00:45:18justanotheruser:Has anyone read about PoSV? http://www.reddcoin.com/papers/PoSV_FAQ.pdf
00:46:06justanotheruser:It seems like it incentivizes spamming the blockchain and doesn't actually solve any problems. Does anyone have an opposite opinion?
00:53:17a5m0_:a5m0_ is now known as a5m0
00:57:10zack-bitcoin:It is bad to reward users for making the network do work. Users should be charged for how much work they make the network do.
00:59:13justanotheruser:zack-bitcoin: that was my concern
02:34:43coyo:hai vfor
02:41:29coyo:justanotheruser: that's actually a good idea. however.. what stops people from running a massive number of clients and simply sending money to themselves?
02:44:39andytoshi:justanotheruser: that doc is a series of serious and unoriginal misunderstandings of bitcoin, unless the author is idling here it's not worth discussing
02:45:06coyo:andytoshi: hai! ^_^
02:45:43andytoshi:hi coyo, welcome to the channel. please be aware that many users of this channel are full-time researchers who take the time to follow the entire scrollback
02:45:54andytoshi:so we try to keep it low-volume and high-signal
02:46:03coyo:oh. okay, i'll chat in pm, then.
03:50:30Krellan:Colored coins (aka assets that are accounted for separately and can be exchanged for regular uncolored coins):
03:50:48Krellan:What's the current thought on this, is it better to do it as an overlay of Bitcoin (Counterparty) or as an altcoin?
03:51:03Krellan:Both have advantages/disadvantages.
04:02:16shesek:The original idea behind colored-coins didn't involve a Countryparty-like overlay on top of Bitcoin, it was meant to be just regular coins sent using regular transactions
04:05:37gmaxwell:I don't see any advantage of the overlay for that kind of thing except in so far as it creates another speculative asset market. (which is an inefficiency...)
04:06:51gmaxwell:I don't think it's productive to talk about "colored coins" as singular things. Many applications of it that people talk about are, I think, better accomoidated by exo-coloring ... e.g. just not having a colored coin at all.
04:07:42gmaxwell:For example, people sometimes use smart property examples as an application for colored coins. But since you must trust the property to respect the ownership, you can instead arrange the system so that the property instead respects title changes without the colored coin.
04:09:01gmaxwell:(e.g. I tell my car you will own it if it sees a payment of >=x to 1Me prior to some date, it signs an acknoweldgement... I give that to you, .. you can pay confident that the title transfer will happen— and the need to have a privacy reducing / state expanding ownership token in bitcoin is eliminated)
05:49:01shesek:gmaxwell, right. a Bitcoin-like decentralized consensus isn't really that useful for many of the use-cases colored coins are being pushed for
05:50:14shesek:and I think that the main advantage of an overlay/meta network on top of Bitcoin is that the dust rules pretty much killed the original colored coins idea
05:51:29shesek:there were some attempts with padding, but that has its own problems
05:51:34gmaxwell:shesek: I don't think it really does, the dust amounts are still infinitesmal. just use the dust threshold or whatever as your tracking quanta. (okay that might discourage you from issuing a million shares that way, but jesus, thank god we discouraged that…)
05:53:12shesek:1m shares isn't that much... and even 100k shares costs almost $3k to issue
05:54:22gmaxwell:I mean 1m shares would increase the utxo set size by 10%— for a single issuance, ouch.
05:54:54gmaxwell:and all creating txouts which are so worthless that once the asset dies (as most do) no one will bother to sweep them up before destroying the keys.
05:55:17shesek:not necessarily... people buying them at bulk would probably have one output with multiple shares
05:55:18gmaxwell:Maybe someday we'll add opt-in expiration for utxo.
05:55:48shesek:it probably won't be as bad as one share per output
05:55:53gmaxwell:shesek: well some exising examples, like asicminer— made txouts for every share because doing otherwise was "too hard"
05:56:25gmaxwell:it's easy to ignore the cost of an inefficient design when other people are carring 99.999% of the total cost. :)
05:56:58shesek:well... that's all their fault though, its not a disadvantage for doing that in general
05:57:48shesek:and btw, if each share is at the dust limit of 5430 satoshis, they're worth almost 3 cents each at current prices
05:58:00gmaxwell:the dust limit is now much lower.
05:58:11gmaxwell:(for better or worse)
05:58:14shesek:oh, really? how much is it now?
05:58:39gmaxwell:around 540 I think. it's pegged to the relay fee.
05:58:56shesek:(just to complete my thought - I was going to say that if you're doing it like that, people have some incentive to clean it up if the asset dies)
05:59:14gmaxwell:in any case, yea thats the goal— to make sure there is an incentive to clean it up.
05:59:29shesek:when did that happen?
05:59:33gmaxwell:also to create a differential advantage for spendable utxo compared to unspendable ones.
05:59:48gmaxwell:shesek: 0.9 lowered the relay fee.
06:00:15gmaxwell:(I think its actually too low now for the moment, but not worth worrying about too much)
06:00:31shesek:was the dust spam amount always pegged to the relay fee?
06:01:44gmaxwell:We didn't want there to be multiple economically sensitive parameters.
06:02:14shesek:yeah, make sense.
06:02:15gmaxwell:and presumably if lower fees will suffice for relaying then that implies lower coin values will suffice for getting mined.
06:04:09shesek:petertodd, are you around?
06:08:44justanotheruser:coyo: That is my concern. It seems like proof of spamming the blockchain with tx back to themselves
06:12:37qwertyoruiop:qwertyoruiop is now known as Guest14349
06:18:02michagogo:shesek: it was 5460, not 5430
06:18:17shesek:oh, right
06:18:18michagogo:(I wonder how long that wrong number will stick around)
06:18:25michagogo:And yeah, I think it's 546 now
06:19:17michagogo:And yeah, IIRC the definition is that it would cost more to spend than it's worth or something
06:19:24michagogo:Or maybe some large fraction?
06:21:12shesek:michagogo, are you going to the hackathon?
06:21:32michagogo:shesek: I don't think I know what you're referring to
06:22:22shesek:Mastercoin is having an hackathon in Tel Aviv
06:22:48shesek:but I just realized its Shabbat today, so you probably can't come anyway
06:25:30shesek:michagogo, btw, what happened to the "|cloud" in your nickname? you stopped using it?
06:25:40shesek:I mean, stopped using the cloud service you were using
06:26:07michagogo:I realized there's no point leaving it there, since I'm not using anything else
06:26:37shesek:ah... yeah, makes sense
06:26:49michagogo:(originally I was using this in parallel with mIRC, joining the same channels and using it for mobile and backlog. Eventually I found myself just using this. And the | sometimes breaks some bots, etc)
06:27:04michagogo:It messed up the #bitcoin-dev logs, for example
06:29:00michagogo:Hm, looks like there's going to be a big conference in Tel Aviv in July
06:29:55shesek:yes, an international one this time
06:30:12shesek:I understood from Meni that they got some interesting people to present there
06:30:21michagogo:Looks like slush is coming
06:30:51michagogo:Heh, in unvowelled Hebrew, it looks like Mark
07:16:59sipa:michagogo: marginal cost of adding bith the output and input to spend it would be more than 1/3 of the value of the coin
07:30:06justanotheruser:justanotheruser is now known as coles
07:30:14coles:coles is now known as justanotheruser
08:58:59jaromil_:jaromil_ is now known as jaromil
12:51:23avantgeek:avantgeek has left #bitcoin-wizards
15:01:50cr3pe:cr3pe has left #bitcoin-wizards
15:07:02fanquake:fanquake has left #bitcoin-wizards
15:12:28c0rw1n_:c0rw1n_ is now known as c0rw|bbq
15:29:31enodios:enodios has left #bitcoin-wizards
16:47:25john3213:john3213 has left #bitcoin-wizards
17:16:18jps_:jps_ is now known as jps
18:41:36justanotheruser:justanotheruser is now known as aaaa
18:41:53aaaa:aaaa is now known as justanotheruser
18:44:55Guest1402:Guest1402 is now known as maaku
18:58:25gmaxwell:I'm planning on writing a State of CoinJoin blogposty article where I revew some existing implementations and give some overview of the development in this space. I started up some notes on some of the things I'll be looking at.
18:58:29gmaxwell:at https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/User:Gmaxwell/state_of_coinjoin
18:58:52gmaxwell:If you're aware of Bitcoin things in the coinjoin space that I should be considering please add to that page.
19:00:49pigeons:is this the ringsig stuff? https://github.com/maaku/coinjoin
19:02:19gmaxwell:er bling sig not ringsig.
19:02:25gmaxwell:yes. thats what I was thinking of however.
19:15:32zooko:gmaxwell: I'm glad to hear you're going to write such an article!
19:17:09helo:do you think there is likely to be widespread utilization of coinjoin across multiple wallets?
19:18:02helo:multiple wallet implementation, that is
19:18:03andytoshi:yes, but not until we've gotten some working implementation and some working UI figured out
19:18:54gmaxwell:So I'm told that the darkwallet stuff is more or less production grade now, part of the point of writing an article is going and taking the time to try out all the things.
19:19:43gmaxwell:I think wumpus was looking into what darkcoin was doing. Apparently its closed source?!
19:20:00helo:most people aren't willing to put much effort into protecting their privacy; i guess they're lucky some developers are.
19:20:25andytoshi:i haven't taken the time to look at darkwallet, i'd be very surprised if they're closed source
19:20:37gmaxwell:Thats how software works. Effort goes in to make the software smart so the user can spend their time on things other than configuring logic gates by hand. :)
19:21:08gmaxwell:andytoshi: not darkwallet but darkcoin
19:22:12wumpus:gmaxwell: yes, they've added coinjoin to the bitcoind/-qt wallet, call it 'darksend' and keep it closed source (but they say they'll open source it)
19:22:18wumpus:gmaxwell: that's pretty much all of the difference
19:22:37wumpus:gmaxwell: of course, without giving you any credit or even mentioning coinjoin
19:24:29wumpus:and of course being closed source limits the applicability to their own scamcoin
19:26:30gmaxwell:yea, there has apparently been a bunch of weird controversy around that coin.
20:11:12Vitalik__:Vitalik__ is now known as Vitalik
20:11:49Vitalik:Vitalik is now known as Vitalik_
20:12:55sl01:gmaxwell: cryptonote stuff doesnt fall under your topic?
22:10:05wallet421:wallet421 is now known as wallet42