I think for several reasons that the emmission rate of xmr is close to perfect - the only thing i am unsure is if the price is probably to high. but we will see.
if you study the emmission rate in a greater detail you'll see the beauty. from an economics perspective it has quite a ton of very interesting implications.
this place is so used to pump and dump that it forgets where the true value of a decentralized currency can be found. its possibility to create network effects.
Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 2180. (Read 3312350 times)
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here! You've set it up so that everyone suffers.
Thinking that something is crazy or is worse for everyone when other obviously intelligent people disagree should be a clue that you don't understand it entirely. This doesn't mean you have to change your mind ultimately, but at least open it a crack.
This is what I tell people who start in with the whole "these politicians are crazy/inept/stupid to have passed this bill" etc.
I really wish Monero inflation wasn't so high. I'm thinking of investing, but it's hard to imagine any real price increases when there's 20,000 XMR being mined per day. At a arbitrarily selected value of $100, that's $2,000,000 per day, compared with only $288,000 for Darkcoin, the only thing I have besides Bitcoin. A real dilemma for me, as Monero seems to be the most legitimate CN coin.
Doesn't seem like such a high rate of emission when you consider that there are ~28000 Litecoins mined every day. If the higher price of LTC can be sustained, I see no reason why XMR cannot go much higher.
It's much much higher than LTC presently, but that's not really the point I guess. LTC isn't $100 after all.
Please correct me if I'm mistaken, but purely in terms of coins mined per day - isn't LTC higher? Monero is roughly at 21,000 coins per day and dropping daily. Litecoin is fixed around 28,000 per day until the next block reward halving.
I am referencing the data in the rpietila XMR Economics thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=702140.140
No you are correct on absolute numbers of coins emitted, I was referring to inflation figures (which ARE relevant, but we can argue HOW relevant
).However, given LTC's numbers, it could only support an XMR price of about .014! 0.0105*(28,000/21,000)
(Almost) 3x is an acceptable short term return.
(actually about 3.25x) I agree and think that's not a bad target short term. I'm trying to present it in opposition to the argument (whether anyone actually presented said argument directly) that LTC's daily influx could support much higher prices.
I really wish Monero inflation wasn't so high. I'm thinking of investing, but it's hard to imagine any real price increases when there's 20,000 XMR being mined per day. At a arbitrarily selected value of $100, that's $2,000,000 per day, compared with only $288,000 for Darkcoin, the only thing I have besides Bitcoin. A real dilemma for me, as Monero seems to be the most legitimate CN coin.
Doesn't seem like such a high rate of emission when you consider that there are ~28000 Litecoins mined every day. If the higher price of LTC can be sustained, I see no reason why XMR cannot go much higher.
It's much much higher than LTC presently, but that's not really the point I guess. LTC isn't $100 after all.
Please correct me if I'm mistaken, but purely in terms of coins mined per day - isn't LTC higher? Monero is roughly at 21,000 coins per day and dropping daily. Litecoin is fixed around 28,000 per day until the next block reward halving.
I am referencing the data in the rpietila XMR Economics thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=702140.140
Don't forget the amount of outstanding LTC is 3 times that of Monero. Therefore the mining of Monero is a far larger increase percentage wise.
I really wish Monero inflation wasn't so high. I'm thinking of investing, but it's hard to imagine any real price increases when there's 20,000 XMR being mined per day. At a arbitrarily selected value of $100, that's $2,000,000 per day, compared with only $288,000 for Darkcoin, the only thing I have besides Bitcoin. A real dilemma for me, as Monero seems to be the most legitimate CN coin.
Doesn't seem like such a high rate of emission when you consider that there are ~28000 Litecoins mined every day. If the higher price of LTC can be sustained, I see no reason why XMR cannot go much higher.
It's much much higher than LTC presently, but that's not really the point I guess. LTC isn't $100 after all.
Please correct me if I'm mistaken, but purely in terms of coins mined per day - isn't LTC higher? Monero is roughly at 21,000 coins per day and dropping daily. Litecoin is fixed around 28,000 per day until the next block reward halving.
I am referencing the data in the rpietila XMR Economics thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=702140.140
No you are correct on absolute numbers of coins emitted, I was referring to inflation figures (which ARE relevant, but we can argue HOW relevant
).However, given LTC's numbers, it could only support an XMR price of about .014! (0.0105/0.0043)*(28,000/21,000)
(Almost) 3x is an acceptable short term return.
I really wish Monero inflation wasn't so high. I'm thinking of investing, but it's hard to imagine any real price increases when there's 20,000 XMR being mined per day. At a arbitrarily selected value of $100, that's $2,000,000 per day, compared with only $288,000 for Darkcoin, the only thing I have besides Bitcoin. A real dilemma for me, as Monero seems to be the most legitimate CN coin.
Doesn't seem like such a high rate of emission when you consider that there are ~28000 Litecoins mined every day. If the higher price of LTC can be sustained, I see no reason why XMR cannot go much higher.
It's much much higher than LTC presently, but that's not really the point I guess. LTC isn't $100 after all.
Please correct me if I'm mistaken, but purely in terms of coins mined per day - isn't LTC higher? Monero is roughly at 21,000 coins per day and dropping daily. Litecoin is fixed around 28,000 per day until the next block reward halving.
I am referencing the data in the rpietila XMR Economics thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=702140.140
No you are correct on absolute numbers of coins emitted, I was referring to inflation figures (which ARE relevant, but we can argue HOW relevant
).However, given LTC's numbers, it could only support an XMR price of about .014! 0.0105*(28,000/21,000)
Edit: forgive my fail formula (which smooth quoted next page). Number was correct, formula not.
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here! You've set it up so that everyone suffers.
There is a parable about this, but I couldn't remember where it comes from so I can't quote it properly.
But the thrust of it is that if something seems useless to you, you probably don't fully understand the purpose of it. Only when you can clearly understand and explain the argument in favor of something should you decide you are opposed to it, or vice versa. In fact most things that are worse for everyone doesn't even exist in the world. Ideas that dumb are quickly abandoned. So there must be someone for whom this is better. Try to figure out who that is and why.
Thinking that something is crazy or is worse for everyone when other obviously intelligent people disagree should be a clue that you don't understand it entirely. This doesn't mean you have to change your mind ultimately, but at least open it a crack.
I really wish Monero inflation wasn't so high. I'm thinking of investing, but it's hard to imagine any real price increases when there's 20,000 XMR being mined per day. At a arbitrarily selected value of $100, that's $2,000,000 per day, compared with only $288,000 for Darkcoin, the only thing I have besides Bitcoin. A real dilemma for me, as Monero seems to be the most legitimate CN coin.
Doesn't seem like such a high rate of emission when you consider that there are ~28000 Litecoins mined every day. If the higher price of LTC can be sustained, I see no reason why XMR cannot go much higher.
It's much much higher than LTC presently, but that's not really the point I guess. LTC isn't $100 after all.
Please correct me if I'm mistaken, but purely in terms of coins mined per day - isn't LTC higher? Monero is roughly at 21,000 coins per day and dropping daily. Litecoin is fixed around 28,000 per day until the next block reward halving.
I am referencing the data in the rpietila XMR Economics thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=702140.140
A very fast initial distribution, followed by a long, slow emission seems vastly superior from an investment standpoint. It just appears to be better for all involved. The developers can get a reasonable stake for a low cost, to justify their time investment, early adopters get rewarded nicely, and prospective investors can be confident that inflation won't dilute their investment. The only ones who suffer are miners , and considering that no matter what your emission, mining will generally just break even due to economics, what is really lost there?
No, the difference is that this structure is compatible with a pump-and-dump scam. So buyers always have to be wary of it, which depresses the price and ultimately serves as a competitive disadvantage against cleanly launched coins.
Only systems that are structurally incompatible with fraud don't suffer from the overhang of potential fraud.
Your argument basically comes down to centralized systems being more efficient and mining being inefficient. That might be true in an ideal world without the possibility of fraud or abuse. It isn't true in the real world.
Combining posts...
No, the difference is that this structure is compatible with a pump-and-dump scam. So buyers always have to be wary of it, which depresses the price and ultimately serves as a competitive disadvantage against cleanly launched coins.
Only systems that are structurally incompatible with fraud don't suffer from the overhang of potential fraud.
Basically the argument is that "bunch of coins mined over a few months to a year" = more participants than "bunch of coins mined in a few days", which should lead to better distribution as well as much better perception. It's only one piece of the distribution schedule, but it is largely responsible for public perception (and XMR can get negative perception as well for its defined curve, just that it didn't go way outside of what was defined like DRK did).
Doesn't seem like such a high rate of emission when you consider that there are ~28000 Litecoins mined every day. If the higher price of LTC can be sustained, I see no reason why XMR cannot go much higher.
It's much much higher than LTC presently, but that's not really the point I guess. LTC isn't $100 after all.
This is kinda nonsense, as you are pretty apparently comparing to DRK (at 50% of current supply, which isn't even true anymore), but their community (of which I am a part as well) is quite big and active. They have the longest thread in the entire altcoin section. The other part of it is, absolutely some people got XMR at super cheap prices. I was one of them.
You are spot on about fast emission keeping price relatively low for early adopters/accumulators.
A very fast initial distribution, followed by a long, slow emission seems vastly superior from an investment standpoint. It just appears to be better for all involved. The developers can get a reasonable stake for a low cost, to justify their time investment, early adopters get rewarded nicely, and prospective investors can be confident that inflation won't dilute their investment. The only ones who suffer are miners , and considering that no matter what your emission, mining will generally just break even due to economics, what is really lost there?
No, the difference is that this structure is compatible with a pump-and-dump scam. So buyers always have to be wary of it, which depresses the price and ultimately serves as a competitive disadvantage against cleanly launched coins.
Only systems that are structurally incompatible with fraud don't suffer from the overhang of potential fraud.
Basically the argument is that "bunch of coins mined over a few months to a year" = more participants than "bunch of coins mined in a few days", which should lead to better distribution as well as much better perception. It's only one piece of the distribution schedule, but it is largely responsible for public perception (and XMR can get negative perception as well for its defined curve, just that it didn't go way outside of what was defined like DRK did).
I really wish Monero inflation wasn't so high. I'm thinking of investing, but it's hard to imagine any real price increases when there's 20,000 XMR being mined per day. At a arbitrarily selected value of $100, that's $2,000,000 per day, compared with only $288,000 for Darkcoin, the only thing I have besides Bitcoin. A real dilemma for me, as Monero seems to be the most legitimate CN coin.
Doesn't seem like such a high rate of emission when you consider that there are ~28000 Litecoins mined every day. If the higher price of LTC can be sustained, I see no reason why XMR cannot go much higher.
It's much much higher than LTC presently, but that's not really the point I guess. LTC isn't $100 after all.
Is simple as this, if 50% of XMR would be minted in first month, few people would buy them and hold and price would go x10 or x100 in few months and not many people would got into coin at all, community would be weak. And some other coin would take XMR spot. As it is is perfect since will keep coin at low price for longer period of time + noone got coins super cheap. What you think is better is at quite some other coins, so i think is better you chose those.
This is kinda nonsense, as you are pretty apparently comparing to DRK (at 50% of current supply, which isn't even true anymore), but their community (of which I am a part as well) is quite big and active. They have the longest thread in the entire altcoin section. The other part of it is, absolutely some people got XMR at super cheap prices. I was one of them.
You are spot on about fast emission keeping price relatively low for early adopters/accumulators.
Is simple as this, if 50% of XMR would be minted in first month, few people would buy them and hold and price would go x10 or x100 in few months and not many people would got into coin at all, community would be weak. And some other coin would take XMR spot. As it is is perfect since will keep coin at low price for longer period of time + noone got coins super cheap. What you think is better is at quite some other coins, so i think is better you chose those.
I really wish Monero inflation wasn't so high. I'm thinking of investing, but it's hard to imagine any real price increases when there's 20,000 XMR being mined per day. At a arbitrarily selected value of $100, that's $2,000,000 per day, compared with only $288,000 for Darkcoin, the only thing I have besides Bitcoin. A real dilemma for me, as Monero seems to be the most legitimate CN coin.
Doesn't seem like such a high rate of emission when you consider that there are ~28000 Litecoins mined every day. If the higher price of LTC can be sustained, I see no reason why XMR cannot go much higher.
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here! You've set it up so that everyone suffers. To be clear this is not trolling. If you look through my posts, you'll see that I've been very disappointed with how Darkcoin is coming along. I'm looking to diversify.
A very fast initial distribution, followed by a long, slow emission seems vastly superior from an investment standpoint. It just appears to be better for all involved. The developers can get a reasonable stake for a low cost, to justify their time investment, early adopters get rewarded nicely, and prospective investors can be confident that inflation won't dilute their investment. The only ones who suffer are miners , and considering that no matter what your emission, mining will generally just break even due to economics, what is really lost there?
No, the difference is that this structure is compatible with a pump-and-dump scam. So buyers always have to be wary of it, which depresses the price and ultimately serves as a competitive disadvantage against cleanly launched coins.
Only systems that are structurally incompatible with fraud don't suffer from the overhang of potential fraud.
Your argument basically comes down to centralized systems being more efficient and mining being inefficient. That might be true in an ideal world without the possibility of fraud or abuse. It isn't true in the real world.
I really wish Monero inflation wasn't so high. I'm thinking of investing, but it's hard to imagine any real price increases when there's 20,000 XMR being mined per day.
It is 20k new coins so people have something to buy. If there would be 2000, everyone would fight for them and there might be huge riots on the world. Developers thinked it all over to be perfect.
I think the price "hurts" longer, which arguably benefits accumulators more.
I really wish Monero inflation wasn't so high. I'm thinking of investing, but it's hard to imagine any real price increases when there's 20,000 XMR being mined per day.
It is 20k new coins so people have something to buy. If there would be 2000, everyone would fight for them and there might be huge riots on the world. Developers thinked it all over to be perfect.
A very fast initial distribution, followed by a long, slow emission seems vastly superior from an investment standpoint. It just appears to be better for all involved. The developers can get a reasonable stake for a low cost, to justify their time investment, early adopters get rewarded nicely, and prospective investors can be confident that inflation won't dilute their investment. The only ones who suffer are miners, and considering that no matter what your emission, mining will generally just break even due to economics, what is really lost there?
This definition could vary a bunch. DRK was obviously VERY fast (but only about 10% of the longer term supply), XMR is just "fast" with 50% in two years. Its supply will certainly outpace DRK's sometime next year.
So you could argue XMR's distribution is faster, however DRK has to contend with major accusations that never cease from those fateful first 24 hours. I think the present price would be much higher if that hadn't occurred.
I really wish Monero inflation wasn't so high. I'm thinking of investing, but it's hard to imagine any real price increases when there's 20,000 XMR being mined per day.
It is 20k new coins so people have something to buy. If there would be 2000, everyone would fight for them and there might be huge riots on the world. Developers thinked it all over to be perfect.
A very fast initial distribution, followed by a long, slow emission seems vastly superior from an investment standpoint. It just appears to be better for all involved. The developers can get a reasonable stake for a low cost, to justify their time investment, early adopters get rewarded nicely, and prospective investors can be confident that inflation won't dilute their investment. The only ones who suffer are miners , and considering that no matter what your emission, mining will generally just break even due to economics, what is really lost there?
I really wish Monero inflation wasn't so high. I'm thinking of investing, but it's hard to imagine any real price increases when there's 20,000 XMR being mined per day. At a arbitrarily selected value of $100, that's $2,000,000 per day, compared with only $288,000 for Darkcoin, the only thing I have besides Bitcoin. A real dilemma for me, as Monero seems to be the most legitimate CN coin.
You do know that the block reward is shrinking for every block though right?
That's not how markets work. If people expect the coin to be $10 in two years then money will rapidly flow in to support the emission at something close to $10.
If you don't expect the coin go to up, ever, the don't buy it. Clearly.
Jump to: