justusranvier
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1013
|
|
August 11, 2015, 09:21:59 PM |
|
I question the need for new messages to help SPV clients find the right path because 1) they seem exploitable to me and 2) all they need is the header chain to find the right path and headers are already short and fast to transmit. Waiting for x blocks again seems to protect them if you assume a majority of well connected miners.
This is a far weaker security model that what is achievable. If you can point a way to exploit this technique, I'd appreciate having it pointed out: https://gist.github.com/justusranvier/451616fa4697b5f25f60
|
|
|
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
August 11, 2015, 09:35:52 PM |
|
going UP:
|
|
|
|
rocks
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1153
Merit: 1000
|
|
August 11, 2015, 09:49:59 PM Last edit: August 11, 2015, 10:01:47 PM by rocks |
|
Have you guys seen this, a DAC gambling/prediction engine built on top of Ethereum http://reason.com/blog/2015/08/11/augur-gambling-prediction-ethereumI think this is the first example of a true DAC out in the wild that I've seen. Bitcoin still hasn't even gotten started yet. Edit: the reason folks are solid libertarians but most of them still don't get bitcoin.
|
|
|
|
jmw74
|
|
August 11, 2015, 09:53:41 PM |
|
I question the need for new messages to help SPV clients find the right path because 1) they seem exploitable to me and 2) all they need is the header chain to find the right path and headers are already short and fast to transmit. Waiting for x blocks again seems to protect them if you assume a majority of well connected miners.
This is a far weaker security model that what is achievable. If you can point a way to exploit this technique, I'd appreciate having it pointed out: https://gist.github.com/justusranvier/451616fa4697b5f25f60I'm a bit shocked that no one is talking about this idea. It would greatly increase the security (and hence the value) of SPV clients and allow far greater scaling with almost no sacrifice in security.
|
|
|
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
August 11, 2015, 09:54:10 PM |
|
market responding well to the arrival of XT! iCEBLOW & co is going to get blown away:
|
|
|
|
rocks
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1153
Merit: 1000
|
|
August 11, 2015, 09:57:59 PM |
|
I question the need for new messages to help SPV clients find the right path because 1) they seem exploitable to me and 2) all they need is the header chain to find the right path and headers are already short and fast to transmit. Waiting for x blocks again seems to protect them if you assume a majority of well connected miners.
This is a far weaker security model that what is achievable. If you can point a way to exploit this technique, I'd appreciate having it pointed out: https://gist.github.com/justusranvier/451616fa4697b5f25f60I guess I'm just expressing the opinion that the current header based proof if work mechanism is working fine so far and is difficult to exploit. I'll take a look when I have time (but you're a smart guy so I'm sure the solution is strong). Its just that in this instance I'm not sure we have a problem yet, and I'm starting to take a if its not broke why fix it view largely out of fear that an unneeded change might have adverse unknown consequences (but maybe we will someday and so its very useful to have solutions ready)
|
|
|
|
justusranvier
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1013
|
|
August 11, 2015, 10:02:00 PM |
|
I'm a bit shocked that no one is talking about this idea.
It would greatly increase the security (and hence the value) of SPV clients and allow far greater scaling with almost no sacrifice in security.
A pessimistic explanation would be that maybe nobody actually wants solutions to any of Bitcoin's problems. They just want to have problems to point to as excuses for furthering one agenda or another.
|
|
|
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
August 11, 2015, 10:03:40 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
Erdogan
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1005
|
|
August 11, 2015, 10:12:04 PM |
|
It is resolved. We won. The devil lost.
|
|
|
|
thezerg
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1010
|
|
August 11, 2015, 10:13:03 PM |
|
this sounds exactly like something i'd say: The Blockstream Business Plan (self.Bitcoin) submitted an hour ago * by Celean
And if this is true Blockstream is making a HUGE mistake. I don't think many people are doing multiple txns per day, every day right now. I don't even think many people do 1 txn per week. I doubt that people will be willing to sequester coins into the LN for significant periods (no I have no facts to back up this intuition). So I don't think that the lightning network solves the problem we have today which is getting people to do their FIRST txn (expand the network) and then getting them to use it periodically (use encourages merchants to accept it). Once people are using BTC a couple times per day, LN is becomes very valuable. Its actually WORSE if you do just one txn in a payment channel (it takes 2 blockchain txns instead of 1). So LN won't actually solve the typical use pattern today. And if that pattern is forced to pay high fees people will choose other payment options stagnating Bitcoin growth (or best case transforms into low velocity digital gold) to the point where we'll never need the volumes LN can offer.
|
|
|
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
August 11, 2015, 10:14:59 PM |
|
this sounds exactly like something i'd say: The Blockstream Business Plan (self.Bitcoin) submitted an hour ago * by Celean
And if this is true Blockstream is making a HUGE mistake. I don't think many people are doing multiple txns per day, every day right now. I don't even think many people do 1 txn per week. I doubt that people will be willing to sequester coins into the LN for significant periods (no I have no facts to back up this intuition). So I don't think that the lightning network solves the problem we have today which is getting people to do their FIRST txn (expand the network) and then getting them to use it periodically (use encourages merchants to accept it). Once people are using BTC a couple times per day, LN is becomes very valuable. Its actually WORSE if you do just one txn in a payment channel (it takes 2 blockchain txns instead of 1). So LN won't actually solve the typical use pattern today. And if that pattern is forced to pay high fees people will choose other payment options stagnating Bitcoin growth (or best case transforms into low velocity digital gold) to the point where we'll never need the volumes LN can offer. it was never about practicality or common sense. let alone fairness. it was about greed.
|
|
|
|
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2156
Merit: 1072
Crypto is the separation of Power and State.
|
|
August 11, 2015, 10:16:10 PM |
|
Just to clear things up, that thread wasn't removed by a moderator, I removed it to address some factual inaccuracies and add some additional sources. It is now reposted. So much for thermos being the "epitome of authoritarianism" and ready to start "book burnings." If you and the toxic Redditards (eg Frap.doc) could learn the diff between moderation and censorship, that would be great. XTnodes = 3%Wow, very disruption. Such revolutionary!
|
██████████ ██████████████████ ██████████████████████ ██████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████████ ██████████████ ██████████████ ████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████ ██████████████████████ ██████████████████ ██████████ Monero
|
| "The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy." David Chaum 1996 "Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect." Adam Back 2014
|
| | |
|
|
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
August 11, 2015, 10:19:09 PM |
|
Big middle finger to iCEBLOW, brg444, tvbcof, and MOA:
|
|
|
|
iCEBREAKER
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2156
Merit: 1072
Crypto is the separation of Power and State.
|
|
August 11, 2015, 10:24:34 PM |
|
it was never about practicality or common sense. let alone fairness.
it was about greed.
Attacking what you imagine to be people's motivations is easy. Refuting the actual computer science and game theory is hard:
|
██████████ ██████████████████ ██████████████████████ ██████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████████████ ████████████████████████████████ ██████████████ ██████████████ ████████████████████████████ ██████████████████████████ ██████████████████████ ██████████████████ ██████████ Monero
|
| "The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy." David Chaum 1996 "Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect." Adam Back 2014
|
| | |
|
|
|
brg444
|
|
August 11, 2015, 10:26:10 PM |
|
Big middle finger to iCEBLOW, brg444, tvbcof, and MOA: you still playing that game where you pretend any random thing that suits your delusions is confirmed true if price goes up maybe you should move away from the keyboard forever then, we had a nice little rally that time you went camping or w/e
|
"I believe this will be the ultimate fate of Bitcoin, to be the "high-powered money" that serves as a reserve currency for banks that issue their own digital cash." Hal Finney, Dec. 2010
|
|
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
August 11, 2015, 10:28:07 PM Last edit: August 11, 2015, 11:23:04 PM by cypherdoc |
|
it was never about practicality or common sense. let alone fairness.
it was about greed.
Attacking what you imagine to be people's motivations is easy. Refuting the actual computer science and game theory is hard: note the non-technical assumption that idiot makes in his post upon which he bases all his technical mis-steps. he's wrong. where Bitcoin XT is headed, there's a big enough pie to bring every miner currently involved in the space along for the ride. and the miners know this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=or65M4Ht4Kk
|
|
|
|
Peter R
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1007
|
|
August 11, 2015, 10:29:16 PM |
|
Just to clear things up, that thread wasn't removed by a moderator, I removed it to address some factual inaccuracies and add some additional sources. It is now reposted. So much for thermos being the "epitome of authoritarianism" and ready to start "book burnings." You're referring to a totally different post that was deleted by the author (the one about the Blockstream Business Plan). Just look three comments up:
|
|
|
|
awemany
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
|
August 11, 2015, 10:36:57 PM |
|
[...]
So I don't think that the lightning network solves the problem we have today which is getting people to do their FIRST txn (expand the network) and then getting them to use it periodically (use encourages merchants to accept it).
Once people are using BTC a couple times per day, LN is becomes very valuable. Its actually WORSE if you do just one txn in a payment channel (it takes 2 blockchain txns instead of 1).
So LN won't actually solve the typical use pattern today. And if that pattern is forced to pay high fees people will choose other payment options stagnating Bitcoin growth (or best case transforms into low velocity digital gold) to the point where we'll never need the volumes LN can offer.
This is actually a great argument! I think you are completely 100% correct here, but to have another strong case for the blocksize increase, what we would need to have here is some data on actual usage patterns of Bitcoin to support this argument. Did someone already extract 'typical spending patterns' vs. 'typical investment patterns' from the Blockchain?
|
|
|
|
Peter R
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1007
|
|
August 11, 2015, 10:39:25 PM |
|
[...]
So I don't think that the lightning network solves the problem we have today which is getting people to do their FIRST txn (expand the network) and then getting them to use it periodically (use encourages merchants to accept it).
Once people are using BTC a couple times per day, LN is becomes very valuable. Its actually WORSE if you do just one txn in a payment channel (it takes 2 blockchain txns instead of 1).
So LN won't actually solve the typical use pattern today. And if that pattern is forced to pay high fees people will choose other payment options stagnating Bitcoin growth (or best case transforms into low velocity digital gold) to the point where we'll never need the volumes LN can offer.
This is actually a great argument! … +2. Yes, it is a great argument thezerg!
|
|
|
|
cypherdoc (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002
|
|
August 11, 2015, 10:41:22 PM |
|
this sounds exactly like something i'd say:
The Blockstream Business Plan (self.Bitcoin)-
what is really going on here is that Blockstream wants to shift the long term miner tx fees away from the mainchain into SC & LN tx fees paid to their federated nodes, LN gateways, & consulting fees for SC's.
|
|
|
|
|