Nostr Web Client

Fiat also has inflation because central banks print fiat out of thin air. But they are not bad in your opinion? They who actually financially enslave ordinary people?

Did you know about the second successful 51% attack on Monero?

"What happened technically: An 18-block "reorg" (reorganization) hit the Monero network - meaning that 18 blocks the entire network believed to be valid and permanent were suddenly discarded and replaced by an alternative version of history. To put this in perspective, reorganizations of more than 2-3 blocks are extremely rare in established blockchain networks.

The financial outcome: 55 confirmed double spends (the same money spent twice) and 115 transactions completely invalidated. While we cannot know whether these were merchants, exchanges, or individuals transacting, this matters little in the face of real double spending scenarios - someone lost real money."

https://www.eddieoz.com/monero-under-attack-how-the-community-responds-to-selfish-mining-attacks/

Have fun.

pookiebear 2mo ago 💬 1

No, in my opinion, it is very different in the case of fiat.

I already talked about this here (a previous note, i can't seem to quote it here apparently but here is the link):

nostr:nevent1qqs2hfet8ep6u29u56ly7de0qfhgzjas6rycnuwuj3lzaeqslpwexvszyqkhc7pl3gunuxw63hra6ydz4msz7rejhv9zexcusxvx2d983tnvkqcyqqqqqqg4x52jd

Personally, i am willing to accept fixed and predetermined inflation of my currency if it is sovereign and private.

Plus, neither Monero nor Bitcoin prices correlate well to their available supply.

I am well aware of the 18 block reorg, and its implications. Though

-such an attack could only mean governments are scared of Monero's privacy

-qubic is now targetting Dogecoin and abandonning Monero, supposedly because it cost them too much money

Don't get me wrong, i still think Bitcoin is a superior store of value, precisely because of this inflation, and i'd rather hodl BTC than XMR.

Though, you have to admit privacy features are lacking in Bitcoin, which Monero provides.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

BitcoinIsFuture 2mo ago 💬 2

1. The attack on Monero does not come from government. It comes from economically incentivized people who get more money when mining with the attacker. It also shows weak design. It happened two times.

2. "fixed and predetermined inflation of my currency" is wishful thinking. You have had how many hard forks? 14, 15, 16? It can change at any time. It is a bad desing. You sound like Powell and Lagard - 2% inflation is good for the people. Inlation is theft. Any inflation on the money is theft.

3. About the privacy in Bitcoin - check the research of SuperTestnet on Lightning vs Monero

Here answering probably to a friend of yours:

nostr:nevent1qqs0vj6muzm5x4qvu2h39n0a7ry5guw2qpf3f0thgrx43skvq7q9lyqppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qywhwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnzd96xxmmfdejhytnnda3kjctv9uq3qamnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wd4hk6tc0kffn3

pookiebear 2mo ago

1) Fair, saying governments directly control Qubic is a shortcut. My point was that seeing Monero being attacked hints that Monero as a MoE is enough of a threat to fiat. But no, the design (referring to ASIC resistance I suppose) is not 'weak', Monero is simply not as mature as Bitcoin (especially in terms of hashrate).

2) I know I rely on a centralized group of devs to maintain & update Monero's Codebase. If they go rogue, (like core devs did -wink wink-), I'lll deny the abusive consensus changes. Tail emissions can change any time there is a consensus to (not anytime soon then). Once again, I do agree BTC is a superior store of value to XMR because of the inflation tail emissions it injects in the supply cap. But is BTC better as an MoE? I'm less positive about that.

3) Thanks for the podcast. From what i've listened, most of the points made in the video are aligned with mine: Privacy in Bitcoin is possible, but way harder to achieve.

Saberhagen The Nameless 2mo ago 💬 2

Selfish mining attacks are possible with any PoW cryptocurrency even Bitcoin. It isn't something unique to Monero.

If you voluntarily use a crypto that has inflation, no it isn't theft. No one forced anyone to use Monero. Gold mining isn't "theft" because more is mined every year. That would be ridiculous.

Monero/gold mining is open to anyone, requires PoW, and is predictable

Fiat inflation is closed to a select few, requires no work, and unpredictable

To say those are the same thing is dishonest

Any "fixed/predetermined" block reward or supply is only as good as the users that are in consensus with those rules. Code cant control people choosing to leave or join the Bitcoin network and taking their money with them.

BitcoinIsFuture 2mo ago 💬 2

Inflation devalues the worth of every hodler. Gold has inflation and it devalues Gold with about 1.5% a year. Its still valuable because fiat inflation is much much bigger than that. Same with houses that are build new in addition to the existing ones.

That is why Bitcoin being limited to 21 Million is The Greates Money of them all.

Selfish mining attacks succeeded with Monero 2 times, not with Bitcoin because probably there are differences ASIC vs CPU, incentives and so on.

Inflation in Monero devalues the worth of any Monero holder. Inflation is always theft!

BitcoinIsFuture 2mo ago 💬 2

"Monero/gold mining is open to anyone, requires PoW, and is predictable

Fiat inflation is closed to a select few, requires no work, and unpredictable"

That is True! But it only means that inflation in Monero is not that severe as in fiat. The same way that inflation in Gold is not that severe as in fiat.

But it is still inflation and still devaulues worth. The big difference with Bitcon is that inlation in Bitcoin is reducing untill it will reach 0 (already less and Gold and anything else). On Monero and in Gold it will go on forever.

ede3d957... 2mo ago 💬 4

Monero inflation will also tend against 0. Just like Bitcoin. The only difference is the time frame used.

Jean-David Bar 2mo ago 💬 3

How could something agreed upon be theft? If you know the inflation rate for ever, you agree on a possible (but not necessary) loss of value. It makes fiat inflation really different from Monero inflation.

Another innovative way to manage this with a predefined inflation rate is to use two units, one being the currency as usual, the other being the currency corrected from inflation. I only saw that in this "relative theory of money", only in French at the moment: http://trm.creationmonetaire.info/index.html

It's being experimented with an actual cryptocurrency: https://duniter.org/

BitcoinIsFuture 2mo ago 💬 1

So you are saying its not a theft of your value, its loss of your value. Isn't that linguistic gymnastics?

Jean-David Bar 2mo ago 💬 2

No. If I agree upon something, I am not being stolen, that's that simple. If you come to my house and take my car without my consent, it's theft. If I agree you take it it's not.

BitcoinIsFuture 2mo ago 💬 1

What if many people are not aware of how tail emissions / inflation on Monero work?

Like this guy for example

nostr:nevent1qqsv0g068qgvc8wzd4yfnv5g9lcy6839j6u86ae40g2c5xa4xc4hs9gppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qywhwumn8ghj7mn0wd68ytnzd96xxmmfdejhytnnda3kjctv9uq3qamnwvaz7tmwdaehgu3wd4hk6tcafhya7

Saberhagen The Nameless 2mo ago

Then it's their responsibility to research before buying it.

If I impulsively buy something at the store and it doesn't work how I thought because I didn't learn about it beforehand that isn't the stores fault. That's not theft.

ede3d957... 2mo ago 💬 1

Obviously I do understand mathematics better than you do.

BitcoinIsFuture 2mo ago

Obviously not. It will never become 0 "just like Bitcoin".

pookiebear 2mo ago

no, precisely because i am willing to loose some of it in exchange for better privacy.

Had it been without my consent, then it would be theft.

🧙🏼‍♂️Homemdosaco 2mo ago 💬 2

I actually see tail emissions as an ever decreasing percent fee on increased security provided by every extra block. A fee for a service.

As it is, miner funding in the future is somewhat fragile, and hodlers get something for nothing.

I also understand that opening this pandora box is risky.

But I see most arguments against tail emissions to come from a kind of (justifiable) revolted place against fiat and central bank policy.

BitcoinIsFuture 2mo ago 💬 1

Its your point of view. The time will tell.

What I am noticing is that many people try to predict the future and in my opinion they try to solve problems that are currently non-existant. And may never be.

Only visionaires for example like Satoshi Nakamoto can create strong, balanced and secure systems that can serve as Money. There are so many factors to weigh in.

