--- Log opened Wed Jun 17 00:00:44 2015
00:00 -!- antanst [~Adium@ppp-2-86-206-246.home.otenet.gr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:04 -!- hktud0 [wq@unaffiliated/fluffybunny] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
00:07 -!- hktud0 [wq@unaffiliated/fluffybunny] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:12 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:24 -!- gill3s [~gill3s@pat35-3-82-245-143-153.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:24 -!- _biO_ [~biO_@80.156.183.43] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:25 -!- devrandom [~devrandom@unaffiliated/niftyzero1] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
00:26 -!- devrandom [~devrandom@unaffiliated/niftyzero1] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:27 -!- Relos [~Relos@unaffiliated/relos] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
00:28 -!- luny [~luny@unaffiliated/luny] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:34 -!- moa [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/moa] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
00:35 -!- dEBRUYNE [~dEBRUYNE@239-196-ftth.onsbrabantnet.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:35 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:36 -!- Mably [56401ec3@gateway/web/freenode/ip.86.64.30.195] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:47 -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:52 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
01:03 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
01:03 -!- andy-logbot [~bitcoin--@wpsoftware.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
01:03 -!- andy-logbot [~bitcoin--@wpsoftware.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:03  * andy-logbot is logging
01:06 -!- antanst [~Adium@ppp-2-86-206-246.home.otenet.gr] has left #bitcoin-wizards []
01:10 -!- rht__ [uid86914@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-dwqwbdzanrmjzilp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:17 -!- alephbet [a9e578bd@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip.169.229.120.189] has quit [Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client]
01:17 -!- someguy [a9e578bd@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip.169.229.120.189] has quit [Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client]
01:17 -!- CoinMuncher [~jannes@178.132.211.90] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:18 -!- rustyn [~rustyn@unaffiliated/rustyn] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:18 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:31 -!- JackH [~Jack@host81-154-202-222.range81-154.btcentralplus.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:35 -!- moa [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/moa] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:35 -!- koshii [~w@c-68-58-151-30.hsd1.in.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
01:40 -!- RoboTeddy [~roboteddy@2601:645:8200:137d:44f0:19b1:3d4d:c2] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
01:42 -!- koshii [~w@c-68-58-151-30.hsd1.in.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:42 -!- jtimon [~quassel@137.30.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:47 -!- rubensayshi [~ruben@91.206.81.13] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:52 -!- c-cex-yuriy [uid76808@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-ndxbtmocxlvkacth] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:55 -!- antanst [~Adium@ppp-2-86-206-246.home.otenet.gr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:56 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@79-98-72-216.sys-data.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:56 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@79-98-72-216.sys-data.com] has quit [Changing host]
01:56 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:01 -!- NewLiberty [~NewLibert@76-255-129-88.lightspeed.irvnca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:03 -!- fanquake1 [~fanquake@167.160.116.134] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:03 -!- kgk [~kgk@76.14.85.43] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
02:03 -!- fanquake [~fanquake@unaffiliated/fanquake] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
02:03 -!- kgk [~kgk@76.14.85.43] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:13 -!- SDCDev [~quassel@unaffiliated/sdcdev] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
02:14 -!- SDCDev [~quassel@unaffiliated/sdcdev] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:25 -!- ebfull [~ebfull@c-76-120-40-34.hsd1.co.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:26 -!- moa [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/moa] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
02:30 -!- justanotheruser is now known as justanotherusr
02:38 -!- SDCDev [~quassel@unaffiliated/sdcdev] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
02:38 -!- SDCDev [~quassel@unaffiliated/sdcdev] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:47 -!- Tiraspol [~Tiraspol3@unaffiliated/tiraspol] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
02:48 -!- Tiraspol [~Tiraspol3@x5ce09e47.dyn.telefonica.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:48 -!- Tiraspol [~Tiraspol3@x5ce09e47.dyn.telefonica.de] has quit [Changing host]
02:48 -!- Tiraspol [~Tiraspol3@unaffiliated/tiraspol] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:51 -!- n0n0_ [~n0n0___@x5f77b5a2.dyn.telefonica.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:02 -!- sparetire_ [~sparetire@unaffiliated/sparetire] has quit [Quit: sparetire_]
03:04 -!- triazo [~adam@198.23.202.102] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
03:05 -!- airbreather [~airbreath@d149-67-99-43.nap.wideopenwest.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:06 -!- fanquake1 [~fanquake@167.160.116.134] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
03:07 -!- PaulCapestany [~PaulCapes@204.28.124.82] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
03:08 -!- fanquake [~fanquake@unaffiliated/fanquake] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:11 -!- darwin_ [~darwin@88-103-255-166.jes.cz] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
03:11 -!- darwin_ [~darwin@88-103-255-166.jes.cz] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:16 -!- cadenadelabloque [6c3b0a99@gateway/web/freenode/ip.108.59.10.153] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:16 < cadenadelabloque> I've been doing some reading up on zero knowledge contingent payments,  computational complexity theory, PSPACE(interactive proof systems), secure multiparty computations, and bitcoin contracts in general and I'm in need of some help from someone with working knowledge of them.
03:17 < cadenadelabloque> From what I can tell, gmaxwell (who proposed CoinSwap) is likely to not only understand these concepts but have actually written code for them, but I can't seem to find any examples or samples online anywhere from him or anyone else, only theories and discussions.
03:18 -!- kgk [~kgk@76.14.85.43] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
03:18 -!- [d__d] [~d__d]@ec2-54-85-45-223.compute-1.amazonaws.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
03:19 < cadenadelabloque> I've got a job offer for anyone who has experience in these areas and can write some "simple" code to allow a trustless agreement to pay based on user supplied data or random input.
03:20 -!- [d__d] [~d__d]@ec2-54-85-45-223.compute-1.amazonaws.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:20 < midnightmagic> ..  not really topical..
03:20 < cadenadelabloque> Ideally what I want is some code that allows 2 or more parties to perform rock-scissors-paper and force the loser's funds to the winner, cryptographically.
03:21 < cadenadelabloque> According to this whitepaper (http://eprint.iacr.org/2013/784.pdf), it's already been done to a degree, I just don't understand how it was done.
03:23 < cadenadelabloque> I gather it's done using hashes of choices and some OP_CODE that incorporates a multiparty transaction of sorts(?), but to put that into a code that can be generated on the fly is beyon my pay grade.
03:24 < cadenadelabloque> Rather, I'd prefer paying someone whos pay grade it is not beyond so that it doesn't take me 20 years to accomplish it! :)
03:24 < midnightmagic> cadenadelabloque: Consider making job offers in a place like #bitcoin-otc or one of the bitcoin job boards.
03:24 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:25 < cadenadelabloque> I was actually referred here because of the specific needs. I'm pretty sure if anyone can do it, it'll be someone here.
03:26 < cadenadelabloque> I was also under the impression #bitcoin-otc was mostly for traders. I'll check it out.
03:26 -!- Mably [56401ec3@gateway/web/freenode/ip.86.64.30.195] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
03:27 -!- Cory [~Cory@unaffiliated/cory] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
03:32 -!- moa [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/moa] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:33 -!- Cory [~Cory@unaffiliated/cory] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:35 < nsh> amiller, thanks!
03:38 -!- Mably [56401ec3@gateway/web/freenode/ip.86.64.30.195] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:39 -!- catlasshrugged [~catlasshr@ec2-54-149-141-214.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
03:39 -!- catlasshrugged [~catlasshr@ec2-54-149-141-214.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:45 -!- cadenadelabloque [6c3b0a99@gateway/web/freenode/ip.108.59.10.153] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
03:47 -!- fanquake1 [~fanquake@115-166-38-135.ip.adam.com.au] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:47 -!- p15_ [~p15@182.50.108.17] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:48 -!- fanquake [~fanquake@unaffiliated/fanquake] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
03:48 -!- p15 [~p15@182.50.108.23] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
03:51 -!- adam3us1 [~Adium@c3-219.i07-1.onvol.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
03:59 -!- adam3us [~Adium@195.138.228.25] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:01 -!- ThomasV [~ThomasV@unaffiliated/thomasv] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:02 -!- darwin_ [~darwin@88-103-255-166.jes.cz] has quit []
04:02 -!- SDCDev [~quassel@unaffiliated/sdcdev] has quit [Quit: http://quassel-irc.org - Chat comfortably. Anywhere.]
04:11 -!- adam3us [~Adium@195.138.228.25] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
04:14 -!- fanquake1 [~fanquake@115-166-38-135.ip.adam.com.au] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
04:15 -!- fanquake [~fanquake@unaffiliated/fanquake] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:19 -!- mjerr [~mjerr@p578EB3B1.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:23 -!- SDCDev [~quassel@unaffiliated/sdcdev] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:27 -!- llllllllll [~lllllllll@6d482698.ftth.concepts.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:33 -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
04:35 -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:39 -!- antanst [~Adium@ppp-2-86-206-246.home.otenet.gr] has left #bitcoin-wizards []
04:40 -!- prodatalab [~prodatala@2600:1006:b164:8d88:81f7:5c72:6494:e780] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:41 -!- shesek [~shesek@IGLD-84-228-3-15.inter.net.il] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
04:42 -!- airbreather [~airbreath@d149-67-99-43.nap.wideopenwest.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
04:43 -!- chmod755 [~chmod755@unaffiliated/chmod755] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:57 -!- shesek [~shesek@IGLD-84-228-3-15.inter.net.il] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:00 -!- ThomasV [~ThomasV@unaffiliated/thomasv] has quit [Quit: Quitte]
05:03 -!- adam3us [~Adium@109.200.43.13] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:05 -!- www [~v3@f052000057.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
05:21 -!- moa [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/moa] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
05:27 -!- adam3us [~Adium@109.200.43.13] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
05:34 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@2a02:8108:73f:f6e4:e23f:49ff:fe47:9364] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:35 -!- c-cex-yuriy [uid76808@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-ndxbtmocxlvkacth] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
05:36 -!- nessence [~alexl@166.170.23.115] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:41 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
05:44 -!- pollux-bts [uid52270@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-ndtsvjwqqtutbchu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:46 -!- gill3s [~gill3s@pat35-3-82-245-143-153.fbx.proxad.net] has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
05:48 -!- eudoxia [~eudoxia@r167-57-128-152.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:49 -!- Mably_ [56401ec5@gateway/web/freenode/ip.86.64.30.197] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:49 -!- Mably [56401ec3@gateway/web/freenode/ip.86.64.30.195] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
05:49 -!- Relos [~Relos@unaffiliated/relos] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:49 -!- yoleaux [~yoleaux@xn--ht-1ia18f.nonceword.org] has quit [Quit: dpk made me do it!]
