Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 2176. (Read 3313070 times)

Cryptonite coins using the Cryptonite algo(Monero) can be mined by Both GPU's and very high end  CPU's..

The average CPU will get hardly any xmr per day since the difficulty is so high, not sure what point youre trying to make concerning botnets(which normally use 32 bit low end cpus) coinhoarder.

You are confusing Zerocoin with Zerocash, Zerocoin and Zerocash are two completely different protocols. Zerocoin can be implemented without requiring the trust of a third party using RSA UFOs.

https://wiki.anoncoin.net/RSA_UFO
https://sigterm.no/media/without_trapdoor.pdf
https://github.com/Anoncoin/ufo_client


I see what you mean here, and I agree with you that existing technology > vaporware. However, in this case it is vaporware that people are working very hard to implement into a crypto currency. There is a lot of risk investing in Monero considering people are working on implementing a superior anonymous protocol. The Monero demand, and thus the liquidity it provides, will likely dry up if a more anonymous cryptocurrency comes to market.

Again, you are referring to Zerocash, I am referring to Zerocoin.


It is just a fact that CPU mined cryptocurrencys are more susceptible to being controlled and mined by bot nets. Bot nets are less profitable on ASIC and GPU mined coins, so it makes more sense for them to be mining CPU algorithms like CryptoNight due to the economics of mining.


Link?


I might and that is why I am posting here.. to seek enlightenment. You guys must know something I don't. I do a lot more research on cryptocurrencies than most people, and my research on anonymous cryptocurrencies has led me to these conclusions. Please enlighten me why I am wrong.


Yes, it can't be confirmed that is correct, but it is a fact that CPU PoW algorithms are more susceptible to bot net mining than GPU and ASIC mined cryptocurrencies. Monero seems like the most profitable choice for bot net operators at the present time due to its liquidity and market cap. I think it is foolish to assume that they would not choose the most profitable option.


Again, I have done a ton of research on the subject and it has led me to these conclusions. You might not know that although the people that wrote the Zerocoin white paper have moved onto Zerocash, there are still people working on implementing their original idea of Zerocoin. Zerocash and Zerocoin are two different protocols. Since the white paper and alpha library was released for Zerocoin, there is nothing stopping somebody else from implementing it even though the original developers moved onto Zerocash.


Yes, I know about this already. However, you guys seem to be ignoring the fact that Zerocoin and Zerocash are two different protocols. You can see I already know this as I have listed Zerocash as a bad investment and Zerocoin as a good investment on my Cryptocurrency analysis website:

http://www.cryptoreview.net/cryptocurrency/zerocoin/
http://www.cryptoreview.net/cryptocurrency/zerocash/


I seriously doubt anyone in the black market cares about being able to prove a transaction took place, in fact I think they would rather the opposite. You and I know the importance of financial privacy and the bad things that can happen by practicing bad financial privacy methods, but most people are oblivious to this. The sheeple of this world that are still using FIAT, and even a lot of Bitcoin users, are oblivious to the importance of financial privacy. Therefore, it narrows the population of possible Monero adopters to the small group of people that understand the value of financial privacy and the black market. The black market is a much bigger and valuable subgroup, and more people within it will be adopting an anonymous cryptocurrency rather than the general public.

I also think it's silly to think that Monero will be used in a large way by "legit companies/institutions." That space is reserved to Bitcoin for the time being. For that to change, Monero would have to achieve greater liquidity and popularity than Bitcoin. I just don't see that happening... ever... because Monero doesn't provide enough of a benefit over Bitcoin for everyone to switch over.

The same goes with Zerocoin, Anoncoin, or Darkcoin. Anonymous cryptocurrencys will not overtake Bitcoin for the simple fact they are more anonymous, it will take much more than that. I think it is possible that another cryptocurrency eventually surpasses Bitcoin, but Monero is not that cryptocurrency. Simply making transactions more anonymous is not a big enough innovation to overcome the infrastructure and network effect of a crypto currency like Bitcoin. It will require better anonymity couple with many other features and/or improvements to do this.

Again, Zerocash =/= Zerocoin

That is the biggest risk Darkcoin and Monero have at the moment I think. I think it is silly just to assume they will fail or never be released, especially when people are working hard to implement them. I think this is my biggest concern here.. it seems a lot of people are putting all their eggs in the Monero basket, when it is not the clear winner of the anonymity wars.

Again, Zerocash =/= Zerocoin

See my argument above.. that is not really the market that an anonymous cryptocurrency is really tailored for. People that understand the need for financial privacy are few and far between, and are vastly outnumbered by the number of people and the amount of money that flows through the black market... trillions of dollars.

