mats: 'Effective immediately, eligible existing credit cardmembers will be able to request a new credit card, which displays their chosen name' https://www.citigroup.com/citi/news/2020/201019a.htm the first paragraph says chosen first name, but folks like michael bazzell have confirmed you can also pick a chosen surname, and there's no req to explicitly identify as lgbt
mats: might be useful if you care about cc tx privacy. amex has had the feature for a long time, but only on some cards, mastercard only recently rolled it out
asciilifeform: wb davout !
asciilifeform: davout: i rec to get on dulapnet, asciilifeform's wartime ircism; fleanode aint long for this world.
snsabot: Logged on 2021-06-15 22:06:55 asciilifeform: 126.96.36.199:6667
asciilifeform: mats: whatever happened to the disposable-number CCs. ~that~ was a useful thing, in contrast
dulapbot: Logged on 2021-07-01 18:24:19 asciilifeform: realizes that the problem, as posed, may not necessarily have a solution
dulapbot: Logged on 2021-07-01 18:14:44 asciilifeform: was laying this out on chalkboard, and currently stuck on the puzzler of 'how do peers know 'the current difficulty' ?'
thimbronion: dumb question: Why is out of band transmission of difficulty not acceptable?
thestringpuller: shinohai: what's the simping story arc on Bitcoin twitter?
asciilifeform: welcome to dulapnet, davout !
asciilifeform: thimbronion: elaborate re out of band -- where wouldja have it go ?
shinohai: thestringpuller: Just another meme.
thimbronion: asciilifeform: I suppose this depends on exactly what 'current' implies. Will a peer's difficulty change often?
asciilifeform: thimbronion: it must be able to change, or quite useless, imho
thimbronion: asciilifeform: Is the rate of change so high that a pgp gram sent via the postal service would be too slow?
asciilifeform: thimbronion: it gotta be able to change mechanically in response to traffic.
thimbronion: asciilifeform: and wai not bootstrap out of band and broadcast updates in-band?
thimbronion: answers self - because under attack might not be possible to receive update...
asciilifeform: thimbronion: also because this. if yer gonna lock out ALL guests, may as well have shared symmetric key
dulapbot: Logged on 2021-06-30 15:40:03 asciilifeform: likes the idea of a lock mechanism which does not necessarily prevent receipt of messages from strangers, but instead comes with a knob to make it as cheap or expensive as operator wants
thimbronion: asciilifeform: yes initially the problem struck me as similar to key distribution.
thimbronion: But I see how it is not.
asciilifeform: thimbronion: this and the loop problem makes ~2~ open (afaik) problems which prevent meaningful motion on this front.
asciilifeform: of course it can be brought down to ~one~ by abandoning 'can talk to visitors' and going w/ shared MAC auth (where obvious minus being that any user who knows the code can impersonate any other, but from our pov this doesn't matter, it is no worse than the item we're currently speaking into, in this respect)
dulapbot: Logged on 2021-06-30 17:30:26 asciilifeform: http://logs.nosuchlabs.com/log/asciilifeform/2021-06-30#1041916 << my current draft consists of a) for strangers, pow b) for folx who have a shared keystring (not long-term or esp. valuable) S -- simply demonstrate knowledge of S by sending hash(S+message+S), then don't need to pow
asciilifeform: i.e. fugheting about the pow thing
asciilifeform: gold standard would obv. be rsa signatures. but these aint practical at line-rate on pc sadly.
dulapbot: Logged on 2021-05-18 16:15:41 asciilifeform: the main obstacle currently is that non-leaking rsa is slow on pc.
asciilifeform: not even remotely near.
asciilifeform: thimbronion et al : the key bit is that ~validating~ a packet must be fast. (generating a valid one -- not necessarily; hence pow variant. rsa fails on both counts)
davout: asciilifeform ty!
signpost: http://logs.nosuchlabs.com/log/asciilifeform/2021-07-01#1042248 << yep, I've also been working within this constraint, for this reason and because enemy shouldn't know to whom you reply/ignore
dulapbot: Logged on 2021-07-01 18:18:34 asciilifeform: they MUST NOT BE answered
signpost: also, must say it's nice to see some old names. hello davout and jurov.
signpost: http://logs.nosuchlabs.com/log/asciilifeform/2021-07-01#1042269 << http://logs.nosuchlabs.com/log/asciilifeform/2021-05-17#1036443
dulapbot: Logged on 2021-07-01 18:27:23 gregory4: asciilifeform: I didn't know that. nonetheless, you better be sure. even 99% is unacceptable IMO.
dulapbot: Logged on 2021-05-17 13:26:23 trinque: recently has been filling in gaps in the kademlia guy's online-codes paper. much was unspecified other than the core algo
signpost: incidentally I've got a shitty one of these in python now, debugging etc
signpost: it may prove unecessary, but working on it has been instructive.
verisimilitude: I'd be interested in seeing how these gaps were filled, signpost.
verisimilitude: I've not been too proactive in doing so myself, yet.
signpost: yeah, will share in time
dulapbot: Logged on 2021-07-01 18:41:12 asciilifeform: ugh now bringing in one of the least reliable things on satan's green earth as external dep ?!
signpost: but, signaling of some kind does seem to be a requirement.
signpost: suppose you require that there is *some* WoT-peering-path for any rando that wants to talk with you (not unlike the +1 given to n00bs in the old days)
signpost: perhaps rando "discovers" difficulty by doing e.g. binary search upward, sends packets of increasing difficulty, until acknowledgement comes from you along WoT-peerings to him.
signpost will expand later, gotta afk for a while
asciilifeform: http://logs.nosuchlabs.com/log/asciilifeform/2021-07-03#1042406 << imho will defo come in handy -- later
dulapbot: Logged on 2021-07-03 16:20:33 signpost: incidentally I've got a shitty one of these in python now, debugging etc
asciilifeform: http://logs.nosuchlabs.com/log/asciilifeform/2021-07-03#1042414 << given as public key crypto isn't available at line-rate, i was considering to use pow to get out of the untenable situation where EVERY link in the graph requires a shared secret (or, worse, whole network has a shared 'polichinelle's seekrit', rather like we
dulapbot: Logged on 2021-07-03 16:30:39 signpost: suppose you require that there is *some* WoT-peering-path for any rando that wants to talk with you (not unlike the +1 given to n00bs in the old days)
dulapbot: Logged on 2021-07-03 13:14:52 asciilifeform: gold standard would obv. be rsa signatures. but these aint practical at line-rate on pc sadly.
asciilifeform: currently do)
asciilifeform: so, to restate, one very modest aim would be to simply have a 100% decentralized version of current dulapnet, on udp+pow, where literally anyone can send in a message so long as it fits in packet ~and~ comes with sufficient pow; and the node being addressed will reply then, and up to say past hour's log if requested.
asciilifeform: this variant introduces q of 'how to know the pow?' and if one posits that 'insufficient pow? simply no reply', this sets you up the bomb where you try and match a potentially infinite 'pow' demand by a box that simply died
dulapbot: Logged on 2021-07-01 18:23:53 asciilifeform: say he tripped over his mains cable. and now ~your~ cpu to its knees ?
asciilifeform: (and thereby not answering, no matter how much pow 'postage' you include)
asciilifeform: 'box didn't answer' is simply not an actionable piece of info under any circumstances imho.
asciilifeform: ( to clear up a potential confusion -- in this variant, there are NO shared secrets b/w anyone whatsoever, and hence pow applies to erryone, friend or foe. )
asciilifeform: this variant has the considerable, imho, advantage where it is ultra-simple to implement, and does not require regular O(N^2) number of pgpgrams b/w participants to keep going
asciilifeform: (pgpgrams then only for when folx actually need to have an authenticated or private conversation. as anywhere else on the net.)
asciilifeform inclined towards the pole of 'zero crypto' rather than a muddle half-arse of half-arse crypto
asciilifeform: ~later on~ imho oughta add shared-symmetric seekrits, so that actually can associate/dissociate into nets having some permanence.
dulapbot: Logged on 2021-06-18 18:35:02 asciilifeform: the troo p2p topology i propose removes all kindsa fundamentally palace-flavoured concepts -- 'joining', 'kicking', 'banning' -- and replaces simply w/ freedom of association, i.e. peering & unpeering.
asciilifeform: but initial focus, imho, oughta be the simplest possible udp net which cannot be flooded to death.
asciilifeform will expand in response to specific q's.
verisimilitude: On the topic of proof of work in UDP, the nonce could double as the checksum field.
verisimilitude: Rather, the checksum field could double as the nonce.
verisimilitude: No, I suppose that wouldn't actually work well, or at all.
mats: http://logs.nosuchlabs.com/log/asciilifeform/2021-07-03#1042372 << http://web.archive.org/web/20210226194139/https://wallethub.com/edu/cc/virtual-credit-card/65981 been available for a while. theres also privacy.com
dulapbot: Logged on 2021-07-03 12:03:08 asciilifeform: mats: whatever happened to the disposable-number CCs. ~that~ was a useful thing, in contrast
mats: twilio is also pretty great for untangling phone numbers from your PII
mats: similarly allows you to gen #s
mats: for the americans out there, i advise being extra cautious this weekend, there is an unprecedented nationwide blood shortage