07:10:45 Why exactly is downloading the last 10% of the blockchain far slower than downloading the first 90% of the blockchain? 07:12:40 Also, why are my logs getting spammed with constant stack traces? 08:25:06 DiffieHellman: Bigger blocks 08:25:18 Tx volume and tx weight. Originally txes were smaller and fewer in number. In recent times, and with updates to the protocol, txes are significantly larger, and the amount of people using it is much higher 08:25:37 Ok 09:37:40 isn't that also because rx blocks take longer to verify? 09:38:09 i guess if it's before the checkpoint it's irrelevant 11:05:55 monero_man: take a look at https://www.getmonero.org/community/merchants/ 11:06:09 I don't kno any service that does XMR -> Steam card 11:06:27 but you can use something like xmr.to and bitrefill 11:09:48 fwiw it's quite easy and fast to use bitrefill with xmr. Just use a mobile wallet which integrates xmr.to, scan the bitcoin bar code and the conversion happens automatically 11:10:36 You can still do it. 11:11:01 Instead of being automatic you have to go to xmr.to, paste the bitcoin address there and then follow their instructions 11:11:34 but yeah, would be cool if compamnies like bitrefill, purse, etc would start to accept Monero payments. The only thing we can do is to let them know :) 11:11:59 btw can be that somebody offers XMR -> gift card, i'm just not aware of any 11:12:28 *anybody doing that 11:42:15 yes. Some wallets integrate xmr.to. So you can pay with xmr to anyone accepting btc 12:01:07 Few minutes 12:17:09 I heard bitcoin is slow since a few days due to network congestion. I guess that also influences the conversion through services like xmr.to.. 12:17:46 Sorry I mean "even slower than usual". 12:29:49 lol yeah xmr.to doesn't even batch transctions, not great for the poor overwhelmed btc network 12:30:26 oh I see what you mean though. as far as I can tell xmr.to hasn't raised their fees to match 12:38:38 hasn't raised their fees for users I mean. I've still had stuff confirming in one block even with btc having like $5 fees. xmr.to is an incredible deal for folks doing small btc transactions. literally cheaper than using the btc network directly 13:34:39 i wonder how the service makes money. exchange rate spread ? 13:48:28 Test for checking "voice" over in IRC 13:48:52 artefact: I think to remember they charge progressively larger fees for larger amounts and make up this way for what they often loose with smaller transfers 13:50:05 By the way, how do I get permission back to directly post on IRC in #monero and #monero-dev? I did not get a "blue dot" :( 13:55:29 rbrunner7 you have to ask an OP to give you voice 13:55:57 It's a bit a mess for relays. I cannot write in -community and -dev 13:57:00 By direct message on IRC? 13:57:11 And will it stick? 13:57:56 Until you disconnect AFAIK. 13:58:31 Oh no, I disconnect all the time ... 13:59:27 I will hack the damn thing to become OP :) 14:00:03 Thanks for the voice, btw 14:00:30 Anyone who wishes to post and can't, feel free to /query me to ask. 14:00:56 Except those spammers I guess ... 14:01:25 Can you see in some logs whether they continue to try? 14:02:32 I've not seen the telltale tor join/part with the usual nick template in a while. But then I did not look for them. 14:37:03 isn't that also because rx blocks take longer to verify? >>> turns out randomx is faster to verify. look at h/s at: https://github.com/tevador/RandomX#cpu-performance 14:38:41 well, compared to cnv4. there used to be a table somewhere with original cnv0 14:51:27 don't the checkpoints on the first ~90% of the chain speed things up? 14:51:52 for that part 14:54:38 Most of the blocks have precomputed hash of hashes which allow skipping some checks (including PoW) on those known good blocks. There's a command line option to toggle this. 14:55:23 Checkpoints just add a guide to what cannot be the right chain. 15:25:43 What does everyone think about Litecoin adding MimbleWimble? 15:26:15 Won’t see adoption and has all the issues of opt-in privacy 15:26:38 Seems like a money grab to keep pulling people into a dead chain, but we’ll see. 15:26:53 MW is better as a scalability tool, its not amazing at privacy (though it has some native benefits). 15:27:44 So I take it you dont see Grin as a direct competitor to xmr as a privacy coin then? 15:28:28 Grin/MW untraceability is based on the assumption that everyone in the world buries their head in the sand 15:28:50 if anyone bothers to run an archival node to keep full blockchain history, they can trace at will 15:30:43 Interesting I have not looked into Grin/MW just was just curious 15:31:05 So it seems xmr is still the #1 privacy coin option right now despite other chains trying 15:58:38 GRIN is a good in-between of scalability and *reasonable* privacy, but has many privacy flaws Monero does not have. I.e. anyone running a large amount of nodes on the network breaks user privacy across all transactions. 15:58:39 It’s an interesting tool but MW is far more useful as a layer-two approach instead of a base-layer for a money. 15:58:39 Tari is fine because you don 15:59:06 * Tari is fine because you don ‘t need perfect privacy for NFT/tickets, so its sufficient and much more scalable than Bitcoin/Monero at-present. 16:17:17 the more interesting tech to look at these days, IMO, is Avalanche, if their scaling claims are true 16:22:46 Could sb explain to me why masternodes would be no good substitute for pow? As far as I understood the logic: Masternode operators are locking up coins, which keeps them honest. I know about nothing at stake. Couldnt this be solved like with Lokis current Pulse (punishing double signed blocks)? I dont see the difference between miners using physical resources and stakers locking up their monetary resources? 16:24:42 It's inherently not distributed: the ones with money control what others can do. You're new, you're not equal, qualitatively, not only quantitatively. 16:26:21 moneromoo: Isnt it the same with btc pow for example. If you dont spend money for miners and electricity you have nothing to say. 16:26:25 ? 16:27:36 To a point only. With monero pow, it's quantitative only. Bitcoin, it's a mix, since you need an ASIC and apparently that needs KYC to have any worthwhile one (hearsay only). 16:28:44 But everyone plays by the same rules. You start your daemon, you verify txes/blocks, you send yours, and as long as you abide by the consensus rules, you're good. 16:29:07 Masternodes mean there's a privileged class which decides whether to allow you. 16:29:14 That's qualitative. 16:29:40 At least from what I know of how they're done currently, which is superficial tbh. 16:29:51 It doesn't mean it could not ever get done right I suppose. 16:29:58 Arent masternodes just deciding which block comes next? 16:30:54 Well, depends what you have them to.But with darkcoin, they do more: they mix your coins for you (allegedly), the decide what txes get in prior to a block, that kind of thing. 16:31:05 Hence " It doesn't mean it could not ever get done right I suppose." 16:31:30 Masternodes mean there's a privileged class which decides whether to allow you. -> Ok, but you could spend resources in order to become part of that "privileged class". In order to be a monero miner you have to do that too. 16:31:40 A number of chains have privileged nodes like this, which are the only ones allowed to create/rubberstamp blocks. 16:32:10 Sure, to get money, you have to expend money. 16:34:07 Well, depends what you have them to.But with darkcoin, they do more: they mix your coins for you (allegedly), the decide what txes get in prior to a block, that kind of thing. -> I agree that it would be bad for privacy if masternodes would take care of that. But if they are just there for keeping the chain honest. Why not? 16:34:22 One thing that should be clear, because I assume it in the above: you can particupate in the monero network (or bitcoin) without mining, and you still do your own things: verify txes, and send yours doing your own verifiable privacy things. etc. 16:34:23 who keeps the master nodes honest? 16:34:33 "Ok, but you could spend resources in order to become part of that "privileged class". In order to be a monero miner you have to do that too." yeah you have to do it, but its a different level. its buy a computer and run it 16:34:58 with anything involving staking, you need to jump through permissions. hence, its not permissionless. hence, its not good. 16:35:32 if your system is permissioned then all the decentralization is useless 16:35:42 Anyone knows about "you need an ASIC and apparently that needs KYC" ? I'm not sure where I read that, and not sure whether true. 16:35:54 someone recently tried buying a bitcoin asic 16:37:02 thought it was sethsimmons maybe 16:37:43 i mean, you can try it for yourself. figure out what the latest hotness is for in bitcoin and try and buy one 16:39:30 Not sure that'd tell me much. So much of the web is unusable if you want to be private. 16:40:03 One thing that should be clear, because I assume it in the above: you can particupate in the monero network (or bitcoin) without mining, and you still do your own things: verify txes, and send yours doing your own verifiable privacy things. etc.-> Ok, couldnt you verifiy transactions as well with masternodes. You could verify if the masternodes operator locked up the coins instead of verifying if the miners nonce is true. What is 16:40:03 ference there? 16:40:51 "Ok, but you could spend resources in order to become part of that "privileged class". In order to be a monero miner you have to do that too." yeah you have to do it, but its a different level. its buy a computer and run it. -> I think that is just true for monero and we dont know yet what happens if things are going to scale. 16:41:08 Anyway, I don't care too much really, I think I'll keep it as a "plausible, not sure if true". 16:42:14 Anyway, I don't care too much really, I think I'll keep it as a "plausible, not sure if true". -> I was just thinking about it, because the envirmental impact would be significantly smaller. 16:42:35 oh that 16:42:42 wheres my link 16:42:54 show me :) 16:43:31 https://medium.com/@danhedl/pow-is-efficient-aa3d442754d3 16:43:47 Thank you! 16:44:55 you should change your nick to xmrpos 16:45:02 i mean yeah, at the face of it, poS and its derivatives make sense regarding "oh it doesn't use energy" ... the problem is that you don't achieve what you need for a decentralized permissionless system with PoS and its derivatives. you end up with paypal 16:45:12 or the existing fiat system. so, fail. 16:45:34 decentralization is diametrically opposed to efficiency 16:46:39 if your aim is a permissionless system you have to just accept that there will be unavoidable overheads. 16:48:30 You have to have either PoW or PoS or something similar. If you don't, then there's no cost to rewrite. 16:48:40 Whether masternodes or not. 16:50:09 hyc: Name is not always the agenda ;) 16:51:05 hyc: Just kidding. Why not thinking about how alternatives could work. 16:52:03 many people already have, and moved on 16:53:12 hyc: Might be true for those people, but it never hurts to understand things by oneself :) Maybe for you its a little bit boring ;) 16:53:32 Hearing things over and over again ;) 16:59:17 gingeropolous: "All things in our lives are closely linked to the price of energy" If prices are already linked to energy. Couldnt we protect the blockchain by market mechanisms? 17:00:30 hyc - when you mentioned avalanche is an interesting technology. I tried searching avalanche, but wasn't sure what other keywords to put in. 1 result was an "next generation" NVRAM company. Or is something else? 17:01:08 Maybe, hyc was true it is more about pos there. I thought that masternodes and pos do both have the concept of locking up stake. 17:03:32 john_r365: it's another project from Emin Gun Sirer 17:03:33 moneromoo: You have to have either PoW or PoS or something similar. If you don't, then there's no cost to rewrite.-> True. I think that by saying masternode I just meant to lock up stake. 17:07:04 locking coins with masternodes/pos is great if you don't want people to dump your scamcoin on the market and tank the price :P 17:07:38 sounds fiscally responsible! 17:10:48 asympt: It is true that you are forcing people to lock up capital resources. Arent we doing that as well when we are buying miners? If I would buy a dozen asic miners. Then that would be equivalent to locking up capital in my opinion. 17:11:46 nobody buys ASIC miners for XMR ;) 17:11:56 Maybe the point is not that strong for monero with randomx, but I think it would still be difficult to sell a farm of used ryzen rigs... 17:12:37 The intention has always been to disicentivize that sort of thing. and promote the every-day computer users. 