02:10:45 <bridgerton[m]> <joshhavepigdog> Just to be sure, where else is Monero’s codebase stored aside from GitHub? Does anyone know some places where or have a comprehensive list?
02:13:05 <bridgerton[m]> <joshhavepigdog> Upon further digging I see (1) Rewind (2) Monero pulse domains (3) personal devices (4) Gitlab (maybe, not clear from the post I read)
02:13:39 <selsta> a lot of devs have a local copy
02:18:25 <bridgerton[m]> <joshhavepigdog> So we are sweet
02:19:17 <bridgerton[m]> <joshhavepigdog> It seems the risk is very well mitigated. The difficulty is amending the codebase if it gets the boot from GitHub. Perhaps this is also something you guys have figured out already?
02:19:43 <bridgerton[m]> <joshhavepigdog> I see people talking about IPFS quite a bit, but am unfamiliar with it.
02:35:44 <bridgerton[m]> <joshhavepigdog> Let’s say there was a bad totalitarian crackdown. GitHub repo is gone and getmonero.org is gone.... (full message at https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/libera.chat/a074906054210580656baff98d419ac03c2efaf2)
02:36:30 <bridgerton[m]> <joshhavepigdog> Basically, would the new download link still be verifiable secure / not malicious via a process similar to how things currently are?
02:44:41 <selsta> download link for binaries?
02:47:31 <BusyBoredom[m]> Presumably the binaries would still be signed by binaryfate or some other well-known community member.
02:52:14 <bridgerton[m]> <joshhavepigdog> ^ So a person downloading could still verify their software is coming from a legitimate source right? This would only be false if someone was able to duplicate binaryfate’s signature.
03:00:47 <BusyBoredom[m]> Yep
03:01:47 <BusyBoredom[m]> You could grab it from dread or the pirate bay or anywhere, and verify the signature the same way regardless of where you download the software from. 
03:58:13 <bridgerton[m]> <joshhavepigdog> Alrighty
03:58:28 <bridgerton[m]> <joshhavepigdog> Thanks that is very helpful to me if things get ugly soon
03:59:05 <bridgerton[m]> <joshhavepigdog> Busy, what is the strongest attack you think the gov could do on Monero? How would they go about it?
04:35:14 <BusyBoredom[m]> They'd sow distrust in the community. Look at how bitcoin has been neutered, they can't even make common-sense updates anymore without everyone screaming bloody murder.
06:38:42 <jozsef[m]> Oh. Can't help thinking that that also applies to offline society (nost prominently in the US and in the west) in general. In bitcoin that's easier to see because the timescale is only about a decade compared to about 5-7 offline.
11:02:54 <shima1944[m]> Hi, loading blocks stopped at 5012 mark and no further goes.Tell me that's okay?
11:03:30 * shima1944[m] uploaded an image: (6250KiB) < https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/matrix.org/taZxnnqywKBSJwksyjtcURZd/ima_94c7497.jpeg >
11:03:55 <shima1944[m]> For minutes 30 on this mark
11:09:06 <shima1944[m]> Reboot the pridevity,now synchronization is complete but shows that I have 0 on account.How could it be?
11:09:30 * shima1944[m] uploaded an image: (5136KiB) < https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/matrix.org/ScXjOLmkbGIliDMAkcyVSPsf/ima_8c3b45b.jpeg >
11:12:33 <shima1944[m]> Pdsazhat please burn.I worry about coins
11:12:57 <shima1944[m]> Подскажите  пожалуйста что делать .переживаю за монеты
11:13:51 <shima1944[m]> Please tell me what to do.I worry about my coins
11:16:08 <shima1944[m]> Please if anyone knows what the matter help to return money to balance
11:18:58 <shima1944[m]> Please call someone.I'm very worried about my funds
11:20:47 * shima1944[m] uploaded an image: (6075KiB) < https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/matrix.org/lZvPlyzVmqagwXeftscvOYkb/ima_ee84a35.jpeg >
11:21:56 <ofrnxmr[m]> Appears internet nit working 
11:25:26 <shima1944[m]> Internet normal working
11:26:48 <spackle_xmr[m]> Does the wallet show your transaction history at the same time it shows 0 balance?
11:26:59 <shima1944[m]> Yes
11:27:28 <shima1944[m]> Transactions are not seen either
11:28:42 <spackle_xmr[m]> To be clear... no transaction history is shown? And this happened after you rebooted and reopened the software?
11:29:10 <shima1944[m]> Yes
11:30:39 <shima1944[m]> On time loading blocks all over the rabble,then I tried to send part of the funds,the app depended,I closed it ,opened and nothing was already
11:32:12 <shima1944[m]> s/over the rabble/appeared/, s/the//
11:35:12 <spackle_xmr[m]> Clearly the result is incorrect if there is a known transaction history and no transactions are shown, so first thought would be try to relax a bit. There is no proof that anything is missing for now.
11:35:12 <spackle_xmr[m]> The transaction history disappearing is not something I've seen, but typically it is because the restore height is set too recently. You can check the value under Settings, Info.
11:37:21 * shima1944[m] uploaded an image: (4602KiB) < https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/matrix.org/vFkgNxwPpxAXuYEwgGqHyRKl/ima_3fbf492.jpeg >
11:38:05 * shima1944[m] uploaded an image: (5300KiB) < https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/matrix.org/PkSPrBFPRSdqRUFbYJgAwYCK/ima_d681021.jpeg >
11:38:36 <shima1944[m]> Height different in left corner and in settings
11:41:52 <spackle_xmr[m]> That's correct. Left corner should show the current height of the network when sync'd, in settings that is the oldest height you are checking for transactions. Assuming all your activity is in the past two months or so, that is the correct setting.
11:41:52 <spackle_xmr[m]> I would try to rescan the wallet. Do this by changing the height in settings to a slightly lower number (you can change 2634238 to 2634200, for example).
11:51:52 <spackle_xmr[m]> If your earlier transactions are older than 2-3 months, than you need to change the restore height to a significantly lower number to get the correct history.
11:52:41 * shima1944[m] uploaded an image: (4718KiB) < https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/matrix.org/fnPvCDWVwFPaTSKWwHSjGdWP/ima_6335776.jpeg >
11:53:11 <shima1944[m]> Should he fully download what would be visible balance?
11:53:48 <shima1944[m]> Because until it is visible
11:55:31 <spackle_xmr[m]> I'm sorry, I do not understand your question.
11:55:31 <spackle_xmr[m]> Right now the wallet is scanning for your transaction history. In that image it is looking around 72 days ago.
12:13:53 <DanIsnotthemanBr> How long ago in days did you transact xmr?
12:16:59 <shima1944[m]> Yeeeeeees,fuh,thank you so much bro.
12:17:17 <shima1944[m]> > <@spackle_xmr:matrix.org> I'm sorry, I do not understand your question.
12:17:17 <shima1944[m]> > Right now the wallet is scanning for your transaction history. In that image it is looking around 72 days ago.
12:17:17 <shima1944[m]> You the best))
12:18:26 <spackle_xmr[m]> You are very welcome. I assume everything is showing correctly and you are able to transact as expected?
12:18:34 <shima1944[m]> Oh mo,1 sec,new problem)
12:18:52 * shima1944[m] uploaded an image: (4212KiB) < https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/matrix.org/BvrSqfQGYuvOYRWJUapdVKbK/ima_98aa352.jpeg >
12:20:18 <spackle_xmr[m]> Has the wallet fully completed the scan?
12:20:35 <shima1944[m]> Yes
12:27:13 <spackle_xmr[m]> Hmmm... well I can't say I'm sure of how to respond to that. If you are using remote nodes I would try connecting to a different.
12:27:13 * shima1944[m] uploaded an image: (4227KiB) < https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/matrix.org/USAANeEqeAwOEFIEGGDlvUYD/ima_8b87441.jpeg >
12:28:48 <spackle_xmr[m]> I'm trying to follow what you are doing. You attempted to create a transaction and it failed with the above error, and then did you set it to scan again?
12:29:33 <spackle_xmr[m]> I should be more clear... did you just try to send that transaction, get the above error, and now the wallet looks like your latest image without you doing anything else?
12:38:38 <DanIsnotthemanBr> I think it stopped syncing at certain block height and they rebooted and now its zero
12:44:28 <shima1944[m]> I accidentally went into an old version of my wallet,now I removed it.Once again put the wallet into a new version.Now let's see what happens)
12:46:22 <shima1944[m]> > <@123bob123:matrix.org> 
12:46:23 <shima1944[m]> > I think it stopped syncing at certain block height and they rebooted and now its zero
12:46:23 <shima1944[m]> > 
12:46:23 <shima1944[m]> Is that bad?
12:59:53 <shima1944[m]> >I think it stopped syncing at certain block height and they rebooted and now its zero
12:59:54 <shima1944[m]> What do I need to do to fix it?
13:02:02 * shima1944[m] uploaded an image: (5295KiB) < https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/matrix.org/uKvhKThrABVpZhPpTCAnBdnP/ima_a962dbc.jpeg >
13:02:13 <shima1944[m]> All the same
13:06:57 <ofrnxmr[m]> Around what date did you make your FIRST tx
13:07:58 <ofrnxmr[m]> Restore height has to be before your first tx
13:10:50 <sech1> The easiest fix is to restore your wallet from the seed words ad to use restore date before first transaction
13:10:56 <sech1> *and to use
13:17:14 <helpisinneed123d> Can somone tell me how i can cancel a transaction using the gui which has not been transmited to the network yet?
13:19:43 <shima1944[m]> >Around what date did you make your FIRST tx
13:19:43 <shima1944[m]> 30 june
13:47:42 <bridgerton[m]> <joshhavepigdog> Is v0.18.0 compatible with v0.18.1 ? Are point releases compatible? Or does one need to upgrade to the newest point release to be able to send a tx?
13:50:04 <helpisinneed123d> as far as i know v0.18.0 is the first version which currently can sent tx.
13:51:55 <nioc> they are compatible, the 0.18.1 is a good upgrade for the GUI
13:53:28 <ofrnxmr[m]> .1 for ledger/trezor
13:54:30 <ofrnxmr[m]> > <@shima1944:matrix.org>... (full message at https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/libera.chat/a9f4267faa55b50681beacf975f75137546ca198)
13:57:53 <bridgerton[m]> <joshhavepigdog> Thanks for the info guys
13:57:55 <bridgerton[m]> <joshhavepigdog> Appreciate it
13:59:07 <bridgerton[m]> <joshhavepigdog> I saw a comment that a great upgrade for Cake and the GUI would be something that indicates the Monero version of the remote node one is connected too. I haven’t personally run into problems with this, but I can imagine that it would trip some people up if they update their software and connect to v17 nodes.
13:59:29 <helpisinneed123d> > the 0.18.1 is a good upgrade for the GUI
13:59:29 <helpisinneed123d> is it possible there to cancel a transaction?
13:59:46 <bridgerton[m]> <joshhavepigdog> I don’t know
13:59:53 <bridgerton[m]> <joshhavepigdog> I’ve never tried to cancel a tx
14:00:49 <ofrnxmr[m]> No
14:01:46 <ofrnxmr[m]> @josh
14:01:46 <ofrnxmr[m]> GUI maybe, but cake wallet doesnt add random nodes 
14:02:58 <ofrnxmr[m]> Either its their node, which is up to date, or one that you added manually. 
14:02:59 <ofrnxmr[m]> If youre picking up nodes in dark alleyways, you dont deserve to know whether its updated 😂.
