Topic: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency - page 1718. (Read 4670972 times)

Thank you
I don't undestand the mixin count what number i have to type? 0 or 5? I want to send XMR to Poloniex

Let's keep the discussion factual.  First of all, both teams are making real progress where it counts:

Boolberry has contributed numerous code-level fixes to the inherited code from Bytecoin that have been later incorporated by the XMR team.

XMR has contributed numerous code-level fixes to that same code that have been / will probably be incorporated by Boolberry.

Boolberry has a working, cross-platform GUI.  XMR will soon as well, with several candidates being worked on.

Boolberry's "non-shit" changes, in your parlance, center primarily around mechanisms to keep the blockchain smaller over time by allowing some of the ring signature information in old transactions to be pruned after a period of time, and improvements to the mixing function to provide stronger assurances of anonymity.

Monero has triggered an explosion of awareness of both XMR and the cryptonote family more generally by providing the first available non-80%-premined implementation of the bytecoin codebase.

"Trash-talking" either BBR or XMR is, at this point, counterproductive:  It's very clear from their market behavior that people buying these coins are viewing them together as the leading options from a very interesting new family of coins.  They're not dumping XMR to buy BBR, or the opposite -- they're selling BTC (or, hopefully, some actual "shit coin" - grin) and buying either or both of them.

There's a lot more to be gained in cryptonote progress by pushing forward both the underlying CryptoNote technology and seeing if the differing feature sets of XMR and BBR help lead to further technological progress than by sniping from sockpuppet accounts.

That has to do with the pool aswell as if the admin has updated. Monerpool.com for me has 2 orphans in the last 150 blocks (1,3% orphans) .
Bad share variance depends on server location , vardiff , your internet connection and 100 different other parameters.
How big is your sample size ? 1-2-7-30 days ?

^The command is:
is the number of transactions yours is indistinguishable from (from 0 to maximum available)
[payment_id] is needed when you send to the exchanges and you get it from the particular exchange. It's not needed when you send to your wallet or someone else (except if he want to identify if this payment is from you and he'll then give you 64 characters payment ID.
Do not add '<', '>', '[' or ']' in the command.
Example (a valid transfer command, which will send 1 XMR to me with a PaimentID 'bzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzz4'):

Code:

transfer 5 4AyRmUcxzefB5quumzK3HNE4zmCiGc8vhG6fE1oJpGVyVZF7fvDgSpt3MzgLfQ6Q1719xQhmfkM9Z2uNXgDMqYhjJVmc6KX 1 bzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzzbzz4

What is the command to send monero?

No. We restarted the website API after doing some changes.
It's just the website, not the server. The connections aren't interrupted.

BTW we are at Pool Efficiency: 114%. Which mean that we find 14% more blocks than average pool or solominers. If we get such a good result, some are doing really bad.

The following is quoted from ducknotes thread, since I am not mining other coin except xmr, I hope someone do mine all three coins to confirm the comparison below or make comment on that:


For those who can`t see differences from other cryptonote coins - look at source code, check % of orphans in the network, check % of "bad shares" on pools, you will see that duckNote is a winner. Like

24 hours of mining with the same mining software and hardware gives:
4% of bad shares on Monero
2% of bad shares on Bytecoin
0.5% of bad shares on duckNote.

Orphans in above networks 6/2/1.

Man, don't just give up on this. You've gotta believe in the CryptoNote, not in Monero. A coin is transient, they will probably come and go in hundreds and what really matters is the groundbreaking technology underneath Bytecoin, Quazar, Fantom, XMR, etc. that will live on no matter what happens with all these currencies. Do you get it?

Well, it's not really so simple and a few eloquent spatterings which ignore the differences between Bitcoin and CryptoNote.  Nope, that really doesn't do justice to a discussion on how a 51% attack may actually be affected by improved features of CryptoNight.  The discussion really should delve into the whitepaper (and other sources) deeper: https://cryptonote.org/whitepaper.pdf

Really consider the outcome of the random oracle.  What does it mean when the argument for forgery in Bitcoin is overcome by a forgery resistant algorithm?  It means that there is much more to consider here and the argument for 51% jeopardy associated with CryptoNote is nowhere near settled.  What good is a forgery when the forger(s) themself/selves can't make out what exactly was forged?  I think that's the whole point of CryptoNote and a huge reason why it's so important.  It's a tangled mess that can't be undone and this is the beauty of this algorithm: it saves ourselves from ourselves.  It's also designed to be more forkable with lesser consequence.

What the whitepaper fails to do is really get into the cruches of such an algorithm.  It's hugely complicated and you can see the overhead immediately if you have ever used the wallet or began to download the blockchain.  However, I agree with the white paper's summation that more than one coin may serve viable purposes and can coexist based on their own merits. 

do you know if there are issues sendding xmr from mintpal to personal wallet ?

Thank you guys, that was what I thought. Just more eloquent and succinct than I could have said it.

And now I also see where the misunderstanding that Cryptonote is resistant to a 51% attack appears to come from:


In this respect, it actually doesn't help. This overview causes confusion. The people responsible for https://cryptonote.org/inside.php#double-spend-proof should amend that section. It should be explicitly stated that it talks about prevention of doublespends strictly on the same chain, that is, when there is no alternate blockchain attack (These are possible with a hashing power of less than 50% of the network by the way. See https://bitcoil.co.il/Doublespend.pdf).
People looking to invest in XMR read it when doing their due diligence and get wrong ideas, which they spread on the forums. Which in turn makes Monero look shady at first glance (making impossible promises raises red flags that it might be a scam).

Sorry if I looked like a FUDster, just a long time lurker with low post count who needed clarification

Is this the Yam official twitter? I fear the day one of these twitter accounts gets hacked and suddenly hundreds of people download forged binaries.

Mega has updated Yam link check https://twitter.com/yvg1900 for new link for Yam M7v.

Right.  and to the poster above, here's that whitepaper: https://cryptonote.org/whitepaper.pdf

It does mention the 51% vulnerability specifically to bitcoin but falls short of directly saying CryptoNote defeats the vulnerability.  However, it does speak directly to the difficulty of forgery in CryptoNote... ehhh... maybe I need to read and re-read that paper a few times...

The 51% double-spend in either Bitcoin or CryptoNote is done by legitimizing a new chain after spending on the old chain. No scheme can prevent this because it outright replaces blockchain data. Networks are based on always trusting the longest chain.

In CryptoNote, the 51% attacker's new chain wouldn't have the spent key image so the DS would succeed. The DS proof mentioned in the whitepaper refers to spends on the same chain (51% attacks involve 2+ chains). Normally this wouldn't be worth mentioning since Bitcoin is also DS proof in the same sense, but CryptoNote's ring signatures are anonymous so preventing it isn't trivial. This is why they made a special mention of being DS proof, but it's not referring to a 51% attack situation.

Yes, my question was could I run on 32 bit ubuntu; reading the last few pages has made it clear it's not practical.
My CPU is an Intel atom n270, which won't run 64 bit instructions.  So I have to get a different machine and install 64-bit Linux on it.

urg. never got it to work. i guess ill try to figure it out tomorrow.

Don't think "Double-Spend Proof" in the context of CryptoNote means protection against 51% attack.

I'm not an cryptographer or a mathematician but I just read the CryptoNote whitepaper and the double-spend protection is with respect to the sender, not the network.

The sender can't sign more than one signature with the same key when sending the transaction.

But the network is the one that verifies whether double-spending of ring signature occurred. And if an advisory controls more than 51% of the network, he can forge the Image Key. The Image Key is what is kept track of to prevent double-spending of ring signature but if the spender is also the same one has 51% of the hash, the can skip the verification step or forge this key, allowing double spending to occur.

The guy didn't say anything near FUD.  He was talking about XMR's ability to reduce negative affects of 51% issues such as a double-spend flaw.  Here's the link and it has nothing to do with FUD but everything to do with the benefits of cryptonote (which includes XMR) https://cryptonote.org/inside.php#double-spend-proof

This also has more links to features of cryptonote: https://cryptonote.org/#

Hope that helps clear things up.

smh

I was surprised today when I check my wallet, the file has gone too big!

Is it safe to just delete this 2 files:

bitmonero.log (file size 2,416,509 KB)
simplewallet.l,og (file size 84,462,548 KB)

Anyone can help me? Just want to ask than regret later.....