00:15:52 xmrack: I'd like to start by saying I wish m0rdinals did CLSAG steg than output flooding (if it comes to that). It'd be so much more efficient and damage the publisher's privacy yet limit the outputs poisoned. 00:16:26 I'd follow by saying Grootle proofs or arithmetic circuit proofs are infeasible to steg. 00:17:10 BP had 32 bytes IIRC? BP+ doesn't? Data recovery requires redoing the proof and getting the diff? 00:20:47 We could get rid of almost all steg with a full chain membership proof, the Chaum-Pedersen proof, no TX extra, and strict 2-out with 20m lock time. It'd have a linear data rate of ~96b per 20m. The issue is the outputs can be treed to parallelize it and... 00:21:15 So while that may be enough to discourage NFT bs, it's still impossible to fully get rid of data. 00:21:39 Eh. May be ~300b. I don't have exact numbers in front of me. Just estimating on a few diif things 00:21:55 hey, what is the plan with tx_extra 00:29:50 kayabanerve: I agree, the approach mordinals is taking is equivalent to a child pouting when they don’t get what they want. Thank you for giving some rough estimates, it seems like a very difficult problem without a perfect solution (besides full membership proofs) 00:30:38 someone said that tx_extra will be limited to 256 bytes, is this true? will it fix the issue at hand? 00:30:49 or is output spam still a porblem 00:34:54 "hey, what is the plan with..." <- Read above lol 00:35:02 1 post up snh 00:35:05 Wooper: Output spam is a problem regardless of tx_extra. We need membership proofs for them to become less of a problem. 00:35:06 read what above 00:35:09 * 1 post up snh 00:35:09 I just got here 00:35:16 * 1 post up smh 00:35:23 1 post 00:35:25 there is no post above that 00:35:32 i just got here 00:35:47 this is IRC 00:36:07 https://libera.monerologs.net/monero/20230325#c225047 00:36:17 Alex, do you have any links for info on membership proofs 00:36:30 some guy on 4chan was saying membership proofs weren't possible the other day 00:37:05 Well, I've never seen anyone lie on 4chan, so I guess that's that then. 00:37:15 Let's wrap it up. 00:37:28 you think someone would do that? 00:37:33 just go on the internet and tell lies? 00:38:39 what if devs just increase TX fees for transactions with tx_extra, by a lot. 00:38:44 I think that might solve it 00:38:52 like a 5 dollar fee 00:39:38 it seems like tx_extra could probably just be used to soft-fork monero, so it's dangerous from that point of view too. 00:40:19 Wooper: Search the Monero github repos, there's plenty of discussion. I don't have those links on hand and don't have the time to link it for you right now, I'm afraid. 00:40:36 s/link/search/, s/it/them/ 00:40:40 alright 00:44:55 "kayabanerve: I agree, the..." <- It's someone who doesn't know anything about Monero as a living body claiming to be contributing despite rejection, and as you say, like a child, continuing regardless while making a fuss. 00:46:24 on the bright side, we can now upload the entire monero source tree to the blockchain 00:46:31 ensuring GPL compliance 00:46:33 When we have a supermajority of pools no longer relaying these TXs (>1060), I'd call for a soft fork to ban them entirely tbh (if we aren't hard forking yet? 00:46:57 I’m not sure about that, to build mordinals you at least have to understand monero a little at a fundamental level. I believe the account is run by a competent community member who has a strong opinion about tx_extra and is playing dumb 00:47:17 kayabanerve[m] soft fork how? 00:47:32 the best thing to do is simply prevent new ones from being created 00:47:38 They could be lying about not knowing of the meetings, and this could be a troll/psy-op 00:48:05 xmrack, probably a bitccoiner or someone else 00:48:34 I think they also own moneropunks.com 00:48:38 Regardless, I just want to cut them out. They're just creating issues and drama. If a soft fork achieves an effective ban on mordinals, and is feasible (it isn't currently), I'd support it. 00:48:57 or maybe it's a parody of etherium/bitcoin 00:49:42 kayabanerve[m]: without membership proofs, they can resort to output spam 00:49:59 and also, isn't tx_extra a heuristic that could de-anonymize users anyways 00:51:48 how do they plan to implement "inscriptions transfer"? 00:52:52 oh hold on this guy released a thing on twitter.com 00:54:01 https://twitter.com/m0rdinals/status/1639220571954368513 00:54:03 HAHAHAHA 00:55:36 Yea that thread sparked this discussion 00:57:27 If the logic is that reducing the tx_extra to 1kb will multiply the number of tx's needed for a 50kb file, why doesn't that logic apply the other way around to current standards? 00:57:29 "how do they plan to implement "..." <- They do it by using a bunch of known to be burnt outputs in the ring signature so your input would be the only possible real spend 00:57:30 LOL 00:58:44 you might as well argue that *not* setting the tx_extra to 100GB is forcing ordinal creators (who want to upload the entire wikipedia or something) to make millions of tiny 100kb tx_extras 00:58:58 Wooper: Even with, they can spam outputs. Full chain membership proofs just solve the privacy issues of that. 00:59:22 boog900[m]: that is what I feared 00:59:48 so what, now? do we just blackball all the transactions with tx_extra? 01:01:23 Isn't there some better way to implement colored coins on monero? using burnt outputs is literally retarded 01:04:15 Wooper: I got the same idea, Found about the blackball when reading wallet2 code and someone pointed me to some old DB, so I assume it's possible to have something that scan for all the poisoned output 01:04:33 and automatically feed it to the node 01:04:53 Well, if they all get blackballed it's not that bad 01:05:06 Except for the bloat 01:05:13 but it's still taking up blockspace that would otherwise be used by real transactions 01:05:25 like it is pricing real transactions out of the fee market 01:05:32 that would otherwise provide anonyminity 01:05:38 *in theory* 01:10:28 "What they posted is the stupides..." <- He's come around :) 01:12:21 jberman: I pinged you above re: wallet2 behavior 01:12:39 fr33_yourself: 255 bytes, optional, var Len, remains my advocacy. 01:13:25 I agree with 255 bytes 01:13:40 but the real solution is just to increase the fees 01:13:46 they can make multiple transactions 01:13:54 Thats not a solution 01:14:00 it is a soluation 01:14:01 As a malicious pool, ill accepts those np 01:14:07 it's a great soluation 01:14:11 I dont care about monero, I care about moneyb 01:14:14 "Output spam is a problem..." <- so even if tx_extra is deprecated these guys have still announced that they intend to use a flood attack to do mordinals? 01:14:27 If someone wants to burn millions of monero to upload gigabytes of data, that is fine by me 01:14:34 everyone will just prune it 01:14:50 At 10xmr/kb, im fine too 01:14:59 monero blocks ara a merkle hash, correct? 01:15:06 :) 01:15:24 yeah lol 10 xmr/kb 01:15:42 fr33_yourself: 🫠🫠 whyy 01:15:44 Please resd 01:15:59 Convoy has been going on for hours 01:16:21 Read the liked posts and the replies here 01:17:15 (To answer your question, they plan to spam as a response to us limiting instead of blackballing) 01:17:35 And say if we hard fork to limit, they will steg into outputs 01:17:54 Wooper: if the tx_extra fee is too high then they'll just go back to output spam which defeats the purpsoe 01:18:08 Too high? 01:18:23 high enough to be costly, but not high enough for output spam to outcompete 01:18:25 They claim will do it at current costs because were limiting 01:18:30 Need 6gb block size 01:18:44 what if we just hard fork every 6 months to delete all the inscriptions 01:19:03 That has a lot of flaws 01:19:12 ofrnxmr[m]: They will eventually run out of money from doing this by fees though right? 01:19:27 the fees are nothing 01:19:30 I think they saw jtgrassie post about within 10 years for full membership proofs, and thinks that means were 10 years away 🥹 01:19:41 (currently) 01:20:37 if they want to turn monero is a majority nft storage, its simply a malicious attack and there's nothing you can do other than innovate 01:20:42 IMO fees should be higher than currently, but it's hard to account for market fluctuation. One day they mights be 0.05 USD and the next, 5 USD 01:20:47 So stegging their nfts into outputs isn't all that expensive? If so is it possible or feasible to increase fees for tx's with more than 'n' outputs? 01:21:11 32bytes per output 01:21:19 Vs 100kb like they wanted 01:21:26 ^ they want 100kb. 01:21:38 fr33_yourself[m]: yes we could raise fees for that, but NFT transfers are still possible with strict 2-in-2-out 01:21:40 They can lick nah ballz 01:22:14 Just put a special fee on tx_extra, like normal fee for 32 bytes per output in tx_extra, then 10xmr for first kb, 100xmr for second kb, 1000xmr for 3 kb, etc etc 01:22:31 ofrnxmr: I plan to bring up a soft fork once we have sufficient adoption of this patch. 01:22:39 would help secure the network too as more miners wanting to grab spammers fees 01:22:45 RavFX: then they'll just spam smaller transactions 01:22:51 Also, output steg has a slightly non-trivial computational cost. 01:23:14 kayabanerve[m]: Not really. Worse case XOR, but that might not even be necessary 01:23:28 politicalweasel[: But at that stage we would've done our best to prevent them right? if they spam 2 in 2 out, then we can't stop them 01:23:29 and XOR is already completely negligable 01:23:37 politicalweasel: You have to run bulletproofs to create them 01:23:50 If you put a special fee on tx_extra, it may not stop future implementations of it through output spam, but it seems like the mordinals people will compromise for that. Once that becomes the mainstream implementation of NFTs, no one is going to want to make incompatible NFTs 01:24:10 have fun with the small transactions, yes you can do it. just enforce x:2 except for coinbase. Gonna need to mess along time to accumulate enough output to be able to spam a nft over 10000 TX 01:24:14 We do have aggregated BPs though so it's not a notable cost in practice 01:24:20 fr33_yourself[m]: Exactly my point, no restriction can stop them 01:24:21 considering the 20 minutes average lock 01:24:26 the whole point of NFTs is that they have "legacy" and "history" attached to them. they won't want to keep changing the NFT implemenation 01:24:34 see my previous message 01:25:11 kayabanerve[m]: No, you can use the subaddr ECDH keys, stealth addresses, and in certain cases the pedersen commitment 01:25:27 I'm dropping out of this discussion for tonight as it's largely opinionated without progress right now. 01:25:32 so I think it can work in the long run if the goal is just "reduce output spam" and not "make arbitrary data/steg impossible" 01:25:45 politicalweasel: Creating an output requires proving it has a valid commitment. I don't card to debate this. 01:25:52 RavFX: doesn't rav's point mean the nft bois won't effectively be able to do 2 in 2 out steg? 01:26:07 The encryption is trivial. The output it's placed into it requires multiple ECC ops to be created. 01:26:30 if you want to make a NFT over 10000TX to circunvent the fees, you need to have these output available for use 01:26:45 possible, yes, anoying as fsck, yes too 01:26:50 kayabanerve: I know you want to leave but.. that's not true. stealth addresses + ECDH keys can be any arbitrary data. Like I said the pedersen commitment can be used too in some cases 01:27:05 there's more to an output than the pedersen commitment 01:27:53 RavFX: so at that point we should beat the nft bro's? basically it seems that there will need to be some serious changes to how fees are calculate based on tx_extra and number of outputs, then we should be out of the woods and in the clear right? 01:28:06 Adding any output, legitimate or data, requires providing a range proof for it. That range proof is non-trivial. 01:28:24 I'm not discussing the cost of steganography. I'm discussing the costs of adding outputs. 01:28:29 Oh i see 01:28:35 the cost is still low though 01:29:04 and extracting the data is basically free 01:29:10 kayabanerve[m]: That's why I only use free range outputs 01:29:34 and they're organic too! 01:29:48 fr33_yourself[m]: Yeah, basically low fee for 32 bytes output per TX, anything over that it should use an exponential formula to crank up the fees real fast. 01:30:28 what if there was a sidechain that implemented NFTs better 01:30:32 RavFX: this idea makes pretty good sense to me. what does arcticmine think about this? 01:30:51 and then everyone would just use the sidechain and leave the main chain alone 01:31:00 Good question. 