03:08:32 I think that the Community as a whole should know this, even though for me it's just one rejected person's drama, but it's starting to get sick, IMO. 03:08:32 https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/tl5w1b/comment/i2e6kdh/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3 04:08:54 > <@mj-xmr:matrix.org> I think that the Community as a whole should know this, even though for me it's just one rejected person's drama, but it's starting to get sick, IMO. 04:08:54 > https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/tl5w1b/comment/i2e6kdh/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3 04:08:54 oh scary we don't know how this open source software will be used... what if someone uses the library for analyzing monero 04:14:29 Might be cool to have a CCS that focuses on creating a sort of psychological Monero dev welcome manual that highlights some of the types of harassment one will begin to receive as a Monero developer and tie it into some of the documented disruption tactics used by the feds 04:15:03 would be cool if it had some real examples from reddit/twitter etc 04:23:48 https://repo.getmonero.org/monero-project/ccs-proposals/-/merge_requests/295#note_15562 10:14:26 "Might be cool to have a CCS that..." <- Monero Dev: An introduction to modern psychological warfare 13:22:48 https://repo.getmonero.org/monero-project/ccs-proposals/-/merge_requests/295 please engage the like/dislike buttons and leave a comment if desired 13:49:31 "https://repo.getmonero.org/..." <- Left a comment and thumbs up there, seems an oddly combative crowd (that I have never seen on other platforms) jumped in there to downvote, name call, and be toxic. 13:49:31 I absolutely support the proposal and see it as a necessary step forward or Monero as a tool for freedom. 14:08:17 https://twitter.com/jp_koning/status/1508431385861795844?s=20 14:08:25 Apparently the gov is testing out an 'e-cash' 14:09:08 '5. Does E-Cash involve blockchain or distributed ledger technology? 14:09:08 No. In contrast to most cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum, E-Cash is a true bearer instrument. Consequently, E-Cash transactions do not involve or require settlement via a blockchain or distributed ledger. 14:09:08 Instead, an E-Cash transaction works by transferring an e-cash balance, which is a unique digital representation of value issued and verified by the government, from one secure hardware device to another. The hardware devices themselves, as well as the security measures undertaken by government at the point of original issue, are responsible for preventing double-spending and counterfeiting.' 14:11:15 * chesterfield[m] uploaded an image: (233KiB) < https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/faelix.im/GEMfgrbsEIQTMwArqnNrcaOU/image.png > 14:13:29 Huh, that's an interesting concept 14:13:43 But it doesn't address the issue of "where does the money come from" 14:14:26 merope: yeah it needs another column in there :) 14:14:35 Whoever is in charge of that system has the power to create an infinite amount of money out of nowhere with no oversight nor restrictions 14:15:05 but but cryptocurrencies are backed by nothing. it's just numbers on a distributed excel spreadsheet. ngmi 14:15:18 wow i'm loading up on ecash 14:16:39 If it weren't for the issue of fetching data to create ring signatures, it could even be applied to Monero 14:16:46 * of fetching chain data to 14:17:55 Well bearer instrument seems great, the "unique" digital representation makes me question the fungibility 14:17:57 It would definitely be doable with a transparent coin like Bitcoin though. You'd basically be creating chained transactions with whatever you have "offline", and then settling them all at once when you sync your device online 14:18:05 Ooooh nvm, it still doesn't solve the issue of double spending 14:18:38 Uniqueness in the sense that you can't duplicate the contents of a device on another device 14:18:43 (I presume) 14:19:09 Because otherwise you could get two devices, copy the money from one to the other, and end up having twice the money 14:19:20 Aka infinite inflation bug 14:20:10 And it only takes one pair of such 'broken' devices to send the whole economy in the shitter 14:26:45 >Although the ECASH Act does not specifiy a specific per-device denominational or transactional cap, it is expected that such limits will ultimately be incorporated into the final E-Cash design following the pilot phase, similar to how physical currency has denominational caps today. 