00:00:19akrmn:gmaxwell: Yes but eventually there will be the incentive for fees
00:00:29akrmn:And I think it can be softforked
00:00:57akrmn:Either header only with 1 MB limit (compatible with old clients) or full block with no limit
00:01:25Luke-Jr:akrmn: nobody would ever mine >1 MB blocks this way.
00:02:00akrmn:ok thanks for your opinions. Just thinking of the possibilities :)
00:02:20akrmn:someone will have to do the math eventually
00:03:28akrmn:but ya what I want to do is so no one mines more than 1 MB blocks (99% of the time)
00:04:45akrmn:and still give the "pro big blocks people" the freedom they desire
00:05:05Luke-Jr:akrmn: did you see gmaxwell's suggestion? http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/38937n/idea_make_the_difficulty_target_scale_with_block/crta20m
00:09:16akrmn:If the point is just to limit the UTXO size, then I don't think that's good enough, but I will read more carefully
00:10:08Luke-Jr:it's too bad there's no obvious way to punish miners if UTXOs don't get spent ever
00:10:13akrmn:I think we need on average 1 MB with some rare and not too big variations around it
00:10:19Luke-Jr:(of course, then the problem becomes "how do miners guess if they will?")
00:10:42Luke-Jr:akrmn: Bitcoin can't handle average 1 MB today.
00:10:46akrmn:I'm the guy who proposed the "subchains" idea btw.
00:11:08akrmn:My idea is log(n) storage and verification complexity for each participant
00:11:23akrmn:so even O(n) storage is bad in my view
00:13:50akrmn:(well assuming you don't count all the headers in the storage measurement)
00:15:06Luke-Jr:also, even if bigger blocks cost more, if it puts your competition out of mining, then you eventually get the difficulty to drop for you
00:15:15Luke-Jr:so I'm not so sure how well that idea works
00:16:49akrmn:ya it's not so crucial for the system, but it can give some more flexibilty. Needs some calculations though.
00:36:43HostFat:luke-jr what is your opinion about my idea instead?
00:36:54HostFat:did you read it?
00:39:28akrmn:but one way to look at it (my idea) is that as computers get faster in the future, a 10 MB block for example, may be tiny and no different from a header when calculating the SHA256 sum, but I have to see the details of how the SHA algorithm works in order to understand.
00:40:18Luke-Jr:HostFat: which one?
00:40:36Luke-Jr:HostFat: that creates some serious problems
00:40:59Luke-Jr:akrmn: the hashing is never done on computers..
00:41:30frankenm_:seems easy to collusion HostFat, sorry i havent really looked at this in depth
00:41:58Luke-Jr:don't even need collusion. Just make empty blocks all the time, and you will always win.
00:42:23frankenm_:frankenm_ is now known as frankenmint
00:44:19HostFat:hmm, they just win if more blocks are found contemporary ... anyway, I see the problem, I'm not sure that it work perfectly ... but it can be a good idea when the bitcoin mining bonus will be lower then the sum of fees
00:47:22HostFat:I think that this problem can be fixed easily, "nodes will not accept blocks that are lower than the sum of tx that they know"
00:47:56justanot1eruser:justanot1eruser is now known as justanotheruser
00:49:55gmaxwell:"Explanations exist; they have existed for all time; there is always a well-known solution to every human problem — neat, plausible, and wrong."
01:11:33bsm117532:One of my favorite quotes...
01:23:58Luke-Jr:HostFat: now you're breaking consensus.
01:24:42Luke-Jr:HostFat: as well as breaking miners' rights and the hope of ever filtering spam (which is necessary for the blockchain to function)
01:25:33HostFat:you are right
01:26:15Luke-Jr:justanotheruser: *4=10
01:26:43justanotheruser:oh right, your tonal stuff
03:09:01Taek:wrt the patented research ideas, it was suggested in #mit-dci by wumpus and petertodd that it might be worth boycotting patented papers
03:10:12Taek:especially if the paper has good ideas, you might find ways to build on those ideas and then find your own work subject to patent litigation
03:10:40gmaxwell:Taek: unfortunately thats not how patents work in the US.
03:10:59gmaxwell:unless you just mean intentionally not building on patented things; which is prudent.
03:11:08Taek:I do mean the latter
03:11:57Taek:when you read a good idea, you can't help but incorporate it into the other things you are working on
03:12:42Taek:I was also thinking that by refusing to acknowledge patented work, you provide an active disincentive for some researchers whose goals include recognition
03:15:10gmaxwell:unfortunately you can't tell from papers; there is no obligation to disclose (and often people don't); the authors might not even know at publication time, since at least for US patents you can begin the entire process up to a year after publishing.
