<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> if you connected manually to a malicious node, thats probably a "you problem"

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> I agree

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> GUI connects to malocious nodes automatically :D

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> @ofrnxmr:xmr.mx: And advertises the feature to noobs

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> select a trusted node manually

didn't monero.fail get flooded with a sea of I2P nodes suddenly one day?

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> Yea

<just_another_day:matrix.org> getmonero also says this in the faq: "All transactions on the network are private by mandate; there is no way to accidentally send a transparent transaction. This feature is exclusive to Monero. " > <DataHoarder> on monero front page since I remember

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> is there a single system that doesn't have a kind of viewkey feature? even tornado has it. maybe some coinjoin impls?

just_another_day: that is true

there is no way to actually send a transparent transaction

but monero doesn't stop you from leaking your view keys or sending rnadom people proof that you sent the TX

s/actually/accidentally/

because that's not accidental

As in, you can't make a transaction open to everyone

Like Z vs T on others

<just_another_day:matrix.org> can't I publish my view key in the open?

How do you do this in the network?

^

You can send it here, or post it on a website

you can only do this off-chain

<just_another_day:matrix.org> it's not a big difference really

i mean, you can shove your keys in tx_extra

It is a big difference

it is

if you wanna publish your keys so badly, monero won't stop you

Specially that even your transactions mask others

<just_another_day:matrix.org> we want transactions hidden from a single adversary primarily

<just_another_day:matrix.org> and this adversary can persistently ask for the keys

They can ask for your spend keys

Or for you to provide interactive proofs

Regardless

<just_another_day:matrix.org> no one is gonna give them spend keys

that sounds like a problem outside the scope of monero

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> why would someone want to make their transactions public anyway? I'm confused.

No one is going to give them view keys

See?

if the adversary has a 5 dollar wrench on the top of your head

then they'll make you give them anything

<just_another_day:matrix.org> because aml demands so

rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp: for example Monero donation wallet operates in the open

<just_another_day:matrix.org> people happilty compromise their privacy doing kyc

<just_another_day:matrix.org> no one wants to lose their coins

It's transactions are still the same class as others, but they have shared their local keys

Remember that for you to decode your keys that sort of key exists

<just_another_day:matrix.org> Cindy: we're going back and forth, but the adversary powers are not unlimited

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> just make a new wallet, send your coins to your new wallet, be careful.

Then the adversary asks you to move to their wallet that reports but you keep your keys

<just_another_day:matrix.org> i just want to maximize the political cost of forcing users to make their wallets transparent

Or asks you to make an interactive proof for every tx ever automatically

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> don't admit to having a wallet maybe lol

And same way, can't tx again with them if you ever withhold proofs

Note you can prove you have not received or having received a transaction without sharing tx keys

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> I wish I had enough money that I actively needed to be creative to not lose it. I play with pennies.

View keys*

This is again using the proof system

if i want to reveal my transactions or not, i should have the option to

<just_another_day:matrix.org> DataHoarder are you on Reddit? Maybe just write an anti-FUD post?

Which is not an addition on top but something solely possible due to cryptography

<just_another_day:matrix.org> explaining all the stuff

I just deleted the spend keys from my wallet

I feel safe now

Well there's the carrot derivation scheme and the PQ pages on MRL issue tracker and turnstile one

But people won't read

And will get stuck in semantics of what is view key or decoding etc

And what exists due to cryptographic reasons or as a side effect

nioc: do you like looking at a number :P

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> are you looking to get your coins out? or you looking to please regulators by saying hey look here's my wallet, hey look here's my transaction history etc?

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> Because you can just use BTC if you want to be out in the open. Most countries have delisted XMR for a reason I think. Your trying to accomplish the opposite of what xmr is supposed to do?

And what is a designed feature

Like here already :P

Now imagine doing this on reddit

<will not type your username>: but what if i want to have transparent fundraisers

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> use btc

<just_another_day:matrix.org> this is a secondary goal to Monero

Atomic swaps btw ^

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> your trying to fish with dynamite. use a fishing rod

It is a primary goal

To be able to be auditable by you or other reporting selectively entirely by you

<just_another_day:matrix.org> pursuing secondary goals is good, but not hurting the primary goal

Cindy: yes, hold only

(This is your own freedom to use the methods provided as you see fit(

<just_another_day:matrix.org> monero's better not be auditable, so that we don't get aml bs

The primary goal is safe cash system , and now that includes quantum forward secrecy

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> I'm so confused why anyone would want this.

Auditable by people you chose

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> i understand the quantum play

my wallet no longer has keys and is now non auditable \o/

You can also audit that blocks are mined with the right rewards

(That is why miner tx outputs are in the clear)

<just_another_day:matrix.org> Real cash is audited by excel spreadsheads. that's why authorities don't like real cash

<just_another_day:matrix.org> I want Monero to be the same

same reason why people like to be transparent sometimes

You also can prove the receiver you sent them funds

Instead of them claiming they received nothing

why the monero CCS does the same thing

even the monero general fund

I use cash but have never used excel, this time imma not joking

you can get the view keys of those wallets if you want, and look at how much they got

Imagine swapping funds in DEX

Without any way to prove the swap lol

This is what auditable is, and gives actual force to the transaction/money

Instead of sharing pictures that are fake

<just_another_day:matrix.org> Cindy: if they already do this, why would we need more powerful view keys?

To make it transferable in a way you can prove doing so (without other person lying about it)

Again

They are not being ADDED

also to make the balance more accurate

They are a side effect of splitting spend and key image for quantum forward secrecy (and being able to migrate in the future)

in case people pull from the wallet

Also it's not even dependent on hardfork

<just_another_day:matrix.org> CARROT is possible with cryptonote?