14:27:06 So will that mean I can only hold $1000 in ecash? 14:27:45 Or will I simply have 2 "ecash smartcards" with $2000 total? 14:28:09 withdraw from your cbdc account to your ecash smartcard(tm) 14:28:52 i keep my cash in ecash smartcards under my mattress 14:29:36 >galactic credit chits become real 14:30:09 Is the bill text unavailable for anyone else? I get 404 14:32:02 surgeon_[m]: sir you need a license to read the bill 14:32:14 just trust me 14:32:37 I have special permission from the Federal Reserve to access public domain information, its all good 14:34:20 someone find that damn bill 14:34:24 404 for me too 14:38:57 Prob just a nice little trial test run to see if people will adopt it 14:39:12 Nice to see Monero now officially on the UA govt donation page. It was just "someones" tweet a couple of weeks ago. 14:39:30 "Oh shit ecash failed, better introduce CBDC asap" 14:40:02 Cash and crypto only, get with the time stinky govt 14:40:17 s/time/times/ 14:43:26 What is worse: not trying out ecash and it fails and a CBDC gets adopted as a better replacement, or lots of ppl trying out ecash and a CBDC gets adopted because people were clearly excited for digital USD. 14:48:32 Doesn't matter, media will already be primed to write articles shitting on eCash and praising CBDC 14:49:06 Have to keep spreading WEF memes to combat it 14:52:12 https://nitter.it/EcommunistForum 15:07:47 > <@sethforprivacy:matrix.optoutpod.com> Left a comment and thumbs up there, seems an oddly combative crowd (that I have never seen on other platforms) jumped in there to downvote, name call, and be toxic. 15:07:47 > 15:07:47 > I absolutely support the proposal and see it as a necessary step forward or Monero as a tool for freedom. 15:07:47 yawn. the attempt to discredit any negative feedback in pathetic and telling 15:07:53 * yawn. the attempt to discredit any negative feedback is pathetic and telling 15:12:03 Literally thanked two people for negative feedback lmao, but good try. 15:12:19 Critical feedback != Poop emojis and name calling 15:12:51 Haveno seems too much for profit to me, but still it'll be probably better than CEXes 15:13:24 I don't understand this fixation to not letting any entity in the ecosystem be for-profit... 15:13:54 You know, I still remember about the huge funding request... 15:14:04 For-profit that contributes back to the community and ecosystem is a huge win and necessary component. 15:14:24 And anyways it's like paying them to make them earn later 15:14:50 I hope Haveno helps spreading Monero by the way 15:15:19 it may also be useful to stop centralized exchanges from shorting XMR and faking its price 15:15:30 xxfedexx[m]: its not the profit thats the issue, its this ridiculous engine council they are trying to tie to it 15:15:45 r4v3r23[m]: Then propose something better instead of shitting on everyone else 15:16:02 sethforprivacy: get rid of the engine council 15:16:13 this is a proposal for front end development 15:16:27 and ill shit on who i want, thanks 15:16:49 r4v3r23[m]: THen how do you handle fee funds and proposals? 15:17:03 r4v3r23[m]: And the council is part of how the Monero community gets control of future income 15:17:28 sethforprivacy: Haveno can pay for frontend developement and keep profits and decide how to use those funds however they want 15:17:32 sethforprivacy: I am against forced dev funds, it reminds me of ZCash's 20% of block rewards to developers to help development 15:17:51 I want to choose if, how much, and who I want to support 15:17:53 xxfedexx[m]: ??? How is this at all reminiscent? 15:18:21 xxfedexx[m]: exactly. this is a pathetic attempt to control CCS process 15:18:43 whoever thought of the engine council should seriously be ashamed of themselves 15:18:44 r4v3r23[m]: How, exactly, can they pay for front end dev before they have fees or income? 15:18:49 Are you even reading how this works? 15:19:00 sethforprivacy: get a working product out 15:19:02 use bisq UI until they have enough 15:19:10 do yo u not know how a start up business works? 15:19:21 So ship a half-baked product because you don't like anything? 