14:02:59 <ofrnxmr[m]> You should _only_ use nodes you _trust_
14:03:26 <ofrnxmr[m]> "No" referring to cancel transactions 
14:03:26 <ofrnxmr[m]> But really
14:03:26 <ofrnxmr[m]> Xyproblem.info please and thxx
14:04:13 <ofrnxmr[m]> Were at bullet 4 of the xyproblem
14:06:59 <helpisinneed123d> xyproblem, nice solution. Real helpful
14:16:13 <plowsof> Id say restore from seed and dont open that wallet again, assuming it has a 'pending' / failed transaction 
14:18:01 <plowsof> I know the cli will auto resubmit the transaction after x hours, i assume the GUI does the same or something similar selsta? 
14:18:23 <ofrnxmr[m]> They left the roomn🫣
14:18:41 <ofrnxmr[m]> All I wanted to know was "what is the real issue"
14:18:54 <ofrnxmr[m]> Revoking a transaction is the supposed solution to a problem
14:19:00 <ofrnxmr[m]> Its not possible
14:19:04 <ofrnxmr[m]> So what id the problem 
14:19:19 <ofrnxmr[m]> Oh well.
14:20:16 <ofrnxmr[m]> Id have to make assumptions about what the issue is, in order to figure out how to solve it.
14:20:17 <ofrnxmr[m]> Assuming the issue is a tx was sent on v17 and is stuck in pending state 
14:22:32 <nioc> for CLI you can there is a command to flush the tx pool
14:23:43 <nioc> usually gets rid of a tx gets stuck for some reason
14:23:58 <nioc> stuck as in not relayed
14:26:50 <ofrnxmr[m]> Because of the times (hard fork) id be more inclined to think the user is either using an out of date wallet or node vs a tx not being relayed 
14:26:50 <ofrnxmr[m]> They mentioned 0.18.0.0, never mentioned if they were running it
14:27:17 <nioc> yeah
14:27:34 <nioc> I have zero experience with the GUI  :D
14:44:09 <selsta> plowsof: quite sure both CLI and GUI don't resubmit the transaction
14:44:35 <selsta> the daemon resubmits it, but if you connect to an outdated one they can resubmit it as often as they want
15:39:21 <r4v3r23[m]> sech1: is it possible to make p2pool mandatory?
15:45:51 <sech1> No. At least I don't know how to disable pools without disabling p2pool too.
15:46:15 <sech1> the most promising approach is https://github.com/monero-project/research-lab/issues/98 but it doesn't guarantee that pools will be impossible
15:52:59 <r4v3r23[m]> <sech1> "the most promising approach is..." <- so the idea is to make it more expensive to run a mining pool and incentivize to mine on p2pool instead
15:53:05 <r4v3r23[m]> would this kill botnets?
15:54:09 <sech1> not entirely
15:57:33 <RavFX[m]> Getting the pool operator in increase there fill could help.
15:57:33 <RavFX[m]> Or have them have fee based on the % of the pie they have
15:57:46 <RavFX[m]> And use who don't want fee at all could just use p2pool
15:57:53 <RavFX[m]> s/use/user/
15:58:03 <RavFX[m]> s/fill/fees/
16:00:34 <RavFX[m]> <r4v3r23[m]> "would this kill botnets?" <- Botnet operator can just have a p2pool server and have all bot mining in there
16:13:15 <r4v3r23[m]> <RavFX[m]> "Botnet operator can just have..." <- great
16:14:56 <Rucknium[m]> RavFX: I think the idea behind MRL #98 is that -- for efficient mining -- xmrig and a Monero node would have to be run on the same machine, which would reduce the profitability of botnets greatly unless the bots could somehow download and store over 100GB of data of the infected machine
16:17:47 <RavFX[m]> Rucknium[m]: Indeed, that's is enough for me to put some of my miner offline
16:20:03 <Rucknium[m]> I think if there is a way to make p2pool the only viable way to mine, then it will have a high likelihood of being included in the next hard fork upgrade. We continue to have centralized pools with too much hash power.