This is also what people misunderstand

It's not a consensus protocol (unless turnstile becomes relevant in the far future)

Yes

Carrot is two things

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> this is the explanation that makes sense. I get what your saying here. For escrow related issues. > <DataHoarder> To make it transferable in a way you can prove doing so (without other person lying about it)

this all feels like ddos

An output format (this is just a convenience)

And an addressing mode (new)

<just_another_day:matrix.org> i'll let Ghost speak. He's a new voice here

The new addressing mode is not even implemented in wallet and probably won't be ready and doesn't matter

<just_another_day:matrix.org> I'm just repeating myself really

ya think

It can come later, or someone else can add it

The legacy wallets also use the outputs, either old or new

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> im a noob, don't listen to me

noobs welcome

Carrot native wallets could just ... put this onto tx extra today

This is why it's called an addressing mode too, and addressing modes stay entirely on the wallet / client side

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> in theory does Carrot wallet help get xmr relisted on delisted platforms? is that the goal? more onramps to pump price?

it will not get it relisted, it will still work too well

The hardfork carrot output format doesn't add any new wallet format. The output format however allows deriving legacy or new better (unrelated to wallet features) so eligible addressing schemes (new carrot, partially legacy) can also get quantum forward secrecy

No way that helps

If anything it prevents future quantum adversaries from getting your history

More reason to deliat

<johnjenkinss:unredacted.org> @rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org: I don't think that's the goal, but could be an effect of it, but we wouldn't know until it comes

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> I need to learn what your talking about. I'm aware of quantum risk , but not really knowledgeable on how what your talking about helps.

FCMP++ makes tracking via rings or outputs also not possible

So they can't do chain analysis

You will see an effort to increase spy nodes or attempt to remove features that make people safer

<just_another_day:matrix.org> But isn't the PQ plan quite new? I mean, the OVK debate dates back to 2021/22

quantum, here is a link but good luck reading it :) gist.github.com/jeffro256/146bfd5306ea3a8a2a0ea4d660cd2243

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> DataHoarder: how is this achieved. we don't like chain analysis this I do know

<just_another_day:matrix.org> So OVKs predate PQ

the history has already been explained to you

and the decision process

is this some sort of operation to destroy the brain cells of monero developers

and make them dumber?

<just_another_day:matrix.org> DataHoarder says OVKs are a consequence of PQ

it's ok, DataHoarder is an alien, this is ez 4 him

Jamtis is before that

<johnjenkinss:unredacted.org> Not gonna lie Thankful, at this point its looking like you looking to argue, or have some never ending debate, people have explained you a LOT , multiple times

Again NO

It is a side effect

Of splitting spend key into something that you can use to generate key images

his username is accurate

to monero devs, it is just_another_day of arguing

It's not OVK -> bolt it onto quantum for reasons

It's that the scheme to allow quantum forward secrecy and it staying safe on an active environment necessitates the split

And because it exists, you can use it locally (or same as the other keys)

But without ability to SPEND

Cause spend key ended up separate due to the aforementioned reasons

@rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org: There are no decoys anymore

The entire past Monero history is effectively your decoy ser

So you can't do statistical analysis

Even in the face of a cex or tagging attack done by entities

just_another_day you are getting an amazing depth of knowledge provided to you, it certainly worth something

may I suggest that you give DataHoarder a donation

You can't tag outputs and see where decoys might have used them in a ring signature

<just_another_day:matrix.org> sure

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> the more I read the more I realize I don't know. Weren't the decoys a good thing? or your talking about CA sneaking stuff in? leaving breadcrumbs?

Stuff like this p2pool.observer/sweeps

Which I built on p2pool to show the point

decoys are good but have weaknesses, the only weak part of monero

Every mining output there can be tagged to come from a miner, so when multiple outputs are used you can statistically determine how likely it was them or not

Decoys are good

<just_another_day:matrix.org> DataHoarder: where can I donate you for your time spent here?

But when tagged you can be open to stuff like this, or black marble attacks (see research paper(

FCMP++ effectively makes the decoy set be as large as all outputs in Monero

Meaning you can no longer do any statistical analysis at all

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> thank you

It is a chain membership proof that says "yes I exist in Monero"

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> I'm glad I joined this group

The linked p2pool observer page has a donation address at the end

Or blocks.p2pool.observer on the header menu

Under about

On the sweeps page I linked you can click in some

You can see how I previously tagged some known public mining outputs, then when they are spent in a group it is likely it was this miner

I don't decode amounts, or destination

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> your a smart man, this is all above my intelligence level.

But in many cases in sweeps I attribute the transaction to the miner entity

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> I appreciate the help in understanding a lot.

hang out and it slowly sinks in :)

I mark the sweeps as well, sometimes you can see secondary sweep groups

FCMP++: none of this is possible

Even if you know all outputs of someone via other means

Yes and I should be sleeping too

I just looked one last time, my curse

I have reimplemented the new hardfork features to test on stressnet, carrot output format and derivations for legacy, and carrot

I have raised concerns when I couldn't replicate results or when changes were done, I brought these for my own review

I made a list of changes to do to also make life easier for mining (which saw some implemented)

Example git.gammaspectra.live/P2Pool/consen…src/branch/master/docs/STRESSNET.md

I didn't need to but I went and also reimplemented the PQ Turnstile as part of my end to end tests

This is how I learned about all of this

Can even play a game with the donation stuff neat

So someone sent me this just now-ish blocks.p2pool.observer/tx/693687f1c…2697b2513b4f215f08b984b43aca0318bde

However I could claim to have received nothing. The sender can then generate an OutProofV2 (available under advanced -> prove?) or share the tx key. Others can then verify this on the block explorer by entering the details or on their local Monero GUI or CLI

irc.gammaspectra.live/66017aede397c3d9/IMG_8297.jpeg

That section

this is why selective proofs exist

have a good night and thx

I don't know who sent that, or which address came from or where the change went to

Maybe I'll peek around again I was sleepy but not anymore thanks for the excitement

<just_another_day:matrix.org> a single tx proof is great, but allowing users to make their entire wallet transparent indefinitely is dangerous

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> I'm reasearching everything you posted. It is starting to come together a bit more clearly. Have a great night.

