Monero Origins | The Storm is Coming (Kevin Wad) video coming soon

21D Ago
First phase. 2010 to 2014 A) Objective timestamp

All events from 2010 to 2014

Useful link:

BitcoinTalk user Bytecoin (thought to be Nicolas van Saberhagen) discussing bitcoin privacy issues since 2010

July 21, 2010, 02:20:18 AM

Thread: With "Balance sheets" most of the block chain can be forgotten.

Bytecoin: “with a bank there's no concept of where the money has come from, it loses all it's identity when it hits your bank account. Not so with BitCoin!” (

“[...] Bitcoin will have little choice but to either change the protocol or to move to a client implementation in which nobody remembers all the transactions, such as "balance sheets" (

-> In this thread Bytecoin proposes a system of Balance sheets to get a much lighter blockchain. The main idea would be to have a system that works based on the record of all btc addresses with corresponding balances and remove the need for keeping all txs history. 

August 10, 2010, 05:45:45 AM

Thread: Not a suggestion

 Red: “As some might have noticed, one of the things that bugs me about bitcoin is that the entire history of transactions is completely public”

“In effect, I want to create real gold coins. I can give my coins to you, but everyone in the world doesn't know I did. You can give them to the next guy and prove they are pure gold coins,”

Satoshi: (

“This is a very interesting topic.  If a solution was found, a much better, easier, more convenient implementation of Bitcoin would be possible. [...] It's the need to check for the absence of double-spends that requires global knowledge of all transactions.”

-> Satoshi says that the reason for bitcoin being public is not philosophical but because he didn’t find a technical solution

Satoshi: “[...] Do you have any ideas on this?”

-> Btc maxis cult about Satoshi destroyed. Satoshi didn’t have responses to everything and was willing to discuss how to implement privacy at blockchain level with cryptonote founders


“If we're willing to have clients keep the history for their own money, then some of the information may not need to be stored by the network, such as:

- the value

- the association of inpoints and outpoints in one transaction

The network would track a bunch of independent outpoints.  It doesn't know what transactions or amounts they belong to.  A client can find out if an outpoint has been spent, and it can submit a satisfying inpoint to mark it spent.  The network keeps the outpoint and the first valid inpoint that proves it spent.  The inpoint signs a hash of its associated next outpoint and a salt, so it can privately be shown that the signature signs a particular next outpoint if you know the salt, but publicly the network doesn't know what the next outpoint is.”

-> Satoshi describing Monero tech back in 2010


“What we need is a way to generate additional blinded variations of a public key. [...] When paying to a bitcoin address, you would generate a new blinded key for each use.”

-> Satoshi talking about implementing stealth addresses to Bitcoin in 2010

“If not, I think that's where group signatures comes in.  With group signatures, it is possible for something to be signed but not know who signed it.”

-> Satoshi talking about ring signatures back in 2010

-> On this thread we see that Satoshi willingness to discuss how to implement privacy at Bitcoin core level contrasts with what Bitcoin community has become today 12 years later. There is a huge discrepancy between nowadays Bitcoin maximalists’ veneration of public layer and Satoshi. Satoshi didn’t reject the idea to make Bitcoin private but was unable to do it because he didn’t find the technical solution yet


“If you want to provide more privacy you could always change transactions so that nobody can tell who the recipient is and how much until the recipient spends the money. At the moment the beneficiary of a transaction is a certain bitcoin address. If that address has ever received coins before then everyone knows that all the money is in the same place. Alternatively, that address has been publicized as a receiving address so you know exactly where the money is going.

Instead you specify that the recipient of the money is the address that can decrypt a certain message that you have signed. So your transaction would comprise a load of signed TxIns and a signed public key encrypted message saying how much of the BitCoins goes to the person able to decrypt the message. All the network nodes try to decrypt the message with each of their public keys. The one who succeeds knows that they have received the money and updates their displayed balance accordingly. When the recipient decides to spend the money their transaction includes  the decrypted message. Only when the other network nodes see this do they know who the recipient was and how much the transaction was worth. Any change is ascribed to the signing key and the decrypted message and original are cited when the change is spent in subsequent transactions.

I wonder why transactions weren't designed like this in BitCoin from the start.“

-> ByteCoin (aka Nicolas van Saberhagen) describes cryptonote technology and wonders why bitcoin was not built this way. ByteCoin slowly realizes Bitcoin would have to completely change its protocol in order to implement his vision. We can assume this is the starting point of his work on the creation of cryptonote

August 15, 2010, 09:53:18 AM

Thread: Hiding the recipient and amount until the money is spent


“We can change transactions so that nobody can tell who the recipient is and how much until the recipient spends the money. [...] I don't know whether this could be implemented in the current system through adroit use of the scripting language.”

Gavin Andresen:

“could you make through adroit use of the scripting language:  you could hide the receiving address, but not the amount.”


“If encrypted transactions were made the default then then it would be much more difficult to assess at any given point who currently holds bitcoins.”

-> In this thread we see that ByteCoin’s work starts to become more precise

November 08, 2010, 04:50:38 AM

Thread: "wallet" handling code should be a separate process.

-> In this thread ByteCoin proposes help to Bitcoin when Satoshi and Gavin Andresen were still the only bitcoin developers few days before Satoshi disappeared

November 20, 2010, 11:33:48

Thread: Block size limit automatic adjustment

-> Thread about automatic block size back in 2010, another feature that will be implemented  in Monero but not in Bitcoin

December 12, 2010, 06:22:33 PM (Important date)

Satoshi last post:

-> Important date because from that date Bitcoin entered the post Satoshi era. Satoshi never rejected the idea to implement privacy at Blockchain layer 1 level, on the contrary Satoshi discussed technical ways to do it

April 17, 2011, 02:34:24 AM

Thread: Untraceable transactions which can contain a secure message are inevitable.

-> ByteCoin keeps working on untraceable transactions

August 25, 2011, 03:23:40 AM

Thread: Protecting privacy without generating and distributing new addresses.

-> ByteCoin keeps engaging discussion about implementing privacy features in the default bitcoin client but Satoshi was no longer here to reply anymore

ByteCoin (surely Nicolas Van Saberhagen) was last active on May, 30, 2014.

B) First phase analysis

BitcoinTalk user ByteCoin is very likely Nicholas Van Saberhagen, the creator of Cryptonote. After identifying Bitcoin critical privacy issue he quickly started to focus on how to improve Bitcoin to make it more private. We can see through his BitcoinTalk posts and exchanges with Satoshi and Red that he progressively realizes it will be too hard to do it on top of Bitcoin and it would be better to start superior system from scratch. Statoshi agrees with Red and ByteCoin that an implementation of Bitcoin with privacy would be much better but don’t know how to technically achieve it.

Satoshi never rejected the idea to implement privacy at Blockchain layer 1 level, on the contrary Satoshi discussed technical ways to do it.

Bitcoin maximalists have successfully created a false narrative to rationalize their reluctance or inability to add privacy in bitcoin layer 1, we have more reasons to believe Satoshi was for privacy at blockchain layer 1 than against privacy at layer 1

How can we know that? Look at the threads above it’s pretty clear, the question is how come the cryptocurrency industry has been ignoring these facts for so long

Second phase.

II. A) Objective Timestamp

All events from 2014 discovery of bytecoin BTE to creation of Bitmonero by thankful_for_today

March 28, 2013, 03:38:22 PM

Maria2.0 makes Bytecoin (BTE) announcement:

Bytecoin [BTE] (Genesis block launch April,1 2013) 

April 02, 2013, 02:28:41 AM

Bytecoin (BTE) launch:

“Bytecoin, a new blockchain released today April 1, 2013.

Exactly 4 years ago, I learned about a wonderful technology that was designed to give the people, power and control over their finances, with anonymity and privacy. 4 years later, we realize that the technology is to be spread, multiplied and evolved. Today we introduce Bytecoin. This is a fresh start for a bigger, wiser community that did not have the opportunity to participate in the early stages of bitcoin.”

-> We can notice wrong motives

March 28, 2013, 03:44:33 PM

To what purpose? Simply to start yet another doomed-to-fail altcoin piece of garbage?

“An exact alt coin, No changes at all. Think of it as a bitcoin re-launch, a fresh start for those who started mining late.

It it shares Bitcoins DNA, why would it be garbage?

Maria 2.0”

-> Bytecoin (BTE) is an obvious scam launched on april 1st 2013 probably to prepare for the “strange” and fake discovery of Bytecoin (BCN) in 2014

March 11, 2014, 03:37:18 PM

DStrange discovers a new bytecoin on a new site: “” (published in BTE thread).

“yes, but there is something strange in getting started section  :

‘4. Create a ByteCoin address to recieve payments.

Downloading the client & block chain: Download the ByteCoin client from here ‘

"here" is a link to (is that official bytecoin site? pretty cool). But binaries for windows from are not working!”

March 11, 2014, 03:48:58 PM


Is that really new bytecoin site? What's happend to

March 11, 2014, 03:57:59 PM


No that's not our bytecoin! They copied us

March 11, 2014, 04:18:01 PM


Algo: CryptoNight;

Block reward decreases each block according to the formula:

BaseReward = (MSupply - A)/218

where MSupply = (264 - 1) atomic units and 'A' is amount of already generated coins;

I'm not sure that they copied us.

- > The new bytecoin (BCN) is very different from the bytecoin (BTE) released on april 1st 2013. Bytecoin (BTE) was just a copy and paste of Bitcoin although this new bytecoin (BCN) has a complete new code base different from bitcoin.

March 12, 2014, 10:15:36 AM


“Guys! I spend some time studying that strange bytecoin from

May be I'm captain obvious, but that's completely different from our bytecoin. So we have slight confuse with the coin names. But the first community news there says their system was launched July 4th, 2012. I'm sure our bytecoin was announced ~ April, 2013. Have we stolen their name?

Meanwhile, I tried to mine that bytecoin and have found a block:”

-> user DStrange (now identified as a very likely bytecoin team scam account) shares idea that bytecoin (bcn) was in reality launched on July 4th 2012 and not in 2014

March 12,2014, 03:58:32

DStrange creates Bytecoin BCN thread:

March 15, 2014, 02:33:49 PM:

“Just to note this isn’t the Bytecoin on cryptsy or any of the exchanges so afaik it is untradable on exchanges.”

-> Bytecoin BCN would have been untradeable since july 2012

March 17, 2014, 11:40:58 AM

DStrange makes BCN giveaways:

March 18, 2014, 02:52:31 PM

DStrange maintains and increases giveaways;

“Giveaway still goes on! I have free coins for you! Just fill the form”

March 24, 2014, 04:36:13


“Yes, now we have two coins with equal names and it's super-confusing.

I don't know how it has happened, but according to the BCN website ( it was launched as Bytecoin about 1.5 years ago (Jul,2012) while BTE was started only spring, 2013.

So I'm still not sure who stole whose name  

It's rather strange why we heard nothing about BCN though they have been working for so long, but BCN network hash rate shows 2-3 thousands machines in the net. And according to BCN community news (from site) they even had several meetups”.

March 25, 2014, 11:30:18 PM


“Very mysterious!

-Secret messages left in blockchain.

-The devs, miners and users have kept this quiet until this month.”

-> Bytecoin team leaves hidden and secret messages on their blockchain, start to engage communication with the BitcoinTalk thread this way

March 25, 2014, 11:31:13 AM


“Dude, did you even read the topic? Everybody knows there is "already" one bytecoin.

The question is why there is another bytecoin that was the bytecoin since 2012 and nobody knew about it. Even if it's so cool as it's said in their docs: true anonymity and so on.

BTW, DStrange, do you have a contact with developers? “

-> BitcoinTalk users start to wonder how it’s possible such a crypto was unknown for 2


March 26, 2014, 07:02:24 AM

Thankful_for_today makes his first comment:

“Cool. Can you show some examples of messages and the method to decrypt them from blockchain?

Probably this will explain all other questions.”

-> thankful_for_today will be the one that will decide to launch a fork of Bytecoin (called Bitmonero) but he’ll later be excluded from Monero project due to its actions

April 01, 2014, 12:23:11 AM:

“can someone tell me how many coins are already in existence out of the 184billion?”

