--- Log opened Thu Oct 20 00:00:26 2016
00:03 -!- soah [b4054feb@gateway/web/freenode/ip.180.5.79.235] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:04 -!- soah [b4054feb@gateway/web/freenode/ip.180.5.79.235] has quit [Client Quit]
00:09 -!- superkuh [~superkuh@unaffiliated/superkuh] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
00:16 -!- Firescar96 [~nchinda2@dhcp-18-111-76-34.dyn.MIT.EDU] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
00:20 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:22 -!- superkuh [~superkuh@unaffiliated/superkuh] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:27 -!- WungFu [~WungFu@unaffiliated/wungfu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:28 -!- ThomasV [~ThomasV@unaffiliated/thomasv] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
00:34 -!- WungFu [~WungFu@unaffiliated/wungfu] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
00:36 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@80.215.178.194] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:36 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@80.215.178.194] has quit [Client Quit]
00:36 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@80.215.178.194] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:38 -!- JackH [~laptop@79-73-190-13.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:44 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
00:44 -!- uiuc-slack3 [~uiuc-slac@li175-104.members.linode.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
00:46 -!- uiuc-slack [~uiuc-slac@li175-104.members.linode.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:47 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:48 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:52 -!- moli [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
00:52 -!- moli [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:57 -!- Eliel [~jojkaart@104-250-47-212.rev.cloud.scaleway.com] has quit [Quit: leaving]
00:58 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@80.215.178.194] has quit [Quit: laurentmt]
00:59 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
01:03 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:06 -!- Eliel [~jojkaart@104-250-47-212.rev.cloud.scaleway.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:14 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
01:17 -!- molz [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:18 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:18 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
01:20 -!- xsdfdfsa [~x@unaffiliated/sdfgsdfg] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:21 -!- moli [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
01:27 -!- ThomasV [~ThomasV@unaffiliated/thomasv] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:32 -!- AusteritySucks [~Austerity@unaffiliated/austeritysucks] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
01:39 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@80.215.178.194] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:41 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@80.215.178.194] has quit [Client Quit]
01:47 -!- AusteritySucks [~Austerity@unaffiliated/austeritysucks] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:49 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:51 -!- Ylbam [uid99779@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-mpgnomwudklnmxtk] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:04 -!- roconnor [~roconnor@host-192.252-165-186.dyn.295.ca] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
02:07 -!- MoALTz [~no@user-46-113-122-22.play-internet.pl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:08 -!- CrazyLoaf [uid67551@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-ziqkzvhgovjgaqoz] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
02:08 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@80.215.178.194] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:10 -!- MoALTz [~no@user-46-113-122-22.play-internet.pl] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
02:14 -!- Dizzle [~Dizzle@2605:6000:1019:4099:c510:8e0b:3a29:44f4] has quit [Quit: Leaving...]
02:14 < nsh> adiabat, did you figure out the tn divergence?
02:14 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@80.215.178.194] has quit [Quit: laurentmt]
02:14 < nsh> (testnet)
02:19 -!- CrazyLoaf [uid67551@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-wxyooksmpyjhbscr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:19 -!- DigiByteDev [~JT2@202.83.241.113] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:44 -!- Topogetcyrpto [~Topogetcy@105.158.233.95] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
02:44 -!- Topogetcyrpto [~Topogetcy@41.250.47.55] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:48 -!- xsdfdfsa [~x@unaffiliated/sdfgsdfg] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
02:48 -!- Topogetcyrpto [~Topogetcy@41.250.47.55] has quit [Client Quit]
02:48 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
02:49 -!- ThomasV [~ThomasV@unaffiliated/thomasv] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
02:49 -!- xsdfdfsa [~x@unaffiliated/sdfgsdfg] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:52 -!- nikivi [~nikivi@194.151.204.182] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:54 -!- DigiByteDev [~JT2@202.83.241.113] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
02:57 -!- c0rw1n [~c0rw1n@109.128.248.206] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
03:03 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:09 -!- nikivi [~nikivi@194.151.204.182] has quit [Quit: irc]
03:10 -!- coins123 [~coins123@unaffiliated/coins123] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:15 -!- xissburg [~xissburg@unaffiliated/xissburg] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:26 -!- 7YUAAFB4P [~tenhi@static-ip-69-64-50-196.inaddr.ip-pool.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
03:29 -!- Tenhi_ [~tenhi@static-ip-69-64-50-196.inaddr.ip-pool.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:51 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@80.215.178.194] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:07 -!- Ylbam [uid99779@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-mpgnomwudklnmxtk] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
04:07 -!- jannes [~jannes@178.132.211.90] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:12 -!- koshii [~w@c-67-162-88-16.hsd1.in.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:35 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@80.215.178.194] has quit [Quit: laurentmt]
04:38 -!- CrazyLoaf [uid67551@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-wxyooksmpyjhbscr] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
04:47 -!- Cory [~Cory@unaffiliated/cory] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
04:51 -!- haallz [c3b0b2b8@gateway/web/freenode/ip.195.176.178.184] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:52 -!- efynn [~efynn@unaffiliated/efynn] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:52 -!- efynn [~efynn@unaffiliated/efynn] has left #bitcoin-wizards []
04:52 -!- haallz [c3b0b2b8@gateway/web/freenode/ip.195.176.178.184] has quit [Client Quit]
04:52 -!- pro [~pro@unaffiliated/pro] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:04 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:09 -!- DigiByteDev [~JT2@n218250011174.netvigator.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:21 -!- Topogetcyrpto [~Topogetcy@41.141.100.44] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:22 -!- jtimon [~quassel@211.28.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:32 < adiabat> nsh: nope, still 2 chains.  I can only get one working, the other I observe only from block explorer websites
05:33 < adiabat> http://tbtc.blockr.io/ https://www.blocktrail.com/tBTC https://test.webbtc.com/ are currenly on a 1M 9K chain
05:34 < adiabat> https://live.blockcypher.com/btc-testnet/ https://testnet.smartbit.com.au/ are currently on the 1M 8K chain
05:34 < adiabat> all testnet nodes I'm running are on the 8K chain
05:44 < adiabat> last block in common looks like 0000000000e0f4516a7558eb92a0d4cbfd630c6bce18c181b8515ebee5fa399a
05:45 < adiabat> after which the branch I get with 0.13.0 goes to 0000000000af7aac1817b82d377fa989407d607dc1953d63827d8adfa39de85b
05:46 < adiabat> and some of the block explorers go to 00000000008818f4b21dc6203b9c86f2c8b2aa694c0d46106a5e2baf93dcc691
05:47 < musalbas> petertodd, :o that has very useful applications then (if the consistency proofs can be done in O(log(n)) or less time like MMRs
05:49 -!- kkode [~kkode@ool-ae2cd072.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:51 -!- mkarrer [~mkarrer@7.red-83-47-85.dynamicip.rima-tde.net] has quit []
05:53 -!- mkarrer [~mkarrer@7.red-83-47-85.dynamicip.rima-tde.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:56 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
06:12 -!- Noldorin [~noldorin@unaffiliated/noldorin] has quit [Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com]
06:17 -!- Noldorin [~noldorin@unaffiliated/noldorin] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:28 < kanzure> musalbas: so you claim that with a merbinner tree and consistency proofs, you can detect double spending, without knowing the transactions? or what is the claim more precisely.
06:48 -!- harrymm [~wayne@104.222.140.113] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
06:51 -!- harrymm [~wayne@104.222.140.70] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:54 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
06:57 -!- Ylbam [uid99779@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-jnshpgiqmjkysqxz] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:58 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:04 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@80.215.178.194] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:05 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@80.215.178.194] has quit [Client Quit]
07:19 -!- nikivi [~nikivi@dhcp-077-250-172-150.chello.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:24 -!- Expanse is now known as nOgAnOo
07:24 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-40-227-45-190.cm.vtr.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:24 -!- nOgAnOo [sid146237@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-owqiljyghzvqjcqm] has quit [Changing host]
07:24 -!- nOgAnOo [sid146237@unaffiliated/noganoo] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:24 -!- nOgAnOo [sid146237@unaffiliated/noganoo] has quit [Changing host]
07:24 -!- nOgAnOo [sid146237@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-owqiljyghzvqjcqm] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:50 -!- roconnor [~roconnor@host-45-58-213-81.dyn.295.ca] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:57 -!- Cory [~Cory@24-240-67-80.dhcp.mdsn.wi.charter.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:57 -!- Cory [~Cory@24-240-67-80.dhcp.mdsn.wi.charter.com] has quit [Excess Flood]
07:58 -!- Cory [~Cory@24-240-67-80.dhcp.mdsn.wi.charter.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:58 -!- Cory [~Cory@24-240-67-80.dhcp.mdsn.wi.charter.com] has quit [Excess Flood]
07:58 -!- Guest12765 [~Cory@24-240-67-80.dhcp.mdsn.wi.charter.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:58 -!- Guest12765 [~Cory@24-240-67-80.dhcp.mdsn.wi.charter.com] has quit [Excess Flood]
07:59 -!- domwoe [~domwoe@2001:67c:10ec:52c5:8000::24c] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:59 -!- Guest12765 [~Cory@24-240-67-80.dhcp.mdsn.wi.charter.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:02 < domwoe> Was wondering if there was already a discussion about these new provably secure PoS protocols. Couldn't find anything in the logs. @andytoshi @bsm117532
08:02 < domwoe> https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/919
08:02 < domwoe> https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/889.pdf
08:04 -!- instagibbs [~instagibb@pool-100-15-114-3.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:20 < bsm1175321> Their assumptions are far from plausible:
08:20 < bsm1175321> (1) the network is highly synchronous, (2) the majority of the selected stakeholders is available as needed to participate in each epoch, (3) the astakeholders do not remain offline for long periods of time
08:20 < bsm1175321> None of those are true, and...DDoS.
08:20 -!- nooblord [~Nooblord@190.8.87.27] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:24 < bsm1175321> Bitcoin's PoW has an ex-post-facto leader, which is a huge advantage -- the only way to stop the system is to DDoS ALL miners.  Traditional PAXOS-derived systems have the leader known by everyone in advance, and as such are not Byzantaine fault tolerant against adversaries that target the leader.
08:25 -!- nikivi [~nikivi@dhcp-077-250-172-150.chello.nl] has quit [Quit: zzz]
08:28 < domwoe> SnowWhite desires "robustness in a sleepy network". Isn't that -not- highly synchronous
08:38 < bsm1175321> A distributed system is fundamentally asynchronous.  Assuming synchronicity is famously one of the eight fallacies of distributed computing.  The assumption in bitcoin results in orphans, and the selfish mining attack.  It's a bad assumption.
08:38 -!- jannes [~jannes@178.132.211.90] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
08:44 -!- e0_ [~e0@cs10-dhcp16.bu.edu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:51 -!- e0_ [~e0@cs10-dhcp16.bu.edu] has quit [Quit: leaving]
08:56 < domwoe> ok, I see you quoted the assumptions of the first paper. The second paper, however, doesn't have the synchronicity assumption
09:02 < domwoe> But I'm really missing a comprehensive conclusion in this paper
09:05 -!- ThomasV [~ThomasV@unaffiliated/thomasv] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:15 -!- huseby [~huseby@unaffiliated/huseby] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 1.6]
09:27 -!- MoALTz [~no@77-254-12-108.adsl.inetia.pl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:30 -!- Firescar96 [~nchinda2@24-1-102.dynamic.csail.mit.edu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:38 -!- domwoe [~domwoe@2001:67c:10ec:52c5:8000::24c] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
09:39 -!- Firescar96 [~nchinda2@24-1-102.dynamic.csail.mit.edu] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
09:39 -!- Aranjedeath [~Aranjedea@unaffiliated/aranjedeath] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:39 -!- domwoe [~domwoe@2001:67c:10ec:52c5:8000::24c] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:44 -!- domwoe [~domwoe@2001:67c:10ec:52c5:8000::24c] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
09:53 -!- Firescar96 [~nchinda2@24-1-102.dynamic.csail.mit.edu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:55 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
09:58 -!- xissburg [~xissburg@unaffiliated/xissburg] has quit [Quit: ZZZzzz…]
10:08 -!- huseby [~huseby@unaffiliated/huseby] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:08 -!- Firescar96 [~nchinda2@24-1-102.dynamic.csail.mit.edu] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
10:19 -!- xissburg [~xissburg@unaffiliated/xissburg] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:19 -!- DigiByteDev [~JT2@n218250011174.netvigator.com] has quit [Quit: DigiByteDev]
10:25 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
10:30 -!- domwoe [~domwoe@84-75-162-45.dclient.hispeed.ch] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:38 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:44 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@80.215.178.214] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:44 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@80.215.178.214] has quit [Client Quit]
10:47 -!- kkode [~kkode@ool-ae2cd072.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
10:52 -!- vghzfkgh [~bhhhfgjh@ip-109-43-1-169.web.vodafone.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:03 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:06 -!- WungFu [~WungFu@unaffiliated/wungfu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:08 -!- vghzfkgh [~bhhhfgjh@ip-109-43-1-169.web.vodafone.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
11:12 -!- WungFu [~WungFu@unaffiliated/wungfu] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
11:13 -!- instagibbs_ [640f7203@gateway/web/freenode/ip.100.15.114.3] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:14 < instagibbs_> roasbeef: you said you had no-trusted-dealer ecdsa treshold sig paper for me couple weeks back?
11:15 < kanzure> http://diyhpl.us/~bryan/papers2/bitcoin/Securing%20Bitcoin%20wallets%20via%20a%20new%20DSA%20ECDSA%20threshold%20signature%20scheme.pdf
11:15 < kanzure> http://diyhpl.us/~bryan/papers2/bitcoin/Securing%20Bitcoin%20wallets%20via%20threshold%20signatures.pdf
11:17 < instagibbs_> "The desktop acts as a trusted dealer when distributing the phone’s keyshare" <--- without that
11:18 < instagibbs_> thanks for the links regardless. Need to read these.
11:18 < kanzure> page 6 says something about the dealerless version
11:20 < kanzure> also see http://diyhpl.us/wiki/transcripts/mit-bitcoin-expo-2015/arvind-narayanan/
11:20 < instagibbs_> ah i see, must be talking about specific applications that require dealers
11:20 < kanzure> and https://freedom-to-tinker.com/2014/05/23/threshold-signatures-and-bitcoin-wallet-security-a-menu-of-options/
11:21 < instagibbs_> "Paillier encryption" yeah this is the one thanks
11:21 < kanzure> (including the table in the last link)
11:24 < instagibbs_> roasbeef: "Secondly, this means that t ≤ (n + 1) / 2. This scheme will thus be unable to realize a 2-out-of-2 signature. In the Bitcoin context, this means that two-factor security cannot be implemented with this scheme. (The error in the first draft of our paper arose because we didn’t realize that t’ > t in the Gennaro et al. scheme.)" Ok that's where my memory was coming from
11:27 -!- Firescar96 [~nchinda2@dhcp-18-111-76-34.dyn.mit.edu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:30 -!- Yogh [~Yogh@f36186.upc-f.chello.nl] has quit [Quit: ZNC 1.6.3 - http://znc.in]
11:35 -!- priidu [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:41 -!- nikivi [~nikivi@dhcp-077-250-172-150.chello.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:42 < roasbeef> instagibbs_: nah that's not it
11:42 < roasbeef> specifically I was referring to a distributed 2-of-2 key gen and signing protocol
11:43 < roasbeef> keygen is on page 11 of this, and signing is on page 14: https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/451.pdf
11:44 < roasbeef> in the paper they use the scheme to construct a ZKCP, but can be on independant use outside of that particular use-case
11:45 < roasbeef> as interaction from both parties is required to generate the signature, neither side can re-sign unilaterally
11:45 -!- CrazyLoaf [uid67551@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-ezubwbxuayyuuoau] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:46 < roasbeef> also only one side gets a sig at the end of the protocol
11:49 -!- ThomasV [~ThomasV@unaffiliated/thomasv] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
11:50 < instagibbs_> roasbeef: yes it's mentioned in the blog post
11:51 < instagibbs_> thanks
11:53 -!- WungFu [~WungFu@unaffiliated/wungfu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:59 -!- harrymm [~wayne@104.222.140.70] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
12:02 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:13 -!- Guest12765 [~Cory@24-240-67-80.dhcp.mdsn.wi.charter.com] has quit []
12:15 -!- harrymm [~wayne@104.222.140.40] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:15 -!- Cory [~Cory@24-240-67-80.dhcp.mdsn.wi.charter.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:15 -!- Cory [~Cory@24-240-67-80.dhcp.mdsn.wi.charter.com] has quit [Excess Flood]
12:19 -!- Cory [~Cory@24-240-67-80.dhcp.mdsn.wi.charter.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:19 -!- Cory [~Cory@24-240-67-80.dhcp.mdsn.wi.charter.com] has quit [Excess Flood]
12:21 -!- ThomasV [~ThomasV@unaffiliated/thomasv] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:24 -!- Cory [~Cory@unaffiliated/cory] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:29 -!- ThomasV [~ThomasV@unaffiliated/thomasv] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
12:41 < AaronvanW> in gmaxwell his CoinSwap proposal on bitcointalk, it says: "CoinSwap results in the participants knowing the linkage."
12:41 < AaronvanW> is that because of the HTLCs?
12:44 -!- nikivi [~nikivi@dhcp-077-250-172-150.chello.nl] has quit [Quit: irc]
12:45 < instagibbs_> AaronvanW: I assume that just means if I swap with you, we both know we swapped.
12:45 -!- nikivi [~nikivi@dhcp-077-250-172-150.chello.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:47 < AaronvanW> instagibbs_: yeah but isn't the point that there is no linkage? that is the very first sentence of the proposal: "Alice would like to pay Bob, but doesn't want the whole world (or even Bob) tracing her transactions."
12:47 < AaronvanW> am I misunderstanding something?
12:48 -!- nikivi [~nikivi@dhcp-077-250-172-150.chello.nl] has quit [Client Quit]
12:48 < instagibbs_> They key here is "participants"
12:48 < instagibbs_> non-participants can only do time-correlation or whatever, but no direct on-chain linkage.
12:51 < AaronvanW> instagibbs_: right, that's what I figured. The "(or even Bob)" part of the intro-sentence through me off though...
12:55 -!- blackwraith [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:57 -!- priidu [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
13:02 -!- roconnor [~roconnor@host-45-58-213-81.dyn.295.ca] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
13:06 -!- GreekMiner2 [~Greek@ppp-2-86-57-29.home.otenet.gr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:07 -!- GreekMiner [~Greek@ppp-2-86-57-29.home.otenet.gr] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
13:08 -!- e4xit [~e4xit@cpc92302-cmbg19-2-0-cust1369.5-4.cable.virginm.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:13 -!- davec [~davec@cpe-24-243-251-52.hot.res.rr.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
13:14 -!- davec [~davec@cpe-24-243-251-52.hot.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:16 -!- nikivi [~nikivi@dhcp-077-250-172-150.chello.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:27 < adiabat> coinshuffle with > 2 participants can help with that; even participants of the coinjoin don't know the linkage
13:30 -!- nikivi [~nikivi@dhcp-077-250-172-150.chello.nl] has quit [Quit: irc]
13:33 -!- xissburg [~xissburg@unaffiliated/xissburg] has quit [Quit: ZZZzzz…]
13:34 -!- c0rw1n [~c0rw1n@109.128.248.206] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:34 -!- Topogetcyrpto [~Topogetcy@41.141.100.44] has quit [Quit: Topogetcyrpto]
13:35 -!- Davasny [~quassel@78-11-193-195.static.ip.netia.com.pl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:36 < musalbas> kanzure, yes so my hypothesis is that if you have a merkle tree structure that has O(log(n)) non-inclusion proofs as well as O(log(n)) or better proofs of consistency, you can shift double-spend detection to the client-side (not probabilistic; with 100% accuracy) without requiring full nodes to check double-spends, and from there you can build a cryptocurrency that scales with the number of nodes in the network
13:39 < kanzure> so to make a payment you would give the recipient a huge list of non-inclusion proofs for all the intermediate states where you want to show that no spends happened?
13:39 < bsm117532> I think the fly in the ointment there is the consistency proof...
13:40 < musalbas> kanzure, yes, which obviously the issue is that the proofs will grow in MB over time as has been discussed previously, but I think there could be a way to distribute that across the nodes
13:40 < musalbas> bsm117532, you think that efficient consistency proofs aren't possible?
13:40 < kanzure> other client-side validation proposals limit the client-side proofs to merely the ones to prove inclusion at certain points in history or something
13:41 < bsm117532> I don't think they're impossible, but I don't know an efficient way, without having all the data.
13:41 < kanzure> (which laso end up becoming multiple megabytes. but non-inclusion proofs over the intermediate states? that's surely even more data, unless i'm misunderstanding.)
13:41 < kanzure> *also
13:42 < musalbas> bsm117532, well petertodd above claims his Merbinner trees can do that, but are they O(log(n)) or O(n)? if latter, it's not efficient. <musalbas> petertodd, so using the Merbinner tree stuff you linked me to, does it support efficient consistency proofs between a tree and its updated version? i.e.  like MMR/CT merkle trees. it seems like it looking at https://github.com/petertodd/python-merbinnertree/blob/master/merbinnertree/__init__.py
13:42 < musalbas> #L469 <petertodd> musalbas: yes, the underlying data structure certainely can do that, and IIRC it's implemented too
13:43 < musalbas> kanzure, but as I understand correctly, the other client-side proposals require miners to check for double-spends or no?
13:43 < kanzure> well the others have probablistic fraud or whatever, which originates from i forget
13:44 < kanzure> even if miners aren't themselves checking for double spends in those other proposals
13:44 < musalbas> if they require to check for double-spends then mining is done at O(n) efficiency. I want to achieve O(log(n)) efficiency
13:44 < kanzure> (except for their fees they receive/take)
13:44 < musalbas> from http://diyhpl.us/wiki/transcripts/scalingbitcoin/milan/client-side-validation/?
13:45 < kanzure> i'd have to ask petertodd to figure out which aspects requird probabilistic validation and why it wasn't full validation
13:45 < kanzure> anyway, i agree with your goal of non-probabilistic validation :P
13:48 < bsm117532> musalbas: Correct me if I'm wrong, but every transaction results in a new root hash, no?  So there's no sense that you can "divide up" the work among many nodes -- all nodes need to see all transactions in order to compute the new root hashes.
13:49 < musalbas> bsm117532, so there's something that I think most people haven't thought of when thinking about this, I've written it somewhere, one second..
13:50 < musalbas> "since appending items to a MMR is deterministic, then a wallet - and a cold wallet - does not necessarily need to moniter the network to spend coins in the future, as long as there are nodes that store all merkle consistency proofs for blocks exist - which would be a requirement to be able to bootstrap full nodes
13:50 < musalbas> because if a client knows that the merkle proof for a utxo at block n, such a node would be also able to determine the merkle proof for the same utxo at block n + k, by calculating the new location of the child of the proof by inferring the difference between the number of txos between those two blocks by looking at the merkle consistency proofs between those two blocks."
13:50 -!- xissburg [~xissburg@unaffiliated/xissburg] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:50 < musalbas> so the fact that there is a new root hash, does not mean that merkle-proofs for old hashes are useless
13:51 < musalbas> because the new merkle-proof can easily be inferred by any full node
13:52 < musalbas> by some simple math
13:52 < bsm117532> Hmmm...
13:53 < bsm117532> Full nodes still need to keep the entire tree though, so the work is not divided up
13:54 < bsm117532> I'm looking for a solution where a node has a fraction of the tree, yet the tree kept consistent collaboratively.
13:54 < musalbas> bsm117532, they don't need to see all transactions in order to compute the new root hashes, that's point of merkle trees...
13:54 < musalbas> bsm117532, the same way you can compute a new bitcoin block just based on the previous block, without seeing all the blocks before it
13:55 < bsm117532> Ok I don't understand how that works then.
13:55 < musalbas> <bsm117532> I'm looking for a solution where a node has a fraction of the tree, yet the tree kept consistent collaboratively.
13:55 < musalbas> that's possible.  merkle consistency proofs for MMRs can be done without seeing all the childs
13:55 < musalbas> one second
13:55 < musalbas> let me link you to the RFC
13:56 < musalbas> here https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6962#section-2.1.2
13:56 < musalbas> the example in 2.1.3 is quite useful
13:56 < musalbas> and it's referring to a MMR-like structure
13:57 < musalbas> in an MMR, you can add a million items to the tree, and the consistency proof will still be extremely small
13:58 < musalbas> that's the beauty of it
13:58 -!- blackwraith [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
13:59 < arubi> musalbas, sorry, can you explain "you can compute a new bitcoin block just based on the previous block, without seeing all the blocks before it", I understand that, but if the history isn't validated, then the root might be invalid, no?
14:00 < kanzure> yes you still need to stay online and collect the consistency proofs (or recalculate your proofs in your wallet) because otherwise there is little reason for others to store the intermediate updates for you, or something
14:00 < bsm117532> How does this not result in a "tree" with one long branch?
14:00 < kanzure> arubi: clients are responsible for validating the proofs that they receive from payers
14:00 < bsm117532> (e.g. the right subtree contains one element, over and over again)
14:01 < musalbas> arubi, yep, but I'm proposing a system there is no such thing as an "invalid" history, except if someone broke the append-only rules of the chain. i.e. all data in blocks is valid and validation is done by the clients, not full nodes
14:01 < arubi> thank you both, I see I'll need to read the back log a bit
14:02 < kanzure> bsm117532: so, i don't know if there's a better answer to your question, but one possible answer is that miners should be incentivized to take fees only in situations where the fee proofs are not infinitely huge and therefore unspendable. they wouldn't mine those blocks, i think. or they would prefer to mine blocks that don't extremely bloat that situation.
14:02 < musalbas> kanzure, you don't need to collect anything, or stay online. if you have a txout merkle-proof from 1000 blocks ago and give it to an up-to-date node to spend it, they can spend it without you giving them any more information
14:03 < musalbas> <bsm117532> How does this not result in a "tree" with one long branch?
14:03 < musalbas> are you talking about the actual tree in the blockchain, or the transaction proofs
14:04 < musalbas> bsm117532, the point of MMRs is to have perfect binary trees, so trees with one long branch are avoided
14:04 < bsm117532> I'm just looking at the diagram in the RFC, imagining adding one hash at a time.  Each new hash becomes a new right subtree, with the previous tree becoming the left subtree.
14:05 < musalbas> bsm117532, the structure is better explained here https://github.com/opentimestamps/opentimestamps-server/blob/master/doc/merkle-mountain-range.md
14:05 < musalbas> (but does not contain an explanation of the consistency proofs)
14:05 < bsm117532> I've read all this before, but now forgotten it... :-/
14:06 < musalbas> bsm117532, so the point in MMRs is that the tree is "rebalanced" on the fly
14:06 < musalbas> to make a perfect binary tree
14:06 < musalbas> or as close to one as possible
14:07 < kanzure> perhaps i was thinking of similar proposals that also incorporated pruning. hrm.
14:10 < kanzure> or because of this: "because the new merkle-proof can easily be inferred by any full node"
14:10 < musalbas> i'm not great at explaining things
14:11 < bsm117532> Isn't the rebalancing extremely expensive?  That's the usual argument for why this kind of data structure isn't being used for UTXO set commitments...
14:11 < musalbas> bsm117532, no that's the beauty of MMR/RFC6962-like trees. Rebalancing is insanely efficient
14:12 < musalbas> i mean i'm not even sure i'd call it rebalancing
14:12 < bsm117532> So imagine I have a UTXO set commitment, and I want to modifyit by the new UTXO's in a block...
14:13 < bsm117532> If it's so efficient, why are we not doing this in bitcoin again?
14:13 < musalbas> bsm117532, not too sure about that one
14:13 < musalbas> the rebalancing is only efficient when it's append-only
14:13 < musalbas> i haven't read too much on the utxo set commitment proposals for bitcoin
14:13 < bsm117532> Well, a spent transaction output set is append only...
14:14 < musalbas> (and maybe i'm using the term 'rebalancing' wrong, in this context I'm using it to mean to have a perfect binary tree)
14:14 < bsm117532> That's because there aren't any...
14:14 < kanzure> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/3977
14:15 < kanzure> http://gnusha.org/bitcoin-wizards/2015-09-18.log
14:15 < musalbas> bsm117532, I recalling there being some proposals for Bitcoin to have UTXO sets using MMRs to have better scalability
14:15 < musalbas> on the mailing list
14:15 < kanzure> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2013-December/003921.html
14:15 < kanzure> etc..
14:15 < musalbas> .t https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-May/012715.html
14:15 < yoleaux> musalbas: Sorry, I don't know what timezone that is. If in doubt, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tz_database_time_zones for a list of options.
14:15 < kanzure> also i have been trying to convince musalbas to read the conversation between petertodd and bramc https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-June/012764.html
14:15 < musalbas> .title https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-May/012715.html
14:15 < yoleaux> [bitcoin-dev] Making UTXO Set Growth Irrelevant With Low-Latency Delayed TXO Commitments
14:16 < musalbas> kanzure, I'm reading it, still trying to understand it :)
14:17 < musalbas> however discussion about hardware-efficient merkle trees isn't the interesting part i think
14:17 < bsm117532> Haven't heard from bramc for a long time, but I talked a lot with him about optimizing his Merkle tree implementation...
14:17 < kanzure> well the other aspect there is about the updates and diffs
14:18 < musalbas> yeah that's the interesting bit for me :)
14:18 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
14:20 < kanzure> i think the search term is deltas and delta commitments http://gnusha.org/bitcoin-wizards/2015-09-18.log
14:21 < kanzure> also see 'rebalancing' in there
14:22 < musalbas> ty
14:22 -!- WungFu [~WungFu@unaffiliated/wungfu] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
14:22 < musalbas> (though this will take me a while to understand :P)
14:22 -!- xissburg [~xissburg@unaffiliated/xissburg] has quit [Quit: ZZZzzz…]
14:23 < kanzure> actually that is a good thing to link you to. good log.
14:24 < kanzure> looks like for some reason i was insisting on validation work in addition to the deltas
14:25 -!- xissburg [~xissburg@unaffiliated/xissburg] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:27 -!- Ylbam [uid99779@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-jnshpgiqmjkysqxz] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
14:32 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:48 -!- domwoe [~domwoe@84-75-162-45.dclient.hispeed.ch] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
15:03 -!- nikivi [~nikivi@dhcp-077-250-172-150.chello.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:06 -!- Topogetcyrpto [~Topogetcy@41.141.100.44] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:08 -!- MoALTz [~no@77-254-12-108.adsl.inetia.pl] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
15:21 -!- nikivi [~nikivi@dhcp-077-250-172-150.chello.nl] has quit [Quit: irc]
15:27 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
15:27 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Quit: :)]
15:28 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:30 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
15:34 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded]
15:34 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:44 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:45 -!- e4xit [~e4xit@cpc92302-cmbg19-2-0-cust1369.5-4.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Quit: e4xit]
15:49 -!- Davasny [~quassel@78-11-193-195.static.ip.netia.com.pl] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
15:51 -!- e4xit [~e4xit@cpc92302-cmbg19-2-0-cust1369.5-4.cable.virginm.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:18 -!- pro [~pro@unaffiliated/pro] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
16:19 -!- pro [~pro@unaffiliated/pro] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:43 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:45 -!- igno_peverell [~user@104.238.169.137] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:47 < igno_peverell> I have a minimal implementation of MimbleWimble available. It's very far from complete but has the basics, included the summing of pedersen commitments:
16:47 < igno_peverell> https://github.com/ignopeverell/grin
16:47 < igno_peverell> Any feedback or review is greatly appreciated. Thanks!
16:48 < qpm> tx:<Jeremy_Rand> igno_peverell: nice username.  :)
16:50 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
16:51 < kanzure> https://github.com/kanzure/grin
16:51 < kanzure> he took it offline. there's a copy.
16:53 < kanzure> ah replaced with f245d0ef5d30061e758bfead6bb81c7bb50bd3cf
16:53 -!- Guest7 [~textual@c-73-141-152-56.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:53 < kanzure> okay fine. i'll do the same.
16:55 < kanzure> igno_peverell: you might also want to prune chain/.grin/chain/
16:56 < igno_peverell> kanzure: good point, thank you
16:57 -!- PRab [~chatzilla@c-68-62-95-247.hsd1.mi.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.92 [Firefox 49.0.1/20160922113459]]
16:59 -!- alpalp [~allen@2605:6000:f4d6:d600::3] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:59 -!- alpalp [~allen@2605:6000:f4d6:d600::3] has quit [Changing host]
16:59 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:03 < andytoshi> hi igno_peverell thank you for this
17:03 < andytoshi> are you using the voldemort sigs or the sinking signatures from the poelstra paper?
17:04 < kanzure> (batsignal worked)
17:04 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:05 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
17:07 < igno_peverell> andytoshi: for now simple voldemort type sigs, but sinking signatures are in the TODO list
17:08 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:08 < igno_peverell> nice addition btw
17:08 < andytoshi> igno_peverell: awesome, i think this is best for a while, (a) nobody understands sinking signatures, this is hard enough to explain and get mindshare without them, (b) they mess up the ergonomics of the system, (c) they interact badly with payment channels
17:08 < andytoshi> thanks :)
17:09 < kanzure> http://diyhpl.us/~bryan/papers2/bitcoin/mimblewimble-andytoshi-INCOMPLETE-DRAFT-2016-10-06-001.pdf
17:09 < kanzure> http://diyhpl.us/~bryan/papers2/bitcoin/mimblewimble-2016-scaling-bitcoin-slides.pdf
17:10 < andytoshi> kanzure: there is a non-incomplete draft now, one sec..
17:10 < kanzure> non-incomplete! big claim.
