log☇︎
72300+ entries in 0.528s
mircea_popescu: one's like "you were in a coma for the past thirty years, here's what happened that you don't remember" ; the other's like "you had a hallucinatory episode, your history for the past x period is bad and you'll have to rewrite it".
mircea_popescu: there's a difference between extension and reorg, however.
asciilifeform: (blocks really oughta live in antifuse rom. we had a thread..)
mircea_popescu: but the reason it's mired in "first, experiment, profile" is because this is EXACTLY the sort of thing which should theoretically work out of the box on a modern nix, and ABSOLUTELY never does, at all. central lizard fodder.
mircea_popescu: but i have nfi whether this is even feasible, because this'd be step 2, after the "hey, what happens if you fill a disk with symlinks" EXPERIMENT returns some fucking results.
mircea_popescu: no, it'll be a mildly configured ext4 i guess
asciilifeform: (a trb-i item )
asciilifeform: so this'd be a new fs.
asciilifeform: symlink gets you a file containing desired block, but there is no way on any unix fs that i know of, to symlink to ~an offset inside a file~
mircea_popescu: there is that. perhaps a better indexing scheme could be had. hence the fucking symlinks
asciilifeform: a good raid card will aggregate BLOCK accesses
asciilifeform: nor has any means for bolting on such a thing
mircea_popescu: the other problem is that a good db fix is a very large project, because bitcoin is written insanely. and our fs db isn't moving, last i heard a month ago someone was going to try and profile an extx ☟︎
mircea_popescu: now then : a fix for the db would significantly improve a few classes of block verification delays ; and it would alleviate blackhole-like behaviour due to that, node's frozen checking a new block. there's at least 3 different dos vectors for other nodes, and a) the foregoing wouldn't help ; b) if it helped the enemy could easily upregulate the crapflood to compensate. ☟︎
asciilifeform: i also have a test going where :
asciilifeform: all i got is a stopwatch. the idea is, mod6 et al can run same stopwatch, on other boxes, with other types of disk
mircea_popescu: which can be briefly summarized as "alf : omg all blackhole is disk wait for db ; mp : thatr's a factor, there's more" repeated a dozen times.
a111: Logged on 2016-12-29 23:20 asciilifeform: type2 ( pete_dushenski's ) is the garden variety shitflood. which is sometimes solved by ip ban, but only in the case of 'shrapnel addressed to occupant', i.e. idiot prb nodes wildly spamming crapolade, and not in the 'bullet with your name on it' case, where somebody actually has a sybil constellation drowning your trb node in liquishit, with no SINGLE ip misbehaving in any way
mircea_popescu: it IS a problem.
asciilifeform: mno, we had a thread where i cut'em up into classes
mircea_popescu: "i observed something on three blocks on one machine and here's the 100% conclusion ; tune in tomorrow for another one that a) fails to reference how i was wrong yesterday or address why and b) offer another 100% plus measures to be taken" is entirely undistinguishable.
mircea_popescu: that specific sort of retard is specified as follows : "i heard about bitcoin yesterday, and i have a solution!".
mircea_popescu: the problem with prb is that it's run by a specific sort of retard.
asciilifeform: the 'type 2' (non-verification) blackhole goes right back to the fundamental question of 'something to all comers', how much disk thrashing does a derp get to invoke simply by coming up with a not-yet-banned ip and a pseudonode. ☟︎
asciilifeform: incidentally, rationing by ip is a nonstarter, notice that the requests come from a multitude of 'nodes'.
asciilifeform: instead we see what appears to be a node simply pecked to death by queued-up getdata-for-block flood
asciilifeform: a blackhole certifiably NOT connected with block verification.
asciilifeform: in very other lulz, http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2017-February/031615.html ( https://archive.is/jLUGT ) << 'Bruce Schneier has recently published an impassioned plea for a United States Federal Internet Security Agency, which would likely gain control of civilian cryptography, among many other munitions.'
