That's all what's needed in crypto
>>61520624>PoSNo.
>>61520624Literally, i dont own any xmr, but you are right!
>>61520630monero is pow
>>61520624Only XMR is enough. You don't need to "do stuff" because whatever stuff is just gonna be another scam like NFTs
>>61520652>just expose yourself to crazy volatility>can buy 19 times more things with eth>lending>borrowing>apy>gamble on some coins
>>61520662>can buy 19 times more things with ethNobody actually buys anything with eth>lending and borrowing and apyJust lend from bank, USDT has 20% yield btw>gamble on some coinsThe only honest thing on your list
>>61520652>>61520666I use defi every day. if you are in "crypto" and still don't understand the value of defi then you're kind of retarded, no offense
>>61520666>Nobody actually buys anything with ethThis is just wrong>20% yield??????>just use your bank>says the monero guyI.....
>>61520693but there is no real utility in defi. its whole purpose is gambling on coins which also don't have any utility.
only monero is needed, ethereum and this whole "defi" crap is just a bunch of garbage for midwits
>>61520783Midwit take
>>61520777>there is no utility in sending stable money around the globe instantly and cheap>no utility in borrowing against your coins>no utility in lending and earning more apy>no utility in beeing able to hold usd fiat when you are in turkeySoon coming stock trading
>>61520746>no argument>>61520808>stock tradingI hope every uppity crypto "trader" gets raped by wall street when that happens
>>61520817Your claim were just retarded20% apy??????? Dude how can I even discuss this bullshitAnd then you as a monero guy says use a bank instead of defi? Really?And then on the second post you ignored all but one point
>>61520817Oh and yes with Ethereum you can pay for far more things then with monero
>>61520630>PoS>No.Didn't Monero just almost get 51%'d by a random dude? Imagine someone with way more resources. There's so many attack vectors to PoW even if it has tail emission. PoS is more secure if coin supply is widely distributed, and ETH is.>>61520783Monero is best privacy crypto we have right now but it's a dumb gen 1 chain. It doesn't have the same room for technological growth as Eth, which is building privacy rollups that will do the same thing as Monero but with added programmability. Just like SSL was natural evolution for the internet, privacy will happen for all crypto, and this will take away the unique value proposition of Monero. Still years and years away though.
>>61520746Yeah its tribal always was....
>>61520823Still too much btc maxi fudders, here, i recommend ignore!
>>61520825what can you buy with ethereum for which you can't use anything other than ethereum? other than shitcoins I mean
>>61520843For example look at the website you're on. Today I moved some money to/from Hyperliquid and Polymarket. Neither supports XMR.
>>61520808yeah all of those have ZERO utility in real life. DeFi is a big giant scam
>>61520843Gift cards hotels and so on>>61520877>no argument muh scamMidwitSome of my points like the cheap money sending over the globe IS actually already used millions of times in real life
>>61520854>>61520896You didn't understand my question, I meant what can you buy with ONLY ethereum and NOTHING else (including fiat). Your own screenshot lists a bunch of coins other than ethereum
>>61520901But that's not the point. The point is it can buy more then monero and therefore complements monero as a cryptocurrency
>>61520926No, the point is ethereum is a gimmick and isn't strictly needed for anything. No one will ever have to go out of their way to buy ethereum just to buy something in the real world.
>>61520926Monero is private and the future of crypto
>>61520956its exactly cause its prive that its not the future. for the average person its more hassle than its worth. it will just get you flagged and targeted
>>61520901Ethereum blockspace (transaction fees) is the only thing you can buy only with ETH. Everything else can be bought with other tokens or stables or whatever. But why does this matter to the original ETH vs. XMR argument? Ethereum is used more. When you add support for one EVM chain like Eth you get BSC, Polygon, Avalanche, Monad and every Eth L2 with it so it's a no brainer to add it as an option. Monero has its own type of transactions and doesn't benefit from this EVM network effect so it's often left out. Doesn't mean it's worse though.
>>61520963Not if everyone adopts it
>>61520624>XMR is gay
>>61520941It's less out of the way then other ways to get dollar or us stocks or some goods or monero as a third worlder.
>>61520829>Didn't Monero just almost get 51%'d by a random dude?No, it was around 40% at best, he ran out of money despite being backed by some group that can easily set up multiple server farms and he lead to us implemented even more solutions to make it more expensive to attack us in any way.
