00:25:13 use it! 00:31:22 ...or lose it! - just like rpc-pay! which jeffro256 has submitted a pull request to delete from the monero code base https://github.com/monero-project/monero/pull/8724 00:42:34 Good one plowsof 00:57:10 product placement is key 01:15:30 Head of monero marketing department 01:25:22 spacecat: =Kitty? 02:26:40 what's the story with bitcoin ordinals? to what extent could this be done on Monero? 02:26:52 The bitcoiners are panicking now 02:32:47 what is bitcoin ordinals? 02:33:04 fr33_yourself: People can put anything they want in a Monero transaction's tx_extra field, but it cannot be "transferred" to anyone. It stays with the transaction. 02:33:28 Rucknium[m]: So ordinals are possible on Monero too? 02:33:38 Monero quantities do not even appear on the blockchain, so the exact form of ordinals could never happen. 02:33:54 fr33_yourself: What are the essential features of ordinals? 02:33:59 Rucknium[m]: phewwwww thank goodness 02:34:40 Rucknium[m]: I'm seeing a concerningly large number of bitcoiners panic that jpegs can be permanently directly tied to a Satoshi forever onward 02:34:41 Anyone can "claim" an ordinal in Monero (if it were to try to exist) by including the tx's output public key in their ring signature as a decoy. 02:35:18 Rucknium[m]: You lost me here 02:35:38 fr33_yourself: How do you transfer an ordinal? 02:36:05 Rucknium[m]: op_extra or is it different? I just heard about them now and only understand at a surface level how they work 02:36:54 What is the worst thing that can be included in the tx_extra field? only text and numbers can be in the tx_extra field right? 02:37:35 are you sitting down fr33? 02:37:35 To spend an output in bitcoin you have to prove that you have the private key of the output's public key (its address). There is only one. In Monero you only prove that one of the many outputs (of 16 now) that you are including is yours. 02:37:42 plowsof11: yes 02:38:06 jpegs are also text and numbers 02:38:24 the... entire bee movie script exists on the monero blockchain, please don't panic 02:38:31 its a great movie 02:38:36 haha 02:38:52 zero to monero pdf also (a great document) 02:38:54 I knew that but ordinals seem to be even worse than bee movie script in tx_extra 02:39:40 Rucknium[m]: So basically by doing funny stuff with tx_extra you would be revealing you are the true spend? 02:39:54 its an issue of chain bloat - any block chain can be bloated, at a cost, some more Zcheaper than others 02:40:04 LOL 02:40:12 fr33_yourself: No 02:41:31 What is the worst thing that can happen to Monero then? basically the bitcoin boys seem to be on full panic because csam can be attached forever to a satoshi directly on chain 02:41:33 for a fee 02:42:16 can the same sort of thing happen in xmr? and if so what happens if you own the bee movie output or csam output in Monero's case? 02:42:21 People have been able to put arbitrary data on the bitcoin blockchain since basically the beginning. Since OP_RETURN was invented. 02:43:26 Yes, but this time it's apparently an order of magnitude worse. Like before they could put hidden service links, but now if my understanding is correct the image itself be stored on the chain inseperably linked to that satoshi 02:43:27 this is not arbitrary, it's an NFT!! 02:43:31 creating taint 02:43:46 Lol 02:44:09 it's why it's called ordinal 02:44:09 Satoshi put arbitrary data in the genesis block 02:44:24 taint aint our problem , dont waste brain cells thinking about it 02:45:22 why are we safe from having this sort of nft ingrained in our outputs? what about the bee movie tx? what happens if you receive the output with the bee movie in it? 02:45:31 Maybe in 2013 OP_RETURN was implemented: https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/29554/explanation-of-what-an-op-return-transaction-looks-like 02:46:52 fr33_yourself: Nothing. That's what I was saying. You or I could construct a tx right now with that tx's output public key and appear to "spend" it....but there is plausible deniability with ring size 16. 02:47:10 The only question is if the tx was post- or pre-RingCT 02:47:55 So we are somewhat unaffected by this madness? Basically even the bee movie guy who initially added that in the tx_extra field had plausible deniability? 