1 2010-12-31 00:00:10 <afed> it looks like they might not fit if the power connectors stick out the top
   2 2010-12-31 00:00:29 <ArtForz> yep... which is ALL decent ati cards :/
   3 2010-12-31 00:00:42 <lfm> most dell cases are far from standard
   4 2010-12-31 00:00:51 <afed> my 5770 cards are on the end fwiw
   5 2010-12-31 00:00:51 <ArtForz> 48xx, 58xx, 59xx, 68xx, 69xx
   6 2010-12-31 00:01:25 <afed> perhaps dell has an adapter that is not pictured
   7 2010-12-31 00:02:35 <ArtForz> yes, and 16 5770s are about as fast as 4.7 5970s and need 26% more power :P
   8 2010-12-31 00:02:52 <mrb__> afed: this is a 3U chassis, it may be fine.
   9 2010-12-31 00:03:09 <ArtForz> doesnt look like it
  10 2010-12-31 00:03:18 <mrb__> the height of a 5970 + power connector is 1 inch less than 3U
  11 2010-12-31 00:03:20 <ArtForz> look at the card sled, look how they sit in the chassis
  12 2010-12-31 00:03:55 <ArtForz> of course fixing this is pretty easy
  13 2010-12-31 00:03:56 <afed> that sled is 3U high though
  14 2010-12-31 00:04:06 <afed> the pictured card is abnormally high
  15 2010-12-31 00:04:15 <afed> and also designed to have air blown through it
  16 2010-12-31 00:04:15 <mrb__> actually 2 inches, I have not measured exactly
  17 2010-12-31 00:04:21 <mrb__> I know because my box fits in less than 3 U
  18 2010-12-31 00:04:41 <ArtForz> doesnt look unusually high
  19 2010-12-31 00:04:42 <mrb__> if the sled adds less than 2 inches in height it should be fine
  20 2010-12-31 00:04:52 <lfm> just leave cover off
  21 2010-12-31 00:06:14 <ArtForz> PSUs are 3.6kW max, so you could have 16 5870s or 6970s
  22 2010-12-31 00:06:41 <afed> 8
  23 2010-12-31 00:06:52 <ArtForz> 16
  24 2010-12-31 00:06:58 <marioxcc> ArtForz: you mean computer PSUs?
  25 2010-12-31 00:07:22 <afed> oh i get it
  26 2010-12-31 00:07:36 <ArtForz> unless I'm missing something, 16*210 < 3600
  27 2010-12-31 00:08:00 <afed> no i was miscounting the slots
  28 2010-12-31 00:08:03 Bananaphone_ has joined
  29 2010-12-31 00:08:09 <ArtForz> 10 in front, 6 in back
  30 2010-12-31 00:08:10 <afed> i saw < 16 in the front and didn't realise there were more in the back
  31 2010-12-31 00:08:24 <ArtForz> with fans in the middle
  32 2010-12-31 00:08:36 <mrb__> that's definitely the highest GPU density I have seen per RU
  33 2010-12-31 00:08:42 <ArtForz> yep
  34 2010-12-31 00:08:52 <ArtForz> I doubt you can pack em tighter
  35 2010-12-31 00:08:53 Bananaphone has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
  36 2010-12-31 00:09:24 <mrb__> a full cabinet would be 50 kW
  37 2010-12-31 00:09:40 <mrb__> almost no datacenter/colo could host this
  38 2010-12-31 00:09:53 <ArtForz> HPC centric centers sure can
  39 2010-12-31 00:10:33 <mrb__> what are these
  40 2010-12-31 00:10:42 <ArtForz> high performance computing
  41 2010-12-31 00:11:04 <mrb__> I mean the 'centric centers'
  42 2010-12-31 00:11:12 <ArtForz> specialising in HPC
  43 2010-12-31 00:11:54 <ArtForz> >1kW/U isn't too uncommon
  44 2010-12-31 00:13:57 <mrb__> ah HPC-centric datacenters
  45 2010-12-31 00:14:14 <ArtForz> yeah
  46 2010-12-31 00:17:37 <mrb__> afed: this C410x chassis cannot accomodate double-width cards though
  47 2010-12-31 00:18:35 <mrb__> so no high-end cards. only thin slow and expensive teslas.
  48 2010-12-31 00:18:47 <ArtForz> ?
  49 2010-12-31 00:18:52 <ArtForz> besides the old dual-board dualGPU cards, I've never seen a true double width card
  50 2010-12-31 00:18:59 <afed> that was the other reason i thought it held only 8
  51 2010-12-31 00:19:09 <lfm> someone said you can modify card to use water cooling in single slots
  52 2010-12-31 00:19:14 <ArtForz> sure, you might need a different cooler, but cooler != card
  53 2010-12-31 00:19:22 <mrb__> 19 inch / 16 = 1.19 inch. good luck finding any high-end ati less than 1.19 inch thick
  54 2010-12-31 00:19:24 <ArtForz> and from the look of the sled it IS 2-slot wide
  55 2010-12-31 00:19:25 <afed> those cages look like they should hold a double slot card
  56 2010-12-31 00:19:45 <afed> what do you think they charge for this box and the interface cards though?
  57 2010-12-31 00:19:46 <ArtForz> theres TEN sleds on the front
  58 2010-12-31 00:19:51 <mrb__> they _look_ like it. but they are not.
  59 2010-12-31 00:19:52 <ArtForz> and 6 in back
  60 2010-12-31 00:20:04 <mrb__> ah. 6 in the back.
  61 2010-12-31 00:20:08 <ArtForz> 19 / 10 = 1.9, 2 slots = 1.6
  62 2010-12-31 00:20:08 <mrb__> I get it.
  63 2010-12-31 00:20:12 <afed> i just spent 800 two 5870s PLUS the computer required to run them
  64 2010-12-31 00:20:18 <mrb__> I thought it was 16 all in the front.
  65 2010-12-31 00:20:24 <afed> i doubt this box competes with that
  66 2010-12-31 00:20:31 <ArtForz> nope, they really packed this thing
  67 2010-12-31 00:21:07 Bananaphone_ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
  68 2010-12-31 00:21:08 <ArtForz> and the whole shebang only has a single PCIe x16 uplink
  69 2010-12-31 00:22:02 <ArtForz> so effectively each card only has a single PCIe1 lane
  70 2010-12-31 00:22:43 <lfm> shouldnt be a problem for mining, might not be so good for hpc
  71 2010-12-31 00:22:47 <ArtForz> yep
  72 2010-12-31 00:23:01 <ArtForz> for mining we dont need much bandwidth anywhere
  73 2010-12-31 00:23:27 <ArtForz> and density isnt really much of an issue either
  74 2010-12-31 00:23:53 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
  75 2010-12-31 00:24:33 <mrb__> if someone knows the price of a C410x, let me know. it would have to be less than ~$3k (unlikely) to be worth buying instead of building cheap DIY mining boxes.
  76 2010-12-31 00:24:59 <lfm> unless you're pressed for space
  77 2010-12-31 00:25:43 <ArtForz> my guess is about $15-20k empty
  78 2010-12-31 00:25:55 <mrb__> good datacenter designs are power-constrained, not space-constrained. if you can afford 3.6kW, you can afford renting a few more Us...
  79 2010-12-31 00:26:08 <Diablo-D3> depends on the datacenter
  80 2010-12-31 00:26:18 <Diablo-D3> many let you just get more power drops
  81 2010-12-31 00:26:19 devon_hillard has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
  82 2010-12-31 00:26:24 <mrb__> poorly designed ones are space constrained, yes...
  83 2010-12-31 00:26:41 <Diablo-D3> you get one with the rack, and the cost of another power drop is almost the cost of the rack
  84 2010-12-31 00:26:54 <Diablo-D3> one or two with the rack, anyways
  85 2010-12-31 00:27:22 <nanotube> joe_1: bc,estimate shows next difficulty estimate. bc,calc is to calculate avg time for block gen
  86 2010-12-31 00:28:07 <ArtForz> it also depends on how long your interconnects can be before you have to go optical
  87 2010-12-31 00:28:18 <ArtForz> which is kinda a huge deal for HPC clusters
  88 2010-12-31 00:28:22 <mrb__> looks like the C410x is designed for a dedicated 208V/20A circuit
  89 2010-12-31 00:29:12 <mrb__> (3600W ~90%-efficient PSU plus 5% headroom)
  90 2010-12-31 00:29:24 <ArtForz> nominal PSU is 4*1400W
  91 2010-12-31 00:29:43 <ArtForz> N+1redundant
  92 2010-12-31 00:29:57 <mrb__> ArtForz> PSUs are 3.6kW max
  93 2010-12-31 00:30:19 * mrb__ checks
  94 2010-12-31 00:30:44 <mrb__> yeah max draw 3.6kW
  95 2010-12-31 00:30:52 <ArtForz> which is weird as fuck
  96 2010-12-31 00:30:58 <mrb__> no makes sense
  97 2010-12-31 00:31:05 <mrb__> it's designed for a single 208V/20A circuit
  98 2010-12-31 00:31:09 <ArtForz> 4*1400W N+1 != 3.6kW
  99 2010-12-31 00:31:18 <mrb__> yeah but some are redundant
 100 2010-12-31 00:31:23 <ArtForz> one
 101 2010-12-31 00:31:26 <ArtForz> so 3 are active
 102 2010-12-31 00:31:41 <mrb__> so they over spec'd the PSUs for safety
 103 2010-12-31 00:31:54 <mrb__> but designed the whole system for not drawing more than 3.6kW
 104 2010-12-31 00:32:07 <ArtForz> thats stupid
 105 2010-12-31 00:32:52 <mrb__> it's what you do with your 2x1kW PSUs
 106 2010-12-31 00:33:01 <ArtForz> nope
 107 2010-12-31 00:33:04 <mrb__> at 60% load
 108 2010-12-31 00:33:41 <ArtForz> actually thats because I specced the PSUs for overvolted cards
 109 2010-12-31 00:34:11 wheel has joined
 110 2010-12-31 00:34:26 <mrb__> we talked about that yesterday. running at full load 24/7 reduces the lifetime of your parts. so they aimed at 3600/5600 = 64% load
 111 2010-12-31 00:34:50 <ArtForz> if a server PSU can't do 100% load 24/7, it's a fucking pile of crap
 112 2010-12-31 00:34:58 <mrb__> well 1 redundant so 4200 W total
 113 2010-12-31 00:35:09 <mrb__> 3600/4200 = 86% load
 114 2010-12-31 00:35:11 <ArtForz> we overspec consumer PSUs because the fucking tech data is a fucking joke
 115 2010-12-31 00:35:57 <ArtForz> = "800W" PSUs overheating or just blowing up at 90% load or so
 116 2010-12-31 00:36:03 <mrb__> it can operate 100% 24/7. it will not shorten the life dramatically, just roughly proportionally to the load
 117 2010-12-31 00:36:35 <ArtForz> industrial/server PSUs are usually specced for load vs. ambient temp
 118 2010-12-31 00:37:01 <mrb__> another reason for overspeccing the PSUs is to hit the sweet spot of efficiency around 60-90%
 119 2010-12-31 00:37:17 selesta has joined
 120 2010-12-31 00:38:07 <ArtForz> again, it's the job of the PSU designer to do that
 121 2010-12-31 00:38:23 <ArtForz> data on PC Power supplies is just a sad joke
 122 2010-12-31 00:38:49 <Diablo-D3> pc power SUCKS
 123 2010-12-31 00:38:51 wheel has quit (Quit: Ухожу я от вас (xchat 2.4.5 или старше))
 124 2010-12-31 00:38:54 <Diablo-D3> I dont know what the fuck happened
 125 2010-12-31 00:39:01 <Diablo-D3> original silencer series, perfect
 126 2010-12-31 00:39:02 <ArtForz> *pc power supplies
 127 2010-12-31 00:39:04 <Diablo-D3> new silencer IIs?
 128 2010-12-31 00:39:05 <Diablo-D3> FAIL
 129 2010-12-31 00:39:09 <Diablo-D3> FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL FAIL
 130 2010-12-31 00:39:16 <ArtForz> yep
 131 2010-12-31 00:39:31 <ArtForz> all consumer PSUs are crap, some more so than others
 132 2010-12-31 00:39:41 <Diablo-D3> that isnt it though
 133 2010-12-31 00:39:44 <Diablo-D3> silencer Is were perfect
 134 2010-12-31 00:39:47 <Diablo-D3> 10 pounds of heatsink
 135 2010-12-31 00:39:59 <Diablo-D3> 80mm thermal starting fan
 136 2010-12-31 00:40:12 <Diablo-D3> a little longer than spec just to fit the gigantic balls in
 137 2010-12-31 00:40:20 <Diablo-D3> giant japanese caps
 138 2010-12-31 00:40:26 <Diablo-D3> now its fucking ocz-ware
 139 2010-12-31 00:40:28 <Diablo-D3> fail
 140 2010-12-31 00:41:43 <marioxcc> ArtForz: what PSUs do you buy for yourself?
 141 2010-12-31 00:42:36 <ArtForz> Andyson K series based 80+ gold 1kW
 142 2010-12-31 00:42:44 <ArtForz> they have a "minor" design flaw
 143 2010-12-31 00:42:52 <ArtForz> they like to blow up their secondary rectifier mosfets
 144 2010-12-31 00:43:21 <marioxcc> haha
 145 2010-12-31 00:43:41 <ArtForz> because they use crappy thermal pads between fet+heatsink and dont tighten the screws enough
 146 2010-12-31 00:43:57 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: that could be easily fixed, though
 147 2010-12-31 00:44:06 <ArtForz> which I am doing
 148 2010-12-31 00:44:12 <marioxcc> ArtForz: can't they be tightened by the end user?
 149 2010-12-31 00:44:16 <ArtForz> not easily
 150 2010-12-31 00:44:42 <ArtForz> to get at the damn screws you have to desolder the main transformer and the whole rectifier mosfet bank
 151 2010-12-31 00:44:55 <marioxcc> uh
 152 2010-12-31 00:45:02 <ArtForz> ... yeah
 153 2010-12-31 00:45:17 <marioxcc> what about making one yourself? :)
 154 2010-12-31 00:45:29 <ArtForz> and today I checked on a still-working-but-not-fixed one
 155 2010-12-31 00:46:04 <ArtForz> I could actually unscrew a bunch of em with my fingers...
 156 2010-12-31 00:47:14 <marioxcc> ArtForz: what converter topology do they use?
 157 2010-12-31 00:47:18 <marioxcc> i'm wondering
 158 2010-12-31 00:47:47 <ArtForz> looks to be a resonant push-pull with synchronous rectification
 159 2010-12-31 00:47:47 <Kiba> all of this technical matters is beyond me
 160 2010-12-31 00:47:48 <marioxcc> when I dissassambled one I saw a toroidal core with 2 or 3 separte windings, uh?
 161 2010-12-31 00:48:12 <ArtForz> dioffers a lot, theres like a fuckton if different topologies nowadays
 162 2010-12-31 00:48:27 <marioxcc> ok
 163 2010-12-31 00:49:32 selesta has quit (Quit: Page closed)
 164 2010-12-31 00:49:35 <ArtForz> but general trand seems to be toward resonant main converter + DC-DC stepdown for 12->5V and 3.3V
 165 2010-12-31 00:50:01 <ArtForz> probably because you can get crazy efficiency out of a resonant converter
 166 2010-12-31 00:50:57 <ArtForz> >93% for the main converter isnt too unusual
 167 2010-12-31 00:51:09 <marioxcc> good :)
 168 2010-12-31 00:52:29 <marioxcc> i'm thinking of building a buck converter with an AVR
 169 2010-12-31 00:52:29 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Quitte)
 170 2010-12-31 00:52:43 <marioxcc> just to practice, as i'm a student
 171 2010-12-31 00:53:14 <marioxcc> should there be any issue with the ADC converter?
 172 2010-12-31 00:54:20 <tcatm> It will work.
 173 2010-12-31 00:54:39 <marioxcc> have you built one?
 174 2010-12-31 00:54:39 <ArtForz> expect EMI noise, and sampling artefacts if your sampling frequency is a nice multiple of the switching frequency
 175 2010-12-31 00:54:44 <tcatm> yup
 176 2010-12-31 00:55:59 <ArtForz> yeah, I designed some other random crazy psu-like stuff too
 177 2010-12-31 00:56:24 <ArtForz> for eaxmple a resonant push-pull CCFL inverter
 178 2010-12-31 00:56:34 <marioxcc> what's CCFL?
 179 2010-12-31 00:56:50 <marioxcc> oh, cold cathode
 180 2010-12-31 00:56:53 <ArtForz> yep
 181 2010-12-31 00:57:33 <ArtForz> needs a few kV ignition voltage
 182 2010-12-31 00:58:45 <marioxcc> brb
 183 2010-12-31 01:00:57 <ArtForz> btw, tuning the control loop is really fun
 184 2010-12-31 01:01:58 dwdollar has joined
 185 2010-12-31 01:03:08 <ArtForz> "throwing spahetti at the wall" seems to work best for buck, boost, buck-boost, flyback and SEPIC
 186 2010-12-31 01:10:27 <Diablo-D3> [07:41:31] <ArtForz> not easily
 187 2010-12-31 01:10:27 <Diablo-D3> [07:41:57] <ArtForz> to get at the damn screws you have to desolder the main transformer and the whole rectifier mosfet bank
 188 2010-12-31 01:10:28 <Diablo-D3> ffffffffffff
 189 2010-12-31 01:10:30 <Diablo-D3> thats bs
 190 2010-12-31 01:11:00 <marioxcc> i'm back
 191 2010-12-31 01:11:05 <ArtForz> well, either the mosfet bank or the output inductor
 192 2010-12-31 01:11:17 <marioxcc> sorry, I had to attend an issue
 193 2010-12-31 01:11:28 <ArtForz> and desoldering the mosfet bank is easier
 194 2010-12-31 01:14:20 <marioxcc> ArtForz: I have a 120-12V 1A transformer here
 195 2010-12-31 01:14:42 <Diablo-D3> who doesnt?
 196 2010-12-31 01:14:43 <marioxcc> I had the idea of building an inverter
 197 2010-12-31 01:14:53 <marioxcc> using PWM, but
 198 2010-12-31 01:14:57 <marioxcc> my question is:
 199 2010-12-31 01:15:00 <Diablo-D3> I have a shitload of 120v->something transformers of various voltages
 200 2010-12-31 01:15:06 <marioxcc> would this work with a standard transformer?
 201 2010-12-31 01:15:16 <ArtForz> yes, but not well
 202 2010-12-31 01:15:36 <marioxcc> Diablo-D3: i'm was not boasting
 203 2010-12-31 01:15:43 <ArtForz> 60Hz transfomers usually dont like square wave drive too well
 204 2010-12-31 01:17:10 <marioxcc> ArtForz: the inductance won't smooth the wave?
 205 2010-12-31 01:17:25 <ArtForz> no, because it's effectively short-circuited by the load
 206 2010-12-31 01:17:48 <ArtForz> just measure leakage inductance, it's not much
 207 2010-12-31 01:18:45 <marioxcc> ok
 208 2010-12-31 01:19:24 <ArtForz> but it's sure possible to do it
 209 2010-12-31 01:19:52 <ArtForz> the transformer will hum more than usual and only provide ~70% of rated power, but it'll work
 210 2010-12-31 01:20:27 <marioxcc> ok
 211 2010-12-31 01:20:37 <ArtForz> of course it's a lot more space efficient to just do DC-DC and then create square wave AC with a bridge
 212 2010-12-31 01:21:36 <marioxcc> how do you create a sin wave?
 213 2010-12-31 01:21:49 <ArtForz> thats... tricky
 214 2010-12-31 01:22:11 <ArtForz> usually PWM and LC smooting
 215 2010-12-31 01:22:14 <ArtForz> *smoothing
 216 2010-12-31 01:22:17 <marioxcc> ok
 217 2010-12-31 01:22:20 <marioxcc> what about inductive loads?
 218 2010-12-31 01:22:48 <ArtForz> what about them?
 219 2010-12-31 01:23:14 <ArtForz> like anything with a non-1 cos phi, they'll backfeed part of the time
 220 2010-12-31 01:23:15 <marioxcc> i suppose they increase the inductance factor
 221 2010-12-31 01:23:38 <marioxcc> can the filter deal with that?
 222 2010-12-31 01:23:45 <ArtForz> yep
 223 2010-12-31 01:23:46 * Kiba ponders the idea of building a...space train!
 224 2010-12-31 01:24:19 <Kiba> da dyson sphere project
 225 2010-12-31 01:24:53 <afed> let's write a computer program that makes dyson spheres and use them as currency
 226 2010-12-31 01:25:14 <AAA_awright> There's not enough Bitcoins in existance to build that train of yours, Kiba
 227 2010-12-31 01:25:17 <ArtForz> build a dyson sphere, then we can have space subways!
 228 2010-12-31 01:25:25 * AAA_awright blink
 229 2010-12-31 01:26:32 <lfm> id be happy with a ringworld
 230 2010-12-31 01:26:45 <Kiba> a ringworld around the sun?
 231 2010-12-31 01:27:07 <Kiba> maybe I could build a ring around the earth first
 232 2010-12-31 01:27:10 <lfm> ya, slice of a dyson shere
 233 2010-12-31 01:27:29 <ArtForz> ringworld?
 234 2010-12-31 01:27:47 <ArtForz> lol
 235 2010-12-31 01:27:55 <afed> molly ringwald
 236 2010-12-31 01:28:09 <Kiba> a train network that spans the globe
 237 2010-12-31 01:28:45 <Kiba> the only problem is that some wars will collapse some of these train track
 238 2010-12-31 01:28:55 <Kiba> or earthquake, or any number of thing
 239 2010-12-31 01:29:06 <Kiba> that's why it's improtant to build a self-replicating train network
 240 2010-12-31 01:29:40 <ArtForz> just build a flying train network
 241 2010-12-31 01:29:59 <Kiba> that just make no sense
 242 2010-12-31 01:30:04 <ArtForz> why?
 243 2010-12-31 01:30:32 <Kiba> trains don't fly
 244 2010-12-31 01:30:38 <Kiba> maybe they levitates
 245 2010-12-31 01:30:44 <Kiba> but they don't fly
 246 2010-12-31 01:30:55 <ArtForz> no, the tracks fly
 247 2010-12-31 01:31:22 <ArtForz> well, actually they're suspended from vacuum balloons
 248 2010-12-31 01:31:38 <lfm> they can use aerodynamic effects
 249 2010-12-31 01:31:48 <Kiba> they're still vulnerable to missle launches
 250 2010-12-31 01:32:15 osmosis has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
 251 2010-12-31 01:32:39 <lfm> what isnt
 252 2010-12-31 01:32:55 <marioxcc> Kiba: just as every other satelite
 253 2010-12-31 01:33:50 <Kiba> the first step is to defeat the tree hugging nonsense
 254 2010-12-31 01:34:01 <marioxcc> lol
 255 2010-12-31 01:34:13 <Kiba> then we can engineer the world to our liking
 256 2010-12-31 01:34:54 <Kiba> if you want nature, you can alway buy property and engineered nature
 257 2010-12-31 01:36:27 <lfm> kiba you read Ian M Banks? I can recomend him
 258 2010-12-31 01:37:12 <ArtForz> Imo the whole OMG save the planet! crap is illusion of grandeur
 259 2010-12-31 01:37:46 <lfm> not that pollution and such isnt a real problem sometimes
 260 2010-12-31 01:38:11 <ArtForz> yes, for humans, also for a bunch of plants or animals, for the planet? not really
 261 2010-12-31 01:38:24 <Kiba> lfm: no, but I read BLAME!
 262 2010-12-31 01:39:21 <Kiba> it have the most badass dyson sphere ever
 263 2010-12-31 01:39:39 <Kiba> the dyson sphere stretch to Jupiter's orbit
 264 2010-12-31 01:40:15 <Kiba> the only problem...
 265 2010-12-31 01:40:29 <Kiba> no nature to inhabit..and very rarely do you meet human beings
 266 2010-12-31 01:40:36 <Kiba> if you meet cyborgs, you're dead
 267 2010-12-31 01:40:39 <Kiba> unless you are one
 268 2010-12-31 01:41:12 dduane2 has joined
 269 2010-12-31 01:42:12 <marioxcc> that happens when you read too much sci-fi books
 270 2010-12-31 01:42:52 <marioxcc> ok, now regarding the tesla beam energy gun...
 271 2010-12-31 01:42:53 <marioxcc> hehe
 272 2010-12-31 01:42:58 <lfm> Ian M banks novel titled "Matter" has a structure sounds symilar to the City
 273 2010-12-31 01:43:07 <Kiba> you mean
 274 2010-12-31 01:43:17 <Kiba> the graviton beam emitter?
 275 2010-12-31 01:43:33 <lfm> no, multi level shere world
 276 2010-12-31 01:43:40 <lfm> sphere
 277 2010-12-31 01:43:56 <marioxcc> what's really impressive when you saw it the first time is the tesla coil
 278 2010-12-31 01:44:00 <marioxcc> which is real
 279 2010-12-31 01:45:57 <ArtForz> yep
 280 2010-12-31 01:46:16 <ArtForz> also interesting to see 2 tesla coils tunded to the same freq used as a transformer
 281 2010-12-31 01:46:36 <marioxcc> how is that?
 282 2010-12-31 01:46:41 <ArtForz> *tuned
 283 2010-12-31 01:46:48 <marioxcc> ok
 284 2010-12-31 01:47:06 <ArtForz> well, pretty much same way RFID works, inductive coupling
 285 2010-12-31 01:47:51 <lfm> or the corless battery chargers?
 286 2010-12-31 01:47:57 <lfm> cordless
 287 2010-12-31 01:48:03 <marioxcc> ArtForz: interesting
 288 2010-12-31 01:48:04 <ArtForz> not quite, those use near-field coupling
 289 2010-12-31 01:48:17 <marioxcc> lfm: how corless are they?
 290 2010-12-31 01:48:28 <ArtForz> = 2 halves of a ferrite transformer seperated by a bit of plastic and air
 291 2010-12-31 01:48:33 <marioxcc> lol
 292 2010-12-31 01:48:58 <marioxcc> so i guess their cordlessness is limited to 2 mm
 293 2010-12-31 01:49:04 <ArtForz> yep
 294 2010-12-31 01:49:13 <marioxcc> marketing BS :(
 295 2010-12-31 01:50:08 <ArtForz> the trick with tesla coils is that the 2ndary is essentially just a LC resonant circuit
 296 2010-12-31 01:50:34 <lfm> well you dont plug your phone in strictly speaking, (actually I wouldnt want one either)
 297 2010-12-31 01:50:37 <ArtForz> and if you have current flowing in several feet of air-cored coil, you get a HUGE magentic fringe field
 298 2010-12-31 01:50:52 <ArtForz> put anything resonating at the same freq in the field, and it draws power from it
 299 2010-12-31 01:51:08 <marioxcc> great :)
 300 2010-12-31 01:51:16 <ArtForz> yep
 301 2010-12-31 01:51:27 <ArtForz> seeing it demoed is... interesting
 302 2010-12-31 01:51:53 <marioxcc> guess so
 303 2010-12-31 01:52:18 <ArtForz> with a smallish tabletop coil you can get a few W over 10' no problem
 304 2010-12-31 01:52:22 <ArtForz> well, 2 of em
 305 2010-12-31 01:52:43 <marioxcc> ArtForz: 2?
 306 2010-12-31 01:52:51 <ArtForz> one transmitter, one receiver
 307 2010-12-31 01:52:54 <marioxcc> oh, sure
 308 2010-12-31 01:53:22 <marioxcc> is that radio wave propagation or pure inductive coupling?
 309 2010-12-31 01:53:42 <ArtForz> mostly inductive
 310 2010-12-31 01:53:56 <marioxcc> ok
 311 2010-12-31 01:54:13 <ArtForz> the interesting part is the magentic field doesn't seem to go down with distance cubed
 312 2010-12-31 01:54:20 <ArtForz> *magnetic field strength
 313 2010-12-31 01:54:23 <sipa> http://blockexplorer.com/address/1655orL9kVqVqCGMjGLogr11MFmeDBXw61
 314 2010-12-31 01:54:30 <sipa> transactions with value=0 are legal?
 315 2010-12-31 01:54:59 <marioxcc> ArtForz: wow, how do that works?
 316 2010-12-31 01:55:12 <ArtForz> thats the weird part
 317 2010-12-31 01:55:31 <ArtForz> it has something to do with the shape of the generated magnetic field
 318 2010-12-31 01:55:45 <marioxcc> is like a directed antena?
 319 2010-12-31 01:55:47 <ArtForz> yep
 320 2010-12-31 01:56:29 ciuciu has joined
 321 2010-12-31 01:56:47 <ArtForz> yo you get nearly no field outside the plane
 322 2010-12-31 01:56:50 <ArtForz> *so
 323 2010-12-31 01:56:58 <marioxcc> nice
 324 2010-12-31 01:57:03 <marioxcc> i would love to make one
 325 2010-12-31 01:57:45 <ArtForz> when you get further away, it goes more and more from H to E field
 326 2010-12-31 01:58:46 <marioxcc> it's then a radio wave?
 327 2010-12-31 01:58:49 <ArtForz> yep
 328 2010-12-31 01:58:57 <marioxcc> nice
 329 2010-12-31 01:59:46 <ArtForz> the physics are well understood but really very nonintuitive
 330 2010-12-31 02:00:08 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
 331 2010-12-31 02:00:12 <ArtForz> yep, current code allows 0 value TX...
 332 2010-12-31 02:00:40 <ArtForz> still incurs the 0.01 "microTX" fee
 333 2010-12-31 02:01:04 <marioxcc> I'm studying calculus to undestand the related physics
 334 2010-12-31 02:01:12 <marioxcc> just the elementary for now
 335 2010-12-31 02:02:12 <lfm> siba looks like zero amounts are allowed if you pay fee
 336 2010-12-31 02:02:16 <ArtForz> yep
 337 2010-12-31 02:02:40 <marioxcc> what's the motivation to such transactions?
 338 2010-12-31 02:02:52 <ArtForz> no clue
 339 2010-12-31 02:03:07 <lfm> no idea. I spoze someone is just exploring limits
 340 2010-12-31 02:03:17 <sipa> dang, now i need to adapt my coin tracer :)
 341 2010-12-31 02:03:38 <ArtForz> nice thing is we can just forget the output
 342 2010-12-31 02:03:42 <marioxcc> lfm: it's fine for me, someone just lost 0.01 BTC to a miner :)
 343 2010-12-31 02:03:48 <lfm> zero is smaller then 0.01 so with a fee it goes thru
 344 2010-12-31 02:03:57 <ArtForz> yep
 345 2010-12-31 02:03:59 <ArtForz> you can't spend a 0-value TX
 346 2010-12-31 02:04:10 <ArtForz> well, you can try, but no iner wil laccept it as it doesnt have enough fee
 347 2010-12-31 02:04:13 <ArtForz> *miner
 348 2010-12-31 02:04:29 <sipa> why do such small transactions need such (relatively) high fee?
 349 2010-12-31 02:04:40 <lfm> even if combined with other inputs?
 350 2010-12-31 02:04:49 <ArtForz> hurrm
 351 2010-12-31 02:04:55 <ArtForz> actually that should work
 352 2010-12-31 02:05:10 <sipa> the current client does not check for fees at all, right?
 353 2010-12-31 02:05:10 <ArtForz> you can combine a 0-value with other inputs to make a normal TX
 354 2010-12-31 02:05:21 <ArtForz> errr... it does
 355 2010-12-31 02:05:23 jyaworski has joined
 356 2010-12-31 02:05:26 <sipa> ok
 357 2010-12-31 02:05:33 <sipa> i believe i read it didn't
 358 2010-12-31 02:05:52 <ArtForz> http://bitcoin.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/bitcoin/trunk/main.cpp?r1=199&r2=198&pathrev=199
 359 2010-12-31 02:06:00 <marioxcc> could a miner make blocks without including any transaction at all (other than generation)?
 360 2010-12-31 02:06:01 <ArtForz> line 633
 361 2010-12-31 02:06:06 <ArtForz> yep
 362 2010-12-31 02:06:16 <lfm> sipa the idea was to try to reduce "dust" of transactions so small they are practically valueless
 363 2010-12-31 02:06:49 <lfm> marioxcc they do that all the time
 364 2010-12-31 02:07:01 <marioxcc> lfm: who does?
 365 2010-12-31 02:07:06 <marioxcc> it would be very egocentrical
 366 2010-12-31 02:07:10 <ArtForz> every miner
 367 2010-12-31 02:07:25 <lfm> miners make blocks with only generation txn in them
 368 2010-12-31 02:07:36 <sipa> marioxcc: the fee is decided by those who do transactions
 369 2010-12-31 02:07:37 dduane2 has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
 370 2010-12-31 02:07:38 <ArtForz> if theres no TXs queued you mine for a gen-only block
 371 2010-12-31 02:07:53 <sipa> the miner simple finds a nonce needed to combine some transactions into a block
 372 2010-12-31 02:07:54 <marioxcc> oh, sure
 373 2010-12-31 02:08:05 <lfm> marioxcc you kinda have to do it since some times there are no transactions being made
 374 2010-12-31 02:08:41 <sipa> and a lot of blocks are indeed only a generation, without any transaction
 375 2010-12-31 02:08:47 <marioxcc> ok
 376 2010-12-31 02:09:02 <sipa> you could make that illegal, acutally i think
 377 2010-12-31 02:09:10 <lfm> I presume you could only spend the zero amounts once
 378 2010-12-31 02:09:20 <sipa> lfm: you can spend any transaction only once
 379 2010-12-31 02:09:33 <marioxcc> sipa: why illegal?
 380 2010-12-31 02:09:35 <ArtForz> so miner puts a 0.01btc tx-to-self in block, now what?
 381 2010-12-31 02:09:57 <sipa> marioxcc: well, blocks are necessary for the network
 382 2010-12-31 02:10:11 <sipa> but the necessity is a lot lower when there are no transactions to process
 383 2010-12-31 02:10:18 <lfm> marioxcc and the system still needs time stamps saying "nothing happened here"
 384 2010-12-31 02:10:34 <sipa> and miner is and stays a huge waste of power, only for the benefit of the network
 385 2010-12-31 02:10:58 <marioxcc> ok
 386 2010-12-31 02:11:00 <ArtForz> not exactly a huge waste of power
 387 2010-12-31 02:11:12 <sipa> well, in global terms, not yet
 388 2010-12-31 02:11:23 <lfm> sipa it is performing a service
 389 2010-12-31 02:11:41 <sipa> yes of course it is
 390 2010-12-31 02:11:55 <sipa> but that service is not really necessary when there are no transactions
 391 2010-12-31 02:13:50 <lfm> well I spoze we dont really need any sort of money, we could all live on barter. it would be a pain to try to keep it fair and running smoothly
 392 2010-12-31 02:14:02 <sipa> please
 393 2010-12-31 02:15:05 <sipa> i'm just saying that it wouldn't harm much if mining was stopped if there are no transactions to process
 394 2010-12-31 02:15:29 <ArtForz> yes it would
 395 2010-12-31 02:15:32 <marioxcc> why?
 396 2010-12-31 02:15:57 <lfm> so the bitcoin system is what it is. part of it is the regular creation of new btc, if you reduce that just cuz there are no other txn, its a different system an It might not be as attractive, I dont think it would work a smoothly
 397 2010-12-31 02:16:04 <ArtForz> it allows someone to get a headstart for double-spends
 398 2010-12-31 02:17:01 <marioxcc> ArtForz: how can the double-spender use the absence of blocks when there are no Tx?
 399 2010-12-31 02:17:26 <ArtForz> easy sceanrio: a 1/unconf double spend
 400 2010-12-31 02:17:38 <ArtForz> netwrok just sits there with 0 transactions
 401 2010-12-31 02:18:35 <ArtForz> put "real" tx in block, start mining, find block, put one more useless tx in the block after that, keep mining until you got 2 blocks, broadcast fake tx to network, wait for network to create a block, payee sees 127unconf, now broadcast your 2 blocks
 402 2010-12-31 02:18:40 <lfm> and like art said, an idle miner would just make a dummy 0.,01 txn to itself so it could keep running
 403 2010-12-31 02:19:49 <marioxcc> ArtForz: I think in such case one of the blocks will eventually take precedence
 404 2010-12-31 02:19:59 <ArtForz> yes, the attackersd
 405 2010-12-31 02:20:04 <ArtForz> because it has a block after it
 406 2010-12-31 02:20:36 <marioxcc> hmm
 407 2010-12-31 02:21:40 <lfm> if your a miner and you actually stop mining when there are no txn yo0u give up chances at "winning"
 408 2010-12-31 02:24:22 <sipa> good points
 409 2010-12-31 02:24:25 <sipa> http://sipa.be/static/bitcoin/spending.pdf
 410 2010-12-31 02:24:51 <sipa> that's ThomasV's idea for a graph earlier today
 411 2010-12-31 02:25:44 <sipa> it traces each bitcoin from generation to where it ends up, counting the number of transactions it's been in
 412 2010-12-31 02:29:40 <lfm> I thot most were still at 1
 413 2010-12-31 02:30:28 <sipa> 0 = never spent
 414 2010-12-31 02:30:34 <sipa> and not shown on the graph
 415 2010-12-31 02:30:43 <lfm> ok most are still zero then
 416 2010-12-31 02:30:47 <sipa> yes
 417 2010-12-31 02:31:53 <sipa> 2.54275853920655 million BTC to be precise
 418 2010-12-31 02:31:58 <sipa> hey
 419 2010-12-31 02:32:04 <sipa> that's not possible
 420 2010-12-31 02:32:06 <marioxcc> ???
 421 2010-12-31 02:32:30 <lfm> oh includes fees
 422 2010-12-31 02:32:50 <sipa> still, i don't see how it's possible
 423 2010-12-31 02:33:06 <lfm> when its a fee it gets reset and included in generation
 424 2010-12-31 02:33:13 <sipa> no it's not
 425 2010-12-31 02:33:24 <sipa> only the 50 BTC is counted as 0
 426 2010-12-31 02:33:29 <sipa> the fee is traced as normal
 427 2010-12-31 02:33:40 <lfm> otherwise it should be a multiple of 50 with zero txn
 428 2010-12-31 02:33:52 <sipa> indeed, that's why it's not possible :)
 429 2010-12-31 02:34:11 <lfm> must be a bug
 430 2010-12-31 02:35:21 <lfm> and looks like you're rounding off with floating arithmetic to smaller than 1e8 bits per bitcoin
 431 2010-12-31 02:35:47 <sipa> which is strange, since i'm using integers :)
 432 2010-12-31 02:36:35 <lfm> oh million maybe not
 433 2010-12-31 02:36:37 <sipa> (by multiplying the amounts with 1e8)
 434 2010-12-31 02:37:06 <lfm> ya, the fraction is the right number of digits, sorry
 435 2010-12-31 02:37:44 <lfm> btw I get number of unspent generated transactions: 51349
 436 2010-12-31 02:38:34 <lfm> so 2.567450 million btc
 437 2010-12-31 02:38:39 <sipa> indeed
 438 2010-12-31 02:38:56 <joe_1> why in the world does the software make you wait for 100-200 transactions before you can spend generated coin?
 439 2010-12-31 02:39:12 <ArtForz> to avoid invalidating transactions on chain splitas
 440 2010-12-31 02:39:26 <sipa> 100 transactions is a *lot*
 441 2010-12-31 02:39:41 <nanotube> 100blocks you mean
 442 2010-12-31 02:39:44 <nanotube> and it's not a lot at all.
 443 2010-12-31 02:39:45 <sipa> yes
 444 2010-12-31 02:39:47 <nanotube> less than a day
 445 2010-12-31 02:39:50 <sipa> that's enough for a bug to be found, exploited, detected, and fixed :)
 446 2010-12-31 02:40:09 <nanotube> well, yes, that's the hope. :)
 447 2010-12-31 02:40:10 <lfm> joe_1 generated txn have to be a little different cuz they dont have previous input values you can check
 448 2010-12-31 02:40:18 <joe_1> but why only those transactions? i can spend a regular received transaction with 0 confirmations
 449 2010-12-31 02:41:29 <ArtForz> because normal trasnactions dont just vanish into thin air twhen the chain they're in gets overtaken
 450 2010-12-31 02:41:49 <joe_1> well, they go to someone else though.
 451 2010-12-31 02:41:59 <ArtForz> yes
 452 2010-12-31 02:42:04 <joe_1> let's say i receive 50 BTC in a regular transaction from somebody, then immediately spend it off to someone else.
 453 2010-12-31 02:42:14 <lfm> joe_1 usually they will get re-issued the same
 454 2010-12-31 02:42:19 <joe_1> chain gets overtaken, i lose all authority to have sent anything
 455 2010-12-31 02:42:33 <ArtForz> yep, and all dependent trasnactionsa re now also invalid
 456 2010-12-31 02:42:41 <ArtForz> = they never happened
 457 2010-12-31 02:43:21 <sipa> the generated coins are the foundation on which all other transactions are built
 458 2010-12-31 02:43:40 <marioxcc> what if you spend a just generated bitcoin block?
 459 2010-12-31 02:43:43 <ArtForz> a normal transaction in the "losing" chain not depnding on coins generated in that chain fork will just get put into the main chain
 460 2010-12-31 02:43:47 <ArtForz> you can't
 461 2010-12-31 02:43:48 <marioxcc> before 100 blocks confirmation?
 462 2010-12-31 02:43:52 <ArtForz> you can't
 463 2010-12-31 02:43:56 <ArtForz> it's invalid
 464 2010-12-31 02:43:56 <marioxcc> ArtForz: why?
 465 2010-12-31 02:44:02 <sipa> marioxcc: other nodes in the network will not accept it
 466 2010-12-31 02:44:07 <ArtForz> because the code says it's invalid
 467 2010-12-31 02:44:14 <marioxcc> other miners you mean?
 468 2010-12-31 02:44:15 <lfm> joe_1 most normal txn on a chain split will wind up the same in both chains, might be in different blocks even but the same txn
 469 2010-12-31 02:44:20 <ArtForz> blocks containing such a beasty are also invalid
 470 2010-12-31 02:44:36 <marioxcc> ok
 471 2010-12-31 02:44:52 <sipa> marioxcc: to be technically correct, the miner code doesn't know anything, it just looks for hashes - but yes, the clients those miners are working for
 472 2010-12-31 02:45:32 <marioxcc> ok
 473 2010-12-31 02:46:09 osmosis has joined
 474 2010-12-31 02:46:45 <lfm> marioxcc back to blocks with no txn. it is even allowed in the protocol for miners to ignore txn like ones with no fees and generate empty blocks even when some txn are waiting
 475 2010-12-31 02:47:17 <joe_1> ok, im starting to see how normal transactions would most likely wind up on both sides of a split where generated ones would not. however, isn't 100 blocks outrageously large of a wait?
 476 2010-12-31 02:47:34 <sipa> it's less than a day
 477 2010-12-31 02:47:36 <marioxcc> lfm: ok
 478 2010-12-31 02:48:53 <lfm> joe_1 maybe but how long should it be. he miners are generally willing to wait for their money so just to make sure it is extra long
 479 2010-12-31 02:49:45 <joe_1> 1 or 2 confirmations
 480 2010-12-31 02:50:02 <joe_1> max 6
 481 2010-12-31 02:50:19 <sipa> how many blocks did it take for that exploit with the overflow to get detected?
 482 2010-12-31 02:50:28 dcvii has joined
 483 2010-12-31 02:50:52 <lfm> detected less than an hour, corrected several more hours
 484 2010-12-31 02:51:43 <joe_1> ok
 485 2010-12-31 02:53:39 <sipa> ArtForz: how many blocks do you find a day?
 486 2010-12-31 02:54:36 * Kiba start up a miner on his netbook
 487 2010-12-31 02:54:53 <lfm> ;;math calc 144*.2
 488 2010-12-31 02:54:53 <gribble> 28.8
 489 2010-12-31 02:55:11 <sipa> ok ok, so ArtForz finds one every hour :)
 490 2010-12-31 02:55:21 <joe_1> i dont know if art will admit to it, but we can probably calculate backwards because i believe he has about 15 to 20 radeon 5870s.
 491 2010-12-31 02:55:22 <lfm> sipa est 25 - 30
 492 2010-12-31 02:55:42 <sipa> 5870?
 493 2010-12-31 02:55:44 <lfm> sipa ya thatd be average
 494 2010-12-31 02:55:55 <sipa> still, i think most miners don't find more than one a day
 495 2010-12-31 02:56:04 <Kiba> he's the richest bitcoiner alive, maybe
 496 2010-12-31 02:56:26 <joe_1> so about 20 dollars an hour, which is 400+ per day
 497 2010-12-31 02:56:30 <joe_1> yeah, he's retired.
 498 2010-12-31 02:56:40 <lfm> kiba I suspect Satoshi may be richer cuz he was nearly alone for the first year
 499 2010-12-31 02:56:50 <Kiba> lonely satoshi!
 500 2010-12-31 02:57:15 <Kiba> if I can go back to time, I would have earned LOOOOOOOOOOOOT OF BITCOIN
 501 2010-12-31 02:57:28 <Kiba> hindsight are 20/20
 502 2010-12-31 02:57:36 <sipa> but if everybody could, you wouldn't
 503 2010-12-31 02:57:44 <sipa> Kiba: no infinity/20 :)
 504 2010-12-31 02:58:24 <lfm> hidesight wears rose colored glasses?
 505 2010-12-31 02:58:36 <ArtForz> 24 5970s, 22.something blocks/day
 506 2010-12-31 02:59:40 <joe_1> plans to buy more gpu's?
 507 2010-12-31 02:59:44 <ArtForz> nope
 508 2010-12-31 03:00:07 <joe_1> plans to succeed bill gates as richest man in the world?
 509 2010-12-31 03:00:15 <ArtForz> nope
 510 2010-12-31 03:00:29 <sipa> 5 million BTC, the current amount in circulation
 511 2010-12-31 03:00:53 <sipa> is 1.5 million $
 512 2010-12-31 03:00:55 <joe_1> when the market pops 1 BTC will rise to just over a couple thousand dollars each
 513 2010-12-31 03:01:23 <lfm> hehe whens that gonna happen joe?
 514 2010-12-31 03:01:30 <sipa> the market may have people wanting to buy some BTC for 1$ maybe sometime in the future
 515 2010-12-31 03:01:35 <joe_1> i would say 5 to 10 years
 516 2010-12-31 03:01:50 <sipa> but do you think someone's ever going to want to buy *millions* of BTC for that price?
 517 2010-12-31 03:01:58 <joe_1> look at it this way - it's doubled 6 times in the past few months (it was 0.005)
 518 2010-12-31 03:02:10 <lfm> safe prediction, no one will remember the prediction that long
 519 2010-12-31 03:02:46 * Kiba made a bet on the success of bitcoin
 520 2010-12-31 03:03:02 <Kiba> boy, I hope I am right!
 521 2010-12-31 03:03:16 <joe_1> the real driver of the price, however, is how much it is used in every day transactions; and, by extension, people's predicition of future level of use.
 522 2010-12-31 03:03:50 <Kiba> is that so? .30 pitiful
 523 2010-12-31 03:04:00 <EvanR> bill gates hasnt been the 'richest man' in a whole
 524 2010-12-31 03:04:03 <EvanR> in a while
 525 2010-12-31 03:04:12 <Kiba> I don't think he care
 526 2010-12-31 03:04:19 <sipa> i hopse he doesn't
 527 2010-12-31 03:04:25 <sipa> hope
 528 2010-12-31 03:04:32 <lfm> been there done that
 529 2010-12-31 03:04:45 <Kiba> for him, a million dollar is a rounding error
 530 2010-12-31 03:04:56 <Kiba> dollars
 531 2010-12-31 03:05:38 <lfm> i bet he watches every million pretty close
 532 2010-12-31 03:06:29 <Kiba> rational philantrophy
 533 2010-12-31 03:06:38 ianm_ has joined
 534 2010-12-31 03:11:25 EvanR has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
 535 2010-12-31 03:13:03 EvanR has joined
 536 2010-12-31 03:16:19 <joe_1> if bitcoin enjoys as much use as paypal does today, each bitcoin will be worth $710.
 537 2010-12-31 03:18:19 <Kiba> and I'll be rich beyond my wildest dream?
 538 2010-12-31 03:18:33 <Kiba> well
 539 2010-12-31 03:18:43 <Kiba> I would have 171,820 if it come true
 540 2010-12-31 03:19:01 <Kiba> USD
 541 2010-12-31 03:19:09 <Kiba> that's a hell of saving
 542 2010-12-31 03:19:40 <joe_1> yeah
 543 2010-12-31 03:19:49 <tcatm> + we'd probably have good jobs at some bitcoin business.
 544 2010-12-31 03:20:22 <Kiba> ridiclious saving rate
 545 2010-12-31 03:20:47 <ArtForz> I'd have 21M
 546 2010-12-31 03:21:06 <tcatm> I'd about 8M
 547 2010-12-31 03:21:58 <Kiba> satoshi is probably a billionaire
 548 2010-12-31 03:22:01 <Kiba> but of course
 549 2010-12-31 03:22:10 <Kiba> our saving is dependent on us not spending
 550 2010-12-31 03:23:03 <tcatm> Not billionaire, but close ;)
 551 2010-12-31 03:24:11 <tcatm> I'd be happy with 1 USD/BTC for now
 552 2010-12-31 03:25:10 <Kiba> that mean, I have 200 + dollars in saving
 553 2010-12-31 03:25:12 <Kiba> phew!
 554 2010-12-31 03:26:51 <newsham> paypal has marketting and vc w/ connections
 555 2010-12-31 03:26:55 <Diablo-D3> if satoshi was really a billionare
 556 2010-12-31 03:27:01 <Diablo-D3> he'd give me exactly 5 million
 557 2010-12-31 03:27:03 <Diablo-D3> no more, no less
 558 2010-12-31 03:27:20 <newsham> if false then diablo would give me 6billion
 559 2010-12-31 03:27:29 <newsham> ex falso quod libet
 560 2010-12-31 03:27:54 <Diablo-D3> that isnt it
 561 2010-12-31 03:28:05 <Diablo-D3> I could dedicate my life to making bitcoin worth using
 562 2010-12-31 03:30:21 * Kiba would start a foundation dedicated to defeating death
 563 2010-12-31 03:30:55 Samedhi has joined
 564 2010-12-31 03:33:02 <nanotube> Kiba: join an existing one... i'm sure one exists.
 565 2010-12-31 03:34:18 <newsham> death would be a release after this travesty...
 566 2010-12-31 03:35:38 <Kiba> nanotube: but they want to defeat death with far off technology
 567 2010-12-31 03:35:57 <newsham> proof of work found
 568 2010-12-31 03:37:33 <nanotube> woo
 569 2010-12-31 03:38:49 <newsham> i should show that to my wife
 570 2010-12-31 03:38:53 <newsham> she's always saying i dont do anything
 571 2010-12-31 03:40:08 <nanotube> hahaha
 572 2010-12-31 03:40:16 <nanotube> see right there, proof!
 573 2010-12-31 03:40:18 <nanotube> yep
 574 2010-12-31 03:40:32 <Kiba> show what to your life?
 575 2010-12-31 03:41:04 <newsham> proof of work
 576 2010-12-31 03:46:03 <joe_1> wont have to do any work once the market pops
 577 2010-12-31 03:46:53 <joe_1> we'll all be rich
 578 2010-12-31 03:46:59 <newsham> not me.
 579 2010-12-31 03:47:14 <joe_1> have u been to the casino yet?
 580 2010-12-31 03:47:20 <newsham> nope
 581 2010-12-31 03:47:38 <joe_1> if u go to it you can multiply your coins really quick
 582 2010-12-31 03:47:51 <newsham> multiply by 0.99?
 583 2010-12-31 03:48:36 <nanotube> newsham: hahaha yea
 584 2010-12-31 03:49:22 <Kiba> wouldn't multiplying by .99 make your bitcoin pile smaller?
 585 2010-12-31 03:49:36 <newsham> kiba: thats what casinos do
 586 2010-12-31 03:50:09 <newsham> thats how they build all those big hotels
 587 2010-12-31 03:55:24 <marioxcc> of course
 588 2010-12-31 03:55:39 <marioxcc> you loose in the long run
 589 2010-12-31 03:56:07 <marioxcc> do anyone really expects to build a fortune in a casino?
 590 2010-12-31 03:56:43 <Kiba> unless you're card counting
 591 2010-12-31 03:57:28 osmosis has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
 592 2010-12-31 03:57:54 <nanotube> in which case you get kicked out as soon as you start doing well.
 593 2010-12-31 03:59:17 osmosis has joined
 594 2010-12-31 03:59:33 dcvii has left ("Leaving")
 595 2010-12-31 04:07:24 <newsham> people hae done well and not gotten kicked out in the past
 596 2010-12-31 04:07:34 <newsham> also you can makemoney at prop bets and poker
 597 2010-12-31 04:07:36 <newsham> the housetaking a cut
 598 2010-12-31 04:07:53 osmosis has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
 599 2010-12-31 04:08:47 * nanotube just stays away
 600 2010-12-31 04:09:03 <newsham> yah not my thing
 601 2010-12-31 04:09:13 <newsham> i like to make money in teh computers
 602 2010-12-31 04:10:46 <Kiba> me too
 603 2010-12-31 04:20:10 dduane2 has joined
 604 2010-12-31 04:27:58 dduane2 has quit ()
 605 2010-12-31 04:32:54 <nanotube> how does one report spam on the forum? i don't see a nice pretty button to do that?
 606 2010-12-31 04:34:57 <marioxcc> nanotube: why you don't just open a thread?
 607 2010-12-31 04:35:37 <nanotube> well, i thought someone on here might tell me where. but i guess i will. :)
 608 2010-12-31 04:35:47 <lfm> im sure the moderators will see it soon enuf, just ignore it
 609 2010-12-31 04:37:23 Samedhi has quit (Quit: Samedhi)
 610 2010-12-31 04:38:49 <nanotube> still, would be nice if there was a way to report - it would be 'sooner'.
 611 2010-12-31 04:39:14 <Kiba> nanotube: how about 5 votes than the spam is gone?
 612 2010-12-31 04:41:28 <marioxcc> Kiba: spammers would then begin to delete legitimate messages
 613 2010-12-31 04:41:32 <nanotube> no, just bring it to moderator attention.
 614 2010-12-31 04:41:39 <nanotube> autodelete is a bad idea
 615 2010-12-31 04:41:44 <ArtForz> yep
 616 2010-12-31 04:41:45 <marioxcc> yes
 617 2010-12-31 04:41:57 <ArtForz> just make it hide the post from current user and flag it to moderator for permanent deletification
 618 2010-12-31 04:42:04 <nanotube> ya
 619 2010-12-31 04:42:09 <marioxcc> Kiba: are you the forum administrator?
 620 2010-12-31 04:42:58 <Kiba> No.
 621 2010-12-31 04:43:25 <Kiba> marioxcc: spammer would have to learn the very special feature of deleting legit messages
 622 2010-12-31 04:43:32 <Kiba> nanotube: just put it in a spam queue
 623 2010-12-31 04:43:40 <Kiba> and ban any user abusing it
 624 2010-12-31 04:45:25 <marioxcc> or move to a mailing list :)
 625 2010-12-31 04:46:28 * Kiba shrugs
 626 2010-12-31 04:46:34 <Kiba> it might be better to have a
 627 2010-12-31 04:46:41 <Kiba> a specialized forum
 628 2010-12-31 04:46:44 <Kiba> fit to our need
 629 2010-12-31 04:46:46 <Kiba> I don't know.
 630 2010-12-31 04:47:00 <marioxcc> well, other day we talked a bit about the issue
 631 2010-12-31 04:47:06 <marioxcc> i think it was with nanotube or ArtForz
 632 2010-12-31 04:47:19 <nanotube> marioxcc: it was me
 633 2010-12-31 04:47:24 <marioxcc> ok
 634 2010-12-31 04:47:27 <nanotube> anyway, i made this thread: http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=2545.0
 635 2010-12-31 04:47:28 <bitbot> Combating forum spam
 636 2010-12-31 04:47:59 <marioxcc> Kiba: in few words: a mailing list offers a uniform machine friendly interface
 637 2010-12-31 04:48:11 <marioxcc> which can be fit to user and community needs
 638 2010-12-31 04:48:21 <marioxcc> there are even forum gateways to mailing lists
 639 2010-12-31 04:48:37 <marioxcc> that isn't possible with forums, because they offer a static web interface that can't be changed
 640 2010-12-31 04:48:43 <marioxcc> nor easily parsed
 641 2010-12-31 04:48:59 <marioxcc> (at least it isn't efficient because of HTML formatting and other BS)
 642 2010-12-31 04:51:49 Bth8 has left ("Leaving")
 643 2010-12-31 05:02:45 <nanotube> marioxcc: make a post on the forum with the suggestion. :)
 644 2010-12-31 05:03:02 * Kiba is lazy to do anything
 645 2010-12-31 05:03:15 <Kiba> time to retire to the bed for the night
 646 2010-12-31 05:03:56 <marioxcc> good night
 647 2010-12-31 05:04:27 <marioxcc> nanotube: not worth the effort :)
 648 2010-12-31 05:04:46 <marioxcc> ArtForz: have you programmed a FPGA using a free software suite?
 649 2010-12-31 05:07:29 <nanotube> marioxcc: haha
 650 2010-12-31 05:08:13 <marioxcc> nanotube: haha the above question or the above statement?
 651 2010-12-31 05:09:45 jyaworski has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 652 2010-12-31 05:12:12 <ArtForz> yea
 653 2010-12-31 05:12:50 <marioxcc> ArtForz: could you linkme to a starting point?
 654 2010-12-31 05:13:35 <marioxcc> i don't have anything in mind to build, just want to know
 655 2010-12-31 05:15:18 <ArtForz> for jtag downloading, xc3sprog, for synthesis... there really isnt much good foss for that
 656 2010-12-31 05:19:00 <marioxcc> ArtForz: ok, thanks
 657 2010-12-31 05:30:35 <nanotube> marioxcc: for the 'not worth the effort' :)
 658 2010-12-31 05:33:35 <ArtForz> problem is, writing a decent synthesis toolchain is HARD
 659 2010-12-31 05:33:42 AAA_awright_ has joined
 660 2010-12-31 05:34:20 AAA_awright has quit (Disconnected by services)
 661 2010-12-31 05:34:36 <ArtForz> and the synthesis tools for affordable FPGAs are free(beer)
 662 2010-12-31 05:34:46 <marioxcc> no, i mean free as in freedom
 663 2010-12-31 05:34:55 <ArtForz> yes, but thats why no one bothers
 664 2010-12-31 05:34:59 BCBot has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
 665 2010-12-31 05:35:03 <marioxcc> why it's so hard, BTW?
 666 2010-12-31 05:35:05 <newsham> free as in tibet
 667 2010-12-31 05:35:16 <ArtForz> the actual hardware is undocumented
 668 2010-12-31 05:35:23 <marioxcc> oh
 669 2010-12-31 05:35:44 <ArtForz> and place&route is at least NP-hard
 670 2010-12-31 05:36:43 <marioxcc> hmm
 671 2010-12-31 05:36:52 AAA_awright_ is now known as AAA_awright
 672 2010-12-31 05:37:12 <ArtForz> I think some people documented at least the Spartan3 bitstream->hardware mapping
 673 2010-12-31 05:37:23 <marioxcc> ok
 674 2010-12-31 05:37:43 <marioxcc> isn't there any oficially documented FPGA?
 675 2010-12-31 05:37:54 <ArtForz> I doubt it
 676 2010-12-31 05:37:59 <marioxcc> what a pity :(
 677 2010-12-31 05:38:16 <marioxcc> to buy something you don't know what does, in some degree
 678 2010-12-31 05:38:31 <ArtForz> mfgs for some fucked up reason think their actual hardware structure is a trade secret or something
 679 2010-12-31 05:39:17 BCBot has joined
 680 2010-12-31 05:39:40 <marioxcc> wait, mfgs?
 681 2010-12-31 05:39:47 <ArtForz> manufacturers
 682 2010-12-31 05:39:56 <marioxcc> ok
 683 2010-12-31 05:40:21 <ArtForz> you also need timing info to have any hope of getting any kind of automated placement going, and thats even harder to come by
 684 2010-12-31 05:40:52 <marioxcc> yeah
 685 2010-12-31 05:41:54 <ArtForz> though I wonder if timing data is actually copyrightable
 686 2010-12-31 05:42:06 <marioxcc> probably not, but they won't tell you
 687 2010-12-31 05:42:16 <ArtForz> well, their tools do
 688 2010-12-31 05:42:42 <marioxcc> do you mean propagation dealy, rise/fall time and the like?
 689 2010-12-31 05:42:48 <ArtForz> yep
 690 2010-12-31 05:43:22 <ArtForz> synthesize + PAR some random design, dump timing for all paths, disassemble bitstream, figure out which path has how much delay with simple linear equations
 691 2010-12-31 05:43:22 T_X has quit (Quit: http://quassel-irc.org - Chat comfortably. Anywhere.)
 692 2010-12-31 05:43:45 <marioxcc> oh, reverse engineering
 693 2010-12-31 05:43:47 <ArtForz> use placement constraints to force it to use paths you dont know yet
 694 2010-12-31 05:43:49 <ArtForz> not quite
 695 2010-12-31 05:43:50 <nanotube> hey, anyone have firefox4 handy?
 696 2010-12-31 05:44:02 T_X has joined
 697 2010-12-31 05:44:02 T_X has quit (Changing host)
 698 2010-12-31 05:44:02 T_X has joined
 699 2010-12-31 05:44:10 <marioxcc> nanotube: iceweasel 3.0.6 here
 700 2010-12-31 05:44:33 <ArtForz> we're just using official timing report output
 701 2010-12-31 05:44:36 <nanotube> marioxcc: isn't that a little old... not even 3.6 ?
 702 2010-12-31 05:44:40 <marioxcc> ArtForz: ok
 703 2010-12-31 05:44:45 <marioxcc> nanotube: no, why should I?
 704 2010-12-31 05:44:51 AAA_awright has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 705 2010-12-31 05:44:59 acous has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 706 2010-12-31 05:45:09 <marioxcc> the most advanced thing I do use is javascript for the sites with menus which require it
 707 2010-12-31 05:45:13 AAA_awright has joined
 708 2010-12-31 05:45:35 <nanotube> marioxcc: i bet there are a bunc hof security fixes between 3.0.6 and 3.6.13...
 709 2010-12-31 05:45:58 <marioxcc> nanotube: ¿of what kind?
 710 2010-12-31 05:46:16 <marioxcc> any code injection hole around?
 711 2010-12-31 05:46:27 <marioxcc> password retrival?
 712 2010-12-31 05:46:41 <ArtForz> so I guess we *could* get enough info to have a "good enough" understanding of delays, required setup/hold times, max clocks, ... by just black-box REing the vendor tools
 713 2010-12-31 05:47:27 <nanotube> marioxcc: look at the release notes... http://www.mozilla.org/security/known-vulnerabilities/firefox30.html#firefox3.0.7  (and scroll up)
 714 2010-12-31 05:47:34 <nanotube> note that ff3.0 is not even supported anymore
 715 2010-12-31 05:47:37 <marioxcc> ArtForz: what about code uploading?
 716 2010-12-31 05:47:45 <ArtForz> thats the easiest part
 717 2010-12-31 05:47:52 <marioxcc> oh, lol
 718 2010-12-31 05:47:58 <ArtForz> xc3sprog does that
 719 2010-12-31 05:47:59 AAA_awright has quit (Client Quit)
 720 2010-12-31 05:48:15 <nanotube> marioxcc: there's more for ff3.5: http://www.mozilla.org/security/known-vulnerabilities/firefox35.html#firefox3.5.6
 721 2010-12-31 05:48:19 AAA_awright has joined
 722 2010-12-31 05:48:37 <ArtForz> also supports a fuckton of programming cables and devices from various vendors, yeha, the name is kinda misleading
 723 2010-12-31 05:48:56 AAA_awright has quit (Client Quit)
 724 2010-12-31 05:48:58 <marioxcc> ok, i see
 725 2010-12-31 05:48:59 <nanotube> marioxcc: and more for firefox 3.6: http://www.mozilla.org/security/known-vulnerabilities/firefox36.html
 726 2010-12-31 05:49:16 <marioxcc> ArtForz: so what's the hardest part or limiting factor to free toolchains?
 727 2010-12-31 05:49:19 AAA_awright has joined
 728 2010-12-31 05:49:23 <nanotube> marioxcc: so basically... with all that, there are probably dozens of known security issues with 3.0.6
 729 2010-12-31 05:49:42 AAA_awright has quit (Client Quit)
 730 2010-12-31 05:50:05 <marioxcc> nanotube: i'm not really concerned about
 731 2010-12-31 05:50:08 <ArtForz> HDL->physical LUT/FF/... synthesis and Place&Route on that
 732 2010-12-31 05:50:31 <ArtForz> really the latter part, even the vendor tools have a very hard time doing a good job at it
 733 2010-12-31 05:50:34 <nanotube> marioxcc: i'm not going to go through all of them myself, but there are a bunch of critical-level security fixes... which probably include 'arbitrary code execution'
 734 2010-12-31 05:51:05 AAA_awright has joined
 735 2010-12-31 05:51:08 <ArtForz> probably because the nuber of possible placement/routing variations for any given design is just astronomical
 736 2010-12-31 05:51:08 <marioxcc> nanotube: i will check that later, i really dobut the sites I see would ever attempt to crack their users
 737 2010-12-31 05:51:25 <marioxcc> ArtForz: ok, i undestand
 738 2010-12-31 05:52:01 <marioxcc> but if the proprietary tools have somewhat adressed the problem...
 739 2010-12-31 05:52:01 <marioxcc> :)
 740 2010-12-31 05:52:34 <nanotube> marioxcc: sites can be compromised, malicious code injected.
 741 2010-12-31 05:52:49 Slix` has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 742 2010-12-31 05:52:59 <nanotube> hey, it's your choice, just giving you the information.
 743 2010-12-31 05:53:11 <marioxcc> nanotube: I appreciate very much you care about my security
 744 2010-12-31 05:53:30 <marioxcc> but even if my user home is completely destroyed i will just bring up that dayly rsync
 745 2010-12-31 05:53:44 AAA_awright has quit (Client Quit)
 746 2010-12-31 05:53:49 <nanotube> what if your bank account passwords are stolen?
 747 2010-12-31 05:53:58 <nanotube> no daily rsync will save you then
 748 2010-12-31 05:53:59 <marioxcc> nanotube: i have none
 749 2010-12-31 05:54:08 AAA_awright has joined
 750 2010-12-31 05:54:17 <marioxcc> and the really personal information is encrypted
 751 2010-12-31 05:54:36 <marioxcc> gpg-encrypted, not filesystem encryption
 752 2010-12-31 05:54:36 <nanotube> your irc account password, your email password, etc. no amount of encryption will save you from a keylogger.
 753 2010-12-31 05:54:49 <nanotube> your gpg private key and password can be stolen just as well
 754 2010-12-31 05:55:00 <marioxcc> nanotube: gpg private key is encrypted
 755 2010-12-31 05:55:05 <nanotube> with what?
 756 2010-12-31 05:55:07 <nanotube> your password?
 757 2010-12-31 05:55:14 <nanotube> which can be stolen with the aforementioned keylogger?
 758 2010-12-31 05:55:33 <marioxcc> yeah, supposing they somehow manage to really run such keylogger
 759 2010-12-31 05:55:39 <marioxcc> i'm not running windows, hey!
 760 2010-12-31 05:55:46 <ArtForz> actually with a properly implemented system, installing said keylogger is impossible
 761 2010-12-31 05:55:48 <nanotube> "arbitrary code execution" == "they can run anything they want"
 762 2010-12-31 05:56:03 <marioxcc> nanotube: no, they can't
 763 2010-12-31 05:56:14 <marioxcc> that's what user permissions are for
 764 2010-12-31 05:56:18 <nanotube> well, anything your user can
 765 2010-12-31 05:56:31 <nanotube> unless you run your browser as a separate user
 766 2010-12-31 05:56:37 <marioxcc> no, i don't
 767 2010-12-31 05:57:34 <nanotube> well then
 768 2010-12-31 05:57:42 <marioxcc> but i really, really dobut they will 1) compromise one of the sites I do use 2) install such code in my computer somehow by browser bugs 3) make the software run and retrive meaningfull data 4) atack ME, insead of the another 1000's of visitors of such web site
 769 2010-12-31 05:58:00 <nanotube> yes, i really doubt that as well
 770 2010-12-31 05:58:14 <nanotube> but that's no reason you should deliberately run a browser with known security holes.
 771 2010-12-31 05:58:20 <marioxcc> and as ArtForz says, installing a keylogger on a properly configured system is a hypotetical case
 772 2010-12-31 05:58:38 <marioxcc> nanotube: well, isn't that I chosed to run this specific version
 773 2010-12-31 05:58:47 <marioxcc> this is the one that comes with debian
 774 2010-12-31 05:59:22 <nanotube> hey, i mean, if you are really attached to 3.0.6 for some reason, up to you. i'm giving you the info, and my suggestion. :)
 775 2010-12-31 05:59:24 <ArtForz> TPM was actually a good idea, before intel got all tivoy with it
 776 2010-12-31 05:59:53 <marioxcc> nanotube: i'm not bound to it, just i don't want to update
 777 2010-12-31 05:59:58 <nanotube> ArtForz: don't tell me that you deliberatly run old unsupported browser, just because it is unlikely you'd be targeted? :P
 778 2010-12-31 06:00:03 <ArtForz> nope
 779 2010-12-31 06:00:10 <nanotube> well, good. :)
 780 2010-12-31 06:00:22 <marioxcc> <ArtForz> TPM was actually a good idea, before intel got all tivoy with it <- what's that?
 781 2010-12-31 06:00:40 <ArtForz> what? TPM?
 782 2010-12-31 06:00:58 <marioxcc> TPM, tivoy
 783 2010-12-31 06:01:06 <ArtForz> TPM, Trusted Platform Module, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Platform_Module
 784 2010-12-31 06:01:36 <ArtForz> tivoy = tivo-like, only device manufacturer has the root key capable of signing a bootloader
 785 2010-12-31 06:02:15 <marioxcc> ok, i didn't recognized the word
 786 2010-12-31 06:02:24 <marioxcc> i'm used to see "tivoization" instead :)
 787 2010-12-31 06:02:33 <marioxcc> yeah, the GPL 3 deals with that
 788 2010-12-31 06:02:43 <ArtForz> with TPM you can do proper chain-of-trust booting
 789 2010-12-31 06:02:50 <lfm> "tivo"y
 790 2010-12-31 06:02:57 <marioxcc> lfm: yeah
 791 2010-12-31 06:03:30 <ArtForz> so each piece of code checks that whatever it loads is signed by a key signed by a key utimately signed by your own personal root key
 792 2010-12-31 06:04:20 <mizerydearia> marioxcc, Can you tell me if http://witcoin.com/ask looks okay in iceweasel 3.0.6?
 793 2010-12-31 06:04:22 <afed> more like
 794 2010-12-31 06:04:23 <marioxcc> yes
 795 2010-12-31 06:04:24 <afed> microsoft's key
 796 2010-12-31 06:04:26 <afed> or dell's key
 797 2010-12-31 06:04:29 <afed> or the MPAA's key
 798 2010-12-31 06:04:30 <ArtForz> exactly
 799 2010-12-31 06:04:54 <lfm> ya like wouldnt microsoft like to sell the right to run programs on windows
 800 2010-12-31 06:04:56 <ArtForz> which is where the "until they got all tivoy" part comes in
 801 2010-12-31 06:04:57 <marioxcc> mizerydearia: it does
 802 2010-12-31 06:05:22 <ArtForz> in the orig spec the user (or site admin) had the ultimate root key
 803 2010-12-31 06:05:38 <marioxcc> yes, it is a good techlology
 804 2010-12-31 06:05:40 <marioxcc> but has bad uses
 805 2010-12-31 06:05:43 <ArtForz> yep
 806 2010-12-31 06:05:49 <ArtForz> but it also has good uses
 807 2010-12-31 06:05:50 <marioxcc> like almost everything
 808 2010-12-31 06:06:49 <marioxcc> people which don't cares about will end loosing all their privacy and freedom regarding computers
 809 2010-12-31 06:06:56 <marioxcc> free software always will prevail for people which values it
 810 2010-12-31 06:07:20 <ArtForz> yeah, but TPM done properly and FOSS fit together nicely
 811 2010-12-31 06:07:37 <marioxcc> sure
 812 2010-12-31 06:07:38 <mizerydearia> marioxcc, thanks ^_^
 813 2010-12-31 06:07:57 <marioxcc> mizerydearia: np :)
 814 2010-12-31 06:08:14 <marioxcc> ultimately, how much these slaving applications of technology will suceed is bound to how much people is going to accept it
 815 2010-12-31 06:08:33 <marioxcc> i mean where the manufacturer has the key
 816 2010-12-31 06:08:49 <marioxcc> when the user has the key is of course, a good security improovement
 817 2010-12-31 06:08:54 <marioxcc> i agree
 818 2010-12-31 06:09:28 <ArtForz> people generally dont seem to care until it bites them in the ass
 819 2010-12-31 06:09:49 <ArtForz> and then they forget about it 2 weeks after
 820 2010-12-31 06:09:58 <marioxcc> yes
 821 2010-12-31 06:10:31 <marioxcc> that also affect us
 822 2010-12-31 06:10:50 <marioxcc> because manufacturers then know they can make "technology" as proprietary as they want
 823 2010-12-31 06:10:54 <marioxcc> and people will still buy it
 824 2010-12-31 06:12:27 <marioxcc> it was very nice to chat with you
 825 2010-12-31 06:12:32 Samedhi has joined
 826 2010-12-31 06:12:33 <marioxcc> now it's 12:09
 827 2010-12-31 06:12:36 <marioxcc> (midnight)
 828 2010-12-31 06:12:39 <marioxcc> and i'm going to bed
 829 2010-12-31 06:12:45 <marioxcc> good night
 830 2010-12-31 06:12:55 <nanotube> marioxcc: gn
 831 2010-12-31 06:12:56 <marioxcc> oh, and thanks for all information ArtForz :)
 832 2010-12-31 06:13:04 <nanotube> it's 0109 here heh
 833 2010-12-31 06:13:16 <marioxcc> where do you live in?
