Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 2153. (Read 3312512 times)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6D6HKQ4i5Y

It is tied to BTC it should not fall with it. Deluding yourself is as bad as fud. I picked the wrong time to buy back in.

But at least my Doggies are rallying.

Once again price correlates with BTC falling. So it's not so obvious if there was actually so much influence of all the latest events and discussions. Everything is OK. It's just bear market. It will change in proper time.

"The attack" is simply the ongoing process of people who want to compete for either money or attention on the basis of various forms of exploits and attacks, or threats of the same. It will never be finished, it is just something needs to be dealt with, like cleaning the windows or mowing the lawn.

Are you sure the attack has finished?

Mine, mine, mine, mine!!!!!!

yeah it's been interesting watching the "post-attack" happenings.
I was expecting to shoot back into the low 004 range, but as it turns out we're still on a slight decline.

It's weird how everything has kind of gone silent, anticlimactic if you will...even the trolls seem to have moved on.

I'll be buying more soon to keep the cost average down in case it dips further in any case.

Perfect executive summary.

The fact that the price is still .0034xxx (actually, now .00337xx) makes me wonder if the market is still cautious about the threat.

Seems as though you see it exactly the way I do, which makes me believe I'm seeing it right and the market is just a bit behind or slightly less informed.  I'm sitting here wondering if there is something I am missing, because this price does not make a lot of sense to me.

Guess that means I better buy some more. Edit: I just posted in another thread that by my reckoning, XMR is on a 15-20% discount right now at .00337773.  Just placed a couple of orders, not much below where we are, that I hope will fill.

Executive summary sir:

There was a threat.

To the extent that the threat was credible, it was mitigated in the code.
During the mitigation, most exchanges stopped transacting with the monero block chain, but kept exchanging openly.
There were some brief DDoS attacks and minor alerts, but no substantial problems

Business as usual resumed shortly after the mitigation work was completed, with some nice enhancements to the code that prevent this sort of threat from reoccurring. 

Lessons learned discussions are still ongoing but at minimum, the enhancements are sufficiently innovative that they may be adopted by all other coins to prevent this type of threat in a distributed fashion.  This is a win for crypto currency in general.

Back to speculation...

When will we get back to .0036?  Are people still thinking that this TW is going to materialize?

Personally, I suspect we'll hit .0042 within a week.

Excellent analysis from both rdnkjdi and oda.krell.

And what NewLiberty said about fire drill is spot on.

Thanks to all for the insightful comments.

There has been no evidence of an attack aside from a small amount of anomalous network traffic yesterday that may or may not have been related.

The attack is in the form of a credible threat coupled with an actual DDoS on a major exchange.

We are vigilant and taking actions to mitigate the threat.

Can someone put everything that happened very briefly for a non computer nerd in laymans term? Is BCN attack legit? what is going to happen? what the hell is this.

This time, at least we know it is coming.

I waste a little time on the psychological aspects as well, but feel no personal malice or ire.  To polish a good game of chess, one needs worthy opponents.  I also don't mind if the little FUD games were profitable for him.  He sold or bought a bit of reputation and maybe got or lost some XMR or BTC out of it, none of that affects me.
What it did do is it raised a challenge, and though it distracted from some important pursuits for development, it may result in raising the security level a bit.

Monero is very easy to mine.  I can run it in the background on one of my game machines and add a few hashes to the network when I am not goofing off.  Everyone can.  It is like the early Bitcoin days all over again.  And hey, it just might catch on, you may want to get some for yourself.

There will be MUCH greater opposition in the days and years to come.  Few or none will give prior notice.  This was little more than a friendly fire drill.

My guess is behind door number 3 -child.

Ah - that makes me understand your definitions better.  I do believe that BCX had hinted at basically doing a timewarp and then dumping all of the coins on an exchange for bitcoin.

So in that scenario there might be an attack that was both beneficial inside the network and destroys it.  But it's probably not worth bringing up.  I do have to wonder what happens inside of BCX's head.  Odd duck.

First remark: interesting discussion. Thanks.

Second: Agreed, but I didn't intend to distinguish "malicious" (or "benevolent") as moral categories.

Inside the economic system of one individual crypto, an actor will be economically irrational if he attacks the network to the point of destruction: he is going to experience a net loss if he destroys the value of the currency that he is paid in. The network value post-attack times his share of the network he gained through the attack must be higher than the cost of the attack for him to consider the attack economically viable.

For an outside actor, this doesn't hold. He could either have a higher level economic motivation that allows him to take the cost of an attack (e.g. removing a competitor crypto, to strengthen his preferred crypto), or he could be what you called a "joker type personality". I claim that from the practical point of view of the network that needs to be defended, the two are indistinguishable. This is the case I meant by "malicious actors".

The defense against the first type is keeping the total network market value in balance with the cost of an attack. If the former is a lot higher than the latter, a (controlled) attack becomes profitable. "Outside" attacks (joker type attackers, or competitors) can only be deterred by strengthening the network further, to the point where the attack is prohibitively expensive for the attacker on its own.

I'm pretty sure the Monero network is far from the second type of security yet (the Bitcoin network might be close to it, for anyone other than a government organization or extremely large company), but I suppose your point could be rephrased as that the network isn't even secure in the first sense so far.

I guess in cryptocurrency when somebody threatens to be a computer bully.  I expect the response I would expect from a SEAL team dealing with a bully.

"If you can beat us - go for it.  We deserve it."

Not a sniveling coddled grade school kids response "ur being meaaaaannnn"

Because he's behaving like a bully, and no one like a bully.