--- Log opened Mon Jan 27 00:00:02 2014
05:07 < _ingsoc> :/
05:31 < grazs> a what
08:18 < warren> http://www.identitymind.com/company/partners/  "There are about 10 Billion devices in the world that are connected to the Internet and BlueCava aims to identify all of them."
08:18 < warren> frightening
08:20 < brisque> wonder what they're using to distinguish devices. surely most embedded linux devices all have the same public fingerprint, there's barely anything to distinguish them.
08:21 < warren> more bitcoin devices than humans in the world
08:22 < nsh> s#bitcoin#tcp/ip#
08:23 < TD> i am skeptical about the 10 billion figure
08:24 < TD> having worked in the field myself i am a lot MORE skeptical about identifying all of them being a remotely realistic goal
08:26 < brisque> their goal seems to be attempting to correlate users between devices. matching one browser fingerprint with another, rather than trying to uniquely identify devices.
08:28 < TD> yes of course
08:28 < TD> it's still rather hard
08:29 < TD> well, assuming you "play the game" normally of course
08:30 < brisque> I doubt any of these companies do. if google is using browser bugs to track Safari devices against their cookie settings, you can be pretty sure these companies are going even dirtier.
08:31 < TD> ah, well you don't know the story of that bug.
08:31 < TD> there is a long explanation of it here: http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000937.html
08:31 < TD> tl;dr that was actually a bug in safari and google got the blame for it. nice, huh
08:32 < TD> by "play the game" i meant, try and do it all in the browser. if i had a really compelling product to sell for credit cards i'd ask the user to download and run a native app
08:33 < TD> you can get a lot more scammers that way, of course
08:34 < brisque> TD: that's interesting, i heard the noise around the time but the followup must not have had quite the journalistic merit.
08:35 < TD> the "story" was revealed by the wall street journal at a time when Murdoch was giving speeches about how Google was destroying the newspaper business and it'd be saved by the iPad
08:36 < TD> and it went downhill from there
08:37 < brisque> that bluecarva.com thing seems reasonably standard. it does the usual, user agent, plugin version, installed fonts, all the normal fingerprinting stuff. attempts to put cookies and lcoalstorage cookies everywhere, and that's about the end of it.
08:38 < brisque> comes with a big scary warning about how the source they're presenting is confidential and secret, but that's about the end of it.
08:39 < TD> yeah that's typical
08:39 < TD> of course carders know about all of that
08:39 < brisque> coinbase uses all of those too, interestingly enough.
08:44 < brisque> looks like bluecarva tries to use clock skew as a fingerprint too, that's one I hadn't thought of before.
09:16 < aksyn> you can probably fingerprint a browser version based on rendering time of certain DOM elements
09:17 < aksyn> and yeh, shotgun crap into cookies, localstorage, flash cookies etc. to identify users
09:18 < aksyn> market seems busy for a monday night
09:18 < aksyn> on huobi at least
11:57 < tacotime_> http://www.businessinsider.com/report-ceo-of-major-bitcoin-exchange-arrested-2014-1
11:57 < tacotime_> whoops
12:00 < grazs> but he looks so honest
12:01 < tacotime_> Popped on those charges for just a mil too, sucks.
12:02 < gmaxwell> Guess the folks who were hoping to get coins back from him, http://bitinstant.info/ are out of luck.
12:14 < sipa> gmaxwell: get coins back?
12:18 < gmaxwell> sipa: right before bitinstant shut down apparently they bought BTC from a number of parties and never paid. see the link.
12:23 < sipa> ewww
12:26 < pigeons> SHREM is also charged with one count of willful failure to file a suspicious activity report, which carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison.
12:27 < sipa> and the site is gone
12:28 < tacotime_> I'm guessing maybe they dug up the silk road stuff after getting subpoenas/warrants related to fraud.
12:33 < phantomcircuit> tacotime_, yeah or you know they're reading all of the silkroad message system messages
12:33 < phantomcircuit> im thinking that one
12:33 < _ingsoc> Highly unlikely they'd arrest someone high profile without a solid case that'll probably end up in a successful prosecution.
12:34 < krl> having messages in cleartext on a site like that...
