<d​aybreak:nitro.chat> If there's anything I love more than tax evasion it's gambling 😋

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Theres an xmr poker game soon i think

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> x.com/QuickEx_Tweets/status/1836432252315529667

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> x.com/QuickEx_Tweets/status/1835694660942963011

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> pokernow.club/mtt/quickex-poker-uXKcIyB6R4

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> starts at September 19, 2024 6:00:00 PM +0000

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> 32 ppl registered so far

hey i'm pretty new to monero and everything but I'm using monero-cli and having some trouble

I seem to be stuck behind one block consistently

and can't sync completely

is this a common issue?

i also seem to be blocking a lot of hosts for some reason :/

any insight is greatly appreciated!

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> What node are you using

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Oh. When you say "monero-cli", you mean `monerod`?

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Better to continue in #monero-support but, 1. how is your internet speed and 2. Are you using an ssd

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> If 1 = fast, and 2= yes, you may want to stop monerod and restart it using the flag `--enable-dns-blocklist`

okay thank you

oh

hm

one sec

291.8 Mbps down / 386.5 Mbps up

I am using an hdd

ill try the blocklist

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> hdd is slow to sync and might cause you to fall behind occasionally

i see

fwiw, pastebin.com/raw/uXa6CzRa

how much space does entire sync takes?

A bit over 200 GB IIRC.

About a third of this if you set your node to prune.

A third to a half or so.

got it, thanks

any golang lib to interact with the node?

Maybe on github.com/monero-ecosystem

The only advantage of tail emission versus no emission (bitcoin's model) is that essentially not only transactions' creators/authors (I don't know how they are named) "pay" for working+secure network (miners job) but also XMR holders do?

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> No

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> 1. Buttcoin has higher emission than xmr atm

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> 2. 0 inflation, like nano, is just bagholders selling their bags

The advantage of tail emission is that it works, while no emission doesn't work.

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> 1000

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Xmr spenders pay to increase block sizes. The emission pays to maintain the network security

in which sense no emission doesn't work? what's wrong with it?

blocks without transactions which are unprofitable for miners?

<m​onerobull:matrix.org> i much rather have 0.?% inflation than not have any network security unless enough transactions are made

<k​ewbit:matrix.org> The tail emission is a good thing

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> No inflation/emission (like nano) is POS

<k​ewbit:matrix.org> There will always be botnets that will run it

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Idk why anyone in their right mind would use POW if they were just burning $

<k​ewbit:matrix.org> Because they lose nothing running it on other peoples machine at a loss

<n​ihilist:nowhere.moe> The tail emission advantages will be apparent once the last bitcoin is mined

<k​ewbit:matrix.org> By the time the last bitcoin is mined I bet more than half the circulating supply is lost to human error

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> The last btc will never be mined. Will die 80 years b4 that

<n​ihilist:nowhere.moe> Oh yea true lol

<n​ihilist:nowhere.moe> Well the btc fees are already stupidly pricy, that is already a good deterrent

<k​ewbit:matrix.org> Unless we make a super chip

<k​ewbit:matrix.org> Like a quantum computer using kewbits

lost? By losing private key? Maybe someday someone will generate the same key, nano % for this, but technically I guess there is no way to lose circulation supply

<m​onerobull:matrix.org> jup, it will be waaay before

bitcoin will die way before?

<m​onerobull:matrix.org> yeah the emission/fee ratio doesnt math at all

<m​onerobull:matrix.org> bitcoin would have to have a marketcap larger than the global economy to sustain itself on the emissions just a few decades from now

man i get so easily frustrated tryin to figure out code stuff. Like, where are the support flags defined

<m​onerobull:matrix.org> and even if it works out, then you have an asset with the marketcap of the global economy that is secured by a few millions

you use print_cn, you can see them.. but what does 1 mean... what does 3 mean.

my git grep of the code just leads me to endless this = that things

and none of them are 1 or 3

Likely bitflags. Lemme look...

maybe its in this one.. src/p2p/net_node.h

1 is fluffy blocks. Everyone will support that now.

