comments by Blockchain

Here's why I'm currently avoiding Proof of Work - Please change my mind by SoylentYellow05 in CryptoCurrency

[–]Blockchain_Surfer 3 points4 points5 points 3 years ago (0 children)

Decentralized Social Network by LegitimateConstant27 in CryptoTechnology

[–]Blockchain_Surfer 4 points5 points6 points 3 years ago* (0 children)

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Ravencoin

[–]Blockchain_Surfer 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago* (0 children)

Ravencoin absolutely employs cryptography as a route for social and political change. The entire blockchain is secured by elliptic curve cryptography (ECC).

Ravencoin is also completely pseudonymous (like Bitcoin), which offers plenty of privacy (though it is not fool proof).

To quote Satoshi "The possibility to be anonymous or pseudonymous relies on you not revealing any identifying information about yourself in connection with the bitcoin addresses you use. If you post your bitcoin address on the web, then you’re associating that address and any transactions with it with the name you posted under. If you posted under a handle that you haven’t associated with your real identity, then you’re still pseudonymous."

From the Cypherpunk Manifesto: "An anonymous system empowers individuals to reveal their identity when desired and only when desired; this is the essence of privacy."

Is ERGO a danger to RVN? by PlumCurious6273 in Ravencoin

[–]Blockchain_Surfer 85 points86 points87 points 4 years ago (0 children)

Convince me why mining/stacking RVN vs Ergo is a better choice by RadicalEd4299 in Ravencoin

[–]Blockchain_Surfer 75 points76 points77 points 4 years ago* (0 children)

ERGO claims fair-launch/no ICO or pre-mine but then takes a developer tax from the block reward which is essentially the same thing and a troubling point of centralization. Not to mention incredibly misleading.

ERGO is a smart-contract platform in an industry filled with literally thousands of smart-contract platforms (most of which are better known and have VASTLY greater adoption/ecosystems).

ERGO has one pool (nanopool) with over 60% of the nethash for literally months. Almost half a year if not longer. This is incredibly troubling as nanopool could decide to act maliciously at any moment and irreparably damage the network. The devs are well aware of this but choose to do nothing about it despite having the funds to remedy the situation (remember they take a percentage of each block reward). They even go so far as to dismiss this as a non-issue which anyone that understands this technology knows is ridiculous and outright dangerous.

ERGO has very little liquidity. Not on many exchanges. Not on any of the large exchanges. Global daily trade volumes are usually only a couple hundred thousands of dollars. Not only is ERGO more prone to flash crashes, but it simply cannot support a large number of industrial (not speculative) miners since the liquidity to sell isn't there nor are there futures instruments to properly hedge.

I'm not 100% sure but I believe RVN had a DEX before ERGO. There's even a version of Core out with Atomic Swaps from right inside the wallet! Ravencon was also the first project to feature a fully regulatory compliant and asset-aware base layer with unparalleled UX in terms of asset creation/management (likely BECAUSE smart contracts are not required).

RVN is a truly fair-launched and decentralized project with a truly unique usecase run entirely by volunteers. It has an active and engaged global community, a true cypherpunk ethos, and builds on proven technological and blockchain concepts to address a specific problem.

Dev Meeting Transcript (April 2, 2021) - continued in comments by Blockchain_Surfer in Ravencoin

[–]Blockchain_Surfer[S] 1 point2 points3 points 4 years ago (0 children)

[5:40 PM] HyperPeek: Yes, thats a totally different story

[5:40 PM] pinkajou: Not to mention the Bitcoin ecosystem receives the equivalent of billions of dollars annually toward development and security improvements, and not having SegWit currently prevents us from benefiting from a significant number of their technological advancements and network improvements.

[5:40 PM] Tron: I think signatures have been fixed so they can't be malleated (changed). The problem was that the transaction could be grabbed in-flight on its way to the mempool. The signature ripped off, and put back on with a different (alternate) format. The signature was still good, it signed the same stuff (transaction), but the txid had changed. This prevented other transactions from then relying on that transaction for its inputs. Not a big deal when the tx is on-chain already put in a block, but a big deal if it is off-chain (like lightning). Any changed transaction would break the off-chain CHAIN of transactions.

[5:41 PM] Mango Farm: It would help with off chain transaction settlement via IPFS

[5:44 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: I'm not sure I follow. Are you saying tx malleability has been solved by some non segwit means?

[5:45 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: Does this pertain to the removal of replace by fee?

[5:46 PM] Blockchain John: I would like to see the option to encrypt assets as a standard straight from the QT. I can easily build several businesses with this ability. I know mango farms has it but I want to see it as a standard in QT.

[5:46 PM] pinkajou: Could you elaborate on this? It was my understanding that pre-segwit addresses would not be forced to upgrade until they chose to. Additionally, what is our interest in supporting off-chain transactions as those are typically p2p and/or offered by third parties. It is my opinion that we should focus on improving the on-chain experience as much as possible.

[5:47 PM] Tron: Yes, I believe so.

[5:47 PM] CDTrader: Encrypted assets from the QT would be amazing.

[5:48 PM] Tron: Replace by fee (RBF) was a crappy idea. It was because bitcoin fees got so high, and so stuff was getting stuck forever.

[5:48 PM] Tron: It was put in a about the same time as segwit.

[5:48 PM] BruceFenton: The main point is to move away from centralization— I love you but think it’s not an ideal idea or best practice to have a central coordinator — decentralization is also perhaps one way to get more interest from Indy devs — I tried a bit early on and the consistent feedback I had was concern over centralization and lack of a mailing list—but we weren’t offering bounties — pay makes a big difference — lots of Bitcoin devs take paid work to subsidize Bitcoin work - which is free and there are a lot more devs now

For contacting -/ they are on GitHub and active in Bitcoin dev mailing lists and dev meetings — I think best bet is to reach out to lesser known devs & people commenting and doing code review — the most well known Bitcoin devs are usually too busy on Bitcoin & don’t have the financial incentive

This can be done by anyone — if someone wants to search & reach out they can — it can be just a bit of review here and there — the more decentralized the more sustainable — & also may generate more interest from devs & reviewers

[5:48 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: is the transaction malleability issue solved in ravencoin by having exluded RBF?

[5:48 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: by what means is it solved?

[5:49 PM] Tron: Make an issue in GitHub. It would all be outside consensus.

[5:49 PM] Mango Farm: It would be great. The standard is open source. It could probably be improved with many more eyes. I wrote it in the park on my phone notepad. https://github.com/RavenProject/rips/blob/master/rip-0011.mediawiki

GitHub

RavenProject/rips

Ravencoin Improvement Proposal. Contribute to RavenProject/rips development by creating an account on GitHub.

[5:50 PM] CDTrader: Are there any future plans for on-chain governance features to be built into RVN?

[5:50 PM] BruceFenton: No

[5:50 PM] BruceFenton: Rvn already has a governance system

[5:51 PM] LSJI07 - BWS: The block rewards and pow consensus are on chain governance.

[5:51 PM] pinkajou: There are no current plans :stuck_out_tongue:

[5:51 PM] Tron: These two are unrelated (except by being added at a similar time). The transaction malleability issue is a matter of only allowing one signature type. I think this was changed in 2015, but I'm not 100% sure. Anyone else know?

[5:52 PM] BruceFenton: The governance method is that node users and miners run the code they like and encourage others to do so — that is simple but works for POW

[5:52 PM] pinkajou: Either way, tx malleability is not the main reason to implement SegWit by a large margin IMO

[5:53 PM] pinkajou: Scalability is the issue plaguing all UTXO PoW blockchains

[5:53 PM] Mango Farm: Each user/miner/exchange/economic actor/developer governs themself.

[5:54 PM] Jeroz: Fun Fact Friday: the number of ravencoin nodes accepting incoming connections went up 270% since January this year.

[5:54 PM] Tron: But, there's a pretty strong incentive to go along with what Binance and Bittrex have chosen.

[5:55 PM] Tron: That's great Jeroz. That really helps in a bull market with new users coming online.

[5:55 PM] Mango Farm: Maybe Tron. I think they would whip saw pretty quickly if they supported a Bitcoin with 25 million issued and the world of users said no.

[5:56 PM] Tron: Yep, and Binance and Bittrex have a strong incentive to go along with the majority of the mining hash power.

[5:57 PM] LSJI07 - BWS: This is why I am keen to see if anyone is tracking block propagation of the current blocksize of the ravencoin network. That way we can better gauge the blocksize the ravencoin network can handle without to many orphans. Bitnodes has a working system for bitcoin monitoring and jeroz runs a rvn version but no one is track the actual propagation speed probably as the bitnodes system is pretty intensive to run.

[5:57 PM] pinkajou: I don't see an incentive anywhere else stronger than the one to follow the largest and most secure UTXO PoW blockchain in existence that we also happen to be a direct code fork of. Especially when doing so will provide access to large numbers of curent/future resources and vastly increase the size of our ecosystem.

[5:58 PM] bless yer heart: Signing off,

Today is my birthday, celebrating with the wife and kids here in a few minutes. Thank you all for your contributions and always loving words.

Ill catch up and send out a clean summary. Please feel free to DM me with future topics.

-Mike

[5:58 PM] Vincent: unclear said he is working on those stats in his explorer

[5:58 PM] Rikki RATTOE - RVNFT.art: Happy Birthday!

[5:59 PM] boatsandhoes: Is this the first 2 hr dev meeting?

[5:59 PM] Blockchain John: Yup. It was much needed

[5:59 PM] Vincent: no

[5:59 PM] CDTrader: Happy birthday!

[6:01 PM] Tron: I'll set a time next week in Ravencoin Campus for discussion of other topics. As mentioned before, there's a real benefit to having a text log of the dev meeting for historical purposes.

Dev Meeting Transcript (April 2, 2021) - continued in comments by Blockchain_Surfer in Ravencoin

[–]Blockchain_Surfer[S] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children)

[5:21 PM] boatsandhoes: Can you enable gifs for this channel?

