PoS has two main problems: (1) It makes the blockchain less resistant. (2) the Cantillion Effect. With PoS, all it takes to do a 51% attack is to have enough XMR.

If you look at the existing financial system, you can regularly see the big players openly sabotaging themselves to either kill competition or push down prices to cause a panic and then silently buy back more than they had sold while people are still panicking or just because they are subsidized to do so (e.g. DEI). With XMR's antagonism to the existing financial system, PoS would be a death sentence. PoW + PoS changes little since you can just game the algorithm so the PoW doesn't matter.

The Cantillion Effect is essentially, people with wealth get more and more power over time to game the system because they have wealth (PoS) and not because the did anything to deserve that wealth (PoW). It's the whole reason why the financial system is the way it is now and XMR should have no part of it.

Kewbit, if you look at my previous response, I gave you the benefit of the doubt and encouraged you to get an emotionally intelligent friend to tell your side of the story. If this is the response, it's clear that whether or not you were sincere about completing Haveno mobile and whether or not you wished to scam, you're far too petty an immature to work on the CSS, so the CSS was correct in its decision to close the CSS. It is a pity since Haveno mobile is a much needed part of the XMR ecosystem and I hope someone completes it.

As for BasicSwapDEX, the code is finicky and is difficult to install but it does what it says it does. It needs a lot of improving for the newbie to get right but it does work and it does have liquidity. I'd say it's about six months away from being as competitive as Haveno, and its potential for automation makes it a worthy part of the XMR ecosystem. If BasicSwapDEX mobile could ever be developed, it would be even more competitive.

I agree with Bobr. As someone who regularly keeps friendly relations between several parties who "know" they are "in the right" I can tell you that it's unlikely the complete story is being told once emotions take over. When that happens truth takes a back seat to "being right". From reading the logs, emotions were inflamed far too early with kewbit threatening to stop right at the beginning. You can't lead a horse to water. At that point, the CSS should have dispassionally lay down the law without insult or consession and either negotiate an end to the CSS or negotiate new timelines and expectations.

My reading of that likely happened is this. Kewbit appears to have classic engineer delusions. Engineers naturally overestimate their abilities and underestimate the difficulties. Experienced engineers or well managed engineers know about this tendency and add buffers and contingencies "just in case". Kewbit likely thought he could do more than he was able to in the time period, but "knows he is just needs to get over a minor difficulty to make up the time". When he missed his deadlines, he became defensive and the emotions on both sides started there and escalated.

Could the drama been avoided? From the CSS side, yes. Calling Kewbit an exit scammer automatically ends any hope that can be resolved and brings needless drama. When the deadline was missed and attempts at negotiation (which are not likely show in the published logs) failed, the CSS should have been withdraw and a settlement should be made. At most, it should have been announced, "Due to on project completion disagreements, the CSS has been withdrawn. Anyone else that wishes to take over the CSS may apply with a plan."

No but it's a good thing for a few reasons (1) XMR really needs to focus on it's primary mission. Blockchain based smart contracts make privacy harder. (2) There is no consensus on a good smart contract language is yet, especially for UTXOs so it's best to wait until a standard emerges (note there are several challengers to EVMs that might yet replace it), (3) Once something is on the public blockchain, it'll stay forever so it needs to be done right the first time so we need a mature smart contract standard (see previous point), (4) It can be handled by a parallel merge mined chain for added flexibility and experimentation so XMR might never need it, (5) the comining implementation of FCMPs has featurres that will make it easier to do, so any effort spent now will need to be thrown out. (6) Most common smart contracts like automatic payments and smart contracts and payment channels can be done by using time locked XMR and checkpoints (with clear roll back rules) and step signatures. These can be integrated into wallets to run in the background, so it might not even be necessary for most cases to hard code opcodes onto the main block chain. All you need to do is leave your phone on to handle the checkpoints. Atomic swaps and the "Monero Subscriptions Wallet" already prove this is possible. All that's needed is a more full featured wallet extension library that handles all the typical smart contract cases (i.e. currently there are thousands of smart contracts out there...most are abandoned and only a handful are actually useful. We could implement those).

these sanctions are actually hurting the individual citizens more than the government to whom they should be targeted.

Of course. That's the point. Sanctions rarely ever harm the leaders. Do you think 1000 times harsher sanctions would affect the North Korean dictator one bit? Sanctions are meant to cause so much civilian pain that the governments has no choice but to yield or risk revolution. Causing revolution in the enemy to weaken it is an extremely old and effective strategy to win without fighting. The US would not likely exist without the support of the French of the American revolution against the British. Of course, the french monarchy might still be around if it did not go bankrupt funding the American revolution, thus causing its own revolution, so this strategy has its dangers.

You do not need to fight governments. You just need to make them irrelevant. As much as possible, reduce your government dependance footprint.

May I suggest that you don't convert to fiat and instead buy either gift cards and debit cards or buy items directly with Monero? This avoids all the KYC issues with offramps and helps the Monero economy. If you need the cash in hand, then buy a gift card for something you normally pay with fiat (e.g. amazon, gas, phone, vpn, etc) and then use the money you would have spent on those items or bills for whatever you need the cash for.

Agreed, all wallets should included and added to a trust tier chart. Note that multicoin is not the only unreasonable exclusion. Non-reproducible wallets are also excluded, so the monero.com and Monerujo wallets are also excluded. Unless you have a completely controlled and specified environment (i.e. linker and linker version, compiler and compiler version, all needed libraries and library versions, target type), no source code is binary reproducible. You might get it with the JVM or Qt or Go but those are minority platforms for wallets. What counts is that you can compile the code yourself if you distrust the source. Similarly, multicoin is only a problem if monero is "just another coin" and not the primary coin of the wallet or if the code is mixed together so a bug in another coin could compromise the security of Monero. So Monerujo, Cake, and Monero.com should at least be added, even if they classify them as tier two wallets. Stack wallet would then go in tier three since it is multicoin without a Monero focus, and all the other wallets except Exodus for be tier four, and Exodus being closed source would be tier five.

Notice that Signal isn't attacked (at least not yet). Telegram is optionally end to end encrypted and it is a for profit company. Those are two vectors that Durov was attacked on. It's the same reason Samurai Wallet was attacked on and Tornado Cash. Going after Monero would be much harder. It is not a for profit company (or even DAO). It's privacy is part of the protocol, like SSH and when ring signatures are gone the final legal potential weakness will be gone. Legally, there is no clear way to attack Monero since if Monero is attacked, any privacy technology like VPNs and SSH and HTTPS could also be attacked and that would have a major industry backlash. It is far more likely that if an attack happens, the infrastructure would be attacked (e.g. getting Monero off github, etc) by putting pressure on the web hosts, but there are already several projects that work on GIT over TOR so this is more an inconvenience than a threat. At the moment, I'm not worried. If Signal and ZCash are attacked, then I'd start to be more worried.

This is not how things worked in the past. Income tax is a modern invention and if the government or anyone who was in power wanted money, they would take it and punish you if you resisted. There was nothing voluntary about it. The key difference is that governments tend to tax you either or force "tribute" per head or per property or per trade port, and your family, religious group, guild, protector, tribe, and lord would have their own "taxes", either as a percentage of what you produce or seasonal fees. Governments tended to leave you alone and focused on roads, the military, and courts. As for the military, it tended to be forced on each land owner to supply a certain number of people when the region needed it, and there were strict penalties for both avoiding military service or trying to take advantage of unoccupied land because the owner was serving. Also, people in the military often needed to pay their own way and provide their own weapons. In modern times, everything is centralized and the government has done its best to get rid of all competitions so families, religion, guilds, tribes, and "lords" have all been dis-empowered, except those who found a way to become so powerful that they span nations. Because there's little competition, there's only one organization to pay and only one organization to plan your life because there is no competition, that organization keeps wanting to grow and take over ever more of your life. Centralization is the issue, not taxes. With competition from the local groups, you may not be freer, but you will have more flexibility on which groups to pay taxes to and services are more customized and taxes are lower since no-one group wants the other groups to grow too big and will go to war to assert this. Does monero help fix this? To some extent. It forces government to depend more on property and head taxes and user fees for government services since it's possible to hide income taxes, sales taxes, transaction taxes, etc. But it's not a solution for building up the other competing groups to supplement government as has been shown to work in all countries around the world for thousands of years.

@aodhsishaj@lemmy.world It seems as long as you have an anonymous email and mail box somewhere, you can be anonymous with these cards. It's an easy off ramp for daily living for the average person. One thing I don't like about these cards is that they're not refillable. So unless you have a purchase of exactly $50, you'll have large number low spend amount cards ($1.23 on this card, $4.06 on this card, $0.02 on this card) which you'll either never use or you'll have to convince someone to accept payment with several of these cards.

Depending on how serious you are about "getting government approved", you can do a cross chain analysis on yourself and provide necessary view keys. To prove you bought 10K of Monero, just show that your bank account went down 10K and your Monero account went up 10K (at the past exchange rate). To show you exchanged 5K Monero for 5K Bitcoin, show that 5K Monero was transferred from your wallet at the same time 5K was added to your Bitcoin wallet. It's extremely cumbersome and requires that you have access to all wallets/accounts and is extremely invasive on your privacy, but it can be done if you really want to. Personally, I'd agree about the tax attorney. Often there's a way of "legitimising" grandfathered funds, but expected to be taxed to the max. Alternately, there may be a way of doing crypto loans so that you get the money without actually cashing out.