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
shrug has quit []
Chris_Stewart_5 has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
<riclas>
same thing by 3 different groups at the same university? xD
<riclas>
ah i jumped the gun. different things. cool
rafalcpp_ has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
rafalcpp has joined #bitcoin-wizards
queip has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
vtnerd has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
vtnerd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
queip has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mauz555 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Hunger- has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
<adiabat>
riclas: one sortof interesting thing about the vault paper, and I guess proof of stake in general:
<adiabat>
there's no security downgrade by making what in bitcoin is the SPV assumption
rafalcpp has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
queip has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
<adiabat>
since the security definition is that 2/3 of signers are honest, and honest nodes only sign off on correct blocks, there's no reason to verify signatures yourself
rafalcpp has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<adiabat>
the idea of a block with a valid proof of work that is otherwise invalid doesn't apply there, so might as well really leverage the SPV assumption and get as much as you can from it
<adiabat>
.. they've still got a pretty serious error though on page 2
<adiabat>
" with the same 500 million transactions, Ethereum and Bitcoin would require 5 GB and 143 GB respectively"
<adiabat>
I pointed out to Derek that this is way off, and comparing apples to oranges (SPV in ethereum vs full validation in bitcoin)
queip has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<riclas>
yeah those numbers didn't add up
<riclas>
and sure, you basically get spv on the base layer
<riclas>
the checkpoint system seems to be generic, and without the drawbacks of utxo checkpoints
elichai2 has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
<riclas>
the sharding part always gets me thinking, there will probably be some kind of chain attack, where someone trusted a bad node and the following ones are screwed because they trust the trusted person
<adiabat>
there's no additional trust I guess, since you're already trusting the signers to be honest, and have no recourse if they're not
<riclas>
ah you're right. we are assuming the signers were honest
<adiabat>
the "Bootstrap Security" part of table 1 bugs me; as if they have a "cryptographic" guarantee while bitcoin has a "probabilistic" one
<instagibbs>
adiabat, "just delete their deposit and move on"
<adiabat>
instagibbs: I think that's ethereum / slasher? This one is guaranteed no-forks-ever
<instagibbs>
95% sure it meant in the case that slasher didn't even work either, but perhaps too snarky
<adiabat>
yeah, at least the ethereum world tries to have backup plans for things going wrong; in algorand / vault it's just "2/3rds always honest"
emilengler has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<riclas>
you can't check anything and detect a problem
<riclas>
the thing is: these ideas seem valid and fine, assuming algorand is a good base
<adiabat>
there are some problems you can detect, but there's nothing you can do other than halt if you detect them
<riclas>
i couldn't find issues with these ideas.
<riclas>
what i find seems always related to base assumptions
<adiabat>
yeah I think it's true that if you're already making the proof of stake assumtions, this is a good optimization
<adiabat>
similarly algorand seems pretty good if you're OK with the assumtions, which seem necessary for all proof of stake systems
<adiabat>
*assumptions
<adiabat>
there does seem to be some assumptions swept under the rug though, like selling old keys
<riclas>
you mean an honest node becoming dishonest?
<riclas>
for any reason, not just selling keys.
<instagibbs>
incentives seem to always be non-0 to not delete, then possibly sell, the keys
<riclas>
yeah, but that's the generic pos problem.
<adiabat>
I guess the problem is you can become a dishonest node after you stop being a node
<adiabat>
I guess we'll see in practice how much of an issue it is. Maybe it won't be
Chris_Stewart_5 has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
elichai2 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<elichai2>
Hi, I'm at chaincode and we're trying to make a double spend session at the residency. until now I've tried using OP_RETURN, bad addresses(1dice, 1lucky etc.) and vladimir's script (bitcoin_submittx) and i can't make it work
<elichai2>
I'm looking for other ideas on how to make a successful double spend
<duqd>
ask at bitdevs in like 2 hours
<duqd>
lul
Guyver2 has quit [Quit: Going offline, see ya! (www.adiirc.com)]
<adiabat>
elichai2: define double spend? Like a reorg, where a tx gets confirmed and then reorged out?
<elichai2>
0conf rbf without nSequence
duqd has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
<adiabat>
RBF without flagging RBF? Harder I guess; might be possible by directly connecting to some miners, but yeah you'd have to find non standard nodes
<elichai2>
exactly. I don't want to signal
emilengler has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<aj>
elichai2: transmit incompatible txes to two different nodes at the same time?
jacob11 has quit []
rafalcpp has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
rafalcpp has joined #bitcoin-wizards
queip has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
jpcw1 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
queip has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jimmysong has joined #bitcoin-wizards
bildramer has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
bildramer has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mauz555 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
mauz555 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mauz555 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
rafalcpp has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
rafalcpp has joined #bitcoin-wizards
queip has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
queip has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mauz555 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mauz555 has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
spinza has quit [Quit: Coyote finally caught up with me...]
kristofferR has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Zenton has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
mauz555 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
spinza has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mauz555 has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-wizards
kristoff_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
kristofferR has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
michaelfolkson has quit [Quit: Sleep mode]
michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-wizards
kristofferR has joined #bitcoin-wizards
kristoff_ has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
jtimon has quit [Quit: gone]
michaelfolkson has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]