02:48:20 If it was a pre-RingCT tx, then we would have to own a pre-ringCT output to appear to spend it in a ring 02:49:09 I see. so basically we are good then. 02:49:20 plowsof: Do you know the tx hash of the Bee Movie script tx? 02:49:28 world isn't going to burn down 02:50:36 * fr33_yourself[m] uploaded an image: (218KiB) < https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/v3/download/monero.social/hZwHvBzHsRqCUTjkLInbPpOf/elmo-burn---elmo-burn-2339798260.png > 02:51:40 Put it this way: coins are only actually transferred through a Bulletproofs+ operation. Is tx_extra included in that Bulletproofs+ operation? No. Only integers (the coins themselves) are. 02:53:42 Rucknium[m]: So this somewhat seperates a currency unit of Monero from the tx_extra data, such as bee movie script? if so what does the tx_extra data stay attached to? the entire cryptographic blob? but what happens if that blob is split into two outputs on chain? 02:53:49 Rucknium[m]: What's Bee Movie script tx? 02:54:02 cant find the bee movie atm, the best i can do currently is zero to monero id's https://forum.monero.space/d/38-should-we-remove-tx-extra/5 02:54:47 fr33_yourself: tx_extra is a field in the tx. 02:55:22 Zero to Monero 2.0 has a description of exactly what a tx contains in its appendix. 02:55:55 It is a little out of date since it doesn't include the view tag or the update from Bulletproofs to Bulletproofs++ 02:56:45 Blobs don't split into outputs. 02:57:30 The blockchain is a database 02:59:25 more things in tx extra https://github.com/monero-project/monero/issues/6668#issuecomment-670978771 02:59:27 https://matrix.to/#/!toFcRZtpaiwiyapgVO:matrix.org/$RK2gtFNe5ea7VSii04Qc2NlOSTZ0osVv9LgtHFiCqzM?via=monero.social&via=libera.chat&via=matrix.org 03:00:48 Researchers put a ton of data on the LTC blockchain: https://petsymposium.org/popets/2022/popets-2022-0011.php 03:01:20 "We present results from UWeb experiments with writing 268.21 MB of data into the live Litecoin blockchain, including 4.5 months of live-feed BBC articles, and 41 censorship resistant tools. The max-rate writing throughput (183 KB/s) and blockchain utilization (88%) exceed those of state-of-the-art solutions by 2-3 orders of magnitude and broke Litecoin’s record of the daily average block size. " 03:02:48 I was a little shocked when I read that. 03:03:38 Why do we use txextra again? 03:03:52 payment ids sir 03:03:58 ofrnxmr keeps posting links that I can't access :( 03:04:03 I know thorchain and serai need it, and thorchain even "promised" not to spam 03:04:40 removing tx extra = removing payment ids (?) 03:04:48 Are payment ID's even necessary anymore? With subaddresses and coming jamtis 03:04:52 I'm looking at ztm 2 now to see if my monke brain can understand the maximum risks 03:05:01 The same reason that Bitcoin added OP_RETURN, basically. If you don't have a designated place, people will find a place to put data in places that need cryptographic verification. kayabanerve explained it in one of the channels about 6 months ago 03:05:19 ofrnxmr[m]: it was discussed today in the mrl lounge 03:05:25 I remember that. But where else would they put it, in Monero 03:05:29 where else would they put it? 03:05:47 would they just get mad spam tx's lol 03:05:47 And if there is anew need for some "extra" field in a tx, then you would have to hard fork. 03:05:52 nioc: Hey, ive been awake for 20hrs. I read that earlier too 😆😆. I'll remember it all after I wake up 03:05:54 something something kayabanerve clsag something townforge is cool 03:06:10 ^^^ 03:06:39 I actually don't endorse the CLSAG method 03:06:44 i like how we can joke about this while the btc community is in high defcon state right now 03:06:57 ofrnxmr: Fake outputs. 03:07:07 They'd appear identical to valid ones, if done correctly. 03:07:19 There have been a few papers about using Monero as a secure global private messaging protocol. 03:07:40 oh no... lol 03:07:44 they could use stagenet / their own 'net' though? 