 834 2010-12-31 06:13:39 <marioxcc> somewhere in the east US?
 835 2010-12-31 06:13:54 <nanotube> yes
 836 2010-12-31 06:14:44 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 837 2010-12-31 06:16:23 AnonymousUser has joined
 838 2010-12-31 06:18:03 marioxcc is now known as marioxcc-AFK
 839 2010-12-31 06:20:06 <mizerydearia> It appears the number parameter for "listaccounts" method does not function properly.  Is it just me or do others notice the same?
 840 2010-12-31 06:21:58 <AnonymousUser> So I just learned about BitCoin today, and I'm very interested.  I'd like to get involved.  First - How do I generate a "paper bitcoin"?  Is this possible?  I've read that if someone gets access to your wallet.dat, they have all your bitcoins, but what I want to give someone a bitcoin that is in my wallet so that they can "trade" it to themself.  How can I do that?
 841 2010-12-31 06:22:36 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: please clarify what you mean... you can just send them a coin as usual, via the bitcoin client...
 842 2010-12-31 06:22:50 <AnonymousUser> Well... here's what I want to do...
 843 2010-12-31 06:23:16 marioxcc-AFK has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 844 2010-12-31 06:23:54 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: um, why dont you just send them the coin?
 845 2010-12-31 06:23:58 <AnonymousUser> I want to post an image on Reddit that says "here is 0.1 btc.  The first person who trades this to themself has ownership of this bitcoin" and I want it to contain all the info needed so that they have control over the bitcoin
 846 2010-12-31 06:24:19 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: thats easy: you send it to them via bitcoin
 847 2010-12-31 06:24:22 <AnonymousUser> I want to give an anonymous person a bitcoin.
 848 2010-12-31 06:24:32 <AnonymousUser> But what if I don't want to know who I'm sending it to?
 849 2010-12-31 06:24:34 <Diablo-D3> you cant take a coin out of your wallet and then hand it to someone
 850 2010-12-31 06:24:43 <Diablo-D3> the system knows you have it
 851 2010-12-31 06:24:46 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: well, you can post your keypair
 852 2010-12-31 06:25:05 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: the anonymous person getting it can generate a used once address
 853 2010-12-31 06:25:07 <nanotube> first person to grab the keypair, and generate a transaction to some other address owned by him, gets the coin.
 854 2010-12-31 06:25:08 <mizerydearia> btw listaccounts method comes from https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin
 855 2010-12-31 06:25:20 <mizerydearia> I shall ask gavin
 856 2010-12-31 06:25:21 <Diablo-D3> nanotube: which clients CAN reject such transactions
 857 2010-12-31 06:25:27 <Diablo-D3> nanotube: since it never cleared the chain
 858 2010-12-31 06:25:29 <mizerydearia> Does gavin visit irc occasionally anymore?
 859 2010-12-31 06:25:36 <Diablo-D3> gavin is on irc periodically
 860 2010-12-31 06:25:36 <mizerydearia> Ah, yes he does.
 861 2010-12-31 06:25:37 <AnonymousUser> yes, exactly.  Does that work?
 862 2010-12-31 06:25:49 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: what do you mean? you pull an address out of your own wallet, which has a valid bitcoin balance in it.
 863 2010-12-31 06:26:02 <Diablo-D3> nanotube: if I hand someone the address, yes, then thats fine
 864 2010-12-31 06:26:12 <Diablo-D3> I just cant manually move a coin from one address to another
 865 2010-12-31 06:26:13 <nanotube> that seems to be exactly what he wants to do.
 866 2010-12-31 06:26:23 <AnonymousUser> i don't want to know who gets it
 867 2010-12-31 06:26:24 <nanotube> hand out an address
 868 2010-12-31 06:26:35 <AnonymousUser> i want to hand someone a piece of paper that gives them control over the bitcoin
 869 2010-12-31 06:26:39 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: you can still know the address that gets it... by using block explorer.
 870 2010-12-31 06:26:45 <nanotube> (later, after they send)
 871 2010-12-31 06:26:50 <AnonymousUser> ok.  i suspected that
 872 2010-12-31 06:26:50 <nanotube> but you won't know who it is
 873 2010-12-31 06:26:52 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: even if someone gives you an address to send to, you dont know who they are
 874 2010-12-31 06:27:09 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: well, you can associate that address with their email address, though. so you know /something/ about them.
 875 2010-12-31 06:27:20 <AnonymousUser> Diablo-D3: Sorry, what I mean is... I want to give someone a bitcoin without having to know their address
 876 2010-12-31 06:27:21 <Diablo-D3> nanotube: no, they can send it to me with a use once email address
 877 2010-12-31 06:27:24 <nanotube> with the 'post key somewhere', you know nothing but the eventual recipient address.
 878 2010-12-31 06:27:32 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: cant do it without subverting the system
 879 2010-12-31 06:27:46 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: the whole entire point of the system is to protect the transactional integrity of the money supply
 880 2010-12-31 06:27:47 <AnonymousUser> i don't care if i eventually learn their address, but I don't want to know it ahead of time
 881 2010-12-31 06:28:00 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: well, then you can do it via the posting of the keypair, as i said.
 882 2010-12-31 06:28:16 <Diablo-D3> handing someone the keypair of an address is pretty much handing them a wallet.dat that contains one address, effectively
 883 2010-12-31 06:28:20 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: though the tools to extract and import keypairs don't exist yet.
 884 2010-12-31 06:28:24 <AnonymousUser> ok, so how to i generate a keypair?
 885 2010-12-31 06:28:25 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: right
 886 2010-12-31 06:28:25 <lfm> anonymous user: the thing is you can hand them a key but they can never be sure you havnt kept a copy
 887 2010-12-31 06:28:30 <AnonymousUser> right
 888 2010-12-31 06:28:41 <nanotube> lfm: that's why they have to spend the coin to their own address when they get it.
 889 2010-12-31 06:28:44 <AnonymousUser> i'd have a copy, but as soon as they'd trade it to themself, my copy would no longer exist
 890 2010-12-31 06:28:50 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: right
 891 2010-12-31 06:29:04 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: dead dropping coins isnt part of the system yet
 892 2010-12-31 06:29:05 <lfm> so just send it to them why not?
 893 2010-12-31 06:29:05 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: easiest is to generate a new wallet... send a coin to the wallet... then post that wallet somewhere.
 894 2010-12-31 06:29:15 <Diablo-D3> yeah what nanotube said
 895 2010-12-31 06:29:22 <Diablo-D3> then they could just send it to themselves with another client
 896 2010-12-31 06:29:27 <AnonymousUser> @nanotube: thanks.  that's what i thought.  is this easy to do?
 897 2010-12-31 06:29:53 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: yes
 898 2010-12-31 06:30:03 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: create address on another client, send coins to it, wait until that client accepts the transaction, then shut it down and send the wallet.dat somewhere
 899 2010-12-31 06:30:14 <lfm> just seems like you could just send them the btc the regular way
 900 2010-12-31 06:30:27 <nanotube> lfm: for some reason, he wants to 'dead drop' the btc...
 901 2010-12-31 06:31:12 <lfm> for no reason id say
 902 2010-12-31 06:31:21 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: not even another client necessarily... you could close your client, start it again with a different -datadir argument... that'd generate a new wallet. you take note of the address... shut it down... then start again with a new datadir.
 903 2010-12-31 06:31:32 <Diablo-D3> nanotube: dont want ot accidently grab your own transaction
 904 2010-12-31 06:31:44 <Diablo-D3> since you have to create the address on your wallet.dat your way
 905 2010-12-31 06:31:56 <AnonymousUser> like i said, I want to post an image on Reddit that is valued at... say 1 btc
 906 2010-12-31 06:32:00 <Diablo-D3> you need a second client to do it transactionally safe
 907 2010-12-31 06:32:02 <AnonymousUser> and see what happens
 908 2010-12-31 06:32:32 BoBeR has joined
 909 2010-12-31 06:32:33 <AnonymousUser> and i want to be able to generate an image that a merchant could scan to grab a payment quickly
 910 2010-12-31 06:32:56 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: thats already been heavily discussed
 911 2010-12-31 06:33:06 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: i don't get where the problem would be... close client, start with -datadir=dir2, which generates wallet2. close client, start -datadir=dir1, generate a transaction to send to wallet2. once confirmations come in, you know your wallet2 contains the coin.
 912 2010-12-31 06:33:09 <lfm> regular payments arnt quick enuf? I dont get it
 913 2010-12-31 06:33:14 <Diablo-D3> nanotube: thats two clients.
 914 2010-12-31 06:33:33 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: one client, running at different times with different datadirs.
 915 2010-12-31 06:33:35 <AnonymousUser> the current ways seems to require me to know the person i want to pay's account number
 916 2010-12-31 06:33:41 <nanotube> but i guess... that's semantics. effectively two clients. :)
 917 2010-12-31 06:33:51 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: you dont directly need to
 918 2010-12-31 06:33:57 <lfm> just their address, you dont need to know them
 919 2010-12-31 06:34:03 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: someone proposed a system that would work with cell phones
 920 2010-12-31 06:34:03 <AnonymousUser> i need to actually have access to my wallet at the time that i give them the money
 921 2010-12-31 06:34:10 <AnonymousUser> sorry, *address*
 922 2010-12-31 06:35:02 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: walk up to the vendor, take a picture of their QR code (which would also encode the transaction amount), press send, and then bam
 923 2010-12-31 06:35:05 <lfm> btc works now with any browser including cell phones via services such as mybitcoin.com
 924 2010-12-31 06:35:36 <AnonymousUser> but what if i don't have access to my cellphone for some reason.  of course the payee needs to have access to his wallet, but i want to make sure that i don't need access to mine to pay
 925 2010-12-31 06:36:03 <Diablo-D3> the payee wouldnt need access to his wallet
 926 2010-12-31 06:36:17 <Diablo-D3> neither side would actually
 927 2010-12-31 06:36:24 <lfm> and if youre electricity is off you cant see in the dark, big deal, keep your phone with you!
 928 2010-12-31 06:36:43 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: how do you pay with credit card if you dont have it on you?
 929 2010-12-31 06:36:46 <Diablo-D3> its the same thing
 930 2010-12-31 06:36:56 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: only as long as the payee trusts the payer not to whip out his client and spend the coin on the key he just gave to the payee
 931 2010-12-31 06:37:04 <Diablo-D3> nanotube: not true
 932 2010-12-31 06:37:17 <Diablo-D3> anyone can check the chain for transactions
 933 2010-12-31 06:37:19 <AnonymousUser> but i don't need to have access to the internet to give someone a USD
 934 2010-12-31 06:37:25 <Diablo-D3> they know their own address
 935 2010-12-31 06:37:35 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: yes, but USD are not secure
 936 2010-12-31 06:37:43 <lfm> so use us$ when you have no phone
 937 2010-12-31 06:37:45 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: i mean, in the case where you walk up to the guy, and hand him a bitcoin wallet.
 938 2010-12-31 06:37:52 <AnonymousUser> of course, but i want btc to be just as easy to use
 939 2010-12-31 06:38:01 <Diablo-D3> the government itself can and does double spend USD in an analog way
 940 2010-12-31 06:38:12 <AnonymousUser> anyway, it seems that i just need to give someone a wallet.dat
 941 2010-12-31 06:38:19 <lfm> and I want my face on the 50BTC note
 942 2010-12-31 06:38:43 <AnonymousUser> and then they need to send the money to themself before i spend it elsewhere
 943 2010-12-31 06:39:15 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: yes... you can, but there are trust issues involved. (a) payee needs to verify presence of coins in the wallet. he'd have to use blockexplorer, or load the wallet in his client. and (b) needs to know that you won't spend the coin yourself, before he has a chance to use it
 944 2010-12-31 06:39:22 <lfm> just sounds like a solution looking for a problem, a waste of effort
 945 2010-12-31 06:39:37 <AnonymousUser> gah, i already told you what i intend to do with this
 946 2010-12-31 06:39:48 <AnonymousUser> i intend to post a picture on the internet worth Money
 947 2010-12-31 06:39:56 <AnonymousUser> so that someone can claim it
 948 2010-12-31 06:40:01 <lfm> and if you tried to pay me that way Id laugh in your face
 949 2010-12-31 06:40:09 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: how would the actual picture be worth money? would you put it in a zip archive together with a wallet.dat?
 950 2010-12-31 06:40:10 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: that'd be very difficult
 951 2010-12-31 06:40:24 <Diablo-D3> nanotube: no, he'd just hide the wallet.dat in the image
 952 2010-12-31 06:40:29 <Diablo-D3> its a common technique
 953 2010-12-31 06:40:31 <nanotube> steganography?
 954 2010-12-31 06:40:34 <Diablo-D3> sure
 955 2010-12-31 06:40:41 <Diablo-D3> or just storing it after the image
 956 2010-12-31 06:40:46 <AnonymousUser> or just a barcode that links to a file...
 957 2010-12-31 06:40:52 <nanotube> right
 958 2010-12-31 06:40:57 <nanotube> well, could work
 959 2010-12-31 06:41:08 <nanotube> let us know when you post it... so we can try claiming the bitcoin :)
 960 2010-12-31 06:41:14 <AnonymousUser> hahaha, no chance
 961 2010-12-31 06:41:36 <AnonymousUser> a wallet is first claim... gets it
 962 2010-12-31 06:41:38 <nanotube> aw... so that means we'd have to monitor reddit for keyword bitcoin? :)
 963 2010-12-31 06:41:57 <AnonymousUser> well, i have 0.05 btc in my wallet right now.  i need to buy some first
 964 2010-12-31 06:42:23 <lfm> 0.05 seems about what the idea is worth
 965 2010-12-31 06:42:27 <nanotube> hehe, i see you have partaken of the generosity of the faucet. :)
 966 2010-12-31 06:42:52 <nanotube> lfm: he basically wants to give away some bitcoin... to a random passerby. what's wrong with that?
 967 2010-12-31 06:43:09 AAA_awright_ has joined
 968 2010-12-31 06:43:21 <nanotube> kinda like throwing a dollar bill on the sidewalk
 969 2010-12-31 06:44:01 <AnonymousUser> speaking of buying, there seems to be only one place i can buy btc on credit, and it seems to be down.  is there any other way i can buy some online?
 970 2010-12-31 06:44:18 <lfm> nanotube just the arrogance of him that his way is the only way suitable for his wonderfull gift
 971 2010-12-31 06:44:27 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: mtgox.com, bitcoin4cash.com, #bitcoin-otc channel.
 972 2010-12-31 06:44:36 <AnonymousUser> well, is there anyother way to do it?
 973 2010-12-31 06:44:51 <AnonymousUser> how can you do the equivalent of throwing a dollar bill on the ground?
 974 2010-12-31 06:44:55 <lfm> ya, ask for a btc address to send the gift to
 975 2010-12-31 06:45:09 AAA_awright has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 976 2010-12-31 06:45:09 <nanotube> lfm: he just wants to give it a try for fun. yes it seems pointless... but it's amusing. :)
 977 2010-12-31 06:45:39 <nanotube> lfm: at least... i can speak for myself and say that i'm amused. ;)
 978 2010-12-31 06:46:09 <lfm> fine I guess I am the only one thinks its a waste of effort
 979 2010-12-31 06:46:11 <AnonymousUser> :( but i don't want to be involved after i post the link.  i'm a theoretical physicist.  i want to test a concept, and my concept is "giving a lucky person an image worth money"
 980 2010-12-31 06:47:39 <AnonymousUser> plus, it gives me the opportunity to print a bitcoin "bill" that can be used once and only once.  i think that's pretty cool
 981 2010-12-31 06:47:40 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: sure, have at it, and let know how it goes. :)
 982 2010-12-31 06:47:42 AAA_awright_ is now known as AAA_awright
 983 2010-12-31 06:48:01 <Diablo-D3> yeah see
 984 2010-12-31 06:48:06 <Diablo-D3> the bitcoin bill is the hardest part
 985 2010-12-31 06:48:19 <Diablo-D3> you'd need a tool built into the client to take the address keypair
 986 2010-12-31 06:48:45 <AnonymousUser> ideally, i'd like a smartphone app that'd scan the bill and transfer it to your wallet
 987 2010-12-31 06:48:49 <Diablo-D3> and I dont particularly want to see that
 988 2010-12-31 06:48:52 <AnonymousUser> but small steps
 989 2010-12-31 06:48:53 <Diablo-D3> because it breaks the system
 990 2010-12-31 06:49:03 <AnonymousUser> how does it "break" the system?
 991 2010-12-31 06:49:05 <Diablo-D3> I cant tell if the bill you handed me is valid
 992 2010-12-31 06:49:11 <AnonymousUser> right, of course
 993 2010-12-31 06:49:16 <Diablo-D3> you can hand me the bill and then immediately double spend it
 994 2010-12-31 06:49:56 <AnonymousUser> no, i can't double spend it.  i can spend it once.  the person i give the bill to needs to trust that i won't spend it before he's able to
 995 2010-12-31 06:50:13 <Diablo-D3> but see
 996 2010-12-31 06:50:15 <Diablo-D3> thats the problem
 997 2010-12-31 06:50:25 <Diablo-D3> bitcoin doesnt allow trust.
 998 2010-12-31 06:50:39 <AnonymousUser> i'd be decieving someone if i didn't let them know that was how the bill worked
 999 2010-12-31 06:50:42 <Diablo-D3> this is why every client has the full history of every single transaction ever
1000 2010-12-31 06:50:43 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: double spend means - you 'spend' it once when giving it to a person (possibly in exchange for goods)... and then spend it again before he has a chance to transfer.
1001 2010-12-31 06:51:09 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: bitcoin, as it stands, works
1002 2010-12-31 06:51:22 <Diablo-D3> subverting it only breaks the system
1003 2010-12-31 06:51:35 <Diablo-D3> as a bitcoin user, I would never accept coins except through the transaction system
1004 2010-12-31 06:51:35 <ianm_> it could be printed by a parent to give to a kid to buy from a store that has a device to check its validity..?  (that's the best I've come up with)
1005 2010-12-31 06:51:51 <Diablo-D3> ianm_: no, the parent would just send it to the kid through bitcoin
1006 2010-12-31 06:52:06 <Diablo-D3> its already done through kid oriented refillable cash cards
1007 2010-12-31 06:52:09 <ianm_> Diablo-D3: doesn't that assume the kid has a device?
1008 2010-12-31 06:52:16 <lfm> ianm_ not if I am the shopkeeper
1009 2010-12-31 06:52:20 <Diablo-D3> kids have devices when parents dont
1010 2010-12-31 06:52:41 <Diablo-D3> even young kids have some sort of device on them with net access
1011 2010-12-31 06:52:54 <Diablo-D3> cell phones, iSomethings, DSes, PSPs, etc
1012 2010-12-31 06:53:06 <ianm_> Diablo-D3: in a few places in the world, yes
1013 2010-12-31 06:53:15 <Diablo-D3> more so outside of the US than inside it
1014 2010-12-31 06:53:15 <AnonymousUser> the thing is, if i don't make this, someone else will.  it's something possible with the design of the system, at worst, a flaw that could allow someone to take advantage of people's misunderstanding of how the system works
1015 2010-12-31 06:53:33 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: no, it introduces trust into a system where none should eixst
1016 2010-12-31 06:54:03 <Diablo-D3> vendors dont even trust you when you hand them large denomination bills
1017 2010-12-31 06:54:08 <Diablo-D3> how many do the marker test
1018 2010-12-31 06:54:18 <Diablo-D3> trust is expensive.
1019 2010-12-31 06:54:33 <AnonymousUser> but if the person i give the bill to has the ability to immediately transfer a bill to his wallet, then the transaction is complete
1020 2010-12-31 06:54:39 <ArtForz> yeah, it doesnt really act like cash
1021 2010-12-31 06:54:43 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: no.
1022 2010-12-31 06:54:56 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: the transaction is complete when it appeares in a chain block
1023 2010-12-31 06:55:06 <ArtForz> and I doubt it can be coaxed to do so
1024 2010-12-31 06:55:17 <AnonymousUser> a problem only appears when he doesn't have the ability to immediately verify and spend the bill
1025 2010-12-31 06:55:33 <ArtForz> immediatly verify = transmit TX, wait for at least X confirms
1026 2010-12-31 06:55:46 <ianm_> lfm: as the shopkeeper, couldn't you scan the paper, which takes the wallet, and sends the bitcoins to your wallet?
1027 2010-12-31 06:55:46 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: "a problem only appears when you're not using bitcoin correctly"
1028 2010-12-31 06:55:56 <Diablo-D3> ianm_: no you cant
1029 2010-12-31 06:56:02 <Diablo-D3> ianm_: because you dont know if the coins are valid
1030 2010-12-31 06:56:12 <Diablo-D3> you have to take the wallet and send to yourself and see of the tx takes.
1031 2010-12-31 06:56:20 <ArtForz> yep
1032 2010-12-31 06:56:23 <ianm_> Diablo-D3: and then you know?
1033 2010-12-31 06:56:26 <AnonymousUser> Diablo: but couldn't the shopkeeper verify quickly if the bill is valid?
1034 2010-12-31 06:56:27 <Diablo-D3> and then you know.
1035 2010-12-31 06:56:32 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: no.
1036 2010-12-31 06:56:40 <ianm_> why no?
1037 2010-12-31 06:56:53 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: as a shopkeeper, I have no clue if the coins have not been removed from the wallet in the past ten minutes
1038 2010-12-31 06:57:17 <ianm_> Diablo-D3: could you not take the bill and immediately "take the wallet and send to yourself and see of the tx takes"
1039 2010-12-31 06:57:18 <AnonymousUser> ok, so the shopkeeper scans the bill and doesn't give me the goods until the payment is transferred to his wallet
1040 2010-12-31 06:57:20 <ArtForz> a tx only "takes" if it's in a block, normally you'd want to have at least 1 block after that
1041 2010-12-31 06:57:25 <AnonymousUser> is there a problem?
1042 2010-12-31 06:57:35 <ArtForz> so I hope you like sitting in shops for half an hour or so
1043 2010-12-31 06:57:41 <AnonymousUser> so, there is inherently a delay in shopping??????????
1044 2010-12-31 06:57:44 <AnonymousUser> that's terrible!!!!!
1045 2010-12-31 06:57:46 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: yes... and how is this different than just using bitcoin normally?
1046 2010-12-31 06:57:53 <Diablo-D3> bitcoin is not useful for in person shopping.
1047 2010-12-31 06:57:53 <AnonymousUser> i've never used bitcoin before
1048 2010-12-31 06:58:02 <Diablo-D3> at least, not the way the system exists
1049 2010-12-31 06:58:08 <ArtForz> bitcoin doesnt act like cash, was never designed to act like cash
1050 2010-12-31 06:58:12 <Diablo-D3> new blocks are produced every 10 minutes
1051 2010-12-31 06:58:23 <Diablo-D3> its perfect for async transactions, such as online shopping
1052 2010-12-31 06:58:28 <ArtForz> yep
1053 2010-12-31 06:58:29 <nanotube> well, in-person shopping is fine... i'd trust small transactions without confirmation, as long as my node was well-connected to the network.
1054 2010-12-31 06:58:42 <AnonymousUser> but if i can't buy something and have the transaction be done in a few seconds or minutes, then i doubt i'll ever use it for much
1055 2010-12-31 06:58:42 <ArtForz> yup
1056 2010-12-31 06:58:42 <Diablo-D3> (most online shops verify with the card issuer, et al. anyhow)
1057 2010-12-31 06:58:45 <ianm_> how long does it normally take to clear a transaction?
1058 2010-12-31 06:58:50 <lfm> anyway btc arnt for every day shopping, if you need quick txn you should use something like mybitcoin.com
1059 2010-12-31 06:59:13 <Diablo-D3> ianm_: depends on the paranoia of the person, but about a half hour.
1060 2010-12-31 06:59:21 <AnonymousUser> a half hour!?!?!
1061 2010-12-31 06:59:24 <AnonymousUser> that's terrible!!!!
1062 2010-12-31 06:59:24 <ArtForz> yup
1063 2010-12-31 06:59:26 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: if "about 10 minutes" is "a few minutes"... then it works fine
1064 2010-12-31 06:59:33 <AnonymousUser> nonononono!!!
1065 2010-12-31 06:59:34 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: not really
1066 2010-12-31 06:59:36 <ArtForz> yes, checks and bank wires take WAY less time
1067 2010-12-31 06:59:43 <ArtForz> only like ... DAYS
1068 2010-12-31 07:00:15 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: buy on amazon, it takes them about a half hour to get past the transaction viability verification stage
1069 2010-12-31 07:00:42 <ianm_> bad comparison since it's a different model (central clearing authority) no?
1070 2010-12-31 07:00:45 <AnonymousUser> WallStreet deals in transactions that take place in milliseconds (though it is on credit until several minutes through)!  how can you expect them to use bitcoin if it takes 10 minutes for a transaction to complete!!!
1071 2010-12-31 07:00:52 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: wrong.
1072 2010-12-31 07:01:08 <ArtForz> closed system
1073 2010-12-31 07:01:11 <Diablo-D3> wallstreet transactions take about 3 days.
1074 2010-12-31 07:01:20 <lfm> ~anonymoususer mtgox btc trades are just as fast as wall street
1075 2010-12-31 07:01:26 <Diablo-D3> you yourself never see it because your shares are held in your street name
1076 2010-12-31 07:01:40 <Diablo-D3> very rarely do actual shares trade hands on wallstreet
1077 2010-12-31 07:01:52 <BoBeR> mtgox online
1078 2010-12-31 07:01:57 <ArtForz> yep
1079 2010-12-31 07:02:00 <BoBeR> ;;seen mtgox
1080 2010-12-31 07:02:01 <gribble> mtgox was last seen in #bitcoin-dev 1 day, 16 hours, 1 minute, and 18 seconds ago: <mtgox> EvanR-work: you have to tell me you are doing it and I'll look for the transaction in my account
1081 2010-12-31 07:02:03 <ianm_> is the issue that without a central authority, you have to ask the p2p network if anyone has heard of the bill being spent?
1082 2010-12-31 07:02:08 <BoBeR> not really
1083 2010-12-31 07:02:11 <Diablo-D3> ianm_: basically.
1084 2010-12-31 07:02:16 <Diablo-D3> ianm_: thats why everyone has the entire chain
1085 2010-12-31 07:02:21 <joe_1> when bitcoin catches on, only large inter-bank transactions will actually be cleared on the block chain.
1086 2010-12-31 07:02:27 <Diablo-D3> yeah what joe said
1087 2010-12-31 07:02:33 <ArtForz> yep
1088 2010-12-31 07:02:42 <Diablo-D3> you'll see the rise of paypal-like banks
1089 2010-12-31 07:02:54 <ArtForz> you mean paypal-like not-a-banks :P
1090 2010-12-31 07:02:58 <Diablo-D3> all the user friendlyness, none of the faggotry
1091 2010-12-31 07:03:05 <AnonymousUser> but the transactions happen on credit in milliseconds at worst.  if people who use bitcoin refuse to deal in credit and bitcoin only verifies transactions on the order of minutes, then i can't imagine anyone would ever care to use it directly
1092 2010-12-31 07:03:06 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: no, I mean banks in the real sense
1093 2010-12-31 07:03:10 <Diablo-D3> something paypal never will be
1094 2010-12-31 07:03:24 <ArtForz> yep
1095 2010-12-31 07:03:26 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: you CANT use it directly.
1096 2010-12-31 07:03:34 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: its not meant to be used that way
1097 2010-12-31 07:03:47 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: this is the kind of system you'd see deployed on the international banking networks in the far future
1098 2010-12-31 07:04:07 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: banks themselves would use it, mere mortal men never would even hear of it
1099 2010-12-31 07:04:21 <BoBeR> !ggogle mybitcoin
1100 2010-12-31 07:04:25 <lfm> except its not exclusive, anyone can play if they want
1101 2010-12-31 07:04:29 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: what you want is a third party central authority that is chosen by the end user to represent him in transactions
1102 2010-12-31 07:04:45 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: one that can vouch on his behalf of the integrity of the transaction
1103 2010-12-31 07:05:03 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: this is no different than me whipping out a Chase credit card, or using Paypal
1104 2010-12-31 07:05:29 <Diablo-D3> they, as financial institutions, represent me during the transaction
1105 2010-12-31 07:05:54 <BoBeR> but i hate autority
1106 2010-12-31 07:05:55 <AnonymousUser> then it doesn't seem like it's usable in many situations...  if people can't trade in it in realtime, people will always need something els
1107 2010-12-31 07:06:16 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: but the banking system ALREADY does not trade in real time
1108 2010-12-31 07:06:24 <Diablo-D3> even if I swipe a credit card, the transaction takes 3 days
1109 2010-12-31 07:06:37 <Diablo-D3> 30 minutes beats 3 days.
1110 2010-12-31 07:07:06 <AnonymousUser> i thought the point was to outdo the current system?
1111 2010-12-31 07:07:24 <Diablo-D3> uh, we did
1112 2010-12-31 07:07:29 <lfm> now you're just trolling
1113 2010-12-31 07:07:30 <Diablo-D3> by an order of magnitude.
1114 2010-12-31 07:07:38 <ArtForz> last time I checked, 30 minutes < 3 days
1115 2010-12-31 07:07:58 <ianm_> is the attempt to double-spend a coin provable by the injured party?  does the sender private-sign the intention?
1116 2010-12-31 07:08:23 <Diablo-D3> as a shopkeeper, I cant jerk off with freshly printed $100 bills for 3 whole days
1117 2010-12-31 07:08:28 <Diablo-D3> thats how the system, currently, works
1118 2010-12-31 07:08:36 <joe_1> ianm: yes
1119 2010-12-31 07:08:52 <Diablo-D3> and other instruments such as checks, money orders, cashier's checks, bank drafts, etc, can reverse screw you
1120 2010-12-31 07:09:02 <AnonymousUser> most of the wealth of any country is in the financial sector, and you're telling me that it's impossible for them to use the currency directly.
1121 2010-12-31 07:09:06 <lfm> is the shopkeeper required to accept the card and then accept that it was stollen and give back the money 90 days later?
1122 2010-12-31 07:09:22 <ArtForz> yep
1123 2010-12-31 07:09:30 <AnonymousUser> what you're telling me is that it's too slow and they need to use credit, but no such system exists yet
1124 2010-12-31 07:09:36 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: yes
1125 2010-12-31 07:09:51 <AnonymousUser> well shit
1126 2010-12-31 07:10:01 <Diablo-D3> you're looking at an electronic system designed in the 70s, hacked in the 80s, legislated in the 90s, unable to compete in 00, and we're in 10.
1127 2010-12-31 07:10:10 <AnonymousUser> someone's working on it at least, right?
1128 2010-12-31 07:10:15 <Diablo-D3> we're overdue for throwing the whole system out
1129 2010-12-31 07:10:29 <ArtForz> yep
1130 2010-12-31 07:10:36 <mrb__> interesting: the distribution of the nonces of the blocks I solve seems highly non-random
1131 2010-12-31 07:10:48 <Diablo-D3> bitcoin does in 30 minutes, without any sort of trust, centralized authority, or even any sort of real overhead, what the system barely does in 3 days.
1132 2010-12-31 07:10:53 <joe_1> what do you mean by credit
1133 2010-12-31 07:11:27 <mrb__> in 15 of the 17 blocks I solved, my nonces have bit 31 set to 1
1134 2010-12-31 07:11:47 <Diablo-D3> all we need is to do is layer a soft CA system that can instantly verify transactions on behalf of consumers
1135 2010-12-31 07:11:49 <mrb__> when I search through the whole 2**32 search space
1136 2010-12-31 07:12:06 <Diablo-D3> this is what the credit/debit card system does and paypal does and stuff
1137 2010-12-31 07:12:24 <mrb__> that's very strange. I don't see a similar bias in the last 1000 blocks solved by others
1138 2010-12-31 07:12:27 <Diablo-D3> I can instantly verify a transaction is quasi-valid during the creation of the transaction
1139 2010-12-31 07:12:37 <ArtForz> maybe because 17 is not exactly a huge sample size
1140 2010-12-31 07:12:37 <Diablo-D3> mrb__: its truly random, not smoothly random
1141 2010-12-31 07:12:58 <Diablo-D3> mrb__: I could solve 12 blocks in a row with 42 somewhere in them and not bat an eye
1142 2010-12-31 07:12:58 <joe_1> there was a thread about software someone made for this
1143 2010-12-31 07:13:00 <mrb__> ArtForz: that's what I thought after 4, 8, 12 nonces
1144 2010-12-31 07:13:09 <mrb__> but 17... seems kind of big
1145 2010-12-31 07:13:10 <ArtForz> randomness is random that way
1146 2010-12-31 07:13:37 <ArtForz> just calculate the probability
1147 2010-12-31 07:13:40 <AnonymousUser> my first transaction took me a few hours to verify because i had to download the whole chain.  isn't that only going to increase as the number of people who trade bitcoin increases?
1148 2010-12-31 07:13:51 <mrb__> I will re-evaluate at 50 blocks or so
1149 2010-12-31 07:14:18 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: your first transaction didnt even happen until all the blocks were downloaded
1150 2010-12-31 07:14:18 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: yes initial block download time will keep increasing.
1151 2010-12-31 07:14:36 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: his first tx was from the faucet. of course it happened.
1152 2010-12-31 07:14:42 <ianm_> what will the max data size be?
1153 2010-12-31 07:14:45 Samedhi has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1154 2010-12-31 07:14:46 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: it was independent of whether he had all the blocks.
1155 2010-12-31 07:14:49 <Diablo-D3> nanotube: not from his point of view
1156 2010-12-31 07:14:53 <Diablo-D3> bitcoin works like this
1157 2010-12-31 07:14:57 <Diablo-D3> I walk up to a house
1158 2010-12-31 07:15:04 <Diablo-D3> all I can tell you is this side of the house is blue
1159 2010-12-31 07:15:08 <nanotube> well, yes... but from the pov of the network, it happened. and that's what matters. :)
1160 2010-12-31 07:15:17 <Diablo-D3> I can walk to the other side of the house, tell you that is also blue
1161 2010-12-31 07:15:28 <Diablo-D3> I cannot tell you the front of the house has not changed colors by the time I get back
1162 2010-12-31 07:15:50 <Diablo-D3> thats bitcoin-level paranoia in a nutshell.
1163 2010-12-31 07:17:05 <ianm_> what will the size of the initial block download be, when all coins exist?
1164 2010-12-31 07:17:26 <Diablo-D3> ianm_: probably less than 50mb
1165 2010-12-31 07:17:30 skeledrew has joined
1166 2010-12-31 07:17:37 <ArtForz> very large
1167 2010-12-31 07:17:43 <AnonymousUser> i guess i'm ok with the system not working as a currency exchange in realtime as long as it's possible for such a system to develop.  can someone assure me that it will, in the future, be possible to do real time exchanges in bitcoin even if it's limited to credit until a reasonable time has passed?
1168 2010-12-31 07:18:00 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: well, you are forced to be okay with it
1169 2010-12-31 07:18:04 <Diablo-D3> thats how the current system works
1170 2010-12-31 07:18:13 <Diablo-D3> a system designed by people much smarter than you
1171 2010-12-31 07:18:54 <Diablo-D3> bitcoin just fixes all the flaws in that system
1172 2010-12-31 07:19:01 <Diablo-D3> but its only a part of a much larger interlocking system
1173 2010-12-31 07:20:16 <ianm_> Diablo-D3: so the initial block download size doesn't grow with the # of total historical transactions, but rather the number of coins in existence?
1174 2010-12-31 07:20:30 <Diablo-D3> ianm_: no, it grows with the transactions
1175 2010-12-31 07:20:39 <Diablo-D3> but remember, each coin creation is also a transaction
1176 2010-12-31 07:20:51 <Diablo-D3> its the first one in the list of transactions for that block
1177 2010-12-31 07:21:15 Nevezen has joined
1178 2010-12-31 07:21:45 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1179 2010-12-31 07:22:04 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: block chain is already about 50 mb...
1180 2010-12-31 07:22:04 <Diablo-D3> ianm_: I could make like 200 transactions in 10 minutes
1181 2010-12-31 07:22:09 <Diablo-D3> it'll result in a fat block
1182 2010-12-31 07:22:12 <Diablo-D3> nanotube: really?
1183 2010-12-31 07:22:22 <nanotube> yea, check out the files in your .bitcoin dir
1184 2010-12-31 07:22:25 skeledrew has joined
1185 2010-12-31 07:22:28 <Diablo-D3> I suspect satoshi needs beat
1186 2010-12-31 07:22:29 <AnonymousUser> Diablo: but if the whole chain of transactions must be downloaded, and the 21M bitcoins will only exist after an infinite number of transaction (i.e. NEVER, but in a few years we'll get very close), then won't the block chain eventually be absolutely huge?
1187 2010-12-31 07:22:41 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: 60998394 2010-12-31 01:45 blk0001.dat
1188 2010-12-31 07:22:45 <nanotube> 60 mb, even.
1189 2010-12-31 07:22:54 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: not infinite.
1190 2010-12-31 07:23:11 <AnonymousUser> well, up to the 8 decimal place rounding
1191 2010-12-31 07:23:21 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: no
1192 2010-12-31 07:23:24 <AnonymousUser> but i suspect that will take several decades
1193 2010-12-31 07:23:26 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: it's already possible, via parties like mtgox or mybitcoin, to do 'instant' transactions.
1194 2010-12-31 07:23:40 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: it'll stop at blocks that produce 1 iirc
1195 2010-12-31 07:23:45 <ArtForz> 33 halvings iirc
1196 2010-12-31 07:23:49 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: no it doesnt stop at 1
1197 2010-12-31 07:23:53 <ArtForz> @ 210000 blocks each
1198 2010-12-31 07:24:05 <Diablo-D3> I thought it did?
1199 2010-12-31 07:24:14 <ArtForz> yes, after 0.00000001 there will be 0
1200 2010-12-31 07:24:23 <nanotube> it stops at 1 of smallest unit, which is 0.00000001
1201 2010-12-31 07:24:23 <Keefe> regardless of the number of bitcoins being awarded, there will always be approximately 144 blocks generated and added to the chain each day
1202 2010-12-31 07:24:28 <Diablo-D3> well, after 12 halvings, its 2.5 million blocks
1203 2010-12-31 07:24:31 <AnonymousUser> nanotube: but that's on the credit of mtgox/mybitcoin/etc, right?
1204 2010-12-31 07:24:40 <Diablo-D3> thats 0.01 btc per block
1205 2010-12-31 07:24:46 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: yes, you essentially have to trust those parties.
1206 2010-12-31 07:24:50 <AnonymousUser> ok
1207 2010-12-31 07:25:07 <Diablo-D3> er sorry, 2.73 million
1208 2010-12-31 07:25:19 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: just like you now trust your bank not to run away with your cash. :)
1209 2010-12-31 07:26:09 <AnonymousUser> or like how my brother trusts an Exchange to honor all of the transactions that happen on the market
1210 2010-12-31 07:26:10 <Diablo-D3> first 210k blocks produces 10.5 million coins
1211 2010-12-31 07:26:33 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1212 2010-12-31 07:26:43 <ArtForz> next 210k half that, next 210k half that, ...
1213 2010-12-31 07:26:44 <Diablo-D3> takes 1.05m blocks to get to 20
1214 2010-12-31 07:26:45 <AnonymousUser> though i have no idea how it works...
1215 2010-12-31 07:26:47 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: yea... it's good to be around for the first 210k blocks :)
1216 2010-12-31 07:27:29 <Diablo-D3> [02:23:23] <AnonymousUser> or like how my brother trusts an Exchange to honor all of the transactions that happen on the market
1217 2010-12-31 07:27:30 <Diablo-D3> no
1218 2010-12-31 07:27:43 <Diablo-D3> he probably very rarely is party to a transaction on the exchanges themselves
1219 2010-12-31 07:28:40 <AnonymousUser> but the transactions happen on the order of microseconds.  if they can't be verified for another 3 days, he needs to trust someone to hold on to all the money and honor the transactions that occur
1220 2010-12-31 07:29:04 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: his transaction doesnt direcly happen that way
1221 2010-12-31 07:29:15 <Diablo-D3> consumer brokers simply dont move like that
1222 2010-12-31 07:30:38 <AnonymousUser> oh, i guess he did tell me something about there being lots of rules about how transactions are done.  i didn't really understand them
1223 2010-12-31 07:30:42 <joe_1> thread about bank software to layer on top of bitcoin: http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=847.0
1224 2010-12-31 07:30:44 <bitbot> Open Transactions: untraceable digital cash
1225 2010-12-31 07:30:59 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: the broker does the transactions on his behalf
1226 2010-12-31 07:31:07 <Diablo-D3> and btw, yes, transactions HAVE been broken before
1227 2010-12-31 07:31:29 <Diablo-D3> most recent was last year where a flash crash caused the system to overload
1228 2010-12-31 07:31:49 <Diablo-D3> so it basically nuked the last 4 hours (or right before the flash crash) as never happening
1229 2010-12-31 07:31:54 <AnonymousUser> ouch
1230 2010-12-31 07:31:57 <AnonymousUser> that sounds bad
1231 2010-12-31 07:32:02 <Diablo-D3> it isnt supposed to happen
1232 2010-12-31 07:32:11 <AnonymousUser> i'm surpised i didn't hear about this
1233 2010-12-31 07:32:19 <Diablo-D3> Im surprised too, that was front page news
1234 2010-12-31 07:32:29 <Diablo-D3> pissed off a shitload of useless faggot day traders
1235 2010-12-31 07:32:33 <ArtForz> yeah, I' malso surprised you didnt hear about this, it was all over the news
1236 2010-12-31 07:32:58 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: at least, however, it was two way... you lost gains and losses.
1237 2010-12-31 07:33:33 <AnonymousUser> i heard about everyone going crazy with greece defaulting on its debt and people blaming it on a system error.  that's the only big thing i talked to my brother about
1238 2010-12-31 07:34:19 <AnonymousUser> i've just gotten interested in finances in the past few months
1239 2010-12-31 07:34:19 <Diablo-D3> greece defaulting isnt even big news
1240 2010-12-31 07:34:36 <ArtForz> everyone knew they were pretty much done for for years
1241 2010-12-31 07:34:45 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: well its not even that
1242 2010-12-31 07:34:48 <Diablo-D3> it was 100% orchestrated
1243 2010-12-31 07:35:11 <Diablo-D3> europe's investment structure had been slowly moving pure shit into greece
1244 2010-12-31 07:35:22 <ArtForz> yep
1245 2010-12-31 07:35:23 <Diablo-D3> government, major banks, etc, all had shit on their books
1246 2010-12-31 07:35:32 <Diablo-D3> especially the US housing market
1247 2010-12-31 07:35:50 <Diablo-D3> and that bubble burst and down went greece
1248 2010-12-31 07:36:03 <Diablo-D3> it was all planned.
1249 2010-12-31 07:36:09 <Diablo-D3> they dont even bother hiding it anymore
1250 2010-12-31 07:37:36 <AnonymousUser> anyway, i'm glad that my desire to "throw a dollar on the ground of 4chan/reddit/facebook/whatever" is possible with bitcoin.  i'm very disapointed that the same idea can't be used to pay a shopkeeper in person and be out of the store in a minute though, but i'm now under the impression that it's unavoidable and being delt with in other ways
1251 2010-12-31 07:39:18 RazielZ has joined
1252 2010-12-31 07:39:57 <AnonymousUser> speaking of which.  will the system go crazy if i post a wallet.dat online and have 10 people all claim ownership and attempt transactions before the next block is produced?
1253 2010-12-31 07:40:11 <ArtForz> nope
1254 2010-12-31 07:40:13 <AnonymousUser> or will the 1st one go through and the others simply be denied?
1255 2010-12-31 07:40:24 <ArtForz> yep
1256 2010-12-31 07:40:26 <AnonymousUser> cool
1257 2010-12-31 07:40:39 <AnonymousUser> at least that's done and good
1258 2010-12-31 07:41:47 <AnonymousUser> Thank you everyone.  This has been a very enlightening exchange.
1259 2010-12-31 07:42:56 <AnonymousUser> It's time to go buy some btc (what is the proper acronym anyway?), do this, and see what happens.
1260 2010-12-31 07:43:13 <nanotube> heh have fun. come back any time. :)
1261 2010-12-31 07:44:38 <AnonymousUser> :)
1262 2010-12-31 07:51:01 <AnonymousUser> Oooh, actually.  I wanted to ask about something I read.  Someone posted on the btc.org forums that it'd take the US government's supercomputers 20 years to crack a single private key and steal someone's bitcoin.  However, given both Moore's "Law" and the advances in algorithms, we should expect that in 2030 similar problem would take only a week to solve with a powerful government's supercomputer
1263 2010-12-31 07:51:36 <ArtForz> more like 20 gazillion years
1264 2010-12-31 07:51:46 <AnonymousUser> Was that "20 year" figure serious?  Should I be worried that bitcoin will be broken by 2050?
1265 2010-12-31 07:51:48 <AnonymousUser> good
1266 2010-12-31 07:51:52 <ArtForz> ECDSA256 is equiv to 128 bits symmetric
1267 2010-12-31 07:51:58 <AnonymousUser> i'd be worried if it wasn't 20 trillion years
1268 2010-12-31 07:53:17 <joe_1> the 20 years is probably true, but i think it can be avoided by making sure you pay all your bitcoins back to yourself on different keys every 19 years
1269 2010-12-31 07:53:44 <joe_1> oh- unless artforz is right that the 20 years is wrong.
1270 2010-12-31 07:53:55 <AnonymousUser> 128 bits isn't much... in 40 years, i'd expect the average crytpographic key to be 1MB.  is the protocol extendable so that 128 bits isn't a hard limit?
1271 2010-12-31 07:54:05 <Diablo-D3> 128 bits is no longer considered secure
1272 2010-12-31 07:54:12 <ArtForz> wtf
1273 2010-12-31 07:54:13 <Diablo-D3> no matter what algo you use
1274 2010-12-31 07:54:15 <ArtForz> if you have a massive supercomputer capable of 2**64 ECDSA operations per second, it'll take about 18 quintillion years
1275 2010-12-31 07:54:31 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: so, what, 20 5970s?
1276 2010-12-31 07:54:59 <ArtForz> thats still a few orders of magnitude short
1277 2010-12-31 07:55:21 <AnonymousUser> that's only a few days
1278 2010-12-31 07:55:25 <Diablo-D3> btw
1279 2010-12-31 07:55:26 <AnonymousUser> at worse
1280 2010-12-31 07:55:29 <AnonymousUser> worst
1281 2010-12-31 07:55:34 <Diablo-D3> ecdsa is 2**256 difficulty still
1282 2010-12-31 07:55:40 <ArtForz> no
1283 2010-12-31 07:55:56 <Diablo-D3> yes, because Im lazy and dont feel like optimizing another hasher ever
1284 2010-12-31 07:56:01 <Diablo-D3> *ever again
1285 2010-12-31 07:56:20 <Diablo-D3> infact, after Im done transliterating this murmurhash3 impl, I never want to see hashes ever again
1286 2010-12-31 07:56:23 <ArtForz> ECDLP takes ~ sqrt(order) steps
1287 2010-12-31 07:57:11 <AnonymousUser> the advances in algorithms have been beating Moore's Law (and don't forget about probabilitstic quantum computing), but not so badly that i'd think breaknig a 1MB key would be feasible if that'd be allowed by the protocol
1288 2010-12-31 07:57:18 TheAncientGoat has joined
1289 2010-12-31 07:57:26 <AnonymousUser> i'm just worried.  is the 128 bit key a hard limit?
1290 2010-12-31 07:57:30 <ArtForz> nope
1291 2010-12-31 07:58:09 <AnonymousUser> "nope" what?
1292 2010-12-31 07:58:31 <ArtForz> you just need to have all clients accept transactions using a different curve
1293 2010-12-31 07:58:38 <AnonymousUser> all clients?
1294 2010-12-31 07:58:40 <ArtForz> yep
1295 2010-12-31 07:58:48 <ArtForz> we already have a version field in transactions
1296 2010-12-31 07:59:11 <ArtForz> at least it's backwards compatible, so old transactions will still be valid
1297 2010-12-31 07:59:38 <AnonymousUser> there might be a few hundred clients now, but what about when there are a few billion clients?  you can't expect everyone to switch to a new version
1298 2010-12-31 07:59:53 <Diablo-D3> slush: fix your shit
1299 2010-12-31 08:02:03 Bth8 has joined
1300 2010-12-31 08:02:06 <AnonymousUser> i'm sure there are people much more involved worrying about this, but if the cryptography "works now" but isn't immediately extendable to future needs, that worries me
1301 2010-12-31 08:03:27 <ArtForz> so assuming you can build a computer that does 2**64 steps/second, and lets say moores law holds, it'll take 38 doublings before you can do 2**128 steps in a year
1302 2010-12-31 08:03:59 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: except
1303 2010-12-31 08:04:07 <AnonymousUser> obviously, you don't want to require that every key be 1MB because that's a huge amount of data to have to send for a 0.05 bitcoin transaction, but some day, that might be feasible for a transfer occurring a between a few thousand miles
1304 2010-12-31 08:04:10 <Diablo-D3> I do not currently consider 2**128 safe
1305 2010-12-31 08:04:16 <Diablo-D3> if it can be done in my lifetime, its not good enough
1306 2010-12-31 08:04:27 <ArtForz> at that point a transistor would be 85fm in length
1307 2010-12-31 08:04:55 <ArtForz> yes, thats femtometers
1308 2010-12-31 08:05:07 <Diablo-D3> so, roughly the size of a dick in India?
1309 2010-12-31 08:05:15 <AnonymousUser> that's not too unreasable when you consider that we've yet to build any commercial probabilistic computers
1310 2010-12-31 08:05:19 <joe_1> yes
1311 2010-12-31 08:05:32 <AnonymousUser> and that such machines might be built within the next 100 years
1312 2010-12-31 08:05:59 <ArtForz> iirc QC doesnt gain you anything for ECDLP
1313 2010-12-31 08:06:20 <AnonymousUser> ECDLP?
1314 2010-12-31 08:06:34 <ArtForz> Elliptic curve Discrete Logaritm Problem
1315 2010-12-31 08:06:55 <Diablo-D3> btw
1316 2010-12-31 08:07:01 <Diablo-D3> bits are not a useful measure in of itself
1317 2010-12-31 08:07:07 <ArtForz> btw, thats sub-atom size
1318 2010-12-31 08:07:17 <Diablo-D3> you have to compare that to cycles per bit it takes to calculate
1319 2010-12-31 08:07:26 <Diablo-D3> there are algos that are really fucking slow
1320 2010-12-31 08:07:31 <ArtForz> yes, thats why I said 2**128 STEPS
1321 2010-12-31 08:07:48 <ArtForz> one ECDLP step is a pretty well-known operation
1322 2010-12-31 08:07:57 <AnonymousUser> well, so far no one's found a solution to the problem, but since no one's proved it's impossible, that doesn't mean that we won't find a speed up in the future
1323 2010-12-31 08:08:13 <afed> lets say we build a computer using every atom in the universe
1324 2010-12-31 08:08:20 <afed> and use it to mine for digital currency
1325 2010-12-31 08:08:31 <ArtForz> just because the universe didnt suddenly cease to exist, doesnt mean it can't happen in the next 5 seconds
1326 2010-12-31 08:08:44 <afed> how would we know if that happened
1327 2010-12-31 08:08:52 <ArtForz> and why would we care?
1328 2010-12-31 08:09:06 <afed> so let's operate under the assumption that it wont'
1329 2010-12-31 08:09:08 <ianm_> I, for one, would be furious
1330 2010-12-31 08:09:25 <AnonymousUser> well, we currently think that the problem is complex, but some day, we might discover that it's not
1331 2010-12-31 08:09:36 <ArtForz> so nobody will build a better monetary system while we have SUB-FUCKING-NUCLEAR COMPUTERS?!?
1332 2010-12-31 08:09:59 <afed> not sure if a sub nuclear computer makes sense
1333 2010-12-31 08:10:08 <ArtForz> exactly
1334 2010-12-31 08:10:15 <afed> "i know, let's build a computer using every quark in the universe!"
1335 2010-12-31 08:10:17 <afed> "but how?"
1336 2010-12-31 08:10:32 <afed> "well, i guess we could assemble them...into..."
1337 2010-12-31 08:10:39 <afed> "atoms"
1338 2010-12-31 08:10:44 <AnonymousUser> as an example, we once thought that determining if the number n is prime takes n^2 time.  however, a few years ago we found an algorithm that takes only sqrt(n) time
1339 2010-12-31 08:11:12 <ArtForz> actually it was long suspected that a sub-exponential time algorithm existed
1340 2010-12-31 08:11:29 <AnonymousUser> n^2 was already sub-exponetial...
1341 2010-12-31 08:11:55 <ArtForz> see that nice little exponentiation operator there?
1342 2010-12-31 08:12:06 <AnonymousUser> that's not what "exponetial time" means.
1343 2010-12-31 08:12:10 <ArtForz> yes it does
1344 2010-12-31 08:12:15 <AnonymousUser> exponential time means something like 2^n
1345 2010-12-31 08:12:17 <AnonymousUser> not n^2
1346 2010-12-31 08:12:23 <AnonymousUser> n^2 is polynomial time
1347 2010-12-31 08:12:51 <ArtForz> whoops, right
1348 2010-12-31 08:13:07 <Diablo-D3> no
1349 2010-12-31 08:13:19 <Diablo-D3> n^2 sounds like a good name for a band
1350 2010-12-31 08:13:54 <AnonymousUser> basically, as long as we haven't shown that a problem is NP-Complete, then i don't think of it as being secure
1351 2010-12-31 08:14:11 <ArtForz> nothing is secure
1352 2010-12-31 08:14:19 <afed> en squared
1353 2010-12-31 08:14:20 <ArtForz> our complete understanding of math could be wrong
1354 2010-12-31 08:14:21 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: well
1355 2010-12-31 08:14:28 <Diablo-D3> we still havent proved N != NP
1356 2010-12-31 08:14:45 <Diablo-D3> and given enough math, I can prove 1 = 2
1357 2010-12-31 08:14:47 darrob has quit (Disconnected by services)
1358 2010-12-31 08:14:51 <Diablo-D3> so you're rather fucked.
1359 2010-12-31 08:14:54 darrob has joined
1360 2010-12-31 08:14:57 <afed> Diablo-D3: all proofs of that nature have obvious errors
1361 2010-12-31 08:15:09 <afed> or not-so-obvious errors which is the fun part
1362 2010-12-31 08:15:19 <AnonymousUser> Diablo: but your math that shows 1=2 would be inconsistent with any axioms that require 1!=2
1363 2010-12-31 08:15:53 <ArtForz> yep
1364 2010-12-31 08:15:59 <AnonymousUser> and there's a good reason i was thinking of printing "In P!=NP we trust" on the bitcoin bill i'm going to post on Reddit!
1365 2010-12-31 08:17:13 <afed> so is there a way of generating lots of addresses and looking for ones with words in them?
1366 2010-12-31 08:17:25 <ArtForz> yes
1367 2010-12-31 08:17:42 <afed> what about colliding addresses to intercept transactions?
1368 2010-12-31 08:17:46 <ArtForz> someone alreadyx did it, search for "vanity address" on the official forums
1369 2010-12-31 08:17:58 <ArtForz> thats a lot harder, again about 2**128
1370 2010-12-31 08:18:02 skeledrew has joined
1371 2010-12-31 08:18:26 <joe_1> we need longer keys...
1372 2010-12-31 08:18:40 <afed> so if i use a couple of GPUs i could collide an address roughly once a day?
1373 2010-12-31 08:18:48 <ArtForz> wtf?
1374 2010-12-31 08:19:45 <joe_1> afed your math is way off i think.
1375 2010-12-31 08:20:00 <afed> wouldn't surprise me, i am drinking and speculating, not doing math
1376 2010-12-31 08:20:27 <joe_1> 2^128 is huge, that's what takes the cia computer 20 years to do.
1377 2010-12-31 08:20:34 <ArtForz> fastest GPU is about 2500000000000 ops/second, 2**128 is 1365210104749935188661229533709701721249511737885146321670698635579350978186664116487286492188065715081609508117276650596643981892041834496
1378 2010-12-31 08:20:40 <AnonymousUser> anyway.  it worries me that many problems that took 20 years to complete using the computers and algorithms of the 1990s would today only take a few months
1379 2010-12-31 08:21:03 <joe_1> the keys, though, only need to keep for as long as you are holding the money.
1380 2010-12-31 08:22:09 <AnonymousUser> if we expect that our cryptographic needs could increase exponentially with time, we shouldn't expect that a hard limit imposed today will satisfy our needs in 50 years
1381 2010-12-31 08:22:27 <joe_1> the network can be updated to use longer keys
1382 2010-12-31 08:22:45 AAA_awright_ has joined
1383 2010-12-31 08:22:50 <joe_1> and, yes, should be updated as soon as possible. but it's not an immediate (<3 years) threat
1384 2010-12-31 08:23:09 <AnonymousUser> easily?  as needed?  or with the agreement of everyone using the system?
1385 2010-12-31 08:23:20 <joe_1> agreement
1386 2010-12-31 08:23:31 <AnonymousUser> that sounds like a big weakness to me
1387 2010-12-31 08:23:35 <ArtForz> well, you dont have to agree, but then you wont see any transactions done by others
1388 2010-12-31 08:23:55 <ArtForz> = as soon as a majority switches, everyone else is pretty much forced to if they want to keep doing business
1389 2010-12-31 08:24:17 <joe_1> we would have to ask someone more knowledgeable whether it could be done backwards compatible
1390 2010-12-31 08:24:24 <ArtForz> nope
1391 2010-12-31 08:24:42 <AnonymousUser> yeah... and that'd be no problem if there is a central body that everyone trusts who's saying "we need to switch to system X", but what if politics get involved?
1392 2010-12-31 08:24:58 <ArtForz> current client doesnt accept any curve except secp256k1
1393 2010-12-31 08:24:59 AAA_awright has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1394 2010-12-31 08:25:01 <joe_1> it probably wouldn't because the change is so well understood and non-politicial in nature.
1395 2010-12-31 08:25:30 <AnonymousUser> i think that about a lot of things that politicians can't agree on...
1396 2010-12-31 08:25:45 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1397 2010-12-31 08:25:49 <ArtForz> so you cant get anyone running the current client to accept a tx or block containing a tx signed using a keypair usingt a different curve
1398 2010-12-31 08:26:00 <afed> oh here's another flaw i discovered in bitcoin
1399 2010-12-31 08:26:05 <ArtForz> and in 50 years someone still runnign this old client still wont accept those transactions or blocks
1400 2010-12-31 08:26:15 <afed> two months ago when i first heard about it, i installed it and it didn't do anything because i was glined from freenode
1401 2010-12-31 08:26:23 <afed> nevermind why i was banned from freenode
1402 2010-12-31 08:26:28 <ArtForz> that sounds wrong
1403 2010-12-31 08:26:34 <joe_1> well, satoshi alluded to some method he had for clients to work on 2 networks with the same work. so it would be backward compatible if the upgrade simply branched the chain and published transactions to 2 networks; one with the 128 bit keys, and 1 with the better longer keys
1404 2010-12-31 08:26:50 <afed> idk, i never had any connections
1405 2010-12-31 08:26:52 <ArtForz> we had the list of fallback nodes for WAY longer than that
1406 2010-12-31 08:27:01 <afed> maybe i messed up something else then
1407 2010-12-31 08:27:11 <afed> but it never downloaded the blocks
1408 2010-12-31 08:27:16 <ArtForz> probably kept trying to connect to IRC
1409 2010-12-31 08:27:32 <ArtForz> well, or got stuck because it didnt expect it
1410 2010-12-31 08:27:37 <afed> yeah it probably didn't fail out correctly since the IRC server wasn't unreachable
1411 2010-12-31 08:27:47 <ArtForz> thats why we have -noirc
1412 2010-12-31 08:28:27 <afed> i think it wasn't obvious enough that something was wrong
1413 2010-12-31 08:28:40 <ArtForz> yeah, current GUI needs work
1414 2010-12-31 08:28:51 <afed> it said generating and 0 connections at the bottom
1415 2010-12-31 08:29:02 <AnonymousUser> maybe it's not worth worrying about now, i worry what will happen if, in 50 years someone decides to fork bitcoin.  what happens when 25% of the people move on to ByteCoin and the other 75% stay with bitcoin?
1416 2010-12-31 08:29:06 <ArtForz> actually current GUI needs to be nuked from orbit and replaced with a frontend-backend system
1417 2010-12-31 08:29:50 <ianm_> AnonymousUser: seems to me that if bitcoin succeeds, then in 50 years the world will look a lot different
1418 2010-12-31 08:29:56 <afed> i'd be satisfied with a console tab
1419 2010-12-31 08:30:07 <afed> simply displaying each line it sends to debug.log
1420 2010-12-31 08:30:11 <afed> with a timestamp
1421 2010-12-31 08:30:17 <AnonymousUser> hell, i expect that the project will be forked in just a few years if it catches on
1422 2010-12-31 08:30:20 <afed> i bet i could even add that
1423 2010-12-31 08:30:42 <afed> AnonymousUser: sure just like that facebook alternative caught on like wildfire
1424 2010-12-31 08:30:44 <ArtForz> if you like wx wrangling, yes
1425 2010-12-31 08:30:46 <afed> (not)
1426 2010-12-31 08:31:06 <afed> people would have to move their wealth from one system to the other
1427 2010-12-31 08:31:18 <afed> easy if traders are going to trade on bitcoin and the bitcoin fork
1428 2010-12-31 08:31:37 <afed> hard or impossible if original bitcoin becomes worthless for some reason
1429 2010-12-31 08:31:46 <joe_1> software can fork and still operate on the same network
1430 2010-12-31 08:31:53 <ArtForz> yes
1431 2010-12-31 08:32:03 <ArtForz> the problem is incompatible protocol changes
1432 2010-12-31 08:32:08 <afed> i thought he was talking about a fork of the whole system, not a fork of the software
1433 2010-12-31 08:32:29 <ArtForz> we already have partial alternative clients
1434 2010-12-31 08:32:33 <joe_1> yeah, i dont know which he meant, it's an important distinction
1435 2010-12-31 08:34:40 EvanR has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1436 2010-12-31 08:35:53 ThomasV_ has joined
1437 2010-12-31 08:35:57 ThomasV_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1438 2010-12-31 08:36:30 EvanR has joined
1439 2010-12-31 08:36:45 <mizerydearia> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=2546
1440 2010-12-31 08:36:46 <bitbot> Bitcoin Control Panel
1441 2010-12-31 08:37:03 <mizerydearia> Woo, I beat #bc-news feed
1442 2010-12-31 08:38:41 <AnonymousUser> i guess it's not important.  i can't guess at the nature of any forks, and the project seems pretty secure as it is.  i doubt anyone would want to render the whole bitcoin supply worthless with a fork.
1443 2010-12-31 08:39:46 <afed> it's not up to them
1444 2010-12-31 08:40:07 <afed> you could never render bitcoins worthless by creating incompatible forkcoins
1445 2010-12-31 08:40:23 <afed> no one who actually owns a decent amount of bitcoins will want some shitty forkcoins
1446 2010-12-31 08:40:52 <AnonymousUser> that'd only happen if everyone decided that the fork was more worth their while and stopped accepting bitcoins as payment
1447 2010-12-31 08:41:37 <afed> the existence of a bitcoin fork alone will never cause anyone to switch
1448 2010-12-31 08:41:43 <AnonymousUser> of course not
1449 2010-12-31 08:41:43 <afed> some other event making bitcoins worthless would have to occur
1450 2010-12-31 08:41:54 <afed> a compromise that allowed anyone to generate tons of bitcoins forinstance
1451 2010-12-31 08:42:37 <AnonymousUser> sure, but that's not all
1452 2010-12-31 08:43:08 <AnonymousUser> see, right now, i can only use bitcoins to buy a few things.  if i want to buy anything else, bitcoins are worthless to me
1453 2010-12-31 08:43:29 ThomasV has joined
1454 2010-12-31 08:43:31 <afed> i honestly don't see that changing
1455 2010-12-31 08:43:39 <afed> but bitcoins have value to speculators
1456 2010-12-31 08:43:52 <afed> or they have value because speculators will pay for them
1457 2010-12-31 08:43:59 ianm_ has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1458 2010-12-31 08:44:11 <AnonymousUser> the whims of speculators are very fluid
1459 2010-12-31 08:44:21 <afed> absolutely
1460 2010-12-31 08:44:27 <afed> but they are smart people too
1461 2010-12-31 08:46:31 <afed> the last digit of each of my bitcoin transactions is a prime
1462 2010-12-31 08:46:40 <afed> 5, 3, 7, 7, 3
1463 2010-12-31 08:46:52 <AnonymousUser> interesting.  is that by design?
1464 2010-12-31 08:47:08 <afed> well the 5 came from the faucet
1465 2010-12-31 08:47:19 <afed> the rest is from slush's pool
1466 2010-12-31 08:47:44 <AnonymousUser> slush?
1467 2010-12-31 08:47:56 <ArtForz> ,,bc,pool
1468 2010-12-31 08:47:57 <gribble> Error: "bc,pool" is not a valid command.
1469 2010-12-31 08:47:58 <afed> er he's the bitcoin.cz pool
1470 2010-12-31 08:48:00 <afed> right?
1471 2010-12-31 08:48:02 <AnonymousUser> ah yes that
1472 2010-12-31 08:48:03 <ArtForz> yep
1473 2010-12-31 08:48:12 <AnonymousUser> it looks like a Ponzi Scheme to me...
1474 2010-12-31 08:48:17 <ArtForz> what?
1475 2010-12-31 08:48:26 <afed> oh god you're not that guy are you
1476 2010-12-31 08:48:29 <ArtForz> wtf are you smoking?
1477 2010-12-31 08:48:38 <AnonymousUser> i mean, not quite.  the payments are randomized
1478 2010-12-31 08:48:41 <ArtForz> who loses?
1479 2010-12-31 08:48:53 <afed> i was sort of joking, it's pure coincidence about the primes
1480 2010-12-31 08:49:14 <ArtForz> not to mention every participant can easily check that the server is fair
1481 2010-12-31 08:49:33 <afed> i don't know if they can
1482 2010-12-31 08:49:46 <ArtForz> it's trivial to check how mayn shares you found for a block
1483 2010-12-31 08:49:57 <AnonymousUser> well, the expected payout is 1 bitcoin, which is the same as you put in
1484 2010-12-31 08:50:04 <ArtForz> wtf?
1485 2010-12-31 08:50:21 <afed> but he could pay an address of his own and add false shares for it on the web server to make the numbers come out
1486 2010-12-31 08:50:30 <afed> i don't claim that he does this
1487 2010-12-31 08:50:38 skeledrew has joined
1488 2010-12-31 08:50:49 annodomini has quit (Quit: annodomini)
1489 2010-12-31 08:50:55 <ArtForz> that would also be noticable
1490 2010-12-31 08:50:57 <afed> he could take a cut for running the service and say so publicly and i don't think people would object
1491 2010-12-31 08:51:01 <ArtForz> yep
1492 2010-12-31 08:51:08 <afed> or if they did they could feel free not to use it
1493 2010-12-31 08:51:22 <ArtForz> if he overreports shares, avg # of blocks/time would disagree with num_shares/difficulty over longer timespans
1494 2010-12-31 08:51:31 <AnonymousUser> so that's certainly better than a Ponzi Scheme, where the payout inclease and the likihood of payment decreases as the number of participants goes up
1495 2010-12-31 08:51:56 <ArtForz> it's the exact same scheme as normal mining
1496 2010-12-31 08:52:13 <afed> gah
1497 2010-12-31 08:52:18 <afed> i'm going to send back this 6950
1498 2010-12-31 08:52:27 <AnonymousUser> oh.  maybe i'm thinking of the wrong service
1499 2010-12-31 08:52:29 <afed> i can't run it stably in this machine
1500 2010-12-31 08:52:43 <afed> and it doesn't provide as many hashes per dollar as a 5870
1501 2010-12-31 08:52:52 <ArtForz> yep
1502 2010-12-31 08:53:06 <ArtForz> 58xx/59xx is pretty close to EOL though
1503 2010-12-31 08:53:13 <ArtForz> acdtualyl I think 58xx is already EOL
1504 2010-12-31 08:53:29 <ArtForz> 5970 in a month or 2 when 6990 comes out
1505 2010-12-31 08:53:32 <afed> must be why newegg is giving them away
1506 2010-12-31 08:53:40 <AnonymousUser> ah sorry, i was thinking of something entirely different
1507 2010-12-31 08:53:46 <afed> $270 USD plus a free 1 TB disk plus a mailin rebate
1508 2010-12-31 08:53:56 <ArtForz> no hookers and blow?
1509 2010-12-31 08:54:03 <afed> that's what the bitcoins are for
1510 2010-12-31 08:54:28 <afed> some day we will be able to use bitcoins to purchase drugs and a woman's services
1511 2010-12-31 08:54:28 <ArtForz> actually $270 for a 5870 is damn decent
1512 2010-12-31 08:54:33 <afed> otherwise what are we working for?
1513 2010-12-31 08:54:36 <AnonymousUser> hopefully...
1514 2010-12-31 08:54:43 <AnonymousUser> that's what i'm hoping for
1515 2010-12-31 08:54:57 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1516 2010-12-31 08:54:59 <afed> after i send back the 6950 i might buy a second round of what i just ordered
1517 2010-12-31 08:55:16 <afed> two miner nodes with two 5870 each
1518 2010-12-31 08:55:30 <ArtForz> thats about the same $/Mh as 5970s for $500
1519 2010-12-31 08:55:37 <AnonymousUser> i'm actually waiting on bitcoin.cz to verify ~0.005 bitcoins that might be owed to me.  how likely is it that i'll get that?
1520 2010-12-31 08:56:03 <ArtForz> he doesn't send sub-cent amounts
1521 2010-12-31 08:56:21 <afed> that isn't possible with the current software?
1522 2010-12-31 08:56:27 <ArtForz> normal clients just throw em away
1523 2010-12-31 08:56:38 <afed> deflation will eventually require that though
1524 2010-12-31 08:56:42 <ArtForz> yep
1525 2010-12-31 08:56:50 <ArtForz> easy enough to chnage
1526 2010-12-31 08:57:09 <AnonymousUser> sure, so i'll have to do it another few times before i get a payment, but how often are blocks found to be invalid?
1527 2010-12-31 08:57:28 <mizerydearia> Is "listaccounts" method included in official bitcoin client yet?
1528 2010-12-31 08:57:45 <ArtForz> basically if sending a tx results in < 0.01 change-to-self, it's just dropped as "fee" and the miner of the block containing it picks it up
1529 2010-12-31 08:58:02 <mizerydearia> s/ yet//
1530 2010-12-31 08:58:08 <ArtForz> nope
1531 2010-12-31 08:58:15 <afed> just like a bank lol
1532 2010-12-31 08:58:30 <mizerydearia> mm, hmm, will it be next version possibly?
1533 2010-12-31 08:58:33 <ArtForz> 0.3.19 = r201, listaccounts = r203
1534 2010-12-31 08:58:42 <mizerydearia> ah, nice
1535 2010-12-31 08:58:48 <mizerydearia> good to know, thanks
1536 2010-12-31 08:59:07 <AnonymousUser> actually the "Ponzi Scheme" that i was thinking of is the Bitcoin Randomizer at fxnet.co.cc  it's definitely not a Ponzi Scheme, but it looks real damn shady to me
1537 2010-12-31 09:00:44 <afed> AnonymousUser: i can't figure out what that is
1538 2010-12-31 09:00:53 <afed> if it would be legal if you tried it with real money in a first world country
1539 2010-12-31 09:01:05 <ArtForz> well, we do have a "official" ponzi scheme
1540 2010-12-31 09:01:13 <afed> i certainly wouldn't get involved in that in any way
1541 2010-12-31 09:01:59 Nevezen has quit (Quit: leaving)
1542 2010-12-31 09:02:01 <ArtForz> and thats actually it
1543 2010-12-31 09:02:03 <ArtForz> see http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=854.0
1544 2010-12-31 09:02:05 <bitbot> Bitcoin Randomizer, just a stupid pyramid scheme
1545 2010-12-31 09:02:21 <ArtForz> is it a ponzi scheme if it says so on the box?
1546 2010-12-31 09:02:52 <afed> call the police in that guy's country and have him arrested
1547 2010-12-31 09:02:55 <Diablo-D3> it ALWAYS does what it says on the tin
1548 2010-12-31 09:03:13 <AnonymousUser> lololol
1549 2010-12-31 09:03:15 <afed> it's illegal whether you do it in dollars, euro, or fake internet monopoly money
1550 2010-12-31 09:03:24 <Diablo-D3> afed: erm
1551 2010-12-31 09:03:29 <AnonymousUser> i remember the first time i saw a ponzi scheme on the internet
1552 2010-12-31 09:03:29 <Diablo-D3> I don't think so, Tim.
