Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 60. (Read 3314316 times)

^  That would be really nice..  Not holding my breath tho.


What do you mean?  I haven't been following the space as closely as I did before for quite a long time but I thought Tari was still in testnet.

Yes understanding BTC as base money and the the tech on top as scaling is not something even Satoshi had figured out, though Hal got it very early on.

I agree I would love to see Monero light up the tree.

Almost 80% of my 0,0063 order was filled, canceled the rest of 0,0063 and placed the rest of BTC on 0,00625 

At the moment speaking i am a happy Monerofellow 

But by the time its needed other things (BTC) will have evolved anyway right? no one else is glued to the pasts


Monero come on do something for xmas   



All the best to everyone for the season. Ill toast a glass with you next year I guess.

Schnauzero located

We will see, but i think my buy orders for 0,0063 will be filled latest by tomorrow 

   And where is that damned Schnauzer, anyway..   0.00635 is low enough.

.

I doubt it is the large scale attack Anonymity outlined in his 2017 hit piece. As you point out, with modern ring sizes and more than one attacker it becomes impossible. However, they are almost certainly dusting wallets of interest.

Also a very good point.  But fact is they are scared of it.

There are very few technologies more important that ones that preserve privacy.  With the governments of the world going into nuclear privacy destruction mode I am glad there is some flicker of hope somewhere.

   Hello.  Have you met government?

I hate to give BSV legitimacy by even naming it such.. and I agree the actors are beyond bad.  But if you are a big blocker... it is the chain that takes that notion to it's conclusion.

This is a tremendous point.  And correct.  And oversight on my part.  But still bullish really...  because why spend the time and money if it is not worth it.

Nice post, sir.
I like the value versus data framework. BTC and XMR's transactions are value, BSV's are data. ETH is somewhere in between. However, taking a longer term perspective, value is just a subcase of data. Value is just a special kind of data.

I think not enough people are taking BSV seriously. Transactions on Bitcoin in 2009-2012 could be classified as "spam" by today standards (think SatoshiDice...). Transactions on BSV are not necessarily made to prove a point, people and corporations are just experimenting with it.

Big blocks is the only scaling strategy that appears to work, BTC and ETH do not scale. Both BSV and XMR have adopted it, they are the only two blockchains that actually scale.
And BSV and XMR are the only two blockchains that have a use case that does not overlap (transparency versus opacity). Because, since value is a special case of data, everything you do on BTC and ETH, you can theoretically do that on BSV as well. Only the use case of XMR (opaque value) does not overlap with BSV reach.

Tari will not add transactions to Monero. Will be or already is on testnet own blockchain. What will have incommon with Monero is that miners that mine Monero will also mine Tari. So secure both networks.




They would need to make a lot of transactions to be successful. And once ring signature will raise it will make their work exponentially harder. Also lets say two agencies want to do this attack. KGB and CIA. While one of them is adding transactions it is just making other agency work harder.

I believe most of the transaction volume growth is organic, however, this statement is not strictly true. The privacy features of XMR provide incentive for attackers to transact in an attempt to weaken the privacy. Lets not forget the IRS bounty on tracking Monero.

Gavin visited the CIA in 2011. The Snowden leaks revealed the NSA was tracking bitcoin users as early as 2013. In 2018 the department of defence ran war game scenarios involving a Bitcoin rebellion.  If the public even becomes aware of these initiatives it is typically years later.

Rest assured the public IRS announcement is not the only well resourced adversary trying to unravel Monero privacy. They are guaranteed to be running nodes, making transactions, monitoring the networking layer, collecting metadata, and tracking outputs.

Could it be the tari kicking in? wasn't that going o be a bit eth style and assisting the Monero chain?

By your description maybe the bsv is trying to be the 5 years time bitcoin (forever poisoned in my mind by the bad actors)

Let's see, but BTC is surching so i left a buy option at 0,0063 

  0.006473 @Binance so far.  I don't want them to fill, but I left a couple buys @ 0.0062 and .0060 range, just in case.  I'd rather keep the BTC, and take my bags to higher ground now

  
Something wrong with the XMR price, at 0.65% BTC

OK.  This increase in usage is so bullish.

You know if you think about it, transactions on a chain are very uniquely influenced by the design of that asset.  It's not just all equal. The design and parameters of the asset create all kinds of downstream incentives, etc.

For example:

BTC: Has the small block strategy has put a functional cap on BTC's transaction volume and that has a direct impact on transaction fees.  This creates all kinds of incentives for users that do not exist on chains without a limit, or with not enough use to matter.  Transaction batching, the growing importance of trusted third parties, layer two incentives etc.  All unique to this chain still.  Also, the VAST majority of transactions on the BTC chain are 100% value focused, but not all.

ETH: Completely different.  ETH gets moved around with all ERC20 transactions.  So it's basically just constant transaction fees.  No limits mean no need to make things efficient.  The ETH philosophy is use resources without regard to cost strategy.  So that network can get congested AND expensive, and the bloated blockchain will either break ETH or centralize it in the end, and if it continues to be used people will just have to accept that.  ETH has more transactions than any chain, because it is basically involved n every transaction for every child token that is available. (I really think it is just a nightmare.)

BSV: The ultimate big block chain that isn't ETH, lol.  This chain is actually incentivizing making as many transactions as possible just to show that it can, and in my opinion ultimately centralizes.  They are actively spamming the chain constantly to support the narrative, or if you are a believer do proof of concept.  Most of what is going on the blockchain is (well there's a lot of wash transactions...) data storage.  So you are getting high transactions with high block sizes.  The central parties involved with this chain are incentivized to make transactions purely for show.  Gigamegs are core to it's narrative.

XMR: No blocksize limit, but ONLY transactional.  All of Monero's volume is value transfer.  But here's Monero's interesting twist.  We can't know very much about what happens in a particular transaction, but only that it happened.  The baked in layer 1 privacy, along with the flexible block size limits changes incentives slightly.  There is absolutely ZERO incentive to transact on the Monero blockchain for any reason but ONE.  I would not think anyone would be inflating blocksize/tx volume to try to prove a point ala BSV.  And I am not aware of any projects as of yet that would use the chain for something else, sort of like counterparty or blockstack on BTC,  or all of ETH.

So.....

We can be fairly certain that all of Monero's transaction volume is real and organic.  There is no incentive for anyone to pay for a transaction other than to move XMR. So people are actually USING the coin.  AND along with only a handful of crypto tokens aside from BTC we know that XMR is being used in real world transactions. 

This means the increased volume can only be two things that I can think of:

Increased real world use as a money.
Increased positions being taken (or liquidated) by speculators.

Like I said... this is incredibly bullish fundamentally. 

We are here.