| 00:45:18 | justanotheruser: | Has anyone read about PoSV? http://www.reddcoin.com/papers/PoSV_FAQ.pdf |
| 00:46:06 | justanotheruser: | It seems like it incentivizes spamming the blockchain and doesn't actually solve any problems. Does anyone have an opposite opinion? |
| 00:53:17 | a5m0_: | a5m0_ is now known as a5m0 |
| 00:57:10 | zack-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. |
| 00:59:13 | justanotheruser: | zack-bitcoin: that was my concern |
| 01:58:59 | vfor: | hi |
| 02:34:43 | coyo: | hai vfor |
| 02:41:29 | coyo: | justanotheruser: that's actually a good idea. however.. what stops people from running a massive number of clients and simply sending money to themselves? |
| 02:44:39 | andytoshi: | justanotheruser: that doc is a series of serious and unoriginal misunderstandings of bitcoin, unless the author is idling here it's not worth discussing |
| 02:45:06 | coyo: | andytoshi: hai! ^_^ |
| 02:45:43 | andytoshi: | 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 |
| 02:45:54 | andytoshi: | so we try to keep it low-volume and high-signal |
| 02:46:03 | coyo: | oh. okay, i'll chat in pm, then. |
| 03:50:30 | Krellan: | Colored coins (aka assets that are accounted for separately and can be exchanged for regular uncolored coins): |
| 03:50:48 | Krellan: | What's the current thought on this, is it better to do it as an overlay of Bitcoin (Counterparty) or as an altcoin? |
| 03:51:03 | Krellan: | Both have advantages/disadvantages. |
| 04:02:16 | shesek: | 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 |
| 04:05:37 | gmaxwell: | 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...) |
| 04:06:51 | gmaxwell: | 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. |
| 04:07:42 | gmaxwell: | 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. |
| 04:09:01 | gmaxwell: | (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) |
| 05:49:01 | shesek: | gmaxwell, right. a Bitcoin-like decentralized consensus isn't really that useful for many of the use-cases colored coins are being pushed for |
| 05:50:14 | shesek: | 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 |
| 05:51:29 | shesek: | there were some attempts with padding, but that has its own problems |
| 05:51:34 | gmaxwell: | 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…) |
| 05:53:12 | shesek: | 1m shares isn't that much... and even 100k shares costs almost $3k to issue |
| 05:54:22 | gmaxwell: | I mean 1m shares would increase the utxo set size by 10%— for a single issuance, ouch. |
| 05:54:54 | gmaxwell: | 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. |
| 05:55:17 | shesek: | not necessarily... people buying them at bulk would probably have one output with multiple shares |
| 05:55:18 | gmaxwell: | Maybe someday we'll add opt-in expiration for utxo. |
| 05:55:48 | shesek: | it probably won't be as bad as one share per output |
| 05:55:53 | gmaxwell: | shesek: well some exising examples, like asicminer— made txouts for every share because doing otherwise was "too hard" |
| 05:56:25 | gmaxwell: | it's easy to ignore the cost of an inefficient design when other people are carring 99.999% of the total cost. :) |
| 05:56:58 | shesek: | well... that's all their fault though, its not a disadvantage for doing that in general |
| 05:57:48 | shesek: | and btw, if each share is at the dust limit of 5430 satoshis, they're worth almost 3 cents each at current prices |
| 05:58:00 | gmaxwell: | the dust limit is now much lower. |
| 05:58:11 | gmaxwell: | (for better or worse) |
| 05:58:14 | shesek: | oh, really? how much is it now? |
| 05:58:39 | gmaxwell: | around 540 I think. it's pegged to the relay fee. |
| 05:58:56 | shesek: | (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) |
| 05:59:14 | gmaxwell: | in any case, yea thats the goal— to make sure there is an incentive to clean it up. |
| 05:59:29 | shesek: | when did that happen? |
| 05:59:33 | gmaxwell: | also to create a differential advantage for spendable utxo compared to unspendable ones. |
| 05:59:48 | gmaxwell: | shesek: 0.9 lowered the relay fee. |
| 06:00:15 | gmaxwell: | (I think its actually too low now for the moment, but not worth worrying about too much) |
| 06:00:31 | shesek: | was the dust spam amount always pegged to the relay fee? |
| 06:01:28 | gmaxwell: | Yes. |
| 06:01:44 | gmaxwell: | We didn't want there to be multiple economically sensitive parameters. |
| 06:02:14 | shesek: | yeah, make sense. |
| 06:02:15 | gmaxwell: | and presumably if lower fees will suffice for relaying then that implies lower coin values will suffice for getting mined. |
| 06:04:09 | shesek: | petertodd, are you around? |
| 06:08:44 | justanotheruser: | coyo: That is my concern. It seems like proof of spamming the blockchain with tx back to themselves |
| 06:12:37 | qwertyoruiop: | qwertyoruiop is now known as Guest14349 |
| 06:18:02 | michagogo: | shesek: it was 5460, not 5430 |
| 06:18:17 | shesek: | oh, right |
| 06:18:18 | michagogo: | (I wonder how long that wrong number will stick around) |
| 06:18:25 | michagogo: | And yeah, I think it's 546 now |
| 06:19:17 | michagogo: | And yeah, IIRC the definition is that it would cost more to spend than it's worth or something |
| 06:19:24 | michagogo: | Or maybe some large fraction? |
| 06:21:12 | shesek: | michagogo, are you going to the hackathon? |
| 06:21:32 | michagogo: | shesek: I don't think I know what you're referring to |
| 06:22:22 | shesek: | Mastercoin is having an hackathon in Tel Aviv |
| 06:22:48 | shesek: | but I just realized its Shabbat today, so you probably can't come anyway |
| 06:25:30 | shesek: | michagogo, btw, what happened to the "|cloud" in your nickname? you stopped using it? |
| 06:25:40 | shesek: | I mean, stopped using the cloud service you were using |
| 06:25:49 | michagogo: | Nah |
| 06:26:07 | michagogo: | I realized there's no point leaving it there, since I'm not using anything else |
| 06:26:37 | shesek: | ah... yeah, makes sense |
| 06:26:49 | michagogo: | (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) |
| 06:27:04 | michagogo: | It messed up the #bitcoin-dev logs, for example |
| 06:29:00 | michagogo: | Hm, looks like there's going to be a big conference in Tel Aviv in July |
| 06:29:55 | shesek: | yes, an international one this time |
| 06:30:12 | shesek: | I understood from Meni that they got some interesting people to present there |
| 06:30:21 | michagogo: | Looks like slush is coming |
| 06:30:51 | michagogo: | Heh, in unvowelled Hebrew, it looks like Mark |
| 07:16:59 | sipa: | 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 |
| 07:30:06 | justanotheruser: | justanotheruser is now known as coles |
| 07:30:14 | coles: | coles is now known as justanotheruser |
| 08:58:59 | jaromil_: | jaromil_ is now known as jaromil |
| 12:51:23 | avantgeek: | avantgeek has left #bitcoin-wizards |
| 15:01:50 | cr3pe: | cr3pe has left #bitcoin-wizards |
| 15:07:02 | fanquake: | fanquake has left #bitcoin-wizards |
| 15:12:28 | c0rw1n_: | c0rw1n_ is now known as c0rw|bbq |
| 15:29:31 | enodios: | enodios has left #bitcoin-wizards |
| 16:47:25 | john3213: | john3213 has left #bitcoin-wizards |
| 17:16:18 | jps_: | jps_ is now known as jps |
| 18:41:36 | justanotheruser: | justanotheruser is now known as aaaa |
| 18:41:53 | aaaa: | aaaa is now known as justanotheruser |
| 18:44:55 | Guest1402: | Guest1402 is now known as maaku |
| 18:58:25 | gmaxwell: | 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. |
| 18:58:29 | gmaxwell: | at https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/User:Gmaxwell/state_of_coinjoin |
| 18:58:52 | gmaxwell: | If you're aware of Bitcoin things in the coinjoin space that I should be considering please add to that page. |
| 19:00:49 | pigeons: | is this the ringsig stuff? https://github.com/maaku/coinjoin |
| 19:02:19 | gmaxwell: | er bling sig not ringsig. |
| 19:02:25 | gmaxwell: | yes. thats what I was thinking of however. |
| 19:15:32 | zooko: | gmaxwell: I'm glad to hear you're going to write such an article! |
| 19:17:09 | helo: | do you think there is likely to be widespread utilization of coinjoin across multiple wallets? |
| 19:18:02 | helo: | multiple wallet implementation, that is |
| 19:18:03 | andytoshi: | yes, but not until we've gotten some working implementation and some working UI figured out |
| 19:18:54 | gmaxwell: | 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. |
| 19:19:43 | gmaxwell: | I think wumpus was looking into what darkcoin was doing. Apparently its closed source?! |
| 19:20:00 | helo: | most people aren't willing to put much effort into protecting their privacy; i guess they're lucky some developers are. |
| 19:20:25 | andytoshi: | i haven't taken the time to look at darkwallet, i'd be very surprised if they're closed source |
| 19:20:37 | gmaxwell: | 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. :) |
| 19:21:08 | gmaxwell: | andytoshi: not darkwallet but darkcoin |
| 19:22:12 | wumpus: | 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) |
| 19:22:18 | wumpus: | gmaxwell: that's pretty much all of the difference |
| 19:22:37 | wumpus: | gmaxwell: of course, without giving you any credit or even mentioning coinjoin |
| 19:24:29 | wumpus: | and of course being closed source limits the applicability to their own scamcoin |
| 19:26:30 | gmaxwell: | yea, there has apparently been a bunch of weird controversy around that coin. |
| 20:11:12 | Vitalik__: | Vitalik__ is now known as Vitalik |
| 20:11:49 | Vitalik: | Vitalik is now known as Vitalik_ |
| 20:12:55 | sl01: | gmaxwell: cryptonote stuff doesnt fall under your topic? |
| 22:10:05 | wallet421: | wallet421 is now known as wallet42 |