17:10 < andytoshi> lol
17:10 < andytoshi> https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/wizardry/mimblewimble.pdf
17:11 < andytoshi> igno_peverell: having said this, we can do schnorr-style aggregation like what sipa has been working on, and get space savings on top of the voldemort scheme without any user-visible changes
17:11 < igno_peverell> yes, there may be other construnctions to obtain the same effect but it's nice to see you've been thinking about it as well
17:12 < andytoshi> i'm glad you chose rust here, i'd put a bunch of work into a C implementation then got super frustrated with C and decided to switch to rust (but hadn't yet started cutting code)
17:12 < igno_peverell> I've also been thinking about the threat model of pruning range proofs
17:13 < andytoshi> afaict it's really bad, you can get unlimited inflation with one bad rangeproof :/
17:14 -!- andytoshi is now known as grindeltoshi
17:15 < igno_peverell> right, I don't have something very concrete yet, mostly a feeling that once you have the UTXO merkle tree or the (head-X) block you've synced, you already have some guarantees assuming you can double check that with the rest of the network
17:15 < midnightmagic> grendeltoshi
17:16 < grindeltoshi> igno_peverell: yeah, that's true, you can definitely get SPV security of no-negative-outputs
17:16 < grindeltoshi> while still having full security of everything else
17:17 < igno_peverell> right, along a relaxed SPV-style model
17:17 < igno_peverell> I've kept the rangeproof out of output hashes for that reason
17:19 < igno_peverell> grindeltoshi: thank you for your secp256k1 Rust wrapper btw, I've had to extend it to support the zkp stuff
17:19 < grindeltoshi> igno_peverell: thanks very much, i had been putting this off because there is some API cleanup that i had wanted to do in secp256k1-zkp first
17:20 < grindeltoshi> but mimblewimble is more exciting, good that we've got something now :)
17:20 < igno_peverell> was my impression as well that the zkp stuff was still in progress, was planning to send a pull request your way eventually, once the dust settles
17:21 < grindeltoshi> that's a correct impression. the next version of elements, whenever that lands, will have API cleanups in it and also sign the output scripts (i think) (tho we don't care about this for MW which has no scripts)
17:21 -!- Firescar96 [~nchinda2@dhcp-18-111-76-34.dyn.mit.edu] has quit [Quit: The flame grows dim, I must rekindle]
17:21 < igno_peverell> grindeltoshi: MW is very cool, feel free to file issues if you find any problem with the impl
17:22 < grindeltoshi> igno_peverell: thanks. i might, i'll prefer to submit PRs, it's exciting to get this off the ground
17:22 < igno_peverell> PRs are even better
17:22 < grindeltoshi> i've been meaning to post a "here's my plan" doc on r/mimblewimble for a week, i keep getting distracted
17:25 < grindeltoshi> igno_peverell: so i think fast blocktimes are incompatible with cuckoo cycle
17:28 < igno_peverell> grindeltoshi: in which way?
17:29 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
17:29 < grindeltoshi> igno_peverell: an important feature of PoW is progress-freeness, that having a fast machine doesn't let you "race" other participants, but tromp's current implementation takes like 1.5min/Gb on 8 threads on a PC
17:30 < grindeltoshi> he says 4-5x speedup on a CPU, and there are probably some algorithmic speedups to be found
17:30 < grindeltoshi> but you want to have tens of thousands of attempts per blocktime per user to get reasonable progress-freeness
17:31 < grindeltoshi> tromp: does « for a given header, the odds of its graph having a 42-cycle are about 2.5% » on the cuckoo cycle README imply that a valid header will be found after (on average) 40 attempts?
17:32 < grindeltoshi> oh, no, i see, there's also a sha2 difficulty target, sorry
17:33 < igno_peverell> right, there are multiple knobs there, including connectivity and total graph size
17:34 -!- Guest7 [~textual@c-73-141-152-56.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com]
17:34 -!- up_dn [~up_dn@c-73-141-152-56.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:34 < igno_peverell> I've been using a 2^20 size with 75% edges for tests so it's fast to run, default is 2^28 size with 75% edges as well
17:34 -!- up_dn [~up_dn@c-73-141-152-56.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has quit [Client Quit]
17:35 < igno_peverell> I was meaning to try on seem beefy machine at some point and see what the numbers are like it terms of hashing per second
17:37 < igno_peverell> and the sha3 step with classic bitcoin-style difficulty target does the rest
17:37 < grindeltoshi> yep i see
17:39 < igno_peverell> I like Cuckoo because the implementation is short and simple and it's easy to grasp as a whole, I'm trying to keep the idea of simplicity that's in MW
17:39 -!- so [~so@unaffiliated/so] has quit [Quit: ...]
17:40 < grindeltoshi> yeah, i had also been leaning toward cuckoo cycle (though i had a chat with BlueMatt last week about centralization pressures and he convinced me that power distribution is not a critical one, which i had thought it was)
17:41 < grindeltoshi> so there is the standard worry about mem-hard PoW leading to expensive hardware that's cheap to run, meaning high barrier to entry, amortization for early players, and an entrenched oligopoly
17:41 < grindeltoshi> but it's simple and i'd like to experiment, so *shrug*
17:42 < igno_peverell> agree, no need to worry about hard forks yet :P
17:44 < grindeltoshi> igno_peverell: do you have block de/serialization? have you thought about the merkle tree structures you need?
17:45 < igno_peverell> grindeltoshi: block (de)ser is here but I've avoided the utxo merkle tree so far, just been thinking about it
17:46 < grindeltoshi> igno_peverell: can you serialize pruned blocks that are missing some txos?
17:47 < igno_peverell> yes
17:47 < igno_peverell> some of that logic is there
17:47 < grindeltoshi> ok, i'll poke more into this..
17:48 < nsh> oh is it cryptomas \o/
17:48 < igno_peverell> https://github.com/ignopeverell/grin/blob/master/core/src/core/mod.rs#L925
17:48 < kanzure> https://github.com/ignopeverell/grin/blob/f73a308bf3c9c3a621f8b08d5dfd2e8d87c8a840/core/src/core/mod.rs#L925
17:49 -!- DigiByteDev [~JT2@n218250011174.netvigator.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:49 < igno_peverell> aand the test case eight after
17:50 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
17:50 < igno_peverell> one is intra-block merge and the other is block addition
17:50 < grindeltoshi> what do you mean by "merging blocks", what do the commitments to utxos look like?