<just_another_day:matrix.org> have a good night

All in all the concern is: the new addressing features of Carrot (not the hardfork tx format, but the upcoming wallet addressing) allows an user to disclose a value that allows tracking not just incoming but all spends, without allowing spending. This value is necessary for forward secrecy in the face of a quantum opponent

Options:

No new wallet addressing ever (it's not tied to hardfork) and no quantum secrecy . Someone could still release a wallet that implements it regardless

Make this value (OVK) be within advanced menus with a warning, and tbh, also add a warning to incoming view keys

And spend keys cause some people shared them

c. Make sharing dangerous values an advanced feature only available in CLI for Monero. For example, seed words or spend keys, or full view keys (OVK)

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> The no new wallet thing, can you further explain? Don't people do this quite frequently?

c. Part two: make them available via an alternate launch mode of GUI (but with a command line arg to start it for advanced users); or alternatively a very angry message

I mean no new wallet addressing mode (Carrot)

Not just no new wallets XD

You could make the argument that allowing users to share these is harmful and stupid, however, users ability to be stupid is also part of their freedom

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> DataHoarder: people get joined bank accounts with their wives, people give debit cards to their kids. I have thought of setting my kids up xmr wallets to show them the ropes.

Otherwise you'd be limited and cannot use Monero as a business if your financial auditor requires access to a spend wallet

<just_another_day:matrix.org> realistically, OVKs will be promoted as a tool for charity audits, get added to every wallet and then AML will start abusing it

but why is that not done today

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> @just_another_day:matrix.org: they can't change every wallet, lets be realistic.

<just_another_day:matrix.org> wallet devs will do it themselves

<just_another_day:matrix.org> oh look a new cool feature to imrpove ux

<just_another_day:matrix.org> DataHoarder: Monero is still niche

"fine, i'll do it myself"

And such wallet devs can do it today or later

That is the part I don't get here. It doesn't matter what Monero devs do

<just_another_day:matrix.org> carrot is an infohazard

Someone else can do it ON Monero protocol/transactions

Like we already have non compatible wallets generated

What carrot

<just_another_day:matrix.org> addressing scheme

The transaction output format?

Or addressing scheme

The only part that hard forks is tx format. Which doesn't bring up carrot addressing scheme with it

<just_another_day:matrix.org> but it enables it?

The tx format is shared with Jamtis (for them to be compatible)

Not at all

They could put the same data in tx extra instead

And do it today

But no point was seen on this as the part that brings partial forward secrecy (even for legacy) it's the tx format

<jeffro256> @just_another_day:matrix.org: Don't use the wallet format if you don't like it

<jeffro256> keep your old wallet

<jeffro256> It will still work on FCMP++

Then carrot addressing format extends this and allows self send, change and internal txs to also be fully forward secret, and opens the way fur future full quantum encryption schemes

The hardfork brings FCMP++ and tx output format

You WANT FCMP and the output format

Keep fighting towards the carrot addressing scheme if that is what you want

<just_another_day:matrix.org> @jeffro256: i don't want everyone to require shari OVK as an AML policy

<johnjenkinss:unredacted.org> isn't carrot and info-hazard only if you decide for it to be an info-hazard? > <@just_another_day:matrix.org> carrot is an infohazard

This is why the FUD is everything overreaching and tying everything

<just_another_day:matrix.org> But the issue isn't about the hardfork per se

You have an issue, as I listed above: a future upgrade (in this case not a hardfork) brings a feature you view as bad or challenging. Listed are ways to go with it

But suddenly it's "stop the hardfork"???? All on Reddit cause FUD mixes it all up, and this is only good for detractors or adversaries of Monero

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> it seems the fear here is a misunderstanding, thinking monero is perfect right now, and that change will make it easier to get your wallet doxxed or that all wallets will be required at some point to do this. Even if that may or may not be the case.

I'm certain @jeffro256 would be open for this (carrot addressing scheme, quantum safety and the generate image key) to be brought on an MRL meeting item or somewhat explanation as this seems to be a contention item

It is clear cryptographically why it's needed but this usually doesn't transfer over to general understanding

<just_another_day:matrix.org> DataHoarder: I posted the "Is optional transparency good for Monero?" post, it didn't get that much of attention, but then people started to generate AI slop based on it

So asking for clarifying the need of it: good, but instantly seeing it as an extra bad feature is a bad way to bring the topic up

hasn't monero always been optionally transparent?

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> you've got me convinced, but I'm not an expert

It has nioc

Part of the whitepaper too

<just_another_day:matrix.org> i like the option b or c > <DataHoarder> Make this value (OVK) be within advanced menus with a warning, and tbh, also add a warning to incoming view keys

Yeah just_another_day that is how FUD works. Any organic traction is increased exponentially

You have doubts, you ask, then send people in panic with other people helping along the way and saying different things

Suddenly the only thing the hardfork brings is OVK: but it's not even part of the hardfork! And a weeks before the FUD was about quantum security and how Monero has done nothing. Which we point carrot tx format, carrot addressing scheme, and FCMP++ to combat current BS

It's not even scheduled, it's not even in the code yet

It's in stressnet on a different codebase still having changes, and the part people are talking about isn't even in the code yet or implemented for wallets (and doesn't need to, it's not in a rush as it's not part of the hardfork)

<just_another_day:matrix.org> maybe a stupid question, but would it be possible to implement PQ-secure cryptography before a quantum computer emerges and migrate everyone from legacy addresses to this new scheme without the intermediate CARROT step

That is the desired pathway

However in case it's too sudden the turnstile is there as fallback

And once that's around you can't transact using old systems anymore

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> how long will people have to migrate?

