this is best pitch to buy monero

I have question regarding seed. whether its bitcoin or monero, how is it possible that two people dont have same seed

whats the probability of two people downloading wallet and get exact same seed

I use custom seed on electrum. auto generated + 4/5 additional words

1 in a number with 79 zeroes, something like that

ok but it is possible, so better add one word of our own atleast

there are articles on how likely it is. if you used a general computer, it would like hundreds of thousands of years in making addresses to even have a slight chance of having the same seed

1/1000...79 is much rare btw

possible after sun turns off

there you go

haha

basically impossible

and same maths goes for generating stealth add. if my friends/customer send me 2 payments a day for coffee still their will be no duplicate stealth addrrss.

and wallets also never check blockchain to check if they r not repeating already generated stealth add

if I am daily receiving 2, 3 payments from same person and also both have same device. still no chance of generating same stealth add

that's more like magic than maths

what happens if some one spams too many used outluts/past transaction

does network get cluttered? or only senders has to wait till all key image is checked

what happens if simultaneously many fake transaction are done??

only transaction with un used key image are added on blockchain?

does any attack slows confirmation time

is KOVRI feature implemented?

<playmate7782[m]> "is KOVRI feature implemented?" <- Kovri is all but dead b/c of Dandelion++ . Dandelion++ does the job of routing new transactions into the network anonymously

<playmate7782[m]> "what happens if simultaneously..." <- > <@playmate7782:matrix.org> what happens if simultaneously many fake transaction are done??

> only transaction with un used key image are added on blockchain?

By protocol rules, only transactions with unique key images are added to the chain, so only one will ever make it onto the chain. Also, in implementation, nodes will only allow the first transaction that they see with any given key image into their mempool, all further attempts at double spending are dropped

<playmate7782[m]> "does any attack slows confirmati..." <- No

I thought dandelion had to do with bitcoin

I am impressed by name after watching video of dandelion on youtube

crypto industry have awesome bames lol

It was initially proposed for Bitcoin, but was implemented into Monero first IIRC

ic

Yeah Dandelion is a perfect name

<jeffro256[m]> "Kovri is all but dead b/c of..." <- D++ doesn't hide the fact that there is someone making bunch of outgoing connections to 18081 ports, am I right?

Kovri would've obfuscated that networking footprint, if I understand correctly.

18080*?

kovri is just i2p4monero

i2p in xmr is still broken

We can use i2p or tor to relay blocks

D++ < txproxy

D++ 30 seconds to obfuscate and propagate

txproxy + disabke_noise 3 seconds

and not just obfuscated, but anonymized

<ofrnxmr[m]> "D++ < txproxy..." <- By txproxy you mean i2p or tor, right?

Also, apart from just D++ obfuscating which node is the real "announcer" of a transaction, I am more concerned about the footprint monero nodes have on a certain network: am I correct in saying that the network owner can see that my computer is making a bunch of outgoing connections to 18080 ports of other computers?

Again, afaik, with i2p, your computer just connects to random ports of other i2p nodes. Thus, having a much larger plausible deniability as to what you do with these connections.

--proxy kills incoming connections but hides the fact that youre using monero

I will read up on that

--proxy isnt documented

Its in monerod help and github pr

Eh.. Then I will try that and see what it does

Its the block sync proxy

Works with tor (over exit nodes)

I remember we had that convo before on what --proxy does

I enable --proxy anytime im using an insecure / not-my network

Does --proxy allow my new node to make an initial blockchain download over the i2p network?

no

I2p (or onion, ie hidden services) doesnt serve blocks at all over monero

ofrnxmr[m]: So in what other ways does --proxy help you on insecure networks?

the only known info is that im using tor

ofrnxmr[m]: Oh that is cool

Its POSSIBLE to implement block sync over i2p and onion, very possible

I would very much like that

Bitcoin has that available to their nodes

We just dont do it yet due to fears of sybil attacks and partitioning

I get the fears about partitioning

Bitcoin has less full nodes than us, and users who dont csre about privacy

Monero users would likely flood to the most private option, whereas btc still just uses onion/i2p as "extras"

