hi, this is an excerpt from ZtM2 regarding the dynamic block size, penalty, and fee structure. ArticMine, and/or anyone else who has insight into this topic, would you mind verifying the information is correct? I have some skepticism about how fees are designed, maybe it's my misinterpretation of the code.

<f003brv> Hi, I am a research fellow and I was told to join this channel by a Monero contributor (SH).

hi

<f003brv> Hey, what are you working on?

Can you be more specific?

the future!

Recently put out a preprint for a ring signature construction: eprint.iacr.org/2020/018

Finalizing a security model update for this preprint: eprint.iacr.org/2019/654

Updating security model for this preprint: eprint.iacr.org/2019/595

<f003brv> Nice, sorry for not being so specific. I originally asked SH about the open source HW wallet project Kastelo, as I thought I could contribute to that.

Looking into hidden lock time commitments, Omniring, SHA-2 circuits for atomic swaps, other general proving systems, graph-theoretic models for signatures, etc.

Lotsa stuff

SH?

<f003brv> SerHack on Reddit

ah ok

<f003brv> Yeah so I am not familiar with what the research team does.

This channel doesn't have much talk about hardware stuff

<f003brv> but thanks for the links, I will check it out.

Anyone is free to contribute to research

it's not a formal group

<f003brv> no worries, I can contribute to research but like I said I need to wrap my head around it first.

what kind of research are you interested in?

You want to find msvb (IIRC, might be a similar nick) about the kastelo hw.

This channel tends to discuss the math and cryptography and protocol side of things often

There are folks in #noncesense-research-lab who enjoy data science and similar analysis

But I can't speak to the hardware side of things personally

<f003brv> Well I do Computer Science research, not pure math like some others here. I feel like I can contribute to Blockchain research.

<f003brv> like new algorithms for example

here is git repo for kastelo github.com/monero-project/kastelo

new algorithms?

<f003brv> Did RandomX come out of Monero-Research-Lab/

<f003brv> but along the lines of RandomX if there are new algorithms of that sort to work on.

yes and no. most discussion now happens in #monero-pow

RandomX was designed primarily by tevador and hyc, who sometimes hang out here

It came from tevador, who wasn't a monero contributor previously AFAIK.

"by Monero Research Lab" is not really a formal thing

This is a workgroup of people interested in research

for example, I research how monero actually works :')

<f003brv> Ah I see, thanks for the links. I will check those out.

Contributors here have been working on some constructions like CLSAG and DLSAG and Triptych and others, not sure if that's the type of thing that interests you

<f003brv> What protocols do you discuss sarang?

(it's more on the cryptography side, FWIW)

There is also the rmxwallet.io hardware wallet which I think is also open source and focuses on Monero.

I am mainly interested in cryptographic constructions and protocols

like the ones I mentioned above

<f003brv> yes I see. hmm okay, thanks. I will read through this stuff and see where I am suited best.

There are informal research meetings each Wednesday (see topic) where people are free to discuss things they are working on or otherwise interested in

Meeting logs are in GitHub issue comments, if this interests you

If you want to learn more about the Monero protocol and how it all fits together, Zero to Monero (which koe writes) is a great technical resource

The protocol has changed a lot, and it can be tough to follow all the changes

<f003brv> Okay cool, what time?

Wednesdays at 18:00 UTC

The channel topic always lists the meeting information

<f003brv> cool, how can I join in?

It's this channel

just show up

yes ZtM is about 1.5 years out of data, updating it currently

<f003brv> oh okay not a g hangout

no

<f003brv> cool cool and sarang I wiil read Zero to Monero

it's a great resource

<f003brv> I read a high level book on Monero called Mastering Monero, while it has some details, it mostly discusses high level stuff.

Yeah, Zero to Monero goes into the math

I can give you a draft of the second edition, which is mostly put together excluding bulletproofs

koe: I had some basic information on bulletproofs in my fork

<f003brv> that would be very nice koe

not sure if that was at the level you were looking for

Ill take a look

I'll make sure I actually pushed that branch

it was a while ago

I try to avoid a deep discussion of them, since that would just be rehashing the original paper, which does a fantastic job

<f003brv> btw this probably a question for the future. What is the best way to get funded for working on Monero through the CCS? Are you guys funded?

I request funding to do full-time cryptographic work

as does suraeNoether

What type of work do you wish to do?

<f003brv> i'll have to get back to you on that after reading through the links.

Do you currently do CS research professionally?

<f003brv> my initial intuition will be some kind of development as that is low hanging fruit for me. I can contribute well do the website app or hardware wallet

<f003brv> Yes

Neat; university-type research?

What area of CS?

