1 2017-06-13 00:22:30	0|bitfriend|hi if i want to buy ethereum do i need to buy bitcoin first
 2 2017-06-13 00:22:48	0|bitfriend|oh is this the wrong channel
 3 2017-06-13 00:27:18	0|sipa|try #bitcoin
 4 2017-06-13 00:29:52	0|bitfriend|thank you friend i went to #ethereum and they helped me
 5 2017-06-13 05:55:53	0|kb4yer__|Be a part of the NEW V-Tec-Telegram Lognterm Trading BOT Start here:  https://goo.gl/yYT5qJ
 6 2017-06-13 06:40:18	0|luke-jr|correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems compact blocks breaks the "DoS banning for invalid blocks" stuff..
 7 2017-06-13 06:40:39	0|luke-jr|the assumption of it, relied on to ensure peers are on the same chain
 8 2017-06-13 07:09:14	0|gmaxwell|luke-jr: it didn't break it, it intentionally changed the behavior in order to facilitate relay before validation.
 9 2017-06-13 07:09:56	0|luke-jr|gmaxwell: then there's no problem with removing DoS banning from non-compactblock cases? O.o
10 2017-06-13 07:12:05	0|gmaxwell|they'll still get disconnected if diverged (e.g. once the parent of their tip is not your tip)
11 2017-06-13 07:13:11	0|luke-jr|oh, because that scenario falls back to non-cb?
12 2017-06-13 07:17:07	0|gmaxwell|yes.
13 2017-06-13 07:22:43	0|luke-jr|gmaxwell: lacking a clean way to ensure the tips match, can you think of any problem with simply turning all existing DoS banning for invalid blocks into a disconnect-only-if-a-primary-peer?
14 2017-06-13 09:55:42	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 4 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8d9f45ea6a5e...303c171b949b
15 2017-06-13 09:55:43	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1430c2d9d 15practicalswift: [tests] Remove unused function InsecureRandBytes(size_t len)
16 2017-06-13 09:55:43	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 149f841a6 15practicalswift: [tests] Remove accidental trailing semicolon
17 2017-06-13 09:55:44	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1467ca816 15practicalswift: Simplify "bool x = y ? true : false" to "bool x = y"
18 2017-06-13 09:56:16	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10553: Simplify "bool x = y ? true : false". Remove unused function and trailing semicolon. (06master...06minor-cleanups) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10553
19 2017-06-13 10:36:23	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15drizzt opened pull request #10580: Prefer gpg2 to gpg (06master...06prefer_gpg2) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10580
20 2017-06-13 12:56:22	0|rupy|hi, so I know accounts are deprecated but I have no choice but to use them anyways. My concern is that come segwit accounts won't be able to make the new transactions, any1 have any clue about that?
21 2017-06-13 16:33:12	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14e241a63 15Pieter Wuille: Clarify prevector::erase and avoid swap-to-clear
22 2017-06-13 16:33:12	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/303c171b949b...a514ac3dcb60
23 2017-06-13 16:33:13	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14a514ac3 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10534: Clarify prevector::erase and avoid swap-to-clear...
24 2017-06-13 16:33:44	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10534: Clarify prevector::erase and avoid swap-to-clear (06master...06clarify_erase) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10534
25 2017-06-13 17:34:25	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14a090d1c 15Pieter Wuille: Header include guideline
26 2017-06-13 17:34:25	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/a514ac3dcb60...22ec76883886
27 2017-06-13 17:34:26	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 1422ec768 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10575: Header include guideline...
28 2017-06-13 17:35:00	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10575: Header include guideline (06master...06includeguide) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10575
29 2017-06-13 17:48:35	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 5 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/22ec76883886...a4fe07714da1
30 2017-06-13 17:48:36	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14cf44e4c 15Pieter Wuille: Squashed 'src/leveldb/' changes from a31c8aa40..196962ff0...
31 2017-06-13 17:48:36	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14e4030ab 15Pieter Wuille: Update to LevelDB 1.20
32 2017-06-13 17:48:37	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 142424989 15Cory Fields: leveldb: enable runtime-detected crc32 instructions
33 2017-06-13 17:49:12	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10544: Update to LevelDB 1.20 (06master...06leveldb120) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10544
34 2017-06-13 19:13:43	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 145432fc3 15Pieter Wuille: Fail on commit with VERIFY SCRIPT but no scripted-diff
35 2017-06-13 19:13:43	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj pushed 2 new commits to 06master: 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/a4fe07714da1...fbf5d3ba1516
36 2017-06-13 19:13:44	0|bitcoin-git|13bitcoin/06master 14fbf5d3b 15Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge #10480: Improve commit-check-script.sh...
37 2017-06-13 19:14:17	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15laanwj closed pull request #10480: Improve commit-check-script.sh (06master...06update_script_check) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10480
38 2017-06-13 19:21:31	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15sipa opened pull request #10581: Simplify return values of GetCoin/HaveCoin(InCache) (06master...06simplehavecoin) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10581
39 2017-06-13 19:25:22	0|morcos|wumpus: where are we with 0.14.2?  i'm still tracking down where this bug appeared, and not sure it's urgent to fix, but the coin control approxmiate fee is no longer updated by the smart fee slider.  it looks like the bug exists in 0.14.1 but not in 0.13.2
40 2017-06-13 19:28:15	0|gmaxwell|unrelated to anything, should we be considering changing the fallback fee?
