well minexmr is still online and its HR has increased the last several hrs from 250 to 280MH

They on APAC time or something maybe?

is there a difference between scanning blocks vs syncing them (data-wise)?

want to figure out how much data a mobile wallet would use to scan a wallet each month

<nioc> "well minexmr is still online and..." <- maybe as soon as HF does activates, then that hashrate might go down to 0, like, if they didnt do the extra necessary step to get the pool working with the upgrade since apparently just upgrading the daemon wasnt enough for some pools to keep working

<r4v3r23[m]> "is there a difference between..." <- i think so, was wondering about the same thing few months ago, like if an rpc client using silent.link 2gb data could have been enough but unfortunately, it still use a fuck ton a data to scan those wallets....

s/client/server/

to which was pointed torward the monero-lws thingy

which unfortunately works only with iirc something like monerujo and calls home and all that shit

but dont take my word for it if they're using the same amount of data, i just know that it does use a fuck ton but idk if its actually the same amount

<r4v3r23[m]> "is there a difference between..." <- Afaik no there is not

You need to scan every tx in every block

So....

* i dont think so, was wondering about the same thing few months ago, like if an rpc server using silent.link 2gb data could have been enough but unfortunately, it still use a fuck ton a data to scan those wallets....

jwinterm[m]: ~2GB/month then

Unless blocks grow significantly I suppose

a bit more than that and keeps growing

if average block is ~0.1MB

so pissed off that starlink couple weeks ago showed its true color by paving the ways for data caps and gon start throttling at 250GB monthly.... with extra 10 bucks for each extra 100 gb...

for full nodes could have been really nice

well, guessing at least they halved the price so, could get a 2nd and 3rd terminal for redundancy, still, pissed off

"Dutch police have arrested the developer of Tornado Cash, a privacy mixer"

" It is suspected that persons behind this organisation have made large-scale profits from these transactions."

Another reason why it's good to not have dev-tax on a cryptocurrency

on a protocol level

they call it "decentralized organizations" lol

so how about haveno with that "engine" thingy that would be getting fees from transactions on the platform? o.o

very bad idea looking at what's happening

or devs just gotta be anon instead of being greedy wanting to brag for their linkedin 😹

it's risky for sure to use free speech in this f-up world

Monero is the best anti-tyranny weapon we've got right now

the "regular FIAT money is used also for crime" argument for Monero will soon be gone when they replace it with digital version

Monero got the best chance of surviving due to it's true privacy and decentralization

ypavtv97lx[m]: if shady politicians pushing for cbdc then how will they keep hiding trillions in offshore accounts? there will always be something for those criminal elites imo

and monero definitely isnt that with that low 5 billion market cap

well at least for now

it's all corrupted, they did not have problem hiding their shady wealth using regular banks

right but that's where there is a difference between regular banks and transparent ledger, for example with bitcoin it's all public but with banks only the ones in power have access to the view keys for everyone else

will the cbdc be transparent ? for sure only for the banksters

so ofc they could hide it in those banks as regular people can see what's up in the bank acc of those in powers

ypavtv97lx[m]: idk but would have thought so

s/can/cant/

transparency is bad for them, they rather be semi-private and inflate the price whenever they want without public knowing

so i guess even the source code for those cbdb might not even become publicly available either uh? would just be so weird that people would just adopt something that shady in mass

s/cbdb/cbdc/

even if source code was available, how would we know if their compiled version is not modified ? it's centralized, we would need to trust that they are not cheating

yeah...

the problem is that most people trust government issued money more than anything else, anything with a government approval is saint.

and government shouldn't have nothing to do with money

it's not their business how people trade their time

oh and they prob wont actually even need people to "adopt" the new system, they could just make it seamlessly, like mastercard bought ciphertrace or somethin like that... so they might also just make those mastercard seamlessly working with cbdc, ATMs would just get a software update and grandma would just be able to use her current debit card without any extra step nor consent on her end.... that would be fucked up

yep for those who already use digital cash (master/visa/wire) it would be seamless

with the push for "cashless" cause paper cash can give you the 2020 herpes or somethin, everything is already set up going that way LOL

with cbdc and lack of true privacy, people will very quickly realize that digital does not guarantee clean, herpes-less money.