<f003brv> Yes at Dartmouth College

I recommend talking to msvb about the hardware side of things; he's far more of an expert

He has a few different nicks that begin with msvb- (often in monero-dev or monero-community)

<f003brv> so my research is AI algorithms that are inspired by Neuroscience

cool

<f003brv> this is why I mention the algorithm contribution. that would be a good area for me

<f003brv> I don't delve into cryptography really. I am excited to learn, but I would not expect to be funded for that work

You may find #noncesense-research-lab interesting too, since there's a lot of discussion about data analysis there, particularly relating to transaction distinguishability

Not so much the cryptography side, but the data science part of things

suraeNoether is also spearheading work (in this channel) on graph theory models of chain analysis

not sure if that's of interest to you

<f003brv> oh graph theory would be good. the type of research I do is most on combinatorics

<f003brv> than it is on data analysis

Ah, then you might want to chat with suraeNoether about his graph matching project

That project looks at transaction graphs using bipartite graph matching, and builds statistical models relating to analysis and user behavior

<f003brv> very good, i will do that. and like i said probably a question for the future but can we get funded for contributing to any of these projects through the CCS

<f003brv> very interesting sarang, this could suit me well

Anyone is free to post a CCS; it's up to individual folks in the community to decide if they think it's a good value

<f003brv> what part of Monero will this be applied to Blockchain?

<f003brv> makes sense

"this" = the graph project?

<f003brv> yes sorry will the graph project be applied to Blockchain?

<f003brv> the Monero Blockchain

Yes, but it can be applied elsewhere

You could model different default wallet behavior and see what the effects are on chain analysis, for example

<f003brv> where else? i am curious

Oh, I mean to other projects

It's not specific to the Monero chain

<f003brv> oh yes sorry seeing the second message now

<f003brv> could apply well to a dex too

Let me look up the repo where suraeNoether works on it

<f003brv> thanks, i would appreciate that very much.

I think this is the current branch: github.com/b-g-goodell/mrl-skunkworks/tree/matching-buttercup

<f003brv> cool, i will look through this.

ok here is current draft, please take with a grain of salt since it's just a draft. In particular, the range proofs are bulletproofs now (not a critical flaw since they are basically a black box to any sane person).

<f003brv> koe, don't worry i look at research paper drafts all the time

<f003brv> I appreciate you sharing

sure thing, feel free to email me with comments or questions

<f003brv> indeed i will. where can i reach you

<f003brv> nvm don't answer. found it in the paper

koe: any thoughts on the bulletproofs stuff?

Hopefully it's useful to you

ah not sure yet, will have to put it in my 'workflow' for when I try to grasp the bulletproofs story; I'm committed to one thing at a time!

Any other parts of ZtM for which you'd like assistance?

related to the cryptography

always happy for reviews :) , not much else changed since first edition cryptography-wise. Commitment changes are section 5.3 in this draft

Any particular sections/chapters for review?

5.3 for commitments, as you say

Others?

I reworked chapter 5, and now it is chapters 4 through 6, so would be nice to know the rework works

Sure, glad to review

Using that PDF link, I suppose?

that's the transaction protocol, yeah or I can email if you dont trust pdf archive, those bastards

Is it from an Overleaf version? I have read access to that

I think I shared it with you a while back actually

same one

yep

ok cool

this is great koe.

koe: the PoW p54, "with the name now Cryptonight

V2 [10], and Cryptonight-R was the third tweak implemented in March, 2019 (v10) [11]. A new

proof of work called RandomX"

That is a little misleading in so far as the CryptoNight changes went from variant 0 to 5 until 6, which became RandomX.

CN/R was variants 4&5.

ah I had a hard time finding clear documents on the progression

it basically went: CN, twek, tweak, CN/R, RX

the monero/README says 'cryptonight variant 1 (v7), 'cryptonight variant 2 (v8), 'cryptonight-R (v10)', and 'randomx (v12)

are you saying CN/R was radically different and doesn't count as a tweak?

right, but your vX is not the PoW version.

and no CN/R is not a tweak.

vX is the protocol version

It's a CN base, and adds a set of random intructions inside.

RandomX is a differnet algorithm, has no CN base.

CN/R is a lot more than a tweak is all I'm saying. It's signficantly different to what came before.

You might also want to make it clear v9 uses variant 2, etc.

Since some people started calling variants by their fork version, which makes things confusing.

^ tell me about it!

Throughout the document I imply that (vX) is the protocol version where something was implemented, and that it sticks around unless replaced

right but moos point is right "You might also want to make it clear v9 uses variant 2, etc."

anyone authoring mning code needs this detail.

(i.e. precisely what algo and when)

I could say (v8-v9)

the point is that the "tweaks" are variants of CN released at vX protocol.

it probably is better suited to a table

thanks for the feedback guys ^.^

If only we had come up with a badass naming scheme...

our current pow name is literally random!

We should have called it CryptoWight

... wight --> wraith for those not up on their spooky folkore

folklore

And RandomHex.

ASICSlayer

ASIC Ghoster ;)

It's (randomx) name doesn't matter for me if it works.

Indeed. Which is why, now that it works, we can waste some time joking about new names