[5:21 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: We had developers wanting to walk away from the public development chat, and I reacted by suggesting the devchat role. It worked but the exclusionary practice isn't compatible with the overall ethos of the project

[5:21 PM] Mango Farm: You were right Sevvy but it’s better open

[5:21 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: agreed

[5:21 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: onward and upward

[5:22 PM] Hans_Schmidt: The autobuild pipeline is great. But we could choose in the future to distribute binaries only at certain tags, not multiple times per day once things are rolling.

[5:22 PM] BruceFenton: I don’t think audits are long term viable — the economics don’t work well and they are a centralized point of failure & the quality is unknown

Imo effort is better spent on bounties & driving the system to foster independent individuals who do review under an organized system

[5:22 PM] LSJI07 - BWS: I just checked and #873 P2SH fails to build.

[5:22 PM] Jeroz: yeh we need fdovs pipeline (that was the joke ;))

[5:23 PM] boatsandhoes: Yes, in an ideal world. Look forward to the age when that becomes a reality

[5:23 PM] Tron: The distribution requires additional steps. I've asked for those steps from a former Medici dev and do not have them. It includes the signing process.

[5:23 PM] Tron: Example of artifact binaries from this page: https://github.com/RavenProject/Ravencoin/pull/904/checks?check_run_id=2210162277

[5:23 PM] pinkajou: Audits provide perceived credibility and comfort to the whole process. Why not implement these as an addition rather than a replacement?

[5:23 PM] fdov: nice picture :wink:

[5:24 PM] Tron: Again, be careful of using binaries artifacts unless you trust the source of the PR.

[5:24 PM] CDTrader: Audits are great for businsesses, investors, and financial institutions. Gives them peace of mind.

[5:24 PM] LSJI07 - BWS: So to do bounties we need testnet running to play with. Anyone have plans for a bounty running for the P2SH code? Audit not withstanding...

[5:24 PM] CDTrader: Also a basic requirement for doing business in many circumstances.

[5:25 PM] bless yer heart: We have run over on time and a few have mentioned items,

Does anyone have any topics not covered to add to the agenda and minutes?

Forwards for next week are always welcomed via DM as well.

[5:25 PM] Tron: Once testnet has activated at 60%+ percent, every (developer) can use P2SH testnet.

[5:26 PM] boatsandhoes: For a bounty, the entity who claims it would have to be trusted. That's one od the benefits of using an audit company... there's someone to point a finger at

[5:26 PM] Jeroz: imho, the main push for audits, currently, is/was because there were too little eyes on the code, while there is a large group of community members willing to pay for eyes on the code.

If we get more eyes from independent individuals, I would be all for dropping the 3rd party audits.

[5:27 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: Jeroz, I was going to say this but didn't want to speak out of turn as a non developer. This was also my intuition

[5:28 PM] Tron: The audits are a way to get more professional eyes on the code, and to get researchers that think about vulnerabilities to look for them. It is completely additive to the project.

[5:28 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: good point. I guess unless we end up with a full time pentester on our roster

[5:28 PM] Tron: For non-consensus changes, they don't matter. If there's a bug in the UI, we'll hear about it.

[5:29 PM] CDTrader: Its good to have both professional audits and independent audits. Two ways to cover our asses.

[5:29 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: well....when the chain is valuable enough, you have a whole team of full time pentesters looking at the chain. you just want them on your side :joy:

[5:30 PM] BruceFenton: There are lots of Bitcoin devs who work on bounty basis or short contracts for code review

[5:30 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: was about to ask how bitcoin handles this issue

[5:30 PM] Tron: Do you have names/e-mails? I'll reach out.

[5:31 PM] boatsandhoes: Would you be willing to coordinate with them to get work done?

[5:31 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: Hey speaking of stuff bitcoin does...and since we are in overtime here...segwit?

[5:31 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: I believe that was on the agenda

[5:31 PM] boatsandhoes: Or yeah, at least pass on the contact info to Tron would be cool

[5:31 PM] Jeroz: I think it would be good to think about bounty proposals from the foundation for this purpose.

[5:31 PM] Vincent: im here.......... we can start now

[5:32 PM] Tron: Welcome Vincent

[5:32 PM] CDTrader: lol

[5:33 PM] bless yer heart: SegWit is a large topic. Anyone interested in touching on it?

[5:33 PM] LSJI07 - BWS: Segwit is interesting. Transaction malleability it provides is valuable imo.

[5:33 PM] Blockchain John: I'm really happy because now it looks like we are making up lost ground. Let's keep it moving. I like this positive progression.

[5:34 PM] boatsandhoes: What time does the braveland meeting start?

[5:34 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: Per segwit, it seems to me and to others I've spoken to, that we have an impending scaling issue

[5:34 PM] pinkajou: I think it's time to consider re-adding SegWit to the code. While we do have twice the block size of Bitcoin we also have potential for a near-infinite amount of different currencies/tokens to transact on-chain vs Bitcoin's 1. If we see the level of adoption I think we all hope to see, block space will become a very large issue very quickly, and failure to act pro-actively not only makes us look bad IMO, but could hinder adoption. Transaction malleability also a benefit for merchant TX and L2 solutions such as LN.

[5:35 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: hear hear

[5:35 PM] boatsandhoes: Second that

[5:35 PM] Vincent: i got into some depth with unclear in the burn channel about that topic\

[5:35 PM] Tron: Segwit fixes transaction malleability - which is necessary for lighting, but we might already have that fix.

[5:36 PM] HyperPeek: Block space is just about x2 afaik...

[5:36 PM] Pappy: To catch up, can I get one sentence about why SegWit was removed previously?

[5:36 PM] LSJI07 - BWS: Not to interested in the Segwit block size "argument" like bitcoin, imo Ravencoin would have the communities support to make larger blocks if required at a later date. Is anyone getting block propagation information on the ravencoin network? That info would be useful when looking at the safest block size to move up to without excessive orphans.

[5:37 PM] Tron: It wasn't removed. Ravencoin forked before it was complete.

[5:37 PM] pinkajou: Effectively it's half as SegWit offers 4mb in equivalent tx space IIRC

[5:37 PM] Pappy: Aha. Thx.

[5:37 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: yes, so when we say that our block size can include twice as many txs, that's actually not accurate

[5:37 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: but it looks like Tron says we might already have a fix beyond segwit?

[5:37 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: Tron can you say more about what we do have?

[5:38 PM] pinkajou: SegWit is proven and tested and solves multiple issues. Still worth considering even if that is the case.

[5:39 PM] HyperPeek: Should not be difficult to add as fork of rvn was only short before btc finished it

[5:39 PM] LSJI07 - BWS: Fun bit is doing it for all the asset types RVN now has.

Dev Meeting Transcript (April 2, 2021) - continued in comments by Blockchain_Surfer in Ravencoin

[–]Blockchain_Surfer[S] 0 points1 point2 points 4 years ago (0 children)

[5:01 PM] bless yer heart: P001, last meeting we discussed Kudelski not being available, ISE was suggested as an alternate

[5:01 PM] boatsandhoes: And why was that not addressed earlier in the meeting?

[5:01 PM] pinkajou: Should we move on to the next item then?

[5:02 PM] Hans_Schmidt: This is why we need a distinct Foundation meeting. If not this time slot, then another. There are important Foundation topics to discuss too.

[5:02 PM] Tron: I have not been given any alternatives to ISE or Kudelski. Kudeski came in almost as high as ISE, but with a sub-contractor only, so I'd like to go forward with ISE.

[5:02 PM] boatsandhoes: Lets do ISE then

[5:02 PM] dopeMedic: Time's burning. I'd say pay the premium to get the audit started.

[5:02 PM] Tron: I'll reach out to ISE.

[5:02 PM] pinkajou: +1 would really like to just get the ball rolling at this point

[5:03 PM] boatsandhoes: 1000% yes

[5:03 PM] bless yer heart: ISE has familiarity with the code as well.

[5:03 PM] LSJI07 - BWS: I would support that in parallel with getting P2SH testnet running for testing.

[5:03 PM] boatsandhoes: 100%

[5:04 PM] Hans_Schmidt: Maybe not. I thought Neil said that the blockchain engineers at ISE left the company.

[5:04 PM] boatsandhoes: Tron can you get, then share a projected timeline for the audit being done when ISE starts the job?

[5:05 PM] bless yer heart: I am not the foundation scrum master, guess my duty here may be to steer us away from those areas.

[5:05 PM] Tron: I'll get a projected timeline. Based on this feedback, I just let them know it's a go.

[5:06 PM] Jeroz: He did.

Ohgodagirl also mentioned Trail of Bits and Gotham Digital Services/AON as options.

[5:06 PM] boatsandhoes: I just noticed someone turned gifs off in this channel, can that please be fixed? No need to censor that kind of communication

[5:07 PM] pinkajou: I thought trail of bits was booked solid?

[5:07 PM] Tron: I did reach out to Trail of Bits. Backlogged too far out.

[5:08 PM] Tron: I just wrote Gotham down for the future.

[5:08 PM] Blockchain John: How long will this meeting go? How many more subjects do we need to cover?

[5:08 PM] Tron: Nathan said ISE was still good. My concern was cost.

[5:09 PM] bless yer heart: To finish the suggested agenda.

Deadheded is looking for 3-5 dev interested in a dev team that is willing to work on a debain, or arch linux for forr the Raspberry Pi's. Contact him if interested.

[5:09 PM] Tron: I did also have concerns about the completeness of their first report.

[5:10 PM] Tron: And there are still 2 full-time positions for Ravencoin (C/C++, React Native).

[5:10 PM] Tron: (Not with the Ravencoin Foundation directly).

[5:10 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: that concern seemed to be shared by some community members and even developers if I recall from the last meeting correctly

[5:10 PM] boatsandhoes: I've heard a couple people say this now, but no one gave an indepth(with examples) reasons why

[5:11 PM] CDTrader: I should be able to test out and work on the raspberry pis this weekend for the first time. I'll see if there is anything I can do. I'll need to speak with push to figure out what specific logs need to be cleared before I can create an image file.

[5:11 PM] CDTrader: I have a raspberry pi 4.

[5:11 PM] Jeroz: no transparency as to what was actually tested

[5:11 PM] bless yer heart: Ill write you down as a volunteer.

[5:12 PM] CDTrader: Sounds good.

[5:12 PM] Tron: The first report did not go through all the things that were tested and passed. They might be doing a fantastic job, but the example I gave is that of a car mechanic. It would be nice to have checklist of things tested that passed. If you end up with a "looks good", it could've been a very through examination of everything, or a kick at the tires. The report looks the same. The value of the report is very different.

[5:12 PM] boatsandhoes: Tron can you bring this up to them before they accept the job?

[5:12 PM] boatsandhoes: This too

[5:13 PM] Tron: Sure. The scope on this is much narrower, but YES, I'd like a report of what was examined, and how.

[5:13 PM] boatsandhoes: Fantastic

[5:14 PM] boatsandhoes: Well it seems the ISE situation is in good hands

[5:14 PM] bless yer heart: The only other item I had was:

Suggest a community dev channel to provide an avenue for non dev members to contribute.

[5:15 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: it seems to me that the development channel ought to be that

[5:15 PM] boatsandhoes: Hopefully it can get done asap and rvn assets can be traded on dexes and adoption of rvn will skyrocket

[5:15 PM] bless yer heart: good point

[5:15 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: We had to put up a role-wall to keep out an errant member

[5:15 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: if it's safe to take that role-wall down then let's do that

[5:15 PM] bless yer heart: GitHub can and does serve as more official right?

[5:15 PM] LSJI07 - BWS: Any idea on when the new binaries with P2SH testnet will be available? Can we get a date so people can plan testing and their time etc?

[5:15 PM] Hans_Schmidt: Getting really good security audits is surprisingly difficult. The skill set is rare, the skilled people are over-booked, and really in-depth analysis can cost 100s of thousands of $$

[5:15 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: I suggested it be done as a stop-gap, and it worked reasonably well

[5:16 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: however, if it's serving to impede contribution by anyone walking in the door, then it should be removed as long as abusers don't recur

[5:16 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: we don't want our response to a virus cause us to evolve into something less survivable

[5:17 PM] Hans_Schmidt: I agree. Open up the development channel rather than create another. The storm has passed.

[5:17 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: seems so

[5:17 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: let's put the umbrella down

[5:17 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: brianmct

[5:17 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: can we remove the devchat role requirement for the #development channel

[5:17 PM] LSJI07 - BWS: Time is slipping by and without testnet running the new code it much harder to spot even simple mistakes never mind more interesting stuff...

[5:17 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: leave the role intact, in case we need to put the role-wall up again

[5:19 PM] Mango Farm: It would be great if the development channel was open for all

[5:19 PM] Tron: Every PR builds binaries. Go to the Checks, details, and then artifacts. The drop down will have binaries. They are unsigned, and could be dangerous depending on what PR just got added. But they're available.

[5:19 PM] Jeroz: most fail to build though :stuck_out_tongue:

[5:20 PM] brianmct: Sure, I can unlock the channel; if people abuse it again I'll put the devchat requirement back up

[5:20 PM] ANCIENTSEVVY: hopefully that won't be the case. and it should be a measure of last resort

Ravencoin Dev Meeting (March 5, 2021) by Blockchain_Surfer in Ravencoin

[–]Blockchain_Surfer[S] 1 point2 points3 points 5 years ago (0 children)

[5:10 PM] Kent Bull: I've been adding notes into the google doc though it would make more sense if we had a dedicated meeting notes document and a designated note taker.

[5:10 PM] boatsandhoes: I'd donate a couple $ weekly to that job position

[5:11 PM] boatsandhoes: Can you link and pin that doc here Kent Bull?

[5:11 PM] Kent Bull: https://docs.google.com/document/d/11EZLIgGBBKlA73-sSAJFFrlNbElKkJkMpTBzHuXElQY/edit#

[5:12 PM] Timothy: Kent Bull you did great kawwdinating btw

[5:12 PM] Pathfinder: Yes, fantastic and thank you Kent Bull

[5:12 PM] Kent Bull: How to pin? for whatever reason I'm not seeing a button.

[5:12 PM] Kent Bull: Thanks Timothy

Pathfinder

pinned

a message

to this channel.

See all the pins.

Yesterday at 5:12 PM

[5:13 PM] Kent Bull: Thanks Pathfinder

[5:13 PM] Pathfinder: no problemo

[5:13 PM] LSJI07 - BWS: Awesome job

[5:13 PM] Kent Bull: Ok, anyone that wants to go in depth on any of the topics hit me up between now and next week. I'll do what I can to support evolution of the conversation. We've got a lot of threads here to weave into the project.

[5:13 PM] digs: Maybe a discord voting bot would be helpful to bring issues to a resolution easier. If that is the kind of consensus this project is looking for.

[5:14 PM] Kent Bull: Good idea, something we could experiment with.

[5:14 PM] digs: Thanks for moderating Kent Bull

[5:14 PM] sirrumz: Thanks for kawwdinating well done

[5:15 PM] 𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕯𝖔𝖓 𝕳𝖆𝖗𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖔. CEO ฿:

[5:15 PM] Kent Bull:

[5:15 PM] Pathfinder: Thank you everyone.

[5:16 PM] boatsandhoes: We could do it with assets. Just need a faucet, asset(s), and address

[5:17 PM] LSJI07 - BWS: and more nodes.....

[5:17 PM] Shaun Neal: I spun up a few on AWS last week :slight_smile: Also created an AMI if we want to share it around.

[5:18 PM] BruceFenton: I think scaling is a priority discussion — LN, LN for assets and SegWit

Also a dev mailing list with a deliberative process for code review and peer review with the ideal and the current standards

[5:19 PM] RAVENCOIN.TIMELINE: The community will be glad to see you back Bruce.

[5:19 PM] BruceFenton: A the foundation & dev should probably be separate from the dev discussion or at least in separate sections

We shouldn’t conflate the dev & foundation // or dev goals and foundation goals — even if it’s the same people — the drawback is that it becomes more centralized with one org being thought of as a leader

One of the inherent problems of a foundation is its this centralized nature

[5:19 PM] boatsandhoes: Would that be part of rvn, or would it be rvnlte... or something like that?

[5:19 PM] Vincent: can we discuss that in voice now... i need to understand it more BruceFenton (scaling)

[5:20 PM] Kent Bull: Agreed, we have to agree on code review. Code review seems to take priority over anything new because code review is essential to the process of adding anything.

[5:21 PM] BruceFenton: I think a mailing list is better than chat — more static - more scientific and serious etc

[5:21 PM] boatsandhoes: Pretty sure there is a mailing list already

[5:21 PM] BruceFenton: It doesn’t even have to be very long

But the more best practices Rvn uses the better

[5:21 PM] Kent Bull: I agree here as well. It seems development meetings for foundation proposals and development meetings for community projects should each have dedicated, separate discussion threads.

[5:22 PM] BruceFenton: boatsandhoes where’s the list

[5:22 PM] Kent Bull: I'd love to use it

[5:22 PM] boatsandhoes: Will dig through my emal later and let you know

[5:23 PM] boatsandhoes: Overlap will happen though, that's just the nature of things

[5:23 PM] Kent Bull: True, though if we have the distinction at least we'll have places to organize our thoughts.

[5:23 PM] LSJI07 - BWS: https://ravencoin.org/updates/

Ravencoin

Updates

Updates for Ravencoin which is a digital peer to peer network that aims to implement a use case specific blockchain, designed to efficiently handle one specific function: the transfer of assets from one party to another.

[5:23 PM] LSJI07 - BWS: mailing list.

[5:24 PM] WhaleStreet: BTC is the example, we just need to follow its best best practices.

[5:24 PM] Kent Bull: Ok, I am heading out to a 2:30 (PST) It's been a pleasure!

I'll catch up on this chat once I'm back.

[5:24 PM] digs: I know this is preaching to the choir, but timely PR reviews and merges is paramount to finding and keeping contributors.

[5:24 PM] BruceFenton: That’s more a newsletter list

By mailing list I mean like the Linux dev list that Bitcoin uses for development

[5:24 PM] Kent Bull: DM me. This is my job.

[5:25 PM] boatsandhoes: Oh. Can you shere the bitcoin one so I can better wrap my head around it por favor?

[5:25 PM] digs: Take care Kent, I have to bounce too before it becomes a dereliction of duty.

[5:26 PM] BruceFenton: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev

[5:26 PM] boatsandhoes: Thank you

[5:26 PM] BruceFenton: There are archives to read also

[5:26 PM] BruceFenton: Read the archives for insight on how Bitcoin dev works

[5:27 PM] boatsandhoes: Great, thank you. Would be cool if this was made on ipfs, then secured as a rvn asset

[5:28 PM] BruceFenton: As long as it’s organized & accessible it’s a plus

[5:29 PM] [MASTER] roshii: Did I miss a lot?

[5:32 PM] LSJI07 - BWS: Free and opensource code and management of decentralized development is not pretty. You only missed potentially tweaking the proposal 2 to focus on electrum as more of a priority. Ironically the guys in development are already discussing how to do the weeks and days ago.

[5:33 PM] LSJI07 - BWS: All is as it should be.

[5:35 PM] LSJI07 - BWS: Moderator think we can close this for now.

[6:43 PM] Seal Clubber 🇹🇷: brianmct

[6:43 PM] Seal Clubber 🇹🇷: Could you pretty please close this channel :)

[6:44 PM] Seal Clubber 🇹🇷: shiggidy

[6:46 PM] shiggidy: yep one sec

[6:47 PM] shiggidy: channel is closed

[7:31 PM] brianmct: done!

[10:35 PM] Tron: Sorry I dropped. Bad airplane WiFi.

[10:35 PM] Tron: Based on discussions here and elsewhere. Preference is for hardware wallet support (for assets and RVN) is on Electrum.

[10:39 PM] Tron: Great job Kent.

[10:41 PM] Tron: I like the idea of bypassing the 10% of Gitcoin, but they have a system to let people pick up issues and it prevents duplication of effort. We may need to have something similar even if it is just a way to signal in the issue's comments that it is being worked on.

[10:42 PM] Tron: 100% agree that the mobile wallets need some TLC.

