00:35:27amiller:* amiller digs in to the ripple whitepaper.....
01:12:03Dr-G3:Dr-G3 is now known as Dr-G
02:07:10alferzz:alferzz is now known as alferz
04:37:33gmaxwell:My response to jeff here may be of interest, http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2f6iiq/bitcoin_is_really_fragile_bitcoin_core_developer/ck6es4t (copyedits accepted)
04:39:05Luke-Jr:gmaxwell: I don't get " all of it faulty,"
04:39:47gmaxwell:All the software is broken.
04:40:05gmaxwell:Every implementation has consensus significant bugs.
04:40:35gmaxwell:(while I cannot name them all— otherwise I'd be fixing them instead of writing that— I know that they are there)
04:43:17justanot1eruser:gmaxwell: doesn't seem to contradict him, rather explains how the software by itself can achieve consensus without humans messing with it even though humans may decide to mess with it and form a new network that accepts hardforked rules.
04:45:31gmaxwell:As I said at the start, I don't disagree with Jeff. I think I probably do disagree with what some people who read what Jeff said might walk away with.
04:46:02gmaxwell:I think you can read jeffs message and go "yea, it's not fragile, people will just magically fix it". ... and miss the huge risk and tension inherent in that.
04:46:51gmaxwell:We-the-people can only fix it because it is weak and not living up to its security goals, ... of course, this weakness is partially because fixes very much are required.
04:51:06sipa:ultimately, we-the-people are thise deciding to run verification nodes, and thus are obviously in control - collectively - to fix whatever problems exist in the software
04:51:51super3:i mean the human element is what gives bitcoin value, and will maintain it
04:51:51sipa:however, that doesn't mean that the goal shouldn't be to limit the involvement of we-the-people to the absolute minimum possible
04:52:23super3:but the underling problems is that only covers fixes
04:52:31super3:not improvements
04:53:37super3:case 1: this is a major flaw (march 2013) and your bitcoins will lose all value if its not solved
04:54:03super3:average user: oh no, what can i do to help? this must be fixed
04:55:06super3:case 2: this improves security and improves efficiency by 20%
04:55:15super3:average user: and i care why?
04:56:17super3:so the question is how you can get the average user to care about underling improvements, not just fixes.
04:56:39gmaxwell:sipa: right, the less we-the-people are needed the harder it becomes to manipulate we-the-people into violating the system's promises.
04:58:48sipa:right; we-the-people (well, satoshi...) determined what properties we wanted in a system, exactly so that we-the-people or trust in them would bot be required for the system's correctness
05:40:04Dr-G2:Dr-G2 is now known as Dr-G
08:05:15cameron.freenode.net:topic is: This channel is not about short-term Bitcoin development | http://bitcoin.ninja/ | This channel is logged. | For logs and more information, visit http://bitcoin.ninja
08:05:15cameron.freenode.net:Users on #bitcoin-wizards: andy-logbot Hunger- _ingsoc cbeams damethos lclc adam3us RoboTeddy mappum CoinMuncher kmels__ todaystomorrow Keefe go1111111 copumpkin justanot1eruser TheSeven jchp tromp shesek alferz skinnkavaj Dr-G mortale toffoo p15 ebfull SDCDev grubles nuke1989 pi07r nsh bangsnap wiretapp1d forrestv moa Luke-Jr jaromil jgarzik rfreeman_w OneFixt harrow tacotime Krellan K1773R nsh- phantomcircuit Guest53956 CryptOprah pigeons EasyAt iddo cfields nickler_
08:05:15cameron.freenode.net:Users on #bitcoin-wizards: gwollon [\\\] Starduster_ bsm117532 grandmaster2 azariah4 samson_ bobke drawingthesun starsoccer midnightmagic mr_burdell Graet HM @ChanServ Apocalyptic lianj wumpus nkuttler Ken` BrainOverfl0w throughnothing sipa chocah warren artifexd pajarillo comboy roasbeef gribble Guest10516 phedny so kinlo wizkid057 UukGoblin petertodd kanzure ryan-c [d__d] jcorgan optimator_ burcin Dyaheon- postpre LaptopZZ_ danneu2 DoctorBTC dansmith_btc
08:05:15cameron.freenode.net:Users on #bitcoin-wizards: Fistful_of_Coins amiller catcow spinza tjopper BigBitz a5m0 Meeh gmaxwell TD-Linux poggy_ quackgyver jbenet DougieBot5000 grishnakh hollandais Guest78271 davidlatapie rs0 nanotube bbrittain SomeoneWeird lechuga__ espes__ abc56889 Iriez weex dgenr8 sl01 digitalmagus7 BlueMatt berndj-blackout asoltys [Derek] Transisto koshii_ Guest50253 mmozeiko tromp_ waxwing zibbo epscy crescendo andytoshi helo Eliel michagogo zling_____ xenogis Anduck
08:05:15cameron.freenode.net:Users on #bitcoin-wizards: Sangheili LarsLarsen1 Muis HaltingState2 polyclef Adohgg super3 atgreen melvster maaku Logicwax CodeShark
13:05:42Starduster_:Starduster_ is now known as Starduster
15:13:07irc.freenode.net:Disconnected from irc.freenode.net (ERROR :Closing Link: (Ping timeout: 245 seconds))
15:14:22barjavel.freenode.net:topic is: This channel is not about short-term Bitcoin development | http://bitcoin.ninja/ | This channel is logged. | For logs and more information, visit http://bitcoin.ninja
15:14:22barjavel.freenode.net:Users on #bitcoin-wizards: andy-logbot justanotheruser altoz Quanttek cbeams_ adam3us gavinandresen eslbaer fierbuq _ingsoc Aquent_ llllllllll Ursium rdponticelli torsthaldo Guyver2 postpre jtimon mortale vdo Graftec mkarrer Alanius todays_tomorrow Hunger- damethos lclc mappum CoinMuncher Keefe go1111111 copumpkin TheSeven jchp tromp alferz skinnkavaj Dr-G ebfull SDCDev grubles nuke1989 pi07r nsh bangsnap wiretapp1d forrestv Luke-Jr jaromil jgarzik rfreeman_w OneFixt
15:14:22barjavel.freenode.net:Users on #bitcoin-wizards: harrow tacotime Krellan K1773R nsh- phantomcircuit Guest53956 CryptOprah pigeons EasyAt iddo cfields nickler_ gwollon [\\\] Starduster grandmaster2 azariah4 samson_ bobke drawingthesun starsoccer midnightmagic mr_burdell Graet HM CodeShark Logicwax maaku melvster atgreen super3 Adohgg polyclef HaltingState2 Muis LarsLarsen1 Sangheili Anduck xenogis zling_____ michagogo Eliel helo andytoshi crescendo epscy zibbo waxwing tromp_ mmozeiko
15:14:22barjavel.freenode.net:Users on #bitcoin-wizards: Guest50253 koshii_ Transisto [Derek] asoltys berndj-blackout BlueMatt digitalmagus7 sl01 dgenr8 weex Iriez abc56889 espes__ lechuga__ SomeoneWeird bbrittain nanotube rs0 davidlatapie Guest78271 hollandais grishnakh DougieBot5000 jbenet quackgyver poggy_ TD-Linux gmaxwell Meeh a5m0 BigBitz tjopper spinza catcow amiller Fistful_of_Coins dansmith_btc DoctorBTC danneu2 LaptopZZ_ Dyaheon- burcin optimator_ jcorgan [d__d] ryan-c kanzure petertodd
15:14:22barjavel.freenode.net:Users on #bitcoin-wizards: UukGoblin wizkid057 kinlo so phedny Guest10516 gribble roasbeef comboy pajarillo artifexd warren sipa throughnothing BrainOverfl0w @ChanServ Apocalyptic lianj wumpus nkuttler
15:14:22barjavel.freenode.net:[freenode-info] channel flooding and no channel staff around to help? Please check with freenode support: http://freenode.net/faq.shtml#gettinghelp
18:18:33gmaxwell:petertodd: I'm confused here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=766893.0
18:19:01gmaxwell:where did you write a proof of concept patch? I know I wrote one.
18:41:38petertodd:gmaxwell: https://github.com/viacoin/viacoin/issues/5
18:42:05petertodd:gmaxwell: "I wrote up an implementation of it awhile back: https://github.com/petertodd/bitcoin/tree/op-checknlocktime I don't think I actually tested it - it was just a code exercise - but it should be pretty close to what we actually need modulo testing."
18:42:31gmaxwell:I totally don't remember that. weird.
18:43:11petertodd:I think I mentioned it on -dev once in passing; I made it on my lunch break.
18:43:43petertodd:My main motivation to add it to viacoin is just to test the whole soft-fork process out in all aspects.
18:44:43gmaxwell:yea, you'd mentioned that— I just didn't recall seeing the patch before.
18:44:54petertodd:I might not have actually posted it
18:45:00petertodd:it's pretty trivial anyway
18:46:38gmaxwell:ah this is different from my approach.
18:47:34gmaxwell:What I'd done was allowed the script to introspect the transaction's locktime to test it. What your implementation is is just a distinctive locktime inside the script.
18:48:16petertodd:One use-case for CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY that I discovered recently was for PayPub: without it the publisher of the data can just hold onto the funds, not spending them, for an indefinite amount of time and the people paying for it don't get the data they want. You'd solve that with IF HASH EQUALVERIFY CHECKSIG ELSE CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY DROP ENDIF
18:48:41petertodd:yeah, I didn't want it to be possible to make a script unspendable after a date, only spendable after
18:50:19gmaxwell:Mine was still a verify so it was still one sided in that way. Now I don't remember what advantage I was gaining from testing the one on the transaction beyond just avoding having to inspect the scriptpubkey to know if a transaction was locktime valid or not. I'm pretty sure there was a reason.
18:50:51petertodd:what exactly were the semantics of your version?
18:54:07gmaxwell:https://people.xiph.org/~greg/OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY.patch what it didn't handle was the dual meaning of locktime, which was the main design problem with it IIRC.
18:56:52petertodd:ah, I remember that, I think we decided it was a strict improvement, as it removed the need to pass time or block height to EvalScript (modulo the dual meaning)
18:58:29petertodd:handling the dual meaning shouldn't be a big deal: if < LOCKTIME_THRESHOLD then fail if tx.nLockTime > LOCKTIME_THRESHOLD
19:08:35jtimon:cool, we have another payment processor?
19:09:21jtimon:we should contact them to get listed in the foundation's site
19:13:42maaku:jtimon: wrong channel :)
19:14:05jtimon:upps, sorry
20:34:16Luke-Jr:(context: I think jtimon was talking about Freicoin Foundation :P)
20:39:13jtimon:yep, sorry again, that was #freicoin
22:17:12gwollon:gwollon is now known as gwillen