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.
Topic: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency - page 1718. (Read 4671953 times)
Keep your eyes open, fellas.
I am an investor who has bought heavily into xmr.
I asked a question in this thread, and didn't get an answer.
You guys have to be on the alert for the opportunity to reach out to people like me.
I asked a question that was so simple it was apparently worth ignoring in the high level discussion going on here.
If I can't get up to speed on the wallet I then must choose between leaving my holdings on an exchange into the indeterminate future or dumping, which is bad for me and bad for everybody else.
Please make monero useful to people who know less than you do. It shouldn't be beneath you to give a beginner a helping hand.
I am an investor who has bought heavily into xmr.
I asked a question in this thread, and didn't get an answer.
You guys have to be on the alert for the opportunity to reach out to people like me.
I asked a question that was so simple it was apparently worth ignoring in the high level discussion going on here.
If I can't get up to speed on the wallet I then must choose between leaving my holdings on an exchange into the indeterminate future or dumping, which is bad for me and bad for everybody else.
Please make monero useful to people who know less than you do. It shouldn't be beneath you to give a beginner a helping hand.
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?
You can still doublespend with a 51% attack, nothing has changed about that attack vector
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.
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.
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:
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
This also has more links to features of cryptonote: https://cryptonote.org/#
Hope that helps clear things up.
smh
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
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 ?
You can still doublespend with a 51% attack, nothing has changed about that attack vector
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.
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.
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:
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
This also has more links to features of cryptonote: https://cryptonote.org/#
Hope that helps clear things up.
smh
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
Mega has updated Yam link check https://twitter.com/yvg1900 for new link for Yam M7v.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
(snip)
did your question get answered? is your problem solved?
Yes, my question was could I run on 32 bit ubuntu; reading the last few pages has made it clear it's not practical.did your question get answered? is your problem solved?
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.
[...] Monero is most fundamental coin to the day. Not only it is strictly anonymous, it has double-spend proof even in case 51% attack. [...]
That's new to me. Is this true? How is that supposed to work?
Yes - link to support this claim is now necessary, otherwise, it's pure FUD.
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
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.
[...] Monero is most fundamental coin to the day. Not only it is strictly anonymous, it has double-spend proof even in case 51% attack. [...]
That's new to me. Is this true? How is that supposed to work?
Yes - link to support this claim is now necessary, otherwise, it's pure FUD.
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.....
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.....
Today i can't sync wallet it connect fail to node why 
It doesnt want to run on linux.
When i search my apt-cache for libboost_system i get nothing. When i search for libboost-system i get back results. so i suppose that's what the devs meant to write. anyway i get these results
no version 1.55.0
I tried apt-get update and then rebuilding my cache with apt-cache gencaches but no change. any advise?
Code:
./bitmonerod: error while loading shared libraries: libboost_system.so.1.55.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
When i search my apt-cache for libboost_system i get nothing. When i search for libboost-system i get back results. so i suppose that's what the devs meant to write. anyway i get these results
Code:
libboost-system-dev - Operating system (e.g. diagnostics support) library (default version)
libboost-system1.53-dev - Operating system (e.g. diagnostics support) library
libboost-system1.53.0 - Operating system (e.g. diagnostics support) library
libboost-system1.49-dev - Operating system (e.g. diagnostics support) library
libboost-system1.49.0 - Operating system (e.g. diagnostics support) library
libboost-system1.54-dev - Operating system (e.g. diagnostics support) library
libboost-system1.54.0 - Operating system (e.g. diagnostics support) library
no version 1.55.0
I tried apt-get update and then rebuilding my cache with apt-cache gencaches but no change. any advise?
what would be the rate of mining XMR with 80 hs? 
pretty slow...like maybe 0.1 per day
you can check with the bot on freenode #monero
meh, not worth it then i guess
what would be the rate of mining XMR with 80 hs?
pretty slow...like maybe 0.1 per day
you can check with the bot on freenode #monero
is http://monero.crypto-pool.fr/# getting DDOSed again ?!?
Jump to: