Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 2072. (Read 3313076 times)

There was a wall there yes (0.0015/0.00155), but it has almost completely vanished. My guess is that the wallguy was just accumulating and not really selling, selling at such a big loss makes no real sense.

Marketcap is around 50 % lower than Monero's marketcap.
Trading volume varies a lot. Today it has been over 10 000 usd but usually it is somewhere between 3000-8000 usd range. In every trade there is a seller and a buyer and usually those participants are from the community.
UNO is not used, it is stored. If you look at the wallet adresses, many of them have hardly movements - they are just idle for hundreds of days. UNO is not technically the sharpest top coins but it is a store of value (low inflation) and a community of silver/gold bullion holders.

Unfortunately no, not possible.


Moore's law is a worthy discussion - the average Bitcoin transaction is 250 bytes, and Moore's law says that "it" doubles every 2 years (Moore's law is too slow to apply to everything, mind you, Kryder's law is typically applied to disk storage density, and that predicts 40tb drives costing $40 by the time we hit 2020). If we go solely based on Moore's law, though, we get January 2009 (Bitcoin genesis block) to today as around 6 years, so a transaction size growth of 3x = average Monero transaction size of 750 bytes.


Here's a similar, recent Bitcoin transactions: https://blockchain.info/tx/239a93ab087b57b6e4ab98a28030546e88c976bd5d66d2eae2bf311ada9d98b8

That transaction has 122 inputs and is 18.589kb. To give you some baseline, the 22.783kb Monero transaction has 12 inputs, but with a mixin of 28 that's a total of 336 signatures. It does seem that like-for-like Monero has smaller transactions - this Monero transaction with 5 inputs, no mixins, has a size of 763 bytes, this Bitcoin transaction with 5 inputs has a size of 816 bytes.


This is a tough one - which is more applicable? Kryder's law or Moore's? What about bandwidth?

The bottom line is this: Bitcoin's transaction size is only going to increase if privacy becomes an issue and people start using mixers or similar as a daily occurrence. Transactional privacy requires a trade-off. It's clear that ZeroCoin's trade-off is too large *right now*, but in 10 years time maybe even that will be acceptable. For the moment Monero's transaction size/privacy trade-off is at an acceptable ratio, and whilst we aren't blind to alternatives that may allow us to reduce the per-tx size we're also not going to chase a linear reduction. Our efforts at reducing size implication would be far better spent on finding a solution, in the future, to completely pruning the blockchain.

What's the marketcap of UNO, what's the $ that gets traded per day in UNO? Both of those things might be easily manipulated if hardly anyone trades/uses UNO, to make it look as if it's been rising these few months, when it's actually been a few traders trading amongst themselves and buying their own coins.

I agree that UNO is a clone etc.
The goal of UNO is not to be #1 in tech but # 1 in increasing the price and marketcap of the coin. While all the coins - including bitcoin - is tanking severely this coin has risen 7 months a row. The bull trend of the coin is something I am unable to ignore.
After all, I am an investor more than tech enthusiastist.
I thought in autumn 2014 that UNO is only a short term pump but behold - it is still growing.
And if there is a dump, it cannot be that severe since there are not that many coins available for dumpsters to dump.
There are more than 10 000 wallets in UNO so it is safe to assume the size of the community is probably 1000 members.

I say this once again: The bull trend has been in force months - not days or weeks. Something is fundamentally right there. I wish we as XMR community learn our lesson, too from the winners, not from the losers.

But yup - low inflation coin is something that is definetely the only way a coin can get a significiant value. Otherwise the inflation will kill the coin. Very basic economics and can be seen very clearly among the alt coins, too.

Many people like this coin.

Many people that like this coin hate some of the people that like this coin.

Aside from the currently high emission, I'm pretty sure the only reason people who like this coin, and people who want to like this coin continue to remain bearish is because they like to see certain people who liked this coin before them go almost bankrupt even more.

Actually, I'm convinced that more than half of the struggling that has gone on socially in this coin is because people hate people like rpietila.

Just speculation, not trying to personally bash the guy.

So, regardless of my personal feelings about this coin and the few people who are clearly being targeted, I'm going to hold off buying this coin until until either they're bankrupt, or divorce/divest themselves completely from this project.

I guess a risk assessment would be in order, so I'd have to research how much people like rpietila are willing to invest in this coin, whether or not that amount would put them in financial dire straits if the value of this coin were to continue to decline, and the actual amount of money I'd lose out on by either keeping the value of this coin low, or the amount of money i'd lose out on by not being financially engaged with this coin, and also the amount of value that each person like rpietila would not control in BTC due to financial involvement in XMR.

So if someone in control of 20k BTC were to invest as much as 10% as 2k BTC in XMR and lose about 75% of that value, is that valuable to me, after this player has basically relinquished 1500 BTC of control?

I guess I would have to figure out how much money these types of people were willing to short on btc, because likely after months of being bled out I could only assume that they'd get much much quieter and potentially seek to divest completely, following a potential innovative streak.

Didn't one of them already put up a big BTC wall at a low price? I can't remember what that was, .0014 or something?

W/e my proposition for a new uptrend: get the current vocally offensive megawhales to divest, expect the price to drop a ways below .001 as they recoup their losses.

Likely the response to this is: not gonna happen.

Well then, expect to be usurped by some other cryptonote coin.

Also, then there's also the massive size of the transactions. Is there any possible way to get the same security with smaller sized transactions?

It's painful to see a 20kb transaction, as one single transaction, go out to thousands of people. The size of these transactions far surpass moore's law by at least an order of magnitude. So, is it possible to get reasonably sized, high mixin, transactions for 2kb? I'm talking a mixin of no less than ten with an average of 2-3 inputs?

I mean, look at this standard transaction using the new daemon with fee scaling: https://minergate.com/blockchain/mro/transaction/653f746ee2eda1d78557f261892b0d4871748a1143501f699c89f8bc45e5180d

Thats 5 inputs, one mixin making a whopping 2.561kb transaction.

Or this one: https://minergate.com/blockchain/mro/transaction/2a51c7438c41f7eb0ee35d299e6f4cdce3479ed1fee649a296d1bab6388703fc

With 19 inupts, one mixin making a staggering 3.95kb transaction.

The 5 - 19 inputs is a pretty good baseline for establishing an average range of inputs, yet the choice of using a single mixin gives someone a greatly increased ability to make your transaction identifiable. It's just not really strong as far as anonymity goes. So really, you're getting between 2kb and 4kb transactions just for using cryptonote as a standard transaction processing system. I mean with one mixin, your transaction is indistinguishable from only one other transaction. This hardly seems like enough, because in reality, it's not enough.

Now let's take a look at some transactions with average input ranges, and look for higher mixing.

Here's a good one, it uses the old flat-fee structure, but afaik that doesn't affect the sizing at all: http://chainradar.com/xmr/transaction/7e10418c95f426428f5146adea272324bdee5bc7d5dd461b482ff16e158b1472

It's 12 inputs, with a mixin of 28, but a size of 22.783 kb.

The tough part here, is that for cryptonote to work as intended, we're outpacing moore's law by at least two entire powers of ten. For cryptonote to even work at all, with minimal anonymity, we're outpacing it by a single power of ten.

Now, let me get to why I'm setting moore's law around a transaction size of 200-400 bytes.

Let's say we're looking to handle the amount of transactions daily that bitcoin handles: https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions

I'm going to use 85k transactions per day. That's literally about 1 transactions per second.

Biggest bitcoin transaction I could find: https://blockchain.info/tx/ae6f07f187c3d4fe3c2cdb75a325b6881a524d2e7f7ec3657d26d6a0ef37c6da

as 4.882 kb

But the average bitcoin transaction is here: https://blockchain.info/tx/f18119e64bd3d8d6dfc607608e267ad83199a840237ed80db58ebbcaeddb883d

as 260 bytes

other average bitcoin transaction sizes are usually under 600 bytes.

We can safely say that the p2p network and people's hard drives can definitely handle bitcoin in its current state.

With the large amount of people rejecting of the now 20mb block size hard fork, it's seeming like this is the correct 'size' of a cryptocurrency transaction from the standpoint of moore's law in 2014. Not going into it any further.

So, as we fall further and further away from following moore's law IRL, while also currently being 4 years out from even being able to being encompassed safely by it, I'm asking seriously, does anyone see this scaling to anywhere past a few tens of thousands of people?

