For a more serious reply (no memes lol), I would say that while the possibility of XMR becoming the dominant crypto exists, it's a pretty remote possibility, for at least two reasons.

First, the massive network effect Bitcoin has, which is unlikely to be dispelled anytime soon.

And second, the fact that XMR is the true cypherpunk project, which means it flies in the face of every government and every institution, in our age of always-on mass-surveillance (which is why it ought to be used of course, if you ask me). Meanwhile BTC is accepted for its surveillance-friendly nature and ability to make money when expressed in fiat.

But make no mistake, I think you know as well as I do that if Bitcoin were totally private and anonymous, the legacy financial system would have never embraced it, nor would any government have done so.

So, the rewards for holding XMR are potentially very disproportional (yuge gains), but the possibility of this happening is very remote.

Therefore (imo) better use BTC for what it does best - appreciating vs everything else and XMR for what it does best - paying anonymously and privately.

As always, Thomas Sowell explains:

?w=768

Yeah. I think any intelligent unbiased person would reach the same conclusion, it's only fanaticism, hubris and arrogance that prevents many from realizing this obvious truth.

It's not so much fighting one another, almost all the Monero people hold much more BTC than XMR, the difference is they/we understand the importance of always-on privacy and anonymity.

The most logical thing to do is to hodl BTC and having a bit of XMR on the side for private purchases. This seems to be the conclusion of the market as well, judging by Monero basically having become a stablecoin in the last few years (only pumped a bit recently), as well as it being top contender in any shop that takes both.

Whst benefits have you personally experienced from doing this practice?

Do the plunges get less uncomfortable over time, or do you learn to deal with the discomfort better?

As I have often alluded to, the Lightning Network is one giant hot wallet.

Exploits like this are completely expected given the nature of the protocol, the limitations of human beings, and complexity of the software involved.

Perhaps now some of the more stubborn understand why the tradeoffs between #monero and Lightning are not even remotely the same (for better and for worse).

So you're saying.. there's a chance

Where "strange" is arbitrarily and ever more narrowly defined, of course.

The fact that the data is available (in perpetuity, to boot) makes the discriminations possible - nay, eventually unavoidable.

Feminists hate this one trick

Your whole argument boils down to since you can't be sure a technology protecting your privacy (proving a negative) and anonymity will stand, might as well do everything in the clear, without any protection.

But we are the dumb ones?

You, "buddy", are the worst kind of fool: the fool who doesn't even realize he's a fool.

That's a DNS error, I highly doubt they have the ability to do that.

Your assertion that I cannot explain it is incorrect. I already understand it but don't have the time or the patience to explain the same thing over and over to the 1000th person who brings up the same fallacy.

Do your homework and understand it, or don't, but if you don't then at least don't post falsehoods.

https://www.moneroinflation.con

Read and understand it, and take your own conclusions.

You're conflating privacy and anonymity. You always have zero privacy on Bitcoin L1 since it's completely transparent.

Bitcoin not tied to your identity is not about privacy, but about anonymity. You are very weakly pseudonymous at best, and any mistakes you make from now to eternity carries the risk of retroactive deanonymization.

If you really think buying no kyc while leaving an eternal cleartext breadcrumb behind you is the same as transacting in an opaque-by-cryprography chain, I really don't know what else to tell you.

You're right, I read something different (the common complaint about allegedly not being able to verify the supply.

So, to your point: I'd rather have "unverifiable privacy" in software made by world-class cryptographers than the certainty of zero privacy and weak pseudonymity.

I was writing irrespective of the present situation, just pointing out it is a leap of logic to assume the final outcome based on the first action alone.

Gotta adapt, my man. Never stop learning, never stop growing!

Common falsehood.

If I had a satoshi for every time I've posted this link..

https://www.moneroinflation.com

lame, privacy is not a crime.