>>61520624>https://github.com/AthanorLabs/atomic-swap>xmr-eth atomic swaps have already been developedbut nobody seems to want/be able to implement it into anything>seraiSoon(tm) will be btc/xmr/eth dex to easily swap between the 3 with no restrictions>https://serai.exchange/blog/index.html
A lot of midwit takes from XMR pedos in this thread. What do you have to hide monerofags? What are you trying to buy discreetly online (we all know)?
>>61520624Absolutely correct and best post on /biz/ in months.
>>61520982Won't happen can't happen. Most people would never use the "banned evil" money. That's another reason why Ethereum is needed. So your argument is just fictionary>>61522706Thats good but 40% is bad enough for one retard. Pos is more secure but less private. Perfectly complementing each other.>>61522806Hm maybe because there are no kyc exchanges already up?>>61522816I don't know what's with this midwittery. It's like they lost money and in 2022 they convinced themselves ALL (a sign of midwits) defi is a scam (after the cefi meltdown) and now they are dickheaded and not open for arguments anymore.
>>61520635He's talking about ETH.And yeah PoS is proof-of-nothing. I can make a fake ETH chain and a client would have no way to know if my chain or the one other participants are giving him is the real ETH chain. He'd have to trust the majority but that majority is Sybil-susceptible. Especially for clients just joining the network because one would only need to Sybil attack their one and only view of the network right at the moment of joining to trick them. It is harder, maybe even close to impossible to pull such a Sybil attack on established clients of the network that also actively use it (i.e. they make meaningful transactions with connections to other assets they can verify, like buying physical goods).
>>61523928>Thats good but 40% is bad enough for one retard.Let me help you finish that sentence: '... that managed to get support by lots of server farms that bought in on his AI + crypto scam'. >Pos is more secure but less private.We will not compromise on privacy. You think it was just a coincidence that we had a large attack and immediately after the zcash fud? Despite millions (even modest calculations say that cfb needed to invest 7 figures over the span of his attack + the absurd pnd that also required millions in marketing and pushing prices) being used against us we came up on top AND made it so similar attacks would be immensely more expensive. >Perfectly complementing each other.No, including worse assets will leave a hole in your opsec and increases attack vectors (both in scope and amount). >>61522816>What do you have to hide monerofags?How much we owe the IRS.
>>61524995>yeah, proof of stake doesn't work at all. I know this because Ethereum has absolutely no transactions occuring on it what so ever.
>>61520624When a true cypherpunk visionary speaks, I listen
>>61525091>driving without a seatbelt is safe. I know that because most people who drive without a seatbelt are alive and will probably die of heart disease or cancer.
>>61524995If weak subjectivity is the worst Ethereum FUD I know things are good.
>>61520829>Didn't Monero just almost get 51%'d by a random dude? >Imagine someone with way more resources.It was already someone with resources... 'random' guy, God you 'people' are fucking retarded. All of this was already explained in August, fuck yourself in the face.>General scale of hashrate + power usageLet's be absolutely conservative and assume they got some insane deal on the following for $6,000 (CPU, MOBO, RAM)>most cost effective and efficient configurationDual socket 9654 + 12 DIMMs (6 per CPU) @ 160kH = 1100W~ (at the wall)>total cost 12,500 x $6,000 = $75,000,000>total power 12,500 x 1100W = 13,750,000W / 1,000,000 (MW) = 13.75MW (basically a small town)with Antminer X5s only being marginally more efficient @ 200KH/s for 1300W and far more expensive per unit, per public pricesQubic's profile>Socials-Reddit: 2,100 members / 1 online (kek)-Telegram members: 20,000 / 400 online-Discord members: 60,000 / 4,000 online-Twitter followers: 100,000 (post engagement in the hundreds though)>30-40% network share - 25,000 EPYCs worth of hashrateEven with the selfish mining advantage that gets them at BEST a 10% bump, so the hashrate (and therefore block results) had to have been at least 25%+ (1.2GH/s) of the network. Which is still phenomenal at 14,000~ 9654s worth.>Government/corporate/academic collusion Possible>Rented compute Unlikely and would require good personal connections to use for this long cheaply. Would still cost hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars. I think people are vastly underestimating the scale of this hashrate, regardless of the selfish mining edge.>Crowd-sourced computeOnly plausible if practically their whole 'community' fully deployed and committed multiple CPUs per user (3/5/7/9)* - *900X/*950X hashrate to their pool + some users/Qubic have EPYCs + Qubic still rented compute make up the remaining difference.1/3
