1 2011-01-03 00:00:00 <Diablo-D3> tcatm: more than m0's
2 2011-01-03 00:00:09 <lucky> I'm trying to develop a web thing for bitcoin commerce, and I'm trying to figure out how to sanely (in a data model sense) handle letting my app know about new transactions
3 2011-01-03 00:00:24 <lucky> short of re-importing the entire transaction history every ten minutes ... because i can foresee certain scaling issues with that ;p
4 2011-01-03 00:00:49 rapacity has joined
5 2011-01-03 00:01:02 <tcatm> Diablo-D3: give me an accurate number :P
6 2011-01-03 00:01:28 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|tcatm: I can give you
7 2011-01-03 00:01:31 <Diablo-D3> well, for stock speeds, probably around 314
8 2011-01-03 00:01:40 <Diablo-D3> assuming -w 64
9 2011-01-03 00:02:08 <tcatm> okay, I'll stay with my hacked poclbm
10 2011-01-03 00:02:28 <lucky> hm i couldnt get poclbm to work
11 2011-01-03 00:02:36 <Diablo-D3> tcatm: how fast is yours?
12 2011-01-03 00:02:44 <tcatm> 325.83
13 2011-01-03 00:02:52 <Diablo-D3> then Ill probably get around 330
14 2011-01-03 00:03:07 <tcatm> xelister|DrUNK: how fast is yours?
15 2011-01-03 00:03:19 <Diablo-D3> tcatm: also, you've failed to detail what hacks you've made
16 2011-01-03 00:03:22 <tcatm> Diablo-D3: only if I port my kernel to your miner
17 2011-01-03 00:03:25 <Diablo-D3> most likely, you broke the miner.
18 2011-01-03 00:03:32 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|tcatm: I expect 5870 to be 320M * 0.98
19 2011-01-03 00:03:35 <Diablo-D3> and you've been producing crap
20 2011-01-03 00:03:47 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|and then calculate o.c., linearly
21 2011-01-03 00:03:48 <slush> wtf, 10ghash on pool
22 2011-01-03 00:04:08 <Keefe> nice
23 2011-01-03 00:04:09 <tcatm> slush: that's me :P
24 2011-01-03 00:04:14 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|tcatm: your stock 5870 is 325M ?
25 2011-01-03 00:04:23 <slush> tcatm: how much 5970?
26 2011-01-03 00:04:35 <tcatm> xelister|DrUNK: yep
27 2011-01-03 00:04:44 <Diablo-D3> tcatm: what version of cat and sdk are you on?
28 2011-01-03 00:04:46 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|slush: 5970 theoretically is up to 545M, practically around 530M
29 2011-01-03 00:04:46 <tcatm> slush: 3x 5870, 4x 5970
30 2011-01-03 00:05:05 <slush> tcatm: nice
31 2011-01-03 00:05:08 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|tcatm: wow, that is /above/ the theoretical perfect maximum speed. strange
32 2011-01-03 00:05:11 <tcatm> Diablo-D3: can't tell you, I mixed files from 2.2 and 2.1
33 2011-01-03 00:05:12 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
34 2011-01-03 00:05:27 <Diablo-D3> tcatm: thats probably a very bad idea
35 2011-01-03 00:05:37 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|tcatm: you are doing something wrong, speed from cores clock * number of cores is not even as big. so not possible ;)
36 2011-01-03 00:05:39 <tcatm> xelister|DrUNK: theoretical max. is 330.5 IIRC
37 2011-01-03 00:05:41 <Diablo-D3> tcatm: 2.2 doesnt produce better compiled files.
38 2011-01-03 00:05:55 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|hm ok, perhaps I didnt account enough for changes in architecture
39 2011-01-03 00:05:57 <Diablo-D3> tcatm: and my miner specifically avoids the 2.2/2.3 cpu use bug
40 2011-01-03 00:06:07 <Keefe> Art's would do 326 on stock 5870, last i heard
41 2011-01-03 00:06:20 <Diablo-D3> art's is doing weird shit, however
42 2011-01-03 00:06:35 <marioxcc> jgarzik: I have just rebased my changes to v0.5 (latest one i think)
43 2011-01-03 00:06:35 <slush> Firstly I though it is some kind of attack, but hashes are really unique :)
44 2011-01-03 00:06:36 <marioxcc> :)
45 2011-01-03 00:06:38 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|art just admited bein pedo :o </usa joke>
46 2011-01-03 00:06:39 <Keefe> maybe tcatm is doing the same stuff
47 2011-01-03 00:06:48 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|*and a terrorist
48 2011-01-03 00:06:52 <tcatm> btw, my miner is working crrectly as slushs pool accepts all its blocks
49 2011-01-03 00:07:48 * marioxcc request a pull from jgarzik: http://200.56.150.72:8080/software/cpuminer.git/
50 2011-01-03 00:09:03 * sipa just got two shares rejected by slush's pool
51 2011-01-03 00:09:28 <marioxcc> oh, why did they got rejected?
52 2011-01-03 00:09:31 <sipa> ah, one accepted
53 2011-01-03 00:09:43 <slush> well, because server is a little bit overloaded right now ;)
54 2011-01-03 00:10:01 <Sami345> slush, who the hell is working so hard
55 2011-01-03 00:10:09 <sipa> slush: maybe you could increase the difficulty for for fast nodes?
56 2011-01-03 00:10:15 <sipa> so you have less shares to process?
57 2011-01-03 00:10:16 <slush> My plan was to move pool to standalone server when 10ghash will come
58 2011-01-03 00:10:32 <slush> sipa: It is not only about submitting shares, it is also about getwork
59 2011-01-03 00:10:43 <sipa> ah, of course
60 2011-01-03 00:10:45 <slush> Pool itself is ok, but server is currently doing backups and so
61 2011-01-03 00:10:52 <tcatm> slush: cache getwork and only update ntime?
62 2011-01-03 00:10:54 <slush> Those things will be off on standalone server
63 2011-01-03 00:10:57 <Diablo-D3> tcatm: btw, if you're using a hacked 2.2+2.1 thing, who knows how fast mine will be
64 2011-01-03 00:11:03 <Diablo-D3> tcatm: obviously it'll be faster than yours
65 2011-01-03 00:11:10 <Diablo-D3> but no one tested with such a broken setup
66 2011-01-03 00:11:10 <sipa> Diablo-D3: why are you so sure?
67 2011-01-03 00:11:20 <Diablo-D3> sipa: because hes still using m0's
68 2011-01-03 00:11:31 <tcatm> Diablo-D3: does your code check for bitalign?
69 2011-01-03 00:11:37 <Diablo-D3> tcatm: yes.
70 2011-01-03 00:11:41 * marioxcc thinks that's why a decnetralized pool is neccesary
71 2011-01-03 00:11:46 <tcatm> then you're doing the wrong checks
72 2011-01-03 00:12:01 <sipa> Diablo-D3: and without knowing what changes tcatm did, you know for sure yours is faster?
73 2011-01-03 00:12:22 <Diablo-D3> tcatm: I check if the extension is available.
74 2011-01-03 00:12:29 <tcatm> yep
75 2011-01-03 00:12:33 <Sami345> slush, did someone connect super computer to your pool?
76 2011-01-03 00:12:34 <Diablo-D3> thats the correct way.
77 2011-01-03 00:12:35 <tcatm> and then adds a #define, right?
78 2011-01-03 00:12:42 <slush> Sami345: yep, tcatm
79 2011-01-03 00:12:43 <afed> i'm seeing invalid or stale a little more often
80 2011-01-03 00:13:19 <Diablo-D3> tcatm: yes
81 2011-01-03 00:13:54 <afed> tcatm: what are the specs of your farm?
82 2011-01-03 00:13:58 <lucky> so any suggestions on how to extract "most recent transactions" out of the bitcoind into a web app database without polling / iterating through the entire output (which is justgoing to get larger every time) ?
83 2011-01-03 00:14:07 <Sami345> Excepted reward: 0.727532097004
84 2011-01-03 00:14:14 <Sami345> find a block fast :D
85 2011-01-03 00:14:18 Slix` has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
86 2011-01-03 00:14:22 <Diablo-D3> tcatm: I mean, if your shit really is going that much faster, then submit a patch
87 2011-01-03 00:15:29 <Sami345> it gave invalid or stale ffor two blocks :(
88 2011-01-03 00:15:53 T_X has joined
89 2011-01-03 00:15:53 T_X has quit (Changing host)
90 2011-01-03 00:15:53 T_X has joined
91 2011-01-03 00:16:33 <Sami345> tcatm, performance is going down
92 2011-01-03 00:16:51 <slush> afed: server was little busy now. It is serving many web sites and currently also performing nightly backups
93 2011-01-03 00:16:54 <marioxcc> slush: what do "Max jobs" means?
94 2011-01-03 00:17:16 purpleposeidon has joined
95 2011-01-03 00:17:20 <Diablo-D3> marioxcc: number of concurrent jobs your miner can use
96 2011-01-03 00:17:22 <slush> afed: I will move pool to standalone server without other load
97 2011-01-03 00:17:38 <afed> slush: i'll send you some coins
98 2011-01-03 00:17:46 <nanotube> ;;bc,poolstats
99 2011-01-03 00:17:47 <gribble> {"active_workers": 177, "hashes_ps": 8562808092, "shares": 3788, "round_started": "2011-01-02 23:43:10"}
100 2011-01-03 00:17:49 <slush> afed: thx :)
101 2011-01-03 00:18:20 <marioxcc> Diablo-D3: what do they mean "jobs"?
102 2011-01-03 00:18:25 <marioxcc> *by "jobs"
103 2011-01-03 00:18:26 <slush> afed: I introduce automatic donations soon; hope it will help me running pool also for huge speeds :)
104 2011-01-03 00:18:44 <sipa> slush: how much does the standalone server cost you?
105 2011-01-03 00:18:54 <slush> sipa: It is VPS, linode.com
106 2011-01-03 00:18:59 <Diablo-D3> marioxcc: getworks.
107 2011-01-03 00:19:14 <marioxcc> Diablo-D3: ok
108 2011-01-03 00:19:22 <slush> sipa: linode is great service, but peaks from other server load make troubles
109 2011-01-03 00:19:28 <marioxcc> slush: aren't you interested in decentralizing your pool?
110 2011-01-03 00:19:38 <marioxcc> you won't have to buy rent hosting
111 2011-01-03 00:19:49 <slush> marioxcc: I still don't know how to solve this safely and fast
112 2011-01-03 00:20:01 <sipa> marioxcc and i are working on an idea
113 2011-01-03 00:20:24 <marioxcc> yes, we alredy have a secure system
114 2011-01-03 00:20:24 <sipa> but i don't think you can compare it
115 2011-01-03 00:20:40 <marioxcc> the vandalism problem still remains (just as with your current implementation)
116 2011-01-03 00:21:06 <sipa> you would lose control, nice web-interface, ability to just use a normal miner, ...
117 2011-01-03 00:21:15 <sipa> so it's something very different
118 2011-01-03 00:21:20 <marioxcc> i don't think so
119 2011-01-03 00:21:29 <marioxcc> I could make a web interface if need
120 2011-01-03 00:21:33 <marioxcc> just like the exisitng one
121 2011-01-03 00:21:36 <marioxcc> but you connect to localhost
122 2011-01-03 00:21:39 <afed> there's a long road ahead
123 2011-01-03 00:21:58 <slush> we will see
124 2011-01-03 00:22:08 <lucky> No suggestions :(
125 2011-01-03 00:22:10 <marioxcc> what's true is you would have to install the pool client
126 2011-01-03 00:22:10 <lucky> ? anyone
127 2011-01-03 00:22:12 <afed> i think gpu mining for a pool is the only practical way to do it
128 2011-01-03 00:22:19 <marioxcc> lucky: suggestions for wath?
129 2011-01-03 00:22:20 <afed> cpu mining is a waste of electricity
130 2011-01-03 00:22:44 <lucky> suggestions on how to extract "most recent transactions" out of the bitcoind into a web app database without polling / iterating through the entire output (which is justgoing to get larger every time) ?
131 2011-01-03 00:22:56 <marioxcc> afed: well, i think you have a better eficiency on server CPUs
132 2011-01-03 00:22:57 <lucky> i really can't think of a good way to do it.
133 2011-01-03 00:23:18 <marioxcc> lucky: improove the API
134 2011-01-03 00:23:20 <afed> marioxcc: if they're powered on and otherwise idle
135 2011-01-03 00:23:24 <marioxcc> your changes would pretty sure, be welcomed
136 2011-01-03 00:23:30 <lucky> marioxcc, that's far beyond me, unfortunately.
137 2011-01-03 00:23:34 <afed> marioxcc: but there is more than one reason not to do that
138 2011-01-03 00:23:52 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Quitte)
139 2011-01-03 00:23:54 <marioxcc> afed: there is one reason for not to use GPU miners
140 2011-01-03 00:24:02 <marioxcc> they all require proprietay controller for what i undestand
141 2011-01-03 00:24:19 <Sami345> is difficulty in Bitcoin network == security?
142 2011-01-03 00:24:20 <marioxcc> no use who values his computer freedom enough will install propreitary software for profit
143 2011-01-03 00:24:27 <sipa> Sami345: no
144 2011-01-03 00:24:30 <marioxcc> Sami345: no
145 2011-01-03 00:24:32 <lucky> I wonder what the cpuminer output would look like on a T2 heh.
146 2011-01-03 00:24:42 <marioxcc> T2?
147 2011-01-03 00:24:44 <sipa> Sami345: it's just a way to keep the block generation rate at 1/10min
148 2011-01-03 00:24:52 <lucky> marioxcc, Sparc T2
149 2011-01-03 00:24:56 <afed> marioxcc: there is idealism and there is pragmatism
150 2011-01-03 00:25:17 <marioxcc> afed: there is pragmatic idealism too
151 2011-01-03 00:25:21 <afed> marioxcc: i like and use Free software, but i also use a ton of proprietary hardware and software
152 2011-01-03 00:25:39 <marioxcc> well, then you don't value your freedom enough to my crietaria
153 2011-01-03 00:25:41 <nanotube> Sami345: sipa: well, see ,,(bc,wiki weaknesses). higher total difficulty makes it harder to attack the network with processing power.
154 2011-01-03 00:25:41 <gribble> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Weaknesses | Dec 19, 2010 ... Weaknesses. From Bitcoin. Jump to: navigation, search .... Retrieved from "https ://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Weaknesses". Category: Technical ...
155 2011-01-03 00:25:45 <Sami345> so why don't we just set difficulty == 1 and stop wasting power :D
156 2011-01-03 00:25:47 <afed> i'm using windows to run my miners and i sleep the sleep of the just
157 2011-01-03 00:26:08 <marioxcc> free software philosphy is about not using proprietary software, not about using free software
158 2011-01-03 00:26:13 <lucky> marioxcc, 64 simultaneous threads, with good integer performance, and eight hardware crypto engines capable of SHA256
159 2011-01-03 00:26:13 <nanotube> Sami345: because difficulty == total processing power == security. :)
160 2011-01-03 00:26:20 <marioxcc> free software is just the way to avoid proprietary software
161 2011-01-03 00:26:38 <afed> but some of the objections to proprietary software don't apply to windows
162 2011-01-03 00:26:45 <afed> it's workings are not a secret
163 2011-01-03 00:26:47 <lucky> sadly, introductory price for such a server is like $12,000 :P
164 2011-01-03 00:26:49 <afed> i know an awful lot about it
165 2011-01-03 00:26:50 <marioxcc> they do afed
166 2011-01-03 00:26:54 <marioxcc> windows its proprietary software
167 2011-01-03 00:27:01 <marioxcc> if you use it is your problem, i don't want to argue so
168 2011-01-03 00:27:09 <afed> i don't have the freedom to modify or distribute it, of course
169 2011-01-03 00:27:49 <marioxcc> afed: I don't want to argue yet another time why you shouldn't use it, just to let you know we DO object it
170 2011-01-03 00:28:07 <afed> marioxcc: "we"
171 2011-01-03 00:28:18 <marioxcc> we=free software supporters
172 2011-01-03 00:28:29 <lucky> so does anyone here have a bitcoin trading/using website? How do you get incoming transactions out of the daemon into your web app ?
173 2011-01-03 00:28:50 <afed> sure then
174 2011-01-03 00:28:56 <afed> i respect your objections
175 2011-01-03 00:28:58 <Sami345> slush, can you add Approx. time left to find a block. I know it basicly impossible. Put just calculate the average time to find a block
176 2011-01-03 00:29:02 <afed> but i will continue to run my machines my own way
177 2011-01-03 00:29:04 <nanotube> lucky: well, mtgox has. :)
178 2011-01-03 00:29:10 <afed> that is real freedom, isn't it :)
179 2011-01-03 00:29:17 <marioxcc> lucky: i'm not sure, hyperthreading don't works the same way as multi-core
180 2011-01-03 00:29:33 <marioxcc> i would like to see how a 12-core opteron handles it :)
181 2011-01-03 00:29:38 <lucky> marioxcc, i have a multicore hyperthreaded cpu
182 2011-01-03 00:29:48 <lucky> marioxcc, it's about 80% i'd guess.
183 2011-01-03 00:30:02 <sipa> Sami345: you know that number would just be constant?
184 2011-01-03 00:30:09 <marioxcc> well, you know, it's almost totally dependent on applications
185 2011-01-03 00:30:10 theymos has joined
186 2011-01-03 00:30:20 <lucky> marioxcc, indeed, but i'm talking about hashing.
187 2011-01-03 00:30:27 <Sami345> sipa, no? subtract time used from it
188 2011-01-03 00:30:30 <lucky> 2 threads (one per core) is 1500 khash/s each
189 2011-01-03 00:30:37 <lucky> 4 threads (two per core) is 1200 khash/s each
190 2011-01-03 00:30:43 <marioxcc> lucky: :)
191 2011-01-03 00:30:44 <marioxcc> ok
192 2011-01-03 00:30:47 <afed> 4 threads wins
193 2011-01-03 00:31:10 <lucky> which suggests simultaneous multithreading lends itself well to this sort of problem.
194 2011-01-03 00:31:21 <sipa> Sami345: what would be wrong
195 2011-01-03 00:31:28 <lucky> which makes me suspect something like the T2 would be an absolutely vicious beast for hashing.
