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

[smooth]

2: exactly the same as a dust attack on the Bitcoin blockchain. Do we not remember the 1Enjoy 1Sochi dust attack? Attackers attempting this quickly run out of funds, which is kinda the point of transaction fees:)

The tx fees with Monero are extremely low compared to Bitcoin, especially considering the price difference.

I could send 1 million transactions for 2 USD right now.

If this is true something will have to be done because every coin that had very low fees has suffered attacks when it mattered (litecoin, dogecoin), in doge case it required a hard fork which I'm sure Monero will be able to deliver, possible together with lager time between blocks, which would require large blocks so emission remains the same...

There will likely need to be a client/node update to impose a realistic relay (anti-spam/anti-dust) fee. It's not really a hard fork, just something we will want people with nodes/wallets to update, which they probably will anyway, and there is no hard fork required to rationalize the miner transaction fees (probably; I may be missing some secondary change needed).

[1713990437]

1713990437

[AlexGR]

2: exactly the same as a dust attack on the Bitcoin blockchain. Do we not remember the 1Enjoy 1Sochi dust attack? Attackers attempting this quickly run out of funds, which is kinda the point of transaction fees:)

The tx fees with Monero are extremely low compared to Bitcoin, especially considering the price difference.

I could send 1 million transactions for 2 USD right now.

The level of transaction fees is definitely TBD. As I mentioned they should be somewhat close to the cost of actually processing the transaction (at which point if someone sends a million transactions, great, that's more business for miners), and right now that is likely not the case.

Do tx costs scale depending the laundry depth? If not, the attack vector can be to use maximum laundering per tx to create as much bloat as possible. But if they are charged proportionally then it might give away the laundry depth (?).

[unpure]

Does this coin have a local wallet client?

[equipoise]

^Yes, you could find it here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=583449.0

[smooth]

2: exactly the same as a dust attack on the Bitcoin blockchain. Do we not remember the 1Enjoy 1Sochi dust attack? Attackers attempting this quickly run out of funds, which is kinda the point of transaction fees:)

The tx fees with Monero are extremely low compared to Bitcoin, especially considering the price difference.

I could send 1 million transactions for 2 USD right now.

The level of transaction fees is definitely TBD. As I mentioned they should be somewhat close to the cost of actually processing the transaction (at which point if someone sends a million transactions, great, that's more business for miners), and right now that is likely not the case.

Do tx costs scale depending the laundry depth? If not, the attack vector can be to use maximum laundering per tx to create as much bloat as possible. But if they are charged proportionally then it might give away the laundry depth (?).

As I said the fee structure should reflect the actual cost of processing the transactions, or perhaps modestly higher to prevent spam but only impose a small extra cost on legitimate users. What that looks like exactly is TBD. It may not be necessary to exactly adjust to all the factors that account for cost as long as the fee is always a little higher than cost. We can start with something more than the negligible fee that is used now and go from there.

[surfer43]

As I said the fee structure should reflect the actual cost of processing the transactions, or perhaps modestly higher to prevent spam but only impose a small extra cost on legitimate users. What that looks like exactly is TBD. It may not be necessary to exactly adjust to all the factors that account for cost as long as the fee is always a little higher than cost. We can start with something more than the negligible fee that is used now and go from there.

I suggest 0.0001 MRO as a starting point.

[ibleed100s]

someone needs to fix the cpuminer fork https://github.com/Lucasjones/cpuminer-multi

because it litterally stop working after 10 min of mining.. then have to restart all over for it to work

[2014-05-23 07:41:56] json_rpc2.0 error: Unknown job id
[2014-05-23 07:41:56] submit_upstream_work json_rpc_call failed
[2014-05-23 07:41:56] ...retry after 10 seconds
[2014-05-23 07:42:07] json_rpc2.0 error: Unknown job id
[2014-05-23 07:42:07] submit_upstream_work json_rpc_call failed
[2014-05-23 07:42:07] ...retry after 10 seconds


was there a fix for this?

[surfer43]

someone needs to fix the cpuminer fork https://github.com/Lucasjones/cpuminer-multi

because it litterally stop working after 10 min of mining.. then have to restart all over for it to work

[2014-05-23 07:41:56] json_rpc2.0 error: Unknown job id
[2014-05-23 07:41:56] submit_upstream_work json_rpc_call failed
[2014-05-23 07:41:56] ...retry after 10 seconds
[2014-05-23 07:42:07] json_rpc2.0 error: Unknown job id
[2014-05-23 07:42:07] submit_upstream_work json_rpc_call failed
[2014-05-23 07:42:07] ...retry after 10 seconds


was there a fix for this?

Which pool?

[sorryforthat]

someone needs to fix the cpuminer fork https://github.com/Lucasjones/cpuminer-multi

because it litterally stop working after 10 min of mining.. then have to restart all over for it to work

[2014-05-23 07:41:56] json_rpc2.0 error: Unknown job id
[2014-05-23 07:41:56] submit_upstream_work json_rpc_call failed
[2014-05-23 07:41:56] ...retry after 10 seconds
[2014-05-23 07:42:07] json_rpc2.0 error: Unknown job id
[2014-05-23 07:42:07] submit_upstream_work json_rpc_call failed
[2014-05-23 07:42:07] ...retry after 10 seconds


was there a fix for this?

Which pool?

Minergate has been doing that

[surfer43]

Hey...  how do I get simplewallet to stop crashing when unlocking my wallet?  I have already checked on a different workstation and it is opening just fine.  Also...  I have never managed to open this wallet with CryptoNoteWallet though...  it keeps saying Initializing even with the updated version.

Is there anything I can do to make simplewallet to STOP CRASHING when I try unlock???  