>>61526046>ASICsI initially dismissed this based on the lack of CURRENT X5 stock and the low perceived numbers of deployment historically. But acquiring the hardware could have happened over a much longer period.For example, over the last year (08/2025 as of writing) or so X5s went from relatively available to being out of stock everywhere. The units could have been cheaply bought at bulk liquidation prices from distributors who were left bag holding.~7,000 X5 units would equate to about 1.5GH/s (7,000 x 200,000H/s per unit) which is a middle of the road figure and seems to be their base hashrate. Even then I have serious doubts about that many X5s being out in the wild.Assuming that CFB is in fact Belarusian, that may also mean he has access (possibly through bribing) to large, unused or underutilized industrial properties that could house huge amounts of miners (CPU or not). Apparently Belarusian legislation for crypto is quite friendly as well, including power usage.Although X5s are decently compelling, the primary hurdle for their use is still how restrictive they are for the price and the shitty support from Bitmain originally. However, if someone chopped up custom firmware/software for the units it's conceivable that they would be more useful.2/3
>>61526057>BotnetThe only worthwhile systems to infect are dumb fucks using game cheats and if that was the case the only time a botnet would get full compute is outside of gaming hours.Let's throw out a rough estimation of the top games, CoD, CS2, Fortnite, PUBG, Valorant and absolutely conservatively (maximally for your argument) call it 24 million 'hackers' total. Now divide it up between however many cheat devs one could speculate there are and their client count.Then consider that about 10% (based on Steam surveys) of that total is about 2.5 million hackers with high-end CPUs (12+ cores) that would be worth mining on in the first place. That's not even factoring that over 50% of that is still Intel with it's rubbish e-cores and abysmal cache.>but they don't check their system utilizationBut they'll definitely fucking notice their system shitting itself during their game and stop using that hack>but you could just do minimized, dynamic core allocation or off-hour miningOn Intel with garbage hashrate even with full core allocation?? Ryzen will also do full cache allocation (per CCD) regardless of core count for XMRig. Very noticeable either from fan speed or performance drop even during basic tasks. If it's truly 'off-hour', slash the mining time to a fraction then.>N-no they infect average PCs and laptopsSo 5x-10x or even 20x the amount of systems and in a broad sweep botnet only mining? No other tasks? Get fucking real, if that was the case we'd have better network security.3/3
>>61520829>privacy>rollup (aka PoS)Pick one and only one. You’re not getting real privacy on a PoS chain (let alone a fucking L2 on top of a non-private PoS L1) any time remotely soon.It’s cute but still really fucking annoying when the mETHheads come into Monero circles and try to pontificate to us with their completely uneducated assumption that ETH is some masterful technology innovation.There is literally nothing impressive about being a publicly viewable chain with centralizing ownership that is just a surveillable version of traditional finance. And since there is effectively no difference between centralized finance in ETH versus tradfi (except the complete lack of customer support with ETH) you can expect literally ALL of ETH’s use cases to be absorbed by tradfi.Incidentally did you know all the big banks coming out with their own stablecoins are using their own chains? Wow shocking who would have thought?In case you didn’t know, the fucking point of crypto was to be SEPARATE from those very banks. Because if you have literally no problem with public chains and legally sanctioned “DeFi” why aren’t you using JP Morgan for it? At least they offer you a pajeet who can refund your money when you fat finger a loan.
>>61526046>>61526057>>61526072You can write walls of cope text about hardware and hashrate but it still happened. Also I thought "random dude" was obvious enough language to be understood as tongue in cheek. >>61526168>Pick one and only oneHow does a consensus mechanism affect user privacy? I understand PoS usually has faster block times that prevents validators/nodes from running through TOR but let's imagine a PoS chain (e.g. a rollup) with usual PoW block times like few minutes. From a user standpoint (who runs his own node through TOR) who sends a transaction, what's the difference if a block is built by a PoS validator vs. a PoW miner, assuming all other things between the two chains are equal? Please, feel free to educate me why a private PoS chain is not possible if that's what you think.>let alone a fucking L2 on top of a non-private PoS L1Validity proofs on Eth L1 won't affect L2 privacy. >any time remotely soonI quote myself: "Still years and years away though". Maybe one of us thinks more practically ("what can I use today") and one more theoretically ("what is possible and can be built within ~5 years"). I quote myself again: "Monero is best privacy crypto we have right now"
>>61526452>but it still happened.What happened? An unsuccesful 51% attempt?
>>61526640Not unsuccessful enough if you ask me
>>61520854>Today I moved some money to/from Hyperliquid and Polymarket. Neither supports XMR.Check againhyperwagyu.xyz
>>61526716>Achieved nothing except for strengthening XMR>Cost millions >No one can even remember the name of his chain or AIIn what terms was it successful? As FUD?
