--- Day changed Tue May 16 2017
00:37 < trotski2000> I have another question
00:39 < trotski2000> when I lose connection for whatever reasons and I discconect from IRC, when I reconnect I get this message: "ERROR not enough liquidity in the orderbook n=6 suitable-counterparties=0"
00:39 < trotski2000> is like it loses the order book for whatever reason
00:39 < trotski2000> is there any way to fix this?
02:02 < waxwing> trotski2000: only generic answer for now, but you can restart the tumbler according to the instructions at the bottom of the wiki page on tumbler. also, the version in my repo (joinmarket-clientserver) has some extra features to make it more robust, but it's a separate install process.
02:03 < waxwing> and yes 'suitable counterparties 0' would *usually* mean that the connection failed. i'd take note of which of the two IRC servers you might not have succeeded in connecting to; if that happens, you'll need to restart with one of them removed from the config file (or just somehow manage to connect)
02:03 < waxwing> you can run against just one IRC server, it'll be fine
02:03 < trotski2000> waxwing: ok, so I restarted the tumbler. Unfortunately I managed to arrive to 10 out of 13 transactions in the first run - now it will do another 10 transactions. Is unfortunate because fees are super high, in the first run I paid 0.3 BTC in fees... Another 0.3 for 10 more transactions is crazy :8
02:03 < trotski2000> :(     
02:03 < waxwing> (as well as 'extra feature making more robust'  it also has '--restart' option
02:03 < trotski2000> about IRC... I don't know what's happening but now I keep getting disconnected from both servers
02:04 < trotski2000> waxwing: I will definitely install your version. 
02:04 < trotski2000> for future runs
02:04 < waxwing> 0.3BTC for 10 txs? that seems about an order of magnitude too high
02:04 < trotski2000> waxwing: that's what I paid. 
02:04 < trotski2000> at least that's the difference from the starting balance and the balance I had when I had to stop the first run
02:05 < waxwing> i would expect around $5-$7 maybe per tx with current high tx fees. do you have tx_fees set to 3 in the config?
02:05 < trotski2000> waxwing: yes
02:05 < waxwing> and using Bitcoin Core?
02:05 < trotski2000> waxwing: yes
02:05 < waxwing> if so can you try to run bitcoin-cli estimatefee 3 ?
02:06 < trotski2000> 0.00218208
02:06 < waxwing> also, did you change the default value for -N in the tumbler run? if not you'll generally have 5 to 7 counterparties
02:06 < trotski2000> no, I didn't
02:07 < waxwing> hmm actually maybe this makes sense. say 2kB transaction, 0.002 fee rate, that's 0.004 per tx, that gives 0.04 for 10. 0.3 instead of 0.003 seems strange. either large coinjoin fee somewhere, or something is wrong with your sync and you're not seeing all coins.
02:08 < waxwing> (scratch that "maybe makes sense" at the start, just thinking aloud)
02:08 < trotski2000> waxwing: btw, I'm running Core via Tor. I don't know if that can affect something. What I see is that I keep getting disconnected from both IRC servers, and after I get disconnected I start getting liquidity error
02:08 < trotski2000> see:
02:08 < trotski2000> 2017-05-16 11:07:00,398 [TumblerThrea] [WARNI]  waiting for liquidity 60secs, hopefully more orders should come in
02:08 < trotski2000> 2017-05-16 11:08:00,403 [TumblerThrea] [INFO ]  choosing sweep orders for total_input_value = 14563645 n=5
02:08 < trotski2000> 2017-05-16 11:08:00,416 [TumblerThrea] [ERROR]  ERROR not enough liquidity in the orderbook
02:08 < trotski2000> 2017-05-16 11:08:00,416 [TumblerThrea] [WARNI]  waiting for liquidity 60secs, hopefully more orders should come in
02:10 < trotski2000> and then, again and again...
02:10 < waxwing> check if there is 1 out of 2 you can connect to (look for the "connected to/logged on" message, i forget the exact form)
02:10 < trotski2000> 2017-05-16 11:10:18,011 [PingThread  ] [WARNI]  irc ping timed out
02:10 < trotski2000> 2017-05-16 11:10:18,016 [MCThread    ] [INFO ]  disconnected from irc host agora-irc
02:10 < waxwing> right so agora is failing there, if you can connect to cgan then remove agora from the config and go again
02:11 < trotski2000> cgan is failing too
02:11 < trotski2000> I guess the problem is on my end
02:11 < trotski2000> because I logged into the channels to see if others are disconnecting too
02:11 < trotski2000> and they are not
02:11 < waxwing> although personally i'd first want to know why you're out that much money, again, it sounds approximately 1 order of magnitude too large.
02:11 < waxwing> right
02:11 < trotski2000> waxwing: OK, I'm stopping the tumbler again
02:11 < waxwing> afk     
02:12 < trotski2000> yeah, I'm out of ~0.28 BTC
02:13 < trotski2000> ahhhhh no
02:13 < trotski2000> sorry
02:13 < trotski2000> 0.23 already arrived to one of the destination addresses
02:13 < trotski2000> cool!
02:13 < trotski2000> so fees so far were 0.28 - 0.23 = 0.005
02:13 < trotski2000> that makes much more sense
02:13 < trotski2000> 0.05
02:15 < trotski2000> ok. so now I have a small amount on one of the destination addresses and coins in depth 2 and 3. Is there a way to have the tumbler just do a 2/3 more coinjoins? It already did 11 txs in total, I'd say that's quite enough. I know I can't have it pick up from where it left but maybe I can have it to just do 2/3 tx before sending everything to de destination
02:15 < trotski2000> addresses?
02:44 < trotski2000> well, I used -c 1 1 to try to reduce as much as possible the number of transactions... Hopefully I didn't screw up :(
03:12 < waxwing> trotski2000: sorry was afk; first, glad i was right about the order of magnitude :)
03:12 < trotski2000> waxwing: me too :)
03:12 < waxwing> second, yeah i mean the effect of the algorithm is progressive, so if you've finished 11/13 or whatever it's mostly done its job, the only confusion there is if (usually) you want the coins in specific destinations
03:13 < trotski2000> waxwing: my problem now is that I keep getting disconnected from both IRC channels, and when that happens it seems I lose the order book... So I do the first transactions, and then keep getting the not enough liquidty in the order book error
03:13 < trotski2000> :(     
03:14 < waxwing> trotski2000: yeah not much to say really, if you can't connect to either then you can't do anything
03:14 < trotski2000> I don't know why I keep getting disconnected from IRC. Last night during the first run it worked OK. I needed to go and take the laptop with me and I manually stopped the script, and now is when I'm having all the problems.
03:14 < waxwing> a bit surprising you can't connect to *either* though
03:15 < trotski2000> waxwing: I mean... I can connect but I get disconnected. Look:
03:15 < trotski2000> [11:59] == J5BPLikYhYh6F2yf [username@mynet0id.d0q.ejevp0.IP] has joined #joinmarket-pit
03:15 < trotski2000> [12:01] == J5BPLikYhYh6F2yf [username@mynet0id.d0q.ejevp0.IP] has quit [Connection closed]
03:15 < trotski2000> that's me
03:15 < trotski2000> :(     
03:15 < waxwing> yes. i see that behaviour sometimes too. maybe someone else has an anecdotal comment.
03:15 < waxwing> i just got back don't have any JM or even btc running right now.
03:16 < trotski2000> if I cannot fix this behviour and thaking into account that I already did 13/14 coinjois, would you suggest to just send the coins to the final destinantions with sendpayment?
03:20 < trotski2000> waxwing: can I change joinmarket.cfg on the fly or should i restart the python scrypt for changes to take effect?
03:20 < trotski2000> I think I will try to remove one of the IRC servers, to see if using just one works. 
03:39 < waxwing> trotski2000: yeah unfortunately never fixed this point up: you have to manually remove *all* the entries for one of the servers ( so if it's setting=a,b change it to setting=a). best make different versions of joinmarket.cfg for each case. sorry about that.
03:40 < trotski2000> no problem!
03:40 < trotski2000> now hopefully I won't vet disconnected... But I don't know why I'm getting not enough liquidity. see:
03:40 < trotski2000> 2017-05-16 12:40:07,317 [TumblerThrea] [INFO ]  reloffer fee = 3.004e-06
03:40 < trotski2000> 2017-05-16 12:40:07,318 [TumblerThrea] [INFO ]  uses 30 makers, at 0.0003004% per maker, estimated total cost 0.009%
03:40 < trotski2000> 2017-05-16 12:40:07,318 [TumblerThrea] [INFO ]  starting
03:40 < trotski2000> 2017-05-16 12:40:07,344 [TumblerThrea] [INFO ]  sweeping
03:40 < trotski2000> 2017-05-16 12:40:07,348 [TumblerThrea] [INFO ]  We have a fee estimate: 676228
03:40 < trotski2000> 2017-05-16 12:40:07,348 [TumblerThrea] [INFO ]  And a requested fee of: 487194
03:40 < trotski2000> 2017-05-16 12:40:07,348 [TumblerThrea] [INFO ]  choosing sweep orders for total_input_value = 0 n=6
03:41 < trotski2000> 2017-05-16 12:40:07,348 [TumblerThrea] [ERROR]  ERROR not enough liquidity in the orderbook
03:41 < trotski2000> 2017-05-16 12:40:07,348 [TumblerThrea] [WARNI]  waiting for liquidity 60secs, hopefully more orders should come in
03:41 < trotski2000> waxwing: why is that?
03:42 < waxwing> hmm i think this is a known problem case where the number of available counterparties is only slightly more than the number requested. just a guess though at this point.
03:42 < waxwing> can you try with -N 4 0 ?
03:42 < trotski2000> waxwing: maybe I screwed and I've chosen a mixdepth that's already empty
03:42 < trotski2000> mmm     
03:42 < trotski2000> yeah
03:42 < trotski2000> that was it
03:43 < trotski2000> and btw 
03:43 < trotski2000> all my coins are in a single mixdepth right now
03:43 < waxwing> oh right, so you're restarting but you didn't do -m ?
03:43 < trotski2000> that's bad fro privacy, right?
03:43 < waxwing> did you read the bit at the bottom of the tumbler wiki page about how to restart/
03:43 < trotski2000> yeah, I did -m 2 and I should have done -m 3
03:43 < waxwing> ?     
03:43 < waxwing> ok i see. doh forgot about that :)
03:43 < trotski2000> waxwing: yes I did but I also played with -c (I did -c 1 1) so I guess I took all the coins to the same mixdepth
03:43 < trotski2000> is that a problem?
03:44 < trotski2000> I did -m 2 - c 1 1 
03:44 -!- MaxSan [~one@213.152.162.74] has joined #joinmarket     
03:44 < trotski2000> now I'm trying -m3 -c 2 1 -l 5
03:44 < waxwing> not really a problem; just the amount correlation means that that step didn't do much (didn't help privacy as much as it should)
03:44 < trotski2000> waxwing: will -c 2 1 -l 5 makes sense?
03:45 < trotski2000> I think there were already a lot of steps so privacy should be OK
03:45 < trotski2000> I want the last run just to be as quick as possible
03:45 < waxwing> consider, if you moved 1btc through each mixdepth, then the fact that each tx is about 1btc kinda gives away the flow.
03:45 < trotski2000> and with as few transactions as possible
03:45 < waxwing> yeah even with 1 is OK, like i say, it's just suboptimal
03:47 < trotski2000> waxwing: lol, now it seems its working. At the end of the day if this run finishes successfully... I will have done like 20 coinjoins :D
03:57 < trotski2000> waxwing: well, it seems that by removing one of the irc servers from joinmarket.cfg I don't have IRC problems anymore (fingers crossed)
04:03 < trotski2000> waxwing: lol, I spoke too early. I was disconnected again from the IRC so now the liquidity errors will begin. Fuck!!