it could accelerate adoption to Monero.... at least some percentage of those people will think about alternatives

hopefully... am still skeptical since the whole narrative is being controlled, whatever it might be, majority will just keep going with what's being pushed by whatever gov/media but as long as there's at least a small enough adoption on those alternative then whatever if the whole world gon insane if could still live and survive without joining the borg then we good :3

i agree, I'm already free with my wealth secured with Monero and couldn't care less what government will do.

they can take my house, they can take my land, car, even my freedom and put me in jail BUT they won't ever take MY Monero. I have encrypted seed words in many places with password that's easy to remember but practically impossible to brute-force. I feel safe.

haha i hear ya, i dont even have any backup anywhere, no data and could just recover the seeds straight up from the blockchain's data itself without even needing to remember or write down the seed or anything (next level opsec o.o)

and even if price goes to like 10 bucks due to being legal only in a single country on the whole planet then it would still work the way it's currently working

you got me thinking, how about putting encrypted seed words on the blockchain itself ? :D

Idk if Monero tx_extra is still around, could also post on Bitcoin chain

doesnt even have to be an existing encryption algorithm, only the first 3 letters of each words of the seed are necessary (them being full words is just so could avoid typos but first 3 letters works as well) so from that could figure, idk, like in movies they being like hiding messages in books for example but could just be block numbers then when checking on that specific block from the blockchain, could be a certain

transaction hash and reconstructing the seed from your own made logic ;)

nice, in this way the message wouldn't be on constant attack

the funniest thing, I'm more concerned about government than regular thief's

haha i hear ya on that :P

oh right and there's also the seed offset that could be used so like, reconstructing the seed and adding a seed offset which could be any string of character so that way even if someone figures your logic to create and recover seeds that way, yours would be with the offset that only you know in your own mind

police constantly seizing money, some legit and some not - why they all don't switch to Monero ? i guess lack of knowledge.

currently not using offset due to the way i encrypt and store my seeds, it's pretty pointless. but on the public blockchain it would make more sense.

:3

the worst part for me was coming with a password that i wouldn't forget but would be hard enough so i wouldn't have to worry about brute-force

not easy

the nightmare of forgetting your password...

haha yeah 😹

and if you have to store it due to complication, it's pointless

i remember in my past forgetting password to some of my stuff, it sucks! but forgetting it to all your money ? oh man

right, when started out that journey, registering on many exchanges and whatnot using different passwords for each... errr what a pain, so started writing them down but then hdd fuck up and lost that so now just being like, well, fuck storing anything, just gotta figure a logic to important passwords but also nowadays aint even using that many different websites i actually need to register into anyways

there's always e-mail password restore for sites

yeah for few years every single time i had to connect anywhere i literally had to do the pass recovery, such a pain 😹

i do it all the time lol

and also... multiple mail, single use mails and whatnot, which mail for which website, errrr... XD

ahh yeah

a little bit of paranoia is good for your health.

yeah, and overall its good practice for proper opsec

everywhere they try to collect your data to sell it, when i buy something from e-shops i use fake name for each store and when they sell my data i know exactly who sold it "hello, is this duke nukem ? i would like to offer you...."

so when its something actually important then figured what not to do, what didnt work out in the past and what still works now

that too yea :P

gotta go, nice talking with you. see ya later!

likewise, cheers 😽

Morpheus[m]: exactly which data did you want? was it number of miners and hashrate across time?

if so can make a quick-ish one that gathers this data per "main block found" as that data is pre-calculated and cached

akin to p2pool.observer/api/found_blocks?limit=100&coinbase

otherwise you can do towards any N height number via p2pool.observer/api/block_by_height/1234567?coinbase for example

each one has difficulty / and "outputs" that would have existed related to actual miners on the window

I can provide the first one in bulk, with just numbers

second one can only provide a dump of the blocks on-disk readily without processing everything again, but you can probably extract a sample every "hour" worth or so

alternatively for some non-documented statistics p2pool.observer/api/stats/difficulty

these provide a whole dump of information, do not request them more than once per day I'd say (you can backfill some of the data via p2pool.observer/api/pool_info which returns current miners known, difficulty, etc)

these undocumented statistics have an hour granularity for the first one, a day for the second, third 6 hours (the window length)

these endpoints match mini as well

<DataHoarder> "if so can make a quick-ish one..." <- Hi fren, I wanted the historical data for the variables provided on this API p2pool.io/api/pool/stats

p2pool.observer/api/stats/difficulty more or less applies to hashrate

So I could plot. It's the number of miners, hashrate, totalhashes, and totalblocksfound. The others there's no need.

