I think that the Community as a whole should know this, even though for me it's just one rejected person's drama, but it's starting to get sick, IMO.

> <@mj-xmr:matrix.org> I think that the Community as a whole should know this, even though for me it's just one rejected person's drama, but it's starting to get sick, IMO.

> reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/tl5w1b…e=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

oh scary we don't know how this open source software will be used... what if someone uses the library for analyzing monero

Might be cool to have a CCS that focuses on creating a sort of psychological Monero dev welcome manual that highlights some of the types of harassment one will begin to receive as a Monero developer and tie it into some of the documented disruption tactics used by the feds

would be cool if it had some real examples from reddit/twitter etc

<chesterfield[m]> "Might be cool to have a CCS that..." <- Monero Dev: An introduction to modern psychological warfare

repo.getmonero.org/monero-project/ccs-proposals/-/merge_requests/295 please engage the like/dislike buttons and leave a comment if desired

<luigi1111w> "repo.getmonero.org..." <- Left a comment and thumbs up there, seems an oddly combative crowd (that I have never seen on other platforms) jumped in there to downvote, name call, and be toxic.

I absolutely support the proposal and see it as a necessary step forward or Monero as a tool for freedom.

Apparently the gov is testing out an 'e-cash'

'5. Does E-Cash involve blockchain or distributed ledger technology?

No. In contrast to most cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum, E-Cash is a true bearer instrument. Consequently, E-Cash transactions do not involve or require settlement via a blockchain or distributed ledger.

Instead, an E-Cash transaction works by transferring an e-cash balance, which is a unique digital representation of value issued and verified by the government, from one secure hardware device to another. The hardware devices themselves, as well as the security measures undertaken by government at the point of original issue, are responsible for preventing double-spending and counterfeiting.'

Huh, that's an interesting concept

But it doesn't address the issue of "where does the money come from"

merope: yeah it needs another column in there :)

Whoever is in charge of that system has the power to create an infinite amount of money out of nowhere with no oversight nor restrictions

but but cryptocurrencies are backed by nothing. it's just numbers on a distributed excel spreadsheet. ngmi

wow i'm loading up on ecash

If it weren't for the issue of fetching data to create ring signatures, it could even be applied to Monero

* of fetching chain data to

Well bearer instrument seems great, the "unique" digital representation makes me question the fungibility

It would definitely be doable with a transparent coin like Bitcoin though. You'd basically be creating chained transactions with whatever you have "offline", and then settling them all at once when you sync your device online

Ooooh nvm, it still doesn't solve the issue of double spending

Uniqueness in the sense that you can't duplicate the contents of a device on another device

(I presume)

Because otherwise you could get two devices, copy the money from one to the other, and end up having twice the money

Aka infinite inflation bug

And it only takes one pair of such 'broken' devices to send the whole economy in the shitter

>Although the ECASH Act does not specifiy a specific per-device denominational or transactional cap, it is expected that such limits will ultimately be incorporated into the final E-Cash design following the pilot phase, similar to how physical currency has denominational caps today.

So will that mean I can only hold $1000 in ecash?

Or will I simply have 2 "ecash smartcards" with $2000 total?

withdraw from your cbdc account to your ecash smartcard(tm)

i keep my cash in ecash smartcards under my mattress

>galactic credit chits become real

Is the bill text unavailable for anyone else? I get 404

surgeon_[m]: sir you need a license to read the bill

just trust me

I have special permission from the Federal Reserve to access public domain information, its all good

someone find that damn bill

404 for me too

Prob just a nice little trial test run to see if people will adopt it

Nice to see Monero now officially on the UA govt donation page. It was just "someones" tweet a couple of weeks ago.

"Oh shit ecash failed, better introduce CBDC asap"

Cash and crypto only, get with the time stinky govt

s/time/times/

What is worse: not trying out ecash and it fails and a CBDC gets adopted as a better replacement, or lots of ppl trying out ecash and a CBDC gets adopted because people were clearly excited for digital USD.

Doesn't matter, media will already be primed to write articles shitting on eCash and praising CBDC

Have to keep spreading WEF memes to combat it

> <@sethforprivacy:matrix.optoutpod.com> Left a comment and thumbs up there, seems an oddly combative crowd (that I have never seen on other platforms) jumped in there to downvote, name call, and be toxic.

