If "spam" is making #Bitcoin node running harder anyway, maybe we should bloat the network for better privacy.
Discussion
What are you talking about?
>Some people are claiming that Bitcoin spam is making node running for the average person more difficult over time.
>One major argument I've seen against increasing on chain privacy is that node running will become more difficult for the average person over time. (See the Monero use vs size of chain)
My conclusion is that MAYBE we should just have better on chain privacy if the outcome is the same either way.
Sounds like something a shitcoiner would say. Why don’t you just switch to Monero✌️
One of these positions was my own. I'm revisiting it to see if it still makes sense to me in light of new opinions I've been exposed to.
It's something I do frequently. Not sure what it's called. Reflection?
Taking it out of my head onto Nostr sometimes leads to interesting conversation. Sometimes not.
we say "Monero is what noobs think they bought"
but it's also what bitcoiners think they bought
> small, 300kb blocks (dynamic to increase but with a miner reward punishment)
> resistant to spam (spam exists: https://github.com/mooonero/mordinals but we use and enforce filters)
> only monetary transactions
> cost effective to be fungible and anonymous money (that means txs are slightly bigger with added privacy, but not as expensive as bitcoin's coinjoins source: https://sethforprivacy.com/posts/comparing-private-spends/)
> it may get LN-like payment channels in the next network upgrade
> no mining centralization
nostr:npub1yxp7j36cfqws7yj0hkfu2mx25308u4zua6ud22zglxp98ayhh96s8c399s would LOVE monero if it wasn't a separate coin but was made by the hands of Satoshi himself
I'd rather just use a Bitcoin related system for the same privacy benefits. That's just an honest admission of where I am as a Bitcoin user. It just integrates with my life better than Monero did, which is why I stopped using it.
The Lightning-like thing sounds really cool though. In fact, I actually still really like the general philosophy of Monero and it's users. They're the one crowd in this space I can find common ground with.
Maybe I will play around with Monero again, but I think it has lost the narrative at this point. The more likely outcome in my view is better privacy built around the Bitcoin ecosystem. I like having Monero around to compete and push that. After all, it is a free market.
I think the "I just want to use Bitcoin" makes sense, there's too much "crypto" out there too much stuff to worry about just go for the "safest bet" and largest community where most people are, I wouldn't say to someone "- stop what you are doing and learn about Monero"
But you lost me when you said monero lost the narrative? how did Monero lose any narrative if it keeps growing, not just in price but usage, adoption, every place that accepts monero sees higher XMR volume than BTC, and it's still the king of the dark web?
Pitiful.
I challenge you to pay this lightning invoice and trace your payment to its destination:
lnbc10104970p1p5rpd26pp5hdcxfsd4esv23xlkhnrfvgz3h8xnakjfktp24tqvsg9ygn5uet4qdqqcqzdyxqyz5zzsp5pk7t9n6z83zdl65ls3kfc6vptnml7n8an4kgluyzv553tya26wps9qxpqysgqh6qwhk7rag2tuufwy2y69ws67jmqcwpvr6hd9wcu4jm4hzgzumvq680g5m2s4f0f66lzvydpmxpt79derf4w9phs2eazhr67p8ctrzgpjtc2nk
Tell me what pubkey controls the funds and what balance it holds.
I will pay a monero address of your choice and I will yell you what pubkey controls the funds and what balance it holds.
Deal? If you think monero's privacy holds a candle to LN let's put it to the test.
Haha this wasn't just about privacy, the OP was talking about spam even, and I thought youd agree with anything not trying to spite anything. Here's a challenge come back when XMR has a LN and we compare?
I was talking about a lot of past notes that I didn't add as context. But in general, I am challenging my own beliefs on some of these issues to be sure I'm not missing anything. I didn't even expect to have a Monero discussion here, but that's why I post things I'm thinking like this. I usually get exposed to other perspectives. Competition is the best way, as far as the Monero vs. Bitcoin thing goes.
> this wasn't just about privacy
Figures -- he'd like to compare monero to bitcoin on every metric except the one it's for.
> Here's a challenge
I recommend doing my challenge before you issue a counter-challenge. Looks a bit sus.
> the OP was talking about spam
Your post contradicted itself on this point. The statement "spam exists [on monero]" is incompatible with the statement "only monetary transactions." The fact that few people bother to bypass your filters is probably just because few people care about monero.
The statement "small, 300kb blocks" is incompatible with the statement "dynamic to increase." Imagine if I pointed to a block like this one from two days ago (https://mempool.space/block/000000000000000000000463103ac48ed3c8887e59ba7d0078683c4fa4913e7b) and said it proves that bitcoin has "small, 500kb blocks" but that they are "dynamic to increase to 4mb." The statements are incompatible because the first implies they can't increase and the second explicitly says they can.
The reason why the first sentence implies they can't increase is this: if you don't adopt that implication, then you're just commenting on the lack of usage in a particular block. Which is a pointless observation. Just because a particular block doesn't take up the max size doesn't mean the max size is temporarily lower. Monero's blocks do not have a max size, which is a centralizing force, and as for the "penalty" for creating large blocks, that's what fees are for. If monero had any volume, huge blocks would make it even more centralized than it is today.
> no mining centralization
Very funny
> compare monero to bitcoin on every metric except the one it's for
yes monero is not just for privacy, and you are comparing LN to Monero. never ask super testnet why he doesn't like comparing bitcoin (onchain) to monero (onchain) ! (he won't answer)
> doing my challenge before you issue a counter-challenge
doing your challenge to compare LN to monero requires a LN-monero so by waiting the development implies finishing you challenge
> Your post contradicted itself
nope it totally matches up. Monero has 1/400 of the mkt cap of bitcoin and 1/10 of the tx count, why does it not have 1/10 of the spam and way lesser than that? people care to transact more on Monero, thus it may even flip btc on that metric, but it will never have more spam than btc, that means filters work.
> incompatible
Bitcoin has a ruling dynasty that determines that blocks shall be big, for **free**, Monero has a mathematical limit that forces blocks to be small, but **punishes** increase taking away your profit. seems very compatible
> Very funny
never ask a bitcoiner what is a "p2pool" and why is it increasing (they won't answer)
> why he doesn't like comparing bitcoin (onchain) to monero (onchain) !
I do like comparing them, and I often do so
I'll do it again here:
Monero's ring signatures offer similar privacy protections as coinjoins do, with a few caveats:
(1) monero's ring signatures are non-interactive, which is way better than a coinjoin
(2) monero's ring signatures are limited to 16 people in the current protocol, which is way worse than a coinjoin
> doing your challenge to compare LN to monero requires a LN-monero
No it doesn't. I'm comparing LN to "on-chain" monero and I'm saying LN -- as a well-designed off-chain protocol -- offers superior privacy features than "on-chain" monero. I look forward to LN-monero existing maybe someday in the future, but the nice thing is, you don't have to wait! You can have LN-like privacy "right now." Use lightning. It exists and works.
> why does [monero] have [so much less] spam?
I don't know but if I had to guess it's because no one cares to spam it
> monero...forces blocks to be small, but **punishes** increase
This is a contradiction. If they are allowed to increase, they are not forced to be small.
> never ask a bitcoiner what is a "p2pool" and why is it increasing
I don't know what p2pool is or why it is increasing. Care to share?
This is sort of where I'm at as a solution. (Lightning and maybe ecash at some point). I'm questioning the assumption that base chain transactions for Lightning/ecash stuff need the same level of privacy. To be fair, my understanding is that I may need to handle a lot of Lightning node stuff myself for the privacy? It seems like using Strike or whatever would expose me to them if they care to track me.
So the main agreement is that: no one cares to spam monero, but a lot of people care to transact on it for monetary purposes (about 10% of bitcoin daily count) meanwhile a lot of people care to spam and inscribe data on btc, but not use it for monetary means that much, even when adding LN to the mix (XMR always stays on top with about 50% of volume on markets like shopinbit, mynymbox, silent link, coin cards, etc...)
Context on the "no spam" thing: https://monero.observer/monero-punks-inscribes-first-nft-collection-monero/
What context does that add that wasn't added before from the mordinals github link I shared?
It has a neat timeline. Everything happened so quickly
The point is: it's easier to do in a smaller community where there's more lenience with the development team.
That's shown in the github link as well since the development team of Mordinals themselves lost interest, 2 years ago they left it abandoned, but no one lost interest in transacting on the network since it continued growing without spam
Sure. After the reactions from the network and the fact that: "shitcoins on monero" doesn't have nearly the same market as "shitcoins on bitcoin", I would abandon it too.
My point is that pretending that if monero had the same size (and perhaps expressibility) as Bitcoin, things would be better. I just think this is wishful thinking.
Depending on who you ask they may see a better market for "shitcoins on monero" than "shitcoins on bitcoin" since they also get the privacy features, someone even forked monero to create a shitcoin for shitcoins on monero (zano)
But of course it's a smaller network my point is it's still neat how the tx volume and the node count are so high while keeping it monetary mainly, that means every transfer is an uncensorable, untraceable, self sovereign money transmission
since you still insist on these bullshit theatrics
i just dropped by to say that "rando on the internet cant trace a payment" is a fucking stupid test that doesn't prove anything about the privacy of a network.
have a nice day.
Perhaps it says a lot then that "rando on the internet CAN trace a monero payment"
your semantic bullshit isn't impressive to anyone
the sender knowing the address isnt "tracing a monero payment"
Why is it okay for the sender to know the destination? Why not hide that information from the sender? Why needlessly make the recipient vulnerable?
nobody said any of that.
the sender knowing the destination of their payment is NOT "tracing"
Big problem with the monero community:
When a flaw like this is pointed out that exemplifies a huge hole in monero's vaunted receiver privacy, many monero bros play a semantic game and focus on whether it counts as tracing or not. Which, by the way: shiw me a definition of tracing where this doesn't count.
I'll refer you to Merriam Webster
def 2A
The commonly accepted definition in this context (payment tracing) Is "to follow or study out in detail or step by step"
Which is absolutely NOT what is happening here.
The sender has an address and a derived hash that appears on chain that are provably linked. There is no "study on detail" or working it out "step by step".
Ie, no "tracing."
if you tell me your address and I send you a letter, did I "trace you"?
ffs.
the sender knows where the payment goes. period. no tracing involved.
as you say, its not ideal.
But you don't mind making it *sound as if* "tracing" is happening now do you?
which is the point of using the words you do.
As if you could follow the trail of funds through the chain...
which you cant.
and also
fuck you for the "he didn't talk about what *I* wanted to talk about. so monero bros are disingenuous"
as if we haven't litigated it to death before.
just stop calling it "tracing"
:s/bros/clowns/ other than that, spot on 🎯