16:21:27 <Rucknium[m]> I don't know if centralized pools can be tamed. I don't think there is any game theoretic argument for why they would be self-limiting.
16:22:51 <Rucknium[m]> And there is some game theoretic reason why they would not be self-limiting: the growth of pools is basically an externality that individual miners create. Each miner does not bear the full costs of the "pollution", so the pollution continues
16:25:31 <RavFX[m]> Just include that change wow that made local node required in next fork... (full message at https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/libera.chat/a05d7d0300d6326db35df9d2d9b2a0db2eeb459b)
16:25:34 <RavFX[m]>  * Just include that change wow that made local node required in next fork... (full message at https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/libera.chat/16daf75b36c745a33f0446a0170d61169188fa62)
16:26:39 <Rucknium[m]> WOW's change is incompatible with p2pool. WOW basically enforced solo-mining only.
16:28:43 <ofrnxmr[m]> And solo only doesnt stop someone from running a "pool"
16:29:59 <ofrnxmr[m]> Meaning, its a trivial matter to use xmrig proxy and connect 100 miners to it
16:31:27 <sech1> even pools are possible on Wownero
16:31:37 <ofrnxmr[m]> <Rucknium[m]> "RavFX: I think the idea behind..." <- I dont like this
16:31:46 <sech1> if each miner makes a deposit (1 Wownero block worth)
16:31:49 <ofrnxmr[m]> Makes my android miners useless
16:32:31 <sech1> in Wownero, when you mine a block, you always can spend it, so 1 block worth deposit is enough to compensate for possible cheating
16:33:16 <nioc> RavFX[m]> And use who don't want fee at all could just use p2pool <<>> there are fees, when you combine your outputs you pay tx fees as well as bloat the chain   
16:33:24 <nioc> this effects small miners more  
16:33:33 <nioc> if you are always getting paid for only 1 share and then combine those tiny payouts it costs between 3% and 4% of your payout in tx fees
16:33:50 <sech1> no one is always paid for 1 share
16:34:02 <sech1> sometimes even the smallest miners find 2 shares in the same window
16:34:13 <nioc> sometimes
16:34:33 <nioc> I mostly got 1 share, sometimes 2 or 3
16:34:35 <sech1> but yes, small miners pay between 3 and 4% when combining outputs
16:35:41 <sech1> 3.07% for my miner wallet right now
16:36:20 <sech1> and I combined everything right before the fork, so these are post-fork payouts (32 outputs right now)
16:36:55 <nioc> so tell the big miners to switch to p2pool  :D
16:37:09 <ofrnxmr[m]> I dont know if sech agrees, buy my hypothesis is for the lowest fee you should choose the p2pool with the lowest # of miners
16:37:13 <RavFX[m]> Yeah, just calculated it, about 2.5% here
16:37:58 <RavFX[m]>  * Yeah, just calculated it, about 2.5% here
16:37:58 <RavFX[m]> personally I just mine to mine so I don't really care
16:38:50 <nioc> same, I'm on a pool with 200 KH
16:39:23 <ofrnxmr[m]> I solo or main 
16:39:50 <nioc> main?
16:40:02 <ofrnxmr[m]> P2pool main*
16:41:26 <nioc> it is fun to get constant p2pool payouts 
16:42:39 <RavFX[m]> nioc: Yeah it is, partly why I use it, I prefer than than waiting for pool to send me payout
16:43:18 <nioc> supportxmr is currently 32.5% of network
16:44:17 <ofrnxmr[m]> Suppertime+nano >60%
16:44:29 <ofrnxmr[m]> Supportxmr....*
16:45:40 <nioc> *lunchtime
16:48:31 <nioc> when using p2pool even small miners get immediate payouts while they have to wait to get payouts on most pools and are therefore committed to mining on them till payout
16:49:24 <ofrnxmr[m]> +dust
16:49:37 <nioc> yes they leave dust behind 
16:49:55 <ofrnxmr[m]> Centralized pools.. i always seem to leave some dust
16:57:00 <ofrnxmr[m]> sech1:... (full message at https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/libera.chat/1a2837fe32ad8be131391b3fdab82c87d07e9d66)
16:57:24 <sech1> yes
21:37:15 <bridgerton[m]> <joshhavepigdog> I don’t use simple mode on the GUI. It’s a bad idea given how remote nodes can tinker with fees or at least they have in the past.
