12:34:27 <m-relay> <j​ohnfoss68:matrix.org> Hi everyone, just curious if the implementation of FCMP++ could potentially lead to improvements or modifications to the 10-block time lock? If so, is there anywhere I could find discussion related to this? Cheers.
12:37:22 <plowsof> From Ruckniums open research item list https://github.com/monero-project/research-lab/issues/94
12:57:02 <m-relay> <r​ucknium:monero.social> johnfoss68: AFAIK, no. Arguably makes it worse since txs are guaranteed to have referenced the most recent available outputs instead of having some low probability of doing so: https://github.com/monero-project/research-lab/issues/100#issuecomment-1608082485
12:58:26 <m-relay> <r​ucknium:monero.social> Given some security model, it is possible that a lower lock time would be better. But that's a question of probability of re-org, malicious behavior, etc.: https://github.com/monero-project/research-lab/issues/102  https://github.com/monero-project/research-lab/issues/95
13:07:28 <m-relay> <r​ucknium:monero.social> Erm, to the "arguably makes it worse" comment would refer to a proposal to reference recent ring members by output public key instead of confirmed-on-the-chain index. Then a re-org deeper than the N block lock would not necessarily invalidate txs with rings constructed in such a manner.
14:43:44 <m-relay> <o​frnxmr:monero.social> I asked kaya, and kaya said no. Different set of risks
14:43:47 <m-relay> <j​ohnfoss68:matrix.org> Thanks guys. And thanks for all your hard work on Monero!
14:44:29 <m-relay> <o​frnxmr:monero.social> >The aspects of what would happen if it was removed change with FCMP(++)s, yet it still makes sense to have.
14:44:31 <m-relay> <o​frnxmr:monero.social> > Thankfully, pocket change is no longer such a privacy issue and some payment channel designs open up.
16:23:44 <m-relay> <s​yntheticbird:monero.social> Has there been any payment channel designs worked on ? I must have seen 3 different paper on MRL repo
16:24:13 <m-relay> <s​yntheticbird:monero.social> I also remember some people saying Tari was one, but im doubtful
16:33:29 <m-relay> <k​ayabanerve:matrix.org> I'd again argue the n-block lock duration should be the same n recommended to exchanges for effective finality on payments.
16:34:59 <m-relay> <k​ayabanerve:matrix.org> Tari is not one and no one has actually worked on any AFAIK. All enabled designs still rely on PoW puzzles AFAIK which are a mess.