--- Day changed Wed Dec 03 2014
00:00 < phantomcircuit> sl01, no
00:00 < sl01> does bitcoin mining not becoming all money laundering rely on the state :P  well i guess money laundering relies on the state as well so...
00:00 < op_null> that's not really wizards material. it's not very good laundering if you just shove money into a company and they just pay you the same money back.
00:01 < sl01> true, sorry
00:04 -!- kgk [~kgk@173-8-166-105-SFBA.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:05 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
00:05 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:05 -!- gues___ [gues@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-jdriakmuijcvhyoq] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
00:06 -!- davejh [~davejh@host86-156-141-169.range86-156.btcentralplus.com] has quit []
00:07 -!- gues [~gues@193.138.219.233] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:07 -!- Transisto [~Trans@modemcable026.188-59-74.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
00:08 -!- Transisto [~Trans@modemcable026.188-59-74.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:08 -!- Transisto [~Trans@modemcable026.188-59-74.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Excess Flood]
00:08 -!- Transisto [~Trans@modemcable026.188-59-74.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:10 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
00:12 -!- vmatekole [~vmatekole@e181252115.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
00:13 -!- DougieBot5000 [~DougieBot@unaffiliated/dougiebot5000] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
00:26 -!- Baz___ [~Baz@modemcable147.31-81-70.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Read error: Connection timed out]
00:27 -!- Baz___ [~Baz@modemcable147.31-81-70.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:28 -!- Baz___ [~Baz@modemcable147.31-81-70.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded]
00:28 -!- Baz___ [~Baz@modemcable147.31-81-70.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:29 -!- Baz___ [~Baz@modemcable147.31-81-70.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded]
00:29 -!- Baz___ [~Baz@modemcable147.31-81-70.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:30 -!- Baz___ [~Baz@modemcable147.31-81-70.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded]
00:30 -!- davejh69 [~davejh69@host86-156-141-169.range86-156.btcentralplus.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:30 -!- Baz___ [~Baz@modemcable147.31-81-70.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:31 -!- Baz___ [~Baz@modemcable147.31-81-70.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded]
00:32 -!- Baz___ [~Baz@modemcable147.31-81-70.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:32 -!- Baz___ [~Baz@modemcable147.31-81-70.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded]
00:33 -!- Baz___ [~Baz@modemcable147.31-81-70.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:33 -!- Baz___ [~Baz@modemcable147.31-81-70.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded]
00:35 -!- Baz___ [~Baz@modemcable147.31-81-70.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:35 -!- Baz___ [~Baz@modemcable147.31-81-70.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded]
00:36 -!- Baz___ [~Baz@modemcable147.31-81-70.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:37 -!- davejh69 [~davejh69@host86-156-141-169.range86-156.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Quit: Lingo: www.lingoirc.com]
00:40 -!- jb55 [~jb55@S0106f46d049a0b83.vc.shawcable.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
00:40 -!- davejh69 [~davejh69@host86-156-141-169.range86-156.btcentralplus.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:43 -!- Baz___ [~Baz@modemcable147.31-81-70.mc.videotron.ca] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
00:43 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:43 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has quit [Changing host]
00:43 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:44 -!- Baz___ [~Baz@modemcable147.31-81-70.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:49 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
00:56 -!- Logicwax [~Logicwax@c-50-161-23-192.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: rm -rf /]
01:05 -!- andy-logbot [~bitcoin--@wpsoftware.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:05  * andy-logbot is logging
01:10 -!- soundx [~soundx@gateway/tor-sasl/soundx] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:11 -!- vmatekole [~vmatekole@p5DC47B71.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:14 -!- jtimon [~quassel@67.pool85-53-142.dynamic.orange.es] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:16 -!- woah [~woah@199-241-202-232.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
01:17 -!- Profreid [~Profreitt@37.203.209.10] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:19 -!- jtimon [~quassel@67.pool85-53-142.dynamic.orange.es] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
01:19 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:20 -!- Logicwax [~Logicwax@c-50-161-23-192.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:26 -!- bramm [~bram@99-75-88-206.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
01:27 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
01:40 -!- Aquent2 [~Aquent@gateway/tor-sasl/aquent] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:42 -!- kristofferR [~kristoffe@208.37-191-147.fiber.lynet.no] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:42 -!- Logicwax [~Logicwax@c-50-161-23-192.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: rm -rf /]
01:44 -!- c0rw|sleep is now known as c0rw|away
01:47 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:47 -!- Logicwax [~Logicwax@c-50-161-23-192.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:50 -!- kgk [~kgk@173-8-166-105-SFBA.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
01:53 -!- hearn [~mike@84-75-198-85.dclient.hispeed.ch] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:55 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
02:02 -!- roconnor [~roconnor@e120-pool-d89a6a71.brdbnd.voicenetwork.ca] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:04 -!- roconnor__ [~roconnor@e120-pool-d89a7ece.brdbnd.voicenetwork.ca] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
02:09 -!- nsh [~xeb@wikipedia/nsh] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
02:10 -!- TonyClifton [~TonyClift@gateway-nat.fmrib.ox.ac.uk] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:13 -!- vmatekole [~vmatekole@p5DC47B71.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
02:21 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:22 -!- Graet [~Graet@unaffiliated/graet] has quit [Quit: ZNC - http://znc.in]
02:24 -!- nsh [~xeb@wikipedia/nsh] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:28 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:29 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
02:30 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:30 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has quit [Changing host]
02:30 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:31 -!- rusty [~rusty@ppp14-2-22-51.lns21.adl2.internode.on.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:31 -!- rusty [~rusty@ppp14-2-22-51.lns21.adl2.internode.on.net] has quit [Changing host]
02:31 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:35 -!- Graet [~Graet@unaffiliated/graet] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:36 -!- lclc is now known as lclc_bnc
02:37 -!- lclc_bnc is now known as lclc
02:43 -!- btc__ [sid40798@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-yxpnlvapslztyvql] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
02:43 -!- btc__ [sid40798@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-vgvhkzjvzwmyzofz] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:48 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@g225050222.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
02:49 -!- wallet421 [~wallet42@g225050222.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:49 -!- wallet421 is now known as wallet42
02:51 -!- yoleaux [~yoleaux@xn--ht-1ia18f.nonceword.org] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:51 -!- c0rw|awa_ [~c0rw1n@91.176.85.68] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:53 -!- tobyai [~toby@113x43x131x34.ap113.ftth.ucom.ne.jp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:54 -!- c0rw|away [~c0rw1n@91.176.95.227] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
02:56 -!- samson2 is now known as samson_
03:07 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
03:07 -!- kristofferR [~kristoffe@208.37-191-147.fiber.lynet.no] has quit [Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com]
03:15 -!- soundx [~soundx@gateway/tor-sasl/soundx] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
03:15 -!- devrandom [~devrandom@gateway/tor-sasl/niftyzero1] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
03:15 -!- rfreeman_w [~rfreeman@gateway/tor-sasl/rfreemanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
03:15 -!- Graftec [~Graftec@gateway/tor-sasl/graftec] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
03:16 -!- Aquent2 [~Aquent@gateway/tor-sasl/aquent] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
03:16 -!- Dr-G3 [~Dr-G@gateway/tor-sasl/dr-g] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
03:16 -!- adlai [~Adlai@gateway/tor-sasl/adlai] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
03:16 -!- eristisk [~eristisk@gateway/tor-sasl/eristisk] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
03:16 -!- mortale [~mortale@gateway/tor-sasl/mortale] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
03:18 -!- orik [~orik@50-46-132-219.evrt.wa.frontiernet.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:20 -!- Shiftos [~shiftos@gateway/tor-sasl/shiftos] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
03:21 -!- cletus11 [~cletus11@99-172-47-87.lightspeed.tblltx.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
03:22 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
03:24 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:44 -!- zibbo_ [zibbo@zibbo.oldskool.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
03:45 -!- zibbo [zibbo@zibbo.oldskool.fi] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:46 -!- d4de [~d4de@unaffiliated/d4de] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
03:48 -!- Profreid [~Profreitt@37.203.209.10] has quit [Quit: Profreid]
03:54 -!- tobyai [~toby@113x43x131x34.ap113.ftth.ucom.ne.jp] has left #bitcoin-wizards []
03:54 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:54 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
03:56 -!- nsh_ [~nsh@wikipedia/nsh] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:01 -!- d4de [~d4de@unaffiliated/d4de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:04 -!- lnovy [~lnovy@2002:4d57:f055::1] has quit [Quit: Got root?]
04:08 -!- zz_lnovy [~lnovy@2002:4d57:f055::1] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:09 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
04:09 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:09 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has quit [Changing host]
04:09 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:10 < op_null> mildly interesting, there's an altcoin that has decided to make mining non outsourceable partly by padding the whole block out to the maximum size and then hashing the whole thing. lets see how that works out for them.
04:11 -!- zz_lnovy is now known as lnovy
04:11 -!- lnovy [~lnovy@2002:4d57:f055::1] has quit [Excess Flood]
04:12 -!- zz_lnovy [~lnovy@2002:4d57:f055::1] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:12 < op_null> they did some mildly interesting stuff by modifying OP_CHECKSIG to do public key recovery from transactions, and then bundled it all up with X11 super secure hashing :P
04:12 -!- zz_lnovy is now known as lnovy
04:14 < fluffypony> lol X11
04:14 < Luke-Jr> op_null: non-outsourcable, eh? what happens when I just use a midstate?
04:15 < op_null> Luke-Jr: eh, there's other bits too like having the coinbase transaction pubkey sign the block. here's a malware-free overview of it, anyway. https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=en&q=cache%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fspreadcoin.net%2Ffiles%2FSpreadCoin-WhitePaper.pdf
04:19 -!- lnovy [~lnovy@2002:4d57:f055::1] has quit [Quit: Got root?]
04:21 < Luke-Jr> op_null: what stops the pool from signing after a solution is found?
04:21 < Luke-Jr> I don't see that in there
04:23 < op_null> Luke-Jr: I think that hashing stuff is done, and then the PoW is done on top of it. I couldn't quite work it out either. I presented it as humour not anything else.
04:24 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
04:24 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:24 < Luke-Jr> s/interesting/funny/ <.<
04:25 < op_null> good point.
04:25 < op_null> as soon as you see "X11" though you know it's a joke.
04:28 -!- lnovyz [~lnovy@2002:4d57:f055::1] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:28 -!- lnovyz is now known as lnovy
04:29 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@ip1f11200b.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:31 -!- hashtagg [~hashtagg_@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:31 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
04:32 -!- Quanttek_ [~quassel@ip1f112476.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:32 -!- Quanttek_ [~quassel@ip1f112476.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
04:34 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@ip1f11200b.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
04:36 -!- vmatekole [~vmatekole@f049255056.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:38 -!- lnovy [~lnovy@2002:4d57:f055::1] has quit [Quit: Got root?]
04:39 -!- zz_lnovy [~lnovy@2002:4d57:f055::1] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:39 -!- zz_lnovy is now known as lnovy
04:43 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@ip1f12e9aa.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:46 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@ip1f12e9aa.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
04:46 < nubbins`> gross, had a buyer for my genesis block newspaper, now he's gone missing ;/
04:47 -!- hashtagg [~hashtagg_@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
04:48 -!- hashtagg [~hashtagg_@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:49 -!- Emcy_ [~MC@unaffiliated/mc1984] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:49 -!- tacotime [~mashkeys@198.52.200.63] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
04:51 -!- Emcy [~MC@unaffiliated/mc1984] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
04:52 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@2a02:8108:d00:870:2d0b:ffcf:d5b3:4347] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:56 -!- koshii [~0@c-68-58-151-30.hsd1.in.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: leaving]
04:56 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@2a02:8108:d00:870:2d0b:ffcf:d5b3:4347] has quit [Client Quit]
04:56 -!- koshii [~0@c-68-58-151-30.hsd1.in.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:04 -!- zibbo [zibbo@zibbo.oldskool.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
05:09 -!- instagibbs [32f65962@gateway/web/freenode/ip.50.246.89.98] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
05:13 -!- vmatekole [~vmatekole@f049255056.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
05:17 -!- zibbo [zibbo@zibbo.oldskool.fi] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:22 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:22 -!- hashtagg [~hashtagg_@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
05:31 -!- jtimon [~quassel@67.pool85-53-142.dynamic.orange.es] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:33 -!- nsh [~xeb@wikipedia/nsh] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
05:40 -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:41 -!- prodatalab [~prodatala@c-69-254-45-177.hsd1.fl.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
05:41 -!- grandmaster [dansmith3@knows.the.cops.are.investigat.in] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
05:43 -!- prodatalab [~prodatala@c-69-254-45-177.hsd1.fl.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:45 -!- jgarzik [~jgarzik@unaffiliated/jgarzik] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
05:55 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
05:55 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:58 -!- jgarzik [~jgarzik@c-24-126-220-68.hsd1.ga.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:58 -!- jgarzik [~jgarzik@c-24-126-220-68.hsd1.ga.comcast.net] has quit [Changing host]
05:58 -!- jgarzik [~jgarzik@unaffiliated/jgarzik] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:59 -!- Greed [~Greed@unaffiliated/greed] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:59 -!- mkarrer [~mkarrer@164.Red-88-18-137.staticIP.rima-tde.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
06:00 -!- mkarrer [~mkarrer@50.Red-88-1-125.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:00 -!- webdeli [~projects@bit1642888.lnk.telstra.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
06:09 -!- davejh69 [~davejh69@host86-156-141-169.range86-156.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Quit: Be back later ...]
06:14 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
06:15 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:15 -!- lclc is now known as lclc_bnc
06:21 -!- davejh69 [~davejh69@host86-156-141-169.range86-156.btcentralplus.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:27 -!- jps [~Jud@cpe-74-72-116-143.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:33 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
06:33 -!- coiner [~linker@113.161.87.238] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
06:35 -!- lclc_bnc is now known as lclc
06:35 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:37 -!- kyletorpey [~kyle@c-24-131-0-5.hsd1.va.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:41 -!- vmatekole [~vmatekole@e182062152.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:42 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
06:43 -!- vmatekole [~vmatekole@e182062152.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Client Quit]
06:43 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:45 -!- tdlfbx [~bsm117532@172-0-174-200.lightspeed.cicril.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:46 -!- jgarzik [~jgarzik@unaffiliated/jgarzik] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
06:47 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
06:51 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:51 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has quit [Changing host]
06:51 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:55 -!- vmatekole [~vmatekole@e182062152.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:56 -!- jgarzik [~jgarzik@c-24-126-220-68.hsd1.ga.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:56 -!- jgarzik [~jgarzik@c-24-126-220-68.hsd1.ga.comcast.net] has quit [Changing host]
06:56 -!- jgarzik [~jgarzik@unaffiliated/jgarzik] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:02 -!- coiner [~linker@1.52.191.96] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:03 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
07:03 -!- xeb [~xeb@46.233.116.196] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:13 -!- xeb [~xeb@46.233.116.196] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
07:14 -!- nsh [~xeb@wikipedia/nsh] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:26 -!- cbeams_ [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:26 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
07:31 -!- nsh [~xeb@wikipedia/nsh] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
07:36 -!- DougieBot5000 [~DougieBot@unaffiliated/dougiebot5000] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:41 -!- cbeams_ [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
07:41 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:41 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has quit [Changing host]
07:41 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:45 -!- cbeams_ [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:47 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
07:51 -!- tacotime [~mashkeys@198.52.200.63] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:51 -!- nsh [~xeb@46.233.116.18] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:51 -!- hearn [~mike@84-75-198-85.dclient.hispeed.ch] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
07:51 -!- cbeams_ [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
07:52 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:57 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
08:03 -!- TonyClifton [~TonyClift@gateway-nat.fmrib.ox.ac.uk] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
08:07 -!- Baz__ [~Baz@modemcable147.31-81-70.mc.videotron.ca] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:08 -!- lclc is now known as lclc_bnc
08:11 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:12 -!- nsh [~xeb@46.233.116.18] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
08:19 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
08:20 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:21 -!- cbeams_ [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:21 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
08:23 -!- cbeams_ [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
08:28 -!- lclc_bnc is now known as lclc
08:31 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:31 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has quit [Changing host]
08:31 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:31 -!- TonyClifton [~TonyClift@gateway-nat.fmrib.ox.ac.uk] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:31 -!- bramm [~bram@99-75-88-206.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:39 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
08:39 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:41 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:41 -!- skyraider [uid41097@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-fdhtsytkdqjpbfef] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:44 -!- cbeams_ [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:44 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
08:45 -!- cbeams_ [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
08:46 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:46 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has quit [Changing host]
08:46 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:48 -!- ryanxcharles [~ryanxchar@2601:9:4680:dd0:54c4:26f9:c7b8:a199] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
08:48 -!- user7779078 [~user77790@ool-4354b720.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:57 -!- xeb [~xeb@host213-123-15-175.range213-123.btcentralplus.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:00 < bramm> gmaxwell, A number of those things look like serious antipatterns from my experience with programming, but crypto/security code is a bit special. It seems a bit nuts to be writing servers which are supposed to be secure in C though.
09:03 < tromp_> what language would be less nuts, bramm?
09:03 -!- zooko [~user@174-16-237-135.hlrn.qwest.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:06 < sipa> well there is one advantage that lower-level languages have which is relevant (not that i disagree that there are dangers too), namely tight control over resources (in particular, languages with strong reliance on garbage collection are really hard to reason about)
09:06 < sipa> you don't want to have perfectly ok average case memory usage, and then some attack on the network which does nothing more than blow up the memory usage of every node in the system
09:07 < bramm> tromp_, python
09:07 < bramm> or java
09:09 < tromp_> i thought you were gonna say Rust
09:09 < sipa> Rust seems a very hopeful combination between safety guarantees and resource guarantees
09:09 < bramm> I'm not familiar with rust
09:09 < sipa> but i'm not very familiar with it, and it seem not very mature yet either
09:10 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
09:10 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:13 -!- atgreen [~user@CPE687f74122463-CM84948c2e0610.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
09:14 -!- nsh- [~lol@2001:41d0:8:c2da::1337] has quit [Changing host]
09:14 -!- nsh- [~lol@wikipedia/nsh] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:14 -!- vmatekole [~vmatekole@e182062152.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
09:14 -!- vmatekol_ [~vmatekole@e182062152.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:14 < bramm> Python has ref counted garbage collection with mark and sweep as a back-stop. In practice it's rare for it to behave any differently than it would if you wrote the same thing in C++11, and in cases where it does the mark and sweep is probably saving your ass from a bug
09:14 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
09:16 < sipa> using c++11 naively with standard containers is indeed not that much better (it'll copy data structures all over the place, allocate where you don't expect things, and if you're using shared_ptr or equivalents it's really just refcounting anyway)
09:18 < tacotime> ehm, haven't there been a lot of memory expansion ddos attacks on bitcoind though? eg getutxos
09:19 < tacotime> or maybe i misread and you weren't antagonising gc-rich (hehe) languages
09:19 < bramm> Yes the modern approach is to use a lot of either ref counted pointers or unique pointers, for the same practical software development reasons you have in higher level languages
09:20 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:20 < sipa> tacotime: bitcoin is by no means perfect wrt to guaranteeing resource limits
09:20 -!- ryanxcharles [~ryanxchar@162.245.22.162] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:21 < sipa> i'm just making the general observation that using higher-level languages make it generally harder to reason about resources
09:21 < sipa> and c++ is higher-level in this regard :)
09:21 < bramm> You do have the nice feature of higher level languages that the crypto can be kept *very* encapsulated in a library. Perhaps it would be a good idea to have all handling of private crypto stuff happen in the library. Unfortunately you can't really help but have private keys be put into a string once in a while.
09:21 < bramm> ref counting is fairly good as far as resource usage goes, it doesn't make any fundamentally new edge cases like mark and sweep does
09:22 < sipa> well, the ultimate defense (but hardly optimal) against resource usage attacks is making the worst case equal to the average case
09:23 < sipa> and every optimization that doesn't actually improve the worst case doesn't actually help
09:24 < sipa> at least without making the attacker costlier
09:24 < andytoshi> most of the crypto is used in consensus code, we really really need that to be explicit
09:25 -!- prodatalab [~prodatala@c-69-254-45-177.hsd1.fl.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
09:26 < gmaxwell> tacotime: kinda weird that you cite an example of code we rejected there.
09:26 < andytoshi> (and actually C++ is not explicit enough, its weak typing has caused eg the SIGHASH_SINGLE bug)
09:26 < tacotime> gmaxwell: ah, didn't realize that didn't make it to master
09:26 < sipa> andytoshi: that's just sloppy programming; returning an error code as a hash is just totally broken
09:26 -!- prodatalab [~prodatala@c-69-254-45-177.hsd1.fl.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:26 < sipa> tacotime: it was, but never in a release (and it was controversial from the start...)
