209100+ entries in 0.139s
mircea_popescu: there's no expectation involved. for
these
tanks on
this river out of
this metal
this is
the bridge.
mircea_popescu: (materials, here, means :
the river ;
the metal ;
the
tanks)
mircea_popescu: not so.
these are
the materials,
this is
thereby
the bridge.
mircea_popescu: engineering is specifically
the practice of eliminating expectations from human behaviour. it is
the hopeless adventure.
a111: Logged on 2017-03-08 18:29 mircea_popescu: which is why all
the impudent cuntlets want
to be "in a creative career" aka hallucinated non-science. if irresponsible activity bereft of verification, ie,
the antithesis of science,
then
their imposture has some space
mircea_popescu: this is no kind of argument against having
test suite.
ben_vulpes: i hope
the point is coming
through,
though,
that 'CI' is utterly irrelevant in
the face of
the scope of systems choreography demanded and actual
tests
to be written
ben_vulpes: can even diddle
trb-observed clock
to get difficulty curve
to do whatever
ben_vulpes: hey, if genesis is programmable, can generate chains for
testing on
the fly
☟︎ mircea_popescu: to be fed
to node
to be
tested from block 1 onwards, can set own difficulty
then.
mircea_popescu: prolly but
that's finnickyer. unless of course we bother
to create 3rd item here, which would be a
test chain.
mircea_popescu: signatures don't match, scripts are bad, inputs are bad, outputs are
too long, on it goes
ben_vulpes: should even be possible
to
test reorg behavior!
mircea_popescu: at
the very least
try see what happens in
the obvious cases, doublespend, bad block etc.
mircea_popescu: it means you feed a
trb
to be
tested randomly generated "txn"
ben_vulpes: if afl is not a lurking piece of garbage, plugging
trb into
that might yield some interesting strange.
mircea_popescu: prolly should churn
the chain as a
test yeh. also a
tx fuzzer would be great in general.
ben_vulpes: (well, not entirely baseless, i've put a modicum of
thought into
the
topic and have been pricing a new box
to boot)
ben_vulpes: one quickly starts
thinking
thoughts like "verify whole chain for every vpatch"
ben_vulpes: so before even
thinking about CI
the
testing strategy needs some actual
thought, planning, and likely at least one patch. maybe more.
ben_vulpes: i went so far as
to set up a solipsistic
test net before bumping into
the dumb-as-rocks "needs 2 nodes in order
to mine" shit
mod6: ben_vulpes' is making some super cool v automated
tests as well.
there is a bit of overlap, but perhaps one day, his will become
the defacto-standard
tests. mine are a bit brittle
to say
the least.
jhvh1: mircea_popescu: Bitfinex BTCUSD
ticker | Best bid: 1180.9, Best ask: 1181.0, Bid-ask spread: 0.10000, Last
trade: 1181.0, 24 hour volume: 27111.34861041, 24 hour low: 1129.0, 24 hour high: 1196.6, 24 hour vwap: None
ben_vulpes: anyways, having
thought about "testing"
trb, i am interested
to hear what kinds of
tests framedragger would write
☟︎ ben_vulpes: total outstanding, not
traded over daily mining vol
mircea_popescu: also wtf are
they on about, 3600 bitcoin mined a day, 10-15k
traded a day (on fiatola outlets), 30-50k
total.
ben_vulpes: to jump over
to mod6's
thread for half a second, both he and i have our own suite of automated
tests
mircea_popescu: ben_vulpes isn't all
teh butthurt delicious
though ? "we are very upset
that apparently we don't matter ; also we won't mention mp's warning about all
this because
then it won't burn so much."
ben_vulpes: "in stark contrast
to gold, where daily
trade volume exceeds
total mined by several orders of magnitude"
ben_vulpes: "daily
trade volume is only a small volume of
total bitcoin mined"
mod6: <+ben_vulpes> bashops uber alles << yeah, CI
to mean doesn't mean "must use current devop-isms". we could build our own automated
toolset. np.
ben_vulpes: "because we've made it impractical
to
trade
the underlying, nobody
trades
the underlying on our wholly-owned venues"
ben_vulpes: "exchanges
that account for
the bulk of
trading are subject
to little regulatory oversight and
that existing know-your-customer or identity-verification measures are lax and can be easily bypassed"
ben_vulpes: > "the Commission believes
that
the significant markets for bitcoin are unregulated."
Framedragger: asciilifeform: are you doing
this
to prototype your 32b
tx header index idea?
a111: Logged on 2017-03-11 23:56 mircea_popescu: script needs
to be killed / specified.
mircea_popescu: ahahahaha. so in further "everyone in sweden is just asking
to be raped with a
toilet plunger", nobel prize for literature -> bob dylan.
mircea_popescu: anyway, point being, most
txn are small but long
tail exists.
mircea_popescu: well,
they were unspent before. fucking up
the prb dried shit echafaudage
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform
take for instance famous davout
txn paying out bitbet.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform i measure it continuously,
this is just distilled impression over years
mircea_popescu: > 10kb
tx are rare, but not inexistent. and
then
there's periodic massive ones.
phf: possibly proper adatron solution would be
to allocate a block and use it as operational space
too
mircea_popescu: anyway, proper adatron ->
trb-i -> fixed 2/2
txn model.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform in
theory
they shouldn't be capped outside of
the block size.
phf: i believe it's not explicitly bound (i combed for limits while writing lisp btc and found none for any of
the struct combinations)
mircea_popescu: because block 500 with hash x can't be followed by block 501 with hash x equal
to itself because
that block 501 would be
trying
to spend outputs
that are already spent.