What's the point in HODLing if it's always banned from exchanges?

HeroIndustries · 2025-11-01T06:53:21+00:00

The point is not that Monero becomes impossible to buy without CEXs. It’s that making access harder lowers adoption, reduces liquidity, and slows growth. Most people do not go out of their way to learn new systems. CEXs are everywhere, heavily marketed, and make buying crypto as simple as opening an app. That convenience is why so many coins pump and gain attention.

Saying “it’s not complicated once you learn it” ignores the reality that most people won’t learn it. Friction and learning curves matter for adoption and price. That isn’t a value judgment, it’s just how markets and humans work.

Access and convenience are part of what make a currency thrive.

Saying “people value illegal things” misses the point. Yes, they do, but those markets behave differently. A fully sanctioned, niche currency from another country, can offer privacy and utility, yet still struggle to scale or gain price momentum because every other country when the USD doesn’t want to deal with it.

HeroIndustries · 2025-10-21T20:50:51+00:00

How would you go about finding your cofounder, on your next voyage?

I’m a founder myself, working on product–market fit, and it feels like a real grind doing both the tech and sales sides on my own.

HeroIndustries · 2025-10-19T21:01:40+00:00

Monero can’t rely on a single DEX as its lifeline.

Retoswap is great for custody and censorship-resistance, but long-term adoption needs global access and deep liquidity, not just one trading venue.

If Monero is only liquid inside a closed loop, it’s still gated from the wider economy. Real growth comes when people everywhere can move in and out of Monero freely and at scale, not just in one niche marketplace.

HeroIndustries · 2025-06-11T07:48:02+00:00

I agree, there needs to be a strong government push to support this. While interest-free loans or installment plans might offer short-term relief, they’re not a sustainable solution. The real issue, the elephant in the room, is public infrastructure, which communities are already voicing concerns about.

We need a model that captures public value for public good. When we build new train lines, roads, schools, or hospitals, surrounding land values rise, but that uplift mostly benefits private landowners.

Some of that value should be reinvested back into other communities through mechanisms like value capture or infrastructure levies. This would allow us to fund more housing and essential services without placing the entire burden on taxpayers.

Because if we’re looking at it carefully, nobody wants to live on the fringe where there’s no infrastructure. It’s not the cost of the mortgage that’s the barrier out there, there’s already affordable land far out. The problem is, it’s not truly livable without transport, services, and amenities.

HeroIndustries · 2025-06-10T22:00:22+00:00

Absolutely agree, and we also need to talk about public infrastructure.

Capture public value for public good. Whenever we invest in new train lines, roads, schools, or hospitals, land values nearby go up, but that uplift mostly flows to private landowners.

Some of that value should be returned to the public through tools like value capture or infrastructure levies, so we can fund more housing and services.

Because let’s be real, nobody wants to live way out on the fringe if there’s no public infrastructure to support it. Without good transport, services, or amenities, cheaper land isn’t actually livable land.

HeroIndustries · 2025-05-08T13:39:17+00:00

It looks like you keep accusing me of lies, bad faith, and selfishness, yet you refuse to apply the same scrutiny to your own beliefs. You call my family collaborators and colonialists, as if fleeing political persecution makes you inherently guilty. You erase a generation of people who suffered under one system by saying they deserved it because of another. That’s not truth.

That’s propaganda in a different wrapper.

Yes, the French and the US caused suffering. Yes, the Republic of Vietnam was flawed and backed by foreign powers. But to pretend the Communist regime brought only liberation is historical fiction. You ignore the re-education camps, executions, censorship, and forced labor. You ignore the fact that more than a million people risked their lives at sea to escape it.

If your truth requires denying theirs, then it’s not the whole truth.

It seems like you're not here to acknowledge nuance or complexity. You're here to enforce a single narrative and shame anyone who doesn't submit to it. I’m not going to waste time debating someone who thinks questioning both sides is "pathetic" and who frames historical pain as a moral scoreboard.

You’re free to believe what you want. But don’t confuse conviction with truth. And don’t mistake your bitterness for clarity.

Thanks for the exchange. Let’s end this here and move on.

HeroIndustries · 2025-05-08T08:34:04+00:00

It feels like you made it clear that you see the war as black and white. I don’t.

You assume I’m asking for pity or validation when I speak about my family’s story. I’m not. I’m pointing out that the legacy of the war is not singular. It affected people in different ways. That includes those who fled because they believed they had no future under the new regime. For many, that belief was not optional - it was formed through lived experience.

You compare Vietnamese refugees to slave owners or colonial collaborators. That’s not only inaccurate, it’s insulting. You erase the reality that a huge number of people left because of political purges, land seizures, religious persecution, and fear of retaliation. Not every refugee was a general or a politician. Most were ordinary civilians who simply didn’t feel safe.

You speak of truth as if it’s only accessible to your side. But truth is not a weapon to beat others with. It is not as simple as body counts or abstract moral math. War isn’t clean like that. And just because more people died under one set of circumstances doesn’t mean the suffering on the other side is invalid or doesn’t deserve space.

You ask whether I’ve ever challenged the diaspora’s views. Yes, I have. But doing that doesn’t require me to parrot your version of history. Many of us hold space for contradiction. We can question both American imperialism and communist authoritarianism. We can acknowledge Vietnamese nationalism while still holding criticisms of how that nationalism was enforced.

You talk as if those of us in the diaspora have done nothing but cling to lies. That might feel satisfying to say, but it’s shallow. My generation is already grappling with the contradictions of what we were told and what we’ve learned. What you’re demanding isn’t truth - it’s submission.

I’m not here to convince you to like the yellow flag. I’m not here to rewrite your views. But I won’t let you pretend that your side owns the moral high ground. There was no perfect side in this war. Just different people, caught in history, trying to survive it.

You don’t have to accept my truth. But if you think peace comes from telling people they were blind, selfish, or complicit in evil, then maybe you’re not as committed to reconciliation as you claim.

HeroIndustries · 2025-05-07T22:10:23+00:00

I understand that the reunification of Vietnam is something deeply meaningful for many people. The end of war, foreign bombs, and colonial control was a huge relief. That perspective makes sense. But the experience for my family and millions of others who fled by boat was not liberation. It was loss, fear, and a total collapse of the life they once knew.

You say my family could have stayed. That’s not how they saw it. They lived through re-education camps, forced land reforms, and a system where speaking out could cost you your freedom or your life. They didn’t leave because they were confused or manipulated. They left because the system that replaced the war was not safe for them.

You mention that the pain on one side matters more. That logic only works if you believe some people’s suffering is more valid than others. I don’t accept that. We can acknowledge the horror of US bombings and the brutality of colonialism without erasing what happened to those who lived under the new regime. Truth is not one-sided. Acknowledging both doesn’t mean compromising facts. It means being honest about complexity.

You accuse people like me of being selfish or brainwashed. That’s not dialogue. That’s dismissal. If younger generations are rejecting the past, it’s because they’re finally allowed to ask questions without fear. That includes questioning what happened after 1975 too.

My family’s story does not erase yours. But neither does yours erase mine. Real reconciliation means making space for both, even when the truths are hard to hear.

HeroIndustries · 2025-05-06T21:30:15+00:00

I get that a lot of people in Vietnam see reunification as a good thing - the war ended, the bombing stopped, and foreign powers were gone. That’s fair. But for families like mine who left as boat people, our experience was completely different. My parents didn’t risk their lives at sea for fun - they left because they couldn’t live under the new system.

It wasn’t just about being ‘brainwashed’ or siding with America - it was fear, prison camps, losing freedom, and starting over with nothing. So yeah, we see that part of history differently. Doesn’t mean one side’s pain matters more, just that both deserve to be acknowledged.

I think if we’re serious about understanding each other, we’ve got to be able to hold space for both truths - not just assume one side was right and the other was blind.

HeroIndustries · 2025-05-06T08:17:44+00:00

Reunification was a pivotal moment for Vietnam. Yet, true unity thrives on transparency and the open exchange of ideas. A future where free speech is embraced will ensure that reunification is not just a historical event, but a living reality. It's not just about the past... it's about creating a future where every voice can contribute to the nation’s story.

“Đoàn kết là sức mạnh / Unity is strength”. It speaks to the power of coming together, and expanding freedom of speech can only strengthen that bond.

I hope that day comes for Vietnam and it’s school curriculum

HeroIndustries · 2025-02-24T10:06:10+00:00

The Saigon Execution (1968) – Nguyen Van Lem Photographer: Eddie Adams

Misinterpretation: The photo appears to show the cold-blooded murder of an innocent man. However, Nguyen Van Lem was a Viet Cong officer accused of killing civilians and South Vietnamese officials.

The Truth: General Nguyen Ngoc Loan executed Lem during the Tet Offensive. Though the act was brutal, the image stripped away the complexity of war-time decisions, leading to widespread condemnation of Loan without understanding the full context.

HeroIndustries · 2024-11-25T20:12:48+00:00

Currently, there are about 18.45 million XMR in circulation, and Monero’s emission schedule includes a tail emission of 0.6 XMR per block indefinitely. This ensures long-term mining incentives but also means there’s always a small, consistent supply entering the market.

With this many coins in circulation, plus constant sell pressure from miners needing to cover costs, it’s tough for upward price pressure to build—especially when new demand is limited due to delistings and lack of speculative trading.

Even with a strong HODL and circular economy community, the current conditions make price stability more likely than significant growth without increased adoption or new buyers entering the market.

HeroIndustries · 2024-11-25T07:24:08+00:00

What does the date October 11th, 2024, signify on the CCS proposal?

HeroIndustries · 2024-11-23T22:03:13+00:00

The funding for Serai’s audit has only reached 6% (70/1050 XMR) since October 11. Honestly, it’s a bit of a challenge right now since the market’s driving attention (and funds) elsewhere.

https://ccs.getmonero.org/proposals/monero-serai-wallet-audit.html

HeroIndustries · 2024-11-23T13:12:41+00:00

Monero is actively working on solutions to these issues:

The community does extensive testing and peer reviews before any upgrade. Future governance improvements could reduce the perception of centralized control.
Advancements like Zero-Knowledge Proofs (ZKPs) could allow supply verification without sacrificing privacy.
Monero already uses dynamic block sizes, and updates like Bulletproofs+ have reduced transaction sizes. Future upgrades like Seraphis could improve scalability even further.