01:31:03 Wooper: In theory that's what Tari should do but at this rate it'll be ready.... never 01:31:45 Yeah, A sidechain could but, but I still don't see the point of unfungible poison on a chain designed for a fungible currency 01:32:00 I'm surprised there is a guy, the one who is creator of mordinals, who's best possible use of his time is to create nfts on monero which probably won't be profitable for him 01:32:22 Make him look cool 01:32:45 he will have glory gold and glitter 01:32:55 Make him haten by 99% of the monero community 01:32:59 Wooper: No 01:33:00 I wouldn't be surprised if the mordinal dev(s) are just trying to force Monero to address tx_extra 01:33:02 hated* 01:33:06 He has the worst nfts out there 01:33:11 Meanwhile WE have the best ones 01:33:13 yeah the NFTs are shit 01:33:15 I'm just surprised there is a guy who thought. Hm this seems like a good idea and the best possible use of my time and money 01:33:22 these shitty pixel heads 01:33:31 I actually did make an NFT, it's pretty good 01:33:31 * ofrnxmr[m] uploaded an image: (177KiB) < https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/v3/download/monero.social/ebvfHzThiasYFZoVoTmpsymm/c9ew7k5s8ord8ryr.jpg > 01:33:31 I have the best one but I stopped production, wast of XMR dust lol 01:33:40 This is how we do it. 01:33:40 #Amateur 01:34:11 Dns-blacklist nft 01:34:26 ^^^ 01:34:34 the NFTs are being produced at an exponential rate 01:34:39 I think 1000 were made just today 01:34:46 Ill blacklist shitty mining pool's from my node lol 01:34:53 and they are constantly getting worse 01:35:13 And priority node hashvault (they'll update) so it gets sent to p2pool 01:35:18 the stupidest part of all of this is that you don't even need to store anything on-chain in order to have NFTs 01:35:24 I think they will die out eventually, but I could be wrong 01:35:34 NFT are by default really low end except some very rare exception. And for reason the good one are almost free 01:35:41 you can literally have a signed certificate that just points to a transaction output 01:35:47 boom, NFT 01:35:47 Its just trying to use range proofed data storage. 01:35:47 Idiocy 01:35:59 Use ipft or torrents ya fkn noob 01:36:25 Imagine cresting monero blockchain FOR nfts. 01:36:25 Lmao 01:36:25 Can we roll back chain k thx bye 01:36:32 yeah, IPFS 01:36:33 YEah, even NFS scams on ETH use ipfs link.... That would save so much space lol 01:36:36 Might as well scrap all of the ineffeciencies, rings, etc 01:36:42 When should the next patch be released? I'm so ready to download it and know I'm cockblocking the mordinal cucks 01:36:52 oh I have a great idea 01:36:55 maybe we should not give them idea, they gonna continue to spam out chain with IPFS link once we limit tx_extra 01:37:07 Teue 01:37:15 * Truw 01:37:41 I will double spend by sending kraken a massive amount in an NFT, and when the community rolls the transactions back I will have double spent. 01:38:12 kidding of course 01:38:32 Did i hear p2pool use tx_extra? 01:38:43 Wooper: infinite money glitch discovered mar 24 2023 01:39:03 how quickly would your bank acc get frozen though lol 01:39:24 Someone could try to attack 0 confirmations site like that. If the shit hit the mempool but is never mined. 01:40:12 0-conf should only be used for small amounts anyway' 01:40:14 But I think all the fixes will block them before it go in mempool 01:40:44 RavFX: This is a good point 01:40:50 You accept 0-conf in the same way you accept a cash payment 01:41:07 if they try to double spend, you throwing hands 01:41:17 good for in-person payments 01:41:19 man m0rdinals are really making fungibility go bye bye aren't they 01:41:44 not really 01:41:53 mordinals are an attack, but not a very successful one 01:42:00 not necessarly, if you blackball all the poisoned tx 01:42:05 especially after the patch is released 01:42:06 With shitty pics 01:42:06 this is my mordinal 01:42:07 https://mordinals.org/item/292 01:42:11 it's pretty good I think 01:42:15 what if you receive a m0rdinal on accident though and then want to spend it, but the miner won't forward the tx 01:42:35 fr33_yourself[m]: wdym 01:42:40 Then youre stuck with it, but at the end it's monero so other people won't know you received it 01:42:48 oh i see nvm 01:42:50 hey wait I have an idea 01:42:59 with defeat all the purpose of that scam 01:43:02 for how you can spend mordinals without output spamming 01:43:19 what if, you just say the output that has the ordinal is just the one that is the biggest number 01:43:40 what if miner's stop mining tx's with m0rdinals but you accidentally received one? I guess the problem with this situation is logically if the miner's already ofac sanctioned the mordinal then you couldn't have received it in the first place 01:43:41 so you have to calculate 2^ringsize transactions on average 01:44:30 think about it 01:44:32 it's genius 01:45:10 OFAC sanctionned the m0rdinal 😂 01:45:11 no wait 01:45:31 I like RavFX's train of thought here 01:45:56 what if we declare mordinals are a security 01:46:18 so the SEC regulates them 01:46:26 not good train of though 01:47:05 holy crap, they just added 400 in the last hour 01:47:07 best we can do is make it difficult for these guys to use monero for nfts instead of as currency 01:47:31 the rate of mordinal production must be rivaling real transactions 01:47:53 so does this mean we need to make an emergency move of some sort? 01:47:54 Wooper: Theyre mad 01:48:01 But they can lick mah ballz 01:48:28 step 1 is capping tx_extra size, step 2 is enforcing some statistical check on decoy age, step 3 is a more long-term tx_extra change @ next hard fork 01:48:46 (step 2 would break their transfer system) 01:49:29 Dont know where those steps came from but lol 01:49:32 i like the above ^^^ the question is when does step 1 happen? 01:49:42 I guess I mean step 2 01:50:28 politicalweasel they can probably bypass any decoy age limitation 01:50:50 ... right? 01:51:35 Maybe, but they choose decoys in a way that proves the NFT was the real transfer. That becomes extremely hard/impossible with step 2 01:51:51 They're sending about 25-50kb/block 01:52:44 7kb of garbage 01:52:54 50kb per block = 13gb per year. If mords are patched soon then the total damage shouldn't be too bad 01:52:59 Fkn amateurs. At least upload something nice 01:52:59 (so let's do that, asap) 01:53:09 Lol 01:53:16 50kb per block is not trying 01:53:25 I can do 300kb/block if u want 01:53:36 Somehow even worse than most NFTs 01:53:43 I think that if you institute some regulation on tx_extra, that the NFT people would appreciate that 01:53:50 Even worse than their old ones 01:53:53 Yeah, I did see a small increase in block size since the poison is available. Not too much so far but I know how that can go out of control easily 01:53:57 part of what makes NFTs valuable is the high entry cost 01:54:00 Like they found the stuff on their windows 95 pc 01:54:08 morbinals dev still thinks the patch will allow 1kb images? 01:54:17 Yea 01:54:20 its over 01:54:23 amateurs 01:54:24 Yeah, I just looked at mordinal.org, the new batchs are so repetitive (like the same in loop) and ugly 01:54:31 plowsof11: Super amateurs 01:54:41 you can fit a lot of pixel art in 1MB 01:54:47 1. can't even bloat the chain 2. not even good content 01:54:51 the stupid pixel heads are like 400 bytes 01:54:57 so theyre just spamming because theyre angry now, right? 01:55:07 Yes 01:55:10 Probably 01:55:28 plowsof11: when does the patch go live? 01:55:29 Hey guys who wants to buy pot with monero ? 01:55:38 They probably tought it would get popular or something and pump so they can dump or something 01:55:44 when luigi1111 has time for merges it can go live asap xD 01:55:47 fr33_yourself[m]: it's relay-level so just as node adopt it 01:55:51 Trojanvolta: FED 01:55:57 fr33_yourself[m]: This week 01:55:58 You can build and run it now 01:56:03 I think they realized you can spam at a much higher rate if you divide your monero into multiple coins 01:56:17 oh no ^^^^ 01:56:17 Trojanvolta[m]: Me 01:56:21 Don't give them ideas lol 01:56:25 politicalweasel[: Fed = federated egocentric dog 01:56:26 instead of using a single coin and waiting 10 mins every time 01:56:37 its becoming sentient 01:56:46 Wooper 01:56:52 ye? 01:57:00 i gotcha grass until I bake my flass 01:57:01 politicalweasel[: so it's a point release or something? 01:57:04 Brb while I get the dictionary so I can read it out loud for everyone 01:57:17 No need to tell stupid people that a comes before B 01:57:18 yes a point release 01:57:35 My nodes are already updated since a while 01:57:45 traitor!! 01:57:48 Amateurs 01:57:49 and it is already live? 01:57:59 people just need to update their nodes and no more m0rbinals 01:58:13 just merge the pull request and compule 01:58:14 Mining pools* 01:58:15 compile* 02:01:13 I will continue not to comment 02:01:40 I don't see a commit 02:01:49 is this the monero repo? 02:03:04 https://github.com/monero-project/monero/pull/8733 02:07:16 I guess PR8758 should not be merged until real solution to block the poison is found 02:24:11 Tx_extra research group 02:27:33 The only good thing about that, everyone know about tx_extra now.. lol 02:32:03 And monero 02:32:05 Winrar 02:35:17 So will nfts be added as an attack vector? 02:41:19 More like tx_extra poisoning I guess, because it's not only limited to nft. Technically you want all TX to look the same. With is not the case when you have stuff in tx_extra 03:01:02 yall mofos up in this bitch literally so retarded or what, like, yall acting like no one ever had malicious intents regarding the monero blockchain... (full message at ) 03:12:52 dang you seem pretty mad bro 03:13:40 Who would not be mad when idiots are poisoning you're precious blockchain 03:14:29 agree though. I'm still with alex from local monero. Nuke tx_extra or restrict it as much as possible. We can't prevent steg and floods, only by not cooperating with poor services built around monero 03:15:28 what if we all flood the chain at the same time to counter a single person's output flood hehe 03:16:05 Would do nothing good, except adding more poison 03:16:36 What if no one floods the chain and we just adopt the open patch, please .-. 03:17:11 If anyone has better ideas then let me know: But (1) Limit or kill tx_extra (2) Increase fees (3) Don't use services that aren't necessary for transactions this seems like all we can do 03:18:13 If I look in the explorer, it feel like there is easily 25 to 50% of the TX that are poison 03:18:40 Hopefully people can take some comfort from the recent ring size increase. 03:18:54 > <@spacekitty420:matrix.org> yall mofos up in this bitch literally so retarded or what, like, yall acting like no one ever had malicious intents regarding the monero blockchain... (full message at ) 03:19:15 * ofrnxmr[m] uploaded an image: (74KiB) < https://libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/v3/download/monero.social/JHSDxRhwxNOuogGTtXixUPrR/q2tt5a6stesqr6tl.jpg > 03:19:33 fr33_yourself[m]: nah, as it was discussed there would apparently be other attack vectors if they wanted to 03:19:33 All of those 1/2 that arent 1.5kb are nfts 03:20:06 Satisfied? No. Thats 1 step 03:20:17 Far from the goal of fully fungible tx on moneo 03:20:21 * wanted to, would be a start tho, putting the foot down type of thing being liek "fuck dem nft" 03:25:39 "nah, as it was discussed there..." <- I just don't think we will get the output/steg security until seraphis with larger ring set or complete membership proof if possible 03:26:25 Without putting any real thought into it, and I already see an issue (inputs, sizes (padding?), distribution) 03:26:25 but if outputs were standardized to 2/4/8/16 you could make rings use an equal distribution of easy as decoys. Four decoys with 2 outputs, four with 4 etc. 03:26:25 Because, say, exchanges started making up the majority of the volume, your rings would be polluted with 16 out tx. 03:26:25 Most economically meaningful transactions will have 2out (1 receiver + change or dummy). 03:27:10 As it is you can already pretty much eliminate any non 2 out as the real spend 03:27:29 right but seraphis best case scenario still 2 year away and for some reason yall just want a single hard fork before it while they used to be so much more frequent in the past 03:27:29 gotta normalize frequent hard forks again imo :P 03:27:52 Seraphis 2 years away is a random number 03:28:10 it is, hence why "best case scenario" 03:28:28 No reason it couldnt be 6 months away if we had a magic team 03:28:30 > <@spacekitty420:matrix.org> right but seraphis best case scenario still 2 year away and for some reason yall just want a single hard fork before it while they used to be so much more frequent in the past 03:28:30 > gotta normalize frequent hard forks again imo :P 03:28:30 why would one hardfork pre-seraphis be bad 03:28:31 like... haveno was supposed to be end of 2021, we in 2023 03:28:39 Please stop using reply funcrmtion 03:28:56 Haveno ccs was a scam tho 03:28:59 ok i will not use it anymore. ALso haveno is scam 03:29:11 lol me ofrnxmr are spirit brothers 03:29:22 Haveno isnt a scam anymore imo. But ccs was 03:29:28 On the topic of counter-attack spam, I think it could be done in a way that enforces some baseline anonymity. It is obviously not an ideal solution, and I believe there are multiple better options to consider for anyone who wants the project to actively respond. I'm sure it has been discussed before. 03:29:55 fr33_yourself: because if there's just a single hard fork then it'll be awhile still so could pack a bunch of other stuff in it, am saying more HF would be better 03:30:02 They should just put an anouncement, hard fork 15 april, prepare and deal with it 03:30:31 * in it (and some other stuff might be missing as well and will ahve to wait the seraphis one), am 03:30:36 April 15 isnt enough time to fork testnet and stagenet 03:30:37 Or make it one week away, I would not mind 03:30:47 Hmm, yeah, better testing the patches 03:31:47 i thought the current fix of miner relays not relaying m0rbinal is sufficient to neutralize him 03:32:13 so if m0rb is done from here on, then what's the big worry 03:32:18 Only if mining pools update 03:32:29 A hard fork forces them to choose. Monero for tx, or monero for nft fees 03:32:56 Not really, it have to be installed and if not all pool install it or miners not using pool is not installing it... Without a HF will will still be possible to push the poison on the blockchain 03:33:37 ofrnxmr[m]: (on no i using the reply function so irc boomers gonna be angy... :derp:), how about if someone renting a bunch of vps and mine those, if no hard fork that aint really solving it, right? 03:33:42 spacekitty420: this is why the only eta for serai is 22020 😎 03:33:51 i still don't see the problem. I mean a hardfork in may or smthing wouldnt be so bad. but i don't see the rush anymore 03:33:54 anything sooner is just quality by hard work. 03:35:15 We can't hard fork on short notice. We could soft fork by adoption. I'm unsure the prior discussions over the year on the idea of soft forking. 03:35:16 If 2miners txpool is 600mb, they might decide to update 03:35:36 m0rb guy should be neutralized for now, so i think we have some time 03:36:05 Can i use tx_extra to backup my data? 03:36:08 M0rb guy still pumping them at full power 03:36:18 Yes, please backup you're seed on tx_extra 03:36:26 Brb 03:37:14 even if m0rb guy is still pumping them out like the fed buying underwater treasuries, it's all for naught once the mining pools update 03:37:22 DanIsnotthemanBr: I recommend that you also backup the same data into CLSAG and outputs to ensure redundancy. You know if you have 1 backup you have no backups. 03:37:25 let him pump the jpgs 03:38:12 I’ll split passphrase into multiple tx dont tell anyone 03:46:10 brb telling everyone 03:46:24 /s 03:47:16 oh hey u seen that tv show "Copenhagen Cowboy"? was pretty good o.o 03:47:44 lol no 03:47:56 aw x) 04:12:04 My moenro synced upto ~92% pretty fast now it taking forver to sync a few blocks. Is that normal 04:12:10 RE: mordinals, I think it is helpful to keep in mind that there are many MANY things the Monero project can do to respond. fr33_yourself mentioned restricting tx_extra, increasing consensus fees, and avoiding those services. Off the top of my head I'll add:... (full message at ) 04:13:59 It's a bad idea because it increases the retry rate, which damages privacy, and requires downloading the full bloated TX to determine not to use it. 04:14:08 I'm sure people can add to that list quickly with a bit of contemplation. 04:14:08 I have full faith and confidence in the Monero project, and I don't believe there is any need to panic. 04:14:21 aiena: it does slow toward the end usually yas, so normal 04:14:42 ok 04:14:44