I don't. Not now, and not without some serious changes to transaction sizes.

edit: I'm not trying to say that this is doomed or a fruitless effort, sorry if it came off like that. I say a few tens of thousands of people because of the moore's law scaling. If bitcoin has about 1,000,000 users, we can expect 10,000 monero users. I say this because we need to assess the market for potential candidates for monero adoption. "the world" seems a bit too large, so a more manageable size of "a few tens of thousands" might be better to start with -- let alone the mindset that comes along with that. I do not think there are currently 1,000,000 bitcoin users, because typically I'd expect to use my money about once per day if I were a currency user. So at 1 tx/second, we'd see about 86k actual bitcoin users. This would correlate to between 860-8600 monero users. If bitcoin scaled to even 100 tx/sec then that would be about 8,600,000 users, so 86,000-860,000 monero users. And if bitcoin made it to 1000 tx/sec then we'd use the same math. Seems not so far off from how many people use visa: http://www.howmanyarethere.net/how-many-people-are-using-visa-credit-cards-in-the-world/


Visa claims the ability to handle, http://usa.visa.com/merchants/industry-solutions/retail-visa-acceptance.jsp:
so they get about 13125 people for every transaction per second they handle.

Or here is a claim for 10k tps: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/11/12/bitcoin-needs-to-scale-by-a-factor-of-1000-to-compete-with-visa-heres-how-to-do-it/

which would yield 31500

Or the bitcoin wiki which claims some unicorn number or 2000 tx/sec, which would yield 157,500 people per every transaction per second.

I feel my number of one person per every second of the day for every transaction per second, as about 86,000 users per transaction per second is pretty reasonable given the three above sources. Users may be different from 'people' I guess.

2nd edit:

I'd also suggest researching anger and rage triggers related to naming and branding conventions. Unconsciously, both the naming an branding used in this coin are absolutely abysmal. The color choices would normally inspire hope, but given the naming convention does the exact opposite. I would suggest a name change to something else, as the word "Monero" clearly is not having the intended subconscious effect.

I like this coin
time to buy again
go to the moon monero.

additionally price will mostly be a function of demand, especially in the future.

at this point of time inflation plays a role but we are probably even know close to a point where demand exceeds supply at current prices.

anyway if people cannot see the potential of xmr it is probably their failure. the succeess will mostly be in the hands of 10-15 people who will probably see the potential of this technology. they will be responsible for the determining how much demand will be in the future.

Unobtanium is nothing except a clone that had the majority of coins emitted in a month or three (i.e. it probably has an extremely poor distribution). Looking at the rich list here, https://chainz.cryptoid.info/uno/#!rich , that seems to be true with > 80% of coins held in 100 addresses.  It hasn't had any significant updates in more than six months, meaning it isn't even keeping up with progress implemented in bitcoin core. I know people have been shilling all over this forum for UNO, but I imagine those people are mostly early adopters looking to build buy support to dump into. I don't think UNO is surpassing XMR in marketcap, but if you think so, better go all into UNO before it gets "more rare". Also, Bryce Weiner, ick.

Sounds like Monero will never go to really high prices like UNO might go... 

^There will be a tail emission (see OP):
I believe the vast majority of holders are supporting the tail emission and it'll be implemented soon enough.

Depends on how do you define crumbs.
I think there are plenty of Moneros for sale if the price is correct.
Monero might get a serious bull market when the block reward is significiantly lower than the current state.
Let's study Unobtanium - it produces only 15 UNOs per day and it has risen since July 2014 and there is no reason why UNO would stop. There is simply no sellers but buyers only for this coin - and most of the largest wallets have been untouched for hundreds of days (=hundreds of years in crypto).

I think XMR might have similar pattern when the block reward is 0.1 XMR/block or less.
There is no need for tail emission - the price will be rewarding the miners when the blockreward is lower.

Buy low sell high, So buy when I sell and sell when I buy.

what do you strategy to trading this coin?
because I want to try to trade this coin.

thanks

I posted that the same thing happens to me. but it got deleted for some reason?

Can you sell all your coins, Maybe the price will skyrocket 

Ive been to moon already...5 times .   ech....

buy this coins and hold long time
I think this coin to the moon.

It would be greatly appreciated.

Yah know what, I'm just gonna announce when I buy. Because apparently thats when you should sell. Sombitch. Everytime. Everytime I buy it then tanks.