Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 2086. (Read 3313076 times)

I limited the collective which I represent to 0.1% median mean per capita.  Whether you consider that a yes or a no is up to you.

I'd take a couple of thousand off your hands. PM if considering dumping and we'll see if we can strike a deal.

speaking of libertarians, Is anyone actively on their site promoting? I'd check the MEW thread but I'll be damned if I'm going to pay to give free marketing idea's.

What's a cloakcoin?

Edit: that's a joke. CLOAK is an abandoned project whose anonymity didn't work. Its market cap is now ~$25,000.

I'll see if I can find where it was cited, I think it was on either deepdotweb or reddit that was reporting that listings on Nucleus (similar to SR) were showing people asking for Darkcoin or Monero.

Either way, the casual Monero user is going to be interested in the anonymity of using it vs darkcoin/darksend. I could be wrong in my perception of what the casual monero user is going to use it for. Setting libertarians aside, what's the general use case for it vs something like cloakcoin? I think it's acceptance on more exchange and market acceptance.  Like I said, I could be wrong.

Just curious, and you have no need to answer this...  but did you limit yourself to 0.1% supply?

Sometimes, in order to fix stupid, one must smack a shovel up the side of the head of said stupid head. Now some will argue that you can't fix stupid and there is some merit to that argument. Unfortunately uber stoopid is terminal.

The mixin count refers to the number of other signatures (aside from yours) in the ring-signature that authorizes the transaction. So a mixin of 3 means that there are a total of 4 signatures. This means that someone looking at the monero blockchain has no way of knowing which of the four signers is the true sender.

re: Uber

Agreed. We've not yet sufficient usability to seriously suggest XMR to those most in need of its benefits, but it won't be long before we do. And if those who are most in need of its benefits are too short-sighted to realize that they need XMR's benefits, then it will be up to us to build competing services to demonstrate that fact.

re: emotional investing

I've been holding some amount of crypto without interruption for more than three years, friend. I do not invest emotionally, but I can recognize a good deal when I see one.

Which suggests to me that another use-case of XMR might be au courant :  In light of Über's "rides of glory" fiasco, I want to pay for car service in XMR.
Unfortunately that's not the whole solution:  The app is the root of the problem, not the credit card.  But it is a necessary part of the solution.
These flaps and furors will occur again in future.  When they do, we need to hop on them, inject the privacy benefits of cryptonote into the conversation.

Could be a cultural difference. That's just the way we talk in New York.

The Bible has 100 translations and versions, correct? The way I see it, we need to get this message out in every language and style there is. Some people demand to be confronted. Some people demand to be spoken to and told what to do plainly and for what reasons. You can be the King James version if you will, but I'm going to elucidate this "pet project" in the manner in which I'm familiar.

Emotional investment in the merits of a pet project (XMR for example), combined with a history of (e.g. FUD, and buffer/numerical overflow software) attacks upon it, can lean to an unhealthy level of sensitivity, paranoia even.  If you find yourself reacting in this way, you probably shouldn't be making investment or trading decisions until you've distanced yourself a bit from the situation emotionally, so that reason can do its work unclouded.  And please think twice before posting a reactive negative message.  It can harm your own interests by damaging the social atmosphere which your investment breathes, and depends upon.  God knows I've been guilty of hasty reactive hostility on more than one occasion.  Let that serve as a lesson for other kids.

That said, it is helpful to confront uncertainty with elucidating questions, confront error and falsehood with factual truth, and confront more subtle malignancies by exposing their dark folds to clarity in incremental steps with the scalpel of logic (rather than using a rhetorical hammer to smash at every perceived threat).

I very much enjoy reading your thoughts. Thank you, sir.

Minor correction: XMR has never had a higher cap than DRK. The per coin price of XMR was higher briefly several times in August.

