07:55:47 <geonic> maybe time to revive it?
11:58:59 <lagoon93> hello
12:51:06 <zluoq> is there any point in using monero in windows?
12:53:33 <lagoon93> depends
13:00:47 <cornfeedhobo> can someone remind me the name of the protocol used for onion routing within the monero network?L
13:01:03 <cornfeedhobo> (not tor)
13:01:14 <moneromooo> If you mean "MS will spy on what I'm doing in excruciating detail anyway", then there is one point: let them know you like privacy, but for some reason are unable to not use windows.
13:01:27 <moneromooo> The other's I2P.
13:01:42 <moneromooo> It's styled "garlic" routing/
13:02:01 <cornfeedhobo> no not i2p either
13:02:03 <moneromooo> Or maybe you mean dandelion ? It's even less close. That one is a one step forward.
13:02:09 <cornfeedhobo> yessss dandelion
13:02:14 <cornfeedhobo> that was killing me. thank you
13:03:34 <moneromooo> It's not onion routing fwiw. The sender has no control over the route, it's a one step forward proxy really.
13:03:44 <moneromooo> All the nodes in the chain know the payload.
13:04:01 <lagoon93> if someone lower dandelion numbers on config.h what will happen
13:04:15 <moneromooo> Depends on what dandelion numbers.
13:04:48 <moneromooo> If it's the fluff prob, then it'll keep ping ponging. Unless it hits a node that had already received it maybe.
13:05:10 <moneromooo> If it takes too long, it'll end up being broadcast after a timeout.
13:06:13 <lagoon93> CRYPTONOTE_NOISE_MIN_DELAY   from 10 to 1
13:09:15 <moneromooo> I dunno what this one'd do. AFAK noise is the cover traffic system to stymie traffic analysis.
13:23:42 <cornfeedhobo> moneromooo: not sure what you mean by that. i've never thought of onion routing being associated with sender control
13:24:11 <cornfeedhobo> oh, you mean that the sender isn't describing an address?
13:24:54 <cornfeedhobo> afaik everything else is more or less the same, the messages bounce around in dandelion before finally being ingested by a random node, no?
13:49:17 <moneromooo> Well, maybe it is considered a pathological form of onion routing. It's fire and forget send to one peer and wash one's hands off it really. Doesn't really matter.
13:50:00 <moneromooo> And your characterisation's right, if by "ingested" you mean "broadcast".
16:04:55 <cornfeedhobo> indeed
17:17:24 <dougquaid> If I send XMR to someone twice, can that person tell that the two transactions are from the same XMR wallet or person?
17:18:57 <sech1> No
17:19:12 <dougquaid> thanks
17:19:16 <sech1> except if you agreed on a very specific XMR amount and you sent the exact amount twice...
17:19:33 <sech1> then they can assume it's the same person sending
17:19:38 <sech1> but not prove 100%
18:09:46 <moneromooo> If you send to the same person without spending in between, and you had just one output, you'd end up sending the change to the same person on the second time, this is a good indication it might be from the same person.
18:10:14 <moneromooo> The longer between the two txes, the more probable the inference is.