01:02:28 Anyone have experience with niceasicminer.com? 01:03:36 ? 01:05:10 What does this have to do with monero, [@reverb3352:matrix.org](https://matrix.to/#/@reverb3352:matrix.org) 01:06:36 Want to buy antminer x5's 01:07:00 I know there is a monero mining chat, but can't find it 01:08:11 Better build epyc rigs or wait for next gen miners from bitmain 01:15:11 reverb3352: #xmrmine:matrix.org 01:23:47 Thank you 03:10:52 [CCS Proposals] Lee Clagett opened merge request #586: Update vtnerd 2025 Q1 Part 2 https://repo.getmonero.org/monero-project/ccs-proposals/-/merge_requests/586 03:40:18 Is a RandomX upgrade planned with FCMP++? If so, have any audits been initiated 03:40:20 Or without fcmp++ in case we go with just ringsize bump only 03:40:21 Fuck a ring size bump 03:41:07 DSA >>> ring size bloat 03:41:35 I'd take 8/16 rings wirh 1.5kb tx over 6/32 with 3kb txs anyday 03:45:09 Welcome usability 03:45:10 Is fcmp++ even usable without divisor or watervever that is still not proven safe to use 03:45:12 fees double if you double the ring size, number of tx per block halves, number of inputs per tx halves 03:46:10 fees per input* double 03:51:10 Cypherstack didnt NACK divisors based on academics, they NACK'd based on needing more time to confirm academics before willing tonsign off 03:55:25 i dont know the specifics, but iirc divisors make txs larger while reducing verification time. not using divisors requires a separate approach that hasnt been mapped out yet. I personally think its ill advised to move on to plan b as if divisors was formally nackd (it hasnt been. Its been ack'd by veridise and not-yet-ack'd / WIP for more thorough review by cypherstack) 03:57:14 I'm running a fcmp++ testnet, and its definitely not ready for what would have been tomorrows stressnet date, but it does work (sort of) 04:03:18 So it’s nackd, they are still reviewing it ? 04:03:20 Is there a plan b though? 04:03:22 Shouldn’t we get another audit done for divisor ? Funding really isn’t a issue 04:03:24 Cypherstack is still doing theirs 04:04:39 They just arent willing to put a premature ACK on it and green light out timeframe. They want to finish properly. (whereas they feel veridise took shortcuts) 04:06:48 But those shortcuts are under pressure to meet deadlines, not out of malice. Unless you're willing to risk the entire monero project, the audit should be allowed complete w/o cutting corners 04:09:09 I personally believe that divisors will work out successfully even if CS finds some issues that need to be addressed 04:20:00 True, but even if CS is working on it we should get another audit done 04:20:01 I think audits can only get you so far, still need better testing and more eyes on the 40k+ lines of code 04:21:01 (thats 40k+ of integration c++ code, not including the rust) 04:26:59 Full code was never audited don’t know how many million it would cost 😅, and there aren’t many ppl actually available to do it via ccs 04:27:00 Was bitcoin code ever audited ? 04:27:02 It’s well studied. Also far less theoretical. In encryption old is considered good - tested by time. 04:28:12 New stuff, cryptologists are often afraid of 04:28:13 Look at bulletproofs. Sarang fixed monero's, but many implementations were flawed 04:29:38 or zcash's, or bitcoin's inflation bugs 04:31:23 Even well reviewed stuff can be flawed. Audits arent a panacea 11:12:34 Hello everyone, I am new to this community, currently working on integrating Monero support to a hardware wallet, just started exploring the codebase integrated sub modules and working on the sub division protocol for signing, was wondering if I can get some test vectors for testing my firmware side code 11:13:14 Hello everyone, I'm new to the community and am working on integrating Monero support for a hardware wallet. I'm implementing the MLSAG signature algorithm on the device side and would greatly appreciate if anyone could share test vectors or point me to existing test suites for validating my implementation. Specifically, I need inputs and expected outputs for the MLSAG signing pro 11:13:16 cess to ensure compatibility with the Monero network. Any guidance on testing transaction signing would be valuable. Thanks! 11:13:27 hi Keyur279 probably more suited for #monero-dev:monero.social channel 11:13:38 ofrnAI: 11:13:42 oh alright you did it already 11:13:48 Ofc 18:13:12 Hi guys! We put out a cool video on MiCAR and stuff. 18:13:14 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYkAgBtjhtw 19:07:42 looks cool. ( watched it without sound because I dont care about MiCAR, but the animations look professional 😀👍️ ) 19:09:55 One of the goals here is to show that just relying on regulation will always give you murky answers. 19:10:04 Best to just go with Monero. ;) 19:19:51 i wrote a new article on monerochan.news and added an rss feed. 19:27:07 sometimes people are too obsessed with what the government does and don't focus enough on creating the future we are looking for 19:27:20 what other content do you have planned for stack wallet ? 19:55:29 animation wise? 20:05:24 A government is supposed to represent the people, not the other way around 20:11:30 content wise. some of the interviews on the stack channel are banger. underappreciated 20:11:32 would love to see more 20:13:54 ofrnAI: totally 22:46:55 glad to hear you think so. We've got a couple more in the pipeline. 23:01:31 the spelling of `decentralied` triggered me :P 23:01:46 me too 23:01:50 it's European 23:09:04 5th time I hear of Paul Baran in my life and its driving me crazy. (very good video btw) 23:42:13 that tari miner will mine tari & xmr equally (measured in hash)? 23:57:10

seems to be solo mining xmr in equal hash