09:27 < andytoshi> sipa: sure, i'm just saying "totally broken" intersect "compiles" could be be a smaller set
09:27 < gmaxwell> tacotime: it was merged by mistake for a couple hours until people woke up.
09:27 < sipa> yeah, the person who merged it wasn't aware of some ongoing discussion about it still
09:27 < sipa> though that discussion was not about the resource usage problems of it, so maybe not all that relevant
09:31 < gmaxwell> Well, sort of circularly: it hadn't been reviewed because people had stopped on the architectural issues.
09:34 < bramm> How cleanly specced is the bitcoin protocol?
09:34 < bramm> Parsing is the #1 place where security problems come in, and sloppy formats are the #1 cause of parsing problems
09:35 < sipa> bramm: the p2p protocol is pretty well documented, but the consensus rules can't really be specified
09:35 < gmaxwell> We've never had a single issue related to that as far as I recall. The p2p protocol itself is pretty trivial.
09:36 < bramm> Not sure what you mean by 'consensus rules'
09:36 < andytoshi> bramm: almost everything in the block and transaction formats are fixed-width, there is a wiki page somewhere with everything explicitly written out
09:36 < sipa> bramm: the rules that determine which block is valid
09:37 < sipa> bramm: because even if we had a full specification that everyone agreed on that the consensus rules should be, if we would find that actual implementations on the network didn't follow that document... we'd need to update the document, because the alternative is requiring _everyone_ to change their software
09:37 < bramm> Fixed width has its advantaged and disadvantages. It works great as long as the practical values stay within range.
09:37 < gmaxwell> The cryptographic validation of the correctness of blocks. By "can't be specified", pieter means that basically every attribute of the validation down to a single bit is generally completely normative. Which doesn't lead to human comprehensible specification.
09:37 -!- soundx [~soundx@gateway/tor-sasl/soundx] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:37 -!- TonyClifton [~TonyClift@gateway-nat.fmrib.ox.ac.uk] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
09:37 < bramm> 'normative'?
09:37 < andytoshi> bramm: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_specification ... parsing is one thing that is very well-specced
09:37 -!- Shiftos [~shiftos@gateway/tor-sasl/shiftos] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:38 < sipa> bramm: every node must independently come to the exact same conclusion about which block is valid or not
09:38 < bramm> I view block validation as part of the spec.
09:38 < gmaxwell> bramm: every system must perform an identical or at least indistinguishable computation or the network forks.
09:38 -!- Graftec [~Graftec@gateway/tor-sasl/graftec] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:38 < sipa> you have no idea (really!) how nearly impossible that is from an engineering perspective
09:38 < bramm> Yes, that's something where I'd expect the de facto spec of what the standard codebase does to be the only thing which matters.
09:39 < sipa> rigfht, but the point is that such a spec can only be descriptive, and not prescriptive
09:39 < sipa> if the code was found to not match the document, the document would need to be updated
09:39 < andytoshi> https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/alts.pdf sections 6.0 and 6.1 talk a little bit about this
09:39 < bramm> Correct. Maybe you could explain that to the w3c
09:39 < sipa> because consistency is more important than correctness
09:40 -!- TonyClifton [~TonyClift@gateway-nat.fmrib.ox.ac.uk] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:40 < sipa> (well, excluding totally crazy bugs that would allow stealing money probably...)
09:40 < gmaxwell> It is not acceptable to be too permissive or too restrictive in almost any way. No hidden behavior additional or inconsistent limit is permitted, no hidden limit. You cannot refuse to handle something permitted becaue you don't have enough memory or something. etc.  Nonsensible garbage and 'error' cases need to be handled all exactly the same.
09:40 < andytoshi> lol i should make an alt with html transactions
09:40 < sipa> andytoshi: use JSONx
09:41 < sipa> bramm: we have had the network fork due to a default limit on the number of simultaneous locks bdb could hold
09:41 -!- devrandom [~devrandom@gateway/tor-sasl/niftyzero1] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:41 < gmaxwell> yadda yadda. Consensus systems have a higher set of annoying requirements over mearly distributed systems which can fail to interoperate but usually don't need to be completely lockstep and interop failures don't usually result in large scale meltdowns.
09:41 < sipa> bramm: when a new version switched to a different database engine, a fork occurred because old nodes didn't accept some block that did particularly many updates to the database
09:41 < gmaxwell> sipa: even the limited wouldn't have been so bad, if it were determinstic in how it was enforced. :)
09:42 < gmaxwell> (if we'd known that it was even hittable; ... number of locks bdb used depended on the layout of the data on disk)
09:42 < sipa> i don't think anyone even expected that number of locks to be effectively part of the network's consensus rules
09:42 < bramm> Yes, disagreements about how big updates are allowed to be is an issue. Relatedly  there's the very interesting limitation that each block can only be a megabyte.
09:43 < sipa> that's a very important limitation :)
09:43 < sipa> and it's a well-known rule too, unlike that bdb issue
09:43 < bramm> It cuts both ways
09:43 < gmaxwell> bramm: but not just updates, there are relatively few behaviors which cannot be turned into a network split if there is even the smallest difference.
09:43 < bramm> The lesson about bdb seems to be don't use bdb. They've been working on that thing for decades and still don't have really basic simple functionality working right.
09:44 < sipa> bramm: the block size limit sets a compromise between scalability of transaction volume and scalability of running a full node
09:44 < gmaxwell> bramm: missing the point there, the forking event was triggered by _elimiating_ bdb.
09:44 -!- Aquent2 [~Aquent@gateway/tor-sasl/aquent] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:45 < bramm> gmaxwell, Oh you mean the non-bdb nodes had more permissive acceptance criteria?
09:45 < sipa> bramm: a system with infinite transaction volume but only a google-size datacenter can validate is not more useful than the current banking system; a system which doesn't allow anyone but a big national banks to do transactions isn't more useful either
09:45 < bramm> sipa, I didn't say it's bad, I said it cuts both ways
09:45 < bramm> I understand the reasoning
09:45 < sipa> bramm: yes, i agree; just clarifying
09:45 < gmaxwell> Effectively fixing the 'bug' of BDB's mystical locking insanity, (where you could use 2x the locks expected from your transaction depending on the disk layout) made the fixed nodes (more) inconsistent with the rest of the network.
09:46 < bramm> gmaxwell, still triggered by weird implicit stuff in bdb. You want all limitations to be explicit rather than implicit.
09:46 < sipa> bramm: fully agree there
09:46 < sipa> (which is why we're happy to not use bdb in consensus code anymore :p)
09:46 -!- woah [~woah@75-101-111-82.dedicated.static.sonic.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:46 < gmaxwell> bramm: yes agreed, the point I was making was that BDB was bad and stupid and implicit, ... but the 'fixed' version was faulty.
09:47 < sipa> right; the new version was at fault for not mimicking the existing rules of the system
09:47 < bramm> Well yes, once the implicit behavior is part of the de facto spec you have a real problem on your hands.
09:47 < sipa> and the old version was buggy because it didn't do what people expected it to do
09:47 < gmaxwell> and in particular, doing so in an uncontrolled way.
09:47 < sipa> we've used such implicit things before in a positive way too
09:47 < sipa> for example compressed public keys were not known when satoshi designed the system, but every node accepted them, so we could just start using them
09:48 < gmaxwell> bramm: sadly thats always the case. There is always some implicit behavior, though you do say 'such' ... indeed, thats a pretty bad example.
09:48 < bramm> What's a compressed public key?
09:48 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
09:48 < sipa> one which only encodes the x coordinate of the elliptic curve point, and uses 33 bytes
09:48 < sipa> instead of encoding the x and y coordinates, for 65 bytes
09:48  * gmaxwell contines to hate the description 'compressed public key' considering the compression consists of a bit test and truncation.
09:48 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:49 < bramm> doesn't that make transactions bigger, because they have to include the missing information?
09:49 < sipa> there is no missing information
09:49 < gmaxwell> No, there is nothing missing.
09:49 < sipa> you can compute the y coordinate from the x coordinate
09:49 < Alanius> how about the sign of the y coordinate?
09:49 < gmaxwell> The x coordinate alone is sufficient (well, with one additional bit, which is provided)
09:49 < sipa> Alanius: that's why it's 33 and not 32 bytes :)
09:51 -!- woah [~woah@75-101-111-82.dedicated.static.sonic.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
09:51 < bramm> Very strange that the 'compressed' version wasn't how it was done to begin with
09:51 -!- adlai [~Adlai@gateway/tor-sasl/adlai] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:52 -!- woah [~woah@75-101-111-82.dedicated.static.sonic.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:52 < sipa> it wasn't how openssl encodes keys by default; that's all
09:52 < sipa> satoshi seems to just have used whatever openssl gave him
09:52 -!- lclc is now known as lclc_bnc
09:52 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
09:53 < bramm> sipa, Which leads to the question of why openssl does that, which probably has the answer 'because openssl'
09:54 < gmaxwell> Well lots of people are unaware of it. Most of the time EC math is written out using the full x/y.  Handling compressed points does require some more code. Also in some cases there were until recently patent considerations (which were themselves insane, considering that the first publication on ECC mentioned that you could send X only)
09:54 < sipa> bramm: there's also a reason why we're trying to get rid of the openssl dependency in consensus code :)
09:54 < gmaxwell> bramm: many protocols require x,y.  As an example, the OpenPGP spec for ECC (with the nist curves) prohibits point compression.
09:54 -!- xeb [~xeb@host213-123-15-175.range213-123.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
09:55 < bramm> gmaxwell, pgp is another example of something which one might not necessarily want to emulate
09:56 < bramm> sipa, the received wisdom on openssl seems to be that the insides are a greater horror than you imagine, if when you take into account that they're a greater horror than you imagine.
09:56 < gmaxwell> Yea, sure. Just pointing out the landscape.
09:56 < sipa> bramm: believe me, i disliked openssl before it was uncool :p
09:57 < gmaxwell> Agreed on openssl not being lovely (and we're long on the record of being unhappy with it); the burried headline is that most software is awful and full of holes.
09:57 < gmaxwell> As I mentioned in that bct thread; I don't consider my own software to be well tested until I've found a novel toolchain or system library bug.
09:58 < gmaxwell> Which I never fail to find.