>

> I absolutely support the proposal and see it as a necessary step forward or Monero as a tool for freedom.

yawn. the attempt to discredit any negative feedback in pathetic and telling

* yawn. the attempt to discredit any negative feedback is pathetic and telling

Literally thanked two people for negative feedback lmao, but good try.

Critical feedback != Poop emojis and name calling

Haveno seems too much for profit to me, but still it'll be probably better than CEXes

I don't understand this fixation to not letting any entity in the ecosystem be for-profit...

You know, I still remember about the huge funding request...

For-profit that contributes back to the community and ecosystem is a huge win and necessary component.

And anyways it's like paying them to make them earn later

I hope Haveno helps spreading Monero by the way

it may also be useful to stop centralized exchanges from shorting XMR and faking its price

xxfedexx[m]: its not the profit thats the issue, its this ridiculous engine council they are trying to tie to it

r4v3r23[m]: Then propose something better instead of shitting on everyone else

sethforprivacy: get rid of the engine council

this is a proposal for front end development

and ill shit on who i want, thanks

r4v3r23[m]: THen how do you handle fee funds and proposals?

r4v3r23[m]: And the council is part of how the Monero community gets control of future income

sethforprivacy: Haveno can pay for frontend developement and keep profits and decide how to use those funds however they want

sethforprivacy: I am against forced dev funds, it reminds me of ZCash's 20% of block rewards to developers to help development

I want to choose if, how much, and who I want to support

xxfedexx[m]: ??? How is this at all reminiscent?

xxfedexx[m]: exactly. this is a pathetic attempt to control CCS process

whoever thought of the engine council should seriously be ashamed of themselves

r4v3r23[m]: How, exactly, can they pay for front end dev before they have fees or income?

Are you even reading how this works?

sethforprivacy: get a working product out

use bisq UI until they have enough

do yo u not know how a start up business works?

So ship a half-baked product because you don't like anything?

With no start-up funds

And no front-end

And no devs

half baked? they themselves say its wors

s/wors/works/

its a bisq fork. use the UI

They could, would be not what they have proposed or been building though

And that's why you can choose not to donate

Or give civil feedback

To help the community make a well-informed decision

all feedback is valid

Or throw up a CCS for a cheaper alternative

r4v3r23[m]: No lol

No adult thinks this

sethforprivacy: yes lol

no one asked you

jfc

Literal poop emojies and "commie" name calling is valuable... how?

commie is an accurate description

I am not specifically against UI fund, I am pretty much against the Engine forced donations to development, but as I already said, it's still better than a centralized exchange's fees because at least this might help improving Monero

as for "poop emojies" not my thing but whatever

xxfedexx[m]: Then leave your feedback! Now is the time 🙂

xxfedexx[m]: exactly. go ahead and mentioned that the 2 should be separate

sethforprivacy: isn't that CCS for UI funding? it would be not too much related

this is literally like a govt spending bill that jams in random things that have nothing to do with main proposal

its a power grab

xxfedexx[m]: Yes, ultimately it's for front-end dev funding

from the mind of a statist

But the council/new proposals/etc. are how the Monero community benefits from the donations past just the funded product.

Monero community gets a 3/5 control over the council

sethforprivacy: a lot of people is downvoting for the Engine, not for the front-end dev funding tho

sethforprivacy: how exactly

it already has 100% control over CCS by direct donations

r4v3r23[m]: Community chooses 3/5 seats?

Did you read the proposal?

sethforprivacy: you dont see an issue in this?

"community" now becomes 3 peopls

r4v3r23[m]: How, exactly, do you propose the community each custody funds?

And handle transactions?

Democratic People's Community Council of Monero

has a great ring to it

If you come up with some useful insight or feedback feel free to share it.

Until then this is obviously a useless venture wasting time on your trolling and time-wasting name calling.

sethforprivacy: resistance to a horrible idea is great feedback

If anyone else wants to chat about the proposal let's do so 🙂

feel free to stop being smug and pretentious

<sethforprivacy> "I don't understand this fixation..." <- The problem I see is how Dexs will be regulated going forward. A legal entity subject to LE requests and duress is the problem, not being for-profit imho.

surgeon_[m]: It's not a legal entity

That has been changed and is clear in the new proposal.

Yes, and thats a good thing(tm)

Steps are being taken to reduce and pressure points on the HCT members as well, like signing using ring sigs.

surgeon_[m]: Absolutely!

Thus why the funds are always kept in Monero and re-distributed by a multisig between many parties (the HCT)

Circular economy plus distributed keys = much harder to pressure.

Yup.

no one is against having a monero dex

There's 280 xmr / 62k usd collecting dust from this proposal ccs.getmonero.org/proposals/36c3.html , no one seems to care.

We need to get back to more serious and based CCS's like the Tesla giveaway and Project Coral Reef

plowsof[m]: Huh, Idk that anyone knows -- luigi1111w could these funds be pivoted into a future proposal?

plowsof[m]: I could have it, I guess

:^)

Theres 7kusd in bitcoin in moneros btc general fund wallet collecting dust.

chesterfield[m]: you see, the Tesla has a REAL engine. it's a 450 horsepower dual motor. You can't take that away. It's ungovernable (okay there is a governor chip)

7k usd is very little

plowsof[m]: now would be a good time to convert that to XMR

r4v3r23[m]: ahem. XMR is going to ZERO. It's a transfer of value currency, not a store of value. Monero devs have repeatedly ignored my requests to add Bitcoin like store of value properties

nioc: thats one's month salary for community spokesmen! god knows we have so many self-proclaimed losers trying to take the role

s/self-proclaimed//

nioc: $8.6k * , i think that is quite a substantial amount xd

so people are advocating that haveno should get private funding and give the profits to that private entity instead of community funding and money going back to the comunity

hmmm

People are begging for haveno to support the monero community with donations but we have funds collecting dust that we dont care about . so we frankly dont deserve ANYTHING! (if we dont care about the 'useless' funds)

nioc: that money comes at a cost of giving "engine council" authority on what they deem to be good for monero development

nioc: when and where did people "advocate" for that? care to link me to a specific comment or post a screenshot of it?

onions: semantics lol

r4v3r23[m]: more funding mechanisms for monero is a good thing

chesterfield[m]: not at the cost of centralization

nioc: clearly. brain fog is back on IRC, so not surprised. Welcome back, either way.

that would be the result

there are people out there like seth who think they know better than you what is right or wrong

r4v3r23[m]: wut

nioc: that would be "your" result. get it right.

r4v3r23[m]: so you should also make a funding mechanism

these are the types that will be attracted to a "council" position

We are trying to use a centralised service (CCS) to discourage a centralised service. My +1 vote is to let the free market decide

chesterfield[m]: we have the ccs. people vote with their wallets

so let them vote

they already do

how do we vote if it doesn't go to funding

by.. sending monero?

like we do now?

youre not getting it

we already have the CCS where users can decide directly what to fund

so how do we fund monero development?

nioc: Well, you don't "vote" with money, you vote _before_ it gets moved to funding required stage, so the community does come to a loose consensus whether it should be moved there or not, in the first place.

Does nioc ever use his brain?

Haveno wants to replace that with their fees and council that decides how those fees are spent

nioc: "who will build the roads?"

If we are going to move everything to funding required stage because we "vote" with donations, might as well scrap the comments section and get everything posted in funding required stage by default.

Fuck the community meetings, fuck the reddit threads, fuck the GitLab comments section, amirite?

tdo you want to require haveno to fund things in addition to the CCS?

sethforprivacy hmm let's see

r4v3r23[m]: CCS is not being replaced, no idea why you're lying about that.

onions: THE COUNCIL WILL DECIDE

onions: I know you know, I was asking someone else :)

onions: No one is saying the current approach isn't fine and working well.

CCS will go on as-is

ok.

sethforprivacy: im not lying because thats not what i said

Haveno fees will fund a new funding platform, CCS will still be funded by community donations as always

but haveno is selling that monero development will not be self-sustaining

More funding sources = huge win for Monero

s/not/now*/

Relying on community donations forever is not sustainable, I would argue

there needs more development than is currently happening

Expanding to more sources, especially funding sourced from other entities that don't drain community donations, is a huge win.

nioc: 100%

And more ways for devs and researches to get and maintain funding.

are donations from haveno limited to funding via the CCS?

nioc: What do you mean?

