Pi is a new digital currency being developed by a group of Stanford PhDs. For a limited time, you can join the beta to earn Pi and help grow the network. To join Pi, follow this link minepi.com/tiulu and use my username (tiulu) as your invitation code.

sure…

is mymonero.com not working?

my balance is all kinds of fucked up and i have had my transaction pending for over 6 hours

no clue wtf is going on

asteele i worked on that a little a few mins ago

apparently it's still stuck

seemed a daemon thing

which part is stuck? Something with the mymonero node, or something local on my pc? I tried using their web wallet and the desktop wallet

or something in the monero network endogenic ?

hi all

i'm new to monero, i just try to run a monero node, how can i detect a deposit to an address?

alexbrown, if you're running the wallet it should pop up automatically

jwinterm can you give a doc about it?

well which wallet are you running?

jwinterm sorry for late response you, i'm start wallet by command `monero-wallet-rpc ....`

ok, well if you are running the daemon and it is synced you should see payments come in on the terminal in real time

anyway

but here is a list of rpc commands you can use web.getmonero.org/resources/developer-guides/wallet-rpc.html

if you start the wallet using monero-wallet-cli you can use most/all of the same commands just by typing in the terminal

rather than using curl or something

lol endogenic just ghosted on you asteele

lol

yeah im not sure what to do maybe the wallet is downloading something i dont know

oof so sorry

maybe i need to load my seed into a new wallet but i dont want to download the whole network stuff

asteele: very unlikely to be on your side

daemon on our server possibly stuck

hmm ok

do you have to wait for others to be able to fix that?

it's really not too bad to export seed and load it up in monerujo or whatever

yep cause the apps use our scanning server by default

jwinterm I'm trying to build a wallet service, our api will should be detect deposit. if in `monero-wallet-cli` show real time income payments, is it has start parameters such as notice or call to a webhook on our api?

no you should probably be using rpc wallet

check out the commands in link above

you can see incoming payments before or after confirmation

is there any wallets that use remote nodes like my monero, that i can use?

that is not on mobile

you can use a remote node with the desktop gui or cli wallet

i looked at moneroju but i dont have android

if i changed the remote node in my monero would that fix things?

I don't think you can do that

afaik

it allows me to change the server address in the settings

but im not sure what all that does

I am pretty sure mymonero uses a different kind of server

ok

is it used widely enough that it should be fixed by tomorrow?

hasnt been working for about 7 hours for me

no eyed deer

roger

we're gonna look at it right now. was at dinner table

sorry

it uses an official monero daemon plus a server in front which scans for you and gives a simpler api

it's cause we needed to scale beyond the rpc server

ah ok thanks endogenic that would be awesome, let me know if you see somethin

thanks

appreciate you reaching out

im not an expert with monero, but i do know software stuff - it seems like it was able to receive my incoming deposits into the wallet okay, but when i sent them, they like went into nowhere land, i get a tx id but its not on any block explorers. and my balance is showing up weird because i had some that was incoming to my wallet and marked as pending, but then things broke and so it never showed confirmed in my wallet (Even

though it was confirmed on the chain in block explorers)

so after that i went to send some money, and it made a transaction - but not for the amount i said to send, only the available amount - which then seems to have locked that up in a dead tx somewhere

endogenic ^ if those details help at all

asteele: v helpful. when was the last time you tried btw?

probably 6 hours ago

oh lol

can you try again?

after i realized it was all fucked up i just let it sit and was hoping it would resolve, like slow network or something

my funds are all locked up now

in pending and lcoked

of transactions that dont exist

Hi, can anybody help me find the video referred to in this post? reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/eg3hgv…k_europol_speaking_on_privacy_coins

asteele: so incoming funds are locked

well

?

i have incoming money that is still marked as pending for some reason

and i have outgoing money that is also marked as pending

and has been

for 6 hours

There's a vimeo link but it's dead vimeo.com/379765960/a813511f6a

so i cant really spend anything

the incoming money is confirmed on the chain

the outgoing money doesnt exist anywhere on the chain

so to you confirm you see an existing tx.. probably something you sent

does closing the wallet and reopening it (desktop version) make any difference? i am hoping it like tries to reconnect and resync

nah... seems you may have sent a tx that will get marked as failed

after 24 hrs

at this point endogenic my tx log doesnt match my balance

i'm unsure tho

so its kind of hard to understand what exactly happened

i can show you screenshots and give more details

i would delete the wallet from the app after saving your wallet seed

ok

then log back in

the failed tx will probbaly not be there

does using the web wallet and desktop wallet at same time matter?