09:58 < bramm> In bitcoin, when a utxo is locked on a preimage, does it specify which hash algorithm must be used beforehand?
09:58 < gmaxwell> the scriptpubkey specifies the hash algorithim used.
09:58 < bramm> Oh good
09:58 < Alanius> if it didn't ... you could just design a really bad hash function that produces the desired result
09:59 < bramm> so probably reasonable for interoperability is to support sha256 and sha3, also with specifying which hash function
10:00 < gmaxwell> the scriptPubKey is literally a bit of program for our hobbled forth like stack machine which must return true for the spend to be permitted, so hash preimage locking is a bit of code that does something like "OP_RIPEMD160 <hash> OP_EQUALVERIFY"
10:00 < bramm> Alanius, I'm thinking about the atomic transactions protocol. If different currencies supported different secure hash algorithms for the preimage, that would lead to a trivial and horrible attack
10:02 < bramm> Back on the subject of how the acceptance criteria has to be *exactly* the same
10:02 < bramm> Also the accepted lengths of the preimage string need to be the same
10:04 < gmaxwell> or tested, if there is an oppturnity for differences.
10:05 < gmaxwell> e.g. OP_SIZE 20 OP_LESSTHANOREQUAL OP_VERIFY OP_RIPEMD160 <hash> OP_EQUALVERIFY
10:06 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:06 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has quit [Changing host]
10:06 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:06 < tacotime> are there dangers to point compression?
10:07 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@ip1f12e9aa.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:08 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@ip1f12e9aa.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
10:08 < gmaxwell> it's a bijection. The dangers are that you implement handling it wrong (dangers that exist everwhere), and until recently that you might get harassed by certicom patent trolling in some applications. (though, their patent was far narrower than 'point compression' and likely invalid in any case)
10:09 < tacotime> ah
10:09 < gmaxwell> assuming you need the x,y in the verifier, it's slower than not.  Well: even if you have the alternative of doing your processing with x only, that ends up being slower than decompressing and working with the full coordinates.
10:11 < tacotime> well, pubkeys inclusion in scripts could be eliminated anyway if you just use the hash and signature to regenerate the full pubkey. but maybe that also has inherent dangers.
10:11 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
10:12 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:12 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has quit [Changing host]
10:12 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:12 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
10:12 < tacotime> i'm guessing it's also probably more expensive than even decompressing the compressed key.
10:12 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:12 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has quit [Changing host]
10:12 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:13 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
10:13 < gmaxwell> tacotime: There is a recently published patent application in that space (as in during 2012), it may well be invalid; but presumption of validity and all that.
10:13 < bramm> My approach to patent trolls is to tell them 'I fucked your mother and she sucked'
10:13 < gmaxwell> (oh sorry 2013)
10:14 < gmaxwell> In any case, it's a consideration.
10:14 < gmaxwell> tacotime: yes, and also requires some additional bits for the recover, and is also even easier to get wrong.
10:14 < bramm> As a general rule, you should always assume that anything you do is in principle already covered by some patent troll but that patent is invalid
10:14 < tacotime> gmaxwell: yeah, i figured the latter, heh.
10:15 -!- orik [~orik@50-46-132-219.evrt.wa.frontiernet.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
10:15 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@ip1f12e876.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:15 < tacotime> i guess end of the day the savings aren't huge in terms of space either, it's just num_transactions * constant
10:15 < gmaxwell> bramm: there is a difference between the undifferentiated mass of everything being patented and stuff which is actively enforced, though.   (I just mention that the patent is potentially invalid because the technique was published a long time ago, but I didn't do enough review to see what they were claiming for priority)
10:16 < gmaxwell> the certicom ecc stuff is somewhat notorious for good reason, even if you can successfully tell them to bugger off; dealing with it has a cost which is a consideration.
10:17 < kanzure> i wrote up some thoughts about a unique method of patent reform, https://groups.google.com/d/msg/openmanufacturing/vS4ju1VqXb0/jD_TZ8U47b4J
10:19 < bramm> When do the certicom ecc patents run out?
10:19 < gmaxwell> constantly.
10:20 < kanzure> in the department of weird stuff with reorgs, would it be helpful to have schemes where old/deep private keys are revealed (if the public address only had outputs specifically for the purposes of the current payment), such that anyone with a "stake" in having that transaction existing could sign (in the event of a reorg) the original transaction chain back into existence?
10:20 < kanzure> *in the event of a reorg and other scenarios of course
10:20 < kanzure> (since there's no way to make something reorg-only. that's not what i'm suggesting.)
10:20 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@ip1f12e876.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
10:21 < gmaxwell> I mean they have hundreds of patents, most are completely uninteresting over weird curves that sane people wouldn't use (well.. mostly targeting smartcard stuff that trades off security for power, not totally insane).  They have patents expiring all the time. There are quite a few more interesting ones expiring this year +/-.
10:21 -!- soundx [~soundx@gateway/tor-sasl/soundx] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
10:22 -!- bitbumper [~bitbumper@197.115.124.24.cm.sunflower.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:22 -!- soundx [~soundx@gateway/tor-sasl/soundx] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:22 < gmaxwell> EC in general is pretty solid patent wise. See the beautiful IETF foundations of EC RFC...
10:23 < kanzure> instead of giving a signed transaction, you would give the private keys to the outputs, and then a signed transaction can be made from those outputs (as long as the outputs total up to the correct/intended balance). really what needs to be preserved/secured is the destination of the payment- since the outputs are being spent anyway, you shouldn't care that someone else can sign a new transaction from those outputs to whatever address.
10:23 < kanzure> there's probably something impossible about this that i am overlooking
10:23 < kanzure> *from those outputs to that one address(es)
10:24 < gmaxwell> kanzure: yes that can be done, though it potentially results in finger pointing when a recipent decides to pass along keys instead of re-transacting an output.
10:24 -!- vmatekol_ [~vmatekole@e182062152.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
10:24 < gmaxwell> and, of coure, if someone reuse an address ... poof gone.
10:24 < kanzure> well my interest here is something like a concern with not being able to rely on everyone in the history of bitcoin transactions to re-sign their transactions in the event of a catastrophic reorg
10:25 < gmaxwell> It also demands a private channel between sender and reciever which is reasonable but bitcoin has made people lazy; and so they're overly depending on the consensus network for that purpoe.
10:25 < gmaxwell> er purpose.
10:25 < kanzure> instead of relying on people in the past who were involved in the transaction tree to sign things, i should be able to sign it myself based on my cumulative knowledge of uh.. private keys.. or some sort of restricted private key... or something..
10:25 < kanzure> right, i agree this would totes require a private channel of some kind
10:26 < gmaxwell> kanzure: I don't think thats reasonable in any case, I mean, ideally private keys should be staying inside HSMs. You're not going to successfully get people to reissue transactions in some huge reorg, they may not be able to do so.
10:26 < kanzure> exactly, but people who have recently received payments may be able to be motivated to try to re-sign old transactions if they have the capability to do so
10:27 < kanzure> your transaction tree may have involved some dead guy what now. etc.
10:28 < gmaxwell> kanzure: yea sure, but it also may involve people who just refuse, judgement proof unfindable, and already recieved theirs.  And having to keep keys _online_ to accomidate that is a constant security evil against a case which presumably can only happen if the system has already failed.
10:28 < kanzure> communicating private keys would be bad because that just means any alternative transaction can be signed, which isn't the point
10:29 < kanzure> so there might be some construct that would allow this behavior without being an actual private key
10:30 < kanzure> txin would probably have to be modified so that it's not just txid and vout.
10:34 -!- dgenr8 [~dgenr8@unaffiliated/dgenr8] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:34 -!- tdlfbx [~bsm117532@172-0-174-200.lightspeed.cicril.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
10:35 < kanzure> anyway using this other construct would mean that massive reorgs would not be detrimental
10:35 < kanzure> and would not imply total system failure (if adopted)
10:36 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@2a02:8108:d00:870:58bf:edb3:712c:b068] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:37 -!- zooko [~user@174-16-237-135.hlrn.qwest.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
10:38 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@2a02:8108:d00:870:58bf:edb3:712c:b068] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
10:38 < andytoshi> kanzure: what exactly would the key be restricted to? signing transactions whose output sets are the same as the original?
10:39 < kanzure> as long as txin is (txid, vout) that's not going to work
10:40 < kanzure> i don't know, have there been any proposals for more elaborate structs for txin?
10:40 < andytoshi> kanzure: it's not obvious to me what would work here, but i suspect that if you come up with something concrete you can do it by signing different parts of the tx with different keys, and having all keys within a transaction sign each other
10:41 < kanzure> when anything is changed in the transaction tree/history, txid changes, so txin becomes invalid, and allowing anyone to sign for any txid is obviously broken
10:41 -!- TonyClifton [~TonyClift@gateway-nat.fmrib.ox.ac.uk] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
10:41 < andytoshi> right
10:41 < andytoshi> in case of a reorg, the need to re-sign actually reflects the fact that the owner of the old coins needs to sign off on the new history, i.e. this is something that actually conceptually requires reauthorization
10:41 < andytoshi> i think
10:42 < kanzure> i am not sue if that is universally true. there may be a way to sign something that says "i am committing to this particular history and i am okay with any other competing history that says the same thing"
10:42 < kanzure> it is some sort of collaborative agreement about the direction of future-history or something (in concept at least) (not necessarily in current implementation)
10:43 -!- zooko [~user@c-75-70-204-109.hsd1.co.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:43 -!- atgreen [~user@out-on-187.wireless.telus.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:43 < kanzure> i agree that in some alternative histories there may be transactions that disappear or appear that change your solvency or something
10:43 < kanzure> but if you only use this certain class of transactions, then you may be protected from that?
10:45 < andytoshi> would the ability to reference outputs by scriptpubkey cover it?
10:46 -!- jb55 [~jb55@208.98.200.98] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:46 < andytoshi> there is some problem with that (other than the uniqueness requirement it puts on scriptpubkeys) that i never can remember..
10:46 -!- frankenmint [181544de@gateway/web/freenode/ip.24.21.68.222] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:47 -!- jb55_ [~jb55@208.98.200.98] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:48 < kanzure> possibly
10:49 < andytoshi> iirc i said at some point here that if i had an alt i would reference outputs that way, and somebody said "oh no, [bad thing] would happen"
10:49 < kanzure> i suspect a good solution will come out of further elucidation of "the need to re-sign actually reflects the fact that the owner of the old coins needs to sign off on the new history" and other properties or requirements of what the hell a transaction actually means
10:50 < andytoshi> yeah, absolutely. that's not something i can do off the top of my head (at least not while i'm doing other crypto afk :P)
10:51 -!- jb55 [~jb55@208.98.200.98] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
10:59 -!- hguux_ [sid17919@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-wjfilijhdgsmokts] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
11:00 -!- soundx [~soundx@gateway/tor-sasl/soundx] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
11:00 -!- soundx [~soundx@gateway/tor-sasl/soundx] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:00 -!- mr_burdell [~mr_burdel@unaffiliated/mr-burdell/x-7609603] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
11:02 -!- hguux_ [sid17919@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-xgvxhwtihrnfvncv] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:02 -!- mr_burdell [~mr_burdel@unaffiliated/mr-burdell/x-7609603] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:04 < kanzure> really the main thing you care aobut is preserving the ability of others that receive your bitcoin to continue to spend your bitcoin however they please in the future or however they already have chosen to spend it, to the extent that the system also preserves your ability to do the same.
11:04 < kanzure> *about
11:11 -!- OneFixt [~OneFixt@unaffiliated/onefixt] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:11 -!- soundx [~soundx@gateway/tor-sasl/soundx] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
11:11 -!- soundx [~soundx@gateway/tor-sasl/soundx] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:14 -!- vmatekole [~vmatekole@e182062152.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:16 -!- soundx [~soundx@gateway/tor-sasl/soundx] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
11:28 -!- instagibbs [32f65962@gateway/web/freenode/ip.50.246.89.98] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:28 < instagibbs> new arxiv paper from Cornell guy on mining as a prisoner's dilemma: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1411.7099v2.pdf
11:28 < instagibbs> new-ish
11:40 -!- Aquent2 is now known as Aquent
11:42 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@2a02:8108:d00:870:58bf:edb3:712c:b068] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:49 < gavinandresen> instagibbs: executive summary of that paper is: anybody-can-join-anonymously mining pools are probably doomed.  Not a terrible thing, in my opinion, it might drive more solo mining or more smaller ‘trusted circle of people’ pools.
11:49 < gavinandresen> … if it drives people to ‘cloud hashing’ then that’s bad, but I think we’re just about due for a bunch more big disastrous cloud hashing fails.
11:50 < instagibbs> let us hope
11:50 -!- woah [~woah@75-101-111-82.dedicated.static.sonic.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
11:51 < gavinandresen> also: Loi Luu has a paper under submission on the same subject; see https://twitter.com/gavinandresen/status/537247892252413952
11:53 < bramm> I don't know how many of you are in the bay area, but the weather out there SUCKS
11:54 < tromp_> i'll swap your bay area weather for my long island weather
11:54 < instagibbs> gavinandresen: interesting. Ghash is <20% these days, if you believe the numbers. Wonder how widespread the share stealing is today.
11:55 < gavinandresen> I’m headed to the bay area for a few days in a couple of weeks, I expect you to make it nice and warm and sunny by then.
11:56 < instagibbs> I'll swap too. East Coast has been disgusting all week
11:56 < lechuga_> there is no happy medium here
11:57 < bramm> gavinandresen, It is winter, and it's northern california, so it probably won't be sunny
11:58 < gavinandresen> bramm: summer is the foggy season in san francisco, winter was usually nice (i was in silicon valley from ’88 to ’96)
12:02 < zooko> Things are cold but dry and sunny, here in Colorado.
12:03 < bramm> tromp_, I claim California priviledge :-)
12:04 -!- instagibbs [32f65962@gateway/web/freenode/ip.50.246.89.98] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
12:06 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:06 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@chello084114181075.1.15.vie.surfer.at] has quit [Changing host]
12:06 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:06 -!- go1111111 [~go1111111@173.192.176.148] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
12:11 < bramm> Is it reasonable to call atomic transfers 'smart transactions'?
12:19 < bramm> They seem to be called that in the literature, so it would seem reasonable for a cryptocurrency to say it 'supports smart transactions' if it supports atomic transfers.
12:21 < bramm> Much as that might piss off the ethereum people
12:22 -!- go1111111 [~go1111111@162.244.138.37] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:29 -!- bit2017 [~linker@1.52.191.96] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:33 -!- coiner [~linker@1.52.191.96] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
12:36 < nsh-> i thought the bar for a smart transaction was the evaluation of at least one non-ledger input
12:36 < nsh-> or non-monetary input
12:38 -!- andytoshi [~andytoshi@wpsoftware.net] has quit [Changing host]
12:38 -!- andytoshi [~andytoshi@unaffiliated/andytoshi] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:38 -!- nsh- is now known as bnsh
12:44 -!- nubbins` [~leel@unaffiliated/nubbins] has quit [Quit: Quit]
12:45 -!- luny [~luny@unaffiliated/luny] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
12:45 < bramm> bnsh, I don't know what that means
12:45 < bramm> And doesn't a hash pre-image count as a 'non-ledger input'?
12:46  * bnsh reads more context
12:46 -!- bnsh is now known as nsh
12:46 -!- luny [~luny@unaffiliated/luny] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:47 < jgarzik> 'smart transaction' seems to be a new term.  'smart contract' and 'smart property' are known, and a bitcoin transaction is most often a smart contract in its entirety (at least until more advanced smart contract protocols appear)
12:47 < nsh> yeah, so an atomic transfer would be smart because it depend on some information not derived from previous txouts or signatures of private keys
12:48 < nsh> (but i'm not trying to suggest my vague understanding is a good working definition or anything)
12:48 -!- paveljanik [~Pavel@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
12:48 -!- nubbins` [~leel@unaffiliated/nubbins] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:48 -!- frankenmint [181544de@gateway/web/freenode/ip.24.21.68.222] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
12:50 < bramm> nsh, atomic transfers involve the revealing of a hash preimage
12:50  * nsh nods
12:50 -!- koshii [~0@c-68-58-151-30.hsd1.in.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
12:51 -!- luny [~luny@unaffiliated/luny] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
12:53 < bramm> And truth be known, atomic transfers may be the overwhelming bulk of smart transactions people might actually want
12:54 -!- luny [~luny@unaffiliated/luny] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:56 < nsh> well, people have a hard time wanting things of which they can't conceive
12:56 < nsh> but even still, very useful
12:59 -!- iambernie [~bernie@82-169-230-87.ip.telfort.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:59 < bramm> I'm hazy on what the problem is with transaction malleability. As long as a double-spend is prevented, where's the problem?
13:01 < lechuga_> crappy impls get confused
13:01 < bramm> Define 'crappy' and 'confused'
13:01 < lechuga_> is my observation
13:01 < bramm> I mean, as long as it's clear which utxo is used...
13:02 -!- koshii [~0@c-68-58-151-30.hsd1.in.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:02 < lechuga_> so i guess the gox exampel is a good one
13:02 < lechuga_> iirc they had an api endpoint which would show u 'stuck' txs
13:02 < bramm> I heard something about malleability in regards to gox, which might have been complete bullshit
13:03 < bramm> What is a 'stuck' transaction?
13:03 < lechuga_> not accepted by the network
13:03 < kanzure> mtgox could have easily been using txid as an id, but whether or not this caused mtgox's demise is another matter
13:03 < lechuga_> im really hazy as to what the root issue was
13:03 -!- paveljanik [~Pavel@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:03 < lechuga_> in nay case someone observed what the issue was
13:03 < andytoshi> lechuga_: the gox story was bullshit, but i have a writeup from when we believed it was true..
13:03 < lechuga_> any*
13:03 < andytoshi> lechuga_: https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/malleability-faq.pdf
13:04 < lechuga_> and recreated tha txs such that they were now relayble but had different hashes
13:04 < lechuga_> the*
13:04 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
13:04 < lechuga_> and presumably peopel were already refunded for their 'stuck' txs
13:04 < kanzure> bramm: one of the biggest problems with transaction malleability is that most bitcoin implementations (all of them) do not automatically re-create transactions that have become invalidated by a mutated transaction
13:04 < lechuga_> and now got double-paid out
13:04 < lechuga_> andytoshi: nice thx
13:04 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:05 < kanzure> any accepted mutant transaction will invalidate any other transactions that relied on the previous txid
13:05 < lechuga_> right and that
13:05 < kanzure> (because transactions reference prior outputs by txid)
13:07 < bramm> kanzure, but doesn't that only apply if the history gets reworked?
13:07 < kanzure> there are also other weirdo philosophical issues like "if a transaction history tree is practically identical to a prior transaction history tree, but the first origin transaction now has an extra input or extra output, should all of the transactions further in the tree be considered different now?"
13:07 < bramm> gox most likely fell for the 'oops we accidentally your whole balance' attack
13:07 < kanzure> transaction malleability applies during reorgs and even prior to inclusion in a block
13:08 < jgarzik> gox blamed malleability.  that claim is suspect.
13:08 < bramm> Well you probably shouldn't do transactions based on older transactions which aren't very deep
13:08 < kanzure> also, arguably malleability is not a protocol bug.
13:08 < lechuga_> yeah pls dont take my retelling of that story to imply it is factual
13:08 < kanzure> bramm: even the transactions you do on your own are malleable by others (even if they are not the signer)
13:09 < lechuga_> but it's an interesting example even if fictitious
13:09 < bramm> Okay, I've put the malleability FAQ on my list of shit to read
13:09 < lechuga_> heh
13:09 < bramm> kanzure, I can see how that's a problem, true
13:09 < kanzure> the only way to guarantee a transaction is never mutated is to never broadcast a transaction and never relay the transaction to anyone, ever
13:09 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
13:09 < bramm> I'm out for the day - going without my computer until this evening, laters everybody
13:10 -!- bramm [~bram@99-75-88-206.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
13:10  * kanzure checks that kanzure is not full of crap, https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/malleability-faq.pdf
13:11 < kanzure> "Therefore, malleating a transaction cannot reroute funds or invalidate
13:11 < kanzure> er, they can certainly invalidate future transactions
13:11 < kanzure> or i should say, dependent-future transactions...
13:13 < andytoshi> kanzure: so, the surrounding context of that document was that i had been sleeping 3 hours a day for about ten days, ever since the gox claims came out, explaining this stuff on irc
13:14 < andytoshi> and there was the usual irc burnout, plus i was really angry at them, and some people i knew had been screwed, and things were really emotionally charged
13:14 < andytoshi> so correctness is not guaranteed :)
13:15 < andytoshi> but the specific claim "malleating a tx cannot invalidate it" is right, it can't invalidate the tx itself
13:15 < andytoshi> well, that's not quite true, with SIGHASH flags you can make a tx which can be broken after the fact..