Haveno fees will fund Haveno Engine proposals, CCS will go on as always

are those proposals limited to funding only CCS proposals?

there are other funding avenues currently being used

sethforprivacy: not at any cost, stop being disingenious

nioc: No, new proposals that are distinct

People can propose directly to the Engine to have things funded

The CCS rejected Monerujo - but the free market voted with their wallets and gave them everything they asked for funding.monerujo.app

Instead of CCS

the only way i see this working out is if Haveno gives you an option to decide what CCS proposals you want to fund using your fees directly in the UI

Or alongside I suppose

<sethforprivacy> "image.png" <- Haveno Engine proposals are distinct

nioc: Yes, MAGIC in particular

plowsof[m]: yes. CCS is already too centralized, Council is a step too far

May i just shill the new wishlist which accepts WOWnero too , thanks getwishlisted.xyz/donate

This "type" of person that contributes nothing and spends all their time shitting on every approach being taken in the community is.. quite something.

plowsof[m]: Love it 😀

<RawParrot> I'm a bit confused about the centralization concern. If you don't like the proposal, don't donate to it. The proposal changes nothing about the Monero project itself.

The choice that is on the table is between Haveno completely funding itself, or it receiving community funding and setting up a system to channel funds to Monero related work. Why do the specifics of the system in the latter case cause a centralization concern? If you donate to the proposal then you are accepting that your investment is represented by the council that is planned.

For the record, I don't plan on donating to the Haveno CCS. I also don't see why it should concern me if this plan goes forward and others decide to do so.

sethforprivacy: yup

What % of the engine fee collected goes towards Monero, not Haveno, development? Or is it completely up to the 3/5 members?

entry1[m]: Up to all 5 members what is approved or not for funding

But I would suspect with 4/5 being non-Haveno, most will be Monero-focused

Especially as Haveno funding will be via distinct proposals every 6-12mo

That will likely encompass the bulk of Haveno work, and comes out of the other 50% of fees collected.

i repeat: the only way i see this working out is if Haveno gives you an option to decide what CCS proposals you want to fund using your fees directly in the UI

N.B.: Certain variants of Seraphis would allow non-custodial crowdfunding in a similar way to Flipstarter on BCH:

> <@bridgerton:matrix.org> <RawParrot> I'm a bit confused about the centralization concern. If you don't like the proposal, don't donate to it. The proposal changes nothing about the Monero project itself.

> The choice that is on the table is between Haveno completely funding itself, or it receiving community funding and setting up a system to channel funds to Monero related work. Why do the specifics of the system in the latter case cause a centralization concern? If you donate to the proposal then you are accepting that your investment is represented by the council that is planned.

> For the record, I don't plan on donating to the Haveno CCS. I also don't see why it should concern me if this plan goes forward and others decide to do so.

And that's the beauty of a completely opt-in funding system like the CCS 🙂 You can just... not donate!

r4v3r23[m]: ugh stop name calling jeez 🙄

> <@rucknium:monero.social> N.B.: Certain variants of Seraphis would allow non-custodial crowdfunding in a similar way to Flipstarter on BCH:

> monero-project/research-lab #91#issuecomment-967768995

Ohhh, nice!

They are gonna blow all the fee funds on coke, aren't they? 😂

lockhead[m]: ?

sarcasm

:)

surgeon_[m]: for the good of monero!

gulago

r4v3r23[m]: Seth For Privacy: here's your "constructive feedback"

in b4 "that unrealistic"

i love monero

i use monero to launder my money

thanks a lot)

based?

inlight: based

<r4v3r23[m]> "i repeat: the only way i see..." <- Actually a good idea, propose it 🙂

Although it doesn't work until there are proposals actively needing funding

But once there are it's an interesting one.

sethforprivacy: why? so i can be shot down for attacking monero for going against ericcoines wishes?

sethforprivacy: general fund

with NO council

r4v3r23[m]: it would be the first useful feedback you've provided

You chose your approach and chose to be toxic so far so it's likely you won't be taken seriously

Assuming 50% of engine fees (effectively 1/4th of the 1% transaction fee collected by using Haveno to trade), we would need $61,600,000 trade volume to recoup the amount raised by the community. That would be the break even for a profitable recurring revenue stream based on amount raised. Again, it would be a flowing revenue stream from the beginning, but just less than the amount raised until that point is reached.