03:15:59gmaxwell:some venues may have requirements to disclose patent information, we could certantly encourage venus to adopt such rules.
03:17:14gmaxwell:Oh also, it may eventually be useful to distinguish patent terms, for example if someone gets patents assigns them to a 501(c)(3) and offers them under permissive protective licenses; would you shun those too?
03:18:09Taek:personally, I'm on the MIT/Apache side of things: information / invention should be as unrestricted as possible
03:18:20Taek:but I acknowledge that some things are a lot better than others
03:19:16Taek:There is a 'Linux Defenders' group that makes defensive publications related to linux technologies, I'm wondering if it would be worth organizing something similar for Bitcoin
03:19:30Taek:(not that I am volunteering)
03:21:27zooko:In theory that organization -- the Open Invention Network -- could define Bitcoin as being part of linux, and then all of its current members would be obligated not to patent-sue anyone for their use of Bitcoin
03:21:37zooko:or else they would get kicked out of the club.
03:21:40zooko:I think that's how it works.
03:22:10zooko:The process would be that someone, ideally someone influential/authoritative/famous begs Open Invention Network to define Linux as including Bitcoin.
03:45:44Sub|afk:Sub|afk is now known as SubCreative
05:03:00Jaamg:* Jaamg thinks that it should not be possible to patent money
05:19:30Jaamg:in general I'm an "agnostic" on this subject; maybe there are things where patenting is justified or maybe not, but it should not be possiblt to patent money. it's like patenting game theory
05:39:17maaku:* maaku thinks it should not be possible to patent
05:41:55Jaamg:you may be right, i have never really given a good thought on the subject
05:42:32moa:a gentleperson's agreement on attribution would be good start for a civil society
05:45:25dgenr8:* dgenr8 plans to patent his DNA, then sue his children
05:45:50moa:for half?
05:46:07dgenr8:mo' children, mo' better
05:47:02dgenr8:suppose there was a patch to not bother downloading a block past 5MB, unless it were built on to some degree. evil?
05:48:05dgenr8:oh, and hard fork has eliminated blocksize limit (forgot that part)
05:48:40maaku:dgenr8: ah but in great irony you are liable for them until they reach age of majority, at which point your patent would have expired. you'd be suing yourself ;)
05:49:56dgenr8:clever choice of jurisdiction notwithstanding i presume
06:15:51dgenr8:the conclusions of Houy http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2400519 are not very convincing as they ignore the possibility of changes in the economic value of the block reward (read exchange rate atm)
06:18:27dgenr8:in practice, that change was +infinity between halvings 0-1, and might be 10x between halvings 1-2 (enough to cover more than 3 halvings)
06:26:39Jaamg:"I confess that I prefer true but imperfect knowledge, even if it leaves much indetermined and unpredictable, to a pretence of exact knowledge that is likely to be false." - F.A. Hayek
06:30:24Jaamg:this kind of modelling of tx fee economics can potentially lead into much harm, but i understand why it's interesting
06:43:54moa:anybody have insights as to why bitcoin-xt is not a git fork of bitcoin core https://github.com/bitcoinxt/bitcoinxt?
07:28:46bramc:Macroeconomic concerns are irrelevant to Bitcoin as it exists today. It's a completely normal commodity driven by microeconomic principles.
07:31:50Jaamg:bramc: depends what you mean; BTC/USD market price can maybe be assumed "completely normal commodity driven by microeconomics principles"
07:32:26phantomcircuit:bramc, er that's not exactly true
07:32:36Jaamg:but if we try to create formal model for tx fee economics, imho we have a great risk to fall into pretence of knowledge
07:33:37bramc:phantomcircuit, Okay 'completely normal' is probably inaccurate. It's deeply weird in many ways. But the pricing mechanisms are all ordinary supply and demand.
07:36:20phantomcircuit:lol so that paper is basically showing that there has to be blocksize pressure in order for bitcoin to survive
07:36:33phantomcircuit:and seems to be reasonable
08:05:15kornbluth.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
08:05:15kornbluth.freenode.net:Users on #bitcoin-wizards: andy-logbot artiefoo SubCreative dabos dEBRUYNE dc17523be3 gill3s adam3us antanst RoboTedd_ [d__d] Mably hktud0 d1ggy priidu p15 paveljanik cosmo b_lumenkraft melvster Emcy Relos waxwing felipelalli akrmn wallet42 harrow [7] akstunt600 droidr rht__ Dr-G2 moa prodatalab tromp__ metamarc justanotheruser wumpus DougieBot5000 STRML Starduster gielbier jmcn spinza qawap iNFiNiTY__ bosma Aaaaand-its-go__ palexander LeMiner Madars Adlai gmaxwell
08:05:15kornbluth.freenode.net:Users on #bitcoin-wizards: a5m0 theymos Jouke c0rw1n mikolalysenko kumavis runeks adams__ Muis artifexd dasource go1111111 lclc mengine superobserver Luke-Jr rustyn wizkid057 stonecoldpat null_radix robogoat hulkhogan_ Cory yrashk mariorz btcdrak CryptoGoon platinuum Oizopower CryptOprah catcow yorick amiller koshii Meeh davout jessepollak huseby espes GreenIsMyPepper elastoma pollux-bts Logicwax PaulCapestany fript tromp sneak CodeShark mountaingoat dgenr8 helo
08:05:15kornbluth.freenode.net:Users on #bitcoin-wizards: cryptowe- veox mm_1 luny ttttemp lnovy jbenet vonzipper sadoshi copumpkin phantomcircuit michagogo bedeho ebfull PRab yoleaux EasyAt comboy stevenroose pigeons kinlo gwillen sl01 Tiraspol kyuupichan gavinandresen nickler Iriez cdecker Keefe jrayhawk K1773R luigi1111 Apocalyptic prosodyContext ggreer Hunger- Pan0ram1x isis HM bsm117532 harrigan andytoshi scoria brand0 larraboj OneFixt mappum weex gnusha nsh triazo jonasschnelli berndj
08:05:15kornbluth.freenode.net:Users on #bitcoin-wizards: leakypat tucenaber Taek iddo epscy wiz lmacken cfields Krellan coryfields catlasshrugged Alanius kanzure bliljerk_ azariah warptangent sparetire TD-Linux crescend1 Zouppen _whitelogger binaryatrocity heath BananaLotus maaku optimator Eliel narwh4l mr_burdell throughnothing_ fluffypony Fistful_of_Coins Jaamg xabbix smooth dignork Sqt poggy livegnik petertodd richardus nephyrin phedny so afdudley SwedFTP guruvan ajweiss nanotube forrestv
08:05:15kornbluth.freenode.net:Users on #bitcoin-wizards: warren Xzibit17 sdaftuar eric roasbeef morcos merlincorey [ace] sturles jaromil Graet indolering ryan-c gribble d9b4bef9 starsoccer otoburb midnightmagic BlueMatt Anduck AdrianG @ChanServ BrainOverfl0w
08:06:45Tiraspol:* Tiraspol slaps andy-logbot around a bit with a large trout
08:27:04Jaamg:It is really going to suck if bitcoin ends up being a scheme where we religiously try to keep avg block size / max block size at some "optimum" level so that "bitcoin survives". It will be perpetual political conflict on whether the max block size should be higher or lower (and by how much).
08:29:07Jaamg:in the mean time too small blockchain hinders adoption. When we reach the limit, not everybody get their txs through, no matter how much they pay. It will not be "pay more and we process your tx", it will be "go away"
08:29:37gmaxwell:gmaxwell has left #bitcoin-wizards
08:37:51Jaamg:i agree that there must be a safety mechanism for exploiting bloat. i also agree that there must be a mechanism to keep blockchain secure even after the subsidized era. i agree that max block size can be a solutin for the former but i disagree that it can be a solution to the latter
08:50:14pgokeeffe:pgokeeffe is now known as kef
08:50:43kef:kef is now known as Guest60337
08:51:28Guest60337:Guest60337 is now known as pgokeeffe
08:58:22phantomcircuit: in the mean time too small blockchain hinders adoption. When we reach the limit, not everybody get their txs through, no matter how much they pay.
08:58:29phantomcircuit:that's not how it will work
08:59:09Jaamg:phantomcircuit: yes it does. if we have 101 people trying to make a tx and only room for 100 tx, not everybody are going to get their tx through
08:59:36Jaamg:sorry that the expression was really messed up, as you can probably see, english is not my 1st language
09:00:09Taek:jaamg: that's true, not everyone will get a txn through. But someone is going to give before the others. It it's worth $1 million to you, you're probably okay. It's probably not worth $1m to everyone else
09:00:27Jaamg:Taek: yes, it will not be "go away" for everybody
09:02:11Jaamg:but since so many people must "go away" the marginal tx fee probably approaches 0 (or whatever is the minimum that the miners process)
09:02:24Jaamg:i have no formal proof of this, just a gut feeling
09:03:14Jaamg:it is hard to imagine that there is a long line of people waiting so that somebody gets priced out and they can take his place
09:03:26Jaamg:*so that when
09:09:00phantomcircuit:Jaamg, yeah and? that's a fundamental property of a global consensus system
09:09:12phantomcircuit:there is limited throughput
09:09:19phantomcircuit:1MB is probably too large
09:09:56phantomcircuit:(good thing we're not even close to 1MB yet!)
09:10:22Jaamg:phantomcircuit: not sure if sarcastic
09:10:38phantomcircuit:Jaamg, why would any of that be sarcastic
09:11:41Jaamg:phantomcircuit: well, i see no point in having max block size other than prevent exploits
09:13:23phantomcircuit:Jaamg, care to elaborate on what you understand the potential exploits to be? (im curious about this view point)
09:14:09Jaamg:phantomcircuit: low cost to bloat blockchain with meaningless txs
09:14:23Jaamg:maybe there is something else
09:16:05phantomcircuit:Jaamg, ok so yeah that's true
09:16:37phantomcircuit:Jaamg, but now go one deeper, why is the blockchain full of meaningless transactions a problem?
09:18:03Jaamg:phantomcircuit: there is a risk involved in a situation if we lose the property "anybody can be a full node"
09:18:25phantomcircuit:Jaamg, right great
09:18:59phantomcircuit:Jaamg, now consider, what happens if there are actually an enormous number of legitimate users
09:19:09phantomcircuit:in other words replace blockchain bloat with blockchain use
09:19:15phantomcircuit:does that change the risk at all?
09:20:00Jaamg:phantomcircuit: yea, then we face a difficult situation where we must either tell some of the people to go away or take the previously described risk
09:22:04phantomcircuit:Jaamg, the risk is still the same
09:22:11Jaamg:phantomcircuit: yes it is
09:35:48Jaamg:phantomcircuit: can you tell why the blocksize should be smaller than 1MB? you said it wasn't sarcasm
09:36:07Jaamg:max blocksize that is
09:36:21fluffypony:because the average bandwidth available in places like South Africa (where I live) is like 128kbps
09:36:36Jaamg:fluffypony: you can't process 1MB blocks? :p
09:36:54fluffypony:I'm on a 10mbps line at home, I'm not representative of the general populous
09:36:58phantomcircuit:Jaamg, empirical measures of decentralization all show declines
09:37:11phantomcircuit:the total number of nodes which are reachable has dropped from 8k to 5.3k
09:37:24phantomcircuit:many more people are using reduced security clients
09:37:58phantomcircuit:most of the available headroom to optimize bitcoind has already been squeezed out of it
09:38:27phantomcircuit:(excluding the very nice performance benefits of using libsecp256k1 to verify... but we cant do that yet since the openssl code is consensus critical)
09:39:53Jaamg:phantomcircuit: correlation does not imply causality. is there a proof that those 2.7k nodes have quit because of avg block sizes getting higher? i think more feasible explanation would be that they were home miners who quit after the difficulty got too high
09:42:16Jaamg:phantomcircuit: do you expect the number of full nodes to rise if max block size is lowered to, say 750kb?
09:44:03phantomcircuit:Jaamg, whenever i ask someone why they dont run bitcoin core as their wallet
09:44:14phantomcircuit:the response is that it's too slow 99% of the time
09:44:35phantomcircuit:the remaining 1% is features that were explicitly not implemented because they're considered not safe
09:46:36p15_:how elastic is that though, even if it were 10x faster maybe they'd still think it was too slow
09:48:35phantomcircuit:p15_, see that is a good question
09:48:48phantomcircuit:p15_, i genuinely dont know
09:49:00phantomcircuit:p15_, i can however say for sure that making it slower will make it worse
09:49:23phantomcircuit:i cant say that making it faster will necessarily make it much better
10:12:40jrayhawk:and even half of the rural U.S. population is at sub-broadband speeds, making tens of gigabytes of blockchain synchronization an onerous requirement for verifiable transactions.
11:11:17midnightmagic:a combined spv initial operation during the sync process would likely eliminate that: "it works while the sync is happening"
13:29:41hulkhogan_:/window splitv
13:36:46fluffypony:hulkhogan_: thank you for signing up for Cat Facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about CATS! >o<
13:38:06hulkhogan_:thanks... just what i needed :)
13:39:38fluffypony:that's impressive
13:39:44b_lumenkraft:fluffypony: where can i get these cat facts?
13:40:13fluffypony:b_lumenkraft: you don't find cat facts, they find you
13:53:19eudoxia:ugh wrong window
14:45:53c0rw1n:c0rw1n is now known as c0rw|away
15:17:36dabura667:This string says "Create x-of-y wallet"
15:17:36dabura667:but in Japanese localization I need to change the order
15:17:36dabura667:to "x-of-y wallet create"
15:17:36dabura667:but the way the string is formatted it is not possible currently
15:17:36dabura667:without having separate html file for Japanese.
15:17:36dabura667:"Create %d of %d wallet" %(cosigners, copayers) type format is possible?
15:17:37dabura667:if this was translated I could move the %d in the po file for translation
15:26:35wallet421:wallet421 is now known as wallet42
15:27:27jae:jae is now known as Guest71002
15:51:01moarrr:moarrr has left #bitcoin-wizards
16:37:55wallet421:wallet421 is now known as wallet42
16:42:22justanot1eruser:justanot1eruser is now known as justanotheruser
16:54:36thesnark:thesnark is now known as narwh4l
16:56:28dgenr8:phantomcircuit: if Houy's assumptions were reasonable, bitcoin would have died already, since no fixed fee and no capacity pressure until 2015-09.
17:00:09dgenr8:phantomcircuit: instead, hashing grew exponentially and i think we can agree exchange rate figures heavily into miner decisions
17:01:25jae:jae is now known as Guest25695
17:04:05dgenr8:no capacity pressure until 2014-09, sorry http://i.imgur.com/5Gfh9CW.png
17:08:02wallet421:wallet421 is now known as wallet42
17:26:09bosma_:bosma_ is now known as bosma
17:38:05wallet42:wallet42 is now known as Guest38207
17:38:05wallet421:wallet421 is now known as wallet42
17:55:32narwh4l:How do you all feel about proof of burn? I'm writing contracts for counterparty but proof of burn seems destructive to me.
17:56:22narwh4l:Also, if you don't like proof of burn an alternative to counterparty would be wonderful if you know of one
18:00:22kanzure:narwh4l: there's openassets, omniwallet, colour, just.. lots..
18:00:55narwh4l:kanzure: do you have a favorite?
18:01:30kanzure:so far i have been intrigued the most by sidechain stuff
18:04:32narwh4l:kanzure: so no clear winners? a link to practical sidechain doc would be immensely appreciated
18:08:45temujin:narwh41: there is no existing side-chain implementation
18:09:01temujin:if you want to do something you can test on main/testnet right now, go with open assets or counterParty
18:09:25temujin:this might be biased, but it's a good overview of the protocols: http://blog.coinprism.com/comparison-coinprism-counterparty-mastercoin/
18:10:32narwh4l:temujin: Great comparison sheet, even if it is biased
18:10:38narwh4l:thank you
18:11:36temujin:if you're interested in the counter-points to this, i believe there is a reddit thread... i can't find it right now though
18:11:49temujin:fwiw counterParty has the best documentation by far
18:12:30narwh4l:temujin: counterparty definitely seems to have it all together, proof of burn just makes my stomach turn a little
18:13:14temujin:i believe the idea is that it gives the tokens some value which can be used to trade against other assets on the counterParty network
18:13:30temujin:in a similar way that Bitcoins themselves have value because it costs resources to mine
18:14:02temujin:also, as a method of distribution of initial tokens, it makes sense because the developers/early contributors took equal risk with everyone else involved
18:14:11temujin:(as a function of burnt BTC)
18:15:17narwh4l:temujin: I understand why it gives value to xcp, I just hate the notion of making BTC useless.
18:17:09temujin:it's an uncomfortable thought but in practice it makes no difference, right?
18:17:32narwh4l:* narwh4l shrugs
18:17:33narwh4l:I guess
18:17:42temujin:even if 99% of all Bitcoins were burned, we could simply extend the decimal place further and trade with the remaining coins
18:18:19temujin:perhaps there's an argument to be made for concentration of wealth, but that's separate from the notion of destroying Bitcoins
18:18:41narwh4l:* narwh4l shuts up and carries on
20:20:39Relos:has this been looked into: https://twitter.com/NickSzabo4/status/606531393007558656 ?
20:21:48yoleaux:Great computer science paper on reducing the advantages of fast internet connectivity in Bitcoin: GHOST http://eprint.iacr.org/2013/881.pdf (@NickSzabo4)
20:21:57maaku:Relos: that paper is years old
20:22:10maaku:and yes it has been looked into and has issues
22:34:54pigeons:pigeons is now known as Guest18168
22:43:17otoburb:otoburb is now known as Guest78969