00:48:46 <3​21bob321:monero.social> I think you missed gui room 00:49:05 <3​21bob321:monero.social> And events room 01:03:34 Don't give him more ideas! 01:41:43 Guys Monero is starting to head towards its genuine market value; another “event” is likely inbound 03:15:12 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Trumps conviction ? 03:21:12 Hashrate took a dump 03:21:40 Lost 37% 03:36:11 sxmr and nano lost 500mh each 04:19:36 Somebody was complaining about nanopool on Twitter earlier 04:20:20 Maybe they have a power outage 05:52:51 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Solar eclipse ? 06:55:34 Thats what you get when you touch hookers lol 06:56:53 > <@321bob321:monero.social> Trumps conviction ? 06:56:55 Thats what you get when you touch the hookers lol 06:57:15 > <@321bob321:monero.social> Trumps conviction ? 06:57:17 Thats what you get when you play with hookers lol 13:51:42 Fengzie Yang: I replied to your DM, but matrix often has problems where DM isn't working, in case you don't see my replies 14:57:52 We need people to start mining on not-nanopool 14:58:46 Gupax is neat for that. Maybe a reddit post to remind people to use it when they're bored 14:58:47 the 1gh fhat disappeared yesterday (500mh from sxmr and 5ppmh from nano), if it returns and all goes to nanopool, theyll have 1.7/2.9gh 14:59:54 Gupax is nice and simple, but p2pool bloats the chain, especially for small miners 15:01:31 bloats the chain? 15:01:37 with coinbase outputs? 15:03:04 with coinbase consolidations 15:03:28 ah yeah 15:04:13 I get your point but I would honestly prefer a little bloat per block than a 51% attack. What other pool could we recommend at the moment aside of p2pool 15:04:19 Greater than hundreds of times more bloat than a solo block 15:04:42 Thats an uneducated statement, no offence. 15:05:09 it takes > than a whole block to consolidate 1 block reward 15:05:22 And it literally crashes nodes 15:06:28 p2pool is excusable / not that bad if you have like 100kh 15:06:51 crashing ndoes is due to a bug in monerod, not the transaction itself 15:07:05 yeah ^ 15:07:11 hopefully fixed soon™ 15:07:17 if bloat is a long-term issue the oom issue should be fixed by then 15:07:41 mrl 108/109 fix it, but soontm and fcmp might move the goalpost there as well 15:07:52 yeah, well thx delays 15:09:18 Whats the maximum amount of outputs per coinbase tx? 15:11:55 Not sure if there js a hard max, but mini is doing about 600 atm 15:15:29 https://mini.p2pool.observer/payouts/4AtVp79V7y4GTVHVK2XhYhJGqV5MqwyjN4yJNfMwpBMV9Zx8wDqmyDKPzCNX4LoCypPhwpqhHwdvp74rnmJT5gaeDESyGW5 15:17:29 ~0.0005xmr payments = 1500inputs to consokidate into 1 coinbase (0.6). thats 3 entire blocks 15:18:10 indeed concerning 15:18:17 And 3 blocks worth of fees. Its expensive as hell too 15:19:25 without mrl 108, p2pool shouldnt be used by small miners 15:20:46 Btw. Consolidating 1500 i puts to make 0.6xmr over 3.33 blocks = 0.15xmr in fees (25%) 15:21:07 Inputs* 15:22:56 Without 108, mass adoption of p2pool is bad / terrible for the blockchain. 15:24:26 solo > mining with a centralized pool that uses p2pool (like aterx) > centralized pool (like monerop.com) > p2pool 15:31:12 Even for #2 = mining on a centralized pool that uses p2pool, aterx (250kh) is being paid outputs of 0.02xmr. They dont have to consolidate any more than necessary to payout miners, so not much worse bloat-wise than if they were a completely centralized pool (monerop, 250kh 0.05min payout) 15:40:20 would make solo mining vs p2pool with a couple of 1kh/s help also to counter the risk of 51% attack? Or is it then like pissing in the ocean? 15:53:04 Interesting. I hope a mitigation will be found. In the near-term, we still need to recommend people pools to mine on in order to balance things up. Gupax just happen to have excellent UX. Monero GUI solo would also be something to recommend according to what you said 16:04:33 GUI mines slow compared to xmrig 16:05:10 there are plenty of small pools to choose from 16:06:27 downloading xmrig, setting up config and choosing a pool is already making 90% of people flee 16:07:23 xmrig will generate the config for you 16:07:24 Gupax runs XMRig 16:07:39 Congrats to the 10% 16:07:53 but I wanna be the 1% 16:08:04 So Gupax is just as fast (minus the small overhead for GUI) 16:08:28 Who would have thought making money / mining crypto would require a bit of thonk 16:08:48 sech1: is gupax just for p2pool? 16:08:58 sech1: ofrnxmr brought the concern about on-chain bloat caused by p2pool coinbase rewards. 16:09:38 thus the discussion around UX outside of gupax(p2pool) 16:09:45 Gupax does (succeeds mostly) the uhh.. thing that gui doesnt do for you to give more hashes 16:11:55 nioCat, afaik it is 16:12:36 Gupaxx adds xmrvsbeast raffle to the mix 16:13:09 plowsof matrix! 16:13:14 Do better! 16:14:53 P2Pool reduced the bloat more than a year ago. Main P2Pool pays in bigger chunks (depending on pool hashrate) 16:16:45 Can't the same be applied to mini chain ? last mined block (3160897) have ~590 outputs in coinbase tx. 16:17:23 plowsof @plowsof:matrix.org mate. 16:17:26 😂 16:19:18 Mini chain also has it. It will reduce outputs if it gets higher hashrate 16:21:07 Oh cool, so in a long-term scenario, can we recommend p2pool mini ? Or will it not be enough to avoid bloat 16:33:57 The bloat is overrated 16:34:21 Consolidations take around ~530 bytes per input 16:36:25 P2Pool mini generates around ~2200 payouts per day, or only 1.1 MB/day in consolidations 16:37:38 P2Pool main finds many more blocks, but it pays in larger chunks, so it generates even a bit fewer payouts (~2000/day) 16:39:23 Reassuring to hear, I crave for 2MB per day in exchange to 51% resiliency 16:42:31 maybe a stupid question but if an input is 530 bytes in average. How is https://p2pool.io/explorer/tx/de943ab20371b0fdacac78ce7c18a32d610983aa9af110c84debe7687ef8dc88 only 22 kB? Compression? or did I missed smth? 16:52:47 Listening to a spaces rn where they're talking about "silent payments" ... which is merely stealth addresses, cutely named, normies thinking now they've got Privacy! 16:52:49 They were now just talking about "how to make a transaction not look unique or stand out from other transactions" 16:55:01 I just found out about silent payments. I have zero interest, but thought was interesting how vik and sethforprivacy making it seem revolutionary 16:55:43 SyntheticBird it's 22 kb is because it's coinbase output (39 bytes per output). But it later becomes an input in the consolidation tx, and then it's 530 bytes 16:58:40 sech1 make sense. thx 17:05:38 Revuo Monero Issue 197: May 23 - 30, 2024. https://www.revuo-xmr.com/issue-197.html 17:14:01 Sech, thats just playing with words.. if the pool _difficulty_ increases, people find less shares. Main's payout window pays a 500kh miner outputs of 0.001 17:14:19 Thats 600 outputs for 1 coinbase 17:14:49 Sorry, 0.002, 300 outputs for 500kh. 17:15:39 https://p2pool.observer/payouts/48mYZD9FzibToDttTAurTj4xNNhqbH8BsWsQK9vVNp1T9L6xiu1xREmgvTeHokW4MLHyBffM6pxXVRFnG9t8xcx27W92z8b 17:17:42 Saying "its only 2200 payouts" is ignoring that its still 300x more chain space AND that it literally takes up an entire block for s 300kh miner to consolidate 1 coinbase 17:19:45 Mrl 108 fixes the issue. And it IS an issue. Mass adoption of p2pool is not a non-isssue. 300/1 is not a non-issue. 1500/1 is not a non-issue. There are Only 720 blocks per day. you csnt have 1 person using >1 blocks just to spend spend 1 coinbase 17:20:40 Its not a p2pool issue, but it is an issue exposed by p2pool. 17:21:49 Yeah, wtf sech1? 17:23:29 Where my math is wrong? 17:23:46 Main payout is 0.00174 right now, not 0.001 17:24:18 i changed my statement ans rounded up to 0.002 17:24:18 300 outputs for 500 kh, yes. But p2pool will need to find 300 blocks for that, and it will take a few days 17:24:32 it's still 1 MB/day from p2pool main and 1 MB/day from p2pool mini 17:26:33 p2pool main only finds ~70 blocks/day 17:27:35 Mass adoption will increase p2pool hashrate, then it will automatically increase the minimal payout 17:28:21 "you csnt have 1 person using >1 blocks just to spend spend 1 coinbase" <- dynamic block size algorithm says hello 17:32:15 public version of Monero Garden finally live at monero.garden 17:32:33 my comment in the original CCS page: https://repo.getmonero.org/monero-project/ccs-proposals/-/merge_requests/346#note_24804 17:37:05 https://github.com/monero-project/research-lab/issues/108 would of course be nice to save on fees when consolidating inputs 17:47:45 108 saves massively on blockspace 17:49:27 Im not sure if/how 108 would work with fcmp, if at all, but 108 would save us a lot of trouble 17:54:59 "dynamic block size algorithm says hello" << not a solution to taking up hundreds of times more storage space vs solo, and tens of times more than pool. Pools have larger minimum payouts vs p2pool (ie 0.05xmr vs 0.0004-0.002 currently), but still split the coinbase into smaller sizes vs solo (ie 0.05 vs 0.6) 17:58:39 Instead of 3 tx/block (450 outputs), with 108 you could consolidate ~7000 p2pool outputs per block or ~2500/tx 18:05:15 only takes 2160 tx consolidations to take up 24hrs of blockspace and force users to pay higher fees. 432xmr produced/day, Thats 324k outputs * 0.002 18:07:39 =648xmr in p2pool outputs to own a full day of blockspace. You dont want mass adoption or the majority of blocks will be consolidations or will cause blocks to expand inorganically. Mrl108 fixes this under the current ring signature model 18:23:02 monero.garden Hm 18:24:46 "648xmr in p2pool outputs to own a full day of blockspace" p2pool can't mine that much even in theory because the whole network mines 432 xmr/day. Don't twist the number 18:24:49 *numbers 18:25:20 Dynamic block size IS the solution 18:26:34 I'm for MRL108, but for a different reason 18:28:39 not what i expected it to look like: "Overall, it's design should mimic children picture books" looks like a monerodocs thing. https://quartz.jzhao.xyz/ 18:41:32 we'll keep moving apart from the standard design and towards a different aesthetic. It was never intended to look (or read) as a 5yo picture book, the layout maybe, but the intended age is more like 10-12 18:41:48 and above of course 18:42:27 with the illustrations on it it'll look way more book-like 18:45:28 anhdres you scared me for a moment there, we need to read your comment first https://repo.getmonero.org/monero-project/ccs-proposals/-/merge_requests/346#note_24804 19:08:36 "p2pool can't mine that much even in theory because the whole network mines 432 xmr/day. Don't twist the number" << of course not. If it mined 432/day it would use 66% of blockspace if people consolidated regularly. I said "the majority of blocks will be consolidations" 66% is a majority 19:09:57 And thats assuming people always consolidate max size transactions. Less than max size tx scales even worse 19:11:21 And dynamic blocks are not the solutions. "a different reason" = fees? Fees and blockspace are linear afaik. 7000inputs for 100kb vs 150 is a massive difference 19:17:12 2/3 of a block when you have 500kh doesnt scale. You need to increase blockspace to 500kb to account for 2 transactions! Lol! 19:17:52 Dynanic blocks dont solve bloat, they make bloating easier and cheaper. P2pool can be used to attack the network and im sure you know that 19:19:40 108 and 109 do nothing against people who want to actively attack the network with tx that mimic p2pool (mordinals or split > reconsolidation), but they prevent p2pool from accidentally doing it 19:23:05 Im not telling people don't use p2pool, im sayinf without mrl108 p2pool a 5kh miners on mini has to pay terribly expensive fees (25%) and creates 3+ blocks worth bloat to spend 0.6xmr 19:24:11 P2Pool produces ~2000-2200 inputs/day, and it doesn't change with adoption. It was a problem in the original release, but now it reduces PPLNS window size to reduce the number of outputs per block 19:24:19 More hashrate -> more difficulty -> larger min. payout 19:25:19 and if someone spins up a p2pool small and a p2pool micro, because they want rewards more often? 