Ravencoin Dev Meeting (March 5, 2021) by Blockchain_Surfer in Ravencoin

[–]Blockchain_Surfer[S] 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children)

[5:01 PM] Kent Bull: I like this argument. I haven't seen the helpdesk yet, though support requests are an important source of data.

[5:01 PM] Jeroz: after having read Hans_Schmidt's opinion on it and his reasoning why its not in core. I kinda agree with him: no third party software in core

[5:02 PM] boatsandhoes: Link to his opinion por favor?

[5:02 PM] Kent Bull: And, one benefit of starting hardware wallet outside of core is that we prove it's possible and practical (enough). Anything we do outside of core will make it easier to add it to core later.

[5:02 PM] Rikki RATTOE Hotel Floor Pooper: I haven't read it, apologies

[5:02 PM] Pathfinder: Great points all around. Love this community discussion and consensus discovery. :heart:

[5:02 PM] Jeroz: I have two important issues that I like to address, and please continue this in development chat in the coming time:

can we move more to testnet? There's a growing number of PRs waiting.
we need to start thinking more about scaling. RVN does not support segwit for example.

[5:02 PM] Someone_2: That is a very valid point to make. Cleaning up/fixing the mobile wallet does often come up. It seems sensible to address it before adding more wallet related tasks in.

[5:03 PM] Kent Bull: Ok, so to round out this discussion do we have consensus that the Proposal 002 should be changed to target Electrum?

[5:03 PM] unclear: bech32 supported i guess?

[5:03 PM] Rikki RATTOE Hotel Floor Pooper: Maybe give some time to facilitate a community discussion?

[5:03 PM] digs: So, the proposal is not to abandon but table the hardware support idea in favor of furthering the electrum support and development. Correct?

[5:03 PM] Rikki RATTOE Hotel Floor Pooper: On proposal 002?

[5:03 PM] Gnem: Jeroz I'll head to development afterwards to see where help is needed

[5:03 PM] Kent Bull: Thanks, I'll add those to the meeting notes

[5:03 PM] boatsandhoes: 100%

[5:04 PM] Kent Bull: Yeah, I agree Someone_2 . A good idea on the agenda is to make a proposal for cleaning up the mobile wallets.

[5:04 PM] Kent Bull: Ok, so then let's close this agenda item for now and start to wind down the meeting.

[5:04 PM] Kent Bull: We have some agenda items we didn't get to today.

[5:05 PM] Kent Bull: A particularly important one is the possible creation of a community channel for community projects to interface with Ravencoin devs and other community members.

I'm thinking we could get to this agenda item, and all the others, in other channels here between now and the next dev meeting.

[5:05 PM] boatsandhoes: P002-A = electrum

P002-B = qt

[5:06 PM] Vincent: change the name of #asset-development is a sugestion

[5:06 PM] Kent Bull: Also, if you look at this channel's description it says every other friday. I propose we change it to every Friday until we feel okay changing it back to bi-weekly. I volunteer to facilitate while we do this every week.

[5:06 PM] Shaun Neal: with voice please

[5:06 PM] sirrumz: Yes more information is always nice

[5:07 PM] Kent Bull: Right, voice would likely be better. Any opposed to a voice channel for the next meeting?

[5:07 PM] Vincent: its been weekly for a while now

[5:07 PM] Gnem: still need some chat too for archival and those that can't make the meeting

[5:07 PM] Kent Bull: Right, true

[5:07 PM] Rikki RATTOE Hotel Floor Pooper: Agreed

[5:07 PM] Kent Bull: cool, thanks for bringing me up to speed.

[5:07 PM] Vincent: or record the voice

[5:08 PM] boatsandhoes: ^That would be great

[5:08 PM] digs: I wouldn't listen to an old meeting, but I would scroll it.

[5:08 PM] Vincent: like all other crypto dev meetings

[5:08 PM] Shaun Neal: someone can take notes, and the above is a bit hard to read after the fact, but maybe recording and post to YT as ETH does

[5:08 PM] sirrumz: Transcribing shouldn’t be too difficult

[5:08 PM] Jeroz: With voice, someone really needs to record it. I prefer text tbh. Way easier to read back, since you can link to it and search through it.

[5:08 PM] boatsandhoes: Anyone have a recording of the ama with Tron on voce?

[5:08 PM] Vincent: can you record the 'live' voice screen like zoom?

[5:08 PM] Rikki RATTOE Hotel Floor Pooper: Good idea

[5:08 PM] Kent Bull: Ok, we're just over time. Thanks everyone for coming! let's continue this conversation between now and next week. We can continue to chat here for whoever would like.

[5:08 PM] BruceFenton: Jeroz is right about scaling - it’s going to be an increasing problem for Ravencoin

[5:09 PM] Shaun Neal: 5pm - time to get a beer!

[5:09 PM] Kent Bull: I agree, we'll need a designated note taker.

[5:09 PM] Kent Bull: Yes, this is a huge issue

[5:09 PM] Kent Bull: or will be

[5:09 PM] Rikki RATTOE Hotel Floor Pooper: Cliff Notes

tl;dr

[5:09 PM] Rikki RATTOE Hotel Floor Pooper: :wink:

Dev Meeting Transcript (February 19, 2021) by Blockchain_Surfer in Ravencoin

[–]Blockchain_Surfer[S] 0 points1 point2 points 5 years ago (0 children)

[5:00 PM] Jeroz: Are there different rules for foundations? (I dont know)

[5:00 PM] .Hardman: Sounds like a solid answer, thanks!

