pull down to refresh

Rachel Maddow missing the forrest for the trees
387 sats \ 18 comments \ @028559d218 12 Mar bitcoin
Rachel Maddow is, in my opinion, completely missing the forest for the trees. There is no 'cryptocurrency', there is no 'crypto industry' there are no 'cryptos'... There is only Bitcoin.
Only Bitcoin competes in Proof-of-Work (absolutely mandatory) market cap, liquidity, security, and hardware + software support plus the Lightning network.
And of the PoW 'cryptos' that do exist... BCH, Litecoin, BSV, Doge and Monero...
Based on hashrate, price, adoption, security (hardware and software wallets) 'layers' like Lightning, regulatory acceptance (necessary long-term) and name-brand nothing else competes with Bitcoin. There is no second best, no-one wants the 'second-best' PoW cryptocurrency.
Cryptos from numbers "2-11" are proof of airtoken (with the exception of Doge) and # 11, higher on the list than BCH, Litecoin, BSV, and Monero... is the Pi-Coin.
Pi-Coin is generated from tapping on a phone once daily... and after you enter your email address you 'invite' 2 other 'tappers' underneath you who also tap daily (generating coins) who also invite more tappers "underneath them" and so on and so forth...
In short a pyramid scheme.
Putting all the 'cryptos' in the same basket, because 'crypto is a scam' and all 'beanie-babies' and 'greater fools' misses the point.
Bitcoin is a product of energy (cpu cycles plus electricity) and a way to store and transfer energy on the internet. Somewhere somehow that message about 'crypto' is being lost.
From the White Paper
  • The steady addition of a constant of amount of new coins is analogous to gold miners expending resources to add gold to circulation. In our case, it is CPU time and electricity that is expended.
write
preview
related posts
51 sats \ 4 replies \ @kepford 12 Mar
Rachel Maddow is a clown. She's a clown when she talks politics and bitcoin.
reply
10 sats \ 3 replies \ @kepford 12 Mar
I mean... most people that talk politics on TV are clowns. But she is especially bad.
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @028559d218 OP 12 Mar
In my opinion it's a huge mistake not to take Bitcoin seriously... and she (or her producers, editors) are saying it's just all beanie-babies. Isn't that remarkable?
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @SimpleStacker 12 Mar
She, and her producers, and her editors are literally stupid. Full stop. They have low IQ. They speak of matters of which they are completely ignorant.
reply
30 sats \ 0 replies \ @028559d218 OP 12 Mar
I can zap send and zap-receive sats all day... for almost zero fees. Sats to anyone anywhere in the world, basically instantly.
And all those 'sats' are a product of energy. It's digital energy... the digitization of capital on the internet. And they're like 'nah it's beanie babies' Really? It's remarkable.
I believe that 'weaker' money doesn't survive contact with 'better' money... and the logical conclusion is that even the 'naysayers' will be using Bitcoin one day.
reply
10 sats \ 1 reply \ @galt 13 Mar
If you do everything opposite to what Rachel Maddow thinks and preaches on TV you will be very rich and successful
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @028559d218 OP 13 Mar
<3
reply
0 sats \ 10 replies \ @yo2xncv0 15 Mar
Aside from the fact that Lightning is an L2 (doesn't make much sense to directly compare with a blockchain), it has many disadvantages that Monero doesn't.
A few of these disadvantages: -Need to lock up money to send/receive to begin with -Requires rebalancing channels -Requires an always online hot wallet -Less secure as it's still possible to steal -Can be force-closed and lose money -The higher value the payment the higher the failure rate of a transaction -Onion routing privacy is questionable and unquantifiable since most of the network is flowing through large routing nodes
And we can see the obvious outcome of this inconvenience and complexity for users. Vast majority of LN users are on custodians so are ruggable and have no privacy which is inarguably worse than Monero.
https://xcancel.com/shopinbit/status/1899727450898075863
reply
21 sats \ 9 replies \ @028559d218 OP 15 Mar
Aside from the fact that Lightning is an L2 (doesn't make much sense to directly compare with a blockchain), it has many disadvantages that Monero doesn't.
Lightning is not a blockchain correct. My understanding is that regardless the privacy and scaling will only be accomplished 'off-chain' so it's necessary. If monero had a lightning-network or similar... people would use it. When is it going to have one?
I mean comparing a blockchain with L2 is apples and oranges right? I am not meaning to be negative on Monero. Only to seek the truth. So here are my thoughts.
A few of these disadvantages: -Need to lock up money to send/receive to begin with This is not true. For example there are just-in-time channels and they work. You pay a lightning invoice... and have immediate access to the funds to spend or receive. I think Phoenix/Acinq has their own way of doing this too
-Requires rebalancing channels I don't think 'rebalancing' channels is that big of a deal or that important. You can purchase a channel and 'rent' it, or the channel can be spliced in and out (phoenix) or created just-in-time.
-Requires an always online hot wallet Yes it is hot. However what 'cold' wallets are available for monero? Cake? MoneroWallet? Those are hot too right?
If someone wanted a 'cold' wallet for their monero, what is it? Which one do they choose? I'm not sure that Trezor still supports Monero and that was the last one I heard of...
-Less secure as it's still possible to steal This is true, lightning is hot hot hot. However it is also true that institutions and businesses are running large lightning nodes and I haven't heard of any hacks or exploits at least recently. It doesn't mean it can't happen, however it is something with low risk in my opinion
-Can be force-closed and lose money I have heard this. I don't think it's the 'force close' that causes the loss... but the transaction fee associated with the close. As long as the user opens the wallet every so often this is something that's low risk
-The higher value the payment the higher the failure rate of a transaction My understanding is that every-day type payments are OK. I have tried up to 500-600k sats even 1 mil sats and it's ok. Lightning is for speedy, lower-cost transactions. Above a few million sats and people use on-chain... I'm not sure this is a criticism of Lightning today
-Onion routing privacy is questionable and unquantifiable since most of the network is flowing through large routing nodes Lightning is a huge improvement in privacy, but it is not perfect it is true. We need bolt 12 widely implemented + blinded paths (which is an LND thing?). Having said that lightning transactions aren't publicly veiwable
And we can see the obvious outcome of this inconvenience and complexity for users.
Vast majority of LN users are on custodians so are ruggable and have no privacy which is inarguably worse than Monero.
I have read this elsewhere but I don't believe it. Why? Because Lightning is so easy to use. LND has LNAddress where you can 'claim' the sats up to 24 hours later. It's what I use here on SN. There are other ways to have a 'node in the cloud' too (like with the blockstream greenlight thing) if you're not 'online'. Or use a combination of custodial and non-custodial for 'zapping'.
I believe that a combination of custodial/non-custodial is OK anyway... for example having a small custodial account for zaps which you 'withdraw' from you when have the mobile node open.
All this stuff though... is irrelevant though right? Monero doesn't have an L2 so it's like comparing an L1 to L2 apples and oranges that don't exist.
I have a lot of respect for the Monero community - the governments have really tried to stamp it out and yet it still exists. I just don't see lots of money, capital, savings, and trust moving into Monero. What if there's a hard fork? All the shopkeepers and merchants who don't keep up with the 'community' or 'developer-side' of things (99%) how do they know when to update in the event of a hard-fork? And why should they?
Do we know, really, who the mining pools are? What % of Monero-mining is botnets? If botnets can come and go (and many will) couldn't they disrupt the overall mining ecosystem, especially if CPUs can mine and appear/disappear at will at any time?
When is Monero going to have a Lightning-network? Layer 2s/offchain will be necessary eventually because not everything can/should be on the blockchain. No blockchain will infinitely scale. If it does the storage space is too great + it interferes with the fee market developing long-term. And how do you send 1 cent to someone instantly, without having to wait if it's all on-chain or the 'fees are high'? Without an L2 no blockchain solves this.
I'm not 'souring' on Monero... as the privacy associated with it is very important. But I don't know how EU users even get it. LocalMonero shut down right? Is there a replacement? With a lot of users?
I have looked on Reddit and read through r/Monero and the sentiment there... is not encouraging. Most of the comments lament the lack of liquidity, availability, exchanges, and even knowledge (by the public) that Monero exists. If people can't get it (p2p exchanges are too difficult for beginners) and companies + institutions have never heard of it... and the street-legal vendors don't accept it how does it continue to grow?
