6 ms·

Its too bad monero research lab seems to be slowing down and disbanding. Devs have to eat and all, but I wonder sometimes if a longer and slower emission curve

by 0des 4y ago

Its too bad monero research lab seems to be slowing down and disbanding. Devs have to eat and all, but I wonder sometimes if a longer and slower emission curve would have helped here. Monero is mostly emitted at this point. For a project that means so much to the world and still has much work to do, its a shame how things turned out with MRL.

vmception 4y ago
Why is that bad? it’s done people deciding if they want excess holdings of Monero shouldnt base their confidence on a standing committee
- 0des 4y ago
  It is not a standing committee, it was community funded research that produced privacy technology. "It" is never done.
  - vmception 4y ago
    Tornado cash is good enough tbh Monero communities arrogance and in-grouping has segregated them just like they desired. That technology and user experience is an evolutionary dead end, it can exist and that has enough utility. But in the multichain world the user experience is better and the funding models are better, even gitcoin grants streamline development of projects.
    - 0des 4y ago
      Respectfully I disagree with this statement, on a conceptual, as well as factual level. >Tornado cash is good enough tbh I hold neither of these, but as someone with a significant amount of experience in the field, the facts are clear. "Good enough" is not an objective measurement of the binary quality of fungibility. Monero is fungible. Is this me saying everyone should go out and buy some Monero, no, it is me saying that when you consider the mechanics of the way these two scantly comparable technologies function, there is one clear winner because only one is fungible. I don't have a response to the social issues of those that use or perpetuate Monero adoption, just as I don't have a response to the social issues of those that use or perpetuate USD, or any other asset. It's not my business what other people do, and I don't feel associated by virtue of using the same utility. > That technology [ ... ] is an evolutionary dead end This will need a source.
      - tromp 4y ago
        > the binary quality of fungibility The fact that Monero has been growing the minimum ring size over time, as well as refining the decoy selection algorithm, shows that fungibility, in the sense of transaction graph obfuscation, is more of a spectrum.
      - vmception 4y ago
        Its good enough in user experience and storage, in fact far superior to Monero’s experience. When a user then wants fungibility the one time they want the state’s money and financial institution then they use Monero as a conduit.
seibelj 4y ago
This is why tokens make sense. Can fund development of new features if you could integrate new tokens on Monero. It’s how Ethereum has moved mountains with new infrastructure projects.
- px43 4y ago
  Tokens were thing on Bitcoin too. They were called "colored coins". The reason that it works on Ethereum is turing complete scripting allowing you to build all sorts of fun financial gadgets and tools around the token.
selsta 4y ago
monero, without dev tax and pre-mine, simply doesn't have the funds to compete in research with other, more well funded projects. I don't see how a different emission curve would have helped here. MRL work is progressing on Seraphis[1] which will allow for significantly higher ring sizes without increasing the transaction size. A proof of concept is currently in development. [1] https://www.getmonero.org/2021/12/22/what-is-seraphis.html https://www.getmonero.org/2021/12/22/what-is-seraphis.html
- 0des 4y ago
  Hello Selsta :)
hereme888 4y ago
Monero is about to go through a hard fork and significant upgrades, like trading XMR to BTC and back without a centralized exchange. The mining rewards was recently voted to a specific amount for perpetuity, to guarantee it never going to zero. I think the project is going quite well.
- tiluha 4y ago
  The mining reward schedule has not been changed since monero was started. The tail emission was alays part of the protocol.
  - 0des 4y ago
    I'm not sure if that is entirely true, historically, I can explain.. The emission schedule was changed when the tail emission was added, however that was early on, to your credit. Smooth was the one who proposed it iirc, then it was added shortly after. It was not part of Bitmonero originally, as Smooth, Fluffyponyza, et al did not arrive until ThankfulForToday abandoned the project. Maybe someone with less gray in the beard can put some dates on that, I'm just going by memory.
opportune 4y ago
More people need to put up bounties for feature development. There are some existing sites but they’re not heavily used. I think plenty of people would be happy to develop a feature for 5/6 figures. There are also some monero whales that could probably stand to contribute to further development even if they don’t do it themselves (like fluffy pony) but unfortunately it looks like they are/he is in the early stages of getting Assanged
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- aaaaaaaaata 4y ago
  Where can one read more about this last bit?

by 0des 4y ago

vmception 4y ago

Why is that bad? it’s done people deciding if they want excess holdings of Monero shouldnt base their confidence on a standing committee

0des 4y ago
It is not a standing committee, it was community funded research that produced privacy technology. "It" is never done.
- vmception 4y ago
  Tornado cash is good enough tbh Monero communities arrogance and in-grouping has segregated them just like they desired. That technology and user experience is an evolutionary dead end, it can exist and that has enough utility. But in the multichain world the user experience is better and the funding models are better, even gitcoin grants streamline development of projects.
  - 0des 4y ago
    Respectfully I disagree with this statement, on a conceptual, as well as factual level. >Tornado cash is good enough tbh I hold neither of these, but as someone with a significant amount of experience in the field, the facts are clear. "Good enough" is not an objective measurement of the binary quality of fungibility. Monero is fungible. Is this me saying everyone should go out and buy some Monero, no, it is me saying that when you consider the mechanics of the way these two scantly comparable technologies function, there is one clear winner because only one is fungible. I don't have a response to the social issues of those that use or perpetuate Monero adoption, just as I don't have a response to the social issues of those that use or perpetuate USD, or any other asset. It's not my business what other people do, and I don't feel associated by virtue of using the same utility. > That technology [ ... ] is an evolutionary dead end This will need a source.
    - tromp 4y ago
      > the binary quality of fungibility The fact that Monero has been growing the minimum ring size over time, as well as refining the decoy selection algorithm, shows that fungibility, in the sense of transaction graph obfuscation, is more of a spectrum.
    - vmception 4y ago
      Its good enough in user experience and storage, in fact far superior to Monero’s experience. When a user then wants fungibility the one time they want the state’s money and financial institution then they use Monero as a conduit.

seibelj 4y ago

This is why tokens make sense. Can fund development of new features if you could integrate new tokens on Monero. It’s how Ethereum has moved mountains with new infrastructure projects.

px43 4y ago
Tokens were thing on Bitcoin too. They were called "colored coins". The reason that it works on Ethereum is turing complete scripting allowing you to build all sorts of fun financial gadgets and tools around the token.

selsta 4y ago

monero, without dev tax and pre-mine, simply doesn't have the funds to compete in research with other, more well funded projects. I don't see how a different emission curve would have helped here. MRL work is progressing on Seraphis[1] which will allow for significantly higher ring sizes without increasing the transaction size. A proof of concept is currently in development. [1] https://www.getmonero.org/2021/12/22/what-is-seraphis.html https://www.getmonero.org/2021/12/22/what-is-seraphis.html

0des 4y ago
Hello Selsta :)

hereme888 4y ago

Monero is about to go through a hard fork and significant upgrades, like trading XMR to BTC and back without a centralized exchange. The mining rewards was recently voted to a specific amount for perpetuity, to guarantee it never going to zero. I think the project is going quite well.

tiluha 4y ago
The mining reward schedule has not been changed since monero was started. The tail emission was alays part of the protocol.
- 0des 4y ago
  I'm not sure if that is entirely true, historically, I can explain.. The emission schedule was changed when the tail emission was added, however that was early on, to your credit. Smooth was the one who proposed it iirc, then it was added shortly after. It was not part of Bitmonero originally, as Smooth, Fluffyponyza, et al did not arrive until ThankfulForToday abandoned the project. Maybe someone with less gray in the beard can put some dates on that, I'm just going by memory.

opportune 4y ago

More people need to put up bounties for feature development. There are some existing sites but they’re not heavily used. I think plenty of people would be happy to develop a feature for 5/6 figures. There are also some monero whales that could probably stand to contribute to further development even if they don’t do it themselves (like fluffy pony) but unfortunately it looks like they are/he is in the early stages of getting Assanged

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
aaaaaaaaata 4y ago
Where can one read more about this last bit?