delete

[Oscilson]

If XMR is vulnerable, then I think it would be most beneficial for XMR to be attacked and fixed. I would love to understand the vulnerability if one exists.

Wouldn't it be better if XMR were fixed and then the attack was attempted? The result would be the same wouldn't it, you would get your information on the vulnerability and its fix without putting the investors funds at risk (well at as much risk anyway)

We should do a test on the testnet, not the main chain.

[1714009138]

1714009138

[othe]

I find it quiet amusing that the talk is only about Monero where at least 10 other coins also use Cryptonote and there are even older ones than Monero - kind of fascinating...

[smooth]

I find it quiet amusing that the talk is only about Monero where at least 10 other coins also use Cryptonote and there are even older ones than Monero - kind of fascinating...

That's because every single person on this thread including BCX, TFM, and all the rest are pro-Monero shills and all of the activity is fake.

Hypothesis accepted

[vuduchyld]

I find it quiet amusing that the talk is only about Monero where at least 10 other coins also use Cryptonote and there are even older ones than Monero - kind of fascinating...

That's because every single person on this thread including BCX, TFM, and all the rest are pro-Monero shills and all of the activity is fake.

Hypothesis accepted

I lolled

[TheFascistMind]

Can anyone loan me Monero? How much and what are the terms? PM me please.

[hypostatization]

If XMR is vulnerable, then I think it would be most beneficial for XMR to be attacked and fixed. I would love to understand the vulnerability if one exists.

Wouldn't it be better if XMR were fixed and then the attack was attempted? The result would be the same wouldn't it, you would get your information on the vulnerability and its fix without putting the investors funds at risk (well at as much risk anyway)

We should do a test on the testnet, not the main chain.

I agree. I have not gotten the sense in this thread that those options are not on the table. I may be wrong.

I find it quiet amusing that the talk is only about Monero where at least 10 other coins also use Cryptonote and there are even older ones than Monero - kind of fascinating...

Also agree. It is ridiculous that all emphasis is on Monero, but if this controversy surrounding XMR can benefit advancement of the underlying tech---I would like to see it play out.

I also, selfishly, want to see an epic rs vs. BCX battle.

[drawingthesun]

Well BCX did offer to show a live chain demonstration to Maxwell.

Almost but not exactly.

If gmaxwell is so sure in his belief of "bullshit" then a live chain demonstration isn't possible is it?

I am not that eager to go head to head with a Bitcoin Core Dev for the obvious political reasons.

If I win, I lose.


~BCX~

I don't get this line of thinking, how would you lose? Your reputation would be boosted quite a bit. As far as I can tell you are capable of attacking young coins through mining attacks, however I believe you are out of your depth regarding the ability to steal Monero without needing ones private key.

A live demonstration would further cement Litecoin and Bitcoin, of which you apparently hold a considerable position.

[TheFascistMind]

I no longer want to short Monero. You can rest easier. What I found can be fixed (if it isn't already). I believe I found BCX's exploit, although it is possible I found one that is different than his. And I believe he is incorrect about it not being fixable. At first thought, I too also thought it was a "coin killer".

Note I haven't worked through one part of the math so it is still possible that I am incorrect about this being an exploit, but I think I got the key epiphany of the exploit which makes it is possible.

It is also possible that this was already thought of and mitigated. I haven't checked the source code to verify. This is all conceptual at this point.

[TheFascistMind]

What I have thought of is so obvious that it is possible that I haven't discovered anything the developers didn't already know. But the proof is whether they have the mitigating fix already coded or written down. If not, then they didn't think of this attack vector.

[rdnkjdi]

I no longer want to short Monero. You can rest easier. What I found can be fixed (if it isn't already). I believe I found BCX's exploit, although it is possible I found one that is different than his. And I believe he is incorrect about it not being fixable. At first thought, I too also thought it was a "coin killer".

Note I haven't worked through one part of the math so it is still possible that I am incorrect about this being an exploit, but I think I got the key epiphany of the exploit which makes it is possible.

It is also possible that this was already thought of and mitigated. I haven't checked the source code to verify. This is all conceptual at this point.

As somebody who owns Monero - I would love to see incentivation to try and "kill" the coin now.  I would even be interested in chipping in a little to cover the cost of shorting it thru rptellia if you thought you could pull it off.  The reasons are 3fold.

A.  If it works the price of the coin will likely half even after the fix and create buy in opportunity.

B.  If there is no fix it's better that it dies now than later.

C.  Economically I think it's easier to concentrate back from a small market cap (if trust = money people have invested there is less "trust" to earn back.

[DieJohnny]

BCX, most people that are interested in crypto know absolutely nothing about the underlying technology. We can read white papers and nod our heads in agreement.... feigning a sliver of understanding, then those tiny bits of knowledge are deleted from all thought almost immediately. We are fundamentally helpless to evaluate the true stability and safety of any coin we own.

And thus the battles for public opinion. And even we developers aren't 100% sure which technological innovations are superior and must wait for the market and exploits to tell us.

Once the technological innovation settles down a bit, I and others can pursue education of laymen. I enjoy that actually. I used to tutor my engineering friends in college in physics, math, etc..

Right now we are so busy actually trying to innovate, do not have sufficient time to educate and we don't have sufficient unifying understanding to educate optimally. It is more a piecemeal process at this juncture.

The reason I say this, is because it is a waste of time for the crypto community and for individual investors to bother with coins that are flawed. They should be exploited and destroyed the moment they are proven vulnerable. Coins would be much more careful about launching, there would be a cost to launching a coin that is weak, today there is no such cost and the investor is left to simply gamble.

Killing innovation too early though also has a cost. And it appears to me BCX is too busy and was asked by his confidents to make a decision on XMR (and CN) and took his investigation only as far as finding the answer he wanted.

And doesn't interest him (economically) to expend more effort on it. Of he could be bluffing for some reason such as deciding he wants to be in XMR and thus wants to buy it cheaper.

Or he had a hunch and wanted to entice someone to do his work for him.

You have articulated my belief that a coin which has its act together on making laymen knowledgeable (in a non-confrontational manner) will have an advantage.

I do think education matters but only to a certain extent. For example, if you think educating people how wallets work is going to win over the masses then I am going to disagree, what needs to happen is wallets need a better solution that requires less education and fewer sleepless nights.

[DieJohnny]

I would call upon you and your similarly capable friends to take it upon yourself to ALWAYS destroy a coin that is vulnerable, this includes low-hash coins, because 51% is a vulnerability that cannot be ignored. Someone has to be the police, we have police for a reason, to protect the innocent.

Every new coin will have low hash. If a "low-hash coin" takes off i.e. becomes popular, the low-hash issue goes away. Whereas a fundamental technological flaw will not.

It is called a barrier to entry, and I think Bitcoin supporters have a vested interest in exploiting those barriers. Distributed and open doesn't mean naive and stupid.

[DieJohnny]

Again, I have no intentions on attacking XMR as my focus is my pools and DGC if anything.

~BCX~

Whiny obsequious appeal for centralized action.

Your dependence on those you fear is a touching example of human weakness.

For the record, This quote doesn't come from me.