17:12:59 in that case, the investment in mining is transient, not locked up. 17:13:19 e.g., you use your PCs for your day to day tasks, and they only mine when you're done and they're idle. 17:14:01 Do you think there dont exist monero mining farms? 17:14:07 of course they exist 17:14:33 but they're not a first priority 17:21:55 I think entities with more resources will always somehow able to drive out the small guy, just because of more monetary resources. Maybe farms dont have an advantage on the hardware side, but they can just allocate more resources for mining and so taking a bigger cut of the profit pie. Im not sure if in large scale industries the resources are that transient. 17:22:30 sure, a dedicated mining farm would presumably mine 24/7 17:23:17 as for driving out the small guy - maybe. this seems to be a law of the universe, success breeds success, the rich get richer. 17:24:17 hyc: Do you dislike the idea of locking up monetary resources? 17:24:38 it very obviously favors the richer 17:25:16 although if you allow pooled investment into masternodes, I guess that's more fair 17:26:12 Any idea what is going on here? https://www.reddit.com/r/monerosupport/comments/jktiyg/tor_node_stuck_on_height_2210016/ 17:26:14 there's still a qualitative difference, to me - most people already own PCs. they don't need to make any additional investment solely to participate in Monero 17:26:17 It's not the locking up that's bad, it's the fact that there's this small clique that has more rights, in effect. 17:26:21 Seems like curl from localhost displays the proper height, curl from outside does not 17:26:32 in every other case, people must go out of their way to dedicate resources to the task 17:29:01 Looks like it's not querying hte same daemon. 17:29:14 hyc: Ok, lets expect a coin where you could do these shared masternodes. Wouldnt that be better than using additional electricity? You could say as well that everybody has a few bucks left over. 17:30:48 You seem to be asking about mater nodes but making argments about PoS. 17:31:20 moneromoo: Dont these concepts do have sth in common? 17:31:41 They bot allocated monetary resources for keeping the chain honest. 17:31:46 *both 17:33:28 moneromooo: How did you infer that? 17:33:36 Differnet heights. 17:33:55 and not by just a couple, which could be he case if you wait a minute beteeen two calls. 17:35:37 According to the user it is the same node, but I guess I will ask if he runs multiple instances 17:36:45 def looks like different nodes 17:36:46 I guess it *might* be that somehow a lmdb txn did not abort nor get committed, so it's continuing to read old data. 17:37:28 That doesn't sound super likely since the dtor takes care of that. 17:38:03 moneromoo: It's not the locking up that's bad, it's the fact that there's this small clique that has more rights, in effect.- > I think not everybody is mining as well. Would be nice but not everybody can do that just because of the nature of different electricity prices worldwide. So in the end we do have a "small clique " called miners. 17:38:18 hyc, moneromooo: All right, ty 17:38:23 I will ask the user to clarify 17:39:01 You're still not getting it. I am not tlaking about miners. I was not. Still am not. 17:39:11 You're confusing miners/pow with masternodes. 17:39:54 You can have PoS wihtout masternodes. You can have masternodes will pow. 17:41:04 moneromoo: So if we are talking about masternodes. Other nodes are not verifying anything? 17:41:19 I suspect masternodes with pow might used for semi pubiv govt coins. 17:41:33 Gives an air of legitimacy from pow :) 17:42:24 Depends aout your consensus rules. They typically verify some stuff, or it'd have less of a pint.. 17:42:27 point. 17:43:08 PoS is a total scam 17:43:17 The one thing in particular that drives the point home is that in darkcoin you can't do your own privacy crypto, you ask a master node to do it for you. 17:43:19 just use visa if you want low power costs 17:43:30 but with blockchains, you *can't* have a 0-waste system 17:43:33 Anyway. Things to do. 17:43:36 it's completely pointless and impossible 17:44:22 yanmaani: Im not talking about 0 waste. More about efficiency. 17:44:34 the efficiency must be exactly as high/low 17:45:05 because "irreversibly wasted resources between block X and Y == resources needed to overtake chain at height block X starting at block Y" 17:45:11 this is constant for all blockchains 17:45:16 so PoS just wastes money instead. 17:46:08 (this is disregarding the fact that PoS is impossible. But even if you could do it, it'd be equally wasteful) 17:46:28 Ok, but the issuance of money is not directly connected with a global footprint. 17:48:10 ???????????????? 17:48:27 I don't know what that sentence means. 17:49:10 in PoS, you're lighting $X of money on fire to earn $X of Monero 17:49:22 in PoW, you're wasting $X of energy to earn $X of Monero 17:49:30 Hello everyone, I have a technical question. How can we assert or know exactly what are the technical rules or requirements on which Monero is built upon (should we exactly know what's happening in the code, right?)? Example, TXO's 10 decoys is a requirement. These decoys is a transaction rule, without those 10 decoys the transaction is not able to be added to the blockchain. 17:49:30 What other rules or requirements are there? Is there a source where those rules are listed? Stealth addresses, another example, without the public address being cryptographically modified inside the blockchain the transactions aren't verified. 17:49:58 lh1008[m]: monero, like Bitcoin, doesn't have a spec IIRC 17:50:01 so it's reference implementation 17:50:28 in PoS, you're lighting $X of money on fire to earn $X of Monero -> Trading x$ for monero does not need much electricity. 17:51:13 no, but you're still wasting resources 17:51:22 you're just wasting money instead of power 17:51:40 you forego the cost of capital 17:59:39 hyc - thanks! will take a look at his project - https://www.avalabs.org/ 18:00:21 Money is a representation of a certain amount of goods. So with x$ you can buy x goods. If you buy monero you just decide to buy a virtual currency instead of goods. So the opportunity costs for the crypto must be paid by the users of the network. What is the problem of the capital cost? 18:32:07 yanmaani: Maybe I got your point. If you are seeing at a basic level, people would exchange pos crypto for goods (represented by fiat currencies). In ordert to keep the ledger honest transactions are associated with costs which are paid in the pos currency, which is then exchanged back by the staker, because of goods consumption . 18:39:39 thank you yanmaani 20:12:56 locustlord: trolling maxis? 20:17:49 Inge- where? 20:18:18 yeah maxis are pretty dumb 20:36:56 sech1: #bitcoin 20:37:29 I got banned from there briefly because I suggested it would be easier and cheaper to buy monero than to run your bitcoin through a dozen layers of coinswap and tumblers 20:44:26 heh 20:44:35 I was gonna say something similar yanmaani 22:24:17 the truth hurts 22:40:57 artefact: larger spread for larger orders 22:41:38 Lyza: yes but tumbling large quantities is not reliable 22:42:15 sorry that was a bit of a non sequitur I was calling back to a convo from this morning 22:43:28 interesting and timely conversation about master nodes though. I was just learning about zcoin and they have a hybrid pow + staked master node system. their transaction tech looks cool but I'm not sold on what appear to be a number of centralizing features of the protocol 22:55:39 master node / staking / whatever is just a total scam 22:55:52 nobody has explained how it would work, or came up with a working system 22:56:13 there are really solid reasons to believe proof of stake is impossible 22:58:26 The only consensus that resolve byzantine generals is PoW 23:01:27 "resolves" 23:01:45 but basically, yes. Although I don't think there's a mathematical proof of impossibility of PoS. 23:06:47 although I remain skeptical, tezos appears not to have exploded 23:09:03 Lyza: isn't tezos centralized? 23:09:31 more centralized than Proof of Stake usually is? idk 23:14:16 I'm considering a PoW/PoS hybrid for my game. Half because interesting to do, and half because of the tari people's exploration of merge mining security. 23:14:50 It's actually fun to work with something that doesn't have to be as secure as monero. 23:38:50 For Townforge would be nice to try it