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

[Anon136]

ASIC is coming ,XVG and DGB are killed by AISC,obviously，XMR will dump to floor.

Monero's POW algorithm is soon to be changed slightly. This will render any asics useless.

[xs.over]

ASIC is coming ,XVG and DGB are killed by AISC,obviously，XMR will dump to floor.

Monero's POW algorithm is soon to be changed slightly. This will render any asics useless.

Are you sure that minor changes in hash algorithm can help to avoid asics, cause they probably can update/reprogramming their FPGA

[Anon136]

ASIC is coming ,XVG and DGB are killed by AISC,obviously，XMR will dump to floor.

Monero's POW algorithm is soon to be changed slightly. This will render any asics useless.

Are you sure that minor changes in hash algorithm can help to avoid asics, cause they probably can update/reprogramming their FPGA

A FPGA is not an ASIC. This change will stop ASICs but not FPGAs. I don't think anything can do that except maybe an intentionally developed FPGA resistant algorithm.

[Hueristic]

ASIC is coming ,XVG and DGB are killed by AISC,obviously，XMR will dump to floor.

Monero's POW algorithm is soon to be changed slightly. This will render any asics useless.

Are you sure that minor changes in hash algorithm can help to avoid asics, cause they probably can update/reprogramming their FPGA

FPGA (field Grid Programmable Array) is a system that can be programmed to act as an asic but it does not have even close to asic speed because the chips used are much slower than if you had made the asic on die.

Holy crap you guys. Eureka! I figured it out! Not just a stop gap measure to address the fork ring sig reuse problem. The actual solution! I was just laying in bed trying to fall asleep and it hit me like a tire iron to the face.

It is possable to deterministically derive ring sig partners but in a way that would be functionally random to any outside observer. I'll give an example of one way of doing it. Take

Code:

sha256([your private key] [transaction hash of most recent input]) mod [number of prospective ring signature partners]

Then make all of the prospective ring signature partners into an ordered numbered set and use the resulting modulus from the pseudo code above to select one. Continue wrapping around the clock face as many times as needed to arrive at the number of ring signature partners desired.

There would be 0 information leak from the outside, the ring signature partners would be functionally random to any outside observer BUT, and here is the beautiful thing, the same ring signature partners would end up being selected on both the main chain AND the fork chain!

Of course what I outlined above almost certainly isn't the best way to achieve this. It was just to outline the concept.


Merits! I deserve all of the merits. Bequeath unto me thine merits! (well, after peer review, and not just if my specific idea is right but if I'm barking up close enough to the right tree to inspire someone smarter than me)

The prospective ring signature partners is a numbered order set consisting of the total number of transactions so what is the benefit of using that as it can easily be determined? Or am I just missing something there?

AFA as the concept itself,I cannot comment on except it sounds doable.

What happened to the hoard of reddit supporters? They have no issue funding marketing bullshit so they can line their greedly little pockets but when it comes to the most important core parts of the project they are no where to be found. It's almost as if security is kicked from the back seat into the trunk. I bet if we put up a funder to get some second rate hack actor like Seagal it would be funded in 10 minutes.

https://forum.getmonero.org/8/funding-required/90007/bulletproofs-audit-fundraising

We want Carlos from bitconnect!

Come on now 170 xmr in 3 days is not bad at all.

It used to be hours tops for this stuff.

All done.  3 days.  240 xmr ain't peanuts anymore either.

120k subs on reddit. Typically 3000-4000+ online at any given time.  Ya, not much for community support given the numbers.  But we still get it done.

Nice to see you guys still supporting the core ideals over here and I'm glad Fluffy used the Dev fund for the remainder. It's weird with the FFS sometimes I forget that there is a Dev fund that gets a cut of most pools.

Anyone know how much is in the development fund?

Good question, I'm sure there is a view key around somewhere but I have no clue where. It would be nice to see a spreadsheet to see how it's been used over the years. I only disagreed with one thing it was used for (at least that I know) so that's pretty damn good over all as in any organization having that kind of agreement from the community is pretty unheard of.

[Anon136]

Holy crap you guys. Eureka! I figured it out! Not just a stop gap measure to address the fork ring sig reuse problem. The actual solution! I was just laying in bed trying to fall asleep and it hit me like a tire iron to the face.

It is possable to deterministically derive ring sig partners but in a way that would be functionally random to any outside observer. I'll give an example of one way of doing it. Take

Code:

sha256([your private key] [transaction hash of most recent input]) mod [number of prospective ring signature partners]

Then make all of the prospective ring signature partners into an ordered numbered set and use the resulting modulus from the pseudo code above to select one. Continue wrapping around the clock face as many times as needed to arrive at the number of ring signature partners desired.

There would be 0 information leak from the outside, the ring signature partners would be functionally random to any outside observer BUT, and here is the beautiful thing, the same ring signature partners would end up being selected on both the main chain AND the fork chain!

Of course what I outlined above almost certainly isn't the best way to achieve this. It was just to outline the concept.


Merits! I deserve all of the merits. Bequeath unto me thine merits! (well, after peer review, and not just if my specific idea is right but if I'm barking up close enough to the right tree to inspire someone smarter than me)

The prospective ring signature partners is a numbered order set consisting of the total number of transactions so what is the benefit of using that as it can easily be determined? Or am I just missing something there?

AFA as the concept itself,I cannot comment on except it sounds doable.

No you aren't missing anything. I was just trying to be as clear as possible. Said differently, one would use the ouput from that algorithm, call it N, to select the Nth valid prospective ring signature partner.

[Hueristic]

Holy crap you guys. Eureka! I figured it out! Not just a stop gap measure to address the fork ring sig reuse problem. The actual solution! I was just laying in bed trying to fall asleep and it hit me like a tire iron to the face.

It is possable to deterministically derive ring sig partners but in a way that would be functionally random to any outside observer. I'll give an example of one way of doing it. Take

Code:

sha256([your private key] [transaction hash of most recent input]) mod [number of prospective ring signature partners]

Then make all of the prospective ring signature partners into an ordered numbered set and use the resulting modulus from the pseudo code above to select one. Continue wrapping around the clock face as many times as needed to arrive at the number of ring signature partners desired.

There would be 0 information leak from the outside, the ring signature partners would be functionally random to any outside observer BUT, and here is the beautiful thing, the same ring signature partners would end up being selected on both the main chain AND the fork chain!

Of course what I outlined above almost certainly isn't the best way to achieve this. It was just to outline the concept.


Merits! I deserve all of the merits. Bequeath unto me thine merits! (well, after peer review, and not just if my specific idea is right but if I'm barking up close enough to the right tree to inspire someone smarter than me)

The prospective ring signature partners is a numbered order set consisting of the total number of transactions so what is the benefit of using that as it can easily be determined? Or am I just missing something there?

AFA as the concept itself,I cannot comment on except it sounds doable.

No you aren't missing anything. I was just trying to be as clear as possible. Said differently, one would use the ouput from that algorithm, call it N, to select the Nth valid prospective ring signature partner.

Got ya.

[SillyGirl]

Waited for Monero to come out of the dip. +10% today! Check out the fluctuations in the charts:https://www.coinranker.net/cryptocurrency/monero

[Drhiggins]

I need some help.  Ever since v0.11.1.0 I can not figure out how to send a payment through the CLI wallet feature.  I typed help and get this in the wallet help menu but I don't know how to format it correctly.

Ring size does this matter and what values do you use min max?  Also what is the minimum mixinn these days?   Can someone please place an example of how to transfer here please.

how do you generate a payment ID now has this changed as well?

[nioc]

I need some help.  Ever since v0.11.1.0 I can not figure out how to send a payment through the CLI wallet feature.  I typed help and get this in the wallet help menu but I don't know how to format it correctly.

