I wonder if there’s been any further information on this. Donating Monero seems like a great idea for them. However, if they want to insist that the entire crypto community is energy-wasting shit bags, then that makes me want to have a lot less to do with them.
You’d be correct to point out that not all of them waste energy like Ethereum did until later in 2022 and Bitcoin still does, but wrong to pick Monero as an example of one that doesn’t.
Oh, I know Monero uses proof of work and therefore uses power. However, my thought is that Monero can replace the banks and so you’ve got to consider how much power it takes to run bank buildings and bank employees cars and armored trucks etc. Also, since Monero is mined with CPUs instead of application-specific integrated circuits, you don’t get a bunch of miners in one place. They are much more distributed throughout the entire power grid. So like we don’t have giant mining farms located in Texas that is causing noise pollution to the nearby towns and stuff like that. We also don’t have big mining companies causing drama in the news.
Edit: Proof of work is truly required because it literally backs the value of your currency with energy. And proof of stake has no physical backing.
Every cyptocurrency could replace fiat currency and traditional banks. Get back to me when one actually makes inroads on that.
Also with Firefox having effectively the only feature complete open source browser engine, personally I could care less if they might have implied negative things about the better crypto currencys.
Everyone is welcome to their own opinion, but this is incredibly minor in the grand scheme of things.
Monero People are actually working very hard to build a circular economy and use Monero as a daily currency. I am also extremely glad that Lady Bird exists because while it is not ready yet, I think it’s going to end up being an escape hatch for when Mozilla finally kicks the bucket.
How does Monero increase value except by enticing other people to join in? After all, cryptocurrency is only worth money if people are willing to spend money to get it. If people ended up not wanting it, the value would plummet, like it has with so many NFTs and scams before it. It seems to me that by embracing any cryptocurrency, and you have any interest in it maintaining or increasing in value, you must advocate it, evangelize it.
Monero is intensely focused on being the world’s best private digital cash system for making purchases on a day-to-day basis, such as your coffee from Starbucks, your items on Amazon, etc. It is uniquely positioned because governments absolutely cannot stand it, but it provides privacy for those who use it, and so the government cannot stop it, even though they absolutely wish they could.
Right, but does it manage to avoid those pitfalls I mentioned except by popularity? I know Monero is relatively private (discounting issues), but a lot of cryptocurrency is treated more like stock than currency by investors.
We really don’t have to advocate or evangelize for it much considering the fact that it’s completely used on the dark net for drug purchases. Love them or hate them. Criminals are the first ones to adapt. New better technology. And then everybody else follows on after that. That video is a lot of guesswork and most of it is completely solvable either today or in the very near future. The idea that they can trace Monero depends on compromised nodes which is fixed by running your own node or using somebody you trust as a node provider trading with a centralized exchange which is easily solved by not trading with a centralized exchange, and ring signature weaknesses that are well-known and in the process of being fixed.
I wonder if there’s been any further information on this. Donating Monero seems like a great idea for them. However, if they want to insist that the entire crypto community is energy-wasting shit bags, then that makes me want to have a lot less to do with them.
You’d be correct to point out that not all of them waste energy like Ethereum did until later in 2022 and Bitcoin still does, but wrong to pick Monero as an example of one that doesn’t.
Oh, I know Monero uses proof of work and therefore uses power. However, my thought is that Monero can replace the banks and so you’ve got to consider how much power it takes to run bank buildings and bank employees cars and armored trucks etc. Also, since Monero is mined with CPUs instead of application-specific integrated circuits, you don’t get a bunch of miners in one place. They are much more distributed throughout the entire power grid. So like we don’t have giant mining farms located in Texas that is causing noise pollution to the nearby towns and stuff like that. We also don’t have big mining companies causing drama in the news.
Edit: Proof of work is truly required because it literally backs the value of your currency with energy. And proof of stake has no physical backing.
Every cyptocurrency could replace fiat currency and traditional banks. Get back to me when one actually makes inroads on that.
Also with Firefox having effectively the only feature complete open source browser engine, personally I could care less if they might have implied negative things about the better crypto currencys.
Everyone is welcome to their own opinion, but this is incredibly minor in the grand scheme of things.
Monero People are actually working very hard to build a circular economy and use Monero as a daily currency. I am also extremely glad that Lady Bird exists because while it is not ready yet, I think it’s going to end up being an escape hatch for when Mozilla finally kicks the bucket.
How does Monero increase value except by enticing other people to join in? After all, cryptocurrency is only worth money if people are willing to spend money to get it. If people ended up not wanting it, the value would plummet, like it has with so many NFTs and scams before it. It seems to me that by embracing any cryptocurrency, and you have any interest in it maintaining or increasing in value, you must advocate it, evangelize it.
Monero is intensely focused on being the world’s best private digital cash system for making purchases on a day-to-day basis, such as your coffee from Starbucks, your items on Amazon, etc. It is uniquely positioned because governments absolutely cannot stand it, but it provides privacy for those who use it, and so the government cannot stop it, even though they absolutely wish they could.
Right, but does it manage to avoid those pitfalls I mentioned except by popularity? I know Monero is relatively private (discounting issues), but a lot of cryptocurrency is treated more like stock than currency by investors.
We really don’t have to advocate or evangelize for it much considering the fact that it’s completely used on the dark net for drug purchases. Love them or hate them. Criminals are the first ones to adapt. New better technology. And then everybody else follows on after that. That video is a lot of guesswork and most of it is completely solvable either today or in the very near future. The idea that they can trace Monero depends on compromised nodes which is fixed by running your own node or using somebody you trust as a node provider trading with a centralized exchange which is easily solved by not trading with a centralized exchange, and ring signature weaknesses that are well-known and in the process of being fixed.
Uses magnitudes less energy than fintech. Scales up without consuming more energy. Gets called a shitbag.
?