13:53:35 <ajs_[m]> https://haveno.exchange/2022/02/02/haveno-structure.html
14:00:26 <ajs_[m]> sigh.. Haveno's proposed structure is deeply flawed. there is absolutely no need to have a "council" and arbitrators vetted by a committee.
14:00:51 <ajs_[m]> they need to keep it simple... 100% goes directly to the general fund... that's it
14:03:21 <ajs_[m]> and selection of arbitrators should be an open market, where the buyer and seller themselves are free to select the trusted third party
14:20:31 <sethforprivacy> I much prefer this approach over just sending funds to the general fund.
14:21:12 <sethforprivacy> It's past time we had more funding bodies out there then just the GF and CCS, and decentralizing that funding like this proposal is a great step forward. MAGIC is another great approach to breaking up funding out of one central place as Monero grows.
14:21:36 <Inge> Decentralize all the things
14:21:57 <sethforprivacy> The proposed structure is a great blend of decentralization and allowing trusted community members to apply for and vote on the council, essentially a more decentralized Monero Core.
14:22:07 <Inge> sethforprivacy: did you see the guy calling you into his twitter comments about monero transaction numbers over the past months?
14:22:17 <sethforprivacy> We should not be funneling all revenue in the Monero ecosystem to the GF.
14:22:32 <sethforprivacy> Inge: Not sure, Twitter's been a bit busy the last few days lol
14:22:36 <Inge> heh
14:26:06 <Inge> privacy got a bit of wind in its sails of late huh
14:27:42 <ajs_[m]> There is a danger if there is coordinated management over funds and operation of the project, some jurisdictions might view "the council" as an unincorporated partnership
14:27:44 * gomar[m] uploaded a video: (5998KiB) < https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/monero.social/ZXDlUqdeubzpFxcIbSWIqzFa/signal-2022-02-18-11-20-09-350.mp4 >
14:31:25 <rbrunner> Hmm, yes, but there is also a danger that things like a well-working "market for arbitrators" does not magically spring up all on itself, and keeps itself afloat without trouble
14:31:59 <sethforprivacy> ajs_[m]: Then the general fund would be even more clearly problematic under false attempts at regulation.
14:32:04 <sethforprivacy> Would it not?
14:32:16 <sethforprivacy> You're just proposing funneling all funds to a single entity instead...
14:34:59 <sethforprivacy> <Inge> "privacy got a bit of wind in its..." <- Heck yeah, great to see it! Wish it didn't take events like this for people to open their eyes, but alas...
14:37:36 <Inge> the Head Punk also had a decent thread https://twitter.com/punk6529/status/1494444624630403083
14:38:40 <ajs_[m]> <rbrunner> "Hmm, yes, but there is also a..." <- OpenBazaar had such a system. Of course, it will not magically spring up, but it should not be too difficult for people that already have an online rep to offer themselves as an arbitration service provider. https://medium.com/openbazaarproject/how-moderators-and-dispute-resolution-work-in-openbazaar-7c98bfa15388
14:53:30 <ajs_[m]> <sethforprivacy> "Would it not?" <- Perhaps, but the CCS administrator is anonymous and the core team has an established track record of stewardship over the monero project
14:56:27 <sethforprivacy> A reliance on Core is not healthy and we really need to start moving away from that. They are also far too hands off to be a fitting steward for something like Haveno, IMO.
14:56:46 <sethforprivacy> The project is far past the point of defaulting everything to "give it to Core"
14:56:48 <plowsof[m]> The GF is controlled by 1 person 😅
14:56:50 <ComplyLast> agree
14:57:12 <sethforprivacy> We need to be moving stuff away from Core, not adding more to Core.
14:57:23 <sethforprivacy> I'm 100% certain Core would agree as well
14:58:28 <ajs_[m]> I see your point
14:59:35 <sethforprivacy> <ajs_[m]> "OpenBazaar had such a system. Of..." <- The ann makes it clear that the arbitrators will be chosen based on reputation and proposals that the community gets to give feedback on with the Council having final say.
14:59:35 <sethforprivacy> That seems like a great compromise and middle ground, especially as Haveno Core Team won't then have 100% say in arbitrators.