04:04 < trotski2000> yeah, now the not enough liquidity error is hitting me. !!!!!!
04:12 -!- MaxSan [~one@213.152.162.74] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]     
04:41 < belcher_> given that you've done so many coinjoins already trotski2000, you could just finish with sendpayment
04:42 < belcher_> use sendpayment to send the coins to destination
04:42 < trotski2000> belcher_: yeah, I think this is what I'm doing. I really don't understand why I keep getting disconnected. During the first run (+8h) I didn't get disconnected a single time.
04:42 < trotski2000> And I've tried to switch WIFI networks, use Ethernet... To no avail
04:43 < trotski2000> the only thing I can try now is to reboot the laptop.. LOL
04:45 < waxwing> trotski2000: if you need to send the coins but both IRC servers refuse to cooperate, use sendpayment -N 0 to send directly, without IRC (and without coinjoin of course)
04:46 < belcher_> iv been having problems connecting to cyberguerilla lately, i think its just the servers are a bit unstable
04:47 < trotski2000> I'm monitoring the IRC channel (I'm connect via webchat) and I'm the only one who constantly connects and reconnects
04:47 < waxwing> so i think it's worth mentioning the fees issue for coinswap (see https://github.com/AdamISZ/CoinSwapCS/issues/8 , particularly the second comment) here in this channel. would be interested in anyone else reviewing the idea/plan there.
04:47 < waxwing> because i think i might start coding it now.
04:47 < trotski2000> belcher_: btw, regarding sendpayments, any best practice I should follow to ensure I don't break the privacy I gained by tumbling?
04:51 < waxwing> trotski2000: as a matter of general principle, you don't lose what you already gained, *unless* you aggregate the outgoing coins into 1, in which case you gave away the ~ equal amount again.
04:52 < belcher_> waxwing: i remember reading that issue before and it seemed okay, having each fee be a fixed bf number doesnt match how miner fees should work but the rest seemed like it should work
04:52 < waxwing> note that tumbler is an algorithm, so you can implement in manually by doing sendpayment in a set sequence; but this is a moot point, your issue is network
04:52 < waxwing> belcher_: yes i fudged that a bit.
04:53 < belcher_> people can always use CPFP i guess
04:53 < waxwing> i was thinking of it as "a standard high priority fee for a 1 in 2 out" but that doesn't even quite fit the pattern of what i describe
04:53 < waxwing> the most important concept is the second Carol output. well, i'll start working on it in a branch, and see what issues crop up as i do it.
04:59 < waxwing> belcher_: further to what we just mentioned in #coinswap; the persistent nicks approach is interesting for coinswap especially because of the backout risk, but i'm still not really convinced it isn't interesting as an option for joinmarket itself
05:04 < waxwing> so how about them wannacry people. amateurs or what? :)
05:04 < waxwing> or chinese pretending to be north korean pretending to be amateurs maybe.
05:06 < belcher_> it is interesting yes, theres an issue about using the idea in joinmarket
05:07 < belcher_> https://github.com/JoinMarket-Org/joinmarket/issues/57
05:07 < belcher_> i think thats it
05:07 < waxwing> internal review of makers, yeah, basically
05:08 < waxwing> i mean, it's an almost trivial PR to allow private key of nick to be stored now
05:08 < belcher_> btw regarding the fees, have you seen issue 715 in joinmarket, one of the ideas is fee estimating algorithms have problems and using the slowly-increasing RBF method is also good, so a combination of them would be good
05:08 < waxwing> the multiple mc upgrade helped in that regard because it needed to address impersonation
05:09 < waxwing> ok no i hadn't looked into that. seems like it'd be pretty complicated at first glance
05:16 < waxwing> oh of course "saving nick privkey" is hardly enough for a rep system if we rely on IRC .. at the least you'd need to register the nick ... meh, that's annoying. i guess you just move the ID into the message, not the nick. probably should have done it that way to start, but it's annoying adding more and more data. oh well, one day someone will use #650 .. maybe ..
05:42 < trotski2000> waxwing, belcher_: I switched to IRC over Tor. Let's see if now I will have less disconnections or hopefully no disconnections at all
05:50 < trotski2000> waxwing, belcher_: now I'm getting the "failed to source commitments" message and all my coins have +5 confirmations. Why is that? 
05:51 < waxwing> it means you used them up (you get 3 tries per utxo which is at least 20% of the amount).
05:52 < waxwing> your choices are, send with -N 0 to destination(s), (i would have done that already), send with -N 0 to a new address in the wallet and wait +5 confirms and then try again, add external commitments as per explanation on wiki
05:52 < trotski2000> ok, thanks! I guess its time to send with -N 0 to destinations
05:53 < trotski2000> it is ok to combine all coins that are in a single mixdepth, right waxwing ?
05:53 < waxwing> well sweep does that. yes, the idea is not to co-spend coins from different mixdepths.
05:53 < trotski2000> at least it seems that by connecting via Tor I'm not getting more disconnections on IRC. Fingers crossed.
06:03 < belcher_> waxwing: issue 715 (cohen's method) is a bit complicated to describe but on the whole fairly easy to understand
06:03 < belcher_> essentially taking RBF to its logical conclusion
06:07 < waxwing> right. i guess i  was more thinking about implementation.
06:08 < belcher_> the implementation is that you create and transfer several transactions instead of one
06:08 < belcher_> each transaction has a different fee rate, and you broadcast them one by one to make the fee rate go up
06:09 < belcher_> theres more data transfered yes (although you can send signatures not entire transactions)
06:10 < belcher_> no ofc im not asking you to implement it, just i think we should be aware of the idea, since i think fee estimation has limits because 1. there will be an arms race between miners and fee estimation algo writers and 2. fee estimation can only use past information while cohen's method uses present information
06:11 < waxwing> yes i can see the implementation isn't really hard, understood. but data transfer a bit annoying, yeah. noticing a theme here :)
06:12 < belcher_> MORE DATA :)
06:12 < waxwing> right. let's just go full retard and do RingCT, screw it.
06:12 < belcher_> i think the more complicated thing for joinmarket is that all the makers/takers have different fee rate preferences and you need a way to combine them all into one coinjoin
06:13 < belcher_> for coinswap its a bit easier since its just one/two entities making transactions
06:13 < waxwing> hmm. on that front, i think falling back to the position adlai (and I think I?) took makes sense: btc fee is entirely Taker's business. (well, that's basically how it works today anyway).
06:13 < waxwing> but yeah even then we have to have better control over Maker inputs.
06:13 < waxwing> but that's orthogonal to cohen's method
06:14 < belcher_> thats probably incompatible with a future where coinjoin is used with schnorr to save space/fees
06:14 < belcher_> but yes it would work fine with coinjoin-only-for-privacy
06:15 < waxwing> yes, good point there. but it's kind of moving away from the joinmarket concept then (if it's not one pays for others to coordinate).
06:17 < belcher_> im not sure its moving away, there could still be coinjoin fees
06:17 < belcher_> well anyway, schnorr might be help up forever because of politics :p
06:18 < belcher_> i think one of the most interesting things about coinswap is it works with today's bitcoin
06:19 < waxwing> right. tumblebit does too.
06:19 < waxwing> but it's a lot heavier in coordination terms, so coinswap's still of interest.
06:20 < belcher_> yes     
06:20 < belcher_> i talked with ethan and got the impression tumblebit transactions are apparent as tumblebit on the blockchain
06:21 < belcher_> tumblebit and coinswap are quite similar really, they just have slightly different tradeoffs
06:21 < waxwing> in the original paper he didn't use the "ordinary tx overwrites contract" trick, but now he does so at least you don't see the hash preimage stuff.
06:22 < belcher_> you just see a 2of2 right?
06:22 < belcher_> one thing i dont really get, why cant you replace the 2of2 with pallier p2pkh and get the same hiding as coinswap?
06:22 < waxwing> i remember chatting with them quite a lot about this, iirc there is no way to completely hide it, part of the issue is the tumbler's own wallet. and the amount correlation is unavoidable i *think* due to the equivalence of the puzzles.
06:23 < belcher_> yes, the amounts have to be fixed
06:23 < waxwing> precisely what defends the unlinkability is the fact that those outputs are equal sized.
06:23 < belcher_> while coinswap could be any amount
06:24 < belcher_> fixed size amounts where many users wait a little bit before it starts
06:24 < waxwing> as to why not paillier, i don't know, have no further knowledge than the vague comments i made before.
06:25 < belcher_> btw have you heard that idea of multi stage coinswap? there would be two or more Carols/Charlies and more than one hash preimage
06:25 < belcher_> so it would be a lot like lightning actually, and it would mean each C doesnt know for sure the source and destination, unless they collude
06:25 < belcher_> not sure its really worth it
06:25 < waxwing> that sounds a bit like what proslogion suggested back in the day.
06:26 < waxwing> yes and it also sounds like what andytoshi is talking about with his lightning idea for MW/scriptless scripts. a lot of somewhat connected ideas.
06:26 < waxwing> btw i had a chance to get more info from him in milan last week. pretty amazing in theory what this scriptless script thing can do.
06:27 < waxwing> basically everything goes off chain except a single schnorr sig.
06:27 < belcher_> they can make all of LN i hear, and 2of3 multisig escrow
06:27 < belcher_> was there a conference or meetup in milan?
06:27 < waxwing> just a meetup, but todd and poelstra were there.
06:28 < waxwing> you probably saw his thing about opentimestamps/archive.org?
06:28 < belcher_> yep     
06:29 < belcher_> a big merkle tree right?
06:29 < waxwing> yeah, sure. there's a website they have up somewhere. opentimestamps.org or something
06:31 < belcher_> i guess if segwit activates coinswap will be a lot less interesting, you could get the same kind of blockchain privacy by opening a LN channel, sending the coins and closing it to another address
06:31 < belcher_> probably with a much higher anonymity set, you'd hide amongst everyone else who uses LN
06:32 < waxwing> possibly, i could imagine so. one of the interesting things to consider is whether coinjoin/coinswap still has value, and how, in a lightning world.
06:32 < waxwing> the linkages on the "heavy"/on-chain layer are still of interest, so to speak.
06:32 < waxwing> but for ordinary people one would expect it would be all LN. probably.
06:32 < belcher_> coinjoin would likely be useful for schnorr/saving blockchain space
06:33 < waxwing> yes that's the ideal, isn't it, where there's an economic incentive and so it happens anyway, aside from privacy
06:33 < belcher_> yes, the blockchain only for high value payments, cold storage and highly-uncensorable stuff
06:34 < belcher_> and offline payments (e.g. a donation address)
06:34 < belcher_> iv been noticing a lot of donation addresses on thepiratebay torrents, and they really do get donations
06:35 < waxwing> hmm not sure really, but maybe one could imagine LN fully replacing any need for privacy in on-chain linkages. then, as you say, the space saving of schnorr-CJ remains. not sure.
06:37 < belcher_> well id be happy with that, joinmarket would have served its purpose in the sense of privacy/fungiblility until better tech matures
06:38 < belcher_> or segwit might never activate, then its coinjoin/coinswap/tumblebit/chaumian ecash bank/sidechains
06:58 -!- MaxSan [~one@213.152.162.74] has joined #joinmarket     
07:05 -!- coins123 [~coins123@unaffiliated/coins123] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
07:05 -!- coins123 [~coins123@ip-244-225.sn1.clouditalia.com] has joined #joinmarket     
07:05 -!- coins123 [~coins123@ip-244-225.sn1.clouditalia.com] has quit [Changing host]     
07:05 -!- coins123 [~coins123@unaffiliated/coins123] has joined #joinmarket     
07:11 < belcher_> you know it might be worth separating out and releasing our hacked up version of pybitcointools with libsecp256k1, since its useful and better than the original, and the author of the original is now an altcoin scammer
07:12 < Anduck> what altcoin scammer?
07:12 < Anduck> ripple?
07:12 < Anduck> ah, vbuterin. ethereum
07:13 < Anduck> i thought pybitcointools is not made by him
07:13 < belcher_> he made the original way back in 2013 iirc
07:14 < belcher_> we (or rather, mostly waxwing) wrote lots of tests and replaced vitalik's crypto code with libsecp256k1
07:15 < Anduck> ah i mixed it up with https://github.com/richardkiss/pycoin
07:35 < xcvvcx> why don't you switch IRC server to freenode for bots, seems used irc servers are unreliable atm
07:40 < trotski2000> waxwing, belcher_ : about opentimestamps - check stamp.io, pretty much the same conceopt
07:40 < MaxSan> xcvvcx: its a privacy thing I would believe
07:40 < MaxSan> freenode is HEAVILY monitored in comparison to the anarplex servers
07:41 < MaxSan> belcher_: who is the altcoin scammer?
07:41 < MaxSan> oh vitalik
07:41 < MaxSan> lol     
07:41 < MaxSan> see how slow i read
07:43 < grubles> turing completeness was always a red herring
07:50 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-240-13-215-201.cm.vtr.net] has joined #joinmarket     
08:14 < Anduck> i think vitalik claimed he never intended ethereum to be turing complete
08:14 < MaxSan> that was what it was marketed as...
08:19 -!- MaxSan [~one@213.152.162.74] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
08:27 < trotski2000> Anduck: the whole point of Ethereum was for it to be turing complete
08:30 < Anduck> not according to vitalik buterin
08:31 < Anduck> https://twitter.com/vitalikbuterin/status/854271590804140033
08:37 < belcher_> i was thinking of writing an outreach post about coinswap and why its interesting today
08:38 < belcher_> though it mostly rests on the idea that things will be okay even if segwit doesnt activate.. i dont really want to take away people's motivation to make segwit happen
08:38 < belcher_> then again, segwit has huge benefits even if coinswap exists, so people should still fight hard for segwit even if coinswap exists
08:47 < waxwing> xcvvcx: there is nothing stopping people using any IRC server they choose; just a question of finding one that supports Tor, many users will not connect without Tor (and it's hard to argue with that)
08:48 < waxwing> while most IRC servers don't like Tor connections, especially if not registered nicks and whatnot
08:51 -!- coins123 [~coins123@unaffiliated/coins123] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
08:51 -!- coins123 [~coins123@ip-244-225.sn1.clouditalia.com] has joined #joinmarket     
08:51 -!- coins123 [~coins123@ip-244-225.sn1.clouditalia.com] has quit [Changing host]     
08:51 -!- coins123 [~coins123@unaffiliated/coins123] has joined #joinmarket     
09:15 < Anduck> btw, the node ban list should IMO have varying bantimes
09:22 < belcher_> aside: how much would a VPS + irc + tor that could support joinmarket cost? could the joinmarket community simply crowdfund it?
09:23 < belcher_> sure theres centralization, the server can make you meet only its own sybils.. but combined with CGAN and agora it might be okay
09:27 < belcher_> you could also crowdfund two servers, and make sure they're run by different people
09:28 < belcher_> and i think you can save a system image (?), if the server runs out of money shut it down, then it someone donates it can be restored from image and carry for a month/until it runs out of money
09:28 < Anduck> belcher_: it'd be maybe 3 eur a month
09:28 < belcher_> thats.. nothing, lol
09:28 < Anduck> 200+ gbps up/down
09:28 < Anduck> yeah
09:29 < Anduck> it's mostly about the work it requires to set up and maintain
09:29 < Anduck> scaleway.com can probably be useful
09:31 < Anduck> and one can get a true dedicated one for maybe 15eur/month
09:31 < Anduck> scaleways are dedicated too, not all vps. they have both
09:35 -!- belcher_ [~user@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]     
10:01 -!- zxccxz [5db780b4@gateway/web/freenode/ip.93.183.128.180] has quit [Quit: Page closed]     
10:22 < grubles> vultr has $2.5 instances
10:22 < grubles> 1 vcpu, 512MB RAM
11:56 -!- MaxSan [~one@185.156.175.59] has joined #joinmarket     
12:46 < pigeons> lol at the twitter responses "Be careful what you say, Vitalik. Words are not like ETH transactions because you can't take them back"
12:55 < Pilate> lol     
13:09 < MaxSan> hahahaha
13:18 -!- takamatsu [~takamatsu@unaffiliated/takamatsu] has quit [Quit: (┛◉Д◉)┛┻━┻]     
13:25 -!- MaxSan [~one@185.156.175.59] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]     
13:41 -!- MaxSan [~one@159.148.186.32] has joined #joinmarket     
13:41 -!- belcher_ [~user@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #joinmarket     
13:45 -!- MaxSan [~one@159.148.186.32] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]     
13:51 -!- MaxSan [~one@185.156.175.43] has joined #joinmarket     
14:25 < grubles> :p     
14:50 -!- Guest__ [~textual@2a02:908:1470:8a60:507b:1390:57dd:1c08] has joined #joinmarket     
15:00 -!- zxccxz [5db780b4@gateway/web/freenode/ip.93.183.128.180] has joined #joinmarket     
15:04 < belcher_> Anduck your site anduck.net/bitcoin/fees is showing all red bars (>$5.00/kB), due to a combination of the exchange rate going up and the price of block space going up
15:04 < belcher_> bitcoinfees.github.io showing 400 satoshi-per-byte for 1 confirm(!)
15:06 < Anduck> ohh     
15:06 < Anduck> thanks
15:08 < belcher_> fee rates really go up when the exchange rate is more volatile.. makes sense that volume on exchanges is followed by volume on the blockchain
15:11 < OverlordQ> txn fees are stupid right now.
15:11 -!- Guest__ [~textual@2a02:908:1470:8a60:507b:1390:57dd:1c08] has quit [Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com]     
15:15 < belcher_> to think that only 3 weeks ago we actually had an empty mempool and half-empty blocks at weekends
15:19 < OverlordQ> cheaper to pay credit card fees right now
15:20 < OverlordQ> I mean even the dead simplest 1-1 txn is what? like 200 bytes? 
15:21 < belcher_> the ransomware that encrypted my hdd doesnt accept credit cards unfortunately :p
15:21 < OverlordQ> That's $1.37 at current BTC cost
15:23 < OverlordQ> CC's are like 1-3% depending on network, So unless you're sending hundreds of USD, probably cheaper and quicker to put a check in the mail lol
15:24 < belcher_> bitcoin users will get pushed to off-chain transaction :\ either centralized off-chain just xapo debit card or decentralized off-chain like LN/chaumain ecash bank/sidechains
15:34 < OverlordQ> better clean up your change outputs before fees price them out :)
15:35 < OverlordQ> Pretty sure I got a few
15:36 < gmaxwell> belcher_: need better off-chain systems. Current options kinda suck.  (and I don't even think it's really fair to call lightning offchain,  simpler and cheaper is possible if you're actually willing to relax the security requrements)
15:49 < OverlordQ> Hahahahah, jesus christ. if I wanted to send the ~$13 in my m0 mix level, suggested fee is $3.5
16:02 < Anduck> belcher_: i'll adjust the graph if this situation continues. gotta sleep now.
16:05 -!- MaxSan [~one@185.156.175.43] has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]     
18:34 -!- juscamarena_ [~justin@47.148.176.74] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
18:34 -!- juscamarena_ [~justin@47.148.176.74] has joined #joinmarket     
20:43 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-240-13-215-201.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]     
21:59 -!- belcher_ [~user@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]     
22:00 -!- belcher_ [~user@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #joinmarket     
22:32 -!- ajvpot [~ajvpot@the.motherfuckin.ddosshield.net] has left #joinmarket ["Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com"]     
23:24 -!- takamatsu [~takamatsu@unaffiliated/takamatsu] has joined #joinmarket