Few regular businesses take Bitcoin (I have looked). I haven't seen or heard any that take Monero and frankly why should they? The money, capital, market share, notoriety, name-brand, plus the L2 wallets all are on Bitcoin. If we can barely get coffee shops to take Bitcoin... how do we get them to accept Monero if so few people have heard of it (relatively) and it has such a shady reputation for those that want 'crypto' to be a part of their businesses? And if the Business is in Europe... where are they going to get it or offload it?
Proton does not accept Monero for their products. I listened to Andy (co-founder of Proton) explain why and when they accept monero it might change things but we are not there.
reply
0 sats \ 8 replies \ @yo2xncv0 15 Mar
My understanding is that regardless, the privacy and scaling will only be accomplished 'off-chain' anyway.
Yes, kind of, Monero is going to have an upgrade later this year called FCMP that enables L2s and it seems like there is talk for a ZK Rollup design down the road being discussed instead of Lightning-like layer (although I'm sure there will be that as well at some point). An encrypted blockchain + L2 will always be better for privacy because you leak information on a transparent blockchain. You don't have to worry about things like coinjoining before and after leaving Lightning. A Lightning-like layer on Monero is ironically better because fees are much cheaper on-chain which means unilateral exit is actually feasible for smaller amounts. Dynamic blocksize also means it will never become "broken" like it did earlier last year when fees shot up on Bitcoin.
For example there are just-in-time channels and they work. You pay a lightning invoice... and have immediate access to the funds to spend or receive. I think Phoenix/Acinq has their own way of doing this too...You can purchase a channel and 'rent' it, or the channel can be spliced in and out (phoenix) or created just-in-time.
Correct, but you're just shifting around the cost and adding additional costs. You add another fee from Phoenix on top of LN network fees. When chain congestion is low you can actually end up paying more fees with them than on-chain. You have no privacy from Phoenix, as it says in their FAQ, and they can censor your transactions. It's also a centralized service which means they can be banned or shutdown (we already saw this last year when they left the USA). All these things together make the benefits questionable in regards to p2p digital cash (censorship resistance, privacy, low fees).
However what 'cold' wallets are available for monero?
There are many options and growing. In fact Keystone Hardware Wallet just announced Monero support a few days ago.
Besides that there is Trezor(Safe 3 and Model T), SideKick (Monerujo), Cupcake (Cake Wallet), Anonero DIY, Tails DIY, and Paper Wallets. So there are quite a few options to choose from already - all offline - with Passport Prime and XMRSigner(SeedSigner fork) not too far from completion too.
https://xcancel.com/KeystoneWallet/status/1900223192511504549#m
This is true, lightning is hot hot hot. However it is also true that institutions and businesses are running large lightning nodes and I haven't heard of any hacks or exploits at least recently. It doesn't mean it can't happen, however it is something to be worked on you're correct.
Fair enough. My point was, even if you ignore all the other disadvantages of LN, just that for higher value private transactions it still makes more sense to use Monero as it only costs a few cents. And to be fair I heard multipath atomic payments help this a bit. Although I don't think the support is quite there yet last time i checked.
Lightning is a huge improvement in privacy I agree if used correctly. The average user does not do that though because of the complexities and inconveniences involved. Look at custodial LN wallet downloads vs Phoenix, or Nostr zap stats. They will download Wallet of Satoshi and call it a day. Great privacy from the general public, terrible privacy from the custodian/LSP.
All this stuff though... is irrelevant though right? Monero doesn't have an L2 so it's like comparing an L1 to L2 apples and oranges.
The only reason I'm comparing in the first place is because that was what your original post was doing. You can compare them, not saying you can't, but it would make more sense to compare blockchain vs blockchain and L2 vs L2 once Monero introduces one.
Do we know, really, who the mining pools are? What % of Monero-mining is botnets? If botnets can come and go (and many will) couldn't they disrupt the overall mining ecosystem, especially if CPUs can mine and appear/disappear at will at any time?