>>61526452>Please, feel free to educate me why a private PoS chain is not possible if that's what you think.
>>61526808This is interesting. There's some counterparty risk with XMR1 but it's better than nothing. Also have to go through a separate bridge vs. just using HL website and clicking "Deposit".>>61526836As a proof of concept? Good to see something productive come out of it... didn't he claim it to be a stress test anyway?
>>61526979That does not answer my question why a PoS chain can't be private. I'm not talking about smart contracts. I'm talking about consensus mechanisms' effect on privacy.
>>61526979>Also have to go through a separate bridge vs. just using HL website and clicking "Deposit".It's a feature, not a bug. The endgame according to the dev is to make XMR1 <-> XMR atomic swaps, which should be much easier to do once FCMP/CARROT is rolled out
>>61527024Sure anon let’s pretend you were asking about a very specific (and non existent) non-smart contract enabled PoS blockchain.Which isn’t Ethereum right? Are you going to pretend you haven’t been advocating for Ethereum the entire fucking thread? Stop being a faggot
>>61527055Meant for >>61526988>>61527024>That does not answer my question why a PoS chain can't be private.He's probably defining private as "as private as Monero or better". As for your question, the answer is "not really". The Monero community went over this with Luke Parker's finality layer proposal. The TLDR is that stakers would have to disclose a bunch of stuff to each other to allow for things like slashing without a pow layer to fall back on. I'm not too sure of the technicals beyond that, but you can read about it herehttps://github.com/monero-project/research-lab/issues/135
>>61527106>Sure anon let’s pretend you were asking about a very specific (and non existent) non-smart contract enabled PoS blockchain.I was asking about PoS in general. Not Ethereum, just PoS as a consensus mechanism. Could have smart contracts or not.>Which isn’t Ethereum right?No, Ethereum doesn't have privacy built on L1. There could be rollups on top of it that do, that was my original point in my 1st post.You made the argument that privacy can't theoretically exist on any PoS blockchain, and I asked you to back that up with reasoning but you're failing at that. Why the PoS hate anyway? Just because there is no good privacy PoS/rollup right now? >Are you going to pretend you haven’t been advocating for Ethereum the entire fucking thread?Obviously I'm poking at Monero and creating Ethereum vs. Monero discussion. Not full devil's advocate but a little bit.>>61527194Thanks will read that one.
>>61522706>No, it was around 40% at best, he ran out of money despite being backed by some groupThat's really fucking bad. Basically means that if any gov really wanted to fuck up Monero they could easily.
>>61527247And there are parties that are interested in keeping monero alive and just as resourceful, so it will balance out
>>61527238>Thanks will read that one.Let us know what (You) think anon
>>61526988>As a proof of concept?Ok, if some threat actor showed up quickly, spun up server farms in unprecedented speed, invested 7 figures and all before we have fcmp++ or the other mitigations, accept we could quickly introduce bans and knows that more miners because of the recent bull run, then we could be in danger. >didn't he claim it to be a stress test anyway?An announced, unwarranted and unhelpful pentest from which he profited. In the analogue world we'd consider that illegal in multiple ways. >>61527247See my other posts regarding this. Or just read this one.
>>61527385>In the analogue world we'd consider that illegal in multiple ways.It still could be if the monero community was willing to use the CCS to hire lawyers to file class action lawsuits agains bad actors, but that's a pipe dream.
>>61527454I doubt the legal frame work is there. Some countries are fairly open to white hat hackers.
>>61527238>Why the PoS hate anyway?Calling PoS a “consensus mechanism” is being way too generous to it. In reality there is no consensus, there is only increasing oligopoly. Over time the rich get richer and it completely undermines any supposed democratization of the consensus.There is a reason ETH had to rely on muh electricity as its justification for switching instead of like, anything else.
>>61527247Qubic probably *was* a government and it failed. And saying “oh it’s 40% it’s so close” really does not capture the difficulty of acquiring that last 11% needed for an attack. It’s much much harder than it seems just looking at the numbers linearly.
>>61527889>In reality there is no consensusInteresting opinion>the rich get richer In all finance the rich get richer because x% of large number is not equal to x% of small number. With PoW the rich get richer even faster than with PoS where every staking unit is equal and receives the same ROI. A miner in residential home with normal electricity contract will never be as profitable as a large rich corpo who can mine on the other side of the planet if it has cheaper electricity, negotiate a cheap industrial electricity contract or just simply build his own power infra with a dedicated power plant(s). ASIC PoW is the worst, then GPU and finally CPU where economies of scale is present the least.>democratization of the consensusWhat consensus? There wasn't supposed to be any consensus?>rely on muh electricity as its justification for switchingWas decided long before muh electricity green planet bullshit. Actually before the chain even went live in 2015. You are parroting the same old stale and refuted points. But at least you answered why you hate it, even if it's based on false beliefs.