I think it's pretty obvious that you guys assume I don't get it, when I have (maybe/likely) done more research on the subject than you have. I spend days researching cryptocurrencies and different innovative cryptocurrency technologies. This is what my research has led me to conclude. Again, if I am wrong then please point out how I am wrong- I am here seeking enlightenment.

73+ days of research on cryptocurrencies by my count: https://www.dropbox.com/s/u13y9iqssbd0zqf/Bitcointalk%20activity.png

I understand people prefer to use something that exists- because vaporware is unusable. However, you can't disregard that someone releasing a cryptocurrency is a large risk as to the success of Monero. I find it much more likely that a better solution as to anonymity is released than nothing better ever being released at all. Especially considering the hard work that is being done to implement Zerocoin.


Sure, ring signatures are less complicated than zero knowledge proofs, but it doesn't make them any more legitimate. People will have a hard time understanding how they work, but you know what this doesn't matter. Do most people know the details of how airplanes, credit cards, the internet, websites, programs, debit cards, money transmitters, and cell phones work? No, but they are still used on a massive scale because they work and they have been told that they are safe.

As long as a large group of smart people that are able to understand can vouch for the work, then I see no reason why the technology couldn't be adopted. It doesn't mean that everyone has to understand exactly how it works, just as long as it does work is sufficient. 98% of the people in the Bitcoin community have no idea how Bitcoin works on a fundamental level (IE. source code level.) Have you dug through every line of code of Bitcoin to make sure there are no backdoors? Probably not, but you take the word of others that have done so and can understand it.

I did not realize that a GPU miner had been released for the CryptoNight PoW algorithm, so that is one thing I have learned thus far since entering this thread. I am not a bad guy and not here to spread FUD, I am just here seeking enlightenment. I take everything I said about bot nets and CPU mining back if it is true that Monero can be GPU mined, as that pushes the bot nets out... not completely, but it makes them a lot less profitable and they'd probably rather mine CPU-only cryptocurrencies.

It seems like a lot of people are thinking they will win the lottery with Monero and I just dont get it. It seems like a pretty risky play.. much riskier than simply investing in Bitcoin.


That's cool, what else are they trying to accomplish?

---------------------------

Again, I'm not here to spread FUD, I am here to seek enlightenment. There must be something I am not understanding with all the craze behind Monero.. I just don't get it. A lot of you seem to be confusing Zerocash and Zerocoin, and/or thinking that Zerocoin has been completely abandoned. It has been abandoned by its original developers, but there are people still working on it separately.

Is Monero compatible with side-chains? If so, could a Zerocash-like side chain someday be incorporated into Monero, giving users per-transaction options of transparency, pretty good privacy, and total anonymity (provided you trust the Mint)?

Perhaps we will someday have ZeroMonero Minting Ceremonies as we add new Zerocash sidechains to Monero, and people will only accord trust to ZeroMonero that they or their webs-of-trust witnessed being minted honestly.

Thanks, as well to othe.

It will be interesting to see what happens when the buying overcomes the selling.
I understand the emission curve over the next 4 years or so will probably aid in
A nice distribution, a very fair one, relatively speaking.

It´s pretty obvious that you don´t get it. Some people prefer to use something that actually exists.

Ringsignatures provide good privacy without moonmath, read gmaxwells posts maybe (nullc): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7765455
Or Andytoshis post on stackexchange: http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/29471/is-there-any-true-anonymous-cryptocurrencies


Care to proof that mainly botnets mine Monero? Most hash seems to be from Claymores GPU miner.

If this, if that... who cares, if i win the lottery......

PS: Financial privacy is just one of the things XMR tries to accomplish.

Huh? You've got a few things wrong

1) The majority of the hashrate is not botnets or that can't be confirmed

2) Zerocoin was abandoned by it's original dev team in favor of Zerocash(Please read up more on that before making comments, Zerocoin isn't going anywhere)

3) Zerocash has a large degree of initial trust(You trust that they developers/people given keys won't join together and doublespend all they want without you ever knowing via it's anonymous structure)

4) Zerocash, should it ever be released, would Only offer anoymous transactions(Yes, that's pretty much a bad thing, since even private companies need to keep a record of their transactions etc, Ring Signature(Monero) allows both anonymous sending and regular sending, while Zerocash doesn't which means it likely won't be used by any legitimate companies/institutions)

Basically, Zerocash from what I've read, will probably 1) Fail/never be released, 2) Fail because of it's trust issue and doublespending issue, 3) Fail because it may be "too anonymous", since they have no option to send coins regularly and that's a very limiting factor when trying to get used by companies, average individuals, agencies, you get the drift.