nah

with same seed

does the outgoing tx show up if you fresh log in through web wallet?

i just reloaded the wallet on desktop and it shows what web shows

which is one outgoing tx as pending

its not the amount i told it to send

but that i think is related to the wallet limiting it to what it THOUGHT was confirmed

at the time of making that tx

that outgoing tx though, the Date on it updates to every time i re open the window, the txid it shows does not exist on any explorers

it seems like it shows the pending/locked amount correctly though and my balance. so now the main problem is this outgoing tx that is stuck

endogenic so yes it does show the outgoing tx with a fresh load. and now balance/locked amount looks right. so with this stuck transaction - will it go through, or is it kind of stuck for 24 hours?

And am I safe to send other parts of my balance or not yet? I dont want more of it to get stuck

can you send the tx id of the pending tx through to our support line?

we can check

The place I am sending to... regenerates my deposit address on each send so I don't want to send multiple times and cannot get a new send address until I know whats going to happen with the one transaction i sent to it.... if you get me ;)

sure where is the support line

i can dm it to you otherwise

yeah either way

there's livechat on our site

gtg for the moment

mmmm k

thanks for your help

there is some kind of interface that one can use with globee to accept payments ?

is xmrhaelan here via some linker?

damn now all i can think of is linker

relay. there we go

kinghat, your msg in gui reminded me of a great joke i saw on reddit

i aim to please 😁

there was a horse. it was not thinking. therefore, it disappeared.

you see, this is in reference to descartes "i think, therefore I am"

but if I would have said that first, I would have put descarte before the horse

(end of joke)

its so great

perhaps best joke of the decade

oh boy

i know right?

my special boy!

it has it all

there was a horse in a bar*

is that how it starts?

no, the version I read was pretty much just like that. reddit. bringer of truth and mirth.

just pointing out it didnt have everything. a missed opportunity i'd say.

I heard something is happening in here

Is this true, sir?

cc gingeropolous

it happened.

u has no scrollback?

fml

dont worry, its stupid

🤦‍♂️

Notepad

Cool story bro

Anyone familiar with "Lelantus"? It's a privacy method.

No

Jmabsd: The monero research lab has extensively looked into a number of techniques for improving privacy such as RingCT 3.0, Triptych, Omniring and Lelantus.

Inge-: So cool. What did they come up with?

(also apologies disconnect, "Jmabsd: The monero research la..." was the last message i got in the channel)

Inge-: (bump)

Jmabsd: well, all of them are promising, but none are without its challenges. From what I as a layperson can see, Triptych seems like the most promising candidate for XMR currently - but I'd expect at least a year to pass before it might get rolled into Monero - and there are still a lot of questions about having to migrate the outputs to a new output pool in order to do so. On the plus side, maybe it would

support say 500 or 1000 decoys in a transaction.

see also askrypto.com/news/2020/01/moneros-t…-could-vastly-improve-its-anonymity

Inge-: what are your impressions of lelantus?

My impressions don't matter.

Inge-: are you aware if this has been discussed anywhere?

my laptop weirdly died, took a battery inout to work again. now i get: Loading blockchain from folder /home/azy/.bitmonero/lmdb ... Segmentation fault

but other things run fine?

as far as i can tell

try to redownload the software, maby it got corrupted. but it sounds like a hardware issue

good thinking

(bbl)

Hey everyone. If someone needs a 20% off in Ledger wallet shop coupon, dm me

I want 20% more crypto on my ledger.

<xmrhaelan> gingeropolous what’s up?

xmrhaelan, i forget

something to do with lochamesh

oh thats what it was

there's a group in bitcoin thats been working with radio .... is this the same group? or is lochamesh's approach different / better, and how? etc

<xmrhaelan> I’m not sure which bitcoin group you are referring to?

there was a presentation at a recent bitcoin conference

maybe magical crypto conference

Hi, I'm trying to integrate openalias into my clientside webapp but I can't find any examples or libraries (except one npm one that doesn't have source code) for node.js or js. my googling is failing me

I believe the openalias website (I forget the url) has samples.