There are always trade offs. You can't necessarily know these things in an open permissionless system where one has the ability to be anonymous. Hashpower moves around all the time just like when Bitcoins migrated from China to the USA a few years ago. It's an experiment and open question just like Bitcoin. So far it works.
But I don't know how EU users even get it. LocalMonero shut down right? Is there a replacement? With a lot of users?
Monero is always a single swap away from any major cryptocurrency. There is a new website called OpenMonero that is basically a copy paste ran by anons. I can't vouch for it though as I havent tried it yet. I can vouch for the options in this link though:
#878707
Few regular businesses take Bitcoin (I have looked). I haven't seen or heard any that take Monero and frankly why should they?
I think it's more lack of familiarity that you think this. And how could I blame you if you aren't a Monero user. Of course you're not going to know if you don't use it. There is a whole website dedicated to showing businesses that accept Monero called Monerica:
https://monerica.com/
Here is a long list including many businesses I'm sure you've heard of like Mullvad, CoinCards, Tuta, Simple Login, etc
#878707
I want to end by saying that white markets are nice to have, but you're required to follow rules of a central authority on white markets by definition which defeats the entire point of Bitcoin. The only truly relevant activity for Bitcoins value proposition (permissionless transactions) is on black markets.
Without those core properties, which we already established does not exist for white markets transactions, Bitcoins advantages over fiat payment apps don't exist. It makes little sense to use over fiat on white markets. It's slower, volatile, more expensive (in fees/taxes), faces regulatory uncertainty, and far less merchants accept it.
reply
0 sats \ 6 replies \ @028559d218 OP 15 Mar
Thank you for your comment. I only seek the truth, nothing more.
"Yes, kind of, Monero is going to have an upgrade later this year called FCMP that enables L2s and it seems like there is talk for a ZK Rollup design down the road being discussed instead of Lightning-like layer (although I'm sure there will be that as well at some point)."
  • An upgrade - it is a hard fork. Maybe the upgrade/fork will bring benefits, if so great. But how do merchants and vendors whose focus is on their business keep up with the forks and changes? They aren't on 'community' websites and they aren't developers.
"A Lightning-like layer on Monero is ironically better because fees are much cheaper on-chain which means unilateral exit is actually feasible for smaller amounts. Dynamic blocksize also means it will never become "broken" like it did earlier last year when fees shot up on Bitcoin."
  • Yes fees are cheaper... when there is little on-chain usage. Any blockchain with widespread usage and popularity will have higher fees. Low fees on L1 low usage.
"Dynamic blocksize also means it will never become "broken" like it did earlier last year when fees shot up on Bitcoin."
  • Bitcoin wasn't broken. The fee spam-filter was doing what was intended, filtering spam with fees. The NFT jpeg people have run out of money... and the BRC20s plus now Runes have 98% gone to zero if you look at their charts. All that money goes to miners and users learn not to 'waste' Bitcoin on stupidity and it stops eventually.
  • As far as the variable blocksize... all you do (in my opinion) is increase the required storage space for spam on home nodes. We don't want spam to be cheap we want it to be expensive, otherwise we have nodes full of spam which we have enough of already. That's why I am incredibly skeptical of variable blocksizes when the spammer-to-transactor ratio is still so high.
"Correct, but you're just shifting around the cost and adding additional costs. You add another fee from Phoenix on top of LN network fees. When chain congestion is low you can actually end up paying more fees with them than on-chain."
  • Lightning network fees are low, really low. I've used real-world Lightning for accommodations plus food/pizza from my own node and the fees were < 1%. As far as the opening-channel and closing-channel fees... you are correct. The fees will go up and users need to be cognizant as to what they are.
  • However in my opinion the long-term value proposition is much, much greater than through traditional payment methods or monetary networks.
"You have no privacy from Phoenix, as it says in their FAQ, and they can censor your transactions. It's also a centralized service which means they can be banned or shutdown (we already saw this last year when they left the USA)"
  • You are correct, you have less 'privacy' from Phoenix when you use them, as opposed to using on-chain exclusively. We are not in disagreement. What I would ask then is... how and why should I expect 'privacy' to order tacos and a beer at a restaurant? Or tip some rando on Stacker News? There are always going to be tradeoffs in the real-world and 99% of the time nobody cares.