196 2011-01-03 00:31:42 <lucky> (of course, those 8 hardware crypto processors wouldn't hurt either :P)
197 2011-01-03 00:31:45 <marioxcc> maybe, unless it consumes 300+ W
198 2011-01-03 00:31:46 <Sami345> it could be negative number but who cares
199 2011-01-03 00:31:46 <marioxcc> hehe
200 2011-01-03 00:31:57 <Sami345> then just print negative time
201 2011-01-03 00:32:08 <afed> perhaps it could consume negative watts of energy too
202 2011-01-03 00:32:29 <marioxcc> Sami345: "time left to find a block" don't make sense at all
203 2011-01-03 00:32:29 <Sami345> ...
204 2011-01-03 00:32:36 <marioxcc> it should be "averange time to find a block"
205 2011-01-03 00:32:44 <marioxcc> then it would be meaningful
206 2011-01-03 00:32:44 tg has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
207 2011-01-03 00:32:46 <Sami345> I mean in pool
208 2011-01-03 00:32:51 <marioxcc> still
209 2011-01-03 00:32:56 <marioxcc> there is no "time left"
210 2011-01-03 00:33:02 <Sami345> I know
211 2011-01-03 00:33:09 tg has joined
212 2011-01-03 00:33:41 <Sami345> but still you could calculate average - time used
213 2011-01-03 00:33:53 <lucky> well that's brutal.
214 2011-01-03 00:33:55 <marioxcc> that's stupid
215 2011-01-03 00:33:56 <Sami345> and say Average time left to find a block:
216 2011-01-03 00:33:57 <marioxcc> sorry
217 2011-01-03 00:34:04 <lucky> 980 megabit/s SHA256 hashing on the T2
218 2011-01-03 00:34:05 <marioxcc> it's a huge fallacy
219 2011-01-03 00:34:12 <lucky> per crypto core.
220 2011-01-03 00:34:18 <marioxcc> lucky: really? :)
221 2011-01-03 00:34:25 <marioxcc> where did you get data from?
222 2011-01-03 00:34:55 <lucky> how many kilobytes is the hash that's being... hashed?
223 2011-01-03 00:35:18 <marioxcc> whath matteres, i think, are the blocks
224 2011-01-03 00:35:26 <marioxcc> of the SHA256
225 2011-01-03 00:35:29 <marioxcc> i think they're 2
226 2011-01-03 00:35:36 <marioxcc> and it is hashed twice
227 2011-01-03 00:35:52 <lucky> marioxcc, http://blogs.sun.com/sprack/entry/ultrasparc_t2_crypto_performance
228 2011-01-03 00:35:58 <nanotube> lucky: see http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=2151.0 (particularly, reference to 'monitorreceived' patch from gavin)
229 2011-01-03 00:35:58 <afed> someone get a demo unit from oracle
230 2011-01-03 00:36:00 <bitbot> JSON-RPC method idea: list transactions newer than a given txid
231 2011-01-03 00:36:05 <afed> i think they were offering 60 day trials
232 2011-01-03 00:36:19 <lucky> marioxcc, 41 gigabit/s hashing per CPU
233 2011-01-03 00:36:22 <theymos> marioxcc: http://blockexplorer.com/q/hashtoaddress/ is equivalent to Bitcoin's hash160ToAddress.
234 2011-01-03 00:37:36 <lucky> if it's a 2 KB unit then ... hmm theoretically 2.5 ghash/s
235 2011-01-03 00:38:03 <sipa> for bitcoind you need 3 SHA256 blocks per hash
236 2011-01-03 00:38:15 <afed> $18,642.00
237 2011-01-03 00:38:22 <lucky> okay, just under 1 gigahash/s
238 2011-01-03 00:38:23 <afed> starting price for a T3-1 box
239 2011-01-03 00:38:24 <Diablo-D3> sipa: 2.
240 2011-01-03 00:38:29 <zygf> I thought it was two sha256 ops
241 2011-01-03 00:38:31 <marioxcc> yes, it is like 1.5 KB
242 2011-01-03 00:38:35 <nanotube> lucky: seems like it'd be cheaper to just buy two ati 5970s :)
243 2011-01-03 00:38:36 <afed> maybe i can cut it down
244 2011-01-03 00:38:37 <sipa> Diablo-D3: if you can do the precalculation, yes
245 2011-01-03 00:38:40 <lucky> nanotube, probably :p
246 2011-01-03 00:38:40 <marioxcc> zygf: 3 calls to the compression function
247 2011-01-03 00:38:40 <afed> we don't need 16 GB of r am
248 2011-01-03 00:38:46 <sipa> but that cpu may not support that
249 2011-01-03 00:38:48 <afed> how much ram do we need to run 128 cpu miners?
250 2011-01-03 00:38:49 <marioxcc> because the first hashing hash 2 blocks
251 2011-01-03 00:38:53 <marioxcc> the second hasing hash only one
252 2011-01-03 00:38:55 <Diablo-D3> sipa: wait, do you mean blocks as in sets of rounds?
253 2011-01-03 00:39:00 <sipa> yes
254 2011-01-03 00:39:01 <Diablo-D3> yes, the first sha256 has two
255 2011-01-03 00:39:05 <Diablo-D3> but you precalc those
256 2011-01-03 00:39:13 <sipa> i know
257 2011-01-03 00:39:15 <marioxcc> only one, i undestand
258 2011-01-03 00:39:16 <Diablo-D3> bitcoin even hands them to you precalced
259 2011-01-03 00:39:22 <lucky> though that's also completely ignoring the CPU miner additional throughput and working solely w/ their cryptocores
260 2011-01-03 00:39:22 <sipa> i know
261 2011-01-03 00:39:23 <afed> oracle are ass rapists
262 2011-01-03 00:39:31 <afed> the dvd drive costs $195
263 2011-01-03 00:39:40 <afed> the hard drive is $689
264 2011-01-03 00:39:46 <marioxcc> lol
265 2011-01-03 00:39:56 <Diablo-D3> this is why you never use sun replacement parts
266 2011-01-03 00:40:06 <lucky> ewll the hard drive is probably 15 krpm SAS
267 2011-01-03 00:40:11 <lucky> but the dvd is a bit hard to justify ;P
268 2011-01-03 00:40:24 <Diablo-D3> the dvd drives are stock rack slims
269 2011-01-03 00:40:41 <afed> i seriously doubt it gets fast enough to be worth it
270 2011-01-03 00:40:42 <Diablo-D3> and even if the drive is a 15krpm SAS
271 2011-01-03 00:40:49 <lucky> oh probably not
272 2011-01-03 00:40:49 <Diablo-D3> you can get those cheaper straight from seagate and hitachi
273 2011-01-03 00:40:52 <lucky> it's just an interesting thought :p
274 2011-01-03 00:41:03 <lucky> sexy, sexy machines they are, you gotta admit.
275 2011-01-03 00:41:08 <Diablo-D3> no I dont
276 2011-01-03 00:41:14 <Diablo-D3> I find sun hardware a pita
277 2011-01-03 00:41:21 <Diablo-D3> everything sun can do, I can do better
278 2011-01-03 00:41:24 <Sami345> Current shares: 9
279 2011-01-03 00:41:27 <Sami345> *99
280 2011-01-03 00:41:31 <lucky> Diablo-D3, but it's RISC, it's architecturally elegant. :p
281 2011-01-03 00:41:32 <afed> sun machines were really cool 20 years ago
282 2011-01-03 00:41:41 <Diablo-D3> lucky: only if you buy a sparc
283 2011-01-03 00:41:51 <Diablo-D3> sun sells a shitload of x86 boxen now
284 2011-01-03 00:42:53 <lucky> sun doesn't exist anymore :(
285 2011-01-03 00:43:06 <Diablo-D3> it does
286 2011-01-03 00:43:09 <lucky> Diablo-D3, and i was talking about the T-series SPARCs so I was talking about SPARCs, obviously. :P
287 2011-01-03 00:43:18 <Diablo-D3> lucky: except T2s kind of suck
288 2011-01-03 00:43:31 <Diablo-D3> for that kind of wattage I can build an opteron box that beats it
289 2011-01-03 00:44:34 <lucky> yes but x86 is morally repugnant :P
290 2011-01-03 00:44:59 <Diablo-D3> lucky: its not even x86 anymore
291 2011-01-03 00:45:12 <Diablo-D3> phenom IIs are the least x86 x86 processors ever designed
292 2011-01-03 00:45:33 <marioxcc> ??
293 2011-01-03 00:45:58 <lucky> nanotube, thanks for that link, just kinda reaffirms what i thought... it's infeasible to actually attempt to write a program around it ;p
294 2011-01-03 00:46:03 <marioxcc> what are they then?
295 2011-01-03 00:46:05 <marioxcc> if not x86?
296 2011-01-03 00:46:20 <Diablo-D3> marioxcc: very optimized micro RISC with a pretty optimized x86 jit on top
297 2011-01-03 00:46:46 <marioxcc> ok
298 2011-01-03 00:46:54 <marioxcc> how do you know?
299 2011-01-03 00:47:00 <lucky> well taht's been true of everything since the pentium pro
300 2011-01-03 00:47:01 * Diablo-D3 sighs.
301 2011-01-03 00:47:05 <Diablo-D3> I swear, I repeat myself.
302 2011-01-03 00:47:09 <marioxcc> i mean
303 2011-01-03 00:47:16 <marioxcc> it's mainly x86
304 2011-01-03 00:47:16 <Diablo-D3> lucky: yeah, but AMD went off into Alphaland here
305 2011-01-03 00:47:20 <marioxcc> some micro code, of course
306 2011-01-03 00:47:23 <lucky> Well, Intel chips have reprogrammable microcodes
307 2011-01-03 00:47:24 theymos has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
308 2011-01-03 00:47:32 <lucky> and the underlying architecture is publicly known
309 2011-01-03 00:47:33 <Diablo-D3> its a fucking nth generation alpha inside.
310 2011-01-03 00:47:36 <lucky> AMD is more speculation.
311 2011-01-03 00:47:37 <sipa> depends what you understand under x86
312 2011-01-03 00:47:58 <marioxcc> sipa: a processor which runs x86 instructions
313 2011-01-03 00:54:38 <lucky> So it would seem the only approach to do what I want is regularly import the entire wallet dump then cycle through each entry, see if it's in the database, and if not, add it, otherwise skip to next entry.
314 2011-01-03 00:54:39 <lucky> :/
315 2011-01-03 00:54:41 <lucky> ugh that's ugly.
316 2011-01-03 00:55:58 <sipa> lucky: sorry, i must have missed what you wanted to do
317 2011-01-03 00:56:23 <lucky> sipa, i need to know if someone has deposited money into my wallet for my app
318 2011-01-03 00:56:24 <Sami345> if all clients would be updated, wouldn't it be possible to increase amount of BTC produced?
319 2011-01-03 00:56:39 <lucky> yes.
320 2011-01-03 00:57:09 <lucky> part of the underlying assumption is that no single attacker would be able to corner a majority of nodes in the network
321 2011-01-03 00:57:33 <Sami345> what would happen if ónly like 50% off clients would be updated?
322 2011-01-03 00:57:39 <Sami345> huge client fight?
323 2011-01-03 00:58:15 <Sami345> *of
324 2011-01-03 00:58:28 <lucky> a lot of noise and wasted resources on the respective halves from rejected calculations, and basically two separate networks, I would guess.
325 2011-01-03 01:01:18 <sipa> lucky: bitcoind listreceivedbyaccount 0 true ?
326 2011-01-03 01:02:15 <kiba> wow, this Gantz manga had been going on for 10 years?
327 2011-01-03 01:02:23 <lucky> sipa, the thing is that would be an ever-growing dataset and each time i pull it i have to somehow make it coexist with what already exists in my database
328 2011-01-03 01:02:43 <sipa> ?
329 2011-01-03 01:03:54 <lucky> sipa, every time i pull it i have to confirm whether the entry has already been processed, which means keeping track of all the transactions i've processed already, and every time there's a transaction that dataset returned by listreceivedbyaccount is going to be larger and larger
330 2011-01-03 01:04:18 <sipa> yes
331 2011-01-03 01:04:25 <sipa> oh
332 2011-01-03 01:05:02 <lucky> which is both an implementation headache and makes me wonder about how well it'd scale ;/
333 2011-01-03 01:05:38 <Sami345> ;;bc,calc 140000
334 2011-01-03 01:05:39 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 140000 Khps, given current difficulty of 14484.16236123 , is 5 days, 3 hours, 25 minutes, and 50 seconds
335 2011-01-03 01:06:03 <afed> ;;bc,calc 660000
336 2011-01-03 01:06:03 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 660000 Khps, given current difficulty of 14484.16236123 , is 1 day, 2 hours, 10 minutes, and 56 seconds
337 2011-01-03 01:06:19 <lucky> ;;bc,calc 5500
338 2011-01-03 01:06:19 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 5500 Khps, given current difficulty of 14484.16236123 , is 18 weeks, 4 days, 21 hours, 52 minutes, and 7 seconds
339 2011-01-03 01:06:30 <lucky> i'll be sticking with pooled ;
340 2011-01-03 01:06:31 <lucky> :P
341 2011-01-03 01:07:25 <lucky> sipa, so i was wondering how other people had done it, and if there was any code i could look at ;/
342 2011-01-03 01:08:22 <Sami345> how much power of pool is going to calculate proof of work
343 2011-01-03 01:08:32 <sipa> ?
344 2011-01-03 01:09:15 <Sami345> I mean when pool send "false" jobs, how much power calculating those false jobs costs
345 2011-01-03 01:09:16 <lucky> tbh i consider this entire "omg i gotta max hash, brb buying 128 $1000 ATI video cards" fetish to be silly, i'm far more interested in actually using BC as a currency
346 2011-01-03 01:09:34 <lucky> Sami345, they're not false.
347 2011-01-03 01:09:42 <sipa> Sami345: you don't get false jobs
348 2011-01-03 01:09:51 <sipa> you get real ones, with lower difficulty
349 2011-01-03 01:10:04 <Sami345> but aren't they useless?
350 2011-01-03 01:10:08 <sipa> no
351 2011-01-03 01:10:11 <lucky> a lone person doing regular hashing is burning through billions of incorrect numbers until they find a sufficient one
352 2011-01-03 01:10:17 <lucky> as well.
353 2011-01-03 01:10:20 <lucky> that's the entire point, really
354 2011-01-03 01:10:21 <sipa> Sami345: every hash is a number
355 2011-01-03 01:10:22 <lucky> proof of work.
356 2011-01-03 01:10:33 <sipa> Sami345: we're looking for hashes whose number is small enough
357 2011-01-03 01:10:51 <sipa> to win in the the real bitcoin network, it has to be lower than 2^224/difficulty
358 2011-01-03 01:11:05 <Sami345> so it makes my client send too big numbers too?
359 2011-01-03 01:11:35 <sipa> however, the pool asks you to not only report the very small numbers (less than 2^224/difficulty), but also the larger ones (up to 2^224)
360 2011-01-03 01:11:53 <sipa> but the ones you do report also include the small ones
361 2011-01-03 01:12:34 <Sami345> what about you said the hashes pool clients are corrupted
362 2011-01-03 01:12:44 <sipa> ?
363 2011-01-03 01:12:44 <Sami345> so they can't steal it to them self
364 2011-01-03 01:13:04 <sipa> you have to decide who the block will be fore, before you start hashing
365 2011-01-03 01:13:20 <Sami345> oh
366 2011-01-03 01:13:26 <sipa> and in fact, the miners don't even know that, they don't get to see the full block
367 2011-01-03 01:13:30 <Sami345> yeah that makes sense
368 2011-01-03 01:13:48 <sipa> they just get work from the pool, and return the hashes, without having any clue whom it will be for
369 2011-01-03 01:13:53 fabianhjr has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.6.13/20101203075014])
370 2011-01-03 01:14:40 <sipa> there is one possibility for vandalism, and that is deliberately withholding blocks which do beat the full difficulty
371 2011-01-03 01:14:48 <sipa> that's hurting yourself and the pool
372 2011-01-03 01:14:55 <sipa> but it's possible
373 2011-01-03 01:15:21 <Sami345> but I can't still get the money from the blocks
374 2011-01-03 01:15:27 <Sami345> so what's the point?
375 2011-01-03 01:15:54 <Sami345> What I have is unusable block
376 2011-01-03 01:15:59 <sipa> yes
377 2011-01-03 01:16:16 <sipa> the only way to earn money through it, is by sending it to the pool
378 2011-01-03 01:16:28 <Sami345> hmm
379 2011-01-03 01:16:37 <sipa> but if you would want to hurt the pool, you could decide not to send it
380 2011-01-03 01:16:48 <Sami345> but it can wait until you have high shares and then send the block? :d
381 2011-01-03 01:17:18 <jgarzik> marioxcc: your implementation queues work in the background... old work
382 2011-01-03 01:17:53 <marioxcc> jgarzik: ?
383 2011-01-03 01:18:24 <marioxcc> i don't claim these to be a wonder, they're just my 2 cents
384 2011-01-03 01:19:04 <marioxcc> if that's what you mean
385 2011-01-03 01:19:15 <sipa> marioxcc: he means you fetch work
386 2011-01-03 01:19:16 <jgarzik> marioxcc: work retrieved is always a few seconds older than current in-line scheme. it is a regression.
387 2011-01-03 01:19:21 <sipa> and only start working on it much later
388 2011-01-03 01:19:26 <jgarzik> correct
389 2011-01-03 01:19:47 <sipa> so by the time you work your way through it, it may have become invalid
390 2011-01-03 01:19:52 <marioxcc> of course
391 2011-01-03 01:19:54 <jgarzik> correct
392 2011-01-03 01:20:05 <marioxcc> but the other option is to await the work
393 2011-01-03 01:20:16 <marioxcc> the work you're working on may become obsolete when you work in it
394 2011-01-03 01:20:22 <marioxcc> there is no currently a way to know when to update
395 2011-01-03 01:20:29 <marioxcc> with the API
396 2011-01-03 01:20:32 <marioxcc> as far as i know
397 2011-01-03 01:20:44 <jgarzik> marioxcc: sure there is -- observe timings, and fetch work just before thread completes current run
398 2011-01-03 01:21:21 <jgarzik> marioxcc: your proposed changes are worse than waiting for an inline 'getwork' RPC, because you are introduced silent delays.
399 2011-01-03 01:21:23 <marioxcc> jgarzik: network latency is unpredictable
400 2011-01-03 01:21:46 <marioxcc> the queue size is configurate
401 2011-01-03 01:21:49 <jgarzik> for a single client and server it is predictable within bounds 99% of the time
402 2011-01-03 01:22:00 <sipa> there is no point in using a queue
403 2011-01-03 01:22:05 <marioxcc> not if you have other software using network
404 2011-01-03 01:22:07 <sipa> just always use the latest one
405 2011-01-03 01:22:09 <marioxcc> as is my case, running a tor relay
406 2011-01-03 01:22:21 <sipa> unless the nonce overflows in that time
407 2011-01-03 01:22:49 <marioxcc> sipa: would you use a stack?
408 2011-01-03 01:23:15 <marioxcc> jgarzik: i was also thinking of dropping old works, but that increses load on server
409 2011-01-03 01:23:38 <sipa> what i would do, is having two completely independent threads
410 2011-01-03 01:23:47 <sipa> one fetches work every X seconds
411 2011-01-03 01:24:08 <sipa> the other works on the latest getwork that succeeded
412 2011-01-03 01:24:22 <sipa> if there is a network delay, just keep working on the previous one
413 2011-01-03 01:24:49 <sipa> and make the timings so that nonce overflows rare occur
414 2011-01-03 01:25:19 <sipa> *rarely
415 2011-01-03 01:26:03 <marioxcc> i think curernt implementation scans all the range
416 2011-01-03 01:26:33 <sipa> if a nonce overflows, you can increase the TS btw
417 2011-01-03 01:26:40 <jgarzik> marioxcc: also, your list implementation should be http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=blob_plain;f=include/linux/list.h;hb=b518a64983cbf2ff31aed530898de2d80e4573d5
418 2011-01-03 01:26:44 <marioxcc> timestapm?
419 2011-01-03 01:26:48 <sipa> yes
420 2011-01-03 01:27:15 <marioxcc> jgarzik: what's the difference?
421 2011-01-03 01:27:48 <jgarzik> marioxcc: the kernel's is inline, small, efficient, does not require huge module for simple linked list
422 2011-01-03 01:28:48 <marioxcc> jgarzik: do you suggest to spend 5 minutes with a new implementation to make a 5 µs difference?
423 2011-01-03 01:31:17 <jgarzik> marioxcc: cpuminer does not need bloat from a linked list implementation. linked lists aren't that hard that you must link 1300 lines of code into cpuminer.
424 2011-01-03 01:31:18 <jgarzik> 546 cpu-miner.c
425 2011-01-03 01:31:18 <jgarzik> 1359 lists.c
426 2011-01-03 01:31:18 <jgarzik> 473 sha256_4way.c
427 2011-01-03 01:31:18 <jgarzik> 625 sha256_cryptopp.c
428 2011-01-03 01:31:18 <jgarzik> 279 sha256_generic.c
429 2011-01-03 01:31:20 <jgarzik> 89 sha256_via.c
430 2011-01-03 01:31:25 <jgarzik> that's just silly.
431 2011-01-03 01:31:59 <lfm> whats wrong?
432 2011-01-03 01:32:28 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|what is lists
433 2011-01-03 01:32:44 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|o lol own lists implementation
434 2011-01-03 01:32:47 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|ah, the C days
435 2011-01-03 01:33:04 * xelister DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|the_wheel.c deps.: fire.c open_doors.c manual_mem_managment.asm
436 2011-01-03 01:33:05 <marioxcc> jgarzik: bear in mind the file you linked to is 718 lines long
437 2011-01-03 01:33:12 <marioxcc> almost half
438 2011-01-03 01:33:23 <marioxcc> stripping can drop the non used functions
439 2011-01-03 01:33:39 <jgarzik> marioxcc: yes, and only the tiny needed bits are actually used.
440 2011-01-03 01:33:46 <sipa> what are you all talking about?
441 2011-01-03 01:34:00 <sipa> is see absolutely no reason why you would use a list at all
442 2011-01-03 01:34:30 <marioxcc> jgarzik: i was actually thinking of a array implementation
443 2011-01-03 01:34:42 <jgarzik> marioxcc: see what sipa said :)
444 2011-01-03 01:34:45 <marioxcc> just a array with 2 pointers to first and last item
445 2011-01-03 01:35:11 <sipa> never work on anything but the last getwork you received
446 2011-01-03 01:35:19 <marioxcc> yeah, that
447 2011-01-03 01:35:21 <marioxcc> that's a good idea
448 2011-01-03 01:35:27 <marioxcc> i will implement it
449 2011-01-03 01:35:59 <sipa> if all 2^32 have been tried and you still don't have a new getwork
450 2011-01-03 01:36:15 <sipa> increase the timestamp of the old one yourself, and continue with that
451 2011-01-03 01:37:08 <sipa> slush: maybe you can implement a getwork call which blocks until actual new work is available (new tx, or new block) ?
452 2011-01-03 01:38:21 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|jgarzik: you are implementing bitcoin in pure C? why ._.
453 2011-01-03 01:38:33 <sipa> xelister|DrUNK: it's just a miner
454 2011-01-03 01:39:13 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|ah
455 2011-01-03 01:40:34 <EvanR> what block are we on?
456 2011-01-03 01:40:48 <EvanR> have it been 100769 for freakin ever?
457 2011-01-03 01:41:45 <lfm> ;;bc,stats
458 2011-01-03 01:41:47 <gribble> Current Blocks: 100769 | Current Difficulty: 14484.16236123 | Next Difficulty At Block: 100799 | Next Difficulty In: 30 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 4 hours, 16 minutes, and 0 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 16293.31583200
459 2011-01-03 01:42:22 <lfm> thats odd
460 2011-01-03 01:42:39 <lfm> I am at 100769 too
461 2011-01-03 01:42:57 <EvanR> i still have 0 confirmations
462 2011-01-03 01:43:19 <EvanR> world wide drop in hash power?
463 2011-01-03 01:43:49 <lfm> yes, nearly an hour on that blcok
464 2011-01-03 01:43:51 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|EvanR: everyone got drunk
465 2011-01-03 01:44:00 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|only loosers keep now miners running
466 2011-01-03 01:44:10 * xelister DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|mined 3 blocks on 1st 2011. ooops.
467 2011-01-03 01:44:11 <lfm> Block #100769 2011-01-03 00:48:52 UTC
468 2011-01-03 01:44:19 <jgarzik> EvanR: sometimes blocks just take forever to solve, even with everyone working at full hash rate.
469 2011-01-03 01:44:26 <jgarzik> that's the nature of the hash :)
470 2011-01-03 01:44:41 <EvanR> whats the stddev ?
471 2011-01-03 01:44:42 <lucky> So does anyone have a code sample for what i'm describing? because i think it's beyond me to implement without having something to base it off of
472 2011-01-03 01:50:29 <EvanR> no i think an hour for a hash is very unlikely
473 2011-01-03 01:50:40 <sipa> it's a bit unlikely
474 2011-01-03 01:50:53 <EvanR> assuming constant cpu power
475 2011-01-03 01:51:25 <sipa> assume 115 Ghash/s
476 2011-01-03 01:51:50 <EvanR> ;;bc,calc 115000000
477 2011-01-03 01:51:51 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 115000000 Khps, given current difficulty of 14484.16236123 , is 9 minutes and 0 seconds
478 2011-01-03 01:52:27 <sipa> 115000000000/(2^32*14484.16236123)
479 2011-01-03 01:52:41 <sipa> .00184860700621980743 is the average number of blocks found per second
480 2011-01-03 01:53:00 <sipa> now look at the exponential distribution with lambda=.00184860700621980743
481 2011-01-03 01:54:28 <sipa> 0.128% chance
482 2011-01-03 01:54:36 <EvanR> ._.
483 2011-01-03 01:54:45 <sipa> for a given interval being larger than 1 hour
484 2011-01-03 01:54:54 <EvanR> soon we will win the lottery
485 2011-01-03 01:55:04 <sipa> so once every 776 blocks, that should occur
486 2011-01-03 01:55:47 <EvanR> once every 776 blocks that should occur, dont you have to go through another round of analysis to determine the chance that its much less or greater than 776
487 2011-01-03 01:56:11 <ArtForz> see poisson distribution and CDF
488 2011-01-03 01:56:31 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|ArtForz: got pm?
489 2011-01-03 01:56:36 <ArtForz> yup
490 2011-01-03 01:57:30 <sipa> EvanR: then you are doing hypothesis testing :)
491 2011-01-03 01:57:43 <EvanR> i just want to transfer my damned coins xD!
492 2011-01-03 01:58:14 <Cusipzzz> transfer them where?
493 2011-01-03 01:58:15 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|how long are we waiting for the new block?
494 2011-01-03 01:58:30 <EvanR> somewhere!
495 2011-01-03 01:58:35 <sipa> 1h07m
496 2011-01-03 01:58:40 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|lol shit
497 2011-01-03 01:59:03 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|perhaps ArtForz invited all his friends, so did the owners of other clusters
498 2011-01-03 01:59:13 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|and they all play 128 players turnament of quake
499 2011-01-03 01:59:48 <sipa> you need 4 5970's to play quake these days? ;)
500 2011-01-03 02:00:01 <zygf> when he's done generating he can rent his cluster to onlive or something
501 2011-01-03 02:00:19 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|but in fact computing power seems impared, on 1st day of 2011, instead of expected 0.5 block, I mined not 1, not 2, but 3 blocks!!! woot?
502 2011-01-03 02:00:41 <Cusipzzz> wow, u haxx =)
503 2011-01-03 02:00:45 <EvanR> approximately 10 minutes lol, 80 minutes is approximately 10 minutes now
504 2011-01-03 02:00:57 <EvanR> very large values of 10
505 2011-01-03 02:01:19 <sipa> xelister|DrUNK: that has nothing to do with the computing power
506 2011-01-03 02:01:25 <ArtForz> yep, random distributions are weird that way
507 2011-01-03 02:01:30 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|heeey what is that... line 1561 main.cpp if (year>=2011) diff *= 10;
508 2011-01-03 02:01:39 <Cusipzzz> lolol
509 2011-01-03 02:01:49 <EvanR> >_<
510 2011-01-03 02:01:50 <ArtForz> there we go
511 2011-01-03 02:02:29 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|now we know why satoshi isn't releasing any new versions... and people said Yakuza will not read the source code
512 2011-01-03 02:02:44 <EvanR> xelister|DrUNK: what are you drinking?
513 2011-01-03 02:02:47 * sipa checks his source, just to be sure
514 2011-01-03 02:02:50 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|Im not even surwe
515 2011-01-03 02:03:00 <Diablo-D3> hey art
516 2011-01-03 02:03:01 <Diablo-D3> you here?
517 2011-01-03 02:03:05 <EvanR> i got abita beer, 'purple haze'
518 2011-01-03 02:03:11 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|but I think that aspirine I took earlier was not aspirine
519 2011-01-03 02:03:15 <ArtForz> no, why?
520 2011-01-03 02:03:19 <lfm> theres a block
521 2011-01-03 02:03:24 <Cusipzzz> absinthe?
522 2011-01-03 02:03:40 <EvanR> 100770
523 2011-01-03 02:03:50 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|wee need btc2narcotics portal
524 2011-01-03 02:03:56 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|narcotics including good wines etc
525 2011-01-03 02:03:57 <EvanR> 0/unconfirmed
526 2011-01-03 02:04:01 <EvanR> :(
527 2011-01-03 02:04:11 <ArtForz> ;;bc,stats
528 2011-01-03 02:04:13 <gribble> Current Blocks: 100770 | Current Difficulty: 14484.16236123 | Next Difficulty At Block: 100799 | Next Difficulty In: 29 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 4 hours, 7 minutes, and 28 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 16235.78820033
529 2011-01-03 02:04:32 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|omg 16000 diff
530 2011-01-03 02:04:37 <EvanR> :(
531 2011-01-03 02:04:43 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|so diff continues to climb up the way it did
532 2011-01-03 02:04:48 <ArtForz> actually thats only a 12% increase
533 2011-01-03 02:04:51 <afed> someone needs to open a shop where you can buy GPUs for bitcoins
534 2011-01-03 02:05:04 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|do we have an realtime graph of diff/time ?
535 2011-01-03 02:05:10 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|afed: =)
536 2011-01-03 02:05:36 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|or, how to get over JSON or www data needed for such graph?
537 2011-01-03 02:06:00 <sipa> http://sipa.be/static/bc-speed.pdf
538 2011-01-03 02:06:15 <sipa> it used to include the difficulty as well
539 2011-01-03 02:07:50 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|can you publish downloadable data used for that graph? (or just raw samples)?
540 2011-01-03 02:07:57 <ArtForz> the drop caused by the 0.3.8 bug looks fun in there
541 2011-01-03 02:08:03 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|yea =)
542 2011-01-03 02:08:54 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|LOL WOOOOT
543 2011-01-03 02:08:58 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|IBM patents patenting
544 2011-01-03 02:09:01 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|hahaha
545 2011-01-03 02:09:05 <Diablo-D3> thats
546 2011-01-03 02:09:06 <Diablo-D3> epic
547 2011-01-03 02:09:07 <Diablo-D3> ;_;
548 2011-01-03 02:09:10 <ArtForz> lol
549 2011-01-03 02:09:14 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: hey, any leaked shit on 67xx?
550 2011-01-03 02:09:28 <ArtForz> nope, no one yet knows WTF is up with 67xx
551 2011-01-03 02:09:42 <ArtForz> we got rumors about pretty much every other model
552 2011-01-03 02:10:05 <sipa> anyone know how to calculate difficulty from 'bits' ?
553 2011-01-03 02:10:16 <lfm> sipa yes
554 2011-01-03 02:10:18 <ArtForz> yes
555 2011-01-03 02:10:24 <ArtForz> my guess is they want to pull a 4770 with it
556 2011-01-03 02:10:39 <sipa> lfm: any pointer? :)
557 2011-01-03 02:10:42 <ArtForz> = 28nm pipecleaner, late '11
558 2011-01-03 02:10:55 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: whats the round trip time for me starting a kernel to getting the data out of it, if the kernel completes instantly
559 2011-01-03 02:11:13 <EvanR> what the hell happened in 01/07/10
560 2011-01-03 02:11:23 <sipa> EvanR: slashdot maybe
561 2011-01-03 02:11:23 <lfm> sipa theres a web page ill see if I can find it ...
562 2011-01-03 02:11:29 <EvanR> increasing total speed by a factor of 10
563 2011-01-03 02:11:35 <sipa> or gpu miners?
564 2011-01-03 02:11:43 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|EvanR: gpu miners motherfucker, do you use them?
565 2011-01-03 02:11:51 <Cusipzzz> lolol
566 2011-01-03 02:11:53 <ArtForz> /.
567 2011-01-03 02:12:01 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|just /.? impressive
568 2011-01-03 02:12:11 <Cusipzzz> EvanR is mining on an 8088 4.77Mhz
569 2011-01-03 02:12:38 <Cusipzzz> dating myself
570 2011-01-03 02:12:52 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|does it have capacity to hold entire hash at once in memory?
571 2011-01-03 02:12:59 <ArtForz> actually maybe both
572 2011-01-03 02:13:07 <EvanR> are you kidding i get 1,800,000,000,000uH/s
573 2011-01-03 02:13:35 <Cusipzzz> he also ported the client to run on his Casio watch...poor latency though
574 2011-01-03 02:13:35 <sipa> wooow!
575 2011-01-03 02:14:01 <ArtForz> first GPU miners came online pretty much at the same time
576 2011-01-03 02:14:15 <lucky> _> #bitcoin-mining
577 2011-01-03 02:14:15 <lucky> :P
578 2011-01-03 02:15:09 <ArtForz> = my first 4870 started ~1 day before we got /. frontpage
579 2011-01-03 02:15:27 <lucky> this is really starting to frustrate me, how can i get the txid and the address for the same transaction?
580 2011-01-03 02:15:31 <EvanR> were getting blocks at breakneck speed now :S
581 2011-01-03 02:15:53 <sipa> ArtForz woke up
582 2011-01-03 02:15:56 <sipa> ;)
583 2011-01-03 02:15:57 <Cusipzzz> lol
584 2011-01-03 02:16:02 <ArtForz> yep, randomness is weird that way
585 2011-01-03 02:16:14 <EvanR> something could be done to reduce the variance
586 2011-01-03 02:16:20 <lfm> sipa try http://www.bitcoin.org/wiki/doku.php?id=difficulty
587 2011-01-03 02:16:43 <Cusipzzz> lucky: use 1 address per account?
588 2011-01-03 02:16:48 <sipa> lfm: that's not it
589 2011-01-03 02:17:01 <sipa> that says how to go from target to difficulty - i know that
590 2011-01-03 02:17:09 <sipa> the hard part is going from nbits to target
591 2011-01-03 02:17:11 <lucky> Cusipzzz, will the bitcoind handle that ? :s
592 2011-01-03 02:17:16 <ArtForz> not really
593 2011-01-03 02:17:32 <sipa> you can't reduce the variance
594 2011-01-03 02:17:37 <Sami345> My computer generated has beginning with 0 :o
595 2011-01-03 02:17:38 <sipa> it's a posson proces
596 2011-01-03 02:17:45 <lfm> sipa ok, the first byte is a byte shift number, the next 3 bytes are a mantissa
597 2011-01-03 02:17:45 <ArtForz> iirc target = (nbits & 0xFFFFFF) << (8 * ((nbits >> 24) - 3))
598 2011-01-03 02:17:50 <Cusipzzz> poisson?
599 2011-01-03 02:17:53 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: nm I found it, its 225 us
600 2011-01-03 02:17:55 <sipa> Cusipzzz: yes
601 2011-01-03 02:18:01 <EvanR> its a poison process
602 2011-01-03 02:18:02 <Cusipzzz> now i'm hungry
603 2011-01-03 02:18:10 <EvanR> sounds like a terrible idea
604 2011-01-03 02:18:40 <sipa> lfm,ArtForz: thanks
605 2011-01-03 02:19:32 <lucky> oh just fucking fuck it, i give up.
606 2011-01-03 02:19:46 <ArtForz> it's got a bit more special cases for target < 2**24 and negative target, but I kinda doubt those can happen
607 2011-01-03 02:22:38 <lucky> test network is not working, i can't get the bitcoind to compile on my server, and trying to extract useful information from bitcoind to run any sort of web app is like pulling teeth
608 2011-01-03 02:22:47 <lucky> let me know when (if) things aren't so terribly broken
609 2011-01-03 02:27:41 <Sami345> when generating hashes, it includes some transactions
610 2011-01-03 02:27:50 <Sami345> what is the changing part?
611 2011-01-03 02:29:41 <EvanR> the time and the nonce
612 2011-01-03 02:29:48 Guest60704 is now known as johndrinkwater
613 2011-01-03 02:31:30 <Sami345> Hmm what if two computer generate hash at the same time
614 2011-01-03 02:31:51 <Sami345> half of network gets another block, half of network another
615 2011-01-03 02:32:27 <sipa> the one upon which is first built wins
616 2011-01-03 02:32:42 <sipa> so there is a temporary block chain split
617 2011-01-03 02:33:03 <sipa> but as soon as one of the chains is "better" than the other, it will win
618 2011-01-03 02:35:19 james has joined
619 2011-01-03 02:35:45 james is now known as Guest86226
620 2011-01-03 02:36:14 james__ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
621 2011-01-03 02:36:55 <luke-jr> so what's the smallest division of a bitcoin? I mean really, not rounding it⦠:p
622 2011-01-03 02:37:31 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|luke-jr: afair 8 digits
623 2011-01-03 02:37:42 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|but now it is limited (by source code) to 2 digits
624 2011-01-03 02:38:00 <EvanR> "nanocoins"
625 2011-01-03 02:38:15 <EvanR> 10^8 BTC
626 2011-01-03 02:38:19 <EvanR> er
627 2011-01-03 02:38:21 <EvanR> 10^-8 BTC
628 2011-01-03 02:38:36 <luke-jr> xelister|DrUNK: decimal digits? why?
629 2011-01-03 02:38:50 marioxcc is now known as marioxcc-AFK
630 2011-01-03 02:38:57 <lfm> thers a sign bit I think
631 2011-01-03 02:39:00 <luke-jr> it makes no sense why software would be limited in decimal digitsâ¦
632 2011-01-03 02:39:03 <EvanR> so you can have 1/10 of a coin
633 2011-01-03 02:39:37 <luke-jr> EvanR: but it's still to work in 10ths
634 2011-01-03 02:39:40 <luke-jr> tenths*
635 2011-01-03 02:39:43 <luke-jr> silly*
636 2011-01-03 02:39:46 <EvanR> no, it isnt
637 2011-01-03 02:39:57 <sipa> lfm: humans work with 10ths
638 2011-01-03 02:39:59 <EvanR> 1/10 has no finite representation in base 2 fractions
639 2011-01-03 02:40:05 <lfm> luke-jr it is reserved for future use
640 2011-01-03 02:40:07 <luke-jr> sipa: only if you force them to
641 2011-01-03 02:40:25 <sipa> agree, but most are trained to do so
642 2011-01-03 02:40:32 <luke-jr> sipa: it's still stupid
643 2011-01-03 02:40:32 <EvanR> as soon as you stop displaying base 10 fractions of the bitcoin/dollar, you can use floating point
644 2011-01-03 02:40:48 <luke-jr> EvanR: good, I don't display base 10 fractions of them
645 2011-01-03 02:40:52 <nanotube> lucky: might want to chat with gavin about the monitorpatch or something.
646 2011-01-03 02:40:57 <EvanR> everyone else does
647 2011-01-03 02:41:28 <luke-jr> I display ½, ¾, â
, 1â16, 1â32, etc
648 2011-01-03 02:41:36 <ArtForz> of what?
649 2011-01-03 02:41:38 <luke-jr> BTC
650 2011-01-03 02:41:46 <lucky> nanotube, i need a cool off period, spending 6 hours on 20 lines of code tends to get me in a pissy mood :P
651 2011-01-03 02:41:48 <ArtForz> thats fucking idiotic
652 2011-01-03 02:41:53 <ArtForz> 1btc = 1e8 base units
653 2011-01-03 02:41:53 <luke-jr> no, decimal is idiotic
654 2011-01-03 02:42:01 <nanotube> lucky: hehe ok
655 2011-01-03 02:42:02 <EvanR> haha
656 2011-01-03 02:42:19 <EvanR> lets use base 11 just to be contrary
657 2011-01-03 02:42:33 <luke-jr> base 11 is probably the only base worse than 10 :p
658 2011-01-03 02:42:34 <ArtForz> so how many base units is 1/512 bitcoin ?
659 2011-01-03 02:43:18 <EvanR> 195312.5
660 2011-01-03 02:43:23 <sipa> base phi is actually very nice
661 2011-01-03 02:43:30 <luke-jr> ArtForz: it appears BTC's poor design prevents that fraction
662 2011-01-03 02:43:51 <ArtForz> or maybe using fractions of a multiple of a base unit is fucking crazy
663 2011-01-03 02:43:52 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|well how many bits are there?
664 2011-01-03 02:43:58 <luke-jr> so 1â256 is the smallest sane BTC
665 2011-01-03 02:44:09 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|how big is the rounging error of bits vs digital representation that is causing loses
666 2011-01-03 02:44:11 <EvanR> 1 nanocoin is the smallest
667 2011-01-03 02:44:12 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|but what happens now??
668 2011-01-03 02:44:16 <sipa> updated graph: http://sipa.be/static/bitcoin/speed.pdf
669 2011-01-03 02:44:37 <EvanR> 2^12 nanocoins would be a luke-jr unit coin
670 2011-01-03 02:44:43 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|if I transfer 0.01, do I transfer something like 167772/16777216 = 0.01000005712 and so on, or do I really transfer 0.01 ?
671 2011-01-03 02:44:50 <EvanR> er 2^34
672 2011-01-03 02:44:58 <ArtForz> you transfer 1000000 base units
673 2011-01-03 02:45:00 <sipa> so my current estimate for the bitcoin network speed is 118Ghash/s
674 2011-01-03 02:45:05 <luke-jr> wait, so really BTC is just displaying UNIT / 100000000 ?
675 2011-01-03 02:45:09 <EvanR> yeah
676 2011-01-03 02:45:11 <nanotube> sipa: nice :)
677 2011-01-03 02:45:11 <ArtForz> yep
678 2011-01-03 02:45:51 <luke-jr> so I should instead be advocating 1 BTC = 5.96 TBTC :p
679 2011-01-03 02:46:03 <sipa> luke-jr: whatever you like
680 2011-01-03 02:46:06 <luke-jr> or 0.372529 TBTC
681 2011-01-03 02:46:14 <sipa> what's a tbtc?
682 2011-01-03 02:46:20 <luke-jr> Tonal BTC :p
683 2011-01-03 02:46:21 <mrb__> sipa: 116.6 Ghash/s
684 2011-01-03 02:46:25 <EvanR> tebi coin?
685 2011-01-03 02:46:25 <mrb__> ;;bc,stats
686 2011-01-03 02:46:26 <gribble> Current Blocks: 100781 | Current Difficulty: 14484.16236123 | Next Difficulty At Block: 100799 | Next Difficulty In: 18 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 2 hours, 33 minutes, and 36 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 16290.78197542
687 2011-01-03 02:46:37 <mrb__> 2**32*16290.78197542/600/1e9 = 116.6
688 2011-01-03 02:46:48 <ArtForz> how about base units base 16 divided by 2**24, so 1btc = 5.F5E1
689 2011-01-03 02:46:52 <luke-jr> so then why is exactly 50 BTC generated at a time?
690 2011-01-03 02:47:01 <sipa> mrb__: sorry, my estimate is definitely better than an average over the past two weeks :)
691 2011-01-03 02:47:08 <EvanR> 50*10^8
692 2011-01-03 02:47:09 <luke-jr> ArtForz: I was converting to decimal because you all can't see Tonal probably
693 2011-01-03 02:47:31 <nanotube> mrb__: the difficulty adjustment lags real hash power, since it's average over last 2016 blocks.
694 2011-01-03 02:47:31 <luke-jr> ArtForz: it would really be ~5.î§5î§1
695 2011-01-03 02:47:31 <mrb__> you computed a running estimate on the last 24h?
696 2011-01-03 02:47:37 <afed> ;;bc,calc 10800000
697 2011-01-03 02:47:38 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 10800000 Khps, given current difficulty of 14484.16236123 , is 1 hour, 36 minutes, and 0 seconds
698 2011-01-03 02:47:50 <mrb__> my calculation is effectively the running average over the last 2 weeks
699 2011-01-03 02:48:08 <ArtForz> right
700 2011-01-03 02:48:14 <mrb__> I think it is pointless to compute daily averages as it is too granular
701 2011-01-03 02:48:17 <ArtForz> 5.F5E1
702 2011-01-03 02:48:23 <sipa> mrb__: no, it's a gaussian window with sigma=1 week, and within each window it measures both average speed and growth rate
703 2011-01-03 02:48:24 <mrb__> eg. how many people went to vacation and shut down their miners...
704 2011-01-03 02:48:55 <sipa> and combines those windows back using gaussians to the resulting data points
705 2011-01-03 02:48:57 <mrb__> s/granular/variable/
706 2011-01-03 02:49:04 <mrb__> ok
707 2011-01-03 02:49:16 <luke-jr> or we could say your nanoBTC = 1 TBTC cent
708 2011-01-03 02:49:28 <luke-jr> which would mean 0x10 nanoBTC per TBTC shilling
709 2011-01-03 02:49:44 <luke-jr> and 0x100 nanoBTC per TBTC dollar
710 2011-01-03 02:50:11 <luke-jr> but then there's way too many TBTC dollars per BTC XD
711 2011-01-03 02:50:15 <sipa> luke-jr: just use UNIT as your base unit, and represent that in binary any way you like
712 2011-01-03 02:50:32 <luke-jr> sipa: huh?
713 2011-01-03 02:51:00 <sipa> 1 BTC = 0x5F5E100 UNIT
714 2011-01-03 02:51:27 <sipa> 0.01 BTC = 0xF4240 UNIT
715 2011-01-03 02:51:40 <luke-jr> well, 1 BTC would be 0x1000000 UNIT more like
716 2011-01-03 02:51:40 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|--- message of a day ---
717 2011-01-03 02:51:46 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|gtalk sucks cock in hell, about anonimity
718 2011-01-03 02:51:53 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|--- that was the message of the day ---
719 2011-01-03 02:51:54 <EvanR> 1 BTC is already standardized
720 2011-01-03 02:51:58 <EvanR> use a different name
721 2011-01-03 02:51:59 <luke-jr> err
722 2011-01-03 02:52:00 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|*gmail. well, geverything
723 2011-01-03 02:52:02 <luke-jr> TBTC
724 2011-01-03 02:52:19 <EvanR> dont use google
725 2011-01-03 02:52:24 <sipa> xelister|DrUNK: you are combining a google product name in the same phrase as 'anonimity' ?
726 2011-01-03 02:52:51 <nanotube> sipa: yes he is, with a negative relationship between them, it seems to be a sensible combination :D
727 2011-01-03 02:53:16 <sipa> mrb__: there's some nice math behind it, but i think it estimates the speed very well
728 2011-01-03 02:54:02 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|well, which email provider is fine with TOR
729 2011-01-03 02:54:13 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|hm. would anyone want to have
730 2011-01-03 02:54:29 <sipa> with sigma=1 day is says 125Ghash/s, with sigma=1 week is says 118Ghash/s
731 2011-01-03 02:54:47 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|say for 5 BTC / year, a very anonymous friendly and overall good email account?
732 2011-01-03 02:54:55 <sipa> it think it's something in between
733 2011-01-03 02:55:13 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|access via TOR, via TOR .onion, via i2p and all. Perhaps even via freenet (freemail<->email bridge)
734 2011-01-03 02:55:18 <afed> xelister|DrUNK: for $1.50 per year?
735 2011-01-03 02:55:25 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|well for some low price
736 2011-01-03 02:55:38 <nanotube> what, does gmail block tor?
737 2011-01-03 02:55:45 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|nanotube: try it
738 2011-01-03 02:55:48 <afed> it probably should
739 2011-01-03 02:55:53 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|nanotube: cocksuckers want mobile phone number to register
740 2011-01-03 02:56:01 <nanotube> well, there are always invites
741 2011-01-03 02:56:05 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|ofcourse epic spamming will be banned
742 2011-01-03 02:56:09 <sipa> register for what?
743 2011-01-03 02:56:12 <nanotube> you don't need phone with invite right?
744 2011-01-03 02:56:27 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|and I would well, 'help' lea in case of actuall EVIL use of the service (like, blackmail)
745 2011-01-03 02:56:32 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|(but most logs would be deleted)
746 2011-01-03 02:56:34 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|(not kept)
747 2011-01-03 02:56:54 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|the point is, I want to simple anon email. To not show my IP to receive. Im not doing any crimes or nothing
748 2011-01-03 02:57:06 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|just I want a bit of privacy, tried 4 providers so far, all failed (tor + no js)
749 2011-01-03 02:57:23 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|this is outrage
750 2011-01-03 02:57:35 <sipa> run your own :)
751 2011-01-03 02:57:50 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|yeah that is so anonymous
752 2011-01-03 02:58:00 <nanotube> hushmail?
753 2011-01-03 02:58:02 <sipa> right :p
754 2011-01-03 02:58:13 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|I will just register myname.name put my personal cell phone in dns details and use that
755 2011-01-03 02:58:18 <eureka^> hushmail is good
756 2011-01-03 02:58:22 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|what can possibly go wrong
757 2011-01-03 02:58:48 <nanotube> xelister|DrUNK: you can buy a vps, and a domain, with bitcoins now. :)
758 2011-01-03 02:58:51 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|who use hushmail?
759 2011-01-03 02:59:07 <nanotube> i don't.... but was wondering if they would block tor
760 2011-01-03 02:59:15 <nanotube> seems like that would be antithetical to their mission
761 2011-01-03 02:59:27 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|well, also I would like some provider that is big enought to probably not read all my emails
762 2011-01-03 02:59:53 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|fuck, just everyone should run tor, i2p and freenet
763 2011-01-03 02:59:54 <EvanR> nanotube: but is a bitcoin vps going to protect your anonymity?
764 2011-01-03 03:00:01 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|and fuck big govs. soon they will make it like in china
765 2011-01-03 03:00:13 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|in fucking china you need ID card to use internet afair (or signup for email or something)
766 2011-01-03 03:00:22 <nanotube> EvanR: yes... if you take care not to tie it to your real world identity in any way.
767 2011-01-03 03:00:36 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|google wants phone number, and in many countries you MUST, or at leas usually you do, show ID and/or use credidcard to get phone number
768 2011-01-03 03:00:41 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|so we are just 1 step behind chine opressions
769 2011-01-03 03:00:50 mtgox has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
770 2011-01-03 03:00:58 <luke-jr> 1 TBTC = 0x10000 NanoBTC ; 1 TBTCáµ = 1 NanoBTC ; 1 áµTBTC =~ 2.6844 BTC ; 1 áµBTC =~ 42.9497 BTC; 1 Tran-BTC =~ 2814749.7671 BTC
771 2011-01-03 03:00:59 <luke-jr> kthx
772 2011-01-03 03:01:00 <EvanR> nanotube: i mean, the cops show up at the place, and ask the guy in charge for the information on the site
773 2011-01-03 03:01:10 <luke-jr> except that "TBTC" isn't sanely pronouncable and stff
774 2011-01-03 03:01:18 * xelister DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|runs 1 more freenet node
775 2011-01-03 03:01:20 <EvanR> they are likely to get nothing, or a bunch of 'useless' data?
776 2011-01-03 03:01:21 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|fuck you mother fuckers
777 2011-01-03 03:01:34 <nanotube> EvanR: yes... if you make sure to always only connect through tor.
778 2011-01-03 03:01:45 <nanotube> the guy who runs it won't have any info on where you are or who you are
779 2011-01-03 03:01:50 <nanotube> so the cops are sol
780 2011-01-03 03:01:50 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|actually, we all should run freenet nodes to help own freedom
781 2011-01-03 03:02:02 <EvanR> ok, regardless of the vps admins politics
782 2011-01-03 03:02:09 <EvanR> except for the choice to rent to you
783 2011-01-03 03:02:12 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|nanotube: well, cops. I just don't need the recipient of my email to know my ip -> geopip etc
784 2011-01-03 03:02:27 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|why this is so freaking hard
785 2011-01-03 03:03:08 <nanotube> EvanR: well, if they sell to you for bitcoin... they don't know your real name, or any 'real world' financial info about you, like your credit card number, etc.
786 2011-01-03 03:03:18 <EvanR> xelister|DrUNK: you tell me, i see exactly where you are
787 2011-01-03 03:03:48 <EvanR> nanotube: right but in my experience, people ask you for a real name, address etc
788 2011-01-03 03:03:58 <EvanR> at least to 'have your identity'
789 2011-01-03 03:04:09 <nanotube> EvanR: yes... but i guess you haven't bought any vps for bitcoins yet eh :)
790 2011-01-03 03:04:22 <EvanR> ah, thats my answer then
791 2011-01-03 03:04:25 <Cusipzzz> nanotube: i have =)
792 2011-01-03 03:05:14 <EvanR> nanotube: but seems like they can still shut you down, without knowing who you are
793 2011-01-03 03:05:43 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|you can also follow trail of which IP generated given block, right?
794 2011-01-03 03:05:49 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|node A at ip ... generated block
795 2011-01-03 03:05:52 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|then send to node B at ip ...
796 2011-01-03 03:05:54 <luke-jr> do you pay BTC for your VPS?
797 2011-01-03 03:05:54 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|etc
798 2011-01-03 03:06:13 <lfm> did you try vekja.net?
799 2011-01-03 03:06:34 <luke-jr> lfm: no, I was soliciting :P
800 2011-01-03 03:06:54 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|guys, at what price per year for email account (200 mb + pop/smtp/imap + basic antispam; accepts TOR/I2P connections, also freemail gateway) would you certainly buy an account?
801 2011-01-03 03:07:12 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|like.. 50 btc / year?
802 2011-01-03 03:07:16 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|10? 100?
803 2011-01-03 03:07:27 <EvanR> 10!
804 2011-01-03 03:07:30 <EvanR> sold
805 2011-01-03 03:07:30 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|also .onion access
806 2011-01-03 03:07:44 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|and what possible other things would you want in such service?
807 2011-01-03 03:07:48 <luke-jr> lfm: haha, they have 25 BTC/wk for web/email, whereas I have 27 BTC/mo for VPS :p
808 2011-01-03 03:08:14 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|luke-jr: but you have to dick around to set up your email there. and not get banned by other servers etc
809 2011-01-03 03:08:19 <Cusipzzz> luke-jr: what vps?
810 2011-01-03 03:08:27 darrob has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
811 2011-01-03 03:08:35 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|goal is to provide trully anonymous nice email to use for private reasons. (spamming or /actuall/ crime - is not wellcomed and is banned etc)
812 2011-01-03 03:08:54 <luke-jr> Cusipzzz: OpenVZ. 8 BTC more for KVM :p
813 2011-01-03 03:09:22 <Cusipzzz> ahh
814 2011-01-03 03:09:33 <luke-jr> plus 7 BTC if you need IPv4
815 2011-01-03 03:09:35 <luke-jr> (IPv6 included)
816 2011-01-03 03:09:56 <EvanR> xelister|DrUNK: how is email normally not 'anonymous'?
817 2011-01-03 03:10:09 <EvanR> if you have anonymous dns and vps
818 2011-01-03 03:10:16 mtve has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
819 2011-01-03 03:11:16 mtve has joined
820 2011-01-03 03:12:14 <Cusipzzz> still pretty cheap
821 2011-01-03 03:12:57 <luke-jr> Cusipzzz: yeah, maybe too cheap :x
822 2011-01-03 03:12:59 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|EvanR: if you run own VPS, and on it you ream email server, then yea this is anonymous
823 2011-01-03 03:13:12 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|on the other hand, people not always want to dick around with setting up own email server
824 2011-01-03 03:13:15 <luke-jr> Cusipzzz: I price in gold, then convert to other stuff, usually rounding things up. I might not be rounding BTC enough
825 2011-01-03 03:13:16 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|normal users
826 2011-01-03 03:13:24 <EvanR> ah righ
827 2011-01-03 03:13:30 <EvanR> youd be providing email
828 2011-01-03 03:13:39 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|with admin and all
829 2011-01-03 03:13:44 <EvanR> already set up, no more no less
830 2011-01-03 03:13:54 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|for non thecnical person VPS shell is useless shit
831 2011-01-03 03:14:07 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|they just need email with web and imap access
832 2011-01-03 03:14:07 <luke-jr> xelister|DrUNK: depends!
833 2011-01-03 03:14:17 <luke-jr> xelister|DrUNK: they could hire an admin or buy managed hosting :p
834 2011-01-03 03:14:27 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|I have vps and it is shit for me now,
835 2011-01-03 03:14:38 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|because I just needed to send email now, not fuck around for 1-3 hours to set it up
836 2011-01-03 03:15:13 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|instead I need that time to watch a movie, drink, fuck some girl, play games, do again Diablo-D3's sister, setup something actually cool like freenet node, and so on
837 2011-01-03 03:15:15 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|=)
838 2011-01-03 03:15:17 Guest86226 has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
839 2011-01-03 03:16:26 <Cusipzzz> loool
840 2011-01-03 03:16:33 james_ has joined
841 2011-01-03 03:17:11 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|or talk with you guys in irc
842 2011-01-03 03:17:21 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|or all at once lol
843 2011-01-03 03:17:40 * luke-jr wonders if he could use an embedded Intel GPU for mining, while using a discrete card for real graphics
844 2011-01-03 03:18:54 <Diablo-D3> nope
845 2011-01-03 03:18:58 <Diablo-D3> gma doesnt have opencl
846 2011-01-03 03:19:25 <luke-jr> huh? I saw a Google result suggesting it does
847 2011-01-03 03:19:49 darrob has joined
848 2011-01-03 03:20:11 <Diablo-D3> nope.
849 2011-01-03 03:20:28 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|if it would, it would be probably still like x50 slower
850 2011-01-03 03:21:00 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|then normal miners with many shader units capable of doing instructions needed by opencl
851 2011-01-03 03:21:10 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|*then normal radeons
852 2011-01-03 03:22:03 acous has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
853 2011-01-03 03:30:59 james__ has joined
854 2011-01-03 03:31:32 james_ has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
855 2011-01-03 03:31:39 AAA_awright_ has joined
856 2011-01-03 03:33:42 AAA_awright has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
857 2011-01-03 03:43:05 james__ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
858 2011-01-03 03:43:54 marioxcc-AFK is now known as marioxcc
859 2011-01-03 03:44:24 james_ has joined
860 2011-01-03 03:49:41 fabianhjr has joined
861 2011-01-03 03:49:45 <fabianhjr> Hi, sup?
862 2011-01-03 03:50:57 <marioxcc> ¿sup?
863 2011-01-03 03:51:02 <fabianhjr> nanotube: you could be interested in this pledge: a FOSS decentralized exchange.
864 2011-01-03 03:51:22 <fabianhjr> Ripple gave me the idea and I pledged for it. :)
865 2011-01-03 03:51:40 <marioxcc> fabianhjr: isn't bitcoin a decentralized exchange system?
866 2011-01-03 03:51:41 <fabianhjr> marioxcc: are you interested?
867 2011-01-03 03:51:53 <marioxcc> fabianhjr: in the idea, yes
868 2011-01-03 03:52:01 <marioxcc> not particullary i'm goint to use anything
869 2011-01-03 03:52:02 <fabianhjr> marioxcc: No, like exchanging Bitcoins for USDs or MXN or CADs or even gold.
870 2011-01-03 03:52:19 <marioxcc> great! :)
871 2011-01-03 03:52:53 <fabianhjr> So, I read in the forums that there cannot be in Russia any sort of exchange because it belongs to the financial institutes.
872 2011-01-03 03:53:15 <fabianhjr> Here is the thread I opened: http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=2581.0
873 2011-01-03 03:53:18 <bitbot> Free Open Source Decentralized Exchange - Pledge 10 BTC
874 2011-01-03 03:53:31 <marioxcc> pledge?
875 2011-01-03 03:53:44 <fabianhjr> I am pleding for it. :)
876 2011-01-03 03:54:04 Shadowolf has joined
877 2011-01-03 03:54:33 <marioxcc> fabianhjr: i don't undestand
878 2011-01-03 03:54:45 <marioxcc> would you pay someone which implements such a system?
879 2011-01-03 03:54:55 <fabianhjr> marioxcc: ok. basically you got real life friends you would trust money right
880 2011-01-03 03:54:56 Shadowolf is now known as Abhish
881 2011-01-03 03:55:12 <fabianhjr> marioxcc: yeah. I want the working acceptable implememntation.
882 2011-01-03 03:55:34 james_ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
883 2011-01-03 03:55:36 <fabianhjr> marioxcc: why, do you kn ow an implementation I didn't hear of?
884 2011-01-03 03:55:40 <marioxcc> no
885 2011-01-03 03:56:21 <fabianhjr> marioxcc: wanna pldge for it or do you want me to explan it?
886 2011-01-03 03:56:31 <EvanR> haha
887 2011-01-03 03:56:35 <EvanR> fabianhjr is a salesman
888 2011-01-03 03:56:49 james_ has joined
889 2011-01-03 03:56:55 <marioxcc> fabianhjr: i'm more interested in development than in "pleding"
890 2011-01-03 03:57:23 <marioxcc> why you don't use the explicit word "to pay for a system which does such and such"?
891 2011-01-03 03:57:28 <marioxcc> i think it is more clear
892 2011-01-03 03:57:49 <fabianhjr> EvanR: what? I don't know how to code yet. I am right now moding the BitCoin System for a one that continuously inflates.(50 PeerCoins per block, no exception, always)
893 2011-01-03 03:57:52 AAA_awright_ is now known as AAA_awright
894 2011-01-03 03:58:17 <marioxcc> fabianhjr: what for?
895 2011-01-03 03:58:20 <EvanR> that does not sound sustainable
896 2011-01-03 03:58:26 <marioxcc> why not?
897 2011-01-03 03:59:03 <fabianhjr> Because Bitcoins has the flaw that the coins on circulation will be decreasing. People die, careless people lose their wallet.dat, etc.
898 2011-01-03 03:59:12 <EvanR> assuming we dont conquer the galaxy, the economy should reach an equilibrium point. if more money keeps being created after that, then we all get indefinitely poorer until we have nothing
899 2011-01-03 03:59:26 <marioxcc> fabianhjr: i thought that too, but that's why bitcoin is very divisible
900 2011-01-03 04:00:06 <fabianhjr> EvanR, no. Because the inflation rate(In percentage) would be decreasing over time. If money gets lost even if I don't know it the percentage of inflation will keep a balance.
901 2011-01-03 04:00:08 <EvanR> making more and more money for no reason will cost energy and damage the environment
902 2011-01-03 04:00:26 <marioxcc> EvanR: first
903 2011-01-03 04:00:33 <fabianhjr> EvanR: Still, Bitcoin depends on block generation.
904 2011-01-03 04:00:34 <marioxcc> using energy don't damages the enviromnt
905 2011-01-03 04:00:40 <EvanR> the lost money factor isnt going to be as big as the inflation
906 2011-01-03 04:00:50 <marioxcc> it does if you use a enviroment unfriendly generation system
907 2011-01-03 04:00:51 <fabianhjr> EvanR: the differnece is the reward for generating it.
908 2011-01-03 04:00:58 <EvanR> no, there are fees
909 2011-01-03 04:01:01 <marioxcc> if you use energy from a coal plant
910 2011-01-03 04:01:12 <marioxcc> it is not bitcoin problem
911 2011-01-03 04:01:16 <marioxcc> but is your problem
912 2011-01-03 04:01:21 <marioxcc> so it's the each one chooise
913 2011-01-03 04:01:34 <fabianhjr> EvanR: Yeah, I know. From the transactions under that block. It is my idea of a better system :3
914 2011-01-03 04:01:34 <lfm> evanr save the environment, turn of your computer, quick, now.
915 2011-01-03 04:01:40 <lfm> off
916 2011-01-03 04:01:53 <marioxcc> lfm: please...
917 2011-01-03 04:02:13 <lfm> please
918 2011-01-03 04:02:15 <fabianhjr> When I am done with this I am going to release it. The market will choose. Also, both have their advantages. I am sure both can exist in harmony.
919 2011-01-03 04:02:23 <marioxcc> lfm: no, i mean that's absurd
920 2011-01-03 04:02:41 <marioxcc> plese don't start a discussion about, energy usage may or may not harm the envoriment
921 2011-01-03 04:02:46 <EvanR> fabianhjr: yeah you could have conversion services
922 2011-01-03 04:02:52 <EvanR> but its the same as harmony
923 2011-01-03 04:02:56 <EvanR> its not the same*
924 2011-01-03 04:03:11 <lfm> marioxco naw, I juist want evenr to turn his off
925 2011-01-03 04:03:16 <fabianhjr> It is different. Neither are bad. They have advantages and disadvantages.
926 2011-01-03 04:03:30 <marioxcc> fabianhjr: what's the exact problem if bitcoins are lost?
927 2011-01-03 04:03:37 <marioxcc> thats good for you actually, because of deflation
928 2011-01-03 04:03:38 <marioxcc> i think
929 2011-01-03 04:03:48 <Cusipzzz> yes please lose all your wallets =)
930 2011-01-03 04:04:13 <EvanR> i dont think losing coins is going to necessitate 50coins per block forever
931 2011-01-03 04:04:21 <fabianhjr> marioxcc: how long do you want this to last? Untile we get a better solution or until we run out of coins to the point where 0.00000001 BTC is worth over 100 of todays dollars?
932 2011-01-03 04:04:42 <marioxcc> fabianhjr: just add more digits
933 2011-01-03 04:04:44 <EvanR> by that time everything will be different
934 2011-01-03 04:04:52 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|people will be chip'ed ;)
935 2011-01-03 04:04:56 <EvanR> everyone can move their decimal place over, among other things
936 2011-01-03 04:04:57 <fabianhjr> EvanR: as it goes forever if no coins are lost the inflation rate will approximate to 0%. Think about it.
937 2011-01-03 04:05:04 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|we can store bitcoin wallet in our id-chip under left arm
938 2011-01-03 04:05:10 <Cusipzzz> lol
939 2011-01-03 04:05:22 <fabianhjr> xelister|DrUNK: LO(L!
940 2011-01-03 04:05:37 <marioxcc> fabianhjr is talking about a real problem
941 2011-01-03 04:05:49 <EvanR> not really
942 2011-01-03 04:05:49 <marioxcc> but i don't think we need to address it now
943 2011-01-03 04:05:55 <marioxcc> just when that happens
944 2011-01-03 04:05:57 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|if United People States of China and World Peace party approves your form requesting such activity
945 2011-01-03 04:06:01 <marioxcc> we add more presicion
946 2011-01-03 04:06:19 <marioxcc> then we won't talk of 1 BTC
947 2011-01-03 04:06:26 <EvanR> equivalently, multiply everyones balance by 100000
948 2011-01-03 04:06:27 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|marioxcc: really 4 MLN * 1000 coins in circulation is not enough? I think it is
949 2011-01-03 04:06:27 <fabianhjr> marioxcc: everything should be addressed at the moment it arises.
950 2011-01-03 04:06:30 <marioxcc> but rather of 1 BTC' (0.001 BTC)
951 2011-01-03 04:06:32 <marioxcc> or so
952 2011-01-03 04:06:38 <marioxcc> fabianhjr: this don't arises yet
953 2011-01-03 04:06:40 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|if not, then we do bitcoin2 value that will use today bitcoin as its "gold reserves" or somehing
954 2011-01-03 04:06:46 <marioxcc> bitcoin is granular enough
955 2011-01-03 04:07:03 <marioxcc> just think what happened to MXN
956 2011-01-03 04:07:20 <marioxcc> it went from 1000 to 1
957 2011-01-03 04:07:21 <fabianhjr> I am rising this potential issue with this implementation of a decentralized currency. I mean. There is even people talking in the forums since an early stage about destroying bitcoins.
958 2011-01-03 04:07:27 <marioxcc> because it was too granural
959 2011-01-03 04:07:31 <marioxcc> with BTC that wll happen the other way
960 2011-01-03 04:07:35 <marioxcc> it will go from 1 to 1000
961 2011-01-03 04:07:40 <marioxcc> 1 BTC = 1000 BTC'
962 2011-01-03 04:07:47 <marioxcc> and that solves everything
963 2011-01-03 04:07:49 <EvanR> i brought up the losing of coins in here too, no one seems to care
964 2011-01-03 04:07:50 <marioxcc> if need, are more digits
965 2011-01-03 04:07:51 <Cusipzzz> let me live to see the day when .00000001 BTC = hundreds of dollars
966 2011-01-03 04:07:52 <marioxcc> and that's all
967 2011-01-03 04:08:12 <fabianhjr> marioxcc: how do you convince everyone's node that your wallet and everyones gets multiplied by 1000?
968 2011-01-03 04:08:14 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|Cusipzzz: ArtForz would be multimilioner
969 2011-01-03 04:08:19 <marioxcc> fabianhjr: it don't
970 2011-01-03 04:08:22 <Cusipzzz> uh, we all would
971 2011-01-03 04:08:31 <marioxcc> it is another currency
972 2011-01-03 04:08:35 <marioxcc> please read what i write
973 2011-01-03 04:08:38 <marioxcc> <marioxcc> 1 BTC = 1000 BTC'
974 2011-01-03 04:08:43 <EvanR> right
975 2011-01-03 04:08:43 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|marioxcc: ok awesome idea
976 2011-01-03 04:08:48 <marioxcc> new software will display BTC'
977 2011-01-03 04:08:52 <marioxcc> old software will display BTC
978 2011-01-03 04:08:55 <fabianhjr> xD lol. Ok.
979 2011-01-03 04:08:56 <marioxcc> people will know the difference
980 2011-01-03 04:09:06 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|marioxcc: why dont you right now buy XeliCoins? we both can agree that 1 XeC = 1000 BTC
981 2011-01-03 04:09:13 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|marioxcc: so how many XeC would you like to buy
982 2011-01-03 04:09:20 <fabianhjr> LOL!
983 2011-01-03 04:09:26 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|there are just 5 such coins so there is no inflation and there will be no more such coins produced ever
984 2011-01-03 04:09:37 <EvanR> gotta collect em all
985 2011-01-03 04:09:40 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|=)
986 2011-01-03 04:09:42 <marioxcc> i really don't see the problem
987 2011-01-03 04:09:47 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|marioxcc: me too!
988 2011-01-03 04:09:48 <marioxcc> unless there is absolutely ZERO BTC
989 2011-01-03 04:09:52 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|stop the chit chat and buy it!
990 2011-01-03 04:09:52 <marioxcc> we can also put more divisions
991 2011-01-03 04:09:58 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|how much, 2, 3 XeC ?
992 2011-01-03 04:10:03 <EvanR> id like to buy some
993 2011-01-03 04:10:03 <marioxcc> i mean, when it's need we can use BTC' or mBTC
994 2011-01-03 04:10:08 <marioxcc> then µBTC
995 2011-01-03 04:10:13 <marioxcc> nBTC
996 2011-01-03 04:10:16 <marioxcc> pBTC
997 2011-01-03 04:10:17 <marioxcc> and so on
998 2011-01-03 04:10:20 <EvanR> nanocoins
999 2011-01-03 04:10:23 <EvanR> lol
1000 2011-01-03 04:10:28 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|EvanR: 1MauACXKKwJiSzLojqcUipZvCNatPrUtpr
1001 2011-01-03 04:10:34 <marioxcc> if bitcoins cointinue to be lost
1002 2011-01-03 04:10:35 <fabianhjr> marioxcc: starting the currency all over again? 0_o
1003 2011-01-03 04:10:38 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|EvanR: you can also buy part of XeC like 0.001 of it etc.
1004 2011-01-03 04:10:40 <EvanR> xelister|DrUNK: exactly what am i buying again? lol
1005 2011-01-03 04:10:41 <marioxcc> we continue to add sub-currencies
1006 2011-01-03 04:10:44 <marioxcc> fabianhjr: no, no
1007 2011-01-03 04:10:49 <marioxcc> it is a multiple of BTC
1008 2011-01-03 04:10:54 <marioxcc> is just a convenience
1009 2011-01-03 04:10:59 <Cusipzzz> i think everyone should destroy their wallets to test the theory, whose with me ?
1010 2011-01-03 04:10:59 <marioxcc> to think in mBTC
1011 2011-01-03 04:11:01 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|EvanR: I guarantee there will be just 5.00 XeC ever. I keep the track of ownership. I dont guarantee to re-buy them lol
1012 2011-01-03 04:11:02 <marioxcc> instad of BTC
1013 2011-01-03 04:11:05 <marioxcc> when 1 BTC = 1000 USD
1014 2011-01-03 04:11:10 <EvanR> xelister|DrUNK: centralized?
1015 2011-01-03 04:11:10 <marioxcc> if such deflation happens
1016 2011-01-03 04:11:12 <EvanR> bullshit
1017 2011-01-03 04:11:15 <fabianhjr> marioxcc: you mean hanging new currencies of Bitcoins like if they were gold?
