--- Day changed Sat Nov 26 2016 00:16 -!- Ylbam [uid99779@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-nbxkwztwdrcjwlfr] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 00:47 -!- Taek [~quassel@2001:41d0:1:472e::] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 00:48 -!- JackH [~laptop@79-73-189-171.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 01:13 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 01:14 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 01:19 < jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: heh. Yes. It copies all relevant wtxs into a vector vWtx (memory), EraseTx everything, does plenty of stuff (upgrade/rescan) and then try to write those vWtx txes back. 01:20 < jonasschnelli> There is a reasonable high risk that you will end up with a wallet without any wtxs. 01:20 < jonasschnelli> (risk of loosing comments) 01:34 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 01:35 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 02:18 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 02:24 < luke-jr> gmaxwell: 9188: how to get results from testing, before I stop it to test other stuff? 02:26 < luke-jr> something to grep for? 02:40 -!- Squidicuz [~squid@pool-173-48-116-49.bstnma.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: Oh no, not again] 02:58 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 03:00 < luke-jr> jonasschnelli: got a patch for you .. :x 03:37 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 03:38 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 03:47 < luke-jr> anyone can flood testnet? :x 04:16 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 04:17 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 04:18 * luke-jr grumbles at whoever found blocks and cleared his flood 04:22 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 04:22 -!- BashCo_ [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 04:40 -!- bitcoinrbb [5367e79c@gateway/web/freenode/ip.83.103.231.156] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 04:54 -!- Squidicc [~squid@pool-173-48-116-49.bstnma.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 05:06 -!- Squidicc is now known as squidicuz 05:34 -!- bitcoinrbb [5367e79c@gateway/web/freenode/ip.83.103.231.156] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 05:42 -!- Victorsueca [~Victorsue@unaffiliated/victorsueca] has quit [Quit: Gone frying asparagus or my Windows had a BSOD] 05:43 -!- Victorsueca [~Victorsue@unaffiliated/victorsueca] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 05:57 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] s-matthew-english opened pull request #9223: unification of Bloom filter representation (master...patch-10) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9223 06:38 < kanzure> https://elliot.land/sql-transaction-isolation-levels-explained 06:43 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~Chris_Ste@unaffiliated/chris-stewart-5/x-3612383] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 07:52 -!- tester1 [d593a529@gateway/web/freenode/ip.213.147.165.41] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:02 -!- tester1 [d593a529@gateway/web/freenode/ip.213.147.165.41] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 08:32 -!- abpa [~abpa@2602:306:b837:dbf0:5caa:75b4:fe60:4b2f] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:53 < jonasschnelli> luke-jr: Thanks. Will have a look ai 08:53 < jonasschnelli> at it 08:53 < jonasschnelli> From what I saw when i cross read the code, you moved it to a Layout? 08:58 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ivdsangen opened pull request #9224: Define FD_SETSIZE for all architectures (master...unix-compilation) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9224 09:00 -!- To7 [~theo@cpe-158-222-222-232.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 09:09 -!- molz [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 10:05 -!- Guest52676 [~chatzilla@71-84-219-33.dhcp.ccmn.ca.charter.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:06 -!- Guest52676 is now known as roidster 10:17 -!- GalvaNation [6151a7c6@gateway/web/freenode/ip.97.81.167.198] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:36 -!- moli [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:45 -!- abpa [~abpa@2602:306:b837:dbf0:5caa:75b4:fe60:4b2f] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 11:10 -!- droark [~droark@c-24-22-123-27.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: ZZZzzz…] 11:11 -!- droark [~droark@c-24-22-123-27.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 11:16 -!- droark [~droark@c-24-22-123-27.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 11:19 -!- moli [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds] 11:21 -!- moli [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 11:24 -!- molz [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 11:27 -!- moli [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 11:49 -!- jtimon [~quassel@186.31.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 11:50 -!- typedef [c925a274@gateway/web/freenode/ip.201.37.162.116] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 11:50 * jtimon notes that the supposedly distuptive https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8493 hasn't needed rebase for a long time... 12:02 -!- harrymm [~wayne@104.222.140.34] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 12:05 -!