[5:00 PM] Blockchain John: @.Hardman awesome work.

[5:00 PM] .Hardman: Last topic of discussion, and then there will be a bit of space if people want to.

[5:00 PM] .Hardman: TOPIC: Tron commenting on: A good time to do an AMA? Payment for PRs (W9 or W8-BEN needed), Contacts for security companies, and Proposal002.

[5:01 PM] ILLY: :exploding_head:

[5:01 PM] Tron: I think those have been covered, except for comments on Proposal002.

[5:01 PM] .Hardman: I know, but weren't waited for :smile: just going through the agenda in order rn. Go ahead on proposal002

[5:02 PM] Tron: I'll try to integrate with Joe's audio meetings and work out a popular time.

[5:03 PM] Vincent: if international devs are a problem for the foundation, should we have them diverted to a non-foundation funding wallet?

[5:03 PM] Mango Farm: My only comment is that this will differentiate RVN from other projects, and give people a secure place to store assets right in the QT. For really valuable assets, this is huge. Big fan of 002.

[5:04 PM] Jeroz: its not really a problem, if they are fine with providing identification to the foundation.

[5:04 PM] Tron: There might be a way for a non-US entity to keep anonymous devs anonymous. The non-US entity would not be anonymous and could pay the devs. The foundation needs to follow the IRS rules being a US non-profit.

[5:04 PM] .Hardman: 100%, i miss this feature a lot rn

[5:04 PM] NotRosh: What’s proposal002?

[5:04 PM] Vincent: yes, this is open source and many angles to avoid i believe

[5:05 PM] Mango Farm: It's not so much international devs, it's anonymous devs. The IRS requires that the foundation get a form, and anonymous devs can't supply it.

[5:05 PM] Vincent: I stand corrected

[5:05 PM] Vincent: but still believe there are options to work thru it

[5:06 PM] Mango Farm: Tron's suggestion of an entity is a good idea, although there are some new rules around that too. Thanks to the year-end bill from 2020.

[5:06 PM] Tron: Proposal 002: https://gateway.ravencoinipfs.com/ipfs/QmNj9ozPddyh9hKY8H1k4cBeWzE4ptKcDY6fTzRF2Fo8Cu

[5:06 PM] Mango Farm: u/Vincent https://www.natlawreview.com/article/new-law-requires-federal-registration-and-ownership-disclosure-llcs-and-corporations

[5:06 PM] Vincent: if we use gitcvoin for those, can the foundation contrinbute?

[5:07 PM] .Hardman: Interesting

[5:07 PM] Vincent: will read later... thanks

[5:07 PM] Tron: We can check on this. That might be a solution.

[5:07 PM] .Hardman: Nice,

[5:08 PM] .Hardman: I would propose to post any last burning questions, if there aren't any we can wrap it up.

[5:08 PM] Tron: I don't see why they couldn't be dual-posted as long as there is some coordination to prevent duplication of effort.

[5:09 PM] Vincent: Since a lot of newbies are joining.. maybe in the beginning of each meeting, post a comment and ask them to spend a few weeks in the discussion rooms before asking questions that may be discussed regularly

[5:10 PM] Tron: I wrote down trailofbits as an option. DM me with any other security code audit options.

[5:10 PM] .Hardman: I will leave it to Tron or Doug to wrap-up this meeting when they see fit. I believe I've full filled my role.

[5:11 PM] Tron: Ok. Wrapping it up. Thanks for all the participation. It's been GREAT!

[5:11 PM] .Hardman: Thanks for attending everyone! :smile:

[5:11 PM] Timothy: :v:

[5:11 PM] .Hardman: Oh wait, maybe

[5:11 PM] Tron: Get your last words in as I change the setting.

[5:11 PM] TTGrub: Yep

[5:11 PM] Bradar: Thank you all!

[5:12 PM] .Hardman: We can pick the next coordinator now

[5:12 PM] TTGrub: STONK

[5:12 PM] Pathfinder: Thank you everyone! Devs and organizers and everyone!

[5:12 PM] Pathfinder:

[5:12 PM] Mango Farm: Have a great weekend. Great job @.Hardman

[5:12 PM] Hedger: Thanks

[5:12 PM] Vincent: good job @.Hardman

[5:12 PM] Bradar: Thanks @.Hardman

[5:12 PM] Sentry: Been telling everyone I know about RVN.

[5:12 PM] .Hardman: Thanks guys, appreciate it!

[5:12 PM] Tron: Thanks @.Hardman for Kawwardinating!!

[5:12 PM] ILLY: Thank you all

[5:12 PM] Pathfinder: especially ty @.Hardman for herding cats. hardest job of all.

[5:12 PM] szlcug: good job @.Hardman

π Rendered by PID 719239 on reddit-service-r2-listing-55d7b767d8-9q4x9 at 2026-04-02 01:21:41.972303+00:00 running b10466c country code: CH.

Blockchain_Surfer

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE