01:22:44 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 https://minepi.com/tiulu and use my username (tiulu) as your invitation code. 01:51:23 sure… 03:10:59 is mymonero.com not working? 03:11:15 my balance is all kinds of fucked up and i have had my transaction pending for over 6 hours 03:11:18 no clue wtf is going on 03:15:11 asteele i worked on that a little a few mins ago 03:15:17 apparently it's still stuck 03:15:22 seemed a daemon thing 03:15:44 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 03:17:08 or something in the monero network endogenic ? 03:19:58 hi all 03:21:24 i'm new to monero, i just try to run a monero node, how can i detect a deposit to an address? 03:24:11 alexbrown, if you're running the wallet it should pop up automatically 03:25:16 jwinterm can you give a doc about it? 03:25:30 well which wallet are you running? 03:31:11 jwinterm sorry for late response you, i'm start wallet by command `monero-wallet-rpc ....` 03:31:42 ok, well if you are running the daemon and it is synced you should see payments come in on the terminal in real time 03:31:44 anyway 03:32:08 but here is a list of rpc commands you can use https://web.getmonero.org/resources/developer-guides/wallet-rpc.html 03:32:37 if you start the wallet using monero-wallet-cli you can use most/all of the same commands just by typing in the terminal 03:32:42 rather than using curl or something 03:33:16 lol endogenic just ghosted on you asteele 03:33:25 lol 03:33:42 yeah im not sure what to do maybe the wallet is downloading something i dont know 03:33:46 oof so sorry 03:33:58 maybe i need to load my seed into a new wallet but i dont want to download the whole network stuff 03:34:35 asteele: very unlikely to be on your side 03:34:44 daemon on our server possibly stuck 03:35:41 hmm ok 03:36:10 do you have to wait for others to be able to fix that? 03:36:48 it's really not too bad to export seed and load it up in monerujo or whatever 03:36:50 yep cause the apps use our scanning server by default 03:37:01 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? 03:38:05 no you should probably be using rpc wallet 03:38:15 check out the commands in link above 03:38:25 you can see incoming payments before or after confirmation 03:39:19 is there any wallets that use remote nodes like my monero, that i can use? 03:39:33 that is not on mobile 03:39:44 you can use a remote node with the desktop gui or cli wallet 03:39:47 i looked at moneroju but i dont have android 03:40:42 if i changed the remote node in my monero would that fix things? 03:41:08 I don't think you can do that 03:41:09 afaik 03:41:19 it allows me to change the server address in the settings 03:41:25 but im not sure what all that does 03:41:58 I am pretty sure mymonero uses a different kind of server 03:42:06 ok 03:42:39 is it used widely enough that it should be fixed by tomorrow? 03:42:50 hasnt been working for about 7 hours for me 03:43:07 no eyed deer 03:43:11 roger 03:43:11 we're gonna look at it right now. was at dinner table 03:43:18 sorry 03:43:43 it uses an official monero daemon plus a server in front which scans for you and gives a simpler api 03:43:50 it's cause we needed to scale beyond the rpc server 03:43:52 ah ok thanks endogenic that would be awesome, let me know if you see somethin 03:43:58 thanks 03:44:04 appreciate you reaching out 03:45:38 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 03:45:38 though it was confirmed on the chain in block explorers) 03:46:05 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 03:46:16 endogenic ^ if those details help at all 03:48:09 asteele: v helpful. when was the last time you tried btw? 03:48:16 probably 6 hours ago 03:48:25 oh lol 03:48:29 can you try again? 03:48:32 after i realized it was all fucked up i just let it sit and was hoping it would resolve, like slow network or something 03:48:38 my funds are all locked up now 03:48:43 in pending and lcoked 03:48:47 of transactions that dont exist 03:49:13 Hi, can anybody help me find the video referred to in this post? https://www.reddit.com/r/Monero/comments/eg3hgv/jerek_jakubcek_europol_speaking_on_privacy_coins/ 03:49:47 asteele: so incoming funds are locked 03:49:52 well 03:50:02 ? 03:50:08 i have incoming money that is still marked as pending for some reason 03:50:18 and i have outgoing money that is also marked as pending 03:50:23 and has been 03:50:24 for 6 hours 03:50:30 There's a vimeo link but it's dead https://vimeo.com/379765960/a813511f6a 03:50:31 so i cant really spend anything 03:50:39 the incoming money is confirmed on the chain 03:50:46 the outgoing money doesnt exist anywhere on the chain 03:51:26 so to you confirm you see an existing tx.. probably something you sent 03:51:32 does closing the wallet and reopening it (desktop version) make any difference? i am hoping it like tries to reconnect and resync 03:51:49 nah... seems you may have sent a tx that will get marked as failed 03:51:59 after 24 hrs 03:52:00 at this point endogenic my tx log doesnt match my balance 03:52:03 i'm unsure tho 03:52:09 so its kind of hard to understand what exactly happened 03:52:20 i can show you screenshots and give more details 03:52:25 i would delete the wallet from the app after saving your wallet seed 03:52:30 ok 03:52:32 then log back in 03:52:43 the failed tx will probbaly not be there 03:52:45 does using the web wallet and desktop wallet at same time matter? 03:52:57 nah 03:52:58 with same seed 03:53:17 does the outgoing tx show up if you fresh log in through web wallet? 03:54:08 i just reloaded the wallet on desktop and it shows what web shows 03:54:14 which is one outgoing tx as pending 03:54:24 its not the amount i told it to send 03:54:37 but that i think is related to the wallet limiting it to what it THOUGHT was confirmed 03:54:41 at the time of making that tx 03:55:44 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 03:58:04 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 03:59:29 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? 03:59:57 And am I safe to send other parts of my balance or not yet? I dont want more of it to get stuck 04:00:59 can you send the tx id of the pending tx through to our support line? 04:01:07 we can check 04:01:07 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 ;) 04:01:17 sure where is the support line 04:01:22 i can dm it to you otherwise 04:01:44 yeah either way 04:01:49 there's livechat on our site 04:01:56 gtg for the moment 04:02:48 mmmm k 04:02:53 thanks for your help 04:36:00 there is some kind of interface that one can use with globee to accept payments ? 04:44:43 is xmrhaelan here via some linker? 04:44:50 damn now all i can think of is linker 04:44:53 relay. there we go 04:45:28 kinghat, your msg in gui reminded me of a great joke i saw on reddit 04:45:57 i aim to please 😁 04:46:11 there was a horse. it was not thinking. therefore, it disappeared. 04:46:26 you see, this is in reference to descartes "i think, therefore I am" 04:46:55 but if I would have said that first, I would have put descarte before the horse 04:47:21 (end of joke) 04:47:22 its so great 04:47:27 perhaps best joke of the decade 04:47:30 oh boy 04:47:46 i know right? 04:47:51 my special boy! 04:47:52 it has it all 04:48:52 there was a horse in a bar* 04:49:16 is that how it starts? 04:49:47 no, the version I read was pretty much just like that. reddit. bringer of truth and mirth. 04:49:59 just pointing out it didnt have everything. a missed opportunity i'd say. 04:52:12 https://pics.me.me/ive-been-through-the-desert-on-a-horse-with-no-64205476.png 04:53:48 I heard something is happening in here 04:53:57 Is this true, sir? 04:54:04 cc gingeropolous 04:54:06 it happened. 04:54:15 u has no scrollback? 04:54:22 fml 04:54:58 dont worry, its stupid 04:55:09 🤦‍♂️ 06:49:23 Notepad 06:50:15 Cool story bro 06:59:14 Anyone familiar with "Lelantus"? It's a privacy method. 07:03:11 No 07:23:17 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. 07:44:55 Inge-: So cool. What did they come up with? 07:45:14 (also apologies disconnect, "Jmabsd: The monero research la..." was the last message i got in the channel) 08:03:18 Inge-: (bump) 08:33:50 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 08:33:56 support say 500 or 1000 decoys in a transaction. 08:33:59 see also https://askrypto.com/news/2020/01/moneros-triptych-research-could-vastly-improve-its-anonymity/ 08:34:38 Inge-: what are your impressions of lelantus? 08:43:37 My impressions don't matter. 08:49:26 Inge-: are you aware if this has been discussed anywhere? 