| 00:53:41 | jcrubino: | is a provably fair high volume bitcoin currency exchange by 2015 achievable? |
| 00:53:51 | jcrubino: | provably solvent |
| 00:55:09 | maaku: | jcrubino: you could do that today |
| 00:55:15 | maaku: | but good luck getting people to use it |
| 00:55:26 | jcrubino: | businesses or customers? |
| 00:55:32 | maaku: | customers |
| 00:55:38 | maaku: | well, either |
| 00:56:48 | maaku: | jcrubino: there are already ways to do, e.g., voting pools for moving funds in or out of an open-transactions server |
| 00:56:52 | maaku: | which has the properties you asked for |
| 00:57:36 | jcrubino: | what practical limitations are there? |
| 00:57:56 | jcrubino: | limitations to the implemenation? |
| 00:58:24 | maaku: | if you want ot stay within the ecosystem, there are ways of doing similar things with colored coins, tagged assets (e.g. freimarkets), or scripting language extensions |
| 00:58:30 | maaku: | any one of which could be finished in 2014 |
| 00:58:45 | maaku: | if given proper funding and attention |
| 00:59:10 | maaku: | jcrubino: performance limitations would be a question for #opentransactions |
| 01:00:58 | jcrubino: | where can I read about scripting language extentions? |
| 01:02:32 | maaku: | jcrubino: there isn't a good writeup on that, but I'm organizing a project to come up with a proposal |
| 01:02:37 | maaku: | you can read about that here: https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/concatenative/conversations/messages/4950 |
| 01:03:27 | jcrubino: | in your opinion will ethereum be successful enough to stand on its own? |
| 01:04:22 | jcrubino: | of course that fact that your working on extending scripting says alot. |
| 01:04:24 | maaku: | there's also the great thread on all the evil things that could be done with scripting language extensions : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=278122.0 |
| 01:04:32 | maaku: | which actually has some good non-evil ideas in there too |
| 01:04:42 | maaku: | jcrubino: etherium as written? no. |
| 01:05:08 | maaku: | but that's why i'm working on my own proposal of course |
| 01:05:50 | maaku: | i see great practical utility in a more expressive script, but not in the way etherium is doing it |
| 01:05:53 | maaku: | but that's just my opinion |
| 01:28:31 | irc.freenode.net: | Disconnected from irc.freenode.net (ERROR :Closing Link: S0106c0c1c0894c25.vs.shawcable.net (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)) |
| 01:29:45 | holmes.freenode.net: | topic is: "Bitcoin research, hardfork wishlist, ideas for the future - see also: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Hardfork_Wishlist https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/User:Gmaxwell/alt_ideas. This channel is logged at http://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/wizards/. For questions about the logs talk to andytoshi." |
| 01:29:45 | holmes.freenode.net: | Users on #bitcoin-wizards: andytoshi-logbot K1773R DougieBot5000_ c--O-O shinybro_ CodeShark Emcy ghtdak1 roidster rdymac breesy RoboTeddy MoALTz Krellan_ spinza [\\\] HM_ andytoshi otoburb gribble mappum go1111111 samson_ Muis forrestv licnep IOI_ coryfields skinnkavaj c0rw1n nsh zacm heffner tucenaber shesek OneFixt ironzorg krypto pajarillo jtimon trn ryan-c Xarikins hnz ageis maaku austinhill Sangheili wangbus areaurbum firepacket perrier nOgAnOo jcrubino |
| 01:29:45 | holmes.freenode.net: | Users on #bitcoin-wizards: gavinandresen e4xit midnightmagic shinybro Luke-Jr Sorcier_FXK nanotube hno` michagogo|cloud Alanius azariah4 tacotime_ crucif0rm salsa poggy Guest982 warren Mikalv iddo aksyn matrixfox jron UukGoblin jgarzik Krellan asoltys pigeons petertodd gmaxwell fagmuffinz optimator_ espes___ wumpus poeticlobster jrmithdobbs heakins sipa realazthat a5m0 comboy bobke Graet harrow EasyAt Fistful_of_Coins typex Ryan52 phantomcircuit @ChanServ rs0_ |
| 01:29:45 | holmes.freenode.net: | Users on #bitcoin-wizards: crescendo kinlo amiller helo qwertyoruiop grazs imsaguy BlueMatt sl01 edulix |
| 01:29:45 | holmes.freenode.net: | [freenode-info] channel trolls and no channel staff around to help? please check with freenode support: http://freenode.net/faq.shtml#gettinghelp |
