--- Log opened Thu Oct 15 00:00:47 2020
00:47 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined ##taproot-activation
01:19 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
01:31 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined ##taproot-activation
01:42 -!- jonatack [~jon@109.202.107.147] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
01:47 -!- jeremyrubin [~jr@c-73-15-215-148.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
02:12 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
02:21 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined ##taproot-activation
02:22 -!- jonatack [~jon@213.152.161.211] has joined ##taproot-activation
02:33 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
02:38 -!- jonatack [~jon@213.152.161.211] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
02:40 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.172.104.51] has joined ##taproot-activation
02:45 < sanket1729> Just to get discussions started, I like roconnor's "we should try to deploy bip8(false) this minor release. If we want we can add more deployment bits later."
02:47 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.172.104.51] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
02:49 -!- jonatack [~jon@213.152.161.10] has joined ##taproot-activation
03:23 -!- jonatack [~jon@213.152.161.10] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
03:25 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.172.104.51] has joined ##taproot-activation
03:27 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined ##taproot-activation
03:32 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [Client Quit]
03:38 -!- aj [aj@cerulean.erisian.com.au] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
03:39 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.172.104.51] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
03:39 -!- jonatack_ [~jon@37.172.104.51] has joined ##taproot-activation
03:41 -!- jonatack_ [~jon@37.172.104.51] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
03:41 -!- jonatack__ [~jon@37.172.104.51] has joined ##taproot-activation
03:43 < michaelfolkson> On harding's doc you are proposing "let's see what happens" sanket1729? https://gist.github.com/harding/dda66f5fd00611c0890bdfa70e28152d
03:45 < michaelfolkson> We need to stick to consistent terminology (for my sake as much as everybody else's lol)
03:45 -!- jrawsthorne_ [~jrawsthor@static.235.41.217.95.clients.your-server.de] has joined ##taproot-activation
03:47 < michaelfolkson> I guess I can share a few more links for those that need a refresher (I certainly do)
03:48 < michaelfolkson> AaronvanW article on the various options: https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/bip-8-bip-9-or-modern-soft-fork-activation-how-bitcoin-could-upgrade-next
03:50 < michaelfolkson> Eric Lombrozo and Luke Dashjr on why we should go BIP 8 rather than Modern Soft Fork Activation: https://diyhpl.us/wiki/transcripts/bitcoin-magazine/2020-08-03-eric-lombrozo-luke-dashjr-taproot-activation/
03:52 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.164.124.179] has joined ##taproot-activation
03:55 -!- jonatack__ [~jon@37.172.104.51] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
04:11 -!- chemipital [9f934bea@159.147.75.234] has joined ##taproot-activation
04:13 < michaelfolkson> BitMEX post too: https://blog.bitmex.com/bitcoin-softfork-activation-methodology/
04:17 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.164.124.179] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
04:25 -!- aj [aj@cerulean.erisian.com.au] has joined ##taproot-activation
04:31 -!- Livestradamus [~quassel@unaffiliated/livestradamus] has left ##taproot-activation ["Doh!"]
04:32 -!- DeanGuss [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
04:32 -!- DeanGuss [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has joined ##taproot-activation
04:38 < belcher> theres also this bitcoin wiki page https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Taproot_activation_proposals (which might be a repeat of the above, but we can fix typos if we see them)
04:38 < belcher> i have a slight preference to bip8(true) because to me it seems like theres no real opposition to taproot
04:46 < michaelfolkson> Is that Gently discourage apathy, BIP8(true, 2y)?
04:47 < michaelfolkson> We need to keep to the options outlined imo. We already have too many...
04:47 < michaelfolkson> Ideally we should be narrowing down options rather than adding new ones
04:52 < belcher> yes, Gently discourage apathy
04:57 < michaelfolkson> Cool. Slight preference. So you'd be happy with "let's see what happens". Just prefer "gently discourage apathy"
04:58 < belcher> yes
04:58 < belcher> "let's see what happens" is only 3 months after all
05:02 < michaelfolkson> Cool, thanks. That's useful. Anybody else want to express a view? Don't be shy :)
05:04 < michaelfolkson> I get the sense a lot of people don't care. They just want Taproot activated. But that view is just as important to receive as support for a specific activation proposal I think
05:04 -!- kristapsk___ [~KK@gateway/tor-sasl/kristapsk] has joined ##taproot-activation
05:04 -!- kristapsk_ [~KK@gateway/tor-sasl/kristapsk] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
05:22 -!- chemipital [9f934bea@159.147.75.234] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
05:27 < emzy> I may be one of the persons on the side lines. And just want Taproot activated. I have no clear perference yet.
05:38 < darosior> +1 for "let's see what happens". I find bip8(true) *really* scary.
05:42 < michaelfolkson> Cool thanks emzy darosior
05:46 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined ##taproot-activation
05:51 -!- Kilart [4ec076c3@78.192.118.195] has joined ##taproot-activation
05:52 -!- willcl_ark is now known as [github-bot]
05:57 -!- [github-bot] is now known as wilcl_ark
06:03 -!- jonatack [~jon@2a01:e0a:53c:a200:bb54:3be5:c3d0:9ce5] has joined ##taproot-activation
06:20 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has quit [Quit: ZNC - http://znc.sourceforge.net]
06:21 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has joined ##taproot-activation
06:31 -!- jonatack [~jon@2a01:e0a:53c:a200:bb54:3be5:c3d0:9ce5] has quit [Quit: jonatack]
06:37 < luke-jr> darosior: why?
06:38 < luke-jr> we already did it successfully under active contention..
06:38 < luke-jr> should be smooth sailing without disputes
06:38 -!- jonatack [~jon@109.232.227.138] has joined ##taproot-activation
06:39 < luke-jr> (false) makes me think "didn't anyone learn from the past?"
06:45 < emzy> I also leaning to BIP8(true). Not sure on the 2y part.
07:11 -!- DeanWeen [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has joined ##taproot-activation
07:12 -!- DeanGuss [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
07:17 < harding> luke-jr: the goal isn't just to learn from the past, but also not to screw up in the future.  (true) makes it easier to screw up, IMO.
07:18 < michaelfolkson> Right. SegWit activation was a sample size of 1 after all. Lessons to be learned but an infinite number of other scenarios we haven't seen before
07:29 < luke-jr> harding: IMO the opposite is correct; false is known to be problematic
07:31 < luke-jr> true can only screw up, in the same scenarios false could also screw up
07:32 -!- ksedgwic [~ksedgwic@157-131-253-103.fiber.dynamic.sonic.net] has quit [Quit: Lost terminal]
07:37 < michaelfolkson> So this is referring to "Committal" in the doc on the wiki https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Taproot_activation_proposals
07:38 < michaelfolkson> False is listed as non-committal and hence low risk in that 3 month period
07:39 < michaelfolkson> True is committal "if a problem is discovered with taproot before activation, users and developers may need to intervene to prevent the problem from being exploited."
07:40 < michaelfolkson> So in response to "true can only screw up, in the same scenarios false could also screw up" isn't technically true right? If a bug is found in that 3 month period it would be better to be on False than True
07:41 < kallewoof> TBH, I think segwit's activation issues were a misunderstanding on the miner's part, more so than a failure on the activation method. Maybe that's just me tho.
07:41 < kallewoof> *miners'
07:42 < michaelfolkson> So (unless I'm missing something which is possible) this effectively boils down to an argument of which is higher risk. Miners acting with bad intentions or apathy vs finding a bug in the code
07:43 < michaelfolkson> Personally I think the latter (finding a bug in the code) is more of a concern than miners acting with bad intentions *this time*. For SegWit it was totally different. It was an absolute s***storm
07:45 < kallewoof> Tricky. (1) we can't assume miner majority is not trying to take over the entire thing, and (2) we can't assume there are no bugs.
07:45 < kallewoof> too bad we're not ethereum devs. we could just ask vitalik for the answer
07:46 < belcher> if its plausible there are bugs then why did reviewers ACK the thing? finding bugs after deployment seems to to me very unlikely, because all the reviewing and finding is done before deployment
07:47 < michaelfolkson> Because an ACK isn't a "I am 100 percent sure this is fine" whoever you are
07:47 < pinheadmz> belcher were there any bugs in segwit?
07:47 < pinheadmz> arguably not commiting to all input values for example
07:47 < michaelfolkson> No one is 100 percent sure when they ACK
07:47 < kallewoof> belcher: exploits are hard to find.
07:47 < pinheadmz> bech32 address issue
07:47 < belcher> i think False is for the case where theres some kind of legitimate opposition (i.e. people who think taproot is a bad idea for some reason), not because of bugs
07:47 < kallewoof> I think we had 10+ year old exploits that were patched recently
07:49 < michaelfolkson> In that case you disagree with the doc belcher (which is fine, the doc isn't gospel)
07:49 < michaelfolkson> " if a problem is discovered with taproot before miner activation, or there’s a lack of user support for the proposal"
07:49 < belcher> in either case, 3 months wont be enough to find bugs, if bugs are a concern the deployment should be 10years instead or something absurd..... the 3 month figure is set by how quickly people update
07:49 < michaelfolkson> The doc says it is for both
07:49 < kallewoof> the outcomes are: (1) taproot is ok, we activate, nothing is bad, yay. (2) taproot is ok, the miners go megalomanic again like with segwit, activation is stalled, but ultimately goes thru, (3) taproot is NOT okay, we realize last minute, the miners are apathetic and don't upgrade to the "do not activate" version and we are fucked, (4) taproot is not okay, and miners upgrade responsible.
07:49 < kallewoof> *bly
07:50 < pinheadmz> UASF to deactivate broken taproot - that would be a sight
07:50 -!- waxwing_ [~waxwing@92.40.183.61.threembb.co.uk] has joined ##taproot-activation
07:50 < michaelfolkson> You don't know that belcher. Some bugs could be caught in 3 months. Some bugs could be caught in 5 years
07:50 < kallewoof> yeah, i'm not sure why 3 months is unacceptable in this case. we've already reviewed the thing since like february.
07:50 < michaelfolkson> As long as people are still testing it and reviewing it in that period there is a chance they could find a bug in 3 months. If no one is it is pointless obviously
07:51 < belcher> id argue finding bugs isnt about time, but about reviewers
07:51 < michaelfolkson> Both right?
07:51 < michaelfolkson> You need sufficient reviewers and you need to give them sufficient time
07:51 < belcher> the 3 month figure can only be for giving time for people to update.... otherwise you could always argue to make the period longer in order to find more bugs (and then you run into problems of having developers throw their hands up and work on other things)
07:52 < michaelfolkson> It is a trade-off. Too short, not enough time to find bugs. Too long, no one cares
07:53 < luke-jr> aj: do you already have an implementation of https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/950 ?
07:53 < luke-jr> just rebased the current bip8 branch
07:53 < luke-jr> we should probably try to get it into 0.21 if possible
07:53 < belcher> michaelfolkson isnt the tradeoff: Too short, not enough time to adopt the new Core version. Too long, no one cares
07:53 < kallewoof> not sure why you guys are talking about 3 months tho. 0.21 is at feature freeze as of tomorrow. which means the first release with activation logic in it will be 0.22
07:54 < kallewoof> err, as of today, even
07:54 < kallewoof> since there's ~6 months between each release, the earliest we will see activation logic will be in half a year+ from now
07:54 < belcher> wouldnt people look for bugs /before/ deployment, why risk deploying something if theres a plausible risk that it has bugs? why did people ACK in that case? "ACK" surely means "iv reviewed this enough that the risk of bugs is acceptably low"
07:55 < luke-jr> kallewoof: activation params are not a feature
07:55 < michaelfolkson> You are thinking in boolean belcher.
07:55 < kallewoof> belcher: i ACK'ed it because i couldn't see any issues with it. that doesn't mean there were none
07:55 < michaelfolkson> Risk is a continuous spectrum
07:55 < luke-jr> it would be nice to get the BIP8 logic merged before freeze though
07:56 < luke-jr> do we have enough devs who care, to make that happen?
07:56 < kallewoof> luke-jr: i just don't think that's possible. or i would be all over it.
07:56 < kallewoof> besides, i think it's questionable whether activation is NOT a feature
07:57 < luke-jr> kallewoof: it's well-defined that it isn't
07:58 < luke-jr> kallewoof: activation is never allowed in 0.y.0 releases
07:59 < luke-jr> but if BIP8 *logic* slips the freeze, we may end up with people arguing for BIP9 on that basis :/
07:59 < waxwing_> i think i'm in favour of the bip9 equivalent approach. not for objective merits but because it's the least action that can be taken (essentially, we change nothing except some minor technical detail).
08:00 < luke-jr> waxwing_: ?
08:00 -!- einelefantle [uid463918@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-tlctkazijtxpeqvp] has joined ##taproot-activation
08:00 -!- waxwing_ is now known as waxwing
08:00 -!- waxwing [~waxwing@92.40.183.61.threembb.co.uk] has quit [Changing host]
08:00 -!- waxwing [~waxwing@unaffiliated/waxwing] has joined ##taproot-activation
08:00 < waxwing> just offering my opinion.
08:00 < luke-jr> waxwing: I didn't understand it
08:01 < waxwing> i'm going off the nomenclature here: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Taproot_activation_proposals#Notes_on_BIP8
08:01 < luke-jr> waxwing: how is it "the least action"?
08:02 < belcher> why is "least action" worthwhile
08:02 < luke-jr> anyway, no matter what params we end up going with, the code/logic is the same
08:03 < luke-jr> with freeze tomorrow, that should be the priority right now
08:03 < waxwing> least action in the sense of not a change to what was done in the previous large soft fork
08:03 < luke-jr> even if BIP8 isn't formally proposed yet
08:03 < luke-jr> waxwing: last one was equivalent of (true, 1y)
08:03 < waxwing> yes
08:04 < luke-jr> that's not "BIP9 equivalent" as defined on the wiki
08:04 < waxwing> wait no wasn't it (false, 1yr)
08:04 < luke-jr> no, it was changed to (true, 1y) by BIP148
08:04 < waxwing> ah well that's the can of worms :)
08:05 < luke-jr> regardless of any worms, it worked and is the precedent :p
08:05 < waxwing> i meant what happened originally, but fair point to raise how complex it is even to state what the historical facts are ...
08:06 < luke-jr> kallewoof: do you think it would be easier to merge *part* of BIP8?
08:06 < luke-jr> ie, minus the part aj is revising
08:07 < kallewoof> luke-jr: i'm not sure what you're referring to. is there a PR or something?
08:07 < luke-jr> kallewoof: aj's changes are in https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/950
08:09 < kallewoof> luke-jr: thanks! I'll have to get back to you on that one. Will read in the morning :)
08:09 < luke-jr> kallewoof: but.. freeze :x
08:09 < kallewoof> oh
08:09  * luke-jr kicks bip8 unit tests for failing
08:18 < luke-jr> I guess this is ready for immediate review: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19401
08:30 -!- kabaum [~kabaum@h-13-35.A163.priv.bahnhof.se] has joined ##taproot-activation
08:31 -!- ksedgwic [~ksedgwic@157-131-253-103.fiber.dynamic.sonic.net] has joined ##taproot-activation
08:32 -!- ksedgwic [~ksedgwic@157-131-253-103.fiber.dynamic.sonic.net] has quit [Client Quit]
08:33 -!- ksedgwic [~ksedgwic@157-131-253-103.fiber.dynamic.sonic.net] has joined ##taproot-activation
08:44 -!- kristapsk___ is now known as kristapsk
08:57 < luke-jr> merged part of aj's BIP PR for now
09:13 -!- jeremyrubin [~jr@c-73-15-215-148.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined ##taproot-activation
09:22 -!- Zeven [33afe11f@31.51-175-225.customer.lyse.net] has joined ##taproot-activation
09:24 -!- Zeven [33afe11f@31.51-175-225.customer.lyse.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
09:48 -!- z7 [49539482@c-73-83-148-130.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has joined ##taproot-activation
09:48 < luke-jr> jeremyrubin: around for code review today+tomorrow?
10:05 -!- Uzuz [554c2abc@85-76-42-188-nat.elisa-mobile.fi] has joined ##taproot-activation
10:06 -!- Uzuz [554c2abc@85-76-42-188-nat.elisa-mobile.fi] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
10:06 -!- dddd97 [1b4a86be@27.74.134.190] has joined ##taproot-activation
10:07 -!- dddd97 [1b4a86be@27.74.134.190] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
10:09 -!- justwatching494 [44956a59@S01069050caa6f913.ed.shawcable.net] has joined ##taproot-activation
10:13 -!- Suntsu007 [d5c8ec17@23.236.200.213.static.wline.lns.sme.cust.swisscom.ch] has joined ##taproot-activation
10:16 -!- Suntsu007 [d5c8ec17@23.236.200.213.static.wline.lns.sme.cust.swisscom.ch] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
10:19 -!- justwatching494 [44956a59@S01069050caa6f913.ed.shawcable.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
10:24 < instagibbs> I think taproot is likely so uncontroversial it doesn't particularly matter what params are picked. Good luck finding something people can be happy with :) (I'm afk for a couple weeks at least)
10:28 -!- roottap [a2d82f89@162.216.47.137] has joined ##taproot-activation
10:40 < jeremyrubin> hi luke-jr my computer missed the scrollback
10:40 < jeremyrubin> review on what in particular
10:53 -!- lalaland [bc507d7a@bl15-125-122.dsl.telepac.pt] has joined ##taproot-activation
10:54 < luke-jr> jeremyrubin: BIP 8 logic
10:54 < luke-jr> [15:18:52] <luke-jr> I guess this is ready for immediate review: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19401
10:57 < luke-jr> instagibbs: let's worry about that after the logic is in
10:57 -!- DeanWeen [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
10:59 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit []
11:05 -!- lalaland [bc507d7a@bl15-125-122.dsl.telepac.pt] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
11:05 -!- kristapsk [~KK@gateway/tor-sasl/kristapsk] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
11:06 -!- kristapsk [~KK@gateway/tor-sasl/kristapsk] has joined ##taproot-activation
11:16 -!- joerodgers [~joerodger@141.98.255.150] has joined ##taproot-activation
11:30 -!- einelefantle [uid463918@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-tlctkazijtxpeqvp] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
11:33 -!- DeanWeen [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has joined ##taproot-activation
11:40 -!- roottap [a2d82f89@162.216.47.137] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
11:42 -!- giaki3003 [4f1485e1@host-79-20-133-225.retail.telecomitalia.it] has joined ##taproot-activation
11:50 -!- lol98 [5d278bb6@93-39-139-182.ip76.fastwebnet.it] has joined ##taproot-activation
11:51 -!- lol98 [5d278bb6@93-39-139-182.ip76.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
12:05 -!- einelefantle [uid463918@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-mvsuiuhgikfqzyti] has joined ##taproot-activation
12:14 -!- D21 [5b602d3f@dyndsl-091-096-045-063.ewe-ip-backbone.de] has joined ##taproot-activation
12:14 -!- D21 [5b602d3f@dyndsl-091-096-045-063.ewe-ip-backbone.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
12:18 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
12:19 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined ##taproot-activation
12:25 -!- z7 [49539482@c-73-83-148-130.hsd1.wa.comcast.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
12:37 -!- otoburb [~otoburb@unaffiliated/otoburb] has joined ##taproot-activation
12:39 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has joined ##taproot-activation
12:42 -!- joekik [5fd3bbe5@95.211.187.229.adsl.inet-telecom.org] has joined ##taproot-activation
12:53 -!- a34 [bc4c4ccd@205.76.76.188.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined ##taproot-activation
12:54 -!- a34 [bc4c4ccd@205.76.76.188.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
13:06 -!- DeanWeen [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
13:07 -!- mestresarava [b097be73@176.151.190.115] has joined ##taproot-activation
13:08 -!- joekik [5fd3bbe5@95.211.187.229.adsl.inet-telecom.org] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
13:13 -!- mestresarava [b097be73@176.151.190.115] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
13:14 -!- z84 [32f36641@50-243-102-65-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined ##taproot-activation
13:14 -!- z84 [32f36641@50-243-102-65-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
13:21 < aj> luke-jr: you did some of the bip8 bits without merging a PR? this is so confuuuuusing
13:22 -!- DeanWeen [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has joined ##taproot-activation
13:23 < luke-jr> aj: want me to rebase yours for you?
13:23 < luke-jr> aj: I did suggest you split yours up a while ago, but I was impatient ;p
13:24 < luke-jr> and I wanted to update the code
13:29 < aj> luke-jr: nah, i can figure it out. and yeah, i had no idea how to sanely split them up, so you doing it is fine :)
13:29 < luke-jr> https://dpaste.com/6N69HXEKC
13:30 < luke-jr> IMO this should be split two more ways still
13:31 < aj> you regenerated the dot file outputs?
13:35 -!- vincenzopalazzo [~vincent@2001:b07:6474:9d49:9867:273:d21b:c6c] has joined ##taproot-activation
13:35 < luke-jr> aj: here, fully split up: https://dpaste.com/2B62KCYJJ https://dpaste.com/GX2HWSKZM
13:36 < luke-jr> aj: yes, the first commit didn't regen the .svg
13:39 < luke-jr> aj: probably best to open a new PR for each of them?
13:39 < aj> luke-jr: yeah, i think that makes sense
13:40 -!- wergil81 [51a4e5ce@d51a4e5ce.access.telenet.be] has joined ##taproot-activation
13:40 -!- wergil81 [51a4e5ce@d51a4e5ce.access.telenet.be] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
13:56 -!- firedragon [~firedrago@92.40.172.74.threembb.co.uk] has joined ##taproot-activation
14:00 -!- wilcl_ark is now known as willcl_ark
14:05 -!- firedragon [~firedrago@92.40.172.74.threembb.co.uk] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
14:10 -!- einelefantle [uid463918@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-mvsuiuhgikfqzyti] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
14:15 -!- vincenzopalazzo [~vincent@2001:b07:6474:9d49:9867:273:d21b:c6c] has quit [Quit: Leaving]
14:40 -!- rabidus [~rabidus@85.76.51.88] has joined ##taproot-activation
15:26 -!- asd [be13fdda@190.19.253.218] has joined ##taproot-activation
15:26 -!- asd [be13fdda@190.19.253.218] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
16:00 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit []
16:40 -!- fjahr_ is now known as fjahr
16:47 -!- _joerodgers [~joerodger@c-76-125-83-191.hsd1.ar.comcast.net] has joined ##taproot-activation
16:49 -!- _joerodgers [~joerodger@c-76-125-83-191.hsd1.ar.comcast.net] has quit [Client Quit]
16:52 -!- joerodgers [~joerodger@141.98.255.150] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
17:00 -!- DeanWeen [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
17:05 -!- DeanGuss [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has joined ##taproot-activation
17:15 -!- instagibbs [~instagibb@pool-100-15-139-5.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
17:31 -!- Vicchiatti [bf3e0fba@191.62.15.186] has joined ##taproot-activation
17:32 -!- Vicchiatti [bf3e0fba@191.62.15.186] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
17:37 -!- Kilart [4ec076c3@78.192.118.195] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
19:57 < windsok> Would anyone object to this channel being piped into the Bitcoin Core Slack in a read-only mode?
19:57 < windsok> Bitcoin Core Community Slack*
20:32 < luke-jr> read only is lame? :P
20:45 < windsok> well if people want to contribute to this channel, they can come to IRC
20:48 < midnight> for what it's worth, I think providing additional value to a company that holds communications essentially hostage and removes the ability to independently witness comms history is not super ethical.
23:12 -!- Spyro [49aa5f1f@c-73-170-95-31.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined ##taproot-activation
23:12 -!- Spyro [49aa5f1f@c-73-170-95-31.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
23:13 -!- Spyro [49aa5f1f@c-73-170-95-31.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined ##taproot-activation
23:14 -!- Spyro [49aa5f1f@c-73-170-95-31.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
23:43 -!- David52 [5d90a747@net-93-144-167-71.cust.vodafonedsl.it] has joined ##taproot-activation
23:44 -!- David52 [5d90a747@net-93-144-167-71.cust.vodafonedsl.it] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
23:56 -!- kristapsk [~KK@gateway/tor-sasl/kristapsk] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
23:56 -!- kristapsk [~KK@gateway/tor-sasl/kristapsk] has joined ##taproot-activation
--- Log closed Fri Oct 16 00:00:48 2020