19:25:27 It is tuned in such a way that each found share is paid out in no more than 2 Monero blocks on average 19:25:28 Mini and main are the o 19:25:34 and the number of shares per day is fixed in p2pool 19:26:03 2k inputs/day for each p2pool instance 19:26:12 right. 19:26:18 Bloat is not a problem at this scale 19:26:31 key point "at this scale" 19:26:31 it's 1 MB/day, maybe 1.2 MB/day 19:26:55 Even with 10 p2pool chains, it's 10-12 MB/day 19:26:57 Nothing 19:27:29 3.6 GB/year 19:27:41 You can buy 1 TB ssd for cheap now 19:33:15 key point "at this scale" <- p2pool PPLNS window algorithm is designed to limit number of outputs per day to 2-2.2k, no matter how many miners are there. Now another question is how many concurrent p2pool chains are running, but I doubt there will be many in the future 19:40:17 Greed tells me that once difficulty gets too high that people will want their payouts. If all blocks were mined by 1 p2pool, the outputs would be 0.196xmr minimum. "how long does it take to mine that much" = 1/3rd as long as solo mining, and incredibly difficult to find a p2pool share 19:42:18 And if there are 5 p2pool chains with 80%, 15%, 5%, 3% and 2% of the network hashrate, every miner can find a pool that matches their hashrate 19:42:31 So really there's no need for more than 5 chains 19:42:45 5-6 MB/day is the max bloat with current transaction sizes 19:43:36 or maybe 40,40,15,5,3,2 - that makes it 6 chains 19:47:36 actually p2pool-mini is 0.5% now, so maybe a few more chains will be needed. It's an interesting math task to find the optimal distribution of pool hashrates to satisfy all miners 20:22:35 cc Rucknium ? 20:27:34 My gut feeling says something like Fibonacci sequence will be the best 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, ... 20:28:28 lmfao 20:29:02 Golden ratio strikes again 20:29:26 <3​21bob321:monero.social> Golden shower* 20:33:12 SyntheticBird: IMHO MRL #108 "Coinbase Consolidation Tx Type" would be a good idea for the next hard fork. If we still have rings in the next hard fork, it helps privacy for most users and reduces blockchain size and cost to P2Pool miners. If the next hard fork is FCMP, then we don't really get privacy benefits, but we still get the blockchain size and P2Pool cost benefits. 20:34:58 If the next hard fork increases fee per byte and/or tx size a lot (through FCMP or a large ring size increase), then MRL #108 would be important to keep P2Pool competitive with centralized mining pools. I do some calculations in https://github.com/Rucknium/misc-research/blob/main/Monero-Black-Marble-Flood/pdf/monero-black-marble-optimal-fee-ring-size.pdf page 11, lines 240-284. 20:41:39 > With the ring size 60 and 70 nanoneros per byte scenario considered above, about 57 percent of the value of that output would be consumed by the cost to spent the output in a transaction’s output. 20:41:39 Ouch! 20:42:31 In this case P2Pool would have to hard fork too to increase the minimum payout to 0.003 XMR or even more. 20:42:41 If MRL108 is not implemented 20:44:10 0.003 XMR is more than 24 hours of mining at 10 kh/s, so payouts will be rare for low hashrate mining 20:44:13 *miners 20:45:04 It's better to implement a compact coinbase consolidation tx type to keep min payouts low 23:17:04 The control port of tor is really useful and should be used in binaries 23:18:54 It helps isolating transaction circuits or switching circuits when refreshing a wallet and for monerod it could autosetup the --anonymous-inboung + --proxy arg