nubbins`: or mod6, by all accounts a great guy, head of TRB, almost quit in the first week because he couldn't get a gentoo install up and running.
PeterL: are Canadians allowed to talk about each other so impolitely?
nubbins`: take the situation of poor bitcoinpete: his underwear probably smells like mp's dick
nubbins`: they don't bicker much, and alf's a smart guy
nubbins`: i could count the individuals i'd consider intellectual peers on one hand
nubbins`: PeterL i don't know how much of the logs you've read, but it's mostly derps
PeterL: and if we blindly follow him then he knows we are all derps?
nubbins`: PeterL only if you own 25% of the shares
PeterL: If I send a txn to the addresses listed on a bitbet page, will that expense be put on the bitbet books too?
asciilifeform: but i have nfi, i'm not his mother, cannot answer why he does things! l0l!
nubbins`: especially considering the shitstorm that this egregious fraud has blown up
asciilifeform: nubbins`: i fully expected that mircea_popescu would cover the 17 from the coin stuck in his toenails
nubbins`: if there are any omissions or corrections to be made to my summation above, now would be the time
nubbins`: so we can explain why A1 was held for so long before being mined, and we can explain why A2-A4 vanished, and we can explain why mp thought that sending B was a good idea, but we now see that it was simply not a good idea because mp did not understand the payment protocol as well as he thought he did, and now we've got a 17 btc fraudulent expense on bitbet's ledger
asciilifeform: [02:07:54] [mircea_popescu] ALL these ~happened~ to somehow drop out of mempools ? << from the document << later we learn that prb DROPS what it deems 'doublespend' SOLELY based on chronology.
nubbins`: kakobrekla seems like you've got a good understanding of the likelihood of each explanation
nubbins`: anyone who supports this gibberish shames themselves
nubbins`: seriously. "the stupidest tx ever was slow to propagate, therefore all payouts are suspended"
kakobrekla: i dont think this will be a problem. notice the 'double-check' guy from comments.
nubbins`: "what are they sniffing?"
nubbins`: most of the users will cry "this place is fucked"
asciilifeform: kakobrekla: it sounds reasonable. except that i suspect that most of the users will cry, 'how do i transmit a tx?111 waaah'
asciilifeform: kakobrekla: from the statement ?
nubbins`: asciilifeform the "what instead" has been stated to be "use a fee of 9 cents" more than once.
kakobrekla: asciilifeform see the agreed upon solution for future bets payouts
nubbins`: this is like ordering pizza from 2 different shops, eating the one that shows up first, and acting surprised when you see both charged to your credit card
kakobrekla: asciilifeform certainly not sign more parallel transactions to same effect and broadcast them like nothing happened
nubbins`: so A1 and A2 were bad judgment calls, we can all agree there
asciilifeform: but forgot that the network is now run by aggressive imbeciles
PeterL: nubbins`> go to qntra article and see how long it takes for someone to even MENTION the obvious cheapo explanation << if you look at the timestamps, it was just a couple hours before we started complaining, which was pretty much as soon as I got around to reading the article in question
asciilifeform: davout: 'A second transaction was broadcast, spending the same inputs as A1, including a fee of 0.0001'
davout: asciilifeform: no, the tx he sent was not conflicting
nubbins`: so, where do we go from here? we have an mpex listing where the owner's introduced fraudulent expenses and the other owner won't sign the financial statement. the only party who has recourse of any sort is mpex, but of course the conflict of interest involved will preclude mpex from resolving the situation to honest satisfaction
asciilifeform: kakobrekla: mircea_popescu sent the first tx. noticed that it has apparently vanished from the fact of the earth. what is the thing to do in that case ?
thestringpuller: nubbins`: "Why is Bush so convinced Iraq has weapons of mass destruction?" Negrodamus: "Because he has the receipt."
kakobrekla: asciilifeform there never was.
asciilifeform: rather than 'miner cartel' model.
asciilifeform: mircea_popescu's observations best fit the 'there is no longer a reliable network' model.
nubbins`: asciilifeform bush didn't have the smoking gun but he still went to iraq
asciilifeform: nubbins`: i ~really~, very much, hate the miners. but i do not have the smoking gun that tells us that they were at fault.
nubbins`: by the time it's raised, you can barely read it for the noise about "bitcoin has been forked"
nubbins`: go to qntra article and see how long it takes for someone to even MENTION the obvious cheapo explanation
gribble: The operation succeeded.
asciilifeform: PeterL: i have nfi how mircea_popescu concluded that miners were involved. the only clue i have is that it has recently come out that the top cn miners have formed a derp committee of some kind, apparently for purposes of negotiated separate peace with the enemy
PeterL: kakobrekla is there an estimated timeframe for when bet payouts will resume?
nubbins`: and "we" jumped to the conclusion because there's a not-insignificant amount of worry in the ecosystem right now about chinese monopoly, so it's an easy lie to sell
PeterL: and by the way, how did we jump to the conclusion that the collusion is from "Chinese miners"? (And why is the disclaimer on bitbet so tiny and discreet?)
davout: kakobrekla: pls to do so, i'm looking through my nodes logs to see if and when i heard about them
kakobrekla: Thats what they said for Jesus.
nubbins`: any bets on whether that'll happen?
nubbins`: so if mp defrauds bitbet, mpex has the OPTION of liquidating it.
nubbins`: Should BitBet fail to execute this Agreement, as for instance by but not limited to breaching 3.2.h above, MPEx will notify the named individuals of their breach and may, at its sole discretion, suspend the asset from trading thus activating the liquidation of the asset.
adlai is fairly certain bitbet has been "mixing bets" for ~ever. isn't this how the whole "bitbet as tumbler" story was supposed to work? ie, the blockchain tells a different story than the addresses listed on the site
PeterL: nubbins` payout from inputs is good for transparency, but it would be perfectly legitimate for bitbet to send all funds to one address and then make all payouts from the same address
assbot: The greatly anticipated BitBet (S.BBET) February 2016 Statement on Trilema - A blog by Mircea Popescu. ... ( http://bit.ly/1LamWrs )
adlai: nubbins`: it does change the picture from "fraud! abdication! blood of tyrants!" to "mp made a mistake when acting as coin-handler for a corporation"
nubbins`: it shares many letters with the word pizza
asciilifeform: nubbins`: what does the listing agreement say re: what to do, as a shareholder, if you think mp has been afflicted by martian brain parasites and broke the agreement ?
nubbins`: and there's a name for an operation that pays cashouts from more recent takings
nubbins`: even if it'd worked, he still would have been introducing a private expense to bitbet's books and then paying himself back from A* inputs, which still breaks the listing agreement
assbot: Logged on 07-03-2016 16:50:24; adlai: nubbins`: couldn't the inputs of B have been from other bets? maybe not how "bettors have come to expect" payouts would work, but not strictly speaking funds which don't belong to s.bbet
asciilifeform: anyway i have no idea if mircea_popescu send the 'doubles' because he was pissed and mashing keys, or if he forgot that most of the node network is run by imbeciles who go by chronology to 'resolve doublespend', or what. ask him, not me.
asciilifeform: what was bbet (or mircea_popescu at the console, or imagine youself there instead) do instead ?
nubbins`: if he'd gone straight from A1 to A4 we'd probably all be drinking soda together now
asciilifeform: and then do what? eat pistol ?
PeterL: or double spend the outputs (and get a miner to include) before sending txn B
nubbins`: while the backlog is still huge.
nubbins`: with the same inputs.
nubbins`: or send another turbo low fee transaction 12 hours later.
nubbins`: asciilifeform well then!
adlai: nubbins`: couldn't the inputs of B have been from other bets? maybe not how "bettors have come to expect" payouts would work, but not strictly speaking funds which don't belong to s.bbet
nubbins`: asciilifeform if i send $7,000 cash in the mail, i don't let the post office choose the delivery standard
asciilifeform: nubbins`: this is not true, see the onetimepad thread, mp admitted that he made an arithmetical mistake once !
PeterL: asciilifeform but sending the second txn was pure idiocy, since he had no way of knowing the first would not also be mined
PeterL: but how is mircea_popescu going to address the concerns if he ignores the people who raise them?
asciilifeform: nubbins`: my current hypothesis is that he did not intend a reactor test, but simply allowed the transmitter to calculate a default fee, which turned out to be 0, and sent.
nubbins`: PeterL i think it's fairly obvious that customer payouts are zero priority, given the 0-fee payout attempt followed by a payout embargo
dooglus: I suspect that's the client's fault - used to be that high-priority inputs meant you didn't need a fee
nubbins`: all these maybes, and more, to be left unaddressed -- stay tuned!
nubbins`: maybe bitbet shouldn't be sending 0-fee transactions when there's a massive mempool backlog!
