<n​obfg9000:matrix.org> BlueHealer: not any more than cash

<n​obfg9000:matrix.org> with chaumian cash you can still have taxes and prevent money laundering in the same way that you do with cash

<s​trawberry:monero.social> This isn't the purpose of the tail emission and we should absolutely not be doing coin weighted votes on anything important

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> The purpose of tail emission is to keep an adequate supply of the currency for practical use and replacing lost coins is part of that?

<s​trawberry:monero.social> 1 xmr = 10^12 atomic units, we're not running out of coins any time soon

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> Currently it’s the devs who make decisions. Maybe we can keep it that way but weighting it by stakeholders especially when they can’t receive the created coins without mining or through trade doesn’t sound immediately as bad to me as it seems you think it is. Having miners vote is a problem because they have an direct incentive to increase the payout.

<s​trawberry:monero.social> Coin weighted votes = letting Binance & friends set our monetary policy

<s​trawberry:monero.social> I don't think I need to explain why that's a bad idea

AIUI you need a tail emission for dynamic block sizes to work

because of the penalty in the formula used to expand clocks, the penalty comes from the block reward and the block reward is currently the tail emission

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> Sure but the point of a currency is to access to a fast medium of exchange when needed. And if there’s not enough supply then eventually it would become more costly to use this currency over another. It’s not optimal to just ignore the need for more currency when there’s a demand for it without creating an excessive amount that will lead to inflation

<s​trawberry:monero.social> nioCat: yes, and because relying on fees alone for security incentivizes reorgs, technically makes the coin permissioned and it's unclear whether it would keep a high enough security budget

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> Okay so let’s say binance is the majority stake holder rn and votes to massively inflate the currency. Then what? They’d just lose their share and have to buy it back at a loss. What if they greatly reduce the rate of coin creation? The currency loses utility from a lack of supply and nobody really benefits aside from an initial increase in valuation before a competitive fork <clipped message>

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> with a voter base that votes more optimally to stabilize the supply takes marketshare

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> Sure but the point of a currency is to have access to a fast medium of exchange when needed. And if there’s not enough supply then eventually it would become more costly to use this currency over another. It’s not optimal to just ignore the need for more currency when there’s a demand for it without creating an excessive amount that will lead to inflation

<s​trawberry:monero.social> then the damage is already done, but they might gain even more vote share because some mining pools dump their xmr on exchanges to pay out in btc

<s​trawberry:monero.social> also devs don't make the decisions, this isn't eth, nobody does

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> I mean the developers of monero determined the protocol and we just accept that

<s​trawberry:monero.social> determined it once and now it's fixed forever at 0.3 new xmr/min

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> I mean if a change was proposed, generally we’d have other devs confer with each other then push the change. Then the community may or may not decide to go along with it, although we typically expect them to. It’s not dictated by them but it’s primarily influenced by them. There isn’t a streamlined protocol for having the stakeholders be the primary influence for certain c<clipped message>

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> ategories of decisions.

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> They “might” and I’d argue likely at a net loss in terms of stable commodity value

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> They “might” and I’d argue likely at a net loss measured relative to stable commodity value

<s​trawberry:monero.social> causing a net loss in terms of stable commodity value is the entire reason they'd do it

<s​trawberry:monero.social> do you think binance wants prices in xmr to be stable? lol

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> I’m saying they would take a net loss priced in a stable commodity

<s​trawberry:monero.social> why? binance aren't the ones who actually own the xmr, they're holding it for other people

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> I mean we can practically consider that binance’s money at this point. So I don’t think it makes sense for us to call it the people their holding it for’s loss. Giving up their custody en masse has numerous vectors for indirect forms of theft

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> I mean we can practically consider that binance’s money at this point. So I don’t think it makes sense for us to call it the people they’re holding it for’s loss. Giving up their custody en masse has numerous vectors for indirect forms of theft

<s​trawberry:monero.social> so you're saying they would vote for a low tail emission to increase the value and % of xmr they have the potential to steal?

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> Pretty much. They’d pump and dump and then be out of our hair well eventually if not the first time around.

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> They’d only be making a profit by doing that multiple times if they did that cyclically which requires a large enough amount of wealth from the next group of victims that also happens to be larger than the circular economy of users of xmr to repeatedly fall for their scam.

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> But in that case the circular economy wont be dumping into another currency and will just be burdened by the increase in volatility that they’re inducing. Which will increase the premiums on the DEX’s and make it less and less profitable for them over time. And basically the circular economy is gonna siphon that wealth their stealing through our premiums

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> So the circular economy will benefit from their shenanigans until eventually they fuck off from not being able to fool enough people for it to be profitable anymore

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> Pretty much. They’d pump and dump and then be out of our hair well eventually if not the first time around.

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> They’d only be making a profit by doing that multiple times if they did that cyclically which requires a large enough amount of wealth from the next group of victims that also happens to be larger than the circular economy of users of xmr to repeatedly fall for their scam.

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> But in that case the circular economy wont be dumping into another currency and will just be burdened by the increase in volatility that they’re inducing. Which will increase the premiums on the DEX’s and make it less and less profitable for them over time. And basically the circular economy is gonna siphon that wealth they’re stealing through our premiums

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Look at any pos chain 😂

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Look at particl

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Particl voted to make 50% emission go to the treasury and the emission %. This leads towards total control of the voting if the treasury was to use those coins to vote

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> And increase* the emission

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> The only way to have more voting power than those who are given 50% of all newly minted coins, is to but them

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> This is the same logic why eth went POS before the premine hit sub 50%

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> I proposed something to Firo where stakers would only be able rewarded for staking as much as the pow they can produce. No "proof of pow" then no proof of stake

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> And only being able to stake virgin coins

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> Although my argument effectively still applies for PoS, it’s a critical difference though that miners get the reward instead of stakers. This further reduces the incentive for them to add an excessive amount of supply since it’s even less profitable if the miners are getting the reward, even if they start mining themselves it’ll cost them more than if they were only staking

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> If profitability drops, often difficulty follows. selfish miners would want profitability to fall. Greater total % of new emissions leads to greater control of the supply, leads to price manipulation

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> A lot of virgin bitcoin is sold directly to coinbase etc.

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> miners (and the fed) dont care about inflation, as long as they are gaining a larger % of total supply as a result

<k​arano:poddery.com> whats a virgin bitcoin ?

<s​trawberry:monero.social> freshly mined

<k​arano:poddery.com> i c

<k​arano:poddery.com> binance has btc pools too for that reason

<s​trawberry:monero.social> true, that's another thing to think about when doing coin weighted votes on emission

<s​trawberry:monero.social> afaik no exchanges have monero mining pools, but if they did, that would really break the incentives

I had my first ever failed monero transaction today. How do I check why it failed?

What did you use to create/send the tx? Any error messages appear .. did it not fail to construct the tx, spit out a txid, and then it didnt appear in the mempool (was not broadcast)?

I typically use monero-cli wallet software, but this is the first time I used the monero-gui wallet. I suspect it was because after installing the wallet it had not finished sync'n the blockchain when I tried to send the payment

I just skimmed .bitmonero/bitmonro.log and .bitmonero/monero-wallet-gui.log and could not see anything relevant. In the wallet log I saw both the earlier transaction attempt and the one I just tried again without any errors

The one I just tried again has failed. Hmmm

It gave me a txid, waited a while without any confirmations and then came up as failed.

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> Except I wasn’t saying mining in general would be less profitable. I was saying it would be less profitable specifically for people with the majority of supply to mine compared to staking. Because it’s a smaller percentage ROI for someone who already owns most of the currency to have the coin inflated then earned back through mining.

<h​ardhatter:monero.social> Someone who mines but doesn’t own much the currency would have a better percentage ROI since the reward isn’t coming from the inflation of a large amount of coins they own.

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> "<d​uso_> It gave me a txid, waited a while without any confirmations and then came up as failed." << youre likely connected to a bad node

<u​speptab:matrix.org> matrix.to/#/#_utopia_:matrix.org

<b​asses:matrix.org> spam

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Theyre everywhere

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Hackliberty, fdroid

<b​asses:matrix.org> Nheko, privacyguides

What is everywhere?

<b​asses:matrix.org> spam of weird matrix rooms

<b​asses:matrix.org> 🍯

<3​21bob321:monero.social> Rip cme-ban now

<v​cfhfghdfghdfgh:nope.chat> its been like 26 hours for me and the domain is still not active

<v​cfhfghdfghdfgh:nope.chat> are you sure it's not a scam?

<n​ihilist:nowhere.moe> which registrar ?

<v​cfhfghdfghdfgh:nope.chat> incognet.io

<n​ihilist:nowhere.moe> feel free to open a ticket on their end if they are too slow

<v​cfhfghdfghdfgh:nope.chat> i'll wait another day and if it's still not active then i'll open a ticket

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Theyre slow on weekends, or so a friend has told me

<v​cfhfghdfghdfgh:nope.chat> yeah maybe that's why because i bought the domain on sunday

<v​cfhfghdfghdfgh:nope.chat> finally the domain is active

<k​k717353ic3n483r:nowhere.moe> Hey anyone here rent servers to have nodes and mine? Or is that just dumb. If you do what hosters take XMR and let you have a mining node

<a​tori_0xbdc3ab4e:matrix.org> Anybody know how much larger the txs will get with fcmp?

<r​ottenwheel:kernal.eu> atori question for kayabanerve

<k​ayabanerve:matrix.org> For two inputs? 2KB I believe.

<k​ayabanerve:matrix.org> (that's the amount larger, not the the new size)

<a​tori_0xbdc3ab4e:matrix.org> So about a doubling.

<a​tori_0xbdc3ab4e:matrix.org> Can we drop the decoy output when paying to one person only once we have fcmp to save some space?

<s​trawberry:monero.social> Decoy output?

<a​tori_0xbdc3ab4e:matrix.org> txs always have minimum 2 outputs

<a​tori_0xbdc3ab4e:matrix.org> When paying one person only a decoy with 0 value is created.

<a​tori_0xbdc3ab4e:matrix.org> If we don't use ring sigs anymore I don't know how useful that still is.

atori: Second output is typically change

<s​trawberry:monero.social> That's a change output and it's not 0 value unless you're paying the entire value of the inputs

Or were you referring to inputs?

<a​tori_0xbdc3ab4e:matrix.org> Yes I mean dropping those.

<a​tori_0xbdc3ab4e:matrix.org> When you pay the full amount

<a​tori_0xbdc3ab4e:matrix.org> Come to think of it probably that doesn't happen very often 🤔

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> It happens all the time

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Often people (btc maxis) dont carry a balance and "send all".

<s​yntheticbird:monero.social> I love proton

<s​yntheticbird:monero.social> *sigh* strawberry whats wrong

<s​trawberry:monero.social> Proton bad

<s​yntheticbird:monero.social> Proton good

<s​yntheticbird:monero.social> good > bad

<s​yntheticbird:monero.social> checkmate loser

<a​mmortel:monero.social> Please, How does someone prove that He owns a given UTXO ? And How can he also prove, that it is indeed unspent?

<s​yntheticbird:monero.social> prove you spent output => prove you didn't spent another output in this tx

<s​yntheticbird:monero.social> ig

<j​ohnfoss68:matrix.org> themoneromoon.com/p/the-monero-moon-issue-72