- typedef [c925a274@gateway/web/freenode/ip.201.37.162.116] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 12:16 < luke-jr> jonasschnelli: yes, I reconstructed the widgets using standard interfaces so it should adapt to any environment reasonably 12:22 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 12:24 -!- harrymm [~wayne@104.222.140.43] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 12:29 < luke-jr> jonasschnelli: I wonder if the feerate line should figure out its scale independently from the rest 12:29 < luke-jr> it doesn't really have a metric to compare with the other two 13:24 -!- mol [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 13:28 -!- molz [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 13:37 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@212.152.219.90] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 13:37 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@212.152.219.90] has quit [Changing host] 13:37 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 13:44 -!- mrkent [~textual@unaffiliated/mrkent] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 13:56 -!- layman01 [b0fe04f4@gateway/web/freenode/ip.176.254.4.244] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 13:58 < layman01> ok simple question [txid][in][out][sig][locktime] if i put extra data [txid][in][out][sig][locktime][something] does it auto invalidate a tx or just ignores 'something' and pushes it through 13:59 < layman01> what i mean is. older clients that never understood nlocktime. do they store nlocktime as arbitrary data even though they dont know what the extra bytes after the tx actually do 14:01 < sipa> every client understands nlocktime 14:01 < sipa> and no, you can't just append more data to transactions 14:01 < sipa> that would be a dos attack if that data is unverifiable 14:02 < sipa> segwit adds extra data to transactions 14:02 < sipa> but it uses a new format with optional fields, and it gets stripped out when relaying to old clients 14:05 < layman01> "that would be a dos attack if that data is unverifiable" - so no possible way to just add random data. or just morally avoided but possible 14:07 < luke-jr> wouldn't current nodes just ignore it (and relay the tx without it)? 14:08 < layman01> EG [txid][in][out][sig][locktime][receipt number:123]&[thank you for shopping at walmart] 14:09 < layman01> not physically possible in any way to have it locked in the blockchain 14:10 < layman01> WITHOUT using the "output as message" trick (within the tx) 14:11 < gmaxwell> layman01: the blockchain is NOT free file storage, it's carefully designed to avoid allowing people to dump their porn collections in it, if it were possible to do what you describe (it isn't as far as we know)-- we'd consider it a serious bug and would work diligently to fix it. 14:12 < layman01> gmaxwell, so where will you store your confidential payment commitments 14:15 < layman01> where is the bip/document information that stops extra data after signatures/locktime. eg what mechanism prevents extra data being added 14:16 < gmaxwell> the structure of the protocol. There is just no 'extra' place to put it. 14:17 < gmaxwell> layman01: if something is _confidential_ it should not be in the public blockchain. If something is a commitment it can be commited to using the existing signatures or existing outputs without adding any data at all to the blockchain. 14:19 < layman01> gmaxwell sound familiar: "CT is possible due to the cryptographic technique of additively homomorphic commitments. As a side-effect of its design, CT also enables the additional exchange of private "memo" data"" 14:20 < BlueMatt> layman01: do note that CT only exists in implemented form in non-public blockchains 14:20 < gmaxwell> layman01: the private memo data is maigical and takes no size at all. 14:20 < BlueMatt> also, that ^ 14:21 < layman01> but im asking how can extra data be added. how can gmaxwell also make output values private onchain.. if data cant be added.. 14:21 < gmaxwell> Otherwise it wouldn't have been interesting. 14:21 < gmaxwell> layman01: CT's memo data doesn't add any other data at all. (also, even if it did: CT isn't part of Bitcoin-- though the memo data wouldn't have made sense if it added data, so I wouldn't have done it if it did) 14:22 < BlueMatt> layman01: think of it kinda like pay-to-contract-hash: there is data there, but it takes no extra room compared to not having it (well, pay-to-contract-hash is just a commitment, whereas CT is more, but whatever) 14:22 * luke-jr wonders if sipa is still working on sign-to-contract :x 14:23 -!- gribble [~gribble@unaffiliated/nanotube/bot/gribble] has quit [Disconnected by services] 14:23 < luke-jr> layman01: the payment protocol has an out-of-band mechanism for memos btw 14:23 < layman01> out-of-band.. i need to research that :D 14:24 < BlueMatt> * gribble :No such server 14:24 < BlueMatt> nanotube: :'( 14:25 -!- gribble [~gribble@unaffiliated/nanotube/bot/gribble] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 14:25 < BlueMatt> lol, helgrind is so slow that it makes my node think its nTimeOffset needs to be adjusted by 3 minutes 14:26 < layman01> any link to 'out-of-band' documentation, instead of asking google and spending ages trying to find info 14:26 < gmaxwell> I think some of the recent changes to smartptr may have slowed down valgrind. 14:26 < luke-jr> layman01: BIP 70 14:33 < layman01> ok so bip70 is still using the [output] part of a tx as the messaging tool (from my quick brief read of it) not adding data after [sig][nlocktime] 14:35 < layman01> anyone with a current testnet open and about to do a tx, able to just add some random bytes after the raw tx to see what happens? 