17:52 < grindeltoshi> it looks like you're making a new block with the old blocks' cut-through transactions, but what happens to the PoW?
17:54 -!- up_dn [~up_dn@c-73-141-152-56.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:54 -!- Topogetcyrpto [~Topogetcy@41.141.100.44] has quit [Quit: Topogetcyrpto]
17:55 < grindeltoshi> i think to get this to work properly the blocks need to retain their identity, you need to have a merkle structure that can be easily pruned (without changing the root)
17:55 < grindeltoshi> i did a bunch of work on this in the c code, i can work on this over the weekend..
17:56 -!- igno_peverell [~user@104.238.169.137] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
17:56 -!- Burrito [~Burrito@unaffiliated/burrito] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
17:58 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:16 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has quit [Quit: null]
18:16 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:17 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
18:20 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@185pc230.sshunet.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:20 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@185pc230.sshunet.nl] has quit [Changing host]
18:20 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:30 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:42 -!- DigiByteDev [~JT2@n218250011174.netvigator.com] has quit [Quit: DigiByteDev]
18:48 -!- GreekMiner2 [~Greek@ppp-2-86-57-29.home.otenet.gr] has quit [Quit: Nettalk6 - www.ntalk.de]
18:50 -!- DigiByteDev [~JT2@n218250011174.netvigator.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:56 -!- veleiro [~veleiro@fsf/member/veleiro] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:16 -!- DigiByteDev [~JT2@n218250011174.netvigator.com] has quit [Quit: DigiByteDev]
19:24 -!- up_dn [~up_dn@c-73-141-152-56.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: up_dn]
19:26 -!- kkode [~kkode@ool-ae2cd072.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:26 -!- Topogetcyrpto [~Topogetcy@41.141.100.44] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:27 -!- DigiByteDev [~JT2@n218250011174.netvigator.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:29 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
19:30 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
19:32 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:32 -!- veleiro [~veleiro@fsf/member/veleiro] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
19:34 -!- harrymm [~wayne@104.222.140.40] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
19:35 -!- harrymm [~wayne@104.222.140.93] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:38 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:42 -!- DigiByteDev [~JT2@n218250011174.netvigator.com] has quit [Quit: DigiByteDev]
19:48 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
19:51 -!- veleiro [~veleiro@fsf/member/veleiro] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:57 -!- Topogetcyrpto [~Topogetcy@41.141.100.44] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
20:03 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:04 -!- Dizzle [~Dizzle@2605:6000:1019:4099:4176:fe6e:8a33:e1c5] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:09 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
20:10 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
20:11 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:29 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
20:33 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:39 -!- pro [~pro@unaffiliated/pro] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
20:43 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
20:49 -!- veleiro [~veleiro@fsf/member/veleiro] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
20:50 -!- veleiro [~veleiro@fsf/member/veleiro] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:57 -!- roconnor [~roconnor@host-45-58-213-81.dyn.295.ca] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:59 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
21:00 -!- legogris [~legogris@128.199.205.238] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
21:00 -!- legogris [~legogris@128.199.205.238] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:08 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:19 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
21:19 -!- shangzhou [uid156782@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-gnofhwxdjxtqwvlb] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:23 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:35 -!- nooblord [~Nooblord@190.8.87.27] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
21:36 -!- Dizzle [~Dizzle@2605:6000:1019:4099:4176:fe6e:8a33:e1c5] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
21:36 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-40-227-45-190.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
21:36 -!- Dizzle [~Dizzle@2605:6000:1019:4099:4176:fe6e:8a33:e1c5] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:45 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
21:48 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:01 -!- roconnor [~roconnor@host-45-58-213-81.dyn.295.ca] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
22:06 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
22:16 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:17 -!- GreekMiner [~Greek@ppp-2-86-57-29.home.otenet.gr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:25 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
22:27 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:34 -!- ghtdak [~ghtdak@unaffiliated/ghtdak] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
22:44 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
22:44 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:48 -!- aalex [~aalex@64.187.177.58] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:50 -!- ghtdak [~ghtdak@unaffiliated/ghtdak] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:57 -!- veleiro [~veleiro@fsf/member/veleiro] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
23:06 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
23:08 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:09 -!- brguy [uid21011@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-oubkqgxptmfwailw] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
23:11 -!- jtimon [~quassel@211.28.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
23:16 -!- veleiro [~veleiro@fsf/member/veleiro] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:18 -!- CrazyLoaf [uid67551@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-ezubwbxuayyuuoau] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
23:19 -!- Dizzle [~Dizzle@2605:6000:1019:4099:4176:fe6e:8a33:e1c5] has quit [Quit: Leaving...]
23:20 -!- CrazyLoaf [uid67551@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-huzxqvqbqbsebjvx] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:29 -!- cyphase [~cyphase@unaffiliated/cyphase] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
23:31 -!- shangzhou [uid156782@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-gnofhwxdjxtqwvlb] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
23:32 -!- veleiro [~veleiro@fsf/member/veleiro] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
23:33 -!- veleiro [~veleiro@fsf/member/veleiro] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:33 -!- Aranjedeath [~Aranjedea@unaffiliated/aranjedeath] has quit [Quit: Three sheets to the wind]
23:34 -!- cyphase [~cyphase@unaffiliated/cyphase] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:37 -!- veleiro [~veleiro@fsf/member/veleiro] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
23:41 -!- Topogetcyrpto [~Topogetcy@105.156.117.41] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:42 -!- Topogetcyrpto [~Topogetcy@105.156.117.41] has left #bitcoin-wizards []
23:47 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has left #bitcoin-wizards []
23:53 -!- Topogetcyrpto [~Topogetcy@h5-152-213-186.host.redstation.co.uk] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
--- Log closed Fri Oct 21 00:00:27 2016