There are not many people like Satoshi and also Bitcoin has no 2nd best.

Tail emission will double Monero supply in 117 years. I don't see that as a positive. And it will continue to inflate. It will tripple its supply in 234 years. And so on.

Bitcoin will have 0 inflation in 117 years. In reality it will have deflation due to lost coins.

Bitcoin will never double its supply because its limited at 21 Million Bitcoins.

And when we are talking about Money, Gold has been Money for more than 5000 Years.

🧙🏼‍♂️Homemdosaco 2mo ago 💬 2

Fair point about concerning too much about future problems.

Just want to note that doubling supply every 100 years falls far behind production output increase, so it's still deflationary and is still a great improvement over current policy.

BitcoinIsFuture 2mo ago

It is inflationary and its the opposite of improvement.

Hanshan 2mo ago 💬 1

A supply inflation of .8%

and approaching zero with every block

is such a ridiculous thing to get hung up on.

Autistically clinging to a fixed number is just maxi virtue signaling. Its bad monetary policy and its only value is memetics.

BitcoinIsFuture 2mo ago

A clown that can't comprehend that current supply will double in 117 years and tripple in 234 years and will continue.

The clown likes this. I don't like it.

Hanshan 2mo ago

"Gold has been money for 5k years but monero is bad because no supply cap"

Hey, haven't you heard?

the number of monetary units doesn't matter as long as it is known and predictable.

get with the program.

BitcoinIsFuture 2mo ago

You seem to need to study more Monero.

"Monero's inflation through tail emission is designed to go on forever. Starting from mid-2022, Monero implemented a perpetual tail emission with a fixed block reward of 0.6 XMR per block. This results in a continuous issuance of approximately 157,680 XMR annually, indefinitely."

Jean-David Bar 2mo ago 💬 3

It's maths. Fixed emission per block forever makes relative increase of money supply tend against 0 (0%).

157K/18M=0,87%

In ten years, 157K/(18M+157K*10)=0,8%

Etc.

BitcoinIsFuture 2mo ago

Okay but that means so much increase of the volume with time so that it becomes negligible.

Jean-David Bar 2mo ago

Yes. Depending on what is seen as negligible to you. Starting from 0.8% annual and only going down can be seen already as negligible compared to fiat 😄

S!ayer 2mo ago

Maths? What's that? It's only NGU theory here!

Jean-David Bar 2mo ago 💬 1

I understand that with NGU you relate to inflation in purchasing power?

This is not incompatible with maths applied to inflation in money supply...

You see something wrong in this?

BitcoinIsFuture 2mo ago

I think his comment was addressed towards me. Your math is correct. He is kinda salty about smth.

Saberhagen The Nameless 2mo ago 💬 1

I'm not arguing Monero doesn't have inflation, I'm saying it is different from fiat inflation and much more like mining precious metals like gold

(anyone can participate, it requires work, and is even more predictable so the market can take into account supply for their future decisions at any point in time - you can't do that with fiat inflation) and if people are voluntarily choosing to opt into Monero it isn't theft. No one forced anyone to buy Monero and it's up to the user to decide if they want to buy it after weighing pros and cons. If they didn't research enough beforehand to know that's their responsibility. That goes for anything.

What you say is true, Bitcoin doesn't have inflation, but supply alone doesn't determine value. Demand is also a factor and you can't control demand. Even something with more supply can be more valuable than something with less supply if more people are demanding it. Demand is constantly changing for any good/service/money.

The block reward is a constant, not a percent, so you can effectively treat it as zero over time similar to approaching a limit in calculus.

https://github.com/libbitcoin/libbitcoin-system/wiki/Scarcity-Fallacy

BitcoinIsFuture 2mo ago 💬 1

I agree with that.

The only correction is to the last part. The constant block reward inflates the supply and thus declines as a percentage of the whole but it will never be zero.

Saberhagen The Nameless 2mo ago

Yep true

S!ayer 2mo ago

Dude, please get a proper education not hustler's university theories on inflation and economics.

Honestly the reason why I stopped engaging with this. but it does make me laugh so thanks 🙏