<monerobull[m]> "Nono that twitter is up since..." <- you can buy aged twitter accounts for like 20 cents each

source: ive done it before

or rather, you could, when i was still on twitter

after i stopped using it elon joined and started his crusade against le evil bots

not sure how successful it was

Have they unborked nitter?

I I don't think twitter will be available from the other aggregator until scamlon remove the restriction (He won't , he need do data mine you all to be profitable)

Except if someone make a browser plugin to harvest the data. But then the success of the operation will depend of how much people would use it.

<monerobull[m]> "the privacy is better because..." <- nah it is worse. A fediverse host has much more power than a reddit mod.

<monerobull[m]> "yeah you really shouldnt post..." <- that would be good. realistically most fediverse content will be lost when the the hosters eventually lose interest and the instance shuts down.

kayabanerve: do you know the standard size of seraphis 1:2 transaction, using the increased ring size

I was just thinking.. thats a better comparison. Iirc, FCMP is less of a size increase from seraphis tx, than from current 16 decoy tx

<r4v3r23[m]> "i vote support the women of..." <- im lebanese

why are we talking about this lol

i know swear words in Lebanese does that count?

kek

ayree

i mean they talking about afghan whats our women got to do with this lol

Habibti

does Monero have enough wamen?

nope we need a squad of cheerleaders

<spirobel[m]> "does Monero have enough wamen?..." <- we have monerochan

she is fungible

😆

meeting tomorrow: monero-project/meta #857 and another later on in #monero-events:monero.social

Vostoemisio script is linked in the github issue, i had confusion reading the "Monero model" paragraph specifically the part i have highlighted in the image below:

<monerobull[m]> "she is fungible..." <- she funge on my mo then i nero

for me, other than this, the whole thing is great

s/then/till/

plowsof11: yeah that should be worded more clearly

this guys preliminary script looks better than my job applications

my problem is i cant offer advice because i don't know the concept its trying to convey .. maybe.. miners spending their own money to 'bump the block chain size' ?

s/block chain/block

it means miners cant just increase the blocksize bcs they would loose out on blockreward

is Tail Emission the defense? (a dumb 0.6 per block)

the block reward being fixed* ? 🤷 😅

<plowsof11> "Screenshot from 2023-07-07 15-25..." <- sech1 do you know what this is about?

plowsof are you for real right now

the block reward/tail emission enables the dynamic block size because penalties for too fast a block increase come from the block reward

tail emission has two reasons to exist, one is securing the chain by offering miner incentives for a long time and the other is to enable dynamic blocksize

if no block reward then no penalties are possible

👍️

plowsof is learning AND he wants to learn :)

"Preventing fee markets from harming usage" -> "meaning Monero doesn't rely on an unstable fee market"

ah "penalties for too fast a block increase come from the block reward" here is my confusion

I think the highlighted part is fairly clear tbh

It is a difficult concept to get across in a few words

IMHO, tail emissions creates an elastic supply curve for block space. You can have dynamic block size without tail emission (have a hard limit that increases when block are nearly full), but the supply curve would probably be completely inelastic in that case.

Well, at least in theory we could probably burn part of the fees to punish miners that build blocks that are too big ... so penalties possible even without block reward

For example, there is a proposal on the table for BCH to have a dynamic block size limit.

so the 0.6 emission .. can drop below 0.6 if you're trying to be naughty?

(without changing how the block reward subsidy for bitcoin works)

it drops below 0.6 every time we have a full block

i did not know this

Maybe add ", because the amount of penalty is based on the mean average blocksize in the recent past." to the end

Block reward: 0.599973

plowsof: If "trying to be naughty" means that users (or a spammer) does not increase their tx fee "bid" above the minimum, yet the miners include all txs above the "penalty area"

Rational miners wouldn't do that. They would wait for users to increase their bids

i have in my notepad for next years trivia quiz: Monero means money. AND now this new info

Monero means coin

plowsof11: im nearly as disappointed with you as i was with the payment channel speaker who didnt understand mining

i assumed 0.6 was fixed + fee market to expand , didnt know about penalties 😭

Basically all pool implementations don't include transactions that reduce their bottom line for the current block

Please pass on my comments on gitlab as I don't have an account

which means you need to pay high fees to push block size

If not hopefully I will remember to do it later

how did you doge all the posts talking about how dynamic blocksize was hit

btw i am right in the assumption that the payment channels based on hash-timelocks is using way more energy than if you just put the same payment on-chain right

because blocks get mined with or without transactions but every time one of these payment channels gets opened, someone starts mining away at the timelock

thanks for the info all 🤔

Yes it actually introduced additional "proof of work". Interesting concept but the " more efficient" stuff in the talk was total nonsense

<Rucknium[m]> Monero means coin <<>> yes and monero began as bitmonero :D

It's still .bitmonero in the filesystem 😐️

yes

.wownero fixed it

ofrnxmr: Sorry, I didn't have those numbers.

Lol I was the one who wrote the script for vosto

Yeah the gee penalty part is difficult to explain and the goal was to have about a minute of material

s/gee/fee/

<blankpage[m]> "Maybe add ", because the..." <- That's a good idea.

I did want to bring up spam attacks, even if briefly, because moneros low fees often lead people to assume monero would be very cheap to spam.