03:07:47 They'd be like half as efficient at data storage, not prunable, and globally increase scan time 03:07:53 plowsof: No 03:07:56 Which you would know if you ptu moneroresearch.info in your RSS feed! :P 03:08:01 ohh :( 03:08:25 The point of using Monero is exactly how decentralized it is, and also due to the vast amount of people using Monero 03:08:43 Suggesting testnet/stagenet immensely decreases those attributes 03:08:59 use pgp and leave monero alone ! cries 03:09:11 i don't know what to make of all this honestly haha 03:09:17 I'm not suggesting Monero should be used that way ofc. I'm ack'ing why there's the discussion for it 03:09:21 I feel kind of like that rn plowsof 03:09:36 https://moneroresearch.info/index.php?action=resource_RESOURCEVIEW_CORE&id=33 03:09:36 Guo, Z., Shi, L., Xu, M., & Yin, H. (2021). MRCC: A practical covert channel over Monero with provable security. IEEE Access, 9, 31816–31825. 03:10:36 we want to make mooonero fungible and minimal funny business if possible right 03:11:32 plowsof: You cannot stop me from placing ~60 bytes on chain. I will either fake outputs, globally increasing scan time with less prunable, inefficient data storage, yet maintaining privacy, or use an arbitrary data field, breaking TX uniformity (though multi-out TXs already kinda do that) yet not increasing scan time, being perfectly efficient at being arb data, and with a clearer path towards pruning. 03:11:38 fr33_yourself: same comment goes to you 03:12:17 This isn't a simple discussion. I have a GH comment covering this. I favor a <=255 byte field with an extra fee associated. 03:12:23 And encrypted healthcare data: "In this paper, we describe an efficient, fully anonymous and GDPR-compliant PPBA protocol built into the blockchain of any privacy coin such as Monero." https://moneroresearch.info/index.php?action=resource_RESOURCEVIEW_CORE&id=108 03:12:44 Rucknium: i will hack that site and destroy it just to erase that paper off the internet 03:12:52 Sarier, N. D. (2022). Privacy preserving biometric authentication on the blockchain for smart healthcare. Pervasive and Mobile Computing, 86, 101683. 03:13:09 kayabanerve: You already have the means to do so 03:13:26 Since you helped save us that one time from an out-of-control log file 03:13:31 Thanks 03:13:42 I don't think I ever got SSH access, actually. I just told y'all what to do :p 03:13:51 kayabanerve[m]: if what you say is true, then I do agree with you 03:13:55 I do despise the idea of replicated private data though 03:14:58 Blockchains are data-storage devices. It is really hard to stop people storing data on it if they really want to. 03:18:10 Basically any amount of freedom you give someone can be used to store data bits. It may be very inefficient. Without any freedom, you don't have a meaningful protocol. 03:18:30 Think about Morse code. 03:19:11 No one should make private data publicly available, even in encrypted form. That's my stance re: that paper and I don't care to debate it. I'd even argue such papers are immoral as written and without value, by the title, yet I'll wait till I read it to properly comment. 03:19:26 Going back from that horror of a paper to the general TX extra discussion though, agreed. 03:19:48 do you think a csam imagine could be uploaded in tx_extra? if so, what could a third party infer about the sender or reciever? 03:20:09 ofc, I'd be surprised if we didn't have links to them rn. BTC does IIRC 03:20:30 Also malware byte strings, which trips some AVs 03:20:48 a link is one thing, but the image itself can't fit into the monero tx_extra field can it? 03:20:57 it's not limited 03:21:05 we have the entire bee movie script on chain 03:21:16 so if the guy pays enough he can put the csam on chain 03:21:18 when out in lisbon, we discussed the actual bee movie 03:21:23 even in monero 03:21:25 ... we really should add an additional fee to it 03:21:56 Like almost every single blockchain, yes 03:22:23 People added entire software to the LTC chain by chaining OP_RETURN together in multiple transactions. DO you see that paper I just posted? 03:22:33 i guess the upside in monero's case is that that output can't be used to taint another person's wallet since addresses and subaddresses never appear on chain right? 