for miners, either miner_seen or miner_seen_window

for blocks found, I don't think I have a readily available bulk one but should be fairly easy

for totalhashes I think this is derived off the block afaik, no ready ones for that and it'd require a bit more expensive bulk calculation (as it's designed atm)

Yes, that's how I've been calculating too

If I have number of miners and hashrate (historical) I can faily derive the others

fairly*

yep, then use p2pool.observer/api/stats/difficulty for hashrate

p2pool.observer/api/stats/miner_seen for just total "miners" seen, and the other one for miners seen per "window" (6h)

H/s is calculated via difficulty / block_time (10s)

on that endpoint it's pre-converted from hex, in other places it's shown in hexadecimal

see if you can do it via those, poke if you need any other endpoint

<joshhavepigdog> What do you guys think about David Chaum? He seems pretty intelligent.

<joshhavepigdog> xx.network

<joshhavepigdog> I think there is a Treasury / dev fund though

<joshhavepigdog> Also doesn’t look like they have Confidential Transactions. Looks like the network is still very new too.

Stop shilling 💩 in community please and thanks

Has a dev tax and isnt private? Thanks for wasting 8 seconds of my time LOL

<joshhavepigdog> Well some of the tech / ideas are interesting

<joshhavepigdog> It does look a bit scuffed though

<joshhavepigdog> I’m not a shill

Chaum is legit, but like so many cypherpunks their historical work is incredible, but they haven't really done anything of note lately - they're running on the steam of their past victories, which simply isn't enough

<joshhavepigdog> Thanks fluffy🙂

xx.network as featured in the wall st journal

I always look to conservative finance guys for my shitcoin guidance lol

08:23 <r4v3r23[m]> is there a difference between scanning blocks vs syncing them (data-wise)? <-- I measured yesterday about 15MB per day of blocks

noice

The current block height is 2,688,805. Fork height is 2,688,888. 83 blocks to go, happening in approximately 2.77 hours

and minexmr pushed their closure to one more week so it should keep mining after that HF, curious if nanopool took the necessary steps, would be fun if they actually didnt :3

so they are now prepared to mine after the fork yet will still be shutting down on the 19th

hmmm

i mean tbh, i kinda believe the narrative that it's for ideological reasons or whatever, well, there wasnt any actual statements on the matter but, taking in consideration that they got a really nice stream of revenue for that long and were the reason for so much fud about mining centralization, i definitely get why they would take a step back, take those gains and trying to push for a p2pool adoption on their way out

that's the best thing they could do to hopefully get their own stack to gain in value

there was some market, WHM or somethin and few others that literally planned their retirement and did just that, taking their gains and closing gracefully

and by pushing by 1 week, they still being on those top pools on miningpoolstats and the first thing being seen is that they're closing and trying to direct miners to p2pool so 1 week delay definitely does make some sense

Im telling yall, they fucking around LOL

Either they updated their nodes, or are keeping them on v17 and forking the chain

If they updated, why wait til 2hrs before fork to come out with your news lmao

lol no way

Shitheads should shut down right now while hash rate is low

We'll see

If hash rate returns to minexmr over the next 24 hrs, those.guys are for sure dicking around

as talked over the monero space channel earlier, there is literally no reason at all for anyone to try a chainsplit, there is literally no controversy whatsoever about that upgrade 😹

Yeah, so why plan to shut down (not upgrade) then change your mind and upgrade 10s of nodes hours before the fork?

i thought they would have to upgrade anyways to keep doing the payouts, maybe they did the 18.0.0 upgrade days or weeks ago already

Whether they updated or not, the only difference is the objective. Neither is in good nature. Updated and plan to push hashrate around during the hard fork

Or didnt update and are tricking miners into lowing v18 global hashrrate during the fork