12:36 < tacotime_> krl: You really think someone would do that?  Just go on illegal marketplace sites on the internet and use cleartext to communicate? :yaranaika face:
12:36 < home_jg> TorMail data was also seized in its entirety
12:36 < home_jg> as part of the Freedom Hosting takedown
12:36 < krl> people will unless you force them not to
12:37 < home_jg> at _ingsoc implied, arrests at the federal level are not usually made unless they are convinced they have a strong case.
12:38 < home_jg> successful prosecution rate is > 90%.  They also overcharge, hoping to negotiate down to a guilty plea that sticks
12:39 < home_jg> will make the NY hearing _very_ interesting.  It appears that was the intention (just my supposition...)
12:40 < sipa> what hearing?
12:41 < tacotime_> http://www.coindesk.com/charlie-shrem-to-banks-we-want-to-work-with-you/
12:41 < tacotime_> I guess maybe he should have been working with Swiss banks.
12:41 < home_jg> sipa, https://twitter.com/BenLawsky/status/426431501115211776 etc.
12:41 < home_jg> NYDFS is holding hearings, similar to the US senate hearings.
12:42 < home_jg> Lawsky is the "you should have BitLicenses" guy at NY-DFS
12:42 < sipa> New York... depth first search?
12:42 < home_jg> Dept Financial Services
12:42 < home_jg> NY regulator of money transmitters
12:42 < sipa> got it
12:43 < home_jg> I think these hearings will be much more harsh than the US Senate hearings
12:55 < gmaxwell> home_jg: well the 90% conviction rate is in part because damn near everyone pleds guilty because its so stacked against you.
13:10 < michagogo|cloud> Um
13:10 < michagogo|cloud> Did bitinstant market to SR users or something?
13:11 < pigeons> not like the charge would imply
13:49 < TD> michagogo|cloud: read the criminal complaint
13:49 < TD> michagogo|cloud: the dude is almost certainly going to spend a long time behind bars
13:49 < TD> michagogo|cloud: the evidence just in the document needed to get an arrest warrant seems to create an open/shut case.
13:51 < TD> gmaxwell: that .... and prosecutors try to avoid spending time on weak cases. japan has a 99% conviction rate but not the same culture of insane jail sentences
13:52 < TD> UK has 80%
13:53 < TD> anyway home time
13:53 < shesek> michagogo|cloud, if I understand correctly, he did this via a 3rd party company that was marketing to SR users
13:53 < TD> third party guy
13:53 < michagogo|cloud> TD: I was specifically asking about the "sold bitcoins for drugs" part
13:53 < TD> yes
13:54  * michagogo|cloud goes to read
13:54 < TD> shrem knew he was selling bitcoins to a drug dealer on SR, said he knew many times, and explicitly helped the guy avoid bitinstant's partner companies AML controls
13:54 < _ingsoc> TD: Plea deal or jail time?
13:54 < michagogo|cloud> TD: ah
13:54 < michagogo|cloud> BTW, shesek, could you tell me if you're able to access tigerdirect.com?
13:54 < TD> the guy's emails write the case for him. the prosecutor probably doesn't even need to turn up
13:54 < shesek> michagogo|cloud, nope. blocking Israeli IPs?
13:54 < TD> _ingsoc: both?
13:55 < michagogo|cloud> shesek: Would appear so
13:55 < michagogo|cloud> Looks like Germany isn't blocked, while Latvia is
13:55 < shesek> perhaps some poor anti-ddos protection?
13:55  * michagogo|cloud shrugs
13:56 < phantomcircuit> it's internap
13:56 < phantomcircuit> so yeah probably just terrible anti-ddos
13:56 < phantomcircuit> michagogo|cloud, charlie is going to prison for a very very long time
13:57 < michagogo|cloud> internap?
13:57 < phantomcircuit> michagogo|cloud, internap.com
13:57 < shesek> TD, oh, right, guy. I thought Faiella was a company
13:57 < TD> nope. that's his last name
13:58 < phantomcircuit> shesek, he's the guy who was all over sr offering to purchase money packs
13:58 < phantomcircuit> iirc he even had a ridiculous little cartoon king
13:58 < TD> he was getting people to deposit into his personal bank account, even
13:59 < shesek> I never used SR, so I'm not really familiar with that/him
13:59 < gmaxwell> I wonder if he's the guy who OTC downrated me when I punted him from OTC for his moneypak moneylaundering.
13:59 < shesek> o_O his personal bank account? is he stupid?
13:59 < phantomcircuit> TD, afaict faiella legitimately did not believe that he was breaking the law
13:59 < TD> shesek: has anyone who has been involved with SR so far *not* been stupid?
13:59 < phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, he has definitely been on -otc before
13:59 < TD> shesek: i mean, Shrem was supposed to be head of regulatory compliance at BitInstant and was busy telling reporters how he'd only hire people he got stoned with
14:00 < phantomcircuit> shesek, neither have i, but i went through and looked at it out of morbid curiosity
14:00 < TD> phantomcircuit: do read the complaint. they address that. he absolutely knew, and wrote to DPR that he was afraid LE would come for him
14:00 < shesek> TD, I guess consumers are pretty safe - there's too many of them to do anything to any of them
14:00 < TD> they all knew. none of these guys have been idiots
14:00 < phantomcircuit> TD, fiella?
14:00 < michagogo|cloud> Hmm
14:00 < TD> phantomcircuit: yes
14:00 < phantomcircuit> or shrem?
14:00 < TD> phantomcircuit: both
14:00 < michagogo|cloud> Count Three, overt act b
14:00 < gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: fiella, near the end.
14:00 < phantomcircuit> well the question is when
14:01 < michagogo|cloud> Anyone care to guess which service that is? :P
14:01 < gmaxwell> Basically fiella talks to DPR and points out how vulnerable he is.
14:01 < phantomcircuit> i warned charlie that operating in the us was illegal at the same time i shutdown intersango usd trading
14:01 < phantomcircuit> he ignored me obviously
14:01 < TD> shesek: who knows? it's not joe random dealer that worries me, it's that shrem was dealing with businesses who (we think) are legitimate and actually try to follow the law, but the laws are so vaguely written that trying and failing can be punished in the same way as deliberately failing
14:02 < TD> so i'm hoping they don't go after mtgox or the cash processor next (i think i know who that was)
14:02 < TD> given that BitInstant died when their cash processor cut them off for AML violations, hopefully that insulates them
14:02 < gmaxwell> Zipzap.
14:02 < phantomcircuit> TD, the cash processor is pretty clearly zipzap
14:02 < TD> yeah
14:02 < TD> i know. for some reason i didn't want to say it
14:02 < TD> it's not named in the complaint
14:02 < phantomcircuit> zipzap is pretty obviously an unlicensed money transmitter
14:03 < gmaxwell> Obviously the exchange in the complaint is mtgox.
14:03 < TD> yes indeed
14:03 < phantomcircuit> i would be fairly surprised if mtgox is implicated in this in anyway
14:03 < michagogo|cloud> Hm, section 10: is that The Foundation?
14:03 < phantomcircuit> despite bitinstant's claims they were never an agent of mtgox
14:03 < michagogo|cloud> Or some other foundation?
14:03 < phantomcircuit> michagogo|cloud, yes it is
14:03 < shesek> they do need to show intent, I'm not sure how easy that would be... if they did try to follow the law and didn't do anything maliciously, they should be fine
14:03 < phantomcircuit> charlie is a founding member iirc
14:04 < gmaxwell> In any case, its a bit annoying because _legally_ there probably isn't a bright line procedural distinction between what was going on here and what a lot of other things are doing/have done which aren't intentionally trying to facilitate unlawful activity.
14:04 < TD> "vice chair" :(
14:04 < shesek> though... the laws are indeed vaguely written and you never know :-\
14:04 < phantomcircuit> michagogo|cloud, https://bitcoinfoundation.org/about/board
14:04 < TD> the foundation has sucked at cleaning its website of members that were later found to be involved in bad stuff. the logo of inputs.io is still there!
14:04 < michagogo|cloud> Ew
14:04 < phantomcircuit> TD, is it really?
14:04 < TD> gmaxwell: right, there isn't .... it's part of why banks refuse to deal with bitcoin companies
14:05 < michagogo|cloud> Who's the webmaster?
14:05 < gmaxwell> So while we can all look at this and say "Idiots!" the successful prosecution here may lay the groundwork for causing problems for people who weren't doing anyhting that was so obviously problematic.
14:05 < TD> it was, at least
14:05 < _ingsoc> Lol, Mark. I wonder how badly the US wants him too.
14:05 < sipa> TD: guess i haven't followed up so closely, what is inputs.io?
14:05 < phantomcircuit> shesek, the unlicensed operation of a money transmitter is fairly solidly defined, the failure to file an SAR stuff however largely has to do with whether a reasonable person would have found the activity suspicious
14:05 < shesek> TD, I'm not sure how that works, can he simply be removed from it?
14:05 < TD> yep
14:05 < michagogo|cloud> sipa: webwallet specializing in micropayments
14:05 < phantomcircuit> shesek, (or rather whether a reasonable compliance officer would have known)
14:05 < TD> sipa:  a bitbank run by an anonymous dude who vanished with everyones money
14:05 < michagogo|cloud> (off-chain)
14:06 < TD> michagogo|cloud: a new website is being built actually
14:06 < sipa> TD: ah, same old story :)
14:06 < midnightmagic> The knowingly facilitating SR stuff probably is something that will differentiate future *actually* innocent people.
14:06 < phantomcircuit> TD, mybitcoin.com 2.0
14:06 < shesek> TD, there must be some official procedure for removing board members. I'm not sure if its possible to simply delete him from the page :O
14:06 < TD> indee
14:06 < TD> *indeed
14:06 < gmaxwell> Not just that but shortly before inputs.io existed the guy was on the forum selling accounts and stuff, it stank from a long distince away.
14:06 < phantomcircuit> shesek, there is and it can be done within 48 hours
14:06 < midnightmagic> There is a procedure for removing board members who have engaged in criminal activity and it requires a vote from the remaining directors.
14:07 < phantomcircuit> gavinandresen, migggght want to start that
14:07 < midnightmagic> But he's not convicted yet..
14:07 < jgarzik> catching up... URL of criminal complaint?
14:07 < phantomcircuit> midnightmagic, iirc board members can be removed by a vote of 2/3rds
14:07 < midnightmagic> http://www.scribd.com/doc/202555785/United-States-vs-Charles-Shrem-and-Robert-M-Faiella#download
14:08 < midnightmagic> phantomcircuit: I think it requires cause doesn't it?
14:08 < shesek> or a tl;dr: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1wac1t/ceo_of_bitinstant_arrested_for_conspiracy_to/cf048a1
14:08 < shesek> oops
14:09 < _ingsoc> Wtf was he thinking?
14:09 < phantomcircuit> midnightmagic, ah founding members have more rights than normal members
14:09 < phantomcircuit> 5.16(b)
14:09 < TD> michagogo|cloud: though FWIW i get looped in on a lot of foundation stuff, and i have never once seen a reference to Shrem doing anything at all
14:09 < midnightmagic> shesek: The full bylaws (except for possible changes that they've neglected or deliberately refused to release to the github repo) are here: https://github.com/pmlaw/The-Bitcoin-Foundation-Legal-Repo/tree/master/Bylaws
14:09 < shesek> midnightmagic, thanks
14:09 < TD> he may well have been a founding member but he had little impact on the organisation beyond that, i guess
14:10 < gmaxwell> I was surprised to hear that he was in miami, I thought he'd largely dropped off the radar after bitinstant shut down.
14:10 < gmaxwell> esp with people accusing him of theft.
14:10 < phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, yeah he was super busy getting wasted...
14:10 < TD> yeah, i didn't hear anything about him lately either.
14:10 < midnightmagic> lo
14:10 < sipa> gmaxwell: when did it shut down?
14:11 < TD> many months ago
14:11 < TD> when zipzap terminated them
14:11 < gmaxwell> sipa: june 2013ish?
14:11 < michagogo|cloud> phantomcircuit: 3.6(b), you mean?
14:11 < TD> july
14:11 < TD> it's in the complaint
14:11 < shesek> some people are also accusing him of stealing money - http://bitinstant.info/
14:12 < phantomcircuit> michagogo|cloud, 3.6(b) defines how a member can be terminated, 5.16(b) defines how a founding member can be terminated
14:12 < phantomcircuit> shrem is a founding member
14:12 < TD> i looked at the SR forums once, a long time ago. it was full of threads complaining about bitinstant's AML policies. i figured charlie had finally wised up.
14:12 < TD> guess not
14:12 < michagogo|cloud> 3.6(b) is what defines founding members' special rights, afaict
14:12 < maaku> phantomcircuit: charges are pretty damning and not defending shrem at all ... but innocent until proven guilty is a pretty important part of due process
14:13 < shesek> so if I understand this correctly, until (and if) he's convicted, and unless he resigns, he remains a foundation members and part of the board
14:13 < phantomcircuit> maaku, sure, but the foundation is not the government, charlie has no right to be assumed innocent by a private party
14:13 < maaku> maybe there's some sort of way his duties as director can be suspended
14:13 < phantomcircuit> especially when he is so clearly guilty as all hell
14:13 < phantomcircuit> shesek, that's correct
14:14 < TD> there's a 2/3rd vote that could also remove him
14:14 < sipa> gmaxwell: and how long has that bitinstant.info thing been going on?
14:14 < michagogo|cloud> Hrm
14:14 < shesek> 3.6b - Except for the Founding Members who shall only be removed for cause (per the requirements detailed in Section 5.16(b)) ... 5.16b: : (i) declared of unsound mind by a final order of court; (ii) convicted of a felony; or (iii) found by a final order or judgment to have breached any duty arising under these Bylaws,
14:14 < michagogo|cloud> I haven't read the whole thing, but it looks like he can be removed as director under 5.16(c)
14:14 < shesek> right
14:14 < _ingsoc> sipa: First time I heard of it. :/
14:14 < sipa> _ingsoc: same
14:14 < michagogo|cloud> All that requires cause is removal of his membership entirely
14:15 < phantomcircuit> TD, you're right 5.16(c)
14:15 < shesek> michagogo|cloud, not as a founding member, it seems
14:15 < phantomcircuit> TD, except looking at the sitting members of the board you're not going to get that
14:15 < maaku> sipa: since about the time bitinstant shut down, I forget when that was
14:15 < michagogo|cloud> shesek: From those two sections, I think it's only his membership that's protected as a founding member
14:15 < michagogo|cloud> Not his directorship
14:15 < phantomcircuit> michagogo|cloud, there isn't a way to remove him as a director without stripping his membership afaict
14:16 < michagogo|cloud> Isn't there?
14:16 < TD> sipa: that site is itself kind of dodgy looking.
14:16 < sipa> TD: no doubt about that
14:16 < michagogo|cloud> What about 5.16(c)?
14:16 < sipa> i just never knew there was any problem with bitinstant or people complaining about it :)
14:16 < sipa> but i clearly missed some things :)
14:16 < michagogo|cloud> Or is there something saying that removing a director necessarily removes their membership?
14:16 < TD> i knew they had an issue supplying people during the april spike and that triggered a class action lawsuit. this sounds different
14:17 < shesek> I bumped into that .info site for the first time today, too
14:17 < shesek> I have no idea who's behind that and if they have anything to back that up, was just pointing out he's accused by some people
14:18 < phantomcircuit> TD, they have bigger problems than that
14:18 < TD> clearly!
14:19 < phantomcircuit> TD, well...
14:19 < phantomcircuit> i believe bitinstant actually lost a good amount of their records
14:19 < phantomcircuit> as in they failed to deliver because they didn't know who purchased what
14:19 < michagogo|cloud> It would seem to me, from sections 3.6 and 5.16, that while his membership can't be terminated without cause, he can be removed as a director
14:19 < TD> at this point i'd believe anything about them
14:19 < michagogo|cloud> (unless there's a part saying that removing a director terminates their membership...)
14:19 < phantomcircuit> michagogo|cloud, except getting 2/3rds of the board to agree isn't something i expect to happen
14:19 < michagogo|cloud> Ah.
14:20 < jgarzik> "my night out with bitcoin millionaire and proud stoner Charlie Shrem"  http://www.vocativ.com/12-2013/night-bitcoin-millionaire-proud-stoner-charlie-shrem/
14:20 < midnightmagic> michagogo|cloud: Only if he's convicted.
14:20 < jgarzik> Profile pieces like that can't help.
14:20 < michagogo|cloud> midnightmagic: no
14:20 < michagogo|cloud> midnightmagic: If he were convicted, his membership could be terminated
14:20 < midnightmagic> Ah (c)
14:20 < michagogo|cloud> But without a co-yes
14:20 < TD> and banned in russia too? crappy day for bitcoin indeed
14:21 < midnightmagic> Simple majority required for cause.  2/3 for without cause.
14:21 < phantomcircuit> russia is bipolar about regulation
14:21 < phantomcircuit> tomorrow they'll change their mind entirely
14:21 < TD> seems like it's the usual thing where different parts of government can't agree
14:21 < phantomcircuit> midnightmagic, you'll notice a felony conviction doesn't automatically eject them
14:21 < phantomcircuit> this is because roger ver is a felon
14:22 < TD> i would assume it'd be easy to distinguish between "convicted whilst being a member" and "convicted before being a member"
14:22 < TD> anyway. home time.
14:26 < midnightmagic> lol
14:26  * michagogo|cloud cringes at the away nick
14:26 < midnightmagic> phantomcircuit: Yeah I remember we had that conversation before and thinking it was odd but I suppose not unexpected.
14:27 < maaku> :sigh: is it really so hard to run an honest bitcoin business?
14:27 < maaku> /honest/law-abiding/
14:28 < gmaxwell> it's probably very hard or nearly impossible to be pedantically law abiding for many classes of business.
14:28 < midnightmagic> maaku: The attraction is very very strong to psychopaths and sociopaths. It's not hard. It's just easier to someone who literally can't anticipate or is completely unaffected by, consequences for actions.
14:28 < midnightmagic> ..  to choose to conduct themselves unethically.
14:28 < gmaxwell> So you have this cooling effect where people who are both smart enough and interested enough in being law abiding run for the hills. What remains is overly dense with people who are stupid or sleezy.
14:29 < midnightmagic> and what gmaxwell said
14:29 < midnightmagic> maaku: The cool part is honest people are pretty good at recognising other honest people, and especially non-psychopaths.
14:30 < midnightmagic> s/honest/honest\/smart/
14:30 < midnightmagic> :)
14:30 < gmaxwell> Back in early 2011 I got pulled into technically consult with some people looking at running an exchange in the US and basically they concluded that the regulatory uncertanty was so great— esp with the possiblity of criminal charges even if you thought you were doing everything right— that no amount of potential upside would make it make sense.
14:30 < jgarzik> yep
14:30 < jgarzik> I concluded same, independently ;p
14:31  * midnightmagic is glad to live in Canada, not for the first time
14:31  * jgarzik wanted to do an exchange in late 2010, but research proved 'hell no'
14:32 < phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, the principle issue is that it's difficult to operate a legitimate business if your competition are not compliant
14:32 < phantomcircuit> their costs are temporarily below yours
14:32 < _ingsoc> jgarzik: Smart man.
14:33 < jgarzik> phantomcircuit, indeed
14:33 < phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, operating an exchange in the us isn't impossible, just wildly expensive
14:33 < sipa> this is not really a wizards discussion, though...
14:33 < midnightmagic> sometimes wizards non-technical analyses or research is a quick way to disseminate myth-free facts.
14:34 < midnightmagic> just.. wanted to say I appreciate the links and quick refreshers on bitinstant history.
14:35 < jgarzik> sipa, agreed, though I think it's OK on rare days, when it's not drowning out other discussion
14:36 < jgarzik> days like when bitcoin is almost-banned in Russia and Shrem is arrested, for instance ;p
14:36 < sipa> well, i'm not innocent in keeping the discussion alive either
14:36 < sipa> but i like the rule of keeping this channel about non-actual-today-bitcoin stuff
14:37 < gmaxwell> sadly I don't think I can extract any real wizards discussion from this.
14:39 < optimator> sobering read - http://www.scribd.com/doc/202555785/United-States-vs-Charles-Shrem-and-Robert-M-Faiella
14:41  * midnightmagic 's optimism gets strangled in its crib
14:41 < jgarzik> sipa, part of the "problem" is that the conversation is really people-centered, not topic-centered.  #bitcoin-dev-chatter-but-without-the-assholes.
14:41 < michagogo|cloud> optimator: Is that document identical to http://www.scribd.com/doc/202572639/Faiella-Robert-M-and-Charlie-Shrem-Complaint?
14:41 < jgarzik> thus is appears whereever we are ;p
14:41 < michagogo|cloud> (appears to be)
14:43 < optimator> michagogo|cloud - i think so, it's just the link i had
15:38 < adam3us1> ooh policy-wizards :)  shrem = crazy guy, doing seemingly self-sabotaging actions if the accusations are correct.
15:46 < petertodd> adam3us1: overhearing him talking with a group while prepping my talk in the speakers room at the san jose conference convinced me the dude was a bit unbalanced to say the least
15:47 < petertodd> bbl
16:36 < jtimon> has anyone looked into twister?
16:37 < jtimon> seems interesting http://twister.net.co/
16:52 < azariah4> "The twister incentive is: whoever finds the hash collision to validate a new block of transactions will be awarded with the right to send a promoted message. Promoted messages have a certain probability of being displayed by twister client."
16:52 < azariah4> hehe :D
16:52 < azariah4> at first I laughed, but thinking of it, it's not too bad for a microblogging platform
16:52 < azariah4> some company could throw hash power at it to push some ads
16:52 < michagogo|cloud> ...
16:52 < sipa> it's trivial to modify your client to just ignore such promoted messages, though...
16:52 < michagogo|cloud> except that you can just not display th-
16:52 < michagogo|cloud> what sipa said
16:55 < azariah4> well, adblock+ haven't killed the website ad industry
16:56 < jtimon> why didn't they just used namecoin for the user registration?
16:57 < sipa> reinventing the wheel is more fun, especially when the wheel can be made to look like a hammer
17:14 < adam3us1> azariah4: is twister an alt as well as a p2p microblog?
17:46 < andytoshi> john baez has a neat article about information complexity and bitcoin scarcity: https://johncarlosbaez.wordpress.com/2014/01/27/the-rarest-things-in-the-universe/
17:47 < andytoshi> i mean, bitcoin rarity. scarcity is an econ term that i don't mean to use
17:52 < andytoshi> he suggests a POW with a trapdoor function so that the key possessor (i.e. the government) can print coins. then you get the monetary control of fiat -and- the unforgeability of bitcoin :}
17:53 < gmaxwell> andytoshi: you don't need to use a pow for that, if you want to give someone the power to inflate the currency you can just let them (via a key) spend coins that don't exist just directly in the system.
17:54 < gmaxwell> POW = minting is a weird notion; in bitcoin pow = consensus, minting is just permitted as a rule in the blocks. :)
17:56 < andytoshi> yeah, i get that. baez is very unfamiliar with bitcoin and (i think) he thinks that the small hashes are the actual "coins".
17:56 < andytoshi> though, it is neat to see a complete outsider perspective from somebody as smart as him
17:57 < gmaxwell> yea thats not actually an uncommon belief.
17:58 < gmaxwell> I dunno where it comes from though.
18:06 < midnightmagic> password cracking analogies probably.
18:25 < CampyCoin> Any interest in domains?
18:26 < phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, ^
18:28 < CampyCoin> I'm confused here, let me know if I've done something wrong
18:44 < CampyCoin> anybody want some domains?
18:44 < nsh> that's off-topic here, CampyCoin
19:18 < adam3us3> gmaxwell, andytoshi: i think an interesting rule for fiat coins would be to encode the monetary policy into a smart issuance policy.  eg 2%/yr QE cap, things like that.  then they cant exceed it without a super majority vote of clients
19:20 < adam3us3> gmaxwell, andytoshi: cryptographic assurance against moral-hazard :)  ie cant panic bend the formal rules because a monetary policy committee cant withstand political pressure even though they know its a bad idea.
22:32 < Luke-Jr> new proof-of-<foo> system to be announced soon based on the efforts of BlueMatt, myself, and others!
22:37 < petertodd> Luke-Jr: curious
22:39 < Luke-Jr> petertodd: another guy is writing up the announcement post now
22:39 < petertodd> Luke-Jr: oh nice, you guys are serious?
22:39 < brisque> Luke-Jr: a serious POW, not like proof-of-twerk?
22:39 < Luke-Jr> petertodd: <.<
22:39 < brisque> well, proof of something.
22:40 < Luke-Jr> >.>
22:40 < brisque> oh.
22:40 < brisque> still interested.
22:47 < andytoshi> by 'writing up' you mean that if i stay up another hour i'll see it?
22:48 < Luke-Jr> andytoshi: not sure what the schedule is on it
22:49 < Luke-Jr> he said by this weekend :<
22:50 < Luke-Jr> .. but he might have a draft for me to look over in a few mins
23:29 < brisque> has somebody tried poking ghash.io and asking them to change their default block size?
23:30 < Luke-Jr> brisque: they intentionally have it set low because they can't afford a decent internet connection apparently -.-
23:31 < Luke-Jr> (and can't figure out how to run a pool with the block broadcasts colo'd)
23:31 < brisque> that's awful. I've seen them orphan their own blocks quite a few times too.
23:33 < brisque> it would be nice for them to make decent sized blocks though. surely they can manage the small influx of data they need to broadcast them properly.
--- Log closed Tue Jan 28 00:00:05 2014