We would need to think of a way to ensure that each type of node has to communicate with another type

Like i2p must broadcast to clesrnet, clear must broadcast to tor,tor must broadcast to i2p etc

ofrnxmr[m]: Yeah. That sounds tricky. I would favor moving the whole network to i2p

im far not in favor

I2p isnt a great protocol and has a lot of bugs

Like the outproxy in i2pd had been broken for over a year

And they really dont care

ofrnxmr[m]: I2p isn't supposed to have "ourproxy" anyways

It is a closed network

It has it

And its broken

ofrnxmr[m]: I2p devs themselves say that the outproxy stuff in i2p is more of a "hack"

Just to shut up the noobs about "muh how to connect clearnet"

its not a hack

Its an outproxy

It proxies data to tor

which WOULD allow using i2p for m(nero

As you could then receive incoming over i2p and outgoing over exit nodes that can communicate with clearnet nodes

That sounds plausible and dandy, but with i2p there are far few outproxies that they would be the bottleneck for connection between the i2p monero nodes and the clearnet ones.

outprixies?

Its just 127.0.0.1:9050

Hmm.. Am I confusing outproxy and exit nodes here

So when you enter a non i2p address into the i2p 4447 proxy, it outproxies it to tor

Alright

The... some word i cant find.. is probably i2pd vs i2p naming

k4r4b3y[m]: Or i could be using the wrong word here altogether ^

im thinking one is httpoutproxy and the other is socksoutproxy

Im referring to socks, if thats the case

<ofrnxmr[m]> "It proxies data to tor" <- The outproxy can connect to any proxy server hosted over I2P I think

Stormycloud for example

ofrnxmr[m]: Are these the same feature?

Outproxy in I2P terminology is supposed to be what non-i2p connections get sent to

* Outproxy in I2P terminology is supposed to be what non-i2p connections get sent to

<ofrnxmr[m]> "Are these the same feature?" <- I think so

socks one is for socks proxy services, while http is for http proxies

new remote nodes

if monero dev make code change. limit block size, do layer 2 over monero, will this attract bitcoin maxi? or they limit max monero to 21 million. will bitcoin maxi adopt monero?

and is their any coin using mimble wimble?

Most bitcoin maxi with max followers are non computer/software guys like saylor or nik bhatia or saifdean or robert kiyosaki or planB. mostly bankers and investor.

are their any famous non technical guys like bankers or investor monero maxi?

they all managed to pump btc to 60k+

and strangely monero have relatively topped 400 only

playmate7782[m] media.giphy.com/media/G3w5bFfY85rag/giphy.gif

you serious?

I am almost convice monero is way way better than bitcoin. but looking at bitcoin adoption rate seems it will take much time to moon

am wondering are bitcoin maxi dumb or ignoring truth

check bitcoin adoption rate on DNMs

compared to world population very less people have adopted btc

most people in India see btc as ponzi

my parents included. no one have heard about monero

its frustrating when u know truth

sech1: whats DNM

darknet markets

oh

where using wrong coin can put you "in a room"

I never used one

for many years

neither did I

but they all switch to Monero

I dont know anything I know only available on darknet

I am pure vegitarian. never tried and cigar, liquor or tobaco. drugs is out of league

bitcoin maxis will only say "you're shitcoin" no matter what arguments you provide

hard supply cap or not, doesn't matter to them

not Bitcoin? Then it's shitcoin

most Austrian economic talk only about btc

There is no second best, if it was worth using it'd be added as a layer2 yesterday and render your shitcoin obsolete - btc_maxiboi69

Austrian economic doesn't mean it's a biblical level truth and revelation

I dont blame them. even I wont understand most stuff.

IMHO Austrian economic is flawed itself

sech1: I got degree in economic

fixed supply mean less and less coins will be available in the future, with no way to resupply lost coins

I am convinced we were taught BS

so maybe it works for cash (printing new coins only to replace lost coins), but it doesn't work for crypto

sech1: no am saying austrian economic are pro bitcoin only because they believe its HARD MINEY

also, fixed supply means = no miner incentive when everything is mined

* no am saying austrian economic are pro bitcoin only because they believe its HARD MONEY

sech1: what hqppens to fees

they can still charge fees

fees are not a stable source of income for miners

playmate7782[m]: That is a quite irregular income for the miners.

and this is something I wont agree with monero folks. I may be wrong.

but just like people run tor or torrent etc people will run full node even if their is no incentive

what happens if all bitcoin miners shut down because of mining being not profitable

their will be nodes?

playmate7782[m]: > <@playmate7782:matrix.org> and this is something I wont agree with monero folks. I may be wrong.

> but just like people run tor or torrent etc people will run full node even if their is no incentive

you disagree with what? that relying on txfees alone is NOT irregular?

people can still use bitcoin right?

basically difficulty also decreases

with btc, the miners have to bet on 1) btc will have monetary value 2) there will be enough transactions taking place on the network.

with xmr, miners only bet on the 1) point.

less bet, less risk.

and do monero also have difficulty adjustment etc

?

playmate7782[m]: > <@playmate7782:matrix.org> people can still use bitcoin right?

not if the transaction fees are high. and if people can't use bitcoin, then transaction fees will be low or nonexistent and the miners will not get paid. and you can see how these two extremes can cause a wild fluctuation for btc mining enterprises' economic calculation.

what happens if bitcoin price falls tomorrow to 1000

lets say all miner shut down

playmate7782[m]: > <@playmate7782:matrix.org> lets say all miner shut down

if literally all the miners shut down, the blockchain stops

and your lovely "difficulty adjustments" can't take place

developers will fork like BCASH guy did. and mining will done on laptops right?

because the difficulty adjustment take place every 2016 blocks (if I am not wrong).

yes 2 weeks approx

so, no blocks added means, no difficulty adjustment period getting completed

so then they need to update code or fork or do something to re adjust difficulty?

but you are all over the place: what are you discussing? I read that you were asking about if there are rich influencers promoting monero up above. and now you are asking about difficulty adjustment? what is the topic of this convo now?

because if we are gonna keep riffing on random talking points like this, we can spend the whole day.

k4r4b3y[m]: > <@k4r4b3y:karapara.net> but you are all over the place: what are you discussing? I read that you were asking about if there are rich influencers promoting monero up above. and now you are asking about difficulty adjustment? what is the topic of this convo now?

>

I am trying to fig out whats tempting people to avoid monero

most of this billionaire or investors

they probably know transparency is bug

playmate7782[m]: > <@playmate7782:matrix.org>

> I am trying to fig out whats tempting people to avoid monero

for me it is mixture of monero's "scary" "dark" reputation plus the difficulty of layperson's reach-ability to buying monero.

I understand 70% of bitcoin.

both of these have solutions in the works, btw

I want to understand monero. so I compare it with btc

I dont understand btc 100℅ . especially encryption part

elliptic curve etc etc

merkel tree

etc

I understand diff between symmetric and asymmetric encryption. nothing more

like I said am 50/50 on btc and monero

before going 100% monero I need to be sure

playmate7782[m]: much of it is that they dont even know it exists or what it provides, rather than them actively rejecting it

the problem with "all or most miners shut down" is that Bitcoin will be vulnerable to 51% attack when it has low hashrate

and it will have low hashrate if miners get only fees

sech1: > <@sech1:libera.chat> the problem with "all or most miners shut down" is that Bitcoin will be vulnerable to 51% attack when it has low hashrate

that's right.

so it's fundamentally unstable

either miners will drop off randomly and blockchain will not move forward sometimes

with every miner leaving btc mining is more sha256 hashing equipment waiting on the sidelines for the govt to confiscate and mount an attack on btc.

or it will also be 51% attacked

Someone should write a book about monero.. "mastering monero" or "zero to monero" (some kind of catchy title) - would help alot

so it's not safe to only rely on fees for mining

sech1: this is what am wondering. now how monero hashrate compare to btc

sech1: > <@sech1:libera.chat> so it's fundamentally unstable

that's a common theme with btc: a lot of things about it causes it to behave (or will behave) in an unstable way.

monero hashrate doesn't compare to btc

it's a totally different algorithm

plowsof11: am reading one

sech1: this is one thing am trying to fig out since day one

I know btc is POW

k4r4b3y[m]: > <@k4r4b3y:karapara.net> that's a common theme with btc: a lot of things about it causes it to behave (or will behave) in an unstable way.

>

the 1 MB block size limit, the 21 mil hard cap, the 4 year halving period, the easily-specialized hardware dependency with its production processes...

and does monero algorithm makes it less secure to 51%

all of these are unworkable if we want something beyond a ponzi scheme instrument.

51% is not just about hashrate. It's about hardware availability, mining centralization, pool centralization

Andreas antonopolous said gov need lot of money to spend on electricity if they want to revearse transaction

sech1: > <@sech1:libera.chat> 51% is not just about hashrate. It's about hardware availability, mining centralization, pool centralization

yes, I agree.

Thats something stick with me

In BTC, governments can knock on a few very specific doors and claim 51% of the network

because BTC is mined by huge centralized farms

sech1: > <@sech1:libera.chat> In BTC, governments can knock on a few very specific doors and claim 51% of the network

facts. they done so in Iran and Venezuela. They can easily do so in China.

btc not created in thin air. now its needs lot of electricity i.e work

so this I am trying to fig out

if monero has better algorithm

yes

better for decentralization

why people like andreas talk about it

anyone with a PC can mine it

playmate7782[m]: > <@playmate7782:matrix.org> btc not created in thin air. now its needs lot of electricity i.e work

the govt OWNS the electricity generation and distribution infrasturcure my dude. And those large scale mining operations are sitting ducks...

it wrote book about etherum too

I'm about halfway through Mastering Monero

SNeedlewoods: written by andreas?

sech1: > <@sech1:libera.chat> anyone with a PC can mine it

now, some PC _do_ mine better, though. But still, the level of potential mining activity distribution is greater than it is with btc.

he contributed to it afaik

it's a great book

have sold ether post migration of POW to POS

i dont understand POS

monero sounds like POS

no asic involved

I dont know if Asic ban was good or Bad

I see it as Bad

you really don't understand POS

because Monero is not POS

sech1: so its GPU

MINING

?

no it's not GPU

playmate7782[m]: > <@playmate7782:matrix.org>

> so its GPU

no. monero is CPU mining

one data center one vote ;)

I had purchased lot of monero mining hash rate with genesis mining. they stopped contracts and offered alternative

it was long back

playmate7782[m]: > <@playmate7782:matrix.org> I had purchased lot of monero mining hash rate with genesis mining. they stopped contracts and offered alternative

you mentioned this before...

so I was in impression thats monero did something controversian like bcash

k4r4b3y[m]: > <@k4r4b3y:karapara.net> one data center one vote ;)

>

irrespective of hash?

they can mine more but cant do 51 as it only have one vote right?

k4r4b3y[m]: > <@k4r4b3y:karapara.net> > <@playmate7782:matrix.org>... (full message at <libera.ems.host/_matrix/media/v3/do…0d19889da2a0eb40d9e9a7bc0411497a5d1>)

I assumed it was GPU

all I have to download full node right? dont care about mining rewards

And how to mine on browser

playmate7782[m]: > <@playmate7782:matrix.org>

> in that case I will start on my old device

try it out, it is great. Use gupax.io

basically browser extention use computer resources right?

playmate7782[m]: > <@playmate7782:matrix.org> all I have to download full node right? dont care about mining rewards

yeah, as I said, use gupax software, it makes all the work easier to setup.

hmmm

no browser extension

browsers can't mine Monero

you need dedicated miner software

<playmate7782[m]> "if monero dev make code change..." <- For fuck sake. Someone please open Reddit again. I can't take more of this shit.

What what.

If they limit XMR to make it like a shitcoin, BTC maxi won't migrate because there coin already all do that. It would just make Monero user run away to another coin or fork monero so it can continue to be great. 😂

the <amount> parameter from 'transfer' command in 'monero-wallet-cli' is in XMR, correct?

SNeedlewoods: yeah, 1.3 is 1.3 xmr

because the transfer method of the RPC is in atomic units

the amount in the transfer method*

thx

ofrnxmr[m] k4r4b3y[m]: iirc --proxy allows block downloads over tor, but --tx-proxy does only txes over tor

<vtnerd_> "ofrnxmr k4r4b3y[m]: iirc --proxy..." <- > <@vtnerd_:libera.chat> ofrnxmr k4r4b3y[m]: iirc --proxy allows block downloads over tor, but --tx-proxy does only txes over tor

I will try this out. If I can completely conceal every internet connection of my node under Tor (including initial blockdownload, and the tx propaagation) that would be great.

vtnerd: how do I use the `proxy` directive in monerod.conf file? I have the examples of using --tx-proxy, but no "proxy" directive itself.

I suppose `proxy=127.0.0.1:9050` is enough?

this is cool: monero-project/monero #5914#issuecomment-1093073277

I'm playing around with monero-wallet-cli, but I'm unable to connect to stagenet with the following command:

./monero-wallet-cli --wallet-file TestStagenet --stagenet --daemon-address monero-stagenet.exan.tech:38080

I get to the output "Use the "help" command to ... " and a warning "Warning: using an untrusted daemon at monero-stagenet.exan.tech:38080" but I'm not able to type anything

first tried on v0.18.2.2-2f45d5c6 built from source and then tried with v0.18.2.2-release

Not quite sure of the convention for questions/support, so I posted mine in Monero Support.

If anyone is able to take a look, or could let me know if I should just ask in here would be much appreciated 🙏

<SNeedlewoods> "./monero-wallet-cli --wallet-..." <- Wrong port, probably. `38080` is normally reserved for P2P connections. You want a `RPC` port.

TheDragon: Don't ask permission, ask for forgiveness, after the fact 😂

<k4r4b3y[m]> "D++ doesn't hide the fact that..." <- Yeah they couldn’t use port numbers as a heuristic anymore but Kovri wouldn’t be able to hide when someone is making a bunch of connections to IP addresses associated with Monero nodes

jeffro256[m]: If the other nodes also use kovri, how would an outside observer discern those other nodes as part of Monero network?

Revuo Monero Issue 175: June 8 - 15, 2023. revuo-xmr.com/issue-175.html

TrasherDK[m]: thanks, but that's what I tried first and I got the error "Error: Wallet konnte keine Verbindung zum Hintergrunddienst herstellen: monero-stagenet.exan.tech:38081. Daemon either is not started or wrong port was passed. Please make sure daemon is running or change the daemon address using the 'set_daemon' command."

idk why the first sentence is in German, I thought I've set the language to English, but it translates to something like "wallet couldn't connect to daemon"

Who's node is that?

Why not just spin one up.c

what do you mean? Should I create my own stagenet?

./monerod --stagenet

It will sync your a stagenet node locally

If thats too much trouble, you can find an active node here community.rino.io/nodes.html

thanks, I'll look into that

tried syncing, it would take too much time and space, but the rino.io node works, thx

I just noticed the language I've set was just for the mnemonic seed. Is there a way to change the general language?

<k4r4b3y[m]> "If the other nodes also use..." <- Well i guess depends on if it integrates with the rest of I2P traffic or makes its own network. It could be more anonymous if there are other services outside of Monero which are routing Monero traffic

My main concern for all of this (whenever I try to shill i2p + monero here): in the third-world it can be suspicious to run a monero node. Since on the clearnet monero nodes leave a pretty much clear footprint (bunch of connections to other computers' 18080 ports) that can put the monero node operators in crosshairs. That's why I have been learning about ways of obfuscating such a network footprint.

I think for the time being, I will use --proxy option to route the initial blocksync traffic to tor. and use --tx-proxy to route the transaction data propagation to tor, too.

but again, using tor itself is also suspicious here in the third world, and more and more public wifi networks operated by the city municipalities block connecting to the tor network (and no, bridges do not work either).

in contrast to that, i2p works in these public wifi points operated by the city municipality. And that's why I was constantly asking (hoping) about a way to also do the initial block download over i2p network.

how much memory on avrg does mem pool need

It's typically very small right now since <1MB since there's not really any backlog to speak of

how many transaction feet in 1mb

s/feet/fit/

<k4r4b3y[m]> "in contrast to that, i2p works..." <- Have you looked at this guide (it might be out of date idk) ? getmonero.org/resources/user-guides/node-i2p-zero.html

playmate7782[m]: ~400

500

jeffro256[m]: > <@jeffro256:monero.social>

> Have you looked at this guide (it might be out of date idk) ? getmonero.org/resources/user-guides/node-i2p-zero.html

I did. isn't i2p zero no longer maintained or something? afaik there are only i2p java implementation and i2pd (there is alo i2p+ I guess)

yeah, the latest release of i2p zero is back in 2020

Ngl I'm not super familiar with i2p implementations

There have been some radical changes to i2p in the last few update cycles, so older versions may not be able to connect to the newer versions

jeffro256[m]: That's only for tx broadcasting not initial block download I'm pretty sure

Monero will be the King

Hail, to the King

jeffro256[m]: > <@jeffro256:monero.social> Ngl I'm not super familiar with i2p implementations

also, the point isn't using i2pzero or not. The point is this: currently monero cannot do initial block download over i2p network. And also ofrn says i2p implementation in monero is broken.

demetriusyukirozki[m]: > <@demetriusyukirozki[m]:libera.chat> Monero will be the King

it always is.

IIRC even using Tor you can only sync through exit nodes as well

demetriusyukirozki[m]: > <@demetriusyukirozki[m]:libera.chat> Hail, to the King

real recognize real: piped.video/watch?v=DelhLppPSxY&listen=1

boog900[m]: > <@boog900:monero.social> IIRC even using Tor you can only sync through exit nodes as well

yeah, that's true. But at least even with that I can conceal my monero node's internet connections AND do the initial block sync.

IIRC the decision to not do sync over hidden networks was because of the potential issues around peers giving bad blocks and not being able to ban them

boog900[m]: > <@boog900:monero.social> IIRC the decision to not do sync over hidden networks was because of the potential issues around peers giving bad blocks and not being able to ban them

yeah that was mentioned here before, I know.

Ah ok

I am just saying again, that decision is causing a trade-off in which the monero node operators are forced to use easily identifiable networks with peculiar footprints (tor, or monero clearnet)

for initial block download at least

we need to take a good hard look at how bitcoin mananages to not get partitioned

And copy them

spcifically full nodes on btc, since thry actually have less than us

yeah

Iirc btc forces you to allow clearnet, and only can add i2p and tor on top.

I dont believe anon networks are intended to be used exclusively on btc, but i barely did my homework on it

Same for me too (not doing a proper homework) but I remember seeing a guide on how to just allow tor + i2p on a btc node

Yeah, i remember reading that you couldnt disable clearnet though.

Imo an immediate win, since --proxy is already implemented and we already have a partitioning problem with nodes that lack incoming

Is to..... (thinking)

- Nodes who dont support incoming clearnet should allow incoming via anon networks

- nodes who do support incoming clearnet should prefer outgoing via anon networks

Er. No, bullet 1 flawed

I think --proxy allowing tor to do the initial block download and --tx-proxy allowing tx-data propagation over tor is an immediate win---in the snese that I can conceal that I am running a monero node on a certain network. The problem for the middle-, t- long-term is the fact that tor will be blocked on more and more public networks. Then people like me will have a problem with syncing their mobile nodes (on android or laptops) over tor.

Its a w with a L

lol yeah

I mean W with a W

--proxy adds privacy for the user, but hurts/destroys the network if everybody uses it

It relies on people who dont use it to serve massive data

IMHO, long term, camouflaging Monero node traffic as, e.g. video streaming, would help people access Monero in extreme network environments. Tor works until it is blocked.

Extremely difficult to do. I have skimmed a few papers about the general problem.

Put it on cuprate so it doesn't affect...and boog900 is typing

cuprate pls i2p

* pls i2p...

- Nodes who dont support incoming clearnet should allow incoming and outgoing via anon networks. Blocks should be relayed from clearnet to anon, and anon to anon.

- nodes who do support incoming clearnet should relay in from anon out to clearnet and in from clearnet out anon

* clearnet out to anon

^ not sure if this is flawed too

I think Session is researching it. But their fundraiser either isn't showing donations, or the fundraiser is going poorly: btcpay.magicgrants.org/apps/2WE269dC1f22266iFfs6WVoHxGJG/crowdfund

I want to have syncing over hidden networks ... but how do we stop people from spamming bad blocks

I guess we could only sync over outbound anon connections but they could just flood the address book with bad addresses ....

* flawed too. "clearnet with no incoming" includes --proxy users

ofrnxmr[m]: > <@ofrnxmr:monero.social> - Nodes who dont support incoming clearnet should allow incoming and outgoing via anon networks. Blocks should be relayed from clearnet to anon, and anon to anon.

> - nodes who do support incoming clearnet should relay in from anon out to clearnet and in from clearnet out to anon

Boog ^. Thought?

"clearnet with no incoming" includes --proxy / exit node users

I mean the flaw is that bad actors can spam bad blocks unless you are on about something else so i dont think that fixes this

s/so//

Bad actors can spam bad blocks regardless. They can control more domains for cheaper

yeah but we can ban domains

Right right.

Incoming connections are anon. Woossh

the random-x POW upgrade would solve this I think as it would reduce the amount of work it takes for a node to discard a bad block

Maybe need to expose the addr over the handshake

🤔 i wonder how btc gets away with it lol. Really should look a bit more at some point

<k4r4b3y[m]> "cuprate pls i2p" <- probably but Tor is way easier with ARTI

ofrnxmr[m]: they can just fake it

POW for anon connections would help as well

boog900[m]: Thats why i2p is broken

Lolol

you can spam ports onto peerlists and they all remain valid

Anon inbound simply broadcasts what you write there

SHA-256 hashes are probably quicker to verify (re-compute) than RandomX hashes.

18080, 18081, 18084, 18085, 18086 etc. Everytime you change your config port you commit a new valid entry to the peerlist

For onions they are inaccessible, so they will drop from peerlists. Any port works with i2p, so all ofbthe peers remain valid

Example.. you can connect to and partition yourself

In theory. I havent tried to spam peerlists with valid entries. Just noticed i was conncted to myself a few times. And multiple of the same person on diffent ports

Btc had same problem. Fixed years ago

for i2p on bitcoin issue:

initial issue: bitcoin/bitcoin #21389

comment with proposed fixes: bitcoin/bitcoin #21389#issuecomment-866925116

the merged fix: bitcoin/bitcoin #22112

Ive been 🏃‍♂️ around for a while. No time to make a proper issue on github

Even bitcoin abc backported the fix Bitcoin-ABC/bitcoin-abc 10df6b1

I spoke with some people about the issue but was told the opposite of everything here and that "user error".

one day it might be fixed

<boog900[m]> "the random-x POW upgrade would..." <- wait this wont solve it as we will still have all the old blocks to sync ...

I think POW for anon connections is the best option

Just use checkpoint blocks 😎

(half sarcastic)

Hyc had an idea of a running hash of hashes, not sarcastic

Pay-to-use RPC, but for block syncing. Make people pay XMR before they have XMR 😎

Rucknium[m]: I would want to see just how bad syncing without hash of hashes is to see if it's worth it, I wouldn't want this in Cuprate if i had the option

ofrnxmr[m]: Boog ^: running hoh idea

surly this is the same as blindly trusting blocks from peers ...

blindly trusting blocks + checking hashes match expected hash (hash of block n-1 is in block n) hash of tx is actually inside the block

Did you read whole discussion

"so it's basically "yolo" sync mode where it only checks PoW and trusts that other nodes which produced that PoW, also checked transactions"

and this imwas regarding initial / catch up sync. Using at tip is like blindly trusting blocks, yeah. Idea sounds doa

I dont think I missed anything ... maybe I did but new blocks already include a reference to all the blocks in the blockchain .. so what would be the difference from me downloading blocks checking hashes and POW match and skipping tx verification

*they include a reference to the last block which has a reference to the block before that ...