1018 2011-01-03 04:11:21 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|EvanR: ok actually this can be done on top of BTC
1019 2011-01-03 04:11:29 <marioxcc> fabianhjr: please elaborate
1020 2011-01-03 04:11:37 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|EvanR: we can have XeC transfers done as label-comment of your transfer
1021 2011-01-03 04:12:02 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|e.g.: the block where you send 1MauACXKKwJiSzLojqcUipZvCNatPrUtpr 1 BTC is a proofe that you own 1/1000 = 0.001 of XeC
1022 2011-01-03 04:12:06 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|*proove
1023 2011-01-03 04:12:16 <EvanR> i havent used comments before
1024 2011-01-03 04:12:17 <fabianhjr> marioxcc: you are talking about coming with a new currency that has as security the Bitcoins.
1025 2011-01-03 04:12:23 <marioxcc> no
1026 2011-01-03 04:12:24 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|EvanR: anyway its bullshit, bbl ;)
1027 2011-01-03 04:12:30 <marioxcc> fabianhjr: it isn't a real new currency
1028 2011-01-03 04:12:32 <marioxcc> is a multiple of BTC
1029 2011-01-03 04:12:34 <EvanR> another deal goes out the window, lol
1030 2011-01-03 04:12:35 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|EvanR: ./bitcoind help and pass lable as next argument
1031 2011-01-03 04:12:43 <marioxcc> just like you use picofarads or milifards
1032 2011-01-03 04:12:50 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|or piccards
1033 2011-01-03 04:12:53 <marioxcc> because the farad is a huge unit
1034 2011-01-03 04:12:55 <EvanR> engage
1035 2011-01-03 04:13:01 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|Picards! now that is a currency I woule buy
1036 2011-01-03 04:13:03 <marioxcc> that's what i suggest
1037 2011-01-03 04:13:10 <marioxcc> if 1 BTC is too much
1038 2011-01-03 04:13:16 <marioxcc> you use 1 mBTC as the unit
1039 2011-01-03 04:13:26 <EvanR> you do need to at least patch the software to allow more decimal places
1040 2011-01-03 04:13:28 <marioxcc> but it is the VERY SAME as 0.001 BTC
1041 2011-01-03 04:13:43 <marioxcc> EvanR: what's the problem with that?
1042 2011-01-03 04:13:44 <EvanR> right now everything is done in a whole number of nanocoins
1043 2011-01-03 04:13:51 <marioxcc> again, bitcoin is free software
1044 2011-01-03 04:13:56 <EvanR> to do what you say, you basically have to do what i say, multiply everyones balance
1045 2011-01-03 04:13:58 <marioxcc> we can modify it as need
1046 2011-01-03 04:14:10 <marioxcc> incompatible changes are more difficult
1047 2011-01-03 04:14:13 <marioxcc> of course
1048 2011-01-03 04:14:24 <fabianhjr> Yeah, well. And how do you guarantee all nodes will take that way?
1049 2011-01-03 04:14:26 <marioxcc> EvanR: NOOO
1050 2011-01-03 04:14:27 <marioxcc> again
1051 2011-01-03 04:14:33 <marioxcc> you will display mBTC if you want
1052 2011-01-03 04:14:41 <marioxcc> others could display BTC
1053 2011-01-03 04:14:44 <marioxcc> there is no probem with that
1054 2011-01-03 04:14:50 <marioxcc> just as some capacitors are rated in pF
1055 2011-01-03 04:14:53 <marioxcc> and others in µF
1056 2011-01-03 04:14:55 <EvanR> fine, were talking about when people have 8 nanocoins to their name and need to give 45 nanocoin cents
1057 2011-01-03 04:15:01 <fabianhjr> Yeah, I know that. :P
1058 2011-01-03 04:15:02 <EvanR> you cant
1059 2011-01-03 04:15:12 <EvanR> because you cant give fractional base units
1060 2011-01-03 04:15:28 <marioxcc> EvanR: if more granularity is need
1061 2011-01-03 04:15:28 <EvanR> you need to multiply everything and change units
1062 2011-01-03 04:15:33 <marioxcc> just patch the software
1063 2011-01-03 04:15:36 <marioxcc> no, again
1064 2011-01-03 04:15:38 <marioxcc> and again
1065 2011-01-03 04:15:46 <marioxcc> you don't multiply anything
1066 2011-01-03 04:15:51 <EvanR> youre wrong, and you need to realize it
1067 2011-01-03 04:15:58 <marioxcc> 1 BTC = 1000 mBTC = 1000000 nBTC and so
1068 2011-01-03 04:16:01 <fabianhjr> Well, either way I am going to release PeerCoin when I get a chance. IMHO is also a good solution.
1069 2011-01-03 04:16:05 <marioxcc> it alredy happens with SI units
1070 2011-01-03 04:16:09 <marioxcc> when you need more granularity
1071 2011-01-03 04:16:12 <EvanR> you cant display 45 pico coins, because 45 pico coins is not possible
1072 2011-01-03 04:16:13 <marioxcc> patch the software
1073 2011-01-03 04:16:15 <marioxcc> that's everything
1074 2011-01-03 04:16:57 <EvanR> granularity is basically the point of the discussion
1075 2011-01-03 04:17:13 <EvanR> patching the software == multipling by a global factor
1076 2011-01-03 04:17:23 <EvanR> once
1077 2011-01-03 04:17:31 <EvanR> sounds tricky
1078 2011-01-03 04:17:34 <fabianhjr> IMHO, I could have the node software and shouldn't need to patch it ever again. :/
1079 2011-01-03 04:17:51 <EvanR> you will if everyone else upgrades and rejects you
1080 2011-01-03 04:17:55 <EvanR> democracy
1081 2011-01-03 04:17:57 <marioxcc> fabianhjr: your change is incompatible i think
1082 2011-01-03 04:18:03 <marioxcc> you actually will made another currency
1083 2011-01-03 04:18:22 <marioxcc> while there is a handfull of users which don't switch
1084 2011-01-03 04:18:25 <marioxcc> bitcoin will prevail
1085 2011-01-03 04:18:31 <marioxcc> that's its nature
1086 2011-01-03 04:18:46 <fabianhjr> marioxcc: that is the plan. It is called PeerCoin.
1087 2011-01-03 04:19:00 <EvanR> are you the 15 year old mexican?
1088 2011-01-03 04:19:11 <fabianhjr> yeah. :)
1089 2011-01-03 04:19:17 <EvanR> stealing satoshis empire?
1090 2011-01-03 04:19:29 <EvanR> better watch your back, kid
1091 2011-01-03 04:19:33 <marioxcc> EvanR: "stealing"?
1092 2011-01-03 04:19:37 <fabianhjr> No, I am improving it. I believe this is as a good addition.
1093 2011-01-03 04:19:44 <EvanR> marioxcc: making his own currenc
1094 2011-01-03 04:19:45 <EvanR> y
1095 2011-01-03 04:19:54 <marioxcc> EvanR: that's in no way stealing
1096 2011-01-03 04:19:59 <EvanR> i know.
1097 2011-01-03 04:20:25 <marioxcc> i'm pretty sure you're kidding, but this can lead to misunderstanding
1098 2011-01-03 04:20:47 <EvanR> how?
1099 2011-01-03 04:21:10 <marioxcc> think about, it is very differnt to create a new network
1100 2011-01-03 04:21:17 <marioxcc> than to "steal" an existing one
1101 2011-01-03 04:21:23 <EvanR> yes?
1102 2011-01-03 04:21:32 <marioxcc> fabianhjr: think about the implications to the bitcoin economy
1103 2011-01-03 04:21:39 <marioxcc> what you're suggesting is like a fork
1104 2011-01-03 04:21:44 <marioxcc> i'm not againsting forks but
1105 2011-01-03 04:21:46 <EvanR> referring to A as if it were B is basic humor
1106 2011-01-03 04:21:49 <marioxcc> we know these split community
1107 2011-01-03 04:21:50 <fabianhjr> Well, eitherway I will be reading the 0.3.19 source and see if I can make the change.
1108 2011-01-03 04:22:04 <marioxcc> if you make a fork, there should be a good reason for
1109 2011-01-03 04:22:19 <marioxcc> otherwise, you're just splitting the community and that don't benefits anybody
1110 2011-01-03 04:22:34 <EvanR> fabianhjr: at the first division, your client will be rejected
1111 2011-01-03 04:22:46 <marioxcc> think of the current bitcoin volume is in the milion USD order
1112 2011-01-03 04:23:09 <marioxcc> EvanR: that's what i'm telling
1113 2011-01-03 04:23:22 <EvanR> if 50% of people are using it, we split in two
1114 2011-01-03 04:23:27 <EvanR> very unusual situation
1115 2011-01-03 04:23:50 <fabianhjr> marioxcc: the two currencies are different. One is set to deflate. This one to inflate.
1116 2011-01-03 04:24:03 <marioxcc> fabianhjr: i do know they are different
1117 2011-01-03 04:24:10 <marioxcc> i'm telling you that may be a problem
1118 2011-01-03 04:24:11 <EvanR> yours will eventually be worth less
1119 2011-01-03 04:24:21 <EvanR> bitcoins worth more
1120 2011-01-03 04:24:28 <EvanR> not sure why you want this
1121 2011-01-03 04:24:31 <marioxcc> EvanR: worth less per unit
1122 2011-01-03 04:24:35 <marioxcc> but you will have more units
1123 2011-01-03 04:24:35 <EvanR> yes
1124 2011-01-03 04:24:42 <marioxcc> so no real problem
1125 2011-01-03 04:24:44 <fabianhjr> EvanR the inflation rate would decrease the more the currency units in circulation increases.
1126 2011-01-03 04:24:51 <EvanR> technically yes, but not if you ignore the finite divibility
1127 2011-01-03 04:25:12 <EvanR> fabianhjr: wait, so its not always 50coins?
1128 2011-01-03 04:25:22 <marioxcc> EvanR: is not the same 50 to 100
1129 2011-01-03 04:25:28 <marioxcc> as 50 to 1000 milions
1130 2011-01-03 04:25:33 <fabianhjr> EvanRIt would always be 50 PeerCoins per block.
1131 2011-01-03 04:25:37 <EvanR> marioxcc: depends on the divisibility
1132 2011-01-03 04:25:40 <marioxcc> the first generate a huge inflation
1133 2011-01-03 04:25:42 <marioxcc> the second don't
1134 2011-01-03 04:25:47 <marioxcc> also fabianhjr
1135 2011-01-03 04:25:53 <marioxcc> inflation generates a problem on the other side
1136 2011-01-03 04:25:55 <EvanR> fabianhjr: so how are you proposing to change inflation
1137 2011-01-03 04:26:07 <marioxcc> what when 1 USD is worth milions of your PeerCoins?
1138 2011-01-03 04:26:21 <marioxcc> then ordinary transactions will overflow the fixnums
1139 2011-01-03 04:26:35 <EvanR> 64bit was stupid
1140 2011-01-03 04:26:48 <marioxcc> ???
1141 2011-01-03 04:26:49 <EvanR> sane fixed point numbers dont overflow
1142 2011-01-03 04:27:01 <marioxcc> EvanR: well
1143 2011-01-03 04:27:10 <marioxcc> it is the same possibility for the PeerCoins to overflow
1144 2011-01-03 04:27:13 <marioxcc> as the BTC to overflow
1145 2011-01-03 04:27:16 <EvanR> yes
1146 2011-01-03 04:27:18 <marioxcc> both are fixed point
1147 2011-01-03 04:27:25 <marioxcc> so you change a problem
1148 2011-01-03 04:27:26 <ArtForz> no
1149 2011-01-03 04:27:26 <EvanR> fixed point doesnt imply overflow though
1150 2011-01-03 04:27:32 <marioxcc> to it complement
1151 2011-01-03 04:27:43 purpleposeidon has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1152 2011-01-03 04:27:53 <ArtForz> bitcoin is limited to 21M * 10e8 units, which fits in a int64 with ~10 bits to spare
1153 2011-01-03 04:28:12 <EvanR> oh, i thought it didnt fit
1154 2011-01-03 04:28:18 purpleposeidon has joined
1155 2011-01-03 04:28:42 <ArtForz> why the fuck we left > 10 bits unused, no clue
1156 2011-01-03 04:28:52 <fabianhjr> ArtForz: lol
1157 2011-01-03 04:28:56 Abhish has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1158 2011-01-03 04:29:00 <marioxcc> maybe to use these as a tag
1159 2011-01-03 04:29:02 <marioxcc> who knows?
1160 2011-01-03 04:29:20 <EvanR> ArtForz: for the purposes of this discussion on increasing granularity, i guess we have room to expand
1161 2011-01-03 04:29:24 <EvanR> but theres a limit
1162 2011-01-03 04:29:42 <marioxcc> ArtForz: can't it be expaned more and more?
1163 2011-01-03 04:29:52 <marioxcc> is there some limitation in the protocol for instance?
1164 2011-01-03 04:29:53 <EvanR> 10 bits worth yes
1165 2011-01-03 04:29:57 <ArtForz> 64 bits, fixed
1166 2011-01-03 04:30:31 <ArtForz> and for some really weird reson we're using signed int64s for strictly nonnegative values
1167 2011-01-03 04:30:41 <marioxcc> lol
1168 2011-01-03 04:30:47 <fabianhjr> Ok, so in my currency. Each year 1908000 would be generated per year. That means that it would take 100 years to get to a 1% inflation rate if no coins are lost) lol.
1169 2011-01-03 04:31:07 <EvanR> ArtForz: since it cant be negative, and we dont use the biggest numbers, they are effectively the same
1170 2011-01-03 04:31:16 <fabianhjr> ArtForz: why not unsigned? That would relief the memory. xD
1171 2011-01-03 04:31:21 <EvanR> so you could change all the stupid c++ code and nothing would happen
1172 2011-01-03 04:31:29 <EvanR> unless you wanted to use the last bit
1173 2011-01-03 04:31:46 * marioxcc agrees with the "stupid c++ code" thing
1174 2011-01-03 04:31:51 <marioxcc> :)
1175 2011-01-03 04:32:12 <ArtForz> well, with the space left over in the int64 we couldv'e made COIN=1e11 and still had some room left
1176 2011-01-03 04:32:19 Xanie has quit (Quit: This a triumph,I'm making a note here HUHE SUCCESS!)
1177 2011-01-03 04:32:22 <fabianhjr> Does anyone know if https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin is active?
1178 2011-01-03 04:32:37 <marioxcc> probably not
1179 2011-01-03 04:32:43 <marioxcc> there is a SVN repo in source forge
1180 2011-01-03 04:33:07 <marioxcc> but please think twice before actually suggesting people to use your PeerCoins instead of bitcoins
1181 2011-01-03 04:33:10 <fabianhjr> Yeah, I know, though, I am using GitHub and woukld prefer making a fork instead of going the long way. xD
1182 2011-01-03 04:33:12 <ArtForz> anyways, lets say we keep generation fixed at 50*10e8 units per block, that means to voerflow a int64 we'd need... 1844674407 blocks
1183 2011-01-03 04:33:19 <marioxcc> if you use fixed size numbers
1184 2011-01-03 04:33:25 <marioxcc> then you trade the underflow problem
1185 2011-01-03 04:33:27 <fabianhjr> marioxcc: I will. I hadn't submitted anything yet.
1186 2011-01-03 04:33:29 <marioxcc> for a overflow problem
1187 2011-01-03 04:33:53 <ArtForz> so... at 6 blocks/h about 35k years
1188 2011-01-03 04:34:17 <marioxcc> fabianhjr: I don't object you to make the changes you want, I would object however, if you announce it as a BTC alternative or replacement
1189 2011-01-03 04:34:22 <marioxcc> :)
1190 2011-01-03 04:34:35 <EvanR> it just seems like the signedness can be changed under everyones noses
1191 2011-01-03 04:34:53 <EvanR> the protocol would be unchanged
1192 2011-01-03 04:35:01 <ArtForz> well, I dont see why anyone would want to hold onto peercoins when they're constantly inflating
1193 2011-01-03 04:35:22 <nanotube> fabianhjr: see my post in your thread about decentralized exchange.
1194 2011-01-03 04:35:55 <marioxcc> fabianhjr: you can also use git commands which speak SVN on the wire
1195 2011-01-03 04:35:55 <eureka^> is there an active BTC->IRL currency exchange?
1196 2011-01-03 04:36:02 <marioxcc> see git-svn doccumentation
1197 2011-01-03 04:36:17 <ArtForz> errr... what currency is IRL?
1198 2011-01-03 04:36:18 <EvanR> eureka^: theres #bitcoin-otc
1199 2011-01-03 04:36:27 <EvanR> and bitcoinbuy.com
1200 2011-01-03 04:36:45 <fabianhjr> Oh cool. I have to check that nanotube. :)
1201 2011-01-03 04:37:30 <nanotube> :)
1202 2011-01-03 04:41:55 <fabianhjr> nanotube: I think they do not mention an actual exchange.
1203 2011-01-03 04:42:22 <fabianhjr> They focus on credits as an escrow.
1204 2011-01-03 04:42:42 <fabianhjr> I seen their software. Do you refer to the currency internal exchnage?
1205 2011-01-03 04:44:26 james_ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1206 2011-01-03 04:44:50 <nanotube> it's not about exchange... it's about having the trust network, and being willing to do exchange with your counterparty. the ripple network would merely be the enabler of trust.
1207 2011-01-03 04:45:43 james has joined
1208 2011-01-03 04:46:09 james is now known as Guest21612
1209 2011-01-03 04:47:51 * MT`AwAy fixed http://www.pastecoin.com/
1210 2011-01-03 04:48:13 <MT`AwAy> (took a while to get this crap ubuntu to work)
1211 2011-01-03 04:49:32 <nanotube> MT`AwAy: nice :)
1212 2011-01-03 04:51:16 <MT`AwAy> ok
1213 2011-01-03 04:51:21 <MT`AwAy> now the thing I didn't want to touch
1214 2011-01-03 04:51:24 <MT`AwAy> need to move my mails server
1215 2011-01-03 04:51:28 <MT`AwAy> this is going to be painful
1216 2011-01-03 04:55:31 tjgillies_ has joined
1217 2011-01-03 04:55:58 <tjgillies_> do bitcoin clients send ip addresses of other clients?
1218 2011-01-03 04:56:21 <tjgillies_> or are ips found exclusively through irc?
1219 2011-01-03 04:57:04 <nanotube> tjgillies_: yes; no.
1220 2011-01-03 04:57:23 <nanotube> :)
1221 2011-01-03 04:58:01 <tjgillies_> oh so client A asks client B "what are all the ips you know of?"
1222 2011-01-03 04:58:07 tjgillies has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1223 2011-01-03 04:59:09 <nanotube> yea pretty much. the irc is just a backup bootstrapping method.
