--- Log opened Sat Jun 20 00:00:46 2015
00:03 < CodeShark> (σ1σ2)2 = (σ2σ3)2 = (σ3σ1)2 = (σ1σ2σ3)2 = −1
00:04 -!- mm_1 [~malte0@bnc33.nitrado.net] has quit [Excess Flood]
00:04 -!- mm_1 [bnc33@bnc33.nitrado.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:09 < ggreer> I really wish there was OCR for math symbols. I'm more likely to recognize a random hanzi than a random math symbol :/
00:10 < ggreer> basically I want pleco for math
00:11 -!- _biO__ [~biO_@ip-37-24-195-112.hsi14.unitymediagroup.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:12 -!- adam3us [~Adium@62-2-191-242.static.cablecom.ch] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:16 -!- bramc [~bram@99-75-88-206.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
00:18 -!- kgk [~kgk@76.14.85.43] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:21 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:23 -!- kgk [~kgk@76.14.85.43] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
00:25 -!- ThomasV [~ThomasV@unaffiliated/thomasv] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:26 -!- nullbyte [~NSA@193.138.219.233] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
00:27 -!- nullbyte [NSA@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-ggtcgeluyfmyotjb] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:31 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
00:31 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:34 -!- nullbyte [NSA@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-ggtcgeluyfmyotjb] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
00:38 -!- nullbyte [NSA@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-pzyllmxsdsihjjon] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:41 -!- _biO__ [~biO_@ip-37-24-195-112.hsi14.unitymediagroup.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
00:42 -!- ThomasV [~ThomasV@unaffiliated/thomasv] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
00:49 -!- dEBRUYNE [~dEBRUYNE@239-196-ftth.onsbrabantnet.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:50 -!- jaekwon [~jae@c-98-234-63-169.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:56 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
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
01:04 -!- gill3s [~gill3s@pat35-3-82-245-143-153.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:23 -!- frankenmint [~frankenmi@c-24-22-67-17.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
01:26 -!- SDCDev [~quassel@unaffiliated/sdcdev] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:27 -!- sparetire_ [~sparetire@unaffiliated/sparetire] has quit [Quit: sparetire_]
01:29 -!- c-cex-yuriy [uid76808@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-hdcdmdpsikdtmgly] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:31 -!- Mably [~Mably@unaffiliated/mably] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:40 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:46 -!- jaekwon [~jae@c-98-234-63-169.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
01:52 -!- gill3s [~gill3s@pat35-3-82-245-143-153.fbx.proxad.net] has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
01:54 -!- frankenmint [~frankenmi@c-24-22-67-17.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:00 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:00 < the_last> http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3agk61/ultimate_bitcoin_stress_test_monday_june_22nd/
02:00 < the_last> UH OH
02:05 < phantomcircuit> the_last, https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3ahl43/i_believe_we_have_our_first_scammer_organizing_a/
02:05 < phantomcircuit> the_last, all the more reason not to increase the blocksize
02:06 < the_last> phantomcircuit: wow, that's interesting, pretty clever
02:07 < phantomcircuit> also i can add to that
02:07 < phantomcircuit> it's totally 100% a scam
02:07 < the_last> i wonder if lots of other people will short
02:07 < the_last> because of the hype around this event
02:08 < the_last> and cause the market to drop anyway
02:08 -!- gill3s [~gill3s@pat35-3-82-245-143-153.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:09 < gmaxwell> it's a little goofy though, esp in that this has nothing to do with blocksize. regardless of the blocksize anyone can generate transactions and fill up whatever and delay transactions that aren't paying more.
02:10 < the_last> yeah, but the hivemind is easily persuaded and manipulated when it comes to things surrounding the block size
02:14 < phantomcircuit> the_last, it appears to be much less the hive mind and much more a series of paid shills
02:15 < the_last> paid by who?
02:15 < phantomcircuit> an excellent question
02:17 < gmaxwell> there has been some funded attack on bitcoin lately, e.g. that full page ad that had a thread on reddit recently.
02:17 -!- adam3us [~Adium@62-2-191-242.static.cablecom.ch] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
02:18 < the_last> full page ad? I must have missed that
02:19 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
02:19 < gmaxwell> reddit thread: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/39qx01/negative_full_page_bitcoin_ad_in_large_swedish/
02:20 < the_last> ah yep
02:20 < the_last> that doesn't surprise me
02:21 -!- hulkhogan_ [WW@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-cuindtheloncyarl] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
02:30 -!- GAit [~lnahum@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
02:32 -!- GAit [~lnahum@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:34 -!- priidu [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:38 -!- n0n0_ [~n0n0___@x5f77b8ed.dyn.telefonica.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:39 -!- orperelman [~orperelma@109.67.207.175] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:40 -!- mjerr [~mjerr@p578EAB34.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
02:46 -!- Tiraspol [~Tiraspol3@unaffiliated/tiraspol] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
02:46 -!- Tiraspol [~Tiraspol3@x5ce4fbf6.dyn.telefonica.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:47 -!- Tiraspol [~Tiraspol3@x5ce4fbf6.dyn.telefonica.de] has quit [Changing host]
02:47 -!- Tiraspol [~Tiraspol3@unaffiliated/tiraspol] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:52 -!- nullbyte [NSA@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-pzyllmxsdsihjjon] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
02:54 -!- nullbyte [NSA@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-odbzxfceqiglgejv] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:56 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-5305.ethz.ch] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
02:58 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@nb-10350.ethz.ch] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:02 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
03:02 -!- nullbyte [NSA@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-odbzxfceqiglgejv] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
03:05 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@nb-10350.ethz.ch] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
03:05 -!- nullbyte [~NSA@193.138.219.233] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:06 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@nb-10350.ethz.ch] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:07 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@nb-10350.ethz.ch] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
03:08 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-10236.ethz.ch] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:15 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-10236.ethz.ch] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
03:17 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-5305.ethz.ch] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:19 -!- prodatalab_ [~prodatala@2602:306:ceef:a750:b49d:89c8:3f30:d378] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:21 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-5305.ethz.ch] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
03:22 -!- adam3us [~Adium@178.197.225.249] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:23 -!- _biO__ [~biO_@ip-37-24-195-112.hsi14.unitymediagroup.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:23 -!- adam3us [~Adium@178.197.225.249] has quit [Client Quit]
03:23 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-5305.ethz.ch] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:26 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-5305.ethz.ch] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
03:26 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-5305.ethz.ch] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:28 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-5305.ethz.ch] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
03:28 < Xh1pher> sweden... enough said, a land where u pay 80% taxes and woman stand above the law, sure they dont like btc
03:31 -!- gmaxwell [greg@wikimedia/KatWalsh/x-0001] has left #bitcoin-wizards []
03:34 -!- adam3us [~Adium@178.197.225.231] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:35 -!- SDCDev [~quassel@unaffiliated/sdcdev] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
03:39 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-5305.ethz.ch] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:41 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-5305.ethz.ch] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
03:41 -!- adam3us [~Adium@178.197.225.231] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
03:42 -!- orperelman [~orperelma@109.67.207.175] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
03:42 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-10236.ethz.ch] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:42 -!- orperelman [~orperelma@bzq-109-67-207-175.red.bezeqint.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:42 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-10236.ethz.ch] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
03:43 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-5305.ethz.ch] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:43 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-5305.ethz.ch] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
03:44 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-5305.ethz.ch] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:52 -!- justanotherusr [~Justan@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:56 -!- nullbyte [~NSA@193.138.219.233] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
03:57 -!- nullbyte [NSA@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-pnjmcoruzqyjytxp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:03 -!- fanquake [~fanquake@unaffiliated/fanquake] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:07 -!- bosma is now known as bosnia
04:08 -!- bosnia is now known as bosma
04:08 -!- erasmospunk [~erasmospu@46-198-61-117.adsl.cyta.gr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:08 -!- erasmospunk [~erasmospu@46-198-61-117.adsl.cyta.gr] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
04:08 -!- erasmospunk [~erasmospu@46-198-61-117.adsl.cyta.gr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:16 < leakypat> It was funny watching the 21inc dude presenting Bitcoin to Goldman Sachs
04:17 < leakypat> He was like, "there's a patch being worked out there to scale it to billions of transactions"
04:17 < leakypat> I mean, it's true...
04:17 < leakypat> They way he said patch though made it sound like it was a one line code change
04:18 < leakypat> Instead of a whole new network layer
04:18 < leakypat> I need to learn to talk like that
04:19 -!- gill3s [~gill3s@pat35-3-82-245-143-153.fbx.proxad.net] has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
04:21 < nsh> --
04:21 < nsh> Mr. Burns: Smithers, I've designed a new plane! I call it the Spruce Moose, and it will carry 200 passengers from New York's Idlewild Airport to the Belgian Congo in 17 minutes!
04:21 < nsh> Smithers: That's quite a nice model, sir.
04:21 < nsh> Mr. Burns: Model?
04:21 < nsh> --
04:25 -!- frankenmint [~frankenmi@c-24-22-67-17.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
04:27 < leakypat> nsh: lol
04:35 -!- erasmospunk [~erasmospu@46-198-61-117.adsl.cyta.gr] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
04:38 -!- fanquake1 [~fanquake@106-68-192-170.dyn.iinet.net.au] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:39 -!- erasmospunk [~erasmospu@46-198-61-117.adsl.cyta.gr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:41 -!- fanquake [~fanquake@unaffiliated/fanquake] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
04:44 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-5305.ethz.ch] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
04:45 -!- c-cex-yuriy [uid76808@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-hdcdmdpsikdtmgly] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
04:45 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@nb-10350.ethz.ch] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:45 -!- davi [~davi@gnu/davi] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
04:46 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@nb-10350.ethz.ch] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
04:47 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-5305.ethz.ch] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:47 -!- bosma is now known as bosnia
04:47 -!- bosnia is now known as bosma
04:50 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-5305.ethz.ch] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
04:50 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@nb-10350.ethz.ch] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:52 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@nb-10350.ethz.ch] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
04:52 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
04:53 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-10236.ethz.ch] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:55 -!- davi [~davi@gnu/davi] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:58 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-10236.ethz.ch] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
05:00 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-10236.ethz.ch] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:03 -!- alferz [~alferz@unaffiliated/alfer] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
05:09 -!- shesek [~shesek@IGLD-84-228-3-15.inter.net.il] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
05:14 -!- mkarrer_ [~mkarrer@248.Red-88-21-186.staticIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:16 -!- Relos [~Relos@unaffiliated/relos] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
05:16 < kanzure> bitcoin-development mailing list is moving to bitcoin-dev at https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
05:18 < nsh>  +1
05:18 -!- mkarrer [~mkarrer@148.Red-88-8-116.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
05:27 -!- davi [~davi@gnu/davi] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
05:27 -!- shesek [~shesek@IGLD-84-228-3-15.inter.net.il] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:28 -!- moa [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/moa] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
05:28 -!- mkarrer [~mkarrer@148.Red-88-8-116.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:30 -!- gielbier [~giel@f142219.upc-f.chello.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:32 -!- mkarrer_ [~mkarrer@248.Red-88-21-186.staticIP.rima-tde.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
05:37 -!- fanquake [~fanquake@unaffiliated/fanquake] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:39 -!- _biO__ [~biO_@ip-37-24-195-112.hsi14.unitymediagroup.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
05:40 -!- fanquake1 [~fanquake@106-68-192-170.dyn.iinet.net.au] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
05:41 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:45 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
05:46 -!- erasmospunk [~erasmospu@46-198-61-117.adsl.cyta.gr] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
05:48 -!- adam3us [~Adium@178.197.236.160] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:53 -!- adam3us [~Adium@178.197.236.160] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
05:55 -!- adam3us [~Adium@178.197.236.160] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:00 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:00 -!- airbreather [~airbreath@d149-67-99-43.nap.wideopenwest.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:10 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@vpn10.hotsplots.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:10 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@vpn10.hotsplots.net] has quit [Changing host]
06:10 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:10 -!- mjerr [~mjerr@p578EAB34.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:11 -!- adam3us [~Adium@178.197.236.160] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
06:17 -!- fanquake1 [~fanquake@203-59-252-178.dyn.iinet.net.au] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:20 -!- fanquake [~fanquake@unaffiliated/fanquake] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
06:21 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@ip1f10af17.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
06:24 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@ip1f10af17.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:26 -!- frankenmint [~frankenmi@c-24-22-67-17.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:31 -!- adam3us [~Adium@178.197.226.105] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:35 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
06:36 -!- hashtag [~hashtag@cpe-69-23-213-3.ma.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:44 -!- afk11 [~thomas@46.7.4.219] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:54 -!- mjerr [~mjerr@p578EAB34.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
06:54 -!- LeMiner2 [LeMiner@5ED1AFBF.cm-7-2c.dynamic.ziggo.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:56 -!- LeMiner [LeMiner@unaffiliated/leminer] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
06:56 -!- LeMiner2 is now known as LeMiner
06:59 -!- priidu [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
07:07 -!- TheSeven [~quassel@rockbox/developer/TheSeven] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
07:08 -!- getplank [~getplank@cpe-74-71-180-161.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:11 -!- laurentmt [~chatzilla@89-93-129-41.hfc.dyn.abo.bbox.fr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:13 -!- TheSeven [~quassel@rockbox/developer/TheSeven] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:19 -!- Keefe [~Keefe@unaffiliated/keefe] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
07:19 -!- erasmospunk [~erasmospu@46-198-61-117.adsl.cyta.gr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:20 -!- Tiraspol [~Tiraspol3@unaffiliated/tiraspol] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
07:22 -!- Tiraspol [~Tiraspol3@x5ce4fbf6.dyn.telefonica.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:22 -!- Tiraspol [~Tiraspol3@x5ce4fbf6.dyn.telefonica.de] has quit [Changing host]
07:22 -!- Tiraspol [~Tiraspol3@unaffiliated/tiraspol] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:28 -!- laurentmt [~chatzilla@89-93-129-41.hfc.dyn.abo.bbox.fr] has quit [Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.91.1 [Firefox 38.0.5/20150525141253]]
07:31 -!- jaekwon [~jae@2601:645:c001:263a:6c33:2b9c:881d:6eba] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:33 -!- adam3us [~Adium@178.197.226.105] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
07:34 -!- bramc [~bram@99-75-88-206.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:37 -!- laurentmt [~chatzilla@89-93-129-41.hfc.dyn.abo.bbox.fr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:42 -!- cornusammonis [~Cornus@pool-173-73-140-137.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
07:46 -!- davi [~davi@2001:4b98:dc0:51:216:3eff:feae:792] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:47 -!- davi [~davi@2001:4b98:dc0:51:216:3eff:feae:792] has quit [Changing host]
07:47 -!- davi [~davi@gnu/davi] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:53 -!- _biO__ [~biO_@ip-37-24-195-112.hsi14.unitymediagroup.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:53 -!- adam3us [~Adium@178.197.232.111] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:55 -!- LeMiner [LeMiner@5ED1AFBF.cm-7-2c.dynamic.ziggo.nl] has quit [Changing host]
07:55 -!- LeMiner [LeMiner@unaffiliated/leminer] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:59 -!- getplank [~getplank@cpe-74-71-180-161.nyc.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
08:06 -!- orperelman [~orperelma@bzq-109-67-207-175.red.bezeqint.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
08:10 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
08:12 -!- sy5error [~sy5error@unaffiliated/sy5error] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:16 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:17 -!- adam3us [~Adium@178.197.232.111] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
08:18 -!- bramc [~bram@99-75-88-206.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
08:25 -!- adam3us [~Adium@178.197.232.111] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:27 -!- hashtag [~hashtag@cpe-69-23-213-3.ma.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
08:30 -!- laurentmt [~chatzilla@89-93-129-41.hfc.dyn.abo.bbox.fr] has quit [Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.91.1 [Firefox 38.0.5/20150525141253]]
08:33 -!- adam3us [~Adium@178.197.232.111] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
08:34 -!- nullbyte [NSA@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-pnjmcoruzqyjytxp] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
08:35 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
08:38 -!- nullbyte [NSA@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-mkuwomqdeohkoqbw] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:39 -!- fanquake1 [~fanquake@203-59-252-178.dyn.iinet.net.au] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
08:42 -!- hashtag [~hashtag@cpe-69-23-213-3.ma.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:42 -!- eudoxia [~eudoxia@r186-49-240-111.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:47 -!- hashtag [~hashtag@cpe-69-23-213-3.ma.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
08:55 -!- eudoxia [~eudoxia@r186-49-240-111.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
08:59 -!- zmanian [~zmanian@c-24-5-125-31.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:00 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:02 -!- Mably [~Mably@unaffiliated/mably] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
09:04 -!- davi [~davi@gnu/davi] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
09:06 -!- GAit [~lnahum@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
09:22 -!- nullbyte [NSA@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-mkuwomqdeohkoqbw] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
09:26 -!- nullbyte [NSA@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-orgsjssmudzyddqf] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:26 -!- gill3s [~gill3s@pat35-3-82-245-143-153.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:27 < dgenr8> ;;seen Relos
09:27 < gribble> Relos was last seen in #bitcoin-wizards 1 week, 0 days, 22 hours, 28 minutes, and 50 seconds ago: <Relos> I said enough, I just switched to the tab and saw your comment, I don't know if there was a real discussion ongoing and I wouldn't want to in anyway take up its space
09:28 < kanzure> hahaha
09:28 < kanzure> 09:27 < Relos> and why have I been banned earlier today from #bitcoin-wizards.... I have never even said a word there
09:40 -!- GAit [~lnahum@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:09 -!- Populus [Populus@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-xuruyrmdbkgldvoh] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:09 -!- Populus [Populus@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-xuruyrmdbkgldvoh] has quit [Changing host]
10:09 -!- Populus [Populus@unaffiliated/populus] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:09 -!- Populus [Populus@unaffiliated/populus] has quit [Changing host]
10:09 -!- Populus [Populus@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-xuruyrmdbkgldvoh] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:13 -!- www1 is now known as wiwjwy
10:13 -!- instagibbs [60ff5d39@gateway/web/freenode/ip.96.255.93.57] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:15 -!- priidu [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:20 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
10:21 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:21 -!- Tiraspol [~Tiraspol3@unaffiliated/tiraspol] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
10:21 -!- Tiraspol [~Tiraspol3@x5ce4fbf6.dyn.telefonica.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:21 -!- Tiraspol [~Tiraspol3@x5ce4fbf6.dyn.telefonica.de] has quit [Changing host]
10:21 -!- Tiraspol [~Tiraspol3@unaffiliated/tiraspol] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:29 -!- Burrito [~Burrito@unaffiliated/burrito] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:30 -!- gill3s [~gill3s@pat35-3-82-245-143-153.fbx.proxad.net] has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
10:30 -!- GAit [~lnahum@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
10:32 -!- gill3s [~gill3s@pat35-3-82-245-143-153.fbx.proxad.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:33 -!- GAit [~lnahum@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:34 -!- nullbyte [NSA@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-orgsjssmudzyddqf] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
10:35 -!- bramc [~bram@99-75-88-206.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:36 -!- nullbyte [~NSA@193.138.219.233] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:44 -!- instagibbs [60ff5d39@gateway/web/freenode/ip.96.255.93.57] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
10:49 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
10:49 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:50 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has quit [Client Quit]
10:54 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-185-201-214-201.cm.vtr.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:56 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@ip1f10af17.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
10:58 -!- nullbyte [~NSA@193.138.219.233] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
11:00 -!- nullbyte [NSA@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-fvsodsyncnxgdsqo] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:07 -!- kyuupichan [~Neil@ae041057.dynamic.ppp.asahi-net.or.jp] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
11:09 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:15 -!- freakyfractal [~freakyfra@unaffiliated/freakyfractal] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:27 -!- Populus [Populus@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-xuruyrmdbkgldvoh] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
11:29 -!- gill3s [~gill3s@pat35-3-82-245-143-153.fbx.proxad.net] has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
11:29 -!- temujin [~temujin@75.133.112.155] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:30 -!- Populus [Populus@unaffiliated/populus] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:30 -!- Populus [Populus@unaffiliated/populus] has quit [Changing host]
11:30 -!- Populus [Populus@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-ejirngbnxitrovla] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:34 < bramc> An interesting wrinkle to the extension which allows a mutability fix: Once it's adopted there's a fairly trivial DOS of miners who don't support it
11:34 < bramc> The extension here being one which allows a transaction to refer to an input by the transaction rather than its signature
11:36 < bramc> You make a transaction of that type, then you connect to all miners directly and start giving them a double-spend of the old transaction every generation. Other miners will recognize it as a double-spend and treat their mining results as invalid
11:36 -!- afk11 [~thomas@46.7.4.219] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
11:37 < kanzure> they would have treated other miners' results as invalid since the others did not accept the other blocks that were mined with the patch
11:37 < kanzure> oh, you are probably talking about a different patch/idea, whoops
11:38 -!- freakyfractal [~freakyfra@unaffiliated/freakyfractal] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 1.2]
11:44 < bramc> kanzure, Not sure what patch you're talking about or which one you think I'm talking about
11:45 < bramc> I'm referring to one where the malleability fix is opt-in. It unfortunately leads to a situation where older miners are mistaken about which utxos have and have not been spent
11:45 < bramc> And you can't add that information in because the whole point is that it isn't there.
11:47 < bramc> This isn't a reason not to add the extension - it's very important functionality - but it's something to keep in mind.
11:47 -!- adam3us [~Adium@195.138.228.14] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:47 -!- adam3us [~Adium@195.138.228.14] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
11:47 -!- adam3us1 [~Adium@195.138.228.14] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:48 < kanzure> yes, i was definitely not talking about that; my bad.
11:48 -!- adam3us [~Adium@c3-219.i07-1.onvol.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:49 -!- mjerr [~mjerr@p578EAB34.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:50 -!- Mably_ [~Mably@unaffiliated/mably] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:52 -!- adam3us1 [~Adium@195.138.228.14] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
11:53 -!- zooko [~user@174-16-136-72.hlrn.qwest.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:53 -!- afk11 [~thomas@46.7.4.219] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:53 -!- Mably_ is now known as Mably
11:55 -!- erasmospunk [~erasmospu@46-198-61-117.adsl.cyta.gr] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
12:00 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:03 -!- nullbyte [NSA@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-fvsodsyncnxgdsqo] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
12:04 -!- nullbyte [NSA@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-ypqzyqabnlfytzcu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:09 < bramc> A thought on inflation: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/06/20/voters-always-want-a-strong-currency/
12:11 -!- nullbyte [NSA@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-ypqzyqabnlfytzcu] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
12:13 -!- nullbyte [NSA@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-dqvjkoeqpufhgwhl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:20 -!- nomailing [~Thunderbi@ip4d1472d1.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:21 -!- bramc [~bram@99-75-88-206.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
12:22 < zooko> I refuse to read anything by Paul Krugman.
12:23 < akrmn> Man no one gives me a clear answer on whether subchains can be used for scaling. Sipa didn't answer my last reply on bitcointalk. Jeff Garzik kinda said it can work in the far future (not clear). Peter Todd suggested that tree chains can work but no one still gave a solid proposal and UTXO commitments are already well established. Yes I read about UTXO commitments and P2Pool but I don't think either will help as much as subchains (P2P isn't helping rig
12:23 -!- eudoxia [~eudoxia@r186-49-240-111.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:24 < akrmn> And now sipa is writing about hard forks on the mailing list and hiding out on #sidechain-dev (so I won't bother him). Why don't we consider all options first?
12:24 < kinlo> akrmn: I think I can explain why subchains wont work for scaling
12:25 < akrmn> For UTXO commitments, what gives incentive to nodes to relay the merkle trees branches? Miners have an incentive to relay blocks because that's how the fees they made are recognized, but no incentive for merkle trees of UTXOs.
12:25 < kinlo> every client is now fully validating every block, in order to make sure nobody is cheating the system
12:26 < akrmn> Well the point is that you can validate just the transactions you're interested in and the whole system is still sustainable
12:26 < kinlo> you will need someone to validate  all to ensure the next block is valid
12:27 < kinlo> if you just look at a few chains, how do you produce new blocks?
12:27 < akrmn> Well if you haven't read my post: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1083345.0
12:27 < kinlo> are you going to trust that the other chains are valid too when creating a new block?
12:27 < akrmn> Its a tree of chains
12:27 < akrmn> each of 1 MB
12:27 -!- Populus [Populus@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-ejirngbnxitrovla] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
12:28 < akrmn> wallets can generate addresses so that they are constrained to one branch of that tree
12:28 < akrmn> so you can monitor your wallet fully or someone else's (like your government representative)
12:28 < akrmn> (be sure of the UTXOs and their coin value)
12:28 < kinlo> ok but how do you validate the blockchain?
12:29 < kinlo> you can just look at your chain, but then you can't mine, coz you don't know the entire tree
12:29 < akrmn> there are multiple blockchains (synchronized)
12:29 < kinlo> and those all need to be validated
12:29 -!- zooko [~user@174-16-136-72.hlrn.qwest.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
12:30 < kinlo> the question is, if you mine a new block, do you require all chains to be valid inside that tree?
12:30 < akrmn> Yes mining is decentralized because each chain requires a unique hashing problem to solve
12:30 -!- temujin [~temujin@75.133.112.155] has quit [Quit: temujin]
12:30 < kinlo> in that case, you're dividing the entire hashing power into multiple chains
12:31 < kinlo> and the idea is that the blockchain is unbreakable because there is nobody with more computer power then what is used for the blockchain
12:31 -!- nullbyte [NSA@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-dqvjkoeqpufhgwhl] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
12:31 < kinlo> if we divide our hashingpower into 10, 2-3 chains can be stopped being mined to get the power to attack on another subchain
12:32 < akrmn> Miners will have an incentive to validate the children chains of the chain theyre mining on, since they will commit the hashes of their headers into special transactions that give them outputs that are only valid on the children chains (but the deeper you go with the children the less important it gets)
12:32 -!- nullbyte [~NSA@193.138.219.233] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:32 < kinlo> so you are dividing themain blockchain into multiple seperatly mined chains?
12:32 < akrmn> ok wait that may be one disadvantage that I have to think about
12:34 < kinlo> it's basically the reason why all alt-coins are not safe, the hashing power is divided and people can quickly switch tree to perform an attack
12:34 < akrmn> It needs to be done so that mining on a child chain helps the hash power of all parent chains...
12:34 < akrmn> but not the other way around
12:34 < kinlo> but that can only happen if you validate all chains
12:34 < kinlo> which means you're not solving the problem, you're adding an extra layer and the combined blocksize - which needs to be validated - remains the same
12:35 < kinlo> do you know how merged mining works?
12:35 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-10236.ethz.ch] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
12:35 < akrmn> Yes I know merged mining
12:35 < kinlo> that partially solves that problem already
12:35 < kinlo> however, the 2 chains are completly seperated
12:35 < akrmn> but I dont want miners on the parent chain to be able to solve blocks on the child chains
12:35 < kinlo> and the only way it would work is if every miner would be mining every chain at the same time
12:35 < akrmn> that would result in decentralization
12:36 < akrmn> centralization
12:36 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-5305.ethz.ch] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:36 < kinlo> akrmn: the whole bitcoin consensus model works on the fact that everyone works on one tree, making it "centralized" in a way
12:36 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-5305.ethz.ch] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
12:37 < kinlo> akrmn: did that answer your question ? :)
12:38 < akrmn> Well the child chains are still part of the entire network, so putting hash power into them without putting it directly into the top chain isn't so bad
12:38 -!- zooko [~user@174-16-136-72.hlrn.qwest.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:39 < akrmn> If too little hashpower exists on the main chain, then difficulty will drop and there will be incentive for more miners to mine on it to get the higher fees associated with the top chain
12:39 < akrmn> so no I see everything still fine
12:40 < kinlo> it's in the current situation already common for 3-4 pools to have 50+% of the chains
12:40 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-5305.ethz.ch] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:40 < kinlo> if you have 10 chains, you will still have 3-4 pools having 50% of each chain
12:41 < akrmn> no because in the lower chains, there will be lower difficulty, so you don't need to be so powerful to mine on it
12:41 < akrmn> the point of pools is to lower the variance
12:41 < kinlo> I'm talkign about relative power
12:41 < kinlo> let's say at this moment, the top pool has 25%
12:42 < akrmn> and also there will be smaller pools and they will have to be different pools. It will be difficult for the miners on the top chain to also mine all the other chains
12:42 < kinlo> and manages to keep 25% overall when we upgrade to 10 chains
12:42 < kinlo> and lets say the difficulty of each subchain is equal, as you stated yourself, the network would balance out to that by itself
12:43 < kinlo> then that particular pool would be able to pauze mining on 9 pools, and would have mining power equal to 10 times 25% of the subchain it is attacking
12:44 < kinlo> so it would just blow away the competition on that chain and dominate it
12:44 < kinlo> do you follow?
12:44 < akrmn> kind of
12:45 < kinlo> ehm, it would pauze mining on 9 subchains
12:46 < akrmn> Attacks can always happen still so I don't see how doing it my way would be worse
12:47 < akrmn> people using the subchains know that security is a little lower on the subchain
12:50 < kinlo> ok but 10 times 1 mb is not enough for the future. let's say we go to 100 chains or 1000
12:50 < kinlo> do the math then
12:50 < kinlo> then the issues with your logic become more clear (altough theoretically they stay exactly the same)
12:52 < akrmn> I'm not disregarding your criticisms (some are good points). But scaling is not a problem since you can just keep adding more child chains, and there is an incentive to keep the child chains safe, since miners are getting paid fees by the child chain miners to include their block header hashes in the block.
12:53 -!- frankenmint [~frankenmi@c-24-22-67-17.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
12:53 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@pc-5305.ethz.ch] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
12:53 < kinlo> how do you validate the child chains?
12:53 -!- ttttemp [~ttttemp@nb-10350.ethz.ch] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:55 < akrmn> Well miners can validate the direct children chains of the chain they are working on. They can do more if they want, but the deeper you go the less important. And the child chain miners will take care of validating the grandchildren anyway.
12:55 < kinlo> I don't understand how a parent is validating their children?
12:56 < akrmn> By downloading the blocks and making sure the transactions are following the rules
12:56 < kinlo> but a child chain is only valid when all their child chains are valid, no?
12:56 < akrmn> Yes, but in case of conflict, the parent decides
12:57 < akrmn> is the rule I put
12:57 < kinlo> so the parent needs to evaluate all child and granchildren etc
12:57 < akrmn> so there can be mistakes, but it becomes less important the deeper you go
12:57 < kinlo> so you basically end up with one big chain, let's just keep the bitcoin model then
12:57 < akrmn> just the child is enough since the child will validate the grandchildren
12:58 < kinlo> how does the child validate the grandchildren?
12:58 < akrmn> just like the parent validates the children
12:58 < kinlo> by deciding which block is the tip on that granchild?
12:59 < akrmn> if the bitcoin model means centralization, I don't want that. I want to try to make things more decentralized that's all.
12:59 -!- mjerr [~mjerr@p578EAB34.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
12:59 < kinlo> ok but how does a child validates their grandchildren/
13:00 < akrmn> just by getting the blocks of the (direct grandchildren)
13:00 < akrmn> chain of level n validates chains of level n+1
13:00 < akrmn> and more if it wants
13:00 < kinlo> how does it technically work?
13:00 < kinlo> a block of a child has a list of the blockhashes of the grandchild?
13:01 < akrmn> Ya block of a child has 10 special transactions, each with the hash of the header of a grandchild
13:01 < kinlo> ok and how do I calculate that hash?
13:01 -!- DougieBot5000_ [~DougieBot@unaffiliated/dougiebot5000] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:02 -!- nessenc__ [~alexl@c-68-51-194-2.hsd1.mi.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:02 < akrmn> You just need the header and hash it (for whatever hash)
13:02 < kinlo> where do I get that?
13:03 < akrmn> from the miners/nodes responsible
13:03 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
13:03 -!- wiz_ [~sid1@tor-exit.echelon.nsa.network] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:03 < kinlo> so I blindly trust those miners?
13:03 -!- airbreather_ [~airbreath@d149-67-99-43.nap.wideopenwest.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:04 -!- catcow_ [sid62269@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-uxexyzkozeyyyjev] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:04 -!- maaku_ [~quassel@50-0-37-37.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:04 -!- DougieBot5000 [~DougieBot@unaffiliated/dougiebot5000] has quit [Killed (barjavel.freenode.net (Nickname regained by services))]
13:04 -!- DougieBot5000_ is now known as DougieBot5000
13:04 < kinlo> bitcoin is about not trusting anyone else, you're saying I should pick some miners and trust them with whatever hash they come up with?
13:04 -!- Taek42 [~quassel@2001:41d0:1:472e::] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:04 -!- prodatalab__ [~prodatala@2602:306:ceef:a750:2cc4:ac9b:5a93:715d] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:05 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:05 -!- Meeh_ [~meeeeeeh@meeh.sigterm.no] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:06 -!- larraboj_ [kax@heizenberg.ds.karen.hj.se] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:06 -!- qawap_ [~quassel@80.240.137.113] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:06 -!- grubles_ [~grubles@45.55.156.213] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:06 -!- qawap_ [~quassel@80.240.137.113] has quit [Changing host]
13:06 -!- qawap_ [~quassel@unaffiliated/qawap] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:06 -!- jrayhawk_ [~jrayhawk@unaffiliated/jrayhawk] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:06 -!- roasbeef_ [~root@104.131.26.124] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:06 -!- ThomasV [~ThomasV@unaffiliated/thomasv] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:06 < akrmn> The child chain will have to follow what the parent chains commit to with their hashes. The parent may need to trust some miners deep down the tree, but even if they are wrong it doesn't matter because those miners will have to trust the parents hash, and those people using the deep chains already know the risks involved.
13:07 -!- comboy_ [~quassel@tesuji.pl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:07 -!- cfields_ [~quassel@unaffiliated/cfields] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:07 < akrmn> I am just allowing for a more choice instead of a one size fits all policy
13:07 < akrmn> You can still have full nodes watching all chains and it's the same as having big blocks
13:08 -!- azariah_ [azariah@Tricholoma.Update.UU.SE] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:08 -!- Xzibit17_ [sid50165@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-mxbkwnaqeuuiowjt] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:08 -!- amiller_ [~socrates1@li175-104.members.linode.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:08 < kinlo> so if I understand it correctly, a parent chain picks out a child chain, trusts it blindly, and then all other miners will trust that hash that ends up in the tree because the parent hash takes precedence?
13:08 < kinlo> imagine that there isn't even foul play, say a bug creates an invalid block in a grandchildchain miner
13:09 < kinlo> the parent of that chain accepts it because it trusts it, and might even validate it  using the same buggy software, and then it submits that block into his own chain
13:09 -!- GreenIsMyPepper_ [~GreenIsMy@altcoins.are-on-my.ignorelist.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:09 < akrmn> o ok I see your point
13:09 < akrmn> but I have to think
13:09 -!- rasengan_ [rasengan@pdpc/corporate-sponsor/privateinternetaccess.com/rasengan] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:09 -!- warren_2 [~warren@fedora/wombat/warren] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:09 -!- merlinco1ey [merlin@69.42.217.140] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:10 -!- midnightmagic_ [~midnightm@unaffiliated/midnightmagic] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:10 -!- HM2 [~HM@81.4.101.225] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:10 < kinlo> I'll let you think, I kinda like poking holes in ppl's theories :)
13:10 -!- HM2 is now known as Guest17324
13:10 -!- warptangent_ [~warptange@192.73.232.107] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:11 -!- orperelman [~orperelma@bzq-109-67-207-175.red.bezeqint.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:12 -!- sturles_ [~sturles@unaffiliated/sturles] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:13 -!- TD--Linux [~Thomas@2604:a880:1:20::173:1001] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:13 -!- Netsplit *.net <-> *.split quits: larraboj, rasengan, warren, HM, warptangent, afk11, sturles, maaku, nessence, roasbeef,  (+27 more, use /NETSPLIT to show all of them)
13:13 -!- warren_2 is now known as warren
13:13 -!- Guest17324 is now known as HM
13:13 -!- wiz_ is now known as wiz
13:13 -!- TD--Linux is now known as TD-Linux
13:14 -!- TD-Linux [~Thomas@2604:a880:1:20::173:1001] has quit [Changing host]
13:14 -!- TD-Linux [~Thomas@about/essy/indecisive/TD-Linux] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:14 -!- Xh1pher [~Xh1pher@pD9E38632.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
13:14 -!- catcow_ is now known as catcow
13:15 -!- merlinco1ey is now known as merlincorey
13:15 -!- merlincorey [merlin@69.42.217.140] has quit [Changing host]
13:15 -!- merlincorey [merlin@nginx/adept/merlincorey] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:16 -!- Xzibit17_ is now known as Xzibit17
13:16 < akrmn> Well, after the next few blocks, the problem (in the grandchildren chain) may be discovered by the child chain miners and so they will fix it (equivalent to using a different fork in their chain) and the parents will in turn fix it, because the parents need to follow the chain the strongest child chain.
13:16 -!- erasmospunk [~erasmospu@46-198-61-117.adsl.cyta.gr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:16 < akrmn> I think that's the main idea to resolve the problem
13:16 -!- Netsplit over, joins: Krellan
13:17 -!- shesek [~shesek@IGLD-84-228-3-15.inter.net.il] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:18 -!- Burrito [~Burrito@unaffiliated/burrito] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:18 < kinlo> given enough mining power, I can reverse all transactions made today on the bitcoin blockchain
13:18 < akrmn> yes true
13:18 -!- jonasschnelli [~jonasschn@2a01:4f8:200:7025::2] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:18 < kinlo> the amount of mining power required is enormeous, I will never be able to do so
13:19 < kinlo> if you have subchains, and subsubchains etc
13:19 < kinlo> I will
13:19 -!- grubles_ is now known as grubles
13:20 -!- grubles [~grubles@45.55.156.213] has quit [Changing host]
13:20 -!- grubles [~grubles@unaffiliated/grubles] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:21 -!- Taek [~quassel@2001:41d0:1:472e::] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:21 -!- GAit [~lnahum@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:21 -!- Zouppen [joell@dsl-jklbrasgw1-54fb18-253.dhcp.inet.fi] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:21 < akrmn> there's also the issue of validating transactions coming in from a sibling chain you don't track but that's easy because you just need an SPV proof for that. Also at most 2 sibling chains can be involved in a transaction (to avoid many duplicates). But you can read that on my write up. Im too busy to get too involved in this but I will try my best to understand the current Bitcoin code and maybe do some development related to this.
13:21 -!- luke-jr_ [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:21 -!- afk11 [~thomas@46.7.4.219] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:22 -!- lnovy_ [~lnovy@2002:4d57:f055::1] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:22 -!- sneak_ [~sneak@unaffiliated/sneak] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:23 -!- TheSeven [~quassel@rockbox/developer/TheSeven] has quit [Disconnected by services]
13:23 -!- Guest24115 [~sd@5ED11658.cm-7-2a.dynamic.ziggo.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:23 -!- Jaamg [jhpiloma@gateway/shell/tkk.fi/x-hlafeoipfwdlrhyk] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:23 -!- [7] [~quassel@rockbox/developer/TheSeven] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:23 -!- hearn [~mike@84-75-197-78.dclient.hispeed.ch] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
13:23 -!- cfields [~quassel@unaffiliated/cfields] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:24 -!- null_rad- [Elite7851@gateway/shell/elitebnc/x-jxrhookdcgcioadn] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:26 -!- rasengan [rasengan@pdpc/corporate-sponsor/privateinternetaccess.com/rasengan] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:26 -!- stevenroose|BNC [stevenroos@bnc1.sollidi.us] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:27 -!- AlexStraunoff [~stqism@freebsd/user/stqism] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:28 -!- Netsplit *.net <-> *.split quits: Logicwax, PRab, pollux-bts, rasengan_, null_radix, theymos, waxwing, sneak, nsh, stevenroose,  (+20 more, use /NETSPLIT to show all of them)
13:28 -!- lnovy_ is now known as lnovy
13:28 -!- stevenroose|BNC is now known as stevenroose
13:29 -!- erasmospunk [~erasmospu@46-198-61-117.adsl.cyta.gr] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
13:30 -!- pollux-bts [uid52270@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-hutdiluqgbqmpodw] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:36 -!- gnusha_ [~gnusha@unaffiliated/kanzure/bot/gnusha] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:36 -!- Topic for #bitcoin-wizards: This channel is not about short-term Bitcoin development | http://bitcoin.ninja/ | This channel is logged. | For logs and more information, visit http://bitcoin.ninja
13:36 -!- Topic set by andytoshi [~andytoshi@unaffiliated/andytoshi] [Fri Aug 22 14:51:37 2014]
13:36 [Users #bitcoin-wizards]
13:36 [@ChanServ      ] [ bsm117532       ] [ forrestv      ] [ K1773R        ] [ OneFixt       ] [ SwedFTP        ] 
13:36 [ [7]           ] [ Burrito         ] [ GAit          ] [ kanzure       ] [ optimator     ] [ sy5error       ] 
13:36 [ [ace]         ] [ c0rw|zZz        ] [ gavinandresen ] [ kinlo         ] [ optimator_    ] [ Taek           ] 
13:36 [ [d__d]        ] [ catcow          ] [ ggreer        ] [ koshii        ] [ orperelman    ] [ TD-Linux       ] 
13:36 [ _biO_         ] [ catlasshrugged_ ] [ gielbier      ] [ kumavis       ] [ otoburb       ] [ Tebbo          ] 
13:36 [ _biO__        ] [ cfields         ] [ Giszmo        ] [ larraboj_     ] [ petertodd     ] [ the_last       ] 
13:36 [ _biO___       ] [ cluckj          ] [ gnusha        ] [ lclc          ] [ phantomcircuit] [ ThinThread     ] 
13:36 [ _whitelogger  ] [ CodeShark       ] [ gnusha_       ] [ leakypat      ] [ pigeons       ] [ ThomasV        ] 
13:36 [ a5m0          ] [ comboy_         ] [ go1111111     ] [ LeMiner       ] [ platinuum     ] [ thrasher`      ] 
13:36 [ adam3us       ] [ copumpkin       ] [ goregrind     ] [ livegnik      ] [ poggy         ] [ throughnothing_] 
13:36 [ adams__       ] [ Cory            ] [ Graet         ] [ lmatteis      ] [ pollux-bts    ] [ Tiraspol       ] 
13:36 [ Adlai         ] [ coryfields      ] [ grandmaster   ] [ lnovy         ] [ PRab          ] [ triazo         ] 
13:36 [ AdrianG       ] [ crescend1       ] [ gribble       ] [ Logicwax      ] [ priidu        ] [ tromp          ] 
13:36 [ afdudley      ] [ CryptoGoon      ] [ grubles       ] [ luke-jr_      ] [ prodatalab__  ] [ tromp_         ] 
13:36 [ afk11         ] [ cryptowest_     ] [ Guest24115    ] [ luny          ] [ prosodyContext] [ ttttemp        ] 
13:36 [ airbreather_  ] [ d1ggy           ] [ guruvan       ] [ maaku_        ] [ qawap_        ] [ tucenaber      ] 
13:36 [ ajweiss       ] [ d9b4bef9        ] [ Guyver2       ] [ Mably         ] [ rasengan      ] [ veox           ] 
13:36 [ akrmn         ] [ dansmith_btc    ] [ gwillen       ] [ Madars        ] [ richardus     ] [ vonzipper      ] 
13:36 [ akstunt600    ] [ dasource        ] [ harrigan      ] [ Meeh_         ] [ roasbeef_     ] [ wallet42       ] 
13:36 [ Alanius       ] [ davout          ] [ harrow        ] [ melvster      ] [ runeks        ] [ warptangent_   ] 
13:36 [ AlexStraunoff ] [ dc17523be3      ] [ hashtag_      ] [ mengine       ] [ ryan-c        ] [ warren         ] 
13:36 [ amiller_      ] [ dEBRUYNE        ] [ heath         ] [ merlincorey   ] [ s1w           ] [ waxwing        ] 
13:36 [ Anduck        ] [ dgenr8          ] [ helo          ] [ midnightmagic_] [ sadoshi       ] [ weex           ] 
13:36 [ andytoshi     ] [ dignork         ] [ HM            ] [ mkarrer       ] [ scoria        ] [ wiwjwy         ] 
13:36 [ Apocalyptic   ] [ DougieBot5000   ] [ iddo          ] [ mm_1          ] [ sdaftuar      ] [ wiz            ] 
13:36 [ artifexd      ] [ Dr-G2           ] [ indolering    ] [ MoALTz        ] [ shesek        ] [ wizkid057      ] 
13:36 [ azariah_      ] [ EasyAt          ] [ Iriez         ] [ morcos        ] [ sl01          ] [ wumpus         ] 
13:36 [ b_lumenkraft  ] [ ebfull          ] [ isis          ] [ mountaingoat  ] [ smooth        ] [ xabbix         ] 
13:36 [ badmofo       ] [ elastoma        ] [ Jaamg         ] [ mr_burdell    ] [ sneak_        ] [ yoleaux        ] 
13:36 [ BananaLotus   ] [ Eliel           ] [ jaromil       ] [ MrTratta      ] [ so            ] [ yorick         ] 
13:36 [ bedeho        ] [ Emcy            ] [ jbenet        ] [ Muis          ] [ sparetire     ] [ yrashk         ] 
13:36 [ berndj        ] [ epscy           ] [ jcorgan       ] [ n0n0_         ] [ spinza        ] [ zmanian        ] 
13:36 [ binaryatrocity] [ eric            ] [ jessepollak   ] [ nanotube      ] [ starsoccer    ] [ zooko          ] 
13:36 [ bliljerk101   ] [ espes           ] [ jgarzik       ] [ nephyrin      ] [ stevenroose   ] [ Zouppen        ] 
13:36 [ bliljerk_     ] [ eudoxia         ] [ jmcn_         ] [ nessenc__     ] [ STRML         ] 
13:36 [ BlueMatt      ] [ face            ] [ jonasschnelli ] [ nickler       ] [ sturles_      ] 
13:36 [ bosma         ] [ fenn            ] [ jouke         ] [ nomailing     ] [ SubCreative   ] 
13:36 [ BrainOverfl0w ] [ Fistful_of_Coins] [ jrayhawk_     ] [ null_rad-     ] [ sundance      ] 
13:36 [ brand0        ] [ fluffypony      ] [ justanotherusr] [ nullbyte      ] [ superobserver ] 
13:36 -!- Irssi: #bitcoin-wizards: Total of 229 nicks [1 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 228 normal]
13:36 -!- Channel #bitcoin-wizards created Mon Feb 25 23:24:47 2013
13:36 -!- Irssi: Join to #bitcoin-wizards was synced in 22 secs
13:37 -!- GreenIsMyPepper [~GreenIsMy@altcoins.are-on-my.ignorelist.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:37 -!- jaekwon [~jae@2601:645:c001:263a:6c33:2b9c:881d:6eba] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:37 -!- theymos [~theymos@unaffiliated/theymos] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:37 -!- huseby [~huseby@unaffiliated/huseby] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:37 -!- arubi [~ese168@unaffiliated/arubi] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:38 -!- nsh [~lol@wikipedia/nsh] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:38 -!- btcdrak [uid52049@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-dltqbjmhwjjttymz] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:40 -!- dansmith_ [~dansmith@static-ip-188-138-10-193.inaddr.ip-pool.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:40 -!- mikolalysenko [sid34553@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-rmensoulyowxjmgs] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:41 -!- mappum [sid43795@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-ihythaqzlijoknql] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:41 -!- zooko [~user@174-16-136-72.hlrn.qwest.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
13:42 -!- Emcy_ [~MC@unaffiliated/mc1984] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:43 -!- Emcy [~MC@unaffiliated/mc1984] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
13:43 -!- jessepollak_ [~jessepoll@104.131.138.130] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:44 -!- fluffypony_ [~fluffypon@coreteam.monero.cc] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:44 -!- cryptowe- [~cryptowes@191.101.1.104] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:45 -!- ThomasV [~ThomasV@unaffiliated/thomasv] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
13:45 -!- mariorz [sid490@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-zoyvigpjkpazhnqr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:45 -!- wiwjwy [~v3@x55b3aa29.dyn.telefonica.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
13:46 -!- therealnanotube [~nanotube@unaffiliated/nanotube] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:47 -!- Netsplit *.net <-> *.split quits: optimator, grandmaster, nanotube, prosodyContext, wallet42, _biO__, jmcn_, Tiraspol, fluffypony, ThinThread,  (+8 more, use /NETSPLIT to show all of them)
13:47 -!- jessepollak_ is now known as jessepollak
13:47 -!- fluffypony_ is now known as fluffypony
13:47 -!- sturles_ is now known as sturles
13:47 -!- fluffypony [~fluffypon@coreteam.monero.cc] has quit [Changing host]
13:47 -!- fluffypony [~fluffypon@unaffiliated/fluffypony] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:48 -!- Netsplit over, joins: Tiraspol
13:50 -!- MoALTz_ [~no@78.11.179.104] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:50 -!- shesek [~shesek@IGLD-84-228-3-15.inter.net.il] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:51 -!- jmcn [~jamie@2.24.158.59] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:51 -!- a5m0 [~a5m0@unaffiliated/a5m0] has quit [Disconnected by services]
13:51 -!- a5m0_ [~a5m0@unaffiliated/a5m0] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:51 -!- ryan-c [~ryan@srv1.turboslow.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
13:51 -!- Emcy_ [~MC@unaffiliated/mc1984] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
13:52 -!- tucenaber [~tucenaber@o144.231.lokis.net.pl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:52 -!- tucenaber [~tucenaber@o144.231.lokis.net.pl] has quit [Changing host]
13:52 -!- tucenaber [~tucenaber@unaffiliated/tucenaber] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:52 -!- Emcy_ [~MC@cpc3-swan1-0-0-cust996.7-3.cable.virginm.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:52 -!- Emcy_ [~MC@cpc3-swan1-0-0-cust996.7-3.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Changing host]
13:52 -!- Emcy_ [~MC@unaffiliated/mc1984] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:52 -!- wump [~quassel@pdpc/supporter/professional/wumpus] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:52 -!- petertod1 [~pete@ec2-52-5-185-120.compute-1.amazonaws.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:53 < akrmn> If anyone knows much about UTXO commitments and whether they can work, let me know
13:53 < petertod1> akrmn: define "work"
13:53 -!- comboy_ [~quassel@tesuji.pl] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
13:53 -!- MoALTz [~no@78.11.179.104] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
13:53 -!- comboy [~quassel@tesuji.pl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:54 < akrmn> petertod1: What gives incentive to nodes to give out the merkle trees to peers who ask?
13:57 < akrmn> Cause you need that tree of UTXOs to prove validity of a UTXO
13:57 < akrmn> My idea is of subchains for scaling
13:57 < akrmn> but with UTXO commitments it can possibly solve one problem that I want to solve
13:57 -!- d9b4bef9 [~d9b4bef9@web419.webfaction.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
13:57 -!- gnusha_ [~gnusha@unaffiliated/kanzure/bot/gnusha] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
13:57 -!- gnusha [~gnusha@unaffiliated/kanzure/bot/gnusha] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:57 -!- Topic for #bitcoin-wizards: This channel is not about short-term Bitcoin development | http://bitcoin.ninja/ | This channel is logged. | For logs and more information, visit http://bitcoin.ninja
13:57 -!- Topic set by andytoshi [~andytoshi@unaffiliated/andytoshi] [Fri Aug 22 14:51:37 2014]
13:57 [Users #bitcoin-wizards]
13:57 [@ChanServ      ] [ Burrito         ] [ GAit           ] [ justanotherusr] [ nsh           ] [ sundance       ] 
13:57 [ [7]           ] [ c0rw|zZz        ] [ gavinandresen  ] [ K1773R        ] [ null_rad-     ] [ superobserver  ] 
13:57 [ [ace]         ] [ catcow          ] [ ggreer         ] [ kanzure       ] [ nullbyte      ] [ SwedFTP        ] 
13:57 [ [d__d]        ] [ catlasshrugged_ ] [ gielbier       ] [ kinlo         ] [ OneFixt       ] [ sy5error       ] 
13:57 [ _biO_         ] [ cfields         ] [ Giszmo         ] [ koshii        ] [ optimator_    ] [ Taek           ] 
13:57 [ _biO___       ] [ cluckj          ] [ gnusha         ] [ kumavis       ] [ orperelman    ] [ TD-Linux       ] 
13:57 [ _whitelogger  ] [ CodeShark       ] [ gnusha_        ] [ larraboj_     ] [ otoburb       ] [ Tebbo          ] 
13:57 [ a5m0_         ] [ comboy          ] [ go1111111      ] [ lclc          ] [ petertod1     ] [ the_last       ] 
13:57 [ adam3us       ] [ copumpkin       ] [ goregrind      ] [ leakypat      ] [ petertodd     ] [ therealnanotube] 
13:57 [ adams__       ] [ Cory            ] [ Graet          ] [ LeMiner       ] [ phantomcircuit] [ theymos        ] 
13:57 [ Adlai         ] [ coryfields      ] [ GreenIsMyPepper] [ livegnik      ] [ pigeons       ] [ ThomasV        ] 
13:57 [ AdrianG       ] [ crescend1       ] [ gribble        ] [ lmatteis      ] [ platinuum     ] [ thrasher`      ] 
13:57 [ afdudley      ] [ CryptoGoon      ] [ grubles        ] [ lnovy         ] [ poggy         ] [ throughnothing_] 
13:57 [ afk11         ] [ cryptowe-       ] [ Guest24115     ] [ Logicwax      ] [ pollux-bts    ] [ Tiraspol       ] 
13:57 [ airbreather_  ] [ d1ggy           ] [ guruvan        ] [ luke-jr_      ] [ PRab          ] [ triazo         ] 
13:57 [ ajweiss       ] [ d9b4bef9        ] [ Guyver2        ] [ luny          ] [ priidu        ] [ tromp          ] 
13:57 [ akrmn         ] [ dansmith_       ] [ gwillen        ] [ maaku_        ] [ prodatalab__  ] [ tromp_         ] 
13:57 [ akstunt600    ] [ dasource        ] [ harrigan       ] [ Mably         ] [ qawap_        ] [ ttttemp        ] 
13:57 [ Alanius       ] [ davout          ] [ harrow         ] [ Madars        ] [ rasengan      ] [ tucenaber      ] 
13:57 [ AlexStraunoff ] [ dc17523be3      ] [ hashtag_       ] [ mappum        ] [ richardus     ] [ veox           ] 
13:57 [ amiller_      ] [ dEBRUYNE        ] [ heath          ] [ mariorz       ] [ roasbeef_     ] [ vonzipper      ] 
13:57 [ Anduck        ] [ dEBRUYNE_       ] [ helo           ] [ Meeh_         ] [ runeks        ] [ warptangent_   ] 
13:57 [ andytoshi     ] [ dgenr8          ] [ HM             ] [ melvster      ] [ rusty         ] [ warren         ] 
13:57 [ Apocalyptic   ] [ dignork         ] [ huseby         ] [ mengine       ] [ ryan-c        ] [ waxwing        ] 
13:57 [ artifexd      ] [ DougieBot5000   ] [ iddo           ] [ merlincorey   ] [ s1w           ] [ weex           ] 
13:57 [ arubi         ] [ Dr-G2           ] [ indolering     ] [ midnightmagic_] [ sadoshi       ] [ wiz            ] 
13:57 [ azariah_      ] [ EasyAt          ] [ Iriez          ] [ mikolalysenko ] [ scoria        ] [ wizkid057      ] 
13:57 [ b_lumenkraft  ] [ ebfull          ] [ isis           ] [ mkarrer       ] [ sdaftuar      ] [ wump           ] 
13:57 [ badmofo       ] [ elastoma        ] [ Jaamg          ] [ mm_1          ] [ shesek        ] [ wumpus         ] 
13:57 [ BananaLotus   ] [ Eliel           ] [ jaekwon        ] [ MoALTz_       ] [ sl01          ] [ xabbix         ] 
13:57 [ bedeho        ] [ Emcy_           ] [ jaromil        ] [ morcos        ] [ smooth        ] [ Xzibit17       ] 
13:57 [ berndj        ] [ epscy           ] [ jbenet         ] [ mountaingoat  ] [ sneak_        ] [ yoleaux        ] 
13:57 [ binaryatrocity] [ eric            ] [ jcluck         ] [ mr_burdell    ] [ so            ] [ yorick         ] 
13:57 [ bliljerk101   ] [ espes           ] [ jcorgan        ] [ MrTratta      ] [ sparetire     ] [ yrashk         ] 
13:57 [ BlueMatt      ] [ eudoxia         ] [ jessepollak    ] [ Muis          ] [ spinza        ] [ zmanian        ] 
13:57 [ bosma         ] [ face            ] [ jgarzik        ] [ n0n0_         ] [ starsoccer    ] [ Zouppen        ] 
13:57 [ BrainOverfl0w ] [ fenn            ] [ jmcn           ] [ nephyrin      ] [ stevenroose   ] 
13:57 [ brand0        ] [ Fistful_of_Coins] [ jonasschnelli  ] [ nessenc__     ] [ STRML         ] 
13:57 [ bsm117532     ] [ fluffypony      ] [ jouke          ] [ nickler       ] [ sturles       ] 
13:57 [ btcdrak       ] [ forrestv        ] [ jrayhawk_      ] [ nomailing     ] [ SubCreative   ] 
13:57 -!- Irssi: #bitcoin-wizards: Total of 236 nicks [1 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 235 normal]
13:57 -!- Channel #bitcoin-wizards created Mon Feb 25 23:24:47 2013
13:58 -!- Netsplit *.net <-> *.split quits: coryfields, mengine, PRab, otoburb, sneak_, nsh, null_rad-, forrestv, prodatalab__, c0rw|zZz,  (+17 more, use /NETSPLIT to show all of them)
13:58 -!- Irssi: Join to #bitcoin-wizards was synced in 17 secs
13:58 -!- ThomasV [~ThomasV@unaffiliated/thomasv] has quit [Quit: Quitte]
13:59 -!- melvster1 [~melvster@ip-86-49-18-198.net.upcbroadband.cz] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:59 -!- binaryatrocity_ [~atr0phy.n@69.85.87.117] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:00 < akrmn> petertod1: What gives incentive to nodes to give out the merkle trees to peers who ask?
14:00 < akrmn> Cause you need that tree of UTXOs to prove validity of a UTXO
14:00 < akrmn> My idea is of subchains for scaling
14:00 < akrmn> but with UTXO commitments it can possibly solve one problem that I want to solve
14:00 -!- d9b4bef9 [~d9b4bef9@web419.webfaction.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
14:00 -!- gnusha_ [~gnusha@unaffiliated/kanzure/bot/gnusha] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
14:00 -!- bosma [~bosma@S01067cb21bda6531.vc.shawcable.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
14:00 -!- d1ggy [~d1ggy@dslb-088-070-181-213.088.070.pools.vodafone-ip.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
14:00 -!- melvster [~melvster@ip-86-49-18-198.net.upcbroadband.cz] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
14:00 -!- elastoma [~elastoma@162.248.160.175] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
14:00 -!- cluckj [~cluckj@pool-108-16-231-242.phlapa.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
14:00 -!- binaryatrocity [~atr0phy.n@unaffiliated/br4n] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
14:00 -!- Emcy_ [~MC@unaffiliated/mc1984] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
14:00 -!- dEBRUYNE [~dEBRUYNE@239-196-ftth.onsbrabantnet.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
14:00 -!- heath [~heath@unaffiliated/ybit] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
14:00 -!- Iriez [wario@distribution.xbins.org] has quit [Quit: changing servers]
14:00 -!- mountaingoat [~mountaing@unaffiliated/mountaingoat] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
14:00 < akrmn> Well you just need the branches of the UTXO tree corresponding to your "outputs of interest". But if no nodes give you the branches that you need, then it can be a problem.
14:00 -!- d9b4bef9 [~d9b4bef9@web419.webfaction.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:01 -!- MrTratta [~MrTratta@2-228-102-98.ip191.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Excess Flood]
14:01 -!- Emcy [~MC@unaffiliated/mc1984] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:01 -!- starsoccer [~starsocce@unaffiliated/starsoccer] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
14:01 -!- starsoccer [~starsocce@ns372404.ip-94-23-252.eu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:01 -!- jmcn [~jamie@2.24.158.59] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
14:01 -!- jmcn [~jamie@2.24.158.59] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:02 -!- Iriez [wario@distribution.xbins.org] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:02 -!- starsoccer is now known as Guest70908
14:02 -!- midnightmagic_ is now known as midnightmagic
14:04 -!- bosma [~bosma@S01067cb21bda6531.vc.shawcable.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:04 -!- elastoma [~elastoma@162.248.160.175] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:05 -!- erasmospunk [~erasmospu@46-198-61-117.adsl.cyta.gr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:05 -!- sparetire_ [~sparetire@unaffiliated/sparetire] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:07 -!- jmcn [~jamie@2.24.158.59] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
14:09 -!- eudoxia [~eudoxia@r186-49-240-111.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
14:09 -!- Emcy_ [~MC@cpc3-swan1-0-0-cust996.7-3.cable.virginm.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:09 -!- Emcy_ [~MC@cpc3-swan1-0-0-cust996.7-3.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Changing host]
14:09 -!- Emcy_ [~MC@unaffiliated/mc1984] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:11 -!- ggreer [~ggreer@162.243.155.78] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:11 -!- MoALTz__ [~no@78.11.179.104] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:13 -!- erasmosp_ [~erasmospu@46-198-61-117.adsl.cyta.gr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:13 -!- roasbeef [~root@104.131.26.124] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:13 -!- heath [~heath@unaffiliated/ybit] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:14 -!- pigeons_ [~pigeons@94.242.209.214] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:14 -!- sneak [~sneak@2a01:4f8:141:ffc:18f6:8a37:43fc:29e6] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:14 -!- sneak [~sneak@2a01:4f8:141:ffc:18f6:8a37:43fc:29e6] has quit [Changing host]
14:14 -!- sneak [~sneak@unaffiliated/sneak] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:14 -!- pigeons_ is now known as Guest73245
14:14 -!- sipa_ [~pw@unaffiliated/sipa1024] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:14 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@unaffiliated/dr-g] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:15 -!- grubles_ [~grubles@45.55.156.213] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:15 -!- contrapumpkin [~copumpkin@unaffiliated/copumpkin] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:15 -!- helo_ [~helo@unaffiliated/helo] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:16 -!- veox_ [~veox@shinji.veox.pw] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:16 -!- wiz_ [~sid1@tor-exit.echelon.nsa.network] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:16 -!- nullbyte_ [~NSA@193.138.219.233] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:16 -!- optimator [~optimator@ec2-54-205-93-122.compute-1.amazonaws.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:16 -!- optimator [~optimator@ec2-54-205-93-122.compute-1.amazonaws.com] has quit [Changing host]
14:16 -!- optimator [~optimator@unaffiliated/optimator] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:16 -!- nullbyte_ is now known as Guest60314
14:17 -!- erasmosp_ [~erasmospu@46-198-61-117.adsl.cyta.gr] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
14:17 -!- Anduck_ [~anduck@unaffiliated/anduck] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:17 -!- gavinand1esen [~gavin@unaffiliated/gavinandresen] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:18 -!- null_radix [Elite7851@gateway/shell/elitebnc/x-rlxbokkohromhkhe] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:18 -!- livegnik_ [~livegnik@bnw.7c0.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:18 -!- roasbeef_ [~root@104.131.26.124] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- yoleaux [~yoleaux@xn--ht-1ia18f.nonceword.org] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- pigeons [~pigeons@94.242.209.214] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- dignork [~dignork@unaffiliated/dignork] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- BrainOverfl0w [~fred@178.62.183.174] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- Emcy [~MC@unaffiliated/mc1984] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- waxwing [~waxwing@62.205.214.125] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- sparetire [~sparetire@unaffiliated/sparetire] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- copumpkin [~copumpkin@unaffiliated/copumpkin] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- poggy [~poggy@ks3262860.kimsufi.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- livegnik [~livegnik@bnw.7c0.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- MoALTz_ [~no@78.11.179.104] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- grubles [~grubles@unaffiliated/grubles] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@x4d08a916.dyn.telefonica.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- helo [~helo@unaffiliated/helo] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- veox [~veox@shinji.veox.pw] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- erasmospunk [~erasmospu@46-198-61-117.adsl.cyta.gr] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- d9b4bef9 [~d9b4bef9@web419.webfaction.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- optimator_ [~optimator@unaffiliated/optimator] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- nullbyte [~NSA@193.138.219.233] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- gavinandresen [~gavin@unaffiliated/gavinandresen] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- throughnothing_ [~throughno@162.243.78.67] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- [ace] [~ace@128.199.135.61] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- wiz [~sid1@tor-exit.echelon.nsa.network] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- Anduck [~anduck@unaffiliated/anduck] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- guruvan [~guruvan@unaffiliated/guruvan] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
14:18 -!- wiz_ is now known as wiz
14:18 -!- yoleaux [~yoleaux@xn--ht-1ia18f.nonceword.org] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:19 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:19 -!- jmcn [~jamie@2.24.158.59] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:19 -!- dignork [~dignork@unaffiliated/dignork] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:20 -!- waxwing [~waxwing@62.205.214.125] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:20 -!- guruvan [~guruvan@unaffiliated/guruvan] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:20 -!- poggy [~poggy@ks3262860.kimsufi.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:20 -!- sparetire [~sparetire@unaffiliated/sparetire] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:20 -!- throughnothing [~throughno@162.243.78.67] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:22 -!- catlasshrugged [~catlasshr@ec2-54-149-141-214.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:22 -!- [ace] [~ace@128.199.135.61] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:23 -!- b_lumenkraft [~b_lumenkr@unaffiliated/b-lumenkraft/x-4457406] has quit [Quit: b_lumenkraft]
14:23 -!- BrainOverfl0w [~fred@178.62.183.174] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:24 -!- prosodyContext [sid32673@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-xyarftwnkhpoxhna] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:24 -!- indo [~indolerin@104.236.55.109] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:24 -!- orperelman [~orperelma@bzq-109-67-207-175.red.bezeqint.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
14:25 -!- b_lumenkraft [~b_lumenkr@unaffiliated/b-lumenkraft/x-4457406] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:25 -!- b_lumenkraft [~b_lumenkr@unaffiliated/b-lumenkraft/x-4457406] has quit [Client Quit]
14:26 -!- grandmaster [dansmith3@gateway/shell/bnc4free/x-pyhvlcdmvgfantok] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:26 -!- mountaingoat [~mountaing@unaffiliated/mountaingoat] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:27 -!- mengine [~mengine@14.84-234-132.customer.lyse.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:28 -!- kanzure_ [~kanzure@unaffiliated/kanzure] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:29 -!- o3u [o3u@unaffiliated/o3u] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:29 -!- c0rw|zZz [~c0rw1n@92.74-67-87.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:29 -!- crescendo [~mozart@unaffiliated/crescendo] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:29 -!- gribble [~gribble@unaffiliated/nanotube/bot/gribble] has quit [Disconnected by services]
14:30 -!- indolering [~indolerin@104.236.55.109] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
14:30 -!- indo is now known as indolering
14:30 -!- GAit [~lnahum@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
14:31 -!- mr_burdell_ [~mr_burdel@hop.cryptolabs.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:31 -!- nanotube [~nanotube@unaffiliated/nanotube] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:31 -!- gribble [~gribble@unaffiliated/nanotube/bot/gribble] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:31 -!- GAit [~lnahum@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:32 -!- Pasha [~Cory@unaffiliated/cory] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:33 -!- fenn_ [~fenn@unaffiliated/fenn] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:34 -!- jaromil_ [~jaromil@f1x.eu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:34 -!- davout_ [~david@195.154.83.222] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:36 -!- Alanius_ [~alanius@ssh2.ulyssis.student.kuleuven.be] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:36 -!- therealnanotube [~nanotube@unaffiliated/nanotube] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
14:36 -!- kanzure [~kanzure@unaffiliated/kanzure] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
14:36 -!- Fistful_of_Coins [o3u@162.243.79.19] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
14:36 -!- mr_burdell [~mr_burdel@unaffiliated/mr-burdell/x-7609603] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
14:36 -!- Cory [~Cory@unaffiliated/cory] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
14:36 -!- crescend1 [~mozart@173.203.100.20] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
14:36 -!- andytoshi [~andytoshi@unaffiliated/andytoshi] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
14:36 -!- fenn [~fenn@unaffiliated/fenn] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
14:36 -!- davout [~david@unaffiliated/davout] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
14:36 -!- jaromil [~jaromil@f1x.eu] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
14:36 -!- scoria [~blaze@wpsoftware.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
14:36 -!- Alanius [~alanius@ssh2.ulyssis.student.kuleuven.be] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
14:36 -!- mr_burdell_ is now known as mr_burdell
14:37 -!- mr_burdell is now known as Guest68586
14:39 -!- Pasha is now known as Cory
14:44 -!- hashtag [~hashtag@cpe-69-23-213-3.ma.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:44 -!- jtimon [~quassel@69.29.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:46 -!- LeMiner2 [~LeMiner@5ED1AFBF.cm-7-2c.dynamic.ziggo.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:46 -!- LeMiner [LeMiner@unaffiliated/leminer] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
14:46 -!- LeMiner2 is now known as LeMiner
14:47 -!- Adlai [~Adlai@unaffiliated/adlai] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
14:48 -!- Adlai [~Adlai@unaffiliated/adlai] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:48 -!- Netsplit *.net <-> *.split quits: jmcn
14:48 -!- LeMiner [~LeMiner@5ED1AFBF.cm-7-2c.dynamic.ziggo.nl] has quit [Changing host]
14:48 -!- LeMiner [~LeMiner@unaffiliated/leminer] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:49 -!- c0rw|zZz is now known as c0rw1n
14:50 -!- nomailing [~Thunderbi@ip4d1472d1.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de] has quit [Quit: nomailing]
14:50 -!- jouke [~jouke@a83-163-42-163.adsl.xs4all.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
14:50 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
14:51 -!- jouke [~jouke@a83-163-42-163.adsl.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:52 -!- afk11 [~thomas@46.7.4.219] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
14:52 -!- STRML [~STRML@unaffiliated/strml] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:52 -!- afk11 [~thomas@46.7.4.219] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:52 -!- jmcn_ [~jamie@2.24.158.88] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:53 -!- kanzure_ is now known as kanzure
14:54 -!- superobserver [~superobse@unaffiliated/superobserver] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:56 -!- andytoshi [~andytoshi@wpsoftware.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:59 -!- c0rw1n [~c0rw1n@92.74-67-87.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be] has quit []
15:00 -!- c0rw1n [~c0rw1n@92.74-67-87.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:01 -!- luke-jr_ is now known as Luke-Jr
15:02 -!- scoria [~blaze@wpsoftware.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:03 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
15:13 -!- Guest24115 [~sd@5ED11658.cm-7-2a.dynamic.ziggo.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
15:13 -!- fenn_ is now known as fenn
15:17 -!- zmanian [~zmanian@c-24-5-125-31.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
15:18 -!- jmcn_ [~jamie@2.24.158.88] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
15:18 -!- jmcn [~jamie@2.24.158.88] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:21 -!- bosma [~bosma@S01067cb21bda6531.vc.shawcable.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
15:30 -!- d1ggy [~d1ggy@dslb-088-070-181-213.088.070.pools.vodafone-ip.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:39 -!- nsh [~lol@wikipedia/nsh] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:41 -!- grubles_ is now known as grubles
15:42 -!- grubles is now known as Guest78614
15:49 -!- _biO___ [~biO_@ip-37-24-195-112.hsi14.unitymediagroup.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
16:00 -!- o3u is now known as Fistful_of_Coins
16:03 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:13 -!- MrTratta [~MrTratta@2-228-102-98.ip191.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:17 -!- otoburb [~otoburb@ec2-54-173-213-83.compute-1.amazonaws.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:18 -!- otoburb is now known as Guest28897
16:26 -!- DougieBot5000_ [~DougieBot@unaffiliated/dougiebot5000] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:29 -!- spinza_ [~spin@197.89.39.101] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:30 -!- jmcn [~jamie@2.24.158.88] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
16:31 -!- spinza [~spin@197.89.39.101] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
16:31 -!- DougieBot5000 [~DougieBot@unaffiliated/dougiebot5000] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
16:31 -!- BananaLotus [~BananaLot@club.maza.club] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
16:31 -!- LeMiner [~LeMiner@unaffiliated/leminer] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
16:31 -!- Logicwax [~Logicwax@c-76-126-174-152.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
16:31 -!- spinza_ is now known as spinza
16:32 -!- LeMiner2 [LeMiner@5ED1AFBF.cm-7-2c.dynamic.ziggo.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:32 -!- Logicwax [~Logicwax@c-76-126-174-152.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:32 -!- amiller_ [~socrates1@li175-104.members.linode.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
16:32 -!- justanotherusr [~Justan@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
16:32 -!- nickler [~nickler@185.12.46.130] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
16:33 -!- nickler [~nickler@185.12.46.130] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:33 -!- justanotherusr [~Justan@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:34 -!- akstunt600 [~ak@65-78-62-173.c3-0.upd-ubr2.trpr-upd.pa.static.cable.rcn.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
16:34 -!- BananaLotus [~BananaLot@club.maza.club] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:34 -!- akstunt600 [~ak@65-78-62-173.c3-0.upd-ubr2.trpr-upd.pa.static.cable.rcn.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:35 -!- Guest42448 [~socrates1@li175-104.members.linode.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:38 -!- justanotherusr [~Justan@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
16:38 -!- Mably [~Mably@unaffiliated/mably] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
16:39 -!- Guest70908 is now known as starsoccer
16:39 -!- starsoccer [~starsocce@ns372404.ip-94-23-252.eu] has quit [Changing host]
16:39 -!- starsoccer [~starsocce@unaffiliated/starsoccer] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:39 -!- justanotherusr [~Justan@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:42 -!- catcow [sid62269@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-jivcbtwkxnwbfzgr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:42 -!- jmcn [~jamie@2.24.158.88] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:47 -!- Starduster [~sd@unaffiliated/starduster] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:49 -!- hashtag [~hashtag@cpe-69-23-213-3.ma.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
16:50 -!- Guest42448 [~socrates1@li175-104.members.linode.com] has quit [Changing host]
16:50 -!- Guest42448 [~socrates1@unaffiliated/socrates1024] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:50 -!- Guest42448 is now known as amiller
16:59 -!- dEBRUYNE_ [~dEBRUYNE@239-196-ftth.onsbrabantnet.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
16:59 -!- PRab [~chatzilla@2601:40a:8000:8f9b:959b:96b6:9b51:62f5] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:59 -!- prodatalab__ [~prodatala@2602:306:ceef:a750:2cc4:ac9b:5a93:715d] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:59 -!- vonzipper [sid77971@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-snamtxslvsnkqvgv] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:00 -!- Burrito [~Burrito@unaffiliated/burrito] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:01 -!- Emcy_ [~MC@unaffiliated/mc1984] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
17:01 -!- coryfields [~quassel@2001:4802:7800:1:6fc4:c486:ff20:1fa] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:01 -!- fluffypony [~fluffypon@unaffiliated/fluffypony] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
17:03 -!- jmcn [~jamie@2.24.158.88] has quit [Ping timeout: 275 seconds]
17:03 -!- jmcn [~jamie@2.24.158.88] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:04 -!- Emcy [~MC@unaffiliated/mc1984] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:04 -!- fluffypony [~fluffypon@unaffiliated/fluffypony] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:05 -!- adams__ [sid73416@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-knpaizixanlcrjwx] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:05 -!- mappum [sid43795@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-pfshnwbfmtkvocqm] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:06 -!- richardus [~richardus@2605:2700:0:3::4713:9a16] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:06 -!- jbenet [sid17552@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-kdgejimecmltbusg] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:06 -!- airbreather_ [~airbreath@d149-67-99-43.nap.wideopenwest.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
17:06 -!- mariorz [sid490@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-zoyvigpjkpazhnqr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:06 -!- mikolalysenko [sid34553@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-rmensoulyowxjmgs] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:06 -!- forrestv [forrestv@unaffiliated/forrestv] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:06 -!- mariorz [sid490@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-zoyvigpjkpazhnqr] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded]
17:07 -!- btcdrak [uid52049@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-auuztxxcpudyigkh] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:08 -!- Burrito [~Burrito@unaffiliated/burrito] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
17:08 -!- jmcn [~jamie@2.24.158.88] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
17:08 -!- jmcn [~jamie@2.24.158.106] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:12 -!- mariorz [sid490@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-yjfjyvjkztrogiua] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:22 -!- d1ggy_ [~d1ggy@dslb-088-070-181-213.088.070.pools.vodafone-ip.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:23 -!- n0n0_ [~n0n0___@x5f77b8ed.dyn.telefonica.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
17:26 -!- prodatalab [~prodatala@108-238-250-117.lightspeed.jcvlfl.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:26 -!- o3u [o3u@unaffiliated/o3u] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:27 -!- davout [~david@unaffiliated/davout] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:27 -!- jmcn [~jamie@2.24.158.106] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
17:27 -!- PRab_ [~chatzilla@c-68-34-102-231.hsd1.mi.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:29 -!- pigeons [~pigeons@94.242.209.214] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:29 -!- pigeons is now known as Guest22312
17:29 -!- jmcn [~jamie@2.24.158.106] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:30 -!- livegnik [~livegnik@bnw.7c0.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:30 -!- kyuupichan [~Neil@ae041057.dynamic.ppp.asahi-net.or.jp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:31 -!- jbenet_ [sid17552@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-kqyagscqivzxyopj] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:31 -!- nickler_ [~nickler@185.12.46.130] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:31 -!- wiz_ [~sid1@tor-exit.echelon.nsa.network] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:31 -!- catcow_ [sid62269@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-molsjmoepjhtilcx] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:31 -!- mappum_ [sid43795@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-setgsnyogqlgragy] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:34 -!- prosodyContext_ [sid32673@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-uahxhgeqpnkvmdog] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:35 -!- catcow [sid62269@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-jivcbtwkxnwbfzgr] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
17:35 -!- sipa_ [~pw@unaffiliated/sipa1024] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
17:35 -!- d1ggy [~d1ggy@dslb-088-070-181-213.088.070.pools.vodafone-ip.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
17:35 -!- Fistful_of_Coins [o3u@unaffiliated/o3u] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
17:35 -!- Netsplit *.net <-> *.split quits: jbenet, mappum, vonzipper, wiz, PRab, prosodyContext, coryfields, mariorz, adams__, richardus,  (+12 more, use /NETSPLIT to show all of them)
17:35 -!- catcow_ is now known as catcow
17:36 -!- Netsplit over, joins: crescendo
17:37 -!- mappum_ is now known as mappum
17:38 -!- luny` [~luny@unaffiliated/luny] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:38 -!- Tebbo` [~Jerry`@ip72-211-88-176.no.no.cox.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:39 -!- GAit [~lnahum@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:40 -!- richardus [~richardus@2605:2700:0:3::4713:9a16] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:40 -!- sipa_ [~pw@2a02:348:5e:5a29::1] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:40 -!- nsh [~lol@2001:41d0:8:c2da::1337] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:40 -!- vonzipper [sid77971@gateway/web/irccloud.com/session] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:40 -!- mariorz [sid490@gateway/web/irccloud.com/session] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:40 -!- adams__ [sid73416@gateway/web/irccloud.com/session] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:40 -!- null_radix [Elite7851@gateway/shell/elitebnc/session] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:40 -!- sneak [~sneak@2a01:4f8:141:ffc:18f6:8a37:43fc:29e6] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:40 -!- ThinThread [~far@162.243.132.19] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:40 -!- btcdrak [uid52049@gateway/web/irccloud.com/session] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:40 -!- coryfields [~quassel@2001:4802:7800:1:6fc4:c486:ff20:1fa] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:40 -!- btcdrak [uid52049@gateway/web/irccloud.com/session] has quit [Changing host]
17:40 -!- btcdrak [uid52049@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-etjqtzrucwqrbpfb] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:40 -!- mariorz [sid490@gateway/web/irccloud.com/session] has quit [Changing host]
17:40 -!- mariorz [sid490@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-wihjjhufgnltxvfz] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:40 -!- null_radix [Elite7851@gateway/shell/elitebnc/session] has quit [Changing host]
17:40 -!- null_radix [Elite7851@gateway/shell/elitebnc/x-zixovsyqxjpflfjc] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:40 -!- adams__ [sid73416@gateway/web/irccloud.com/session] has quit [Changing host]
17:40 -!- adams__ [sid73416@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-idhaiksxnmmkxmbx] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:40 -!- vonzipper [sid77971@gateway/web/irccloud.com/session] has quit [Changing host]
17:40 -!- vonzipper [sid77971@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-pnilxcspuyjlohwg] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:41 -!- hashtag [~hashtag@cpe-69-23-213-3.ma.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:41 -!- btcdrak is now known as Guest65838
17:41 -!- sneak is now known as Guest15258
17:41 -!- goregrin1 [~goregrind@unaffiliated/goregrind] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:42 -!- ryan`c [~ryan@srv1.turboslow.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:43 -!- larraboj [kax@heizenberg.ds.karen.hj.se] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:43 -!- dc17523b13 [unknown@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-qvyqvowiwvwbjsav] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:45 -!- jbenet_ is now known as jbenet
17:45 -!- catcow [sid62269@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-molsjmoepjhtilcx] has quit []
17:45 -!- Guest78614 is now known as grubles
17:45 -!- grubles [~grubles@45.55.156.213] has quit [Changing host]
17:45 -!- grubles [~grubles@unaffiliated/grubles] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:46 -!- warptangent [~warptange@unaffiliated/warptangent] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:46 -!- afdudley0 [~afdudley@166.84.136.68] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:46 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:47 -!- bramc [~bram@99-75-88-206.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:51 -!- ericp4 [~ericp4@unaffiliated/ericp4] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:51 -!- BlueMatt_ [~BlueMatt@mail.bluematt.me] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:53 -!- stevenroose|BNC [~stevenroo@bnc1.sollidi.us] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:53 -!- ggreer [~ggreer@162.243.155.78] has quit [Changing host]
17:53 -!- ggreer [~ggreer@unaffiliated/angryparsley] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:53 -!- dc17523be3 [unknown@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-itojjyhekwbksbvz] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
17:53 -!- stevenroose [stevenroos@bnc1.sollidi.us] has quit [Ping timeout: 943 seconds]
17:53 -!- warptangent_ [~warptange@192.73.232.107] has quit [Ping timeout: 943 seconds]
17:53 -!- larraboj_ [kax@heizenberg.ds.karen.hj.se] has quit [Ping timeout: 943 seconds]
17:53 -!- Tebbo [~Jerry`@ip72-211-88-176.no.no.cox.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 943 seconds]
17:53 -!- SwedFTP [~SwedFTP@unaffiliated/swedftp] has quit [Ping timeout: 943 seconds]
17:53 -!- goregrind [~goregrind@unaffiliated/goregrind] has quit [Ping timeout: 943 seconds]
17:53 -!- luny [~luny@unaffiliated/luny] has quit [Ping timeout: 943 seconds]
17:53 -!- eric [~ericp4@unaffiliated/ericp4] has quit [Ping timeout: 943 seconds]
17:53 -!- BlueMatt [~BlueMatt@unaffiliated/bluematt] has quit [Ping timeout: 943 seconds]
17:53 -!- afdudley [~afdudley@166.84.136.68] has quit [Write error: Connection reset by peer]
17:53 -!- stevenroose|BNC is now known as stevenroose
17:53 -!- ericp4 is now known as eric
17:54 -!- mountaingoat [~mountaing@unaffiliated/mountaingoat] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:54 -!- ryan-c [~ryan@srv1.turboslow.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
17:54 -!- BlueMatt_ is now known as BlueMatt
17:54 -!- BlueMatt [~BlueMatt@mail.bluematt.me] has quit [Changing host]
17:54 -!- BlueMatt [~BlueMatt@unaffiliated/bluematt] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:55 -!- d1ggy [~d1ggy@dslb-092-077-242-026.092.077.pools.vodafone-ip.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:55 -!- o3u is now known as Fistful_of_Coins
17:56 -!- gmaxwell [greg@wikimedia/KatWalsh/x-0001] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:56 < gmaxwell> http://www.tau.ac.il/~tromer/radioexp/  Nothing we didn't know, but the demonstrations are neat.
17:57 -!- SwedFTP [~SwedFTP@unaffiliated/swedftp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:58 -!- d1ggy_ [~d1ggy@dslb-088-070-181-213.088.070.pools.vodafone-ip.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
17:58 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
17:58 -!- spinza [~spin@197.89.39.101] has quit [Excess Flood]
17:59 -!- catcow [sid62269@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-syohmmampjbtcoxx] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:59 -!- maaku_ is now known as maaku
18:01 -!- spinza [~spin@197.89.39.101] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:04 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
18:09 < akrmn> Possible problems with UTXO commitments: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1095194.0. Looking for comments.
18:10 < gmaxwell> akrmn: you don't?  I'm sorry, I think you've underdefined what you're talking about there. I mean that isn't an issue with UTXO commitments; it's potentially an issue with some unspecified scheme to use them.
18:11 < akrmn> gmaxwell: Then what is an example of a good scheme?
18:12 < gmaxwell> Hm? good for what?
18:12 < gmaxwell> If someone told you that utxo commitments magically make bitcoin scalable they fed you a line of bull. :)
18:12 < akrmn> My use case examples: I want to track the public Bitcoin addresses that my government representative can use for spending.
18:13 < akrmn> or I simply want to track the addresses in my wallet to make sure they weren't stolen.
18:13 < gmaxwell> But no other seperated scheme does substantiavly better they can all all censor within some subdomain.  It's perhaps possible to make censorship harder with PIR-ish techniques but those increase costs for servers.
18:14 < gmaxwell> akrmn: in that first example you'd ask the respresentative to prove their spending to you, so I think it's not a great case.
18:14 < akrmn> Well Peter Todd replied to my scaling Bitcoin with Subchains thread and said that UTXO commitments and fraud proofs are already well established, and tree chain structures are only useful for miner decentralization
18:15 < akrmn> gmaxwell: No they can spend without you knowing
18:15 < akrmn> If you don't download the full blocks
18:16 < gmaxwell> akrmn: You can require them to prove to prove the absense of updates to them (assuming address indexed trees).
18:17 < akrmn> So they have to keep moving their coins around to prove to you?
18:17 < gmaxwell> akrmn: what? no!
18:17 < akrmn> I don't understand
18:18 < gmaxwell> akrmn: any commited search tree can show the the absense of an entry as efficiently as it can show the entry.
18:18 < akrmn> gmaxwell: So you are still relying on being able to access the merkle tree of UTXOs
18:18 < akrmn> ?
18:18 < akrmn> And if some parts of it are denied to you by the nodes that have those parts?
18:19 < gmaxwell> akrmn: no, I am relying on the representative to be able to access the tree fragments for his own scriptpubkey.
18:19 < akrmn> gmaxwell: ok I see
18:19 < akrmn> still doesn't seem robust
18:19 < gmaxwell> the constituitent never consults the network at all, except to check the identity of the chain.
18:20 -!- c0rw1n is now known as c0rw|zZz
18:20 < akrmn> They can say, well we are having technical difficulties and no nodes are feeding it to us
18:20 < gmaxwell> It's prefectly robust for that application. The representative can either show you all the transactions, provable respond incompletely, or fail to respond at all.
18:20 < akrmn> I guess they can just move their coins around if they really have problems to prove it
18:21 < gmaxwell> akrmn: they can claim that perhaps of course, but if they can't find out about the payments to them themselves, then they couldn't spend them either; so someone showing they spent them would prove they were lying about those technical difficulties.
18:21 < akrmn> but then you are trusting the miners maybe a bit too much
18:21 < gmaxwell> There is no moving anything required there.
18:21 < gmaxwell> If they know about the transactions paying them, the process of learning about them was the same membership proofs they need to give to you.
18:22 < gmaxwell> So either everyone is being censored for those addresses (which is possible), and the coins can't even be spent, or at least the representative knows and can comply with your request for information.
18:23 < gmaxwell> In any case, _all_ subset systems have a censorship problem;  and the only hope to address that appears to be is to use techniques from PIR but that requires the source have more information to enable an anonymity set for the query; which undermines some of the scaling gain.
18:24 < akrmn> hmm thinking...
18:24 < akrmn> what is PIR?
18:24 < gmaxwell> Might be helpful to also consider that someone fetching a tree fragment could just as well fetch little subsets that he could also serve on, e.g. you're not dependant on someone with all the data to construct membership proofs.
18:25 < gmaxwell> Private information retrieval; where you can fetch data from a server without the server knowing what data you fetched.
18:25 < gmaxwell> E.g. you can fetch record 0 and the server doesn't know if you fetched 0,1,2,3,4...   but obviously you can't have fetched any record that the server's behavior didn't depend on.
18:26 < akrmn> gmaxwell: You want to rely on someone showing that they spent the public's coins?
18:27 < gmaxwell> akrmn: ::sigh:: the reliance is on the fact that they cannot hide that they spent a coin without simply failing to respond entirely. (and then people can demand they respond, since the failure is conspicious)
18:27 < akrmn> I still don't understand. I think with my method it is better, because you can download all the full blocks of the subchain corresponding to a wallet, so you can catch EVERY transcation with those addresses.
18:27 < gmaxwell> this is why the politician example is silly, there is obvious recourse if the politician is refusing to comply.
18:28 < akrmn> gmaxwell: Well if there's big blocks and only a few big nodes and only a few miners, then it is plausible that yes they can hide a transaction.
18:28 < akrmn> because no one else will be looking at the full blocks
18:29 < gmaxwell> akrmn: In this respect the systems fail identically.  You could download the all the transactions corresponding to a particular utxo subtree. It's just the same as blocks. In either case you could be potentially censored though the censorship wouldn't be secret.
18:30 < akrmn> For a subchain, the miners of a subchain have an incentive to broadcast their blocks, but nodes do not have an incentive to give out the UTXO merkle trees
18:30 < gmaxwell> akrmn: No, they cannot. They can only hide a transaction by hiding the records connected to a particular scriptpubkey _completely_, in which case the representative couldn't spend either. So he would be taking a grave risk in saying "sorry, I can't access those records either" since his spending would _prove_ that he had.
18:31 < gmaxwell> akrmn: what? no. They only have an incentive for a substantial amount of hashpower to build on them. (30% or 50% depending on what information advantage you assume); they have no particular incentive to give them to anyone else.  And likewise UTXO commitments do not in any way diminish the requirement of giving your block data to other miners.
18:32 < akrmn> Well ya they need to broadcast to get other miners on their chain, and with more miner decentralization, it is better
18:32 < akrmn> I think the censorship issue is underestimated in the blocksize debate
18:33 < akrmn> and UTXO commitments wont save us
18:33 < gmaxwell> I dunno who said they would, none of the people who are conserviative about blocksize think they would.
18:34 < akrmn> alright just saying to make sure others are aware, and also for myself to know if I understand
18:34 < sipa_> UTXO commitments help for bootstrapping full nodes _in a reduced security mode_, and help SPV nodes prove the non-spentness of coins
18:34 < gmaxwell> Miners are harmed, technically, by giving the data promptly to more than half the hashrate.   But again: this is the same across the board-- the censorship is completely orthorgonal to utxo commitments vs subchains. In both cases a miner only needs to provide the data to a subset of other miners.
18:34 < sipa_> they are not a scaling mechanism
18:34 < gmaxwell> what sipa says. (as usual)
18:35 < akrmn> Ah sipa finally :)
18:35 < sipa_> in fact, they hurt scalability, by burdening full nodes with updating the utxo merkle root for every block
18:35 < gmaxwell> They're potentially pretty useful; maybe. Unclear, they appear to be much more expensive to maintain than people were originally estimating, so their narrow uses may not offset their costs.
18:36 < akrmn> sipa_ said my subchains scheme is equivalent to an SPV node downloading just the transactions it thinks are important, but it's not if you understand how UTXO states can be proved
18:37 < sipa_> UTXO commitments are also just SPV security
18:38 -!- priidu [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
18:38 < sipa_> they are not useful if you want full node security
18:38 -!- jtimon [~quassel@69.29.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
18:38 < sipa_> because all UTXO commitments do, is prove that miner hashpower agreed with the commitment
18:38 < akrmn> Well it is similar to UTXO commitments, but not quite. Each parent chain stores the hashes of the block headers of the child chains in special transactions
18:38 < sipa_> how do you validate them?
18:38 < akrmn> so no merkle tree is needed to prove UTXO state
18:38 < akrmn> you download the full blocks for the subchains you want to track
18:38 < sipa_> if you don't verify them, you don't get fill node security for them
18:39 < sipa_> then you cannot get full node security for the parents without validating the children
18:39 < akrmn> The parent always decides in case of conflict
18:40 < akrmn> so yes, parent can commit to some bad things deep down in the tree of chains, but the deeper you go the less important it is
18:40 < akrmn> it is a good tradeoff I think
18:41 < gmaxwell> akrmn: I don't know why you think in this respect there is any difference at all.  You can download the subtries pubkeys 0000... through 0001... under a utxo commitment scheme and then a party can only censor or not the whole thing.   just like they could censor or not a subchain. You argue that miners are incentivized to share but this is exactly as true (not very) in both cases.
18:41 < sipa_> so can parent miners steal coins from the subschain#m
18:41 -!- frankenmint [~frankenmi@c-24-22-67-17.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:42 < akrmn> sipa_: Parent miners have an incentive to keep the child chain working well since they get fees for including the child chain hashes in their blocks
18:42 < gmaxwell> to the extent that they're different in the subchains case since not all miners are mining all subchains and enforcing validity as a group there are arguably more censorship incentives (e.g. so miners can steal the coins).
18:42 < akrmn> and the fees can only be spent in the children chains (outputs valid only in children chains)
18:43 < gmaxwell> akrmn: why bother with fees under conditions when you could instead just steal the coins?
18:43 < akrmn> gmaxwell: Good question. Have to think about it.
18:45 < gmaxwell> similarly in the utxo commitment stuff the miners have to process updates for the whole utxo or they can't mine at all.  I could see where you might argue that this was less scalable, but not less secure.  (and indeed, utxo commitments do not generally improve scalability; though they do make some particular cases more efficient)
18:45 < akrmn> Well then the value of those coins will go down
18:45 < gmaxwell> (some particular reduced security use cases)
18:45 < akrmn> just like miners dont have an incentive to steal coins now
18:45 < sipa_> akrmn: then we could just use a central bank too
18:46 < sipa_> much more efficient
18:46 < sipa_> akrmn: miners niw _cannot_ steal coins, because full nodes would reject their blocks
18:46 < gmaxwell> akrmn: they coins they steal are not confined to that system (otherwise you're just describing an altcoin)
18:46 < gmaxwell> sipa_: well subject to not reorging deeper than 100 blocks, but thats a bit hair splitting.
18:47 < sipa_> agree
18:47 < akrmn> Well its in the satoshi paper as I remember that miners wouldn't want to compromise the value of their coins by making the system look bad
18:47 < sipa_> akrmn: blockchains don't solve security of coins
18:48 < sipa_> akrmn: the only authority given to miners in bitcoin is deciding between two equally valid potential versions of historu
18:48 < sipa_> but _valid_ versions of history
18:48 < sipa_> and yes, they can cheat here too, by reverting completed transactions
18:48 -!- jmcn [~jamie@2.24.158.106] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
18:48 < sipa_> so there is an incentive necessary for them not to do so
18:49 < sipa_> and that is subsidy and fee
18:49 -!- jmcn [~jamie@2.24.158.106] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:49 < sipa_> but it works because it is the only means through which they can earn money
18:49 < sipa_> if they could just steal coins, you are not doing much better than a central bank
18:50 < akrmn> ok true full nodes will reject that, so that's also a reason. I guess full nodes on the child chains could go with the parent chain only if it follows basic rules
18:50 < sipa_> the difference that bitcoin offers is the ability for everyone to verify that nobody is cheating, and just outright reject attempts in which it is tried
18:50 < sipa_> the problem in your case is that to get full node security on the parent chain, you need to already validate all childchains
18:50 < sipa_> afaict
18:51 -!- moa [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/moa] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:51 < akrmn> well the parent will validate the children, the child will validate the grandchildren, so recursively the system holds together
18:52 < akrmn> and deeper validations can be done by the parent, but it's not so required, and becomes less important the deeper you go
18:52 < sipa_> the children also have to validate the parent for transfers from them
18:52 < sipa_> or from other children
18:52 < akrmn> so you can fine tune the level of security depending on how deep of a chain you use
18:52 < sipa_> no, you just need to validate the whole thing
18:52 < akrmn> ya children track the parents
18:53 < gmaxwell> uhhh. you cannot have X validation depend on Y and then validate X without validating Y. You're being fuzzy there, and I think dishonest about the security levels you're talking about as a result (I don't mean that to imply that its intentional)
18:53 -!- gmaxwell [greg@wikimedia/KatWalsh/x-0001] has left #bitcoin-wizards []
18:53 < akrmn> gmaxwell: Im not saying my scheme is perfect. But I think it is at least better than increasing the blocksize.
18:54 < sipa_> the fundamental problem is that to have coins transferring between coins, the receiver needs to validate that the coin existed in the first place where it was sent from. that means fully validating the sender
18:54 < kanzure> akrmn: there are many alternatives to increasing the max block size http://www.mail-archive.com/bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net/msg08183.html
18:54 < sipa_> akrmn: at best, it is identical in full node validation cost
18:56 < akrmn> sipa_: Yes but the rule says to trust the parent to commit to the children headers, and (possibly) you need to do an SPV validation using the headers of the sibling chain.
18:56 < sipa_> i think that's an unacceptable compromise
18:56 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@x4d08a7a4.dyn.telefonica.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:56 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@unaffiliated/dr-g] has quit [Disconnected by services]
18:57 < sipa_> the security of the whole system can never be better than the bottom blockchains
18:58 < sipa_> you are talking about introducing multiple tradeoffs, which is good
18:58 < sipa_> but you do it at the cost of significantly reducing the best security possible
18:59 < sipa_> when talking about centralization pressure from scaling, it is usually the cost to that best possible security we're talking about
19:00 < akrmn> You just need a proof that the sender from a sibling (not parent or child) has the coins right?
19:01 < sipa_> and to get full node security, that proof is the entire blockchain
19:01 < sipa_> for spv security, it is the headers of that chain
19:02 < sipa_> and if there were coins transferred into it during its history, you need the blockchains of those sender chains too
19:02 < sipa_> you cannot validate a transaction's effect without seeing the transaction
19:03 < sipa_> spv security is relying on the fact that miners vouched for it, but it is not full validation
19:03 < akrmn> The sender had to start from the common parent chain, then transfer to the sibling chain (child of the parent next to the child chain you track). So you just need a proof of all their transactions from when they entered the sibling chain until the present moment.
19:03 < sipa_> not going to argur anymore
19:03 < sipa_> argue
19:04 -!- fanquake [~fanquake@unaffiliated/fanquake] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:04 < sipa_> i think you should try to understand why bitcoin is secure first
19:05 < akrmn> ok no problem
19:08 < akrmn> but even if you like the current way of doing things, you can still do it by tracking all the subchains. It will be equivalent to increasing the blocksize. So I don't see how it can be worse.
19:08 < sipa_> more complex with no benefit
19:08 < akrmn> well for some applications theres a benefit I think
19:09 < sipa_> ok
19:11 -!- frankenmint [~frankenmi@c-24-22-67-17.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
19:23 -!- fanquake [~fanquake@unaffiliated/fanquake] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
19:23 -!- fanquake [~fanquake@unaffiliated/fanquake] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:00 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-185-201-214-201.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
20:00 -!- Guest22312 is now known as pigeons
20:08 < CodeShark> sipa, I really like the witness separation thing you're working on :)
20:19 < bramc> utxo commitments become more useful if the block sizes are larger.
20:20 < bramc> Also, on the subject of PIR, it's now possible to do efficient reverse PIR: http://arxiv.org/abs/1503.06115
20:21 < CodeShark> block size should ultimately be dictated by technological capacity and economics...and must ultimately be dynamic
20:22 < bramc> block size is just fine where it is
20:23 < CodeShark> for an experimental network, sure - for a global payment network capable of handling billions of users, it most certainly is not (unless the blockchain consists merely of hash commitments)
20:25 < CodeShark> the far more important issues of how to schedule hard forks and how to create a fee market got conflated into this whole block size debate
20:25 < CodeShark> I'm glad to see that at least a few people in this space have the vision to give these things their due
20:35 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:37 < bramc> Here's a good schedule for hard forks: never
20:38 < bramc> Unless there's a critical reason
20:39 -!- hashtag [~hashtag@cpe-69-23-213-3.ma.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
20:41 < moa> it's hard to imagine what a good hard forking would even look like
20:42 < CodeShark> there will be critical reasons sooner or later - we need to at least have a mechanism in place
20:42 < CodeShark> so that it isn't an ad-hoc thing each time
20:43 < CodeShark> and so that people don't use these situations as political opportunity for self promotion
20:43 < moa> opportunists-resistant protocol
20:43 < CodeShark> :)
20:44 < CodeShark> well, I should rephrase that - self-promotion in and of itself isn't what's bad - it's driving wedges in cryptoledgers for political gain that's bad
20:44 -!- goregrind [~goregrind@unaffiliated/goregrind] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:44 -!- goregrin1 [~goregrind@unaffiliated/goregrind] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
20:47 -!- [7] [~quassel@rockbox/developer/TheSeven] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
20:47 < CodeShark> but in principle I agree that they should be rather infrequent, bramc
20:48 < CodeShark> some of the most critical things that should be done in a hard fork is precisely to figure out ways to avoid them in the future
20:50 < CodeShark> but no matter how much foresight we think we have we'll surely miss something...and sooner or later we'll either encounter some crisis...or someone will find a brilliant solution to some issue we'd like to incorporate but can only incorporate it via hard fork
20:53 < Luke-Jr> CodeShark: hey, thanks for saying things that need to be said on the ML ☺
20:53 < CodeShark> :)
20:54 -!- TheSeven [~quassel@rockbox/developer/TheSeven] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:54 < bramc> The method of doing a hard fork of coming up with an unpopular and dubious proposal and whipping up hysteria on reddit is not a good one
20:55 < CodeShark> I think most of us agree with that, bramc :)
20:55 < moa> r/bitcoin could do with a hard forking
20:56 -!- hashtag [~hashtag@cpe-69-23-213-3.ma.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:56 -!- erasmospunk [~erasmospu@46-198-61-117.adsl.cyta.gr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:57 -!- the_last [~the_last@58-6-171-98.dyn.iinet.net.au] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
20:58 -!- afk11 [~thomas@46.7.4.219] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
20:58 < phantomcircuit> CodeShark, there's no way for a hard fork to be orderly unless there is nearly universal consensus
20:59 < CodeShark> phantomcircuit: agreed - which makes it a huge challenge
20:59 -!- the_last [~the_last@58-6-171-98.dyn.iinet.net.au] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:00 -!- hashtag [~hashtag@cpe-69-23-213-3.ma.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
21:00 -!- erasmospunk [~erasmospu@46-198-61-117.adsl.cyta.gr] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
21:00 -!- go1111111 [~go1111111@162.244.138.37] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
21:02 < CodeShark> more the reason to focus the core protocol on only the critical consensus tasks and move specific details off to
21:03 < CodeShark> other networks
21:04 < CodeShark> ultimately the blockchain is a decentralized timestamping mechanism for converging on a commit history
21:04 < phantomcircuit> CodeShark, bitcoin core's been massively re-factored to get closer to that
21:04 < CodeShark> yes, I'm happy to see those efforts underway
21:04 < phantomcircuit> but ultimately things like the blocksize limit are the critical consensus tasks
21:05 < phantomcircuit> actually i think that's the fundamental disagreement
21:05 < CodeShark> what's the fundamental disagreement?