-> BitcoinTalk users start to make research and the supply issue is brought to light

April 5, 2014, 10:42:56


“The hidden pgp message on the onion site had a passphrase attached.. DUUUUH  

Cryptonote isn't a cult.

It isn't a government, it isn't banks.

It isn't Satoshi Nakamoto.

Cryptonote is fundamentally about evolution of man.

About taking us to the next step.

Not the next biological step.

It's more than that.

It's about man overcoming humanity.”

April 8, 2014, 09:11:05


“[...] I got a feeling that we've potentially stumbled upon a story of the year. There should be an economy somewhere with this coin, which might emerge out of nowhere anytime (deep web maybe?) I got what you're saying with 1% of the market and the actual price of BCN, but what if it would turn out to be just another way around and their economy is strong, which would finally increase the exchange rate?

BCN is definitely slowly emerging, and by the time it is fully out I personally want to make sure that I've mined enough bytecoins.”

-> Rias (suspected to be a Bytecoin team spam account) Trying to insert the idea that there would be a hidden economy with bytecoin bcn n the dark net.

April 08, 2014, 10:56:07 AM (important date)

Thanks_for_today discovers 82% of supply already emitted and announces fork

“did some calculations about emission too. Here are details:


- % emitted coins

- block number

- number of coins emmited

-> 2012, July

5.00029% 13446 9223904354

10.0005% 27620 18447646972

20.0007% 58497 36894821466


Next week I will start my own fork of Bytecoin - another coin based on CryptoNote technology. It will be started from scratch (from block zero). I will write an anouncement today ot [ANN] subforum. Emission schedule will be more flat and block target will be reduced to 60 sec.

I need help from:

- web dev - there is a huge number of works:

  - official site and forum

  - block explorer

  - merchant integration sites

- designer - a cool logo is required

- dedicated machine owners - in order to setup seed nodes

- techwritters / translators - to translate announcement to other languages

- C++ developers - to create a cool GUI wallet

Please PM me if you want to help.”

-> Bitmonero official announcement

April 08, 2014, 11:36:32 AM

X0rcist confirms +80% of bytecoin (bcn) supply was already mined:

“I did a quick translation of the emission to a graph, the red block shows where we are now.

Like you said, the value of this coin depends for +80% on the community that kept this coin out of the clearweb for the last 2 years. Also its possible we will never find out the true value of this coin or a economy where these coins can be used. Its also possible a new bubble will arise because of a strong anonymous community controlling this coin. So atm we can really go both ways.”

April 08, 2014, 06:24:55 PM


“Looks like i decoded the message

<--! Part2  13:4 ,5 ,16:3 ,16 ,19:1 ,15 ,22:3 ,11 ,5:7, 14, 10:5 -->

the 13:4 (word:letter) etc refers to the song lyrics and corresponds to the letters k e l o i g, the normal letters can be found in the normal alphabet and correspond to e p o k n. Combined it says keep looking”

-> Bytecoin team uses same techniques as Cicada 3101 to communicate with them



II. B) Second Phase Analysis

From 2014 discovery of bytecoin BTE to creation of Bitmonero by thankful_for_today

In my opinion:

As we’ve seen in part one, Nicolas van Saberhagen truly dedicated himself to the creation of cryptonote since 2010 and rightfully identified btc critical issues. But for unknown reason, it appears it was decided to cripple the launch of Bytecoin to serve the own interest of Bytecoin creators. It was a long planned decision and well prepared with the release of a strange and obvious scam crypto called Bytecoin BTE on april 1st 2013 to be used as a way to lead to the fake discovery of Bytecoin BCN one year later.

1- Additional clues the goal of the Byetcoin BTE was to prepare for the fake discovery of Bytecoin BCN:

Saberhagen was last active on May, 30, 2014:

-> Nicolas van Saberhagen (;u=490) stopped his BitcoinTalk activity exactly the eve of Bytecoin BTE  release one year anniversary. As if all his next posts were done for Bytecoin BCN with scam accounts (DStrange, Rias?)

Maria 2.0 thread stopped on April 20, 2014, 08:41:21 AM

-> They stopped the thread as soon as its goal was accomplished: leading people to fake discovery of Bytecoin BCN thanks to BTE

2- We know Bytecoin team watched and followed actively the thread:

April 09, 2014, 06:53:55 PM

Johnny Mnemonic:

“New music on, plus a shout-out to danteT!”

-> they published a new music on their site and made a reference to one of the BitcoinTalk forum member

3- Bytecoin team real motives revealed:

All this Bytecoin issues led to the creation of a fork launched on april 18th 2014: Bitmonero

Bytecoin team was smart but had a huge complex of superiority, they thought people were dumber than them and would not understand what was going on. They were surprised by the emergence of a new community and their capacity to decipher their scam. They got angry and decided to launch multiple forks to fight the rise of the new cryptonote cryptocurrency Bitmonero

Third phase

            All events from Bitmonero creation to MRO creation

III. A) Objective Timestamp

April 09, 2014, 08:50:04 PM

New thread created by thankful_for_today

[ANN][BMR] Bitmonero - a new coin based on CryptoNote technology - LAUNCHED

9 april 2014, 09:14:15

Johnny Mnemonic (a very important figure for Monero futur key choices) appears for first time and shows strong belief and good intention:

“If we're going to create a bcn derivative, I think we need to have a serious community discussion about possible changes and improvements in the next iteration. For example:

- Should there be a small perpetual debasement (3-5%)? This is important to keep wealth evenly distributed and to always keep block rewards high enough to incentivize miners. It also serves as a check and balance to prevent centralization from within the network.

- Either no transaction fees ever, or fixed transaction fees (0.01% no matter what). Otherwise run the risk of escalating fees.

- Should there be a slower minting process? Bytecoin isn't even 2 years old and over 80% of its coins have been mined. If there was a good reason for this, I'd love to hear it.

- Should we limit pool sizes, to prevent large pools from taking too much network power?

- Must include a cross platform GUI miner out of the box that is super easy to use (think minergate, but open source, and for win/mac/linux). Should rapidly increase early adoption.

