--- Log opened Mon Feb 17 00:00:42 2020 05:47 -!- jonatack [~jon@2a01:e0a:53c:a200:bb54:3be5:c3d0:9ce5] has quit [Quit: jonatack] 06:13 -!- jonatack [~jon@2a01:e0a:53c:a200:bb54:3be5:c3d0:9ce5] has joined ##ctv-bip-review 09:17 -!- bsm1175321 [~mcelrath@2601:196:4902:25b0:3067:a90a:9a06:babf] has joined ##ctv-bip-review 09:17 -!- bsm1175321 [~mcelrath@2601:196:4902:25b0:3067:a90a:9a06:babf] has quit [Client Quit] 10:07 -!- brandoncurtis [brandongwu@gateway/shell/matrix.org/x-hnlkadivnylxvnus] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 10:46 -!- brandoncurtis [brandongwu@gateway/shell/matrix.org/x-kehhvdmshgqavtcv] has joined ##ctv-bip-review 11:46 -!- brandoncurtis [brandongwu@gateway/shell/matrix.org/x-kehhvdmshgqavtcv] has quit [Quit: killed] 12:20 -!- brandoncurtis [brandongwu@gateway/shell/matrix.org/x-fjveotlrkztwoday] has joined ##ctv-bip-review 14:27 < jeremyrubin> So the point of the argument, which I need to make more clear, is that CTV is not a worse user of blockspace 14:27 < jeremyrubin> It's not to show that it's substantially better 14:28 < jeremyrubin> It spawns from a discussion with morcos that he thought that CTV for scaling may be ~bad because overall it will lead to less block space being available 14:29 < jeremyrubin> The point of the simulation is to make an argument that given non const priority of payment requests, people will already do priority boarding for their batches, and then to show that CTV is more efficient for that 14:33 < jeremyrubin> harding: ^ 14:35 < harding> Meh. So consolidation is undeniably a worst user of block space than non-consolidation, but I think it's still a useful techique for reducing fees. 14:36 < harding> If we're gonig to recommend consolidation (which maybe morcos doesn't), I don't know why we wouldn't recommend CTV. 14:37 < harding> Anyway, maybe that's a useful proof. I'm just saying, the extra block space used by CTV in order to minimize fees by priority/time arbitrage wasn't something that concerned me. 18:27 < kanzure> harding: pre-signed transactions can do similar consolidation work, at the cost of requiring trusted setup (n-of-n with 1/n honesty requirement (e.g. the user deletes the key and knows they deleted the key)). doesn't scale to high values of n. 18:27 < kanzure> s/consolidation/congestion control 19:52 < harding> Yeah, though that uses more block space than CTV because CTV can be spent without a signature. 20:22 < jeremyrubin> kanzure: pre-signeds both require a trusted setup & extra data & extra validation so not a great substitute for this sort of use case 20:23 < jeremyrubin> harding: yeah, if you're willing to accept at face value that CTV congestion control decreases overall chain utilization, or at least doesn't make it more than marginally worse, this is not the most useful simulation 20:24 < jeremyrubin> However if you are hardline that any use case has to fundamentally reduce the amount of tx space for a given number of users (so we can ignore Jeven's Paradox...) then this is useful to show that we're better off with CTV 20:24 < jeremyrubin> All in an effort to be 100% methodical with minimal sleight of hand on my claims of congestion control working --- Log closed Tue Feb 18 00:00:44 2020