00:02:36 bravo UkoeHB 00:14:48 * rottenstonks claps 02:16:32 UkoeHB thanks for that encapsulation 03:02:34 UkoeHB: nothing in what I suggested had anything to do with governance 03:02:59 as for the rest of what you wrote, sure, I agree 03:07:16 > a non-profit org to be an umbrella for MRL workers 03:07:16 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). 03:07:30 no 03:07:46 this is how you do research if you want to work on it full time and be paid by the monero project 03:08:11 if you don't need to be paid a a full time MRL researcher then it doesn't affect you 03:10:54 Maybe for the first couple years, that is what it would be. In the long run, it would metastasize into an inescapable burden. 03:26:12 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. 09:57:46 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 https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/libera.chat/7ccd7d671bb430a30cc7285c721810b09011778b) 10:15:17 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 10:15:57 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 10:16:39 Thinking adversarially, it would be something to stay the hell away from, for everyone 10:18:26 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 10:20:28 Long story short, it would provide a golden opportinity for tracing companies to dig their claws deep into Monero 10:20:42 why would people not just churn those outputs instead of using this service? 10:20:50 I fail to see the use case for such a service, tbh 10:21:07 merope: I see your point. Thanks. 10:22:12 Because by churning, each transaction in the churning process is associated with you (albeit with a decreasing probability) 10:22:46 Whereas by "crossing the streams", you would effectively introduce a whole new potential transaction history into the mix 10:23:21 and unknown risk, unlike churning 10:23:28 It's not a bad idea on paper imo, but it would only work among trusted parties who know what they're doing 17:18:46 > <@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 https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/libera.chat/9892a25fd69b45d08912b9405723a31880be5e9a) 18:44:00 what are the current top research focused problems that people are interested in/are important in monero? 19:10:33 ullbeking, i think the meeting agenda covers the recent topics well: https://github.com/monero-project/meta/issues/616 19:21:33 thank you gingeropolous