09:10:31 my laptop weirdly died, took a battery inout to work again. now i get: Loading blockchain from folder /home/azy/.bitmonero/lmdb ... Segmentation fault 09:11:15 but other things run fine? 09:11:42 as far as i can tell 09:16:46 try to redownload the software, maby it got corrupted. but it sounds like a hardware issue 09:19:33 good thinking 09:20:36 (bbl) 13:38:30 Hey everyone. If someone needs a 20% off in Ledger wallet shop coupon, dm me 13:48:29 I want 20% more crypto on my ledger. 13:51:58 gingeropolous what’s up? 14:21:25 xmrhaelan, i forget 14:21:35 something to do with lochamesh 14:21:58 oh thats what it was 14:22:26 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 14:32:42 I’m not sure which bitcoin group you are referring to? 14:34:37 there was a presentation at a recent bitcoin conference 14:34:51 maybe magical crypto conference 15:18:43 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 15:21:12 I believe the openalias website (I forget the url) has samples. 15:21:38 Or at least one :) 15:26:51 reading stack it might not be possible to do with browser without a server of some kind 15:27:55 you could use a DNS-over-HTTPS provider to do it in the browser 15:30:59 ah that might work, google service. neat thanks 15:32:08 Someone created a service called xmr.id (that's a domain name) that gives users an OA address. Might find examples there. 15:33:18 awesome! 15:42:18 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 15:42:18 or w/e 15:43:59 TXT DNS record is awesomely scalable, but would be nice to have trust minimized version 15:45:25 maybe I'll make one this week, seems incredibly simple 15:47:10 Because you'd get a landgrab and the same kind of assholes that "resell" domain names. 15:47:45 Basically subsidizing a new type of parasites. 15:47:59 (unless you have a solution to that) 15:48:32 yes I agree that's an issue but non-0 sustainment policy could work 15:48:54 let me clarify, requirement to burn or pay to keep name within specific length of time 15:49:19 I don't really mind if i had a name like Cartersg1999 instead of Cartersg1 for example either 15:49:54 Would those txes be on chain ? That could get pretty spammy, and kept forever. 15:50:18 in bitcoin no utxo forms for op_return standard, not sure how to get prunable on monero 15:50:41 so can't get rid of it on chain but can get rid of it in state/utxo 15:50:55 You don't want to prune this if you use it as an authoritative source of who owns what. 15:51:18 you can get information by reading blocks in order 15:51:47 and allow standards rule, not enforced by consensus, decide ownership 15:52:32 could even allow challenges for names if another larger by (lets say) 2x transaction occurs within 24 hours or something 15:52:36 If you don't want consensus to determine who owns what (I think that's what you mean), why on chain ? 15:52:46 data availability and cost of security 15:53:00 Explain "cost of security". 15:53:17 would be very hard to remove it from publicly accessible and syncable blockchain 15:53:29 Yes, that's a *bad* thing. 15:53:46 i think it has value 15:54:04 Why, if you specify the authoritative thing isn't consensus ? 15:54:09 you'll have to pay for use of blockspace like everyone else to get that censorship resistance 15:54:30 you're free to use another interpretation standard 15:54:33 Yes, pushing up the price for everyone else. I don't buy the "we want billions of txes on chain" thing. 15:54:45 me neither, bc that compromises security 15:54:48 Unless you have something like a sidechain. 15:54:57 Or merge mined chain. 15:55:02 but this isn't a frequent transaction 15:55:19 once a year per person wouldn't be that bad 15:55:38 Oh, you also can't repudiate an address if your keys are compromised (unless you pre-register another key, presumably safer). 15:55:54 I guess it might not be too bad, ok. 15:55:55 good idea 15:56:22 i think keys being compromised would screw you up even with regular addresses haha 15:57:19 the only issue is if too many different standards show up, but then i'd just forward people to better one 15:58:21 monero have provably prunable tx of some kind? would hate to add to txo growth 15:58:49 Depends what you mean by provably exactly. 15:59:00 I'd say yes at first approximation. 