--- Log opened Tue Mar 09 00:00:51 2021 00:33 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has quit [Quit: ZNC - http://znc.sourceforge.net] 00:33 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has joined ##taproot-activation 00:42 -!- kabaum [~kabaum@h-13-35.A163.priv.bahnhof.se] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 00:42 -!- kabaum [~kabaum@h-13-35.A163.priv.bahnhof.se] has joined ##taproot-activation 01:36 -!- meshcoll- [meshcollid@gateway/shell/ircnow/x-fxgnvsfciueukqqj] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 01:38 -!- jonatack_ [~jon@37.167.192.44] has joined ##taproot-activation 01:42 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.166.110.136] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 02:06 -!- meshcollider [meshcollid@gateway/shell/ircnow/x-qjonxuxpnxmzzqjx] has joined ##taproot-activation 03:11 -!- meshcollider [meshcollid@gateway/shell/ircnow/x-qjonxuxpnxmzzqjx] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 03:13 -!- DeanWeen [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 03:14 -!- DeanGuss [~dean@gateway/tor-sasl/deanguss] has joined ##taproot-activation 03:46 -!- pinheadmz_ [~pinheadmz@hns-contributor.dev] has quit [Quit: ZNC 1.8.2+deb1+bionic2 - https://znc.in] 03:47 -!- pinheadmz [~pinheadmz@hns-contributor.dev] has joined ##taproot-activation 03:50 -!- pinheadmz [~pinheadmz@hns-contributor.dev] has quit [Client Quit] 04:05 -!- meshcollider [meshcollid@gateway/shell/ircnow/x-vbhvluwoeowgddsh] has joined ##taproot-activation 04:31 -!- setpill [~setpill@unaffiliated/setpill] has joined ##taproot-activation 04:54 -!- belcher_ is now known as belcher 05:20 -!- jonatack_ [~jon@37.167.192.44] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 05:30 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.167.192.44] has joined ##taproot-activation 05:46 -!- meshcollider [meshcollid@gateway/shell/ircnow/x-vbhvluwoeowgddsh] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 05:56 -!- meshcollider [meshcollid@gateway/shell/ircnow/x-irngybgfmgpzypua] has joined ##taproot-activation 06:01 -!- yevaud [~yevaud@2001:bc8:1820:118::1] has joined ##taproot-activation 06:11 -!- pinheadmz [~pinheadmz@hns-contributor.dev] has joined ##taproot-activation 06:43 -!- sword_smith [sword_smit@bitcoinfundamentals.org] has left ##taproot-activation [] 06:57 -!- jtimon [~quassel@90.166.158.146.dynamic.jazztel.es] has joined ##taproot-activation 07:35 < jtimon> harding: re "trying to figure out why something you expected to happen didn't happen" isn't it better to consider all the possibilities? ie don't set up yourself to a surprise by making assumptions like "this particular proposal will be uncontroversial". ie designing a deployment mechanism that serves us for all proposals? 07:42 < roconnor> We have been considering these possibilities for 200 days, and there is no need to halt discussion of these possibilities while ST is running. I don't see how discussing for another 200 days before running a depolyment with a perfect mechanism is better than running ST in parallel with further discussion if it is plausible that these other possibilities become moot. We can even still keep discussing the perfect deployment 07:42 < roconnor> mechansim even if ST activates tarpoot. 07:43 < roconnor> Are you worried that ST will activate taproot and no one would be motivated to continue depolyment mechanism discussion? 07:47 -!- ksedgwic [~ksedgwic@192-184-130-48.fiber.dynamic.sonic.net] has quit [Quit: Lost terminal] 07:52 -!- wumpus2 is now known as wumpus 07:52 -!- Teleportando [8eb30758@d142-179-7-88.bchsia.telus.net] has quit [Quit: Connection closed] 07:54 -!- ksedgwic [~ksedgwic@192-184-130-48.fiber.dynamic.sonic.net] has joined ##taproot-activation 07:56 -!- andytosh1 is now known as andytoshi 07:57 -!- belcher_ [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined ##taproot-activation 07:58 -!- belcher [~belcher@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 08:03 < setpill> I don't think it's possible to design a deployment mechanism that serves us for all proposals. 08:04 < setpill> And if it is, the question should also be if it's worth delaying deployment until we've found it. 08:04 < setpill> If we can find a deployment mechanism that is perfect (or even "good enough") for the current deployment much more quickly. 08:07 < setpill> Because either there will be plenty more opportunities to test out that "perfect" deployment mechanism, or it was pointless to try to optimize for every possible deployment to begin with. 08:27 < harding> jtimon: obviously it is better to consider all possibilities, to not make assumptions, and design a deployment mechanism that serves us for all proposals. I'm not sure what specifically you're suggesting. 08:28 -!- cguida [~Adium@2806:2f0:51c1:5cee:111d:a146:4654:4a12] has joined ##taproot-activation 08:32 < jtimon> my point is you say "if ST fails we ask miners why". well, we don't need for that situation to happen to analize what could happen next 08:32 < jtimon> they could give some good feedback, correct it, try again, that's one possibility 08:32 < jtimon> or they could oppose for reasons we don't think are reasonable 08:33 < jtimon> either way, it perpetuates the false perception that miners have a say in the rules. imo that's not the reason we use miner signaling 08:34 < jtimon> we use it because it all goes well, that helps preventing reorgs and it helps with coordination 08:35 < jtimon> ideally many users would have upgraded before any change is activated, for that reason, I think we should set the start height for signaling porposals, say, 3 months in the future from the release 08:36 < jtimon> ST feels like "if devs and miners coordinate, they decide the rules" to me. or at least it feels like it keeps perpetuating that notion 08:37 < jtimon> I mean, not something we haven't done. but it feels like kicking the can down the road 08:38 < roconnor> by kicking the can down the road you mean you are worred that taproot will activate without resolving how to proceed if miners don't activate taproot? 08:54 < belcher_> theres so many people who want to use taproot as a football to set some kind of precedent 08:54 -!- belcher_ is now known as belcher 09:04 < luke-jr> jtimon: I see ST as just an attempt to preempt LOT=True, in a way that grows support for LOT=True when/if it fails 09:04 < luke-jr> jtimon: so long as LOT=True continues to move forward, that seems okay 09:14 -!- jeremyrubin [~jr@024-176-247-182.res.spectrum.com] has joined ##taproot-activation 09:35 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.167.192.44] has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds] 09:37 < jtimon> roconnor: yeah 09:38 < jtimon> belcher: to me is not about taproot but about activation mechanisms in general 09:41 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.167.192.44] has joined ##taproot-activation 09:46 < roconnor> jtimon: We can still discuss how to prodeed if miner don't assist in the activation of softforks generally even after taproot is activated. 09:46 < jtimon> sure 09:46 < jtimon> or just wait for the next proposal... 09:48 < roconnor> Right, but having taproot in a not-activated-state isn't a requirement for the discussion to occur. 09:48 < jtimon> sure 09:48 < jtimon> I'm all for discussions happening 09:50 -!- setpill [~setpill@unaffiliated/setpill] has quit [Quit: setpill] 10:06 < RusAlex> hi mates, Im hardly follow all these days. Maybe someone could give a short update for a state of current consesuns LOT=true/false ? Thanks 10:07 < roconnor> No doubt Bitcoin Optech will have some sort of summary tomorrow. 10:13 < luke-jr> RusAlex: no consensus, but LOT=True has sufficient support to move forward 10:14 < luke-jr> (basically the same status as a week and/or two ago) 10:14 < RusAlex> is there any info from big exchanges to publicly reveal their LOT decision ? 10:15 < luke-jr> at the end of the day, exchanges have to serve their customers (not to mention LOT=False would likely lead to them losing a lot of money when/if miners were to attack) 10:16 < RusAlex> thank you luke-jr 10:37 -!- jonatack_ [~jon@37.167.192.44] has joined ##taproot-activation 10:37 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.167.192.44] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 10:40 -!- jonatack_ [~jon@37.167.192.44] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 10:41 -!- jonatack_ [~jon@37.167.192.44] has joined ##taproot-activation 10:41 -!- jonatack_ [~jon@37.167.192.44] has quit [Client Quit] 10:42 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.167.192.44] has joined ##taproot-activation 11:00 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@205.209.28.54] has joined ##taproot-activation 11:04 -!- lightlike [~lightlike@p200300c7ef188100a44b6800926d040e.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined ##taproot-activation 11:13 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.167.192.44] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 11:14 -!- Teleportando [8eb30758@d142-179-7-88.bchsia.telus.net] has joined ##taproot-activation 11:19 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.167.192.44] has joined ##taproot-activation 11:31 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined ##taproot-activation 11:54 -!- stortz [c8b9cbcf@200.185.203.207] has joined ##taproot-activation 12:20 -!- stortz [c8b9cbcf@200.185.203.207] has quit [Quit: Connection closed] 12:42 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 12:46 -!- jonatack [~jon@37.167.192.44] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 12:58 < luke-jr> split out https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21399 if anyone wants a quick (mostly automated) verify+review 13:00 < luke-jr> actually, I wonder if just leaving these changes out for now would be best.. 13:00 < luke-jr> achow101: ^ thoughts? 13:00 -!- realname192 [~real@37.162.43.185] has joined ##taproot-activation 13:01 < achow101> genericide is a funny word 13:02 < achow101> luke-jr: aj has a commit in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21380/ that does almost the same thing too 13:03 < luke-jr> achow101: yeah, but I'm wondering if we should just drop this ~identical commit and leave the types/comments wrong for now? 13:03 < luke-jr> that'd probably be best for backports I think 13:03 < luke-jr> might even enable rebasing on a common commit again 13:04 < achow101> you mean do the rename after all of the activation params? 13:06 < luke-jr> yeah, down the road after things settle 13:06 < luke-jr> backports done etc 13:06 < achow101> that seems reasonable 13:06 < luke-jr> user-facing stuff still can change, but types/comments don't need to.. 13:06 < achow101> especially since the rename is the main conflict with 0.21 13:32 -!- stortz [c8b9cbcf@200.185.203.207] has joined ##taproot-activation 13:34 -!- realname192 [~real@37.162.43.185] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 13:48 -!- jtimon [~quassel@90.166.158.146.dynamic.jazztel.es] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 14:15 -!- stortz [c8b9cbcf@200.185.203.207] has quit [Quit: Connection closed] 14:26 < AaronvanW> roconnor "Are you worried that ST will activate taproot and no one would be motivated to continue depolyment mechanism discussion?" <- I fully expect this btw 14:28 < waxwing> AaronvanW, you mean the second part also? 14:28 < waxwing> but there's a nuance between 'people won't be motivated to carry on the discussion *straight away* vs later in preparation for a next SF 14:29 < AaronvanW> that's fair. 14:30 < AaronvanW> and yes I meant the second part also. 14:30 < AaronvanW> but yeah maybe later in preparation for a next SF. 14:32 < waxwing> it's typical 'optimistic algo' stuff though - you can keep assuming the happy path iteratively, as long as you actually have a backup plan for the unhappy path 14:32 < waxwing> lightning is speedy trial for bitcoin transactions :) 14:35 < AaronvanW> speedy trial is maybe like custodial lightning wallets ;) OKish for now, but we need better long-term. 14:37 < luke-jr> nah, custodial lightning wallets in this analogy would be only miners enforcing Taproot 14:37 < luke-jr> and not ok at all ;) 14:47 -!- jigawatt [~mcfly@2605:2700:1:100e:dc::f01d] has quit [Quit: McFly out.] 14:47 -!- jigawatt [~mcfly@2605:2700:1:100e:dc::f01d] has joined ##taproot-activation 14:58 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined ##taproot-activation 15:24 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 15:24 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined ##taproot-activation 15:32 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 15:32 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined ##taproot-activation 15:46 -!- jeremyrubin [~jr@024-176-247-182.res.spectrum.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 16:25 -!- jeremyrubin [~jr@024-176-247-182.res.spectrum.com] has joined ##taproot-activation 16:26 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has quit [Quit: ZNC - http://znc.sourceforge.net] 16:26 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has joined ##taproot-activation 16:29 -!- AaronvanW [~AaronvanW@unaffiliated/aaronvanw] has quit [] 16:38 -!- Ed0 [~edouard@2001:41d0:401:3100::4897] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 16:50 -!- LRSN [d41dd2e6@212.29.210.230] has joined ##taproot-activation 17:08 -!- lightlike [~lightlike@p200300c7ef188100a44b6800926d040e.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 17:34 -!- proofofkeags [~proofofke@205.209.28.54] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 17:39 -!- Netsplit *.net <-> *.split quits: robert_spigler, timeerrr[m] 17:45 -!- timeerrr[m] [timeerrrma@gateway/shell/matrix.org/x-byclsxzeyoxsmecy] has joined ##taproot-activation 18:02 -!- robert_spigler [robertspig@gateway/shell/matrix.org/x-fqzdcayiqboawwcs] has joined ##taproot-activation 18:05 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has quit [Quit: ZNC - http://znc.sourceforge.net] 18:06 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has joined ##taproot-activation 18:48 -!- rotten [~rottensox@unaffiliated/rottensox] has joined ##taproot-activation 18:57 -!- rotten [~rottensox@unaffiliated/rottensox] has quit [Quit: rotten] 20:03 -!- jeremyrubin [~jr@024-176-247-182.res.spectrum.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 20:09 -!- pox [~pox@gateway/tor-sasl/pox] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 20:10 -!- LRSN [d41dd2e6@212.29.210.230] has quit [Quit: Connection closed] 20:25 -!- pox [~pox@gateway/tor-sasl/pox] has joined ##taproot-activation 20:25 -!- pox [~pox@gateway/tor-sasl/pox] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 20:26 -!- pox [~pox@gateway/tor-sasl/pox] has joined ##taproot-activation 20:42 < robert_spigler> Finally all caught up on discussion after family emergency. I was in the original LOT=true camp, and just wanted to say that I am very happy with ST and will not be running any UASF while it is underway. If it fails (don't think it will), not sure what I'll do (I'll need to look at /why/ it failed). I think continuing conversation at some point on an optimal activation path for future SF would be ideal 20:46 -!- shesek [~shesek@unaffiliated/shesek] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 20:47 -!- shesek [~shesek@unaffiliated/shesek] has joined ##taproot-activation 21:38 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 21:40 -!- roconnor [~roconnor@host-45-58-192-182.dyn.295.ca] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 21:41 -!- roconnor [~roconnor@host-45-58-192-182.dyn.295.ca] has joined ##taproot-activation 21:44 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has joined ##taproot-activation 22:10 -!- Teleportando [8eb30758@d142-179-7-88.bchsia.telus.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 22:27 -!- jeremyrubin [~jr@024-176-247-182.res.spectrum.com] has joined ##taproot-activation 22:36 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 23:58 -!- jeremyrubin [~jr@024-176-247-182.res.spectrum.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] --- Log closed Wed Mar 10 00:00:54 2021