05:49 -!- yoleaux [~yoleaux@xn--ht-1ia18f.nonceword.org] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:51 -!- Mably_ is now known as Mably
05:56 -!- LeMiner [LeMiner@unaffiliated/leminer] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
05:57 -!- fanquake [~fanquake@unaffiliated/fanquake] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
05:59 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:01 -!- zwick [~zwick@fsf/member/zwick] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:05 -!- fanquake [~fanquake@unaffiliated/fanquake] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:05 -!- p15_ [~p15@182.50.108.17] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
06:06 -!- fanquake [~fanquake@unaffiliated/fanquake] has quit [Client Quit]
06:07 -!- p15 [~p15@114.243.159.44] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:16 -!- orperelman [~orperelma@bzq-109-67-207-175.red.bezeqint.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:27 -!- p15_ [~p15@111.193.170.169] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:27 -!- gill3s [~gill3s@pat35-3-82-245-143-153.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:27 -!- p15 [~p15@114.243.159.44] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
06:36 -!- Adlai [~Adlai@unaffiliated/adlai] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
06:37 < JackH> !seen hearn
06:37 < gribble> hearn was last seen in #bitcoin-wizards 22 hours, 36 minutes, and 50 seconds ago: <hearn> yeah, i'm getting rather tired of it myself.
06:38 -!- Adlai [~Adlai@unaffiliated/adlai] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:40 -!- davi [~davi@gnu/davi] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:41 -!- LeMiner [LeMiner@unaffiliated/leminer] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:47 -!- orperelman [~orperelma@bzq-109-67-207-175.red.bezeqint.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
06:51 -!- priidu [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
07:08 -!- priidu [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:13 -!- nwilcox [~nwilcox@68.233.157.2] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:20 -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has quit [Quit: Bye]
07:21 -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:21 -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has quit [Client Quit]
07:23 -!- jtrag [~jtrag@173.233.123.226] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:24 -!- orperelman [~orperelma@109.67.207.175] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:26 -!- Zooko-phone [~androirc@2600:100e:b009:9649:5bd2:8456:64a:aea6] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:26 -!- DougieBot5000 [~DougieBot@unaffiliated/dougiebot5000] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:28  * nsh is somewhat surprised by how seriously amiller's advisor appears to be taking ethereum
07:29 -!- triazo [~adam@198.23.202.102] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:35 -!- temujin [2679a51e@gateway/web/freenode/ip.38.121.165.30] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:35 < ThinThread> ah damn didnt see if anyone answered my question yesterday
07:36 < nsh> <gmaxwell> ThinThread: you want a wet paper code.
07:36 < nsh> <gmaxwell> though temporal sequencing, if visible to the attacker can break the privacy.
07:36 < nsh> <gmaxwell> but if you assume that the attacker can't tell what order messages were authored in, then you can make it so that it's undecidable which message conveyed the secret message, even if there is only a small amount of malleability.
07:36 < fluffypony> nsh: sometimes clever people don't realise they're being duped if there's enough technical hand-waving
07:36 -!- nubbins` [~leel@unaffiliated/nubbins] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:36 < nsh> mebbes
07:36 < ThinThread> thanks nsh!
07:36 < nsh> np
07:37 < nickler> nsh: "They have real cryptographers in their board: Koblitz and Merkle." - Nicolas Courtois
07:39 < nsh> my position is that it's all grist for the mill, and even if it doesn't work out as currently envisioned, there will be useful results
07:39 < nsh> so i don't demean any of it, i just have theoretical reservations
07:39 -!- nubbins` [~leel@unaffiliated/nubbins] has quit [Client Quit]
07:40 -!- Zooko-phone [~androirc@2600:100e:b009:9649:5bd2:8456:64a:aea6] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
07:42 -!- zooko [~user@208.186.248.116] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:46 -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:47 -!- nubbins` [~leel@unaffiliated/nubbins] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:50 -!- lnsybrd [~lnsybrd@ip98-167-192-68.ph.ph.cox.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:53 -!- nubbins` [~leel@unaffiliated/nubbins] has quit [Quit: Quit]
07:54 -!- zooko [~user@208.186.248.116] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
07:56 -!- orperelman [~orperelma@109.67.207.175] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
07:56 -!- orperelman [~orperelma@bzq-109-67-207-175.red.bezeqint.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:56 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
08:02 -!- nemild [~nemild@104.207.195.34] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:11 -!- jtrag [~jtrag@173.233.123.226] has quit [Quit: jtrag has left the channel :-(  ©ya!  ®™]
08:11 -!- sy5error [~sy5error@unaffiliated/sy5error] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:11 -!- jtrag [~jtrag@173.233.123.226] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:13 -!- jtrag [~jtrag@173.233.123.226] has quit [Client Quit]
08:15 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:25 -!- darwin_ [~darwin@88-103-255-166.jes.cz] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:25 -!- badmofo [~badmofo@ec2-177-71-246-238.sa-east-1.compute.amazonaws.com] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
08:28 -!- darwin_ [~darwin@88-103-255-166.jes.cz] has quit [Read error: No route to host]
08:30 -!- badmofo [~badmofo@ec2-177-71-246-238.sa-east-1.compute.amazonaws.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:31 -!- darwin_ [~darwin@88-103-255-166.jes.cz] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:36 -!- erasmospunk [~erasmospu@178.162.199.92] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:42 -!- prodatalab [~prodatala@2600:1006:b164:8d88:81f7:5c72:6494:e780] has quit [Read error: No route to host]
08:42 -!- prodatalab_ [~prodatala@2602:306:ceef:a750:81f7:5c72:6494:e780] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:43 -!- jtrag [~jtrag@173.233.123.226] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:52 < nwilcox> nsh: Just my guess, but amiller's advisor's research interests include programming language security, so the PL interface to Ethereum is probably attractive to experiment with.
08:52  * nsh nods
08:54 -!- SDCDev [~quassel@unaffiliated/sdcdev] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
09:00 -!- nessence [~alexl@166.170.23.115] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
09:04 -!- kmels [~kmels@186.64.110.122] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:04 < ThinThread> gmaxwell; nice @ wet paper codes. yeah temporal sequencing is a problem. i was thinking that the trigger when multiplied by ciphertext could put it into a countdown state, where each successive tweets multiplication would only advance countdown towards ciphertext assuming trigger value
09:05 < ThinThread> but dunno how you can actually do that.  i dont see any results about how you can make a turing machine with matrix multiplies or anything close
09:09 -!- _biO_ [~biO_@80.156.183.43] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
09:13 -!- zooko [~user@67.51.227.94] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:16 -!- Burrito [~Burrito@unaffiliated/burrito] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:17 -!- eudoxia_ [~eudoxia@r167-57-215-159.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:18 -!- StephenM347 [~stephenm3@static-64-223-246-218.port.east.myfairpoint.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:18 -!- eudoxia [~eudoxia@r167-57-128-152.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
09:20 -!- erasmospunk [~erasmospu@178.162.199.92] has quit [Quit: ttm]
09:22 -!- eudoxia_ [~eudoxia@r167-57-215-159.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has quit [Client Quit]
09:24 < ThinThread> http://www.cs.columbia.edu/2015/chasing-real-security/
09:34 -!- gill3s [~gill3s@pat35-3-82-245-143-153.fbx.proxad.net] has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
09:37 -!- chmod755 [~chmod755@unaffiliated/chmod755] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
09:37 -!- _biO_ [~biO_@ip-37-24-195-112.hsi14.unitymediagroup.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:40 -!- cosmo [~james@unaffiliated/cosmo] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:41 -!- zooko [~user@67.51.227.94] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
09:41 -!- JackH [~Jack@host81-154-202-222.range81-154.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
09:41 -!- dEBRUYNE_ [~dEBRUYNE@239-196-ftth.onsbrabantnet.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:41 -!- heath__ [~heath@unaffiliated/ybit] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:41 -!- Starduster_ [~sd@unaffiliated/starduster] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:41 -!- pavel_ [~paveljani@79-98-72-216.sys-data.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:42 -!- execut3 [~shesek@IGLD-84-228-3-15.inter.net.il] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:42 -!- nwilcox_ [~nwilcox@68.233.157.2] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:42 -!- catlasshrugged_ [~catlasshr@ec2-54-149-141-214.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:43 -!- d1ggy [~d1ggy@dslc-082-082-192-234.pools.arcor-ip.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:43 -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has quit [Quit: Bye]
09:43 -!- Netsplit *.net <-> *.split quits: heath, paveljanik, Logicwax, kyuupichan, dEBRUYNE, badmofo, Starduster, nwilcox, shesek, d1ggy_,  (+1 more, use /NETSPLIT to show all of them)
09:45 -!- orperelman [~orperelma@bzq-109-67-207-175.red.bezeqint.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
09:47 -!- jtrag [~jtrag@173.233.123.226] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
09:47 -!- Mably [56401ec5@gateway/web/freenode/ip.86.64.30.197] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
09:48 -!- jtrag [~jtrag@173.233.123.226] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:48 -!- Netsplit over, joins: badmofo
09:50 -!- justanotherusr [~Justan@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
09:50 -!- www [~v3@f052000057.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:50 -!- justanotherusr [~Justan@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:51 -!- Logicwax [~Logicwax@c-76-126-174-152.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:52 -!- kyuupichan [~Neil@ae041057.dynamic.ppp.asahi-net.or.jp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:53 -!- grubles [~grubles@unaffiliated/grubles] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:54 -!- pavel_ [~paveljani@79-98-72-216.sys-data.com] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
09:54 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:55 -!- justanotherusr [~Justan@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
09:56 -!- justanotherusr [~Justan@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:05 -!- bramc [~bram@99-75-88-206.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:05 -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:07 -!- MrTratta [~MrTratta@2-228-102-98.ip191.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
10:09 -!- zooko [~user@67.51.227.94] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:11 -!- MrTratta [~MrTratta@2-228-102-98.ip191.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:13 -!- Mably [~Mably@unaffiliated/mably] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:14 -!- tcrypt [~tylersmit@173.247.206.110] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:17 -!- priidu [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
10:18 -!- gill3s [~gill3s@89-93-153-220.hfc.dyn.abo.bbox.fr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:26 -!- nessence [~alexl@166.170.23.115] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:29 -!- superobserver [~superobse@unaffiliated/superobserver] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
10:33 < bramc> Good morning everybody
10:35 < tromp_> afternoon, Bram
10:35 -!- lnsybrd [~lnsybrd@ip98-167-192-68.ph.ph.cox.net] has quit [Quit: lnsybrd]
10:37 < zooko> Howdy bramc and tromp_.
10:37 -!- eudoxia [~eudoxia@r167-57-215-159.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:37 -!- CoinMuncher [~jannes@178.132.211.90] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
10:39 -!- superobserver [~superobse@unaffiliated/superobserver] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:39 < bramc> Bitcoin seems to be hurtling rapidly towards a completely self-inflicted crisis
10:43 < fluffypony> bramc: this is my favourite recent post on it: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3a58z9/why_the_hell_are_people_against_increasing_block/cs9egkq?context=2
10:44 < fluffypony> it really exemplifies the sort of hivemind, horse-blinker commentary that's spearheading things
10:46 -!- lnsybrd [~lnsybrd@ip98-167-192-68.ph.ph.cox.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:47 < midnightmagic> What's a horse-blinker?
10:48 -!- JackH [~Jack@host-80-43-142-154.as13285.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:49 -!- nubbins` [~leel@unaffiliated/nubbins] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:50 < zooko> midnightmagic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blinkers_%28horse_tack%29
10:50 -!- nwilcox_ is now known as nwilcox
10:51 < midnightmagic> I have never seen them referred to as blinkers. Cool.
10:54 < bramc> Looks like full nodes have about 1800 transactions, or about 3/sec
10:55 < bramc> or rather, would be 3/sec if they represented 10 minutes each
10:59 -!- JackH [~Jack@host-80-43-142-154.as13285.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
11:00 -!- rubensayshi [~ruben@91.206.81.13] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
11:03 < tromp_> you mean full blocks:)
11:04 < tromp_> did you read BIP 100, bramc?
11:05 -!- RoboTeddy [~roboteddy@c-67-188-40-206.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:14 -!- bramc [~bram@99-75-88-206.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
11:15 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:16 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has quit [Client Quit]
11:20 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:23 -!- NewLiberty [~NewLibert@76-255-129-88.lightspeed.irvnca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
11:25 -!- jtrag is now known as jtrag[away]
11:26 -!- gill3s [~gill3s@89-93-153-220.hfc.dyn.abo.bbox.fr] has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
11:27 -!- jtrag[away] [~jtrag@173.233.123.226] has quit [Quit: jtrag has left the channel :-(  ©ya!  ®™]
11:28 -!- jtrag [~jtrag@173.233.123.226] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:32 -!- cosmo [~james@unaffiliated/cosmo] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
11:34 -!- lnsybrd [~lnsybrd@ip98-167-192-68.ph.ph.cox.net] has quit [Quit: lnsybrd]
11:35 -!- spinza [~spin@197.89.39.101] has quit [Excess Flood]
11:36 -!- davi [~davi@gnu/davi] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
11:36 -!- cosmo [~james@unaffiliated/cosmo] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:37 -!- spinza [~spin@197.89.39.101] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:38 -!- mjerr [~mjerr@p578EB3B1.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
11:39 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
11:40 -!- austinhill [~Adium@bas1-montreal43-1177755675.dsl.bell.ca] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:42 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:47 -!- priidu [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:48 -!- Xh1pher [~Xh1pher@pD9E38632.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
11:50 -!- lnsybrd [~lnsybrd@ip98-167-192-68.ph.ph.cox.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:50 -!- dasource [uid48409@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-zsqlhhdkleoqpsyy] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
11:51 -!- dasource [uid48409@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-awqyoxvxynknftrl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:55 -!- hktud0 [wq@unaffiliated/fluffybunny] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
11:58 -!- prodatalab_ [~prodatala@2602:306:ceef:a750:81f7:5c72:6494:e780] has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
11:59 -!- lnsybrd [~lnsybrd@ip98-167-192-68.ph.ph.cox.net] has quit [Quit: lnsybrd]
12:03 -!- jtrag [~jtrag@173.233.123.226] has quit [Quit: jtrag has left the channel :-(  ©ya!  ®™]
12:07 < nsh> 'blinkered' is pretty common as an adjective in the UK to refer to that sort of narrow-minded headlong rushing confidence
12:07 -!- p15_ [~p15@111.193.170.169] has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
12:07 < nsh> or politics, as it's colloquially termed
12:07 -!- jtrag [~jtrag@173.233.123.226] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:08 <@gmaxwell> It was familar to me too. :)
12:08 -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
12:08 < nsh> (aye, didn't mean to suggest exclusively, just can't talk for other anglolands)
12:08 < nsh> (due to not having stayed in any extensively)
12:09 <@gmaxwell> cadenadelabloque:  The ZKCP protocol was my 'invention' too.  It's not actually been put into production yet; though as the page now reflects the science is ready for it.
12:09 -!- prodatalab [~prodatala@2602:306:ceef:a750:b532:2336:35b2:82ba] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:09 < fluffypony> nsh: well South Africa still retains its colony tattoo :-P
12:11 -!- zooko [~user@67.51.227.94] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
12:12 <@gmaxwell> cadenadelabloque: I've also seperately described an efficient protocol that is not ZK for fair contracts for certian kinds of games (e.g. determinstic ordered turn games without secret state); but not fully implemented it yet; though I hope to do so somewhat soon.
12:12 -!- gill3s [~gill3s@pat35-3-82-245-143-153.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:15 < nsh> gmaxwell, neat. one of the videos from simons institute i posted yesterday (and some pdfs by the same folk) was quite similar sounding. secure computing through an ideal refund-with-penalty multisig timeloack predicate and complex n-party protocols composed from 2-party stateless protocols
12:16 < nsh> .title https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZlIRr6Xwe8
12:16 < yoleaux> How to use Bitcoin to Enhance Secure Computation - YouTube
12:17 < nsh> (uses SNARKS for some constructions, and something about currently-disabled bitcoin opcodes, or a slightly vague 'miners do it for increased fees' alternative which may be more dubious)
12:18 < nsh> sorry, claim-or-refund is what they call their primitive
12:23 -!- kmels [~kmels@186.64.110.122] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
12:28 < nsh> this might be interesting:  'Modeling bitcoin contracts by timed automata'  -- http://arxiv.org/pdf/1405.1861.pdf
12:30 < nsh> .wik Uppaal Model Checker
12:30 < yoleaux> "UPPAAL is an integrated tool environment for modeling, validation and verification of real-time systems modeled as networks of timed automata, extended with data types (bounded integers, arrays etc.)." — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uppaal_Model_Checker
12:31 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
12:32 -!- bramc [~bram@38.99.42.130] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:33 < bramc> What have gavin and mhearn said about bip100?
12:34 < bramc> Aside from this, I mean: https://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg07938.html
12:34 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@2a02:8108:73f:f6e4:e23f:49ff:fe47:9364] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
12:34 <@gmaxwell> nsh: yea, it's a somewhat obvious approach once you think about it, thus my quotes around invented.
12:34  * nsh nods
12:34 < kanzure> what if someone writes a patch that rejects blocks iwth the other version number in it
12:35 < kanzure> i guess that's just an early fork
12:35 < kanzure> but it's better than a delayed hard-fork
12:35 < nsh> what if everybody writes their own consensus-breaking fork proposal and we all dance around a bonfire and throw them all in
12:35 < nsh> and then be done with it
12:35 < kanzure> i don't know what bonfires have to do with it
12:35 < nsh> they make things go away
12:35 < nsh> when used appropriately
12:35 < kanzure> writing and deploying a patch to stop a contentious hard-fork would be pretty helpful i think
12:36 < nsh> also there's some sort of reference to fighting fire with fire :)
12:36 < kanzure> well if nobody relays the new version number then there's no last-minute game of chicken regarding a hard-fork
12:36 < kanzure> (during the "grace period")
12:37 < nsh> it's arguably as bad as the threat it intends to mitigate
12:38 < kanzure> could you attempt to make that argument please
12:39 < nsh> because obviously gavin and mike would NACK such a version lock-up update, if they were asked, and to do it anyway is just as much an abandonment of process as the unilateral fork proposal (threat)
12:40 < nsh> retrospective cynicism is sometimes appropriate. speculative cynicism is usually bad
12:40 < bramc> gmaxwell, Has anybody figured out the issues of needing a trusted setup for ZK?
12:40 < kanzure> yes, well you will never see the peanut gallery telling you "we are proceeding with it anyway" (actually they have, oops!)
12:40 < bramc> kanzure, nsh I'm not sure what you're saying
12:41 < kanzure> so in the context of a hostile contentious hard-fork, rolling out something faster to protect the system from multi-chains seems prudent. the companies that they convince will operate the patch that has the grace period, and everyone else will reject their version number blocks in the mean time anyway.
12:41 < nsh> kanzure is suggesting that an update is released that preempts and prevents a nonconsensus hard-fork attempt
12:41 <@gmaxwell> bramc: for SNAKRS? there are other candidate constructions outside of the CRS model, though they'll be less efficient (larger proofs, like tens of kb). And AFAIK haven't yet been build but people are working on it.
12:41 < kanzure> nsh: right, something that breaks down the scheduling of the hard-fork patch's "activation" (it's already activated, of course, the moment it goes in)
12:42 < nsh> which is a very conservative/protectionist move and will be taken as badly as you can imagine anything being taken
12:42 < bramc> There's already something which 'prevents' a nonconsensus hard-fork update. It's called the bitcoin codebase :-P
12:42 < kanzure> however, i am not advocating for this solution, just contemplating or speculating its possibility
12:42 < nsh> and will not help us achieve a consensus process for adding headroom in blocksize
12:42 < kanzure> bramc: can you explain how it does that?
12:42 < nsh> unless consensus-by-virtue-of-alienation counts, which it shouldn't
12:42 < bramc> kanzure, the bitcoin codebase rejects hard forks. That's why they're called hard forks.
12:42 < kanzure> bramc: specifically the context here is someone has said "i have convinced companies to run my patch, i'm doing this anyway, see you later"
12:43 < kanzure> bramc: yes, well not everyone runs that code base
12:43 < bramc> kanzure, Has Gavin said that in so many words?
12:43 < kanzure> !!!
12:43 < gribble> Error: "!!" is not a valid command.
12:43 < nsh> bramc, the current position seems to be that they will make BIP proposal, with working code, and give some time for it to be evaluated, but reserve the right afterwads to go ahead unilaterally
12:44 < nsh> there was an attempt to soften this position yesterday but it didn't seem to get anywhere
12:44 -!- zooko [~user@sta-207-174-117-102.rockynet.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:44 < kanzure> bramc: http://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/34155307/
12:44 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:44 < bramc> We need to start explaining to journalists what a clusterfuck a hard fork is. There *will* be two chains, they *will* both survive, and both wallets and exchanges *will* need to start treating them as sort of two separate currencies.
12:45 < nsh> can we hardfork dogecoin for didactic purposes?
12:45 < nsh> people would probably get upset
12:46 < kanzure> there have been some other hard-forks in the past, like elielcoin or something? that's a recent one.
12:46 < bramc> It's funny the conspiracy theories which don't exist. We don't believe that openssl was created to sneak security problems into things. We don't believe that Applied Cryptography was written to get people to design insecure protocols. And we don't believe that Gavin is trying to tank bitcoin
12:46 < kanzure> er there's also the other g man
12:46 < kanzure> wait, that's ambiguous
12:47 < bramc> Although there's so much obvious evidence for all these things. They only require one conspirator, and if that conspirator was really conspirating they sure did a shitty job of covering their tracks.
12:47 < kanzure> (it's not just gavin; and the other one doesn't have a g in his name, so that doesn't work. oops.)
12:47 <@gmaxwell> The prior on "dumb shit happens" is so amazingly high that its hard to give any other theory credibility.
12:48 < kanzure> yeah, i think that "oops" is still a reasonable explanation, although not the only possible explanation
12:48 -!- jposner [~jposner@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/jposner] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:49 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has quit [Client Quit]
12:49 < bramc> Can anyone think of a case of a bdfl getting kicked out?
12:49 < kanzure> nsh: so your argument is that we should relay blocks that are communicating support for a hard-fork that has a high likelihood of fragmenting the network. why?
12:49 < kanzure> bramc: we don't have a bdfl
12:50 < bramc> kanzure, The media portrays gavin as the bdfl
12:50 < kanzure> the media also portrays bitcoin as anonymous
12:50 < bramc> I didn't say they're right.
12:51 < bramc> If there is a fork between big-bitcoin and little-bitcoin, is there a way of crafting transactions so they'll get accepted by one but not the other?
12:52 < maaku> bramc: we never had a bdfl
12:52 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:52 < maaku> bramc: sure, double spend
12:53 < maaku> bramc: generate a transaction >1MB in size
12:53 < bramc> maaku, the frequency with which double spend works depends on whether the two networks manage to separate completely or there's a transactions bridge between them
12:54 < maaku> bramc: a >1MB transaction won't bridge
12:54 <@gmaxwell> bramc: you can also derrive your transaction out of coinbase outputs made post-fork.
12:54 < bramc> maaku, Let's assume that a >1mb transaction is unacceptable generally
12:54 < kanzure> crafting transactions out of two blockchains only solves parts of the problem; ther'es also ledger reconciliation issues to be aware of, incompatible software, fragmentation of the business ecosystem, etc.
12:55 < bramc> gmaxwell, There's a chance that transactions will usually be applied to both, even if they don't mean to.
12:55 < bramc> kanzure, the inevitable result of a hard fork is two separate cryptocurrencies both called bitcoin
12:56 < ajweiss> no bdfl, more like a central committee of cryptophile programmers who shepherd and lead the cryptoproleteriat in building the one true ledger state
12:56 < kanzure> ajweiss: that's a misrepresentation of what's going on
12:56 < ajweiss> it's a joke.
12:56 < kanzure> don't those have to be funny
12:56 < bramc> Is there anything in mhearn's patch besides changing a constant?
12:56 < kanzure> bramc: there's a "grace period" after blocks with the version number show up
12:57 < kanzure> bramc: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/39ziy6/eli5_what_will_happen_if_there_is_a_hard_fork/cs7xxhe?context=1
12:57 < nwilcox> bramc: If there is a hard fork, and no way for users to differentiate the units on different forks, seems bad for users.
12:57 < kanzure> there's a long list of problems that arise
12:57 < nwilcox> -but that's just one of many problems.
12:59 < nsh> bramc, mike isn't making a patch, as i understand it, gavin is, and presumably it's more complex than that as he's still in testing phase
12:59 < nsh> and intends to draft a BIP
12:59 < kanzure> (see the link)
12:59 < morcos> one of the issues i've been wondering about is what will the legal implications be for companies holding bitcoin balances for users, they will probably have to support both forks
12:59 < nsh> morcos, feel free to wonder about that in depth, in a public blog post
12:59 < nsh> :)
13:00 < zooko> nwilcox: this is the genesis of Ian Grigg's notion of the Ricardian Contract, I think.
13:00 < fluffypony> nsh: on medium
13:00  * nsh smiles
13:01 < zooko> nwilcox: Sorry if I was dismissive earlier, but actually now that I'm less grumpy, your idea of using the earliest unique block id as the fork id is excellent!
13:01 < fluffypony> because that's the best forum for it
13:02 < bramc> Forks are a Bad Thing
13:03 < ThinThread> can i spent my bitcoin twice on each branch of fork?
13:03 < kanzure> not always
13:03 < morcos> and once on each branch might be easier
13:03 < nsh> not even once on each branch, except in some circumstances :)
13:04 < ThinThread> so are bitcoin forks basically like stock splits
13:04 < maaku> what? no
13:04 < maaku> they are nothing like stock splits
13:04 < bramc> Gavin is really sounding out of control. His approach to dealing with the rancor against his proposed hard fork is to make the limit go up exponentially in perpetuity? Yeah, great way to get people on your side.
13:04 < gwillen> ThinThread: there's not a clean separateion of the two sides. Some transactions will go through on one side only, some will go through on both.
13:05 < ThinThread> ah i see
13:05 < gwillen> ThinThread: initially coins will be "in sync" on both sides, but as transactions fail to clear on both sides (e.g. because you mix in some coins generated after the form), they will fall "out of sync"
13:05 < bramc> ThinThread, Yes each coin basically splits in two, but it isn't clear how easy it might be to actually get your coins to separate, hence my earlier question about getting accepted on either side
13:05 < gwillen> so you'll have a mixture of coins on one side, the other, or both, depending on where they came from
13:05 <@gmaxwell> zooko: there is an old proposal of mine that transactions should be able to 'checkpoint' what chains their fees are payable in.
13:05 < nwilcox> ThinThread: Imagine every user and exchange and miner was clear which fork a txn "belonged" to. Then you could treat the two forks as two currencies.
13:05 < kanzure> gmaxwell: yes that would help, although of course a fork could ignore those rules, heh
13:06 < nwilcox> They'll probably be currencies which are in catastrophic economic collapse, though...
13:06 <@gmaxwell> zooko: which was intended to address the problem that your transaction pays the honest network and a forking attacker equally. (assuming it can be mined in both)
13:06 < kanzure> it is wrong to think about two currencies really; there's no way that will be a stable result of this
13:06 < bramc> oh, here's a thought: Once the two chains get slightly out of sync on time, you can use timelock and malleability
13:06 <@gmaxwell> kanzure: yes, it wasn't a tool intended against hardforks, just against reorg attacks.
13:06 < kanzure> i mean yes that will technically exist for a few minutes or hours or something
13:06 < zooko> gmaxwell: neat!
13:06 < gwillen> in principle, if all the software were designed to treat coins carefully with regard to which chain recognizes them, you could have two currencies
13:06 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
13:06 < gwillen> in practice it's not and you will have a big fucking mess
13:06 < nwilcox> ThinThread: However, without code changes: people won't be clear on forks and (some) txns can be replayed between forks.
13:07 < zooko> gmaxwell: will add that to my big book of maybes.
13:07 < kanzure> zooko: it's mentioned on the wiki
13:07 < bramc> gwillen, inevitably it would get there eventually, but yeah big fucking mess for a long time
13:07 -!- jgarzik [~jgarzik@unaffiliated/jgarzik] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
13:07 < gwillen> bramc: I expect one or both of them would die before then
13:07 < nwilcox> kanzure: Yes, I agree that the two currenies ideas is very unlikely.
13:07 < kanzure> and also there might be more than two blockchain forks during this time
13:08 < kanzure> because perhaps the network is not well-connected
13:08 < gwillen> also, one of the sides would presuambly be limping along with negligible hashpower
13:08 < gwillen> which would make it extremely prone to attacks
13:08 < kanzure> e.g. the topology of the network after the hard-fork could be such that different forks start happening for hours in different segments of the network
13:08 < bramc> gwillen, It's extremely difficult for either of them to completely die once they have any momentum, and people will hang onto whatever coins they have as long as they're worth *something*
13:08 < kanzure> e.g. especially if nodes start dropping connections due to non-rule-following
13:08 < bramc> gwillen, The hashpower of each side will be directly proportional to their rewards
13:09 < bramc> Also notably, there's no proposal to allow merge-mining. Gavin seemed confused when I suggested it.
13:09 < gwillen> bramc: rewards as denominated in external currency, though. So whichever side has more valuable coins will get more hashpower, but probably whichever side has more hashpower will get more valuable coins
13:09 < bramc> kanzure, There's likely to be two separate networks due to dropping for non-rule-following
13:09 < kanzure> or more than 2
13:09 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:10 < bramc> gwillen, Its not like one side wins over the other. They each get hashpower proportional to their value.
13:10 < kanzure> why would it be proportional to anything? why not "proportional to the hashrate that was pointed at that chain and rule set"?
13:11 < gwillen> kanzure: if both sides' generated coins are trading at independent values, people will mine them proportional to the values they trade at
13:11 < gwillen> for optimum reward
13:11 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has quit [Client Quit]
13:11 < bramc> kanzure, for any altcoin its hashpower will wind up being about proportional to its rewards, because that's the point at which ROI of doing more goes negative
13:11 < gwillen> I expect we will not end up with both sides trading at stable independent values though
13:11 < bramc> It seems likely, of course, that the value of both forks would tank rapidly.
13:12 < gwillen> yeah
13:12 -!- antanst [~Adium@adsl-66.37.6.208.tellas.gr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:12 < ajweiss> depends on what the exchanges do
13:12 < ThinThread> are bitcoin forks the only way to see what the consensus really is?  ie whose fork has most miners
13:12 < kanzure> "most miners" is not the way to decide anything
13:13 < kanzure> the absolute number of miners is non-detectable in this system anyway
13:13 < ThinThread> well theres no good way to decide anything
13:13 < jposner> "most difficulty"
13:13 < ThinThread> the supreme court is crap
13:15 < bramc> ThinThread, For multiple forks on the same chain, which happen all the time, the rule is that greater work total wins. For hard forks, they're different chains, and there's no way any of them can kill off the other
13:15 -!- nwilcox [~nwilcox@68.233.157.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
13:16 < kanzure> nsh: so your argument is that we should relay blocks that are communicating support for a hard-fork that has a high likelihood of fragmenting the network. why?
13:16 < kanzure> nsh: you might be right, but i would need your elaboration
13:17 < jposner> bramc, but even with a hard fork, there will only be 1 chain with the most work
13:17 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:17 -!- nwilcox [~nwilcox@68.233.157.2] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:17 < kanzure> jposner: it's most work plus validity
13:17 < bramc> jposner, That won't result in the other dieing though
13:17 < kanzure> one of them will not be valid according to various rules
13:18 < fluffypony> jposner: for valid blocks yes, but that's also "eventually"
13:18 < jposner> bramc, no it won't kill the others, just as bitcoin hasn't killed alts
13:18 < fluffypony> which could take hours or days or weeks to resolve if the split is quite fine
13:18 < gwillen> 13:14:34 < ThinThread> well theres no good way to decide anything
13:19 < kanzure> proof-of-work
13:19 < gwillen> ThinThread: you have identified the fundamental problem inherent in organizing humans together for a common task ;-)
13:19 < bramc> There's something about the miners in china having met and 'decided' on 8mb, presumably as a 'compromise', does anybody have a source for this?
13:19 < zooko> gmaxwell, kanzure: could you give me a link to the documentation of the idea of transactions being required to include the hash of a recent block?
13:19 < fluffypony> bramc: here: http://i.imgur.com/JUnQcue.jpg
13:19 < kanzure> bramc: started with a few emails on bitcoin-development; then there was some statement posted to reddit; then there was some news article.
13:19 < gwillen> ThinThread: the choices are "democracy", "dictatorship", and "shrug, let's see what happens", and we're currently working our way through the third one
13:19 < bramc> fluffypony, Is there a transation? I don't speak or read chinese
13:20 < ajweiss> woah cool chinese stamps!
13:20 < jposner> one cpu, one vote
13:20 < kanzure> gwillen: that's not right; there are far more options than that. and it's wrong to describe this as "let's see what happens"... bitcoin.pdf basically describes this as "the only way to know is to see all the transactions and run the rules". spv is mentioned, sure, but that's different.
13:20 < fluffypony> jposner: what do you do about virtual CPUs, then?
13:20 < kanzure> jposner: it's nothing about cpus or votes
13:20 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has left #bitcoin-wizards []
13:20 < gwillen> kanzure: sorry, I'm being a little bit glib
13:21 < fluffypony> bramc: https://imgur.com/a/LlDRr
13:21 < kanzure> bramc: there is a translation on reddit
13:21 < gwillen> kanzure: and I'm not really talking about how bitcoin itself decides things, but rather about how we as a community make meta-decisions about bitcoin
13:21 -!- blazes816 [~tylersmit@173.247.206.110] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:21 < kanzure> "high orphan rate leading to hard forks down the road".. oh i guess they mean if they hard-fork it to a lower max size. well, whatever. that's true.
13:22 < kanzure> but reorgs are not hard forks
13:22 < gwillen> kanzure: historically the answer seems to have been 'consensus', but now we're having to answer questions like "what is consensus" and "consensus of who"
13:22 < kanzure> gwillen: that's still the wrong representation of this; the way that bitcoin works is that everyone is personally responsible for validating the rules. it's not a consensus. it's a matter of correctness.
13:22 < jposner> fluffypony, it's just a way of describing proof-of-work from the white paper
13:23 < kanzure> jposner: it's a poor (and wrong) description
13:23 < fluffypony> ^^
13:23 < jposner> glad you guys are smarter than satoshi
13:23 < bramc> It's fair at this point to say that Gavin's gone rogue. He's preemptively going to vendors and presenting himself as the voice of sanity and reasonableness when he's in a tiny minority of those who are technically informed.
13:25 < bramc> jposner, I don't know what you're trying to say, but knock it off with the attitude
13:25 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@ip1f10af17.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:25 -!- tcrypt [~tylersmit@173.247.206.110] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
13:25 < kanzure> jposner: that's an argument from authority, and that sort of breaks bitcoin (if you wanted authority, go use a centralized design)
13:25 -!- darwin_ [~darwin@88-103-255-166.jes.cz] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
13:25 < ThinThread> TIL gavin is gmaxwell
13:26 < ThinThread> im building dossiers
13:26 < fluffypony> jposner: if you asked me to design a massively distributed system 5 years ago I would say things and conclude things that *would* be wrong in the face of data and hindsight
13:26 < bramc> ThinThread, Yeah it's ironic because Gavin is supposed to be the diplomatic one who gets everybody to play nice and he's doing the exact opposite.
13:26 -!- darwin_ [~darwin@88-103-255-166.jes.cz] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:26 -!- dEBRUYNE_ [~dEBRUYNE@239-196-ftth.onsbrabantnet.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
13:26 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:26 -!- nwilcox [~nwilcox@68.233.157.2] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
13:26 < jposner> I simply think it takes some hubris to call Satoshi's description of proof-of-work
13:27 <@gmaxwell> zooko: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/User:Gmaxwell/alt_ideas third top-level bullet.
13:27 < jposner> poor and wrong
13:27 < fluffypony> to believe that Satoshi Nakamoto was somehow perfectly able to foresee every eventuality, every possibility, every change, is naïve at best
13:27 < kanzure> and is disproven by the existence of soft-forks
13:27 < ThinThread> did Gavin short bitcoin on bitfinex or something?
13:27 < ThinThread> im trying to figure out how to trade this
13:27 < zooko> gmaxwell: thanks.
13:28 < fluffypony> jposner: you're misquoting him, you're making the same mistake the CryptoNote authors made
13:28 < fluffypony> he does say "Proof-of-work is essentially one-CPU-one-vote"
13:28 < fluffypony> but the following sentence explains
13:28 <@gmaxwell> jposner: If you'd like to talk about hubris, I suggest that you start with thinking you can fradulently claim that someone supported something they didn't support, in a discussion they are not a part of (as far as you know).
13:28 < fluffypony> "The majority decision is represented by the longest chain, which has the greatest proof-of-work effort invested in it."
13:28 < ThinThread> its hard to rollout technology improvements without interrupting outstanding demands of customers
13:28 -!- nwilcox [~nwilcox@68.233.157.2] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:28 < kanzure> what is wrong with hubris, again? especially in a no-authority system design?
