sgp Are you seriously trying to push this idiotic narrative? Read my comment again and you'll realise that i'm ok with posting both if there is a multi-wallet category. Also, me not agreeing doesn't mean that it won't be added. At least try to be intellectually honest.

Since i'm "concern trolling" could you explain how monero.com ended up listed as an official monero website on coingecko? Hard to believe it's a mistake since it's the only cryptocurrency on their website that beside the official website also hosts the website of a private wallet... in the section of the official website? Weren't you in past in contact with coingecko for Monero things? I'm sure you'll contact them and fix it now? Because

somebody concerned about cake's aggressive marketing tactics is trolling 😉

i'm sure you know that monero.com is not an official monero website, so why is it listed on coingecko? Quite the visibility tho 😉

I'm confused. Isn't monero.com a possibly malicious site ? Or was it bought out ? IIRC they wanted 10k monero for the domain. I sure hope nobody paid them off :/

Oh, no that was .org I think...

monero.com was some building company or so ?

Anyway, if coingecko points to a random website, that needs fixing before it gets abused.

They seem to link to random other third party stuff. Including facebook (lol).

IIRC the monero facebook account was some spammer.

monero.org was the malicious one. monero.com was recently bought by Cake. They created a monero-only version of Cake called monero.com. The thing is that monero.com is listed as a monero official website, on coingecko when that's not the case, it's a wallet.

OK. I'll ping the core team to see if they want to point out the mixup.

Wait, so the original question is why not add two links to cake wallet ? That is a bit of a WTF question then :D

Choose one.

(preferably the one that doesn't specifically whitelist dash)

(assuming htey still do)

Also, cake wallet being a bit of a asshole squatting monero.com here.

I guess it could have been a worse squatter...

ErCiccione:

Regarding Monerujo... do we think m2049r will update it before HF?

Otherwsie we should probably remove "dead" wallets..

no idea. Makes sense to remove it if it's going to be outdated after the hf

Ok. I'll pr it if the time comes and still no response.

I have updated and improved builds of monerujo and shruum, though obviously unofficial.

Shruum git is Mia git.mayumi.one/mayumi/shruum

m2049r's last GitHub activity was in may.

Regarding monero.com... (full message at libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/do…0cbbf1f15d61033a0ec7038d00cc367e27e)

Id argue that wallets must be HF capable and include no tracking to be posted on getmonero.org.

Monero.com doesnt fit this, neither does cake. (Yes this is me pushing sgp: to release fixes and updates asap)

What does "ping" mean here ? They get IP + time of use, or more ?

Monero.com website seems pretty dishonest by not mentioning cake wallet until the bottom of page, and only offering cake wallet products in the wallet suggestions <- this is what i refer to with aggressive marketing tactics. The wording on monero.com is very carefully placed and might give the wrong idea of what it is about. The addition on coingecko as a monero website makes harder to think of a mistake

Whether they mention it or not, it's still squatting.

if they use any Monero code, it's actually a violation of the bsd license.

How so ?

Unless they claim they wrote it, which I doubt they do.

my understanding is that the bds-3 forbids people from using parts of Monero code and then using the name of the monero project to market their product

3. Neither the name of the copyright holder nor the names of its contributors

may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without

specific prior written permission.

Hmm. Indeed. Not sure we want to go there though, unless egregious.

Well, I guess squatting is egregious.

the thing is that any copyright holder can claim they are violating the license. Not sure why they would put themselves in such situation

I don't think it really applies here though, but then I did not look at that site beyond a cursory glance...

Unless they're saying "the monero team approves of us", without evidence.

I mean, I kinda approve kinda disapprove, depending. It's... fuzzy.

I'm sure other people are similar.

sgp[m]: are you from cake wallet ?

if they use code under the bsd-3 for the wallet, it does. Unless i'm missing something. In any case, i don't care either, but if i'm correct they have put themselves in quite the risky situation

Anyway, my opinion is kick monero.com from anything from us. Linking to squatters is WTF.

Fucking companies, can never trust any.

Even if the'yre owned by standup guys, they can become assholes overnight if bought or bankrupt.

"We will never sell your data". Yeah, right.

Is this a discussion about monero.com website or the wallet itself?

My side is about the squatting. Sorry :D

I've not tried their wallet. I hear Cake wallet is pretty good (though it whutelisted dash at some point, which I didn't like, but hey).

Companies. Again. A bit more money to be had, so let's have a scam.