  • As far as censorship goes... yes Phoenix was 'shut down' but it is still available. With the intro of Bolt 12 (not to move the goalposts) according to Acinq they cannot see the receiving node when you send. Or the sending node when you receive... if the transacting node is also Bolt 12. They can if it is phoenix also... but again I think this is a privacy 'trade-off' which the vast majority won't care about unless they do in which case there are other options.
"All these things together make the benefits questionable in regards to p2p digital cash (censorship resistance, privacy, low fees)."
  • Bitcoin in my opinion is a "digital capital" network... not a "cash" network. It is not a 'currency' network either in my opinion but capital. And it does not function like 'cash' today. In other words, you are paying for the 'property' not the house. You are paying for the 'location', not the building materials exclusively. Currency has an issuer, it is 'stable' and is designed to lose value and Bitcoin goes up in value almost every year. It is a capital network not just about handing someone pieces of paper.
  • That's why I don't believe in using 'another coin'... just to 'make a payment' it was always about more than payments.
"There are many options and growing. In fact Keystone Hardware Wallet just announced Monero support a few days ago. Besides that there is Trezor(Safe 3 and Model T), SideKick (Monerujo), Cupcake (Cake Wallet), Anonero DIY, Tails DIY, and Paper Wallets. So there are quite a few options to choose from already - all offline - with Passport Prime and XMRSigner(SeedSigner fork) not too far from completion too."
  • The only cold wallets on that list today are Keystone and Trezor. The rest are hot, right or don't exist 'yet'? I think the passport one is really interesting... it is more than a 'wallet' after all but is not available yet. I hope all these manufacturers understand that with 'monero' there will be/may be a future hard fork that they 'have to' comply with otherwise... I don't know. I would also add that 'paper' wallets are hot wallets they are not cold.
"just that for higher value private transactions it still makes more sense to use Monero as it only costs a few cents."
  • It only costs a few cents... because almost no-one is using it (note I said 'almost' no-one as opposed to Bitcoin + the liquidity I mention later?)
"I agree if used correctly. The average user does not do that though because of the complexities and inconveniences involved. Look at custodial LN wallet downloads vs Phoenix, or Nostr zap stats. They will download Wallet of Satoshi and call it a day. Great privacy from the general public, terrible privacy from the custodian/LSP."
  • Can you send one cent (or the equivalent) instantly for a post you like on Monero? how about 10 cents instantly just to post yourself? The L2 (on Bitcoin) makes this possible... and I'm not sure (because I don't know) if monero can make transactions like this. And if it can't, then it is inferior to Bitcoin today as a monetary network. Monero needs an L2 which doesn't exist yet.
  • By the way, are there any companies 'working' on the Monero L2 or is it all... anonymous devs?
"The only reason I'm comparing in the first place is because that was what your original post was doing. You can compare them, not saying you can't, but it would make more sense to compare blockchain vs blockchain and L2 vs L2 once Monero introduces one."
  • I have thoughts on this and I'll get to it in a moment.
"Monero is always a single swap away from any major cryptocurrency. There is a new website called OpenMonero that is basically a copy paste ran by anons. I can't vouch for it though as I havent tried it yet."
  • This is an issue I have with altcoins like Monero. Even if I wanted to experiment with them or 'try them out' to decide for myself their merits I absolutely DO NOT download poorly vetted, sketchy software involving cryptocurrencies or anything else. It MAY be OK it may be not. If it's not widely accepted and vetted and well-reviewed I don't use it period.
"I think it's more lack of familiarity that you think this. And how could I blame you if you aren't a Monero user. Of course you're not going to know if you don't use it. There is a whole website dedicated to showing businesses that accept Monero called Monerica:"
  • I have checked out Monerica and honestly... I don't see a lot there. It's way way less than is available for Bitcoin today. Maybe the list and support will grow in the future... but today there isn't much there. Why should I look at that list 'just' to pay in Monero when I can pay at 'more' locations in Bitcoin? Honestly Bitcoin NGU is better too (over time) and that is not immaterial.
