00:00:43 tacotime_: amiller wants to use it to make compact proofs that a whole chain has a specific total difficulty. 00:01:03 yeah that ^, way simpler than what i was staritng to type 00:01:35 that's for sure a useful crucial component in any sharding strategy or whatever but i dont know the dtails of this PT's scheme 00:01:42 so I can give you a small proof and you'll know that the chain I have is the best of all your peers before you do the work of fetching headers. 00:02:21 amiller: so I think I can save it and make it incremental, but the cost might be too high. 00:02:33 * amiller is prepared to sacrifice a limb 00:02:52 Ah, I see. 00:03:22 basically any random graph with sufficient order is very likely to be an expander graph. So I think you can just impose random graphs and keep incresing their size by virtually repeating blocks until its an expander... but this would increase your proof sizes. 00:03:38 Oh, because if you have people doing lots of easy work on the network, you'll generate a ton of different trees? And you only want people working on one? 00:04:31 I hadn't even thought of that, but it makes sense (if that's the reasoning). 00:04:55 PT did say that children were supposed to be generated sequentially. 00:06:45 Well, sort of. Hmm. 00:08:51 the construction in this paper is recursive 00:09:21 the graph can be split into two subgraphs of equal size / identical structure 00:10:05 the two equal size subgraphs are "connected with the edges of a bipartite A-expanding graph" 00:11:06 i think the edges are all going in one direction 00:11:16 i think that's a compatible structure with incremental construction 00:13:58 <5EXAANQ7F> 5EXAANQ7F has quit 00:14:16 mapppum has joined #bitcoin-wizards 00:19:05 Ursium has joined #bitcoin-wizards 00:22:49 mappum has quit 00:26:16 Ursium has quit 00:32:54 http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/001076.html 00:33:22 well thats quite a world away from 'HTTP/2.0 will be TLS by default' isnt it 00:33:37 funny how things always work out this way 00:35:02 mappum has joined #bitcoin-wizards 00:35:29 bebopzzz has quit 00:35:30 i think all IETF meetings are now conducted aboard a jet-ski jumping over a shark and landing squarely onto a human face, forever 00:37:25 nice 00:38:03 Krellan_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards 00:42:26 Ursium has joined #bitcoin-wizards 00:52:22 samesong has joined #bitcoin-wizards 00:57:28 well like any power structure, cunts eventually infest it like the vermin they are 00:59:36 MagicalLies is now known as c--O-O 01:04:16 /j mtgox-chat 01:05:41 lol 01:12:25 gox is pretty much confirmed to be insolvent by now right 01:12:39 going by the 'if it looks like a duck' axiom 01:12:52 i read they terminated the lease on thier offices 01:13:42 austinhill1 has quit 01:16:20 lol @ the live ticker 01:20:31 bebopzzz has joined #bitcoin-wizards 01:23:00 Emcy: the ones they *moved out of*? :P 01:23:03 jron_ is now known as jron 01:23:11 pretty normal to terminate a lease when you move 01:23:13 lol 01:23:18 jron has quit 01:23:18 jron has joined #bitcoin-wizards 01:23:33 (not confirming or denying solvency or lack thereof, just making a point) 01:27:21 interesting timing 01:27:43 ? 01:28:38 move offices whilst facing your biggest crisis 01:28:54 did they upsize or downsize 01:31:53 Emcy: … 01:32:13 as much as one has the right to doubt MtGox, making bad arguments doesn't help :P 01:32:51 Luke-Jr, stopping the FUD one rumour at a time. 01:32:51 i havent made an argument 01:33:32 did they movd or not 01:35:09 they publicly stated they were moving *because* the crisis was creating a risk to their employees' safety 01:35:15 that part sounds perfectly reasonable to me 01:35:36 er 01:35:38 tacotime_: it's not even FUD, just bad logic 01:35:45 wernt they in a high rise in tokyo 01:36:52 the conclusion may very well be true, but bad logic is still bad logic :P 01:37:44 what logic 01:54:46 antephialtic has joined #bitcoin-wizards 02:01:16 go11111111111 has joined #bitcoin-wizards 02:04:52 antephialtic has quit 02:15:10 jhj is now known as trn 02:16:03 justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-wizards 02:16:49 justanotheruser has quit 02:16:50 justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-wizards 02:19:15 shinybro_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards 02:19:52 Could anyone give me an example of a script that would be difficult to make in a lisp-like language? (and (not (= $1 $2))) (= (sha256 $1) (sha256 $2))) is the syntax right now 02:20:20 searching for corner cases 02:35:23 c0rw1n has quit 02:35:40 pawpads has joined #bitcoin-wizards 02:36:04 c0rw1n has joined #bitcoin-wizards 02:36:56 pawpads has left #bitcoin-wizards 02:42:29 