14:36 < gmaxwell> layman01: you've misunderstood BIP70. 14:36 < gmaxwell> It doesn't put message data in the transaction at all. 14:37 -!- mrkent [~textual@unaffiliated/mrkent] has quit [] 14:37 -!- mrkent [~textual@unaffiliated/mrkent] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 14:38 -!- mrkent [~textual@unaffiliated/mrkent] has quit [Client Quit] 14:38 -!- mrkent [~textual@unaffiliated/mrkent] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 14:38 -!- mrkent [~textual@unaffiliated/mrkent] has quit [Client Quit] 14:39 -!- mrkent [~textual@unaffiliated/mrkent] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 14:39 < layman01> well my question is about putting messages into a transaction. that gets locked into a block. that gets distributed over a network. so i dont know why anyone is guiding me to stuff thats not about messages added to a transaction 14:39 -!- mrkent [~textual@unaffiliated/mrkent] has quit [Client Quit] 14:39 -!- mrkent [~textual@unaffiliated/mrkent] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 14:40 -!- mrkent [~textual@unaffiliated/mrkent] has quit [Client Quit] 14:40 < layman01> plus i only took a few seconds to see the word output mentioned a few times. i know that outputs can be used to write messages but again my question was about messages not using the output area 14:40 -!- mrkent [~textual@unaffiliated/mrkent] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 14:40 < gmaxwell> 14:11 < gmaxwell> layman01: the blockchain is NOT free file storage, it's carefully designed to avoid allowing people to dump their porn collections in it, if it were possible to do what you describe (it isn't as far as we know)-- we'd consider it a serious bug and would work diligently to fix it. 14:41 -!- mrkent [~textual@unaffiliated/mrkent] has quit [Client Quit] 14:41 < layman01> i know the morals. i know bitcoins ethos i know what its meant for. im asking about the possibility of adding data. 14:43 < gmaxwell> As far as we know it's not possible to do what you're asking. If, due to some phenominial bug, it were possible it would be a _serious_ bug and patches to block it would be issued as fast as possible. 14:44 < BlueMatt> layman01: have you seen pay-to-contract-hash? 14:44 < layman01> so is the only way to use another unused opcode (like segwit did).. but safeguarded against happening due to mining pools not having consensus to allow funky tx's into block 14:45 < layman01> bluematt, im looking while on here. but got interupted due to bip70 that didnt answer my question 14:48 < BlueMatt> layman01: there are lots of answers depending on what your actual use-case is....problem is youre asking for a solution to a specific question to which there is no answer.....maybe go to #bitcoin and try again except start by stating waht, exactly youre trying to do 14:48 -!- moli [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 14:50 < layman01> trying to see if there a way someone can fill the 'weight' area with bloat but not using 'outputs' to do it. theres a debate elsewhere, some say it can be done some say it cant. im just trying to figure who is right 14:50 -!- mol [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 14:51 < gmaxwell> You seem to be unable to take no for an answer, so I'm going to bet that you're going to remain unenlightened. 14:52 < layman01> its not a 'accept' no... its a why 'no' i need answering 14:52 < sipa> transactions consist of inputs and outputs. if you want to increase their size, you'd need to put it in either of those 14:52 < layman01> 'because bitcoin not designed that way' is an empty answer too 14:52 < gmaxwell> Because extra data just isn't permitted, it's ignored. Nodes understand the data that they're parsing and they'll ignore any extra data that isn't actually part of the transaction, stripping it out. 14:53 < gmaxwell> (or treating the whole transaction as corrupted, depending on what you did.) 14:54 < BlueMatt> layman01: ahh! see now, thats a question: the answer is "no, treating the witness space as 'free' isnt true - witnesses are counted just like the rest of the transaction and, really, should be seen as a part of the inputs, not extra data" 14:56 < gmaxwell> ^ by segwit nodes, by non-segwit nodes, segwit transactions aren't handled at all unless stripped of witness data-- they would be seen as corrupted if not witness stripped. 14:56 < luke-jr> if it's part of a block, it's actually impossible to add the extra data at all because after the locktime, it will begin parsing the subsequent transaction implicitly 14:56 < BlueMatt> that, too 14:56 < layman01> so the mechanism that prevents it is the parsing data into classes with known lengths of bytes for each element/namespace/variable and then ignoring/dropping the remainder it does not recognise 14:57 < sipa> right, nodes decode all messages they receive, and send them on in a form that the receiver understands 14:57 < gmaxwell> Yes, or, in some contexts treating it as corrupted and dropping the whole thing. Segwit blocks are handed to non-segwit nodes by first stripping out the witness data so they'll accept it. 14:57 < sipa> they're not just relaying the transactions or blocks as just bytes 14:57 < luke-jr> layman01: you can put anything inside the scripts within the transaction, but that doesn't change with segwit 14:57 < luke-jr> or rather, miners can* 14:58 < gmaxwell> The whole idea of a transaction as "bytes" is a too limited mental model. It would be like understanding numbers as a series of strokes on paper. :) Bytes are one way of representing a transaction, but when a transaction comes in the bytes are decoded and turned into a different in memory form. Then when they go out again they're converted back into bytes in a form sutiable for the reciever. 