16:59:45 dayum: "All 2,210 hosts up" -- monerosim can do a full reproduction of that Nyx thing on the 1tb box. It turns out if your not slinging txs around we can cram quite a bit of monerods in there 17:04:14 Their reproduction instructions are giving me a syntax error. You are our only hope now :D 17:05:04 I think 1000 of those hosts are just py-levin, not actual nodes. 17:21:55 yeah i recall seeing the bot rambling on about creating a levin thing in python 17:23:13 it estimates another hour for the run to complete. can you access the lever65 stuff on senior? feel free to dig through the results / data 17:26:11 oh snap its done 17:29:13 "Interpretation — a clean, honest full-scale result. The established victim was gradually eclipsed from 0 to a 17:29:13 ~7/12 plateau (peak 8/12), shedding every seed/miner connection — but it did not reach a clean 12/12. The 17:29:13 residual 4–7 slots stayed benign, held by the paper-faithful 1,199-node honest population re-injecting records 17:29:13 faster than update_sync_search evicts them. This is exactly the convergence-limited behavior we predicted, 17:29:13 and it quantifies the honest-population dependence: fewer benign → higher takeover (585-node Nyx hit 9/12; the[... more lines follow, see https://mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/z9Hz_KoLRy05UUJK ] 17:34:17 Thanks! So it doesn't reproduce the results. I don't recall reading anything about "whistler-filling" in the paper. Try to ask it to reproduce the behavior in the paper. I guess you already did that, but why does it say "we did something besides what the paper said"? 17:34:53 yeah i dunno. prolly cause its opus 4.9 17:34:56 4.8 17:38:28 ah ok. apparently it had its sights set on seeing if we could run that scale at all. 17:38:38 i guess that means another 20 hour run.... 17:41:52 https://pastebin.com/raw/2TqvFGCd for its rationale 17:43:01 crankin it now 17:52:11 "The paper's attack (formally N-I/N-II/N-III "network-wide peerlist poisoning", not "whistler-filling" — my mislabel)" >> this guy