|
It will definitely be interesting to watch network hash here in a bit.
To be clear the fork or network upgrade is happening on April 6th
|
|
|
|
Would two corsair hx1000W be perfectly fine/enough for 6x RX Vega 56 ?
does hx1000W have enough pci-e connectors?
No it's not enough. You'd be really beating it out to the limits. Two 1000 watt psu should be plenty to run 6 cards. You'll have to do your own research on pci-e connectors but again you should be fine |
|
|
|
After the MoneroV fork Monero will be as "anonymous" as Bitcoin.
The few people that don't claim their MoneroV and cash out will be left with both compromised Monero holdings and an ever sinking market value.
For anybody thinking that it's 'smart' not to claim XMV... Wat is smart is to have a protocol where this kind of attack isn't even possible. Don't just blame XMV for attacking Monero, blame Monero for having a critical vulnerability. It's as much a social exploit as a technical one. The technical one makes the social attack possible in the first place. FIX THE PROTOCOL!
Hard to see how this could be done on a protocol level. Anyone can fork, and how can you prevent people exposing their private keys to the new fork if they want to? I will move my Monero to a new wallet just before the fork, and the original Monero to another new wallet just after. That should solve the problem for me. Of course, many won't bother to do this. As to the key image attack, there were several mitigations that were discussed and one that I believe has been approved on github and should be included in the upcoming release. To say the Dev team and/or community is doing nothing is false. Talking about PR 3322. |
|
|
|
A while ago when BTC was thought to be anonymous it was the boogeyman... Now privacy coins are the target. But isn´t this the whole point? Financial freedom and struggle for individual privacy that brought us here? In the US, I believe the pressure would generally come from FinCEN, SEC and the tax man - I imagine they'd be arguing KYC, exchanges follow existing security laws and pay your taxes. The bigger exchanges in the US should be able to handle this. |
|
|
|
Mind sharing what kind of a hardware wallet that is? It looks really interesting, but I have a feeling it's also really expensive... It's a ledger nano s. Support is coming soon |
|
|
|
No, the wallet is not the only issue.
Much more fundamental stuff here, spends on different chains could reveal things about the other.
I should have just replied with this. Oh well |
|
|
|
...so let me get this right.
The biggest claim with regards to monerov being a scam are that they are having people enter their private key in a closed source wallet?
Correct me if I'm wrong what what's the harm in waiting for an open source one?
Also, being given the option to sell/monetize personal transaction histories at will en masse seems like a major opportunity I would think?
The biggest concern for Monero is the potential damage of privacy via an on chain fork that requires private key use to claim an airdrop. Private key reuse is a new-ish attack vector on the network. My guess is that they could care less whether or not its a scam. However, claims regarding a scam revolve around the unknown team, closed source software, 10x airdrop, >5% premine, questionable claims on finite supply, coin serves a duplicate or unknown purpose and despite being made aware how their on chain fork damages the privacy of both networks they're moving forward. It will be interesting to see who or if any exchange supports them. Wouldn't the potential 'damage to privacy' claim necessarily be dependent on whether or not the pk is actually shared publicly, or rather with someone collecting many? Is it being implied that a closed source wallet would automatically upload your private keys to some tla database is a little much I think. Especially if anyone is running Windows, operating over a WiFi connection, etc... I mean chances are they already got the data if they want it. So aside from that, the concern i can discern would be more toward an unaffiliated third party (utp) like a marketing agency having the ability to monetize transaction data, if they obtained the private key of a wallet through this means. Alternatively, the tax man could also purchase such data from the utp. For one - there are a series of legal precedents that need to be considered before that could happen which I haven't had much thought on, and have not read much. Over the next few months, monerov and it's affilitates (provided this isn't some elaborate scalping) will be filling this role. From there onwards, others may likely do the same. My point here is that regardless of what monerov is doing now - years down the line what's stopping literally anyone from forking monero and actually releasing a closed source wallet with published capacity to add your pk to a database and use said information for whatever purpose they wish? What if some utp decides to put up a market peg of a million dollars bid in exchange for as many pk's as will fill the order? Outside of the general phishing risk that occurs with private key reuse - I'd agree that scale most likely matters on the transaction Key Image attack vector. From what I've read though, I'm leaning towards that information isn't private. Please someone correct me if I'm wrong. From the SerHack article that I posted above: "Each Monero transaction generates a “key image” that secretly encodes the amount of Monero transferred and the public address of the true sender. These key images typically protect transaction anonymity while preventing “double-spending” attacks and illegitimate attempts to inflate the Monero supply with fake coins. It is dangerous to claim MoneroV because these key images will be identical on both chains, which can be exploited to reveal the true sender of both transactions. This reduction in privacy allows Monero (and MoneroV) transactions to be linked in a manner that is not typically possible. The negative ramifications extend far beyond the individuals that use both chains, since any user on either chain may unknowingly employ compromised transactions as decoy ring members." I'd disagree with "Chances are they already got it." I'd also disagree that there are legal precedents in this space. Please provide sources and/or an explanation for your reasoning. I'm confused on what role you think MoneroV and it's affiliates will be filling? (and who MoneroV and its affiliates are). Are you implying that MoneroV main purpose is marketing Monero transaction data? A quest to destroy Monero's privacy? If future parties present new on chain forks that require your private keys in a blatant phishing attempt or attack on the network, the community will do exactly what they are doing now. Make people aware of the risks and build tools to help protect the network in the future. Look, myself and I'm assuming many others in this thread are more than willing to support a new coin that introduces new and better privacy technology. In fact, I'd almost wager that it is inevitable for a better product to eventually come to market. The fact is MoneroV doesn't introduce any new tech and potentially harms the privacy of both networks. Despite being made aware of their flawed approach, MoneroV pushes forward with no new technology to speak of. I'd agree that the only value add MoneroV has presented is introducing a new attack vector that needed to be solved - which Monero Devs are actively working to mitigate. There's a chance some new tools make it into the next release that will further mitigate this attack and types like it in the future. For fun - another one of my favorite MoneroV claims is that the MyMonero wallet not only supports but is the best wallet to use to claim your shitdrop. Of course, MyMonero has to then write a post saying that is false: https://medium.com/@tweetingpauls/beware-of-non-native-forks-of-monero-6f5a0bf1fccf |
|
|
|
I'll just leave this here...
Hey got some working drivers! Compute toggle finally working for Vega on Cnote? Too bad there's no real performance gain? No real need in pulling rigs down to update just yet. Although, it would be nice to switch between Cnote and Neoscrypt at will... Working, yes. But still WIP. Compute Toggle is only needed for Polaris. All compute instructions have always been available for vegas. This driver has no gains, in fact for me is showing a decrease of 50 H/s per card, but no longer requires to disable / enable devices. Oh, and it is by far more stable, even in gaming. Solid work. Will look forward to seeing them in the future. Assume this is through Vanguard. Glad to see more people participate in that program. Thanks for dropping a hint. |
|
|
|
I'll just leave this here...
Hey got some working drivers! Compute toggle finally working for Vega on Cnote? Too bad there's no real performance gain? No real need in pulling rigs down to update just yet. Although, it would be nice to switch between Cnote and Neoscrypt at will... |
|
|
|
Dang, that makes at least 3? Grabbed the below from another thread. Network hash and difficulty will be very interesting to watch later this month. Monero network hashrate distribution ( stats on 8 february) Roughly 70% of network hashare are on private pools. Seems to be coinhive, js web miners, compromised pc/cpu instances botnets and Baikal, PinIdea and Bitmain ASICs/FPGAs  |
|
|
|
...so let me get this right.
The biggest claim with regards to monerov being a scam are that they are having people enter their private key in a closed source wallet?
Correct me if I'm wrong what what's the harm in waiting for an open source one?
Also, being given the option to sell/monetize personal transaction histories at will en masse seems like a major opportunity I would think?
The biggest concern for Monero is the potential damage of privacy via an on chain fork that requires private key use to claim an airdrop. Private key reuse is a new-ish attack vector on the network. My guess is that they could care less whether or not its a scam. However, claims regarding a scam revolve around the unknown team, closed source software, 10x airdrop, >5% premine, questionable claims on finite supply, coin serves a duplicate or unknown purpose and despite being made aware how their on chain fork damages the privacy of both networks they're moving forward. It will be interesting to see who or if any exchange supports them. |
|
|
|
Yes just like BCH you are going to end up with a pile of the stuff. But you wont be able to spend it without compromising your privacy. They don't seem to care about this problem either. They seem to just be pretending like it doesn't exist and ignoring anyone who points it out to them. It's almost like they don't really care about building a solid project and instead are looking for a quick cash grab that doesn't really require any work on their part...
It did pump the price. Then they delayed it by a couple of months right before the air drop was supposed to happen and that's when the price fell.
I understand revealing the IP is the only concern here. So why not use Tor in the process? Like : 1- you move your coins from XMR wallet A to XMR wallet B 2- you never use XMR wallet A anymore 3- you connect to a new XMV wallet through Tor and claim your XMR using the private key of XMR wallet A 4- you shapeshift your XMV to XMR wallet B through Tor Or am I missing something? Revealing your IP is not the main concern. It's an on chain fork that requires you to give them your private keys to claim your shit drop. Giving anyone your private keys is a no no but in this case it actually damages the privacy of both networks. Crazy. Serhack's article is probably my favorite so far. https://serhack.me/articles/introduction-to-monerov-and-its-inherent-risks |
|
|
|
I wonder...
Frequently when alts crash, XMR holds up better than most of the pack. But today it is the opposite. XMR seems to be losing more than usual.
I wonder if this might be somewhat influenced by the fact we could be following the pre-forkcoin selloff as the original date for the snapshot was today.
A certain percentage of people dumb enough to buy XMR to get the forkcoins would also be dumb enough not to have noticed they didn't get them yet and still sell off...
Just a thought.
I mean - maybe? That's some pretty dumb people though... |
|
|
|
I agree with you.
Any thought's on the market?
I am a terrible speculator. I should probably not even post in this thread.  I think XMR is suffering from a set of circumstances. 1. Last winter's crypto explosion, and current correction. Looks to me like Bitcoin is trying to decide if it is going to continue the bear or get back on the rocket. Looks to me like it is continuing the bear. This has a HUGE impact on all of crypto including XMR. 2. The forkcoin. This created some sort of "artificial" volume and hype moving us into the 30s and now that is gone. This combination looks short term bearish for XMR to me. I remain long term bullish on this project, and it's value. Keep crashing monero. I actually have dry powder for once! No kidding! Slowly adding to coffers at 0.0265 |
|
|
|
I am glad to see what appears to be a little bit of balance. I understand the ideal of one CPU one vote, but many folks who would argue against ASICs will also argue in defense of botnets. The botnet defense usually goes like: "They are securing the network, and they are incentivized not to wreck it by their financial stake". This exact same argument can be used for ASICs. I believe the question at the heart of this idea is clear: Is it desirable to stick to the original 1 CPU 1 vote vision? And if so, is it FEASIBLE to continue to enforce that vision? With ASICs already in the wild it is a very valid set of questions. If the answer to either is NO, then arguably we should move towards not only allowing ASIC development, but making it as easy as possible. Disclaimer - I have been fairly firmly in the "original vision" camp for a long time. But over the years I have grown more amenable to considering other options. I seem to fall in this camp. I do believe the general argument of the potential efficiency and stability ASICs could bring to a network is of merit - and at the very least worth discussing. But yes - current price point and the current state of centralized control of manufacturing and retail make me believe now is just not the time for Monero to adopt ASICs |
|
|
|
So I've ordered one to test it. I will let you know when I have it.
From where did you order? Why did you order? Share reasoning please! Looks like he says where he ordered on page 3. They deliver, they resell a lot of Baikal miners, but they are not too much reliable, especially bad communications if something defective in warranty. Thanks. Yeah, I've read about the communication issue. I will probably try to buy one from them then. |
|
|
|
Hello everyone, im new here so forgive me for stupid questions.
I want to upgrade my rx480 and add vega 64 or 56 to system
Can you please post here how much hash u got in popular algo at this moment. I want to know if whattomine different from real world tuned cards
I need to decide if it worth spend extrea 150$ for 64 vs 56
Help will be very appreciated.
my rx 480 - 27 mhs - claymore single mining 1150 core 2195 memory -100 mav - Blockchain drivers, but i didnt flash bios yet. Whattomine show i sopose to get 29,5 and i get only 27 , thats why im couirious about vega
Vegas are good if tuned well (not easy) and have samsung mem. Main profitable algos for Vega are 1. Cryptonight, ~2kh/s, ~150watt 2. Neoscrypt, ~2100kh/s, ~250watt 3. Dagger-Hashimoto, ~46mh/s, ~160-180watt If your vega wull be with Hynix mem then expect no more than 1.8kh/s cryptonight, neo and eth speeds - don't know As rednoW pointed out - as long as you get a card with Samsung memory performance will be nearly identical between a 56 and 64. Not worth the extra $150 imo if all things are equal. |
|
|
|
I may test with a rig later this evening. But essentially this is a bundling of XMRig and Stak-XMR? No performance gain at the moment - just convenience and monitoring?
Correct Still haven't gotten around to moving a rig over. I am interested to test this though. Quick question - Is this gpu only or are you using the newer xmr-stak that incorporates cpu as an all in one? On some of my Vega rigs, I run Ryzen 5 1600 that do quite well together |
|
|
|
|
Who was it that had the Dash theory? Basically saying - those in Dash for privacy reason are finally seeing XMR as the better option and will start to move over?
Based on my shitty 30 day charts against BTC -
Dash - down 28%
XMR - Up 20%
I also wonder as XMR moves up the mkt cap charts if there is significant money/funds who index off the top 10 caps and rebalance frequently enough to snowball the climb a bit.
|
|
|
|
How high will this go xmr/btc ?
Excluding Bithumb ATH was half year ago at 0.035. So if it breaks that can go really high. Monero March Madness will be here. Interesting times. Obvious question is how much of this is being driven by the hot air of the fork. Then again Monero is a chronically undervalued crypto. Looks like we may have topped out for a bit. Highest I saw on this run was 0.0305. Not too shabby. Still a chance we push higher 0.03288 at Poloniex. That is a new high since the August ATH. I'm somewhat surprised to see it hold above .03 still. I thought we'd be a few weeks yet for that. Still holding strong - almost to my dismay. Ready to add more below 0.03 but now I'm curious whether or not we will get there. May have to wait for this MoneroV fart to blow on past. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