- Must also include a GUI wallet”

April 09, 2014, 03:09:11 AM (very important)

Smooth (futur Monero core team) warning about the need to increase denominator if block time changed to 1 minute:

“I mostly laugh at all the me-too copy-and-paste altcoins forksclones, but in this case I think you have a point.

If it can deliver on its promises this is the most innovative development since bitcoin. Bitcoin has a four year reward halving schedule, and by the first halving, the bitcoin economy was at least somewhat fairly developed. This one seems to be more like one year for halving, and maybe there is development in the dark web somewhere, but unless we can see some evidence of it or people buying 100m coins to arbitrage between the dark web and the light web (which would be evidence of it) turns out to be real, then we have a situation that looks a lot like a premine (perhaps unintentional).

I can see an argument for shortening the schedule relative to bitcoin, but going to one year is probably taking it too far.  BTW, it is simple to slow down the schedule, just increase the denominator in the reward formula. If you speed up the blocks to a minute, which I'm not sure is necessarily a good idea, then you need to double the denominator to keep the schedule the same.

I would contribute this effort if I'm impressed with the team and vision. PM me when you have more in place.


I would caution on forking if the original developers don't approve though. If they are silent, well, I guess there is no reason not to do it.

EDIT: It seems they are actively inviting it: I'm in.”

-> Smooth announces he is in to help Bitmonero and work on the new fork. This is a key moment as Smooth appears to be the grand coordinator

April 17, 2014, 12:28:31 PM

Wanesst Ask for votes to list BCN on first exchange (comkort):

April 17, 2014, 12:41:45 PM

Lunokhod2: replies:

“You realize that BCN is, in effect, 80% premined ? It was not released on clearnet until about a week ago.”

April 17, 2014, 12:43:57 PM

Smooth confirms Bytecoin has not been on clearnet for more than few months:

“It was on the clearnet February 25, according to the wayback machine archive of It may have been there earlier (but not indexed), but no more than a few months.”

-> BitcoinTalk users start to realise Bytecoin (BCN) is a scam and await for Bitmonero fork launch

April 17, 2014, 03:10:15 PM

DStrange receives msg from bytecoin team and cicada 3301 pic at end of page discussion:


See what I have received just right now!

Cicada pic:”

April 21, 2014, 08:22:15 PM

Eizh (futur Monero Core team) announces he found a new Bytecoin fork HoneyPenny fork (future Boolbery):

“New BCN clone: "HoneyPenny" (yes, really)

Interesting changes to the PoW. Also seems to have 10% of every mined block going to devs? Wording is not clear.

Props to them for actually putting anonymous and unlinkable in the thread title. A casual browser still would have no idea what BMR actually does.”

-> Boolbery is a fork launched by Andrey Sabelnikov who claims to be the lead developer of original Bytecoin (BCN). According to him Bytecoin is a result of a team 5 with 2 cryptographers (Nicolas Van Saberhagen and another) and 3 devs. Andrey Sabelnikov says he left Bytecoin after disagreements on their launch and is now kept by none disclosure agreement with Bytecoin team

April 23, 2014, 10:40:57 PM

David Latapie (futur Monero Core team) announcing new MRO thread:

“Not finished yet, come join in!

So far:

Changing bitmonero (BMR) to monero (MRO) Buying a domain name (done:, cc standing for "crypto currency") Creating an account for an new OP. This OP includes eizh's proposal. The account password will be given to trusted monero users

New OP:”

-> Due to thankful_for_today starting to act strange, ignore other members recommendations on code updates and disappearing for a week, David Latapie and others decide to make a new thread and rename Bitmonero (BMR) into Monero (MRO). It is just a soft split at that moment and they intend to keep the same blockchain (no fork).

April 23, 2014, 04:46:03 PM

Eizh on Ring signatures vs zero-knowledge proofs:

“I never used the word untraceable. That's not what "unlinkable transactions" means -- it's more like automatically generating new public keys for every act of receiving payment. The ring signatures are a different feature.

Yes, zero-knowledge proofs have more anonymity but at the cost of:

a completely blinded blockchain making it impossible to monitor the economy an RSA key to initiate the accumulator that has power over the network and must be trusted to be destroyed research-level cryptography that hasn't been subjected to vetting that can only come with usage and time“

"It's new and shiny" is not a reason to trust your money with it -- it's a reason not to, in fact. I think decentralized mixing like this or DRK has better prospects than ZeroCash/ZeroCoin. While Green and his team are doing very good work, these are more like academic curiosities right now. Mixing gives robust 99% anonymity (that can be taken to 99.999... with cascaded mixing). By the way, knowing grad students and professors, I'm not holding my breath on a May release.

-> Future Monero core team and other BitcoinTalk members start to talk about the technology behind Cryptonote

April 23, 2014, 07:06:10 PM

NoodleDoodle (futur Monero Core team) proposes help:

“I can't help with anything else but I can donate 2000 BMR towards various projects relating to the coin. I hope it helps.”        

-> In fact NoodleDoodle will do even more than donation and will contribute as a dev whose help was very useful for the first early days miners optimisation                                        

April 23, 2014, 10:13:52 PM

Creation of a Monero (MRO) thread but in wrong section

[ANN][MRO] Monero - an anonymous coin based on CryptoNote technology)

April 25, 2014, 04:58:17 PM

Tacotime (futur Monero Core team) announces the Monero thread that will eventually become the main Monero thread:


We moved to this thread since TFT's been quiet lately

Main differences:

- 20kb penalty free block sizes

- 1 minute blocks

- emission time is halved (80% distributed over 4 years)

- emission is via clearnet (80% of ByteCoin was mined in the past two years by persons unknown, it only entered the clearnet last month apparently)

- what is often considered a fair chance to mine the coin (instructions for solo mining, release of linux source and windows binaries at launch)

So far only 0.1% of Monero has been distributed.”