21:06 -!- afk11 [~thomas@46.7.4.219] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:07 < phantomcircuit> CodeShark, those seeking to change the blocksize dont see the fee pressure as part of the consensus critical code
21:08 < phantomcircuit> fees has always been kind of a big question mark in the incentives model
21:08 < phantomcircuit> but there's nothing to replace them!
21:09 < CodeShark> the fee issue is an unsolved one - but the original bitcoin design makes it very clear that ultimately the network is to be subsidized by fees, not block rewards
21:10 < CodeShark> six years into this thing, it's still unsolved
21:10 < CodeShark> shall we wait until block subsidies are in the millibitcoins?
21:11 < phantomcircuit> CodeShark, exactly my point
21:11 < phantomcircuit> "oh well fix that later"
21:11 < phantomcircuit> s/later/never/
21:12 < rusty> CodeShark: I always thought a good model for thinking about hard forking would be an SHA break or equiv.
21:12 < phantomcircuit> without substantial transaction fees (in the range of $1.50/tx) the incentives model for mining doesn't make any sense at all
21:12 -!- Populus [Populus@unaffiliated/populus] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:12 -!- Populus [Populus@unaffiliated/populus] has quit [Changing host]
21:12 -!- Populus [Populus@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-zjvdkzncjppkuebd] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:12 < phantomcircuit> if the incentives model doesn't work... then the pow security is useless
21:13 -!- go1111111 [~go1111111@104.200.154.33] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:13 < CodeShark> phantomcircuit: if the transaction volume were large enough mining could still be potentially profitable even at much lower fees. But for that to happen we need fundamental architectural and algorithmic improvements to scalability
21:14 < CodeShark> increasing the block size alone will never fix that
21:15 < CodeShark> rusty: so you mean we set a crypto challenge?
21:15 < phantomcircuit> CodeShark, transaction fees will be effectively zero until blocks are full
21:16 -!- chmod755 [~chmod755@unaffiliated/chmod755] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:16 < phantomcircuit> CodeShark, it's an obvious game theory failure
21:16 < phantomcircuit> CodeShark, when selecting the transactions to include in a block right now miners will always include everything that pays a fee upto the size limit
21:17 < rusty> CodeShark: Not quite. I mean if you want to provide a scenario where a hardfork would have almost universal consensus, for the purposes of designing a hardfork protocol (I mean protocol in the human sense).
21:17 < phantomcircuit> if the limit isn't being hit then the fees will tend towards zero
21:17 < rusty> phantomcircuit: gmaxwell's flexcap proposal or something is required, agreed.
21:17 < phantomcircuit> CodeShark, to correct this there needs to be some form of supply fixing
21:17 < rusty> brb
21:17 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has left #bitcoin-wizards []
21:19 < CodeShark> phantomcircuit: correct - we need to hit the limit and we need to design for fee bidding. and we need to apply pressure on all the parts of the ecosystem to start migrating to this.
21:19 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:19 < CodeShark> we still have block reward subsidies...so we don't need fees to cover the entire cost for pow
21:19 < CodeShark> at least for now
21:19 < CodeShark> so NOW is when we should do this
21:19 < CodeShark> when we still have an economic cushion
21:20 -!- frankenmint [~frankenmi@c-24-22-67-17.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:20 < CodeShark> then we can focus on scalability and increasing volume
21:22 < phantomcircuit> CodeShark, then we agree
21:22 < phantomcircuit> k
21:22 < phantomcircuit> awkwardish silence
21:22 < CodeShark> heh
21:23 < moa> block rewards can go to anyone who solves the transition to fees only POW security
21:23 < CodeShark> but you do bring up a very important point which I'm starting to put more into perspective - I was thinking perhaps a block size increase is good because it buys us a little more time - but it's clear that the cushion should be in the block reward, not in the block sizd
21:23 < CodeShark> *block size
21:24 < CodeShark> otherwise it only works to the detriment of these developments - as you say, a game theory fail
21:25 < phantomcircuit> CodeShark, and you can probably see why it's so hard to explain this to people
21:25 < CodeShark> the economic pressure is essential to the solution here
21:25 < phantomcircuit> "well you see this is almost a classic prisoners dilemma problem" *eyes glaze over*
21:25 < moa> what about "if tot_fees_last_2016 > X*total_rewards_last_2016 then new_max_block_size = Y*max_block_size" ?
21:26 < moa> X and Y to be bike-shedded
21:26 < CodeShark> lol
21:26 < phantomcircuit> moa, using the fees directly as a proxy doesn't work; unfortunately miners get paid the fees so they can trivially jump up the apparent fees paid
21:26 < CodeShark> well, the problem with that is that it's hard to prevent people from generating fake volume and fees
21:26 < CodeShark> right, phantomcircuit  :)
21:26 < phantomcircuit> (note: they should be the ones getting the fees)
21:32 -!- frankenmint [~frankenmi@c-24-22-67-17.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has quit []
21:35 < bramc> Having wallets set their fees is an interesting problem
21:36 < bramc> (and one which won't be solved until it has to be, one of the reasons real fees are a good thing)
21:36 < bramc> One approach is to have wallets always start at a small fee and increase it over time until it goes through
21:36 < moa> phantomcircuit: which would be the same as miners voting for larger blocks
21:37 < CodeShark> bramc: it would be nice to have fee queries built into the protocol somehow
21:37 < CodeShark> and fee commitments in blocks
21:37 < bramc> CodeShark, Yes it's an interesting question where those should go, and how they could be proven
21:38 < bramc> One interesting extension would be to make minimum fee per byte be part of the root metadata of blocks
21:38 < CodeShark> miners could advertise their fee policy in their blocks - and relayers could advertise their fee policy as either part of their handshake or as a separate message
21:38 < CodeShark> although the latter part is still fundamentally broken because the fees here are only for spam prevention
21:38 < bramc> fee policies should be assumed to be a bidding process where they take the maximum fee/byte and go down the line until the block is full
21:39 < CodeShark> true
21:39 < CodeShark> so I guess you'd need some kind of orderbook
21:39 < bramc> It's more complicated than that because of transaction dependencies of course
21:40 < CodeShark> miners could periodically propagate messages with their orderbook info, I suppose
21:40 < CodeShark> hmmm
21:41 < phantomcircuit> bramc, i actually dont think it's that difficult of a problem if we make one tiny assumption
21:42 < phantomcircuit> if we assume that miners are maximizing for fees
21:42 < phantomcircuit> it becomes nothing but a matter of estimating the fees needed to get you in the next block based on the mempool
21:43  * jgarzik appears
21:43 < jgarzik> phantomcircuit, very bad assumption though
21:43 < CodeShark> but there's another problem even assuming that...which is that wallets then need to track the entire mempool as well
21:44 < jgarzik> the problem is ultimately predicting the collective scope of multiple local miner policies
21:45 < bramc> Yes there's an issue with calculating the going rate
21:45 < bramc> It's unfortunate that bitcoin protocol doesn't require that fees be identical per byte across all transactions
21:46 < CodeShark> it would be nice, perhaps, to be able to set a fee range and have a mechanism that proves that the fee you had to pay was the best available to get into the block...and maybe a way to set confirmation priority
21:46 < CodeShark> "I'm willing to wait longer but want to pay less"
21:46 < bramc> The escalator approach: start at a small value, go up exponentially until you get in, has the advantage of always working and requiring no trust. It does take a while though
21:47 < bramc> It also highlights that there will always be a tradeoff where wallets willing to wait a bit longer can get a cheaper rate
21:47 < bramc> There's likely to be daily and weekly cycles of fees.
21:48 < leakypat> I've often wondered when the fee market is there, won't miners be able to troll $1bn transactions for example?
21:49 < phantomcircuit> CodeShark, what you dont run bitcoin core wallet? :P
21:49 < CodeShark> lol
21:49 < phantomcircuit> jgarzik, yes i've discussed this a bunch around limiting the memory pool
21:50 -!- ryan`c is now known as ryan-c
21:50 < phantomcircuit> both limiting the memory pool and estimating fees require coming up with some function that approximates miner policy
21:50 < bramc> I would argue that wallets should always be doing some amount of escalator, as a public good, otherwise weird effects can happen
21:50 < phantomcircuit> with RBF this actually becomes much easier
21:50 < CodeShark> about the best we can do for estimating fee policy is looking at recent block history, I think
21:51 < phantomcircuit> since the easiest way to guess at miners policy is to look at the age of transactions in the mempool
21:51 < phantomcircuit> which you cant really do a priori
21:51 < bramc> like prices can get high and get stuck high for no reason other than that they were that way before. If wallets always try to underbid and then work up to what they're willing to pay things will be much more stable overall, regardless of what algorithm is used to set their initial bid.
21:51 -!- Populus [Populus@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-zjvdkzncjppkuebd] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
21:52 < phantomcircuit> jgarzik, so... yeah approximating all miners as using nothing but feerate is reasonable so long as there's a fallback
21:52 < CodeShark> bramc, I think the escalator approach is best...if only there were a way for wallets to quickly receive a message from miners saying how likely they are to include it
21:52 < phantomcircuit> without rbf you're taking an educated guess and cant change it though
21:52 < phantomcircuit> in other words rbf is necessary for bitcoin to work long term
21:53 < jgarzik> phantomcircuit, as stated days ago, you need a multi-level approximation...  first fee tranche then priority tranche
21:53 < bramc> CodeShark, Bidding is part of the price discovery process, I think *any* algorithm where wallets pick a price and don't adjust it will inevitably cause wacky artifacts
21:53 < rusty> jgarzik: safe rbf makes the fee guessing much more interactive.  That may be a bad thing, of course...
21:53 < bramc> jgarzik, Escalator has two, maybe three big parameters: starting value, max value, and rate of increase
21:54 < bramc> What is 'safe rbf'?
21:54 < phantomcircuit> jgarzik, what?
21:54 < phantomcircuit> no you dont
21:54 < phantomcircuit> either way you're making a best guess approximation
21:55 < the_last> i for one am glad our overlord Gavin decided to make a move
21:55 < phantomcircuit> including priority in the equation is assuming all the miners run the default policy
21:55 < phantomcircuit> which is irrational...
21:55 < jgarzik> phantomcircuit, 2 tranches, because that is what miners follow
21:55 < jgarzik> phantomcircuit, the free transaction area must be included in your guesstimate
21:55 < rusty> bramc: basically, allowing a transaction to be replaced in the mempool if it's a superset.
21:56 < phantomcircuit> jgarzik, that seems like a short term attempt to model based on a monoculture of policy
21:56 < phantomcircuit> that really just feels extremely lame
21:56 < jgarzik> phantomcircuit, Translation:  You wish to model something other than reality.
21:56 < phantomcircuit> read: im not writing that
21:57 < phantomcircuit> jgarzik, if you'd like i can write a pure fee policy and lobby miners to run it
21:57 < phantomcircuit> apparently the game of the day is changing reality
21:57 < jgarzik> phantomcircuit, your problem set is modelling what miners do, not what you want them to do!
21:57 < jgarzik> If you are unhappy with reality I can't help with that part ;p
21:58 < CodeShark> miners don't optimize for fees because it's a diminishing returns proposition right now
21:58 < CodeShark> a lot of work for very little gain
21:58 < CodeShark> they basically run whatever software they get
21:58 < rusty> phantomcircuit: you could argue that it'll happen eventually.  When fees are no longer << subsidy, that free stuff will go away pretty fast.
21:58 < phantomcircuit> jgarzik, im modeling what i expect miners will be doing when it actually matters
21:58 < CodeShark> but if we had an actual fee market there'd be an incentive for people to write more economically rational mining software
21:58 < jgarzik> ...then it doesn't get merged for years
21:58 < phantomcircuit> if you think anybody is going to have a free transactions area when there's actual fee pressure
21:58 < phantomcircuit> well
21:58 < phantomcircuit> that's just hilarious
21:58 < jgarzik> because it doesn't match real life for years
21:58 < jgarzik> thus, pointless
21:59 -!- stonecoldpat [~a9380004@janus-nat-128-240-225-56.ncl.ac.uk] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:00 < CodeShark> I think we can assume that given a real fee market, miners would tend to move towards a more rational bidding approach
22:00 < CodeShark> and would abandon the current tx selection algorithms
22:00 < jgarzik> CodeShark, nod - but the foundational assumption remains false today, and possibly for some time yet to come
22:00 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:01 < jgarzik> The __current__ bitcoin economic policy is to prevent fee pressure from developing.  This talk of "building a fee market" has to happen in the future, but it is de facto an economic policy _change_, a delta from the years-long policy of avoiding fee pressure to subsidize bitcoin adoption.
22:02 < CodeShark> it was a stupid policy - it's too bad I wasn't in those meetings :p
22:02 < jgarzik> Each block limit size change reboots the fee market.
22:02 < jgarzik> from scratch
22:02 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has quit [Client Quit]
22:04 < CodeShark> the time to solve the problem is BEFORE bitcoin is huge...while it's still relatively experimental and the costs of failure are still relatively small
22:04 < CodeShark> not once it's gone global and we have no solution
22:06 < rusty> jgarzik: I'm pretty sure everyone knew free money wouldn't last forever.  If not, they're learning now.
22:06 < CodeShark> bitcoin is already subsidized by block rewards - and even with the current block size limit it took us over 6 years to start to get close to it
22:08 < moa> ok "if total_fee_last_210000 > X*total_reward_last_210000 then new_max_block_size = Y*max_block_size" for the transitional period from rewards to fees
22:08 < jgarzik> rusty, It is highly likely that the block size limit will be increased, and the current policy continued
22:08 < CodeShark> then we need a change of leadership
22:08 < CodeShark> I'm sick of cowtowing to mediocrity
22:08 < CodeShark> we need to set higher standards for our industry
22:08 < rusty> jgarzik: it is highly unlikely that it will happen before low-fee transactions are delayed enough.  We're one big burst away from that happening.
22:08 < CodeShark> this isn't a piggy bank
22:09 < jgarzik> rusty, nod, we've already had community-run stress tests along those lines
22:09 < rusty> jgarzik: they're bullshit.  We've had mempool fills before and since, no indication those "stress tests" did anything.
22:10 < jgarzik> rusty, Are they comprehensive?  No.  Are they more than the community & industry have done in the past?  Yes.  Is that sad?  Yes.
22:11 < jgarzik> they are useful wake-up calls
22:11 < rusty> jgarzik: True.  AFAICT they haven't changed user behaviour.  That 45% of transactions moving < $1 is the number to watch.
22:11 < CodeShark> I should also add that if it was policy to avoid fee pressure, this should have been made more explicit as part of the specifications...rather than pulling fud on forums and scaring everyone into suddently increasing block size
22:11 < jgarzik> the last time blocks got full, the action was Mike Hearn lobbying miners to increase their soft limit ;p
22:11 < rusty> jgarzik: indeed; some people were promised "no fees!" for bitcoin transfers.
22:11 < jgarzik> which they did
22:11 < rusty> jgarzik: indeed, I'd rather see them drop priority txs.
22:12 < bramc> The current main anti-DOS fee measure is to ignore fees and put through bigger transactions first. This makes things work okay when such stress tests happen, but is rather counter to what needs to happen eventually
22:12 < bramc> It also isn't a great anti-dos measure. I ran the numbers a while ago on how much money you'd have to allocate to make it so that $10 transactions could never go through, I think it was like $25,000
22:15 -!- arubi [~ese168@unaffiliated/arubi] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
22:15 < bramc> Blocking less than $100 would require $250,000
22:16 < bramc> And of course the attacker wouldn't lose that deposit, although they might have done some damage to its value in the process of the attack
22:16 < moa> is there any evidence that zero free transactions take any longer than fee-paying TX?
22:16 < jgarzik> bramc, not sure I understand that?  The current main anti-DOS measure is that fee pressure begins, once blocks fill up.
22:16 < moa> zero fee
22:16 < jgarzik> Blocks are not full by default, because of anti-dust (anti-spam) policy.
22:16 < jgarzik> Natural economic state of a block is 100% full at all times
22:16 < jgarzik> absent de-spamming
22:17 < CodeShark> blocks not being full because of anti-dust policy is another game theory fail
22:17 < CodeShark> the incentives are all completely screwed up on that one
22:17 < bramc> jgarzik, That isn't my understanding, I could be wrong, I don't have a link handy, I definitely read something which gave a concrete algorithm which involved transaction size and age as the biggest inputs, I think priority was something like size*age
22:18 < jgarzik> bramc, that is the _secondary_ sort
22:18 < jgarzik> bramc, the primary sort is fee/kb
22:18 < jgarzik> bramc, if room is left after primary sort, _then_ size/age sort kicks in
22:18 < jgarzik> bramc, size/age priority is referred to as the "free transaction area"
22:18 < jgarzik> size/age is only used when the fee is otherwise too low for inclusion
22:19 < bramc> jgarzik, You mean for things which are tied, generally with a fee of zero?
