Topic: [XMR] Monero Speculation - page 908. (Read 3314537 times)

I like your posts, kurious, but I don't get the love for Mr Reptilia (from you and many others.) It affects the impressionable minds of newbies (cough cough me) into thinking this guy is some amazing oracle. I am guilty of believing his earlier predictions and selling a portion of my coins because I surmised he would know better than me (totally my fault, I know.)

At that time I bought sub 0.01 because to me it was obvious we were going up considering what was on the near horizon.  I will continue to look towards the horizon near and far.  There are fundamental things about Monero and it's development that most people don't seem to appreciate.  No need to elaborate as all the info is in the open.

Another big bunch of merges on the official GUI. Only three outstanding currently:

https://github.com/monero-project/monero-core/pulls

I'd generalize this sentiment and apply it as optimism to all exchanges which have yet to add XMR.

You know exchange operators/investors must be PISSED OFF at and JEALOUS of Poloniex for eating the lion's share of not only XMR volume, but most other alts as well.

What good does it do for your exchange to offer trendy stuff like ETC/ETH/DAO/ZEC when everyone stays at Polo because all the action is over there?   

Good to see you back Risto - I hope things are improving in your world and I am sure I am not the only one looking forward to your further thoughts.

At the end of the day it's business and XMR is an earner.   I don't think they will jump immediately, but opening communication channels is a good idea and never hurts.   

I think they might look at Bitfinex's volume and be non-plussed about it, but if (when, rather) it picks up, then the need to consider it will renew and the obvious privacy factor may or may not be of interest according to how Coinbase sees its own position in crypto long-term.

It would be good for XMR, but it's for them to decide how they see it fitting in.  The volume justifies them considering it, certainly and XMR is growing and gaining respect constantly....

I know it's a long-shot but I'd add to that list FluffyPony's going to speak to coinbase in January too.

Probably has very small chance of happening BUT if Brian Armstrong *really* wants to make a name for himself as a serious mo-fo in the crypto space, adding Monero support for coinbase customers would be an epic, awesome, totally out-of-the-blue amazing game-changer, LOL, especially in light of all this recent hullaballoo over the IRS trying to muscle info out of coinbase on all their customers.

Coinbase is largely persona non grata in crypto space for a long time now, after all the shit they've pulled over the last few years, BUT doing THIS would totally redeem them, at least in my eyes.

Yeah, I know... snowball's chance in hell of actually happening BUT can you IMAGINE what the IMPACT would be IF it really DID happen???

I speculate he bought in when he tricked some people to sell their coins sub 0.01 by giving predictions of Monero hitting the bottom of 0.004 which never happened obviously.

Heh I'd actually argue the big exchanges are actually the weak link, given everything that's happened with them

Indeed - hopefully it won't take a Gox-style event for it to happen, but I could definitely see Bitfinex picking up volume over the coming months. The near-term future for XMR looks very strong:

- RingCT
- GUI
- Bitfinex additional liquidity & decentralization (and wallet storage for the risk-takers)

Do we have you back in the XMR game, Risto?

I think the situation is good.

They already added it, not great volume so far, but they aren't doing margin trading yet.

Early days - but yes, in the event of Polo struggling Bitfinex could cope....

Thank-you, very rational. Anyway, hopefully being added to Bitfinex might negate this "single point-of-failure" (potential) problem? What do you think? And do you know when are they adding it? Thanks, V.

The trade would inevitably go elsewhere.  A coin doesn't die when its main exchange disappears.

It would reflect on the alts market, including BTC and all alts - as all would have been affected.   Scandalous, bad for the alts market, bad for XMR - yes initially, but people would still want to buy and sell.

The main risk is that Polo is being used by many people with XMR as a wallet, since there is not GUI.  So more Monero would be 'lost' and therefore the XMR market would be hit. 

If it was a hack - there would be a fear of any stolen coins being dumped - which would depress price. If it was a crash that locked up or lost coins - it would reduce supply and so (in theory) actually increase the price of the remaining available coins.

Whatever happened the market for XMR would still exist - but move to a new location, or new locations.

If your "dream" was recording for eternity in the Holy Mother of All Blockchains every Frappuchino, Dorito, and bus ticket purchase, sorry for your loss.

LOL Circle.  They rage quit just like Mike Hearn, who is/was one of their board advisers.

I guess Hearn advised Circle to maximize 1MB vs XT butthurt, get triggered, blame GMAX, and crawl off into a safe space to die bitter and alone.   

How much code has Circle contributed?  Oh that's right, none at all.  Circle may moan all they like about what their hapless customers are not allowed to do, but talking about Bitcoin (which is permissionless) did not make them part of it.

Why aren't you "sure" Bitcoin is a fat protocol?  It's very clear from the definition that it qualifies (Bitcoin market cap > sum of apps built on top), albeit not as much as Monero since we only have minimal apps built on top.

Do you have a better explanation that accounts for the observable fact heavily funded bitcoin companies failed to produce the kinds of spectacular results Silicon Valley expects, even as the value of bitcoin itself continues to climb?  Speculating about motivations and fretting about EVIL BLOCKSTREAMCORE doesn't count; your personal status as disgruntled isn't an argument that leads to a falsifiable (ie useful) hypothesis.

You may believe building out layers >1 will hollow out Bitcoin's value and leave it a gutted shell, but most of us call that process "scaling" and think it will add tremendously to the protocol's usefulness.  That's why the price is in a secular bull market and shows no signs of turning bearish.

BTW payment channels such as Lightning are not "secondary layers."  Sidechains are secondary layers; LN style write caches are more accurately conceived of as Layer 1.5.  Regardless of nomenclature and semantics, additional higher layers become part of (ie are not distinct from nor compete with) the Bitcoin protocol, which gets fatter as its utility expands.  IOW, the Bitcoin protocol (Layer 1 + extensions) is Bitcoin's killer app.

If you could stop fixating on BTC's fixed blocksize limit and dragging it into every topic just so you can get in a bit of axe-grinding, that would be great.  You're starting to remind me of Daniel Hopsicker, who does outstanding investigative reporting yet insists on tying everything back the JFK assassination.   

Should we know him?

Looks like someone has set his straightedge at the price of 0.0107... It is like a straight line...

The missing % isn't what worries me. Don't you think it's bad that 97% of all XMR volume is coming from one exchange. Really, it looks like XMR is the Poloniex "house-coin", and as we all know, exchanges don't last, they always go down in the end. It makes me feel like it's not very safe to hold XMR long-term. How bad/or good would it be for Monero, do you think, if Polo went bye-bye, or would nothing much change? Serious question, no trolling.

The missing % is probably what's traded at Bitfinex - which is also miniscule to what is traded on Polo - but they are not offering margin yet, which is what Finex traders were known for....

Polo is where the volume is, Finex will be (hopefully) the fiat on-ramp.  But as a relatively mature currency, the volume is staying where it habitually has been.

I'll take a stab at it and sat that 97% is traded on POLO.