<j​ohndoe427:matrix.org> Its seriously to the point I am not sure what's real anymore. Like I feel like maybe I have hallucinations and delusions of all this or something, but so many other people say they are seeing it too... wtf?

<t​igerix:matrix.org> kayabanerve: Just read your post on getmonero.org about fcmp++

<t​igerix:matrix.org> It sounds like it replaces seraphis?

<t​igerix:matrix.org> Or which features of seraphis will still be needed after fcmp++?

<t​igerix:matrix.org> Jamtis is what you mean when you talk about wallet features?

<t​igerix:matrix.org> Jamtis doesn't need a hardfork?

<t​igerix:matrix.org> I am confused.

<t​igerix:matrix.org> Forgive me the questions I am not that deep into these topics but would still like to get a rough understanding.

<k​ayabanerve:matrix.org> Tigerix: It's feature complete with and makes Seraphis, the key redefinition, optional.

<k​ayabanerve:matrix.org> Seraphis, the TX and wallet code, almost certainly won't disappear.

<k​ayabanerve:matrix.org> JAMTIS is a new address protocol and would be done with new wallet software. It doesn't need a hard fork though there's reasons to do it with one (force an update).

<k​ayabanerve:matrix.org> That's assuming it's deployed TBC. If the endeavor fails or takes too long, it'd presumably fall back to being donw with Seraphis (the key redefinition).

<d​iakonos:monero.social> Has anyone had issues where Monero GUI not showing wallet balance? It’s this typical because of the block height setting?

<d​iakonos:monero.social> Has anyone had issues where Monero GUI not showing wallet balance? It’s this typically because of the block height setting?

diakonos: Which version of the GUI are you using?

<d​iakonos:monero.social> 3.3

<s​needlewoods:monero.social> I had an issue where I created a new wallet and the restore height was above the current block height (v0.18.3.3 on windows)

<d​iakonos:monero.social> I just restored from an older block height. Let’s see if that helps

sneedlewoods: can you reproduce that consistently? mainnet or testnet or stagenet?

<b​asses:matrix.org> old.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/1c…_monero_with_ai_a_fresh_look_at_the

<b​asses:matrix.org> Ad, remove reddit mods

<s​needlewoods:monero.social> selsta I'll test later and report back, it was on stagenet

ok stagenet makes more sense, it's possible that blocks came in slower than anticipated, causing the blockheight approximation to be ahead

<m​onero-guides:matrix.org> Hi all, we've just finished putting together a CCS proposal for a new series. Would be glad for any feedback repo.getmonero.org/monero-project/ccs-proposals/-/merge\_requests/451

<b​asses:matrix.org> They created moneroguides.org

<b​asses:matrix.org> blog.px.dev/detect-monero-miners related

<b​asses:matrix.org> researchgate.net/publication/355896…onero_Mining_Pools_Data_Publication

<m​onero-guides:matrix.org> thanks a lot for those links, will take a read of them now

<b​asses:matrix.org> also recommend running a proxy when mining to not leak IP

hello, everyone. is there a way to send a ~2700-byte message along with an XMR transaction, in an anonymous way?

<s​yntheticbird:monero.social> no

<a​yaansoni:monero.social> Is there any limit on the number of bytes or we can't send any anonymous text along with the transaction? I never used such a feature if it exists.

<3​21bob321:monero.social> Tx_extra

<s​yntheticbird:monero.social> `tx_extra` field is limited to 1060 bytes. Regarding anonymous, even with or without enough bytes, sending extra data on your transaction does make you look different than average tx pool.

<d​etherminal:monero.social> Hmmm, that is actually very fucked up

<p​oliticalweasel:matrix.org> kayabanerve: So IIUC, the primary advantage of FCMP++ is that it creates an anonset covering all past and (foreseeable-) future outputs? And the cost of this is that transactions are ~2x larger and ~2x slower, relative to Seraphis+FCMP?

<p​oliticalweasel:matrix.org> Please correct me if I'm wrong

<k​ayabanerve:matrix.org> 1) I'm unsure I've said 2x. The ownership proof may be 2x but that's a fraction of membership.

<k​ayabanerve:matrix.org> 2) The first layer is larger. That first layer being larger does not mean the entire proof is proportionately larger. If the first layer of Seraphis did enable crossing a power of two threshold, one of the two proofs would be 50% smaller. Since I was looking at a 2048-long proof and a 1024-long proof, that'd be 33% faster. It'd only be 64 bytes smaller re: proof length (though may<clipped message>

<k​ayabanerve:matrix.org> incur additional commitments).

<k​ayabanerve:matrix.org> 3) I'm now looking at (256, 256) proofs, a number I'm hesitant to publish as it'd be an incredibly performant best case. This is due to how the discrete log proofs ended up. Said proofs were also the overhead compared to Seraphis (so it's now further minimal).

<k​ayabanerve:matrix.org> I'd assume it's 10-50% slower, not larger, with all the developments which have occurred. We'll have to wait and see how it finalizes for the exact number in that range.

<j​ack_ma_blabla:matrix.org> Does monnero-gui work on windows arm ?