bravo UkoeHB

UkoeHB thanks for that encapsulation

UkoeHB: nothing in what I suggested had anything to do with governance

as for the rest of what you wrote, sure, I agree

> a non-profit org to be an umbrella for MRL workers

This translates to 'this is how you do research for Monero; these people are the gatekeepers of Monero research', which is related to governance (the process of ideas being implemented).

no

this is how you do research if you want to work on it full time and be paid by the monero project

if you don't need to be paid a a full time MRL researcher then it doesn't affect you

Maybe for the first couple years, that is what it would be. In the long run, it would metastasize into an inescapable burden.

I don't see why you think that. a 501c(3) org has a strict charter, it can't just feature creep into something else.

I've been thinking about a service that could be offered as a mitigation for poisoned output/EAE attacks, and I'd like to get feedback on it. I am not a subject matter expert, so I'll ask for your patience. I fully expect this has been discussed before, I just couldn't find information on it.... (full message at libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/do…d671bb430a30cc7285c721810b09011778b)

For one thing, it would put a massive target on this service's back: it would be a centralization point where everyone with something to hide would be converging to

If it were run by a hostile entity, it would become a massive source of deanonymization for not just its users, but the entire chain

Thinking adversarially, it would be something to stay the hell away from, for everyone

Even with a p2p implementation, you would still have no idea who the other party of the trade is - and again, thinking adversarially, you would have to assume it's someone hostile tracking all the transactions they've taken part in

Long story short, it would provide a golden opportinity for tracing companies to dig their claws deep into Monero

why would people not just churn those outputs instead of using this service?

I fail to see the use case for such a service, tbh

merope: I see your point. Thanks.

Because by churning, each transaction in the churning process is associated with you (albeit with a decreasing probability)

Whereas by "crossing the streams", you would effectively introduce a whole new potential transaction history into the mix

and unknown risk, unlike churning

It's not a bad idea on paper imo, but it would only work among trusted parties who know what they're doing

> <@spackle:matrix.org> I've been thinking about a service that could be offered as a mitigation for poisoned output/EAE attacks, and I'd like to get feedback on it. I am not a subject matter expert, so I'll ask for your patience. I fully expect this has been discussed before, I just couldn't find information on it.... (full message at libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/do…25fd69b45d08912b9405723a31880be5e9a)

what are the current top research focused problems that people are interested in/are important in monero?

ullbeking, i think the meeting agenda covers the recent topics well: monero-project/meta #616

thank you gingeropolous