"Here is a long list including many businesses I'm sure you've heard of like Mullvad, CoinCards, Tuta, Simple Login"
  • Again maybe the 'total' list will grow in the future... but Lightning is accepted too at those places. Honestly anyone using Lightning at those places is 'expert' enough to have privacy with it and so they will. And if you're buying gift cards to use at the grocery then... why the cloak and dagger privacy anyway?
"I want to end by saying that white markets are nice to have, but you're required to follow rules of a central authority on white markets by definition which defeats the entire point of Bitcoin. The only truly relevant activity for Bitcoins value proposition (permissionless transactions) is on black markets."
  • Completely disagree. Following the rules of a 'central authority' is a grey area, because while cryptocurrencies can circumvent the rules they will never 'replace' the rules unless they fundamentally change them and in order to do that they have to interact with 'white' markets too in a big way.
  • Furthermore Bitcoin is not a payments network. It is a monetary network, and evolved today to a secure the 'digital capital' network. Yes you can and will 'make payments' but without a monetary basis and energy basis for Bitcoin... what will the payments be worth?
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @yo2xncv0 16 Mar
An upgrade - it is a hard fork. Maybe the upgrade/fork will bring benefits, if so great. But how do merchants and vendors whose focus is on their business keep up with the forks and changes?
  • Yes, it's a software upgrade/hardfork. The same way vendors or anyone else upgrades their software with any other program or PoS they use. It is becoming much more infrequent over time than even those things so not sure why there would be an issue. That's already a thing businesses do.
  • Also, the upgrade includes something called CARROT (Cryptonote Address on Rerandomizable-RingCT-Output Transactions) which is compatible with older address schemes so they don't have to upgrade right away (although they won't benefit from any of the improvements if they dont obviously)
Yes fees are cheaper... when there is little on-chain usage. Any blockchain with widespread usage and popularity will have higher fees. Low fees on L1 low usage.
  • This is false. The reason it will always be cheaper to transact on Monero, even if it had the transaction count of Bitcoin, is because blocksize adjusts to demand. Contrast this to Bitcoins blocksize that is fixed and users are bidding for limited blockspace so an increase in usage = growing fees that will never fall. We already had a real world example of dynamic blocksize kicking in action last year.
Bitcoin wasn't broken...all you do (in my opinion) is increase the required storage space for spam on home nodes. We don't want spam to be cheap we want it to be expensive
  • You're right I shouldve phrased it differently that's why I put "broken" in quotes. Maybe "shown the disadvantages of fixed blocksize" would have been a better way to decribe it because there are also advantages to it.
  • There is a fee penalty to stop miners from increasing the blocksize too fast. There has to be a long sustained use (which would cost spammers a lot of money) for it to actually increase without penalty. It also decreases the blocksize when usage falls again.
Lightning network fees are low, really low
  • Yes, but the LN network fees aren't the only costs when you use Phoenix/ACINQ. They charge extra to open channels and transact. They take their own cut. Vlad from Bitcoin TakeOver Podcast recently showed how he lost $40 over lightning when he could have sent the same payment on-chain for $1. So depends on network congestion and how large of a payment you want to send if it is worth it. With Bitcoin larger payments might be better to send on-chain. But larger payments are always better to send on Monero vs Phoenix/ACINQ/LN. https://xcancel.com/TheVladCostea/status/1869359856010019058
What I would ask then is... how and why should I expect 'privacy' to order tacos and a beer at a restaurant? Or tip some rando on Stacker News? There are always going to be tradeoffs in the real-world and 99% of the time nobody cares.
  • You can decide that for yourself. All I'm saying is for those that want strong default privacy it isn't an option to use Phoenix/ACINQ as a substitute. People also use cash to pay for those things which is more private than Phoenix/ACINQ. And if your appeal is to popularity how do you think the vast majority are going to use Lightning? Probably not permissionlessly/privately (if at all). Why wouldn't they simply use fiat if it is more popular to make those payments and no one cares?
As far as censorship goes...yes Phoenix was 'shut down' but it is still available. With the intro of Bolt 12 (not to move the goalposts) according to Acinq they cannot see the receiving node when you send. Or the sending node when you receive... if the transacting node is also Bolt 12.
