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
* nsh
frowns
<PeterR>
nsh: it may be a bad idea. One of our Editorial Board members brought it up.
<nsh>
who knows :)
<coinoperated>
nsh: there's only one journal (right now), and it has to cover a lot of ground
* nsh
nods
<PeterR>
Personally, I like it. Nature and Science do something similar.
<nsh>
they're magazines
<nsh>
:)
<PeterR>
lol
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<moa>
glossies
<coinoperated>
try to get an article published in either
<coinoperated>
it's no cakewalk
<coinoperated>
even if they are generalist
<nsh>
i don't think you could dynamically vote on blocksize without a massively complex [and therefore almost certainly broken] consensus
<PeterR>
moa: are you suggesting that Nature is not a legitimate scholarly journal?
<coinoperated>
Bitcoin needs almost exactly something in the style of Nature, IMHO. At this stage.
<nsh>
but it's not clear exactly where the degree of control attempted dynamically becomes pathological
dnaleor_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
dnaleor_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<nsh>
somewhere between setting the difficulty and dynamically changing the validity of blocks i'd say it becomes intractable
<nsh>
but there's no solid theory on this really
<PeterR>
coinoperatated: the is our vision.
<moa>
visions are not quantifiable
tjader has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<moa>
nor all that objective unless you get others to join you in your vision
<maaku>
PeterR: it's not a two-sided issue
<coinoperated>
persuasion is not inherently bad
<PeterR>
Moa: what are you referring to?
<PeterR>
maaku: agreed.
<PeterR>
The idea would be to purposely present two honest, but polarized, views.
dnaleor_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<PeterR>
To find the truth, sometimes it is useful to consider the extremes.
<coinoperated>
then one side will emerge with consensus. i see no problem presenting both to make one the foil of the other. plus you might get a nice surprise out of the "wrong" side.
<kanzure>
polarization is irrelevant, the only thing that matters is correctness
dnaleor_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<PeterR>
So, back to the article title: "How should the supply of block space be controlled?"
<kanzure>
you should not subsidy your own views just because it can't pass peer review
<kanzure>
*subsidize
<PeterR>
kanzure: what are you referring to?
dnaleor has quit [Quit: Leaving]
<kanzure>
i don't know how to make that more clear
dansmith_ has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
<instagibbs>
maaku, I did check the code :)
<coinoperated>
a published Journal is going to get a lot more respect than random doodz pusting links to random papers on IRC. that's what
<kanzure>
i am specifically talking about your polarization. you just mentioned it moments ago.
<coinoperated>
even if the random doodz are right
<PeterR>
Coinoperated: agreed.
<kanzure>
it's irrelevant whether random dudes are random. it really is.
dnaleor has joined #bitcoin-wizards
conner_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<PeterR>
Kanzure: the idea was to present two editorials answering the question "How should the supply of block space be controlled?"
<kanzure>
it's wrong to villify irc users. it's true that irc is universally considered awful, but that's no reason to think that ideas expressed over irc are faulty merely because of the medium.
<kanzure>
PeterR: no, you specifically said polarized views.... you said so moments ago.
dansmith_btc has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<adlai>
PeterR: what length editorial are you seeking, by what deadline? i advocate for block-size reduction and earn a sufficiently sub-epsilon salary writing code to divert some time to writing text
<coinoperated>
PeterR, the word "controlled" does sound a little too obviously polarizing. Is that the best choice? What about "allocated"
<PeterR>
Right. We would solicit one article from prominent intelligent people who lean towards smaller blocks, and another from people who lean towards larger blocks.
<PeterR>
I suspect the two articles would focus on different things.
<PeterR>
And we might all learn something from the exercise.
<kanzure>
polarization is irrelevant
<kanzure>
why spend time on something wrong? either put up or shut up.
<nsh>
unless circular
<PeterR>
Coinoperated: yes, allocated is better
<kanzure>
if your ideas can't pass peer review then you should not subsidize wrong views
<nsh>
(circular polarization is often very important)
<kanzure>
"teach the controversy" is a failure
<PeterR>
Kanzure: so you're saying that you are not in favour of non-peer reviewed articles in Ledger.