Zerocoin Zerocash has shown that no one knows how to make a trustless currency with better anonymity characteristics than ring signatures allow:  Zerocoin Zerocash requires trusting the mint.  It has also shown that vaporware trades at a severe discount to a working cryptocurrency.  The market wants private liquidity, and isn't going to wait for Zerocoin Zerocash.  I doubt that the market will tolerate the trusted mint.

That is an unsubstantiated allegation.

That has been proven false.

EDIT: Corrected misuse of Zerocoin where I was talking about Zerocash.

I don't get why so many people are hopping on the Monero train. It is not even anonymous, just more anonymous than Bitcoin and arguably the best solution that exists right now, but that is subject to change. Zerocoin has shown it is possible to create a more anonymous Cryptocurrency than ring signature and coin join implementations, and it is just a matter of time before the first Zerocoin implementations are released into the wild. For instance, if Anoncoin successfully implements Zerocoin, then Monero is going to be somewhat pointless and a lot of people are going to lose a lot of money. It seems like a pretty risky play IMO.

Furthermore, I also don't like that it is mainly bot nets providing the majority of the processing power to support the Monero network. Why support these criminals? Do you think it was really any coincidence the CryptoNight PoW algorithm and Cryptonote were developed on the deep web?

I just don't get it...

That prediction was for the next 30 days, guys

Think we'll go below .004?

It's a weekend of accumulation.  I love it.

Any way we can change the best case scenario from "stellar" to "supernova" or something else that doesn't share its name with another cryptocurrency?  I keep doubling over and laughing in the middle of reading comments!

Pretty big sell off happening right now!

You should really check out the list of wonders that James has innovated.  It's quite spectacular.
If I thought something was a threat to XMR, I wouldn't short it, of that I can assure you.  

I can get up a goodly amount of bile when I perceive a threat to the pocketbooks of the naive.  Yet I am not above seeking to benefit personally by shorting that threat, as I consider it an essential part of price discovery:  The sooner fair price is discovered, the less damage will be done.

0.05 is not stellar by far ...

You realize for stellar to materialize XMR would need to overtake XBT? I know it's not impossible, but to call it a near certainty is a very big stretch.

Don't apologize. Interesting post, and pretty obvious to me that it was a quote, not your own statement.

Now, jl777's rant sounds half whiny, half entitled, but he also made a point I can sort of appreciate:

Monero supporters (or at least a vocal subset) have the unpleasant habit of not only talking up Monero, which is fine, but also talking down every single other alt.

It's more a stylistic issue than a moral one, in my opinion, but I dislike it. Makes us look petty, as a community.


That said, the "ultimatum" of the jl777 quote is ridiculous. By requiring a 'be nice to me' condition on coins and their community to be allowed to join his secret little club chain he made sure nobody in his right mind would want to join.

Sometimes one guy can innovate wonders. Satoshi was one such person, and I hold AnonyMint in high regard also. Now, Satoshi has not been well received in his time (or even now) by the general populace, and AnonyMint is one of the most hated members of this community. Perhaps James is making his way to this group, perhaps not. One wise pharisee once said: "Let him go. If this thing is from man, it will collapse on its own merit. But what if it is from God? Are you prepared to fight against God?"

Well his words were not heeded to, and 2000 years later Jesus has more followers than ever.

As for James, I don't have any evidence of him scamming people. (Not that I have searched though.) My advice would be likewise, to point out his past misdeeds if such are found, and flaws in technology and economics, in a respectful manner. It does not take long to notice if the initiative has merit or not, and Monero folks are each individually in a position to hedge their fortunes if they so wish.

These threads, believe it or not, are visited by influential people and their aides. The matter that most sets Monero apart from any other coin is its community, and therefore I beg that we could stay civil even in the face of such grave and existential threat as a lone C programmer.

I never attacked him or any other coin from what I remember. Still I'm a XMR supporter..how is that possible? Would that mean the "XMR group" is made of individuals with different agendas and behaviors?

Damn it seems so complicated. Let's punish an entire community based of the words of a few vocal individuals that might not even be invested in the currency to begin with.

Anyway...back to the topic. We're breaking our support at this very moment. Looks like a panic-sell.

There are plenty of public people with massive personal wealth - while there should be some care and attention, I don't believe that there's necessarily anything more to fear for high net worth individuals who have fortunes in crypto vs stock or cash or real estate, etc.

If anything, it merely means that they need to exercise strong digital security, as should we all.