Also, there is a cutover date for such moves too

Afterwards only the turnstile would work

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> ohhh like literal turnstile, one way in, no going back

There is no information around this. That is why the turnstile exists as a fallback

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> so is it like a toll bridge? 1:1 or will people be racing to swtich?

If the opportunity arises they'd definitely like not using this turnstile (it exposes some details to edite it's all verified and cannot be faked even against a quantum adversary)

No race

They go one way

Well not even one way per se, they just use that to move old outputs

A special way to unlock them instead of any new quantum safe scheme

Which by necessity is incompatible (it's not ed25519)

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> what happens to people that don't actively pay attention to what is happening? will they just be at increased risk? or they can migrate later or how does that look for laymen trying to stay secure and up to date?

But questions like these would be something to actually bring up into any future topics in research lounge maybe, but note that is a research focused channel and usually expects at least some form of understanding

The PQ Turnstile would be for those people

At some point, it'd be turned off. You can read on the gist about that

That is not decided not planned. It just lays down the technical means to accomplish a failover migration

> just increased risk

A quantum adversary can fake membership proofs so they can't be allowed to transact

They can also go backwards and break legacy wallets and have their history compromised pre-hardfork, or conditionally after

They also could fake and inflate amounts if allowed to transact normally

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> do you have any predictions when someone might achieve a functional quantum device capable of all these scary things? What is your mental timeline for this happening? years? months?

That is again why the PQ Turnstile has to do things in a special way to ensure a quantum adversary cannot fake the membership, the amounts or double spend

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> I'm thinking 5-10 years, but I guess that is being optimistic, reality moves quickly.

The specific people you are worried about might have some before normies get to know

As always, it's a few years away since 20y ago

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> I think they are close, just too glitchy/buggy to be reliable right now

It is taken seriously, including by the same agencies

The research, implementation, move and standardization has to happen now to be ready for it in 10 years for example

For Monero the scheme also has to be economically/usability viable and not have say, as a random pull, 1 GiB tx sizes

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> @rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org: 30 years

Or require a day to generate or decode a transaction

Such parameters are discussed here monero-project/research-lab #151

Also just realized nioc every time I waste my energy with FUD you also advertise donations lol

Same with Qubic

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> Wait are the viewkey guys the same people saying we should be no block limit

(Also: calling something FUD unless extreme lies is usually about bringing it down to the actual complaint that was made way bigger and wide than necessary due to many factors(

Unrelated random number, but everyone usually participates in these discussions in MRL meetings

You can view via matrix too but there's also a history of meetings on github and also logs on libera.monerologs.net/monero-research-lab/20260126

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> I'm reading the git you sent.

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> I think I would just observe those discussions for now, I wouldn't want to offend anyone by wasting their time sounding uniformed. lol

Feel free to observe

-lounge tends to be a bit more open, but it also assumes some general knowledge .

(As said Zero to Monero 2.0 pdf gives a great annotated overview)

Sleep is finally coming \o

<rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> me too brother

<torir:matrix.org> It's been "only 5 years away" for more than 5 years now. So very hard to predict. > <@rrjo1zj8p7lhtl15lylp:matrix.org> do you have any predictions when someone might achieve a functional quantum device capable of all these scary things? What is your mental timeline for this happening? years? months?

<angled:matrix.angled.rip> getmonero has been broken on furryfox-based browsers since at least 2 days ago

<angled:matrix.angled.rip> mrelay.p2pool.observer/m/matrix.ang…ed.rip/HPXnJtqhthapHbMSMukzJaPw.png (image.png)

<angled:matrix.angled.rip> reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/1ql7ua…hat_i_see_when_i_visit_getmoneroorg

<angled:matrix.angled.rip> also the reddit is actually full of tards

<angled:matrix.angled.rip> why are we defending low effort ai slop posts reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/1qmm9c…of_uquirkyfisherman4611s_post_about

<sbt:nope.chat> @angled:matrix.angled.rip: What was it about?

<sbt:nope.chat> DataHoarder: Is there a more latest version to this? It was published in 202

<sbt:nope.chat> 2020*

@torir:matrix.org: It's interesting because bitcoin was released around the time when moore's law hit and confirmed it's peak. imo we are nowhere near having to worry about Quantum Computers cracking EC cryptography since the applications are very niche at this point.

I think I read that it's a Q-bit issue, far to few Q-bits at present. Not to say that they can't catch up, but it's orders of magnitude off

Most of the Quantum hype was used to secure VC funding

<sbt:nope.chat> redlib.perennialte.ch/r/Monero/comm…izi/this_controversy_is_really_good

<sbt:nope.chat> "Currently when you send Monero to Kraken, it's like cash - no coin history available, so none is needed. After this change they will demand viewable history back to the origin or the coins will be blacklisted. So you are removing fungibility (the MAIN FEATURE of Monero) with this change. And what is gained? An easier way to c [... too long, see mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/x_eknuAKOXBHdHAz ]

<sbt:nope.chat> is this comment true?

<tuw:matrix.org> as someone who got fudded by this the other day

<tuw:matrix.org> 1. they could already demand history if they wanted. if you can provide the entire history by yourself you could already. "back to origin" is clearly impossible

<tuw:matrix.org> 2. just dont use exchanges who act like that

<tuw:matrix.org> 3. does not impact privacy of anyone who does not leak their key[... more lines follow, see mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/jKzFnuAKS04wZUIw ]

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> @tuw:matrix.org: Congrats.

<tuw:matrix.org> ty it also doubles as a heater

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> @tuw:matrix.org: Pool or solo ?

<tuw:matrix.org> p2pool

<tuw:matrix.org> need the frequent dopamine hits

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> Based.

jesus christ

the FUD never ends

<redsh4de:matrix.org> @sbt:nope.chat: No

<redsh4de:matrix.org> Its based on assumptions and speculation about a niche scenario that does not scale due to friction and compute resources

<redsh4de:matrix.org> Furthermore with the viewkeys you are not able to get receivers or senders, so fungibility not impacted, and privacy not impacted for everyone else either

<redsh4de:matrix.org> And if this was mandated it is possible to already do today and always has been

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> I think what's most interesting about the FUD, is how people are proposing scenarios that don't make sense for Monero users to end up in.

<sbt:nope.chat> @pyratevevo:matrix.org: Yeah sorry, I'm out of loop

<redsh4de:matrix.org> @pyratevevo:matrix.org: The FUD assumes that the average Monero user is a knuckle-dragging troglodyte who will paste their view keys and compromise their privacy with no pushback

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> @sbt:nope.chat: That wasn't directed to you, don't worry.

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> @redsh4de:matrix.org: It's like gubbermints and CEXs will start going door to door hunting for viewkeys.

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> Or the monero user willingly providing the keys to said parties for some unknown reason, where one shouldn't come in contact with them in the first place.

<sbt:nope.chat> Even if they do provide, I don't understand the argument of tainted monero

<sbt:nope.chat> That's simply impossible right?

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> @sbt:nope.chat: in their mind, taint = unknown origin

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> For btc etc, taint = known origin

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> @ofrnxmr:xmr.mx: Unknown origin, so all the Monero's in the world ?

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> Yeee

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> Retards

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> Wonder how much of this is a malicious campaign or genuine lack of knowledge.

<monerobull:matrix.org> probably mostly the later

<ity:itycodes.org> Has anyone tried RoboSats ? I'm trying to find some sane way to get any cryptocurrency so I can then exchange it for XMR x3

<monerobull:matrix.org> AHHHHH MY LE HECKING PRIVATE MONERO

<monerobull:matrix.org> THEY WANT TO MAKE IT LE TRANSPARENT

<monerobull:matrix.org> @ity:itycodes.org: or buy it directly: retoswap.com

<sbt:nope.chat> @pyratevevo:matrix.org: Some are even speculating monero has been infiltrated by three letter agencies, on reddit

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> @sbt:nope.chat: This is something that should always be readily examined, but currently, no evidence suggests this is the case.

<ity:itycodes.org> @monerobull:matrix.org: Well, that needs me to have a large amount of Monero already, and can't find anything below a 100€

<monerobull:matrix.org> nope

<ity:itycodes.org> Don't exactly wanna yolo with a 100€

<ity:itycodes.org> Huh

<monerobull:matrix.org> boldsuck.github.io/haveno-reto-docs…deposit#2-taking-a-no-deposit-offer

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> Let's say that an agency does decide to take on Monero, what will be the most likely attack vector they'd choose ? Hashrate takeover ? Cracking the fungibility ?

<monerobull:matrix.org> 51% attack that wipes a month plus of history

<monerobull:matrix.org> cost, 10 million?

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> @ity:itycodes.org: Check XMRBazaar.

<monerobull:matrix.org> this is why im not all in on xmr right now

<monerobull:matrix.org> we need daily checkpoints

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> @monerobull:matrix.org: The cost to pull this off ?

<monerobull:matrix.org> id assume, yes

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> That's a little troubling, yeah.

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> @monerobull:matrix.org: And more p2pool miners.

<monerobull:matrix.org> doesnt matter if net-hash itself is overpowered with one AWS contract

<monerobull:matrix.org> without safeguards, this will eventually happen

<monerobull:matrix.org> imo it's currently moneros fatal vulnerability

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> @monerobull:matrix.org: Make it harder for em to do in the meantime.

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> With more miners.

<monerobull:matrix.org> and why i sold the majority of my coins before the giga pump -.-

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> @monerobull:matrix.org: Not very bullish of you..

<monerobull:matrix.org> personal risk managment

<monerobull:matrix.org> cant fault me for de-risking when new information changes my risk model

the FUD scenario makes no sense

if all monero users were like that, they would be super easy to scam

"YOUR COINS MAY BE FLAGGED. please paste in your seed to validate them"

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> I think this will be a bigger issue in a possible future where monero gets wider adoption. Larger exposure increases the risk for a state actor to do something about it.

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> Because right now it seems like they could do it if they feel like it. Not pocket change but also not that expensive of an operation.

pyratevevo: whoever's benefiting from this are most likely the state actors who are investing in quantum computers

and counting on them to decrypt the past history of monero transactions

recent history

not just past

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> I'm not talking about the FUD.

oh

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> @monerobull:matrix.org: It was just a joke about your username.

<monerobull:matrix.org> i know :P

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> Cindy: We're talking about the risk of Monero going under after a 51% state actor attack.

<monerobull:matrix.org> which wont be possible after the fork > <Cindy> and counting on them to decrypt the past history of monero transactions

monerobull: exactly, which is why they're trying to get people to go against carrot

pyratevevo: why bother with a 51% attack, besides it won't even help in their case (besides destroying monero.... for a little bit)

quantum computers on the other hand will let them decrypt any transaction history and walk back key derivations

<tuw:matrix.org> honestly realising it is just constant FUD is making me so much more bullish. if the powers that be want monero to fail so badly I want it to succeed more

<tuw:matrix.org> tamp from $800 -> $450? BULLISH

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> Cindy: Maybe I'm wrong, but it feels like even a temporary attack could have long lasting consequences.

just look at pubic

they did their reorgs crap months ago.. and people have already forgotten about them

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> Cindy: I actually didn't read about the aftermath of that yet. I was following just when it first started then for the entirety of last August I wasn't following the news for reasons.

their shitcoin has actually been on its all-time low ever since the attack

now for a state actor, i'm sure they'll have much more resources to do an actual 51% attack

better yet if they borrow some computing resources from their supercomputers

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> @tuw:matrix.org: I'm starting to think these Monero exit boating accidents could turn more beneficial than harmful if they keep happening.