April 25, 2014, 12:38:50 AM

Monero thread is created:

[XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency

III. B) Third phase analysis

All events from Bitmonero creation to MRO creation

Thankful_for_today makes choices on its own and split from the community

June 18, 2014, 06:20:12 PM

Suspicions on TFT belonging to BCN:


“Maybe he doesnt want to work with anyone ? Maybe his goal is to hurt any cryptonote coin but BCN ? Doesn't anyone find it strange that the same day TFT comes back, there is also an announcement on ? Doesn't anyone find it strange that TFT is looking for a PR firm for its project and that the QCN dev is also looking for a PR firm ? It should be strange enough when you know that the QCN dev tried to relaunch Monero (you can find the thread in google cache).

My theory is that he's either severely bipolar or that he's a puppet for BCN and that his goal is to wreck any coin the community make out of the cryptonote sourcecode - because so far he hasnt really demonstrated that he wanted to work for a community project.”

TFT keeps ignoring community suggestions, so the community has now doubts of BMR future. NoodleDoodle, eizh, David Latapie, Tacotime, Xorcist, Johnny Mnemonnic and smooth among others lead a split, firstly just to change the name to Monero (MRO) and re-publishing the announcement thread, but they will eventually hard-split. By changing block time to 1 minutes without changing block reward, thankful_for_today increases monero issuance rate by 2. without realizing it?

Bitmonero github, we can see the 60 seconds blocktime change:

What was really important was the spirit of first monero founders not technical expertise

For instance David Latapie’s comment praising pos over pow shows some limits, even if of course most of them were experts with excellent technical skills:

April 18, 2014, 12:57:54 PM

“The only thing that bothers me with cryptonote is that it is still a PoW coin, thus an energy-hungry coin. Although, pure PoS like NXT, MINT, BC... but also FAC (100% premine although it is not PoS) seem to allow faster transactions - at least this is the case for the first three.”

Fourth phase.

All events after MRO creation to the establishment of Monero key features on top of Cryptonote (tail emission, 2 minutes block time)

IV. A) Objective timestamp

April 21, 2014, 12:26:34 AM

MRO Monero trading thread and OTC xchg 

-> first (MRO aka XMR) otc desk trades as a BitcoinTalk thread

April 24, 2014, 01:20:33 AM


“There are approximately 150k coins. There will likely be a "reverse stock split" turning these into 75k "new" coins at some point, because the mining reward is currently twice what is intended.

Syncing the daemon is currently pretty fast as there isn't much of a block chain. Type refresh in the wallet to sync it.”

-> It was discussed to make a reverse

April 24, 2014, 03:05:05 AM

Eizh submits a graph comparing the issuance rate in both scenarios. And also mentions a tail emission as minimum subsidy:

“Here's a graph I made showing the change of new (red) vs. old (blue) emission schedule [...]. There's also a minimum subsidy to preserve miner incentives (and hence blockchain security)”

April 24, 2014, 09:29:51 AM:

TFT (thankful_for_today) comes back and pushes for Merge mining:

Thankful_for_today wants to implement merge mining but smooth and others refuse the idea:

“In few days I will publish a code with merged mining support.”

April 24, 2014, 09:51:46 AM:

Smooth rejects merge mining:

“For the record I approve of the voting process.

I do not approve of merged mining. It hurts this coin more than it helps it. With what we have done here we can easily build the largest and most secure network using the cryptonote design. We're well on our way to doing that already.

We should just go our own way, and leave bytecoin and its ninja-preminers to do the same.

That is my view. “

April 24, 2014, 11:01:47 AM:

Smooth explains how TFT ignored his recommendation causing the issuance rate increase:

“At one point in that discussion, I suggested increasing the denominator by a factor of 4, which is what ended up being done, but I also suggested retaining the block target at 2 minutes, which was not done. The effect of making one change without the other is to double the emission rate from something close to bitcoin to something much faster (see chart a few pages back on this thread).”

April 24, 2014, 09:46:06 PM (Monero critical moment, if smooth leaves, Monero would certainly have been much different)


“I don't think the proposed reward curve is bad by any means. I do think it is bad to change the overall intent of a coin's structure and being close to bitcoins reward curve was a bit part of the intent of this coin. It was launched in response to the observation that bytecoin was 80% mined in less than two years (too fast) and also that it was ninja premined, with a stated goal that the new coin have a reward curve close to bitcoin.

At this point I'm pretty much willing to throw in the towel on this launch:

1. No GUI

2. No web site

3. Botched reward curve (at least botched relative to stated intent)

4. No pool (and people who are enthusiastically trying to mine having trouble getting any blocks; some of them have probably given up and moved on).

5. No effective team behind it at launch

6. No Mac binaries (I don't think this is all that big a deal, but its another nail)

I thought this could be fixed but with all the confusion and lack of clear direction or any consistent vision, now I'm not so sure.

I also believe that merged mining is basically a disaster for this coin, and is probably being quietly promoted by the ninjas holding 80% of bytecoin, because they know it keeps their coin from being left behind, and by virtue of first mover advantage, probably relegates any successors to effective irrelevance (like namecoin, etc.).

We can do better. It's probably time to just do better.”

April 26, 2014, 12:37:00 PM

Thankful_for_today opens a thread on Bitmonero emission curve change proposal

[BMR] BitMonero emission curve change (proposal)

April 26, 2014, 01:36:42 PM


“I proposed the discount/exchange but I have revised my position and I'm now against it as well, because it is too confusing and some people feel like their coins are being taken away. Whatever other merits there might be, that's too high a price to pay.

Another solution is to temporarily reduce emissions until the new curve is reached. This can probably be done gradually over a period of a month or two. Maybe it isn't quite as "fair" (tough word to define) as everyone giving back their coins, but from the point of view of anyone mining after the new curve is reached, it is pretty much the same (no "extra" coins will have been given out before they joined). I am in favor of either this or the crowdfunding approach.

I'm in favor of the 21 curve. I suggest this be done by leaving the formula alone and changing the block target back to two minutes. The original premise for one minute was to help solo mining. Solo mining is already difficult and new miners are complaining that they often don't get anything, and the coin is only a week old! The increased orphans created by one minute blocks are not a worthwhile trade off.

Failing that I would adjust the formula to the 21 curve.

I will submit my vote to the poll as well as this comment.

I will donate half my coins if the switch is made. It is also conditional on merged mining not being implemented because in that case I will likely sell all my coins and focus my attention elsewhere. Right now that would be about 10k coins. That might be different later.”

-> Smooth makes a proposition to fix issuance rate issue implemented by thankful_for_today

April 26, 2014, 09:12:40 PM:

Quote from: BitRock on April 26, 2014, 05:34:26 PM


“Are  the BitMoneros supposed to be send back to community if those BitMoneros were bought from miner?”

Smooth response:

“Yes they are. It doesn't matter where you got them, we are still asking everyone to donate half their coins, and if that is done, the total number of coins being created will also be cut in half.

Please understand that you are not losing value by doing this. You are reducing the number of your coins, but the total number of everyone's coins and newly mined coins is also being correspondingly reduced, so each coin should be worth about twice as much.

If double the intended number of coins weren't being given out, you wouldn't have been able to buy those coins at that price. They would have been more expensive (roughly twice as expensive, most likely).

There is an obviously relationship between the number of coins being given out and their price. Look at coins that pay out a million coins per block, their coins are obviously worth much less than similar coins that pay out 10 or 20 coins per block. it's all relative.”

-> Smooth confirms his proposition of sending back the excess of coins mined compared to original desired emission rate due to thankful_for_today error. But finally the community will reject and decide to keep things as there are with higher issuance rate than planned

April 26, 2014, 02:45:33 PM

[ANN][FCN] FantomCoin. CN-based currency with merged mining. LAUNCHED NOW!

-> thankful_for_today launches Fantomcoin and raises suspicion of belonging to Bytecoin team since the begining

April 28, 2014, 12:37:00 PM (Extremely important moment, decision is made to keep issuance rate)

[BMR] BitMonero emission curve change (proposal)


Question: Which curve is better for BitMonero?                                

-> Finally, The first members of Monero community decided to keep the issuance rate induced by thankful_for_today error although it’s much higher than what was originally planned

April 30, 2014, 09:04:43 PM

NoodleDoodle releases his first miner optimisation

IV. B) Fourth phase analysis

All events after MRO creation to the establishment of Monero key features on top of Cryptonote (tail emission, 2 minutes block time)

-> MRO (XMR) decided to keep emission rate of about 50% coins minted in 1.3 years vs bitcoin did it after 3.66 years and 86% in 4 years vs bitcoin in ~11 years

But on the other hand monero community was very active from first day so there were much more people mining xmr first years than there were for btc. So despite some huge whales that benefited from early days issues with miners, most of supply should be well distributed.

-> Jonnhy Mnemonnics, Eizh and Tacotime emphasize need for a tail emission and it is decided to add a “minimum subsidy” (aka “tail emission”) to incentivize miners “forever” and avoid scaling fees (it will be finally added to the code march 2015)

-> Smooth emphasizes need to go back to 2 minutes block time and the issue with wrong emission rate would have been avoided if thankful_for_today followed his recommendations

-> Merged mining is rejected by new Monero community. Thankful_for_today become more and more distant with Monero community after merge mining rejection

-> The future “core team” is somehow being formed in a decentralized way: tacotime, eizh, NoodleDoodle, smooth, David Latapie, Fluffypony and others. This a group of disconnected individuals sharing a goal and working together to reach it.

Fifth phase.

The early days of Monero (MRO) to the Monero Missive and creation of XMR

V. A) Objective timestamp

May 05, 2014, 09:04:29 PM:

Eizh explains final decision not to change anything about situation of issuance rate:

“The emission curve vote was rejected by a bit over 60% earlier when there were fewer people involved so it will fail by even larger margin now. The reason is simple: the OTC exchange has a pretty sizable volume and the amount of hardware dedicated to this coin is getting larger. Part of how people price the currency unit or decide how much hardware to dedicate to mining it is to compare the amounts they gain to the eventual maximum supply. Amount relative to current supply also matters, certainly even more, but it's undeniable that the former is involved. People have been making these decisions based on the current curve.

In order to fairly implement an emission curve change, we need to retroactively adjust everything mined up to that point. If we don't, it's an instamine where the early adopters changed the rules in the middle of the game to benefit themselves. But on the other hand, a retroactive adjustment means miners/buyers/sellers all made decisions on false information. This is why there were a lot of complaints about "taking my coins away" earlier. So the most agreeable thing to do is to leave the curve as it is.”

In second part of the comment Eizh emphasizes need for tail emission:

“About 8 years from now, we'll have a problem where the block reward is fairly small and miners don't mine for nothing. The solution to that is to implement a minimum subsidy. This would cause a sub-1% inflation that decreases over time and keeps miners happy to ensure network security. tacotime will probably implement this in hard fork in the near future.”

May 07, 2014, 06:19:47 PM

Tacotime discovers hashing algorithm issue:

“It appears from the simplicity of the fix that there may have been deliberate crippling of the hashing algorithm from introduction with ByteCoin.”

May 08, 2014, 03:21:55 AM

Johnny Mnemonic identifies Bitcoin 21M cap issue back in 2014:

“A bitcoin style emission means the circulating money supply will continue to decrease. As block reward decreases miners will become more and more dependent on tx fees. Eventually the transaction fees will be so expensive the transaction won't be worth conducting. You must have a steady debasement or even the smallest currency unit will eventually be too valuable. Ideally, there shouldn't be any tx fees at all.

Bitcoin is only maintaining its circulating supply because new coins are still being created. However, with mining becoming more and more privileged and block reward decreasing, the circulating wealth will dry up and a tx fees will spiral out of control.”                                                                         -> Circulating wealth will dry up here means velocity of bitcoin will decrease due to btc being used mainly as store of value. But the pb is store of value  -> much less txs, so being store of value and depending 100% on txs fees is none sense                 

May 11, 2014, 08:07:58 PM        

“The world’s first exchange for Monero just opened!


May 13, 2014, 02:51:17 AM                                         

Johnny Mnemonic:

“I've been trying to raise awareness of this issue. The typical response seems to be, "when Bitcoin addresses the problem, so will we." To me this means it will never be addressed. The obvious solution is to perpetually increase the money supply, always rewarding miners with new coins.

Tacotime mentioned a hard fork proposal to never let the block reward drop below 1 coin:


if (blockReward < 1){

blockReward = 1;


I assume this is merely delaying the problem, however. I proposed a fixed annual debasement (say 2%) with a tx fee cap of like 0.001% of the current block reward (or whatever sounds reasonable). That way we still get the spam protection without worrying about fee escalation down the road.

Any solution involving debasement, however, will be met with harsh criticism, because "inflation is bad" and stuff.”

-> Johnny Mnemmonic underlines that a perpetual increase of supply is mandatory and goes even further than tail emission. A tail emission (fixed amount issued per day) only postpones the long term incentive issue and Jonnhy Mnemonnicwould have preferred a debasement instead but it is less likely to be accepted by community so tail emission was implemented        

May 13, 2014, 08:24:05 AM (on Monero Economy thread)

Johnny Mnemonic: debasement would be better than tail emission

“The idea of "smart" debasement is something that I've been thinking a lot about. [...] I'm not sure what the minimum effective dose would be, but debasement is also important for keeping the wealth distributed and the network decentralized. This is why I think closer to 5% (or maybe higher) might be appropriate. As long as the block reward is high enough for the miners to not rely on fees, then we can cap the tx fee to a small percentage of the block reward, and the payers won't have to enter a bidding war to get their transactions included.”


May 13, 2014, 03:35:07 AM

Aminorex replies to Johnny Mnemonic:

“It's a non-problem.  The market will fix it.  Miners will mine the txns with the best fees.  Don't worry about prices.  The market sets them. They are never what payers want them to be anyhow.”

Johnny Mnemonic replies:

“Uh... that's exactly why it is a problem.  If payers have to enter a bidding war to get their transactions included, they might as well go back to fiat.”

-> Monero founders really thought about everything in advance and paid attention to solve all btc issues beyond privacy. In consequence they even increased Monero advantages over Bitcoin. Monero is not only a better for privacy and fungibility thanks to cryptonote but with their early choices Monero has also long term much better monetary policy than Bitcoin

May 15, 2014, 11:43:11 PM

Surfer43: Moneropool first block:

“ (aka successfully submitted a block. Miners will be paid for their work once payments start working.  

P.S. This is actually our second block today. The first was orphaned. :/”

May 16, 2014, 09:12:34 AM

Dreamspark underlines potential hidden gigantic monero miner using online servers:

“Actual mining botnets have been discussed in detail in regards to other coins and how much of a threat they pose is questionable.

Botnets are very good for some things and not very good for others. The bottom line is the owner of a botnet wants to keep his botnet as large as possible and for as much as is possible, undetected.

This makes botnets very good for DDoS attacks as the client will often not know that they are part of an attack, in contrast to this, mining is very obvious and detectable by the clients.

This means two things, this is risky for the owner of the botnet as he may have people de-infect their PC or turn it off altogether, this also makes these botnets very expensive to rent. This then throws into question not just risk/reward but whether you will actually break even.

Sys admins running server farms is much more of a risk in my opinion.”

-> this theory will appear to be true and the secret miner will be leaked on 28th May 2014. The dev of the secret miner made an article explaining the behind the scenes of his operations on august 28th 2014 (

May 16, 2014, 08:57:27 PM

Monero reaches 300000$ marketcap


“Thanks! That means the Monero marketcap is around $300,000 as of now”

May 17, 2014, 01:18:19 AM

Smooth realises that the miner was deliberately crippled:

“I was skeptical of this conspiracy theory at first but after thinking about the numbers and looking back at the code again, I'm starting to believe it.”

“Assuming they had the reasonable, and not deoptimized, implementation of the algorithm as designed all along (which is likely), the alleged "two year history" of bytecoin was mined on 4-8 PCs.”

May 17, 2014, 02:05:04 PM

fluffypony first public post in Monero threads:

“Not possible, unfortunately. Remember, the Monero code shares little similarity with anything forked from Bitcoin (Myriadcoin is forked from Zetacoin which is forked from Bitcoin). The RPC APIs are incompatible, the blockchains share no similarity (Monero doesn't even use Berkley DB as a data store), and the way transactions are managed and transferred is equally different.”

-> He appears to have really studied xmr code and other privacy coins code

May 17, 2014, 02:52:39 PM


“ is up to 2KHs, (average of 26Hs per user).  But that's still only 0.3% of the reported network rate of 575Khs.

So either a large botnet is mining, or someone's sitting quietly on a much more efficient miner and raking in MRO”.

-> either botnets or a super-optimized miner is mining monero confirmed

May 17, 2014, 03:29:46 PM


I figure its either:

A 20-30000 computer bot-net Someone developed a gpu miner on the quiet The pools are all reporting the wrong network data (I hope its this - but the rate of discovery of blocks by pools would suggest otherwise)

Is there a bounty for a GPU miner?

May 19, 2014, 02:35:32 AM:


5x optimized miner released, network hashrate decreases by 10%

Make your own conclusions. :|

-> More evidence that surely someone had found a way to control most of monero hashrate

May 19, 2014, 03:40:01 AM

Eizh explains what certainly happened with optimised miners:

“That doesn't make sense when you can see your own hashrate go up.

My guess - some miners out there with large farms or cloud computing instances already optimized their miner (these are naturally the types who would know how to optimize). Up until now they dedicated a large number of CPUs to it. With 5x the MRO mined for the same electricity, their return was great. When an optimized miner was released, they reduced the number of CPUs dedicated to MRO (or just stopped mining altogether). Thus we see a roughly constant or maybe even decreasing hashrate as these two opposing trends cancel.

It should also be noted that the network hashrate was ~300 kH/s before we said an optimized miner was coming. That shot up to 700 kH/s within 24 hours (when the miner still was being tested and wasn't released). This suggests they wanted to gather more MRO (for hoarding or dumping) before they were back on equal footing with everyone else.

This is why we bother with optimization at all. After all, if everyone's hashrate goes up proportionally, no one is gaining any more coins than they used to. But we need to optimize to prevent unfairness from private optimizations. This is no different from what Bitcoin went through and still goes through on a monthly basis (because of constantly improving ASICs, which a few people have access to before anyone else). As for

why this code is so unoptimized in the first place, you can go ask the Bytecoin developers. It may have been deliberate. It may not have been. I don't know. Just be glad we have Noodle.

