00:16:00 OVK, "something" View Keys? 00:16:00 If so yes, so much fud about that 00:17:26 yes 00:17:40 everyone's going crazy over OVK 00:27:30 @ravfx:xmr.mx: Yup 00:28:34 It's crazy how a couple FUD posts spread so fast compared to months of steady educational information 00:31:58 years 00:32:00 Jamtis also had the same 00:33:16 Even long time moneroers on my rooms went all on on that fud 00:33:35 It propagate so easily lol 00:34:00 I assume some ztrasher trying to bring monero lower because it hold ~previous ath 00:34:10 they can TODAY force the issue of such an addressing scheme btw 00:34:27 I don't even mean rings 00:34:38 but they can ask to use compliant wallets that implement that, if they so much wanted it 00:35:15 "We should not make it easy for them" cool then let's have OVK be something that you can only get via the cli wallet :P 00:35:40 then goalposts shift 00:36:02 you saw it yesterday, now it's "yeah we shouldn't have any viewkey" 00:36:10 so ... that forces you to move to no subaddresses 00:36:32 or wallets that get lost if you don't backup every move 00:37:06 You all are assuming it's a fud and not a real concern for some reason 00:37:32 the concern is around regulators forcing it on people, and these don't care how it gets done 00:37:47 "that is your problem buddy now move to this wallet that implemented it regardless" 00:38:59 the "view" key allows decoding and decrypting an output details, then mapping it to a subaddress; the spend key allows generating key images and signing with these 00:39:31 So the view key are required for subaddress operation? 00:39:32 the split is now made in that generate -> sign specifically to address computation of your spend key via quantum-capable opponents 00:39:35 yes 00:39:40 that is exactly how it works 00:39:51 So it must stay there lol, just dont paste it on reddit 00:40:03 and why creating a million subaddresses doesn't slow down sync 00:40:14 01:39:32 the split is now made in that generate -> sign specifically to address computation of your spend key via quantum-capable opponents 00:40:14 ^ and such the generate image key is made 00:40:29 @sgp_:monero.social i was testing skylight and it doesn't seem like it can connect to an onion address - it will connect to clearnet over tor but not onion direct. can you confirm if this is correct or user error? 00:40:40 i had an onion address entered and the wallet would not accept it 00:40:47 now even if an actor can attack that, they can't go backwards to your spend key that are unrelated to that 00:41:49 it is also just that sharing your view incoming key + generate image key allows for finding if outputs have been spent, but that's it 00:42:35 01:37:06 You all are assuming it's a fud and not a real concern for some reason 00:43:05 a couple of weeks ago it was spammers talking about quantum security and how monero had not done anything about it and wasn't planning to 00:43:35 Carrot with the partial hardening, plus addressing method to allow relatively seamless migration: exists 00:43:37 🕵️ 00:44:07 specific feature that makes it work: yeah remove that (and now the quantum people are not talking) 00:44:42 the fud can be joined by others with well intentions and amplified, specially where this is not an "extra" feature bolted onto 00:45:53 I see. I didn't even know about the quantum fud 00:46:06 I haven't yet looked into the quantum migration plan 00:46:08 the concern is valid but it's specifically being blown out of proportions by first misunderstanding how it works or what it does, and second assumption that regulators will stop there 00:47:01 and also: that it not being implemented by X doesn't mean Y implements it (or a different scheme, like a wallet that auto-submits the proofs) and demands compliance 00:47:07 specially when all people talk is about "CEX and Merchants" 00:48:01 these could run their own custom stack, wallets, addressing schemes, or anything in between and you'd not even notice and doesn't need to be in monero-core 00:51:16 also Jamtis/Quantum addressing scheme https://github.com/monero-project/research-lab/issues/151 00:51:41 Carrot (with descriptions for carrot-native and legacy) https://github.com/jeffro256/carrot/blob/master/carrot.md 00:52:00 current Post-Quantum Turnstile design for Carrot https://gist.github.com/jeffro256/146bfd5306ea3a8a2a0ea4d660cd2243 00:57:54 > and also: that it not being implemented by X doesn't mean Y implements it (or a different