13:29 < fluffypony> clearly that represents "majority processing power", not literally "one-CPU-one-vote"
13:29 < kanzure> fluffypony: and even that is unclear and ambiguous; he naturally means "the longest valid chain, which has the"
13:29 < fluffypony> 100%
13:29 <@gmaxwell> jposner: while it's impossible to say for sure what someone who hasn't entered into the discussion would say; I can easily point to where I've made the same arguments and clarify what I meant.  But thats all I can do, I don't speak for anyone but myself.
13:29 < ThinThread> any link to manifestos for both sides of the issue?
13:30 < fluffypony> manifestos? on what, a blog post?
13:30 < ThinThread> better yet summarized in few sentences
13:30 < kanzure> the issue of contentious hard-forks?
13:31 < ThinThread> hm yeah.
13:31 < ThinThread> i guess the blocksize dispute is secondary to that
13:31 < ThinThread> so most people are like hey dont fork stay in this together, and someone else is like no we really need this improvement were forking
13:32 < ThinThread> i guess this day was inevitable, birds leaving nest etc
13:32 -!- gmaxwell [greg@wikimedia/KatWalsh/x-0001] has left #bitcoin-wizards []
13:33 -!- n0n0_ [~n0n0___@x5f77b5a2.dyn.telefonica.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
13:33 < jposner> gmaxwell, I'm not trying to claim what Satoshi would say, I was simply trying to reference his statement from the white paper that "Proof-of-work is essentially one-CPU-one-vote."
13:33 < bramc> ThinThread, No there's nothing inevitable about what's going on now, it's completely self-inflicted and ridiculous, with the overwhelming majority of people in the know being adamantly against it.
13:34 < jposner> gmaxwell, there are admittedly many ways to interpret that statement
13:34 < ThinThread> go i wish satoshi would release a signed message of guidance
13:34 < kanzure> yes the first way to interpret it is by reading the next sentence
13:35 -!- zooko [~user@sta-207-174-117-102.rockynet.com] has left #bitcoin-wizards ["must concentrate"]
13:37 -!- jtrag [~jtrag@173.233.123.226] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
13:39 -!- mm_1 [bnc33@bnc33.nitrado.net] has quit [Excess Flood]
13:39 < kanzure> bramc: the link for the signed statement was http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3a5qj5/draft_signed_by_f2pool_antpool_bw_btcchina_huobi/
13:39 < kanzure> or the other link, i mean
13:39 -!- mm_1 [~malte0@bnc33.nitrado.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:40 -!- bramc [~bram@38.99.42.130] has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
13:40 < kanzure> "Does anyone worry that this shows mining pool collusion is entirely realistic?"
13:41 -!- dEBRUYNE_ [~dEBRUYNE@239-196-ftth.onsbrabantnet.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:45 -!- heath__ [~heath@unaffiliated/ybit] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
13:46 -!- tdryja [~tx@s186.62.229.222.fls.vectant.ne.jp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:47 -!- heath [~heath@131.252.130.250] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:47 -!- heath [~heath@131.252.130.250] has quit [Changing host]
13:47 -!- heath [~heath@unaffiliated/ybit] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:49 -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:49 -!- antanst [~Adium@adsl-66.37.6.208.tellas.gr] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
13:51 -!- sparetire_ [~sparetire@unaffiliated/sparetire] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:54 -!- RoboTeddy [~roboteddy@c-67-188-40-206.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
13:55 -!- shen_noe [~shen_noe@172.56.16.219] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:56 -!- tdryja [~tx@s186.62.229.222.fls.vectant.ne.jp] has left #bitcoin-wizards []
13:59 -!- shen_noe [~shen_noe@172.56.16.219] has quit [Client Quit]
14:04 -!- nessence [~alexl@166.170.23.115] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
14:06 -!- RoboTeddy [~roboteddy@c-67-188-40-9.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:06 -!- RoboTeddy [~roboteddy@c-67-188-40-9.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Client Quit]
14:06 -!- belcher [~belcher-s@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:08 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has left #bitcoin-wizards []
14:13 -!- gill3s [~gill3s@pat35-3-82-245-143-153.fbx.proxad.net] has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
14:14 -!- GAit [~lnahum@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:14 -!- n0n0_ [~n0n0___@x5f77b5a2.dyn.telefonica.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:16 -!- temujin [2679a51e@gateway/web/freenode/ip.38.121.165.30] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
14:18 -!- PRab [~chatzilla@2601:40a:8000:8f9b:ed5a:7b56:d036:5b1b] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
14:18 -!- PRab [~chatzilla@2601:40a:8000:8f9b:ed5a:7b56:d036:5b1b] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:19 -!- temujin [2679a51e@gateway/web/freenode/ip.38.121.165.30] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:22 -!- moa [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/moa] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:22 -!- lnsybrd [~lnsybrd@fwsm-io-azp-dmz.phx1.ip.io.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:28 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
14:29 -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has quit [Quit: Bye]
14:30 -!- jmcn [~jamie@2.24.158.66] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:30 -!- GAit [~lnahum@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
14:31 -!- GAit [~lnahum@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:32 -!- eudoxia [~eudoxia@r167-57-215-159.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
14:33 -!- jmcn_ [~jamie@2.24.158.53] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
14:49 -!- darwin_ [~darwin@88-103-255-166.jes.cz] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
14:53 -!- StephenM347 [~stephenm3@static-64-223-246-218.port.east.myfairpoint.net] has quit []
14:55 -!- _biO_ [~biO_@ip-37-24-195-112.hsi14.unitymediagroup.de] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
15:00 -!- kmels [~kmels@93.166.151.186.static.intelnet.net.gt] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:00 -!- tdryja [~tx@s186.62.229.222.fls.vectant.ne.jp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:01 -!- tdryja [~tx@s186.62.229.222.fls.vectant.ne.jp] has left #bitcoin-wizards []
15:10 < maaku> kanzure: what's seemingly entirely lost is that the mining pools in China want smaller blocks to protect non-Chinese miners
15:11 < nsh> heh
15:11 < nsh> they should be disqualified for not acting as rational actors :)
15:11 < nsh> *behaving
15:14 < phantomcircuit> nsh, it's meta rational to project their capital investment
15:14 < nsh> indeed
15:14 < phantomcircuit> damn now im making the same bizarre arguments as the others
15:14  * nsh smiles
15:14 < phantomcircuit> (note you cant rely on this behavior as it's unstable)
15:15  * nsh nods
15:17 -!- lnsybrd [~lnsybrd@fwsm-io-azp-dmz.phx1.ip.io.com] has quit [Quit: lnsybrd]
15:20 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
15:21 -!- c-cex-yuriy [uid76808@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-ryrowwkbbzrutyef] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:21 -!- jae [~jae@c-50-185-138-22.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:22 -!- jae is now known as Guest99295
15:26 -!- Guest99295 is now known as jaekwon
15:29 -!- shen_noe [~shen_noe@172.56.16.219] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:38 -!- cosmo [~james@unaffiliated/cosmo] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
15:46 -!- c0rw|zZz is now known as c0rw1n
15:52 -!- DougieBot5000 [~DougieBot@unaffiliated/dougiebot5000] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
15:56 -!- cosmo [~james@unaffiliated/cosmo] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:05 -!- nessence [~alexl@166.170.24.6] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:07 -!- nwilcox [~nwilcox@68.233.157.2] has quit [Quit: leaving]
16:09 -!- shen_noe [~shen_noe@172.56.16.219] has quit [Quit: quitquitquit]
16:15 -!- hashtag [~hashtag@cpe-69-23-213-3.ma.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:16 -!- temujin [2679a51e@gateway/web/freenode/ip.38.121.165.30] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
16:17 -!- Mably [~Mably@unaffiliated/mably] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
16:26 -!- justanotherusr [~Justan@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
16:26 -!- nessence [~alexl@166.170.24.6] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
16:26 -!- justanotherusr [~Justan@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:26 -!- bramc [~bram@38.99.42.130] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:35 -!- bramc [~bram@38.99.42.130] has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
16:39 -!- jtimon [~quassel@137.30.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
16:39 -!- dEBRUYNE_ [~dEBRUYNE@239-196-ftth.onsbrabantnet.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
16:39 -!- austinhill [~Adium@bas1-montreal43-1177755675.dsl.bell.ca] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
16:44 -!- www1 [~v3@f052161096.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:46 -!- www [~v3@f052000057.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
16:50 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@ip1f10af17.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
16:51 -!- bramc [~bram@38.99.42.130] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:58 -!- bramc [~bram@38.99.42.130] has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
17:00 -!- d1ggy_ [~d1ggy@dslb-178-003-123-037.178.003.pools.vodafone-ip.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:04 -!- d1ggy [~d1ggy@dslc-082-082-192-234.pools.arcor-ip.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
17:05 -!- zwick [~zwick@fsf/member/zwick] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
17:08 -!- cosmo [~james@unaffiliated/cosmo] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
17:13 -!- c0rw1n is now known as c0rw|sleep
17:14 -!- jposner [~jposner@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/jposner] has quit []
17:17 -!- nessence [~alexl@c-68-51-194-2.hsd1.mi.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:19 -!- belcher [~belcher-s@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
17:20 -!- www1 [~v3@f052161096.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
17:25 -!- n0n0_ [~n0n0___@x5f77b5a2.dyn.telefonica.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
17:33 -!- AlexStraunoff is now known as stqism
17:40 -!- cosmo [~james@unaffiliated/cosmo] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:43 -!- NewLiberty [~NewLibert@99-48-178-219.lightspeed.irvnca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:44 -!- nemild [~nemild@104.207.195.34] has quit [Quit: nemild]
17:54 -!- go1111111 [~go1111111@162.244.138.37] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
17:58 -!- d1ggy [~d1ggy@dslb-092-077-246-034.092.077.pools.vodafone-ip.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:01 -!- d1ggy_ [~d1ggy@dslb-178-003-123-037.178.003.pools.vodafone-ip.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
18:02 -!- zwick [~zwick@fsf/member/zwick] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:03 -!- bramc [~bram@38.99.42.130] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:05 -!- go1111111 [~go1111111@104.200.154.55] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:09 -!- mkarrer [~mkarrer@148.Red-88-8-116.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:10 -!- michagogo [uid14316@wikia/Michagogo] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
18:16 -!- priidu [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
18:16 -!- _whitelogger [whitelogge@fehu.whitequark.org] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
18:23 -!- zwick [~zwick@fsf/member/zwick] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 1.2]
18:24 -!- zooko [~user@h-66-134-117-59.dnvt.co.megapath.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:24 -!- llllllllll [~lllllllll@6d482698.ftth.concepts.nl] has quit []
18:30 -!- _whitelogger [whitelogge@fehu.whitequark.org] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:30 -!- GAit [~lnahum@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
18:33 -!- GAit [~lnahum@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:34 -!- blazes816 [~tylersmit@173.247.206.110] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
18:38 -!- nubbins` [~leel@unaffiliated/nubbins] has quit [Quit: Quit]
18:38 -!- bramc [~bram@38.99.42.130] has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
18:48 -!- rht__ [uid86914@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-dwqwbdzanrmjzilp] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
18:48 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:55 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@unaffiliated/dr-g] has quit [Disconnected by services]
18:55 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@x4d08dbaf.dyn.telefonica.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:07 -!- zooko [~user@h-66-134-117-59.dnvt.co.megapath.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
19:22 -!- SDCDev [~quassel@unaffiliated/sdcdev] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:25 -!- c-cex-yuriy [uid76808@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-ryrowwkbbzrutyef] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
19:26 -!- p15 [~p15@111.193.180.180] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:31 -!- jaekwon [~jae@c-50-185-138-22.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
19:44 -!- bramc [~bram@99-75-88-206.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:47 -!- zooko [~user@c-73-181-114-84.hsd1.co.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:49 -!- kmels [~kmels@93.166.151.186.static.intelnet.net.gt] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
19:53 -!- kmels [~kmels@93.166.151.186.static.intelnet.net.gt] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:55 -!- DougieBot5000 [~DougieBot@unaffiliated/dougiebot5000] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:58 -!- prodatalab [~prodatala@2602:306:ceef:a750:b532:2336:35b2:82ba] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
20:00 -!- kgk [~kgk@76.14.85.43] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:02 -!- goregrind [~goregrind@unaffiliated/goregrind] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
20:04 -!- nemild [~nemild@cpe-72-225-229-25.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:08 -!- goregrind [~goregrind@unaffiliated/goregrind] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:19 < bramc> I'm working on a less-technical post about the current goings-on. It's making me really, really mad.