1553 2010-12-31 09:03:45 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: so do I: I went to the Federal Reserve's website
1554 2010-12-31 09:03:47 <Diablo-D3> dohohohohoho
1555 2010-12-31 09:04:33 <AnonymousUser> it was a letter on the Internet saying "Please send everyone on this list $1, then remove the person on the top of the list and add yourself to the bottom"
1556 2010-12-31 09:05:15 <ArtForz> so, why should that be illegal?
1557 2010-12-31 09:05:25 <AnonymousUser> when i was 10 years old, it sounded like a great idea, but i realized it'd be a lot easier to just put my name on the list and not send any money to anyone
1558 2010-12-31 09:05:36 <ArtForz> yep
1559 2010-12-31 09:06:24 <AnonymousUser> and at the time, i really didn't have $5 to send to random people.  i also didn't understand how sending people $5 would ensure that i had hundreds
1560 2010-12-31 09:07:36 <AnonymousUser> a few years later, i saw the same idea in a Dinsey Movie, and finally realized it was a scam
1561 2010-12-31 09:08:13 <ArtForz> a really old one at that
1562 2010-12-31 09:08:28 <AnonymousUser> hey, Joe Rogan was in that movie...
1563 2010-12-31 09:08:35 <AnonymousUser> it's not thaat old
1564 2010-12-31 09:08:49 <ArtForz> the scam is
1565 2010-12-31 09:08:51 <AnonymousUser> o yea
1566 2010-12-31 09:09:14 <AnonymousUser> Ponzi died in 1949
1567 2010-12-31 09:09:27 <Diablo-D3> except the scam is older than him
1568 2010-12-31 09:09:42 <Diablo-D3> the pyramid scheme is as old as the pyramids
1569 2010-12-31 09:09:48 <AnonymousUser> uhg
1570 2010-12-31 09:10:11 <AnonymousUser> so now I'm a grad student, and I've realized that my livelihood is based on a pyramid scheme
1571 2010-12-31 09:10:30 <ArtForz> yup, isnt life great?
1572 2010-12-31 09:11:05 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: what is your job?
1573 2010-12-31 09:11:35 <AnonymousUser> i need to get out of it....  my professors don't produce anything of any economic worth.  i'll be surprised if they still have a job once the US's economy collapses
1574 2010-12-31 09:11:43 <AnonymousUser> i'm a theoretical physics grad student
1575 2010-12-31 09:11:52 <ArtForz> neat
1576 2010-12-31 09:11:53 <Diablo-D3> thats not a pyramid scheme
1577 2010-12-31 09:12:03 <Diablo-D3> its not very useful, but its not a pyramid scheme
1578 2010-12-31 09:12:35 <AnonymousUser> well, once i'm done with my masters, i'll be doing a PhD.  as a PhD student, i'll be doing someone else's research for free
1579 2010-12-31 09:12:40 <ArtForz> well, it kinda is
1580 2010-12-31 09:12:41 <ArtForz> yep
1581 2010-12-31 09:12:53 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: well no
1582 2010-12-31 09:12:59 <Diablo-D3> you'll be doing your own reasearch for free
1583 2010-12-31 09:13:06 <AnonymousUser> i.e., i won't be getting paid for it.  i'll have the "priveledge" of working on someone else's research so that i can put it on my resume
1584 2010-12-31 09:13:17 <Diablo-D3> if you're smart, you'll start climbing into the teaching role
1585 2010-12-31 09:13:22 <AnonymousUser> if i'd do my own research, then sure, but most PhDs do someone else's research
1586 2010-12-31 09:13:25 <Diablo-D3> and convince others to do the research for you
1587 2010-12-31 09:13:36 <ArtForz> = you now have other suckers doing your work
1588 2010-12-31 09:13:38 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: no, most PhDs scam first year students into doing it for them
1589 2010-12-31 09:14:00 <Diablo-D3> people getting PhDs, or ones that have them, have reached the rung on the ladder that they have mooks.
1590 2010-12-31 09:14:19 <AnonymousUser> i haven't done that yet.  i'm still working on the Masters.  i'll be the one getting scammed into doing someone else's research
1591 2010-12-31 09:14:28 <Diablo-D3> yeah, you're still at that stage
1592 2010-12-31 09:14:47 <Diablo-D3> gotta suck up to your professors, or no masters for you
1593 2010-12-31 09:15:05 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: and btw, your professors technically dont have to produce anything of value
1594 2010-12-31 09:15:12 <Diablo-D3> it depends on how they arrived at their position
1595 2010-12-31 09:15:44 <Diablo-D3> and yes, even theoretical physics has value
1596 2010-12-31 09:16:01 <BoBeR> GUINNESS EXTRA STOUT
1597 2010-12-31 09:16:03 <AnonymousUser> yeah, and it's hilarious because my professors are getting paid by people who are essentially donating them money.  my professors don't produce anything other than promise
1598 2010-12-31 09:16:08 <Diablo-D3> I mean, tommorow, we could discover the higgs boson, and find out it tastes good.
1599 2010-12-31 09:16:21 <ArtForz> thats pure research for you
1600 2010-12-31 09:16:35 <AnonymousUser> seriously, i'll be surprised if my adviser has a job once the economy collapses
1601 2010-12-31 09:16:36 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: not all professors reach their professorship through research
1602 2010-12-31 09:16:46 <Diablo-D3> some just teach full time.
1603 2010-12-31 09:16:55 <Diablo-D3> (they're very low on the rungs)
1604 2010-12-31 09:17:23 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: and depending on the college, they'll force people trying to get phds to teach
1605 2010-12-31 09:17:32 <Diablo-D3> which is great
1606 2010-12-31 09:17:36 <AnonymousUser> my university's been doing a great job of moving all the teaching onto the grad students.  they have lots of bullshit "research" showing that we do a better job than the professors
1607 2010-12-31 09:17:41 <Diablo-D3> you ALWAYS convert your class into cannon fodder
1608 2010-12-31 09:17:58 <AnonymousUser> they don't pay us any more, but they make us do 2x as much work as they had the students do a few years ago
1609 2010-12-31 09:18:05 <Diablo-D3> hah
1610 2010-12-31 09:18:12 <Diablo-D3> that sounds like colleges to me
1611 2010-12-31 09:18:24 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: btw, if you actually have a phd, then that means you already did your work
1612 2010-12-31 09:18:25 <BoBeR> colllage sounds ilke a GUINNESS EXTRA STOUT
1613 2010-12-31 09:18:39 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: the thesis paper has to be of actual value
1614 2010-12-31 09:18:48 <Diablo-D3> it has to be a unique piece of research
1615 2010-12-31 09:19:01 <Diablo-D3> it doesnt have to be particularly useful research, it just has to add to the body of knowledge
1616 2010-12-31 09:19:14 <AnonymousUser> Diablo: sorry, i said before that i was a "theoretical physicist".  that was a lie.  i'm a grad student working toward that goal
1617 2010-12-31 09:19:37 <Diablo-D3> somewhere out there someone is getting a phd on the physiological impact of eating the body of the noodly one.
1618 2010-12-31 09:19:50 <Diablo-D3> (spoilers: om nom nom nom nom)
1619 2010-12-31 09:20:22 <AnonymousUser> and right after i got here, i realized that the thing is a damn pryamid scheme no better than the emails i got when i was 10 years old telling me that if i sent $1 to everyone on a list and add my name to the list, then i'll be rich
1620 2010-12-31 09:20:41 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: well, its a pyramid scheme in the sense that, eventually, we will know everything
1621 2010-12-31 09:20:46 <Diablo-D3> and once that happens, no more phds.
1622 2010-12-31 09:20:50 <AnonymousUser> sure, it happens for some people, but 80% of the people do work that never pays off
1623 2010-12-31 09:21:00 <Diablo-D3> depends how you define "pays off"
1624 2010-12-31 09:21:04 <Diablo-D3> if they get the phd, it DID pay off
1625 2010-12-31 09:21:16 <AnonymousUser> only about 20% of PhD candidates become professors do get to direct the research themselves
1626 2010-12-31 09:21:27 <Diablo-D3> so?
1627 2010-12-31 09:21:32 <Diablo-D3> its a filter
1628 2010-12-31 09:21:39 <Diablo-D3> only the best get to get the best positions
1629 2010-12-31 09:21:45 <Diablo-D3> thats not a pyramid scheme, thats how life works.
1630 2010-12-31 09:22:25 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: and some people get a phd and stop
1631 2010-12-31 09:22:31 <AnonymousUser> the rest just work on other people's research (for free.  i get paid to teach, not to do research) and hope that it furthers their career
1632 2010-12-31 09:22:36 <Diablo-D3> thats the end of their academic career
1633 2010-12-31 09:22:45 <Diablo-D3> they simply wernt interested in doing research their whole lives
1634 2010-12-31 09:23:07 <Diablo-D3> some people just want the letters phd after their name
1635 2010-12-31 09:23:19 <Diablo-D3> and then run off to be some upper management in some company somewhere and get paid tons of money
1636 2010-12-31 09:23:46 AntonB has joined
1637 2010-12-31 09:24:02 <AnonymousUser> i like research though... a lot.  it's been my goal to do research for years, but i'm pretty sure i could do it better on my own
1638 2010-12-31 09:24:13 <Diablo-D3> well it depends
1639 2010-12-31 09:24:23 <Diablo-D3> a lot of people do research outside of an academic setting
1640 2010-12-31 09:24:33 <Diablo-D3> even on theoretical physics
1641 2010-12-31 09:24:55 kermit has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1642 2010-12-31 09:25:44 <Diablo-D3> a phd isnt the end
1643 2010-12-31 09:25:52 <Diablo-D3> its just another tool to use to get hired with
1644 2010-12-31 09:26:17 <Diablo-D3> if you're one of those 20% that end up doing large scale research at a college, good for you
1645 2010-12-31 09:26:25 <Diablo-D3> otherwise, you'll be the 80% that gets a high paying job somewhere
1646 2010-12-31 09:28:28 <AnonymousUser> it's just that i have a bunch of things that i want to look at myself that don't line up with my professors' research programs.  ideally, i'd like to do research on my own work (not paid of course.  i can't expect that).  i know of one professor at my university who lets his students do that.  i don't think i want to work on his specialty though
1647 2010-12-31 09:29:02 <Diablo-D3> well, do realize, SOMEBODY is paying for the research
1648 2010-12-31 09:29:07 <Diablo-D3> and you do the research THEY want you to do
1649 2010-12-31 09:29:52 AntonB has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1650 2010-12-31 09:30:40 AntonB has joined
1651 2010-12-31 09:30:56 <Diablo-D3> that means if you have to research about how there is four gauge bosons and four members of the Beatles and that there must be some connection between the two, then thats how its done
1652 2010-12-31 09:30:59 <slush> Diablo-D3: ?  slush: fix your shit
1653 2010-12-31 09:31:09 <Diablo-D3> slush: pool died for a minute or so
1654 2010-12-31 09:31:50 <slush> at 8:57?
1655 2010-12-31 09:32:01 <Diablo-D3> who knows
1656 2010-12-31 09:32:45 <AnonymousUser> yes that's the problem.  because my adviser (once i get a research adviser) must be paid to help me with my research even if i am not being paid.  but what do i do if my research doesn't line up with any of my professors' interests?
1657 2010-12-31 09:33:09 <AnonymousUser> i suppose at that point, i need to search for a place to transfer
1658 2010-12-31 09:35:41 <Diablo-D3> you know, someday people are going to laugh at my humor
1659 2010-12-31 09:36:27 <slush> Diablo-D3: Looks like another service ate server resources for a moment; pool will need own server soon, just because those performance peaks
1660 2010-12-31 09:36:43 ebel has joined
1661 2010-12-31 09:36:50 <Diablo-D3> slush: just get a vps at rapidxen and be done with it
1662 2010-12-31 09:36:56 <slush> but after latest tweak we are on 10% of peformance
1663 2010-12-31 09:37:10 <slush> Diablo-D3: I'm using linode and it is very good
1664 2010-12-31 09:37:39 <Diablo-D3> rx > linode
1665 2010-12-31 09:37:41 <AnonymousUser> but let's see... Paul - E&M, George - Strong, John - Weak, and Ringo - Gravity, clearly because with or without him, nothing makes sense
1666 2010-12-31 09:39:03 <AnonymousUser> John is the Weak field because the Weak interaction has always been "all the rage"
1667 2010-12-31 09:40:12 <AnonymousUser> Paul is E&M because he's so well understood and good natured
1668 2010-12-31 09:40:36 <Diablo-D3> heh, thats kind of funny
1669 2010-12-31 09:40:53 <Diablo-D3> I was going to go with ringo = higgs the same way
1670 2010-12-31 09:41:54 <AnonymousUser> George is the Strong field because it's got real strong couplings to everything else and George is the only Beatle i'm sure understood the theory of music in and out
1671 2010-12-31 09:42:25 <Diablo-D3> Im not sure any of them understood music until they started doing drugs
1672 2010-12-31 09:43:09 <AnonymousUser> they all claimed to never have learned music theory, but George's son Dhani is definitely well versed
1673 2010-12-31 09:45:17 <AnonymousUser> haha, true.  Revolver was when they really started understanding music as an art form
1674 2010-12-31 09:45:48 <Diablo-D3> well just think
1675 2010-12-31 09:45:51 <AnonymousUser> that was the first album that was really influenced by their LSD usage
1676 2010-12-31 09:45:53 <Diablo-D3> you're now on your way to a phd =P
1677 2010-12-31 09:46:40 <AnonymousUser> and god damn my drug connection... i've been trying to get weed for months!!!!
1678 2010-12-31 09:48:27 <AnonymousUser> i fucking live in Cali now!!!!  I'm ready to pay someone to drive me to the city to get a card and access to a dispensary!!!
1679 2010-12-31 09:48:42 <Diablo-D3> lol
1680 2010-12-31 09:49:56 <AnonymousUser> access to drugs is 50% of the reason i'm excited about bitcoin.  the other 50% is an idea that i have to create an online market for intellectual services
1681 2010-12-31 09:50:11 <AnonymousUser> and the other 50% is that it's just a great idea
1682 2010-12-31 09:51:54 <ArtForz> ahhh, the famous third 50%
1683 2010-12-31 09:51:58 <AnonymousUser> i figure, once the US economy collapses, we'll have millions of people with college degrees who are very knowledgable.  if i can find a trustworthy way of connecting people to exchange the services they've been trained to provide, then they'll have at least some means of income
1684 2010-12-31 09:52:21 <AnonymousUser> millions of *unemployed* people with college degrees
1685 2010-12-31 09:54:52 <slush> Diablo-D3: what's your timezone?
1686 2010-12-31 10:03:57 fil has joined
1687 2010-12-31 10:04:53 <fil> is it possible to set up a wallet (or wallet-type-thing) which requires any 2 out of 3 (or more) possible signatories to authenticate each transaction that sends bitcoins elsewhere?
1688 2010-12-31 10:04:58 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1689 2010-12-31 10:07:40 omglolbbq1 has joined
1690 2010-12-31 10:09:22 omglolbbq has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1691 2010-12-31 10:11:08 lucky has joined
1692 2010-12-31 10:19:59 altamic has joined
1693 2010-12-31 10:21:39 ianm_ has joined
1694 2010-12-31 10:26:06 <Diablo-D3> slush: est
1695 2010-12-31 10:26:27 <Diablo-D3> fil: no
1696 2010-12-31 10:26:55 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: btw, if that happens, they will beat their degrees into plowshares.
1697 2010-12-31 10:27:46 altamic has quit (Quit: altamic)
1698 2010-12-31 10:28:31 ThomasV has joined
1699 2010-12-31 10:31:39 <fil> Diablo-D3: is that because it's impossible in the protocol, or because it's not been implemented?
1700 2010-12-31 10:31:55 <Diablo-D3> fil: it wouldnt be handled in the protocol
1701 2010-12-31 10:32:37 <Diablo-D3> fil: infact
1702 2010-12-31 10:32:42 <Diablo-D3> you could just take the wallet.dat
1703 2010-12-31 10:32:47 <Diablo-D3> encrypt it three times
1704 2010-12-31 10:32:55 <Diablo-D3> and require all three keys to use it
1705 2010-12-31 10:34:16 <fil> well, yes, but that unlocks the thing in use, which means it's then available to be stolen, and requires the three signers to come together in some sense
1706 2010-12-31 10:35:58 <fil> you can do the 2 of 3 type thing if using gfsplit/gfcombine -- but again, you then recreate the real key to use it
1707 2010-12-31 10:38:36 <fil> I was under the impression that one could create transactions that required additional signature(s) to go through to the destination, but I imagine that's only at the option of the (single) sender
1708 2010-12-31 10:42:03 <Diablo-D3> fil: the transaction could never be valid
1709 2010-12-31 10:42:20 <Diablo-D3> you'd need all three signatures to send the transaction off to everyone else
1710 2010-12-31 10:42:28 <Diablo-D3> so, still, they'd all have to be there at the same time
1711 2010-12-31 10:43:25 <ThomasV> not at the same time
1712 2010-12-31 10:43:50 <Diablo-D3> ThomasV: yes
1713 2010-12-31 10:43:59 <Diablo-D3> an invalid transaction would be rejected
1714 2010-12-31 10:44:04 <ThomasV> the first key holder could accept to unlock, then the 2nd refuses
1715 2010-12-31 10:44:27 <Diablo-D3> yes, but then thats just an invalid transaction
1716 2010-12-31 10:44:53 <ThomasV> ok, I don't know what you want to use this for
1717 2010-12-31 10:45:30 <ThomasV> all i'm saying is that if you encrypt something 2 times, the two key holders are not in a symmetric situation
1718 2010-12-31 10:45:42 <fil> I want to do the equivalent of a company bank account, where any 2 directors can sign a cheque
1719 2010-12-31 10:46:11 <ThomasV> without sharing the same key ?
1720 2010-12-31 10:46:21 <Diablo-D3> fil: electronic methods dont use such things
1721 2010-12-31 10:46:43 <Diablo-D3> fil: I dont need someone else around to use the company credit card, nor issue ECH from the company bank account
1722 2010-12-31 10:47:04 <fil> well, once they share the key, one of them can flit off to the caymens with all the cash
1723 2010-12-31 10:47:21 <Diablo-D3> dude, if you dont trust your partners, you're in the wrong company
1724 2010-12-31 10:47:22 <fil> Diablo-D3: some such methods don't
1725 2010-12-31 10:47:25 <Diablo-D3> period
1726 2010-12-31 10:48:47 <fil> I was only using the company as an example, as it happens, but regardless, it's much easier to trust people when you know embezelment is cryptographically impossible
1727 2010-12-31 10:49:26 <ThomasV> that's not people that you trust, then.
1728 2010-12-31 10:50:06 <fil> in fact, I was thinking of holding funds for virtual organisations where the players are almost certianly trustworthy, but are also somewhat paranoid security professionals (i.e. Debian)
1729 2010-12-31 10:51:19 <ThomasV> imo a paranoid person is not trustworthy
1730 2010-12-31 10:51:46 <Diablo-D3> depends what kind of paranoid
1731 2010-12-31 10:51:47 <fil> am I really having this conversation on #bitcoin ?
1732 2010-12-31 10:51:52 <Diablo-D3> Im paranoid, yet very trustworthy.
1733 2010-12-31 10:52:03 <Diablo-D3> if I wasnt paranoid, I wouldnt be supporting bitcoin
1734 2010-12-31 10:52:10 <ThomasV> lol
1735 2010-12-31 10:52:50 <ThomasV> if you are paranoid, why are you revealing things about yourself on a logged channel ?
1736 2010-12-31 10:53:02 <fil> FFS
1737 2010-12-31 10:53:05 <Diablo-D3> because security through obscurity is not security
1738 2010-12-31 10:53:34 <Diablo-D3> fil: anyhow, your request would be better served at a different level
1739 2010-12-31 10:56:23 <fil> Diablo-D3: such as?  The problem I'm attempting to address is that of corporate ownership -- many corporate bodies are not allowed to delegate control of their assets to a single person
1740 2010-12-31 10:56:47 <fil> UK Charities for example
1741 2010-12-31 11:03:02 <lucky> where's bitcoin.conf on OS X ?
1742 2010-12-31 11:19:32 rachael has joined
1743 2010-12-31 11:19:44 nathan7 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1744 2010-12-31 11:32:18 <mizerydearia> Who is in charge of spaola in #bc-news?
1745 2010-12-31 11:33:19 <mizerydearia> ne0futur, are you around?
1746 2010-12-31 11:33:35 <mizerydearia> I suggest monitoring github also, if possible.
1747 2010-12-31 11:33:55 <mizerydearia> I submitted a Bitcoin-related project to github, but didn't notice any mention of it in the channel.
1748 2010-12-31 11:36:43 AntonB has quit (Quit: AntonB)
1749 2010-12-31 11:45:41 <Diablo-D3> fil: Im just saying, locl stuff using osmething other than the client
1750 2010-12-31 11:48:33 darrob has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1751 2010-12-31 11:50:13 darrob has joined
1752 2010-12-31 11:56:49 glassresistor has joined
1753 2010-12-31 11:57:56 <glassresistor> i just upgraded and compiled from the git repo and updated poclm no it all seems to be running a little slower
1754 2010-12-31 11:58:59 <glassresistor> also i've been wondering is there a way to have been coin not use ALL of my gpu cycles i've got 400 stream procs but i cant watch hulu without horrible lag while im mining
1755 2010-12-31 11:59:13 <glassresistor> s/been coin/bitcoin
1756 2010-12-31 11:59:29 AntonB has joined
1757 2010-12-31 12:20:56 <sipa> glassresistor: put your framerate higher
1758 2010-12-31 12:21:38 <sipa> a GPU doesn't have pre-emptive scheduling, you send a job to it, and it performs it until it's done
1759 2010-12-31 12:22:20 <sipa> so if you're mining you're effectively sending a lot of small jobs that last 1/60 of a second (by default), but that may be enough to cause a lag
1760 2010-12-31 12:32:33 TD has joined
1761 2010-12-31 12:36:15 <edcba> the miner should have an option
1762 2010-12-31 12:36:30 <sipa> for?
1763 2010-12-31 12:36:46 <edcba> not taking all GPU power
1764 2010-12-31 12:36:56 <sipa> it can't
1765 2010-12-31 12:37:23 <sipa> it sends a job - it can choose a long or a short one - and the GPU stops doing graphics work for that time
1766 2010-12-31 12:37:52 <sipa> so you only option is to send very short jobs, so they don't hinder other things
1767 2010-12-31 12:40:14 altamic has joined
1768 2010-12-31 12:46:48 <edcba> you can chose when you send jobs
1769 2010-12-31 12:47:30 <sipa> yes you can choose to often send a very small job
1770 2010-12-31 12:48:54 <sipa> that's what m0mchil's and Diablo-D3's miner allow you using the --frames or -f or --fps options
1771 2010-12-31 12:50:44 larsig has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1772 2010-12-31 12:52:55 Diablo-D3 has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1773 2010-12-31 12:55:26 <Keefe> anyone know how to get a text list of the blocks i've generated. the gui client displays it, but i need it in a text file
1774 2010-12-31 12:55:29 <Keefe> ?
1775 2010-12-31 12:56:19 <Keefe> i have gavin's tools, but there doesn't appear to be the function i need
1776 2010-12-31 13:03:16 <Keefe> actually, --wallet-tx might be close, but i need the block numbers
1777 2010-12-31 13:03:19 <glassresistor> sipa: whats the default and option ie -X
1778 2010-12-31 13:04:59 <Keefe> or anything by which i can lookup the details at blockexplorer
1779 2010-12-31 13:05:56 <glassresistor> sipa: yeah i understand it doesn't have a priority que like a cpu, hopefully we will eventually hack a software version but anyways, when i tired to change in afew months ago last time i looked at my mining boxes i could get the framebuffer to change even if i changed the rate
1780 2010-12-31 13:05:58 mtgox has joined
1781 2010-12-31 13:07:39 <sipa> glassresistor: try --frames=1000 or so
1782 2010-12-31 13:12:59 <glassresistor> nope
1783 2010-12-31 13:13:15 <glassresistor> neither changes my hash rate or my lag
1784 2010-12-31 13:13:36 <glassresistor> i running to gpu but only one is running a display
1785 2010-12-31 13:14:12 <glassresistor> and im changing the frames for the miner on vcard running the display
1786 2010-12-31 13:14:58 <glassresistor> python poclbm.py --user=mike --frames=4000 --pass=password -d1
1787 2010-12-31 13:16:13 <Keefe> nvm, i figured out a way to get a suitable list. i modified gavin's util.py to print the full hex instead of shortened. that gets me block hashes that i can use to lookup at blockexplorer
1788 2010-12-31 13:16:14 <glassresistor> and i've tuned down my cpu while im testing just to make sure thats not the problem
1789 2010-12-31 13:22:15 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1790 2010-12-31 13:22:41 larsig has joined
1791 2010-12-31 13:47:50 ebel has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1792 2010-12-31 13:53:01 altamic has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1793 2010-12-31 14:06:17 Zarutian has joined
1794 2010-12-31 14:26:12 larsig has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
1795 2010-12-31 14:26:33 <mizerydearia> What do you think the future holds for Bitcoin?
1796 2010-12-31 14:35:00 <helmut> depends on whether you try it
1797 2010-12-31 14:35:50 <cosurgi> ArtForz: nonce is a 32bit variable. Can you tell me why jgrazik i is scanning only 24 bits? From 1 to 0xffffff, instead of 0xffffffff ?
1798 2010-12-31 14:36:47 duck1123 has joined
1799 2010-12-31 14:37:35 <cosurgi> ArtForz: from what I see, jgrazik's miner omits '1' and all numbers from 16777216 to 4294967295. Why?
1800 2010-12-31 14:43:22 <slush> cosurgi: I'm not sure, but maybe for faster getwork update?
1801 2010-12-31 14:43:59 acous has joined
1802 2010-12-31 14:44:34 <cosurgi> yes. Maybe because scanning 2^32 would take much longer, so you have a feeling of 'speed' when you see that another 2^24 have been analyzed
1803 2010-12-31 14:45:17 <cosurgi> would take about 255 time longer...
1804 2010-12-31 14:45:54 <cosurgi> instead of 10 seconds, you would wait 2550 seconds = 42.5 minutes
1805 2010-12-31 14:48:44 <slush> cosurgi: 10 seconds per one getwork is so-so. Crunching task for longer time makes overhead with computing hashes on invalid block
1806 2010-12-31 14:50:00 <cosurgi> I see. So better get new work after 10 seconds, than to beat the dead horse.
1807 2010-12-31 14:50:46 <cosurgi> Hmm... does Diablo's GPU miner scan all 2^32 ?
1808 2010-12-31 14:51:21 jyaworski has joined
1809 2010-12-31 14:58:50 Samedhi has joined
1810 2010-12-31 14:58:59 paul0 has joined
1811 2010-12-31 15:01:48 <cosurgi> slush: how do you think, what is the maximum affordable delay? Can it be more than 10 seconds ?
1812 2010-12-31 15:02:10 * cosurgi wonders how many bits he could afford to scan
1813 2010-12-31 15:02:41 <xelister> cosurgi: it probably is not a problem, if you switch to scan other workspace after just 2^24
1814 2010-12-31 15:04:35 larsivi has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1815 2010-12-31 15:05:46 <slush> cosurgi: Diablo's and m0mchil's are working on job for 5 second. GPUs are much faster than CPUs, so they solve all 2^32 hashes in job
1816 2010-12-31 15:10:43 <cosurgi> hmm.. My GPU says: 213501 khash/sec, so that is 213501000 hashes/sec, given that thare are 4294967295 all possible hashes it takes: 4294967296/213501000 = 20 sec to slove all 32 bits
1817 2010-12-31 15:11:34 <cosurgi> if you say, that it gets new work every 5 seconds, then it scans 30 bits.
1818 2010-12-31 15:12:01 <slush> cosurgi: I'm not sure there is exact 5sec job timeout
1819 2010-12-31 15:13:23 <cosurgi> ok... perhaps it scans all 32 bits. Because average delay between submitted blocks to your pool is 20 seconds.
1820 2010-12-31 15:13:28 nathan7 has joined
1821 2010-12-31 15:13:43 <cosurgi> my GPU on average finds one block every 20 seconds.
1822 2010-12-31 15:14:01 <nathan7> Whee!
1823 2010-12-31 15:14:08 <nathan7> I like, have internet :>
1824 2010-12-31 15:14:26 <xelister> cosurgi: lol?
1825 2010-12-31 15:14:29 <xelister> cosurgi: on testnet?
1826 2010-12-31 15:14:36 ByteCoin has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1827 2010-12-31 15:15:00 <cosurgi> xelister: no, in slush's pooled mining, where difficulty is fixed at 32 zero-ed bits
1828 2010-12-31 15:15:17 <xelister> and what for is that mining done?
1829 2010-12-31 15:15:26 <xelister> are you trying to generate a normal bitcoin?
1830 2010-12-31 15:15:39 <cosurgi> for sharing the prize - a normal bitcoin.
1831 2010-12-31 15:15:40 <cosurgi> yes.
1832 2010-12-31 15:16:03 <cosurgi> eventually somebody will by accident discover a block of higher difficulty, and the prize is divided between all participants.
1833 2010-12-31 15:16:25 <cosurgi> I have found two real blocks, already. And got 2 BTC for each of them, instead of 50 BTC.
1834 2010-12-31 15:16:48 <cosurgi> But, also, I am getting 1 BTC every two hours, so I have a steady income.
1835 2010-12-31 15:16:58 <xelister> with what are you mining? for how long to get this 2*2 BTC?
1836 2010-12-31 15:17:16 <cosurgi> Diablo's GPU miner.
1837 2010-12-31 15:20:10 <edcba> why don't you just run a regular node ?
1838 2010-12-31 15:20:26 <cosurgi> because I like steady income.
1839 2010-12-31 15:21:10 <nanotube> cosurgi: what's your hash rate
1840 2010-12-31 15:21:11 <edcba> and how does the pool verify you are being honest ?
1841 2010-12-31 15:21:24 <nanotube> edcba: read the wiki page about how the pool works.
1842 2010-12-31 15:21:31 <nanotube> ;;bc,wiki pooled mining
1843 2010-12-31 15:21:31 <gribble> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Pooled_Mining | Dec 28, 2010 ... Pooled mining is an approach where multiple generating clients contribute to the generation of a block, and then split the block reward ...
1844 2010-12-31 15:21:49 <nanotube> also a similar description on the ,,pool website
1845 2010-12-31 15:21:50 <gribble> No fancy GPU farm, and don't want to wait for months for a block gen? Join the mining pool! http://mining.bitcoin.cz/
1846 2010-12-31 15:22:19 <xelister> selling service: access to very good freenet node (2000 GB store, filled, 24/24, 98% uptime, 300 KiB updown avg, 1000 KiB limit), with access to comamnd to get given file for you (and then give it say over ssh). Seems interesting? what do you think guys?
1847 2010-12-31 15:22:31 <xelister> just 10 BTC per month for example
1848 2010-12-31 15:24:31 <edcba> hmm the two pooled miner examples are not really the best
1849 2010-12-31 15:24:33 <cosurgi> nanotube: 213 Mh/s
1850 2010-12-31 15:24:59 <nanotube> cosurgi: not too shabby. :)
1851 2010-12-31 15:27:38 <nanotube> edcba: how so? feel free to edit wiki btw ;)
1852 2010-12-31 15:30:54 annodomini has joined
1853 2010-12-31 15:30:54 annodomini has quit (Changing host)
1854 2010-12-31 15:30:54 annodomini has joined
1855 2010-12-31 15:35:42 larsivi has joined
1856 2010-12-31 15:37:04 <lucky> dang. my stupid nvidia GPU only gives me 6 mhash
1857 2010-12-31 15:37:15 <sipa> not so lucky
1858 2010-12-31 15:37:40 <lucky> my CPU actually gives me more
1859 2010-12-31 15:37:43 <lucky> heh
1860 2010-12-31 15:37:48 <sipa> really :o
1861 2010-12-31 15:38:18 <lucky> yeah about 1500 per thread, 8 threads
1862 2010-12-31 15:38:25 <lucky> quadcore hyperthreaded
1863 2010-12-31 15:42:50 <lfm> lucky is that with 4way?
1864 2010-12-31 15:42:57 <lucky> yea
1865 2010-12-31 15:43:47 <lucky> i'm finding the minerd segmentation faults fairly often though.
1866 2010-12-31 15:44:03 <lfm> try the 4way in bitcoin
1867 2010-12-31 15:44:52 <lucky> i pool
1868 2010-12-31 15:45:00 <lfm> oh too bad
1869 2010-12-31 15:46:42 altamic has joined
1870 2010-12-31 15:50:02 <omglolbbq1> i wish everybody a pre-happy new bitcoin year!
1871 2010-12-31 15:50:28 <xelister> omglolbbq1:  ;)
1872 2010-12-31 15:50:54 <sipa> i wish everybody a happy bitcoin pre-(new year)
1873 2010-12-31 15:50:58 <Keefe> does the pool miner have all the optimizations from the stock client?
1874 2010-12-31 15:50:59 <Kiba> cheers to the collective bitcoin entrepeneural effort!
1875 2010-12-31 15:51:13 <sipa> Keefe: it's the same
1876 2010-12-31 15:51:36 <sipa> Keefe: oh, compared to the miner in the bitcoin client itself?
1877 2010-12-31 15:51:38 <sipa> not sure
1878 2010-12-31 15:51:50 <Keefe> in other words, is the pool miner as good as it gets on all cpus?
1879 2010-12-31 15:52:11 * Kiba have 3 CPU running mining for bitcoin
1880 2010-12-31 15:56:33 <Kiba> Government big. Corporations bigger. Government small. Corporations smaller.
1881 2010-12-31 15:57:12 <Kiba> No government. No regulatory game. Corporation are entirely different creatures altogether
1882 2010-12-31 16:04:50 <lucky> hm, i guess that answers that back of the mind question "is my 2.2 GHz processor really faster than my old 2.4 GHz P4?" P$ = 600 khash, core i7 = 9000 khash aggregate
1883 2010-12-31 16:10:37 altamic has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1884 2010-12-31 16:10:48 ianm_ has left ()
1885 2010-12-31 16:12:08 altamic has joined
1886 2010-12-31 16:12:46 larsivi has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1887 2010-12-31 16:29:07 <Kiba> ;;bc,difficulty
1888 2010-12-31 16:29:08 <gribble> Error: "bc,difficulty" is not a valid command.
1889 2010-12-31 16:29:14 <Kiba> ;;bc,estimate
1890 2010-12-31 16:29:15 <gribble> 15933.89511955
1891 2010-12-31 16:29:26 <Kiba> ;;bc,nextestimate
1892 2010-12-31 16:29:27 <gribble> Error: "bc,nextestimate" is not a valid command.
1893 2010-12-31 16:29:34 <sipa> ;;bc,target
1894 2010-12-31 16:29:34 <gribble> Error: "bc,target" is not a valid command.
1895 2010-12-31 16:29:39 <sipa> ;;bc,currenttarget
1896 2010-12-31 16:29:39 <gribble> Error: "bc,currenttarget" is not a valid command.
1897 2010-12-31 16:29:42 <sipa> ;;help
1898 2010-12-31 16:29:43 <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/
1899 2010-12-31 16:29:46 <sipa> ;;bc,help
1900 2010-12-31 16:29:46 <Kiba> ;;bc,nexttarget
1901 2010-12-31 16:29:46 <gribble> Alias bc,bcm, Alias bc,blocks, Alias bc,btcex, Alias bc,calc, Alias bc,diff, Alias bc,estimate, Alias bc,help, Alias bc,hextarget, Alias bc,markets, Alias bc,mtgox, Alias bc,nexttarget, Alias bc,poolstats, Alias bc,stats, Alias bc,timetonext, Alias bc,totalbc, and Alias bc,wiki
1902 2010-12-31 16:29:47 <gribble> 100799
1903 2010-12-31 16:29:57 <sipa> ;;bc,diff
1904 2010-12-31 16:29:57 <Kiba> 100799?
1905 2010-12-31 16:29:58 <gribble> 14484.16236123
1906 2010-12-31 16:30:03 <Kiba> seesh!
1907 2010-12-31 16:30:07 <sipa> Keefe: at block 100799
1908 2010-12-31 16:31:12 <lfm> ;;bc,stats
1909 2010-12-31 16:31:14 <gribble> Current Blocks: 100354 | Current Difficulty: 14484.16236123 | Next Difficulty At Block: 100799 | Next Difficulty In: 445 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 2 days, 18 hours, 7 minutes, and 55 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 15942.82634357
1910 2010-12-31 16:32:48 altamic_ has joined
1911 2010-12-31 16:33:04 altamic has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1912 2010-12-31 16:33:04 altamic_ is now known as altamic
1913 2010-12-31 16:57:16 grondilu has joined
1914 2010-12-31 16:58:13 <nanotube> mm, not over 16k next difficulty yet...
1915 2010-12-31 17:00:50 <Kiba> just about
1916 2010-12-31 17:05:16 teralaser has joined
1917 2010-12-31 17:06:03 Samedhi_ has joined
1918 2010-12-31 17:06:04 Samedhi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1919 2010-12-31 17:06:04 Samedhi_ is now known as Samedhi
1920 2010-12-31 17:13:10 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
1921 2010-12-31 17:15:12 <brocktice> bc,calc 1700
1922 2010-12-31 17:15:22 <brocktice> ;;bc,calc 1700
1923 2010-12-31 17:15:23 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 1700 Khps, given current difficulty of 14484.16236123 , is 1 year, 8 weeks, 2 days, 12 hours, 52 minutes, and 11 seconds
1924 2010-12-31 17:15:28 <brocktice> ;;bc,calc 1700000
1925 2010-12-31 17:15:29 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 1700000 Khps, given current difficulty of 14484.16236123 , is 10 hours, 9 minutes, and 53 seconds
1926 2010-12-31 17:15:39 <brocktice> ;;bc,calc
1927 2010-12-31 17:15:40 <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)]]".
1928 2010-12-31 17:24:45 AntonB has quit (Quit: AntonB)
1929 2010-12-31 17:24:55 Samedhi has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1930 2010-12-31 17:33:31 altamic has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1931 2010-12-31 17:47:25 <glassresistor> sipa: so --frame doesn't seem to help it neither changes my hash rate or fixes my lag
1932 2010-12-31 17:47:55 paul0 has quit (Quit: paul0)
1933 2010-12-31 17:50:34 <newsham> ;;bc,calc `uptime`
1934 2010-12-31 17:50:35 <gribble> Error: 'uptime' is not a defined function.
1935 2010-12-31 17:51:24 <newsham> ;;bc,calc 123|ls
1936 2010-12-31 17:51:24 <gribble> Error: 'ls' is not a defined function.
1937 2010-12-31 17:52:07 <sipa> what do you want to do?
1938 2010-12-31 17:52:14 <newsham> is that tcl?
1939 2010-12-31 17:53:11 <glassresistor> sipa: be able to watch a video on a system that im mining on
1940 2010-12-31 17:53:22 Abhish has joined
1941 2010-12-31 17:53:34 <sipa> glassresistor: that question was not for you
1942 2010-12-31 17:53:41 <sipa> glassresistor: sorry, no idea anymore
1943 2010-12-31 17:53:43 <newsham> glass: renice?
1944 2010-12-31 17:53:51 <lucky> hmm, i'm looking at a thread http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=484.60 full of basically people saying they had a successful transaction w/ a person, so.
1945 2010-12-31 17:53:52 <bitbot> List of honest traders.
1946 2010-12-31 17:53:53 <sipa> won't help much i thin
1947 2010-12-31 17:54:00 <lucky> bitcoin + web of trust? has anyone thought / proposed that before?
1948 2010-12-31 17:54:17 <glassresistor> newsham: gpu
1949 2010-12-31 17:54:21 <newsham> I dont like "web of trust" that much.. trust is not transitive.
1950 2010-12-31 17:54:34 <newsham> i dont trust the guy someone I trust trusts.
1951 2010-12-31 17:55:01 <glassresistor> newsham: well said, but i might trust them a little
1952 2010-12-31 17:55:15 <lucky> indeed, i think it should be configurable in your software though.
1953 2010-12-31 17:55:25 <Kiba> reputation in something does not translate to everything
1954 2010-12-31 17:55:33 <newsham> lucky: perhaps, though sometimes i might want to antitrust everyone soemone trusts.
1955 2010-12-31 17:55:36 <lucky> ie, i have certain acquaintances i think have good judgement, and would be willing to give a certain weight to them.
1956 2010-12-31 18:01:54 grondilu has quit (Quit: leaving)
1957 2010-12-31 18:06:54 johndrinkwater has joined
1958 2010-12-31 18:27:40 Samedhi has joined
1959 2010-12-31 18:31:11 <nanotube> lucky: see trust.bitcoin-otc.com
1960 2010-12-31 18:31:22 <nanotube> a rough first implementation for the otc channel. :)
1961 2010-12-31 18:31:35 <nanotube> newsham: gribble is a supybot. it's python.
1962 2010-12-31 18:33:58 Abhish has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1963 2010-12-31 18:35:59 <mizerydearia> Would anyone like to review this and let me know if it is useful possibly?  http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=2546.0
1964 2010-12-31 18:36:02 <bitbot> Bitcoin Control Panel
1965 2010-12-31 18:37:01 AntonB has joined
1966 2010-12-31 18:52:35 larsig has joined
1967 2010-12-31 18:53:32 <lucky> :) hm i find bitcoin mining to be quite the efficient little space heater.
1968 2010-12-31 18:56:50 <nanotube> lucky: haha
1969 2010-12-31 18:59:01 davout has joined
1970 2010-12-31 18:59:30 <davout> hi
1971 2010-12-31 19:02:48 <lucky> hi
1972 2010-12-31 19:12:11 Diablo-D3 has joined
1973 2010-12-31 19:12:19 Orbixx has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1974 2010-12-31 19:19:24 Samedhi has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1975 2010-12-31 19:21:16 Orbixx has joined
1976 2010-12-31 19:22:58 davout has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1977 2010-12-31 19:33:02 Samedhi has joined
1978 2010-12-31 19:34:26 RazielZ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1979 2010-12-31 19:37:37 * nathan7 hops around
1980 2010-12-31 19:38:01 nathan7 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1981 2010-12-31 19:38:14 jgarzik has joined
1982 2010-12-31 19:44:11 RazielZ has joined
1983 2010-12-31 19:45:38 larsig has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1984 2010-12-31 19:46:05 nathan7 has joined
1985 2010-12-31 20:03:31 davout has joined
1986 2010-12-31 20:07:53 AntonB has left ()
1987 2010-12-31 20:12:05 <davout> jgarzik, you around ?
1988 2010-12-31 20:17:45 <mizerydearia> What api method calls are used to optimally reproduce the same data that appears in Bitcoin gui "All Transactions" view?
1989 2010-12-31 20:18:03 <Diablo-D3> there isnt one
1990 2010-12-31 20:18:20 <mizerydearia> Not, one, it will require multiple calls.
1991 2010-12-31 20:18:25 <Diablo-D3> listtransactions "" does not include half baked generated coins
1992 2010-12-31 20:18:36 <mizerydearia> hmm
1993 2010-12-31 20:18:38 <Diablo-D3> other than that, it includes everything else
1994 2010-12-31 20:19:32 davout has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
1995 2010-12-31 20:33:19 TheAncientGoat has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1996 2010-12-31 20:33:48 davout has joined
1997 2010-12-31 20:56:18 grondilu has joined
1998 2010-12-31 21:08:48 darrob has quit (Disconnected by services)
1999 2010-12-31 21:08:56 darrob has joined
2000 2010-12-31 21:16:21 genjix has joined
2001 2010-12-31 21:16:40 <genjix> great. only irc and vim work on my computer.
2002 2010-12-31 21:16:53 <genjix> no X heh
2003 2010-12-31 21:17:57 <genjix> anyone know how to make the tty show more lines? ... i have no browser to check.
2004 2010-12-31 21:18:12 <xelister> wadup Diablo-D3
2005 2010-12-31 21:18:18 <xelister> Diablo-D3: happy upcomming 2011 too \o
2006 2010-12-31 21:18:40 <genjix> oh is it 2011?
2007 2010-12-31 21:20:31 Samedhi has quit (Quit: Samedhi)
2008 2010-12-31 21:23:14 <jgarzik> davout: around
2009 2010-12-31 21:23:21 jgarzik has quit (Changing host)
2010 2010-12-31 21:23:21 jgarzik has joined
2011 2010-12-31 21:25:35 AAA_awright_ is now known as AAA_awright
2012 2010-12-31 21:26:01 <davout> yep
2013 2010-12-31 21:38:03 * Kiba drove his new car home
2014 2010-12-31 21:38:11 <Kiba> Toyota Camry 1999
2015 2010-12-31 21:39:06 <Kiba> it have a CD drive
2016 2010-12-31 21:39:14 <Kiba> but still have tape drive
2017 2010-12-31 21:39:16 <Kiba> lol
2018 2010-12-31 21:40:46 <teralaser> how much bitcoin did it cost?
2019 2010-12-31 21:42:08 <Kiba> 5,250 USD
2020 2010-12-31 21:42:54 <Kiba> 17500 BTC
2021 2010-12-31 21:43:08 <Kiba> that what it would cost me in bitcoin
2022 2010-12-31 21:43:38 <Kiba> in contrast
2023 2010-12-31 21:44:11 <Kiba> with the bitcoin movie bounty worth 4086.615 USD
2024 2010-12-31 21:44:15 <grondilu> I wish I had a car to sell, so that I'd be the first ever guy who sells a car for bitcoins.
2025 2010-12-31 21:44:53 genjix has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2026 2010-12-31 21:45:00 <rapacity> selling liver for bitcoins
2027 2010-12-31 21:45:34 <Kiba> you mean pig liver?
2028 2010-12-31 21:46:48 Slix` has joined
2029 2010-12-31 21:47:12 grondilu has left ()
2030 2010-12-31 21:49:06 <davout> i'd buy a motorbike for bitcoins
2031 2010-12-31 21:49:24 <Kiba> a self driving motorbike!
2032 2010-12-31 21:49:35 <davout> if someone has a suzuki for sale... :)
2033 2010-12-31 21:49:45 <davout> i'll take kawasaki too
2034 2010-12-31 21:50:01 <davout> svs 650 or z750
2035 2010-12-31 21:50:20 <davout> we need some place to take requests of people buying stuff for btc
2036 2010-12-31 21:52:45 <Kiba> so we see a euro to bitcoin exchange...
2037 2010-12-31 21:52:46 <Kiba> hmm
2038 2010-12-31 21:57:23 <nathan7> There's a bitcoin ebay thing
2039 2010-12-31 21:57:31 <nathan7> frogbay or something
2040 2010-12-31 21:57:36 annodomini has quit (Quit: annodomini)
2041 2010-12-31 21:57:47 <nathan7> something with a frog or a toad
2042 2010-12-31 22:04:01 <Kiba> biddingpond.com
2043 2010-12-31 22:06:40 <davout> you can sell but afaik you can't request stuff
2044 2010-12-31 22:10:28 * nathan7 pats Kiba 
2045 2010-12-31 22:11:47 * jgarzik wants to sell a car on ebay, with starting price $1.00.  that would be fun to watch it get bid up.
2046 2010-12-31 22:35:55 Xanie has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
2047 2010-12-31 22:36:15 Samedhi has joined
2048 2010-12-31 22:39:52 Xanie has joined
2049 2010-12-31 22:48:27 <mndrix> my brother sold a $13,600 video game on eBay with a $1 starting bid: http://blog.videogamepricecharts.com/2010/01/how-i-sold-nintendo-world-championships.html
2050 2010-12-31 22:51:40 devon_hillard has joined
2051 2010-12-31 22:53:05 <Kiba> really? You have a brother?
2052 2010-12-31 23:01:00 <lfm> im sure the moderators will see it soon enuf, just ignore it+http://blog.videogamepricecharts.com/2010/01/how-i-sold-nintendo-world-champio
2053 2010-12-31 23:01:08 kermit has joined
2054 2010-12-31 23:01:19 <lfm> ooops sorry, wrong button
2055 2010-12-31 23:06:38 <nathan7> Hoppy new year and stuff, GMT+1-y world
2056 2010-12-31 23:07:22 ciuciu has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2057 2010-12-31 23:14:31 RazielZ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2058 2010-12-31 23:18:07 <davout> happy new year from gmt+1 :)
2059 2010-12-31 23:22:30 <EvanR> oh
2060 2010-12-31 23:22:38 <EvanR> youre on the other side?
2061 2010-12-31 23:27:53 * nathan7 pats davout 
2062 2010-12-31 23:50:05 osmosis has joined
2063 2010-12-31 23:51:43 ThomasV has joined
2064 2010-12-31 23:52:15 ThomasV has quit (Client Quit)
2065 2010-12-31 23:53:52 <davout> :)