3 isn't defined AFAICT.

the problem with no emission is what transaction fees will be big?

3 wold be 1 and 2 but 2 isn't defined.

whats the --public-node one?

-> #monero-dev ?

im just tryin to get a sense of how many nodes are actually running with that flag

i thought it was indicated by the support flag in the print_cn ...

<d​aybreak:nitro.chat> The economy in general grows every year (even if not per capita, the global population is increasing currently) so having no emission would be deflationary should monero be a global currency

holy shit. print_net_stats is fun. "Sent 13522026165338 bytes (12.30 TB) in 91976084 packets in 2.2 months, average 2.20 MB/s = 2.26% of the limit of 97.66 MB/s

"

lol

deflation is bad (I am really a noob in economics, sorry)?

<r​ucknium:monero.social> b​ig_dota2_player: Imagine bitcoin is a country. Lots of people want to attack that country. Bitcoin defends itself by paying mercenaries from its budget. Its budget is in exponential decay. Bitcoin's mercenaries leave when the budget runs out. Bitcoin's enemies attack and destroy bitcoin. That's the problem with emission going to zero.

sorry, I can't get this analogy

<r​ucknium:monero.social> You know that honest miners protect bitcoin's security by having more hashpower than malicious miners, right? Have you read bitcoin's white paper? It's short and not hard to read.

<r​ucknium:monero.social> If malicious miners have more hashpower than honest miners., the malicious miners can re-write chain history, reversing transactions from the past.

<e​ndor00:matrix.org> <b​ig_dota2_player> the problem with no emission is what transaction fees will be big? -> To rephrase it better: once emission goes down, if fees aren't big enough to compensate, then the mining incentive will be too small to sustain the current network size, so miners will have to leave

<m​onerobull:matrix.org> nice uptime ginger

IIRC I read it completely, you're talking about 51% attack

<r​ucknium:monero.social> Yes

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Rucknium - whats the command that you noticed batched the response into 100 before filtering

<m​onerobull:matrix.org> alternatively youtube.com/watch?v=O4xFzWCT_HU

<e​ndor00:matrix.org> The problem is that fees will have to go up to 50+$ for the smallest transaction AND the blocks will have to be 24/7 full in order to replace the current emission levels

<e​ndor00:matrix.org> And if (when) they don't, then bitcoin's hashrate will go down accordingly

<r​ucknium:monero.social> ofrnxmr: `print_pl publicrpc 20` libera.monerologs.net/monero-community/20240813#c411325

endor00, so emission just forces coin (XMR) holders to pay for the network (without emission only spenders do it, and so no transactions = no money for miners), right?

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Thanks. I was looking in stressnet

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Gingeropolous ^^ `print_pl publicrpc`

endor00, so difficulty will decrease (and network security), but it is not obvious for me that it will be that bad

thanks for the insight moneromooo

You're quite right. It's a very common problem. It's almost never obvious why less security is bad until you get walloped right in the face.

"You see ? It will works fine"

<m​onerobull:matrix.org> do you know how powers of 2 work big dota

<e​ndor00:matrix.org> "With emission, holders pay for the network" - do you mean that their coins lose value due to supply inflation? If so, then technically yes - but if you keep inflation to a very low amount, then the value lost is small (over a person's average lifespan), but the network can stay alive indefinitely. Keep in mind that monero's inflation is *linear* (a fixed amount of new coins per y<clipped message>

<e​ndor00:matrix.org> ear), not *exponential* (supply goes up by X% ever year)

it's hard to estimate how much less security it will be

It is also subjective to an extent. A question of probabilities, and some of the inputs are fuzzy.

<m​onerobull:matrix.org> as bitcoin emissions fall exponentially, fees will have to grow exponentially

<e​ndor00:matrix.org> It's not hard at all - in fact I've done just that (just never got around to publishing the full results)

<r​ucknium:monero.social> gingeropolous: This is what I saw: "According to some data I collected from a few nodes' /get_peer_list responses, about 25 percent of nodes on the network have an RPC endpoint available." monero-project/monero #9334#issuecomment-2307824031

So what you can do is quantify what you can and reduce the size of the problem somewhat, and hope to get something that's more eyeballable.

