1 2016-12-25 05:59:50 <cannon-c> If I want to have a 2 of 2 multisig address, how can timelock type operation be used to refund one person if the other does not follow through?
2 2016-12-25 06:00:20 <cannon-c> such as if person one funds the 2 of 2 multisig address, but other person abandons.
3 2016-12-25 06:18:11 <arubi> cannon-c, bip112 and bip65 have nice examples
4 2016-12-25 06:19:08 <cannon-c> I am still new to OP scripting. Good sources to learn? and will check out bip 112 and bip65 thanks
5 2016-12-25 06:19:41 <arubi> the wiki page on Script, and interpreter.cpp are good sources
6 2016-12-25 06:19:51 <arubi> basically I don't know of any other sources :P
7 2016-12-25 06:20:06 <cannon-c> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Script is what currently studying
8 2016-12-25 06:21:12 <arubi> cannon-c, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/script/interpreter.cpp#L248
9 2016-12-25 06:21:52 <arubi> it ends in line 1046 :)
10 2016-12-25 07:06:25 <luke-jr> cannon-c: what if the 1-of-2 claiming the other-of-2 abandoned it is lying?
11 2016-12-25 07:08:38 <cannon-c> Idea is if I put funds in a 2 of 2 multisig, with it being refunded after certian time if other party does not claim
12 2016-12-25 07:08:47 <cannon-c> sounds weird, but I have a purpose.
13 2016-12-25 07:09:04 <cannon-c> Will post when it is written up
14 2016-12-25 07:09:39 <cannon-c> what do you mean about lying luke-jr ?
15 2016-12-25 23:33:16 <afk11> anyone here running a testnet explorer that *isn't* 13.0+ ? There's a great lack of these right now, so people testing code with segwit don't have a place to look-up witness data, or broadcast segwit transactions unless they run a local bitcoind. Think of the travis tests :(
16 2016-12-25 23:38:56 <phantomcircuit> afk11, er why not run a local bitcoind? :P
17 2016-12-25 23:39:30 <afk11> you need the full chain before you can sendrawtransaction, because it has to enter the mempool
18 2016-12-25 23:40:07 <afk11> could probably host one with travis credentials, but think testnet explorers are doing a disservice by not supporting it by now
19 2016-12-25 23:40:22 <afk11> travis' encrypted env vars*
20 2016-12-25 23:45:43 <phantomcircuit> afk11, shouldn't take very long
21 2016-12-25 23:46:29 <afk11> aye, here's to that!
22 2016-12-25 23:46:51 <afk11> I'm hearing people say there's no point in supporting it until it lands on mainnet, which I find unacceptable
23 2016-12-25 23:47:08 <afk11> looking at things, apparently a lot of people can't be bothered right now :)
24 2016-12-25 23:47:12 <phantomcircuit> that's pretty silly
25 2016-12-25 23:47:20 <afk11> yeah you're telling me
26 2016-12-25 23:47:44 <afk11> how are people meant to support it if they can't test their applications with it..
27 2016-12-25 23:47:49 <afk11> I've heard lib maintainers say that xD
28 2016-12-25 23:48:09 <afk11> oh well - fingers crossed for an Xmas miracle
29 2016-12-25 23:55:14 <phantomcircuit> o.o