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
Ylbam has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
<bsm1175321>
Taek: there needs to be a lower bound: it is expressed as a fraction of the "high water mark". Obviously an arbitrarily low-difficulty chain can't be merged with the main one.
<bsm1175321>
Or you open a DDoS attack.
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
xissburg has quit [Quit: ZZZzzz…]
mdavid613 has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
GAit has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
N0S4A2 has quit [Quit: WeeChat 1.5]
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
Giszmo has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
Noldorin has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
Mazz_ has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
chjj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Mazz_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Mazz_ has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
Mazz_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
pro has quit [Quit: Leaving]
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
GAit has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
byteflame has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
Alopex has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Alopex has joined #bitcoin-wizards
oleganza has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
oleganza has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
Damiana has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Alopex has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Alopex has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Mazz_ has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
Mazz_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Damiana has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Samdney has quit [Quit: Verlassend]
Samdney has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Samdney has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
Mazz_ has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
Mazz_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Alopex has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Alopex has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Mazz_ has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
Mazz_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
chjj has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
chjj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
pavel_ has quit [Quit: Leaving]
rusty2 has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
Mazz_ has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
sdaftuar has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
zxzzt has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-wizards
zxzzt has joined #bitcoin-wizards
morcos has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
sdaftuar has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Mazz_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
morcos has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
oleganza has joined #bitcoin-wizards
sdaftuar has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
morcos has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
zxzzt has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
zxzzt has joined #bitcoin-wizards
sdaftuar has joined #bitcoin-wizards
morcos has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tripleslash has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
oleganza has quit [Quit: oleganza]
tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rusty2 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rusty2 has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
Mazz_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Mazz_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Mazz_ has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
Mazz_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
BashCo has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rusty2 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rusty2 has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
BashCo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jediji has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<jediji>
is it just really quiet in here or do I need to join a channel?
<sipa>
stay a few days
jediji has quit [Client Quit]
<sipa>
discussions only happen occasionally
<fluffypony>
oh well if they're just going to leave
<sipa>
ah.
<gmaxwell>
time to start a discussion then
<gmaxwell>
only to stop before they join again.
laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-wizards
laurentmt has quit [Client Quit]
<sipa>
i concur.
<fluffypony>
hah hah
rusty2 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-wizards
laurentmt has quit [Client Quit]
Mazz_ has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
Mazz_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
HostFat has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rubensayshi has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rusty2 has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
chjj has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
Mazz_ has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
Mazz_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Logicwax has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
Mazz_ has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
Mazz_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Mazz_ has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
Logicwax has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Mazz_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
chjj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
chjj has quit [Client Quit]
davec has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
chjj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
davec has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
NewLiberty_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
kyletorpey has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
Guest30579 is now known as [Derek]
[Derek] has quit [Changing host]
[Derek] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
aalex_ has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
aalex_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
parathon has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Mazz_ has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
vega4 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Mazz_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
assder has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
pro has joined #bitcoin-wizards
vega4 has left #bitcoin-wizards ["Leaving"]
vega4 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
snoopie has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jtimon has joined #bitcoin-wizards
snoopie has quit []
copumpkin has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
Mazz_ has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
alferz has joined #bitcoin-wizards
alferz has joined #bitcoin-wizards
alferz has quit [Changing host]
Mazz_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Davasny has joined #bitcoin-wizards
alferz has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
Davasny_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
parathon has quit [Quit: Leaving]
Davasny has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
Davasny has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rusty2 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Davasny_ has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
Davasny has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<sipa>
ThomasV: you're giving a talk tonight in zurich?
<ThomasV>
yes
<sipa>
cool
<ThomasV>
hop you'll be there :)
<sipa>
i'll attend
<ThomasV>
cool, great
<ThomasV>
I'm just finishing my slides
<sipa>
are you nearby already?
<ThomasV>
yes
xissburg has joined #bitcoin-wizards
yoleaux has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
mhanne_ has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
mhanne has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
Mazz_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
Mazz_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
moli has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
AaronvanW has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
jtimon has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
copumpkin has joined #bitcoin-wizards
moli has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Mazz_ has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
Mazz_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
vega4 has quit [Quit: Leaving]
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-wizards
AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-wizards
AaronvanW has quit [Changing host]
Mazz_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Mazz_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Samdney has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Mazz_ has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
Mazz_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Mazz_ has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
rusty2 has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
Mazz_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Mazz_ has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
Mazz_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GAit has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GAit has quit [Client Quit]
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GAit has quit [Client Quit]
edvorg has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<e0_>
Eliel: the 10 BTC payment to the 2-of-2 is not confirmed beforehand. An attacker could doublespend it, be if an attacker doublespends it with 90% probability, then 10% of the time the attacker will lose 10 BTC.
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<Eliel>
e0_: ah, yes, you're right. it isn't profitable on average to do that.
jtimon has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GAit has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
yoleaux has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Mazz_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
cdecker has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Chris_Stewart_5 has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Giszmo has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Samdney has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rubensayshi has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
OxADADA_ is now known as OxADADA
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
Noldorin has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<e0_>
Eliel: there must be some bitcoin-talk post from 2011 inventing this.
<Eliel>
e0_: Yes, I recall seeing something like that years ago. It's good to be reminded of that.
<Eliel>
that actually works pretty well for opening payment channels too. You generally want to open the channel for much bigger amount than you want to pay the other party immediately.
<e0_>
yeah
Hunger-- has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
aalex_ has quit [*.net *.split]
bassguitarman has quit [*.net *.split]
Hunger- has quit [*.net *.split]
mn3monic has quit [*.net *.split]
tromp has quit [*.net *.split]
afdudley has quit [*.net *.split]
gnusha has quit [*.net *.split]
epscy has quit [*.net *.split]
Taek has quit [*.net *.split]
<e0_>
transaction malebility requires you trust the person you are paying. They could change the txid and break the refund. Segwit should fix that though.
Guyver2 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
jannes has quit [Quit: Leaving]
Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Hunger-- is now known as Hunger-
grubles has quit [Quit: reticulating splines]
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
aalex_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
bassguitarman has joined #bitcoin-wizards
afdudley has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mn3monic has joined #bitcoin-wizards
gnusha has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tromp has joined #bitcoin-wizards
epscy has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Taek has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
grubles has joined #bitcoin-wizards
grubles has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Starduster has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
Starduster has joined #bitcoin-wizards
maaku has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
maaku has joined #bitcoin-wizards
arubi has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
grubles has joined #bitcoin-wizards
arubi has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
GAit has quit [Client Quit]
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
Samdney has joined #bitcoin-wizards
morcos has quit [Quit: leaving]
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
BashCo has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
morcos has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
mdavid613 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GAit has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
oleganza has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Aranjedeath has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GAit has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
skyraider has joined #bitcoin-wizards
BashCo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<mryandao>
whats the status on confidential transactions that's still sitting in the Elements Project?
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
TheSeven has quit [Disconnected by services]
[7] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GAit has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
Giszmo has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
Starduster has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Starduster has joined #bitcoin-wizards
edvorg has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
* mryandao
waves
grubles has quit [Quit: reticulating splines]
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
instagibbs_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<instagibbs_>
mryandao: it works, what specifically are you wondering about
AusteritySucks has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
<mryandao>
the links on the elements project page to confidential addresses is broken
<vega4>
I won't bother you here on this channel with an irrelevant subject as you say it is. @gmaxwell, I am not looking for criticism, I am a researcher and I see a lot of pointless criticism on forums suchs as Bitcointalks. I specialise in security cryptography I am looking for facts. For ex. from mathematical, security point of view why a given currency is considered a SCAM by some etc.
<katu>
fluffypony: i like how you were eventually called out on monero, which has a rather less glamorous launch too :)
<gmaxwell>
Plus the ~worse~ an altcoin is the stronger that rule generally applies. Like if an altcoin is pretty interesting but has some warts, perhaps some thoughtful people will give some (perhaps even constructive-) criticism. If it's super scammy, then it's even boring to even look at ... and any interaction with it means interacting with scammy people, or worse-- getting scammy people mad at you.
<katu>
oh well, only altcoin should be criticizing altcoins.
<vega4>
the internal workings of Bitcoin are clear and solid to me, various altcoins such as DASH are not.. with their funny proof-of-being-connected to the network etc
<fluffypony>
katu: "less glamorous" sure, but certainly not pre- or instamined by any measure (see the Monero section on https://archive.is/XCxc1)
<sipa>
vega4: claiming that something is a scam requires you're convinced it's intentionally deceiving people
<sipa>
vega4: that's often hard to say
<sipa>
some things may have been started by some people with genuine interest in experimenting with technology, and then pumped by others who are only in it for a quick money
<CocoBTC>
Well, the _obvious_ scams OneCoin and Swisscoin (or what's it called), and PayCoin back in the days. Others are are just shady
<fluffypony>
there, now we can stop talking about it
<gmaxwell>
vega4: there are many layers to those questions-- for example a system could be sound technology; but have been created in a sketchy way by dishonest people trying just to enrich themselves. Or, alternatively, it could be earnestly created but by unqualified parties and throughly unsound as a result (and a really bad thing to use). or perhaps something could be good by both those measures but b
<gmaxwell>
y accident of history many of the people promoting it are sketchy and use dishonest means. Each of those cases is pretty different but people would call something a scam in each of them, with justification.
<katu>
CocoBTC: i'd refrain from calling particular names, because we'd never see end of the day. why not just talk in general, ie motivations of spawning useless clones, what to do about, if anything etc?
<fluffypony>
katu: OneCoin isn't an altcoin.
<sipa>
if you're asking about the technology you're almost certainly not asking about the intentions with which it was created
<gmaxwell>
sipa: English is complex like that though, something can be "a scam" without there existing "a scammer"-- becuase "a scam" conventionally can also mean a really bad deal (-EV) deal.
<vega4>
@sipa that is right what you say that in some situations it might be diffcult to say whether something will deceive people in the end. That is why I am looking for technical possibilities, reasons which would even make it possible to deceive people in the end. As far as Bitcoin goes a 51% attack is the only thing I see. In altcoins where funny stuff such as proof-of-stake comes into play things are much less solid I would s
<vega4>
ay
<gmaxwell>
I think the word's meaning has crept some because you can't really know people's motivations.
<sipa>
vega4: if you're talking about technical weaknesses, there are many
<CocoBTC>
katu: fair enough
<sipa>
but that does not imply the technology is uninteresting or deceiving
<sipa>
(i personally am not interested in dash, but i also haven't studied it deeply to point at any)
<gmaxwell>
vega4: there are many altcoins which are basically just impossible to analyize. They make a multitude of vague claims, without being precise enough to analyize or refute them, but it sounds good. Marketing pap, if you will. That in and of itself is a kind of "meta-unsoundness"-- how can you say a system is reviewed if its presentation has made it unreviewable? Maybe there is something of merit
<gmaxwell>
burried there, but in the sea of meritless marketingcoins its not a good use of time for most people to look.
HostFat has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<gmaxwell>
Doubly so because of the fact that, as I've pointed out, being critial of these things-- even, sometimes, over minor fixable things can cause a really hostile response by unsavory advocates of some of the systems.
<fluffypony>
gmaxwell: they have a vested interest in hiding their failures, so nobody should trust any claims coming from within the system anyway
<katu>
in short, 90% of altcoins lack rigor to remove their opaqueness.
<gmaxwell>
(This isn't unique to altcoins, though its much worse for some ... --- I've had bitcoin adhearents respond in threatening ways when I pointed out unsolved problems or limitations)
<sipa>
monero is one of the few that do actual research, and are honest about limitations imho
<gmaxwell>
in other domains of intellectual inquiry it's less common for mobs of angry people to respond with such hostility to earnest analysis. Not unheared of, especially in a few specially politicized areas... but uncommon.
<fluffypony>
sipa: and still people ignore us and overstate what Monero does :/
<katu>
its bound to happen, this is basically area of rabid penny stock marketing
<sipa>
fluffypony: same with bitcoim :)
<gmaxwell>
fluffypony: welcome to the club.
<sipa>
*coin
<katu>
penny stock marketers in the 90s were very aggresive too
<fluffypony>
lol
<gmaxwell>
katu: yea, I've pointed out to people that the only place I've seen so much bile as we have in cryptocurrency is on the yahoo stock forums in the late 90s.
<sipa>
how is babby formed?
<gmaxwell>
SELL SELL SELL
<CocoBTC>
fluffypony: pro-monero people seems to be literally everywhere. It's weird
<fluffypony>
sipa: how girl get pragnent
<gmaxwell>
fluffypony: the point I make to people is that inherently cryptocurrency has a strong scam vibe to most people. Being frank about limitations while being positive about the future makes many people much more confident in it. Though I can't say that I've really ever turned a foaming advocate of Bitcoin to someone using a more measured advocacy.
<fluffypony>
CocoBTC: if any of them ever spew nonsense link me to it so I can tell them to slow their roll :-P
<katu>
monero is more or less nice, though i wish they were more transparent on their initial AES gambit
<sipa>
also, there is rarely just one identifiable group behind an altcoin
<katu>
not really complaining as i wrote one of the private miners too
<sipa>
there are delopers, and advocates, and marketers, and an ecosystem
<gmaxwell>
well that was bytecoin's doing, not monero persay. :( pretty unfortunate.
<fluffypony>
katu: that was out of our hands, I didn't even know Monero existed until 6 days after the launch
<fluffypony>
gmaxwell: yeah indeed
<fluffypony>
clever scammers gonna scam
<kanzure>
gmaxwell: so in cryptosystem review, would it be helpful if there was a standard review format where people are asked to state their assumptions very explicitly (such as which of the 'standard' hardness assumptions they are using) in an explicit format? at least then reviewers could easily point out when there's format failure. unfortunately i think this will fail for cryptosystems that require unusual details that break common ...
<kanzure>
... formatting choices. i guess, then, those should even be further highlighted, so perhaps this is a good idea.
<fluffypony>
otoh at least we take some dark market / ransomware / etc. heat off Bitcoin ;)
<kanzure>
and by 'explicit format' i mean something that is one-glance gleanable
<sipa>
i wonder whether anyone who isn't using oure pow can even answer that question
<sipa>
*pure
<kanzure>
i was thinking something like "once you can get people to agree about formatting, then you can do exponential backoff of reviewing updates to the same system, because otherwise reviewers are going to be denial-of-service attacked"
<CocoBTC>
fluffypony: not sure if that's really positive
<kanzure>
well i mean, if you can get someone to cryptographically sign their review for some obviously broken thing, then you can at least use that as evidence that their reviews are worthless
<katu>
speaking, of exotic proof-* ... has there been any serious proposal to eigentrust metric?
<gmaxwell>
It can get a little complicated when your system has a layered security assumption.
<fluffypony>
CocoBTC: which bit?
<gmaxwell>
katu: I think there should be a meme image for "when your consensus system can become numerical unstable" :P
<katu>
gmaxwell: :)
<CocoBTC>
if dark net people start using another cryptocurrency because bitcoin doesn't satisfy
<kanzure>
gmaxwell: that's a good start. i definitely agree that these things should be more explicitly documented.
cjd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<gmaxwell>
E.g. I think Bitcoin's security assumption is best described in a layered way, where you talk about a majority hashpower strictly protocol following ('honest'), and it has some properties in that model... and then you can talk about a 2/3 rational 1/3rd honest, and what that looks like.. including the shape of what rational behavior based on the payoff matrix for defecting.
<kanzure>
gmaxwell: specifically my "formatted cryptosystem review-request" idea above is a way to make it possibly worthwhile to do review in public, specifically the value is that it will be possible to accumulate evidence of terrible reviewers and evidence of dubious security writeups and/or rapid design churn
NewLiberty_ is now known as NewLiberty
<kanzure>
not sure what to do about layering. i was actually thinking of more simple cryptograhpic primitives as a starting point.
<fluffypony>
CocoBTC: I dunno, I think it forces reporters to reconsider whether "privacy enhancing thing X" is inherently bad just because it *can* be used for "criminal activity Y"
<gmaxwell>
And the layering is really hard for people to deal with, I've encountered people with proposals which they say are _identical_ in security to bitcoin, except they're only working with the strongest supermajority honest assumption, and what they propose is totally brittle, having no security at all outside of the honest majority model. Thats not the same as Bitcoin.
<kanzure>
and a lot of bitcoin security status partly relates to the bootstrapping phase (in weird intertangly ways)
<gmaxwell>
kanzure: sure, plain crypto primitives are easier to do this for, in part because if they had security as weak as what we're stuck with for consensus, they'd be discarded. :)
<gmaxwell>
(unless they're multilinear maps, people seem to not do a good job discarding those systems. :P )
<kanzure>
well i mean, look at the marketing for the altcoins and such, i'm sure someone will eventually start applying pressure like that on primitives. so even there it would be good to accumulate signatures of terrible reviewers endorsing stupid shit.
<katu>
numerical instability as such is not really a problem, as tor will probably never become actually decentralized (ie fatal fault mode would be fixed by centrally issued checkpoint)
<kanzure>
it would also be useful to ask people for a specific hash of their writeup (or code, sigh) before doing review. hash could be timestamped in public. then, you can show that the flurry of updates should disqualify the design from being considered ready for review -- plus, there can be an actual set of content that is being explicitly reviewed. it would be a good precedent to establish.
<kanzure>
so while the negative impact of doing public criticism is a bunch of online harassment, the positive benefit is the collection of signatures for dumb broken proposals
<kanzure>
(er, of course, it's possible to sign a review saying something looks somewhat secure, and in the future the cryptosystem may no longer be secure. it might not be uncommon to find a bunch of broken security assumptions that were heavily reviewed as 'good idea' at the time in ancient past....)
<katu>
kanzure: invisible hand to the rescue. make altcoins a reputation market, with futures and bonds.
<gmaxwell>
katu: likely it wouldn't... in all these systems if you have open admissions (required for true decenteralization) the attacker can almost always behave strategically to eclipse the honest participants. Or, consider the alternative, many actual users could join and _couldn't_ override misbehavior of the initial set there, so it would be a dictatorship. Bitcoin isn't free of that kind of failure,
<gmaxwell>
but at least we can more or less clearly describe what tradeoff its actually making.
* gmaxwell
vomits all over 'reputation market' ... lemon market.
<katu>
well, target demographic is rabid speculators anyhow; so what difference it makes to them
<gmaxwell>
in #bitcoin-otc ... one of the larger expirements in meaningful online reputation, highly positive rank in the reputation system is positively correlated with scamming rather than negative.
<kanzure>
these are all lemon markets anyway. aren't they?
<gmaxwell>
because scammers work the system, while honest people don't have much to gain by jucing their stats (they're making fair trades after all), and participate in much less vigorous way.
JHistone has quit [Quit: Leaving]
<katu>
gmaxwell: yea, though i take research based on advogato data as more fitting. it is definitely possible to scam your way to the top, but it takes a lot of effort to beat pagerank.
<sipa>
my first rating on bitcoin-otc was for "nice graphs"
<katu>
incidentally, that is related to eigentrust too
<katu>
eclipsing edges and clique detection
<gmaxwell>
katu: advogato rakings lead to bad conclusions, you gained nothing much by high advogato marks. Dishonest use was largely a waste of time behind vanity.
CocoBTC has quit [Quit: Leaving]
<gmaxwell>
Basically if you measure reputation in contexts where reputation doesn't matter much, you learn little to nothing about the exceptional cases that attackers can drive the systems into... similar to niche altcoins -- "hasn't been attacked yet" isn't much of a security metric.
<katu>
gmaxwell: indeed, definitely a lot less of profit motive and more ... trolling motive? :)
<kanzure>
what
<kanzure>
katu are you a bot
<gmaxwell>
katu: sure you can have mechnical clique detection (and the tools around otc help people see cliques) -- but attackers just adapt. They don't just form self rating cliques, they make a new identity, make a pile of real at-par trades using that identity.. it's as real as anyone else. Then they start scamming.
<kanzure>
katu: (the reason i ask is because your responses don't seem to update based on recent past input)
<katu>
kanzure: parsing irony is a hard AGI problem, perhaps you could be more descriptive
NewLiberty has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<kanzure>
there is a bug (not irony) somewhere here and i'm not sure how to suss it out, but i'll offer that "profit/trolling" motives don't seem related to .. oh maybe you are talking about eigentrusters.
<gmaxwell>
no, talking about advogato.
<gmaxwell>
no real profit motive to juice the stats, but perhaps trolling motive.
Davasny has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
copumpkin has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
<bsm1175321>
There's an agency in every major country tasked with regulating these kinds of scams. They happened long before the crypto era. In the US it's called the Howey test -- basically if the buyer doesn't have control over whether he makes money with the asset, then it's a security, and subject to regulation. The question to ask of any new coin is: does it satisfy the Howey test; are the creators profiting off it; ha
<bsm1175321>
If the creators can't be even bothered to know whether they're legal or not...well...caveat emptor.
<kanzure>
you are experiencing message cutoff
<bsm1175321>
The question to ask of any new coin is: does it satisfy the Howey test; are the creators profiting off it; have the creators applied to the appropriate regulatory body?