Sept 26

If eth chain is 300gb and bitcoin 168gb, which is the success?


[10:38]
I'd actually like to see the tx count inside each, eth could just be inefficient


spunky
[10:52 PM]
If these ICOs were happening on BCC, I wonder how the tone would change?


coinstash [10:55 PM]
You have to be pretty smart to create an ICO on BCH. That alone excludes most of them.



[10:57]
https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/729oqc/underpants_gnomes_taking_over_crypto/
reddit
Underpants gnomes taking over crypto • r/CryptoCurrency
According to https://www.coingecko.com/ico?locale=en there are 111 ICOs currently vying for attention with a further 54 opening within the next...



spunky [10:58 PM]
ETH has a web interface for creating a new coin, so I heard. If btc cash had such a thing, would we still hate on ICOs I wonder? I think "Good for you, eth, good for you"


coinstash [10:58 PM]
Yes, I for one would still hate the majority of ICOs.


spunky [10:59 PM]
If we had btc cash ico, I might break off a lil' somethin' for it


primordial
[10:59 PM]
I would like that they were based on BCH sure, at least they would have a sound base.   I have never liked or used ETH



spunky [11:07 PM]
Wow, ballsy [https://satoshidice.com/verifygame.html?id=2355]



coinstash [11:07 PM]
@spunky It would depend on the purpose, the team and the plan. But yes, I'd be favourable to investing in a BCC ICO myself.


[11:08]
Someone risked 30 BCC on the roll of a die? Madness.


primordial
[11:09 PM]
all they got was 1.5 for risking 30?


spunky [11:09 PM]
Yes but 94% chance to win


bitsko [11:09 PM]
low risk. I still couldn't do it


coinstash [11:09 PM]
93% chance. Still risky.


primordial
[11:09 PM]
ah makes sense


spunky [11:09 PM]
They are now number 1 on the "Big Wins" list


primordial
[11:09 PM]
still negative long term since the return is only 5%


coinstash [11:10 PM]
Yeah, and the odds just dropped for everyone else.



[11:13]
@mxmbt2


mxmbt2 [11:13 PM]
joined general by invitation from coinstash.



spunky
[11:13 PM]
Hi friend


coinstash [11:14 PM]
@mxmbt2 is from Melbourne, and like to promote Bitcoin. (edited)


bitsko [11:17 PM]
welcome!


spunky [11:29 PM]
I am contributing around 25 tx per block at this point hahaha

1 reply 1 day ago View thread


coinstash [11:31 PM]
Bwahahahahaha
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/728npe/i_almost_threw_up_all_over_the_table_when_i_saw/
reddit
I almost threw up all over the table when I saw that photo. How can we fix this? • r/Bitcoin
56 points and 21 comments so far on reddit


 3 replies Last reply 1 day ago View thread


spunky [11:32 PM]
OMG YES!! HAHAHAA


moonkin48 [11:32 PM]
lol


spunky [11:32 PM]
Such a fucking baller shot too


moonkin48 [11:32 PM]
awesome


spunky [11:32 PM]
His expression like "sup bitches" (edited)

1 reply 1 day ago View thread


coinstash [11:32 PM]
Anything that makes r/bitcoin puke has to be gold.


spunky [11:36 PM]
I'll bet they ate it again straight from the table, like a dog


[11:37]
:vomit: :dogdance: :knife_fork_plate:


spunky [11:37 PM]
so mature


spunky
[11:39 PM]
Just scalped 0.5 bcc from satoshi dice, $25 of that is your money, wanna a refund dude? :stuck_out_tongue:


coinstash [11:39 PM]
Naah, I'm good. If $25 made that much difference I wouldn't have gambled it.


spunky
[11:40 PM]
You sure? You're talking to a guy who thinks we're all one here :wink:


coinstash [11:40 PM]
Buy yourself some beers dude.


spunky
[11:41 PM]
Cool cool, may as well quit while I'm ahead. Thanks for the cash XD


coinstash [11:42 PM]
Bloody dull since I started sleeping nights again. I miss the overnight rants.


spunky
[11:43 PM]
Yeah day time in here is pretty boring


[11:44]
Oh look, a win with no payout tx [https://satoshidice.com/verifygame.html?id=2431]


[11:44]
Must be some kind of double spend protection


spunky [11:54 PM]
Oh noes!! I think the site is broken, payouts aren't coming through for everyone


frido
[11:55 PM]
im getting an error


[11:55]
mempool something something through electroncash


spunky
[11:55 PM]
Yes if you place too many unconfirmed bets the actual network rejects you, saying the tx chain is too long in the mempool


frido [11:56 PM]
ah shit, sorry guys im not normally like that XD



----- Yesterday September 25th, 2017 -----
lechango [12:27 AM]
anyone think there's any truth to Amazon adding BTC?


robbot [12:33 AM]
none whatsoever


[12:33]
_if_ amazon were to do that


[12:33]
do you think they'd a) tell someone else and let them leak it before they announce it


shemuel [12:33 AM]
Did McAfee really say that?



robbot [12:33 AM]
b) not announce it even with only a month away from the supposed launch date


[12:34]
and c) do it right in the middle of two contentious hard forks


lechango [12:41 AM]
yeah, it really wouldn't make any sense to do it now if they were going to


frido
[12:42 AM]
tbh fuck that guy


spunky [12:43 AM]
Fuck McCofee?


lechango [12:43 AM]
Pretty sure the rumor didn't come from McAfee, correct me if i'm wrong tho


frido [12:44 AM]
mccaffee didnt say that.


[12:44]
he's smarter than that.


phoenix [12:44 AM]
It came from James Altucher afaik



spunky
[12:44 AM]
What a towel



lechango [12:44 AM]
never heard of him


phoenix
[12:45 AM]
he's a well known writer/investor in the US


[12:45]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Altucher
Wikipedia
James Altucher
James Altucher is an American hedge fund manager, entrepreneur, best-selling author, venture capitalist, and podcaster. He has founded or co-founded more than 20 companies, including Reset Inc. and StockPickr, and says he failed at 17 of them. He has published eleven books, and he is a frequent contributor to publications, including The Financial Times, TheStreet.com, TechCrunch, Seeking Alpha, Thought Catalog, and The Huffington Post. (79kB)


lechango [12:46 AM]
ew


[12:46]
looks like quite the slimy fellow


spunky
[12:47 AM]
I wonder if you could create a POS system where a third party could "sponsor" a business to support it, earning a little kickback from every purchase.


[12:48]
Sponsor buys all the equipment and business just needs to plug it in and learn what is a valid tx


kensalomon [12:48 AM]
Oh that happens with POS these days too I think


lechango [12:49 AM]
CIA is showing their hand if Amazon really does add BTC pre 2X fork



spunky
[12:50 AM]
Is that right? Hmm, I always thought the bank was the sponsor and the bank took all the kick backs and even charged a monthly fee for the privilege.


[12:51]
You could even arrange it so the sponsor drops off cash every month, so even if the business doesn't wanna deal with crypto right now, they will always wanna deal with cash. It would be no different to accepting fiat cash. Heh (edited)


kensalomon [12:51 AM]
Ah yea I was thinking more like renting to own type rental services


[12:53]
But yea I like the idea POS usually have a lot of time ins to how things work. It’s not like a card reader you can just add support for something and it work, it kind of revises things


[12:53]
Having written code on at least one type of POS application, it handles the confirmation of a transaction for you unless it’s cash


spunky [12:54 AM]
POS is kind of a chicken and egg problem, merchant doesn't wanna add it because they think they'll only get 4 tx every 12 months or something. Customer wants to spend but only a handful of merchants support it.


kensalomon [12:54 AM]
AcceptBitcoin.Cash dude, we need to get more merchants supporting it as payment


spunky [12:55 AM]
Ayyyeeeee love the design of that site, Semantic UI :heart: :heart:


kensalomon [12:56 AM]
But yes, I get it. We need more adoption. One day we might hit a critical mass where we don’t need these things but it’s like, “We’re starting a business, we are accepting AMEX, Visa  and then Mastetcard or Bitcoin Cash?


[12:56]
“


spunky
[12:56 AM]
I'm more thinking of IRL type scenarios. If such a POS system existed, I could "sponsor" all the places I regularly shop and become their first customer. Defeats the chicken/egg issue


kensalomon [12:56 AM]
Ah


[12:56]
You’re overthinking


[12:57]
You need to first get the manufacturer of it to add support


[12:57]
Then they won’t care what it is, if they get cash at the end and it has lower fees than Amex or Visa they will gladly take it


spunky [12:57 AM]
Damn, yeah that would be the silver bullet


[12:57]
I'm more thinking of bottom up, that would be top down


kensalomon [12:58 AM]
Trust me they all hate Amex fees but know it’s how you get good customers


[12:58]
Visa is easy they’re middle of the road fees


spunky [12:58 AM]
The machine is the property of the merchant bank though, the fee would remain I'm guessing?


kensalomon [12:59 AM]
But hey, if they get the same money at the end of the month and it’s lower fees, they all would be happy to take that since they already raise prices to account for a certain percentage of transactions to cost a percentage in fees


spunky [12:59 AM]
Unless you're saying you could get the machine to subvert the banking system, via a plugin in the machine or something? So an open devkit anyone can build plugins for?


kensalomon [12:59 AM]
I mean, it’s more appealing the lower the fees


[12:59]
You would probably just have a monthly minimum fee if you don’t do enough processing


[1:00]
Like a maintenance fee from a bank for an account that sits idle with not enough funds in it, but if it gets enough activity they wave the fee


[1:00]
Well the company like Bitpay or something processing things might have something like that going on but maybe not


[1:01]
Ideally the lower the cost to have it running the more likely they are to accept it


[1:05]
Think of it this way, you’re a small ice cream shop with an iPad register at the front desk that runs square and this silly plastic iPad holders


[1:07]
Now a person comes in and they have a gift card QR code on their phone, or they scan your QR code and the value of the transaction magically turns to zero either way


[1:07]
Do you care which they used?


spunky
[1:08 AM]
Yeah that's what I'm thinking, you could set up a business dedicated to merchant adoption. All infrastructure is owned by said sponsor. Sponsor is notified when a sale happens, sponsor can wire business the money or even drop in with cash. All merchant has to do is say "Yes".


kensalomon [1:08 AM]
Now what if the one scanning the QR code used Bitcoin Cash?


[1:09]
What you’re saying might be too much in respect that POS ties into so much you cannot just add a little contraption to a current system and call it a day.


spunky [1:10 AM]
You could totally build a dedicate device that handles it, purpose built, focused on low friction for the merchant


kensalomon [1:10 AM]
Your model works if you partner with a traditional bank to offer a good deal to anyone getting a business loan because you need to be in on the ground floor


spunky [1:11 AM]
Merchant could easily sponsor themselves and handle the backend of things, my experience shows that merchants are already "too busy" to look in to it.


kensalomon [1:11 AM]
I guess it could but I see it less adoptable


spunky [1:11 AM]
It creates the right incentives I think. When first good POS system arrives I'm gonna look in to it


kensalomon [1:12 AM]
I am all for that


[1:12]
Night now


[1:16]
Btw, @robbot is apparently working on a POS and hasn’t told me. WTF dude? I want in! (edited)


coinstash [1:16 AM]
@spunky I'm onto it mate.


spunky
[1:17 AM]
Hell yeah @coinstash you following me on this tho? Like the whole merchant sponsor thing? I can think of several businesses I would start a conversation with


coinstash [1:18 AM]
Only model I can see workable is an open source system with the money being made from the conversions. Potential users are too sparsely located for anything else.


[1:20]
Fucking bank rang back to qualify me for a loan and I hit the wrong button on the phone. FML.


spunky [1:23 AM]
So long as the solution is cheaper than an iPad I will test the concept


robbot
[1:31 AM]
>spunky [12:54 AM]
>POS is kind of a chicken and egg problem, merchant doesn't wanna add it because they think they'll only get 4 tx every 12 months or something. Customer wants to spend but only a handful of merchants support it.
(edited)


[1:31]
dont worry pal im on it


coinstash [1:43 AM]
After just having a discussion with a loan officer for the NAB and being refused an $80k loan on the basis that I don't have a job (I'm retired) I can't wait for the day when they all collapse and burn. I've been with these arseholes 35 years and can't get $80k. Fuck that.


[1:44]
Rigid immovable conditions. If they can't make you a slave to the system they don't want you as a customer.


brad1121
[1:44 AM]
Yea, you wont be able to get a loan anywhere I suspect. Unless you have young working age family who will co-sign


[1:45]
Investment !== income in their eyes :face_with_rolling_eyes:


coinstash [1:45 AM]
I have probably one of the highest credit ratings available and want only $80k for a $250k house. The loan officer I spoke to was an utter moron.


[1:46]
They have $189k of my money in their bank right now.


rightleftupper [1:46 AM]
A 250k house in Australia?


brad1121 [1:46 AM]
We dont all live in sydney / melbourne :wink:


coinstash [1:47 AM]
It's a Public Trustee auction. But they want cash in 42 days guaranteed.


brad1121 [1:47 AM]
Our 4bed place was ~280


rightleftupper [1:47 AM]
@brad1121 nice, where abouts?


brad1121 [1:47 AM]
Regional Vic


coinstash [1:47 AM]
Ths is 100km north of Brisbane in the middle of a rural area. (edited)


brad1121 [1:48 AM]
Our place on the gold coast was ~260


[1:48]
5 years ago


coinstash [1:50 AM]
I will never, ever ask a bank for anything again. They can go and get fucked.


brad1121
[1:51 AM]
My parents couldn't get a 150k loan on ~70k a year in stable company dividends...


[1:52]
same story basically... Told old, not income. No repayment capacity


coinstash [1:52 AM]
Brad, I have tried three or four times to get a loan in my life. In every case they claimed it was impossible. If that's the case how is it these refugees and low income earners own houses? (edited)


brad1121 [1:52 AM]
centrelink is stable income


[1:52]
you can get a 250k loan on centrelink


[1:53]
it;s why half the people in my street even have houses


[1:53]
Centrelink is even better, because the bank can deduct from it automatically before it even gets to you


coinstash [1:53 AM]
Like I said, I have $189k in the bank and only want $80k so how do they think I can't survive for 11 months on the remaining $19k? (edited)


brad1121
[1:54 AM]
110% crock of :poop:


coinstash [1:54 AM]
In 11 months I get the full pension which is $800 per fortnight. (edited)


brad1121
[1:54 AM]
They will probably give you that loan then....


[1:54]
fkcers (edited)


coinstash [1:54 AM]
Nope, no income no loan. That's EXACTLY what she said.


brad1121 [1:55 AM]
Not sure about pension, but the dole is income


coinstash [1:55 AM]
I'm not on the fucking dole, I'm retired. (edited)


brad1121 [1:55 AM]
Maybe you should go on the dole :facepalm:


coinstash [1:55 AM]
I don't qualify, I have $189k in the bank ferchissakes. (edited)


brad1121 [1:56 AM]
Yea tough spot. You could lose it all in an investment into some fancy online money you heard about :wink:


coinstash [1:56 AM]
My father's estate still owes me $40k and I have $100k in crypto.


[1:57]
I also own a house in NZ, two vehicles, two yachts and $20k worth of computers.


brad1121
[1:57 AM]
yea, you're boned dole wise


coinstash [1:57 AM]
But a bank won't lend me $80k?? FFS. Madness.


