Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 2071. (Read 3313076 times)

So a growth of 2 mb/day is equivalent to 1579520 b/day in natural growth, or 1.580 mb/day in legit transactions, where we have about 1.580/.010 kb /tc so we have like 158 transactions per day, or the equivalent of .001828 transactions per second, or about .1828% of bitcoin daily transaction action daily?

I think monero is a niche coin (anonymity).
For average user I guess it doesn't play so significiant role which protocol the coin is.
From average Joe's perspective all the cryptos are on the same line - they call all the crypto protocols by the same name - digital currency.

My perspective is here to have a coin that gives me some value, and a coin that has designed to increase in price is something that brings to me value personally.


I am not saying you are wrong and XMR is bad, by no means no. Monero has a chance to increase in value by many multiples, if not against bitcoin, so against fiat money at least (assuming btc is more expensive 3-4 yrs from now than it is today).

I am not suggesting to dump XMR (I have pretty huge stack of it), but also why to increase the amount neither.

For me it is cool if you guys are not interested in this type of coins that have low inflation and 7 months long bullish price trend. I guess you have your prefeences and I have my preferences.  

Very little at the current level of activity. The growth rate of the blockchain is currently something like 2 MB per day, so still well under a GB per month of bandwidth on average, assuming each transaction is sent four times (once in a block and once on its own, sending and receiving).

Even low-end mobile plans can cover that within base usage. (I don't recommend that though, since there may be substantial variations from the average.)

Monero is worth, to me, whatever it is I can afford to pay. My hard drive space is nothing compared to the bandwidth it takes to both utilize my own hard-drive space as well as share the blockchain with as many people as possible, which may will be worth much more than $.18. Again, this is under the idea that the price of hard drive space will trend toward zero because legitimate pruning is a possibility and not just size reduction.

But, how much bandwidth does the daemon use a month?

Admittedly, it's not being shared across a 3g or 4g network, but if it's even more than 1gb a month, then it's likely more costly than $.18.

Actually, if my bandwidth was capped at 150 GB /month and I was paying the same $60 a month I do now, and you're saying  it will cost me between $.18 cents to $1.8 then I would expect to use anywhere from 450 mb to 4.5 gb a month from just running my daemon on a standard broadband connnection.

If this was a 3g or 4g network, I would expect 10x that, at $1.8 to $18 a month. This is still affordable, if necessary, if Monero were to require it for usage.

Is .45 to 4.5 gb a month an expected amount of usage of the monero daemon?

The original pool payouts were absolutely terrible, but even after the dust fix they can still be quite small, paying out as little 0.1-0.3, which is something like 4 USD cents. That creates an excess of small outputs on the chain and makes subsequent transctions larger too.

Unless we expect Monero to be used for microtransactions in a big way, the mix will change once mining and trading of recently-mined coins is a much smaller proportion of usage.


In terms of storage on your computer, it is not. A moderate 1 TB hard drive costs about 60 USD so a 3 GB file costs you about 18 USD cents. A 100 GB SSD is about the same, so 1.80 USD. If you don't think running Monero is worth 0.18-1.80 USD (a one time cost that you can recover by uninstalling it) to you then I guess its kind of a waste of time to even discuss.

LOL without glasses and coffee and thought the "." was a ",". My Apologies even though factually correct.



LOL, definitely a pastime of mine. ;P

I guess that brings us a bit closer.

I think the pools have been stabilized with their payouts for, let's say half their lifetime now, so we're dealing with about a 75% of 50% of 97.6% of 90% of 10315, or about 1132 bytes, which is only about 51% larger than fluffypony explained.

My error was caused the the lack of want to incorporate almost double the amount of time necessary to estimate the size in the first place, resulting in a 10% error.

My second error was caused by apparent lack of incorporating that 1 kb is exactly 1024 bytes and not 1000 bytes, resulting in a ~3% error.

My third error was based on the assumption that the blocks were not based on a database, resulting in a 50% error.

My fourth error was based on that pool payouts were every block, instead of at a certain threshold, which is arguably speculative, resulting in a 75% error.

But the reality is, the acutal blockchain size on my computer right this second is still well over 10kb/tx, regardless of speculative changes or archetypal changes to block structure ........ since april 14 2014 until feb 8 2015, the average transaction size is, in real average reality over 10 kb per transaction.

I understand that a db will mitigate this, and pool payouts will change this, and bytes/kbytes across continents will change this, but the actual size of the file on my computer compared with the real number of people that has made a transaction on the monero network to date, is really 10kb per transaction.

I see that it's not getting bigger, but please, understand that this is a massive number.

it will take time for it to go down, time that I expect will be paid for in whale blood.

I am a holder, a gambler, but not a buyer.

That's not actual size of the chain itself, that is the size of the serialized data structures that get stored by the daemon. This is done somewhat inefficiently. The actual size is roughly half that.

Also, current transactions on the chain are larger than a long-term average would be (with more usage), because of the relatively high portion that are pool payouts, or spending of dusty pool payouts. Once the typical coin is spent around many times rather than being mined and hoarded or spent a few times, the average will converge to something closer to what I estimated above, which is about 8 inputs, 8 outputs, possible somewhat smaller.

Discussion about Monero transaction sizes and how that might help or hinder its success is definitely on topic, just not back and forth about kilobytes vs. bytes and such

I know smooth just made a mod note of keeping back the discussion, but here's my numbers:

292 bytes is coinbase reward

427881 blocks total

124,941,252 bytes for total bytes for coinbase reward

3,573,000,000 is the size in bytes of the blockchain

5002 pages is the number of pages chainradar has of blocks with >1 transaction in them, 30 blocks a page

2536 @ 2 tx ea = 2526 * 30 = 75780 transactions

3617 @ 3 tx ea = 1081 * 2 * 30 = 64860

4148 @ 4 tx ea = 531 * 3 * 30 = 47790

4462 @ 5 tx ea = 314 * 4 * 30 = 37680

4666 @ 6 tx ea = 204 * 5 * 30 = 30600

4800 @ 7 tx ea = 134 * 6 * 30 = 24120

4867 @ 8 tx ea = 67 * 7 * 30 = 14070

4906 @ 9 tx ea = 39 * 8 * 30 = 9360

and add another 30000 estimated all the way until the last page

so a total of 304260 plus an estimated 30k tx's over a block with greater than 10 tx's a piece gives us a total of 334260 transactions.



So, my average monero transaction size is actually closer to 10315 bytes, more than 10x higher than your figure fluffypony.

How do we come so far apart?

Keep in mind that I'm going to put an accuracy on my figure of about 90%, but we're still so far apart.


Please forgive me for the additional 2.4 % + .0024^2, etc ... error in my numbers then

There is no more supply than demand, otherwise the price would be 0.

We all have a different definition of a crap coin, and I don't pretend to have a superior one in general. Though, I recon Monero being a different beast here, and I would be glad if you could stop bringing examples from other coins if everything you are bringing to the discussion is about block reward and price.
Why not selling all your XMR to buy some UNO? If you start to answer "because XMR has some intrinsic interesting fundamentals...", that will be spot on.

Yes that's right, and intentional. Section 2.5 of the white paper talks about one of the ways bloat in Bitcoin was improved upon (by not using a bulky spend and redeem scripts for standard transactions). There are other ways though too. The encoding in general is very compact.

(Also note by the way, that the above Monero transaction has 4 outputs but the above Bitcoin transaction has only 2. So the Monero transaction is smaller in encoding despite being functionally larger.)

Of course, this high baseline space efficiency gets offset by the increased space usage of stealth addresses and mixing, but were the protocol not designed to be very space efficient to begin with, the transactions would be much larger than they would otherwise be.

A pretty good expectation for number of inputs is something like 6-10, with a likely average of 8.  The number of inputs will equal the number of outputs and the number of outputs can be estimated from the observation that a typical transaction will have one recipient and one change. Each of those recipients will receive an amount that will probably have between 3 and 5 significant digits. It could possibly be smaller; many retail items are priced with one or two significant digits (29.95 is actually 30.00, or one significant figure; 14.95 is 15.00, or two digits; etc.).

MOD NOTE: Lets cut short the back and forth on bytes, kilobytes, etc.

  In Binaryworld kilo is 2^10 = 1024.  This isn't the metric system  

What is the defination of a crap coin?
Based on the price movements, Monero looks like a crap coin currently... I am not saying I think it is but it just looks that there is less demand than there is supply.

What about optionally reduced security, while also offering the same security?



Yes, I had gotten the vibe that I had misrepresented Moore's law likely at the same time as you were writing your post, sorry for that. Perhaps we should use it more as an example of some law that represents "real physical barriers that will hinder significant usage, due to network capacity and HDD capacity". I'll look into Kryder's law, as it seems a little bit better at describing what I was trying to say, but I'm unsure if it encompasses network capacity as well as HDD space? Also, please remove the block reward, if you would, from your standard Monero transaction size, as I'm willing to believe that the coinbase reward is likely 50% or more of the actual representative transaction on the network, and would have a large effect on this value you've presented as it's a single input transaction with no mixin, and i don't believe it's representative of a standard transaction size unlike bitcoin. I would do so myself, but it seems like you've analyzed this in-depth and would only have to to absolutely minimal work. Also, the 10x faster block reward in Monero compared to Bitcoin would skew this number even further.

Unless, this number has already had this done to it?

Guess I'll look!

What is it?

Total transactions - total blocks = number of real transactions

and

size of blockchain - (number of real transactions * size of block with only coinbase reward) = size of monero blockchain due to real transactions

Then take the (number of real transactions) and divide it by the (size of monero blockchain) to find the average size of real monero transactions?

Sorry if you've already done this, just wondering?



It's mostly bandwidth and HDD space that I was concerned with. HDD space could be mitigated because I'm operating under the assumption that the blockchain can be legitimately pruned, and not just a mere reduction in size, so that leaves bandwidth the major hinderance.

What kind of bandwidths does this use?

I'm curious, because with all this net neutrality stuff in the USA, you're likely going to see monthly GB caps become a harsh reality, coupled with already allowable network speeds.

Taking into account that most people would likely opt for streaming netflix or some other form of media rather than use the conventional tv cable lines, this starts to choke up the bandwidth accessible to p2p cryptocurrencies, torrents, etc. 300 million of the richest people on the planet, and arguably the same demographic that provides a major basis of cryptocurrencies, will have to budget their bandwith to accomodate these things, or be faced with overusage penalties. So now, we're not only talking about Kryder's law, were also looking at some adulterated version of it that will likely come into play if you're hitting around 30Gb a month in network usage.




I like it!

Can you stop with your cheap analogies?
I won't get lengthy on the fact that apparently you want Monero to get more expensive for stupid reasons.
Your raisoning is also fundamentally just crap. Nobody cares about the absolute reward/block, even if you insist on that again and again. That is one of the usuless argument Litecoin used to differentiate from Bitcoin for instance.
Glad you're a long term investor in XMR, but please stop being talkative about the inspiration/examples we should take from crap coins.

He seems to be at the Bottom of a Bottle

Pretty sure this is a difference in dialect.

America: 2561 bytes = 2.561 kb = 2561 bytes / 1000 bytes/kilobyte

Wherever you are: 2.561 kb = 2561000 bytes

Where are you?

Sorry, stopped reading when you Stated bytes were kilobytes.