PeterL: <mircea_popescu> by this measure, there's a large overlap between all sorts of things. maybe there is, sure. << it only takes one, and I bet and have a node, therefore it might have been me too
dooglus: if A1 and A2 went to non-overlapping sets of nodes then A2 should have been accepted and mined, right?
mircea_popescu: by this measure, there's a large overlap between all sorts of things. maybe there is, sure.
PeterL: well, there is probably a large overlap between bettors and people running nodes, since these are people who have an interest in the bitcoin network working so they can get paid
nubbins`: "to a non-overlapping set of nodes" -- aha! he's found an out that he hasn't used yet -- the nodes weren't overlapping now, see?!
mircea_popescu: and then we do this a coupla more times, and so on.
nubbins`: except for B, where one of the outputs went back to you because it was your money, not bitbet's
mircea_popescu: let's move on to the next step. THEN, MP broadcast A2, which HAD a fee. to a non-overlapping set of nodes. the disjunction of the two sets had a perfectly valid txn they... also didn't broadcast, because magic reasons.
mircea_popescu: all the outputs go to bet winners.
nubbins`: PeterL one person watching one of the 23 outputs, yes
PeterL: so there are what, 23 outputs or so? and it would take just one of them seeing the txn to hold onto it
nubbins`: surely he couldn't just add the pubkey.
mircea_popescu: well... if it's not a bettor then "for them A1 credits one of their addresses and so it sticks around forever for them" doesn't stick anymore.
dooglus: "bettor" could be replaced by "anyone who wants to fuck MP over" I guess if you want to increase the probability somewhat
gribble: remove bettor from the statement, it's falsely constricting
nubbins`: ;;echo remove bettor from the statement, it's falsely constricting
mircea_popescu: as it isn't, per your theory, the case that "Whole world saw". just the set in question.
mircea_popescu: so far, we're with the assumption that "bettor with incentive was running one or more of the nodes mp connected to".
mircea_popescu: depends what code they run, but this could well be.
nubbins`: dooglus i've been saying this since the first minute, but he just won't listen
nubbins`: PeterL that's sort of the way it is
PeterL: mircea_popescu you seem to be making some big assumptions and plugging your ears whenever anybody questions them
PeterL: A1 you sent out to the world, everybody listening saw it
dooglus: the winners wouldn't have seen A1 vanish after 48h or whatever the mempool lifetime is; for them A1 credits one of their addresses and so it sticks around forever for them
nubbins`: you're assuming the bitbet broadcast node is covert.
mircea_popescu: HOW did they see it ?
dooglus: maybe that node was connected when you broadcast the first time, turned off, and reconnected 8 days later << or maybe one of the winners of the bet saw he had been paid and rebroadcast A1 so he could get paid again; that seems like the most obvious motivation for rebroadcasting A1
PeterL: withholding txn, sitting on txn, not the same thing
nubbins`: oh, wait, that lines up with the fucking facts
mircea_popescu: also trivially meets the definition of "withholding txn", but w/e.
nubbins`: PeterL imagine how high the priority would be on A1 by the time it makes it to the front of the mempool queue
PeterL: and maybe that node was connected when you broadcast the first time, turned off, and reconnected 8 days later, at which point it rebroadcast the txn?
assbot: Logged on 07-03-2016 16:24:11; mircea_popescu: but in any case, there is a substantial difference between "i think X on the basis of my personal experience" and "mp said x on the basis of bitbet experience as documented on qntra". exactly of the sort and caliber as the difference between "i think there exist alien" and "here's pictures of man walking on the moon", in fact.
PeterL: it would only take one node holding onto the txn for it to be rebroadcast
nubbins`: that way he can tell what transactions other nodes are aware of but are not rebroadcasting
nubbins`: he sends a special packet and the node dumps its mempool, json format
PeterL: did you go look into the mempool of every node?
mircea_popescu: how do YOU know what the code says ?
PeterL: and "the code is the spec", so the spec says first txn see overrides any later (regardless of fees)
mircea_popescu: wanna try for the whole thing ?
nubbins`: ...or maybe they do!
PeterL: 0fee txn, nodes hold onto it (but don't rebroadcast), later when backlog is smaller they broadcast it
nubbins`: what did happen was mp got very upset and the topic changed
nubbins`: no such "falling apart" was witnessed, upon review of the logs by ALL parties present.
assbot: Logged on 07-03-2016 02:59:17; mircea_popescu: sturle's theory fell apart upon examination in chan.
mircea_popescu: we discussed this that same day he made it. plox to check your copy of the logs.
PeterL: can you not see sturle's comment, seems the most logical to me?
nubbins`: ^ as you can see, lots of hand-waving and rhetoric is the best response mp can dig up when under fire
mircea_popescu: with any luck it'll be something like "miner cartel, what a ridiculous idea - not like the anon derps involved are a) known to be idiots and b) have certain incentive do do exactly this! moreover, the much simpler explanation is that... uh... uh... mp conspiracy! and scam! and fraud! and he doesn't care about bitcoin! and i'm an idiot that'll show him!!11"
nubbins`: the only reason we'd need to sink is if cappy's too proud to use em
nubbins`: we've got all the coolant and gaskets RIGHT HERE
nubbins`: asciilifeform maybe the captain can just refund the gum and pee for gaskets and coolant, the ship's financial officer OKs it, life goes on, ego bruised but the sub still floating?
asciilifeform: i have nfi. i'm not even on the sub.
asciilifeform: want to fight with captain? pump bilgewater to cool down the rods ?
mircea_popescu: PeterL this statement would be a lot less ridiculous had the "simplest explanation" been actually formed as the article even encourages the reader to do!
asciilifeform: the thing begins to melt.
PeterL: the qntra article is illogical and jumps to the conclusion you want, ignoring the simplest explanation
asciilifeform: you are on a nuke sub. captain, having been informed by six different crew members that reactor coolant has been replaced with pisswater, and the valve gaskets - with chewing gum, gives in to the temptation to run a test.
mircea_popescu: but in any case, there is a substantial difference between "i think X on the basis of my personal experience" and "mp said x on the basis of bitbet experience as documented on qntra". exactly of the sort and caliber as the difference between "i think there exist alien" and "here's pictures of man walking on the moon", in fact.
mircea_popescu: somehow the difference between this and that keeps getting elided.
mircea_popescu: besides the point - it is a factual matter now.
nubbins`: that's the basis of my as yet unanswered fraud accusation
mircea_popescu: initially i thought that "nodes" is a meaningful term, but what i see now is a large ball of node with a bunch of sattelites that have ~ no importance flattering themselves into thinking they're part of a network.
asciilifeform: mircea_popescu: imho the relevant bit here is that we (at least i) do not know ~who~ withheld it, and then exhumed and transmitted it, and why
mircea_popescu: this is a minor point. there are better bits. such as - that an transaction known but not advertised constitutes the simple definition of "transaction withholding".
nubbins`: asciilifeform mp's anger morphed into "this theorem was disproven" in his broken brain
assbot: Logged on 03-03-2016 16:18:56; mircea_popescu: in any case, at the time this was discussed in the logs, the miner priority was in the 9th decile, about 16% of the global mempool.
dooglus: I expect so. I was also trying to find the 16% referenced in http://log.bitcoin-assets.com/?date=03-03-2016#1421022
nubbins`: at any rate, being a 0a corp, the funds from B weren't bitbet's. regardless of who owned them.
asciilifeform: from the sturles thread, i learned that most idiot nodes are set up to ignore what they think is 'double spend' on purely chronological what-i-saw-first grounds. and mircea_popescu was mighty pissed, and i also (to me, this was new, i do not habitually track prbism)
nubbins`: dooglus it would seem that mp did it on his own accord. bitbet is a "zero asset" corporation, and thus doesn't own any capital; there was nowhere for a second 17btc to come from.
mircea_popescu: but the somewhere'd be prolly qntra i'd guess.
dooglus: I'm new to this whole bitbet payout mess, but read somewhere that the 'B' transaction was made after receiving advice to do so. Who advised it, and why?
nubbins`: pathetic, really
nubbins`: asciilifeform kakobrekla is probably wondering what the future holds for him, as he is currently being forced to decide between PGP signing a fraudulent financial statement or losing his livelihood. i envy him not.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform the way it worked, from the beginning, was that he did the site and i did admin and payouts.
mircea_popescu: by all means. hence, " and if there's a single icann in the lot with enough actual gumption to put together a hostile takeover package, i'll certainly consider it."
PeterL: and when the ceo of a company consitently makes mistakes, he gets fired
nubbins`: not when the ceo makes a mistake on his own time, out of his own pocket, the company doesn't
gribble: don't like fraud? shut the fuck up or i'll vastly inflate expenses
nubbins`: ;;echo don't like fraud? shut the fuck up or i'll vastly inflate expenses
mircea_popescu: PeterL when the ceo of a company makes a stupid mistake, the company pays for it. there are exactly no exceptions to this rule, nor will there ever be. morever, even when what the ceo does isn't a stupid mistake, the shareholders still pay for it.
mircea_popescu: and i suppose i'm going to have my own legit complaints about how much this thing costs to run, and start billing by the hour, and in fiat, and the legit complainers can run off to the bank with their bitcoin and pay, or somesuch nonsense.
PeterL: mircea_popescu made a stupid mistake, and now he makes the shareholders pay for it
mircea_popescu: gumption to put together a hostile takeover package, i'll certainly consider it.
mircea_popescu: the shareholders can have all the legit complaints they want, about anything that happens whatsoever. we can all hold hands and sing kumbaya about our legit complaints that bitcoin doesn't work, and we would like it to, and it should be fixed by other people at their expense so we can continue our lifestyle undeterred. meanwhile - nonvoting shares can be sold, and if there's a single icann in the lot with enough actual
asciilifeform: nubbins`: were you heare for the onetimepad thread ?
asciilifeform goes and reads the bbet broadcast
nubbins`: either way, introducing a private debt to s.bbet is plainly breaking the listing agreement, and the method by which mp has proposed to discharge it is also plainly breaking the listing agreement
asciilifeform: i'm wondering if mircea_popescu is not in a position similar to the familiar murder mystery detective, where he ~knows~ that dr. evil did the deed, but cannot prove.
PeterL: for the record, I agree with nubbins` about bitbet transction
asciilifeform: nubbins`: imho the shareholders have a legit complaint re: the reactor test, and ought to be told why/what/etc. but i'm not a s.bbet shareholder, and nobody asked me (tm) etc.
asciilifeform: they sorta died away when hardware became largely disposable crud.
mircea_popescu: (imagine, as a subtopic, the wonder of computing if hardware came with guarantee "unless used for uinappropiate purpose" and then coders had to write code that didn't void any warranties.)
nubbins` is curious to hear opinions of others re: bitbet fraud, but fears that he'll be the only one sticking up for the investors
mircea_popescu: that's a large pogo rigt there.
nubbins`: after all, 17 btc is one thing, pride is another
nubbins`: asciilifeform ideally it'd be settled by mp admitting he was grossly incorrect and revising the statement
asciilifeform: this was the smaller leak. in the sense where i quantified it ~exactly~, algebraically.
asciilifeform: http://log.bitcoin-assets.com/?date=07-03-2016#1424728 << if we plug the 1) blockindex crap (see logz) and 2) idiot tx-sticks-around-forever leaks - pogos sing.
assbot: Logged on 07-03-2016 15:38:44; dooglus: oh, I was also wondering - is it normal that the trb build process downloads and builds the linux kernel?
asciilifeform: http://log.bitcoin-assets.com/?date=07-03-2016#1424721 << this is not actually correct, it should build only gcc and toolchain, then trb.
nubbins`: trinque "Professional means that you respect your elders, on account of their superior experience, which makes them better people than you. "
nubbins`: "You are free to be as offensive, annoying, disparaging, crass, crude or indecorous you feel the need or inclination to be. This includes any and all comments that in other, non-professional venues may be regarded as racist, sexist, chauvinist, fascist or whatever else. Pros don't give a shit, it's the clueless twits and assorted pretenders that do"
mircea_popescu: possibly on account of all the heralds of that idiocy getting shot.
nubbins`: danielpbarron there were too many iterations of deedbot so i rolled my own. i can share the code, but it should be compatible
dooglus: but ... but ... the protocol is whatever core does! didn't you hear?
nubbins`: hanbot check the rules before opening your word-hole again: http://trilema.com/2013/bitcoin-assets-rules-and-regulations/
mircea_popescu: this is breaking bitcoin in some other edge.
