11:16:32 <monerobull[m]1> how do I explain the spike in xmr transaction fees?
11:17:11 <monerobull[m]1> January 2021
11:18:15 * monerobull[m]1 uploaded an image: (334KiB) < https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/download/matrix.org/CzudhySWyJLJTaQrObmlhJqa/IMG_20220120_121737_1.jpg >
11:21:30 <Halver[m]> monerobull[m]1: wasn't it the rogue node asking for ~4XMR fees ?
11:24:16 <monerobull[m]1> did that happen multiple times?
11:24:35 <monerobull[m]1> I know it happened a few weeks ago but this is a year ago
11:33:55 <merope> This has been happening for years
11:34:18 <merope> Every now and then, somebody drops a tx with insanely high fees for no apparent reason
11:35:11 <merope> And by "insanely high" I mean >1XMR for a basic 2-in 2-out transaction
11:35:51 <merope> That skews the data for the average tx fee
11:36:13 <merope> But if you look at the median fee, it's lower and doesn't spike like that 
13:49:49 <Rucknium[m]1> The more informative data is the median fee (for all coins in fact), but bitinfocharts doesn't display the median Monero fee for some reason.
16:10:33 <mj-xmr[m]> In general: the median filters out outliers.
16:11:24 <mj-xmr[m]> Sometimes you'll want them to be included, but there's a reason for existence of the book called: "How to lie with statistics" :)
16:16:45 <monerobull[m]1> I'll just call it experimental attack or something
16:17:28 <monerobull[m]1> just ruins the point comparing it to btc a little
18:10:28 <monerobull[m]1> is sending a lot of transactions in a short amount of time bad for privacy?
18:33:42 <fluffypony> https://git.wownero.com/wownero/wownero/pulls/369
18:33:48 <fluffypony> have we ever discussed this idea?
18:38:49 <UkoeHB> would that push most of the mining time into EC operations? which would be asic-able?
18:49:07 <Rucknium[m]1> Would p2pool still be possible?
18:50:59 <Rucknium[m]1> It may be the case that the larger 51% attack threat is not from a longstanding pool, but rather from an outside force. Enforcing solo mining I think would reduce hashpower, leading to more threat from an outside force.
18:53:30 <sech1> p2pool can't work with header signing
18:53:56 <sech1> because it pays many miners in each block, and you need to know private key for each payout address to do it
19:01:21 <wernervasquez[m]> <sech1> "p2pool can't work with header..." <- what are the technical differences between central mining and p2pool? Can any of those be exploited to enabled one while disabling the other? 
19:41:52 <merope> It would be a terrible idea imo, and it would severely decrease the securirty of the network against 51% attacks
19:42:31 <merope> With pool mining, even someone with a few measly kH/s can still earn a few bucks by joining in with their cpu in their spare time
19:44:00 <merope> By forcing everyone to solo-mine, it would make mining pretty much pointless for small miners who don't have several rigs available, because it would take them from several months to over a year to find a single block
19:44:46 <merope> Without even considering the effects of variance and bad luck, as well as the price swings that could occur over such long timeframes
19:46:13 <merope> The root of the issue is the relative size of individual cpus compared to the whole network
19:50:11 <merope> Small miners who can't absorb the variance over literal years would be pushed out, while mining farms would be mostly unaffected
20:30:43 <UkoeHB> ArticMine[m]: ok, how do you use a GPU for verification? lol
22:20:36 <UkoeHB> If it requires custom code for all the proofs, I think that would be a 'far in the future' project. Bulletproofs + grootle proofs + seraphis composition proofs + ed25519 + strict transaction verification logic = a lot of work to do one time, let alone 2+ times.
23:09:01 <wernervasquez[m]> <merope> "It would be a terrible idea imo,..." <- What if, instead of attacking "big pools", we could enable efficient decentralized anonymous pools? I have no specific idea in mind. However, as a user, if the easiest thing for me to do was install monero and press a button, that is what I would do. Assuming the payout was as good or better than alternatives.
23:09:57 <wernervasquez[m]> Push button, get cookie. If it is harder to join a centralized outfit, why would I?
23:14:55 <wernervasquez[m]> And if you arent making anything harder, only making other things easier, I cant imagine that would hurt the hashrate.
23:16:01 <merope> In the current system, from the pov of the network, a mining pool is effectively a solo miner. When you join a pool, you are effectively solo mining for the pool owner - who then promises to pay you based on your contribution
23:17:57 <merope> The best option we have, so far, is p2pool - a mining pool with no "owner" that allows users to split rewards fairly
23:19:13 <merope> We just need to make the setup more user-friendly
23:24:09 <Rucknium[m]1> And there is now a 25 XMR bounty for writing code integrating p2pool into the Monero GUI wallet. Any takers?
23:24:10 <Rucknium[m]1> https://bounties.monero.social/posts/53/integrate-p2pool-mining-into-monero-gui-wallet
23:27:12 <sech1> monerod is a more appropriate place for integration because GUI wallet just calls start_mining RPC. It doesn't mine itself
23:27:40 <sech1> but then there's an issue with licensing (p2pool is GPLv3)
23:33:09 <sech1> I guess Monero release could distribute the p2pool binary and sources, start it and connect to it for mining without violating the license.
23:54:47 <wernervasquez[m]> <sech1> "monerod is a more appropriate..." <- For the target audience, I think there should be push button access from the GUI
23:55:37 <monerobull[m]1> if possible, ux would greatly improve by running a short benchmark and then choosing between p2pool and mini and providing an expected time till first payout
23:56:44 <monerobull[m]1> currently p2pool is more like "might work, might not"
23:57:57 <monerobull[m]1> and unless you are familiar with hashrate & mining, you'll just think nothing works if you don't get any feedback after a week of mining