But you can always try to claw back some shred of reputation.

sethforprivacy: bitch about it

r4v3r23[m]: Then build it or propose it and see if Haveno are open

sethforprivacy: spoken like a true clout chaser

I would be against funding general fund directly, FWIW.

entry1[m]: The donations are also 100% funding the critical front-end work, they're not just being given away.

sethforprivacy: jesus man

We're getting FOSS development for that, and the whole Engine council situation

lockhead[m]: this is the type of attention seekers we are dealing with

entry1[m]: Good to run the numbers though, I hadn't considered that angle on the ROI for the amount itself

I would love to think we get to that volume rather quickly once Haveno is live 🙂

But only time will tell.

sethforprivacy: 100%, just wanted to put some perspective out there. This is not intended to be just a recurring revenue stream fundraiser. I'm all in favor for another dex because if something happened to LM, that would be extremely devastating.

entry1[m]: No kidding, and the centralization of LM makes that a distinct possibility.

Something decentralized and FOSS is key as an alternative, and it will have quite different approaches and so quite different pros/cons.

<entry1[m]> "Assuming 50% of engine fees (..." <- who said that Haveno will have an 1% fee?

hi seth

you seem nice

the fee is not decided yet, right?

inlight: Hi 🙂

btw- i have an issue

1% would be a lot by the way

why are you using nad promoting threema ?

inlight: Great tool for private e2ee chats w/o phone number

you promote anything cheesy and shiny which comes on the internet (no offence)

lol

Threema is just a cheap insecure clone of signal

signal use phone no. to counter spam (threema is snake oil)

inlight: Lol Threema existed 2y before Signal

Tox and briar is better.

but it is

And was more modeled off of an e2ee WhatsApp

and it's marketing tactic

inlight: For a few distinct threat models, but has massive draw backs.

This is off-topic, lets keep this room for Monero discussions please.

Feel free to DM about all of that if you feel like it.

sethforprivacy: would you mind reading: soatok.blog/2021/11/05/threema-three-strikes-youre-out

xxfedexx[m]: Its not. Based my 1% fee on this resource and to a comparable DEX.

^ kindly read this :)

i hope for 0.2% fees or less

nearly no one would use an exchange with 1% fee

current fees for LM are 1% maker 0% taker

inlight: anything for the likes!

xxfedexx[m]: Kraken's "buy with credit card" fee is 3%

I am talking about crypto<>crypto

wut , i'm genuine,before reading i used to believe threema is better but its a snake oil

(not saying that it's "good", just that it exists)

r4v3r23[m]: yah)

merope: exchanging bitcoin into monero and viceversa on tradeogre costs you 0.2% fee, why would any user switch to haveno?

only for fiat to crypto?

because fiat

yup

what are the fees on Bisq?

"We haven’t made a final decision on the amount of the Haveno fee, but it will most likely be less than 1%"

So it's not really 1% - nor any other number really, because they haven't decided yet

nioc: Combined BTC trading fee rate is 1% (0.12% by maker and 0.88% by taker).

i know, i said "i hope for something like 0.2%

* like 0.2%"

yes I ddg ed

Combined BTC trading fee rate is 1% (0.12% by maker and 0.88% by taker)

thx entry1[m]

np OG

a possible issue with voting on proposals by trading fees is that the whales have more say, sort of like pos

there is no simple answer, even this idea which certainly has merit

<xxfedexx[m]> "exchanging bitcoin into monero..." <- They probably wouldn't

nioc: The fee-payers don't get the vote, the council does FWIW

And fee-payers don't get a correlated voting weight when choosing council members or anything.

I was commenting on an idea put forth here

Ah

Sorry 🙂

np

surgeon_[m]: I know, this is why we need super low fees

be sure to give feedback in #haveno:haveno.network, I could also see different fees for crypto<>crypto and fiat<>crypto trades as they have different risks and difficulties.

sethforprivacy: already did

different fees for crypto<>fiat and crypto<>crypto can work

but anyways why putting fees?

To fund development, fund arbitrators, etc.

i mean, at least some minimal fees are for avoiding spamming

If you have a way to do all of the things necessary from fees without fees, please do propose it 🙂

<1% is already quite minimal

sethforprivacy: it's not minimal if you are a trader

Idk that a platform like Haveno is really ideal for "trading"

Of course it can be used for that but p2p solutions for exchanges will necessarily be not great for "trading"

As they introduce a lot of friction and time delays (necessarily) over CEXs and paper-trading.

xxfedexx[m]: Why? Just use tradeogre instead.

surgeon_[m]: TradeOgre is custodial, could KYC or freeze funds at any time, cannot do fiat trades, etc.

tradeogre is bad just like any centralized exchange

It's a good service but not ideal long-term in any way.