<kanzure>
what is the alternative review mechanism if it is non-peer?
<moa>
it might sense if you get the small-block proponent to argue the big-block case and vice-versa (Oxford debate style) or you're just going to end up with usual polemics
<PeterR>
Ledger publishes Original Research articles, Review Articles, and Perspectives (editorials). Only the first two are peer reviewed.
<adlai>
defining corectness on the basis of peer review is not sybil-resistent
<coinoperated>
kanzure, the art of connecting with the public is largely about meeting people where they are, to bring them to where you are.
<kanzure>
adlai: correct
<PeterR>
Moa: interesting idea!
<adlai>
kanzure: i see what you did there!
<maaku>
adlai: meritocracies are sybil-resistent
<kanzure>
adlai: still, he knows the score--- he has to fix the failures in his ideas that have alread been identified, either through peer review or before it, or else he's just wasting our time again
<maaku>
(mostly)
<adlai>
#NotAllMeritocracies
<kanzure>
right, peer review is supposed to identify flaws, not define correctness
<PeterR>
kanzure: this has nothing to do with "my ideas"
<kanzure>
hahahaha
<kanzure>
that's impossible
<kanzure>
you put your name on them!
<PeterR>
We're discussing two articles that each answer the question "How should the supply of block space be allocated?"
<coinoperated>
speaking of Oxford style debates, I wonder if one could be assembled for a teleconferenced event
<PeterR>
Kanzure: they haven't been written yet.
<PeterR>
I'm asking this IRC channel if they think soliciting two such editorials would be a worthwhile exercise.
<kanzure>
i have no reason to assume you have fixed your previous assumptions
<adlai>
PeterR: so you should write a third editorial, advocating that block space should never be changed because the market doesn't know what's good for itself
* nsh
submits a polemic editorial lambasting discrete options in the abstract
<nsh>
we should be allowed a continuous range of misinformed opinions on the matter
<PeterR>
adlai: only under a pseudonym.
* adlai
wonders whether Utilitarian Conservative Bitcoin Universalists should donate a larger percent of their income to p2pool miners or coinbase-tx-only miners
<nsh>
maybe two very brief speculative fictions about the doomsday scenarios that will inevitably result from [not] changing the BS to blah
<PeterR>
Anyways, if anyone is interested, please let me know.
<adlai>
ooh, speculative fiction! this would increase the mass-appeal of the journal, which clearly needs mass adoption in order to survive and be taken seriously.
dansmith_btc has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
<nsh>
nad we can make the whole thing have a 1950s Popular Mechanics aesthetic
c0rw1n is now known as c0rw|zZz
<nsh>
bitcoin-bubble-top will be ultimate blockchain
<nsh>
nah, but it could be a good move PeterR if you get high quality submissions. good luck :)
<nsh>
it'd be more productive if everyone just read Hegel for a month though
ttttemp has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<kanzure>
which hegel things?
<nsh>
the things about how to engage in a dialectical process
<nsh>
some kind of prehistoric lost art
<kanzure>
i think you mean popper
<nsh>
no.
<nsh>
popper is more of a large-scale sociological-espistemological phenomenon. dialectic with a small d is very much something that should happen with conscious individual and group participation
dansmith_btc has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<nsh>
the structure of scientific revolutions is more about fashion than reason
Tiraspol has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Tiraspol has quit [Changing host]
Tiraspol has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<moa>
nsh: usually recently discovered experimental facts that give rise to 'fashionable' theories
<nsh>
(one might argue that it's the strange attractors between the laughs at ultimate nothingness or vertiginous amazement at meaningless infinities that make all the difference)
<nsh>
(some might also argue that where shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, drinking largely sobers us again)
dansmith_btc has quit [Max SendQ exceeded]
dansmith_btc has joined #bitcoin-wizards
NewLiberty has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
<PeterR>
adlai: I missed your earlier question: we're not sure length yet (this idea just came up today), but I would guess ~2000 - 3000 words (something shorter than a full-length research article).
GGuyZ has quit [Quit: GGuyZ]
<PeterR>
We could decide on anything, however.
jtimon has quit [Quit: gone]
jtimon has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<PeterR>
We'd want the articles towards the end of March, probably.
jtimon has quit [Client Quit]
jtimon has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jtimon has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
* adlai
could throw something together; picking up the earlier theme of "write drunk, edit sober", and collaborative authorship: the 'perspective'-oriented editorials may be more valuable with several names on top... attributive multisignature
<adlai>
PeterR: but obviously 2000 words is too much! "640 words should be enough for anybody"
Tiraspol has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
GGuyZ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Tiraspol has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<PeterR>
adlai: I was thinking some kind of a flexcap: the more words you write, the more typos per page the copyeditors inject.
<PeterR>
:)
<adlai>
to your credit - at least you're able to make fun of yourself! this ability is in precious short regard these days, in this space
<moa>
you mean like clowns?
<adlai>
no, like adults... if this doesn't make sense, maybe it's a cultural thing. men are from mars, women from venus, /me from the circus.
<moa>
ah, self-deprecating humour
<adlai>
yes.
<maaku>
adlai: I'm from mercury you insensitive clod
<adlai>
i thought that was mappum ?
<adlai>
maaku: also, cf "but I am no man..." but tolkein references probably belong in ##bitcoin-slightly-ontopic
* adlai
floats an equally-offtopic question for this channel: which is more urgently needed: ACCS, decentralized hedging contracts, or general-purpose decentralized counterparty discovery (aka "order book")?
<mappum>
Adlai: IMO decentralized order book, but it seems hard to solve
<bsm117532>
I've been thinking a lot about a decentralized order book and matching.
* adlai
sketched out tonight a highly expensive atomic order matching, which requires an "atomicity provider", and 100% additional collateral; leaves room open for margin lending...
<bsm117532>
It's very amenable to a blockchain solution, where instead of a UTXO set, transactions create the book.
<moa>
there is no reason why the price dicovery (order book and matching) needs to be decentralised, it is the settling that is the weak point
<bsm117532>
moa: It does need to be decentralized. How do I know what rules the centralized order book is operating under?
<adlai>
moa: centralization yields control. even if your exchange isn't front-running, the mere fact that somebody can make millions selling books claiming that it is, turns the ecosystem into a negative-sum game
* adlai
admits never quite understanding where federation redistributes into decentralization
<bsm117532>
Or maybe I mean distributed > federated > centralized
<bsm117532>
federation is a hub-and-spoke network. distributed is random interconnectivity (in my mind)
<moa>
point being it is the transfer of funds where the elimination of a counter party is most beneficial
<moa>
i.e. trusted 3rd party
<bsm117532>
In maintaining an order book, there is tremendous incentive to cheat to give yourself better prices. It's highly desirable to make that distributed.
<coinoperated>
decentralization wants to be decentralized, it is a goal to avoid centralization pressures even if it incurs overhead costs to do so
<coinoperated>
thats my understanding anyway
fn2187_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
alpalp has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<coinoperated>
decentralization may not work at all in a truly adversarial climate. Actors joining the decentralizaed group have to agree that the costs incurred by it are worth it, as a minimum condition for joining
<coinoperated>
so they self select
<belcher>
in all this decentralized-but-profitable stuff, isnt there a tragedy of the commons inherent that nobody can be incentivized to maintain it? so centralized rent-seeking systems will be better funded and outcompete it
ggreer has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<moa>
belcher: unless it has a built-in token
ggreer has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<adlai>
belcher: "In 7 yrs of researchcosting >$6bn, scientists have finally proven that bees can't fly, but nobody told them yet so they keep buying Bitcoin"
<belcher>
right so bitcoin is an exception because it can be owned
<adlai>
and people can make money with less downside in a system where their funds can't get outright stolen
<moa>
well there is 600++ other alts of varying valuations also
fn2187 has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
<belcher>
has anyone heard of bitsquare? its a decentralized otc marketplace, not many i imagine, yet everyones heard of localbitcoins which is the centralized equivalent that has money to fund itself
<adlai>
there's a lot of value in trading a small reduction in maximum upside for a massive reduction in maximal downside
<belcher>
nothing against the bitsquare devs, they're great but i can understand why development is going slowly
<moa>
bitsquare has been in 'alpha' for what seems like a long time :(
<belcher>
another example is openbazaar vs a centralized tor marketplace
<adlai>
localbitcoins can go out of business, bitsquare only dies if everybody loses interest
<belcher>
bitsquare isnt even alive
<adlai>
let me rephrase: companies starve when they run out of money; open source / decentralized projects only starve when people run out of time
<adlai>
another example is centralized mixers vs joinmarket. oh wait.
ggreer has quit [Changing host]
ggreer has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<belcher>
money can be exchanged for people's time, if something is valuable then its likely it will always be able to raise an income for itself
<belcher>
it would be perfect could be decentralized yet somehow had enough rent-seeking to fund itself
* adlai
waits, for centralized mixers to publish their volume statistics... or chainalysis to do this for them
<belcher>
err, *if it could be
<belcher>
adlai walletexplorer.com already has
voxelot has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
kang_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<adlai>
it doesn't give me pretty little bar charts of DAUs and MAUs
<belcher>
even the current bitcoin political war might be related to this, block space is not inherently scarce yet it must be made so in order to fund network security after the reward is gone
<adlai>
(that's Daily Active UTXOs, not Users...)
<adlai>
belcher: how about "block space is not inherently scarce so it must be kept so while the reward is still here, to fund network security as the reward disappears"
<belcher>
so tragedy-of-the-commons, individuals would rather not pay higher tx fees so they complain to try to get the limit raised, of course we're homo-economius so plenty recognise a block size limit is good
<kang_>
belcher: We could switch to PoS after rewards drop to zero.. Give it a thought..
<belcher>
kang_ PoS doesnt work i thought? the nothing-at-stake problem
<adlai>
kang_: PoW has nothing to do with inflation. if fees are sufficient to cover electricity costs, there's no reason to switch to a less secure system
<kang_>
belcher: Some claim to have solved it like ethereum's slasher algo..
<kang_>
adlai: It does, all PoS coins have origin of money problem
<adlai>
dude what? how does the price of eggs in afghanistan have to do with the paper on which it's printed?
<kang_>
adlai: And with PoW we'd already have originated all the money by then
<adlai>
PoW is a mechanism for convincing yourself that you'll be able to convince others
oneeman has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<adlai>
inflation subsidizes an expensive operation for bootstrapping, but satoshi could've wired miners dollars if he hadn't cared for his own privacy
DougieBot5000 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<adlai>
money doesn't "originate from" anywhere. bitcoins do not represent shares in consumed negentropy.
<adlai>
bitcoin is bitcoin, and PoW is only there because it's hard to fake, so easy to agree that it's not fake.
<belcher>
but marginal utility = marginal cost, so the creator of coins generally has to spend what they're worth on the market
<adlai>
but static friction /= kinetic friction, so markets are inefficient
<belcher>
imagine if you could magic $10k every 10 minutes out of nothing, it seems unreal and it is, nobody gets a free lunch, the only reason miners can is because they burn close to $10k worth of energy at the same time
<kang_>
adlai: PoW does what you say, but it is also the only known fair mechanism to originate money
<adlai>
they don't magic money out of anywhere! 21M bitcoin already exist, 6M are simply unallocated today. the lottery tells us who can spend them first.
<kang_>
Same thing
<dcousens>
to be fair, the power stations are doing most of the work, they just don't realise that they are a proxy for PoW :P, the miners are just middlemen with hardware
<adlai>
money originates from nowhere, it just gets agreed upon by a bunch of people. if it's harder to fake, then more people can agree on it more readily.
laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<dcousens>
adlai: heh, good paper that
GGuyZ has quit [Quit: GGuyZ]
<adlai>
title: "Money Is Memory" also relevant: "A version of this paper circulated under the title 'Money Versus Memory'" but note what they changed the title to, before pubdication.
laurentmt has quit [Client Quit]
darmou has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
<adlai>
dcousens: i'm not enough of a physicist/electrician to compare the "work" done in converting chemical/nuclear potential energy to AC, vs the work done in converting DC to preimage collision seeking[, vs the work done in converting AC to DC]
<dcousens>
:p, indeed, I don't know either, just thought it was funny to follow an abstract thought
<adlai>
not to mention gravitational and thermal PE... the only "work" we can get a definite handle on is that of structured heat creation, and even this is done using differening and proprietary apparati
<PeterR>
dcousens: "the power stations are doing most of the work, they just don't realise that they are a proxy for PoW :P, the miners are just middlemen with hardware"
MrChrisJ has quit [Quit: MrChrisJ]
<PeterR>
the power stations are middle men harvesting power from the water running through the dam's turbine
<dcousens>
PeterR: indeed, it was a recursive argument
<dcousens>
We can go back to the big bang
<dcousens>
Next on CNN: big bang a proxy for PoW in bitcoin...
<PeterR>
I gave a physics talk once called "it all comes from the sun"
<moa>
right now the chip fab plants are doing as much of the work as the running water
<dcousens>
whats great about bitcoin, is that mining is worth exactly what we agree it is worth, as a systemic cost
<PeterR>
Sort of fun to show how what powers (almost) everything here on Earth, came as energy from the sun
<coinoperated>
there was a good post on reddit like 6 months ago, some guy compared PoW to wall clocks, fences with locks, refrigerators keeping food cold, and the universe in general.
<adlai>
"I don't pray to the sun, though. I wouldn't want to presume on our friendship." - George Carlin
darmou has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<adlai>
so back to decentralized discovery: the most common complaint appears to be lack of atomicity, which can be addressed by having each offer fund an escrow with an "atomicity provider" (henceforth known as the "Atomizer")
<kang_>
adlai: Yes money is memory. Since scarcity of bitcoin is fixed, rather than originating it, its the mining lottery. My point was all PoS coins have this initial allocation problem
<moa>
POW turns energy into information so it cryptographic proof that entropy was raised somewhere (using demonstrable negentropy as proof)
<adlai>
so we have Offerer, Atomizer, and Crosser, where the latter is the counterparty placing the offer which crosses books and hits the Offerer's already-placed offer
<kang_>
adlai: They do not have a fair mechanism for initial distribution of a scarce quantity
AaronVW has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<coinoperated>
kang_: There are hybrid PoW/POS coins that start out a PoW and transition to PoS (in various ways) as an attempt to rectify the distribution problem. But it doesn't since PoW also has initial distribution problems. If you are near the source at the start of distribution, you end up with more for less. In both systems.
<adlai>
Offerer funds 2of2 escrow with Atomizer to place the offer in the book. Crosser funds the 2of2 for the bet (CFD, option, etc) itself (or 2of3 including an Arbitrator) in an atomic swap along with Atomizer and Offerer
AaronvanW_ has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
<kang_>
coinoperated: I feel that that problem is unsolvable and beneficial to spread of a blockchain akin to acquiring shares of new company for cheap
* adlai
notes that this protocol is roughly six hours old, and uses roughly six times as many tx fees as simply "counterparties find eachother outside of the blockchain, and fund their escrow"; the advantage of the latter is that offer cancellation is "free": you just don't fund the address
dontbesquare has quit [Quit: Leaving]
conner_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
sausage_factory has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
conner_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
conner_ has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
p15 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<dcousens>
btcdrak: hey, that RBF FAQ, how can I link to it on the site
<yoleaux>
Taek: Sorry, that doesn't appear to be an HTML page.
<Taek>
"On Decentralizing Prediction Markets and Order Books"
<Taek>
Ther
<Taek>
*There's also another way I know of to perform a decentralized order book, or at least set up decentralized trading. It involves either ACCS or payment channels
tjader has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
<Taek>
you set up a network of nodes where each node is running both cryptocurrencies
NewLiberty has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<Taek>
then they each have a buy price and a sell price. When they want to transact, they ask all the other nodes what the going rate is
<Taek>
whoever offers them the best offer gets to complete the trade
<Taek>
using payment channels this can be done quickly, but requires setup
<Taek>
using ACCS, you can do it but it takes more time and leaves DOS vulnerabilities
<Taek>
when using payment channels, you trade just a tiny amount at a time, in a large series of trades
<Taek>
if there's any cheating, trading stops immediately and the only money lost is the tiny amount at risk in each trade
dcousens has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<Taek>
a maximum of one of these trades can go sour
<Taek>
assuming a round trip time of 500ms, you can do 120 of these trades every minute, which is sufficient for small volumes of money
<Taek>
incidentally, this means that you can put a mission-impossible style progress bar on your trading :)
memymo has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
andy-logbot has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
andy-logbot has joined #bitcoin-wizards
* andy-logbot
is logging
gavink has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
AaronVW has joined #bitcoin-wizards
AaronVW has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-wizards
adam3us has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
adam3us has joined #bitcoin-wizards
adam3us has quit [Client Quit]
kelly has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
freekevin has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
gmaxwell has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<gmaxwell>
hehe, trolls on reddit are sometimes entertaining:
<gmaxwell>
"Personally I like the idea of hashcash if, and only if, it's structured like a real currency as opposed to simply proof of work. In the real world you pay for resources used. In many cases this should also apply to P2P and other computer systems.
<gmaxwell>
Of course getting hashcash workable as a real currency is extremely difficult. I've thought of a scheme that would work (coins are signed by owner and can only be changed (signed to a different owner) by owner) except you need a decentralized "central" database of all the hashcash that's been minted. Unworkable. !@#$ spend-twice problem. :(" ... Peter Todd in 2001, on a mailing list with Hal and
<nsh>
so i guess my quesiton resolves to whether or not minimax exhibits 'structure' that allows for quantum speedup
NewLiberty has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<nsh>
' Performing any form of minimax search on a quantum computer in better than exponential time is ridiculously unlikely, and one would expect at most a modest (polynomial) speedup compared to now. This much is already proved by the existing literature.' -- http://senseis.xmp.net/?QuantumComputing
<nsh>
heh
<nsh>
'However, the expression "solving go", as if we were doing sudoku, is wrong. It's like saying you could solve art, or solve mathematics (googleFor:Göedel). Simply, there are things you can not compute. Anyone who's played enough Go knows that this isn't a game a about mere calculations, there is a lot of right brain hemisphere activity going on as well. There are a lot of factors involved in a Go m
<nsh>
atch, and understanding another person's intentions is no easy task for machines. It's a human capacity known as "empathy"; I just don't think machines might get right-hemisphere-type artificial intelligence someday, creative tasks and abstract reasoning, aesthetics perception, intuition, imaginative process.. result => does not compute, I think. '
<nsh>
that's a very strong position contra computational church turing
<tromp_>
i think that's enough way off topic for now:)
<nsh>
i find it increasingly hard to think of any kind of physics as noncomputational. so the idea of a brain doing something other than calculations in some abstract sense seems pretty devoid of meaning
* nsh
nods
<nsh>
my bad
<kanzure>
i think i solved 100 arts
<instagibbs>
#bitcoin-wizards-offtopic
memymo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
IAmNotDorian has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
danielsocials has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
NewLiberty has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
erasmosp_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Yoghur114 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-wizards
bityogi has joined #bitcoin-wizards
erasmospunk has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
Yoghur114 has quit []
zookolaptop has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
bit2017 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GGuyZ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Tiraspol has quit []
Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
NewLiberty has joined #bitcoin-wizards
IAmNotDorian has joined #bitcoin-wizards
IAmNotDorian has quit [Changing host]
IAmNotDorian has joined #bitcoin-wizards
DougieBot5000 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
erasmosp_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
erasmospunk has joined #bitcoin-wizards
AndChat|435584 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
skyraider_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GGuyZ has quit [Quit: GGuyZ]
voxelot has joined #bitcoin-wizards
alex_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
GGuyZ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
alex_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
c0rw|zZz is now known as c0rw1n
tjader has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
tjader has joined #bitcoin-wizards
IAmNotDorian has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
arowser has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
arowser has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Dizzle has joined #bitcoin-wizards
murch has joined #bitcoin-wizards
sergiohlb has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
alex_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
alex_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
alex_ has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
alex_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
alex_ has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
phiche has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
danielsocials has joined #bitcoin-wizards
danielsocials has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<bsm117532>
Can anyone provide any references on distributed, deterministic order matching? i.e. imagine that instead of a block containing UTXO's, it contained an order book with bids and asks, which get matched deterministically. I know a few projects do this, effectively.
adam3us has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
phiche has joined #bitcoin-wizards
nivah has joined #bitcoin-wizards
N0S4A2 has quit [Quit: WeeChat 1.3]
bit2017 has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
<nsh>
which projects?
<nsh>
i mean, there are obvious trivial impossibility results unless you loosen the notion of strict sequential matching because a distributed system does not have a common proper time
N0S4A2 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<nsh>
and loosening that without it being open to gaming or other problems seems tricky
phiche1 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
arowser has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
phiche has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
frankenmint has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
arowser has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<bsm117532>
nsh: that's exactly what I was hoping to find literature on. CounterParty, NXT, etc claim to do it.
<nsh>
shout if you find any!
<bsm117532>
I was thinking naively of publishing all orders in a "block" (bids and asks would overlap) and having deterministic resolution rules. But I'm sure it can be gamed...
<nsh>
you can make it so the expected utility of gaming is below some cost threshold
<nsh>
that's the generic solution i suspect
<bsm117532>
obviously, a time based first-in-first-out isn't possible in a distributed system...
<nsh>
but when a single trade can be massively valuable, that's hard
<nsh>
so might result in having to set a maximum order-differential value delta
<nsh>
if that makes sense?
<nsh>
which will mean some bid/asks will have to be broken up
<bsm117532>
Partial fills are a requiremenet.
<nsh>
or else another way to prevent a reordering changing value too much
<nsh>
what's a partial fill?
<bsm117532>
Two people place orders for 100 units against an existing sell of 100 units, each would get 50.
<bsm117532>
(only fair way to do it if you don't have time ordering)
<nsh>
ah i see
<nsh>
yeah, in that case if you define the degree of order overlap and apply partial fill, then it's pretty much optimally fair
<bsm117532>
The gaming I think would come down to non-random oracle of your hash function. Taking all the orders to be matched you can make a PRNG to decide (e.g. rounding of partial fills).
<nsh>
but because that depends on latency which is hard to predict, you probably end up having to fine-tune the err
<nsh>
hmm
<bsm117532>
Why would latency matter?
<bsm117532>
Just imagine a "tick" sending out the order book once per time interval, just like blocks.
<nsh>
because 'now' depends on the now of elsewhere getting to you
NewLiberty has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<nsh>
and that depends on network stuff that's out of our hands
<bsm117532>
Imagine the tick is long enough that all participants have a chance to see the order book and react (so, more than a second, roughly0
* nsh
nods
alex_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<bsm117532>
I think this is what CounterParty does...
<nsh>
so i characterised bitcoin this way once, in terms of conflict-free replicated data types
<nsh>
in which you have operation-based and state-based, but bitcoin ends up being a hybrid of these due to blocktime 'tick' as you say
<nsh>
--
<nsh>
Operation-based CRDTs are called commutative replicated data types, or CmRDTs. CmRDT replicas propagate state by broadcasting the state update operation itself, which must be commutative. For example, a CmRDT of a single integer might broadcast the operations (+10) or (-20). Replicas receive the updates and apply them locally. The operations are commutative, so can be received and applied in any ord
<nsh>
er; however, they are not idempotent, and additional network protocol guarantees are required to ensure unique delivery.
<nsh>
-- block propagatoins
<nsh>
State-based CRDTs are called convergent replicated data types, or CvRDTs. In contrast to CmRDTs, CvRDTs send their full local state to other replicas. CvRDTs have the following local interface:
<nsh>
query - reads the state of the replica, with no side effects
<nsh>
update - writes to the replica state in accordance with certain restrictions
<nsh>
merge - merges local state with the state of some remote replica
<nsh>
-- transaction propagation
<bsm117532>
egads you should read some of the things I've written privately. It's like you read my mind...
<nsh>
hehe :D
alex_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
alex_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<bsm117532>
One side thought I've been having is the notion of commutative updates, conflict-resolvable, and conflicting updates.
<bsm117532>
e.g. multiple sequential spends from a single UTXO could in principle be merged, instead of being a double spend in bitcoin.
<nsh>
right
Piper-Off is now known as Monthrect
Erik_dc has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GAit has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
darmou has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
frankenmint has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GAit has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
tjader has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tjader has joined #bitcoin-wizards
nonaTure has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
phiche1 has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
dnaleor has quit [Quit: Leaving]
phiche has joined #bitcoin-wizards
danielsocials has joined #bitcoin-wizards
danielsocials has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
nonaTure has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Emcy has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
frankenmint has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
GAit has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
priidu has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jtimon has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GAit has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
frankenmint has joined #bitcoin-wizards
blackwraith has joined #bitcoin-wizards
priidu has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
sausage_factory has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mihar has joined #bitcoin-wizards
blackwraith has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
ThomasV has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GGuyZ has quit [Read error: No route to host]
MrChrisJ has quit [Quit: MrChrisJ]
ThomasV has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
adam3us has joined #bitcoin-wizards
memymo has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
brg444 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tjader has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
darmou has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
tjader has joined #bitcoin-wizards
darmou has joined #bitcoin-wizards
darmou has quit [Client Quit]
dnaleor has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Jeremy_Rand_2 has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jposner has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
zookolaptop has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
jposner has joined #bitcoin-wizards
gocrazy has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
gocrazy has joined #bitcoin-wizards
stevenroose_ has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
memymo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
raedah has joined #bitcoin-wizards
erasmospunk has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
jposner has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Dizzle has quit [Quit: Leaving...]
erasmospunk has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rusty has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jposner has joined #bitcoin-wizards
c0rw1n has quit []
c0rw1n has joined #bitcoin-wizards
darmou has joined #bitcoin-wizards
danielsocials has joined #bitcoin-wizards
adam3us has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
polyclef has joined #bitcoin-wizards
danielsocials has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
everyBloc has quit []
darmou has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
darmou has joined #bitcoin-wizards
dnaleor_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
dnaleor_ has quit [Client Quit]
alex_ has quit []
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
adam3us has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Jeremy_Rand_2 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
davec has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
davec has joined #bitcoin-wizards
OxADADA has quit [Quit: leaving]
OxADADA has joined #bitcoin-wizards
riplin has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Logicwax has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
riplin has quit [Quit: Page closed]
Logicwax has joined #bitcoin-wizards
T23WS has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tjader has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
voxelot has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
Jeremy_Rand_2 has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
tjader has joined #bitcoin-wizards
dcousens has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
melvster has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
Linus_ has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
Jeremy_Rand_2 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
melvster has joined #bitcoin-wizards
zzyzx has quit [Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.92 [SeaMonkey 2.39/20151103191810]]
erasmospunk has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-wizards
zookolaptop is now known as zooko
T23WS has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
voxelot has joined #bitcoin-wizards
MrChrisJ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Jeremy_Rand_2 has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
adam3us1 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
adam3us1 has quit [Client Quit]
adam3us1 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
adam3us1 has quit [Client Quit]
adam3us1 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
adam3us1 has quit [Client Quit]
adam3us1 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
WyzBTC has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
adam3us has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
e_low is now known as prosody
gavink has joined #bitcoin-wizards
melvster has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
rusty has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
melvster has joined #bitcoin-wizards
dcousens has joined #bitcoin-wizards
MoALTz has quit [Quit: Leaving]
zzyzx has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mkarrer_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
adam3us1 has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
darmou has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
danielsocials has joined #bitcoin-wizards
MoALTz has joined #bitcoin-wizards
danielsocials has quit [Remote host closed the connection]