15:02:15 <plowsof[m]> Remember the meeting the community we had where we said 'lets donate ? xmr from the GF to the ? proposal', i don't either. The GF is as centralised as it gets, (we're just lucky they make sane decisions) the more funding 'entities' to dilute it the better 
15:03:35 <r4v3r23[m]> Haveno is a shit show, glad to see it being forked
15:03:53 <ajs_[m]> Having a formal hierarchical structure is not ideal, but if that is direction they are going, then ultimately it will be up to the market to embrace it or not
15:04:29 <sethforprivacy> ajs_[m]: It always has been up to the market?
15:04:29 <sethforprivacy> This is absolutely an improvement for decentralization of the project and of Monero.
15:05:07 <sethforprivacy> But the community is impossible to please so Idk. Someone will always be upset with something.
15:05:59 <sethforprivacy> I figured a "hey lets rethink this with more decentrilization and community input!" post would be a *positive* thing :P
15:06:05 <sethforprivacy> s/decentrilization/decentralization/, s/*positive*/_positive_/
15:07:44 <sethforprivacy> r4v3r23[m]: They literally took community feedback to heart and entirely adjusted course, improving decentralization and community input because of it. That's exac
15:07:44 <sethforprivacy> It's not even launched and you're *already* calling it a shitshow and calling for a replacement?
15:07:55 <sethforprivacy> > <@r4v3r23:matrix.org> Haveno is a shit show, glad to see it being forked
15:07:55 <sethforprivacy>  * They literally took community feedback to heart and entirely adjusted course, improving decentralization and community input because of it. That's exactly what you want to see in a project like this.
15:07:55 <sethforprivacy> It's not even launched and you're _already_ calling it a shitshow and calling for a replacement?
15:08:02 <r4v3r23[m]> > <@sethforprivacy:matrix.optoutpod.com> They literally took community feedback to heart and entirely adjusted course, improving decentralization and community input because of it. That's exactly what you want to see in a project like this.
15:08:02 <r4v3r23[m]> > 
15:08:02 <r4v3r23[m]> > It's not even launched and you're _already_ calling it a shitshow and calling for a replacement?
15:08:02 <r4v3r23[m]> actions speak louder than words
15:08:03 <sethforprivacy>  * They literally took community feedback to heart and adjusted course, improving decentralization and community input because of it. That's exactly what you want to see in a project like this.
15:08:03 <sethforprivacy> It's not even launched and you're _already_ calling it a shitshow and calling for a replacement?
15:08:11 <sethforprivacy> They spoke with actions, bud
15:08:19 <r4v3r23[m]> yeah ok, bud
15:08:23 <sethforprivacy> The blog post is saying "here are our actions moving forward"
15:08:35 <sethforprivacy> But you're free to go build your perfect, all-pleasing fork.
15:08:39 <r4v3r23[m]> uh huh
15:08:47 <r4v3r23[m]> sethforprivacy: thans for your permission, bud
15:08:51 <r4v3r23[m]> ffs
15:08:55 <sethforprivacy> While Monero wallows in a lack of fiat on/off-ramps and community drama delays a necessity.
15:09:03 <sethforprivacy> The community spoke, they listened.
15:09:23 <sethforprivacy> It's great to see and the path forward is much-improved due to the meaningful input of community members.
15:09:41 <sethforprivacy> And due to the sound ethos and passion of those driving Haveno forward.
15:10:00 <r4v3r23[m]> right, go farm clout elsewhere
15:10:17 <r4v3r23[m]> influencers gonna influence 🤷‍♂️
15:10:31 <sethforprivacy> chesterfield: It's FOSS, so forks will happen and can lead to good things, for sure.
15:12:46 <sethforprivacy> But I would hope we can avoid division for once and push forward together (as much as possible) towards something that is an absolute necessity for Monero's survival and adoption.
15:13:17 <sethforprivacy> Especially as the vision for Haveno more and more clearly aligns with the general ethos of the Monero community.
