Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 2189. (Read 3313070 times)

Probability is not based on point of view. Some things are improbable, so we can't go down the road of calling the improbable probable.

Probability is a term used when there is evidence from normally reliable sources to suggest X will occur. In fact, probability is all we really have. Tomorrow, the sun will probably rise.

Don't lump fantasy together with probability.

probability is dependent on point of view..
calling the "next bitcoin" is basically enthusiastic and no serious investor will invest based on such statements. crypto note has great potential especially compared to generic clones, which most of alt coins are.

Getting into breakout territory, although there's some decent sized walls to break past 0.004...

Nothing that Rpietila can't take care of though  



edit: wall gone

Hmm so you guys think .1btc per xmr is  possible?

I know what the point is, but it applies to every other altcoin. So singling out Monero makes no sense. I could single out twenty promising alts, and use the same line of argument. There is no solid reason to believe Monero will become another Bitcoin. Just because it's possible is not sufficient as an argument. It is possible that Beertokens will get a new dev, and take the coin to the moon. It is possible that there is no external world, and we are just brains in VATS (google it). There are infinite possibilities, and Monero does not appear to be placed in a position where we could say the possibility was a probability.

I think the point they're making is that Bitcoin has 5.5 years of development, we have a couple of months. It "feels like Bitcoin in 2010" because it's the wild west, rough and raw and unknown and hard to use. I'd hope that in the next 3 or 4 or 5 years the Monero landscape will be vastly different;)

I don't really understand your reply. I gave a fairly clear reason but it was just a possibility,  an educated gamble (as BTC was and is).
Essentially, we are in the early days of something quite substantial, I'll let you figure out the rest. It is just basic math with a little bit of foresight thrown in.

Not sure that name calling nor what followed it (and partly preceded it) makes much sense. Perhaps you can rebut with something more substantial.
(And I see you are on a roll, spreading the insults. Do you realize this just discredits you more?)

Spread the love,  
IAS

You again, with your stories, and your photo and your pretend world.

Forgive me for taking whatever you say as untrue or exaggerated.

What you are saying makes no sense. I guess you could twist your prediction, and say we are playing "possible worlds", and indeed it is possible that Monero will do what you claim.

However, I don't think using the fallacy that whatever BTC has done, Monero has to do, will help achieve this possible world.

Anyone that buys into your way of thinking is likely to be quite stupid, so I wouldn't expect them to have lots of cash, or to to be able to work out how to use the MSDOS-like client.

I think I was essentially saying the same thing in my post above (regarding opportunity).
Quite simply, we are extremely early adopters in Monero, or even BTC for that matter at this time.
Back in 2010, BTC was around .08 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Bitcoin and it was essentially unknown. Looking at Monero now (a bit over $2 I believe), the opportunity for returns in is there. (In general, people looking into Anonymous coins now are about as rare as people looking into BTC in 2010 I'd say.) In the next few years this space will blow up. If BTC does indeed hit $10,000-$100,000 in 5-15 years, I can easily see Monero being in the hundreds. That, in a sense, would be like getting into Bitcoin in 2011 sometime (if Monero blows up in the next 4 or 5 years.) Ok, so I'd go with we are where BTC was in 2011, but Rpietila can jump in...

How is Monero like Bitcoin in 2010? were you around at that time or is that from third party sources?

Feels nothing like it to me, (Cryptonote itself, a somewhat different story) Not sure how much of that is attributed to the fact the concept of p2p decentralized crypto cash is already embedded into our consciousness however.

U.N. estimates of global black market in 2012 were 2tln USD, like havocscope.  

Most of that is large-ticket stuff.  It requires deep liquidity.  BTC is not an option due to tracability.  Today, XMR is not an option due to poor liquidity.  To achieve sufficient liquidity to do large ticket black market transactions will require a price in the 1000s.

Once the price is in the 1000s, the liquidity will also be large enough for multinational corporate to take an interest.

Relying on black market to raise the liquidity is dangerous.  Much better to find a way to bring the liquidity up without the black market.  However, it seems inevitable that dark web will use XMR as soon as usability is sufficient.  That is a very small portion of global black market, and won't move the price past 100 on demand.

I find it difficult to see a price below 100 in 1 year.  Sub-USD100 in 9/2015 is not going to happen, unless there is a shocking event, a risk event, of large proportions.  To properly discount and make a current price on that future expected price you need to estimate the risk.

Estimating the risk is harder and more pressing than estimating the central tendency demand support.

It is because risk estimation plays such a large part in determining rational present value that I very very much appreciate the rigor of the development process being applied in the core software, and the ability of the team to maintain coherent vision, even as players move in and out.  I think there is no more insider risk in XMR than there is in BTC right now.

The legal risk seems greater for BTC at present because of relative size focusing attention on BTC, but XMR will get all too much unwanted attention when it passes MAID into top-ten cap, during September.  I am sure it is already on the radar of grassroots operatives.  When it gets on the political radar, the big guns come out.

IIP has become a pressing need, for that reason.  This fait needs to be accompli before the main becomes trop forte.

I can partially agree on this. I do not see a 2nd or 3rd coin replacing Bitcoin. At least that is not going to happen soon (!).
Indeed when this Bit Licence is crap goes through I except a portion of people turning to anonymous coins. This is where the likes of DRK and Monero will succeed right now. The question is how much market cap will each coin be able to take.

A shocking fact to me is, how easy it has been to convince people that:

- Monero is now in the situation where Bitcoin was in 2010
- Monero fixes Bitcoin's worst flaw, lack of privacy.

People who have never owned Bitcoin are flocking into Monero starting about now. I am helping them by accepting fiat as payment.

I really think Lawsky trying to pass those crazy laws in NY is REALLY going to drive more people into Anonymous coins.
Once one realizes how young this entire field is, they will realize what bargains current prices are (if you can "guess" the right crypto.)
Once the Crypto space is really large, the 2nd and 3rd "place" coins will probably have a larger market cap than BTC has right now, much larger.
That is something to chew on.

IAS

Edited my post, was a bit too enthusiastic  Anyway, I hope we can break through that tough resistance at 0.004 area.

Thats not the definition of "pumping"; its simply buying.

Some one is buying monero! 3200 buy with a 10k support at 0.00377. Let's see how this plays out.

I guess it depends how you count it.

In the first link they have btc as 0.375% of the bm so monero would need to be 3x higher for 1%.

In the second link the value of arms trafficking is the same as either counterfeit watches or fake diplomas and degrees.

lol^

I imagine it will take a year or so to get that kind of traction, even bitcoin's silk road had less than 1billions worth of btc traded on it.^