sipa changed the topic of #bitcoin-wizards to: This channel is for discussing theoretical ideas with regard to cryptocurrencies, not about short-term Bitcoin development | http://bitcoin.ninja/ | This channel is logged. | For logs and more information, visit http://bitcoin.ninja
xcthulhu has joined #bitcoin-wizards
notj has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
SgtStroopwafel has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
ThomasV has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
SgtStroopwafel has joined #bitcoin-wizards
notj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mrkent has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mrkent_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
Lightsword has quit [Quit: Lightsword]
Casper- has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mrkent_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mrkent has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
Lightsword has joined #bitcoin-wizards
DougieBot5000 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mrkent has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mrkent_ has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
mrkent has quit [Client Quit]
Lightsword has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
mrkent has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Lightsword has joined #bitcoin-wizards
notj has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
notj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
notj has quit [Client Quit]
dEBRUYNE has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
mrkent_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mrkent has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
notj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Ylbam has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
notj has quit [Client Quit]
Dizzle has joined #bitcoin-wizards
notj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
notj has quit [Client Quit]
mrkent has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mrkent_ has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
notj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
notj has quit [Client Quit]
ttttemp has joined #bitcoin-wizards
SgtStroopwafel has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
bramc has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
GAit has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
tulip has quit []
erasmosp_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<kanzure>
this problem is solved by using the transcript instead
melvster has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
tulp is now known as tulip
GAit has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
Lightsword has quit [Quit: Lightsword]
xcthulhu has quit [Quit: xcthulhu]
alex_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
alex_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
alex_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
bendavenport has quit [Quit: bendavenport]
<TD-Linux>
the audio is also great which is what matters
mrkent has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mrkent_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
Lightsword has joined #bitcoin-wizards
xcthulhu has joined #bitcoin-wizards
melvster has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GGuyZ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
GGuyZ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
CodeShark_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GGuyZ_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rusty has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GGuyZ has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
GGuyZ_ is now known as GGuyZ
livegnik has joined #bitcoin-wizards
p15 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
zookolaptop has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
Yoghur114 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
livegnik has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
xcthulhu has quit [Quit: xcthulhu]
livegnik has joined #bitcoin-wizards
livegnik has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
aj has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
livegnik has joined #bitcoin-wizards
publius1788 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
adam3us has joined #bitcoin-wizards
livegnik has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
frankenmint has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
aj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
livegnik has joined #bitcoin-wizards
livegnik has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
GGuyZ has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
GGuyZ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
livegnik has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Casper- has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
GGuyZ has quit [Quit: GGuyZ]
livegnik has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Giszmo has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
livegnik has joined #bitcoin-wizards
livegnik has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
livegnik has joined #bitcoin-wizards
adam3us has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
wallet42 has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
alex_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
sparetire_ has quit [Quit: sparetire_]
alex_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
livegnik has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
livegnik has joined #bitcoin-wizards
livegnik has quit [Client Quit]
droark has joined #bitcoin-wizards
erasmospunk has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<Taek>
Kanzure: I don't fully understand your comments about large weak blocks, so we may have to go back and forth a few times before we are on the same page
<Taek>
That said, the idea behind mandatory weak blocks is to bound the 'race size' of a newly discovered block
<Taek>
Currently, in an adversarial setting, the race size is the full block
<kanzure>
max weak block size is not going to be dramatically larger than max big block size before eating up all of the benefits of using weak blocks at all
<Taek>
Define dramatically - I think we could see a 10x throughput increase
<kanzure>
i was not talking about throughput increase though?
<Taek>
Oh
<kanzure>
dramatic was in reference to size comparison between weak block max size to big block max size
<kanzure>
assuming scenario of big blocks with weak blocks
<Taek>
It's the size of the diff over the previous weak block that matters, because all you are sending around is the diff
<aj>
kanzure: what are "big blocks" ?
GGuyZ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<kanzure>
eh they are just useful to identify that i am talking about block size issues
<aj>
kanzure: i thought the idea was weak blocks are the same size as big blocks, but they allow any blocks (real ones or weak ones) to be sent efficiently as deltas
roxtrongo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<Taek>
aj: varies by proposal, weak blocks are an entire class of proposals
<kanzure>
aj: at the moment my head is full of fluff about cryonics and large-scale automated animal breeding facilities, something about animal throughput bottlenecks is interfering with me thinking about bandwidth asymmetries on bitcoin network graph so uh.. give me a few minutes or something.
