12016-07-02T00:10:52  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  22016-07-02T00:23:51  *** pedrobranco has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  32016-07-02T00:26:57  *** TheFactory7 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  42016-07-02T00:28:07  *** pedrobranco has quit IRC
  52016-07-02T01:16:11  *** Alopex has quit IRC
  62016-07-02T01:17:16  *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  72016-07-02T01:40:32  *** LeMiner has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  82016-07-02T01:41:06  *** Alopex has quit IRC
  92016-07-02T01:42:12  *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 102016-07-02T01:50:10  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
 112016-07-02T01:54:18  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
 122016-07-02T01:54:46  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 132016-07-02T01:58:11  <adiabat> Hey I have a humble suggestion
 142016-07-02T01:58:15  <adiabat> doesn't really change functionality
 152016-07-02T01:58:30  <adiabat> right now in the getrawtransaction and getblock rpc calls
 162016-07-02T01:58:41  <adiabat> there's size and Vsize for a tx
 172016-07-02T01:58:53  <adiabat> and strippedsize, size, and cost for a block
 182016-07-02T01:59:07  <adiabat> as far as I can tell, cost is just Vsize * 4
 192016-07-02T01:59:28  <gmaxwell> nope, you're not looking at segwit transactions.
 202016-07-02T01:59:59  <adiabat> ok wait, what's the relationship of cost and Vsize
 212016-07-02T02:00:43  <adiabat> I thought Vsize was normalized to 1M;  (Wsize + 3*strippedsize) / 4
 222016-07-02T02:03:52  <gmaxwell> It's (cost + 3) / 4; technically.  Cost is size + 3*strippedsize.
 232016-07-02T02:04:31  <adiabat> ok but so, Vsize is cost /4, round up.
 242016-07-02T02:04:49  <gmaxwell> yes.
 252016-07-02T02:05:03  <adiabat> could you say a tx has a cost?
 262016-07-02T02:05:15  <adiabat> seems like you could...
 272016-07-02T02:05:38  <gmaxwell> Yes I just did?
 282016-07-02T02:05:56  <adiabat> right, so I'm just suggesting, for rpc calls, return the cost of the tx
 292016-07-02T02:05:57  <gmaxwell> (there is a problem with using the word cost, annoyingly, it seems like it gets confused with fee)
 302016-07-02T02:06:02  <adiabat> yeahhhh I know
 312016-07-02T02:06:05  <gmaxwell> when it's just an abstract unit.
 322016-07-02T02:06:19  <adiabat> It's just that right now it's a bit confusing because blocks have cost and txs have Vsize
 332016-07-02T02:06:23  *** bsm1175321 has quit IRC
 342016-07-02T02:06:49  <adiabat> seems like you could say that txs also have cost with no real loss of information
 352016-07-02T02:07:19  <gmaxwell> they do, the vsize is strictly a lossy unit.
 362016-07-02T02:07:34  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
 372016-07-02T02:08:03  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 382016-07-02T02:08:06  <gmaxwell> I agree they should be consistent. And really, they should be the cost unit..
 392016-07-02T02:08:13  <gmaxwell> I wish we had a better word than cost.
 402016-07-02T02:08:16  <adiabat> OK cool that's what I'm saying
 412016-07-02T02:08:24  <adiabat> with txs now, you see:
 422016-07-02T02:08:27  <adiabat>   "size": 38919,
 432016-07-02T02:08:27  <adiabat>   "Vsize": 26433,
 442016-07-02T02:09:05  <adiabat> but you could return "size": 38919, "cost": 105732
 452016-07-02T02:09:28  <adiabat> that way it's more consistent and one less name to keep track of for users
 462016-07-02T02:11:41  *** davec_ has quit IRC
 472016-07-02T02:18:45  *** cryptapus_afk is now known as cryptapus
 482016-07-02T02:20:37  *** davec_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 492016-07-02T02:44:42  *** PaulCape_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 502016-07-02T02:48:27  *** PaulCapestany has quit IRC
 512016-07-02T02:49:52  <CubicEarth> gmaxwell:  Thinking about your 'carving a block of marble' analogy for forks, and thinking about the nature of Bitcoin, I tend to think that anything can be accomplished with a 'soft-fork', such as effectively raising the coin limit, etc.  I see it like a nested-universe scenario, but in the marble analogy... take the statue of David.  Say we find ourselves disappointed that Michelangelo didn't give David
 522016-07-02T02:49:52  <CubicEarth> two heads.  We could basically carve a miniature replica of David out of the right butt-cheek of the full size version, with the 'replica' having two heads.  In real life there would be problems with absolute scale, but I don't see a parallel in code.
 532016-07-02T02:50:34  <CubicEarth> Perhaps I am taking the analogy too far.
 542016-07-02T02:51:09  <gmaxwell> You can try, but it's not invisible or non-consentual.
 552016-07-02T02:51:22  <gmaxwell> Imagine that you try to make more coins.. well no existing wallet will reconize or accept those coins.
 562016-07-02T02:51:44  <gmaxwell> you pay me some 0 value output that the softfork reconizes as the extra coins. fine.. but my wallet will see it as zero.
 572016-07-02T02:52:08  <CubicEarth> That is true
 582016-07-02T02:52:14  <CubicEarth> Thankfully
 592016-07-02T02:52:47  <gmaxwell> so the most you could do is try to also DOS attack me to force me into going along with that change and accepting those coins, but that reduces to a power miners always have (DOS attacking users) which has a tidy solution: change the POW to fire the service provider (miners) that are screwing over the users and not faithfully including ordinary transactions.
 602016-07-02T02:55:47  *** Ylbam has quit IRC
 612016-07-02T03:03:59  *** TheFactory7 has quit IRC
 622016-07-02T03:04:38  *** cryptapus has quit IRC
 632016-07-02T03:10:42  *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 642016-07-02T03:10:42  *** cryptapus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 652016-07-02T04:40:38  *** adiabat has quit IRC
 662016-07-02T04:44:56  *** kvnn has quit IRC
 672016-07-02T04:45:06  *** Alopex has quit IRC
 682016-07-02T04:46:11  *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 692016-07-02T04:47:17  *** netsin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 702016-07-02T04:47:54  *** jiggalator has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 712016-07-02T04:48:12  *** jiggalator is now known as netsin
 722016-07-02T04:51:54  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
 732016-07-02T04:53:03  *** netsin has quit IRC
 742016-07-02T05:03:29  *** CyrusV` has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 752016-07-02T05:04:49  *** tadasv has quit IRC
 762016-07-02T05:04:49  *** CyrusV has quit IRC
 772016-07-02T05:04:49  *** CubicEarth has quit IRC
 782016-07-02T05:04:49  *** jonasschnelli has quit IRC
 792016-07-02T05:04:49  *** whphhg has quit IRC
 802016-07-02T05:04:50  *** michagogo has quit IRC
 812016-07-02T05:05:10  *** jonasschnelli_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 822016-07-02T05:23:13  *** whphhg has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 832016-07-02T05:23:27  *** CubicEarth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 842016-07-02T05:30:28  *** cryptapus is now known as cryptapus_afk
 852016-07-02T05:31:49  *** netsin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 862016-07-02T05:35:43  *** CubicEar_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 872016-07-02T05:39:21  *** CubicEar_ has quit IRC
 882016-07-02T05:39:28  *** CubicEarth has quit IRC
 892016-07-02T05:39:36  *** CubicEarth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 902016-07-02T05:48:58  *** pedrobranco has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 912016-07-02T05:53:06  *** pedrobranco has quit IRC
 922016-07-02T05:55:10  *** netsin has quit IRC
 932016-07-02T06:03:02  *** Alopex has quit IRC
 942016-07-02T06:04:07  *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 952016-07-02T06:24:11  *** Alopex has quit IRC
 962016-07-02T06:25:16  *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 972016-07-02T06:33:55  *** netsin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 982016-07-02T06:34:14  *** netsin has quit IRC
 992016-07-02T06:41:07  *** baldur has quit IRC
1002016-07-02T07:04:02  *** Alopex has quit IRC
1012016-07-02T07:05:07  *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1022016-07-02T07:20:16  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1032016-07-02T08:15:03  *** CyrusV` is now known as CyrusV5
1042016-07-02T08:15:05  *** CyrusV5 is now known as CyrusV
1052016-07-02T08:26:18  *** baldur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1062016-07-02T08:30:57  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
1072016-07-02T08:35:18  *** paveljanik has quit IRC
1082016-07-02T08:49:09  *** paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1092016-07-02T08:49:09  *** paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1102016-07-02T08:59:36  *** murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1112016-07-02T09:02:34  *** spudowiar has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1122016-07-02T09:08:21  *** LeMiner2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1132016-07-02T09:10:49  *** LeMiner has quit IRC
1142016-07-02T09:10:49  *** LeMiner2 is now known as LeMiner
1152016-07-02T09:24:49  *** murch1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1162016-07-02T09:25:57  *** murch has quit IRC
1172016-07-02T09:32:49  *** spudowiar has quit IRC
1182016-07-02T09:34:52  *** Chubbyurf88 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1192016-07-02T09:38:45  *** murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1202016-07-02T09:39:54  *** murch1 has quit IRC
1212016-07-02T09:50:33  *** murch has quit IRC
1222016-07-02T09:52:40  *** tadasv has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1232016-07-02T09:53:11  *** murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1242016-07-02T10:25:09  *** beany has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1252016-07-02T10:44:10  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1262016-07-02T10:47:38  *** beany has quit IRC
1272016-07-02T10:52:54  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
1282016-07-02T12:00:13  *** murch1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1292016-07-02T12:01:12  *** dgenr8 has quit IRC
1302016-07-02T12:01:24  *** murch has quit IRC
1312016-07-02T12:06:33  *** murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1322016-07-02T12:06:37  *** murch1 has quit IRC
1332016-07-02T12:18:48  *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1342016-07-02T12:21:37  *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1352016-07-02T12:28:47  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1362016-07-02T12:49:03  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
1372016-07-02T13:34:45  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1382016-07-02T13:56:53  *** dgenr8 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1392016-07-02T14:03:19  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
1402016-07-02T14:07:06  *** musalbas has quit IRC
1412016-07-02T14:12:51  *** musalbas has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1422016-07-02T14:26:36  *** TheFactory7 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1432016-07-02T14:29:28  *** murch1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1442016-07-02T14:29:48  *** murch has quit IRC
1452016-07-02T14:30:29  *** dgenr8 has quit IRC
1462016-07-02T14:31:32  *** dgenr8 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1472016-07-02T14:39:11  *** murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1482016-07-02T14:40:17  *** murch1 has quit IRC
1492016-07-02T14:56:27  *** Inaltoas1nistra has quit IRC
1502016-07-02T15:44:32  *** murch has quit IRC
1512016-07-02T15:59:50  <dgenr8> <gmaxwell> These folks are extremely and dangerously incompetent.
1522016-07-02T15:59:58  <dgenr8> Don't be so hard on yourself.  The last core checkpoint was 4 months old when added to a release candidate.
1532016-07-02T16:00:06  <dgenr8> That's the same as XT when 4 script checking threads are enabled
1542016-07-02T16:00:12  <dgenr8> Your 1-day figure is off by a factor of 30
1552016-07-02T16:08:20  <dgenr8> ...
1562016-07-02T16:08:21  <dgenr8> The partition risk to XT is a result of your sneak attack on its usage of bip37 for the original thin blocks mechanism. Thanks for that.
1572016-07-02T16:24:32  *** Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1582016-07-02T16:27:51  <luke-jr> sure, blame us for your bugs..
1592016-07-02T16:28:33  <luke-jr> you could have easily taken petertodd's patch to prefer RBF connections and used it for thin blocks instead
1602016-07-02T16:32:21  *** spudowiar has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1612016-07-02T16:46:16  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1622016-07-02T16:52:04  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1632016-07-02T17:06:28  *** molz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1642016-07-02T17:06:50  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1652016-07-02T17:06:59  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
1662016-07-02T17:09:04  *** moli has quit IRC
1672016-07-02T18:06:51  *** harrymm has quit IRC
1682016-07-02T18:20:27  *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1692016-07-02T18:20:48  *** spudowiar is now known as jcase
1702016-07-02T18:20:55  *** jcase has quit IRC
1712016-07-02T18:21:50  *** jcase has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1722016-07-02T18:22:18  *** jcase is now known as spudowiar
1732016-07-02T18:22:43  *** jannes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1742016-07-02T18:23:21  *** netsin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1752016-07-02T18:28:05  *** netsin has quit IRC
1762016-07-02T18:34:53  *** netsin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1772016-07-02T18:35:12  *** mkarrer has quit IRC
1782016-07-02T18:36:45  *** mkarrer has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1792016-07-02T18:38:59  *** netsin has quit IRC
1802016-07-02T18:48:15  *** netsin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1812016-07-02T18:49:49  *** netsin has quit IRC
1822016-07-02T18:51:00  *** netsin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1832016-07-02T18:52:06  *** netsin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1842016-07-02T18:53:16  *** netsin has quit IRC
1852016-07-02T18:59:18  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1862016-07-02T19:01:21  *** netsin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1872016-07-02T19:42:16  *** spudowiar has quit IRC
1882016-07-02T19:42:36  *** spudowiar has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1892016-07-02T20:03:28  *** CubicEarth has quit IRC
1902016-07-02T20:11:47  *** spudowiar has quit IRC
1912016-07-02T20:12:53  <gmaxwell> dgenr8: Tom, your claim that I maliciously undermined XT is libelous and unsupported by the facts. I already responded to that claim in depth https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/43iup7/mike_hearn_implemented_a_test_version_of_thin/czipysi
1922016-07-02T20:13:04  *** CubicEarth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1932016-07-02T20:16:14  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
1942016-07-02T20:26:56  *** moli has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1952016-07-02T20:28:50  *** molz has quit IRC
1962016-07-02T20:56:06  *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1972016-07-02T20:59:34  <gmaxwell> dgenr8: Checkpoints, dumb as they are, reference a particular block, they're not subject to miners claiming old times on blocks. The code in classic, at least, triggered at one day, and I've already tested making it accept invalid blocks on a chain without reorg. If you backed it off to make it more sensible then good for you, but triggering on header timestamps is still incompetent.
1982016-07-02T21:47:21  <dgenr8> If you choose not to explain your test, we'll have to assume you gave yourself 100% hash power and control of the local clock
1992016-07-02T21:52:43  *** spudowiar has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2002016-07-02T22:04:09  <gmaxwell> dgenr8: I immediately pointed out the attack when classic proposed this fool scheme. Miners can widen the permitted time back arbritarily far, and then a single block can be created that breaks the rules without any reorg at all. No clock control is required.
2012016-07-02T22:04:44  <gmaxwell> The fact that you also didn't immediately sees this shows that you are probably not qualified to be maintaining an implementation that makes security critical changes such as this.
2022016-07-02T22:05:14  <gmaxwell> The fact that it's possible for miners to widen the accepted time window has been well known since at least 2011.
2032016-07-02T22:07:25  <gmaxwell> (google "timewarp attack" for a description on widening the accepted timestamp window)
2042016-07-02T22:08:28  <gmaxwell> Though even if that attack didn't exist, and it did require all the blocks to agree, it still wouldn't require changes to the local clock... and it _still_ would be a change to the security model that deserved the loudest possible disclosure.
2052016-07-02T22:18:53  *** spudowiar has quit IRC
2062016-07-02T22:24:13  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
2072016-07-02T22:31:44  *** moli has quit IRC
2082016-07-02T22:31:46  *** molz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2092016-07-02T22:37:29  *** spudowiar has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2102016-07-02T22:44:38  <kanzure> and even if local time change was required, aren't lots of time protocols busted anyway?
2112016-07-02T22:44:54  *** spudowiar has quit IRC
2122016-07-02T22:48:32  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2132016-07-02T22:48:50  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
2142016-07-02T22:49:38  <gmaxwell> yes, including the one built into bitcoin's p2p protocol, though thats several layers of irrelevance down the line. (also an attacker who can influence that one is already too powerful)
2152016-07-02T23:27:11  <kanzure> yeah but who needs clock time when you have block time (/cringe)
2162016-07-02T23:27:49  <dgenr8> So yeah, well over 51% hash power required
2172016-07-02T23:32:18  <gmaxwell> so now you've gone from 100% and local clock control to over 51%.  Actually that isn't quite correct still.
2182016-07-02T23:33:32  <gmaxwell> A majority hashpower is needed to open the time window, but once it does, anyone can produce an invalid block.   Moreover, when synchronizing, a partitioned node will accept a backdated invalid chain -- even if the attacker had far less than a majority hashpower.
2192016-07-02T23:39:51  <dgenr8> XT, like Core, is vulnerable to 51% of hash power doing all sorts of nasty things.  And a partitioned Core node is vulnerable to an invalid backdated chain prior to the checkpoints.
2202016-07-02T23:47:44  <gmaxwell> No, the scriptsig skipping is pinned to a particular well known chain hardcoded in the software. This chain is not invalid.
2212016-07-02T23:49:01  <gmaxwell> The primary, nearly exclusive, argument provided to why someone won't overpower the network (e.g. briefly) is becaues there isn't much that they can do with it. They can't just blank-check write themselve an extra 100,000 Bitcoin.  They can DOS attack and double spend their own payments.
2222016-07-02T23:49:04  *** foo1 has quit IRC
2232016-07-02T23:50:21  *** foo1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2242016-07-02T23:50:34  <gmaxwell> You and your community (while you withhold contradiction) have regularly and agressivly attacked very narrow soft-forks because they cause some non-upgraded warning-spewing nodes to not check a few new rules introduced, and then nearly silently and without fanfair you roll out a feature that makes every node running your software check no signatures at all on any block when the miner provided ti
2252016-07-02T23:50:40  <gmaxwell> mestamp is old.
2262016-07-02T23:51:31  <gmaxwell> and you have done so without even actually understanding the effect, as demonstrated by your above "100% hashpower and control of the local clock"
2272016-07-02T23:51:52  <kanzure> iirc they are fine with malicious miners and rule invalidity
2282016-07-02T23:52:00  <kanzure> e.g. "it's up to the miners"
2292016-07-02T23:52:14  <gmaxwell> kanzure: not so, or they would have nothing to complain about softforks at all.
2302016-07-02T23:52:16  <kanzure> i don't mean to strawman anyone but it would explain the observation
2312016-07-02T23:52:22  <kanzure> ah hmm
2322016-07-02T23:52:46  <gmaxwell> don't mistake pure politics for technical understanding or logic.
2332016-07-02T23:54:30  <kanzure> maybe it's more of a "just query the miners" sentiment. dunno. but rapidly off-topic from my end for this channel.