[1:57]
I just told her "you bank people are mad" and hung up.


brad1121 [1:58 AM]
Tried a broker? Some have access to the less secure loan vendors who will loan to a sheep, they just up the interest rate


coinstash [1:58 AM]
No, fuck that. I have the credit rating, their conditions are just arbitrary and fuckwitted. (edited)


[2:00]
So, I'll just forget about this bargain. There will be others. And I'll pay cash and the bank will get nothing. No interest. Zero.


brad1121
[2:02 AM]
There's another scam market there. The low income earners loans. Lend you money, charge higher interest, mortgage insurance and then harsh repayment rules like u can't pay it off faster.. setting up poor stupid people to default.


coinstash [2:03 AM]
If I could have gotten a loan in the 70s under those conditions I would have taken it. Instead I paid rent (dead money) for 40 years.


brad1121
[2:03 AM]
Yea I knew to get out of the rent game asap


[2:03]
Now I'm the landlord


coinstash [2:12 AM]
I could have told her that I paid myself $20k out of crypto gains last year, but fuck them. It's none of their business where my money comes from.


brad1121 [2:16 AM]
2nd that


coinstash [2:16 AM]
And because I had no other income it was tax free.


[2:18]
And I could take another $20k today tax free as well.


[2:18]
So with the $40k my father's estate still owes me, there's $60k of it already.


[2:20]
In fact I can get another $10k on my fucking credit card.


brad1121
[2:20 AM]
Almost there


coinstash [2:21 AM]
Trouble is I don't have the $40k yet, my stupid sister has been dragging her heels finalizing the accounts since March.


[2:23]
She also screwed up and paid far too much in taxes. (edited)


[2:27]
Hopefully it will convert into CGT credits, which I am most happy with.


[2:28]
But until I see the full accounts I have no idea what she has been doing with the estate paperwork.


brad1121 [2:35 AM]
Bit irritating I'm sure.


[2:35]
The wifes work deals with all sorts of mess and rubbish regarding families fighting over estates.


coinstash [2:36 AM]
I should have received $346k from my father's estate. Due to her mismanagement it looks as if I'll only get $290k


[2:37]
Apparently the rest went to accountants, lawyers and the ATO.


rt121212121 [2:37 AM]
Man, you're bumming me out with your family drama.  I hate hearing about the mistakes my own family make


[2:37]
I'm always like "I don't want to hear about how X made a stupid decision they didn't think about"


coinstash [2:38 AM]
The problem was the will. It was a fucking nightmare.


otaci [2:39 AM]
this has been resolved, i've received what was due from satoshi dice



rt121212121 [2:39 AM]
Can't you take her to court and get the losses taken out of her share :slightly_smiling_face:


coinstash [2:39 AM]
Until I have accounts I don't even know what the hell she did.


rt121212121 [2:40 AM]
Hmm, do I want to put myself through the pain of watching the new social justice star trek..  I kind of feel like I have to see how bad it is in their communist future where there is no bitcoin


coinstash [2:41 AM]
Don't they have Galactic Credits or something?
1 reply 1 day ago View thread


rt121212121 [2:44 AM]
> During an excursion to 1986-era San Francisco, Kirk told Spock about 20th century Earth, saying, "They're still using money. We need to get some."


[2:44]
> In 2364, Jean-Luc Picard tried to explain to Ralph Offenhouse, a financier from the 20th century, that there would be no need for his services any longer. "A lot has changed in three hundred years," said Picard. "People are no longer obsessed with the accumulation of 'things.' We have eliminated hunger, want, the need for possessions."


[2:45]
Commies.


[2:45]
Let's not pretend it wouldn't be a galactic venezuela.  In a real future, it'd be bitcoin.


kokansei [2:50 AM]
If only they had stopped at "hunger and want"


rt121212121
[2:51 AM]
who has the corner apartment, or the penthouse?  which commie is most deserving?
1 reply 1 day ago View thread


rt121212121 [2:51 AM]
Or do they only build corner apartments in the tower and penthouse corners at that (edited)


kokansei [2:51 AM]
Here in the 21st century Western world, we also eliminated hunger and want... With capitalism, bitches


[2:52]
Just submit to Federation testing, and you will be assigned an appropriate dwelling, citizen


rt121212121
[2:52 AM]
And appropriate job..


kokansei [2:53 AM]
Who needs money when you can brownnose your way to success by sucking Picard's dick?


rt121212121
[2:53 AM]
Try approaching picard from another angle and then you wouldn't have to complain about your nose being brown?



[2:55]
Anyway, bitcorn. :corn:


hugobits88 [2:56 AM]
Who ever placed 30 BCC on satoshi dice has balls of steel.


[2:57]
Transactions are on the rise thanks too


[2:57]
.....


rt121212121 [2:57 AM]
Hopefully satoshi dice have fixed the bugs with not paying out


hugobits88 [2:58 AM]
Ye... that does not sound good


rt121212121 [2:58 AM]
i expect that since @otaci got his  payment, it should be fixed (edited)


hugobits88 [2:58 AM]
Thumbs up then



[2:59]
I'm enjoying the momentum that has been created so far.


[2:59]
Bitcoin Cash in general.


otaci [3:03 AM]
hmm, not sure they've fixed the satoshi dice bug, but they are going through their logs and correcting ... this win has no tx at the time i wrote this https://satoshidice.com/verifygame.html?id=2679 (edited)


[3:04]
(note, its not mine)


rt121212121 [3:06 AM]
I wonder how profitable it is


otaci [3:08 AM]
it must be reasonably profitable - "On 18 July 2013, Erik Voorhees announced that SatoshiDice had been sold for 126,315 BTC, or US$12.4 million at the time of the announcement."
1 reply 1 day ago View thread


lechango [3:09 AM]
wow, so has someone just been sitting on it until now? Or possibly it was sold again?


[3:09]
2% house edge, over time that definitely adds up.


otaci [3:09 AM]
maybe, dunno ... its bloody addictive


coinstash [3:10 AM]
US$12.4M ??? That's batshit insane. (edited)


lechango [3:11 AM]
even more insane is to think Voorhees may still be sitting on that 126K BTC


hugobits88 [3:11 AM]
Definitely a honey pot


lechango [3:12 AM]
lol..


coinstash [3:12 AM]
That's about half a billion today. Christ.


hugobits88 [3:13 AM]
Voorhees! What a deal!


[3:15]
Who owns it now?


[3:18]
Wiki says Voorhees conducted a share buyback


rightleftupper [3:18 AM]
I don't think anyone knows for sure who bough tit


[3:18]
> A rumor is out there that the site is operated by and licensed under a Costa Rica company, Blockchain Limitada, however, googling the name shows no results. It's mysterious, but so far I think they are doing a good job.


[3:18]
>https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1740448.0
bitcointalk.org
who owns satoshidice
who owns satoshidice


hugobits88 [3:25 AM]
Has anyone here played around with Openbazaar 2.0?


Jason C [3:26 AM]
a little, it only has a few test products last time i checked


hugobits88 [3:26 AM]
Could it be used world wide?


[3:27]
Including logistics.


lechango [3:28 AM]
you'd think there's only a handful of people who'd have 126K+ BTC, even back in 2013


Jason C [3:28 AM]
my understanding is it just connects buyers/sellers, providing a platform for sale - shipping still needs to be handled by seller (edited)


zquestz [3:28 AM]
sup all


[3:29]
seeing huge spikes in traffic for acceptbitcoin.cash :smiley:



hugobits88 [3:29 AM]
Wazzup!!


zquestz
[3:29 AM]
watching stats from the sites I helped launch this weekend :smiley:


hugobits88 [3:32 AM]
It's an awesome platform. I'll spread the word around my village. Might get a few merchants on-board. I live in a tourist hot spot..


[3:32]
A Bitcoin Cash ATM would be perfect in this location.


zquestz [3:33 AM]
I would love to see some BCC ATM's show up :smiley:


[3:33]
Not seeing them in SF yet


[3:33]
a couple that do BTC/ETH


hugobits88 [3:33 AM]
It's unfortunately slow in Africa.. we currently have only one ATM in South Africa and it's only Bitcoin


[3:34]
Really? A couple!


[3:35]
I keep reloading the page to enjoy the Bitcoin spinner.. nice! :+1:


blockextreme [3:51 AM]
I guess google believes :stuck_out_tongue: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/728npe/i_almost_threw_up_all_over_the_table_when_i_saw/ (edited)


csw [3:53 AM]
lol


blockextreme [3:59 AM]
csw a lot of folks here asking for the HK conference videos. Its hard to wait :stuck_out_tongue:

 2 replies Last reply 1 day ago View thread


frido
[4:02 AM]
Soon tm.


zquestz [4:04 AM]
has been wanting to see them for sure


coinstash [4:04 AM]
Meh. He probably has weird socks on anyhow.


frido [4:09 AM]
i got a reply from uber


[4:09]
"Send a note our way via the "Help" option in app and we'll connect."


[4:09]
https://twitter.com/Crypt0_PimP/status/912173329741643781
DigitaL_PimP @Crypt0_PimP
Please consider accepting #BitcoinCash for payments @Uber_Support - it’s fast and secure, with low fees! More @  http://acceptbitcoin.cash
TwitterYesterday at 12:34 AM


[4:09]
#winning boizz


zquestz [4:10 AM]
Woot!


[4:10]
Servers are humming, both bitcoincash.org and acceptbitcoin.cash are getting good traffic right now :smiley:


frido [4:11 AM]
allot of people joining?


[4:11]
i mean visiting?


zquestz [4:11 AM]
yep, exactly


[4:12]
lots of activity in china right now


[4:14]
anyhow must get sleep


[4:14]
talk to you all later


frido [4:19 AM]
GN.


[4:19]
Acceptbitcoin.cash fucking rocks.
RT guys.


cryptorebel [4:42 AM]
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/72azmp/csw_shadow_banned_on_bitcoin_lol_what_did_you/
reddit
CSW shadow banned on /bitcoin - LoL - What did you post - evil tech? • r/btc
5 points and 0 comments so far on reddit



hyena [4:56 AM]
@frido what to think of those merchants who accept bitcoin cash via shapeshift? should such be listed on acceptbitcoin.cash ?
 3 replies Last reply 1 day ago View thread


cryptorebel [5:00 AM]
deadalnix seems to hate malleability doesnt seem to think it has much use case, is he wrong? https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/721rd8/bitcoin_cash_whitepaper_released/dnh6alw/?context=3
reddit
Bitcoin Cash Whitepaper released! • r/btc
126 points and 109 comments so far on reddit



[5:01]
hope he wont be pushing flex trans, i dont like flex trans


csw [5:02 AM]
He is wrong


[5:02]
And pushing flex trans will fork cash


[5:02]
Badically. It is death



singularity [5:11 AM]
Stop fudding CSW.


[5:12]
It worries me that instantly after BCC forked off of bitcoin you turn up and start using the exact same tactics I saw the blockstream gang use 2-3 years ago.



joeldalais
[5:18 AM]
its not fud


cryptorebel [5:18 AM]
we gotta nip this flex trans thing in the bud


joeldalais
[5:19 AM]
malleability has a use, is meant to be used, if you integrate flextrans then you destroy the purpose for which malleability was used in the 1st place


[5:19]
there is a weird fascination with "malleability MUST be fixed"


[5:19]
it doesn't



erik.beijnoff [5:20 AM]
As it is now, flextrans is implemented with a separate tx version. If you need malleability you can use the original tx type.


Jason C [5:20 AM]
what's the use case flex trans is enabling?



cryptorebel [5:21 AM]
if that is so, is there any danger, including economic danger of being forced off of the original tx type


erik.beijnoff [5:21 AM]
There’s always a danger in implementing new features in an existing system.


rightleftupper [5:21 AM]
it's too much, too early


erik.beijnoff [5:22 AM]
But it’s not forcing anyone off the existing tx type.


[5:22]
It’s just a suggested alternative format.


[5:23]
Aside, I don’t think anyone is pushing for network adoption of flextrans within a year or two.


[5:23]
Not that I am aware of anyways.


joeldalais
[5:24 AM]
within a year should hopefully be fine for csw to reveal more of the stuff he's doing, then hopefully people will see flextrans isn't needed, and in fact would be push us in the opposite of adoption


[5:24]
its great it exists, and great they did the work, but here's hoping people are just patient


erik.beijnoff [5:25 AM]
I agree. Implementation of new (protocol) features, apart from very minor ones, should be at least a year down the road. (edited)



joeldalais [5:26 AM]
one of the things that using malleability correctly will bring is - proper 0-conf - we really do want that


[5:26]
and security


erik.beijnoff [5:27 AM]
@Jason C to answer your question about the purpose of flextrans, my take on it is this:


[5:27]
1. More compact transactions.


[5:27]
2. More flexible over-the-wire format.


[5:27]
3. Malleability.


[5:27]
(I think there was a fourth as well. :slightly_smiling_face: )


Jason C [5:28 AM]
how does that benefit the user?


cryptorebel [5:28 AM]
quadratic hashing but that was already fixed in Bitcoin Cash


erik.beijnoff [5:28 AM]
Compact transactions - increased network performance


Jason C [5:28 AM]
is network performance an issue for people?


brad1121
[5:29 AM]
I really dont get the big hooHah with changing the protocol... How often are we changing TCP/IP?


peggy [5:29 AM]
How much smaller would transactions be and does any important information get removed?


rightleftupper [5:29 AM]
double spend proof



erik.beijnoff [5:29 AM]
Improving network performance are changes for improving the network several years down the line. It is not aimed at current network load.


[5:29]
Which is tiny.


[5:30]
@peggy - I think it is in the area of 15% and no, information does not get removed.


rightleftupper [5:30 AM]
oh @joeldalais already mentioned ... scratch that


erik.beijnoff [5:30 AM]
Anyways - as I said, it’s a suggestion. I am not aware of any initiatives that are actively pushing for it for the moment.


csw [5:31 AM]
BS


erik.beijnoff [5:32 AM]
I either don’t see any need for malleability to be “fixed”, so I see no need to implement it for that matter.


rightleftupper [5:33 AM]
Bullshit or Blockstream? I can never tell the two apart these days :slightly_smiling_face:


erik.beijnoff [5:33 AM]
And with regards to network performance - you don’t have to change the protocol to make wire transfer more efficient. There are other ways to do that. (edited)


csw [5:33 AM]
Both


thedunlap [5:33 AM]
eh I knew CSW was gonna say that :wink:



csw [5:33 AM]
UDP is NOT used by Google, Not by Amazon Prime, NOT by Netflix


[5:34]
Not by exchanges


[5:34]
Not in high volume trades


[5:34]
There are reasons for this


Jason C [5:35 AM]
like they use their own networking protocol?


thedunlap [5:35 AM]
like they use TCP/IP



csw [5:35 AM]
No. HTTP


[5:35]
And TCP


[5:35]
The network protocol is not the issue everyone is making it to be



[5:39]
We DO NOT need Lightning - and it does not work in any event


[5:40]
We need to make ON CHAIN used


[5:40]
Here is the thing. YOU CANNOT trust TXID anyway as it is ALWAYS malleable - even in SegShit


[5:41]
They are discussing 3rd party malleability and this is not the "attack" and merchants always need to consider that a Double spend of an altered TX can occur


[5:42]
If they do not, they deserve to be lossed out of existence


[5:42]
Threshold Blinding - REAL confidentiality requires it.


mwilcox [5:43 AM]
lightning is literally less efficient


csw [5:43 AM]
No, it is utter crap based on the WRONG network form


mwilcox [5:43 AM]
ya


csw [5:43 AM]
That maths I tweeted - it is why it does not work


mwilcox [5:43 AM]
all I need is to send a p2p transaction and a copy to majority hashpower


csw [5:43 AM]
And why it cannot - it is never economical


mwilcox [5:43 AM]
none of this 10 hops nonsense


[5:44]
miners need to build the infrastructure


Jason C [5:44 AM]
afaict BCC currently has everything it needs to handle plenty transaction volume, only thing stopping it is getting more adoption (which current txn volume is ~3% BTC) (edited)


mwilcox [5:44 AM]
btw the whole point of bitcoin is that the transaction was recorded


csw [5:44 AM]
10,000x


[5:44]
Not 100


[5:45]
10,000x


Jason C [5:45 AM]
yea, dr evil moment



joeldalais [5:45 AM]
adoption with bcc is the same as before blockstream got their claws in - create onroads and use cases


mwilcox [5:45 AM]
10,000 is not even crazy


csw [5:45 AM]
So, let us stop fucking about andf make this grow



[5:45]
There is a train coming before Nov.


[5:46]
I do not want more ppl standing watching the light (edited)


[5:46]
We have Core for that


mwilcox [5:46 AM]
ill be hiring another 100 ppl in next 12mo



csw [5:47 AM]
A good interview.

https://calvinayre.com/2017/09/25/business/beckys-affiliated-calvin-ayre-brilliance-bitcoin-londons-role-appeal-antigua-video/
CalvinAyre.com
Becky’s Affiliated: Calvin Ayre on the brilliance of Bitcoin, London’s role and an appeal for Antigua
Calvin Ayre has chosen to conduct his first video interview dedicated to the subject of Bitcoin here in London with CalvinAyre.com. (148kB)
Yesterday at 12:11 AM
1 reply 1 day ago View thread


mwilcox [5:47 AM]
who cares about core tbh, if they want to bet their business on a dying chain thats their loss


csw [5:47 AM]
Yes, so lets stop trying to think we need to add shit to compete


mwilcox [5:47 AM]
i have put too much effort into explaining things to them


singularity [5:49 AM]
@csw does "fixing" malleability invalidate any of the works in your patents?


mwilcox [5:49 AM]
thats not how patents work


csw [5:49 AM]
No, it makes threshoilding and blinding REALLY a mess



joeldalais [5:49 AM]
calvin ayre, bit of a legend


csw [5:49 AM]
And the plan was to gift these to Cash


[5:50]
REAL confidential TXs



mwilcox [5:50 AM]
cash needs to show it can compete purely on block size


csw [5:50 AM]
_"In the version 1 of transactions there is a field "NLockTime" and the related sequence numbers in the inputs. Due to NLockTime being superseded by  OP_CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY, the V4 version of transactions will not add support for any of these fields. Users can still use the version 1 transaction format if she chooses."_


singularity [5:50 AM]
@mwilcox Why?


csw [5:51 AM]
There are STILL uses of nLocktime



mwilcox [5:51 AM]
its a dangerous game if the core chain counterforks


[5:51]
its better for it to lose


csw [5:51 AM]
Having money that changes protocol on a regular basis is BAD



[5:51]
It NEEDS to be stable


[5:51]
Bug fixes - good



mwilcox [5:52 AM]
@csw I got 0ms sync working today


[5:53]
amazing bootstrap


joeldalais [5:54 AM]
regarding core, considering they're trying to change the network based on a false assumption, means that if even do fork more after that = gawd knows what fucking mess they'd be left with


mwilcox [5:55 AM]
doesnt matter


[5:55]
their dominance is threatened by a rising power


[5:55]
read your history books :slightly_smiling_face:


joeldalais [5:55 AM]
this is mostly the only attention i give them now, for historical records :smile: when cash emerged core died to me


mwilcox [5:57 AM]
thats not how bitcoin works


[5:57]
core dies when everyone realises


joeldalais
[5:58 AM]
shrug, to me it died, they don't know what they did to their own network and they can't compete with whats coming


[5:59]
but ye, i agree it "dies" fully when everyone realises, but i moved past that, time to focus just on growing bitcoin again



csw [6:02 AM]
A double spend is ALWAYS 1st party


[6:02]
There can be NO double spend by 3rd party


[6:02]
Logic 101


[6:03]
Malleability cannot result in double spends


[6:03]
The first party - in SegShit AND Flextrans can ALWAYS malleate a TX


csw [6:12 AM]
_The effect of leaving the signatures out of the calculation of the transaction-id implies that the signatures are also not used for the calculation of the merkle tree. This means that changes in signatures would not be detectable and open an attack vector._


[6:12]
This means, you NEED to wait for a block to be formed


[6:12]
To have security, you need to not have 0-conf


[6:12]
You cannot trust a user NOT to malleate and do an attack


[6:13]
This means we kill 0-conf


[6:13]
Still sound a good idea? (edited)



brad1121 [6:19 AM]
:muchwright: :raised_hands:


csw [6:20 AM]
Look at ther TX format


[6:20]
https://zander.github.io/posts/Flexible_Transactions/


[6:22]
_Transactions can be pruned (removing of signatures) after they have been confirmed. Then the size goes down to an average of 450 bytes or a median of 101 bytes_


[6:22]
That is what they keep wanting


[6:22]
To kill the Digital Sigs



[6:22]
Bitcoin IS a chain of digital Sigs


[6:23]
That quote is from Tom's Blog


shadders [6:30 AM]
Does he want everyone to run a full archival node? That's the only rationale I can think of for shrinking txs rather than pruning the whole tx once it's irrelevant. (edited)


hyena [6:34 AM]
I also had an argument regarding FlexTrans and keeping signatures out. My opinion is that since TX Malleability already has a poor-man's workaround with the help of CPFP we should not introduce radical changes in order to satisfy hypothetical need for a fix to TX malleability so that unicorn software would work if it was ever created in the first place :stuck_out_tongue:



csw [6:48 AM]
And onchain.


[6:48]
Not lightning


[6:49]
Miners are nodes


[6:49]
Stop the all must be a node crap


[6:49]
Companies are not evil


[6:49]
They are just associations of ppl


blockextreme [6:50 AM]
People believe in conspiracy because it makes them feels more intelligent.


hyena [7:07 AM]
https://twitter.com/govjventura/status/911710251849629696
speaking of conspiracies ... Jesse Ventura has been briefed on Bitcoin :smile: perhaps he will make another episode of "Conspiracy Theory" featuring Bitcoin
Jesse Ventura @GovJVentura
Thank you @rogerkver for explaining #bitcoin to me. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DKcLoNeV4AApCpX.jpg
TwitterSep 23rd at 5:53 PM (174kB)
(edited)


csw [7:38 AM]
uploaded this image: image.png
Add Comment



csw [7:38 AM]
_we decided we want to instead just move the signatures._


[7:41]
Basically, Flex Trans decides that signatures are not needed


[7:41]
It also has this idea that things like nLockTime are obsolete


[7:41]
It changes the block as TXs have the sigs removed, hence 0-conf is again less secure


[7:42]
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15055444


[7:42]
_Flextrans will provide the capability of Lightning Network on Bitcoin Cash as well._


[7:43]
Basically, they have segshit and now they want to add crap to Cash


[7:43]
_If they’re right, it also means the improvement will set the stage for the Lightning Network_ (edited)


csw [7:43 AM]
uploaded this image: image.png
Add Comment



csw [7:44 AM]
And Zander explains how he removes Tech debt with...


[7:45]
More technical debt and changes for the sake of changes


shadders [7:45 AM]
I agree that concept of sigs not being tied to the merkle tree is an awful idea. But can you explain for us mere mortals how zero conf is compromised by the tx id not being dependent on the sigs?


csw [7:46 AM]
Malleability is an issue of 1st party change


shadders [7:46 AM]
In terms that the layman can understand and proliferate across the interwebz....



csw [7:46 AM]
The issue is when a user signs several TXs


[7:47]
And nothing solves that


[7:47]
Not even schnoor


csw [7:47 AM]
uploaded this image: image.png
Add Comment



csw [7:47 AM]
_Signatures can still be changed by anyone who has access to the corresponding private keys._



[7:48]
The ONLY one who can double spend is the person WITH the keys


[7:48]
So, not a signle solution helps this


shadders [7:48 AM]
would this be more clearly stated as 'the user signs the same tx in several different ways with different resultant tx ids'?
Craig S Wright
The issue is when a user signs several TXs
Posted in #generalYesterday at 7:46 AM


erik.beijnoff [7:49 AM]
@shadders just a quick clarifier - in the current implementation of flextrans signatures are a part of the merkle tree; a block is not complete without them and cannot be recreated properly. I don’t know why Zander talk about pruning them, maybe the context is in relation to segwit. I think it’s unfortunate that he does.


csw [7:49 AM]
scriptSig malleability is also not a problem (and has uses in contracts) but that is killed by killing these forms of script


[7:50]
He has the idea that they can be removed later


[7:50]
FT first


[7:50]
Prune next


otaci [7:53 AM]
Maybe a dummies guide to how to deal with malleability as a developer?


csw [7:53 AM]
If we had time, just to have things stable for 6 months, all of this would occur


[7:53]
The longer we run about politicing, the less we do



shadders [7:54 AM]
The wider community has been conditioned to believe malleability is a fault... It may not have any substantial downside if you're correct... But until people believe it has an upside the public discourse on the subject will be one sided... So please address that... Doesn't have to be a mathematical proof...


blockextreme [8:06 AM]
Just a fact nothing but a fact: https://twitter.com/mikerelentless/status/911993165946777605
Michael Matthews @mikerelentless
The chart that #Segwit Lovers hate!

BitcoinCash profitability is steadily rising!

Just look at the trend lines! Show more…
TwitterSep 24th at 12:38 PM (56kB)


hyena [8:33 AM]
If Bitcoin wishes to maintain its position as the base currency for all the others then it should be extremely conservative with its changes. It's key for success is not those technical bells and whistles but actual stability, simplicity and robustness. Technical debt should be removed but not in a way that makes Bitcoin more complex but in a way that makes the protocol more simple.


csw [9:00 AM]
Exactly


[9:00]
Get merchants and adoption first



topolino [9:02 AM]
@csw - not to interject, but have you seen the community project that I and few others have launched yesterday? https://acceptbitcoin.cash ? (edited)

 4 replies Last reply 23 hours ago View thread


topolino [9:03 AM]
Our goal is to help foster merchant adoption


[9:03]
hoping this will be a good tool that the community can use to achieve that (edited)


csw [9:03 AM]
Yes, great work !


topolino [9:04 AM]
Thanks much! Means a lot! We'll be doing our best onwards.


blockextreme [9:04 AM]
Yep great job!



hyena [9:28 AM]
who owns bitcoin.cash btw?


[9:29]
... nvm, some squatter --- "We require a minimum offer of $100,000 USD to start any negotiations. Crypto also accepted."


kensalomon [9:34 AM]
I snapped up acceptbitco.in before we launched


hyena [9:38 AM]
I'm still squatting on rockpaperbitcoin.com :sweat_smile: some day I will develop something for it, some day ... I figured that if https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/ is a rather popular website then my name also has a chance
rockpapershotgun.com
Rock, Paper, Shotgun - PC Game Reviews, Previews, Subjectivity |
Rock, Paper, Shotgun - PC gaming news, previews, reviews, opinion


coinstash [9:46 AM]
Nice little breakout there.


coinstash [9:56 AM]
Just on new business ideas, I'm inspiring our Filipino friend Neiljon to set up a website selling BCC items similar to the t-shirt / mug / sticker websites already selling their wares. He has solid contacts with manufacturers that can turn out a shirt for $3.00 + shipping so it allows both of us to make a profit. He's doing the web design and I'll be providing the startup capital and business mentoring. (edited)


[9:59]
It's also a way for him to get BCC into the Philippines for resale. Right now it's hard to get due to the limited exchanges.


kensalomon [10:01 AM]
Nice! He was asking me about that. II think if he's hosting his own content, @robbot mentioend they are planning to offer a sweet low % fee option if you're running your own store and not using their hosting.


coinstash [10:02 AM]
Which is his website?


kensalomon [10:04 AM]
he co-founded Rocketr.net


coinstash [10:04 AM]
Ah OK. I haven't investigated that one yet, will check it out to see if there's something it provides that can work with that idea.


[10:06]
Payment processor. Right, that's handy.


kensalomon [10:07 AM]
He mentioned in thsis cahannel actually that they have two models now, a free one and a pro account or something that have different fees but they are planning to offer one to site that are usinng their own hosting a plan that takes 1% fee or less I think. I dont want to speak for him but it did sound like it would be a great offer for low margin merchants.


coinstash [10:08 AM]
The Voyager $10 a month deal looks awesome.


kensalomon [10:09 AM]
talk to @robbot when he wakes up (1-2 hours) if you have any questions,


coinstash [10:09 AM]
We will be self hosting so may be able to do better. I'll be interested to hear what he has going for BCC merchants.


kensalomon [10:10 AM]
@Tilian your faucet well has dried up


coinstash [10:10 AM]
Having all those payment options opens up a world of possibilities.


kensalomon [10:11 AM]
yea, if I remember correctly he said 0.5% fees for the self hosted option, but thats not an official statement yet, might change, talk to him though


[10:11]
maybe he can let you beta test that track


coinstash [10:11 AM]
I like the way you think. :slightly_smiling_face:


[10:11]
Even at 2% it's pretty good.


[10:13]
And free for Paypal Standard is awesome.


kensalomon [10:14 AM]
solid dude too


coinstash [10:24 AM]
Yeah, I've seen him here and he seems the kind I'd like to do business with.


robbot
[11:26 AM]
:blush:


coinstash [11:27 AM]
Hey buddy. Glad to see you. Just signed up, the service looks neat.


[11:28]
Just investigating Stripe Atlas right now, not sure if having a Delaware address would be a good idea taxwise.


robbot [11:29 AM]
Hm?


[11:31]
Sorry just woke up (interesting people are learning my sleep schedule already @kensalomon ) what do you mean coinstash


kensalomon [11:32 AM]
it was easy, you sleep like I want to sleep. going to bed late and sleeping till its basically afternoon


frido
[11:34 AM]
is that really a bad thing :stuck_out_tongue:


robbot [11:34 AM]
i think the trick is to just have a healthy dose of depression



coinstash [11:35 AM]
Stripe has a service called Atlas where they arrange for a Delaware corporation to be formed. But I don't really like the idea of becoming involved with the US tax system. The business will be a partnership between an Australian (me) and a Filipino. All manufacturing will be done in the Philippines.


robbot [11:35 AM]
ah i see


coinstash [11:36 AM]
I'll check out their tax rates for businesses first, might be a better deal. Or at least simpler to comply with anyhow.


robbot [11:37 AM]
well in any case our new plan we're working on will boast 0.5% fees with no monthly premium


[11:37]
so something to keep in mind


coinstash [11:37 AM]
Any specific conditions to get that rate?


robbot
[11:37 AM]
just be a self hosted merchant


coinstash [11:37 AM]
Cool, 'cos that's exactly what we'll be doing. (edited)


robbot
[11:37 AM]
perfect then


coinstash [11:39 AM]
Interestingly I was considering setting up a similar business about 18 months ago, but decided against it in the end. Of all the options rocketr is the best I've seen by a country mile.


robbot
[11:39 AM]
thanks :slightly_smiling_face: just let me kno


[11:39]
wait


[11:40]
what is a country mile


[11:40]
is that longer than a normal mile


coinstash [11:40 AM]
A bloody long way. It's an old expression.


robbot [11:40 AM]
i think ill start using it


coinstash [11:40 AM]
https://www.google.com.au/search?q=country+mile&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-b&gfe_rd=cr&dcr=0&ei=dSPJWaDEIYfp8wfD5JyIBA


robbot [11:41 AM]
https://english.stackexchange.com/a/32645
english.stackexchange.com
Origin of the term 'country mile'?
A 'country mile' is a term used casually in some areas of the English-speaking world to refer to a very great distance, but what's the origin of the term? Obviously 'mile' refers to what could be ...



