[XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency

[nioc]

One reason you will find a large % of 0.1 transaction fees is because that what Poloniex charges for withdrawals.

They did not change their fee when the per KB fees were instituted.  When I asked over a month ago they had no plans to change it.

[wpalczynski]

3 pennies is a high fee? Thats like free, XMR wasnt meant for micropayments.  Go shill in your own thread bud.  Your desperation is just pathetic.

All my recent transfers from my wallets cost me less than a fiat penny.

I will repeat. IMO Monero fees are extremely high, lets look:

Average XMR transaction: http://chainradar.com/xmr/transaction/bb902735207abdee5c8549133e9b0083e289813443b1be472ccba5acec3e49d0
Fee = 0.1 XMR

https://www.cryptonator.com/rates/XMR-USD/0.1

With current XMR rate fee = 0.02986642, almost 3 penny, man

[binaryFate]

AFAIK there was never any evidence or even reasonable hints of Darknote having any link to the CN scam, so maybe we should all relax on this.

There is really no need for any hostility either side. Hostility is often what prevails in altcoin land and the monero community has always been largely different, let's try to keep it that way!

[smooth]

I'm not sure where this 0.03-0.10 range comes from. There are plenty of 0.01 transactions that are < 1 KB.  Here is one from within the past hour:

http://chainradar.com/xmr/block/1b4a04fd1f2ce2ebc52a962f9a3b2278e647f9c51a512e1062a374a214db3178

It is even possible to have small transactions with mixins that still come in < 1 KB (so 0.01 fee) if they have a small number of intputs and outputs, though this one doesn't.

As for people not bothering to upgrade I think that says a lot about the perceived cost of the fees. 3 US cents seems to not concern a lot of folks if they can't bother to download an update.

[generalizethis]

Have a great SuperBowl day guys!

To you too. I wish they won't run it on a Saturday afternoon in the US, as that makes it the night to Monday for Europe and Africa, which is just very inconvenient. Why not Saturday afternoon?

One answer I found was that advertisers want you sober for the commercials and a Sunday evening keeps most people sober (or at least more so) because you have to work Monday.

Also Superbowl Sunday is trademarked and playing it on Sunday is tradition which is treated as Holy to some people.The early super bowls were never the global events that they are today and didn't have to consider the time differential, so what to do about it now? Change the date and risk losing advertising dollars or pissing off your core demographic? I think the NFL MEW had a 100% vote to keep it as is.

[generalizethis]

Calling BinaryFate

This sadly seems the consensus at r/bitcoin

"[–]dangero 29 points 7 hours ago
You can't track every single satoshi. Multiple inputs can be combined into a single output. At that point you cannot say which satoshi came from which input. Once they're mixed like that you can't separate them again and say which part came from where. It's like pouring multiple smaller cups of water into one larger cup. Once they are combined and mixed you can't provably separate them again. Even if you pour half out into another cup, who is to say where that half originally came from? Bitcoin is absolutely fungible."

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2uew9j/bitcoin_is_a_finite_resource_like_land_if_you_own/

I know it's wrong, but I'm not sure I know how wrong it is.

[kazuki49]

This doesnt protect who sends, only the receiver, that can later use the bitcoins to do whatever, but can be put in a list as receiver of "bad coins", this is the problem with the traceability.

[sorryforthat]

Have a great SuperBowl day guys!

To you too. I wish they won't run it on a Saturday afternoon in the US, as that makes it the night to Monday for Europe and Africa, which is just very inconvenient. Why not Saturday afternoon?

One answer I found was that advertisers want you sober for the commercials and a Sunday evening keeps most people sober (or at least more so) because you have to work Monday.

I and everyone else I work with have Monday off because they know thats not going to be the case.

[GingerAle]

What is the estimated maximum transactions per second (TPS) of the monero network / protocol?

i've bitcoin is currently 7 TPS. Monero is?

[smooth]

What is the estimated maximum transactions per second (TPS) of the monero network / protocol?

i've bitcoin is currently 7 TPS. Monero is?

There is no hard protocol-defined limit the way there is in Bitcoin. In the original Cryptonote white paper, hard coded constants are given as a reason to want to improve on Bitcoin. (Sections 2.4 and 6.2.2 at least.)

What the limits turn out to be in practice will a function of technology (bandwidth, storage, etc.) and how it is used.

[arnuschky]

Calling BinaryFate

This sadly seems the consensus at r/bitcoin

"[–]dangero 29 points 7 hours ago
You can't track every single satoshi. Multiple inputs can be combined into a single output. At that point you cannot say which satoshi came from which input. Once they're mixed like that you can't separate them again and say which part came from where. It's like pouring multiple smaller cups of water into one larger cup. Once they are combined and mixed you can't provably separate them again. Even if you pour half out into another cup, who is to say where that half originally came from? Bitcoin is absolutely fungible."

