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
qu4ku has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Topogetcyrpto has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
Topogetcyrpto has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jannes has quit [Quit: Leaving]
snthsnth has joined #bitcoin-wizards
dnaleor has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-wizards
dnaleor has joined #bitcoin-wizards
laurentmt has quit [Client Quit]
_rht has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
snthsnth has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
snthsnth has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Dizzle has joined #bitcoin-wizards
snthsnth has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
edvorg has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
Ylbam has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
NewLiberty_ is now known as NewLiberty
Dizzle has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
oleganza has quit [Quit: oleganza]
Alopex has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Alopex has joined #bitcoin-wizards
btcdrak has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
snthsnth has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Alopex has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Topogetcyrpto has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
cjd has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
qu4ku has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
Topogetcyrpto has joined #bitcoin-wizards
snthsnth has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cjd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ratbanebo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cjd has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
cjd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
PaulCapestany has quit [Quit: .]
cjd has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
cjd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
chjj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cjd has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
PaulCapestany has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cjd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
PaulCapestany has quit [Client Quit]
pro has quit [Quit: Leaving]
PaulCapestany has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cjd has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
cjd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jhogan42 has quit [Quit: My MacBook Air has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
DigiByteDev has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Alopex has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
cjd has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
cjd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Alopex has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cjd has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
Logicwax- has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
Alopex has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
DigiByteDev_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
DigiByteDev has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
DigiByteDev_ is now known as DigiByteDev
Logicwax has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Alopex has joined #bitcoin-wizards
legogris has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
legogris has joined #bitcoin-wizards
priidu has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
Alopex has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
mrkent has quit []
Alopex has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cjd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Topogetcyrpto has quit [Quit: Topogetcyrpto]
Topogetcyrpto has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cjd has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
cjd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Topogetcyrpto has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
cjd has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
Alopex has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
cjd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Alopex has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cjd has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
cjd_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Alopex has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
cjd_ has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
cjd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Alopex has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ratbanebo has quit []
[7] has quit [Disconnected by services]
TheSeven has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cjd has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
cjd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
snthsnth has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
cjd has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
cjd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cjd has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
oleganza has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cjd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
coryfields has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
coryfields has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cjd has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
btcdrak has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cjd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cjd has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
snthsnth has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cjd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Giszmo has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
cjd has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
cjd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cjd has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
cjd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Alopex has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
coryfields has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
coryfields has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Alopex has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cjd has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
oleganza has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
oleganza has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cjd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
snthsnth has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
cjd has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
cjd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
snthsnth has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cjd has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
cjd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cjd has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
cjd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
spinza has quit [Max SendQ exceeded]
spinza has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cjd has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
cjd has joined #bitcoin-wizards
arowser has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
arowser has joined #bitcoin-wizards
skang404 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
gabridome has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
<skang404>
Hey I have ques regarding segwit.. Aren't BLS signatures like ring
<skang404>
signatures and Can BLS scheme/balloon be applied to CT?
gabridome has quit [Quit: gabridome]
arowser has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
oleganza has quit [Quit: oleganza]
arowser has joined #bitcoin-wizards
NewLiberty_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
oleganza has joined #bitcoin-wizards
NewLiberty has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
DigiByteDev has quit [Quit: DigiByteDev]
oleganza has quit [Quit: oleganza]
Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
priidu has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jhogan42 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
snthsnth has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
snthsnth has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cjcj has quit [Quit: Page closed]
Topogetcyrpto has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Guyver2_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Guyver2_ has quit [Client Quit]
Guyver2 has quit [Quit: :)]
snthsnth has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
DigiByteDev has joined #bitcoin-wizards
gabridome has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cryptowest has joined #bitcoin-wizards
gabridome has quit [Quit: gabridome]
priidu has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
r0ach has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jtimon has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
Dizzle has quit [Quit: Leaving...]
gabridome has joined #bitcoin-wizards
DigiByteDev has quit [Quit: DigiByteDev]
gabridome has quit [Quit: gabridome]
ThomasV has quit [Quit: Quitte]
mol has joined #bitcoin-wizards
molz has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
<Taek>
I stated in my jute draft that SPV committment delays would need to be very high if the block time was much larger than 5 seconds.
<Taek>
I realize now that there's a way to remove this limitation, and make it so that SPV commitment delays need only be as long as network convergence around a particular ordering
<Taek>
which should be less than a few minutes
<Taek>
That would make it reasonable to have a jute implementation with something like 30 second block times, where you get all the advantages of eliminating selfish mining without any of the txn-fee and convergence related problems that come with lower block times
r0ach has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
r0ach has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Davasny has joined #bitcoin-wizards
kyletorpey has quit [Ping timeout: 276 seconds]
pro has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
q4 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
maaku has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Davasny_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Davasny has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
AaronvanW has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
dnaleor has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
dnaleor has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Burrito has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
priidu has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-wizards
blackwraith has joined #bitcoin-wizards
priidu has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
baffo32 has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
nikitab has joined #bitcoin-wizards
laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-wizards
nikitab has quit [Client Quit]
blackwraith is now known as priidu
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
baffo32 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
laurentmt has quit [Quit: laurentmt]
NewLiberty_ has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
NewLiberty_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
pro is now known as Guest13397
pro has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Guest13397 has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
blackwraith has joined #bitcoin-wizards
priidu has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
priidu has joined #bitcoin-wizards
blackwraith has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
nooblord has joined #bitcoin-wizards
blackwraith has joined #bitcoin-wizards
priidu has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
jhogan42 has quit [Quit: My MacBook Air has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
Davasny has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Davasny_ has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
<bsm1175321>
Taek: How? I've been thinking of having SPV commitments refer to "lucky" blocks, regardless of DAG structure. Requiring a particular DAG structure prevents you from doing merging, were it to become necessary. And, you can't know whether merging will be necessary.
droark has joined #bitcoin-wizards
sausage_factory has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
blackwraith has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
droark has quit [Quit: ZZZzzz…]
Davasny_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Davasny has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
musalbas has joined #bitcoin-wizards
ThomasV has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
gabridome has joined #bitcoin-wizards
gabridome has quit [Quit: gabridome]
Topogetcyrpto has quit [Quit: Topogetcyrpto]
Topogetcyrpto has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Topogetcyrpto has quit [Client Quit]
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has quit [Max SendQ exceeded]
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
sausage_factory has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
adam3us_ is now known as adam3us
arowser has quit [Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.]
arowser has joined #bitcoin-wizards
JackH has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Davasny has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Davasny_ has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
kyletorpey has joined #bitcoin-wizards
edvorg has joined #bitcoin-wizards
pigeons has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
pigeons has joined #bitcoin-wizards
pigeons is now known as Guest38420
ThomasV has joined #bitcoin-wizards
priidu has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Davasny_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Davasny has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
blackwraith has joined #bitcoin-wizards
priidu has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
mol has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Davasny has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Davasny_ has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
rogerwilco has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Topogetcyrpto has joined #bitcoin-wizards
droark has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Davasny_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Davasny has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
Guest38420 is now known as pigeons
edvorg has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
gabridome has joined #bitcoin-wizards
gabridome has quit [Client Quit]
gabridome has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
rogerwilco has quit [Quit: Leaving]
jtimon has joined #bitcoin-wizards
snthsnth has joined #bitcoin-wizards
gabridome has quit [Quit: gabridome]
skang404 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
moli has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
sausage_factory has joined #bitcoin-wizards
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<Taek>
bsm1175321: All blocks have a particular ordering relative to when they were the most recent block.
<Taek>
So they make the SPV commitment to that ordering
<Taek>
You add code to the SPV clients so that the SPV clients realize when a block's ordering is no longer relevant
blackwraith has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
<Taek>
you still ban any blocks that make a wrong commitment relative to their own height
<Taek>
the SPV commitment still needs to be in the past, otherwise it's not useful as pretty much all blocks will have their commitment invalidated
<Taek>
But, the reason that it needed to be far in the past was that a 45% hashrate attacker can occasionally (0.01% of the time or something) execute a reorg XXX blocks deep
<Taek>
As long as that number is below like 5% of the time, it's okay if SPV clients occasionally see commitments that get reversed
<Taek>
This is the same as a 1-2 block reorg in Bitcoin, it happens all the time
<Taek>
but in the vast majority of blocks the SPV commitment holds, and once a commitment is sufficiently confirmed it's going to hold for good
<Taek>
So we keep the same security model for SPV clients without putting miners at risk of having their blocks invalidated if an adversary manages to cause a deep (10-30 minutes of history) reorg
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
aen9ah0S has joined #bitcoin-wizards
aen9ah0S has left #bitcoin-wizards [#bitcoin-wizards]
<bsm1175321>
Taek: what is "height" here?
<Taek>
oops
<Taek>
"height" -> ancestry
<bsm1175321>
So SPV clients could commit to a particular cohort, even though that cohort could be merged with another, and a later SPV client could commit to a structure that *contains* another SPV client's commitment?
<Taek>
I don't think it's all that helpful to think in terms of cohorts for jute, because for lower block times there's no place where the width of the dag is only 1
<bsm1175321>
The definition of the "thing" that these SPV clients commit to needs to be defined such that it cannot be reversed without 51% hashpower.
paveljanik has quit [Quit: This computer has gone to sleep]
<bsm1175321>
Accept the cohort. It is the total ordering. ;-)
<Taek>
You can make any cohort arbitrarily big by adding more blocks which merge the granparent and the most recent child
<Taek>
then someone only needs to merge you from the main chain
<bsm1175321>
Taek: if you bring the block time so low that the "width" is too large, a total ordering becomes exponentially impossible to determine.
<Taek>
not with the algorithm described in my jute gist
<bsm1175321>
Taek: yes, so this requires a mechanism to define sub-cohorts.
* bsm1175321
goes back to read that...
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<Taek>
<bsm1175321> The definition of the "thing" that these SPV clients commit to needs to be defined such that it cannot be reversed without 51% hashpower.
<Taek>
I realized you can relax that a bit
<Taek>
as long as it can't be reversed most of the time, you're safe
<Taek>
well, it can't be reversed most of the time, and after some threshold of work is on top it's overwhelminingly difficult to reverse
<Taek>
in Bitcoin, 'overwhelmingly difficult' is typically accepted as 6 confirmations, but most SPV clients are happy at 1 confirmation
<bsm1175321>
This is a critically important point. I want to make sure we have a solid proof that a DAG construction leads to restoration of the 51% rule.
<Taek>
so I would adopt the equivalent for jute - sometimes you end up being wrong about the commitment but it's a heavy minority of the time, and it's easy to figure out what the right thing is
<bsm1175321>
This should be absolutely provable in a formal way.
<Taek>
My post makes it pretty intuitive to understand that it's true for the 'edge voting' method of ordering dags
<bsm1175321>
Do you have any code demonstrating it?
<Taek>
just the 13 lines of conversational pseudocode
<Taek>
Every block uses previous blocks to determine a total ordering, and then it votes for the edges in that total ordering. The ordering is decided by the edge votes of previous blocks
<bsm1175321>
It should be pretty easy to add that to my python simulator, and simulate it to see if it ever reverses the order of blocks...
<Taek>
There's this 'uncertainty' period where all the blocks are making commitments to different edges
<Taek>
however once you've gone through enough network cycles, all of the honest hashrate is going to start confirming the same edge path for blocks far enough back in history
<Taek>
The only way to alter history at that point is to somehow get another child of a parent that's got more edge votes
<Taek>
but you're fighting all of the 'honest' hashrate which is continually adding votes to just that single edge
<Taek>
and thus it becomes exponentially difficult to alter the history of that block as mining continues
<Taek>
the squishy part of the algorithm comes from the fact that at some point the network needs to agree on which edge they are all confirming. I believe that it happens naturally, but I don't have a proof yet for it
<bsm1175321>
Arguments are good, code is better. I'm looking over my code, trying to figure out how to make a simulation for your rules...
<Taek>
also worth noting that the navie implementation has a runtime of O(DAG Size) to add a single block. It's pretty easy to optimize, but then you're going to end up with more confusing code
<bsm1175321>
What I'm interested in is seeing whether adding a bead/block, and re-doing your sorting ever results in a different total ordering.
<Taek>
Captchas make me feel awful, basically makes Google the gatekeeper of the internet.
nikivi has joined #bitcoin-wizards
nikivi has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<bsm1175321>
Taek: do you have any simulations for your talk?
<Taek>
bsm1175321: the edge sorting method creates a sorting by starting with a parent and choosing which child to use as the direct child, based on which child has the most 'votes' on its edge
<Taek>
it's therefore plain to see that the only way to get a different history is to add blocks such that another child has more votes
<Taek>
*an edge to a different child gets more votes
cyphase has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
<Taek>
So you've got 3 children, and their edges have votes 5-7-2, you know that you can reorg the history at that point by adding just 2 blocks
<Taek>
uh, actually I think it takes 3
ThomasV has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
<Taek>
regardless, you've got an easy way to quantify the difficulty of changing history
nikivi has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<bsm1175321>
Taek: my simulator will make fat DAGs, skinny DAGs, tall DAGs and short DAGs, and you can apply whatever rules you want to it. ;-) Let me help you make a simulation and graphs by next week.
<Taek>
the missing number here is that we don't know what % of the hashrate is currently confirming the '7' block vs. the '5' block
<Taek>
bsm1175321: that sounds great, I think it would be very good to use your simulation code. I don't have any
<bsm1175321>
The other simulation code you may want to consider is simbit: https://github.com/ebfull/simbit if you prefer javascript over python
<Taek>
7v5 is not very convincing though, especially if the dag is like 3-5 blocks wide. But if the vote count is more like 12 vs 60, then you've got a pretty high certainty that most of the hashrate is working on the 60 edge instead of the 12 edge
<Taek>
(well, unless your dag is like 60 wide, in which case you definitely need to wait longer)
<bsm1175321>
I found an awful lot of suprising edge cases when making actual simulations, and my "cohort" algorithm went through at least 3 iterations before I got it right.
cyphase has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<bsm1175321>
Mine uses jupyter and graph_tool. If you can get that installed and run the notebook, I can help you implement your rules and simulate them.