03:23:10 Rucknium: I didn't, which was that 03:23:12 Rucknium[m]: yes but i am monke so i didn't fully grasp the scale of what had been done 03:23:39 I see biometrics, healthcare data, and covert channels 03:23:39 but yes it seems incredible indeed 03:23:40 > we have the entire bee movie script on chain 03:23:40 Do you happen to know which transaction lol 03:23:40 the covert channels one was fascinating as it used the selected decoys IIRC 03:24:02 > Rucknium: I didn't, which was that 03:24:02 Me too I'd like to see that 03:24:09 jeffro256: Uhhh there's a blog post covering TX extra which may have it, but just run strings on the DB and it should pop up 03:24:12 *a copy of the bee movie, not the TX it's in. 03:24:22 Is this like a roundabout smart-contract thing? 03:25:38 kayabanerve: https://petsymposium.org/popets/2022/popets-2022-0011.php 03:25:55 They put Tor, i2p, and whonix on the Litecoin blockchain 03:26:14 41 software programs in total 03:26:31 a noble cause but at what cost🤔 03:26:31 kayabaNerve Isn't tx_extra encrypted with a DH exchange of the transaction key? 03:26:38 ha no 03:27:01 It's arbitrary data interpreted as TLV 03:27:02 I might be thinking of payment IDs inside tx_extra 03:27:07 The payment ID is ECDH'd 03:27:15 If it's an encrypted payment ID 03:28:23 Ah yes that's it 03:29:24 Rucknium When is someone gonna be meta and put the Monero core repo on there? 03:29:34 Monero doesn't have explicit encrypted memos, right? Zcash does. 03:30:10 Recursion :) 03:30:24 Sounds like you could implement your own encrypted messaging scheme inside tx_extra 03:30:47 I know nothing about it, have never used it, but I think that's similar to what MMS does 03:32:05 kayabaNerve While doing strings grep 'bee', I found this message: "Thanks for the helphavesome beer" 03:32:20 so i still wonder what the worst case outcome of a csam jpeg in the tx_extra field is? because you have plausible deniability and your addresses don't appear on chain, then you are safe right? whereas in bitcorn you address appears on chain and nobody wants that tainted satoshi with a jpeg on it 03:36:06 jeffro256: https://github.com/monero-project/monero/issues/6668#issuecomment-670978771 03:39:44 fr33_yourself: that's not how any of this works 03:39:46 at all 03:40:04 you can'rt get 'sent' data, 03:40:26 While yes, you can say those sats were owned by a pedophile... that doesn't make the sats themselves illegal nor worth less 03:40:31 *nor worth less by being illegal 03:40:35 They're just disgusting 03:41:22 The only commentary about Monero being private is: 1) You can upload stuff without you being noted as the payer 2) You can be in the TX without getting a call from the police, even if you weren't the uploader, just a 'recipient' 03:43:43 Why dont we force all tx extra to be encrypted 03:44:01 Because we can't. 03:44:06 So only the recipient can read whatever is in it 03:44:06 Same as how we send a dummy output with each tx 03:44:21 We don't send a dummy output with each TX? 03:44:54 1) The data in TX extra currently doesn't benefit from being encrypted. Its all ZK. It's either group elements, revealing nothing, or already encrypted payment IDs. 03:45:21 2) When someone includes arbitrary data, there's no distinction between raw bytes and encrypted data other than a statistical guess. 03:47:17 kayabanerve: And compressed data would look pretty similar to encrypted data, statistically, right? 03:47:40 Uhhhhh no, encrypted should be uniformed, compressed has some level of self-description 03:47:54 Percentage wise, yeah, sure, compressed data looks much more similar than plaintext 03:48:27 "While yes, you can say those..." <- why would anyone in bitcoin want to be the guy who owns the satoshi with a csam ordinal nft permanently attached or ingrained into it 03:48:47 but there should be no ability to distinguish a random series of bytes and encrypted data. zip programs yell at you for a malformed zip 03:49:31 Because few people would notice, it'd get mixed in some vat at some point, and the sat itself isn't a risk of clawback 03:49:54 Rucknium: what are the odds a modern UTXO descends from a sat in a TX which also contained a link in OP_RET 03:50:02 Extremely high, right? 03:50:59 kayabanerve: Probably. You can re-read this ;) 03:50:59 https://rucknium.me/posts/cashfusion-descendants/ 03:51:06 kayabaNerve what did you think of tevador's idea of implementing randomness checks in the relay rules? 03:51:25 jeffro256: I despise it 03:51:42 To the room: That ^ research can give you some idea of how bitcoin transaction descendants spread through the chain. 03:51:45 I understand the idea. I fucking hate when protocols just start randomly failing on you. 03:52:01 I could re-run that analysis on any tx 03:52:02 kayabanerve[m]: I don't follow? 03:52:03 94% ??? That's crazy 03:52:07 Everything's tained 03:52:20 BTC will fail if the mempool spikes, if you have a small enough enough output. That output won't have enough value to be spent and BTC will consider it spam. 03:52:31 So one BTC fee spike will just change whether or not a prior created TX is spam 03:52:54 jeffro256: That's not asingle UTXO. That's all that were involved in a BCH coinjoin 03:52:55 And then XMR has 'sanity checks', which yes, can theoretically trigger in a perfectly random, valid TX, using the gamma distribution 03:52:55 > I understand the idea. I fucking hate when protocols just start randomly failing on you. 03:52:55 True... But the wallet would also be able to implement this test at rest before the transaction was broadcasted 03:53:08 Those aren't enforced at relay, just when publishing over RPC to local node, I just still hate them 03:53:16 I hate all of these rules. 03:53:35 kayabanerve: That sanity check is at wallet2 level only. Not node relay or consensus. 03:53:50 Right 03:53:50 Especially ones dependent on network view. It's acceptable, just annoying af, if the TX can be checked as an isolate, but the network view ones? Fuckkkk that 03:53:53 Okay but the fee check depends on input/transaction from other people. The randomess check would be entirely static 03:53:59 Rucknium: I just acknowledged that, but thank you 03:54:01 No environmental variables 03:54:27 jeffro256: It's just still largely meaningless IMO. 03:55:05 I don't care to waste my time remembering protocol rules which should never be triggered on the claim they're 'helpful' when they can cause intermittent failures. 03:55:17 I'd rather yell at people using TX extra to encrypt it, not have the node randomly yell that. 03:56:57 You know what 03:57:13 Someone should put 25/24 in tx_extra 03:57:21 25/24? 03:57:53 The infamous monero matrix spammer 03:59:40 Yeah idk. It's impossible to verify randomness, unfortunately. I'm more in favor of removing tx_extra completely, no randomness checks needed . You could still pass arbitrary data thru dummy outputs, but it makes it a whole lot harder and more inefficient 04:00:26 > The infamous monero matrix spammer 04:00:26 The one that did the Christmas serialization attack? 04:02:11 jeffro256: No. Asking the same question over and over again in Matrix/IRC 04:02:53 Might get a diff answer 04:06:12 that sounds like me 04:07:27 You wish 04:08:37 Its not easy being 24/25 04:09:51 Imagine trying to do a swap for 2 months? Or taking just as long to learn how to use your ledger? 04:09:51 Now.. imagine faking it for 2 months for 3 hours a day, 3-5 days a weel 04:10:11 24/25 is a very, very dedicated troll 04:11:05 Getting flashbacks 04:11:32 If youre lucky, he'll dm you 04:11:54 Sounds like a scary prank, but im not lying 04:11:56 He's here 04:12:51 (I am / siren is him) 04:15:12 https://matrix.to/#/!WzzKmkfUkXPHFERgvm:matrix.org/$868sGZSBK1MNXmTNCLkaueFoaUqCJW8UPsxDdzOvb5U?via=monero.social&via=matrix.org&via=libera.chat 04:16:01 ofrnxmr[m]: Yes he haunts some people 04:18:40 Why do you think I decided not to sleep 04:18:54 ( /s) 04:22:37 I used to work in IT. This man/creature sounds horrifying 04:23:53 Reminds me of some of the clients, but they were genuine. Just couldn't both bothered learning how to use tech 04:36:45 "Yes he haunts some people" <- Wake up in cold sweats? 04:57:22 Wake up to my phone buzzing 04:58:13 It's 25/24 05:18:46 https://twitter.censors.us/AutismCapital/status/1620234998833098753 05:44:14 Fire me 🍿 07:05:08 get back to work 09:07:34 "But this does sound a lot better..." <- Better then the placeholder voice for presentation purposes we never intended to use in a final product? Well, that is an upgrade indeed 09:08:15 kayabanerve @kayabanerve:matrix.org: I don't understand your stance of an "additional fee" for tx_extra. Aren't fees already by default based on the size of the transaction? And nonstandard fees can be chosen regardless, so long as they are accepted by some miner? 09:09:46 An additional fee means it'd cost more than other bytes in the TX. 09:10:46 Right, but this would still only work for default wallet behaviours yes? As fee calculations are not governed by consensus 09:11:35 I ask because stuffing the bee movie into the tx_garbage is already "nonstandard" behaviour so we could expect such a person to use nonstandard fees 11:53:14 someone minted one of the xmr posters onto bitcoin 11:53:14 https://ordinals.com/inscription/c39fa127c961c8a0a577371e758220f6d90e363fcdf503a61e38b837a71d2cb3i0 13:05:35 blankpage: Nodes will not relay a tx that is below the minimum relay fee. 13:11:15 Rucknium: I suppose the minimum relay fee could be adjusted to ensure that some rule of "different fees for different data" is being followed, where you have rate x for most transaction data and rate y for tx_garbage data. I suspect this could be gamed in some way but I'll need to think about it more. Also of course, it encourages two tiers of transaction types which is bad for fungibility. 13:13:58 blankpage: There is already different rules for different data: Section 7.3.2 Dynamic Block Weight of https://web.getmonero.org/library/Zero-to-Monero-2-0-0.pdf 13:14:26 Is the minimum relay fee literally for relaying between nodes? So that it is not consensus and can be changed by nodes? Or is it really a "minimum fee to be validly included in a block" so that sending an illegally low fee txn to a miner would not produce a valid block? 13:14:37 "Since Bulletproofs were added (v8), transaction and block sizes are no longer considered strictly. The term used now is transaction weight. Transaction weight for a miner transaction (see Section 7.3.6), or a normal transaction with two outputs, is equal to the size in bytes. When a normal transaction has more than two outputs the weight is somewhat higher than the size." 13:15:57 A miner would have to have a specially-configured node to accept tx below minimum relay fee directly from a user, probably 13:17:12 About 50 txs were accidentally dropped from the network in the August hard fork since they were created before the new rules were enforced. AT the boundary. 13:17:12 Thanks for the reference. I guess this is to account for the computational burden of additional outputs being added and scanned/verified forever. 13:17:31 Those users would have to broadcast their tx under the new rules. Not a huge deal 13:17:35 minimum tx fee is for including tx in mempool 13:17:42 this is why 50 tx were dropped in August 13:18:00 of course tx with fee blow the minimum won't be relayed 13:18:09 because it won't be added to the mempool in the first place 13:18:39 sech1: Right. To blankpage 's question, technically a miner could decide to mine a tx that has a fee below the minimum, correct? 13:18:44 yes 13:18:51 it's possible to mine 0-fee tx 13:19:08 coinbase transactions (miner payouts) are 0-fee 13:20:01 but any regular transaction can be 0-fee, you just need to mine it yourself 13:20:14 or find a mining pool node that will accept it 13:22:08 The minimum fee rate could in theory be made a consensus rule (I.e. a condition of a block being valid), if it was decided that bypassing the disincentives to add huge txns in this way was a threat to the network? 13:22:40 sech1: ^^^^^ 13:22:41 I guess it is pointless though as the miner could be the spammer 13:23:10 That's the idea 13:23:28 minimum fee doesn't matter for miners 13:23:34 because they mine this fee back to themselves 13:23:38 and get the block reward too 13:23:54 fee only matter for transactions relaying and rpc calls 13:25:01 Mining pools hardly want to mine txs even above the minimum fee, so...probably they won't configure their nodes specifically to take below-minimum txs. 13:25:10 enforcing min. fee on consensus level could help against a possible coalition of miners deciding to allow 0-fee transactions on their nodes 13:27:10 Seems it is not a perfect defence against a class of spam attacks, and the threat of those kinds of attacks is lessened by things like p2pool in any case 13:31:16 I think you cannot really spam low- or zero-fee txs to bloat the blockchain too much since users have to pay more to push the dynamic block size up. So you could spam within the current block size minimum, but not push above. 