Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.138]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83ABEC0001 for ; Sat, 13 Mar 2021 17:11:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71A7A83B3F for ; Sat, 13 Mar 2021 17:11:48 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.612 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.612 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G3JdcVzMNJhy for ; Sat, 13 Mar 2021 17:11:47 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from mail-yb1-xb2c.google.com (mail-yb1-xb2c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b2c]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F7BC83B3A for ; Sat, 13 Mar 2021 17:11:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yb1-xb2c.google.com with SMTP id c131so28768155ybf.7 for ; Sat, 13 Mar 2021 09:11:46 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=9AbNK9hEtd1l/nv5+pC9YU1m5gF+xww6hGHbnW25lys=; b=Lf+/tY5QBhHNhu8YdtfsNkpoX9KNDJ0RCLw7CYRBTyFgTE54D6fQ+pJ7syOh8Hu9h5 tuU0+ml4SO1OD48J21FKHR2vI8sUqc1+8BwjKU5qMSe05wVdGg/+BF4Rqz/8zJgIggq7 oUv232vYvFh04gHORIl9l7se7iVnSETpswBlMMDTtIOLBzzygCNHQw8Eu7kSMgTQCuWb GHy96wPJDjMDs2OhBcOryPjU9BLRbt6sBqBEHFmPqPKa+bqu9L920WUdpKL6lt+VE3Kk yy8QxA6SeKKfsyBz1L7QFwIt/HPWTgM4KEq1zJC3URPK8sYqb/GNCMxp2wgiO+zu5c3n H8Jw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=9AbNK9hEtd1l/nv5+pC9YU1m5gF+xww6hGHbnW25lys=; b=qqC0b1iyZT+H6HdGHpC4Yq/SJdgikN5l8FWlX/3enzIiOCEQNm/v10xEc+MDwUJOdD 7FHIR1mT8J1TAGLf4GgrDiQaorLl8hzBBuf4GXgUCR334OSQXoFfr77USbg1AZpAY+nJ dXs6GRjMQYKVyyz6SVXoG1t4nshgacLSm1GbtZLewiK4R9cdefFjtZ/awb1uKex6vZml 7Hm044fPIhw/9yevRKBGkBpGb9KxveVkDoTZV1wLO+OyDyg6CthluENFJTUiVSu0ggWB LjGt6J9F1rGWQA76eblNjH4HcljR2/6qqc9WtGvk02Tzx7cC4mIzC97JxKVD0gr33BtW ub6w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530KpurxFnSwlL+fkhSmecAttRDwIX/pMjgCCZKocVkFmuDd6ScK rpmVRbHBsSgf2fTg19PkpJVQSgcxF7+RjKK4AV0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwCkBrU+DmuBnJtknoUx7ho7GpQhTiZW6szaYeZZKp+iuco5ixxVC3xcppJYkj5msi2rILpuG77d1+pZL9k1dQ= X-Received: by 2002:a25:d704:: with SMTP id o4mr24902334ybg.6.1615655505919; Sat, 13 Mar 2021 09:11:45 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1802-604c7400-4d1-7b635e80@91248813> <31108cac-c3d5-4435-9ca0-41153545855b@yancy.lol> In-Reply-To: <31108cac-c3d5-4435-9ca0-41153545855b@yancy.lol> From: Lonero Foundation Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2021 12:11:33 -0500 Message-ID: To: yancy Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000008282f105bd6e1c3a" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 13 Mar 2021 22:53:20 +0000 Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Proposal: Consensus (hard fork) PoST Datastore for Energy Efficient Mining X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2021 17:11:48 -0000 --0000000000008282f105bd6e1c3a Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, no worries. I made the changes now in the GitHub repository and pull request. I'm hoping for a BIP # soon. Thanks for the feedback, and I guess the sense of humor. Best regards, Andrew On Sat, Mar 13, 2021, 10:45 AM yancy wrote: > Ok thanks. Using the correct terminology helps people understand what > you're talking about and take you seriously. > > Cheers, > -Yancy > > Mar 13, 2021 4:02:18 PM Lonero Foundation : > > Hi, I know the differences between the cryptographic hashing algorithm an= d > key validation. I know hashing is for SHA, but was referring to asymmetri= c > cryptography in regards to the key validation. I should have used a > different term though instead of, "In regards to cryptographic hashing,",= I > should have stated in regards to cryptographic key validation. There are = a > few other dubious clarifications or minor edits I should make in order to > not draw confusion. I will do a repo update today. Honest mistake, but > enough with the sarcasm. > > Best regards, Andrew > > On Sat, Mar 13, 2021, 3:13 AM email@yancy.lol wrote: > >> My email was not intended as an insult. Your proposal seemed a bit like >> gibberish and made some obvious mistakes as pointed out before (such as >> conflating secp256k1 with sha256), and so I was genuinely curious if you >> were a bot spamming the list. >> >> >> Maybe a more interesting topic is, can GPT3 be used to generate a BIP? >> How long before our AI overlord produces improvements to Bitcoin? At wh= at >> point will the AI have more than 51% of commit frequency? Will we have >> lost the war to our new centralized overlord? >> >> Cheers, >> -Yancy >> >> >> On Saturday, March 13, 2021 00:31 CET, Lonero Foundation < >> loneroassociation@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> Also, I already stated I was referring to signature validation >> cryptography in that aspect: >> https://wizardforcel.gitbooks.io/practical-cryptography-for-developers-b= ook/content/digital-signatures/ecdsa-sign-verify-examples.html >> My BIP has a primary purpose in regards to what I want to develop proofs >> for and the different cryptographic elements I want to develop proofs fo= r. >> That said to those who disagree with the premise, I do prefer >> constructive feedback over insults or making fun of one another. After a= ll >> this is an improvement proposal with a specific purpose aiming to develo= p a >> specific thing, not a guy who is just wanting to copy and paste a >> repository and call it a day. >> >> Best regards, Andrew >> >> On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 6:21 PM Lonero Foundation < >> loneroassociation@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi, I also want to emphasize that my main point isn't just to create a >>> BTC hardfork or become another Bitcoin Cash, Gold, or SV. The main poin= t in >>> regards to this BIP actually expands POW rather than replaces or create= s an >>> alternative. Many of the problems faced in regards to security in the >>> future as well as sustainability is something I believe lots of the cha= nges >>> I am proposing can fix. In regards to technological implementation, onc= e >>> this is assigned draft status I am more than willing to create preprint= s >>> explaining the cryptography, hashing algorithm improvements, and consen= sus >>> that I am working on. This is a highly technologically complex idea tha= t I >>> am willing to "call my bluff on" and expand upon. As for it being a dra= ft, >>> I think this is a good starting point at least for draft status prior t= o >>> working on technological implementation. >>> >>> Best regards, Andrew >>> >>> On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 5:37 PM email@yancy.lol >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I think Andrew himself is an algo. The crypto training set must not b= e >>>> very good. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> -Yancy >>>> >>>> On Friday, March 12, 2021 17:54 CET, Lonero Foundation via bitcoin-dev= < >>>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> =E2=80=A6 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > --0000000000008282f105bd6e1c3a Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi, no worries. I made the changes now in the GitHub repo= sitory and pull request. I'm hoping for a BIP # soon. Thanks for the fe= edback, and I guess the sense of humor.

Best regards, Andrew

On Sat, Mar 13, 2021, 10:45 AM yancy &l= t;email@yancy.lol> wrote:
=20 =20
Ok thanks.=C2=A0 Using the co= rrect terminology helps people understand what you're talking about and= take you seriously.=20
=20
Cheers,=20
-Yancy=20
=20
=20
=20

Mar 13, 2021 4:02:18 PM Lonero Foundation <loneroassociat= ion@gmail.com>:

=20
=20
Hi, I know the differences between the cryptographic hashing algorith= m and key validation. I know hashing is for SHA, but was referring to=C2=A0= asymmetric cryptography in regards to the key validation. I should ha= ve used a different term though instead of, "In regards to cryptograph= ic hashing,", I should have stated in regards to cryptographic key val= idation. There are a few other dubious clarifications or minor edits I shou= ld make in order to not draw confusion. I will do a repo update today. Hone= st mistake, but enough with the sarcasm.=20

=20
=20
Best regards, Andrew=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
On Sat, Mar 13, 2021, 3:13 AM email@yancy.lol <email@yancy.lol>= ; wrote:=20
=20
=20
=20

My email wa= s not intended as an insult.=C2=A0 Your proposal seemed a bit like gibberis= h and made some obvious mistakes as pointed out before (such as conflating = secp256k1 with sha256), and so I was genuinely curious if you were a bot sp= amming the list.

=C2=A0=20

Maybe a more interest= ing topic is, can GPT3 be used to generate a BIP?=C2=A0 How long before our= AI overlord produces improvements to Bitcoin?=C2=A0 At what point will the= AI have more than 51% of commit frequency?=C2=A0 Will we have lost the war= to our new centralized overlord?

=20
Cheers,=20
-Yancy=20
=20
=20
On Saturday, March 13, 2021 00:31 CET, Lonero Foundation <loneroassociation@gmail.com> wrote:=20
=C2=A0=20
=20
=20
Also, I already stated I was referring to signature validation cr= yptography in that aspect: https://wiza= rdforcel.gitbooks.io/practical-cryptography-for-developers-book/content/dig= ital-signatures/ecdsa-sign-verify-examples.html=20
=20
My BIP has a primary purpose in regards to what I want to develop= proofs for and the different cryptographic elements I want to develop proo= fs for.=20
=20
That said to those who disagree with the premise, I do prefer con= structive feedback over insults or making fun of one another. After all thi= s is an improvement proposal with a specific purpose aiming to develop a sp= ecific thing, not a guy who is just wanting to copy and paste a repository = and call it a day.=20
=20
=C2=A0=20
=20
Best regards, Andrew=20
=20
=C2=A0=20
=20
On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 6:21 PM Lonero Foundation <= loneroassociation@gmail.com> wrote:=20
=20
=20
=20
Hi, I also want to emphasize that my main point isn't just = to create a BTC hardfork or become another Bitcoin Cash, Gold, or SV. The m= ain point in regards to this BIP actually expands POW rather than replaces = or creates an alternative. Many of the problems faced in regards to securit= y in the future as well as sustainability is something I believe lots of th= e changes I am proposing can fix. In regards to technological implementatio= n, once this is assigned draft status I am more than willing to create prep= rints explaining the cryptography, hashing algorithm improvements, and cons= ensus that I am working on. This is a highly technologically complex idea t= hat I am willing to "call my bluff on" and expand upon. As for it= being a draft, I think this is a good starting point at least for draft st= atus prior to working on technological implementation.=20
=20
=C2=A0=20
=20
Best regards, Andrew=20
=20
=C2=A0=20
=20
On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 5:37 PM email@yancy.lol <email@yancy= .lol> wrote:=20
=20
I think Andrew himself is an algo.=C2=A0 The crypto training se= t must not be very good.=20
=20
Cheers,=20
-Yancy=20
=20
On Friday, March 12, 2021 17:54 CET, Lonero Foundation via b= itcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:=20
=C2=A0=20
=E2=80=A6=20
=20
=20
=20
=C2=A0=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
=C2=A0=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
--0000000000008282f105bd6e1c3a--