--- Log opened Mon Mar 02 00:00:09 2015
00:07 -!- Mably [56401ec3@gateway/web/freenode/ip.86.64.30.195] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:08 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:08 -!- null_radix [Elite7851@gateway/shell/elitebnc/x-threassioyvpkcmp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:16 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
00:18 -!- erasmospunk [~erasmospu@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/erasmospunk] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
00:18 -!- erasmospunk [~erasmospu@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/erasmospunk] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:29 -!- lclc [~lucas@unaffiliated/lclc] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:30 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@home-tomis2.rdsct.ro] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
00:41 < brisque> OT, but I thought I'd have a look into how various pinning systems are using OP_RETURN code messages to pin data into the Bitcoin blockchain (as it seems to be all the rage). there's some some reasonably compact encodings, some sort of weird things (did you really need an 21 byte magic number?), and then there's someone who had to multipart their data over three transactions because their encoding didn't fit in the 40 byte limit.
00:42 < brisque> 6a257b2264657363223a2022416e67656c2048656c70696e672048616e64204d696e7574657322 + 6a252c20226e616d65223a202248484d696e75746573222c2022746f74616c223a203231383430 + 6a0a2031303030303030307d
00:42 -!- bramc [~bram@99-75-88-206.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:44 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:49 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@unaffiliated/dr-g] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
00:53 -!- go1111111 [~go1111111@162.244.138.37] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
00:55 -!- delll_ [~chatzilla@yh97.internetdsl.tpnet.pl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:56 -!- erasmosp_ [~erasmospu@net-2-38-211-181.cust.vodafonedsl.it] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:00 -!- erasmospunk [~erasmospu@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/erasmospunk] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
01:05 -!- andy-logbot [~bitcoin--@wpsoftware.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
01:05 -!- andy-logbot [~bitcoin--@wpsoftware.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:05  * andy-logbot is logging
01:06 -!- go1111111 [~go1111111@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/go1111111] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:18 -!- rubensayshi [~ruben@91.206.81.13] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:23 -!- xabbix [~xabbix@unaffiliated/xabbix] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
01:44 -!- adam3us1 [~Adium@host-92-18-107-164.as13285.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
01:45 -!- adam3us [~Adium@host-92-18-107-164.as13285.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:46 -!- vmatekole [~vmatekole@g229071093.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:49 -!- nuke_ [~nuke@176.92.208.235] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:52 -!- nuke1989 [~nuke@46-163-153.adsl.cyta.gr] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
01:53 -!- Grishnakh [~grishnakh@dsl-espbrasgw1-50dfb6-218.dhcp.inet.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
01:58 -!- fac7or [~fac7or@87.246.79.99] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:01 -!- Dr-G3 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:04 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
02:07 < adam3us> andytoshi: you might be able to make a threshold ringsig by committing to two c_i, c_j values with a degree two directed cycle.  seems like in the obvious construction you would reveal the distance between the two known keys.
02:08 -!- CoinMuncher [~jannes@178.132.211.90] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:09 -!- p15 [~p15@89.248.174.54] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:09 -!- NewLiberty [~NewLibert@2602:304:cff8:1580:443c:ddbe:5bf5:b260] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
02:10 -!- p15_ [~p15@198.50.160.97.static-ca.cryptolayer.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
02:11 -!- wiz is now known as shroff
02:12 -!- lmatteis [uid3300@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-hljtuafsxsnizzeb] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:13 -!- bramc [~bram@99-75-88-206.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
02:14 -!- shroff is now known as wiz
02:17 -!- SDCDev [~quassel@unaffiliated/sdcdev] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:19 -!- p15_ [~p15@89.248.174.54] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:20 -!- p15 [~p15@89.248.174.54] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
02:23 < fenn> zooko: any thoughts on this? http://archiveteam.org/index.php?title=INTERNETARCHIVE.BAK http://archiveteam.org/index.php?title=Talk:INTERNETARCHIVE.BAK
02:26 -!- CodeShark [~textual@cpe-76-167-237-202.san.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com]
02:26 -!- CodeShark [~textual@cpe-76-167-237-202.san.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:30 -!- adam3us [~Adium@host-92-18-107-164.as13285.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
02:30 -!- adam3us [~Adium@host-92-18-107-164.as13285.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:30 -!- brisque [~brisque@unaffiliated/brisque] has left #bitcoin-wizards ["Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com"]
02:31 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:31 < fluffypony> fenn: given a super-user-friendly wrapper to Tahoe-LAFS you could have something distributable quite easily
02:41 -!- delll_ [~chatzilla@yh97.internetdsl.tpnet.pl] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
02:41 -!- nuke__ [~nuke@46-37-150.adsl.cyta.gr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:42 -!- erasmospunk [~erasmospu@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/erasmospunk] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:44 -!- erasmosp_ [~erasmospu@net-2-38-211-181.cust.vodafonedsl.it] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
02:44 -!- nuke_ [~nuke@176.92.208.235] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
02:46 -!- espes__ [~espes@205.185.120.132] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
02:52 -!- espes__ [~espes@205.185.120.132] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:01 -!- [nsh] [~ubuntu@wikipedia/nsh] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:03 -!- [nsh] [~ubuntu@wikipedia/nsh] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
03:05 -!- adam3us [~Adium@host-92-18-107-164.as13285.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
03:08 -!- p15 [~p15@198.50.160.97.static-ca.cryptolayer.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:10 -!- p15_ [~p15@89.248.174.54] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
03:12 -!- fac7or [~fac7or@87.246.79.99] has quit []
03:14 -!- [nsh] [~ubuntu@wikipedia/nsh] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:15 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:15 -!- [nsh] [~ubuntu@wikipedia/nsh] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
03:19 -!- Dr-G3 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
03:19 -!- fac7or [~fac7or@87.246.79.99] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:20 -!- fac7or [~fac7or@87.246.79.99] has quit [Client Quit]
03:20 -!- fac7or [~fac7or@87.246.79.99] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:21 -!- fac7or [~fac7or@87.246.79.99] has quit [Client Quit]
03:24 -!- adam3us [~Adium@host-92-18-107-164.as13285.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:26 -!- jgarzik [~jgarzik@unaffiliated/jgarzik] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
04:00 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
04:01 -!- hashtag [~hashtag@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:01 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:11 -!- moa [~moa@opentransactions/dev/moa] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
04:12 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
04:12 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:12 -!- bsm117532 [~bsm117532@static-108-21-236-13.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:13 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@home-tomis2.rdsct.ro] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:15 -!- kyletorpey [~kyle@c-24-131-0-5.hsd1.va.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:18 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
04:19 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaways.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:24 -!- oujh [~vfbtgn@82.76.120.35] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
04:26 -!- hashtag [~hashtag@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
04:27 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@2a02:8108:73f:f6e4:e23f:49ff:fe47:9364] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:34 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaways.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
04:35 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaways.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:37 -!- oujh [~vfbtgn@188.25.72.13] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:41 -!- eudoxia [~eudoxia@r167-57-57-143.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:42 -!- hashtag [~hashtag@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:46 -!- hashtag [~hashtag@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
04:47 -!- OneNomos [~OneNomos@pool-71-163-227-3.washdc.east.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:48 -!- fac7or [~fac7or@87.246.79.99] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:54 -!- llllllllll [~lllllllll@6d482698.ftth.concepts.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:55 -!- bigpup3 [~bigpuppy@pool-173-66-42-3.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
05:12 -!- xenog [~xeno@86-41-41-107-dynamic.b-ras2.dbn.dublin.eircom.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:16 -!- maraoz [~maraoz@43-161-16-190.fibertel.com.ar] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:24 -!- NewLiberty [~NewLibert@2602:304:cff8:1580:443c:ddbe:5bf5:b260] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:35 -!- p15_ [~p15@123.118.93.56] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:36 -!- p15 [~p15@198.50.160.97.static-ca.cryptolayer.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
05:37 -!- hashtag [~hashtag@cpe-98-157-219-44.ma.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:40 -!- lmatteis [uid3300@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-hljtuafsxsnizzeb] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
05:40 -!- erasmospunk [~erasmospu@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/erasmospunk] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
05:47 < andytoshi> adam3us: interesting. i think this works (as does committing to the sum say by H(g^{s_1}g^{s_2}y_1^{c_1}y_2^{c_2}) ) but in both cases each vertex corresponds to a pair of keys, so to really make it 2-of-n you'd need n^2 vertices; if you have only n vertices it's "any of these n pairs"
05:51 -!- pigeons [~pigeons@172.56.5.12] has quit [Quit: leaving]
05:54 -!- lclc [~lucas@unaffiliated/lclc] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
05:59 -!- lclc [~lucas@unaffiliated/lclc] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:07 -!- lclc [~lucas@unaffiliated/lclc] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
06:11 -!- p15_ [~p15@123.118.93.56] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded]
06:17 < zooko> fenn, fluffypony: interesting! Thanks for the link.
06:18 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:18 -!- p15 [~p15@123.118.93.56] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:22 -!- Mably [56401ec3@gateway/web/freenode/ip.86.64.30.195] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
06:25 < zooko> Do you know if there is a mailing list or otherwise how I should contact those folks?
06:27 < adam3us> andytoshi: curiously i seem to have a size 2 ringsig.  baffled.  (assuming you know product of all public keys, and can query for random public keys from the utxo set)
06:28 -!- eudoxia [~eudoxia@r167-57-57-143.dialup.adsl.anteldata.net.uy] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
06:28 < adam3us> andytoshi: you need to look at 4.2 scheme in https://eprint.iacr.org/2003/067.pdf
06:31 < adam3us> andytoshi: s is the index of the signer, pick a random j and compute all a_i values (for i!=j) as eg a_i=H^k(a_0) and R_i = g^a_i (forall i!=j again).  finally observe you can compute R_j in the method they use to compute R_s, even the j != s. and so you get a size 3 ringsig (sig = R_j, a_0, s)
06:31 < adam3us> andytoshi: however looking at that for a while you realise you only need one R value.  (in the above all a_i other than a_j are disclosed, you need to keep a_j private for security otherwise you leak your private key).
06:33 < andytoshi> adam3us: o.O incredible, you must be wrong ;)   i'll check it out
06:34 < adam3us> andytoshi: the resulting signature for l=3 (3 public keys y_1=g^x_1 etc) is (R,s) signing for signer i=2, where R=g^a/(y_1*y_3)^H(m,R), s=a+x_2*H(m,R)
06:34 < adam3us> andytoshi: well i think i convinced myself the only way I am is if 4.2 signature in that paper is broken.
06:35 < adam3us> andytoshi: verification is to check g^s=?R*(y1*y2*y3)^H(m,R)
06:40 -!- jps [~Jud@cpe-74-72-116-143.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:40 < andytoshi> adam3us: wow!
06:41 < adam3us> andytoshi: yeah
06:41 -!- xenog [~xeno@86-41-41-107-dynamic.b-ras2.dbn.dublin.eircom.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
06:44 < andytoshi> their proof looks very simple to adapt, i will do that as a first step to see if anything breaks, then fill in the "can be shown ... in the extended paper" etc parts
06:44 < andytoshi> but just looking at your scheme, you can sorta see that it's just as secure as a schnorr sig
06:45 < adam3us> andytoshi: if this holds water it constitutes a trapdoor free discrete log accumulator with a fixed size standard schnorr signature sized set membership proof
06:45 -!- SDCDev [~quassel@unaffiliated/sdcdev] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
06:46 < andytoshi> adam3us: yes, so, this does still seem too good to be true, so i will not let my heart race ... plus "why has nobody else thought of this, it's just multiplication?" ... but it seems to hold up
06:46 < adam3us> andytoshi: (spent the entire weekend trying to get variants to work:)
06:47 < andytoshi> oh, ok, if it's only obvious in retrospect i'm more confident :)
06:48 < adam3us> andytoshi: another way to look at it is well that signature form is a lot more amenable (4.2) its also size 2+n, but there are limited restrictions on a_i values.  so then the problem is to choose random a_i values such that l-1 of them are from a CPRNG and the last is chosen at random, in such a way that you cant tell which is the random one
06:49 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@79-98-72-216.sys-data.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:49 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@79-98-72-216.sys-data.com] has quit [Changing host]
06:49 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:49 < andytoshi> i spent a long time thinking about "l-1 are CPRNG and you can't tell which is the lth" and couldn't get sublinearity
06:49 < andytoshi> ohh, i see, a is the sum, so that gives it to you ... and in this case you actually only need the sum
06:49 < adam3us> andytoshi: which is a double headache when you use that hash-ring ringsig.  but here its much simpler construction, and that observation that you can sign using a R_i value where you are signing as j such that j!=i does the trick.  the rest is an observation that wait what do we even need the l R_i values for.
06:50 < andytoshi> for verification
06:50 -!- coiner [~linker@115.79.55.177] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
06:50 -!- kmels [~kmels@186.151.61.56] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
06:51 < adam3us> andytoshi: right.  verifying a sum is clearly useless for convincing the verifier of anything.
06:53 < adam3us> andytoshi: also if l=1 this thing is a schnorr signature
06:53 < andytoshi> do you have a rigorous argument for why this doesn't reveal the signer's index? i think it is not statistically indistinguishable bc a appears in both cases, but maybe distinguishing reduces to DL or DDH or something?
06:54 < adam3us> andytoshi: i think any of the signers could generate the same signature equally likely at random.
06:56 < andytoshi> ah, yeah, that's correct in the RO model (i think: a and H both give results in {0,1}^n, together they span all {0,1}^{2n} sigs)
06:57 < andytoshi> oh, no, even for a fixed hash fn i think you are right
06:58 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaways.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
06:58 < andytoshi> s can be chosen uniformly at random, then this implies the same R for every signer (tho a will be different)
06:58 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:58 -!- jps [~Jud@cpe-74-72-116-143.nyc.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: jps]
06:59 < adam3us> andytoshi: right.  i believe that means it retains the unconditional privacy claimed in the paper.
06:59 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
06:59 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:00 -!- Adlai` [~Adlai@unaffiliated/adlai] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:00 < andytoshi> i think you still need an RO to argue it (because you want H(m,R) to be stat independent of R) but yes, i believe that's correct
07:01 < adam3us> andytoshi: yes there could be a little bias from the non-uniformity of the hash function.
07:01 -!- Adlai [~Adlai@unaffiliated/adlai] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
07:03 < andytoshi> i have to sit through a 90-minute undergrad crypto lecture today, i will try to reduce schnorr to breaking this (because i'm not comfortable enough with forking lemma stuff to believe my own proof of such a consequential result, tho im ok with blindly believing schnorr is secure)
07:03 < adam3us> ok
07:05 -!- lclc [~lucas@unaffiliated/lclc] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:07 -!- skittylx [~skittylx@ks203868.kimsufi.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:08 -!- sdaftuar [~sdaftuar@static-100-38-11-146.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: leaving]
07:10 -!- weex_ [~weex@99-6-135-18.lightspeed.snmtca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:10 -!- xenog [~xeno@46.7.118.40] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:11 -!- sdaftuar [~sdaftuar@static-100-38-11-146.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:11 -!- weex [~weex@fsf/member/weex] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
07:21 -!- kmels [~kmels@186.151.61.56] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:23 -!- DougieBot5000 [~DougieBot@unaffiliated/dougiebot5000] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:23 -!- nuke__ [~nuke@46-37-150.adsl.cyta.gr] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
07:24 -!- nuke__ [~nuke@46-37-150.adsl.cyta.gr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:26 -!- OneFixt [~OneFixt@unaffiliated/onefixt] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:27 -!- ryanxcharles [~ryan@2601:9:4680:dd0:7c46:e371:e28e:f441] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
07:29 -!- hearn [~mike@c-67-180-209-140.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:35 -!- bsm117532 [~bsm117532@static-108-21-236-13.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
07:39 -!- prodatalab [~prodatala@c-69-254-45-177.hsd1.fl.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
07:40 -!- bigpup [~bigpup@50.253.32.117] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:46 -!- hearn [~mike@c-67-180-209-140.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
07:47 -!- alewis [774aacfe@gateway/web/freenode/ip.119.74.172.254] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:51 -!- p15 [~p15@123.118.93.56] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded]
07:53 -!- xenog [~xeno@46.7.118.40] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
07:54 -!- antgreen [~user@CPE687f74122463-CM84948c2e0610.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
07:54 -!- p15 [~p15@123.118.93.56] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:57 -!- droark [~droark@209-6-53-207.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:01 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@2a02:8108:73f:f6e4:e23f:49ff:fe47:9364] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
08:05 -!- koeppelm_ [~koeppelma@dyn-160-39-29-101.dyn.columbia.edu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:06 -!- koeppelmann [~koeppelma@dyn-160-39-29-101.dyn.columbia.edu] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
08:19 -!- brisque [~brisque@unaffiliated/brisque] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:19 -!- lclc [~lucas@unaffiliated/lclc] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
08:22 < kanzure> funny to see the european central bank talking about proof-of-stake http://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/other/virtualcurrencyschemesen.pdf
08:25 -!- alewis [774aacfe@gateway/web/freenode/ip.119.74.172.254] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
08:29 -!- koeppelm_ [~koeppelma@dyn-160-39-29-101.dyn.columbia.edu] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
08:29 -!- koeppelmann [~koeppelma@dyn-160-39-29-101.dyn.columbia.edu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:30 < tromp> and further displaying their ignorance in "
08:30 < tromp> Currently, efforts are put
08:30 < kanzure> "... the Bitcoin protocol does not require or provide any identification or verification of the users, nor does it generate historical records of transactions"
08:30 < tromp> into using the X11 algorithm for reasons of higher cryptographic security and lower processing
08:30 < tromp> costs, so it is quite possible that the algorithms mentioned above will be replaced shortly.
08:30 < tromp> "
08:30 < kanzure> this is an impressive level of ignorance
08:31  * fluffypony shudders
08:31 -!- gonedrk [~gonedrk@d40a6497.rev.stofanet.dk] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:31 < brisque> this is exactly why you should hire competent consultants.
08:31 < tromp> they also claim that no custom hardware is developed for scrypt:(
08:31 < fluffypony> "lower processing costs" is literally the stupidest thing I've ever heard
08:32 < fluffypony> "it doesn't use 100% of the CPU/GPU when mining, it must be because it's efficient!"
08:32 < brisque> fluffypony: it stems from the fact that X11 GPU miners have very low power draw due to poor optimisation.
08:32 < fluffypony> brisque: yes
08:32 -!- pigeons [~pigeons@rrcs-70-62-91-94.midsouth.biz.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:33 < fluffypony> I mentioned that in an interview last week, that the "power savings" of X11 are fictitious, and as a result of bad optimisation
08:34 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
08:35 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaways.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:35 < kanzure> now here's what you should really be worried about: what if this is their default level of investigation into any topic, not just bitcoin?
08:38 < brisque> bitcoin in general is a pretty difficult concept to gather information about. there's very few authoritative sources of good information, few people who understand the concepts well enough to separate the signal from the noise. lots of the common knowledge about bitcoin is completely untrue as a result.
08:40 -!- arubi [~ese168@unaffiliated/arubi] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
08:40 -!- xenog [~xeno@46.7.118.40] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:40 -!- alewis [774aacfe@gateway/web/freenode/ip.119.74.172.254] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:43 < fluffypony> so then why not approach the developers?
08:44 < andytoshi> fluffypony: the devs are very busy and it's not obvious a priori that they are the experts
08:44 < andytoshi> fluffypony: there is a problem in this space that if you don't understand the tech really well then it's basically "our word against andreas/drk/whoever" and those guys are paid more than us
08:44 < fluffypony> true on both counts, what I meant to wonder is if they even try
08:45 < brisque> fluffypony: it's difficult to tell a hack from a developer if you're not in this world.
08:45 < kanzure> brisque: the first step is to ask them if they are a developer
08:45 < fluffypony> yeah
08:45 < tromp> for all we know they contacted the X11 devs believing they are experts
08:45 < fluffypony> I suppose Linus gets approached by fewer businesses than Canonical do
08:46 < fluffypony> tromp: I really hope not, but it's entirely possible
08:48 < fluffypony> in other news, how's Cuckoo Cycle going?
08:48 < tromp> some ppl told me they're planning a new coin using it
08:49 < zooko> I'm very interested in Cuckoo PoW.
08:49 < fluffypony> seconded
08:49 < brisque> kanzure: maybe not. see while I might dismiss a crackpot blog that's ranting for pages on end about how secp256k was generated using the hash of hell and will cause us to burn as a result, it's hard for other people to make the distinction between that being nonsense and having a basis in reality. without the background knowledge that's a lot better than sipa almost single handedly writing headers first, isn't it?
08:49 < tromp> hi Zooko! any feedback from the scientists?
08:50 < zooko> Hi tromp! No, I haven't brought it up to them yet.
08:50  * zooko makes a note to self to do that.
08:50 < tromp> you made that note before:)
08:51 < kanzure> brisque: this is all just extremely basic knowledge acquisition stuff though. if anything i would expect them to know how to do knowledge acquisition well.
08:51 < zooko> Well, not in these notes here I didn't. :-)
08:51 < kanzure> "first step to not breaking everything: be aware of prinicpal agent problems and epistemology, or sources of knowledge and why people claim to have certain knowledge"
08:51 < kanzure> *principal agent
08:52 < brisque> kanzure: knowledge acquisition will tell you the UTXO is stored in memory. there's published books on the matter, lots of reddit posts and people talking about it on bitcointalk. surely that's correct then?
08:52 < fluffypony> "PoS systems rarely have a SHA-256 algorithm"
08:53 < andytoshi> without reading this, it sounds like it's actually logically impossible to extract an implementation from it, so i suspect this is not something we need to worry about
08:54 < kanzure> brisque: no, that's not knowledge acquisition -___-
08:54 < kanzure> brisque: that's just reading reddit.. that's not how you know things.
08:54 < fluffypony> kanzure: but you may stumble on to Reddit comments / threads when Googling for stuff
08:55 < kanzure> googling for stuff is also not often how you know things.. that might tell you about the existence of certain ideas, concepts, or perspectives. but again that' not how you know something.
08:55 < brisque> kanzure: I read it in a published book, googled around and there's lots of people talking about it as fact. is that not due diligence?
08:55 -!- jps [~Jud@cpe-74-72-116-143.nyc.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:55 < kanzure> no
08:56 < kanzure> that is definitely not due diligence
08:56 < kanzure> have you guys never verified anything ever?
08:56 < fluffypony> I read it on the interwebz
08:57 < kanzure> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology
08:57 < sipa> i just trust what #bitcoin-wizards conclides
08:57 < brisque> given the relative importance of the "fact", I think it would be going overboard to research it further if you were trying to understand bitcoin.
08:57 -!- alewis [774aacfe@gateway/web/freenode/ip.119.74.172.254] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
08:57 < fluffypony> sipa: conclides...?
08:57 < andytoshi> kanzure: "not due diligence" sure but surely you can see expecting that to work, i mean, it can't be that 99% of everything published about bitcoin is lies, right? how would that even happen?
08:58 < andytoshi> (btw i am curious about the answer to "how did this even happen?")
08:58 < zooko> Perhaps you folks should apply these techniques of discerning principle/agent problems
08:58 < fluffypony> andytoshi: they used a "top tier consulting firm"
08:58 < fluffypony> (I guess)
08:58 < zooko> and why folks claim to know things, and all that
08:58 < sipa> fluffypony: concludes
08:58 < zooko> to the question of what purposes are served by that bank publishing that document.
08:58 < kanzure> andytoshi: no, i can't really believe that a central bank would have such a poor understanding of how knowledge works
08:58 < zooko> Maybe technical accuracy is useless or even an impediment to their goals.
08:58 < zooko> I don't know. I haven't done that exercise of trying to discern that stuff.
08:59 < fluffypony> sipa: ah, so follow-the-herd then, it just happens to be a particularly gifted herd :-P
08:59 < sipa> fluffypony: a herd that rarely actually comes to a consensus :)
08:59 < fluffypony> hah hah
08:59 < brisque> kanzure: look, neither can I, but that wasn't the point I was making, just that it's hard to work out right from wrong with this particular subject due to the tight clustering of knowledge.
09:00 < kanzure> brisque: yes but then the correct thing to do would be to *increase* carefulness, not *decrease* it
09:02 < Luke-Jr> andytoshi: it's actually not that surprising IMO
09:04 < brisque> andytoshi: I can't go into the details, but I did consult for a company who had an absolutely insane idea of what to do with bitcoin. unworkable expectations of fairy dust, the takeaway I got from them was that the problem was me, they'd find someone else to consult with who would tell them it's possible. it's always possible something like that happened.
09:05 < brisque> you say our idea is insane? we'll find someone who we can pay to say it isn't.
09:06 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaways.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
09:06 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaways.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:08 < kanzure> "Research perspectives and challenges for Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies" http://www.jbonneau.com/doc/BMCNKF15-IEEESP-bitcoin.pdf
09:09 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaways.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
09:09 < kanzure> oh wait, i didn't recognize this paper because it wasn't posted by amiller
09:09 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaways.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:10 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@2a02:8108:73f:f6e4:e23f:49ff:fe47:9364] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:10 < amiller> yes it was
09:10 < amiller> wat
09:10 < kanzure> oh.
09:10 < kanzure> well i'm out of ideas. i just didn't see you.
09:13 -!- runeks [~quassel@212.60.121.11] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:15 < brisque> I don't understand "turing complete scripting" being presented as a simply positive thing, with little regard to what it actually gives you and what it takes away. as far as I'm aware there's never been a case where someone has been obstructed by the lack of loops.
09:15 < brisque> (that's RE that paper)
09:16 < runeks> So, what do people think about the proposed "Lightning Network"? http://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper-DRAFT-0.5.pdf
09:16 -!- oujh [~vfbtgn@188.25.72.13] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
09:20 -!- fac7or [~fac7or@87.246.79.99] has quit []
09:20 -!- mpmcsweeney [~mpmcsween@c-50-189-4-61.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:21 -!- bramc [~bram@99-75-88-206.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:23 -!- stonecoldpat [~Paddy@janus-nat-128-240-225-56.ncl.ac.uk] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
09:25 -!- mpmcsweeney [~mpmcsween@c-50-189-4-61.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Client Quit]
09:28 < maaku> brisque: what does it take away?
09:29 < brisque> maaku: static analysis, or ease of it anyway.
09:29 < maaku> brisque: that's pretty orthogonal, unless there's a specific analysis you are talking about (e.g. runtime)
09:30 < maaku> but runtime analysis isn't a concern for bitcoin scripting -- the signer has that information
09:31 < brisque> halting problem means you end up with awkward solutions like Ethereum uses, where they burn fees rather than using them as a mining incentive.
09:31 < amiller> brisque, i dont think your criticism makes any sense yet
09:32 < brisque> amiller: I'll put them on the backburner for the moment then.
09:32 < maaku> brisque: I disagree. Ethereum's approach is awful, but that's their fault. Include execution statistics (e.g. opcode count) in the signature. If it doesn't match, invalidate the transaction
09:32 < amiller> first of all, in ethereum the fees aren't burned, they're given to miners
09:33 < maaku> brisque: please don't. i'm interested to hear what your critiques are
09:33 < sipa> the full node network ought to set the limits of what execution cost is acceptable
09:33 < sipa> not miners
09:34 < maaku> sipa: but that's an ideal we don't have now
09:34 < amiller> there's an auto adjusting of the gas limit per block, that's a different issue though
09:34 < brisque> amiller: are you sure about that? I would have sworn they burn them, reason being that otherwise they aren't really a denial of service limiter if you're a miner.
09:34 < sipa> maaku: we do; checksig limit per block and blocksize limit in bytes
09:34 < sipa> the limits may not be well-chosen, but they exist
09:35 < amiller> brisque, for now they're given to miners, there's been some talk about burning a portion of it to avoid some incentive misalignemnt, but that's really unrelated to turing completness
09:35 < sipa> i think turing completeness is mostly irrelevant
09:35 < sipa> harmless, and useless
09:35 < amiller> i think so too, it's a red herring of a phrase, really the point is just 'more expressive'
09:36 < sipa> my only real problem with is that it adds unnecessary complexity
09:36 < amiller> that seems subjective, its arguably not that complex
09:36 < sipa> maybe
09:36 < sipa> i'll need to see a use case for it before i'm convinced :)
09:36 -!- koeppelmann [~koeppelma@dyn-160-39-29-101.dyn.columbia.edu] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
09:37 < maaku> sipa: I'm not sure how that is different? you could have hard limits no matter what scripting system is used
09:37 < sipa> maaku: yes
09:37 < amiller> the last thing i want to argue about with brisque is that static analysis isn't actually the issue
09:37 < sipa> which is why i say it's orthogonal
09:37 < amiller> "static analysis" is often about like denovo analysis of exisitng legacy code
09:37 < amiller> like i'm going to apply some static analysis to the big bucket o' openssl code
09:37 < brisque> amiller: wonder where I got that idea from, I thought that was mentioned authoritatively somewhere but seems not, sorry about that.
09:37 < amiller> but if you want to assert things about ethereum contracts, you can provides hints to the static analysis or a proof about whatever constraint holds
09:38 < amiller> (that's all theoretical i don't think anyone proposed concretely how to do that yet, but it's obvious from a pl persepctive)
09:38 -!- rusty2 [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:38 < sipa> in general, i think the bitcoin scripting system ought to be something that allows signers to prove a particular pre-committed condition was fullfilled
09:39 < maaku> amiller brisque: it's a fair complaint that certain systems are not as amenable to static analysis as they could be. but imho it's a mostly orthogonal issue to turing completeness
09:39 < sipa> which doesn't need generalized execution
09:39 < sipa> and can be made significantly more efficient without
09:39 < sipa> (batch validation e.g.)
09:39 < maaku> sipa: the qustion is whether their exist constraints that are too difficult to represent without generalized computation
09:40 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
09:40 < sipa> yup
09:40 < sipa> of course those exist
09:40 < sipa> the question is whether they are useful :)
09:40 < sipa> (and i have no answer to that question)
09:41 -!- hearn [~mike@199-188-193-172.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:44 -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:52 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaways.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
09:52 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:01 -!- CoinMuncher [~jannes@178.132.211.90] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
10:05 < andytoshi> adam3us: i cant compute R in your scheme, it depends on H(m,R)
10:05 -!- erasmospunk [~erasmospu@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/erasmospunk] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:05 < andytoshi> (and i cant figure a way around this)
10:09 -!- Mably [~Mably@unaffiliated/mably] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:10 -!- lclc [~lucas@unaffiliated/lclc] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:13 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
10:13 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:13 -!- ceedz [~eric@187.139.146.65] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:14 -!- hearn [~mike@199-188-193-172.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
10:15 < adam3us> andytoshi: so I think the intermediate version works where R_k is computed as in the paper and R_i=g^a_i for all i!=k j is signer, k is random from 1..l.  i think maybe i simplified one too many times, and it needs two R values.  (with all l R values it is a size 3 sig vs a size 2; reducing number of R values is a computational not size saving)
10:15 < adam3us> andytoshi: but you are right about the size 2 version.. appears broken.
10:15 < adam3us> andytoshi: well non-functional!
10:20 -!- skittylx [~skittylx@ks203868.kimsufi.com] has quit [Quit: Bye]
10:23 -!- p15 [~p15@123.118.93.56] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded]
10:26 -!- droark [~droark@209-6-53-207.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
10:26 -!- p15 [~p15@123.118.93.56] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:26 < bramc> I'm utterly unconvinced that bitcoin's scripting language gains anything whatsoever from its expressivity. Having a list of things which can help unlock a utxo and an enumerated list of subsets which can do it successfully can accomplish everything I've seen seriously claimed the script has ever been used for.
10:27 < bramc> Does anybody have an opinion on my suggestion that a 'better' way of doing ANYONECANPAY is to make it so that in transactions with multiple inputs the individual signatures  from the inputs can be either for the whole transaction or just for their specific input and the output?
10:28 < tromp> the other novelty Ethereum brings is having smart stateful contracts
10:28 < sipa> tromp: that's imho the only interesting thing about it
10:28 < tromp> which would be rather handicapped without an expressive script language
10:29 -!- skittylx [~skittylx@ks203868.kimsufi.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:32 < dgenr8> sipa: why again, do miners need the full-node network?
10:33 -!- grandmaster [dansmith3@knows.the.cops.are.investigat.in] has quit [Quit: quit]
10:33 < brisque> I might be thinking particularly narrowly here, but the use of stateful contracts seems limited, you're still stuck in the same position where you have no external inputs.
10:33 < sipa> dgenr8: ?
10:33 < sipa> dgenr8: miners are clients to the full node network
10:33 < sipa> they produce blocks that follow the rules mandated by the network
10:34 < sipa> and are paid by subsidy and fees in return
10:34 < dgenr8> sipa: why do they need non-miners? because they don't know the difference?
10:35 < sipa> dgenr8: because they are the ones that give the currency value
10:35 < dgenr8> sipa: how?
10:35 < sipa> withoit users of the system, there is no reason to produce blocks for it
10:35 < dgenr8> sipa: define user
10:36 < sipa> anyone
10:36 < sipa> you me
10:36 -!- koeppelmann [~koeppelma@dyn-160-39-29-101.dyn.columbia.edu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:36 < sipa> payment processors
10:36 < sipa> and miners themselvds
10:36 < sipa> i'm not saying that miners are not also users
10:37 < sipa> but they are not the only ones
10:37 < sipa> and they are not privileged
10:37 < sipa> they just provide a service the system needs
10:37 < dgenr8> sipa: would it be a problem if miners proved hashpower to each other, connected to themselves, and only looked to that network for transactions?
10:37 < sipa> yes
10:37 < dgenr8> ok that's what I was looking for
10:38 < sipa> it would mean they could give themselves as much money as they wanted
10:38 < sipa> if nobody could verify their correct operation
10:38 < dgenr8> so preserving the state where the network contains non-mining full nodes is critical
10:39 < sipa> no
10:39 < dgenr8> do explain ;)
10:39 < sipa> it is critical that anyone who _wants_ is able to validate the system's correctness
10:39 < sipa> whether they actually do, or how many people do, or whether they are non-miners is not relevant
10:40 < dgenr8> who cares whether some random person thinks the all-miner network that receives all transactions is correct or not
10:40 < sipa> it's the only interesting thing in bitcoin imho
10:41 < sipa> a monetary system that works without needing to trust anyone, for almost all of its operation
10:41 < sipa> if i lose that abiloty, i'll gladly ise paypal instead
10:41 < sipa> *ability, use
10:41 < dgenr8> what good is having that ability unless miners need you for something?
10:42 < sipa> it's other way around
10:42 < sipa> me, and every other user of the currency, needs miners
10:42 < sipa> they need us for the btc they receive to have valie
10:42 < sipa> a currency that isn't used has no value
10:43 < dgenr8> today they need us
10:43 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
10:43 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:43 < dgenr8> because the transactions are submitted to the p2p network
10:44 < sipa> heh
10:44 < sipa> transactions are irrelevant
10:44 < sipa> they can be broadcast in any way
10:44 -!- sw [~sw@79.112.244.88] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:44 < sipa> they're not part of bitcoin's consensus model
10:44 < sipa> only blocks are
10:44 -!- belcher [~belcher-s@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:44 < sipa> and full nodes set the rules on what blocks are valid
10:45 < sipa> and miners create blocks obeying those rules
10:45 -!- NewLiberty [~NewLibert@2602:304:cff8:1580:443c:ddbe:5bf5:b260] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
10:45 < dgenr8> they why would it be a problem if miners proved hashpower to each other, connected to themselves, and only looked to that network for transactions?
10:46 < dgenr8> s/they/then
10:46 -!- sw [~sw@79.112.244.88] has left #bitcoin-wizards ["Leaving"]
10:46 < sipa> i may misunderstand the question
10:46 -!- Dr-G3 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:46 < sipa> where they look for transactions is totally irrelevant
10:46 < sipa> the question is whether people accept the blocks they produce
10:47 < dgenr8> in this reality, people = other miners
10:48 < sipa> no
10:48 < sipa> assume miners decide among themselves that a 100 BTC reward is totally acceptable
10:48 -!- grandmaster [dansmith3@knows.the.cops.are.investigat.in] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:48 < sipa> 100% of miners agree about this
10:48 < sipa> what would happen?
10:49 < sipa> the rest of the network ignores their blocks, a new miners will pop up that produce blocks that the network accepts
10:49 < belcher> the 100btc would be valueless because no investor would want it, miners wouldnt make any money
10:49 < sipa> *and new
10:50 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
10:50 -!- Dr-G3 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
10:51 -!- Dr-G3 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:52 < maaku> bramc: there are use cases for which an expressive script is required. in particular conditions of spend which are forced-inhereted by child transactions
10:53 < bramc> maaku, What do you mean? Can you give an example?
10:53 < maaku> indeed that is the only category of conditions that i've so far discovered which absolutely benefits from expanded script
10:53 -!- oujh [~vfbtgn@188.25.72.13] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:54 < maaku> bramc: e.g. redemption of IOUs -- a condition attached to an issued IOU which allows the issuer to replace it by its face value at any time, no matter its current ownership status
10:55 < maaku> i have so far found no other way of implementing that except by inhereted constraints (aka covenants), and no way of doing that neatly except by generalized execution
10:55 < bramc> dgenr8, Without mining you can verify transactions but you can't verify that a particular coin wasn't spent already. The entirety of bitcoin's mining and consensus model is a glorified distributed database whose only guarantee is that double spends don't happen. Or at least, double spends would require more than a certain amount of resources to be able to pull off.
10:56 < bramc> maaku, Do you have a link for that? I honestly don't know what you're talking about, and would like to read up on it.
10:57 < maaku> bramc: it is not written up anywhere, to my knowledge. i'd be happy to answer questions about it though
10:57 < bramc> Well for starters, what is an IOU?
10:57 < sipa> i owe you
10:58 < bramc> sipa, I know that, I meant more specifically and technically
10:58 -!- OneNomos [~OneNomos@pool-71-163-227-3.washdc.east.verizon.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
10:59 -!- Adlai` is now known as adlai
10:59 < sipa> bramc: oh, sorry, no idea then
10:59 < maaku> bramc: asset issuance could be implemented any number of ways -- colored coins, natively validated assets with a fork, committed transactions, etc.
10:59 < maaku> but an IOU is just some issued asset that I, the issuer, promise to someday redeem for face value plus interest
11:00 < maaku> the trouble is that if there is interest, I can be held hostage by the owner so long as the interest I originally agreed to is above market rate
11:01 < maaku> the owner will just hold on collecting interest and refusing to let me take it back, at least until he fears I might default
11:01 -!- rubensayshi [~ruben@91.206.81.13] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
11:02 -!- mpmcsweeney [~mpmcsween@c-98-217-146-94.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:02 < bramc> Not sure what you're saying. It's possible to have interest-bearing things in bitcoin, but they're unspendable until due, which isn't very useful.
11:02 -!- mpmcsweeney [~mpmcsween@c-98-217-146-94.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Client Quit]
11:03 < maaku> so you put a condition on it -- the IOU can be transferred to someone else by its owner, in which case the condition follows, OR anyone can replace it with its face value and accumulated interest, and the condition is dropped
11:03 < bramc> What is an IOU in bitcoin land? All there are are utxos.
11:03 < maaku> bramc: i'm not sure what you're saying either. it's prefectly possible to have interest-bearing things that continue to accumulate interest while being used
11:04 < bramc> Can you give an example of a utxo script to support this stuff?
11:04 -!- lclc [~lucas@unaffiliated/lclc] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
11:04 < maaku> bramc: no, because bitcoin scripting language is not expressive enough to do this, which is rather the point
11:05 < bramc> Can you give an example of a script which could be made in an extended scripting language?
11:06 < maaku> bramc: are you familiar with the concept of a quine?
11:07 < bramc> I think i remember reading a hofstadter essay about them when I was in high school. Something about self-referencing sentences
11:07 < maaku> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quine_%28computing%29
11:07 < maaku> a computer program which takes no input and prints its own source code
11:08 < maaku> so the simplest version is - push my own code on the stack, push the output on the stack, check that the output script starts with my own code, yield
11:09 < maaku> it's known as a 'covenant' around here because it allows you to attach a condition to a coin which is carried over to whoever later owns it, and can only be removed (if it can be removed) under explicit conditions
11:10 -!- embicoin [~chatzilla@unaffiliated/embicoin] has quit [Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.91.1 [Firefox 36.0/20150222232811]]
11:10 < brisque> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=278122.0
11:10 < brisque> .t
11:10 < yoleaux> Mon, 02 Mar 2015 19:10:32 UTC
11:10 < brisque> .title
11:10 < yoleaux> CoinCovenants using SCIP signatures, an amusingly bad idea.
11:12 < maaku> an amusingly awesome idea. i wish gmaxwell didn't title it that way
11:13 < tromp> sounds like an amusingly controversial idea:)
11:13 < bramc> maaku, Isn't bitcoin script incapable of evaluating the output which a utxo is going to?
11:13 < brisque> yes.
11:13 < maaku> bramc: in principle? no, that information is available in the transaction
11:13 < maaku> bitcoin script can't do that now because there is no opcode to access that information
11:14 < sipa> maaku: that we know of
11:14 < bramc> That's what I thought
11:14 < maaku> (and the other opcodes you'd need -- substr, etc., are disabled)
11:14 < sipa> i wouldn't claim it is provably impossible
11:14 < maaku> bramc: hence, the argument for more expressive script
11:16 < bramc> This covenants post is reminding me of how back in 2002 acadamics thought it was awesome to spend time studying XML for all the awesome things it would enable
11:16 < bramc> I made bencode and that was that.
11:16 < maaku> bramc: if checksig wasn't a monolithic opcode but rather implemented as push-tx-data, hash, ecdsaverify as separate opcodes, this would have been doable with bitcoin 0.1
11:18 < bramc> I'm with gmaxwell on this: "Any attempt to think of why someone might want to do this leaves me screaming in horror"
11:18 < bramc> It seems like an explicit violation of the doctrine of first sale
11:18 -!- shesek [~shesek@77.127.13.193] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
11:18 < sipa> it breaks fungibility of coins for starters
11:18 < maaku> bramc: I just gave you above a very valid reason for doing this -- IOU redemption at issuers request is otherwise impossible
11:19 < sipa> but the argument in favor is that there are very interesting applications, which, if supported in a generic way, almost certainly enable covenants as well
11:19 < maaku> not to mention that there are plenty of other constructs you can come up with -- e.g. spending limits
11:20 < bramc> Or transaction fees :-P
11:20 < bramc> With this, an exchange could start tacking covenants onto transactions which (a) block further covenants and (b) require a fee be paid to the original exchange every time the coin changes hands
11:21 < maaku> bramc: who would accept such a coin?
11:22 < bramc> maaku, Anyone whose wallet supported it
11:22 -!- OneNomos [~OneNomos@pool-71-163-227-3.washdc.east.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:23 < tromp> such coins would be deemed practically worthless
11:24 < gwillen> bramc: wallet software right now will only recognize specific script templates as coins "paid to it"
11:24 < gwillen> so it would have to be specifically changed in order to recognize a convenanted coin as an inbound coin being paid to it
11:26 < gwillen> (which means that even if an exchange wrote in its ToS that it could send you convenanted coins, users would rebel if it did, since they would just see that they received no coins)
11:26 < maaku> covenants break fungibility when they are used. thankfully it's not something that can just be transparently added to someone's pubkey
11:26 < maaku> every wallet would have to be upgraded to specifically understand these new covenants
11:27 < bramc> I think the only reasonable policy is to automatically reject any covenanted transaction
11:27 < brisque> reject?
11:27 < maaku> bramc: correct. accept only whitelisted covenants
11:27 < brisque> you can ignore but not reject
11:27 < maaku> attach anything not understood by the user base and you've effectively burnt the coins
11:28 < maaku> bramc: i assume that's what he meant..
11:29 -!- zwischenzug [~zwischenz@pool-108-51-197-41.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:29 -!- Burrito [~Burrito@unaffiliated/burrito] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:31 < bramc> You can also, of course, encourage reasonable policies about covenants by not adding support for them to the scripting language to begin with
11:31 < bramc> Because, you know, doctrine of first sale.
11:32 < sipa> the problem, we have discovered, is that it is incredibly hard to make covenants impossible
11:32 < sipa> bitcoin itself barely avoided it
11:32 < sipa> very barely
11:32 < sipa> you don't need explicit support for them
11:33 < bramc> If you make it so that the output isn't available for the script to evaluate then there's no problem.
11:33 < maaku> that plus: they actually solve real problems that otherwise have no acceptable solution
11:34 < sipa> bramc: but you want outouts covered by the signatures
11:34 < sipa> which brings them implicitly into scope
11:34 < bramc> maaku, I still don't understand what you want your IOU covenant to do. Trying to parse what you wrote it sounds like an output which can be reclaimed at any time
11:35 < sipa> just the ability to request "what is the hash i would have to sign for this transaction" is enough to have a covenant
11:35 -!- shesek [~shesek@77.127.13.193] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:35 < bramc> oh right, you can make it so that the output has to be provided so you can verify it.
11:35 < maaku> bramc: you give me an IOU with 10% interest. I then decide to sit on it, because 10% annual interest is awesome. you want it back. how do you get it back?
11:36 < bramc> maaku, Do you mean how can I pay it off?
11:36 < maaku> yes
11:36 < maaku> the covenant lets you pay it off at any time
11:36 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
11:36 < bramc> Not sure what point there is to doing IOUs in bitcoin, because there's no enforcement mechanism. I can just, you know, not pay it.
11:38 < bramc> sipa, If you have a completely lobotomized signature system which doesn't allow anything even vaguely resembling scripts then avoiding covenants is straightforward.
11:38 < sipa> sure
11:38 < sipa> also not very interesting
11:38 < bramc> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine
11:38 < sipa> i agree, it is easy to avoid
11:39 < sipa> but not in any interesting system
11:39 < bramc> sipa, totally interesting, you can still have hash preimage reveals, hence simultaneous transfer
11:39 < sipa> sorry, too tired now :)
11:39 -!- sipa [~pw@unaffiliated/sipa1024] has left #bitcoin-wizards []
11:39 < bramc> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine
11:40 < bramc> You can even have preimage length checking (you'd have to work extra hard to avoid it) which allows for gambling
11:41 -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
11:44 -!- blerker [d1286013@gateway/web/freenode/ip.209.40.96.19] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:44 < maaku> bramc: first-sale doctrine doesn't apply here
11:44 -!- devrandom [~devrandom@unaffiliated/niftyzero1] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:45 < bramc> the theory behind it does. First sale doctrine was created to stop a lot of predatory practices which vendors had
11:46 < gmaxwell> lol
11:46 < maaku> *sigh*. the covenant solution *provides* first-sale doctrine rights
11:46 -!- hearn [~mike@199-188-193-172.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:46 < maaku> otherwise if I wanted right to pay off at any time I'd have to have multisig control over the coins or something, and that's too granular a permission
11:48 < maaku> the covenant solution is saying "I give up any control over who gets this IOU. You can resell it to anyone at any time for any price. I reserve the right to pay it off at a time of my chosing, but claim no other rights beyond that."
11:48 -!- burcin [~quassel@oscar.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:50 < dgenr8> bramc: that's why miners are needed, but that wasn't my question
11:51 < dgenr8> sipa: if I may summarize you, miners need the validating p2p network because that's where users look. The fact that the transactions come from there is irrelevant.
11:52 < bramc> dgenr8, I have no idea what point you're trying to make
11:52 -!- NewLiberty [~NewLibert@2602:304:cff8:1580:443c:ddbe:5bf5:b260] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:55 < dgenr8> just seeking to understand sipa's comment that the p2p network sets rules for miners
11:55 < brisque> the p2p network is sort of unrelated, it would work (though probably not quite as well) via smoke signals.
11:56 < dgenr8> i didn't say "the IP network"
11:57 < brisque> neither did I.
11:58 < skittylx> non-mining nodes would reject the blocks
11:58 < skittylx> wrong windows srry
11:58 < brisque> I may have missed the point, perhaps
12:01 -!- koeppelmann [~koeppelma@dyn-160-39-29-101.dyn.columbia.edu] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
12:01 -!- koeppelmann [~koeppelma@dyn-160-39-29-101.dyn.columbia.edu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:06 < bramc> brisque, Smoke signals would have much longer latency, which would cause all kinds of problems
12:06 -!- justanotheruser [~Justan@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
12:07 < brisque> so increase the block time? point was anyway that the p2p network doesn't have much do to with anything. in fact it's preferable to have other transports.
12:07 -!- go1111111 [~go1111111@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/go1111111] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
12:08 < bramc> You could do IP over smoke signals
12:08 < bramc> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2549
12:10 -!- hearn [~mike@199-188-193-172.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
12:10 -!- grandmaster [dansmith3@knows.the.cops.are.investigat.in] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
12:13 < dgenr8> I could have said "I didn't say ethernet" but then I 'd get a whole different kind of nitpicking ;)
12:14 -!- OneNomos [~OneNomos@pool-71-163-227-3.washdc.east.verizon.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
12:15 < brisque> it was hyperbole so undeserving of anything anyway.
12:16 -!- adam3us [~Adium@host-92-18-107-164.as13285.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
12:18 -!- justanotheruser [~Justan@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:19 -!- adam3us [~Adium@host-92-18-107-164.as13285.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:23 -!- go1111111 [~go1111111@162.244.138.37] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:30 -!- droark [~droark@209-6-53-207.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:35 -!- ceedz [~eric@187.139.146.65] has quit [Quit: ceedz]
12:38 -!- ceedz [~eric@187.139.146.65] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:38 -!- adam3us [~Adium@host-92-18-107-164.as13285.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
12:41 -!- adam3us [~Adium@host-92-18-107-164.as13285.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:41 -!- oujh [~vfbtgn@188.25.72.13] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
12:46 -!- oujh [~vfbtgn@188.25.72.13] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:47 -!- Dr-G3 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
12:47 -!- Dr-G3 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:47 -!- coiner [~linker@118.69.7.216] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:52 -!- coiner [~linker@118.69.7.216] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
12:52 -!- brisque [~brisque@unaffiliated/brisque] has left #bitcoin-wizards ["Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com"]
12:54 -!- zooko [~user@c-75-70-204-109.hsd1.co.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
12:56 < andytoshi> adam3us: even the two-R version doesn't seem to work, no matter what i try i'm either (a) impossible to compute or (b) trivially forgeable, you can't just choose a random j and pretend it's the signer's index
12:57 < andytoshi> because in the scheme as written, you'd need to compute x_j*H(m, R_j) (which is impossible) ... if you calculate R_j as R_s in the paper (punching at s) then you have R_j depending on H(m, R_j)
12:59 -!- SubCreative [~SubCreati@unaffiliated/cannacoin] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
13:04 < adam3us> andytoshi: so step one do you agree one can replace a_i where i!=j (they call s=j the signer in the paper) st a_i = H^i(a_0).  (regardless that this identifies the signer as then you know a_j is the signer.
13:09 -!- bramc [~bram@99-75-88-206.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
13:10 -!- erasmospunk [~erasmospu@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/erasmospunk] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
13:12 < andytoshi> adam3us: yes, agreed
13:13 -!- adam3us1 [~Adium@host-92-18-107-164.as13285.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:13 -!- adam3us [~Adium@host-92-18-107-164.as13285.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
13:14 -!- OneNomos [~OneNomos@pool-71-163-227-3.washdc.east.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:19 -!- OneNomos [~OneNomos@pool-71-163-227-3.washdc.east.verizon.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
13:19 -!- OneNomos [~OneNomos@pool-71-163-227-3.washdc.east.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:22 -!- hearn [~mike@199-188-193-172.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:23 -!- zwischenzug [~zwischenz@pool-108-51-197-41.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
13:24 -!- Dr-G3 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
13:24 -!- Dr-G3 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:28 -!- waxwing__ [waxwing@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-uwyexturdfpqsfem] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:28 -!- waxwing [waxwing@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-fuufosudrooagtsw] has quit [Disconnected by services]
13:30 -!- waxwing__ is now known as waxwing
13:30 -!- wyager [~wyager@nat-128-62-76-251.public.utexas.edu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:31 -!- wyager [~wyager@nat-128-62-76-251.public.utexas.edu] has quit [Client Quit]
13:32 -!- wyager [~wyager@nat-128-62-76-251.public.utexas.edu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:33 -!- moa [~moa@opentransactions/dev/moa] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:34 -!- waxwing__ [waxwing@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-vqfcexihrlsfubjd] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:37 -!- waxwing [waxwing@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-uwyexturdfpqsfem] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
13:38 -!- waxwing [waxwing@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-ozsodwkqvdlljtbr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:38 -!- pigeons [~pigeons@rrcs-70-62-91-94.midsouth.biz.rr.com] has quit [Quit: leaving]
13:39 < adam3us1> andytoshi: ok then if you try replace R_k for R_j and still make a sig where k !=j random 1..l
13:40 -!- waxwing__ [waxwing@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-vqfcexihrlsfubjd] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
13:41 < adam3us1> andytoshi: hmm that may have a related problem. uh oh
13:47 -!- Mably_ [Mably@unaffiliated/mably] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:49 -!- zwischenzug [~zwischenz@pool-108-51-197-41.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:50 -!- Mably [~Mably@unaffiliated/mably] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
13:53 -!- Mably__ [~Mably@unaffiliated/mably] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:55 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
13:56 -!- pukie [~pukes@50.248.81.66] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
13:56 -!- Mably_ [Mably@unaffiliated/mably] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
14:01 -!- nuke__ [~nuke@46-37-150.adsl.cyta.gr] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
14:02 -!- nuke__ [~nuke@46-37-150.adsl.cyta.gr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:04 -!- hearn [~mike@199-188-193-172.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
14:05 -!- hearn [~mike@199-188-193-172.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:06 -!- rusty2 [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
14:07 -!- koeppelmann [~koeppelma@dyn-160-39-29-101.dyn.columbia.edu] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
14:07 -!- koeppelmann [~koeppelma@dyn-160-39-29-101.dyn.columbia.edu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:07 -!- mpmcsweeney [~mpmcsween@c-98-217-146-94.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:08 -!- mpmcsweeney [~mpmcsween@c-98-217-146-94.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Client Quit]
14:10 -!- NewLiberty [~NewLibert@2602:304:cff8:1580:443c:ddbe:5bf5:b260] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
14:10 -!- hashtag [~hashtag@cpe-98-157-219-44.ma.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
14:13 -!- maraoz [~maraoz@43-161-16-190.fibertel.com.ar] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
14:15 -!- wyager [~wyager@nat-128-62-76-251.public.utexas.edu] has quit [Quit: wyager]
14:17 -!- NewLiberty [~NewLibert@2602:304:cff8:1580:443c:ddbe:5bf5:b260] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:18 -!- xabbix [~xabbix@bzq-79-178-146-223.red.bezeqint.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:18 -!- xabbix [~xabbix@bzq-79-178-146-223.red.bezeqint.net] has quit [Changing host]
14:18 -!- xabbix [~xabbix@unaffiliated/xabbix] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:19 -!- vmatekole [~vmatekole@g229071093.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
14:19 -!- vmatekole [~vmatekole@g229071093.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:21 -!- vmatekole [~vmatekole@g229071093.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
14:21 -!- vmatekole [~vmatekole@g229071093.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:26 -!- belcher [~belcher-s@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
14:26 -!- orik [~orik@50-46-132-219.evrt.wa.frontiernet.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:28 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@2a02:8108:73f:f6e4:e23f:49ff:fe47:9364] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
14:29 -!- belcher [~belcher-s@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:29 -!- hearn [~mike@199-188-193-172.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
14:31 -!- hearn [~mike@199-188-193-172.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:35 -!- Hunger- [hunger@proactivesec.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
14:41 -!- Hunger- [hunger@proactivesec.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:57 -!- zooko [~user@c-75-70-204-109.hsd1.co.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:59 -!- bigpup [~bigpup@50.253.32.117] has quit []
15:04 -!- orik [~orik@50-46-132-219.evrt.wa.frontiernet.net] has quit [Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com]
15:06 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:08 -!- PaulCapestany [~PaulCapes@204.28.124.82] has quit [Quit: .]
15:10 -!- PaulCapestany [~PaulCapes@204.28.124.82] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:12 -!- Mably__ [~Mably@unaffiliated/mably] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
15:14 -!- Pan0ram1x [~Pan0ram1x@095-096-084-122.static.chello.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
15:16 -!- arubi [~ese168@unaffiliated/arubi] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:20 -!- ceedz [~eric@187.139.146.65] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
15:20 -!- ceedz_ [~eric@177.240.197.32] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:20 -!- hearn [~mike@199-188-193-172.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
15:21 -!- Pan0ram1x [~Pan0ram1x@095-096-084-122.static.chello.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:23 < fenn> zooko> Do you know if there is a mailing list or otherwise how I should contact those folks?  <- efnet channels #internetarchive.bak and #archiveteam-bs
15:24 < fenn> or just write stuff on the wiki, the password is "yahoosucks"
15:25 -!- hashtag [~hashtag@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:27 -!- waxwing [waxwing@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-ozsodwkqvdlljtbr] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
15:27 -!- fanquake_ [~anonymous@unaffiliated/fanquake] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:27 -!- Pan0ram1x [~Pan0ram1x@095-096-084-122.static.chello.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
15:28 -!- koeppelmann [~koeppelma@dyn-160-39-29-101.dyn.columbia.edu] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
15:28 -!- fanquake [~anonymous@unaffiliated/fanquake] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
15:28 -!- fanquake_ is now known as fanquake
15:29 -!- waxwing [waxwing@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-bhebfbnztpmfusem] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:33 -!- Pan0ram1x [~Pan0ram1x@095-096-084-122.static.chello.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:33 < zooko> fenn: thanks!
15:49 -!- bosma_ [~bosma@S01067cb21bda6531.vc.shawcable.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:49 -!- bosma [~bosma@S01067cb21bda6531.vc.shawcable.net] has quit [Disconnected by services]
15:49 -!- bosma_ is now known as bosma
15:49 -!- bramc [~bram@99-75-88-206.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:54 -!- melvster [~melvster@ip-86-49-18-198.net.upcbroadband.cz] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
15:55 -!- melvster [~melvster@ip-86-49-18-198.net.upcbroadband.cz] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:01 -!- Logicwax [~Logicwax@c-50-161-23-192.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
16:03 -!- zwischenzug [~zwischenz@pool-108-51-197-41.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
16:04 -!- hearn [~mike@199-188-193-172.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:14 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaways.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:17 -!- Dr-G3 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
16:19 -!- DougieBot5000 [~DougieBot@unaffiliated/dougiebot5000] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
16:22 -!- bsm117532 [~bsm117532@static-108-21-236-13.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:24 -!- vmatekole [~vmatekole@g229071093.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
16:25 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaways.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
16:26 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:27 -!- ceedz_ [~eric@177.240.197.32] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
16:27 -!- ceedz [~eric@187.139.146.65] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:28 -!- d1ggy [~d1ggy@dslc-082-082-156-003.pools.arcor-ip.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:30 -!- d1ggy_ [~d1ggy@dslb-092-076-000-051.092.076.pools.vodafone-ip.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
16:46 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
16:46 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaways.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:53 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaways.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
16:53 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaways.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:03 -!- llllllllll [~lllllllll@6d482698.ftth.concepts.nl] has quit []
17:06 < rusty> amiller: I'm enjoying your Research Perspectives paper.  Nicely done!
17:06 < amiller> ty rusty
17:11 -!- DougieBot5000 [~DougieBot@unaffiliated/dougiebot5000] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:21 -!- helo [~helo@unaffiliated/helo] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
17:22 -!- helo [~helo@unaffiliated/helo] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:25 -!- kmels [~kmels@186.151.61.56] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
17:27 -!- helo [~helo@unaffiliated/helo] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
17:34 -!- helo [~helo@unaffiliated/helo] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:34 -!- p15_ [~p15@111.193.164.105] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:36 < rusty> amiller: surprised you didn't mention the downsides of merge mining; ISTR some paper bringing up that it lowers the cost of a goldfinger attack (was Elgius vs CoiledCoin merge mined?)
17:36 -!- p15 [~p15@123.118.93.56] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
17:37 < amiller> hm, we mentioned the coiledcoin story in a footnote, and didn't say anything about the downside of merge mining, thats a good point
17:40 -!- hashtagg_ [~hashtag@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:40 < rusty> amiller: yes, I followed the coiledcoin reference with some interest, since I'd not heard that before.  Thanks!
17:41 < amiller> oh, yeah i see what you meant, yes the coiledcoin vs eligius is a perfect illustration of that so it shouldn't be hard to make that point
17:43 < rusty> amiller: you repeat the 7tps number, but not sure that's accurate.  Eyeballing charts gives around ~700 transactions in a ~1/3MB block, implying 2100 transactions in 1MB -> 3.5 TPS.
17:43 -!- hashtag [~hashtag@CPE-69-23-213-3.wi.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
17:47 -!- belcher [~belcher-s@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
17:50 -!- OneNomos [~OneNomos@pool-71-163-227-3.washdc.east.verizon.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
17:52 < rusty> amiller: I would verify that properly, but I was stupid enough to choose btrfs for my test system's root fs, and now of course it won't boot.
17:57 < rusty> amiller: [98] was genuinely chuckle-worthy.
18:00 < justanotheruser> amiller: even worse, I don't think the pool was used
18:00 < amiller> ?
18:01 < justanotheruser> IIRC, it was just the hardware he owned
18:01 -!- Logicwax [~Logicwax@c-50-161-23-192.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:01 < amiller> oh
18:01 < amiller> well, that seems more fair in a way
18:01 < justanotheruser> It also demonstrates even more strongly the downside of merged mining since only a subset of eligius was needed
18:02 -!- zwischenzug [~zwischenz@pool-108-51-197-41.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:07 -!- dc17523be3 [~unknown@193.138.219.233] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
18:12 -!- TheSeven [~quassel@rockbox/developer/TheSeven] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
18:13 -!- dc17523be3 [unknown@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-cnineywogihwfrip] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:16 -!- zooko` [~user@97-122-248-7.hlrn.qwest.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:18 -!- zooko [~user@c-75-70-204-109.hsd1.co.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
18:19 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaways.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
18:19 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:21 < rusty> amiller: typo in Appendix X.  "ADS  protocols  (e.g.,  Merkle  trees)  a protocols  allowing  a  verifier  ".   s/ a / are /.
18:25 -!- bsm117532 [~bsm117532@static-108-21-236-13.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
18:25 -!- bsm117532 [~bsm117532@static-108-21-236-13.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:27 -!- Dr-G3 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaways.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:27 -!- SubCreative [~SubCreati@c-76-121-19-166.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:27 -!- SubCreative [~SubCreati@c-76-121-19-166.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has quit [Changing host]
18:27 -!- SubCreative [~SubCreati@unaffiliated/cannacoin] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:30 -!- d1ggy [~d1ggy@dslc-082-082-156-003.pools.arcor-ip.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
18:30 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
18:30 -!- Pan0ram1x [~Pan0ram1x@095-096-084-122.static.chello.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
18:36 -!- Pan0ram1x [~Pan0ram1x@095-096-084-122.static.chello.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:39 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@gtng-d9ba10de.pool.mediaways.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:39 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@gtng-d9ba10de.pool.mediaways.net] has quit [Changing host]
18:39 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@unaffiliated/dr-g] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:41 < zooko`> Hi rusty! Nice to see you here.
18:41 -!- zooko` is now known as zooko
18:42 < zooko> I enjoyed the LWN article about your coin.
18:42 -!- Dr-G3 [~Dr-G@gtng-4d08a1a5.pool.mediaways.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
18:42 < rusty> zooko: thanks.... it's kind of fun to give a talk on all the ways gmaxwell is smarter than me :)
18:42 < zooko> :-)
18:43 < zooko> Sounds like a fun topic. :-)
18:46 -!- blerker [d1286013@gateway/web/freenode/ip.209.40.96.19] has quit [Quit: Page closed]
18:46 -!- Dizzle [~Dizzle@cpe-72-182-36-12.austin.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:47 -!- hearn [~mike@199-188-193-172.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
18:56 -!- xenog [~xeno@46.7.118.40] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
18:58 -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:59 -!- fanquake_ [~anonymous@unaffiliated/fanquake] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:00 -!- luny` [~luny@unaffiliated/luny] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:01 -!- fanquake [~anonymous@unaffiliated/fanquake] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
19:01 -!- fanquake_ is now known as fanquake
19:02 -!- moa [~moa@opentransactions/dev/moa] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
19:03 -!- luny [~luny@unaffiliated/luny] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
19:14 -!- brisque [~brisque@unaffiliated/brisque] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:21 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@unaffiliated/dr-g] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
19:21 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@gtng-d9ba10de.pool.mediaways.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:21 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@gtng-d9ba10de.pool.mediaways.net] has quit [Changing host]
19:21 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@unaffiliated/dr-g] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:26 < amiller> cool https://lwn.net/Articles/630805/ i hadnt seen it: Pettycoin and sidechaining
19:28 -!- devrandom [~devrandom@unaffiliated/niftyzero1] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
19:28 < amiller> hahahaha these slides
19:29 -!- devrandom [~devrandom@unaffiliated/niftyzero1] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:32 -!- bsm117532 [~bsm117532@static-108-21-236-13.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
19:43 -!- shesek [~shesek@77.127.13.193] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
19:44 -!- shesek [~shesek@87.68.72.193.cable.012.net.il] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:46 -!- dgenr8 [~dgenr8@unaffiliated/dgenr8] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
19:46 -!- dgenr8 [~dgenr8@unaffiliated/dgenr8] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:50 -!- shesek [~shesek@87.68.72.193.cable.012.net.il] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
19:50 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@home-tomis2.rdsct.ro] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
19:52 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@home-tomis2.rdsct.ro] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:54 < jcorgan> wait...just read on the Ethereum blog: "So one of the major things that needed sorting for the next release is the proof-of-work algorithm that we’ll use."  Is this thing a forever moving target?
19:55 < kanzure> maybe it's a typo :-)
19:56 < justanotheruser> man, it was supposed to be released three months ago and they still don't have a pow
19:57 < jcorgan> to be fair the blog entry said they release Proof-of-Concept VII and VIII
19:57 < jcorgan> released*
19:58 < rusty> amiller: recommend the video, actually: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qq2EvH4eGLk .
19:59 < kanzure> .title
19:59 < yoleaux> Pettycoin: Towards 1.0 - YouTube
19:59 -!- NewLiberty [~NewLibert@2602:304:cff8:1580:443c:ddbe:5bf5:b260] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
19:59 < amiller> jcorgan, it's a constantly moving target but it's been "basically" settled for at least a couple months now..
20:00 < justanotheruser> the great thing about crypto proof of concepts is "working" doesn't mean anything
20:00 < amiller> justanotheruser, yeah.... the only proof is a *proof* (and that isn't a proof either)
20:01 < justanotheruser> my GPG proof of concept writes random letters after messages and accepts all messages as correctly signed
20:01 < jcorgan> it's probably off-topic here.  i'm just sort of mystified by their dev process.  if it were a commercial dev effort under sane engineering mgmt it would have been scrapped months ago i think.
20:02 < kanzure> i have been wondering about plausible "shutdown" scenarios and how they should handle that in an elegant way
20:02 < justanotheruser> shutdown?
20:02 < kanzure> perhaps if they decided they don't have anything, they should simply start contributing to bitcoin more directly?
20:02 < kanzure> yeah, i mean if they didn't want to keep all their crazy promises- what are the things they could do and still save face?
20:03 < jcorgan> i long ago stopped crying over how much excess energy goes into altcoins and spirals down the drain
20:03 < justanotheruser> kanzure: they will release a half-finished program
20:03 < justanotheruser> I wonder what their burn rate is
20:06 < jcorgan> the blog kind of reads like a high-school programming club
20:07 -!- hearn [~mike@c-67-180-209-140.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:08 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@unaffiliated/dr-g] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
20:09 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@gtng-d9ba10de.pool.mediaways.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:09 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@gtng-d9ba10de.pool.mediaways.net] has quit [Changing host]
20:09 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@unaffiliated/dr-g] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:11 < kanzure> this is a fun query: site:math.stackexchange.com intitle:"intuitive explanation"
20:15 -!- prodatalab [~prodatala@2602:306:247d:4109:2882:9f84:8623:2f03] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:23 < justanotheruser>  /win 21
20:23 -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
20:25 -!- Vote-4-Luke [~Notabot@cpe-184-56-226-50.neo.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:27 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@unaffiliated/dr-g] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
20:28 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@gtng-d9ba10de.pool.mediaways.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:28 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@gtng-d9ba10de.pool.mediaways.net] has quit [Changing host]
20:28 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@unaffiliated/dr-g] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:30 -!- StephenM347 [~stephenm3@static-64-223-246-218.port.east.myfairpoint.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:34 -!- Vote-4-Luke [~Notabot@cpe-184-56-226-50.neo.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: Viva Butcoin!]
20:35 -!- Burrito [~Burrito@unaffiliated/burrito] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
20:40 -!- ceedz [~eric@187.139.146.65] has quit [Quit: ceedz]
20:43 -!- zooko` [~user@c-75-70-204-109.hsd1.co.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:45 -!- jps [~Jud@cpe-74-72-116-143.nyc.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: jps]
20:45 -!- orik [~orik@50-46-132-219.evrt.wa.frontiernet.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
20:46 -!- HaltingState [~HaltingSt@unaffiliated/haltingstate] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
20:46 -!- zooko [~user@97-122-248-7.hlrn.qwest.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
20:54 -!- skittylx [~skittylx@ks203868.kimsufi.com] has quit [Quit: Bye]
21:05 -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@home-tomis2.rdsct.ro] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
21:05 -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:14 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@unaffiliated/dr-g] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
21:14 -!- p15_ [~p15@111.193.164.105] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
21:15 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@gtng-d9ba10de.pool.mediaWays.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:15 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@gtng-d9ba10de.pool.mediaWays.net] has quit [Changing host]
21:15 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@unaffiliated/dr-g] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:15 -!- p15 [~p15@89.248.174.54] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:24 < maaku> rusty: the "approximately 7tps" number is assuming the absolutely smallest transaction possible
21:24 -!- coiner [~linker@115.79.55.177] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:24 < maaku> obviously real transactions can be arbitrarily larger...
21:25 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@unaffiliated/dr-g] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
21:25 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@gtng-d9ba10de.pool.mediaways.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:25 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@gtng-d9ba10de.pool.mediaways.net] has quit [Changing host]
21:25 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@unaffiliated/dr-g] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:25 < StephenM347> And it also assumes 1MB blocks, but I think even larger blocks tend to be around 750 kb
21:26 < StephenM347> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/main.h#L51
21:33 -!- Dizzle [~Dizzle@cpe-72-182-36-12.austin.res.rr.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
21:44 -!- bramc [~bram@99-75-88-206.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
21:50 -!- shesek [~shesek@77.127.158.156] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:56 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@ip1f1171b4.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:00 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@ip1f1171b4.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
22:02 -!- StephenM347 [~stephenm3@static-64-223-246-218.port.east.myfairpoint.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
22:02 -!- p15_ [~p15@89.248.174.54] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:03 -!- p15 [~p15@89.248.174.54] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
22:07 < adam3us1> rusty: did you see this? http://lightning.network/lightning-network.pdf
22:08 < rusty> adam3us1: is on my reading list.... you just bumped it up :)
22:08 -!- bramc [~bram@99-75-88-206.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:08 -!- fanquake [~anonymous@unaffiliated/fanquake] has quit [Quit: fanquake]
22:09 < rusty> adam3us1: was there more than just the slides anywhere?
22:10  * rusty finds draft whitepaper...
22:10 < adam3us1> rusty: joseph gave a presentation at the sf bitcoin meetup, i think the video should go online within a few weeks.  yes that too
22:12 < bramc> There's a draft paper but I have yet to read it and don't know if it's okay to redistribute
22:16 < smooth> http://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper-DRAFT-0.5.pdf
22:17 < smooth> both are linked from http://lightning.network
22:18 -!- zooko` [~user@c-75-70-204-109.hsd1.co.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
22:18 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@2a02:8108:73f:f6e4:e23f:49ff:fe47:9364] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:24 -!- Quanttek [~quassel@2a02:8108:73f:f6e4:e23f:49ff:fe47:9364] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
22:24 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@79-98-72-216.sys-data.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:24 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@79-98-72-216.sys-data.com] has quit [Changing host]
22:24 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:25 -!- NewLiberty [~NewLibert@2602:304:cff8:1580:bce8:b1b7:f693:52ab] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:32 -!- CodeShark [~textual@cpe-76-167-237-202.san.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com]
22:32 -!- CodeShark [~textual@cpe-76-167-237-202.san.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:33 -!- orik [~orik@50-46-132-219.evrt.wa.frontiernet.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
22:51 -!- Dr-G2 [~Dr-G@gtng-d9ba10de.pool.mediaways.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:51 -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@unaffiliated/dr-g] has quit [Disconnected by services]
22:54 -!- Mably [~Mably@unaffiliated/mably] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:54 -!- hearn [~mike@c-67-180-209-140.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
22:57 -!- zwischenzug [~zwischenz@pool-108-51-197-41.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
23:06 -!- hktud0 [wq@unaffiliated/fluffybunny] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
23:07 -!- hktud0 [wq@unaffiliated/fluffybunny] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:12 -!- Mably [~Mably@unaffiliated/mably] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
23:16 -!- droark [~droark@209-6-53-207.c3-0.smr-ubr1.sbo-smr.ma.cable.rcn.com] has quit [Quit: ZZZzzz…]
23:19 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
23:37 -!- p15 [~p15@198.50.160.97.static-ca.cryptolayer.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:38 -!- p15_ [~p15@89.248.174.54] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
23:38 < fluffypony> justanotheruser: they'll release a half-finished program and then layer complexity on top of it to "fix" it...till they run out of money
23:43 < Taek> and then they'll raise $40m more b/c people believe in them
23:44 < justanotheruser> No way they'll raise another 40m
23:44 < justanotheruser> the might get arrested for an illegal IPO before then
23:45 < fluffypony> lol
23:47 -!- lclc [~lucas@unaffiliated/lclc] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:48 -!- DougieBot5000 [~DougieBot@unaffiliated/dougiebot5000] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
23:53 -!- coryfields [~quassel@2001:4802:7800:1:6fc4:c486:ff20:1fa] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
--- Log closed Tue Mar 03 00:00:10 2015