15:59:08 doesn't participate in "mixing" and nodes do not have to keep it in memory 15:59:57 That's a bit unclear. Transactions don't participate in mixing. 15:59:58 maybe a provable burn address option to use with TX_EXTRA 16:00:07 sorry, not transaction but the newly formed outputs 16:00:37 basically when bitcoin node sees the OP_RETURN transaction standard type, they do not give it a utxo 16:00:42 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. 16:00:52 With rct outputs, that's generally not used though. 16:01:00 awesome 16:01:10 But that's local to your wallet. 16:01:32 I also don't see the relevance to that so I might be replying to the wrong question :) 16:01:38 ah, right, was curious about general standards that are also relayed haha 16:01:57 You use the word standard a lot, and with a definition which appears not to be mine. Can you define it ? 16:02:32 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 16:02:56 anyone running the standard client for xcp would reach same conclusions of validity 16:02:58 OK, so standard data format, as in well known format everyone knows how to parse and generate ? 16:03:04 right 16:03:37 OK. That matches my definition. Then "was curious about general standards that are also relayed" makes no sense to me with that definition. 16:03:40 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 16:03:53 oh oops, I used another thing there 16:04:07 you're right, same word, 2 diff meanings. bitcoin has standard transaction types which are relayed 16:04:15 like p2sh p2wsh op_return so on 16:04:21 based on pubkeyscript 16:04:34 non standard pubkeyscripts are not relayed 16:04:58 could be included in blocks but nodes in many defaults ignore them, miners can include them and they'll be valid 16:05:01 Ah. With monero, extra is unparsed. Anything in there is OK. 16:05:11 Though some people would like to start parsing it and/or remove it. 16:05:31 is it part of the signed message? 16:05:35 Yes. 16:05:39 oh good 16:05:52 (unparsed by the daemon for consensus, the wallet does parse it after it's on the chain) 16:06:22 The intent is to leave it for innovative uses, such as the one you're talking about. 16:06:42 The other side of the coin is potential for privacy degradation and spam. 16:06:49 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 16:07:32 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. 16:07:41 right. I think most projects will rely on fees eventually so as long as everyone has to pay for it it seems fine 16:08:24 one man's spam is another mans life savings :P 16:11:06 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 16:11:26 so I guess provable burn option is most important 16:12:44 I'll try this method: https://monero.stackexchange.com/questions/10780/how-does-one-burn-and-provide-a-proof-of-burn-in-monero 16:12:49 FWIW I'll probably NAK a patch for this in monero until it's shown to be not spammy. 16:13:21 Though of course it doesn't mean you can't do it, just that monero-wallet-cli would not use it :) 16:13:33 Hopefully consensus will not go the ohter way :P 16:15:32 A side chain for this would be good. Side chains for all peripheral stuff. 16:15:38 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 16:16:40 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. 16:16:57 You'll probably want change though, unfortunately :P 16:17:03 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 16:17:08 Which means 2 outputs :/ 16:18:07 AFAIK merge mining adds 32 bytes (plus maybe extra scaffolding chaff) per block, that's not super huge. Anyhting else you know about ? 16:18:53 Well, enough bytes to create a link, canonical is a block hash, but it could be small maybe. Security dependent. 16:19:01 smaller* 16:19:20 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 16:20:23 Well, you were saying before a similar problem was not a problem, because fees pay for it :) 16:20:35 (pushing all these on monero) 16:20:54 But yes, fair point. 16:21:02 well, on same chain the bandwidth processing doesn't increase due to cap 16:21:11 but yeah, I don't know tbh 16:21:26 Can you expand on "on same chain the bandwidth processing doesn't increase due to cap", I don't understand that point. 16:22:00 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) 16:22:13 that's out of security concerns 16:22:16 Ah. 16:22:25 Odd point. 