Ring size does this matter and what values do you use min max?  Also what is the minimum mixinn these days?   Can someone please place an example of how to transfer here please.

how do you generate a payment ID now has this changed as well?

the minimum and default for ringsize is 5 (that is the same as mixin 4) ring size has replaced mixin as the descriptor. No need to change this.

when you type help you will see "transfer" and that is the format to use. and it describes it as well

transfer [<priority>] [<ring_size>] <address> <amount> [<payment_id>]

you don't need to set ring size.  If you want to lower priority and therefore the fee use [1]  I usually just set the priority before a transfer by "set priority 1" so as not to be concerned with the order of things and then just use "transfer <address> <amount>"

for the PID, whoever you are sending to will give that to you.  If receiving then I am unsure.  I have found no need for it

With the new release and hardfork at the end of the month subaddresses can be used instead of PID.  They will work better but it will probably take a while before exchanges start using them. 

[Drhiggins]

I need some help.  Ever since v0.11.1.0 I can not figure out how to send a payment through the CLI wallet feature.  I typed help and get this in the wallet help menu but I don't know how to format it correctly.

Ring size does this matter and what values do you use min max?  Also what is the minimum mixinn these days?   Can someone please place an example of how to transfer here please.

how do you generate a payment ID now has this changed as well?

the minimum and default for ringsize is 5 (that is the same as mixin 4) ring size has replaced mixin as the descriptor. No need to change this.

when you type help you will see "transfer" and that is the format to use. and it describes it as well

transfer [<priority>] [<ring_size>] <address> <amount> [<payment_id>]

you don't need to set ring size.  If you want to lower priority and therefore the fee use [1]  I usually just set the priority before a transfer by "set priority 1" so as not to be concerned with the order of things and then just use "transfer <address> <amount>"

for the PID, whoever you are sending to will give that to you.  If receiving then I am unsure.  I have found no need for it

With the new release and hardfork at the end of the month subaddresses can be used instead of PID.  They will work better but it will probably take a while before exchanges start using them. 

Thank you good sir.

[LTCMAXMYR]

ASIC is coming ,XVG and DGB are killed by AISC,obviously，XMR will dump to floor.

Monero's POW algorithm is soon to be changed slightly. This will render any asics useless.

Are you sure that minor changes in hash algorithm can help to avoid asics, cause they probably can update/reprogramming their FPGA

i mean this ASIC,not FPGA.
http://www.baikalminer.com/product12.php

[nioc]

^^^^
They have already removed Monero from the list of coins that can be mined with this

[Whtwabbit]

Still says it mines Monero on their website from the link above

[nioc]

They removed it from their twitter

https://twitter.com/baikalminer

[Hueristic]

SO, It IS TRUE !

Hah, did I get to say that first?

[vitocorp]

Unidentified entities at a telecom company connected to the Egyptian government are using malware to trick Middle Eastern Web users into unwittingly mining monero, according to a new report.
Internet users in Turkey and Syria who downloaded Windows applications such as Avast Antivirus, CCleaner, Opera, or 7-Zip were unknowingly redirected to malicious versions with malware, the University of Toronto's Citizen Lab claimed in a study published Friday.

Seen at: https://www.coindesk.com/monero-mining-malware-attack-linked-to-egyptian-telecom-giant/

[onionpealer]

They removed it from their twitter

https://twitter.com/baikalminer

Excellent news. Looks like I'll have to drop mining Electroneum (just about breaking even on it just now anyway) and move back to mining Monero.

https://screenshots.firefox.com/TDP3HMC416V2qKeA/twitter.com

[Hueristic]

They removed it from their twitter

https://twitter.com/baikalminer

Excellent news. Looks like I'll have to drop mining Electroneum (just about breaking even on it just now anyway) and move back to mining Monero.

https://screenshots.firefox.com/TDP3HMC416V2qKeA/twitter.com

You might want to wait until the cryptonight has been forked, these asics can still mine it even if it's not advertised. Unless I missed something and there was a change I don't know about.

[CanErik]

Hi;

Can anyone tell, how "Biakal Giant N" miner will affect this project?

Kind regards

[explorer]

Hi;

Can anyone tell, how "Biakal Giant N" miner will affect this project?

Kind regards

It won't.  If it is real, it has probably already had it's effect.  Bricking it may have a further effect, time will tell.  Soon.

At the least, it has spurred to action the PoW alteration scheme that has been mumbled about for some time.  The next few weeks should will be interesting!