00:21:21rdponticelli:rdponticelli has left #bitcoin-wizards
00:56:49zz_lnovy:zz_lnovy is now known as lnovy
01:38:01ryan-c:https://blockchain.info/address/1EHNa6Q4Jz2uvNExL497mE43ikXhwF6kZm < private key is 1
01:48:10Greed`:Greed` is now known as Greed
02:10:54gmaxwell:ryan-c: my logs say its been mentioned a couple times in #bitcoin-dev
02:11:29ryan-c:gmaxwell: not surprised, i should grep my logs
02:11:53ryan-c:(2^256-1)%N also has some action on it
02:26:49OP_NULL:ryan-c: there's more interesting things to sight see in the blockchain if that's your thing. can you come up with a reason for a few tens of outputs spent to a script "OP_IFDUP OP_IF OP_2SWAP OP_VERIFY OP_2OVER OP_DEPTH"?
02:27:16ryan-c:wtf is OP_DEPTH?
02:27:35gmaxwell:OP_NULL: I know the reason for that, if you were asking instead of posing a puzzle.
02:27:48OP_NULL:gmaxwell: it's a puzzle, I know the answer.
02:28:38OP_NULL:ryan-c: pushes the number of items in the stack, to the stack.
02:33:04ryan-c:OP_NULL: well, OP_IF without OP_ENDIF is invalid, most of the opcodes are in the ascii text range though....
02:33:29tacotime:ryan-c: you're on the right track.
02:33:47kefkius:Don't tell me! I'm trying to work through it
02:35:47ryan-c:okay, well i can read it
02:36:34ryan-c:OP_NULL: I spend a disturbing amount of time looking at stuff that's hex encoded.
02:36:40manaka:do zero knowledge makes sense in order to prove the identities of peers in a dht?
02:37:07tacotime:ryan-c: wanna know why it's there?
02:37:16OP_NULL:ryan-c: as you no doubt found out, it decodes to a literal ascii "script". it came from a typo in P2Pool.
02:37:22tacotime:yeah. heh.
02:37:34ryan-c:this is what testnet is for
02:37:34kefkius:* kefkius pretends he was about to say that
02:38:25ryan-c:kefkius: If it makes you feel better, I play in a lot of CTFs
02:38:53ryan-c:by this time i can often tell what sort of data something is just by looking at the hex or base64 encoded version
02:39:21tacotime:it's almost as fun as the time mtgox sent 2609 bitcoins to OP_DUP OP_HASH160 0 OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG
02:39:26OP_NULL:there's more fun if you go looking. for example, there's 2700 BTC with an output script of OP_DUP OP_HASH160 0 OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG. one can only assume one of Mt Gox's functions returned false.
02:39:43tacotime:jinx :)
02:39:53kefkius:OK I at least know what that p2pkh does
02:39:57ryan-c:I found one a little earlier that just wanted 3 3 on the stack
02:42:47ryan-c:* ryan-c is dumping data from the block chain and looking at weird things if it somehow wasn't obvious
02:47:21davidlatapie:davidlatapie has left #bitcoin-wizards
02:52:53Dizzle_:Dizzle_ is now known as Dizzle
05:38:41bryanvu_:bryanvu_ is now known as bryanvu
06:19:55phantomcircuit:ryan-c, with pool stuff there is often no reason to use testnet
06:20:26phantomcircuit:if you happen to find a valid network block with your beta quality pool software
06:20:31phantomcircuit:maybe you get lucky and it's valid
06:20:41phantomcircuit:or you're using testnet and horray testnet coins
06:21:17phantomcircuit:i actually found valid blocks with alpha quality software unexpectedly
06:21:22phantomcircuit:(two of them!)
