can we see list of development  is it some thing like these :: add missing overflow check for already generated coins ---> fixing bug fix pending transfers fee display in show_transfers ---> fixing bug fix send queue limit warning spam avoid deadlock waiting for send queue to drain EDIT ::: looolwut they were all bug fixing, instead of " development "At this very second Monero and I2p Devs are on IRC talking about kovri development for more anonymous Monero<-->I2p integration. https://www.irccloud.com/#!/ircs://irc.freenode.net:6697/%23kovri-devhttps://github.com/monero-project/kovri |
|
|
|
i dont get it
That's why I explained it. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1443867.0Can't make it any clearer (unless cognitive dissonance, or worse, is the real problem). BTW, masternodes compound the problem of mining centralization, so stating a problem to explain the need for a new problem is not what you are doing here (though it's still weird logic) you are actually adding another problem that is most likely worse--and, in dash's case, is worse. Also, I don't watch markets that much, but is there a corollary between masternodes and stable price? Both XMR and dash seem to have similar price fluctuations. If that's true, then your original argument goes out the window (masternodes=price stability). Aren't there already benefits to miners and services running full-nodes? If so, then increased mining and services should correspond with node increase. Although even the incentivized node as price stabilizer isn't really a valid argument in itself. Unless you account for the coins being removed from the market, you aren't really saying nodes are creating the upward or stabilizing pressure--you could very turn the argument to, "Why doesn't dash have a CryptoKingdom style game to stabilize the price?"  i dont get it because my FUD is dihonest, with masternodes you can control voting so there is centralization. your dash whale might hodl 50% of dash coin and he is swinging price like a toy. so there is your centralization, how would you prevent ppl from dumping all their dash when close up their node If you aren't going to bother reading, I'm not going to bother explaining--I'll just fix your mistakes. |
|
|
|
i dont get it
That's why I explained it. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1443867.0Can't make it any clearer (unless cognitive dissonance, or worse, is the real problem). BTW, masternodes compound the problem of mining centralization, so stating a problem to explain the need for a new problem is not what you are doing here (though it's still weird logic) you are actually adding another problem that is most likely worse--and, in dash's case, is worse. Also, I don't watch markets that much, but is there a corollary between masternodes and stable price? Both XMR and dash seem to have similar price fluctuations. If that's true, then your original argument goes out the window (masternodes=price stability). Aren't there already benefits to miners and services running full-nodes? If so, then increased mining and services should correspond with node increase. Although even the incentivized node as price stabilizer in'ts really a valid argument in itself. Unless you account for the coins being removed from the market, you aren't really saying nodes are creating the upward or stabilizing pressure--you could very turn the argument to, "Why doesn't dash have a CryptoKingdom style game to stabilize the price?" |
|
|
|
Flatlining at 0.00192215 atm. Interesting to see where this will go.   My guess, it will go down.  it alwasys saddening to see investor being skinned by whale... EDIT : IMHO monero should think about implementing masternode btw, so that price have better stability Does IMHO mean In My Horrible Opinion? Incentivizing nodes creates more problems than it fixes. Even if you did it in a way that doesn't encourage centralization (IE the Evan way) you still add a layer of complexity that will have many unintended results. Isn't creating a coin with fungibility as near as cash as possible and having it work within the most private network available enough for the Devs to contend with? Or do you also suggest that Monero moves away from the built-the-way-it-was-supposed-to-be-built-plan to promises-then-lowered-expectsations-followed-by-bigger-promises-then-lowered-expectations-followed-by-OH-SHIT-IT"S-BROKE-that-was-not-the-plan? cryptocurrency is not paper money, it need node by design, the same way it need miner. so as by design which miner was incentivized, so node too should be rewarded. yes it will add complexity, but that give bigger reward to the coin holder. why afraid of complexity is that why monero still using command line wallet because gui wallet add complexity to developer Complexity + unintended consequences = bad design I get why nodes are important, but until someone figures out a way to reward them without introducing centralization, I doubt you'll find the concept in any serious cryptocurrency. Do you have a plan to implement them that doesn't incur more centralization? If you do, I'd like to hear it. BTW, here's why masternodes are a terrible idea as implemented: Dash's failure at trustless decentralization is the test case that formed my understanding of why trustless decentralization is necessary for any cryptocurrency to succeed at being disruptive. Dash's failure is that it built a centralizing flaw that aggregates coins to those who run nodes and layering power functions (votes, fees, privacy, etc...) onto these nodes.
Dash's nodes have two major weaknesses in design: first, they are pay based, or paynodes, which means that they can be bought and sold. The second flaw in design is that they collect fees, which means node holders collect money that in turn can be used to buy more nodes that in turn can collect more fees, and so on and so forth. Where this especially becomes troubling is that dash's launch produced 2 million coins in 2 days and this initial distribution cannot be verified to be fairly distributed, which means the resources to buy 2000 nodes (more than half of current existing at this writing) were made available to a few lucky guys who happened to be mining at that right moment--considering this is 30% of current distribution and given that they could have bought 2000 or more masternodes since that scheme was introduced, the number of masternodes these initial miners could have may be considerably more than 30%, and considering that this control can aggregate over time, it illustrates why these systems need to be trustlessly verified.
I apologize for all the numbers just thrown at you, but lets make it simpler, since the masternode system collects the revenue that determines its degree of centralization, and that centralization can't be verified to any statistical certainty, we should assume that it is increasingly trending towards a traditional oligarchy or monarchy, where one or a few have undue power over the entire system--how it behaves, the distribution and security of its benefits.
We can assume this model fails at decentralization if we follow the principle that a cryptosystem should be trustlessly verified--it is imperative that if you want to break away from the shackles of a central power and from the enablers of these systems, you can not get there following the same old trusted rules, mathematics have given us the tools to undermine and outperform these old world systems, but we will never get there by using systems that forgo the technology and embrace the old world trust model in a vain attempt to disrupt those standards by embracing them.
|
|
|
|
Flatlining at 0.00192215 atm. Interesting to see where this will go. My guess, it will go down. it alwasys saddening to see investor being skinned by whale... EDIT : IMHO monero should think about implementing masternode btw, so that price have better stability Does IMHO mean In My Horrible Opinion? Incentivizing nodes creates more problems than it fixes. Even if you did it in a way that doesn't encourage centralization (IE the Evan way) you still add a layer of complexity that will have many unintended results. Isn't creating a coin with fungibility as near as cash as possible and having it work within the most private network available enough for the Devs to contend with? Or do you also suggest that Monero moves away from the built-the-way-it-was-supposed-to-be-built-plan to promises-then-lowered-expectsations-followed-by-bigger-promises-then-lowered-expectations-followed-by-OH-SHIT-IT"S-BROKE-that-was-not-the-plan? |
|
|
|
Sure is quiet around here
Where is AP? I feel like he's busy making a hacker-style cryptonote movie or writing his memoirs. |
|
|
|
Have you ever read Delueze's Societies of Control? Bitcoin fits great with this agenda, though I think Deleuze would say it's the natural progression of Capitalism and more the TPTB playing themselves than leading anyone--pay specially attention to the discipline society being ousted for control society when reading. While I think some in Bitcoin are trying to make it more private, I don't think it will ever achieve any degree of great privacy as it will never be at the protocol level and require you going through observable way stations that require you to borrow further and further underground--"Neo, what's in your wallet?" http://www.mccoyspace.com/nyu/10_s/ideas/texts/week08-Deleuze.pdf |
|
|
|
I am going to have to agree with that. After reading their reddit , they do seem to keep coming back to Dash over and over again. Tough not to do when the OP points to it in his example of "good marketing." I'm sure if he had led in with Ethereum or Bitcoin that that is what would have influenced the replies. Maybe better to move to another topic to get a feel for the reddit. Though it is funny that a dasher reads r/monero and posts it on here. |
|
|
|
Thanks for the bump, macrochip. The argument on dash's superior marketing versus monero's superior design highlights very divergent methods to coin development, while dash's method allows for them to buy soda machines and girls in bikini's to further its cause, it still hasn't paid for any cryptographers to show how their coin centralizes itself into an unfair and fragile design that governments (or their own leadership) can exploit. Strange that I have to point it out and that no one in their community wants or can address it as a problem. Monero may not get the notice of the noobs, but its design is superior and those who wish to market it, and even write about it here, do so out of love for the technology and a desire to see it succeed based on merit and not hype. |
|
|
|
and the credibility of monero supporters shrinks again..
And you rehashed a thread that hasn't been posted on for almost a month to what? Gain credibility? Here we go again, the monero tard force out in action with their marketing. Ceti, can you explain how pointing out that raising dead threads isn't doing anything for anyone's credibility is marketing? Do you even read what you write to see if it makes sense? Or is it just throw a dart at the dash versus monero bullet points--and wherever it lands it lands? Son, take your angry attacks elsewhere, the DASH community has had enough of your aggressive ranting and personal attacks. Go do something positive for your own coin instead. Hi Risto ! If you can't answer the questions, just say so. No reason to deflect and get all community spokesman with it. |
|
|
|
and the credibility of monero supporters shrinks again..
And you rehashed a thread that hasn't been posted on for almost a month to what? Gain credibility? Here we go again, the monero tard force out in action with their marketing. Ceti, can you explain how pointing out that raising dead threads isn't doing anything for anyone's credibility is marketing? Do you even read what you write to see if it makes sense? Or is it just throw a dart at the dash versus monero bullet points--and wherever it lands it lands? |
|
|
|
and the credibility of monero supporters shrinks again..
And you rehashed a thread that hasn't been posted on for almost a month to what? Gain credibility? |
|
|
|
@eca.sh, I'm not sure why you sent me a PM stating that TPTB_need_war is banned for ten days, but if it's true, I'm really unsure why you are attempting to argue with him a few hours after you broke the news to me--hard to reply when you're banned. "Your buddy was banned for 10 days, lol « Sent to: generalizethis on: Today at 03:24:19 AM »" !!! WARNING: This user is a newbie. If you are expecting a message from a more veteran member, then this is an imposter !!!
!!! WARNING: This user is a newbie. If you are expecting a message from a more veteran member, then this is an imposter !!!
Theymos replied when I sent him a copy of the prior message (didn't mention nor quote you) with the following message and he banned me from BCT for 10 days. Your technical claims are nonsensical, but yet you keep spamming them and resorting to ad hominem arguments. For example, there is a known attack on reduced-SHA-256 with 52/64 rounds, but the attack has complexity 2255.5. So the best-known attack on SHA-256 causes it to lose half a bit of security when the number of rounds is reduced. It's nothing. Saying that we're doomed (and spamming about it everywhere) because someone might possible find a way to invert SHA-256 is like freaking out because there might be psychics capable of reading keys from people's minds.
Take a break...
Clearly he either didn't bother to read my linked post (which I also provided to him in the quote) wherein explained I wanted to explore theoretical security concerns about double-hashing (which btw is not the same as what Merkel trees do), not not single hashing which I am positing may have different security attributes. In that linked post, I also quoted wherein I had always made a disclaimer that readers should wait for expert peer review and that I hadn't expended a lot of time on the issue. Also the ad hominem starts from his tribe attacking me, such as for example Foxup's condescending posts. I responded in kind after it was clear that Foxup wouldn't stop his snide attitude and follow a more fruitful one. Also theymos is disingenuous by cherry picking the preimage attack at 52 rounds which requires 2 255.5 trials and not also mentioning the pseudo-collision attack at 46 rounds with only 2 46 trials: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHA-2#Cryptanalysis_and_validationThe point of my theoretical inquiry is whether double-hashing might open an opportunity for a new cryptoanalysis breakthrough such as the Boomerang attack given the significant structure at the midpoint the doubling the hash ostensibly introduces. And why are theymos and gmax so worried about allowing information to propagate freely and letting readers make up their own minds. Why do they feel they need to control the minds of readers. So yes it appears you are correct. I hit the root nerve. Theymos and gmax are ostensibly in bed together and can't tolerate any theoretical discussion. None of this is going to help them, because they both have only left thumbs. Over and out. P.S. you may want to quote this message immediately before it is deleted by the mods.Everybody knows that SHA-256 hasn't been broken. It is quite nonsensical to discuss ways it might be broken, when everyone knows that is impossible. No wonder why everyone ignores you. |
|
|
|
His account is solely used for Shilling Monero.
i do believe there is some wealthy monero investor that pays $$$ for certain posts. otherwise i cannot explain how this people are: - ready 24/7 to reply any damn post in a matter of seconds - repeating the same things over and over for months (try to go back 10 months in the forum history and you'll find the same people posting same crap) - creating multiple account with very similar writing style, often questioning each other almost everyday i get censored (post removed) for my opinion about this monero supporters so i do believe i'm not completely wrong, i wonder how long it will take to get this post removed aswell I'm posting this minutes after you posted, therefore I must be getting paid--right? Here's more shitcoiner logic you can throw at me since you can't explain away your lead Dev criticizing your privacy scheme while shilling the vaporware intended to fix it--maybe someday he'll have the whitepaper with the required math to fill in the gaps. My guess is greed and fantasy will do the job for most dashers in the meantime. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1430839.msg14509987#msg14509987I'll probably have to post a "guide to time wasting management for trolls and shills," so Sputz gets that most people get his game. again, i couldn't care less about any altcoin. i'm here for bitcoin and sometime i trade some altcoin for fun. so yeah, you can believe i'm a dash shill as much as you want, is not true at all. the reason i still keep on posting against the monero-troll-wave is because you guys turned this forum in a shit storm and is really annoying to see for MONTHS the same posts by the same people pushing the same agenda. why can't we have nice things in this world? Not sure I ever called you a dash shill, and I didn't just now, but if you think dash is a nice thing or this discussion thread isn't about hashing out which coins are legitimate technology and which ones are just here to rip off noobs or worse, then you'll probably never get why I criticize dash. What I don't get is why anyone defends it, but that's why there is a continual rehashing of the same points that get lost over time and need to be revisited. I went to the trouble of creating the centralization and shitcoin logic threads, so I didn't have to waste time repeating the same thing to people who either have terrible memories or are willfully trying to bog down the argument by repeating the same logically fallacies, spin, ect., over and over and over again. You don't see the situation as I do, and that's fine, but let's try and keep it from ad hominem attacks of accusing me of being paid or any other speculation that gets away from fact and into straight trolling or (like why sputz is on ignore) piling accusations on top of each other and creating busy work for me as I try and detangle innuendo from fact--that's what I was talking about when I wrote, "I'll probably have to post a "guide to time wasting management for trolls and shills," so Sputz gets that most people get his game." |
|
|
|
His account is solely used for Shilling Monero.