13:15 < kanzure> hrmm the way that transaction chains are structured or the transaction tree or whatever is sorta unfortunate, but an alternative is not obvious
13:16 -!- tdlfbx [~bsm117532@172-0-174-200.lightspeed.cicril.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:17 < kanzure> txin could reference a prior signaturehash instead of a prior txid?
13:17 < kanzure> oh, order of outputs can change hmm.
13:19 < kanzure> each output should be referenced by transaction signaturehash + output amount. nobody cares about the exact order...
13:20 < kanzure> oh.. that still doesn't work.
13:24 -!- TonyClifton [~TonyClift@cpc69058-oxfd26-2-0-cust984.4-3.cable.virginm.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:25 -!- woah [~woah@152.179.69.246] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:26 -!- tdlfbx [~bsm117532@172-0-174-200.lightspeed.cicril.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
13:26 -!- tdlfbx [~bsm117532@172-0-174-200.lightspeed.cicril.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:31 -!- Dizzle [~diesel@70.114.207.41] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:34 -!- paveljanik [~Pavel@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
13:35 -!- luny [~luny@unaffiliated/luny] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
13:35 -!- luny [~luny@unaffiliated/luny] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:39 -!- ebfull [~ebfull@c-76-120-40-34.hsd1.co.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
13:50 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:53 -!- nullbyte2 [~WW@cpe-66-68-54-206.austin.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:53 -!- nullbyte2 [~WW@cpe-66-68-54-206.austin.res.rr.com] has quit [Changing host]
13:53 -!- nullbyte2 [~WW@unaffiliated/loteriety] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:59 -!- hearn [~mike@84-75-198-85.dclient.hispeed.ch] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:04 -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:04 -!- orik [~orik@remote.snococpa.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:07 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
14:11 -!- Dizzle__ [~diesel@70.114.207.41] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:12 -!- hashtagg_ [~hashtag@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:12 -!- Dizzle [~diesel@70.114.207.41] has quit [Disconnected by services]
14:12 -!- Dizzle__ is now known as Dizzle
14:12 -!- AnoAnon [~AnoAnon@197.37.17.120] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:18 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@2a02:8108:d00:870:58bf:edb3:712c:b068] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
14:19 -!- jb55_ [~jb55@208.98.200.98] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
14:19 -!- jb55 [~jb55@208.98.200.98] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:23 -!- AnoAnon [~AnoAnon@197.37.17.120] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
14:24 -!- jb55 [~jb55@208.98.200.98] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
14:26 -!- soundx [~soundx@gateway/tor-sasl/soundx] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:28 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@g225050222.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
14:28 -!- soundx [~soundx@gateway/tor-sasl/soundx] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
14:28 -!- webdeli [~projects@42.39.233.220.static.exetel.com.au] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:28 -!- soundx [~soundx@gateway/tor-sasl/soundx] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:31 -!- d4de [~d4de@unaffiliated/d4de] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:33 -!- soundx [~soundx@gateway/tor-sasl/soundx] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
14:37 -!- jb55 [~jb55@208.98.200.98] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:40 -!- atgreen [~user@out-on-187.wireless.telus.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
14:44 -!- webdeli [~projects@42.39.233.220.static.exetel.com.au] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
14:45 -!- skyraider [uid41097@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-fdhtsytkdqjpbfef] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
14:46 -!- d4de [~d4de@unaffiliated/d4de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:59 -!- soundx [~soundx@gateway/tor-sasl/soundx] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:03 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:03 -!- soundx [~soundx@gateway/tor-sasl/soundx] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
15:10 -!- Dizzle [~diesel@70.114.207.41] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
15:13 -!- EasyAt [~EasyAt@unaffiliated/easyat] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
15:23 -!- Starduster_ [~Guest3@unaffiliated/starduster] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
15:23 -!- Starduster [~Guest3@unaffiliated/starduster] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:25 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:26 -!- NewLiberty [~NewLibert@99-48-178-219.lightspeed.irvnca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:30 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
15:32 -!- TonyClifton [~TonyClift@cpc69058-oxfd26-2-0-cust984.4-3.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
15:34 -!- webdeli [~projects@bit1642888.lnk.telstra.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:37 -!- TonyClifton [~TonyClift@cpc69058-oxfd26-2-0-cust984.4-3.cable.virginm.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:42 -!- user7779078 [~user77790@ool-4354b720.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
15:44 -!- c0rw|awa_ is now known as c0rw1n
15:44 -!- atgreen [~user@CPE687f74122463-CM84948c2e0610.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:44 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
15:44 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:45 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has quit [Client Quit]
15:50 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@gateway/tor-sasl/dr-g] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:53 -!- nullbyte_ [WW@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-qhapsifcjdgvruqw] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:53 -!- nullbyte_ [WW@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-qhapsifcjdgvruqw] has quit [Changing host]
15:53 -!- nullbyte_ [WW@unaffiliated/loteriety] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:53 -!- nullbyte_ [WW@unaffiliated/loteriety] has quit [Changing host]
15:53 -!- nullbyte_ [WW@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-qhapsifcjdgvruqw] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:53 -!- RoboTeddy [~roboteddy@173.247.202.131] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:53 -!- nullbyte_ is now known as Guest46653
15:56 -!- nullbyte2 [~WW@unaffiliated/loteriety] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
15:58 -!- Guest46653 [WW@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-qhapsifcjdgvruqw] has quit [Quit: leaving]
16:03 -!- zooko [~user@c-75-70-204-109.hsd1.co.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
16:04 -!- jtimon [~quassel@67.pool85-53-142.dynamic.orange.es] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
16:05 -!- woah [~woah@152.179.69.246] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
16:07 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
16:09 -!- TonyClifton [~TonyClift@cpc69058-oxfd26-2-0-cust984.4-3.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
16:10 -!- soundx [~soundx@gateway/tor-sasl/soundx] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:12 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
16:14 -!- soundx [~soundx@gateway/tor-sasl/soundx] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
16:14 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:21 -!- orik [~orik@remote.snococpa.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
16:35 -!- NewLiberty_ [~NewLibert@99-48-178-219.lightspeed.irvnca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:36 -!- NewLiberty [~NewLibert@99-48-178-219.lightspeed.irvnca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
16:37 -!- hearn [~mike@84-75-198-85.dclient.hispeed.ch] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
16:38 -!- NewLiberty__ [~NewLibert@99-48-178-219.lightspeed.irvnca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:40 -!- super3 [~Thunderbi@96-32-185-118.dhcp.gwnt.ga.charter.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:41 -!- NewLiberty_ [~NewLibert@99-48-178-219.lightspeed.irvnca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
17:00 -!- user7779078 [~user77790@ool-4354b720.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:01 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
17:10 -!- jps [~Jud@cpe-74-72-116-143.nyc.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: jps]
17:11 -!- DougieBot5000 [~DougieBot@unaffiliated/dougiebot5000] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
17:31 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:37 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
17:39 -!- jb55_ [~jb55@208.98.200.98] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:39 -!- jb55_ [~jb55@208.98.200.98] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
17:41 -!- ryanxcharles [~ryanxchar@162.245.22.162] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
17:41 -!- NewLiberty__ [~NewLibert@99-48-178-219.lightspeed.irvnca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
17:43 -!- jb55 [~jb55@208.98.200.98] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
17:57 -!- jb55 [~jb55@S0106f46d049a0b83.vc.shawcable.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:00 -!- NewLiberty__ [~NewLibert@99-48-178-219.lightspeed.irvnca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:02 -!- c0rw1n is now known as c0rw|zZz
18:09 -!- woah [~woah@142-254-26-6.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:11 < kanzure> http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/people/mickens/thesaddestmoment.pdf
18:11 < kanzure> "“How can you make a reliable computer service?” the presenter will ask in an innocent voice before continuing, “It may be difficult if you can’t trust anything and the entire concept of happiness is a lie designed by unseen overlords of endless deceptive power.” The presenter never explicitly says that last part, but everybody understands what’s happening. Making distributed systems reliable is inherently impossible; we ...
18:11 < kanzure> ... cling to Byzantine fault tolerance like Charlton Heston clings to his guns, hoping that a series of complex software protocols will somehow protect us from the oncoming storm of furious apes who have somehow learned how to wear pants and maliciously tamper with our network packets."
18:11 -!- zooko [~user@c-75-70-204-109.hsd1.co.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:12 < kanzure> "Figure 1: Typical Figure 2 from Byzantine fault paper: Our network protocol"
18:12 < kanzure> "Figure 2: Our new protocol is clearly better."
18:13 < kanzure> "The caption will say something like “Figure 2: Our network protocol.” The caption should really say, “One day, a computer wanted to issue a command to an online service. This simple dream resulted in the generation of 16 gajillion messages. An attacker may try to interfere with the reception of 1/f of these messages. Luckily, 1/f is much less than a gajillion for any reasonable value of f. Thus, at least 15 gajillion messages ...
18:13 < kanzure> ... will survive the attacker’s interference. These messages will do things that only Cthulu understands; we are at peace with his dreadful mysteries, and we hope that you feel the same way."
18:14 < zooko> ☺
18:15 < kanzure> "Every paper on Byzantine fault tolerance introduces a new kind of data consistency. This new type of consistency will have an ostensibly straightforward yet practically inscrutable name like “leap year triple-writer dirty-mirror asynchronous semiconsistency.” In Section 3.2 (“An Intuitive Overview”), the authors will provide some plainspoken, spiritually appealing arguments about why their system prevents triple-conflicted ...
18:15 < kanzure> ... write hazards in the presence of malicious servers and unexpected outbreaks of the bubonic plague. “Intuitively, a malicious server cannot lie to a client because each message is an encrypted, nested, signed, mutually-attested log entry with pointers to other encrypted and nested (but not signed) log entries.”"
18:15 < nsh> (it's probably easier to read from the pdf)
18:16 -!- Aquent [~Aquent@gateway/tor-sasl/aquent] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
18:17 < kanzure> too bad that this is from 2013
18:20 < gmaxwell> kanzure: I mentioned it here when it was first published I think.
18:20 < kanzure> i wonder if this brand of humor goes over the head of altcoin designers
18:22 < kanzure> definitely needs to be a cryptocurrency version. lots to be said...