The wallet is open source, doesn't steal people funds, and it offers something people want (and asked for)

If it was named MoneroCake would you approve to include it?

Is the name/domain the only problem?

For me, it's the main problem right now. It's clearly squatting.

> <@ofrnxmr:monero.social> Regarding monero.com... (full message at libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/do…5e7bbda24f846202a4f1338d0c818741c97)

I have no real problem with cake wallet itself (beyond the dash whitelist).

moneromooo: yes, SGP is VP of cake wallet (and monero.Com)

I mean it's a question of honesty really. Nothing technical.

for the records, me netiher (before absurd claims pop up)

Jesus. OK.

sgp[m]: please stop squatting moero.com. It's dishonest.

they paid 400k for that domain. I doubt they are going to leave it now 😛

And that does NOT mean sell it for $BANK.

Fuck. Bastards, both sides...

For thst money, they must have been planning to con a lot of people.

Who did they get it from ?

Was it a buildibg company ?

If so, those aren't bastards, they predated us IIRC.

No idea, there was a reddit post with some details some time ago

Regarding calling home, both Cake and monero.com ping fiat-api.cakewallet.com at launch with no way to disable it.

I opened an issue (to allow disabling fiat lookups) but I imagine cake is receiving the time and ip of each time someone opens cake wallet.

For what its worth - Cake and monero.com wallets are identical. .com is monero-only. Cake is Haven, btc, ltc, monero and a lot more in the code, zcash, dash etc

Anyway, I'm starting to get really annoyed now, so if I get a vote, mine is to kick cake wallet altogether unless they have a really good explanation for how they spent 400k if thy didn't plan to con people into mistaking the two.

After opening an issue, they fixed it, never merged it, but decided to update the privacy policy to include that they might get data from you via the fiat api.

wtf?

sgp could you clarify this and since we are at it, what data cake collects?

Issue:... (full message at libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/do…16b53e172832f067429ca6cba3a886b0c71)

Moral issues aside, Cake wallet (the wallet) in itself isn't malicious, removing seems excessive IMO

If rigorous privacy is a concern, then revise Light Wallets that send your view key by default as well, possibly create a new categories "for daily usage, non-optimal privacy" (better written)

* malicious, removing it seems excessive

I try to be nice, but cake isnt "not" malicious

* Moral issues aside, Cake wallet (the wallet) in itself isn't malicious, removing it seems excessive IMO

If rigorous privacy is a concern, then revise Light Wallets that send your view key by default as well, possibly create a new categorie: "for daily usage, non-optimal privacy" (better written)

* Moral issues aside, Cake wallet (the wallet) in itself isn't malicious, removing it seems excessive IMO

If rigorous privacy is a concern, then revise Light Wallets that send your view key by default as well, possibly create a new category: "for daily usage, non-optimal privacy" (better written)

Found enough issues to be a jackass but I keep my mouth shut and try to get stuff fixed behind the scenes.

They are obviously very hood for the community. But they also have a monopoly on mobile wallets tend to abuse it

Malicious is the wrong/too strong of a word.. excuse me.

Greedy perhaps

Paying 400k for squatting tells me they had a plan to make up at least that much through the squatting. THAT seems malicious.

Can't relaly say "it looked cool at the time, we bought it"

Keeping the mouth shout is never the way to go. Better talk and rise a mess than let things boil until they explode. This is quite the news, that privacy policy clearly states that they collect ip addresses and we can only trust their word that they don't if that's actually the case

..if we decide to threat Cake Wallet with removal in order for them to improve their privacy, the same should go for other wallets as well (MyMonero default behavior)

Mymonero is by design

Cake wallet, I assumed I was using my wallet privately only to find out ive been telling cake and my isp each time I open my wallet

Good point, then we definitely need a new category for "non-optimal" wallets

Edge and mymonero are light wallets. You literally give up your view and rely on a third party server.

Monerujo does 0 external calls unless you specifically request the fiat price, an exchange, or openalias

Cake actually contacts cakewallet.com before it contacts my node... ive stopped using cake because of this and rebuilt monerujo

Anyway, as it stands there are no full node wallets for mobile that are v0.18 ready

My (unofficial) builds of monerujo and shruum are the only v0.18 full mobile wallets available..

monerujo usually updates for the hard fork and sometimes they are not active for long time. Let's wait and see i would say

Monerujo is broken though.... (especially if you try to use tor just one time) has been for months

The pr has been in for about a week for the update to v0.18. but even after adding it m2049r has to make a bunch of chsnges as there are a lot of depreciated dependencies and connection fixes that need to be implemented.. he's probably 100x the dev I am, but 10 days is cutting it short unless he's already fixed or can copy from my repo.

Just thought I should share this, any new user who gives a damn about using Monero, would read the FAQ

Although I would like to suggest changing this to:

"recommended by Cake Labs" sgp

s/recommended/Recommended/

jesus what did I run into here

moneromooo: if you want monero.com you can buy it. You could have bought it up until now, it was available. We turned it into a website that promotes a monero-only open source wallet, wow such horror

NO.

FUCK NOl

Anyone should NEVER have to buy all the possible versions of a domain to avoid squatters. That's blaming hte victim.

clearly I'm not going to win you over lol

It's a losing battle anyway.

And, to answer your intellectually dishonest strawman:

I warn people of jumping off too deep into a purity contest of what gets listed on the site, else you're basically just going to have to yank away everything except for the official downloads

I have NO problem with you makeing a website that promotes a moenro-only open source wallet. I have a problem with the domain name squatting.

monerujo and feather offer custodial exchanges as well, etc

Oh. I thought feather was still good. Hrm.

Anyway, there are degrees, and saying "this isn't 100% white" is NOT a defense for "I'm doing this wrong".

I mean, I can't do much about it, beyond complaining and maybe making a cakewallet.com site which shames you (can't be arsed), so I guess it'll stay that way if you don't want to do the right thing.

moneromooo: Did you ask the previous owner too? Why stop at dot com why not any site with the word monero in it. monero.social. monero.site, monero.xxx or whatever.

Which is probably too late now since much mony was spent. Shrug.

mymonero is very close to getmonero

No. I don;t know who owns these. Btu again, fucking asshole, ohters being squatters does not mean you are OK BEING ONE.

moneromooo: At least its in the hands of someone in the community and supports Monero.

Yes. It could be worse. That doesn't make it right, and it's a company, so it can't ever be trusted.

> <@gonbatfire:monero.social> Although I would like to suggest changing this to:

> "Recommended by Cake Labs" sgp

Agreed. Will do.

moneromooo: Someone was going to buy it. I had heard people from other coins were looking at it.

moneromooo: really any external wallet shouldn't be trusted by that test tho

moneromooo: Someone was going to squat one it. At least it is being used to promote Monero.

Again, just because it culd br worse doesn't make something bad right.

moneromooo: Its funny I heard no complaints from you when someone else was squatting it. Now its in better hands, and you are complaining ?

Though, I guess thank you for making it so it's not worse I suppose.

It was predating monero AFAIK. And unrelated.

A building company IIRC ?

moneromooo: At Cake, we love your work and want to thank you for always being there for our devs.. Its really appreciated.

They clearly weren't trying to make people believe they were us.

moneromooo: neither are we. We are clear about that.

Flattery is not a defense for squatting -_-

Guys, it's not like there is a CEO of Monero to which we should hand over all XMR related assets, I actually find it a good thing that different entities own these assets

That is a good point.

moneromooo: its not flattery. Just saying we love you :)

gonbatfire[m]: yeah I don't see a difference between mymonero or monero.social or monero.net or whatever

I suppose a lot of my problem is that I do not trust you guys. I guess I would be OK with, say, luigi or articmine having it personally...

That's understandable

monero.social, I agree. It's... borderline.

Is it third party ?

moneromooo: Why don;t you trust us? We have been here since 2017. Almost 5 years now. We have had many direct commmunications with you in that time too

We had a dedicated FAQ about the difference between monero.com and getmonero.org. We want to make sure there's a reasonable explanation of the difference. We see the sites as serving different purposes

You're a company. If you get sold, the buyer will fuck us over without a second thought.

And if you start being short on money, you might too.

Someone could also buy getmonero.org as well

There is nothing trustless there either

moneromooo: so you mistrust us based on what happens in the future? Any wallet can be sold or taken over by someone in the future

I mistrust you because I have no good reason to trust you. That's default.

at least we don't have a honeypot of view keys :/

and if a buyer close sources us, people we will just stop using it.

anyway, we have no intention of selling.

sgp[m]: Hey I made that post lmao

lol

You're a third party. You get the canonical domain name for a project.

moneromooo: really? open source, track record of 5 years.. giving to the community, holding events, sponsoring everything monero under the sun that we can... and you mistrust us?

I mean, it is kind of obvious bad faith to me.

moneromooo: Who owns getmonero.org? Someone

moneromooo: mymoner?

> <@moneromooo:libera.chat> You're a third party. You get the canonical domain name for a project.

* mymonero?

Everyone is a third party to the Monero Blockchain

Yes. I do not mistrust you more than any other compoany really. But yes, I do not trust easily.

That is kinda why I'm here after all.

Anyway, as I said, I'm not going to do anything about it except complain, and my arguments are made so I'll shut up now.

i think people start with hate and then look for a reason is what is happening here.

moneromooo: sure.. 5 years of track record means nothing. Got it.

(about sponsoring everything monero under the sun, that sounds nice, I do remember seeing mentions of that, so thakns for this)

Hey, it's not like I use your wallet. That means not much to me, same as 5 years of anyone else I wasn't involved with counts for not much.

moneromooo: and I have been open about my identity. Look at Majestic bank.. no one knows who they are and a big chunk of the community trusts them without any info.

It's not a slight. I don't distrust you more than the average. Just not the opposite either.

moneromooo: sure you can keep ignoring the things we did and focus on the things you don't like. This is what I mean by start with hate and then look for reasons to justify.

Never even heard the name. But it's not relevant.

Why are we even talking about trust? Doesn't matter if it's open source

anyway, I'm not going to convince you. We love your work and thank you for your support. We will keep building for monero as we do.

It's about squatting a name. Can't be open source gonbatfire[m]. I have nohting against that wallet in particular.

moneromooo: we aren't squatting. We bought it in the open market just like anyone couldve.

please let me know when you go after monero.social and other monero domains.

the point of monero.com is to help promote the commercial nature of monero with resources that benefit that side like spending and buying Monero (and yes, also to support Cake Labs), so getmonero.org can focus on the core monero protocol. I think both are necessary for a healthy monero economy

But squatting requires a "legit" owner to exist, who is it?

^ that is the only good point that makes me rethink my position here

Monero.com should recommend feather and gui then.. not only their own products ?

ofrnxmr[m]: we do recommend GUI

we recommend official GUI/CLI and our own. Maybe we'll list Monerujo if they list Cake on their site :)

If its about supporting monero and not just about cake, why the stipulation

Monerujo shouldn't be recommended at this point though, on any site

ofrnxmr[m]: we have listed the official Monero GUI and CLI.

ofrnxmr[m]: why

I meant the stipulation for monerujo.

Re: why

Monerujo is broken and dev is absent

oh.. still absent.

and shruum too?

Shruum git is gone too

the total git is gone?

Yep. We have a fork though.

And a fixed version of monerujo.. hoping devs return before Aug 13

^ dead

wow

our devs are working today (and as long as it takes from now) to get 0.18 ready

Would very much appreciate it. Then cake/monero.com will be the only v0.18 mobile wallets.

And sgp: from 80s to 20s on the onion tx. Instant on clearnet (monerujo tests)

> <@ofrnxmr:monero.social> Yep. We have a fork though.

> And a fixed version of monerujo.. hoping devs return before Aug 13

"we" ?

R4v3r23 forked the repo, I forked it from them

oh

great. We, as in all wallets, really should not leave users stranded. I remember in the last fork x wallet didn't update for 30 days AFTER the fork.

vikCake[m]: being that monero dot com can easily be mistaken as the official site for monero, after all it is listed by coingecko along with monero.org, may I suggest that the first page you see when going to monero dot com clearly states this instead of needing to navigate the site in order to determine this important fact

I dont want to speculate. Heres hoping they are working hard and have surprises for us :).... (full message at libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/r0/do…3ad1a69e974fbf996e3fa93d9741ac4c7cc)

I think the fact this is being discussed here at all shows how far discussions that should be straightforward can stray for random reasons, making it very simple to block changes

While it's sometimes good to be picky, keep in mind that if you don't add Monero.com and if Monerujo doesn't update, you're barrelling towards there being 0 Monero-only mobile wallets on that page that don't share the view key. So I hope that's part of the practical consideration for how the page should be used

Sounds a bit like blackmail.

Though I guess it also does in the reverse.

how does my suggestion sound?

I thought just linking to monero.com makes most sense, on the landing page you can explain the difference between cake wallet / monero.com

since personally the added non monero wallets in cake wallet aren't too relevant for getmonero.org

I'd be grudgingly OK with them keeping using monero.com with a big warning at the top that it's just a third party company. They get to have the extra clicks they wanted, but they don't essentially try to impersonate my work (not mine alone, but mine is what interests me here).