<kanzure>
or, actually, prefer the version of me saying things in that log
<rusty>
Taek: note that in HK I'm only referring to weak blocks for encoding purposes, none of the compulsory stuff...
<kanzure>
"viscosity of animal bytes/sec? what?"
<rusty>
kanzure: that's "animal bites".
<kanzure>
oh is that what it is
Giszmo has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
NewLiberty has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
adam3us has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Giszmo has quit [Client Quit]
Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
droark has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Lightsword has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
Lightsword has joined #bitcoin-wizards
adam3us has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
GGuyZ has quit [Quit: GGuyZ]
mrkent has quit []
Giszmo has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
instagibbs has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
Casper- has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<Taek>
The flagverify proposal looks solid to me, the only worry being that people will assume that the flag means they don't also need to validate.
Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<Taek>
But I don't think that's a substantial issue
Giszmo has quit [Client Quit]
<gmaxwell>
I think it's a good idea (obviously) but I don't think it's survial odds are good.
roxtrongo has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Quanttek has joined #bitcoin-wizards
wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
nivah has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Casper- has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<rusty>
gmaxwell: " Because there is no consensus enforced behavior there is no special deployment strategy required. " Except BIP9 needs consideration.
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<gmaxwell>
rusty: Yes, indeed, thats why I'm asking here before posting; what do you want me to do for BIP9?
<rusty>
gmaxwell: I think we should play Bit Chicken! Whoever gets implemented first wins, and the other one has to choose a new bit! :)
<gmaxwell>
OKAY.
<rusty>
gmaxwell: or, we could modify BIP9 to exclude <somebit>. Post-BIP9, you need to use a soft fork process to deploy this.
bliljerk101 has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<gmaxwell>
Yea, I was thinking we'd just make BIP9 don't-care that bit. or shift over the BIP9 flag... if this doesn't get instantly flamed to death on the list.
wallet42 has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
Casper- has left #bitcoin-wizards [#bitcoin-wizards]
<rusty>
gmaxwell: it's not quite RFC 3514, but maybe people will resist. I'm happy with downshifting BIP9 to a "00x1" prefix.
<gmaxwell>
my concern is that people will split into OK, {but it can't be enforced, it may mislead}, {but they must validate, this endorses not validating!} ... but we'll see.
<gmaxwell>
I expect that 1:1 I could convince everyone, but if the initial impressions are bad it won't have legs.
<aj>
gmaxwell: typo: "only or two confirmations" <-- missing "one"
<rusty>
It might be premature? Once we have fraud proofs, it's easier to say "OK not to validate, please set bit"/
<gmaxwell>
rusty: already ~>50% of the hashpower is not validating for non-trivial amounts of time, from what I can determine.
<gmaxwell>
Also in response to the BIP66 forking incident about 1001 technical people immediately responded suggesting that miners just do it for limited times, as if it was no big deal.
<rusty>
gmaxwell: perhaps we need to release (a version of?) core which facilitates that then?
<rusty>
gmaxwell: and (of course) clears the bit.
<gmaxwell>
Yes absolutely. I decided to write the BIP because several people suggested implement validation free in core.
<gmaxwell>
And I don't think its wise or safe to do it without at least trying to signal.
<rusty>
gmaxwell: makes sense. The two are reasonable together.
cinik has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
arowser has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
cinik has joined #bitcoin-wizards
arowser has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Quanttek has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
rusty has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
notj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
instagibbs has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<CodeShark>
the only caveat is for thin client developers...to not assume that a set bit means everything is perfectly fine
wallet42 has quit [Client Quit]
<CodeShark>
it's hard to find an exploit...but it's easy to see how people might still botch things up inadvertently
matsjj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<gmaxwell>
It does tell you not to trust it and explains several reasons why. but yea, ... but I think the same people today will just not even think validation free mining is possible (much less common...)
instagibbs has joined #bitcoin-wizards
notj has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
droark has joined #bitcoin-wizards
bliljerk101 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Lightsword has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
Lightsword has joined #bitcoin-wizards
LeMiner2 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-wizards
paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-wizards
paveljanik has quit [Changing host]
paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-wizards
damethos has joined #bitcoin-wizards
bramc has joined #bitcoin-wizards
wallet421 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
wallet421 has quit [Changing host]
wallet421 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
wallet42 is now known as Guest76788
wallet421 is now known as wallet42
wallet42 has quit [Client Quit]
Guest76788 has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
rustyn has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
rustyn has joined #bitcoin-wizards
DougieBot5000 has quit [Quit: Leaving]
davec has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
davec has joined #bitcoin-wizards
paveljanik has quit [Quit: Leaving]
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
arowser has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
arowser has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-wizards
wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
chmod755 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
wallet42 has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
CoinMuncher has joined #bitcoin-wizards
p15 has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
p15 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
benten has joined #bitcoin-wizards
AaronvanW has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
TBI has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rusty has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Emcy has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
SDr has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
SDr has joined #bitcoin-wizards
roconnor_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
sparetire_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
grubles has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
grubles has joined #bitcoin-wizards
grubles is now known as Guest71484
roconnor has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-wizards
melvster has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
dEBRUYNE has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Emcy has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Emcy has quit [Changing host]
Emcy has joined #bitcoin-wizards
p15 has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
p15 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
melvster has joined #bitcoin-wizards
roxtrongo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rusty has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
<petertodd>
gmaxwell: inclined to NACK the didn't validate flag on the grounds that we can force validation in the future ~100% of the time
<petertodd>
gmaxwell: also, it's a good thing for the ecosystem if people aren't trusting miners to validate
<petertodd>
gmaxwell: the fact that miners validate is a mistake, albeit one that is very difficult to fix
<Lightsword>
petertodd, I think the biggest problem with the lack of validation is that you can’t rollback to previous blocks easially on most deployed mining software
<Lightsword>
so you can’t even implement a timeout on validation
roxtrongo has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
GAit has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
<petertodd>
Lightsword: you're talking about a very different level of problem then I am :)
<Lightsword>
petertodd, maybe but it makes non-validating headers only mining just unsafe in general
CodeShark_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<petertodd>
Lightsword: what do you mean?
<Lightsword>
petertodd, say you pick up an invalid block header and send out stratum updates….eventually you find out the header was invalid….now you are stuck since you can’t put the miners back on the previous header
bramc has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
<petertodd>
Lightsword: huh? why can't you just push them a new header?
<Lightsword>
petertodd, because the mining software will think it is stale
<Lightsword>
and will refuse to mine on it
<petertodd>
Lightsword: mining sw determines staleness based on prevblockhash?
lmatteis has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Giszmo has quit [Client Quit]
Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
robmyers has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
notj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
robmyers has joined #bitcoin-wizards
alex_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
atgreen_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
alex_____ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
alex_ has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
TBI_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
alex_____ has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
TBI has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
<kanzure>
02:38 < petertodd> gmaxwell: the fact that miners validate is a mistake, albeit one that is very difficult to fix
<kanzure>
the alternative needs a good name
notj has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
<CodeShark>
kanzure: it's not an isolated mistake - it's an implication of the original incentives model which is now busted in several ways
<CodeShark>
The satoshi whitepaper only listed one incentive for validation...not losing mining rewards
<CodeShark>
the original bitcoin design makes no attempts at division of labor...you either run a full node or you run an spv node
hashtag_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<CodeShark>
the only quasi-attempt is the idea of fraud proofs...but no specification for this was ever provided by satoshi
Quanttek has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
gielbier has joined #bitcoin-wizards
gielbier has quit [Changing host]
gielbier has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Quanttek has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tulip has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
tulip has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<CodeShark>
So I'm not sure what to call an alternative
<CodeShark>
Nonminer incentives?
jtimon has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<kanzure>
fraud proofs were the idea of proving miner validation fraud, so that's still miners doing validation, so no
<kanzure>
well, i guess you can have fraud proofs for other activity, nevermind
roconnor_ has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
notj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
el33th4x0r has joined #bitcoin-wizards
notj has quit [Client Quit]
Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Yoghur114 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ir2ivps5 has quit [K-Lined]
cluckj has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
Dizzle has joined #bitcoin-wizards
gocrazy has joined #bitcoin-wizards
aem has joined #bitcoin-wizards
aem is now known as aem
notj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
AaronvanW has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
dEBRUYNE has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Guest71484 is now known as grubles
grubles has quit [Changing host]
grubles has joined #bitcoin-wizards
DougieBot5000 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
alex_____ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
notj has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
damethos has quit [Quit: Bye]
alex_____ has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
notj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
dEBRUYNE has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<instagibbs>
kanzure, why isn't it just "embedded consensus"?
rustyn has quit []
frankenmint has joined #bitcoin-wizards
zooko has joined #bitcoin-wizards
kisspunch has joined #bitcoin-wizards
notj has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
aem has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
liteIRC_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
zooko has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
liteIRC_ is now known as zooko
aem has joined #bitcoin-wizards
justanotheruser has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
notj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rdponticelli has joined #bitcoin-wizards
bramc has joined #bitcoin-wizards
notj has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-wizards
bendavenport has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tripleslash_p has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tripleslash has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
roidster has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tripleslash_p has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<JackH>
what is the channel for scaling bitcoin hong kong?
<JackH>
anyone knows?
erasmospunk has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
CoinMuncher has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
Erik_dc has joined #bitcoin-wizards
justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-wizards
zooko has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
mrkent has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<kanzure>
JackH: #bitcoin-workshops
PaulCapestany has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<JackH>
thx
coinoperated has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rdponticelli has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
coinoperated is now known as coinoperated_rob
robmyers has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
robmyers has joined #bitcoin-wizards
bt_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
justanotheruser has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-wizards
dEBRUYNE has joined #bitcoin-wizards
shen_noe has joined #bitcoin-wizards
bendavenport has quit [Quit: bendavenport]
shen_noe has quit [Client Quit]
frankenmint has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
bendavenport has joined #bitcoin-wizards
matsjj has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
cinik has quit [Quit: Leaving]
<coinoperated_rob>
hello, new to this chan. is there a summary of the scope of topics discussed here someone can point me to, or should i just review the logs?
bt_ has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
<kanzure>
reading the logs is a good idea.
<kanzure>
while you are doing that, writing a summary would also be great
bitkarma_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tulip has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
bitkarma has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
bitkarma_ is now known as bitkarma
tulip has joined #bitcoin-wizards
bt_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<coinoperated_rob>
I'll write a summary for a bitcoin community as soon as my nomex suit is back from the cleaners
eudoxia has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<coinoperated_rob>
but thx, i figured logs would be the answer
pozitrono has quit [K-Lined]
TBI has joined #bitcoin-wizards
TBI_ has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
bt_ has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
zooko has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Quanttek has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
chmod755 has quit [Quit: Ex-Chat]
dEBRUYNE has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
frankenmint has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rusty has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
erasmospunk has joined #bitcoin-wizards
zooko has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
zooko has joined #bitcoin-wizards
zooko has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
mrkent_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mrkent has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
Lightsword has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Lightsword has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
Lightsword has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
pozitrono has joined #bitcoin-wizards
erasmospunk has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<coinoperated_rob>
how much hashpower is "enough hashpower," i.e. the point at which any further securitization of a Tx is beyond the point of diminishing returns?
<coinoperated_rob>
i suppose it would be somewhat subjective, based on the purchaser's estimation and apetite for risk
bramc has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
<sipa>
coinoperated_rob: depends on how much hashpower potential attacks have
eudoxia has quit [Quit: Leaving]
<coinoperated_rob>
is the assumption "infinite" the upper bound?
<sipa>
theoretically, yes
<sipa>
but if that was the case, they are choosing to lose a lot of money by not using it already
ale______ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<coinoperated_rob>
@sipa not sure i follow, sorry :/ I think an example might help. So presently a Tx worth 0.01 BTC requires the same amount of security as a 1.00 BTC Tx, or a 100 BTC tx. It seems like this is a good thing for the reputation of the blockchain as a tool for securing Tx, but it doesn't make as much sense in an individual's economic terms.
<coinoperated_rob>
My working assumption is that a consistent testimony of security for any given Tx is a higher priority than matching cost to benefit for individual Tx.
<coinoperated_rob>
IOW I might be OK with losing a little money for a little security, even if I wasn't ok with losing a lot of money
<coinoperated_rob>
in which case yeah, i want all of it
<sipa>
that's a very fundamental weakness in bitcoin's security... all transactions are treated equal in security level
<coinoperated_rob>
Dial-a-hash.
<sipa>
which means its usefulness is limited to a certain range of values to protect
<coinoperated_rob>
@sipa indeed. i assume it's like common law - the most minor conflicts must be adjudicated with the same entire force of law as major ones, or the authority of the law risks becoming subjective
<sipa>
well we don't need authority here
<sipa>
i'd say it's a weakness; a system that is useful for a wider range of values, perhaps with reduced security at one side, would be better
<coinoperated_rob>
authority isn't something we can opt out of though. it forms wherever conditions favorable to it exist
<sipa>
if it does not come with a reduction of security at the other
<sipa>
in a very extreme sense, sure, but that would correspond here with people stop using the blockchain for determining authority to spend coins
<sipa>
i guess the real world equivalent of that is bitcoin using value
<coinoperated_rob>
would this be basically what sidechains are for? sharded domains of local authority, subject to federal authority
<sipa>
sidechains are just a tool
el33th4x0r has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<sipa>
federated sidechains are a way to introduce another security tradeoff
<sipa>
merged-mines ones imho not really; if we want people to validate and adopt them they must come with the same downsides as bitcoin itself
<coinoperated_rob>
i understand, maybe a better way to phrase would be "is this the fundamental problem that sidechains are a response to"
<sipa>
no, they enable innovation
<sipa>
they don't shard security
<kanzure>
the upper bound is local energy content of solar system
<kanzure>
or possibly a bit lower
<kanzure>
slightly.
<coinoperated_rob>
half of it
justanotheruser has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
<sipa>
coinoperated_rob: the fundamental problem that sidechains are a response to is the fact thay we can't improve bitcoin without approval of the entire ecosystem
* fluffypony
goes off to build a dyson sphere
<coinoperated_rob>
this is bad though, i don't think we want to pit A's 50% of the dyson sphere against B's 50%
<kanzure>
fluffypony: actually i think a dyson swarm would be a more practical initiative
<coinoperated_rob>
@sipa approval of the entire ecosystem is what i mean by authority forming where it will, not where it is desired
<sipa>
coinoperated_rob: lightning for example looks like a much better example of another point on the security/value tradeoff
mrkent_ has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
<kanzure>
authority-centric views are probably non-productive in this domain
<sipa>
coinoperated_rob: or other types of micropayment channels
<coinoperated_rob>
@sipa i have to catch up on lightning, but my rudimentary grasp is that it's something like ripple layered on to bitcoin, with pre-paid caches that hold direct channels beteen parties open
<kanzure>
sipa: i am curious if you have seen and/or disagreed with the (vague) explanation of payment channels as "rough constraints around otherwise undefined behavior of zero-conf transactions"
<coinoperated_rob>
this is probably way way off though.
<sipa>
coinoperated_rob: the way i like to describe it best is as a caching layer: transactions are negotiated and renegotiated in lightning, but the transactions are fully fledged bitcoin transactions; the bitcoin blockchain is however only involved for settling after either a timeout of non-cooperation of a participant, rather than for every individual transfer
<coinoperated_rob>
@kanzure we may not like authority any more than cancer, but both have natural causes rooted in things we do like
<kanzure>
i was not making any claims about my preferences regarding authority and i'm a little surprised you would somehow interpret my prior message as doing so?
roidster has quit [Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.90.1 [SeaMonkey 2.22.1/20131113180422]]
<sipa>
i just very much disagree with the notion that (mined) sidechains add any useful security tradeoff to the ecosystem. they're strictly less secure than using the alternative of using one blockchain
rusty has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<kanzure>
my (dis)preferences regarding authority should not inform whether i understand when its inapplicable
<coinoperated_rob>
@sipa so a settlement layer for bulk Tx aggregations, with bitcoin blockchain being a record of contract of these Tx confirmed as agreed by both/all parties?
<sipa>
what they add is the ability to experiment with new technology, which indirectly can lead to a more secure system overall of course, but not by using it directly
<sipa>
coinoperated_rob: aggregated transactions go to the blockchain yes
<coinoperated_rob>
@kanzure I was using "we" in the same sense you used "here" - not addressed to anyone in particular, but to "us" "here"
<kanzure>
i know.
forrestv has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
<sipa>
i think this conversation would be more useful if it was a bit less abstract :)
<kanzure>
sipa: yes/no on explaining payment channels as "mostly zero-conf"? more harmful than helpful?
<kanzure>
coinoperated_rob: my point only is that you should not assume applicability of a concept merely because of our preferences
<kanzure>
(or inapplicability)
<coinoperated_rob>
@sipa probably, given the forum. working from the middle out instead of from the top down is better when you can do it in confidence that the topmost premises are all settled questions.
<kumavis>
RootStock white paper here: https://t.co/DhRQg6cczp ( spoiler alert: its a federated peg )
<coinoperated_rob>
@kanzure I'm personally neutral on authority, it's just a form of social force to me. Having an approving view on it would be like having an approving view on gravity. It's just something that's there and must be contended with regardless of preferences.
el33th4x0r has quit [Client Quit]
dEBRUYNE has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<coinoperated_rob>
@sipa: thanks for clarification
justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<kanzure>
i never said anything about approval, and i'm confused why you would bring up gravity approval.
<kanzure>
at any rate, this is not only bad epistemology, but it's also off-topic,
<kanzure>
s/bad/low-quality
<coinoperated_rob>
@i'm really just interested in original question, which is how much hashpower is 'enough', are there any discussions of this or models etc. "Auhority" is a sidetrack.
<sipa>
kanzure: i guess yes, though the only requirement channels have of confirmability is "bounded time inclusion", thry don't rely on non-replacability of zero-conf tramsactions, which is what people mostly mean when they talk about 0-conf security
<coinoperated_rob>
@kanzure ^^
<sipa>
coinoperated_rob: a majority :)
<kanzure>
sipa: that's true, i guess most people talk about zero-conf in the context of flooding the network, not about private exchange of zero-conf between two parties
* sipa
adapts to HK time
<kanzure>
although i think some of the routing proposals have included flooding of some kind
mrkent has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
el33th4x0r has joined #bitcoin-wizards
bobke has joined #bitcoin-wizards
zooko has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<coinoperated_rob>
@kanzure
el33th4x0r has quit [Client Quit]
ThomasV has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
mrkent has joined #bitcoin-wizards
zooko has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<instagibbs>
sipa, wow fixed your jetlag already, nice
mrkent has quit [Client Quit]
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
bt_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
bt_ has quit [Client Quit]
el33th4x0r has joined #bitcoin-wizards
el33th4x0r has quit [Client Quit]
justice has joined #bitcoin-wizards
pozitrono has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
bt_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
bt_ has quit [Client Quit]
justanotheruser has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
bt_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
el33th4x0r has joined #bitcoin-wizards
justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<coinoperated_rob>
@kanzure, that paper is good. it comes close to asking the question that really matters, which is whether consensus is either physically impossible (other than by chance) or expensively redundant at planetary scales. great examination of some of the natural boundaries and how some may be overcome
<kanzure>
above is sergio lerner dag chain dagcoin stuff.
bramc has joined #bitcoin-wizards
bt_ has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
<kanzure>
"The resulting authenticated data structure is a Direct Acyclic Graph (DAG) of transactions where each transaction “confirms” one or more previous transactions. The confirmation security of a transaction is measured in accumulated amount of proof-of-work referencing the transaction."
<kanzure>
seems to make sense, given coinbase transactions...
moa has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Burrito has quit [Quit: Leaving]
bt_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<kanzure>
regarding restriction of the shape of the graph, i would expect that to influence transaction creation preferences somehow (probably in a similar sense to how lightning requires liquidity in certain places and incentivizes either creation of those channels or utilization of paths that have less-fee-heavy access to liquidity).