--- Day changed Mon Aug 03 2015
00:38 -!- btcdrak [uid52049@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-zihngcjmrzgqbkup] has joined #lightning-dev
00:43 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
01:31 -!- jtimon [~quassel@200.Red-79-148-174.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has joined #lightning-dev
02:04 -!- CoinMuncher1 [~jannes@178.132.211.90] has joined #lightning-dev
02:06 -!- CoinMuncher [~jannes@178.132.211.90] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
03:05 -!- fkhan [~weechat@unaffiliated/loteriety] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
03:06 -!- fkhan [~weechat@unaffiliated/loteriety] has joined #lightning-dev
03:46 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #lightning-dev
05:46 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
05:56 -!- c_ [~c@93.182.179.229] has joined #lightning-dev
05:56 -!- c_ is now known as Guest77094
07:27 -!- CodeShark [~textual@cpe-76-167-237-202.san.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com]
08:24 -!- rodarmor [~rodarmor@static-100-38-11-146.nycmny.fios.verizon.net] has left #lightning-dev []
09:25 -!- CoinMuncher1 [~jannes@178.132.211.90] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
14:55 -!- jtimon [~quassel@200.Red-79-148-174.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
16:36 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #lightning-dev
16:41 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
16:55 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #lightning-dev
17:15 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
17:33 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #lightning-dev
17:38 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
17:54 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #lightning-dev
18:00 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
18:13 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #lightning-dev
18:28 -!- btcdrak [uid52049@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-zihngcjmrzgqbkup] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
18:47 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has left #lightning-dev []
19:28 -!- CodeShark [~textual@cpe-76-167-237-202.san.res.rr.com] has joined #lightning-dev
23:01 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #lightning-dev
23:09 < Guest77094> Hey rusty! Will you be using shachains with R values in HTLCs also?
23:09 < rusty> Guest77094: good question... 
23:10 < rusty> Guest77094: I could, but it's less obviously useful, since it's a client-side thing.  Client might as well pick a new random 256-bit val every time.
23:12 < Guest77094> But if we do millions of micro-payments to single receiver, wouldnt it be beneficial to require them to prove R-values as part of the shachain?
23:25 < rusty> Guest77094: Maybe... BTW since revealing the N'th hash risks revealing N-1... you need to use SHA(shachain).  
23:26 < rusty> Guest77094: the real cost is on the intermediary nodes who need to remember all the R values.  And you don't want them correlated in any way.
23:26 < rusty> (Not that you could tell...)
23:27 < Guest77094> Makes sense.. Is there any plan to make LN transactions standard? To get around having to store all R values when using P2SH? Or are there downsides to this?
23:28 < rusty> Guest77094: there is an increase in UTXO bloat when using non-P2SH.  OTOH, it wouldn't "normally" appear on the blockchain.
23:29 < rusty> Guest77094: it's a possible extension, but it's not a priority for the immediate future.
23:34 < CodeShark> rusty: are the complications brought about by time invalidation of transctions simply too insurmountable to continue to consider them?
23:35 < CodeShark> because right now, we do time invalidation indirectly
23:35 < CodeShark> time invalidation meaning "if height of block is larger than X, script returns false"
23:36 < rusty> CodeShark: you're referring to the XXXVERIFY?  That's for soft-forkability.
23:36 < CodeShark> not familiar with the term XXXVERIFY
23:36 < rusty> CodeShark: ah, sorry... right, direct timeout.  No, bitcoin devs really really don't like txs which vanish.
23:37 < rusty> CodeShark: that's the reason behind the 100 block delay for coinbase maturity, for example.
23:37 < CodeShark> they do add some complications for sure...but if these complications could be mitigated it also makes it much simpler to reason about certain things
23:37 < CodeShark> for instance, a condition in a script that expires in 1000 blocks
23:38 < CodeShark> or that expires 1000 blocks after it was mined, rather
23:38 < rusty> CodeShark: unspending transactions seems to make bitcoin less moneyish, so the consensus seems to be that it should only be done where absolutely necessary (eg. doublespend).
23:39 < rusty> CodeShark: in some ways it would be nice, but I'm not the one you'd need to convince :)
23:39 < CodeShark> there is really only one retroactive invalidation mechanism native to bitcoin...and that's the reorg
23:40 < CodeShark> and it complicates the hell out of other attempts at invalidation mechanisms ;)
23:43 < CodeShark> what's the current approach you're considering for an output such as (AliceSig && BobRevocation) || (AliceSig && BobResult && must be within m days) || (BobSig && must be at least  n days after this transaction is mined) ?
23:43 < CodeShark> where BobResult is some data that Alice requested from Bob
23:44 < CodeShark> in other words, unless Bob provides this information within m days, the second clause is void
23:46 < CodeShark> err, sorry
23:46 < CodeShark> what's the current approach you're considering for an output such as (AliceSig && BobRevocation) || (BobSig && BobResult && must be within m days) || (BobSig && must be at least  n days after this transaction is mined) ?
23:46 < CodeShark> or better yet, (AliceSig && BobRevocation) || (BobSig && BobResult && must be before specific time t) || (BobSig && must be at least n days after this transaction is mined)
23:49 < CodeShark> bleh...let me try that one last time :p
23:51 < CodeShark> anyhow, the specific details aren't really important
23:52 < CodeShark> I'm too tired...I should be sleeping
23:52 < CodeShark> I'll try again tomorrow :)
23:55 < rusty> CodeShark: sorry, was making coffee...
23:56 < CodeShark> I'm too tired anyhow...probably dangerous to try to figure this out in my current condition