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
tromp has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
pro has quit [Quit: Leaving]
rmwb has joined #bitcoin-wizards
sudo_pscience has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Dyaheon has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-wizards
harrymm has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
harrymm has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tromp has joined #bitcoin-wizards
sudo_pscience has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
Ylbam has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
wizkid057 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
alferz has joined #bitcoin-wizards
alferz has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
rmwb has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
rmwb has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rmwb has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
rmwb has joined #bitcoin-wizards
kenshi84_ is now known as kenshi84
rusty has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rusty has quit [Changing host]
rusty has joined #bitcoin-wizards
molz_ has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
NewLiberty has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
moli_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
moli_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
moli_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
pedrovian_ has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
pedrovian has joined #bitcoin-wizards
arowser has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
arowser has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Noldorin has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
arowser_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
arowser has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<nsh>
this seems like an less-than-credibly strong result... [scrypt's 'maximal' memory-hardness]
cluckj has quit [Quit: Leaving]
cluckj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Giszmo has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
cluckj has quit [Client Quit]
cluckj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
abpa has joined #bitcoin-wizards
BashCo has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-wizards
andytoshi has quit [Changing host]
andytoshi has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
sudo_pscience has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
heath_ is now known as heath
BashCo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mol has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<Eliel_>
would it be possible to implement a transaction version based signaling for soft-forks? That is, individual wallets could signal their readiness for a soft-fork by producing transactions to indicate they're capable of validating the new rules.
moli_ has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
<sipa>
Eliel_: sure, and miners could produce them themselves and/or censor transactions that signal for something they don't like
<Eliel_>
I'm not too worried about miners producing them themselves and censoring would effectively become "I don't mind being paid less".
<Eliel_>
the miners producing transactions themselves could perhaps be solved by weighing the transactions with the bitcoin days destroyed measure.
<sipa>
i also don't know why it would be superior
<sipa>
for a softfork, the security requirement is that a reasonable amount of economically-relevant full nodes and a hash majority of miners enforce the rules
<sipa>
it does not at all require that wallets or coin owners enforce it
<Eliel_>
it's the economically relevant nodes that produce most transactions, no?
<sipa>
nodes don't produce transactions, they verify them
benthamshead has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<sipa>
there is some correlation, but it may not be very strong
<Eliel_>
yes, strictly speaking it's the parties that create those transactions that run the nodes.
<sipa>
well the verification is on the receiver side
<sipa>
it's correlated because everyone who receives a lot of coins will eventually tend to send them elsewhere as well
harrymm has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<sipa>
but strictly speaking, a sender SPV wallet that produces a lot of transactions doesn't matter here at all, while the full node the payment processor the webshop uses can be incredibly relevant even though it produces no transactions at all
<Eliel_>
anyway, I got this thought while reading BIP149. It seemed to me it'd be better to have some signaling about the readiness other than just miners.
<sipa>
i disagree
<sipa>
the signalling is there to find a good time to activate
<sipa>
having transaction creators signal is potentially a disaster if they signal before miners are ready
airbreather has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<Eliel_>
Assuming the delay in activation is sufficient, would that really become a real problem except in the case where miners are dead set against the change but nearly the whole community wants the change?
<sipa>
if nearly the whole community wants the change, they should force miners to upgrade :)
<Eliel_>
yes, that'd be the effect basically.
<sipa>
except transaction creators are not necessarily the same as economically relevant full nodes
<sipa>
only the latter can force miners
<sipa>
in a hypothetical scenario where nearly all transactions are sent by lightweight clients, validated by full nodes, and the lightweight clients want a softfork but nobody else does, letting them control activation is asking for a disaster
<Eliel_>
I find it rather unlikely that the signaling percentage could reach significant levels that way...
<Eliel_>
miners could still block it if it's worth the lost fees to block it.
<Eliel_>
but... this really is an interesting problem. The most important job in the network is being done by nodes that are difficult to measure and are almost invisible.
<Eliel_>
I wonder if transaction mining might help here. For example, define a mining algorithm that's cuckoo cycle but implemented so that you need the whole UTXO set to mine. That would be fast to verify and would basically require a validating node to do.
<Eliel_>
and then require transactions to be mined to some degree with that algorithm to be valid
Dyaheon has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<tromp_>
i prefer light clients to be able to verify pow without needing to maintain a large data set
<tromp_>
of course that is still possible with a merkelized data set
<tromp_>
but then proof size becomes many kilobytes
asz has joined #bitcoin-wizards
dgenr8 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
DougieBot5000_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
dgenr8 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
priidu has joined #bitcoin-wizards
DougieBot5000 has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
wizkid057 has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
wizkid057 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
molz_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mol has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
Aranjedeath has joined #bitcoin-wizards
molz_ has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
moli_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<stevenroose>
there seems to be a single address that fails