1 2010-12-14 00:00:21 <theymos> Dashkal: It's not a majority. Clients reject blocks/transactions that use a different reward per block than they do. Changing it would put you on a separate network.
2 2010-12-14 00:00:25 <ArtForz> my current design would be manufacturable, but it's kinda slow
3 2010-12-14 00:00:40 <genjix> ;;bc,mtgox
4 2010-12-14 00:00:41 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":0.23,"low":0.21,"vol":6416,"buy":0.212,"sell":0.229,"last":0.2299}}
5 2010-12-14 00:00:45 <Dashkal> ok, that's what I thought. Good design.
6 2010-12-14 00:00:59 <ArtForz> so I'm working on a variation that sacrifices size for speed
7 2010-12-14 00:01:02 * Kiba finds it hard to get people using his Soulplaying web service and getting people to bid on his next art project
8 2010-12-14 00:01:42 <ArtForz> with such a tiny run area isn't a huge factor
9 2010-12-14 00:03:10 theymos has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
10 2010-12-14 00:03:10 <Phoebus> ArtForz, are you building a cluster or?
11 2010-12-14 00:03:28 <da2ce7> kiba, 10BTC a drawing from a photo of myself.
12 2010-12-14 00:03:48 <da2ce7> but in the background, not a main character
13 2010-12-14 00:04:06 <ArtForz> nope
14 2010-12-14 00:04:11 <ArtForz> ASICs
15 2010-12-14 00:04:13 <Phoebus> So 2$ for a drawing? :P
16 2010-12-14 00:04:17 <nanotube__> custom hardware ftw.
17 2010-12-14 00:04:24 <Phoebus> ArtForz, which is?
18 2010-12-14 00:04:34 <nanotube__> ;;sl asic
19 2010-12-14 00:04:35 <gribble> http://www.asicsamerica.com/ | Manufacturer of sports shoes, apparel, and accessories.
20 2010-12-14 00:04:39 <nanotube__> er... heh
21 2010-12-14 00:04:47 <Phoebus> Definitely not shoes :P
22 2010-12-14 00:04:51 <ArtForz> ever heard of deep crack?
23 2010-12-14 00:04:59 <Phoebus> No, but it sounds like a porno :P
24 2010-12-14 00:05:02 <nanotube__> ;;wp asic
25 2010-12-14 00:05:03 <gribble> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Application-specific_integrated_circuit | An application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) (pronounced /Ëeɪsɪk/) is an integrated circuit (IC) customized for a particular use, rather than intended ...
26 2010-12-14 00:05:07 <nanotube__> Phoebus: --^ that :)
27 2010-12-14 00:05:09 <Kiba> da2ce7: really? than put it in the thread!
28 2010-12-14 00:05:13 <ArtForz> EFFs DES bruteforce cracker, about 1800 custom ICs
29 2010-12-14 00:05:22 genjix has left ()
30 2010-12-14 00:05:23 <Phoebus> Ah, sweet, thank you nano
31 2010-12-14 00:05:30 <nanotube__> Phoebus: lol re: porno
32 2010-12-14 00:05:39 <ArtForz> I'm pretty much intending to do the same thing with bitcoin-sha2
33 2010-12-14 00:05:41 <Phoebus> I have a friend who has a masters in elec engineering from stanford.
34 2010-12-14 00:05:42 <edcba> ArtForz: what would you gain economically to implement some deep crack vs gpu ?
35 2010-12-14 00:05:48 <Phoebus> I wonder if he would be interested.
36 2010-12-14 00:06:01 <ArtForz> about same hash/$, 8-10x better hash/W
37 2010-12-14 00:06:04 * Kiba wonders why da2ce7 wants to be in the background
38 2010-12-14 00:06:45 <ArtForz> = a machine matching the current network would need about 5kW
39 2010-12-14 00:07:00 <edcba> hmm forgot i pay for electricity :)
40 2010-12-14 00:07:02 <Phoebus> Kiba, he probably wants to put a hot chick in the foreground :P
41 2010-12-14 00:07:13 <Kiba> ArtForz: so you're implementing much more efficent form of mining?
42 2010-12-14 00:07:19 <ArtForz> pretty much
43 2010-12-14 00:07:23 <Phoebus> Hijack power lines :P
44 2010-12-14 00:07:26 <Kiba> Phoebus: Haruka Nakamoto is a hot chick
45 2010-12-14 00:07:27 <ArtForz> onyl problem is it doesn't scale down
46 2010-12-14 00:07:32 <edcba> bitcoins and hookers !
47 2010-12-14 00:07:57 <ArtForz> even at 1k chips fixed costs dominate
48 2010-12-14 00:08:18 <Kiba> are you going to buy a wind mill?
49 2010-12-14 00:08:29 <Phoebus> ArtForz, did you study/are studying engineering somewhere?
50 2010-12-14 00:08:38 <nanotube__> ArtForz: how about you collect investment from other community members, then distribute the chips pro-rata?
51 2010-12-14 00:08:39 kaspar has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
52 2010-12-14 00:08:40 <Kiba> he's a 37 years old fart
53 2010-12-14 00:08:48 <ArtForz> Phoebus: yup
54 2010-12-14 00:08:52 kaspar has joined
55 2010-12-14 00:08:59 <Phoebus> ArtForz, where if I may ask.
56 2010-12-14 00:09:03 <nanotube__> ArtForz: that way you get more volume, lower cost. and as a side benefit... you don't end up with >50% of the network
57 2010-12-14 00:10:01 <ArtForz> TUM
58 2010-12-14 00:10:12 <edcba> what is the problem for him to have >50%
59 2010-12-14 00:10:14 <nanotube__> tum?
60 2010-12-14 00:10:17 <Phoebus> ArtForz, you love acronyms, and that is? :P
61 2010-12-14 00:10:20 <edcba> (if noone knows it)
62 2010-12-14 00:10:39 <fabianhjr> I got stock at 92K blocks. What is happening?
63 2010-12-14 00:10:41 Insty has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
64 2010-12-14 00:10:54 <edcba> tungunska university of moscow ?
65 2010-12-14 00:10:58 <edcba> something like that ?
66 2010-12-14 00:11:10 <nanotube__> fabianhjr: stop and restart client
67 2010-12-14 00:11:32 <edcba> that client is really crappy
68 2010-12-14 00:11:33 <nanotube__> mayde run it with -addnode=<ip> from one of the fallback nodes
69 2010-12-14 00:11:36 <Phoebus> TUM Muenchen?
70 2010-12-14 00:11:42 <ArtForz> yup
71 2010-12-14 00:11:43 <fabianhjr> nanotubedid so twice. Mus I open some ports?
72 2010-12-14 00:11:49 <Phoebus> Ah ok, thought I recognized it.
73 2010-12-14 00:12:03 <Phoebus> ArtForz, I was considering goint to Aachen's :P
74 2010-12-14 00:12:08 nanotube__ has quit (Quit: Page closed)
75 2010-12-14 00:12:09 <Phoebus> Technical uni that is.
76 2010-12-14 00:12:40 <edcba> ArtForz: you going to CCC ?
77 2010-12-14 00:12:40 Insty has joined
78 2010-12-14 00:12:43 <ArtForz> nope
79 2010-12-14 00:12:48 <bonsaikitten> Phoebus: good plan
80 2010-12-14 00:13:04 <edcba> damn won't be able to do some hold up to get bitcoins !
81 2010-12-14 00:13:09 <Phoebus> bonsaikitten, I lived in Aachen for a bit, but ended up moving to London :P
82 2010-12-14 00:13:14 <Phoebus> And then Canada.
83 2010-12-14 00:13:20 <bonsaikitten> Phoebus: I accidentally ended up in Aachen to study
84 2010-12-14 00:13:29 <edcba> accidentally lol
85 2010-12-14 00:13:33 <bonsaikitten> if you are masochist enough that uni is good
86 2010-12-14 00:13:36 <Phoebus> bonsaikitten, ah cool, do you go to "heaven and hell"? :P
87 2010-12-14 00:13:41 <Phoebus> hahaaha
88 2010-12-14 00:14:08 <Phoebus> Heaven and hell close to the old church used to be my hangout.
89 2010-12-14 00:14:13 <Phoebus> There's a greek guy working there.
90 2010-12-14 00:14:29 <Phoebus> I remember the clubs a little bit.
91 2010-12-14 00:14:40 <Phoebus> Whats the one that has a donner shop right next to the exit? Convenient :D
92 2010-12-14 00:14:44 <bonsaikitten> I think that one closed and then rotated new shops through every 6 months
93 2010-12-14 00:14:51 <Phoebus> Aww :(
94 2010-12-14 00:16:04 <Phoebus> 3100khash/s is pretty pathetic eh? :P
95 2010-12-14 00:16:57 <zygf> don't worry, my earliest c2d model does 1800 :P
96 2010-12-14 00:17:22 <Phoebus> I'm tempted to use my amazon c2 account :P
97 2010-12-14 00:17:28 <donpdonp> Phoebus: its twice as fast as my laptop :)
98 2010-12-14 00:17:54 <edcba> aa
99 2010-12-14 00:18:38 <edcba> oups
100 2010-12-14 00:19:22 <Phoebus> I want to use the gpu cluster and see how fast that would go.
101 2010-12-14 00:19:25 <fabianhjr> nanotube: ok, now I am doing better. 1-10 blocks/sec
102 2010-12-14 00:19:30 <Phoebus> Has anyone done it yet?
103 2010-12-14 00:20:50 <ArtForz> yes
104 2010-12-14 00:21:23 <ArtForz> 1 btc will cost you about $1.50 on amazon ec2 gpu
105 2010-12-14 00:23:01 <fabianhjr> ArtForz: what's the most efficient way to generate bc?
106 2010-12-14 00:23:07 <Phoebus> Ouch.
107 2010-12-14 00:23:10 <da2ce7> artforz, you could run a gup cloud service. :P when it isn't getting used, you can generated coins, when people are paying for the use you make more money that when you generate.
108 2010-12-14 00:23:18 <Phoebus> Not worth it >.<
109 2010-12-14 00:23:27 <ArtForz> currently? ATI GPUs
110 2010-12-14 00:24:38 <fabianhjr> ArtForz: Are the new 6000 GPUs worth it?
111 2010-12-14 00:25:33 <ArtForz> not really
112 2010-12-14 00:25:48 <ArtForz> and 69xx will probably suck even worse
113 2010-12-14 00:26:26 <Kiba> are you going to sell your GPU cards to the bitcoin economy?
114 2010-12-14 00:26:30 <Kiba> or on to ebay?
115 2010-12-14 00:27:14 <ArtForz> I'll probably just ebay them
116 2010-12-14 00:27:15 <da2ce7> has anyone tried the new 6xxx gpu, what hash/powertime do they get?
117 2010-12-14 00:27:32 <ArtForz> I got a 6870, not worth it
118 2010-12-14 00:28:32 <ArtForz> 235Mh/s, 150W, doesnt have much OC headroom
119 2010-12-14 00:29:09 ze__ has joined
120 2010-12-14 00:29:28 <ArtForz> and you need sdk 2.2 for it
121 2010-12-14 00:29:41 <ArtForz> = say goodbye to decent multiGPU performance
122 2010-12-14 00:30:21 <fabianhjr> ArtForz: If you are OCing why didn't you went with the 5870? Doesn't it have better cooling?
123 2010-12-14 00:30:49 <ArtForz> 5870 is more expensive, and you need 2x the number of boxes
124 2010-12-14 00:31:32 <fabianhjr> ArtForz: not true. Both are limited to 4 GPUS right?
125 2010-12-14 00:31:39 <ArtForz> 5970 is dual GPU
126 2010-12-14 00:31:44 <da2ce7> what is new in the 0.3.19 on bitcoin.org?
127 2010-12-14 00:31:44 <ArtForz> I am running 4 5970s per box
128 2010-12-14 00:31:55 <ArtForz> = 8 GPUs
129 2010-12-14 00:32:55 <ArtForz> that stunt only works in linux, windows catalyst refuses to see more than 4 GPUs
130 2010-12-14 00:33:59 <Phoebus> What bothers me, is that what you're actually calculating is pretty much arbitrary. Why not cooperate with folding at home, seti at home and get paid bitcoins for process -- but process used for something that's actually beneficial in the real world - rather than a closed system?
131 2010-12-14 00:34:22 <ArtForz> you need a one-way problem, hard to solve but easy to check
132 2010-12-14 00:34:40 <Phoebus> Do we really /need/ it? :P
133 2010-12-14 00:34:43 <ArtForz> yes
134 2010-12-14 00:34:56 <Phoebus> Throwing so much power, and electricity at it, in the middle of an environmental crisis?
135 2010-12-14 00:35:05 <Phoebus> Why, because it's the only way we know to solve the problem?
136 2010-12-14 00:35:09 <da2ce7> we need to check that people haven't cheated.
137 2010-12-14 00:35:38 <Phoebus> Yeah, but it seems to inefficient, so much cpu time that could be actually used for something good.
138 2010-12-14 00:35:40 <ArtForz> the total work spent is what proves the chain's authentic
139 2010-12-14 00:35:57 <lfm> if its not worth it to make btc then you dont do it
140 2010-12-14 00:35:57 <achristianson> happy coincidence: those who want something for nothing end up doing all the useless work, while the rest of us get a stable currency
141 2010-12-14 00:36:04 <noagendamarket> Think about this though phoebus
142 2010-12-14 00:36:04 <Phoebus> Yeah, I get that - but it's extremely inefficient and counter-productive.
143 2010-12-14 00:36:08 <OneFixt> Phoebus: This idea has been brought up numerous times, and if you can find a good solution, I'm sure it could be implemented.
144 2010-12-14 00:36:18 <noagendamarket> the feds print money which allows them to go to war
145 2010-12-14 00:36:28 <noagendamarket> how much does that hurt the world?
146 2010-12-14 00:36:31 <Phoebus> noagendamarket, I know how fiat currencies work bud, don't waste your breath.
147 2010-12-14 00:36:39 <gavinandresen> Phoebus: inefficient and counter-productive compared to what? Digging gold out of the ground? Cutting down trees to print dollar bills?
148 2010-12-14 00:36:41 <noagendamarket> just saying
149 2010-12-14 00:36:45 <da2ce7> power costs << war
150 2010-12-14 00:37:07 <Phoebus> gavinandresen, yeah, that's not saying this system is better though. In fact, we need to TIE envrionment and social costs into the economy.
151 2010-12-14 00:37:07 <[Noodles]> gavinandresen: compared to looking for ET ^.^
152 2010-12-14 00:37:09 <noagendamarket> gold mining causes environmental destruction
153 2010-12-14 00:37:15 <Phoebus> Not make a new system that is more oblivious than the last.
154 2010-12-14 00:37:19 <lfm> Phoebus: "worth" is subjective. what is worth it to you maybe isnt to me and vice versa
155 2010-12-14 00:37:31 <noagendamarket> look a the bp mine and arsenic poisining
156 2010-12-14 00:37:34 <Phoebus> Worth may be, survival is not.
157 2010-12-14 00:37:50 <noagendamarket> you can plant more trees
158 2010-12-14 00:37:52 <ArtForz> yup, I pretty much expect miners to act rationally
159 2010-12-14 00:38:01 <ArtForz> so, how much power is then wasted?
160 2010-12-14 00:38:02 <Phoebus> How is the calc of btcs going to HELP the environment and social environment?
161 2010-12-14 00:38:07 <da2ce7> who knows, maybe bitcoin generation will inspire sombody to acualy get cold fusion working.
162 2010-12-14 00:38:09 <ArtForz> well, about 300BTC worth per hour
163 2010-12-14 00:38:13 <gavinandresen> Phoebus: (I agree with you, and would support a carbon tax if I didn't suspect that it'd just be used to fund Yet Another Pointless War....)
164 2010-12-14 00:38:14 <lfm> survival is very subjective. only the survivors know it
165 2010-12-14 00:38:42 <Phoebus> gavinandresen, I'm not talking about a carbon tax, I'm talking about putting the environment and social env on the accounting balance sheet altogether.
166 2010-12-14 00:38:46 <fabianhjr> Woho, got my 0.05 bcs :D
167 2010-12-14 00:38:47 <gavinandresen> Phoebus: well, if it lessens the demand for gold there will be less gold mining. That's a definite plus.
168 2010-12-14 00:38:49 <noagendamarket> al gore flys around the world in jet planes wasting fuel lol
169 2010-12-14 00:38:52 <Phoebus> I'm talking about long term, truer progit.
170 2010-12-14 00:38:59 <Phoebus> *profit.
171 2010-12-14 00:39:01 omglolbbq has joined
172 2010-12-14 00:39:04 <achristianson> how can it be waste if it enables freedom
173 2010-12-14 00:39:09 omglolbbq is now known as KwukDuck
174 2010-12-14 00:39:10 <lfm> fabianhjr: wtg
175 2010-12-14 00:39:15 <noagendamarket> carbon trading = con job
176 2010-12-14 00:39:31 <edcba> block chain math problem should help cracking address keys
177 2010-12-14 00:39:31 <Kiba> instead of trying to stop carbon dioxide growing
178 2010-12-14 00:39:36 <Kiba> why not "ADAPT"
179 2010-12-14 00:39:37 <edcba> that would have been neat
180 2010-12-14 00:39:38 <Phoebus> achristianson, because it is oblivious to the environment. Eating up cpu cycles, and electricity - and where does the electricity come from really?
181 2010-12-14 00:39:46 <edcba> we would know when change it then
182 2010-12-14 00:39:51 <Granttt> phoebus: its going to help in that, hopefully millions of bank employees will get a real job and stop wasting resources on flipping paper 16 hours a day. If bitcoin becomes that mainstream. Imagine the amount of transactions a ATI 5970 generates compared to citigroups beurocracy ;)
183 2010-12-14 00:40:12 <Phoebus> What we need to do is push the 3rd industrial revolution, using green energy to power new industry.
184 2010-12-14 00:40:13 <da2ce7> :D
185 2010-12-14 00:40:16 <noagendamarket> how much paper does it take to print all those notes?
186 2010-12-14 00:40:20 <edcba> if bitcoin becomes mainstream we would have to redo it because it won't scale
187 2010-12-14 00:40:21 <noagendamarket> lmao
188 2010-12-14 00:40:21 <Phoebus> Speed china's change into 3IR.
189 2010-12-14 00:40:23 <Kiba> I don't care about green technologies
190 2010-12-14 00:40:34 <da2ce7> ^
191 2010-12-14 00:40:35 <achristianson> Phoebus: it costs electricity to people who want the "free" money. it is a fools game, IMO, to try to make money this way. to me, that electricity cost is justified simply in that it enables the system to work
192 2010-12-14 00:40:37 <edcba> unless bandwidth augment dramatically everywhere i guess
193 2010-12-14 00:40:44 <ArtForz> again, with rational miners the total amount of power wasted should end up close to 300BTC/hour
194 2010-12-14 00:40:48 <noagendamarket> They have nuclear reactors you can put in your back yard
195 2010-12-14 00:40:59 <KwukDuck> bitcoin doesn't scale??
196 2010-12-14 00:41:03 <noagendamarket> if the governement got out of the way
197 2010-12-14 00:41:12 <Kiba> I don't care if I emitt 1 KABILLION of carbon dioxide
198 2010-12-14 00:41:16 <Kiba> that what plant life are for
199 2010-12-14 00:41:18 <edcba> KwukDuck: not at world scale as implemented as now
200 2010-12-14 00:41:24 <Kiba> that what plant life NEEDS
201 2010-12-14 00:42:01 <KwukDuck> edcba, thats rather lame then, if the goal iss to make a new currency, why not make it scalable to start with?
202 2010-12-14 00:42:02 <Granttt> there ya go: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eScDfYzMEEw -- George Carlin - Saving the Planet :D
203 2010-12-14 00:42:08 <da2ce7> the problem isnt the carbon, it is the _rate of change_ of the carbon.
204 2010-12-14 00:42:21 <edcba> KwukDuck: it's still in beta...
205 2010-12-14 00:42:50 <OneFixt> If you guys really care about energy problems and solutions, try reading this: http://www.cheniere.org/articles/Solution%20to%20the%20World%20Energy%20Crisis%20-%20final%20draft2a.doc
206 2010-12-14 00:43:01 <KwukDuck> edcba, if it can gradualy change over time without redoing the entire network and current blocks that would work
207 2010-12-14 00:43:03 <edcba> it would still allow big transfer of money i guess
208 2010-12-14 00:43:11 <Phoebus> Granttt, if you actually knew what carlin meant -- you'd get it. He says the earth will be fine, people are fucked. And when he says people, he means the biosphere.
209 2010-12-14 00:43:17 <Phoebus> The earth is a pile of rock, it doesn't give a shit.
210 2010-12-14 00:43:18 <OneFixt> Otherwise, talk of "green" energy is utter nonsense when compared to the real solution.
211 2010-12-14 00:43:22 <Phoebus> I love carlin.
212 2010-12-14 00:43:27 <gavinandresen> Phoebus: are you happy with the current money situation?
213 2010-12-14 00:43:39 <Kiba> Just go nuclear
214 2010-12-14 00:43:42 <ArtForz> replacing the network protocol is pretty easy
215 2010-12-14 00:43:45 <Kiba> but we all know how unpopular that is
216 2010-12-14 00:43:48 <Phoebus> gavinandresen, definitely not, but I think if your only argument is against the fiat currencies, then it's a weak one.
217 2010-12-14 00:43:55 <achristianson> Kiba: also diversify across planets
218 2010-12-14 00:43:59 <Phoebus> I prefer the idea of resource based economies, and biosphere management.
219 2010-12-14 00:44:03 <ArtForz> and needed if we want to scale beyond a few 100 TX/block
220 2010-12-14 00:44:05 <Granttt> Phoebus: "if you actually knew what carlin meant -- you'd get it" ... you shouldn't ASSUME to know what i believe he ment. get real.
221 2010-12-14 00:44:25 <Phoebus> Granttt, it seemed to me you posted it like that.
222 2010-12-14 00:44:30 <edcba> ArtForz: indeed it's easy but you just have to convince satoshi :p
223 2010-12-14 00:44:32 <KwukDuck> artforz, say byebye to all your generated coins then i guess xD
224 2010-12-14 00:44:40 <Phoebus> Aka "the earth will be fine", yeah I know it will.
225 2010-12-14 00:44:47 <Phoebus> The universe will be fine too :P
226 2010-12-14 00:44:50 <edcba> no satoshi seems to like the chain as it is :)
227 2010-12-14 00:44:52 <Phoebus> But the suicidal monkeys will get their wish :)
228 2010-12-14 00:45:01 <ArtForz> changing network protocol != changing the chain
229 2010-12-14 00:45:07 <noagendamarket> An asteroid will fix the problem :)
230 2010-12-14 00:45:07 <Kiba> Phoebus: how are we sucidiing oursleves?
231 2010-12-14 00:45:12 <gavinandresen> edcba: you could implement an alternative bitcoin client that connected to the standard bitcoin network and one using an alternate protocol....
232 2010-12-14 00:45:22 <ArtForz> easy enough to move to a hub/peer structure
233 2010-12-14 00:45:25 <Phoebus> Kiba, read your own responses, scroll up. Then tell me :)
234 2010-12-14 00:45:28 <edcba> yes but i'm really too lazy gavinandresen :)
235 2010-12-14 00:45:41 <noagendamarket> haha
236 2010-12-14 00:45:43 <Kiba> Phoebus: if you would tell me...
237 2010-12-14 00:45:51 <Kiba> and don't give me that kind of bullshit.
238 2010-12-14 00:45:59 <KwukDuck> doesn't a hub/peer system make it relatively easy too take down?
239 2010-12-14 00:46:26 akem has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
240 2010-12-14 00:46:34 <ArtForz> well, usenet still seems to be doing fine :P
241 2010-12-14 00:46:36 <Phoebus> Fine, if I have to quote. "<Kiba> I don't care about green technologies" "<Kiba> I don't care if I emitt 1 KABILLION of carbon dioxide" You assume you know what the biosphere needs, when you have no clue.
242 2010-12-14 00:46:49 <Phoebus> Also, you have no clue when you reach a point of critical change, and radical shift.
243 2010-12-14 00:47:00 <Granttt> but i agree with him mostly, i think its a GOOD thing we're all fucked. I hope for an asteroid which will get rid of enough trolls to liberate the planet from us ;)
244 2010-12-14 00:47:17 <da2ce7> The cost of taking over the network should be just over 50% of the economy. So the bitcoin economy must grow to arround 1B$ USD before even a noticable amout of carbon is produced. The amout of enegey used to generate will be much much less, than the goods traded with the coins.
245 2010-12-14 00:47:19 <Phoebus> Granttt, the planet doesn't care though, it makes no difference.
246 2010-12-14 00:47:34 <Phoebus> We care, so long we're alive, the somewhat sane(r) of us at least.
247 2010-12-14 00:47:43 <Phoebus> Because the delusional, well... not really.
248 2010-12-14 00:47:50 <Granttt> Phoebus: fuck human beings, save the plane! ;)
249 2010-12-14 00:47:51 <achristianson> da2ce7: brilliantly put
250 2010-12-14 00:47:53 <Kiba> meh, trying to change climate is hubrius, I tell ya
251 2010-12-14 00:47:56 <Phoebus> They'd rather we went down in a big party, and then released the nukes.
252 2010-12-14 00:47:59 <Granttt> planet*
253 2010-12-14 00:48:01 <Phoebus> Granttt, the planet does not need saving.
254 2010-12-14 00:48:14 <Granttt> why are worth saving ?
255 2010-12-14 00:48:14 <Phoebus> How are you going to save it - from changing into something else? The sun /will/ explode.
256 2010-12-14 00:48:15 <Kiba> it's called ADAPTATION.
257 2010-12-14 00:48:30 <Kiba> that what we're good at.
258 2010-12-14 00:48:34 <Kiba> so get with the program.
259 2010-12-14 00:48:35 <Granttt> accept reincarnation, makes that thought easier to accept ;)
260 2010-12-14 00:48:39 <Phoebus> There is no adaptation when a species is extinct :P
261 2010-12-14 00:48:46 <Phoebus> It's an end of the line.
262 2010-12-14 00:48:54 <Phoebus> Microorganisms will adapt, sure.
263 2010-12-14 00:49:02 <Phoebus> They're quicker at radical chemistry changes.
264 2010-12-14 00:49:43 <gavinandresen> http://scienceray.com/biology/measuring-the-speed-of-evolution/
265 2010-12-14 00:49:45 <fabianhjr> G2G
266 2010-12-14 00:49:48 fabianhjr has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.6.13/20101203075014])
267 2010-12-14 00:50:02 <Kiba> we have...FUCKING BRAINS
268 2010-12-14 00:50:06 <noagendamarket> Protip: death is an inevitable consequence of life
269 2010-12-14 00:50:15 <Phoebus> Haha, the irony of that statement :P
270 2010-12-14 00:50:21 <gavinandresen> "The speed with which these mutations appeared explains why plants become immune to herbicides in only a few years."
271 2010-12-14 00:50:37 <Phoebus> noagendamarket, so, making sure our species is extinct is ok?
272 2010-12-14 00:50:43 <noagendamarket> no
273 2010-12-14 00:51:02 <Phoebus> Then, how does the statement connect? No one said death is unnatural :P
274 2010-12-14 00:51:12 <noagendamarket> But thats the road the environmentalists and eugena cists want to go down
275 2010-12-14 00:51:29 <Kiba> I want kabillion of human to live
276 2010-12-14 00:51:34 <Kiba> we need to build a dyson sphere
277 2010-12-14 00:51:39 <Phoebus> So why are you responding to them? :P
278 2010-12-14 00:51:47 <Phoebus> We have to solve the problem, not get tied up in our own politics again.
279 2010-12-14 00:51:54 <Phoebus> Or our own delusions.
280 2010-12-14 00:51:55 <noagendamarket> Birth rates are falling everywhere
281 2010-12-14 00:52:08 <Phoebus> Good, but that's not true actually.
282 2010-12-14 00:52:15 <Phoebus> Population is going up, rapidly still.
283 2010-12-14 00:52:17 <noagendamarket> The problem wiill solve itself
284 2010-12-14 00:52:24 brian has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
285 2010-12-14 00:52:33 <Phoebus> Haha, now that would be nice wouldn't it?
286 2010-12-14 00:52:38 <Phoebus> Let's do nothing :)
287 2010-12-14 00:52:43 <Kiba> we have more energy in the sun in one hour than we use in an entire year
288 2010-12-14 00:52:48 <noagendamarket> Yes thats my motto lol
289 2010-12-14 00:52:50 <Phoebus> No, let's find out a way to use more power up :P
290 2010-12-14 00:52:54 <Kiba> it's just a matter of converting that energy into what we can use
291 2010-12-14 00:53:05 <altamic> night folks. And remember: when the subway jerks, it is the fixed stars that throw you down
292 2010-12-14 00:53:19 <altamic> no seriously
293 2010-12-14 00:53:19 <Phoebus> Night altamic :)
294 2010-12-14 00:53:22 <Kiba> look, we can go nuclear
295 2010-12-14 00:53:28 <Kiba> but ya know, people hate nuclear
296 2010-12-14 00:53:42 <gavinandresen> Phoebus: Were you here when ArtForz was talking about getting 8 times the hash per watt by investing in custom-fab silicon?
297 2010-12-14 00:53:51 <Phoebus> We are using nuclear, not to a high degree. And we need to come up with a diff implementation, which is underway.
298 2010-12-14 00:53:51 <ArtForz> no, people hate nuclear in their backyard :P
299 2010-12-14 00:53:55 altamic has quit (Quit: altamic)
300 2010-12-14 00:54:07 <ArtForz> nuclear far away is fine
301 2010-12-14 00:54:11 <gavinandresen> mmmm.... nuclear powered bitcoin......
302 2010-12-14 00:54:20 <Phoebus> gavinandresen, yeah, for part of the convo. But given the model is that the longer it runs, the more inefficient it becomes - I don't know, still sounds like a waste.
303 2010-12-14 00:54:21 <Kiba> ArtForz: they're more likely to die from a car accident than a nuclear accident
304 2010-12-14 00:54:41 <Phoebus> gavinandresen, so, you'd end up making integrated circuits, and have one at every home/business?
305 2010-12-14 00:54:43 akem has joined
306 2010-12-14 00:54:43 akem has quit (Changing host)
307 2010-12-14 00:54:43 akem has joined
308 2010-12-14 00:54:48 <ArtForz> I think they're actually more likely to die from terrorist attack than nuclear accident
309 2010-12-14 00:55:06 <Kiba> yeah
310 2010-12-14 00:55:09 <noagendamarket> decentralise the power and have a small nuclear generator in everyone backyard
311 2010-12-14 00:55:15 <Kiba> well, human beings don't have an accurate sense of risk
312 2010-12-14 00:55:17 <KwukDuck> it's the same scare system at work
313 2010-12-14 00:55:18 <ArtForz> yup
314 2010-12-14 00:55:26 <noagendamarket> woulb be impossible to take down the power grid
315 2010-12-14 00:55:27 <Phoebus> I'm all for nuclear, but 3rg gen nuclear.
316 2010-12-14 00:55:29 <gavinandresen> Phoebus: no, as ArtForz said, the most efficient "bitcoin miners" will survive-- the ones sitting on top of thermal power, or next to a big solar array in the Arizon desert, or....
317 2010-12-14 00:55:43 <ArtForz> bruce schneier did a nice paper on that
318 2010-12-14 00:55:47 <Phoebus> Building factories with too many human factors, too many things that can go wrong, is not the greatest idea.
319 2010-12-14 00:56:12 <ArtForz> why people consistently get risk/reward so horribly wrong
320 2010-12-14 00:56:19 <Phoebus> gavinandresen, we don't know that, we'll see. But regardless, let's talk about better implementations/changes.
321 2010-12-14 00:56:25 <gavinandresen> Phoebus: there is built-in incentive for bitcoin miners to become more efficient over time.
322 2010-12-14 00:56:35 <Phoebus> gavinandresen, how/where?
323 2010-12-14 00:56:35 <Kiba> if we did a war on car accidents rather than on drug offenses
324 2010-12-14 00:56:45 <gavinandresen> Phoebus: re: better implmentations: all ears
325 2010-12-14 00:56:45 <Kiba> we would save more lives every year than there are death in the drug wars
326 2010-12-14 00:57:13 <achristianson> bitcoin use is simply not contention with environmental sustainability. the electricity is the cost of doing business and the only question is whether this is the global optimum or not. unless another viable system is presented having a better global optimum, there is nothing to discuss
327 2010-12-14 00:57:17 <Granttt> war on car accidents LOL, how would that look a B-52 over new york ? ;)
328 2010-12-14 00:57:53 <Phoebus> gavinandresen, my hacking buddy from the 90's is interested in doing a paper on the bitcoin system, and I said I'd help. So I may be able to devote some time and brain power in the future. But for the time being, pointing out and outlining some questions.
329 2010-12-14 00:58:20 <ArtForz> we already have the technology
330 2010-12-14 00:58:33 <Kiba> Granttt: road reconstruction, systematic anlysis, taking the humans out of the equation, and so on.
331 2010-12-14 00:58:49 <Phoebus> achristianson, I disagree, we need every bit of computation power we have to solve problems, and advance our tech. Wasting cpu cycles and power is not wise overall, We need to cut down, not add consumption.
332 2010-12-14 00:58:55 <gavinandresen> Phoebus: ok.... but I think you'd get a better reception here if you'd done the "devote some time and brain power" thing first....
333 2010-12-14 00:59:02 <noagendamarket> google has a car that drives itself ffs
334 2010-12-14 00:59:11 <Kiba> noagendamarket: but it will take years
335 2010-12-14 00:59:23 <Kiba> these tech should be MAINSTREAMED as fast as possible
336 2010-12-14 00:59:24 <Phoebus> gavinandresen, I don't mind how I am received, that's a diff question. Questions must be asked and examined regardless.
337 2010-12-14 00:59:35 <Phoebus> Now if this community is not condusive to open dialog, that's good to know :)
338 2010-12-14 00:59:42 <KwukDuck> a car that drives itsself?
339 2010-12-14 00:59:44 <gavinandresen> Phoebus: we get testy when they're questions asked and answered in our FAQs
340 2010-12-14 00:59:47 <Kiba> most common cause of death: disease of the heart
341 2010-12-14 00:59:57 <Phoebus> gavinandresen, I read the FAQ and wiki.
342 2010-12-14 01:00:09 <Kiba> 2nd, cancer
343 2010-12-14 01:00:14 <ArtForz> yeah, google car is pretty neat
344 2010-12-14 01:00:22 <Phoebus> ArtForz, yeah, agreed.
345 2010-12-14 01:00:37 <ArtForz> current implementatuion still sucks though
346 2010-12-14 01:00:42 <gavinandresen> I really really hope I can buy a google self-driving car before my kids hit sixteen years old
347 2010-12-14 01:00:52 <ArtForz> mercedes has had trucks doing pretty much the same thing for over 10 years
348 2010-12-14 01:01:39 foobar_ has quit (Quit: Page closed)
349 2010-12-14 01:01:45 <noagendamarket> How much resources does the military industrial complex use? If they are unable to fund themselves by endlessly printing money it will benefit humanity more than anything else
350 2010-12-14 01:01:45 <KwukDuck> that would be horrible, no control, everything tracked
351 2010-12-14 01:02:12 <gavinandresen> noagendamarket: amen
352 2010-12-14 01:02:13 <Phoebus> Yeah, I watched the docs on those. They look pretty good. But you have to drive the first one, the rest are programmed to follow.
353 2010-12-14 01:02:15 <Kiba> KwukDuck: on the flip side, we don't have to deal with the police
354 2010-12-14 01:02:43 <ArtForz> kinda
355 2010-12-14 01:02:46 <KwukDuck> kiba, because your every breath is being monitored by in-car cameras and microphones xD
356 2010-12-14 01:02:47 <Kiba> which mean police are unnecesary to enforce traffic rules...which mean that they are out of their job..which hopefully mean
357 2010-12-14 01:02:54 <ArtForz> thats the system they're testing on public roads
358 2010-12-14 01:02:55 <noagendamarket> If they stopped making bombs and concentrated on planting trees
359 2010-12-14 01:03:06 <noagendamarket> and feeding the worlds hunger
360 2010-12-14 01:03:16 <noagendamarket> it would be a non issue
361 2010-12-14 01:03:17 <Kiba> we need interdependence with Africa
362 2010-12-14 01:03:27 <ArtForz> they actually have ones that follow a pre-set route while doing autonomous collision avoidance
363 2010-12-14 01:03:49 <noagendamarket> instead we get carbon credits up the ass
364 2010-12-14 01:03:53 <Kiba> http://danger.mongabay.com/causes_of_death.htm
365 2010-12-14 01:04:04 <ArtForz> karbon kredits = krap
366 2010-12-14 01:04:19 <noagendamarket> its just another form of tax
367 2010-12-14 01:04:19 <Granttt> karbon credits = ponzi scam
368 2010-12-14 01:04:35 <Kiba> maybe I should start the antideath bitcoin foundation
369 2010-12-14 01:04:37 <achristianson> Phoebus: you can't escape economics. I'm all for an economically and environmentally sustainable economy. if our markets are more efficient then we're more capable of living sustainably. it's a matter of resource allocation (in this case, computing resources and electricity). I am unconvinced that the alternative systems of government fiat currencies are more efficient than a system based on bitcoin. if there is an alternative more
370 2010-12-14 01:04:37 <achristianson> efficient than bitcoin then that one should be adopted, but I find it unlikely that a bitcoin economy is less efficient
371 2010-12-14 01:04:45 <noagendamarket> lmao kiba
372 2010-12-14 01:05:13 <Kiba> the funds would be allocated amongst the most common cause of death
373 2010-12-14 01:05:20 <Phoebus> achristianson, but you can expand economics to include the biosphere - because we depend on it. It's just that most are blind to that fact.
374 2010-12-14 01:05:22 davex__ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
375 2010-12-14 01:05:36 <noagendamarket> so a serial killer would get lots of bitcoins?
376 2010-12-14 01:05:37 <Phoebus> achristianson, look into RBE - resource based economy models.
377 2010-12-14 01:05:51 <noagendamarket> :)-
378 2010-12-14 01:05:52 <Phoebus> The computation goes directly into observing and analysis the state of the planet - vs wasting cycles.
379 2010-12-14 01:05:53 <Kiba> and there will be quartery paper anaylsising how effective certain research is
380 2010-12-14 01:06:12 <Kiba> how would we do economic calculation without money?
381 2010-12-14 01:06:37 <achristianson> Phoebus: the problem with that (already has been addressed) is that it is much harder to ensure integrity of such systems
382 2010-12-14 01:07:00 <da2ce7> maybe we could make an anti-bition generator. It spends bitcoins turning them into power.
383 2010-12-14 01:07:07 <Phoebus> achristianson, it's well worth trying. The biosphere is of the utmost importance.
384 2010-12-14 01:07:21 <Kiba> life can survive without us, Phoebus
385 2010-12-14 01:07:26 <Phoebus> Keeping a stable weather/earth/env chemistry is also.
386 2010-12-14 01:07:37 <Kiba> I am more worried about human beings murdering each other in an atomic war or something
387 2010-12-14 01:07:47 <achristianson> Kiba: if bc or other anonymous currencies take off, we might have to play a game of imperfect information. but we're already doing that anyway. do you trust CPI numbers?
388 2010-12-14 01:08:43 <Kiba> beside, trying to control climate is kinda crazy
389 2010-12-14 01:08:53 <achristianson> Phoebus: very well. at this point I think it's safe to consider bc a good candidate as a stepping stone in bootstrapping to more efficient systems
390 2010-12-14 01:09:27 <Phoebus> achristianson, I don't know, I'm cautious. Definitely keeping my eye on it. And it's nice to see alternatives, but I see some insanity in the waste of cpu cycles and power.
391 2010-12-14 01:09:40 <Kiba> it's not a waste of CPU cycles!
392 2010-12-14 01:09:45 <Kiba> it secure and make possible bitcoin
393 2010-12-14 01:10:12 <Granttt> its less of a waste of GPU cycles than having 5million geeks around the world waste theirs on playing world of warcraft :)
394 2010-12-14 01:10:18 <achristianson> Kiba: agreed. it is hard to justify the assertion that the cycles are waste
395 2010-12-14 01:10:51 <ArtForz> the total sum of "wasted" CPU cycles is whats keeping someone from creating a completely bogus chain
396 2010-12-14 01:11:10 <Phoebus> achristianson, you are using massive cycles, to do nothing more than verify integrity. When most problems in science require computation. Do you see the divide?
397 2010-12-14 01:11:26 <Phoebus> From protein analysis, to coming up with new computing models.
398 2010-12-14 01:12:07 <ze__> Phoebus and others like him lack non-linear thinking. If somone wants to mine bitcoins at a cost of electricy, that electricity is not 'wasted.' The potential for mined btc render greater subjective value percieved by the miner.
399 2010-12-14 01:12:14 <achristianson> Phoebus: when you begin to dissect the vulnerabilities of such systems, I think you'll see we're led naturally to systems of cryptographic integrity and computation that is far away from anything that might be considered otherwise useful
400 2010-12-14 01:12:43 <ze__> Phoebus why do you impose your sense of values on others?
401 2010-12-14 01:13:00 <gavinandresen> Phoebus: yeah.... it'd be lovely to do protein folding instead of "worthless" hash-finding. If you figure out how to make that work, let us know.
402 2010-12-14 01:13:03 <Phoebus> It doesn't make this system better. ze__ linear thinking? What's an example of that? :P Thinking in a box, or connecting the different variables that may ensure or risk our survival? :)
403 2010-12-14 01:13:07 <Kiba> he want to save the the biosphere so that we live, supposely
404 2010-12-14 01:13:12 <ArtForz> a simple hash based proof-of-work is obvious and secure as long as the hash algorithm isn't broken
405 2010-12-14 01:13:13 <Phoebus> gavinandresen, cheers.
406 2010-12-14 01:13:29 <ArtForz> for more complex proof-of-work systems it gets... considerably more complex
407 2010-12-14 01:14:03 <Phoebus> gavinandresen, from what I understand, there just needs to be work, that can be accurately recalculated. The problem could be replaced with useful problems. I'll think about it.
408 2010-12-14 01:14:06 <Kiba> find us a problem that is hard to do computationally, and easy to verify...then we talk.
409 2010-12-14 01:14:13 <ze__> Linear thinking: assuming someone else's value scales are the same as yours
410 2010-12-14 01:14:20 <Phoebus> I need to read the whole paper though, when I have less things to do :)
411 2010-12-14 01:14:21 <ArtForz> well, factoring large integers comes to mind
412 2010-12-14 01:14:39 <gavinandresen> Phoebus: NOT accurately re-calculated-- it has to be hard to find the solution, but very easy to verify that the solution is valid.
413 2010-12-14 01:14:43 <Kiba> prime numbers..isn't that basically useful for cryptographic application?
414 2010-12-14 01:14:51 <ArtForz> well, factoring prime numbers is easy
415 2010-12-14 01:14:54 <achristianson> Phoebus: we necessarily must assume a pathological case with respect to trust in actors that are allowed to participate (the whole internet)
416 2010-12-14 01:14:55 <ArtForz> solution = p
417 2010-12-14 01:15:06 <lfm> Phoebus: it doesnt make it better, it just allows it to exist in the first place
418 2010-12-14 01:15:08 <Phoebus> Oh, there's plenty of difficult problems then, hence the demand for computation.
419 2010-12-14 01:15:22 <da2ce7> checking "IS Prime" is much faster than "Factor"
420 2010-12-14 01:15:31 <ArtForz> facoring large composite numbers without small factors is a lot hadrer
421 2010-12-14 01:16:17 <achristianson> Phoebus: take NCAR CAM, for example --we can run this model on our systems today. tell me, how do we verify that the results are correct? without running code that is proven to be untampered?
422 2010-12-14 01:16:18 <davux> do you know why listtransactions does only list transactions related to the wallet?
423 2010-12-14 01:16:21 <da2ce7> a classic trapdoor function... multiplication
424 2010-12-14 01:16:30 <gavinandresen> davux: yes
425 2010-12-14 01:16:36 <davux> same thing for gettransaction
426 2010-12-14 01:17:00 <Kiba> wouldn't it be bad if we run out of difficult problem to solve?
427 2010-12-14 01:17:15 <kaspar> nah, just porn all day long.
428 2010-12-14 01:17:16 <Phoebus> achristianson, how do you verify the computation and that there has been no corruption right now? (yourself)
429 2010-12-14 01:17:17 <kaspar> ;)
430 2010-12-14 01:17:23 <gavinandresen> davux: we're thinking ahead to the 'lightweight client', which won't necessarily have the entire transaction history.
431 2010-12-14 01:17:23 <lfm> kiba not something we need to worry about
432 2010-12-14 01:17:31 <da2ce7> it gets interesting when we have reliable quantum computers.
433 2010-12-14 01:17:35 <Phoebus> How does any user that hasn't toyed with the source himself know?
434 2010-12-14 01:17:35 <zygf> if bitcoin was about integer factorization or discrete logarithms Art would be designing a quantum computer to run Shor's algorithm now :P
435 2010-12-14 01:17:57 <davux> gavinandresen: so maybe it should show the transaction if it knows about it, and send an error otherwise
436 2010-12-14 01:18:17 <da2ce7> that is the main weakness of bitcoin. Once sombody makes a quantum computer, they will be easly able to 'steal' bitcoins.
437 2010-12-14 01:18:26 <achristianson> Phoebus: we have a problem that is hard to calculate but fast to verify. presumably "hard to calculate" and "easy to check" are proved by rigorous mathematical deduction
438 2010-12-14 01:18:31 <gavinandresen> davux: that's what it does.... give it a transaction id that's not in the wallet and it should tell you 'invalid transaction'
439 2010-12-14 01:18:45 <gavinandresen> davux: oh, I see what you're saying....
440 2010-12-14 01:18:46 <davux> da2ce7: they'll have read your email and sniffed your SSH sessions before anyway
441 2010-12-14 01:18:47 <achristianson> Phoebus: also, we have no counterexample to the assertions that our problem is hard to answer and easy to check
442 2010-12-14 01:18:49 <Kiba> that is based on the cryptographic algorithm no? So we make quantum cryptographic tech?
443 2010-12-14 01:18:58 <gavinandresen> davux: ... show transactions that it HAPPENS to know about....
444 2010-12-14 01:19:03 <Phoebus> achristianson, ok, now we need to replace the problem, with one whose solution is of benefit :)
445 2010-12-14 01:19:10 <davux> gavinandresen: sorry?
446 2010-12-14 01:19:27 <Phoebus> Aside the verification and integrity alone.
447 2010-12-14 01:19:51 <Phoebus> I just see a rising insanity of people leaving their computers on forever, to make a quick btc, and skyrocketing energy consumption. This ain't good news.
448 2010-12-14 01:19:54 <gavinandresen> davux: right now, if you hand a transaction id to gettransaction it'll give you an invalid transaction error if the transaction isn't in your wallet.
449 2010-12-14 01:20:08 <achristianson> Phoebus: there is not known a problem that is of utility and has those properties, not that I know of. show us the counterexample
450 2010-12-14 01:20:09 <davux> da2ce7: oh, and reading your email includes the encrypted ones
451 2010-12-14 01:20:20 <achristianson> Phoebus: the proof is on you
452 2010-12-14 01:20:31 <da2ce7> davux, the problem is that the network can move to a new, longer, hash for protection... but any old coins that haven't moved to the new 2KB long addresses will be vulnerable.
453 2010-12-14 01:20:43 <Kiba> just go nuclear, right? That will solve all your problem
454 2010-12-14 01:20:45 <davux> gavinandresen: i know
455 2010-12-14 01:20:59 <Phoebus> Ooh, personal scientific debate. Suddenly I feel like I'm one of the scientists in Ancient Greece, debating each other with scientific models :)
456 2010-12-14 01:21:15 duck1123_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
457 2010-12-14 01:21:20 <davux> gavinandresen: my point is: why doesn't it give details about any transaction it has in its downloaded blockchain?
458 2010-12-14 01:21:24 <Phoebus> The question is of collaboration these days, finding a way to reduce waste/energy consumption and efficiency.
459 2010-12-14 01:21:43 <Kiba> a more efficent bitcoin network is a more secure network
460 2010-12-14 01:21:45 duck1123_ has joined
461 2010-12-14 01:22:06 <Kiba> or maybe not?
462 2010-12-14 01:22:07 <Kiba> hmm
463 2010-12-14 01:22:09 <Granttt> phoebus: try call the chinese, russian and american govt. start there, thats our biggest problem on the issue of waste/energy consumption/collaboration.
464 2010-12-14 01:22:15 <gavinandresen> davux: because people would come to rely on that behavior, and then they'd be disappointed when we had to break it to support lightweight clients or blockchain pruning
465 2010-12-14 01:22:22 <ArtForz> btw, I think I probably was one of the first private individuals to factor a RSA512
466 2010-12-14 01:22:42 <Phoebus> Granttt, yeah, I know, that's old news :P But making another energy inefficient alternative does not make the first worse, or solve it.
467 2010-12-14 01:22:47 <Phoebus> We can do better.
468 2010-12-14 01:22:56 <ArtForz> that was... 2004
469 2010-12-14 01:23:10 <Kiba> bitcoin is more efficent than all the weapon, nuclear, helicopter etc
470 2010-12-14 01:23:15 <Granttt> it isnt inefficient so long as people find "cost of energy price, vs mining output profitable"
471 2010-12-14 01:23:19 <Kiba> need to secure the value of the USD
472 2010-12-14 01:23:31 <Granttt> i dont
473 2010-12-14 01:23:35 <Granttt> thats why i dont mine
474 2010-12-14 01:23:38 <davux> gavinandresen: if the command description says "display information about a transaction if the client knows about it", i don't think it's a real issue
475 2010-12-14 01:23:45 <Phoebus> But the model says it is built in to become less efficient by design :P
476 2010-12-14 01:23:50 <ArtForz> what?
477 2010-12-14 01:24:11 <Phoebus> The more you generate, the harder it becomes, as a coded inflation control.
478 2010-12-14 01:24:15 <achristianson> Phoebus: I actually appreciate that you have concern for our long term surviability. but I think we get nowhere unless we stick to logically consistent deduction and empirical measurement. or at least some running code
479 2010-12-14 01:24:18 <Phoebus> But at the same time, your efficiency goes.
480 2010-12-14 01:24:20 <Granttt> yea, and hardware is built on the model of getting exponentially more efficient hardware. so whats the prob ?
481 2010-12-14 01:24:26 <ArtForz> minting will decrease over time
482 2010-12-14 01:24:41 <Kiba> Phoebus: code or GTFO
483 2010-12-14 01:24:58 <Phoebus> achristianson, I'd like to see an open forum on new economy and currency models. But individual efforts are great too.
484 2010-12-14 01:25:02 <da2ce7> no, it is not efficent as eveyone who has coins is paying for the generation via inflation... In the future it will be optional to support the network, via the option of sending transaction fees.
485 2010-12-14 01:25:19 <ArtForz> except it wont be optional
486 2010-12-14 01:25:27 <Phoebus> Just don't see the current application as solid off the bat, and nor should it be. We just need to find solutions - make it more efficient.
487 2010-12-14 01:25:37 <Phoebus> And it will happen, should enough people join in.
488 2010-12-14 01:25:42 <da2ce7> no, but you can choose to counduct a transfer, or not.
489 2010-12-14 01:26:03 <ArtForz> I expect miners will set min fees based on their costs
490 2010-12-14 01:26:12 <da2ce7> yep :D I expect so.
491 2010-12-14 01:26:51 <ArtForz> so for-profit miners will charge fees, I also expect miners only mining to keep total difficulty up to protect value of their held bitcoins
492 2010-12-14 01:27:14 <da2ce7> at the moment, just holding coins (that hold a value), supports the network throogh inflation. In the future only those who use the service will need to pay for it.
493 2010-12-14 01:27:24 <ArtForz> yep
494 2010-12-14 01:27:52 <noagendamarket> Its not bitcoiners holding back the adoption of nuclear energy
495 2010-12-14 01:28:14 <Kiba> bitcoiners aren't the one subsidizing fat cat American farmers
496 2010-12-14 01:28:22 <noagendamarket> lol methane?
497 2010-12-14 01:28:24 <nelisky> one just hopes the coins will be valuable by themselves by then, so we pay tx fees instead of bank fees
498 2010-12-14 01:28:40 <Kiba> noagendamarket: it also make Africa worthless too
499 2010-12-14 01:29:00 <Granttt> im curious what motivator will there be for "miners" after the IPO has been mined 100% to 21mill ?
500 2010-12-14 01:29:01 <noagendamarket> mcdonalds causes global warming
501 2010-12-14 01:29:04 <noagendamarket> :)-\
502 2010-12-14 01:29:12 <ArtForz> in 130 years?
503 2010-12-14 01:29:18 <da2ce7> sex causes global warming
504 2010-12-14 01:29:20 <Granttt> yea, i plan to live that long ;)
505 2010-12-14 01:29:27 <Granttt> better think long term
506 2010-12-14 01:29:37 <Kiba> Granttt: let start an antideath bitcoin foundation!
507 2010-12-14 01:29:42 * Zarutian notices that i2p project now accepts donations at 1HkJCceXf7of1sTNRVJbXiZHfDTLL71Siy
508 2010-12-14 01:29:47 <Granttt> kiba: yes :)
509 2010-12-14 01:30:07 <Kiba> I want the investment in antideath to be as efficent as posssible.
510 2010-12-14 01:30:22 <kaspar> I just want some bitcoins.
511 2010-12-14 01:30:41 <KwukDuck> kaspar, buy some
512 2010-12-14 01:30:52 <da2ce7> no free lunches here.
513 2010-12-14 01:31:02 <Kiba> I sell art for bitcoin!
514 2010-12-14 01:31:03 <davux> gavinandresen: don't you think?
515 2010-12-14 01:31:07 <da2ce7> *well you cannot buy a lunch for 0.05 BTC
516 2010-12-14 01:31:12 <kaspar> Jeez, I should have known, dry humor does not work over IRC.
517 2010-12-14 01:31:44 <Zarutian> kasper: and you cant wet it up with cybering *drumm tiss*
518 2010-12-14 01:32:10 <ArtForz> da2ce7: in a few decades you might be able to
519 2010-12-14 01:34:31 * Kiba wonders how far the IRS is willing to go to capture a prepretual traveler
520 2010-12-14 01:34:47 <ArtForz> a prewhat?
521 2010-12-14 01:34:56 <Kiba> somebody who travel constantly
522 2010-12-14 01:35:02 <ArtForz> oh
523 2010-12-14 01:35:45 <Kiba> and somebody that make money in the bitcoin economy too
524 2010-12-14 01:35:58 <Kiba> say
525 2010-12-14 01:36:10 <Kiba> you walk up to a bitcoin dealer, exchange it for cash...
526 2010-12-14 01:36:59 <Granttt> you should report any gains (after mining/purchasing/pizza/noodles expenses) from what you cashout
527 2010-12-14 01:37:35 <Granttt> or simply dont cashout until you make a few mill USD, and then dissapear to some exotic island
528 2010-12-14 01:37:47 <Kiba> lol
529 2010-12-14 01:37:50 <da2ce7> dont' ever cash out
530 2010-12-14 01:37:53 <da2ce7> just trade in BTC
531 2010-12-14 01:37:59 <Kiba> that's hard at first
532 2010-12-14 01:38:44 <zygf> is it possible that in a while if rich folks or corporations enter with clusters of ASICs and gain most of the throughput, you'll need to auth your transactions with them and the whole freedom/anonymity thing collapses?
533 2010-12-14 01:38:44 <achristianson> Kiba: IMO anonymous markets imply plausibly deniable wealth and income. Grantt is right: we should all be reporting. but the organized governments have no means of enforcement short of destroying the internet
534 2010-12-14 01:38:57 <da2ce7> I'm going to europe in 9 months, I want to see how much I can do with bitcoins, just for fun.
535 2010-12-14 01:39:59 <Kiba> if the US and Europe government's collapse are immeninent
536 2010-12-14 01:40:05 <Kiba> than it might be a m00t point
537 2010-12-14 01:40:26 <da2ce7> lol, people will still want bitcoins... say for food and accomidation.
538 2010-12-14 01:40:38 <lfm> its the end of the world, details at 11
539 2010-12-14 01:41:10 <Kiba> 30 years after hte collapse of the Soviet Union
540 2010-12-14 01:41:31 <da2ce7> kiba, why the 30 years being so inportant?
541 2010-12-14 01:41:46 <da2ce7> why not 20 or 50?
542 2010-12-14 01:41:56 <Kiba> because it's 2020
543 2010-12-14 01:42:12 <thrashaholic> Kiba, not "if" ;)
544 2010-12-14 01:42:29 * da2ce7 looks confused, why 2020?
545 2010-12-14 01:42:30 <Kiba> in the meantime
546 2010-12-14 01:42:40 <Kiba> we as Westerner need to strengthen our economic ties
547 2010-12-14 01:42:59 <Kiba> that is the key to world peace
548 2010-12-14 01:43:22 <Granttt> kiba: we can't, because greed is now legal ;)
549 2010-12-14 01:43:29 <da2ce7> providing we don't keep on voting in labor, aus should be fine for a while.
550 2010-12-14 01:43:59 <Kiba> Granttt: well, when nation-state collapse, we need an alternative soon
551 2010-12-14 01:44:03 <Kiba> so that society will be stable
552 2010-12-14 01:44:24 <thrashaholic> we need no alternative!
553 2010-12-14 01:44:26 <achristianson> Kiba: if you are seriously expecting collapse, then you need to be acquiring guns, ammo, food, and survival knowledge
554 2010-12-14 01:44:40 <thrashaholic> forget food
555 2010-12-14 01:44:41 <Kiba> just collapse of the state
556 2010-12-14 01:44:45 <thrashaholic> you need to be mobile
557 2010-12-14 01:44:46 <Kiba> not collapse of society
558 2010-12-14 01:44:56 <da2ce7> national broadband network is a 40$ billion dollar peice of shit from hell.
559 2010-12-14 01:44:57 <lfm> kiba thats like saying we're all gonna die, invest in graveyards
560 2010-12-14 01:45:04 <thrashaholic> actually
561 2010-12-14 01:45:08 <achristianson> Kiba: well in that case, who cares about the state
562 2010-12-14 01:45:19 <Granttt> lol: lfm, that market is bullish ;)
563 2010-12-14 01:45:22 <thrashaholic> the best three businesses to be in: strip clubs, liqour stores/bars, funeral homes
564 2010-12-14 01:45:29 <thrashaholic> recession proof.
565 2010-12-14 01:45:30 <noagendamarket> t costs more for a gallon of coke than for a gallon of petrol.
566 2010-12-14 01:45:48 <noagendamarket> :)
567 2010-12-14 01:46:06 <achristianson> thrashaholic: the best business to be in is diversified equity stakes in means of production
568 2010-12-14 01:46:47 <da2ce7> I wonder who is going to be the first full-time bitcoin hooker...
569 2010-12-14 01:47:15 <achristianson> da2ce7: you mean it hasn't happened yet?
570 2010-12-14 01:47:27 <Kiba> I want a pizza buying service!
571 2010-12-14 01:47:27 <lfm> da2ce7: there were some drug dealers on the other day
572 2010-12-14 01:47:49 <da2ce7> oh, ok, well I'm new here.
573 2010-12-14 01:48:07 <Kiba> do women buy sex too?
574 2010-12-14 01:48:17 * da2ce7 looks embarrassed
575 2010-12-14 01:48:36 Phoebus has quit (Quit: Nature is being governed by consistent rational structure. To live in harmony with nature is to live rationally. To comprehend your position in the world and act wittingly.Unnatural is paralogism and peremptoriness. Truth doesn't exist to satisfy us.)
576 2010-12-14 01:48:55 <Granttt> well the 3 things that made the small secondlife economy grow by 400% a year for past few first years: sex, gambling, and ponzis
577 2010-12-14 01:49:08 <Granttt> we have a bit of the latter 2 in bitcoin, we need sex
578 2010-12-14 01:49:27 <achristianson> Granttt: can't tell if you're joking
579 2010-12-14 01:49:35 <Granttt> im not joking
580 2010-12-14 01:49:38 <da2ce7> TheMadhatter has two trashy porn sites.
581 2010-12-14 01:49:40 <noagendamarket> da2ce7 was that an offer? :)-
582 2010-12-14 01:49:43 <achristianson> Granttt: very well then. you're probably right :)
583 2010-12-14 01:49:44 <noagendamarket> haha
584 2010-12-14 01:49:45 <Granttt> google a bit, you'll see lol
585 2010-12-14 01:50:06 <noagendamarket> rule34 on bitcoin?
586 2010-12-14 01:50:06 <Granttt> what else is there to do in a virtual 3d world ? ;)
587 2010-12-14 01:50:48 <da2ce7> I cannot launch myself at the first thing that waves bitcoins at me!
588 2010-12-14 01:50:54 <noagendamarket> lool
589 2010-12-14 01:51:46 <noagendamarket> You could always take you laptop to a brothel lmao
590 2010-12-14 01:52:11 <da2ce7> we need phone clients already!
591 2010-12-14 01:52:35 <da2ce7> then we could have a bitcoin sexline.
592 2010-12-14 01:52:50 <noagendamarket> well....
593 2010-12-14 01:54:44 <lfm> btc phonesex would be easy to set up
594 2010-12-14 01:55:29 acous has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
595 2010-12-14 01:55:33 <noagendamarket> pics or it didnt happen...
596 2010-12-14 01:56:18 * da2ce7 mumbles "positions, positions, positions, always have to remember the darn positions"
597 2010-12-14 01:56:44 <Granttt> only there would have to be some incentive to do it with bitcoin, theres tons of cam/voice sites out there
598 2010-12-14 01:57:24 <noagendamarket> 8bitporn
599 2010-12-14 01:57:38 <noagendamarket> where the mario brothers play
600 2010-12-14 01:57:42 <noagendamarket> :0
601 2010-12-14 01:57:54 <noagendamarket> lol
602 2010-12-14 01:58:00 <Granttt> lol
603 2010-12-14 01:58:09 <da2ce7> rofl
604 2010-12-14 01:58:17 <noagendamarket> donkey kong
605 2010-12-14 01:58:23 <noagendamarket> has a new game
606 2010-12-14 01:58:33 <noagendamarket> lol
607 2010-12-14 01:59:02 <da2ce7> lol
608 2010-12-14 02:01:01 <noagendamarket> http://cache.kotaku.com/gaming/image/rampage-wang.gif
609 2010-12-14 02:01:06 <noagendamarket> haha
610 2010-12-14 02:08:58 redengin has joined
611 2010-12-14 02:12:04 <Kiba> once I improve on my art skill
612 2010-12-14 02:12:08 <Kiba> I think I will do an...
613 2010-12-14 02:12:12 <Kiba> a graphic novel
614 2010-12-14 02:12:15 <Kiba> "Underfeeder"
615 2010-12-14 02:12:31 jb55 has joined
616 2010-12-14 02:12:59 <Granttt> more hacking exposure for bitcoin: "1515 Corporates' attacks on Wikileaks may lead to rise of peer-to-peer distributed DNS to replace ICANN and overthrow of PayPal's online financial services and payments monopoly through Bitcoin." - from: http://hackingexpose.blogspot.com/2010/12/wikiwars-blow-by-blow_14.html
617 2010-12-14 02:16:09 <Zarutian> Granttt: is that good or bad?
618 2010-12-14 02:16:28 <Kiba> can't tell
619 2010-12-14 02:17:28 <Granttt> well its good if they print our name, but it would be bad if people started to think the only purpose of bitcoin is to fund blackmarkets
620 2010-12-14 02:18:11 <Granttt> right now it may seem taht way
621 2010-12-14 02:18:48 <Kiba> the majority are libertarian, right? supermajority, I think.
622 2010-12-14 02:19:23 <Granttt> << quiet libertarian yes
623 2010-12-14 02:20:59 <Granttt> speaking of libertarian/anti-state, wheres the bitcoin button on this page: http://www.freedomainradio.com/Donate.aspx ;)
624 2010-12-14 02:21:40 <Kiba> and.....we ARE BACK
625 2010-12-14 02:22:18 mndrix_ has joined
626 2010-12-14 02:23:17 <Kiba> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin
627 2010-12-14 02:23:36 <mndrix_> excellent
628 2010-12-14 02:23:43 <tcatm> Yay! :)
629 2010-12-14 02:23:46 <Granttt> yay
630 2010-12-14 02:24:27 <Kiba> we're famous now :D
631 2010-12-14 02:27:02 <noagendamarket> awesome
632 2010-12-14 02:27:09 <da2ce7> yes!
633 2010-12-14 02:27:17 <da2ce7> we are now notable!
634 2010-12-14 02:27:31 <Kiba> I almost read that now as non
635 2010-12-14 02:30:42 fabianhjr has joined
636 2010-12-14 02:32:53 StrangeCharm has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
637 2010-12-14 02:33:08 <fabianhjr> Hey, I was thinking. Shouldn't BitCoin have an easy 1-click payment system? coin://[addr]/preselected_quantity where the user just has to confirm the payment and click send?
638 2010-12-14 02:34:19 <Kiba> to da forum!
639 2010-12-14 02:34:33 <fabianhjr> I am writting currently.
640 2010-12-14 02:34:35 <mndrix_> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=55.0 is about bitcoin URIs
641 2010-12-14 02:34:38 <bitbot> URI-scheme for bitcoin
642 2010-12-14 02:34:49 <mndrix_> thanks bot
643 2010-12-14 02:36:17 <fabianhjr> 0_o why are there like 3 bots on this channel?
644 2010-12-14 02:37:07 <tcatm> one for ~50 users ;)
645 2010-12-14 02:38:19 <Kiba> how many peoiple are in here?
646 2010-12-14 02:38:52 <tcatm> depends on how many of them are bots
647 2010-12-14 02:40:52 boot has joined
648 2010-12-14 02:41:00 boot has quit (Client Quit)
649 2010-12-14 02:46:46 <fabianhjr> Kiba: I am sure at least 10. :P
650 2010-12-14 02:47:52 mtgox has quit ()
651 2010-12-14 02:48:38 <noagendamarket> fabianhjr that would be useful
652 2010-12-14 02:48:42 ze__ has quit (Quit: Page closed)
653 2010-12-14 02:49:17 <fabianhjr> noagendamarket: a simple URI based 1-click system.
654 2010-12-14 02:49:26 darrob has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
655 2010-12-14 02:49:32 <Granttt> its needed, payment should be simple
656 2010-12-14 02:49:45 <fabianhjr> cash://[BitCoin Address]/Quantity <-- My proposal
657 2010-12-14 02:49:58 <noagendamarket> no we are going to use bitcoin
658 2010-12-14 02:49:59 <fabianhjr> Then you just confirm the info and click send.
659 2010-12-14 02:50:15 <noagendamarket> bitcoin:
660 2010-12-14 02:50:17 <fabianhjr> ok, bitcoin:// instead :P
661 2010-12-14 02:50:21 <noagendamarket> yes
662 2010-12-14 02:50:27 <noagendamarket> :)-
663 2010-12-14 02:50:32 <fabianhjr> noagendamarket: the point still remains.
664 2010-12-14 02:50:40 <noagendamarket> yes it does
665 2010-12-14 02:50:44 <thrashaholic> we've discussed this before
666 2010-12-14 02:50:51 <noagendamarket> its on the forum
667 2010-12-14 02:51:01 <thrashaholic> feel free to implement it :)
668 2010-12-14 02:51:14 <noagendamarket> you dont need permission :)
669 2010-12-14 02:53:59 darrob has joined
670 2010-12-14 02:53:59 <Zarutian> fabianhjr: you might be intrested in http://pastebin.ca/2012512
671 2010-12-14 02:54:51 <midnightmagic> gah, protocol overrides..!
672 2010-12-14 02:54:54 * midnightmagic claws his eyes out..
673 2010-12-14 02:57:50 * fabianhjr gets his c++/programming books out.
674 2010-12-14 03:04:03 Diablo-D3 has joined
675 2010-12-14 03:12:52 StrangeCharm has joined
676 2010-12-14 03:15:51 bananagrenade has joined
677 2010-12-14 03:17:46 StrangeCharm has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
678 2010-12-14 03:24:11 jcw9 has joined
679 2010-12-14 03:25:41 darrob has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
680 2010-12-14 03:30:09 darrob has joined
681 2010-12-14 03:30:24 fabianhjr has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.6.13/20101203075014])
682 2010-12-14 03:30:41 StrangeCharm has joined
683 2010-12-14 03:34:06 <jb55> How long does it take for a transaction to propagate? I'm testing this with a friend, it has been around 30 minutes and he hasn't gotten anything.
684 2010-12-14 03:39:49 <doublec> he should see 0/unconfirmed immediately
685 2010-12-14 03:40:03 <mndrix_> usually under 30 seconds
686 2010-12-14 03:40:19 <doublec> and then confirmations start rolling in after 10 minutes or so
687 2010-12-14 03:42:09 PeterCooperJr has joined
688 2010-12-14 03:42:17 <jb55> so would it be a port issue then?
689 2010-12-14 03:43:20 jchysk1 has joined
690 2010-12-14 03:44:23 PeterCooperJr has quit ()
691 2010-12-14 03:46:50 jchysk has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
692 2010-12-14 03:47:50 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
693 2010-12-14 03:50:47 akem has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
694 2010-12-14 04:08:41 Grantt has joined
695 2010-12-14 04:12:11 Granttt has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
696 2010-12-14 04:12:46 Granttt has joined
697 2010-12-14 04:15:43 osmosis has joined
698 2010-12-14 04:16:05 Grantt has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
699 2010-12-14 04:16:18 <ne0futur> (Reuters) - The head of the Bank of England had sought to set up a group with the United States, Switzerland and Japan to recapitalise major global banks six months before the financial crisis engulfed them, U.S. diplomatic cables show.
700 2010-12-14 04:16:25 <ne0futur> http://story.londonmercury.com/index.php/ct/9/cid/0f440bf3fff89f01/id/41224378/
701 2010-12-14 04:16:30 <ne0futur> and its reuters :
702 2010-12-14 04:16:36 <ne0futur> http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE6BD07U20101214?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Reuters%2FUKBusinessNews+%28News+%2F+UK+%2F+Business+News%29
703 2010-12-14 04:19:42 <ne0futur> i dont know exactly what they mean with "recycling dollars" :p
704 2010-12-14 04:19:47 <ne0futur> http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?chart_type=line&s[1][id]=BASE&s[1][range]=5yrs
705 2010-12-14 04:19:54 <ne0futur> probably this way
706 2010-12-14 04:23:29 <nanotube> jb55: does he have all the blocks downloaded?
707 2010-12-14 04:24:37 <jb55> nanotube: he eventually got it after an hour or so, I sent it to him right after he downloaded the client. He send it back and I immediately got it (I've been running it for awhile).
708 2010-12-14 04:26:11 <nanotube> jb55: if it was "right after he downloaded the client", that must mean he didn't have the whole block chain yet.
709 2010-12-14 04:26:15 <nanotube> so... mystery solved.
710 2010-12-14 04:26:32 darkstar has joined
711 2010-12-14 04:27:38 ze__ has joined
712 2010-12-14 04:28:04 <jb55> Ah ok good to know
713 2010-12-14 04:31:25 <Kiba> those damn
714 2010-12-14 04:31:32 <Kiba> financial criss wouldn't happen
715 2010-12-14 04:31:41 <Kiba> if they didn't practice fractional reserve banking
716 2010-12-14 04:34:35 ze__ has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
717 2010-12-14 04:35:51 phuzion has quit (Quit: leaving)
718 2010-12-14 04:39:25 wumpus has quit (No Ping reply in 180 seconds.)
719 2010-12-14 04:39:44 wump has joined
720 2010-12-14 04:40:37 <thrashaholic> fractional reserve isn't the problem
721 2010-12-14 04:41:41 phuzion has joined
722 2010-12-14 04:41:48 sjaak_ has joined
723 2010-12-14 04:41:52 roberthl_ has joined
724 2010-12-14 04:41:56 zerwas_ has joined
725 2010-12-14 04:42:08 CyanDynamo1 has joined
726 2010-12-14 04:42:15 shortcir1uit has joined
727 2010-12-14 04:42:18 lmptfy_ has joined
728 2010-12-14 04:55:12 jaromil_ has joined
729 2010-12-14 04:55:12 int0x27h_ has joined
730 2010-12-14 04:55:12 Grantt has joined
731 2010-12-14 04:55:25 mizerydearia has joined
732 2010-12-14 04:56:16 satamusic has joined
733 2010-12-14 04:58:08 tg is now known as Guest24315
734 2010-12-14 04:58:18 bananagrenade has joined
735 2010-12-14 04:58:18 lfm has joined
736 2010-12-14 04:58:18 BitCoinz has joined
737 2010-12-14 04:58:18 foxstrike has joined
738 2010-12-14 04:58:18 FreeMoney has joined
739 2010-12-14 04:58:33 darkstar has left ()
740 2010-12-14 04:58:48 HarryS has quit (Max SendQ exceeded)
741 2010-12-14 04:59:51 Rh0nda_ has joined
742 2010-12-14 05:00:15 DELTA9 has joined
743 2010-12-14 05:00:15 HarryS has joined
744 2010-12-14 05:00:31 satamusic has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
745 2010-12-14 05:00:39 nelisky has quit (Quit: nelisky)
746 2010-12-14 05:00:50 bencoder_ has joined
747 2010-12-14 05:02:34 bencoder has quit (Write error: Broken pipe)
748 2010-12-14 05:02:36 Teppy has quit (Ping timeout: 333 seconds)
749 2010-12-14 05:03:18 satamusic has joined
750 2010-12-14 05:03:24 chuck251 has joined
751 2010-12-14 05:03:27 Teppy has joined
752 2010-12-14 05:08:26 acous has joined
753 2010-12-14 05:09:36 satamusic_ has joined
754 2010-12-14 05:09:45 satamusic has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
755 2010-12-14 05:20:41 dwdollar has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
756 2010-12-14 05:22:46 StrangeCharm has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
757 2010-12-14 05:27:28 <nanotube> tcatm: ping
758 2010-12-14 05:34:29 StrangeCharm has joined
759 2010-12-14 05:35:35 noagendamarket has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
760 2010-12-14 05:43:15 satamusic_ has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
761 2010-12-14 05:44:22 satamusic_ has joined
762 2010-12-14 05:46:26 dre_ has joined
763 2010-12-14 05:47:13 satamusic_ has quit (Client Quit)
764 2010-12-14 05:47:45 Stephen_ has joined
765 2010-12-14 05:48:57 <Stephen_> MT`AwAy, you dirty ol' bastard
766 2010-12-14 05:49:25 <jcw9> ignore -channels #bitcoin-dev * JOINS PARTS QUITS NICKS
767 2010-12-14 05:49:30 <jcw9> oops :)
768 2010-12-14 05:49:41 <nanotube> quick, everyone change your nick! hehe
769 2010-12-14 05:50:21 <Stephen_> I fought an IRCOp for this one, no thanks :-)
770 2010-12-14 05:50:23 <Stephen_> er
771 2010-12-14 05:50:26 Stephen_ is now known as Stephen
772 2010-12-14 05:50:28 <Stephen> This one
773 2010-12-14 05:51:45 <jcw9> You could always ChAnGe ThE cAsE
774 2010-12-14 05:52:04 <jcw9> oh my god I haven't done l33tcaps in a decade; forgot how annoying it is!
775 2010-12-14 05:52:05 <Stephen> Nah, I like going as myself
776 2010-12-14 05:52:16 Stephen is now known as FesterCluck
777 2010-12-14 05:52:19 <FesterCluck> or this guy
778 2010-12-14 05:52:24 FesterCluck is now known as Stephen
779 2010-12-14 05:52:47 <Stephen> Anyone seen this build error when making bitcoind on linux:
780 2010-12-14 05:52:49 <Stephen> make: *** [obj/nogui/rpc.o] Error 1
781 2010-12-14 05:53:50 <nanotube> anything else surrounding it, Stephen ?
782 2010-12-14 05:53:57 FreeMoney has quit (Quit: Page closed)
783 2010-12-14 05:54:28 <Stephen> g++ -c -O2 -Wno-invalid-offsetof -Wformat -g -D__WXDEBUG__ -D__WXGTK__ -DNOPCH - DFOURWAYSSE2 -DUSE_SSL -I"/usr/local/include/wx-2.9" -I"/usr/local/lib/wx/includ e/gtk2-unicode-debug-static-2.9" -I"/usr/include/openssl" -o obj/nogui/rpc
784 2010-12-14 05:55:17 <nanotube> Stephen: use a pastebin and stick the whole thing in
785 2010-12-14 05:55:24 <Stephen> Sorry
786 2010-12-14 05:55:27 <Stephen> momplz
787 2010-12-14 05:57:13 <Stephen> actually, that's interesting...
788 2010-12-14 05:57:42 <Stephen> shouldn't there be an "rpc.h" file in the /src directory of the bitcoin source?
789 2010-12-14 05:58:03 <ArtForz> yup
790 2010-12-14 05:58:29 <Stephen> the package I downloaded did not include this luxury
791 2010-12-14 05:58:35 <Stephen> I shall extract again
792 2010-12-14 05:59:11 <ArtForz> it's here, and in svn, so... uhhh... truncated tar?
793 2010-12-14 05:59:31 <Stephen> possibly
794 2010-12-14 06:00:28 <Stephen> hmm...
795 2010-12-14 06:00:31 <Stephen> Well then
796 2010-12-14 06:00:38 <Stephen> extracted again, now it's there
797 2010-12-14 06:00:43 <ArtForz> weird
798 2010-12-14 06:00:53 <Stephen> along with a few others that were missed
799 2010-12-14 06:01:03 <nanotube> strange indeed
800 2010-12-14 06:01:51 <Stephen> maybe I took them out amongst all my dependency hell ventures
801 2010-12-14 06:02:32 <Stephen> if I somehow managed to type rm r* while frantic at a crashing ssh session, I somehow don't feel surprised
802 2010-12-14 06:03:01 * Stephen cleans and starts the build again
803 2010-12-14 06:03:56 <Stephen> So I have this idea for a patch, perhaps a plugin if you will
804 2010-12-14 06:05:12 <nanotube> what would it do?
805 2010-12-14 06:05:24 <Stephen> Once you send your block in for a guess, and are shot down for the millionth time, the fail block should be sent to a secondary server which has a more lenient list of winners. Everyone can donate to play, and we
806 2010-12-14 06:05:28 <nanotube> (and yea, when frantic, i frequently type rm followed by random strings, too. :P )
807 2010-12-14 06:05:31 <Stephen> will call it "BitConsolation"
808 2010-12-14 06:05:49 <nanotube> haha, that's called the testnet. :)
809 2010-12-14 06:05:56 <ArtForz> or pooled mining
810 2010-12-14 06:06:08 <nanotube> yea or that
811 2010-12-14 06:06:12 <Stephen> Yeah, I just heard about pooled mining yesterday
812 2010-12-14 06:06:30 <Stephen> Once I get the client ported to javascript I'm so game :-P
813 2010-12-14 06:06:47 <nanotube> haha
814 2010-12-14 06:07:33 <Stephen> I'm not really sure who in their right mind would set Chrome's processor Affinity to a GPU, but I'd be excited to watch it fly
815 2010-12-14 06:11:29 <Stephen> So, the optional irc connection to find peers, does anyone see this as a security risk when running bitcoin on dev servers?
816 2010-12-14 06:11:29 <ArtForz> no
817 2010-12-14 06:11:29 <Stephen> good, then I'll leave it on
818 2010-12-14 06:11:29 RichardG has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
819 2010-12-14 06:11:29 <ArtForz> check irc.cpp, it's pretty limited in scope
820 2010-12-14 06:12:05 roberthl_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
821 2010-12-14 06:12:05 JStoker has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
822 2010-12-14 06:12:20 <ArtForz> no, a split
823 2010-12-14 06:12:27 <nanotube> hehe
824 2010-12-14 06:12:38 <Kiba> hmm
825 2010-12-14 06:12:41 <Stephen> No wammy
826 2010-12-14 06:13:03 <Stephen> ok, so current make is at rpc.o
827 2010-12-14 06:13:08 roberthl has joined
828 2010-12-14 06:13:09 roberthl has quit (Changing host)
829 2010-12-14 06:13:09 roberthl has joined
830 2010-12-14 06:13:15 darsk1ez has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
831 2010-12-14 06:13:22 * Stephen hopes for the best
832 2010-12-14 06:13:27 darkskiez has joined
833 2010-12-14 06:15:34 josswr has joined
834 2010-12-14 06:15:36 darsk1ez has joined
835 2010-12-14 06:17:33 <Stephen> Alrighty, error again
836 2010-12-14 06:17:37 <Stephen> here's pastebin
837 2010-12-14 06:17:38 <Stephen> http://pastebin.com/yu78qM6p
838 2010-12-14 06:18:04 <ArtForz> soudns like your ox is having serious problems
839 2010-12-14 06:18:06 <ArtForz> *box
840 2010-12-14 06:18:36 <Stephen> actuallu
841 2010-12-14 06:18:41 <Stephen> that's an OOM error
842 2010-12-14 06:18:49 JStoker has joined
843 2010-12-14 06:18:50 <Stephen> Stupid amazon instance
844 2010-12-14 06:19:22 <ArtForz> *facepalm*
845 2010-12-14 06:20:23 <thrashaholic> Stephen: i would so write that javascript for V8. seriously. functionally, even.
846 2010-12-14 06:20:49 <thrashaholic> but im a sick fuck who loves him some hardcore JS action.
847 2010-12-14 06:21:09 <Stephen> thrashaholic: Nice to meet you. I'm your kin
848 2010-12-14 06:21:19 <thrashaholic> unless it's "OO" javascript, that makes me want to kill people.
849 2010-12-14 06:21:27 <Stephen> booo
850 2010-12-14 06:21:34 <ArtForz> meh, high level weenies
851 2010-12-14 06:21:35 <thrashaholic> javascript !== java
852 2010-12-14 06:21:39 <Stephen> It can be done properly
853 2010-12-14 06:21:51 <thrashaholic> it shouldn't be, though
854 2010-12-14 06:22:04 <thrashaholic> but im a lisper
855 2010-12-14 06:22:17 <thrashaholic> so, i much prefer to see template functions and such
856 2010-12-14 06:22:18 <Stephen> well, it all depends on how necessary it is to protect your variables
857 2010-12-14 06:22:24 <Stephen> but, give it a year
858 2010-12-14 06:22:36 <Stephen> Javascript is getting private and locked variabled
859 2010-12-14 06:22:40 <Stephen> variables
860 2010-12-14 06:22:48 <thrashaholic> great :/
861 2010-12-14 06:22:48 <ArtForz> wrote a simple TCP/IP stack in MIPS asm
862 2010-12-14 06:23:06 <thrashaholic> and it only took you 3 years, right, ArtForz ? :P
863 2010-12-14 06:23:20 <ArtForz> no, about a month
864 2010-12-14 06:23:29 <thrashaholic> gross
865 2010-12-14 06:23:39 <thrashaholic> i can do asm with the best of them, but i have a social life.
866 2010-12-14 06:23:41 <ArtForz> embedded system
867 2010-12-14 06:23:52 <thrashaholic> and dont deal with those either hehe
868 2010-12-14 06:24:10 <ArtForz> devs ran out of memory and the hardware was already finalized
869 2010-12-14 06:24:51 <Stephen> Am I wrong to think that it's completely insane to think that building rpc.cpp would hog up over 200MB?
870 2010-12-14 06:24:58 <ArtForz> no
871 2010-12-14 06:25:04 <ArtForz> thats g++ for you
872 2010-12-14 06:25:20 <Stephen> Basically, these small instances only have ~650MB of ram
873 2010-12-14 06:25:41 * Stephen goes process hunting
874 2010-12-14 06:25:46 <ArtForz> no swap?
875 2010-12-14 06:25:54 <Stephen> should be
876 2010-12-14 06:26:49 <ArtForz> I'm memory crazy
877 2010-12-14 06:26:49 <Stephen> hmmm
878 2010-12-14 06:26:52 <Stephen> apparently not
879 2010-12-14 06:27:13 <ArtForz> local dev box has 8GB ram ... less than a gig free
880 2010-12-14 06:27:14 <thrashaholic> 650 should be enough for everybody.
881 2010-12-14 06:27:22 <thrashaholic> jesus
882 2010-12-14 06:27:31 <thrashaholic> i have 2g, i have like....350m in use lol
883 2010-12-14 06:27:35 <ArtForz> and 1.6GB swap used
884 2010-12-14 06:27:44 <thrashaholic> no swap usage either of course
885 2010-12-14 06:27:49 <jcw9> I'm a little surprised that ~650 isn't enough!
886 2010-12-14 06:27:50 int0x27h_ has quit (Changing host)
887 2010-12-14 06:27:50 int0x27h_ has joined
888 2010-12-14 06:27:58 int0x27h_ is now known as int0x27h
889 2010-12-14 06:28:17 <jcw9> It's not like you're compiling mozilla or something
890 2010-12-14 06:28:36 <ArtForz> well, it's also my main workstation
891 2010-12-14 06:28:42 <jcw9> Ah, you have X11 running
892 2010-12-14 06:28:53 <thrashaholic> X11 takes up nothing
893 2010-12-14 06:29:05 <thrashaholic> in today's metrics
894 2010-12-14 06:29:13 <thrashaholic> FF is the big hog on my system
895 2010-12-14 06:29:29 <Stephen> How do I build a 600MB file in linux
896 2010-12-14 06:29:31 <ArtForz> 4 VMs active, Opera with about 120 tabs open, 3 firefox instances about 20 tabs each, dozens of ref docs and editors open on 6 workspaces
897 2010-12-14 06:29:35 <Stephen> random data, I don't care what
898 2010-12-14 06:29:37 <thrashaholic> without FF i run at about 100m
899 2010-12-14 06:29:56 <thrashaholic> but i have a super light WM
900 2010-12-14 06:30:06 <thrashaholic> ArtForz: jesus, information overload
901 2010-12-14 06:30:15 <Stephen> lol
902 2010-12-14 06:30:17 <thrashaholic> i hope you have 3 monitors for all that clutter
903 2010-12-14 06:30:34 <thrashaholic> and...editors?
904 2010-12-14 06:30:40 <thrashaholic> you should only be using ONE editor, sir!
905 2010-12-14 06:30:45 <thrashaholic> in a tmux/screen session !!
906 2010-12-14 06:30:51 <thrashaholic> heretic!
907 2010-12-14 06:31:02 <ArtForz> 2 monitors
908 2010-12-14 06:31:27 <ArtForz> 22" CRTs running 1600x1200
909 2010-12-14 06:31:47 <jcw9> That should keep you warm
910 2010-12-14 06:31:57 <ArtForz> not really
911 2010-12-14 06:32:04 <ArtForz> about 120W a pop
912 2010-12-14 06:32:07 <thrashaholic> overlapping window manager or tiled?
913 2010-12-14 06:32:30 <ArtForz> overlapping
914 2010-12-14 06:32:54 <thrashaholic> heh
915 2010-12-14 06:32:55 <thrashaholic> nuts
916 2010-12-14 06:33:10 <ArtForz> except I never have floating windows on main screen
917 2010-12-14 06:33:12 <thrashaholic> i only have 5 workspaces right now
918 2010-12-14 06:33:16 <Stephen> too bad, I use xvfb with an imagination interface, my screens get as big as they want, and X is headless!
919 2010-12-14 06:33:54 <thrashaholic> term, pidgin, www, video...i lied, 4
920 2010-12-14 06:34:50 <thrashaholic> but i have about 12 different terminals in my main tmux session
921 2010-12-14 06:34:56 <thrashaholic> 10 of them vim
922 2010-12-14 06:35:53 <ArtForz> vim ftw
923 2010-12-14 06:36:05 <thrashaholic> indeed, i even run vimperator
924 2010-12-14 06:36:11 <thrashaholic> i want EVERYTHING to use vim bindings, damnit
925 2010-12-14 06:36:44 <thrashaholic> my tmux uses screen-ish bindings though, because i find it hard to break a decade of muscle memory
926 2010-12-14 06:37:07 <thrashaholic> my window manager uses screen bindings too. just a different meta key
927 2010-12-14 06:38:22 <thrashaholic> i wish i could get links graphical mode to work not in framebuffer mode
928 2010-12-14 06:38:33 <thrashaholic> that's be the ultimate win right there
929 2010-12-14 06:38:55 Kiba has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
930 2010-12-14 06:39:03 Kiba` has joined
931 2010-12-14 06:39:09 <ne0futur> if screen and vim had the same bindings . . . could be a problem
932 2010-12-14 06:39:57 <thrashaholic> you couldnt if you wanted to
933 2010-12-14 06:40:28 <thrashaholic> what vm do you run , ArtForz ?
934 2010-12-14 06:40:46 <ArtForz> virtualbox OSE
935 2010-12-14 06:40:49 <thrashaholic> i want to build an uber-xen box one day
936 2010-12-14 06:40:54 <Kiba`> FSCK
937 2010-12-14 06:40:54 <Kiba`> I lost my artwork progress for tonight
938 2010-12-14 06:40:58 <ArtForz> with a few custom modifications
939 2010-12-14 06:41:16 <Diablo-D3> vbox is dead =/
940 2010-12-14 06:41:19 <Diablo-D3> oracle killed it
941 2010-12-14 06:41:22 <thrashaholic> with a dedicated windows gaming domU
942 2010-12-14 06:41:25 <Diablo-D3> vbox4 looks like is shaping up to steal money
943 2010-12-14 06:41:34 <thrashaholic> vbox used to be so good
944 2010-12-14 06:41:45 <thrashaholic> i prefer it to vmware for desktop stuff
945 2010-12-14 06:41:46 wumpus is now known as wumpus
946 2010-12-14 06:41:47 * Kiba` crys
947 2010-12-14 06:41:50 <ArtForz> meh, I like my windows gaming boxes native
948 2010-12-14 06:42:16 <thrashaholic> well i only play one game, so it's not worth it to drop coin on a seperate box, just a card that supports passthru
949 2010-12-14 06:42:23 <thrashaholic> (civ)
950 2010-12-14 06:45:07 Kiba` is now known as kiba
951 2010-12-14 06:46:33 eureka^ has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
952 2010-12-14 06:48:07 eureka^ has joined
953 2010-12-14 06:54:47 kaspar has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
954 2010-12-14 07:14:06 bananagrenade has quit (Quit: Page closed)
955 2010-12-14 07:23:37 StrangeCharm has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
956 2010-12-14 07:35:59 StrangeCharm has joined
957 2010-12-14 07:48:52 Toadyonps3 has quit (Quit: So if a tree falls on Bill Gates in the forest,would anyone really care?)
958 2010-12-14 08:05:17 <Amiga4000> hmkay,. the NVidia GeForce 480GTX went down to ~40Mhases/sec over time
959 2010-12-14 08:13:47 <ArtForz> what speeds are you getting?
960 2010-12-14 08:20:43 <Amiga4000> ~4000 khashes for the core i7 and ~35-40 Mhahses/sec for each of 2 GForce 480GTX on win7 64bit
961 2010-12-14 08:20:54 <ArtForz> that sounds awfully low
962 2010-12-14 08:21:12 <ArtForz> each 480 should get close to 100Mhash/s
963 2010-12-14 08:21:14 acous has joined
964 2010-12-14 08:21:23 <Amiga4000> but thats what they do
965 2010-12-14 08:21:42 <ArtForz> hurrrm, SLIed?
966 2010-12-14 08:21:46 <Amiga4000> without any tweaking, just setup the miner and go
967 2010-12-14 08:21:48 <Amiga4000> yeah, SLI
968 2010-12-14 08:22:07 <ArtForz> I'd have to google, but I think there's some problem with nvidias OpenCL driver and SLI
969 2010-12-14 08:23:20 <Amiga4000> so I just need to setup another machine with just one SLI. any link to a linux miner setup?
970 2010-12-14 08:25:34 <ArtForz> don't know any, but I think there's a howto on the forums
971 2010-12-14 08:26:27 <Amiga4000> ok, will dig into
972 2010-12-14 08:26:30 <ArtForz> maybe try disabling SLI before running the miner, might help
973 2010-12-14 08:26:39 <Amiga4000> could test, right
974 2010-12-14 08:26:50 <Amiga4000> but as I got a few machines with 480gtx...
975 2010-12-14 08:28:37 duck1123_ has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
976 2010-12-14 08:31:37 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: "and SLI"
977 2010-12-14 08:31:38 <Diablo-D3> lolol
978 2010-12-14 08:31:47 <Diablo-D3> the crossfire bug all over again
979 2010-12-14 08:32:07 <ArtForz> yup
980 2010-12-14 08:40:59 Granttt has joined
981 2010-12-14 08:43:54 Grantt has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
982 2010-12-14 08:44:21 redengin has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
983 2010-12-14 08:48:08 pankkake has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
984 2010-12-14 08:48:18 pankkake has joined
985 2010-12-14 08:51:12 AAA_awright_ has joined
986 2010-12-14 08:52:28 zygf has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
987 2010-12-14 08:52:46 zygf has joined
988 2010-12-14 08:54:23 ne0futur has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
989 2010-12-14 08:54:31 ne0futur has joined
990 2010-12-14 08:54:38 <jcw9> Have people gotten OpenCL working on OSX?
991 2010-12-14 08:55:09 AAA_awright has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
992 2010-12-14 08:56:02 <ArtForz> soemone has I think
993 2010-12-14 08:56:22 <ArtForz> Diablo posted about his miner now working on OSX
994 2010-12-14 08:57:32 AAA_awright_ is now known as AAA_awright
995 2010-12-14 08:57:38 CIA-84 has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
996 2010-12-14 08:57:46 <jcw9> Thanks, I'll see if I can navigate those god awful forums :)
997 2010-12-14 09:00:56 CIA-52 has joined
998 2010-12-14 09:02:47 <Amiga4000> a single 480gtx does 70 MHashes in same setup, diff system. 2 in a box does together the same, SLI en/disablked in driver does no change
999 2010-12-14 09:03:08 <ArtForz> sounds like driver bug to me
1000 2010-12-14 09:03:15 <ArtForz> is that using m0s miner or diablos?
1001 2010-12-14 09:03:44 <Amiga4000> m0s one, or, I check
1002 2010-12-14 09:04:13 <Amiga4000> I use http://www.newslobster.com/random/how-to-get-started-using-your-gpu-to-mine-for-bitcoins-on-windows as guide
1003 2010-12-14 09:04:27 <Amiga4000> m0s one, sure
1004 2010-12-14 09:04:44 <ArtForz> yeah
1005 2010-12-14 09:05:10 <Amiga4000> nvidia driver could be a issue, need to check on the dualcard setup
1006 2010-12-14 09:05:15 <Amiga4000> could be a few month old
1007 2010-12-14 09:06:25 <Amiga4000> after new PSU arrives I will check the 5870 card from AMD.
1008 2010-12-14 09:06:40 <ArtForz> but even 70Mh/s is kinda bad
1009 2010-12-14 09:07:38 <Amiga4000> win setup, quite plain
1010 2010-12-14 09:07:57 <Diablo-D3> jcw9: my miner works on osx now
1011 2010-12-14 09:10:58 CyanDynamo1 has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1012 2010-12-14 09:11:32 StrangeCharm has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1013 2010-12-14 09:22:08 <jcw9> Oh yes it does 9540101 khash/s here :)
1014 2010-12-14 09:22:08 altamic has joined
1015 2010-12-14 09:23:53 <jcw9> is that possible??
1016 2010-12-14 09:25:25 elgee has joined
1017 2010-12-14 09:25:39 elgee has left (lappy!~elgee@unaffiliated/elgee|)
1018 2010-12-14 09:28:58 <Diablo-D3> jcw9: nope
1019 2010-12-14 09:29:11 <Diablo-D3> and for the error condition, thats pretty low too
1020 2010-12-14 09:29:16 <Diablo-D3> silly osx is so slow
1021 2010-12-14 09:29:17 <jcw9> :)
1022 2010-12-14 09:29:21 <jcw9> 78641 khash/sec
1023 2010-12-14 09:29:34 <Diablo-D3> is that what you're getting now?
1024 2010-12-14 09:30:01 <jcw9> yea, my machine has pretty high IO load right now (running rsync locally). ATI Radeon HD 5750 (#1) (10 CU, local work size of 256)
1025 2010-12-14 09:30:11 <Diablo-D3> thats much more like it
1026 2010-12-14 09:30:20 <Diablo-D3> also, wtf apple
1027 2010-12-14 09:30:24 <Diablo-D3> quit renaming the devices
1028 2010-12-14 09:30:44 <Diablo-D3> AMD doesnt name them with their actual names, but instead the chip model
1029 2010-12-14 09:31:08 <Diablo-D3> Im glad I dont detect features based on that
1030 2010-12-14 09:31:25 <Diablo-D3> jcw9: btw, try using -w 64
1031 2010-12-14 09:31:28 <Diablo-D3> it should be faster
1032 2010-12-14 09:31:44 <jcw9> should I issue a sighalt to rsync?
1033 2010-12-14 09:31:49 <ArtForz> btw, 70MH/s for a 480 is kinda bad, theoretical peak is ~106Mh, expected ~100
1034 2010-12-14 09:31:50 <Diablo-D3> no
1035 2010-12-14 09:32:23 <Amiga4000> ok, driver update to 290.66 and now I run 3 480GTX each at 88MHashes/Sec
1036 2010-12-14 09:32:43 <ArtForz> thats sounds better
1037 2010-12-14 09:32:48 <Diablo-D3> jcw9: 5750 should be doing about 116 mhash/sec
1038 2010-12-14 09:32:49 <Amiga4000> even two in a box runs each at that speed and fans are kinda loud now
1039 2010-12-14 09:33:04 <Diablo-D3> Amiga4000: who's miner are you using?
1040 2010-12-14 09:33:05 <ArtForz> still far from the 95%+ peak we get from ATIs, but meh
1041 2010-12-14 09:33:07 <Amiga4000> m=s
1042 2010-12-14 09:33:14 <Amiga4000> m0s, sry
1043 2010-12-14 09:33:16 <Diablo-D3> try mine
1044 2010-12-14 09:33:25 <Amiga4000> noted in forum somewhere?
1045 2010-12-14 09:33:33 <Diablo-D3> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=1721.0;all
1046 2010-12-14 09:33:35 <bitbot> Official DiabloMiner Thread
1047 2010-12-14 09:33:41 <Amiga4000> ok
1048 2010-12-14 09:33:49 <ArtForz> so... a single 5850 is as fast as 3 GTX480s
1049 2010-12-14 09:33:51 <Amiga4000> somewhat later
1050 2010-12-14 09:34:02 <jcw9> seems pretty stable at 51800 w/ -w 64
1051 2010-12-14 09:34:03 chuck251 has left ()
1052 2010-12-14 09:34:37 <Amiga4000> Diablo-D3: does yours run on linux?
1053 2010-12-14 09:34:44 <Amiga4000> guess so ;-)
1054 2010-12-14 09:34:47 <Diablo-D3> I would hope so
1055 2010-12-14 09:34:51 <Diablo-D3> Ive never tried it on anything else
1056 2010-12-14 09:35:55 <jcw9> I'll give it a shot when my IO isn't totally borked.
1057 2010-12-14 09:36:49 <Diablo-D3> jcw9: btw, apple wrote their own opencl impl
1058 2010-12-14 09:36:55 <Diablo-D3> I have no clue how well it works
1059 2010-12-14 09:37:02 Guest24315 is now known as tg
1060 2010-12-14 09:37:08 <Diablo-D3> the 116 figure is for amd's impl
1061 2010-12-14 09:37:18 <jcw9> Like, their own compiler for OpenCL?
1062 2010-12-14 09:37:19 <Diablo-D3> apple's could just very well suck dick
1063 2010-12-14 09:37:23 <Diablo-D3> jcw9: yes.
1064 2010-12-14 09:37:29 <Diablo-D3> they have their own opengl stack too
1065 2010-12-14 09:39:45 <jcw9> I've messed around with it a little inside Quartz Composer to do like; Conway's game of life
1066 2010-12-14 09:40:27 <Diablo-D3> meh, you can do that in glsl
1067 2010-12-14 09:40:45 <jcw9> Yea, I don't really know much about either.
1068 2010-12-14 09:41:06 <jcw9> All I knew was that it was a lot easier than trying to do that logic in Quartz itself
1069 2010-12-14 09:43:36 josswr has left ()
1070 2010-12-14 09:52:53 jackmcbarn has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1071 2010-12-14 09:55:06 zeviroksz has joined
1072 2010-12-14 09:55:26 zeviroksz has left ()
1073 2010-12-14 09:56:24 jackmcbarn has joined
1074 2010-12-14 10:02:31 thrashaholic has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1075 2010-12-14 10:10:05 altamic has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1076 2010-12-14 10:11:24 altamic has joined
1077 2010-12-14 10:25:57 altamic has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1078 2010-12-14 10:29:34 altamic has joined
1079 2010-12-14 10:30:48 thrashaholic has joined
1080 2010-12-14 10:31:47 Grantt has joined
1081 2010-12-14 10:33:16 puddinpop has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
1082 2010-12-14 10:35:03 Granttt has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1083 2010-12-14 10:40:48 <jcw9> Well I managed to take my machine down :)
1084 2010-12-14 10:40:52 Granttt has joined
1085 2010-12-14 10:44:09 sjaak_ is now known as sjaak
1086 2010-12-14 10:44:48 Grantt has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1087 2010-12-14 10:44:57 darsk1ez has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1088 2010-12-14 10:45:27 darsk1ez has joined
1089 2010-12-14 10:48:18 xelister has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1090 2010-12-14 10:48:18 xelister has joined
1091 2010-12-14 10:48:18 darkskiez has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1092 2010-12-14 10:48:49 darkskiez has joined
1093 2010-12-14 10:50:09 xelister has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1094 2010-12-14 10:50:34 xelister has joined
1095 2010-12-14 10:54:04 AAA_awright_ has joined
1096 2010-12-14 10:54:49 noagendamarket has joined
1097 2010-12-14 10:55:22 noagendamarket has quit (Changing host)
1098 2010-12-14 10:55:22 noagendamarket has joined
1099 2010-12-14 10:57:36 AAA_awright has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1100 2010-12-14 11:02:07 Xunie` is now known as Xunie
1101 2010-12-14 11:02:11 Xunie has quit (Changing host)
1102 2010-12-14 11:02:11 Xunie has joined
1103 2010-12-14 11:03:56 TheAncientGoat has joined
1104 2010-12-14 11:07:21 RazielZ has joined
1105 2010-12-14 11:13:36 altamic has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1106 2010-12-14 11:16:08 noagendamarket has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1107 2010-12-14 11:16:34 kaspar has joined
1108 2010-12-14 11:19:53 kaspar has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1109 2010-12-14 11:21:34 zerwas_ is now known as zerwas
1110 2010-12-14 11:25:49 AAA_awright has joined
1111 2010-12-14 11:29:38 AAA_awright_ has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1112 2010-12-14 11:30:45 foobar_ has joined
1113 2010-12-14 11:43:12 <doublec> interesting discussion going on at a poker forum about genjix's bitcoin poker room idea
1114 2010-12-14 11:43:39 <doublec> related to this thread: http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=2262.0
1115 2010-12-14 11:43:41 <bitbot> Poker Meeting
1116 2010-12-14 11:43:51 <doublec> poker forum discussion: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/28/internet-poker/rake-free-open-poker-room-run-poker-community-938389/
1117 2010-12-14 11:48:04 Romain1 has joined
1118 2010-12-14 11:49:07 <UukGoblin> ;;bc,estimate
1119 2010-12-14 11:49:08 <gribble> 13656.11171876
1120 2010-12-14 11:49:19 <UukGoblin> ;;bc,stats
1121 2010-12-14 11:49:21 <gribble> Current Blocks: 97498 | Current Difficulty: 12252.03471156 | Next Difficulty At Block: 98783 | Next Difficulty In: 1285 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 1 day, 0 hours, 8 minutes, and 48 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 13656.11171876
1122 2010-12-14 11:54:05 Rh0nda_ is now known as Rhonda
1123 2010-12-14 11:54:08 <thrashaholic> 29.920 :)
1124 2010-12-14 11:54:08 Rhonda has quit (Changing host)
1125 2010-12-14 11:54:09 Rhonda has joined
1126 2010-12-14 11:54:20 <thrashaholic> no sleep 'till 30
1127 2010-12-14 11:54:25 <thrashaholic> hehe
1128 2010-12-14 11:55:16 <Romain1> who can lend me 0.7 BTC for a month?
1129 2010-12-14 11:55:27 <UukGoblin> Romain1, I can
1130 2010-12-14 11:55:39 <Romain1> do you want interest?
1131 2010-12-14 11:56:03 <UukGoblin> that'd be around 0.702 with interest... so no ;-]
1132 2010-12-14 11:56:08 darrob has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1133 2010-12-14 11:56:22 <Romain1> ok then
1134 2010-12-14 11:56:29 <Romain1> is this the first bitcoin loan?
1135 2010-12-14 11:56:35 Azetab has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1136 2010-12-14 11:56:38 <UukGoblin> no ;-]
1137 2010-12-14 11:56:45 <UukGoblin> I lent my friend 10BTC
1138 2010-12-14 11:56:48 <UukGoblin> he still didn't repay
1139 2010-12-14 11:57:09 <Romain1> i want to put them in the randomizer
1140 2010-12-14 11:57:14 <Romain1> 1 btc
1141 2010-12-14 11:58:20 <UukGoblin> did you not get anything from the faucet?
1142 2010-12-14 11:58:59 <Romain1> i got 0.05
1143 2010-12-14 11:59:34 thrashaholic has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1144 2010-12-14 12:00:51 Azetab has joined
1145 2010-12-14 12:01:14 <xelister> UukGoblin: hire some Pollocks to beat him up. ha. ha. ha.
1146 2010-12-14 12:01:15 <xelister> <_<
1147 2010-12-14 12:02:06 <Romain1> UukGoblin, can you send please to 17XW5LQ6EMU7gWC6HQajteauAP9QoaRdnB
1148 2010-12-14 12:02:09 thrashaholic has joined
1149 2010-12-14 12:03:34 <xelister> Romain1: btw, what for do you need / what are you buying?
1150 2010-12-14 12:04:02 <Romain1> i want to put 1 BTC in the randomizer
1151 2010-12-14 12:04:17 <xelister> url?
1152 2010-12-14 12:04:43 <Romain1> huh?
1153 2010-12-14 12:04:50 <doublec> what is the randomizer?
1154 2010-12-14 12:05:35 Azetab has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
1155 2010-12-14 12:05:54 <Romain1> http://fxnet.co.cc/index.php
1156 2010-12-14 12:05:57 Azetab has joined
1157 2010-12-14 12:07:04 <doublec> ah,right
1158 2010-12-14 12:07:23 <doublec> then you can spam^H^H^H^Hsend messages to friends to get more bitcoins ;)
1159 2010-12-14 12:10:06 darrob has joined
1160 2010-12-14 12:10:34 <Romain1> there shoul be something like a lottery: people put in 1BTC and then one is randomly chosend and send all the BTC
1161 2010-12-14 12:10:40 <Romain1> like a wheel game
1162 2010-12-14 12:11:14 <doublec> there is a lottery
1163 2010-12-14 12:11:37 <doublec> http://taabl.datlatec.com/
1164 2010-12-14 12:11:47 <lfm> Romain1: if you (or anyone) sends me 0.01 btc then I will send you 0.05 btc
1165 2010-12-14 12:11:57 <lfm> 1Cu9aY3j1yKLbySfLmtYu3DnzJ5AL43ocs
1166 2010-12-14 12:13:19 <lfm> you have 10 min
1167 2010-12-14 12:14:17 Granttt has quit (Changing host)
1168 2010-12-14 12:14:17 Granttt has joined
1169 2010-12-14 12:14:32 <doublec> how will you know who sent you the 0.01?
1170 2010-12-14 12:14:58 <lfm> doesnt matter who. I will send to Romain1
1171 2010-12-14 12:15:08 <doublec> ah, I see
1172 2010-12-14 12:15:57 <lfm> of course I could always send back to the from address
1173 2010-12-14 12:17:57 <Romain1> lfm, what is the point of that?
1174 2010-12-14 12:18:18 <doublec> to give you coins....
1175 2010-12-14 12:18:52 <lfm> Romain1: do you trust me with your 0.01? I might just keep it
1176 2010-12-14 12:19:58 <lfm> oh some one took the leap!
1177 2010-12-14 12:21:10 <Romain1> and if someone sends you 0.1 you send 0.5?
1178 2010-12-14 12:21:49 <lfm> I didnt say that, do you want me to?
1179 2010-12-14 12:22:37 <lfm> oh dear someone sent 0.05! now what should I do?
1180 2010-12-14 12:23:25 <Romain1> i might ask for 0.5 if you send 0.05
1181 2010-12-14 12:23:41 StrangeCharm has joined
1182 2010-12-14 12:24:10 <lfm> Oh, I send the first 0.05 to myself! hehe, Romain1 should have his payment now
1183 2010-12-14 12:24:38 <Romain1> yes, i do
1184 2010-12-14 12:26:28 <Romain1> i'm brainstorming to see how I could start with one BTC (or 2, but 1 being a rezerve) and invest them to win
1185 2010-12-14 12:26:52 <lfm> to win what?
1186 2010-12-14 12:27:18 <Romain1> the game
1187 2010-12-14 12:27:28 <Romain1> the game of money
1188 2010-12-14 12:27:43 <lfm> the lottery?
1189 2010-12-14 12:27:53 devon_hillard has joined
1190 2010-12-14 12:28:13 <devon_hillard> What's a good video card priced around $100?
1191 2010-12-14 12:28:15 <Romain1> note that i didn't said i want to be rich, I just want to see how fast i can expand my wallet from 1 to 1000 let's say
1192 2010-12-14 12:28:30 bitanarchy has joined
1193 2010-12-14 12:28:30 bitanarchy has quit (Changing host)
1194 2010-12-14 12:28:30 bitanarchy has joined
1195 2010-12-14 12:28:34 <lfm> devon_hillard: ati 5730?
1196 2010-12-14 12:28:39 <Romain1> lft, the taabl seems a very hard-to-win lottery
1197 2010-12-14 12:29:10 <bitanarchy> Can the bot tell me what and when the next difficulty is expected?
1198 2010-12-14 12:29:44 <lfm> devon_hillard: maybe 5570 woukd be easier to find
1199 2010-12-14 12:30:07 <bitanarchy> ;;difficulty
1200 2010-12-14 12:30:07 <gribble> Error: "difficulty" is not a valid command.
1201 2010-12-14 12:30:12 <bitanarchy> ;;help
1202 2010-12-14 12:30:12 <gribble> The bot responds when you start a line with the ! character. A good starting point for exploring the bot is the !facts command. You can also visit the bot's website for a list of help topics and documentation: http://gribble.sourceforge.net/
1203 2010-12-14 12:30:29 <devon_hillard> 5750 has double the performance of a 5570, but costs $40 more
1204 2010-12-14 12:30:38 <Romain1> I should make a loose-oriented lottery. 10 people enter the game, knowing that one will loose. And the rest take the looser's btcs.
1205 2010-12-14 12:30:40 <lfm> !help?
1206 2010-12-14 12:30:47 <sjaak> ;;bc,stats
1207 2010-12-14 12:30:47 <lfm> it lies
1208 2010-12-14 12:30:49 <gribble> Current Blocks: 97505 | Current Difficulty: 12252.03471156 | Next Difficulty At Block: 98783 | Next Difficulty In: 1278 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 0 days, 22 hours, 25 minutes, and 27 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 13704.56731505
1209 2010-12-14 12:31:50 <bitanarchy> Is there a website with this kind of info?
1210 2010-12-14 12:31:52 <finnomenon> Romain1: what stops somebody from buying 8 of the lottery tickets?
1211 2010-12-14 12:32:27 <Romain1> hmm
1212 2010-12-14 12:33:03 <lfm> devon_hillard: ya if you were looking at thr 5750 then just $10 more could get you 5770 which should be quite better
1213 2010-12-14 12:33:07 <Romain1> good question
1214 2010-12-14 12:34:05 <bitanarchy> I have a 5770, but I still have no incentive to make it generate bitcoins... :-) the noise :-P
1215 2010-12-14 12:35:50 Auctus has joined
1216 2010-12-14 12:35:50 <devon_hillard> I wish card manufacturers standardized a few screw positions
1217 2010-12-14 12:36:06 <devon_hillard> so that coolers were easier to manufacture
1218 2010-12-14 12:36:07 <Romain1> what hashrate has the 5770?
1219 2010-12-14 12:36:18 <Romain1> does it worth to put 180& in it?
1220 2010-12-14 12:36:19 <lfm> bitanarchy: 5770 are one of the better cards for bitcoin generation I have heard
1221 2010-12-14 12:36:44 <lfm> bitanarchy: price/performance wise, not pure performance
1222 2010-12-14 12:36:50 <bitanarchy> What btc rate can it do then?
1223 2010-12-14 12:37:10 <lfm> bitanarchy: I think aboit 150 mhash/sec
1224 2010-12-14 12:37:41 <xelister> 5770 have 160M
1225 2010-12-14 12:37:42 <bitanarchy> But what is the expectation time for block generation at that hash ratae?
1226 2010-12-14 12:37:51 <xelister> ;;bc,calc 160
1227 2010-12-14 12:37:51 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 160 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 10 years, 22 weeks, 2 days, 13 hours, 47 minutes, and 32 seconds
1228 2010-12-14 12:37:56 <xelister> ;;bc,calc 160000
1229 2010-12-14 12:37:56 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 160000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 3 days, 19 hours, 21 minutes, and 28 seconds
1230 2010-12-14 12:38:13 <lfm> ya 3 + days sounds about right
1231 2010-12-14 12:38:15 <xelister> bitanarchy: every ~4 days you get 50 BTC = 50*0.20 USD
1232 2010-12-14 12:38:36 <lfm> on average till the difficulty changes again
1233 2010-12-14 12:38:52 <xelister> yeah, so over a month it will be probably avg. like each 6 days
1234 2010-12-14 12:38:58 <xelister> and over 2 months, like each week+
1235 2010-12-14 12:39:00 <Granttt> is there any way to see the complete (bid side) orderbook @ mtgox ? (http://mtgox.com/code/data/getDepth.php seems to cutoff)
1236 2010-12-14 12:39:05 <xelister> so like.. 8*50*0.20 usd
1237 2010-12-14 12:39:18 <xelister> so around 60-80 usd
1238 2010-12-14 12:39:18 <bitanarchy> Can this be done with http://bit.ly/9QO26e
1239 2010-12-14 12:39:32 <xelister> if you leave computer running all the time around the clock in perfect conditions
1240 2010-12-14 12:40:00 <xelister> minus electricity bill, you profit around 30-50 USD. Now depending on if you really want the 5770 card anyway or not, it is or is not profitable
1241 2010-12-14 12:40:27 <lfm> bitanarchy: that might work. I thin the m0mochil miner is most commonly used tho
1242 2010-12-14 12:40:35 <xelister> bitanarchy: use Diablos miner
1243 2010-12-14 12:40:37 <xelister> or it's fork
1244 2010-12-14 12:40:53 <xelister> I recommend to use it's fork, as it says more what is going on
1245 2010-12-14 12:41:57 <bitanarchy> lfm: Is there a procedure for installing the m0mochil miner?
1246 2010-12-14 12:42:08 <xelister> bitanarchy: yes:
1247 2010-12-14 12:42:19 <xelister> 1. ignore it
1248 2010-12-14 12:42:24 <Romain1> bitanarchy, can i have 0.7 of your first generated btcs?
1249 2010-12-14 12:42:32 <xelister> 2. get Angel miner
1250 2010-12-14 12:42:37 <xelister> 3. install java jdk
1251 2010-12-14 12:42:38 <xelister> 4. run it
1252 2010-12-14 12:42:40 <xelister> 5. profit
1253 2010-12-14 12:42:45 <lfm> bitanarchy: sure, lots of different procedures. Not sure which ones work! grin. depends on your hardware and your OS
1254 2010-12-14 12:43:29 <bitanarchy> Don't want to stick too much time into it.
1255 2010-12-14 12:44:57 <lfm> I havt had much luck myself trying to use kubunutu 10.10
1256 2010-12-14 12:44:59 <Romain1> can I generate on a nvidia 6200?
1257 2010-12-14 12:45:04 <xelister> .j #java
1258 2010-12-14 12:45:27 <lfm> Romain1: yes but that card is so slow it is probably not worth the effort
1259 2010-12-14 12:45:37 <sjaak> Romain1: opencl/cuda is supported starting from the geforce 8 series afaik
1260 2010-12-14 12:45:54 <Romain1> on a 9500?
1261 2010-12-14 12:45:56 <lfm> Romain1: oh 6200, nom yiou need at least 8xxx from nvidia
1262 2010-12-14 12:46:22 <sjaak> i'm using a 8800gt, it gets about 16M with the remote cuda miner
1263 2010-12-14 12:46:42 <Romain1> what about 9500?
1264 2010-12-14 12:46:52 <sjaak> dunno, slightly better i guess
1265 2010-12-14 12:46:57 <lfm> Romain1: ya 9500 is real slow!
1266 2010-12-14 12:47:12 <Romain1> onther question then
1267 2010-12-14 12:47:21 <MT`AwAy> my card (9800GT) displays ~22M with Diablo's miner, but when I start it, the computer becomes unusable (need to press Ctrl-C and wait ~10 minutes to get control back)
1268 2010-12-14 12:47:43 <sjaak> yeah diablo's miner uses like 95% of the gpu
1269 2010-12-14 12:47:44 <Romain1> if i take the source code and translate bitcoin into bulgarian or romanian?
1270 2010-12-14 12:47:48 <sjaak> remote cuda about 80%
1271 2010-12-14 12:48:04 <MT`AwAy> Romain1: you don't need to take the source code, there are po files
1272 2010-12-14 12:48:11 <Romain1> grat
1273 2010-12-14 12:48:14 <Romain1> great
1274 2010-12-14 12:48:17 <MT`AwAy> Romain1: read the translation threads and download poedit
1275 2010-12-14 12:48:49 <MT`AwAy> (btw I don't know who did the french translation of bitcoin, but it has some errors)
1276 2010-12-14 12:49:16 <lfm> so fix em
1277 2010-12-14 12:49:22 <Romain1> MT`AwAy, can't find the po files
1278 2010-12-14 12:49:27 <MT`AwAy> Romain1: in the zip
1279 2010-12-14 12:49:44 <MT`AwAy> Romain1: in the "locale" directory
1280 2010-12-14 12:49:45 <lfm> po files are include with source (linux file?)
1281 2010-12-14 12:49:53 <MT`AwAy> I got them with my linux files
1282 2010-12-14 12:50:21 <lfm> you maybe already have them if you installed bitcoin
1283 2010-12-14 12:51:15 <devon_hillard> http://athousandnations.com/2010/12/14/startup-countries-seasteading-lightning-talk/
1284 2010-12-14 12:52:06 <devon_hillard> modern politics as the technological equivalent of a horse & buggy
1285 2010-12-14 12:52:07 <Romain1> found them but there is no en folder so i can translate
1286 2010-12-14 12:53:52 <MT`AwAy> Romain1: english texts are in all files
1287 2010-12-14 12:54:06 <MT`AwAy> Romain1: the .po files contain both english & [whatever] texts
1288 2010-12-14 12:54:15 <MT`AwAy> Satoshi at some point gave empty file, dunno where those are now
1289 2010-12-14 12:54:17 <bitanarchy> I would like to see a demographic chart with the distribution of the hash rate :-)
1290 2010-12-14 12:54:33 <MT`AwAy> bitanarchy: would be difficult to know where the hash rate is higher
1291 2010-12-14 12:54:50 <MT`AwAy> but doing a demographic chart with the number of clients would be easy
1292 2010-12-14 12:54:51 <MT`AwAy> really easy
1293 2010-12-14 12:54:56 <Romain1> yea
1294 2010-12-14 12:55:09 <lfm> bitanarchy: demographic? kinda hard since generation is quite annonymous
1295 2010-12-14 12:56:00 <bitanarchy> But the large generators like artforz are known
1296 2010-12-14 12:56:17 <MT`AwAy> who knows
1297 2010-12-14 12:56:29 <lfm> bitanarchy: ya but we cant really know which blocks he generates vs other people
1298 2010-12-14 12:56:58 darrob has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1299 2010-12-14 12:57:53 <bitanarchy> maybe it is possible to see where the ip addresses in irc.lfnet.org/bitcoin are located
1300 2010-12-14 12:58:31 <lfm> bitanarchy: ya just estimates might be possible with unknown accuracy
1301 2010-12-14 12:59:05 <lfm> BitCoinz: addresses in the irc chan might not be generating at all
1302 2010-12-14 13:00:22 <bitanarchy> are these gpu miners open source?
1303 2010-12-14 13:00:28 <lfm> and sites like ArtForz have many machines but just one ip address
1304 2010-12-14 13:00:46 <lfm> bitanarchy: some are, the opencl ones mostly
1305 2010-12-14 13:00:53 <Romain1> lfm thank you for the 0.05
1306 2010-12-14 13:01:01 <Romain1> 0.04 actually
1307 2010-12-14 13:03:38 darrob has joined
1308 2010-12-14 13:05:07 <lfm> Romain1: no need for thanks 0.05 btc os only worth about one penny
1309 2010-12-14 13:05:54 <Romain1> then everybody send me a penny
1310 2010-12-14 13:06:19 <Romain1> 17XW5LQ6EMU7gWC6HQajteauAP9QoaRdnB
1311 2010-12-14 13:06:35 <Romain1> we will see how many people will send me a penny in an hour
1312 2010-12-14 13:06:42 <Romain1> first bitcoin beggar
1313 2010-12-14 13:06:46 <lfm> if you do romain translate then we should pay you
1314 2010-12-14 13:07:21 <Romain1> donate, no payment. ugly term for open source
1315 2010-12-14 13:07:29 <Romain1> s/no/not
1316 2010-12-14 13:07:49 <UukGoblin> Romain1, definitely not the first ;-]
1317 2010-12-14 13:07:54 <lfm> I dont think pay is ugly
1318 2010-12-14 13:08:35 <Romain1> payment is to receive a service, donate is for receiveng a service
1319 2010-12-14 13:08:43 <Romain1> or product
1320 2010-12-14 13:09:05 <lfm> voluntary payment is still pay for service (translation)
1321 2010-12-14 13:11:12 genjix has joined
1322 2010-12-14 13:12:01 <Romain1> it's very easy to translate the .po file
1323 2010-12-14 13:12:12 <Romain1> anything i should do besides that?
1324 2010-12-14 13:12:12 <lfm> if you just beg for donation for no service then that is ugly I think
1325 2010-12-14 13:12:27 <Romain1> i'm translating the .po file
1326 2010-12-14 13:12:34 <lfm> wtg
1327 2010-12-14 13:13:52 Grantt has joined
1328 2010-12-14 13:13:58 Granttt has quit (Disconnected by services)
1329 2010-12-14 13:14:09 Grantt is now known as Granttt
1330 2010-12-14 13:14:11 Granttt has quit (Changing host)
1331 2010-12-14 13:14:11 Granttt has joined
1332 2010-12-14 13:14:17 <Romain1> wtg?
1333 2010-12-14 13:14:25 <Keefe> way to go
1334 2010-12-14 13:14:50 <lfm> Romain1: when you have done translation then post it or link to it in forum and you can ask for reward/donation/payment too
1335 2010-12-14 13:15:47 <Romain1> ok
1336 2010-12-14 13:15:51 <Romain1> what about diacritics
1337 2010-12-14 13:15:57 <Romain1> should I use them?
1338 2010-12-14 13:16:06 <lfm> they are ok, bitcoin uses utf
1339 2010-12-14 13:19:06 <genjix> hey gavinandresen, I have your new patch compiled and bitcoind running... Is there anything particular you want me to stress test?
1340 2010-12-14 13:21:15 <xelister> [2010-12-14_11:14:50] [score][good] 1-Cypress-core2: found a valid-looking solution: nonce=171111444 G=294922 H=0 ************************
1341 2010-12-14 13:21:24 <xelister> 1-Cypress-core2: SOLUTION SENT :-) Block found (1 blocks so far) and sent to server.
1342 2010-12-14 13:21:27 * xelister victory dance
1343 2010-12-14 13:21:58 <xelister> [2010-12-14_11:16:40] error: Executor on 1-Cypress-core1 locked up, restarting it
1344 2010-12-14 13:22:16 <xelister> haha, found solution 10 seconds before my card locked up.
1345 2010-12-14 13:22:32 <ArtForz> thats also weird
1346 2010-12-14 13:22:46 <ArtForz> my cards never ever stall
1347 2010-12-14 13:22:52 <xelister> no wait, 2 minutes before. nm
1348 2010-12-14 13:23:05 <xelister> ArtForz: Diablo's miner stalls when using other VTs and shit
1349 2010-12-14 13:23:12 <ArtForz> well, thats normal
1350 2010-12-14 13:23:22 <ArtForz> VT switching causes all X activity to freeze
1351 2010-12-14 13:23:34 <ArtForz> ATIs OCL runs via X messages
1352 2010-12-14 13:26:04 Zarutian has joined
1353 2010-12-14 13:26:20 <xelister> I mean, it still does NOT work when in other VT
1354 2010-12-14 13:26:33 Stephen has quit (Quit: Nova Initia: Rebuild the Underground! http://www.nova-initia.com)
1355 2010-12-14 13:26:34 <ArtForz> yes
1356 2010-12-14 13:26:46 <xelister> would be nice if program run on vt7 with display=:0 would still work even if vt8 display=10: is showing on a monitor
1357 2010-12-14 13:26:56 <ArtForz> doesnt work
1358 2010-12-14 13:27:15 <xelister> could if opencl would more directly use GPU, not via X server(s)
1359 2010-12-14 13:27:24 <ArtForz> yeah, but ATIs doesnt
1360 2010-12-14 13:27:28 <Diablo-D3> xelister: you're getting on my nerves again.
1361 2010-12-14 13:27:36 <xelister> that is why ati sucks cocks in hell
1362 2010-12-14 13:28:00 <ArtForz> nvidias does, but thats not exactly helpful as their hardware sucks balls
1363 2010-12-14 13:28:05 <xelister> Diablo-D3: with what? angel miner should be more friendly for people that are not experts in miming
1364 2010-12-14 13:28:07 <xelister> mining
1365 2010-12-14 13:28:12 <Diablo-D3> oh and btw
1366 2010-12-14 13:28:16 <Diablo-D3> even if you didnt need X running
1367 2010-12-14 13:28:24 <Diablo-D3> you still need it anyhow to deal with the awt fuckup in lwjgl
1368 2010-12-14 13:28:28 <Diablo-D3> (which isnt lwjgl's fault)
1369 2010-12-14 13:28:31 <xelister> ArtForz: perhaps there should be Atidia - ati's hardware, NV drivers, Amd quality controll
1370 2010-12-14 13:28:44 <Diablo-D3> but nvidia drivers are utter shit
1371 2010-12-14 13:28:51 <xelister> ati's are more shit
1372 2010-12-14 13:28:52 <ArtForz> yup
1373 2010-12-14 13:28:52 <Diablo-D3> worst closed source drivers Ive ever seen on linux
1374 2010-12-14 13:28:58 <xelister> ati's worse
1375 2010-12-14 13:29:01 <ArtForz> atis drivers arent THAT bad
1376 2010-12-14 13:29:04 <Diablo-D3> and ati and amd are the same company, douchebag.
1377 2010-12-14 13:29:12 <ArtForz> they only crashed my box once so far
1378 2010-12-14 13:29:18 <xelister> used nvidia for half year, 1 hang per 2-3 months
1379 2010-12-14 13:29:29 <Diablo-D3> I never get a hang on mine.
1380 2010-12-14 13:29:30 <Diablo-D3> Ever.
1381 2010-12-14 13:29:30 <da2ce7> what is the name of the opposite of printing money, whent he goverment burns dollars?
1382 2010-12-14 13:29:32 <ArtForz> nvidias crap regularly caused fun hangs and kernel oopses
1383 2010-12-14 13:29:36 <xelister> switched to RAGE!!!on:[ and now 1 lockup/hang per 2-3 days
1384 2010-12-14 13:29:38 StrangeCharm has quit (Quit: StrangeCharm)
1385 2010-12-14 13:30:10 <xelister> ArtForz: I have the reverse here
1386 2010-12-14 13:30:38 <Amiga4000> as long as you just game with them they are both fine. if you depend on other nice features, both suck. For sure.
1387 2010-12-14 13:31:07 <xelister> well I would like the drivers to not like, freeze my box. Both fail to avoid that. Ati is failing order of magnitude more
1388 2010-12-14 13:31:22 <ArtForz> accelerated video playback with nv + dualhead = BOOM
1389 2010-12-14 13:31:39 <xelister> ArtForz: each 3 or 4 VT switches with radeon give
1390 2010-12-14 13:31:46 <ArtForz> and I'm not talking about hardware decoding, plain ole overlay
1391 2010-12-14 13:31:47 <xelister> 2d3 roll:
1392 2010-12-14 13:32:12 <xelister> 2..4: destroy mouse cursor or random pixmals, bitmaps, textures in memory
1393 2010-12-14 13:32:19 <ArtForz> use a different console video driver
1394 2010-12-14 13:32:24 dishwara has joined
1395 2010-12-14 13:32:48 <Granttt> da2ce7: socialism ? ;)
1396 2010-12-14 13:32:48 <xelister> 5: some short freeze or other random shite
1397 2010-12-14 13:32:56 <dishwara> hi
1398 2010-12-14 13:33:13 <da2ce7> just writing an essay, wondering if there was a word for it.
1399 2010-12-14 13:33:13 <xelister> 6: totall computer lockup, video shows blank screen. keyboard works a bit. Needs sysrq+B
1400 2010-12-14 13:33:16 <dishwara> is there any way to get free bitcoins?
1401 2010-12-14 13:33:39 <lfm> dishwara: yes, look for faucet
1402 2010-12-14 13:34:26 <ArtForz> well, let's hope the radeon/gallium teams get their act together
1403 2010-12-14 13:39:09 <lfm> ;;bc,calc 2500000
1404 2010-12-14 13:39:10 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 2500000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 5 hours, 50 minutes, and 48 seconds
1405 2010-12-14 13:39:40 Romain1 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1406 2010-12-14 13:39:48 genjix has left ()
1407 2010-12-14 13:41:13 <appamatto> ;;bc,stats
1408 2010-12-14 13:41:15 <gribble> Current Blocks: 97513 | Current Difficulty: 12252.03471156 | Next Difficulty At Block: 98783 | Next Difficulty In: 1270 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 0 days, 21 hours, 19 minutes, and 2 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 13698.40418711
1409 2010-12-14 13:41:53 dishwara has quit (Quit: Page closed)
1410 2010-12-14 13:42:02 Grantt has joined
1411 2010-12-14 13:42:03 Granttt has quit (Disconnected by services)
1412 2010-12-14 13:42:07 Grantt is now known as Granttt
1413 2010-12-14 13:42:12 Granttt has quit (Changing host)
1414 2010-12-14 13:42:12 Granttt has joined
1415 2010-12-14 13:43:43 <Amiga4000> ;;bc,calc 100000000
1416 2010-12-14 13:43:44 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 100000000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 8 minutes and 46 seconds
1417 2010-12-14 13:43:55 <Amiga4000> nicely
1418 2010-12-14 13:47:27 <pankkake> ;;bc,calc 4000
1419 2010-12-14 13:47:28 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 4000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 21 weeks, 5 days, 6 hours, 18 minutes, and 42 seconds
1420 2010-12-14 13:47:33 <pankkake> :(
1421 2010-12-14 13:47:54 <BitCoinz> xelister offered me help for 50 coins
1422 2010-12-14 13:49:45 <Amiga4000> ;;bc,calc 100000
1423 2010-12-14 13:49:46 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 100000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 6 days, 2 hours, 10 minutes, and 20 seconds
1424 2010-12-14 13:50:23 <xelister> yeap
1425 2010-12-14 13:50:42 <xelister> BitCoinz: I will have some time later tonight on jabber.. or actually also right now I guess Im around
1426 2010-12-14 13:53:39 <xelister> BitCoinz: ping me when you have time and I will help you in background (while doing also more actuall work :)
1427 2010-12-14 13:57:14 cykros has joined
1428 2010-12-14 13:57:25 <cykros> greetings.
1429 2010-12-14 13:58:36 <cykros> so, heard about bitcoin awhile ago, then saw that there's been some connection with wikileaks indirectly, as well as that EFF is accepting bitcoin donations, AND that I can transfer linden dollars to bitcoin...so i started using it. One question: is there a cli/headless version?
1430 2010-12-14 13:59:16 <ArtForz> yup, bitcoind
1431 2010-12-14 13:59:35 <cykros> ahh, sweet
1432 2010-12-14 13:59:56 <cykros> i'm kind of the digital equivalent of homeless...jumping computer to computer...the closest thing to my home computer is a shell account, so that should help matters.
1433 2010-12-14 13:59:59 <cykros> thanks
1434 2010-12-14 14:00:39 duck1123 has joined
1435 2010-12-14 14:01:39 <xelister> cykros: btw, on CPU do not mine
1436 2010-12-14 14:01:44 <xelister> cykros: just buy bitcoins
1437 2010-12-14 14:02:57 <cykros> why's that?
1438 2010-12-14 14:02:59 <lfm> or make mybitcoin account
1439 2010-12-14 14:04:23 <BitCoinz> ;;,bc,calc 2500000
1440 2010-12-14 14:04:24 <gribble> Error: ",bc,calc" is not a valid command.
1441 2010-12-14 14:04:51 <edcba> ;calc 3000
1442 2010-12-14 14:05:02 <edcba> ;bc,calc 3000
1443 2010-12-14 14:05:11 <BitCoinz> ;;bc,calc,2500000
1444 2010-12-14 14:05:12 <gribble> Error: "bc,calc,2500000" is not a valid command.
1445 2010-12-14 14:05:27 <BitCoinz> :S
1446 2010-12-14 14:05:41 <lfm> ;;bc,calc 2400000
1447 2010-12-14 14:05:43 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 2400000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 6 hours, 5 minutes, and 25 seconds
1448 2010-12-14 14:05:58 <edcba> ;;bc,stats
1449 2010-12-14 14:06:01 <gribble> Current Blocks: 97516 | Current Difficulty: 12252.03471156 | Next Difficulty At Block: 98783 | Next Difficulty In: 1267 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 0 days, 20 hours, 58 minutes, and 34 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 13690.71897841
1450 2010-12-14 14:06:06 <BitCoinz> :D
1451 2010-12-14 14:06:18 <ArtForz> ;;bc,calc 15750000
1452 2010-12-14 14:06:19 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 15750000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 55 minutes and 41 seconds
1453 2010-12-14 14:07:17 <BitCoinz> ;;bc,calc, 2500000
1454 2010-12-14 14:07:18 <gribble> Error: "bc,calc," is not a valid command.
1455 2010-12-14 14:07:39 <lfm> BitCoinz: watch the puncuation carefully
1456 2010-12-14 14:07:47 <BitCoinz> ;;bc,calc 2500000
1457 2010-12-14 14:07:48 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 2500000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 5 hours, 50 minutes, and 48 seconds
1458 2010-12-14 14:07:57 <BitCoinz> i got it
1459 2010-12-14 14:08:03 <achristianson> ;;bc,calc 5
1460 2010-12-14 14:08:04 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 5 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 333 years, 37 weeks, 6 days, 9 hours, 21 minutes, and 19 seconds
1461 2010-12-14 14:08:23 <BitCoinz> i am not getting that old..lol
1462 2010-12-14 14:08:53 <lfm> achristianson: that is pretty slow
1463 2010-12-14 14:09:03 <achristianson> lol
1464 2010-12-14 14:09:05 <BitCoinz> pretty?
1465 2010-12-14 14:09:07 <BitCoinz> lol
1466 2010-12-14 14:09:18 <BitCoinz> thats eternally
1467 2010-12-14 14:09:26 <lfm> 486?
1468 2010-12-14 14:09:29 <achristianson> I just need to install more vms running bitcoind... right? right?
1469 2010-12-14 14:09:37 <ArtForz> ported bitcoin to 8051? ;)
1470 2010-12-14 14:10:45 duck1123_ has joined
1471 2010-12-14 14:11:08 <BitCoinz> hey art...is my internetconnection sufficient for that? 1024kb/s op 4096 down?
1472 2010-12-14 14:11:20 <BitCoinz> up*
1473 2010-12-14 14:11:34 <cykros> so is the reason not to mine because its just really slow?
1474 2010-12-14 14:11:36 <ArtForz> should be fine
1475 2010-12-14 14:11:42 <cykros> or is there another reason for not doing so?
1476 2010-12-14 14:12:13 <lfm> cykros: costs you electric power to mine
1477 2010-12-14 14:12:25 <ArtForz> really slow, not worth the wasted power
1478 2010-12-14 14:12:48 <BitCoinz> ArtForz?
1479 2010-12-14 14:12:54 <xelister> BitCoinz: sure it is fine, bitcoin uses just little of bandwitdh
1480 2010-12-14 14:13:05 <ArtForz> yeah, bitcoin uses pretty much nothing in bandwidth
1481 2010-12-14 14:13:11 <cykros> ahh, i see
1482 2010-12-14 14:13:19 <BitCoinz> how do i get bitcoins in euro's in my hands best?
1483 2010-12-14 14:13:54 <cykros> though, if the value of the coins eventually jumps up, it could be seen as an investment at a loss for long term gains...
1484 2010-12-14 14:14:15 <lfm> cykros: maybe
1485 2010-12-14 14:14:15 <cykros> and either the value will be going up, or the project will eventually be deemed a relative failure. that seems to be the two options...
1486 2010-12-14 14:14:21 <ArtForz> yet it'd still be cheaper to buy coins at $0.20
1487 2010-12-14 14:14:22 <BitCoinz> it might goes down too
1488 2010-12-14 14:14:28 duck1123 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1489 2010-12-14 14:15:01 <cykros> artforz: yes, but that's assuming a relative limit. as we've seen before with internet phenomena, things can scale up surprisingly fast to surprising heights.
1490 2010-12-14 14:15:15 <cykros> idk. thanks for the heads up either way, gives me something to consider.
1491 2010-12-14 14:15:17 <ArtForz> and cpu will still be slow
1492 2010-12-14 14:15:24 <lfm> cykros: and they can crash too
1493 2010-12-14 14:15:32 <ArtForz> with a really fast CPU ,,bc,calc 16000000
1494 2010-12-14 14:15:33 <gribble> (bc,calc <an alias, 1 argument>) -- Alias for "echo The average time to generate a block at $1 Khps, given current difficulty of [bc,diff], is [time elapsed [math calc 1/((2**224-1)/[bc,diff]*$1*1000/2**256)]]".
1495 2010-12-14 14:15:35 <ArtForz> err
1496 2010-12-14 14:15:36 <cykros> lfm, certainly. its speculation.
1497 2010-12-14 14:15:40 <ArtForz> ;;bc,calc 16000000
1498 2010-12-14 14:15:41 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 16000000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 54 minutes and 48 seconds
1499 2010-12-14 14:16:09 <lfm> ArtForz: more overclocking?
1500 2010-12-14 14:16:13 <ArtForz> errr
1501 2010-12-14 14:16:15 <ArtForz> ;;bc,calc 16000
1502 2010-12-14 14:16:16 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 16000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 5 weeks, 3 days, 1 hour, 34 minutes, and 40 seconds
1503 2010-12-14 14:16:28 <ArtForz> damn hash/khash mixups
1504 2010-12-14 14:16:31 <cykros> idk. i leave extra programs that are sometimes relatively cpu intensive with no gain at all. even a gain of .5 cents every 2 days is something
1505 2010-12-14 14:17:00 <cykros> heh, i have $13USD value in linden dollars that i made by doing traffic generation on secondlife.
1506 2010-12-14 14:17:03 <ArtForz> so.. 38 days @ 125W for ... 50BTC
1507 2010-12-14 14:17:12 <cykros> ie, leaving second life idling most of the time, moving every 10 minutes.
1508 2010-12-14 14:17:41 <cykros> so unless what you're telling me is that bitcoin is more cpu intensive than secondlife, it's not really a concern.
1509 2010-12-14 14:17:49 <ArtForz> thats 114kWh, at $0.10/kWh that comes out to $0.23/BTC
1510 2010-12-14 14:17:59 <xelister> cykros: bitcoin eats all cpu
1511 2010-12-14 14:18:03 <zygf> well you didn't account for difficulty rising
1512 2010-12-14 14:18:09 <ArtForz> yep
1513 2010-12-14 14:18:09 <lfm> cykros: it is more cpu/gpu intensive than second life
1514 2010-12-14 14:18:25 <ArtForz> ;;bc,calc 535000
1515 2010-12-14 14:18:26 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 535000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 1 day, 3 hours, 19 minutes, and 19 seconds
1516 2010-12-14 14:19:12 <ArtForz> thats a HD5970, 27.3h @ 300W = 8.2kWh
1517 2010-12-14 14:19:15 <cykros> are there any tools anyone knows of that can kind of do the cpu equivalent to QoS, limiting its use?
1518 2010-12-14 14:20:08 <lfm> cykros: in btc you are paid for work done so if you limit cpu then you limit btc produced\
1519 2010-12-14 14:20:34 <ArtForz> so GPU mining uses < less than 1/12 power compared to a efficient CPU ...
1520 2010-12-14 14:20:42 Grantt has joined
1521 2010-12-14 14:20:45 <cykros> yea, but it would allow me to pick a constant rate to allow, or even set rules based on time and other activity, so that i could leave it running all the time
1522 2010-12-14 14:20:50 Granttt has quit (Disconnected by services)
1523 2010-12-14 14:20:52 Grantt is now known as Granttt
1524 2010-12-14 14:20:55 <cykros> rather than remembering to set it whenever i leave the computer.
1525 2010-12-14 14:20:56 Granttt has quit (Changing host)
1526 2010-12-14 14:20:56 Granttt has joined
1527 2010-12-14 14:21:13 <lfm> cykros: true
1528 2010-12-14 14:21:17 <cykros> most of what i do is basic browsing or terminal work anyway.
1529 2010-12-14 14:21:32 <zygf> so just nice it up?
1530 2010-12-14 14:21:56 <cykros> essentially. give it the cpu use i have to spare, but not let it get in the way of my active processes.
1531 2010-12-14 14:22:07 <zygf> nice -n19 bitcoind
1532 2010-12-14 14:22:25 <cykros> oh right, nice, as in the program. i forgot about that
1533 2010-12-14 14:22:29 <cykros> good call
1534 2010-12-14 14:22:35 <lfm> zygf: it does that itself alread iirc
1535 2010-12-14 14:23:49 <ArtForz> yup
1536 2010-12-14 14:23:50 <lfm> also nice doesnt effect gpu
1537 2010-12-14 14:23:53 <cykros> ooh, and there's the option to use a gpu for mining as well...that's even more reasonable given my using terminal for most things...not exactly all that gpu intensive
1538 2010-12-14 14:25:23 <cykros> yea, it does actually run at idle priority by default
1539 2010-12-14 14:25:55 bitanarchy has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.6.13/20101203075014])
1540 2010-12-14 14:26:02 nelisky has joined
1541 2010-12-14 14:28:16 akem has joined
1542 2010-12-14 14:28:16 <da2ce7> ok bed time. some food for thought: http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=2267.0 This post contains only the parts that change the bticoin proticol. The main meat happens after this.
1543 2010-12-14 14:28:17 akem has quit (Changing host)
1544 2010-12-14 14:28:17 akem has joined
1545 2010-12-14 14:28:19 <bitbot> On bitcoin, and BitDNS
1546 2010-12-14 14:29:00 <cykros> well, thanks for the help. gonna go grab some breakfast now
1547 2010-12-14 14:29:11 <lfm> i think bitdns should be totally separate
1548 2010-12-14 14:29:12 cykros has quit (Quit: leaving)
1549 2010-12-14 14:29:20 5EXABXA4C has joined
1550 2010-12-14 14:29:32 5EXABXA4C is now known as dwdollar
1551 2010-12-14 14:29:50 StrangeCharm has joined
1552 2010-12-14 14:30:08 <xelister> lfm: I think there should be overall an auction system
1553 2010-12-14 14:30:13 <xelister> distributed auctioning system
1554 2010-12-14 14:30:20 <xelister> to determinate ownership of resources
1555 2010-12-14 14:30:29 <xelister> including DNS, but not limited to :)
1556 2010-12-14 14:30:33 <da2ce7> lfm, one has to be carefull about not creating false markets. A market should only exzist over a restricted resorce.
1557 2010-12-14 14:30:44 <xelister> yes
1558 2010-12-14 14:30:57 <lfm> xelister: I dont know how auction would work
1559 2010-12-14 14:31:03 <xelister> this is also why drug prohibition allows criminals and gov thungs to gain power ;) da2ce7
1560 2010-12-14 14:31:17 <kiba> it doesn't mean that some jackass can take my domain after I brought it, right?
1561 2010-12-14 14:31:19 <xelister> lfm: I should write RFC in free time
1562 2010-12-14 14:31:24 <da2ce7> anyway my spelling is getting atrocious, i need to sleep
1563 2010-12-14 14:31:41 <xelister> kiba: i my idea? yea, well, after like 100 years why not
1564 2010-12-14 14:31:47 <lfm> if you can still spell atrocious you are doing well
1565 2010-12-14 14:31:52 RichardG has joined
1566 2010-12-14 14:32:07 <da2ce7> lol checked it... but got it right anyway.
1567 2010-12-14 14:32:37 <bonsaikitten> mmh, motivating people to cheat ;)
1568 2010-12-14 14:32:48 <ArtForz> I kinda like satoshis idea of piggybacking on bitcoin hashrate
1569 2010-12-14 14:32:54 <xelister> ArtForz: hm?
1570 2010-12-14 14:33:17 <edcba> what ?
1571 2010-12-14 14:33:20 <edcba> url ?
1572 2010-12-14 14:33:24 <ArtForz> it's possible to create a miner that produces alternate chains without doing anyx extra work
1573 2010-12-14 14:33:43 <ArtForz> and without modifying the bitcoin chain at all
1574 2010-12-14 14:33:45 * edcba doesn't understand
1575 2010-12-14 14:33:52 <da2ce7> yep, just include a hash of the other blocks generated in the bitcoin block chain.
1576 2010-12-14 14:33:56 <ArtForz> kinda
1577 2010-12-14 14:34:06 <edcba> but why would we want to do that ?
1578 2010-12-14 14:34:24 <ArtForz> simple, otherchain timestamping is backed by the same hashrate as bitcoin
1579 2010-12-14 14:34:43 <ArtForz> = you're not splitting miner hashrate between X concurrent POW chains
1580 2010-12-14 14:35:04 <lfm> ya, if you just need a timestamp we cant really prevent it
1581 2010-12-14 14:35:15 <da2ce7> merkle hash trees. the blocks are under the tree insted of over it.
1582 2010-12-14 14:35:18 <ArtForz> why the fuck would you want to prevent it?
1583 2010-12-14 14:35:29 <ArtForz> nope, that'd stil need modifying the bitcoin chain
1584 2010-12-14 14:35:36 <lfm> ArtForz: its like spam it seems
1585 2010-12-14 14:35:42 <ArtForz> WTF?
1586 2010-12-14 14:35:52 <ArtForz> it's a completely seperate fucking chain
1587 2010-12-14 14:36:19 <lfm> ArtForz: I mean those timestamps like Satoshi described
1588 2010-12-14 14:37:02 <ArtForz> basic trick is simple
1589 2010-12-14 14:37:17 Grantt has joined
1590 2010-12-14 14:37:21 <da2ce7> well my proposal is agnostic to other chains. They may or may-not exist. It dosn't matter, the stuff I'm planing needs to have transaction groups. and active Templates.
1591 2010-12-14 14:37:48 <ArtForz> otherchain block header references bitcoin block, is signed to pubkey of coinbase TX
1592 2010-12-14 14:39:19 <ArtForz> with otherchain difficulty < bitcoin difficulty, miners also broadcast otherchain-bitcoin blocks that made otherchain diff but not bitcoin diff to otherchain network
1593 2010-12-14 14:40:13 <ArtForz> = otherchain can have diff higher or lower than bitcoin, miners dont have to do extra hashing, bitcoin protocol is unchanged
1594 2010-12-14 14:40:14 albatross_ has joined
1595 2010-12-14 14:41:25 Granttt has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1596 2010-12-14 14:42:49 Romain1 has joined
1597 2010-12-14 14:43:36 <Romain1> hi. I finished the romanian translation: http://bit.ly/ffPJZY
1598 2010-12-14 14:45:16 <MT`AwAy> Romain1: post it in the forum
1599 2010-12-14 14:45:25 <MT`AwAy> oh
1600 2010-12-14 14:45:26 <MT`AwAy> sorry
1601 2010-12-14 14:45:26 <MT`AwAy> XD
1602 2010-12-14 14:45:44 <MT`AwAy> ok it's right at the good place
1603 2010-12-14 14:45:47 <MT`AwAy> should be good enough I guess
1604 2010-12-14 14:46:13 <Romain1> what is the .mo file?
1605 2010-12-14 14:46:24 <Romain1> i did not translated that
1606 2010-12-14 14:49:05 <Romain1> will it be added on the website?
1607 2010-12-14 14:52:04 <edcba> but otherchain can be modified at will by block generator
1608 2010-12-14 14:52:21 <ArtForz> how?
1609 2010-12-14 14:52:39 <ArtForz> otherchain clients obviously reject invalid otherchain blocks
1610 2010-12-14 14:53:25 <edcba> otherchain isn't as strong as main bitcoin chain
1611 2010-12-14 14:53:48 <RichardG> how would I get a list of all addresses on bitcoind (command-line)?
1612 2010-12-14 14:54:13 <sjaak> ./bitcoind help
1613 2010-12-14 14:54:16 <ArtForz> not quite as strong, but if mining it provides any kind of profit a large % of miners will switch to mining both chains quickly
1614 2010-12-14 14:54:23 altamic has joined
1615 2010-12-14 14:54:42 <edcba> i think you need a reference to otherchain in block/tx of main chain
1616 2010-12-14 14:54:46 <ArtForz> why?
1617 2010-12-14 14:55:00 <edcba> because then you can't modify it as easily
1618 2010-12-14 14:55:21 ebel has joined
1619 2010-12-14 14:55:22 <edcba> by ref i mean some hash of course
1620 2010-12-14 14:55:32 <ArtForz> you shouldnt have to
1621 2010-12-14 14:55:53 <edcba> i'd really prefer to have some metadata fields in bitcoin chains
1622 2010-12-14 14:56:00 <ebel> Is this 'bitcoin generator calculator' accurate http://www.alloscomp.com/bitcoin/calculator.php i.e. have people heard of it/used it?
1623 2010-12-14 14:56:11 <edcba> then you could attach anything to bitcoin timestamp service
1624 2010-12-14 14:56:39 <ArtForz> well, if you want a clean impl, metachain containing a merkle tree of different chain block headers
1625 2010-12-14 14:56:59 <edcba> ebel: everytime i do'nt remember the bot command syntax here///
1626 2010-12-14 14:57:00 <edcba> ...
1627 2010-12-14 14:57:18 <edcba> yes i want a clean impl if possible :)
1628 2010-12-14 14:57:46 <ArtForz> except you'd be throwing out the whole bitcoin chain
1629 2010-12-14 14:58:03 <Diablo-D3> ;;bc,calc 75000
1630 2010-12-14 14:58:03 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 75000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 1 week, 1 day, 2 hours, 53 minutes, and 47 seconds
1631 2010-12-14 14:58:24 <edcba> isn't there some version field ? :)
1632 2010-12-14 14:58:52 <edcba> and we're still in beta afaik
1633 2010-12-14 14:59:34 <ArtForz> yeah, let's just throw out a hash chain containing about 1/10 the total CPU time spent for S@H
1634 2010-12-14 15:01:26 <ebel> edcba: ah cool.
1635 2010-12-14 15:03:41 <edcba> i don't mean throw it out
1636 2010-12-14 15:03:52 <edcba> i would keep the generated bitcoins
1637 2010-12-14 15:04:05 <ArtForz> you can't
1638 2010-12-14 15:04:11 <edcba> of course i can
1639 2010-12-14 15:04:38 <ebel> (bitcoin newbie here), do i understand this right, that 'getting 50 btc' is almost random? i.e. you can generate for 5 mins and get some?
1640 2010-12-14 15:04:41 <edcba> bool v3mandatory = (blockcount > 200000);
1641 2010-12-14 15:04:49 <edcba> ebel: yes
1642 2010-12-14 15:04:51 <ArtForz> cool
1643 2010-12-14 15:05:38 <ebel> edcba: cool. I though stopping generation would 'throw away half your work' and have to start again.
1644 2010-12-14 15:05:50 <ArtForz> so I spend 50k of old coins at merchant A still running on bitcoinV1, and the same 50k at another merchant in bitcoinV2, where do I sign up?
1645 2010-12-14 15:06:11 <edcba> lol
1646 2010-12-14 15:06:18 <edcba> no it wouldn't work like that
1647 2010-12-14 15:06:27 <appamatto> more metachain talk?
1648 2010-12-14 15:06:30 <ArtForz> yep
1649 2010-12-14 15:07:26 <edcba> ok we need a version polling
1650 2010-12-14 15:07:28 <appamatto> get anywhere? :p
1651 2010-12-14 15:07:32 <edcba> just to know who is up2date
1652 2010-12-14 15:07:32 <ArtForz> you can't move to a different block hashing method incorporating the existing chain, unless you magically get EVERYONE to switch at the same time
1653 2010-12-14 15:07:43 <ArtForz> and considering we still have <0.3.8 nodes ...
1654 2010-12-14 15:08:09 <RichardG> I still use 0.3.12, that's what is available for 32-bit CentOS
1655 2010-12-14 15:08:14 <edcba> i have still francs at home, doesn't mean i can use them...
1656 2010-12-14 15:08:28 Amiga4000 is now known as amiga4000
1657 2010-12-14 15:08:46 nelisky has quit (Quit: nelisky)
1658 2010-12-14 15:09:14 Grantt is now known as Granttt
1659 2010-12-14 15:09:16 Granttt has quit (Changing host)
1660 2010-12-14 15:09:17 Granttt has joined
1661 2010-12-14 15:09:27 <lfm> isnt version of each connect logged? it used to be
1662 2010-12-14 15:09:33 <ArtForz> it is
1663 2010-12-14 15:10:06 <lfm> that gives sort of survey then
1664 2010-12-14 15:11:18 darrob has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1665 2010-12-14 15:11:26 <albatross_> ;;bc,calc 1
1666 2010-12-14 15:11:27 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 1 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 1668 years, 33 weeks, 0 days, 22 hours, 46 minutes, and 37 seconds
1667 2010-12-14 15:11:33 <albatross_> ;;bc,calc 0.1
1668 2010-12-14 15:11:34 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 0.1 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 16686 years, 18 weeks, 3 days, 11 hours, 46 minutes, and 15 seconds
1669 2010-12-14 15:12:21 <ebel> ;;bc,calc 1605230
1670 2010-12-14 15:12:22 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 1605230 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 9 hours, 6 minutes, and 21 seconds
1671 2010-12-14 15:12:32 <lfm> albatross_: seems like machine with 0.1 khash/s could be called albatross
1672 2010-12-14 15:13:04 <ebel> oh lame, bitcoind gethashespersec gives values in raw hashs, no khashs (right?)
1673 2010-12-14 15:13:20 <tcatm> yep
1674 2010-12-14 15:13:23 <lfm> ebel: ya
1675 2010-12-14 15:13:28 <ebel> ;;bc,calc 1605
1676 2010-12-14 15:13:29 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 1605 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 1 year, 2 weeks, 0 days, 11 hours, 19 minutes, and 7 seconds
1677 2010-12-14 15:13:43 glassresistor has joined
1678 2010-12-14 15:13:45 <ebel> ah, that's considerable slower than I thought :P
1679 2010-12-14 15:13:50 darrob has joined
1680 2010-12-14 15:14:45 <RichardG> as I asked on #bitcoin-discussion to no reply, would anyone be interested on a non-automated lottery where the prize is based on the money raised with bets?
1681 2010-12-14 15:14:57 Grantt has joined
1682 2010-12-14 15:14:58 Granttt has quit (Disconnected by services)
1683 2010-12-14 15:15:00 Grantt is now known as Granttt
1684 2010-12-14 15:15:02 Granttt has quit (Changing host)
1685 2010-12-14 15:15:03 Granttt has joined
1686 2010-12-14 15:15:11 <albatross_> hey tcatm, why does the order book round to 3 digits
1687 2010-12-14 15:15:41 <tcatm> albatross_: That's to make it more readable.
1688 2010-12-14 15:15:53 <lfm> albatross_: it needs to have a limit somewhere?
1689 2010-12-14 15:16:25 thrashaholic has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1690 2010-12-14 15:16:34 <albatross_> tcatm: i take it you group together two orders that are 0.2345 and 0.2346 into 0.234?
1691 2010-12-14 15:16:50 thrashaholic has joined
1692 2010-12-14 15:17:18 <cosurgi> ok.... I am about to insert ATI, Radeon 5830
1693 2010-12-14 15:17:27 <tcatm> I do, real rounding, but that's the basic function, yep.
1694 2010-12-14 15:17:36 <cosurgi> I'll need a bit of your help in configureing OpenCL on debian squeeze :)
1695 2010-12-14 15:17:54 <RichardG> if anyone is interested on the lotto concept, send 2.50 to 17WesZnaQgpqvaGWg1X8wwaYKiYnaydxqY
1696 2010-12-14 15:17:55 <RichardG> I will return the money if I dont get enough people on the trial
1697 2010-12-14 15:18:20 <tcatm> User control over the number of digits is on my todo :)
1698 2010-12-14 15:19:13 <edcba> RichardG: you mean a lotto with something like (100-x)% redistribution ?
1699 2010-12-14 15:19:14 <albatross_> tcatm: it's just a bit weird. you show 4 decimals but round to three. so when i see 0.2399 in the latest trades i'm like 'wtf?'
1700 2010-12-14 15:19:34 <RichardG> edcba: a lotto with price_raised_with_bets-2% bitcoins to distribute
1701 2010-12-14 15:19:55 <RichardG> if anyone is interested on it, send 2.50 to 17WesZnaQgpqvaGWg1X8wwaYKiYnaydxqY and PM me 5 1-100 numbers
1702 2010-12-14 15:20:37 <tcatm> albatross_: That's a temporary problem because bcmPXGAU needs more digits and I'm formatting the number in the template.
1703 2010-12-14 15:21:16 sgornick has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1704 2010-12-14 15:21:51 <albatross_> tcatm: ok. btw, what is the library you use for the chart functions?
1705 2010-12-14 15:22:13 <tcatm> chart director
1706 2010-12-14 15:22:34 <Granttt> one thing i dont understand @ bitcoincharts.com ... Volume and BTC, on some orders those 2 equal on others they don't, why ?
1707 2010-12-14 15:22:45 <MacRohard> nice to see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin back
1708 2010-12-14 15:23:30 <tcatm> Granttt: You're talking about the orderbook?
1709 2010-12-14 15:23:37 <Granttt> precisely
1710 2010-12-14 15:23:39 <tcatm> BTC is accumulated Volume
1711 2010-12-14 15:24:14 <Granttt> accumulated volume, meaning: volume that has been traded before @ that price ?
1712 2010-12-14 15:24:25 <RichardG> forgot to say: my trial is risk-free, if noone wins I'll return everything
1713 2010-12-14 15:24:36 <RichardG> (^^ I forgot to say)
1714 2010-12-14 15:25:20 <tcatm> Nope. Adding all Volume starting from the highest Bid. So BTC at the 3rd bid is the sum of 1st, 2nd and 3rd's bid volume.
1715 2010-12-14 15:25:58 <Granttt> ah gotcha, yea makes perfect sense, thanks :)
1716 2010-12-14 15:26:19 <tcatm> USD column works the same
1717 2010-12-14 15:27:35 <albatross_> tcatm: what about the website overall? coded by hand or other software?
1718 2010-12-14 15:27:59 <tcatm> coded by hand from scratch
1719 2010-12-14 15:28:27 sgornick has joined
1720 2010-12-14 15:28:45 <appamatto> RichardG, I had an idea for a 100+x% return lottery where the extra x% comes from monetization of the lottery's website
1721 2010-12-14 15:29:00 <appamatto> So that actually players would expect to win more than they put in
1722 2010-12-14 15:29:30 <albatross_> cool...very nice work
1723 2010-12-14 15:29:37 <RichardG> appamatto, I'd rather use -x% because I currently have no bitcoins
1724 2010-12-14 15:29:59 Grantt has joined
1725 2010-12-14 15:30:00 Granttt has quit (Disconnected by services)
1726 2010-12-14 15:30:06 Grantt is now known as Granttt
1727 2010-12-14 15:30:08 Granttt has quit (Changing host)
1728 2010-12-14 15:30:08 Granttt has joined
1729 2010-12-14 15:30:25 <RichardG> something messed up on my server. great.
1730 2010-12-14 15:30:35 <RichardG> [richard@hostname_supressed ~]$ ./bitcoind help
1731 2010-12-14 15:30:35 <RichardG> error: couldn't connect to server
1732 2010-12-14 15:30:35 <RichardG> [richard@hostname_supressed ~]$
1733 2010-12-14 15:30:37 <RichardG> bitcoind is running
1734 2010-12-14 15:31:24 <MacRohard> try ./bitcoin help instead
1735 2010-12-14 15:31:40 <RichardG> I'm using a bitcoind build
1736 2010-12-14 15:31:49 <MacRohard> or rather ./bitcoin gethelp
1737 2010-12-14 15:31:49 <RichardG> the only CentOS x86 build I found >_<
1738 2010-12-14 15:32:01 <MacRohard> bitcoind is basically the same as bitcoin -d
1739 2010-12-14 15:32:12 <lfm> yes bitcoind help is the same
1740 2010-12-14 15:32:17 <MacRohard> oh ok
1741 2010-12-14 15:32:18 <RichardG> now it works
1742 2010-12-14 15:32:18 <RichardG> thanks
1743 2010-12-14 15:33:07 <kiba> I think I got a damn good looking genderbended version of Satoshi(who I don't know look like anyway)
1744 2010-12-14 15:33:16 <lfm> ya bitcoind is easier to build than bitcoin
1745 2010-12-14 15:33:51 <MacRohard> hmm someone should port it to android and make a gui
1746 2010-12-14 15:33:56 <davux> are there any jabber users here?
1747 2010-12-14 15:33:58 <RichardG> and iOS.
1748 2010-12-14 15:34:11 <MacRohard> prolly much harder to do ios
1749 2010-12-14 15:34:12 <RichardG> [jailbroken] iOS.
1750 2010-12-14 15:34:18 CyanDynamo has joined
1751 2010-12-14 15:34:27 asdf30 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1752 2010-12-14 15:34:31 <BitCoinz> ;;bc, calc 200000
1753 2010-12-14 15:34:31 <gribble> Error: "bc," is not a valid command.
1754 2010-12-14 15:34:45 <davux> i'd like to make a temporary test with other jabber users on a bitcoin gateway i'm working on
1755 2010-12-14 15:34:57 <davux> a jabber-to-bitcoin gateway
1756 2010-12-14 15:35:00 asdf30 has joined
1757 2010-12-14 15:35:02 <RichardG> I never understand jabber right
1758 2010-12-14 15:35:06 <RichardG> would Google Apps Talk work
1759 2010-12-14 15:35:15 nathan7 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1760 2010-12-14 15:35:19 <davux> if you can register on a gateway, yes
1761 2010-12-14 15:35:28 <RichardG> don't have a client which can do this
1762 2010-12-14 15:35:30 <MacRohard> yea it could be cool to have blocks exchanged over jabber
1763 2010-12-14 15:35:36 <MacRohard> and transactions
1764 2010-12-14 15:35:41 <BitCoinz> ;;bc,calc 200000
1765 2010-12-14 15:35:42 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 200000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 3 days, 1 hour, 5 minutes, and 10 seconds
1766 2010-12-14 15:35:49 <davux> MacRohard: actually it's an interface for managing your waller
1767 2010-12-14 15:35:52 <davux> wallet*
1768 2010-12-14 15:36:01 <MacRohard> oh
1769 2010-12-14 15:36:11 <davux> a bitcoin address is a JID
1770 2010-12-14 15:36:17 <davux> and you just chat with it
1771 2010-12-14 15:36:37 <davux> you say "pay 42" and it receives BTC 42 from you
1772 2010-12-14 15:36:53 <davux> i'm also planning to implement ad-hoc commands
1773 2010-12-14 15:36:55 nathan7 has joined
1774 2010-12-14 15:37:17 <davux> anyway if anyone wants to try, it's running at xmpp:bitco.im
1775 2010-12-14 15:37:45 <davux> it's running on the TESTNET atm
1776 2010-12-14 15:46:53 <albatross_> davux: invalid XMPP ID...domain must be set
1777 2010-12-14 15:48:14 <kiba> http://pastecoin.com/download.php?file=85
1778 2010-12-14 15:48:16 <kiba> wee!
1779 2010-12-14 15:49:42 <davux> albatross_: sorry?
1780 2010-12-14 15:50:10 <davux> bitco.im is a totally valid JID
1781 2010-12-14 15:50:20 <davux> i promise :)
1782 2010-12-14 15:50:21 <kiba> download nad make me SOME MONEY!
1783 2010-12-14 15:51:32 <davux> is there any changelog for 0.3.19?
1784 2010-12-14 15:51:40 <kiba> TO DA FORUM
1785 2010-12-14 15:51:47 <davux> i'm surprised satoshi released it silently
1786 2010-12-14 15:51:55 <davux> or did I miss the announcement?
1787 2010-12-14 15:52:31 <kiba> it's just you
1788 2010-12-14 15:53:00 <nanotube> davux: there's a forum post with the release announcement
1789 2010-12-14 15:53:05 <nanotube> (as usual)
1790 2010-12-14 15:53:26 <albatross_> davux: maybe some instructions for pidgin...i don't know what the f i'm doing
1791 2010-12-14 15:54:06 <davux> albatross_: look for service discovery
1792 2010-12-14 15:54:13 <davux> nanotube: thanks, i'll check again
1793 2010-12-14 15:54:29 <nanotube> in the dev and tech section, iirc
1794 2010-12-14 15:57:11 <davux> nanotube: found it, thanks
1795 2010-12-14 15:58:42 lfm has quit (Quit: Page closed)
1796 2010-12-14 16:03:39 redengin has joined
1797 2010-12-14 16:03:51 shortcir1uit is now known as shortcircuit
1798 2010-12-14 16:10:28 RichardG has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1799 2010-12-14 16:11:08 RichardG_ has joined
1800 2010-12-14 16:11:08 ace has joined
1801 2010-12-14 16:11:08 ace has quit (Client Quit)
1802 2010-12-14 16:11:19 RichardG_ is now known as RichardG
1803 2010-12-14 16:11:47 baste has joined
1804 2010-12-14 16:14:08 Remmy has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1805 2010-12-14 16:17:49 wumpus has quit (No Ping reply in 180 seconds.)
1806 2010-12-14 16:18:07 wump has joined
1807 2010-12-14 16:19:14 arcatan has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1808 2010-12-14 16:20:56 duck1123_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1809 2010-12-14 16:22:33 altamic_ has joined
1810 2010-12-14 16:23:21 <RichardG> how come there are still some peer-finding clients on #bitcoin
1811 2010-12-14 16:24:34 <kiba> RichardG: old clients
1812 2010-12-14 16:24:35 arcatan has joined
1813 2010-12-14 16:24:37 altamic_ is now known as altamic
1814 2010-12-14 16:25:51 Remmy has joined
1815 2010-12-14 16:26:44 uberjar has joined
1816 2010-12-14 16:29:04 arcatan has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1817 2010-12-14 16:34:51 thrashaholic has joined
1818 2010-12-14 16:44:37 TheAncientGoat has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1819 2010-12-14 16:44:42 TheAncientGoat has joined
1820 2010-12-14 16:44:48 TheAncientGoat has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1821 2010-12-14 16:50:09 mtgox has joined
1822 2010-12-14 16:54:44 TheAncientGoat has joined
1823 2010-12-14 16:55:38 arcatan has joined
1824 2010-12-14 16:56:24 davex__ has joined
1825 2010-12-14 16:59:19 <cosurgi> ok.. radeon is in place. Now I need to aptitude upgrade system, because I realized that it's lenny.
1826 2010-12-14 16:59:28 <cosurgi> and probably I need squeeze for better ati drivers
1827 2010-12-14 16:59:36 <cosurgi> upgrading now
1828 2010-12-14 17:06:04 Romain1 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1829 2010-12-14 17:13:28 <xelister> cosurgi: happy f'king with aticonfig crap ;)
1830 2010-12-14 17:13:31 <xelister> especiallyh on 5970
1831 2010-12-14 17:17:35 nelisky has joined
1832 2010-12-14 17:27:50 <uberjar> hrmmm so it seems to me bitcoin is going to eventually open up monetization for sites that are just too shady to get credit card processing.
1833 2010-12-14 17:28:35 <uberjar> warez private trackers and whatnot can now start charging people btc for membership
1834 2010-12-14 17:29:12 <albatross_> xelister: i'm beginning to thing you just have a lemon 5970
1835 2010-12-14 17:29:26 <uberjar> now if only I can think of a good way to be the first to do it and profit
1836 2010-12-14 17:32:39 <kiba> I wonder why the scanlation community and related reading site simply don't give money to the people who c reated it
1837 2010-12-14 17:32:46 <kiba> err
1838 2010-12-14 17:32:47 <kiba> the content
1839 2010-12-14 17:32:59 <kiba> sure, the reading site and scanlator's works are pretty improtant...
1840 2010-12-14 17:33:44 <xelister> albatross_: lemon? well, the 5970 is working fine.
1841 2010-12-14 17:34:13 <xelister> uberjar: I find bitcoin much nicer for normal deals
1842 2010-12-14 17:34:31 <xelister> legal, and evel legal by the immoral law imposed on people by thugs like MAFIAA
1843 2010-12-14 17:34:58 <RichardG> ;;bc,calc 17000
1844 2010-12-14 17:34:59 <xelister> for example, I can finally send/receive money EU<->USA without dicking around with stupid banks
1845 2010-12-14 17:34:59 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 17000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 5 weeks, 0 days, 19 hours, 50 minutes, and 16 seconds
1846 2010-12-14 17:35:00 <RichardG> ;;bc,calc 1700
1847 2010-12-14 17:35:01 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 1700 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 51 weeks, 1 day, 6 hours, 22 minutes, and 49 seconds
1848 2010-12-14 17:35:16 <xelister> and without need to report to faggots from USA my EU->EU transfers (btw, that is fucking crazy)
1849 2010-12-14 17:35:24 <RichardG> ^ Core i5 M 430, 3 GB RAM, Windows 7
1850 2010-12-14 17:35:39 <xelister> RichardG: on CPU you will never get any block, even after years
1851 2010-12-14 17:35:58 <[Noodles]> 1700? seems slow for an i5
1852 2010-12-14 17:36:00 <xelister> RichardG: use radeon 5xxx (or 6xxx) GPU or forget it and just buy the coins
1853 2010-12-14 17:36:11 <RichardG> xelister: Intel HD Graphics D:
1854 2010-12-14 17:36:15 <RichardG> [Noodles]: khps
1855 2010-12-14 17:36:28 <[Noodles]> i guessed that ^.^
1856 2010-12-14 17:36:33 <[Noodles]> still kinda slow
1857 2010-12-14 17:36:39 <xelister> RichardG: intell is useless for mining. Only radeon 5xxx (and 6xxx) make sense. Well, at least 4xxx radeon or the top nvidia /perhaps/
1858 2010-12-14 17:36:41 <Granttt> wow the new catalyst 10-12 whql + sdk2.3 totally sucked out my performance on ATI Radeon HD 5650. On 10-10 and sdk2.1 it used to give 40000khps, with the new one 36000khps :(
1859 2010-12-14 17:37:02 <RichardG> ;;bc,calc 36000
1860 2010-12-14 17:37:02 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 36000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 2 weeks, 2 days, 22 hours, 2 minutes, and 4 seconds
1861 2010-12-14 17:37:06 <xelister> Granttt: ati produces crap drivers etc. Sdk is slower with each release
1862 2010-12-14 17:37:44 <xelister> gribble: report bug / bug them at forums / email / custommer suppot
1863 2010-12-14 17:38:33 <RichardG> anyone here has bitcoin average speed for a geforce 8400gs
1864 2010-12-14 17:38:38 <RichardG> which is what I'm planning on buying for a new PC
1865 2010-12-14 17:38:43 thrashaholic has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1866 2010-12-14 17:39:06 <[Noodles]> 8600GT gets 5-6M, so expect less than that
1867 2010-12-14 17:39:32 dwdollar has left ()
1868 2010-12-14 17:40:23 <xelister> RichardG: 8xxx? they suck afair
1869 2010-12-14 17:41:03 <ebel> [Noodles]: 5,000 to 6,000 khashes per sec?
1870 2010-12-14 17:41:11 <[Noodles]> yes
1871 2010-12-14 17:41:11 * ebel realises his work machine has one of them. :P
1872 2010-12-14 17:41:24 <ebel> ;;bc,calc 5000
1873 2010-12-14 17:41:24 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 5000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 17 weeks, 2 days, 19 hours, 26 minutes, and 57 seconds
1874 2010-12-14 17:41:34 <ebel> yeah, bleh
1875 2010-12-14 17:41:46 <[Noodles]> ^.^
1876 2010-12-14 17:42:00 <nanotube> better than nothing. :)
1877 2010-12-14 17:42:18 <[Noodles]> if they're running anyway, let em crunch
1878 2010-12-14 17:42:44 * ebel wouldn't know where to start
1879 2010-12-14 17:42:57 <ebel> oh yeah, I should finish trying to package it for ubuntu :P
1880 2010-12-14 17:43:26 <xelister> ebel: you try to pack bitcoin for ubuntu?
1881 2010-12-14 17:43:43 <ebel> xelister: yeah was gonna try that. i finally have the cli running on ubuntu
1882 2010-12-14 17:43:54 daveandr has joined
1883 2010-12-14 17:48:24 <Granttt> i take back what i said about cat10-12, actually with the poclbm and --vectors im getting about same kh/s as before with diablominer and no vectors
1884 2010-12-14 17:49:47 <xelister> Granttt: so can u configure it to ot loose any speed?
1885 2010-12-14 17:50:33 <Granttt> not really, i figured diablo doesnt support vectors but the poclbm miner does so i tried with it just for test and it did work better in my case
1886 2010-12-14 17:51:06 <xelister> diablo is able to get the same speed
1887 2010-12-14 17:51:10 <xelister> or even a bit better
1888 2010-12-14 17:51:10 foxstrike has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
1889 2010-12-14 17:51:14 <xelister> really it odens suport vect?
1890 2010-12-14 17:51:31 <Granttt> diablo pulled out that function in later versions
1891 2010-12-14 17:52:14 RazielZ has quit ()
1892 2010-12-14 17:52:54 <RichardG> in other news, I just wished there were game-like camping services which paid bitcoins, just like linden dollars.
1893 2010-12-14 17:54:14 <Granttt> richard: thats no a bad idea, maybe i should setup camping devices that pay bitcoins instead of lindens to boost awarness of bitcoins :)
1894 2010-12-14 17:54:49 <zygf> has anyone tried gaming on hd5xxx under wine? I wouldn't want to buy a radeon just for bitcoin, since it won't pay for itself anytime soon
1895 2010-12-14 17:55:33 <uberjar> I play StarCraft II under wine
1896 2010-12-14 17:55:48 <RichardG> Granttt: I'm trying to find myself ways to obtain bitcoins
1897 2010-12-14 17:56:02 <RichardG> like the money-raised-with-betting lotto concept
1898 2010-12-14 17:56:37 <xelister> RichardG: do you have a hot not too young not too old sister and a webcam >_>
1899 2010-12-14 17:57:08 <uberjar> RichardG, what about a rapidshare.com or mediafire.com clone that charges premium customers btc.
1900 2010-12-14 17:57:08 <xelister> cpt obvious to the rescue
1901 2010-12-14 17:57:25 <RichardG> uberjar: no server
1902 2010-12-14 17:57:26 <RichardG> xelister: LOL
1903 2010-12-14 17:57:29 <uberjar> amazon s3 is super cheap
1904 2010-12-14 17:57:42 <RichardG> uberjar: if you know of some place where I can pay for s3 with brazilian reais, i'd be glad
1905 2010-12-14 17:57:47 <xelister> uberjar: and you need EPIC amounts of bandwidth for rapidshare.com
1906 2010-12-14 17:58:00 <kiba> rapidshit.
1907 2010-12-14 17:58:00 <uberjar> xelister: you'd need som venture captial to get this thing rolling
1908 2010-12-14 17:58:11 <ebel> I have credits on tvtorrents.com. I can trade for bitcoins ?
1909 2010-12-14 17:58:13 <kiba> what the heck are you talking about xelister
1910 2010-12-14 17:58:20 <kiba> we already have download site clones
1911 2010-12-14 17:58:22 <ebel> think i have tvtorrents invites aswell
1912 2010-12-14 17:58:34 <kiba> like ubitio.us, bitcoinservice.co.uk, and pastecoin.com
1913 2010-12-14 17:59:09 <appamatto> I saw ubitio.us today
1914 2010-12-14 17:59:13 <appamatto> That's a great idea
1915 2010-12-14 17:59:29 <kiba> I like bitcoinservice.co.uk and pastecoin.com more
1916 2010-12-14 17:59:50 <kiba> apperantly, I am the only artist who's doing some actual original art
1917 2010-12-14 18:00:01 nelisky has quit (Quit: nelisky)
1918 2010-12-14 18:03:00 <kiba> everybody else just upload wallpapers
1919 2010-12-14 18:03:07 <kiba> from god knows where
1920 2010-12-14 18:03:29 <xelister> kiba: I will buy bulk of original art
1921 2010-12-14 18:03:41 <xelister> if you make artistic photos of above topic lol
1922 2010-12-14 18:03:54 <RichardG> finally posted after loads of IRC talk.
1923 2010-12-14 18:03:55 <RichardG> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=2271.0
1924 2010-12-14 18:03:58 <bitbot> Lottery concept
1925 2010-12-14 18:04:10 <kiba> artistic of what, xelister
1926 2010-12-14 18:05:00 * uberjar waits around for someone to impliment bitcoin texas holdem
1927 2010-12-14 18:05:13 * uberjar taps his foot in anticipation.
1928 2010-12-14 18:07:43 <uberjar> or hell it'd be cool if facebook apps started using btc for micropayments
1929 2010-12-14 18:07:57 <uberjar> facebook would probably throw a fit though
1930 2010-12-14 18:08:40 <kiba> RichardG: dude, nobody trust you.
1931 2010-12-14 18:09:10 <RichardG> I do know ;)
1932 2010-12-14 18:09:57 <midnightmagic> RG: You sound *exactly* like an ISK scammer in EVE:Online. That's the *exact* same scam they run there.
1933 2010-12-14 18:09:58 <donpdonp> facebook likes the coins they have as they get a 30% cut on coin sales
1934 2010-12-14 18:10:12 <kiba> that's a rip off
1935 2010-12-14 18:10:25 <kiba> RIP OFF
1936 2010-12-14 18:11:19 <donpdonp> for those inside the walled garden, its the only game in town.
1937 2010-12-14 18:11:21 <RichardG> self-locked topic.
1938 2010-12-14 18:11:26 <xelister> RIiiiiifff Ooooffff. they toook our joooobs
1939 2010-12-14 18:13:28 <RichardG> <~RichardG> ok, lotto concept is down, as people think I am doing a common scam done in eve online
1940 2010-12-14 18:14:22 <KwukDuck> RichardG, how iss your lottery different from any other sale, how will people know i'll send them the iphone after payment?
1941 2010-12-14 18:15:32 <RichardG> I locked the topic, forget it >_<
1942 2010-12-14 18:16:18 BitCoinz has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
1943 2010-12-14 18:20:30 ebel has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1944 2010-12-14 18:22:00 lolcat has joined
1945 2010-12-14 18:22:05 <lolcat> I want to buy a domain...
1946 2010-12-14 18:22:16 <xelister> lolcat: .com ?
1947 2010-12-14 18:22:19 <MT`AwAy> lolcat: https://www.kalyhost.com/domain.html?Currency=BTC
1948 2010-12-14 18:22:21 <MT`AwAy> :D
1949 2010-12-14 18:22:23 <nanotube> lolcat: iirc there was someone offering
1950 2010-12-14 18:22:27 <xelister> wel nm
1951 2010-12-14 18:22:29 <nanotube> ah MT`AwAy to the rescue :)
1952 2010-12-14 18:22:51 <MT`AwAy> for domains the prices are displayed with regular currency, but once added to the cart it's in bitcoin
1953 2010-12-14 18:23:15 <nanotube> what exchange rate do you use for bitcoin, MT`AwAy ? mtgox-based?
1954 2010-12-14 18:23:33 <MT`AwAy> nanotube: yep
1955 2010-12-14 18:24:10 <kiba> how's your client coming?
1956 2010-12-14 18:24:14 <kiba> me want automatic
1957 2010-12-14 18:24:23 <MT`AwAy> kiba: automatic what?
1958 2010-12-14 18:24:42 <kiba> encrypted backuped wallet
1959 2010-12-14 18:24:52 <MT`AwAy> :D
1960 2010-12-14 18:25:06 <MT`AwAy> wallet can be encrypted so it requires you to put a password to make a transaction
1961 2010-12-14 18:25:26 * nanotube runs a shell script to encrypt wallet with gpg and upload...
1962 2010-12-14 18:25:29 <RichardG> strong rains, be back later with ideas with less people thinking it's a scam
1963 2010-12-14 18:25:47 <nanotube> RichardG: if you code, you could try selling your coding skill for btc
1964 2010-12-14 18:25:53 RichardG has quit (Quit: The Original "Leaving"(tm))
1965 2010-12-14 18:26:06 <xelister> yeah I could use php and java devl perhaps
1966 2010-12-14 18:26:09 <MT`AwAy> maybe I could do a service you pay a few btc for, and your encrypted wallet is automatically backed up everyday on a server~
1967 2010-12-14 18:26:14 <xelister> but then, 90% of time is integrations and shit
1968 2010-12-14 18:26:37 <lolcat> xelister: Yes, .com.
1969 2010-12-14 18:26:56 <lolcat> It seams the prices are comparable when there is no special offers elsewhere.
1970 2010-12-14 18:26:59 <nanotube> lolcat: see what MT`AwAy posted - you can buy domains for btc from kalyhost.
1971 2010-12-14 18:27:23 <lolcat> nanotube: I saw, the prices were almost like godaddys. Except from the christmas special...
1972 2010-12-14 18:28:03 <MT`AwAy> lolcat: I'm not using godaddy
1973 2010-12-14 18:28:23 <appamatto> I think btc is going to enable many business plans that weren't possible before
1974 2010-12-14 18:28:51 <kiba> so guys, do you back up your GPG key too?
1975 2010-12-14 18:29:30 <nanotube> yes, gpg key should of course also be backed up :)
1976 2010-12-14 18:30:01 <nanotube> lolcat: well... do you really expect someone to offer you below-market prices :P
1977 2010-12-14 18:30:14 <MT`AwAy> kiba: btw, is AES+RSA encryption good enough for you?
1978 2010-12-14 18:30:16 <xelister> lolcat: 85 BTC
1979 2010-12-14 18:30:56 <kiba> hmm
1980 2010-12-14 18:31:03 <kiba> don't you need to encrypt the gpg key too?
1981 2010-12-14 18:31:05 <nanotube> ;;bc,mtgox
1982 2010-12-14 18:31:06 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":0.23,"low":0.21,"vol":5367,"buy":0.2105,"sell":0.2289,"last":0.2289}}
1983 2010-12-14 18:31:31 darkskiez_ has joined
1984 2010-12-14 18:31:32 <nanotube> kiba: gpg key is symmetrically encrypted with your password... so if you have a strong passphrase, should be fine.
1985 2010-12-14 18:31:43 <MT`AwAy> kiba: (for the encrypted wallet)
1986 2010-12-14 18:31:43 darkskiez_ has quit (Client Quit)
1987 2010-12-14 18:31:52 <nanotube> ;;math calc 85*.22
1988 2010-12-14 18:31:52 <gribble> 18.7
1989 2010-12-14 18:32:06 <kiba> so I don't need to encrypt the gpg key if I have a strong passphrase?
1990 2010-12-14 18:32:07 <nanotube> xelister: 18.7 usd for a domain reg?
1991 2010-12-14 18:32:08 Toadyonps3 has joined
1992 2010-12-14 18:32:20 <nanotube> kiba: well, what would you encrypt it /with/ :)
1993 2010-12-14 18:32:24 <xelister> and handling, yea
1994 2010-12-14 18:32:39 <MT`AwAy> kiba: using a passphrase == encrypting your gpg key
1995 2010-12-14 18:32:55 <kiba> turtles all the way down
1996 2010-12-14 18:33:06 <nanotube> kiba: you can either encrypt it with another gpg key :), or something that uses a password. so you might as well just be content with your gpg password
1997 2010-12-14 18:33:21 <nanotube> yep, turtles indeed
1998 2010-12-14 18:34:12 <MT`AwAy> turtles?
1999 2010-12-14 18:34:17 <nanotube> xelister: as long as there are no shipping charges.
2000 2010-12-14 18:34:32 <nanotube> MT`AwAy: it's a famous parable from carl sagan (iirc)
2001 2010-12-14 18:35:01 <nanotube> ;;wp turtles all the way down
2002 2010-12-14 18:35:02 <gribble> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down | "Turtles all the way down" is a jocular expression of the infinite regress problem in cosmology posed by the Unmoved mover paradox. ...
2003 2010-12-14 18:35:34 <nanotube> ok, hawking, not sagan. :)
2004 2010-12-14 18:36:52 <MT`AwAy> oh, this turtle
2005 2010-12-14 18:38:31 <nanotube> aha, there /is/ a sagan reference that's earlier than hawking... Carl Sagan recited a version of the story as an apocryphal anecdote in his 1979 book Broca's Brain: Reflections on the Romance of Science, as an exchange between a "Western traveler" and an "Oriental philosopher".
2006 2010-12-14 18:40:02 nelisky has joined
2007 2010-12-14 18:40:34 TheAncientGoat has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
2008 2010-12-14 18:41:41 <xelister> nanotube: no shipping ;)
2009 2010-12-14 18:41:58 <xelister> Im not saying its cheapest
2010 2010-12-14 18:42:00 <xelister> bbl
2011 2010-12-14 18:42:31 <kiba> computer backpack bot
2012 2010-12-14 18:42:38 <kiba> wearable bot
2013 2010-12-14 18:43:29 <nanotube> ;;wp wearable computing
2014 2010-12-14 18:43:30 <gribble> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wearable_computer | Wearable computers are computers that are worn on the body. This type of wearable technology has been used in behavioral modeling, health monitoring systems ...
2015 2010-12-14 18:44:38 <kiba> wearabot bot!
2016 2010-12-14 18:44:45 <kiba> not just a wearable comptuer
2017 2010-12-14 18:44:48 <kiba> but a bot
2018 2010-12-14 18:45:29 <nanotube> you can attach a mechanical arm to the wearable computer. heh.
2019 2010-12-14 18:45:42 <nanotube> what do you envision the bot's capabilities to be? what would it do for you?
2020 2010-12-14 18:45:46 <kiba> a wearable bot that can propell itself
2021 2010-12-14 18:46:27 <kiba> monitor the back, move itself to me....
2022 2010-12-14 18:46:48 <kiba> and it's just plain cool
2023 2010-12-14 18:48:04 <kiba> it's a scout bot really
2024 2010-12-14 18:48:42 <kiba> maybe I could have three of these babies strapped to my back
2025 2010-12-14 18:59:35 bencoder_ is now known as bencoder
2026 2010-12-14 19:02:28 <albatross_> is there a list of all commands that this webirc thing takes?
2027 2010-12-14 19:05:02 RichardG has joined
2028 2010-12-14 19:05:10 AAA_awright_ has joined
2029 2010-12-14 19:06:37 AAA_awright has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
2030 2010-12-14 19:12:42 <uberjar> albatross_: alt-F4
2031 2010-12-14 19:14:30 uberjar has quit (Quit: bbl)
2032 2010-12-14 19:16:53 <RichardG> ;;bc,calc 25000
2033 2010-12-14 19:16:54 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 25000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 3 weeks, 3 days, 8 hours, 41 minutes, and 23 seconds
2034 2010-12-14 19:18:27 <midnightmagic> ;;bc,calc 750000
2035 2010-12-14 19:18:27 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 750000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 19 hours, 29 minutes, and 22 seconds
2036 2010-12-14 19:18:38 <midnightmagic> ;;bc,calc 700000
2037 2010-12-14 19:18:39 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 700000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 20 hours, 52 minutes, and 54 seconds
2038 2010-12-14 19:19:57 ByteCoin has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2039 2010-12-14 19:20:36 Yarou has joined
2040 2010-12-14 19:20:46 <Yarou> hello all, i have a quick question
2041 2010-12-14 19:20:57 <Yarou> is it possible to alter timestamps or spoof them?
2042 2010-12-14 19:21:57 * kiba don't know
2043 2010-12-14 19:22:07 ByteCoin has joined
2044 2010-12-14 19:22:21 <kiba> I think everyone is going to know that you have a weird chain, Yarou
2045 2010-12-14 19:22:39 <tcatm> Yarou: If you meant block timestamps: No.
2046 2010-12-14 19:22:46 <RichardG> ;;bc,calc 177538
2047 2010-12-14 19:22:47 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 177538 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 3 days, 10 hours, 19 minutes, and 59 seconds
2048 2010-12-14 19:22:51 <RichardG> current status of pooled mine
2049 2010-12-14 19:22:54 <ByteCoin> Calling MT AwAy
2050 2010-12-14 19:22:59 <ByteCoin> You there?
2051 2010-12-14 19:23:40 <Auctus> ;;bc,calc 1680
2052 2010-12-14 19:23:41 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 1680 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 51 weeks, 5 days, 12 hours, 44 minutes, and 31 seconds
2053 2010-12-14 19:24:50 <midnightmagic> that's a long time. :-)
2054 2010-12-14 19:25:26 <RichardG> I'm referring a few friends to the pooled mining project
2055 2010-12-14 19:25:42 <RichardG> telling them that at least some cents per 3 days is better than 50 btc per 1-2years
2056 2010-12-14 19:26:03 <albatross_> or they could just buy btc?
2057 2010-12-14 19:26:17 <Auctus> Pentium D 2.66ghz. I also just started bitcoin on a core i3, i'll see how that goes. I'm new to bitcoin. Interesting concept.
2058 2010-12-14 19:26:33 <RichardG> sorry, I'm a math noob, what would 7.134e-005 (current report for me on pooled mining server) mean
2059 2010-12-14 19:27:12 Azetab has quit (Changing host)
2060 2010-12-14 19:27:12 Azetab has joined
2061 2010-12-14 19:27:48 <zygf> 0.00007134 btc
2062 2010-12-14 19:28:09 <Auctus> http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=7.134e-005
2063 2010-12-14 19:28:27 <zygf> where's the pool?
2064 2010-12-14 19:28:46 <RichardG> zygf: 173.255.205.10
2065 2010-12-14 19:29:31 <zygf> there's no web page at this address :P
2066 2010-12-14 19:30:22 <RichardG> I cant remember the member name
2067 2010-12-14 19:30:23 <RichardG> http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz/bitcoin-pool/
2068 2010-12-14 19:30:29 <RichardG> ^ this pool
2069 2010-12-14 19:31:18 <zygf> thx
2070 2010-12-14 19:32:30 <lolcat> Can I use bitcoin through telnet?
2071 2010-12-14 19:33:04 <Yarou> thanks all
2072 2010-12-14 19:33:05 Yarou has left ("Leaving")
2073 2010-12-14 19:34:10 <RichardG> a discussion was recently lifted on the forums and even got a blurb on EFF: what if Wikileaks accepted bitcoin donations
2074 2010-12-14 19:34:29 <lolcat> What about it?
2075 2010-12-14 19:35:06 <MacRohard> lolcat, yes. either by running the command line bitcoin or by typing json directly to bitcoind
2076 2010-12-14 19:35:32 <MacRohard> http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/12/constructive-direct-action-against-censorship
2077 2010-12-14 19:35:55 <MacRohard> they should have mentioned that they take bitcoin donations - but maybe this article was copied from elsewhere
2078 2010-12-14 19:38:10 Lyspooner has joined
2079 2010-12-14 19:40:32 * kiba is angry.
2080 2010-12-14 19:40:47 <arcatan> how do I enable the RPC interface on OS X?
2081 2010-12-14 19:42:27 <appamatto> Is it just me or do most DHTs assume cooperative clients?
2082 2010-12-14 19:42:44 <jcw9> arcatan: make or edit the bitcoin.conf inside ~/Library/Application Support/Bitcoin
2083 2010-12-14 19:42:47 Teppy has left ()
2084 2010-12-14 19:43:49 <AAA_awright_> appamatto: Depends on if you can cryptographically prove the contents of what you ask for
2085 2010-12-14 19:44:23 <AAA_awright_> For a DHT it doesn't matter, for a distributed/decentralized key/value store it does
2086 2010-12-14 19:44:57 <arcatan> jcw9: I did that and restarted BitCoin, but it isn't listening at least on port 8332
2087 2010-12-14 19:45:48 nelisky has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
2088 2010-12-14 19:46:29 <jcw9> Isn't it 8333?
2089 2010-12-14 19:47:12 <arcatan> isn't that port used for BitCoin network communication and 8332 for the RPC interface?
2090 2010-12-14 19:47:32 <arcatan> 8333 doesn't respond to my RPC requests, anyway
2091 2010-12-14 19:47:36 <jcw9> Hang on, I was just greeping through netstat quickly
2092 2010-12-14 19:47:59 <jcw9> Are you trying to RPC from a remote machine (not 127.0.0.1)?
2093 2010-12-14 19:48:32 <appamatto> AAA_awright, for example, in a CAN where incorrect blocks are not the problem
2094 2010-12-14 19:48:59 johanhenselmans has quit (Quit: johanhenselmans)
2095 2010-12-14 19:49:01 <arcatan> jcw9: nope, localhost
2096 2010-12-14 19:49:13 AAA_awright_ is now known as AAA_awright
2097 2010-12-14 19:49:24 <jcw9> do you have "server=1" in there?
2098 2010-12-14 19:50:15 <arcatan> jcw9: ah, that's missing! thanks.
2099 2010-12-14 19:51:13 <jcw9> ;;bc,calc 7975
2100 2010-12-14 19:51:13 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 7975 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 10 weeks, 6 days, 8 hours, 53 minutes, and 0 seconds
2101 2010-12-14 19:53:02 <RichardG> I'm confused on one fact
2102 2010-12-14 19:53:09 <RichardG> does the pooled mining project divide the block equally
2103 2010-12-14 19:53:17 <RichardG> or does it give bitcoins based on your khashes
2104 2010-12-14 19:53:28 <appamatto> I think there were two different systems
2105 2010-12-14 19:53:53 <kiba> it used contributed mode
2106 2010-12-14 19:54:00 <kiba> which basically mean, the more khashes you contribute
2107 2010-12-14 19:54:03 <kiba> the more share you get
2108 2010-12-14 19:54:47 <RichardG> let me close the main client then
2109 2010-12-14 19:54:48 <jcw9> But only the generator of the block gets bitcoins
2110 2010-12-14 19:54:51 <RichardG> because it's eating my khashes
2111 2010-12-14 19:55:00 <Lyspooner> how big is the pooled miner now?
2112 2010-12-14 19:55:18 Jos2 has joined
2113 2010-12-14 19:55:21 <jcw9> oh you're talking about a pooling project - my mistake
2114 2010-12-14 19:55:40 <RichardG> Lyspooner: 97 clients, 197800 khashes
2115 2010-12-14 19:55:46 <RichardG> from the latest output the miner gave me
2116 2010-12-14 19:55:53 <appamatto> Lyspooner, it crashed a couple times apparently, I don't know if that affected the size
2117 2010-12-14 19:55:58 <RichardG> (on bluishcoder's server)
2118 2010-12-14 19:56:07 <appamatto> I remember it being bigger than 97
2119 2010-12-14 19:56:24 <cosurgi> ;;bc,cal 14534457
2120 2010-12-14 19:56:24 <gribble> Error: "bc,cal" is not a valid command.
2121 2010-12-14 19:56:29 <appamatto> ;;bc,calc 56000
2122 2010-12-14 19:56:29 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 56000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 1 week, 3 days, 21 hours, 1 minute, and 20 seconds
2123 2010-12-14 19:56:29 <cosurgi> ;;bc,calc 14534
2124 2010-12-14 19:56:30 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 14534 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 5 weeks, 6 days, 21 hours, 43 minutes, and 39 seconds
2125 2010-12-14 19:56:58 AAA_awright_ has joined
2126 2010-12-14 19:57:03 <RichardG> I should probably make a bot to report the pooled miner's status
2127 2010-12-14 19:57:21 <Lyspooner> indeed
2128 2010-12-14 19:57:40 <RichardG> I already have experience on making bots
2129 2010-12-14 19:58:09 <LobsterMan> hm there are "hidden" columns in the windows ui?
2130 2010-12-14 19:58:23 <zygf> is whoever wrote the remote miner here?
2131 2010-12-14 19:58:27 <Lyspooner> i know it's impossible to ask, but do you think most people on the pooled miner are paying for their own electricity?
2132 2010-12-14 19:58:30 <LobsterMan> i just hit ctrl-+ and it expanded the columns, and i see 2 new columns
2133 2010-12-14 19:58:34 <midnightmagic> yeah, so how do the participants know whether they're being given a fair share..?
2134 2010-12-14 19:58:44 <LobsterMan> one has like 000000003456-0-1875937953 and the other is a huge long text string
2135 2010-12-14 19:58:51 AAA_awright has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2136 2010-12-14 20:00:14 <appamatto> the people in the pool are so poor
2137 2010-12-14 20:00:28 daveandr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2138 2010-12-14 20:00:34 <Lyspooner> ....How poor are they???
2139 2010-12-14 20:00:41 <appamatto> then we have people like ArtForz that generate once an hour
2140 2010-12-14 20:00:56 <LobsterMan> ArtForz owns the bitcoin network
2141 2010-12-14 20:00:58 <LobsterMan> lol
2142 2010-12-14 20:01:06 daveandr has joined
2143 2010-12-14 20:01:07 daveandr has quit (Client Quit)
2144 2010-12-14 20:01:14 <appamatto> massive GPU farm, but only 16% of the network
2145 2010-12-14 20:01:47 <zygf> does anyone know how to tell the opaque monster of a build system that is cmake to use my CXXFLAGS? :P
2146 2010-12-14 20:01:59 <[Noodles]> people cant be that poor if they can afford to "generate" on CPUs
2147 2010-12-14 20:02:37 <appamatto> I have a hypothetical question: If a client could only see new blocks (blocks produced after he connects) under what conditions could he correctly identify the current head of chain?
2148 2010-12-14 20:02:48 <midnightmagic> RichardG: You know there is a way to prove you aren't cheating in that lottery..
2149 2010-12-14 20:03:21 Diablo-D3 has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2150 2010-12-14 20:03:36 <jcw9> Is ArtForz like a university sysadmin or something?
2151 2010-12-14 20:03:39 RichardG_ has joined
2152 2010-12-14 20:03:41 <RichardG_> !pool
2153 2010-12-14 20:03:41 <RichardG> Pooled miner (173.255.205.10:8335) status: khash/s as 633
2154 2010-12-14 20:03:52 <RichardG_> !pool
2155 2010-12-14 20:03:52 <RichardG> Pooled miner (173.255.205.10:8335) status: since 2010-12-14 11:18:42 UTC
2156 2010-12-14 20:04:00 <midnightmagic> only 633? how many total participants?
2157 2010-12-14 20:04:02 <RichardG> yeah broken, letm me check
2158 2010-12-14 20:04:19 <RichardG_> !pool
2159 2010-12-14 20:04:20 <RichardG> Pooled miner (173.255.205.10:8335) status: receive 0.00045057 BTC if this block is solved
2160 2010-12-14 20:04:30 <RichardG> I know what to do
2161 2010-12-14 20:06:07 Azetab has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2162 2010-12-14 20:06:20 <RichardG_> !pool
2163 2010-12-14 20:06:20 <RichardG> Pooled miner (173.255.205.10:8335) status: 97 clients, 174336 khash/s
2164 2010-12-14 20:06:33 Azetab has joined
2165 2010-12-14 20:07:26 <appamatto> jcw9, ask him about his farm, he's pretty open
2166 2010-12-14 20:07:43 <[Noodles]> we need more pools to bundle less GPUs to more CPUs, doesnt make much sense for people using single, or few CPUs when someone hooks up a few GPUs and gets 80% of all coins
2167 2010-12-14 20:07:43 <jcw9> Is there a thread about it?
2168 2010-12-14 20:08:11 <appamatto> jcw9, I don't thisk he's on the forum.
2169 2010-12-14 20:08:36 <appamatto> [Noodles] it shouldn't affect your generation rate
2170 2010-12-14 20:08:55 <[Noodles]> no jc, there's no thread, but he is not a university-admin (afaik), he just needs to run a diesel-gen anyway, so why not use it's power to mint some coins
2171 2010-12-14 20:09:07 <Lyspooner> RichardG, can you throw in ;;bc,calc 174336
2172 2010-12-14 20:09:33 <[Noodles]> if effective kW/h price is $0, that's pretty good for mining ^.^
2173 2010-12-14 20:09:44 <[Noodles]> i'd buy a bunch of cards too
2174 2010-12-14 20:10:12 <midnightmagic> he heats his home with the heat from the generators.
2175 2010-12-14 20:10:14 <jcw9> Oh so the diesel outputs the same amount of juice no matter what?
2176 2010-12-14 20:10:15 <[Noodles]> appamatto: it doesnt effect my rate, but my SHARE
2177 2010-12-14 20:10:40 <[Noodles]> makes no sense for single-core useres to "arn 0.00002btc
2178 2010-12-14 20:10:47 <[Noodles]> *earn
2179 2010-12-14 20:11:03 <tcatm> jcw9: The generator needs an eletrical load to run. Normally that's just a resistor to convert it to heat.
2180 2010-12-14 20:11:09 <midnightmagic> i thought we can't currenly receive that little anyway?
2181 2010-12-14 20:11:21 <zygf> [Noodles]: at current and rising difficulty it'd take months to get even on the cards
2182 2010-12-14 20:11:22 <[Noodles]> my rate will saty at ~400M for a while anyway, nevermind the pool ^.~
2183 2010-12-14 20:11:25 <RichardG> Lyspooner: if I knew how to get the difficulty
2184 2010-12-14 20:11:52 <[Noodles]> i might add another card, when i'm in a good mood
2185 2010-12-14 20:12:00 <midnightmagic> I'm thankfully sitting at 750M. it would be much, much more but I have cooling issues. stupid 4-way motherboards..
2186 2010-12-14 20:12:08 <[Noodles]> havent decided that yet
2187 2010-12-14 20:12:26 <[Noodles]> but it needs btc-price to rise, or it'll take month to get investment back
2188 2010-12-14 20:12:44 <tcatm> only a month? Where do you buy your hardware?
2189 2010-12-14 20:12:49 <[Noodles]> months ^.^
2190 2010-12-14 20:13:07 <tcatm> sounds more realistic :)
2191 2010-12-14 20:13:29 <RichardG_> !pool
2192 2010-12-14 20:13:30 <RichardG> Pooled miner (173.255.205.10:8335) status (last updated at 14/Dec/2010 18:11:18 GMT2): 99 clients, 190670 khash/s
2193 2010-12-14 20:13:36 <[Noodles]> another 5850 at stable price will take about 6month + energy
2194 2010-12-14 20:13:42 <RichardG> try me: !pool
2195 2010-12-14 20:14:12 <midnightmagic> !pool
2196 2010-12-14 20:14:13 <RichardG> Pooled miner (173.255.205.10:8335) status (last updated at 14/Dec/2010 18:12:03 GMT-2): 98 clients, 189537 khash/s
2197 2010-12-14 20:14:13 <RichardG_> Pooled miner (173.255.205.10:8335) status (last updated at 14/Dec/2010 18:12:03 GMT-2): 98 clients, 189537 khash/s
2198 2010-12-14 20:14:19 RichardG_ has quit (Quit: One does not simply walk into this quit message)
2199 2010-12-14 20:14:21 <RichardG> quit second client
2200 2010-12-14 20:14:40 jchysk1 is now known as jchysk
2201 2010-12-14 20:15:29 <[Noodles]> power is too damn expensive, if i'd just pay half of it....
2202 2010-12-14 20:16:23 <tcatm> Yep, one week of mining is only to cover power costs.
2203 2010-12-14 20:18:17 <midnightmagic> ;bc,calc 12500000
2204 2010-12-14 20:18:21 <midnightmagic> ;;bc,calc 12500000
2205 2010-12-14 20:18:22 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 12500000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 1 hour, 10 minutes, and 9 seconds
2206 2010-12-14 20:18:24 <[Noodles]> what's the btc-price in about a year?
2207 2010-12-14 20:18:32 <[Noodles]> that's the question ^.^
2208 2010-12-14 20:18:39 <RichardG> does anyone here know an url to obtain the latest difficulty
2209 2010-12-14 20:18:43 AAA_awright_ is now known as AAA_awright
2210 2010-12-14 20:19:01 <Jos2> ;;bc,calc 765
2211 2010-12-14 20:19:01 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 765 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 2 years, 9 weeks, 3 days, 3 hours, 30 minutes, and 43 seconds
2212 2010-12-14 20:19:04 <cosurgi> ;;bc,calc 189537
2213 2010-12-14 20:19:05 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 189537 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 3 days, 5 hours, 7 minutes, and 14 seconds
2214 2010-12-14 20:19:06 <tcatm> RichardG: http://blockexplorer.com/q/getdifficulty
2215 2010-12-14 20:19:11 <RichardG> ok
2216 2010-12-14 20:19:27 nelisky has joined
2217 2010-12-14 20:19:44 <RichardG> and the formula for calculating seconds needed based on the difficulty and khps
2218 2010-12-14 20:20:52 <midnightmagic> ;;bc,calc 2500000
2219 2010-12-14 20:20:53 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 2500000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 5 hours, 50 minutes, and 48 seconds
2220 2010-12-14 20:22:34 Jos2 has left ()
2221 2010-12-14 20:23:13 <midnightmagic> when is the next step to a lower block distribution again?
2222 2010-12-14 20:23:39 <midnightmagic> or is it purely difficulty rating based?
2223 2010-12-14 20:24:04 <LobsterMan> ;;bc,stats
2224 2010-12-14 20:24:06 <gribble> Current Blocks: 97562 | Current Difficulty: 12252.03471156 | Next Difficulty At Block: 98783 | Next Difficulty In: 1221 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 0 days, 13 hours, 13 minutes, and 22 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 13758.12616121
2225 2010-12-14 20:25:01 <midnightmagic> that's it, so just current CPU participation dictates difficulty, and not some overall algorithm (every 40 days, it gets harder regardless of cpu)?
2226 2010-12-14 20:25:49 <tcatm> midnightmagic: It's only based on total CPU/GPU power.
2227 2010-12-14 20:26:12 <midnightmagic> so the estimate of final block calculation is based on a growth prediction then?
2228 2010-12-14 20:26:27 <tcatm> ?
2229 2010-12-14 20:26:29 <midnightmagic> cool.
2230 2010-12-14 20:26:46 <Lyspooner> there will be no final block
2231 2010-12-14 20:27:06 <midnightmagic> well.. Satoshi was saying somewhere that there will only ever be X blocks in the network. The end-date when the final block is calculated must be figured by using difficulty growth-rate curves..
2232 2010-12-14 20:27:12 <midnightmagic> oh..?
2233 2010-12-14 20:27:18 <[Noodles]> not blocks, coins
2234 2010-12-14 20:27:20 <tcatm> gavinandresen: Is it possible to get transactions using SVN bitcoind (like getblock)?
2235 2010-12-14 20:27:35 <midnightmagic> sorry, coins.
2236 2010-12-14 20:27:42 <[Noodles]> without blocks ther wont be anymore transactions
2237 2010-12-14 20:27:43 <midnightmagic> so will blocks be rewarded with fewer coins over time?
2238 2010-12-14 20:28:11 <gavinandresen> tcatm: nope. svn lets you get a little information, only about transactions in your wallet.
2239 2010-12-14 20:28:17 <gavinandresen> (transactions to or from you)
2240 2010-12-14 20:28:54 <Lyspooner> yes, that's right, the blocks are rewarded with half the coins every 210,000 blocks
2241 2010-12-14 20:29:09 <midnightmagic> ah, that's what I was looking for..
2242 2010-12-14 20:29:19 <Lyspooner> so now it's 50, but in a few years the reward will be 25, and then 12.5 and so on
2243 2010-12-14 20:29:21 <midnightmagic> Thank you! I appreciate your putting up with my n00by questions.
2244 2010-12-14 20:29:47 <Lyspooner> http://www.bitcoin.org/faq if you need it
2245 2010-12-14 20:30:02 <RichardG> okay, I'm having issues with blockexplorer because it does not end in a CRLF
2246 2010-12-14 20:30:09 <RichardG> any other ideas for obtaining the difficutly?
2247 2010-12-14 20:31:10 <tcatm> What do you need the CRLF for?
2248 2010-12-14 20:31:22 <RichardG> if the CRLF isn't there, mIRC can't read the final line
2249 2010-12-14 20:31:35 <RichardG> DEBUG: Connection: close
2250 2010-12-14 20:31:35 <RichardG> DEBUG: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
2251 2010-12-14 20:31:35 <RichardG> DEBUG:
2252 2010-12-14 20:31:51 <tcatm> bug in mirc :)
2253 2010-12-14 20:32:30 <ByteCoin> gavinandresen: I gather you're skeptical of my cartel simulations.
2254 2010-12-14 20:33:26 <RichardG> DEBUG: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
2255 2010-12-14 20:33:26 <RichardG> DEBUG:
2256 2010-12-14 20:33:26 <RichardG> DEBUG:
2257 2010-12-14 20:33:26 <RichardG> DEBUG:
2258 2010-12-14 20:33:28 <RichardG> almost there.
2259 2010-12-14 20:33:54 <RichardG> ooh got it!
2260 2010-12-14 20:34:13 <gavinandresen> ByteCoin: I am-- a few months ago I thought I'd convinced myself that, if I find a block faster than average, it might be to my advantage to hold onto it so I could start working on the next block. But then I convinced myself I was wrong.
2261 2010-12-14 20:34:47 <RichardG> I got it, now I need the formula for calculating seconds to generate a block
2262 2010-12-14 20:34:51 Phoebus has joined
2263 2010-12-14 20:35:02 <ByteCoin> It is somewhat counterintuitive.
2264 2010-12-14 20:35:46 <gavinandresen> ByteCoin: do you still think the cartel could have an advantage even if they have no faster-to-propogate-through-the-network advantage?
2265 2010-12-14 20:36:27 <ByteCoin> Possibly depends on your strict definition of "advantage". Under most plausible definitions yes.
2266 2010-12-14 20:36:45 <RichardG> what is the formula for calculating seconds to generate a block based on the difficulty
2267 2010-12-14 20:36:57 <Lyspooner> ;;bc,calc
2268 2010-12-14 20:36:57 <gribble> (bc,calc <an alias, 1 argument>) -- Alias for "echo The average time to generate a block at $1 Khps, given current difficulty of [bc,diff], is [time elapsed [math calc 1/((2**224-1)/[bc,diff]*$1*1000/2**256)]]".
2269 2010-12-14 20:37:02 <RichardG> okay.
2270 2010-12-14 20:37:40 <nanotube> RichardG: how to get the status of the mining pool? does one have to have a pool client running?
2271 2010-12-14 20:37:49 <RichardG> nanotube: I get it from the log file
2272 2010-12-14 20:38:04 <ByteCoin> Simulations indicate that with no preferential network access, a cartel starts to get a larger share of the blocks than they "ought" to at about 33%
2273 2010-12-14 20:39:05 <ByteCoin> I'm fairly confident about the results.
2274 2010-12-14 20:39:29 <nanotube> ByteCoin: what's your framework for this?
2275 2010-12-14 20:39:32 <gavinandresen> ByteCoin: Are you accounting for wasted hashing time when the Cartel holds back a block and that block, which WOULD have been accepted if they released it right away, gets rejected instead?
2276 2010-12-14 20:39:45 RichardG_ has joined
2277 2010-12-14 20:39:47 <RichardG_> !pool
2278 2010-12-14 20:39:47 <RichardG> Pooled miner (173.255.205.10:8335) status (last updated at 14/Dec/2010 18:37:19 GMT-2): 94 clients, 208466 khash/s, next block est. 0secs
2279 2010-12-14 20:39:54 <Lyspooner> 0 secs!
2280 2010-12-14 20:39:55 <ByteCoin> gavinandresen: Yes I believe I do.
2281 2010-12-14 20:39:57 <RichardG> lol
2282 2010-12-14 20:40:05 <ByteCoin> nanotube: framework?
2283 2010-12-14 20:40:09 <appamatto> ByteCoin, what are your findings?
2284 2010-12-14 20:40:25 <nanotube> ByteCoin: as in... how do you propose the cartel do their cheating?
2285 2010-12-14 20:40:54 <nanotube> framework, mechanism, wtf are you talking about... many synonyms :)
2286 2010-12-14 20:41:02 <ByteCoin> appamatto: To save me spamming I would respectfully refer you to http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=2227
2287 2010-12-14 20:41:03 <RichardG_> !pool
2288 2010-12-14 20:41:03 <RichardG> Pooled miner (173.255.205.10:8335) status (last updated at 14/Dec/2010 18:38:09 GMT-2): 94 clients, 206772 khash/s, next block est. 0secs
2289 2010-12-14 20:41:04 <bitbot> Mining cartel attack
2290 2010-12-14 20:41:10 <RichardG> still est 0secs.
2291 2010-12-14 20:41:13 <nanotube> ByteCoin: ah ok let's see
2292 2010-12-14 20:41:18 <gavinandresen> ByteCoin: ... and how would you have to change your simulation to simulate Cartel versus Cartel? Have you simulated that case, and does it work out that nobody ends up with an extra advantage?
2293 2010-12-14 20:41:46 <appamatto> ByteCoin, I think I already made a reply
2294 2010-12-14 20:42:01 <appamatto> Is your cartel withholding blocks, or is it submitting the blocks it generates?
2295 2010-12-14 20:42:21 <Lyspooner> RichardG, i got married and i have 0secs anymore
2296 2010-12-14 20:42:53 <ByteCoin> The cartel witholds blocks and when the rest of the network generates a block it uses that block to generate the next
2297 2010-12-14 20:43:03 <RichardG> if I calculate with 1/ mIRC's calculator function returns 0.
2298 2010-12-14 20:43:13 <ByteCoin> You can view it as a 1D biased random walk
2299 2010-12-14 20:43:25 <tcatm> RichardG: Try 1.0/
2300 2010-12-14 20:43:29 <RichardG> still 0
2301 2010-12-14 20:43:39 <nanotube> try dumping mirc
2302 2010-12-14 20:43:40 <nanotube> hah
2303 2010-12-14 20:43:41 <appamatto> ByteCoin, what probability are you using to decide which block is accepted?
2304 2010-12-14 20:43:43 <RichardG> ,,bc,calc 1000
2305 2010-12-14 20:43:44 <gribble> (bc,calc <an alias, 1 argument>) -- Alias for "echo The average time to generate a block at $1 Khps, given current difficulty of [bc,diff], is [time elapsed [math calc 1/((2**224-1)/[bc,diff]*$1*1000/2**256)]]".
2306 2010-12-14 20:43:44 <Phoebus> richardG use a real calculator too :P Try googling "wolfram alpha"
2307 2010-12-14 20:43:53 <RichardG> ;;bc,calc 1000
2308 2010-12-14 20:43:55 <ByteCoin> gavin: I *could* simulate cartel vs cartel but would it really be interesting?
2309 2010-12-14 20:43:56 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 1000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 1 year, 34 weeks, 6 days, 1 hour, 14 minutes, and 48 seconds
2310 2010-12-14 20:44:08 * Phoebus looks for his spamshield.
2311 2010-12-14 20:44:26 <gavinandresen> ByteCoin: simulate it, and if you don't get an exactly split, then you know your simulation is bad. It is a good sanity test.
2312 2010-12-14 20:44:30 <nanotube> ByteCoin: i don't get it. say i control 40% of generation capacity. i generate a block... what possible benefit to me would i have to withhold it?
2313 2010-12-14 20:44:51 <appamatto> nanotube, you can slow others' calculations
2314 2010-12-14 20:44:59 <nanotube> appamatto: again, what possible benefit to me?
2315 2010-12-14 20:45:03 <MacRohard> nanotube, you could demand higher fees from people who want timely processing of their payments
2316 2010-12-14 20:45:14 <appamatto> nanotube, because you have a head start on calculations
2317 2010-12-14 20:45:20 <ByteCoin> appamatto: If the cartel has a block queued up and then the non-cartel generates a block then the cartel should try to release their block to race the other through the network
2318 2010-12-14 20:45:46 <LobsterMan> sorry for asking this again, i didn't see a response earlier:
2319 2010-12-14 20:45:46 <LobsterMan> there are "hidden" columns in the windows ui? i just hit ctrl-+ and it expanded the columns, and i see 2 new columns---
2320 2010-12-14 20:45:46 <LobsterMan> one has like 0000013456-0-175937953 and the other is a huge long hex string
2321 2010-12-14 20:46:07 <tcatm> RichardG: 2^256 * diff / (1000 * (2^224-1) * hashrate)
2322 2010-12-14 20:46:19 <LobsterMan> they are to the left of the status column
2323 2010-12-14 20:46:21 <ByteCoin> gavinandresen: If I simulated cartel vs cartel the symmetry in the code would enforce an even split
2324 2010-12-14 20:46:30 <ByteCoin> That is if both cartels used the same rules
2325 2010-12-14 20:46:33 <nanotube> MacRohard: bytecoin's writeup doesn't mention anything about fees... and further, as long as a significant fraction of the network is 'normal' they won't get away with demanding high fees.
2326 2010-12-14 20:46:36 <appamatto> ByteCoin, so let's say that the cartel has a 50% chance of winning the race
2327 2010-12-14 20:46:55 <nanotube> appamatto: what head start? i generate a block... i can release it and get 50 btc right now... or wait and... possibly not get 50 btc. where's the benefit?
2328 2010-12-14 20:47:03 <gavinandresen> ByteCoin: if the symmetry in the code says that each cartel gets 51% of the blocks, then you know the simulation is wrong, because there can only be 100%....
2329 2010-12-14 20:47:21 <MacRohard> nanotube, ok. should probably shutup i wasn't here at the start of the convo
2330 2010-12-14 20:47:22 <RichardG_> !pool
2331 2010-12-14 20:47:23 <RichardG> Pooled miner (173.255.205.10:8335) status (last updated at 14/Dec/2010 18:45:19 GMT-2): 96 clients, 230206 khash/s, next block est. 2days 15hrs 29mins 46secs
2332 2010-12-14 20:47:40 <ByteCoin> nanotube: It's not obvious but if you have a good fraction of the generating capacity, you can benefit by not publishing the block
2333 2010-12-14 20:47:42 <Lyspooner> thanks RichardG
2334 2010-12-14 20:47:45 lolcat is now known as lolhat
2335 2010-12-14 20:47:52 <RichardG> ;;bc,calc 230206
2336 2010-12-14 20:47:55 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 230206 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 2 days, 15 hours, 29 minutes, and 46 seconds
2337 2010-12-14 20:48:02 <RichardG> correct, thanks tcatm
2338 2010-12-14 20:48:07 <gavinandresen> ByteCoin: no, you can't, unless you control (many) more than 50% of the network connections....
2339 2010-12-14 20:48:11 RichardG_ has quit (Quit: Closing Link: RichardG_[0.0.0.0] (panic: We are hanging here...))
2340 2010-12-14 20:48:15 <RichardG> now try me: !pool
2341 2010-12-14 20:48:20 <ByteCoin> gavinandresen: I assure you that I haven't made that sort of mistake
2342 2010-12-14 20:48:21 <Lyspooner> !pool
2343 2010-12-14 20:48:21 <RichardG> Pooled miner (173.255.205.10:8335) status (last updated at 14/Dec/2010 18:46:05 GMT-2): 96 clients, 227003 khash/s, next block est. 2days 16hrs 23mins 32secs
2344 2010-12-14 20:48:23 <nanotube> ByteCoin: "not obvious" is an understatement. at the moment i completely fail to see how it would benefit the cartel.
2345 2010-12-14 20:48:29 <MacRohard> ByteCoin, really is not obvious. if you don't publish the block you acn't collect the free coins and transaction fees. The next time someone releases a block your unreleased block becomes worthless.
2346 2010-12-14 20:48:32 <ByteCoin> gavinandresen: That's where you're wrong
2347 2010-12-14 20:48:38 <appamatto> ByteCoin, have you calculated what the cartel loses when it's wrong and wins when it's right?
2348 2010-12-14 20:49:02 <appamatto> I mean, calculated the win/loss of the race?
2349 2010-12-14 20:49:40 <ByteCoin> appamatto: Basically, the cartel generates a larger fraction of the blocks than its share of the generating power would indicate
2350 2010-12-14 20:50:00 <appamatto> ByteCoin, do you have the actual calculations?
2351 2010-12-14 20:50:08 <ByteCoin> The cartel also has the power to victimize individual miners it wants to punish
2352 2010-12-14 20:50:16 anon92 has joined
2353 2010-12-14 20:50:19 <nanotube> ByteCoin: yes, but getting a larger 'fraction of the blocks' doesn't necessarily mean greater profit.
2354 2010-12-14 20:50:20 <ByteCoin> appamatto: Yes. I have the numbers
2355 2010-12-14 20:50:30 <ByteCoin> nanotube: Explain?
2356 2010-12-14 20:50:33 <nanotube> 50% of 100 is < 30% of 200
2357 2010-12-14 20:50:34 <appamatto> I'll write up my calculations and post them
2358 2010-12-14 20:50:43 <appamatto> But only if you give me 5 btc if I'm right :)
2359 2010-12-14 20:51:02 LobsterMan has left ()
2360 2010-12-14 20:51:02 LobsterMan has joined
2361 2010-12-14 20:51:07 <nanotube> ByteCoin: they don't generate a greater absolute number of blocks. they only get a larger fraction by rejecting other blocks...
2362 2010-12-14 20:51:09 <LobsterMan> when did .19 come out?
2363 2010-12-14 20:51:12 <nanotube> ByteCoin: thereby... no profit.
2364 2010-12-14 20:51:28 <RichardG> LobsterMan: yesterday
2365 2010-12-14 20:51:31 <RichardG> as sourceforge says
2366 2010-12-14 20:51:40 <LobsterMan> i see a forum post from the 12th
2367 2010-12-14 20:52:41 <ByteCoin> True, the number of blocks generated for a given amount of total work falls as many blocks are discarded.
2368 2010-12-14 20:52:43 <MacRohard> ByteCoin, hmm i maybe you have a point.
2369 2010-12-14 20:52:45 <appamatto> ByteCoin, wait, you're only talking about withholding blocks, correct? Or do you mean also rejecting blocks?
2370 2010-12-14 20:53:22 <ByteCoin> The point of the cartel is to monopolise block generation.
2371 2010-12-14 20:53:28 <gavinandresen> ByteCoin: it would be helpful to me if you could post a concrete example using three miners, each with 33.33% of the coin generating power, one of which is using the "hold back coins" strategy. Go through the numbers on what happens when that strategy wins versus when it loses, and what happens if one of the three tries to "shun" one of the others.
2372 2010-12-14 20:53:56 <nanotube> gavinandresen: ++ on that
2373 2010-12-14 20:54:14 <gavinandresen> ... all assuming they're all connected to each other (all have equal network standing)
2374 2010-12-14 20:54:15 <LobsterMan> i'd still like to know what these 2 additional columns are....visible if you hit ctrl-+ in windows
2375 2010-12-14 20:54:48 <nanotube> LobsterMan: iirc one is a timestamp-like thing, another is... something else i forget. basically, it's debug output.
2376 2010-12-14 20:54:49 <ByteCoin> gavinandressen: That's a reasonable request.
2377 2010-12-14 20:54:55 <ByteCoin> I will make a post of it
2378 2010-12-14 20:54:57 <LobsterMan> i cannot resize either of them
2379 2010-12-14 20:55:06 <LobsterMan> they are basically locked as invisible
2380 2010-12-14 20:55:14 <LobsterMan> unless you do ctrl "+"
2381 2010-12-14 20:56:45 <RichardG> second column may be transaction id
2382 2010-12-14 20:56:57 <LobsterMan> it's a long-ass hex string
2383 2010-12-14 20:56:59 <ByteCoin> Note that when the cartel has 34% of the total power then its performance improvement is small (about 0.7%)
2384 2010-12-14 20:57:09 <LobsterMan> like 64 characters
2385 2010-12-14 20:57:18 <MacRohard> basically when you find a block, instead of releasing it you can try to calculate the next block. sometimes you'll find blocks really fast in a matter of seconds but the avg will be 10min. If you manage to get two blocks ahead you can on average delay the next block up to 10min before someone else might find it - and if they do you've already got two queued up so you can force their block to be invalidated by releasing two blocks at once
2386 2010-12-14 20:57:21 <ByteCoin> So it generates 34.7% of the blocks using 34% of the power
2387 2010-12-14 20:57:36 <nanotube> ByteCoin: i suggest you also focus on profit, in terms of number of bitcoins, rather than "fraction of blocks". because ultimately if you make no profit, there's no point.
2388 2010-12-14 20:57:40 <ByteCoin> MacRohard: Precisely
2389 2010-12-14 20:58:03 <ByteCoin> nanotube: Disagree.
2390 2010-12-14 20:58:24 <nanotube> ByteCoin: why? if you get greater fraction, but at a cost of losing bitcoin... then why would anyone do that?
2391 2010-12-14 20:58:26 <ByteCoin> nanotube: Explain how you make less profit
2392 2010-12-14 20:58:34 dwdollar has joined
2393 2010-12-14 20:58:34 <nanotube> since you lose some of the blocks that you generate and not release
2394 2010-12-14 20:59:09 <MacRohard> nanotube, but by slowing down the generation you reduce the difficulty so you get more blocks (maybe)
2395 2010-12-14 20:59:12 <nanotube> if you released all the blocks, you would get all the 50btc bounties. if you don't release some of your blocks in an attempt to reject other people's blocks... sometimes you'll fail and lose the 50btc.
2396 2010-12-14 20:59:22 <nanotube> MacRohard: but so does everyone else get more blocks
2397 2010-12-14 20:59:24 <gavinandresen> nanotube: yup. MacRohard: you're not counting all the times you THINK you'll get two blocks ahead, but don't, and so lose all that time you spent generating that first block
2398 2010-12-14 20:59:29 <ByteCoin> nanotube: The block generation rate is CONSTANT over a long period by design. If you generate a larger proportion than your compute power warrants, you WIN!
2399 2010-12-14 20:59:38 <nanotube> ByteCoin: no
2400 2010-12-14 20:59:47 <nanotube> difficulty adjustments take care of that
2401 2010-12-14 20:59:47 <ByteCoin> nanotube: Yes.
2402 2010-12-14 20:59:57 <ByteCoin> nanotube: Precisely
2403 2010-12-14 21:00:00 <nanotube> if you reject some blocks so total block generation rate drops... difficulty will drop
2404 2010-12-14 21:00:09 <ByteCoin> nanotube: You're almost there
2405 2010-12-14 21:00:32 <gavinandresen> If you control less than 50% of the network you can't just drop blocks.
2406 2010-12-14 21:00:34 <nanotube> and then both you and everyone else would have an "easier time" generating blocks
2407 2010-12-14 21:00:51 <ByteCoin> gavinandresen: yes you can if you're two or more blocks ahead
2408 2010-12-14 21:01:01 <nanotube> yes, you can only drop them sometimes, if you manage to get two blocks in a row before the rest of the network does.
2409 2010-12-14 21:01:29 <gavinandresen> ByteCoin: ... but if you try to get two or more blocks ahead you'll lose out because of all the times when you do NOT manage to get two or more ahead....
2410 2010-12-14 21:01:32 <nanotube> but since >50% of the network has a greater probability of getting two blocks in a row in a period of time, than <50% does... then you have <half chance of success
2411 2010-12-14 21:01:51 <ByteCoin> At 34% generation power you're >1 block ahead 35.6% of the time
2412 2010-12-14 21:02:12 <ByteCoin> gavinandresen: You actually win
2413 2010-12-14 21:02:13 <MacRohard> interesting
2414 2010-12-14 21:02:47 <ByteCoin> nanotube: If you're 3 blocks ahead, you release 2 and you're still 1 ahead!
2415 2010-12-14 21:03:12 <gavinandresen> ByteCoin: so where does this break down if everybody is trying to use the same strategy? What changes?
2416 2010-12-14 21:03:16 <ByteCoin> Anybody know anything about Markov chains?
2417 2010-12-14 21:03:44 <gavinandresen> In the limit, everybody holds back blocks until they are.... how many ahead?
2418 2010-12-14 21:03:49 <LobsterMan> e says that each cartel gets 51% of the blocks, then you know the simulation is wro
2419 2010-12-14 21:03:51 <LobsterMan> err
2420 2010-12-14 21:03:53 <LobsterMan> fail paste
2421 2010-12-14 21:03:57 <LobsterMan> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=2276.0
2422 2010-12-14 21:03:58 <LobsterMan> :P
2423 2010-12-14 21:04:00 <bitbot> "Hidden Columns" in the windows UI?
2424 2010-12-14 21:04:08 <Lyspooner> ByteCoin, wouldn't other miners detect this careteling behavior and start denying blocks
2425 2010-12-14 21:04:09 <LobsterMan> yay bitbot is back
2426 2010-12-14 21:04:11 * LobsterMan slaps bitbot around with a heavy metal pole
2427 2010-12-14 21:04:12 * bitbot slaps LobsterMan around with a heavy metal pole twice!
2428 2010-12-14 21:04:13 * bitbot starts headbanging
2429 2010-12-14 21:04:24 <ByteCoin> gavinandresen: If there are 2 cartels I dunno....
2430 2010-12-14 21:04:30 <MacRohard> Lyspooner, no.
2431 2010-12-14 21:05:13 <ByteCoin> Lyspooner: Miners, or others *could* detect it.... That's not part of our discussion at the moment
2432 2010-12-14 21:05:55 <ByteCoin> Lobsterman: eh?
2433 2010-12-14 21:06:03 <LobsterMan> eh indeed
2434 2010-12-14 21:06:32 <appamatto> ByteCoin, if it's a 1D random walk then why is the probability distribution skewed?
2435 2010-12-14 21:06:33 RichardG_ has joined
2436 2010-12-14 21:06:35 <MacRohard> ByteCoin, they could make a guess at it but you'd never know for sure I don't think.
2437 2010-12-14 21:06:35 <RichardG_> !pool
2438 2010-12-14 21:06:36 <RichardG> Pooled miner (173.255.205.10:8335) status (last updated at 14/Dec/2010 19:04:07 GMT-2): 95 clients, 226505 khash/s, next block est. 2days 16hrs 32mins 1sec
2439 2010-12-14 21:06:38 RichardG_ has quit (Client Quit)
2440 2010-12-14 21:07:19 <ByteCoin> appamatto: It's skewed as on one side you have the cartel with a lower power than the rest of the network
2441 2010-12-14 21:07:49 <appamatto> ByteCoin, does the cartel do anything other than withhold blocks?
2442 2010-12-14 21:08:13 <ByteCoin> MacRohard: The cartel releases 2 blocks at a time to invalidate non-cartel blocks. Fairly obvious.
2443 2010-12-14 21:08:21 <MacRohard> ByteCoin, what if all the clients delayed releasing their blocks until 10min since the last one was released?
2444 2010-12-14 21:08:30 <MacRohard> ByteCoin, right, but sometimes 2 blocks could be ligitimately foudn close together
2445 2010-12-14 21:08:53 <ByteCoin> True. But stats will tell you how often it *should* happen
2446 2010-12-14 21:09:07 <MacRohard> ByteCoin, sure. that's what i meant when i said you could guess - but enver know for sure.
2447 2010-12-14 21:09:19 <ByteCoin> appamatto: The cartel strategies are outlined in my earliest post on that thread
2448 2010-12-14 21:10:10 <nanotube> so i still don't see the profit motive.
2449 2010-12-14 21:10:19 <ByteCoin> MacRohard: I think you'll find that you could ascribe a very low probability of these double block events happening like this by chance
2450 2010-12-14 21:10:25 kisom_dev has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
2451 2010-12-14 21:10:30 <gavinandresen> If the cartel has a 1 in 3 chance of generating 1 block, they have a 1 in 9 chance of being the first to generate two... so if they generate one and then hold it while they try to generate a second, 8 out of 9 times somebody else will announce a block before they generate the second, and all that work trying to generate the first AND the second is for nothing.
2452 2010-12-14 21:10:35 <appamatto> ByteCoin, withholding wasn't a part of the plan before
2453 2010-12-14 21:10:44 <ByteCoin> nanotube: If you generate more blocks than your cpu power entitles you to YOU WIN!
2454 2010-12-14 21:10:49 <MacRohard> ByteCoin, well what would you do about it? just deny blocks that come too close together? then the cartel could just release them slightly slower at just above whatever threshold you set
2455 2010-12-14 21:11:26 <nanotube> ByteCoin: but you do /not/ generate more blocks!
2456 2010-12-14 21:11:40 <Lyspooner> MacRohard, exactly, but buying time is important against the cartel
2457 2010-12-14 21:11:49 <nanotube> at most you can make others generate less blocks.
2458 2010-12-14 21:12:11 <gavinandresen> nanotube: I don't see how you can even do that.
2459 2010-12-14 21:12:50 <appamatto> ByteCoin, so the strategy is publishing up to 2 saved blocks?
2460 2010-12-14 21:13:01 <tcatm> What's the difference between getblockcount and getblocknumber?
2461 2010-12-14 21:13:11 <ByteCoin> gavinandresen: Under the 34% figure, when the cartel detects a non-cartel block being released, it immediately releases at least one stored block and lets them race across the network. The 33% figure presumes that they have equal chances of being accepted by the non-cartel miners.
2462 2010-12-14 21:13:14 RichardG_ has joined
2463 2010-12-14 21:13:17 <RichardG_> !pool
2464 2010-12-14 21:13:18 <RichardG> Could not obtain pooled miner status - log empty?
2465 2010-12-14 21:13:26 <nanotube> gavinandresen: that part i can explain easily enough. with 30 % chance of generating a block, you also have .3*.3 chance of generating two blocks in a row == 9%
2466 2010-12-14 21:13:41 <RichardG_> nanotube: would it be ok if I switch the bot to the new pooled miner
2467 2010-12-14 21:13:42 <RichardG_> (91.121.29.91)
2468 2010-12-14 21:13:55 <gavinandresen> ByteCoin: there's the flaw, then-- the cartel's block doesn't have an equal chance, unless they control more than 50% of the network connections.
2469 2010-12-14 21:14:09 <ByteCoin> gavinandresen: Why not equal?
2470 2010-12-14 21:14:18 <MacRohard> gavinandresen, it would be easy to engineer greater than 50% of network connections.
2471 2010-12-14 21:14:19 <ByteCoin> Ok I got it
2472 2010-12-14 21:14:28 <nanotube> gavinandresen: so if you generate block 1, then hold it back until you generate another one (and hope that in the meantime the rest of the network doesn't generate two), and then release both of them at once, while the rest of the network may have generated only 1 - then you make the network accept your two blocks, but reject the 1 block generated by others
2473 2010-12-14 21:14:36 <RichardG_> !pool
2474 2010-12-14 21:14:37 <RichardG> Pooled miner (91.121.29.91:8335) status (last updated at 14/Dec/2010 19:10:56 GMT-2): 17 clients, 17827 khash/s, next block est. 4wks 6days 3hrs 56mins 59secs
2475 2010-12-14 21:14:42 <RichardG_> switched to the new pooled miner
2476 2010-12-14 21:14:46 <ByteCoin> The non-cartel blocks have some advantage
2477 2010-12-14 21:14:52 <ByteCoin> they get a head start
2478 2010-12-14 21:14:53 <MacRohard> gavinandresen, nothing to stop the cartel being connected directly to almost every node on the network.
2479 2010-12-14 21:14:54 <RichardG_> or should I use the old pooled miner for the bot?
2480 2010-12-14 21:15:15 <gavinandresen> MacRohard: most nodes on the network connect OUT, and don't allow connections IN
2481 2010-12-14 21:15:24 <nanotube> gavinandresen: of course, though you can do it for 9% of blocks, all you'd be doing is losing money of the other 91 % of blocks. a very costly strategy.
2482 2010-12-14 21:15:35 <MacRohard> gavinandresen, take a /22 and join #bitcoin with differetn IPs
2483 2010-12-14 21:15:42 <ByteCoin> Bytecoin: Funnily enough - and this will really bake your noodle - the racing thing isn't actually central to the cartel's success.
2484 2010-12-14 21:15:53 <nanotube> RichardG_: what's that about switching the bot? what are you talking about?
2485 2010-12-14 21:16:18 <gavinandresen> MacRohard: I agree that a sybil attack can give you an advantage, but that's not the case we're arguing over
2486 2010-12-14 21:16:27 <RichardG> nanotube: if you read the latest posts on the "Join a pooled bitcoin mining effort" topic
2487 2010-12-14 21:16:39 <RichardG> doublec said he's being unable to run the pooled miner
2488 2010-12-14 21:16:47 <RichardG> and that sjaak offered a new one
2489 2010-12-14 21:16:55 * Phoebus thinks while loops are common around here...
2490 2010-12-14 21:16:56 <RichardG> I switched the bot to sjaak's server..
2491 2010-12-14 21:17:13 <nanotube> RichardG: linky me. :)
2492 2010-12-14 21:17:29 <RichardG> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=2027.msg30037#msg30037
2493 2010-12-14 21:17:30 <nanotube> also, can sjaak be trusted? and what happened with doublec ?
2494 2010-12-14 21:17:32 <bitbot> Join a pooled bitcoin mining effort : doublec: Unfortunately running the pooled server is proving too taxing for my VPS host. They keep killing the server due to using too much CPU. sjaak on IRC has offered to host a server on 91.121.29.91 that runs full time on a dedicated machine (rather than a VPS). If sjaak posts here to confirm the offer I plan to turn my serve...
2495 2010-12-14 21:17:42 <MacRohard> gavinandresen, i think it would be quite possible to ensure your cartel block got wider and faster distribution than a competing non-cartel block
2496 2010-12-14 21:18:43 <nanotube> RichardG: ah i see it... well... does the new pool have a site? or is doublec going to update his site to point to the new ip?
2497 2010-12-14 21:18:51 <RichardG> I don't know
2498 2010-12-14 21:18:55 <RichardG> that's all that is being said
2499 2010-12-14 21:18:58 <RichardG> I wonder about that though
2500 2010-12-14 21:18:59 <RichardG> posting
2501 2010-12-14 21:19:08 <nanotube> k :)
2502 2010-12-14 21:19:16 <[Noodles]> doublec wont shut it off before the next block is solved, he just asked if someone else is able to host a server, noone knows if sjaak can be trusted, we'll have to find out
2503 2010-12-14 21:19:19 <nanotube> in the meantime, i'll just have the pool factoid pointing to the old site. :)
2504 2010-12-14 21:19:22 <ByteCoin> nanotube: If you generate a larger fraction of the blocks than your cpu share should entitle you to then that's a win for the cartel. Do you still not see that?
2505 2010-12-14 21:19:22 <gavinandresen> MacRohard: knock yourself out... if you're successful, there will be an 'arms race' with cartels trying to have the widest/fastest network, which would be good for bitcoin overall, I think.
2506 2010-12-14 21:19:44 <RichardG> nanotube: let me point my bot to the old server
2507 2010-12-14 21:20:16 <RichardG_> !pool
2508 2010-12-14 21:20:16 <RichardG> Could not obtain pooled miner status - log empty?
2509 2010-12-14 21:20:48 <RichardG_> the old miner is requesting new blocks for me
2510 2010-12-14 21:22:03 <ByteCoin> gavinandresen: Don't trust my figures as I'm generating them without much review but if the cartel has 34% of the generation power then it's 1 block ahead 23% of the time and >1 block ahead 13% of the time
2511 2010-12-14 21:22:08 <gavinandresen> Then there are the practical issues, like how do the cartel nodes recognize each other? What if two cartel nodes both find blocks at about the same time-- which does the cartel decide to ignore/hold back/build on, and how does the cartel decide that as a unit? What's the latency for communication from one side of the cartel to the other, and if the latency is high enough, how much time do the cartel nodes spend
2512 2010-12-14 21:22:08 <gavinandresen> waiting to see which block they should be building on when they could be hashing the current public bitcoin block?
2513 2010-12-14 21:22:19 <RichardG_> !pool
2514 2010-12-14 21:22:19 <RichardG> Could not obtain pooled miner status - log empty? Last log line: Requesting a new block 1292361617578
2515 2010-12-14 21:22:54 <ByteCoin> gavinandresen: I have obviously neglected practical issues at the moment:
2516 2010-12-14 21:23:25 <ByteCoin> Cartel nodes would have to have direct, low latency connections
2517 2010-12-14 21:23:26 <MacRohard> ByteCoin, could you simulate how that changes if all clients witheld their blocks by 10min?
2518 2010-12-14 21:24:09 <MacRohard> since the last released block i mean
2519 2010-12-14 21:24:12 <ByteCoin> MacRohard: I doubt you have provided all the required information for your scheme
2520 2010-12-14 21:24:38 <Lyspooner> MacRohard, if all clients withheld blocks by 10 min, why wouldn't i try to produce a block faster?
2521 2010-12-14 21:24:42 <ByteCoin> If all clients withold for 10 minutes then just imagine the current situation but 10 minutes ago
2522 2010-12-14 21:25:02 <RichardG_> !pool
2523 2010-12-14 21:25:02 <RichardG> Could not obtain pooled miner status - log empty? Last log line: Requesting a new block 1292361784031
2524 2010-12-14 21:25:06 <RichardG_> that's weird
2525 2010-12-14 21:25:09 <RichardG_> can someone help me with that
2526 2010-12-14 21:25:11 <MacRohard> Lyspooner, you'd have to modify the clients to ignore such blocks until 10min were up
2527 2010-12-14 21:25:13 <MacRohard> hmm
2528 2010-12-14 21:25:34 <Lyspooner> then it would be a floodgate at the 10min mark
2529 2010-12-14 21:25:44 <MacRohard> yeah
2530 2010-12-14 21:26:18 <ByteCoin> gavinandresen: Just read your post on the thread. Thx for tidying up
2531 2010-12-14 21:26:27 <RichardG_> the pooled miner doesn't work, it's always requesting a new block - could someone help me with this
2532 2010-12-14 21:26:35 <ByteCoin> nanotube: Not interested anymore?
2533 2010-12-14 21:27:36 <Lyspooner> ByteCoin, i think if the network detected your cartel strategy, then any blocks released too closely together, say by X seconds, would be rejected
2534 2010-12-14 21:27:46 <MacRohard> i guess you can't do it every 10min because the difficulty adjustments depend on generation time differences
2535 2010-12-14 21:28:03 <ByteCoin> Lyspooner: I don't believe that any such check exists at the moment
2536 2010-12-14 21:28:12 <MacRohard> it doesn't and it couldn't
2537 2010-12-14 21:28:31 <RichardG_> !Pool
2538 2010-12-14 21:28:31 <RichardG> Pooled miner (173.255.205.10:8335) status (last updated at 14/Dec/2010 19:18:01 GMT-2): 92 clients, 164401 khash/s, next block est. 3days 16hrs 54mins 43secs
2539 2010-12-14 21:28:41 <MacRohard> wherever you put the bar some legitimate blocks will get snuffed
2540 2010-12-14 21:28:52 <Lyspooner> why couldn't it? if every third block I found was being overtaken by two blocks, i'd become suspicious
2541 2010-12-14 21:28:58 <ByteCoin> nanotube: Post on the thread with what you object to. I think it's useful to get it thrashed out.
2542 2010-12-14 21:29:05 StrangeCharm has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
2543 2010-12-14 21:29:16 <MacRohard> Lyspooner, suspecious sure.. but that happens sometimes anyway
2544 2010-12-14 21:29:26 <MacRohard> Lyspooner, no way to know if it was just one of those times or not
2545 2010-12-14 21:29:30 RichardG_ has quit (Quit: Read error: Connection reset by pier)
2546 2010-12-14 21:29:53 <appamatto> ByteCoin, I have some logic for you
2547 2010-12-14 21:30:02 <ByteCoin> appamatto: Cool!
2548 2010-12-14 21:30:03 <Lyspooner> the network would rather snuff a legitimate block than be run over by a cartel, no?
2549 2010-12-14 21:30:15 <Phoebus> Greedsanity.
2550 2010-12-14 21:30:29 <appamatto> ByteCoin: let's call the state of the system CX where X is the number of saved blocks the cartel has. So the system starts in C0
2551 2010-12-14 21:30:32 bitbot has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2552 2010-12-14 21:30:43 <ByteCoin> appamatto: I like the direction you're going
2553 2010-12-14 21:30:52 <appamatto> From C0, NC (non-cartel) generates 2/3 of the blocks, right?
2554 2010-12-14 21:31:00 <ByteCoin> Yes
2555 2010-12-14 21:31:25 <ByteCoin> So they're generated and the cartel adopts them and you're back in C0
2556 2010-12-14 21:31:43 <MacRohard> Lyspooner, well that's why my original suggestion of just make the bar 10min came from - but that doesn't fix it either.
2557 2010-12-14 21:32:01 <appamatto> Otherwise we go to C1. From C1 there is a 2/3 chance of a run which will be won 1/2 of the time. That's 1/9 of a point for NC
2558 2010-12-14 21:32:15 <Lyspooner> 10 mins too high. make the cartel sweat it out for 20 seconds or so
2559 2010-12-14 21:32:24 <ByteCoin> You're along the right lines but straying...
2560 2010-12-14 21:32:27 <appamatto> Follow that?
2561 2010-12-14 21:32:38 <ByteCoin> There are multiple ways of getting to C1
2562 2010-12-14 21:32:38 <MacRohard> Lyspooner, then they just wait 21 seconds.
2563 2010-12-14 21:32:51 <ByteCoin> You could have been at C3 and published 2 blocks
2564 2010-12-14 21:32:58 <appamatto> Right
2565 2010-12-14 21:33:00 <Lyspooner> bytecoin has a model which will show the optimal time for cartel-stoppers to force cartels to wait so they no longer have an advantage
2566 2010-12-14 21:33:01 <nanotube> ByteCoin: all you're doing is rejecting (some of) the other blocks, at the cost of having some of your own rejected. i guess i'll try posting some stuff on that thread of yours... :)
2567 2010-12-14 21:33:34 <appamatto> But out of the C1 states, NC will generate 1/3 of the time
2568 2010-12-14 21:33:42 <ByteCoin> So the proportion of your time at C1 seems to be about .11
2569 2010-12-14 21:33:46 <ByteCoin> Ooops .22
2570 2010-12-14 21:33:57 <appamatto> Anyways, NC has some equity in C1, correct?
2571 2010-12-14 21:34:17 <ByteCoin> Yes
2572 2010-12-14 21:35:31 <appamatto> Now in the rest of the states, C2-CN, there is a 2/3 chance C will "spend" 2 blocks to get one block, and a 1/3 chance C will get a new block
2573 2010-12-14 21:35:38 <Lyspooner> MacRohard, do you see what i'm getting at? if the cartel has to wait 21 seconds to transmit block 2/2 (and thus nullifying the honest block), then the likelihood that a second honest block found goes up
2574 2010-12-14 21:35:58 <Phoebus> The most one can invest right now is 6k? Why does http://nullvoid.org/bitcoin/ stop at a certain amount?
2575 2010-12-14 21:36:09 Azetab has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2576 2010-12-14 21:36:11 <ByteCoin> appamatto: C will spend 2 blocks to get TWO blocks!
2577 2010-12-14 21:36:16 <appamatto> right
2578 2010-12-14 21:36:22 <ByteCoin> You said 1
2579 2010-12-14 21:36:27 <appamatto> Yes, my mistake
2580 2010-12-14 21:36:59 altamic has joined
2581 2010-12-14 21:37:00 <MacRohard> Lyspooner, yea. sure.. i'm just not sure what that curve would look like.
2582 2010-12-14 21:37:26 <nanotube> Phoebus: that site is out of date/dead... don't use it.
2583 2010-12-14 21:37:34 <nanotube> note it still thinks difficulty is 3000
2584 2010-12-14 21:37:39 <Phoebus> nanotube, alternatives?
2585 2010-12-14 21:37:47 <nanotube> bitcoincharts.com
2586 2010-12-14 21:37:52 <Phoebus> cheers
2587 2010-12-14 21:38:29 <nanotube> :)
2588 2010-12-14 21:38:41 <MacRohard> Lyspooner, especially if you had a larger cartel with say >50% of the network.
2589 2010-12-14 21:38:58 <appamatto> ByteCoin, hmm, this is hard to calculate
2590 2010-12-14 21:40:35 <ByteCoin> Ok. let me do it
2591 2010-12-14 21:40:58 <ByteCoin> It's in C0 64.09% of the time
2592 2010-12-14 21:41:08 <Granttt> !pool
2593 2010-12-14 21:41:09 <RichardG> Pooled miner (173.255.205.10:8335) status (last updated at 14/Dec/2010 19:29:03 GMT-2): 91 clients, 171605 khash/s, next block est. 3days 13hrs 10mins 46secs
2594 2010-12-14 21:41:17 <ByteCoin> it's in C1 22.88% of the time
2595 2010-12-14 21:41:25 <Granttt> !pool
2596 2010-12-14 21:41:26 <RichardG> Pooled miner (173.255.205.10:8335) status (last updated at 14/Dec/2010 19:29:03 GMT-2): 91 clients, 171605 khash/s, next block est. 3days 13hrs 10mins 46secs
2597 2010-12-14 21:41:50 <ByteCoin> when it's in c0 the non-cabal always win
2598 2010-12-14 21:42:07 <ByteCoin> when it's in C1 then non-cabal win 66% of the time
2599 2010-12-14 21:42:32 <appamatto> that's already more than 66% for the non-cabal
2600 2010-12-14 21:42:37 <ByteCoin> so total earnings for non-cabal are .6409+.66*.2288=.7919
2601 2010-12-14 21:43:10 <ByteCoin> cabal win when they're in C>1 which is 13.03% of the time
2602 2010-12-14 21:43:26 <ByteCoin> they also win 34% of the time when they're in C1
2603 2010-12-14 21:43:43 <appamatto> So... doesn't this mean that the cartel is using a losing strategy?
2604 2010-12-14 21:43:49 <ByteCoin> But when they win they get two blocks!
2605 2010-12-14 21:44:05 <appamatto> Are you using a program?
2606 2010-12-14 21:44:14 <LobsterMan> so dumb question....i haven't really been following along... what is "the cartel"?
2607 2010-12-14 21:44:18 <ByteCoin> So total earnings for cabal is 2*(.1303+.34*.2288)=.4161
2608 2010-12-14 21:44:32 <cosurgi> ok.... my ATI is in the box, debian was updated to squeeze. What next? Do I need to build fglrx debian package?
2609 2010-12-14 21:44:43 <appamatto> Can you show me your program?
2610 2010-12-14 21:44:59 <ByteCoin> .4161 is 34.44% of the total of .4161 and .7919
2611 2010-12-14 21:45:16 <Lyspooner> ByteCoin, at the risk of snuffing honest blocks, a cartel-blocking network wouldn't accept 2 successive blocks after X period of time, where X was sufficiently long enough to produce more honest blocks
2612 2010-12-14 21:45:22 <ByteCoin> So with 34% of the power, it generates 34.44% of the blocks
2613 2010-12-14 21:45:26 <appamatto> okay, okay
2614 2010-12-14 21:45:35 <appamatto> Can I see your program, or should I write my own?
2615 2010-12-14 21:46:16 <ByteCoin> appamatto: No objection to you seeing mine. Might be more reasuring for everyone else if you went "clean room" though
2616 2010-12-14 21:46:44 <appamatto> Hmm
2617 2010-12-14 21:46:54 <appamatto> I'd rather just take a look and see if I can spot any bugs
2618 2010-12-14 21:47:26 <appamatto> Hmm, on second thought I'll just do my own
2619 2010-12-14 21:47:27 <ByteCoin> I'll tidy it somewhat and post it to the forum
2620 2010-12-14 21:47:34 <ByteCoin> Ok
2621 2010-12-14 21:48:09 Azetab has joined
2622 2010-12-14 21:50:28 glassresistor has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
2623 2010-12-14 21:50:29 <ByteCoin> nanotube: Thanks! Do that...
2624 2010-12-14 21:51:25 <cosurgi> do you get OpenCL for ati from this site: http://orwell.fiit.stuba.sk/~nou/ ??
2625 2010-12-14 21:51:53 <ByteCoin> appamatto: After you've generated your results, assuming they differ, we can post our code to the forum
2626 2010-12-14 21:52:36 <appamatto> ByteCoin, what do you get if you use 34% for the chance the cartel wins the race?
2627 2010-12-14 21:52:36 <Lyspooner> ByteCoin, once the cartel produces C1 and C2, if honest miners find H1, send it to the network and restrict block 2 to be X seconds after transmission of block 1, then there is a greater chance that H2 is found before C2 is transmitted
2628 2010-12-14 21:53:25 <ByteCoin> Lyspooner: Oh no!... There's only *so* much I can get my head around at once!
2629 2010-12-14 21:53:34 <ByteCoin> So what's H1?
2630 2010-12-14 21:53:56 <Lyspooner> honest block 1 (identical to C1, except who found it)
2631 2010-12-14 21:54:01 <ByteCoin> I think you're using C1 in a different way to appamatto
2632 2010-12-14 21:54:02 <appamatto> I think if the race winning chance is 34% then that changes things a lot
2633 2010-12-14 21:54:39 leeth has joined
2634 2010-12-14 21:54:43 <gavinandresen> ByteCoin: I still don't see how any of your argument changes if everybody is a cartel. In which case, you end up with the absurd result that everybody gets more than their fair share of blocks.......
2635 2010-12-14 21:54:46 <ByteCoin> appamatto: The change from slightly unprofitable to slightly profitable occurs around 33% for this scheme
2636 2010-12-14 21:55:10 <appamatto> ByteCoin, I'm talking about the chance of winning the block race in C1
2637 2010-12-14 21:55:51 <ByteCoin> gavinandresen: Once the cartel has >50% of the network then it can completely shut down other miners by never using their blocks
2638 2010-12-14 21:56:03 <gavinandresen> ByteCoin: yes, we know that.
2639 2010-12-14 21:56:17 <Lyspooner> ByteCoin -- My rules: I am honest. I don't accept 2 blocks in succession until 21 seconds separate the two blocks.
2640 2010-12-14 21:56:20 <ByteCoin> So if everyone is in the cartel then.... no problem
2641 2010-12-14 21:56:49 sgornick has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
2642 2010-12-14 21:57:02 <gavinandresen> ByteCoin: no, I'm talking about the three competing cartels case. By your argument, as far as I can tell, they EACH get 34.44% of the blocks.
2643 2010-12-14 21:57:19 <ByteCoin> If there are two cartels with 49% of the power each then I very much imagine that the remaining 2% don't generate their fair share. That's how multiple cartels works
2644 2010-12-14 21:57:56 <appamatto> ByteCoin, did you try recalculating based on the different race win percentage?
2645 2010-12-14 21:58:06 <Lyspooner> ByteCoin -- As a cartel, say you have found blocks 1 and 2 before me. Then say I found block 1. Your original strategy was to transmit blocks 1 and 2 immediately. Now you will have to wait 21 seconds and run the risk that I find block 2
2646 2010-12-14 21:58:06 <ByteCoin> gavinandresen: The cartel strategy relies on the fact that the non-cartel don't withold blocks
2647 2010-12-14 21:58:33 <kiba> blah, we can't get chromium extension improving
2648 2010-12-14 21:58:36 <ByteCoin> appamatto: Yes
2649 2010-12-14 21:58:47 ByteCoin has left ()
2650 2010-12-14 21:58:48 <kiba> because Bitquux decides to make an excuse as to why he will not release the source code
2651 2010-12-14 21:59:02 ByteCoin has joined
2652 2010-12-14 21:59:12 <ByteCoin> Dunno what happened there...
2653 2010-12-14 21:59:24 <ByteCoin> I've lost my history
2654 2010-12-14 21:59:41 bertodsera has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2655 2010-12-14 21:59:43 * kiba is angry with Bitquux for not releasing the source code
2656 2010-12-14 21:59:50 <Phoebus> ByteCoin, the logs are recorded, check notice on channel join.
2657 2010-12-14 22:00:00 <kiba> he's not replying to my PM
2658 2010-12-14 22:00:43 <ByteCoin> appamatto: If the cabal win the race 3 times out of 4 then I believe I've said that they are profitable at 20% of the total power.
2659 2010-12-14 22:01:32 bertodsera has joined
2660 2010-12-14 22:02:05 <ByteCoin> gavinandresen: I don't really want to play two cabals off against each other as I imagine the optimum strategies about when to publish blocks would be complicated.
2661 2010-12-14 22:02:47 <kiba> why not just publish the damn block?
2662 2010-12-14 22:03:05 <gavinandresen> kiba: I still claim that's the best you can do.
2663 2010-12-14 22:03:09 <ByteCoin> If it was 49%cabal, 49% cabal 2% non cabal then the non-cabal would get stomped on all the time
2664 2010-12-14 22:03:20 <MacRohard> kiba, because while you don't publish it you can start working on th enext block while everyone else is working on the last block
2665 2010-12-14 22:03:34 <ByteCoin> MacRohard: Bingo
2666 2010-12-14 22:04:06 <kiba> yeah, but aren't you're screwing with the network?
2667 2010-12-14 22:04:16 <gavinandresen> MacRohard: as I've said several times before, you're shooting yourself in the foot if you do that, because that block you're saving has a higher chance of getting rejected if you don't publish it right away.
2668 2010-12-14 22:04:19 <ByteCoin> kiba: Doubt it..
2669 2010-12-14 22:04:45 <MacRohard> gavinandresen, well if it does as a last resort you could release the next block too
2670 2010-12-14 22:04:55 <ByteCoin> gavinandresen: If you follow through the maths I just did with appamatto I think you'll see that you do win
2671 2010-12-14 22:05:09 <Lyspooner> shall we start over?
2672 2010-12-14 22:05:25 <gavinandresen> ByteCoin: ... and I come back to: OK, so I follow through the math for the 3 competing cabals case, and end up with the absurd result that they ALL come out ahead.
2673 2010-12-14 22:05:55 <gavinandresen> ... which makes me think there's something missing in the math.
2674 2010-12-14 22:06:06 <ByteCoin> gavinandresen: I never did the maths for any competing cabals. What are you referring to?
2675 2010-12-14 22:06:27 <ByteCoin> It was 34% cabal 66% non-cabal
2676 2010-12-14 22:06:50 <gavinandresen> ByteCoin: I'm just applying the math three times to 1/3 / 1/3 / 1/3 cabal case. All the logic is the same, yes?
2677 2010-12-14 22:06:51 <ByteCoin> Competing cabals is likely to be complex
2678 2010-12-14 22:07:13 <ByteCoin> gavinandresen: No. Because non cabal never withold blocks
2679 2010-12-14 22:07:55 <ByteCoin> Non cabal get exploited as they always give the cabal the "latest" block to base their work off
2680 2010-12-14 22:08:05 <ByteCoin> latest= most recent
2681 2010-12-14 22:08:21 <ByteCoin> cabal keep the latest block secret from non cabal
2682 2010-12-14 22:08:33 <ByteCoin> they can therefore move 2 or more blocks ahead
2683 2010-12-14 22:08:43 anon92 has quit (Quit: anon92)
2684 2010-12-14 22:08:44 <Lyspooner> ByteCoin, as MacroHard and I agree with you, do you care to address optimal network strategy
2685 2010-12-14 22:08:54 <Lyspooner> MacRohard sorry
2686 2010-12-14 22:09:01 <kiba> lol
2687 2010-12-14 22:09:04 <kiba> acoHard
2688 2010-12-14 22:09:24 <ByteCoin> Lyspooner: Are we talking about prevention or implementation of the cabal
2689 2010-12-14 22:09:24 <appamatto> ah, ByteCoin!
2690 2010-12-14 22:09:30 <appamatto> I found an error in your calcs
2691 2010-12-14 22:09:33 <Lyspooner> prevention
2692 2010-12-14 22:09:34 <ByteCoin> appamatto: You have results?
2693 2010-12-14 22:09:53 <appamatto> In the previous example, you said the cabal wins in C>1
2694 2010-12-14 22:10:00 <ByteCoin> yes
2695 2010-12-14 22:10:02 <appamatto> But in only wins in C>1 66% of the time
2696 2010-12-14 22:10:12 <ByteCoin> no, always!
2697 2010-12-14 22:10:19 <appamatto> the other 34% it just moves to C++ without publishing
2698 2010-12-14 22:11:01 <ByteCoin> well yes
2699 2010-12-14 22:11:08 redengin has joined
2700 2010-12-14 22:11:13 <Lyspooner> ByteCoin, run your program with a network-imposed delay of, say, 20 seconds between blocks acceptance
2701 2010-12-14 22:11:14 <ByteCoin> but that accumulated block lead must be spent at some point
2702 2010-12-14 22:11:21 <ByteCoin> given the random walk nature of things
2703 2010-12-14 22:11:35 <appamatto> It's only spent on a down-transition
2704 2010-12-14 22:11:41 <ByteCoin> Lyspooner: You've been very patient but I have my hands full at the moment
2705 2010-12-14 22:12:03 <ByteCoin> I'm sorry I cant do your idea justice.
2706 2010-12-14 22:12:12 <ByteCoin> Please post in that thread on the forum
2707 2010-12-14 22:12:21 <ByteCoin> appamatto: Yes
2708 2010-12-14 22:12:30 <ByteCoin> appamatto: Is that a problem?
2709 2010-12-14 22:12:47 <kiba> nobody download my art today :(
2710 2010-12-14 22:13:01 <appamatto> Yes
2711 2010-12-14 22:13:17 <ByteCoin> appamatto: If cabal gets bored of being at c1000 it can always publish a few hundred!
2712 2010-12-14 22:13:29 <ByteCoin> appamatto: Go on...
2713 2010-12-14 22:13:34 <appamatto> ByteCoin, it means you're giving credit for them publishing two blocks even when they're moving up in saved blocks
2714 2010-12-14 22:13:56 <appamatto> the way you counted, C2->C3 counts as publishing 2 blocks
2715 2010-12-14 22:15:57 <ByteCoin> Well, it's in C>1 13.03% of the time
2716 2010-12-14 22:16:44 <ByteCoin> and the only way to get out is either to c1 or c0 by
2717 2010-12-14 22:16:50 <ByteCoin> ok let me restart that
2718 2010-12-14 22:16:54 <MacRohard> what's the probability of finding more than one blocks in <10min? with only 30% of the network?
2719 2010-12-14 22:17:07 <ByteCoin> It's in Cx where x>1 13.03% of the time
2720 2010-12-14 22:18:02 <ByteCoin> it can get to C1 by publishing a total of x-1 blocks if x>2
2721 2010-12-14 22:18:24 <ByteCoin> and to C0 by publishing x blocks if x>1
2722 2010-12-14 22:19:07 lethys has joined
2723 2010-12-14 22:19:30 <ByteCoin> u7mm... Now I've got myself confused
2724 2010-12-14 22:20:02 <appamatto> ByteCoin, you're changing the strategy now
2725 2010-12-14 22:20:12 <appamatto> Just count the number of blocks published out of each state
2726 2010-12-14 22:20:39 <appamatto> leaving the state, not entering it
2727 2010-12-14 22:20:50 <nanotube> ByteCoin: http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=2227.msg30217#msg30217 fwiw.
2728 2010-12-14 22:21:21 kisom__ has joined
2729 2010-12-14 22:21:32 kisom__ is now known as kisom_dev
2730 2010-12-14 22:21:58 leeth has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2731 2010-12-14 22:22:23 <ByteCoin> Ok. appamatto I admit I'm having trouble with the logic there
2732 2010-12-14 22:22:48 <ByteCoin> The calculations match so wonderfully well with the simulation however....
2733 2010-12-14 22:23:06 <ByteCoin> I can't join the dots at the moment
2734 2010-12-14 22:23:16 <ByteCoin> Must admit...
2735 2010-12-14 22:23:23 <appamatto> Can you paste your code somewhere?
2736 2010-12-14 22:23:48 <appamatto> I'm getting only 30% capacity by a 33.333% cartel
2737 2010-12-14 22:23:51 foobar_ has quit (Quit: Page closed)
2738 2010-12-14 22:24:22 <ByteCoin> bool careful = true;
2739 2010-12-14 22:24:24 <ByteCoin> System.Random rand = new System.Random(1);
2740 2010-12-14 22:24:25 <ByteCoin> for (int percent = 0000; percent < 5000; percent+=10) {
2741 2010-12-14 22:24:28 <ByteCoin> int cartelconfirmed = 0, networkconfirmed = 0, carteldispute = 0, networkdispute = 0;
2742 2010-12-14 22:24:29 <ByteCoin> int[] excess = new int[100];
2743 2010-12-14 22:24:32 <ByteCoin> for (int minute = 0; minute < 10000000; minute++) {
2744 2010-12-14 22:24:34 <ByteCoin> if (rand.Next(100000) < percent) {
2745 2010-12-14 22:24:36 <ByteCoin> carteldispute++;
2746 2010-12-14 22:24:37 <ByteCoin> //System.Console.WriteLine("Cartel!");
2747 2010-12-14 22:24:40 <ByteCoin> }
2748 2010-12-14 22:24:42 <ByteCoin> if (rand.Next(100000) < (10000 - percent)) {
2749 2010-12-14 22:24:44 <ByteCoin> networkdispute++;
2750 2010-12-14 22:24:46 <ByteCoin> //System.Console.WriteLine("Network!");
2751 2010-12-14 22:24:47 <ByteCoin> }
2752 2010-12-14 22:24:50 <ByteCoin> if (networkdispute >= 1 && carteldispute > networkdispute) {
2753 2010-12-14 22:24:52 <ByteCoin> //network generates a block and cartel can punish
2754 2010-12-14 22:24:53 <ByteCoin> cartelconfirmed += 4 * (networkdispute + 1);
2755 2010-12-14 22:24:55 <ByteCoin> carteldispute -= networkdispute + 1;
2756 2010-12-14 22:24:58 <ByteCoin> networkdispute = 0;
2757 2010-12-14 22:24:59 <ByteCoin> }
2758 2010-12-14 22:25:02 <ByteCoin> if (careful && networkdispute == carteldispute) {
2759 2010-12-14 22:25:03 <ByteCoin> networkconfirmed += 1 * networkdispute;
2760 2010-12-14 22:25:05 <ByteCoin> cartelconfirmed += 3 * carteldispute;
2761 2010-12-14 22:25:08 <ByteCoin> networkdispute = 0;
2762 2010-12-14 22:25:10 <ByteCoin> carteldispute = 0;
2763 2010-12-14 22:25:12 <ByteCoin> }
2764 2010-12-14 22:25:12 <bencoder> lol... somewhere is not here
2765 2010-12-14 22:25:14 <ByteCoin> if (networkdispute > carteldispute) {
2766 2010-12-14 22:25:16 <ByteCoin> //System.Console.WriteLine("Bing!");
2767 2010-12-14 22:25:18 <ByteCoin> //network ahead. Cartel must move on
2768 2010-12-14 22:25:20 <ByteCoin> networkconfirmed += 4 * (networkdispute - 0);
2769 2010-12-14 22:25:22 <ByteCoin> networkdispute = 0;
2770 2010-12-14 22:25:24 <ByteCoin> carteldispute = 0;
2771 2010-12-14 22:25:26 <ByteCoin> }
2772 2010-12-14 22:25:28 <ByteCoin> excess[carteldispute]++;
2773 2010-12-14 22:25:30 <nanotube> ;;kick ByteCoin
2774 2010-12-14 22:25:30 <ByteCoin> //System.Console.WriteLine("{0}\t{1}\t{2}\t{3}\t{4}", minute, networkconfirmed / 2.0, cartelconfirmed / 2.0, networkdispute, carteldispute);
2775 2010-12-14 22:25:37 <appamatto> youch
2776 2010-12-14 22:25:37 <bencoder> thanks nanotube
2777 2010-12-14 22:25:43 <nanotube> hehe
2778 2010-12-14 22:25:48 <appamatto> must be new to IRC
2779 2010-12-14 22:25:52 <gavinandresen> I was SO tempted to write:
2780 2010-12-14 22:25:53 <gavinandresen> }
2781 2010-12-14 22:25:56 <bencoder> :D
2782 2010-12-14 22:25:57 <gavinandresen> }
2783 2010-12-14 22:25:59 <nanotube> gavinandresen: haha
2784 2010-12-14 22:26:07 <RichardG> trying to crack that pooled miner protocol >_<
2785 2010-12-14 22:26:22 <RichardG> all I want to do is obtain stats off it.
2786 2010-12-14 22:26:31 <RichardG> I swear I managed to do it once by sending "DD" + CRLF to the server
2787 2010-12-14 22:26:36 <RichardG> but I can't seem to anymore
2788 2010-12-14 22:26:55 <MacRohard> in a way basically this is a martingale betting scheme betting on the time to generate the next block.
2789 2010-12-14 22:27:02 <MacRohard> maybe.
2790 2010-12-14 22:27:06 ByteCoin has joined
2791 2010-12-14 22:27:14 <Lyspooner> tsk tsk
2792 2010-12-14 22:27:23 <ByteCoin> ;me shakes head
2793 2010-12-14 22:27:32 <nanotube> ByteCoin: hey you're back. :) sorry for the kick... but pastebin, maybe? :)
2794 2010-12-14 22:27:43 <ByteCoin> Drat. forgot how to emote
2795 2010-12-14 22:27:47 <albatross_> ;;kick everyone
2796 2010-12-14 22:27:47 <gribble> Error: You don't have the #bitcoin-dev,op capability. If you think that you should have this capability, be sure that you are identified before trying again. The 'whoami' command can tell you if you're identified.
2797 2010-12-14 22:27:51 <albatross_> lol
2798 2010-12-14 22:28:00 <bencoder> /me ByteCoin
2799 2010-12-14 22:28:10 * ByteCoin blinks
2800 2010-12-14 22:28:19 <nanotube> /you not ByteCoin, bencoder :P hehe
2801 2010-12-14 22:28:24 <bencoder> :P
2802 2010-12-14 22:28:40 albatross_ has quit (Quit: Page closed)
2803 2010-12-14 22:28:42 <ByteCoin> appamatto: The code I pasted is not quite right
2804 2010-12-14 22:28:49 <ByteCoin> You've got it though
2805 2010-12-14 22:28:49 <bencoder> better paste it again
2806 2010-12-14 22:28:51 <bencoder> :P
2807 2010-12-14 22:28:56 <ByteCoin> yeah?
2808 2010-12-14 22:29:02 <nanotube> haha in a pastebin!
2809 2010-12-14 22:29:06 <nanotube> not to channel
2810 2010-12-14 22:29:06 <ByteCoin> It's a real hack.
2811 2010-12-14 22:29:24 <bencoder> http://pastebin.com/ just paste it into that
2812 2010-12-14 22:29:50 <appamatto> ByteCoin, also about the strategy: when C loses in C1, he should continue on his own block anyway
2813 2010-12-14 22:29:56 <appamatto> It changes the simulation a bit
2814 2010-12-14 22:30:40 <appamatto> also C should win the race about 2/3 of the time because the C will always take his own block and then NC will be split half and half
2815 2010-12-14 22:31:06 lolhat is now known as lolcat
2816 2010-12-14 22:31:11 <ByteCoin> appamatto: I did simulate that. I believe that it's not as good a strategy..
2817 2010-12-14 22:32:35 <ByteCoin> There's a point in the code where it says networkconfirmed += 3 * something
2818 2010-12-14 22:33:09 <ByteCoin> you have to change the 3 and 1 to 2 and 2 to simulate the cabal having an even chance of propagating the block
2819 2010-12-14 22:33:53 <appamatto> I don't think it's even
2820 2010-12-14 22:34:07 <appamatto> Like I said, the cabal will always take its own block and then the rest will be split 50-50
2821 2010-12-14 22:34:18 <appamatto> So the cabal actually has a 2/3 chance
2822 2010-12-14 22:35:15 <appamatto> Our C1 calculation is not very good
2823 2010-12-14 22:35:41 <ByteCoin> You can alter the code under networkdispute > carteldispute to simulate the cartel not accepting the latest non-cartel block
2824 2010-12-14 22:36:07 <ByteCoin> If I recall correctly, the cartel gets worse results! Surprisingly....
2825 2010-12-14 22:36:19 <ByteCoin> At least initially surprisingly...
2826 2010-12-14 22:36:59 <appamatto> Hmm
2827 2010-12-14 22:37:33 <ByteCoin> You'd need to change networkdispute - 0 to networkdispute -1
2828 2010-12-14 22:37:46 <appamatto> This attack would be better the faster blocks are being produced
2829 2010-12-14 22:37:51 <ByteCoin> and also
2830 2010-12-14 22:37:54 <appamatto> And the more cohesive the cartel
2831 2010-12-14 22:38:06 <ByteCoin> networkdispute =1 instead of networkdispute =0
2832 2010-12-14 22:38:46 <appamatto> Can you repost here? http://pastebin.com/
2833 2010-12-14 22:39:17 <appamatto> Not sure I got it all
2834 2010-12-14 22:40:43 <ByteCoin> http://pastebin.com/uhVgQBKz
2835 2010-12-14 22:40:47 <ByteCoin> Does that work?
2836 2010-12-14 22:41:21 <appamatto> Yes, thanks!
2837 2010-12-14 22:42:09 <ByteCoin> If you don't accept the non-cabal work immediately then you have to have about 41% of the power before you become profitable rather than 33% as we explored before...
2838 2010-12-14 22:42:26 <ByteCoin> Do you want me to talk you through the code?
2839 2010-12-14 22:42:48 <ByteCoin> Reading someone else's hacked code is not fun
2840 2010-12-14 22:43:38 <appamatto> ByteCoin, why do you have two separate tests for network vs cabal production?
2841 2010-12-14 22:43:54 <appamatto> It should simply be 34% chance for cabal, otherwise network produces
2842 2010-12-14 22:44:10 noagendamarket has joined
2843 2010-12-14 22:44:25 <ByteCoin> Well in this instance of the code I wanted to simulate block generation in 1 minute increments
2844 2010-12-14 22:44:53 <appamatto> I think you're adding additional factors
2845 2010-12-14 22:44:54 noagendamarket has quit (Changing host)
2846 2010-12-14 22:44:54 noagendamarket has joined
2847 2010-12-14 22:44:55 <ByteCoin> So the total chance of getting a block in a 1 minute increment is .1
2848 2010-12-14 22:45:13 <appamatto> How do we know that this alone won't favor the cabal?
2849 2010-12-14 22:45:27 <ByteCoin> How could it not be impartial?
2850 2010-12-14 22:45:48 <ByteCoin> You can increase/decrease the granularity
2851 2010-12-14 22:45:48 <ArtForz> I think you're missing something fundamental here, but reading that code gives me a headache
2852 2010-12-14 22:46:10 <ByteCoin> Sorry Artforz. I posted it without making it nice
2853 2010-12-14 22:46:20 * ByteCoin hangs head in shame...
2854 2010-12-14 22:46:30 <appamatto> If I run a simulation with those two separate tests, I'm not convinced that the cabal will get 34% of the produciton
2855 2010-12-14 22:46:36 <appamatto> it may be quite different
2856 2010-12-14 22:46:46 <ArtForz> how about a simple short "game strategy" for C ?
2857 2010-12-14 22:46:58 fabianhjr has joined
2858 2010-12-14 22:47:03 <fabianhjr> Hi, sup?
2859 2010-12-14 22:47:36 <ByteCoin> appamatto: I presume you're talking about running it with percent set to 3400
2860 2010-12-14 22:47:59 <ArtForz> let's call "rest of network" A, Cabal C
2861 2010-12-14 22:48:02 <ByteCoin> Used to be 0 - 100 but I changed it for increased granularity...
2862 2010-12-14 22:48:22 <ByteCoin> Ok ArtForz
2863 2010-12-14 22:48:43 <fabianhjr> nanotube: already started mining with my 5870. :D Tough, I am worried it only uses 30% of the card's capacity. Also, got some weird errors on declaring consts more than one time with the latest remot-miner-opencl. :/ I am worried
2864 2010-12-14 22:48:45 <ByteCoin> percent now 0 - 10000
2865 2010-12-14 22:49:47 <appamatto> ByteCoin, I just tested it, two tests is the same as one test
2866 2010-12-14 22:50:04 <sjaak> fabianhjr: you could check with everest to see how high your gpu usage is
2867 2010-12-14 22:50:07 * ByteCoin doesn't understand
2868 2010-12-14 22:50:10 <Lyspooner> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=2227.0, jcw9 with the cartel breaker
2869 2010-12-14 22:50:41 <ByteCoin> Two tests? One test? What have you changed?
2870 2010-12-14 22:50:50 <fabianhjr> sjaak: I am using CCC. It reads 24% actually and fan isn't making the usual noise it did with MilkyWay@home
2871 2010-12-14 22:51:09 <appamatto> ByteCoin didn't change anything
2872 2010-12-14 22:51:18 <ByteCoin> I gather that the fact that it hasn't changed is at least nor bad for the simulation
2873 2010-12-14 22:51:42 <sjaak> hmm, I never got the opencl version working with my 8800gt, but the cuda miner is using ~80% of my gpu
2874 2010-12-14 22:52:27 <ByteCoin> ArtForz: Are you getting stuck in?
2875 2010-12-14 22:52:30 <fabianhjr> sjaak: I am worried cus there is people claiming the 5870 stock should do about 300Mhashes/sec
2876 2010-12-14 22:52:53 <ArtForz> it should do
2877 2010-12-14 22:52:54 <fabianhjr> Server is currently reporting it as 50K
2878 2010-12-14 22:52:59 <sjaak> hm
2879 2010-12-14 22:53:07 <sjaak> did you try Diablo's miner?
2880 2010-12-14 22:53:18 <fabianhjr> No, I am a newby. I just started.
2881 2010-12-14 22:53:24 <sjaak> I see
2882 2010-12-14 22:53:27 <RichardG> anyone here knows the insidings of the remote mining protcol
2883 2010-12-14 22:53:35 <RichardG> all I need is obtain stats off the server
2884 2010-12-14 22:53:40 <sjaak> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=1721.0 here is the topic for Diablo's miner
2885 2010-12-14 22:54:13 <ArtForz> so what's the strategy for C?
2886 2010-12-14 22:54:38 <ByteCoin> ArtForz: The best strategy for C is as follows:
2887 2010-12-14 22:56:27 <ByteCoin> When C sees a new block by A, if it has no hidden blocks it uses A's block to generate the next block.
2888 2010-12-14 22:56:31 <fabianhjr> sjaak: couldn't set it up in Win7 64-bit first try. Main Class failure.
2889 2010-12-14 22:56:58 <sjaak> hm
2890 2010-12-14 22:57:03 <appamatto> Anyway, I think that there are many other more important factors like network speeds etc. that would factor in here
2891 2010-12-14 22:57:04 <sjaak> I too have win7 64bit and it worked
2892 2010-12-14 22:57:06 <fabianhjr> I also couldn't set up the oython one
2893 2010-12-14 22:57:25 <appamatto> My intuition also says that there is no mathematical advantage even in a pure simulation
2894 2010-12-14 22:57:29 <ByteCoin> If it has 1 hidden block then it publishes that block and for the purposes of this particular set of parameters we assume that it has an equal chance of getting adopted by A.
2895 2010-12-14 22:57:31 <fabianhjr> sjaak: what did you did? I don't see anything but a jar
2896 2010-12-14 22:57:51 <ArtForz> but the chance is not equal
2897 2010-12-14 22:58:06 <ByteCoin> If it has >1 hidden block then it publishes 2 blocks and thereby A's block is in the shorter chain and gets discarded
2898 2010-12-14 22:58:15 <sjaak> fabianhjr: i did "java -cp target\libs\*;target\DiabloMiner-0.0.1-SNAPSHOT.jar -Djava.library.path=target\libs\natives\windows com.diablominer.DiabloMiner.DiabloMiner -u youruser -p yourpassword"
2899 2010-12-14 22:58:17 <RichardG> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=1458.msg30225#new
2900 2010-12-14 22:58:44 <ByteCoin> If it has 3 hidden blocks of course then publishing 2 still leaves it with a lead of 1.
2901 2010-12-14 22:58:47 <fabianhjr> Damn, I cannot go compiling it. I must be able to frop and install in under 5minutes.
2902 2010-12-14 22:58:50 <ArtForz> so let's say C has block X+1 and is working on X+2, A still working on X+1
2903 2010-12-14 22:59:00 <fabianhjr> s/frop/drop/
2904 2010-12-14 22:59:06 <sjaak> fabianhjr: that command isnt for compiling
2905 2010-12-14 22:59:08 <ByteCoin> Artforz: yup
2906 2010-12-14 22:59:12 <sjaak> it is already compiled
2907 2010-12-14 22:59:24 <sjaak> you're just opening the jar file with some different classpath
2908 2010-12-14 22:59:34 <ArtForz> A finds X+1, publishes, C can't publish its X+1 anymore
2909 2010-12-14 22:59:42 <ByteCoin> Why not?
2910 2010-12-14 22:59:53 <fabianhjr> sjaak: how do I explain it to someone with a 50s brain?
2911 2010-12-14 22:59:56 <ByteCoin> They race each other across the network
2912 2010-12-14 23:00:01 <sjaak> hm
2913 2010-12-14 23:00:02 <fabianhjr> xD
2914 2010-12-14 23:00:16 <ByteCoin> we're assuming that the cabal is reasonably well connected
2915 2010-12-14 23:00:21 <ArtForz> except the moment C sees As block, it's already broadcasting
2916 2010-12-14 23:00:22 <sjaak> well basically you only need to install the latest java jdk and execute that command
2917 2010-12-14 23:00:26 <sjaak> it should work
2918 2010-12-14 23:00:32 <fabianhjr> remoteminer-opencl has been the best so far.
2919 2010-12-14 23:01:03 <ByteCoin> If you dislike that assumption then you can discard it but the maths I have been discussing changes.
2920 2010-12-14 23:01:07 <fabianhjr> I will check the docs. Maybe it is getting trottled.
2921 2010-12-14 23:01:13 <sjaak> ok
2922 2010-12-14 23:01:22 <appamatto> ArtForz, but also the cartel will win by default on 1/3
2923 2010-12-14 23:01:25 <ArtForz> so most of A will use As X+1, not Cs
2924 2010-12-14 23:01:29 <ArtForz> yes
2925 2010-12-14 23:01:38 <appamatto> So it could still work out to 50%
2926 2010-12-14 23:01:52 <appamatto> If C can sway 1/6 of A
2927 2010-12-14 23:02:42 <appamatto> In the absolute best (suppose the client of A broadcasted first to C) he may even get 66% because he will get 50% of A
2928 2010-12-14 23:02:47 <edcba> you should implemnt a bitcoin network simulator
2929 2010-12-14 23:02:50 sgornick has joined
2930 2010-12-14 23:03:05 <ByteCoin> Artforz: I don't think that the propagation of competing blocks is really central to the point but if you insist I can dispense with that assumption
2931 2010-12-14 23:03:23 <ByteCoin> Let me know and I will recalculate
2932 2010-12-14 23:04:17 <ArtForz> okay, moot point as long as we're not really close to 50:50
2933 2010-12-14 23:04:35 <ByteCoin> moot meaning relevant or irrelevant?
2934 2010-12-14 23:04:38 <ByteCoin> ;-)
2935 2010-12-14 23:04:50 <ByteCoin> traditional usage or new?
2936 2010-12-14 23:04:57 <ArtForz> relevant *very* close to 50%
2937 2010-12-14 23:05:43 akem has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
2938 2010-12-14 23:05:47 <ArtForz> at which point C might as well just add another few 100Mhps or so and be >50%
2939 2010-12-14 23:06:18 <Lyspooner> i think ByteCoin has a good point
2940 2010-12-14 23:06:40 <ByteCoin> I haven't mentioned this on the forum but if you assume that C will NEVER beat A's blocks across the network then the cabal still wins when they have >41% of the power.
2941 2010-12-14 23:06:42 <appamatto> ByteCoin, why do you have 4 * and 2 * in your code?
2942 2010-12-14 23:06:51 <ArtForz> I still severely doubt it
2943 2010-12-14 23:06:59 <Lyspooner> why
2944 2010-12-14 23:07:08 <ArtForz> because it sounds EXACTLY like "miner hogs 100% of generation attack"
2945 2010-12-14 23:07:13 <ArtForz> only works if mienr has >50%
2946 2010-12-14 23:07:32 <Lyspooner> poke a hole in his strategy then, it seems to work
2947 2010-12-14 23:07:35 <ArtForz> otherwise C "loses" = wins less blocks than it would normall by just publishing blocks
2948 2010-12-14 23:07:38 <ByteCoin> appamatto: THat was a hack to accommodate varying probabilities of cabal vs non-cabal blocks winning the network race
2949 2010-12-14 23:08:41 <ArtForz> a nonpublished block can't win the race, it's not even IN the race
2950 2010-12-14 23:08:47 <ByteCoin> Artforz: If cabal has >41% of generation then cabal gets more than 41% of the blocks
2951 2010-12-14 23:09:41 <Lyspooner> If C hears A has found a block, then C transmit's C's finding of the block
2952 2010-12-14 23:09:45 anon92 has joined
2953 2010-12-14 23:09:51 <ByteCoin> appamatto: Think of a confirmed block being a quarter of a disputed block
2954 2010-12-14 23:09:54 <Lyspooner> that's the race
2955 2010-12-14 23:10:09 <ByteCoin> When I print out the stats notice I divide by 4 to rebalance
2956 2010-12-14 23:10:45 <ByteCoin> Artforz: It's somewhat counterintuitive
2957 2010-12-14 23:11:37 <ByteCoin> Perhaps the best way to view it is that the cabal spends a significant amount of time several blocks ahead happily chugging away and knocking non-cabal blocks on the head
2958 2010-12-14 23:12:20 <ByteCoin> appamatto: You happy?
2959 2010-12-14 23:12:31 <ArtForz> except they won't get several blocks ahead very often with <50% of total network
2960 2010-12-14 23:14:50 <ByteCoin> My simulations show that when the cabal have 41% of the power, even if their blocks never win the race against the non-cabal blocks they are >1 block ahead about 11.3% of the time
2961 2010-12-14 23:15:26 <ByteCoin> I was surprised so I wrote a different simpler program to check that result.
2962 2010-12-14 23:15:34 <ByteCoin> The numbers agree.
2963 2010-12-14 23:15:45 <appamatto> Looks like the C1 calculation matters a lot
2964 2010-12-14 23:15:49 foobar_ has joined
2965 2010-12-14 23:16:17 <appamatto> With 100% adoption of A's blocks, C only generates 23%, and with 100% adoption of C's blocks C generates 44%
2966 2010-12-14 23:16:21 <appamatto> (in the race case)
2967 2010-12-14 23:16:58 xelister has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
2968 2010-12-14 23:17:36 <ByteCoin> What percentage of total generation does C have in your data above?
2969 2010-12-14 23:17:47 <appamatto> 1/3
2970 2010-12-14 23:18:01 akem has joined
2971 2010-12-14 23:18:01 akem has quit (Changing host)
2972 2010-12-14 23:18:01 akem has joined
2973 2010-12-14 23:18:36 <cosurgi> hmmm. I get this error:
2974 2010-12-14 23:18:42 <cosurgi> ~/m0/m0mchil-poclbm-1e3b163$ ./poclbm.py
2975 2010-12-14 23:18:42 <cosurgi> *** CAL version mismatch:
2976 2010-12-14 23:18:42 <cosurgi> This OpenCL build requires version 1.4.879, version 1.4.838 installed.
2977 2010-12-14 23:18:42 <cosurgi> Aborting.
2978 2010-12-14 23:19:19 <kiba> blah, nobody care about Bitquux's mishandling of the project except me
2979 2010-12-14 23:20:05 <ByteCoin> appamatto: Instead of 23% and 44% I get 10% and 45%
2980 2010-12-14 23:20:34 <ByteCoin> I set percent to 3333
2981 2010-12-14 23:20:51 <ByteCoin> Scratch that
2982 2010-12-14 23:20:55 <ByteCoin> let me recalculate
2983 2010-12-14 23:21:08 <ByteCoin> that's what happens when I'm in a rush
2984 2010-12-14 23:21:24 foobar_ has quit (Quit: Page closed)
2985 2010-12-14 23:22:27 <ByteCoin> appamatto: I agree with your figures! ..... good job seeing that we're running the same code!...
2986 2010-12-14 23:24:31 <Auctus> if coins can be lost and not recovered, and there is going to be a finite limit of 21,000,000 bitcoins, does that not mean that eventually all bitcoins will be lost?
2987 2010-12-14 23:25:01 <Lyspooner> yes
2988 2010-12-14 23:25:48 <Zarutian> Auctus: until the peers agree to increase the finite limit up a small amount.
2989 2010-12-14 23:25:58 <Zarutian> s/peers/nodes/
2990 2010-12-14 23:26:31 <Auctus> That can be done? Cool. I guess that solves that problem.
2991 2010-12-14 23:26:54 <Lyspooner> "increasing the finite limit up a small amount" won't ever happen
2992 2010-12-14 23:27:29 <Zarutian> Lyspooner: after few centuries or so it might be needed
2993 2010-12-14 23:27:41 <kiba> CURRENTLY angry.
2994 2010-12-14 23:27:56 <Zarutian> Kiba: what is eating you now?
2995 2010-12-14 23:28:02 <Lyspooner> if bitcoins retain any value whatsoever, not all bitcoins will be lost, for the ones that remain will be worth enough to be guarded
2996 2010-12-14 23:28:09 <kiba> Zarutian: that Bitquux guy
2997 2010-12-14 23:28:51 <kiba> I have been angry for the last couple of hours now
2998 2010-12-14 23:29:13 <appamatto> Okay, I have new figures ByteCoin
2999 2010-12-14 23:29:22 <ByteCoin> Go for it
3000 2010-12-14 23:29:38 <appamatto> With better C1 simulation, 1/3 cartel only produces ~32%
3001 2010-12-14 23:29:49 <kiba> Zarutian: my emotion overshadow the lesson I learned
3002 2010-12-14 23:29:56 <ByteCoin> Better = ?
3003 2010-12-14 23:30:15 <kiba> next time somebody is going to do an open source bounty..I am going to demand that there will be a public repository and an explict license
3004 2010-12-14 23:31:03 <Zarutian> Kiba: aah, I see.
3005 2010-12-14 23:31:19 <kiba> I think I have PMed two times
3006 2010-12-14 23:31:47 <kiba> sure, there's working code, but I don't know if I can't even legally build on his work
3007 2010-12-14 23:31:50 <kiba> fucking copyright law
3008 2010-12-14 23:33:22 <appamatto> ByteCoin, basically, when there is a race C has 1/3 guaranteed, and I'm assuming the C block makes it also to 1/2 of A
3009 2010-12-14 23:33:33 <Zarutian> Kiba: here is the thing, which countrys?
3010 2010-12-14 23:33:48 <kiba> don't know where he's from
3011 2010-12-14 23:34:27 <kiba> blah
3012 2010-12-14 23:34:28 <noagendamarket> some people have more important things going on ..unbelievably
3013 2010-12-14 23:34:38 <Phoebus> Bitcoin is a nice way to burn people's heads... teehe - started a question in a Q/A community I like: http://www.fluther.com/106685/consider-the-bitcoin-currency-what-are-your-thoughts/
3014 2010-12-14 23:34:38 <Zarutian> Kiba: that and in which country the 'contract' was made is also the question.
3015 2010-12-14 23:36:22 <kiba> Zarutian: blah, I didn't make it explict in my contract that it should be open source
3016 2010-12-14 23:36:35 <Lyspooner> ByteCoin, appamatto, if A broadcasts to a single node, and that node is C, then C will always win
3017 2010-12-14 23:37:31 <noagendamarket> I thought all chrome extensions were open by default
3018 2010-12-14 23:38:12 <Lyspooner> C can organize itself strategically among A's to swing the race in its favor, no?
3019 2010-12-14 23:38:14 <appamatto> Lyspooner, yeah that's the absolute best case for C
3020 2010-12-14 23:38:14 <ByteCoin> Lyspooner: True. I think that when you find a block you probably propagate it more widely
3021 2010-12-14 23:38:17 <kiba> my mistake.
3022 2010-12-14 23:38:46 <appamatto> Lyspooner, in reality I think when A transmits it propagates exponentially
3023 2010-12-14 23:38:49 <ArtForz> A doesn't broadcast to a single node, it broadcasts to 8 nodes
3024 2010-12-14 23:39:14 <ArtForz> so unless you're running a sybil attack, A has a headstart when C sees the block
3025 2010-12-14 23:39:14 <appamatto> So C will probably only get a small percentage above 1/3
3026 2010-12-14 23:39:30 <appamatto> ArtForz, and it's really a gigantic headstart
3027 2010-12-14 23:39:39 <Zarutian> Kiba: let is be a hurfull lesson. I recommend you and others to write these kind of contracts carefully. I recommend at least the common economic protocol to be included.
3028 2010-12-14 23:39:42 <ByteCoin> appamatto: I'm going to be leaving this topic shortly.
3029 2010-12-14 23:39:51 <ByteCoin> I've had enough for today..
3030 2010-12-14 23:39:56 <ArtForz> yeah, near-exponential spread is tricky
3031 2010-12-14 23:39:57 <appamatto> Let's say that C finds out on the first wave of broadcasts. It will still be outgunned 8x in the network
3032 2010-12-14 23:40:18 <appamatto> ByteCoin cheers
3033 2010-12-14 23:40:30 <cosurgi> ArtForz: I have ATI 5830, and right now trying to get this to run on debian squeeze. Do I need ati sdk 2.3 or 2.1 ?
3034 2010-12-14 23:40:38 <cosurgi> $ ./poclbm.py -d 1
3035 2010-12-14 23:40:41 <cosurgi> Build on <pyopencl.Device 'Cypress' at 0x9939cc0>:
3036 2010-12-14 23:40:41 <cosurgi> Internal error: Compilation failed.
3037 2010-12-14 23:40:43 * ByteCoin cheers
3038 2010-12-14 23:40:50 <ArtForz> unless C has some out-of-band way to propagate "broadcast block X" to all it's nodes faster than the network
3039 2010-12-14 23:40:52 <ByteCoin> Yay!
3040 2010-12-14 23:41:06 <ArtForz> cosurgi: SDK 2.1 should be fine
3041 2010-12-14 23:41:27 <cosurgi> ArtForz: so I need to downgrade?
3042 2010-12-14 23:41:33 <ArtForz> wait, what, 2.3 is out?
3043 2010-12-14 23:41:34 <Lyspooner> even if C loses every race, ByteCoin still has 41% a successful cartel
3044 2010-12-14 23:41:38 <ByteCoin> Artforz: I believe that the way the current client propagates blocks is very slow as it does the validation before relaying
3045 2010-12-14 23:41:47 <ByteCoin> Not hard to have a faster propagation
3046 2010-12-14 23:41:53 <nanotube> kiba: what's the deal, what are you on about?
3047 2010-12-14 23:41:54 <cosurgi> ArtForz: well. I downloaded debian pacakges
3048 2010-12-14 23:42:07 <cosurgi> hold on, looking again for url
3049 2010-12-14 23:42:18 <ArtForz> I get different numbers here using my own simulator
3050 2010-12-14 23:42:25 <cosurgi> ArtForz: http://developer.amd.com/Downloads/ati-stream-runtime-v2.2-lnx32.tgz
3051 2010-12-14 23:42:28 <ByteCoin> Artforz: Post code
3052 2010-12-14 23:42:34 <appamatto> ArtForz, what do you get?
3053 2010-12-14 23:42:38 <cosurgi> ArtForz: http://developer.amd.com/Downloads/ati-stream-dev-v2.2-lnx32.tgz
3054 2010-12-14 23:43:06 <cosurgi> ArtForz: I installed those, but they were giving this error: "This OpenCL build requires version 1.4.879, version 1.4.838 installed."
3055 2010-12-14 23:43:23 <ArtForz> with C 40% of network and winning 75% of races, C gets about 48% of blocks
3056 2010-12-14 23:43:41 <ArtForz> your fglrx driver is too old I think
3057 2010-12-14 23:43:44 <ByteCoin> Hmm...
3058 2010-12-14 23:43:46 <cosurgi> ArtForz: so I compiled from source: http://developer.amd.com/gpu/atistreamsdk/pages/default.aspx but apparently 'make install' isn't working.
3059 2010-12-14 23:44:14 <kiba> nanotube: being mad in general over chromium source code not being available
3060 2010-12-14 23:44:23 <kiba> then I become a bit more rational about it.
3061 2010-12-14 23:44:46 <cosurgi> uh-huh. weird. 2.3 is in debian pacakge, but not on official website???
3062 2010-12-14 23:44:51 <nanotube> kiba: er... isn't chromium foss?
3063 2010-12-14 23:45:00 <kiba> nanotube: the extension, nanotube
3064 2010-12-14 23:45:07 <nanotube> ah
3065 2010-12-14 23:45:11 <kiba> bitquux withhold the source code
3066 2010-12-14 23:45:16 <kiba> didn't respond to further PM
3067 2010-12-14 23:45:17 <ArtForz> hrrrm
3068 2010-12-14 23:45:29 <noagendamarket> he cant do that
3069 2010-12-14 23:45:33 <kiba> I don't care care if the code is broken, just that we can continue to fund development based on his work
3070 2010-12-14 23:45:37 <ByteCoin> Artforz: With the same parameters I get C winning 50% of the blocks so we are within a couple of %
3071 2010-12-14 23:45:43 <ByteCoin> That is encouraging
3072 2010-12-14 23:45:57 <Lyspooner> that also seems like success for cartel
3073 2010-12-14 23:46:00 <Lyspooner> ?
3074 2010-12-14 23:46:04 <kiba> his code is working code
3075 2010-12-14 23:46:15 <kiba> BUT, I don't even know if we can build on this work
3076 2010-12-14 23:46:38 <ArtForz> yeah, except for the tiny fact that 46% of total blocks are lost
3077 2010-12-14 23:47:25 <tcatm> = constantly decreasing difficulty?
3078 2010-12-14 23:47:27 <ByteCoin> How many blocks does your simulation run? Mine does about 10M...
3079 2010-12-14 23:47:33 <ArtForz> 100k
3080 2010-12-14 23:47:38 <fabianhjr> 300M
3081 2010-12-14 23:47:46 <kiba> that's why I am so pissed off today
3082 2010-12-14 23:47:58 <fabianhjr> ;;bc,calc 300000
3083 2010-12-14 23:47:59 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 300000 Khps, given current difficulty of 12252.03471156 , is 2 days, 0 hours, 43 minutes, and 26 seconds
3084 2010-12-14 23:48:17 <appamatto> Okay, I'm going to post my code
3085 2010-12-14 23:48:21 <cosurgi> ArtForz: sorry, those links were wget http://orwell.fiit.stuba.sk/~nou/ati-opencl-dev_2.3.deb
3086 2010-12-14 23:48:26 <cosurgi> wget http://orwell.fiit.stuba.sk/~nou/ati-opencl-runtime_2.3_i386.deb
3087 2010-12-14 23:48:29 <cosurgi> (2.3 really)
3088 2010-12-14 23:48:37 <cosurgi> I made mistake in pasting before
3089 2010-12-14 23:48:44 <ByteCoin> I get only about 28% of blocks wasted. I might be wrong about that though...
3090 2010-12-14 23:49:09 <ByteCoin> My code not really geared to measure blocks wasted at the moment
3091 2010-12-14 23:49:24 <appamatto> http://pastebin.com/b94zYGit
3092 2010-12-14 23:49:32 <ArtForz> so... yeah... looks like it might be a way for a mining cartel to get a singificant % of blocks without driving difficulty up much
3093 2010-12-14 23:49:43 <appamatto> That code yields ~31% production from a 1/3 cartel
3094 2010-12-14 23:49:57 <ArtForz> I still think I'm missing something here
3095 2010-12-14 23:51:26 <appamatto> ArtForz, 75% is way too many races for the cartel to win
3096 2010-12-14 23:51:48 <nanotube> ArtForz: does the cartel actually make any money off the scheme?
3097 2010-12-14 23:52:00 <ArtForz> well, short term, no
3098 2010-12-14 23:52:04 <nanotube> or does it just manage to reject good blocks, at no profit to itself?
3099 2010-12-14 23:52:46 <appamatto> ArtForz, does my code make sense?
3100 2010-12-14 23:52:50 <ArtForz> even at 75% chance to win the race they're wasting 20% of their blocks
3101 2010-12-14 23:52:58 <Lyspooner> appamatto, how about a 41% cartel
3102 2010-12-14 23:53:20 <nanotube> ArtForz: that's what i've been trying to tell ByteCoin
3103 2010-12-14 23:53:20 <ByteCoin> It doesn't matter how many blocks are wasted though...
3104 2010-12-14 23:53:28 <Lyspooner> wasted blocks don't matter
3105 2010-12-14 23:53:41 <nanotube> if it's not profitable, it is irrelevant.
3106 2010-12-14 23:53:42 <ByteCoin> The difficulty will go down to make block generation easier
3107 2010-12-14 23:53:52 <nanotube> ByteCoin: yes, but it'll be easier /for everyone/, not just cartel.
3108 2010-12-14 23:53:53 <ByteCoin> It's the share of the blocks that counts
3109 2010-12-14 23:53:57 <appamatto> Lyspooner, I'm almost sure that it won't matter if the cartel is 41%
3110 2010-12-14 23:54:03 <nanotube> why does the share of the blocks count?
3111 2010-12-14 23:54:23 <ByteCoin> Remind me how often the difficulty changes
3112 2010-12-14 23:54:27 <ByteCoin> ?
3113 2010-12-14 23:54:29 <nanotube> every 2016 blocks
3114 2010-12-14 23:54:48 <Lyspooner> C is 40% of the network but gets 48% share of coins, according to ArtForz
3115 2010-12-14 23:54:51 <ByteCoin> so every 14 days?
3116 2010-12-14 23:55:04 <appamatto> holy crap, it does matter
3117 2010-12-14 23:55:15 <ArtForz> thats with C winning 75% of races
3118 2010-12-14 23:55:20 <appamatto> C is 41% of the network, and it gets 44% in my sim
3119 2010-12-14 23:55:36 <appamatto> My sim assumes it wins tiebreaks 41% of the time (equal to its share)
3120 2010-12-14 23:56:09 <appamatto> you can check my code at http://pastebin.com/b94zYGit only the random checks are changed to be 41%
3121 2010-12-14 23:56:10 <ByteCoin> So the network ensures that every 14 days 2016 blocks are generated. The number of blocks you win is just your fraction of those 2016 blocks! QED
3122 2010-12-14 23:56:27 <ArtForz> with 40/60% generation and 50/50 race I get 39% for C
3123 2010-12-14 23:56:35 <ByteCoin> If lots of blocks are wasted who cares!
3124 2010-12-14 23:57:04 <ByteCoin> The difficulty adjustment will ensure that the rate stays constant (over the long term)
3125 2010-12-14 23:57:06 <appamatto> ArtForz, hmm
3126 2010-12-14 23:57:15 <appamatto> Did you see how I calculate the race?
3127 2010-12-14 23:57:30 <Lyspooner> appamato, ByteCoin and ArtForz, everybody run 40% cartel with 50:50 race
3128 2010-12-14 23:58:20 <appamatto> The thing is, there is no set winrate for the race
3129 2010-12-14 23:58:29 <appamatto> The race is decided by building another block on top
3130 2010-12-14 23:58:33 <ByteCoin> nanotube: You're rather quiet...
3131 2010-12-14 23:58:44 <appamatto> It's not like C can inspect the network and determine the exact CPU % his block got
3132 2010-12-14 23:58:47 <ByteCoin> That explanation was for you
3133 2010-12-14 23:59:14 <appamatto> The chance that C will win the race is a tad more than C%
3134 2010-12-14 23:59:21 <ByteCoin> appamatto: I'm not sure that your code does things correctly....
3135 2010-12-14 23:59:32 <ByteCoin> But thanks for posting it.
3136 2010-12-14 23:59:42 <ByteCoin> Can I repost it to the forum if I find problems?