--- Log opened Sat May 14 00:00:14 2016
00:05 -!- CrazyTruthYakDDS [uid67551@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-fycpmovvtvisdghz] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:05 -!- arowser [~quassel@106.120.101.38] has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
00:06 -!- thekrynn_ [~thekrynn@pool-74-101-120-91.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:06 -!- arowser [~quassel@106.120.101.38] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:06 < thekrynn_> was wondering if someone could help me with a Q about ASIC devices
00:06 < Taek> thekrynn_: better to just ask the question
00:07 < thekrynn_> From what I understand about ASIC, you can use it to generate SHA256d (people say that it's useless for anything besides mining)
00:07 < thekrynn_> what im wondering is... if i had an actual use to do so, is there an ASIC device that would allow me to take a preexisting list of numbers and sha256d them to a file?
00:08 < thekrynn_> or to stdout or to a program... etc...
00:08 < Taek> You can write an ASIC to do any computation you want
00:08 < Taek> the thing about an ASIC is that it only does *one* type of computation
00:08 < thekrynn_> basically im trying to find a different way to hash a list of input data
00:08 < thekrynn_> instead of doing it via CPU (which is very computationally heavy)
00:09 < thekrynn_> type of hash... doesnt matter to me
00:09 < thekrynn_> as long as it's considered random
00:09 < Taek> ASICs are extremely expensive to manufacture, I doubt that's the solution you want
00:09 < Taek> for hashing, GPUs are often faster than CPUs by a factor of 10-100
00:09 < thekrynn_> so i couldnt repurpose exists ASIC's to do that?
00:09 < Taek> also, blake2 is very fast
00:10 < thekrynn_> ive found it faster, although CUDA seems to be the bottleneck
00:10 < Taek> no, you can't repurpose existing ASICs
00:10 < Taek> the inability to repurpose them is what makes them ASICs :P
00:10 < thekrynn_> im waiting on the pascal series
00:10 < thekrynn_> so ASIC refers to the workflow more so than the computation
00:11 < thekrynn_> a lot of forms ive been looking through seem to be misinformed about that
00:11 < Taek> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Application-specific_integrated_circuit
00:11 < thekrynn_> ie.. ive read 100s of pages that say "oh if you want to do sha256d, yeah.. you can use them all day long"
00:11 < thekrynn_> when talking about bitcoin usbs
00:13 < Taek> well, if your data looks sufficiently like a Bitcoin header, or if the ASIC is general enough to take arbitrarily sized input, then you might be able to reuse the ASIC
00:13 < thekrynn_> my workflow is basically:
00:13 < thekrynn_> integer with padding -> hash of any type >= 32char
00:13 < Taek> a single integer?
00:14 < thekrynn_> yup... im basically doing this for billions of integers
00:14 < thekrynn_> and im doign them one by one
00:14 < Taek> then yes, you could probably get that to work with a Bitcoin miner, bitcoin headers are 80 bytes
00:14 -!- priidu [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:14 < Taek> can I ask why you are hashing billions of integers?
00:14 < thekrynn_> data science
00:14 < Taek> more specifically?
00:15 < thekrynn_> set theory approximation
00:15 < thekrynn_> which has to do with hash byte ordering overlap
00:15 -!- kmels [~kmels@190.106.223.130] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
00:16 < thekrynn_> the very basics of it:
00:16 < thekrynn_> count estimation using hashmaps
00:16 < thekrynn_> http://highscalability.com/blog/2012/4/5/big-data-counting-how-to-count-a-billion-distinct-objects-us.html
00:17 < thekrynn_> GPU is definitly faster, but there's a per thread lock, so scaling it becomes difficult from a sheer PCIe quantity perspective
00:22 -!- ThomasV [~ThomasV@unaffiliated/thomasv] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
00:23 -!- Ylbam [uid99779@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-wqbhkjfpdrmxxgjh] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:25 < thekrynn_> wasn't sure if its possible to talk to these devices with custom written binaries just like mining binaries do it
00:29 -!- mountaingoat [~mountaing@unaffiliated/mountaingoat] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
00:33 -!- CubicEarth [~cubiceart@2601:184:4300:597f:3963:df50:4cbe:2713] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
00:33 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:38 -!- blackwraith [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:38 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:40 -!- priidu [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
00:42 -!- mountaingoat [~mountaing@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/mountaingoat] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:43 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
00:47 < Taek> bsm1175321: CodeShark: anyone else interested in Braids: http://blog.sia.tech/2016/05/14/towards-a-sub-second-block-size/
00:56 -!- Tiraspol [~Tiraspol3@unaffiliated/tiraspol] has quit []
00:58 -!- ThomasV [~ThomasV@unaffiliated/thomasv] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
00:58 -!- raedah1 [~raedah3@172.58.32.194] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:01 -!- raedah [~raedah3@172.56.39.105] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
01:03 -!- Tiraspol [~Tiraspol3@unaffiliated/tiraspol] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:04 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:13 -!- PaulCapestany [~PaulCapes@204.28.124.82] has quit [Quit: .]
01:13 -!- PaulCapestany [~PaulCapes@204.28.124.82] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:15 -!- ThomasV [~ThomasV@unaffiliated/thomasv] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
01:36 -!- sausage_factory [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:38 -!- blackwraith [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
01:46 -!- blackwraith [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
01:48 -!- sausage_factory [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
02:05 -!- nuke_ [~nuke@176.92.91.156] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:06 -!- dEBRUYNE [~dEBRUYNE@unaffiliated/debruyne] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:06 -!- nuke1989 [~nuke@178-139-213.dynamic.cyta.gr] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
02:08 -!- blockzombie [~blockzomb@ppp121-44-8-55.lns20.syd4.internode.on.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:14 -!- nabu [~nabu@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/nabu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:19 -!- nabu [~nabu@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/nabu] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
02:21 -!- nabu [~nabu@184.7.34.95.customer.cdi.no] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:22 -!- sausage_factory [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:24 -!- blackwraith [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
02:26 -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Quit: :)]
02:30 -!- MaxSan_ [~one@78.129.153.58] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:31 -!- blockzombie [~blockzomb@ppp121-44-8-55.lns20.syd4.internode.on.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
02:31 -!- blockzombie [~blockzomb@ppp121-44-8-55.lns20.syd4.internode.on.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:37 -!- blockzombie [~blockzomb@ppp121-44-8-55.lns20.syd4.internode.on.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
02:39 -!- alferz [~alferz@unaffiliated/alfer] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
02:40 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:42 -!- blockzombie [~blockzomb@ppp121-44-8-55.lns20.syd4.internode.on.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:45 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
02:45 -!- sausage_factory [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
02:46 -!- alferz [~alferz@unaffiliated/alfer] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:50 -!- JHistone [~JHistone@cpc7-sgyl35-2-0-cust123.18-2.cable.virginm.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:55 -!- MaxSan_1 [~one@46.19.137.116] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
02:55 -!- nabu [~nabu@184.7.34.95.customer.cdi.no] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
02:56 -!- MaxSan_ [~one@78.129.153.58] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
02:56 -!- alferz [~alferz@unaffiliated/alfer] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
02:57 -!- nabu [~nabu@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/nabu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:00 -!- alferz [~alferz@unaffiliated/alfer] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:04 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
03:06 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:10 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
03:12 -!- xsdfdfsa [~x@unaffiliated/sdfgsdfg] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
03:29 -!- supasonic [~supasonic@172-11-188-117.lightspeed.rcsntx.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
03:49 -!- blockzombie [~blockzomb@ppp121-44-8-55.lns20.syd4.internode.on.net] has quit []
03:51 -!- mountaingoat [~mountaing@gateway/vpn/privateinternetaccess/mountaingoat] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
04:00 -!- ghtdak [~ghtdak@unaffiliated/ghtdak] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
04:01 -!- ghtdak [~ghtdak@unaffiliated/ghtdak] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:09 -!- mountaingoat [~mountaing@unaffiliated/mountaingoat] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:21 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
04:23 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:38 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
04:38 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has quit [Client Quit]
05:00 -!- HostFat [~HostFat@2-235-224-2.ip230.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:11 -!- CrazyTruthYakDDS [uid67551@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-fycpmovvtvisdghz] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
05:11 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:12 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Client Quit]
05:13 -!- dEBRUYNE [~dEBRUYNE@unaffiliated/debruyne] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
05:19 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:37 -!- bliljerk_ [~bliljerk1@c-71-60-0-241.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
05:37 -!- bliljerk101 [~bliljerk1@c-71-60-0-241.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:38 -!- bliljerk101 [~bliljerk1@c-71-60-0-241.hsd1.pa.comcast.net] has quit [Client Quit]
05:45 -!- nuke_ is now known as nuke1989
05:45 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
05:51 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:54 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@cpe-174-97-254-80.ma.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:54 -!- HostFat [~HostFat@2-235-224-2.ip230.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
05:56 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:57 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
05:58 -!- dEBRUYNE [~dEBRUYNE@unaffiliated/debruyne] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:01 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
06:02 -!- raedah1 is now known as raedah
06:04 -!- belcher [~user@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:05 -!- raedah [~raedah3@172.58.32.194] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
06:05 -!- r0ach [~r0ach@107-217-214-192.lightspeed.jcvlfl.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
06:05 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
06:06 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:07 -!- raedah [~raedah3@172.58.32.194] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:12 -!- hashtagg [~hashtagg_@cpe-174-97-254-80.ma.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:13 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
06:14 -!- alpalpalp [~allen@104-54-235-28.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:14 -!- oneeman [~oneeman@ip189-225-64-186.ct.co.cr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:14 -!- raedah [~raedah3@172.58.32.194] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
06:14 -!- raedah [~raedah3@172.58.32.194] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:15 -!- raedah [~raedah3@172.58.32.194] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
06:15 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@cpe-174-97-254-80.ma.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
06:15 -!- raedah [~raedah3@172.58.32.194] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:17 -!- xsdfdfsa [~x@unaffiliated/sdfgsdfg] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
06:18 -!- JHistone [~JHistone@cpc7-sgyl35-2-0-cust123.18-2.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
06:29 -!- r0ach [~r0ach@107-217-214-192.lightspeed.jcvlfl.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
06:46 -!- dEBRUYNE [~dEBRUYNE@unaffiliated/debruyne] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
06:47 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-122-14-46-190.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
06:55 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
06:58 -!- CubicEarth [~cubiceart@2601:184:4300:597f:690c:67d6:f1fc:39a6] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:07 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-122-14-46-190.cm.vtr.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:09 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@cpe-174-97-254-80.ma.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:11 -!- hashtagg [~hashtagg_@cpe-174-97-254-80.ma.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
07:12 -!- Burrito [~Burrito@unaffiliated/burrito] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:16 -!- CubicEarth [~cubiceart@2601:184:4300:597f:690c:67d6:f1fc:39a6] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
07:22 -!- whiteunicorn___ [uid139385@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-shqicdtlhsgzgmmq] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:23 -!- eragmus [sid136308@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-sciirkqweebnkzbp] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
07:23 -!- mappum [sid43795@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-xgizlxvipwxgigtl] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
07:24 -!- aspect_ [uid151486@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-pqpwexmeotfluzpl] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
07:24 -!- aspect_ [uid151486@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-qyzibjqhreufknmv] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:25 -!- whiteunicorn__ [uid139385@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-swaypiardxewrfkf] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
07:25 -!- CubicEarth [~cubiceart@2601:184:4300:597f:157c:d852:6692:22fa] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:25 -!- eragmus [sid136308@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-qmlwrpedwymettnp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:25 -!- mappum [sid43795@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-bjylxkroweemtwur] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:38 -!- Noldorin [~noldorin@unaffiliated/noldorin] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:38 -!- CubicEarth [~cubiceart@2601:184:4300:597f:157c:d852:6692:22fa] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
07:38 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:41 -!- nanotube [~nanotube@unaffiliated/nanotube] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
07:42 -!- nuke1989 [~nuke@176.92.91.156] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
07:42 -!- nuke1989 [~nuke@176.92.91.156] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:48 -!- roconnor [~roconnor@host-45-58-252-161.dyn.295.ca] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:56 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
07:57 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:09 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:10 < bsm1175321> Taek: i'll put my braids code on github today, so you can make prettier diagrams.  ;-)
08:10 < bsm1175321> I've gone back and forth on exactly how a rewards algorithm should work, it would be good to discuss, and simulate...