15:13:58 <r4v3r23[m]> sethforprivacy: *because* it is necessary means it has to be done right
15:14:52 <r4v3r23[m]> telling the community that it is ungrateful and should just take what its given isnt the way
15:15:31 <r4v3r23[m]> i trust the monero anons more than the talking heads - im sure the p2p dex that monero deserves will be built
15:15:36 <sethforprivacy> r4v3r23[m]: That was not in any way what I said
15:16:27 <sethforprivacy> You're already bad-mouthing and shit-talking a project that has been open to community feedback, is run by long-term Monero contributors, and has shown they care deeply about respecting the wishes of the community before it's even launched.
15:16:31 <r4v3r23[m]> "But the community is impossible to please so Idk. Someone will always be upset with something."
15:16:53 <r4v3r23[m]> as if the problem is with the person who is upset, not at all the fault of haveno
15:16:57 <sethforprivacy> That's what I was speaking against, I clearly stated that the constructive feedback of community members in the CCS proposal was helpful and pushed for better approaches.
15:17:30 <sethforprivacy> r4v3r23[m]: Please, by all means, go and propose and build the perfect solution that pleases everyone, is perfectly decentralized, does not custody funds, and requires no organization or coordination!
15:17:38 <sethforprivacy> If you have better ideas do them.
15:18:01 <sethforprivacy> People who sit around and shit-talk those doing real work drive me absolutely nuts, especially as they almost always give zero positive ideas to go along with it.
15:18:03 <r4v3r23[m]> https://gitlab.com/PenumbraDEX/penumbra
15:18:38 <r4v3r23[m]> sethforprivacy: some one's already on it, which i knew would happen
15:19:22 <sethforprivacy> Then go back that and help drive it forward -- don't waste people's time shit-talking projects and everyone who supports them.
15:19:46 <sethforprivacy> No one's stopping you from doing so.
15:19:56 <r4v3r23[m]> sethforprivacy: and people who can't see red line being crossed and spewing generic positive platitudes drive me nuts 
15:20:11 <sethforprivacy> "generic positive platitudes" OK :P
15:20:19 <sethforprivacy> I'm glad my contributions to Monero can be so easily summed up.
15:21:03 <r4v3r23[m]> sethforprivacy: negative criticism is valid - i don't have to give you a perfect solution to something to tell you that its wrong
15:21:15 <sethforprivacy> r4v3r23[m]: I never said it wasn't?
15:21:35 <sethforprivacy> > Haveno is a shit show, glad to see it being forked
15:21:35 <sethforprivacy> Is not "constructive criticism" by any stretch of the imagination.
15:21:36 <sethforprivacy> lmao
15:21:59 <r4v3r23[m]> reactions like mine (and many others in the community in various other chats/forums) are a healthy part of this ecosystems immune system
15:22:08 <r4v3r23[m]> deal with it
15:22:40 <sethforprivacy> r4v3r23[m]: Pure negative vitriol and a lack of building yourself is a pure net-negative to the community.
15:22:43 <sethforprivacy> That is not helpful to anyone.
15:22:56 <r4v3r23[m]> sethforprivacy: wrong
15:23:08 <sethforprivacy> If you see problems with an approach, find a better solution and build it, or find a better solution and make clear feedback to help those actually building improve it.
15:23:41 <rbrunner> "and many others in the community in various other chats/forums" Ah. Yes. Many. Various. It's a wave.
15:23:59 <sethforprivacy> Enough time wasted here, have a good one and hope you actually build something r4v3r23.
15:24:06 <r4v3r23[m]> yawn
15:24:25 <rbrunner> The upvotes on Reddit for that Penumbra dex fork clock in at hundreds :)
15:25:12 <r4v3r23[m]> rbrunner: you want to tell me you haven't seen outrage at haveno's original post?
15:25:32 <sethforprivacy> rbrunner: Well yeah, making spurious claims is easy! If the proposed solution gets built is a whole other thing.
15:26:02 <rbrunner> There where critics, yes. "outrage", well, I don't know.
15:26:29 <rbrunner> And they reacted. Maybe not the way you wanted, but hey, can't have everything.
15:26:34 <ajs_[m]> Seth For Privacy: if they are going to go forward with idea of a governing committee, it would best that the participates are anonymous
15:26:39 <r4v3r23[m]> rbrunner: in my circles there was. and now a deep mistrust of haveno going forward
15:27:07 <rbrunner> Well, yes, then take all people with that deep distrust and turn it into something positive.
15:27:23 <r4v3r23[m]> some are, like the project listed above
15:27:26 <sethforprivacy> rbrunner: It's not encouraging that the devs of Penumbra can't even properly write a Markdown README...
15:27:26 <sethforprivacy> https://gitlab.com/PenumbraDEX/penumbra/-/blob/master/README.md
15:27:26 <sethforprivacy> Images aren't properly referenced, raw HTML is used for some reason, etc.
15:27:45 <sethforprivacy> And do we know who is behind this proposal? Do they have valid experience building tools like this?
15:27:47 <r4v3r23[m]> > <@sethforprivacy:matrix.optoutpod.com> It's not encouraging that the devs of Penumbra can't even properly write a Markdown README...... (full message at https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/libera.chat/6f8f45d28b18a67b1c6e5fc1d95d69c2bdf48176)
15:27:51 <rbrunner> There are people who actually build things, and then there are people writing things on IRC.
15:28:13 <sethforprivacy> r4v3r23[m]: Already have :P
15:28:13 <sethforprivacy> https://sethforprivacy.com/posts/contributing-to-monero/
15:28:19 <r4v3r23[m]> rbrunner: so only users who build are "real" users?
15:28:29 <r4v3r23[m]> > <@sethforprivacy:matrix.optoutpod.com> Already have :P
15:28:29 <r4v3r23[m]> > 
15:28:29 <r4v3r23[m]> > https://sethforprivacy.com/posts/contributing-to-monero/
15:28:29 <r4v3r23[m]> color me shocked
15:28:38 <rbrunner> Do you answer any statement with a question?
15:28:57 <sethforprivacy> r4v3r23[m]: These "devs" are not contributing to Monero -- they're making claims and have yet to show any evidence of being able to back them up.
15:29:01 <r4v3r23[m]> do i? :)
15:29:52 <rbrunner> How is that principle called that critics can ask questions magnitudes faster than people composing meaningful answers?
15:30:32 <sethforprivacy> There has already been clear rebuttals to key claims by Penumbra: https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/srid3a/comment/hww1cps/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3
15:30:43 <sethforprivacy> Their claims are impossible without changes to Monero consensus.
15:31:30 <rbrunner> No, no, that was debunked in part. The risk to get your funds stuck forever in a 2/2 multisig is do-able
15:31:31 <r4v3r23[m]> its a good start
15:31:52 <rbrunner> And if your funds get stuck, that's nobody's fault than your own, of course
15:31:55 <r4v3r23[m]> competition is a good thing
15:32:02 <rbrunner> You did not choose your trade partner wisely.
15:32:04 <sethforprivacy> Competition is, yes.
15:32:17 <r4v3r23[m]> acting as if the current solution is ideal isnt 
15:32:18 <rbrunner> See, no need for arbitrators whatsoever. Problem solved.
15:32:38 <sethforprivacy> Spurious claims that have no basis in technical reality are not helpful, and are either willfully malicious attempts to distract and delay, or are made by people who genuinely don't understand the project they are supposedly building for.
15:32:43 <rbrunner> Why nobody else found out that? Strange. Probably all dumb.
15:33:02 <rbrunner> Thanks, PenumabraDEX.
15:33:28 <r4v3r23[m]> rbrunner: a lot of people had the idea that haveno would be much more decentralized than it turned out to be 
15:33:45 <rbrunner> A lot? (ducks and covers)
15:33:49 <RingCT> <sethforprivacy> And do we know who is behind this proposal? Do they have valid experience building tools like this?
15:33:50 <RingCT> sethforprivacy: FYI, person behind Penumbra is lonelycow. He stripped Bisq's DAO for Haveno. So they do know one or two things. :)
15:34:00 <r4v3r23[m]> rbrunner: yeah
15:34:06 <sethforprivacy> RingCT: Good to know, thansk!