20:20 -!- hashtag [~hashtag@cpe-69-23-213-3.ma.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
20:27 -!- kgk [~kgk@76.14.85.43] has quit [Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com]
20:35 -!- kgk [~kgk@76.14.85.43] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:36 -!- hashtag [~hashtag@cpe-69-23-213-3.ma.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:37 -!- someguy [a9e578bd@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip.169.229.120.189] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:38 -!- alephbet [a9e578bd@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip.169.229.120.189] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:41 -!- hashtag [~hashtag@cpe-69-23-213-3.ma.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
20:44 -!- koshii [~w@c-68-58-151-30.hsd1.in.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
20:45 -!- nemild [~nemild@cpe-72-225-229-25.nyc.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: nemild]
20:45 -!- koshii [~w@c-68-58-151-30.hsd1.in.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:46 -!- [7] [~quassel@rockbox/developer/TheSeven] has quit [Disconnected by services]
20:46 -!- TheSeven [~quassel@rockbox/developer/TheSeven] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:49 -!- moa [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/moa] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
20:56 -!- kmels [~kmels@93.166.151.186.static.intelnet.net.gt] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
21:04 < bramc> My prediction the other day of the end result of this being that gavin and mheard leaving bitcoin development is looking more and more likely.
21:05 < justanotherusr> why do you think that?
21:10 < bramc> justanotherusr, Because they're making it come to that https://twitter.com/petertoddbtc/status/611368079117942786
21:11 < justanotherusr> it looks like hearn is just stirring up the pot to me
21:12 < justanotherusr> In that same interview he said if miners don't support >1MB blocks he might delegate a central authority to keep consensus
21:12 < justanotherusr> split consensus I should say
21:12 < bramc> There's stirring the pot, and there's being hellbent on cramming disastrous ideas down everybody else's throats
21:12 < bramc> justanotherusr, That's... also an awful idea
21:14 -!- nemild [~nemild@cpe-72-225-229-25.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:14 < justanotherusr> I don't really know what to say other than that his camp accepting centralization wouldn't be that surprising https://youtu.be/DB9goUDBAR0?t=122
21:16 < bramc> Yeah, umm, he's crazy
21:19 < bramc> The stupid thing is that the supposed crisis which this is all supposedly meant to avert isn't even a real crisis.
21:19 < bramc> Transaction fees might rise above two cents! The sky is falling!
21:20 < jcorgan> suggesting the nuclear option suggests that there is no further common basis for negotiation
21:21 -!- ircLuigi [~luigi@ip68-228-82-78.oc.oc.cox.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:23 -!- rht__ [uid86914@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-vyqiglmdeiojjnvv] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:28 -!- zooko [~user@c-73-181-114-84.hsd1.co.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
21:29 -!- ircLuigi [~luigi@ip68-228-82-78.oc.oc.cox.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
21:30 -!- ircLuigi [~luigi@ip68-228-82-78.oc.oc.cox.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:30 -!- ircLuigi [~luigi@ip68-228-82-78.oc.oc.cox.net] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded]
21:41 < leakypat> it's been eye opening his whole episode
21:43 -!- fanquake [~fanquake@unaffiliated/fanquake] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:51 < bramc> mhearn's fixation on zeroconf was always bizarre, but this is just unglued.
22:07 -!- kgk [~kgk@76.14.85.43] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
22:14 < petertodd> bramc: the conf I just got back from on blockchain tech was full of financey types looking to use bitcoin for various purposes - e.g. cross-border settlement - who were dumbfounded at how much people were caring at tx fees
22:15 < bramc> petertodd, Transaction fees might climb above two cents! The sky is falling!
22:15 < petertodd> bramc: e.g. one quote was basically "tx fees going up to levels that we can't afford would basically mean fiat is dead"
22:15 < petertodd> bramc: (and they knew damn well about the 1MB limit)
22:16 -!- justanotherusr is now known as {`0__0`}
22:16 < bramc> petertodd, Nobody eats there any more. It's too crowded.
22:16 < petertodd> yup!
22:16 -!- fanquake1 [~fanquake@45.56.158.31] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:17 < leakypat> Exactly
22:17 < petertodd> equally, it's pretty easy to explain to people why tx fees matter, and we can't rely on the inflation subsidy - at least when those people are looking at things like eris that would only use the bitcoin blockchain for last-resort global consensus
22:18 -!- fanquake [~fanquake@unaffiliated/fanquake] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
22:18 < leakypat> "Bitcoin transaction fees rise on demand for blockchain space"
22:19 < petertodd> speaking of, anyone looked at replace-by-fee lately? I'm getting nervous because no-one is finding any bugs :P
22:21 -!- priidu [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:23 -!- nemild [~nemild@cpe-72-225-229-25.nyc.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: nemild]
22:26 -!- jgarzik [~jgarzik@unaffiliated/jgarzik] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:29 -!- sy5error [~sy5error@unaffiliated/sy5error] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
22:31 -!- _biO_ [~biO_@ip-37-24-195-112.hsi14.unitymediagroup.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:38 < bramc> I wonder how much of gavin and mike's increasing arrogance is driven by thinking they have the chinese miners in their pocket (not like miners have that kind of power anyway)
22:38 -!- {`0__0`} is now known as justanotheruser
22:39 < bramc> petertodd, What are the latest replace by fee acceptance heuristics?
22:40 < petertodd> bramc: http://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg08122.html
22:40 < bramc> Not allowing any new outputs to be added or have their value increased is 'conservative', although at this point I'm feeling like 'fuck zeroconf. Really. Fuck it.'
22:40 -!- mjerr [~mjerr@p578EB3B1.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:41 < petertodd> bramc: well, I've written both; I have reasonably firm commitment to implement the conservative option at a reasonably large pool so long as the code can pass peer review
22:42 < bramc> Much as it sounds interesting to work on, I'm not up on the bitcoin codebase and that looks like a serious time sink
22:42 < petertodd> haha, yeah, I can't blame you there
22:42 -!- Mably [~Mably@unaffiliated/mably] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:42 < petertodd> though, it's a good way to learn! :P
22:42 < bramc> The biggest potential issues have to do with introducing a transaction which pays x, then x+e, then x+2e, x+3e, etc.
22:42 < petertodd> how so?
22:42 -!- the_last [~the_last@58-6-171-98.dyn.iinet.net.au] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:42 < petertodd> oh, you mean e as in epsilon?
22:42 < bramc> It's a way to get the network to waste lots of bandwidth
22:43 < bramc> Yeah, e is epsilon
22:43 < petertodd> it makes sure you pay at least as much in increased fees as the min relay fee, so you're just as better off spamming normal txs
22:43 < bramc> It seems like transaction size should be included in there somewhere
22:44 < petertodd> it is! min relay fee is calculated as feerate * tx size
22:44 < bramc> oh good
22:45 < bramc> There's also potential issues where an attacker gets around that minimum by bumping two transactions back and forth out of the pool
22:45 < petertodd> how would that work?
22:45 < the_last> petertodd: Why not just increase the blocksize to say, 4mb. To postpone all of these issues until Lightning Network is complete?
22:46 < petertodd> the_last: if all you're doing is a small 4x increase, why bother with all that work and risk?
