| 00:46:32 | Guest40205: | Guest40205 is now known as SomeoneWeird |
| 01:44:13 | bob131313: | bob131313 has left #bitcoin-wizards |
| 02:31:38 | samson_: | samson_ is now known as 18VABL5ZT |
| 03:27:39 | moribund112: | moribund112 is now known as moribund112[away |
| 04:08:19 | 18VABL5ZT: | 18VABL5ZT is now known as samson_ |
| 04:23:53 | luke-jr_: | luke-jr_ is now known as Luke-Jr |
| 08:51:11 | lclc_bnc: | lclc_bnc is now known as lclc |
| 09:05:13 | asimov.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 |
| 09:05:13 | asimov.freenode.net: | Users on #bitcoin-wizards: andy-logbot Emcy Guyver2 woah cbeams LarsLarsen Baz___ todaystomorrow Aquent TheSeven Starduster Luke-Jr PaulCapestany gazab ryanxcharles nubbins` BlueMatt maaku digitalmagus a5m0 roconnor xmk3 Pan0ram1x Dr-G2 Guest39111 epscy PRab go1111111 SubCreative LaptopZZ sipa waxwing rasengan bosma sneak diametric kgk HaltingState samson_ copumpkin DougieBot5000 c0rw1n rusty Quanttek cajg eristisk po1son3r123 luny`` devrandom SomeoneWeird DoctorBTC |
| 09:05:13 | asimov.freenode.net: | Users on #bitcoin-wizards: nuke1989 rfreeman_w coiner fanquake mortale Grishnakh Hunger- AdrianG jgarzik iddo dansmith_btc Cory jaekwon_ yoleaux ebfull xabbix heath gwillen Greed adlai JohanTitor mkarrer__ livegnik prepost BananaLotus Graftec d4de Myagui Flyer33 SDCDev @ChanServ bitname btcdrak dansmith_btc2 shesek burcin coutts Qfwfq wizkid057 phantomcircuit arowser spinza Nightwolf paperbot Dyaheon bbrittain iambernie NikolaiToryzin forrestv null_radix nickler bobke_ |
| 09:05:13 | asimov.freenode.net: | Users on #bitcoin-wizards: warptangent mr_burdell Logicwax zibbo Meeh kanzure tromp_ Krellan tromp__ poggy pi07r_ comboy_ mmozeiko lnovy Taek optimator_ [\\\] Apocalyptic throughnothing petertodd crescendo CryptOprah cfields kumavis sl01_ Fistful_of_Coins gmaxwell kinlo ahmed_ K1773R so Anduck Alanius lclc [d__d] gnusha_ espes___ hguux_ btc_ jbenet michagogo BigBitz otoburb wumpus artifexd EasyAt starsoccer HM hollandais fluffypony fenn jaromil helo Keefe Iriez Eliel |
| 09:05:13 | asimov.freenode.net: | Users on #bitcoin-wizards: jrayhawk huseby phedny MRL-Relay midnightmagic nsh Muis coryfields mappum andytoshi BrainOverfl0w fds4345 warren gavinandresen asoltys gribble Graet smooth amiller danneu catcow TD-Linux [Tristan] ryan-c roasbeef harrow abc56889 lechuga_ nanotube pigeons |
| 09:40:56 | luke-jr_: | luke-jr_ is now known as Luke-Jr |
| 17:16:08 | lclc: | lclc is now known as lclc_bnc |
| 18:07:56 | mkarrer__: | mkarrer__ is now known as mkarrer_ |
| 19:03:03 | op_null: | "Andreas Antonopoulos explained it well during the Texas Bitcoin Conference - a 51% attack isn't much of a threat any more since we can always fork the software and make the current ASICs obsolete." |
| 19:03:29 | op_null: | this is a terrible fallacy to have people sprouting. suddenly 300PH/s of mining hardware is made useless, the network is only supported by a few people piddling around with GPUs. how does anybody believe that is a viable behaviour? |
| 19:13:05 | op_null: | I'm not particularly clear on what a "51% attack" is either. |
| 19:50:58 | andytoshi: | op_null: i was there for the first 3 minutes of that talk -- the main point was "i, andreas, am awesome", i wouldn't read anything into his bitcoin comments because they were kinda an aside.. |
| 19:51:57 | andytoshi: | also in general, andreas saying dumb shit is something we are aware of and certainly a corcern re public understanding of bitcoin ... but there's not too much we can do about it |
| 19:59:06 | op_null: | andytoshi: I'm more confused by what a "51% attack" is than anything. |
| 20:02:30 | woah: | andytoshi op_null also, switching crypto to obsolete ASICs is pure centralization |
| 20:04:52 | op_null: | well, more to the point it leaves the network in a state where "all hands on deck" wouldn't be enough to secure it. |
| 20:58:55 | kanzure: | i wonder what the best-case hypothetical fix could be to the problem that goes like "you are screwed if everyone decided (perhaps without full knowledge) to mine on a forked blockchain or to mine and transact on a blockchain that progressively incorporated changes that eventually in aggregate became incompatible" |
| 20:59:39 | kanzure: | it can't be "propose another set of rules and start mining on that blockchain", because the amount of hashing power available on the other chain could be trivially diverted to thwart your proof-of-work-backed-security on your blockchain |
| 21:00:05 | kanzure: | oh wait, no that's not true. worst-case or best-case (i don't know which) is "wait long enough until you have enough resources to divert a significant-enough-fraction of hashrate". |
| 21:01:07 | kanzure: | oops, one clarification to offer: presumably those in-aggregate-incompatible-changes on the main chain are rules that you fundamentally disagree with |
| 21:01:36 | kanzure: | and that would not be unreasonable for others to agree with, that do not particularly favor you in particular (for example) |
| 21:04:35 | kanzure: | "convince everyone that you're right" just does not sound like a reasonable strategy at all |
| 21:11:25 | kanzure: | it is also somewhat related to the problem of informing others about what the set of current bitcoin rules are. you can lie to them and send them wrong software, and their node will reject lots of transactions and blocks and otherwise seem to do bitcoin things, even if not using transactions recognized by merchants the user might know... |
| 21:11:59 | mkarrer_: | mkarrer_ is now known as mkarrer |
| 21:25:29 | rasengan: | rasengan has left #bitcoin-wizards |
| 21:33:37 | gmaxwell: | kanzure: I dunno, I think bitcoin already solves this as much as it can be solved. Your node will automatically ignore those people. Putting you on a seperate network. ... It doesn't guarentee the security of your seperate network, but it seems likely impossible to me to do so. |
| 21:36:01 | gmaxwell: | andytoshi, op_null: There is truth to the claim that we the users of bitcoin have mechenisms beyond the protocol to deal with protocol failures; ... but its a terrible true, because it's a sword that cuts both ways, enabling unbalanced changes by popular whim against the interests and will of some of the users. |
| 21:36:34 | gmaxwell: | The fact that it's not as simple as "no, that won't work" makes it harder to talk about, alas. |
| 21:36:46 | gmaxwell: | s/true/truth/ |
| 21:43:31 | op_null: | gmaxwell: my main problem with comments like that is that they are mentioned in a totally off hand, almost blase way. as if "we'll just hard fork and everything will be peachy" has happened in the past with no big issue. |
| 21:43:55 | Aquent: | Aquent is now known as danvcoin |
| 21:43:58 | gmaxwell: | * gmaxwell rolls eyes |
| 21:44:17 | gmaxwell: | yea okay, thats nuts. For one, if things failed it's not like you can just push a magical fix button and make them fixed. |
| 21:45:49 | op_null: | a common one I see is when people mention SHA256 being weakened (say it's found to have a security of 12 bits, panic panic). the response is of course that we just switch to scrypt mining and everything is fine again. |
| 21:46:15 | danvcoin: | danvcoin is now known as Aquent |
| 21:53:09 | rasengan: | rasengan has left #bitcoin-wizards |
| 21:54:15 | gmaxwell: | op_null: sort of funny there since all the 'scrypt' mining stuff is also bottlenecked by sha256. |
| 22:50:52 | diametric: | diametric has left #bitcoin-wizards |