Replies (78)
Do you want that coffee I bought in Tokyo, in 2011 to be recorded on an immutable ledger and copied indefinitely across the planet for ever? 😂
Cannot wait for the monero bros to lose their mind over this one 🤣
They will not have to because they will not reach any threshold that would make using a L2 necessary for their shitcoin.
Bitcoin privacy is already good enough thanks to L2s so Montero will always stay usefull for nich use cases, not more not less than today IMO
I’ve always held this position with the Monero bros and it always leaves them stammering because it’s the absolute truth.
doesn't seem to take much with them
Shush retard
blockchains scale through altcoins + atomic swaps
calle said it
Haha 😆 Epic rant. Love it!
its an iq test. shitcoiners continually fail this one.
Thanks coz a large majority of them don't even understand the actual tech behind blockchain architecture.
If they actually worked in the industry for even 12 months they'd all shut up real quickly.
Use the tokens, buy the crypto, ignore the rabid communities.
Lol you don't scale something that don't scale with something that don't scale bro.
And even at base layer things like monero scale ever worse than bitcoin to begin with
gm btw. keep building. bear market won’t last forever.
💯
Lightning Network: scalability, affordability, privacy
Silent Payments: absolute privacy
Well, do they need to scale? 🤔
The larger scale transactions are impossible to effectively hide, anyway, and need the higher security and liquidity of Bitcoin. The only other options are stablecoins or fiat and those have their own inherent risks.
But that doesn't mean that a smaller space or use case can't include something other than Bitcoin as one of multiple options. For example, to maintain monetary velocity and promote a circular economy.
If I were to bring in Monero to the Nostr market, it would stay moving and get passed around **precisely because people like you refuse to take it**. Intra-Nostr commerce would increase with Monero because the people willing to receive it are inclined to spend it, so it keeps moving. Monero Bros won't zap you a piconero and be like #generationalwealth.
i’ll take monero
Payment target on your profile or it didn't happen.
send me a private key via DM
I think Monero is the only legit Crypto money apart from Bitcoin.
I want you to sign a publically-viewable event with your Nostr nsec, that is attached to your profile and visible on your profile page.
Respectfully, even if this wasn't wrong it at least skips lots of very relevant nuances. Which is a shame, you are a very talented developer and we need people like you to relax their definitions and extend the same grace everyone extends to L2s, but for sidechains and what can be done with expressive contracts.
One of the most ignored nuances is grouping hash rate escrow and signers in the same bucket... Even though we know for a fact that they create very different dynamics and tradeoffs.
If we just start from the UX and KYC and analysis paralysis of choosing your own mints like choosing your own Mastodon server... And think how can we do better, it is clear that PoW and possibly PoS backed by PoW can offer much better UX, with no KYC, without fragmentation etc... and it wouldn't be equivalent to trusting anyone, but trusting a vague but so far very fair assumption that sufficient Work + fraud proofs, is not a terrible proxy for validity.
Who benefits from the "gotcha you don't validate everything so you might as well trust a rando custodial that doesn't even give you good UX"?
On this we can fully agree sir ⚡️👌🏻
There is nothing legit about tail emissions - infinite supply chain with the hope of adoption is worse than fiat money
"Blockchains don't scale" is a software design bottleneck, not a physical law. Older chains choke because they run single-threaded and waste bandwidth arguing over time. Modern architectures fix this with fundamental computer science:
1. Decentralized Clock: Baking chronological order cryptographically into the data structure so nodes don't waste time gossiping to agree on timestamps.
2. Parallel Processing: Multi-threading execution by declaring state paths upfront. This lets non-overlapping transactions run concurrently across multiple CPU cores instead of waiting in a single-file queue.
3. Direct Routing: Eliminating global mempools by streaming transactions directly to scheduled block producers.
The idea that "nobody uses it" is just as outdated. As of early 2026, Solana handles 2,000 to 4,000+ *real* TPS continuously (compared to Ethereum's 15) and sees over 5 million daily active addresses. It's not just retail; BlackRock hosts its $550M+ BUIDL fund there, Citigroup uses it for tokenized trade finance, and Visa settles on it precisely because it handles massive global volume without breaking a sweat.
It's not a lack of users; it's maximizing physical hardware capacity instead of choking at the software layer.
Acting like model chains don't exist is akin to closing your ears and pretend you're not hearing, it juvenile.
When there's no more BTC left to mine those industrial miners won't be running charity w/ only TX fee peanuts. You Bitcoiners who can't comprehend the future will experience it.
Fiat inflation is exponential and arbitrary. A properly designed tail emission (like Monero's) is linear, which means the actual inflation rate asymptotically approaches zero over time. It is a predictable, mathematically fixed security subsidy.
You're arguing that Bitcoin needs to subsidize security through inflation because you assume the fee market won't mature. But if fiat currencies are destined to fail (as history suggests), Bitcoin will be the settlement layer for the world's wealth. If the network is moving that level of value, the transaction fees will be more than sufficient to incentivize miners. Adding tail emissions to 'solve' a security problem that hasn't happened yet just creates the same debasement issue we are trying to escape. A system that can change its monetary policy to benefit miners at the expense of holders isn't sound money, it's just a more complex version of the central banking system we're trying to replace.
Tail emission is taxation.
At 7 TPS, the only way fees can replace block subsidies is if they cost thousands of dollars per transaction. That prices out normal people and hands the L1 directly to the banking cartels you claim to hate. If you push everyone to L2s to keep it cheap, the L1 miners starve, hash rate plummets, and your "world settlement layer" gets 51% attacked.
Fiat inflation is arbitrary and exponential. A tail emission is hard-coded and linear, meaning the actual inflation rate mathematically trends toward zero. Comparing a fixed algorithmic security budget to a central bank printing money is mathematically illiterate.
Security isn't free. You have to pay for the network's immune system. A capped supply taxes the users with exorbitant fees, punishing them for using the network. A tail emission lightly taxes the holders through microscopic dilution, making them pay for the security that protects their wealth.
A capped supply isn't "sound money", it’s an unfunded security mandate hoping that astronomical fees will magically keep miners online forever. Money is an abstraction designed to measure and exchange value. If the total pool of value (goods and services) in the world grows, the measuring stick has to grow with it.
Nothing you say makes any mathematical sense, you're just spewing ideas you heard w/o any understanding that they don't hold up to any scrutiny. Good luck.
You are assuming that by the end of bitcoins final block mined the world would still be plagued by inflation… thats just not reality. No fiat currency could last that long (2140 is 114 years away and the average lifespan of fiat is 27 years). USD is long overdue. It’s in the last decade at the most given the current geopolitical situation.
More importantly, “in a free market, the natural state is deflation” (that’s a quote from
@Jeff Booth )
This points out the major flaw with Monero. By introducing a patch for inflation - you are assuming we are in a free market and copying the very mechanism of a fiat system. Using tail emission “security” is an excuse to debase on that false assumption.
If the network is valuable enough to be the world's settlement layer, it will be valuable enough to pay for its own security without debasing the holders.
That’s how a real free market functions. Based on time, energy and true scarcity. It’s a positive sum game where security increases as the network grows.
I find it interesting that people can simultaneously argue that Monero’s tail emission is absolutely necessary to maintain long-term mining security, while also arguing that it trends toward effectively zero so it doesn't matter.
If it truly trends toward zero and becomes barely noticeable, then it doesn’t materially change mining incentives or network security. But if it does materially impact mining incentives, then the inflation is significant. You can't have both.
The same goes to Bitcoin discussions around future transaction fees. People constantly attach a $ price to future block fees, as if the economy of 2140 will still be dollar denominated.
By the time the last Bitcoin block reward is mined, economic activity will be denominated in sats, not dollars. Transactions won’t “cost thousands of dollars” in the way people frame it today.
People also project today’s mining environment infinitely into the future, without considering how incentives evolve over time.
Early Bitcoin mining rewards were massive, which naturally incentivized large scale industrial mining operations to emerge and aggressively secure the network during its infancy. But as halvings continue, large industrial miners increasingly struggle with operational overhead, energy costs, debt structures, and margin compression.
That opens the door for smallerscale miners and home miners to become more competitive.
Bitcoin’s design seems to front-load security through big issuance incentives, then gradually transition toward a more decentralized mining space over time.
BTC L∞ < 21M
I find it interesting that people can simultaneously argue that Monero’s tail emission is absolutely necessary to maintain long-term mining security, while also arguing that it trends toward effectively zero so it doesn't matter.
If it truly trends toward zero and becomes barely noticeable, then it doesn’t materially change mining incentives or network security. But if it does materially impact mining incentives, then the inflation is significant. You can't have both.
You're confusing absolute numbers with percentages. Miners are paid in absolute terms (0.6 XMR per block), which provides a permanent baseline incentive to keep rigs running. Holders care about relative inflation (percentages). Because the emission is fixed but the supply grows, the dilution rate trends toward zero. A fixed block reward can easily fund security while the inflation rate simultaneously flatlines. It’s basic math.