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> When it happens next time and the price shoots up again, treat yourself with a couple things profiting off the inflated exchange rate. And when it crashes back down, go back to accumulating more XMR.

<monerobull:matrix.org> a month-deep reorg would destroy trust in monero > <Cindy> they did their reorgs crap months ago.. and people have already forgotten about them

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> Cindy: If I remember correctly, it turned out they were faking hashrate or something ?

<monerobull:matrix.org> nobody could rely on it as a payment network

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> Exactly.

<monerobull:matrix.org> with daily checkpoints at least the damage would be contained to 24 hours

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> Daily checkpoints sounds like a rational idea. What's the developers thoughts on it ?

federal agencies have more than enough computing resources to mine out monero entirely

<monerobull:matrix.org> people screamed about a PoS finality layer

just look at their recent supercomputers

<monerobull:matrix.org> so now they are trying to do it with less reliable methods

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> @monerobull:matrix.org: Such as ?

<monerobull:matrix.org> node-based checkpoints

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> @monerobull:matrix.org: I'm not too knowledgeable about cryptography so this went over my head.

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> Cindy: I assume there's a "but" here.

their latest supercomputer (El Capitan) has 43,808 AMD 4th gen EPYC 24-core CPUs

hosted at the lawrence livermore national laboratory

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> Damn.

if we multiply that to a similar CPU in randomX benchmarks (AMD EPYC 9254 24-Core Processor)

it is about 1.2 GH

<monerobull:matrix.org> the randomx benchmarks are bench-maxxed

<monerobull:matrix.org> in reality you get about half of what that site says

<redsh4de:matrix.org> never understood the freakout about this either > <@monerobull:matrix.org> people screamed about a PoS finality layer

<redsh4de:matrix.org> block production would still be done by proof of work, a finality layer would just decide which block is final to prevent re-orgs as a whole, with collateral being put up so that the finalizers act in a fair manner

<monerobull:matrix.org> some people thought the feds might hold more than 30% of the supply lol

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> My cpu gets what is labeled "average hashrate" on the benchmark website.

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> The "high" value I never reached, probably with over clocking and shit.

<redsh4de:matrix.org> ah so baseless conspiracy theories yet again

<redsh4de:matrix.org> sounds like what is going on here with the view keys lol

<monerobull:matrix.org> and if they would, they could halt finality

<monerobull:matrix.org> and who is going to trust the pow chain when finality is already halted

the point is the feds have plenty of hashrate to use against monero

but i've yet to see them actually do it :P

<monerobull:matrix.org> imo we should just go pure PoS because its the most expensive to attack, PoS/PoW hybrid is just PoS with extra steps anyways

<redsh4de:matrix.org> wouldn't in that case it would just fall back to the existing system? it is cheaper to use CPU power than buy up Monero

monerobull: no

then who will get the tail emissions

you will turn monero into passive income for the rich

<monerobull:matrix.org> PoS stakers?

<monerobull:matrix.org> for running validator nodes?

the stake is proportional to how much they have?

<monerobull:matrix.org> you could even reduce the total emission amount

<monerobull:matrix.org> thats how PoS usually works yeah

<redsh4de:matrix.org> disagree, i still think block production should be done by CPUs to be egalitarian > <@monerobull:matrix.org> imo we should just go pure PoS because its the most expensive to attack, PoS/PoW hybrid is just PoS with extra steps anyways

<monerobull:matrix.org> with pure PoS we could have near-instant finality

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> And they need about a little over 3GH/s to wreck havoc, yes ? > <Cindy> it is about 1.2 GH

pyratevevo: they have a lot of setups around the country than just that :P

especially at the NSA or CIA

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> So they really can just to ahead and do it at any time..

yes

<monerobull:matrix.org> correct

the reason why they haven't is 1) it's a waste of resources to them

<monerobull:matrix.org> real Sword of Damocles type shit

like how would you justify using up millions of dollars in resources from those supercomputers to attack some niche privacy coin

that'll just go up with mitigations in a week or month

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> Cindy: Yeah, thats what I said earlier when I mentioned maybe it'll be more worthwhile in the future where presumably Monero becomes big enough that's it's a problem for them.

<monerobull:matrix.org> bro they kidnapped venezuelas president using brain-emp guns

<monerobull:matrix.org> they can do whatever the fuck they want

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> Moving away from the long term risks, just checked the mining stats and supportxmr is dangerously close too..

I think maduro was a bit higher up on the list than morono

<monerobull:matrix.org> very unlikely that theyll do anything

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> @monerobull:matrix.org: Separate topic, but don't believe just because they snatched one person means theyre unstoppable.

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> Their big and scary delta force failed elsewhere.

Cat remains unconcerned

<monerobull:matrix.org> our puny little bit of hashrate is not stopping them

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> @monerobull:matrix.org: I'm not knowledge about this, but let's say supportxmr admin goes rogue for arguments sake, can they also mess up the network this way ?

<monerobull:matrix.org> of course

<monerobull:matrix.org> but it would be more obvious

or people could stop mining their wen it happens

<monerobull:matrix.org> in my horror scenario the feds would drop a fat reorg on us out of the blue

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> nioc: Would be cool if miners could stop now and distribute the hashrate. Though I don't know if thats tiresome or less profitable for them.

<monerobull:matrix.org> just lazy

<monerobull:matrix.org> with gupax its easier to p2pool mine than config xmrig for a pool

<monerobull:matrix.org> and yet

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> Yeah Gupax is piss easy to set up, I did it myself allegedly.

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> No, they need 6+ > <@pyratevevo:matrix.org> And they need about a little over 3GH/s to wreck havoc, yes ?

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> More like 80% > <@monerobull:matrix.org> in reality you get about half of what that site says

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> @ofrnxmr:xmr.mx: Don't they only need more than half ?

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> asics fix this. pos makes rich get richer, those who don't have enough to stake don't grow as fast as inflation, problematic > <@monerobull:matrix.org> imo we should just go pure PoS because its the most expensive to attack, PoS/PoW hybrid is just PoS with extra steps anyways

Isn't PoS also the easier to take over by the rich people entirely?

<nknc:matrix.org> BlueyHealer: PoS = cantillon effect. bascically new money creation in an economy benefits those closest to the money source first. So I'd agree for sure.

<nknc:matrix.org> PoS centralises the block production rewards, to want for a better phrase.

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> and that's why we need asics

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> @pyratevevo:matrix.org: Yes

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> if you have 10 and add 5, is 5 half? No. Because there are now 15.

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> quick mafs

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> If there is 6gh at current, you have to add 6 to have half of the combined 12

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> asics will be the most obvious, because they will have to confiscate the miners, instead of stealth building a chain with aws + azure > <@monerobull:matrix.org> but it would be more obvious

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> pos is broken because everyone keeps their coins on the exchange, instant control loss

<monerobull:matrix.org> on which exchange do you keep XMR

<pyratevevo:matrix.org> @ofrnxmr:xmr.mx: Mind = blown

it's still current for most of it. will need a revamp for FCMP++ > <@sbt:nope.chat> Is there a more latest version to this? It was published in 202

14:03:23 <br-m> <pyratevevo:matrix.org> Wonder how much of this is a malicious campaign or genuine lack of knowledge.

FUD allows a start of a campaign to become run by people that have good intentions but misunderstood it all

<intr:unredacted.org> @kiersten5821:matrix.org: wouldn't they just need to compel mining farm operators to do their bidding?

<intr:unredacted.org> like how in bitcoin ~50% of the hashrate is owned by 2 mining farms

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> Really like 1 underlying pool

lol, even fluffypony is getting same shit questions and FUD

x.com/fluffypony/status/2015684629479510514 x.com/fluffypony/status/2015474202695131471 x.com/fluffypony/status/2015502230011380096

<intr:unredacted.org> @ofrnxmr:xmr.mx: wdym?

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> Someone did some analysis and a couple btc pools were really the same pool operator iirc

<intr:unredacted.org> no way...

<intr:unredacted.org> well then

<intr:unredacted.org> DataHoarder: of course mr Maverick is going full fud as well

FUD means engagement

does the account have a verified check mark -> they will be paid for engagement

<intr:unredacted.org> also wow, fluffy lost a lot of weight, good on him

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> @ofrnxmr:xmr.mx: i believe it is the same block builder, but separate entities

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> pools are not farms though, each pool may have dozens or hundreds of farms, and it is sure someone would have blown the whistle > <@intr:unredacted.org> like how in bitcoin ~50% of the hashrate is owned by 2 mining farms

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> and it will be obvious from the hashrate drop that they are building a different chain, if they are told to mine in covert

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> because you cannot draw on a reserve of more hashpower than the network has in "hidden" asics, they are all either being used already, or in ewaste

<ofrnxmr> @kiersten5821:matrix.org: The btc hashrate has dropped 50% as a result of government banning mining

<ofrnxmr> cant always assume that 100% of the asics are mining. They obv turn them off when reward doesnt follow consumption

<ofrnxmr> This is POW after all. It costs $ to produce coins

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> @ofrnxmr: they were rapidly moved to the US and restarted though, the ones that get turned off because of reward drop are usually moved, sold or trashed very quickly, there's not like a huge reserve of asics to secretly mine, it would be obvious instantly if bitcoin was holding steady but all of a sudden the hashrate was dropping 20-30-40-50%

many retired asics out there

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> they are either trashed or gathering dust in a bunch of random hobbyists garages, just like what happened to the decade-old gpus when eth mining died

<ofrnxmr> @kiersten5821:matrix.org: No production facility runs at full capacity if demand isnt overwhelming.

<ofrnxmr> I might own 100k asics, but only run 50k of them because value is low and difficulty is high

isnt this the Monero GPU asic friendly coin? miningpoolstats.stream/moneroclassic

<ofrnxmr> ofc it makes sense to sell old stock, but assuming facilities run at 100% is a bit ridiculous unless price shoots up withiut hashrate following

<ofrnxmr> plowsof: I think so

<intr:unredacted.org> they're not as autonomous as you think, and the point still stands. It'd be a few dozen people at most, very easy for a government to mess with > <@kiersten5821:matrix.org> pools are not farms though, each pool may have dozens or hundreds of farms, and it is sure someone would have blown the whistle

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> @ofrnxmr: they are either almost all running or not at all, no one has enough asics to increase the difficulty enough to consider running only part of them. are you saying the difference in profit between the first and the marginal asic is different? i don't know of any electric contracts like that

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> @intr:unredacted.org: what is the better alternative? pos, where you make calls to 3 biggest exchanges who hold coins for users and companies? resistant pow, where all they do is call aws and azure and say we want to rent some machines?

<ofrnxmr> Id sooner believe that every farm runs at 50-70% capacity for maximum profit, than that they all run at 90% and minimize profit

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> you haven't explained why there is any profit difference between the first and marginal asic

<intr:unredacted.org> asic resistant pow is the lesser of evils, imo

<ofrnxmr> Especially when its like 3 kyc'd pools and registered companies controlling the majority

<ofrnxmr> @kiersten5821:matrix.org: You get paid for your % of global hashrate, not total hashrate

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> are you saying like 50 different large miners will be colluding to keep it down?