<m​onerobull:matrix.org> btw, bitcoin becomes a lot closer to a permissioned system when there are no longer any ways to obtain it other than through buying from others or receiving fees from others

<e​ndor00:matrix.org> Like I said, in 20-30 years tx fees will *need* to skyrocket to keep up with current emission. If they stay to the current levels, the network could drop by *80-90%*, possibly even more. Which would basically mean that the bitcoin network is fubar and anyone with a small mining farm today could 51% the network at will in the future

endor00, yes, 0.6 xmr per block spreads between all holders, so it is < 1%/year (currently)

monerobull, WDYM? because of no ASIC resistence?

<r​ucknium:monero.social> gingeropolous: Maybe I am misinterpreting the data, since the 25 percent seems high to me. Let me know your opinion on it once you see the data.

Oh, fuck it. Any system when you buy stuff off others is permissioned. A truly non permissioned system will let you steal from othres without their permission. So no tail emission is better for a permissionless network. Did I get it right ?

moneromoo, IDK what "permissonless netwrok" is

<g​ingeropolous:monero.social> Rucknium: , thanks. I guess I can check out get_peer_list. I wonder if thats with --public-node, or the manual setup

well, to completely derail things, there's this. monero-project/meta #1079

<m​onerobull:matrix.org> if you cant mine it yourself (like ETH), you can only get in if its allowed aka permissioned by other existing users

Means you do not need anyone's permission to participate. m​onerobull's point was that if you can't get currency by mining, you have less opportunity to partipate in the network, ceteris paribus.

(and my trolling sentence was just pushing it to an extreme)

monerobull, I can't mine ETH myself?! (Sorry for stupid quesitons, I am just new to cryptocurrencies)

You're talking about lack of ASIC resistance?

big_dota2_player, naw for eth you need like $15k worth of eth, and its staking

<e​ndor00:matrix.org> ETH cannot be mined anymore. It switched to Proof of Stake

This is a related issue. ASIC resistance means you have an opportunity to mine without having to buy a machine from a (very) small number of parties.

ie, any (powerfull enough) machine will do. Better on the continuum.

so you have to somehow obtain eth from someone, who can just deny your ability to own eth. its entirely permissioned.

<e​ndor00:matrix.org> Which means that in order to "mine" it yourself (i.e. stake coins) you first need to buy coins from someone else (i.e. get their "permission" to join the network)

jinx by me a coke

buy

That said, if we go by capitalist gospel, if you pay enough, you get automatic permission.

And the larger the number of participants in the network, the closer we then asymptotically get to permissionless.

Complicated by having to either go through an intermediary (exchange) or find someone for p2p transfer, which may be a pain in the butt. So another type of participant to give permission

Which does not exist if you mine.

If you mine, your ISP might also become a permission holding gatekeeper.

Or you get an income cut by going through, eg, tor, with its extra latency.

There was this mesh networking thing a few years back. Probably got shit latency though.

Satellite comms have shit latency. Geo is 36k km, and we have no tachyons.

We go back to needing a tree structure, or maybe locally consistent blockchain "shrubs" with later reconciliation onto the main chain, which has to get really complex. And larger reorgs.

<e​ndor00:matrix.org> Starlink is alright, from what I've read

Maybe we'll get that in a couple dozen years.

Maybe not geo ? They have loads, so they cold keep coverage much lower than geo...

endor00, for mining?

wikipedia says ~500 km, so pretty low, yes.

Jesus, approval for 30k sats :D

Would be amusing if they trigger their own kessler cascard right before elon musk shoots off the earth marsbound :D

<e​ndor00:matrix.org> b​ig_dota2_player for low latency internet connectivity (in reference to moo's point about ISPs and satellite alternatives)

Then again, starlink is pretty permissioned. "Free speech for those that share my speech."

<q​uickex:matrix.org> hey guys, 18 uct today we start poker tournament with $XMR prizes, wait for you!