Only reason it's "fine" is that it's no-KYC (for now)

sethforprivacy: centralized exchanges can also give you "fake xmr" they don't actually own, thus reducing the price

xxfedexx[m]: Yeah as long as you don't withdraw.

this happened for centuries with gold and happens with Monero tooù

For sure

s/tooù/too/

sethforprivacy: Not many people withdraw

including myself, i keep a part of my XMR on TradeOgre

sethforprivacy: So what you're saying is there is value in a service that doesn't have these shortcomings? Could this value possibly be expressed in higher fees?

<surgeon_[m]> "So what you're saying is there..." <- Yes, and should be

Higher fees are necessary as you're paying arbitrators, open-source contributors, and can't be as "lean" as a centralized and closed-off entity.

IMO, of course.

Yeah, that was exactly my point.

hi

i closely follow monero , but i use bitcoin cash/ btc

however, i would like to use monero as early as possible, but the problem i am facing is related to the 24 word seed key

generally i remember my 12 word (multiple) wallet keys of my btc/bch wallet

that isn't possible in monero wallet

and i want a electrum style wallet for monero), not some electrion gui thing.

just make believe it is 2 twelve word seeds :)

it is actually 25 words

feather wallet uses a 14 word seed

c11

inlight: you can import your 12 word seed into Monerujo

it will convert it to monero's 25 word seed

convert a btc/bch seed into monero?

yes

hi

Maybe is a too basic question, but can someone tell HOW to buy Monero at beginning? I look for no fees starting from IBAN accounts or debit cards or cash at ATMs

ther are fees )

Withdrawal from BTC wallet in Crypto.com is fixed to about 20 EUR. How much withdrawal for Monero?

what? withdrawal from where?

Monero transactions cost less than 0.01 EUR

withdrawal fee on Kraken is 0.0001 XMR, or about 2 cents

<TuscanDigitalNom> "Maybe is a too basic question..." <- Kraken, Binance (make sure to immediately withdraw due to their history), LocalMonero, ChangeNow, FixedFloat

I mentioned withdrswal fee from BTC

entry1[m]: Thanks

hi

brothers

Hi

<TuscanDigitalNom> "Maybe is a too basic question..." <- You can't avoid fees because operating a service costs resources. Don't use centralized exchanges. First buy BTC with fiat from a someone at your local Bitcoin meetup group, Bisq, or a crypto ATM (find one on Coin ATM Radar). Then use Bisq or an instant exchange (e.g. Fixedfloat, Sideshift) to exchange the BTC to XMR.

<chesterfield[m]> "> <@chesterfield:faelix.im> oh..." <- Then I propose to close the sources of Monero, if that's your concern. Same with OpenSSL.

<chaser1> "You can't avoid fees because..." <- Not possible to buy Monero with Fiat currency?

<mj-xmr[m]> "Then I propose to close the..." <- It was a joke 😀😉

Booahhh. I was starting to loose hope in humanity!

Sorry. I'm in a bad mood today.

mj-xmr[m]: Take a walk in the woods, and know your work is appreciated by many 👍

<TuscanDigitalNom> "Not possible to buy Monero..." <- Possible, but for now, much harder. There may be someone in your local crypto community who is willing to sell monero as well, ask around. You can find a few ATMs that work with Monero. You can use LocalMonero too. Hopefully this year Haveno will launch, which will be a decentralized fiat <--> XMR exchange in the spirit of Bisq.

well there is bisq which I imagine will be around. And some CEX though you have to KYC to buy from fiat carry it. In US Kraken is the best of them. And you can buy most any coin you like for fiat and swap it to monero without KYC on swapzone, changenow, stealtex.io, xchange.me etc.

whats a "store of value property" that XMR lacks?

inflation bug

* inflation bug /s lol

plowsof[m]: instant visibility of an inflation bug ;)

there might be a gigantic gold mine in my backyard that nobody has discovered yet, which has enough gold in it to double the amount on earth. is gold not a store of value?

That would not be a bug though

point is, total gold supply is not auditable. this does not stop gold from being an excellent store of value. of course we know that gold cant just arbitrarily inflate due to laws of physics so not direct analogy

store of value - currency - pick one?

i call false dichotomy

i would agree - i meant 'number go up' instead of store of value

they are on to you Jesus: youtu.be/IoE28DSp2SU

* to you, Jesus: