--- Day changed Fri Dec 29 2017 00:59 -!- beIcher [~user@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds] 01:15 -!- beIcher [~user@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #joinmarket 03:20 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #joinmarket 03:23 -!- takamatsu [~takamatsu@unaffiliated/takamatsu] has joined #joinmarket 04:29 -!- obsedd [~what@37.9.56.10] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 05:36 -!- xcvvcx [53e42f33@gateway/web/freenode/ip.83.228.47.51] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 05:44 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-204-28-214-201.cm.vtr.net] has joined #joinmarket 06:25 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-204-28-214-201.cm.vtr.net] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 07:17 -!- keyerror [b9e67d26@gateway/web/freenode/ip.185.230.125.38] has joined #joinmarket 07:23 < keyerror> anyone alive in here? 07:25 < belcher> nope 07:26 < keyerror> same 07:27 < keyerror> I'm having an issue with sendpayment.py when sending from a mix depth > 5 07:27 -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 07:27 < keyerror> keep getting 07:27 < keyerror> Traceback (most recent call last): File "sendpayment.py", line 431, in main() File "sendpayment.py", line 410, in main direct_send(wallet, amount, options.mixdepth, destaddr) File "sendpayment.py", line 49, in direct_send utxos = wallet.get_utxos_by_mixdepth()[mixdepth] KeyError: 6 07:27 < belcher> try adding -m 7 to the command line arguments 07:27 < belcher> i think its -m, it might also be -M 07:28 < belcher> use --help to see, it should be one that control how many mixdepths to use 07:28 -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has joined #joinmarket 07:29 < keyerror> was using "python sendpayment.py -N 0 -m 7 wallet.json amount address" 07:30 < waxwing> i think -a 07:30 < waxwing> let me check 07:31 < belcher> -m is probably which mixdepth to send from, the other one is how many mixdepths to generate in the wallet (by default 5) 07:31 < belcher> so if you set -m to bigger than 4 then you need to increase how many mixdepths to generate 07:31 < waxwing> yeah, at least on new version (joinmarket-clientserver). i can't remember whether i changed that earlier, in the old version. 07:31 < keyerror> parser.add_option('-a', 07:31 < waxwing> there was some obscure reason for having to add -a 07:31 < keyerror> looks lie it is -a 07:31 < keyerror> like* 07:31 < waxwing> keyerror, do python sendpayment.py --help 07:31 < belcher> we probably ran out of letters tbh 07:32 < waxwing> it explains exactly what -a is, and it's that (for if you have more than default) 07:32 < waxwing> oh i remember now, i needed to add it because of podle 07:32 < waxwing> because the wallet needs to know where it can source commitments (at least, in general) 07:33 < waxwing> anyway yes this has tripped people up before occasionally. not ideal. 07:33 < keyerror> I see. I actually had a look through sendpayment.py earlier. I can't believe I missed that lol 07:34 < keyerror> thanks for the help 07:34 < waxwing> np, nice nick :) 07:35 -!- waxwing is now known as attributeerror 07:35 -!- attributeerror is now known as waxwing 07:36 < keyerror> thanks lol. Do you happen to know where I can dump large amounts of bch shitcoins for btc anonymously? 07:36 < waxwing> hmm not sure about "anonymous" but there is hitbtc, i've found it ok. 07:37 < waxwing> i can't remember but i think i might have needed to give an email, but i didn't need anything else. 07:37 < belcher> keyerror iv been using yobit since i had a problem with hitbtc 07:37 < belcher> probably the hitbtc is just their incompetence and busyness rather than being scams though 07:37 < belcher> both are anonymous 07:37 < waxwing> i'm still withdrawing bcash from hitbtc without issues 07:38 < waxwing> must be bgold, i believe the main wallet for that was malware, maybe they had trouble because of that 07:38 < belcher> no the problem was with withdrawing btc 07:38 < waxwing> ah interesting. 07:38 < belcher> their website showed me a txid which didnt appear on my node or any explorer 07:38 < waxwing> sorry i described completely wrong. i only ever *withdrew* BTC there, and it always worked. more than 10 times. 07:39 < waxwing> hmm additional correction, i did make 1 bcash withdrawal, that was to another exchange. that also worked. 07:39 < keyerror> IT'S CALLED BITCOIN CASH *flicks you off and mocks your networth* 07:39 < belcher> hah 07:39 < keyerror> jk lol. thanks, guys 07:39 < waxwing> It's called BCLASHIC actually. true vision. 07:40 < belcher> you can never really tell with these anonymous hidden exchanges, best thing to do is deposit/sell/withdraw in parts so you dont lose everything 07:40 < keyerror> bcrash 07:40 < belcher> a free 20% is really worth the effort 07:40 < waxwing> the nonymous exchanges are pretty damn risky too 07:41 < belcher> true, knowing their name doesnt mean they wont screw up 07:42 < keyerror> just wait until everyone gets coinbased 07:42 -!- keyerror [b9e67d26@gateway/web/freenode/ip.185.230.125.38] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 08:02 -!- instagibbs [~instagibb@pool-100-15-116-35.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 09:11 -!- zxccxz [d41594da@gateway/web/freenode/ip.212.21.148.218] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 10:54 -!- zxccxz [d41594da@gateway/web/freenode/ip.212.21.148.218] has joined #joinmarket 11:17 -!- instagibbs [~instagibb@pool-100-15-116-35.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #joinmarket 11:37 -!- Giszmo [~leo@pc-204-28-214-201.cm.vtr.net] has joined #joinmarket 12:03 < waxwing> tfw when you search for an obscure bug on google and 3 of the first 5 results are your own code repo :( 12:05 < belcher> which bug? 12:06 < waxwing> BigString() for sending > 65k chars over AMP doesn't work on python3, and fails in a very obscure way. needed for orderbook which can get very large. 12:19 -!- zxccxz [d41594da@gateway/web/freenode/ip.212.21.148.218] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 12:35 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds] 12:47 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #joinmarket 13:31 -!- quitobro [~quitobro@65.209.60.146] has joined #joinmarket 13:45 -!- grubles [~grubles@unaffiliated/grubles] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 13:46 -!- grubles [~grubles@utxo.xn--3ds443g] has joined #joinmarket 13:47 -!- grubles is now known as Guest32401 13:51 < belcher> waxwing regarding our earlier discussion about the $5 wrench attack https://twitter.com/Ragnarly/status/946850275813343236 13:51 < belcher> no guns in europe though 14:12 < belcher> also waxwing and others please read this idea of mine https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2664747.msg27179198 14:12 < waxwing> just got back, reading 14:14 < waxwing> I guess it's kinda on a spectrum of many different ideas along the same lines 14:16 < waxwing> whoa they paid apparently: https://twitter.com/kyletorpey/status/946820080855371776 14:16 < waxwing> whatever happened to the finex hack coins? 14:18 < belcher> wow 14:19 < waxwing> alternatively the CEO of Exmo just found a great way to get out of paying taxes. 14:19 < waxwing> per kaminsky: "bitcoin has terrible privacy, but tremendous deniability" 14:23 < waxwing> how do you see your proposal as distinct from a local electrum server, belcher ? on reflection not sure i understood. 14:23 -!- Guest32401 [~grubles@utxo.xn--3ds443g] has quit [Quit: leaving] 14:28 < belcher> waxwing type 1 doesnt need a server, it downloads full blocks from the p2p network 14:28 < belcher> type 2 is like a server but you can enable pruning and blocksonly, and you dont need a server 14:34 < arubi> belcher, have you seen https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10794 14:35 < belcher> i havent but it looks good 14:36 < waxwing> belcher, but i mean, you're going to take the blocks data and then serve requests like an electrum server does, right? How would it be different functionally to running your own electrum server? 14:36 < belcher> an electrum server needs to have all the blocks on disk and txindex=1 and needs to create an index of addresses->transactions 14:36 < waxwing> right 14:37 < belcher> that type 2 gateway can have a pruned full node 14:37 < waxwing> so you're arguing that one can get the same effect with a more lightweight access to a btc node? 14:37 < belcher> yep 14:37 < arubi> someone has to watch the scriptpubkeys 14:37 < belcher> the gateway would do importaddress for all the addresses in electrum's wallet 14:37 < waxwing> right; but perhaps the leaset effort way to do that is to submit it as an optional feature to electrumx or similar. 14:38 < belcher> right so you'd tell electrumx your master public key and it would do the importaddress stuff 14:39 < belcher> and then it wouldnt do any of the building of database 14:39 < belcher> yeah that would work too 14:39 < waxwing> yeah keep all the interfaces and whatnot. it's just about backend. (easy to say of course!) 14:40 < waxwing> so it's basically a proposal for lightweightness of electrum server, so the only goal is really to keep all the nice UI and usability features of electrum without having 1 of 2 bad options: (a) bad privacy (b) excessive resource requirement. 14:41 < belcher> yep 14:41 < waxwing> yeah light client SPV in Core would be cool 14:42 < belcher> and type 1 would be trading off bandwidth and speed for privacy 14:42 < belcher> you download some full blocks which takes longer, but in return you get much better privacy 14:43 < waxwing> right 14:48 < waxwing> hmm could we make an unbroadcast bitcoin transaction a transferrable asset? using .. timelocks and .. voodoo or something 14:52 < arubi> explain? 14:55 < waxwing> i guess i'm just musing about how we can do better than, ecash tokens (server problem, even if backed by BTC), or Lightning, which gives something similar to the above but requires broadcast to setup, so costs time/money. 14:59 < arubi> ah I see, maybe if the original owner adds a new output at the next available index to made to the next owner, then when the new owner wants to transfer, they add their own input and new output to the next owner 14:59 < arubi> the txids can be anything that's worth committing to. scripts can run the same 15:00 < waxwing> yeah i was wondering about sighash_single as a starting point 15:02 < arubi> with just single you'll have to know all the inputs in advance. you'll have to attack ACP to it, and we're back to the ACP|single magic :) 15:02 < waxwing> yes acp|single in what you're thinking of 15:03 < waxwing> pure unbroadcast looks like fantasy, since inputs can be invalidated 15:04 < waxwing> perhaps if you held punishment txs in advance though, so if inputs are invalidated, other coins are spent. perhaps if those *other* coins are in timelocks? hmm now i'm just confusing myself :) 15:04 < arubi> oh you mean broadcast-able but unbroadcast? 15:04 < waxwing> well a setup where you broadcast to "set up", that's what LN already does. 15:04 < waxwing> but i'm really just musing at this point. 15:05 < arubi> at this hour I'm probably not useful anyway :) 15:12 < waxwing> hmm. ignoring the invalidation problem, your scheme works nicely in the slightly fantastical scenario of fixed coin sizes. which is at least interesting. 15:21 -!- quitobro [~quitobro@65.209.60.146] has quit [Quit: quitobro] 15:26 -!- zxccxz [d41594da@gateway/web/freenode/ip.212.21.148.218] has joined #joinmarket 15:30 -!- lkiu [c118f432@gateway/web/freenode/ip.193.24.244.50] has joined #joinmarket 15:40 < waxwing> hmm, if all the inputs are on the same timelock, then i guess it's safe to do the above process until that time T, i.e. it's a transferrable token up to time T. 15:41 -!- raedah [~x@71.19.251.248] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 2.0] 15:51 < waxwing> the constraint is not actually "all coins must be equal size", rather it's "i can only pay an amount of a single coin (utxo) that i possess (with the timelock)". 15:54 < waxwing> (second thoughts, timelock is not enough of course, still get doublespend problem when it times out. oh well.) 15:59 -!- lkiu [c118f432@gateway/web/freenode/ip.193.24.244.50] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 16:44 -!- quitobro [~quitobro@pool-108-41-0-186.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has joined #joinmarket 18:02 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 20:01 -!- quitobro [~quitobro@pool-108-41-0-186.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: quitobro] 21:08 -!- quitobro [~quitobro@pool-108-41-0-186.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has joined #joinmarket 21:43 -!- quitobro [~quitobro@pool-108-41-0-186.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Quit: quitobro]