I set up an email for xmr.beauty

Contact me at ahmed⊙xb

that's about 2000 miners that moved to different pools tho, there is just no way imo

If they updated, they could have kept quiet and just not disappeared, then announed on the 15th that they would remain open

We'll see what happens over the next 24-48hrs

like, in what world the 2000 individual miners that moved to other pools would just go back to minexmr in 2 days? doesnt make sense

6200 miners on minexmr

so more like 3000 then?

i mean, compared to last week

they were around 9000

to about 3000 that left already

s/to/so/

must be relatively small miners still there

yeah

160 Mh/s from 950 Mh/s

so the big ones already left

You couldnt see on minexmr

But you can on nanopool. The hashrates of those "3000" miners

nanopool gained only about a couple hundreds new miners top in a whole week and hashrate didnt move much

It onto takes a maybe 100 miners to return to quadruple the hashrate on minexmr

Nanopool went from 100mh-700mh

....

you can mouse hover the "7 days history" on that first row of miningpoolstats and slide so see the evolution of that hashrate on each pools

Ive been watching since announcement

it went from 350 to 700 Mh/s in a single day last week without a miners increase while minexmr stayed unchanged at 950 Mh/s

Not since minexmr has been flat for 4 days

and stayed around that 700 Mh/s for the past week

And supposedly something will change if they keep running for another week LOL

Exactlt

So how does staying open another week help offload miners if the number is stagnant

These bots gonna bot

supportxmr got a nice increase, smol pools went from being at like 50 to 200 and p2pool from like 80 to 170

50mh

35 mh

well idk, it's still 160 Mh/s on minexmr that could still be going elsewhere and they keep promoting p2pool...

33mh

There's all of nanopools previous hashrate from 2 weeks ago.

august 6th: nanopool 720 Mh/s, minexmr 963 Mh/s

22mh

which sure, 1 week ago is after the announcement but still, what am saying is that that past week minexmr kept decreasing while nanopool didnt increase that much more

like, your theory is basically that minexmr planed to do some fuckery by moving hashrate around

while at the same time saying to individual miners to move their hashrate

there is no point at all going through all that trouble in your scenario cause in that case, they could just do the fuckery with their own hardware by solo-mining

Yeah, my dates are off

But 170mh is nothing to lose and an opportunity for the hashrate to increase.

Miners that get cut off, would notice and switch.

And leaving the pool open is an opportunity*

fair yeah, having experienced that as well with was wownero when they went solo-mining, i had some rigs that kept having that red error mining message in loop for 2 days cause i thought that was just a temporary issue with the pool itself rather than a whole upgrade type of situation so definitely agreeing on that, if they closed, miners would notice and switch :P

Definitely.

If the idea is to move hashrate around, the method wouldnt be to pull the plug without notice. It would be some bait and switch tactics like what this looks like

Am I saying im correct? Nahuhh... but smells like bs to me.

not everything is an attack lol

And has since the day they said "August 12"

I would be surprised if they do anything shady

their announcement just seemed genuine to me but i guess we never know in this space

the tor site is running

Everything sounded good to me, but the date was a "blocker".

It only makes sense ~1 week prior or post hard fork. Not the day of.

Now, getting the the finish line and moving to 1 week post.. sounds good.. if it was announced 2 weeks ago.

that was close to a 2 weeks notice tho if am not mistaken

11 days ago

The August 19 was 2 hrs notice

right but imo that 2nd notice doesnt mean much, just that things will just keep going how they went for the past days

like, it doesnt really have as much of an impact as the 1st notice

It does

and either way, that still makes interesting data, there was a bunch of speculations about botnets, hashrate that couldnt be moved anymore and whatnot but it still keeps decreasing even as of today so....

We were expecting a 170mh drop in 2hrs

Now, we have no idea whats going to happen. Whether miners will return or what.

They used minexmr partially because minexmr doesnt say who mined what blocks

A more simple alternative explanation is that miners were/are simply not aware MineXMR is shutting down

right, i meant the speculations am referring to was from those past years

which was also the speculations around minexmr closure, the reason of their close i mean

Yeah, like not updating nodes

s/close/closure/

But thats out. Obviously they did

and would have had to anyways to finish paying out the dust left from miners

No

If they close on the 12 they have 24 hours where old tx are accepted

Extending it forces them to update

after v16 they would have had yea

Which is 26 hours from now

it did have some big impact on that mempool tho so i mean... it just makes sense to take a few days range for that...

Hey. Im 100% against closing on the 12

And had always said 1 week prior or post

unexpected shits do happen all the time, no reason to set a specific deadline that everything would be done at that precise time rather than just chill, upgrade to v0.18.1 and take all the time they need to do their thing u know

Uh. You're making my point

:derp: x)

I said day 1, why would they choose to close the largest pool on 2 weeks notice, hope to notify 10k miners and then pull the plug at the hard fork

Made no sense (because of the date)

Makes a shit ton more sense to do it after the fork settles, or well in advance if saving on fees and want a clean exit.

i guess will see but yeah, i just dont see how they would try to pull something malicious now which could have been done differently if they really wanted to do some fuckery

so they have a huge amount of hashrate for years, wait until almost all miners switched to a different pool before doing something malicious?

makes 0 sense

extended the deadline is not an attack, they probably saw that not all users switched yet and gave them more time

or at least wait for them to do something malicious first before accusing them of doing something malicious lol

😆😆 selsta, im anxious

I hard fork in 2 hrs. I'm bored. Gotta stir up something 😁

xnbya is a long time community member who also reported vulnerabilities in the past to the project, i have no worries

i would have trusted minexmr more than nanopool

But I was saying, my initial issue was the August 12 date.

The new date is the one u suggested

It's been like 2hrs since drama. We ARE DYING HERE

The one I* suggested

So im really not mad, just saying "see. This Aug 12 thing wasnt gonna work"

ah, funny u saying trusting more minexmr than nanopool cause was exactly my thoughts as well when a week ago nanopool got that jump in nethash while minexmr didnt decrease at all, like, been really thinking nanopool being shady there :3

Luigi1111, where is Luigi1111w? Crazy guy

@selsta good to know

1hr 9mins til I can make view tag tx?

And use 16 rings?

imma waiting for 16 rings

I think Nanopool is not involved at all with the community, so them becoming the biggest pool is bad for the project.

^ 100% agree on that

The current block height is 2,688,854. Fork height is 2,688,888. 34 blocks to go, happening in approximately 1.13 hours

you know what happens when we hard fork?

nothing

everything still happens

smooooothly

I wasnt aware minexmr was involved.

I presume moneroocean is good

Liberty pool is active here (moneroocean clone)

C3pool is another clone. Any insight on them?

tbf, any pool just being a pool are greedy mofos that just want to get those fees o.o

solo-mining ftw

I don't know about Liberty and C3pool

p2pool is like solo mining :D

That's why I mine with that one

at the exception that your receiving address becomes known with p2pool

solo-mining is the purest form of money laundering o.o

spacekitty420[m4: That's why I have a mining wallet

:3

al800[m]1: right, definitely good practice

is there a link with a pretty countdown?

Liberty is 0% for xmr iirc @spacekitty

that is a block behind

caught up

localmonero.co/blocks seems on time right now but couple hours ago while refreshing it had a 5mins delay

dang aight, nvm then, localmonero still late

it is not late

I thought blockchain explorers always show 1 block behind?

oh, maybe

being on 2688866 means that the last mined block was 2688865

not sure tbh :D

nah i think you're right

block explorers = last block already mined, daemon = block currently being mined

lubs our coin

:)

20 blocks to go

btc has used a node binary flag as consensus before, no? like if x % of the network runs with the flag it will be considered consensus and the network will upgrade to that?

or enlighten me if im wrong but you know what im talking about.

Thats only a small sample, but 👀

kinghat[m]: for segwit and things like that, they used the flag before i think yeah

ofrnxmr[m] these numbers are not important, what matters are pool nodes

i dont recall monero doing consensus like that, but i could be wrong.

havent came across something like that on monero either

i guess one of the excuse so far was that, all the hard fork didnt have any controversy within the community, would love to hear some more thoughts on the flag thingy tho

though i feel like that could be gamed fairly easily 🤔

was on the previous to last aantonop youtube vid regarding bip119 that he mentioning the pros and cons of the flag, that there is some upgrades that miners have a financial incentive to vote for while majority of devs would be voting against and things like that, interesting perspective on the matter

<selsta> "08:23 <r4v3r23> is there a..." <- yeah, those were the numbers i was guesstimating. so scanning a block uses less data than syncing same block on a node

* a block in a wallet uses less

10 blocks remaining!