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2uew9j/bitcoin_is_a_finite_resource_like_land_if_you_own/

I know it's wrong, but I'm not sure I know how wrong it is.

The reddit poster is correct. Once you make a new transaction, you cannot tell which satoshi in the output came from which input. You can therefore not "follow" the way an individual satoshi took from its creation through the blockchain.

Now, keep in mind that this doesn't keep you from drawing some conclusions about the transactions/senders themselves. Even if we cannot track a single satoshi, by combining knowledge about multiple transactions you can sometimes figure out who sent what to whom.

[arnuschky]

What is the estimated maximum transactions per second (TPS) of the monero network / protocol?

i've bitcoin is currently 7 TPS. Monero is?

There is no hard protocol-defined limit the way there is in Bitcoin. In the original Cryptonote white paper, hard coded constants are given as a reason to want to improve on Bitcoin. (Sections 2.4 and 6.2.2 at least.)

What the limits turn out to be in practice will a function of technology (bandwidth, storage, etc.) and how it is used.

Keep in mind that the limits in Bitcoin are not limitations of the protocol either. They are limits built into the reference client in order to prevent spam, and can be easily lifted ("easily" is of course a matter of discussion, see the debate around the max block size and the required fork )

[smooth]

Calling BinaryFate

This sadly seems the consensus at r/bitcoin

"[–]dangero 29 points 7 hours ago
You can't track every single satoshi. Multiple inputs can be combined into a single output. At that point you cannot say which satoshi came from which input. Once they're mixed like that you can't separate them again and say which part came from where. It's like pouring multiple smaller cups of water into one larger cup. Once they are combined and mixed you can't provably separate them again. Even if you pour half out into another cup, who is to say where that half originally came from? Bitcoin is absolutely fungible."

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2uew9j/bitcoin_is_a_finite_resource_like_land_if_you_own/

I know it's wrong, but I'm not sure I know how wrong it is.

The reddit poster is correct. Once you make a new transaction, you cannot tell which satoshi in the output came from which input. You can therefore not "follow" the way an individual satoshi took from its creation through the blockchain.

Now, keep in mind that this doesn't keep you from drawing some conclusions about the transactions/senders themselves. Even if we cannot track a single satoshi, by combining knowledge about multiple transactions you can sometimes figure out who sent what to whom.

It is simpler than that. Unless some form of mixing is being used, every input of a tranasction has the same owner. So every such transaction and every output is directly linkable to that owner. If the owner is using stolen bitcoin or some other form of "bad" bitcoin then every output of that transaction is tainted.

If mixing is used, then you have the issues of effectiveness (are enough people using it at the same time, are their transactions of similar size) and trust (is the mixer going to steal your coins or keep records of which inputs correspond with which outputs).

[smooth]

What is the estimated maximum transactions per second (TPS) of the monero network / protocol?

i've bitcoin is currently 7 TPS. Monero is?

There is no hard protocol-defined limit the way there is in Bitcoin. In the original Cryptonote white paper, hard coded constants are given as a reason to want to improve on Bitcoin. (Sections 2.4 and 6.2.2 at least.)

What the limits turn out to be in practice will a function of technology (bandwidth, storage, etc.) and how it is used.

Keep in mind that the limits in Bitcoin are not limitations of the protocol either. They are limits built into the reference client in order to prevent spam, and can be easily lifted ("easily" is of course a matter of discussion, see the debate around the max block size and the required fork )

I disagree. The protocol as currently defined (by the code, though certainly the limit is also well known and well documented too) requires that all blocks be rejected if they exceed 1 MB. If you don't do this your blocks will be rejected (even if they aren't > 1 MB, if they build on blocks that are). It is not simply a matter of the reference client not creating 1 MB blocks itself. Every other client must follow the same rule or its blocks will be rejected. Even if a non-mining node doesn't create blocks but relays non-conforming blocks, it will be dropped and banned, so to participate in the network every relay node must also apply the same rule.

The reason a hard fork is needed is to change the protocol. That does not apply to Monero.

[shitaifan2013]

Have a great SuperBowl day guys!

To you too. I wish they won't run it on a Saturday afternoon in the US, as that makes it the night to Monday for Europe and Africa, which is just very inconvenient. Why not Saturday afternoon?

Yeah, that doesn't make sense. Idunno?

OK, Too lazy to setup irc for tiperino, So any Seahawk fan that I trust wants to bet with me on superbowl?

I have 700 XMR and will put it on my pats straight up. No lines no gambling adjustments just straight up winner take all.

Have a great SuperBowl day guys!

well I don't know much about handegg, but I'd be willing to bet 100XMR on the seahawks 

deal?

Well I don't know you but your a hero member with no neg so I don't see why I can't take your word.

Your on, GL and Just an FYI, I called Wilson as a most underrated probable great in his rookie year (When everyone else was Keapernick crazy) because he's one smart bastard!


gonna be a great game.

Anyone else speak up soon as I'll be leaving in an hour or so.

600 XMR left

ok, cool. gl dude! 

btw. since I'm in germany don't be surprised if I won't be online directly after the game, pretty sure I'll fall asleep while watching.

I'll be at casino for who knows how long so I will take awhile to pay as well. I'll be back sometime between tonight and Friday depending on how the Poker tables are treating me.

congrats dude!  shall I use the adress in your siganture to send the funds too?

[stslimited]

How about a software upgrade where the software client replaces any user generated transaction's mixin parameter with 3, if the user does not enter a mixin or if mixin is less than 3

This will not require a hard fork.


I was looking at simplewallet.cpp but I'm not sure exactly where the code change would be https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero/blob/master/src/simplewallet/simplewallet.cpp

[binaryFate]

Calling BinaryFate

This sadly seems the consensus at r/bitcoin

"[–]dangero 29 points 7 hours ago
You can't track every single satoshi. Multiple inputs can be combined into a single output. At that point you cannot say which satoshi came from which input. Once they're mixed like that you can't separate them again and say which part came from where. It's like pouring multiple smaller cups of water into one larger cup. Once they are combined and mixed you can't provably separate them again. Even if you pour half out into another cup, who is to say where that half originally came from? Bitcoin is absolutely fungible."

https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2uew9j/bitcoin_is_a_finite_resource_like_land_if_you_own/

I know it's wrong, but I'm not sure I know how wrong it is.

First of all, typically you can assume it is the same entity that had control over all inputs, if they include them in the same transaction.

Anyway, what you describe is true, and is technically the way bitcoin works. It means you cannot trace back every single satoshis to a given initial block X, and know their full history until they've reached their current destination. It does make bitcoin a little bit fungible, since you can't have perfect knowledge at the level of the smallest atomic values. Agree with you up to this point.
Now I disagree with your conclusion: you explain rightfully that bitcoin is at least a little bit fungible and conclude that it is thus fungible. Sophist logic to me. Unlike my fate, you cannot think of fungibility as being only a binary attribute. If it were, and I would follow the same logic as you do, I could easily demonstrate that bitcoin is not perfectly fungible, and would conclude that therefore it is not fungible at all. (A simple example of a drug dealer sending you bitcoins from a wallet later seized by authorities would do it...).

Fungibility is a complex property in the case of digital currencies. I don't think it's even just a linear scale on which you could "place" them, let alone as I said just a binary answer "yes it is", "no it is not". What is sure is that there is a very common overestimation of how strong bitcoin's fungibility actually is.

Think of it practically: if bitcoin's fungibility is already so good it suits all our needs, why do we have to trust mixers/tumblers that cost us money? If bitcoin's fungibility is already so good it suits all our needs, why do we have A. Poelstra and G. Maxwell working on strong and fundamental improvements? (see http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2oh7vq/toward_unlinkable_bitcoin_transactions_andrew/)

[binaryFate]

I think we tend to see less completely blind bitcoiners "bitcoin is completely fungible and anonymous" as before. But more and more "if you take sufficient precautions, you can hide your traces". Basically they're saying "if *I* can't trace something, therefore *nobody else* can, now and forever". Which is surprisingly naive.

Btw, we must be careful, I fear soon enough we'll see some "if you don't do evil, bitcoin is sufficiently private", which is a dangerous line of thoughts.

[smooth]

How about a software upgrade where the software client replaces any user generated transaction's mixin parameter with 3, if the user does not enter a mixin or if mixin is less than 3

This will not require a hard fork.


I was looking at simplewallet.cpp but I'm not sure exactly where the code change would be https://github.com/monero-project/bitmonero/blob/master/src/simplewallet/simplewallet.cpp

You could implement something like that around line 1077, which is where fake_outs_count gets parsed from the transfer command.

However, it is a bit more complex to do right because there are cases where it is impossible to mix because there aren't enough outputs of the same size. This mostly happens with dust-type outputs but can also happen with large amounts. So in that case (maybe after a few tries because sometimes that helps) you would want to reduce the mix factor, maybe after getting confirmation from the user.

[generalizethis]

I think we tend to see less completely blind bitcoiners "bitcoin is completely fungible and anonymous" as before. But more and more "if you take sufficient precautions, you can hide your traces". Basically they're saying "if *I* can't trace something, therefore *nobody else* can, now and forever". Which is surprisingly naive.

Btw, we must be careful, I fear soon enough we'll see some "if you don't do evil, bitcoin is sufficiently private", which is a dangerous line of thoughts.

Thanks BinaryFate and Smooth, good lessons in the minutia of fungibility.