Well, youre probably going to get at least one "Monero" but I figure I'll say it again. That's the only coin I'll shill because it's the only one worth shilling.

I will add, Mimblewimble as an architecture/scheme is the only thing in existence today that comes close to truly solving scalability issues with bitcoin. You should look into it. I've said this a lot around here, to solve the issues with bitcoin you need to have the same security guarantees as bitcoin without the requirement of keeping any and/or all historical data. Mimblewimble *almost* achieves this. Actually, it does achieve it as originally specified, with the downside that you get absolutely no programmability, no multisig, no time locks, nothing. To get those a trade off was made, and tiny little proofs from each transaction must be kept, called kernels, that are present in all MW implementations to my knowledge and in the reference implementation, Grin. If this issue can be solved while keeping those programmability features, you've got bona fide space money.

Lol oh I see call me upset to see if you can get a rise out of me.

Honest people don't resort to childish tactics, they approach about topics from a place of veracity and attempt to delve into them with genuine curiosity.

There isn't a serious bitcoiner that doesn't accept Monero.

Lack of a layered approach? What does that mean?

What's the cost of full validation? You mean syncing the chain?

What's wrong with the transaction size, and what is the Monero block size?

Monero has it's own network effects, with blow and hookers.

No person, man or woman, truly knows themselves until they've shaved their head. That's not the only requirement to knowing ones self, but it is a requirement.

Shave your head and experience true freedom.

You don't understand clearly what I've told you. This is a system of incentives, a "game" in the parlance of game theory. The outcomes are very much predictable, I'm not guessing here or making an argument on behalf of something or against something, I'm only making an educated observation. You can take what I've said and try to understand it deeper, or you can default to defending something you're emotionally attached to, but the incentives are the incentives and the outcomes are predictable.

This is only with fedimint and not cashu (as of right now; they keep open the option of building federated mints but it is not currently planned).

Bitcoin is not a better long term store of value than Monero. This is actually a much more interesting one than most arguments on this topic so I'll go in depth as to why.

In game theory, there's a problem called tragedy of the commons, and within that concept there's the idea of the "free rider", I don't know how in depth you dive into game theory stuff but you should understand it intimately because all networks involving multiple agents are pure game theory and you can't understand peer to peer networks without it.

Anyway, in Bitcoin, there's a cost to maintaining the network, without which a sat has no value whatsoever. This cost is entirely borne by those transacting in it, ultimately *the recipients* of it (just like how business taxes are borne ultimately by the clients of said business), and in this game, hodlers are free riders. This is, of course, assuming a capped supply of just under 21 million coins. And so, the incentive pressure is for everyone to become hodlers, you get to store your value at the expense of more frequent users, and the logical conclusion of course being that very few people transact and those that do pay for maintaining the security on behalf of those who don't.

The only possible outcome of such a scheme is that nobody transacts, miners don't get paid, they quit, security drops and the network, and therefore your holdings, lose value. This is, of course, entirely a consequence of the hard cap, and Monero on the other hand with it's tail emission means that hodlers pay through debasement of their holdings for their share of the security of the network that gives their coins value, and since it's debasement, they pay in proportion to the value they get from the network. In the long term, Monero is the better store of value counterintuitively precisely due to the tail emission, the thing that is cited as the reason it is inferior as such.

As far as the anonymity set (reducing Monero's privacy because you have a smaller group to hide in) this is not really a problem because of the fixed ring size, but it can be exploited in certain ways, but with full chain membership proofs which are Coming Soon™ to Monero, it will no longer be an issue.

Do you write checks from your savings account?

Monero's current inflation rate is lower than that of bitcoin. Check for yourself if you don't believe me.

The scaling challenges that Bitcoin faces, Monero mostly resolves. I say mostly because I'm a firm believer that in order to completely solve them you need the same security guarantees that bitcoin and Monero offer without the necessity to save all historical data. The dynamic block size though does a great deal to alleviate it.

People actually spend Monero. Network effects in the long term are in it's favor if your goal is peer to peer digital cash.

Once you write something down and send it to someone they can choose to keep it forever. There's no way to enforce ephemerality.

The proper solution to people holding you to something you may have said at some point during your growth that you no longer agree with is to tell them you've changed your mind. If they still try to hold you to it tell them to go fuck themselves. That's the only way.

If it's something you don't want anyone but the recipient to know, make sure you trust them to protect and/or destroy the message and use a secure channel. That's all you can do.

I'm having the same problem. Other apps update in Obtainium fine, this one doesn't. No error, no "not installed", it downloads, installer launches, click install, get a toast from Obtainium that says "apps updated" and it's still not updated. That's what youre seeing?

Not to sound picky but how loud is it? I'd have to run it in the house and I don't know how loud they are.

Yes you did.

Do you write any other languages?

Has anybody taken you up on this? What's shipping look like?

Yeah, we get resources for improved maps, but if Meta ever gets *control* of OSM, it will start undermining it the way Google does with chromium and Android. Their goal is not to give us something awesome for free, it's to try to take Google down a notch by reducing reliance on their maps. So we can't rest easy, but we can enjoy the benefit they give so long as we remain vigilant about their nature and true motive and avoid them abusing their influence on the project.

I'm checking it out.

If youre using Garnet, remember to contribute, even if it's just reporting bugs. It is alpha software after all.

Speaking of which, I need to report one where it has trouble switching between accounts.

Never get confused about what hes doing. He is not giving it to the world, he's trying to ensure that the competitors have no proprietary advantage that can overcome network effects. They have some other plan to monetize it, and seeing as it's Meta, I'd be willing to bet it's predatory.

It's similar reasoning to Meta being the largest contributor to OSM. Google already has the commercial advantage on maps, and that's the key difference, but if OSM can beat Google on accuracy then they're not a monopoly player anymore.

Make no mistake, his goal is to beat Google and take their position in the tech industry.

Really? I'm not seeing this specified in the repo. So when tipping someone on Garnet, the client parses the profile for XMR addresses?

The most popular president in american history by vote count, not running for reelection because He's unelectable. Shits crazy yo.