1224 2011-01-03 04:59:26 <tjgillies_> gotcha
1225 2011-01-03 04:59:36 <tjgillies_> thnx
1226 2011-01-03 05:00:08 <nanotube> np
1227 2011-01-03 05:00:21 tylergillies has joined
1228 2011-01-03 05:00:21 tylergillies has quit (Changing host)
1229 2011-01-03 05:00:21 tylergillies has joined
1230 2011-01-03 05:01:38 james_ has joined
1231 2011-01-03 05:01:40 Guest21612 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1232 2011-01-03 05:14:48 remmy_ has joined
1233 2011-01-03 05:16:03 james__ has joined
1234 2011-01-03 05:16:28 james_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1235 2011-01-03 05:19:23 <Sami345> I get 1 BTC from this http://blockexplorer.com/block/000000000000b9c7ef6be66b02fe6e4f11e2e9ac57abd550cc8e4a211f7bd640 :)
1236 2011-01-03 05:19:27 <fabianhjr> Wow, hashrate x4 from last week 0_o
1237 2011-01-03 05:19:46 <Sami345> I found this thing from Wikipedia
1238 2011-01-03 05:20:54 <AnonymousUser> Hey, does anyone here know anything about cryptography? I'm looking for a client that does a very particular application of encrpytion
1239 2011-01-03 05:20:57 <marioxcc> fabianhjr: PM :)
1240 2011-01-03 05:21:04 <AnonymousUser> er, an email client
1241 2011-01-03 05:21:11 <marioxcc> AnonymousUser: as fsbot ,anyone says
1242 2011-01-03 05:21:20 <marioxcc> don't as if you can ask or if someone is good or knows of X
1243 2011-01-03 05:21:25 <marioxcc> just throw your real question
1244 2011-01-03 05:21:33 <marioxcc> and if someone can, he will help you
1245 2011-01-03 05:22:31 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|fabianhjr: what? hash arete is now x4 since last week??
1246 2011-01-03 05:23:00 <Sami345> lots of new users I think :d
1247 2011-01-03 05:23:19 midnightmagic_ has joined
1248 2011-01-03 05:23:26 <midnightmagic_> ;;bc,stats
1249 2011-01-03 05:23:27 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|with gpu clusters?!
1250 2011-01-03 05:23:27 <gribble> Current Blocks: 100801 | Current Difficulty: 16307.48285682 | Next Difficulty At Block: 102815 | Next Difficulty In: 2014 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 5 days, 0 hours, 50 minutes, and 24 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 65230.42677925
1251 2011-01-03 05:23:44 <nanotube> oooh, new difficulty
1252 2011-01-03 05:24:16 <Sami345> Next Difficulty Estimate: 65230.42677925
1253 2011-01-03 05:24:17 <Sami345> lol
1254 2011-01-03 05:24:22 * marioxcc curses the one who selected a so GPU-optimal PoW
1255 2011-01-03 05:24:27 <Sami345> that's pretty high?
1256 2011-01-03 05:24:37 <nanotube> Sami345: it's a bad estimate, wait until a few hundred blocks have passed.
1257 2011-01-03 05:24:38 <Sami345> PoW?
1258 2011-01-03 05:24:44 <nanotube> pow = proof of work
1259 2011-01-03 05:25:26 <AnonymousUser> I'm wondering if there's an email cleint that can handle multple key encrpytion
1260 2011-01-03 05:25:38 <marioxcc> Sami345: proof of work
1261 2011-01-03 05:25:43 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|marioxcc: you mean the AES commision ;) well, I guess Satoshi could had used some other algo.. but which, sha256 was the most obvious choice imo
1262 2011-01-03 05:25:47 <Sami345> marioxcc, too late :P
1263 2011-01-03 05:25:56 <marioxcc> yeah
1264 2011-01-03 05:25:58 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|AnonymousUser: multiple openpgp recipients? sure
1265 2011-01-03 05:26:02 <marioxcc> i should have cursed him earlier
1266 2011-01-03 05:26:21 <marioxcc> or they, if you talk about the AES commision, hehe
1267 2011-01-03 05:26:25 <marioxcc> xelister|DrUNK: probably
1268 2011-01-03 05:26:44 <marioxcc> what could be a good PoW which is faster on CPU?
1269 2011-01-03 05:28:14 <Sami345> something that takes lot's of memory?
1270 2011-01-03 05:28:27 <Sami345> idk
1271 2011-01-03 05:28:29 <marioxcc> maybe not
1272 2011-01-03 05:28:35 <marioxcc> a branching-intensive thing maybe
1273 2011-01-03 05:28:41 <marioxcc> like integer factoring (i'm not sure)
1274 2011-01-03 05:28:43 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|it is said, that operations which include lots of small random memory accesses, or lots of branching, or non standard instructions
1275 2011-01-03 05:28:58 <xelister> DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|yeah and taking lots of mem helps too
1276 2011-01-03 05:29:01 <marioxcc> :)
1277 2011-01-03 05:29:10 sgornick has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1278 2011-01-03 05:29:43 <Sami345> Server temporily down :(
1279 2011-01-03 05:30:18 * midnightmagic_ waves.
1280 2011-01-03 05:30:25 <midnightmagic_> Happy New Year!
1281 2011-01-03 05:30:26 <marioxcc> hello midnightmagic_ !
1282 2011-01-03 05:30:31 sgornick has joined
1283 2011-01-03 05:30:38 <marioxcc> it isnt longer new but happy new year too too
1284 2011-01-03 05:30:39 xelister is now known as DrUNK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|xelister|DrUnK
1285 2011-01-03 05:30:52 midnightmagic_ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1286 2011-01-03 05:31:21 <Sami345> hmm
1287 2011-01-03 05:31:34 <Sami345> it takes forever for most 3D-renders to render a image
1288 2011-01-03 05:31:41 <Sami345> what about OpenCL 3D-render
1289 2011-01-03 05:31:46 <marioxcc> what?
1290 2011-01-03 05:31:48 <xelister> DrUnK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|yeah lol
1291 2011-01-03 05:32:04 <marioxcc> Sami345: they can't render 3d faster
1292 2011-01-03 05:32:06 <xelister> DrUnK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|GPU cards are known for being bad at fancy things like 3d-rendering. LOLOLOLolololoLLOLOLollololoOLOL000lll1111
1293 2011-01-03 05:32:14 <marioxcc> they're alredy especialiced for such thing
1294 2011-01-03 05:32:18 <Sami345> marioxcc, faster than CPU?
1295 2011-01-03 05:32:20 <Diablo-D3> I think he means offline CGI rendering
1296 2011-01-03 05:32:29 <marioxcc> yes
1297 2011-01-03 05:32:34 <xelister> DrUnK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|3d rendering is too undefinable
1298 2011-01-03 05:32:36 <marioxcc> unless you have a
1299 2011-01-03 05:32:36 <Diablo-D3> and yes, some renderers already use GPUs
1300 2011-01-03 05:32:38 <marioxcc> damn crappy GPU
1301 2011-01-03 05:32:40 <xelister> DrUnK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|there is no best algo for it
1302 2011-01-03 05:32:47 <marioxcc> or a CPU
1303 2011-01-03 05:32:49 <xelister> DrUnK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|people will not agree on that
1304 2011-01-03 05:32:52 <marioxcc> sort of intel research
1305 2011-01-03 05:32:55 <xelister> DrUnK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|we need something simple to define
1306 2011-01-03 05:32:55 <marioxcc> like 120 cores or so
1307 2011-01-03 05:32:58 <marioxcc> at 4 GHz
1308 2011-01-03 05:33:17 <marioxcc> i undestand GPU power comes from SIMD
1309 2011-01-03 05:33:20 <marioxcc> instructions
1310 2011-01-03 05:33:33 <xelister> DrUnK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|ye
1311 2011-01-03 05:33:53 <Sami345> damn I must be bored
1312 2011-01-03 05:33:59 <marioxcc> but they will probably suck at branching
1313 2011-01-03 05:34:18 <Sami345> I have stared xxxxxxx khash/s for a few hours :D
1314 2011-01-03 05:34:39 <Diablo-D3> whos client?
1315 2011-01-03 05:34:41 <marioxcc> what do you did with overheating?
1316 2011-01-03 05:35:24 <Sami345> marioxcc, cleaned up
1317 2011-01-03 05:35:35 <Sami345> now temp never rises over 81 degree
1318 2011-01-03 05:35:44 <Sami345> even after 4 hours
1319 2011-01-03 05:36:47 <AnonymousUser> huh... is it possible to set up an encrpytion scheme so that multiple documents are produced to be read by different public keys?
1320 2011-01-03 05:36:58 <xelister> DrUnK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|AnonymousUser: yes
1321 2011-01-03 05:37:10 <xelister> DrUnK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|AnonymousUser: openpgp email sent to multiply recipients at once uses that afaik
1322 2011-01-03 05:37:28 <marioxcc> xelister|DrUnK: OpenPGP isn't email-specific
1323 2011-01-03 05:37:32 xelister is now known as DrUnK!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|xelister|dRuNk
1324 2011-01-03 05:37:33 <AnonymousUser> no, i mean, different documents
1325 2011-01-03 05:37:51 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|ah
1326 2011-01-03 05:37:54 <AnonymousUser> like 4 public keys, 4 different only slight different documents
1327 2011-01-03 05:37:55 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|yes, phonebook encryption
1328 2011-01-03 05:37:58 <fabianhjr> Night
1329 2011-01-03 05:38:01 fabianhjr has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.6.13/20101203075014])
1330 2011-01-03 05:38:03 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|and they can be totally different too
1331 2011-01-03 05:38:11 <Sami345> 114 confirmations left I want my money!
1332 2011-01-03 05:38:16 <AnonymousUser> right
1333 2011-01-03 05:38:31 <AnonymousUser> and most importantly, it needs to be secure to both figuring out the data and the public keys to decrypt the data
1334 2011-01-03 05:39:05 <marioxcc> AnonymousUser: what are you looking for, exactly?
1335 2011-01-03 05:39:24 <AnonymousUser> Well the ideal program would be:
1336 2011-01-03 05:39:32 <marioxcc> don't post pseudocode please
1337 2011-01-03 05:39:38 <marioxcc> use pastebin for that
1338 2011-01-03 05:39:50 <AnonymousUser> Can I write a description?
1339 2011-01-03 05:40:03 <marioxcc> sure
1340 2011-01-03 05:40:09 <marioxcc> i mean just please don't flood
1341 2011-01-03 05:40:18 <marioxcc> :)
1342 2011-01-03 05:40:20 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|1-Cypress-core2: INVALID BLOCK found. nonce=2098861849 G=80624 H=2456409318
1343 2011-01-03 05:40:22 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|thank you ati
1344 2011-01-03 05:40:26 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|FUCK YOU IN THE ASS, CROSSFIRE SHIT
1345 2011-01-03 05:40:31 <marioxcc> xelister|dRuNk: ???
1346 2011-01-03 05:40:35 <marioxcc> data corruption?
1347 2011-01-03 05:40:54 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|marioxcc: since Ati software development is lead by mentally retarded fucktards, and it takes a while for Amd to fire this idiots,
1348 2011-01-03 05:41:05 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|therefore their software drivers are still, since 2005's, utter crap
1349 2011-01-03 05:41:16 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|in example enabling crappy xfire, that makes OpenCL produce invalid results
1350 2011-01-03 05:41:27 <marioxcc> what a pity
1351 2011-01-03 05:41:33 <marioxcc> that is when free software comes in handy
1352 2011-01-03 05:41:41 <marioxcc> if they were free, you could debug it
1353 2011-01-03 05:41:42 <marioxcc> :)
1354 2011-01-03 05:41:45 <AnonymousUser> Sure. I'll do my best -- I'm looking for a program that sends out an email to each recipient after accepting a public key. essentially, i want a system where users have multiple private keys and they are exchanged in secure transactions
1355 2011-01-03 05:41:47 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|it is possible to again disable it. just it takes some time. and few restars of X server, that I dont want to d onow
1356 2011-01-03 05:42:13 <marioxcc> so you have to work around the bug
1357 2011-01-03 05:42:20 <AnonymousUser> i mean, in practice it's something similar to that
1358 2011-01-03 05:42:20 <marioxcc> proprietary software makes you do that, to adapt you to the software
1359 2011-01-03 05:42:26 <marioxcc> instead of to adapt the software to you
1360 2011-01-03 05:42:27 <marioxcc> :)
1361 2011-01-03 05:42:28 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|yea, i just dont want now to restard my X server milion times to fix this
1362 2011-01-03 05:43:08 <marioxcc> ok
1363 2011-01-03 05:44:40 <marioxcc> AnonymousUser: sorry, i don't undestand very well
1364 2011-01-03 05:44:43 <marioxcc> let's see
1365 2011-01-03 05:44:45 <AnonymousUser> sorry, i meant public
1366 2011-01-03 05:44:49 <marioxcc> you encrypt the doccuemt
1367 2011-01-03 05:44:54 <marioxcc> who should be able to see it?
1368 2011-01-03 05:45:39 <Sami345> ;;bc,calc 6219000
1369 2011-01-03 05:45:40 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 6219000 Khps, given current difficulty of 16307.48285682 , is 3 hours, 7 minutes, and 42 seconds
1370 2011-01-03 05:45:41 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|AnonymousUser: you want different data decrypted based on what key you use? google addressbook encryption
1371 2011-01-03 05:45:54 <AnonymousUser> ok
1372 2011-01-03 05:45:59 <luke-jr> xelister|dRuNk is just trolling. :P
1373 2011-01-03 05:46:10 <luke-jr> ATi's cards work fine with free software
1374 2011-01-03 05:46:19 <Sami345> ;;bc,calc 9000000
1375 2011-01-03 05:46:20 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 9000000 Khps, given current difficulty of 16307.48285682 , is 2 hours, 9 minutes, and 42 seconds
1376 2011-01-03 05:46:37 <marioxcc> luke-jr: fine, but they can run a miner with it?
1377 2011-01-03 05:46:52 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|no. wait
1378 2011-01-03 05:46:52 <luke-jr> marioxcc: not that I know of
1379 2011-01-03 05:46:57 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|phonebook
1380 2011-01-03 05:46:59 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|AnonymousUser: http://www.freenet.org.nz/phonebook/
1381 2011-01-03 05:47:19 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|luke-jr: are you idiot? Ati card do not at all support OpenCL on freesoftware
1382 2011-01-03 05:47:39 <luke-jr> xelister|dRuNk: nothing does
1383 2011-01-03 05:47:46 <luke-jr> ATi cards will probably be the first
1384 2011-01-03 05:47:57 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|luke-jr: *be* not are
1385 2011-01-03 05:48:03 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|so you sir are trolling, stfu
1386 2011-01-03 05:48:24 <luke-jr> so ATi cards suck because they don't do something that no other card does
1387 2011-01-03 05:48:24 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|right now you have to use Ati's closed source drivers to mine on gpu, and this drivers are SHIT. even ask ArtForz for example
1388 2011-01-03 05:48:25 <marioxcc> luke-jr: ok, thanks
1389 2011-01-03 05:48:25 <luke-jr> riiight
1390 2011-01-03 05:48:51 <luke-jr> xelister|dRuNk: proprietary software doesn't count as anything
1391 2011-01-03 05:48:53 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|luke-jr: they suck because they constantly hang, re-enable xfire, make glitches on switching VTerminals/Xservers, and so on
1392 2011-01-03 05:49:40 <AnonymousUser> xelister: that sounds like what i want. Is this implemented in any email clients?
1393 2011-01-03 05:49:53 <AnonymousUser> nothing came up when i googled it
1394 2011-01-03 05:50:32 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|AnonymousUser: I dont think it is implemented. But you can send the entire "partiotion" of this phonebookfs
1395 2011-01-03 05:50:33 <AnonymousUser> oh wait, i called it addressbook
1396 2011-01-03 05:50:51 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|AnonymousUser: but this software seems not very supported nowdays. Abandoned? Well it is opensource, someone should pick it up
1397 2011-01-03 05:50:51 <luke-jr> I mined 0.037 BTC yesterday >_<
1398 2011-01-03 05:51:04 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|luke-jr: I mined 150.00 BTC on 1st 2011. Pitty cpu miners :P
1399 2011-01-03 05:51:24 <luke-jr> xelister|dRuNk: but you used proprietary software, so you automatically lose
1400 2011-01-03 05:51:25 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|*over 150
1401 2011-01-03 05:51:34 <AnonymousUser> :( damn
1402 2011-01-03 05:51:36 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|luke-jr: lol, easy there rms
1403 2011-01-03 05:51:41 <marioxcc> xelister|dRuNk: pitty, to my opinion, those who surrent their freedom for 150 BTC
1404 2011-01-03 05:52:03 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|ArtForz: you should stop mining and use only GPU, to be more FOSS friendly :}
1405 2011-01-03 05:52:08 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|s/GPU/CPU
1406 2011-01-03 05:52:24 <Diablo-D3> lol
1407 2011-01-03 05:52:30 <Diablo-D3> he should join the pool
1408 2011-01-03 05:52:49 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|yeah I would like to run the pool ArtForz would join
1409 2011-01-03 05:52:59 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|I would not like run away with all the blocks mined, or anything
1410 2011-01-03 05:53:13 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|anyway, bbl o/
1411 2011-01-03 05:53:18 <luke-jr> xelister|dRuNk: who would trust you? you sold your soul for 150 BTC! :P
1412 2011-01-03 05:53:56 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|well but then I bought Diablo-D3's sister for 150 BTC and she has a heart of gold, so that does count as karma balance 0 right?
1413 2011-01-03 05:54:01 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|ok enough this ;) bye o/
1414 2011-01-03 05:54:08 <marioxcc> youre a troll
1415 2011-01-03 05:54:23 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|and you're a CPU miner
1416 2011-01-03 05:54:35 <marioxcc> and very proud of :)
1417 2011-01-03 05:54:41 <luke-jr> marioxcc: how's that FPGA coming? <.<
1418 2011-01-03 05:54:57 <luke-jr> this troll needs to be put where he belongs >:D
1419 2011-01-03 05:55:05 <marioxcc> luke-jr: oh well, ArtForz say it is difficutl to develop FPGAs with free software
1420 2011-01-03 05:55:15 <marioxcc> and even the propreitary softwar of manufacturer sucks
1421 2011-01-03 05:55:16 <marioxcc> he says
1422 2011-01-03 05:55:22 <luke-jr> probably
1423 2011-01-03 05:55:28 <marioxcc> if I had money, I would bet on ASICs
1424 2011-01-03 05:55:44 <Sami345> we nee P2P email!
