What status of BMR currently holding?

No change, this is just a renaming. In the future, the binaries will have to be changed, as well as some URL, but that's all. By the way, this very account (monero) is shared by several user and is meant to make it easier to change the OP in case of vacancy of the OP. This idea of a shared OP comes from Karmacoin.

Some more things to come:

• A logo
• A website (URL will be monero.cc)
• A GUI wallet

is there a hidden gpu miner?

To expand on this, if you read the Cryptonote whitepaper (see https://cryptonote.org/whitepaper.pdf) you'll see that the PoW, even if implemented on a GPU, would be unlikely to give a significant advantage, as it is limited by memory random access speed rather than bandwidth (the traditional strength of GPUs for hashing).

I want to buy 1000 moneo, PM me the BTC price. Thank

so i create a wallet via password


if i create a new wallet. if i set the same password. would this still be the same wallet generated?

Moving discussion to more relevant thread, previous found here:

https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/578192.msg6364026#msg6364026

I have to say that I am surprised that such an idea is even being countenanced - there are several obvious arguments against it.

Perception - what kind of uproar would happen if this was tried on a more established coin? How can users be expected to trust a coin where it is perceived that the devs are able and willing to "dip" into people's wallets to solve problems?

Technically - people are trying to suggest that this will make no difference since it applies to reward and supply, which *might* be fair enough if the cap was halved also, but it isn't. People's holdings in the coin are being halved, however it is dressed up.

Market price - How can introducing uncertainty in the contents of people's wallets possibly help market price?

I may well be making a fool of myself here, but I have never heard of such a fix before, unless you had savings in a Cypriot bank - has this ever been done for another coin?

This coin wasn't working as advertised. It was supposed to be mined slowly like BTC but under the current emission schedule, 39% would be mined by the first year and 86% by the fourth year. Those targets have been moved out by a factor of 2, i.e. 86% mined by year 8, which is more like BTC's 75% by year 8. So the cap has been moved out much further into the future, constraining present and near-term supply, which is what determines the price.

I think correct the coin now while early.  Not many blocks mined so if fixed now future of coin is strong.

So long as the process is fair and transparent it makes no difference what the number is... n or n/2 is the same relative value so long as the2 is applied to everyone. Correcting this now will avoid people accusing the coin of a favourable premine for people who mined in the first week.