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
dnaleor has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
Guest11755 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
pigeons has joined #bitcoin-wizards
pigeons is now known as Guest51878
bramc has joined #bitcoin-wizards
bramc is now known as Guest28903
zookolaptop is now known as zooko
bityogi has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
dnaleor has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Guest51878 has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
pigeons_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
memymo has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
RoboTeddy has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
RoboTeddy has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Monthrect is now known as Piper-Off
pigeons_ has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
mpmcsweeney has joined #bitcoin-wizards
pigeons has joined #bitcoin-wizards
pigeons is now known as Guest4713
jtimon has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Guest4713 has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
pigeons_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
pigeons_ has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
pigeons_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
memymo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
LeMiner2 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
LeMiner has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
LeMiner2 is now known as LeMiner
zooko has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
GAit has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
memymo has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
dEBRUYNE has quit [Quit: Leaving]
zooko has joined #bitcoin-wizards
zooko` has joined #bitcoin-wizards
AaronvanW_ has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
zooko has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
bad-dragon has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
roasbeef has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
roasbeef has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Ylbam has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
stevenroose_ has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
raedah has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jtimon has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
pigeons_ has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
raedah has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
raedah has joined #bitcoin-wizards
pigeons has joined #bitcoin-wizards
pigeons is now known as Guest16621
mpmcsweeney has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Guest16621 has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
mrkent_ has quit []
tjader has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
kang_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
priidu has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
tjader has joined #bitcoin-wizards
pigeons_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
NewLiberty has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
dnaleor has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
pigeons_ has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
veleiro has joined #bitcoin-wizards
dcousens has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
andytoshi has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
dcousens has joined #bitcoin-wizards
pigeons_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
andytoshi has joined #bitcoin-wizards
brg444 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
c0rw1n is now known as c0rw|zZz
dcousens has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
RoboTeddy has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
dcousens has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mpmcsweeney has joined #bitcoin-wizards
RoboTeddy has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mpmcsweeney has quit [Client Quit]
r0ach has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
memymo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
T23WS has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mihar has joined #bitcoin-wizards
T23WS_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
T23WS has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
mihar_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
pigeons_ has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
RoboTeddy has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
RoboTeddy has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mihar has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
NewLiberty has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GGuyZ_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GGuyZ has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<bsm1175321>
A braid. siblings of the bead with a black circle are labeled with (m,n) which is their rank (how many generations you have to go up & down to get to them).
<bsm1175321>
genesis is on the left, braid tip on the right.
<bsm1175321>
The cohort of the indicated bead is in purple (cohort is the analog of a bitcoin block).
brg444 has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
tjader has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
Guest70344 has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
tjader has joined #bitcoin-wizards
voxelot has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<bsm1175321>
The numbers on the beads are an indication of whether the miner is performing a withholding attack (taken entirely from graph structure).
pigeons_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<AdrianG>
ic
veleiro has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
<bsm1175321>
alles klar?
<AdrianG>
klar wie Kloßbrühe.
<MRL-Relay>
[othe] ausgezeichnet.
<AdrianG>
lol
<bsm1175321>
Kloßbrühe
<bsm1175321>
Hmmm one of us has a UTF-8 problem.
Auxon has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GGuyZ has quit [Quit: GGuyZ]
veleiro has joined #bitcoin-wizards
lauren has joined #bitcoin-wizards
r0ach has joined #bitcoin-wizards
hashtag has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
hashtag has joined #bitcoin-wizards
sparetire has quit [Quit: sparetire]
Guest28903 is now known as bramc
Auxon has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
ThomasV has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
NewLiberty has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
TheSeven has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
TheSeven has joined #bitcoin-wizards
andytoshi has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
andytoshi has joined #bitcoin-wizards
priidu has joined #bitcoin-wizards
zwischenzug2 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
oneeman has quit [Quit: Leaving]
arowser has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
arowser has joined #bitcoin-wizards
veleiro has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
memymo has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
andy-logbot has joined #bitcoin-wizards
* andy-logbot
is logging
dnaleor has quit [Quit: Leaving]
mihar has joined #bitcoin-wizards
nivah has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mihar has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
bit2017 has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
c-cex-yuriy has joined #bitcoin-wizards
nivah has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
bit2017 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
adnn_ has quit []
moa has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
frankenmint has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Guest31223 has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
melvster has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
markus-k has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
markus-k has joined #bitcoin-wizards
damethos has joined #bitcoin-wizards
frankenmint has joined #bitcoin-wizards
p15 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
voxelot has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
roconnor__ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
melvster has joined #bitcoin-wizards
roconnor_ has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
tjader has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-wizards
p15 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
lnovy is now known as talpa23
mihar has joined #bitcoin-wizards
laurentmt has quit [Client Quit]
tjader has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mihar has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
mrkent has quit []
nivah has joined #bitcoin-wizards
bit2017 has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
Guyver2 has quit [Quit: :)]
c0rw|zZz is now known as c0rw1n
erasmospunk has joined #bitcoin-wizards
erasmospunk has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
dEBRUYNE has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tjader has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
adam3us has joined #bitcoin-wizards
damethos has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
damethos has joined #bitcoin-wizards
AaronvanW_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tjader has joined #bitcoin-wizards
adam3us has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
adam3us has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
eudoxia has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
erasmospunk has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
GGuyZ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
arowser has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
arowser has joined #bitcoin-wizards
hazirafel has joined #bitcoin-wizards
YankoRo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tjader has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
GAit has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
tjader has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mihar has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mihar has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
kang_ has quit [Quit: Page closed]
eudoxia has quit [Quit: Leaving]
voxelot has joined #bitcoin-wizards
dEBRUYNE has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
nivah has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
gavink has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
jtimon has joined #bitcoin-wizards
arowser has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
proslogion has joined #bitcoin-wizards
arowser has joined #bitcoin-wizards
voxelot has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
Guyver2 has quit [Quit: :)]
dcousens has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
dcousens has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Oizopower has joined #bitcoin-wizards
adam3us has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
hazirafel has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
WyzBTC has joined #bitcoin-wizards
dnaleor has joined #bitcoin-wizards
MrHodl has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mihar has joined #bitcoin-wizards
proslogion has left #bitcoin-wizards ["离开"]
melvster has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
mihar has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
GGuyZ has quit [Quit: GGuyZ]
<bsm1175321>
In case anyone looked at the above graph: one can generalize the concept of "sibling" to say 3rd order siblings. That is, find a common ancestor and descendant of 3 sibling beads (analogous to orphans -- produced at the same time). This becomes possible as the size of a cohort increases, due to faster bead/block time and lower difficulty targets. One then can measure the relative work along each path to the commo
<bsm1175321>
This might tell us something interesting about the behavior of miners, that could be used in an incentive formula. I think 2nd order siblings is sufficient to eliminate selfish mining attacks, but I wonder what one could do with a higher order analysis of the structure. Any ideas?
zooko` has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
<bsm1175321>
It's worth noting that as you increase the number of simultaneous siblings you're going to consider the complexity of the algorithm increases. e.g. a naive implementation of siblings as shown in the graph is O(n^3) and 3rd order siblings should be O(n^4) where n is the number of beads in the cohort. This can certainly be improved by clever use of subgraph analysis though.
Yoghur114 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
melvster has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tjader has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
zooko has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tjader has joined #bitcoin-wizards
memymo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
conner_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mihar has joined #bitcoin-wizards
roconnor__ has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
sparetire has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GGuyZ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mihar_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GGuyZ has quit [Client Quit]
mihar has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
freekevin has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
GGuyZ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ozanyurt has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
freekevin has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
zooko has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Yoghur114 has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
zooko has joined #bitcoin-wizards
DougieBot5000 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
zzyzx has joined #bitcoin-wizards
memymo has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
GAit has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cryzlr has quit [Quit: Leaving]
hazirafel has joined #bitcoin-wizards
damethos has quit [Quit: Bye]
GAit has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mrkent has joined #bitcoin-wizards
zooko has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
voxelot has joined #bitcoin-wizards
voxelot has quit [Changing host]
voxelot has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tjader has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
zooko has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tjader has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rishobot has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Oizopower has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
rishobot has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GAit has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
IanT_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GGuyZ has quit [Quit: GGuyZ]
GGuyZ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
bramc has joined #bitcoin-wizards
bramc is now known as Guest6121
wallet42 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Luke-Jr has quit [Excess Flood]
Luke-Jr has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<bsm117532>
I invented my own language. I talk mostly to myself. Voices in my head... ;-)
<amiller_>
every voice starts out in someones head
<zooko>
☺
bit2017 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GAit has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
* adlai
isn't sure which bsm117532 to highlight
melvster1 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
melvster1 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
rishobot has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
melvster1 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<adlai>
bsm117532: can you please explain how graph structure indicates miner strategy?
mrkent has quit []
rishobot has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<adlai>
it might help to reverse the direction of arrows in these graphs. genesis doesn't point to anything, everything points back towards it.
mrkent has joined #bitcoin-wizards
murch has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<bsm117532>
adlai: Everything does point to genesis. The arrows are pointing to the parent.
phiche has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
<adlai>
"genesis is on the left, braid tip is on the right" is that backwards?
<bsm117532>
adlai: A withhheld block will have an old parent but will be followed quickly by a child.
wallet42 has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
<bsm117532>
adlai: Yes I said it backwards.
<bsm117532>
So a rank (m,n) with m>n indicates that the sibling was withheld.
<bsm117532>
m<n indicates other miners are withholding.
dcousens has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
* adlai
can't figure out the rank labelling either :-\
<bsm117532>
That's probably because I just made it up..s.
<adlai>
shouldn't the (1,3) bead in that same chart be (1,1) ?
<bsm117532>
The (1,3) is relative to the bead circled in black.
<bsm117532>
I think you're right, my arrows are backwards.
<bsm117532>
Darnit
<adlai>
if the arrows are backwards then now the (2,1) ranks are incorrect. shouldn't those be (1,1)?
<bsm117532>
With (m,n), m is the number of steps you have to go from the black bead to find a common ancestor with the (m,n) labelled sibling; n is the number of steps toward the orange bead to find a common descendant.
<bsm117532>
It's steps *from* the black bead. It's not symmetric. Viewed from the (1,3) labelled bead, the steps to get to the black bead is not (1,3) or (3,1) it is something else entirely, in general.
* adlai
gets it now (confusion was interpreting n as the number of steps from MRCA to sibling)
<bsm117532>
Viewed from the (1,3) bead, the black bead would be labelled with rank (1,1).
<adlai>
rank = (m = distance to Most Recent Common Ancestor, n = distance to Least Recent Common Descendent), calculated from reference bead to sibling
<bsm117532>
A bit confusing. Every time I look at these graphs I think my code is broken, but many iterations now I convince myself it's actually correct.
<bsm117532>
adlai: correct.
* adlai
initiates coffee ritual
<bsm117532>
In my code I call it "oldest common descendant" and "youngest common ancestor"
* adlai
stole "MRCA" from biology, it's an actual thing
<bsm117532>
Ooooh concestor. Didn't know that word. Sounds dirty though :-/
<adlai>
concise yet precise terminology is indispensable... otherwise we end up with colloidal sporks and electroweak subjectivity
UNHCR has joined #bitcoin-wizards
* bsm117532
googles both those. Is confused. Wrote Ph.D. thesis on Electroweak Symmetry Breaking... ;-)
<bsm117532>
That's why I'm making up words. Want to be clear when I'm talking about a blockchain and blocks and when I'm not.
<bsm117532>
But for a time it means I talk to myself...
* adlai
is being uncharitable to the "hard / soft fork" [false(?)] dichotomy, and "weak subjectivity"
conner_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<bsm117532>
Ha! I like it.
memymo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
conner_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
conner_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
GGuyZ_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
erasmospunk has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
<adlai>
we should just avoid all general terms and refer to proposed changes by their git commit hash. people who want memorable names must mine vanity-IDs...
wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
conner_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
conner_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<bsm117532>
`git mine b6a1d`
Guest6121 has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
<adlai>
git mine c1a551c
<adlai>
is the 6 a vertically-mirrored rho?
<bsm117532>
Best I could do with hex.
conner_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GGuyZ has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
conner_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
GGuyZ_ is now known as GGuyZ
<adlai>
git mine dag
<adlai>
er, da9
<bsm117532>
eeewww incest is bad.
* adlai
is suddenly reminded of `21 mine` :D
conner_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
melvster1 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
conner_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
conner_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
conner_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
GGuyZ has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
GGuyZ_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mihar_ has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
conner_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
conner_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
GGuyZ_ has quit [Client Quit]
tjader has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
Piper-Off is now known as Monthrect
* bsm117532
is suddenly reminded that his 21.co is not mining...
murch has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
hashtag_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tjader has joined #bitcoin-wizards
hashtagg has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
UNHCR has quit [Quit: AndroidIrc Disconnecting]
melvster has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
stevenroose_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
bramc has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mrkent has quit []
bramc is now known as Guest63397
<instagibbs>
adlai, lol watch out I think people might take you seriously
<adlai>
my serious complaint is that "hard/soft fork" have very specific technical definitions that are rather easy to grasp, and give people a false sense of understanding the entire landscape of {for,back}wards-{in,}compatible changes to CRDT structure
Guest63397 has quit [Client Quit]
<adlai>
the terms definitely have meaning and everybody can reach consensus on whether a specific proposed change is hard or soft; but the issues that matter (economic effects, who has to update, who gains/loses security, etc) are rather independent of the hardness bit
PaulCapestany has quit [Quit: .]
<zooko>
adlai: I think a lot of folks have misunderstandings about those terms.
<zooko>
A lot of folks that I observe seem to think that a "hard fork" means a fork that changes fundamental economics.
<zooko>
Others seem to think that a "hard fork" means a fork that is contentious.
PaulCapestany has joined #bitcoin-wizards
melvster has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mihar has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<kefkius>
Coming the world of shitcoins, I think a "hard fork" is a regular wallet upgrade
Dizzle has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mrkent has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mihar has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
GAit has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
<bsm117532>
I've been disappointed that certain actors have been spreading misinformation too. The argument is that in a soft fork miners can lose money. But if a miner is not keeping his software up to date, he's *not*doing*his*job*. Miners are transaction validators and that's why they are paid. They shouldn't expect to get paid if they refuse to validate a new tx type.
mihar has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<adlai>
every node is a transaction validator, miners only provide consensus
<adlai>
you can rephrase a softfork as a majority of consensus producers colluding to exclude the minority... which is why softforks should only trigger with supermajority support (for easy justification of majority tyranny)
<bsm117532>
Only miners commit to their validation cryptographically and communicate that fact.
<bsm117532>
(SPV mining not withstanding -- which is a thing we should seek to destroy)
<adlai>
regular nodes *must* validate, without trusting miners to have done so; otherwise miners can get away without validating
dEBRUYNE has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has quit [Quit: Quitte]
GGuyZ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
raedah_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<amiller_>
i think "soft fork" should be qualified by exactly what kind of service is maintained for old nods
<amiller_>
by default, i think the service everyone has in mind when saying "soft fork" is "can identify the current head of blockchain"
raedah has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
<amiller_>
but there are other services too, such as ability to receive SPV payments (that tends to come along for free)
<amiller_>
as an extreme example to illustrate the distinction here, it would be possible to "soft fork" to a rule that says: "no more transactions ever, maxblocksize=0bytes"
<amiller_>
legacy nodes would be able to identify the head of the blockchain, but they wouldn't be able to spend their money or receive payments so it's preserving one kind of service and interrupting another
<amiller_>
this distinction is useful because there are actually some potentially meaningful edge cases
<amiller_>
for example a soft-fork that sets a minimum fee and flat-out abandons free tx
<amiller_>
because right now you could have a legacy wallet that only makes free tx, and it will at least work when the coins get old enough,
<amiller_>
whereas after this hypothetical work it would no longer work
<amiller_>
so, question to ask is, for a "soft-fork that breaks service X", is X a service that people actually use or are reasonably justified in using?
<adlai>
alternatively, is the mining cartel reasonably justified in denying a service even if its not in frequent use today?
tjader has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
* adlai
uses "the" hypothetically, not accusing anybody today of doing this; but once a [super]majority collude to push through a softfork, they become a cartel, even if they joined it voluntarily
GGuyZ has quit [Quit: GGuyZ]
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
brg444 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tjader has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GAit has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
blackwraith has joined #bitcoin-wizards
priidu has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
<r0ach>
amiller_: finally someone besides Satoshi understands bitcoin needs a forced min transaction fee and free tx is just an attack vector
<amiller_>
well i'm not aiming to espouse any opinions on which services should and should not be discontinued, just that that's a better way than lumping everything ambiguously into "soft-fork", and it's also better than making up one-off names for everything else, firm fork, jelly fork, brittle fork, spork
raedah_ has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
zooko has quit [Quit: brb]
bramc has joined #bitcoin-wizards
bramc is now known as Guest41378
<AdrianG>
adlai: mining cartel?
NewLiberty has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<instagibbs>
amiller_, lots of e-ink is spilled trying to figure out if things are out in the wild using things that will be soft-forked. High-S transactions I think are an example.
* adlai
doesn't see why free transactions are an attack vector, provided that they "cost" coinage, by an amount dictated by supply&demand (same as the coin cost for paid transactions is also dictated by the market)
<instagibbs>
you also can't enforce a fee floor, so kind of DOA
<adlai>
AdrianG: a hashpower majority can arbitrarily soft-fork the minority off the network, and increase their own relative hashrate. doing this would be stupid as it would rapidly erode confidence in the entire system, but it's still technically possible.
wallet42 has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
<instagibbs>
but yes being more specific is helpful. Lots of (intentional?) confusion floating around.
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<AdrianG>
adlai: i think we will see such scenarios. right now we have a hard fork threat, and miners are behind it, even though it is very damaging.
<AdrianG>
so anything that is possible will likely be attempted.
zooko has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<adlai>
ehh, Bitcoin will always be under various threats... it actually seemed to me (from the little exposure I suffered to the latest drama) that a) miners are coming to their senses about the senselessness of intentionally wrecking consensus systems, and b) Bitcoiners are coming to their senses about the irrelevance of miner opinions about this kind of consensus breakage
<r0ach>
adlai: It's a fact that Bitcoin has central bankers. The only way for it not to is to set block size to unlimited and min transaction fee to 0. Once you've established it does have them, it's only a question of who should be doing what with those powers. Miners have incentive to make as much profit per tx as possible, so there's no reason for them to support 0 fee transactions.
<r0ach>
and devs should be supporting a min transaction fee to prevent a perma back log or they're not fulfilling their duty
<r0ach>
so both parties should technically be pro min fee
<adlai>
nobody has any "duty", all parties are free to act in as altruistic or antagonistic a manner as they choose
<adlai>
but your comment about "central bankers" and their consequence is news to me :)
<AdrianG>
r0ach: who are the central bakners?
erasmospunk has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<r0ach>
devs and miners, and you need to understand the maxwell + theymos argument about block size
arowser has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
e4xit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
arowser has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<AdrianG>
i think thats a bad analogy.
<AdrianG>
central bankers cannot be forked away from.
<adlai>
ad hominems and arguments from or against authority fall under "short-term Bitcoin development" and are thus off-topic
<AdrianG>
adlai: how is decentralization going to be assured in the long term?
hazirafel has quit [Quit: Leaving]
<bsm117532>
By requiring everyone to mine at the input. (mine your own tx's). Not that this is a near-term possibility for bitcoin...
murch has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<AdrianG>
without such changes there simply could be no long term.
<bsm117532>
AdrianG: agreed.
zooko` has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<AdrianG>
bsm117532: if you would require mining at the input, couldnt you just borrow hashpower for a little bit?
gmaxwell has left #bitcoin-wizards [#bitcoin-wizards]
kisspunch has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
zooko has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
<bsm117532>
AdrianG: possibly, and I don't think one can prevent outsourcing of hashing in this manner. But then the centralization force is not part of the protocol itself.
<bsm117532>
But see the "scratch-off puzzles" paper...
maaku has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
<AdrianG>
bsm117532: what do you think about cuckoo cycle, where asics are replaced with RAM chips
<AdrianG>
idk how that will prevent centralization, you'd just have ppl warehouse DRAM chips instead.
<AdrianG>
non-outsourceable puzzles prevent pools. you could still end up with massive farms.
<r0ach>
non-outsourceable puzzle gets rid of pools but gives an even higher barrier of entry to mining, so kinda making small, pool hopping type of home miners extinct
kisspunch has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<AdrianG>
i am not sure its possible to discourage economies of scale in principle.
<instagibbs>
typically the discourse there is a bit behind the current lore, but alas
Guest41378 has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
<zzyzx>
Adrian.mining chip in every phone...! Google ARA
laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<AdrianG>
instagibbs: what makes you think its possible to sustain a global system on altruism? and how much altruism will be necessary?
<zooko`>
instagibbs: thank
<zooko`>
s
<AdrianG>
if mining at residential rates does not result in outrageous bills, it might be easier to charge your phone overnight and have some dust to spend vs going thru AML/KYC. but amounts mined in this fashion might be too low to boostrap this.
<erasmospunk>
or pay with hashing power for content
Erik_dc has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<erasmospunk>
a kind of off-chain microtransaction
<amiller_>
don't think about it as sustaining a network with altruism, think of it as leverage
<amiller_>
how do you best utilize and leverage the existing altruism hwerever it is
<AdrianG>
erasmospunk: same thing in the end
<erasmospunk>
AdrianG: only if you have Lightning, even in that case you need >dust to open a channel
<AdrianG>
erasmospunk: maybe chips will come with pre-opened channels?O
ozanyurt has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<AdrianG>
sort of like factory activation.
<AdrianG>
or preloaded with 100 satoshis or something.
e4xit has quit [Quit: Right I'm out!]
<erasmospunk>
this assumes that you mine for the chip manufacturer
<AdrianG>
the US has ~300 mio phones.
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tjader has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
<AdrianG>
even if they all mine 1 satoshi every night, that would be 3 bitcoins daily.
<AdrianG>
at 1watt consuption it would be a 300 megawatt facility.
<AdrianG>
what are the roadblocks for such commoditization?
<tromp_>
phone needs to access to full node in order to mine
tjader has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<AdrianG>
connect to a node in p2pool?
<AdrianG>
spv mine.
e4xit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<tromp_>
yes, mining should be integrated into wallet for ease of use
sausage_factory has joined #bitcoin-wizards
blackwraith has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
ThomasV has quit [Quit: Quitte]
ozanyurt has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
laurentmt has quit [Quit: laurentmt]
<bsm117532>
erasmospunk: "blockdag" is not sufficiently specific to identify attack vectors. There are multiple visions of a dag with different advantages/drawbacks.
<bsm117532>
But there should be a minimum difficulty as well as a maximum difficulty.
<bsm117532>
The minimum difficulty is related to the dag complexity of the analog of a bitcoin block, and the computational resources involved in analyzing it.
dnaleor has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<erasmospunk>
bsm117532: an attacking miner could easily mess with the dag when it is supported by a small minority of the hashing power
<bsm117532>
How?
<erasmospunk>
I am a 30% pool
<erasmospunk>
and the dag is used by miners with 1%
<bsm117532>
FYI the three DAG ideas I know of are: Iota, "Inclusive Blockchains" and Braids.
<tromp_>
not rootstock?
<erasmospunk>
I can create 30 times more soft blocks than the minority
<erasmospunk>
increase the difficulty
<erasmospunk>
and then leave
<bsm117532>
erasmospunk: Sharechains like p2pool (not a dag) will drop you out of the payouts when you leave.
<erasmospunk>
bsm117532: I am only familiar with Braids (that I borrowed the "no-incest" rule)
<bsm117532>
Also, the sharechain shouldn't have such a dumb difficulty calculation...
<bsm117532>
erasmospunk: That would be me...the braid authro.
<erasmospunk>
hi Bob
<erasmospunk>
this design does not deal with shares
<bsm117532>
So the sharechain needs an estimate of its own hashrate that is more sophisticated than Bitcoin's.
<erasmospunk>
only propagation
<bsm117532>
Ok. Then I'm not sure what you're talking about with a more specific design.
<bsm117532>
I can tell you mine though...
c-cex-yuriy has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
<erasmospunk>
the dag is used to form a consensus about what miners are mining at the same time
<erasmospunk>
and when a solution is found, only about 350bytes need to be relayed
<erasmospunk>
to reconstruct the block
<bsm117532>
erasmospunk: So you're trying to build a "soft block" scheme on top of a DAG?
dnaleor has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<erasmospunk>
the opposite, a dag using soft block extensions
<bsm117532>
Egads, why would you want that?
<bsm117532>
Soft blocks are a mechanism for eliminating orphans. Braids don't have orphans.
moa has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<erasmospunk>
a soft block can be standalone, just to propagate a block. In that case you use transaction ids to describe the merkle tree
Tasoshi has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<erasmospunk>
but this still takes 10K+
<erasmospunk>
it is possible to further drop the size
<bsm117532>
But the reason you want to propagate it so fast is because you might get orphaned. Braids have no orphans.
<bsm117532>
10k is not a problem...
<bsm117532>
You might be interested in a recent development since my Scaling Bitcoin talk: sibling rank.
<bsm117532>
The numbered beads are siblings of the black circled bead. The "rank" is how many beads away the youngest common ancestor and oldest common parent are.
<bsm117532>
This is an indication of miner behavior, and can be used explicitly in an incentive formula to remove the problems you're worried about (I think).
<erasmospunk>
do you have a document to look it better?
dnaleor has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<bsm117532>
Still working on it. Code to generate that graph works, and will be on github this week.
<bsm117532>
I think we still have work to do on developing and proving a correct incentive structure.
<erasmospunk>
btw, you say that braids don't have orphans. This is not true for the bitcoin blockchain
<bsm117532>
Bitcoin blockchain is not a braid.
<bsm117532>
What do you mean?
<erasmospunk>
yes
dnaleor has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<erasmospunk>
creating a braid structure can only be via a soft fork at best
shesek has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<bsm117532>
Yep. It can be done in a manner similar to how segwit is being done.
<erasmospunk>
so we would still have the blockchain
<bsm117532>
The idea is that every bead would be a valid bitcoin block.
zooko` has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
<bsm117532>
At some point, when 95% of miners are mining the beads, you allow there to be more txs in beads than in the bitcoin block. This becomes a soft-fork capacity increase.
<erasmospunk>
hmmm
<bsm117532>
The mechanism is completely analagous to segwit.
<erasmospunk>
but you still need to put everything in the normal blocks
<bsm117532>
Until you hit 95% on the soft fork, yes.
<bsm117532>
Before you hit 95%, the braid becomes a de-facto mempool synchronization tool.
GAit has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
<erasmospunk>
and the pow target?
<bsm117532>
TBD.
<bsm117532>
There's a min and a max though.
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<erasmospunk>
one of the beads will be be the one?
<bsm117532>
One of the beads will be the one bitcoin block.
dnaleor has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
ozanyurt has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<erasmospunk>
trying to think about it in a backwards compatible way
<bsm117532>
If I mine one surpassing the braid's minimum difficulty, I remove the tx's that have already been seen in the braid, and transmit the bead to other braid-aware miners.
<erasmospunk>
so there will be nodes that doesn't understand beads
<erasmospunk>
as they don't have enough POW
<bsm117532>
Yes. But since all beads contain in their Merkle tree everything that's in the Bitcoin block...
IanT_ has quit []
<bsm117532>
So it's kind of a side-channel for communicating mempool synchronization, very akin to "weak blocks".
<bsm117532>
Except structured as a DAG.
<erasmospunk>
yes, what I am working on
<bsm117532>
Of course once the soft fork takes effect, then one can drastically increase the capacity.
<bsm117532>
Also one needs to trigger the new incentive mechanism of the braid, and payouts that are backward-looking, instead of miners creating their own coinbase txn.
<erasmospunk>
yeah, a kind of future coinbase, right?
<bsm117532>
Yes. The coinbase would refer to a state 100 cohorts in the past.
adnn has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<erasmospunk>
bsm117532: there is one change from the last time we talked. Remember that the ASICs need time to warm up and you cannot change often the work?
<bsm117532>
erasmospunk: Turns out I was wrong about that.
<erasmospunk>
what do you mean?
<bsm117532>
The real issue is validating a block. So there's a window in which miners are SPV mining after they receive a block.
<bsm117532>
There's a separate issue that has a lot to do with misunderstandings of how p2pool works.
<bsm117532>
But all hardware currently available can retarget in ~ms.
adnn_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<bsm117532>
rather, reload work.
<erasmospunk>
ok
<bsm117532>
I'm just about ready to post my code, if you'd like a preview I can send something tonight.
adnn has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
<erasmospunk>
The SPV mining is due to miners seeing a different previous hash from the stratums of other miner pools
Yoghur114 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<erasmospunk>
before they get the block themselves
<bsm117532>
That too
<bsm117532>
But that's what's going on, it's not that the hardware is slow.
<erasmospunk>
in fact the block validation takes very little time if all the transactions are in the mempool
<erasmospunk>
good to know about the hardware
<bsm117532>
Yeah, relief for me. ;-)
<erasmospunk>
this is why I think a sub 512-byte block is important
<erasmospunk>
it can be propagated extremely fast
adnn_ has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
<bsm117532>
How about one block per transaction? ;-)
<erasmospunk>
but you need miner commitments
Tiraspol has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<erasmospunk>
I like the idea
dnaleor has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<bsm117532>
You only need super-fast because you're worried about orphans, but you can't completely eliminate that, no matter how fast or how small your block.
Tiraspol has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Tiraspol has quit [Changing host]
Tiraspol has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<erasmospunk>
true
<erasmospunk>
but even with soft fork braids, a node needs to see blocks every 10 minutes
<bsm117532>
if transactions were individually mined, they couldn't conflict anyway unless there's a double-spend.
<bsm117532>
erasmospunk: yes, the bitcoin difficulty target will always remain as the upper difficulty limit.
<bsm117532>
Even if there's only one transaction in that block!
<bsm117532>
That's required to keep the minority non-upgraded nodes following the highest PoW.
<erasmospunk>
so there will be always a bead that meets that target and becomes the true block
<bsm117532>
Yes, always.
<bsm117532>
It's existence is also tied to Satoshi's payout schedule, which must be kept.
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
WyzBTC has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
<erasmospunk>
bsm117532: this could work as a sidechain
<erasmospunk>
I was think about the possibility of an internal sidechain
<erasmospunk>
where you can sent in and out in a single transaction
<erasmospunk>
all the coins that are in this sidechain are kept in "anyone can spend" UTXOs
zooko has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<erasmospunk>
and once you send to the main chain, the transaction burns the sidechain coins and the miner spends one UTXO to send to your destination
WyzBTC has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<bsm117532>
That's one possibility that's been discussed for "extension blocks" as sidechains.
<bsm117532>
And one can view braids this way too.
WyzBTC has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
<bsm117532>
This is why I tried to avoid the conversation about "how to get this into bitcoin" at Scaling...the conversation often goes off to the weeds, and there are many options.
GAit has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
droark_ has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
tjader has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
zooko` has joined #bitcoin-wizards
sdaftuar has quit [Changing host]
sdaftuar has joined #bitcoin-wizards
zooko has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
jposner has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tjader has joined #bitcoin-wizards
pasky has quit [Quit: leaving]
<kanzure>
bsm117532: "the only way to get this into bitcoin is using a balanced unicycle fork"
<bsm117532>
Are you quoting someone in particular? ;-)
<amiller_>
i really like balancing unicycles
dnaleor has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
* zooko`
looks for the ❤ button on IRC.
ThomasV has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
dnaleor has joined #bitcoin-wizards
dnaleor has quit [Remote host closed the connection]