I've never complained about any other coin's faults except one post ages ago in response to AlexGR. Your post is baseless - please link me to these posts where the core team is complaining about other coins' faults.

No, it's too old (despite the misleading version numbers). You're using a version of Monero that is NOT by us and is not up-to-date with the latest changes. Only use versions of Monero linked in the OP or on the website.

Spot on - first we refactor in order to support arbitrary key-value stores, and then we test a bunch of them for our specific workloads before deciding on one. Initial candidates that we liked out the box were hamsterdb and rocksdb. There's been some contention as there is a slightly faster version of hamsterdb available for purchase (you get the source, but can't distribute it), and some people feel its very availability would compromise the integrity of Monero. On the other hand, rocksdb (a leveldb fork by Facebook) breaks leveldb's Windows compatibility.

So everything is staying as loose and generic as possible, and then we'll plug into as many embedded databases as we can get our hands on, and publish the results. I'm also terribly keen on having a full node pushing the blockchain on to Tahoe-LAFS and having a bunch of independent nodes "verify" that the correct blockchain is being pushed, partly for fun, but also because I can envision some interesting use-cases where applications can be built accessing the blockchain on Tahoe-LAFS instead of locally (lightweight clients, for instance).

It's a pseudonym (hence the shout out to Emmy Noether), same as Satoshi Nakamoto, same as Nicolas van Saberhagen. If he chooses to identify himself in future that is his prerogative, but he has asked to remain under the guise of a pseudonym at this stage.

It's not possible at present, we will add this functionality in future:) If you want to change your password right now you have to restore your wallet from the 24 word deterministic seed, or you have to create a new wallet and move your funds over.

It's not correct, as pointed out above.

Ring signatures add obfuscation, but there are already stealth addresses, so even without ring signatures tracking a transaction is extremely difficult and requires reducing the anonymity set in other ways until you've figured it out.

If you're particularly interested, our annotated version of the CryptoNote whitepaper is a good starting point. Section 4.3 describes the unlinkable nature of transactions, ring signatures are only covered in 4.4, and 4.5 shows how they're combined in a standard transaction.

Yeah - this is about identifying areas where Monero and Anoncoin are trying to accomplish the same thing, and instead of duplicating effort we're finding ways of only developing something once so that both Anoncoin and Monero can use and benefit from it:)

There is some talk around that (a minimum block reward) - tacotime had some nice thoughts around it, and we'll wrap it up into a proposal and put it out there soon-ish.

Well you know what they say..."Alles hat ein Ende, nur die Wurst hat zwei"

We made a decision a while back not to fiddle with mediawiki's ACLs and try and control who can edit things.

Instead, the knowledge base will be published to github, and anyone can edit it by submitting a PR (pull request). This will make editing the content super easy, and since PRs are public and easy to look at, if we reject any it will be easy to see why.

I hate committing to time frames because we're working on so many things and because we all have to do stuff-to-earn-money as well, but this should be ~2-3 weeks away from done.

Please list some specific examples of that in this thread. Don't make claims without backing them up with specific examples.

Guys - I'm delaying publishing this week's Monero Missive as I'm just waiting on confirmation of two things, and I will only get confirmation tomorrow (especially since Germany won, which throws everything out of the loop;) Tomorrow's Missive will be backdated to today as it will be this past week's Monero Missive. Thank you for your patience with this!

Agreed.

I can't imagine a situation where we released, say, RC2 of a specific version of Monero and it caused a bunch of forks because it was poorly tested and we had to roll back. The consensus network is the consensus network, and we have to make changes that the consensus network agrees with or else they will reject it. We also have to be cautious and make changes in a way that will remain compatible with the majority of the network so that miners can choose whether to adopt the changes or not. 99.9% of the things we want to change can be done via a soft fork and not a hard fork, so that plays quite well into that approach. I'm a big fan of soft forking over hard forking, if that wasn't apparent.

Thanks for providing me with my Sunday morning chuckle:) Nobody has ever described me as being incompetent or lazy (except when it comes to the gym), so it's good to know that I have someone who can psychoanalyse me and the rest of the core team from a handful of posts on Bitcointalk, and come to conclusions that not even our wives/girlfriends/mothers have reached.

To comply with the ISO 4217 standard.

Please link me to the first post where we "refused" help. You claim that "weeks go by", so I'm assuming you'll link me to a post in May, or maybe early June? Without that your post is supposition and nonsense.

We have only said "don't stress, we are working on it" when we have been...well...working on it.

Which feature are you asking about?

If I (or any one of us) had control of a botnet we would not be involved with Monero. Trust me. We would have much more profitable fish to fry (ransomware, for instance).


Your first sentence is 100% right. Per SearchSecurity:

'Eric Raymond, compiler of The New Hacker's Dictionary, defines a hacker as a clever programmer. A "good hack" is a clever solution to a programming problem and "hacking" is the act of doing it. Raymond lists five possible characteristics that qualify one as a hacker, which we paraphrase here:

A person who enjoys learning details of a programming language or system
A person who enjoys actually doing the programming rather than just theorizing about it
A person capable of appreciating someone else's hacking
A person who picks up programming quickly
A person who is an expert at a particular programming language or system, as in "UNIX hacker"'

Your second sentence needs a specific example. What is "the way they do things" that leads to these dark prospects? Be specific, vague hand-waving and ad hominem attacks don't make your point.


We don't have any Debian packages out yet, so I'm not sure how you could be disappointed in our debs.

To your second point: why would a competent core team, skilled and knowledgeable in C / C++, low-level networking, mathematics, and cryptography ever be capable of being excellent web developers? You seem to conflate the two.


Now now, my little troll, let us not use such turns of phrase for fear this god you mention smite you for your blasphemous words.

I think it would be tough to argue that we're anywhere close to the level of Mark Karpeles or pirateat40 or, say, the developers of a cryptocurrency with an 82% premine.

I understand perfectly well what you've written, you seem to have misunderstood what I have written.

First, stop talking about Tor, we've never mentioned Tor and have already rejected it due to the problems inherent in their use of exit nodes.

Now: we are not aiming to prevent a global adversary who has control of all bordergates at all ISPs on the planet from making assertions and observations. We are aiming to prevent them from knowing whether Monero is running or not. They can know I2P is running, that we don't care about, but they should not be able to determine whether the person is harmlessly browsing the web or using Monero without completely decrypting the traffic.

Why? Because a wannabe "global police state" (without resorting to the exotic methods I described) cannot possibly go after millions or billions of people around the world under the control of regimes and governments of all sorts merely for using a communications system.

I understand that you're a terribly clever and opinionated chap, but don't assume that we are ignorant or that we have made decisions for no good reason. I2P integration is for a specific purpose and is fully expected to be a stopgap if its shortcomings are not solved over time.