>>61528087>In all finance the rich get richer because x% of large number is not equal to x% of small number.There are also bad investments. >With PoW the rich get richer even faster than with PoS where every staking unit is equal and receives the same ROI.RandomX ensures that mining is heavily skewed to regular people and the less wealthy because of ASIC resistance. While your point in regards to power is correct, we also need to realize that in general the citizens of countries with higher power bills are better off. >There wasn't supposed to be any consensus?Consensus is needed. We all need to agree on how much each party owns. If we don't, people could just claim they own whatever they wish and past transactions would be completely worthless. >Actually before the chain even went live in 2015.Environmentalism existed before that. The meme got revived but it isn't new.
>>61528180>There wasn't supposed to be any consensus?It was a jab at "In reality there is no consensus". Of course consensus is needed. You missed the sarcasm.>Environmentalism existed before that. Sure, but it wasn't even in top 5 reasons why PoS was chosen for Ethereum. Some like to make it seem like Ethereum bent the knee to some ESG wokeism to make it look bad. Some were Ethash miners, some just feel the need to attack anything not their bags. Ethereum is a common enemy for many.
>>61528342>Some like to make it seem like Ethereum bent the knee to some ESG wokeism to make it look bad.You don’t think the behavior of the overwhelming majority of major figures in ETH agreeing with that shit had something to do with it?Sometimes things seem the way they are.
>>61528342>You missed the sarcasm.My expectations with you (and this board in general) aren't very high. >Sure, but it wasn't even in top 5 reasons why PoS was chosen for Ethereum.Sad if true. It's one of the more sensible ones.
>>61528497If Eth devs prioritized eco-friendliness above everything they would've rushed some PoS out in 2016 instead of running GPU PoW for 7 years. Of course being good for the environment is better than being bad for the environment, and for some this is more important than for others. But I don't think there's any dev who thinks it's more important than chain security.
>>61526452>You can write walls of copeI see no refutation>"random dude">tongue in cheekCalling a borderline state operative with immense resources a "random guy" isn't very tongue and cheek, it's just ignorant and comes off as bad faith.
>>61529736>My expectations with you (and this board in general) aren't very high.Understandable. Technical knowledge in crypto has dumped hard since 2017. Especially on /biz/ which is not /g/.>It's one of the more sensible ones.>wasn't even in top 5 reasonsMaybe for some it was, but but for most it's just a side-effect of PoS. The lower issuance needed from not burning electricity was a bigger priority (especially ETH holders) than saving few terawatt-hours. Even the image of Eth (virtue signaling) and new eco-friendly investors bringing in more money were bigger priorities than actual environment.>>61529754>no refutationI'm not wasting time arguing/refuting a screenshot. It missed the question completely so I'm not going to get Gish galloped.>just ignorant and comes off as bad faithI wanted to trigger people to create discussion and it worked.
>>61529772>arguing/refuting a screenshotI meant a copypasta. Same applies for links and screenshots etc.
Confused it with >>61526979 at first.... I'm tired and I need some more sleep before Christmas starts. Meatspace calls. By the time I'm back online this thread will have died.
>>61529772>Especially on /biz/ which is not /g/.You think very highly of /g/. It has some nuggets of gold underneath all the jeet flinging shit to defend their favorite billion dollar company. >Even the image of Eth (virtue signaling) and new eco-friendly investors bringing in more money were bigger priorities than actual environment.I think that's something we can all agree on. With this thought of unity, I hope you depart peacefully into slumber.
>>61529772>It missed the question completelyIt only “missed the question” because you saw an opportunity to distinguish it even though you never intended to argue for a non-smart contract PoS chain.Even after that “missed question” literally everything post of yours has been about Ethereum, which I hope we can agree IS a smart contract enabled chain? Yes? So how was it off the mark? Because you moved the goalpost for literally only one reply and pretended you weren’t talking about Ethereum?In reality there are such massive technical issues with private smart contracts that there is no foreseeable future where they are possible. If you want to pretend you weren’t talking about that and instead wanted a solely P2P currency just on a PoS chain, go ahead. But your premise that there is some special utility to Ethereum smart contracts that serves or complements Monero is just wrong.If I want privacy I use Monero.If I don’t care about privacy (aka the standard for all other chains) I’ll use tradfi and have Best In Class Customer Service.
