<g​ingeropolous:monero.social> i wonder if the things have been worked out regarding miners creating empty blocks in an attempt to keep the medians artificially low.

<g​ingeropolous:monero.social> like if the 2 top pool right now just said "nope, we're just gonna keep on making 300 kb blocks, even though there's a txpool backlog"

<g​ingeropolous:monero.social> i guess the bleedover of the txs paying to try and get into the major pool blocks that end up in the minor pool blocks would eventually shift the median

<g​ingeropolous:monero.social> though the majors could perform some block withholding....

<g​ingeropolous:monero.social> and if its the top 3 pools, thats damn near 75% currently, so the minors could barely shift the median. Though there is the possibility (or really, the pooled-mining panacea) that the miners will migrate. Though if its paying more in rewards, would miners move?

<g​ingeropolous:monero.social> i wonder if that could be detected. Like if you have a consistent looking window for that median analysis, and it doesn't change (it stays top heavy, if the window is 100, the first 75 are 300 kb, and then the remaining 25 are are 300+ ... and it stays this way for like n windows of 100,) then that means that this particular artificial capping attack is occuring

<g​ingeropolous:monero.social> a normal drive in tx volume would cause the median to "tick over"

<g​ingeropolous:monero.social> maybe. I wonder if our larger median takes care of this, the higher time rolling one

<g​ingeropolous:monero.social> though this could occur at whatever penalty free zone is. doesn't have to be the default 300kb

<g​ingeropolous:monero.social> well they'd still be incentivized to drive it down to 300 i guess.

<g​ingeropolous:monero.social> i thinki broke gemini with this one

<g​ingeropolous:monero.social> dude its still going

<g​ingeropolous:monero.social> i've probably used like 2 cities worth of power

<m​onero.arbo:matrix.org> Need one of the major pools to make miners build their own block templates

<g​ingeropolous:monero.social> that just kicks the can to a different attacker, the miner themselves. A large hashrate miner could still mine on artificially capped block templates

<g​ingeropolous:monero.social> if anyones interested in the AI slop output, its here: gingeropolous.github.io/xmr_blocksi…ppression/block_suppression_cl.html

<g​ingeropolous:monero.social> gonna make me an AI slop smoothie

<g​ingeropolous:monero.social> currently gemini is choking on revisions to the report and a request to analyze the mitigation strategy i proposed. I think i need to restart with the 1st report in the primary ingest.

<e​longated:matrix.org> Divisor are off the table or will be researched further ?

<r​ucknium:monero.social> Probably researched further. AFAIK, that question will be discussed at the next MRL meeting Wednesday.

<s​yntheticbird:monero.social> plowsof

luigi1111

<m​onero.arbo:matrix.org> yeah but at that point it's a classic 51% attack, just not one that tries to double spend