[11:41]
fun


coinstash [11:43 AM]
Yeah. I think the general idea is that walking across hill and dale seems a lot further.


robbot
[11:43 AM]
yeah


coinstash [11:44 AM]
So, new option is available ... when?


robbot
[11:44 AM]
soon ^(tm)


[11:44]
realistically we should have it ready near the end of the month


coinstash [11:44 AM]
Hahahah. You get that a lot here.


[11:44]
The other standing joke is "two weeks (tm)"


robbot
[11:44 AM]
haha


coinstash [11:46 AM]
Anyhow, I've already set up ETH, BTC and BCH addresses. Considering whether it's worthwhile opening a new Paypal account for this.


[11:46]
And Stripe of course. But they want all sorts of data.


robbot [11:47 AM]
yeah stripes gonna want a shitload of data


coinstash [11:50 AM]
They assume that because I'm in Australia that I have a company and business number and shit. I'll be doing the legals in PH but they currently don't support that. Grrr.


[11:50]
So maybe fuck credit cards. Too much hassle with chargebacks anyhow.


robbot
[11:51 AM]
true, though does have much more usage than crypto


[11:51]
if you fuck cc's now, definitely still worth looking into in the future


[11:51]
at least until rocketr's goal of world-wide crypto integration succeeds


coinstash [11:52 AM]
Yeah, true. Then again I'd prefer to inspire people to use real money rather than live off credit anyhow.


robbot
[11:52 AM]
ah so not catering to americans at all thne


[11:52]
:joy:


coinstash [11:52 AM]
No, evidently not. :slightly_smiling_face:


[11:53]
A cc isn't as prevalent here, since we have great bank-issued debit cards usable anywhere.


[11:54]
Mine is Visa linked too so I can spend in any country in the world.


[11:54]
Of course that gets expensive because they really rip you off with exchange rates.


kensalomon [11:55 AM]
Anyone know who snagged the u/acceptbitcoincash reddit account? https://www.reddit.com/user/acceptbitcoincash
reddit.com
overview for acceptbitcoincash
reddit: the front page of the internet


coinstash [11:55 AM]
Some bastard jumped on your game Ken?


robbot
[11:55 AM]
man i dont know how every time im on some project


[11:55]
i _always_ forget to snag proper social media names


coinstash [11:56 AM]
Yeah, someone got my username on Twitter. Bastards.


kensalomon [11:56 AM]
anyways, I wanna know, they're talking like they represent the project and about our roadmap but I want to make sure they are actually with us and not just spewing crap that hurts our cause


coinstash [11:57 AM]
Yeah, that could be nasty.


kensalomon [11:57 AM]
like the reply here: https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/72d3bt/every_day_with_this_bitcoin_cash/dnhjn4w/
reddit
Every day with this bitcoin cash • r/btc
Awesome, will do. Idea - add a 'petition' feature and ask users to sign Then send vendors the results (minus addresses) - could be the tipping...



robbot
[11:58 AM]
i pmed him


kensalomon [11:58 AM]
should have been asking to add it as an issue or the user behind this account should have added it as an issue so it would be tracked and discussed


[11:58]
I PMd too


coinstash [11:58 AM]
Well they are promoting your website, so it doesn't look too bad.


robbot
[11:59 AM]
true but could just be trying to become a voice for it and then take over once people recognize him as an authority in it or something


[11:59]
of course its probably more likely that im just paranoid


coinstash [12:00 PM]
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they won't get you in the end.


robbot [12:00 PM]
damn right


kensalomon [12:01 PM]
we set standards though, so he/she is not helping us maintain proper tracking, which eventually leads to things falling through the cracks. Also, they do not appear to ask here about things which means they are saying things without any knowledge


[12:01]
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/72cjiv/new_satoshi_bitcoin_cash_wallet_for_ios_android/dnhexvt/
reddit
[New] Satoshi Bitcoin Cash Wallet for iOS & Android • r/btc
Great news! Looking forward to a full (production-ready) release and we would love to add you over at _the Accept Bitcoin Cash initiative_ - ##...



[12:01]
that implies we might add them once they add production ready release? No! we added them to our issues list immediately to be added with a note saying they'


[12:01]
re in Beta


coinstash [12:02 PM]
I'm on a mission to fuck banks up now, after today's fiasco. Tried to get a loan and was refused on the basis that I don't have a steady income. I'm a fucking self-funded retiree.


kensalomon [12:02 PM]
also, they seem to spam the same thing, which is fine but we dont want to annoy people and add work for the mods who believe they are us.


kensalomon [12:03 PM]
uploaded this image: Okay, I like them now!
Add Comment



robbot [12:03 PM]
color me shocked


coinstash [12:04 PM]
Who's the altcoin here? ROFL


kensalomon [12:07 PM]
so all the announcement posts they've done have been removed


coinstash [12:07 PM]
Rob, I have a thought about currency options. Prices are usually quoted in USD online and yet Paypal and/or Stripe may need to be denominated in local currency.


[12:09]
It would be silly for me to quote prices in AUD since nobody would be easily able to calculate what that represents in their head.


robbot
[12:09 PM]
so to clarify, you'd like to display USD but receive AUD?


[12:10]
if so, is it possible to just set it up for USD and then allow paypal to convert to aud?


coinstash [12:10 PM]
Yup, exactly. Or display EUR and receive AUD. Depends on where I'm targeting sales. (edited)
 12 replies Last reply 22 hours ago View thread


coinstash [12:11 PM]
If I allow Paypal to convert then I get ripped off on the exchange.


csw [12:11 PM]
*Malleability*


[12:11]
Thing of the day


[12:12]
Who knows what this is?


coinstash [12:12 PM]
In terms of metallurgy I have a reasonable idea.


robbot
[12:12 PM]
changing txid post submission, yeah?



csw [12:12 PM]
Yes.


[12:12]
S to -S


[12:12]
Due to the symetric nature of EcDSA


kensalomon [12:13 PM]
so, you brought it up, got a proposal?


csw [12:13 PM]
3rd Party for that at least


[12:13]
Proposal... for what?


csw [12:13 PM]
It is not an issue. That is the proposal

 2 replies Last reply 21 hours ago View thread


csw [12:13 PM]
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0066.mediawiki
GitHub
bitcoin/bips
bips - Bitcoin Improvement Proposals



kensalomon [12:13 PM]
a fix or for people to stop making it seem like the end of the world


csw [12:14 PM]
That addresses ECDSA S and -S by rejecting -s (edited)


[12:14]
No, education so they see it is all a lie


mohrt
[12:14 PM]
@kensalomon are you going to grab u/usebitcoincash or should I sqat it? :wink:


kensalomon [12:15 PM]
go for it, but really we only got useBitcoinCash as the twitter because it fit the character limit for usernames (edited)


mohrt
[12:15 PM]
oops meant that for accept-bcc-project


[12:15]
right, I just dont want in the wrong hands


kensalomon [12:15 PM]
true


deadr0ck [12:15 PM]
<-- u/acceptbitcoincash

(we had a little miscommunication)


coinstash [12:15 PM]
@mohrt It was YOU!!


kensalomon [12:15 PM]
move this back to the project channel, read my last post


mohrt
[12:15 PM]
what was me?


coinstash [12:15 PM]
Oh, wait ...


[12:16]
@deadr0ck just outed himself as the squatter.


deadr0ck [12:16 PM]
lol


robbot
[12:16 PM]
>@csw:
>No, education so they see it is all a lie


[12:17]
yeah good luck with that though


csw [12:17 PM]
uploaded this image: image.png
Add Comment



csw [12:18 PM]
I am going to start here.
 3 replies Last reply 21 hours ago View thread


kensalomon [12:18 PM]
yea @csw you cant come here spewing facts and truths, you've behind some evil corporation that wants to influence our already influenced Bitcoin!
^Lol


csw [12:18 PM]
And work out


robbot
[12:18 PM]
you know what bitcoin cash really needs?


[12:19]
hats.


[12:19]
hats and girls wearing them on twitter


[12:19]
i think thats how corestream got so many no2x retards


csw [12:19 PM]
_Arguably, benign malleability is always present in that a given piece of data often has multiple encodings, and any non-malleable scheme can be transformed into a benignly malleable one by applying such an encoding,_


kensalomon [12:19 PM]
hats with dragons!


csw [12:19 PM]
So, anything they do always has some form of malleability.


robbot [12:19 PM]
yes


coinstash [12:19 PM]
Naah, we need hot chicks who enjoy having tequila shots done off their boobs. Or maybe that's just my kinky obsession.


csw [12:20 PM]
That already started


[12:20]
https://news.bitcoin.com/bither-ceo-bitclub-performing-segwit-related-attack-network/
Bitcoin News
Bither CEO: Bitclub is Performing Segwit-related Attack Against Network - Bitcoin News
Wen Hao, CEO of Bither wallet, a Chinese mobile bitcoin wallet, said early Friday morning that the Bitclub pool (which has 4% of the total hashrate) launch
Mar 10th at 4:31 AM



robbot [12:20 PM]
oh?


coinstash [12:20 PM]
The tequila shots? Do tell.


robbot [12:20 PM]
oh


[12:20]
no not the tequila shots


[12:20]
my dreams are crushed


coinstash [12:20 PM]
Urm ... (disappointment)


csw [12:21 PM]
https://youtu.be/OjTqdkusyJw?list=LLo5jhOoq7Snz-TVu-QmY0vg&t=128
YouTube Gedd Nicholls
Is Bitcoin Interesting? Up to you...



robbot
[12:21 PM]
YES.


[12:21]
yo that girl can have all my bitcoin legacies


csw [12:22 PM]
uploaded this image: image.png
Add Comment



csw [12:22 PM]
_ The “attack” involved not only extracting the signature, but also changing R to R’ in the elliptic curve cryptography._


robbot
[12:22 PM]
(i dont hold any bitcoin legacy anymore)


csw [12:22 PM]
That is NOT benign malleability, it is a miner crafting their own TXs. Miners CANNOT change other people's R values


robbot
[12:22 PM]
csw was this today


csw [12:23 PM]
In Bitcoin, the (r,s) pair is set following BIP 66 to not allow (R, -s)


[12:23]
S could in non-DER be changed to -s


[12:23]
See above


[12:23]
But it cannot have R changed without access to the PRIVATE Key


[12:23]
So, this is NOT a malleability attack


[12:24]
It was a lie as is all the BS


coinstash [12:24 PM]
Misreporting then?



[12:24]
Hmmm.


[12:24]
FUD.


csw [12:25 PM]
Yes.


[12:25]
So, where now is this need to change the protocol drastically?


[12:26]
Active malleability is something that Blocks solve, when it is in a block, it is not able to be altered



[12:26]
Benign malleability is a BIP 66 solution (and it was never an issue in any event) just bad process


kensalomon [12:26 PM]
so, BCC devs discussing rolling block generation would also solve? (edited)


robbot [12:26 PM]
bcc*


kensalomon [12:27 PM]
@robbot BCH please!


robbot [12:27 PM]
no. follow bitcoincash.org


csw [12:27 PM]
You cannot solve something that is not broken


robbot [12:27 PM]
ticker confusion isnt a battle we want to fight


coinstash [12:27 PM]
bchpls.com


robbot [12:27 PM]
just follow bitcoincash.org


kensalomon [12:27 PM]
nice! @coinstash


robbot [12:27 PM]
unify under a common flag


[12:27]
shit now coinstash has my ip


[12:28]
freenode all over again


csw [12:28 PM]
So, the change is, a user makes a change to a TX and doublespends.


coinstash [12:28 PM]
@robbot How do I have your IP?


csw [12:28 PM]
Double spends when you have a private key are not something that can be solved other than to stop RBF and other anti-0-conf ideas


robbot [12:28 PM]
oh im kidding, but presumably you could check your access logs now and see my ip


kensalomon [12:29 PM]
Just interjecting that I love that BSCore see Malleability as a gaping hole that needs fixing yet RDF is fine


coinstash [12:29 PM]
Oh right. I never read those.


csw [12:29 PM]
That is just it


robbot [12:29 PM]
sometimes i just tail -f my access logs when im out and about so i look like a cool hacker


csw [12:29 PM]
Malleability was the false flag used to make things like RBF and segwit seem needed


[12:31]
_More generally, if one or more of the signers of the transaction revise their signatures then the transaction remains valid and pays the same amounts to the same addresses, but the txid changes completely because it incorporates the signatures. The general case of changes to signature data (but not the outputs or choice of inputs) modifying the transaction is called scriptSig malleability._


[12:31]
https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/01/26/segwit-benefits/
Bitcoin Core
Segregated Witness Benefits
Segregated Witness Benefits


[12:31]
That was called - a changed TX and SegWit does not fix this.


[12:31]
Then they say


[12:31]
_Segwit prevents third-party and scriptSig malleability by allowing Bitcoin users to move the malleable parts of the transaction into the transaction witness, and segregating that witness so that changes to the witness does not affect calculation of the txid._


[12:31]
We have A.


[12:32]
We do B


csw [12:32 PM]
But, it is done as a magic trick where you do not see that they talk about one senario and address a separate one
1 reply 19 hours ago View thread


coinstash [12:33 PM]
Hocus Pocus.


csw [12:33 PM]
https://blockchain.info/tx/683f45578328242a06bc5c54acbcbe6e70a5435b4561fc8b0570a59ab09f8bfa?show_adv=true
blockchain.info
Bitcoin Transaction 683f45578328242a06bc5c54acbcbe6e70a5435b4561fc8b0570a59ab09f8bfa
View information about a bitcoin transaction 683f45578328242a06bc5c54acbcbe6e70a5435b4561fc8b0570a59ab09f8bfa


[12:33]
This is the example used


[12:34]
That is why BS Core say it needs fixing


[12:34]
The transaction is INTENTIONALLY designed to be able to be signed once and sent in separate forms.


[12:34]
That is ALSO not addressed in SegWit


[12:37]
*So, the so-called attack*


[12:38]
Alice makes a TX and sends it to Bob


[12:39]
Bob has control of a LARGE (>50%) of miners (or this is just a probabilistic senario.


[12:39]
Bob uses his nodes to accept (r,-s) (which was depreciated in BIP30, BIP66 with DER enforcement)


[12:40]
Alice watches for the TX ID to go to BOB and be on the blockchain


[12:41]
Alice IGNORES the Bitcoin address that she sent coin to. This will show Alice -> Bob, but she looks only to find the TXID associated with (r,s)


[12:41]
Alice decides... oh, this is slow... I will send again and again as I want Bob not to miss out


[12:42]
Alice watcher her wallet show unconfirmed TX after unconfirmed TX as her balance goes down


[12:42]
But states, "what the Fuck" and keeps sending


[12:42]
Bob runs off with the money


[12:42]
*So, seem realistic*


[12:42]
???


coinstash [12:43 PM]
If Bob keeps insisting he didn't receive it, maybe.


[12:43]
And Alice would have to be plenty stupid.


csw [12:43 PM]
The TX is STILL recorded as Alice to Bob


[12:44]
If she uses Block Explorer, she can show Bob that the TX is there...


[12:44]
The assumption is that Bob will be looking for a TXID and that is also what Alice watches and that they ignore all other information


[12:45]
When we consider non-benign malleability, that is also known as a double spend. It cannot be changed with FT or SegWit


coinstash [12:45 PM]
Well I always search by address so it wouldn't catch me.


csw [12:45 PM]
_Before continuing, I want to re-emphasize that Bob can’t change where Alice’s money comes from, where it goes, or how much is sent. These parameters are all cryptographically signed by Alice, using her private key. Bob can really just change the actual txid shown to humans. How does this work exactly?_


[12:45]
So, as Core state....


[12:46]
*Bob can’t change where Alice’s money comes from, where it goes, or how much is sent.*


coinstash [12:46 PM]
In other words, it's so obscure as to not ever need "fixing" at all.


grabberfish
[12:47 PM]
SegWTF.


csw [12:47 PM]
And only if the wallet really is fucked


[12:47]
And Alice is dumb


[12:47]
The Miner attack on Malleability is - a classic double spend.


[12:47]
So, NOT solved


[12:49]
*Question*
In a basic TX (not one designed to be malleable with additions and which is easy to ignore), how many possible signature pairs are there for each Sig?


coinstash [12:50 PM]
I've seen fudsters saying that the BCC network isn't safe because a double spend would be easy with the low difficulty. Really? That would imply a miner is intent on footbullets for the sake of a few bucks.


csw [12:51 PM]
Yes, I have my coffee... my 100 million capital can burn (edited)


[12:51]
muhahha


[12:52]
So, we need to strip the Signatures.... stated reason, malleability.


robbot
[12:52 PM]
>csw [12:51 PM]
>Yes, I have my coffee...


[12:52]
that makes one of us...


[12:52]
wheres my damn latte


csw [12:52 PM]
LOL


coinstash [12:52 PM]
:coffee: Here


robbot [12:52 PM]
oh thank the lord


csw [12:52 PM]
Well, I will get you coffee for life for only 25million USD


[12:52]
:wink:


robbot
[12:52 PM]
oooh only $25m


[12:52]
do you take cash?


[12:52]
_bitcoin_ cash?


csw [12:52 PM]
BCH


[12:52]
:slightly_smiling_face:


tomothy [12:53 PM]
so, what's the point of eliminating signatures?


coinstash [12:54 PM]
It saves a few bytes.


tomothy [12:54 PM]
i mean, even if they introduce centralized authority, will they just re-introduce signatures?


robbot
[12:54 PM]
muh bytes


[12:54]
muh nibbles


kensalomon [12:54 PM]
makes them have patents around Bitcoin


tomothy [12:54 PM]
they're unilateral contracts as is, and fully binding


csw [12:54 PM]
NO, they will hold them on their own nodes that the rest of us do not see


kensalomon [12:55 PM]
oh, and maybe one day they will introduce showing us the signatures for a fee, for anyone wanting to keep the full chain on a new rPi node


tomothy [12:55 PM]
but theoretically, i could run a LN node if i had capital to do so as well, so i would see the txs, but still none of these nodes would be able to pull signature data, since it's gone and the signatures were never recorded


[12:55]
i mean, why don't you want signatures EVER viewable again?


coinstash [12:55 PM]
Gotta cater for dem satellites ...


tomothy [12:55 PM]
is it privacy through obscurity?


mengerian [12:55 PM]
@csw Have you looked at Tomas van der Wansem's Malleability fix proposal? https://github.com/tomasvdw/bips/blob/master/malleability-fix.mediawiki
- Leaves Tx format unchanged, except for re-defining "previous-tx" field for Tx inputs
- Merkle tree construction remains exactly the same, including Full sig data in Merkle leaf
GitHub
tomasvdw/bips
bips - Collection of Bitcoin Improvement Proposals

1 reply 19 hours ago View thread


csw [12:55 PM]
Yes @tomothy


tomothy [12:56 PM]
i mean, if you take away signatures, you can bring into question the legal status of bitcoin (edited)


[12:56]
it' isn't fungible anymore


mohrt
[12:56 PM]
Great info on malleability. Do we have the entire argument captured in an article (say medium.com or?) so we can send folks there when the argument arises? The parrots need to be silenced :wink:


tomothy [12:56 PM]
you can't prove person A was person A and in fact paid person B


csw [12:56 PM]
@mengerian Why?


[12:56]
I am working on getting it all together



[12:57]
There are just so many false ideas to get fixed


[12:57]
It is taking time


mohrt
[12:57 PM]
thanks for that (edited)


tomothy [12:57 PM]
it's like borrowing someones gun, shooting yourself in the foot, and then yelling at the person to say that it's broke


[12:57]
bad analogy maybe but, none of this makes sense


[12:58]
except if you own the hospital and treatment and are the only hospital in town


[12:58]
but hey, remember to donate to LukeJR


[12:58]
because...?


csw [12:58 PM]
@mengerian That BIP seems ok, but for why? It is a fix for something that is easy to fix without all the changes and that does not address the real issue


tomothy [12:58 PM]
:trollface:


mengerian [12:58 PM]
Why do the Mallleability fix? Some of the miners seem to want it, I'm not sure precisely why.


robbot [12:59 PM]
`agendas`


csw [12:59 PM]
They have been taught the lie


mengerian [12:59 PM]
But at least that proposal leaves the construction of the Merkle tree unchanged


csw [12:59 PM]
Hardly  a one of them understands that this idea is *Nonintentional malleability becomes impossible.* - but the attack is INTENTIONAL


[1:01]
_Preventing scriptSig malleability is being considered as well. Currently transactions with anything other than data push operations in their scriptSig are considered non-standard and are not relayed, and eventually this rule may extend to enforcing that the stack have exactly one item after execution. However doing that may interfere with later extensions to Bitcoin._


mengerian [1:01 PM]
Yeah, the originator of the Tx could still mine a block full of "malleated" sigs


csw [1:02 PM]
This is the other thing.


[1:02]
BS CORE have MAST and Alpha


[1:02]
They have been teaching us that scripts that can change are BAD


[1:02]
They want to have all the scripting as they have things to lock you into sidechains


tomothy [1:03 PM]
they want to break bitcoin


csw [1:03 PM]
Tomas does not and cannot fix non-benign malleability


mengerian [1:03 PM]
I don't have a strong opinion about malleability, but I like Tomas' approach because it makes the minimal change needed
So at least that way it can be evaluated more easily


csw [1:04 PM]
It is only when a block is mined that this is never possible


[1:04]
Before, it is probabilistic


[1:04]
Tomas van der Wansem has the best approach to a change that should not be made.


mengerian [1:04 PM]
Ha ha :slightly_smiling_face:


csw [1:05 PM]
Tomas of course also makes a form that is not compatible with later script use


[1:06]
Right now, if a TX has anything other than data push operations in their scriptSig are considered non-standard and are not relayed


[1:06]
But, this can be fixed and changed in Cash


[1:06]
BS Core DID NOT want to have script as this would make sidechains and Alpha of no use


[1:07]
That does not preclude this from being something that Cash again does, as scripts are NOT spam if you pay for it


[1:07]
And miners *EARN MORE*


[1:07]
Special TXs can be costed at a higher rate


[1:07]
This, miners make fees


[1:07]
Cash is cheap, script and contracts cost


[1:08]
Here is the other thing... the thing core say is crap...


[1:08]
Implement Business rules


[1:09]
If an exchange has a withdraw, do not just assume when a client states they are not paid that the TX was not sent!


[1:09]
OR.


[1:09]
Move funds to a pay address


[1:11]
So, Alice has 10 BCH in wallet A1
She needs to pay 5 BCH to Bob later on. She can move 5 BCH to Alice's own wallet, A2

Now, she cannot spend more than 5 BCH as the TX will only allow the amount she holds to be spent.


[1:12]
If Alice is tricked (stupid girl) into sending a second amount from A2 to Bob, she does this, but the wallet only has 5BCH


[1:12]
Hence, it fails if the other is in a block


[1:12]
Issue solved.


[1:14]
Adding these *Malleability fixes* kills off a lot of script uses that we can have working again now that we are not seeing coloured coins and document signing and gambling as spam!



robbot [1:14 PM]
okay


[1:14]
my latte has arrived


[1:14]
thank the gods


csw [1:14 PM]
lol


robbot [1:15 PM]
>now that we are not seeing coloured coins and document signing and gambling as spam!


mengerian [1:15 PM]
I don't understand how the Malleability fix kills off the other use cases, I'll have to research it more.


robbot [1:15 PM]
i swear to god if any of you start calling this kind of shit spam i will punch you in the throat


coinstash [1:16 PM]
Love my SatoshiDice. :slightly_smiling_face:


lunar [1:16 PM]
@bitsko can we get a pastebin of the Malleability stuff, for the record.
 12 replies Last reply 18 hours ago View thread


mengerian [1:16 PM]
But at least Tomas' proposal is a "minimal" approach, so it lets us understand the change in isolation without all the other changes that Flex Trans makes


csw [1:16 PM]
@mengerian
It means that data that can be validly changed in script (and hence that alters the TXID) is not valid


[1:17]
Yes, it is a minimal approach, but to ensure we cannot easily enable scripting and all its ability again
That leads us right into the Core path


[1:18]
They get Alpha and sidechains


[1:18]
We have... low value TXs and no more


[1:18]
Hence, I am starting to try and educate people as to what Malleability really is


mengerian [1:18 PM]
Yeah, I think part of the motivation is to enable Lightning-type off chain stuff


csw [1:19 PM]
And it is ONLY benign malleability that can be changed by others


[1:19]
And the values are s or -s


[1:19]
Then only allow DER S sigs


[1:19]
Detect and ignore -s


coinstash [1:19 PM]
@lunar Just pasted it to the #library



mengerian [1:20 PM]
Any approach lets the originator change the script.
It only makes subsequent Tx's that refer to it become non-valid


csw [1:20 PM]
Allice can ALWAYS try and doublespend


kensalomon [1:20 PM]
we have a Library channel?


csw [1:21 PM]
Sighash, Anyone can pay


robbot
[1:21 PM]
we've been found


[1:21]
execute order 66



mengerian [1:21 PM]
I believe Cash already enforces the strict DER


csw [1:21 PM]
They do


[1:21]
So, 99.99% of the issue is not a Cash issue that we are solving....


[1:22]
https://bitcoin.org/en/developer-guide#term-sighash-anyonecanpay
bitcoin.org
Developer Guide - Bitcoin (15kB)


robbot
[1:22 PM]
hm


[1:22]
someone should reach out to bitcoin.org and let them know their B is facing the wrong way


csw [1:22 PM]
So, you use SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY and chain the TX that way


[1:22]
TX0 -> TX1 -> TX2


[1:22]
All SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY


[1:23]
@mengerian
What in that is the attack?


[1:25]
To answer:

1. Added TXs over the value are added and the original output is fulfilled and a lucky miner earns more
2. A random party pays first and stops Allice needing to pay whilst having the TX go to her


[1:25]
I call that the random run up and pay for another persons purchase attack


[1:25]
In it, a person randomly runs over, dumbs cash on the table and runs off leaving you to leave the store without having paid and the store to be happy


mengerian [1:26 PM]
"This ensure that the HF activates STRICTENCODING (just standard right now, not consensus)"...
https://github.com/Bitcoin-ABC/bitcoin-abc/commit/e49826c1fcc36e5ae26de0ad4d06e2063a759e73
GitHub
Reject non replay protected transactions after the fork. · Bitcoin-ABC/bitcoin-abc@e49826c
Summary: This ensure that the HF activates STRICTENCODING (just standard right now, not consensus) and it'll reject any transaction not using SIGHASH_FORKID after the fork. To make sure we get a cl...



[1:30]
The only "attack" I know of was when BitClub mined some blocks where they purposely malleated all the transactions.
ViaBTC Complained about it.
But I'm not sure how serious of a problem the attack was. It seemed like more of an annoyance than a serious problem


csw [1:31 PM]
It was also changing R to -R


[1:31]
That means they altered their own TX


[1:31]
A miner can always try and doublespend or change their own TX


mengerian [1:32 PM]
Oh I was under the impression they altered other people's Txs


[1:32]
I can't see how you could prevent people from altering their own Txs


csw [1:33 PM]
uploaded this image: image.png
Add Comment



csw [1:33 PM]
Only the originator can alter the R value in a TX


[1:34]
To change (R, s) to have -R means that you need to have access to the private key


mengerian [1:35 PM]
Hmm, I thought they had altered ViaBTC transactions. Maybe I was mistaken
 2 replies Last reply today at 3:32 AM View thread


csw [1:35 PM]
There was another "Attack" as well.


[1:35]
But that was not really an attack either


lechango [1:36 PM]
also perpetuated by Bitclub, correct?



csw [1:36 PM]
And again, S to -S just means checking


[1:36]
Oh...


[1:36]
How did you guess


[1:36]
Everyone's fav miner it seems


lechango [1:36 PM]
Shillhard really is trying it seems


csw [1:37 PM]
So, if all miners BUT Bitclub accept S and reject -S...


[1:37]
The change to reject -S is a "softfork" and miners can override this.


primordial
[1:40 PM]
https://medium.com/@bithernet/bitclub-why-are-you-doing-malleability-attack-now-6faa194b2146
Medium
BitClub, why are you doing Malleability Attack now?
Hi BitClub,
Reading time
----------------
1 min read

Mar 10th at 1:31 AM


csw [1:41 PM]
So, if DER changes such as BIP 66 were mandatory (which BS Core did not want as this is a HF and does not allow their story)


[1:42]
If a miner does the "attack"


[1:42]
They lose a block


[1:43]
Now, one of the examples P Wullie uses is:

F' P1 CHECKSIG NOT fails (changed)


[1:43]
F is any invalid but DER-compliant signature (including 0, the empty string). F' is any invalid and non-DER-compliant signature.


[1:45]
Now... How many times do you want to accept a script that is:

Sig   PubKey   CHECKSIG NOT


[1:46]
That NOT is generally a give away and is constructed to fail...


lechango [2:02 PM]
Is this true @csw? Did you kill dave for his keys? https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/72df1f/every_seemingly_illogical_action_and_statement_by/ :stuck_out_tongue:
reddit
Every seemingly illogical action and statement by Ver, Wright, and Jihan makes sense if u assume they need low fees to wash stolen coins • r/Bitcoin
I make the conjecture Ver helped karples steal the mt gox coins and wright stole kleinmans Bitcoins and possibly killed him over them.




mohrt [2:05 PM]
looks like the BS crettins stooped to a new low


kensalomon [2:06 PM]
I saw that earlier today and then questioned myself, Why am I on r/bitcoin?


csw [2:13 PM]
I was in Australia. Dave in Florida


[2:13]
Dave had his own drive


[2:13]
Only Dave has access to Dave's drive


klee
[2:14 PM]
How many coins are missing from you Hal & Dave, can you disclose?


lechango [2:14 PM]
pretty fucked up to insinuate that he would kill an already dying man..


csw [2:14 PM]
Hal, no.


[2:14]
Dave, 330,000k


[2:14]
approx


klee [2:14 PM]
(Had to ask :grin: )


[2:14]
Damn


bitwho [2:14 PM]
They is no* low point bitcoin shills won't go (edited)


csw [2:15 PM]
Dave's AES key can be cracked in 20 years easily


bitwho [2:16 PM]
assuming some one has them right?


csw [2:16 PM]
or so


bitwho [2:16 PM]
his wife has it correct


csw [2:16 PM]
Brother


bitwho [2:16 PM]
kk


csw [2:16 PM]
Well, unless he had others do copies


[2:16]
Then...


[2:17]
So, basically, coin-join is good other than when it is for business people...


[2:17]
So, these BS Core ppl want to have fungible coins but only for those THEY choose


klee
[2:20 PM]
https://twitter.com/kristovatlas/status/912377748764667904
Kristov Atlas 🇺🇲 @kristovatlas
Important vuln in Bitcoin Armory client for large HODLers who used the SSS functionality. Fix requires fund sweep https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2199659.0
TwitterYesterday at 2:06 PM


[2:22]
https://twitter.com/futurism/status/912368756457971713
Futurism @futurism
They believe their system could process more than a million qubits. https://buff.ly/2jXDzPe
TwitterYesterday at 1:30 PM


bitwho [2:22 PM]
i guess i was trying to figure out if you meant "cracked by whom control the back up wallet" or cracked by anyone out there
Craig S Wright
Dave's AES key can be cracked in 20 years easily
Posted in #generalYesterday at 2:15 PM


mohrt [2:25 PM]
One would think you have to have physical access to the key to crack and know if its a 128, 192 or 256 bit length (?)


csw [2:26 PM]
That would be Dave's brother


mohrt [2:27 PM]
so it is known for a fact the USB key exists, and someone has possession of it (not lost/stolen/misplaced) ?


[2:28]
or, its just an assumption


csw [2:29 PM]
It is a Aluminium cased HDD


[2:29]
3.5"


[2:29]
External


[2:29]
Silver.


mohrt [2:30 PM]
so that has a wallet.dat file with said AES


csw [2:31 PM]
The entire drive is protected


klee [2:31 PM]
Good project for 2pda


[2:31]
No?


csw [2:31 PM]
LOL
Only that Dave's brother Ira owns it


[2:31]
So that would be theft


klee [2:32 PM]
:smiling_imp:


[2:32]
:innocent:


newliberty [2:55 PM]
It runs the edges of Dodd-Frank violation, according to recent guidance.
http://www.dfi.wa.gov/documents/credit-unions/compliance-manual/udaap-overview.pdf
FTC may get interested.


jonald_fyookball [3:10 PM]
i get why its not a problem but why is mallaebility useful


csw [3:14 PM]
Scripts


[3:15]
Script mallability and SigHash types allows yhings such as secure high speed trades settled in 10 mins


[3:15]
It allows derivatives


[3:15]
It allows financial instruments to be created


[3:16]
All things Core wants on Alpha and encourages their shills to hate


[3:18]
Parallel processes


[3:18]
Bonds


[3:18]
Option contracts


[3:18]
Loans and owner tokens


[3:18]
Without Eth


lechango [3:18 PM]
sounds like a good topic for the next Nchain blog post or CoinGeek


csw [3:18 PM]
Getting there


[3:18]
Long year


[3:19]
Much to do


robbot [3:31 PM]
tippr updated


robbot
[3:32 PM]
now if tippr is banned from a subreddit, it will pm the user being tipped instead of posting. since it cant, yknow, post

 3 replies Last reply 18 hours ago View thread


lunar [3:32 PM]
https://localbitcoins.com/blog/bitcoin-bcash/


[3:32]
"Instead of providing support for Bcash, we have decide to compensate customers who held Bitcoin on their LocalBitcoins account at the time of the air-drop on August 1st. The Bcash that LocalBitcoins held has been sold and credited to customers at it's corresponding value. We did this by converting all Bcash to Bitcoins, and sharing all of the converted Bitcoins between the users who held a Bitcoin balance on their accounts at the time of the creation of Bcash. Open trades that had any balance at the time were also taken into consideration, based on who received the Bitcoin after the trade was completed or closed."


slackbot Custom Response [3:32 PM]
At least I'm not as stupid as people calling Bitcoin Cash _bcash_


lunar [3:32 PM]
don't shoot the messenger slackbot  :wink:


slackbot Custom Response [3:32 PM]
Do androids dream of electric sheep?
 2 replies Last reply today at 3:50 AM View thread


robbot
[3:32 PM]
yes


[3:32]
duh


[3:33]
>LocalBitcoins has decided against supporting Bcash, for various reasons.


slackbot Custom Response [3:33 PM]
To bcash or not to bcash?  How about Bitcoin Cash instead?


robbot [3:33 PM]
yeah mostly to keep the money


kensalomon [3:33 PM]
yea we dont know how much they sold at


robbot [3:33 PM]
yeah. sure theyre giving out the bitcoin cash now but they essentially held it interest free for two months


[3:33]
>The processing fee for this conversion is 0.0002 BTC per account


lunar [3:33 PM]
if you had a bank account and they converted your $ into € without your permission at a loss, would that be liable ?


robbot
[3:34 PM]
processing fee????


[3:34]
what a load of shit


kensalomon [3:34 PM]
hey, its bitcoin, whoever owns the keys owns the coin


[3:34]
will this cause more on-chain transactions to happen?


[3:34]
cause backlog core chain mempool is getting fucked


lunar [3:35 PM]
its an asset in their custody. Law still applies.


[3:35]
dear sir we've converted your apple shares into enron stock



kensalomon [3:36 PM]
and it cost you $20



lunar [3:39 PM]
and anything under 20$ we just stole from you.


csw [3:39 PM]
Well. We may have to make a decentralised local bch



lechango [3:40 PM]
some sort of reputation system with people who can apply to act as escrow agents?


[3:42]
and get rewarded for doing so obviously, they can set their own rates


bitsko [3:42 PM]
if anyone is opposed to the days messages here in #general being released in pastebin form tomorrow on say, bitco.in or reddit please PM me.  I hope to spark discussion on malleability with this discussion if the participants do not mind...
 3 replies Last reply 15 hours ago View thread


robbot [3:43 PM]
i have no problem


kensalomon [3:44 PM]
Would it perhaps be possible to build our own Local Bitcoins style site but the site and the vendor have partial keys to the funds? So that transactions like selling forked coins cannot go through because neither party has full control?


robbot [3:45 PM]
oh my lord


robbot
[3:45 PM]
my girl made grilled cheese with chicken in it using garlic bread
1 reply 17 hours ago View thread


robbot [3:45 PM]
and made some tomato soup to go with it


robbot
[3:46 PM]
after this joint its like heaven

1 reply 17 hours ago View thread


kensalomon [3:46 PM]
didnt know this was @robbot food corner


robbot
[3:46 PM]
wait till you discover my cooking youtube channel


kensalomon [3:46 PM]
but that does sound delicious


lechango [3:47 PM]
mhmm, sounds goods, I just ate a garlic bagel sandwich, tomato soup would have been nice


go1dfish [3:47 PM]
That's the best qualification for a mod


kensalomon [3:52 PM]
seems people have squatted the URLS but local bitcoin cash would be nice.


lechango [3:56 PM]
I really like the idea of anyone being able to be arbitrator and can set their own rates and earn reputation for each trade


[3:57]
most of the time they'll not have to do anything if there's no disputes


[3:58]
there's no way around having some amount of trust involved when dealing with fiat on one end


lunar [4:00 PM]
Unless you could make it truly trustless, you're going to need a decent reputation system, perhaps combined with a collateral deposits from larger vendors?


kensalomon [4:01 PM]
Not to disrupt this thought but maybe lets not remake localbitcoins, lets consider what we would like to do differently to make it better than the original (edited)


lechango [4:02 PM]
as far as a name goes, since localbitcoins.cash is taken, how about proximity.cash ?


[4:02]
kinda a cool name?


robbot
[4:03 PM]
i like it but the problem is that people are stupid and cant spell


lechango [4:03 PM]
haha yeah lol


robbot
[4:03 PM]
you start throwing words like proximity around and they'll never remember how to get to your site


lechango [4:03 PM]
it's not that hard a word lol, but I get ya


[4:05]
cashforcash.com is for sale


kensalomon [4:06 PM]
cashfor.cash?


robbot
[4:06 PM]
oh my shit


[4:06]
i like it


rowdy_beaver [4:07 PM]
nearby.cash ?


robbot [4:07 PM]
i like that too


kensalomon [4:07 PM]
Its like chicken in a grilled cheese made of garlic bread? (edited)


robbot [4:07 PM]
no


[4:07]
nothing is like that


[4:07]
god damn that was good


[4:07]
i only with my stomach was bigger so i could eat more


rowdy_beaver [4:08 PM]
@robbot got me hungry... back after a bite


kensalomon [4:09 PM]
cashfor.cash is available on Namecheap for $4.06 apparently....



gsam [5:25 PM]
#aside - This might be useful for this Slack's administrators https://twitter.com/paul__walsh/status/902971961453580289
Paul Walsh 🎣🚨 @Paul__Walsh
I just published “How crypto communities can stay more safe from phishing attacks on Slack — Beta release #2” https://medium.com/@Paul__Walsh/how-crypto-communities-can-stay-more-safe-from-phishing-attacks-on-slack-beta-release-2-d9e1cb787f8b
TwitterAug 30th at 3:11 PM


bitwho [6:34 PM]
Inmight be late to the party with this but localbitcoin sold their bitcoincash? Are they legally allowed to do this?
2 replies Last reply 15 hours ago View thread


bitwho [6:35 PM]
I would be pissed if they did that to my coins :/


lechango [6:52 PM]
I don't think there's any rules saying they can't, they deal in Bitcoin, they have no obligation to provide any other forks to their clients. It would be even more shitty if they never even gave BTC compensation


rt121212121 [7:03 PM]
kiwi coin in nz did that


[7:03]
no bcc, no compensation


roger_murdock [7:57 PM]
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/72g8o9/measuring_maximum_sustained_transaction/
reddit
"Measuring maximum sustained transaction throughput on a global network of Bitcoin nodes” [BU/nChain/UBC proposal for Scaling Bitcoin Stanford] • r/btc
3 points and 6 comments so far on reddit




[7:58]
(BU/nChain/UBC proposal for Scaling Bitcoin Stanford)


robbot [8:37 PM]
https://twitter.com/tipprbot/status/912476061207863296
tippr @tipprbot
Free #BitcoinCash now that it's #TippingTuesday. Check it out https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/72gm44/tipping_tuesday_come_experience_what_a_peertopeer/
TwitterYesterday at 8:37 PM


lechango [8:43 PM]
I feel kinda dirty for taking a a dollar of BCC from him when there's other newbies who could benefit more. But hey, hard to turn down free money


cryptorebel [8:44 PM]
its cool, can always re-tip


lechango [8:46 PM]
indeed


zquestz [8:51 PM]
free bcc isn't something I turn down =P


[8:51]
but I am hoping to retip to other users anyways


lechango [8:54 PM]
same here, I've been lazy, I need to fund up my tippr wallet and get at it


cryptorebel [8:56 PM]
we should try to post the twitter link on /r/bitcoin


lechango [9:01 PM]
I feel like there's got to be a way to circumvent the tippr ban on /r/bitcoin


[9:02]
I suppose you could just PM users with private keys


kensalomon [9:02 PM]
simple, PM tippr, is that enabled @robbot?


lechango [9:04 PM]
I guess there's no way to make it effective, any public reply stating they've been tipped will be removed


cryptorebel [9:04 PM]
he said it would still be classified as spam


kensalomon [9:04 PM]
then you have no choice but to see if that username corresponds to a twitter account and tip them there


cryptorebel [9:05 PM]
maybe if we implement segwitcoin, then they cant ban it


[9:05]
but still nobody will really use segwitcoin because its high fees


kensalomon [9:05 PM]
eh, i'm banned on r/bitcoin


cryptorebel [9:05 PM]
but then we could illustrate why they are banning a bitcoin tip bot


kensalomon [9:05 PM]
so it wouldnt matter no matter what


cryptorebel [9:06 PM]
they allowed doge tipping before


[9:06]
is doge tipping allowed


kensalomon [9:06 PM]
no alts!


rt121212121 [9:06 PM]
If the tip withdrawal fee comes out of their segwitcoin tip balance, and they can't cash out until they've got enough, then that's one way


kensalomon [9:23 PM]
I got this one for the lulz......accepttruebitco.in


[9:23]
have fun


[9:24]
just remember if you link to the site it helps our SEO if you use the real URL


zquestz [10:40 PM]
ok so is everything in master that you need to deploy?


[10:40]
oops


[10:40]
saw ken, but this is general :wink:


robbot
[11:02 PM]
https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/72gm44/tipping_tuesday_come_experience_what_a_peertopeer/
reddit
Tipping Tuesday - Come experience what a peer-to-peer electronic cash system looks like! [26/09/2017] • r/btc
Post in this thread and I'll send you some bitcoin (cash), as long as the balance in my /u/tippr account lasts. If you want to withdraw your...



[11:03]
lol only 77% upvoted


[11:03]
hatboys: REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE



coinstash [11:21 PM]
Well I don't feel too bad about not being able to get a loan any more. The bidding started $50k above my top price and the property was passed in unsold at $465k which means the Australian property market is utterly delusional.



[11:24]
I can get the same in the Philippines with a harbour view for $115k.


rt121212121 [11:27 PM]
I am sure the Phillipines is a lovely place.. but it's not quite the same


coinstash [11:28 PM]
No, the house in the Philippines doesn't need $100k spent on it to be livable.


spunky [11:29 PM]
Sounds like you were just a victim of underquoting


coinstash [11:30 PM]
Seriously, would you spend half a million on this?
https://www.realestate.com.au/property-House-qld-Beachmere-126268814 (edited)


spunky [11:32 PM]
That is a lovely space, if I'm honest, I probably would


rt121212121
[11:32 PM]
Depends on the cost of property nearby and the appeal of living in that location


[11:32]
I find the place depressing though


spunky
[11:33 PM]
Median property price is $350, so 500k is probably a bit excessive


coinstash [11:33 PM]
The kitchen and bathroom are both horrible, and all that cream brick veneer screams out for a rendering job. Yuck.


spunky
[11:34 PM]
Yeah you'd put 100k to rennovate it, install a pool and turn it in to a 600k livable property


coinstash [11:35 PM]
Yeah but it would have to be worth $1M at the end to make it worthwhile.


spunky
[11:35 PM]
It wouldn't go higher than 700k, so 500k is excessive yet again


coinstash [11:35 PM]
Now, contrast this at PHP 4.7M (about AU$115k):
http://www.islandsproperties.com/properties/houseandlots/min-pue-rh-6141/index.htm (edited)


spunky
[11:37 PM]
Are the papasans included?


coinstash [11:38 PM]
Fully furnished. Check out the additional photos of the view over the harbour.


spunky
[11:39 PM]
Yeah, if I was unencumbered and that was a possibility, I would totally do that instead. The hell with the lifestyle tradeoffs


coinstash [11:39 PM]
And it's built of solid stone by an English builder. (edited)


[11:40]
The only snag is that foreigners can't own land in PH otherwise I'd already own it. (edited)


spunky [11:41 PM]
Go bag yourself a nice filipino then lol


coinstash [11:42 PM]
High price to pay for a bachelor. And they can rip you off ...


[11:42]
Current owner got around it by putting the ownership in the name of a daughter of a friend who happens to be a judge.


spunky
[11:43 PM]
Why don't you move to Coober Pedy and buy a dugout


coinstash [11:43 PM]
Why don't you get a rat up your arse


[11:43]
:slightly_smiling_face:


spunky [11:43 PM]
HBahahahaha


coinstash [11:45 PM]
Yeah, I could afford a humpy in Broken Hill but there's a reason they only cost $50k


spunky [11:45 PM]
I mean, you want a property that backs on to a river, with boat parking ffs... that's gonna fetch some kind of premium


coinstash [11:46 PM]
It ain't worth an extra $250k over the real value.


[11:46]
I can get a 3 storey hotel in NZ for $75k, right opposite a river.


spunky
[11:47 PM]
Yeah you're talking to the wrong guy, houses in Canberra cost $400k starting price. Not sure how we got here but hey, it is what it is


coinstash [11:48 PM]
Canberra has always been 15% over market, captive audience.


spunky
[11:48 PM]
Yeah and under supply so I hear


[11:49]
Could trade my house for a whole street of NZ hotels by the sounds of it


[11:50]
Own the whole street, then charge whatever I want, get myself a top hat and monocle... muahahaha


[11:51]
Anyway now is not the right time to be buying, we are entering the 9th year since the last fin crisis


[11:52]
People are getting cocky, asking 500k for properties clearly only worth 350k


[11:52]
Boom/bust cycle lasts 9 years, bout time we had a lil shake up




----- Today September 26th, 2017 -----
coinstash [12:02 AM]
I'll be shaking it right out of Australia as soon as I can apply for the pension.


rt121212121 [12:10 AM]
Any set destination?


coinstash [12:11 AM]
Just want to see as much as possible. Asia, then more of Europe. Yacht trip round the world.


[12:12]
I'll have to drop into EnZed to mow the lawn too I suppose.


hyena [3:03 AM]
wouldn't openbazaar be suitable as a localbitcoins alternative?


cryptorebel [3:05 AM]
there is also a wallet app similar to localbitcoins, i think mycelium local trader i think isnt it


hyena [3:07 AM]
`Firefox can't find the server at github.com.` anyone else experiencing this at the moment?


lechango [3:08 AM]
nope, loading fine for me


hyena [3:08 AM]
ok thanks for the info... perhaps something with the vpn, I'm using airVPN


lechango [3:14 AM]
this guy can't be serious. Implement replay protection on 2X by creating >1MB transactions. Am I missing something or this superbly stupid? https://github.com/btc1/bitcoin/issues/123
GitHub
Opt-in, two-way replay protection using a well known P2SH · Issue #123 · btc1/bitcoin
I think there might be a way to implement opt-in, two-way replay protection purely from the 2x side. First we come up with a well known P2SH that's more expensive to spend than create (in terms of ...



kyuupichan [3:28 AM]
That was my understanding too.  ViaBTC had a tx chain and it was broken.  @deadalnix knows the details I think but didn’t answer when I asked what happened.


spunky [3:32 AM]
@lechango it is a novel solution, although crazy AF. Note the repo hasn't been touched since Jul 22 so that issue list is just a forum at this point


frido
[3:32 AM]
https://imnotdead.co.uk/blog/richard-heart
I'm Not Dead
Richard Heart - Spam, ICOs, and Death Threats
It's pretty safe to say that I was becoming a fan of Richard Heart. And then shit hit the fan. (145kB)
  +1 15 replies Last reply today at 4:08 AM View thread


frido [3:33 AM]
shit got real.


otaci [3:35 AM]
Bitcoin Core - test network for Bitcoin Cash.


[3:35]
Like it?


csw [3:37 AM]
If they all do >1MB... they might even get 1 TX a block



spunky [3:40 AM]
uploaded this image: richard-heart-spam-king.jpg
Add Comment



spunky
[3:41 AM]
Oops, that image was supposed to go here


thedunlap [3:42 AM]
Can someone feel me in on what happened with Viabtc? How did someone changing a transactionid (I'm assuming through malleability) invalidate a transaction chain?


thedunlap [3:42 AM]
*fill
1 reply Today at 3:48 AM View thread


csw [4:00 AM]
See above.


[4:00]
There is a softfork for malleability


[4:00]
This was ignored by a certain BTC club


[4:01]
The nature of signatures in EcDSA is they have two values:

(R, S) and (R, -S)


[4:02]
Anyone with the public key can calculate -S from S given the modulus (set in Bitcoin for the curve) and the public key - exposed to miners on sending a TX


[4:02]
The change there was to make a change and create a block using -S in place of S (edited)


[4:02]
That is it. That is the GREAT attack


[4:03]
The coin amounts and addresses they are paid to do not change


lechango [4:05 AM]
So because of that, the transactions in that block was seen as invalid by some nodes?


tomtomtom7 [4:06 AM]
Negative S is not allowed as per BIP 66.


lechango [4:06 AM]
So I missed this, was this on the BTC or BCC chain?


csw [4:06 AM]
It is not supposed to be allowed


[4:06]
DER encoding was set in BIP 66 as a soft fork


[4:07]
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0066.mediawiki
GitHub
bitcoin/bips
bips - Bitcoin Improvement Proposals



tomtomtom7 [4:07 AM]
BIP 66 can be seen as the first attempt to fix malleability. But then some argued that there were more forms, such as changing the push-data opcode.


csw [4:08 AM]
That is Script Malleability


[4:08]
And 66 was sofforked in place of a 62 harder fork


tomtomtom7 [4:08 AM]
Yes. But because there are multiple ways to malleate the input scripts (not just the sigs), the idea of softforking out all forms was abandoned


[4:09]
Though I think  it may be possible to fix it that way.


csw [4:09 AM]
And, As I wewnt over last night, there are 3 forms of malleability


[4:09]
And only one of these, bengin malleability is addressed


[4:10]
And for that matter, non-benign malleability cannot be addressed other than reverting away from RBF as Cash has done



spunky
[4:10 AM]
69 tx in latest block, hurr durr, sixty nine


csw [4:10 AM]
As for methods - BIP 66 "Examples" Covered this


spunky
[4:12 AM]
So just to clarify for laymen, this bug was introduced by RBF?


csw [4:12 AM]
No, the attack was


[4:13]
Before RBF, if you malleated, the TX was still paid.


[4:13]
Now, with RBF, the user can change the TX as a double spend.


[4:15]
1. Alice pays Bob
2. Bob chains a TX to Charles
3. Bob watches for the TXID he has used
4. Alice malleates the TX and replaces it using RBF
5. Bob now has a payment to Charlie that fails.

Only works with RBF


lechango [4:16 AM]
stupid question, is RBF compatible with segwit transactions?


csw [4:16 AM]
IF
Bob has a sighash anycanpay

Then without RBF, the payment from Allice can be chained with malleability


[4:17]
Altering the R,S pair to R,-S means nothing and the payment from Bob to Charle goes through


[4:17]
Yes RBF is SegShit compatible


[4:19]
*The attack... if you call it this for sighash anycanpay....*


[4:19]
Mallory jumps in and sends money into Bob's TX before Allice


[4:19]
Alice keeps her money or sends to Bob


[4:20]
Bob sends to Charlie and either has funds from Alice or not


[4:20]
Alice, Bob and Charle have their money


[4:20]
But EITHER Alice or Bob has a refund from Mallory


thedunlap [4:20 AM]
I believe I understand how malleability can break chained transactions that are not yet comitted to the blockchain, but in relation to ViaBTC, did they have an entire mined block that was rejected because of the -s exploit?


csw [4:20 AM]
I call it the haha I paid for your purchase and run  off attack



lechango [4:21 AM]
lol, that is quite the "attack"


[4:21]
the "pay it forward" attack


csw [4:22 AM]
No, it was not a lost block



lechango [4:23 AM]
the transactions were just invalid so it's like it was an empty block? or what


csw [4:23 AM]
As noted last night, this was an issue with TXID and ViBTC systems - not bitcoin, their business systems


[4:24]
ViaBTC Should have used separate addresses for each deposit. Then, they could have mapped the payment to the user.


lechango [4:25 AM]
So what motivation or message were they trying to spread by doing this?


csw [4:25 AM]
ViaBTC needed to suspend deposits and withdrawls


[4:25]
It was a result of poor accounting practices


lechango [4:26 AM]
Other exchanges that re-used deposit addresses were not also affected?


csw [4:26 AM]
The Attack was designed to cause a few issues - some know what business process failures an exchange has


[4:26]
Exchanges that map TXID and not the actual address deposit can be impacted


lechango [4:27 AM]
ah ok


csw [4:27 AM]
Malleability does not change the to nor from address nor the amount paid


[4:28]
Right now, if a TX has anything other than data push operations in their scriptSig are considered non-standard and are not relayed
But, this can be fixed and changed in Cash
BS Core DID NOT want to have script as this would make sidechains and Alpha of no use
That does not preclude this from being something that Cash again does, as scripts are NOT spam if you pay for it
And miners *EARN MORE*
Special TXs can be costed at a higher rate

This, miners make fees

Cash is cheap, script and contracts cost

Here is the other thing... the thing core say is crap...

Implement Business rules

If an exchange has a withdraw, do not just assume when a client states they are not paid that the TX was not sent!

OR.

Move funds to a pay address

So, Alice has 10 BCH in wallet A1
She needs to pay 5 BCH to Bob later on. She can move 5 BCH to Alice's own wallet, A2

Now, she cannot spend more than 5 BCH as the TX will only allow the amount she holds to be spent.

If Alice is tricked (stupid girl) into sending a second amount from A2 to Bob, she does this, but the wallet only has 5BCH

Hence, it fails if the other is in a block

Issue solved. (edited)


[4:29]
*So, the Business rule attack is...* (edited)


[4:30]
Find an exchange that has not implemented recommended practices.
Malleate a TX
Say you did not get a payment
Request the exchange send again


[4:30]
*Basically* something that banks solved in the 1700s


[4:31]
Validate the ledger and not the TXID (edited)



[4:33]
If you use a deterministic address for deposits, that is, you map each one separately (as any good exchange will do)
And you only pay based on amounts added
Then, this is not an issue.


hyena [4:35 AM]
the argument for TXID mapping is that it makes bookkeeping simple, because issuing a new address for each client/payment request would require the business to integrate with bitcoin wallet which could technically be too hard :stuck_out_tongue:


csw [4:36 AM]
It is also a factor that if an exchange has poor practice in one area, it will in others. So, I am brutal here. The exchange SHOULD have good practice or it SHOULD be allowed to fail.

No blaming myths. Reality bites


[4:36]
And they do not need to hold keys, just monitor the deposits


[4:36]
And, they also should have a delay time in adding and removing funds. It is not a bank, it is an exchange


[4:37]
And sending notification of a withdrawal and having time for the user to block it is a basic security control


[4:39]
So, the Malleability fix is an excuse *AT BEST* to have BAD systems last longer and get bigger before they crash and burn



[4:39]
And they WILL crash and burn if they do not fix process and FUD the way out of it


hyena [4:40 AM]
my proposed solution for businesses that do not want to issue a new address for each customer --- just have one cold storage address for payments, but require slightly different amount of bitcoins from each customers (add a random number of satoshis in the range of 0-999 to the end of the requested amount). so if you have 2 customers who both have to pay you 1 bitcoin, ask the first one to send you 1.00000157 and the second one 1.00000521. that way you can poll for confirmed payments using your favorite block explorer, and the receiving address can be a cold storage address. yes this is a kludgy hack, but it works very well, cryptograffiti.info has been using this for 3 years and I wouldn't want to change it


csw [4:43 AM]
https://bitcoin.org/en/developer-guide#term-signature-hash
bitcoin.org
Developer Guide - Bitcoin (15kB)


[4:43]
SIGHASH_ALL|SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY


[4:44]
If you create a payment address that is used - you can also pre-sign TXs even with cold storage


[4:48]
Steps

Exchange makes a TX with:

Input -
Exchange_Address - 1000 Sat

OutPut -
Exchange_Address - 1,000,010,00 Sat (just over 1 BTC)

To be valid, the others need to send funds and add them to this TX.

As the output is to the exchange address and it is SIGHASH_ALL|SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY

It means that the exchange can send this and it is ALWAYS valid


[4:48]
That is, it is a TX that can be used and re-used


[4:50]
The user either taks on a
SIGHASH_NONE|SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY

Which is like a blank cheque


[4:51]
Or better a SIGHASH_SINGLE to sign the output


[4:51]
These are combined and the exchange is paid.


[4:51]
*Rather than change Bitcoin*
How about learning how the system works...



[4:52]
@hyena had a *wonderful* post of real quality on CPFC (edited)


[4:52]
child pays for parent (edited)


[4:52]
If this was coupled with SigHash flags


hyena [4:52 AM]
you mean CPFP? :smile: child pays for parent


csw [4:53 AM]
He would have a tremendously effective system to chain TXs


[4:53]
Keeping you on your toes and I need more espresso (edited)


hyena [4:54 AM]
yeah yeah, typical trick from a true professor's handbook, just checking if the students pay attention :joy:


csw [4:54 AM]
This is a write-up on what Bitculb was doing:
https://medium.com/@bithernet/bitclub-why-are-you-doing-malleability-attack-now-6faa194b2146
Medium
BitClub, why are you doing Malleability Attack now?
Hi BitClub,
Reading time
----------------
1 min read

Mar 10th at 1:31 AM


[4:56]
_The blockchain.info site is almost down (cannot query the data of the blocks mined by you), this can make their users confusing too._

I do not agree with that claim


[4:56]
If users watch their address they will see the TX hit when the block is released


[4:56]
What happened was Bitclub malleated but also hid the changes


[4:57]
So, a block would be released and it would have a malleated TX and not the one with the original TXID


[4:57]
The payment was still there and in your block.


[4:57]
Again, only an issue if you have bad business processes.


[4:58]
ViaBTC have fixed this from what I hear, so that is good


[4:58]
But it should not have been an issue in the first place...


[4:59]
Oh... and this is the issue with *SoftForks*


[4:59]
Bitclub used a -s


[4:59]
As Tom stated, this is a no no - but a miner can  mine a block and ignore Softfork rules and still be allowed


[5:00]
In a hard fork, this would not be an issue as Bitclub would have dropped the malleated TX in a block and all other miners would have orphaned it


[5:01]
Again... Softforks are good for the Core BS narative


[5:01]
Not Bitcoin



hyena [5:02 AM]
the core wallet uses unconfirmed outputs when there are not enough confirmed funds in the wallet, and this can cause giant mess for businesses who allow withdrawals that depend on long unconfirmed TX chains. let's suppose the first TX gets malleated, so none of the customers receive their deposits :stuck_out_tongue: tech support hell, and crafting your own TXs with `createrawtransaction` seems to be avoided due to the paranoia of messing something up with the fees and such


csw [5:02 AM]
Yes, but this is a Core BS issue


[5:02]
Not a Bitcoin issue


[5:03]
Core failed to make a robust wallet



[5:03]
Not that maleation is the issue


[5:03]
On top of that, they added RBF


hyena [5:04 AM]
yes, malleation is not the issue, the issue is the wallet that lacks of proper RPC to absolutely deny using unconfirmed funds as inputs for new TXs


csw [5:06 AM]
This is ALSO the issue with why there is :
no ETF in the US
SEC warnings
PBoC warnings


[5:06]
Basically, it is not malleability - it is making a good product that is going to make Bitcoin succeed


[5:06]
But BS Core do not want this. They seek to stay _underground_. No banks, no businesses and no companies


[5:07]
Hence, they are not trying to fix the business process issues, they want these


[5:08]
http://agbrief.com/news/blockchain-and-disruptive-tech-and-startups-sigma17
AGB
Blockchain and disruptive tech and startups at SiGMA17
SiGMA will host Malta’s largest gaming exhibition yet, along with eleven conferences at the Malta Fairs and Conventions Centre from November 22-25. (53kB)
Yesterday at 7:24 AM


[5:08]
On a different note


lechango [5:10 AM]
nice, looking forward to seeing that talk if it's recorded. Talking bigger picture stuff I assume?


janko33 [5:14 AM]
@csw What about future txids. Mulitsig with nLockTime


[5:16]
@csw Changing the signature is always possible if you have the key. With segwit only the witness data is changed. However for a normal tx, the txid is changed.
Let say we do a pure 2 of 2 multisig. But you want to make sure that in case I disappear you can get a refund after a certain time
So you let me sign the refund tx (locktimed) which is based on the multi sig funding tx which is NOT YET included in the chain
This refund tx needs the txid of the funding multi sig TX.
The problem is that if I manage to include our multi sig funding tx with a replaced signature (first party malleabililty), then we still have a 2 of 2 multisig but your refund tx will never be valid.
With segwit your refund tx will be still valid since the agreement does not depend on my signature of the funding tx


csw [5:16 AM]
If you have the key, SegWit TXs can also be altered


[5:17]
_Mulitsig with nLockTime_

SIGHASH_ALL|SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY


[5:18]
SegWit, FT etc etc do nothing to stop non-benign malleability


[5:18]
In fact, it is an issue only if:
1. The miner doublespends
2. RBF allows the user to doublespend


[5:19]
_This refund tx needs the txid of the funding multi sig TX._

Not at all. SIGHASH_ALL|SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY


[5:19]
*Question*
If a random party screws up your refund by paying the refund BEFORE you... do you care?


[5:20]
Next, CLTV is there, so is CSV. They are incorporated into script, like it or not


[5:20]
So, you can use these for the refund you propose


csw [5:22 AM]
@janko33
This is a business process issue and comes to learning and implementing how to use the features in Bitcoin rather than changing Bitcoin to fit the square peg in a round hole.

You have a square hole. People just do not use it.

 4 replies Last reply today at 7:27 AM View thread


hyena [5:25 AM]
I'd prefer a round hole though, personally :wink:


csw [5:26 AM]
Oh and @janko33 http://zander.github.io/posts/Flexible_Transactions/
nLockTime is depreciated... so your TX is screwed if not already in the chain


[5:26]
@hyena


[5:26]
I like choice


[5:27]
I like the option of a round or a square hole


[5:28]
We would need to see what was implemented, but it is a possible that it could be killed off.
Craig S Wright
Oh and @janko33 http://zander.github.io/posts/Flexible_Transactions/
nLockTime is depreciated... so your TX is screwed if not already in the chain
Posted in #generalToday at 5:26 AM


hyena [5:28 AM]
I'm just personally more fit for round holes, and curves in general :stuck_out_tongue:


janko33 [5:29 AM]
I was not using flextrans in my example just normal versus segwit


csw [5:29 AM]
As long as the curves are not too curvy


[5:29]
Just right works :wink:


hyena [5:29 AM]
:joy:


spunky
[5:29 AM]
Deprecated not depreciated



csw [5:29 AM]
Yep


janko33 [5:33 AM]
@csw The process was this: Create multi a sig address, only the public address only the public keys are needed
You want to have agreement for a refund BEFORE you pay to the multi sig.
In order to do that you need the details of the utxo generated by the funding tx (e.g. double escrow).
But this will depend on signatures.
Txid should not depend on random signatures. But there are now and there used in every tx.
In order to send fund you make a reference to a utxo


csw [5:34 AM]
So... one of the things that FT and SegShit _fix_

*Sighash flags based masking*,  Sighash flags can be used to ignore certain parts of a script when signing.

This also means that the use cased for several functions that cxan be added and created again (such as ones Mike H started) such as Lighthouse are also killed off


[5:35]
@janko33
SIGHASH_ALL|SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY


[5:35]
In the next few days a video will be out on CoinGeek from HK


[5:36]
This is where I start discussing thresholds and Blinding


[5:36]
You can do all that and not even use P2SH


[5:36]
No changes to Bitcoin needed


janko33 [5:38 AM]
@csw How can you alter a segwit tx. The actual tx (changing only the txid but nothing else), not the witness?
How do you alter the txid of a segwit tx?


csw [5:38 AM]
The parties recreate


[5:38]
But I am not interested in SegShit, so I will not be going into it more


janko33 [5:39 AM]
that was the main argument.. that txid cannot be changed.. only witness changes..


csw [5:40 AM]
Basically, I will not go into segwit problems further as I have no interest in segwit solutions being made.


[5:41]
SegWit does not address same party malleability


[5:41]
Do not fall for that


janko33 [5:44 AM]
@csw Ok so how will my problem be solved without using txid, because that is malleable?


[5:44]
You want to have agreement for a refund BEFORE you pay to the multi sig.


[5:44]
and I need to make a reference to a utxo


csw [5:44 AM]
In the case you note, you have a multi-sig address and you require collusion. So, the issue is not a malleability case. In fact of point, you do not need to create the TX in the manner you did you achieve the results.


[5:45]
No @janko33
I know I keep stating this:

SIGHASH_ALL|SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY


[5:45]
And there is scripting with CLTV / CSV


janko33 [5:45 AM]
ok will look up for that


csw [5:45 AM]
All that can be done in script WITHOUT segwit


[5:45]
And easier


janko33 [5:49 AM]
can you go more in detail.. I have a hunch that maybe there is the devil hiding :wink: So I just need to create a tx with SIGHASH_ALL and CLTV  to have future refund tx working? (edited)


brad1121
[5:59 AM]
A lot to catch up on I see.... see you all in 15min


peggy [6:02 AM]
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-09-25/new-wu-tang-coin-raises-money-buy-martin-shkrelis-copy-once-upon-time-shaolin
zerohedge.com
New "Wu Tang Coin" Raises Money To Buy Martin Shkreli's Copy Of "Once Upon A Time In Shaolin"
The goal of the project is to release the album for free on the internet. The company says coin holders will be compensated with (24kB)


[6:03]
Where do I send my money?


brad1121 [6:18 AM]
What a good read


janko33 [6:30 AM]
@csw and to refence the UTXO I can use address of the tx, not the TXid as the UTXO is TXid, txOutIndex, CoinValue, height, coinbase, script, address (edited)


coinstash [6:53 AM]
@peggy Rap? Seriously?


spunky
[6:54 AM]
Not just any rap, coinstash... it's an album that no one has ever heard.


[6:55]
Pretty sure it was purchased by DPR, then later seized. Not sure how it re-entered society.


coinstash [6:57 AM]
My point is, I guess, that it's rap. I mean, it's probably best that no-one has heard it.


spunky [7:04 AM]
https://youtu.be/KmGnl7quDbY?t=19s
YouTube Comedy Central UK
Chappelle's Show | Wu-Tang Financial



csw [7:17 AM]
uploaded this image: image.png
Add Comment



kensalomon [7:19 AM]
so, are you saying a softfork is never a good thing? or just that they should be the extreme and the norm be HF?


csw [7:21 AM]
The later



kensalomon [7:32 AM]
So to grossly oversimplify, SF can only do so much so they lead to stagnation of the protocol and technology but HF give us the potential to actually make improvements to Bitcoin


[7:33]
Right


joeldalais [7:34 AM]
the system was built with the intention that HF's would be the norm as needed


csw [7:34 AM]
SF can be overridden (as with the ViaBTC - BitcoinClub thing)


[7:35]
The issue is not Bitcoin Club are bad, it is that the system was not being used


[7:35]
If this was a HF, then they would not have made the malleated TXs


kensalomon [7:36 AM]
Got it


[7:36]
So, Core bad, pretty much anyone else....not as bad as Core wants you to think


csw [7:36 AM]
Do not blame people, create a system that does not rely on trusting them


[7:37]
RBF was bad...


[7:37]
Very bad


kensalomon [7:38 AM]
Yea the concept for Core chain to increase your fee makes somewhat sense and would have a need but it feels like they added more malleability (I know I’m using it wrong) with RBF than they ever solved


[7:38]
And RBF does more than just change the fee


csw [7:40 AM]
There is no real use to change the fee


kensalomon [7:41 AM]
in a properly working chain


csw [7:41 AM]
If the block was not congested, it would never have been an issue


kensalomon [7:41 AM]
but on Core, they want a fee market


[7:41]
yea, we're on the same page, upping a fee even as a thought should've meant we need more capacity not we need to pay more


csw [7:46 AM]
The Core BS argument is that in 120 years, TXs will need to be priced such that Bitcoin can survive.


[7:46]
First, 120years is a LONG time


[7:47]
Next, 5 billion people sending 0.10USD in fees a day over 50 ave TXs and 100,000 large Banks and Corps sending $10 a day in fees for contracts (and this is just the start) adds to more than the Core Fee market


kensalomon [7:47 AM]
second, if you process more transactions, everyone is better off, so fees can stay low if blocks can hold more


csw [7:48 AM]
Yep


kensalomon [7:48 AM]
yea, they're playing with projections when we need a solution to things we face today


csw [7:49 AM]
That alone is approx $3,500,000 USD a block in fees


[7:49]
So, where is the block reward needed?


kensalomon [7:52 AM]
What block size are we assuming? Or just talking widespread saturation of bitcoin usage by businesses and people before 120 years


csw [7:53 AM]
As large as it needs to be


[7:53]
But, remember this Moore's law thing


[7:54]
We end up with smal;l blocks as the systems get bigger


[7:54]
1k was large once


kensalomon [7:55 AM]
Yea okay, I know Moore’s law is live and well but do you think it will hold 20 more years? 50? 120?


joeldalais [7:55 AM]
yes


csw [7:55 AM]
2600


[7:56]
That is about when light speed becomes an issue


kensalomon [7:56 AM]
Also, and I guess this has no point if people don’t need to run nodes, but even businesses don’t upgrade internet plans more than once every two or three years so doesn’t that slow down the effect of Moore’s law if user adoption is delayed


csw [7:56 AM]
Right now, we have 20 years to catch up with the tech that is not commercial but has been created


kensalomon [8:00 AM]
What’s the rate of losing the over development? 1 year for every 5?


kensalomon [8:08 AM]
Or is it a slow trickle as we have years we advance a lot and a few of stagnation where we catch up?


csw [8:09 AM]
Logistic


[8:09]
And we are already behind at 8mb


kensalomon [8:10 AM]
Oh we’re talking about just in the Blockchain and supporting technology?


joeldalais [8:11 AM]
adoption/growth (edited)


kensalomon [8:18 AM]
@csw I just saw your tweet about a huge block being compressed. That’s fucking awesome. I had been thinking scaling might mean coming up with a new form of transaction that’s smaller so it fits more per block but compression makes a ton of sense. Who doesn’t compress data in motion. I feel so stupid now


[8:18]
For not seeing that before


csw [8:19 AM]
Peter has done this up to 1000TPS level on 2k USD hosts


[8:19]
My testing in 2014/2015 was what is now a 20k machine to get 50,000TPS


[8:20]
In 5 years, we would expect Moore's law to have 50,000TPS on a 2,500 USD host


kensalomon [8:20 AM]
If only we could implement that right now on BCH. Make our 8 MB less than Core chain blocks before soft fork


csw [8:20 AM]
And if we have 50k TPS in 5 years I will be more than happy


[8:21]
The block is still 8MB


kensalomon [8:21 AM]
So it compressed three orders of magnitude


csw [8:21 AM]
The xthin sending is larger


kensalomon [8:21 AM]
Xthin?


csw [8:21 AM]
It needs to decompress to validate


kensalomon [8:22 AM]
I know the block is the same size but when in transit it is less in size


csw [8:22 AM]
https://medium.com/@peter_r/towards-massive-on-chain-scaling-presenting-our-block-propagation-results-with-xthin-da54e55dc0e4
Medium
Towards Massive On-Chain Scaling: Presenting Our Block Propagation Results With Xthin
Part 1 of 5: Methodology
Reading time
----------------
4 min read

(51kB)
May 30th, 2016 at 11:17 AM


kensalomon [8:22 AM]
So you need the block compressed, and a checksum to validate before decompressing and validating


csw [8:22 AM]
Most TXs will already be at the node/miner


[8:23]
So, you need a method to index it and allign


[8:23]
That is what xThin does


[8:23]
and the result is smaller block sending


[8:23]
Basically, it allows Visa level scaling now


kensalomon [8:23 AM]
So you’re saying, the block just needs to send the full block if you’re downloading the chain, otherwise the node can just realign the transactions it has in Mempool


csw [8:24 AM]
Yes


kensalomon [8:24 AM]
I like it


[8:24]
So a node can say which it needs


[8:24]
And the other nodes share that


csw [8:24 AM]
And you can still checkpoint data and download from a hash that you have validated


kensalomon [8:25 AM]
Is xthin implemented now?


[8:25]
In a PR at least, or test net


csw [8:27 AM]
In Unlimited


[8:27]
BU has it and it does not require a major change


kensalomon [8:27 AM]
Unlimited nodes already do this? Or test


csw [8:27 AM]
It is also Backward compatible (edited)


kensalomon [8:27 AM]
Sounds like it should be


csw [8:27 AM]
You can choose it and scale or not


kensalomon [8:28 AM]
So, soft fork?


[8:28]
Or not even a fork


csw [8:28 AM]
NO, overlay


[8:28]
It is not a fork, it is a means to send


[8:28]
So, not a fork,


[8:28]
but a change to how some nodes send


kensalomon [8:29 AM]
Seems to make an RPi node was easier than it is now with Core


[8:29]
Makes me giggle


csw [8:30 AM]
No


[8:30]
RPs crash


[8:30]
Too little ram


kensalomon [8:30 AM]
That is a fatal flaw I always hated about RPi


csw [8:33 AM]
And they do not hold many connections open


[8:33]
So, more centralised


[8:33]
100,000,000,000 RasPis is more centralised than 1000 server hosts


[8:33]
That seems hard for people to get


[8:33]
But this is the network


[8:34]
And the graph theory for this is well developed


brad1121
[8:35 AM]
Really needs to be a blockchain for dummies book series. Naturally one that BS has had nothing to do with. Hence they will be part of the target audience


shemuel [8:36 AM]
Great info this morning. :rocket::popcorn:


joeldalais
[8:36 AM]
" We consider a blockchain to be a type of DLT where records are collated into “blocks” and linked
using a cryptographic signature." - FCA terminology for what a blockchain is, see, even they *get it* where blockstream/core doesn't.



[8:37]
and some others..


[8:37]
dlt = distributed ledger technology


kensalomon [8:38 AM]
Can that book series be distributed with a hardware wallet in the shape of a bank building?


brad1121
[8:38 AM]
Lol


kensalomon [8:38 AM]
The title, being your own bank for dummies


[8:39]
Though Blockchain can be used for other things


[8:40]
OMG! Let’s make a “My first Blockchain” baby book....



[8:41]
Every crypto nerd would buy it


[8:41]
Mae can send a copy to LukeJr


[8:42]
And other Core


csw [8:44 AM]
Visa has tested 80,000 TPS


[8:45]
Mastercard 52,000 Tps


blockextreme [8:45 AM]
What happen with viabtc?


[8:45]
offtopic*


[8:46]
I mean not the exchange but the fuzz you guys are talking about


kensalomon [8:47 AM]
Not sure but it sounds like they accidentally mined malleated transactions into a block because the soft fork didn’t restrict them from this and so soft forks are bad....totally fucked that up but I tried


[8:50]
The basics though are a block was mined that would’ve been rejected if not soft fork


[8:50]
But hard fork


blockextreme [8:59 AM]
any source of that happening?


otaci [9:01 AM]
I was expecting a flood of messages on reddit but not seen anything yet. Anyone got something?


blockextreme [9:05 AM]
Would be nice to use that info


tomothy [9:42 AM]
Csw, is there an alternative forum besides Reddit/bitcointalk that you've thought about writing this stuff on? Slack sucks for catching up. I'm mainly thinking bulletin board because that's what I'm used to but and something not Reddit. I think the type of medium influences discussion. I.e. twitter, vs Reddit, vs slack, vs bulletin board/forum. Could just be me. Just wondering.


kensalomon [9:44 AM]
Yours.org?


libitx [9:44 AM]
If there's interest for such a thing, I'd be happy to set up and run a bitcoin cash Discourse forum


csw [9:45 AM]
We have papers coming


[9:45]
Most things like reddit etc just attract trolls


kensalomon [9:47 AM]
I think you mean "The internet attracts trolls"



otaci [9:47 AM]
https://bitco.in/forum/ ?
bitco.in
Bitcoin Forum
Bitcoin Forum is a community of developers, academics, and entrepreneurs dedicated to promoting and improving Bitcoin. (2kB)



csw [9:48 AM]
Limited time right now. Much happening in the background (edited)


[9:48]
and the more you guys take this and run with it, the better


otaci [9:55 AM]
These guys won't use bitcoin as a settlement layer https://www.coindesk.com/barclays-joins-cls-blockchain-consortium-search-swift-alternative/
CoinDesk
Barclays Joins CLS Blockchain Consortium in Search of Swift Alternative - CoinDesk
Barclays has become the latest major financial institution to join the foreign exchange-focused blockchain consortium CLS.