Can some of the #bitcoin maxis explain to my why #monero is a shitcoin?
Not pre-mined. Decentralized. Uses proof of work.
Discussion
Unverifiable supply is a point which often comes up. Personally, if an asset is < $ trilly in total value it’s not worth too much attention.
I never did it myself and don't know how to, but the monero folks saying it's verifiable.
By running a Monero node and typing in a command just like any Bitcoiner would do
A hidden inflation bug is potentially harder to suss out on Monero. But it gains the advantage of privacy and fungibility. I guess it depends what you think is more important for digital cash (nothing stops us from using both for different situations).
Technically it is true it is not verifiable in a simple manner, but in practice there is no difference in my opinion. Virtually no Bitcoiner manually makes sure every single input/output on-chain of literally over a billion+ transactions cancel out (and indefinitely every ten minutes on top of that).
They just run a node (if even that)
One you can't verify in a simple way (relies on cryptographic assumptions and correct implementation)
The other you can, but in practice almost no one does
An advantage one never takes advantage of doesn't seem like much of an advantage, but thats just me I guess
Do you know if it can be done on a start9 running monero?
I don't have much familiarity with start9 so don't take my word for it but I'm 99% sure you can
The supply is verifiable cryptocraphically.
Not pre mined, but check out the distribution curve. Lots of coin for early miners.
Isn't that also the case for bitcoin?
Monero was much steeper
This is true it was steeper, but also not as crucial as Bitcoin because of tail emission.
It's also unlikely those early miners just held onto it this whole time. Most traded or sold long ago. Whichever early miners held took on great risk to do so. They deserve any potential gains they made.
Bitcoin maxis can’t define what a shitcoin is other than by the definition that everything that isn’t Bitcoin is a shitcoin.
Na that would be a shame. And I already got some substantial replies
They are not telling you how Monero is a shitcoin. They are telling you how Monero is different from Bitcoin. Of course no other crypto is going to be like Bitcoin (similarly to how no other crypto is going to be like Monero). Ask for a definition of what a shitcoin is and you won’t have any consistent answer.
Unlimited supply. Which is the opposite of the whole point of money, scarcity, fixed supply. I would add that, the brilliance of bitcoin is that it achieved the optimum between all tradeoffs of the critical variables, to become immutable, incorruptible money. That’s why there will never be a second best.
Scarcity and fixed supply aren't the same. But agree that bitcoin will get this point for finite supply at the characteristics that make a good money. But one could argue monero has a better fungibility because of the better privacy.
Fixed supply is a form of scarcity, the absolute form…re your second point, it‘s a trade-off that ultimately negatively impacts Bitcoin‘s immutability. Bitcoin optimally solves for one human problem only, money. One has to be careful not to superimpose trying to solve unrelated issues on it, that dilutes the purity. It’s like saying we are limiting free speech to solve child pornography….Bitcoin has enough privacy for two peers to transparently transact with each other, they have to trust each other. The invasion of privacy by a third party is unacceptable and has to be solved directly.
Ok true, absolute scarcity is a fixed supply. But a private transaction is really hard because of the on-chain transparency. If we do a transaction with a change output included I always have to take care of the future usage of this change output. If we do a cash transaction where I get some money back you can't see what I do with the change.
It's a fallacy that absolute scarcity alone automatically = more valuable
You can fix the supply, but you can't control demand. Ultimately value is subjective like any good bitcoin maxi austrian should know. And demand can change at any time.
On-chain Bitcoin has some anonymity if done correctly, but can never have privacy. Big difference between the two. It's a transparent public ledger.
https://github.com/libbitcoin/libbitcoin-system/wiki/Scarcity-Fallacy
nah.
infinite divided by 21M is a stupid meme.
as if the supply inflation of gold over the last 2k years made it a poor store of value.
these maxis need to get a grip and stop just repeating stupid saifedean catchphrases.
My two cents on the negative parts:
- Tail emission, its an inflationary asset
- very few people use it, makes it way less decentralized
- hash computation ridiculous compared to bitcoin, so less secure
- doesn't scale, no layer 2s
- development of the ecosystem is extremely slow compared to bitcoin
Is there a scaling solution needed with dynamic block size?
Yes because when your blockchain has 4 gigabytes blocks and it's no longer decentralized then you will need to find a solution.
What do you mean by no longer decentralized if it has 4 gigabyte blocks? Storage capacity should be no problem for decentralization if the capacity of SSD grows like in the past
It's not about the storage it's about the bandwidth and infrastructures. If you have 4 gigabytes blocks only few percentage of individuals would be able to run a node. Look at ethereum network. Today you can run a bitcoin node on your phone because we have small capped blocks.
Never heard of a full node on a phone. Can you name one?
Monero is far away from 4 GB Blocks. Let's see what solution will come up, if monero hits 4 GB blocksize.
What a great problem to have. Monero is used so much that it is hitting 4 GB blocks 😂
Don't think we'll see that anytime soon if ever...
tell me you don't understand dynamic block size without telling me you don't...
There is nothing complex about it. At some point toward global adoption you'll have huge blocks on average and an increasing centralizing issue because not anyone's terminal would be performant enough to run a node.
Do you really believe Bitcoin can scale toward global adoption right now when it's well known that not even lightning can do this? With a large enough and sustained spike in adoption Bitcoin would break just as easily (practically unusable due to fees and confirmation times, and increased centralization because if the average user can't afford to use the network why in the hell would they run a node?). We see this literally every time there is a modest increase in use. Even lightning breaks when mempool is congested.
Bitcoin hasn't avoided future centralization issues yet either.
If Bitcoin in it's much larger usage and popularity has time to figure it out then so does Monero
Is there any way to figure this out though. I don't think this problem can be resolved without some complex off chin lightning type model, which is an awful solution to the problem. It needs to be baked in and I see nothing that can even theoretically address this problem with bitcoin or monero.
-(See my previous post about scarcity below)
-# of nodes are comparable to Bitcoin nodes
-you can't directly compare hash like that. two totally different PoW algos
-lightning network enabled with next major upgrade FCMP++
-Has 3rd largest dev ecosystem right behind BTC and ETH
nevent1qqsrukgp6lc0grxn73s7syjqvghryg8quhrjrfaafc5g2yzzlk3uw5gp4xn0f
In that case, have a look at another shitcoin called bcash.