41 2017-06-13 19:28:27	0|gmaxwell|I believe it's at a level which will never get confirmed.
42 2017-06-13 19:30:17	0|morcos|gmaxwell: i'd be in favor of increasing it, but its unclear to what
43 2017-06-13 19:31:08	0|gmaxwell|some minimum amount that is actually getting confirmed? https://anduck.net/bitcoin/fees/
44 2017-06-13 19:33:45	0|morcos|Well it depends, a couple of weeks ago txs paying up to 70 sat/B were evicted from the mempool
45 2017-06-13 19:34:07	0|gmaxwell|70s/b would be a big improvement over where it is now.
46 2017-06-13 19:36:27	0|morcos|I think this past weekend, txs were being confirmed possibly as low as 20 sat/B
47 2017-06-13 19:36:38	0|morcos|but maybe its ok if the fallback is occasionally an over estimate
48 2017-06-13 19:36:57	0|morcos|its not like 70 sat/B is so high that it would have been considered ridiculous any time in the last year
49 2017-06-13 19:37:22	0|gmaxwell|well, so long as we don't have replacability by default I think it's better to overpay a little.
50 2017-06-13 19:37:30	0|morcos|and its not a floor its just a fall back, so yeah that seems reasonable, maybe even higher...
51 2017-06-13 19:37:54	0|morcos|btw, it looks like #8989 is what broke the approximate fee in the coin control section
52 2017-06-13 19:37:56	0|gribble|https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/8989 | [Qt] overhaul smart-fee slider, adjust default confirmation target by jonasschnelli · Pull Request #8989 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
53 2017-06-13 19:38:08	0|morcos|i don't know about anyone else, but it seems to me this is fairly important to fix
54 2017-06-13 19:38:32	0|morcos|if people are trying to manually select coins and there is a wide range of fee rates, it'll be super annoying if its not actually telling them how much its going to pay
55 2017-06-13 19:38:46	0|morcos|the final dialog box at the end after you click send has the correct fee of course
56 2017-06-13 19:39:51	0|gmaxwell|that PR is confusing.
57 2017-06-13 19:58:42	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15morcos opened pull request #10582: Pass in smart fee slider value to coin control dialog (06master...06fixcoincontrolfee) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10582
58 2017-06-13 21:37:11	0|kvnn|@gmaxwell are you indeed the Gmaxwell at https://en.bitcoin.it/w/index.php?title=Segwit_support&action=history ? Sorry, I'm not sure how else to verify
59 2017-06-13 21:40:16	0|midnightmagic|Sure hope so, or else someone's been impersonating him all these years
60 2017-06-13 22:10:44	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15benma closed pull request #10497: remove the PAIRTYPE macro (06master...06pairtype) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10497
61 2017-06-13 22:11:59	0|phantomcircuit|gmaxwell, possibly there shouldn't be a fallback fee at all
62 2017-06-13 22:12:06	0|phantomcircuit|if we fail to estimate the fee
63 2017-06-13 22:12:18	0|phantomcircuit|we should probably just do an rbf transaction with no fee
64 2017-06-13 22:12:21	0|phantomcircuit|and correct later
65 2017-06-13 22:12:24	0|phantomcircuit|(but work)
66 2017-06-13 22:15:24	0|gmaxwell|kvnn: yes.
67 2017-06-13 22:17:39	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15achow101 opened pull request #10583: [RPC] Split part of validateaddress into getaddressinfo (06master...06getaddressinfo) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10583
68 2017-06-13 22:40:22	0|bitcoin-git|[13bitcoin] 15ryanofsky opened pull request #10584: Remove unused ResendWalletTransactions notification (06master...06pr/noresend) 02https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10584
69 2017-06-13 22:41:45	0|TD-Linux|phantomcircuit, is there fee bumping support in bitcoin core now?
70 2017-06-13 22:59:20	0|sipa|there is a bumpfee RPC
71 2017-06-13 22:59:29	0|sipa|only works for bip125 transactions
72 2017-06-13 23:19:53	0|TD-Linux|seems like exposing that in the GUI would be required before relying on it
73 2017-06-13 23:21:35	0|gmaxwell|ACK
74 2017-06-13 23:22:11	0|TD-Linux|:)
75 2017-06-13 23:23:02	0|TD-Linux|though immediately, I'm mostly suggesting that you just crank the fallback fee to 70 sat/b for now
76 2017-06-13 23:25:27	0|TD-Linux|by the way, the top Google results for "bitcoin transaction stuck" involve multi-step processes using web wallets that are much worse than overpaying
77 2017-06-13 23:30:38	0|TD-Linux|oh, bumpfee is already in the gui. right click transaction -> increase transaction fee
78 2017-06-13 23:30:58	0|sipa|orly?
79 2017-06-13 23:34:14	0|TD-Linux|seems to work. automatically picks fee bump
80 2017-06-13 23:38:50	0|TD-Linux|I do think if there's still opposition to enabling replaceability by default, enabling it when smartfee isn't available is reasonable
81 2017-06-13 23:42:18	0|gmaxwell|TD-Linux: the GUI support isn't in a release yet.