Bottom line is that our network still only corresponds to ~7,000 modern quad-core CPUs. Believe me, that's not a lot. There are plenty of people who could easily whip up that many CPUs by themselves and do so legally (or at least discreetly). An easy example is server admins who could dedicate unused clock cycles to mining. Save the conspiracy theories for when we're at over 100,000 CPUs.”

May 19, 2014, 05:02:44 AM

Monero is on Poloniex

LMHO! Polonniex first withdrawals issues one day after launch

May 20, 2014, 07:01:59 AM


is there anyone can withdraw MRO from Poloniex lately ? Did they fix their system ?


May 20, 2014, 07:31:12 AM


“No, I still have the same coin stuck there”

May 20, 2014, 06:55:31 AM


Monero is holding a $500 logo contest on now:

May 21, 2014, 02:02:40 AM


Monero added to coinmarketcap

May 21, 2014, 05:27:27 AM

Eizh:explains who are the main developers

“[...] The main developers are tacotime, smooth, NoodleDoodle. Some needs are being contracted out, including zone117x, LucasJones, and archit for the pool, another person for a Qt GUI, and another person independently looking at the code for bugs.”

May 21, 2014, 08:37:03 AM

Fluffypony interesting post about Monero vs BCN capacity to drive code updates:

“[...] I also feel we should challenge BCN's claimed 2 years of blockchain data for several reasons:[...]”


May 21, 2014, 08:39:42 PM

Johnny Mnemonic:

“Smooth, I agree block time needs to go back to 2 minutes or higher. I think this and other changes discussed ( should be rolled into a single hard fork and bundled with a beautiful GUI wallet and mining tools.”

-> Johnny Mnemoni and others agree with Smooth about necessity to increase blocktime back to 2 minutes. Finally it will be done in March 2015. But the block reward was also increased so it didn’t change the emission rate inserted by thankful_for_today

May 21, 2014, 08:46:41 PM


“Block time should be increased but block reward also need to be increased proportionally to keep the amount of to-be-mined coins unchanged. We need to stick with original emission graph,...”

May 21, 2014, 08:48:14 PM

Smooth replies:

“Yes that has always been the plan.”

-> But the situation was never dealt with and monero kept its issuance rate

May 21, 2014, 03:18:19 PM

Wolf0: super-optimized miner is finally released to the public. Now the hashrate is 100 times bigger than originally with crippled miner

May 23, 2014, 03:39:44 AM

Johnny Mnemonic:

“Transaction fees should be a fixed percentage of the block reward, or at the very least not be controllable by the payer. If payers can optionally pay more then it opens the door for miner discrimination and tx fee bidding wars.”

May 28, 2014, 03:54:32 AM

super-optimized miner is leaked. Hedge of the "cloud farmers" is over in the cpu mining.

The author of the secret optimised miner made an article on 28th august 2014.

“Regarding bitmonero it is profitable with aws”

“I woke up on May 28th, 2014, on vacation with my family in the middle of the desert, to find a copy of my private source code plastered across the bitcointalk message board”

-> On May 28th, the theory of a hidden cloud miner with optimised became true and its code was leaked to bitcointalk.

“The more I looked at it, the more clear it became:  The original developers deliberately crippled the miner”

“This original code was roughly 50x slower than my final optimized code, and could have easily been used to fake two years of blockchain data on a single computer or a small cluster.  I'm pretty sure that's what happened.”

-> Bytecoin probably team faked blockchain history and released crippled miner to make it look harder than what it was to mine.

“By the 14th of May, we were 45% of the total hashing power on the coin”

“on May 21st, we each netted 13 BTC (about $6500 USD), and 17BTC the next day.”

-> They sold their freshly mined xmr for btc immediately, so better for decentralisation and they didn’t keep 45% of supply

“ I think we exceeded 60% of the net hash of the coin at a few points”

“We just sold as fast as we could mine.” -> They confirm having sold their xmr for btc immediately

“In the end, our game continued into July -- almost two months of mining at an advantage large enough to make a profit on Amazon.  We spent over a quarter of a million dollars renting cloud compute time, to the point where I had a great phone call with the manager of the Spot instance program at Amazon who was trying to figure out how they could improve usability for weirdos like us”

-> NoodleDoodle, yvg1900, Claymore and others work on Open source miners that started to catch up with the release of their leaked code but they kept improving and succeeded in keeping a good advantage with both cpu and gpu miners until july

“I don't personally own any (xmr), nor do I hold any Bitcoin - I mine and sell for the most part, to minimize my risk exposure.”

-> What a mistake

Monero slow hash function crippled:

June 02, 2014, 10:55:43 PM

Monero Missives

-> new logo

-> In order to maintain ISO 4217 compliance, we are changing our ticker symbol from MRO to XMR effective immediately

June 08, 2014, 08:30:57 PM

Tacotime proposes tail emission code with charts examples:

“As you can see from the images, there is only slight inflation at this time.

Final block subsidy: 0.117061151915

Inflation starting at year 11: 0.335774683775%

Inflation starting at year 20: 0.325925311615%”

June 10, 2014, 10:22:53 PM

Aminorex: Monero Painting Day

“I cannot speak to Pizza, but I bought this painting:

by Marianne Huntington for 2500 XMR.”

June 18, 2014, 08:32:45 PM

Monero Missives:

Monero core team takes over cryptonote whitepaper and developers code. Release of annotated whitepaper (

V. B) Fifth phase analysis

The early days of Monero (MRO) to the Monero Missive and creation of XMR

   Summary of Monero history since 2010 and further analysis in upcoming video

Other Events & links:

April 29, 2014, 07:29:35 PM

tacotime opens thread on first Monero Bounty:


David Latapie video:

Bytecoin former website:


Reddit 4 part series:

Bitmonero github repo, we can see the 60 seconds blocktime change:

Monero price historic coinmarketcap 24 may 2015:


                                                   The storm is coming

                                                                 Kevin Wad 47ybTfRSiVcbamZMCatnXyFyc158hAxLE7SvwSBTqJpGUQF4Q1GVWcB4KxdeFaxLpw5jDBwrdtZKF6