00:27:50mr_burde_:mr_burde_ is now known as mr_burdell
00:34:52artifexd:artifexd is now known as benkay
00:35:11benkay:benkay is now known as artifexd
00:35:45artifexd:artifexd is now known as benkay
00:36:15benkay:benkay is now known as Guest46913
00:36:26Guest46913:Guest46913 is now known as artifexd
01:42:03zzyzx:zzyzx is now known as roidster
01:42:33roidster:roidster is now known as Guest47149
03:12:22artifexd:artifexd is now known as artifexbob
03:13:13artifexbob:artifexbob is now known as artifexd
08:47:29dansmith_btc:dansmith_btc has left #bitcoin-wizards
09:50:55sl01:has anyone found a good explanation of how maidsafe solved proof of resource in a workable fashion?
12:15:49artifexbob:artifexbob is now known as artifexd
12:16:19artifexd:artifexd is now known as Guest76994
12:37:12Guest76994:Guest76994 is now known as artifexd_
12:45:47artifexd_:artifexd_ is now known as artifexd
15:43:07contrapumpkin:contrapumpkin is now known as copumpkin
19:32:26phantomcircuit:gmaxwell, petertodd thoughts on counterpary?
20:13:52maaku:phantomcircuit: you might need to be more specific
20:14:16phantomcircuit:maaku, is it something that is even worth looking at
20:14:40phantomcircuit:im waiting for a raid array to initialize and fiddling around :P
20:15:05phantomcircuit:i should probably make myself a list of all these projects
20:15:11phantomcircuit:it's hard to keep track there are so many
20:15:31maaku:phantomcircuit: i assume you are familiar with mastercoin?
20:15:54maaku:counterparty is almost exactly the same thing, just with a marginally more honest initial distribution
20:16:41maaku:imho it is of zero value, but I know petertodd will disagree
20:17:07phantomcircuit:maaku, so it's basically another asset coin
20:17:22phantomcircuit:which ends up being an abstraction on top of the issuers credibility
20:17:29maaku:another embedded/parasitic asset transaction system, yes
20:17:45phantomcircuit:oh it's not even working as a merged coin?
20:18:01phantomcircuit:why does everybody insist on using the bitcoin blockchain to store their data
20:18:01maaku:nope, data on the bitcoin blockchain. exactly like mastercoin
20:18:08phantomcircuit:just build a merged datacoin and use that
20:18:11maaku:phantomcircuit: absolutely no problem with having issuers 99% of real world transactions involve this in some way
20:18:23phantomcircuit:hell i'll even guarantee you 4Ph/s of merged mining powah
20:19:32maaku:phantomcircuit: counterparty is basically a fork of mastercoin, albeit with a separate implementation, and using one-way proof of burn instead of sending coins to JR
20:21:21Luke-Jr:phantomcircuit: jgarzik and I tried to convince counterparty to use OP_RETURN instead of spam, and they basically refuse
20:21:54maaku:Luke-Jr: they were onboard with OP_RETURN, but couldn't fit it within 40 bytes
20:22:06Luke-Jr:maaku: yeah, I mean OP_RETURN(80)
20:22:19maaku:yeah, that was their implementation choice
20:22:45maaku:which is why there was some snafu when the limit got changed to 40 bytes - they felt betrayed
20:23:11wallet42:now they use OP_MULTISIG?
20:23:11Luke-Jr:maaku: well, they were refusing to use it
20:23:35maaku:Luke-Jr: check their development thread. they were committed to OP_RETURN(80)
20:23:55Luke-Jr:maaku: check the pages and pages of jgarzik and I trying to convince them to use OP_RETURN(80) and their refusal
20:24:45maaku:wallet42: i don't know. I stopped paying attention after they threated to use forever unspendable UTXOs in response to the OP_RETURN(40) change
20:55:14dansmith_btc:Luke-Jr, could you please give me a link to where you were trying to convince them?
20:56:22Apocalyptic:" I stopped paying attention after they threated to use forever unspendable UTXOs" // that's a regrettable move
20:58:08Luke-Jr:dansmith_btc: too many pages of crap in their thread to look through
21:01:30Luke-Jr:pages around 340
21:18:48nsh_:nsh_ is now known as nsh
22:26:32wallet42:wallet42 is now known as Guest40480
22:26:32wallet421:wallet421 is now known as wallet42
23:39:33jcorgan:fyi: i had a chat w/Matt at Counterparty a few days ago, he reiterated that OP_RETURN(80) was acceptable but OP_RETURN(40) wasn't, and that they plan to continue using bare multisig
23:45:11Luke-Jr:need to get more miners filtering bare multisig..
23:47:16jcorgan:also, he objects to the sidechain concept as he claims it is too dependent on the good will of miners to merge mine
23:48:03Luke-Jr:all transactions are dependent on the "good will" of miners (or transaction fees) period
23:48:44Luke-Jr:why do people who don't understand how bitcoin works think they can make "bitcoin 2.0"?
23:49:14jcorgan:anyway, i don't have enough knowledge/history of the situation to have a meaningful opinion; i just ran in to him at the SCV bitcoin meetup this last Tuesday and the subject came up.
23:52:07shesek:Luke-Jr, GAit told me the other day that you recommended him to avoid signing multiple times with the same key, because it could have some weaknesses
23:52:14shesek:can you elaborate on that?
23:52:51Luke-Jr:shesek: all the same problems as with address reuse
23:53:28shesek:address reuse have privacy concerns, which don't apply in my case
23:53:53shesek:and it also reveals the public key after the first spend
23:54:16shesek:which isn't a weakness on its own, but could be a problem if a weakness is found in ECDSA in the future
23:54:36shesek:but other than that, is there any weakness today caused by re-signing multiple times with the same key?
23:54:48shesek:* weakness known today
23:55:16Luke-Jr:yes, two so far
23:56:32Luke-Jr:1) using the same K value twice makes calculating the private key simple
23:56:43nsh:honey i leaked the kids
23:56:50Luke-Jr:2) http://eprint.iacr.org/2014/161.pdf works with ~300 sigs
23:57:44shesek:reusing the same key doesn't imply reusing the same K value
23:57:53shesek:I'll look into the other one
23:57:58shesek:thanks Luke
23:58:56Luke-Jr:at this point I think it's a given there will be more found over time