I know that and I know it is one big problem that cannot be solved. What followed was completely biased opinions for months trying to sway people to join the cult and jaundiced information. It is certainly not all FUD, but a major part of it. Well played though because now the dumb carry the torch and recklessly try to confirm their biases.


Not really a victim and certainly not a fool. When people try to borrow money to dump a coin to obvilion amongst a straight up smear propaganda campaign because they cannot roll back the clock, tech and innovation still can't be beat.

Maybe if you spent less time talking shit about every coin not named Monero on the forums and more time actually developing XMR you would have a GUI. 

Facts:
BBR has a smaller blockchain, syncs faster, and has an official gui.
XMR has a dev team, unofficial guis.
Neither BBR or XMR is used in any significant way

Opinions:
Tacotime's opinion may be biased. The privacy of neither approach to ring signatures has been thoroughly tested.
Cryptonote devs? They have their own agenda.
Some say BBR has better emission curve (you, rpietila) but who knows. Cryptocurrencies are too new.
BBR is better
XMR is better

Reasonable characterizations. My earlier objection was not to any of these facts, but to the stated opinion that the changes made by BBR are "improvements." Factually they are changes. Whether they are improvements is opinion. Other than syncing faster and blockchain being smaller, which you covered.

I would put under facts, that the BBR blockchain is not independently verifiable, because signatures necessary to check transactions have been removed (trimmed). Whether that is "good" or "bad" is opinion of course.

You realize people have borrowed XMR for shorting too right? Three guesses who they borrowed from (not recently and now repaid).

And for that matter, XMR has also been subjected to of a lot of FUD and trolling (and as I said shorting and dumping). Perhaps it would be a lot higher were it not for that! It is certainly possible, yet I don't run around saying "XMR is only #13 due to FUD!" Otherwise it would be higher than DRK!

Claiming with high confidence that everything that happens is due to some hostile and deliberate scheme without being able to prove that degree of causality (and you can't because no one can prove the reasons for what happens in these markets) denotes a degree of paranoia, delusion, victimization complex, or something along those lines. It can't be entirely rational for the reason I stated.

It is not apples to apples. When BBR was being shorted, it had no support due to FUD spread by a certain camp in order to consolidate newbies into the coin that got launched earlier, in hopes that it wouldn't recover from there. XMR shorting was profitable due to a larger community, a much much higher valuation and support from lying scumbag bald BTC whales. It was for profit.

BBR shorting was at a loss or at the very least not-for-profit. Either way it had no where near the yields. But you knew this or should know this. Do you just have way too much time on your hands?


You retards were asking for it. A lot of us kept saying don''t troll on other threads or forums or what not unless someone is spreading false information, and people would come on their own to XMR after discovering CN. But some retarded members thought it was their birth right to troll other threads now that whitepaper has been vetted, open tens of threads, spread FUD about other coins and a bunch of other shit. You don't go to the neighbor's house and call their house ugly (even if it is), you don't spam incessantly about your house even if it is the prettiest in the hood. It is just bad marketing. But then you retards never listened to those of us who said it. It took fake shills like MoneroMan88 to wake you guys up and stop the spam fest.


This is not a court or a scientific experiment to prove schemes. There is more than enough instances of participation that can be deduced from post history of individuals. Don't blame me for your ineptitude. I am the least of your problems.

In a different way that addresses the issue of namespace management and squatting, which I'm pretty sure is what we said we would do at the time. It has other tradeoffs, as do all implementations of anything, I suppose.


It isn't possible to independently verify the chain. This significantly elevates the trust model for checkpoints from choosing among valid chains to trusting that the chain below the checkpoint was valid before being trimmed. Again, tradeoffs....

Could you elaborate on the con's of Wild Keccak's proof-of-work function approach implemented in Boolberry over vanilla cryptonight implemented in bytecoin, quazarcoin,aeoncoin monero etc?

Seems that it satisfies the same ASIC resistant properties of cryptonight, whilst being much faster to validate, therefore resulting in a more pleasant user experience and better DoS resistance (In independent tests BBR synchronized from scratch in about 12 minutes, whilst XMR synced in about 3.5 hours) which is around 17 x faster.

Whilst you may not agree with the numbers there  (obviously the 17x slower syncing of monero was not simply down to using cryptonight instead of wild keccak) with same transaction flow, BBR was still demonstrated to synchronize 4x faster - of course we know that there are not 4x as many blocks in XMR than BBR, that seems to go against your claims.



Could you give more details to the disadvantage it might have in the future that you alluded to there?

1. Getting pool support, miner support, etc. was much slower and contributed to the lag of uptake of the coin. There are still many more pools for even the failed cryptonight coins than for BBR.

2. A much higher GPU performance ratio, especially earlier. Arguably a plus or minus depending on your point of view.

3. Lag on getting optimized miners, which also contributed to the lag of uptake, and also contributed (much) more to the dumping than the claims of manipulation. BTW, for the conspiracy theorist(s) who think(s) all BBR dumping was manipulative, it is well documented that XMR had a lag in getting optimized miners and this contributed to hundreds of thousands of USD of dumping. The difference is that XMR had the demand to absorb those coins, and BBR did not. Nevertheless I count this as a negative on WK because of the one-month launch lag. BBR could have piggybacked on the optimization (de-unoptimization) curve of the rest of the cryptonotes and avoided its privileged mining period almost entirely.


In reality who knows.


When crypto_zoidberg measured it he confirmed that only a portion of the difference in sync time was due to PoW. My recollection (not 100%) is that he was slightly surprised that portion was as small as it was. This is not rocket science, you can measure the PoW time on a typical computer at about 20ms, which means 50 PoW verifies per second. Roughly an hour worth of (XMR) blocks per second at that rate. A week takes a few minutes.

BTW, I slightly questioned the 4x number when it was reported because during the period in question XMR had 2.5x the number of blocks of BBR (and therefore 2.5x the number of coinbase transactions, etc.), while on average it would have 2x. A small difference but likely significant on a few of the measurements and the 4x overall result. No question it is still faster to sync, I have acknowledged that several times.


Only in so far as we will have to see what the future holds.

I'm always skeptical of homebrew PoW (and crypto generally). Cryptonight probably qualifies as that too, but at least it was already in use on several coins, well on its way to being optimized by the time BBR launched, etc. If you're going replace homebrew, you should probably replace it with non-homebrew.

Distribute the coin to non-investors.

Btw, has anyone paid close enough attention to the selfish-mining paper to observe that as the attackers hashrate approaches 50% of the network, his portion of the blocks won goes to 100%.  

Bitcoin often has a single pool with 50% of the network hashrate.

There is a fundamental problem here. All the anonymity tech in the world is sort of useless against the state under this current situation. We need to fundamentally rethink the longest chain rule as it is currently formulated.

Some ideas were presented by ethereum.