scheme, like a wallet that auto-submits the proofs) and demands compliance 00:57:54 It's a valid point. Still, I believe the "political cost" of moving users to a complaint wallet is higher than requiring a single key that almost every wallet provides, only once per address. I'm glad that we at least have common ground in actually understanding what this FUD/concern is about 00:58:29 If it's about making it easier, make it a cli-only feature :') 00:59:00 or like for hw wallets, like you need to edit the source code to printf it out to console (or I had to) as the GUI displays all zero's as the view key even while it has it in memory 00:59:11 (and compile monero) 01:00:51 Yeah, I think it's a good middle ground 01:01:19 in life ux is everything 🚬 01:07:29 You could actually still have subaddresses. It's just that scanning for received coins would necessitate loading the private spend key, which would make HWs / cold wallets / multisig wallets effectively useless. It would also be super insecure for software wallets. > so ... that forces you to move to no subaddresses 01:08:34 I'm not assuming it is FUD, I know that it is FUD based on cryptographic reality, and not baseless speculation about niche scenarios > <@just_another_day:matrix.org> You all are assuming it's a fud and not a real concern for some reason 01:09:01 yeah, that was brought up earlier, you'd also have to generate the wallet in a specific way 01:11:30 (off current topic) every time I see the quote reply on the irc bridge it makes me happy, it usually brings up the perfect amount of context on replies 01:11:41 @just_another_day:matrix.org: Legacy wallets will not and cannot have OVKs in the sense that you are thinking of 01:12:22 OVKs will solve the issue with view-only wallets having inflated balances 01:12:30 without having to constantly export key images 01:12:45 If you do nothing besides update your Monero software, you will not have scary OVKs forced upon you 01:13:32 ^ and use monero software, not third party wallets or those "all in one" programs. who knows what they end up with even if they are good today 01:14:30 also jeffro256: you won't be able to use a PQ Turnstile in case it ever needs to be used, and you don't move beforehand to Jamtis or a system that can migrate 01:15:49 (plus, you also have your previous historical txs, made visible by quantum opponents, instead of Carrot which explicitly does further to combat this, specially if you are sweeping to yourself!) 01:15:52 Cindy: so this will make the airgap sign process easier right? 01:16:03 for legacy it's 2.1.1 conditional 01:16:05 yes 01:16:14 in the past it required like 3 back and forths or something it was terrible 01:16:32 @jeffro256: Legacy wallets are called legacy for a reason. I believe Monero popularity will grow significantly in the following years. New users will obviously get carrot addresses. Then the legacy wallet owners risk to become the non-compliant marginalized minority, similar to Bitcoin mixer users 01:17:02 also FCMP++ changes this @kiersten5821:matrix.org as members can sign but the chain proof and other things can be built later 01:17:36 it eases this specially in offline conditions 01:17:55 @just_another_day:matrix.org: This is already possible without OVKs. Its just a matter of amount of data sent and number of rounds of communication required. 01:17:55 hey guys. How can I get some stagenet monero? 01:18:10 Then the legacy wallet owners risk to become the non-quantum-safe marginalized minority > Then the legacy wallet owners risk to become the non-compliant marginalized minority 01:18:16 Solution: don't be a surveillance cuck and give all your info 01:18:32 vamos881: https://cypherfaucet.com/xmr-stagenet 01:18:45 @kiersten5821:matrix.org: Yep. You will only have to consult the cold device when you want to send XMR 01:18:49 or ask Cindy for some 01:18:57 > <@jeffro256> I'm not assuming it is FUD, I know that it is FUD based on cryptographic reality, and not baseless speculation about niche scenarios 01:18:57 This is not about cryptography at all. And I wouldn't dismiss regulatory pressure as a niche scenario. You might love the cryptography in Monero, and that's a good thing, but Monero really is a liberation tool that uses cryptography as an instrument. We shouldn't forget about the goal of the project 01:19:15 vamos881: https://stagenet-faucet.xmr-tw.org/ 01:19:18 but the generate image kei is there due to cryptography 01:19:29 oh looks like they put english translation now 01:19:35 so it IS about cryptography 01:19:36 i remember it being entirely chinese 01:19:48 but yeah, put your address there, click send, it'll give you 1 XMR 01:21:03 vamos881: if you are developing, it is easier to run a purely local chain, then you can send yourself infinite coins 01:22:23 you could just mine on stagenet 01:22:31 it is pretty doable to solomine 01:22:44 because it doesn't have that much global hashrate 01:22:59 A few years ago I ran my 3950x for like an hours and got so many coins 01:23:35 Can give then back eventually, just have to restore old seed 01:23:42 on stagenet? 