--- Log opened Thu Aug 24 00:00:58 2017 00:02 -!- eck [~tGysJVzRq@151.56.197.35.bc.googleusercontent.com] has quit [Changing host] 00:02 -!- eck [~tGysJVzRq@fsf/member/eck] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 00:17 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@2001:df0:ce:1601:788a:4b5e:a059:6511] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 00:17 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@2001:df0:ce:1601:788a:4b5e:a059:6511] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 00:19 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 00:22 -!- jtimon [~quassel@173.29.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 00:22 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@2001:df0:ce:1601:788a:4b5e:a059:6511] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 00:52 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@unaffiliated/alina-malina] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 00:55 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@37.157.223.81] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 01:19 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@216.165.220.79] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 01:23 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@216.165.220.79] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 01:23 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 01:35 -!- d9b4bef9 [~d9b4bef9@web501.webfaction.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 01:36 -!- d9b4bef9 [~d9b4bef9@web501.webfaction.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 01:57 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 01:58 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 02:53 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@2001:df0:ce:1601:788a:4b5e:a059:6511] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 03:00 -!- prime_ [~quassel@ip-178-203-233-2.hsi10.unitymediagroup.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 03:00 -!- daszorz [~daszorz@cpc106809-live29-2-0-cust896.17-2.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 03:06 -!- dabura667 [~dabura667@p98110-ipngnfx01marunouchi.tokyo.ocn.ne.jp] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 03:13 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 03:14 -!- JackH [~laptop@46.189.28.211] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 03:19 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@216.165.220.79] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 03:22 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@115.31.156.105] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 03:22 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@115.31.156.105] has quit [Client Quit] 03:23 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@2001:df0:ce:1601:788a:4b5e:a059:6511] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 03:24 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@216.165.220.79] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 03:31 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 03:40 -!- harrigan [~harrigan@skynet.skynet.ie] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 03:41 -!- harrigan [~harrigan@skynet.skynet.ie] has quit [Client Quit] 03:55 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 03:58 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 03:58 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded] 03:59 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 04:02 -!- thrmo [~thrmo@unaffiliated/thrmo] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 04:04 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 04:06 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 04:06 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded] 04:08 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 04:08 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded] 04:09 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 04:09 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded] 04:10 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 04:10 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded] 04:14 -!- tiagotrs [~tiago@unaffiliated/tiagotrs] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 04:21 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@2001:df0:ce:1601:788a:4b5e:a059:6511] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 04:26 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@216.165.220.79] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 04:39 -!- Yogh [~Yogh@92.110.183.153] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 04:40 -!- Yogh [~Yogh@92.110.183.153] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 04:40 -!- cobragoat [~alanwilhe@c-98-234-87-61.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: leaving] 04:41 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 04:42 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 04:44 -!- thrmo [~thrmo@unaffiliated/thrmo] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 04:45 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 04:47 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@216.165.220.79] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 04:48 < nsh> .tw https://twitter.com/WhalePanda/status/900583302704312320 04:49 < yoleaux> While the activation of Segwit is awesome, miners are still playing games. They activated the Emergency difficulty adjustment again on BCash (@WhalePanda) 04:49 < nsh> .tw https://twitter.com/WhalePanda/status/900583482442870785 04:49 < yoleaux> So it's more profitable again, to mine it like crazy again. So again we'll have slow #Bitcoin blocks until the BCash difficulty is too high. (@WhalePanda, in reply to tw:900583302704312320) 04:49 < nsh> .tw https://twitter.com/WhalePanda/status/900583879114977280 04:49 < yoleaux> At this speed they'll trigger the BCash halving way sooner than expected though and meanwhile there is some sort of hyperinflation at play (@WhalePanda, in reply to tw:900583482442870785) 04:49 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 04:49 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@216.165.220.79] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 04:49 < kanzure> wrong channel 04:50 < nsh> well, it's about new incentives for miners to game relative difficulty between two chains, which may be of some theoretical interest 04:50 < nsh> but perhaps better discussed in -forks 04:50 < kanzure> nope. happened in scrypt land for years. 04:50 -!- jtimon [~quassel@173.29.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 04:51 < nsh> hm 04:53 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@216.165.220.79] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 04:54 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@2001:df0:ce:1601:788a:4b5e:a059:6511] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 04:56 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@115.31.156.105] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 05:01 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@115.31.156.105] has quit [Client Quit] 05:10 -!- airbreather [~airbreath@d149-67-99-43.nap.wideopenwest.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 05:16 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@37.157.223.81] has quit [Changing host] 05:16 -!- Alina-malina [~Alina-mal@unaffiliated/alina-malina] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 05:25 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@199.119.130.36] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 05:26 -!- airbreather [~airbreath@d149-67-99-43.nap.wideopenwest.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 05:29 -!- welcomed1 [8503c92f@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip.133.3.201.47] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 05:33 < welcomed1> About bitcoin's blockchain model; Would it be proper to require a proof of work for a decentralized consensus blockchain based healthcare system? Typically given that entries in the ledger for such systems will be health records and nodes or users rather are so not designed to reward each besides granting access to health records. 05:36 < kanzure> idea is too vague, please submit your question in the form of an answer 05:39 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@199.119.130.36] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 05:41 -!- harrigan [~harrigan@skynet.skynet.ie] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 05:41 -!- harrigan [~harrigan@skynet.skynet.ie] has quit [Client Quit] 05:42 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 05:51 -!- harrigan [~harrigan@skynet.skynet.ie] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 05:52 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@2001:df0:ce:1601:788a:4b5e:a059:6511] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 05:54 < welcomed1> I want to apply the blockchain architecture in the implementation of a decentralized healthcare system. From my study of the bitcoin implementation of blockchain architecture, I understand that for a block of transaction to be added to the chain, the transaction must be valid and the associated proof of work must be solved. Apart from regulatory ro 05:54 < welcomed1> les (In terms of coin generation) and determining which node to reward, does the proof of work concept provide any other advantage to the network? 06:00 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 06:01 -!- harrigan [~harrigan@skynet.skynet.ie] has quit [Quit: leaving] 06:01 -!- airbreather [~airbreath@d149-67-99-43.nap.wideopenwest.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 06:01 -!- g33kyboi [8503c931@gateway/web/freenode/ip.133.3.201.49] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 06:10 -!- Giszmo [~leo@ip-61-233.219.201.nextelmovil.cl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 06:10 -!- thrmo [~thrmo@unaffiliated/thrmo] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 06:12 < welcomed1> wrong channel? 06:14 -!- airbreather [~airbreath@d149-67-99-43.nap.wideopenwest.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 06:18 -!- Noldorin [~noldorin@unaffiliated/noldorin] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 06:19 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 06:22 -!- daszorz [~daszorz@cpc106809-live29-2-0-cust896.17-2.cable.virginm.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 06:22 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 06:24 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@2001:df0:ce:1601:788a:4b5e:a059:6511] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 06:25 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 06:44 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 06:47 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 06:51 -!- cluckj [~cluckj@static-173-59-27-112.phlapa.ftas.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 06:53 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 06:59 -!