All Bitcoiner false claims come from not understanding basic finance and basic math. People assume you can develop theories over cryptocurrencies because it's a popular topic, but no, you can't w/o knowing some about math and monetary theory, which most people don't.
We have LLMs now, people can easily share these "opinions" and hear precisely how they're wrong, but they prefer to just throw it out there anyways. That's the real "interesting" part.
I never really thought about mining like that. It's interesting to think that huge mining operations today may actually become permanently unprofitable. I'd imagine that as the economy and usage of Bitcoin expands, not just home miners, but businesses will mine just to secure the network and create pool alliances to ensure their transactions don't get censored.
we know blockchains dont scale bro.
but monero does 10% of Bitcoin tx volume without breaking a sweat.
and yall reee incessantly about scaling problems and have already sold out self custody
because why?
nobody is using Bitcoin either.
blockchains scale horizontally bro.
monero IS bitcoin
yeah. utxo nailed the iq test here 🙄
View quoted note →Economics and game theory is not “basic math”. Tail emission is a zero sum game. It’s still based on the assumption that fiat will always exist and that inflation is possible in a truly free market.
If the market were truly free and fiat did not exist, why would holders need to pay miners for the security of the network outside of a fee based on demand ?
Thats why Bitcoin's security model is superior- its based on the transition to a mature, market-driven fee environment where the value of the network justifies the cost of settlement.
This is my view as well. A chicken in every pot, an inexpensive miner in every home. There won’t even be a supply of large scale ASIC machines to assemble a 51% attack. Small scale mining operations for large holders/institutions to have decent reliability of getting their transaction on the base layer. Everyone else happily transacting on top of the world best monetary network using bitcoin L2s
I don't really understand what the scaling issue is.
Not enough people running nodes?
Isn't one of the benefits of monero doge lite coin etc. that they require less data storage than Bitcoin and therefore are more scalable?
So much arrogance and stupidity in one post 🤔
sigh
nobody ever said Monero scaled better than Bitcoin
this is just more making shit up to fight about
(but we DO dunk on L2s when they suck and/or are custodial. as we should)
What the fuck did I just read
Just gonna leave this here.
Monero mfs when hundreds of txs get invalidated by an 18 block reorg
they don't though
They hate us cuz they ain’t us.
Love it
First one debatable, last one is 100% not true...
Better do homework before making such dogmatic claims about scalability and number of users
> only a dozen people can use it
unlike Bitcoin where only about a dozen shops accept it as payment
fair
Approx 1 million - 5 million merchants worldwide accept bitcoin.
Chat GPT is free you retard
"You don't have scaling issues, until you have scale"
Standing on the shoulder of a giant, claiming you're taller than everyone else and spitting on the courageous builders down there... Peak idiocy! 👌
What are you talking about? Monero has an higher real-life throughput than Bitcoin thanks to dynamic blocks. 🤔
Great explanation 👍
Changing the denomination doesn't change the fact that only states & global corps will be able to afford transacting mainchain... wtf was that broken counter point bro. 😂😂😂
I think you're confusing bitcoiners & maxis. Bitcoiner just means you're holding bitcoin and have some knowledge about it, while maximalists are bitcoin-only zealots. Many bitcoiners hold monero (or the other way around). Not everyone is engaged to a token, especially not cypherpunks. ;)
Monero holders have to hold Bitcoin or they would lose all their value.
When you go all in on bitcoin you don’t need anything else.
The denomination doesn’t “change”; the currency becomes worthless. Every single unbacked form of value in human history has ultimately faced obsolescence. From the clay tokens of Mesopotamia to the cowrie shells of ancient China, any medium of exchange whose supply can be easily expanded (whether by a central authority or changing trade dynamics) eventually inflates and gets abandoned for a harder, more reliable medium.
The dollar and Monero are no different. Once the fiat experiment runs its course and all 21 million Bitcoins are mined, the network will no longer rely on block subsidies. If Bitcoin remains decentralized and secure, it will sustain itself purely on transaction fees. The cost to transact will be determined by a free market bidding for block space, completely decoupled from the whims of an inflationary printing press.
This is because a real free market is actually deflationary.
The End Of Fiat — Sentra AGI
I don't think you understand the point. For bitcoin to survive from fees alone with 7TPS, it means each mainchain transaction will cost roughly a month of salary whatever the denomination is. We already know that cause we already know the cost of mining a block.
Pointless arguing with people who don't know basic math I muted him long time ago :D
You don't need anything else if you are OK with the state & big corps to monitor all of your transactions.