01:24:00 DataHoarder, Cindy: thank you man 01:24:03 Yes. 01:24:08 @yokoama:matrix.org: Which is stupid considering how traceable many MWEB transactions are. https://www.mwebexplorer.com/ will tell you want block an MWEB output was created in, and the volume is low enough that sometimes both peg-in and peg-out are the only MWEB transactions in a block and you can perfectly deanonymize it. 01:24:30 br-m: I'm not developing yet. Is what you're describing similar to bitcoin's regtest? 01:24:49 vamos881: it's hosting a private blockchain 01:25:04 ok, then it's the same apparently 01:25:05 basically one you create yourself, so you can mess around with it 01:25:34 ./monerod --regtest --offline --fixed-difficulty 1 01:25:35 use that 01:25:39 and rpc generateblocks command 01:25:52 @just_another_day:matrix.org: It is about cryptography because people don't understand that this is already possible. They hear the new "outgoing view key" term and assume that this enables a novel form of tracing. It doesn't. 01:26:40 is there a good reference to learn how monero actually works? I have read Mastering Monero, it's very superficial (mastering bitcoin goes a lot deeper, for example). I know there's Zero to monero, but that's very specific to the cryptography 01:26:51 I'm not dismissing the concern itself, but it has bad presumptions built into it. 01:27:40 Zero to Monero is excellent. Cryptography is a lot of how Monero works, what else are you looking for specifically? 01:28:25 People think exchanges will just ask everyone viewkeys or something and that will lower other privacy (it wont, even if people where dumb enough to all comply) 01:29:08 br-m: transaction structure, for example. What goes in a transaction? I know there isn't a script language, for instance. Blocks too 01:29:14 Zero to Monero btw (will need an update after FCMP++/Carrot) https://www.getmonero.org/library/Zero-to-Monero-2-0-0.pdf 01:29:48 vamos881: Are you opposed to reading code? 01:30:43 vamos881: The Cuprate Monero book is a great resource for specific implementation details: https://monero-book.cuprate.org/ 01:30:45 vamos881: monero-oxide / Cuprate in Rust reimplemented decoding transactions, I also did so in my own go code 01:30:46 br-m: to learn how things work? Yea 01:31:48 thanks, this looks like a good one :) 01:32:02 https://github.com/monero-oxide/monero-oxide/blob/main/monero-oxide/src/transaction.rs / https://git.gammaspectra.live/P2Pool/consensus/src/branch/master/monero/transaction 01:45:36 > <@jeffro256> It is about cryptography because people don't understand that this is already possible. They hear the new "outgoing view key" term and assume that this enables a novel form of tracing. It doesn't. 01:45:36 We don't currently have keys that allow tracking both incoming and outgoing transactions indefinitely. If you're referring to statistical heuristics that allow to leak more info than intended, given an incoming view key - then it's obviously a vulnerability that should be patched (and the new upgrade indeed patches it). A vulnerability can't justify making its impact a feature. 01:45:36 And a big part of this discussion is about not the technical possibility of disclosing your existing history, but availability of such an instrument to most of users. Cryptography doesn't make this distinction, but the distinction matters for real world consequences 01:48:42 excuse the n00b question: what is jeffro256? 01:48:52 or alternatively: you stay on an addressing scheme that can be backwards dug through via quantum computers 01:49:04 vamos881: br-m is a bridge, jeffro256 is on Matrix 01:49:19 oh ok, I thought br-m was the person. Duh! 01:49:34 you see it prefixes the user on matrix 01:49:47 vamos881: Oh my gosh what am I 01:50:07 yes, I thought br-m was talking to jeffro256, but then I saw it was meant to me lol. Sorry jeffro256 01:51:25 https://mrelay.p2pool.observer/m/monero.social/tlimTmkdsBmZhGbPpcQSALeg.png (image.png) 01:51:31 That how it looks on the other side 01:51:35 DataHoarder: what is your go code? Go is easier than rust for me 01:51:42 I sent it as well 01:52:04 it's what I use for go-p2pool, p2pool.observer and my block explorer on https://blocks.p2pool.observer/ 01:52:39 the git.gammaspectra is giving me http 403 for some reason. 01:52:41 nice, will check 01:53:21 @just_another_day:matrix.org: Right now your tx history is extremely available if I assume that you're going to give it to me willingly. I can even write you a nice, neat wallet software which sends it to me automatically, cryptographically verifiable, and 0 user friction is required. I could even have it send me spend key [... too long, see https://mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/jrrp4t8KZzZ2bEtv ] 01:53:35 403? might be blocked due to coming from a range abused by AI scrapers 01:53:49 you can just $ git clone https://git.gammaspectra.live/P2Pool/consensus.git 01:53:52 lol no worries > yes, I thought br-m was talking to jeffro256, but then I saw it was meant to me lol. Sorry jeffro256 01:53:54 and that will work 01:54:30 not really, it's the same host. I'll try vpn later 01:55:06 "fatal: unable to access 'https://git.gammaspectra.live/P2Pool/consensus.git/': The requested URL returned error: 403" 01:56:45 If we assume that the evil tyrannical government is all powerful, then Monero is pointless. To get the best decentralization+privacy results, we have to make some real-word assumptions like "we can't maintain privacy with cryptography if the user chooses to leak every single detail to someone they're trying to keep the informa [... too long, see https://mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/v_T14t8KQmNRLXhR ] 02:07:47 yeah vamos881 it is Zenlayer 02:08:23 that's where I get a couple TiB of abuse so that was explicitly dropped 02:23:59 @jeffro256: I'm not the one assuming an all powerful government. Quite the opposite, I know that direct government oppression scales poorly, and governments heavily rely on people willingly comply with their demands. For example, many people choose to do KYC on centralized exchanges for the solely reason of convenience of [... too long, see https://mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/t8TZ498KZ01uSVQ3 ] 02:23:59 As for Monero, there is a very plausible scenario when you have to leak your OVK to get access to most merchants, because otherwise the merchants would have to deal with annoying agencies forcing AML policies on them. If we assume most casual users would leak it, then merchants have little incentive not to comply with the AML [... too long, see https://mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/t8TZ498KZ01uSVQ3 ] 02:24:05 @just_another_day:matrix.org: By "niche scenario" I wasn't referring to increased regulatory pressure and/or increased KYC requirements; I understand that this is the current norm. I was referring to the niche scenario where governments / financial institutions require you prove XMR transaction history for KYC but only a [... too long, see https://mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/4oTa498KbXQ5Q0x1 ] 02:29:51 @just_another_day:matrix.org: I agree about making DEXs easier, which is one reason why I like OVKs: they make multisig UX way way better. I can, and will, blame users who willingly provide tracing information, and then complain about the consequences of their actions. 02:29:51 > As for Monero, there is a very plausible scenario when you have to leak your OVK to get access to most merchants, because otherwise the merchants would have to deal with annoying agencies forcing AML policies on them. 02:29:51 I don't think it's getting through that THIS IS CURRENTLY POSSIBLE WITHOUT OVKs. YOU CAN DO THIS WITHOUT OVKs. YOU CAN LEAK YOUR TRANSACTION HISTORY AT YOUR OWN DISCRETION. THIS CAN BE AUTOMATED. THIS CAN BE CRYPTOGRAPHICALLY VERIFIABLE. MERCHANTS COULD REQUIRE IT TODAY. YOUR PRIVACY IS OPTIONAL. FULL STOP. 02:30:25 There is no such tool in most wallets 02:30:32 What's stopping this from happening ? A) no one has coded it yet, B) people choose not to do silly things 02:30:44 @just_another_day:matrix.org: There is in the CLI and GUI wallet 02:31:01 Yes, but I didn't find it in Cake 02:31:04 how big is the stagenet blockchain? I