1 2016-12-11 13:08:08 <moli> so i compiled the master version on Windows Sub Linux system and then went back to compile v0.13.0 - the commands i used were:  git checkout -b v0.13.0;  ./autogen.sh;  ./configure --prefix=`pwd`/depends/x86_64-w64-mingw32 the result came out the same master version again, no 0.13.0, does anyone know why?
 2 2016-12-11 18:55:10 <BW^-> what's the best sidechain tech currently?
 3 2016-12-11 18:56:26 <BW^-> even like, unpolished
 4 2016-12-11 18:56:38 <BW^-> also like, tools to make unlimited- or at least higher-bandwidth transactions
 5 2016-12-11 18:59:57 <arubi> lightningd/lightning-cli works
 6 2016-12-11 19:00:15 <arubi> not sure how fast it gets, I only used it for simple stuff for now
 7 2016-12-11 19:01:57 <arubi> BW^-, I used this: https://github.com/ElementsProject/lightning
 8 2016-12-11 19:05:22 <Chris_Stewart_5> BW^-: What arubi linked to is lightning stuff, if you are itnerested in peg designs see elements
 9 2016-12-11 19:05:24 <Chris_Stewart_5> https://github.com/ElementsProject/elements
10 2016-12-11 19:05:37 <BW^-> interesting
11 2016-12-11 19:05:57 <Chris_Stewart_5> also, #sidechains-dev although it is pretty dead
12 2016-12-11 19:06:00 <BW^-> arubi: how well does it scale, isn't it only between two parties currently?
13 2016-12-11 19:06:01 <BW^-> aha
14 2016-12-11 19:06:17 <BW^-> Chris_Stewart_5: hm interesting. what can you do with that?
15 2016-12-11 19:06:23 <arubi> BW^-, not sure, I did only do direct connections (afaik)
16 2016-12-11 19:06:31 <BW^-> arubi: right. hm.
17 2016-12-11 19:06:39 <Chris_Stewart_5> Create a sidechain, transfer coins into the sidechain, and then transfer them out
18 2016-12-11 19:06:46 <BW^-> arubi: why didn't multiple party take off yet?
19 2016-12-11 19:07:00 <arubi> I don't know, I'm just getting familiar with lightning myself
20 2016-12-11 19:07:07 <BW^-> Chris_Stewart_5: neat. what's the transaction cost and bandwidth inside the side chain?
21 2016-12-11 19:07:08 <Chris_Stewart_5> there are interesting things implemented in the elements sidechain, such as confidential txs
22 2016-12-11 19:07:23 <BW^-> Chris_Stewart_5: neat. do you have supplementary URL:s I can read too?
23 2016-12-11 19:07:37 <Chris_Stewart_5> BW^-: The sidechain is only pegged to testnet3, so there isn't real bitcoin at stake
24 2016-12-11 19:07:57 <Chris_Stewart_5> https://elementsproject.org/
25 2016-12-11 19:08:03 <BW^-> Chris_Stewart_5: anyone using it for production things?
26 2016-12-11 19:08:33 <Chris_Stewart_5> BW^-: All sidechains that i'm aware of are still in alpha and being tested
27 2016-12-11 19:08:42 <BW^-> Chris_Stewart_5: aha. which more do you know of?
28 2016-12-11 19:08:54 <Chris_Stewart_5> https://elementsproject.org/sidechains/
29 2016-12-11 19:08:57 <BW^-> Chris_Stewart_5: btw, can the one you mentioned be run on the actual bitcoin network as it is now, or is it waiting for segwit or anything=
30 2016-12-11 19:08:58 <BW^-> ?
31 2016-12-11 19:09:26 <Chris_Stewart_5> I think it can run against bitcoin technically, but it is not advised to do so since it hasn't been heavily reviewed
32 2016-12-11 19:09:49 <BW^-> ok
33 2016-12-11 19:09:57 <BW^-> ok.. thanks for mentioning it. :)
34 2016-12-11 19:10:04 <Chris_Stewart_5> also the peg in elements isn't trustless, it uses a federation of signers to transfer coins out of the sidechain since we have not soft forked op codes into bitcoin to support an asymmetric 2 way peg
35 2016-12-11 19:10:08 <BW^-> Chris_Stewart_5: ah, what about bandwidth and price within the sidechain?
36 2016-12-11 19:10:34 <BW^-> Chris_Stewart_5: wait.. what does that mean in practice?
37 2016-12-11 19:10:46 <BW^-> Chris_Stewart_5: that lots of participants need to sign for anyone to check out?
38 2016-12-11 19:10:51 <BW^-> Chris_Stewart_5: what if anyone is malintended?
39 2016-12-11 19:10:53 <Chris_Stewart_5> BW^-: Not sure what you mean by that, there isn't a fee market for the elements sidechain and bandwidth is minimal since it is only being used for testing
40 2016-12-11 19:11:06 <Chris_Stewart_5> BW^-: It's a 5 of 7 multisig
41 2016-12-11 19:11:18 <Chris_Stewart_5> so I wouldn't say 'alot' of participants
42 2016-12-11 19:11:38 <BW^-> ok
43 2016-12-11 19:12:25 <BW^-> ok thanks. :)
44 2016-12-11 19:12:58 <Chris_Stewart_5> I think it is safe to say the tech is still in it's infancy. Lightning is much more developed IMO
45 2016-12-11 19:14:07 <BW^-> mhm
46 2016-12-11 19:14:20 <BW^-> Chris_Stewart_5: but.. no multiple parties with lightning for now.
47 2016-12-11 19:18:17 <Chris_Stewart_5> BW^-: Not sure what you mean by that
48 2016-12-11 19:21:17 <BW^-> Chris_Stewart_5: a lightning channel is currently hardcoded to be used between Adam and Bob only
49 2016-12-11 19:21:22 <BW^-> the two initiators of the channel
50 2016-12-11 19:21:26 <BW^-> they don't do any routing
51 2016-12-11 19:22:29 <Chris_Stewart_5> BW^-: I'll take your word for it, I don't know much about lightning other than the theoretical benefits
52 2016-12-11 19:23:02 <BW^-> ok
53 2016-12-11 19:31:54 <BW^-> Chris_Stewart_5,arubi: do you know about when the malleability fix will effectuate?
54 2016-12-11 19:32:00 <BW^-> Chris_Stewart_5,arubi: also do you know why it's needed for Lightning to work?
55 2016-12-11 19:32:38 <arubi> malleability fix is in segwit, it's not needed for lightning, just makes it easier
56 2016-12-11 19:33:47 <arubi> afaict, it makes transactions a lot easier to track (because you're expecting a certain tx to be redeemed)
57 2016-12-11 19:34:41 <BW^-> arubi,: ^
58 2016-12-11 19:36:56 <BW^-> Chris_Stewart_5: ^