just me, or was the cipher trace interview not helpful at all?

New and Improved !!

cornfeedhobo: i turned it off halfway through it was very clear that Dave has never had to "sell" his product to someone that is knowledgeable in the area

not knowing what kind of addresses are traceable? absolutely amateur

Anyone care give a summary?

while working at a startup I got very good at quickly telling which CEOs and CTOs were smart and knew what they were talking about vs ones that just blow hot smoke up peoples butts all the times

and dave reminded me very strongly of the latter

his patents are interesting. they come off extremely generalized - the kind of stuff no one patents unless they feel like firing off court battles in the future

craight wright anyone? :laugh:

s/craight/craig/g

I've heard of people like this that have bs patents the threaten small outfits with

a hash representing a mobile devices unique attributes? that's been going on forever, and is just an evolution of what's been happening on desktops since the 90s

I thought the point was to defend from them. X threatens to sue you for vague patent nonsense, you point out you also have vague patent nonsense, and they back off.

nope

there are some patents people use like SLAP suits

on the topic of craig wright, they're going to hardfork BSV

slapp*

to give Wright the Satoshi coins

and also to impose an 8% fee on miners

lol

I thought the 8% fee was bcash

bch proposed a 12% fee I think

ha. not to be outdone!

tfw you accidentally tap two 0's out and remember the feeling of typing out the year during the aughts

but that at least had a thin veneer of legitimacy. It was going to go into some sort of big multisig to fund development or something

this is just, like, a direct line to craig

well, it'll be interesting to see if anyone figures anything out

hard not to see a decent bounty being placed on their ip eventually

I will never have 25 patents like Dave does :(

selsta, moneromooo: Then why include it in the Windows build?

I'd imagine most serious miners use xmrig or something

not solo mining in the GUI wallet

when they're as useless as these, and so obviously crafted for the purpose of extortion, I think you can rest easy for not being a shitty person

03:53 <yanmaani> selsta, moneromooo: Then why include it in the Windows build? <-- afaik randomx code is also required for block verification

we don’t know what AV scans for

oh, of course

I mean, you could try to make a separate build with it hidden behind #ifdef and upload to virustotal

but then you'd have to cross-compile for windows and shit

fuck windows, use linux!

it seem that windows does respond to the mining code and mining withe the daemon is for non serious miners

third party wallet providers can avoid shipping monerod, similar to mobile wallets

someone who solo mines with it found 2 blocks in the last year

niocbrrrrrr: With Windows?

nit sure but for mining I don't think it matters

not

Isn't there a compile time opt to disable mining already?

he posted both times in redddddddit

Not aware of any compile time options for it.

of course, you need it for the tests too

we are looking into code signing certs for Windows

for the GUI at least

that might work, yes

pretty hot binary

(What prevents viruses from just bundling your signed monero binaries?)

they don’t bundle monero bins at all, they all use xmrig or xmr-stak

or modified versions of them

but what stops them? no idea

I don't understand the codebase

what's with the coding style?

But it's easy! youtube.com/watch?v=RXJKdh1KZ0w

what is with it?

not consistent?

well there's bits like

>const Blockchain& get_blockchain_storage()const{return m_blockchain_storage;}

yanmaani: that’s old bytecoin code

oh, I see

Is it still used?

I guess so

(the code style from this line is from old bytecoin code) to be more specific

oh, so bytecoin had a different style guide

don’t think they had a style guide

not sure if monero has one apart from keep it inline with other code from the same file / region

<[discord] Yonatan#6948>: Will Monero ever have faster block times?

Doubtful, and not a clear reason to want faster block times

Obviously they could change, but not without strong evidence as to what it would improve.

it used to be one minute instead of two

Yeah

Was changed early on

<[discord] Yonatan#6948>: Interesting

<[discord] Yonatan#6948>: The main problem with Monero becoming cash is that change takes 2 minute to be spendable

<[discord] Yonatan#6948>: Clearly not efficient for adoption

uh

it takes 20 minutes to be spendable. 10 blocks.

An easy fix is wallets breaking down your inputs into standard denominations

Just like you get back what change you want from the register

For instance -- you spend 1.5XMR and get back 8.5XMR in change

Wallet takes that 8.5XMR input and breaks it down into 5/1X4/0.5/0.1X5 XMR inputs

Once you do that a few times you would have lots of inputs in each denomination to make spending rapidly easier

Right now nothing like that is done automatically AFAIK

and if the block time got shorter, we should wait more blocks (especially for things like exchange deposits) since the point is work and not blocks

<[discord] Yonatan#6948>: Then mass adoption will not happen

lol

A) L1 is likely never going to 100% support the entire worlds transaction flows

B) Did you read what I said about breaking up denominations of inputs?

<[discord] Yonatan#6948>: Yeah but that makes it harder

No

It doesnt

Wallets do it in the background

User never cares or knows

Just set the denominations you want at wallet creation (and be able to change them in settings)

this is basically only a problem when you first start using XMR. once you've received more than one or two inputs, it practically speaking goes away.

Then just spend to your hearts content and the wallet is constantly breaking up change outputs

<ndorf "this is basically only a problem"> Yeah I haven't hit this issue in a *very* long time, but I used XMR quite frequently

What is mass adoption? It gets thrown around like some magical marketing bla

so, i don't see how it's a barrier to adoption.

it's something you have to deal with like the first couple of days of using XMR.

*shrug*

<[discord] Yonatan#6948>: lol

@Yonatan: consider contributing to the project if you like to see change

Change starts with YOU

<[discord] Yonatan#6948>: I can contribute sperm

<[discord] Yonatan#6948>: That's the only thing I'm good at producing

<[discord] Yonatan#6948>: Otherwise I have no skills i can contribute

whose idea was this discord bridge, anyway?

<[discord] Yonatan#6948>: idk

<[discord] Yonatan#6948>: Discord bad

<[discord] Yonatan#6948>: I only use it when I'm on my phone and can't connect on IRC

<[discord] Yonatan#6948>: Makes it much easier to connect to IRC on mobile

<[discord] Yonatan#6948>: All mobile IRC clients are absolutely garbage

Just use Matrix/Element

its a better bridge and more private

Works great on mobile

+1 for matrix/element

discord definitely usese way more resources than telegram.

yaaic is a decent mobile irc client

revolution irc is also really good

with a good bnc you're gold

Hello everyone.

I am looking for a way to transfer my monero blobkchain history to another machine. Basically I would like to avoid having to download the whole blockain history again. Is there any guide around for such task?

Thanks a lot in advance

rsync ? scp ?

Or nc.

Not sure if that's for me @moneromooo

tar + rsync + untar?

It is.

It's data.mdb you want btw.

only that one file? then forget the tar...dont listen to me...i don't work here :DDD

So just copying .bitmonero/lmdb/data.mdb on a fresh install would do?

yes

That's great thanks a lot :)

c'mon cluster!!!!!

dang ol mainframe

jfc ive been battling format errors for the past 12 hrs

gingeropolous are you updating your testnet nodes :D

you have 10 blocks left before hf

oh jesus

well, everything else aint working

might as well try to see if monero wants to work today

you have to compile master + 6794

oh whats that command

git blargh blorf 6794

git pull origin pull/6794/head

and how to only build daemon

aint nobody got time for wallets

i know theres a trhing

I am trying to get BinaryFate's GPG Key

no luck

gingeropolous: make -C build/master/release/ daemon

any known issues about that?

or wherever your build dir is

Polemos__: what is the problem?

selsta page seems to be down

which website?

seems up here.

Not for me. Trying from 2 diff computers

Any other way to get that key?

here I reuploaded it, but make sure to compare the fingerprint with the one from the tutorial irccloud.com/pastebin/rSCG1IK9

thanks a lot selsta will do ;)

usually taking keys from random sources is bad :) but it’s okay if you verify the fingerprint with a trusted source

yay, that worked.

lets see if the other things wanna work now

selsta good signature thanks a lot :)

afaik the .bitmonero dir where lmbd forder and data.mbd lie will generate once wallet is open for the first time right?

No. When monerod is run.

so it is ok if I ./monerod on terminal then overwrite the file with the other data.mbd ?

Yes.

(after you stop monerod of course)

oki doki then when with new data.mdb I guess ./monero-wallet-gui and import seed ?

Sure.

Monero now has an atomic swap implementation :D

orly

:]

raecarruth: Considering I just finished it, yes :P

what did you swap?

I also made a post on r/Monero about it

BTC-XMR?

It's based off the recent research funded by the CCS

binaryFate: please update xmr.to testnet node infra to latest master, we forked the testnet to CLSAG

kayabaNerve: nice work

Thanks!

is this the end for xmr.to now?

yanmaani: most likely not

They're very different services, so I would doubt it.

You could easily see xmr.to and friends getting commoditized

XMR.to is a centralized tool that offers very fast and easy XMR->BTC payments

Atomic swaps take a while, require liquidity on the other end of the trade, and are not really great for payments directly

I don't see much overlap there, XMR.to isn't even really an exchange (though it can be used as one)

Yes, the idea is that you ahve a centralized service providing the liquidity

Or a large group of decentralized people you coordinate with over a second layer

kayabaNerve: You need for one side to be semi-trusted

or they can just claim to be dealing and then never show up

yanmaani: Not sure what you mean

If they never show up, they never show up. You won't lock any funds.

If you do lock and they disappear, you reclaim the funds.

But that takes time, right?

You never lose anything other than the TX fees if you have a valid tool.

Say I want to fuck with your l2 protocol

Yeah. BTC block latency.

I create 1 million offers to buy/sell

+ timelocks

people accept them, put in XBT/XMR

DEXs have ways to work with this is my comment.

I put on a pot of coffee, completely ignore them, and wait for the money to be refunded

rinse and repeat until people get fed up

DEXes are mostly Ethereum frauds?

It's a trustless system for security, but a reputation system so you can trust it to be worth bothering...

I was referring to things like Bisq/BlockDX

I actually haven't looked into the latter too much, but tech seems solid IMO

I'm not referring to Uniswap/those ERC20 DEXs

blockdx?

Bisq isn't atomic swap based though, to be clear

never heard of that

DEX based on atomic swaps. There's also Decred's DEX, AtomicDEX, and I think LUX (the former McAfee coin; EVM on BTC) is working on one.

How does Bisq work again?

Multisigs

Yeah but does it have a rep system?

kayabaNerve: do you use blockdx often?

What prevents Sybils?

does it work well?

raecarruth: No. You have to have money to use an exchange :P

kek

I don't support the latter three (definitely not LUX), but I like BlockDX from what I've seen. That said, haven't researched it too much. Just the basics (but beyond their website's first paragraph, of course)

yanmaani: No idea, but I've heard great review

I tried using Bisq and it was horrible, and the fraud protection seems really subpar

yeah, bisq could be better

i prefer to use openbazaar

Alrighty. I'll keep that in mind :)

So this has 0 fraud protection. Just needs a reputation system/external loss system.

*0 fraud risk

Sorry.

This doesn't need fraud protection

right

I mean, yes, fraud you won't participate, but atomic swaps are guaranteed to give you one set of the funds

I mean, one way might be to just have people lock up some trivial sum of Monero

External loss, yep.

Or charge a trading fee in some native token?

No, no fees

no loss

BlockDX has a token and they charge per order

just lock up some money

as a Sybil mechanism

Oh, got it.

If you want to create an order for $5, you need to have say $1 locked up. If you just ignore it, then that's fine, but you can't take a million orders for $0

or just do web of trust, I guess

*Only one side pays fees though. The makers. I'm not saying that's competent to stop this attack, just bringing it up.

Both sounds like good ideas :)

Anyways. I love DEX theory and want to see a great DEX, but I'm personally not too interested in making one

how come 14 word mnemonic seeds aren't any less secure?

they only have 1 key instead of 2

but the key is still the same strength as in a 25-word seed

maybe bigger dictionary, too

the 25 word seed only encodes the spend key (in 256-bit)

viewkey is derived deterministically

256-bit is overkill because the curve only provides 128-bit security

Does this imply you could have 128 bit keys for the same level of security ?

depends on the KDF. but mathematics says yes

Is this more or less equivalent to "Monero keys are 256 bits, but only 128 bits of actual entropy" ?

no

you have 128 bits of security. like how RSA keys are in the thousands of bytes, but don't have nearly that level of actual security

I guess I'm trying to get to: if keys from 256 bits of entropy get you 128 bits of security, why do keys from 128 bits of security not get you 64 bits of security" :)

s/8 bits of securit/8 bits of entrop/

because it's how the elliptic curve works

same reason giving MD5 an input twice as long, doesn't make it twice as hard to crack

Within reason, since it'll obviously break down if you continue.

So, where does it break down.

so you can derive a 256 bit key from a 128 bitstring, and use that for the curve, with no loss of security, if the KDF isn't stupid

I mean otherwise you can continue splitting and end up wiuth keys with 2 bits of entropy.

So there has to be somehting that changes.

OK, so the EC ops basically only use 128 bits of entropy to work at their fullest. Is that correct ?

Apologies for my crypto cluelessness :)

sure

OK, then I see why the MD5 comparison applies. Thanks.

i thought the comparison with rsa keys was good

I find it funny one of the reason they give is "underfunding", when they not only got *shitloads* of money from their 4 years 20%, but came back for another bite, breaking their promise.

The other reason also seems inverted, since how can keeping something closed soure help the public since htey can't adapt it to their needs.

I might be missing something dumb...

moneromooo: I think that was for another room :)

Oh. Oh. Sorry.

moneromooo: zcash?

yes, they now release research under an open source license that isn’t really open source for the first couple years

what

>Special thanks to Vitalik Buterin for reviewing and providing feedback to this post.

that's how you know it's good

Was hoping Bungie's Halo 2 under open-source :(

you know what'd be really funny?

If someone hardforked zcash or ethereum or something, and just took out the founder's reward/premine

so it's the GPL but with a 12-month delay on actually having to give up the source

kept everything the same, and merged everything from upstream

no really "open" source, is it

artefact: I don't even thing it's FSF-certified open source after that

but that's just nitpicking :)

afaik fsf hates "open source"

that too

but yes, it's certainely not libre either

Oh no, this is even worse

you can't even use it for any purpose

if you take the source, you *have to* submit your improvements to upstream

within 12 months

So it's the other way around

does it? "upstream" seems tricky to define in legalese

Their software is kind of open, but if you modify it, you have to send them those improvements within 12 months. They are under no obligation to publish them anywhere.

That's what the blog post says

The license just says

"Licensor grants you a ... license ... to distribute ... copies of the ... Work ..., with the proviso that copies of ... Work ... that You distribute ... shall be licensed under this Transitive Grace Period Public Licence no later than 12 months after You distributed ... said copies

"

yes. it dosen't say you actually have to upstream anything

just give source on request. like the GPL

(ianal)

I don't think a lawyer wrote this, it's very shoddily written. The blog post very directly conflicts with the license

That might explain why it didn't make sense to me. I only read the post :D

if I take the software and use it for internal use, then what?

then nothing. just like the GPL

Right. But the blog post implies it becomes FOSS

you can write your fancy proprietary GCC patch and use it just fine- nobody will kick your door open

if you publish your gcc binaries though... different story

>an open-source model that gives everyone equal access to the code and equal rights to improve Halo commercially as long as they subsequently open-source their improvements after 12 months

"provided that they abide by the agreement to open-source the derived work under the same terms once the grace period expires. " is clear. you have to releae your private mods.

moneromooo: that's not in the license

While with GPL, you can keep them private. GPL -> you only have to give the source to whoever gets binaries.

Possibly. Then the blog seems to be a lie ?

yes. or i'm reading the wrong licence text

or i suck at legalese (which there is no doubt about that)

moneromooo: The blog isn't a lie they're just not very good at writing licenses

github.com/zcash/halo2/blob/main/LICENSE-TGPPL this is the license

their definition of "source code" is also a bit shoddy. "machine-readable"?!

I'd rather have a license in normal human language tbh

what is halo2? the readme is a little bare and the documentation seems to link to a blank page :P

It's also not new!

>This License is Copyright © 2007 Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn.

what the hell

asy: electriccoin.co/blog/ecc-releases-code-for-halo-2 seems to go into more detail

see sarang’s analysis on halo 2 irccloud.com/pastebin/ZTMlG2pB

it does read like buzzword soup

but i don't know much about their stuff in great detail