already had a pruned mainnet node, started syncing stagenet: Synced 254841/2041748 (12%, 1786907 left, 6% of total synced, estimated 11.7 hours left)]] 02:31:32 Okay I'm big bag government: I say that you can't use Cake b/c no tx proofs. You roll over and comply. That's it 02:31:50 Wrap it up, the permisionless blockchain is dead 02:32:50 "Mandatory privacy" doesn't exist, it never has, and cannot exist while humans still retain free will. 02:32:55 > <@just_another_day:matrix.org> It's a valid point. Still, I believe the "political cost" of moving users to a complaint wallet is higher than requiring a single key that almost every wallet provides, only once per address. I'm glad that we at least have common ground in actually understanding what this FUD/concern is about 02:32:55 > Still, I believe the "political cost" of moving users to a complaint wallet is higher than requiring a single key that almost every wallet provides, only once per address 02:34:12 Also, consider the scenario when only 10% of merchants require OVK vs 10% of merchants require key images 02:34:35 vamos881: use the command i told you earlier and it will not need to sync 02:34:38 it will start from block 0 02:34:39 and be entirely local 02:35:24 It's sufficient for surveillance that user provides OVK only once, while they need a continuous stream of key images 02:37:17 When a user needs to install another wallet to get access to a merchant from that 10%, he/she will just choose another merchant. So the 10% of merchants quickly loose all of their clients. As a consequence, this thing doesn't get normalized 02:37:29 Sorry for constantly getting FUDed.. if the scenario described by thankful (whereby merchants mostly require OVK) comes to pass, and say 50% of moneros OVKs are exposed, could that potentially compromise the privacy of the non exposed wallets? The worry is just that this will be used as a potential attack vector in the future. 02:37:35 @just_another_day:matrix.org: What is the practical difference if you are someone who complies with such requests? If you have a change of heart, it is visible to the key holder that you stopped complying 02:38:07 So you will still be on the hook for providing that information 02:38:37 @just_another_day:matrix.org: When every wallet has this option, then the complying 10% lose much less users because of that. So their portion will grow 02:39:40 @tuw:matrix.org: If you don't comply, then your transactions are just as private as if the Monero usage was restricted to that 50% of people that didn't comply. With FCMP++, this still means perfect spend privacy within that 50% pool 02:40:08 ^ and even further if you self-send in carrot, even against quantum opponents 02:40:24 understood thanks. 02:40:53 @jeffro256: The merchants are on hook because there are less of them than users. Users don't face consequences in my scenario, they just choose merchants and comply/not comply with their AML policy 02:48:24 kiersten5821:matrix.org: but that is regtest. I want to send coins from monero-wallet-gui to cake etc 02:48:51 exactly just_another_day:matrix.org so it's super easy to have merchants comply using a custom solution as jeffro256 also says 02:49:21 I missed your early message too, I was still confused about br-m being a person 02:50:40 DataHoarder: maybe... but we're considering clients leaking their OVK in this scenario. A merchant can't get a client to leak OVK by a special custom solution 02:55:21 > <@jeffro256> By "niche scenario" I wasn't referring to increased regulatory pressure and/or increased KYC requirements; I understand that this is the current norm. I was referring to the niche scenario where governments / financial institutions require you prove XMR transaction history for KYC but only after we implement OVKs, and they magically don't care about it before that point. 02:55:21 Maybe they will require it even without OVKs. The pressure is yet to come. My point was that we shouldn't accommodate them by implementing the exact thing they would ideally want. 02:56:59 is it what they ideally want? are you sure that it isn't something else? 02:58:39 like ... destroying the ability to properly hide this on the face of a quantum opponent, or any migration whatsoever 02:58:53 (besides the usability a generate image key brings for safe usage of monero) 03:00:40 and FYI jeffro256 is who is driving Carrot specification and implementation (to put context to these words > I'm not assuming it is FUD, I know that it is FUD based on cryptographic reality, and not baseless speculation about niche scenarios ) 03:00:50 I think we should get rid of not just OVKs, yet IVKs and even spend keys. 03:00:54 No one should be able to see how much you have: not even you. 03:01:09 spending is harmful too 03:01:59 All currency exchange should occur solely offline, with no ability for any computer to view any records. 