Topic: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency - page 112. (Read 4671951 times)

The coin must keep evolving.  This is necessary and good.
But when you consider that only a tiny segment the people are geeks or crypto enthusiasts; how most people's eyes would just glaze over if you tried to lead them through nitty-gritty stuff like the monero subaddress business; it makes you realize that the struggle to achieve crypto acceptance and growth is going to be a very long road.
I'm deeply into crypto and have been educating myself about it since 2013.  But when I saw that I now will have more homework to do because of the move from payment ID's to subaddresses, I just wished there was some way to avoid it.

Shit I hope it wasn't me that gave you that merit.

That is how big investors do it. They do not care about the technology or future use, they simply pick the most beautiful logo on coinmarketcap and then invest everything  . Recommended strategy to everyone  .

I would pick ZEC instead of XMR because of better symbol

https://github.com/noncesense-research-lab/Blockchain_big_bang/blob/master/models/Isthmus_Bx_big_bang_model.ipynb
You probably all saw this before? Posted without comment.

That is amazing! But really sidechains could help Monero to fight with Grin or Beam?
I know that Monero has other cool features, but if we think about the scalability.

That is good news this coin will get more better features and it will make this more reliable in future. Monero is here to stay for long time with great use case.

Yes. MimbleWimble sidechain was confirmed to be a part of Monero by fluffy a year ago.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Mimblewimble/comments/7gqnth/confirmed_mimblewimble_coming_to_monero_as_a/

And recently it was confirmed once again.
https://twitter.com/fluffypony/status/1084524086741602304

I am not expert about privacy coins, but many people are talking about the revolutionary mimblewimble protocol. Is Monero going to support this protocol?

I don't persist on the idea of forced registering of pools/miners. I accept any better idea with great enthusiasm.

What our practical experience show today:
1. Hard fork twice a year to alter the mining algo don't kill ASICs - they evolve faster than we think. Just 3 of 6 months passed since previous fork - and ASICs are on the scene again. Note cn/2 was designed ESPECIALLY to be ASIC-resistant compared to cn/1.
2. It is obviously a difficult task to distinguish CPU/GPUs and ASICs in terms of mining efficacy: new algo should preserve the CPU/GPU mining efficacy while be violent against ASIC mining efficacy.

I've just read about CryptonightR in more depth and I like it. It meets the 2. requirement above. Let's CryptonightR will be our first step to fight against ASICs:
https://github.com/SChernykh/CryptonightR

Any thoughts? May be somebody sees hidden disadvantages in CryptonightR?

Sad news if Rpietila is still insane... I remember his great contribution in the community life. There was a discussion when Rpietila want to make a Monero real-world meeting in his castle... or a meeting had been done indeed?.. my memories about that discussion are dim now...

Thanks.

Man, that castle went through a lot of drama, I recall an earlier robbery / water damage situation as well.  Surprised he didn't have a boat that sank as well ;-)

But I guess it is best to let sleeping dogs lie.

I argued this plan should have been in place years ago and if it isn't already then it should be. It's not like this is a surprise, there should be a dev with the assignment of notifying all those places for just such an occurrence. It's not a cluster fuck if you are prepared. Basic security shit here, be prepared. I think they teach that to kids somewhere, oh yeah, boy scouts.

Surprise fork sounds like a cluster fuck for exchanges, pools, and users. Unless you tell everyone, but then it's not a surprise.

Off hand and on first thought a surprise fork does not sound like a bad idea as it will once again de-incentify asic development but forced registering of pools/miners is against all crypto stands for.

Currently it's becoming more apparent by the day that there is a very well established and constantly growing movement within the community to 'keep the small miners in the mining game'. Specifically that this initiative appears to be growing faster socially than the initiative to cater toward a larger mining network is most concerning to me. This is because, while goals like keeping small miners in the game sound quite 'equalitiarian' .. or 'fair' .. in this particular instance extreme caution should be utilized. I am advising this because those who would work actively toward keeping Monero permanently vulnerable, would also share these exact same goals.

I see measures like: Only cerified pools should be allowed to submit blocks. But which pools are these? Doesn't this proposition in particular entirely ruin the prospect of an individual miner, why was this propsed?

Or like: Make a surprise fork. But using which algorithm for mining going forward? The one that appeared two months ago directly before the hashrate increase? They can't all be infinitely secure, and making too small of a change can be designed/accomodated well in advance.

Or even: Let the community vote for a surprise fork. But which community? And by which form of vote? Hashrate? The .. increasingly vociferous 'small miner' community of late?

Why, with an already aggressive forking schedule, are we hearing calls for more forks?

I just want to make the point that Monero can likely survive a (short-lived) 51% attack. But seeding the community with malicious actors speaking for the 'small miners' and having actual responses being made to protect these people by means of a social engineering attack is a very real and dangerous threat that will kill just about anything. (This applies from the top to the bottom of the 'community')

Just a few weeks ago I had to request coinmarketcap.com to change their main landing page to getmonero.org from monero.cc operating under this very hallucination.

Regardless, I don't have a miner in the game that I'd care to vouch for. Just wanted to state the obvious.

Look there's really just a few choices here that I see at this moment: Do nothing about the algorithm, Change the algorithm to avoid asics, Change the algorithm one final time. Whatever it is I don't necessarily care one way or the other just be very wary of ongoing social engineering attacks that appear to be taking root (yet again) in this community, IMO.

Right now : 614 - 311 unknown vs 313 known = 303 UNKNOWN vs 311 known.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
608..614..617 it is increasing every single minute...

51% ATTACK is ongoing. Summarizing all the discussion above:
Unknown hashrate ARE ASICs for almost SURE, because The Community fights against ASICs thus forces them to use hidden, unknown pools.

Honest miners are becoming bankrupts right now: The Ratio Hashrate / Price = 608 MH/s / $46 = 13.2 Mh/s/$,
BUT A YEAR AGO:
https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/monero-hashrate.html#1y
https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/monero-price.html#1y
The Ratio Hashrate / Price was ~650 MH/s / ~$350 =~ 1.8 Mh/s/$, and that time ASICs were NOT on the scene yet - they came in February 2018 increasing the hashrate by factor ~2 to 1GH/s (and now we observe the same factor ~2 from ~300 to ~600).

I VOTE FOR IMMEDIATE HARDFORK WITH ALTERED MINING ALGO LIKE THIS ONE:
https://github.com/SChernykh/CryptonightR

CryptonightR is normalized in hashrate as our current cn/2 and is efficient with GPUs (but much not as well with ASICs/FPGAs).

------------------

Alternative/additional way I proposed: each pool should register in XMR blockchain its signature. Each block mined should be signed by pool's signature. Unsigned or mal-signed blocks should be rejected by the XMR consensus.

This way can also count hashrate distribution among pools exactly, so the consensus may reject a block mined by a pool close to 51% hashrate.

This proposal doesn't violate an anonymity of a pool owner: just pool as web-site must be public, https certificates may be done by "Let's Encrypt" for example.

https://miningpoolstats.stream/monero

and for now - there are more 300 MH unknown hashrate, and this is almost 50% of all hashrate

it seems that bitmain testing new CN8 asics

I think this was him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHg8qIKJo1I