Or at least one :)

reading stack it might not be possible to do with browser without a server of some kind

you could use a DNS-over-HTTPS provider to do it in the browser

ah that might work, google service. neat thanks

Someone created a service called xmr.id (that's a domain name) that gives users an OA address. Might find examples there.

awesome!

i always wondered why nobody has tried to implement an embedded standard alias logic into bitcoin's OP_RETURN or monero's TX_EXTRA fields that specify rules over who owns what alias. you'd have to scan the blockchain according to some standard but it could decide a lot, be publicly available and verifiable, and could be simplified via api endpoints

or w/e

TXT DNS record is awesomely scalable, but would be nice to have trust minimized version

maybe I'll make one this week, seems incredibly simple

Because you'd get a landgrab and the same kind of assholes that "resell" domain names.

Basically subsidizing a new type of parasites.

(unless you have a solution to that)

yes I agree that's an issue but non-0 sustainment policy could work

let me clarify, requirement to burn or pay to keep name within specific length of time

I don't really mind if i had a name like Cartersg1999 instead of Cartersg1 for example either

Would those txes be on chain ? That could get pretty spammy, and kept forever.

in bitcoin no utxo forms for op_return standard, not sure how to get prunable on monero

so can't get rid of it on chain but can get rid of it in state/utxo

You don't want to prune this if you use it as an authoritative source of who owns what.

you can get information by reading blocks in order

and allow standards rule, not enforced by consensus, decide ownership

could even allow challenges for names if another larger by (lets say) 2x transaction occurs within 24 hours or something

If you don't want consensus to determine who owns what (I think that's what you mean), why on chain ?

data availability and cost of security

Explain "cost of security".

would be very hard to remove it from publicly accessible and syncable blockchain

Yes, that's a *bad* thing.

i think it has value

Why, if you specify the authoritative thing isn't consensus ?

you'll have to pay for use of blockspace like everyone else to get that censorship resistance

you're free to use another interpretation standard

Yes, pushing up the price for everyone else. I don't buy the "we want billions of txes on chain" thing.

me neither, bc that compromises security

Unless you have something like a sidechain.

Or merge mined chain.

but this isn't a frequent transaction

once a year per person wouldn't be that bad

Oh, you also can't repudiate an address if your keys are compromised (unless you pre-register another key, presumably safer).

I guess it might not be too bad, ok.

good idea

i think keys being compromised would screw you up even with regular addresses haha

the only issue is if too many different standards show up, but then i'd just forward people to better one

monero have provably prunable tx of some kind? would hate to add to txo growth

Depends what you mean by provably exactly.

I'd say yes at first approximation.

doesn't participate in "mixing" and nodes do not have to keep it in memory

That's a bit unclear. Transactions don't participate in mixing.

maybe a provable burn address option to use with TX_EXTRA

sorry, not transaction but the newly formed outputs

basically when bitcoin node sees the OP_RETURN transaction standard type, they do not give it a utxo

You can mark some outputs as not to be used when you make your signatures. That's used for old pre-rct outputs which are known spent.

With rct outputs, that's generally not used though.

awesome

But that's local to your wallet.

I also don't see the relevance to that so I might be replying to the wrong question :)

ah, right, was curious about general standards that are also relayed haha

You use the word standard a lot, and with a definition which appears not to be mine. Can you define it ?

pardon me using another prject for example, but counterparty has a embedded standard on how to interpret text included in OP_RETURNs in bitcoin transactions

anyone running the standard client for xcp would reach same conclusions of validity

OK, so standard data format, as in well known format everyone knows how to parse and generate ?

right

OK. That matches my definition. Then "was curious about general standards that are also relayed" makes no sense to me with that definition.

people can make a different data format that would decide some of that or all of that data is invalid and consider other stuff valid

oh oops, I used another thing there

you're right, same word, 2 diff meanings. bitcoin has standard transaction types which are relayed

like p2sh p2wsh op_return so on

based on pubkeyscript

non standard pubkeyscripts are not relayed

could be included in blocks but nodes in many defaults ignore them, miners can include them and they'll be valid

Ah. With monero, extra is unparsed. Anything in there is OK.

Though some people would like to start parsing it and/or remove it.

is it part of the signed message?

Yes.

oh good

(unparsed by the daemon for consensus, the wallet does parse it after it's on the chain)

The intent is to leave it for innovative uses, such as the one you're talking about.

The other side of the coin is potential for privacy degradation and spam.

as long as the signature has to provide some hint of ownership, that's good, but ofc could put signature in it but would use up extra space

Well, it's signed so you know the tx is the original one from the owner of one input in each ring, but you don't kow *who* it's from.

right. I think most projects will rely on fees eventually so as long as everyone has to pay for it it seems fine

one man's spam is another mans life savings :P

I guess owner of the message is not as important as the pubkey included in the publicly readable message. for most fairness i think payments should be burned to avoid "free" aliases by standard's creator paying himself

so I guess provable burn option is most important

I'll try this method: monero.stackexchange.com/questions/…d-provide-a-proof-of-burn-in-monero

FWIW I'll probably NAK a patch for this in monero until it's shown to be not spammy.

Though of course it doesn't mean you can't do it, just that monero-wallet-cli would not use it :)

Hopefully consensus will not go the ohter way :P

A side chain for this would be good. Side chains for all peripheral stuff.

Bitcoin devs used to be worried about spam but with a capped size embeded text users are competing with real transactions for fees which pay for more security of the network. don't see an issue. main issue is ofc the nodes having to store useless extra data that has no coin value hence the op_return standard for which there is no new utxo formed

Well, most of the space in a tx is range proofs. You don't need any if you burn stuff. So this could be fairly small actually.

You'll probably want change though, unfortunately :P

I actually share concerns with shinobi guy on mergemining as it has downsides when it's small of being free for miners to attack and when it's big of requiring miners to follow it to stay competitive hence has similar effect to increasing block size

Which means 2 outputs :/

AFAIK merge mining adds 32 bytes (plus maybe extra scaffolding chaff) per block, that's not super huge. Anyhting else you know about ?

Well, enough bytes to create a link, canonical is a block hash, but it could be small maybe. Security dependent.

smaller*

his argument and I think bluematt's too was that miners would want to collect fees on sidechains if fees are significant so might be required to process unlimited bandwidth of block data (mb/sec) with more or bigger sidechains

Well, you were saying before a similar problem was not a problem, because fees pay for it :)

(pushing all these on monero)

But yes, fair point.

well, on same chain the bandwidth processing doesn't increase due to cap

but yeah, I don't know tbh

Can you expand on "on same chain the bandwidth processing doesn't increase due to cap", I don't understand that point.

monero and bitcoin only allow so much data to be onchain (i know monero blocks increase in size of cap over time and decrease but still there's a cap)

that's out of security concerns

Ah.

Odd point.

spammers can't just add unlimited data, they have to pay for scarce space

that's the issue with stuff like bsv imo

and eos lol

They can squeeze out other people. If our chain ends up being used mostly for spam, it becomes pointless.

Though you can argue if it becomes useless, spammers will stop using it, then it becomes more useful again, but with all the baggage.

it's hard to tell apart what's spam and what's a valuable transaction fo rsomeone

Yes. Otherwise it'd be done. That's unfortunate.

the only way to guage importance is through fees afaik

which works great bc miners pick the biggest bribes

Yes, but this makes the world shittier for everyone else too.

It's like... the real world :/

i think sidechains can provide lower value tx place to transact

or more precisely batching solutions like layer 2 or childchains that rarely have to post on parent chain

I mean, if fees go through the roof due to massive spam, you can consider that a success, but I would not. It'd be a pointless chain.

Yes, side/merged/layer2/whatever is really what we need. And what we don't yet have.

i think blockchains should provide options of various security vs fee tradeoffs

layer 2 like LN is one of them

I think merged mine is nice (like what tari will do) because it adds new block rewards, thereby incentivizing more hash rate on the chain.

yeah def and miners can't really stop it

So ideally it means the extra bandwidth is paid for. And users that don't care about tari don't see the spam.

but there was example of luke jr divering a mining pool to attack (to coin death) a mergemined coin

at no cost to them

I think that's better than fees, where users would see the spam (or what they're not interested in anyway).

namecoin is a successful mergemine that didn't suffer same fate haha

Right, so a merged mined coin would need to be opted into by most of the hash.

And if it's any good, it'll presumably be... Maybe.

right. it has to be valuable enough for them to do that, much like a soft forked block size increase

Anyway, I think a series of merged mined coins with monero will further ensure more revenue to be had securing the chain, so it's something I want to see happen.

And that address alising thing of yours would fit there :)

A lot more work though.

well, i dunno, point is you want to buy the some trust minimized security by using such a thing, using a cheap to attack chain would cost less but also mean less

Can you rephrase that, I do not understand your point.

i could use some super low cash coin (can't think of any at the moment, let's say pizzacoin, no idea if that's still around) to store aliases, but then block reorgs can mess it up for very little money

hash*

Ah. Right. But the merge mining means you can't (assuming not just one or two pools mine it).

right, so in a way # of hash power that does mergemine is similar to hash power mining some altcoin

which is the scale of your security

btw, fun fact namecoin once had more hashpower than bitcoin

Why would that be ?

AFAIK, it's "free" to mine the extra merge mined coin, so pools have an interest in doing it. Very little extra cost, and some extra income.

security is basically cost to do block re-org, so if fees/blockrewards on sidechain aren't worth much and it has little security for pools not to double spend on it

My understanding is that a reorg on the side chain is *hard* since you'll quickly find you have to revert a monero block in the process, no ?

Since many of the side chain blocks will be monero blocks.

if they had to pay extra to mine the sidechain, they would want that money back and be less likely to attack their own means of recovering that cost

right but miners always have option to collude to attack

If they had to pay extra, they would not do it. Unless that chain was expensive. And then they would not want to do it anymore. Hmm. Confusing.

yeah tbh i'm confused too, very complex incentives differences

Yes, but that's about the same difficulty as in monero. They can collude there too.

right, but they don't bc they have to recover costs they put into equipment and electric

And tbh IIRC two pools are enough on monero. It's a shit situation.

I'm not following anymore, but I think we're kinda drifting anyway.

so imo pow is relatively safe via incentives even with 1-2 mining pools :P anyway thanks for chat

In practice, but if the pool or two gets pwned, that security is worth zilch. Same issue as with asics.

btw this is neat - childchains instead of sidechains that simulate pow by burning coins instead of energy bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5212814.0

It's the typical "it works well till it doesn't" situation.

That's whay I don't like about monetary incentive. It works well till it doesn't.

There's no inherent security, just incentives.

I think security through incentives is one of main inventions of satoshi, otherwise you just have blockchains with no reason not to collude to attack

one of perils of being permissionless

Yes, it's great, because it opens new avenues that did not exist before, but it's also shit so hopefully someone clever finds a better way later :)

peter todd vs vitalik arguments usually end up with vitalik assuming most are honest vs todd requiring it to be unforitable to collude

unprofitable*

Thing is, a government can decide to tax their peons and put down the cash needed for a large reorg. "Money not an issue". Or some can just coerce a few pools.

It's *possible*. Not profitable, but if they care enough, that's no obstacle.

totally. but then they'd still have to pay money to do it and be unable to recover it

See above. They jut take the money from their peons, as they do for everyhting else. Like a new war.

so either they run out or hard fork the pow algo that ends with a worthless chain that's attacked and new chain that's not with full consensus over switch

I think many people underestimate what a government can do if it chooses to do so. Much money. Many people with no morals.

totally

Or maybe worse, people with morals that don't align with mine :P

So all this feels a lot a lot like collective delusion.

hell, even oil companies. you know what they do when they find new source of oil? build entire cities around it. they can easily build fabs too. :P

true believers where means justify ends.

but even irrational government actions eventually run out of finite resources - russia overstretched its budget in cold war and basically fell apart. I was there, it was bad.

unforgeable costliness of PoW is one of coolest inventions

So the people they crushed can smile from their grave ? :)

What we need to have is many large govts staring to use, then rely, on monero.

Or Bitcoin, if it decides to grow good privacy at the base someday.

yeah either one i'd be happy with. hopefully people are smarter than to chose something stupid like tron, but i have my doubts

Then it'll start to be plausible (short of continental trouble with power supply).

Nah. Always look at scammy stuff. Once thre's something scammy without a good explanation, stay out. Tron is the one with the plagrialized whitepaper iirc.

it's PoS so it's about as decentralized as a permissioned database

I mean, it might go up, but someone will get scammed again, 99% sure.

scams are profitable, that's why people do them lol

Not the worst though. People are still clinging to obvious scam like bitcoin cash sv and dash so...

I think Bytecoin finally dead though. Maybe.

nah i'd argue tron is far worse. at least cash didn't give themselves control over 100% of supply like tron

I won't argue there, I never looked.

sv infinite block size or dash instamine are also bad, but takes balls to claim trusting 100% of stake in proof of stake to some guy isn't a problem haha

Yeah, my point was more about looking for dishonesty rather than the effect of the dishonest actions. But yes, both are important.

Like, anything craig wright does is 100% stay out, regardless of whether he comes up with something apparently great technically.

Wait till a honest project uses it :)

But yeah, I guess that's not from a pump and dump viewpoint. Then you might want to go in. Shrug. The world sucks.

personally i don't think intent matters as much as if something's good. waitingfortoday wasn't a great guy but monero turned out great :)

Intent does matter. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

Fool me thrice, I must be in cryptocurrency.

:')

< moneromooo> Or Bitcoin, if it decides to grow good privacy at the base someday. <-- I have a bridge to sell. Special prize for you my special friend!

Well, I dunno. At some point the penny will have to drop.

I'm not going for a panopticoin and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

I'm guessing it would be a BTC fork looong before it has any chance of entering the base layer on BTC...

not sure how i'd trade bitcoin atomic swap to xmr and then atomic swap back

(still ok with having some to try and get rich but not use it)

panopticoin is a great sales pitch

trace*

Yeah, apparently someone said a few days it's been used before though.

I said that.

given the amount traded isn't same bc then you can track it lol

Atomic swaps don't exist with monero yet.

but at least it is now theoretically feasible

youtube.com/watch?v=qnBTfG6umEI <- Kristov Atlas Panopticoin - Streamed live on Feb 27, 2014

YouTube Title: Kristov Atlas Panopticoin Views: Length: 58:49 Uploaded: 2014-02-27 User: Bitcoin Philadelphia Likes: 2 Dislikes: 1

I thought maybe we coined panopticoin here a couple of months back, so had to look it up. No such luck.

panopticoin.com is even a registered domain - taken in 2016.

There are building blocks that exist which might get added but it's all yet to be researched afaik.

yeah bit tricky to put locking scripts onto utxo w/o breaking privacy afaik, letting experts tackle that

my understanding is that the missing buildijng block is a zk-proof construct (which might need an out-of-band transfer mechanism), and using standard bitcoin protcol stuff, while the XMR transactions are just like they are today

sorry meant txo*

i.e. Joel Guggers approach youtu.be/pa0RlyH92Ns?t=1811

YouTube Title: 36C3 PART 1: Riccardo Spagni on Tari & Monero and Joel Gugger on Monero Atomic Swaps Views: 620 Length: 45:27 Uploaded: 2020-01-07 User: Monero Talk Likes: 56 Dislikes: 1

just found this github.com/h4sh3d/xmr-btc-atomic-swap/tree/master/whitepaper draft for swaps like that

I think I recognized the name as the one that's missing the zkp construct Inge- mentioned.

if monero switched to proof of bitcoin burn, it could have bitcoin 2-way-pegged pegged tokens directly on its chain

Creative approach that doesn't impinge on XMR privacy as it seems tho

Cartersg1: bringing a whole slew of potential privacy issues to wade through

yeah lol but liquid is doing some CT with multiple currencies, not sure about implementation tbh

and mining tx were always visible on xmr

oh nice post by lobsterman that i'm gonna watch now, very relevant

I know they had issues with deploying unaudited bulletproofs before and used to be closed source lol and have premine, but I was still curious if they are discussed in at least testnet to learn from capacity by monero devs? I don't quite understand how to know state of a smart contract when you don't know which output in ring sig sent coins to it?

been searching their github for explanation with no luck. is it nonsense?

oops forgot to mention i'm talking about dero. oh yeah and they claim dag is 51% attack safe lol, such nonsense.

nah uh. they said it is

so, it is

see?

Dero also copied Monero code without license attribution in the past.

yes, I was just curious about a single aspect of their implementation (which i'm not hopeful on given other issues) - seems real tricky to handle contract state without compromising privacy

I use bitcoin script almost daily though so just on lookout for unique implementations that legit projects can adopt. since they copied monero on most things, if they accidentally stumble upon something nice, no issues copying back :P

51% attack vulnerability is a feature, not a bug.

Any coun "51% proof" has a different weakness

Hopefully it's not "vulnerable to 49%".

vulnerable to 1 org

yeah typically subjectivity which is same as 1 trusted party deciding the "real" chain

Cypherpunk Bitstream podcast - taz0.org/bitstream

0x04 touches on Dropgangs. See: opaque.link/post/dropgang