15:19:26 With no start-up funds 15:19:29 And no front-end 15:19:31 And no devs 15:19:34 half baked? they themselves say its wors 15:19:38 s/wors/works/ 15:19:48 its a bisq fork. use the UI 15:20:15 They could, would be not what they have proposed or been building though 15:20:19 And that's why you can choose not to donate 15:20:25 Or give civil feedback 15:20:33 To help the community make a well-informed decision 15:20:36 all feedback is valid 15:20:40 Or throw up a CCS for a cheaper alternative 15:20:45 r4v3r23[m]: No lol 15:20:49 No adult thinks this 15:20:51 sethforprivacy: yes lol 15:20:55 no one asked you 15:20:59 jfc 15:21:07 Literal poop emojies and "commie" name calling is valuable... how? 15:21:25 commie is an accurate description 15:21:31 I am not specifically against UI fund, I am pretty much against the Engine forced donations to development, but as I already said, it's still better than a centralized exchange's fees because at least this might help improving Monero 15:21:41 as for "poop emojies" not my thing but whatever 15:21:43 xxfedexx[m]: Then leave your feedback! Now is the time 🙂 15:22:07 xxfedexx[m]: exactly. go ahead and mentioned that the 2 should be separate 15:22:25 sethforprivacy: isn't that CCS for UI funding? it would be not too much related 15:22:28 this is literally like a govt spending bill that jams in random things that have nothing to do with main proposal 15:22:30 its a power grab 15:22:40 xxfedexx[m]: Yes, ultimately it's for front-end dev funding 15:22:42 from the mind of a statist 15:22:57 But the council/new proposals/etc. are how the Monero community benefits from the donations past just the funded product. 15:23:06 Monero community gets a 3/5 control over the council 15:23:12 sethforprivacy: a lot of people is downvoting for the Engine, not for the front-end dev funding tho 15:23:39 sethforprivacy: how exactly 15:24:01 it already has 100% control over CCS by direct donations 15:24:05 r4v3r23[m]: Community chooses 3/5 seats? 15:24:13 Did you read the proposal? 15:24:31 sethforprivacy: you dont see an issue in this? 15:24:34 * sethforprivacy uploaded an image: (90KiB) < https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/matrix.optoutpod.com/zfXvJIydsySeGQWroCWfsZsA/image.png > 15:24:40 "community" now becomes 3 peopls 15:24:58 r4v3r23[m]: How, exactly, do you propose the community each custody funds? 15:25:03 And handle transactions? 15:25:20 Democratic People's Community Council of Monero 15:25:25 has a great ring to it 15:25:46 If you come up with some useful insight or feedback feel free to share it. 15:26:03 Until then this is obviously a useless venture wasting time on your trolling and time-wasting name calling. 15:26:07 sethforprivacy: resistance to a horrible idea is great feedback 15:26:14 If anyone else wants to chat about the proposal let's do so 🙂 15:26:19 feel free to stop being smug and pretentious 15:26:38 "I don't understand this fixation..." <- The problem I see is how Dexs will be regulated going forward. A legal entity subject to LE requests and duress is the problem, not being for-profit imho. 15:27:42 surgeon_[m]: It's not a legal entity 15:27:43 That has been changed and is clear in the new proposal. 15:27:47 Yes, and thats a good thing(tm) 15:27:48 Steps are being taken to reduce and pressure points on the HCT members as well, like signing using ring sigs. 15:27:53 surgeon_[m]: Absolutely! 15:28:24 Thus why the funds are always kept in Monero and re-distributed by a multisig between many parties (the HCT) 15:28:36 Circular economy plus distributed keys = much harder to pressure. 15:28:46 Yup. 15:29:17 no one is against having a monero dex 15:29:48 There's 280 xmr / 62k usd collecting dust from this proposal https://ccs.getmonero.org/proposals/36c3.html , no one seems to care. 15:30:24 We need to get back to more serious and based CCS's like the Tesla giveaway and Project Coral Reef 15:30:25 plowsof[m]: Huh, Idk that anyone knows -- luigi1111w could these funds be pivoted into a future proposal? 15:30:30 plowsof[m]: I could have it, I guess 15:30:30 :^) 15:31:06 Theres 7kusd in bitcoin in moneros btc general fund wallet collecting dust. 15:31:38 chesterfield[m]: you see, the Tesla has a REAL engine. it's a 450 horsepower dual motor. You can't take that away. It's ungovernable (okay there is a governor chip) 15:31:42 7k usd is very little 15:31:48 plowsof[m]: now would be a good time to convert that to XMR 15:32:34 r4v3r23[m]: ahem. XMR is going to ZERO. It's a transfer of value currency, not a store of value. Monero devs have repeatedly ignored my requests to add Bitcoin like store of value properties 15:32:56 nioc: thats one's month salary for community spokesmen! god knows we have so many self-proclaimed losers trying to take the role 15:33:08 s/self-proclaimed// 15:33:34 nioc: $8.6k * , i think that is quite a substantial amount xd 15:34:54 so people are advocating that haveno should get private funding and give the profits to that private entity instead of community funding and money going back to the comunity 15:35:11 hmmm 15:36:00 People are begging for haveno to support the monero community with donations but we have funds collecting dust that we dont care about . so we frankly dont deserve ANYTHING! (if we dont care about the 'useless' funds) 15:36:11 nioc: that money comes at a cost of giving "engine council" authority on what they deem to be good for monero development 15:36:15 nioc: when and where did people "advocate" for that? care to link me to a specific comment or post a screenshot of it? 15:36:35 onions: semantics lol 15:36:35 r4v3r23[m]: more funding mechanisms for monero is a good thing 15:36:50 chesterfield[m]: not at the cost of centralization 15:36:53 nioc: clearly. brain fog is back on IRC, so not surprised. Welcome back, either way. 15:36:57 that would be the result 15:37:01 there are people out there like seth who think they know better than you what is right or wrong 15:37:02 r4v3r23[m]: wut 15:37:09 nioc: that would be "your" result. get it right. 15:37:20 r4v3r23[m]: so you should also make a funding mechanism 15:37:22 these are the types that will be attracted to a "council" position 15:37:30 We are trying to use a centralised service (CCS) to discourage a centralised service. My +1 vote is to let the free market decide 15:37:43 chesterfield[m]: we have the ccs. people vote with their wallets 15:37:58 so let them vote 15:38:06 they already do 15:38:24 how do we vote if it doesn't go to funding 15:39:04 by.. sending monero? 15:39:12 like we do now? 15:39:13 youre not getting it 15:39:30 we already have the CCS where users can decide directly what to fund 15:39:37 so how do we fund monero development? 15:39:42 nioc: Well, you don't "vote" with money, you vote _before_ it gets moved to funding required stage, so the community does come to a loose consensus whether it should be moved there or not, in the first place. 15:39:47 Does nioc ever use his brain? 15:40:01 Haveno wants to replace that with their fees and council that decides how those fees are spent 15:40:24 nioc: "who will build the roads?" 15:40:31 If we are going to move everything to funding required stage because we "vote" with donations, might as well scrap the comments section and get everything posted in funding required stage by default. 15:40:44 Fuck the community meetings, fuck the reddit threads, fuck the GitLab comments section, amirite? 15:41:10 tdo you want to require haveno to fund things in addition to the CCS? 15:41:20 sethforprivacy hmm let's see 15:41:36 r4v3r23[m]: CCS is not being replaced, no idea why you're lying about that. 15:41:47 onions: THE COUNCIL WILL DECIDE 15:41:48 onions: I know you know, I was asking someone else :) 15:41:51 onions: No one is saying the current approach isn't fine and working well. 15:41:55 CCS will go on as-is 15:41:56 ok. 15:41:57 sethforprivacy: im not lying because thats not what i said 15:42:30 Haveno fees will fund a new funding platform, CCS will still be funded by community donations as always 15:42:30 but haveno is selling that monero development will not be self-sustaining 15:42:45 More funding sources = huge win for Monero 15:42:55 s/not/now*/ 15:42:57 Relying on community donations forever is not sustainable, I would argue 15:43:05 there needs more development than is currently happening 15:43:16 Expanding to more sources, especially funding sourced from other entities that don't drain community donations, is a huge win. 15:43:23 nioc: 100% 15:43:32 And more ways for devs and researches to get and maintain funding. 15:44:03 are donations from haveno limited to funding via the CCS? 15:44:47 nioc: What do you mean? 15:45:03 Haveno fees will fund Haveno Engine proposals, CCS will go on as always 15:45:43 are those proposals limited to funding only CCS proposals? 15:46:15 there are other funding avenues currently being used 15:46:54 sethforprivacy: not at any cost, stop being disingenious 15:47:11 nioc: No, new proposals that are distinct 15:47:26 People can propose directly to the Engine to have things funded 15:47:28 The CCS rejected Monerujo - but the free market voted with their wallets and gave them everything they asked for https://funding.monerujo.app/ 15:47:29 Instead of CCS 15:47:31 the only way i see this working out is if Haveno gives you an option to decide what CCS proposals you want to fund using your fees directly in the UI 15:47:31 Or alongside I suppose 15:48:02 "image.png" <- Haveno Engine proposals are distinct 15:48:17 nioc: Yes, MAGIC in particular 15:48:55 plowsof[m]: yes. CCS is already too centralized, Council is a step too far 15:49:25 May i just shill the new wishlist which accepts WOWnero too , thanks https://www.getwishlisted.xyz/donate/ 15:49:34 This "type" of person that contributes nothing and spends all their time shitting on every approach being taken in the community is.. quite something. 15:49:50 plowsof[m]: Love it 😀 15:50:10 I'm a bit confused about the centralization concern. If you don't like the proposal, don't donate to it. The proposal changes nothing about the Monero project itself. 15:50:10 The choice that is on the table is between Haveno completely funding itself, or it receiving community funding and setting up a system to channel funds to Monero related work. Why do the specifics of the system in the latter case cause a centralization concern? If you donate to the proposal then you are accepting that your investment is represented by the council that is planned. 15:50:10 For the record, I don't plan on donating to the Haveno CCS. I also don't see why it should concern me if this plan goes forward and others decide to do so. 15:50:16 sethforprivacy: yup 15:50:23 What % of the engine fee collected goes towards Monero, not Haveno, development? Or is it completely up to the 3/5 members? 15:50:45 entry1[m]: Up to all 5 members what is approved or not for funding 15:51:06 But I would suspect with 4/5 being non-Haveno, most will be Monero-focused 15:51:19 Especially as Haveno funding will be via distinct proposals every 6-12mo 15:51:37 That will likely encompass the bulk of Haveno work, and comes out of the other 50% of fees collected. 15:51:56 i repeat: the only way i see this working out is if Haveno gives you an option to decide what CCS proposals you want to fund using your fees directly in the UI 15:51:57 N.B.: Certain variants of Seraphis would allow non-custodial crowdfunding in a similar way to Flipstarter on BCH: 15:51:57 https://github.com/monero-project/research-lab/issues/91#issuecomment-967768995 15:52:11 > <@bridgerton:matrix.org> I'm a bit confused about the centralization concern. If you don't like the proposal, don't donate to it. The proposal changes nothing about the Monero project itself. 15:52:12 > The choice that is on the table is between Haveno completely funding itself, or it receiving community funding and setting up a system to channel funds to Monero related work. Why do the specifics of the system in the latter case cause a centralization concern? If you donate to the proposal then you are accepting that your investment is represented by the council that is planned. 15:52:12 > For the record, I don't plan on donating to the Haveno CCS. I also don't see why it should concern me if this plan goes forward and others decide to do so. 15:52:12 And that's the beauty of a completely opt-in funding system like the CCS 🙂 You can just... not donate! 15:52:16 r4v3r23[m]: ugh stop name calling jeez 🙄 15:52:18 > <@rucknium:monero.social> N.B.: Certain variants of Seraphis would allow non-custodial crowdfunding in a similar way to Flipstarter on BCH: 15:52:18 > https://github.com/monero-project/research-lab/issues/91#issuecomment-967768995 15:52:18 Ohhh, nice! 15:52:20 They are gonna blow all the fee funds on coke, aren't they? 😂 15:52:33 lockhead[m]: ? 15:52:38 sarcasm 15:52:46 :) 15:54:19 surgeon_[m]: for the good of monero! 15:54:40 gulago 15:55:40 r4v3r23[m]: Seth For Privacy: here's your "constructive feedback" 15:55:52 in b4 "that unrealistic" 15:56:47 i love monero 15:56:53 i use monero to launder my money 15:56:55 thanks a lot) 15:57:12 based? 15:57:34 inlight: based 15:57:44 "i repeat: the only way i see..." <- Actually a good idea, propose it 🙂 15:58:00 Although it doesn't work until there are proposals actively needing funding 15:58:08 But once there are it's an interesting one. 15:58:27 sethforprivacy: why? so i can be shot down for attacking monero for going against ericcoines wishes? 15:58:54 sethforprivacy: general fund 15:59:17 with NO council 15:59:39 r4v3r23[m]: it would be the first useful feedback you've provided 15:59:50 You chose your approach and chose to be toxic so far so it's likely you won't be taken seriously 15:59:57 Assuming 50% of engine fees (effectively 1/4th of the 1% transaction fee collected by using Haveno to trade), we would need $61,600,000 trade volume to recoup the amount raised by the community. That would be the break even for a profitable recurring revenue stream based on amount raised. Again, it would be a flowing revenue stream from the beginning, but just less than the amount raised until that point is reached. 15:59:58 But you can always try to claw back some shred of reputation. 15:59:58 sethforprivacy: bitch about it 16:00:15 r4v3r23[m]: Then build it or propose it and see if Haveno are open 16:00:15 sethforprivacy: spoken like a true clout chaser 16:00:22 I would be against funding general fund directly, FWIW. 16:00:52 entry1[m]: The donations are also 100% funding the critical front-end work, they're not just being given away. 16:00:57 sethforprivacy: jesus man 16:01:11 We're getting FOSS development for that, and the whole Engine council situation 16:01:21 lockhead[m]: this is the type of attention seekers we are dealing with 16:02:16 entry1[m]: Good to run the numbers though, I hadn't considered that angle on the ROI for the amount itself 16:02:44 I would love to think we get to that volume rather quickly once Haveno is live 🙂 16:02:50 But only time will tell. 16:03:12 sethforprivacy: 100%, just wanted to put some perspective out there. This is not intended to be just a recurring revenue stream fundraiser. I'm all in favor for another dex because if something happened to LM, that would be extremely devastating. 16:04:27 entry1[m]: No kidding, and the centralization of LM makes that a distinct possibility. 16:04:50 Something decentralized and FOSS is key as an alternative, and it will have quite different approaches and so quite different pros/cons. 16:05:10 "Assuming 50% of engine fees (..." <- who said that Haveno will have an 1% fee? 16:05:27 hi seth 16:05:31 you seem nice 16:05:35 the fee is not decided yet, right? 16:05:35 inlight: Hi 🙂 16:05:35 btw- i have an issue 16:05:39 1% would be a lot by the way 16:05:44 why are you using nad promoting threema ? 16:06:04 inlight: Great tool for private e2ee chats w/o phone number 16:06:06 you promote anything cheesy and shiny which comes on the internet (no offence) 16:06:14 lol 16:06:16 Threema is just a cheap insecure clone of signal 16:06:48 signal use phone no. to counter spam (threema is snake oil) 16:06:50 inlight: Lol Threema existed 2y before Signal 16:06:54 Tox and briar is better. 16:07:01 but it is 16:07:06 And was more modeled off of an e2ee WhatsApp 16:07:08 and it's marketing tactic 16:07:24 inlight: For a few distinct threat models, but has massive draw backs. 16:07:32 This is off-topic, lets keep this room for Monero discussions please. 16:07:39 Feel free to DM about all of that if you feel like it. 16:07:44 sethforprivacy: would you mind reading: https://soatok.blog/2021/11/05/threema-three-strikes-youre-out/ 16:07:50 xxfedexx[m]: Its not. Based my 1% fee on this resource and to a comparable DEX. 16:07:51 ^ kindly read this :) 16:07:55 https://haveno.exchange/faq/#what-are-the-fees-for-trading-on-haveno 16:08:34 i hope for 0.2% fees or less 16:08:50 nearly no one would use an exchange with 1% fee 16:08:55 current fees for LM are 1% maker 0% taker 16:09:04 inlight: anything for the likes! 16:09:17 xxfedexx[m]: Kraken's "buy with credit card" fee is 3% 16:09:30 I am talking about crypto<>crypto 16:09:31 wut , i'm genuine,before reading i used to believe threema is better but its a snake oil 16:09:43 (not saying that it's "good", just that it exists) 16:09:46 r4v3r23[m]: yah) 16:10:29 merope: exchanging bitcoin into monero and viceversa on tradeogre costs you 0.2% fee, why would any user switch to haveno? 16:10:46 only for fiat to crypto? 16:10:47 because fiat 16:10:59 yup 16:11:08 what are the fees on Bisq? 16:12:01 "We haven’t made a final decision on the amount of the Haveno fee, but it will most likely be less than 1%" 16:12:01 So it's not really 1% - nor any other number really, because they haven't decided yet 16:12:23 nioc: Combined BTC trading fee rate is 1% (0.12% by maker and 0.88% by taker). 