15:02 < nanotube> BlueMatt: ? >_> 15:02 < BlueMatt> nanotube: better now :) 15:03 < layman01> so baseblock/base class (not using official terms) only has [txid][incount][in][val][outcount][out][value] and witness class has [wtxid][witcount][witness][nlocktime] and nothing can appear after nlocktime on the blockchain because of it.. right? 15:03 < layman01> just double checking 15:03 < sipa> layman01: transactions don't contain a txid 15:03 < sipa> the txid is just the hash of the (non-witness) serialization of the transaction 15:03 < BlueMatt> also witnesses dont have witcount 15:04 < BlueMatt> its implicit 15:04 < BlueMatt> or wtxid... 15:06 < layman01> ok i know in the [output] different op codes can be set at different lengths. is there any opcode or any other class variable that has adjustable/non restricted lengths 15:06 < sipa> layman01: you should just study the documentation on this 15:06 < nanotube> BlueMatt: ah ok :) 15:07 < BlueMatt> nanotube: literally 2 seconds after that gribble re-connected 15:07 < sipa> layman01: https://bitcoin.org/en/developer-guide 15:07 < nanotube> heh good timing :) 15:07 < layman01> sipa i would but the documentation is very loose and all over the place, 15:08 < sipa> layman01: you're free to help improve things, but this is not the place to ask for a basic explanation 15:08 < sipa> this channel is for discussing development 15:09 < luke-jr> layman01: there aren't different classes 15:11 < layman01> i heard it wasnt. i was told this place is where the close minded devs live who only think about themselves, just like the mailing list. just like every other place that the devs hang out in. like its a cabin fever experience where devs only want to speak to other devs and only agree with other devs and never talk to the community... 15:11 < sipa> layman01: please 15:11 < layman01> but goodnight anyway 15:11 < sipa> layman01: http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/ 15:11 < luke-jr> layman01: many of us are also in #bitcoin 15:11 < sipa> i answer questions there on a daily basis 15:12 -!- layman01 [b0fe04f4@gateway/web/freenode/ip.176.254.4.244] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 15:37 -!- dervisher [32f2dd35@gateway/web/freenode/ip.50.242.221.53] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 15:45 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] TheBlueMatt opened pull request #9225: Fix some benign races (master...2016-11-lockfixes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9225 15:58 -!- parsimony_ [46a01f53@gateway/web/freenode/ip.70.160.31.83] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 16:00 < parsimony_> hi Bitcoin Core devs and affiliated parties... has anyone with some reputation considered offering the big-blockists a method of saving face while coming around to support Segwit? 16:01 < parsimony_> They might actually *want* to support it but can't do to the need to have an out that will allow the saving of face 16:01 < parsimony_> i thought this would be the most appropriate forum for floating this kind of suggestion, i dunno 16:09 < BashCo_> I'm seeing people just look into the benefits for themselves instead of listening to bad info. Most people just want more tx capacity and they don't care about the details. Segwit will increase tx volume more than BIP109 and is backward compatible. 16:10 < BashCo_> https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/01/26/segwit-benefits/ 16:10 < BashCo_> https://medium.com/@WhalePanda/segwit-eli5-misinformation-faq-19908ceacf23#.sri28gl23 16:10 < luke-jr> parsimony_: off-topic here, #bitcoin 16:14 -!- kadoban [~mud@unaffiliated/kadoban] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 16:18 -!- parsimony_ [46a01f53@gateway/web/freenode/ip.70.160.31.83] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 16:31 -!- roidster [~chatzilla@71-84-219-33.dhcp.ccmn.ca.charter.com] has quit [Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.92 [SeaMonkey 2.39/20151103191810]] 16:39 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] mruddy closed pull request #9180: WIP: remove script checking dependency on checkpoints v2 (master...isburied) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9180 16:47 -!- wasi [~wasi@gateway/tor-sasl/wasi] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 16:47 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 17:01 -!- wasi [~wasi@gateway/tor-sasl/wasi] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 17:23 -!- mrkent [~textual@unaffiliated/mrkent] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 17:33 -!- mrkent [~textual@unaffiliated/mrkent] has quit [] 17:36 -!- dervisher [32f2dd35@gateway/web/freenode/ip.50.242.221.53] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 17:48 -!- juscamarena [~justin@47.148.176.74] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 17:50 -!- juscamarena [~justin@47.148.176.74] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 18:15 < dcousens> https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5f23kk/can_i_selectively_pay_segwitsignalling_miners_a/dah0w7m/ - an interesting thought... if that was soft-forked in, would it have any negative implications? It would allow the economic majority to vote with fees no? 18:16 < dcousens> (may be the wrong channel... #bitcoin?) 18:16 < gmaxwell> bad incentives, signal segwit, take the fees, don't actually enforce it later. 18:17 < dcousens> if you signal though, it would still trigged BIP9 though? 18:17 < dcousens> trigger* 18:18 < sipa> dcousens: we don't want BIP9 to trigger if isn't actually enforced... 18:19 < dcousens> sipa: so the concern would be miners not producing segwit blocks after activation? 18:19 < dcousens> (for example) 18:20 < dcousens> I mean, wouldn't the fee market carry it on past that point, you'd miss out on fees post-activation since you wouldn't be able to include certain transactions without segwit blocks? 18:26 < gmaxwell> People, perhaps even you, are mistaking version bits for a vote. It isn't from an engineering perspective, and can't be. A vote is a statement of what you want. What versionbits are attempting to do is quorum sensing-- trying to determine what you will do-- so that all participants can do it at once. For it to achieve its end there should be little to no incentive to dishonestly signal it. 18:28 < gmaxwell> If in my efforts to contact users of the system or the mailing list thread had indicated that it wasn't universally (or nearly so) wanted, I would have opposed including it. The assumption is that it's wanted. Purpose of BIP9 is so that it will only happen once miners would actually enforce it. 18:42 -!- Ylbam [uid99779@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-nbxkwztwdrcjwlfr] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity] 18:56 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] gmaxwell opened pull request #9226: Remove fNetworkNode. (master...node_is_this_i_dont_even) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9226 19:31 < luke-jr> if it was just a minor fee difference, it might be little enough to not produce too-bad false-signal incentives, but rejecting the entire tx is too much IMO 19:41 < bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] pstratem opened pull request #9227: Make nWalletDBUpdated atomic to avoid a potential race. (master...2016-11-26-nwalletdbupdated-race) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9227 19:43 < luke-jr> (especially if it can function inverted) 19:53 -!- harrymm [~wayne@104.222.140.43] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 19:56 -!- jcorgan [~jcorgan@unaffiliated/jcorgan] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 19:57 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 19:58 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 19:59 -!- fengling [~fengling@223.223.187.142] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds] 20:13 -!- justanotheruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 20:16 -!- justan0theruser [~justanoth@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 20:26 -!- fengling [~fengling@223.223.187.142] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 20:27 < dcousens> gmaxwell: I understand it isn't a vote, but, it is my understanding that the 'economic consensus' should guide the miners into what they should support (political incentives aside), my point in referencing the above was to discuss the idea of how users could help inform miners, economically, what they wanted to be using [and be supported] 20:28 < gmaxwell> Sure. but they can send email-- point being, gimmicks are no good if they create bad incentives. 20:57 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 20:58 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 20:58 -!- kadoban [~mud@unaffiliated/kadoban] has quit [Quit: bye] 21:03 -!- gijensen [~gijensen@gijensen.xyz] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 21:29 -!- d9b4bef9 [~d9b4bef9@web419.webfaction.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 21:30 -!- d9b4bef9 [~d9b4bef9@web419.webfaction.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 21:40 -!- arowser [~quassel@106.120.101.38] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds] 21:41 -!- arowser [~quassel@106.120.101.38] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 21:44 -!- arowser [~quassel@106.120.101.38] has quit [Client Quit] 21:45 -!- arowser [~quassel@106.120.101.38] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 21:53 -!- go1111111 [~go1111111@104.200.154.100] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 21:59 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 22:00 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 22:18 -!- jtimon [~quassel@186.31.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds] 22:47 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 22:47 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has quit [Client Quit] 22:50 -!- sanada [~bitktn@36-2-119-80.chiba.ap.gmo-isp.jp] has quit [] 22:59 -!- sanada [~bitktn@36-2-119-80.chiba.ap.gmo-isp.jp] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 23:27 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 23:28 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 23:36 -!- wvr [~wvr@21.red-83-32-74.dynamicip.rima-tde.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 23:37 -!- wvr [~wvr@189.red-83-33-12.dynamicip.rima-tde.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 23:41 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 23:42 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev