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
tripleslash has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
jtimon has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
jtimon has joined #bitcoin-wizards
alferz has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-wizards
dEBRUYNE_ has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
Pugg has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
AaronvanW has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
Pugg has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Jeremy_Rand has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
jtimon has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
Emcy_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jaekwon has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jtimon has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Emcy has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
dgenr8 has quit [Quit: Leaving]
tripleslash has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
simba has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
arowser has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jaekwon has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
jtimon has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
jaekwon has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jtimon has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Yoghur114 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
sausage_factory has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
JackH has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tripleslash has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
licnep has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
Ylbam has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tripleslash has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
p15 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tripleslash_g has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Lightsword has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
Lightsword has joined #bitcoin-wizards
belcher has quit [Quit: Leaving]
tripleslash_g has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
GGuyZ has quit [Quit: GGuyZ]
GGuyZ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tripleslash has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
dev141 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GGuyZ has quit [Quit: GGuyZ]
tripleslash has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
dEBRUYNE_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
dEBRUYNE_ has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-wizards
davec has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
davec has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tripleslash has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
Newyorkadam has quit [Quit: Newyorkadam]
the`doctor has quit [Quit: the`doctor]
PaulCape_ has quit [Quit: .]
adam3us has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
PaulCapestany has joined #bitcoin-wizards
dgenr8 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tulip has joined #bitcoin-wizards
simba has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Newyorkadam has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Newyorkadam has quit [Client Quit]
GGuyZ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
archobserver has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
[7] has quit [Disconnected by services]
TheSeven has joined #bitcoin-wizards
melvster has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
archobserver has joined #bitcoin-wizards
melvster has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Giszmo has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
c-cex-finch has joined #bitcoin-wizards
the`doctor has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Luke-Jr has quit [Excess Flood]
Luke-Jr has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Luke-Jr has quit [Excess Flood]
alferz has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GGuyZ has quit [Quit: GGuyZ]
Burrito has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
sparetire_ has quit [Quit: sparetire_]
the`doctor has quit [Quit: the`doctor]
tripleslash has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
pigeons has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
pigeons has joined #bitcoin-wizards
pigeons is now known as Guest32712
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
adam3us has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jaekwon_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
p15 has quit [Max SendQ exceeded]
jaekwon has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
tripleslash has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
prosodyCagain is now known as prosody
adam3us has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
adam3us has joined #bitcoin-wizards
DougieBot5000 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
DougieBot5000 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jaekwon_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
p15 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
p15x has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tulip has quit []
snthsnth has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
adam3us has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
sipi has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-wizards
matsjj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Lightsword has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
Lightsword has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
MoALTz has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
damethos has joined #bitcoin-wizards
priidu has joined #bitcoin-wizards
DougieBot5000 has quit [Quit: Leaving]
mjerr has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
matsjj has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
ielo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mjerr has joined #bitcoin-wizards
matsjj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
publius1788 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
publius1788 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
midnightmagic has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
simba has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Lightsword has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
tripleslash has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
tulip has joined #bitcoin-wizards
bramc has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
Lightsword has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mountaingoat has quit [Quit: WeeChat 1.3]
mountaingoat has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-wizards
damethos has quit [Quit: Bye]
JackH has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
MoALTz has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jcluck has joined #bitcoin-wizards
MoALTz has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
cluckj has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
damethos has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Luke-Jr has joined #bitcoin-wizards
CoinMuncher has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tripleslash has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
Piper-Off is now known as Monthrect
mrkent has quit []
dEBRUYNE_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jaekwon has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jaekwon has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
tripleslash has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
rubensayshi has joined #bitcoin-wizards
roconnor has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
moa has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
ielo has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
simba has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
tripleslash_h has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tripleslash_h has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
simba has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
sipi has quit [Quit: Leaving]
matsjj has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
matsjj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-wizards
AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-wizards
orik has joined #bitcoin-wizards
p15x has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
p15 has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
Tiraspol has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
dEBRUYNE_ has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
bedeho_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mjerr has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
bedeho_ has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
matsjj has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
matsjj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mjerr has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
Burrito has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tripleslash has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
dEBRUYNE_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-wizards
simba has joined #bitcoin-wizards
simba has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
arowser has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
arowser has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tripleslash has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
c-cex-yuriy has joined #bitcoin-wizards
dave4925 has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
tripleslash_d has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Guest32712 is now known as pigeons
tripleslash_d has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GGuyZ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
midnightmagic has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tripleslash has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
Tiraspol has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Tiraspol has joined #bitcoin-wizards
hashtag_ has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
arowser has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
arowser has joined #bitcoin-wizards
orik has quit [Quit: My Mac has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
<bsm1175321>
Long term, I want to find a way to get time back into bitcoin. I know it's a taboo topic, but the 2-hour/2-week granularity of bitcoin's time measurements are just silly, we could do a lot better without introducing vulnerabilities.
adam3us has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GAit has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
<gmaxwell>
bsm1175321: thats a big claim to make when even the existing configuration presents vulnerabilties.
cocoBTC has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<kanzure>
i feel like the software should come with stronger statements/requirements/guarantees (dunno which) about referential frames
adam3us has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
priidu has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
adam3us has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rubensayshi has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
adam3us has quit [Client Quit]
<bsm1175321>
gmaxwell: It's an area that needs attention, that's for sure.
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<phy1729>
kanzure: you mean account for relativistic problems?
dudewayne has joined #bitcoin-wizards
priidu has joined #bitcoin-wizards
simba has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<kanzure>
well not just problems, but requirements, but yes.
adam3us has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<phy1729>
should just use TAI then
ielo is now known as sixyearolds
mrkent has joined #bitcoin-wizards
simba has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
sixyearolds is now known as flipswitchbitch
Piper-Off is now known as Monthrect
koshii has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
koshii has joined #bitcoin-wizards
damethos has quit [Quit: Bye]
mrkent has quit []
Yoghur114 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
mrkent has joined #bitcoin-wizards
pozitron has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
matsjj has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
GAit has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
priidu has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
MoALTz has quit [Quit: Leaving]
GAit has quit [Client Quit]
mjerr has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
GAit has joined #bitcoin-wizards
GAit has quit [Client Quit]
bedeho_ has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
MoALTz has joined #bitcoin-wizards
simba has joined #bitcoin-wizards
pozitrono has joined #bitcoin-wizards
dEBRUYNE_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
simba has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
andytoshi has quit [Changing host]
andytoshi has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Ylbam has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
arowser has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
arowser has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
dudewayne has left #bitcoin-wizards ["WeeChat 1.2"]
priidu has joined #bitcoin-wizards
pozitrono has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
maraoz has joined #bitcoin-wizards
maraoz has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
matsjj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
matsjj has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
bramc has joined #bitcoin-wizards
aj has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
MoALTz has quit [Quit: Leaving]
<kanzure>
"Current average non-cash tps globally is 12,357tps. Average non-cash transactions increase by around 7% per year. This would mean that by year 2040 it would be 67,067tps."
<kanzure>
why 7% increase in transactions-per-second? is there a study about this?
<kanzure>
why would the rate be linear..? is this about capacity, or is this about actual demand?
<kanzure>
s/actual demand/... hm that's a hrad concept.
<kanzure>
*hard
<gmaxwell>
increased population, increased industrialization, and deprecation of cash would all be obvious candidate drivers.
<bsm1175321>
Everything is linear because people are too lazy to do a more comprehensive analysis.
CoinMuncher has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
AnoAnon has joined #bitcoin-wizards
AnoAnon has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<phy1729>
on a small enough scale, all functions are linear
<sipa>
all continuous functions, yes :)
<phy1729>
all functions that are differentable in a neighborhood of the point of interest
<gmaxwell>
e^x is linear?
dasource has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<gmaxwell>
considering that all its derivatives are also e^x, that would be a pretty tortured definition of 'linear'. :P
<phy1729>
gmaxwell: y=e^{x_0}(x-x_0)+e^{x_0} is linear
<sipa>
gmaxwell: e^x is very linear when restricted to an arbitrarily small domain :)
jaekwon has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
simba has joined #bitcoin-wizards
aj_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<gwillen>
simba: the theorem says 'polynomial', not linear :-P
<gmaxwell>
thats linear.
<gwillen>
er, sipa
aj_ is now known as aj
aj has quit [Client Quit]
aj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<sipa>
gwillen: it should say "polynomial of any degree, including 1"
<sipa>
gwillen: wait, wrong theorem!
<gmaxwell>
but what I was objecting to was more the approximated. :)
<gwillen>
heh :-)
<gmaxwell>
(there is no polynomal that is _exactly_ e^x on any interval no matter how small or how high the degree)
<sipa>
gmaxwell: the theorem i'm looking for is one that says that any continuous function can be locally aproximated by a linear function in an epsilon-environment around any point
<phy1729>
ok on a small enough scale, all functions *look* linear
<waxwing>
repeat after me, "given epsilon greater than zero, ..."
<gmaxwell>
phy1729: heh. yea.
<phy1729>
waxwing: \forall\epsilon>0
<sipa>
gmaxwell, phy1729: all continuous functions :)
<gmaxwell>
phy1729: the lying with graphs theorem. :)
* phy1729
makes a note to append every word with a * while sipa is watching
<bsm1175321>
sipa: you may be looking for the definition of a continuous function (Weierstrauss definition, aka epsilon-delta)
<bsm1175321>
I didn't think continuous math was allowed in here. ;-)
<gmaxwell>
topic for discussion then, The mean of the interblock intervals is the ML estimator for the distribution paramter assuming a stationary hashrate; but that estimator is biased. The unbiased estimator is scale by (n-1)/n where n is the number of observations. Hypothesis: the biased estimator is less desirable for difficulty control.
davec has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
davec has joined #bitcoin-wizards
MoALTz has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ciege has joined #bitcoin-wizards
d4de has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jaekwon has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<aj>
sipa: "any continuously differentiable function" not just continuous; abs(x) is continuous but can't be approximated by a linear function at x=0
<phy1729>
"all functions that are differentable in a neighborhood of the point of interest"
PaulCapestany has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
<bsm1175321>
it's an approximation though
bramc has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
<bsm1175321>
gmaxwell: FWIW in building a DAG I'm using an actual likelihood to determine which chain-tip has the most work. I'm also allowing nodes to set their targets on their own, so a DAG-tip will contain blocks with many different work targets. The log likelihood is easy enough to compute, there's no reason to collapse it to a biased (or unbiased) estimator.
kyuupichan has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<bsm1175321>
gmaxwell: You're talking about something slightly different though since bitcoin's target difficulty is a consensus parameter. The error in using a biased estimator can be directly translated into slightly more BTC/time on average, but other than that is pretty unimportant. I think we need to stick with the biased estimator because miners would balk to find that we twiddled their income.
Quanttek has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<bsm1175321>
(not to mention hard fork concerns)
Quanttek has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<bsm1175321>
For reference, the likelihood is the product of the Poisson probabilities for the observed blocks. One usually takes the log and compares log-likelihoods. By the Neyman-Pearson lemma this is the most powerful test one can do. I'm performing a hypothesis test that tip A contains more work than tip B. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neyman%E2%80%93Pearson_lemma
aj has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
PaulCape_ has quit [Quit: .]
PaulCapestany has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Guyver2 has quit [Quit: :)]
dave4925 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
belcher has joined #bitcoin-wizards
bramc has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<bramc>
Real world functions tend to be very noisy and look like noisy fractals at any scale, meaning random walks.
Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-wizards
go1111111 has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
GGuyZ has quit [Quit: GGuyZ]
adam3us has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
joesmoe has joined #bitcoin-wizards
go1111111 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
aj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
dasource has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
fuc has joined #bitcoin-wizards
kang_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<bramc>
First draft of the simplest function complete! Sorry for whoever has to unroll this crap in the C port.
kyuupichan has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<bramc>
This is some serious recursion right here
MoALTz has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
MoALTz has joined #bitcoin-wizards
kyuupichan has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
TBI_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
TBI has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
kyuupichan has joined #bitcoin-wizards
tulip has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<bramc>
Oh that's a weird subtlety: in the most straightforward patricia tree you can't have proofs of inclusion or disinclusion when there's only a single element included
<bramc>
I mean, when there's only a single thing in your set. Because you can't prove anything about it.
<bramc>
Not sure how best to special case that.
psztorc_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
psztorc has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<bramc>
Maybe it's best that when there's only a single thing in the set the root is just the hash of that thing.
flipswitchbitch has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<bramc>
Oh ugh, no it isn't just a single special case, for proofs in general it needs to hash in information about whether each thing is terminal
<bramc>
gmaxwell, Presumably there are quite a few accepted transactions which have to get grandfathered in?
<gmaxwell>
bramc: standard for softforks: it will only apply after it's activation point.
<bramc>
gmaxwell, Right, but I think most soft forks don't need to grandfather anything in
simba has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<gmaxwell>
Some we've managed with no violations, but not all.
<gmaxwell>
the activation will eventually get reduced to a height check.
<gmaxwell>
BIP30 was somewhat special, since we actually have to enforce it everywhere (Even before it was invented) to prevent local database corruption.
<bramc>
Does BIP113 make time-based unlocks 'okay' or are they still a basically broken concept and strictly inferior to block height based?
<tulip>
bramc: I don't think there's many transactions in the chain using a non-height based nLockTime, but Bitcoin Core now signs transactions with a height based nLockTime though.
<bramc>
tulip, So then why doesn't the fork ban time-based nLockTime altogether?
<gmaxwell>
bramc: it makes them okay.
<midnightmagic>
mining incentives as a whole operates as though miners' groupthink achieves consensus as a result of identical end conclusion. therefore, even though miners are decentralized, if the incentive exists to fudge time, mining decentralization will not alter the end result. BIP113, if it uses MTP, therefore would have to achieve its effect through miner inertia/apathy/lack of global coordination.
<gmaxwell>
bramc: because the block-time controller is not precise enough if you want a 'hit the right day' lock two months from now.
<gmaxwell>
Mostly because it's relatively slow and because it has no integral-error term in its control.
<bramc>
gmaxwell, Median of the last 11 might be a little loose. I'd prefer median of some larger number
<gmaxwell>
I know, we can always make it stricter in the future. 11 had the nice property that it's already used to define the minimum blocktime for a block.
<midnightmagic>
median time of that small number would make it inline with reverse-looking block time variance maximum.
<bramc>
I think a 20% miner would get to set the median of last 11 once every couple days
<gmaxwell>
bramc: to benefit you have to set it, AND you have to mine the next block.
<gmaxwell>
so you effectively have to mine 6 blocks in the window, plus the next block.
<gmaxwell>
And if you miss it, someone else gets the benefit.
<gmaxwell>
(assuming you're trying to blow the time an hour into the future rather than twiddling it around by a few seconds)
<bramc>
gmaxwell, Assuming that others will opportunistically take your own ill-gotten gains if given the chance but not contribute to it themselves then yes, fudging doesn't buy anything for miners
<gmaxwell>
A more conservative scheme would actually use the minimum of a window, instead of the median.
<bramc>
Does that mean that the default mining software should do that sort of opportunistic stealing?
<midnightmagic>
that calculation is something that someone *using* locktime just needs to include in their calculations of when to set the locktime for, similarly to how people must decide how many confirmations they're willing to risk when receiving funds.
<bramc>
minimum of a window can be similarly pushed out by forcing up the global time
<gmaxwell>
in any case, the goal there was the simplest possible thing that (1) breaks expectation that the threshold is the "time" (whatever that means), and (2) minimum needed to avoid forming a unconstrained powerful incentive to lie for every miner regardless of how low their hashpower was.
<gmaxwell>
e.g. require a conspiracy instead of merely just locally greedy behavior.
<bramc>
midnightmagic, Oh good point. In that case it's just important that the mining software cash in on whatever transactions it can include based on its stated time rather than the real time. There's a question of propagation though.
<bramc>
gmaxwell, Fair enough, it seems to mostly do that, and caveat emptor and you can always use block height if you don't trust it.
<gmaxwell>
I would have liked to make it min not median, e.g. 10 of 11 security instead of 6 of 11 security; but right now times on blocks are kinda wacked in general. :(
<tulip>
bramc: you can go pretty far with making "rational" mining software to the point of just being active disruption to the network. especially with the mining reward halving, it's quite realistic to have blocks with more fees than reward which it would be profitable to try to push out of the chain.
<gmaxwell>
yea, we're not really trying to protect time-based-locktime users; we're trying to prevent them from providing local incentives to screw up the network. :)
<bramc>
tulip, Right, you might want to orphan an old block so you can steal its fees. Hopefully fees are smoothed out enough to not make that such a hot idea
<gmaxwell>
bramc: Bitcoin Core 0.12 will very likely lock every transaction it creates at the current height to help discourage that.
<bramc>
Although that does create the bizarre potential for a hot potato transaction, which has very high fees by itself, incenting it to be orphaned, which incents people to not include it in the first place...
<midnightmagic>
I think forcing up the global time requires mass-sybil, will be noticed by miners, would require that no miners take action to correct it (and thus correct likely orphan problems resulting,) and that no users who care about the accuracy of the network also do nothing to correct it, nor notice it nand let everyone know about it
<gmaxwell>
right now it locks 10 back.
<tulip>
in the past 500 blocks there have been 420,000 transactions, 74,000 of them are nlocktimed with a block height, 105 are locked with a timestamp.
<bramc>
tulip, Ouch that's a nontrivial amount
<gmaxwell>
tulip: are you checking finality too?
<sipa>
gmaxwell: i hope that transactions in the chain are final...
<bramc>
Maybe I can fix the cases of only containing a single element or one element by just throwing in two garbage elements right off the bat
<bramc>
If they're 0x00... and 0x111... then that simplifies proofs of inclusion and disinclusion quite a bit.
<gmaxwell>
sipa: pedant, I just mean if they max seq the locktime field is irrelevant.
<tulip>
gmaxwell: not for that statistic, I just assumed that people aren't signing massive amounts of 0xFFFFFFFF sequence nlocktimes transactions for no reason.
<bramc>
That hack I just said is somewhat nauseating, but it sure makes implementation easier
<gmaxwell>
tulip: This is bitcoin!
<bramc>
Is anybody following my babbling about merkle sets? If not, does anybody mind me doing it here?
<gmaxwell>
Semi following, I do not mind (quite the opposite)
<bramc>
Okay, I'll keep up the occasional babbling. It helps me think.
<gmaxwell>
bramc: wrt hot potatoe transactions. in a future hardfork I want to make coinbase outputs immediately spendable by coinbase transactions. This would let miners pay fees forward.
<sipa>
gmaxwell: and then a softfork later could require them to pay X% forward?
droark has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<gmaxwell>
An equlibrim behavior looks something like "pay forward half the difference between what you got and the fees from the next $block worth of transactions you didn't mine"
<gmaxwell>
sipa: I don't think softforks that require paying forward are sensible, simply because you can fee bypass. But there is a rational equlibrium that being able to pay forkward supports.
<gmaxwell>
but it's one that requires visibility into the mempool.
<bsm1175321>
bramc: I'm following your babbling. Don't think I'm helping you though, but feel free to babble, it's a relevant topic.
<bramc>
gmaxwell, Isn't immediate spending a hard fork?