  • That's the problem isnt it? Bolt12 is neither default, nor widely supported, and I'm guessing it will always be a minority that use it because of that (look at coinjoins as an example). But yes, if the receiver's wallet supports it, and they enable it, blinded paths is definitely a huge privacy improvement.
Bitcoin in my opinion is a "digital capital" network... not a "cash" network....it was always about more than payments.
  • This is just false. Maybe that is what Bitcoin has turned into, but even ignoring the literal title of the white paper, simply look at the cypherpunks and history that paved the way and led to Bitcoin. Digital cash payments were always the goal. Cash, privacy, and untraceability was always emphasized in their content and titles:
"Digital Cash & Privacy" 1993 -Hal Finney "The Case for Privacy" 2005 -David D. Friedman "Credit With Privity" 1996 -Nick Szabo "Confidential Auditing" 1998 -Nick Szabo "Blind Signatures for Untraceable Payments" 1982 -David Chaum "Untraceable Electronic Mail, Return Addresses, and Digital Pseudonyms" 1988 -David Chaum "The Dining Cryptographers Problem: Unconditional Sender and Recipient Untraceability" 1988 -David Chaum "Proofs that Yield Nothing But Their Validity or All Languages in NP Have Zero-Knowledge Proof Systems" 1991 -Oded Goldreich, Silvio Micali, and Avi Wigderson "Online Cash Checks" 1989 -David Chaum "On Digital Cash-Like Payment Systems" 2005 -Daniel A. Nagy "Secrecy, Authentication, and Public Key Systems" 1979 -Ralph C. Merkle "Computer Systems Established, Maintained, and Trusted by Mutually Suspicious Groups" 1982 -David Chaum "b-money" 1998 -Wei Dai "The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto" 1988 -Timothy C. May "The Cyphernomicon" 1994 -Timothy C. May "Contracts in Cyberspace" 2000 -David D. Friedman "Contracts with Bearer" 1999 -Nick Szabo "Crypto Glossary" 1992 -Eric Hughes and Timothy C. May "Cyberspace, Crypto Anarchy, and Pushing Limits" 1994 -Timothy C. May "The Geodesic Market" 1998 -Robert Hettinga "The God Protocols" 1999 -Nick Szabo "Trusted Third Parties are Security Holes" 2001 -Nick Szabo https://nakamotoinstitute.org/library/ https://image.nostr.build/1f6d4cc6528129a7b9c9248a5203ceaaddac6132d196c4941c22f788ffa0c9a1.jpg
The only cold wallets on that list today are Keystone and Trezor. The rest are hot, right or don't exist 'yet'?...I would also add that 'paper' wallets are hot wallets they are not cold.
It only costs a few cents... because almost no-one is using it
  • Not true. Already addressed this above.
Can you send one cent (or the equivalent) instantly for a post you like on Monero? how about 10 cents instantly just to post yourself? The L2 (on Bitcoin) makes this possible... and I'm not sure (because I don't know) if monero can make transactions like this. . And if it can't, then it is inferior to Bitcoin today as a monetary network. Monero needs an L2 which doesn't exist yet.
  • Yes, only 3-4 cents to transact at the moment. In fact, there is a Nostr client that people do this with including myself https://mostard.org/
  • Inferior in what way? Instant payments? Sure. Privacy/security/Permissionless UX/simplicity? No.
By the way, are there any companies 'working' on the Monero L2 or is it all... anonymous devs?
There are both of those groups "working" on Monero
This is an issue I have with altcoins like Monero. Even if I wanted to experiment with them or 'try them out' to decide for myself their merits I absolutely DO NOT download poorly vetted, sketchy software involving cryptocurrencies or anything else. It MAY be OK it may be not.
  • There is a strong FOSS ethos around Monero, but you don't have to. You can use websites to swap if you want. Onion sites and no-javascript are common as well.
  • Bitcoin would have the same issues. You have to download an app or use a website to get it.
  • Didn't you just say 99% don't care about these things? They download apps without even thinking about it. Just saying.
Why should I look at that list 'just' to pay in Monero when I can pay at 'more' locations in Bitcoin?
