Same long term expected value at first approximation, the big difference is the variance, which is much higher for solo mining.

The daemon cannot mine to a pool.

<Kapli "How good of an idea is to mine u"> I wouldn't recommend it. For it it was significantly slower. I was getting about 2kh/s using the wallet. With XMRig, I was getting about 16Kh/s

that difference is much more than wallet vs xmrig

some bad settings

16k vs 14.8k would be my guess for the difference

I sold XMR for cash to a stranger on irc

am I going to jail

is this a bsd joke?

modul8[m]: rofl

i have more. does a tari equal an atari?

Hi. I'm interested, is monero underdevelopment? I mean specifically, is there an interface to the monero network where it can be configured or reconfigured ?

Does anyone know where I might be able to find out what limitations, if any, on the development team and what they can do? My angle here is, would it be possible for the authorities to knock on the door of a monero leading developer and force them to give admin privileges to the authorities

good question. by it beeing hosted on github it very much seems like that

Monero is hosted on github?

that's what a quick search tells me. maby it's just a mirror but i don't think so

there is no risk in hosting on github

git is decentralized and for issues / prs we have regular backups

"would it be possible" yes but that would also be possible if we use self hosted repo

maintainers / core team don't post code changes themselves so it would quickly be noticed

@selsta thanks. Are you involved with monero?

My point being here that to target monero it seems like they could target the individuals involved.

That's true for any human activity ever

Well, it could have been designed with no option for configuration post initialisation. ( i know nothing about this or whether that is possible). I thought the idea of cryptos was they were free from being able to be manipulated by humans as fiat currencies can

CRYPTO IS NOT CRYPTOCURRENCY ಠ_ಠ ~ IT REFERS TO CRYPTOGRAPHY, davp

Ok.

Well I mean cryptocurrency obviously

(It's just a silly bot, ignore it)

You can't manipulate it in the sense that you need everyone to be on-board in order to change the system

if you can manipulate the central source it's easy to get everyone on board

Nothing can stop people from saying: "Ok, we all agree to stop running this old version of the code and start using this new version of the code"

there is a risk that a dev sneaks in unintended changes but that exists with every project

<charolastra "if you can manipulate the centra"> That's the nice thing about git: any change is tagged and labeled, and you can walk through it step by step and see everything, and revery any unwanted changes

Or better yet, just move to an uncompromised copy of the repo and treat it as your new main repo

The ability to download a full copy of the code and personally verify it is one of the greatest powers of open source software

It requires effort, sure, but at least you can

endor00[m]: I get that but i thought that the system ran independently of humans. There needs to be a point of no more development, a shut off allowing no more interacting with it on an admin basis. I thought bitcoin was like that. Basically the human element are massive vulnerabilities, the hole development team could get held hostage a forced to comply, the stakes are masive

What you're thinking of cannot exist, because you would have to take away people's freedom to decide what code to run on their devices

Also, it would imply that you are 100% sure that your code contains no vulnerabilities or bugs of any code, nor will it ever be broken in any sort of way now and forever

And that, at best, would be a prime example of hubris

Sure. So someone has access to bitcoin as admin?

And no, not even bitcoin is like that. Hell, they're still polishing and tweaking things (even though it's mostly fluff, and not core features or protocol changes)

davp: no

Yeah, they have maintainers merging code too

they can't overwrite the network

but sure someone has repo access

but they don't have admins that can press buttons to turn off / change the network if that's what you meant

Oh wait, you meant accessing live running instances and messing with thise? Hell to the nope

<selsta "but they don't have admins that "> This

You are the only one in charge of the code you're running on your machine, and nobody can touch that. That's true for bitcoin, and true for Monero

The network works because we all agree to run versions of the code that are compatibile with eachother

But the only thing that maintainers can touch is the source code in the official repositories

I suppose there are two elements, the network element governing how communications are made but then another element governing monetary policy, coin issuance for example. Can the coin issuance policy get changed and pushed out to the network as an update, or could the ease of mining be changed?

I'm not familiar with the block validation code, but I would assume (hope) that there is a check for the new coins added with each new block

So if a peer tries to create a block with a trillion Monero for themselves, it would just get rejected by everyone else

The only way to change the emission curve would require changing the source and everybody agreeing to run that change

In terms of "what could be changed by changing the source code", the answer is "everhthing"

The real question is: will people run that changed code? Or will they reject your changes and keep running the previous version?

Nobody can come in and say "this is the new Monero, everybody do as I say"

Or rather: they can, but most likely nobody will listen to them and they'll achieve nothing

I am thinking that monero is going to get targeted, it is an obstacle to those who want no cash privacy. I reckon knocking on doors will be the last thing to happen if all else fails.

Presumably another way to target monero would be to push the price of monero down thus making mining not cost effective especially if the price of electric goes up. Can the monero network, or any network run without mining power just using user nodes?

miners have been mining Monero at a loss for large periods of Monero's history

it self-corrects - when the price is too low then they simply can't afford to sell

so they hodl

and the price goes up, because there is natural and speculative demand

ie. there's only so much market manipulation even a sophisticated and resourceful attacker could deploy

A big chunk of monero miners have near zero operating expenses, they don't care about price.

yup

Not only botnets, but also small scale home/college miners with "free" electricity

I see. Limit supply until price goes up. Cheers everyone for all your info. Much appreciated.

What takes elon to tweet monero . doge really

I heard that's a fellow south african that's into Monero

maybe those two country man should talk a bit

lol

unfortunately rocking a South African accent isn't enough for Elon to pay attention to me

shit

not even the ZED stuff?

so disrespectful.

well even the Brits and Ozzies say zed

ohh TIL

thought it was a south african and aussie thing

it's a brit thing

also irish?

hm could be

it is a british thing

and all their bastard offspring imitate

endor00[m]: yes, distributed development is nice but my point was more about having a SPOF. for me it seems that one or a handfull of guys are responsible of merging the different push requests into the official repo. by having that hosted by a US company those individuals are known

btw, are there mechanisms in place to verify the binaries?

charolastra: the binaries are all the result of reproducible builds

anyone can verify their hashes and build locally to compare results

yes, can. but does?

so far it's not necessary as long as the hashes match

and everyone is told to check the hashes of their downloads

I always verify my hashes

And the auto-updater does it automatically iirc, right?

yes

and you can look at the sig archive here github.com/monero-project/gitian.sigs

lots of us have verified the hashes of each build

so, doge coin has over 3x the market cap of monero

how does that make you feel?

market cap is a made up number

I can fork a new coin, mint 1 billion tokens, sell 1 for $1, and instantly have a $1B mcap

it's irrelevant

Liquidity is a more important metric

Bitcoin has $625M liquidity now (+-2% price change), Monero $14.8M

So based on this metric, Monero should be $1000, or Bitcoin should be $6300, depending on your point of view

sech1: Where do you get that liquidity stat from?

I'd love to see top coins arranged by their liquidity, I'm sure Monero would be higher in rankings

is liquidity the amount that is being traded in a period?

Liquidity is the amount you can buy/sell without moving the price much

i.e. the depth of order books

then again, most order book volume is fake

volume is not liquidity

if an order in the order book is live you can in theory fill it, so liquidity is more real metric

volume can be faked by trading bots of course, but not liquidity

unless some exchanges create fake orders to increase liquidity

oooh, that's an interesting definition I was not aware of

"moving the price much": how much is "much"?

the numbers I posted before are +-2% "much"

ok, so how do you go from order depth to the prices you mentioned?

if order depth was proportional to the price then these are the prices we'd have (considering BTC and XMR have roughly the same amount of coins)

not sure I got it

Monero has more liquidity compared to its market cap than Bitcoin

like 6 times more

oooh, so it's a relative measure between two coins, not an absolute

tokineko hyc

tokineko: has a question on using raw partition for LMDB

He's currently using btrfs on an HDD

Mount options `noatime,compress-force=zstd:2,discard,autodefrag`

* Mount options `noatime,compress-force=zstd:2,autodefrag`

Perhaps, disabling copy on write can improve performance a lot.

I'm sure it would.

btrfs is definitely a poor choice

any journaling filesystem is a poor choice for LMDB

and yes, it would perform better on a raw partition

you need commits 5c0dda76c96a3badc9c61fe840c7098451c7ffa2 and a7df9e63a5097b7915a3b4a2788c1166e3c1b470 to get that support

(not in any public release)

hi ! i installed the latest windows monero gui wallet and after some days I got now a virus warning from windows defender

I checked the sha265 sum of the install package and it seems ok

are there also hash sums for the other files included in the installer so that I can verify ?

normal

has a mining capabilities so windows mad

fuck windows, use linux!

ok thx

cobolus[m]: you should also make a habit of checking the hash list against binaryfate's pgp signature

how does one restore a 24-word monero seed?

this should help

thanks

Is it only possible to restor 24-word with the gui?

you should be able to restore 24-word seeds as well as 25 word seeds with both gui and cli

monero-wallet-cli --restore-deterministic-wallet

The last word is optional, it's a checksum.

