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
<MaxSan>
you would need an actual data set though to read over historical events from all the block tips.. from both chains..
<andytoshi>
as i said, good luck :). you've got much different time periods, then the block intervals are different, and even serious fork lengths pale in comparison to the total timeframe
<MaxSan>
which isnt an easy task esp for ethereum
<andytoshi>
and yeah, idk if anybody has all the necessary data
<MaxSan>
im going to guess no :P
<stonecoldpat>
I was hoping the soft/hard fork icon would represent "activation day" and then I was using "accidental split" if there was a consequence - although in the case of thedao that isn't accidental.
smk has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
Alanius has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<andytoshi>
maybe you could represent hardforks as a change in the graph direction whereas softforks widen it (indicating there are extra things you can do, though if you wanna keep going straight ahead nobody is stopping you)
Ylbam has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
oleganza has quit [Quit: oleganza]
stonecoldpat has quit [Quit: Page closed]
danrobinson has quit [Quit: danrobinson]
AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-wizards
d9b4bef9 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
AaronvanW has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
cluckj has joined #bitcoin-wizards
jtimon has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
bodkan has joined #bitcoin-wizards
thrmo has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
bodkan has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
goksinen has joined #bitcoin-wizards
goksinen has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
AlineGomes has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
contrapumpkin has joined #bitcoin-wizards
Giszmo has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
goksinen has joined #bitcoin-wizards
gm2052 has joined #bitcoin-wizards
PaulCape_ has joined #bitcoin-wizards
gm2053 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
PaulCapestany has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
[d__d] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
goksinen has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
n1ce has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
n1ce has joined #bitcoin-wizards
n1ce has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
n1ce has joined #bitcoin-wizards
AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-wizards
AaronvanW has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
pro has quit [Quit: Leaving]
Giszmo has joined #bitcoin-wizards
n1ce has quit [Quit: Leaving]
oleganza has joined #bitcoin-wizards
waxwing has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
waxwing has joined #bitcoin-wizards
legogris has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
legogris has joined #bitcoin-wizards
TheSeven has quit [Disconnected by services]
[7] has joined #bitcoin-wizards
harrymm has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
harrymm has joined #bitcoin-wizards
zaus has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<zaus>
what do people think of systems like algorand or snow white?
<Taek>
They can be innovative in terms of traditional consensus but seem to lack a deeper understanding of Bitcoin's incentive model
<Taek>
and therefore get lost talking about things like "percentage of honest participants", when that's shallow and incomplete security assumption
<zaus>
is it because they are phrased in PoS settings?
oleganza has quit [Quit: oleganza]
oleganza has joined #bitcoin-wizards
contrapumpkin has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
fieldsofgold has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<zaus>
Taek: ^
oleganza has quit [Client Quit]
<Taek>
I think it's because the authors come from an academic background, and Bitcoin's incentive model doesn't have any base in background
<Taek>
so they use the academic version of consensus as the base, and completely miss the incentive stuff
<Taek>
*there's no academic base exploring Bitcoin's incentive model
<zaus>
thanks
<bsm1175321>
If your security model involves the word "trust", you're fucked from the get-go. Everyone can be bribed. Bitcoin makes that incentive very explicit.
<bsm1175321>
Virtually all academic literature assumes *something* that cannot be bribed, and is therefore, deeply flawed for real-world applications.
<zaus>
bsm117532: I think bitcoin assumes that 50% of the power cannot be bribed
<bsm1175321>
That 50% has an existing economic incentive. Your bribe has to be bigger.
<zaus>
bsm117532: same for proof of stake systems
<bsm1175321>
Your argument is circular, since the bribe is internal to the system.
<bsm1175321>
You can't bribe with more money than exists in the system. You CAN bribe with external assets.
<bsm1175321>
PoS is a closed system -- there's no flow of value into the system.
<gmaxwell>
zaus: have you read the PoS paper on bitcoin.ninja?
<gmaxwell>
if not, go do that, it's not that long, and you'll save people here a bunch of time rehasing arguments that have been rehashed 1001 times already.
<zaus>
I have read a few PoS paper but I am not sure which one you refer to
* bsm1175321
is really fucking tired of PoS and wishes it would just die and go away.
<zaus>
alright, if the problem is the internal fixed currency - then what if we peg PoS strategy with external resources
AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-wizards
<bsm1175321>
pegs are very difficult to implement in practice and have a number of real failure modes.
<zaus>
so for example, one could build Algorand/SnowWhite introducing new resources in the system
<bsm1175321>
If one asset spikes, the peg fails if there aren't enough assets of the other type to cover.
<bsm1175321>
What is this "resource"?
fieldsofgold has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
<midnightmagic>
bsm1175321: <3 (re PoS)
<zaus>
bsm117532: I am not sure, whatever is provable
<zaus>
storage (?)
<bsm1175321>
The only provable, economic asset is a brute-forced hash function. A second example has not been provided yet. (Though many are hopeful that storage will be the second example)
<zaus>
energy (? not sure)
<zaus>
I see
<bsm1175321>
The brute forced hash function is a proxy for energy
<bsm1175321>
Anything else is just bits, and has zero marginal cost.
AaronvanW has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
d9b4bef9 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
dnaleor has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
dnaleor has joined #bitcoin-wizards
laurentmt has quit [Client Quit]
<andytoshi>
luke-jr: it does actually, the signing function takes a nonce-computing function...usually this is NULL meaning "just use rfc6979" but you can provide a different one that hashes in aux data
<andytoshi>
hm, maybe i should PR to put one in that does sign-to-contract so there's something halfway standard in place
<gmaxwell>
thats not sign to contract.
NewLiberty has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
<gmaxwell>
sign to contract needs to use the auxdata to take a struct that can return the underlying nonce.
<gmaxwell>
I think I've implemented it at least twice, but the structure of the code is such that it's kinda slow so I'm not happy with it.
<andytoshi>
gmaxwell: if i write a function that does rfc6979, computes the corresponding public nonce, hashes that with aux data, and adds the hash to the result of 6979 before returning, isn't that sign-to-contract?
<gmaxwell>
(the problem is that the nonce function returns K ... not Kinv and kG. which means you need to do multiple multiplies for no real reason...)