21:37:54 <bridgerton[m]> <joshhavepigdog> I still think for someone manually connecting to a node it would be nice to know the version or at least a green light if it’s compatible with the version of software they have running (which should be the up to date version)
21:38:12 <bridgerton[m]> <joshhavepigdog> Pretty minor all things considered though
21:41:01 <selsta> the idea behind simple mode is quite neat, it finds nodes in a decentralized way and everyone can add their own public node to the network
21:41:10 <selsta> but unfortunately people abuse it
21:57:29 <jozsef[m]> Are any of the i2p nodes alive at the bottom of https://github.com/i2p-zero/i2p-zero/blob/master/mipseed.md?
21:58:09 <jozsef[m]> I'm getting `Unable to send transaction(s) to i2p - no suitable outbound connections at height 2693976`.
21:58:30 <jozsef[m]> and I do have all of those nodes listed as `--add-peer`.
22:00:16 <selsta> --add-peer is not necessary, we have seed nodes
22:00:41 <selsta> what does print_cn show?
22:02:13 <jozsef[m]> Filtering IPv4:... (full message at https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/libera.chat/d72058035ea88c42eb9760673b4e7abe50e370ca)
22:02:51 <jozsef[m]> So some connections but with no traffic?
22:03:45 <selsta> do you allow incoming i2p?
22:04:58 <jozsef[m]> I don't think that is correctly configured at this point, since I'm getting no incoming connections.
22:05:23 <jozsef[m]> I have these i2p-related in my config:
22:05:23 <jozsef[m]> ```
22:05:23 <jozsef[m]> tx-proxy=i2p,127.0.0.1:4447
22:05:23 <jozsef[m]> anonymous-inbound=iwliolsvujhespetsl3h3vv5uw4dfwqlce2irv3gqs7knclmhd7q.b32.i2p,127.0.0.1:8061
22:06:19 <selsta> what do you use for i2p?
22:07:03 <jozsef[m]> I'm running i2pd and I use port 4447 as socks proxy.
22:07:13 <jozsef[m]> That part works I think.
22:08:04 <jozsef[m]> Also have this server tunnel configured:... (full message at https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/libera.chat/83da85f3832dbe57a92d2e1ef4d59d6627d0548d)
22:09:10 <jozsef[m]> I have not been able to find a working i2pd monero config on the web.
22:09:38 <selsta> I also don't know how to set it up with i2pd :/ otherwise I would use it over i2p-zero
22:09:42 <selsta> less RAM usage
22:09:49 <jozsef[m]> https://github.com/monero-project/monero/issues/7885 is kinda close but has the same problem.
22:10:24 <jozsef[m]> Can you share the relevant i2p-zero config, e.g., the server tunnel?
22:10:38 <selsta> inport = 18080 seems wrobng
22:10:47 <jozsef[m]> Or that's the same as on getmonero....
22:10:58 <selsta> i2p-zero only reequires router/bin/tunnel-control.sh server.create 127.0.0.1 8061 i think
22:13:52 <jozsef[m]> I took that out and restarted i2pd, which did not complain and on its dashboard now the port is 8061. But now I see no i2p rows on print_cn.
22:14:17 <jozsef[m]> Nvm, slowly showing up... on print_cn...
22:16:24 <selsta> so it works now?
22:16:30 <selsta> or only out?
