Impressive work sonoIO!!!!
Great thanks to you for that!!

At first, as i know, "Chandran signatures" will be slower(algorithmically) than CryptoNote ring signatures, so it's hard to talk about visa or mastercard volume.

Second, as i also read - there need trusted setup.(common reference string model,  http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/nichandr/ringsignaturessublinear.pdf)

Third even if they have less size RS - it's still not the same as zero size of pruned RS in Boolberry blockchain.


Anyway, i think this is interested project and will keep watching progress.

Zoidberg

Do you see that transfers in history?
What wallet version you have?

I could understand why you think so.
But Bitcrea's work is not related in posting here, we talk in skype almost every day (i prefer skype to irc) and he is pretty active in our project, and i guess tifozi could confirm it since he also often in our skype chat.

I like it much(exept thing that i have to maintain it ), good idea, and it definitely some new approach. Since you seems to be trusted person for me and for community, i would be happy to see you as maintainer of this, what you think ?  I really have a lot of stuff last days, even have not enough time to code.

btw: i wrote you in irc, did you saw it ?

Clintar, thank you for understanding, atm i moved your pool to last position in pool's list. Let's see how it's going. Another move that we can do - is to exclude you from list for few days to spread hashrate around other pools, only in case if you don't mind.

Added! Thank you!

I'm not sure if i understand your post corret, i only want to point that you can't see addresses in blockchain, and you can't say on which address was sent transaction (except in the case when you have tracking key of recipient address), since CN blockchain don't have addresses in it.

Can you clarify ? with something more than vague phrases

Yes, i'm thinking about this, but it's pretty questionable if it really usable ? Bytecoin implemented it, and seems that didn't get much attention or usage.

What do you think ?

Yes sure, database is important milestone.
I was actually curiouse if Monero devs finally gona release it? Because it's pretty boring work, and i'm not really want to do it myself:)

Transactions that lay before checkpoins and have pruned ring signatures could be spent, or could be not spent yet. No matter.
I have very similar transaction structure, and it refferes to other transaction's outputs with the same way as any CN - amount + index. So you know exactly from wich transaction your input's selected for mixins.
So answering to your question - yes, it may be detected, and there is no difference since both part of blockchain contatin as spent transactions, as unspent.

I feel that i need to clarify a little here.
First - as i said before - pruning transactions will make significant effect for those part of blockchain that have pretty much transactions in it. Early blockchain consist mostly from coinbase transactions that is not affected(coinbase transaction doesn't have ring signatures). But anyway, there more that 8000 usual transactions in first 70000 blocks.

Second, blockchain.bin is not simple blockchain. When daemon receive blocks with transactions it build from this data special database in memory, there tons of helpful information that is used to verify blocks and transactions and to handle currency rules: global outputs index (that is used to refering in transactions inputs ), transactions database, some information related with each block(such as cumulative difficulty, scratchpad offeset, block cumulative size, emitted coins, etc), blocks by id database, spent keyimages, finally scratchpad. 
All this information is serizlised (dumped)  into this file (blockchain.bin), so it is obvious that there some huge data overhead. So actually summary blocks + transactions size is not so big, hard to say exact numbers, x times less. And this is another reason why you see not much difference - since ringsignatures is actually ballast it is not used in other data model, and after pruning it data model stay almost the same.

Main benefit from this feature is decrease traffic usage(actuall data amount that transfered between syncronizing nodes under checkpoints get significant decrease), and some times (when synchronizing reduced by bandwidth) - speed up synchronyzing.

Blockchain will be smaller, but mostly it will be seen on those parts of blockchain that contain more transactions, early blockchain consist mostly from coinbase transactions that are not affected.

You can mixin with transactions that is as under checkoint as after checkpoin - no difference, it's not affect. Any of them still could be usen for mixin.


Frankly, i was thinking to start pruning transactions after first year of currecy live, since it's not really significant effect from this feature for early blockchain where most of transactions is coinbase. But few my friends suggested me that some people think that our features is fake and it would be better to demonstrate it in real work. So enabled this feature and it's seems to be working now.
I think i'll be doing pruning every 6 mounth.

Please, send me logs from daemon and wallet (if you use CLI) or logs from qt-boolb.log if you use GUI to crypto.zoidberg($)gmail.com

I'm not defending anyone. I've just said that i guess that developers are usually hired people that paid for doing the work.

I'm defending technology.

For me it doen't looks like a developers's driven project. If developers was just hired to create technology, than they are not responsible for... say ..strange marketing ? Isn't it ? Questionable.
It's just my guess.

All i want to say is that technology and way it is used are two different things.

Technology is opened and transparent. It's not messy - all you need is strong exprience with modern C++ design, passion and maybe little different attitude to it. (not you personally sure ) 
It's not only my opinion - for example i have another dev who was helped me with some core patches (difficulty adjustment from 64 to 128 bit to be more concrete) - he also gave good feedback about codebase. And also it said dga (Dave Andersen) if i'm not mistaken (correct me if i wrong).


But still - lack of comments in code is a problem for thirdparty developers. I would like to fix this issue but for me is faster to write in C++ than in English language I guess it's obvious.


Totaly agree with you.

It's not irony. It's misunderstanding.
You probably was confused when someone convinced you to invest money into CN-based project(or you decided it by yourself) - this is not bitcoin-fork with mature life cycle, this is brand new, developed from scrach software that has a lot of work ahead. Every one who at least little familiar with software development should realize what does it mean, esspecially for software related with security. The problem is that you've missed this fact.

And after an about half year of public run there was found first critical bug that was unfortunately used to exploit with Monero network... (and this is sad, i could understand stress that was felt by all involved in xmr people), but this quality indicator many many times higher than bitcoin development has.
Yeah, it's yet enother good chance to blame CryptoNote devs, but i really doubt that any of XMR devs had done their own cryptocurrency, written from scratch and worked fine. (okay, almost fine  ).

The only problem of CryptoNote codebase is that it's undocumented and don't have comments in code... well, that's true. But this is very different from "unbelievably messy codebase intentionally made scammy, buggy, unoptimized". (And don't take into account CryptoNight PoW hash function since it was really suspicious code, and i also agree about C-code, never understood why people use "C" when this is potentialy buggy language? ).

Compared Bitcoin-based projects and CryptoNote technology it's the same as compare say "ford focus", that is good well-known car, and Tesla-prototype, that has bright ideas, a lot of work behind it, but still not perfect, without instructions and documentations, with a lot of work ahead and unfortunaley with some new bugs there.

So it is not a CN fail, it was just your own choice. That i believe is good choice.


PS: I didn't meant that current Tesla is buggy and without instructions and documentation - i used it jusе as an example of something new.


Just my 2 satosi. Sorry for late post.