03:02:04 /s if it wasn't obvious 03:02:58 We have OVKs today though. They're just interactive via disclosing key images or the private spend key. 03:03:27 this was brought up already yep, but, goal shifting to -> that is harder than doing one off 03:03:52 it doesn't matter what you do in the view of regulators they will go as far as they need to obtain X 03:04:18 even spend keys 03:04:41 then goal shifting to -> what if I claim wallet was lost so can't do that 03:04:55 then again, regulators will assume you are non-complying 03:04:57 In order to interact with me, I require your OVK. I promise to you that even though it also allows spending your coins, I will treat it securely with military-grade security. 03:04:57 Please send it in a DM with your name, address, social security number, government ID, and also mail in $10,000 and the deeds to any property you own. 03:04:57 Thank you. 03:05:21 Mhm 03:05:29 a note kayabanerve these will probably be used by the impostor ^ to copy paste elsewhere 03:05:37 If you have the ability to choose not to interact, and you don't want to interact, don't. It's that simple. 03:05:44 and context is lost 03:05:46 they did that during the qubic ordeal 03:05:56 off topic update: Cat is currently laying across 2 mining rigs 03:05:56 and tell people to "search for the message" so they see you posted it, without the /s context 03:06:29 If you don't want to hand your private spend key, don't. If you don't want to hand over your outgoing view key, don't. 03:07:01 Yes, I tried to make them each obviously absurd but I understand anyone can misrepresent me online, including by faking messages outright. 03:08:16 The issue currently is people do want to disclose their outgoing view key to select parties but cannot without making the private spend key hot. 03:08:16 Not that they can't disclose their outgoing view key at all. 03:12:36 @kayabanerve:matrix.org: This logic can be applied to optional privacy chains. Don't want your ETH be traced? Use Tornado Cash! 03:12:36 In real world, you can use Tornado Cash, but it'll quickly make your ETH unspendable at legitimate places 03:13:47 remember a single self-spend using new carrot wallet breaks this link 03:14:22 (under FCMP++) 03:14:29 And creating a new wallet is literally optional privacy 03:14:52 you have extended this too further, I think 03:16:45 I mean, under widespread OVK sharing, wallets will be split into transparent and non-transparent. The latter will essentially form a big "shielded pool". Moving coins into a shielded pool, unfortunately, doesn't help with AML 03:17:42 Of course, widespread OVK sharing is not guaranteed, but I believe there is a high risk of it happening 03:26:00 Just don't share the keys 03:26:00 mkay? 03:26:55 you already share full credit card details when shopping :) so spend keys it is 03:28:25 @ravfx:xmr.mx: I responded to this idea just a few messages above 03:30:34 I'm just explaining the concern btw; a solution is the next step 03:31:02 @just_another_day:matrix.org: Services don't have to accept Ether from sanctioned services and don't have to accept Monero. Monero was already delisted from Binance. That's more a fact of life than anything relevant to this discussion IMO. 03:31:10 I like this as a middle ground > If it's about making it easier, make it a cli-only feature :') 03:31:47 what solution? sending monero back to quantum unsafe/non migration protocol? 03:32:09 Keeping OVKs as a cli-only feature for power users 03:34:37 @kayabanerve:matrix.org: In fact, I'd better have Monero still delisted from Binance. I just don't want merchants who'll start accept Monero to implement AML policies. They should either ignore Monero and lose all the Monero clients or get the clients but pay the price of not implementing AML 03:38:31 I personally believe that the best solution is to add in the default wallet (and strongly enforce other implementations to do so) a very easy way to create and manage "intermediary" wallets, and that whenever a user attempts to access the view key of their main wallet, it should give a rather poignant warning that the main wa [... too long, see https://mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/vc3q5d8KUjZRcXQ4 ] 03:38:31 I believe that the mere ability for users to easily do this should discourage widespread view key requirements, and in the case that it does become commonplace, the amount of information leaked can be plausibly minimized. 03:38:46 (Sry for the delay on writing that; my internet currently sucks lol) 03:39:19 The fud is really because people don't want optional transparency in Monero. The fact they some of them didn't realize we already have some optional transparency is just a sign that it better be kept hidden if we can't get rid of it completely. Cash doesn't have view keys :) 03:40:56 But I believe many realize it; there are good comments under the posts that express similar ideas to mine 03:41:05 @just_another_day:matrix.org: My belief is that transparency should be granular and minimized to the exact information desired to be given. If a CEX just wants to determine your wallet’s behavior during the past, that shouldn’t require you to leak your behavior et infinitum. 03:43:47 I think that the era when Monero had better functioning view keys was also from a time when many things were still in flux with the currency. As with other appeals to history, I will never agree with anyone that says that view keys must be added back just because it was previously done. 03:43:47 If you have other arguments, present those. Monero’s entire development history has been correcting errors made previously, and we shouldn’t start “Satoshi-ing” the past now. 03:43:51 I see no issue with view keys. If an oppressive government is your threat model, internet access might be cut off entirely (as seen in Iran), or they could simply block Monero nodes and Tor. Because infrastructure is almost always state-controlled, decentralization has inherent limits 03:45:22 @continuechoose:matrix.org: > because infrastructure is almost always state-controlled 03:45:22 I believe that in the next 50 years, save there be some sort of black swan event that results in widespread authoritarianism, internet infrastructure and access will be significantly less centralized than it is currently. 03:46:09 I may not personally agree with removing view keys outright, but I can definitely see the rational issues with them. 03:46:35 Apologies, but that is not feasible. It is impossible to decentralize the submarine cables that connect countries 03:49:07 vamos881: just connect them all to your daemon 03:49:08 it will work 03:49:19 connect cake to your offline daemon 03:57:51 Forced hodl > spending is harmful too 03:59:06 @lza_menace: I'm personally connected to my onion LWS directly. Can you please join #skylight-wallet:monero.social so we can diagnose the issue? 04:09:55 "remove view keys to increase privacy" only makes sense if you think about it for one second but don't think any harder. A third party can't conjure your view key from thin air without your consent. You can use additional wallets. They could ask for your spend key (or your SSN, photo ID, blood sample, whatever). The downsides [... too long, see https://mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/s8jd5t8KNTVubDJK ] 04:11:14 If you're envisioning a world where no one can use Monero without handing over a view key (and somehow that's actually enforc d with every potential counterparty refusing to transact with you), it's essentially the same assumption as all Monero activity being banned to strong effect. In that case, Monero already "lost" 04:16:08 Conversely, the downsides to removing view keys are severe and immediately obvious. MAGIC Grants uses BTC Pay Server to accept Monero donations and give donation receipts. That uses a view only key right now. Would you rather tell companies they need to put a private spend key on the server just to check incoming transactions, and increase the risk of funds being stolen? Terrible idea 04:17:25 has anyone managed to crack one of those bitmain miners to get it to run linux instead of just mining 04:18:35 i want a risc v computer with a gazillion threads 04:24:41 <321bob321> For Minecraft ? 04:26:35 @sgp_:monero.social: You're only being asked for a blood sample? Who's your provider, I have to switch 04:30:39 Sorry for being blunt, but the idea of removing view keys for "safety" is just..... ugh 04:31:55