If you want to make a symbolic last TX on v14, do it now!

a txn for the homies?

"symbolic last TX" that might be retroactively de-anon'ed by ciphertrace while the ones on the fork wont o.o

v14 txs will be valid for another 24 hours I believe.

right, until v16 hit

yes but they will only be constructed for the next 20 min (if youve updated) right?

This is the so-called "double fork" that minimizes user-level disruptions

r4v3r23[m]: i would think so, next 24h would be v15 tx then after 2nd part of that "double-fork" happens, would be v16 tx

and if not updated then v14 for next 24 and then would be refused by the network

(or on a chain split)

I wonder which pools, if any, didnt update

been crossing fingers for a week that nanopool didnt or if they didnt that they didnt do the extra step thingy

s/didnt/did/

Haha

someone posted a screenshot of nicehash being like, they still thinking HF was back in july

Whisa

3 more blocks o.o

A whole flood of tx jsut came on txstreet lmao

1

Not a flood to worry about, but txstreet is cool to watch Lol

ya im watching txstreet too

Current Block Height: 2688888

🎉

\o/

\o/

.barolo

lol went from 32(out)+73(in) to 17(out)+40(in)

are we there yet

selsta: 18+81 -> 12+61

validating txpool for v15

WHERES OUR BUS?!?

new info in daemon vs other forks

or I could be senile

I lost about half my connections too

got my first blocked node

can glean anything from the pool situation?

wen 128 rings

soon_tm

r4v3r23[m]: In the past actually

I think the record was about ~1000

its still planned with the upcoming seraphis, might still take a long while tho

* past actually (it used to be possible to choose ring size when sending TX)

Wonder why this fee was so high. Custom wallet perhaps?

The fee/kb, not necesarily the total

Donate to miners?

I don't see why people increase fee with XMR, I mean, just leave it to the default so you're TX don't stand out

Fastest = 6$/tx

so not custom client?

Yeah, not custom. Looks like they have their wallet set to fastest

Fast ^ 0.03064 xmr

Slow 0.00003

Tx still have ringsize 11?

should be 16

p2pool found a block

nioc: Did one using cake after fork, it did with ringsize 11

11 still allowed for next 24 hours

gud job cake

inge: Wallets are programmed to do it with 11? For 24hrs?

don't know if you have to update the wallet

so what was the outcome of the pool talk from earlier?

Wallet is updated 🤔

I would hope any updated wallet would use 16 from the fork block

But un-updated wallets will probably work till the next fork tomorrow

ok, monero gui does it correctly

if they updated wallet2 to v0.18 internally it should work

16 in cake

Support xmr down 150mh

cake wallet also does it correctly for me

nikg83[m]: are you sure you updated?

1in 2out tx size increased 1.42kB>1.50kB

2in 2out 1.92kB > 2.17kB

View tags + extra rings - bp+

<selsta> "nikg83: are you sure you updated..." <- Yah, seems it’s xmrchain display bug 😅 ; counted the decoys and it’s fine

the ring size in xmrchain is for the input, not the tx itself

No update for Monerujo?

they have the apk on github

john_r365[m]: They have one on github

john_r365[m]: working fine here

Thanks! Only checked F-Droid

Have to get it from GitHub

Lolol. #selstas echo

so what's that lowest default fee be at now? like it was something like 0.0000058, lowest am seeing rn is like 0.00025?

.00003 here

noice, alrighty :)

But nice that if someone wants to spam the network, its gonna cost them..

monerujo on gh says it's a pre

kinghat[m]: they always do that

move to stable after a few days of no issues

Wait, did fees increased?

Was it because of jammed mempool or the hardfork increased the standard fee?

hardfork, if am not mistaken was on purpose and not a an actual limitation

min fee increased with the fork, up to 0.5 crnts

I thought fees are 2c now but that was before moonero price dropped

*cents

like, for the reason stated above to be against spamming attack type of situations

CidadoisAncap[m]: To make spam attacks expensive

Kinda sad

miners get paid more

CidadoisAncap[m]: It’s still cheap

Is was having fun paying half brazilian cent

still cheap tho

was 0.00000580*165

so multiply that by 5

Now is 0.00003

for a 1in 2out

and i guess, that thing:

would also be extra expensive to run

gotta preserve that blockchain size increase a bit too :3

Normal speed fees are about 2c selsta:

In cake, whatever medium is is 0.000222 or about 3c

I normally pay 0.00000x (where x is from 5 to 7)

With feather

0.00003*167=0.00501

1/2 cent

slippery slope!

1in 2out

al800[m]1: well, not anymore tho, right? and if so, you might have forgot to upgrade maybe, idk

Fee to TX my mining lot is way higher because it's composed of a lot of inputs I presume

I just did a 2in 2out tx and paid $0.00741146

not even a penny

a wait, you ment fee from since the update, I did not test it yet

yes after fork with 16 rings

right, it increased with the upgrade thats what we sayin :P

someone said 2 cents, although I wasn't following the context

yall talking in usd, that's whats confusing

instead of talking in btc

I don't use btc

I do use usd

cause fee is usd changes every single day

in btc its fixed

i mean

not btc, xmr

fml

whatever

0.00004452 from monerowallet gui (same fee for "normal" and "slow 0.2x fee)

lol

kitties in space

:derp:

will check from feather in 20 minutes lol

(Can't use feather from main account, it does not support 1.8 on ledger)

s/1/0/, s/8/18/

still, point stands, if talking in xmr instead of usd then it would be less confusing cause its fixed, like ofrnxmr earlier posted screenshot of 0.,00003 xmr, the fuck even is 2 cents u know

yeah he said 2 cents which is wrong, that's why I calculated in usd

many people think of fees in usd

but yeah your wallet thinks in xmr

never seen the fee in usd nor would i care to, using xmr cli, showing in xmr o.o

yeah CLI

i guess some wallet does show the automatic conversion tho, not a feature i would personally need but yeah i guess some do like it

GUI is too confusing

ikr!

from Feather, a little less than monero wallet gui

so same as ofrnxmr earlier then :)

* wallet gui (They released a ledger compatible update yesterday)

Just noticed the ledger bug still there on monero wallet gui.

If you unplug the ledger you can't just replug it and send a TX, you have to close monero wallet gui, plug the ledger and open monero wallet gui.

Feather at lease say that it's disconnected from ledger and have yes/no choice to reconnect, without closing the app

from -dev "at the fork height old txs got dropped from pools because they didn't have the minimum fee"

50txs got dropped

al800[m]1: will look into it bug Ledger wallet is not made to work unplugged

but*

cause the old txs needed the new fee

whoops

it re-validated the mempool on fork boundary to avoid monerod getting stuck like last time

would those tx be automatically refunded in wallet or would they have to flush mempool on their end or somethin?

the re-validation code was tested before we merged the fee changes

selsta: Yeah, Feather continue to work until you receive a TX (or until you want to make a TX) in that case a popup show telling you ledger is gone and you can reconnect to it.

I also noticed the ledger need to be connected when you get the first conformation of a received TX (including change)

s/conformation/confirmation/

it isn't supposed to work unplugged

spacekitty420[m4: I'm not sure, if it gets dropped from the mempool it theoretically means the person has to redo the transactions

Those txs should show as "failed", and the outputs again marked as unspent, or less technically, the "amount returned". At least the code tries that. But a fork is a very special situation ...

alrighty

2,688,925 block reward looks juicy with those fees o.o

Yeaa

oh snap, and 4 blocks later 0.641888720000 xmr

:O

0.039 on a single tx apparently, damn

s/039/03952/

ciphertrace back at it again apparently :derp:

well, mastercard more like since they been bought 😹

shit like, that news about mastercard is old now but i still cant even take that shit seriously to this day... like, fucking mastercard 😹

binged watched "How to with John Willson" earlier today, start of 2nd season he being like visiting that real estate in new york and the agents telling him that they dont say "master bedroom" anymore but "primary bedroom" for political correct reasons cause they "werent master of anyone" or somethin like that

wen "mastercard" forced to name change? o.o