Assuming it's the last one which is missing.

I tried my 24-word seed in the gui with that command but it keeps saying electrum blah blah not good

let me get you the exact error

Which software did you use to generate this seed?

no clue, it was long ago

Error: Electrum-style word list failed verification

It could be a typo in one of the words, or extra spaces around.

I suppose that's possible

lululimon, if it helps, only first three letters of the word matter

also, are you sure its a monero seed?

Definitely, I wrote MONERO next to it lol

lol

lululimon, could that be a trezor/ledger seed?

I guess they use bip39 formatting

Its just a regular monero seed from back before monero was a contender for world reserve currency

Monero was always a contender, what are you talking about then?

pre 2014?

like some 2011 monero seed?

No, I guess it was probably after that. I'm sorry, I really don't know. Some portuguese guy talked me through it back then.

oh really?

maybe check #monero-pt

lots of portuguese scammers there

maybe you'll recognize the culprit

I'm not sure. Each of the words is a normal, lexical word and they do not seem to be misspelled. I have even tried using only the first three letters as suggested.

but still it says `Electrum-style word list failed verification`

English seed ?

yes

There was a bug in... 2014 I think... where some words starting with i needed changing. Can't recall details though.

Any word starting with i ?

two

I think this might be a 2015 wallet, but I really can't remember

Anyone remembers what the deal was with those seeds ?

<moneromooo "Any word starting with i ?"> ^ irelativism starts with i

Aye.

lululimon: I suppose you can run with --log-level 2, it might give you better detail, though this is not super likely.

Another question: suppose you had some files for a Monero wallet `wallet` and `wallet.keys` that represent a wallet you have forgotten the password to. However, you have the seed words and restore your wallet and have `newWallet` and `newWallet.keys`. Is there a way to verify that these are the same wallet (e.g. using diff on the .keys file or some other method) without recalling the password of the previous instance?

No.

I'm seeing "Error: Couldn't connect to daemon 127.0.0.1:18081" on monero gui on tails, in the logs. Am I doing something wrong here? It's ben a while since I used it but as far as I recall I've always used it in simple mode on tails.

multifractal: what does `netstat -peanut | grep 18081` show

multifractal: I don’t think simple mode works on tails yet

due to tails being special, use advanced mode

see also xmrguide42y34onq.onion

Is there any work being done to reduce the time to verify transactions?

knacc I got a question about i2p-zero -- the GUI has a tab called "eepsite" that runs a little built in web server. Is that functionality available in the CLI? I don't see documentation for it in the readme

In my experience it's been 20+ minutes which isn't very feasible if monero were ever to be used for in-person transactions, unless I'm mistaken about something?

20+min?

Its a few ms to verify transactions

Do you mean to get confirmations, or sync?

Oh confirmations yeah

maybe they are talking about lock time

Its 2min confs, and you can do 0 conf for most transactions.

If you mean the wallet lock time like SGP says then no, that is locked intentionally.

If you intend on spending frequently you can break up your outputs into normal denominations to make sure you always have plenty unlocked.

That's simple to do in Feather wallet and is hopefully a feature that will come to other wallets at some point.

Think of outputs like bills in your wallet -- if you just have one big bill you have to wait for change before you can spend again, and Monero locks change for 10confs for safety and privacy.

I'm not talking about lock time

It you break down your big bill into multiple smaller bills ahead of time you always have what you need handy.

<leonardus "I'm not talking about lock time"> Oh

Then just decide how many confirmations you need -- most normal transactions can be zero conf

If you need a high assurance you can do multiple confirmation

But each conf should be ~2min

Give or take a bit due to randomness with mining.

* Give or take a bit due to variance with mining.

Thinking of Monero being used for IRL transactions like at a store, 0 confirmations seems too risky for a merchant to ever use, and 2 minutes still seems too long for something like that

0conf is not really risky if you have the transaction in your own mempool.

I wouldn't trust a different node, but if you have your own node 0conf is fine for most.

Finality is not better with shorter block times.

That's a common misconception.

Generally agree, especially for purchases <$1000

<leonardus "Thinking of Monero being used fo"> Think of how no store validates cash for small transactions, but will use a UV light on big bills to make sure.

Same concept here, but simpler because your node validates transactions the moment they're seen automatically.

Well, counterfeiting a (realistic) bill is a more complicated process than say double spending

If your node accepts it to the mempool it will be mined in almost every scenario and the payee can't change that.

<leonardus "Well, counterfeiting a (realisti"> No, double spending is incredibly difficult.

Yeah it requires powerful friends to pull off

In almost every scenario.

And changing block time does not change finality as mentioned.

Its honestly not a problem at all IMO

Dandelion might indeed make double spending easier.

Its just a native aspect of block chains -- choose what finality you're OK with.

In most scenarios 0conf is fine

Most people who are super cautious wait 1-2 confirms. Exchanges may wait longer since they often accept large deposits

<moneromooo "Dandelion might indeed make doub"> Not if comparing against your own nodes mempool, right?

Trusting the attackers/a random node would expose more surface

Depends what you mean by that.

But if your node has seen it its extremely extremely likely its already fluffed.

Alice buys widget from Bob. Alice spends output O in a tx she sends Bobs's node with dandelion. At the time time, she sends a double spend without dandelion, including to pool nodes.

Actually, she sends the other ones with dandelion too. Even better.

Two outputs can't both be spent in the mempool at once, can they?

Bob will see a bit of a delay (probabilistically) before seeing the subsequent txes.

Err two transactions in the mempool can't both spend the same output

The delay in the mempool makes it a bit more uncertain

And Alice wouldn't know or be sending to Bobs node, she'd be using her own or a public node in almost every scenario

Oh sure. It can hardly happen by chance. I was assuming Alice would be trying :)

True

But if the store owner didn't expose his node it would remove that whole vector.

Then how would that store owner know about payments ?

Not expose as in not advertise

It would still be a synced node of course

That's called security through obscurity and is typically not something you want to rely on as your main defense.

It would protect you from most small time attackers

But yeah not something for protecting against a large atyacker

Just mean for simple double spends etc

yeah, once we assume attackers of that capability, by all means wait for a few confirms

the p2p in store scenario can also leverage human trust relationships

if you goto the same store every day for coffee, the merchant can probably accept 0 conf

because you want to come back tomorrow

if you are a drifter / noob, merchant might wait for 1 conf or employ some double spend insurance

which could probably be a profit mechanism for wallet providers

"oh yeah you can 0conf your hamberders if you use walletX"

ah, basically saying they will cover the double spend risk

Accepting a 0conf makes sense for someone buying food in a place where you pay upfront

Or allow 0conf for rewards customers etc as a bonus advantage

Or raised 0conf limits for rewards

Good incentive for people potentially

Which file system without journaling do you recommend for LMDB on linux?

* Which linux file system without journaling do you recommend for LMDB?

Perhaps, ext4 without journaling?

y no journaling?

By the way, max file size on ext4 is 16terabytes.

Journaling seems to degrade LMDB performance.

You could try and see if your distro allows ZFS, if not, consider using FreeBSD for that

I can have ZFS, but ZFS has journaling and copy on write which degrade LMDB performance.

Can I optimize btrfs for monero blockchain LMDB?

btrfs has CoW as well

why don't you try ext4 w/o journaling tokineko[m] ?

Perhaps, `nodatacow,nodatasum` btrfs mount options can improve performance.

well there's no real point having btrfs then

I'd just take ext4

for its stability

Max file size on btrfs is 16EiB. Max file size on ext4 is 16TiB.

do you plan on having 16TiB files?

blockchain is 104GiB currently

you have some margin

you can change the block size also, to have bigger files on ext4

btrfs has no journal.

you can have no journal with ext4 as well

if you want you can have btrfs for your base system, then a ext4 partition

or a ext4 loop device

Disabling checksums and copy-on-write and compression can improve btrfs performance.

lol

lol

I'm not sure it will equal ext4 perf though tokineko[m]

you want to do mining right?

what else do you need the perf for

ext4 with data=writeback would seem enough to me

all the perf is useful for running public remote nodes probably

well, with the current architecture

of wallets asking for useless data