i do believe there is some wealthy monero investor that pays $$$ for certain posts. otherwise i cannot explain how this people are: - ready 24/7 to reply any damn post in a matter of seconds - repeating the same things over and over for months (try to go back 10 months in the forum history and you'll find the same people posting same crap) - creating multiple account with very similar writing style, often questioning each other almost everyday i get censored (post removed) for my opinion about this monero supporters so i do believe i'm not completely wrong, i wonder how long it will take to get this post removed aswell I'm posting this minutes after you posted, therefore I must be getting paid--right? Here's more shitcoiner logic you can throw at me since you can't explain away your lead Dev criticizing your privacy scheme while shilling the vaporware intended to fix it--maybe someday he'll have the whitepaper with the required math to fill in the gaps. My guess is greed and fantasy will do the job for most dashers in the meantime. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1430839.msg14509987#msg14509987I'll probably have to post a "guide to time wasting management for trolls and shills," so Sputz gets that most people get his game. |
|
|
|
Although it may turn out to be false alarm. It is still interesting to see what other high level techs will say about this double hashing and possible vulnerability.
Let's await the discussion and hope it is comprehensible even in part to the layman. It's got to be more interesting than the usual spam that clutters the main alt board.
Amen, and a little reminder as to why alts serve a purpose, at least the ones that didn't copy/paste BTC. |
|
|
|
China's centralization of Bitcoin mining: Chinese Mining Expands
Guo said the mine, operating 24 hours a day, mines 50 bitcoins all day.
Guo launched the operation two years ago. At that time, mining in China represented about 40% of the world’s mining equipment. China now has 70% of all the equipment, he said.
Guo has established two mines in China and is building another one that, once complete, will be the largest in the world and will produce more than 30% of the entire world’s bitcoin.
he said he mine 50 bitcoin all day, and then if he add another farm he will mine 30%?, somethign wrong with his math, because 30% now are 1200 coins, and after halvign still 600 coin, very far away from 50 with just 2 farm That really depends if the third one it is actually the largest farm in the world--he never stated that they are the same size. |
|
|
|
Hello!
BLD 1,184
STO1 75,400
M 4,350,000
KMT 0
Windows Cost 2 WIRS
approx total (M) 19,854,000
Per sqm (M) 342,310
It is for 1-C-F5
Public Gardens, Old Town
But there no SAVE button. What else I need?
What means M? Moneritos?
Can anyone help me?? M are Moneritos. So you'd need 4.35 Monero to complete the building. I have it already, and all another stuff too. So it won't save when you hit the save changes button? |
|
|
|
Hello!
BLD 1,184
STO1 75,400
M 4,350,000
KMT 0
Windows Cost 2 WIRS
approx total (M) 19,854,000
Per sqm (M) 342,310
It is for 1-C-F5
Public Gardens, Old Town
But there no SAVE button. What else I need?
What means M? Moneritos?
Can anyone help me?? M are Moneritos. So you'd need 4.35 Monero to complete the building. |
|
|
|
e-cash must be fungible, untracable, unlinkable. Dash being the best implementation of these values -> added to btce
LOL. Here's Evan saying that the current dash anonymity scheme isn't what you want--maybe he'll put out a white paper with the required math a few months after he's said that it's fixed. Even the "lead scientist" of dash thinks you're wrong. Min 2:13 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5sNx7SMTP8I really need to add decentralized to that list also--how else are you supposed to make it antifragile enough to disrupt the current system? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1443867.0thanks for reposting, i haven't watched that q&a in awhile. good stuff! Had missed that one, thanks generalizthis, good DASH promotion. Hmmm.... Not sure if invalidating your current anonymity scheme with the promise of vaporware is "good promotion," but as they say, "One man's trash is another man's bag to defend and hold at even the cost of cognitive dissonance." |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
