Ok guys - I may post this on the Monero reddit. I am hoping someone can give me some input. A friend of mine has been insisting sidechains will kill off altcoins like Monero. I'm completely open to it. But here's my beef.
Do I understand correctly that if you lock your bitcoin in a sidechain. Lets call it "Drugs/CP/ISIS" sidechain. Basically your bitcoins get locked up there - mixed or exhanged with other coins on the chain. But to move them BACK onto the bitcoin main chain even if all privacy is in tact on that side chain so the government has absolutely no way of knowing what happened after Bitcoin address X moved coins to sidechain. And no way of knowing where bitcoins coming off of the sidechain came from.
They know that these particular coins moving OFF of the Drugs/CP/ISIS sidechain are in fact associated with this polluted chain? Why would there be any reason at all for someone who is buying an ounce of weed or using Satoshi dice and trying to avoid a ban by Coinbase to use this sidechain with ring signatures or whatever and paint a target on his back by the FBI? Further - if we assume that bitcoin grows by 10X from where it is now.
What is stopping the government from picking Drugs/CP/ISIS sidechain and telling exchanges they aren't allowed to deal with these polluted coins? Wouldn't this lead to coin tainting where they would be valueless (or worth way less?) ISIS isn't going to want polluted coins & neither is druglord #431?
How is this not even more of a liability than bitcoin on the clear chain from a value perspective? Am I missing something about how this is going to work - I don't understand how you're going to be able to maintain privacy coming off of sidechains dedicated to mixing without getting tainted even if they don't know where your coins came from?
I never have or will do anything illegal with crypto and pay all my taxes. I just believe the government has overstepped it's bounds and needs to be put back in place by technology. And I'm trying to peep into the sidechain future.
Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 663. (Read 3314325 times)
What about the September fork?
I know that answer.
It will not happen before September.
Or you have some other question?
i was asking about technical information. I've read it in the official site. I do not know anything else.It will bring us Mandatory RingCT and increasing the minimum ring size. I am not sure if this minimum ring size is set yet. Debate is there form February. Original idea was to be 4 from 2 years ago if I am not mistaken. Now will most likely be closer to 10.
Higher ring size you use more anonymous are your transactions but also bigger is transaction, so there needed to be found the perfect balance.
XMR went from 35 to 50 a few times since June. Very attractive patterns for day trading. Problem is I feel absolutely terrorized to put my holdings on any exchange, even the most trusted ones.
Gox was a trusted exchange as well.
Sucks really. A decentralized XMR exchange platform would be glorious.
Gox was a trusted exchange as well.
Sucks really. A decentralized XMR exchange platform would be glorious.
You know what would be glorious? Buying at 35, hold, and XMR going to 500 by December 2017.
Yeah! 500 by December 2017? I hope that's just a typo error.
What about the September fork?
I know that answer.
It will not happen before September.
Or you have some other question?
i was asking about technical information. I've read it in the official site. I do not know anything else. 
Andreas confirms his position on Monero.
Got a link? I am surprised it took him this long. Andreas knows, and I listened to quite a few of his early talks, that Bitcoin and now Etherreum have an Achilles heel: fungibility / privacy. And Andreas is very keen on his (digital) privacy. As a computer nerd you simply can't not like Monero's core features, and there is nothing like it..
I thought the guy was an ETH hater.....hmmz
Quote from: aminorex
In order for technological advance to drag us out of the hole we are in, we need functioning markets with functioning price discovery, and, in my opinion, a UBI. To me the former implies hard, non-inflationary money, with privacy and fungibility baked in, while the latter implies an inflationary fiat or a freigeld which floats against the hard money. I do not believe that a knowledge-based economy can function without both forms of currency, at least not without the adoption of a regime of continuous recurring atrocity (which is the current trend). The former is required for capital formation, required to build enterprise and conduct research involving capital equipment, while the latter is required to support excess consumers.
...how [can] a whole global, or even national society, ... function on a UBI if that society were to use an asset like Monero or even Bitcoin as the new currency. It's not like everyone can afford to put out the same hash rate to mine... or if it should come from somewhere, where should it originally come from?
I tried to describe a dual currency model, in which a fungible hard currency (monero) facilitates the productive functions of capital markets, and an inflationary or freigeld-class of currency floats against the hard money, at some market value. It is the issuance and distribution of the latter which provides UBI. But in order for capitalists to sell their goods, they need to accept and exchange freigeld.
Remember Gresham's law. The currency undergoing inflation or demurrage will see transactional demand, while the hard money will see reserve demand. The clearing exchange price will depend on where the ISLM curves of the two currencies balance.
The other way would be to put a gun to someone's head and make them pay for some unproductive loser's UBI. Which would be (1) immoral, (2) counterproductive, and (3) unsustainable. That is how it works now, except hard money is suppressed by overt threats and covert conspiracies. It won't scale to UBI, in my opinion.
Was always a little curious about people's long term 30-40 year outlook on hard metals in relation to asteroid mining myself.
I see no reason to speculate on it: Space traffic is so surveiled that we would all know about it years before anyone lassos a hunk of platinum. Just watch the space and you should have no trouble front-running the masses to the exits.
But yeah, technology is why I think cultural artifacts and productive assets with low political risk are better for intergenerational wealth transfer than PMs.
I´ve been following the thread for a while. The major caractheristic i see being appointed here for the success and mass adoption of Monero is the fact that it´s the most private coin. IMO if mass adoption would occur today the masses would rather have an easy to use coin than a very private coin. So you think in the future people will be increasingly concern with privacy or you see monero as an easier to use coin than the others?
People don't count for squat. It's the amount of capital going into Monero that determines the float remaining, and the transaction volume over that float, which defines the clearing price.
The coin that prevents you from being robbed is the one that will draw the most capital. When no one can know what you have, no one is incentivized to take it from you at gunpoint, be they Vinnie from the hood or the IRS.
XMR went from 35 to 50 a few times since June, attractive pattern for day trading. Problem is I feel absolutely terrorized to put my holdings on any exchange, even the most trusted ones.
Gox was a trusted exchange as well.
Sucks really... A decentralized XMR exchange platform would be glorious.
Gox was a trusted exchange as well.
Sucks really... A decentralized XMR exchange platform would be glorious.
What about the September fork?
I know that answer.
It will not happen before September.
Or you have some other question?
Andreas confirms his position on Monero.
Got a link? I am surprised it took him this long. Andreas knows, and I listened to quite a few of his early talks, that Bitcoin and now Etherreum have an Achilles heel: fungibility / privacy. And Andreas is very keen on his (digital) privacy. As a computer nerd you simply can't not like Monero's core features, and there is nothing like it..
It was a comment he made today in a Reddit AMA to the Ethereum subreddit.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/6mtnz7/we_are_gav_wood_and_andreas_m_antonopoulos_and_we/dk4b69e/
Andreas confirms his position on Monero.
Got a link? I am surprised it took him this long. Andreas knows, and I listened to quite a few of his early talks, that Bitcoin and now Etherreum have an Achilles heel: fungibility / privacy. And Andreas is very keen on his (digital) privacy. As a computer nerd you simply can't not like Monero's core features, and there is nothing like it..
What about the September fork?
Was always a little curious about people's long term 30-40 year outlook on hard metals in relation to asteroid mining myself.
The cost of production of space rocks will always be vastly higher than earth rocks, so it doesn't matter whatsoever.
Why do you make that assumption? That's like saying production in the united states must always be cheaper than production in China.
Andreas confirms his position on Monero.
AMD uses Monero example as suggestion that not only their GPUs can be used to mine cryptocurrencies but also their Ryzen CPUs.
http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/img/pcw/docs/1069/873/html/1.jpg.html
http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/img/pcw/docs/1069/873/html/1.jpg.html
Was always a little curious about people's long term 30-40 year outlook on hard metals in relation to asteroid mining myself.
The cost of production of space rocks will always be vastly higher than earth rocks, so it doesn't matter whatsoever. We would probably mine things like the ocean floor long before trying to mine metals in space.
I'm curious as to how a whole global, or even national society, can function on a UBI if that society were to use an asset like Monero or even Bitcoin as the new currency.
This will probably be the most unpopular post ever in the Monero thread, but why would you want such a thing to happen? Cryptocurrencies are rent seeking usury systems. Yea yea, Monero is one of the best of the worst, but they are generally all worse than gold and silver. Smooth doesn't seem to be all that bullish on cryptocurrency in the first place so I doubt he will even bother trying to put up an argument against this, but I'm sure people like Icebreaker and Articmine will try:
http://steemit.com/bitcoin/@r0achtheunsavory/the-r0ach-report-18-the-great-pow-lie
The reason why I would want it (and I'm assuming other people have the same opinion) is because you can't transfer gold, silver, or any other currency for that matter in a digital and decentralized fashion to avoid centralization and possible censorship.
I understand the reasoning of having value in hard assets like gold and silver, but it's obvious the economy is moving towards a more digital market place (happy "Prime Day" everyone).
Jump to: