--- Log opened Mon Dec 23 00:00:19 2013
02:16 < andytoshi> ;;cjs fd1d19c88eaa675d7151a625bcb911e05d8b58e35faf51a974ba73c565ba6a63
02:16 < gribble> Coinjoin Status: Session Delta USAFA SAMU SIGS DCSS spook RRF LASINT CFC spookwords NSDM Uziel NRO PLO MSNBC JPL plutonium FINCEN JANET Fortezza ESN SATKA toffee eavesdropping fissionable : completed. The submitted transaction ID was 33854f625c90e3287eae951103489a2449f91bfe039aa4d4c810bd66450edbf1.
02:17 < andytoshi> ;;cjs Delta USAFA SAMU SIGS DCSS spook RRF LASINT CFC spookwords NSDM Uziel NRO PLO MSNBC JPL plutonium FINCEN JANET Fortezza ESN SATKA toffee eavesdropping fissionable
02:17 < gribble> Coinjoin Status: Session Delta USAFA SAMU SIGS DCSS spook RRF LASINT CFC spookwords NSDM Uziel NRO PLO MSNBC JPL plutonium FINCEN JANET Fortezza ESN SATKA toffee eavesdropping fissionable : completed. The submitted transaction ID was 33854f625c90e3287eae951103489a2449f91bfe039aa4d4c810bd66450edbf1.
03:14 <@gmaxwell> hahahah
03:16 <@gmaxwell> ;;cjs
03:16 < gribble> Coinjoin Status: There is no currently open session.
03:42 < maaku> why is JPL a scary word? :P
03:47 <@gmaxwell> maaku: the spookwords lists have a whole bunch of generic military-industrial-complex keywords. ... someone's idea of unusual words that in the early 90s might have triggered some government keyword filter, at least in the busy imagination of some cryptoanarchist.
03:48 <@gmaxwell> (and, well, probably in reality too— at least for some of the words)
03:49 < CodeShark> gmaxwell: were you able to install boost_log? :)
03:49 <@gmaxwell> CodeShark: s'not yet. I figured I'd upgrade fedora and got as far as downloading it. :)
03:50 < CodeShark> well, in the worst of cases you can just ./b2 --with-log :)
03:52 < Emcy> what am i reading
07:50 < adam3us> petertodd, gmaxwell: sender derived address/code and stealth-addr write up on my older thread  (still to locate bytecodes to link) feel free to correct https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=317835.new#new
10:08 < petertodd> ;;cjs
10:08 < gribble> Coinjoin Status: There is no currently open session.
10:33 < andytoshi> petertodd, gmaxwell: if you throw a tx into the joiner it'll trigger a new session
10:33 < andytoshi> at this point it's probably okay to do so without irritating anyone
10:34 < andytoshi> ;;cjs
10:34 < gribble> Coinjoin Status: The current session is open for 15 more minutes. There are currently 1transactions in the pot. The most popular output value is 0.107428.
10:34 < andytoshi> ;;cjs 196bfaf16b1dbfb9
10:34 < gribble> Coinjoin Status: The current session is open for 15 more minutes. There are currently 1transactions in the pot. The most popular output value is 0.107428.
10:34 < andytoshi> hmm, it should say the codeword as long as you give it the hex..
10:34 < andytoshi> ;;cjs 196bfaf16b1dbfb9
10:34 < gribble> Coinjoin Status: Session Propaganda Aum 20755-6000 Privacy bet PRF : open for 15 more minutes. There are currently 1transactions in the pot. The most popular output value is 0.107428.
10:39 < jgarzik_> cute
11:31 < kinlo> 15 min is a bit short, no?
11:31 < andytoshi> kinlo: i think so, it's hard to say what would be optimal. if it's too long people will forget about it
11:32 < kinlo> true, you do want people to get it over with, sign within a certain time frame
11:32 < kinlo> but 15 min requires some coordination
11:32 < andytoshi> yeah -- but if you have coordination, 15 is almost too long :P
11:33 < kinlo> perhaps some kind of untimed participation would be better, just create one, get a private url to paste to those working together, then close off by the one creating it? :)
11:33 < kinlo> just brainstorming here
11:34 < andytoshi> nah, i like this, it minimizes the trust/obligation of the participants
11:34 < andytoshi> if it were popular, 15 minutes would be fine
11:35 < andytoshi> i just bumped it up to 20, we'll see how that works
11:35 < kinlo> I'm just considering the boycot options, if I just add into your transaction and never sign, the entire thing is going to fail
11:43 < andytoshi> yeah, that's also an argument for low timeouts
11:44 < andytoshi> if it gets to be a problem, i'll make people sign with their inputs, and blacklist them, and require more than 1 conf
11:44 < andytoshi> but i don't think so, it's a fairly complex technical and you don't get to see your victims' reactions
11:46 < andytoshi> technical troll*
11:49 < jgarzik_> like a technical virgin?
14:02 < michagogo|cloud> andytoshi: inputs are somewhat cheap :-/
14:07 < andytoshi> michagogo|cloud: this is true, the goal would be to rate-limit an attacker .. there's not much i can do with a UI like this
14:08 < andytoshi> maaku's design is entirely automatic, so it's easy to blacklist inputs then try again a second later
15:18 < petertodd> bitcoin source code from nov 2008: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=382374.0
15:41 < maaku> petertodd: do you have a link to your OP_CODE_SEPARATOR delegation thoughts?
15:42 < petertodd> maaku: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=255145.msg2773654#msg2773654
16:12 < maaku> in freimarkets we introduced a delegation separator, which works kinda opposite the way a code separator does
16:13 < maaku> and lets the delegated signer add restrictions
18:44 < sipa> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/3370#issuecomment-31150656
18:50 <@gmaxwell> Thats the rule I believe we should have.
18:53 < andytoshi> there was a neat question on the mailing list requesting a document to explain distributed consensus systems to newbies
18:54 < andytoshi> idk how much of our language or concepts are standardized by this point
19:17 < TD> sipa: gavin is on vacation at the moment
19:17 < sipa> ok
19:20 < TD> sipa: it's not possible for two blocks to have identical time received, right? is this in case of future multi-threading?
19:20 < TD> (assuming a high enough resolution clock)
19:22 < sipa> it uses a microsecond clock, but that isn't available on windows
19:22 < sipa> actually, there should be no need for that
19:23 < sipa> just an incrementing sequence id
19:23 < TD> yeah
19:23 < TD> windows does have high resolution clock APIs
19:23 < sipa> good to bring that up
19:23 < sipa> yeah, but not available through the boost function we're using now
19:23 < sipa> in any case, sequence id is easier and faster
19:26 < TD> .. // Check trees node between the current best chain and the candidate.
19:26 < TD> that comment is a little unclear, imo
19:26 < TD> what's a "trees node"
19:26 < sipa> that comment makes no sense :)
19:30 < TD> sipa: what happens if a thread is interrupted whilst it's in the middle of re-organising in this new way?
19:30 < sipa> hmmm
19:31 < TD> i see interruption points, but no discussion of what happens if there's an abort
19:31 < sipa> you're right
19:31 < sipa> this could be a problem
19:32 < TD> i should add these comments to the github really
19:32 < sipa> please comment on the pullreq, not on the commits
19:32 < sipa> the commit comments sometimes get lost in rebasings
19:34 < TD> hmmm
19:34 < TD> i'm not sure how to do that. doesn't that lose the line references?
19:35 < sipa> yeah :(
19:35 < TD> oh well. no matter. you have comments in your inbox now
19:47 < sipa> TD: thanks
19:48 < TD> np
22:58 < andytoshi> is there a channel like #bitcoin except everyone is not illiterate?
23:00 < Luke-Jr> #eligius ?
23:58 < nanotube> andytoshi: heh maybe this one.
23:59 < andytoshi> :P i'd like to get a coinjoin going without the same five people :P
23:59 < andytoshi> oops, i put too many :P's in there..
--- Log closed Tue Dec 24 00:00:22 2013