<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> (like using an onion, which prevents even your isp from knowing the destination)

<elongated:matrix.org> @ofrnxmr:xmr.mx: Limited key will allow x number of wallet creation

<elongated:matrix.org> Server address can be shared with someone, if it’s leaked and you need to change address, everyone using that lws will need to change it manually in their wallets

<zombie:catgirl.cloud> How’s Monero doing? ❤️

<lawstar:matrix.org> Willing to buy monero for 20% above market price in bulk. Anyone selling their monero?

<ufo808:matrix.org> monrrreo mrr :3

<ufo808:matrix.org> about this question: binarybaron: are fees going to go up significantly with fcmp?

<ufo808:matrix.org> I wonder too, if it will grow proportionally with tx size? can someone remind what will be post-fcmp tx size in comparison to current average size?

<ofrnxmr> @ufo808:matrix.org: About 4x (6kb) for a 1in/2out tx

<ofrnxmr> I think base fees are supposed to 2x so about 0.00006 for a 1in2out (dont quote me though)

<ufo808:matrix.org> Not bad, let’s go p2p digital cash 🚀

<elongated:matrix.org> @ufo808:matrix.org: Should go up as it consumes more storage space for nodes

<lza_menace> in the wallet rpc for get_transfer_by_txid does the unlock_time value decrement after each new block is mined? or do you compare the unlocktime vs the height the tx was mined to determine if the unlocktime is reached?

<lza_menace> > Number of blocks until transfer is safely spendable

Unock_time is a static number - interpreted differently depending on how large it is

<lza_menace> i'm just going to use locked attribute, i'm assuming that's a simpler way to deal with that

Locked is confs less than 10

Not the same

<lza_menace> damn

<lza_menace> trying to avoid the whole "sending txes with huge unlock_time" prank

<lza_menace> that's silly that locked could be false but the tx is still locked by unlocked_time

Sorry wait, a locked tx via unlock_time.should also be locked

But you want to see pool txs ?

<lza_menace> okay, good, i would hope so

<lza_menace> only for display, but not as settled confirmation

<lza_menace> want to give the user an indication that it's received in short order

<lza_menace> but not proceed until unlocked fully

If unlock_time > 0 ignore it tldr these are a none relay offence but can be mined by a malicious actor themselves.

lza_menace

<lza_menace> fair enough, that's easy as well

<lza_menace> thanks

Confirmations value is bot set for txs in pool from the get_transfers call

Not*

<lza_menace> so your average/default node isn't going to include a unlock_time > 0 tx, but a modified/malicious one will. safe to assume that >0 == bad

<lza_menace> and ignore

Yes

<lza_menace> ez

Why cant i link to the line -_- but its how ive done it, if unlock_time ignore

Pool txs nit having a confirmations key tripped me up so thats everything i can give to help sir

<lza_menace> tyvm

<marioob:matrix.org> Hi ppl. SupportXMR mining pool now has 48% hash share. (as reported here: miningpoolstats.stream/monero)

16:23:21 <DataHoarder> SupportXMR at 52% instant hashrate irc.gammaspectra.live/24b35bcb48144ce3/image.png

16:23:21 <DataHoarder> 46% long term blocks.p2pool.observer/pools

they are at 44% long term hashrate now

when qubic is not mining they have more % ofc

qubic comes in/out every ~35m or so

25*

miningpoolstats looks at instant hashrate, I look at long-term hashrate from blocks actually found (from Monero data)

<angled:matrix.angled.rip> why can't people collectively agree to rotate pools this time?

because nobody is holding a gun to their heads

<angled:matrix.angled.rip> idk that's literally what could happen

<angled:matrix.angled.rip> just offer supportxmr a couple mil to sell out the network

<angled:matrix.angled.rip> I realize the operators are trusted but monero is meant to be trustless

<shitpost:monero.coffee> @angled:matrix.angled.rip: pool operators should not be trusted by default even if they have a history, this is not how it should be addressed in a trustless network

<datahoarder> @angled:matrix.angled.rip: use p2pool then :)

<datahoarder> many new people join -> they go straight to top pool

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> @angled:matrix.angled.rip: Getting rid of minexmr didnt fix anything

<angled:matrix.angled.rip> @datahoarder: m.bitmain.com/product/detail?pid=00020251226185131923DUjfvPIO06BC

<angled:matrix.angled.rip> or the new "people" joining the pool are actually just a bitmain mining cluster

not nonce wise

oh no, i'm scared of a.....

RISC-V cluster

oooh so scary

these probably were with us for years

and are just now getting ready to sell them

if it was an actual ASIC, you'd see them solomining

and take up like 95% of the networ

network*

not mining on an existing pool

and taking up.. nothing

Cindy: afaik previous one were on pools too

DataHoarder: you mean like cryptonight?

I mean X5

no i mean when monero used cryptonight

<shitpost:monero.coffee> is X5 that old?

I don't know then

no

i remember bitmain taking over the network back then

were they solomining or pool mining?

<elongated:matrix.org> Cindy: Never took over , they were mining to pools

i see

even when they managed to make a cryptonight ASIC?

<marioob:matrix.org> @datahoarder: Yes because on every pool comparison website they order it by hashrate share. OFC people click on the first one. Especially looking at that percentage possibly thinking they will do the most money there.

<marioob:matrix.org> I think an efficient sollution would be to change the default sorting mode and give top places to pools with lower fees or longer history...etc. P2Pool should always occupy the first place.

<marioob:matrix.org> a 51% attack I guess/hope would not be possible in a instant hashrate share increase. > <DataHoarder> miningpoolstats looks at instant hashrate, I look at long-term hashrate from blocks actually found (from Monero data)

P2Pool has zero fees

you think this might attract people

<marioob:matrix.org> Will surely do!

Not only has it zero fees, it also has xmrvsbeast's raffle for some extra bonus

<elongated:matrix.org> Can botnets mine to p2pool ?

they can setup their own p2pool somewhere

even via tor

elongated: yes

<shitpost:monero.coffee> an intelligent enough toaster can mine in p2pool

<marioob:matrix.org> @marioob:matrix.org: also still provide a sorting mode by hashrate share but just not make it as default.

<marioob:matrix.org> blocks.p2pool.observer/pools

<marioob:matrix.org> here the high share pool has a warning color (yellow) and the low share pools have the valid color (green) this is a good method to highlight smaller pools.

:)

glad you like it

DataHoarder: what if p2pool had a high share?

I'd split them per pools

but then I would have to look at per-miner distribution

it's still distributed

as each miner controls their own tx targets

but single miner having then 51% of monero

<marioob:matrix.org> I would go further to assign colors as follows: > <DataHoarder> glad you like it

<marioob:matrix.org> > danger (red) 4 pools over 40%

<marioob:matrix.org> > warning (yellow) 4 pools 30-40%

<marioob:matrix.org> > valid (green) 4 pools 0-30%

it is like this git.gammaspectra.live/P2Pool/blocks…h/master/templates/pools.gohtml#L88

50, 33, 5

<marioob:matrix.org> 40% I still find it dangerous

<marioob:matrix.org> page doesn't support sorting. I suspect you want to stay off of javascript?

correct

it's also cached

and generated in the background v

<hopeful26:unredacted.org> Monero have the equivalent to Bitcoin Map?

wtf is bitcoin map

<hopeful26:unredacted.org> Cindy: f-droid.org/packages/org.btcmap

no

i don't think someone made an openstreetmap overlay for that

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> @hopeful26:unredacted.org: xmrbazaar.com

<hopeful26:unredacted.org> @ofrnxmr:xmr.mx: thanks

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> And this xmrmap.org/map