16:22:26 spammers can't just add unlimited data, they have to pay for scarce space 16:22:46 that's the issue with stuff like bsv imo 16:22:53 and eos lol 16:23:04 They can squeeze out other people. If our chain ends up being used mostly for spam, it becomes pointless. 16:23:27 Though you can argue if it becomes useless, spammers will stop using it, then it becomes more useful again, but with all the baggage. 16:23:38 it's hard to tell apart what's spam and what's a valuable transaction fo rsomeone 16:23:52 Yes. Otherwise it'd be done. That's unfortunate. 16:24:12 the only way to guage importance is through fees afaik 16:24:19 which works great bc miners pick the biggest bribes 16:24:35 Yes, but this makes the world shittier for everyone else too. 16:24:41 It's like... the real world :/ 16:24:52 i think sidechains can provide lower value tx place to transact 16:25:23 or more precisely batching solutions like layer 2 or childchains that rarely have to post on parent chain 16:25:23 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. 16:25:45 Yes, side/merged/layer2/whatever is really what we need. And what we don't yet have. 16:25:57 i think blockchains should provide options of various security vs fee tradeoffs 16:26:02 layer 2 like LN is one of them 16:26:43 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. 16:27:07 yeah def and miners can't really stop it 16:27:15 So ideally it means the extra bandwidth is paid for. And users that don't care about tari don't see the spam. 16:27:27 but there was example of luke jr divering a mining pool to attack (to coin death) a mergemined coin 16:27:34 at no cost to them 16:27:36 I think that's better than fees, where users would see the spam (or what they're not interested in anyway). 16:28:03 namecoin is a successful mergemine that didn't suffer same fate haha 16:28:16 Right, so a merged mined coin would need to be opted into by most of the hash. 16:28:46 And if it's any good, it'll presumably be... Maybe. 16:29:08 right. it has to be valuable enough for them to do that, much like a soft forked block size increase 16:29:21 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. 16:29:50 And that address alising thing of yours would fit there :) 16:30:24 A lot more work though. 16:30:39 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 16:31:07 Can you rephrase that, I do not understand your point. 16:31:46 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 16:31:55 hash* 16:32:24 Ah. Right. But the merge mining means you can't (assuming not just one or two pools mine it). 16:32:53 right, so in a way # of hash power that does mergemine is similar to hash power mining some altcoin 16:33:03 which is the scale of your security 16:33:19 btw, fun fact namecoin once had more hashpower than bitcoin 16:33:24 Why would that be ? 16:34:10 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. 16:34:33 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 16:35:37 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 ? 16:36:02 Since many of the side chain blocks will be monero blocks. 16:36:10 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 16:36:53 right but miners always have option to collude to attack 16:36:58 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. 16:37:15 yeah tbh i'm confused too, very complex incentives differences 16:37:18 Yes, but that's about the same difficulty as in monero. They can collude there too. 16:37:37 right, but they don't bc they have to recover costs they put into equipment and electric 16:37:39 And tbh IIRC two pools are enough on monero. It's a shit situation. 16:38:10 I'm not following anymore, but I think we're kinda drifting anyway. 16:38:16 so imo pow is relatively safe via incentives even with 1-2 mining pools :P anyway thanks for chat 16:38:49 In practice, but if the pool or two gets pwned, that security is worth zilch. Same issue as with asics. 16:38:52 btw this is neat - childchains instead of sidechains that simulate pow by burning coins instead of energy https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5212814.0 16:39:07 It's the typical "it works well till it doesn't" situation. 