15:34:18 <r4v3r23[m]> RingCT: no no only haveno team is to be trust
15:34:26 <r4v3r23[m]> s/trust/trusted/
15:34:47 <sethforprivacy> You don't have to trust them -- watch the code, watch the progress, try things out for yourself.
15:35:03 <r4v3r23[m]> anyway, my hope is that atomic swaps with many other protocols come out and make even this type of exchange obsolete
15:35:14 <sethforprivacy> That's the beauty of FOSS and of their proposed path forward now as well -- the community will have direct oversight and input into every aspect.
15:35:34 <sethforprivacy> r4v3r23[m]: You'll still need/want something like Haveno, which is planning on integrating ASs anyways.
15:35:40 <rbrunner> Then you will have to trust the platforms people use to find each other to swap.
15:35:44 <sethforprivacy> You need a way to find swap partners, they don't just materialize.
15:35:54 <rbrunner> I was 4 seconds faster :)
15:36:02 <r4v3r23[m]> sethforprivacy: in terms of "marketplace" yeah, but it would have the most minimized role possible
15:36:06 <sethforprivacy> Haveno will be an excellent way to propose and take swaps.
15:36:16 <r4v3r23[m]> just a meeting point for true p2p trades to take place
15:36:18 <sethforprivacy> rbrunner: Not on Matrix ;)
15:36:27 <rbrunner> lol
15:36:34 <sethforprivacy> r4v3r23[m]: Of course, and Haveno will use those ASAP
15:36:48 <sethforprivacy> Which will obviate the need for arbitrators in those trades, multisig, etc.
15:37:07 <r4v3r23[m]> great
15:37:08 <sethforprivacy> You'll always need arbs or an on-chain arb method for fiat trades.
15:37:22 <sethforprivacy> On-chain isn't possible for Monero ATM, so arbs have to be a part of the design.
15:37:35 <sethforprivacy> The approach now is excellent and allows Monero community oversight into who the arbitrators are.
15:38:26 <r4v3r23[m]> and if what haveno is doing leads to changes to monero protocol to remove the need for so called excellent arbitration then its a win
15:38:39 <sethforprivacy> r4v3r23[m]: Of course!
15:39:03 <r4v3r23[m]> but lets not pretend the design decisions are ideal
15:40:24 <sethforprivacy> They are ideal for the current reality.
15:40:38 <sethforprivacy> I'm thankful they're not proposing things that require problems to be solved we don't have the answers to.
15:40:41 <r4v3r23[m]> reality changes all the time
15:40:50 <sethforprivacy> We need Haveno today, not in some fictional future reality.
15:40:56 <sethforprivacy> And Haveno can change with it?
15:40:56 <rbrunner> Yes, for example when people actually build things.
15:40:58 <r4v3r23[m]> often due to frustration with current situtation
15:41:01 <sethforprivacy> I don't even understand your point.
15:41:04 <r4v3r23[m]> so yes, shit talking has its place
15:41:12 <sethforprivacy> r4v3r23[m]: Literally never.
15:41:24 <sethforprivacy> It is not constructive or helpful.
15:41:34 <rbrunner> Good entertainment, in a way?
15:41:36 <sethforprivacy> Constructive criticism has it's place, of course.
15:41:41 <r4v3r23[m]> ok speech police
15:41:44 <r4v3r23[m]> im done here, later
15:41:49 <sethforprivacy> Blatant insults and shit-talking area always a net-negative.
15:41:51 <rbrunner> I don't believe that.
15:41:57 <sethforprivacy> r4v3r23[m]: I didn't stop you from shit-talking.
15:42:04 <sethforprivacy> I just told you it's bad and harmful :)
15:42:15 <sethforprivacy> That's the perfect working-out of free-speech!
15:42:30 <rbrunner> Censoring! Well-meaning people get brutally oppressed!
15:42:51 <rbrunner> Helpful advice gets murdered
15:42:53 <rbrunner> You get the drift.
15:45:24 <rbrunner> By the way, that's the answer of PenumbraDEX that did not get the attention it deserves because there was a time gap until it appeared:
15:45:24 <rbrunner> https://old.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/srid3a/penumbra_a_truly_uncensorable_havenos_fork/hwwsd3y/
15:46:09 <rbrunner> I referred to statements there like "Freedom comes along with personal responsibility and risk" regarding risks with 2/2 multisig.