22:46 < bramc> Like, I give you a large transaction which just barely makes it in, then another one which pays epsilon more which bumps that one out, then another one which pays out of the first input which gives another epsilon and pushes that second one out, etc.
22:47 < bramc> Obviously this is dicey to do in practice, but worth considering
22:47 < the_last> petertodd: Prevent the necessary rise of txn fees in the mean time and allowance for low-value txns to continue on the network unimpaired?
22:48 < bramc> the_last, What does that accomplish?
22:49 < the_last> bramc: I'm sure there are companies out there that utilize the blockchain like that (if not, there will be), it would allow them to stay in business.
22:49 < petertodd> bramc: well, it has to pay epsilon = tx_{i+1}_size * min-relay-fee, so at every replacement you're paying for bandwidth roughly speaking (assuming at least one of them will get mined)
22:49 < bramc> petertodd, No there's a loophole: You're using your new transaction to bump out your old transaction, thus saving yourself money
22:51 < petertodd> bramc: nope, the new tx has to pay at least as much in total fees as the old one, as well as for it's own bandwidth
22:52 < bramc> petertodd, I'm not sure where our disconnect is here. My point is that the old transaction will get pushed out, so I don't have to pay for the bandwidth to send it out after all
22:53 < bramc> Say I create a 500k transaction which just barely makes it, wait for it to go everywhere, then make another 500k transaction which just barely bumps out the old one, wait for it to go over the whole network, make a new one, etc.
22:54 < bramc> If the amount of time it takes for these transactions to propagate is short enough I'll have succeeded in sending out a lot of them before a block is minted, and I only have to pay the fee on the last one because the others don't make it
22:55 < bramc> If I'm bouncing back and forth between two inputs I don't even run the risk of having to pay more than double in the end
22:55 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:55 -!- fanquake [~fanquake@unaffiliated/fanquake] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:55 < bramc> I'm feeling very collegial today, sort of like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvTCr5Z-0lA
22:55 -!- fanquake1 [~fanquake@45.56.158.31] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
22:56 < justanotheruser> bramc: what do you mean by "just barely" bumps out the old one?
22:56 < petertodd> ok, so tx1 will pay 500k * min_fee_rate in fees, and tx2 will pay (500k * min_fee_rate) + (500k * min_fee_rate) in fees
22:56 -!- Crowley2k [~Crowley2k@93.113.62.93] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:56 < petertodd> if tx2 pays less it gets rejected
22:56 < petertodd> replace-by-fee is *not* a mechanism to make mempools come to consensus, just a mechanism to replace transactions
22:56 < bramc> petertodd, Wait, so transactions which get introduced sooner have a big advantage? that seems unfair
22:56 -!- SDCDev [~quassel@unaffiliated/sdcdev] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
22:57 < bramc> petertodd, To be clear, I'm talking about transactions with different inputs, so they aren't replace by fee, they're bump out the other one
22:57 < petertodd> bramc: what does "unfair" have to do with it?
22:57 < bramc> Maybe this sort of attack is already possible on the existing deployed network
22:57 < petertodd> bramc: the purpose is to be able to replace one transaction with another - there's no "fair" involved as both txs are (basically always) created by the same person
22:58 -!- SDCDev [~quassel@unaffiliated/sdcdev] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:58 < petertodd> yeah, you've always been able to send multiple txs at once that are mutually incompatible
22:59 < bramc> okay, so let's say the attack I'm talking about doesn't even hit the replace by fee codepath. Is there any defense against it in the replace by fee or existing logic?
22:59 < petertodd> no, nor can there be - that's just a standard zeroconf doublespend
22:59 < bramc> I'm not communicating a critical point here
22:59 < bramc> Let's say I have two coins, A and B
23:00 < bramc> I introduce a huge transaction to spend A, then bump it out with another huge transaction to spend B
23:00 < petertodd> right
23:00 < bramc> At this point, will peers forget about the first transaction completely or simply stop relaying it?
23:01 < petertodd> yeah, they forget about tx #1
23:01 < bramc> So then even if there is no replace by fee logic, I can create a new transaction which spends A which pays epsilon more in fees and use it to bump out the existing spend of B, which will cause everybody to forget about the transaction which spends B...
23:01 < petertodd> (and actually, you have to have *three* coins, because you need a conflict)
23:02 < bramc> Let's say that my transactions are greater than 500k, so any two of them will conflict
23:02 < petertodd> no, w/o replace-by-fee the first tx that spends a given output is the one that is kept
23:02 < petertodd> also, max standard tx is 100k - larger than that won't get relayed
23:02 < bramc> But the first transaction was forgotten completely! The double-spend logic won't even notice that it's a replacement
23:03 < bramc> Also I can use ten 100k transactions, that doesn't fundamentally change the attack
23:03 < petertodd> wait, double-spend logic? what double-spend logic exactly?
23:04 < petertodd> and again, without replace-by-fee, transactions don't get removed from the mempool, except by being mined, or double-spent by a tx in a mined block
23:04 < bramc> In the existing deployed logic, if I get a transaction to spend A, then another transaction to spend A, I ignore the second one. But, if the first transaction got completely bumped out I'll have forgotten about it, so I'll accept a new one
23:05 < petertodd> right
23:05 < bramc> Didn't you just say that if a transaction gets bumped out because its fee is too low it will get forgotten completely?
23:05 < petertodd> so, if I have outputs A, B, C, I can create tx1 that spends A,C, replace it with tx2 that spends B,C, and then broadcast tx3 that spends just A
23:05 < petertodd> what's the exploit exactly?
23:06 < bramc> Oh that's a different kind of bumping out than I was thinking, I was thinking of things getting bumped out because the 1meg limit has been hit
23:06 < bramc> So there's no C. Let me think about using C.
23:06 < petertodd> nah, the mempool knows nothing about the blocksize limit, indeed, the mempool is unlimited in size...
23:07 < bramc> I think your logic will stop the bumping out due to using C just fine
23:07 < bramc> Requiring it step up by a full min relay fee seems a bit hash. Maybe half would be good
23:07 < bramc> harsh I mean, not hash
23:08 < bramc> Ah, so you keep whatever transactions you get but you don't relay them if their fees aren't high enough?
23:08 < petertodd> actually, there's potential issues re: block propagation where the min relay fee might be too low to account for  the tx's signatures not being in the sigcache of other nodes
23:08 < petertodd> no, txs that aren't re-relayed aren't kept
23:11 -!- Mably [~Mably@unaffiliated/mably] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
23:14 < bramc> So say a new block happens, and you have transactions locally which are for inputs which are still unspent, what do you do with them?
23:14 < petertodd> they stay in the mempool; the mempool is only changed by txs either getting mined or double-spent
23:17 < Adlai> (or by having the process restarted!)
23:18 -!- priidu [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
23:19 < justanotheruser> petertodd: I assume the possibility of transactions spending different sets of inputs with different fees leading to a transaction replacing cycle being created has been considered?
23:20 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
23:20 < petertodd> justanotheruser: yup! that is allowed, but the cycle will eventually end due to the rule that fees must always increase on every replacment
23:21 < justanotheruser> petertodd: oh, so even if a 100kb tx is being replaced by 100 1kb transactions, all the 1kb transactions individually must have a greater fee than the 100kb transaction?
23:21 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-185-201-214-201.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
23:21 < petertodd> yes!
23:21 < petertodd> sure, you could try to do better, but that's a rare case so no sense adding complex code to handle it
23:22 -!- priidu [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:22 < bramc> petertodd, How do peers prevent you from making them run out of memory by stuffing them full of extremely low fee transactions?
23:22 < petertodd> bramc: they don't
23:22 < petertodd> bramc: long-standing bug
23:22 < bramc> Come to think of it, you couldn't stuff them full of more than the utxo set's worth of data, which isn't all *that* big
23:23 < petertodd> well... a GB of mempool space requires $2.5k worth of btc
23:23 < petertodd> the attack *is* possible
23:24 < bramc> How are you getting that value?
23:25 < petertodd> work out the minimum relay fee/KB * 1GB * exchange rate
23:25 < petertodd> 10uBTC/Kb
23:25 < petertodd> *KB
23:26 < bramc> Isn't the minimum relay fee set based on the other fees being offered, essentially zero if there's less than 1meg worth of transactions total?
23:26 < petertodd> nope! it's hard-coded
23:27 < bramc> Is it already hard-coded or is this new with your new logic?
23:27 < petertodd> it's always been hard-coded
23:29 < bramc> What's the current minimum transaction fee on a standard size transaction?
23:29 < petertodd> 10uBTC/KB * 0.2KB or something - it's purely a $/KB calculation
23:30 < petertodd> anyway, go read the code, it'd do you some good :) AcceptToMemory
23:30 < petertodd> *AcceptToMemoryPool() is the relevant function
23:30 < petertodd> bbl later, bedtime
23:30 < bramc> Good night
23:36 -!- cosmo [~james@unaffiliated/cosmo] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
23:37 -!- moa [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/moa] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:39 -!- mengine [~mengine@14.84-234-132.customer.lyse.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
23:41 -!- someguy [a9e578bd@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip.169.229.120.189] has quit [Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client]
23:41 -!- alephbet [a9e578bd@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip.169.229.120.189] has quit [Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client]
23:41 -!- mengine [~mengine@14.84-234-132.customer.lyse.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:42 < bramc> petertodd, It would take a few weeks of making new utxos to get a gigabyte's worth
23:53 -!- DougieBot5000 [~DougieBot@unaffiliated/dougiebot5000] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
23:53 < the_last> https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions?timespan=all&showDataPoints=false&daysAverageString=1&show_header=true&scale=0&address=
23:55 < leakypat> the_last: and?
--- Log closed Thu Jun 18 00:00:45 2015