sipa changed the topic of #bitcoin-wizards to: This channel is for discussing theoretical ideas with regard to cryptocurrencies, not about short-term Bitcoin development | http://bitcoin.ninja/ | This channel is logged. | For logs and more information, visit http://bitcoin.ninja
michaelfolkson has quit [Quit: Sleep mode]
Guyver2 has quit [Quit: Going offline, see ya! (www.adiirc.com)]
michaelsdunn1 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
shesek has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
shesek has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rh0nj has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
rh0nj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
spinza has quit [Quit: Coyote finally caught up with me...]
spinza has joined #bitcoin-wizards
michaelfolkson has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ruby32 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mn3monic has quit [Excess Flood]
mn3monic has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Chris_Stewart_5 has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
alferz has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tromp has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
tromp has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rusty has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
michaelfolkson has quit [Quit: Sleep mode]
alferz has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
tombusby has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
tombusby has joined #bitcoin-wizards
shesek has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
shesek has joined #bitcoin-wizards
shesek has quit [Changing host]
shesek has joined #bitcoin-wizards
arubi has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
arubi has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ruby32 has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
michaelsdunn1 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
michaelsdunn1 has quit [Changing host]
michaelsdunn1 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
AaronvanW has quit []
michaelsdunn1 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Belkaar has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
Belkaar has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Belkaar has quit [Changing host]
Belkaar has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rh0nj has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
rh0nj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
licnep has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
nephyrin has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
nephyrin has joined #bitcoin-wizards
IGHOR has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
IGHOR has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Zenton has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
thomasan_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ruby32 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jrayhawk has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
jrayhawk has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<cjd>
Does anyone know of work done on reducing the latency between a new block being discovered and miners being able to mine on top of it ?
<cjd>
Last night, I had a thought that if one is ok with some extra complexity in the wallet software, one can make it much easier for small miners.
<cjd>
But that doesn't solve the problem that when you receive a block, you need to scratch off the transactions which were included so that you don't include them in yours
<cjd>
Imagine "coloring" each block by its height, even height = red, odd height = blue. Secondly, txouts are colored by the block where the tx was included.. Transactions spending red txouts can land in blue blocks and vice versa, no transaction can contain inputs from both red and blue txouts.
<cjd>
With that restriction, one can easily build block n+2 while waiting for n+1 to be found
<sipa>
how can value move between red blocks and blue blocks?
<cjd>
red txouts can only be spent into blue blocks, so it moves in every transaction
<sipa>
ah, i see
<cjd>
It might be interesting for projects with fast chains where nobody worries about not being in the next block
<sipa>
i think block assembly is far harder than this problem
<sipa>
but i guess this approach lets you do that ahead of time as well
<cjd>
right, you assemble ahead of time and then you basically tell your miners to switch as soon as you receive the block header (and then you rush to validate the block as fast as possible)
<sipa>
ah, but this would disallow having a txout being created and spent within the same block?
<cjd>
Wallets need to keep 2 sets of addresses and they might not be able to make a single transaction, even though they have enough money to do it.. they'll have to tell the user that it needs to be 2 transactions
<cjd>
I don't think so
<sipa>
it would be in conflict with your rule, right?
<sipa>
but perhaps there can be an exception
<cjd>
If A spends red coins into B and B spends them into C, you could include both but C is going to be blue which is not what wallet software might have expected
<cjd>
I guess the problem comes if A spends red coins into B and B spends A's coins as well as other blue coins which are laying around somewhere...
jrayhawk has quit [Quit: leaving]
jrayhawk has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jrayhawk has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
jrayhawk has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<arubi>
re: Safer sighashes and more granular SIGHASH_NOINPUT , sighash_scriptmask\op_mask is really cool. just need clarification on "for every OP_MASK in scriptCode the subsequent opcode/push is removed", does this mean "MASK 0x20 <pubkey>" removes both 0x20 and <pubkey>?
<arubi>
also if I understand the current spec correctly, a script like "MASK 1 0x20 <pubkey> CHECKSIG" will sign the same scriptcode as "MASK MASK 1 0x20 <pubkey> CHECKSIG" I think? not sure if it matters but it's an interesting edge case
thomasan_ has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
<sipa>
arubi: i meant only the immediately following opcode
<sipa>
and thinking more about it, i think MASK should require the next opcode to be a push - otherwise you can substitute a push for a non-push opcode, changing script semantics entirely
<sipa>
that would outlaw mask mask
<arubi>
I agree with only allowing masking of push ops. don't see a use for masking other opcodes
<sipa>
there may be a use for masking a variable number of pushes, such as the inputs to a CHECKMULTISIG, where the count isn't known or so
<sipa>
but that seems pretty excentric already
<arubi>
oh yea I see what you mean. it does :)
ruby32 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
ruby32 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rh0nj has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
deusexbeer has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ruby32 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
rh0nj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ruby32 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
setpill has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rusty has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ruby32 has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
Zenton has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
harrymm has joined #bitcoin-wizards
serejandmyself has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rusty has left #bitcoin-wizards [#bitcoin-wizards]
<serejandmyself>
hey!
schmidty_ has quit []
serejandmyself has left #bitcoin-wizards [#bitcoin-wizards]
tombusby has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
tombusby has joined #bitcoin-wizards
spinza has quit [Quit: Coyote finally caught up with me...]
spinza has joined #bitcoin-wizards
spinza has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
wildermind has joined #bitcoin-wizards
spinza has joined #bitcoin-wizards
shesek` has joined #bitcoin-wizards
shesek has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
shesek` has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
shesek` has joined #bitcoin-wizards
AndrewRH has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
shesek` has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
shesek` has joined #bitcoin-wizards
intcat has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
intcat has joined #bitcoin-wizards
shesek` has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
scoobybejesus has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
shesek` has joined #bitcoin-wizards
scoobybejesus has joined #bitcoin-wizards
shesek` has quit [Read error: No route to host]
shesek` has joined #bitcoin-wizards
davec_ has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
davec has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Chris_Stewart_5 has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
shesek` has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
shesek` has joined #bitcoin-wizards
root_____ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Guyver2 has quit [Quit: Going offline, see ya! (www.adiirc.com)]
rh0nj has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
spinza has quit [Quit: Coyote finally caught up with me...]
spinza has joined #bitcoin-wizards
wildermind has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
setpill has quit [Quit: o/]
ruby32 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
CheckDavid has joined #bitcoin-wizards
shesek` has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
shesek has joined #bitcoin-wizards
shesek has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
shesek has joined #bitcoin-wizards
shesek has quit [Read error: No route to host]
shesek has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<cjd>
Question: Is it possible to make a ring/threshold pubkey and signature which validates using plain old sig validation code ?
<sipa>
cjd: it depends what setup is acceptable
<cjd>
Trying to settle a discussion about whether or not you can make an x509 cert that any old browser would accept but using a ring/threshold to sign with it
<cjd>
(neither of us know the answer and googling it doesn't seem to be super helpful)
<sipa>
if what you want to do is "given a number of public keys P1, P2, P3, ..., i want to be able to construct a combined public key which any k-of-n threshold of the originals can sign for", i believe it is onoy possible for n-of-n
<cjd>
only possible for n-of-n, thanks
<sipa>
if you permit the individual keyholders to first interact and store artefacts of that interaction, anything is probably possible
<sarang>
Yes, it can be done for the threshold case with interaction
<sipa>
threshold ecdsa and threshold schnorr both exist
<cjd>
ahh, cool
<sipa>
with ecdsa this is certainly nontrivial though
<sipa>
and schnorr isn't used in certificates afaik
<sipa>
with rsa i believe multiparty constructions exist too
shesek has quit [Read error: No route to host]
Jeremy_Rand_Talo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
shesek has joined #bitcoin-wizards
meshcollider_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Chris_Stewart_5 has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
nuncanada has joined #bitcoin-wizards
devrandom has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
devrandom has joined #bitcoin-wizards
nuncanada has quit [Quit: Leaving]
Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rh0nj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
devrandom has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
devrandom has joined #bitcoin-wizards
spinza has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
spinza has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<andytoshi>
fwiw you can literally share a private key if you want 1-of-n
<andytoshi>
naturally this does not work with preexisting keys, gives you no possibility of accountability, etc
shesek has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
shesek has joined #bitcoin-wizards
shesek has quit [Changing host]
shesek has joined #bitcoin-wizards
AaronvanW has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Zenton has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
AaronvanW has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
shesek has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
enemabandit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
fabianfabian has joined #bitcoin-wizards
CheckDavid has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ruby32 has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
AaronvanW has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
kristofferR has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<wallet42>
https://tickets.events.ccc.de/35c3/ <-- last batch of tickets in 12 minutes. we'll have a bitcoin table there like every year since 2013. hope to see a lot of you!