00:07:59 merope: monero maximalism is just as real as bitcoin maximalism then i guess :) logic goes out the window 00:09:17 thats disappointing 00:09:25 that has nothing to do with maximalism, your argument is just nonsense 00:09:42 You've got three different experts telling you that your statement is a nonsequitur, yet you insist you're right on a topic on which you yourself admitted are not an expert 00:09:45 maybe it is, im not sure 00:09:46 it takes 1 cloud miner for a pool to reach 51% 00:09:59 seems like a reasonable inference to me 00:10:02 it's completely unrelated to the emission curve 00:10:47 you really think that a proper mining incentive would have 0 impact on some entity overtaking 51% ? 00:10:51 The mining incentive is a financial incentive to mine based on profitability. How that hashrate is distributed is a whole separate issue 00:11:05 Yes 00:11:32 The fault is in your definition of "proper incentive" 00:12:02 in an adversarial context, "proper incentive" is defined as personal gain 00:12:06 sorry to say :( 00:12:37 The average mining income stays the same, regardless of the size of the mining poil 00:12:39 *pool 00:12:49 right 00:13:04 my point is the distribution of incentive, not the distribution of personal gain 00:13:16 there is incentive OTHER THAN personal gain in this adversarial context 00:13:36 You are using the word "distribution" in two different contexts with two different meanings 00:14:15 the personal gain incentive needs to exist in a proper way in order for the the other incentives to not take over 00:14:17 is my thinking 00:14:52 theres a government bounty on cracking monero 00:14:56 not bitcoin or dog coin 00:14:58 monero 00:15:02 thats my point mainly 00:15:24 its a target more than anything else 00:16:00 There isn't a "tangible" incentive that can do what you say. This is a consequence of the fact that the mining protocol has no concept of what a "mining pool" is - and there's no way to introduce that concept in there 00:16:31 To the rest of the network, a mining pool looks like one big solo-miner - because that's what it actually is 00:16:37 if you have to mine for 15 years to make 100$ 00:16:49 then its enthusiasts who mine because they love the project 00:16:58 ... and everyone else 00:17:16 Again, what this statement shows is that you don't know what profitability is 00:18:02 Which is fine, but you have to understand that you are drawing faulty conclusions because you are missing some important definitions 00:19:09 is there a discussion anywhere that addresses this in any detail? 00:19:21 i just dont see how i could be completely wrong in my thinking here 00:20:04 I'm actually in the process of writing a technical article about this very topic 00:20:15 oh, neat 00:20:21 where do you post 00:20:27 (Not sure yet if it's going to be a small paper, or a series of small articles) 00:20:54 I'll definitely share it on reddit and matrix/irc when it's ready 00:21:16 To give you a quick highlight (and then I have to go to sleep): 00:21:23 Mining profitability is the ratio between your net mining income (in usd, or any other fiat) and your mining cost (your electricity bill) 00:22:04 The more efficient your mining hardware (H/s/W), and the cheaper your electricity cost ($/kWh), the more profitable you are 00:22:20 also i think its very dangerous to pretend like the 51% thing didnt happen or doesnt mean anything 00:22:25 :/ 00:22:48 clearly something isnt ideal 00:22:53 for that to happen at all 00:23:08 As we've said multiple times, that's a completely separate conversation from profitability 00:23:52 A well-educated miner knows that it's best to spread out the hashrate on smaller pools to increase the security of the network 00:24:02 of course 00:24:46 by definition hashrate being well spread out means the opposite of some entity gaining > 51% 00:25:15 The problem is that there are many noobs who don't know/don't care (or sometimes actually think that bigger pool = better) who end up picking the biggest pool (Minexmr) because it's the first on the list, or some low quality guide suggested it 00:25:26 im not saying the incident itself is proof that it was the new world order and all is lost 00:25:39 im saying the incident itself is proof that something is not ideal in the goal to have the hashrate well spread out 00:26:05 Plus, there are a whole bunch of big botnets who also seem not to know better or care (typically because they are run by technically illiterate script kiddies) 00:27:02 yeah, i dont even really suspect that an adversarial entity gained control of the network 00:27:10 just saying it proves something is less than ideal about the whole setup 00:27:10 There's no way to force people to move pools. We can only ask nicely and hope they cooperate - at least out of an instinct of self-preservation 00:28:20 if you change the locks on the front door of your house and your best friend is still able to walk in without a key 00:28:25 But that is completely independent from the actual amount of the mining reward 00:28:31 you are still right to be upset at the security of your system 00:29:37 and constructive criticism is crucial to these kinds of things 00:29:39 If your friend can walk in without a key, that means that the issue wasn't the lock, and you had reason to change it 00:29:42 have you ever heard of peer review 00:29:53 not that im the worlds greatest genius to offer you review, lol 00:29:55 just saying 00:30:07 you shouldnt want to just reflexively attack me as being some asshole 00:30:16 you should want to answer my questions in a logical way 00:30:17 dont you think? 00:30:31 Well that took a turn 00:31:25 was that a yes or a no 00:31:45 it seems like more of a no so far 00:31:46 :/ 00:31:59 I'm just trying to give you a detailed explanation and share my knowledge. If you see that as a personal attack, that's on you 00:32:11 ok 00:33:14 And being condescending when you yourself admitted you are not an expert on the topic does not encourage further discussion 00:34:19 well sir, when you begin an engagement with a condescending and trite instruction to someone to dare not speak their 1 or 2 sentences on a particular channel because they should be said on this other channel, it does not exactly command respect 00:34:34 that colored the entire conversation. 00:34:39 just so you know 00:34:42 what you accomplish with that 00:35:17 we very well wasted an entire hour on emotional bs 00:35:20 The goal was to avoid interfering with other people working - which you did 00:35:20 because of that 00:35:23 just so you know. 00:35:43 And now I'm gonna stop wasting my time too :) 00:35:49 ok 00:35:56 Can monero be made prunable to be sustainable? 00:36:46 i spoke like 5 sentences on that other channel btw 00:36:49 it interfered with nothing 00:36:51 good day. 00:38:40 in the last half hour, the following utterances were uttered 00:38:44 selsta • jeffro256[m]: 8828 does not exist 00:38:46 UkoeHB • 8228? 00:38:48 selsta • 8228 is too new to get added to the merge list 00:38:50 selsta • we wait at least 10 days 00:42:35 qwestion: you can prune the blockchain 00:44:06 selsta: so is monero sustainable or will be too resource intensive at some point? 00:44:33 well I don't know what your definition of sustainable is 00:46:49 Pruning since 2019? Someone gaveme dated info it seems , sorry to bother 00:47:21 yes, it cuts the blockchain size to 1/3 00:49:22 merope: can you point to the critical work which was interefered with 00:49:43 upp: are you trolling at this point? 00:49:54 no, this other guy is 00:49:56 clearly 00:50:30 selsta: someone recommended Tari and BEAM because they can scale up by pruning all spent transaction outputs and utilizing payment channels. 00:50:37 the whole point of having different channels is so that the dev channel doesn't get polluted with off topic discussion 00:51:12 So yes monero cant prune all, so unsustainable 00:51:44 qwestion: well there is more than just storage to sustainability 00:52:03 Such as? 00:53:18 honestly raising this simple and obvious point getting this kind of emotional reaction is the kind of childish antics i would expect from the bitcoin community 00:53:24 very disappointed 00:53:48 upp: you are the one who instantly attacked everyone who disagreed with you as a maximalist 00:54:39 but be disappointed and believe whatever you want, you clearly aren't interested in a good faith discussion 00:54:54 good faith is all im after 00:55:08 qwestion: monero's current pruned blockchain is 40gb, and that is over 8 years of blockchain data 00:55:48 selsta: this guy is a persistent troll, not the first rodeo 00:56:40 now if you say what if usage increases significantly, then you will probably run into other limits (like bandwidth) first before storage becomes an issue 00:57:35 i stated like 6 times i dont claim to be an expert, just attempting to engage in good-faith conversation 00:57:51 if you need to be butthurt anyway well good luck to you then 00:58:09 you are the one being super emotional about it lol 00:59:09 you are clearly projecting at this point, or you are trolling 00:59:14 no 00:59:17 time to end this 00:59:20 im the one ending the conversation at this point 00:59:22 good day 01:02:13 merope: didn't see that username before but will keep in mind in the future 01:13:04 you two are just too quick to want to see an enemy thats all 01:13:09 understandable though 01:16:00 please pump price so that mining is more profitable 01:16:06 thx 01:16:11 hey this guy gets it 01:16:13 :D 01:16:57 wait, more people would then mine and profit would be the same 01:17:27 yes profit would be the same 01:17:38 but < MORE PEOPLE WOULD MINE > 01:17:49 < INCREASE SECURITY OF THE NETWORK > 01:17:52 ^ this guy gets it 01:18:53 more new miners -> more people following guides that have minexmr as default -> even worse hashrate distribution 01:19:18 oh nooo 01:19:24 lol 01:34:14 was that a logical response to a logical attempt at logical discourse 01:34:21 k 01:34:54 just checking 01:35:05 is everyone in agreement on that? 01:35:11 cuz it seems debatable 01:36:03 feel free to gang up on me though 01:36:15 in a 3rd grade elementary school popularity contest sort of way 01:36:32 because clearly thats what we are after here in the crypto community 01:37:50 when someone makes an attempt at logical discourse 01:38:45 merited or not 01:39:01 freely offering the entirely possible conclusion that their concerns are not in fact merited 01:39:15 3rd grade popularity responses are probably still the right answer 01:39:35 yes? 01:40:30 or does someone with > 3rd grade emotional capacity care to weigh in 01:43:40 also noting the fact that i am in fact also a monero maximalist 01:43:56 for lack of better terminology 01:44:38 monero leads the way by an insane margin of like...infinity 01:45:17 on being leading edge with privacy technology and all the features cryptocurrency should have 01:45:46 you should probably still gang up on me like im just some asshole 01:45:48 good call 01:45:50 bros 01:48:04 selsta, nioc, and 01:48:11 merope 01:48:14 you guys fail here 01:48:16 badly 01:49:27 also, in the last 3 hours 01:49:32 no other utterances were uttered 01:49:35 in the dev channel 01:49:38 just so its clear 01:49:45 how much critical work was interupted 01:50:49 merope, didn't wownero somehow kill pools? 01:52:44 do forks like wownero ever do upgrades? 01:52:49 i was actually wondering that 01:54:35 merope, https://git.wownero.com/wownero/wownero/pulls/369 01:55:18 upp, wownero is its own coin... theydo their own upgrades and it is way different than monero now 01:55:30 i know its a fork 01:55:35 i was just wondering if its like doge 01:55:41 some guy just forked it for the lulz one day 01:55:45 and never sees updates 01:55:51 maybe they update, i dunno 01:55:53 just wondering 01:56:36 yes, it's updated a lot 01:56:42 i take interest in anything forking from monero, as its at the leading edge of cryptographic technology 01:57:15 i looked at their website and it is 100% based around being a mem 01:57:27 that might work for price pump potentially 01:57:43 makes a person sceptical about an actual dev team though 02:02:27 still waiting on a response from those 2 or 3 i called out like 5 minutes ago 02:02:35 maybe binaryFate or fluffypony has a response 02:02:57 honest conversation? 02:02:58 banned? 02:03:04 lets hear it 02:03:41 hello 02:05:18 probly free speech is terrible 02:05:23 seems reasonable 02:05:35 shoulda banned me like 3 hours ago 02:05:37 right? 02:05:58 selsta: 02:06:00 nioc: 02:06:10 merope: 02:06:25 defend your anti-freespeech position please 02:07:42 seems speech is frowned upon here 02:07:50 is that right 02:08:10 im not sure why its taking so long to respond to 02:08:18 its a simple yes or no 02:08:39 do you like speech 02:08:42 or do you not 02:08:58 hello is anyone alive here 02:10:44 hello 02:10:48 do we like speech or not 02:13:51 im sorry hello 02:15:05 clearly no dev is being impeded here 02:15:12 maybe someone cares to weigh in on speech 02:15:18 is that a yes or a no? 02:15:44 yes? 02:15:46 no? 02:16:34 binaryFate: 02:16:36 fluffypony: 02:17:30 do we like speech or do we not 02:17:36 seems like a simple question 02:17:54 u look like u need to chill dude 02:18:20 i just want an offical answer 02:18:22 on speech 02:18:26 it seems like a clear question 02:19:25 how can these people treat me like im an asshole 02:19:30 when im just trying to have a conversation 02:19:35 it seems like a very clear question 02:19:37 ok u said that, unless you wanna send it as singing telegram chill and wait 02:19:40 can i have an answer on it please 02:20:03 ok 02:20:05 i will wait 02:20:09 wait for those responsible to return, then ask again i guess 02:20:10 thank you for your clarity 02:23:32 interesting of course that the rest of these 3 or 4 cant respond 02:23:45 in the 3 hours or so that ive been simply asking for a reasonable conversation 02:24:34 the question at this point isnt even a technical one 02:24:49 the question at this point is: why cant you response reasonable to a technical conversation? 02:25:13 respond* 02:25:21 sounds kinda like a loaded question 02:25:32 y eah 02:28:57 it seems like we are having a tough time responding reasonably to a reasonable question 02:29:00 why is that 02:29:09 upp, the people in this channel also lead their own lives and may not even be in the same time zone as you. 02:29:20 this is true 02:29:23 i do not dispute this 02:29:25 :) 02:29:28 I'm connected even while sleeping. 02:30:20 im the biggest supporter of monero in the world 02:30:26 and yet im enemy #1 right now 02:30:31 something in this equation is not right 02:31:14 some idiot needed to spend 100% of irc time telling me my 1 sentence comment needed to be in another channel 02:31:17 i understand his autism 02:31:24 but honestly, this transcends his autism right now 02:32:22 why cant a reasonable conversation about monero be entertained within monero chats right now 02:32:32 that seems like the most relevant question right now 02:32:39 try #monero-community or #monero-offtopic ;) 02:33:37 [XMR] Be excellent to each other and welcoming to newcomers || getmonero.org || Dev: #monero-dev || Pool related: #monero-pools || Price chat: #monero-markets || OTC: #monero-otc || People can & do log this channel || DON'T USE Changelly, Freewallet or Minergate: https://www.reddit.com/r/monero/wiki/avoid 02:33:48 im a newcomoer 02:33:55 that asswipe was definitely not excellent to me 02:33:57 just saying. 02:34:04 To be fair, the topic is not really specific. 02:34:41 why cant a reasonable discussion about monero not be held in monero chat channels right now 02:34:45 someone please answer this 02:35:33 no idea 02:35:47 fair enough 02:36:18 autism knows no bounds 02:36:27 its true 02:36:29 :> 02:44:09 roflmao 03:32:06 upp, a roundabout "solution" to the monero mining rewards "problem" is merge-mining 03:32:59 it'll be interesting if that happens, especially considering the potential for PoW bans from genius gubment folks, and what that will do to asic networks 03:33:30 because it might lead to a land rush, because someone somewhere mentioned that monero can support maybe 10 merge mined chains 03:33:42 merge with what? 03:34:15 whoever wants the security of the monero mining network 03:34:36 oh rite 03:44:59 China confiscating cpu miners https://twitter.com/WuBlockchain/status/1509335878589890561 05:12:28 ffs, i just DL'd 1883 tv series cause it looked good, the fuckers canceled it 05:16:09 wc sheeit 06:37:53 Mochi101: yes, but the way they did that was by introducing a nonce-signing step in the mining algorithm. That way, you can't mine on behalf of somebody else (like a pool) without them revealing their private spend key to you in the process 06:38:47 They effectively killed pools, even though the mining algo/protocol has no idea what a pool is 07:05:18 barf, I'll assume there was nothing important in the middle of the spam :/ 08:12:03 Not particularly, no 08:16:47 ty 08:35:32 I'm happy to announce that Haveno's CCS proposal has been merged and it's now open for donations! https://haveno.exchange/2022/03/31/funding-ccs.html 15:48:30 when trying to run p2pool, I'm getting "P2Pool Invalid wallet address." I copied the wallet address directly from the wallet (and it works with minexmr pool), so I find the error quite confusing. what does it signify, if not an invalid wallet address? 15:53:38 Did you use a subaddress (starts with 8) instead of the main address (starts with 4)? 15:53:47 P2pool only works with main addresses 15:55:41 yes 16:21:43 indeed 18:55:19 Did anyone look at the statement of facts for the Lichtenstein and Morgan case https://darknetlive.com/post/two-arrested-for-conspiring-to-launder-4-billion-in-stolen-bitcoin/documents/statement.pdf ? 18:55:28 Item 26 on page 10 says that Lichtenstein converted stolen BTC to the Monero at the first step in his laundering scheme, and the graphics above it explicitly mentions russian email address. 18:55:52 I looked at it when it was released 18:56:51 they used monero for a small amount, but police wasn't able to trace it. they only knew they deposited monero because they had all the exchange logins, or they traced the bitcoin reverse to the exchange 18:56:56 I **doubt** that he used KYC exchanges like Kraken or anything similar where you have to prove your identity. And I assume he received coins in his wallet and then sent them back to himself and then proceeded to swap back to BTC. So, my question is - how did the investigators traced BTC -> XMR -> BTC swap? 18:57:15 4 billion o_O 18:58:11 Yeah, I mean if you can pull out that hack you would be probably be able to understand opsec basics 18:58:37 it's unclear if they are behind the hack, they only got charged for money laundering 18:58:42 For that amount, you just get in the UK govt and fiddle a wee bit with the SA weapon shipments. 19:04:19 ok, it seems that it has nothing to do with Monero security properties - their account was traced to the exchange through fiat deposits 19:06:51 I thought they were traced by using self-hosted email on a VPS where kyc was done, receiving an email about wallmart gift card purchased with BTC from one of the clusters 19:07:15 * VPS hosting with personal identification 19:07:25 lessless: correlations 19:08:14 It's all about breaking correlations or, in the case of the investigators, finding them. 19:08:35 Nebraskka there are no mentions of VPS in the doc :( 19:08:56 ElderMalaclypse what kind of correlations are we talking about here? 19:09:03 personal email server or something, would take a look once more 19:09:10 not sure off the top of my head; just being a little bit of a smartass 19:09:11 sorry 19:09:35 The email thing seems familiar, though. 19:12:28 If I would be a criminal on a pile of stolen BTC, I would convert them to XMR via decentralised exchange. Or at least a swap service using that doesn't have KYC even remotely and of course through the Tor network. 19:12:34 And then just sit and wait 19:14:24 yes pdf shows that not enough opsec were done, multiple correlations were found 19:15:30 and in case gov catches me, then I would assume that security properties of XMR are compromised 19:28:01 lessless: occasionally break off a piece and churn it 19:28:48 Yeah, defo 19:28:56 No automation and patterns though 19:29:53 yep 19:30:12 don't ever recombine big chunks, either 19:39:53 how's that? 19:40:32 You don't want to eventually exit with a chunk whose size matches up with something someone's trying to find.