a111: Logged on 2016-12-03 01:35 phf: http://btcbase.org/log/2016-09-28#1549612 << so normal action is ^AACTION ... ^A, turns that when the line is too long it gets cut off (which is normal behavior) but in case of action none of client seem to do the regular split, meanwhile the irc server cutsoff terminating ^A, which breaks most parsers (including mine)
mircea_popescu: also cnnleaks.com if anyone still somehow gives a shit about the fake media orgs.
mircea_popescu: "A 17-year-old transgender boy won a Texas state girls wrestling title on Saturday".
mircea_popescu: in a shocking development...
danielpbarron: without any consensus changes, you could put up a node that will only relay transactions which send a fee to itself. user A wants to send transaction X so makes a few versions of it (doublespends) each sending to same place but giving relay fee to whichever node takes it. whoever gets it to a miner first gets the fee
asciilifeform: miners get one hell of a free ride, while node operators get such a thick shaft, that there are -- contrary to appearances - virtually none left.
danielpbarron: a re-occurring cost? like having to replace tools as they wear?
asciilifeform: danielpbarron: it ain't 'a cost', like buying a hammer, it's a monotonically-increasing bleed
danielpbarron: but to have the ability to send/recieve transactions there is the assumption that the space will be wasted -- user takes on the cost of buying a tool in order to use the skill
mircea_popescu: anyway, to get back to the wallet : i would fucking love to see a mpfhf collision on 513 byte input.
mircea_popescu: danielpbarron if we use a fixed block width it will waste disk space.
danielpbarron: isn't the vacant block easier for you to validate? shouldn't you prefer most blocks to be vacant except when you have a transaction to send?
asciilifeform: ( today a miner can occupy as much of youts and my disk with shit tx, as he wants )
mircea_popescu: this is not a factual descreiption. the transition from opportunity cost + 0 to opportunity cost + epsilon may matter, but so far neither record nor theory offer any convincing reason it would.
asciilifeform: who dun give a shit about fees
mircea_popescu: looky, a common strategy of students that are not in possession of the material is to resolve those problems they think they know how.
asciilifeform: there ever being any, is a perversion
asciilifeform: punishments are beneficial, even if a beheading does not grow a corresponding new head on somebody else, or undo the crime which led to the sentence
asciilifeform: possibly it makes more sense to think of the hypothetical 'god fee' as a ~punishment~ of tx-ignoring miners, rather than a payment to relayers.
asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: if 'a' can shit out tx, 'b' shoulders the cost, but unrelated 'c' is paid by a, you have socialistleak.
asciilifeform: danielpbarron: a block, just occupying its 1MB on my disk, costs something.
mircea_popescu: rent has been, historically, a poor dike against socialist tide.
mircea_popescu: it's a rent.
asciilifeform: no practical way, afaik, to do such a thing
danielpbarron: you have to process something. a confirmation is a confirmation
danielpbarron: not a cost to anyone who already had a tx confirmed 1 to 5 blocks ago
asciilifeform: when miner makes empty block, he imposes a cost of cou and disk on every current and future user of the coin
danielpbarron: could make it so a tx spending the smallest unspent output without a sig is considered valid
asciilifeform: a null seat in a block, IS, i argue, a type of junk tx
asciilifeform: we have, if you will, a kind of leak. which is what all socialisms is, a disjunction where 'i can eat, these others -- pay'
asciilifeform: right now when you make a tx, ~infinite unrelated third parties eat the cost.
asciilifeform: the only practical way to do this, afaik, is a deflatory 'gods fee' per tx.
asciilifeform: not only to verify it, again and again every time a new machine is stood up,
asciilifeform: generating and broadcasting a tx imposes a cost on all users, for all time
asciilifeform: btw i suspect that 'tx must include a micro libation to the gods' -- i.e. a leak -- is a necessary component of 'hard vacuum', 0socialism trbi as discussed earlier
danielpbarron: or leaked to a future block to be claimed along with tx fees
a111: Logged on 2017-01-17 00:21 asciilifeform: to possibly squeeze something useful from thread: as i understand, a lamport-based 'trb-i' ~could~ run on z80.
mircea_popescu: in any case i'm not a huge fan of the current address derivation scheme
asciilifeform: so, for instance, you can prove that a k-of-k (must have ALL parts) shamir split, where you then take each share and encipher with different method -- will NEVER be weaker than the strongest cipher used. ☟︎
asciilifeform: i suspect that the most that can be hoped for, is a large pile of items that are provable to add ~zero or more~ headache to the enemy, individually AND in the aggregate.
asciilifeform: much less a guaranteed-headache for enemy.
asciilifeform: eh we don't even have a cipher of known hardness, nor any approach to one.
mircea_popescu: (i dunno if you recall the net history, was at a point swedish torrent published openly mockful "takedowns" on its website)
mircea_popescu: turns out usg is more than happy to bomb a whole dc, or for that matter wedding party.
mircea_popescu: whenever your design calls for "and then they will go in front of the cannons, break the enemy's arms and beat them into a pulp with the broken arms" you're not asking for a merchant, but for a soldier.
asciilifeform: how is it a government ?
asciilifeform: and it is very much in his interest to do a proper job.
mircea_popescu: yes but now you depend on a type of tx - the moving fallbacks.
asciilifeform: the other thing is, 'fallback' is a marketable ( per http://btcbase.org/log/2017-02-25#1618260 ) service. you can post a bond with somebody, and he gives you a fresh addr that you can use as fallback (if you drink it - he drinks up your bond, which is presumably more valuable than the addr amt.) ☝︎
asciilifeform: 1 more upstack : it is possible to make a repudiatable fallback. ( how : you publish the privkey of the fallback addr, after, of course, you've successfully moved its contents to a new one. ) now it is not enough for enemy to find some d00d who knows the privkey to said fallback -- he also has to know ~who had it at time t~, because today ~everyone~ has it.
asciilifeform: unless someone were to discover a variant of 'zkp' that is not a cynical fraud (fat chance, imho) -- this is what you get.
asciilifeform: well you would use a virginal pile of coin as the cosigner
asciilifeform: ( to revisit upstack : a transaction could have any number of blinded inputs, ordered by priority, if the ~sum~ moved is public, and there is at least 1 nonblinded fallback 'cosigner' input carried along. )
asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: last i heard, they set up a 'parallel whitehouse taiwan' to 'report' on.
asciilifeform: that way you can guarantee the validity of a blinded tx.
asciilifeform: you could permit a tx to have an encrypted input, if it has a verifiable fallback input, rather like 'co-signer' in banking world
mircea_popescu: and note that we';re not the onyl ones aware. enemy has placed a strategic urbit right on this space.
mircea_popescu: anyway, there might be others, i make no pretense to exhaustivity, hence why this is a very early phase of the design. we don't well know the space yet.
asciilifeform: now, a magical squaring of the 'anonymous tx' circle, where you lose ~nothing~, can prove a balance, verify a tx, and send entirely blinded, that satisfies everyone -- would technologically supplant classical algo. but there is no sign that such a thing is possible.
mircea_popescu: take the issue of "must have all blocks". there's a strong political incentive to supplant the technological failure.
asciilifeform: 'it won't grind to a halt in few years' is not 'political incentive' ?
mircea_popescu: absent a good or at least workable breakthrough in this vein, there's no strong technological incentive to move to trb-i
asciilifeform: to validate a tx, you gotta know that it is spending a valid input
asciilifeform: i recall a proposal where ^
asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: how do you propose to force miners to include a particular tx ?
asciilifeform: ( if huckster can sell piss-cum-ink to chumps as 'elixir of immortality' -- is this a bug in piss? or in ink ? that he can do this )
mircea_popescu: idiot example #2 : a trb which allows txn to be blocked by others than their issuers is ALSO a "way to do things" which doesn't in fact work, and therefore, exactly equivalent to the peter todd & prb idiots item
mircea_popescu: idiot example #1 : peter todd & prb idiots came up with "a way to do things", which does not in fact work. ☟︎
asciilifeform: the fact of todd's trick being a thing, does not impose, afaik, any costs on legit users of bitcoin
mircea_popescu: you keep fixating on a completely nonsensical interpretation of the comparison.
asciilifeform: that wasn't a legit bitcoin tx tho
mircea_popescu: never mind that. the problem is that if your tx being included depends on you having a miner, you don't actually have a system. just like the 3bullshit isn't a system.