--- Day changed Wed Oct 05 2016
01:29 -!- fqtw_ [~me@x590d5b38.dyn.telefonica.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]     
02:52 -!- moli [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has quit [Read error: Connection timed out]     
02:53 -!- moli [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has joined #joinmarket     
03:38 -!- Zer0Pings [~ImCool@unaffiliated/thisiszenified] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]     
03:48 < fluffypony> https://www.reddit.com/r/litecoin/comments/55tpwe/onchain_coinjoin
03:52 < gmaxwell> fluffypony: why the heck are they putting these things in blocks, when they must use not-in-blocks communication to sign the transaction?
03:53 < fluffypony> gmaxwell: they're trying to compete with ZCash and Ethereum for the 2016 "Bad Ideas Poorly Implemented" award
03:53  * gmaxwell cries
04:06 < Lightsword> where your blockchain crashing on a daily basis is now normal :P
04:21 < fluffypony> Lightsword: don't worry, they'll just raise the gas limit 
04:30 -!- rotarydialer [~rotarydia@unaffiliated/rotarydialer] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]     
04:34 -!- rotarydialer [~rotarydia@unaffiliated/rotarydialer] has joined #joinmarket     
06:11 -!- fluffypony [~fluffypon@unaffiliated/fluffypony] has quit [Excess Flood]     
06:12 -!- fluffypony [~fluffypon@unaffiliated/fluffypony] has joined #joinmarket     
06:39 -!- waxwing [~waxwing@84.237.213.217] has joined #joinmarket     
07:29 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-40-227-45-190.cm.vtr.net] has joined #joinmarket     
07:38 -!- Netsplit *.net <-> *.split quits: Anduck, puddinpop, moli
07:39 -!- Netsplit over, joins: Anduck
07:39 -!- Netsplit over, joins: moli
07:46 -!- jeroen_ [~jeroen@2001:981:9573:1:9c9a:64e0:3153:b8d5] has joined #joinmarket     
08:07 -!- moli [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
08:07 -!- moli [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has joined #joinmarket     
08:27 -!- moli [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has quit [Read error: Connection timed out]     
08:32 -!- moli [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has joined #joinmarket     
08:47 -!- jeroen_ [~jeroen@2001:981:9573:1:9c9a:64e0:3153:b8d5] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]     
08:51 -!- gielbier [~gielbier@2001:981:9573:1:c848:c489:31f3:f90d] has quit [Changing host]     
08:51 -!- gielbier [~gielbier@unaffiliated/gielbier] has joined #joinmarket     
09:00 -!- moli [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has quit [Read error: Connection timed out]     
09:06 -!- moli [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has joined #joinmarket     
10:01 -!- fqtw_ [~me@x590d24b9.dyn.telefonica.de] has joined #joinmarket     
10:09 -!- fqtw [~me@x590d24b9.dyn.telefonica.de] has joined #joinmarket     
10:11 -!- fqtw_ [~me@x590d24b9.dyn.telefonica.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]     
10:35 -!- moli [~molly@unaffiliated/molly] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]     
10:36 -!- fqtw_ [~me@x4db1bc27.dyn.telefonica.de] has joined #joinmarket     
10:39 -!- fqtw [~me@x590d24b9.dyn.telefonica.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]     
11:13 -!- rdymac__ [uid31665@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-ijdihmkoealreltp] has joined #joinmarket     
11:14 -!- fqtw__ [~me@x4db0750f.dyn.telefonica.de] has joined #joinmarket     
11:18 -!- fqtw_ [~me@x4db1bc27.dyn.telefonica.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]     
11:21 -!- Commissar [~Lizard__W@196-215-40-147.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has joined #joinmarket     
11:21 -!- Commissar is now known as Guest20272     
11:21 -!- Guest20272 [~Lizard__W@196-215-40-147.dynamic.isadsl.co.za] has quit [Client Quit]     
11:25 < freekevin> I dont get something now in the funding section of the wiki
11:26 < freekevin> dont send to multiple mixing levels when filling the joinmarket wallet?
11:26 < freekevin> then how are you able to get funds into the mixing levels?
11:26 -!- DeathShadow--666 [~IDSE@S0106a0f3c1139365.vc.shawcable.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]     
11:27 < freekevin> if you are funding from an exchange then you will have to send the coins to the different mixing levels
11:27 < freekevin> or you are funding from electrum etc
11:27 < belcher> which wiki page are you reading?
11:28 < freekevin> https://github.com/JoinMarket-Org/joinmarket/wiki/Sourcing-commitments-for-joins
11:28 < freekevin> funding wallet
11:28 < freekevin> "Don't do a sendtomany to different mixdepths, as that will link those mixdepths together, a central thing that Joinmarket avoids"
11:28 -!- fqtw [~me@x4db04e53.dyn.telefonica.de] has joined #joinmarket     
11:28 < freekevin> belcher: ^
11:28 < belcher> ah     
11:29 < belcher> a mixing depth has multiple addresses inside it
11:29 < belcher> you send to multiple addresses within one mixdepth
11:29 -!- puddinpop [~puddinpop@unaffiliated/puddinpop] has joined #joinmarket     
11:29 < freekevin> ?     
11:29 < freekevin> but you need to fund the other mix depths
11:30 < freekevin> https://github.com/JoinMarket-Org/joinmarket/wiki/Using-the-JoinMarket-internal-wallet
11:30 < freekevin> this used to say "put 0.1 btc into each mixdepth " 
11:31 < belcher> that seems a strange thing for it to say
11:31 < belcher> i think thats wrong
11:32 -!- fqtw__ [~me@x4db0750f.dyn.telefonica.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]     
11:32 < freekevin> that was around in may 
11:32 < freekevin> so now you dont want to send from one wallet to multiple mix depths?
11:33 < freekevin> why and whats changed from then to now?
11:33 < belcher> so this the version of that page from april https://github.com/JoinMarket-Org/joinmarket/wiki/Using-the-JoinMarket-internal-wallet/e20666b4090bddae043fc6256c41a84453ef25a9
11:33 < belcher> i did ctrl+f 'mix' and cant find anything like that
11:34 < belcher> cant guarantee there wasnt something like that in the wiki but its such an odd thing to write i dont see how it would've gotten in
11:39 < freekevin> maybe it was in the send payment example or tumbler example at the time
11:39 < belcher> if you find it again tell us since its wrong
11:40 < freekevin> how is it linking the mix depths?
11:41 < belcher> they are used by tumbler and yieldgenerator for slightly different purposes
11:41 < belcher> but both just send coins from one mixdepth to another
11:45 -!- HeySteve [~Lizard__W@unaffiliated/heysteve] has joined #joinmarket     
11:47 -!- HeySteve [~Lizard__W@unaffiliated/heysteve] has left #joinmarket []     
11:48 < freekevin> also it says this guide is not relevant for earlier versions
11:48 < freekevin> This guide is for Joinmarket 0.2+ ; it is not relevant for earlier versions.
11:49 < freekevin> so does that mean earlier versions you could send to multiple mix depths and it did not link them?
11:49 < freekevin> the tumbler?
11:49 < belcher> the commitment one yes, podle commitments only appeared in 0.2.0+
11:50 < freekevin> so was this true but was not known at the time for earlier versions? 
11:50 < freekevin>  Don't do a sendtomany to different mixdepths, as that will link those mixdepths together, a central thing that Joinmarket avoids. Also, don't send multiple outputs to the same address - use different addresses.
11:50 < belcher> sending to multiple mixdepths wont link them because joinmarket never combines its utxos from different mixdepths
11:50 < freekevin> the previous guide did say dont send multiple outputs to smae address
11:50 < freekevin> and tumbler script gave examples of using multiple addressses
11:52 < freekevin> so If i have a wallet from < 0.2 where I sent from an exchange, 0.1 bitcoin to 10 addresses in 5 mixdepths 
11:52 < freekevin> all the coinjoins are linked?
11:53 < freekevin> or is this just talking about "send to many" function of electrum?
11:53 < freekevin> if you did individual sends from an exchange to multiple mixdepths its fine?
11:54 < belcher> depends what you wanted to do
11:54 < belcher> i dont see any reason to do that, but if you did joinmarket is coded to never link them together
11:55 < belcher> actually.. waxwing i havent read the commitment code in detail yet, but it only uses UTXOs as commitments from the same mixdepth you're spending from, right?
11:57 < freekevin> the blockchain cannot tell if different recieving addresses are linked to the same wallet 
11:57 < freekevin> so how are mix depths "linked" ?
11:58 < belcher> thats what im thinking about now
11:58 < freekevin> if sneding from one wallet to different mixdepths
11:58 < belcher> joinmarket coinjoins still often leak the common ownership of utxos, so if you spent from multiple mixdepths in one coinjoin that would be evidence of common ownership, but joinmarket never does that
11:59 < belcher> UTXOs are also used for the podle commitment thing, waxwing should know if joinmarket there also keeps the mixdepths seperated
12:01 < freekevin> also what about tumlbing from from one joinmarket wallet to another into multiple mixdepths
12:02 < freekevin> I can understand that from the exchange it sees you send several exact same size payments to several addresses
12:02 < freekevin> and links them 
12:02 < belcher> what sees you send?
12:02 < freekevin> but the whole usage of multiple mix depths should break those links once the coinjoins happen 
12:02 < freekevin> the exchange 
12:03 < freekevin> when funding wallet from exchange to joinmarket
12:03 < belcher> ok     
12:03 < belcher> so the way its meant to work is you withdraw coins from the exchange and have them sent to one mixdepth
12:03 < freekevin> becaue the tumbler tumbles into higher mix depths right?
12:03 < belcher> yes, and at the end tumbler.py sends them off to the addresses you give it
12:04 -!- fqtw_ [~me@x4db138ab.dyn.telefonica.de] has joined #joinmarket     
12:07 -!- fqtw [~me@x4db04e53.dyn.telefonica.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]     
12:08 -!- DeathShadow--666 [~IDSE@S0106a0f3c1139365.vc.shawcable.net] has joined #joinmarket     
12:10 < waxwing> belcher: it tries first commitments from transaction, then from whole wallet, then from external. that 2nd option was a mistake now you mention it. should just be mixdepth, not wallet, albeit that does have a drawback of course.
12:12 < belcher> the second method would still only leak linking information to the maker(s) rather than the entire blockchain
12:12 < waxwing> yes, big difference
12:12 < belcher> depends on people's use cases..
12:12 < waxwing> still ... i was loth to make it even more complicated but probably sequence can be: 1/transaction 2/external 3/mixdepth 4/wallet
12:13 < belcher> what is external?
12:13 < waxwing> you add utxo commitments from other utxos you own. explained on the sourcing commitments wiki page
12:14 < belcher> ah ok
12:14 < belcher> gotit
12:14 < waxwing> has its own privacy implications of course, i also mentioned that there. it was intended as a "if you can't get what you want otherwise"
12:14 < waxwing> but i guess if they did have it it's probably 2nd best after "this transaction utxos"
12:15 < waxwing> well meh i suppose "this mixdepth" is always a good option
12:17 -!- twokun [~two@46.19.137.116] has joined #joinmarket     
12:23 -!- Logicgate [~Logicgate@lgse.com] has left #joinmarket []     
12:55 < adlai> freekevin: it's specifically about using bitcoin's "sendmany" command, which funds those mixdepths in a single tx. not really proof that they're owned by the same person, but still... a hint.
12:57 < freekevin> adlai: I see but still its easy to connect the mixdepths if you send from an exchange to each address in 5 mix depths the same amount
12:58 < freekevin> even if its all different tx's , but of 0.1 btc 
12:58 < waxwing> adlai: right. that's what i had in mind anyway, i was thinking about sendmany.
12:58 < adlai> which link is stronger is up to the Evil People telling other Evil People which bitcoin are Evil Coins
12:59 < freekevin> the exchange will connect the mixdepths
12:59 < waxwing> freekevin: what that thing in the "sourcing commitments" page is saying is: when you fund a wallet to begin with, you want multiple utxos to do your transaction, to make it easier (avoid running out of utxos for commitments). you want to do a transaction with all of those utxos, so they should be in the same mixdepth. so send to multiple addresses in 1 mixdepth.
13:00 < adlai> please suggest edits if you have issues with the specific wording on a wiki page
13:00 < waxwing> you can safely assume that all utxos in one mixdepth will eventually be linkable on the blockchain, after they've all been spent. joinmarket is trying to prevent a blockchain analyst from identifying the link *between* mixdepths, or link from 1 mixdepth to the final output.
13:03 < freekevin> waxwing: if you send to >5 addresses on multiple mix depths from your wallet on an exchange then there will be problems sourcing the commitments?
13:04 < waxwing> freekevin: yes, at least there might be, because a commitment utxo has to be at least 20% of the coinjoin amount
13:05 < waxwing> hence 3 is recommended to avoid excessive bloat and at the same time give you a lot of chances (9 in the simplest scenario)
13:05 < freekevin> waxwing:  so if you have 0.1 bitcoin in 5 mix depths , in 5 different addresses, how is the utxo not at least 20% of the coinjoin amount?
13:05 < freekevin> so a total of 25 addresses in 5 different mix depths
13:06 < freekevin> this will give you 75 chances
13:06 < freekevin> ?     
13:06 < waxwing> freekevin: i'm not saying you *can't* fund with 5 separate transactions to 5 different mixdepths if you want, just saying you shouldn't do a "sendmany" to multiple mixdepths at once, because that strongly suggests to an analyst that those mixdepths are linked
13:06 < freekevin> ah so if you did it by hand one tx at a time its not obvious?
13:07 < waxwing> well in that (rather excessive :) ) scenario you have 5x3 = 15 chances for each mixdepth separately; remember you only do joins from one mixdepth at a time, to keep them isolated
13:08 < freekevin> I understand that its possible ofc, but I am wondering why sending same size payments from one wallet to the jm wallet at different mix depths breaks privacy
13:08 < waxwing> but if say you had 0.1 x 5 outputs in one mixdepth, different addresses, then if you tried to send the whole lot .. i can't remember if the borderline case of 5 is OK, better use 4 or 3.
13:08 < adlai> freekevin: privacy is a nebulous concept. for example, an exchange could suspect every single withdrawal you make is to an address you control, but can't prove this in court.
13:08 < waxwing> freekevin: i guess that's a gray area.
13:08 < waxwing> yeah
13:09 < waxwing> i wasn't talking about that, only talking about sending to multiple mixdepths in one transaction (ie saying don't do that)
13:09 < adlai> the use of sendmany to fund multiple mixdepths still leaves plausible deniability - maybe you're just paying three friends, who each wanted to buy the same amount of coin?
13:09 < adlai> it depends whether you're going for deniability, or evasion
13:09 < waxwing> true
13:10 < adlai> using pretty much any "mixer", whether joinmarket, mixers, altcoins, etc, gives you deniability, but sucks for evasion - these methods highlight you as somebody who is trying to make their money deniable.
13:11 < waxwing> the "don't split into 5+" advice is for the extreme case where you're trying to spend all at once, if you split into 6 say, but only wanted to spend 50% of the total in one tx, that's fine. because 1/6 is still > 20% of 1/2 :)
13:11  * adlai should add this point about deniability vs evasion to his talk!
13:11 < adlai> it's a very common misconception
13:12 < waxwing> yes the simplest things are the easiest to forget
13:13 < waxwing> but it's very much a spectrum, not a binary thing
13:13 < waxwing> most ordinary wallets are creating deniability without even trying if they have 2-in 2-out even.
13:15 < adlai> re: funding, i'm wondering whether it's better to recommend that people fund one mixdepth initially, and use sendpayment/tumbler to fund the others... although using tumbler only works if they fund another wallet
13:15 < freekevin> I understand, waxwing , so If you have >5 addresses with bitcoin then you will get "failed to source commitments" forever?
13:15 < adlai> funding each mixdepth with successive transactions from the same wallet is really poor evasion
13:15 < freekevin> if you try to tumble.py
13:16 < waxwing> adlai: probably, i always kind of imagined using it like that
13:16 < waxwing> freekevin: no, actually you'd be ok with tumbler most likely in that specific scenario
13:16 < adlai> unfortunately we should spell out exactly what to do, if we don't want lusers footgunning.
13:16  * adlai is not implying that freekevin is a luser! asking good questions makes you a Valued Customer :)
13:16 < waxwing> if you ever get into a situation where you don't have enough commitments left, you can use the 'external' remedy described on the page (plus there are other outs mentioned)
13:17 < waxwing> i tried to boil down into the simplest conceivable advice that would work the most commonly freekevin  , on that page
13:17 < waxwing> as well as say what to do if something goes wrong
13:18 < freekevin> waxwing: which specific scenario?
13:19 < waxwing> for the case of the tumbler, consider that you'll be doing N transactions, each of which is a percentage of the total, from mixdepth 0, then starting again at mixdepth 1. at some point you won't be able to source from anywhere since they'll all be too new, so it has to wait (but by default it waits a bit anyway, now it waits longer if it needs to)
13:19 < freekevin> >5 address with 0.001 bitcoin?
13:19 < waxwing> freekevin: for all scenarios, that was the intention
13:19 < waxwing> but as you know there are lots of scenarios :)
13:21 < waxwing> freekevin: oh i get your question now, if you started tumbler with > 5 addresses funded, i'm saying in the scenario of tumbler that'll most likely be fine because it doesn't try to spend the whole lot at once
13:22 < waxwing> e.g. you have 5 addresses x 0.1, its first tx is 0.234 for example, that's ok, because your utxos are 0.1 which is bigger than 20% of 0.234
13:24 -!- rdymac__ [uid31665@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-ijdihmkoealreltp] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]     
13:25 < freekevin> so eventually though you will not have any utxo's but then how can you have any bitcoin left in the wallet?
13:25 < waxwing> you'll get new ones :)
13:25 < freekevin> once all the utxo's are gone, so the bitcoin is gone?
13:25 < freekevin> ho lol
13:26 < freekevin> it sounded as though you were saying there would be btc left in the wallet after the utxos are spent
13:26 < waxwing> we're talking about tumbler right, so we're talking about cases where you spend up the mixdepths.
13:26 < freekevin> yep     
13:27 < waxwing> and even outside of that, there are change utxos created (same mixdepth)
14:00 -!- rdymac__ [uid31665@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-lcygmtyexgdpppmv] has joined #joinmarket     
14:01 -!- rdymac__ is now known as rdymac     
14:01 -!- rdymac is now known as Guest73291     
14:08 < adlai> random thought from working on slides - takers might as well publish !hp2 themselves, if makers always broadcast it
14:15 < grubles> waxwing, hey i meant to reply about the commitment stuff
14:15 < grubles> i eventually just gave up and imported the priv keys into bitcoin-qt :x
14:19 -!- Guest73291 is now known as rdymac1     
15:00 -!- gmaxwell is now known as gmaxwell_     
15:01 -!- gmaxwell_ is now known as gmaxwell     
15:32 -!- fqtw__ [~me@x4db01068.dyn.telefonica.de] has joined #joinmarket     
15:36 -!- fqtw_ [~me@x4db138ab.dyn.telefonica.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]     
16:20 -!- twokun [~two@46.19.137.116] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]     
16:43 -!- lnostdal [~lnostdal@90.149.73.62] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
16:43 -!- lnostdal [~lnostdal@90.149.73.62] has joined #joinmarket     
16:50 -!- lnostdal [~lnostdal@90.149.73.62] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
17:29 -!- arubi [~ese168@unaffiliated/arubi] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]     
17:52 -!- mustyoshi [~mustyoshi@c-68-37-216-210.hsd1.mi.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
18:54 -!- rdymac1 [uid31665@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-lcygmtyexgdpppmv] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]     
19:18 -!- fqtw_ [~me@x590cdd70.dyn.telefonica.de] has joined #joinmarket     
19:22 -!- fqtw__ [~me@x4db01068.dyn.telefonica.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]     
19:46 -!- fqtw_ [~me@x590cdd70.dyn.telefonica.de] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
19:48 -!- fqtw [~me@x590cdd70.dyn.telefonica.de] has joined #joinmarket     
19:56 < freekevin> what happens if you set taker_utxo_amtpercent = 0?
19:56 < freekevin> or lower than 20?
19:56 < freekevin> then you are not preventing spying at all?
19:56 < freekevin> because its 20, if you want to sendpayment of 1BTC, you need 1.2 BTC at least in the wallet?
20:17 -!- aharlan [~aharlan@dyn-160-39-63-190.dyn.columbia.edu] has joined #joinmarket     
20:19 -!- aharlan [~aharlan@dyn-160-39-63-190.dyn.columbia.edu] has left #joinmarket []     
20:46 -!- mrkent [~textual@unaffiliated/mrkent] has joined #joinmarket     
20:54 < waxwing> freekevin: you'd just risk being blocked because your counterparties have it at 20%
20:55 < waxwing> purpose of having the rules on the Taker side is so you know what won't be accepted, so don't use it up pointlessly/waste time.
20:55 < waxwing> afk     
20:55 -!- waxwing [~waxwing@84.237.213.217] has quit [Quit: Leaving]     
21:29 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-40-227-45-190.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]     
22:46 -!- arubi [~ese168@unaffiliated/arubi] has joined #joinmarket