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> this is impossible exactly what opec and other large cartels have proven impossible

<ofrnxmr> ya

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> yeah thats not possible

<ofrnxmr> how isnt it

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> thecorner.eu/news-the-world/world-e…opec-to-avoid-production-cuts/83310

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> Same reason

<ofrnxmr> they dont even have to proactively collude. Being profit driven would lead to similar outcome

<ofrnxmr> Theres no benefit to maxing out hashrate if profit doesnt follow

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> no, being profit driven would be maxing your own asics, because it has maximum profit

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> because holding 0.2% of the network will not boost the difficulty enough to be unprofitable

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> you are talking like the socialist economists man

<hooftly:matrix.org> power cost cause a plateau

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> all these dozens of different big miners are colluding? it's just not borne out by reality

<hooftly:matrix.org> It is plausible that power cost + difficulty can make running balls out profit minimized

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> haven't seen a power contract with such kind of price increase, typically they negotiate somewhat more power than to run at max, otherwise they just wouldn't buy those asics in the first place

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> at most the local city is using the power during a storm or something and driving price up tremendously temporarily and then they shut off for a few days but usually everyone will try to run all the asics

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> if it really is profitable to leave a huge chunk of your asics almost permanently offline, it would be more profitable to just have never bought them in the first place

<hooftly:matrix.org> i dont mean that I mean there is a possible sweet spot in regards to difficulty and power cost where your additional hashrate does not outpace the added power cost to turn them on

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> again i am saying i have never heard of a power contract where the marginal asic is suddenly much more expensive to run than the first one, do you have any examples of this

<hooftly:matrix.org> Math?

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> and again, no miner with 1% of the hashrate will have enough impact on the difficulty to cause the marginal asic's profit to be significantly less

<hooftly:matrix.org> Like what?

<hooftly:matrix.org> How many watts does it take run a single ASIC?

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> Where are you finding these electric contracts where suddenly it costs much more, they will usually pay for a max power draw

<hooftly:matrix.org> bro power is cost per kwH use more kwH you pay more

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> the cost per kwh is not increasing that much

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> therefore the cost per asic isn't increasing that much

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> do you understand what per asic means?

<hooftly:matrix.org> If it takes 100 W to run an ASIC it costs 100000 W to run 1000.

<hooftly:matrix.org> kwH=1000W used for one hour.

<hooftly:matrix.org> you pay power based on usage per kwH[... more lines follow, see mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/0KeKp-AKZDh0bGst ]

centralized asic production is a weakness

a point of control

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> can you point to an example where the cost of the marginal kwh is much greater than the cost of the first kwh

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> no one negotiates contracts like this

Are ASICs even accessible to an average Joe?

<hooftly:matrix.org> @kiersten5821:matrix.org: No one pays for power based on usage?

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> do you actually not understand what per kwh or per asic means?

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> i am telling you there is no contract where a guy pays 0.05 for the first kwh, but then suddenly after spinning up half his asics, it is now 0.20 per kwh

<hooftly:matrix.org> It doesnt have to it can be satic at 0.05 the fuck?

<hooftly:matrix.org> more kwH = more cost

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> ok, so you don't understand what per asic means, nor what marginal means, no point in discussing further

<intr:unredacted.org> I don't believe hooftly was arguing that the cost per kwh goes up when more power is used

<hooftly:matrix.org> Im not dude is out to lunch

<rucknium> @kiersten5821:matrix.org: I don't know what this debate is about (just popping in), but many electricity providers do increase the marginal rate when you go over an excess use threshold. If you negotiate a special contract, that may be different. Electrical power generation costs will have many different slopes because of diff [... too long, see mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/75ekp-AKbGdxWHVG ]

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> yes, and obviously the difficulty increase won't cut into profit so much if you have 1% of the global hashrate, so obviously, you should run all the asics, if the first one is profitable

<intr:unredacted.org> and the other variable being market rates per coin

<hooftly:matrix.org> How is perp cow?

<intr:unredacted.org> (and difficulty)

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> yes, what i am saying is most miners will negotiate such that their excess use threshold is somewhat above their total asic capacity, otherwise it would be very pointless to leave a large chunk of the asics off. i have not seen an example where it's so much difference that a significant chunk of the asics will be offline most [... too long, see mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/kaSsp-AKS1BtclVq ]

<hooftly:matrix.org> and none of this matters for what I am saying lol

<hooftly:matrix.org> You can have the lowest power rate in the world as long as it is not free there exists a scenario where just paying the extra capacity at the lower rate outpaces the XMR mined in regards to market price swings and difficulty changes. It may make operational sense to operate at lower capaicty

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> my point is, the claim that for some reason a huge chunk of asic power is available "hidden" and not mining, but could overwhelm the network, is not realistic, at most you will have like 10 or 20% of the hashrate sitting and not mining. no one is keeping their state of the art asics offline in a cartel to keep the difficulty l [... too long, see mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/ueS3p-AKMW1JbjFu ]

<hooftly:matrix.org> Ah ok well I was not debating that. your numbers sound logical to me there

<hooftly:matrix.org> But it is entirely possible operations are not a likely are not at 100% capacity

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> @kiersten5821:matrix.org: When i say "could overwhelm"

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> Whether asic or cpu, letting them sit idle and you are no longer state of the art, yet monero obviously has many GH of hashrate idle at all times

<ofrnxmr:xmr.mx> Why? Simply to maximize profit. It makes zero sense to maintain 6gh if the price of monero dropped to $200

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> @ofrnxmr:xmr.mx: the non-sota asics that sit idle are sold off to random hobbyists man, have you seen the bitaxe? to maximize profit you sell them, no point in letting them sit idle and praying that bitcoin does a 10x and the difficulty can't catch up fast enough, it just wont happen. after the eth merge, there were so man [... too long, see mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/9PXBqOAKT3BNYXdz ]

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> monero is different obviously because there are other useful things that the cpus can do, not just mining. and of course the chunk of cpu power not mining monero is gigantic

<kiersten5821:matrix.org> it is like the gold thing. "gold is better money than bitcoin because it has other real-world uses!" but this is not a good thing. same with asics and cpus