rpietila Altcoin Observer

[TooDumbForBitcoin]

the idiots that read threads like this...

... are often hard on yourselves.

[rdnkjdi]

Time is ticking for me, 90% of RAM usage with bitmonerod opened 

Increase your swap file (AKA virtual memory) size.

Also, RAM is cheap.

Lol ... not sure if that worldview inspires confidence in your potential investors.

[iCEBREAKER]

Time is ticking for me, 90% of RAM usage with bitmonerod opened 

Increase your swap file (AKA virtual memory) size.

Also, RAM is cheap.

Lol ... not sure if that worldview inspires confidence in your potential investors.

What "worldview?"  How is increasing swap file to gain memory a "worldview?"

Likewise, "RAM is cheap" is a fact not an attitude.

I don't want whiny investors who feel FOSS owes them something competing with me to buy cheap XMR.  They may take their "What Have You Done for Me Lately?" Narcissistic Entitlement Syndrome and shove it.   

[rdnkjdi]

Time is ticking for me, 90% of RAM usage with bitmonerod opened  

Increase your swap file (AKA virtual memory) size.

Also, RAM is cheap.

Lol ... not sure if that worldview inspires confidence in your potential investors.

What "worldview?"  How is increasing swap file to gain memory a "worldview?"

Likewise, "RAM is cheap" is a fact not an attitude.

I don't want whiny investors who feel FOSS owes them something competing with me to buy cheap XMR.  They may take their "What Have You Done for Me Lately?" Narcissistic Entitlement Syndrome and shove it.  

1 - I'm not an investor.

2 - I'm not from another coin.

3 - Having a coin that can run on the lowest denominational hardware creates a moat to keep other coins at bay.  

4 - Suggesting users should "upgrade" from 8GB of ram because it's cheap would make me have second thoughts if I was seriously considering purchasing in fear the devs are living in a bubble of what type of technological moat is needed early on to monopolize adoption.  (Closed Source Darkcoin might be an example)

I'm not really asking "What have you done for me lately" - I'm just curious as to how dedicated the XMR coin is to winning the anon/cryptonote coin race.  8GB of ram is a kinda bad deal.  Saying "just buy more ram" isn't a good solution.  Sorry.

[rdnkjdi]

http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-540-73420-8_38#page-1

So what's all this talk about a new crypto that's solved the ring signature bloat issue? Which one is it?

What % of blockchain size does it cut down? 

[dga]

http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-540-73420-8_38#page-1

So what's all this talk about a new crypto that's solved the ring signature bloat issue? Which one is it?

What % of blockchain size does it cut down? 

The cited paper itself doesn't provide a direct implementation.  So no go yet, even though it's from 2007.  I could see some arguments for it, but I've got to admit that I'm skeptical about the practical size improvement from the Chandran sqrt(N) scheme in the context of a cryptocurrency like Cryptonote.

For those interested, btw, a non-springer-evil-paywall link to the paper is here:

http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/nichandr/ringsignaturessublinear.pdf

It'd be a fun little research project for someone to see if ideas in that vein could actually improve a coin, with the obvious question being whether it's better in practice than BBR's ring signature pruning, which C_Z just released yesterday in build 3.0.38?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=577267.msg8744252#msg8744252

[iCEBREAKER]

1 - I'm not an investor.

2 - I'm not from another coin.

3 - Having a coin that can run on the lowest denominational hardware creates a moat to keep other coins at bay.  

4 - Suggesting users should "upgrade" from 8GB of ram because it's cheap would make me have second thoughts if I was seriously considering purchasing in fear the devs are living in a bubble of what type of technological moat is needed early on to monopolize adoption.  (Closed Source Darkcoin might be an example)

I'm not really asking "What have you done for me lately" - I'm just curious as to how dedicated the XMR coin is to winning the anon/cryptonote coin race.  8GB of ram is a kinda bad deal.  Saying "just buy more ram" isn't a good solution.  Sorry.

1 & 2 - I didn't say you are.

3 - Have you seen the reqs for a full BTC node lately?  We dealt with the 'sky is falling because footprint' FUD years ago.  Case dismissed, with prejudice!

4 - You keep harping on the cheap RAM upgrade (which any investor can easily afford) while ignoring the simple quick fix of increasing swap file allocation.

The database implementation is a well-advanced work in progress.  The XMR team is doing it right, not rushing the process just to squelch FUD.

If you're not asking "What have you done for me lately" then you're asking "Are we there yet; How much longer?"   

[rdnkjdi]

If you're not asking "What have you done for me lately" then you're asking "Are we there yet; How much longer?"   Wink

I'm just curious if it's going to turn into a circle jerk "don't worry about it buy ram" while another coin implements the fixes needed to support a larger network/more transactions with lower hardware requirements.  

I just think the approach of "Buy more ram" at 8GB running out is a terrible one to hear when thinking about the future of a coin.  However hearing the delay is "because it's being done right" (assuming it actually is) is the best possible explanation.  

[othe]

rdnkjdi has said nothing wrong, not sure whats up with you guys.

Can´t you just behave a bit, its pretty clear that no normal user will have to deal with virtual swap space mods and stuff like that.

[smooth]

The cited paper itself doesn't provide a direct implementation.  So no go yet, even though it's from 2007.  I could see some arguments for it, but I've got to admit that I'm skeptical about the practical size improvement from the Chandran sqrt(N) scheme in the context of a cryptocurrency like Cryptonote.

The primary benefit would likely be improved security by using higher mix factors, not block chain size, since it doesn't help at all with long term pruning issues, and cheaper large mixes might lead to greater blockchain use.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox

[rdnkjdi]

IF you didn't got yet, the reason your comment was taken not so kindly is because you are playing on the imaginary fear that the current Monero blockchain size issue will play negatively on Monero adoption and you want to shove this on our face, the fact is this is not only a temporary issue but everyone is aware Monero is alpha-level software, so keep pressing the FUD harder if it helps you sleeping at night or something like that.

If the blockchain size is 8GB it is playing negatively on adoption.  Lot of people don't want to open their computers and upgrade ram just to try something out.

Also since the transaction fees went up to .1 to eliminate spamming I believe transactions fell by like 15%?  The larger the blockchain per transaction the more friction there is for adoption.  Also the higher the hardware requirements the more friction there is for adoption.

At some point this friction plays into network effect in how many people adopt it.  Not just what's feasible - but whatever is perceived to be likely to keep up with / lower the hardware requirements / "futureproof" is more likely to pull early adopters. 

I've been accused of being a Monero shill more than once and if this turns into the circlejerks that some most other coins are I won't like it.  Also this is the "Altcoin Observer".  

I'm curious as to what Boolberry's memory/blockchain size would be if it had the transnational volume of Monero with their pruning improvements.

*I'm not an investor.  I'm an observer.  Am I in the wrong thread?

[iCEBREAKER]

If you're not asking "What have you done for me lately" then you're asking "Are we there yet; How much longer?"   Wink

I'm just curious if it's going to turn into a circle jerk "don't worry about it buy ram" while another coin implements the fixes needed to support a larger network/more transactions with lower hardware requirements.  

I just think the approach of "Buy more ram" at 8GB running out is a terrible one to hear when thinking about the future of a coin.  However hearing the delay is "because it's being done right" (assuming it actually is) is the best possible explanation.  

OK I get it now.  You don't know what the terms "swap file' and 'virtual memory' mean, much less how or why one would go about adjusting them.

Here's the skinny: increasing your swap file gives your PC more memory, takes about 60 seconds (including reboot), and costs nothing.  Google it.

Bitcoin's footprint is much heavier than Monero's, but that hasn't even slowed it down and most BTC users aren't even aware of the issue.

[nioc]

Nekomata how much RAM do you have.  I didn't see you mention it and after you did people are talking that 8GB is not enough.

I have 4GB and can run a node.  It has been near maxed out for over a month with it seems no change over that time.  Somebody was discussing physical RAM vs virtual which may be the reason but I would have no idea.

Edit: iCEBREAKER, I also have no idea or need so far but will google it at some point.

[rdnkjdi]

OK I get it now.  You don't know what the terms "swap file' and 'virtual memory' mean, much less how or why one would go about adjusting them.

Here's the skinny: increasing your swap file gives your PC more memory, takes about 60 seconds (including reboot), and costs nothing.  Google it.

I believe my point was lost.  Forget it.

[smooth]

IF you didn't got yet, the reason your comment was taken not so kindly is because you are playing on the imaginary fear that the current Monero blockchain size issue will play negatively on Monero adoption and you want to shove this on our face, the fact is this is not only a temporary issue but everyone is aware Monero is alpha-level software, so keep pressing the FUD harder if it helps you sleeping at night or something like that.

If the blockchain size is 8GB it is playing negatively on adoption.  Lot of people don't want to open their computers and upgrade ram just to try something out.

Also since the transaction fees went up to .1 to eliminate spamming I believe transactions fell by like 15%?  The higher the cost of the blockchain the more friction there is for adoption.  Also the higher the hardware requirements the more friction there is for adoption.

I've been accused of being a Monero shill more than once and if this turns into the circlejerks that some most other coins are I won't like it.  Also this is the "Altcoin Observer".  

Why are you making a big deal about this circlejerk thing?

We are implementing database support to move the blockchain out of RAM okay?

I'm curious as to what Boolberry's memory/blockchain size would be if it had the transnational volume of Monero with their pruning improvements.

Most of the "pruning" (incorrect use of the word but whatever) improvements in Boolberry have not even kicked in yet. CZ said after a year or so is a reasonable target.

Aside from usage and age (Monero is a month older) the differences that are currently active are:

1. 2 minute blocks (BBR) vs 1 minute blocks (XMR). That results in a difference of 720 blocks per day, most of them empty. Empty blocks are about 250 bytes. So 720 of these per day is 180 kbytes per day.

3. Removing dust from mining outputs. There are only 1440 mining outputs per day. At a very, very generous 200 byte usage impact each that would be another 360 kb per day.

All of this adds up 16 megabytes per month, which is hardly anything. It is all usage.

edit: apparently BBR activated RS trimming today. So my comments above are not technically correct. The are still correct as to magnitudes 

[rdnkjdi]

Most of the "pruning" (incorrect use of the word but whatever) improvements in Boolberry have not even kicked in yet. CZ said after a year or so is a reasonable target.

Aside from usage and age (Monero is a month older) the differences that are currently active are:

1. 2 minute blocks (BBR) vs 1 minute blocks (XMR). That results in a difference of 720 blocks per day, most of them empty. Empty blocks are about 250 bytes. So 720 of these per day is 180 kbytes per day.

3. Removing dust from mining outputs. There are only 1440 mining outputs per day. At a very, very generous 200 byte usage impact each that would be another 360 kb per day.

All of this adds up 16 megabytes per month, which is hardly anything. It is all usage.

Thank you for the more detailed explanation.

[bobabouey2]

I already posted this in the monero topic, but I think it's worth posting here as well. I have parsed the ANN topic for monero, boolberry, bytecoin, ducknote and darkcoin. Figured it would be interesting to see these results.

I put them into tables and graphs so its a little easier to compare.

[btc-mike]

If you're not asking "What have you done for me lately" then you're asking "Are we there yet; How much longer?"   Wink

I'm just curious if it's going to turn into a circle jerk "don't worry about it buy ram" while another coin implements the fixes needed to support a larger network/more transactions with lower hardware requirements.  

I just think the approach of "Buy more ram" at 8GB running out is a terrible one to hear when thinking about the future of a coin.  However hearing the delay is "because it's being done right" (assuming it actually is) is the best possible explanation.  

OK I get it now.  You don't know what the terms "swap file' and 'virtual memory' mean, much less how or why one would go about adjusting them.

Here's the skinny: increasing your swap file gives your PC more memory, takes about 60 seconds (including reboot), and costs nothing.  Google it.

Bitcoin's footprint is much heavier than Monero's, but that hasn't even slowed it down and most BTC users aren't even aware of the issue.

A large percentage of users do not know what those terms mean and even greater percent do know how to adjust the VM. Additionally, most users do not know how to upgrade RAM. These users will not Google it. They will quit, put it off till later, or post all over the place asking for help.

I know I had issues on my 8GB Windows box over a month ago. I could only run the deamon if closed most other apps. (edit - i have since upgrade to 16GB and the deamon loads normally)

I do not know the rate the XMR blockchain is growing but someone with more time could extrapolate the blockchain size vs time and figure out when the daemon will not load on a plain vanilla Win build with 8GB. Unless the database is complete at that time, new users will be unable to try out XMR and those already using XMR will lose functionality.

Bitcoin's footprint s indeed heavier but it has multiple lightweight wallets. I don't know of any XMR lightweight wallets endorsed by the devs.

[btc-mike]

I already posted this in the monero topic, but I think it's worth posting here as well. I have parsed the ANN topic for monero, boolberry, bytecoin, ducknote and darkcoin. Figured it would be interesting to see these results.

I put them into tables and graphs so its a little easier to compare.

TKT's data was very informative.

I think you missed the number of unique posters for each thread. Oops. It is there. Good job!

[thefunkybits]

XMR Monero looks like a capitulation to 0035 is needed, despite those massive buy walls (I won't be selling any)

XDN duckNote on the otherhand is ready for another leg up!