good idea. I agree with vokain's recent posts.

I do not know your country but at least in my country you cannot be private with your wealth and that's why it is important to offer Monero for the rich elite.
They probably get a lot of calls from different salesmen of business ventures so Monero is only one of the phone calls.

It wouldn't really help because in order for scripting to work you need everyone in the network to be able to analyze your scripts to see if they resolve true. We would need a different type of transaction. A fully transparent transaction type. This would be difficult to do without having negative externalities for the privacy of other users.

Someone smarter than me feel free to correct me but this is my understanding.

Can somebody please elaborate?
Does a view key play a necessary role in implementing AT with Monero? Or how could it work?
Could Zerocash be used with AT?