| --- Log opened Wed Oct 22 00:00:23 2014 | ||
| -!- amdroid [~amdroid@c8fb265ea2ee.softphone.blizoo.bg] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 00:07 | |
| -!- woah [~woah@199-241-202-232.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…] | 00:09 | |
| -!- woah [~woah@199-241-202-232.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 00:15 | |
| -!- Aquent1 [~Aquent@gateway/tor-sasl/aquent] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 00:20 | |
| -!- woah [~woah@199-241-202-232.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has quit [Client Quit] | 00:20 | |
| -!- Luke-Jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 00:21 | |
| -!- mmozeiko [~mmozeiko@c-50-184-215-21.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 00:23 | |
| -!- woah [~woah@199-241-202-232.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 00:31 | |
| -!- woah [~woah@199-241-202-232.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has quit [Client Quit] | 00:31 | |
| -!- chris200_ [~chris2000@pdv.vipnetwork.fr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 00:34 | |
| -!- chris2000 [~chris2000@tmo-106-254.customers.d1-online.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds] | 00:37 | |
| -!- chris2000 [~chris2000@tmo-106-254.customers.d1-online.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 00:39 | |
| -!- chris200_ [~chris2000@pdv.vipnetwork.fr] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds] | 00:40 | |
| -!- pen [~linker@115.79.55.177] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds] | 00:40 | |
| -!- woah [~woah@199-241-202-232.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 00:48 | |
| -!- OX3_ [~OX3@cpc69058-oxfd26-2-0-cust984.4-3.cable.virginm.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 00:51 | |
| -!- p15 [~textual@182.50.108.61] has left #bitcoin-wizards ["Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com"] | 00:54 | |
| -!- crowex [~crowex@host-78-147-106-214.as13285.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 00:56 | |
| -!- crowex [~crowex@host-78-147-106-214.as13285.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 01:00 | |
| * nsh starts a campaigning group to save the weird machines | 01:01 | |
| -!- 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 | 01:05 | |
| -!- chris2000 [~chris2000@tmo-106-254.customers.d1-online.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 01:11 | |
| -!- chris2000 [~chris2000@tmo-106-254.customers.d1-online.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 01:12 | |
| -!- andy-logbot [~bitcoin--@wpsoftware.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] | 01:12 | |
| -!- andytoshi [~andytoshi@unaffiliated/andytoshi] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] | 01:12 | |
| -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has quit [Quit: Bye] | 01:18 | |
| -!- OX3_ [~OX3@cpc69058-oxfd26-2-0-cust984.4-3.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 01:22 | |
| -!- OX3_ [~OX3@cpc69058-oxfd26-2-0-cust984.4-3.cable.virginm.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 01:22 | |
| -!- Dizzle [~Dizzle@cpe-72-182-49-104.austin.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: Leaving...] | 01:26 | |
| -!- RoboTeddy [~roboteddy@c-67-188-40-206.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds] | 01:26 | |
| -!- OX3_ [~OX3@cpc69058-oxfd26-2-0-cust984.4-3.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] | 01:27 | |
| -!- chris2000 [~chris2000@tmo-106-254.customers.d1-online.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 01:34 | |
| -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 01:35 | |
| -!- chris2000 [~chris2000@tmo-106-254.customers.d1-online.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 01:43 | |
| -!- nsh_ [~nsh@wikipedia/nsh] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 01:45 | |
| -!- vfor [~Adium@g226061183.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 01:46 | |
| -!- gloriusAgain [~gloriusag@g226061183.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 01:46 | |
| -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has quit [Quit: Bye] | 01:47 | |
| -!- gloriusAgain [~gloriusag@g226061183.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 01:49 | |
| -!- vfor [~Adium@g226061183.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Client Quit] | 01:49 | |
| -!- fanquake [~anonymous@unaffiliated/fanquake] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 01:56 | |
| -!- fanquake [~anonymous@unaffiliated/fanquake] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 01:57 | |
| -!- vfor [~Adium@g226061183.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 01:59 | |
| -!- gloriusAgain [~gloriusag@g226061183.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 01:59 | |
| -!- OX3 [~OX3@gateway-nat.fmrib.ox.ac.uk] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 02:02 | |
| -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 02:12 | |
| -!- chris2000 [~chris2000@tmo-106-254.customers.d1-online.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] | 02:17 | |
| -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 02:27 | |
| -!- chris2000 [~chris2000@tmo-106-254.customers.d1-online.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 02:30 | |
| -!- ebfull [~ebfull@c-76-120-40-34.hsd1.co.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: cya] | 02:32 | |
| -!- woah [~woah@199-241-202-232.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…] | 02:36 | |
| -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has quit [Quit: Bye] | 02:41 | |
| -!- moa [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/moa] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] | 02:43 | |
| -!- chris2000 [~chris2000@tmo-106-254.customers.d1-online.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] | 02:45 | |
| -!- moa [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/moa] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 02:47 | |
| -!- chris2000 [~chris2000@tmo-106-254.customers.d1-online.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 02:50 | |
| -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 02:52 | |
| -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 02:52 | |
| -!- coinheavy [~coinheavy@c-67-169-153-44.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [] | 02:57 | |
| -!- vmatekole [~vmatekole@f055110130.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 02:58 | |
| -!- mmozeiko [~mmozeiko@c-50-184-215-21.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] | 03:12 | |
| -!- mmozeiko [~mmozeiko@c-50-184-215-21.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 03:13 | |
| -!- crowex [~crowex@host-78-147-106-214.as13285.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 03:14 | |
| -!- mkarrer [~mkarrer@183.Red-83-40-233.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 03:16 | |
| -!- drawingthesun [~drawingth@106-68-157-235.dyn.iinet.net.au] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 03:18 | |
| -!- dansmith_btc2 [dansmith3@knows.the.cops.are.investigat.in] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 03:39 | |
| -!- moa [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/moa] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] | 03:41 | |
| -!- grandmaster2 [dansmith3@knows.the.cops.are.investigat.in] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 03:50 | |
| -!- chris200_ [~chris2000@tmo-110-128.customers.d1-online.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 03:50 | |
| -!- chris2000 [~chris2000@tmo-106-254.customers.d1-online.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] | 03:50 | |
| -!- grandmaster2 is now known as dansmith_btc | 03:51 | |
| -!- waxwing [~waxwing@62.205.214.125] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 03:53 | |
| -!- johnbrainless [~johnbrain@athedsl-4491544.home.otenet.gr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 03:58 | |
| -!- zwischenzug2 [~zwischenz@137.63.71.134] has quit [Quit: Leaving] | 04:10 | |
| -!- zwischenzug [~zwischenz@137.63.72.102] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 04:11 | |
| -!- waxwing [~waxwing@62.205.214.125] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 04:23 | |
| -!- johnbrainless [~johnbrain@athedsl-4491544.home.otenet.gr] has quit [] | 04:24 | |
| -!- Nightwolf [~Nightwolf@unaffiliated/nightwolf] has quit [Disconnected by services] | 04:25 | |
| -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds] | 04:35 | |
| -!- fanquake [~anonymous@unaffiliated/fanquake] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 04:36 | |
| -!- fanquake [~anonymous@unaffiliated/fanquake] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 04:36 | |
| -!- crowex [~crowex@host-78-147-106-214.as13285.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 04:38 | |
| -!- crowex [~crowex@host-78-147-106-214.as13285.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 04:39 | |
| -!- crowex [~crowex@host-78-147-106-214.as13285.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] | 04:44 | |
| -!- chris200_ [~chris2000@tmo-110-128.customers.d1-online.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 04:44 | |
| -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 04:45 | |
| -!- chris2000 [~chris2000@tmo-110-128.customers.d1-online.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 04:56 | |
| -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 04:56 | |
| -!- Luke-Jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] | 04:58 | |
| -!- fanquake_ [~anonymous@unaffiliated/fanquake] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 04:58 | |
| -!- starsoccer [~starsocce@unaffiliated/starsoccer] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] | 04:59 | |
| -!- OX3__ [~OX3@gateway-nat.fmrib.ox.ac.uk] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 05:00 | |
| -!- fanquake [~anonymous@unaffiliated/fanquake] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds] | 05:01 | |
| -!- fanquake_ is now known as fanquake | 05:01 | |
| -!- OX3 [~OX3@gateway-nat.fmrib.ox.ac.uk] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] | 05:02 | |
| -!- spiftheninja [~miner@173-20-237-20.client.mchsi.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 05:03 | |
| -!- starsoccer [~starsocce@207.12.89.33] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 05:06 | |
| -!- starsoccer is now known as Guest95093 | 05:06 | |
| -!- crowex [~crowex@host-78-147-106-214.as13285.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 05:30 | |
| -!- Adlai [~Adlai@gateway/tor-sasl/adlai] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 05:37 | |
| -!- wiretapped [~wiretappe@gateway/tor-sasl/wiretapped] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 05:40 | |
| -!- Graftec [~Graftec@gateway/tor-sasl/graftec] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 05:40 | |
| -!- Graftec [~Graftec@gateway/tor-sasl/graftec] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 05:40 | |
| -!- wiretapped [~wiretappe@gateway/tor-sasl/wiretapped] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 05:42 | |
| -!- OX3__ [~OX3@gateway-nat.fmrib.ox.ac.uk] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] | 05:50 | |
| -!- orperelman [~wboy@bzq-79-183-8-242.red.bezeqint.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 05:50 | |
| -!- OX3 [~OX3@gateway-nat.fmrib.ox.ac.uk] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 05:53 | |
| -!- Adlai [~Adlai@gateway/tor-sasl/adlai] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 05:53 | |
| -!- llllllllll [~lllllllll@53-109.bbned.dsl.internl.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 05:55 | |
| -!- chris2000 [~chris2000@tmo-110-128.customers.d1-online.com] has quit [] | 05:58 | |
| -!- OX3 [~OX3@gateway-nat.fmrib.ox.ac.uk] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 06:00 | |
| -!- OX3_ [~OX3@gateway-nat.fmrib.ox.ac.uk] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 06:00 | |
| -!- nessence [~alexl@89.246.69.218] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 06:03 | |
| -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@unaffiliated/wallet42] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 06:04 | |
| -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@158pc208.sshunet.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] | 06:05 | |
| -!- fanquake [~anonymous@unaffiliated/fanquake] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] | 06:15 | |
| -!- mkarrer [~mkarrer@183.Red-83-40-233.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 06:18 | |
| -!- fanquake [~anonymous@unaffiliated/fanquake] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 06:19 | |
| -!- fanquake [~anonymous@unaffiliated/fanquake] has quit [Quit: fanquake] | 06:30 | |
| -!- orperelman [~wboy@bzq-79-183-8-242.red.bezeqint.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] | 06:35 | |
| -!- Guest95093 is now known as Starsoccer | 06:41 | |
| -!- Starsoccer [~starsocce@207.12.89.33] has quit [Changing host] | 06:41 | |
| -!- Starsoccer [~starsocce@unaffiliated/starsoccer] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 06:41 | |
| -!- hearn [~mike@185.25.95.132] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 06:44 | |
| -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has quit [Quit: Bye] | 06:49 | |
| -!- hearn_ [~mike@46-253-188-145.dynamic.monzoon.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 06:58 | |
| -!- hearn [~mike@185.25.95.132] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] | 06:59 | |
| -!- hearn_ [~mike@46-253-188-145.dynamic.monzoon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] | 07:03 | |
| -!- crowex [~crowex@host-78-147-106-214.as13285.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 07:06 | |
| -!- Aquent1 [~Aquent@gateway/tor-sasl/aquent] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 07:07 | |
| -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@158pc208.sshunet.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 07:09 | |
| -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 07:11 | |
| -!- hearn [~mike@46.140.0.235] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 07:13 | |
| -!- hashtag [~hashtag@69.23.221.39] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 07:17 | |
| -!- mmozeiko [~mmozeiko@c-50-184-215-21.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] | 07:17 | |
| -!- DougieBot5000 [~DougieBot@unaffiliated/dougiebot5000] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 07:30 | |
| -!- gloriusAgain [~gloriusag@g226061183.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 07:33 | |
| -!- SDCDev is now known as shield____ | 07:33 | |
| -!- vfor [~Adium@g226061183.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] | 07:33 | |
| -!- d4de^^ [~d4de@197.160.156.98] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] | 07:34 | |
| -!- shield____ is now known as SDCDev | 07:35 | |
| -!- c0rw1n [~c0rw1n@83.104-201-80.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] | 07:36 | |
| -!- d4de^^ [~d4de@197.160.62.123] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 07:36 | |
| -!- c0rw1n [~c0rw1n@83.104-201-80.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 07:39 | |
| -!- mmozeiko [~mmozeiko@c-50-184-215-21.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 07:42 | |
| -!- vfor [~Adium@g226061183.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 07:45 | |
| -!- gloriusAgain [~gloriusag@g226061183.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 07:45 | |
| -!- gloriusAgain [~gloriusag@g226061183.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 07:49 | |
| -!- hearn [~mike@46.140.0.235] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…] | 07:49 | |
| -!- vfor [~Adium@g226061183.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Client Quit] | 07:49 | |
| -!- amdroid [~amdroid@c8fb265ea2ee.softphone.blizoo.bg] has quit [Quit: Leaving] | 07:53 | |
| -!- mkarrer [~mkarrer@183.Red-83-40-233.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 07:55 | |
| -!- Graftec [~Graftec@gateway/tor-sasl/graftec] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 07:58 | |
| -!- Graftec [~Graftec@gateway/tor-sasl/graftec] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 07:59 | |
| -!- crowex [~crowex@host-78-147-106-214.as13285.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 08:00 | |
| -!- hearn [~mike@46.140.0.235] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 08:02 | |
| -!- OX3__ [~OX3@gateway-nat.fmrib.ox.ac.uk] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 08:04 | |
| -!- OX3_ [~OX3@gateway-nat.fmrib.ox.ac.uk] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] | 08:06 | |
| -!- hearn [~mike@46.140.0.235] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] | 08:13 | |
| -!- hearn [~mike@46.140.0.211] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 08:17 | |
| -!- jtimon [~quassel@c-50-136-255-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 08:25 | |
| -!- OX3__ [~OX3@gateway-nat.fmrib.ox.ac.uk] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] | 08:40 | |
| -!- rdponticelli [~quassel@gateway/tor-sasl/rdponticelli] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 08:41 | |
| -!- tromp__ [~tromp@ool-4570a006.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 08:43 | |
| -!- pen [~linker@42.118.241.21] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 08:44 | |
| -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-4570a006.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] | 08:46 | |
| -!- OX3 [~OX3@gateway-nat.fmrib.ox.ac.uk] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 08:48 | |
| -!- vmatekole [~vmatekole@95.91.211.71] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 08:48 | |
| -!- mortale [~mortale@gateway/tor-sasl/mortale] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 08:52 | |
| -!- vmatekole [~vmatekole@95.91.211.71] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 08:52 | |
| -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has quit [Quit: Bye] | 08:52 | |
| -!- justanotheruser [~Justan@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds] | 09:02 | |
| gmaxwell | This loading for everyone? http://www.blockstream.com/ | 09:10 |
|---|---|---|
| gmaxwell | (anyone?) | 09:11 |
| BlueMatt | bueller | 09:12 |
| MRL-Relay | [fluffypony] "Imagine a technology that makes it possible to trust anyone" - like except that cheating ex-girlfriend you dated when you were 23? | 09:13 |
| hearn | gmaxwell: loads here | 09:14 |
| MRL-Relay | [fluffypony] also wtf - http://isup.me/blockstream.com says it's down...but it works... | 09:14 |
| hearn | what is MRL-Relay ? | 09:14 |
| MRL-Relay | [fluffypony] oh | 09:15 |
| fluffypony | heh | 09:15 |
| fluffypony | hearn: relay to the Monero Research Lab | 09:15 |
| Apocalyptic | gmaxwell, load even without js | 09:15 |
| Apocalyptic | *loads | 09:15 |
| fluffypony | but Apocalyptic can make anything load with the power of his mind, so there's that | 09:15 |
| Apocalyptic | dat fluffypony | 09:16 |
| fluffypony | dat Apocalypticz | 09:16 |
| nsh | (blockstream loads for me, UK) | 09:17 |
| hearn | nice, a real collection of wizards there. gmaxwell sipa BlueMatt and adam back all together | 09:17 |
| hearn | oh and jorge timon too | 09:17 |
| nsh | nothing about the blockchain is circular. i find that illustration highly offensive | 09:18 |
| nsh | oh wait, maybe it's a spiral | 09:18 |
| nsh | then it makes no geometric sense | 09:18 |
| nsh | i'm probably over-thinking this | 09:18 |
| hearn | nsh: it's pretty. roll with it ) | 09:18 |
| * nsh smiles | 09:18 | |
| -!- adam3us [~Adium@c-50-136-255-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 09:18 | |
| hearn | iirc two way pegging requires script changes, no? are you guys going to implement them? | 09:19 |
| BlueMatt | hearn: you probably want to read the paper :p | 09:19 |
| gmaxwell | yea, wasn't planning on having the site up so early. ... so some problems with it up. | 09:19 |
| amiller | gmaxwell, "Can’t select database" | 09:19 |
| fluffypony | nsh: it's designed to draw attention to gmaxwell's beard | 09:19 |
| amiller | "Does the user wp have permission to use the blockstream_prod database?" | 09:19 |
| BlueMatt | amiller: seems its still being rapidly updated | 09:19 |
| BlueMatt | .... | 09:19 |
| hearn | BlueMatt: right | 09:19 |
| nsh | and what a beard.... | 09:20 |
| fluffypony | ikr? | 09:20 |
| kanzure | hmm http://www.blockstream.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/sidechains.pdf | 09:20 |
| hearn | yeah now the website is busted for me too | 09:20 |
| kanzure | is all this propaganda on the landing page really necessary? | 09:21 |
| fluffypony | I like it | 09:21 |
| kanzure | but doesn't it just waste our time | 09:21 |
| fluffypony | so we're the target market for the front page? | 09:21 |
| BlueMatt | kanzure: its not for you..... | 09:21 |
| fluffypony | the 173 people here are the ONLY people that will ever look at it? | 09:21 |
| gmaxwell | kanzure: Your time, yea probably.. other people, nah. | 09:21 |
| kanzure | if it links to a paper then who is it for | 09:21 |
| gmaxwell | I would have just linked to the paper in here except I needed to know if the site was working for anyone at all. | 09:22 |
| gmaxwell | :) | 09:22 |
| fluffypony | lol | 09:22 |
| fluffypony | so so so scandalouz | 09:22 |
| kanzure | (sidenote: since when do papers get their very own landing pages? i bet we'll see that in biology/sciences soon too.) | 09:22 |
| Taek | blockstream.com redirects to updates.blockstream.com, www.blockstream.com goes to the expected place | 09:22 |
| BlueMatt | Taek: again...might have been linked 10 minutes early :p | 09:22 |
| BlueMatt | still being rapidly updated | 09:22 |
| fluffypony | kanzure: since bugs in OpenSSL get their very own logo, site-tester, and info page | 09:22 |
| kanzure | that's actually quite recent though | 09:23 |
| gmaxwell | kanzure: It's not a landing page for a paper, it's the website for the company I (co-)founded. :) | 09:23 |
| kanzure | i think altcoins were doing landing pages for papers a while back earlier than heartbleed | 09:23 |
| gmaxwell | see the paper and the blogpost at the bottom of the site (if it's not getting attacked and you can load it) | 09:23 |
| amiller | "For many in the Bitcoin community, Greg is likely the person telling you that your protocol is broken and why, but he usually feels pretty bad about it." i liked that a lot | 09:23 |
| nsh | "In the grand tradition of TCP/IP and HTTP that gave rise to the modern Open Internet, and now underpin Bitcoin and blockchain technology, we aim to foster an ecosystem where new innovation can thrive." | 09:23 |
| nsh | that sentence is marginally agrammatical | 09:24 |
| -!- justanotheruser [~Justan@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 09:24 | |
| nsh | (the plurality changes from 'the tradition' through the (plural) technologies underpin...) | 09:24 |
| amiller | no "the tradition" isn't what underpins the technology | 09:25 |
| nsh | i know | 09:25 |
| amiller | the commas there make it ungrammatical (would be better as a parenthetical or dashed phrase -- ) | 09:26 |
| nsh | but the garden path in the non plural form of 'underpins' is caused by the technologies being plural in the construction of the sentence | 09:26 |
| nsh | well, that's conjecture :) | 09:26 |
| gmaxwell | yea, sorry, website wasn't at all ready... alas. | 09:26 |
| Taek | gmaxwell are you going full startup? | 09:27 |
| * nsh likes that the paper has a date and commit tag | 09:27 | |
| sipa | read the site! | 09:27 |
| gmaxwell | But it didn't seem right to put out the paper without disclosing stuff about blockstream at the same time too... | 09:27 |
| -!- austinhill [~Adium@c-50-136-255-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 09:29 | |
| * nsh nods | 09:30 | |
| kanzure | paper is down, here's a copy http://diyhpl.us/~bryan/papers2/bitcoin/sidechains.pdf | 09:30 |
| sipa | amiller: i wanted him to change it to "that your protocol is broken and you should feel broken... but usually feels bad out it" | 09:31 |
| Taek | wasting no time in adding it to the archive | 09:31 |
| -!- mortale [~mortale@gateway/tor-sasl/mortale] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 09:31 | |
| kanzure | Taek: i usually have to add things immediately or else i will forget about them until it's too late | 09:31 |
| justanotheruser | the paper is out now? | 09:34 |
| amiller | yes it's out now click the link above | 09:34 |
| justanotheruser | Sorry, I understand it's out, I'm just wondering under what conditions its out. Is blockstream the publisher? | 09:35 |
| sipa | it's public domain | 09:35 |
| -!- woah [~woah@75-101-111-82.dedicated.static.sonic.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 09:35 | |
| gmaxwell | justanotheruser: the authors are the publisher, it's public domain. See the footnote at the bottom. :) | 09:35 |
| justanotheruser | it seems blockstream can't handle the traffic | 09:36 |
| -!- justanotheruser [~Justan@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Quit: Reconnecting] | 09:36 | |
| gmaxwell | (considered just hosting it on my personal web, ... but that might be rightfully be criticized as hiding the connection with my company :) ) | 09:37 |
| -!- justanot1eruser [~Justan@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 09:37 | |
| hearn | i'm looking forward to the better unit testing framework you guys are gonna have to write ;) | 09:38 |
| BlueMatt | hearn: yes....that will happen | 09:39 |
| gmaxwell | In any case, the blog post on the site that you also can't get to is, http://0bin.net/paste/PpyKcrm5Y1wb5AUJ#kwDsCN6TwWDn61j8QKCn7ifRzSlqwmBJxHUyvsUiHRJ | 09:40 |
| hearn | firstly - very cool, glad to see this finally come out into the daylight. very much looking forward to this work | 09:43 |
| -!- maraoz [~maraoz@186.137.72.20] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 09:43 | |
| hearn | that said, you guys will need to be VERY careful that you don't find yourselves stonewalling changes to bitcoin in order to increase the incentives for people to use sidechains, under the name of conservatism. the level of wallet and UI complexity required to swap coins in and out of side chains will be intense: it's not a substitute for making it easier to upgrade and innovate with bitcoin itself | 09:44 |
| -!- justanot1eruser is now known as justanotheruser | 09:44 | |
| hearn | in particular i don't think you can lay the blame for the slow pace of development 100% at the need to be careful, any more than i can lay it 100% at the need for some kind of better funding mechanism. there are lots of things that make changing bitcoin hard. | 09:45 |
| kanzure | anyone can make a change to the source code, but that doesn't mean it's a change to bitcoin (because it may break consensus and there's already lots of non-bitcoin things that have broken consensus) | 09:45 |
| hearn | finally, i'm still very curious about your business model :) | 09:46 |
| hearn | still, congrats on the announcement! | 09:46 |
| Taek | also super curious about the business model | 09:47 |
| amiller | <- curious too | 09:47 |
| justanotheruser | amiller: are you employed by them? | 09:47 |
| BlueMatt | justanotheruser: not everyone on the paper is employed/a co-founder | 09:48 |
| BlueMatt | see site's list of people | 09:48 |
| amiller | justanotheruser, nope, just contributed a tiny but to the whitepaper | 09:48 |
| justanotheruser | I see | 09:48 |
| justanotheruser | BlueMatt: I will check it out when its back up I guess | 09:48 |
| BlueMatt | yea..... | 09:48 |
| gmaxwell | hearn: Well, I think adam had drafted a 14 paragraph version of that part of that statement, which I reduced down to once sentence. Someplace in that it explored a number of other factors too. :) There is only so much you can say and have people actually read it. But if you look at the tons of commits going in constantly in Bitcoin core, I've really felt your "DEVELOPMENT HALTED" (esp to the general press) are really weird and ... | 09:48 |
| amiller | (im not under contract or anything like that either) | 09:48 |
| gmaxwell | ... unfair... but rather than debating it, I figure it's better to spend time working on stuff. :) | 09:48 |
| amiller | is andytoshi a cofounder / employee / teammate? | 09:48 |
| -!- crowex [~crowex@host-78-147-106-214.as13285.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 09:49 | |
| -!- crowex [~crowex@host-78-147-106-214.as13285.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 09:51 | |
| -!- hearn [~mike@46.140.0.211] has quit [Excess Flood] | 09:51 | |
| -!- OX3 [~OX3@gateway-nat.fmrib.ox.ac.uk] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 09:51 | |
| -!- hearn [~mike@46.140.0.211] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 09:52 | |
| hearn | excess flood? that's a new one | 09:52 |
| -!- Nomos7 [~textual@pool-71-163-224-249.washdc.east.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 09:53 | |
| -!- OX3 [~OX3@gateway-nat.fmrib.ox.ac.uk] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 09:53 | |
| hearn | gmaxwell: there are lots of commits, yes, but most of those are relatively trivial and have no impact on the end users experience of bitcoin. i mean, your own paper notes that there are lots of changes and features that might be desirable, but which don't happen, or which stall. if you try and name major, interesting changes in Core, there's been basically one headline item per release for the past couple of years now i think. | 09:54 |
| hearn | perhaps it's just differing expectations of how large a project the core system should be by now | 09:55 |
| -!- crowex [~crowex@host-78-147-106-214.as13285.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 09:55 | |
| justanotheruser | hearn: what should core be by now? | 09:55 |
| hearn | well, it's the foundation for a multi-billion dollar economy. so i'd have expected on the order of at least ten people working on it and a few major projects being completed per quarter. perhaps i'm biased by having been at google so long, but even quite unimportant projects there had resources in excess of what Core gets | 09:56 |
| hearn | look at it this way - bitcoinj has a commit rate similar to that of Core these days, but i'd never claim it's a large project | 09:56 |
| hearn | unless i was speaking relatively :) | 09:57 |
| hearn | anyway, i agree that the best fix for this is writing lots of code | 09:57 |
| kanzure | i don't think commit rate is important. | 09:57 |
| hearn | + side chains will remove one major bottleneck | 09:57 |
| justanotheruser | your concern seems to be that projects aren't being built on bitcoin? Not with core? | 09:57 |
| kanzure | (for the same reason that you don't scold someone for refactoring 100k lines of code to something more elegant/better) | 09:58 |
| BlueMatt | hearn: the sidechains whitepapers references to slow movements are intended to be about changing the consensus protocol, not so much about bitcoin core speed | 09:58 |
| hearn | BlueMatt: right, though to some extent it's linked. | 09:58 |
| BlueMatt | (sidechains dont really effect that, though maybe paying gmaxwell/sipa/others will help the other) | 09:58 |
| BlueMatt | hearn: ofc | 09:58 |
| hearn | yes getting you guys paid full time is a huge boost | 09:59 |
| hearn | that should like, double the pace of things overnight :) | 09:59 |
| hearn | well, depending on how much time is general stuff in Core and how much time is spent on sidechains specific code | 09:59 |
| sipa | well i hope you've seen we've not stopped contributing to core :) | 09:59 |
| gmaxwell | As far as the business model goes-- Our focus right now is purely on building ecosystem infrastructure. In the longer term we expect to earn revenue by expanding the ecosystem of bitcoin based (and trustless/crypto tech in general), and helping others make use of it. (so there are a couple forks of this, and some of them depend on which things we're expert in that people actually adopt) | 09:59 |
| hearn | right :) | 09:59 |
| * hearn is very happy to see that | 09:59 | |
| sipa | i think i've written more code for core the past two months than the previous year | 09:59 |
| sipa | anyway, we've very much planning to contribute and keep contributing things to core | 10:00 |
| hearn | sipa: yes, it's been awesome | 10:00 |
| gmaxwell | I unfortunately have, sadly, though part of this is been because I've been covering internal engineering things so that pieter, matt, and jtimon could spend more hacking time on public infrastructure. | 10:00 |
| hearn | gmaxwell: such is the life of a good manager ... | 10:01 |
| gmaxwell | Separately, (to the channel) we're hiring. :) | 10:01 |
| hearn | perhaps if sidechains takes off, it'll make sense to find cleaner factorings of bitcoinj so supporting multiple alt chains in the same process is easier. | 10:02 |
| kanzure | gmaxwell: make an offer | 10:02 |
| tromp | "gmaxwell" =~ s/x/nage/ | 10:02 |
| hearn | currently it sort of mostly 80% works but nobody really flexes those muscles so they atrophy | 10:02 |
| hearn | ultimately, users care about features, and moving value back and forth between consensus systems would have to be largely transparent for them to really benefit. and that means a ton of work on wallets. | 10:03 |
| sipa | i agree that that is a real challenge | 10:03 |
| woah | I think that a lot of people work on altcoins because they don't beleive that bitcoin is really as good as it could be and they don't feel that large improvements will be accepted into core | 10:03 |
| gmaxwell | hearn: yea, there is some section in the whitepaper about software complexity impacts on wallets (it grew and shrank over time, so without looking I don't know how much it says there now) but good support in wallets will be important to actually deliver on all you could do. | 10:03 |
| sipa | woah: hence sidechains :) | 10:03 |
| hearn | woah: most sidechains don't contain any real innovations | 10:04 |
| hearn | er, sorry | 10:04 |
| hearn | alt coins | 10:04 |
| * hearn is getting into the groove already :) | 10:04 | |
| kanzure | it's conceptually easier to fork bitcoin than to consider consensus changes... so it's no surprise that forks happen. | 10:04 |
| woah | true... a lot of the time their authors think they do | 10:04 |
| hearn | woah: you can count the number of alts that do something radically interesting on the fingers of one hand | 10:04 |
| BlueMatt | hearn: I'm sure most sidechains wont either :p | 10:04 |
| kanzure | forks will continue to happen even with sidechains well-implemented | 10:04 |
| sipa | hearn: i think i've commented in san jose 2013 that the more interesting a altcoin is, the harder it is to make software that is compatible with multiple | 10:04 |
| hearn | right | 10:04 |
| woah | i've also always felt that there's a bias against bitcoin because of the wealth distribution | 10:05 |
| sipa | hearn, BlueMatt: even better, not a single sidechain today does any real innovation | 10:05 |
| BlueMatt | heh, indeed | 10:05 |
| hearn | haha | 10:05 |
| hearn | that's true! i guess the concept must suck | 10:05 |
| woah | people say it doesn't matter, but then why do people try to fork it so much | 10:05 |
| hearn | bitcoin über alles | 10:05 |
| gavinandresen | woah: because it is easy | 10:05 |
| BlueMatt | incedentally: https://github.com/Blockstream/contracthashtool | 10:05 |
| gmaxwell | ^ implementation of the commitment scheme from appendix a. | 10:05 |
| sipa | woah: or because of the dream that the wealth distribution can be reset in your favor | 10:06 |
| gavinandresen | woah: … and you might get lucky and make a few tens of thousands of dollars on your altcoin. | 10:06 |
| woah | and they want in on the ground floor | 10:06 |
| woah | sipa yep | 10:06 |
| gavinandresen | sidechains won’t change those dynamics | 10:06 |
| hearn | BlueMatt: C? srsly? ;) | 10:06 |
| sipa | IT'S C++! | 10:06 |
| justanotheruser | gavinandresen: altcoins will have to start pretending they are secure *and* they can do something bitcoin can't do in a sidechain | 10:06 |
| sipa | ALSO IT'S CAPSLOCK DAY | 10:06 |
| hearn | BlueMatt: though if that "you broke sha256" line ever triggers please CC me on the bug report | 10:06 |
| gavinandresen | CAPSLOCK DAY! WHY DIDN’T I GET THE MEMO! | 10:07 |
| BlueMatt | hearn: yea.....meh | 10:07 |
| hearn | it's TALK LIKE AN AOL USER day :) | 10:07 |
| BlueMatt | hearn: yea, if I get a response to that it'll be public-enough rather quick | 10:07 |
| gavinandresen | good thing it wasn’t capslock day yesterday, I woulda been shouting all through my AMA | 10:07 |
| gmaxwell | MY LAPTOP DOESN'T HAVE A CAPSLOCK KEY, YOU INSENSITIVE CLODS | 10:07 |
| sipa | use smallcaps please | 10:08 |
| justanotheruser | sɪᴘᴀ: ʜᴇʟʟᴏ | 10:08 |
| sipa | ¡ǝɹǝɥʇ ıɥ | 10:08 |
| hearn | i guess we said everything there is to be said about side chains already :) | 10:09 |
| gavinandresen | BlueMatt: contracthashtool updated 11 hours ago <— did you do that just for me? | 10:09 |
| sipa | yeah, we will retroactrively update the timestamp every hour | 10:09 |
| BlueMatt | gavinandresen: lol, sureeee | 10:09 |
| gavinandresen | Since you’re all here, I wonder if you can save me some searching: anybody have a short list of good previous discussions to techniques to mitigate 51% attacks? | 10:10 |
| kanzure | https://github.com/Blockstream/contracthashtool/issues/1 | 10:11 |
| BlueMatt | kanzure: fixed, thanks | 10:14 |
| -!- hearn [~mike@46.140.0.211] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds] | 10:14 | |
| BlueMatt | well, added a note... | 10:14 |
| kanzure | aha | 10:14 |
| kanzure | yes that makes much more sense | 10:14 |
| -!- hearn [~mike@46.140.0.78] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 10:15 | |
| -!- hearn [~mike@46.140.0.78] has left #bitcoin-wizards [] | 10:15 | |
| -!- hearn [~mike@46.140.0.78] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 10:16 | |
| kanzure | hey it builds. | 10:16 |
| hearn | irc is being exceptionally painful today | 10:16 |
| sipa | have you tried irl? | 10:16 |
| kanzure | but this is a little strange: ./contracthashtool: error while loading shared libraries: libsecp256k1.so.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory | 10:16 |
| hearn | gavinandresen: you know how a couple of years ago, you wanted a wallet that linked to a smartphone to do two-factor multisig coins? and that's why you did p2sh? | 10:16 |
| kanzure | (libsecp256k1 is installed on my system) | 10:16 |
| gavinandresen | hearn: yes.... | 10:16 |
| hearn | gavinandresen: it now exists, check out https://www.bitcoinauthenticator.org/ | 10:16 |
| hearn | gavinandresen: cross platform SPV wallet with accompanying android app that does 2-factor auth of coins, with built in automatic tor usage | 10:17 |
| gmaxwell | amiller: Andytoshi is consulting part-time so that he can work for blockstream while completing his PHD. (I am pretty happy we were able to fund his work on the white paper, he did a ton of the editorial heavy lifting as you saw) | 10:17 |
| gavinandresen | hearn: nice! | 10:17 |
| hearn | current version is an alpha, ui is a bit rough in places but i tried it earlier today and it works fine | 10:17 |
| BlueMatt | kanzure: nfc, export explicit path with LD_LIBRARY_PATH ? | 10:17 |
| kanzure | that's unfortunate. | 10:17 |
| BlueMatt | kanzure: dunno, should absolutely work | 10:17 |
| gmaxwell | BlueMatt: I had that problem too while testing but I just statically linked it by hand. | 10:17 |
| kanzure | since i need to scurry off to other things, should i post this as a bug report or not? | 10:18 |
| sipa | did you run ldconfig? | 10:18 |
| gmaxwell | In my case I didn't have the library installed, so it was expected. | 10:18 |
| kanzure | sipa: that fixes it | 10:18 |
| sipa | you need to so the ld cache knows about the existence of the library | 10:18 |
| kanzure | thank you | 10:20 |
| kanzure | https://github.com/Blockstream/contracthashtool/pull/2 | 10:20 |
| -!- Persopolis [~Persopoli@cpc10-haye19-2-0-cust19.17-4.cable.virginm.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 10:24 | |
| lechuga_ | really exciting | 10:30 |
| lechuga_ | congrats to the authors | 10:30 |
| gmaxwell | kanzure: got it working? | 10:30 |
| -!- MoALTz [~no@user-188-33-132-198.play-internet.pl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 10:31 | |
| kanzure | yep | 10:31 |
| -!- austinhill1 [~Adium@c-50-136-255-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 10:37 | |
| -!- austinhill [~Adium@c-50-136-255-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] | 10:41 | |
| -!- wiretapped [~wiretappe@gateway/tor-sasl/wiretapped] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 10:42 | |
| -!- wiretapped [~wiretappe@gateway/tor-sasl/wiretapped] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 10:42 | |
| -!- kyletorpey [~kyle@c-24-131-0-5.hsd1.va.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 10:47 | |
| -!- zooko [~user@c-24-9-104-70.hsd1.co.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 10:48 | |
| -!- austinhill1 [~Adium@c-50-136-255-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] | 10:52 | |
| maaku | wow i should have been on -wizards instead of reddit. thanks for all the feedback everyone :) | 10:53 |
| maaku | to alleviate some concerns, the fact that headers-first got merge ready, and all the refactoring work jtimon has been doing is because blockstream is committed to us splitting our time on bitcoin core | 10:53 |
| kanzure | hilarious that you guys have gmaxwell setting up build servers | 10:54 |
| maaku | well, things got rushed.. :( | 10:55 |
| sipa | ? | 10:55 |
| gmaxwell | kanzure: hm? nah. not me setting up build servers. But things like hiring, and other business stuff. | 10:55 |
| kanzure | heh, okay | 10:55 |
| lechuga_ | maaku: congrats! | 10:56 |
| -!- justanotheruser [~Justan@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] | 10:57 | |
| maaku | thanks :) | 10:59 |
| zooko | Congrats, you folks. :-) | 10:59 |
| -!- adam3us [~Adium@c-50-136-255-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] | 10:59 | |
| sipa | thanks! | 11:00 |
| -!- mxisaac [~mxisaac@108.60.55.250] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 11:01 | |
| gmaxwell | zooko: thanks! | 11:02 |
| -!- dansmith_ [~dansmith@178-33-115-54.kimsufi.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 11:02 | |
| -!- hearn [~mike@46.140.0.78] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…] | 11:08 | |
| -!- wiretapped [~wiretappe@gateway/tor-sasl/wiretapped] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 11:10 | |
| -!- wiretapped [~wiretappe@gateway/tor-sasl/wiretapped] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 11:10 | |
| -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@unaffiliated/wallet42] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] | 11:10 | |
| -!- crowex [~crowex@host-78-147-106-214.as13285.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 11:10 | |
| -!- Persopolis [~Persopoli@cpc10-haye19-2-0-cust19.17-4.cable.virginm.net] has quit [] | 11:11 | |
| -!- zooko [~user@c-24-9-104-70.hsd1.co.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] | 11:12 | |
| -!- orperelman [~wboy@bzq-79-183-8-242.red.bezeqint.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 11:12 | |
| -!- maclane [~maclane@12.250.97.26] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 11:12 | |
| -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@unaffiliated/wallet42] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 11:15 | |
| -!- adam3us [~Adium@c-50-136-255-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 11:19 | |
| -!- mxisaac [~mxisaac@108.60.55.250] has quit [] | 11:22 | |
| -!- adam3us [~Adium@c-50-136-255-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] | 11:25 | |
| -!- Dizzle [~diesel@70.114.207.41] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 11:25 | |
| -!- crowex [~crowex@host-78-147-106-214.as13285.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 11:30 | |
| -!- vfor [~Adium@g226185245.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 11:31 | |
| -!- gloriusAgain [~gloriusag@g226185245.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 11:32 | |
| -!- NewLiberty [~NewLibert@adsl-172-6-13-22.dsl.lsan03.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 11:33 | |
| -!- jtimon [~quassel@c-50-136-255-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] | 11:34 | |
| -!- gloriusAgain [~gloriusag@g226185245.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 11:34 | |
| -!- vfor [~Adium@g226185245.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Client Quit] | 11:34 | |
| gmaxwell | Any of y'all live in the bay area? | 11:38 |
| lechuga_ | <- | 11:38 |
| nsh | is this sidechains paper the first mention of Dynamic-Membership Multiparty Signatures? | 11:39 |
| * nsh doesn't recall the term in discussion here | 11:39 | |
| @gwillen | nsh: afaik yes | 11:39 |
| nsh | ok, ty | 11:39 |
| lechuga_ | i think it's the first mention of bitcoin being described as an implmentation | 11:39 |
| @gwillen | (I'm pretty sure it is, since the term has changed in the most recent version) | 11:39 |
| * nsh nods | 11:39 | |
| nsh | tastes like conceptual headway anyway | 11:40 |
| -!- crowex [~crowex@host-78-147-106-214.as13285.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 11:40 | |
| maaku | nsh: we coined the term, to our knowledge it is the first descrpition of the concept underlying it. if you know of prior work we should cite, let us know. | 11:42 |
| * nsh nods | 11:42 | |
| maaku | Well i think the idea, if not the DMMS phrase has shown up on -wizards, just not in the literature | 11:42 |
| nsh | i guess too sparsely for me to have accorded it status as an notion-in-itself. it's useful having handles on these things | 11:43 |
| nsh | so i wonder if the fact that the underlying resource is denominated in dimensions of T^-1 (hashpower) is deeply connected to the ability to distributedly consensuate the time-ordering of events | 11:45 |
| nsh | (#bitcoin-showerthoughts) | 11:46 |
| -!- crowex [~crowex@host-78-147-106-214.as13285.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 11:49 | |
| -!- zooko [~user@67-6-128-167.hlrn.qwest.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 11:50 | |
| -!- hearn [~mike@84-75-198-85.dclient.hispeed.ch] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 11:54 | |
| waxwing | nsh, you sure it isn't MLT^-3 ? | 12:01 |
| nsh | i meant includes a /time, rather than to specify the exact dimensions | 12:02 |
| nsh | dunno what the unit of a hash is really | 12:02 |
| waxwing | sure. nor do I :) | 12:02 |
| nsh | "There are trade-offs between scalability and decentralisation. For example, a larger block size would allow the network to support a higher transaction rate, at the cost of placing more work on validators — a centralisation risk." -- is it worth elaborating on how this leads to centralization? | 12:03 |
| sipa | if fewer people can validate, validation becomes more centralized. | 12:03 |
| sipa | any question? :0 | 12:03 |
| nsh | to what extent can fewer people validate a 2mb block compared to a 1mb block? is the barrier to entry the resources required to maintain a mempool? | 12:04 |
| sipa | 2 Mbyte block == twice as many resourced required as 1 Mbyte block | 12:06 |
| sipa | (cpu, bandwidth, storage) | 12:06 |
| * nsh nods | 12:07 | |
| hearn | nsh: from 1mb to 2mb probably the number of people who'd drop out is unmeasurable | 12:07 |
| hearn | nsh: but it's hard to model theoretically | 12:07 |
| nsh | so the degree of centralization depends on the tail of resource-availability or usability of the cadre of potential validating participants | 12:07 |
| * nsh nods | 12:07 | |
| -!- fenn [~fenn@131.252.130.248] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 12:07 | |
| hearn | intuitively it must be greater than zero but could theoretically be less than one :) | 12:08 |
| hearn | (number of people who drop out) | 12:08 |
| nsh | if there's a long tail between 1mb and 2mb it doesn't cut off that many people, but if there gradient is higher then it does | 12:08 |
| * nsh nods | 12:08 | |
| nsh | but we can't model that distribution except by seeing who drops off as resource requirements increase | 12:09 |
| fenn | hi, so apparently i instigated a conversation about scalability | 12:09 |
| hearn | pretty much | 12:09 |
| hearn | and then there are many confounding variables | 12:09 |
| hearn | e.g. price | 12:09 |
| sipa | well, how many people actually run a a full node isn't all that relevant imho | 12:10 |
| sipa | as it does depend on how popular the system is | 12:10 |
| sipa | what matters is how easy it is for someone who wants to | 12:10 |
| fenn | would it be possible with the current protocols to validate only a part of the block, forward that work on to another node, have them validate another part, and eventually someone looks at all the work and validates the whole block? | 12:11 |
| sipa | fenn: sure, it's trivial | 12:11 |
| sipa | but it would only help with cpu usage - not bandwidth or storage | 12:11 |
| hearn | that's called "sharding the full node", effectively ;) | 12:11 |
| nsh | hmm | 12:12 |
| hearn | fenn: the current protocols don't really have big scaling problems: https://bitcoin.org/en/faq#can-bitcoin-scale-to-become-a-major-payment-network | 12:12 |
| sipa | the unique quality is a currency in which everyone can verify that nobody is cheating - whether people actually do of course matters in practice, but it's probably more relevant to ask which % of those who could do | 12:12 |
| hearn | fenn: or at least none that can't be solved with some optimisation | 12:12 |
| nsh | it would help with storage if you could somehow decide who pays attention to which transactions before distributing the validation work | 12:12 |
| kanzure | fenn: for later http://diyhpl.us/~bryan/papers2/bitcoin/VerSum:%20Verifiable%20computations%20over%20large%20public%20logs.pdf | 12:12 |
| nsh | not sure if how trivial that would be be | 12:13 |
| -!- profreid [~profreid@a88-115-210-162.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 12:13 | |
| -!- Nomos7 [~textual@pool-71-163-224-249.washdc.east.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…] | 12:14 | |
| -!- Luke-Jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 12:14 | |
| fenn | sipa: most people dont care if nobody is cheating, only if they're being cheated | 12:15 |
| fenn | themselves | 12:16 |
| sipa | that's the same thing, fortunately | 12:16 |
| -!- JohnnyBitcoin [~Johnny@ool-4352401e.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 12:17 | |
| fenn | nsh were you reading http://langsec.org | 12:20 |
| nsh | briefly | 12:20 |
| -!- Kireji [~nospam@unaffiliated/kireji] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 12:31 | |
| -!- artifexd [sid28611@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-qmpjoryqjmftfxwz] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 12:32 | |
| -!- artifexd [sid28611@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-uzxqszdxtqijfrxp] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 12:33 | |
| -!- adam3us [~Adium@c-50-136-255-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 12:39 | |
| -!- maclane [~maclane@12.250.97.26] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] | 12:40 | |
| orperelman | I just got back from that area a few weeks back Greg, wish I could come :( | 12:40 |
| -!- KingCoin [~KingCoin@unaffiliated/kingcoin] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 12:41 | |
| Luke-Jr | orperelman: don't think anyone knew you were in the area? :/ | 12:42 |
| maaku | sadly my IRC client was on the fritz the last month. I got a message from Or but not until yesterday :\ | 12:43 |
| orperelman | Yep, nm guys, in a few months might take Alex too this time. | 12:44 |
| maaku | look us up when you do :) | 12:44 |
| orperelman | Indeed, I'll! | 12:45 |
| -!- justanotheruser [~Justan@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 12:51 | |
| -!- mkarrer [~mkarrer@183.Red-83-40-233.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 12:51 | |
| -!- mkarrer [~mkarrer@183.Red-83-40-233.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 12:52 | |
| -!- woah [~woah@75-101-111-82.dedicated.static.sonic.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…] | 12:53 | |
| -!- Burrito [~Burrito@unaffiliated/burrito] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 12:55 | |
| -!- mkarrer [~mkarrer@183.Red-83-40-233.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] | 12:56 | |
| -!- woah [~woah@75-101-111-82.dedicated.static.sonic.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 13:03 | |
| -!- woah [~woah@75-101-111-82.dedicated.static.sonic.net] has quit [Client Quit] | 13:05 | |
| Taek | my understanding is that the fundamental benefit of 2wp is that you can make altcoins which use bitcoins for their currency | 13:06 |
| justanotheruser | Taek: another huge benefit is scalability | 13:07 |
| Taek | but scalability at the cost of trusting SPV proofs right? | 13:09 |
| maaku | Taek: we've adopted the terminology "altchain which use bitcoin as its currency" for that | 13:09 |
| gmaxwell | It's not scalability magic pixie dust, for decenteralized systems there is a fundimental scale vs centeralization tradeoff. | 13:09 |
| Luke-Jr | justanotheruser: kinda uncertain how viable the scale-by-having-a-daily-blockchain idea is | 13:09 |
| Taek | maaku my bad I intended to use 'altchain' but the fingers are just used to 'altcoin' | 13:10 |
| maaku | And there are multiple approaches to handling the sidechain firewall, it is probably deserving of a paper in itself. | 13:10 |
| gmaxwell | Some are just areas for future devlopment. | 13:11 |
| justanotheruser | Luke-Jr: Maybe not a day, but I'm confused how that isn't a massive scalability improvement. | 13:11 |
| Taek | I'm also a little bit uneasy about the idea of a contest period. Someone could keep submitting spv proofs that contain double spends, causing bloat. | 13:12 |
| -!- vmatekole [~vmatekole@f055110130.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 13:12 | |
| justanotheruser | I do wonder how p2pool will handle sidechains though. I remember someone mentioning fraud proofs. I wonder how secure that can be, untested waters! | 13:12 |
| Taek | And if they could manage some kind of DDOS that enables them to stifle anti-proofs during the contest period | 13:13 |
| Luke-Jr | justanotheruser: those got renamed to reorg proofs in the paper, FWIW | 13:13 |
| Taek | it just seems loose/rough around the edges | 13:13 |
| Luke-Jr | Taek: the idea is to have miners filter out known fraud upfront | 13:14 |
| gmaxwell | Taek: some of it is because it's simply broad. E.g. there is plenty of design space to build really ill advised things; but if that wasn't possible it wouldn't be flexible enough. | 13:14 |
| Luke-Jr | if they can stifle anti-proofs, then they have an effective attack on Bitcoin nodes already (sybil attack) | 13:14 |
| gmaxwell | Taek: generally the same mechensisms protect against any other kind of txflooding dos attack. The ability to require a confirmation period also helps. | 13:15 |
| Taek | gmaxwell: I'll accept that. It'll make more sense to talk about problems when a specific example of a sidechain implementation exists. | 13:15 |
| Luke-Jr | Taek: note the initial SPV proof will likely require you to stake some of your current bitcoins so there's funds to provide a fee for the reorg proof later | 13:15 |
| Taek | Luke-Jr: they don't have to DoS all bitcoin nodes, just all sidechain nodes, which would be easier for smaller sidechains | 13:15 |
| Luke-Jr | Taek: possibly. I have doubts it'd be hard to DoS all bitcoin nodes anyway | 13:16 |
| Taek | Would miners be able to protect themselves by sitting behind CloudFlare? | 13:17 |
| -!- zooko [~user@67-6-128-167.hlrn.qwest.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] | 13:17 | |
| Luke-Jr | if they want CloudFlare to be a central point of attack on them.. | 13:17 |
| maaku | Taek: i'm not sure we address this in the paper, but you can stifle DoS by attaching forced bounties for the reorg proof | 13:18 |
| maaku | same as other DoS protections | 13:18 |
| Luke-Jr | maaku: that doesn't solve the problem of nodes being DoS'd | 13:18 |
| Luke-Jr | maaku: ie, kill the real sidechain, then mine your fraud | 13:18 |
| Luke-Jr | but it perhaps provides the incentive needed for people to run non-miner full nodes ;) | 13:20 |
| -!- zwischenzug [~zwischenz@137.63.72.102] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 13:20 | |
| -!- Nomos7 [~textual@pool-71-163-224-249.washdc.east.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 13:22 | |
| -!- justanotheruser [~Justan@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] | 13:23 | |
| -!- profreid [~profreid@a88-115-210-162.elisa-laajakaista.fi] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 13:25 | |
| -!- peterlie [~peterlie@99-127-231-33.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 13:31 | |
| -!- justanotheruser [~Justan@unaffiliated/justanotheruser] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 13:31 | |
| -!- woah [~woah@75-101-111-82.dedicated.static.sonic.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 13:34 | |
| -!- mapppum [~mappum@c-24-17-76-220.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 13:42 | |
| -!- maraoz [~maraoz@186.137.72.20] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] | 13:45 | |
| -!- Aquent2 [~Aquent@gateway/tor-sasl/aquent] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 13:47 | |
| -!- moa [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/moa] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 13:48 | |
| -!- Aquent1 [~Aquent@gateway/tor-sasl/aquent] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 13:49 | |
| -!- UukGoblin [~jaa@unaffiliated/uukgoblin] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] | 13:51 | |
| moa | any github repo for sidechains? | 13:51 |
| gmaxwell | Not yet. Though if you're interested, there is an implementation of the appendix a commitment scheme at https://github.com/Blockstream/contracthashtool | 13:52 |
| -!- kyletorpey [~kyle@c-24-131-0-5.hsd1.va.comcast.net] has left #bitcoin-wizards [] | 13:53 | |
| moa | ta | 13:53 |
| -!- zooko [~user@67-6-128-167.hlrn.qwest.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 13:58 | |
| -!- OX3 [~OX3@gateway-nat.fmrib.ox.ac.uk] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 13:58 | |
| Iriez | Your a wizard harry! A bitcoin-wizard! Aspirillicus! | 14:03 |
| moa | lord voldemort? | 14:04 |
| justanotheruser | did someone link this channel after the sidechain announcement? | 14:04 |
| tacotime | Willickers | 14:06 |
| maaku | Aspirillicus? what the hell kind of spell is that. Death by closet mold! | 14:07 |
| MRL-Relay | [surae] I think it has something to do with aspirin | 14:09 |
| -!- AnoAnon [~AnoAnon@197.37.78.36] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 14:09 | |
| -!- AnoAnon [~AnoAnon@197.37.78.36] has quit [Max SendQ exceeded] | 14:09 | |
| -!- devsaturn [~blah@105-237-18-22.access.mtnbusiness.co.za] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 14:11 | |
| -!- vfor [~Adium@g226185245.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 14:15 | |
| -!- gloriusAgain [~gloriusag@g226185245.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 14:15 | |
| -!- crowex [~crowex@host-78-147-106-214.as13285.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 14:17 | |
| -!- mkarrer [~mkarrer@183.Red-83-40-233.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 14:17 | |
| -!- kristofferR [~kristoffe@208.37-191-147.fiber.lynet.no] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 14:18 | |
| gmaxwell | Most flattering insult I've had all month, http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2k01du/peter_todd_on_twitter_the_sidechains_paper_is/clgtayf ... I'm as ignorant as Satoshi. I also like the citation of POS being broken using a paper by one of the sidechain whitepaper authors. :) :) | 14:22 |
| -!- woah [~woah@75-101-111-82.dedicated.static.sonic.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…] | 14:22 | |
| -!- phedny [~mark@prei.vps.van-cuijk.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] | 14:26 | |
| moa | so sidechains will need to use LockTime extensively for the two-way peg? | 14:27 |
| justanotheruser | moa: It would probably be implicit | 14:28 |
| justanotheruser | meaning that redeeming the SPV proof wouldn't have to have checklocktimeverify in the script, it would just be a rule of the sidechain that you had to wait that long | 14:29 |
| sipa | it _could_ be a checklocktimeverify | 14:30 |
| -!- woah [~woah@75-101-111-82.dedicated.static.sonic.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 14:30 | |
| sipa | maybe it's a script that does both checklocktimeverify and checkspvproofverify | 14:30 |
| justanotheruser | sipa: if you allow tx without checklocktimeverify peoples coins can disappear during reorgs | 14:31 |
| sipa | sure - it would be a requirement for the transfer that it has a sufficient locktime | 14:31 |
| justanotheruser | ... so there is an implicit checklocktimeverify | 14:31 |
| sipa | either an implicit one, or a required explicit one | 14:31 |
| justanotheruser | both would work, but if a checkspvproofverify always requires a checklocktimeverify according to the sidechains rules, why not just make it implicit? | 14:32 |
| sipa | reusability - maybe another sidechain would not require it, and use some not-yet-discovered alternative? | 14:33 |
| sipa | a OP_CHECKSIDECHAINTRANSFER would be very unflexible, because it could exactly only do what we currently envision it it to do | 14:34 |
| justanotheruser | sipa: why could the alternative not be implicit as well | 14:34 |
| justanotheruser | since we don't know what the alternative is I guess you cannot say | 14:34 |
| moa | is there a blockexplorer like function/site that is keeping stats on current nLockTime using TX in the blockchain? | 14:35 |
| sipa | well we can't just change opcodes in bitcoin all the time | 14:35 |
| moa | nad how many has there been?... thousands, hundreds, tens? | 14:35 |
| sipa | if we could, we wouldn't even need sidechains for some of the usecases | 14:35 |
| justanotheruser | sipa: so you're suggesting it be explicit for the mainchain? | 14:35 |
| -!- Nomos7 [~textual@pool-71-163-224-249.washdc.east.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…] | 14:36 | |
| sipa | that's so far out that i don't want to talk about it | 14:36 |
| sipa | just saying that it's an option that has advantages | 14:36 |
| justanotheruser | sipa: I'm confused. Why is that an advantage in terms of " well we can't just change opcodes in bitcoin all the time"? | 14:36 |
| justanotheruser | removing the required lock time would be just as hard as removing the implicit lock time afaics | 14:37 |
| sipa | justanotheruser: there is an advantage to having a bunch of neatly-defined small opcodes rather than one single big opcode that does all of the sidechain stuff we envision later | 14:37 |
| -!- JohnnyBitcoin [~Johnny@ool-4352401e.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving] | 14:37 | |
| -!- JohnnyBitcoin [~Johnny@ool-4352401e.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 14:38 | |
| sipa | exactly the reason why bitcoin script does have a OP_MULTISIG and OP_SINGLESIG... it has a fully flexible script that allows doing things that were not originially envisioned | 14:38 |
| sipa | *does not have | 14:38 |
| sipa | welll... they're not nearly as flexible as i would like, but you get the idea i hope | 14:38 |
| -!- myeagleflies [~myeaglefl@unaffiliated/myeagleflies] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 14:38 | |
| sipa | we don't know what the future will bring, and maybe we'll want to do some part of the sidechain transfers differently at some point | 14:39 |
| justanotheruser | sipa: well you have the flexibility to do whatever you like with many OP_CHECKSIGs, OP_MULTISIG is just a compact version of many of those. I don't see why a redemption couldn't be a compact version of a few opcodes | 14:39 |
| justanotheruser | either way, explicit or implicit is a trivial issue | 14:39 |
| sipa | it's a very important design question | 14:39 |
| justanotheruser | two extra bytes :P | 14:39 |
| sipa | having a single opcode that does everything is essentially saying that how we currently thing sidechains will work, will be how they always work | 14:39 |
| sipa | if we just extend the script functionality to encode the sidechain functionality concisely, it means that later siechains can do things in different ways | 14:40 |
| justanotheruser | sipa: at least how chains with the mainchain as a parent work | 14:40 |
| sipa | sure | 14:40 |
| -!- gloriusAgain [~gloriusag@g226185245.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 14:40 | |
| -!- vfor [~Adium@g226185245.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] | 14:40 | |
| -!- gloriusAgain [~gloriusag@g226185245.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 14:41 | |
| maaku | not to mention it would be useful to allow federated peg in conjunction with spv proof verification | 14:41 |
| -!- gloriusAgain [~gloriusag@g226185245.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 14:42 | |
| kgk | *just read the paper* could the bitcoin blockchain be the "child" chain to an alt-coin chain? | 14:43 |
| kgk | or does bitcoin always have to be the parent? | 14:43 |
| justanotheruser | kgk: no, scamcoins can and will copy sidechains too | 14:43 |
| sipa | that's not the question | 14:43 |
| justanotheruser | well hes asking if bitcoin is always the parent | 14:44 |
| -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-4570a006.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 14:44 | |
| kgk | yeah. Specifically, say I'm using a Bitcoin wallet that doesn't know about a parent side-chain | 14:44 |
| tacotime | I assume with modification you could transfer other coins into bitcoin as sorts of coloured coins | 14:44 |
| kgk | and somebody sends me bitcoin that originated from a 2-way peg | 14:44 |
| sipa | kgk: for the transfer perspective, it is symmetric | 14:44 |
| sipa | or at least can be | 14:44 |
| kgk | well those bitcoin are essentially "marked" right? they really represent assets on the other chain in that case | 14:45 |
| kgk | but my wallet wouldn't know that | 14:45 |
| sipa | well your wallet need to deal with every chain it wants to deal with | 14:45 |
| kgk | what happens in that case? Could I get into a situation where somebody sends me "marked" bitcoin without my wallet knowing | 14:45 |
| sipa | no | 14:45 |
| sipa | because if you're talking about the asset bitcoin, there is only one chain able to create them: Bitcoin | 14:46 |
| -!- tromp__ [~tromp@ool-4570a006.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds] | 14:47 | |
| sipa | oh, and coins that locked in Bitcoin (because transferred to the sidechain), are sent to a special script that can only be unlocked by moving (the same, or and equal amount) of coins back | 14:47 |
| sipa | so they can't go into your bitcoin wallet without you knowing - it looks like coins sent to an exotic script | 14:47 |
| -!- tromp__ [~tromp@ool-4570a006.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 14:47 | |
| -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-4570a006.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 14:48 | |
| kgk | I get that. I'm just wondering about the other way. if bitcoin is not the parent. it's the child. | 14:48 |
| -!- phedny [~mark@prei.vps.van-cuijk.nl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 14:48 | |
| sipa | well bitcoins cannot come from anywhere - the Bitcoin chain is the one where they are native! | 14:49 |
| sipa | the Bitcoin rules forbid creation of new coins, you know? | 14:49 |
| sipa | nothing changes about that | 14:49 |
| kgk | lol yeah | 14:49 |
| -!- jtimon [~quassel@c-50-136-255-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 14:49 | |
| maaku | kgk: it is unlikely to happen without further changes to bitcoin which themselves are unlikely to happen because of sidechains | 14:50 |
| maaku | e.g. if bitcoin had native asset issuance then you could issue an asset to represent the pegged coin ... but part of the reason for sidechains is to avoid making such massive changes to bitcoin | 14:51 |
| sipa | so yeah, there is no way that bitcoin could be imported from another chain - that would violate Bitcoin's rules | 14:51 |
| sipa | and Bitcoin doesn't support any other asset than bitcoin, so there is nothing else that could be imported either | 14:51 |
| -!- vfor [~Adium@g226185245.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 14:52 | |
| -!- gloriusAgain [~gloriusag@g226185245.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 14:52 | |
| justanotheruser | I can think of a really hackey way to increase bitcoins monetary supply involving labeling the amount sent in the script :P | 14:52 |
| justanotheruser | you couldn't transact with old clients, however they wouldn't lose consensus. Best to leave that alone IMO | 14:53 |
| kgk | *trying to wrap my head around how the spv proof is spent* I think I was misunderstanding that | 14:53 |
| sipa | kgk: you send to a special script that says "this requires an spv proof of movement to unlock" | 14:54 |
| kgk | when you spend an spv-proof on a sidechain, what does the output of that transaction look like? | 14:54 |
| kgk | er, that doesn't make sense lol | 14:55 |
| sipa | "send to this address on this other chain, and require an SPV move of an output with the same amount being moved back on the other side, to unlock" | 14:55 |
| Luke-Jr | kgk: Bitcoin's present blockchain can only be a parent, and only via federated pegging. But a sidechain-enabled blockchain could very well transfer in any asset, including altcoins. | 14:55 |
| sipa | then you create an SPV proof of that transaction being buried in Bitcoin, and use that SPV proof to generate the coin on the other side | 14:56 |
| kgk | sipa: ah that is what I'm confused about I think. When you say "generate the coin", what does that output look like on the sidechain? | 14:56 |
| -!- gloriusAgain [~gloriusag@g226185245.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 14:56 | |
| -!- vfor [~Adium@g226185245.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Client Quit] | 14:56 | |
| justanotheruser | Luke-Jr: are you talking about sidechains shared between cryptocurrencies? | 14:57 |
| -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 14:57 | |
| sipa | kgk: there are several says to do it | 14:57 |
| -!- AaronvanW [~ewout@158pc208.sshunet.nl] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] | 14:57 | |
| kanzure | justanotheruser: that is an amusing inflation method. technically yes it is compatible. | 14:57 |
| Luke-Jr | justanotheruser: yes, that's mostly what the whitepaper discusses (although perhaps not explicitly) | 14:57 |
| sipa | kgk: one is that it's just a totally new special transaction type that looks perhaps like a coinbase transaction, but has as input the SPV of the busy of the sending to the sidechain in bitcoin | 14:57 |
| -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-4570a006.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 14:58 | |
| sipa | kgk: another is that 21M coins are preallocated to a special script that does SPV checks on the sidechain from the start, and you're required to create a transaction that moves some coins out of it | 14:58 |
| sipa | (it needs special rules to demand that the change goes back to the pool, however) | 14:58 |
| justanotheruser | Luke-Jr: why is that desirable? | 14:59 |
| kgk | sipa: ah ic. ok, so each side-chain has to figure that out itself. | 14:59 |
| Luke-Jr | justanotheruser: once you have assets and sidechains, it's more of "why not? it's trivial" | 14:59 |
| sipa | kgk: some part has to be standardized | 14:59 |
| sipa | but yes, the generation is up to the sidechain | 14:59 |
| sipa | it could be totally insecure too - people would just rob the transferred assets dry | 15:00 |
| -!- tromp__ [~tromp@ool-4570a006.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] | 15:00 | |
| arubi | (chiming in), would you say it's possible to allocate a random quantity of coins in a sidechain to a transaction made to the locked output on the parent chain? | 15:01 |
| kgk | lol right. and the bitcoin would just be locked up forever on the bitcoin blockchain | 15:01 |
| maaku | arubi: sure | 15:02 |
| maaku | but why would you want to ;) | 15:02 |
| kgk | er actually, whoever stole the coins on the alt-chain could just redeem the bitcoin. nvm | 15:02 |
| arubi | great! we can make a satoshidice sidechain then maaku :) | 15:02 |
| justanotheruser | what kind of altcoins are you talking about? Obviously pretty much all would be compatible, I mean, which are desirable, altcoins if you can just replicate their chains characteristics | 15:03 |
| kgk | arubi: lol except whoever created the spv-proof transaction would be the one generating the randomness... | 15:04 |
| arubi | kgk, a single entity is "generating" something with sidechains? that sounds... wrong..? | 15:04 |
| justanotheruser | kgk: thats not a uniform random | 15:04 |
| justanotheruser | its probably incredibly grindable too | 15:05 |
| arubi | oh I see what you're saying.. sorry. no, what I meant is the rules may be put so the generation on the sidechain is random | 15:05 |
| justanotheruser | arubi: generation of what? | 15:06 |
| kgk | i.e. the user is the one generating the transaction to your side-chain. So the user is specifying the amount. | 15:06 |
| arubi | well, "random" is better | 15:06 |
| justanotheruser | pretty much all casino games that might use the blockchain for randomness are probably insecure | 15:07 |
| arubi | generation of the side-coins, maybe a rule is in place as for the quantity of coins to be generated from the transaction to the locked output on the parent | 15:07 |
| -!- atgreen [~user@CPE687f74122463-CM84948c2e0610.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] | 15:09 | |
| -!- RoboTeddy [~roboteddy@2604:5500:13:5fc:8c9e:3945:e970:b529] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 15:09 | |
| arubi | so a provably fair random quantity of coins is generated on the sidechain out of the transaction to the locked output on the parent, then the 'player' can send that quantity back to the parent from the sidechain and either win, lose, or none | 15:09 |
| arubi | s/none/neither | 15:09 |
| justanotheruser | arubi: what determines win or loss? | 15:09 |
| arubi | well, maybe the block hash, i dunno. but something not pre-determined | 15:10 |
| -!- RoboTedd_ [~roboteddy@173.247.202.131] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 15:10 | |
| arubi | hash(quantity*blockhash)? | 15:11 |
| justanotheruser | arubi: block hash is influenced by the miner | 15:11 |
| arubi | huh?! | 15:11 |
| arubi | the blockhash of the parent chain.. say it's bitcoin.. how does the miner have a say in that..? | 15:12 |
| justanotheruser | arubi: lets say I'm mr money miner. I make a 100btc 50/50 bet and then I generate a block that has me losing. If I broadcast the block I get 25btc and lost 100btc. If I don't broadcast the block I have an E[X] of 50btc rather than -75btc | 15:12 |
| justanotheruser | err | 15:13 |
| arubi | an interesting case.. a miner that is also a player. I see what you're saying. | 15:13 |
| justanotheruser | and E[X] of 100btc rather than -75btc | 15:13 |
| justanotheruser | *an | 15:13 |
| arubi | yes yes | 15:13 |
| justanotheruser | arubi: look up "finney attack" | 15:13 |
| arubi | finney as in Hal? | 15:13 |
| justanotheruser | ya | 15:13 |
| arubi | interesting. thanks. | 15:13 |
| justanotheruser | its along the same lines, but this is more expensive since miners have to throw away awards to win this way | 15:14 |
| Luke-Jr | maaku: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2k070h/enabling_blockchain_innovations_with_pegged/clgpxgs <-- I think your 3rd 'altchain' was meant to be 'altcoin' | 15:14 |
| arubi | well, not to win, but not to lose | 15:14 |
| -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-4570a006.dyn.optonline.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] | 15:14 | |
| -!- RoboTeddy [~roboteddy@2604:5500:13:5fc:8c9e:3945:e970:b529] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] | 15:14 | |
| -!- tromp_ [~tromp@ool-18be0b4d.dyn.optonline.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 15:14 | |
| -!- adam3us1 [~Adium@c-50-136-255-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 15:16 | |
| -!- adam3us [~Adium@c-50-136-255-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 15:16 | |
| -!- mapppum [~mappum@c-24-17-76-220.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 15:16 | |
| maaku | Luke-Jr: it is correct | 15:19 |
| -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 15:23 | |
| Luke-Jr | " If you want to make an altchain, fine, more power to you. "? | 15:24 |
| -!- KingCoin [~KingCoin@unaffiliated/kingcoin] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds] | 15:25 | |
| maaku | Yes, moar altchains please. Just not more pointless non-differentiating alt*coins* | 15:25 |
| -!- vmatekol_ [~vmatekole@e179163240.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 15:26 | |
| -!- KingCoin [~KingCoin@unaffiliated/kingcoin] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 15:26 | |
| kanzure | gmaxwell: need some advice, i was going to reply to that murrell email on bitcoin-development. would that be inappropriate? | 15:27 |
| -!- laurentmt [~chatzilla@89-93-131-89.hfc.dyn.abo.bbox.fr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 15:28 | |
| kanzure | oops wait, i'll take this to pm | 15:28 |
| -!- vmatekole [~vmatekole@f055110130.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds] | 15:28 | |
| -!- KingCoin_ [~KingCoin@unaffiliated/kingcoin] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 15:33 | |
| -!- KingCoin [~KingCoin@unaffiliated/kingcoin] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 15:33 | |
| -!- KingCoin_ is now known as KingCoin | 15:33 | |
| -!- Cory [~Cory@unaffiliated/cory] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 15:34 | |
| -!- hearn [~mike@84-75-198-85.dclient.hispeed.ch] has quit [Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com] | 15:37 | |
| -!- KingCoin [~KingCoin@unaffiliated/kingcoin] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] | 15:38 | |
| -!- adam3us1 [~Adium@c-50-136-255-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] | 15:38 | |
| -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 15:39 | |
| amiller | is blockstream development going to be more public now beyond this whitepaper | 15:41 |
| arubi | hmm.. my connection may stalled if it did, please copy&paste your answer. If not, carry on | 15:41 |
| amiller | or still mostly done in quiet periods and released in bursts? | 15:42 |
| -!- adam3us [~Adium@c-50-136-255-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 15:43 | |
| kanzure | arubi: http://gnusha.org/bitcoin-wizards/2014-10-22.log | 15:43 |
| arubi | kanzure, that works, thanks. | 15:43 |
| -!- OX3_ [~OX3@gateway-nat.fmrib.ox.ac.uk] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 15:43 | |
| -!- Emcy [~MC@unaffiliated/mc1984] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 15:46 | |
| -!- Dizzle [~diesel@70.114.207.41] has quit [Quit: Leaving...] | 15:47 | |
| kanzure | .to andytoshi what do you think? https://github.com/kanzure/bitcoin-incentives/issues/4 | 15:47 |
| yoleaux | kanzure: I'll pass your message to andytoshi. | 15:47 |
| kanzure | i haven't considered this one before, "Miners have incentives not to forward transactions with high mining fees to prevent other miners from claiming those fees." | 15:48 |
| -!- Sangheili [Elite8385@gateway/shell/elitebnc/x-xtliexfaxnshozvn] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] | 15:50 | |
| Luke-Jr | amiller: public | 15:51 |
| -!- vfor [~Adium@g226185245.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 15:51 | |
| -!- gloriusAgain [~gloriusag@g226185245.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 15:51 | |
| -!- woah [~woah@75-101-111-82.dedicated.static.sonic.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…] | 15:51 | |
| Luke-Jr | being quiet annoyed everyone :p | 15:52 |
| zooko | \o/ | 15:52 |
| -!- woah [~woah@75-101-111-82.dedicated.static.sonic.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 15:52 | |
| Luke-Jr | (everyone especially including those of us who had to be quiet) | 15:52 |
| stonecoldpat | i like the DMMS term - although argubly, is it not a signature of computational power using a modified version of the guy fawkes signature (which is basicly, just a hash chain, but a hash chain shown to be a signature)? | 15:57 |
| -!- aburan28 [~ubuntu@static-108-45-93-73.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 15:57 | |
| stonecoldpat | (question is more to check my understanding of the term, not a criticism!) | 15:58 |
| gmaxwell | amiller: public. | 16:03 |
| amiller | great :D | 16:03 |
| maaku | amiller: public | 16:03 |
| zooko | ☺ | 16:03 |
| stonecoldpat | (forgot to identify myself with nickserv, sorry if re-post) i like the DMMS term - although argubly, is it not a signature of computational power using a modified version of the guy fawkes signature (which is basicly, just a hash chain, but a hash chain shown to be a signature)? | 16:04 |
| stonecoldpat | (question is more to check my understanding of the term, not a criticism!) | 16:05 |
| zooko | stonecoldpat: it came through the first time, too. | 16:06 |
| zooko | Are you asking, is a DMMS actually the same thing as a Guy Fawkes sig? | 16:06 |
| stonecoldpat | haha now i look stupid! | 16:06 |
| amiller | not stupid just a really tiny bit repetitive :p | 16:06 |
| stonecoldpat | well its not the same thing, but the guy fawkes signature is a hash chain signature, and DMMS is basically another type of hash signature (based on computation), but people work together to participate and make the DMMS signature (making it a group) where something like guy fawkes doesnt, its assumed to be a single person | 16:07 |
| gmaxwell | stonecoldpat: it's not.. there is no secret data involved in a hahshpower DMMS signature. | 16:07 |
| kanzure | justanotheruser: so re https://github.com/kanzure/bitcoin-incentives/issues/4 | 16:07 |
| maaku | DMMS does not have to be based on computation | 16:07 |
| maaku | that's just what hashcash does | 16:07 |
| kanzure | justanotheruser: what do you think, is it safe for me to include that text verbatim and give attribution to that user? | 16:07 |
| maaku | *bitcoin proof-of-work | 16:08 |
| kanzure | justanotheruser: or what's the norms around these parts for safely incorporating third-party text in a not bad way | 16:08 |
| gmaxwell | Whereas a guyfawkes signature is an interactive identification protocol based on hashes made non-interactive by timestamping. | 16:08 |
| gmaxwell | POS, for example, is a DMMS, though it seems not a secure one (for at least the kinds of security we care about for blockchain consensus) | 16:08 |
| justanotheruser | kanzure: I have no idea what the attribution rules are for github documents. I would guess you'd be safe with an attribution since he is giving you that info for the purpose of putting it in your document without requesting some special attribution format. | 16:09 |
| kanzure | justanotheruser: ah, incorporating authors is a good incentive for people to contribute text. it's not like the particle physics people aim for short author lists :). | 16:09 |
| arubi | stonecoldpat, the way I understood it, the strength of the dmms on the head of a chain of length N is N-1, or K-1 on a subset of K blocks on that chain behind the head block.. is that correct, would you say? | 16:09 |
| justanotheruser | but I'd say that miners don't have an incentive to force reorgs most of the time | 16:10 |
| kanzure | justanotheruser: yes out of the additions he suggests, the reorg one seems most suspicious or weak or something. | 16:10 |
| justanotheruser | His second line should be modified to say something like "with insufficient fees for the current block miners have incentive..." | 16:10 |
| gmaxwell | sometimes I prefer not to be attributed... as my willingness to answer technical question is greater than my willinglesss to have my name in a list with people whos work I don't respect. :) | 16:10 |
| kanzure | fair enough, i'll just make it known it's an open issue and anyone can separately negotiate with me for whether they want inclusion on a certain contributor list or not. | 16:11 |
| gmaxwell | yea, thats reasonable. | 16:11 |
| kanzure | all ideas are stolen anyway | 16:11 |
| gmaxwell | (A couple times someone has shot me a random question and then I found my name on some list of consultants for some scammy altcoin. :( ) | 16:11 |
| kanzure | I bomb atomically, Socrates' philosophies and hypothesis can't define how I be droppin these mockeries, lyrically perform armed robbery | 16:12 |
| woah | gmaxwell what should i call my coin? | 16:12 |
| gmaxwell | kanzure: stolen or reinvented, poorly. :) | 16:12 |
| justanotheruser | gmaxwell: reminds me of the time you totally rekt that guy asking about monero | 16:12 |
| kanzure | gmaxwell: ah, yeah that seems like a doomsday scenario, best not to promote a culture of randomly attaching people's names to things, then.... | 16:12 |
| kanzure | gmaxwell: although arguably disrputable people will be doing that anyway :) | 16:12 |
| -!- aburan28 [~ubuntu@static-108-45-93-73.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] | 16:13 | |
| gmaxwell | kanzure: yea, well it backfires pretty easily, since criticism from a guy listed on your site is especially powerful. | 16:13 |
| kanzure | neat | 16:13 |
| stonecoldpat | thanks for answering, its given me something to think about, maaku: i dont know if dmms would work with anything but hashcash | 16:15 |
| -!- crowex [~crowex@host-78-147-106-214.as13285.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 16:15 | |
| maaku | stonecoldpat: proof-of-stake works just fine... for purposes other than distributed consensus | 16:16 |
| justanotheruser | maaku: thoughts on PoS-in-mainchain sidechains? | 16:16 |
| justanotheruser | or PoS-in-PoW-parent | 16:16 |
| maaku | justanotheruser: PoS and mining don't mix, full-stop. | 16:16 |
| justanotheruser | maaku: what do you mean? | 16:17 |
| justanotheruser | you think miners will censor tx? | 16:17 |
| -!- Sangheili [Elite8385@gateway/shell/elitebnc/x-ypaogrgwuceddofs] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 16:18 | |
| maaku | no, i think it doesn't accomplish its stated design objectives, ultimately reducing to either outright breaks or divergent proof-of-work as attackers grind solutions naming them as signers | 16:18 |
| maaku | see anytoshi's wonderful proof-of-stake q&a paper | 16:18 |
| justanotheruser | maaku: how can you grind if the new PoS winner is determined via PoW? | 16:18 |
| justanotheruser | maaku: I have | 16:18 |
| gmaxwell | justanotheruser: by grinding the POW. Basically you can 'fix' PoS by reducing its security to be POW based.. | 16:19 |
| maaku | at which point.. why not just use POW? | 16:19 |
| justanotheruser | gmaxwell: might that involve throwing away many blocks that you would have won? | 16:19 |
| gmaxwell | yup. related to the keys youv'e go, of course other POW miners without the stake you have are deprived. | 16:21 |
| maaku | as far as I can tell you just said "but it's actually PoW!" sorry i'm going to bow out justanotheruser. i don't find PoS mining interesting because in every case it has ultimately reduced to PoW | 16:22 |
| maaku | or been broken | 16:22 |
| -!- laurentmt [~chatzilla@89-93-131-89.hfc.dyn.abo.bbox.fr] has quit [Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.91 [Firefox 33.0/20141011015303]] | 16:22 | |
| justanotheruser | gmaxwell: if the reward for winning the stake is less than the PoW reward, why would one throw away a PoW reward? | 16:23 |
| justanotheruser | maaku: you are referring to bootstrapping distributed consensus from PoS, I am not | 16:23 |
| gmaxwell | to influence the chain, get more stake.... | 16:23 |
| -!- zooko [~user@67-6-128-167.hlrn.qwest.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] | 16:25 | |
| -!- aburan28 [~ubuntu@static-108-45-93-85.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 16:25 | |
| justanotheruser | gmaxwell: are you saying that they aren't directly earning more, but over time they may cause enough people to lose their reward to lower the difficulty and increase their profits? | 16:25 |
| kanzure | justanotheruser: i'm still parsing your suggestion, | 16:26 |
| kanzure | the claim was: "Miners have incentives to reorganize the blockchain to change who gets transaction fees. They can do this without eroding trust by enforcing the same ordering of transactions. This is not currently a problem because the mining subsidy is much greater than the transaction fees for most blocks." | 16:26 |
| kanzure | and your addition was "with insufficient fees for the current block miners have incentive..." for it? | 16:26 |
| justanotheruser | kanzure: Ignoring the incentive to keep the network valuable by not forcing a reorg, miners don't have an incentive to try and take a previous blocks fee unless the expected value of mining the old block is higher than mining the new block. This can happen when the miner has a high enough hash rate, or the current blocks tx fee sum is low enough. | 16:28 |
| arubi | (or only two mining entities of equal hashrate exist on the network) | 16:29 |
| kanzure | can happen when the miner has a high enough hash rate, and also that obscure situation that was discussed yesterday regarding difficulty lowering far enough and competition decreasing overwhelmingly | 16:29 |
| justanotheruser | well I'm ignoring attacks like that right now | 16:30 |
| kanzure | sure sure, i was just confirming whether i'm on the same page | 16:30 |
| kanzure | or wavelength etc | 16:30 |
| justanotheruser | but if you have 10% of the hashrate then it is probably worth it (ignoring devaluing the network) to try and mine the previous block again, which had 100btc in fees rather than the current block, which has 1btc in fees | 16:31 |
| justanotheruser | if you have 0.001% of the hashrate, it probably isn't | 16:31 |
| justanotheruser | haven't done the calculations, but those seem like safe numbers | 16:31 |
| -!- kristofferR [~kristoffe@208.37-191-147.fiber.lynet.no] has quit [Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…] | 16:31 | |
| kanzure | shrug, let's just go with "there's probably a way to calculate this, but out of scope, good luck" :) | 16:32 |
| justanotheruser | kanzure: E[X] = fees_earned * probability_of_winning | 16:32 |
| justanotheruser | probability of winning is in the satoshi whitepaper and here https://people.xiph.org/~greg/attack_success.html | 16:32 |
| kanzure | oh look it has a button and everything | 16:33 |
| justanotheruser | lol | 16:33 |
| -!- Guyver2 [~Guyver2@guyver2.xs4all.nl] has quit [Quit: :)] | 16:33 | |
| -!- llllllllll [~lllllllll@53-109.bbned.dsl.internl.net] has quit [] | 16:35 | |
| tacotime | justanotheruser: I'm doing the PoS-based-on-PoW thing, that'll be out soon. | 16:35 |
| -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@gateway/tor-sasl/dr-g] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 16:35 | |
| dgenr8 | Ok, what button do I press to create a sidechain from my github branch?! | 16:35 |
| nsh | eeps | 16:35 |
| sipa | haha | 16:35 |
| tacotime | Simulation network is working pretty okay so far. But I don't know how useful it actually is. | 16:35 |
| justanotheruser | tacotime: cool, it will be interesting to see how the incentive alignment is worked out | 16:35 |
| nsh | whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad | 16:36 |
| justanotheruser | it seems like selfish mining may be a problem at lower network hash % if the PoS reward is higher | 16:36 |
| tacotime | Yeahhhh I am curious about that too. I don't think there's any clear way to analyze it from my perspective, but I'll throw it to some hired academics and see what they think after. | 16:36 |
| justanotheruser | but I don't think PoS has turned into PoW as maaku suggested. It certainly may be less secure than pure PoW though | 16:37 |
| tacotime | My default chain parameters have PoS reward somewhere below PoW reward, between 50-75%. | 16:37 |
| amiller | tacotime, good, try teaching academics proof of stake! | 16:37 |
| justanotheruser | tacotime: wait, this isn't a sidechain thing? | 16:37 |
| tacotime | justanotheruser: Not at the moment. | 16:37 |
| amiller | 5 years later and academics have finally reproven the satoshi paper :) | 16:37 |
| justanotheruser | oh, you want PoW and PoS in one chain? | 16:37 |
| tacotime | Yeah, but not in the Peercoin way, with a lottery-and-ticket system. | 16:38 |
| justanotheruser | hmm. Well the problem with that I think is that a staker can just change the block to include new tx. | 16:38 |
| justanotheruser | This means PoS confirms are just trust in the stake holder | 16:38 |
| tacotime | PoW miners control the PoS votes included. | 16:39 |
| justanotheruser | If it is PoS that is irreversible, as it would be if the PoS was confirmed by Pow in another chain, there wouldn't be that problem (while there would be incentive problems) | 16:39 |
| tacotime | If they include less, reward is penalized. | 16:39 |
| justanotheruser | include less what? | 16:39 |
| tacotime | Stake votes. | 16:39 |
| tacotime | It's an m-of-n stakeholder voting on a block system. | 16:39 |
| nsh | hmm | 16:40 |
| justanotheruser | I'm not sure you can get PoS that isn't backed by PoW to work (with "backed by" meaning "irreversible because of"), but good luck. | 16:40 |
| tacotime | Where former block coinbase reward is able to be invalidated by stakeholders, and to build a block on top of HEAD requires a majority of stakeholder votes. | 16:40 |
| tacotime | Well, the blocks themselves are all PoW. | 16:41 |
| -!- kristofferR [~kristoffe@208.37-191-147.fiber.lynet.no] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 16:41 | |
| justanotheruser | what, you have a PoS reward? | 16:41 |
| tacotime | Lottery system is driven entirely by the PoW header provided randomness. | 16:41 |
| tacotime | Yes. | 16:41 |
| -!- kristofferR [~kristoffe@208.37-191-147.fiber.lynet.no] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 16:41 | |
| justanotheruser | oh, well thats just a bit silly IMO. You can enter lotteries without a new altcoin or even a new sidechain. | 16:42 |
| tacotime | There are PoW and PoS rewards. | 16:42 |
| tacotime | Um. For block validation? | 16:42 |
| justanotheruser | what do you mean for block validation? | 16:43 |
| tacotime | The lottery system determines the set of stakeholders eligible to validate a PoW block, for some PoS reward. | 16:43 |
| justanotheruser | oh, so PoS *is* part of the consensus system | 16:43 |
| tacotime | Yes. | 16:43 |
| -!- orperelman [~wboy@bzq-79-183-8-242.red.bezeqint.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] | 16:44 | |
| -!- zooko [~user@67-6-128-167.hlrn.qwest.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 16:44 | |
| justanotheruser | So your previous block determines the winners who determine whether a block is valid? | 16:44 |
| tacotime | Basically you purchase tickets (which has a separate floating difficulty attached to it), then wait for your lottery number to come up, then vote on the block. | 16:44 |
| tacotime | Yeah, well, sort of. | 16:45 |
| justanotheruser | tacotime: what is "vote on the block"? | 16:45 |
| -!- maclane [~maclane@12.250.97.26] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 16:45 | |
| kanzure | justanotheruser: here's my response https://github.com/kanzure/bitcoin-incentives/issues/4 | 16:45 |
| -!- orperelman [~wboy@bzq-79-183-8-242.red.bezeqint.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 16:45 | |
| tacotime | A few bits of randomness from the previous block, more from a block 12 blocks behind. | 16:45 |
| justanotheruser | tacotime: but what are they voting on? | 16:45 |
| justanotheruser | if they're voting on block validity that is a huge netsplit risk | 16:45 |
| kanzure | i need a better way to organize these incentives. a list without numbers is wrong and broken. | 16:46 |
| kanzure | or names.. | 16:46 |
| tacotime | justanotheruser: Two things; you need 50% of eligible voters to produce a new block on top of HEAD, and these voters themselves vote as to whether or not to invalidate the coinbase of the previous block. | 16:46 |
| justanotheruser | tacotime: invalidating a transaction should invalidate a block? | 16:47 |
| tacotime | Not with different consensus rules. | 16:47 |
| justanotheruser | ok ok | 16:47 |
| justanotheruser | so they vote whether to pay the miner? | 16:47 |
| tacotime | Yeah. | 16:47 |
| justanotheruser | and why would they vote no | 16:48 |
| justanotheruser | or I should ask, why would stakeholders vote yes? | 16:48 |
| tacotime | If the miner does something irritating like includes no tx in their block. | 16:48 |
| tacotime | Because if they consistently vote no, PoW won't create blocks, and network security would fall apart. | 16:48 |
| kanzure | justanotheruser: stealing an old block subsidy seems difficult if the block subsidy was ever spent, because it means you would have to unwind and not include all those related transactions. which would be again trust eroding. although i think users might also be concerned about old miners losing out on transaction fees they once secured but hadn't yet spent.. | 16:49 |
| tacotime | And if network security falls apart, the coin is worthless. | 16:49 |
| justanotheruser | kanzure: if there are no confs, it wasn't confirmed spent | 16:49 |
| justanotheruser | I'm talking about the immediate previous too | 16:49 |
| kanzure | oh, only immediate previous. hm. | 16:50 |
| justanotheruser | but it could be the previous N, it would just be harder | 16:50 |
| justanotheruser | but the previous 1 does falsify his statement | 16:50 |
| -!- Emcy [~MC@unaffiliated/mc1984] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 16:50 | |
| justanotheruser | kanzure: also, there are 100 blocks between when you win a block and when you can spend it | 16:51 |
| tacotime | There are a lot of assumptions for this system, I'm not really walking into it saying that it's 100% sound or it's going to work. | 16:51 |
| tacotime | Yeah. My fork only allows parent invalidation. | 16:51 |
| justanotheruser | tacotime: ok, so your PoS isn't for consensus then | 16:52 |
| justanotheruser | it is just for the miner getting paid | 16:52 |
| -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@gateway/tor-sasl/dr-g] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 16:52 | |
| tacotime | Only partially. | 16:52 |
| tacotime | You need need 50% of eligible voters to build a block on top of HEAD. | 16:52 |
| tacotime | s/need need/do need | 16:53 |
| justanotheruser | tacotime: also, what happens if they don't vote? | 16:53 |
| justanotheruser | it the blockchain halted? | 16:53 |
| tacotime | Miners have to sit on HEAD~1 and mine a new block on top of that, so they get a different series of voters. | 16:53 |
| justanotheruser | or does a miner just need to ignore the PoS to do whatever they want | 16:54 |
| tacotime | That's potentially bad news bears if you have >50% malicious stakeholders, because it makes PoW difficulty manipulation very easy. | 16:54 |
| justanotheruser | s/a miner/the miners/ | 16:54 |
| justanotheruser | they may just softfork to get rid of the PoS that is taking their rewards | 16:55 |
| tacotime | yeah. | 16:55 |
| tacotime | That's in the worst case scenario, you need to disable PoS temporarily or permanently. | 16:55 |
| tacotime | You would assume that PoS miners, having so many coins, wouldn't do something boneheaded, but you never know. | 16:56 |
| tacotime | Because that undermines both the coins they have committed in tickets and the reward they would get from their tickets. | 16:56 |
| justanotheruser | tacotime: taking rewards from a miner adding security to a confirmation is fairly boneheaded | 16:56 |
| tacotime | Why do you think so? | 16:57 |
| justanotheruser | tacotime: because 2 confirmations is better than 1? | 16:57 |
| tacotime | Ehm, but you also have PoS "confirmations", which is proof of some resource, and you still preserve the work done on HEAD of the blockchain. | 16:58 |
| gmaxwell | the "you need need 50% of eligible voters" threshold schemes can be either secure or freezable, sadly. E.g. if you require 100% any user can block it, but no one can compromise it... or ... 1% and no one can block you but it's trivial to cheat. .... at every point there is a tradeoff between freezability and security. | 16:58 |
| -!- zooko [~user@67-6-128-167.hlrn.qwest.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] | 16:58 | |
| -!- moa [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/moa] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] | 16:58 | |
| tacotime | gmaxwell: Yeah, exactly. That's one of the few parameters I don't actually have tunable in my config for spinning up a new network, maybe I should add it in case people want to play with it in the future. | 16:59 |
| -!- moa [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/moa] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 16:59 | |
| -!- vaxzine [63b9861e@gateway/web/freenode/ip.99.185.134.30] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 16:59 | |
| gmaxwell | nevermind my english failures; I've been awake for >36 hours now I think. | 16:59 |
| kanzure | /topic where unreasonable ideas go to die a few hundred times | 16:59 |
| gmaxwell | kanzure: its our punishment for not writing down more . | 16:59 |
| kanzure | an ideal or even moderately useful format is not at all obvious | 17:00 |
| tacotime | Well, I mean, the m-of-n PoS voter threshold idea hasn't been currently implemented I don't think. So it'd be good to have a chain out there with it, which is why I'm making it. | 17:01 |
| -!- OX3___ [~OX3@cpc69058-oxfd26-2-0-cust984.4-3.cable.virginm.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 17:01 | |
| tacotime | Security is up in the air, though. | 17:01 |
| justanotheruser | gmaxwell: no freezing of the blockchain, just freezing of miner funds in case that wasn't clear | 17:02 |
| tacotime | They can freeze the blockchain too if >50% refuse to vote. | 17:02 |
| justanotheruser | .. | 17:02 |
| justanotheruser | oh | 17:02 |
| tacotime | Yeah, that's why I mentioned two validation points. | 17:02 |
| justanotheruser | well then, that is a very big problem | 17:02 |
| tacotime | Yeah, it's very known for m-of-n PoS validation systems. | 17:03 |
| tacotime | There's no easy answer, as gmaxwell pointed out. | 17:03 |
| -!- OX3_ [~OX3@gateway-nat.fmrib.ox.ac.uk] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] | 17:05 | |
| tacotime | You have to make the assumption, as you do for PoW, that it's not economically desirable for PoS miners to do things that undermine general investor confidence in the blockchain. | 17:05 |
| -!- OX3___ [~OX3@cpc69058-oxfd26-2-0-cust984.4-3.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 17:05 | |
| -!- OX3_ [~OX3@cpc69058-oxfd26-2-0-cust984.4-3.cable.virginm.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 17:06 | |
| justanotheruser | tacotime: True, but that leads to the question to how costly it would be to get >50% of the voters for one block | 17:06 |
| justanotheruser | I have a feeling that over 100000 blocks, it would be cheaper than forcing a large reorg | 17:06 |
| justanotheruser | presumably these lotto winners are getting their money back, so it could be costless | 17:07 |
| -!- adam3us [~Adium@c-50-136-255-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] | 17:07 | |
| tacotime | Mm, depends how much the coins are I guess. Yeah, they get their commitment back + reward if they succeed. | 17:07 |
| -!- jgarzik [~jgarzik@c-24-98-97-147.hsd1.ga.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 17:07 | |
| -!- jgarzik [~jgarzik@c-24-98-97-147.hsd1.ga.comcast.net] has quit [Changing host] | 17:07 | |
| -!- jgarzik [~jgarzik@unaffiliated/jgarzik] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 17:07 | |
| tacotime | But they'll never overtake the main chain without a higher cumulative difficulty. | 17:07 |
| jgarzik | Via djb: "Faster ECC over F_{2^521 - 1} http://eprint.iacr.org/2014/852" | 17:08 |
| tacotime | djb at it again. that dude doesn't sleep. | 17:09 |
| tacotime | justanotheruser: Hence, you try to depend as heavily as you can on PoW for security. :P | 17:09 |
| tacotime | That's maybe the closest thing you can get to a "secure" PoS system. | 17:10 |
| justanotheruser | tacotime: you could just PoS vote on the color of the client and say that you got PoS to work :D | 17:10 |
| justanotheruser | this seems to be hurting the security model and I'm not sure what the gain is | 17:11 |
| tacotime | heh | 17:11 |
| tacotime | Gain is that you're using PoS for validation, if you consider PoS as adding validation. | 17:11 |
| justanotheruser | tacotime: what is the gain of that though? | 17:11 |
| tacotime | That it's harder to do bad things to the network with excessive hash power, because you need some stake in the coin too to build blocks. | 17:12 |
| -!- OX3_ [~OX3@cpc69058-oxfd26-2-0-cust984.4-3.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 17:12 | |
| justanotheruser | you are not making tx more secure, you are just trying to make miners behave at the risk of a few individuals colluding (or one person) to break the system | 17:12 |
| tacotime | Yes, exactly. | 17:13 |
| -!- OX3_ [~OX3@cpc69058-oxfd26-2-0-cust984.4-3.cable.virginm.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 17:13 | |
| tacotime | But a few individuals or one person can already break a PoW system, so long as they have enough hash power. | 17:13 |
| justanotheruser | tacotime: so you are substituting a the ability to force a large reorg with people with lots of stake being able to choose which blocks are valid | 17:13 |
| -!- orperelman [~wboy@bzq-79-183-8-242.red.bezeqint.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] | 17:14 | |
| justanotheruser | interesting idea. Not sure how well it would do if there is no cost to attempting to attack the network | 17:14 |
| -!- orperelman [~wboy@bzq-79-183-8-242.red.bezeqint.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 17:15 | |
| -!- Sangheili [Elite8385@gateway/shell/elitebnc/x-ypaogrgwuceddofs] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] | 17:16 | |
| tacotime | Well, the ticketing system involves locking funds for a long duration of time (months), and your selection by the lottery is going to be random over a period of months. So it's less like classical peercoin where the benefit of dumping your coins to an exchange and then forking the network is obvious. | 17:16 |
| justanotheruser | it is probably more secure than peercoin without checkpoints, I agree | 17:17 |
| -!- bassguitarman [sid40024@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-chgsxyvptngbwbjk] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 17:17 | |
| -!- kgk [kgk@nat/google/x-tlcztyclwvadeuqf] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 0.3.7] | 17:17 | |
| tacotime | justanotheruser: Of course, you know that's not really saying much. :) | 17:17 |
| justanotheruser | :) | 17:17 |
| kanzure | devrandom: /win 9 | 17:18 |
| -!- OX3_ [~OX3@cpc69058-oxfd26-2-0-cust984.4-3.cable.virginm.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] | 17:18 | |
| kanzure | oops. please ignore. | 17:18 |
| tacotime | I'll be happy to be done with it anyway, and move on to more interesting things. It's my first project in the world of cryptocurrencies, and I've learned a lot coding it. | 17:18 |
| justanotheruser | tacotime: I thought you were the monero guy? | 17:19 |
| tacotime | Yeah, I started on this before Monero though. I don't directly code on Monero anymore, just go over more of the theoretical stuff and discuss what we need to implement for it. | 17:20 |
| Taek | kanzure, justanotheruser: https://github.com/kanzure/bitcoin-incentives/issues/4 (I'm DavidVorick btw) | 17:20 |
| tacotime | I really don't like coding in C++ to be honest, I'm working on this PoS fork in Golang (you can all hiss now, I don't mind). | 17:20 |
| Taek | Golang ftw | 17:20 |
| -!- DougieBot5000 [~DougieBot@unaffiliated/dougiebot5000] has quit [Quit: Leaving] | 17:21 | |
| justanotheruser | Taek: even if the block is max size, your fee sum will probably be increasing | 17:22 |
| -!- Aquent2 [~Aquent@gateway/tor-sasl/aquent] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 17:22 | |
| -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 17:22 | |
| Taek | yeah you just pick the most expensive fees from each | 17:22 |
| kanzure | Taek: are you also Taek42? | 17:22 |
| -!- Aquent2 [~Aquent@gateway/tor-sasl/aquent] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 17:22 | |
| Taek | yeah recently was able to register Taek | 17:22 |
| justanotheruser | Taek: if you are getting a ton of tx in your new block and it is comparable to the previous block, forcing a reorg is not going to maximize your profits | 17:23 |
| justanotheruser | s/block and it is/block and the fees are/ | 17:24 |
| Taek | you can't just build a single block with all the highest fees? | 17:25 |
| justanotheruser | Taek: not if the tx are already in a previous block | 17:25 |
| kanzure | but this was about reorgs? | 17:26 |
| Taek | ^ | 17:26 |
| justanotheruser | yes, if you're forcing a reorg it would presumably be to take their fees | 17:26 |
| justanotheruser | if you already are getting 20btc in fees and the previous block hase 20btc in fees and you have a 10% chance of success in the reorg, you are expected to get 4btc forcing the reorg rather than 20btc honest mining. | 17:27 |
| justanotheruser | s/are expected to get/have an expected value of/ | 17:27 |
| justanotheruser | I guess I should compare the odds of winning honestly | 17:28 |
| Taek | ah yeah that makes sense | 17:28 |
| justanotheruser | lets just say 10% the chance you would have mining honestly | 17:28 |
| -!- bassguitarman [sid40024@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-chgsxyvptngbwbjk] has left #bitcoin-wizards [] | 17:28 | |
| justanotheruser | so you would need a disproportionate fee in the previous block for you to care | 17:28 |
| justanotheruser | like 180btc vs 20btc | 17:28 |
| Taek | What matters is p(reorg gets accepted) * (payoff) > (payoff) * (current block gets accepted) | 17:29 |
| Taek | so at 20btc, 20btc, and 10% mining, E(reorg) = 4btc * 10% = .4btc | 17:29 |
| justanotheruser | ignoring the disincentive of hurting bitcoin | 17:30 |
| Taek | E(normal) = 2btc * ~100% | 17:30 |
| Taek | right | 17:30 |
| justanotheruser | yes | 17:30 |
| justanotheruser | so fee variance may be a problem. | 17:30 |
| Taek | would it be reasonable to have fees payout over multiple blocks instead of just 1? | 17:30 |
| justanotheruser | http://i.imgur.com/PuTs16w.png | 17:30 |
| justanotheruser | Taek: not sure what you mean | 17:31 |
| justanotheruser | btw, that image is block size sum by time of day | 17:31 |
| Taek | So, txn fee is 10btc. .1 btc goes to miner of block containing transaction, .1 btc goes to first block confirming transaction... up to 100 confirms | 17:31 |
| justanotheruser | I think it indicates when tx fees will be high | 17:32 |
| justanotheruser | Taek: not sure what that would accomplish | 17:32 |
| -!- Sangheili [Elite8385@gateway/shell/elitebnc/x-povpndwwkdnqlipi] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 17:33 | |
| Taek | if fee payout is smoothed out over 3 days or something, then the variance between the fee payout per block would be a lot smaller | 17:35 |
| justanotheruser | Taek: what so you're redistributing the block reward to people that aren't the miner? | 17:36 |
| Taek | If one block introduces 100x the fees of the next block, it's okay because the next block is drawing fees from x00 blocks behind it | 17:36 |
| Taek | redistributing the block reward to people who confirm the txn in addition to the first person to mine it | 17:36 |
| justanotheruser | That means you have 1/100th the incentive to mine a block | 17:37 |
| justanotheruser | err | 17:37 |
| Taek | not nearly, because you've got incentive from collecting the fees from the 100 blocks behind you | 17:37 |
| justanotheruser | 1/100th the incentive to include a transaction | 17:37 |
| -!- KingCoin [~KingCoin@unaffiliated/kingcoin] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 17:37 | |
| Taek | in the immediate term, yes. but in the long term, you want the mining fee set to be as large as possible | 17:37 |
| justanotheruser | ? | 17:38 |
| Taek | because it's probable that you or your pool will mine one of the 100 next blocks | 17:38 |
| Taek | or 1000 or whatever you set the dilution rate to | 17:38 |
| justanotheruser | yeah, you have 1/100 + hash % the incentive | 17:38 |
| -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 17:39 | |
| Taek | The only thing that's stopping you from including a transaction is the resources it takes to add that transaction | 17:39 |
| justanotheruser | and incentives to not include tx | 17:39 |
| justanotheruser | including higher block propogation time | 17:39 |
| Taek | right | 17:40 |
| justanotheruser | gavins reverse bloom filter may make the incentive not to include a tx even lower | 17:40 |
| Taek | O(1) block propagation time would be pretty neat | 17:41 |
| -!- gloriusAgain [~gloriusag@g226185245.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 17:41 | |
| -!- vfor [~Adium@g226185245.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] | 17:41 | |
| justanotheruser | so what exactly does putting the fee between 100 blocks solve? | 17:41 |
| Taek | it makes it much less likely that the fee from block to block varies by more than 50% | 17:42 |
| justanotheruser | indeed | 17:42 |
| -!- vfor [~Adium@g226185245.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 17:42 | |
| -!- gloriusAgain [~gloriusag@g226185245.adsl.alicedsl.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 17:43 | |
| Taek | and that kills the reorg incentive, because there's no reason to attempt a reorg unless the expected payout is high | 17:43 |
| justanotheruser | with these kinds of things there always some unintended consequence | 17:43 |
| Taek | which requires the payout variance to be high | 17:43 |
| Taek | quite possibly | 17:43 |
| justanotheruser | empty blocks might become more common | 17:44 |
| -!- orperelman [~wboy@bzq-79-183-8-242.red.bezeqint.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] | 17:44 | |
| justanotheruser | it actually seems like it might be a good idea | 17:44 |
| justanotheruser | I'd like someone smarter than me to tell me why it isn't :) | 17:44 |
| * Taek summons gmaxwell | 17:44 | |
| justanotheruser | my thoughts too :p | 17:44 |
| -!- nessence [~alexl@89.246.69.218] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 17:44 | |
| -!- nessence [~alexl@89.246.69.218] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 17:45 | |
| -!- gloriusAgain [~gloriusag@g226185245.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 17:49 | |
| -!- vfor [~Adium@g226185245.adsl.alicedsl.de] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] | 17:49 | |
| -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 17:49 | |
| -!- nessence [~alexl@89.246.69.218] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] | 17:49 | |
| -!- woah [~woah@75-101-111-82.dedicated.static.sonic.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…] | 17:50 | |
| -!- NewLiberty [~NewLibert@adsl-172-6-13-22.dsl.lsan03.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 17:53 | |
| -!- RoboTedd_ [~roboteddy@173.247.202.131] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] | 17:58 | |
| -!- Burrito [~Burrito@unaffiliated/burrito] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] | 17:59 | |
| -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 18:01 | |
| -!- andy-logbot [~bitcoin--@wpsoftware.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 18:04 | |
| * andy-logbot is logging | 18:04 | |
| -!- woah [~woah@75-101-111-82.dedicated.static.sonic.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 18:04 | |
| -!- Aquent2 is now known as Aquent | 18:04 | |
| -!- woah [~woah@75-101-111-82.dedicated.static.sonic.net] has quit [Client Quit] | 18:06 | |
| -!- andytoshi [~andytoshi@wpsoftware.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 18:08 | |
| -!- andytoshi [~andytoshi@wpsoftware.net] has quit [Changing host] | 18:09 | |
| -!- andytoshi [~andytoshi@unaffiliated/andytoshi] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 18:09 | |
| andytoshi | sigh, 657 lines of missed scrollback ... i was only out for a day :) | 18:11 |
| yoleaux | 22 Oct 2014 22:47Z <kanzure> andytoshi: what do you think? https://github.com/kanzure/bitcoin-incentives/issues/4 | 18:11 |
| nsh | if it's any consolation, when you missed it, it was just scroll | 18:13 |
| -!- ucerron [835ebaa2@gateway/web/freenode/ip.131.94.186.162] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 18:15 | |
| andytoshi | :) | 18:16 |
| -!- mapppum [~mappum@c-24-17-76-220.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 18:17 | |
| -!- maclane [~maclane@12.250.97.26] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] | 18:17 | |
| -!- mapppum [~mappum@c-24-17-76-220.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 18:18 | |
| -!- nessence [~alexl@p508113DD.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 18:22 | |
| -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 18:23 | |
| -!- bitjedi [~QuaCryptI@unaffiliated/bitjedi] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 18:36 | |
| -!- DougieBot5000 [~DougieBot@unaffiliated/dougiebot5000] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 18:36 | |
| lechuga_ | whats the proper nomenclature for a non-winning chain with a shared root with the most-work chain | 18:38 |
| lechuga_ | i used to call them sidechains :/ | 18:38 |
| andytoshi | lechuga_: "path from a stale to the main chain" :P | 18:39 |
| -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 18:39 | |
| kanzure | was that an orphan fork? | 18:39 |
| kanzure | oh, stale. yes. | 18:39 |
| lechuga_ | into stalechain | 18:39 |
| sipa | side branches? | 18:40 |
| sipa | stale chains? | 18:40 |
| sipa | they're most often (incorrectly) called orphan blocks/chains | 18:40 |
| lechuga_ | side branches might be confusing | 18:40 |
| lechuga_ | stale sort of implies they were once fresh | 18:41 |
| -!- jtimon [~quassel@c-50-136-255-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 18:43 | |
| -!- quidnunc [~user@bas6-montreal45-1176366201.dsl.bell.ca] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 18:44 | |
| -!- wallet42 [~wallet42@unaffiliated/wallet42] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] | 18:47 | |
| -!- nsh_ [~nsh@wikipedia/nsh] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] | 18:47 | |
| -!- mapppum [~mappum@c-24-17-76-220.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 18:53 | |
| -!- fanquake [~anonymous@unaffiliated/fanquake] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 19:00 | |
| -!- devrandom [~devrandom@gateway/tor-sasl/niftyzero1] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 19:08 | |
| -!- phantomcircuit [~phantomci@blockchain.ceo] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] | 19:08 | |
| -!- PaulCapestany [~PaulCapes@204.28.124.82] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 19:08 | |
| -!- wiretapped [~wiretappe@gateway/tor-sasl/wiretapped] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 19:08 | |
| -!- Graftec [~Graftec@gateway/tor-sasl/graftec] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 19:08 | |
| -!- lnovy [~lnovy@2002:4d57:f055::1] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] | 19:08 | |
| -!- phantomcircuit [~phantomci@blockchain.ceo] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 19:08 | |
| -!- mmozeiko [~mmozeiko@c-50-184-215-21.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] | 19:08 | |
| -!- mmozeiko [~mmozeiko@c-50-184-215-21.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 19:09 | |
| -!- zz_lnovy [~lnovy@2002:4d57:f055::1] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 19:09 | |
| -!- zz_lnovy is now known as lnovy | 19:09 | |
| -!- maaku [~quassel@50-0-37-37.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 19:09 | |
| -!- maaku [~quassel@50-0-37-37.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 19:12 | |
| -!- maaku is now known as Guest56072 | 19:12 | |
| -!- mkarrer [~mkarrer@183.Red-83-40-233.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 19:13 | |
| -!- lnovy [~lnovy@2002:4d57:f055::1] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] | 19:14 | |
| -!- zz_lnovy [~lnovy@2002:4d57:f055::1] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 19:15 | |
| -!- KingCoin [~KingCoin@unaffiliated/kingcoin] has quit [Quit: KingCoin] | 19:15 | |
| -!- zz_lnovy is now known as lnovy | 19:16 | |
| -!- Aquent [~Aquent@gateway/tor-sasl/aquent] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 19:18 | |
| -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@gateway/tor-sasl/dr-g] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 19:18 | |
| -!- Adlai [~Adlai@gateway/tor-sasl/adlai] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 19:18 | |
| -!- mortale [~mortale@gateway/tor-sasl/mortale] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 19:18 | |
| -!- mapppum [~mappum@c-24-17-76-220.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 19:18 | |
| -!- Graftec [~Graftec@gateway/tor-sasl/graftec] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 19:20 | |
| -!- devrandom [~devrandom@gateway/tor-sasl/niftyzero1] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 19:21 | |
| -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 19:23 | |
| lechuga_ | should a demo federated peg chain be expected shortly | 19:24 |
| -!- KingCoin [~KingCoin@unaffiliated/kingcoin] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 19:29 | |
| Luke-Jr | lechuga_: I think I read on reddit someone saying they had basically the same thing going on for some other project - other than that, it might be a bit; what do you consider "shortly" and what counts as a "demo"? :P | 19:29 |
| -!- wiretapped [~wiretappe@gateway/tor-sasl/wiretapped] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 19:29 | |
| lechuga_ | lol no rush | 19:29 |
| -!- Adlai [~Adlai@gateway/tor-sasl/adlai] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 19:30 | |
| lechuga_ | was just curious if i should expect something in th enext couple weeks | 19:30 |
| lechuga_ | given the contracthashtool coming out too | 19:30 |
| -!- maclane [~maclane@12.250.97.26] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 19:30 | |
| BlueMatt | lechuga_: ofc we're working on initial betas, but I think the plan is to build initial, shitty tests which we use to inform our designs when we start working on public implementations | 19:30 |
| -!- jeremyrubin [~chatzilla@18.189.23.120] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 19:30 | |
| lechuga_ | makes sense | 19:30 |
| -!- hashtag [~hashtag@69.23.221.39] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] | 19:30 | |
| jeremyrubin | Hmm anyone know of any interesting bitcoin related security proposals? Looking for a class project. | 19:31 |
| BlueMatt | lechuga_: ofc with our already-public stuff (+/-) you can do a meat-based sidechain already :) | 19:31 |
| andytoshi | jeremyrubin: what level of schooling are you talking about? and can you be more precise "security proposal"? | 19:31 |
| BlueMatt | (ie non-automated transfers) | 19:31 |
| lechuga_ | lol@meat-based | 19:31 |
| jeremyrubin | Grad level MIT network security class | 19:32 |
| gmaxwell | lechuga_: demo? yes. Hurray for permissionless tech. (thus the public commitment tool) | 19:32 |
| kanzure | amiller: petertodd: maybe instead of talking about a single giant consensus it should be mutually overlapping consensus between all of the connected/networked/interoperating participants. afterall, it's only meaningful within the context of two unrelated third parties or something (like, if you assume everyone is honest, then your entire model can collapse into some centralized non-bitcoin implementation anyway). | 19:33 |
| jeremyrubin | Could also involve some OS level hacking | 19:33 |
| -!- jaekwon [~Adium@75-101-96-71.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] | 19:33 | |
| -!- finnsquared [~finnsquar@75.76.190.252] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 19:33 | |
| lechuga_ | nice | 19:33 |
| andytoshi | jeremyrubin: hmmm...so there is a big open problem about formalizing the security properties of proof-of-work...probabl not a class project | 19:33 |
| andytoshi | jeremyrubin: there are some trustless gambling proposals that i think are implementable | 19:33 |
| andytoshi | jeremyrubin: might wanna poke around http://bitcoin.ninja | 19:34 |
| andytoshi | jeremyrubin: https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/wizardry/brs-arbitrary-output-sizes.txt is a modification to monero that gmaxwell and i have been thinking about. what's written there is implementable but probably a way bigger task than a class project | 19:35 |
| andytoshi | since the monero codebase is not super accessible i hear | 19:35 |
| -!- finnsquared [~finnsquar@75.76.190.252] has quit [Quit: Leaving...] | 19:36 | |
| -!- woah [~woah@199-241-202-232.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 19:36 | |
| andytoshi | i guess, how crypto-heavy do you want to be? if you want to do security but not crypto i should shut up, i don't think about that too much | 19:36 |
| BlueMatt | votes on if https://github.com/Blockstream/contracthashtool qualifies as interesting enough for bitcoin.ninja? | 19:36 |
| andytoshi | ack | 19:36 |
| jeremyrubin | (reading up on bitcoin.ninja) | 19:37 |
| lechuga_ | as if it only has 5 stars | 19:37 |
| kanzure | BlueMatt: this isn't a democracy, and you shouldn't judge by start count. | 19:37 |
| lechuga_ | guess it wasnt really publicized was it? | 19:37 |
| lechuga_ | i only saw the link to the repo here | 19:37 |
| andytoshi | ..ah yet it's up to 7 since lechuga_ commented :P | 19:37 |
| lechuga_ | nice! | 19:38 |
| BlueMatt | not particularly, I'm more asking independantly of sidechains | 19:38 |
| BlueMatt | its much more general | 19:38 |
| kanzure | BlueMatt: also how about something like https://github.com/unsystem/paypub or https://github.com/zw/PoLtree/ or https://github.com/petertodd/python-merbinnertree | 19:38 |
| BlueMatt | we should have a software section on bitcoin.ninja | 19:38 |
| kanzure | or https://github.com/petertodd/timelock | 19:38 |
| kanzure | i dunno if this is a good implementation or not but it might be worth poking at https://github.com/olalonde/proof-of-liabilities | 19:39 |
| -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 19:39 | |
| andytoshi | +1 to everything kanzure just suggested (kanzure you should make a pr) | 19:39 |
| kanzure | would a frontend js app to do shamir secret sharing stuff be relevant? | 19:40 |
| andytoshi | i nak mainly to keep the software section from dwarfing the rest :P | 19:40 |
| kanzure | eg http://seedguardian.github.io/ | 19:40 |
| kanzure | kk | 19:40 |
| BlueMatt | the only sharmir's implementation I like is my own :p | 19:41 |
| andytoshi | i think olalonde's thing should be there, if it is broken hopefully people will ask here. i think it's being used | 19:41 |
| BlueMatt | but, yea, thats not particularly wizaardly | 19:41 |
| -!- woah [~woah@199-241-202-232.PUBLIC.monkeybrains.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…] | 19:42 | |
| * BlueMatt is not so sure that python-merbinnertree is that wizardly | 19:44 | |
| BlueMatt | its just a datastructure...not very bitcoin-specific? | 19:44 |
| -!- MoALTz [~no@user-188-33-132-198.play-internet.pl] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds] | 19:44 | |
| andytoshi | hmm, yeah, the wizardly part of it is petertodd's name | 19:44 |
| BlueMatt | heh | 19:45 |
| andytoshi | so i change to nak :) | 19:45 |
| BlueMatt | well, pt has done other wizardly things... | 19:45 |
| -!- Prints_ [~radio@68.118.145.246] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 19:45 | |
| -!- Prints_ [~radio@68.118.145.246] has left #bitcoin-wizards [] | 19:45 | |
| gmaxwell | sure, the random PT tools, and the contract hash tools sure. | 19:45 |
| gmaxwell | I have a ton of old shit on bct thats just posted for prior art establishment... that I should go dredge up, some is pretty good. | 19:46 |
| kanzure | https://github.com/TheBlueMatt/bitcoinninja/pull/9 | 19:47 |
| kanzure | https://github.com/TheBlueMatt/bitcoinninja/pull/8 | 19:47 |
| BlueMatt | damn, was already doing that... | 19:47 |
| kanzure | you can't beat me http://www.seanwrona.com/typeracer/profile.php?username=kanzure | 19:47 |
| gmaxwell | (uh by pretty good I mean ideas that are potentially useful) | 19:47 |
| gmaxwell | Someone want to go write up the statistical arguments for http://people.xiph.org/~greg/simple_verifyable_execution.txt ? I'll rain praise down on you for doing that... it's really only meant as an educational tool, not as something secure or usable... but it would be better with some concrete reasoning on the security. | 19:49 |
| andytoshi | kanzure: btw i have your -incentives pr open in my browser, i will try to read over it tomorrow. i am heading out of town for a short while, will probably get to it on the plane. (not sure, i have a bunch of school stuff i need to read in the next week to get back on track after the blockstream wp blitz) | 19:49 |
| kanzure | andytoshi: no rush | 19:49 |
| kanzure | andytoshi: let me know if you need a ride to/from the airport | 19:50 |
| andytoshi | kanzure: thx a ton. but i'm an eight-minute walk from the 100 shuttle route | 19:50 |
| amiller | so i've been thinking.... actually i guess this is zooko's idea.... sidechains might be a lot more useful if you could process *some* of the transaction rules of the side chain | 19:50 |
| amiller | but for performance reasons ideally not all of them | 19:50 |
| andytoshi | kanzure: will bug you in the next couple weeks, we should meet up in any case | 19:50 |
| amiller | this could address that scary problem where the 51% attacker on a sidechain can make a false transaction and take all the pegged bitcoins | 19:50 |
| amiller | even simple limits like not too much taken in one day for example | 19:51 |
| kanzure | andytoshi: okie dokie | 19:51 |
| gmaxwell | amiller: yea sure, first time they were discussed in here I think that was mentioned. Also ... my coinwitness post bascially just takes about the form where you verify all their rules under a snark. Really for the vision of complete freedom in what you can do, you need to give that up (ignoring snark pixie dust). | 19:51 |
| -!- mortale [~mortale@gateway/tor-sasl/mortale] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 19:52 | |
| andytoshi | (also any other -wizards in austin should be aware that kanzure and i are, and can often be free to meet people) | 19:52 |
| gmaxwell | one trade of there is that you have to expose a lot more data (Again, assuming no pixie dust) ... which ruins all the succinctness and any application around getting some scalablity gains. | 19:52 |
| amiller | gmaxwell, i don't see how if you can't do all of them that means you shouldn't be able to do any of them | 19:52 |
| -!- nessence [~alexl@p508113DD.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 19:52 | |
| -!- nessence [~alexl@p508113DD.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 19:53 | |
| gmaxwell | amiller: doing almost any of them immediately breaks succenctness.. so... :meh: plus the engineering to get it right is harder (I'm not opposed, just explaining why we didn't spend any space discussing that subset of designs in the paper... it would probably merit some more exploration) | 19:53 |
| gmaxwell | goodnight... 6am to 8pm the next day.. wee.. | 19:55 |
| amiller | this all-or-nothing succinctness seems too hasty to me, seems like there might be a useful spectrum | 19:55 |
| -!- MoALTz [~no@user-31-174-252-8.play-internet.pl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 19:55 | |
| amiller | gmaxwell, i think your thing looks like cut-and-choose malicious-secure yao garbled circuits | 19:55 |
| -!- mmozeiko [~mmozeiko@c-50-184-215-21.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds] | 19:59 | |
| -!- jaekwon [~Adium@75-101-96-71.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 20:00 | |
| -!- mmozeiko [~mmozeiko@c-50-184-215-21.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 20:00 | |
| -!- c0rw1n_ [~c0rw1n@167.84-67-87.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 20:02 | |
| -!- c0rw1n [~c0rw1n@83.104-201-80.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] | 20:04 | |
| -!- jaekwon [~Adium@75-101-96-71.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] | 20:04 | |
| amiller | http://eprint.iacr.org/2010/284.pdf Secure Two-Party Computation via Cut-and-Choose Oblivious Transfer | 20:07 |
| amiller | oops i didn't mean that one http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-540-72540-4_4#page-1 An Efficient Protocol for Secure Two-Party Computation in the Presence of Malicious Adversaries | 20:09 |
| -!- paperbot [~paperbot@131.252.130.248] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 20:09 | |
| kanzure | paperbot: http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-540-72540-4_4#page-1 | 20:09 |
| paperbot | http://diyhpl.us/~bryan/papers2/paperbot/9dac56417e2ec6e8716ed3a3ce945f8d.txt | 20:10 |
| Taek | nifty | 20:11 |
| kanzure | doesn't always work, lacks omnipotence.. | 20:12 |
| -!- warptangent [~warptange@192.227.139.148] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 20:14 | |
| Taek | my browser isn't rendering the page, just some html. Don't see the abstract either. | 20:14 |
| kanzure | normally paperbot fetches a pdf, but dumps html into text when it fails as a half-way debug log. this means it doesn't have access. | 20:14 |
| amiller | kanzure, deserves an archivist award of some kind. | 20:15 |
| kanzure | anyway here we go http://diyhpl.us/~bryan/papers2/paperbot/An%20Efficient%20Protocol%20for%20Secure%20Two-Party%20Computation%20in%20the%20Presence%20of%20Malicious%20Adversaries.pdf | 20:15 |
| amiller | like msot the time i find a paper on google scholar its a link to his site | 20:15 |
| kanzure | unfortunately gmaxwell yet again has me beat on this subject haha | 20:16 |
| BlueMatt | heh | 20:16 |
| -!- mkarrer [~mkarrer@183.Red-83-40-233.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 20:16 | |
| -!- MoALTz [~no@user-31-174-252-8.play-internet.pl] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] | 20:19 | |
| -!- fanquake_ [~anonymous@unaffiliated/fanquake] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 20:21 | |
| -!- mkarrer [~mkarrer@183.Red-83-40-233.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] | 20:21 | |
| -!- fanquake [~anonymous@unaffiliated/fanquake] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] | 20:23 | |
| -!- fanquake_ is now known as fanquake | 20:23 | |
| -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 20:24 | |
| -!- wyager [~wyager@nat-128-62-66-201.public.utexas.edu] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 20:28 | |
| -!- wyager [~wyager@nat-128-62-66-201.public.utexas.edu] has left #bitcoin-wizards [] | 20:28 | |
| -!- mmozeiko [~mmozeiko@c-50-184-215-21.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] | 20:29 | |
| -!- mmozeiko [~mmozeiko@c-50-184-215-21.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 20:30 | |
| -!- spinza [~spin@197.83.246.240] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] | 20:34 | |
| -!- spinza [~spin@197.83.246.240] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 20:35 | |
| -!- [7] [~quassel@rockbox/developer/TheSeven] has quit [Disconnected by services] | 20:36 | |
| -!- TheSeven [~quassel@rockbox/developer/TheSeven] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 20:36 | |
| -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 20:39 | |
| -!- jeremyrubin [~chatzilla@18.189.23.120] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 20:41 | |
| kanzure | amiller: here's the rest of that conference-series-thing (still incoming, give it 20 minutes for the rest) http://diyhpl.us/~bryan/papers2/security/advances-in-cryptology/ | 20:42 |
| -!- MoALTz [~no@user-164-126-167-119.play-internet.pl] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 20:43 | |
| * Luke-Jr wonders if libblkmaker belongs on bitcoin.ninja impl list | 20:44 | |
| -!- adam3us [~Adium@c-50-136-255-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 20:45 | |
| -!- mmozeiko [~mmozeiko@c-50-184-215-21.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] | 20:48 | |
| -!- KingCoin [~KingCoin@unaffiliated/kingcoin] has quit [Quit: KingCoin] | 20:55 | |
| -!- jaekwon [~Adium@75-101-96-71.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 20:55 | |
| -!- zoltron5 [~zoltron5@c-69-136-189-159.hsd1.in.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 20:57 | |
| -!- jaekwon [~Adium@75-101-96-71.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] | 21:00 | |
| -!- adam3us [~Adium@c-50-136-255-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] | 21:02 | |
| -!- NewLiberty [~NewLibert@172.6.13.22] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 21:02 | |
| maclane | q | 21:07 |
| -!- maclane [~maclane@12.250.97.26] has quit [Quit: Lost terminal] | 21:08 | |
| -!- Dr-G [~Dr-G@gateway/tor-sasl/dr-g] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 21:10 | |
| -!- quidnunc [~user@bas6-montreal45-1176366201.dsl.bell.ca] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 21:10 | |
| -!- mmozeiko [~mmozeiko@c-50-184-215-21.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 21:13 | |
| -!- ucerron [835ebaa2@gateway/web/freenode/ip.131.94.186.162] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 21:16 | |
| -!- zooko [~user@67-6-128-167.hlrn.qwest.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 21:19 | |
| -!- Guest56072 [~quassel@50-0-37-37.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 21:22 | |
| -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 21:23 | |
| -!- maaku [~quassel@50-0-37-37.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 21:24 | |
| -!- maaku is now known as Guest6823 | 21:24 | |
| lechuga_ | how does minting work on the federated peg sidechain | 21:25 |
| lechuga_ | every1 is aware of the federations public keys and whatever they say goes? | 21:25 |
| -!- Guest6823 [~quassel@50-0-37-37.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 21:25 | |
| sipa | lechuga_: one way is just assigning 21M BTC in the sidechain to the federation (which is a multisig script, composed of the federation's keys) | 21:27 |
| sipa | which then takes the position of all not-transferred bitcoins | 21:27 |
| -!- btcwizkid [c6176761@gateway/web/freenode/ip.198.23.103.97] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 21:27 | |
| -!- RoboTeddy [~roboteddy@c-67-188-40-206.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 21:28 | |
| -!- peterlie [~peterlie@99-127-231-33.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 21:30 | |
| lechuga_ | how will the nonce be provided to the federation | 21:30 |
| sipa | TCP? | 21:31 |
| sipa | or it is just part of the claim transaction you make to unlock the coins on the sidechain | 21:31 |
| lechuga_ | and that channel is out of scope? | 21:31 |
| sipa | ? | 21:33 |
| lechuga_ | i guess im asking what does the claim tx look like | 21:35 |
| sipa | it's a transaction that takes coins from that 'stash' and transfers a part to you | 21:37 |
| sipa | it's a completely normal transaction in case of that 21M preassignment | 21:37 |
| lechuga_ | from bitcoin to sidechain is a multisig p2sh tx but the keys have been deterministically adjusted by a nonce | 21:38 |
| -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 21:39 | |
| lechuga_ | right? | 21:39 |
| sipa | it's the same on the other side | 21:39 |
| sipa | on the bitcoin side it's to the federation, on the sidechain it's from the federation | 21:39 |
| -!- bitjedi [~QuaCryptI@unaffiliated/bitjedi] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] | 21:42 | |
| -!- Luke-Jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 21:43 | |
| lechuga_ | and then how do they come back | 21:45 |
| sipa | send to the federation on the sidechain, and take from the federation on the other side | 21:46 |
| lechuga_ | "take" means the federtion manually creates a bitcoin tx to your spk? | 21:47 |
| sipa | or you do, and ask the federation to sign it for you | 21:48 |
| -!- superobserver [~superobse@unaffiliated/superobserver] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 21:48 | |
| lechuga_ | but going to the sidechain the federation doesn't need to sign anything do they? | 21:52 |
| -!- zooko [~user@67-6-128-167.hlrn.qwest.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] | 21:54 | |
| btcwizkid | Sidechains: I'm not sure how blockstream etc get past the problems Peter Todd cited... | 21:56 |
| -!- Luke-Jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 21:56 | |
| -!- jtimon [~quassel@c-50-136-255-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 21:59 | |
| lechuga_ | isnt the risk of the federation colluding pretty high | 21:59 |
| kanzure | wasn't there a non-federated proposal somewhere? | 22:00 |
| lechuga_ | that's OP_SIDECHAINPROOFVERIFY i think | 22:01 |
| -!- bitjedi [~QuaCryptI@pool-108-35-112-208.nwrknj.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 22:03 | |
| -!- bitjedi [~QuaCryptI@pool-108-35-112-208.nwrknj.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Changing host] | 22:03 | |
| -!- bitjedi [~QuaCryptI@unaffiliated/bitjedi] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 22:03 | |
| sipa | kanzure: well, our whitepaper... | 22:04 |
| -!- Greed [~Greed@unaffiliated/greed] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 22:04 | |
| sipa | using a DMMS for securing transfers is what is proposed in the main body; using a federated peg instead is explained in an appendix | 22:06 |
| -!- bitjedi [~QuaCryptI@unaffiliated/bitjedi] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 22:06 | |
| -!- mapppum [~mappum@c-24-17-76-220.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 22:06 | |
| -!- mapppum [~mappum@c-24-17-76-220.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 22:06 | |
| -!- mapppum [~mappum@c-24-17-76-220.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 22:07 | |
| -!- sighashall [4532b36a@gateway/web/freenode/ip.69.50.179.106] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 22:14 | |
| -!- maaku_ [~quassel@50-0-37-37.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 22:18 | |
| lechuga_ | sorry, had to reread 3.2 | 22:21 |
| Luke-Jr | lechuga_: risk of a 15-of-15 in different countries run by different entities would be low | 22:22 |
| Luke-Jr | could go even lower if you split the keys.. | 22:22 |
| Luke-Jr | as long as all parties to key-parts are in the room observing the destruction of the PC generating it | 22:23 |
| Luke-Jr | and there's no savant that can memorise it instantly | 22:23 |
| lechuga_ | lol | 22:23 |
| -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 22:24 | |
| sipa | 15-of-15 has much higher risk for key loss than theft :p | 22:25 |
| kanzure | Luke-Jr: man now you're going to make me try to memorize that sort of thing instantly | 22:26 |
| Luke-Jr | sipa: beside the point XD | 22:28 |
| sipa | just avoid all false sense of security and use 15-of-14, which is equivalent to 15-of-15 with one lost key | 22:29 |
| -!- moa [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/moa] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] | 22:33 | |
| -!- moa [~moa@opentransactions/dev/moa] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 22:34 | |
| -!- damethos [~damethos@unaffiliated/damethos] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 22:51 | |
| -!- nessence [~alexl@p508113DD.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 22:54 | |
| -!- nessence [~alexl@p508113DD.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 22:54 | |
| -!- mmozeiko [~mmozeiko@c-50-184-215-21.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 22:55 | |
| -!- mmozeiko [~mmozeiko@c-50-184-215-21.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 22:56 | |
| -!- nessence [~alexl@p508113DD.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] | 22:59 | |
| -!- aburan28 [~ubuntu@static-108-45-93-85.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds] | 23:00 | |
| -!- zz_lnovy [~lnovy@2002:4d57:f055::1] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:07 | |
| -!- lnovy [~lnovy@2002:4d57:f055::1] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] | 23:07 | |
| -!- zz_lnovy is now known as lnovy | 23:07 | |
| -!- poggy [~poggy@ks3262860.kimsufi.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] | 23:07 | |
| -!- poggy_ [~poggy@ks3262860.kimsufi.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:08 | |
| -!- bbrittain_ [~bbrittain@172.245.212.12] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:08 | |
| -!- bbrittain [~bbrittain@172.245.212.12] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] | 23:10 | |
| -!- bbrittain_ is now known as bbrittain | 23:10 | |
| -!- Sangheili [Elite8385@gateway/shell/elitebnc/x-povpndwwkdnqlipi] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] | 23:10 | |
| Iriez | sidechain's sure have kicked the hornets nest | 23:10 |
| Iriez | I've not seen dev's this picky at each other in quite some time. | 23:10 |
| * Iriez popcorn | 23:10 | |
| -!- Kireji [~nospam@unaffiliated/kireji] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds] | 23:11 | |
| -!- sl01_ [~sl01@li431-44.members.linode.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:11 | |
| -!- sl01 [~sl01@li431-44.members.linode.com] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] | 23:11 | |
| -!- Meeh [~meeeeeeh@meeh.sigterm.no] has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.] | 23:11 | |
| -!- Alanius [~alanius@ssh2.ulyssis.student.kuleuven.be] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] | 23:11 | |
| -!- emsid [~emsid@unaffiliated/emsid] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] | 23:11 | |
| -!- erizo [~riz0@li59-64.members.linode.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] | 23:11 | |
| -!- Meeh [~meeeeeeh@meeh.sigterm.no] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:12 | |
| -!- emsid [~emsid@unaffiliated/emsid] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:12 | |
| -!- iddo_ [~idddo@csm.cs.technion.ac.il] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:13 | |
| -!- a5m0 [~a5m0@unaffiliated/a5m0] has quit [Disconnected by services] | 23:14 | |
| -!- kinlo [peter@unaffiliated/kinlo] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] | 23:14 | |
| -!- a5m0_ [~a5m0@unaffiliated/a5m0] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:14 | |
| -!- iddo [~idddo@csm.cs.technion.ac.il] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] | 23:14 | |
| -!- kinlo_ [peter@unaffiliated/kinlo] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:15 | |
| -!- maaku_ [~quassel@50-0-37-37.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 23:15 | |
| -!- maaku [~quassel@50-0-37-37.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:15 | |
| -!- aburan28 [~ubuntu@static-108-45-93-85.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:15 | |
| -!- maaku is now known as Guest33913 | 23:15 | |
| -!- kinlo_ is now known as kinlo | 23:17 | |
| -!- sighashall [4532b36a@gateway/web/freenode/ip.69.50.179.106] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 23:17 | |
| -!- Kireji [~nospam@biocontact.org] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:17 | |
| -!- Kireji [~nospam@biocontact.org] has quit [Changing host] | 23:17 | |
| -!- Kireji [~nospam@unaffiliated/kireji] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:17 | |
| -!- Alanius [~alanius@ssh2.ulyssis.student.kuleuven.be] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:17 | |
| -!- erizo [~hellz@li59-64.members.linode.com] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:18 | |
| -!- jtimon [~quassel@c-50-136-255-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] | 23:21 | |
| -!- Guest33913 is now known as maaku | 23:21 | |
| -!- pen [~linker@42.118.241.21] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] | 23:24 | |
| -!- nessence [~alexl@p508113DD.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:25 | |
| -!- nessence [~alexl@p508113DD.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] | 23:29 | |
| BlueMatt | Iriez: huh? | 23:38 |
| -!- KingCoin [~KingCoin@unaffiliated/kingcoin] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:39 | |
| -!- austinhill [~Adium@c-50-136-255-6.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:39 | |
| -!- Kireji [~nospam@unaffiliated/kireji] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] | 23:40 | |
| -!- kinlo [peter@unaffiliated/kinlo] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] | 23:43 | |
| -!- NewLiberty__ [~NewLibert@adsl-172-6-13-22.dsl.lsan03.sbcglobal.net] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:44 | |
| -!- kinlo [peter@unaffiliated/kinlo] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:44 | |
| -!- NewLiberty [~NewLibert@172.6.13.22] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] | 23:45 | |
| -!- nessence [~alexl@p508113DD.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:49 | |
| -!- Adlai [~Adlai@gateway/tor-sasl/adlai] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 23:49 | |
| -!- Adlai [~Adlai@gateway/tor-sasl/adlai] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:50 | |
| -!- NewLiberty__ [~NewLibert@adsl-172-6-13-22.dsl.lsan03.sbcglobal.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] | 23:50 | |
| -!- nessence [~alexl@p508113DD.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] | 23:51 | |
| -!- pen [~linker@115.79.55.177] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:52 | |
| -!- Sangheili [Elite8385@gateway/shell/elitebnc/x-gljxymdaefibxgya] has joined #bitcoin-wizards | 23:52 | |
| -!- vaxzine [63b9861e@gateway/web/freenode/ip.99.185.134.30] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] | 23:54 | |
| --- Log closed Thu Oct 23 00:00:25 2014 | ||
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.15.0.dev0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!
