CryptoNote technical discussion and Chess Challenge

[languagehasmeaning]

I will cast the first vote for Bg7

That's not bad.  Bd7 might be more defensive tho.

I will vote for Bg7. I see nothing wrong with Bd7 but think there is a chance that bishop might want to move to another square. We can be pretty sure our f8 bishop belongs on g7 now that we have already played g6.

[newb4now]

Bg7

[dre1982]

Bg7.

We played g6 for this move. first let this done. After this we gonna develop some more pieces.

[boolberry]

Current position
Based on the votes in this thread Team Boolberry has chosen to play Bg7. Now it is time for Team Monero to respond. I will plan to count votes again tomorrow at approximately 0:00 UTC.

Team Monero (white pieces) vs. Team Boolberry (black pieces)
white to move

1.e4    c5
2.Nf3   d6
3.d4    cxd4
4.Qxd4 a6
5.c4    Nc6
6.Qe3  g6
7.Nc3  Bg7

[XMRpromotions]

8. Be2

[LucyLovesCrypto]

Bd3 then we can castle next move

[8XMR]

Be2

[ArticMine]

Be2

[funnyman21]

Who is winning so far? About even right?

[languagehasmeaning]

Who is winning so far? About even right?

White starts each game with a very small advantage because of the right to moved first. Nothing dramatic has happened yet. Come back in 5-10 moves and things may be more interesting.

[boolberry]

Current position
Based on the votes in this thread Team Monero has chosen to play Be2. Now it is time for Team Boolberry to respond. I will plan to count votes again tomorrow at approximately 0:00 UTC.

Team Monero (white pieces) vs. Team Boolberry (black pieces)
black to move

1.e4    c5
2.Nf3   d6
3.d4    cxd4
4.Qxd4 a6
5.c4    Nc6
6.Qe3  g6
7.Nc3  Bg7
8.Be2

[boolberry]

I will vote for Nf6 because I think it is the best move here. If the team prefers to liven things up, then f5 is another option.

[newb4now]

+1 Nf6

[dre1982]

Nf6 indeed. Just develop some more pieces.

[languagehasmeaning]

Nf6. It has 4 votes now

[boolberry]

Current position
Based on the votes in this thread Team Boolberry has chosen to play Nf6. Now it is time for Team Monero to respond. I will plan to count votes again tomorrow at approximately 0:00 UTC.

Team Monero (white pieces) vs. Team Boolberry (black pieces)
white to move

1.e4    c5
2.Nf3   d6
3.d4    cxd4
4.Qxd4 a6
5.c4    Nc6
6.Qe3  g6
7.Nc3  Bg7
8.Be2  Nf6

[ArticMine]

O-O

[LucyLovesCrypto]

O-O

Castling is smart. +1 vote

Can someone give me some cliff notes for this?

https://github.com/ShenNoether/MiniNero/blob/master/RingCT0.1_copy.pdf

I assume it is too late for 0.9 but could it be in the next release? Is this as important as it sounds? What are the negatives? Anything we should be worried about from sections 4, 5 or six of the paper (tag linkability, exculpability and unforgeability) still needs to be completed)

[smooth]

O-O

Castling is smart. +1 vote

Can someone give me some cliff notes for this?

https://github.com/ShenNoether/MiniNero/blob/master/RingCT0.1_copy.pdf

I assume it is too late for 0.9 but could it be in the next release? Is this as important as it sounds? What are the negatives? Anything we should be worried about from sections 4, 5 or six of the paper (tag linkability, exculpability and unforgeability) still needs to be completed)

1. Definitely not going to be in 0.9. The math isn't even done yet (as you pointed out).

2. The idea is to still have ring signatures, and allow the amounts to be hidden but cryptographically commit to sum(out)=sum(in).

[LucyLovesCrypto]

O-O

Castling is smart. +1 vote

Can someone give me some cliff notes for this?

https://github.com/ShenNoether/MiniNero/blob/master/RingCT0.1_copy.pdf

I assume it is too late for 0.9 but could it be in the next release? Is this as important as it sounds? What are the negatives? Anything we should be worried about from sections 4, 5 or six of the paper (tag linkability, exculpability and unforgeability) still needs to be completed)

1. Definitely not going to be in 0.9. The math isn't even done yet (as you pointed out).

2. The idea is to still have ring signatures, and allow the amounts to be hidden but cryptographically commit to sum(out)=sum(in).

You are good at giving technical answers that make sense to people like me who are not overly technical. I like the way that sounds. Hopefully it works out and can be implemented eventually.