< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] glozow opened pull request #22432: fix incorrect testmempoolaccept doc (master...2021-07-testmempoolaccept-doc) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22432
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8ab0c77299a5...e0fe658b863e
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e65d1d4 Sebastian Falbesoner: doc: recommend `--disable-external-signer` in OpenBSD build guide
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e0fe658 W. J. van der Laan: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22335: doc: recommend `--disable-external-signer` in...
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #22335: doc: recommend `--disable-external-signer` in OpenBSD build guide (master...202106-doc-openbsd_mention_missing_external_signer_support) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22335
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e0fe658b863e...842e2a9c54bd
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 2feec3c Vasil Dimov: net: don't bind on if binds are restricted to Tor
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 842e2a9 W. J. van der Laan: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#20234: net: don't bind on if binds are restr...
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #20234: net: don't bind on if binds are restricted to Tor (master...bind) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20234
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/842e2a9c54bd...839f5d06d6de
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 9169be0 glozow: fix incorrect testmempoolaccept doc
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 839f5d0 fanquake: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22432: doc: fix incorrect testmempoolaccept doc
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake merged pull request #22432: doc: fix incorrect testmempoolaccept doc (master...2021-07-testmempoolaccept-doc) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22432
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] fanquake opened pull request #22433: init: remove straggling boost thread_group related code (master...struggling_thread_group) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22433
< prayank> Is there any way to make version spoofing difficult in software like Bitcoin Core?
< sipa> no
< sipa> nodes can claim whatever they want, and it really shouldn't matter
< prayank> Agree. In few things it really doesn't matter. Love the freedom as well. Although some websites and analysts or even devs may look at version of different nodes and assume things that may not be correct. Also wanted to know is there any benefit in spying with a node that has old version?
< sipa> if you want to spy, you run custom softwate
< sipa> is your question about whether there is a benefit to *using* an old bitcoin core version to spy with (no, spy nodes aren't bitcoin core at all, or heavily modified ones at least), or whether there is a benefit to *claiming* you're an old bitcoin core version when spying (not really, you can claim whatever you want, the data isn't used for anything except statistics etc)
< prayank> My question was about claiming. Second one. Was thinking of ways to detect such nodes and ban. Difficult to change such things and wait for merge but can atleast do for our individual nodes if we are okay with running Core with some changes.
< sipa> if you do that, they'll just become better at pretending
< sipa> there is no inherent way from distinguishing a real node from a spy one
< vasild> sipa: in https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22387#issuecomment-878417152, do you mean that if a node is connected to e.g. only 3 others and I am one of those 3, then every time that node chooses 2 random peers to relay to, then I am very likely to be the chosen one?
< sipa> right
< sipa> hmm, may argument doesn't make much sense
< vasild> there are some ipv4, ipv6, i2p and incoming tor ( - https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22387#issuecomment-878426183
< vasild> but even for e.g. ipv4, the fact that it is ipv4 does not mean that a node is not connected to just e.g. 3 others
< vasild> why? because if they are connected to just 3 others, then there would not be much to relay?
< sipa> well, yes, but just fewer peers doesn't mean much, because they'll also be receiving fewer addr announcememts that get a chance to be relayed
< vasild> right
< vasild> It looks like after running for a long time things tend to improve, though
< vasild> (a few hours)
< vasild> hmm, what about starting with m_addr_token_bucket=some-high-number, e.g. 1000?
< sipa> that means spamming is possible again by cycling (connect, send, disconnect) quickly
< vasild> hm, right :/
< vasild> stupid idea
< * vasild> afk
< sipa> anyway, i'm surprised by your numbers
< sipa> but will run some more metricd myself
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/839f5d06d6de...7e1ba37b5dac
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master aa72ffb fanquake: init: remove straggling boost thread_group code
< bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 7e1ba37 MarcoFalke: Merge bitcoin/bitcoin#22433: init: remove straggling boost thread_group re...
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #22433: init: remove straggling boost thread_group related code (master...struggling_thread_group) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22433
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] salemalem opened pull request #22434: Copyright fix to 2021 from 2020 (master...patch-1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22434
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #22434: Copyright fix to 2021 from 2020 (master...patch-1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22434
< prayank> How many ACKs are required for a PR to get merged if the author is not from chaincode labs or blockstream or OG dev for a simple change that doesn't affect functionality in Bitcoin Core?
< prayank> Are 6 enough?
< prayank> Maybe I was right in avoiding things that would have made me rich. Now I realized how things work. Also right in ignoring funding from Steve Lee. Not every Core hater is correct but they have some points. We need a Core fork. For node and WALLET.
< prayank> Keep your DNS seeds and worship people like god
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] prayank23 closed pull request #22317: doc: Highlight DNS requests part in tor.md (master...highlight-dns-request) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22317
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] prayank23 closed pull request #22430: Fix syntax for `getindexinfo` params in help examples (master...getindexinfo) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22430
< achow101> prayank[m]: usually 3 acks are enough. However the main thing is to advocate for yourself. There are 401 PRs currently open; it is unreasonable to expect that the maintainers know the status of every single one. When you believe the PR is ready to merge, you can say so in this channel or in the PR itself. You will notice that all of the people you indirectly mentioned are active participants in the IRC meetings where high priority PRs are
< achow101> discussed. You will notice that frequently, when a PR goes unnoticed for a while, people will say "#X is rfm". This is all part of advocating for work that you care about, instead of just waiting for something to happen.
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] prayank23 closed pull request #22316: doc: Add 5 privacy recommendations in tor.md (master...tor-privacy-recommend) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22316
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] prayank23 closed pull request #21755: Add more info about prefix in error message for invalid address (master...error-address) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21755
< achow101> it's not some conspiracy or a special club of developers. it's literally just that there is so much stuff going on it's hard to keep track of. You need to be proactive and advocate for things you want
< bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] prayank23 closed pull request #21870: github: Add `config.yml` for GUI issues (master...issue-templates) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21870
< robertspigler> prayank: I second achow101 's response - please reopen your PR's. People are also especially busy right now with the 0.23 release
< robertspigler> Or mark up for grabs. People are free to fork obviously, but NACK from me (as discussed previously) - I strongly prefer a reference implementation for the 'full stack' (wallet, node, gui)
< prayank> achow101: please do not take anything for you. Because its not. Maintainers suck, And its for them. Or maybe compromised by now. However, I couldnt find a vulnerability that they introduced so they can enjoy. You need examples: Ex1: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/22432 (how to merge quickly) with less ACKs. No merge after few ACKs:
< prayank> sipa answering 90% questions on SE
< prayank> sipa answering q on IRC
< prayank> and Bitcoin needs nothing?
< prayank> Can someone answer this?
< prayank> Is anyone working on Dandelion Lite?
< prayank> Thoughts on this issue: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/22424
< prayank> No
< prayank> Because nobody cares about privacy or tx
< sipa> what?
< sipa> excuse me?
< sipa> just because a problem exists doesn't mean every solution is fine
< prayank> sipa: I respect you a lot. And said nothing bad about you.
< sipa> i understand our review and development process is frustrating at times
< sipa> but nobody _owes_ you anything
< sipa> people work on the problems they believe are most impactful, whether that is development or review
< prayank> Why are they not working on simple problems with simple solutions?
< sipa> like?
< sipa> i personally don't believe dandelion is a viable solution, so i'm not spending time on it; i know my opinion is rather extreme, but i think many others share similar sentiments, so they will choose not to work on it
< prayank> Okay I will get to specifics.. Do you care about privacy?
< prayank> Does it matter?
< sipa> of course?
< sipa> you know i co-authored the taproot bips right?
< sipa> and wrote the tor hidden service support in bitcoin core
< prayank> sipa: I never said working on something that improves privacy for something 10% is bad. I am just asking.
< sipa> what 10%?
< prayank> How much do you think is Tor used in Core and how much do you expect Taproot in next 3 years?
< sipa> i hope a lot, but i don't know
< sipa> but i also don't think you can put numbers on it like that
< sipa> if lightning migrates to taproot, as well as some reasonable portion of other types of transactions, i believe that will be a huge privacy boost for a ton of payments
< prayank> Okay I am sorry for the numbers and I cannot talk to you like this
< sipa> note that i don't think that's "sufficient" as a privacy solution, it's an improvement to one rather small aspect
< sipa> but privacy is a big very multi-faceted problem
< prayank> yes that last sentence is everything
< prayank> privacy is a big very multi-faceted problem
< sipa> all i want to say is... please be respectful of people's choices of what they work on, even if seems they disagree with yours
< sipa> if you need attention to PRs of yours, especially if you think they're ready for merge, ping a maintainer
< prayank> People dont care and you know... sipa if you were not there
< sipa> as achow101 says, people can't keep track of everything
< prayank> half questions on SE were unanswered
< sipa> so?
< prayank> people are able to keep track of things they want
< sipa> yes, and they have their own priorities
< sipa> and those aren't yours
< prayank> so? we should improve
< prayank> we need more devs like you
< sipa> okay
< prayank> Idk. I am true to myself and others. I tried everything. Its not helping. I will look for funding or do something to start a better fork (better than Luke Dash Jr). I don't care about anyone to be honest but Bitcoin. Only person I liked during conversations was Pieter Wuille, Greg Maxwell and Sometimes Drunk conversations with others. But I always
< prayank> learnt a lot from sipa and I felt close to development.
< prayank> This is the only reason I was not preferred for funding few weeks back. I had denied it myself and I am not here for more money.
< sipa> i generally find it's most useful to work on many different things, when some of the ones you're working on don't make as much progress as you'd like
< sipa> i'd advise against your own fork; it's very easy to hugely underestimate how much work goes into maintenance
< sipa> but of course you're free to do what you want; it is open source
< prayank> sipa: One last question
< prayank> Thoughts on this issue: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/22424
< sipa> seems reasonable
< prayank> Cool
< sipa> but i'm not going to work on it
< sipa> it does seem a rather invasive change
< prayank> I will work on it or pay for devs
< sipa> i'm not sure if you have enough experience with the codebase to work on something like that
< prayank> Why does everything that improves privacy but not introduced by chaincode labs seems invasive?
< sipa> excuse me?
< prayank> Why is it invasive?
< sipa> i don't see a simple way of introducing something like this
< sipa> so it'll need a bunch of design to figure out how it would fit in
< prayank> Solving complex problems is what for we are here
< sipa> of coyrse
< prayank> else copilot can do better
< prayank> We need humans with intelligence
< sipa> i'm just advising you that if you take on too ambitious problems, you'll just end up more frustrated when they don't make progress
< prayank> It not too ambitious :(
< prayank> sipa
< sipa> i think it is too ambitious for you
< sipa> given what i've seen
< prayank> Okay I will not chat for few weeks. Already have my PowerShell project. Time to prove something. If not. Never take me seriously in life.
< sipa> if you want to improve the tests, please learn python
< prayank> I know python
< prayank> I dont know why does working on PS mean you dont now python
< sipa> i don't understand why you're interested in PS tests
< prayank> I know PS better and feel comfirtable
< sipa> if you can write tests in the existing test framework, and have an actual chance of getting them integrated
< prayank> I will record an audio sometimes
< prayank> I love to test in everything you can
< prayank> like everything
< sipa> what is your goal with these PS tests?
< prayank> Goal: 1. Internship project 2. Nice GUI for script kiddies to play and think Bitcoin is not Digital Gold mem they can play with it and pentest. 3. Reference in Infosec Conf: I dont need followers. Bitcoin needs software devs. 4. Experiment and lets see see if we if find something new
< sipa> okay - as long as you don't have an expectation that these tests will be integrated into the bitcoin core repository or test infrastructure
< sipa> i personally don't see the point, but i also don't know PS
< prayank> yeah never expected that
< prayank> It will stay separate
< sipa> and if it's not going to be integrated it seems like you're missing out on a huge portion of potential impact of your work
< sipa> yes, i saw that - i still don't really get what the goal is
< sipa> but if you think it's useful, good luck
< prayank> sipa I dont know much about you to be honest but I started using bitcoin in 2015 because of some reasons and have some background. I am not as goood as you in programming. But maybe I was never good in anything thats why chatting here today, or I care too much about Bitcoin. I think I have decided that I can do anything for Bitcoin. Younger bro
< prayank> married lots of other things. I just want to focus on learning and doing better. I have issues idk. Lets see. If not Core. Fork. But Bitcoin.
< sipa> prayank: i would encourage you to find other things in life to do too; making everything about bitcoin (or any single thing) is going to drive you nuts
< prayank> And I didn't use bitcoin because of number go up FYI
< sipa> anyway, this is getting off topic, and i have some code to write
< prayank> Thanks for your time
< robertspigler> prayank: I don't understand why you are in such a bad mood today. Burning bridges helps no one. We are all on the same team here, and you are getting good advice from people you are being a bit rude to. I have enjoyed working on doc changes with you. If you are getting frustrated with the process maybe you need a little vacation. It is like any other job
< luke-jr> he left :/