16:39:40 That's whay I don't like about monetary incentive. It works well till it doesn't. 16:39:55 There's no inherent security, just incentives. 16:41:17 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 16:41:28 one of perils of being permissionless 16:42:01 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 :) 16:42:17 peter todd vs vitalik arguments usually end up with vitalik assuming most are honest vs todd requiring it to be unforitable to collude 16:42:32 unprofitable* 16:43:37 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. 16:44:02 It's *possible*. Not profitable, but if they care enough, that's no obstacle. 16:44:08 totally. but then they'd still have to pay money to do it and be unable to recover it 16:44:36 See above. They jut take the money from their peons, as they do for everyhting else. Like a new war. 16:44:55 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 16:45:41 I think many people underestimate what a government can do if it chooses to do so. Much money. Many people with no morals. 16:45:47 totally 16:46:02 Or maybe worse, people with morals that don't align with mine :P 16:46:39 So all this feels a lot a lot like collective delusion. 16:46:44 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 16:46:46 true believers where means justify ends. 16:47:58 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. 16:48:26 unforgeable costliness of PoW is one of coolest inventions 16:48:31 So the people they crushed can smile from their grave ? :) 16:49:05 What we need to have is many large govts staring to use, then rely, on monero. 16:49:22 Or Bitcoin, if it decides to grow good privacy at the base someday. 16:49:48 yeah either one i'd be happy with. hopefully people are smarter than to chose something stupid like tron, but i have my doubts 16:49:52 Then it'll start to be plausible (short of continental trouble with power supply). 16:50:40 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. 16:51:02 it's PoS so it's about as decentralized as a permissioned database 16:51:06 I mean, it might go up, but someone will get scammed again, 99% sure. 16:51:54 scams are profitable, that's why people do them lol 16:52:05 Not the worst though. People are still clinging to obvious scam like bitcoin cash sv and dash so... 16:52:22 I think Bytecoin finally dead though. Maybe. 16:52:58 nah i'd argue tron is far worse. at least cash didn't give themselves control over 100% of supply like tron 16:53:11 I won't argue there, I never looked. 16:54:16 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 16:55:05 Yeah, my point was more about looking for dishonesty rather than the effect of the dishonest actions. But yes, both are important. 16:55:55 Like, anything craig wright does is 100% stay out, regardless of whether he comes up with something apparently great technically. 16:56:08 Wait till a honest project uses it :) 16:56:46 But yeah, I guess that's not from a pump and dump viewpoint. Then you might want to go in. Shrug. The world sucks. 16:56:46 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 :) 16:57:24 Intent does matter. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. 16:57:38 Fool me thrice, I must be in cryptocurrency. 16:58:05 :') 17:00:09 < 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! 17:00:40 Well, I dunno. At some point the penny will have to drop. 17:00:59 I'm not going for a panopticoin and I'm sure I'm not the only one. 17:01:10 I'm guessing it would be a BTC fork looong before it has any chance of entering the base layer on BTC... 17:01:18 not sure how i'd trade bitcoin atomic swap to xmr and then atomic swap back 17:01:20 (still ok with having some to try and get rich but not use it) 17:01:20 panopticoin is a great sales pitch 17:01:22 trace* 17:01:48 Yeah, apparently someone said a few days it's been used before though. 17:01:54 I said that. 17:02:00 given the amount traded isn't same bc then you can track it lol 17:02:30 Atomic swaps don't exist with monero yet. 17:03:02 but at least it is now theoretically feasible 17:03:24 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnBTfG6umEI <- Kristov Atlas Panopticoin - Streamed live on Feb 27, 2014 17:03:24 YouTube Title: Kristov Atlas Panopticoin Views: Length: 58:49 Uploaded: 2014-02-27 User: Bitcoin Philadelphia Likes: 2 Dislikes: 1 17:04:18