08:11 -!- MaxSan_ [~one@h88-150-240-8.host.redstation.co.uk] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:11 < nsh> oO
08:11 -!- MaxSan_1 [~one@46.19.137.116] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
08:12 < nsh> Taek, whose blog is that at sia?
08:12 < bsm1175321> It's his. ;-)
08:13 < nsh> ah, grand :)
08:13 -!- waxwing [~waxwing@62.205.214.125] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
08:13 -!- roconnor_ [~roconnor@host-45-58-252-161.dyn.295.ca] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:14 -!- waxwing [~waxwing@62.205.214.125] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:17 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
08:25 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
08:27 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:27 -!- Guest43042 [~t800@178.114.102.249.wireless.dyn.drei.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
08:32 -!- t800 [~t800@77.116.54.10.wireless.dyn.drei.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:33 -!- t800 is now known as Guest87140
08:33 -!- roconnor_ [~roconnor@host-45-58-252-161.dyn.295.ca] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
08:37 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
08:42 < Taek> bsm1175321: my rewards strategy targeted fairness as much as possible. All miners should get the same winnings per hashrate
08:43 < c0rw1n> sooo "put all the miners in the same pool, problem solved" ?
08:43 -!- johnwhitton [~johnwhitt@c-71-202-223-50.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:01 < Taek> c0rw1n: did you read the post? It makes pooling almost unnecessary.
09:02 < c0rw1n> haven't read no :-/ but then i'm mostly lurking here for the insightainment (which is better than drugs) because i'm totally unqualified to actually contribute
09:05 -!- CubicEarth [~cubiceart@c-73-68-232-79.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:07 -!- dEBRUYNE [~dEBRUYNE@unaffiliated/debruyne] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:12 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
09:13 -!- arowser [~quassel@106.120.101.38] has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
09:13 -!- arowser [~quassel@106.120.101.38] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:15 -!- CubicEarth [~cubiceart@c-73-68-232-79.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
09:15 < CodeShark> Taek: thanks for the post - it's an improvement over the napkin drawings ;)
09:17 -!- CubicEar_ [~cubiceart@c-73-68-232-79.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:17 -!- CubicEar_ [~cubiceart@c-73-68-232-79.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
09:18 -!- CubicEarth [~cubiceart@c-73-68-232-79.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:22 -!- CubicEarth [~cubiceart@c-73-68-232-79.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
09:23 -!- CubicEarth [~cubiceart@c-73-68-232-79.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:24 -!- CubicEarth [~cubiceart@c-73-68-232-79.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
09:25 -!- CubicEarth [~cubiceart@c-73-68-232-79.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:26 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
09:26 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has quit [Quit: laurentmt]
09:34 -!- belcher [~user@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
09:39 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:39 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:46 -!- supasonic [~supasonic@172-11-188-117.lightspeed.rcsntx.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:46 -!- CubicEarth [~cubiceart@c-73-68-232-79.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit []
09:48 -!- fn2187__ [~fn2187@159.203.249.232] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
09:49 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
09:50 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
09:54 -!- supasonic [~supasonic@172-11-188-117.lightspeed.rcsntx.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
09:56 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
10:02 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:02 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
10:07 -!- Aranjedeath [~Aranjedea@unaffiliated/aranjedeath] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:08 -!- Aranjedeath [~Aranjedea@unaffiliated/aranjedeath] has quit [Client Quit]
10:09 -!- c0rw1n_ [~c0rw1n@124.213-241-81.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:14 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:21 -!- Aranjedeath [~Aranjedea@unaffiliated/aranjedeath] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:23 -!- jtimon [~quassel@65.28.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:26 -!- hdbuck [~hdbuck@unaffiliated/hdbuck] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:29 -!- midnightmagic [~midnightm@unaffiliated/midnightmagic] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
10:30 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
10:35 -!- hashtagg [~hashtagg_@cpe-174-97-254-80.ma.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:36 -!- midnightmagic [~midnightm@unaffiliated/midnightmagic] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:38 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@cpe-174-97-254-80.ma.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
10:44 < bsm1175321> Taek: fairness, defined as constant reward/hashrate is easy to achieve, but I've been worrying also about delayed blocks and what to do about them.
10:44 < bsm1175321> In bitcoin they cause the selfish mining problem -- which doesn't occur if miners can't write their own coinbase, eliminating that race.
10:46 < bsm1175321> With braids, delayed blocks cause cohort size to increase, which if taken to far is a denial-of-service, because creating a cohort is O(n^2), and the size of the cohort grows exponentially fast with decreasing block/bead time.
10:47 -!- hdbuck [~hdbuck@unaffiliated/hdbuck] has quit [Quit: hdbuck]
10:47 -!- hdbuck [~hdbuck@unaffiliated/hdbuck] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:47 < bsm1175321> Long ago I proposed a reward weighting which punishes slow blocks, but this also creates an incentive to centralize, and a dis-incentive to run over an anonymizing network e.g. Tor/I2P.
10:49 -!- alpalpalp [~allen@104-54-235-28.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
10:49 < bsm1175321> So right now I'm thinking to simply have a constant reward per bead, and add a hard cutoff for *very* late beads (they would be discarded).
10:49 -!- alpalp [~allen@104-54-235-28.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:49 -!- alpalp [~allen@104-54-235-28.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Changing host]
10:49 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:53 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
10:55 -!- priidu [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:57 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
10:59 -!- Aranjedeath [~Aranjedea@unaffiliated/aranjedeath] has quit [Quit: Three sheets to the wind]
11:07 -!- belcher [~user@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:10 -!- supasonic [~supasonic@172-11-188-117.lightspeed.rcsntx.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:12 < bsm1175321> Taek: commenting is disabled on your blog.  Would you like feedback here?
11:13 -!- c0rw1n_ [~c0rw1n@124.213-241-81.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
11:15 -!- Samdney [~Samdney@dyn-ant666999.hawo.ipv6.uni-erlangen.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:19 -!- oneeman [~oneeman@ip189-225-64-186.ct.co.cr] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
11:26 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
11:27 -!- pro [~pro@unaffiliated/pro] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:31 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:34 -!- mdavid613 [~Adium@cpe-172-251-161-231.socal.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:35 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
11:38 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:40 < bsm1175321> It strikes me that (in bitcoin) since miners report time in their blocks, and that time is used in the retarget calculation, there's an incentive for miners to mis-report the time so as to increase the coins allocated per unit real-time.
11:41 < bsm1175321> In bitcoin blocks can mis-report time by up to 2 hours, and with a retarget window of 2 weeks, miners could systematically report times 2-hours later than actual, to cause an increase in coin allocation of 0.6% per retarget interval.
11:42 < bsm1175321> Pursuing such a strategy results in an 85% APY...what's to stop miners from doing this, today?
11:42 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
11:42 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:46 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@cpe-174-97-254-80.ma.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
11:46 -!- hashtagg [~hashtagg_@cpe-174-97-254-80.ma.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
11:50 < Taek> bsm1175321: feedback here is good. There's a way for me to enable comments but I forget how
11:51 < Taek> I have an unforgiving cutoff for late blocks, more than ~10 minutes late and you get no reward. If you can't propagate your block in 10 minutes you simply can't mine.
11:52 < Taek> Today, miners could misreport time to keep the difficulty low, but full nodes will reject blocks that are too far into the future.
11:53 < Taek> I don't like the way that Bitcoin depends on time but don't have a better solution, I've thought about it quite a bit though
11:57 < Taek> The increased revenue is pretty small compared to the sacrifice of having a chain that most nodes won't accept until X hours later. Every 25btc of income requires you to push the chain permanently forward by 10 minutes
12:03 < bsm1175321> Taek: full nodes would only reject blocks that are more than 2 hours late.  So the strategy is to misreport time to be *close* to but less than 2 hours late.  I don't think any sacrifice is required.
12:03 -!- blackwraith [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:03 < katu> bsm1175321: that would be so if the block time median lived in vacuum, but afaik block time is compared to external time
12:03 < c0rw1n> hm, but wouldn't other miners be likely to find blocks within those 2hrs? or is that counted in already and i'm being an idiot again
12:04 < katu> so its not possible to induce time drift, unless you move system clocks on majority of nodes too
12:04 < bsm1175321> katu: One miner couldn't do it alone, but if all miners decided to move their clocks forward by 2 hours, they could increase the coin allocation by 85%/year.
12:05 < bsm1175321> Taek: I put some comments to your blog post here: http://0bin.net/paste/926g44RM6673mlyl#N2OX0WCSPcbVcKRb1u56Zk0m2gNlZsQHVgcQR8PEahT
12:05 -!- priidu [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
12:05 < katu> bsm1175321: no, once they step over the 2 hours, majority of network would simply reject the blocks, permanently.
12:05 < katu> bsm1175321: this is form of secnodary, online consensus
12:05 < katu> bsm1175321: of course for offline consensus what you say is true, but the blocks would not propagate
12:06 < katu> so indeed if you mount 51% attack, go ahead and drift time
12:06 < katu> but you can do better if you can do 51% :)
12:06 < bsm1175321> katu: aha, gotcha, interesting.
12:06 < bsm1175321> I wouldn't want to play that game near the 2 hour line...The forkmageddon cometh...
12:07 < katu> bsm1175321: indeed, the more your clock is adrift, the higher orphan rate
12:07 < katu> (from a non-colluding miner POV)
12:08 < dEBRUYNE> bsm117531: The Monero Research Lab (MRL) has a working paper on this subject as well -> https://github.com/monero-project/research-lab/blob/60a63a3b5d3f50afd504a76193925f0a132b7bb4/publications/MRL-0006%20-%20Difficulty%20Adjustment%20Algorithms%20in%20Cryptocurrency%20Protocols/main.tex
12:08 < pigeons> best is to timewarp
12:08 < dEBRUYNE> Abstract: As of this writing, the algorithm employed for difficulty adjustment in the
12:08 < dEBRUYNE> CryptoNote reference code is known by the Monero Research Lab to be flawed.
12:08 < dEBRUYNE> We describe and illustrate the nature of the flaw and recommend a solution. By
12:08 < dEBRUYNE> dishonestly reporting timestamps, attackers can gain disproportionate control
12:08 < dEBRUYNE> over network difficulty. We verify this route of attack by auditing the CryptoNote
12:08 < dEBRUYNE> reference difficulty adjustment code, which, we reimplement in the Python
12:08 < dEBRUYNE> programming language. We use a stochastic model of blockchain growth to test
12:08 < dEBRUYNE> the CryptoNote reference difficulty formula against the more traditional Bitcoin
12:08 < dEBRUYNE> difficulty formula. This allows us to test our difficulty formula against various
12:08 < dEBRUYNE> hash rate scenarios.
12:08 < katu> bsm1175321: somewhat related to your concerns was a bug in bitcoind long time ago. a concerned miner effort could drive difficulty down by slightly drifting time
12:08 < katu> bsm1175321: afaik not even 51% was necessary
12:09 < katu> (i have no idea what exactly was the problem, some sort of block off by one in difficulty readjust)
12:09 < pigeons> it still exists
12:09 < pigeons> it was fixed in altcoins because they get exploited
12:10 < pigeons> because hash majority is obviously easier to obtain there
12:10 < bsm1175321> FYI, braids provide a new mechanism for difficulty retargeting: minimizing the cohort time.  It can get the block (cohort) time down around 1s, set by the inherent latency of the network.  (similar to Taek's blog post above)
12:10 < pigeons> https://github.com/litecoin-project/litecoin/commit/b1be77210970a6ceb3680412cc3d2f0dd4ca8fb9
12:11 < katu> pigeons: thanks :)
12:12 < katu> pigeons: ah, so one needs 51% for all 2016 blocks
12:12 < pigeons> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=43692.msg521772#msg521772
12:13 < katu> got confused by altcoins with short readjust where getting "51%" by chance is much more likely
12:13 < bsm1175321> dEBRUYNE: If like me you're too lazy to check out the monero repo and latex that paper yourself, here you go: http://www.trollandtoad.com/p131769.html
12:19 < dEBRUYNE> bsm1175321: Sorry you can use this -> https://github.com/zcash/zcash/issues/147#issuecomment-203419047
12:20 < katu> dEBRUYNE: so much drama
12:20 < katu> KGW
12:20  * katu shivers
12:22 -!- damnesia [~damnesia@ptr-2hj4tbkpeet4ltmdlc3tgpl9z.ip6.access.telenet.be] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:22 -!- damnesia [~damnesia@ptr-2hj4tbkpeet4ltmdlc3tgpl9z.ip6.access.telenet.be] has quit [Changing host]
12:22 -!- damnesia [~damnesia@unaffiliated/damnesia] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:24 -!- mdavid613 [~Adium@cpe-172-251-161-231.socal.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
12:26 < Taek> katu: blocks that are more than 2 hours in the future are not rejected permanently, they are only rejected until they are no longer 2 hours in the future
12:26 -!- damnesia [~damnesia@unaffiliated/damnesia] has left #bitcoin-wizards []
12:27 < Taek> in the meantime, other miners could build a fork, but if the future-time fork is heavier, the future-time fork will eventually win, unless the current fork sufficiently close
12:27 < katu> Taek: i meant in context of online consensus (where you constantly race with rest of the network). in offline they indeed are eventually accepted.
12:28 < katu> Taek: yeah, but the future time still has to be 51% collusion. one interesting scenario would be indeed pools collectively doing this in a race to the bottom (as they compete for profitability)
12:29 < katu> if there weren't fears of backlash and crashing the price they might've done so already
12:29 < Taek> if the future fork is mining with say, 90% of the hashpower, there's little risk that it will lose. In fact, it's a good mechanism to double spend because blocks in the current fork will always be reorg'd once time catches up to the future fork
12:30 < katu> then again, i dont see why people worry so much about this, its a collusion like any other
12:30 < katu> if miners collude, the protocol is doomed in a lot of ways
12:31 < Taek> well, the effective throughput is kept at 1mb. Miners may be able to secure their winnings ahead of time, but they can't collect them any faster than they already could
12:31 < Taek> in that sense, there's not much to gain from the collusion here
12:33 -!- ThomasV [~ThomasV@unaffiliated/thomasv] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:33 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@cpe-174-97-254-80.ma.res.rr.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
12:37 < Taek> bsm1175321: with regards to point 1 in your comments, as soon as the double-spender releases the first block, people are going to start building on it. By the time they release the second block, there will be a lot of work burying the original block
12:37 < Taek> furthermore, per protocol rules, they have to release that second block within ~10 minutes otherwise it's going to have an illegal gap when it gets merged into the broader chain
12:38 < Taek> basically, you've only got a tight window in which you can double spend. After about 10 minutes, the chances of a successful double spend drop dramatically
12:38 < Taek> this is equivalent to waiting for 1 confirmation in Bitcoin
12:38 < Taek> *2 confirmations
12:40 < Taek> because the block rate is so much higher, the probability that an accidental reorg disrupts a 5MB confirmation is virtually zero, and the probability that a 49% hashrate attacker can execute a double spend on more than 6MB is also near-zero
12:40 < Taek> I haven't done the exact math but I'm guessing you start approaching cryptographic-grade probability after a block is confirmed by as little as 6MB
12:41 < Taek> (for anyone who didn't read, in the 'Jute' proposal height is measured by block size instead of by block count, and difficulty is set proportional to block size)
12:42 < Taek> For point 2, allowing conflicting blocks is required for fairness. If we disallow conflicting blocks, a miner with better network connection or better hashrate is going to be able to mine blocks strategically such that competing miners will end up mining losing conflicting blocks
12:43 < bsm1175321> Taek: Releasing blocks in such a manner causes them to be "parallel" with respect to the cohort structure (e.g. in the same cohort), so it's impossible to tell which came first, from graph structure alone.
12:43 < bsm1175321> I agree it's a tight window.
12:44 < Taek> how do you resolve having two parallel but conflicting blocks?
12:44 < bsm1175321> They define forks, as usual.
12:44 < Taek> how do you select a fork then?
12:44 < bsm1175321> By the usual highest-work rule.
12:45 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
12:45 < Taek> ok, so blocks aren't allowed to commit to cohorts with conflicts
12:46 < bsm1175321> If miners aren't making this selection, the number of forks explodes.  This is basically the miner's entire job.  (but see the "inclusive blockchain" idea of "direct simulation")
12:46 < Taek> but that does mean that you will have winners and losers
12:46 < Taek> well, having an exact ordering resolves this problem
12:46 < bsm1175321> Of course.  If you mine on a conflicting fork, you do lose.
12:47 < bsm1175321> This loss is basically a consequence of the speed of light, and non-synchronous nature of reality.  I don't think there's any way to "fix" it that can't be gamed.
12:47 < Taek> it's bad to lose, because if you have a slow network connection, you won't know if you are mining on a block which might be in conflict or not
12:47 < Taek> I think Jute effectively resolves this problem :)
12:47 < Taek> It's made possible with the strict ordering
12:48 < Taek> *exact ordering
12:48 < bsm1175321> I'm aware that's possible -- I've thought about it because if you want to run a network like Ethereum on such a structure, you're required to make a total ordering of all transactions, due to data dependency.
12:50 < bsm1175321> Because of the lack of external dependencies in bitcoin's script, it's trivial to determine the data dependency of its transactions, because it reduces to the dependency of its inputs.
12:50 < Taek> in Jute, there is great uncertainty about the utxo set for the recent 5MB of activity, if you haven't seen all the blocks you aren't sure what order things are going to be in, and therefore which double spends will be selected by the network
12:50 < bsm1175321> An interesting consequence of this is that a bitcoin-like script network can be faster than an Ethereum-like network by around a factor of 4.
12:50 < Taek> but, after the 5MB barrier, it's very unlikely that the set you know will be reorged
12:51 < Taek> effectively, Jute does not change the confirmation time that Bitcoin has, though it does increase the block rate
12:51 < bsm1175321> Taek: I think you need to more clearly define what the UTXO set is and how/when/where it gets defined, WRT the blocks.  Iota is making this mistake.  They effectively never have a UTXO set.
12:52 < Taek> ok, should be pretty easy
12:52 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:52 < bsm1175321> If you allow conflicting parents, your UTXO sets multiply...
12:53 < Taek> The utxo set is defined by the tip of the longest thread that you are aware of, but, the 'confirmed' utxo set is defined starting from the block 5MB backwards from that
12:53 < Taek> no, because after you order the parents, you can eliminate the conflicting transations
12:53 < Taek> so, you accept the transactions as a part of the chain, but not as a part of consensus
12:53 < bsm1175321> Each conflicting tx in each parent has to be in a different UTXO set.
12:53 < Taek> *losing internet
12:54 < Taek> (travelling)
12:54 < bsm1175321> Ok.  I'm gonna put my braids code up.  Obviously I'm too slow with this and people are interested... ;-)
12:55 < Taek> with regards to point #3, difficulty is also tied to block size. Miners are expected to make fake transactions if there are no real transactions to fill the void
12:55 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:56 < Taek> there's some room for network + validation optimization there obviously, perhaps a giant empty OP_RETURN would be allowed or something
12:56 -!- laurentmt [~Thunderbi@176.158.157.202] has quit [Client Quit]
12:56 < katu> bsm1175321: honestly, all the GHOST-like proposals i've seen ultimately lack the elegance of simplicity
12:56 -!- koshii [~w@c-68-58-151-30.hsd1.in.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
12:57 < katu> state machines which are only intuitively reasoned about, instead of simple graphs seem scarier to me
12:57 < bsm1175321> katu: I'm not a fan of GHOST, nor Ethereum's variant.  It seems extremely arbitrary.
12:58 < bsm1175321> Taek: I'm not a fan of saturating everyone's network link either... :-/
12:58 -!- koshii [~w@c-68-58-151-30.hsd1.in.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
12:58 < katu> bsm1175321: are you talking about https://scalingbitcoin.org/hongkong2015/presentations/DAY2/2_breaking_the_chain_1_mcelrath.pdf right?
13:00 < bsm1175321> katu: yes
13:00 < bsm1175321> There's an "On-Chain Scaling" virtual conference, that's the next time I'm going to talk about this...
13:00 < Taek> bsm1175321: you can optimize out the empty txns at the network layer. Though my current assumption is that there will be enough legit transactions to keep everyone saturated regardless.
13:00 < Taek> *following increased adoption
13:01 -!- raedah [~raedah3@172.58.32.194] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
13:01 < bsm1175321> Taek: then what's the point of actually creating blocks that saturate the bandwidth?  You could just give fixed rewards, independent of the block size instead, and it has the same effect as the optimal miner strategy in your proposal.
13:01 < Taek> If it's not clear, Jute does have a fixed reward/time setup. The difficulty adjustment does cause some variance, but it's not large
13:03 < Taek> Glad you asked, it's not yet explained in the post. The point of having variable block difficulties is to allow tiny miners to be able to solo-mine.
13:03 < Taek> At 5kb, you can find a block every day with a $2000 ASIC, which is a high enough frequency to allow solo-mining
13:04 < katu> Taek: if i get it right, in jute, small miners can gang up in a fork (with succession of low difficulty, but numerous blocks) and overpower powerful miner branch, right?
13:04 < Taek> on the other hand, because of things like CoinJoin and CT, you may want transaction much larger than 5kb
13:05 < Taek> katu: yeah, by merging eachothers chains, they effectively act as a pool without actually needing to be a pool
13:05 < Taek> and then as soon as the big miner releases its blocks, those blocks can be merged as well, without permission
13:06 < katu> Taek: they'd still need to gang up intelligently, to avoid orphans, ie there would have to be different bandwidth tiers. obviously the smaller miner you are, the more bandiwdth / lower latency you need
13:06 < Taek> A big miner with <50% hashrate is not going to be able to create a thread that outpaces the rest of the network, though the miner may be able to maintain short term leads due to latency advantages
13:06 -!- Aranjedeath [~Aranjedea@unaffiliated/aranjedeath] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:06 < bsm1175321> katu: There should be no orphans in such a setup.
13:06 < katu> bsm1175321: ultimately what it does is lower block rate
13:06 < katu> or more like, each branch runs at its own pace
13:07 < bsm1175321> katu: that's one consequence, yes.
13:07 < katu> bsm1175321: so you get geographically separated "gangs"
13:07 < katu> one swarm in china, one in europe
13:07 < katu> they'll keep orphaning each other
13:08 < Taek> katu: where do the orphans happen? The gangs will keep merging eachother, and form effectively larger gangs
13:08 < Taek> the deadline for a merge is set to be large enough that blocks can **easily** propagate all over the world
13:08 < katu> Taek: im assuming the rest more or less works like bitcoin, i didnt realize its ghost-like which can adopt orphans :(
13:09 < Taek> why ':(' ?
13:09 < katu> Taek: complex graph, or more like, complex state machine to implement the graph rules
13:09 < Taek> the incentive structure is much better than in GHOST
13:09 < Taek> oh
13:09 < Taek> it's not that complex :P
13:10 < Taek> the only complexity is in knowing how to create the exact ordering. Once you have that, it operates basically the same way as the bitcoin blockchain
13:10 < katu> Taek: i'd be fine with gangs orphaning each other, and instead implement complex heuristics in networking to incentivize orphan avoidance
13:10 < katu> which would be neater as the consensus rules would stay "clear", and gangs would be forced to self organize according to internet topology instead
13:11 < katu> what youre doing with fancy graphs is working around laggy internet
13:11 < Taek> the graph building has 2 rules!
13:11 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
13:12 < bsm1175321> katu: I think that's one way to look at it.  It's taking the laggy internet, and its actual topology into account, instead of throwing out a number like "10 minutes" (which is way slower than dictated by the network) and hoping it works.
13:12 < katu> Taek: exact ordering of what? transactions?
13:12 < Taek> katu: exact ordering of blocks
13:12 < katu> hmm
13:12 < Taek> you have this DAG graph that's messy, and then you have 2 simple rules for turning it into a standard chain
13:13 < katu> Taek: im mostly concerned about conflicting transactions. and various unintended consequences, like introducing conflicts to influence graph shape
13:13 < pigeons> 10 minutes does work
13:13 < katu> yep, 10 minutes is simple and elegant :)
13:13 < Taek> the graph ordering is fully ignorant of the transaction contents
13:13 < bsm1175321> pigeons: It does, but it's at least 600 times slower than necessary.  And inelegant.
13:14 < katu> if you want instant transactions, there are better way to do it
13:14 < pigeons> its likely slower than necesary, but i'm a long way from agreeing with your 600 times premise
13:15 < katu> like make previous transactions to vouch for priority ("instant") transactions to be included in future block, form loose online consensus, and then vouch future blocks when it includes the instant transactions. it is still prone to small race windows which must be judged by tx recipient, but ultimately, one can do it without making the base consensus complex
13:15 < katu> and can be moved out of it
13:15 < bsm1175321> pigeons: actual ping times are ~500ms round trip.
13:15 < katu> *previous winning miners
13:17 < katu> bsm1175321: real self-organizing p2p can do about 250
13:17 < katu> ie approach the technical values
13:17 < bsm1175321> katu: I know.  That's the goal.  So pigeons that's a factor of 2400.  :-P
13:18 < katu> i still see no need for introducing complex graph, when orphan rate itself is incentive for miners to seek optimal network propagation
13:18 < bsm1175321> The orphan problem results in the selfish mining problem, halving the security of the network.
13:19 < katu> selfish mining vanishes the moment rewards are from fees
13:19 < bsm1175321> Also, 10 minutes is way to damn long for me.
13:20 < pigeons> any decrease from 10 minutes isnt worth the risks 10 minutes is so quick ompared to days!
13:21 < katu> yeah, waiting for 60 permanently competing forks inflight to converge is no fun ;_;
13:21 < bsm1175321> pigeons: So it's on any alternative proposal to prove there are no risks, or the risks are acceptable compared to the risks with bitcoin as it stands...
13:21 < katu> but thats mostly bitcoin network code dont make an attempt to self-organize in low latency cliques
13:21 < katu> *mostly because
13:22 < katu> which it could, with no need for hard forks.
13:32 -!- roman__ [~quassel@2a01:cb1d:498:fe00:1cef:a64d:bbec:75d0] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:35 -!- hdbuck [~hdbuck@unaffiliated/hdbuck] has quit [Quit: hdbuck]
13:39 -!- supasonic [~supasonic@172-11-188-117.lightspeed.rcsntx.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
13:40 -!- supasonic [~supasonic@172-11-188-117.lightspeed.rcsntx.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:46 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
13:47 -!- nuke1989 [~nuke@176.92.91.156] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
13:49 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
13:49 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:50 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:56 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
13:56 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
13:58 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
14:13 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
14:14 -!- alpalp [~allen@104-54-235-28.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:14 -!- alpalp [~allen@104-54-235-28.lightspeed.austtx.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Changing host]
14:14 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:16 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:29 -!- supasonic [~supasonic@172-11-188-117.lightspeed.rcsntx.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
14:30 -!- supasonic [~supasonic@172-11-188-117.lightspeed.rcsntx.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:31 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:35 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@cpe-174-97-254-80.ma.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:35 -!- supasonic [~supasonic@172-11-188-117.lightspeed.rcsntx.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
14:36 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
14:41 -!- supasonic [~supasonic@172-11-188-117.lightspeed.rcsntx.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
14:56 -!- ThomasV [~ThomasV@unaffiliated/thomasv] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
15:01 -!- jtimon [~quassel@65.28.134.37.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
15:03 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
15:04 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:12 -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:17 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
15:21 -!- JHistone [~JHistone@cpc7-sgyl35-2-0-cust123.18-2.cable.virginm.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:34 -!- lysobit [~musalbas@2001:bc8:30c2::] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
15:45 -!- Aranjedeath [~Aranjedea@unaffiliated/aranjedeath] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
15:53 -!- raedah [~x@172.56.39.17] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:54 -!- GAit1 [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
15:57 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
15:59 -!- raedah [~x@172.56.39.17] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 1.5]
16:00 -!- raedah [~x@172.56.39.17] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:08 -!- dnaleor [~dnaleor@78-23-74-78.access.telenet.be] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
16:10 -!- raedah [~x@172.56.39.17] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 1.5]
16:11 -!- belcher [~user@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
16:20 -!- belcher [~user@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:28 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
16:28 -!- Jeremy_Rand_2 [~user@ip68-97-35-223.ok.ok.cox.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
16:30 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:33 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:37 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
16:37 -!- Jeremy_Rand_2 [~user@ip68-97-35-223.ok.ok.cox.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:37 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:40 -!- GAit1 [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
16:40 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:41 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@cpe-174-97-254-80.ma.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
16:41 -!- hashtagg [~hashtagg_@cpe-174-97-254-80.ma.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
16:45 -!- dEBRUYNE [~dEBRUYNE@unaffiliated/debruyne] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
16:46 -!- JHistone [~JHistone@cpc7-sgyl35-2-0-cust123.18-2.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
17:02 -!- Emcy [~MC@unaffiliated/mc1984] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
17:03 -!- Emcy [~MC@unaffiliated/mc1984] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:07 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
17:10 -!- TheSeven [~quassel@rockbox/developer/TheSeven] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
17:10 -!- [7] [~quassel@rockbox/developer/TheSeven] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:20 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:20 -!- Jeremy_Rand_2 [~user@ip68-97-35-223.ok.ok.cox.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
17:27 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
17:27 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:43 -!- Jeremy_Rand_2 [~user@ip68-97-35-223.ok.ok.cox.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
17:48 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:18 -!- MaxSan_ [~one@h88-150-240-8.host.redstation.co.uk] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
18:23 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@cpe-174-97-254-80.ma.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:25 -!- hashtagg [~hashtagg_@cpe-174-97-254-80.ma.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
18:35 -!- nivah [~linker@27.75.158.22] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:35 -!- tromp [~tromp@rtc35-252.rentec.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
18:35 -!- tromp [~tromp@rtc35-252.rentec.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:36 -!- bit2017 [~linker@27.75.158.22] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
18:36 -!- supasonic [~supasonic@172-11-188-117.lightspeed.rcsntx.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
18:36 -!- nullfxn [~nullFxn@50-90-30-44.res.bhn.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
18:37 -!- Burrito [~Burrito@unaffiliated/burrito] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
18:37 -!- shesek [~shesek@bzq-84-110-33-207.red.bezeqint.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
18:37 -!- supasonic [~supasonic@172-11-188-117.lightspeed.rcsntx.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:37 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@cpe-174-97-254-80.ma.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
18:37 -!- execute [~execute@52.68.0.151] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
18:37 -!- Guest30834 [~gavin@66.172.11.36] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
18:38 -!- Emcy [~MC@unaffiliated/mc1984] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
18:38 -!- nullfxn [~nullFxn@50-90-30-44.res.bhn.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:40 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@cpe-174-97-254-80.ma.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:42 -!- MaxSan_ [~one@78.129.153.58] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:42 -!- shesek [~shesek@bzq-84-110-33-207.cablep.bezeqint.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:45 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
18:45 -!- Burrito [~Burrito@unaffiliated/burrito] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:48 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:50 -!- gavinandresen [~gavin@unaffiliated/gavinandresen] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:51 -!- Emcy [~MC@unaffiliated/mc1984] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:52 -!- hashtagg [~hashtagg_@cpe-174-97-254-80.ma.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
18:55 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@cpe-174-97-254-80.ma.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
19:01 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
19:02 -!- hashtag_ [~hashtagg_@cpe-174-97-254-80.ma.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:03 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:05 -!- hashtagg [~hashtagg_@cpe-174-97-254-80.ma.res.rr.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
19:10 -!- blackwraith [~priidu@unaffiliated/priidu] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
19:13 -!- Church- [~hatter@unaffiliated/church-] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
19:17 -!- kmels [~kmels@190.106.223.33] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
19:21 -!- Ylbam [uid99779@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-wqbhkjfpdrmxxgjh] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
19:37 -!- pro [~pro@unaffiliated/pro] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
19:58 -!- alpalp [~allen@unaffiliated/alpalp] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
20:01 -!- Burrito [~Burrito@unaffiliated/burrito] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
20:31 -!- belcher [~user@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
20:47 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
21:03 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
21:05 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:07 -!- Jeremy_Rand_2 [~user@ip68-97-35-223.ok.ok.cox.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
21:10 -!- Church- [~hatter@unaffiliated/church-] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:25 -!- Emcy [~MC@unaffiliated/mc1984] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
21:28 -!- kmels [~kmels@190.106.223.33] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
21:41 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
21:43 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:44 -!- Cory [~C@unaffiliated/cory] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
21:48 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
21:49 -!- Cory [~C@unaffiliated/cory] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
21:54 -!- Samdney [~Samdney@dyn-ant666999.hawo.ipv6.uni-erlangen.de] has left #bitcoin-wizards ["Verlassend"]
22:15 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
22:17 -!- johnwhitton [~johnwhitt@c-71-202-223-50.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: johnwhitton]
22:17 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:30 -!- Church- [~hatter@unaffiliated/church-] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
22:31 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
22:33 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:41 -!- ThomasV [~ThomasV@unaffiliated/thomasv] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:49 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:54 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
22:55 -!- raedah [~x@172.56.39.17] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
22:56 -!- raedah [~x@172.56.39.17] has quit [Client Quit]
22:59 -!- nuke1989 [~nuke@176.92.91.156] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:04 -!- raedah [~x@172.56.39.17] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:09 -!- ThomasV [~ThomasV@unaffiliated/thomasv] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
23:11 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
23:12 -!- spinza [~spin@197.89.233.13] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
23:13 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:23 -!- gavinandresen [~gavin@unaffiliated/gavinandresen] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
23:29 -!- Emcy [~MC@unaffiliated/mc1984] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:31 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
23:32 -!- gavinandresen [~gavin@unaffiliated/gavinandresen] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:33 -!- Alopex [~bitcoin@cyber.dealing.ninja] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:34 -!- licnep [uid4387@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-mfgglavkgghjtlmg] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:36 -!- kmels [~kmels@190.106.223.33] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:51 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:53 -!- AusteritySucks [~Austerity@unaffiliated/austeritysucks] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
23:55 -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0bd8.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
--- Log closed Sun May 15 00:00:15 2016