13:32:16 Or the miners would actually be reducing their revenue by including those tx since they have to sacrifice some of the 0.6 XMR block reward 13:32:30 miners could get off-chain compensation for this 13:32:40 but then again, it's not a 0-fee anymore for whoever pays for it 13:36:06 "Seems it is not a perfect..." <- Ofc target, getting colder 13:36:11 Off* 14:25:43 >I think it's much nicer, if I say so myself 14:25:43 Its garbage 14:25:43 dsmlegend: 14:26:41 I think I will do as was suggested by the proposers. Perhaps this ccs should be closed for incompetence 14:26:51 > Discover Monero with this concise video series and learn about its features, benefits, and practical use as a merchant. Funded by anonymous Monero users who have experienced its advantages, this series aims to educate and inspire businesses to adopt Monero for secure and private transactions, free from middleman interference and hazards such as spying, freezing of funds, chargebacks, and deplatforming. 14:26:51 Context 14:28:03 Chatgpt and Monerobull already fixed the script. 14:28:03 Someone should ask chatgpt to grade it 14:28:03 (EMOTIONAL DAMAGE). 14:30:10 "synthesized_audio (3).mp3" <- ^ 14:30:16 Chat got edits 14:30:23 * Chatgpt edits 14:39:48 ofrnxmr: You're full of shit mate, just quit it. I got a talented fiction author friend of mine to rewrite the entire thing. It's clearly a totally different style now but I had to know if you'd keep your angle if you thought it was still me. Now it's clear you really are just being a gadfly. 14:39:52 Normally safe to ignore, but you're poisoning the well against anyone else who may have otherwise given good feedback. 14:44:10 will the fiction author be rewriting the other 9 scripts? 14:46:17 4* 14:46:52 the animator needed help from their friend and the script write needed help from their friend? 14:48:23 > <@ofrnxmr:monero.social> > Discover Monero with this concise video series and learn about its features, benefits, and practical use as a merchant. Funded by anonymous Monero users who have experienced its advantages, this series aims to educate and inspire businesses to adopt Monero for secure and... (full message at ) 14:50:46 "Monero's low, fixed fees" can we talk to the fiction author dsmlegend , fees are not fixed in monero 14:53:43 That's why it's so expensive 14:53:57 They are just hiring subcontractors and taking a nice cut 🫣 14:54:15 > <@dsmlegend:matrix.org> ofrnxmr: You're full of shit mate, just quit it. I got a talented fiction author friend of mine to rewrite the entire thing. It's clearly a totally different style now but I had to know if you'd keep your angle if you thought it was still me. Now it's clear you really are just being a gadfly. 14:54:15 > 14:54:15 > Normally safe to ignore, but you're poisoning the well against anyone else who may have otherwise given good feedback. 14:54:15 I dont care who wrote it, its the same garbage 14:54:57 monerobull[m]1: Monerobull, compare the text from yesterday re anonymous donors 14:55:01 Vs the text for today 14:55:10 ITS THE SAME DOG SHIT 14:55:17 dsmlegend: youre a pos scammer 14:55:36 I'll check it out later 14:55:45 Bull 14:55:51 The text I posted here, is the NEW onw 14:57:26 And dsmlegend: poisoning the well? 14:57:26 Nope. 14:57:26 Because of me, people are willing to tell you his bad it is without worrying about your feelings 14:58:17 All I had to do was post it as "my own" and voila 14:58:40 All of a sudden you arent so comfy in your 8000$ scam 14:58:56 Or wasnt it supposed to ve 18+k? 15:03:03 Yawn. Such a broken record for someone triggered by repetition. 15:03:18 Takes one to know one 15:07:04 "will the fiction author be..." <- I will enlist any resource at my disposal. At my own expense, of course. Not asking for extra funds or anything, so I don't see why it's of relevance here (aside from revealing a personal bias aimed at me for some reason). 15:08:02 "Personal" 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 15:08:07 ""Monero's low, fixed fees" can..." <- Yes, but the point is that the fee is fixed with respect to the amount transacted. This is contrasted with Visa that takes a percentage cut. See what I mean? 15:08:40 Fees are not fixed in monero sir 15:09:05 You're statement is false 15:09:11 s/You're/Your/ 15:09:22 RTFM 15:09:22 the relevance is we need to know who is handling the feedback / writing the script for the ccs 15:09:38 "Flat fee"? "The first derivative of the fee with respect to the amount transacted is zero"? 