  • You don't have to do anything. I'm just showing you places you can use Monero because you brought up the subject and it's much more than what you made it seem. NymVPN just went public and Monero is the only other crypto it accepts besides Bitcoin. But I don't understand why you would simply pretend they don't exist or intentionally remain ignorant about it now that you know. You also act as if the average Joe on the street knows everywhere that accepts Bitcoin. We're all in a niche space here.
And if you're buying gift cards to use at the grocery then... why the cloak and dagger privacy anyway?
  • The only reason I can think of is if you already have some and don't want to convert it back to fiat. But I'm also in agreement with what you're saying. Why not just forgoe both Monero/Lightning and use cash/digital fiat for those purchases?
...Following the rules of a 'central authority' is a grey area
  • It is not. White market transactions are quite literally following rules of a central authority. If you're not doing that, then it is black market by definition.
...because while cryptocurrencies can circumvent the rules they will never 'replace' the rules...
Correct. Cryptocurrencies cannot circumvent rules on the white market. They can only do that on black markets.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @yo2xncv0 16 Mar
Again maybe the 'total' list will grow in the future... but Lightning is accepted too at those places. Honestly anyone using Lightning at those places is 'expert' enough to have privacy with it and so they will.
reply on another page
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @028559d218 OP 15 Mar
"Without those core properties, which we already established does not exist for white markets transactions, Bitcoins advantages over fiat payment apps don't exist. It makes little sense to use over fiat on white markets. It's slower, volatile, more expensive (in fees/taxes), faces regulatory uncertainty, and far less merchants accept it."
  • Completely missing the forest for the trees in my opinion. The greatest demand for Bitcoin TODAY and for most people is protection against government debt and inflation, the big picture problem effecting every country and every society all over the world right now. It is not about 'payments' for most... because for that you could just use paypal or venmo and the vast majority don't use 'black markets'.
  • Bitcoin allows the individual (or organization) to save in energy-conservative capital that is secure and highly survivable. It is not just about payments... as if 'white market' money doesn't matter. If any cryptocurrency is forever limited to 'dark markets' (mostly buying drugs) and not 'white markets' or 'big monetary markets' then it will fail.
  • I have heard this before, that Bitcoin has 'no purpose' for white markets and I fundamentally disagree with that. It CAN 'run home' to dark/grey markets but the idea it is only 'for payments' on dark markets excludes all the monetary principles it excels at... in comparison to fiat or bonds or government debt which is everywhere and really important.
This is the chart XMR/BTC since 2023
This is the chart since 2020
As a monetary/savings/value network Bitcoin is 'outperforming'. Yes it's true spending your savings/cryptocurrency/Bitcoin is important... but for people trying to save there is an obvious, clear winner so far. 9 times out of 10 people choose the better store-of-value first then they'll figure out way to spend as it benefits their network (which I believe is Lightning eventually).
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @028559d218 OP 15 Mar
This is the trading volume of BTC according to coingecko (so take it with a grain of salt)
~14 billion
This is XMR
~34 million
In other words, 400x that of Bitcoin than Monero. Yesterday it was over 600x.
Why is this important? Because of liquidity. See this conversation here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/1ish8zh/the_20mn_transaction/
There is a 'ransom-request' involving 20 million of Monero (according to the post) and one of the comments -
  • "Yes, over a few weeks, I would say, it's doable. In a short period, not so much. But in BTC you can get it in the next minute at some OTC desk."
Here is another thread on North Korean hackers not using Monero after the Bybit hack to obscure funds: https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/1j5vohl/real_world_use_cases_for_monero/
What do the comments say on an r/xmr subreddit? Lack of liquidity. Lack of markets. Lack of market size... lack of buyers and sellers. Lack of availability. One comment mentions the desire to 'buy' 500k USD of Monero and the response?
'Would be hard to do all at once, especially in one place'.
There are Bitcoin exchanges just in the US that handle that in an afternoon... and do it over and over again because of the large liquidity. If Monero can't even handle a '500k buy' (like these comments on Reddit suggest) then what is the point???
I would be curious in hearing from other 'Monero' people... on all these points.
view all 2 replies
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @028559d218 OP 15 Mar
deleted by author