I'm thumb-sucking numbers, don't take these guesstimates as anything actual or realistic.

- Embedded DB solution/implementation - 6 man weeks is a pretty solid guess, so I'll leave the $14 500
- Convertion of C-code - it's not as simple as this. Apart from this specific item, there needs to be an incremental audit and refactor. Just because the bug was lurking in a piece of C code with this doesn't mean there can't be a bug elsewhere, it's just easier to obfuscate it in C. Holistically this is an active, ongoing task, that will likely end up costing in the $80k - $140k range over many, many months.
- Finished (official) GUI - assuming all the other pieces are in place, then dEBRUYNE is correct - anything from $15k - $20k.
- C++ version of the I2P router (IP obfuscation) - this is already making rapid progress: https://github.com/PrivacySolutions/i2pd. To get it to a point where it's usable and implementable as submodule / library I'd imagine is easily a $50k job, but I'm guessing at what orignal's hourly is.
- ... (blockchain bloat issue?) - not really an issue, and I'm unsure as to what we'd consider "solving" it. A linear reduction? A lightweight access methodology that heavily reduces the need for local storage / bandwidth? The amount of experimentation and research needed here to find a cryptographically sound "solution" makes it hard to pin a value down.

Not possible. Once a transaction is mined its permanent. If you mean after broadcast and before its mined, then you need to follow the maths in the whitepaper. Individual *inputs* are ring-signed, not the whole tx. You can't change an input without mucking up the signature for the whole transaction.


How? In order for them to do this they'd need to own a massive portion of the utxoset. Maybe you need to read our research bulletin on chain reactions and traceability in the CryptoNote protocol, as it explains exactly why this is impossible without a huge amount of utxos under your private control: http://lab.monero.cc/pubs/MRL-0001.pdf


Because even though the inputs are ring signed (and thus you can (ostensibly) never know if an input was genuine or merely part of a group signature) the outputs are signed by you and you alone. Thus, verification is trivial - you merely need to reveal the one-time key for that transaction to verify it.


Again, you're conflating ring-signed inputs with individually-signed outputs. The trick here is the combination of stealth addresses and ring signatures, not one or the other. I'd suggest you start with the whitepaper and fully grok the maths behind it as a first step towards understanding.

RingToCryptoCoinNoteJoinSendChandra++

Just in case anyone jumps on it - there are grammatical faux pas in the GUI (we know about them already;) and the terminology is still a bit mixed (wallet / account) - this is visible in the screenshots. A lot of the focus at the moment is on the visual, the actual words and phrases will be tweaked once the other visual bits are in place.

The 82% premine they're talking about belongs to Bytecoin.

Can confirm - "Moneroman88" you just called a core team member an "obvious troll" and a "moron". I think the evidence speaks for itself here.

It's nice how they quoted a Monero contributor (Surae Noether), we really appreciate the reference and the vote of confidence.

We work for free. The donations we receive cover hosting costs, testing equipment, and we pass a TON of donations on to contributors who commit code. Every member of the core team, at this juncture, works "for free". I'm aware that the core team is in a unique position, as we are independently financially ok / successful / whatever, and I know that many do not have such a privileged position (especially round these parts). Nonetheless, the Monero core team do not draw a salary, neither do we own a large portion of Monero. I'm certain that this will change in future as we receive more donations geared towards specific efforts, but that is the status quo right now and it has been that way for several months already.

Just like Jackpotcoin is a clone of Bitcoin. Word for word, just like you said.

And seriously - what is up with this comparison with the Nazis? Do you even have any clue how offensive that is to the Germans on this forum? My wife is German, and she has told me on more than one occasion when I've tried to joke about it that it's unacceptable - Germans are brought up apologising for the sins of their ancestors. You are not offending the Monero core team by your nonsensical comparisons, you are offending the German people. For you to continuously vomit this vile, offensive garbage is simply not morally acceptable. Get a grip and grow up, you are not a child any longer.

It's time for you to stop with the idiotic memes and the stupid pictures and the disgusting accusations that malign an entire nationality, Spoetnik, you and CfA are an embarrassment to the human race.

I will not be responding to anything you have to say in response to this. Feel free to reply and have the last word if it makes you feel like less of a child.

Hello.

Monero core team member here.

Monero is an "altcoin" in the sense that it is an alternative cryptocurrency to Bitcoin, and in the context of Bitcointalk it is most definitely thus viewed as an altcoin. It shares no code with Bitcoin, however, and does not use the Bitcoin protocol. In that sense is not what is commonly viewed as an "altcoin".

As developers and core team members we cannot control what people do or say, and we have little influence over everyone's view of Monero. In the same way we are dispassionate towards any of Monero's use-cases (as and when it is eventually able to be useable and useful).

If somebody wants to use Monero to buy something to which I (personally) am morally opposed...well...I may be offended, but I certainly will not stand in their way to spend their Monero on whatever they see fit. Similarly, if someone wants to create hundreds of threads on this forum praising Monero or bashing Monero...well...I may agree or disagree, but I will not stand in their way.

At the very least I would suggest that everyone choose to ignore supporters AND detractors of Monero, and instead focus on the cryptographically sound technical merits of a cryptocurrency that we hope will have longevity and usefulness in the coming years.

I feel like you need to get a different nick.

"Investors" is a misnomer. They don't pay our salaries, and the majority of them have hardly donated to Monero development.

Nonetheless, as the past two weeks have demonstrated there are fundamental things we have to get right BEFORE we can even think about finalising our GUI. Work has not stopped on it, but we are spending less time on it and more time on fundamentals.

There's a plan - it got slightly derailed by the attacks over the past two weeks, but now that we're getting back on track we'll start pulling things together.

No, that's not one of ours. I suggest Jojatekok's Windows Client - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=683365.0

Can you provide a little bit more information, like maybe tell us the exact steps you took and what it did do?

You mean exactly like we have on the OP? Here:

GUI
All current GUIs are in beta, but they should be fairly safe to use because they work through bitmonerod and simplewallet from the main code.

• Qt GUI (Cross-platform) by Neozaru
• Windows GUI by Jojatekok

Well we do work for free, we're not a company, so check back in ~12 months:-P

We have some very early seeds of ideas to allow for lightweight clients that can do full verification from a point-in-time onwards with negligible disk space and < 50mb a day of data @ 8 transactions a minute (11 585 transactions a day). That is quite some time away, though, as our focus is on getting full nodes working well and efficiently.

We can't use XCN's mini-blockchain, since you want to have the entire utxoset to mix with (the more old transactions you can mix with the better it is for your anonymity). The BBR ring signature pruning is something we won't be implementing, as it makes consensus network validation from before checkpoints impossible (although on an individual basis you can implement the pruning yourself without affecting anything if you simply don't care about that).

It's really hard to pin this down, as you are the only person encountering any of these issues. We try to test thoroughly in multiple Windows environments on VMs with restricted hardware, and even they don't hit the problems you're seeing. At any rate, that 10052 is not a Monero error, it's an error coming from Windows, and it basically means that there was a socket error. 99% of the time a socket error is caused by overly aggressive antivirus software.