15:57:31 <sethforprivacy> <rbrunner> "https://old.reddit.com/r/Monero..." <- > The risk of having user funds locked forever is a risk the user has to accept to when using Penumbra.
15:57:31 <sethforprivacy> Oof...
15:58:44 <rbrunner> Never mind, at least it's a 100% decentralized risk :)
15:59:20 <sethforprivacy> <chesterfield> "Seth For Privacy: any chance you..." <- Will add today, seems they just added native support for it so it just requires a single flag now!
15:59:20 <sethforprivacy> https://github.com/SChernykh/p2pool/releases/tag/v1.7
16:02:44 <lockhead[m]> Seth For Privacy: what is the difference between p2pool and p2pool-mini? 
16:03:03 <sethforprivacy> chesterfield: It was quite involved before and there are no real differences in rewards long-term, so I still don't recommend it. But will add a note and simple way to add now.
16:03:35 <sethforprivacy> lockhead[m]: main chain will get you less shares per Kh but more payouts per share, mini chain will get you more shares per Kh but less payouts per share.
16:03:35 <sethforprivacy> Rewards over time will be equal essentially.
16:03:48 <sethforprivacy> Some people just prefer the psychologic balm of faster shares :)
16:03:54 <sethforprivacy> It has no effect on payouts over time.
16:04:01 <lockhead[m]> Thanks a lot
16:04:13 <lockhead[m]> sethforprivacy: I would be lying if I said I wasn't one of those people
16:04:31 <sethforprivacy> chesterfield: For sure, it's not a *bad* thing, just not something worth recommending as a default etc. IMO
16:04:51 <sethforprivacy> lockhead[m]: I was as well, but 4y of mining Monero will remove that need for balm 😅
16:05:16 <lockhead[m]> 4 years? damn
16:05:21 <rbrunner> https://mini.p2pool.observer/calculate-share-time
16:05:37 <rbrunner> https://p2pool.observer/calculate-share-time
16:05:52 <rbrunner> It's a little depressing to mine on the main pool alright :)
16:05:57 <bridgerton[m]> <ian.niculescu> the idea of needing 5 days in average to get a share, and that it is possible to have an effort of 400% haunts me
16:06:36 <lockhead[m]> is having roughly 1500H/s normal? seems like it's not a lot
16:06:42 <sgp_> I finally read the Haveno post, and it's unclear to me where the funding will go they still ask for funding
16:06:46 <sgp_> and if they no longer need funding, why
16:07:40 <lockhead[m]> sorry for all the dumb questions, btw
16:08:13 <bridgerton[m]> <ian.niculescu> I think they want total funding from the community and in exchange they will give half of their profit to Monero fund so Monero has a more steady income.
16:08:45 <sethforprivacy> Hmm, it didn't answer the need for front-end dev funding I suppose
16:08:47 <sethforprivacy> Just future funding
16:08:55 <sgp_> in what was is it half though? it's the amount allocated to the HCT selected by the "Engine Council"
16:09:06 <sgp_> s/was/way/
16:09:29 <sgp_>  * in what way is it half though? the proportion allocated to the HCT is selected by the "Engine Council"
16:10:19 <sgp_> the HCT would open a proposal, and theoretically the council could just reject it
16:11:34 <sgp_> the HCT is a cost center for development and maintenance. In a way, think of the council as a fund that can choose to issue grants or not. They can "fire" the HCT and select another maintainer for example
16:11:46 <ajs_[m]> So it is like the zcash company and zcash foundation  type thing?
