04:23:38 <Monegro> This has probably been asked before; but hypothetically, why couldn't Monero use zkp and add a mandatory field for "timelock." On the spend, you prove that the number of blocks since the output was created, is greater than the encrypted timelock, without revealing what it was.
04:23:53 <Monegro> Wouldn't that open the opportunity for PCNs?
15:03:15 <vostoemisio[m]> Hey All,
15:03:15 <vostoemisio[m]> I made a ccs proposal today for an animated video. Please read the description and feel free to give feedback and comment, thanks! 
15:03:15 <vostoemisio[m]> https://repo.getmonero.org/monero-project/ccs-proposals/-/merge_requests/387
15:03:15 <vostoemisio[m]> //VOSTO 
17:01:00 <revuoxmr> Revuo Monero Issue 170: May 4 - 11, 2023. https://revuo-xmr.com/issue-170.html
17:14:08 <MoneroBro> You could always reopen Monero.Shopping :) : https://repo.getmonero.org/monero-project/ccs-proposals/-/merge_requests/360
17:21:40 <Rucknium[m]> Monegro: AFAIK, Monero-style time locks on spending outputs cannot be used for payment channel networks. BTC time locks prevent a transaction from being included in the blockchain before a certain time.
17:21:41 <Rucknium[m]> More info: https://github.com/monero-project/research-lab/issues/78
18:38:56 <Monegro> Thanks Ruck. Yeah that makes sense. The ability for the counterparty to sweep the funds before timelock expires is a crucial feature of a payment channel in BTC. Not applicable to these timelocks
18:56:04 <DiegoSalazar[m]> Dude watching this BTC thing go down is hilarious. 
18:56:26 <DiegoSalazar[m]> "Well at least it's good cuz now bitcoin is long term secure"
18:56:36 <DiegoSalazar[m]> "No its actually bad because it's being used for shitcoins."
18:56:53 <DiegoSalazar[m]> "It's good for bitcoin because it's a stress test and will lead to lightning adoption."
18:57:10 <DiegoSalazar[m]> "Lightning is barely functional! Managing channels is a nightmare with these fees."
18:57:23 <DiegoSalazar[m]> Like a bunch of headless chickens. Meanwhile let's check on Monero. 
18:58:05 <DiegoSalazar[m]> No mordinals, and if there was, dynamic blocksize so throughput is good long term. 
18:58:54 <DiegoSalazar[m]> And long term security already taken care of anyways as a cherry on top with tail emission (which also let's dynamic blocksize work)
18:59:28 <selsta> did BTC find a solution to these BRC-20 spam?
18:59:35 <DiegoSalazar[m]> I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but as a person who went to many crypto conferences for three years and spoke with so many maxis it's so validating. :P
18:59:43 <selsta> this
18:59:49 <DiegoSalazar[m]> selsta: Nope
19:00:15 <DiegoSalazar[m]> And its not spam. They're paying for the blockchain space. 
19:02:57 <DiegoSalazar[m]> Hilariously a lot of "bitcoin only"s have said on Twitter that all this debacle is making them look at Monero. 
19:03:57 <DiegoSalazar[m]> https://twitter.com/ChrisBlec/status/1656124458355113985?t=fGW8LulkR_XFzLyftU1n9A&s=19
19:14:55 <selsta> I've seen Vik tweet about $30 fees today :D
19:44:26 <Rucknium[m]> Fees are way down over at https://bchmempool.cash/   ;)
20:11:38 <DanIsnotthemanBr> You find its the eth nft people liking how they can put there monkey memes on chain.
20:43:18 <DanIsnotthemanBr> https://decrypt.co/139679/bitcoin-miners-earning-40m-daily-revenue-as-ordinals-debate-splits-devs