22:16:36 <selsta> I'd let it run for a bit
22:18:11 <jozsef[m]> I still get: Height: 2693984/2693984 (100.0%) on mainnet, not mining, net hash 2.35 GH/s, v16, 63(out)+0(in) connections, uptime 0d 0h 5m 28s
22:18:45 <jozsef[m]> But also... (full message at https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/libera.chat/7aba736b424ad2fb11bdea85ff18afec9bc35c32)
22:19:05 <jozsef[m]> How do I interpret the Recv/sent (inactive,sec)?
22:19:11 <jozsef[m]> Does that mean there is traffic for those?
22:19:30 <jozsef[m]> Also, there is no host.
22:19:32 <jozsef[m]> and per id.
22:19:49 <selsta> no host?
22:20:11 <selsta> and no peer id is intentional to avoid tracking
22:20:44 <jozsef[m]> Ah, ok. Yeah, the host column is empty.
22:20:46 <jozsef[m]> Is that normal?
22:21:08 <jozsef[m]> For IPv4 there are the IPs and ports listed there.
22:21:11 <selsta> yes it is normal, no host and no peer id
22:21:20 <jozsef[m]> ok.
22:22:10 <jozsef[m]> The last columns show no traffic at all.
22:22:37 <selsta> it is normal
22:23:48 <jozsef[m]> So do you think after some time there should be some incoming connections if it is configured properly?
22:24:41 <selsta> not sure, since you don't seem to have clearnet in peers too as far as I can see
22:25:14 <jozsef[m]> Oh you mean IPv4? I filtered those out.
22:25:27 <selsta> ok
22:25:34 <selsta> let it run for a bit and then check again
22:25:43 <jozsef[m]> ok
22:25:45 <jozsef[m]> thansk
23:40:15 <ofrnxmr[m]> https://nitter.net/nahuhhXMR/status/1561129447725715456#m
23:41:25 <ofrnxmr[m]> Numbers arent exact, but im calculating the cost of monerod global hash to be signicsntly more then bitcoin
23:41:25 <ofrnxmr[m]> Like 5x
23:41:41 <ofrnxmr[m]> Anyone can point out any errors in the maths?
23:44:05 <ofrnxmr[m]> This is using used prices: 
23:44:05 <ofrnxmr[m]> the epyc 7763 at $3000
23:44:05 <ofrnxmr[m]> The s19pro at $7000
23:53:13 <assratatouille> epyc cpus arent the best value for the hash power
23:53:21 <ofrnxmr[m]> Ryzen 3950 produces 20kh but uses at least 100w
23:53:30 <ofrnxmr[m]> You need 5 to match an epyc
23:53:42 <ofrnxmr[m]> What is the most efficient ?
23:53:56 <assratatouille> im not talking about power efficiency here
23:54:15 <assratatouille> 3900x is a fourth of the hashrate but for more than 10x less
23:54:35 <ofrnxmr[m]> How much is a 3950 right now? I can check 1 sec
23:54:38 <assratatouille> your time to ROI is much lower with a few 3900xes
23:55:04 <assratatouille> not worth getting a 3950x over a 3900x either
23:55:07 <ofrnxmr[m]> Around $500 on the low end
23:55:16 <ofrnxmr[m]> A 3900 does half the hr
23:55:26 <ofrnxmr[m]> Ok, so 3900 then
23:55:42 <ofrnxmr[m]> Around 300$
23:55:49 <assratatouille> 3950x and 3900x have the same amount of l3 cache so they have similar hashrates
23:56:07 <ofrnxmr[m]> Not according to xmrigbenchmarks 
23:56:40 <ofrnxmr[m]> https://xmrig.com/benchmark?cpu=AMD+Ryzen+9+3950X+16-Core+Processor
23:57:15 <ofrnxmr[m]> https://xmrig.com/benchmark?cpu=AMD+Ryzen+9+3900+12-Core+Processor
23:58:34 <ofrnxmr[m]> The 3900x is a good deal 300$ for 17kh
23:59:17 <ofrnxmr[m]> 142-168w for just the cpu