| 01:42:33 | areaurbum_: | areaurbum_ is now known as areaurbum |
| 02:41:49 | jcrubino: | jcrubino has left #bitcoin-wizards |
| 02:51:20 | fract: | Not sure if any foundation members are here, but I think it would be prudent to ask Mark karpeles to step down from his board seat. He just threw bitcoin under the bus and caused substantial PR damage in the news today due to his misinformation and FUD. It was a reckless and irresponsible press release. Something has to be done. |
| 03:32:29 | petertodd: | ;;cjs |
| 03:32:30 | gribble: | Coinjoin Status: current session is open for 12 more minutes. There are currently something like 1 transactions in the pot. The most popular output value is 0.02497. To participate, visit https://www.wpsoftware.net/coinjoin/ or http://xnpjsvp7crbzlj3w.onion/ . |
| 03:33:58 | a5m0: | i'm interested to see stats on bc.i coinjoin |
| 03:37:02 | petertodd: | a5m0: piuk said they're setting about 1.5 users per join |
| 03:38:17 | luke-jr_: | luke-jr_ is now known as Luke-Jr |
| 03:51:20 | roidster: | roidster is now known as Guest15262 |
| 04:00:50 | a5m0: | ah so they just act as the counterparty for the needed coins i guess |
| 04:13:23 | warren: | hmm, no adam |
| 04:50:44 | fract: | what kind of a transaction is this/? http://webbtc.com/tx/aa62bdd690de061a6fbbd88420f7a7aa574ba86da4fe82edc27e2263f8743988 |
| 04:51:58 | petertodd: | fract: a fuckup |
| 04:52:14 | petertodd: | fract: mtgox's custom code lost a few hundred (thousand?) btc a few years back |
| 04:54:25 | fract: | no shit.. there a few transactions like that |
| 04:54:32 | fract: | over 1000btc outputs unspendable |
| 04:55:08 | petertodd: | yup |
| 04:59:54 | Xarian: | Xarian is now known as Xarikins |
| 06:32:06 | tacotime_: | tacotime_ is now known as tt_away |
| 06:40:34 | maaku: | re: sipa's normative txid patch, perhaps it'd be better to use a base58 serialization so it is visually distinctive? |
| 06:40:57 | maaku: | a checksum might even be useful in that context |
| 07:14:11 | HobGoblin: | HobGoblin is now known as Guest48059 |
| 08:03:32 | krypto: | hello everybody |
| 08:28:43 | c0rw1n: | hello krypto |
| 08:49:23 | krypto: | is DMD just another shitty coin, or does it have anything going for it? |
| 08:49:42 | c0rw1n: | no idea. What's dmd? |
| 08:50:20 | krypto: | diamond coin |
| 08:51:04 | krypto: | it looks like a copycoin but i am no expert or programmer |
| 08:54:06 | c0rw1n: | never heard of it, but then i'm not following the appearance of every scamcoin that pops up |
| 08:54:24 | maaku: | krypto: wrong channel |
| 08:55:05 | krypto: | thanks guys |
| 11:54:01 | Guest48059: | Guest48059 is now known as UukGoblin |
| 12:57:34 | nsh: | nsh is now known as snh |
| 13:03:34 | snh: | snh is now known as nsh |
| 15:05:17 | warren: | adam3us: know anyone that would be good to prove that malleability is fully stopped? |
| 15:05:27 | warren: | adam3us: including "algebraic mutations of DSA beyond the single one we know" |
| 15:06:00 | warren: | adam3us: we could have a soft fork, but we have to know what we need first... |
| 15:09:54 | adam3us: | warren: i was thinking maybe (non-trivial) change to not use the signature but the public key making the signature, so then you would not need the sig algo to be non-crypto-level-malleable; its a new requirement on algorithms that people dont usually think about or care about strongly |
| 15:11:46 | adam3us: | are the tx-ids hashed at the leaves of the merkle tree sorted? or is it arbitrary/order received from the tree builders perspective? |
| 15:12:00 | adam3us: | "form the bottom row of the tree with the ordered double-SHA-256 hashes of the byte streams of the transactions in the block" in the wiki protocol specification... but what order is that? |
| 15:23:19 | petertodd: | adam3us: order is the order the transactions are evaluated when the block is received; ie the order the transactions modify the utxo set state |
| 15:23:49 | petertodd: | adam3us: which is kinda unfortunate as that makes block validation much harder to parallelize |
| 15:34:04 | ghtdak1: | ghtdak1 has left #bitcoin-wizards |
| 15:38:24 | adam3us: | petertodd: so the tx in the block are pre-validated by the block builder (the succesful miner), and the leaves are in the order in which the block builder received the tx. |
| 15:38:50 | adam3us: | petertodd: now if post-mining-event any tx in the block are invalid, the whole block is declared as invalid and ignored I presume? |
| 15:39:36 | petertodd: | adam3us: bingo |
| 15:48:32 | roidster: | roidster is now known as Guest45257 |
| 16:06:18 | adam3us: | maaku: the utxo compaction and trie work.. does that imply a new coinbase version and format at some point? |
| 16:07:27 | sipa: | no |
| 16:07:34 | sipa: | that would be a hard fork |
| 18:17:26 | enodios: | enodios has left #bitcoin-wizards |
| 18:27:01 | maaku: | adam3us: a new block version, yes |
| 18:27:38 | maaku: | similar to bip 34 |
| 18:28:20 | petertodd: | adam3us: blockheader format would stay the same; you'd either commit to the (u)txo tree in the coinbase, or you can do a SPV-soft-fork by making merkleroot=H(actual-merkle-root | secondary tree) |
| 18:30:37 | maaku: | petertodd: that would be a hard-fork for bitcoin-qt, right? |
| 18:31:32 | petertodd: | maaku: yes, for full-nodes |
| 21:11:09 | su_awesome: | hi, so if I understand correctly, due to the malleability attack going on right now, it's insecure to send shared coin through blockchain.info? |
| 21:11:29 | su_awesome: | (using the coinjoin that blockchain.info implemented) |
| 21:11:49 | andytoshi: | su_awesome: absolutely the wrong channel |
| 21:12:19 | su_awesome: | andytoshi, oh sorry I thought this was a channel that discussed these sorts of things |
| 21:12:53 | su_awesome: | because of the "Bitcoin research" in the title |
| 21:13:25 | andytoshi: | su_awesome: o.O that means (academic) research, not anything to do with random companies or their software |
| 21:13:29 | BlueMatt: | su_awesome: coinjoin has been officially moved to non-research (ie #bitcoin-dev) |
| 21:13:41 | BlueMatt: | and discussing bc.i's implementation is probably more #bitcoin |
| 21:13:58 | andytoshi: | oh, i missed the coinjoin part, that's a reasonable misunderstanding |
| 21:14:52 | su_awesome: | I see, so this channel is more about theoretical side of BTC instead of what's already written and implemented? |
| 21:15:12 | petertodd: | su_awesome: it's not insecure, although it might not work |
| 21:15:27 | petertodd: | su_awesome: (bc.i won't lose funds if a cj fails part way through) |
| 21:16:21 | andytoshi: | su_awesome: correct. we try to keep it ontopic and low-volume because most regulars here have brain-intensive day jobs and are busy |
| 21:16:53 | petertodd: | su_awesome: specifically, most of the regulars read everything here |
| 21:17:18 | su_awesome: | petertodd, I see, a user on #bitcoin said that this tx was sent using coinjoin, it took quite a while to be verified, perhaps the attack was the cause? - https://blockchain.info/tx/0654039b8d8e9f97c06a448951d16918a9d1a9ccec4c8e3d252ceb54f843b6f3?show_adv=false |
| 21:18:20 | petertodd: | su_awesome: yeah, could be, bc.i uses multi-step mixes, so if one step is mutated the rest fail |
| 21:19:05 | petertodd: | su_awesome: coinjoin as a concept isn't vulnerable; multi-step mixes aren't required |
| 21:20:21 | su_awesome: | oh, good to know about that. I hope everything gets better soon. Anyway, I won't bother you guys with my simple questions. Thanks :) |
| 21:20:40 | petertodd: | np |
| 21:21:07 | su_awesome: | su_awesome has left #bitcoin-wizards |
| 21:27:10 | nicksavers: | nicksavers has left #bitcoin-wizards |
| 22:01:18 | qwertyoruiop: | qwertyoruiop is now known as xXx_1337masterqw |
| 22:01:48 | xXx_1337masterqw: | xXx_1337masterqw is now known as xXx1337swagqw3r7 |
| 22:01:57 | xXx1337swagqw3r7: | xXx1337swagqw3r7 is now known as x1337swagqw3r7y0 |
| 22:14:26 | x1337swagqw3r7y0: | x1337swagqw3r7y0 is now known as qwertyoruiop |
| 23:59:21 | realazthat: | sipa: lol all these problems with the exchanges, I tested for them when making the unit tests for my deposit system, when I was querying you a few weeks back |
| 23:59:46 | realazthat: | I remarked to someone else how I bet these things were not accounted for in other systems |
| 23:59:52 | realazthat: | so right :D |