4709 entries in 0.463s
davout: ben_vulpes: you might just as well spend that back to
deedbot's wallet by broadcasting a second transaction at the same time
davout: also there was another thing regarding
deedbot, if all deeds are simply concatenated before being hashed into a bitcoin private key, that means anyone watching the process taking place can deduce the bitcoin private key that's going to be generated, and claim the coins that'll be sent there
Apocalyptic: davout sounds right,
deedbot can verify a payment was made to that address and hence include it retrospectively
davout: BingoBoingo: sure, but if your timestamping respects
deedbot's spec just get it included along
BingoBoingo: But part of the
deedbot appeal is also hosting the deeds as a stronger pastebin/dpaste alternative.
davout: you can just sha256 your content, make an address out of that, send a bitcent there, and since that's how
deedbot is supposed to work, you get your stuff
deedbot-timestamped before
deedbot even exists
davout: BingoBoingo: you can already timestamp some stuff and get
deedbot to accept it later as previously timestamped, that is, if the bundle structure is already defined
BingoBoingo thinks this could have been a perfect use of
deedbot mircea_popescu: undata davout so was one of you two picking up
deedbot ?
mircea_popescu: so that someone in 3714, with nothing but an inscription of
deedbot's deeds, can verify our contracts just as well as we can.
davout: say i want to timestamp a contract i made with someone also in the L2 group as nested clearsigns, i doesn't really matter which signature is checked by
deedbot, right?
davout: why do you absolutely want to shoehorn your conception of a notary into
deedbot?
davout: why the hell would it need
deedbot to testify to that too ?
davout: undata: you fail to comprehend that it's not
deedbot's job to certify to a third party that the contract is signed by an identified party, gpg already does that
davout: anyway, my point wrt to
deedbot is that it's supposed to be used by ppl with L1/L2 trust, it doesn't need to check gpg signatures, so let anyone with +v in -assets use it, do away with the requirement that a keyid belonging to someone in assbot's wot be presented or maliciously hammered into the message
davout: the crux is 'verified keys', if
deedbot doesn't maintain a full keyring at all times it can't pull fingerprints
davout: lol,
deedbot isn't supposed to verify sigs amirite
davout: well, i was just reading about them in the
deedbot spec
davout: look, there is a reason it's called
deedbot, and not notarybot, it's none of
deedbot's business to know what happened, for all you know the notarized stuff could perfectly be encrypted
davout: but if you'd be ok with having some API call simply return the array of fingerprints in realtime, that'd be the easiest
deedbot-wise :D
davout: - maintain a full asswot keyring on
deedbot's server
undata: seems like the parties wishing to publish should provide coin to the
deedbot operator
Apocalyptic: davout, so you're taking the
deedbot project ?
davout: thing is, i was also reading mp's
deedbot spec, the part i was wondering about was the "extract keyid from signed message, and use it in w.b-a.link URL"
danielpbarron: this is for
deedbot right? don't you already know what the last pubkey was?
punkman: mircea_popescu: punkman is off the
deedbot project after the horrid failure of the past month << I accept that
punkman: asciilifeform genuinely wonderf wtf happened to
deedbot 2 << lack of hosting admin, mostly
RagnarDanneskjol: re molokization of
deedbot v2.0 - no idea what you're talkin about? has nothing to do with me. also don't recall pestering anyone here ever..once in a blue moon I will ask questions in pm if I'm not authed/voiced.
mircea_popescu: for that matter, if i find out the molokization of
deedbot v2.0 actually has anything to do with your meddling, i'll negrate you too.
mircea_popescu: you're not welcome to keep pestering people in pms, and
deedbot will be reimplemented for the third time.
mircea_popescu: punkman is off the
deedbot project after the horrid failure of the past month, and i've only not neg rated him yet because gribblewas off.
mircea_popescu: the thing where i put it in a pastedbin dun work, im sick of looking up the url for the
deedbot one.
ben_vulpes: punkman: yo what's the story with
deedbot and deeds.bitcoin-assets.com?
punkman: yeah not on
deedbot system, I got plenty of space on a dreamhost account
mircea_popescu: sahould be more in the scoopbot than in the
deedbot domain that, in the interest of not making a mess of things
mircea_popescu: you can dld your own copy. otherwise, punkman is maintaining the
deedbot service.
RagnarDanneskjol: punkman i think eventually you're gonna ahve to ditch electrum and run a daemon - these issues are somewhat known and why
deedbot 1.0 replaced it w/ api
punkman: nubbins`: so maybe
deedbot shouldn't be stripping the \n at eof << it's not really, just doesn't care for anything outside the first and last dash of a gpg message
nubbins`: so maybe
deedbot shouldn't be stripping the \n at eof
nubbins`: truthfully i wonder if
deedbot shouldn't be stripping the trailing \n
jurov: nooo, i dont' want to shove it through
deedbot mircea_popescu: suppose ninjashogun wants to push a patch for
deedbot. or, whatever, the cardano.
RagnarDanneskjol: deednoon|(somerandomnumber) must be someone who logged in from
deedbot.com irc web client fyi
BingoBoingo: ;;later tell punkman Thank you for doing
deedbot right.
mod6: and as far as "[R.1]" it should probably encompass both of our signed submissions of the charter to
deedbot mod6: so there should be a R.1 secion to the submission to
deedbot for the charter, and an R2 that ties back to his submission of the Treasurer's contract to the
deedbot mod6: just jurov's submission to the
deedbot jurov: oh and please kindly send me or to
deedbot your signed contracts
Pierre_Rochard: One thing I had in mind was Accounts Payable / Accounts Receivable integrated with GPG, WoT, and
deedbot BingoBoingo: Maybe fivezerotwo waits a few years and he can scrape his ransom out of the
deedbot bin?
mircea_popescu: joecool: what is this? is there documentation on it yet? <<< you mean the
deedbot ?
PeterL: for
deedbot, if you have multiple deeds waiting for confirmation, could you combine the transactions into a single bitcoin transaction?
gernika: Is there a seminal discussion on deeds/
deedbot I can read up on?
ben_vulpes: are you willing to share the source for
deedbot?
mircea_popescu: <ben_vulpes> punkman: would it be terribly onerous to get
deedbot to certify that multiple documents signed by different people are in fact the same document and that all of the signatures verify? <<< this is not conceptually possible tho.
ben_vulpes: punkman: would it be terribly onerous to get
deedbot to certify that multiple documents signed by different people are in fact the same document and that all of the signatures verify?
punkman: no genesis deed was LF, but
deedbot got CRLF version and it passed
mike_c: to have a list of ways the deed that
deedbot is given is modified before publishing?
mike_c: yeah, ok, so we won't run
deedbot on windows. what does this have to do with it mucking up messages it is given?
mike_c: having
deedbot muck up the message it is given seems retarded.
mike_c: whether or not you trust something signed by a windows user has little to do with
deedbot.
punkman: ok, so I think current
deedbot implementation would only look at the last signature in multisig message. How should it work ideally?
ben_vulpes: hey punkman how should
deedbot be fed multiply-signed documents?
decimation: I guess it's not worth worrying about until there's an uptake in
deedbot usage
jurov: nothing stops anyone from creating their own bundles completely, to prevent it would need
deedbot to have own key
jurov: nothing more and it can be resolved by checking of whether the tx originated from
deedbot's piggy
PeterL: I don't see any benefit the attacker would have over just submitting a deed to
deedbot?
jurov: it can be detected by fact that the payment did not go from
deedbot's address but i still dislike this
mircea_popescu: <PeterL> are you familiar with the
deedbot? << exactly.
decimation: so in your blob you put the chronological list of hashes for all deeds - user will be able to confirm that this blob was indeed put into the blockchain by
deedbot decimation: I'm not sure. It would be useful if punkman released some docs on exactly how
deedbot works
decimation: so either: mirror
deedbot or embed your magnet links to
deedbot's signed blob