cypherblock [11:38 AM]

Not sure if private channel is really needed. Prefer public.

jp [11:39 AM]

No. Private

cypherblock [11:39 AM]

why

jp [11:39 AM]

Troll control.

vlad2vlad [11:39 AM]

Too many trolls are gonna come down when CSW shows up again

bitsko [11:39 AM]

Users were asking me to ban people and im philosophically against that

vlad2vlad [11:39 AM]

Why ban people constantly?

tomothy

[11:39 AM]

If csw comes back, can simply poll and see how he wants to act

travin [11:40 AM]

Thanks for the invite. Agreed on the private channel. Some of the trolls came from BitcoinMarkets. Sorry about that. (edited)

norway [11:40 AM]

Request: Get sickpig in here.

cypherblock [11:41 AM]

discussion should be open. If someone is truly trolling just ignore.

tomothy

[11:41 AM]

Tom Zander too, wasn't he here?

sickpig [11:42 AM]

joined private by invitation from @bitsko

tomothy

[11:42 AM]

Have to see if CSW comes back anytime soon anyway. Could be weeks if ever

vlad2vlad [11:42 AM]

A lot of people gate CSW, you gonna ignore a 100 trolls?

tomtomtom7 [11:42 AM]

joined private by invitation from @bitsko

bitsko [11:42 AM]

What is zanders handle?

cypherblock [11:42 AM]

you have to let them get it out of their system. After what he has done it is to be expected.

awemany [11:44 AM]

joined private by invitation from @bitsko

tomothy

[11:44 AM]

shrem too i think? Vlad, maybe send an invite to nullc, aback, gavin, corrallo, jgarzik, et al? I mean, its basically preparation if he comes back, could just wait till then? See if there's a response to what was discussed today and then do so? Linking IRC might do it but... not sure how that's accomplished...

jp [11:44 AM]

You can join the public and ignore this private if you like @cypherblock

checksum0 [11:45 AM]

joined private by invitation from @bitsko

checksum0 [11:46 AM]

Hello

bitsko [11:46 AM]

I will leave the moderation of this channel to guys like vlad when i find out how to later today

jp [11:47 AM]

I m not going to allow another troll or insult against us again.

[11:48]

2 years .. Enough. We do not forgive, we do not forget.

[11:48]

Now you tell me to put up with trolls because of what he had done?

tomothy

[11:48 AM]

It's starting again https://twitter.com/alansilbert/status/860159110729396225

Alan Silbert @alansilbert

The con comes front stage again. https://twitter.com/Satoshi_N_/status/860150819152375808

TwitterToday at 11:48 AM

The Last Satoshi @Satoshi_N_

Craig S Wright Q&A on Slack. https://pastebin.com/zU6YZWXK

TwitterToday at 11:15 AM

bitsko [11:49 AM]

I will let vlad or jp decide who else gets invite, i will only invite known bigblocker non trolls from now on.

jp [11:49 AM]

Vlad can handle this. I don't need do it

klee [11:49 AM]

Someone invite Vinny too

[11:50]

:joy:

tomothy

[11:50 AM]

oh, yes, please

klee [11:50 AM]

jp will you invite macsga and jvwv too?

jp [11:51 AM]

Yes. Ask them to come over

xhiggy [11:52 AM]

joined private by invitation from @bitsko

vlad2vlad [11:53 AM]

Invite rational people with differing views. I invited @luke-jr even though he thinks the optimal blocks are 3KB. lol. We need people with differing views but not idiots who only troll for the sake of trolling. That said, I should probably ban myself now.

luke-jr [11:56 AM]

I do not.

macsga [11:57 AM]

joined private by invitation from @klee

vlad2vlad [11:57 AM]

I know. It's 300KB. Was having fun

macsga [11:57 AM]

hello :slightly_smiling_face:

[11:57]

thanks for the invite

klee [11:57 AM]

black cat is here

[11:57]

take cover

[11:57]

he is long

[11:57]

time to sell

tomothy

[11:57 AM]

So, I guess we can change this also into an IRC option, just need to have someone figure out how to do so

xhiggy [11:58 AM]

@vlad2vlad Has Craig ever spoke to you about the possibility of using Bitcoin to control the proliferation of WMD's?

macsga [11:58 AM]

I'm the perma tulip hodler

[11:58]

:slightly_smiling_face:

vlad2vlad [11:58 AM]

WMD's? What? No.

xhiggy [11:58 AM]

Let's say you can embed a bitcoin address into a mechanical part in such a way that it can only be read by destroying it

[11:59]

*key

vlad2vlad [11:59 AM]

I guess in theory anything is possible but my theory is anything one man can build another man can take apart.

[12:00]

But we never discussed nukes outside of what we were planning to do to Blockstream/Core. lol

xhiggy [12:00 PM]

lol

tomothy

[12:00 PM]

snaredrumcymbalhit

bitsko [12:00 PM]

You really did it this time vlad2vlad. Thanks for an exciting morning. Wish i had time to read the chat lol.

[12:01]

:success:

macsga [12:02 PM]

read most of it, I'm in the middle of a university class now and people are starting to look at me strangely

2 replies Last reply today at 12:04 PM View thread

macsga [12:02 PM]

:slightly_smiling_face:

[12:02]

thanks for the invite

tomothy

[12:02 PM]

:smile:

satoshi [12:07 PM]

Never a dull moment.

tomothy

[12:07 PM]

:smile:

macsga [12:09 PM]

lol

[12:10]

80-20 rule, we must accept this and go forward

jp [12:10 PM]

See. Alp already comes and lurk

[12:10]

Core troll coming over

tomothy

[12:10 PM]

alp always here

checksum0 [12:10 PM]

Great idea this channel

[12:11]

We got alp trolling...

tomothy

[12:11 PM]

alp is alp, someday he will understand

vlad2vlad [12:11 PM]

Alp won't relent, it's just what he does. This channel is a good idea.

tomothy

[12:11 PM]

point

jp [12:11 PM]

I'm John Paterson. Remember that

tomothy

[12:12 PM]

we've been able to have good discussions

[12:12]

yeah jp but i figure he should have to look through the text to find that

[12:12]

you said who you were so if he hasn't read it, well meh

jp [12:12 PM]

He is an alp lol

tomothy

[12:12 PM]

whenever i think of his name i think of alpacas and then jvp lol

travin [12:12 PM]

>Linking IRC might do it but... not sure how that's accomplished...

I'm not sure if an IRC channel can hook into a private slack channel.

macsga [12:13 PM]

hmm

[12:13]

needs some scripting but could be readily available via a bot (edited)

travin [12:13 PM]

Yeah, we could have a bot in here that does reads and writes to an IRC channel

jp [12:13 PM]

Blah. If LukeJr was serious then didn't have to be irc or not

macsga [12:13 PM]

hahaha

[12:13]

true dat

tomothy

[12:14 PM]

i'm pretty sure luke is serious

macsga [12:14 PM]

as a programmer you mean?

tomothy

[12:14 PM]

about discussing stuff w/ csw in irc but not slack

macsga [12:14 PM]

oh ok

tomothy

[12:14 PM]

people are like that, slack is... slack....

[12:14]

i get it for some reason

macsga [12:16 PM]

irc is jurassic no?

[12:16]

I must have my old Pirc

[12:16]

(anyone here remembers)?

[12:16]

:smile: :stuck_out_tongue:

tomothy

[12:20 PM]

Emin as well maybe

travin [12:22 PM]

IRC has some benefits, but I agree that Slack is more convenient.

macsga [12:24 PM]

yep, you can have it in your cell

jp [12:24 PM]

Oh. Csw is online?

csw [12:24 PM]

Just checking.

[12:25]

Tis thing keeps flicking stuff to my email

[12:25]

IRC never did that :slightly_smiling_face:

jp [12:25 PM]

This is private channel prevent troll

checksum0 [12:26 PM]

@csw you can disable notification on a per-channel basis or globally for slack

jp [12:26 PM]

@Csw macsga is the most talent sciencetist I have ever met.

csw [12:26 PM]

uploaded this image: image.png

Add Comment

macsga [12:26 PM]

nonsense, i'm nobody

csw [12:27 PM]

Now, Benign malleability is a "feature" of ECC and those protocols like it.

macsga [12:27 PM]

it's really a pleasure being here meeting with you Dr.

csw [12:27 PM]

I am a fraud.. so just listen to my arguments and not the persona.

[12:27]

:slightly_smiling_face:

macsga [12:27 PM]

:slightly_smiling_face:

vlad2vlad [12:27 PM]

Haha

csw [12:27 PM]

https://medium.com/@MADinMelbourne/welcome-to-the-ministry-of-truth-in-the-wiki-age-601ec28a2504

Medium

Welcome to the Ministry of Truth in the Wiki Age. – #thewildcard – Medium

“Is this really happening?” was tweeted to me yesterday as nChain announced it’s arrival into the Bitcoin scene, bringing with it the…

Reading time

----------------

4 min read

(461kB)

April 17th at 5:36 AM

jp [12:28 PM]

Yea. Csw is an asshole, con artist.

csw [12:28 PM]

That is out of the way....

[12:28]

Asshole yes. the other... I have money.

[12:28]

Anyway.

[12:28]

Can we look at the image I posted.

jp [12:29 PM]

Yes.

csw [12:29 PM]

It concerns the GMR security conditions of ECDSA

[12:29]

You cannot self sign, but you can create a TX that embeds the value.

[12:29]

This will be a two stage protocol.

[12:29]

You create the payment and then fund it.

tomothy

[12:30 PM]

Somehow I missed this post. Thanks for sharing it again.

csw [12:30 PM]

Have a look at:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=52949.0

Mike states:

For a while I thought including a signature in the output might allow you to do some neat things like restricting the form of the spending transaction, but it can't work - the signature is calculated in the context of the spending transaction and thus always signs over the hash of the connected transaction, which is the thing you need to insert the signature into. Signatures can't sign themselves.

Actually - they can.

This is the core of the patent idea for self signed transactions.

With this, we can securely use Op_CodeSeparator and enable signature replacement.

Just to be lazy, please see Pages 48-49 of the now old (but still valid) ECC standards (attached). This is the process to create a self-signed signature.

We do not need to create a Tx with (R,S) embedded, b ut we can use the process.

When coupled with the Threshold system, we can create a transaction with an UNKNOWN private key that is subject to the thresholding.

If you read the page linked, what Mike is stating is not possible is actually achievable. The Message M is formed. In place of incorporating the Signature (R,S) into the message, we can incorporate the Op_CodeSeparator and associated values into the hash.

A self-signed signature is a signature in which the message signed contains the signature. It is

possible to generate a self-signed ECDSA signature. This is done by selecting the signature first,

then the rest of the message, and finally the key pair. Details for doing this are provided in

Section 4.1.7. of the paper attached.

We are not creating a Self-signed Signature in the true sense (although we can) but are using the ability to CHOOSE a known message M( the transaction) and sign this. If we have Tx(2) with Tx(1) as per the prior email, we can use this to create some rather interesting messages that are valid under the existing protocol.

bitcointalk.org

What purpose was OP_CODESEPARATOR intended for?

What purpose was OP_CODESEPARATOR intended for?

[12:31]

If you read Sec1-v2 you will see the process.

[12:31]

Self-Signed Signatures:

A signature of a message is self-signed if the message contains the signature.

A self-signed ECDSA signature can be generated as follows:

1. Choose random k and s.

We can use the threshold system to create a shared but unknown value k.

2. Compute r = f([k]G).

3. Form the message m containing the signature (r, s).

4. Compute e = H(m).

5. Solve for a private key x that makes this signature valid, which can be found as:

x = (±sk/e)/r (mod q).

This can also be useful in that we can ensure that the private key was not stolen and in aiding in ensuring server-assisted key generation where a server adds entropy to the message m so the signer's private key x has enough entropy.

We need to do more steps on this as we do not want to have the server trusted and we need to ensure that the signer's entropy for k is not weak.

freetrader [12:31 PM]

>Tis thing keeps flicking stuff to my email

Turn it off in Preferences -> Profile & Account -> Account Settings (gearwheel icon) -> Notifications -> Email Preferences (expanded) -> Send Me Email Notifications: Never

csw [12:32 PM]

What this means is that you can create a NEW bitcoin address with a signature check inside the script

[12:33]

Then, you fund the initial TX with an address you already own.

Both the self signed and the funding TX can be sent at the same time

[12:34]

In doing this, you can create a funding transaction that does not suffer from benign malleability.

If you have the payment address as a multisig address, this allows you to create a pay address that cannot be impacted by malleability "attacks" even through the owner unless all singing parties do the attack.

tomothy

[12:53 PM]

It could be best, to try to avoid the trolls, if there were additional technical questions :smile: but... yeah...

travin [12:54 PM]

Andrew Quentson is a troll and "journalist". I'm on another channel with him and he's heavily inebriated 99% of the time.

klee [12:54 PM]

pfffff

travin [12:56 PM]

Sorry, if there's one person I hate in crypto, it's Andrew.

[12:56]

Will try to not lash. On here, anyway. (edited)

iang [12:56 PM]

lol… it’s the sector. Can’t have an open entry system without attracting strange characters…

macsga [12:57 PM]

it's nice I finally meet you @iang - big fan as well :slightly_smiling_face:

klee [12:58 PM]

Strange attractors

[12:58]

macsga has a good one

iang [12:58 PM]

hi there!

klee [12:58 PM]

let me find it....

[12:58]

https://www.tradingview.com/chart/BTCUSD/6yLOE8vM-Chaotic-Attractor-Projection-Model-BTC-USD-Bitstamp/

TradingView

Chaotic Attractor Projection Model BTC/USD (Bitstamp)

Chaotic Attractor Projection Model BTC/USD (Bitstamp) — trading idea and price prediction for Bitcoin / Dollar (BITSTAMP:BTCUSD) from trader sgacos (2017-03-29). TradingView — best trading ideas and expert opinions on a financial platform!

travin [12:58 PM]

True. Strange is putting it lightly though for Andrew.

I'll pastebin this one too just because Craig is talking.

iang [12:59 PM]

omg trading models - that’s all voodoo to me. I have a friend who insists on answering all questions related to the future with trading models. Drives me up the wall.

klee [1:00 PM]

just press play!

[1:00]

:smile:

jp [1:00 PM]

Yep. Lol. You think how I make shitload from leverage?

[1:00]

From macsga model

[1:01]

He uses quantum physics, quantum entanglement and hidden Markov2chain, etc. To model price

tomothy

[1:01 PM]

It seems as they have no credible arguments, they've resorted to name calling. Nice.

travin [1:02 PM]

Ongoing pastebin of what's happening at #general - https://pastebin.com/dUmiV1E8 (edited)

jp [1:02 PM]

Now mostly they attack the character

tomothy

[1:04 PM]

Have to resort to what you can use :confused:

iang [1:04 PM]

it’s a joke. But it’s CSW’s choice to remain there and play Kardashian. Not our business.

tomothy

[1:04 PM]

FUD; it's the whole scaling argument in a teacup

travin [1:05 PM]

yup. Some interesting points though, which is why I'm saving it.

jp [1:05 PM]

Lol. He likes to keep up with the kardashian

tomothy

[1:06 PM]

thanks travin, i've gotta run back to hearings so I want to make sure i can read and ntohings lost

[1:07]

horrible day to have to do any work :slightly_smiling_face:

travin [1:07 PM]

No problem. I'll use this as fuel when I attack Andrew on that other channel.

[1:07]

Yeah, I should be doing work too haha.

macsga [1:11 PM]

@tomothy I'm in the middle of a genetics lecture :stuck_out_tongue: So tell me about it

[1:11]

lol

[1:11]

I randomly laugh and people look at me

tomothy

[1:11 PM]

are you giving it or? LMFAO

macsga [1:11 PM]

no -thank God it's not my turn

[1:11]

I'd be dead in the water

tomothy

[1:12 PM]

yeah, alright off to make arguments and shout loudly. so distracted by all this lol

[1:12]

LOL

macsga [1:12 PM]

fml

[1:12]

:smile:

jp [1:12 PM]

Sheesh

[1:12]

Dat modafackers

tomothy

[1:12 PM]

not all of us are hanging out in vegas :smile:

macsga [1:14 PM]

dat ice cream tho... :stuck_out_tongue:

jp [1:14 PM]

Keep up with the kardashian is happening, featuring Craig Wright and dragon den

travin [1:17 PM]

Updated pastebin. I'm going to eat. brb

klee [1:22 PM]

bring this guy Andy here?

[1:22]

he says good stuff

andy [1:22 PM]

joined private by invitation from @klee

jp [1:24 PM]

uploaded and commented on this image: 20170501_023101.jpg

1 Comment

Dat ice cream bae

andy [1:27 PM]

Great. Now I'm hungry.

macsga [1:30 PM]

JP does this all the time

[1:30]

they're at Vegas eating all the icecream there is and trolling our poor asses here

[1:30]

:stuck_out_tongue:

jp [1:31 PM]

F I L T H Y

[1:31]

Die shitcoin die

macsga [1:31 PM]

lol :stuck_out_tongue:

jp [1:32 PM]

Where is kinnayyy leecuminng?

travin [1:33 PM]

Why the hell am I getting complaints about the Slack and Slack itself?

>In a SLACK, which is at is birth is a TEAM building, you have to build team.

>Lengthy quotes and dated references will not build up anything against the odds in the channel.

>SLACK was developed to be a team building environment NOT a chat messenger. Big difference.

klee [1:33 PM]

patiently waiting for 1600 screenshot at stamp

travin [1:34 PM]

Told them to check Pastebin and I got

>No I don't do pastebin.

>Medium, yes, but not pastebin.

[1:34]

Have fun with beautybubble mods :slightly_smiling_face:

andy [1:34 PM]

LOL

[1:35]

I feel like he could answer questions for 36 hours straight and people would still needle him.

[1:35]

He's been at it 9 and 1/2 hours so far.

macsga [1:35 PM]

I couldn't do this

jp [1:36 PM]

He works like 100 hrs weekly

macsga [1:36 PM]

I need to stop working

[1:36]

just thinking of ice cream

jp [1:37 PM]

uploaded and commented on this image: 20170503_032749.jpg

1 Comment

Ice cream 1600 incumming

macsga [1:38 PM]

wallpapered that

jp [1:39 PM]

Vegas when 10k babe

macsga [1:39 PM]

deal

jp [1:40 PM]

Lol. This private slack is like klee mini slack

klee [1:40 PM]

:stuck_out_tongue:

andy [1:41 PM]

Yesterday Cobra-bitcoin (who has acquired some ownership of bitcoin.org) seemed to make a threat on reddit about something upcoming "very soon" that would make you regret your SN claim.

jp [1:41 PM]

Blah. Con artist. Move on.

iang [1:42 PM]

who is the “you” ?

[1:43]

I don’t think it is possible to regret it any more than already regretted… it’s been a heavy cross.

andy [1:43 PM]

ahh... csw.

[1:43]

I agree.

jp [1:43 PM]

Oh well. Shit hit fan already. What worst?

andy [1:43 PM]

But Cobra has a lot of resources. I wasn't sure if the threat was empty though.

jp [1:44 PM]

Where did he make that threat?

tomothy

[1:44 PM]

Maybe that's why Vlad leaked the documents yesterday (edited)

andy [1:44 PM]

On a reply to a nullc comment. I'll look it up.

[1:44]

What did Vlad leak?

jp [1:44 PM]

Post it here pls?

tomothy

[1:45 PM]

I posted in our troll box slack

[1:45]

For xo

andy [1:45 PM]

I might be in Vegas this fall. First time going.

tomothy

[1:45 PM]

On mobile so reposting is tough. I think Christoph pinned them though

jp [1:46 PM]

uploaded and commented on this image: 20170501_005338.jpg

1 Comment

Pool party

checksum0 [1:54 PM]

I see Andrew his back to his usual "interrogator" persona like @csw committed some kind of a crime :face_with_rolling_eyes:

jp [1:54 PM]

Yes

[1:54]

It is why I hate this slack public

travin [1:54 PM]

I wonder how much he's had to drink today

[1:57]

Ok, I updated the pastebin `https://pastebin.com/dUmiV1E8` but there doesn't seem to be much of a serious thing going on anymore so I'll stop for a bit (edited)

iang [2:01 PM]

it’s called investigative journalism. But he’s not very good at it.

travin [2:02 PM]

Nope. Not at all.

joeldalais [2:05 PM]

@jp & @csw, just ignore the #general, its overrun with trolls

jp [2:06 PM]

Blood boiling

joeldalais [2:07 PM]

its what they want

klee [2:07 PM]

short ltc

[2:07]

you will feel better!

[2:07]

:smile:

andy [2:07 PM]

their goal is to enrage. don't give them that success.

iang [2:08 PM]

look, they gave you icecream, isn’t that enough?

jp [2:09 PM]

Urghh. Gonna get my corn

joeldalais [2:11 PM]

i try to surround myself with like minded people, or at least those who can hold a sensible conversation (which is 'like minded' in my book). The trolls are just energy sapping and a waste of space and time.

jp [2:12 PM]

Fuck this shit. I'm gonna watch 1600 chart instead. Blood boiling with those core trollers

joeldalais [2:12 PM]

come back after you've chilled and chat just in here, i'm sure you'll feel better for it

jp [2:12 PM]

1625

csw [2:14 PM]

What a fun pastime - I see why people do not manage to get much work done now.

travin [2:15 PM]

It's fun every now and then. Becomes work when you're the one moderating though.

iang [2:15 PM]

chat programs are responsible for the GDP of the west plummetting.

klee [2:16 PM]

not porn?

csw [2:17 PM]

I see. There is very little that is of substance. And a lot of misinformation

jp [2:17 PM]

Sorry C S W. My blood ... boiling

iang [2:18 PM]

have more icecream, bitch

jp [2:18 PM]

Already under suppression for years and got all kind of shits

[2:18]

And now you put up with this. Can't believe this.

joeldalais [2:18 PM]

i don't envy you :confused:

jp [2:18 PM]

Best communication is not on slack. You shouldn't do this.

[2:19]

Instead having whiteboard and lecture format is the best

iang [2:19 PM]

there ain’t a better one for this sort of discussion. ANy channel will be trolled. Its how it is.

jp [2:19 PM]

Having a different forum where people can discuss

[2:19]

A different bitcointalk

joeldalais [2:19 PM]

i think it has uses, the #general is open to all, so definitely more prone to trolling

iang [2:20 PM]

In other news, JVP and the drummer in AC/DC look very alike..

joeldalais [2:20 PM]

lol

[2:20]

i've thought that :smile:

andy [2:20 PM]

hahaha

tomothy

[2:20 PM]

LOL

jp [2:23 PM]

He looks like Michael Bolton

jp [2:23 PM]

uploaded this image: ctm_bolton_030613.jpg

Add Comment

iang [2:27 PM]

looks like the chat channel just went hyper-troll

jp [2:27 PM]

No shit. Cobra

joeldalais [2:27 PM]

i'm observing it with wild fascination :smile:

tomothy

[2:28 PM]

Sorry, I was sick of all the one sided attacks.

checksum0 [2:28 PM]

I have never ever seen a slack blow up like that.

[2:28]

CSW can bring in the crowds for sure

jp [2:30 PM]

Keep up with the kardashian round 2

tomothy

[2:38 PM]

We could try to reign it in back to private

freetrader [2:38 PM]

let the fire burn itself out.

iang [2:39 PM]

would be good if we could fan the fire in their direction ….

tomothy

[2:40 PM]

Making fun of AQ seems to help

travin [2:41 PM]

Call him Aquent, he hates that.

[2:41]

Somewhat, anyway

awemany [2:51 PM]

hey csw, so to repeat my argument in a less noise environment: do you have pointers on how you extended SHA256(..) to infinite long streams? Upon further consideration, I don't get your double hashing argument anymore.

csw [2:52 PM]

256 bits are the output of SHA256. With a single input value of SHA256 to another hash you can only have a limited number of matches.

awemany [2:53 PM]

yes i get that. but we've been talking in the context of collisions. and SHA256(anything) can you give you lots of collisions, sure. however for any collision SHA256(x) == SHA256(y), SHA256(SHA256(x)) == SHA256(SHA256(y)) holds as well

[2:54]

so I fail to see what you gain by the double hashing in this context here

csw [2:55 PM]

But SHA(x) =/= SHA (y)

awemany [2:57 PM]

i was assuming a collision. and if SHA256(<256 bits>) is anything but bijective, you make it worse in terms of collisions?

csw [2:58 PM]

There are a limited number of inputs in the range and form that a script allows and it is most likely Bijective.

[2:58]

As you said, this is not proven from principles.

[2:58]

Then, neither is ECC

awemany [2:59 PM]

ok, I don't get what you are saying here, this is too cryptic for me. But I think you can give a lot insight to people if you can point us to a coherent argument on this

macsga [3:00 PM]

ecc elliptic curve cryptosystem

csw [3:01 PM]

I will come back on that. There was talk of a white board linked to this.

awemany [3:02 PM]

ok, thanks. @macsga : yes, obviously. but how does that deal with collision frequency of SHA256 vs. SHA256^2?

macsga [3:02 PM]

what I'd be using?

iang [3:02 PM]

are we dealing with collision attacks? or pre-image?

csw [3:03 PM]

Can somebody get in contact when there is a white board on this I can use?

iang [3:03 PM]

If it is collision attacks, it’s like, I can craft a collision and inject into the blockchain, and create havoc coz two tx have the same hash.

macsga [3:03 PM]

csw, you can write on a whiteboard and photograph it then paste it here

iang [3:04 PM]

OTOH if it is pre-image, it’s like, I can look at the existing blockchain, find some hashes, reverse out the keys or whatever else is hidden.

csw [3:04 PM]

Sounds fun :slightly_smiling_face:

joeldalais [3:04 PM]

working on the white board, but it will probably be a few days and would be in the BU slack

macsga [3:04 PM]

I'm using my phone app for that :stuck_out_tongue:

csw [3:04 PM]

Let me know when it is up. I really need to head. This thing is a time killer.

macsga [3:04 PM]

no joke :stuck_out_tongue:

awemany [3:05 PM]

@iang this was in context of collisions. csw argues that double-hashing reduces collision frequency and he argues - which I find quite odd after reconsideration, with sets the size of aleph1 vs. aleph0. so I really like to see a coherent, structured and easy-to-understand-for-mortals argument on why that makes sense

macsga [3:05 PM]

I missed half the genetics lecture today because of this

[3:05]

but had so much fun meeting with you guys

csw [3:05 PM]

Good night - talk again soon

macsga [3:05 PM]

Gn mate

klee [3:05 PM]

gn

awemany [3:05 PM]

good night!

joeldalais [3:05 PM]

good night :slightly_smiling_face:

klee [3:05 PM]

take care

csw [3:05 PM]

No, that is not it - that was a separate argument.

iang [3:05 PM]

ciao.

tomothy

[3:06 PM]

Gn!

csw [3:06 PM]

This is why I hate this stuff. A0 and A1 are not the same thread.

tomothy

[3:06 PM]

Go sleep! This isn't going anywhere! Lol!

macsga [3:07 PM]

it's been what? 10h in a row now?

csw [3:07 PM]

I will try and separate the two streams of thought on a whiteboard when it is up.

[3:07]

Good night all.

checksum0 [3:08 PM]

Good night Craig

joeldalais [3:11 PM]

i'm going to try arrange a tech discussion + chalk board (with csw, he's agreed, its just a case of getting the board up in the slack) via the BU slack at some point, if you're interested join the slack (email info@bitcoinunlimited.info), i'll post about it in the #general there, and probably here also once its arranged (edited)

6 replies Last reply today at 3:23 PM View thread

iang [3:12 PM]

I’m happy as long as someone can turn the discussion into a mortal’s argument that we can all follow.

[3:13]

By that I mean, followable by people who’ve got the basics of hash collisions :wink:

jp [3:13 PM]

Alright. More ice cream guys. Have peace

andy [3:14 PM]

11 hours straight. That's crazy.

jp [3:15 PM]

I haven't slept since Tuesday.

tomothy

[3:15 PM]

Jesus Jp, I was kinda wondering based on your slack time lol

jp [3:16 PM]

Vegas babe. Baby sit the rocket btc chart is exciting so

macsga [3:17 PM]

@iang this is a matter that needs me clear brain wise and probably read some old papers too

iang [3:17 PM]

yeah … but remember, if you don’t sleep, you’ll fall off the rocket at an embarressing moment…

macsga [3:17 PM]

no, the rocket is going ok

[3:17]

enough fuel

[3:18]

as I said, projected value is 11500$

travin [3:18 PM]

Anything I should pastebin?

macsga [3:18 PM]

I'm not sure travin

[3:18]

it went full retard in there

travin [3:18 PM]

Ok. Not going to add to this then ( `https://pastebin.com/dUmiV1E8` )

iang [3:19 PM]

I’d be very grateful if someone were to extract out the Hash story… too much of a prig to do it myself

macsga [3:20 PM]

yes that was significant

travin [3:20 PM]

Around how many hours ago was that?

macsga [3:20 PM]

1h maybe

travin [3:20 PM]

One moment.

tomothy

[3:21 PM]

I'd agree too

[3:21]

There was some great discussion there and in private here

[3:21]

Maybe try to parse that out

[3:21]

Make two copies

[3:21]

One edited and the other not?

travin [3:23 PM]

Uhh where should I start? Here?

>Oh, Adam wrote hashcash and it is not used in Bitcoin. Sorry to say that and burst your bubble.

megalodon

[3:23 PM]

joined private by invitation from @klee, along with @mastodon

tomothy

[3:25 PM]

Like 1230pm

[3:25]

Now 325pm

[3:25]

Right when he came back

jp [3:25 PM]

Yes it is why I raised the issue of citation

[3:25]

He can't cite someone work he didn't use

tomothy

[3:26 PM]

Guys, this was amazing.

[3:26]

Can we get Fatman in here too so the gang's all back?

iang [3:27 PM]

yeah … I think it’s clear that the citations weren’t accurate. Oh well :disappointed:

megalodon

[3:27 PM]

Hey we got our own dragons den... What's on the agenda guys? :sleuth_or_spy:

jp [3:28 PM]

Yes. I want to use this opportunity to correct the citation

macsga [3:28 PM]

buy teh dips

travin [3:28 PM]

wait so that's 3 hours ago

tomothy

[3:28 PM]

Yes

travin [3:28 PM]

Can you find the first line where you want me to pastebin? I'll take care of the rest.

tomothy

[3:28 PM]

On mobile...

megalodon

[3:28 PM]

Jp if the white paper is messed with then this whole "prove yourself" circular argument will never go away

travin [3:29 PM]

Ok, hang on

megalodon

[3:29 PM]

Csw going to win on sheer prowess and knowledge, white paper be damned

travin [3:29 PM]

Wait, then my pastebin should cover it

[3:29]

it starts at about 3 hours ago

[3:29]

`https://pastebin.com/dUmiV1E8`

jp [3:31 PM]

The citation is btc Achilles heal

[3:31]

Making those opportunitist like Adam back make profit on it

[3:31]

Not just profit but authority power to kill bitcoin

macsga [3:31 PM]

you're talking about segwit right?

checksum0 [3:32 PM]

I'm surprised Greg and Adam did not show up here honestly

megalodon

[3:32 PM]

Yeah but to change it csw has to move the genesis coins. Not worth it IMO

checksum0 [3:32 PM]

Are they staying away from CSW?

[3:32]

Genesis coins can't be moved

macsga [3:33 PM]

let's see how this goes

[3:33]

I liked the encrypted tunnel for transactions

[3:34]

basically it's a new crypto-banking system with bitcoins as money

jp [3:34 PM]

Seriously, we must use this opportunity to correctly credit the citations

[3:34]

Adam Back has the highest authority power.

macsga [3:35 PM]

how could we do this?

jp [3:35 PM]

In the Satoshi roundtable, You guys have no idea

[3:35]

He was like a God

[3:35]

Whitepaper is not just a paper, it is like Bitcoin constitution

travin [3:35 PM]

Ok I updated https://pastebin.com/dUmiV1E8

Pastebin

Craig Wright Discussion Afterparty - Pastebin.com (19kB)

iang [3:35 PM]

well. He now has the ‘authority’ of being CEO of blockstream. Counts for something, and is enough to get his drinks paid,

jp [3:35 PM]

Not just for our generation but for generations after us

macsga [3:35 PM]

I'm confident that he won't be changing his mind anytime soon @jp

travin [3:36 PM]

It now has everything in #general since Aquent came in.

[3:36]

Feel free to extract whatever you want from it :slightly_smiling_face:

iang [3:36 PM]

The paper can’t be changed. It’s been too long, too many cites. The paper is as it is.

jp [3:37 PM]

I agree but it must be a correct in citation

macsga [3:37 PM]

where there any errors that need to be corrected?

iang [3:37 PM]

The best that could be done on the citations issue would be to do an opinion on what was “better” but the trap with that is that is that it would either be very long … or very short … and the latter would start a lot of arguments.

klee [3:37 PM]

guys do we move to xo slack?

iang [3:37 PM]

“pick me!”

jp [3:37 PM]

Oh, Adam wrote hashcash and it is not used in Bitcoin. Sorry to say that and burst your bubble.

klee [3:37 PM]

who is not in there except iang?

jp [3:37 PM]

It is in black and white

klee [3:37 PM]

my adhd....

iang [3:38 PM]

well, the ideas of a shared blockchain go back to Eric Hughes and also Todd Boyle to some extent. Also the notion of using a hash PoW was outlined in a 2005 paper.

[3:38]

Then there is all the smart contract stuff -> Nick.

jp [3:38 PM]

Eric Hughes patent

iang [3:39 PM]

And to be fair, if we’re looking at the smart contracts thing we also want to look at e-rights and Askemos and other things like that … but we’re now getting into history.

macsga [3:39 PM]

@iang seems like a lot of work to be done

iang [3:40 PM]

Also, as a cash - it should really cite the 1990s developments. Just Chaum would probably be ok, but there are several papers in the financial cryptography series which suggest things.

megalodon

[3:41 PM]

I'm just waiting for the goods. SDK, easier pathway to third party development, raise the blocksize. I am happy that this is being focused on

iang [3:41 PM]

Anther thing to bear in mind is that the paper wasn’t peer-reviewed / held up to academic standards. So holding it up now seems odd. Not wrong, just not how it was intended.

[3:42]

In contrast, when the paper was written, a LOT of work was put into it. So it also seems odd that the cites were so … ad hoc.

csw [3:54 PM]

5.5 Foreign exchange issues

(a) Conversion / translation of Bitcoin amounts

Section 960-50 of the ITAA 1997 states that an amount in "foreign currency" is to be translated into Australian currency.

As discussed, "foreign currency" is simply defined as " a currency other than Australian currency" and Bitcoin arguably already meets that definition (being arguably a "currency" other than the Australian dollar.

In any case, an amount expressed in Bitcoin would not meet the requirement in section 960-50 as it is not expressed in Australian dollars, and in order to calculate any Australian income tax liability (e.g. arising from the transactions considered above) in respect of Bitcoin it is necessary to undertake translation.

As such, in order to satisfy this requirement and consistent with the position proposed on the issue from a GST perspective, it is proposed that an amount expressed in Bitcoin may be converted into Australian currency based upon the rules in Subdivision 960-C of the ITAA 1997.

There is no reason why the rated quoted by Bitcoin Exchanges or foreign exchange service providers such as XE and Oanda cannot be used to convert Bitcoin to Australian currency for this purpose (whether as a commercial exchange rate or a rate agreed between the transacting parties). Further, as discussed, it is likely that a transaction in Bitcoin will already reflect a pre-determined rate against Australian currency.

(b) "Foreign currency" gains and losses

Division 775 of the ITAA 1997 provides that a taxpayer's assessable income includes "forex realisation gains" and "forex realisation losses" arising from "forex realisation events". Forex realisation events include CGT event A1 in the context of "foreign currency" (forex realisation event 1) and cessation of rights and obligations to pay or receive "foreign currency" (forex realisation events 2 to 5).

The relevant forex realisation gain or forex realisation loss is described in the applicable forex realisation event. However such gain or loss is only made to the extent that it is attributable to a "currency exchange rate effect." Further, Division 775 does not provide for double taxation or double deductions.

If Bitcoin is "foreign currency", then "realised" gains and losses would need to be included in assessable income of the taxpayer under Division 775 (or perhaps Division 230 of the ITAA 1997 - refer discussion below).

Prima facie, the forex realisation events in Division 775 would seem to have general application to all taxpayers using Bitcoin or accepting Bitcoin as payment - irrespective of whether or not they trade Bitcoin on a Bitcoin Exchange. However, the mere holding of Bitcoin in isolation of any transaction would not fall within a forex realisation event.

Given the volatility of Bitcoin rates against the Australian dollar (as a real world currency), there is potential for significant forex realisation gains or losses arising in respect of transactions undertaken using Bitcoin.

[3:54]

5.6 Taxation of Financial Arrangements (TOFA)

The TOFA rules in Division 230 of the ITAA 1997 provide for the tax treatment of gains and losses arising from "financial arrangements" in priority to other provisions of the Tax Acts (e.g. the trading stock provisions in Division 70 of the ITAA 1997). In summary, the TOFA rules have the effect of bringing gains or losses (including unrealised gains or losses) from a financial arrangement to revenue account.

As a general proposition, the TOFA rules only have mandatory application to large taxpayers (e.g. taxpayers with "aggregated turnover" exceeding $100 m) and not to individuals. However, a taxpayer can elect that the TOFA rules apply to all its financial arrangements.

In and of itself, Bitcoin would not be a financial arrangement within the general meaning in TOFA rules, as it is not an "arrangement" - although the underlying transactions in respect of which Bitcoin is utilised may involve a financial arrangement. It is beyond the scope of this paper to consider any such underlying transactions from a TOFA perspective.

However, section 230-530 of the ITAA 1997 provides that the TOFA rules also apply to "foreign currency" as if the currency "were a right that constituted a financial arrangement".

This means that if Bitcoin falls within the meaning of "foreign currency" in section 995-1 of the ITAA 1997, Bitcoin will be deemed to be a "financial arrangement" and potentially subject to the TOFA rules depending upon the circumstances of the taxpayer.

Where applicable to a taxpayer, gains or losses from Bitcoin (i.e. as "foreign currency") would need to be calculated and included in assessable income in accordance with the TOFA rules (rather than the rules in Division 775 of the ITAA 1997) - this would be the case irrespective of whether or not the taxpayer is trading Bitcoin on a Bitcoin Exchange, and would include any unrealised gains or losses from holding Bitcoin.

[3:55]

There cannot be a Satoshi.

There can not be a case where a government can force a sale.

satoshi [3:56 PM]

It's time for Satoshi to end.

csw [3:57 PM]

Those laws mean that Satoshi has to pay tax. It means in the US/UK that GaaP and in Au TofA make Bitcoin into income. The gains need to be accounted as income each year.

jp [3:58 PM]

@csw: no need Satoshi but you can read code and point out the differences. Can you start by explaining how hashcash was not used and actually different algo was used?

[3:59]

Code speaks right? Doesn't need Satoshi to prove it

csw [3:59 PM]

:slightly_smiling_face:

satoshi [3:59 PM]

I could by them off Satoshi for $1, then sell them right back at market rate for a check that I then burn in your presence. Then repeat each year to eliminate all gain.

[3:59]

*buy

csw [3:59 PM]

Not only was Hashcash SHA1, a simple change, but the format was different.

jp [4:00 PM]

Do u have plan to do a paper on this specific topic?

csw [4:00 PM]

No, it is accounted at market rates.

klee [4:00 PM]

I grab the chance to finally say to you p2p THANK YOU

[4:00]

THANK YOU

csw [4:00 PM]

Not on shooting down Adam.

klee [4:00 PM]

God bless you

jp [4:00 PM]

Kleecumming stopppp

csw [4:00 PM]

Please don't

satoshi [4:00 PM]

Yeah, I was just joking.

klee [4:00 PM]

NO THANKS

csw [4:00 PM]

Please, just me.

klee [4:01 PM]

:slightly_smiling_face:

jp [4:01 PM]

Kleecumming 800

klee [4:01 PM]

75$

[4:01]

All in

jp [4:01 PM]

500x Yolo mder

klee [4:01 PM]

macsga knows lol

jp [4:01 PM]

Why u don't shoot down AB after what he has done?

[4:01]

Really, what is the leftover?

csw [4:02 PM]

I will not stoop to their level.

tomothy

[4:02 PM]

no point, code will say who is right and who is wrong

travin [4:02 PM]

Since the Hash story was requested, and it was summarized here, I pastebinned that - `https://pastebin.com/iFc15p0w`

tomothy

[4:02 PM]

it's better that way, symbolic destruction

csw [4:02 PM]

Yes tomothy

travin [4:02 PM]

Someone should keep track of all the pastebins, other than myself. (edited)

3 replies Last reply today at 4:44 PM View thread

tomothy

[4:02 PM]

miners follow the chain, or they don't

csw [4:02 PM]

All nodes mine

satoshi [4:02 PM]

I maintained a paste and tweeted it.

4 replies Last reply today at 4:09 PM View thread

tomothy

[4:03 PM]

that's what's been most aggravating with this whole segwit/uasf nonsense, the idea that non-mining nodes have votes, it's inane.

csw [4:03 PM]

They are not nodes.

[4:03]

The paper is very clear.

tomothy

[4:03 PM]

yes, but they have been co-opted and re-defined as a node, to suit will of a minority

csw [4:04 PM]

In version 0.8.x they removed the option to mine

jp [4:04 PM]

Actually you can do a recording on this matter. Have good camera and shoot the video.

[4:04]

It doesn't have to be limited on slack

tomothy

[4:04 PM]

and you're supposed to go to bed LOL

6 replies Last reply today at 4:09 PM View thread

tomothy

[4:05 PM]

but i think that's why you said non-mining 'nodes' are wallets, cause, they don't mine.

csw [4:05 PM]

:slightly_smiling_face:

[4:06]

And only miners validate

[4:06]

This idea that you check size and a hash is not validation

awemany [4:09 PM]

what is your opinion on 'SPV mining'?

cypherblock [4:09 PM]

what people commonly refer to as full non-mining nodes, do all the same checks as miners do, the just don’t choose or order transactions. so saying they don’t validate seems a bit odd (damn broke my attempt not to post in private slack) (edited)

csw [4:10 PM]

You mean validationless miners?

awemany [4:10 PM]

@csw , yes and validation while mining already

csw [4:11 PM]

IF they validate, they are ok, it is an economic risk. If they do not, then an issue

satoshi [4:11 PM]

In hindsight this username is terrible. Notifications with every SN mention. I've got to go for now. Have a good one gang.

csw [4:11 PM]

"what people commonly refer to as full non-mining nodes, do all the same checks as miners do, the just don’t choose or order transactions. so saying they don’t validate seems a bit odd (damn broke my attempt not to post in private slack) "

unless the code changed from 0.9.x, they they do not fully validate

csw [4:13 PM]

They look at the hashes, but an invalid TX can have a valid hash and not be ok. If miners do a validation-less block and do not check, the TX may be invalid and propagate from some time if the miner has a large share.

1 reply Today at 5:10 PM View thread

csw [4:15 PM]

Test: Setup a network, a few VMs

Mine false blocks. Use TXs that are invalid and mine these falsely.

See what the "Full node" does when the hashes match and the TX is not right.

[4:16]

I need to go again... but try this, I can help with setup pointers if needed.

jp [4:20 PM]

Enjoy your t bone

andy [4:26 PM]

LOL

iang [4:44 PM]

I don’t get the question on hashcash. As far as I was aware, in hashcash, you use a proof of work as a token to accompany an email to ‘prove’ you’re not a zero-cost spammer. This is completely different to Bitcoin. The only thing in common is that PoW is used, but even the purpose of the PoW is completely different.

1 reply Today at 5:13 PM View thread

iang [4:44 PM]

It’s like saying Bitcoin is a digital signature because they both use hashes….

tomothy

[4:46 PM]

CW said before that he didn't reference HC at all

[4:47]

somewhere in that mess was one heckuva burn at adam back

checksum0 [4:47 PM]

There's a reference in the whitepaper though.

[4:48]

And it is so vague that somehow ABack wedge his foot in the door to get some authority on Bitcoin...

iang [4:49 PM]

well, ok. Dunno. Yes it’s clear the citations in general were all a bit weird. But when it comes to AB, he has also been in the scene for some time, and if he got a leg up, then well, it wasn’t only that, there were a lot of other things.

[4:50]

If anything, the key thing that AB did was to contact Austin Hill. Who was capable of bringing in the big money.

[4:51]

between the two of them, they raised a lot of dosh. But Austin Hill was key to raising the cash - he goes way back and has that capability.

christophbergmann [4:53 PM]

joined private by invitation from @bitsko

bitsko [5:06 PM]

anybody know which one is the best free whiteboard app for slack?

checksum0 [5:08 PM]

Austin Hill is the key to the creation of BS. Pretty sure AB is only there because he is easier to manipulate

iang [5:10 PM]

well, fwiw, you can blame me for that. When I was talking to AB about the whole startup space going crazy way back when, he was wondering whether to get involved. And I said, “you gotta get a money guy. You & I, our sorts of people, we can’t do it.” And he said he knew one … a month later he had Austin out of exile and back on the trail. Rest is history.

[5:10]

Fire away :dart:

tomothy

[5:11 PM]

thanks for that story. It makes me angry, but I love the anecdote LOL

cypherblock [5:16 PM]

everyone should move to General channel unless it is completely unusable. skeptics are very often useful.

bitsko [5:16 PM]

this is a whiteboard linked to the slack

tomothy

[5:21 PM]

bitsko, it asks me to setup a team and stuff

bitsko [5:22 PM]

you cant view it ? hmm.

tomothy

[5:22 PM]

no

[5:22]

whats the team called?

bitsko [5:23 PM]

https://sketchboard.me/DAsReJYawUVp

tomothy

[5:24 PM]

hmm, it worked with that link for some reason

[5:24]

do you see that?

[5:24]

nice

[5:24]

i just have to figure out how to change into me on it

[5:24]

lol

bitsko [5:24 PM]

so if a user wants to do a sketchboard. just goto sketchboard.io

[5:24]

it will generate one

tomothy

[5:25 PM]

ok, do you see my name now?

bitsko [5:25 PM]

thanks @joeldalais

[5:25]

yes

joeldalais [5:25 PM]

nps :slightly_smiling_face:

tomothy

[5:25 PM]

how do we clear it?

joeldalais [5:28 PM]

there's a back arrow at the bottom, and you can select and delete icons

[5:28]

i'm not sure where there's a rubber type thing..

bitsko [5:29 PM]

click something and then click the trashcan

tomothy

[5:30 PM]

need a big eraser :disappointed:

bitsko [5:31 PM]

if you just click sketchboard.io you get a fresh board

[5:31]

then share link... and on and on

tomothy

[5:31 PM]

ahhh

[5:31]

you should name it

bitsko [5:33 PM]

I'll need to make a signup. I hope to get through the logs first :awesome:

megalodon

[5:40 PM]

@bitsko just want to say thanks for the invite here, it's been an interesting day :chart_with_upwards_trend: :chart_with_downwards_trend:

tomothy

[5:40 PM]

I'm still not sure what just happened

bitsko [5:41 PM]

yeah its wild. ATH, nchain, bitpay/bitmain. bitcoin is heating up!

2 replies Last reply today at 5:42 PM View thread

iang [5:50 PM]

before you get too excited… you might want to ask @csw or @satoshi to try out some of the white board ideas. It’s a real pain to put in lots of work and then discover the tool is the wrong style or only comes in pink or dumps the design of century into the sink…

[5:51]

and .. I don’t actually know how you use these things without a drawing board device. I suppose what you could do is buy one and ship it out to whosoever is on the other side of the pen.

joeldalais [5:53 PM]

i've sent him the white board link and he said he'll let me know if its suitable, then we can go from there and set a date/time

iang [5:53 PM]

cool-io!

megalodon

[6:01 PM]

if we are all willing to chip in I'm sure we could get csw some sort of virtual whiteboard to connect to whatever app gets decided on. I'm feeling a little generous considering the btc price right now :sunglasses:

cypherblock [6:05 PM]

csw said some things today I don’t get. maybe he is not up to date with changes in bitcoin code since he left project.

iang [6:06 PM]

such as?

cypherblock [6:07 PM]

his comments on non-mining nodes. made it sound like they are not validating anything but hashes.

[6:07]

here, the part in quotes is from me, then his answer below. made a few more comments of same type after that

csw

"what people commonly refer to as full non-mining nodes, do all the same checks as miners do, the just don’t choose or order transactions. so saying they don’t validate seems a bit odd (damn broke my attempt not to post in private slack) "

unless the code changed from 0.9.x, they they do not fully validate

Posted in #privateToday at 4:11 PM

joeldalais [6:08 PM]

they're not inputting transactions

[6:08]

bitcoin can work without them and just mining nodes, but it can't work in the opposite way, with non-mining nodes and not mining nodes

cypherblock [6:09 PM]

Full node will reject any invalid tx

csw

Test: Setup a network, a few VMs

Mine false blocks. Use TXs that are invalid and mine these falsely.

See what the "Full node" does when the hashes match and the TX is not right.

Posted in #privateToday at 4:15 PM

iang [6:10 PM]

oh ok - the business about nodes being “full” and no partial definitions need apply. Yes I understand that sticks in the craw

joeldalais [6:10 PM]

basically saying that only mining nodes really matter, is how i took it

cypherblock [6:12 PM]

what we call full nodes today validate everything. transactions received to mempool, blocks, every transaction in the block. They check all consensus rules.

[6:13]

what they don’t do is generate blocks. that is what miners/mining-full-nodes do.

[6:16]

he did refer to non-mining nodes as “wallets” which is essentially correct although there are of course just “relay” nodes that don’t have wallets connected to them but might serve some light clients by chance or pass info to full nodes that do have wallets on them.

iang [6:19 PM]

right .. so basically you’re asking for a list of definitions, updated to today’s realpolitik. Might be just a matter of setting up a table with some terms, and see what’s what. It’s a negotiation. CSW has his opinion, so do others, and as you say, things have moved on.

[6:20]

It is probably quite valuable to get some agreed terms nailed down.

joeldalais [6:21 PM]

standards/terminology (edited)

cypherblock [6:22 PM]

yeah indicating that full non-mining nodes don’t validate is like speaking foreign language. or worse it is like speaking english but you are using the word “stop” for the same things people use the word “go” for. So it is a big miscommunication point.

[6:22]

Sounds like to him a non-mining node is what we might call an spv wallet or a light client like you mobile wallet. Those are only checking block hashes (if that).

joeldalais [6:22 PM]

wasn't he agreeing with your point though?

[6:23]

they validate, they just don't choose or order transactions

cypherblock [6:23 PM]

I didn’t see him agree to that.

joeldalais [6:24 PM]

"so saying they don’t validate seems a bit odd" that bit

[6:24]

he's giving it a negative, indicating that he's saying they do validate (edited)

cypherblock [6:25 PM]

the “so saying they don’t validate” is me talking.

[6:25]

not csw

[6:25]

he quoted me from my question above

joeldalais [6:26 PM]

ah

[6:26]

makes sense now :smile:

cypherblock [6:26 PM]

then he wrote “unless the code changed from 0.9.x, they they do not fully validate”

joeldalais [6:27 PM]

i don't have an answer then, looking forward to the whiteboard session when you can ask him :slightly_smiling_face:

cypherblock [6:28 PM]

virtual white boards may not be great. I prefer public slack channel. But we can try. Should be public though.

joeldalais [6:29 PM]

it will probably be by invite (but open to all), you saw what happened to the #general earlier

[6:30]

but its up to csw

cypherblock [6:31 PM]

there is little point in staying in private channel. Yes you may by pass some annoying people but you will also miss out on very intelligent people with good questions, info, etc.

joeldalais [6:32 PM]

it would be nice to have a balance

[6:33]

i'm not sure how anyone would achieve that, but i think taking a step at a time would be nice, greater dev communication from various parts of the sector can only be good (edited)

[6:34]

maybe other people might want to talk about their ideas via a chalkboard+slack? as you said, plenty of amazing minds out there

tomothy

[6:35 PM]

I'm pretty sure most everyone left

[6:36]

Well Alps still here but current topic isn't something I think he would disagree on

[6:37]

I was wondering about the mining thing also as afaik my asic isn't running a node or wallet or is it?

joeldalais [6:37 PM]

its contributing hash towards a node

tomothy

[6:39 PM]

So arguably a mining node is the asic and pool

[6:39]

More or less right?

joeldalais [6:39 PM]

a mining node is the pool, all the asics pointing towards that pool are part of the same node

[6:40]

but probably using multiple nodes

tomothy

[6:40 PM]

Which complicates the prior definitions

[6:40]

Since they're slightly more nuanced

joeldalais [6:40 PM]

i'm really not a deep expert on mining, so don't take my words for 100%

tomothy

[6:40 PM]

No that's pretty good eli5

joeldalais [6:41 PM]

i'm just not sure if a pool would use multiple nodes, it makes sense on a security PoV

megalodon

[6:41 PM]

my only really basic concern is that how do you differentiate through language the difference between a wallet running from a remote node, and a wallet running it's own "node"?

[6:42]

I always considered running a wallet with my own copy of the blockchain being synced as "running a node"

joeldalais [6:43 PM]

it is a node, how i'd consider it

[6:44]

but it doesn't act as a 'real node' (that also does mining)

megalodon

[6:44 PM]

so, it's a node but it's not a full node ?

joeldalais [6:44 PM]

ye

megalodon

[6:45 PM]

that wouldn't really break my current understanding just enhance it which is fine

joeldalais [6:45 PM]

but it has the 'full data' of the blockchain

megalodon

[6:45 PM]

right, its a node

[6:45]

that's what I always thought, I never used the term "full node"

[6:46]

but I can see how saying a wallet with the full blockchain data isn't a node strikes some people as odd but its probably just because that's how we've been referring to it for a whole now

joeldalais [6:46 PM]

its like a living copy of the blockchain, but only the mining nodes are 'central nodes', as they contribute the hash

megalodon

[6:46 PM]

:+1:

cypherblock [7:43 PM]