- Giszmo [~leo@ip-61-233.219.201.nextelmovil.cl] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 07:03 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 07:18 < andytoshi> yes. no blockchain is remotely applicable to this. 07:22 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@2001:df0:ce:1601:788a:4b5e:a059:6511] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 07:37 -!- tiagotrs [~tiago@unaffiliated/tiagotrs] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 07:38 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 07:49 -!- daszorz [~daszorz@cpc106809-live29-2-0-cust896.17-2.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 07:50 -!- Aaronvan_ [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 07:50 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 07:55 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@2001:df0:ce:1601:788a:4b5e:a059:6511] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 07:55 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 07:59 -!- harrigan [~harrigan@skynet.skynet.ie] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 07:59 -!- harrigan [~harrigan@skynet.skynet.ie] has quit [Client Quit] 07:59 -!- harrigan [~harrigan@skynet.skynet.ie] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 08:00 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 08:00 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 08:03 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 08:03 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 08:04 -!- harrigan [~harrigan@skynet.skynet.ie] has quit [Client Quit] 08:12 -!- welcomed1 [8503c92f@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip.133.3.201.47] has quit [Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client] 08:13 -!- tiagotrs [~tiago@p5DC465F3.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 08:15 -!- tiagotrs [~tiago@p5DC465F3.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Changing host] 08:15 -!- tiagotrs [~tiago@unaffiliated/tiagotrs] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 08:37 -!- zxzzt [~prod@static-100-38-11-146.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 08:38 -!- Murch [~murch@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 08:40 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 08:41 < kanzure> .title https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15089476 08:41 < yoleaux> Ask HN: What is your all time favorite CS paper? | Hacker News 08:45 < esotericnonsense> hah. bitcoin.pdf? ;) 08:51 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 08:52 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@2001:df0:ce:1601:788a:4b5e:a059:6511] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 08:52 -!- oleganza [~oleganza@199-188-193-243.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 08:55 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 08:58 -!- prime_ [~quassel@5.146.5.174] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 09:07 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 09:16 -!- tiagotrs [~tiago@unaffiliated/tiagotrs] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 09:18 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-93-17-46-190.cm.vtr.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 09:20 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 09:23 -!- abpa [~abpa@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 09:24 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 09:26 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@2001:df0:ce:1601:788a:4b5e:a059:6511] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 09:26 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 09:29 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 09:43 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 09:45 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 09:48 -!- gwillen [~gwillen@unaffiliated/gwillen] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 09:48 -!- tiagotrs [~tiago@p5DC465F3.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 09:55 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 09:57 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 10:00 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 10:02 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 10:03 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 10:05 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 10:09 < bsm117532> (11:17:12 PM) kanzure: is there a memory-hard timelock puzzle anywhere? 10:09 < bsm117532> Why would you want that? 10:10 < kanzure> timelock encryption reasons 10:10 < bsm117532> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRcegZugqfY 10:10 < kanzure> .title 10:10 < yoleaux> Time-Lock Puzzles from Randomized Encodings - YouTube 10:11 < bsm117532> Well yes...but why is "memory hard" important? 10:11 < kanzure> it's probably not 10:11 < bsm117532> As long as you have the property of sequentiality, memory-hard seems irrelevant 10:11 < kanzure> oh i remember now 10:12 < kanzure> because memory bandwidth tends to be more expensive than CPU PoW 10:12 < kanzure> i was thinking about long-term timelocks with durations greater than a few years 10:12 < bsm117532> But computation-based timelock is tied to max CMOS clock rates. 10:12 -!- andytoshi [~apoelstra@unaffiliated/andytoshi] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 10:13 < kanzure> is computation and clock speed really something you want to be racing against for the purposes of timelocks? 10:13 < bsm117532> I've been thinking about replacing Bitcoin's timestamp in blocks with a proof of elapsed time... 10:13 < kanzure> or is it the only option 10:13 < bsm117532> I think it's the only option. 10:15 -!- andytoshi [~apoelstra@96.53.77.134] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 10:16 < bsm117532> Note I'm talking about something more like the Rivest algorithm 2^2^t rather than Proof of Intel in Sawtooth. 10:16 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 10:23 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@2001:df0:ce:1601:788a:4b5e:a059:6511] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 10:30 -!- Belkaar [~Belkaar@unaffiliated/belkaar] has quit [Quit: bye] 10:39 -!- Belkaar [~Belkaar@xdsl-85-197-54-11.netcologne.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 10:39 -!- Belkaar [~Belkaar@xdsl-85-197-54-11.netcologne.de] has quit [Changing host] 10:39 -!- Belkaar [~Belkaar@unaffiliated/belkaar] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 10:39 -!- Belkaar [~Belkaar@unaffiliated/belkaar] has quit [Client Quit] 10:40 < bsm117532> I really thought I knew how to do proof of elapsed time in a trustless manner. I don't think I do anymore. The Rivest-Shamir-Wagner algorithm requires someone to choose a RSA-style product of primes for verification. 10:40 -!- thrmo [~thrmo@unaffiliated/thrmo] has quit [Quit: Waiting for .007] 10:40 < bsm117532> andytoshi we talked about this a couple months ago. Do you know any way to measure time? 10:42 -!- Belkaar [~Belkaar@xdsl-85-197-54-11.netcologne.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 10:42 -!- Belkaar [~Belkaar@xdsl-85-197-54-11.netcologne.de] has quit [Changing host] 10:42 -!- Belkaar [~Belkaar@unaffiliated/belkaar] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 10:44 -!- Belkaar [~Belkaar@unaffiliated/belkaar] has quit [Client Quit] 10:45 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 10:48 -!- Belkaar [~Belkaar@xdsl-85-197-54-11.netcologne.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 10:48 -!- Belkaar [~Belkaar@xdsl-85-197-54-11.netcologne.de] has quit [Changing host] 10:48 -!- Belkaar [~Belkaar@unaffiliated/belkaar] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 10:52 -!- andytoshi [~apoelstra@96.53.77.134] has quit [Changing host] 10:52 -!- andytoshi [~apoelstra@unaffiliated/andytoshi] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 10:52 < andytoshi> i don't, i think in my use cases there was usually a "challenger" who was allowed to be trusted 10:52 -!- priidu [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 10:54 -!- Aaronvan_ is now known as AaronvanW 10:57 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@2001:df0:ce:1601:788a:4b5e:a059:6511] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 10:58 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 11:06 -!- Meeh [~mikalv@cm-84.209.131.13.getinternet.no] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 11:15 -!- abpa [~abpa@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…] 11:28 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 11:28 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded] 11:29 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 11:29 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded] 11:29 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 11:30 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded] 11:30 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 11:30 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded] 11:31 < bsm117532> poop 11:31 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 11:31 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded] 11:31 -!- thrmo [~thrmo@unaffiliated/thrmo] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 11:33 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 11:38 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 11:38 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 11:43 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 11:44 -!- MaxSan [~one@194.187.251.115] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 11:45 -!- tiagotrs [~tiago@p5DC465F3.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 11:48 -!- Noldorin [~noldorin@unaffiliated/noldorin] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 11:54 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@2001:df0:ce:1080:3029:304a:547a:2ddd] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 12:01 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 12:04 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 12:07 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 12:12 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 12:17 -!- abpa [~abpa@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 12:26 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@2001:df0:ce:1080:3029:304a:547a:2ddd] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 12:30 -!- oleganza [~oleganza@199-188-193-243.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has quit [Quit: oleganza] 12:33 -!- jimmysong__ is now known as jimmysong 12:56 -!- mn3monic [~xxwa@unaffiliated/mn3monic] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 13:11 -!- thrmo [~thrmo@unaffiliated/thrmo] has quit [Quit: Waiting for .007] 13:13 -!- blackwraith [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 13:13 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Quit: Going offline, see ya! (www.adiirc.com)] 13:14 -!- priidu [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 13:19 -!- mn3monic [~xxwa@94.177.176.239] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 13:19 -!- mn3monic [~xxwa@94.177.176.239] has quit [Changing host] 13:19 -!- mn3monic [~xxwa@unaffiliated/mn3monic] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 13:23 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@2001:df0:ce:1601:788a:4b5e:a059:6511] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 13:28 -!- prime_ [~quassel@5.146.5.174] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 13:28 -!- oleganza [~oleganza@199-188-193-243.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 13:43 -!- shesek [~shesek@unaffiliated/shesek] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 13:56 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@2001:df0:ce:1601:788a:4b5e:a059:6511] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 14:03 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 14:09 -!- propumpkin is now known as contrapumpkin 14:11 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 14:13 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 14:13 -!- abpa [~abpa@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com] 14:21 -!- praxeology1 [~praxeolog@cpe-76-187-72-181.tx.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 14:24 < praxeology1> Hi sipa. So is the current plan to not commit on the rolling utxo hash first... and have all communication about them outside of blocks... maybe similar to how assumevalid works? 14:25 -!- bliljerk101 [~bliljerk1@c-71-60-0-241.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 14:30 < instagibbs> praxeology1, not committing into the block means it can be a per-project thing, and you get basically all the benefits, yes 14:32 < praxeology1> Easier to change later w/out commitment. Sounds good to me 14:39 -!- bliljerk101 [~bliljerk1@c-71-60-0-241.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has quit [] 14:48 < shesek> the security trade-off is somewhat different than assumevalid, though. exploiting assumevalid requires cooperation between the developers and miners, while the utxo commitment can be exploited by developers with no miner cooperation 14:49 < kanzure> let's call it a signed utxo commitment or whatever 14:49 < kanzure> not sure that's the right naming. it's not the same thing as a consensus-enforced utxo commitment. 14:54 -!- Aaronvan_ [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 14:54 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 14:55 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 14:55 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@2001:df0:ce:1601:788a:4b5e:a059:6511] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 14:56 -!- gmaxwell [gmaxwell@wikimedia/KatWalsh/x-0001] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 14:56 < gmaxwell> praxeology1: there is a lot more to it than you're thinking. I don't think it's reasonable to expect many nodes to have Nx increase in their state size just to support people syncing from them. 14:57 < gmaxwell> praxeology1: so we have a proposal that uses FEC to split the seralized utxo data into many parts so that peers can keep only 1/nth (e.g. 1/8th) of the last M snapshots. (where M probably needs to be at least 2) 14:59 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 14:59 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 15:04 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 15:10 < Emcy> whats wrong with getting SPV start mode deployed sooner rather than later. That takes a lot of pressure off the sync time problem 15:10 < Emcy> there is an actual project for it on the repo. But it hasnt been touched in a while 15:10 < sipa> Emcy: there is nothing wrong with it, but it's not an easy thing to do 15:11 < sipa> and people are all volunteers 15:11 < Emcy> sure 15:14 -!- MaxSan [~one@185.156.175.59] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 15:19 < gmaxwell> Emcy: and there are many other flamingly critical priorities. 15:19 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 15:20 < Emcy> i dont doubt it 15:21 < Emcy> i misjudged the urgency of the ibd sync issue perhaps. Its going to get even longer form now on assuming well used segwit blocks tho 15:22 -!- eddiewan_ [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 15:24 -!- eddiewang [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 15:24 < sipa> Emcy: SPV sync doesn't help getting IBD sync time up 15:24 < sipa> it helps Bitcoin Core wallet users transact earlier only 15:25 < Emcy> i believe there will be a nice bump in your favour still coming down the line though, in the form of decent sized SSDs as standard making their way down to the cheaper end of the computer market 15:25 < gmaxwell> sipa: I think emcy's point is that a user won't care if it takes two weeks to sync up if their wallet is usable from minute three. 15:25 < sipa> gmaxwell: sure, but full nodes still need to do IBD 15:25 < Emcy> sipa yes i know. what gmax said. 15:26 -!- eddiewan_ [~eddiewang@207.245.12.90] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 15:28 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@2001:df0:ce:1601:788a:4b5e:a059:6511] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 15:30 < praxeology1> gmaxwell: a pruned node keeping a few utxo snapshots around is a lot less data than the entire block history 15:31 < sipa> praxeology1: still a lot more than a pruned node without any snapshots :) 15:31 < gmaxwell> praxeology1: bad comparison though. 15:31 < gmaxwell> a pruned node is the minimum to run a node today. And I expect that like ethereum is heading in the long enough future there won't be any nodes with the full history. 15:32 < gmaxwell> So your point is kinda like saying "a pruned node keeping a few snapshots is a lot less data than a full node plus 100 libraries of congress" .... trueee but not really a good benchmark of the relative costs. :) 15:32 < praxeology1> a snapshot is nothing compared to the full history 15:33 < sipa> praxeology1: why are you comparing with the full history 15:33 < gmaxwell> a full history is nothing compared to 100 libraries of congress. 15:33 < sipa> praxeology1: the full history is currently not required for any full node 15:34 < gmaxwell> If syncing from snapshots is to be useful it must be very widespread if not quite ubiquitous, multiplying storage costs times three isn't a /great/ way to get there. 15:37 < praxeology1> The full history is currently required on *some* nodes in order to synch, and the full history must be validated by any full node who wishes to enter. Having a snapshot option gives users the ability to start from snapshot, a new synch option... which full nodes could run as an option to help others synch from instead of full history, alleviating the need to have/transmit the full history in many use cases. 15:38 < praxeology1> Maybe a node starting from a snapshot would not be considered a "full" node anymore, that definition I do not care to debate 15:39 < sipa> some nodes doesn't mean you 15:39 < sipa> the cost for you, today, is running a pruned node 15:41 < praxeology1> anyways... what is "FEC"? a new acronym to me 15:41 < andytoshi> forward error correction [code] 15:41 < sipa> praxeology1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_error_correction 15:42 < praxeology1> What kind of snapshot period were you guys thinking of? 15:42 < sipa> 1-6 months or so 15:43 < praxeology1> I was thinking 3 months, so I guess I am not too far out there 15:43 < gmaxwell> praxeology1: I'd assumed 6 months. and always syncing off one that was at least 6 months old, or roughly that. 15:44 < praxeology1> yea, I'd definitely want to synch from further back, maybe 1 year I'd be more comfortable with personally 15:46 < gmaxwell> praxeology1: so one hard tradeoff there is for that to work we'd need most nodes to have a year of blocks. Thats a lot of data. (to be clear, I'm not disagreeing, ending up syncing from a year back is what I was suggesting too) 15:47 < gmaxwell> though to be clear, if you will always sync from X back then you need to at least be able to sometimes sync from X+interval back, when you just miss the deadline. 15:49 < praxeology1> yes 15:51 < praxeology1> a year of block history would be much larger than a utxo snapshot :p 15:53 -!- blackwraith [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has quit [Read error: No route to host] 15:54 -!- hasten [~Mutter@2607:fb90:4c48:c7ab:3195:124d:813f:62e8] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 15:54 -!- blackwraith [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 15:57 -!- hasten [~Mutter@2607:fb90:4c48:c7ab:3195:124d:813f:62e8] has quit [Client Quit] 16:04 -!- Aaronvan_ is now known as AaronvanW 16:09 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@129.180.75.159] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 16:12 -!- kenshi84 [~kenshi84@2400:4027:2bd5:1200:69ce:75e9:85b4:9450] has left #bitcoin-wizards ["Leaving..."] 16:15 -!- g33kyboi [8503c931@gateway/web/freenode/ip.133.3.201.49] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 16:15 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 16:16 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 16:18 -!- Dyaheon [~Dya@a91-156-192-39.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 16:18 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@129.180.75.159] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 16:19 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@199.178.233.220.static.exetel.com.au] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 16:20 -!- mn3monic [~xxwa@unaffiliated/mn3monic] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 16:28 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 16:33 -!- mn3monic [~xxwa@unaffiliated/mn3monic] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 16:42 -!- blackwraith [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 16:47 -!- davec [~davec@cpe-24-243-249-218.hot.res.rr.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 16:56 -!- Aaronvan_ [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 16:57 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 16:58 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 17:15 -!- Aaronvan_ [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [] 17:19 -!- davec [~davec@cpe-24-243-249-218.hot.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 17:34 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 17:38 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 17:39 -!- oleganza [~oleganza@199-188-193-243.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has quit [Quit: oleganza] 17:46 -!- chjj [~chjj@unaffiliated/chjj] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 17:49 -!- jtimon [~quassel@173.29.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 17:57 -!- praxeology1 [~praxeolog@cpe-76-187-72-181.tx.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 17:59 -!- dabura667 [~dabura667@p98110-ipngnfx01marunouchi.tokyo.ocn.ne.jp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 18:08 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@199.178.233.220.static.exetel.com.au] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 18:17 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@2001:df0:ce:1080:d5f7:6687:41ea:2e24] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 18:23 -!