16:12:07 <sgp_> I don't see it that similar to zcash's setup
16:12:48 <bridgerton[m]> <ian.niculescu> depends on your machine. Do you have huge pages with permision granted ? and huge pages at 100%
16:12:49 <sgp_> All of the running of software is done by this council, who earns the rewards of the exchange
16:13:03 <sgp_>  * All of the running of the exchange is done by this council, who earns the rewards of the exchange
16:13:27 <sgp_> and then they get to choose what to do with the money (eg: take profit, donate to CCS, etc)
16:14:11 <sgp_> the example of the council paying the haveno core team is one example given in the doc, and they use a 50% example
16:14:54 <sgp_> that said, I don't see why the HCT team would normally be entitled to a profit share in this type of arrangement; it's a pretty basic dev contractor type arrangement in my mind
16:15:56 <sgp_> I think this has similar challenges as before, but at least the decision on funding is now spelled out in the assignment of this concil
16:16:01 <sgp_> s/concil/council/
16:17:18 <sgp_> maybe we have MAGIC Monero Fund-style elections, where the HCT chooses voters, who then elect the council :p
16:17:34 <sgp_> but as of now the selection process is unclear
16:17:58 <bridgerton[m]> <ian.niculescu> I don't quite understand the power that the HCT has. I would imagine the 50% per month is fixed.
16:19:01 <sgp_> perhaps ironically, proceeds from the exchange could go directly to the MAGIC Monero Fund, which could then issue grants for maintenance of the haveno protocol most likely
16:19:25 <sgp_> but that wouldn't work for certain types of profit sharing if they want to try to more directly be entitled to a fraction of profits, regardless of work performed
17:09:55 <bridgerton[m]> <butterfly> how do i go about discovering other interesting projects?
17:10:00 <bridgerton[m]> <butterfly> im not looking to invest in anything
17:10:45 <bridgerton[m]> <butterfly> i just genuinely find it fun to read about the tech but it seems that most are the same, discovering stuff like grin was a cool read
17:11:53 <bridgerton[m]> <ian.niculescu> you hold some ltc ?
17:12:10 <bridgerton[m]> <butterfly> not anymore
17:12:10 <bridgerton[m]> <butterfly> why?
17:12:53 <bridgerton[m]> <ian.niculescu> they just introduced mimbelwimble
17:13:15 <bridgerton[m]> <butterfly> woah what
17:13:38 <bridgerton[m]> <ian.niculescu> I have a small position because of that
17:13:56 <bridgerton[m]> <butterfly> but is it actually using it
17:14:00 <bridgerton[m]> <butterfly> or is it opt in?
17:14:08 <bridgerton[m]> <ian.niculescu> opt in
17:14:18 <bridgerton[m]> <ian.niculescu> it's very new
17:14:42 <bridgerton[m]> <ian.niculescu> I don't know more though
17:48:10 <rbrunner> help
17:48:22 <rbrunner> Wrong console ...
17:59:58 <bridgerton[m]> <butterfly> from what i can find it seems it might just be hiding the amounts and not sender/receivers BUT don’t quote me on that, im trying to find info on it
18:31:59 <nioc> AIUI mimblewimble isn't effective in hiding amounts if someone keeps historical data and imho people will keep the data 
18:32:18 <nioc> add to that opt in and................................
19:46:26 <kinghat[m]> no moneros 😢 https://matrix.org/faq/#how-is-matrixorg-funded
21:37:20 <bridgerton[m]> <butterfly> i am a bit in denial to believe there truly is no other project that focuses on privacy like monero does :exit:
22:38:26 <r4v3r23[m]> https://ccs.getmonero.org/proposals/j-berman-3months-full-time-2.html
22:38:35 <r4v3r23[m]> lets get this funded
23:01:16 <plowsof[m]> Monerujos entire funding page is complete btw 😁 https://funding.monerujo.app/ full-house
23:25:45 <selsta> w0w
23:27:29 <RingCT> FUCK.
23:27:31 <RingCT> YES.
23:27:51 <RingCT> anyone wants to grab some drinks tonight? tequila shots are on me.
23:28:18 <nioc> please no tequila 
23:28:35 <RingCT> then coin doesn't join the party.
23:28:36 <RingCT> big deal.
23:28:43 <nioc> :(
23:35:13 <r4v3r23[m]> <plowsof[m]> "Monerujos entire funding..." <- fuck yeah
23:35:33 <r4v3r23[m]> <RingCT> "anyone wants to grab some drinks..." <- where you at?
23:35:55 <Monk3y> Cheers everyone, enjoy urselfs!