<o​frnxmr:monero.social> Tell you no-coiner friends :D

<d​aybreak:nitro.chat> Yeah deflation is bad because people use your currency as an investment

<d​aybreak:nitro.chat> Look at bitcoin nobody wants to spend it because they want to hodl for number going up

<d​aybreak:nitro.chat> Therefore it's not used as a currency

<d​aybreak:nitro.chat> Meanwhile something like ltc isn't full of people trying to speculate on price appreciating (I.e. they don't expect deflation) which means it's used as a currency more

<d​aybreak:nitro.chat> Technically it's if the average person expects deflation/inflation that matters and not if inflation actually happens

<d​aybreak:nitro.chat> Rucknium probably knows this much better than me xD

Also don't forget LTC having smaller fees.

<r​ucknium:monero.social> One of the reasons I specify that I'm a microeconomist is so I don't have to comment on macroeconomic matters :D

<r​ucknium:monero.social> I don't think people can even agree what the word "inflation" means. 🤷

quickex, isn't online poker especially anonymous flawed?

by anonymous I meant without KYC

<d​aybreak:nitro.chat> Yeah deflation is bad because people use your currency as an investment -> is it bad? if yes, why?

I mean, some people bought dollars or euro to save their savings when inflation camd, lol

<q​uickex:matrix.org> just enjoy the game and have fun mate

<s​trawberry:monero.social> Isn't this also the end state for monero, given that the tail emission is decreasing as a % of the market cap?

<m​onerobull:monero.social> Yeah, in the very long run, the emissions won't be enough

<m​onerobull:monero.social> But it pushes the issue down the road for like 1000 years iirc

<m​onerobull:monero.social> By then monero is either dead or has much larger blocks than today, filled with fee paying transactions

<m​onerobull:monero.social> As a last resort, the community members of that time could also raise the reward and make it a fixed percentage

<m​onerobull:monero.social> It will happen very gradually over a span of multiple decades

<m​onerobull:monero.social> You know, the original design for Bitcoin

quickex, fair

looks like ideally monero emission should increase or be a fixed % of circulation supply

<m​onerobull:matrix.org> looooots of time for that

<m​onerobull:matrix.org> not an issue in our lifetimes

<e​ndor00:matrix.org> No, a fixed % for inflation means exponential inflation of the supply. Even 1% adds up over time - the supply doubles in 70 years

BTW, why empty (without transactions) blocks are allowed, aren't they useless for the network?

<s​trawberry:monero.social> Why are they allowed? Sometimes there just aren't any transactions to include

<s​trawberry:monero.social> Are they useless? If the miner is deliberately ignoring transactions waiting to be included, yes that's pretty annoying, but the new block still adds work to the chain making it harder to reverse old transactions

<n​ononynous:monero.social> tagesschau.de/investigativ/panorama/tor-netzwerk-100.html

<n​ononynous:monero.social> Can someone translate this

<b​asses:matrix.org> not related to Monero but here ndr.de/fernsehen/sendungen/panorama…ne-Tor-anonymisation,toreng100.html

<b​asses:matrix.org> also blog.torproject.org/tor-is-still-safe

<n​ononynous:monero.social> Ok it's an old case with a patched vulnerability, still good to know

<b​asses:matrix.org> but Tor project is not very sure yet

<j​s:nil.im> Nope, it's an issue known since Tor exists, and it's unpatched.

<j​s:nil.im> It's a design problem.

<j​s:nil.im> Tor is designed to be real time and this allows such an attack.

<j​s:nil.im> But probablt #monero-offtopic:monero.social?

<j​s:nil.im> But probably #monero-offtopic:monero.social?

<n​ononynous:monero.social> Well from what I read it is still revelant for monero and maybe pushing I2P is still advised for people who can use it without legal problems

<n​ononynous:monero.social> Well from what I read it is still revelant for monero and maybe pushing I2P is advised for people who can use it without legal problems

<n​ononynous:monero.social> The guard discovery attack is because an evil guard fails circuits to force an user to use a specific circuit

<n​ononynous:monero.social> + knowing other guards the user is connecting to but I don't understand how

<d​aybreak:nitro.chat> Mb chief 🫡

Hi

If only cryptography worked