Can you try deleting wallet.bin (but not wallet.bin.keys) and then opening wallet.bin with simplewallet?

[ibleed100s]

someone needs to fix the cpuminer fork https://github.com/Lucasjones/cpuminer-multi

because it litterally stop working after 10 min of mining.. then have to restart all over for it to work

[2014-05-23 07:41:56] json_rpc2.0 error: Unknown job id
[2014-05-23 07:41:56] submit_upstream_work json_rpc_call failed
[2014-05-23 07:41:56] ...retry after 10 seconds
[2014-05-23 07:42:07] json_rpc2.0 error: Unknown job id
[2014-05-23 07:42:07] submit_upstream_work json_rpc_call failed
[2014-05-23 07:42:07] ...retry after 10 seconds


was there a fix for this?

Which pool?

Minergate has been doing that

yes minergate is the one doing this? is it this pool would it happen with another pool?

[equipoise]

Hey...  how do I get simplewallet to stop crashing when unlocking my wallet?  I have already checked on a different workstation and it is opening just fine.  Also...  I have never managed to open this wallet with CryptoNoteWallet though...  it keeps saying Initializing even with the updated version.

Is there anything I can do to make simplewallet to STOP CRASHING when I try unlock???  

Try this:
1) Backup your wallet (wallet.bin.keys is the most important file)
2) Delete wallet.bin (not wallet.bin.keys)
3) Start simplewallet - it'll ask you for wallet name -> write "wallet.bin"
4) Enter your password. Your wallet will be generated based on the wallet.bin.keys

Edit: wallet.bin is inconsistent with different systems (linux, windows, 64x, 32x), but wallet.bin.keys could be used on any system.

[surfer43]

yes minergate is the one doing this? is it this pool would it happen with another pool?

http://moneropool.org seems to be working fine with cpuminer after 10 minutes.

[smooth]

As I said the fee structure should reflect the actual cost of processing the transactions, or perhaps modestly higher to prevent spam but only impose a small extra cost on legitimate users. What that looks like exactly is TBD. It may not be necessary to exactly adjust to all the factors that account for cost as long as the fee is always a little higher than cost. We can start with something more than the negligible fee that is used now and go from there.

I suggest 0.0001 MRO as a starting point.

We know BTC's relay fee isn't high enough to entirely prevent spam but it to keep it under control somewhat. BTC's fee now is 0.00001 or 0.0001 if you are are using an older version (and some other numbers for other older versions). That's around $0.005 so whatever that translates into in MRO is probably about right. Eventually this should be dynamic, of course, and BTC is looking at doing that as well, but we do need a realistic fee that prevents millions of spam transactions as an attack.

[xxnirvana69xx]

[18:18] <xxnirvana69xx> !calc 225
[18:18] <MoneroBot> With 225 H/s you should get 2.80 MRO per Day

I WISH I was making that right now. I've gotten 0 from solo mining for 2 days and .5 for pool mining lol.

[darlidada]

This is what Pliskov, the developper of the Cryptonote technology, just said regarding its integration within the code of bitcoin:

CryptoNote's main privacy features adoption into Bitcoin and its forks is not so easy as it seems at first glance. If somone desided to do it he would have to rewrite cryptographic functions, change the tranzactions’sctucture, and add a lot of new functions to process it. Thus it would be a hardfork. Of course you can do it from scratch but you’ll have to wait till all your users update their binaries and suppport a lot of exceptions for the old blockchain part. This is arelly difficult task. Nevertheless what benefits do you want to get by getting CN’s code inside the BTC’code?

source: https://forum.cryptonote.org/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=192

[strangewildthing]

Found our first block! Our hashrate is growing rapidly, come join us!

 www.extremehash.com

https://i.imgur.com/JhaPi3r.jpg

[smooth]

[18:18] <xxnirvana69xx> !calc 225
[18:18] <MoneroBot> With 225 H/s you should get 2.80 MRO per Day

I WISH I was making that right now. I've gotten 0 from solo mining for 2 days and .5 for pool mining lol.

Check back in a few weeks on the solo mining. 2.8 MRO per day means roughly one block per week. You might get two in a week or go two or more weeks with none. You can't look at solo mining (on one computer) as something that will throw off coins regularly on a daily basis.

[sorryforthat]

[18:18] <xxnirvana69xx> !calc 225
[18:18] <MoneroBot> With 225 H/s you should get 2.80 MRO per Day

I WISH I was making that right now. I've gotten 0 from solo mining for 2 days and .5 for pool mining lol.

What pool, I get about 3-4 a day with 300h/s

about 2.7 yesterday

Unless minerd is giving me the wrong hash rate

[smooth]

This is what Pliskov, the developper of the Cryptonote technology, just said regarding its integration within the code of bitcoin:

CryptoNote's main privacy features adoption into Bitcoin and its forks is not so easy as it seems at first glance. If somone desided to do it he would have to rewrite cryptographic functions, change the tranzactions’sctucture, and add a lot of new functions to process it. Thus it would be a hardfork. Of course you can do it from scratch but you’ll have to wait till all your users update their binaries and suppport a lot of exceptions for the old blockchain part. This is arelly difficult task. Nevertheless what benefits do you want to get by getting CN’s code inside the BTC’code?

source: https://forum.cryptonote.org/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=192

You can pretty much forget about anything significant being added to BTC, unless there is a major change of leaders and philosophy. BTC in the year 2100 will look about the same as BTC of 2014. Maybe the side chains thing will go in, but even that seems questionable.

This is normal, and probably healthy. Technological progress often happens by leapfrogging, not evolution. The idea that "we can just merge the features" don't work once something because mature and (often well-founded) conservatism sets in.