1 2017-06-25 01:50:29 <SmashShock> Hey, just want to bounce an idea off of someone if there's anyone around?
 2 2017-06-25 02:00:46 <sipa> don't ask to ask
 3 2017-06-25 02:01:03 <SmashShock> Sorry, yeah that's fair.
 4 2017-06-25 02:03:46 <SmashShock> So when a block is mined, you're aiming for a hash under a certain target. I was wondering, would there be a way to make a non-deterministic "mineable" block where instead of aiming for under a certain target, you're...
 5 2017-06-25 02:03:51 <SmashShock> Oh wow, I just figured it out
 6 2017-06-25 02:04:08 <SmashShock> Alright, sorry. Cheers!
 7 2017-06-25 08:44:41 <SpoekplumpeN> Hello, is this the correct channel to hear some qualified oppinions on segwit2x based on the code and not based on political views or is there another channel better suited for this?
 8 2017-06-25 09:14:53 <sipa> /wc
 9 2017-06-25 10:04:07 <stevenroose> Locktimes that use timestamps, are they compared to the block time or do they use median time past of the lasts [howmany was it?] blocks?
10 2017-06-25 10:22:17 <wumpus> always the block time
11 2017-06-25 12:35:52 <stevenroose> wumpus: thanks!
12 2017-06-25 15:06:28 <SopaXorzTaker> I propose a PoW change
13 2017-06-25 15:06:49 <SopaXorzTaker> currently PoW = SHA256(SHA256(block.header))
14 2017-06-25 15:07:10 <SopaXorzTaker> I suggest an improved and hopefully ASIC-resistant version
15 2017-06-25 15:08:11 <SopaXorzTaker> Let Z(h) be (secp256k1.G * h).x
16 2017-06-25 15:08:33 <SopaXorzTaker> X = Z(SHA256(block.header))
17 2017-06-25 15:08:54 <SopaXorzTaker> repeat 1023: X = Z(SHA256(X))
18 2017-06-25 15:09:10 <SopaXorzTaker> this will involve 256-bit multiplication and modulo
19 2017-06-25 15:10:29 <SopaXorzTaker> and that is supposed to be ASIC-resistant
20 2017-06-25 15:11:14 <SopaXorzTaker> or even better, let Z(h) be MMI(h, secp256k1.p)
21 2017-06-25 15:11:24 <SopaXorzTaker> where MMI is modular multiplicative inverse
22 2017-06-25 16:25:40 <Diablo-D3> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2017/06/msg00308.html