18:34 -!- DougieBot5000 [~DougieBot@unaffiliated/dougiebot5000] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:34 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:36  * nsh smiles
18:36 -!- webdeli [~projects@bit1642888.lnk.telstra.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
18:38 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gateway/tor-sasl/dr-g] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:39 -!- webdeli [~projects@bit1642888.lnk.telstra.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:41 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@gateway/tor-sasl/dr-g] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
18:42 -!- op_null [~op_null@128.199.56.23] has left #bitcoin-wizards []
18:43 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
18:44 -!- woah [~woah@142-254-26-6.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
18:48 -!- Shiftos [~shiftos@gateway/tor-sasl/shiftos] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
18:53 -!- woah [~woah@142-254-26-6.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:02 -!- ryanxcharles [~ryanxchar@2601:9:4680:dd0:6961:8c49:da22:2a7e] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:05 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:07 -!- zooko [~user@c-75-70-204-109.hsd1.co.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
19:08 -!- zooko [~user@c-75-70-204-109.hsd1.co.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:16 -!- bitbumper [~bitbumper@197.115.124.24.cm.sunflower.com] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
19:18 -!- bitbumper [~bitbumper@197.115.124.24.cm.sunflower.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:22 -!- kyletorpey [~kyle@c-24-131-0-5.hsd1.va.comcast.net] has left #bitcoin-wizards []
19:32 < petertodd> sipa: I'm already booked to speak at the o'reilly bitcoin conference
19:32 < petertodd> sipa: (re: financial crypto conf)
19:34 -!- NewLiberty__ [~NewLibert@99-48-178-219.lightspeed.irvnca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
19:39 < gmaxwell> o'ra is running a bitcoin conference in parallel to FC? :-/
19:40 < kanzure> this is why we invented simultaneous streaming to two conferences at once
19:40 < kanzure> just got to get the schedules aligned for your slot
19:40 < tromp_> not in parallel, it ends jan 18
19:40 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:41 < kanzure> if it was in parallel and your speaking schedule was aligned then you could even accept questions over irc from both conferences
19:41 < tromp_> well before fc starts on jan 26
19:51 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
19:52 -!- instagibbs [6c1c1eb9@gateway/web/freenode/ip.108.28.30.185] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:52 -!- instagibbs [6c1c1eb9@gateway/web/freenode/ip.108.28.30.185] has quit [Client Quit]
20:01 -!- Dr-G3 [~Dr-G@gateway/tor-sasl/dr-g] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:04 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gateway/tor-sasl/dr-g] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
20:19 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
20:19 -!- bit2017 [~linker@1.52.191.96] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
20:23 < amiller> oh i didn't realize fc was that early
20:24 -!- user7779078 [~user77790@ool-4354b720.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
20:27 -!- [7] [~quassel@rockbox/developer/TheSeven] has quit [Disconnected by services]
20:27 -!- TheSeven [~quassel@rockbox/developer/TheSeven] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:32 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@unaffiliated/wallet42] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:33 -!- bosma [~bosma@S01067cb21bda6531.vc.shawcable.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
20:34 -!- bosma [~bosma@S01067cb21bda6531.vc.shawcable.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:35 -!- NewLiberty__ [~NewLibert@99-48-178-219.lightspeed.irvnca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:42 -!- woah [~woah@142-254-26-6.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
20:42 -!- webdeli [~projects@bit1642888.lnk.telstra.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
20:44 -!- woah [~woah@142-254-26-6.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:46 -!- woah [~woah@142-254-26-6.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has quit [Client Quit]
20:46 -!- bit2017 [~linker@113.161.87.238] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:47 -!- fenn [~fenn@unaffiliated/fenn] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
20:55 < petertodd> tromp_: I'm talking about this one: http://conferences.oreilly.com/bitcoin-blockchain-2015
20:56 < petertodd> gmaxwell: even worse, they're paying expenses... $2.5k vs. $0 isn't that hard of a decision...
20:56 < petertodd> kanzure: heh, I was supposed to be talking at some virtual conference, on the same day as I'll be in London at a real conference... but I wound up cancelling the former because I got sick and ran out of free time
20:59 -!- kgk [~kgk@173-8-166-105-SFBA.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:03 -!- prodatalab_ [~prodatala@c-69-254-45-177.hsd1.fl.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:04 -!- op_null [~op_null@128.199.56.23] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:04 -!- prodatalab [~prodatala@c-69-254-45-177.hsd1.fl.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
21:04 < kanzure> "sorry i couldn't make it to your conference, i have sent a giant stick figure instead i hope that's okay"
21:05 -!- shesek [~shesek@87.68.245.176.adsl.012.net.il] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
21:05 < kanzure> stick figure: http://www3.pcmag.com/media/images/343623-double-telepresence-robot.jpg
21:05 -!- shesek [~shesek@87.68.245.176.adsl.012.net.il] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:06 < petertodd> kanzure: lol
21:06 < op_null> kanzure: you'd do better to send a life sized cardboard cutout of yourself.
21:06 -!- zooko [~user@c-75-70-204-109.hsd1.co.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
21:08 < petertodd> kanzure: in all honesty I probably could pull it off... but ending up in hospital briefly, followed by talking to a friend whose partner just got diagnosed with likely incurable cancer kinda puts you in a "fuck it, why did I schedule four talks in a week?" mood :/
21:09 -!- DougieBot5000 [~DougieBot@unaffiliated/dougiebot5000] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
21:09 -!- Cory [~Cory@unaffiliated/cory] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
21:09 < gmaxwell> petertodd: yes, pleae do not kill yourself. Suicide by tour schedule ... most unglamorous way to go.
21:10 < petertodd> gmaxwell: I like to remind people there's nothing glamorous about spending a week in paris... and not once seeing the eiffel tower
21:10 -!- Pasha [~Cory@unaffiliated/cory] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:10 < gmaxwell> I've done that.
21:11 < op_null> there's better things to do than look at the eiffel tower anyway.
21:11 < op_null> if you go to another country for the tourist things you might as well just buy the coffee table book and be done with it.
21:11 < kanzure> which cancer?
21:11 < gmaxwell> I managed to do a work trip through europe for a week where I never managed to see sunlight.
21:11 < petertodd> kanzure: more than one now - why it's likely incurable :(
21:12 < kanzure> one of my favorite things is telling people with incurable brain cancer about directed radiation and ultrasound ablation of deep brain tumors
21:12 < gmaxwell> op_null: AGREED. (it seems no one seems to understand my view that I'd rather read about the touristy stuff than visit it... reading about it so much more efficient and comprehensive)
21:13 < kanzure> "giant brain cyst? no problem! just melt your brain using this fancy apparatus"
21:13 < petertodd> op_null: I've very, very rarely done touristy things, and find them actually something I dislike - just feels weird to me when you're not getting "something done" in a country
21:14 < kanzure> i tried billing for plane time once
21:15 < gmaxwell> I did some zipline tour thing in hawaii which was actually fun, but otherwise?  "I can relax when I'm dead"
21:15 < kanzure> pfft, somehow i doubt that. you seem like the type that would be relaxed by a good programming problem. (not the throw a laptop out the window kind)
21:16 < op_null> petertodd: it's not traveling unless you've butchered somebodies language. I held up a supermarket queue once because the shopkeeper made me pronounce the word over and over again until I got it right.
21:16 < gmaxwell> kanzure: well right, the touristy crap is mostly not relaxing to me at all.
21:16 < kanzure> s/window kind/window kind of problem
21:16 < petertodd> gmaxwell: see, for me hiking/caving/etc. are mentally "doing stuff", so they don't feel touristy - but trying to "immerse yourself in culture", fuck off
21:17 < petertodd> gmaxwell: vietnam was really weird for me that way
21:17 < kanzure> i spent some time in vietnam
21:17 < op_null> petertodd: do you count "trying to fit in" in all of that?
21:17 < petertodd> op_null: only if I'm trying to steal something
21:17 < op_null> huh
21:18 -!- Pasha is now known as Cory
21:19 < petertodd> op_null: quite seriously, if you're trying to fit in because of *another* reason you want to be there, that's fine by me, but doing that for it's own sake is weird to me
21:19 < op_null> petertodd: in that case I was hungry and wanted to eat.
21:19 < petertodd> op_null: e.g. when I was in paris last I stayed for some of it by one of amirs squats near the sewage treatment plant - no-one there could speak any english - felt totally normal to me
21:20 < kanzure> petertodd: what would be a good alternative to the current format or structure of txin?
21:21 < petertodd> kanzure: serialization structure or *cryptographic* structure?
21:21 < kanzure> in very generic and vague terms i mean: some data structure suitable for referencing amounts of bitcoin that you want to be spent in some way
21:22 < kanzure> specifically this question came up earlier today (in here) because of me wondering about ways of not relying on merely (txid, vout)
21:22 < kanzure> because txid can change
21:22 < petertodd> kanzure: referencing txin by hash is a really, really, really good idea because it enforces determinism... but beyond that gets really complex
21:22 < lechuga_> i'd prob use a DHT
21:22 < petertodd> kanzure: see, you're talking about signatures, where some applications demand different sigs than others
21:22 < kanzure> txid in txin can change, so that doesn't sound like determinism to me
21:23 < petertodd> lechuga_: DHT gives me great trips too
21:23 < op_null> kanzure: the TX hash ideally won't be able to change soon.
21:23 < lechuga_> lol
21:23 < lechuga_> 5meo-DHT
21:23 < op_null> other than if the signer decides to, that is.
21:23 < petertodd> op_null: emphasis on "ideally" - I think that BIP is somewhat misguided
21:23 < petertodd> kanzure: but that's non-deterministic for the wallet - it is fully deterministic for the blockchain, in a sense
21:23 < kanzure> wallet determinism would be nice
21:24 < petertodd> kanzure: like, when you follow transactions back in time, you know *exactly* what data/txs went into proving that txout is real
21:24 < petertodd> kanzure: wallet's aren't consensus critical, so I'm happy for them to lose in favor of the important stuff
21:24 < kanzure> sure, i think preserving that is critical
21:24 < kanzure> right, i am not advocating a regression of consensus critical features
21:25 < kanzure> rather i think it may be possible to pick a method that is even more deterministic than present
21:25 < petertodd> kanzure: the only time tx mutability really matters is a) contracts and b) strings of transactions closely spaced enough for reorgs to matter.