c0rw1n has quit 02:44:18 c0rw1n has joined #bitcoin-wizards 02:52:59 airbreather has quit 02:56:44 Krellan_ has quit 02:59:32 Krellan_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards 03:10:16 airbreather has joined #bitcoin-wizards 03:15:32 cpacia has quit 03:15:42 <[\\\]> [\\\] has joined #bitcoin-wizards 03:21:54 cpacia has joined #bitcoin-wizards 03:29:32 tacotime_ has quit 03:40:08 fractastical has joined #bitcoin-wizards 03:44:59 EasyAt is now known as EasyAt|Sofa 03:52:12 antephialtic has joined #bitcoin-wizards 03:54:23 qwertyoruiop is now known as MagicalFat 03:54:43 MagicalFat is now known as haematite 03:55:11 haematite is now known as qwertyoruiop 04:01:04 justanotheruser is now known as just[dead] 04:02:12 fractastical has quit 04:03:43 just[dead] is now known as justanotheruser 04:04:56 brisque has joined #bitcoin-wizards 04:06:10 mr_burdell has joined #bitcoin-wizards 04:09:47 Krellan_ has quit 04:14:56 jcrubino is now known as Guest85810 04:25:15 c0rw1n has quit 04:27:32 Mike_B has joined #bitcoin-wizards 04:37:27 austinhill has joined #bitcoin-wizards 04:41:18 Fistful_1f_Coins has quit 04:41:57 adam3us has quit 04:46:11 fractastical has joined #bitcoin-wizards 04:49:21 Guest85810 has quit 04:53:47 adam3us has joined #bitcoin-wizards 04:57:28 copumpkin has joined #bitcoin-wizards 04:59:21 adam3us has quit 05:00:32 cpacia has quit 05:09:16 austinhill has quit 05:10:13 airbreather has quit 05:10:49 austinhill has joined #bitcoin-wizards 05:12:37 austinhill has quit 05:12:52 austinhill has joined #bitcoin-wizards 05:13:42 flotsamuel has joined #bitcoin-wizards 05:22:04 tromp__ has quit 05:22:24 bebopzzz has quit 05:22:37 tromp has joined #bitcoin-wizards 05:26:45 tromp has quit 05:30:21 c--O-O has quit 05:32:10 austinhill1 has joined #bitcoin-wizards 05:34:30 adam3us has joined #bitcoin-wizards 05:34:31 austinhill has quit 05:36:56 roidster has quit 05:38:59 mike4 has joined #bitcoin-wizards 05:43:29 austinhill1 has quit 05:43:47 austinhill has joined #bitcoin-wizards 05:50:12 So I've gotten some questions from reporters about the supposed $370 million in BTC mission from Mt Gox…I know that gmaxwell did some blockchain investigations the other day and showed multiple re-payments of transactions coming from Mt Gox 05:50:58 can we be sure they are repayments rather than just two payments of the same amount? 05:51:27 Can this issue be really the only explaination? Seems far fetched to me that transaction malleability which was known for years went unnoticed for so long with them and they just woke up a realized they were insolvent 05:52:35 If I remember gmaxwell's description it pointed to two payments of the same amount. I'm not sure if the 2nd payment was requested because the 1st didnt show up or one of the parties knew there was a flaw in their implementation and took advantage…do we have any info on this? 05:53:51 what would be apparent is Mt Gox making two withdrawals to the same address and the same amount, we probably can't say for certain if this was intended or not though. people like whole numbers and often reuse addresses. 05:54:25 gmaxwell might have better heuristics though, it's possible he has better data than that. 05:55:42 austinhill: I think it's probably incorrect to assume that malleability was playing a role in all of their losses. 05:56:43 austinhill: mtgox was reissuing payments when the originals didn't go through. In at least some cases they did this without conflicting the original transactions. This immediately guarantees a risk of loss even absent malleability, since nothing prevents both txn from going through. 05:57:07 370 million? source? 05:57:14 Though I don't have any reason to believe that regular customers were getting extra payments by chance frequently, as you'd think that would get. reported. 05:57:47 The role malleability would have played there was potentially making it more reliably exploitable. The numbers are a bit hard to believe in any case. 05:57:48 EasyAt|Sofa is now known as EasyAt 05:58:07 gmaxwell, yeah actually since their default is to send w/o any tx fee 05:58:21 this could all have happened even without malleability 05:58:24 I did analysis and found a LOT of duplicate gox payments: but the single transaction and daily withdrawl limits would make us expect a lot of duplication without theft. 06:00:32 Source for claim is http://two-bit-idiot.tumblr.com/post/77745633839/bitcoins-apocalyptic-moment-mt-gox-may-have-lost which in todays rate means around $370m 06:00:50 I also note that people getting "unknown/unexpected" payments isn't unheard of, and the foundation attorney was giving advice to people that if you recieved such a payment the funds were yours: https://github.com/TheBitcoinFoundation/legal/blob/master/White%20Papers/White%20Paper%20-%20Receipt%20of%20BTC%20From%20Unknown%20Person.mdown 06:02:07 austinhill you realise there is large incentive to spook the market right now 06:02:12 gmaxwell: So this was my view as well. There wasn't a well known problem in transaction malleability that allowed unknown hackers to steal for months/years from them. These funds are either double paid to existing mtgox customers or someone around mt gox has stolen funds. 06:02:49 gmaxwell, yet another example of patrick murck being a complete and utter retard 06:02:58 that advise is absolutely unconditionally wrong 06:03:10 nearly every state has a law on the books covering that which makes it theft 06:03:31 austinhill: correct. Nothing about malleability would allow theft normally. And to the best of my ability no other bitcoin business has infrastructure for performing reissues at all. MTGox had other software bugs that made having a reissue facility interesting. 06:03:34 Sure - but the market is spooked as is - FACTs and using this moment to let everyone know that 'trust me' exchange models are broken and suggesting strong crypotgraphic trustless infrastructures as minimum technical requirement for operating an exchange only come by a few times 06:04:03 phantomcircuit: I pointed this out and cited law in several states, in fact. It's a myopic position centered exclusively on a narrow aspect of the UCC and ignoring the rest of the law. 06:04:21 gmaxwell: surely when you're at that size, it would be cheaper and easier to pay a mining pool out of band to confirm your transactions. 06:04:28 gmaxwell, http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/164.065 06:04:40 brisque: they had such a setup with eligius. 06:05:04 austinhill: I don't know if you saw but I proposed some of that and it appears to be getting some traction with several places saying they'll implement. 06:05:16 gmaxwell, i honestly believe that murck is personally responsible for a multitude of tragendies in the bitcoin space 06:05:26 austinhill you say this inthe same week as the first genuine bitcoin banks opens up and everyone loves it 06:05:29 including coinlabs failure to understand state money transmitter laws 06:05:38 tradehills failure to understand state money transmitter laws 06:05:45 and the retards suing me in san francisco 06:06:00 gmaxwell: certainly makes sense to. with such an agreement in place you don't even need to be broadcasting transactions at all, almost. 06:06:10 gmaxwell, also probably bitinstant's failure to understand mt laws 06:06:18 If any of you are in contact with businesses that are hesitant to implement due to confidentality of their holdings, if they're willing to fund work I can point them to academics who I am confident can solve the privacy problem with a modest research grant. 06:06:35 and it also seems ot be the case that the reference client is falling by the wayside (for end user use) 06:06:38 gmaxwell: we need to meet this week & discuss, I'm about to call out all those business's who sent out the letter talking about trust in bitcoin businesses but not providing a cryptographic model for trust 06:06:39 samesong has quit 06:07:24 gmaxwell: Adam3us and I believe we have homomorphic encryption & k/n trustless exchange transactions that solve this.... 06:08:01 rdymac has quit 06:08:48 austinhill that sounds great, but how do people verify it themselves? 06:08:55 without being a math phd 06:09:14 emcy: genuine bitcoin bank in Cyprus I believe, I'm talking about an on blockchain zero-trust cryptographic system whereby people don't need to deposit funds with 3rd parties hoping for the best 06:09:49 austinhill: I think that kind of solution is too invasive in exchanges normal operations, at least in the short term. I've just generally been proposing a simple proof of obligations and assets that shows they aren't fractional that could be published periodically (e.g. daily) 06:10:12 the downside is that it reveals their total holdings, but it wouldn't be too hard to perform in zero knoweldge. 06:11:13 rdymac has joined #bitcoin-wizards 06:11:13 gmaxwell: yeah, we can do proofs in zero-knowledge, and I think with brands based use of schoor boolean logic we can do more advanced greater then & does include your coins proof of knowledge statements 06:11:24 adam3us has quit 06:11:45 adam3us has joined #bitcoin-wizards 06:11:58 austinhill, yes, that summary is basically correct 06:11:58 but I'll need my math assistants to back me up on that statement :) Dr. Brands is a friend and will help us if needed 06:12:31 Emcy, Has Neo&Bee fully detailed their backend architecture and security setup? 06:13:11 well, they haven't fomrally described it 06:13:23 formally 06:14:02 so I agree, that it's a short term much easier implementation……we can use current 'crises' to list a manifesto or set of principles that we ask all exchanges to adhere to - would be great to shift confidence. I'm willing to pay personally for us to develop said list of principles & have within next few days sample code done so no one has an excuse not to adopt. 06:14:04 austinhill: in any case what we do need to get are business requirements. E.g. what level of privacy do they beleve they need, and how are their coins handled. 06:14:29 Would be very beneficial to an ecosystem we all believe in & need to see weather this bullshit storm 06:15:34 Can you come to the BTC house in San Mateo I rented? Let's talk. maaku was here today, adam3us arrives tomorrow, jtimon on wednesday. sipa & mattc are close behind 06:16:08 I think we convinced luke to leave his home state and join us as well. 06:16:38 adam3us has quit 06:16:51 austinhill: can i show up? 06:16:52 Well not this second, this is all horrible timing for me, I am completely saturated (and have been for some time), but I'll have time later this week. 06:16:59 a BTC house sounds like fun 06:17:00 :) 06:17:14 austinhill: good idea. Perhaps you should post a list of principles for exchanges on the subreddit. It probably could gain quite a bit of traction 06:18:30 I was in Malta with adam3us and we came up with a set of principles we think all blockchain based companies should adhere too, maybe I can post these and get feedback and see if it is worthy of posting more publicly 06:18:31 nsh has quit 06:19:02 jgarzik i dont know? 06:19:03 austinhill: what is the bitcoin house? A vacation house? 06:19:04 On this subject, see also: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1yk4nv/please_ask_your_favorite_exchange_to_prove_that/ and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7277865 06:19:46 what i meant was, an outfit comes along calling itself a bank for bitcoin and, at least, the reddit swooned. Struck me as ironic 06:19:47 copumkin: BTC houses are the future :) more of them to come 06:20:53 vis a vis the theory that people will become more discerning in thier bitcoin institutions after mtgox 06:21:28 i always saw exchangers as just a way to capitalise value into the system, not a permanent fixture. It seems now like that was naive 06:21:32 austinhill: what makes a house a BTC house? 06:21:46 another component which might work well with non-fractional-reserve proofs is time locked funds. There are a couple ways to do that. E.g. services could lock up cold funds so they aren't spendable immediately, so you have a upper bound on their drain rates... preventing them from taking the coins to vegas right after updating their proofs. 06:21:47 Emcy: we said that after mybitcoin 06:21:51 emcy: that's the problem. 50% of all BTC exchanges have closed down, stolen client funds or disappeared with money that was not their's. For a beautiful invention like trustless exchance of value we seem to be falling viction to the same old book entry system of off blockchain accounting. I needs to stop 06:22:40 austinhill: how do we move people to use clients instead of web wallets to store coins? 06:22:55 yes. I beleive it has been commented before about the lack of imagination with bitcoin. Programmable money and all that 06:22:56 justanotheruser: by building better clients 06:23:50 good hardware wallets may be an ingredient too... hard to say the much belated trezor looks like a disappointment though a move in a useful direction. 06:24:47 maaku_ for real, bitcoin core needs to pick up the pace 06:25:03 i dont mean that like work harder guys, i mean you need more people/resources 06:25:27 maaku_: is there something wrong with multibit and electrum? 06:25:29 adam3us has joined #bitcoin-wizards 06:25:54 justanotheruser: yes 06:26:20 justanotheruser: I think there is a role for cloud based wallets, but with a bettter security model then brain wallets or web wallets: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhenli_Ye_Gon Zhenli Ye Gon was arrested in his home in Mexico with more then $300 million in USD dollars, Euros and hard currency - do we really think this is the future of asset management? People creating piles of cash protected by private keys they ha 06:26:25 maaku_: Any problems with the consensus? 06:27:02 justanotheruser: neither one of those has a complete set of consensus code... 06:27:08 you realize those aren't full clients, yes? 06:27:09 haha I was telling maaku_ the story of Zhenli Ye Gon today 06:27:30 what does £300mm of cash even look like 06:27:30 austinhill: Isn't the cloud just an fancy way of saying you're giving trust to someone over your money. 06:27:47 maaku_: yes, but if one of the block headers is weird or something it could break the consensus 06:28:02 I'd like to see a public "audit website", that scraped/collected "proven reserve" data from other websites 06:28:04 raise the visibility 06:28:10 incentivize good behavior 06:28:11 Emcy: google Zhenli Ye Gon 06:28:35 gmaxwell: I'd give trezor lots of money to turn that device into a commodity that was given away at every 7eleven until we had btc secure client wallet dominance :) 06:29:09 austinhill, im not sure you quite understand what lots is with hardware development 06:29:13 ephedrine, shit its heisenberg 06:29:51 austinhill: right. the device is too costly and clunky but some later generation of that development path will solve a lot of problems. 06:30:01 maaku_: anyways, is there any reason you don't like those clients? 06:30:07 justanotheruser: no, basic mistake in crypto protocols. We can design multi-party signatores and smart contracts that allow for more complex trust agreements so a user can enjoy the benefits of the cloud & web based wallets without having seconded their trust to another party 06:30:27 jgarzik: bitcoinity (popular ticker site) has already said that they will give special preferred placement to exchanges with such infrastructure. 06:30:42 austinhill, a la https://www.belshe.com/2013/12/15/p2sh-safe-addresses/ 06:30:54 maaku_ it looks like a king size bed made out of fat stacks. Well thats good to know. 06:31:01 its interesting to me that the most innovative use of multiparty transactions is currently being done by a darknet market 06:31:08 austinhill: instead they are trusting multiple third parties? 06:31:27 nsh has joined #bitcoin-wizards 06:31:45 antephialtic, why? if something goes wrong they have nothing to lose 06:31:53 the drug markets have been burned like this 5+ times, and they adapted. now its time for everyone else to learn 06:32:01 justanotheruser: yes, I don't like clients which don't provide the same security / consensus guarantees as the reference client, or as close to it as is possible given performance constraints 06:32:31 but i'm not singling out those wallets in particular 06:32:37 jgarzick: Why do you think I want you to come join us at the BTC house :) flight is paid for …..come join it's only the future of trust that awaits you :) 06:33:16 maaku_: Well clearly those that store their coins in places they get stolen (MtGox, web wallets) care more about convenience than security. SPV is a better trade off. It is a slight inconvenience for much better security. 06:33:27 phantomcircuit: there is a site on i2p called themarketplace that uses 2-of-3 multisig escrow for all transactions 06:33:39 they even wrote a custom electrum plugin 06:34:14 not condoning drug use/sale, but it is a better implementation than anything else I've seen in the wild 06:34:38 antephialtic, im sure that's effective for those kinds of transactions 06:34:54 but consider that acceptable latency on that is several orders of magnitude larger than an exchange 06:35:47 would that be a problem if people wernt in such a rush to recreate the HFT clusterfuck 06:36:09 would any #bitcoins-wizards be willing to sit in on a open dinner with reporters this week in SFO at the BTC house adam3us and I are hosting in San Mateo to answer questions about MtGox and the crisis of confidence that popular media is misreporting on. Format would be an open Q&A for 2-3hrs from a select invite only group of the best tech writers out there who clearly understand tech & bitcoin 06:36:28 maybe change the tied of misinformation 06:37:15 I'm in the bay area, but I'm not a wizard. I just want to be one day 06:37:32 austinhill: I'm not interested in going (and other people in this room would be able to answer the questions way better than me), but could you explain what the bitcoin house is? 06:39:37 antephialtic: keep up your defense against the dark arts studies 06:40:23 I have started a new company with a few bitcoin-wizards. We don't like the way so many bitcoin investments occur off blockchain with a trust model that doesn't support the core idea of distributed trust. So we created a new company to build better software, services, and trustless infrastructures to both support bitcoin (we are altcoin haters) and change the world. So we rented a house in san mateo and have a numbe 06:40:45 maaku_, heh 06:42:06 austinhill that sounds good. Why would investors take on risk they dont really have to, unless they havent actually fundamentally understood bitcoin and whats possible? 06:42:40 maaku_: hah. I'll keep studying crypto in the meantime, seems to be a decent substitute 06:43:11 Emcy, the issue is fairly simple actually, people expect orders to execute serially, which means latency determines throughput 06:43:20 you can change this by changing the execution rules 06:43:26 but then you end up with people getting mad 06:43:40 While we see promise in coloured coins and smart contracts, we see that these systems are proposed are fundamentally flawed and require an investment & technological advancement that no one is discussion. So minus everyone debating or seeking blog posts about imaginary coloured coins we decided to undertake large scale blockchain investments. We are tried of merchants & paypal' wanna be's clollecting all the atte 06:43:43 So that's us :) 06:43:49 britcoin run with a cronjob every minute and used some pretty interesting math to calculate a reasonable middleground 06:43:54 What could we usefully hack into Bitcoin-Qt's wallet in the short term, that would improve people's security? (and motivate other wallets to follow our lead) 06:43:55 except it confused people 06:44:06 a web API to a 2FA signing robot would be easy 06:44:07 so every so often someone would pay like 10000 GBP/btc 06:44:14 when 1 BTC ~= 0.2 GBP 06:44:40 confused people, or bots? 06:44:52 austinhill: I'm game. I'm a bit reportered out... but it'll be interesting to see how the week plays out. 06:45:00 Emcy, confused people 06:45:12 the bots happily trading correctly against the confused people 06:45:16 emcy: I've raised 80 million for cypherpunk technology when everyone was on 28.8 modems…since then created hundred of millions in exists & 4 vc firms - i'm not worried about money ;) 06:45:26 jgarzik: easy enough to have a trusted oracle like that, but it begs the question of who would run it. 06:45:29 austinhill, always up for answering questions, if people need questions answered 06:45:45 austinhill, can i have $3m usd to start a us based bitcoin exchange? this is not a joke 06:45:51 brisque, I'd rather distribute that trust across multiple oracles 06:46:08 phantomcircuit, start in South Carolina, and require SC corps + IP addresses 06:46:25 state-by-state whitelist 06:46:28 jgarzik, more like idaho and require they be in idaho 06:46:50 it takes a bit more than 3m to get 47 different money transmitter licenses needed to operate legally in the US 06:46:51 gmaxwell: I'll ping you, depending on how the next few days play out - holding a truth talk may be important, but will get your OK & schedule before involving you 06:46:57 phantomcircuit, I also researched the cost of doing an incorporation and independent entity in each state 06:47:02 antephialtic, no it doesn't 06:47:04 jgarzik: is that technically doable? with normal 2FA each oracle would have enough information to cheat the others. 06:47:20 jgarzik, do you have the numbers for it? im entirely serious 06:47:24 i mean im a bit drunk 06:47:26 but also serious 06:47:33 austinhill: how close is the house to the caltrain station? 06:47:50 phantomcircuit, under $25m definitely 06:48:03 phantomcircuit, under $10m maybe, depending on factors 06:48:11 jgarzik, is that assuming that you have to post the bonds as cash? 06:48:18 We are in San Mateo, near 92 * 280 - I'll email you address - we can also subsidize uber & pick ups :) 06:48:47 phantomcircuit, yes -- least likely to screw up, though I've also heard of multi-state bonds, which this scheme would necessarily forgo (a cost, versus other models) 06:49:26 adam3us has quit 06:49:46 jgarzik, there are properly licensed bond agents which will do all 47 states for a flat fee that ends up being a massive savings over the cost of per state bonding 06:50:17 it would possibly even be cheaper to be bonded in all 47 states rather than a handful given the market 06:50:25 (or at least equivalent) 06:50:38 i guess it's time to start picking up the phone 06:50:46 (or maybe that time was a year ago) 06:51:40 Interesting thought…if you could prove you were a money transmitter in the fact that you never took possession of the funds or had control of them, could you reduce your regulatory exposure? 06:52:00 austinhill, not really no 06:52:13 but you could probably reduce the cost of the bonds 06:52:22 actually scratch that 06:52:34 the companies offering those bonds are probably not that sophisticated 06:53:31 austinhill: shesek (bitrated.com)'s advice from council was along those lines. 06:54:41 gmaxwell, iirc the federal level regulatory stuff is almost entirely about preventing money laundering (and/or dealing with SDN people) 06:54:51 state level regulation is largely about... well regulation 06:55:39 so i cant imagine reducing the real risk your business has visa ve loss of client funds really matters a lot 06:55:46 even if it should 07:00:26 i guess open contempt for regulation is probably not helpful towards licensing 07:00:31 * phantomcircuit walks away whistling 07:03:29 well, regulators just care about making sure the money transmitter doesn't provide any privacy 07:03:46 amiller: heh 07:03:46 they aren't going to insist you also have to suck at even balancing your own book 07:04:56 oooooo has quit 07:05:00 so maybe go cryptosolve all that stuff above ground and let the red fist manifesto darklibrary team solve privacy (but they don't need to hook up your bank account!) 07:06:09 gmaxwell: stilll checking out bitrated link - sorry : got caught up in other discussions with other bitcoin wizards now flying to SFO for participating in house 07:07:11 oooooo has joined #bitcoin-wizards 07:10:52 gmaxwell: out of interest, what was the total value of possible duplicate Mt Gox transactions you found? 07:11:31 brisque: I didn't add them all up, I started to but once it got over some huge number (like 80kbtc) I terminated it as an insufficiently filtered test. 07:11:58 heh. well, maybe your filters weren't so off after all. 07:12:27 well I'm pretty sure they're off, heck I suspect even one of my own transactions would have been caught. 07:12:51 flotsamuel has quit 07:12:52 problem is that they had both maximum transaction sizes and maximum daily limits on many accounts, so you _expect_ to see people doing 100 100 100 100 100... 07:13:11 (limits + joe blow reuses addresses) 07:13:23 actually no, none of mine would have been repeated because I wouldn't have reused an address. :( 07:13:26 er :) 07:13:29 damn, I was hoping for you to say you found a certain number less than 750k. the explanation they gave just makes no sense. 07:14:10 I mean, its an interesting question but I don't have a full list of their addresses so I wouldn't expect to find all of them. 07:14:29 I could add up ALL duplicate payments in the blockchain... and maybe the number will be less than 750k but I doubt it. 07:14:42 gmaxwell: What has the response been, this is totally legitimate, well presented (although I admidt a bit technical) - why aren't all exchanges not using k/n signatures being shamed everyday? Thoughts? 07:15:00 austinhill: it's a lot of software to write, simple as that 07:15:10 do you think blockchain.info keeps a copy of all the unconfirmed transactions they see? that alone would be enough to prove that it wasn't the issue they claim. 07:15:25 austinhill: k/n doesn't work for exchanges, at least not the fashion of exchanges people are using now, because it requires one slow bitcoin transaction per trade. e.g. exchange wants you to leave your coins on the orderbook. 07:15:38 brisque: someone might have had a list of all gox txn. 07:16:06 shesek: hows bitrated's traffic levels been? 07:16:12 austinhill, Why aren't bitcoin exchanges shamed into proving their reserves on a regular basis? 07:16:16 gmaxwell: I was thinking we could prove that 750k of modified transactions never existed, but that would work too. 07:16:18 Because they suck, and the crowds don't care 07:16:31 Bitcoin is too easy to program for... poorly 07:16:36 jgarzik: which is why we have ghash.io double spending and still a majority hashrate. 07:16:40 austinhill: yea, bitrated is pretty good. I recommend it to people in general. (it's web based which creates its own liabilties, but in the framework of what we can deliver today its a big step forward) 07:16:55 brisque: keep in mind that whether or not ghash.io actualy did something wrong is somewhat debatable 07:17:11 I even had my GF— who'd never used bitcoin before— beta test it with shesek so its provably usable by people who are not bitcoin-wizards. :) 07:17:38 petertodd: I was under the impression that they admitted to it? there was a post somewhere where cex.io mentions the issue had been "dealt with" 07:17:42 petertodd: well their owners agrees it was wrong. (or at least doesn't disagree strongly enough to risk arguing it. :) ) 07:18:10 brisque: the hard-line view is that miners have no responsibility, and equally, as gmaxwell points out they say the issue is "being looked into" 07:18:11 they claimed that ghash.io was commendeered by people who'd been doing contract work on it, and that these people also robbed them. 07:18:31 brisque: either view leads to the conclusion they didn't necessarily do anything wrong! 07:18:44 Yea, we don want to be careful about what duty of care we argue miners have. Saying they have none has certian important advantages. 07:18:59 I wasn't aware of the full explanation, that's interesting. 07:19:11 brisque: and people do like the instant payments and ease of use that ghash.io provides - which IMO is a perfectly rational view to take 07:19:15 gmaxwell: +1 07:20:10 petertodd: It would be easier to argue that highest fee or random replace were good miner policies if we had a faster mechenism. bleh. 07:20:25 gmaxwell: what do you mean by faster? 07:21:15 petertodd: e.g. a two-tier consensus with 1 minute blocks on the faster tier. One problem with having more average uncertanty is that it increases the need to wait for confirmations even on transactions where you generally _can_ afford a risk. 07:21:37 waiting 5 minutes isn't so bad, waiting 30 kinda sucks. 07:21:52 but perhaps this will get better if we get more instant transaction mechenisms. 07:22:01 anyone been following othercoin? 07:22:17 gmaxwell: current implementation aside, would you prefer to have a faster block time? 07:22:24 gmaxwell: right - it's an interesting thought question re: tree chains with the 1 tx per "block" per model I keep thinking about - how low can you push the block interval and still have good enough and non-gamable consensus? 07:22:44 gmaxwell: yeah, I wrote up a bunch of advice on the bitcointalk thread 07:22:56 brisque: no. 07:23:17 brisque: though some (of many possibilties) of two tier system might be interesting. 07:23:18 brisque: speed of light is surprisingly slow... 07:23:31 also there are overheads related to more blocks. 07:23:36 jgarzik: Best question of the night. All reserves should be automagically proved based on k/n signatories where funds aren't in their control (My preference) or worst case a ZKproof showing full balances and coin based participating that cant be denied 07:24:13 jgarzik: see my earlier reddit links, thats in the process of happening and there are some who are now "working on it" 07:24:27 austinhill: note that you don't need zk-proofs for this stuff: you can take customer balances and allocate them to txouts on the blockchain on a fine-grained basis that doesn't require revealing the entire balance of the service 07:24:44 petertodd: it's interesting just how slow the current network can be really. I did some investigating as a rainy-day project and found that some blocks take a lot longer to propagate than I expected. 07:24:57 austinhill: (though obvious zk-proofs can make those proofs stronger against some types of fraud - point is they aren't needed for privacy) 07:25:23 petertodd: the latency between the top 6 mining pools announcing the new work can be anywhere up to 15 seconds, which I wasn't expecting in the least. 07:26:11 brisque: among other things block messages aren't prioritized in the node-to-node communication protocol 07:26:38 petertodd: for privacy , I'd love to involve Dr. Brands, I hate the current full disclosure of balances and transaction ledger mechanisms in blockchain 1.0 : if I were building Blockchain 2.0 I'd start with a blinded identity IDE wallet structre 07:26:39 brisque: e.g. if your "pipe" is full of non-block messages your node will still process them first before processing the new block 07:27:04 petertodd: oh, wow. so enough spam transactions a second would choke up the block delivery completely? 07:27:39 petertodd: so some places don't want to disclose their total holdings. 07:27:41 I never checked, I just expected there to be a priority system. alerts, blocks, transactions, addresses. 07:27:42 austinhill: sure, though my advice might be to think in terms of a scripting language that's flexible enough that blinded identity features can be implemented on top of the basic consensus (where possible) 07:28:12 petertodd: my response to that was "fine, its possible not to do that, but you get to fund some R&D if thats really your requirement. Some of your competition doesn't mind disclosing this however." 07:28:33 gmaxwell: exactly, which is why I keep saying "take customers a, b, c and allocate their holdings to a *subset* of the total txouts you have, and have multiple merkle trees leading to multiple txouts" - but yeah, obviously more complex on the backend then just having one 07:29:01 brisque: exactly! frankly the p2p protocol and associated code is pretty primative 07:29:29 petertodd: I think they should just take the scheme we discussed previously and execute it under a ZKP for general programs. It would be similar in size to the zerocash proofs. 07:30:16 gmaxwell: a ZKP for general programs doesn't meet the crypto-blub test: "Can fine-arts graduate Peter Todd implement it over a weekend?" 07:30:23 I think there is a way using the new blind-ecdsa technique to get the signature out of the zkp too. 07:30:38 petertodd: thats what libraries are for. 07:30:58 a guy had over 4700coin on gox 07:31:01 oh my good lord 07:31:04 gmaxwell: so what? those libraries will need to be ported to multiple languages, tested, etc. etc. it's much uglier than just implementing the dumb thing first 07:31:07 Emcy: I talked to people with more than that. 07:31:36 this is going to be shitstom that defies description 07:31:38 Emcy: that's not a lot. 07:31:44