22:19 < jgarzik> bramc, not tied -- for all transactions which failed to be picked up by the initial fee/kb sort - and fell below the "dust" (fee) limit just mentioned
22:19 < jgarzik> if your fee is below a certain X, it is considered "zero fee" from the miner's sorting perspective
22:20 < bramc> What is the dust limit set to?
22:20 < bramc> At current standard fees everything might as well be dust
22:20 < jgarzik> bramc, grep for IsDust()
22:20 < jgarzik> bramc, it's not a simple number, but a calculation
22:20 < CodeShark> are we talking about relay selection? or miner selection?
22:21 < jgarzik> CodeShark, miner selection
22:21 < jgarzik> relay has a similar metric though
22:21 < bramc> The fees are miniscule relative to the overhead of transferring between real currencies and bitcoin, which is ridiculous
22:21 -!- stonecoldpat [~a9380004@janus-nat-128-240-225-56.ncl.ac.uk] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
22:22 < jgarzik> ...this is why I've been poking phantomcircuit about a two-tranche approach.  That best simulates miners today.  (1) fee/kb   (3) priority (size/age)
22:22 < rusty> (2) collect underpants?
22:22 < jgarzik> er (2)
22:22 < jgarzik> :)
22:22 < bramc> I mean, ridiculous in the sense that increasing them isn't a meaningful increase in costs, and they're subsidized
22:22 < CodeShark> indeed, bramc. If ANYTHING is hampering bitcoin adoption, it ain't the fees :p
22:23 < jgarzik> the end result is that you cannot dump video files into the block chain, but you can send "zero fee" transactions if they are "good"
22:23 < phantomcircuit> jgarzik, it doesn't even matter for the memory pool limit whether there's a free transactions space
22:23 < jgarzik> scare quotes intentional
22:23 < phantomcircuit> the default is 48 hours worth of transactions
22:23 < phantomcircuit> if there's a backup that large
22:23 < phantomcircuit> you can be damned sure there wont be any free transactions
22:23 < phantomcircuit> note: im not writing the fee estimation logic
22:24 < jgarzik> phantomcircuit, If a memory pool janitors fails to approximate what is likely to be confirmed in next 48 hours, then NAK - it's not solving the problem
22:26 < CodeShark> I think all transactions should pay at least the smallest fee possible that doesn't create a dust output :)
22:26 < jgarzik> That's why block time approach was taken in the garbage collector "poolman" - you don't have to perform a priority sort
22:26 < bramc> A good first stab at fee estimation is to find the minimum fee/byte of the last block, multiply it by 2/3, randomly add between 0 and 15%, and repeatedly add between 0 and 15% of what you last did for each subsequent block until your transaction is accepted
22:26 < bramc> Also, ummm, needs malleability
22:26 < CodeShark> if for no other reason than to force software developers to make it possible to add a fee :)
22:26 < CodeShark> and get them used to the need for a fee market
22:27 -!- mjerr [~mjerr@p578EAB34.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:27 < CodeShark> and we should get rid of the "free" space
22:28 < bramc> And, uh, there needs to be something in the wallet UX to set a maximum acceptable fee
22:28 < jgarzik> bramc, indeed
22:28 < jgarzik> bramc, And that's another can o worms... wallet software UX
22:28 < bramc> A default of a fixed percent of the transaction size is a reasonable first pass
22:29 < jgarzik> a tough, tough problem.  Block confirmation wall-clock time is short term unpredictable.  Therefore, a user cannot pay to confirm within X time.  The user only has rough controls: above average, average, below average or approaching-zero fee choices.  It is incredibly difficult to reason, and then for software to figure things out from there.
22:30 < CodeShark> we've basically been encouraging software developers to not even think about fees...and then expect to be able to address the issue of fee-based miner subsidy?
22:30 < jgarzik> Further, transaction fee cost varies based on TX _size_ not value
22:30 < jgarzik> A tiny monetary value with tons of inputs may require a large fee
22:30 < jgarzik> confusing to users
22:30 < CodeShark> sure, that will be a lot easier to do once there's a bunch more money riding on this network, it's got a bunch more users, there's craploads more inertia, and the reward subsidies for blocks are even smaller
22:30 < jgarzik> how to translate into useful UX?
22:30 -!- GAit [~lnahum@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
22:30 < jgarzik> CodeShark, no these are all fundamental to bitcoin design itself
22:31 < jgarzik> wallet software improvements only get us so far
22:31 < bramc> jgarzik, I think the things I just said are reasonable defaults: 70% of last smallest fee, rising 0-15% every time including the first, don't go over 5% of the transaction size
22:31 < jgarzik> A user might pay a high fee, and still have to wait an hour for a single confirmation.  The economic signalling is _very_ muddy.
22:31 < phantomcircuit> jgarzik, it's provably impossible to solve that problem
22:31 < CodeShark> the fee bidding stuff requires some real design improvements at the protocol level - agreed...but my point is that with the current policy of "let's avoid fee pressure at all costs" encourages even less thinking about how to manage fees in UX
22:32 < jgarzik> phantomcircuit, nod
22:32 < phantomcircuit> better not limit the mempool size at all
22:32 < bramc> or maybe go up 0-30% every time and don't go over 1%, something like that
22:32  * phantomcircuit goes to break something
22:32 < jgarzik> CodeShark, agree there
22:32 -!- GAit [~lnahum@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:32 < bramc> Anyway, these are reasonably understandable values, even for not super technical people
22:32 < jgarzik> It remains highly difficult to translate into a useful UX where the non-technical user may make meaningful conscious choices.
22:33 < jgarzik> To the user, the fee is _random_ because they don't know inputs (and therefore TX size)
22:33 < jgarzik> The user knows monetary values, not technical wizardy
22:34 < jgarzik> It depends on how fragmented is their wallet [collection of unspent outputs]
22:34 < bramc> jgarzik, the general tradeoff between how long to a transaction going through and how much the fee is should be reasonably understandable
22:34 < jgarzik> Users with highly fragmented wallets incur high fees on average
22:35 < bramc> Hopefully their fees are exactly proportional to their amount of dust
22:35 < jgarzik> bramc, very roughly, not exactly
22:36 < bramc> If you're really doing it right every transaction should have two inputs and two outputs
22:36 < CodeShark> bramc, not necessarily
22:36 < jgarzik> bramc, eh, not at all
22:36 < CodeShark> there are many use cases where you cannot do it that way even if you really wanted to
22:36 < bramc> that way you're cleaning up your own dust as you go.
22:37 < bramc> I'm assuming you have a wallet which is doing a bunch of transactions over time
22:37 < jgarzik> wallets should do more defragmenting, yes (and that increases privacy as a side-effect!)
22:37 -!- sy5error [~sy5error@unaffiliated/sy5error] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
22:38 < bramc> jgarzik, The effects of defragmenting on privacy are unclear. When I've spoken with people about what algorithms should be used for deciding what to recombine when nobody seems to have particularly clear ideas about how to evaluate the possible approcahes
22:38 < CodeShark> there are also tradeoffs here
22:39 < CodeShark> "privacy" isn't a one-dimensional optimization
22:39 < jgarzik> Related:  gmaxwell has proposed including "net-utxo" into the tx size calculation for block size limit
22:39 < jgarzik> to incentivize reducing UTXO
22:39 < jgarzik> IMO a good idea (but needs study etc.)
22:40 < rusty> jgarzik: yeah, enhanced to include checksigops and it could be an all-in-one.  I've been calling that "flexcap".  But it needs more research and modelling, at least.
22:40 < CodeShark> also, the privacy thing doesn't really apply to certain use cases such as donation addresses or crowdsales where you want to have a public address everyone can send to or check against
22:41 < rusty> jgarzik: note that it could be soft-forked in under some total bytes hardlimit (which is still useful, as allows capacity planning).
22:41 < bramc> CodeShark, still applies, because the privacy of whoever you got the utxo from might matter
22:41 < jgarzik> yup
22:42 < CodeShark> if it all ultimately goes through a single address everything still can be traced
22:42 < CodeShark> but that's a separate issue entirely :)
22:43 < CodeShark> only better crypto will ultimately save us here
22:43 < bramc> There are some cases where you can do a bit better on bytes used to express something, for example if you make multiple payouts at once
22:44 < bramc> Or if you take a bunch of smaller things and glom them all into the same transaction
22:44 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:44 < CodeShark> but the transaction calculation size issue remains
22:44 < CodeShark> or transaction size calculation issue :p
22:45 < CodeShark> coin selection is nontrivial and has no single "correct" solution
22:45 < bramc> If you really want to preserve privacy, then for every transaction you take a utxo bigger than the payout and split it in two
22:45 < bramc> and you... never use your small utxos?
22:45 -!- Xh1pher [~Xh1pher@pD9E38632.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:46 < phantomcircuit> jgarzik, it all needs study... if only we had time.. oh wait we did!
22:46 < bramc> CodeShark, I'd be happy if there was any coherent analysis of it based on non-handwavy metrics
22:48 < jgarzik> ...and then there's Confidential Transactions which hides the amount
22:48 < jgarzik> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1085273.0
22:49 < bramc> Confidential transactions are The Right Way to fix the problem, but have some obvious issues
22:50 < bramc> Trying to anonymize transactions via coinswap keeps getting hosed by the amounts giving you away
22:50 < CodeShark> coinjoin would only work if everyone had similar sized inputs and outputs
22:50 < bramc> Chopping into binary tokens helps... sort of... then you're drawing attention to the binary tokens
22:50 < Luke-Jr> confidential transactions pose a problem for miners though
22:51 < Luke-Jr> it basically kills the main indicator of spam vs high priority
22:51 < bramc> CodeShark, coinswap is a lot better than coinjoin, but yeah if if the sizes are similar if they aren't actually the same then you still have a serious problem
22:51 < bramc> Luke-Jr, That's okay if there are real transaction fees
22:51 < jgarzik> CodeShark, RE CoinJoin, one idea I like - though still has problem - is common denominations.  Similar to real world analogues of $1 bill, $5 bill, etc.  If we break up outputs into common denominations, you preserve privacy through CoinJoin
22:51 < Luke-Jr> bramc: I suppose. I guess we're on the way to real fees anyway.
22:51 < jgarzik> a 96% solution, not 100%
22:52 < bramc> jgarzik, Thats' what I meant by binary tokens
22:52 < amiller> i haven't figured out how you're supposed to combine coinjoin and confidential transactions
22:53 < bramc> amiller, With confidential transactions it's possible to unblind the values to just the recipient
22:53 < amiller> coinjoin works best when there are lots of coins with the same denomination, ct works best when there are coins with hidden value
22:55 < bramc> amiller, When there's confidential transactions you've already solved the amounts problem and are just trying to fix chain of ownership tracing with coinjoin (or hopefully coinswap, because it's better)
22:56 < amiller> is there any way you can do coinjoin on the encrypted values directly
22:56 < moa> coinjoinfidential
22:56 -!- nessenc__ is now known as nessence
22:56 < bramc> Hopefully also you have schnorr signatures for doing collaborative signing properly
22:56 < amiller> if you have to open up the value of a coin before doing a coinjoin, then they seem to be sort of at odds
22:57 < amiller> even then it seems like you'd have to find 5 people and tell them all the balance associated with a coin
22:57 < bramc> amiller, I think you have to open them to whoever you're swapping with. Maybe something more clever can be done.
22:58 < bramc> Like, maybe there's a way that we can all collaboratively mush out stuff together so we can make one big transaction with one input from each of us and one output to each of us all with blinded amounts but we can all verify that everybody else is getting their fair output
22:58 < phantomcircuit> jgarzik, power of two outputs is something i actually implemented in a certain wallet ages ago
22:58 < bramc> That's probably a question for greg
22:58 < phantomcircuit> but since nobody else does it you can find it on the blockchain pretttty easily
23:00 < phantomcircuit> amiller, iirc there's a protocol for coinjoin with the encrypted values
23:00 < amiller> phantomcircuit, but you have to reveal your values to the people you're coinjoining with
23:01 < Luke-Jr> phantomcircuit: you might confuse my transactions with those..
23:01 < jgarzik> thus why I like BTC equiv of $1 bill, $5 bill etc.
23:01 < phantomcircuit> amiller, do you? i thought we had one where you didn't
23:01 < jgarzik> has a hope of matching real world use and blending in with the noise (and finding more coinjoin partners)
23:01 < amiller> 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 but sometimes you get arrested if you use 2
23:01 < jgarzik> ;p
23:01 < Luke-Jr> amiller: what? I used to use $2 all the time
23:02 < Luke-Jr> never had trouble
23:02 < amiller> Luke-Jr, i only said sometimes
23:02 < Luke-Jr> must be pretty rare :P
23:02 < jgarzik> I used $2 to fuck with the system.  It created confusion every single time
23:02 < jgarzik> fun^2
23:02 < phantomcircuit> Luke-Jr, younger people who are assistant managers and are newish will flip a shit
23:02 < phantomcircuit> it's amusing
23:02 < Luke-Jr> I encountered a lot of surprise, but not trouble.
23:02 < Luke-Jr> maybe I should try again
23:02 < Luke-Jr> but I had to physically go into a bank to get them
23:03 < bramc> amiller, There might be some mathematical trickery to make the reveal to the other members of the coinjoin unnecessary. I don't know the math well enough to be able to say though.
23:03 < CodeShark> $2 bills and $1 coins never really caught on in the US
23:04 < bramc> Steve Wozniak gets sheets of $2 bills and has tear-off booklets made out of them. He's gotten into legal trouble for them and had to explain that they are, in fact, legal tender, issued by the US government
23:04 < phantomcircuit> amiller, it's equally possible that im too tired btw
23:04 < phantomcircuit> bramc, to a secret service agent no less
23:04 < Luke-Jr> bramc: ah, maybe it's because of the sheets/tear-off
23:04 < phantomcircuit> lol casinos
23:04 < phantomcircuit> Luke-Jr, yup
23:05 < phantomcircuit> he did the perforations himself
23:05 < Luke-Jr> mine were always crisp :p
23:05 < phantomcircuit> which freaked people out
23:05 < bramc> Luke-Jr, Yeah he's totally trolling with those
23:05  * Luke-Jr wonders if those are available to the public
23:06 < Luke-Jr> http://www.instructables.com/id/2-Bill-Pad/ looks interesting
23:06 < phantomcircuit> Luke-Jr, you can buy $2 sheets from the treasury
23:06 < phantomcircuit> and then perf them yourself
23:07 < CodeShark> you can use adhesive, like post-it notes, rather than perforations
23:07 < CodeShark> or even just a simple adhesive binding
23:08 < CodeShark> like notepads
23:08 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
23:08 < moa> or toilet roll
23:08 < Luke-Jr> the rubber cement sounds least time consuming
23:08 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:11 < Luke-Jr> wtf, buying sheets costs like 3x face value
23:13 < jgarzik> RE Woz, hehe cool
23:13 < jgarzik> another $2 fan
23:14 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
23:14 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:15 < jgarzik> Wow, Googling for this shows a lot of "Wozniak prints his own $2 bills" - the smarter ones clarify he gets them uncut from US govt - but I can see how the SS raised an eyebrow
23:15 < jgarzik> dumb journos out there ;p
23:15 < jgarzik> never let the facts get in the way of a good headline or story
23:15 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has quit [Client Quit]
23:16 < moa> hmmm, when can I buy some $2 bills from?
23:17 < Luke-Jr> moa: seems the only reasonable price will be a local bank
23:18 < moa> they had declaration of independence on the reverse side ... can I get them in the mail for bitcoin somewhere lol
23:20 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@85.100.40.253] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:22 < CodeShark> lots of interesting developments happening in crypto - I just fear that most of the biggest recent breakthroughs are still based on the discrete log problem
23:26 < CodeShark> would be nice to have a bit more diversity in "hard" problems
23:28 -!- nessence_ [~alexl@c-68-51-194-2.hsd1.mi.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:28 -!- nessence [~alexl@c-68-51-194-2.hsd1.mi.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
23:30 -!- Krellan [~Krellan@tardis-6.krellan.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:35 -!- prodatalab [~prodatala@108-238-250-117.lightspeed.jcvlfl.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
23:43 -!- rht__ [uid86914@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-orjjuaaslisvirzq] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:46 -!- Guest65838 [uid52049@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-etjqtzrucwqrbpfb] has quit []
23:46 -!- Guest65838 [uid52049@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-fvmcymwjwogehfwn] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:46 -!- Guest65838 is now known as btcdrak
23:46 -!- btcdrak [uid52049@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-fvmcymwjwogehfwn] has quit [Client Quit]
23:47 -!- btcdrak [uid52049@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-ohnjeagwuwrilejq] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:50 < CodeShark> bramc: regarding what we were discussing yesterday, have you read this article? http://ramakrishnadas.cs.uchicago.edu/gctexplicit.pdf
23:53 < bramc> CodeShark, Yeah thats viewed an the only hunter in the forest with a sharp stick
23:54 -!- _biO__ [~biO_@ip-37-24-195-112.hsi14.unitymediagroup.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
--- Log closed Sun Jun 21 00:00:47 2015