<<  >> (p.348)
    Author Topic: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency  (Read 4675449 times)

    • Rias
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 373
    Merit: 250


    View Profile
    June 20, 2014, 10:58:31 AM
     #6941
    Quote from: Cheesus on June 20, 2014, 10:41:56 AM
    Come on, give Monero guys some credit. They are maintaining the biggest CryptoNote community there is and doing it pretty well. 

    Maintaining community is one thing and developing an innovative tech is another.

    I really appreciate what XMR does to CryptoNote promotion and development of pools, wallets, etc. However, if you take a look at their recent transaction pool changes, you'll be quite surprised.

    Firstly, Monero devs changed the source code so that the transactions could stay in pools forever. This lead to transaction piling up to 250+ transactions in the daemon tx_pools, which were not going anywhere at all and could be stuck for eternity.

    Secondly, they took BBR solution to the problem and I assume didn't even bother thinking deeply on what they were adding. The 24h limit for transactions in the pool was a solution but again not a wise one. As there are no wallet notifications, the wallet doesn't know anything about the transactions being reversed. Users, services are not notified on the process at all.

    What's more, if there are older daemons in the network, a more interesting case is possible. The transaction is reversed in newer daemons, the inputs are free again for other transactions. But when they're used, the older daemons (which didn't get the transaction out of their tx_pools) have to report double-spending attempts.

    This is not how you make critical updates for the currency.

    1) Monero developers should evaluate the long term consequences of their commits. Each unthought solution can cause drastic problems in the long run.
    2) Monero developers should allow a compatibility window in order to make sure that the network is not split during the update. It's not about "mandatory update" alert on the forum, but a sophisticated approach inside the source code.

    And that is why I prefer Bytecoin developers approach. I'm sure they can't ruin the network with one random commit. Can't say the same about XMR devs.

  • Rias
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 373
    Merit: 250


    View Profile
    June 20, 2014, 11:00:11 AM
     #6942
    Quote from: onemorebtc on June 20, 2014, 10:57:25 AM
    Quote from: flower1024 on June 20, 2014, 10:09:41 AM
    I would like to ask you about the botnets in XMR. I've been reading bytecoin thread and stumbled upon XMR mining malware.
    There was also a topic on the stealth miner: https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/639375.0

    Did anybody notice any difficulty spikes in early June?

    a bcn shill here? you must be really afraid Wink
    i prefer botnets over a 80% premine...

    You shouldn't.

    Even if the vast majority of the coins is collected in BCN devs hands, it only reassures their commitment to keep developing the technology. Botnet owners are definitely not the case as the money is wasted.

  • onemorebtc
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 266
    Merit: 254


    View Profile
    June 20, 2014, 11:02:20 AM
     #6943
    Quote from: flower1024 on June 20, 2014, 10:28:43 AM
    Quote from: Rias on June 20, 2014, 10:23:21 AM
    I wouldn't be too surprised, since Monero is easy and most profitable target for botnet owners. I just wonder how much hash rate can be attributed to botnets currently. Hopefully, not that much. But the difficulty growth happens very fast with a long plato afterwards, which might point to new botnets jumping in.

    CPU mined coins are subject to botnets by definition. However, this is not what you want for the coin you're mining or investing in. Large botnet share means that the majority of the coins is obtained by the scammers and is likely to be dumped. This can't be good for the long term development because the coins are spread not among the devs or users, but are obtained by botnet holders.

    How much is the case for Monero? I really believe that not all of the spikes are due to botnets, but at least some of them could be.

    you contradict yourself:
    if botnet owners sell all its good distributed.
    if they dont there are no dumps

    btw i dont think any of this is true: they should sell.... steadily. as any other miner.

    i dont like botnets and think they are criminal. but i dont really see an issue from a crypto-currency-user perspective

    edit: botnets dont havy any influence about how many new coins where generated per day. just how much other miners get
    transfer 3 onemorebtc.k1024.de 1

  • flower1024
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 1428
    Merit: 1000


    View Profile
    June 20, 2014, 11:05:02 AM
     #6944
    Quote from: Rias on June 20, 2014, 10:58:31 AM
    Quote from: Cheesus on June 20, 2014, 10:41:56 AM
    Come on, give Monero guys some credit. They are maintaining the biggest CryptoNote community there is and doing it pretty well. 

    Maintaining community is one thing and developing an innovative tech is another.

    I really appreciate what XMR does to CryptoNote promotion and development of pools, wallets, etc. However, if you take a look at their recent transaction pool changes, you'll be quite surprised.

