has someone mirrored the cryptonote white paper somewhere? As far as I can see, it's not on getmonero.org and cryptonote.org is not responding

crypto_gramp oh good point, thanks

;)

i think we should really get it mirrored here: getmonero.org/resources/research-lab

love that idea

i've also noticed that references from MRL papers are dead

e.g. people.xiph.org/~greg/confidential_values.txt is now 404

i guess it's not such a big deal given we have archive.org to the rescue

uh oh

zooko angry

same old same old

This paper is quite good. It re-runs old attacks on Monero and examines how transparent transactions on the Zcash blockchain affect privacy of the shielded ones: eprint.iacr.org/2020/593.pdf

I do agree that Monero's "statistical attack surface" is kind of huge. That doesn't mean that user privacy is necessarily subject to effective attacks, but rather that every inch of that attack surface must be thoroughly checked for weaknesses and fortified if vulnerabilities are found.

Would love to see a based simple cryptocurrency which is also private. Monero is no that. I'm not sure it's even possible

<Rucknium[m]> "This paper is quite good. It re..." <- fun read

long story short... statistics are cool

r

shroomreactionar: What about a Monero with zec anonymity set, only shielded transactions, and no trusted setup?

The only chain doing that has subpar devs. Can't trust them

If there was a decent tradeoff to get the full anonymity set and no trusted setup, I'd expect MRL would be all over it

I also believe it's new math. So it hasn't really been battle tested

Its good for privacy coins to use different tech

That way if the math gets compromised not all privacy coins get compromised

The same way different cryptos use different hashing algos, etc.

Test what you're paying for! Public testings of the atomic swap node is ongoing, offers from a market making farcaster can be found at farcaster.dev

2021-12-17T11:09:16Z INFO farcaster_node::farcasterd::runtime] Swapped(127) | Refunded(4) / Punished(0) | Initialized(131)

only 11 of those swaps aren't trades from the devs themselves :(

It will be a bit slow in the beginning :)

<Inge> "If there was a decent tradeoff..." <- It's on "the list", but yeah it's not clear that it's possible at this time:

"Private, untraceable transactions without ring signatures, but with acceptable tradeoffs"

Would love any reviews or feedback before I share this widely: blog.sethforprivacy.com/posts/dispelling-monero-fud

<sethsimmons> "Would love any reviews or..." <- Would add something about L2's on Monero to the scalability- could mention the recent Monerotalk and that these are not necessary at the moment due to Monero's excellent L1 scalability, but are totally possible.

i see the 'but monero can't do L2s' stuff occasionally

s/Would add something about L2's on Monero to the scalability- could mention the recent Monerotalk and that these are not necessary at the moment due to Monero's excellent L1 scalability, but are totally possible./Would add something about L2's on Monero to the scalability- could mention the recent Monerotalk and that these are not necessary at the moment due to Monero's excellent L1 scalability, but are totally possible and

being researched/

I don't run into that often but I'll work on adding it -- should already have some resources saved

<sethsimmons> "Would love any reviews or..." <- Pushed a bunch of updates based on feedback!

sethsimmons: FYI regarding payment channel the paper(s) mentioned is not feasible in practice (at least PayMo), you can see a discussion between me and kayabaNerve in mrl some hours ago about the problems

And I don’t remember him coming in the MRL to discuss about his paper neither for the atomic swap he released recently

h4sh3d: Hmm, will take a look at back scroll 😢

Yeah, sorry for breaking the dream

I’m sure we will see payment channel one day in monero, but not with the current protocol :)

<sethsimmons> "Hmm, will take a look at back..." <- You can mention the inflation bug that wasn't exploited but also compare it to bitcoins inflation bug. Although that may be thorny

I would move the infinite supply argument to the top. Since it is the most common fud

I would add to the argument about how the tail emission compares to the amount of lost coins per year that cryptocurrencies usually experience. Growing in theory, shrinking in practice. (1.5% lost coins per year in btc)

"wasn't exploited" - there is a 'script' somewhere that confirms this somewhere (not sure where but fluffy has to mention it alot)

at some point there will be no btc left

and infinite supply happens only with infinite time

Yeah I though it was very nice how it could be verified that the XMR counterfeiting bug was not exploited. By contrast, Zcash could not verify that its own counterfeiting bug was not exploited, so they had to implement "turnstiles"

"Monero mining is centralized" -> "Monero is centralized". Change the title, then also add the graph when China banned mining and compare how bitcoin hashrate shrinked and monero hashrate expanded.

Having more hashrate means nothing if it can easily be located and turned off due to asics energy footprint and space requirements

Thanks for the suggestions, will review and update when I can 🙂

libre[m]: What is the graph of, though?

Sarangs words on monero maybe relevant 'auditability' web.getmonero.org/2020/01/17/auditability.html

What's the vertical axis?

hashrate

How is hashrate estimated?

There are multiple hashrate difficulty trackers on the web for different chains.

plowsof[m]: Yup that's already a linked resource 🙂

h4sh3d and sethsimmons: i remember the paymo guy showing up, and i guess ukoe or i or kayaba gave him the bad news :|

Definitely not me. I didn't remember this news regarding PayMo.

The recent author appears completely unknown to us though