21:25 < op_null> petertodd: and chains of unconfirmed transactions.
21:25 < petertodd> kanzure: the former can use other things, CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY/H(prevout.txout.scriptPubKey) hashing and the later can be largely mitigated with things like tx replacement
21:25 < kanzure> that seems to be b
21:26 < petertodd> op_null: which are by definition close enough for reorgs to matter :)
21:26 < op_null> hm? doesn't need a reorg. just needs a mutant to get into the next block to kill the chain.
21:27 < petertodd> op_null: I think you the joke ;)
21:27 < kanzure> presumably one block also counts as not spaced far enough
21:27 < op_null> petertodd: quite possibly
21:27 < petertodd> op_null: my mitigation suggestions work just fine for unconfirmed is the point
21:27 < kanzure> i don't really like the trend of "well if there's a large reorg we're all fucked anyway" thinking
21:27 < kanzure> no, it is definitively better to make good systems
21:28 < kanzure> you're not the only one to express that opinion of course
21:28 < petertodd> kanzure: the alternatives to H(txid) are very likely worse for general purpose usage
21:28 < op_null> well we are. 0.9 nodes can't handle very deep reorgs.
21:28 < petertodd> a deep reorg should damn well break the system from a social point of view, regardless of what it does from a technical point of view
21:29 < kanzure> from a social point of view i don't care if the blockchain changes as long as all of my transactions of interest are in the right spots and my chains aren't totally broken
21:29 < kanzure> and that i am not left waiting for others to sign new mutated transaction chains
21:29 < gmaxwell> things should handle them technically or risk introducing a corner case vulnerability; but yea.. I mean, you can't simply rewrite history and expect things to not be pear shaped as a result.
21:29 < gmaxwell> kanzure: then don't make #@$# malleable transactions?
21:29 < petertodd> kanzure: and if the reorg happened because of a *delibrate* technical decision, miners can easilly ensure tx's don't get broken
21:30 < kanzure> gmaxwell: i thought any transaction can be mutated by anyone?
21:30 < petertodd> kanzure: but if it happens because of an attack, yeah, bitcoin's fucked
21:30 < gmaxwell> kanzure: yes/no. For normal transactions there is only one piece of malleability left to anyone but miners, and BIP62 will close that.
21:30 < op_null> today *most* wallet software doesn't even rebroadcast it's own transactions after a reorganisation, or at all really. pretty sure a deep reorg would break lots of peoples systems.
21:31 < kanzure> gmaxwell: oh, then i will read BIP62.
21:31 < lechuga_> so it's assumed all potential sources are known?
21:31 < petertodd> op_null: yeah, getting txs back into the blockchain after a reorg is dodgy
21:31 < gmaxwell> kanzure: For standard transactions we're reasonably confident.
21:31 < petertodd> op_null: having explicit code that big pools could run to do it in a delibrate way wouldn't be an insane idea
21:32 < op_null> not rebroadcasting ever it a pretty stupid thing though
21:32 < kanzure> gmaxwell: so suppose there is a miner that is mining a reorg for whatever reason. someone else has a transaction they want to mutate. if bip62 is in universal use, can this non-miner send a mutant to the miner?
21:32 < kanzure> *a valid mutant to the miner
21:32 < gmaxwell> kanzure: _what_ mutant?
21:33 < petertodd> op_null: you know, not rebroadcasting probably makes big reorgs *more* likely to result in all previously confirmed txs getting into the chain again
21:33 < kanzure> okay cool
21:33 < petertodd> op_null: there's lots of wallets out there that double-spend accidentally, and with coinjoin we've got lots of mixing happening - any double-spend breaks all subsiquent txs after all
21:33 < op_null> lots of mixing happening where exactly?
21:34 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:34 < kanzure> weird how wallets aren't told to watch their own double spends
21:34 < kanzure> isn't that a good way to lose money?
21:34 < petertodd> op_null: coinjoin - darkwallet has auto-mixing now
21:34 < petertodd> kanzure: huh?
21:34 < gmaxwell> There are indeed non-trivial amounts of non-malicious double spends.
21:34 < gmaxwell> kanzure: huh?
21:34 < op_null> petertodd: I didn't think it was in anywhere near common use. I mean the software has huge warnings on the front not to use it at all.
21:34 < kanzure> oh sorry, i was thinking of double spends in the wallet sense, not outputs
21:34 < kanzure> sorry
21:35 < kanzure> i don't know how obvious it is but i have been in wallet land for a few weeks now :)
21:35 < petertodd> op_null: I'd guess there's mid five figures - maybe even six figures USD - of coins online being automixed on darkwallet right now in a given day
21:36 < petertodd> op_null: pretty reliable actually - haven't ever had a report of anyone losing money from it permanently, though there were a few issues where you needed a manual rescan
21:36 < kanzure> i also wasn't aware of the breakage with 0.9 about reorgs
21:36 < kanzure> so that does significantly entice me to consider any deep reorg to totally break everything
21:36 < op_null> petertodd: weird, didn't know it was that popular.
21:36 < gmaxwell> kanzure: well it won't reorg deeper than 750. It's fixed in 0.10.
21:37 < kanzure> oh. hrm.
21:37 < petertodd> op_null: doesn't take many people to get five figures...
21:37 < petertodd> op_null: probably still has in the realm of 100 regular users or something
21:37 -!- d4de [~d4de@unaffiliated/d4de] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
21:38 < op_null> petertodd: still wish they hadn't written it in javascript.
21:39 < gmaxwell> op_null: well all software is broken, regardless of the language. :(
21:39 < op_null> in a browser extension though!@?
21:39 < petertodd> op_null: something we agreed on was to do up a CLI-based mixer in python that used bitcoin core as the wallet
21:40 < petertodd> op_null: the old <get users> vs <do it right> debate
21:40 < op_null> no, it's just sloppy.
21:40 < petertodd> op_null: personally I would have written a python library first, followed by a delibrately ugly CLI, followed by...
21:40 -!- d4de [~d4de@unaffiliated/d4de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:40 < petertodd> op_null: software distribution is fucked, sorry. writing browser extensions is a good way to get to a huge number of people quickly
21:41 < petertodd> again, I wouldn't have done that... but the logic is sound for that team's goal
21:42 < op_null> petertodd: that sort of logic is why we have people fawning over the blockchain.info wallet which has probably lost millions of dollars easily.
21:43 < op_null> there's no "move fast and break things" in cryptography.
21:43 < petertodd> ...you're totally missing my point...
21:44 < petertodd> there *is* a move fast and break things, and the *unfortunate* thing is it works great far too often
21:44 < op_null> I know what you're saying.
21:45 < petertodd> darkwallet is interesting because they both did that wrong, and also aren't using a strategy that results in actually moving fast - to do that strategy right they'd have included far fewer features and gotten a v1.0 shipped months ago
21:46 < petertodd> also writing libbitcoin - a rewrite of bitcoin core - was insane
21:49 -!- user7779078 [~user77790@ool-4354b720.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:50 < lechuga_> but fun i'm sure
21:51 < petertodd> lechuga_: yeah... so I found yet another consensus-critical detail we weren't testing for just the other day... and I figured out how to use it to implement rivests paywords!
21:51 < op_null> why did they even do that?
21:51 < op_null> seems like the dumbest thing they could have done with their time
21:51 < petertodd> (use OP_CODESEPARATOR to control which pre-made signature is valid - because OP_CODESEPARATOR is evaluated, not declaritive, so you can turn it off with OP_IF)
21:52 < petertodd> op_null: amir is a good programmer, but his understanding of consensus politics is shit, as is his understanding of *consesnsus* programming
21:52 < lechuga_> can u share your test case? :)
21:53 < lechuga_> op_null: it's at the very least a remarkable learning exercise
21:53 < op_null> no, no it's not.
21:54 < op_null> you do a learning exercise in the sandbox, you don't build systems working with other people's money on top of it.
21:54 < gmaxwell> op_null: pft be nice. Who are you to define how other people learn? :)
21:54 < gmaxwell> oh that point.
21:54  * gmaxwell quiets down
21:54 < lechuga_> fair
21:55 < petertodd> lechuga_: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/5421
21:55 < lechuga_> ah sweet
21:55 < lechuga_> thx
21:56 < petertodd> gmaxwell: fuck yeah, I mean, we need to have standards and shit. You wouldn't want something crazy like, say, some loud-mouthed fine arts grad to start hacking on the core consensus code of a multi-billion financial system would you?
21:56 < petertodd> lechuga_: double-check those test cases 'eh? I'm pretty sure that code was finished...
21:57 < lechuga_> k
21:57 < gmaxwell> lechuga_: please feel free to review petertodd's pull req.
21:57 < lechuga_> nod
21:58 < petertodd> thanks, bbl, got a flight to catch
21:59 < lechuga_> safe travels
21:59 < kanzure> seeya
22:04 -!- RoboTeddy [~roboteddy@173.247.202.131] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
22:06 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@unaffiliated/wallet42] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
22:11 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@unaffiliated/wallet42] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:19 -!- paveljanik [~Pavel@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:29 -!- lclc_bnc is now known as lclc
22:40 -!- RoboTeddy [~roboteddy@c-67-188-40-206.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:43 -!- webdeli [~projects@bit1642888.lnk.telstra.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:46 -!- webdeli [~projects@bit1642888.lnk.telstra.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
22:47 -!- webdeli [~projects@bit1642888.lnk.telstra.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:47 -!- webdeli [~projects@bit1642888.lnk.telstra.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
22:48 -!- webdeli [~projects@bit1642888.lnk.telstra.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:13 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:18 -!- fenn [~fenn@unaffiliated/fenn] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:20 -!- jb55 [~jb55@S0106f46d049a0b83.vc.shawcable.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
23:20 -!- vmatekole [~vmatekole@e182062152.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
23:25 -!- user7779078 [~user77790@ool-4354b720.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
23:26 -!- koeppelmann [~koeppelma@dyn-160-39-29-111.dyn.columbia.edu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:37 -!- wallet421 [~wallet42@f052175067.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:37 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@unaffiliated/wallet42] has quit [Killed (kornbluth.freenode.net (Nickname regained by services))]
23:37 -!- wallet421 is now known as wallet42
23:39 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
23:47 -!- user7779078 [~user77790@ool-4354b720.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:49 -!- cbeams [~cbeams@unaffiliated/cbeams] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:52 -!- Luke-Jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has quit [Excess Flood]
23:53 -!- Luke-Jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards