07:42:16 <monerobull[m]> Monerod reserves a ton of ram while syncing if available but doesn't actually use most of it right?
07:44:15 <sech1> This is data.mdb mapped into memory
15:00:54 <UkoeHB> meeting 2hr
16:30:38 <narodnik> fast ECIP (see 12:00) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zv-3TBgb_KI
16:30:51 <narodnik> for use in curve trees
16:59:40 <UkoeHB> meeting time https://github.com/monero-project/meta/issues/829
16:59:40 <UkoeHB> 1. greetings
16:59:40 <UkoeHB> hello
17:00:15 <vtnerd> hi
17:00:30 <rbrunner> Hello
17:00:34 <Rucknium[m]> Hi
17:03:37 <UkoeHB> 2. updates, what's everyone working on?
17:04:13 <UkoeHB> me: working on 'implementing seraphis' companion paper for the main paper, and need to prep for monerotopia
17:04:40 <Rucknium[m]> I released my analysis of the privacy impact of Mordinals:
17:04:40 <Rucknium[m]>  https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/12kv5m0/empirical_privacy_impact_of_mordinals_monero_nfts/
17:05:47 <Rucknium[m]> Things have been quiet on the Mordinals front. Fewer than 50 Mordinals minted in the past week. I am now tracking Mordinal transfer transactions: https://gist.github.com/Rucknium/67cc9efdf7e43a40c52417611b322d43
17:06:23 <Rucknium[m]> According to my count, there have been 126 Mordinal transfer transactions
17:07:29 <Rucknium[m]> Considering only outputs from Mordinal minting transactions as black marbles, mean effective ring size is 15.88 as of yesterday.
17:08:16 <Rucknium[m]> That number will rise toward 16 asymptotically as time goes on unless many more Mordinals are minted.
17:08:21 <UkoeHB> plowsof: we are past Liam Eagen's self-imposed deadline, any news?
17:09:24 <vtnerd> Ive mainly focused on lws and serialization, but I am _finally_ shifting back to some bp++. going to be a bit I think
17:09:32 <vtnerd> koe what was the self-emposed deadline?
17:09:38 <vtnerd> was he working on the implementation instead?
17:11:52 <UkoeHB> vtnerd: he's updating the paper
17:12:55 <xmrack[m]> Hi
17:13:26 <Rucknium[m]> Could be that BP++ doesn't work.
17:14:38 <ofrnxmr[m]> <vtnerd> "koe what was the self-emposed..." <- The 14th
17:16:16 <UkoeHB> at least as late as feb 23rd he was employed by blockstream to work on it
17:16:23 <UkoeHB> 3. discussion
17:16:46 <ofrnxmr[m]> Rucknium @rucknium:monero.social:  did some analysis of the distribution of number of outputs in each decoy 
17:19:29 <ofrnxmr[m]> I think very telling in for conversation of standardizing outputs.
17:19:29 <ofrnxmr[m]> 2 outs are in every decoy (though it seems there were 100 rings where there was only one 2 out decoy). 16 outs have the next highest prevalance and 3-15 are relatively rare 
17:21:01 <Rucknium[m]> Here's the table: https://gist.github.com/Rucknium/0737163a980a07cf9c837700771d0dea
17:21:16 <Rucknium[m]> There are row >16 there I think because some outputs are selected from very old outputs without the 16 output limit.
17:21:20 <UkoeHB> is the incidence rate different from what you'd expect?
17:22:36 <ofrnxmr[m]> personally it was what i expected based on how people spend 
17:22:36 <Rucknium[m]> UkoeHB: was that a question for me? If so, incidence rate of what?
17:24:27 <UkoeHB> Rucknium[m]: does the distribution in decoys match the expected distribution?
17:26:24 <Rucknium[m]> I expect it to roughly match the actual output-per-tx distribution on the chain. Since I don't know what that is (yet), it vacuously matches my expectations :)
17:26:37 <Rucknium[m]> I can produce the tables to see if it is close
17:26:46 <ofrnxmr[m]> (not technical answer) looks to me like it doesnt descriminate. Ie, looks to be in lin with real spending behavior, but with unlucky/lucky outliers (100 rings with only one 2 out, for example)
17:26:48 <UkoeHB> ah
17:28:20 <UkoeHB> are there any other topics we should discuss today?
17:28:29 <Rucknium[m]> I think ofrnxmr believes that outputs from 16-out txs are not credible decoys  (i.e. are black marbles)for rings that spend from 2-out txs. I am not convinced, but I will keep an open mind.
17:28:57 <ofrnxmr[m]> oh no
17:30:53 <ofrnxmr[m]> actually - id more think of them as.. grey.
17:30:53 <ofrnxmr[m]> they arent standout transactions, but they are obvious not-real-spends if say walmart is accepting xmr in person 
17:33:03 <Rucknium[m]> If someone was paid an output in a batch tx from an exchange or mining pool and then spent that output to the merchant, it's the real spend. IMHO, these are credible decoys
17:33:48 <plowsof11> BP++: no updates since March 28th where April 14th was promised. no reply to an email sent on the 12th yet
17:34:09 <ofrnxmr[m]> If the tx the merchant recieves has fifteen 16 outs, and one 2 out, the real soend is clear
17:34:47 <Rucknium[m]> Yes, but only Mordinals do that. Deliberately.
17:35:32 <ofrnxmr[m]> The 100 on your chart are morbinals?
17:35:52 <Rucknium[m]> Mordinal transfer txs
17:36:33 <Rucknium[m]> I'm pretty sure. I said it in this channel a few days ago.
17:36:33 <ofrnxmr[m]> Yeah, but those 100 from this chart are confirmed to be morbinals? 
17:36:33 <ofrnxmr[m]> ok. I thought it was an outlier 
17:36:46 <ArticMine[m]> What is the typical tx size when mordinals are involved?
17:37:20 <Rucknium[m]> Mordinal minting? I can calculate the mean tx size. One moment
17:38:33 <Rucknium[m]> 370687101 / 43096 = 8601.427 bytes
17:39:20 <Rucknium[m]> Mordinal transfer txs:
17:39:26 <Rucknium[m]> 281030 / 126 = 2230.397 bytes
17:39:45 <ArticMine[m]> There is at least an opportunity for pricing if not looking at tx size limits 
17:40:42 <ArticMine[m]> This is an issue l am looking at in a general sense 
17:40:50 <ArticMine[m]> Tx size pricing and limits
17:42:03 <Rucknium[m]> The new version of the Mordinals software has a self-imposed fee policy. tx fee rises exponential with ex_extra size
17:42:22 <Rucknium[m]> Of course, people can just choose to run the old software and avoid the fee
17:42:23 <ArticMine[m]> That is actually good 
17:42:29 <rbrunner> Yes, they even credit you, ArticMine[m], for the inspiration of the curve :)
17:43:06 <ArticMine[m]> ... but we can use node relay for this 
17:49:39 <UkoeHB> I think we can end the meeting here, thanks for attending everyone
17:55:45 <ofrnxmr[m]> Appreciate it koe.
21:09:28 <plowsof11> UkoeHB: BP++ update: we have the conference version that was submitted to ieee s&p. It is not final / some small things (due to the page constraints) but the author considers it "good for review" 
21:18:01 * xmrack[m] posted a file: (518KiB) < https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/v3/download/matrix.org/zwrOEDgsCYiGLQtFUGNocTBm/main.pdf >
21:18:30 <xmrack[m]> ^ the conference version of the BP++ paper
21:20:07 <xmrack[m]> Liam says a full version without page limits will be posted to eprint once done
21:26:57 <plowsof11> thanks xmrack, Liam wishes Monero a happy birthday too xD my untrained eye sees its a very different paper, so cypherstack will come back with their quote on this one as the author says its good for review.
21:42:05 <UkoeHB> nice