09:05:17hitchcock.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
09:05:17hitchcock.freenode.net:Users on #bitcoin-wizards: andy-logbot jaekwon_ OX3 Guyver2 waxwing bosma bryanvu todays_tomorrow Baz___ copumpkin Guest36969 TheSeven tdlfbx aburan28 hastagg_ irclouis PRab Keefe fanquake moa lnovy DougieBot5000 eristisk Greed tacotime Dr-G2 c0rw1n epscy Starduster wallet42 bitjedi Adlai spiftheninja prepost Burrito Luke-Jr coutts justanotheruser samson_ Fistful_of_Coins devrandom BananaLotus koshii_ CodeShark DoctorBTC jaromil HaltingState Meeh grandmaster2 K1773R
09:05:17hitchcock.freenode.net:Users on #bitcoin-wizards: maaku Grishnakh iddo ebfull null_radix Emcy PaulCapestany Cory eric heath hollandais zwischenzug2 SDCDev warptangent altoz gmaxwell comboy Flyer33 [\\\] Aquent nuke1989 bobke_ sneak napedia huseby GnarSith mortale stonecoldpat Anduck kefkius johndoe01_ helo phedny iambernie MRL-Relay fluffypony berndj phantomcircuit spinza kyletorpey zenojis mmozeiko pi07r btcdrak midnightmagic sl01 nsh wizkid057 Muis Alanius Guest1930 arowser LarsLarsen
09:05:17hitchcock.freenode.net:Users on #bitcoin-wizards: go1111111 sipa poggy NikolaiToryzin cfields coryfields Sangheili mappum jbenet kjj21__000 Taek EasyAt Hunger- optimator_ kumavis andytoshi dgenr8 BrainOverfl0w fds4345 gazab Iriez bbrittain BigBitz Apocalyptic emsid Starsoccer throughnothing warren gavinandresen dansmith_btc Nightwolf AdrianG Logicwax mr_burdell Eliel zibbo_ tromp SomeoneWeird kgk firepacket Dyaheon myeagleflies wumpus pigeons nanotube asoltys weex_ kanzure gribble Krellan
09:05:17hitchcock.freenode.net:Users on #bitcoin-wizards: kinlo a5m0 superobserver artifexd fenn [d__d] LaptopZZ gnusha HM_ espes__ CryptOprah Graet @ChanServ lechuga_ abc56889 harrow so ahmed_ Gnosis pajarillo roasbeef ryan-c [Tristan] TD-Linux catcow danneu btc_ crescendo amiller yoleaux jrayhawk_ michagogo @gwillen BlueMatt smooth petertodd hguux _2539 livegnik burcin
11:00:39c0rw1n:c0rw1n is now known as c0rw|away
11:42:14kefkius_:kefkius_ is now known as kefkius
17:31:02OP_NULL:"In Node the forging process is based on a Proof of Activity [..] PoA is a total different concept, and is not a fork of either PoW or PoS."
17:31:11OP_NULL:"Each node’s active time will be recorded and calculated in seconds, since its last connection. This way a TimeHeight will be determined and used in the algorithm."
17:32:25penny:penny is now known as Guest53067
17:35:36nsh:* nsh expresses total dubious response
17:39:26OP_NULL:I had a look at the client to see if that was easier to parse than their white paper, but it’s 13,000 lines of ridiculously obfuscated JavaScript. fairly obvious why.
17:41:11sipa:their whitepaper is 13000 lines of obfuscated javascript? :o
17:42:49OP_NULL:there's a whitepaper with no real detail and an obfsucated JS client. neither are very readable.
17:43:44nsh:i'm 4/19 pages into the paper and it's tough going
18:01:34Baz___:which whitepaper
18:04:10tacotime:i don't think that PoA paper has anything to do with Node
18:04:33OP_NULL:nsh: we are talking about different things.
18:04:47tacotime:the tl;dr of PoA (which is more or less a fork of PoS) is figure 2 of iddo's paper
18:05:25tacotime:there's a second paper i think that details a pure PoS form of it
18:05:28OP_NULL:nsh: I was ridiculing an altcoin with dubious security claims. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zDlGZn7sICIA8bUPhe6jPPzGOxA4YgTgi6J4XilFpgs/edit
18:05:43tacotime:and ethereum was saying "we'll use PoA maybe along with PoW"
18:05:49tacotime:but ethereum says a lot of things
18:07:12OP_NULL:tacotime: what are they doing this week?
18:07:34tacotime:* tacotime shrugs
18:07:42tacotime:they've been quieter since they raised their money.
18:08:16tacotime:vitalik still pushes daily commits though
18:09:22tacotime:and gav is still working on the c++ version https://github.com/ethereum/cpp-ethereum/commits/develop
18:10:56nsh:ah, my bad
18:12:58OP_NULL:tacotime: writing their client in mulitple languages seems an odd choice.
18:13:15tacotime:OP_NULL: I always thought so too, especially when there's so much to be done
18:13:40tacotime:writing a c++ impl in this time and age seems weird in general
18:14:47tacotime:it looks like there's some kind of uncle weighting function too for GHOST
18:14:54tacotime:but the go client otherwise doesn't use it?
18:16:33tacotime:there too.
18:16:53tacotime:it looks like the difficulty of the uncle blocks is just added.
18:17:42OP_NULL:must more than multiply the workload to have three clients in development
18:18:10tacotime:well if you check the code you see there's a lot of consensus failure in the comments
18:19:47jaromil:funny reading your evaluations guys. I don't feel alone so much. sometimes I fear to be too critical. but rly. ethereum?
18:19:56tacotime:some of it is rather perplexing too, e.g. bool State::amIJustParanoid(BlockChain const& _bc)
18:20:43jaromil:while i'm planning some development myself i get dragged to it by enthusiastic non-technical colleagues and... I'm embarassed.
18:21:56tacotime:in terms of readability their Go code > Python code > C++ code. libethereum/State.cpp in C++ has a ton of GHOST related code, but i'm not totally sure what it's doing. i'm curious to see how the first real implementation of GHOST works out, though.
18:22:13jaromil:yea. still hoping i'm wrong as it would be could to have many of the marketed things. but rly?
18:22:25jaromil:lost in conditionals
18:22:44jaromil:definitely freudian lapsus
18:23:28OP_NULL:I'll be impressed if they mangage to get all of the behaviour the same between go/python/cpp
18:38:47grandmaster2:grandmaster2 has left #bitcoin-wizards
19:44:25Taek:justanotheruser: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=851119.0, it seems like you can actually increase decentralization by having mining fees that pays out slowly over time
19:44:59tacotime:i proposed that a long ass time around, i think 18 mo?
19:45:13tacotime:and i think other people probably did before me. i never have good, new ideas, heh.
19:45:55tacotime:though for me it was more a way to deal with fees incentivization and prevent hoarding. idk if it'd actually work that way.
19:46:14Taek:I know the idea has been around for a while, but I don't think it was explored as much in depth
19:46:19tacotime:but basically you mine blocks and don't know what reward you're going to get, and then in the future you get some reward over time spread out.
19:46:29tacotime:from fees.
19:47:47Taek:at least, the part about a mining pool increasing decentralization is something I don't remember reading. It's entirely possible that that's also been discussed before though
19:47:55Taek:*mining fee pool
19:48:36tacotime:i don't recall bringing it up.
19:49:06tacotime:and i still don't understand microsoft's proposed solution to the red balloons problem, though it does have a lot of pretty math. :)
19:50:08Taek:I was originally intending to propose a solutoin to the red balloons thing in this post
19:50:28Taek:but I think it needs more polishing
19:50:52Taek:the general idea is that you combine the mining fee pool with a transaction fee decay
19:52:18Taek:so if you have a transaction that has a fee worth 20 coins if submitted at block X, but 5 coins at block X+1 and 5/4 coins at block X+2, then the miner's largest expected gain is when the transaction makes it into block X, regardless of whether the miner is the one who finds X or not
19:53:11Taek:because the miner's expected return for mining block X+1 is 5 coins if the transaction appeared in block X, but only 2.5 coins if the transaction first appears in block X+1
19:55:04phantomcircuit:Taek, it's actually a very powerful effect which exists to a limited extent today
19:55:12phantomcircuit:(the 100 block coinbase maturity rule)
19:57:36justanotheruser:phantomcircuit: I don't see how maturity is relevant
19:58:22phantomcircuit:justanotheruser, maturity effectively delays the block reward
19:58:34phantomcircuit:giving an incentive to not break things
19:58:55phantomcircuit:the longer the delay the higher the incentive to keep mining more blocks without doing weird things
20:01:16gmaxwell:Taek: you can't force miners to pay fees forward because miners can just demand people submitting transactions to them do so out of band. (not via 'fees')
20:02:00Taek:"pay fees forward" what do you mean by that?
20:02:12phantomcircuit:gmaxwell, oh right
20:02:13justanotheruser:phantomcircuit: at most you would reorg to the point where you won your last block
20:02:29justanotheruser:otherwise you would be performing this attack at the point you won your last block
20:02:37phantomcircuit:it doesn't work for transaction fees i guess
20:02:44phantomcircuit:but it does work well for the block reward
20:03:13phantomcircuit:gmaxwell, actually how would you pay transaction fees to "whatever miner found block at height x"
20:09:55justanotheruser:phantomcircuit: pay to script redeemable by proof of inclusion on a sidechain maybe?
20:11:45justanotheruser:paying on a sidechannel seems difficult in general to me since you would have to pay ~200% tx fees in order to give the miner his other 99% (assuming the reward is distributed between 100 blocks).
20:28:12penny:penny is now known as Guest86169
20:53:37tdlfbx:So I've had this idea floating in the back of my head for a while that dovetails nicely with the sidechains idea and/or atomic cross-chain transactions:
20:54:25tdlfbx:A trade-secured blockchain. Rather than using PoW, use the amount of external resources traded into the blockchain as a measure of "spent resources" in deciding which fork is correct.
20:55:28tdlfbx:Trades would have to commit to a single fork, and an attacker would have to spend more than the aggregate amount of trades to attack it.
20:55:59tdlfbx:Anyone know of a similar idea? Anyone pursuing something along these lines?
20:56:14justanotheruser:tdlfbx: what is the mechanism for ensuring the trades commit to a single fork?
20:57:25tdlfbx:transactions could contain the merkle root of the fork you're trading into, for instance.
20:58:08justanotheruser:so the blockchain is a merkle tree now?
20:59:10tdlfbx:uh. what? No, just a reference to the last block.
21:00:13tdlfbx:Because trades are two-sided, the blockchain you're trading *out* of also would contain the hash from the chain you're trading into. So you couldn't trade into two forks (it would be a double spend).
21:00:20justanotheruser:ok, so I just have to reference the last block to put my tx in a new fork
21:00:44tdlfbx:Yes, you have to choose a fork by referencing the last block.
21:00:58tdlfbx:A la the SPV proofs in sidechains.
21:02:01justanotheruser:ok, and the main blockchain is the blockchain with the highest amount transferred sum?
21:02:44tdlfbx:As valued in other currencies.
21:03:03justanotheruser:tdlfbx: so it's vulnerable to NaS
21:03:09tdlfbx:What's NaS?
21:03:15justanotheruser:nothing at stake
21:04:02justanotheruser:I can buy a bunch of old private keys that once could be used to spend tokens, but now cannot and rewrite history from the point these assets could spend tokens.
21:05:35tdlfbx:It's possible there's a NaS problem. One possible way around that is to make the trade irreversible. If you chose the wrong fork, you lose your coins.
21:08:17justanotheruser:how do I know you chose the wrong fork?
21:08:24justanotheruser:what is the "wrong" fork?
21:08:37tdlfbx:The one that doesn't get confirmed after some time.
21:08:56tdlfbx:I don't particularly like this idea. But it's a way to make there be something "at stake".
21:09:21justanotheruser:tdlfbx: https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/pos.pdf
21:09:38tdlfbx:Well your trade is into a particular fork. Your coins won't exist on other forks.
21:10:03tdlfbx:I've read it.
21:10:59tdlfbx:The point is that bitcoin makes miners expend external resources. PoS fails because the resources are internal (among other reasons...).
21:11:32tdlfbx:I'm just proposing to make that spent external resource be the external assets traded into the chain.
21:34:32andytoshi:tdlfbx: note that the blocks are supposed to commit to transactions ... so you have bidirectional commitments and there might be some fatal flaw in the details of that
21:35:13andytoshi:tdlfbx: other things to consider are "why are people incentivized to share the same history?" can you rate-throttle the number of histories to give everyone a chance to catch up? what happens in case of reorgs?
21:35:55andytoshi:these aren't fatal problems, but i recommend you try to write this up in some detail to see if it's workable
21:36:02tdlfbx:@andytoshi thanks, lots to think about. It's just an idea at this point.
21:36:32tdlfbx:I've been disappointed that the atomic-cross-chain trading seems to be stalled. (which would be required for this)
21:36:41tdlfbx:Despite the sidechains paper talking about it.
21:38:07andytoshi:tdlfbx: fwiw we don't know that it's impossible to do cross-chain swaps without needing bip62
21:38:26andytoshi:sorry, triple-negative ... i mean "it is an interesting problem to try and do swaps in a malleability-proof way"
21:38:29tdlfbx:There's a triple negative in that s...
21:40:25andytoshi:the other problems of e.g. peer discovery and UI are things that are useful beyond cross-chain swaps, so those would also be great to investigate
21:41:05andytoshi:right now i am slowly defrosting my rust code to start work on wizards-wallet again, plus i have two research projects to do (one wizardly, one for school), so i have no time :(
21:42:09tdlfbx:Yes there are 1000 reasons I want to do cross-chain swaps, and i'm disappointed that they don't seem to be forthcoming.
22:39:50kefkius_:kefkius_ is now known as kefkius
23:43:32samson2:samson2 is now known as samson_