- Dizzle [~Dizzle@2605:6000:1019:41a7:245b:73:e6a2:c1bb] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 18:24 -!- oleganza [~oleganza@c-73-170-224-149.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 18:33 -!- Chris_Stewart_5 [~chris@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/chrisstewart5/x-62865615] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 18:52 -!- oleganza [~oleganza@c-73-170-224-149.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: oleganza] 18:58 -!- shesek [~shesek@unaffiliated/shesek] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 19:16 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 19:19 -!- instagibbs [~instagibb@pool-72-83-36-237.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 19:20 -!- instagibbs [~instagibb@pool-72-83-36-237.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 19:23 -!- jephalien_ [~jephalien@CPE00fc8d947f53-CM00fc8d947f50.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 19:23 -!- bxbxb [bxbxb@2600:3c00::f03c:91ff:fed5:80aa] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 19:24 -!- kisspunch [~za3k@smtp.za3k.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 19:24 -!- sipa [~pw@unaffiliated/sipa1024] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 19:25 -!- sipa [~pw@2001:19f0:ac01:2fb:5400:ff:fe5b:c3ff] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 19:27 -!- Murch [~murch@96-82-80-28-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Quit: Snoozing.] 19:28 -!- Dizzle [~Dizzle@2605:6000:1019:41a7:245b:73:e6a2:c1bb] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 19:28 -!- kisspunch [~za3k@smtp.za3k.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 19:30 -!- bxbxb [bxbxb@2600:3c00::f03c:91ff:fed5:80aa] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 19:32 -!- praxeology [~praxeolog@cpe-76-187-87-73.tx.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 19:37 -!- shesek [~shesek@unaffiliated/shesek] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 19:39 -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has quit [Quit: bye] 19:39 -!- praxeology1 [~praxeolog@cpe-76-187-87-73.tx.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 19:40 -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 19:41 -!- praxeology1 [~praxeolog@cpe-76-187-87-73.tx.res.rr.com] has left #bitcoin-wizards [] 19:42 -!- praxeology [~praxeolog@cpe-76-187-87-73.tx.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 19:48 -!- praxeology1 [~praxeolog@unaffiliated/praxeology] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 19:53 < praxeology1> A hash tree structure created in the background for a periodic utxo snapshots... could use the same method of hashing as the rolling add/subtractable hash... for each of its nodes... so its root hash would be equal to the rolling hash. Then we just need to agree on the order of adding to the tree and number of children per node... in order for people to be able to download from multiple sources 20:01 -!- Murch [~murch@c-73-223-113-121.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 20:18 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@2001:df0:ce:1080:d5f7:6687:41ea:2e24] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 20:56 -!- Dizzle [~Dizzle@2605:6000:1019:41a7:c092:93b3:952e:7896] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 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 21:01 -!- oleganza [~oleganza@c-73-170-224-149.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 21:07 -!- TheSeven [~quassel@rockbox/developer/TheSeven] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 21:08 -!- TheSeven [~quassel@rockbox/developer/TheSeven] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 21:17 < gmaxwell> that makes no sense. 21:18 < gmaxwell> you basically destroy the value of he rolling hash that way. 21:18 -!- rmwb [~rmwb@129.180.75.159] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 21:18 < gmaxwell> the rolling hash doesn't need to be anything but a rolling hash. you can download from multiple sources already. 21:18 < gmaxwell> by using implementation specific commitments. 21:22 -!- TheSeven [~quassel@rockbox/developer/TheSeven] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 21:22 -!- TheSeven [~quassel@rockbox/developer/TheSeven] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 21:23 < praxeology1> When you download a piece, how do you know whether you are making progress towards a rolling hash, until you are done? 21:31 < praxeology1> Maybe I was thinking it would be easier than it actually would be to make this tree structure. With the rolling hash functions suggested... does ((A+B)+C)+D equal (A+B) + (C+D)? 21:32 < gmaxwell> with the implementation specific commitment information. 21:35 < praxeology1> Wouldn't what you are suggesting result in a completely different hash for the snapshot (for synchronization purposes) than the utxo rolling hash? 21:39 < praxeology1> Assuming your answer is yes, sure, that would still work. 21:40 < gmaxwell> the distinction is that it doesn't matter how long it takes to compute the hashes used in fetching because they're only computed for authoring new versions, and they're implementation specific, so it doesn't matter that they've made the encoding and ordering normative. 21:43 < wallet42> I've been recently thinking about roll-over transaction fees. has anyone done some research into this direction? I like to think of money that _actually_ spent on transaction fees to use a block chain's ability to reassign value from one public key to another as a metric for real usage (compared to speculative only usage by custodial wallets in exchanges volume). The problem is, once this metric is being 21:43 < wallet42> used by others its also pretty easy to game by a miner. They just create fake transactions into their own blocks with high fees, they wont risk losing anything since they are mining their own transactions. 21:45 < wallet42> the idea would be to have a softfork which forces miners to only collect like 1/6th of the current block's transactions fees and issue 5/6th to a second, OP_TRUE output, in the coinbase. 21:45 < wallet42> the coins are still locked in there for 120 blocks but the first miner to find the block then, can collect those 21:48 < gmaxwell> wallet42: those schemes strongly incentivize fees to move out of band. 21:49 < gmaxwell> e.g. miners announce that they'll accept fees paid to outputs with the correct horse stapler battery key, and the 'fee' of the transaction is set to zero. 21:49 < gmaxwell> so then all the fee goes to the miner who made the block, and none rolls forward. 21:49 < wallet42> but there would still be competition. if your out of band fee is higher than the public one, i will chose the public route 21:50 < gmaxwell> as an aside, your soffork is somewhat impeded by the fact that that coinbase isn't spendable for 100 blocks, ideally you'd like the next block to be able to spend it. 21:50 < gmaxwell> wallet42: the out of band one would always be lower, because all the fees go to me. 21:50 < gmaxwell> (if I'm a miner) 21:51 < gmaxwell> if it would take a fee of 1 to mine your transaction where I only get a sixth... then I'd accept a transaction with a fee of one sixth via an OOB mechenism where I get all of it. 21:51 < wallet42> oh now i see... 21:52 < wallet42> can we ban transactions that don't pay a fee? 21:52 < gmaxwell> no, because then I make the fee 1 satoshi, and then they "pay a fee", but not really. 21:53 < gmaxwell> Otherwise it introduces an economic parameter into the system (by that I means some varable that 'knows' the value of a bitcoin) 21:53 < wallet42> yeah... that would be a dangerous road to go down 21:55 < praxeology1> wallet42: you could create an altcoin where some amount of coin burn is required... but who would use that vs a more efficient competing distributed currency? 21:55 < wallet42> btw do we have any metrics on how many transactions are "new"? e.g. haven't been seen in the mempool by long running nodes before making it into a block? 21:56 < wallet42> praxeology1: I don't think people want another altcoin /s 22:00 < praxeology1> "As the update operations are also associative, H(a)+H(b)+H(c)+H(d) can in fact be computed as (H(a)+H(b)) + (H(c)+H(d))." Well, there is the answer to my above question of whether such a hash tree would be feasible, that computes to the same hash as the rolling hash. 22:04 < praxeology1> gmaxwell: sorry, I don't follow how making the "implementation specific "commitments"" cannot use the same hashing function as the rolling hash for parallelized/distributed downloading of pieces. And I don't see how such "destroys" the value of the rolling hash. I'm not implying that such a structure must be made immediately... can be made in the background and non-available until complete. 22:05 < praxeology1> Unless of course there is significant performance difference between the rolling hash function and something like plain old SHA256 22:12 -!- dudeguy [62f39885@gateway/web/freenode/ip.98.243.152.133] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 22:18 -!- oleganza [~oleganza@c-73-170-224-149.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: oleganza] 22:23 -!- dudeguy [62f39885@gateway/web/freenode/ip.98.243.152.133] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 22:25 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@115.31.156.105] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 22:25 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@115.31.156.105] has quit [Client Quit] 22:39 -!- airbreather [~airbreath@d149-67-99-43.nap.wideopenwest.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 23:04 -!- rusty1 [~rusty@124-169-161-148.dyn.iinet.net.au] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 23:04 -!- rusty1 [~rusty@124-169-161-148.dyn.iinet.net.au] has quit [Changing host] 23:04 -!- rusty1 [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 23:06 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 23:11 -!- Dizzle [~Dizzle@2605:6000:1019:41a7:c092:93b3:952e:7896] has quit [Quit: Leaving...] 23:36 < sipa> praxeology1: the rolling hash functions are many times slower 23:38 < gmaxwell> praxeology1: if you combine the two you get the disadvantages of both. 23:38 < gmaxwell> praxeology1: the result is no longer rolling, it's no longer implementation independant, and it's no longer fast like sha2. 23:42 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-93-17-46-190.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 23:45 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@115.31.156.105] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 23:51 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 23:59 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-93-17-46-190.cm.vtr.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards --- Log closed Fri Aug 25 00:00:59 2017