The numbers do improve over time, but 10% is beyond the pale.  It could be fixed with an airdrop or some other expedient to disperse those coins, but that leaves a lingering issue:  What does that history say about the competence, the moral and strategic capability of the leading actors?  The instamine distribution numbers could be fixed, but as long as those actors are still influential in the community, the technology decisions, the governance, I don't think it is a reasonable place to store value -- nor would I be inclined to trust lifestyle-threatening secrets to their quasi-cryptographic privacy schemes, let alone their implementation of those schemes, given the manifold ways in which they could subvert those obfuscations in order to conduct extortion which would be far, far more profitable than any instamine has ever been.  As an investment?  My observation of enterprises over the years has been that any sort of internal corruption absent rigorous and effective governance capable of detecting and correcting it, is probably going to be fatal to the enterprise as a whole.

I know this is not a DRK-bashing thread.  But DRK does have more nominal cap than XMR, so it is very important to the future of XMR.  XMR cap passed DRK briefly before the BCX fud fiasco.  Any meaningful speculation on XMR depends in some non-negligible part on its ability to take share from DRK.  thankful_for_today is no longer in the mix, so I feel the sources of potential corruption have been removed, the taint effectively washed away, from XMR.   The rapid mining start was somewhat rash perhaps, but entirely open and public, and the distribution impact miniscule.  This makes the investment potential much better.  The tech makes the transaction potential much better, because it is darker than dark, and less likely to be sabotaged, subverted.  The value store potential....well, that depends on so many other factors, and is so far out on the horizon that I won't even go there yet.

I'm sure the readers enjoy the clarification. Thank you. 40% of the current supply of DRK was instamined.

Monero has seen quite a bit of transactional use, for a coin of its age and liquidity.  I can say this because I have used it enough, for actual goods and services purchases, so that I can place a respectable minimum bound on such uses.  That is not wide-spread use, just anecdotal use, like the bitcoin pizza and alpaca socks.  It proves that it *can* be used, an existence proof.  It does not prove that it *is* being used, or that it *will* be used.  Statistics from mymonero.com would be super-helpful in gauging trends in transactional use, or one could estimate on the basis of samples and transactional data from the blockchain.  Hard to put error bars around that, however, given the lack of a workable, rigorous sampling methodology.

Those numbers are so far from the sort of transaction volume required to provide fundamental value in the sense of quantity theory that they are largely irrelevant to that aspirational regime:  Likely, there are several model phase changes in between the current state and that goal state.  When you buy into XMR, you are buying into the tech, the team, the community, making a choice that the technology is sufficiently compelling, the team sufficiently competent, the community sufficiently vital, to create a compelling distinction from any alternatives meeting the requirements of a leading dark ledger.  Those are the only fundamentals that matter right now:  Tech, team, and traction.  (I needed a third "t", sorry.)

DRK's launch day was bad. Terrible. Horrible. Should-have-been-relaunched. Even scammy. Etc.

However, the above is a bit disingenuous. Right now, day 1 stands a bit under 40% of current supply. The entire instamine is about 10% of estimated total supply.

I enjoy your other analyses, so keep it up! 

Highest number is the best. It is safer, but you will pay more fees than when using a lower mixing count. I don't know for sure what it refers to, but I think it's the same as number of repetitions when using coinjoin (transaction will be mixed 3 times when using mixing count 3). I hope someone with more knowledge on this subject could explain it better.

Haha. The only reason XMR is not a daytrading coin is that you can't short it. Inflation is too high to really bet on short-term upward movements. The inflation will be high for 2-3 more years. That means that the rest of the world has 2-3 years to figure out what XMR is and get some before supply dries up and things get serious, which is about 2-3 years longer than the world had to figure out what Darkcoin* was (24 hours) before nearly 50% of it was distributed.

It's plenty of time.

For those lucky enough to be reading this now or before 2017, you should take your balls in your hand and acquire 0.1% of XMR along with your BTC.

* Darkcoin, is, by the way, a technically inferior coin that will almost certainly be supplanted by even hackjob bitcoin-based privacy solutions such as Dark Wallet or sidechains, let alone XMR. No offense, Taaki et al. It's the best that bitcoin will ever do with its political constraints.