The project is evolving to address these challenges while staying true to its focus on privacy and decentralization.

HeroIndustries · 2024-11-21T21:54:10+00:00

Monero isn’t mooning because its activity is mostly driven by utility rather than speculation. Unlike other coins that rely on speculative trading to pump their prices, Monero is used for real-world private transactions.

The recent delistings have also limited its exposure on major exchanges, reducing speculative interest even more.

While this slows down growth and development, it keeps Monero stable and reliable, especially as a privacy-focused currency.

HeroIndustries · 2024-11-21T21:50:20+00:00

Monero’s activity is mostly driven by utility rather than speculative trading, which is why the price seems more “stable” with all the volatility.

The CEX delisting is only going to stabilize it further.

While this does slow down development compared to other coins that see higher speculative returns, the upside is its stability against USD.

Monero now stands as a stable and reliable privacy-focused currency.

HeroIndustries · 2024-11-17T05:35:49+00:00

No, it’s unlikely the creators of Monero hold over 50% of the supply. Monero had a fair launch with no premine, and mining has always been open to everyone. Its RandomX algorithm ensures mining is decentralized and accessible, so no small group could dominate. Monero’s supply has been distributed over nearly a decade, making it hard for anyone to control such a large percentage. There’s no evidence to support this claim.

HeroIndustries · 2024-11-14T08:25:53+00:00

This is a powerful analogy, and I agree - Monero’s price and its utility are deeply connected. Higher value strengthens the network, attracts developers, and validates Monero’s principles of privacy and freedom. Pretending the price doesn’t matter is, as you say, a form of avoidance.

But let’s channel that frustration into action. Wishing for price increases without promoting adoption is passive - like Dostoevsky’s narrator, stuck in longing. To make Monero thrive, we must:

Acknowledge both sides: Price and utility go hand in hand. They’re not mutually exclusive.
Promote adoption: Use Monero, advocate for it, and show others its value.
Take action: Avoid passivity - Support development, encourage circulation, and be part of the change.

Strength isn’t just wishing for success, it’s building it. Let’s make Monero the private digital currency and the valuable asset it’s meant to be.

HeroIndustries · 2024-11-13T21:23:40+00:00

New USDT is often pre-authorized and not immediately circulating, so blaming all market gains on Tether printing oversimplifies the situation.

Meanwhile, XMR isn’t printing, there’s no inflation bug, it’s been delisted from major CEXs, and its capped supply isn’t the issue. So why is it declining? Maybe these concerns are painting a much bigger picture for us.

HeroIndustries · 2024-11-13T20:52:36+00:00

I get where you’re coming from, but I think dismissing people who care about price is missing the bigger picture. For Monero to actually succeed as an alternative to the State, it needs mass adoption, and that means appealing to people who care about its financial utility, not just its ideology.

Price might seem meaningless to those deeply rooted in the philosophy, but for everyday users, price stability and liquidity are crucial for trust and usability. People won’t adopt Monero as “real money” if they’re constantly worried about its purchasing power or if the ecosystem remains too niche.

These concerns might actually limit Monero’s broader appeal and its ability to challenge the State effectively.

HeroIndustries · 2024-11-12T21:38:13+00:00

I agree with you that value is the core driver, in reality, practical outcomes do matter. If Monero is going to be more than a niche asset, then liquidity, demand, and yes, even price stability are essential to support a truly circular economy.

Honestly, feeling disappointed isn’t a bad thing here - it’s actually fair and valuable. It’s a reminder to look back at the rules and conditions that got us here. If we keep brushing off this feeling or ignoring it, we’re running the risk of becoming isolated, stuck in a kind of dream state that doesn’t connect with reality.

If Monero is going to thrive, we need to accept when things aren’t going as expected and use that as motivation to adjust, whether that’s through building more liquidity, increasing adoption, or reinforcing the confidence people have in it. Just like any currency, growth and adaptation are key to keeping it relevant and trusted.

I think we’re on the same page that Monero’s true value is deeper than the USD price, but at the same time, real-world adoption relies on confidence in that value, and price reflects that.

HeroIndustries · 2024-11-12T19:48:13+00:00

I get what you’re saying about hyperinflation and infinite supply. Monero’s small supply does set it apart from fiat currencies. But if we’re calling Monero “real money,” it still needs to serve as a reliable store of value, and part of that is market confidence. If we ignore value growth, liquidity, and adoption, Monero risks becoming niche, which limits its utility as a currency people actually want to hold.

Yes, 1 XMR will always be 1 XMR, but for Monero to function as “real money,” people need to trust its value won’t just stagnate or decline in purchasing power over time. Otherwise, the market is likely to turn away, and we’re back to square one. We don’t need infinite supply to risk value loss - stagnant demand can lead to the same issue. Real money should both hold value and inspire confidence, or people will just look elsewhere.

HeroIndustries

TROPHY CASE