16:12:26 i know, i said "i hope for something like 0.2% 16:12:27 * like 0.2%" 16:12:33 https://bisq.wiki/Trading_fees 16:13:53 yes I ddg ed 16:13:58 Combined BTC trading fee rate is 1% (0.12% by maker and 0.88% by taker) 16:14:15 thx entry1[m] 16:14:28 np OG 16:16:43 a possible issue with voting on proposals by trading fees is that the whales have more say, sort of like pos 16:17:25 there is no simple answer, even this idea which certainly has merit 16:17:27 "exchanging bitcoin into monero..." <- They probably wouldn't 16:17:32 nioc: The fee-payers don't get the vote, the council does FWIW 16:17:49 And fee-payers don't get a correlated voting weight when choosing council members or anything. 16:18:01 I was commenting on an idea put forth here 16:18:07 Ah 16:18:10 Sorry 🙂 16:18:14 np 16:19:30 surgeon_[m]: I know, this is why we need super low fees 16:20:11 be sure to give feedback in #haveno:haveno.network, I could also see different fees for crypto<>crypto and fiat<>crypto trades as they have different risks and difficulties. 16:20:33 sethforprivacy: already did 16:20:55 different fees for crypto<>fiat and crypto<>crypto can work 16:21:10 but anyways why putting fees? 16:21:19 To fund development, fund arbitrators, etc. 16:21:20 i mean, at least some minimal fees are for avoiding spamming 16:21:42 If you have a way to do all of the things necessary from fees without fees, please do propose it 🙂 16:21:54 <1% is already quite minimal 16:22:11 sethforprivacy: it's not minimal if you are a trader 16:22:25 Idk that a platform like Haveno is really ideal for "trading" 16:22:43 Of course it can be used for that but p2p solutions for exchanges will necessarily be not great for "trading" 16:22:59 As they introduce a lot of friction and time delays (necessarily) over CEXs and paper-trading. 16:23:16 xxfedexx[m]: Why? Just use tradeogre instead. 16:23:41 surgeon_[m]: TradeOgre is custodial, could KYC or freeze funds at any time, cannot do fiat trades, etc. 16:23:42 tradeogre is bad just like any centralized exchange 16:23:49 It's a good service but not ideal long-term in any way. 16:24:01 Only reason it's "fine" is that it's no-KYC (for now) 16:24:19 sethforprivacy: centralized exchanges can also give you "fake xmr" they don't actually own, thus reducing the price 16:24:30 xxfedexx[m]: Yeah as long as you don't withdraw. 16:24:31 this happened for centuries with gold and happens with Monero tooù 16:24:35 For sure 16:24:36 s/tooù/too/ 16:24:46 sethforprivacy: Not many people withdraw 16:25:04 including myself, i keep a part of my XMR on TradeOgre 16:27:01 sethforprivacy: So what you're saying is there is value in a service that doesn't have these shortcomings? Could this value possibly be expressed in higher fees? 16:32:09 "So what you're saying is there..." <- Yes, and should be 16:32:31 Higher fees are necessary as you're paying arbitrators, open-source contributors, and can't be as "lean" as a centralized and closed-off entity. 16:32:40 IMO, of course. 16:44:25 Yeah, that was exactly my point. 16:52:22 hi 16:53:11 i closely follow monero , but i use bitcoin cash/ btc 16:53:48 however, i would like to use monero as early as possible, but the problem i am facing is related to the 24 word seed key 16:54:39 generally i remember my 12 word (multiple) wallet keys of my btc/bch wallet 16:55:23 that isn't possible in monero wallet 16:55:41 and i want a electrum style wallet for monero), not some electrion gui thing. 16:57:49 just make believe it is 2 twelve word seeds :) 16:57:58 it is actually 25 words 16:58:09 feather wallet uses a 14 word seed 16:58:57 c11 16:59:06 inlight: you can import your 12 word seed into Monerujo 16:59:16 it will convert it to monero's 25 word seed 17:07:07 convert a btc/bch seed into monero? 17:08:53 yes 17:25:18 hi 17:26:16 Maybe is a too basic question, but can someone tell HOW to buy Monero at beginning? I look for no fees starting from IBAN accounts or debit cards or cash at ATMs 17:27:49 ther are fees ) 17:54:41 Withdrawal from BTC wallet in Crypto.com is fixed to about 20 EUR. How much withdrawal for Monero? 18:01:14 what? withdrawal from where? 18:01:27 Monero transactions cost less than 0.01 EUR 18:02:36 withdrawal fee on Kraken is 0.0001 XMR, or about 2 cents 18:04:05