15:10:19 a fictional author no less, can we get a factual one who knows about monero? 15:10:39 Rucknium[m]: Yes, thanks. Flat fee. 15:10:43 "Personal" 🥲 15:10:57 dsmlegend[m]: Incorrect 15:11:47 The fee levels arent fixed either 15:12:34 plowsof11: Obviously it's based on the provided source material and of course it's open for inspection in case inaccuracies have crept in. Quite surprised to see this pushback since the other day the takeway message was "get someone else who is good with English to rewrite it" 15:12:34 The size of the tx isnt the only modifier of the fee 15:13:25 The takeaway is "its garbage, wtf" 15:13:29 Read between the lines 15:17:14 Huh, good thing you're not the target audience anyway. You did get me to second-guess myself, I'll be honest. The Melbourne kabab shop guy who posted on r/Monero a few weeks back had high praise. 15:17:23 * dsmlegend[m] uploaded an image: (73KiB) < https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/v3/download/matrix.org/mhjIuqOOviSRdXjQkySyroNC/image.png > 15:18:39 high praise for the original script in the animatic? 15:19:17 No, current script 15:19:38 This was from today 15:19:47 a few weeks back? 15:20:39 are you suggesting you didnt need to second guess yourself at any stage of this script writing process 15:20:53 its been 9 + months and now you're trying. 15:21:48 which i commend* 15:21:50 plowsof11: He posted on r/Monero a few weeks back. I asked him today. 15:22:28 if this is what we must endure for the next 4 scripts, well 15:23:10 plowsof11: They delay was because a superpower invaded the animator's city of residence in Ukraine. So things were on pause for a while. Don't know if you saw the news or anything. 15:24:23 i am aware of savandras situation. what stopped you from seeking feedback before the animatic was released or even earlier? youve been sat with the task of managing scripts since day one 15:25:02 obtaining* 15:25:16 There were six posts on reddit over that time, with almost no engagement. Only once the animatic came out did it start getting attention. 15:25:29 it is your job to obtain feedback / engagement 15:25:46 we've always been here 15:25:55 Hence the posts. Going to sleep now. 15:48:21 "it is your job to obtain..." <- No, clearly thats my job 🐒 16:54:39 it is the opinion of Core that the marketing for the movie is fine. Some precedent was the sail with a Monero logo for a regatta (quite a long time ago). Please do not donate if you do not support the effort. 16:56:30 I wish there was a way to let donors see the movie though. Or maybe the relevant clip 16:57:46 15% of the film can be released without effecting oscar chances 16:58:34 geonic has asked donators - to contact them personally for a private ink before donating* 16:58:43 And 100% can be if it ______ I dont remembr? plowsof @plowsof:matrix.org: 16:59:50 so if yo urelease 100% you MUST win an award (harder) 17:00:02 "it is the opinion of Core that..." <- what happened to "CCS funded things need to be open" 17:00:46 I am sure that was written with code in mind 17:01:23 indeed. Specifically the "Fireice Incident^tm" 17:01:45 geonic hinted at releasing a trailer* but we've had no updates on that yet 17:01:54 I asked him about it 17:01:58 e,g, something that would fall into the "15% of the film rule" 17:02:53 "it is the opinion of Core that..." <- Aka "were merging" ? 17:03:03 Translation/tldr 17:03:17 Sounds like "were merging" 17:03:26 its going to funding and we're going to the oscars 17:03:34 sounds more like we're 17:04:09 ofrnxmr[m] probably but not necessarily. The opinion is specifically about open source rule. 17:04:14 does it need to be officially released for the award clause to kick in 17:04:15 the movie has 2 years from release to qualify 17:04:15 what happens if it gets leaked 17:04:18 doesn't mean something that has very negative response would be merged 17:05:15 seems to me that the 2 milestones should be 2 different CCSs as the 2nd milestone might not be reached 17:05:26 luigi1111w: thanks for clarification 17:05:33 2 years from release to meet the criteria* 17:05:43