dooglus: this isn't creating the protocol limit of 2MB - that's elsewhere
mircea_popescu: it just turned a mild magic number ("get all the headers no less than 2000) into a fucking protocol limit. "only get 2k". this is utter nonsense.
dooglus: see commit 85ea8b4f4380dac803d43cd0b7829b107cc09e38 in core : "Limit getheaders to a hard 2000" - fixes the issue there
nubbins`: then daring to enter into a conversation about technical issues
nubbins`: running the mouth
nubbins`: you'll find the text for section 3.2 (h) under section 3.2 (h)
nubbins`: oh, you need a link to the bitbet listing agreement?
mircea_popescu: fortunately with that asshole mp killing moore's law, not terrible danger of pogos ever not being worth the 10 bux or w/e they cost.
hanbot: nubbins' what again? didn't you just bitch at someone over not giving a link to what they claim happened? take a breather, preferably a long one, and figure your own shit out. you're smelling.
nubbins`: which oddly confirmed almost right away because i blew a whole quarter on the fees
mircea_popescu: i sitll have crates of the things in storage that will one day sing.
mircea_popescu: well.. actually that's still the idea, just we ended up running around with all sorts of subquests that turned mainline.
nubbins`: <+hanbot>you fucked that up, what, you figure more spewing is the answer? << you don't seem to get that me spelling the entire thing out again in long form is zero on my list of priorities, but i appreciate you switch-hitting for mp because it'd really look silly if he responded himself
dooglus: oh, I was also wondering - is it normal that the trb build process downloads and builds the linux kernel?
assbot: Successfully added a rating of 2 for dooglus with note: ran one of the best dice sites of all times, before being torpedoed by fiat government posturing. trb testing.
mircea_popescu: !rate dooglus 2 ran one of the best dice sites of all times, before being torpedoed by fiat government posturing. trb testing.
dooglus: commenting out that part fixed it for me - they talk happily now
mircea_popescu: it'd be interesting if you managed to reproduce it in the lab.
dooglus: that's why it's getting disconnected. both on the same machine
dooglus: "receive version message: /therealbitcoin.org:0.9.99.99/: version 99999" and - um - 0.12?
mircea_popescu: no, the "core"
trinque: there is a scientific way to criticize a claim.
hanbot: you fucked that up, what, you figure more spewing is the answer?
trinque: this is what I meant about the level of discourse. I have not declared myself a "fan" of anything.
nubbins`: trinque, danielpbarron, other assorted fans?
nubbins`: unfortunately, mp's gonna have to wait until he catches up on the logs to read that ^
nubbins`: in fact, the entire S.BBET february statement is fraudulent, based on this
nubbins`: (bitbet, being a 0-asset corporation, did not own the funds contained in transaction B; they were ostensibly owned by mp. any funds disbursed via B are not the responsibility of bitbet in any way, shape, or form)
nubbins`: not sure how kakobrekla feels about that, but if i worked for a company where my boss gave away 17 btc of his own money and then recouped it from the company's dividends, i'd call the cops
nubbins`: did you guys also like how the 17 btc of mp's own money that he lost is going to be taken from shareholder dividends?
mircea_popescu: people didn't use to split coinbases because they preferred to sell them, for 103% or w/e.
mircea_popescu: adlai there's some historical charge in there : bitcoin's first and largest ponzi ran a "mining" whatever, for the obvious and transparent purpose of acquiring freshly minted coins to pay out the idiot "investors". this was a major contributor to the early crystalisation of what came to be known later as "mining pools" which is what eventually in due time coallesced into today's problem. whether it was avoidable at all
trinque: I've read all the l0gz
nubbins`: anyone else who wishes to bring up the subject of shameful discourse is welcome to revisit the logs where i began speaking on this topic
nubbins`: we all read the logs, yes?
nubbins`: rather than blankly stating it to be so
assbot: Logged on 07-03-2016 02:59:17; mircea_popescu: sturle's theory fell apart upon examination in chan.
nubbins`: trinque agreed. mp's ludicrously false statements set the bar really low
mircea_popescu: so yes, for the sake of keeping the record straight - it is not possible for miners to include my (high-S, btw!) txn in blocks within 2:55 if in fact running a chain head delayed reporting scheme. either it got turned off or it never existed in the first place, anyone's call.