    Firstly, Monero devs changed the source code so that the transactions could stay in pools forever. This lead to transaction piling up to 250+ transactions in the daemon tx_pools, which were not going anywhere at all and could be stuck for eternity.

    Secondly, they took BBR solution to the problem and I assume didn't even bother thinking deeply on what they were adding. The 24h limit for transactions in the pool was a solution but again not a wise one. As there are no wallet notifications, the wallet doesn't know anything about the transactions being reversed. Users, services are not notified on the process at all.

    What's more, if there are older daemons in the network, a more interesting case is possible. The transaction is reversed in newer daemons, the inputs are free again for other transactions. But when they're used, the older daemons (which didn't get the transaction out of their tx_pools) have to report double-spending attempts.

    This is not how you make critical updates for the currency.

    1) Monero developers should evaluate the long term consequences of their commits. Each unthought solution can cause drastic problems in the long run.
    2) Monero developers should allow a compatibility window in order to make sure that the network is not split during the update. It's not about "mandatory update" alert on the forum, but a sophisticated approach inside the source code.

    And that is why I prefer Bytecoin developers approach. I'm sure they can't ruin the network with one random commit. Can't say the same about XMR devs.

    This can be crucial for the exchanges and pools. What if a user withdraws the money and it got stuck and reversed after 24 hours?

    If you are right, I assume the service gets the transaction back without any notification about that. Suddenly, there is simply money on the wallet with no other information on the transfer. So the service will have to manually recalculate all the incoming and outgoing transactions to test, who is the transaction owner. The larger your service, the more useless work you should be doing on the daily bases.

    That's not too friendly towards the businesses working with Monero for sure.

  • sang
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 282
    Merit: 250


    View Profile
    June 20, 2014, 11:05:32 AM
     #6945
    Quote from: Rias on June 20, 2014, 10:36:52 AM


    Let's do the math.

    Top EC2 instance has around 700 hash/sec. One added instance is likely to have 42,000 difficulty increase.
    To get 100,000,000 difficulty increase you'd have to add 2,380 of top EC2 instance. Each of the instances costs more than $1000 per month ($33 per day) and requires some work to increase the limits on your account and prepare the servers for mining.

    Not only I don't believe someone invest $80,000 a day to mine XMR, it's very unlikely that it could happen in 2 days.


    Let me break this down for you:

    1) Top EC2 instance has around 700 hash/sec. -- Wrong
    2) Each of the instances costs more than $1000 per month ($33 per day) -- Wrong
    3) It's very unlikely that it could happen in 2 days. -- Wrong

    Your math may be right, but your inputs are all wrong. Botnets can't come anywhere near EC2.

  • onemorebtc
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 266
    Merit: 254


    View Profile
    June 20, 2014, 11:08:54 AM
     #6946
    Quote from: flower1024 on June 20, 2014, 11:05:02 AM

    This can be crucial for the exchanges and pools. What if a user withdraws the money and it got stuck and reversed after 24 hours?

    If you are right, I assume the service gets the transaction back without any notification about that. Suddenly, there is simply money on the wallet with no other information on the transfer. So the service will have to manually recalculate all the incoming and outgoing transactions to test, who is the transaction owner. The larger your service, the more useless work you should be doing on the daily bases.

    That's not too friendly towards the businesses working with Monero for sure.

    and whats the differnce with ANY other crypto?
    you'll send a transaction and check if the network accepts it...

    if not you rebroadcast or doublespent it with a higher fee (the last one only works with btc and eligius - afaik)
    transfer 3 onemorebtc.k1024.de 1

  • Cheesus
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 692
    Merit: 254


    terra-credit.com


    View Profile
    June 20, 2014, 11:09:59 AM
     #6947
    Quote from: sang on June 20, 2014, 11:05:32 AM
    Quote from: Rias on June 20, 2014, 10:36:52 AM


    Let's do the math.

    Top EC2 instance has around 700 hash/sec. One added instance is likely to have 42,000 difficulty increase.
    To get 100,000,000 difficulty increase you'd have to add 2,380 of top EC2 instance. Each of the instances costs more than $1000 per month ($33 per day) and requires some work to increase the limits on your account and prepare the servers for mining.

    Not only I don't believe someone invest $80,000 a day to mine XMR, it's very unlikely that it could happen in 2 days.


    Let me break this down for you:

    1) Top EC2 instance has around 700 hash/sec. -- Wrong
    2) Each of the instances costs more than $1000 per month ($33 per day) -- Wrong
    3) It's very unlikely that it could happen in 2 days. -- Wrong

    Your math may be right, but your inputs are all wrong. Botnets can't come anywhere near EC2.

    Could you please provide a real numbers? Don't take it as an offense, I'm just curious.  Smiley
    ███████████████████████
      █████████████████████ 
        ███████████████████ 
          █████████████████ 
    ███████████████████████
              █████████████ 
                ███████████ 
                  █████████ 
                    ███████ 
                      █████ 
                        ███ 
                          █
    		terracredit
    ●
    ●
    ●
    ●
    ●
    ●
    ●
    ●
    ●
    ●
    ●
    ●
    ●
    ●

    Powered by,

  • Rias
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 373
    Merit: 250


    View Profile
    June 20, 2014, 11:11:26 AM
     #6948
    Quote from: sang on June 20, 2014, 11:05:32 AM
    Quote from: Rias on June 20, 2014, 10:36:52 AM


    Let's do the math.

    Top EC2 instance has around 700 hash/sec. One added instance is likely to have 42,000 difficulty increase.
    To get 100,000,000 difficulty increase you'd have to add 2,380 of top EC2 instance. Each of the instances costs more than $1000 per month ($33 per day) and requires some work to increase the limits on your account and prepare the servers for mining.

    Not only I don't believe someone invest $80,000 a day to mine XMR, it's very unlikely that it could happen in 2 days.


    Let me break this down for you:

    1) Top EC2 instance has around 700 hash/sec. -- Wrong
    2) Each of the instances costs more than $1000 per month ($33 per day) -- Wrong
    3) It's very unlikely that it could happen in 2 days. -- Wrong

    Your math may be right, but your inputs are all wrong. Botnets can't come anywhere near EC2.

    Would you be so kind to provide the proof? I've been mining on c3.8xlarge myself. What's your inputs than?


    Quote from: onemorebtc on June 20, 2014, 11:02:20 AM
    you contradict yourself:
    i dont like botnets and think they are criminal. but i dont really see an issue from a crypto-currency-user perspective

    edit: botnets dont havy any influence about how many new coins where generated per day. just how much other miners get

    Exactly and in my opinion it is way worse than coins in the hands of the devs. Which is not the case for BCN with several hundreds of early miners identified.

    Quote from: flower1024 on June 20, 2014, 11:05:02 AM
    This can be crucial for the exchanges and pools. What if a user withdraws the money and it got stuck and reversed after 24 hours?

    If you are right, I assume the service gets the transaction back without any notification about that. Suddenly, there is simply money on the wallet with no other information on the transfer. So the service will have to manually recalculate all the incoming and outgoing transactions to test, who is the transaction owner. The larger your service, the more useless work you should be doing on the daily bases.

    That's not too friendly towards the businesses working with Monero for sure.

    Exactly. Monero developers are clearly not qualified enough for this yet. Monero is moving in a completely wrong direction. i2p integration, for instance, is nonsense.

  • Rias
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 373
    Merit: 250


    View Profile
    June 20, 2014, 11:15:57 AM
     #6949
    Quote from: onemorebtc on June 20, 2014, 11:08:54 AM
    Quote from: flower1024 on June 20, 2014, 11:05:02 AM

    This can be crucial for the exchanges and pools. What if a user withdraws the money and it got stuck and reversed after 24 hours?

    If you are right, I assume the service gets the transaction back without any notification about that. Suddenly, there is simply money on the wallet with no other information on the transfer. So the service will have to manually recalculate all the incoming and outgoing transactions to test, who is the transaction owner. The larger your service, the more useless work you should be doing on the daily bases.

    That's not too friendly towards the businesses working with Monero for sure.

    and whats the differnce with ANY other crypto?
    you'll send a transaction and check if the network accepts it...

    if not you rebroadcast or doublespent it with a higher fee (the last one only works with btc and eligius - afaik)

    It's a different approach. The service should be notified when the transaction is reversed, otherwise it breaks whole user experience. The money were withdrawn, never appeared in the user's wallet and are not identified by the service and couldn't be credited back to the account.

  • Rias
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 373
    Merit: 250


    View Profile
    June 20, 2014, 11:19:44 AM
     #6950
    Quote from: sang on June 20, 2014, 11:05:32 AM
    Let me break this down for you:

    1) Top EC2 instance has around 700 hash/sec. -- Wrong
    2) Each of the instances costs more than $1000 per month ($33 per day) -- Wrong
    3) It's very unlikely that it could happen in 2 days. -- Wrong

    Your math may be right, but your inputs are all wrong. Botnets can't come anywhere near EC2.

    Let's check.

    http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/pricing/

    c3.8xlarge is $1.680 per Hour, which is $40 per day. Sorry, I was all wrong, it's even worse than I was writing.

    Quote
    3) It's very unlikely that it could happen in 2 days. -- Wrong

    It would be a nightmare to get the limit and set up 2,800 servers. Is there a shortcut?

  • onemorebtc
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 266
    Merit: 254


    View Profile
    June 20, 2014, 11:20:52 AM
     #6951
    Quote from: Rias on June 20, 2014, 11:15:57 AM
    Quote from: onemorebtc on June 20, 2014, 11:08:54 AM
    Quote from: flower1024 on June 20, 2014, 11:05:02 AM

    This can be crucial for the exchanges and pools. What if a user withdraws the money and it got stuck and reversed after 24 hours?

    If you are right, I assume the service gets the transaction back without any notification about that. Suddenly, there is simply money on the wallet with no other information on the transfer. So the service will have to manually recalculate all the incoming and outgoing transactions to test, who is the transaction owner. The larger your service, the more useless work you should be doing on the daily bases.

    That's not too friendly towards the businesses working with Monero for sure.

    and whats the differnce with ANY other crypto?
    you'll send a transaction and check if the network accepts it...

    if not you rebroadcast or doublespent it with a higher fee (the last one only works with btc and eligius - afaik)

    It's a different approach. The service should be notified when the transaction is reversed, otherwise it breaks whole user experience. The money were withdrawn, never appeared in the user's wallet and are not identified by the service and couldn't be credited back to the account.

    ok... just write a script that checks if a transaction has gone through and execute it regulary?
    btw: do you know that a reverse can be reversed to? if the client did already notify the service it would have been resent...

    orphan blocks can be the realchain again: they just need a miner who builds on them (and this can happen very fast)
    transfer 3 onemorebtc.k1024.de 1

  • Hexah
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 728
    Merit: 265



    View Profile
    June 20, 2014, 11:21:07 AM
     #6952
    Quote from: Rias on June 20, 2014, 11:11:26 AM
    Quote from: sang on June 20, 2014, 11:05:32 AM
    Quote from: Rias on June 20, 2014, 10:36:52 AM


    Let's do the math.

    Top EC2 instance has around 700 hash/sec. One added instance is likely to have 42,000 difficulty increase.
    To get 100,000,000 difficulty increase you'd have to add 2,380 of top EC2 instance. Each of the instances costs more than $1000 per month ($33 per day) and requires some work to increase the limits on your account and prepare the servers for mining.

    Not only I don't believe someone invest $80,000 a day to mine XMR, it's very unlikely that it could happen in 2 days.


    Let me break this down for you:

    1) Top EC2 instance has around 700 hash/sec. -- Wrong
    2) Each of the instances costs more than $1000 per month ($33 per day) -- Wrong
    3) It's very unlikely that it could happen in 2 days. -- Wrong

    Your math may be right, but your inputs are all wrong. Botnets can't come anywhere near EC2.

    Would you be so kind to provide the proof? I've been mining on c3.8xlarge myself. What's your inputs than?


    Quote from: onemorebtc on June 20, 2014, 11:02:20 AM
    you contradict yourself:
    i dont like botnets and think they are criminal. but i dont really see an issue from a crypto-currency-user perspective

    edit: botnets dont havy any influence about how many new coins where generated per day. just how much other miners get

    Exactly and in my opinion it is way worse than coins in the hands of the devs. Which is not the case for BCN with several hundreds of early miners identified.

    Quote from: flower1024 on June 20, 2014, 11:05:02 AM
    This can be crucial for the exchanges and pools. What if a user withdraws the money and it got stuck and reversed after 24 hours?

    If you are right, I assume the service gets the transaction back without any notification about that. Suddenly, there is simply money on the wallet with no other information on the transfer. So the service will have to manually recalculate all the incoming and outgoing transactions to test, who is the transaction owner. The larger your service, the more useless work you should be doing on the daily bases.

    That's not too friendly towards the businesses working with Monero for sure.

    Exactly. Monero developers are clearly not qualified enough for this yet. Monero is moving in a completely wrong direction. i2p integration, for instance, is nonsense.


    I remember some guy in twitter was not satisfied with Monero developers either. Well, not some regular guy but some big Bitcoin programmer enthusiast can’t remember his name.
    UPD: found him https://twitter.com/lopp/status/472359052736204800

  • HardwarePal
    Hero Member
    *****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 565
    Merit: 500


    View Profile
    June 20, 2014, 11:26:24 AM
     #6953
    Rias all your posts are in the BCN thread .

    Why would someone believe you are not one of the people behind the 80% instamine before the public release of Bytecoin.

    Please man if your going to FUD like this do it professionally at least  Kiss

    Theres better ways to lead people into Bytecoin and dump in there faces

  • equipoise
    Hero Member
    *****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 794
    Merit: 1000


    Monero (XMR) - secure, private, untraceable


    View Profile WWW
    June 20, 2014, 11:27:15 AM
     #6954
    Two pages of troll posts. They should be scared.
    About me | zRMicroArray - phase 2 - Gene Expression Analysis software | [Weed Like to Talk - Bulgaria] Start a wave of cannabis seminars in Europe | Monero weighted average price stats: moneroprice.i2p
    BTC: 1KoCX7TWKVGwqmmFw3CKyUSrKRSStueZar | NMC: NKhYEYpe1Le9MwHrwKsdSm5617J4toVar9 | XMR (Tip me a beer OpenAlias Monero address): tip.changetheworldwork.com
    [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency: 4AyRmUcxzefB5quumzK3HNE4zmCiGc8vhG6fE1oJpGVyVZF7fvDgSpt3MzgLfQ6Q1719xQhmfkM9Z2u NXgDMqYhjJVmc6KX

  • HardwarePal
    Hero Member
    *****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 565
    Merit: 500


    View Profile
    June 20, 2014, 11:29:38 AM
     #6955
    Quote from: equipoise on June 20, 2014, 11:27:15 AM
    Two pages of troll posts. They should be scared.

    Well you know what they say when fudders and trolls join a coins ann thread  Grin

    Good luck to BCN but no thanks I prefer XMR Smiley

  • Rias
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 373
    Merit: 250


    View Profile
    June 20, 2014, 11:30:56 AM
     #6956
    Quote from: HardwarePal on June 20, 2014, 11:26:24 AM
    Rias all your posts are in the BCN thread .

    Why would someone believe you are not one of the people behind the 80% instamine before the public release of Bytecoin.

    Please man if your going to FUD like this do it professionally at least  Kiss

    Theres better ways to lead people into Bytecoin and dump in there faces

    I'm not fudding, I'm raising concerns. Grounded concerns, if you don't mind.
    And XMR developers should better take it very seriously.

    I really like it how people not knowing a damn about the technology judge whether my arguments are correct or not. Ok, XMR sock puppets have arrived, I'm going home.

  • HardwarePal
    Hero Member
    *****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 565
    Merit: 500


    View Profile
    June 20, 2014, 11:33:28 AM
     #6957
    Quote from: Rias on June 20, 2014, 11:30:56 AM
    Quote from: HardwarePal on June 20, 2014, 11:26:24 AM
    Rias all your posts are in the BCN thread .

    Why would someone believe you are not one of the people behind the 80% instamine before the public release of Bytecoin.

    Please man if your going to FUD like this do it professionally at least  Kiss

    Theres better ways to lead people into Bytecoin and dump in there faces

    I'm not fudding, I'm raising concerns. Grounded concerns, if you don't mind.
    And XMR developers should better take it very seriously.

    I really like it how people not knowing a damn about the technology judge whether my arguments are correct or not. Ok, XMR sock puppets have arrived, I'm going home.

    No need to keep spamming the thread, they will answer soon enough I guess

  • Hexah
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 728
    Merit: 265



    View Profile
    June 20, 2014, 11:33:59 AM
     #6958
    Quote from: equipoise on June 20, 2014, 11:27:15 AM
    Two pages of troll posts. They should be scared.

    Usual monero-tactics for "do xmr devs really develop smth?" topics: just change the subject to "troll FUD" and ignore all the arguments

  • DLow
    Hero Member
    *****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 616
    Merit: 500



    View Profile
    June 20, 2014, 11:34:50 AM
     #6959
    Hey,

    would it be possible to implement a "Zero Transactions" function for the pools?

    So one can reset the "Total Paid"? I like to keep tabs about my daily mining efforts and such.

  • CarlesPuyol
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 1148
    Merit: 1000



    View Profile
    June 20, 2014, 11:41:03 AM
     #6960
    the XMR progress is great, looks promising for the short time - will enter to Mintpal at monday and now its a great enter point. will cross the 1 milion satoshi.
    Pages: « 1 ... 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 [348] 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 ... 2131 »
      Print  
Page 347
Viewing Page: 348

IRLBTC™ © 2025 IRLBTC.com