Cryptocurrency have not been created to make you rich, it has been created to make techno-totalitarian societies impossible by giving the citizens ways to fight back. And Monero is taking it where Bitcoin left it.
Monero can't go to zero unless another, better peer to peer cash option appears. That's a demand Bitcoin is completely unable to meet right now, and it's going to remain that way for the forseeable future.
Honestly, capped supply could work & it's also a great marketing... But with 7TPS & no plans to make that bigger? No way man... That's insane. Plan is clearly to make an actual digital gold, that only big actors can old onchain, and to rebuild the banks on top of it the way it always has been. I mean, the smart guys calling the shot can all do the math & figure out were it leads right?
This leaves a lot of room for Monero to grow, as the currency of the people. It's true that we'll have to pay for our security (~0.5%/year), but at least we'll have self custody. ✊
Btw, something else people miss: what we pay for holding, we won't pay it for transacting. Cause that's the other thing right, most people do both and have to pay for the security anyway. 😅
Yeah, you're right. Just training myself a little I guess 😁
You are literally measuring this 'salary' in a piece of paper rather than what real value is and what an actual free market represents: efficient energy transfer.
It makes sense why you buy into the Monero narrative. To you, privacy is the ultimate battleground, and you assume the primary issue with the world is centralized authority. While those concerns are valid, they are downstream effects.
The foundational issue with society is the corruption of the medium we use to store our life-force and value. Literally everything else is downstream from this. We are told we live in a free market, but we don't, because systemic inflation distorts every price signal. When we assume the issue is just the central authority and fight to hide from it, we paradoxically validate its power over us. The only real escape is to opt out of the broken thermodynamic system entirely.
Nothing accomplishes this better than Bitcoin. It is decentralized, globally secure, possesses an unassailable first-mover advantage, and is backed by verifiable time and energy. Most of all, it has an absolute, immutable supply cap.
Bitcoin's fixed supply is the economic equivalent of the discovery of zero (an absolute mathematical constant). For the first time in history, value can be measured in time and energy alone, completely decoupled from the whims of a central bank or the systemic leakage of a perpetual tail emission.
I definitely hope that bitcoin can clean up some of the corruption, but I'm not completely convinced it'll be able to do so. At that point, it's merely a beautiful theory.
I just tried to zap you to prove this final point (but you don’t have a lightning wallet setup) which makes a lot of sense.
Layer 2 already solved this issue. This was the entire block size war debate over scalability. To handle thousands of TPS on the base layer, blocks would become so massive that only elite data centers could afford the storage, bandwidth, and computing power to validate the chain. This would erode node runners ability to secure the network.
Bitcoin solved this with lightning and then grew massively in adoption (there are over 800,000 square merchants now accepting bitcoin via lightning).
Bitcoin’s layer 2 is a huge part of nostr too. People have bought my album and books with it. I use it everyday. You should try using it!
I know, I use LN too. This is just a temp account to test a Monero client, I didn't set up any address on it.
Unfortunately, LN contracts are secured by a close that let you escape to on-chain in case the other side is being dishonest — but ofc this is only possible with low fees. As we already pointed out, global adoption will lead to really high fees and at that point LN becomes fully trust-based, fully custodial.
So, saying that bitcoin has solved it is really a long shot. Sorry my friend but nothing is solved yet & it's going to be a very hard nut to crack.
“Global adoption will lead to really high fees”
Once again, 'high fees' are relative, and you are measuring them through the broken lens of an inflationary fiat currency.
In a real thermodynamic sense, base-layer fees are an open auction for block space on the most secure, un-forgeable data ledger on earth. When you pay a fee on Bitcoin's base layer, you aren't just paying to move tokens; you are buying a slice of absolute mathematical finality secured by an unassailable wall of physical energy.
On-chain fees aren't a bug; they represent the true, undiscounted cost of security. For everyday transactions, users don't interact with the base layer directly: they use Layer 2 networks like Lightning, where transactions cost virtually zero because they don't require rewriting the entire global bedrock ledger for a cup of coffee.
So yes, bitcoin solved this, not just with a fixed supply but a scalable layer 2. You can’t see this until you accept the fact that the market you live in is not free. Once you realize that, you decide to step out of it entirely.
Until then you will keep clinging to the belief that inflation is inevitable, and move the goal posts further and further.
Money wasn’t meant to be monolithic. The only reason you believe this is because of the force imposed by governments on the public to use fiat money.
Alt-coins have always been a solution to the scaling problem.
rththjytj
