1 2016-01-20T00:00:22 <maaku> sipa: so the coinbase scriptWitness is transmitted with the block, but contains extra data not hashed as part of the witness tree?
2 2016-01-20T00:00:33 <sipa> maaku: indeed
3 2016-01-20T00:00:56 <maaku> ok thank you.
4 2016-01-20T00:02:07 *** aschildbach has quit IRC
5 2016-01-20T00:02:17 <sipa> it allows chaining future consensus structures into it
6 2016-01-20T00:02:32 <sipa> in a way that doesn't require mining software to know what kinds of commitments are to be created
7 2016-01-20T00:03:26 *** sword_smith has quit IRC
8 2016-01-20T00:04:35 *** ennui`` has quit IRC
9 2016-01-20T00:04:58 *** sword_smith has joined #bitcoin-dev
10 2016-01-20T00:05:20 <maaku> sipa: right I'm coding up an alternative (specify the path up to 7-deep in a single byte) and want to make sure I understand the code there first
11 2016-01-20T00:07:13 <sipa> maaku: i was planning to take that approach first too, but I believe it's wasteful for consensus commitments to do that
12 2016-01-20T00:07:21 <sipa> non-consensus commitments can use a generic tree
13 2016-01-20T00:07:23 <Lauda> Sipa some people are seriously confused in regards to SegWit.
14 2016-01-20T00:08:22 <maaku> sipa: I'm not convinced that the witness tree is so privledged as to take a high-level slot in future trees
15 2016-01-20T00:08:36 <maaku> e.g. more important than header commitments or aux mining proofs
16 2016-01-20T00:16:19 <maaku> sipa: so you can encode an up-to-7-depth path in a single byte. the highest set bit is the level, and the bits below that determine left/right branching, right?
17 2016-01-20T00:16:43 <maaku> 0b00000001 is the root 0b00000010 is the left branch of root, 0b00000011 is the right branch of root, etc.
18 2016-01-20T00:16:59 <sipa> maaku: where does that byte go?
19 2016-01-20T00:17:12 <maaku> so the proposal is this: between 0xaa21a9ed and the 32-byte root hash you put that byte
20 2016-01-20T00:17:27 <maaku> and the scriptWitness for coinbase is up to 7 hashes for the other branches
21 2016-01-20T00:18:26 <maaku> and for future extensions the commitment is checked to be at least 37 bytes, and the extra bytes between 0xaa21a9ed and the witnessPath, merkleRoot are ignored
22 2016-01-20T00:19:24 <sipa> what other branches?
23 2016-01-20T00:19:45 <maaku> so right now it would be [0xa21a9ed, witnessPath, merkleRoot]. after skip list header comments, maybe [0xaa21a9ed, skipListPath, witnessPath, merkleRoot]
24 2016-01-20T00:20:17 <maaku> sipa: well the mining code now would be just [magic, 0x01, witness root] and witnessScript is empty
25 2016-01-20T00:21:14 <maaku> but in the future we could have an arbitrary tree structure that gives preference to commitments that are more proof-size sensitive (e.g. stuff affecting mobile wallets or merged mining)
26 2016-01-20T00:21:22 *** rawdr has quit IRC
27 2016-01-20T00:21:57 <maaku> and it's upgradeable because all the commitments really could be placed anywhere in the first 7 levels, but there'd be sensible defaults that results in a huffman-like tree structure
28 2016-01-20T00:22:40 *** rawdr has joined #bitcoin-dev
29 2016-01-20T00:22:47 *** tjader has quit IRC
30 2016-01-20T00:25:11 *** viajero has joined #bitcoin-dev
31 2016-01-20T00:27:33 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
32 2016-01-20T00:27:49 *** GGuyZ has joined #bitcoin-dev
33 2016-01-20T00:31:34 <viajero> what time zone is used for the logs?
34 2016-01-20T00:31:54 <sipa> maaku: ok, need to get to the airport; i don't fully understand your proposal yet, so i can't comment
35 2016-01-20T00:32:07 <viajero> (the logs of this channel)
36 2016-01-20T00:32:34 <maaku> viajero: UTC I would presume
37 2016-01-20T00:32:47 <maaku> also whoever is maintaining the logs, lines are being logged in triplicate
38 2016-01-20T00:32:51 <sipa> indeed, UTC
39 2016-01-20T00:33:01 <maaku> sipa: ok safe travels
40 2016-01-20T00:33:23 <viajero> yeah, needs soime fixing. very inconvenient to go through
41 2016-01-20T00:34:02 <Lauda> "segwit. all the little fixes and future new features... great.
42 2016-01-20T00:34:02 <Lauda> but forcing pruned blocks without witness by default. and only letting segwit implementations have the special parameter to enable archival mode.. not great"
43 2016-01-20T00:34:14 <Lauda> Does this have any negative (possible) effects?
44 2016-01-20T00:34:22 *** DougieBot5000 has joined #bitcoin-dev
45 2016-01-20T00:34:46 <maaku> Lauda: "forcing pruned blocks without witness by default" <-- ??
46 2016-01-20T00:35:11 <Lauda> I have no idea what this is exactly supposed to mean.
47 2016-01-20T00:35:23 <sipa> the initial implementation will download, verify, and store all witnesses
48 2016-01-20T00:35:26 <Lauda> People just have a general understanding of SegWit that is wrong.
49 2016-01-20T00:35:30 *** kgk has joined #bitcoin-dev
50 2016-01-20T00:35:50 <sipa> the only thing that changes is that it introduces a future mode where witnesses are kept less long than other block data
51 2016-01-20T00:36:21 <Lauda> sipa they get deleted after some time or?
52 2016-01-20T00:36:21 <maaku> So what sipa said. I *think* the quote might be talking about non-upgraded nodes.
53 2016-01-20T00:36:22 *** M-mistake has quit IRC
54 2016-01-20T00:36:31 <Lauda> Possibly yes.
55 2016-01-20T00:36:50 <maaku> But the consequences of that are the same as with any other soft-fork. E.g. pre-P2SH clients don't understand the P2SH outputs
56 2016-01-20T00:36:58 <sipa> about non-upgraded nodes, read: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-December/012014.html
57 2016-01-20T00:40:29 *** bityogi has joined #bitcoin-dev
58 2016-01-20T00:40:45 *** kgk has quit IRC
59 2016-01-20T00:41:00 *** tjader has quit IRC
60 2016-01-20T00:41:17 *** nys- has quit IRC
61 2016-01-20T00:41:34 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
62 2016-01-20T00:42:56 <viajero> I haven't followed the recent core vs. classic drama closely but I was wondering if there already have been any efforts made to find a mediator who is trusted from both sides (like maybe nick szabo or anyone else who is willing and appropriate) to give it one last try to calm things down and find some kind of consensus without the danger of some kind of hostile takeover (classic) and half or more of the core team stepping down in the
63 2016-01-20T00:42:57 <viajero> process?
64 2016-01-20T00:43:23 <Lauda> Thanks again sipa, maaku
65 2016-01-20T00:47:18 *** memymo has joined #bitcoin-dev
66 2016-01-20T00:52:11 *** drnet has joined #bitcoin-dev
67 2016-01-20T00:53:54 *** M-mistake has joined #bitcoin-dev
68 2016-01-20T00:54:49 <Lauda> Sipameaning those that dont even have a segwit client are left with shitty blocks of uncheckable data..
69 2016-01-20T00:54:49 <Lauda> meaning the only way to get full with signature data.. is to upgrade to segwit implementation.. because to get archival data you need to push a parameter only available if your a segwit user.
70 2016-01-20T00:54:49 <Lauda> which is removing freedom of choice of differing implementations.. as it forces those who want to be archival nodes, to use segwit..
71 2016-01-20T00:54:56 <Lauda> sipa*
72 2016-01-20T00:55:18 <sipa> point them to my ML post on the security of soft forks
73 2016-01-20T00:55:24 <sipa> it's no so black and white
74 2016-01-20T00:55:33 <Lauda> Done.
75 2016-01-20T00:57:17 <maaku> Lauda: I'm sure someone could code up a client that downloaded that data but didn't validate it. Not sure what the point would be though.
76 2016-01-20T00:57:37 <maaku> viajero: The problem is that the point of contention is political, not technical, it seems.
77 2016-01-20T00:58:22 <maaku> There's a lot more going on than you can see on Reddit or the forums, and there are people acting as mediators as well as some direct conversations going on.
78 2016-01-20T00:58:28 *** memymo has quit IRC
79 2016-01-20T00:59:21 <viajero> maaku: yeah, I get the same impression.
80 2016-01-20T01:00:14 *** DurstBurger has joined #bitcoin-dev
81 2016-01-20T01:00:17 *** agricocb has joined #bitcoin-dev
82 2016-01-20T01:00:23 <viajero> ok, so is the impression incorrect that the classic hardfork might get more than 75% anytime and things might fall appart son after (or at least, many core devs aren't willing to contribute to classic
83 2016-01-20T01:00:25 <maaku> viajero: but the basic problem is political, and the stance of bitcoin core (as much as we can generalize a disparate group of developers) is that such decisions should be made on a technical, not political basis
84 2016-01-20T01:00:48 <maaku> so.. what to do? I don't know. this is probably off topic for #bitcoin-dev but I'm not sure where to send it
85 2016-01-20T01:01:18 <viajero> yeah, thats why I ended up here. didn't know where else to aks these questions
86 2016-01-20T01:02:18 *** altgribble` has joined #bitcoin-dev
87 2016-01-20T01:02:34 *** Eddy has joined #bitcoin-dev
88 2016-01-20T01:02:35 <Lauda> maaku so it would be possible to code a client that would receive full txdata, with the signatures?
89 2016-01-20T01:02:52 *** altgribble has quit IRC
90 2016-01-20T01:03:13 *** Chiwawa_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
91 2016-01-20T01:03:18 <sipa> Lauda: yes, obviously. any segwit supporting client will do that
92 2016-01-20T01:03:35 <Lauda> sipa what about a client that does not support segwit?
93 2016-01-20T01:03:49 <maaku> Lauda: why would you care to?
94 2016-01-20T01:03:57 <Lauda> Just out of curiousity.
95 2016-01-20T01:04:02 <sipa> they won't see the witness data
96 2016-01-20T01:04:17 <sipa> but they also don't care about it
97 2016-01-20T01:04:23 <Lauda> Someone mentioned it. So it is not possible for a client that does not support Segwit to see the witness data?
98 2016-01-20T01:04:31 <maaku> Lauda: it is certainly possible
99 2016-01-20T01:04:40 <maaku> Lauda: but it's meaningless to do.
100 2016-01-20T01:04:58 <sipa> of course it is "possible"... but that "possible" just means supporting segwit
101 2016-01-20T01:05:23 <maaku> viajero: maybe the badly named bitcoin core slack? slack.bitcoincore.org
102 2016-01-20T01:05:25 <Chiwawa_> imagine people wanted to stick with bitcoin-core 0.11 and not upgrade, will they be cut off from getting witness data, by defalt if segwit gets consensus?
103 2016-01-20T01:05:32 <maaku> (I'm not there though)
104 2016-01-20T01:05:36 <viajero> my thinking is, that even if the contention is political, isn't it worth trying to find someone who mediates on "top level" before everything breaks apart? is there even anyone who might fit in that role? (or is my impression just plain wrong that things are on the brink of falling apart?)
105 2016-01-20T01:06:13 <maaku> Chiwawa_: they could certainly code up their wallet to get it, but again what's the point? are they going to check the witness themselves?
106 2016-01-20T01:06:49 <Lauda> maaku with 'check the witness' you mean validate signatures?
107 2016-01-20T01:06:50 <maaku> viajero: perhaps this post might give you some perspective on the other side : https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/41fup9/to_core_developers_we_are_not_firing_you_we_are/cz2c02w
108 2016-01-20T01:06:52 <Lauda> or?
109 2016-01-20T01:06:57 *** adnn has quit IRC
110 2016-01-20T01:07:05 <maaku> (the point being that if a political mediation was necessary, bitcoin's failed anyway regardless of the outcome)
111 2016-01-20T01:07:11 <maaku> Lauda: yes
112 2016-01-20T01:07:24 <Lauda> maaku can't they validate them in this specific case?
113 2016-01-20T01:07:25 <maaku> it's more than just ECDSA checks, but yes "check the signatures" is what I meant
114 2016-01-20T01:07:40 <maaku> Lauda: that's the only difference between a segwit and non-segwit client
115 2016-01-20T01:07:46 *** dlb76 has quit IRC
116 2016-01-20T01:07:54 <Lauda> So a non-segwit client can get the signatures
117 2016-01-20T01:07:56 <Lauda> but is unable to
118 2016-01-20T01:07:59 <Lauda> validate them
119 2016-01-20T01:08:11 <Lauda> non-segwit client as in one coded to get them
120 2016-01-20T01:08:16 <maaku> Lauda: eeehhh this is really getting philosophical at this point
121 2016-01-20T01:08:30 <Lauda> Well let's say in theory
122 2016-01-20T01:08:36 <maaku> the segwit patch set does really two things (1) fetch the witness, (2) validate the witness
123 2016-01-20T01:08:43 *** bityogi has quit IRC
124 2016-01-20T01:08:48 <Lauda> Someone created a client that can download the data but does not support SegWit.
125 2016-01-20T01:08:54 <maaku> you only need to do (1) if you are going to do (2), otherwise you're downloading stuff you're never going to use anyway
126 2016-01-20T01:09:10 <maaku> and if you do (1) and (2) ... you're a segwit client
127 2016-01-20T01:09:27 <Lauda> In theory a non segwit client could do (1) but not (2), right?
128 2016-01-20T01:09:37 <maaku> see I don't know what "does not support segwit" means
129 2016-01-20T01:09:50 <maaku> can you explain what you mean?
130 2016-01-20T01:10:03 <Lauda> A client that does not want to use SegWit.
131 2016-01-20T01:10:13 *** adnn_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
132 2016-01-20T01:10:14 <maaku> what do you mean "use" segwit?
133 2016-01-20T01:10:20 <Lauda> implement?
134 2016-01-20T01:10:34 <maaku> are you talking about transaction validation, or transaction generation?
135 2016-01-20T01:10:39 <viajero> maaku: I read that already. thats one of the posts that gave me the impression that things might fall apart if classic wins. I personally would always support classic over core. but right now it seems that classic might win and what you are describing in your reddit post will actually happen very soon
136 2016-01-20T01:10:54 <Lauda> maaku let's say Bitcoin Core 0.11
137 2016-01-20T01:11:01 <Lauda> can it do (1)?
138 2016-01-20T01:11:06 <Lauda> once SegWit is activated
139 2016-01-20T01:11:40 <maaku> viajero: i don't have a crystal ball
140 2016-01-20T01:11:46 <viajero> fuck, sorry. I would always support core over classic!!! my msitake....
141 2016-01-20T01:12:01 <maaku> viajero: heh i figured from context that's what you meant
142 2016-01-20T01:12:01 *** memymo has joined #bitcoin-dev
143 2016-01-20T01:12:10 *** Eddy has quit IRC
144 2016-01-20T01:12:19 <maaku> Lauda: no, but hypothetically you could back-port just the part that downloads the witness data
145 2016-01-20T01:12:24 <gijensen> How can Classic win if it has no code?
146 2016-01-20T01:12:29 <maaku> all you would do is waste disk space, but yes
147 2016-01-20T01:12:42 <maaku> gijensen: that is the essence of the issue
148 2016-01-20T01:13:15 *** Cryo has joined #bitcoin-dev
149 2016-01-20T01:13:18 <Lauda> maaku that's my question. It would be possibly to modify a client so that it does (1) without supporting SegWit? Because in order to do (2) it would have to implement changes necessary for SegWit.
150 2016-01-20T01:13:55 <viajero> well, as I understand it, it wins the moment it gets more than 75% hashing power. the crowd doesn't seem to care, that classic has no proper team of developers
151 2016-01-20T01:14:27 <maaku> gijensen: because core is all evil autocrats that took VC money and are perverting bitcoin to our own ends. so we'll take a demonstrably worse solution in every way and use that just because f*ck you core.
152 2016-01-20T01:14:37 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
153 2016-01-20T01:14:42 <Lauda> viajero not sure if this is the right channel for that?
154 2016-01-20T01:14:52 <gijensen> viajero, I don't think it does that, I just looked at a diff, it seems to do nothing?
155 2016-01-20T01:15:11 <gijensen> maaku, that's what it looks like to me haha
156 2016-01-20T01:16:06 *** AtnevRed has joined #bitcoin-dev
157 2016-01-20T01:16:10 <maaku> Lauda: again it hinges on what you mean by "support segwit" -- you could for example take a segwit-validating client and make it only send to non-segwit addresses
158 2016-01-20T01:16:35 <maaku> just like you can take a current version of bitcoin core and make it only send to 1- addresses instead of 3- addresses
159 2016-01-20T01:16:37 <maaku> that's a wallet issue
160 2016-01-20T01:17:03 <Lauda> maaku SegWit requires all wallets to make certain changes right?
161 2016-01-20T01:17:07 <Lauda> or (almost) all.
162 2016-01-20T01:17:31 <maaku> Lauda: it *requires* no wallets to make any changes
163 2016-01-20T01:17:40 <Lauda> It does not?
164 2016-01-20T01:17:44 <maaku> just like there are still (very popular!) wallets that don't support 3- addresses
165 2016-01-20T01:18:30 <sipa> Lauda: a wallet that does not support segwit does not need to make changes
166 2016-01-20T01:18:31 <MrHodl> Lauda: SF. No one has to upgrade if they dont want.
167 2016-01-20T01:18:39 <Lauda> Then I think I don't understand something properly.
168 2016-01-20T01:18:48 *** bsm1175321 has joined #bitcoin-dev
169 2016-01-20T01:18:49 <Lauda> Would a wallet that does not make changes be compatible with the network?
170 2016-01-20T01:19:03 <sipa> YES
171 2016-01-20T01:19:14 <Lauda> Then I have no idea why people are complaining on the 'complexity' of segwit.
172 2016-01-20T01:19:18 <viajero> Lauda: yeah, I know it's not the right place. just don't know where else to put it. last question: would you, the core devs, support an effort to find a "top level" mediator who is trusted from both sides to try one last time to find a consensus. if yes, who might be the right person? if no, or you don't think it will have a chance if getting things back on track, just say it and I'll stop wasting your time!
173 2016-01-20T01:19:20 <Lauda> Thanks for clearing that up.
174 2016-01-20T01:19:20 <sipa> it just can't receive segwit transactions
175 2016-01-20T01:19:28 <maaku> Lauda: yup!
176 2016-01-20T01:19:35 <sipa> but it also won't create segwit addresses, so it does not care
177 2016-01-20T01:19:49 <viajero> *of getting things back on track
178 2016-01-20T01:20:00 <Lauda> 'segwit addresses'?
179 2016-01-20T01:20:06 *** IrishGringo_ has quit IRC
180 2016-01-20T01:20:06 <moli> sipa: thanks for that clarification, there has been so much fud about segwit would cause problems to wallets
181 2016-01-20T01:20:12 <maaku> viajero: i think you should take that question to slack.bitcoincore.org
182 2016-01-20T01:20:15 <belcher> segwit addresses are just p2sh addresses (starting with a 3)
183 2016-01-20T01:20:24 *** IrishGringo has joined #bitcoin-dev
184 2016-01-20T01:20:28 <MrHodl> core got slack too??
185 2016-01-20T01:20:32 <sipa> old wallets can send to new wallets
186 2016-01-20T01:20:35 <belcher> almost all wallets can send to them, only wallets that have updated segwit could spend from their own segwit addresses
187 2016-01-20T01:20:38 <maaku> MrHodl: it is misnamed
188 2016-01-20T01:20:40 <sipa> new wallets can send to old wallets
189 2016-01-20T01:20:45 <belcher> so segwit is entirely opt-in
190 2016-01-20T01:21:02 <belcher> it can be rolled out naturally if tx fees go up, since segwit transactions are cheaper to send
191 2016-01-20T01:21:03 <sipa> it is more efficient for new wallets to send to new wallets, however
192 2016-01-20T01:21:03 <maaku> MrHodl: some people associated with core, but among them only a minority of developers, started a slack
193 2016-01-20T01:21:16 <MrHodl> maaku: figured
194 2016-01-20T01:21:17 <sipa> maaku: i think the community effort is great
195 2016-01-20T01:21:20 *** AtnevRed has quit IRC
196 2016-01-20T01:21:28 <maaku> sipa: i agree!
197 2016-01-20T01:21:33 <sipa> bitcoin core is not just developers
198 2016-01-20T01:21:48 <viajero> maaku: will do
199 2016-01-20T01:21:51 <maaku> yes but I just want to be clear we're not deprecating IRC ;)
200 2016-01-20T01:21:58 <MrHodl> lol
201 2016-01-20T01:22:06 <sipa> oh, absolutely agree with that, maaku
202 2016-01-20T01:22:11 <MrHodl> i got it i got it :)
203 2016-01-20T01:22:11 *** IrishGringo has quit IRC
204 2016-01-20T01:22:39 <maaku> Lauda: there is not yet consensus as to whether there needs to be a segwit specific address
205 2016-01-20T01:22:49 <maaku> there is a BIP, and some controversy surrounding it
206 2016-01-20T01:22:58 <Lauda> maaku what is a 'specific segwit address'=
207 2016-01-20T01:22:59 <Lauda> ?
208 2016-01-20T01:23:07 *** stevenroose_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
209 2016-01-20T01:23:08 *** IrishGringo has joined #bitcoin-dev
210 2016-01-20T01:23:11 <sipa> i am in favor of it, but there is no urgency
211 2016-01-20T01:23:16 <maaku> Lauda: something starting with a new prefix, with a different format
212 2016-01-20T01:23:30 <MrHodl> Lauda: like multisig will always start with 3
213 2016-01-20T01:23:44 <sipa> Lauda: when old wallets want to send to segwit wallets, they need to use p2sh for.compatibility
214 2016-01-20T01:23:50 <Lauda> What's the BIP?
215 2016-01-20T01:24:07 <sipa> Lauda: that is slightly less efficient than using witness scripts directly, and that needs a new address type
216 2016-01-20T01:24:11 <maaku> Lauda: it is true that when sending a payment you need to know whether the recipient wallet supports segwit or not
217 2016-01-20T01:24:18 <sipa> Lauda: 142 i believe
218 2016-01-20T01:24:32 <maaku> there are other ways of signaling this, such as fields in the payment protocol or URI of a QR code
219 2016-01-20T01:24:39 <sipa> indeed
220 2016-01-20T01:24:40 <bsm1175321> Regarding the creation of very-large blocks...Is there any risk in the p2p code that it would end up the victim of a DDoS attack, by simply trying to receive an infinite amount of data with a valid header? Or are the checks there sufficient to prevent it? Certainly the p2p code must know how big the blob of data is?
221 2016-01-20T01:24:52 <sipa> bsm1175321: yes
222 2016-01-20T01:24:53 *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
223 2016-01-20T01:24:53 *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-dev
224 2016-01-20T01:25:03 <bsm1175321> sipa: I should not ask three questions in one line.
225 2016-01-20T01:25:51 <Lauda> See now maaku & sipa. I did a fair amount of reserach the day that segWit was presented and the following (albeit few) days and I had a different (yet supprotive) understanding of it.
226 2016-01-20T01:25:58 <zookolaptop> I thought Slack came with good IRC integration...
227 2016-01-20T01:26:02 <zookolaptop> Haven't tried it yet.
228 2016-01-20T01:26:46 <Lauda> I'm out for now. Thanks again.
229 2016-01-20T01:27:00 <bsm1175321> See I just wasted at least an hour making a blog post about this stupid block size thing, when I could have been working on a solution. Darn you people...
230 2016-01-20T01:27:21 *** denisx has quit IRC
231 2016-01-20T01:27:34 <Chiwawa_> i have a question.. about the blocksize part of segwit. lets say in 2015 (presegwit) a 1mb block was 4000tx... now with segwit. is the intention to allow 6000tx for 1mb(without witness) which accumilates to 1.5mb with witness for archival nodes.. or will segwit keep to 4000tx and be 0.66mb(without witness) and 1mb with witness.. what is the benefit of removing witness.. less data or more transactions
232 2016-01-20T01:27:35 <viajero> bsm1175321: url?
233 2016-01-20T01:27:39 <bsm1175321> sipa: in all seriousness it matters whether your "yes" is to the first question or the second two.
234 2016-01-20T01:28:01 <bsm1175321> viajero: Maybe I'll post it tomorrow. Maybe I won't. This is tiresome.
235 2016-01-20T01:28:08 <bsm1175321> Maybe I just typed my rant for myself.
236 2016-01-20T01:29:53 <maaku> bsm117532: no, yes, yes
237 2016-01-20T01:30:19 <bsm1175321> maaku: Thank you, that's the answer I was hoping for.
238 2016-01-20T01:30:24 *** denisx has joined #bitcoin-dev
239 2016-01-20T01:33:03 <Chris_Stewart_5> sipa: can segwit wallets send to segwit wallets using p2pkh or does that need to be p2sh as well
240 2016-01-20T01:33:25 <sipa> Chiwawa_: segwit transactions "look" smaller to older nodes, because they don't see the witness part
241 2016-01-20T01:33:43 <sipa> Chiwawa_: that is why they increase capacity, and effectively are a block size increase
242 2016-01-20T01:33:59 <sipa> Chiwawa_: p2sh or special witness addresses
243 2016-01-20T01:34:56 *** bsm117532 has quit IRC
244 2016-01-20T01:34:56 *** bsm1175321 is now known as bsm117532
245 2016-01-20T01:35:45 *** GGuyZ has quit IRC
246 2016-01-20T01:35:48 *** bsm1175321 has joined #bitcoin-dev
247 2016-01-20T01:35:51 *** bsm117532 is now known as Guest33789
248 2016-01-20T01:35:51 *** bsm1175321 is now known as bsm117532
249 2016-01-20T01:35:52 <Chiwawa_> sipa: ok im not talking about the glory days of everyone doing a segwit formatted transaction. what about normal bitcoin core 0.11 format transactions. imagine there are 4000 of them.. will segwit truncate them down and then give people 0.66mb of no witness data.. will segwit truncate off the witness and then allow another 2000tx.. and so the archival nodes see a realistic 1.5mb block of tx's with witness
250 2016-01-20T01:36:22 <sipa> Chiwawa_: no, you need to use segwit txn to get the benefit
251 2016-01-20T01:36:24 *** drnet has quit IRC
252 2016-01-20T01:36:33 *** bsm1175321 has joined #bitcoin-dev
253 2016-01-20T01:37:07 <Chris_Stewart_5> sipa: Would segwit txs lead to the demise of p2pkh addresses then if mass adoption occurs (which looks fairly certain long term)?
254 2016-01-20T01:37:18 <sipa> i hope so
255 2016-01-20T01:37:23 <belcher> hopefully, p2sh usage is already at ~10% of all bitcoins
256 2016-01-20T01:37:25 <sipa> but there's no need for that
257 2016-01-20T01:37:36 <Chiwawa_> so someone using bitcoin core 0.11 who wants to grab full archival data from another node that just happen to be segwit supported.. would happily send the 1mb 4000tx data with witness.. no issues
258 2016-01-20T01:37:41 *** kgk has joined #bitcoin-dev
259 2016-01-20T01:38:11 <Chris_Stewart_5> interesting, I think it would be useful to have a s(egwit)p2pkh address then
260 2016-01-20T01:38:46 <bsm1175321> Chiwawa_: but why create a custom data stream, why not just upgrade?
261 2016-01-20T01:39:07 <bsm1175321> Chiwawa_: segwit can also enable new script types that also couldn't be parsed by 0.11...
262 2016-01-20T01:39:07 <sipa> Chris_Stewart_5: there is
263 2016-01-20T01:40:23 *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-dev
264 2016-01-20T01:40:32 *** AaronvanW_ has quit IRC
265 2016-01-20T01:41:06 *** deadalni_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
266 2016-01-20T01:41:19 <Chiwawa_> i know segwit has lots of features. but it appear that the agenda is.. segwit or STFU and sit in the corner.. making segwit be the only option to people
267 2016-01-20T01:41:36 *** Belxjander has quit IRC
268 2016-01-20T01:41:41 *** AaronvanW_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
269 2016-01-20T01:42:08 *** kgk has quit IRC
270 2016-01-20T01:42:35 <Chiwawa_> im just making sure that if people want to (freedom of choice and all) stick with doing normal old style transactions and validating them like they have for the last 6 years.. that segwit isnt going to cut them off and remove their ability to check witnesses
271 2016-01-20T01:42:37 <bsm1175321> Chiwawa_: segwit is interesting separate from the block size conflagration. Please keep it civil...
272 2016-01-20T01:42:43 <gijensen> What does a pre-segwit client do with a segwit TX it finds in a block? Just assume it's valid?
273 2016-01-20T01:43:20 *** oneeman has joined #bitcoin-dev
274 2016-01-20T01:43:24 <bsm1175321> To a pre-segwit client, a segwit TX looks like an anyone-can-pay TX. So is valid.
275 2016-01-20T01:43:29 <Chiwawa_> i know segwit is interesting. there is a few details i do like. im just wondering if segwit is going to amputate the older crowd that prefer other implementations
276 2016-01-20T01:44:55 *** deadalnix has quit IRC
277 2016-01-20T01:45:15 *** deadalni_ has quit IRC
278 2016-01-20T01:45:30 <gijensen> bsm1175321, but I thought the witness data was for transaction verification. Would a pre-segwit client then assume invalid segwit transactions are valid?
279 2016-01-20T01:45:49 <Chris_Stewart_5> Chiwawa_: I think segwit is considered 'opt-in' therefore if you don't want to use it you don't have to. There are a lot of reasons to use it though including saving $$$
280 2016-01-20T01:46:53 *** Belxjander has joined #bitcoin-dev
281 2016-01-20T01:46:56 *** Belxjander has joined #bitcoin-dev
282 2016-01-20T01:47:02 *** OneFixt has joined #bitcoin-dev
283 2016-01-20T01:47:08 *** GGuyZ has joined #bitcoin-dev
284 2016-01-20T01:49:12 <bsm1175321> gijensen: That is true. But such transactions would never be included in the main chain because a soft-fork such as this would not begin to include segwit transactions until segwit-validating clients have the majority of the hash power. This keeps the highest-PoW chain the same as a chain that is accepted by all clients.
285 2016-01-20T01:49:33 <bsm1175321> (and in fact all previous soft forks use 95% as their trigger)
286 2016-01-20T01:49:50 <gijensen> I know all that, and thanks :). I think I fully understand segwit now.
287 2016-01-20T01:51:23 <Chiwawa_> i know its opt in.. but as long as those that dont opt in.. wont get cut off and not be able to receive witnessdata. as it seems if segwit doesnt push witness by default.. then older full nodes cant validate old style tx's.. as they just appear as p2sh.. or if segwit does push witness by default for the benefit of the older clients. that the 6000tx block capacity is actually 1.5mb of data and older clients will throw those bloc
288 2016-01-20T01:52:29 *** tjader has quit IRC
289 2016-01-20T01:53:04 *** OneFixt has quit IRC
290 2016-01-20T01:53:11 <Chiwawa_> in which case.. its a good idea otherimplementations that dont want segwit. up their blocklimits to 2mb.. to be able to get segwits 1.5mb withwitness blocks
291 2016-01-20T01:53:43 <bsm1175321> Older clients cannot validate the signatures, but since they look like anyone-can-pay, they're still valid. They will have to upgrade for txn's they *send* against those outputs to be valid, however.
292 2016-01-20T01:54:10 <gijensen> Chiwaea_, Old-style TXs will still follow the 1MB limit. The extra witness data is not seen by older clients (as they won't receive it). The disadvantage older clients have is that they can't verify witness TXs (assume all are valid), but they still see them.
293 2016-01-20T01:55:09 *** bendavenport has quit IRC
294 2016-01-20T01:55:24 *** chatquack has joined #bitcoin-dev
295 2016-01-20T01:55:34 *** afk11 has quit IRC
296 2016-01-20T01:56:14 <Chiwawa_> "assume they are valid" i get it.. so make old style clients redundant.. i see.. obvious now
297 2016-01-20T01:57:06 *** rmwb has quit IRC
298 2016-01-20T01:57:10 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
299 2016-01-20T01:57:16 <Chiwawa_> older clients can validate signatures by the way.. its part of checking a transaction is valid.. if signatures were not checked.. then tell me your bitcoin address and i will spend all your coins
300 2016-01-20T01:57:25 *** deadalnix has joined #bitcoin-dev
301 2016-01-20T01:57:31 <Chiwawa_> because i dont need a privkey sig to do it
302 2016-01-20T01:57:40 <Chiwawa_> (as you say)
303 2016-01-20T01:58:05 <bsm1175321> Well not redundant. But if you choose not to validate these kinds of transactions...you're allowed to make that choice. I have no idea what advantage that would confer to you though. The distinction in my mind is mostly for people who are absent or unable to upgrade. e.g. the creator of SatoshiDice fell ill...
304 2016-01-20T01:58:14 <gijensen> It will still validate older signatures, just not the new witness TXs. It'll look like a bunch of free money is everywhere to an older client, but you can't spend it
305 2016-01-20T01:58:29 *** frankenmint has joined #bitcoin-dev
306 2016-01-20T02:00:59 *** memymo has quit IRC
307 2016-01-20T02:01:20 <Chiwawa_> ok.. going in circles as the narative has changed,, ok imagine segwit node had block 420,000.. with 4000tx of old style format.. and bitcoin-core v0.11 wanted block 420,000.. would segwit by default, without needing any special parameters. send the block with signatures(witness) or send block without signatures
308 2016-01-20T02:02:11 <gijensen> Chiwawa_, you'd get a normal block. No segwit meddling involved.
309 2016-01-20T02:02:20 <bsm1175321> Chiwawa_: I believe it's not up to the node, segwit is encoded in the transaction, which is the choice of the wallet.
310 2016-01-20T02:02:37 <sipa> the segwit data is just not sent along to peers who don't ask for it
311 2016-01-20T02:02:43 <sipa> old clients never ask for it
312 2016-01-20T02:04:04 <Chiwawa_> so.. the only thing that ultimately changes is not segwit truncating off witness data of old style tx's .. but the new style segwit transactions will look truncated..
313 2016-01-20T02:04:21 <gijensen> Basically, yeah. You can't verify them.
314 2016-01-20T02:04:31 *** tachys has joined #bitcoin-dev
315 2016-01-20T02:04:40 <sipa> no, they will look like perfectly valid (but kinda weird) transactions
316 2016-01-20T02:04:42 <Chiwawa_> as long as old style can stil verify old style.. that good
317 2016-01-20T02:04:43 <bsm1175321> Chiwawa_: OTOH you have chosen not to verify them.
318 2016-01-20T02:05:27 <gijensen> Well they look valid, but they can't be verified.
319 2016-01-20T02:05:49 <gijensen> On older clients*
320 2016-01-20T02:05:55 *** zookolaptop has quit IRC
321 2016-01-20T02:06:00 *** GAit has quit IRC
322 2016-01-20T02:06:01 <Chiwawa_> so segwit does manipulated old style transactions and fails to hand back old style transactions with their witness.....
323 2016-01-20T02:06:15 *** patcon has quit IRC
324 2016-01-20T02:06:20 <bsm1175321> gijensen: The old software does not know that. They **are** valid according to the old clients, and according to the old clients they **have** verified them. It's kind of a trick. But this allows old clients to track all balances.
325 2016-01-20T02:07:12 <bsm1175321> The really important thing is that OLD nodes see the same UTXO set as NEW nodes.
326 2016-01-20T02:07:21 <gijensen> I feel like it should be very clear that they're not verified and new clients should upgrade
327 2016-01-20T02:07:59 <Chiwawa_> forget tricks and illusions.. imagine someone is a full node that actually does chck the data it gets.. if i asked for block 420,000... that was 4000 old style tx's... bitcoin-core will or wont get the witness data to be able to validate?? (talking about full nodes not lite clients or spv)
328 2016-01-20T02:08:29 *** jordandotdev has quit IRC
329 2016-01-20T02:08:40 <gijensen> Chiwawa_, in that example I don't believe there is witness data to receive. It'll just receive the block.
330 2016-01-20T02:08:41 <bsm1175321> gijensen: When you give someone a payment address, it's with your wallet, which either knows about segwit or it doesn't (and which wallet is YOUR choice). If it doesn't, it won't give a segwit address.
331 2016-01-20T02:09:00 *** tachys has quit IRC
332 2016-01-20T02:09:23 <gijensen> bsm1175321, you can still have a witness TX pay to YOU, correct?
333 2016-01-20T02:09:25 <bsm1175321> gijensen: someone using an old wallet that only creates P2PKH can still send funds to your P2SH address...
334 2016-01-20T02:09:31 <bsm1175321> gijensen: Yes
335 2016-01-20T02:09:38 <gijensen> So you can't verify it.
336 2016-01-20T02:09:44 <bsm1175321> Yes
337 2016-01-20T02:09:50 <gijensen> All I was saying
338 2016-01-20T02:10:17 <bsm1175321> You give me a 1...address I can verify it. It may have come from a weird "anyone can pay" address, but my (old) node will verify that the funds were received properly.
339 2016-01-20T02:10:45 <bsm1175321> Rather: You give me a 1XXXXX address and YOU can verify it.
340 2016-01-20T02:11:11 <gijensen> It will confirm that, but it doesn't validate the authenticity of the transaction, which is an important point. It's not a point for or against segwit IMO, but an important detail nonetheless
341 2016-01-20T02:12:06 <bsm1175321> Old things don't have the new features. It's a fact.
342 2016-01-20T02:12:25 <bsm1175321> And you can't make them have the new features by choice of what data you send them.
343 2016-01-20T02:12:53 <bsm1175321> Unless you send self-executing code. In which case you deserve the hell you create. ;-)
344 2016-01-20T02:13:01 <gijensen> I agree, I'm *for* segwit. I feel like I'm having a failure to communicate :)
345 2016-01-20T02:13:01 <Chris_Stewart_5> the stack doesn't have to be empty for a script to evaluate to true correct?
346 2016-01-20T02:13:47 <Chris_Stewart_5> i.e. if there are no more script operations to run, but the stack top is OP_1 with more data underneath of it
347 2016-01-20T02:14:11 <bsm1175321> I'm going to defer to sipa as to how exactly he got soft-forking to work, don't fully understand how he did that.
348 2016-01-20T02:14:29 <Chiwawa_> ill ask again.. a old style block of 4000tx (you know the ones with signatures).. once segwit hits concensus.. then the 2% of nodes that are not segwit, will a block of funky p2sh transactions and no signatures to check that the funds are valid realistically.. but will be so confused about what it receives. that it will naively treat them as valid due to trickery.. ?
349 2016-01-20T02:14:31 <bsm1175321> (but, cool! and kudos!)
350 2016-01-20T02:15:12 <gijensen> Chiwawa_, I've answered twice. Blocks without segwit TXs don't have associated witness data. The block is received as normal
351 2016-01-20T02:16:02 <bsm1175321> Chiwawa_: It treats them as valid because they appear as anyone-can-pay. There is a signal somewhere else (that old clients disregard and new clients pick up on) that there is another channel for validation. I don't mean "trick" as a pejorative. ;-)
352 2016-01-20T02:16:21 <gijensen> Blocks aren't mutable, an old block won't change when segwit goes live
353 2016-01-20T02:16:31 *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-dev
354 2016-01-20T02:16:47 <bsm1175321> Good point gijensen
355 2016-01-20T02:17:57 *** blueness has quit IRC
356 2016-01-20T02:18:22 *** Ylbam has quit IRC
357 2016-01-20T02:18:45 *** stevenroose_ has quit IRC
358 2016-01-20T02:18:54 <Chiwawa_> i have 6 years of blocks that do have transactions with signatures (witnesses).. lots of people have 6 years of proof that signatures do exist and are important.. so by saying non segwit tx's dont have associated witness data.. is saying old style tx's never had signatures.. please can we get on the same page
359 2016-01-20T02:19:28 <bsm1175321> Chiwawa_: signatures will not be removed from pre-segwit blocks.
360 2016-01-20T02:20:37 <bsm1175321> Though, a node can reasonably prune them for efficiency because it has already checked them. Your -reindex would be faster as long as your disk doesn't get corrupted.
361 2016-01-20T02:21:00 *** IrishGringo_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
362 2016-01-20T02:21:04 <Chiwawa_> but post-segwit blocks. that may.. lets say have 3950 segwit tx's and maybe 50 oldschool tx.'s... would appear to bitcoin-core v0.11 as 4000 p2sh no witness tx.. or 3950 p2sh and 50 tx with signature
363 2016-01-20T02:21:06 *** IrishGringo has quit IRC
364 2016-01-20T02:21:25 <gijensen> Yes
365 2016-01-20T02:21:46 <gijensen> Sorry, second option
366 2016-01-20T02:22:17 <bsm1175321> So the old node that you insist on running (again, why?) KNOWS beyond a shadow of a doubt that when it receives funds it's receiving them from a valid UTXO. Sending funds is no change.
367 2016-01-20T02:22:19 *** Burrito has quit IRC
368 2016-01-20T02:22:38 <Chiwawa_> ok so even after segwit consensus.. old school nodes will still be able to see old school tx's (with signatures).. like they have for the last 6 years
369 2016-01-20T02:22:49 <bsm1175321> Correct.
370 2016-01-20T02:23:08 <bsm1175321> Signatures are not removed from old school tx's.
371 2016-01-20T02:23:41 <sipa> indeed; that would invalidate them
372 2016-01-20T02:24:04 <Chiwawa_> and that was my concern
373 2016-01-20T02:24:27 *** AaronvanW_ has quit IRC
374 2016-01-20T02:24:48 <Chiwawa_> so that clears that up. and back to me saying what i said 20 minutes ago :D [02:04] <Chiwawa_> as long as old style can still verify old style.. that good
375 2016-01-20T02:24:55 <bsm1175321> New question for the segwit FAQ: Are signatures removed from P2PKH transactions: No. ;-)
376 2016-01-20T02:25:10 *** afk11 has quit IRC
377 2016-01-20T02:25:11 <bsm1175321> Chiwawa_: That's the definition of a soft fork.
378 2016-01-20T02:25:36 <bsm1175321> If we increased the block size, old nodes would NOT be able to verify old transactions.
379 2016-01-20T02:25:45 *** AaronvanW_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
380 2016-01-20T02:25:46 <bsm1175321> And that's a hard fork (by definition).
381 2016-01-20T02:26:58 *** chatquack has quit IRC
382 2016-01-20T02:30:07 <Chiwawa_> that was another concern of mine.. if segwit (nowi know they dont) but if segwit were to ignore (using other merkle) signatures of old school tx's to allow more tx into the 1mb block.. then when a node asks for full data including signatures of oldschools tx's wouldnt that pop the total data over 1mb..
383 2016-01-20T02:31:58 *** atgreen has joined #bitcoin-dev
384 2016-01-20T02:32:12 <Chiwawa_> im thinking that its more like 4000tx old school or 6000tx sw format.. and if there was 1 old school amungst the majority .. it woulnd be 5999 new 1 old.. but more like 5998 new 1 old as the old takes up more than one measure..
385 2016-01-20T02:32:43 <bsm1175321> Chiwawa_: Yes it would. It's important that the full set of transaction outputs fit in 1MB for old nodes to validate. That limits the potential of this solution, when regarded as helping bitcoin scale.
386 2016-01-20T02:33:29 <bsm1175321> We still need to find another way to increase the transaction volume, independent of segwit, IMHO.
387 2016-01-20T02:33:42 <bsm1175321> Segwit helps buy us time to find that "other way".
388 2016-01-20T02:33:44 *** RoboTeddy has quit IRC
389 2016-01-20T02:33:48 *** warren has quit IRC
390 2016-01-20T02:34:05 <sipa> bsm1175321: we certainly do!
391 2016-01-20T02:35:10 *** GGuyZ_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
392 2016-01-20T02:35:11 *** GGuyZ has quit IRC
393 2016-01-20T02:35:11 *** GGuyZ_ is now known as GGuyZ
394 2016-01-20T02:35:22 *** IrishGringo has joined #bitcoin-dev
395 2016-01-20T02:35:30 <Chiwawa_> the part im looking more forward to is the removal of malle.. which is the reason i would use segwit format transactions.. as i can then tweak around more with features that 'could' work with 0 confirms as the confidence of 0 confirms would return
396 2016-01-20T02:36:11 <bsm1175321> Ok now we're onto a completely differen't snake's nest.
397 2016-01-20T02:36:17 <Chiwawa_> lol
398 2016-01-20T02:36:18 *** IrishGringo_ has quit IRC
399 2016-01-20T02:36:21 <bsm1175321> (0-conf)
400 2016-01-20T02:36:23 *** brg444 has joined #bitcoin-dev
401 2016-01-20T02:36:58 <bsm1175321> malleability, do you mean?
402 2016-01-20T02:37:02 *** tachys has joined #bitcoin-dev
403 2016-01-20T02:37:04 <Chiwawa_> yes
404 2016-01-20T02:37:18 <bsm1175321> That has no impact on the fact that 0-conf is fundamentally unsafe.
405 2016-01-20T02:37:19 *** ttttemp__ has quit IRC
406 2016-01-20T02:37:19 *** bendavenport has joined #bitcoin-dev
407 2016-01-20T02:38:05 <bsm1175321> There's really nothing that could ever happen with bitcoin to make 0-conf safe. It's built into its structure. 0-conf might happen on other layers, like payment channels.
408 2016-01-20T02:38:21 <Chiwawa_> i know.. as i said "could".. as there would be a slight confidence increase.. but not worth it on large transactions.. just something for small stuff im thinking of playing around with
409 2016-01-20T02:38:43 <Lightsword> the problem is that there is only one thing IMO that could make 0-conf safe and that is centralization of mining
410 2016-01-20T02:38:58 <sipa> ha
411 2016-01-20T02:39:13 *** ttttemp__ has joined #bitcoin-dev
412 2016-01-20T02:39:18 <Lightsword> and we seem to be headed down that path....
413 2016-01-20T02:39:19 *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-dev
414 2016-01-20T02:39:33 <bsm1175321> Chiwawa_: your risk management model (and its flaws) is your problem. I think you should buy insurance against it.
415 2016-01-20T02:40:59 <bsm1175321> Chiwawa_: payment channels (lightning network) are 0-conf safe, except for the fact that it may take a week to close the channel in the event a disagreement.
416 2016-01-20T02:42:02 <Chiwawa_> yep risk. but thats why i havnt done it as the risk is even higher to due malle.. .. but a step in the right direction atleast lets me play around with a few things i wouldnt play around with before.. still not risk free.. but i will play
417 2016-01-20T02:42:39 *** AaronvanW_ has quit IRC
418 2016-01-20T02:43:11 <bsm1175321> Chiwawa_: FWIW I'm working on getting confirmation times down. I think the theoretical limit is probably ~15s.
419 2016-01-20T02:43:46 *** M-mistake has quit IRC
420 2016-01-20T02:43:46 *** meZee has quit IRC
421 2016-01-20T02:43:54 <bsm1175321> It's kinda a limit implied by physics. But it's a long way out...
422 2016-01-20T02:44:19 <Chiwawa_> us that using the weakblocks/subchain idea.. or totally revolutionising the main blocks which would also mean messing with the reward value to stay on target for 21mill in 100 years
423 2016-01-20T02:45:01 <bsm1175321> A new incentive schedule is required due to selfish mining in any case.
424 2016-01-20T02:46:18 <Chiwawa_> so like 25bitcoin at 10min = 2.5btc at 1min... as i hope you not thinking of screwing the maths of the 21mill cap
425 2016-01-20T02:47:00 <Chiwawa_> selfish mining.. but 29% is not in china no more.. its iceland
426 2016-01-20T02:47:05 *** nivah has quit IRC
427 2016-01-20T02:47:15 *** afk11_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
428 2016-01-20T02:47:31 *** afk11 has quit IRC
429 2016-01-20T02:47:31 *** afk11_ is now known as afk11
430 2016-01-20T02:48:39 *** meZee has joined #bitcoin-dev
431 2016-01-20T02:48:43 *** SlinQ has quit IRC
432 2016-01-20T02:48:58 <Chiwawa_> totally forgot.. about 0 confirms.. malle gets fixed.. but then RBF takes its place.. i see the risk hasnt dropped.. lol ok ill wait patiently for another fix to 0 confirms lol
433 2016-01-20T02:49:23 <bsm1175321> RBF is clearly indicated, you can check for those transactions.
434 2016-01-20T02:50:16 *** M-mistake has joined #bitcoin-dev
435 2016-01-20T02:50:16 <bsm1175321> Frankly, 0-conf is fundamentally not safe and no one should do it. Anyone who wants to take that risk for whatever reason, NEEDS to check for the RBF flag and pay attention to that.
436 2016-01-20T02:50:22 <Chiwawa_> but if i send a tx now................................. you hand me a beer........... i walk away.... .... and now i send RBF tx... i am now 30 feet away with a free beer
437 2016-01-20T02:51:30 *** SlinQ has joined #bitcoin-dev
438 2016-01-20T02:51:37 <bsm1175321> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-November/011783.html
439 2016-01-20T02:52:13 <bsm1175321> "allows receivers to detect if the sender has" elected for RBF. If you choose to depend on this unsafe security model, you can detect RBF, even on an old node.
440 2016-01-20T02:52:29 <bsm1175321> Your insurance policy is your business.
441 2016-01-20T02:53:08 <Chiwawa_> if only miners stopped being greedy and just accepted tx into blocks.. then the delay wouldnt be bad. i seen antpool doing atleast five 0.2mb blocks while the rest of the pools are averaging 0.9mb
442 2016-01-20T02:53:35 <Chiwawa_> then there would be no need for RBF
443 2016-01-20T02:54:11 *** sparetire has quit IRC
444 2016-01-20T02:55:13 <rusty> Chiwawa_: Under any model of future revenue, there will be a lower limit on fees. That makes for a sucky UX if users can't increase fees, hence RBF required. Plus, opportunities to compress txs by combination mean more efficient use of blockspace, at least in theory.
445 2016-01-20T02:55:26 *** belcher has quit IRC
446 2016-01-20T02:55:53 <rusty> (Any model which involves fees supporting miners, at least).
447 2016-01-20T02:56:27 *** DigiByteDev has joined #bitcoin-dev
448 2016-01-20T02:56:47 <Chris_Stewart_5> sipa: Can you have multiple values on your stack, with no more script operations to run and have the script evaluate to true if the top stack item is true?
449 2016-01-20T02:56:58 *** deadalnix has quit IRC
450 2016-01-20T02:57:22 <sipa> Chris_Stewart_5: yes, but that is nonstandard
451 2016-01-20T02:57:39 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
452 2016-01-20T02:57:54 <sipa> so it is valid in the blockchain, but bitcoin core won't accept such transactions to the mempool
453 2016-01-20T03:00:14 <Chris_Stewart_5> thanks
454 2016-01-20T03:00:14 <Chiwawa_> ok final question of the night.. with segwit.. without segwit.. is there a plan to bring tx fee below 1cent each again.. like the olden days.. or is it going to rise to over 10cents to feed the miners greed
455 2016-01-20T03:00:49 <sipa> Chiwawa_: the fee is whatever people want to pay
456 2016-01-20T03:01:15 <Chris_Stewart_5> </3 the market
457 2016-01-20T03:01:35 <Chiwawa_> but there is a mathematical expectation.... will this expectation of minimal fee.. go down to 1cent
458 2016-01-20T03:02:40 *** rmwb has quit IRC
459 2016-01-20T03:04:12 *** afk11 has quit IRC
460 2016-01-20T03:04:56 <rusty> Chiwawa_: if miners rely entirely on fees, and they want the same reward as now (~$10k USD), and mean tx is still ~260 bytes, and you pay 1c for it, that needs 1,000,000 txs in a block, or a blocksize of about 260M. Since miners will presumably want more money in the future, that's probably an overestimate.
461 2016-01-20T03:05:09 <rusty> Sorry, underestimate.
462 2016-01-20T03:05:20 <Chiwawa_> i ask as the expectation is 4cent minimum 0.0001 but i seen someone pay 22cents. and still waited 3 blocks for confirm.. so wondering if anything can be done as many outsiders are watching them damn "what is bitcoin" videos of 'virtually free' virtually instant bitcoin transactions.. but the reality is slow and costly
463 2016-01-20T03:05:23 <rusty> I expect 1c txs to go off chain.
464 2016-01-20T03:08:01 <Chiwawa_> look at this.. https://blockchain.info/block/000000000000000002810c9c8f063f18720e79f0e063f88a12cdf4799b2df0d0 seriously 4tx.. this is why i hate miners more then the politics of bitcoin.. :D
465 2016-01-20T03:08:32 <Chiwawa_> oops 1tx..
466 2016-01-20T03:09:19 *** Baconaetor has quit IRC
467 2016-01-20T03:09:36 <Chiwawa_> they dont need or care about tx fee's right now.. so thats why i dont think we should be paying for tx's up to our noses (4cent min)
468 2016-01-20T03:10:13 <Chiwawa_> anyway.. im just yammering now.. u answered my questions.. im outta here
469 2016-01-20T03:10:36 <Chiwawa_> night!
470 2016-01-20T03:10:53 *** GGuyZ has quit IRC
471 2016-01-20T03:11:01 *** Chiwawa_ has quit IRC
472 2016-01-20T03:11:44 *** deadalnix has joined #bitcoin-dev
473 2016-01-20T03:14:26 *** patcon has joined #bitcoin-dev
474 2016-01-20T03:15:39 *** nivah has joined #bitcoin-dev
475 2016-01-20T03:16:54 *** AtnevRed has joined #bitcoin-dev
476 2016-01-20T03:21:38 *** Ahmed90 has quit IRC
477 2016-01-20T03:21:45 *** AtnevRed has quit IRC
478 2016-01-20T03:22:21 *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-dev
479 2016-01-20T03:23:20 *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-dev
480 2016-01-20T03:27:50 *** zookolap` has joined #bitcoin-dev
481 2016-01-20T03:28:13 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
482 2016-01-20T03:29:47 *** zookolaptop has quit IRC
483 2016-01-20T03:30:10 *** Subo1977 has joined #bitcoin-dev
484 2016-01-20T03:34:22 *** rmwb has quit IRC
485 2016-01-20T03:34:24 *** Delta_ has quit IRC
486 2016-01-20T03:35:06 *** SlinQ has quit IRC
487 2016-01-20T03:35:47 *** deadalnix has quit IRC
488 2016-01-20T03:39:17 *** kgk has joined #bitcoin-dev
489 2016-01-20T03:40:02 *** brson has quit IRC
490 2016-01-20T03:45:05 *** kgk has quit IRC
491 2016-01-20T03:45:31 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
492 2016-01-20T03:46:14 *** atgreen has quit IRC
493 2016-01-20T03:46:40 *** warren has joined #bitcoin-dev
494 2016-01-20T03:47:15 *** patcon has quit IRC
495 2016-01-20T03:52:23 *** Delta_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
496 2016-01-20T03:52:44 *** Subo1977 has quit IRC
497 2016-01-20T03:52:44 *** rael_wiki has quit IRC
498 2016-01-20T03:52:44 *** lolterp has quit IRC
499 2016-01-20T03:54:03 *** parus has quit IRC
500 2016-01-20T03:54:11 *** parus has joined #bitcoin-dev
501 2016-01-20T03:54:23 *** rael_wiki has joined #bitcoin-dev
502 2016-01-20T03:55:03 *** patcon has joined #bitcoin-dev
503 2016-01-20T03:56:38 *** tjader has quit IRC
504 2016-01-20T04:01:24 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
505 2016-01-20T04:01:36 *** treaki_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
506 2016-01-20T04:03:30 *** NLNico has joined #bitcoin-dev
507 2016-01-20T04:04:46 *** treaki has quit IRC
508 2016-01-20T04:10:20 *** Giszmo has quit IRC
509 2016-01-20T04:10:55 *** TheSeven has quit IRC
510 2016-01-20T04:11:55 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-dev
511 2016-01-20T04:12:21 *** TheSeven has joined #bitcoin-dev
512 2016-01-20T04:19:05 *** bitcoin-dev177 has joined #bitcoin-dev
513 2016-01-20T04:21:08 *** bitcoin-dev177 has quit IRC
514 2016-01-20T04:22:05 *** oneeman has quit IRC
515 2016-01-20T04:25:58 *** ftlio has joined #bitcoin-dev
516 2016-01-20T04:27:35 *** eragmus has joined #bitcoin-dev
517 2016-01-20T04:28:18 *** phungus has joined #bitcoin-dev
518 2016-01-20T04:28:40 *** cypherBlock has joined #bitcoin-dev
519 2016-01-20T04:32:00 *** nivah has quit IRC
520 2016-01-20T04:33:19 *** nivah has joined #bitcoin-dev
521 2016-01-20T04:36:20 *** zookolap` has quit IRC
522 2016-01-20T04:40:57 <eragmus> .
523 2016-01-20T04:42:26 *** ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-dev
524 2016-01-20T04:45:30 *** Belxjander has quit IRC
525 2016-01-20T04:50:06 *** arubi has quit IRC
526 2016-01-20T04:50:23 *** jposner has quit IRC
527 2016-01-20T04:53:41 *** Belxjander has joined #bitcoin-dev
528 2016-01-20T04:53:42 *** rmwb has quit IRC
529 2016-01-20T04:55:10 *** bendavenport has quit IRC
530 2016-01-20T04:57:07 *** nys- has joined #bitcoin-dev
531 2016-01-20T04:57:11 *** deadalnix has joined #bitcoin-dev
532 2016-01-20T04:59:09 *** tachys has quit IRC
533 2016-01-20T04:59:11 *** treaki__ has joined #bitcoin-dev
534 2016-01-20T04:59:33 *** deadalnix has quit IRC
535 2016-01-20T04:59:52 *** deadalnix has joined #bitcoin-dev
536 2016-01-20T05:01:12 *** Omni- has quit IRC
537 2016-01-20T05:03:00 *** treaki_ has quit IRC
538 2016-01-20T05:03:32 *** Belxjander has quit IRC
539 2016-01-20T05:05:59 *** Belxjander has joined #bitcoin-dev
540 2016-01-20T05:06:22 *** JeromeLegoupil has joined #bitcoin-dev
541 2016-01-20T05:07:26 *** patcon has quit IRC
542 2016-01-20T05:09:52 *** theorbtwo has quit IRC
543 2016-01-20T05:10:01 <Luke-Jr> jtoomim: I don't doubt. Remember they had problems when HO-mining because they ignored it?
544 2016-01-20T05:10:09 *** ronbo has joined #bitcoin-dev
545 2016-01-20T05:10:27 *** cryptojonathan has joined #bitcoin-dev
546 2016-01-20T05:10:30 <jtoomim> are you talking about SPV mining, or SPV wallets?
547 2016-01-20T05:10:35 <jtoomim> i'm talking about the wallets.
548 2016-01-20T05:10:47 <jtoomim> the ones that a lot of core devs think are not SPV wallets, but just thin wallets
549 2016-01-20T05:11:07 <Luke-Jr> both
550 2016-01-20T05:11:11 <jtoomim> anyway, saying that "some are ignoring it" is different than saying that "all are ignoring it"
551 2016-01-20T05:11:52 <jtoomim> i'm interested in keeping this fork as simple as possible
552 2016-01-20T05:12:08 <jtoomim> we can do a big cleanup fork in a year or something, with plenty of review and planning
553 2016-01-20T05:13:13 <jtoomim> just because it's technically a hard fork doesn't mean we get to do whatever we want with it
554 2016-01-20T05:13:20 <jtoomim> we still have a lot of constraints for how we code this
555 2016-01-20T05:13:35 *** dlb76 has joined #bitcoin-dev
556 2016-01-20T05:14:07 <moa> so you are going to have a "simple hard fork" followed by a "clean hard fork" a year later?
557 2016-01-20T05:15:15 <Luke-Jr> jtoomim: if you want it as simple as possible, why are you going for the ill-advised miner voting rather than the expert-recommended flag day approach?
558 2016-01-20T05:15:29 *** anon has joined #bitcoin-dev
559 2016-01-20T05:15:30 <jtoomim> because the experts are wrong on that point.
560 2016-01-20T05:15:34 * Luke-Jr sighs
561 2016-01-20T05:15:38 <jtoomim> it happens.
562 2016-01-20T05:15:48 <jtoomim> everyone's an expert, don't you know?
563 2016-01-20T05:15:51 *** anon is now known as Guest17949
564 2016-01-20T05:16:06 <jtoomim> sorry, that was insulting.
565 2016-01-20T05:16:13 <moa> you are genearlly
566 2016-01-20T05:16:15 <jtoomim> the point remains, even really smart people can be wrong about these things.
567 2016-01-20T05:16:26 *** theorbtwo has joined #bitcoin-dev
568 2016-01-20T05:16:41 <jtoomim> that goes for me too, of course
569 2016-01-20T05:17:25 <jtoomim> flag day makes sense if there are no economics or humans in the mix
570 2016-01-20T05:17:31 *** memymo has joined #bitcoin-dev
571 2016-01-20T05:17:35 <jtoomim> but there are both
572 2016-01-20T05:17:44 <jtoomim> and that means a miner vote is helpful
573 2016-01-20T05:17:46 *** Belxjander has quit IRC
574 2016-01-20T05:17:52 *** AtnevRed has joined #bitcoin-dev
575 2016-01-20T05:17:52 <dgenr8> just don't call satoshi an expert
576 2016-01-20T05:18:31 <jtoomim> he's probably just an expat
577 2016-01-20T05:18:34 *** eki5bvu7njh has joined #bitcoin-dev
578 2016-01-20T05:18:36 *** T23WS_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
579 2016-01-20T05:19:36 *** JeromeLegoupil has quit IRC
580 2016-01-20T05:19:36 *** adnn_ has quit IRC
581 2016-01-20T05:19:52 *** deadalnix has quit IRC
582 2016-01-20T05:20:21 *** Belxjander has joined #bitcoin-dev
583 2016-01-20T05:20:39 *** deadalni_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
584 2016-01-20T05:21:12 *** T23WS has quit IRC
585 2016-01-20T05:21:25 *** jposner has joined #bitcoin-dev
586 2016-01-20T05:22:15 *** AtnevRed has quit IRC
587 2016-01-20T05:23:14 <Luke-Jr> jtoomim: in other words, you are disinterested in doing anything but what you want to do, because you think you know better than everyone else. that's the gist of what it seems like you said there.
588 2016-01-20T05:23:23 *** priidu has quit IRC
589 2016-01-20T05:25:46 <moa> ... and he's interested in the number of passports people carry
590 2016-01-20T05:26:27 *** AndChat|221969 has joined #bitcoin-dev
591 2016-01-20T05:26:59 *** tjader has quit IRC
592 2016-01-20T05:27:38 *** cryptojonathan has quit IRC
593 2016-01-20T05:27:57 <jtoomim> luke-jr: i've had the discussion about flag days before, i know the arguments
594 2016-01-20T05:28:08 <jtoomim> rehashing them is unlikely to change my mind
595 2016-01-20T05:28:17 <jtoomim> or yours
596 2016-01-20T05:28:25 *** Omni_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
597 2016-01-20T05:28:26 <jtoomim> if you think it's unnecessary, that's fine
598 2016-01-20T05:28:46 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
599 2016-01-20T05:28:48 <jtoomim> using voting plus a grace period should have the best of both worlds
600 2016-01-20T05:29:54 *** memymo has quit IRC
601 2016-01-20T05:30:27 <Luke-Jr> jtoomim: I'm really more interested in getting long-standing hardfork wishlist items cleared, than convincing you out of miner voting.
602 2016-01-20T05:31:07 *** memymo has joined #bitcoin-dev
603 2016-01-20T05:31:59 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
604 2016-01-20T05:32:08 <jtoomim> luke-jr: i know, but this isn't the hard fork for that
605 2016-01-20T05:32:19 <jtoomim> it could have been if we had started prepping for it a year ago
606 2016-01-20T05:32:49 <jtoomim> and if Core had been in favor of it instead of dragging its feet
607 2016-01-20T05:32:58 <jtoomim> but at this point, it's not an option
608 2016-01-20T05:33:02 <jtoomim> sorry
609 2016-01-20T05:33:32 *** rmwb has quit IRC
610 2016-01-20T05:33:46 <Luke-Jr> says who?
611 2016-01-20T05:36:42 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
612 2016-01-20T05:37:06 *** bitcoin-dev303 has joined #bitcoin-dev
613 2016-01-20T05:38:04 *** mrkent has quit IRC
614 2016-01-20T05:38:49 *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-dev
615 2016-01-20T05:42:05 *** kgk has joined #bitcoin-dev
616 2016-01-20T05:43:25 *** bitcoin-dev303 has quit IRC
617 2016-01-20T05:44:01 *** jimtendo-X202EP has joined #bitcoin-dev
618 2016-01-20T05:44:30 <jtoomim> https://bitcoinclassic.consider.it/base-off-112-add-2mb-blocksize-and-nothing-else-yet-release-download-and-fork-asap
619 2016-01-20T05:44:55 <jtoomim> https://bitcoinclassic.consider.it/first-release-is-2mb-hard-fork
620 2016-01-20T05:45:09 <jtoomim> "The first release of Bitcoin Classic will only contain pull requests for increasing the blocksize limit. Other features can be added in subsequent releases."
621 2016-01-20T05:45:12 *** memymo has quit IRC
622 2016-01-20T05:45:32 <jtoomim> those have overwhelming support
623 2016-01-20T05:45:43 <brg444> by consider.it users
624 2016-01-20T05:45:47 <jtoomim> yes
625 2016-01-20T05:45:51 <jtoomim> i.e. our user base
626 2016-01-20T05:45:54 <Luke-Jr> who are a minority of the community
627 2016-01-20T05:45:55 <brg444> less than 1% of Bitcoin users are represented
628 2016-01-20T05:46:04 <Luke-Jr> jtoomim: hardforks are not merely about Classic's user base
629 2016-01-20T05:46:13 <AdrianG> after its been code reviewed on consider.it?
630 2016-01-20T05:46:15 <Luke-Jr> they necessarily affect EVERYONE using Bitcoin
631 2016-01-20T05:46:15 <AdrianG> lol
632 2016-01-20T05:46:15 <jtoomim> we base the decisions for our project on the recommendations of our users
633 2016-01-20T05:46:23 <jtoomim> if you want a say in that, you can become a user
634 2016-01-20T05:46:24 <jtoomim> okay?
635 2016-01-20T05:46:25 <Luke-Jr> hardforks are not project decisions
636 2016-01-20T05:46:36 *** kgk has quit IRC
637 2016-01-20T05:46:36 <AdrianG> jtoomim: how are you going to convince miners your code isnt buggy?
638 2016-01-20T05:46:42 <jtoomim> ok, this is turning into a flamewar, and i'm not interested in participating
639 2016-01-20T05:46:49 <jtoomim> goodbye
640 2016-01-20T05:46:50 <AdrianG> oh ok
641 2016-01-20T05:46:53 <Luke-Jr> jtoomim: treating hardforks like project decisions just goes to show it lacks economic support
642 2016-01-20T05:47:10 <jtoomim> the hardfork is not a project decision
643 2016-01-20T05:47:11 *** maaku has quit IRC
644 2016-01-20T05:47:30 <jtoomim> that's the decision of users to actually run the code
645 2016-01-20T05:47:36 <AdrianG> jtoomim: post more of the code review requests on reddit, it sure instills confidence in your code
646 2016-01-20T05:47:49 <jtoomim> and if they want to interact with most of the bitcoin businesses in the world, then ... well, they will probably want to do that
647 2016-01-20T05:47:54 <gijensen> Hardfork should be up to the maximum amount of people it affects IMO.
648 2016-01-20T05:48:06 <jtoomim> it is
649 2016-01-20T05:48:28 <gijensen> If you hardfork, it affects users who are not on consider.it
650 2016-01-20T05:48:28 <jtoomim> the decision that was on consider.it is to put nothing else in the code except the 2 MB related stuff
651 2016-01-20T05:48:31 <rmwb> I'm starting to remember why I left IRC...
652 2016-01-20T05:48:45 <jtoomim> yeah, i'm just going to close this window now
653 2016-01-20T05:48:47 <jtoomim> bye
654 2016-01-20T05:48:50 *** jtoomim has quit IRC
655 2016-01-20T05:49:22 <AdrianG> zero confidence in their code reviews.
656 2016-01-20T05:49:38 <AdrianG> so now they have to do just this one feature, or bust. heh.
657 2016-01-20T05:49:42 <gijensen> I'm not sure what part of that is considered flaming :/
658 2016-01-20T05:50:12 <Luke-Jr> gijensen: you questioned the Dictator of Bitcoin.
659 2016-01-20T05:50:17 <Luke-Jr> obviously that's flaming. /s
660 2016-01-20T05:50:27 <gijensen> Haha ;p
661 2016-01-20T05:50:46 <Luke-Jr> I bet Classic is a historical blip by this time next week. :p
662 2016-01-20T05:51:02 *** JackH has quit IRC
663 2016-01-20T05:51:19 <gijensen> I hope so, so people can chill
664 2016-01-20T05:51:20 <AdrianG> after democratic code reviews
665 2016-01-20T05:51:21 <Luke-Jr> (not because it *should* die, but because the project leadership is making fools of the project)
666 2016-01-20T05:51:41 <rmwb> projection?
667 2016-01-20T05:52:06 <moli> how many users on that site? 100? and that's what he based on?
668 2016-01-20T05:52:25 <moli> i want $1 bitcoin, come on down
669 2016-01-20T05:53:19 *** memymo has joined #bitcoin-dev
670 2016-01-20T05:53:24 <gijensen> It's not like we all went on consider.it and said "we don't want this" obviously it's going to attract mostly people "for" whatever he wants than against.
671 2016-01-20T05:53:52 <AdrianG> gijensen: he says democracy in general, anything in specific "we wont consider this"
672 2016-01-20T05:54:23 <AdrianG> now after a breakout of major paranoia, apparently they now consider all pull requests DOS attacks lol
673 2016-01-20T05:54:35 <AdrianG> and will not add any features, just the hardfork
674 2016-01-20T05:56:40 *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-dev
675 2016-01-20T05:56:51 <rmwb> your democratic vote comes when you spark up your client of choice...
676 2016-01-20T05:57:52 *** throughnothing has joined #bitcoin-dev
677 2016-01-20T05:59:41 <pigeons> I like hw he calls himself "we"
678 2016-01-20T06:00:08 *** rael_wiki has quit IRC
679 2016-01-20T06:00:08 *** throughnothing has quit IRC
680 2016-01-20T06:00:32 <AdrianG> pigeons: its just the regular majestic plural, after all, he is the supreme leader of all bitcoin
681 2016-01-20T06:00:45 <moli> lmao
682 2016-01-20T06:00:47 *** wrabbit has quit IRC
683 2016-01-20T06:01:01 <Luke-Jr> pigeons: yeah, and trolls like to claim Core devs have big egos..
684 2016-01-20T06:01:14 *** wrabbit has joined #bitcoin-dev
685 2016-01-20T06:01:20 <AdrianG> maybe he means "we the toomims
686 2016-01-20T06:01:21 <AdrianG> "
687 2016-01-20T06:01:24 *** rael_wiki has joined #bitcoin-dev
688 2016-01-20T06:01:57 <phantomcircuit> AdrianG, We have decided that all output scripts in the UTXO should be changed to OP_TRUE to more evenly distribute coins
689 2016-01-20T06:02:01 <phantomcircuit> It shall be done
690 2016-01-20T06:02:08 <phantomcircuit> The real users support me on this
691 2016-01-20T06:02:10 * AdrianG stamps the decree
692 2016-01-20T06:02:26 <pigeons> that was the original vision of satoshi afterall
693 2016-01-20T06:02:32 *** maaku has joined #bitcoin-dev
694 2016-01-20T06:02:34 <AdrianG> peace be upon him
695 2016-01-20T06:02:46 <phantomcircuit> pigeons, i am so glad someone got that
696 2016-01-20T06:02:50 <AdrianG> too much lols today with toomims
697 2016-01-20T06:02:55 *** maaku is now known as Guest26455
698 2016-01-20T06:03:23 *** ttttemp_ has quit IRC
699 2016-01-20T06:03:38 *** ttttemp_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
700 2016-01-20T06:03:57 <AdrianG> embarassing really, how did they manage to get so much verbal support
701 2016-01-20T06:06:49 *** Guest26455 is now known as maaku
702 2016-01-20T06:08:04 *** priver_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
703 2016-01-20T06:11:05 *** smooth has joined #bitcoin-dev
704 2016-01-20T06:14:00 *** priver_ has quit IRC
705 2016-01-20T06:16:51 *** cypherBlock has quit IRC
706 2016-01-20T06:28:32 *** maaku has quit IRC
707 2016-01-20T06:30:06 *** d_t has quit IRC
708 2016-01-20T06:30:42 *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-dev
709 2016-01-20T06:31:08 *** DigiByteDev has quit IRC
710 2016-01-20T06:32:30 *** deadalni_ has quit IRC
711 2016-01-20T06:32:47 *** deadalnix has joined #bitcoin-dev
712 2016-01-20T06:34:12 *** KrellanWk has quit IRC
713 2016-01-20T06:34:17 *** meZee- has joined #bitcoin-dev
714 2016-01-20T06:36:54 *** rawdr has quit IRC
715 2016-01-20T06:37:57 *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-dev
716 2016-01-20T06:38:13 *** Emcy_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
717 2016-01-20T06:38:13 *** Emcy_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
718 2016-01-20T06:38:25 *** rawdr has joined #bitcoin-dev
719 2016-01-20T06:39:47 *** Quent1 has quit IRC
720 2016-01-20T06:40:43 *** Emcy has quit IRC
721 2016-01-20T06:40:53 *** jtoomim has joined #bitcoin-dev
722 2016-01-20T06:42:04 *** nys- has quit IRC
723 2016-01-20T06:43:30 *** kgk has joined #bitcoin-dev
724 2016-01-20T06:43:46 *** maaku has joined #bitcoin-dev
725 2016-01-20T06:44:09 *** maaku is now known as Guest89306
726 2016-01-20T06:45:20 *** Guest89306 is now known as maaku
727 2016-01-20T06:46:16 *** prijedorske_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
728 2016-01-20T06:46:17 *** rmwb has quit IRC
729 2016-01-20T06:46:17 *** rubensayshi has quit IRC
730 2016-01-20T06:47:05 *** KrellanWk has joined #bitcoin-dev
731 2016-01-20T06:47:19 *** neozaru has joined #bitcoin-dev
732 2016-01-20T06:47:24 *** rusty has quit IRC
733 2016-01-20T06:47:33 *** aevitas has joined #bitcoin-dev
734 2016-01-20T06:47:35 *** prijedorske has quit IRC
735 2016-01-20T06:48:04 *** kgk has quit IRC
736 2016-01-20T06:49:32 *** priidu has joined #bitcoin-dev
737 2016-01-20T06:51:26 *** memymo has quit IRC
738 2016-01-20T06:51:49 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-dev
739 2016-01-20T06:52:48 *** aevitas has quit IRC
740 2016-01-20T06:54:56 *** zzyzx has quit IRC
741 2016-01-20T06:56:08 *** paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-dev
742 2016-01-20T06:56:08 *** paveljanik has quit IRC
743 2016-01-20T06:56:08 *** paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-dev
744 2016-01-20T06:57:20 *** tjader has quit IRC
745 2016-01-20T06:59:01 *** ftlio has quit IRC
746 2016-01-20T06:59:34 *** rubensayshi has joined #bitcoin-dev
747 2016-01-20T06:59:40 *** rawdr has quit IRC
748 2016-01-20T07:01:15 *** rawdr has joined #bitcoin-dev
749 2016-01-20T07:01:31 *** brg444 has quit IRC
750 2016-01-20T07:01:37 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
751 2016-01-20T07:04:30 *** waffles has joined #bitcoin-dev
752 2016-01-20T07:04:59 *** bit2017 has joined #bitcoin-dev
753 2016-01-20T07:06:12 *** markus-k has joined #bitcoin-dev
754 2016-01-20T07:07:12 *** nivah has quit IRC
755 2016-01-20T07:09:49 *** ongolaBoy has joined #bitcoin-dev
756 2016-01-20T07:11:35 *** shurnormal has quit IRC
757 2016-01-20T07:14:51 *** nys- has joined #bitcoin-dev
758 2016-01-20T07:14:51 *** jtimon has quit IRC
759 2016-01-20T07:15:32 *** aevitas has joined #bitcoin-dev
760 2016-01-20T07:18:51 *** AtnevRed has joined #bitcoin-dev
761 2016-01-20T07:21:43 *** ThomasV has quit IRC
762 2016-01-20T07:23:05 *** AtnevRed has quit IRC
763 2016-01-20T07:29:02 *** rawdr has quit IRC
764 2016-01-20T07:30:22 *** rawdr has joined #bitcoin-dev
765 2016-01-20T07:30:38 *** m_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
766 2016-01-20T07:32:58 *** viajero has left #bitcoin-dev
767 2016-01-20T07:38:56 *** blueness has joined #bitcoin-dev
768 2016-01-20T07:40:06 *** murch has joined #bitcoin-dev
769 2016-01-20T07:44:08 *** brooss has joined #bitcoin-dev
770 2016-01-20T07:44:09 *** RoboTeddy has joined #bitcoin-dev
771 2016-01-20T07:45:11 *** kgk has joined #bitcoin-dev
772 2016-01-20T07:49:19 *** deadalnix has quit IRC
773 2016-01-20T07:49:22 *** RoboTeddy has quit IRC
774 2016-01-20T07:49:52 *** deadalnix has joined #bitcoin-dev
775 2016-01-20T07:50:00 *** kgk has quit IRC
776 2016-01-20T07:50:17 *** RoboTeddy has joined #bitcoin-dev
777 2016-01-20T07:56:29 *** xegoo_ has quit IRC
778 2016-01-20T07:57:30 *** xegoo_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
779 2016-01-20T07:58:02 *** maaku has quit IRC
780 2016-01-20T07:59:58 *** neozaru has quit IRC
781 2016-01-20T08:00:30 *** nys- has quit IRC
782 2016-01-20T08:04:32 *** MRIO has quit IRC
783 2016-01-20T08:05:04 *** mrkent has quit IRC
784 2016-01-20T08:05:15 *** jonasschnelli has quit IRC
785 2016-01-20T08:07:58 *** jonasschnelli has joined #bitcoin-dev
786 2016-01-20T08:13:50 *** paveljanik has quit IRC
787 2016-01-20T08:13:59 *** priidu has quit IRC
788 2016-01-20T08:14:21 *** YoY has quit IRC
789 2016-01-20T08:16:06 *** YoY has joined #bitcoin-dev
790 2016-01-20T08:17:04 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-dev
791 2016-01-20T08:17:37 *** IAmNotDorian has joined #bitcoin-dev
792 2016-01-20T08:17:37 *** IAmNotDorian has joined #bitcoin-dev
793 2016-01-20T08:19:06 *** DougieBot5000 has quit IRC
794 2016-01-20T08:19:22 *** Grouver has joined #bitcoin-dev
795 2016-01-20T08:21:40 *** deadalnix has quit IRC
796 2016-01-20T08:22:16 *** deadalnix has joined #bitcoin-dev
797 2016-01-20T08:23:35 *** nys- has joined #bitcoin-dev
798 2016-01-20T08:27:02 *** tjader has quit IRC
799 2016-01-20T08:28:29 *** trixis has joined #bitcoin-dev
800 2016-01-20T08:28:53 *** trixis is now known as Guest17646
801 2016-01-20T08:31:45 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
802 2016-01-20T08:32:40 *** twixisowned has quit IRC
803 2016-01-20T08:33:06 *** ennui has joined #bitcoin-dev
804 2016-01-20T08:33:10 *** trixisowned has joined #bitcoin-dev
805 2016-01-20T08:34:22 *** IrishGringo has quit IRC
806 2016-01-20T08:35:11 *** nys- has quit IRC
807 2016-01-20T08:35:24 *** jouke has quit IRC
808 2016-01-20T08:35:25 *** jouke has joined #bitcoin-dev
809 2016-01-20T08:37:35 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-dev
810 2016-01-20T08:38:24 *** IrishGringo has joined #bitcoin-dev
811 2016-01-20T08:38:57 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
812 2016-01-20T08:38:58 *** BashCo_ has quit IRC
813 2016-01-20T08:41:12 *** maaku has joined #bitcoin-dev
814 2016-01-20T08:41:36 *** maaku is now known as Guest99685
815 2016-01-20T08:41:56 *** Guest99685 is now known as maaku
816 2016-01-20T08:42:21 *** shurnormal has joined #bitcoin-dev
817 2016-01-20T08:46:25 *** ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-dev
818 2016-01-20T08:59:22 *** deadalnix has quit IRC
819 2016-01-20T08:59:36 *** stevenroose_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
820 2016-01-20T09:01:07 *** mnk has quit IRC
821 2016-01-20T09:03:54 *** p15x has quit IRC
822 2016-01-20T09:04:12 *** p15 has quit IRC
823 2016-01-20T09:04:32 *** aevitas has quit IRC
824 2016-01-20T09:05:09 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-dev
825 2016-01-20T09:05:28 *** p15 has joined #bitcoin-dev
826 2016-01-20T09:08:08 *** rishobot has quit IRC
827 2016-01-20T09:11:25 *** kinlo has quit IRC
828 2016-01-20T09:13:10 *** kabaum has left #bitcoin-dev
829 2016-01-20T09:13:23 *** kabaum has joined #bitcoin-dev
830 2016-01-20T09:13:39 *** stevenroose_ has quit IRC
831 2016-01-20T09:14:06 *** kadoban has quit IRC
832 2016-01-20T09:14:20 *** d_t has quit IRC
833 2016-01-20T09:20:46 *** IrishGringo has quit IRC
834 2016-01-20T09:33:35 *** IrishGringo has joined #bitcoin-dev
835 2016-01-20T09:37:15 *** teslax has quit IRC
836 2016-01-20T09:43:45 *** teslax has joined #bitcoin-dev
837 2016-01-20T09:46:53 *** kgk has joined #bitcoin-dev
838 2016-01-20T09:50:51 *** guruvan has joined #bitcoin-dev
839 2016-01-20T09:51:24 *** metalcamp has joined #bitcoin-dev
840 2016-01-20T09:51:24 *** kgk has quit IRC
841 2016-01-20T09:54:08 *** BananaLotus has joined #bitcoin-dev
842 2016-01-20T09:58:06 *** risho has joined #bitcoin-dev
843 2016-01-20T09:59:51 *** OMGforking has joined #bitcoin-dev
844 2016-01-20T10:07:38 *** ongolaBoy has quit IRC
845 2016-01-20T10:07:52 *** n0n0_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
846 2016-01-20T10:09:07 *** ongolaBoy has joined #bitcoin-dev
847 2016-01-20T10:10:57 <OMGforking> To separate Bitcoins from an Altcoin emerging from the same blockchain using the same address and TX validation one would need a conflicting input that is only valid in one chain. Is there an easy way to create such input?
848 2016-01-20T10:12:00 <aj> OMGforking: the easiest way is to mine a block... you can also try doublespends on both networks until you get different ones accepted on each
849 2016-01-20T10:12:34 <aj> OMGforking: if the rules are different on the two networks, you can submit a tx that's only valid on one, and once it's mined, doublespend on the other
850 2016-01-20T10:13:14 <aj> OMGforking: eg, bitcoinxt had a limit of 100k for txes, so a 101k tx on bitcoin core would let you split your coin.
851 2016-01-20T10:13:31 <aj> OMGforking: once anyone has a distinct coin, they can use coinjoin to let everyone else get distinct coins too
852 2016-01-20T10:15:09 *** ongolaBoy has quit IRC
853 2016-01-20T10:15:12 *** djoot has quit IRC
854 2016-01-20T10:15:27 *** ongolaBoy has joined #bitcoin-dev
855 2016-01-20T10:15:29 *** djoot has joined #bitcoin-dev
856 2016-01-20T10:15:30 *** djoot has joined #bitcoin-dev
857 2016-01-20T10:16:00 *** kang_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
858 2016-01-20T10:16:08 *** kang_ has left #bitcoin-dev
859 2016-01-20T10:16:17 <OMGforking> aj: thank you! It's not easy mining a block nowadays though. I will see if I can spot different rulesets that would allow creation of a TX that is only considered as valid by one network.
860 2016-01-20T10:17:05 *** one_zero has quit IRC
861 2016-01-20T10:20:29 <aj> OMGforking: getting a payout from a mining pool via the coinbase is good enough too
862 2016-01-20T10:21:05 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
863 2016-01-20T10:21:41 *** kinlo has joined #bitcoin-dev
864 2016-01-20T10:21:46 *** aschildbach has joined #bitcoin-dev
865 2016-01-20T10:22:57 <OMGforking> aj: I'm not sure if they would (immediately) payout the coinbase from the >1MB block. One cannot be sure.
866 2016-01-20T10:23:05 *** IrishGringo has quit IRC
867 2016-01-20T10:23:50 <OMGforking> What I am looking for is a reliable way to split.
868 2016-01-20T10:24:01 *** IrishGringo has joined #bitcoin-dev
869 2016-01-20T10:26:00 *** rmwb has quit IRC
870 2016-01-20T10:26:15 *** kinlo has quit IRC
871 2016-01-20T10:26:23 *** IrishGringo has quit IRC
872 2016-01-20T10:26:42 *** IrishGringo_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
873 2016-01-20T10:27:57 *** patcon has joined #bitcoin-dev
874 2016-01-20T10:28:11 *** AaronvanW_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
875 2016-01-20T10:33:43 *** aevitas has joined #bitcoin-dev
876 2016-01-20T10:38:37 *** iKant has joined #bitcoin-dev
877 2016-01-20T10:41:24 *** moa has quit IRC
878 2016-01-20T10:41:51 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
879 2016-01-20T10:47:35 *** clopez has quit IRC
880 2016-01-20T10:49:01 *** kgk has joined #bitcoin-dev
881 2016-01-20T10:50:35 *** MKCoin has quit IRC
882 2016-01-20T10:50:42 *** clopez has joined #bitcoin-dev
883 2016-01-20T10:51:02 <Lauda> Are there any plans to increase the block size in the future (e.g. in 2017, 18)?
884 2016-01-20T10:53:06 *** kgk has quit IRC
885 2016-01-20T10:56:05 *** aevitas has quit IRC
886 2016-01-20T11:01:16 *** kinlo has joined #bitcoin-dev
887 2016-01-20T11:02:32 *** JWU42 has quit IRC
888 2016-01-20T11:04:43 *** MKCoin has joined #bitcoin-dev
889 2016-01-20T11:05:52 *** wallet42 has joined #bitcoin-dev
890 2016-01-20T11:07:14 *** melvster1 has quit IRC
891 2016-01-20T11:07:48 *** xabbix has quit IRC
892 2016-01-20T11:08:27 *** JWU42 has joined #bitcoin-dev
893 2016-01-20T11:10:01 *** xabbix has joined #bitcoin-dev
894 2016-01-20T11:10:02 *** xabbix has quit IRC
895 2016-01-20T11:10:02 *** xabbix has joined #bitcoin-dev
896 2016-01-20T11:11:38 <m_> Lauda: yes. We have lighting network (2MB), 2MB-4MB-8MB proposal and so on.
897 2016-01-20T11:12:10 <AlienTrooper> Lightning network is goood
898 2016-01-20T11:18:36 *** wallet42 has quit IRC
899 2016-01-20T11:19:12 *** kinlo has quit IRC
900 2016-01-20T11:19:45 *** xegoo_ has quit IRC
901 2016-01-20T11:20:18 *** AtnevRed has joined #bitcoin-dev
902 2016-01-20T11:20:21 *** melvster1 has joined #bitcoin-dev
903 2016-01-20T11:22:59 *** conner has joined #bitcoin-dev
904 2016-01-20T11:23:42 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
905 2016-01-20T11:25:24 *** AtnevRed has quit IRC
906 2016-01-20T11:25:47 *** tjader has quit IRC
907 2016-01-20T11:27:04 *** IrishGringo has joined #bitcoin-dev
908 2016-01-20T11:27:31 *** IrishGringo_ has quit IRC
909 2016-01-20T11:28:05 *** patcon has quit IRC
910 2016-01-20T11:28:23 *** rmwb has quit IRC
911 2016-01-20T11:29:01 *** Alina-malina has joined #bitcoin-dev
912 2016-01-20T11:29:45 *** ThomasV has quit IRC
913 2016-01-20T11:30:01 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
914 2016-01-20T11:31:05 *** xegoo_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
915 2016-01-20T11:32:46 *** ongolaBoy has quit IRC
916 2016-01-20T11:34:51 *** ongolaBoy has joined #bitcoin-dev
917 2016-01-20T11:35:45 *** m_ has left #bitcoin-dev
918 2016-01-20T11:38:06 *** Alina-malina has left #bitcoin-dev
919 2016-01-20T11:38:36 *** G1lius has joined #bitcoin-dev
920 2016-01-20T11:40:44 *** mdemont has joined #bitcoin-dev
921 2016-01-20T11:45:20 *** ongolaBoy has quit IRC
922 2016-01-20T11:45:45 *** Belxjander has quit IRC
923 2016-01-20T11:46:19 *** toffoo has quit IRC
924 2016-01-20T11:48:42 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-dev
925 2016-01-20T11:52:09 *** ronbo has quit IRC
926 2016-01-20T11:52:14 *** Belxjander has joined #bitcoin-dev
927 2016-01-20T11:56:01 *** CheckDavid has joined #bitcoin-dev
928 2016-01-20T11:58:46 *** Emcy_ has quit IRC
929 2016-01-20T12:00:30 *** kefkius has joined #bitcoin-dev
930 2016-01-20T12:02:27 *** ongolaBoy has joined #bitcoin-dev
931 2016-01-20T12:05:06 *** aevitas has joined #bitcoin-dev
932 2016-01-20T12:05:45 *** janko33 has joined #bitcoin-dev
933 2016-01-20T12:06:29 *** mdemont has quit IRC
934 2016-01-20T12:11:36 *** aevitas has quit IRC
935 2016-01-20T12:11:47 *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-dev
936 2016-01-20T12:15:12 *** aevitas has joined #bitcoin-dev
937 2016-01-20T12:16:28 *** kinlo has joined #bitcoin-dev
938 2016-01-20T12:17:27 *** nowan_ has quit IRC
939 2016-01-20T12:17:47 *** nowan has joined #bitcoin-dev
940 2016-01-20T12:20:15 *** atgreen has joined #bitcoin-dev
941 2016-01-20T12:21:55 *** jimtendo-X202EP has quit IRC
942 2016-01-20T12:22:58 *** davec has quit IRC
943 2016-01-20T12:23:12 *** ennui has quit IRC
944 2016-01-20T12:24:07 *** davec has joined #bitcoin-dev
945 2016-01-20T12:25:50 *** mdemont has joined #bitcoin-dev
946 2016-01-20T12:27:05 *** murch has quit IRC
947 2016-01-20T12:27:55 *** IrishGringo has quit IRC
948 2016-01-20T12:28:48 *** frankenmint has quit IRC
949 2016-01-20T12:31:04 *** cryptapus_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
950 2016-01-20T12:31:05 *** cryptapus_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
951 2016-01-20T12:33:52 *** petrkr has joined #bitcoin-dev
952 2016-01-20T12:33:53 *** Cryo has quit IRC
953 2016-01-20T12:35:54 *** mrkent has quit IRC
954 2016-01-20T12:36:12 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-dev
955 2016-01-20T12:37:34 *** damethos has joined #bitcoin-dev
956 2016-01-20T12:38:40 *** herodes has joined #bitcoin-dev
957 2016-01-20T12:40:37 *** sparetire has joined #bitcoin-dev
958 2016-01-20T12:40:44 *** IrishGringo has joined #bitcoin-dev
959 2016-01-20T12:44:07 *** ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-dev
960 2016-01-20T12:47:15 *** GAit has quit IRC
961 2016-01-20T12:47:29 *** damethos has quit IRC
962 2016-01-20T12:48:44 *** damethos has joined #bitcoin-dev
963 2016-01-20T12:50:23 *** kadoban has joined #bitcoin-dev
964 2016-01-20T12:50:51 *** kgk has joined #bitcoin-dev
965 2016-01-20T12:55:31 *** bektar has joined #bitcoin-dev
966 2016-01-20T12:55:32 *** kgk has quit IRC
967 2016-01-20T12:56:14 *** trixisowned has quit IRC
968 2016-01-20T12:56:57 *** trixisowned has joined #bitcoin-dev
969 2016-01-20T12:57:26 *** tjader has quit IRC
970 2016-01-20T13:01:55 *** atgreen has quit IRC
971 2016-01-20T13:02:09 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
972 2016-01-20T13:05:39 *** AndChat|221969 has quit IRC
973 2016-01-20T13:05:41 *** veggi3s has quit IRC
974 2016-01-20T13:05:42 *** veggi3s- has joined #bitcoin-dev
975 2016-01-20T13:06:49 *** xegoo__ has joined #bitcoin-dev
976 2016-01-20T13:07:30 *** xegoo_ has quit IRC
977 2016-01-20T13:10:33 *** priidu has joined #bitcoin-dev
978 2016-01-20T13:12:52 *** ongolaBoy has quit IRC
979 2016-01-20T13:13:53 *** djoot has quit IRC
980 2016-01-20T13:15:03 *** ongolaBoy has joined #bitcoin-dev
981 2016-01-20T13:15:27 *** p15x has joined #bitcoin-dev
982 2016-01-20T13:15:53 *** erasmospunk has joined #bitcoin-dev
983 2016-01-20T13:16:44 *** bpmgrt has joined #bitcoin-dev
984 2016-01-20T13:18:06 *** bit2017 has quit IRC
985 2016-01-20T13:19:20 *** ronbo has joined #bitcoin-dev
986 2016-01-20T13:20:34 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
987 2016-01-20T13:20:38 *** jimtendo-X202EP has joined #bitcoin-dev
988 2016-01-20T13:21:00 *** AtnevRed has joined #bitcoin-dev
989 2016-01-20T13:21:27 *** cryptapus_ has quit IRC
990 2016-01-20T13:22:07 *** cryptapus_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
991 2016-01-20T13:22:08 *** cryptapus_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
992 2016-01-20T13:22:14 *** erasmosp_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
993 2016-01-20T13:22:15 *** Guest33582 has quit IRC
994 2016-01-20T13:22:27 *** gitle has joined #bitcoin-dev
995 2016-01-20T13:24:19 *** erasmospunk has quit IRC
996 2016-01-20T13:24:46 <thermoman> short question about locktime: let's say current block is 100 and I want to propagate a TX from A to B that has a locktime of Block#110 attached to it.
997 2016-01-20T13:25:43 <thermoman> Will bitcoin core relay that TX at the time where current block count is at 100? My understanding is, that it should relay the TX. and the receiver (B) is unable to spend the BTC transferred until block count has reached 110
998 2016-01-20T13:26:05 *** AtnevRed has quit IRC
999 2016-01-20T13:26:10 <thermoman> but it seems that bitcoin core just won't accept the TX A->B before block count is at 110
1000 2016-01-20T13:27:24 <thermoman> could somebody shed some light on this, please?
1001 2016-01-20T13:27:29 <wumpus> only valid transactions will be relayed; if locktime isn't satisfied, the transaction is not yet valid
1002 2016-01-20T13:28:26 <wumpus> (e.g. the condition to relay a transaction is that it can potentially be included into next block)
1003 2016-01-20T13:28:38 <thermoman> ok, thanks for clarification
1004 2016-01-20T13:28:50 *** bektar has quit IRC
1005 2016-01-20T13:29:49 <thermoman> wumpus: this corresponds to the error {"code":-26,"message":"64: non-final"}, right?
1006 2016-01-20T13:30:11 <wumpus> yes
1007 2016-01-20T13:30:41 <wumpus> it is 'final' when the locktime has passed
1008 2016-01-20T13:33:44 *** GGuyZ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1009 2016-01-20T13:34:02 *** gitle has quit IRC
1010 2016-01-20T13:35:02 *** agricocb has quit IRC
1011 2016-01-20T13:35:59 <bsm1175321> I'd like to make a proposal that bitcoin-core commit to capacity improvements though the soft-forking extension block mechanism (without specifying what is in extension blocks or how they are created/validated -- yet). The statement published and signed by many devs: https://bitcoincore.org/en/2015/12/21/capacity-increase/ and the accompanying FAQ do not go in this direction. Why not?
1012 2016-01-20T13:36:23 <bsm1175321> Also...discuss. Any negatives to this proposal?
1013 2016-01-20T13:37:35 <sipa> bsm1175321: extension blocks require changing wallets
1014 2016-01-20T13:37:55 <bsm1175321> Specifically this mechanism by Adam Back: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2015-May/008356.html using anyone-can-pay.
1015 2016-01-20T13:38:28 <sipa> segwit is backward and forward compatible with existing systems
1016 2016-01-20T13:38:42 <bsm1175321> sipa: good point. How does segwit avoid this problem again?
1017 2016-01-20T13:39:35 <sipa> it doesn't move transactions to a formerly-invisible space
1018 2016-01-20T13:39:44 <sipa> only moves the signatures there
1019 2016-01-20T13:39:57 <sipa> so old clients and new clients still see the same UTXO set
1020 2016-01-20T13:40:06 <sipa> just the conditions for spending change
1021 2016-01-20T13:40:20 *** ThomasV has quit IRC
1022 2016-01-20T13:40:28 <bsm1175321> So to do what I proposed you'd need a wallet-visible new address type, or something like that.
1023 2016-01-20T13:41:01 <bsm1175321> AAAAAaaaaarrggghhhh I'm going to put a fork in my eye.
1024 2016-01-20T13:41:54 <sipa> you can't move outputs to a different place if you want to be able to send to old wallets
1025 2016-01-20T13:42:31 *** damethos has quit IRC
1026 2016-01-20T13:43:21 *** damethos has joined #bitcoin-dev
1027 2016-01-20T13:44:26 <bsm1175321> Clearly. So the basic idea a la Adam Back is to move additional capacity into an extension block, via a UTXO that is anyone-can-spend and anyone-can-pay. It's visible to old nodes but they clearly won't be able to interpret it. To soft fork it requires wallet upgrades. What's the best/clearest way to create an "I have opted in to capacity increases" flag that is wallet visible but old-node invisible?
1028 2016-01-20T13:44:35 *** aschildbach has quit IRC
1029 2016-01-20T13:44:55 *** jimtendo-X202EP has quit IRC
1030 2016-01-20T13:47:07 *** PRab_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1031 2016-01-20T13:47:15 *** catlasshrugged has joined #bitcoin-dev
1032 2016-01-20T13:47:23 *** RoboTedd_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1033 2016-01-20T13:47:37 *** Starduster_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1034 2016-01-20T13:47:42 *** cryptapus_ has quit IRC
1035 2016-01-20T13:47:47 *** roybadam1 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1036 2016-01-20T13:47:50 *** User3 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1037 2016-01-20T13:47:52 *** dkog_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1038 2016-01-20T13:48:13 *** p15x_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1039 2016-01-20T13:48:25 *** sanada has joined #bitcoin-dev
1040 2016-01-20T13:48:25 *** bengt__ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1041 2016-01-20T13:48:39 *** fuc has joined #bitcoin-dev
1042 2016-01-20T13:48:41 *** bpmgrt_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1043 2016-01-20T13:49:00 *** geemon has joined #bitcoin-dev
1044 2016-01-20T13:49:00 *** optimator has joined #bitcoin-dev
1045 2016-01-20T13:49:01 *** optimator has joined #bitcoin-dev
1046 2016-01-20T13:49:09 *** s7r_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1047 2016-01-20T13:49:14 *** altgribble has joined #bitcoin-dev
1048 2016-01-20T13:49:30 *** robbak_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1049 2016-01-20T13:50:01 *** pepesza has quit IRC
1050 2016-01-20T13:50:24 *** netg has quit IRC
1051 2016-01-20T13:50:39 *** core___ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1052 2016-01-20T13:50:48 *** ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-dev
1053 2016-01-20T13:51:11 *** [\\\] has joined #bitcoin-dev
1054 2016-01-20T13:51:15 *** harding_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1055 2016-01-20T13:51:19 *** borgtu_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1056 2016-01-20T13:51:23 *** erska_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1057 2016-01-20T13:51:25 *** unlord_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1058 2016-01-20T13:51:26 *** spkm_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1059 2016-01-20T13:51:27 *** comboy_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1060 2016-01-20T13:51:31 *** _mm_1 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1061 2016-01-20T13:51:34 *** crescendo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1062 2016-01-20T13:51:35 *** sotisoti_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1063 2016-01-20T13:51:37 *** a5m0 has quit IRC
1064 2016-01-20T13:51:40 *** roasbeef_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1065 2016-01-20T13:51:44 *** missmogg1 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1066 2016-01-20T13:51:45 *** a5m0_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1067 2016-01-20T13:51:46 *** weex_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1068 2016-01-20T13:51:46 *** Aido_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1069 2016-01-20T13:51:47 *** meLon_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1070 2016-01-20T13:51:51 *** dagurval_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1071 2016-01-20T13:51:58 *** o3u has joined #bitcoin-dev
1072 2016-01-20T13:52:02 *** Keefe_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1073 2016-01-20T13:52:02 *** hbee_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1074 2016-01-20T13:52:10 *** flound1139 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1075 2016-01-20T13:52:12 *** dooglus_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1076 2016-01-20T13:52:13 *** dooglus_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1077 2016-01-20T13:52:13 *** emsearcy_OSL has joined #bitcoin-dev
1078 2016-01-20T13:52:21 *** livegnik_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1079 2016-01-20T13:52:24 *** earthris1 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1080 2016-01-20T13:53:20 *** mr_burdell_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1081 2016-01-20T13:54:15 *** da2ce7_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1082 2016-01-20T13:54:39 *** Bjander has joined #bitcoin-dev
1083 2016-01-20T13:54:55 *** ItSANgo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1084 2016-01-20T13:54:56 *** KingCaper_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1085 2016-01-20T13:55:04 *** kcud_dab has joined #bitcoin-dev
1086 2016-01-20T13:55:05 *** LaudaM has joined #bitcoin-dev
1087 2016-01-20T13:55:09 *** lclc_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1088 2016-01-20T13:55:09 *** ahf_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1089 2016-01-20T13:55:09 *** cluelessperson has quit IRC
1090 2016-01-20T13:55:09 *** stevenroose|BNC has joined #bitcoin-dev
1091 2016-01-20T13:55:11 *** Peter_Geschel_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1092 2016-01-20T13:55:12 *** brand0- has joined #bitcoin-dev
1093 2016-01-20T13:55:16 *** afk11_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1094 2016-01-20T13:55:16 *** Prattler_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1095 2016-01-20T13:55:19 *** disco| has joined #bitcoin-dev
1096 2016-01-20T13:55:26 *** cluelessperson has joined #bitcoin-dev
1097 2016-01-20T13:55:31 *** dansmith_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1098 2016-01-20T13:55:57 *** cryptapus_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1099 2016-01-20T13:56:00 *** ronbo has quit IRC
1100 2016-01-20T13:56:01 *** p15x has quit IRC
1101 2016-01-20T13:56:01 *** Belxjander has quit IRC
1102 2016-01-20T13:56:01 *** bpmgrt has quit IRC
1103 2016-01-20T13:56:01 *** p15 has quit IRC
1104 2016-01-20T13:56:02 *** afk11 has quit IRC
1105 2016-01-20T13:56:02 *** bsm1175321 has quit IRC
1106 2016-01-20T13:56:02 *** altgribble` has quit IRC
1107 2016-01-20T13:56:02 *** tripleslash has quit IRC
1108 2016-01-20T13:56:02 *** percival has quit IRC
1109 2016-01-20T13:56:03 *** jaclupi has quit IRC
1110 2016-01-20T13:56:03 *** MrHodl has quit IRC
1111 2016-01-20T13:56:03 *** dkog has quit IRC
1112 2016-01-20T13:56:03 *** wol has quit IRC
1113 2016-01-20T13:56:04 *** ludx has quit IRC
1114 2016-01-20T13:56:04 *** sanada` has quit IRC
1115 2016-01-20T13:56:04 *** epscy has quit IRC
1116 2016-01-20T13:56:04 *** roybadami has quit IRC
1117 2016-01-20T13:56:04 *** bonks has quit IRC
1118 2016-01-20T13:56:04 *** stevenroose has quit IRC
1119 2016-01-20T13:56:05 *** radius_ has quit IRC
1120 2016-01-20T13:56:05 *** da2ce7 has quit IRC
1121 2016-01-20T13:56:05 *** Yoghur114 has quit IRC
1122 2016-01-20T13:56:05 *** Amnez777 has quit IRC
1123 2016-01-20T13:56:06 *** spkm has quit IRC
1124 2016-01-20T13:56:06 *** missmogg_ has quit IRC
1125 2016-01-20T13:56:06 *** robbak has quit IRC
1126 2016-01-20T13:56:06 *** optimator_ has quit IRC
1127 2016-01-20T13:56:06 *** livegnik has quit IRC
1128 2016-01-20T13:56:07 *** isis has quit IRC
1129 2016-01-20T13:56:07 *** brand0 has quit IRC
1130 2016-01-20T13:56:08 *** crescend1 has quit IRC
1131 2016-01-20T13:56:08 *** haakonn has quit IRC
1132 2016-01-20T13:56:08 *** so has quit IRC
1133 2016-01-20T13:56:08 *** catlasshrugged_ has quit IRC
1134 2016-01-20T13:56:09 *** sdamashek has quit IRC
1135 2016-01-20T13:56:09 *** flound1129 has quit IRC
1136 2016-01-20T13:56:09 *** tych0 has quit IRC
1137 2016-01-20T13:56:09 *** erska has quit IRC
1138 2016-01-20T13:56:09 *** dooglus has quit IRC
1139 2016-01-20T13:56:10 *** dirbaio has quit IRC
1140 2016-01-20T13:56:10 *** lady_awk has quit IRC
1141 2016-01-20T13:56:10 *** KingCaper has quit IRC
1142 2016-01-20T13:56:11 *** sotisoti has quit IRC
1143 2016-01-20T13:56:11 *** dizko has quit IRC
1144 2016-01-20T13:56:11 *** dagurval has quit IRC
1145 2016-01-20T13:56:11 *** roasbeef has quit IRC
1146 2016-01-20T13:56:12 *** AaronvanW_ has quit IRC
1147 2016-01-20T13:56:12 *** BananaLotus has quit IRC
1148 2016-01-20T13:56:12 *** Grouver has quit IRC
1149 2016-01-20T13:56:12 *** RoboTeddy has quit IRC
1150 2016-01-20T13:56:13 *** Starduster has quit IRC
1151 2016-01-20T13:56:13 *** koad has quit IRC
1152 2016-01-20T13:56:13 *** earthrise has quit IRC
1153 2016-01-20T13:56:14 *** owowo has quit IRC
1154 2016-01-20T13:56:14 *** hbee has quit IRC
1155 2016-01-20T13:56:14 *** PRab has quit IRC
1156 2016-01-20T13:56:14 *** borgtu has quit IRC
1157 2016-01-20T13:56:14 *** Prattler has quit IRC
1158 2016-01-20T13:56:15 *** bengt_ has quit IRC
1159 2016-01-20T13:56:15 *** harding has quit IRC
1160 2016-01-20T13:56:15 *** meLon has quit IRC
1161 2016-01-20T13:56:15 *** Peter_Geschel has quit IRC
1162 2016-01-20T13:56:16 *** blueness_ has quit IRC
1163 2016-01-20T13:56:16 *** jaromil has quit IRC
1164 2016-01-20T13:56:16 *** otoburb has quit IRC
1165 2016-01-20T13:56:17 *** Aido has quit IRC
1166 2016-01-20T13:56:17 *** mr_burdell has quit IRC
1167 2016-01-20T13:56:17 *** ahf has quit IRC
1168 2016-01-20T13:56:18 *** bad_duck has quit IRC
1169 2016-01-20T13:56:19 *** NielsvG has quit IRC
1170 2016-01-20T13:56:19 *** s7r has quit IRC
1171 2016-01-20T13:56:19 *** lclc has quit IRC
1172 2016-01-20T13:56:19 *** mm_1 has quit IRC
1173 2016-01-20T13:56:19 *** Keefe has quit IRC
1174 2016-01-20T13:56:20 *** dansmith_btc has quit IRC
1175 2016-01-20T13:56:20 *** bhaak has quit IRC
1176 2016-01-20T13:56:21 *** Fistful_of_Coins has quit IRC
1177 2016-01-20T13:56:21 *** devrandom has quit IRC
1178 2016-01-20T13:56:21 *** Bootvis has quit IRC
1179 2016-01-20T13:56:21 *** Lauda has quit IRC
1180 2016-01-20T13:56:22 *** weex has quit IRC
1181 2016-01-20T13:56:22 *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
1182 2016-01-20T13:56:22 *** unlord has quit IRC
1183 2016-01-20T13:56:22 *** comboy has quit IRC
1184 2016-01-20T13:56:23 *** Azelphur has quit IRC
1185 2016-01-20T13:56:23 *** emsearcy has quit IRC
1186 2016-01-20T13:56:23 *** Prattler_ is now known as Prattler
1187 2016-01-20T13:56:23 *** Bjander is now known as Belxjander
1188 2016-01-20T13:56:23 *** dkog_ is now known as dkog
1189 2016-01-20T13:56:23 *** brand0- is now known as brand0
1190 2016-01-20T13:56:24 *** _mm_1 is now known as mm_1
1191 2016-01-20T13:56:24 *** ahf_ is now known as ahf
1192 2016-01-20T13:56:24 *** afk11_ is now known as afk11
1193 2016-01-20T13:56:25 *** stevenroose|BNC is now known as stevenroose
1194 2016-01-20T13:56:25 *** KingCaper_ is now known as KingCaper
1195 2016-01-20T13:56:26 *** mr_burdell_ is now known as mr_burdell
1196 2016-01-20T13:56:27 *** Peter_Geschel_ is now known as Peter_Geschel
1197 2016-01-20T13:56:30 *** Yoghur114 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1198 2016-01-20T13:56:34 *** Belxjander is now known as Guest30294
1199 2016-01-20T13:56:37 *** BananaLotus has joined #bitcoin-dev
1200 2016-01-20T13:56:45 *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-dev
1201 2016-01-20T13:56:47 *** jaclupi has joined #bitcoin-dev
1202 2016-01-20T13:56:56 *** mr_burdell is now known as Guest75253
1203 2016-01-20T13:57:09 *** Azelphur has joined #bitcoin-dev
1204 2016-01-20T13:57:14 *** percival has joined #bitcoin-dev
1205 2016-01-20T13:57:15 *** Bootvis has joined #bitcoin-dev
1206 2016-01-20T13:57:21 *** devrandom has joined #bitcoin-dev
1207 2016-01-20T13:58:26 *** Amnez777 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1208 2016-01-20T13:58:32 *** otoburb has joined #bitcoin-dev
1209 2016-01-20T13:58:56 *** isis has joined #bitcoin-dev
1210 2016-01-20T13:59:06 *** ludx has joined #bitcoin-dev
1211 2016-01-20T13:59:07 *** ludx has joined #bitcoin-dev
1212 2016-01-20T13:59:08 *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1213 2016-01-20T13:59:39 *** CheckDavid has quit IRC
1214 2016-01-20T14:00:49 *** Amnez777 has quit IRC
1215 2016-01-20T14:00:49 *** Amnez777 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1216 2016-01-20T14:01:01 *** KingCaper has quit IRC
1217 2016-01-20T14:02:26 *** jaclupi has quit IRC
1218 2016-01-20T14:02:37 *** dirbaio has joined #bitcoin-dev
1219 2016-01-20T14:03:16 *** epscy has joined #bitcoin-dev
1220 2016-01-20T14:03:31 *** KingCaper has joined #bitcoin-dev
1221 2016-01-20T14:03:36 *** blueness_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1222 2016-01-20T14:04:00 *** sdamashek has joined #bitcoin-dev
1223 2016-01-20T14:04:02 *** bsm1175321 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1224 2016-01-20T14:04:10 *** tych0 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1225 2016-01-20T14:04:10 *** lady_awk has joined #bitcoin-dev
1226 2016-01-20T14:04:26 *** clopez has quit IRC
1227 2016-01-20T14:04:42 *** jaclupi has joined #bitcoin-dev
1228 2016-01-20T14:05:23 <bsm1175321> wumpus: bitcoinstats.com is down (bad gateway) looks like a cloud flare problem
1229 2016-01-20T14:05:28 *** Grouver has joined #bitcoin-dev
1230 2016-01-20T14:06:01 <bsm1175321> Also it's logging every chat message twice: http://bitcoinstats.com/irc/bitcoin-dev/logs/2016/01/20
1231 2016-01-20T14:06:22 <bsm1175321> and I hope posting the log to the logging bot doesn't cause an infinite loop... ;-)
1232 2016-01-20T14:06:51 *** koad has joined #bitcoin-dev
1233 2016-01-20T14:07:34 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-dev
1234 2016-01-20T14:07:35 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1235 2016-01-20T14:07:35 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-dev
1236 2016-01-20T14:07:56 *** zzyzx has joined #bitcoin-dev
1237 2016-01-20T14:12:11 *** clopez has joined #bitcoin-dev
1238 2016-01-20T14:13:59 <wumpus> hehe
1239 2016-01-20T14:15:05 *** tawar has joined #bitcoin-dev
1240 2016-01-20T14:15:31 *** frankenmint has joined #bitcoin-dev
1241 2016-01-20T14:16:51 *** SlinQ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1242 2016-01-20T14:17:18 *** conner has quit IRC
1243 2016-01-20T14:18:30 *** geemon has quit IRC
1244 2016-01-20T14:18:51 *** GGuyZ has quit IRC
1245 2016-01-20T14:19:27 <jeremias> clear
1246 2016-01-20T14:21:25 *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1247 2016-01-20T14:23:19 *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1248 2016-01-20T14:23:54 *** treehug88 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1249 2016-01-20T14:24:00 *** aevitas has quit IRC
1250 2016-01-20T14:26:01 *** aevitas has joined #bitcoin-dev
1251 2016-01-20T14:28:44 <thermoman> wumpus: what about check lock time verify cltv? is it the same here, that the TX with cltv attached "BTCs can only be spend after Block X" will only be accepted by bitcoin core when X has arrived?
1252 2016-01-20T14:29:26 <thermoman> or will I be able to submit a cltv TX to bitcoin core so that it get's relayed, even if X has not been reached yet?
1253 2016-01-20T14:30:43 *** antizionist__ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1254 2016-01-20T14:31:06 *** aevitas has quit IRC
1255 2016-01-20T14:31:59 *** agricocb has joined #bitcoin-dev
1256 2016-01-20T14:33:35 <sipa> thermoman: you're confusing nLocktime with CLTV
1257 2016-01-20T14:34:22 <sipa> thermoman: a transaction with nLocktime X is not valid in a block until X has passed, and Bitfoin Core also won't relay it until then
1258 2016-01-20T14:35:00 <sipa> thermoman: CLTV simply sets a limit on what nLocktime the spending transaction of an outout should have; nothing more, nkthing less
1259 2016-01-20T14:37:22 *** keen2dev has joined #bitcoin-dev
1260 2016-01-20T14:37:32 <thermoman> sipa: ok, so CLTV *can* be submitted to the network even though the nLocktime specified has not been reached, right? Because a friend of mine is trying exactly this and gets {"code":-26,"message":"64: non-final"} all the time trying to submit the CLTV TX
1261 2016-01-20T14:38:33 *** conner has joined #bitcoin-dev
1262 2016-01-20T14:38:36 *** Tulsene has joined #bitcoin-dev
1263 2016-01-20T14:39:18 <instagibbs> thermoman, does CLTV TX mean it's using utxos that are CLTV, or creating outputs with CLTV?
1264 2016-01-20T14:39:58 *** T23WS_ has quit IRC
1265 2016-01-20T14:40:13 <sipa> thermoman: that error message is about nLocktime and has nothing to do with CLTV
1266 2016-01-20T14:40:30 <sipa> it means you're submitting a transaction with an nLocktime in thenfuture
1267 2016-01-20T14:40:35 <sipa> *in the future
1268 2016-01-20T14:42:46 *** conner has quit IRC
1269 2016-01-20T14:42:51 <thermoman> instagibbs: I understand that my fried uses the demo at https://github.com/petertodd/checklocktimeverify-demos to create/sign a TX with CLTV script embedded that he then uses as argument for sendrawtransaction and that fails
1270 2016-01-20T14:43:19 <thermoman> and propagating that TX fails as I understand him
1271 2016-01-20T14:43:29 <instagibbs> probably what sipa said
1272 2016-01-20T14:43:33 <thermoman> not the TX using the output
1273 2016-01-20T14:44:00 <morcos> thermoman: the use case for CLTV is a sequence of 2 txs. The first txs sends coins to something locked with a CLTV opcode. This requires that the second tx, the spending tx, has a locktime at least as great as specified
1274 2016-01-20T14:44:16 <morcos> the second tx can not be relayed until the locktime is met. thats kind of the whole point
1275 2016-01-20T14:44:18 <thermoman> morcos: I understand
1276 2016-01-20T14:44:23 <thermoman> right right
1277 2016-01-20T14:44:42 <thermoman> I'll ask him for details, but I undestood that the 1st TX did fail already
1278 2016-01-20T14:45:15 <sipa> thermoman: best to talk to petertodd then
1279 2016-01-20T14:45:43 <thermoman> thanks, will relay that info
1280 2016-01-20T14:48:07 *** tantalum has joined #bitcoin-dev
1281 2016-01-20T14:49:29 <thermoman> sipa, instagibbs: my bad. miscommunication between me and my buddy. he got the error in testnet when fiddling around with the 2nd TX that tries to spend the BTC. So this is expected behaviour.
1282 2016-01-20T14:49:35 <thermoman> again, sorry for that confusion
1283 2016-01-20T14:50:21 *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-dev
1284 2016-01-20T14:53:19 *** kgk has joined #bitcoin-dev
1285 2016-01-20T14:57:04 *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-dev
1286 2016-01-20T14:58:04 *** kgk has quit IRC
1287 2016-01-20T14:58:07 *** fuc is now known as MrHodl
1288 2016-01-20T14:58:50 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-dev
1289 2016-01-20T15:01:02 <bsm117532> I'll repeat this question because I think it's really important...
1290 2016-01-20T15:01:10 *** p15x_ has quit IRC
1291 2016-01-20T15:01:11 <bsm117532> Ok given that soft-forking (non-segwit) capacity extensions will require a wallet-aware change, what's the best way to do that?
1292 2016-01-20T15:02:20 *** T23WS has joined #bitcoin-dev
1293 2016-01-20T15:02:20 *** bonks has joined #bitcoin-dev
1294 2016-01-20T15:03:35 *** nys- has joined #bitcoin-dev
1295 2016-01-20T15:03:40 <instagibbs> hmm? what's the best way to make wallets aware?
1296 2016-01-20T15:04:29 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
1297 2016-01-20T15:04:53 <bsm117532> instagibbs: Yes. The way I see it, a post-capacity-extension wallet has to generate addresses signaling that it is monitoring the capacity-extension mechanism.
1298 2016-01-20T15:05:23 <instagibbs> https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0142.mediawiki
1299 2016-01-20T15:05:54 <bsm117532> So it has to basically be a new address format...
1300 2016-01-20T15:06:22 <bsm117532> instagibbs: Thanks, this might answer my question.
1301 2016-01-20T15:06:54 <instagibbs> you can also use p2sh, with the redeemscript being special and "truly" understandable by upgraded nodes
1302 2016-01-20T15:07:18 <instagibbs> so old wallets can send to these addresses
1303 2016-01-20T15:07:37 <instagibbs> if you have too much time on your hands read bips 141-144
1304 2016-01-20T15:08:13 <bsm117532> I think this mechanism needs to be clearly described, tied to an extension-block mechanism, and clearly explained publicly for the hard fork camp. The existing docs by core don't do this, and leaves ambiguous exactly how capacity increases are going to happen.
1305 2016-01-20T15:08:26 *** NielsvG has joined #bitcoin-dev
1306 2016-01-20T15:08:26 *** bhaak has joined #bitcoin-dev
1307 2016-01-20T15:09:04 *** bhaak is now known as Guest74863
1308 2016-01-20T15:09:11 *** ThomasV has quit IRC
1309 2016-01-20T15:09:13 <sipa> bsm117532: that's because we can't decide how or whether they happe
1310 2016-01-20T15:09:25 <sipa> we can explain what we're working on, though
1311 2016-01-20T15:09:40 <bsm117532> sipa: I see that. I can't decide either.
1312 2016-01-20T15:09:51 *** so has joined #bitcoin-dev
1313 2016-01-20T15:09:59 <bsm117532> But it needs to be clear to everyone that there exists a mechanism, that doesn't break people's money.
1314 2016-01-20T15:10:32 <bsm117532> Having all the devs sign gmaxwell's statement does not seem to have had the intended effect, and I think it's in part because of lack of specifics...
1315 2016-01-20T15:11:12 * bsm117532 trundles off to give himself a BIP14X headache...
1316 2016-01-20T15:11:39 <sipa> bsm117532: i think it's because people want something we can't give them
1317 2016-01-20T15:12:05 <bsm117532> sipa: A capacity increase NOW?
1318 2016-01-20T15:12:14 <Yoghur114> many people got it in their heads they want a hard fork - regardless of what it entails
1319 2016-01-20T15:12:29 <bsm117532> I don't think people realize that another mechanism exists, and that's a huge part of the problem.
1320 2016-01-20T15:13:04 <sipa> bsm117532: i believe many people want a world where they don't have to worry about capacity; they want a feeling that if capacity is a problem, people will intervene
1321 2016-01-20T15:13:12 *** T23WS has quit IRC
1322 2016-01-20T15:13:12 *** bonks has quit IRC
1323 2016-01-20T15:13:28 <sipa> and i don't think that's a road many developers want to take
1324 2016-01-20T15:13:33 <bsm117532> sipa: I wouldn't say that we can't give that.
1325 2016-01-20T15:13:47 <sipa> how so?
1326 2016-01-20T15:14:00 <bsm117532> Is this argument really about keeping bitcoin tiny vs. processing all visa transactions?
1327 2016-01-20T15:14:20 <sipa> what do you mean?
1328 2016-01-20T15:15:01 <bsm117532> There's a camp that thinks that the existing capacity is enough for everyone, and bitcoin never will be used by individuals at point-of-sale.
1329 2016-01-20T15:15:16 <bsm117532> There's another camp that wants bitcoin at point-of-sale.
1330 2016-01-20T15:15:23 *** arichnad has quit IRC
1331 2016-01-20T15:15:27 <bsm117532> I think that is conflated into the block size argument.
1332 2016-01-20T15:15:52 <sipa> i definitely want bitcoin at point of sale, but i don't think it's a reasonable expectation that that will be on the blockchain eventually :)
1333 2016-01-20T15:16:50 <bsm117532> We can disagree on that, knowing that for sure is clearly beyond anyone's capacity to know, right now.
1334 2016-01-20T15:17:06 *** drnet has joined #bitcoin-dev
1335 2016-01-20T15:17:53 <sipa> yes, but it is clear to me that the capacity right now is not far off from what the system can provide without losing fundamental properties like decentralization and being beyond influence
1336 2016-01-20T15:18:10 <sipa> whether that capacity is 500k or 1M or 2M, i don't care
1337 2016-01-20T15:18:44 *** cryptapus_ has quit IRC
1338 2016-01-20T15:18:54 <sipa> and choosing a road where we demand intervention because of fear of economic change would for me turn bitcoin into something uninteresting
1339 2016-01-20T15:18:59 <bsm117532> I don't care either. I do care about not breaking money, and I do care about the fragmenting of talented people who contribute to core from each other.
1340 2016-01-20T15:19:10 *** cryptapus_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1341 2016-01-20T15:20:24 <bsm117532> To me, losing gmaxwell or sipa is a bigger loss than anything a hard fork would do. I haven't spoken much with Hearn, Andresson, or Garzik, but I expect they're talented people who have a lot more to contribute than simply 2 > 1.
1342 2016-01-20T15:20:25 *** IrishGringo has quit IRC
1343 2016-01-20T15:21:07 <sipa> if that's what it takes to not destroy the ecosystem, sure, let's do a 2 MB hardfork; but not suddenly, not immediately, and not in a reaction to fear
1344 2016-01-20T15:21:14 *** IrishGringo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1345 2016-01-20T15:21:47 *** memymo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1346 2016-01-20T15:22:00 *** AtnevRed has joined #bitcoin-dev
1347 2016-01-20T15:22:07 *** T23WS has joined #bitcoin-dev
1348 2016-01-20T15:22:26 <smooth> speaking of not losing being beyond influence is somewhat ironic given mining centralization
1349 2016-01-20T15:22:32 <sipa> i've proposed bip103 before, and i've proposed segwit; if the 2 MB bump segwit provides is not enough, and the prospect of slow but steady growth after that isn't enough, then what do people want?
1350 2016-01-20T15:22:42 <smooth> i understand the hope though
1351 2016-01-20T15:22:51 <sipa> smooth: we're already very close to losing that, i agree...
1352 2016-01-20T15:24:18 <smooth> i dont know if "what do people want" is entirely or even primarily a technical question
1353 2016-01-20T15:24:34 <smooth> there is a deep and profound distrust of blockstream, whether justified or not, for example
1354 2016-01-20T15:24:53 <bsm117532> smooth: Everyone wants the ecosystem to grow. That is clear. There is a perception that there exists a camp that does not want the ecosystem to grow.
1355 2016-01-20T15:24:56 <smooth> anyway maybe off topic, but just a reminder that some problems dont ahve techincal solutions
1356 2016-01-20T15:24:58 *** markus-k has quit IRC
1357 2016-01-20T15:25:02 <AaronvanW> what's the latest plan on the table? still the original road map? I heard something about a scheduled hard fork in a year from now or so?
1358 2016-01-20T15:25:23 <sipa> smooth: my (perhaps pessimisitic) view is that what people wamt is not currently viable
1359 2016-01-20T15:25:37 <bsm117532> I'm going to end up weighing in on this, as much as I've tried to stay out of it. I think I do perhaps see it in a different way than others, and maybe I can offer a way forward.
1360 2016-01-20T15:26:00 *** GGuyZ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1361 2016-01-20T15:26:10 <sipa> smooth: i know, and i'm very sad about it
1362 2016-01-20T15:26:11 <bsm117532> e.g. Use BIP142 for extension blocks. We'll specify how "extension blocks" work later.
1363 2016-01-20T15:26:43 *** AtnevRed has quit IRC
1364 2016-01-20T15:27:35 <sipa> AaronvanW: different people have different plans, i'm sure
1365 2016-01-20T15:27:59 <AaronvanW> sipa: ok so no news in that regard
1366 2016-01-20T15:28:14 <sipa> AaronvanW: my view is still that a hard fork requires being non-contentious, and what i'am working on doesn't require one right now
1367 2016-01-20T15:28:31 *** flo626 has quit IRC
1368 2016-01-20T15:29:06 <sipa> being contentious is of course hard to measure objectively
1369 2016-01-20T15:29:20 *** flo626 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1370 2016-01-20T15:29:35 <smooth> there is also a certain circularity in opposing hard forks because they are contentious
1371 2016-01-20T15:29:43 <sipa> i am aware
1372 2016-01-20T15:30:27 <AaronvanW> yeah I thought/heard that wangchun maybe offered something that seemed acceptable. which included a scheduled hard fork, but only in a year or so. (maybe I was misinformed)
1373 2016-01-20T15:30:43 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
1374 2016-01-20T15:31:23 *** aevitas has joined #bitcoin-dev
1375 2016-01-20T15:31:25 <sipa> i haven't seen a specific proposal
1376 2016-01-20T15:32:37 *** GGuyZ has quit IRC
1377 2016-01-20T15:33:02 *** memymo has quit IRC
1378 2016-01-20T15:34:16 <AaronvanW> ok
1379 2016-01-20T15:35:35 *** rmwb has quit IRC
1380 2016-01-20T15:35:56 *** IrishGringo has quit IRC
1381 2016-01-20T15:36:11 *** atgreen has joined #bitcoin-dev
1382 2016-01-20T15:36:12 *** jaromil has joined #bitcoin-dev
1383 2016-01-20T15:36:12 *** jaromil has joined #bitcoin-dev
1384 2016-01-20T15:38:11 *** IrishGringo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1385 2016-01-20T15:39:30 *** flo626 has quit IRC
1386 2016-01-20T15:42:28 *** [Author] has quit IRC
1387 2016-01-20T15:42:57 *** GAit has quit IRC
1388 2016-01-20T15:43:04 *** aschildbach has joined #bitcoin-dev
1389 2016-01-20T15:43:52 *** T23WS_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1390 2016-01-20T15:43:54 *** chmod755 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1391 2016-01-20T15:44:02 *** [Author] has joined #bitcoin-dev
1392 2016-01-20T15:44:05 *** damethos has quit IRC
1393 2016-01-20T15:46:30 *** T23WS has quit IRC
1394 2016-01-20T15:48:48 *** zookolaptop has quit IRC
1395 2016-01-20T15:48:54 *** mdemont has quit IRC
1396 2016-01-20T15:51:56 *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-dev
1397 2016-01-20T15:51:58 *** DougieBot5000 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1398 2016-01-20T15:54:14 *** Guest87 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1399 2016-01-20T15:56:40 *** MrHodl has quit IRC
1400 2016-01-20T15:57:29 *** tjader has quit IRC
1401 2016-01-20T15:58:42 *** xegoo__ has quit IRC
1402 2016-01-20T15:58:45 *** GAit has quit IRC
1403 2016-01-20T15:58:48 *** Guest87 has quit IRC
1404 2016-01-20T15:59:01 *** nys- has quit IRC
1405 2016-01-20T15:59:24 *** LaudaM is now known as Lauda
1406 2016-01-20T16:00:05 *** keen2dev has quit IRC
1407 2016-01-20T16:00:13 *** xegoo_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1408 2016-01-20T16:00:47 *** iKant has quit IRC
1409 2016-01-20T16:00:49 *** dlb76 has quit IRC
1410 2016-01-20T16:02:22 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
1411 2016-01-20T16:04:46 *** bpmgrt_ has quit IRC
1412 2016-01-20T16:06:14 *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-dev
1413 2016-01-20T16:06:16 *** derbumi has quit IRC
1414 2016-01-20T16:11:06 *** Burrito has joined #bitcoin-dev
1415 2016-01-20T16:11:08 *** DurstBurger has quit IRC
1416 2016-01-20T16:11:36 *** mrkent has quit IRC
1417 2016-01-20T16:11:47 *** IrishGringo has quit IRC
1418 2016-01-20T16:13:31 *** GGuyZ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1419 2016-01-20T16:14:49 *** travelingprimate has joined #bitcoin-dev
1420 2016-01-20T16:17:52 *** chmod755 has left #bitcoin-dev
1421 2016-01-20T16:17:52 *** MoALTz has quit IRC
1422 2016-01-20T16:18:07 *** Guest74863 is now known as bhaak
1423 2016-01-20T16:18:08 *** GandalfTheOld has joined #bitcoin-dev
1424 2016-01-20T16:18:36 *** bityogi has joined #bitcoin-dev
1425 2016-01-20T16:18:37 *** bhaak is now known as Guest51765
1426 2016-01-20T16:18:40 *** Guest51765 is now known as bhaak`
1427 2016-01-20T16:18:51 *** IrishGringo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1428 2016-01-20T16:18:53 *** GandalfTheOld has joined #bitcoin-dev
1429 2016-01-20T16:20:21 *** treehug88 has quit IRC
1430 2016-01-20T16:23:19 *** MrHodl has joined #bitcoin-dev
1431 2016-01-20T16:23:24 *** GandalfTheOld has joined #bitcoin-dev
1432 2016-01-20T16:23:26 *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-dev
1433 2016-01-20T16:23:45 *** GandalfTheOld has quit IRC
1434 2016-01-20T16:24:40 *** IAmNotDorian has quit IRC
1435 2016-01-20T16:24:49 *** GandalfTheBabyPo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1436 2016-01-20T16:25:02 *** travelingprimate has left #bitcoin-dev
1437 2016-01-20T16:25:35 *** mnk has joined #bitcoin-dev
1438 2016-01-20T16:28:14 *** atgreen has quit IRC
1439 2016-01-20T16:28:48 *** atgreen has joined #bitcoin-dev
1440 2016-01-20T16:29:51 *** GandalfTheBlack has joined #bitcoin-dev
1441 2016-01-20T16:30:19 *** nys- has joined #bitcoin-dev
1442 2016-01-20T16:31:30 *** GandalfTheBabyPo has quit IRC
1443 2016-01-20T16:33:07 *** treehug88 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1444 2016-01-20T16:33:46 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-dev
1445 2016-01-20T16:34:10 *** deadalnix has joined #bitcoin-dev
1446 2016-01-20T16:35:20 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-dev
1447 2016-01-20T16:35:35 *** MrHodl has quit IRC
1448 2016-01-20T16:37:56 *** drnet has quit IRC
1449 2016-01-20T16:38:26 *** sterl has quit IRC
1450 2016-01-20T16:38:50 *** mrkent has quit IRC
1451 2016-01-20T16:40:22 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
1452 2016-01-20T16:40:52 *** dlb76 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1453 2016-01-20T16:41:44 *** Grouver has quit IRC
1454 2016-01-20T16:43:06 *** prijedorske__ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1455 2016-01-20T16:44:02 *** DurstBurger has joined #bitcoin-dev
1456 2016-01-20T16:44:43 *** ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-dev
1457 2016-01-20T16:45:45 *** scosant has joined #bitcoin-dev
1458 2016-01-20T16:46:45 *** prijedorske_ has quit IRC
1459 2016-01-20T16:48:11 *** scosant_ has quit IRC
1460 2016-01-20T16:50:54 *** GAit has quit IRC
1461 2016-01-20T16:53:21 *** antizionist__ has quit IRC
1462 2016-01-20T16:54:25 *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-dev
1463 2016-01-20T16:55:45 *** markus-k has joined #bitcoin-dev
1464 2016-01-20T16:56:30 *** kgk has joined #bitcoin-dev
1465 2016-01-20T16:57:06 *** pepesza has joined #bitcoin-dev
1466 2016-01-20T16:57:56 *** aevitas has quit IRC
1467 2016-01-20T16:58:30 *** T23WS has joined #bitcoin-dev
1468 2016-01-20T16:59:33 *** bhaak` is now known as bhaak_
1469 2016-01-20T16:59:42 *** bhaak_ is now known as bhaak`
1470 2016-01-20T16:59:58 *** bhaak` is now known as bhaak_
1471 2016-01-20T17:00:45 *** T23WS_ has quit IRC
1472 2016-01-20T17:01:12 *** kgk has quit IRC
1473 2016-01-20T17:01:48 *** bit2017 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1474 2016-01-20T17:02:29 *** Guest17949 has quit IRC
1475 2016-01-20T17:02:46 *** murch has joined #bitcoin-dev
1476 2016-01-20T17:03:31 *** BashCo has quit IRC
1477 2016-01-20T17:03:56 *** SlinQ has quit IRC
1478 2016-01-20T17:04:23 *** SlinQ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1479 2016-01-20T17:05:03 *** aevitas has joined #bitcoin-dev
1480 2016-01-20T17:05:56 *** d_t has quit IRC
1481 2016-01-20T17:09:13 *** ttttemp__ has quit IRC
1482 2016-01-20T17:09:14 *** ttttemp_ has quit IRC
1483 2016-01-20T17:10:12 *** atgreen has quit IRC
1484 2016-01-20T17:11:15 *** GAit has quit IRC
1485 2016-01-20T17:11:18 *** ttttemp_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1486 2016-01-20T17:12:04 *** paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-dev
1487 2016-01-20T17:12:05 *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-dev
1488 2016-01-20T17:15:07 *** neozaru has joined #bitcoin-dev
1489 2016-01-20T17:15:46 *** Tulsene has quit IRC
1490 2016-01-20T17:16:20 *** GAit has quit IRC
1491 2016-01-20T17:16:57 *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-dev
1492 2016-01-20T17:18:18 *** Ahmed90 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1493 2016-01-20T17:19:30 *** NLNico has quit IRC
1494 2016-01-20T17:19:43 *** deadalnix has quit IRC
1495 2016-01-20T17:20:19 *** t7 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1496 2016-01-20T17:20:27 *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-dev
1497 2016-01-20T17:20:28 *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-dev
1498 2016-01-20T17:20:56 *** conner has joined #bitcoin-dev
1499 2016-01-20T17:21:11 *** bonks has joined #bitcoin-dev
1500 2016-01-20T17:22:45 *** AtnevRed has joined #bitcoin-dev
1501 2016-01-20T17:23:13 *** brson has joined #bitcoin-dev
1502 2016-01-20T17:24:00 *** spinza has quit IRC
1503 2016-01-20T17:26:24 *** conner has quit IRC
1504 2016-01-20T17:27:11 *** tjader has quit IRC
1505 2016-01-20T17:27:13 *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-dev
1506 2016-01-20T17:27:50 *** AtnevRed has quit IRC
1507 2016-01-20T17:31:59 *** petrkr has quit IRC
1508 2016-01-20T17:32:04 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
1509 2016-01-20T17:33:00 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
1510 2016-01-20T17:34:03 *** JeromeLegoupil has joined #bitcoin-dev
1511 2016-01-20T17:34:03 *** haakonn has joined #bitcoin-dev
1512 2016-01-20T17:36:09 *** GAit has quit IRC
1513 2016-01-20T17:36:25 *** haakonn has quit IRC
1514 2016-01-20T17:36:46 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1515 2016-01-20T17:38:15 *** iKant has joined #bitcoin-dev
1516 2016-01-20T17:38:53 *** User_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1517 2016-01-20T17:39:32 *** rmwb has quit IRC
1518 2016-01-20T17:40:25 *** priidu has quit IRC
1519 2016-01-20T17:40:42 *** xissburg has joined #bitcoin-dev
1520 2016-01-20T17:42:08 *** User3 has quit IRC
1521 2016-01-20T17:44:40 *** JeromeLegoupil has quit IRC
1522 2016-01-20T17:48:38 *** jtoomim has quit IRC
1523 2016-01-20T17:51:27 *** conner has joined #bitcoin-dev
1524 2016-01-20T17:51:37 *** OMGforking has quit IRC
1525 2016-01-20T17:52:03 *** jtoomim has joined #bitcoin-dev
1526 2016-01-20T17:53:49 *** derbumi has joined #bitcoin-dev
1527 2016-01-20T17:54:23 *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-dev
1528 2016-01-20T17:56:17 *** nickn has joined #bitcoin-dev
1529 2016-01-20T17:56:31 <nickn> 99854
1530 2016-01-20T17:58:21 *** xegoo_ has quit IRC
1531 2016-01-20T18:01:01 *** nickn has quit IRC
1532 2016-01-20T18:01:09 *** brooss has quit IRC
1533 2016-01-20T18:02:42 *** cryptapus_ has quit IRC
1534 2016-01-20T18:03:17 *** MoALTz has joined #bitcoin-dev
1535 2016-01-20T18:04:30 *** zookolaptop has quit IRC
1536 2016-01-20T18:04:59 *** Uglux has joined #bitcoin-dev
1537 2016-01-20T18:05:35 *** melvster1 has quit IRC
1538 2016-01-20T18:06:14 *** GAit has quit IRC
1539 2016-01-20T18:07:30 *** xegoo_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1540 2016-01-20T18:09:54 <Iriez> There is a narrative I've been seeing repeating lately and I would like to bounce the validity of it off the source. Recently, after someone posted on gmaxwell's out of context statement about having a change of algo for PoW, there has been a lot of speculation that should a HF occur and BC (classic) win the majority and trigger, that core would switch to a PoW algo. Could any of you
1541 2016-01-20T18:09:54 <Iriez> wonderful minds please put this rumor to rest? Its causing panic within the ecosystem and as we all know, panic is not a healthy thing to have.
1542 2016-01-20T18:10:35 <Luke-Jr> Iriez: neither Classic nor Core have the power to hardfork
1543 2016-01-20T18:10:39 <bsm117532> Iriez: Luke-Jr posted a pull request on Classic, I think, that does that. i'm not sure if he was simply trolling. But it ain't gonna happen.
1544 2016-01-20T18:10:50 *** cryptapus_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1545 2016-01-20T18:11:15 <Luke-Jr> Iriez: if the miners *attempt* to hardfork, against the consensus of the *community/economy*, the the community/economy may very well change PoW to overrule the miners' defection/betrayal
1546 2016-01-20T18:11:49 <sipa> Luke-Jr: they may, but it's ridiculous to propose that at this point, sorry
1547 2016-01-20T18:11:53 <Luke-Jr> if there is a real consensus (not just miners) for a hardfork, then we don't have that situation and it can proceed safely
1548 2016-01-20T18:12:33 *** manksi has joined #bitcoin-dev
1549 2016-01-20T18:12:35 <Luke-Jr> (in the case of a real consensus, Core must also implement the changes or be abandoned)
1550 2016-01-20T18:12:41 *** hashtagg_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1551 2016-01-20T18:12:52 <Luke-Jr> sipa: just explaining to Iriez
1552 2016-01-20T18:13:02 *** janko33_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1553 2016-01-20T18:13:07 <sipa> Iriez: i would strongly oppose merging it in bitcoin core, on the grounds that it would require an extremely high degree of consensus, and i do not see that hapoening
1554 2016-01-20T18:13:23 <sipa> Luke-Jr: yes, i understand, but it sends the completely wrong message imho
1555 2016-01-20T18:13:33 *** t7_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1556 2016-01-20T18:13:36 <Iriez> sipa: That is exactly what I wanted and hope that will clarify some of the panic.
1557 2016-01-20T18:14:04 <Luke-Jr> sipa: any hardfork requires that degree of consensus, of course
1558 2016-01-20T18:14:17 <sipa> Luke-Jr: exactly
1559 2016-01-20T18:14:28 *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-dev
1560 2016-01-20T18:14:38 *** deadalnix has joined #bitcoin-dev
1561 2016-01-20T18:14:52 *** zookolaptop has quit IRC
1562 2016-01-20T18:15:23 *** wpalczynski_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1563 2016-01-20T18:15:29 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1564 2016-01-20T18:15:37 *** robbak__ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1565 2016-01-20T18:15:59 <Iriez> I do not believe it would reach consensus on a few basic premises of logic. Obviously that would be a insane uphill battle and it would immediately declare core to be alt-coin, a competitor to what is now the defacto-bitcoin (classic) assuming HF is triggered on it.
1566 2016-01-20T18:16:07 *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-dev
1567 2016-01-20T18:16:10 *** warren_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1568 2016-01-20T18:16:53 <Iriez> While I understand there is frustration amongst you guys right now, i hope that you all can continue contributing to the project regardless of circumstance. You guys are a dream team and your contributions are enormous.
1569 2016-01-20T18:17:02 <Luke-Jr> Iriez: Classic can only become defacto-bitcoin if the entire community accepts it, not merely miners
1570 2016-01-20T18:17:10 *** paracyst_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1571 2016-01-20T18:17:20 <Iriez> Luke: Im well aware of the circumstances, thank you.
1572 2016-01-20T18:17:24 *** TheSeven has quit IRC
1573 2016-01-20T18:17:28 *** petertod1 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1574 2016-01-20T18:17:30 *** OxADADA_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1575 2016-01-20T18:17:35 *** [7] has joined #bitcoin-dev
1576 2016-01-20T18:17:42 *** lclc_ is now known as lclc
1577 2016-01-20T18:17:56 *** sdaftuar_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1578 2016-01-20T18:17:59 *** bengt_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1579 2016-01-20T18:17:59 *** morcos_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1580 2016-01-20T18:18:05 <Iriez> I think anyone who is not blinded by emotion can see that the economic incentive to continue on the same PoW will declare the longest chain and anything else will die out.
1581 2016-01-20T18:18:11 *** emzy_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1582 2016-01-20T18:18:22 <Luke-Jr> …
1583 2016-01-20T18:18:43 <sipa> Iriez: the economic incentive to continue on the same *chain* :)
1584 2016-01-20T18:18:49 *** core____ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1585 2016-01-20T18:18:56 *** melvster1 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1586 2016-01-20T18:18:57 <Iriez> Correct.
1587 2016-01-20T18:19:15 <Iriez> with the same PoW* sorry grammar.
1588 2016-01-20T18:19:31 *** tommygunner_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1589 2016-01-20T18:19:32 <sipa> Iriez: the PoW is not very relevant, except for the fact that you can't change PoW without almost certainly splitting the chain
1590 2016-01-20T18:19:36 <Luke-Jr> there is no such incentive to continue with the same PoW, for anyone except miners.
1591 2016-01-20T18:19:43 *** dstien_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1592 2016-01-20T18:19:56 <sipa> agree with Luke-Jr's last statement, but i dom't think it is relevant hrre
1593 2016-01-20T18:19:59 <sipa> here
1594 2016-01-20T18:20:09 <Luke-Jr> brb
1595 2016-01-20T18:20:26 <sipa> the incentive is to maintain a single chain, and changing pow would be very damaging for that
1596 2016-01-20T18:20:37 *** jl2012_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1597 2016-01-20T18:20:37 *** outrox has joined #bitcoin-dev
1598 2016-01-20T18:20:56 <Iriez> Perhaps im confused. Changing the PoW would render current mining equipment useless, which would destroy the investment, which would be directly counter-intuitive to securing the chain.
1599 2016-01-20T18:21:02 *** Azelphur_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1600 2016-01-20T18:21:38 <Iriez> Security is the most important aspect of bitcoin, yes? Because without it, its censorship resistance is gone. So destroy mining equipment, destroy the most valuable feature?
1601 2016-01-20T18:21:58 *** pastly_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1602 2016-01-20T18:21:59 *** stevenroose|BNC has joined #bitcoin-dev
1603 2016-01-20T18:22:00 *** Uglux has quit IRC
1604 2016-01-20T18:22:01 *** t7 has quit IRC
1605 2016-01-20T18:22:01 *** mnk has quit IRC
1606 2016-01-20T18:22:01 *** IrishGringo has quit IRC
1607 2016-01-20T18:22:01 *** koad has quit IRC
1608 2016-01-20T18:22:01 *** Azelphur has quit IRC
1609 2016-01-20T18:22:01 *** afk11 has quit IRC
1610 2016-01-20T18:22:01 *** stevenroose has quit IRC
1611 2016-01-20T18:22:02 *** core___ has quit IRC
1612 2016-01-20T18:22:02 *** robbak_ has quit IRC
1613 2016-01-20T18:22:02 *** bengt__ has quit IRC
1614 2016-01-20T18:22:02 *** janko33 has quit IRC
1615 2016-01-20T18:22:02 *** kefkius has quit IRC
1616 2016-01-20T18:22:02 *** waffles has quit IRC
1617 2016-01-20T18:22:02 *** treaki__ has quit IRC
1618 2016-01-20T18:22:02 *** parus has quit IRC
1619 2016-01-20T18:22:02 *** warren has quit IRC
1620 2016-01-20T18:22:02 *** hashtag has quit IRC
1621 2016-01-20T18:22:03 *** wpalczynski has quit IRC
1622 2016-01-20T18:22:03 *** jl2012 has quit IRC
1623 2016-01-20T18:22:03 *** outr0x has quit IRC
1624 2016-01-20T18:22:03 *** JohnKenney has quit IRC
1625 2016-01-20T18:22:04 *** OxADADA has quit IRC
1626 2016-01-20T18:22:04 *** hanti has quit IRC
1627 2016-01-20T18:22:04 *** ThomasKeller has quit IRC
1628 2016-01-20T18:22:04 *** segy has quit IRC
1629 2016-01-20T18:22:04 *** morcos has quit IRC
1630 2016-01-20T18:22:04 *** paracyst has quit IRC
1631 2016-01-20T18:22:05 *** tommygunner has quit IRC
1632 2016-01-20T18:22:05 *** hno has quit IRC
1633 2016-01-20T18:22:05 *** emzy has quit IRC
1634 2016-01-20T18:22:05 *** dstien has quit IRC
1635 2016-01-20T18:22:05 *** sdaftuar has quit IRC
1636 2016-01-20T18:22:06 *** petertodd has quit IRC
1637 2016-01-20T18:22:06 *** pastly has quit IRC
1638 2016-01-20T18:22:06 *** jmcn has quit IRC
1639 2016-01-20T18:22:06 <sipa> Iriez: changing PoW does not directly hurt security of the system; it would just reset the game
1640 2016-01-20T18:22:06 *** outrox is now known as outr0x
1641 2016-01-20T18:22:06 *** jl2012_ is now known as jl2012
1642 2016-01-20T18:22:22 *** stevenroose|BNC is now known as stevenroose
1643 2016-01-20T18:22:23 <Iriez> I suppose you are correct. If the game was made to start over everyone would be equal.
1644 2016-01-20T18:22:24 *** sipi has joined #bitcoin-dev
1645 2016-01-20T18:22:36 <sipa> Iriez: if mining would become completely centralized, the rest of the ecosystem should have a reason to *together* switch PoW
1646 2016-01-20T18:23:36 <Iriez> I guess im looking at it from a different perspective. My perspective is that if the PoW is switched, then it becomes a new coin, regardless of technical circumstance. Even though it may continue on the same chain, I cannot help but feel everyone will see it as a different being, no longer what it once was.
1647 2016-01-20T18:23:37 *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1648 2016-01-20T18:23:38 <sipa> as mining is an expensive choice for the ecosystem, and its only purpose is avoiding central control and censorship;; in a highly centralized mining ecosystem, you get the coss without the benefits
1649 2016-01-20T18:23:46 <Iriez> And while that might be technically incorrect, I cannot help but feel most would feel this way.
1650 2016-01-20T18:23:49 *** kefkius has joined #bitcoin-dev
1651 2016-01-20T18:23:54 <sipa> it's not a new coin if everyone agreed to switch
1652 2016-01-20T18:24:13 <sipa> and that is the same as with any other hardfork
1653 2016-01-20T18:24:13 <sipa> you can do it with very high ecosystem consensus
1654 2016-01-20T18:24:45 *** Azelphur_ is now known as Azelphur
1655 2016-01-20T18:24:45 *** ThomasV has quit IRC
1656 2016-01-20T18:24:57 *** JohnKenney has joined #bitcoin-dev
1657 2016-01-20T18:24:58 *** hno has joined #bitcoin-dev
1658 2016-01-20T18:24:58 *** IrishGringo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1659 2016-01-20T18:24:58 *** hanti has joined #bitcoin-dev
1660 2016-01-20T18:25:01 <sipa> however, i think that it is clear right now that switching PoW would be way harder to get consensus on than other things thay are being debated
1661 2016-01-20T18:25:19 <sipa> so do not worry, i have no intention of merging such a thing
1662 2016-01-20T18:25:21 *** jmcn has joined #bitcoin-dev
1663 2016-01-20T18:25:26 *** jaclupi has quit IRC
1664 2016-01-20T18:25:26 <Iriez> Thank you :)
1665 2016-01-20T18:25:28 <sipa> in Bitfoin Core
1666 2016-01-20T18:25:33 *** parus has joined #bitcoin-dev
1667 2016-01-20T18:26:38 *** agricocb1 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1668 2016-01-20T18:26:43 *** segy has joined #bitcoin-dev
1669 2016-01-20T18:27:20 *** sdaftuar_ is now known as sdaftuar
1670 2016-01-20T18:27:40 *** IrishGringo has quit IRC
1671 2016-01-20T18:28:06 *** Uglux has joined #bitcoin-dev
1672 2016-01-20T18:28:12 *** agricocb has quit IRC
1673 2016-01-20T18:28:38 *** treaki__ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1674 2016-01-20T18:28:47 *** ThomasKeller has joined #bitcoin-dev
1675 2016-01-20T18:29:32 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1676 2016-01-20T18:29:33 *** jaclupi has joined #bitcoin-dev
1677 2016-01-20T18:32:19 *** waffles has joined #bitcoin-dev
1678 2016-01-20T18:32:55 *** koad has joined #bitcoin-dev
1679 2016-01-20T18:32:58 *** zookolaptop has quit IRC
1680 2016-01-20T18:34:06 *** GGuyZ has quit IRC
1681 2016-01-20T18:34:49 *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-dev
1682 2016-01-20T18:35:15 *** wpalczynski_ is now known as wpalczynski
1683 2016-01-20T18:35:42 *** parus has quit IRC
1684 2016-01-20T18:35:42 *** jmcn has quit IRC
1685 2016-01-20T18:35:42 *** JohnKenney has quit IRC
1686 2016-01-20T18:35:43 *** hno has quit IRC
1687 2016-01-20T18:35:43 *** hanti has quit IRC
1688 2016-01-20T18:35:44 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
1689 2016-01-20T18:36:40 *** zookolaptop has quit IRC
1690 2016-01-20T18:37:11 *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-dev
1691 2016-01-20T18:37:50 *** parus has joined #bitcoin-dev
1692 2016-01-20T18:37:51 *** jmcn has joined #bitcoin-dev
1693 2016-01-20T18:37:51 *** JohnKenney has joined #bitcoin-dev
1694 2016-01-20T18:37:51 *** hno has joined #bitcoin-dev
1695 2016-01-20T18:37:51 *** hanti has joined #bitcoin-dev
1696 2016-01-20T18:39:52 *** underpants has joined #bitcoin-dev
1697 2016-01-20T18:40:24 *** rmwb has quit IRC
1698 2016-01-20T18:41:05 *** T23WS has quit IRC
1699 2016-01-20T18:42:01 *** dagurval_ is now known as dagurval
1700 2016-01-20T18:44:38 <bsm117532> Why does BIP142 define a 32-byte address format? Why is 20 bytes not sufficient?
1701 2016-01-20T18:47:54 *** Cryo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1702 2016-01-20T18:47:55 *** Cryo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1703 2016-01-20T18:48:18 *** parus has quit IRC
1704 2016-01-20T18:48:18 *** jmcn has quit IRC
1705 2016-01-20T18:48:18 *** JohnKenney has quit IRC
1706 2016-01-20T18:48:19 *** hno has quit IRC
1707 2016-01-20T18:48:19 *** hanti has quit IRC
1708 2016-01-20T18:48:40 *** parus has joined #bitcoin-dev
1709 2016-01-20T18:48:40 *** jmcn has joined #bitcoin-dev
1710 2016-01-20T18:48:40 *** JohnKenney has joined #bitcoin-dev
1711 2016-01-20T18:48:40 *** hno has joined #bitcoin-dev
1712 2016-01-20T18:48:40 *** hanti has joined #bitcoin-dev
1713 2016-01-20T18:49:42 *** priidu has joined #bitcoin-dev
1714 2016-01-20T18:54:08 *** GGuyZ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1715 2016-01-20T18:56:24 *** cryptojonathan has joined #bitcoin-dev
1716 2016-01-20T18:57:32 *** tjader has quit IRC
1717 2016-01-20T18:57:37 *** tawar has quit IRC
1718 2016-01-20T18:57:37 *** tawar has joined #bitcoin-dev
1719 2016-01-20T18:57:39 *** owowo has quit IRC
1720 2016-01-20T18:57:39 *** owowo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1721 2016-01-20T18:57:53 *** cryptapus_ has quit IRC
1722 2016-01-20T18:58:55 *** wpalczynski has quit IRC
1723 2016-01-20T18:58:56 *** wpalczynski has joined #bitcoin-dev
1724 2016-01-20T18:59:06 *** parus has quit IRC
1725 2016-01-20T18:59:06 *** jmcn has quit IRC
1726 2016-01-20T18:59:06 *** JohnKenney has quit IRC
1727 2016-01-20T18:59:07 *** hno has quit IRC
1728 2016-01-20T18:59:07 *** hanti has quit IRC
1729 2016-01-20T18:59:18 *** jl2012 has quit IRC
1730 2016-01-20T18:59:18 *** jl2012 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1731 2016-01-20T19:01:25 *** cryptapus_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1732 2016-01-20T19:01:39 *** morcos_ is now known as morcos
1733 2016-01-20T19:02:06 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
1734 2016-01-20T19:07:09 *** bhaak_ is now known as bhaak
1735 2016-01-20T19:07:16 *** mrkent has joined #bitcoin-dev
1736 2016-01-20T19:08:13 *** GGuyZ has quit IRC
1737 2016-01-20T19:14:33 *** warren_ is now known as warren
1738 2016-01-20T19:15:19 *** unlord_ is now known as unlord
1739 2016-01-20T19:16:20 <jonasschnelli> bsm117532: IIRC it's because of SHA256 has higher collision resistance then RIPEMD160. But maybe sipa can clarify this better.
1740 2016-01-20T19:17:14 <bsm117532> jonasschnelli: Thanks I get it, morcos answered me in #segwit-dev.
1741 2016-01-20T19:17:28 <bsm117532> Let me also cast my vote to get rid of #segwit-dev and discuss segwit here.
1742 2016-01-20T19:17:40 *** neilf has joined #bitcoin-dev
1743 2016-01-20T19:19:09 *** op_null2_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1744 2016-01-20T19:21:05 <maaku> bsm117532: you can do that with a /part
1745 2016-01-20T19:21:59 *** atgreen has joined #bitcoin-dev
1746 2016-01-20T19:22:23 *** nys- has quit IRC
1747 2016-01-20T19:22:47 <bsm117532> I'll /part if sipa decides to close it. It's his project.
1748 2016-01-20T19:23:11 *** patcon has joined #bitcoin-dev
1749 2016-01-20T19:23:39 *** AtnevRed has joined #bitcoin-dev
1750 2016-01-20T19:23:44 *** jposner has quit IRC
1751 2016-01-20T19:25:08 *** memymo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1752 2016-01-20T19:27:36 *** rusty has joined #bitcoin-dev
1753 2016-01-20T19:28:15 *** AtnevRed has quit IRC
1754 2016-01-20T19:28:54 *** ongolaBoy has quit IRC
1755 2016-01-20T19:30:02 *** DatBeeDoe has joined #bitcoin-dev
1756 2016-01-20T19:31:33 *** DatBeeDoe has quit IRC
1757 2016-01-20T19:32:20 <Chris_Stewart_5> sipa: A scriptPubKey needs to be run to completion before a tx can be marked valid, correct?
1758 2016-01-20T19:32:22 *** memymo has quit IRC
1759 2016-01-20T19:35:14 *** n0n0_ has quit IRC
1760 2016-01-20T19:37:25 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
1761 2016-01-20T19:38:04 *** G1lius has quit IRC
1762 2016-01-20T19:39:46 *** blueness has quit IRC
1763 2016-01-20T19:41:18 *** zookolaptop has quit IRC
1764 2016-01-20T19:41:34 *** cryptojonathan has quit IRC
1765 2016-01-20T19:43:14 *** rmwb has quit IRC
1766 2016-01-20T19:44:36 *** chjj has quit IRC
1767 2016-01-20T19:46:14 *** priver has quit IRC
1768 2016-01-20T19:48:14 *** metalcamp has quit IRC
1769 2016-01-20T19:50:58 *** op_null2_ has quit IRC
1770 2016-01-20T19:52:11 *** chjj has joined #bitcoin-dev
1771 2016-01-20T19:53:39 *** drnet has joined #bitcoin-dev
1772 2016-01-20T19:57:18 *** chjj_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1773 2016-01-20T19:58:34 *** haakonn has joined #bitcoin-dev
1774 2016-01-20T19:59:43 *** kgk has joined #bitcoin-dev
1775 2016-01-20T20:03:30 *** IrishGringo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1776 2016-01-20T20:04:06 *** kgk has quit IRC
1777 2016-01-20T20:04:13 *** frankenmint has quit IRC
1778 2016-01-20T20:04:35 *** markus-k has quit IRC
1779 2016-01-20T20:07:01 *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-dev
1780 2016-01-20T20:09:48 *** aevitas has quit IRC
1781 2016-01-20T20:10:24 *** drnet has quit IRC
1782 2016-01-20T20:11:37 <Chris_Stewart_5> specifically if a OP_VERIFY operation is run while there are still script operations to run
1783 2016-01-20T20:12:16 *** judahmu has joined #bitcoin-dev
1784 2016-01-20T20:12:40 *** atgreen has quit IRC
1785 2016-01-20T20:17:59 *** ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-dev
1786 2016-01-20T20:18:04 *** parus has joined #bitcoin-dev
1787 2016-01-20T20:18:04 *** jmcn has joined #bitcoin-dev
1788 2016-01-20T20:18:04 *** JohnKenney has joined #bitcoin-dev
1789 2016-01-20T20:18:04 *** hno has joined #bitcoin-dev
1790 2016-01-20T20:18:04 *** hanti has joined #bitcoin-dev
1791 2016-01-20T20:20:03 <maaku> sipa: why is it a consensus rule that `block.vtx[0].wit.vtxinwit.size() != 1 || block.vtx[0].wit.vtxinwit[0].scriptWitness.stack.size() != 1`
1792 2016-01-20T20:20:20 <kefkius> Chris_Stewart_5: Not sure what you're getting at. If OP_VERIFY is executed and the top stack item is evaluated as being False, the script fails and the tx should be considered invalid, right?
1793 2016-01-20T20:20:23 <maaku> er, the consensus rule is the opposite
1794 2016-01-20T20:20:55 <maaku> sipa: why not just constrain the first push, leaving the rest of the space for soft-fork expansion?
1795 2016-01-20T20:21:32 *** rusty has quit IRC
1796 2016-01-20T20:23:37 *** brson has quit IRC
1797 2016-01-20T20:24:08 *** treehug88 has quit IRC
1798 2016-01-20T20:24:30 *** nowan has quit IRC
1799 2016-01-20T20:25:35 *** Logicwax has quit IRC
1800 2016-01-20T20:26:04 *** patcon has quit IRC
1801 2016-01-20T20:26:30 *** Logicwax has joined #bitcoin-dev
1802 2016-01-20T20:26:54 <Chris_Stewart_5> kefkius: What I am getting at, is in situations like this "1 2", "2 EQUALVERIFY 1 EQUAL"
1803 2016-01-20T20:26:59 <Chris_Stewart_5> which is a test case from bitcoin core
1804 2016-01-20T20:27:26 <Chris_Stewart_5> the first string is the scriptSig and the second string is the scriptPubKey
1805 2016-01-20T20:27:53 *** tjader has quit IRC
1806 2016-01-20T20:28:39 *** parus has quit IRC
1807 2016-01-20T20:28:39 *** jmcn has quit IRC
1808 2016-01-20T20:28:39 *** JohnKenney has quit IRC
1809 2016-01-20T20:28:39 *** hno has quit IRC
1810 2016-01-20T20:28:40 *** hanti has quit IRC
1811 2016-01-20T20:29:57 <kefkius> Chris_Stewart_5: Looks legit http://i.imgur.com/lc7ftLc.png - I'm still not sure I understand what you're wondering
1812 2016-01-20T20:30:41 <Chris_Stewart_5> kefkius: OP_VERIFY only terminates the script if the stack top is false, if it is true it pops true off the stack and runs the next script operation?
1813 2016-01-20T20:30:52 <kefkius> Chris_Stewart_5: Yep
1814 2016-01-20T20:32:42 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
1815 2016-01-20T20:36:26 *** Elglobo has quit IRC
1816 2016-01-20T20:37:28 *** tommygunner_ is now known as tommygunner
1817 2016-01-20T20:39:28 *** Elglobo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1818 2016-01-20T20:40:00 *** Elglobonoob has joined #bitcoin-dev
1819 2016-01-20T20:40:40 *** treehug88 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1820 2016-01-20T20:42:53 *** parus has joined #bitcoin-dev
1821 2016-01-20T20:42:53 *** jmcn has joined #bitcoin-dev
1822 2016-01-20T20:42:53 *** JohnKenney has joined #bitcoin-dev
1823 2016-01-20T20:42:53 *** hno has joined #bitcoin-dev
1824 2016-01-20T20:42:53 *** hanti has joined #bitcoin-dev
1825 2016-01-20T20:49:34 *** petrkr has joined #bitcoin-dev
1826 2016-01-20T20:50:04 <Chris_Stewart_5> kefkius: thanks
1827 2016-01-20T20:50:33 *** deadalnix has quit IRC
1828 2016-01-20T20:50:55 *** RubenSomsen has joined #bitcoin-dev
1829 2016-01-20T20:51:46 *** arowser has quit IRC
1830 2016-01-20T20:52:04 <kefkius> np
1831 2016-01-20T20:52:17 *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-dev
1832 2016-01-20T20:52:17 *** nowan has joined #bitcoin-dev
1833 2016-01-20T20:52:50 *** OxADADA_ has quit IRC
1834 2016-01-20T20:53:24 *** nowan has quit IRC
1835 2016-01-20T20:53:25 *** parus has quit IRC
1836 2016-01-20T20:53:25 *** jmcn has quit IRC
1837 2016-01-20T20:53:25 *** JohnKenney has quit IRC
1838 2016-01-20T20:53:25 *** hno has quit IRC
1839 2016-01-20T20:53:26 *** hanti has quit IRC
1840 2016-01-20T20:53:57 *** OxADADA has joined #bitcoin-dev
1841 2016-01-20T20:54:52 *** prijedorske__ has quit IRC
1842 2016-01-20T20:56:34 *** RubenSomsen has quit IRC
1843 2016-01-20T20:58:04 *** zookolaptop has quit IRC
1844 2016-01-20T20:58:52 *** ronbo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1845 2016-01-20T21:00:17 *** keen2dev has joined #bitcoin-dev
1846 2016-01-20T21:05:09 *** LeMiner2 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1847 2016-01-20T21:05:41 *** LeMiner has quit IRC
1848 2016-01-20T21:06:31 *** deadalnix has joined #bitcoin-dev
1849 2016-01-20T21:09:29 *** [\\\] is now known as tripleslash
1850 2016-01-20T21:14:14 *** cryptapus_ has quit IRC
1851 2016-01-20T21:14:30 *** keen2dev has quit IRC
1852 2016-01-20T21:21:14 *** petrkr has quit IRC
1853 2016-01-20T21:21:18 *** btc5 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1854 2016-01-20T21:23:38 *** jposner has joined #bitcoin-dev
1855 2016-01-20T21:24:15 *** Uglux has quit IRC
1856 2016-01-20T21:24:28 *** AtnevRed has joined #bitcoin-dev
1857 2016-01-20T21:24:39 *** patcon has joined #bitcoin-dev
1858 2016-01-20T21:25:07 *** paveljanik has quit IRC
1859 2016-01-20T21:26:22 *** cryptojonathan has joined #bitcoin-dev
1860 2016-01-20T21:28:58 *** AtnevRed has quit IRC
1861 2016-01-20T21:29:33 *** btc5 has quit IRC
1862 2016-01-20T21:29:36 *** erasmospunk has joined #bitcoin-dev
1863 2016-01-20T21:32:00 *** erasmosp_ has quit IRC
1864 2016-01-20T21:33:19 <Lauda> "There's a pretty significant flaw in reasoning here: The other miners will be busy mining away on blocks that don't contain this hypothetical 11-minute transaction, so they'll likely surpass the chain that has it in the time it takes to verify it and build another on top... It is far more likely that the monster block would just get orphaned if it took that long to verify."
1865 2016-01-20T21:33:29 <Lauda> In regards to a transaction that takes too long to verify.
1866 2016-01-20T21:33:32 <Lauda> Anyone care to elaborate?
1867 2016-01-20T21:35:13 *** jimtendo-X202EP has joined #bitcoin-dev
1868 2016-01-20T21:37:07 *** memymo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1869 2016-01-20T21:39:26 *** memymo has quit IRC
1870 2016-01-20T21:39:51 *** memymo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1871 2016-01-20T21:40:48 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
1872 2016-01-20T21:41:32 *** moa has joined #bitcoin-dev
1873 2016-01-20T21:41:39 *** memymo has quit IRC
1874 2016-01-20T21:42:24 <sturles> Unlikely. They would have to do double work. If the miner who mined the 11 minute-to-validate-block mines another one before the rest of the miners have mined *two* blocks, he winss.
1875 2016-01-20T21:42:40 *** petrkr has joined #bitcoin-dev
1876 2016-01-20T21:42:43 <sturles> So you may do a 51% attack with much less than 51% of the hashrate.
1877 2016-01-20T21:43:16 *** Qatz has quit IRC
1878 2016-01-20T21:43:27 <sturles> SPV miners will probably build on top of the block as well, after fetching just the header and not validating the entire block (or even downloading it).
1879 2016-01-20T21:45:06 *** ThomasV has quit IRC
1880 2016-01-20T21:46:29 *** rmwb has quit IRC
1881 2016-01-20T21:46:50 *** memymo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1882 2016-01-20T21:47:25 *** parus has joined #bitcoin-dev
1883 2016-01-20T21:47:31 *** nowan has joined #bitcoin-dev
1884 2016-01-20T21:47:31 *** djoot has joined #bitcoin-dev
1885 2016-01-20T21:47:32 *** djoot has joined #bitcoin-dev
1886 2016-01-20T21:47:41 <sturles> The miner who mined the block obviously know it is valid.
1887 2016-01-20T21:48:13 *** memymo has quit IRC
1888 2016-01-20T21:48:24 *** JohnKenney has joined #bitcoin-dev
1889 2016-01-20T21:48:34 *** hno has joined #bitcoin-dev
1890 2016-01-20T21:49:00 * sturles wonders how low hashrate you can have, and still have a shot at a 51% attack my mining blocks which are hard to validate.
1891 2016-01-20T21:49:44 *** GGuyZ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1892 2016-01-20T21:51:12 *** jimtendo-X202EP has quit IRC
1893 2016-01-20T21:51:44 <Lauda> thanks sturles. I'd like more input if someone else is up.
1894 2016-01-20T21:51:45 *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-dev
1895 2016-01-20T21:51:52 <Lauda> That would be an interesting thing to calculate.
1896 2016-01-20T21:52:59 *** boonies4u has joined #bitcoin-dev
1897 2016-01-20T21:53:39 <bsm117532> Folks need some feedback on a blog post. TL;DR I think core has not provided a sufficiently detailed capacity increase roadmap, and the rumblings of a hard fork are scary. I'd like to write a BIP along the lines of using the new segwit address types to fork-in a capacity increase (extension blocks). People need to know this is a possibility.
1898 2016-01-20T21:53:45 *** brson has joined #bitcoin-dev
1899 2016-01-20T21:54:02 <bsm117532> Specifically I want to make sure I have the technical details correct about a capacity increase soft-fork.
1900 2016-01-20T21:54:29 <bsm117532> If you could take a look: http://blog.sldx.com/go-fork-yourself/ (password is "solidx")
1901 2016-01-20T21:55:25 *** memymo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1902 2016-01-20T21:55:53 <bsm117532> sipa, Luke-Jr ^^^ (who else are the segwit or extension block experts?)
1903 2016-01-20T21:56:09 <instagibbs> people demanding a HF will not be placated by extension blocks. I'd bet really good money on it. Good luck though!
1904 2016-01-20T21:57:10 <bsm117532> I'll give it the explanation a good 'ol college try...
1905 2016-01-20T21:57:35 *** tjader has quit IRC
1906 2016-01-20T21:58:04 *** memymo has quit IRC
1907 2016-01-20T21:58:27 *** treehug88 has quit IRC
1908 2016-01-20T21:58:47 <boonies4u> I've got a quick question... what is the single line of code for setting the max blocksize?
1909 2016-01-20T21:58:52 *** janko33_ has quit IRC
1910 2016-01-20T22:00:13 <boonies4u> I need it for semantics's sake
1911 2016-01-20T22:00:17 *** tuananh5 has joined #bitcoin-dev
1912 2016-01-20T22:01:23 *** jmcn has joined #bitcoin-dev
1913 2016-01-20T22:01:23 *** hanti has joined #bitcoin-dev
1914 2016-01-20T22:01:24 *** zookolaptop is now known as zooko
1915 2016-01-20T22:02:04 *** kgk has joined #bitcoin-dev
1916 2016-01-20T22:02:25 *** tjader has joined #bitcoin-dev
1917 2016-01-20T22:04:38 *** bonks has joined #bitcoin-dev
1918 2016-01-20T22:04:51 *** memymo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1919 2016-01-20T22:05:01 *** GGuyZ has quit IRC
1920 2016-01-20T22:05:10 *** Qatz has joined #bitcoin-dev
1921 2016-01-20T22:05:48 *** frankenmint has joined #bitcoin-dev
1922 2016-01-20T22:06:26 *** kgk has quit IRC
1923 2016-01-20T22:07:53 *** jimtendo-X202EP has joined #bitcoin-dev
1924 2016-01-20T22:09:25 <maaku> boonies4u: grep MAX_BLOCK_SIZE
1925 2016-01-20T22:10:12 *** frankenmint has quit IRC
1926 2016-01-20T22:10:23 <maaku> boonies4u: but note that just changing that constant is not a safe way to deploy this, nor safe for the network -- you'd haave to change the cost metric, have a hard fork flag day, etc.
1927 2016-01-20T22:11:19 <boonies4u> I know that, but it's important for me to let people know when I'm talking about MAX_BLOCK_SIZE, rather than effective block size increases
1928 2016-01-20T22:11:30 *** jmcn has quit IRC
1929 2016-01-20T22:11:30 *** hanti has quit IRC
1930 2016-01-20T22:11:56 *** jmcn has joined #bitcoin-dev
1931 2016-01-20T22:11:57 *** hanti has joined #bitcoin-dev
1932 2016-01-20T22:13:10 *** tawar has quit IRC
1933 2016-01-20T22:14:06 *** IrishGringo has quit IRC
1934 2016-01-20T22:17:18 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-dev
1935 2016-01-20T22:18:35 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
1936 2016-01-20T22:20:36 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
1937 2016-01-20T22:22:10 *** jmcn has quit IRC
1938 2016-01-20T22:22:10 *** hanti has quit IRC
1939 2016-01-20T22:27:06 *** kgk has joined #bitcoin-dev
1940 2016-01-20T22:27:12 *** DurstBurger has quit IRC
1941 2016-01-20T22:27:14 *** Cory has joined #bitcoin-dev
1942 2016-01-20T22:27:22 *** brson has quit IRC
1943 2016-01-20T22:28:52 *** MrHodl has joined #bitcoin-dev
1944 2016-01-20T22:31:35 *** aschildbach has quit IRC
1945 2016-01-20T22:36:16 *** ttttemp has quit IRC
1946 2016-01-20T22:36:16 *** ttttemp_ has quit IRC
1947 2016-01-20T22:39:04 *** ttttemp has joined #bitcoin-dev
1948 2016-01-20T22:40:09 *** erasmospunk has quit IRC
1949 2016-01-20T22:41:04 *** bityogi has quit IRC
1950 2016-01-20T22:45:51 *** boonies4u has quit IRC
1951 2016-01-20T22:48:19 *** tantalum has quit IRC
1952 2016-01-20T22:48:19 *** one_zero has joined #bitcoin-dev
1953 2016-01-20T22:53:46 *** ignit has joined #bitcoin-dev
1954 2016-01-20T22:55:51 <Lauda> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/97e5b55c6fabf5deb57be13bdd8f8b9c90d21570
1955 2016-01-20T22:55:59 <Lauda> Will this be merged?
1956 2016-01-20T22:56:30 *** neozaru has quit IRC
1957 2016-01-20T22:57:14 *** metalcamp has joined #bitcoin-dev
1958 2016-01-20T22:59:17 *** murch has quit IRC
1959 2016-01-20T23:00:40 *** cryptojonathan has quit IRC
1960 2016-01-20T23:01:23 *** hashtagg has joined #bitcoin-dev
1961 2016-01-20T23:02:26 *** hashtag has joined #bitcoin-dev
1962 2016-01-20T23:02:58 *** tegila has joined #bitcoin-dev
1963 2016-01-20T23:03:48 *** deadalni_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1964 2016-01-20T23:04:11 *** xissburg has quit IRC
1965 2016-01-20T23:04:11 *** bsm117532 has quit IRC
1966 2016-01-20T23:04:46 *** hashtagg_ has quit IRC
1967 2016-01-20T23:04:46 *** hashtag_ has quit IRC
1968 2016-01-20T23:04:47 *** instagibbs has quit IRC
1969 2016-01-20T23:05:37 *** instagibbs has joined #bitcoin-dev
1970 2016-01-20T23:06:05 *** rmwb has joined #bitcoin-dev
1971 2016-01-20T23:06:19 *** brson has joined #bitcoin-dev
1972 2016-01-20T23:06:52 *** frankenmint has joined #bitcoin-dev
1973 2016-01-20T23:06:58 *** deadalnix has quit IRC
1974 2016-01-20T23:09:18 *** blueness has joined #bitcoin-dev
1975 2016-01-20T23:11:09 *** metalcamp_ has joined #bitcoin-dev
1976 2016-01-20T23:12:06 *** frankenmint has quit IRC
1977 2016-01-20T23:14:17 *** metalcamp has quit IRC
1978 2016-01-20T23:18:48 *** petrkr has quit IRC
1979 2016-01-20T23:19:39 *** zooko is now known as zooko|afk
1980 2016-01-20T23:22:26 *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-dev
1981 2016-01-20T23:24:11 *** atgreen has joined #bitcoin-dev
1982 2016-01-20T23:24:19 <maaku> Never
1983 2016-01-20T23:24:31 *** IrishGringo has joined #bitcoin-dev
1984 2016-01-20T23:25:15 *** AtnevRed has joined #bitcoin-dev
1985 2016-01-20T23:27:23 <maaku> If it was a 1MB limit it might have a chance, though I'd still object
1986 2016-01-20T23:27:51 <maaku> But it's a solution that approaches the problem from the entirely wrong angle.
1987 2016-01-20T23:28:19 <JackH> hi maaku a quick question. In sidechains when sending back the sidechain coin, what BIP is needed to have that action recorded/understood by the core protocol
1988 2016-01-20T23:28:43 <maaku> There isn't a BIP for that.
1989 2016-01-20T23:28:45 <JackH> ie. when BTC is released again you guys mentioned a certain BIP or a certain feature needed to be in force
1990 2016-01-20T23:29:04 <JackH> wont the CSV related BIP do it?
1991 2016-01-20T23:29:27 <maaku> BIP 68 and 112 are needed, but for a minor detail. For the main part of the two way peg there is no BIP as of yet
1992 2016-01-20T23:29:53 *** AtnevRed has quit IRC
1993 2016-01-20T23:31:04 <JackH> hmm if you propose more than 68 and 112, is there a discussion about what is exactly needed?
1994 2016-01-20T23:31:20 <Lauda> maaku why?
1995 2016-01-20T23:31:27 <Lauda> Elaborate on 'entirely wrong angle'
1996 2016-01-20T23:32:00 <maaku> CSV is needed for the same reason it is needed by lightning, as a way to make sure that an output is locked for a certain amount of time so people can see it and respond with a fraud proof
1997 2016-01-20T23:32:26 <Lauda> His commit limits the functionality?
1998 2016-01-20T23:32:33 <maaku> But the actual fraud proof would use scripting features that have not been proposed for core.
1999 2016-01-20T23:33:18 <JackH> I wonder how Sergio is going to interoperate his rootstock though
2000 2016-01-20T23:33:38 <warren> JackH: please keep in mind that you're talking only about the PoW type of sidechain, the current type of federated sidechain requires no changes to Bitcoin and works 100% right now.
2001 2016-01-20T23:33:51 *** blur3d has joined #bitcoin-dev
2002 2016-01-20T23:35:25 <JackH> we dont have a sidechain running against mainnet yet, do we?
2003 2016-01-20T23:35:31 <JackH> only testnet right?
2004 2016-01-20T23:35:49 <JackH> well at least from blockst guys
2005 2016-01-20T23:35:49 <warren> JackH: the current code would work just fine for mainnet, just people are extremely cautious
2006 2016-01-20T23:38:20 <maaku> Lauda it limits the non witness portion of a tx to 100k
2007 2016-01-20T23:38:36 *** t7_ has quit IRC
2008 2016-01-20T23:38:49 *** rnvk has quit IRC
2009 2016-01-20T23:39:18 <maaku> Certainly that is okay for everyday transactions, but not across the board...
2010 2016-01-20T23:40:24 *** hanti has joined #bitcoin-dev
2011 2016-01-20T23:40:28 *** hanti has joined #bitcoin-dev
2012 2016-01-20T23:40:44 *** bsm117532 has joined #bitcoin-dev
2013 2016-01-20T23:40:56 *** tegila has quit IRC
2014 2016-01-20T23:41:06 *** t7 has joined #bitcoin-dev
2015 2016-01-20T23:43:04 *** iKant has quit IRC
2016 2016-01-20T23:44:00 *** petertod1 is now known as petertodd
2017 2016-01-20T23:44:12 *** blur3d has quit IRC
2018 2016-01-20T23:44:28 <maaku> Lauda by wrong angle I mean the problem being addressed (slow validation) is best fixed by adopting a new cost metric
2019 2016-01-20T23:44:45 <maaku> That solves the problem at the source
2020 2016-01-20T23:44:52 *** drnet has joined #bitcoin-dev
2021 2016-01-20T23:45:35 <warren> maaku: is the video of the Validation Cost Metric presentation online somewhere?
2022 2016-01-20T23:46:03 *** GAit has quit IRC
2023 2016-01-20T23:46:11 <maaku> I believe it is linked from kanzure's transcription
2024 2016-01-20T23:47:06 *** GAit has joined #bitcoin-dev
2025 2016-01-20T23:49:26 *** ignit has quit IRC
2026 2016-01-20T23:49:53 *** Newyorkadam has joined #bitcoin-dev
2027 2016-01-20T23:49:58 *** ignit has joined #bitcoin-dev
2028 2016-01-20T23:53:04 *** DougieBot5000 has quit IRC
2029 2016-01-20T23:53:48 *** joecool has joined #bitcoin-dev
2030 2016-01-20T23:55:44 <joecool> are there still valid reasons why libressl is blocked by bitcoin? (non-lukejr related zealotries)
2031 2016-01-20T23:56:07 *** memymo has quit IRC
2032 2016-01-20T23:57:51 *** lemonmaster has joined #bitcoin-dev
2033 2016-01-20T23:57:55 *** IrishGringo has quit IRC
2034 2016-01-20T23:58:59 *** Bronze has joined #bitcoin-dev
2035 2016-01-20T23:59:19 <joecool> at this point, why not just force specific openssl versions if the consensus breaking boogeyman is such a concern?
2036 2016-01-20T23:59:34 *** RoboTedd_ is now known as RoboTeddy