1425 2011-01-03 05:55:45 * luke-jr ponders how Cell SPUs would do
1426 2011-01-03 05:55:49 <marioxcc> SPU?
1427 2011-01-03 05:55:56 <luke-jr> Sami345: email *is* p2p, idiot :p
1428 2011-01-03 05:56:03 <luke-jr> marioxcc: the 8 cores
1429 2011-01-03 05:56:10 <marioxcc> ok
1430 2011-01-03 05:56:10 <EvanR> they suck
1431 2011-01-03 05:56:17 <luke-jr> o
1432 2011-01-03 05:56:29 <luke-jr> quantum computer?
1433 2011-01-03 05:56:30 <marioxcc> well, AMD have 12-core CPUs
1434 2011-01-03 05:56:32 <Sami345> luke-jr, every user is not running a email server
1435 2011-01-03 05:56:42 <luke-jr> marioxcc: Cell has 9 cores, 1 PowerPC and 8 something else
1436 2011-01-03 05:56:50 <luke-jr> Sami345: not my fault
1437 2011-01-03 05:56:53 <Sami345> so it is s2s
1438 2011-01-03 05:56:59 <Sami345> server to server :D
1439 2011-01-03 05:57:07 <luke-jr> so p2p
1440 2011-01-03 05:57:16 <luke-jr> servers are peers to other servers
1441 2011-01-03 05:57:18 <luke-jr> :P
1442 2011-01-03 05:57:50 <Sami345> I go eat
1443 2011-01-03 05:57:52 <luke-jr> the Internet is p2p. everything on the Internet is also inherently p2p âº
1444 2011-01-03 05:58:02 <marioxcc> well, on the connection side
1445 2011-01-03 05:58:09 <marioxcc> but web isn't for instance
1446 2011-01-03 05:58:30 <marioxcc> on a higher abstraction level, not everything is P2P, even if they are at the IP level
1447 2011-01-03 05:59:01 <marioxcc> :)
1448 2011-01-03 05:59:16 <luke-jr> trivialities <.<
1449 2011-01-03 05:59:28 <marioxcc> hehe
1450 2011-01-03 05:59:52 <luke-jr> anyhow⦠1 TBTC = 0x10000 NanoBTC ; 1 TBTCáµ = 1 NanoBTC ; 1 áµTBTC =~ 2.6844 BTC ; 1 áµBTC =~ 42.9497 BTC; 1 Tran-BTC =~ 2814749.7671 BTC
1451 2011-01-03 05:59:56 <luke-jr> maybe?
1452 2011-01-03 05:59:56 <xelister> dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|ethernet is not nesesarly p2p :P
1453 2011-01-03 06:00:32 <EvanR> 1 ? = pi BTC
1454 2011-01-03 06:00:34 <marioxcc> wai
1455 2011-01-03 06:00:36 <marioxcc> wait
1456 2011-01-03 06:00:43 <marioxcc> what do means
1457 2011-01-03 06:00:43 xelister is now known as dRuNk!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|xelister|smoking
1458 2011-01-03 06:00:47 <marioxcc> b as a superindex?
1459 2011-01-03 06:00:54 <marioxcc> TBTCáµ?
1460 2011-01-03 06:01:02 <luke-jr> -bong divider
1461 2011-01-03 06:01:36 <luke-jr> 1 Xáµ = 1/0x10000 X
1462 2011-01-03 06:01:41 <marioxcc> ok
1463 2011-01-03 06:01:47 <luke-jr> 1 áµX = 0x10000 X
1464 2011-01-03 06:01:48 <marioxcc> myriad-like
1465 2011-01-03 06:01:49 <marioxcc> duh
1466 2011-01-03 06:02:29 <luke-jr> http://www.lulu.com/product/file-download/tonal-system/10991091
1467 2011-01-03 06:03:21 <marioxcc> oh
1468 2011-01-03 06:03:24 <marioxcc> 10000 base 16
1469 2011-01-03 06:03:28 <EvanR> bitbongs
1470 2011-01-03 06:03:31 <marioxcc> that makes more sense now
1471 2011-01-03 06:03:59 <luke-jr> EvanR: interesting idea for a name âº
1472 2011-01-03 06:04:10 <luke-jr> but then that means each single unit is a 'bit' XD
1473 2011-01-03 06:04:31 <marioxcc> Pi don't makes sense here, as a base
1474 2011-01-03 06:04:48 <EvanR> we should use bits as currency
1475 2011-01-03 06:04:52 <marioxcc> luke-jr: I will save it for later :)
1476 2011-01-03 06:05:03 <marioxcc> EvanR: the bit is an information unit
1477 2011-01-03 06:05:05 <luke-jr> no, base Ï probably is impossible for BTC
1478 2011-01-03 06:05:22 <luke-jr> marioxcc: only in the old system :p
1479 2011-01-03 06:05:24 <EvanR> marioxcc: exactly
1480 2011-01-03 06:05:34 <EvanR> information is the new gold
1481 2011-01-03 06:05:43 <luke-jr> bit is replaced by a blokbong in Tonal IIRC
1482 2011-01-03 06:05:45 <marioxcc> it don't works that way
1483 2011-01-03 06:05:56 <marioxcc> using bit as a currency is incosistent with dymensional analysis
1484 2011-01-03 06:05:56 <luke-jr> Báµ
1485 2011-01-03 06:06:31 <EvanR> dimensional analysis isnt a law of the universe, see physics units where electric field units == magnetic field units, space == time, and mass == energy
1486 2011-01-03 06:06:48 <luke-jr> too late, night
1487 2011-01-03 06:06:51 <marioxcc> dymensional analysis is an human tool
1488 2011-01-03 06:06:55 <marioxcc> good night luke-jr
1489 2011-01-03 06:07:01 <marioxcc> units are an human tool
1490 2011-01-03 06:07:05 <EvanR> yeah so anything can be currency
1491 2011-01-03 06:07:08 <EvanR> see mass units of gold
1492 2011-01-03 06:07:19 <EvanR> length units of yarn
1493 2011-01-03 06:07:26 <EvanR> number of pennies
1494 2011-01-03 06:07:33 <EvanR> bits
1495 2011-01-03 06:07:34 <EvanR> lol
1496 2011-01-03 06:07:37 <marioxcc> EvanR: how do you derivate bits from currency?
1497 2011-01-03 06:07:41 <AnonymousUser> Does the license for the bitcoin program allow me to distribute it with a commercial application?
1498 2011-01-03 06:07:44 <marioxcc> maybe using thermodynamic entropu
1499 2011-01-03 06:07:48 <marioxcc> *entropy
1500 2011-01-03 06:07:52 <marioxcc> but it is a mess anyways
1501 2011-01-03 06:07:55 <EvanR> AnonymousUser: yes
1502 2011-01-03 06:08:01 <marioxcc> AnonymousUser: commercial, sure
1503 2011-01-03 06:08:08 <marioxcc> acutually with free softwar
1504 2011-01-03 06:08:15 <marioxcc> we don't have problem with commercial usage
1505 2011-01-03 06:08:26 <marioxcc> unless you really mean proprietary
1506 2011-01-03 06:08:26 <AnonymousUser> And what about free software?
1507 2011-01-03 06:08:28 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: it's mit licence... look it up on wikipedia
1508 2011-01-03 06:08:33 <marioxcc> and use commercial as a disphemism
1509 2011-01-03 06:08:41 <AnonymousUser> ok, thanks
1510 2011-01-03 06:08:42 <marioxcc> AnonymousUser: i invite you to read about free software in gnu.org :)
1511 2011-01-03 06:08:49 <marioxcc> free software is about computer user freedoms
1512 2011-01-03 06:08:52 <marioxcc> not price
1513 2011-01-03 06:08:54 <EvanR> not that gnu or fsf likes the MIT license
1514 2011-01-03 06:08:56 <AnonymousUser> ja
1515 2011-01-03 06:09:24 <marioxcc> EvanR: depending on which "MIT" license
1516 2011-01-03 06:09:30 <marioxcc> the MIT has used several software licenses
1517 2011-01-03 06:09:39 <marioxcc> so saying "MIT license" is really meaningless
1518 2011-01-03 06:09:45 <marioxcc> it don't referes to a definite license
1519 2011-01-03 06:09:46 <EvanR> saying anything is meaningless
1520 2011-01-03 06:09:51 <AnonymousUser> yeah, i've read about the specifics of some licenses, and the battles seemed pretty hairy
1521 2011-01-03 06:14:21 <Sami345> ;;bc,calc 2000
1522 2011-01-03 06:14:22 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 2000 Khps, given current difficulty of 16307.48285682 , is 1 year, 5 weeks, 5 days, 7 hours, 47 minutes, and 32 seconds
1523 2011-01-03 06:14:48 <marioxcc> lol
1524 2011-01-03 06:14:55 <marioxcc> yeah, and it will only get worser
1525 2011-01-03 06:15:14 <marioxcc> eventually, only the obstinates and the more energy efficient hardware will prevail
1526 2011-01-03 06:15:46 <EvanR> Sami345: and watch out for the spread xD
1527 2011-01-03 06:16:00 <EvanR> it may take only 5months, or 2 years
1528 2011-01-03 06:16:04 <marioxcc> spread?
1529 2011-01-03 06:16:07 <marioxcc> oh yeah
1530 2011-01-03 06:16:28 <marioxcc> maybe you should explain him
1531 2011-01-03 06:16:40 <marioxcc> the "it is like winning the lotto" thing
1532 2011-01-03 06:16:45 <Sami345> or 1 second
1533 2011-01-03 06:16:49 <marioxcc> i'm a bit sleepy for now
1534 2011-01-03 06:16:54 <EvanR> 1 second is very unlikely
1535 2011-01-03 06:17:03 <EvanR> 5months isnt as unlikely
1536 2011-01-03 06:17:11 <EvanR> nor 2 years
1537 2011-01-03 06:17:13 <Sami345> 10 minutes?
1538 2011-01-03 06:17:18 <marioxcc> EvanR: well, it as unlikley as exactly 5 months
1539 2011-01-03 06:17:27 <EvanR> i dont know the math
1540 2011-01-03 06:17:42 <marioxcc> Sami345: see this
1541 2011-01-03 06:17:43 <marioxcc> http://blockexplorer.com/q/probability
1542 2011-01-03 06:17:47 <marioxcc> this is the probability
1543 2011-01-03 06:17:51 <marioxcc> of finding a block
1544 2011-01-03 06:17:53 <marioxcc> per each try
1545 2011-01-03 06:17:58 <marioxcc> based on this
1546 2011-01-03 06:18:02 <marioxcc> you can do the required math
1547 2011-01-03 06:18:09 <marioxcc> how much hahes do you do per second?
1548 2011-01-03 06:18:15 <marioxcc> 2M?
1549 2011-01-03 06:18:24 <Sami345> 140000
1550 2011-01-03 06:18:38 <Sami345> 140m
1551 2011-01-03 06:18:53 <EvanR> ;;calc,bc 140000
1552 2011-01-03 06:18:53 <gribble> Error: "calc,bc" is not a valid command.
1553 2011-01-03 06:18:58 <EvanR> ;;bc,calc 140000
1554 2011-01-03 06:19:00 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 140000 Khps, given current difficulty of 16307.48285682 , is 5 days, 18 hours, 58 minutes, and 6 seconds
1555 2011-01-03 06:19:24 <marioxcc> Sami345: then do
1556 2011-01-03 06:19:48 <EvanR> oh i get what youre saying, exactly 5 months, exactly 1 second. yeah, thats irrelevant
1557 2011-01-03 06:19:50 <Sami345> I know
1558 2011-01-03 06:19:59 <marioxcc> 1-((1-0.0000000000000142773705184839894144488425808958709239959)^140000000)
1559 2011-01-03 06:20:05 <marioxcc> and that's the probability you find a block
1560 2011-01-03 06:20:06 <marioxcc> in a second
1561 2011-01-03 06:20:10 <marioxcc> you will need a bignum calculator
1562 2011-01-03 06:20:21 <Sami345> python will work :P
1563 2011-01-03 06:20:36 <EvanR> you basically want to know the probability youll get a block in X seconds or less
1564 2011-01-03 06:20:40 <EvanR> not exactly X seconds
1565 2011-01-03 06:20:50 <marioxcc> EvanR: thats it
1566 2011-01-03 06:20:57 <marioxcc> the probability of not find a block
1567 2011-01-03 06:20:58 <marioxcc> in a try
1568 2011-01-03 06:20:59 <marioxcc> is
1569 2011-01-03 06:21:10 <Sami345> probaplity can go over 100% :/
1570 2011-01-03 06:21:10 <marioxcc> 1-0.0000000000000142773705184839894144488425808958709239959
1571 2011-01-03 06:21:17 <marioxcc> then
1572 2011-01-03 06:21:24 <EvanR> multiply that X times
1573 2011-01-03 06:21:27 <marioxcc> the probability of not finding a bloxk
1574 2011-01-03 06:21:28 <marioxcc> in X times
1575 2011-01-03 06:21:29 <marioxcc> is
1576 2011-01-03 06:21:33 <EvanR> (1-p)^X
1577 2011-01-03 06:21:34 <EvanR> ?
1578 2011-01-03 06:21:36 <marioxcc> 1-0.0000000000000142773705184839894144488425808958709239959^X
1579 2011-01-03 06:21:37 <marioxcc> yeah
1580 2011-01-03 06:21:46 <marioxcc> that's the probability of NOT finding a block
1581 2011-01-03 06:21:51 <marioxcc> then do 1-that again
1582 2011-01-03 06:21:55 <marioxcc> and that is the probability
1583 2011-01-03 06:21:59 <marioxcc> of finding at least 1 block
1584 2011-01-03 06:21:59 <EvanR> 1 - (1 - p)^X
1585 2011-01-03 06:22:03 <Sami345> I know already...
1586 2011-01-03 06:22:28 <marioxcc> then why do you ask!!!
1587 2011-01-03 06:22:29 <marioxcc> <Sami345> 10 minutes?
1588 2011-01-03 06:22:42 <Sami345> idk
1589 2011-01-03 06:22:48 <Sami345> just to be not so bored
1590 2011-01-03 06:22:48 <marioxcc> duh :/
1591 2011-01-03 06:22:51 <marioxcc> hehe
1592 2011-01-03 06:23:00 <EvanR> 1 - (1 - p)^600
1593 2011-01-03 06:23:10 <EvanR> no, python wont work
1594 2011-01-03 06:23:12 <marioxcc> i'm going to bed
1595 2011-01-03 06:23:19 <marioxcc> remember
1596 2011-01-03 06:23:20 <Sami345> I have sitted in front oh my computer trying to generae hash for 8h :D
1597 2011-01-03 06:23:32 <nanotube> Sami345: maybe take a walk :)
1598 2011-01-03 06:23:33 <marioxcc> you can also use GNU bc
1599 2011-01-03 06:23:48 <EvanR> you can use haskell computable real ;)
1600 2011-01-03 06:23:51 <marioxcc> good night gentlemen
1601 2011-01-03 06:23:58 <marioxcc> i would use my CL REPL :)
1602 2011-01-03 06:24:04 marioxcc has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1603 2011-01-03 06:24:10 <Sami345> I currently have colelcted 1.7 BTC :)
1604 2011-01-03 06:24:20 <EvanR> from the pool?
1605 2011-01-03 06:24:22 <Sami345> yeah
1606 2011-01-03 06:25:19 <Sami345> hmm
1607 2011-01-03 06:25:39 <Sami345> would that nvidias PhysX-card be good for processing?
1608 2011-01-03 06:25:55 tjgillies_ has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1609 2011-01-03 06:26:10 tjgillies_ has joined
1610 2011-01-03 06:26:31 <nanotube> Sami345: see ,,(bc,wiki mining hardware comparison)
1611 2011-01-03 06:26:31 <gribble> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mining_Hardware_Comparison | Dec 26, 2010 ... Mining Hardware Comparison. From Bitcoin. Jump to: navigation, search. This page is a stub, you can help by expanding it. ...
1612 2011-01-03 06:27:03 <Sami345> it only has graphics card
1613 2011-01-03 06:27:08 <Sami345> not physics card
1614 2011-01-03 06:28:50 <Diablo-D3> Sami345: nvidia doesnt produce physx cards
1615 2011-01-03 06:28:58 <Diablo-D3> physx did before nvidia bought them
1616 2011-01-03 06:29:12 <Diablo-D3> and NO ONE bought the physx cards
1617 2011-01-03 06:29:14 <Diablo-D3> it was stupid
1618 2011-01-03 06:29:23 <Diablo-D3> its easier to just run the physx shit on the gpu
1619 2011-01-03 06:29:56 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|when physx came out I thought
1620 2011-01-03 06:29:56 <Sami345> I would love to see OpenCL 3D-physics engine
1621 2011-01-03 06:29:58 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|WHAT THE FUCK
1622 2011-01-03 06:30:08 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|whou would want to accelerate their stupid 3d /movement/ shit
1623 2011-01-03 06:30:21 Cusipzzz has quit ()
1624 2011-01-03 06:30:34 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|Sami345: well I guess there could be in fact some uses. like e.g. fluid - water nicelly overflowing randomly moving objects and shit
1625 2011-01-03 06:30:43 <Diablo-D3> xelister|smoking: physics uses math
1626 2011-01-03 06:30:44 <Diablo-D3> ergo
1627 2011-01-03 06:30:47 <Diablo-D3> accelerating it works
1628 2011-01-03 06:30:48 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|but well that is probably for snobs
1629 2011-01-03 06:30:55 <Diablo-D3> Sami345: thats essentially what physx is now
1630 2011-01-03 06:30:57 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|you wouldnt notice this effects normally
1631 2011-01-03 06:31:08 <Sami345> Diablo-D3, it uses CUDA
1632 2011-01-03 06:31:13 <Sami345> not working on ATi
1633 2011-01-03 06:31:14 <Diablo-D3> I said "essentially"
1634 2011-01-03 06:31:15 <Sami345> or AMD
1635 2011-01-03 06:31:21 <Diablo-D3> ATI == AMD
1636 2011-01-03 06:31:22 <ArtForz> fun part is, nvidia is actively crippling physx on CPU
1637 2011-01-03 06:31:30 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|ATI == AMD - quality
1638 2011-01-03 06:31:33 <Sami345> I don't know word "essentially"
1639 2011-01-03 06:31:35 <Diablo-D3> also, they got physx working on radeons
1640 2011-01-03 06:31:45 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|ArtForz: to say "over 9000 times faster"?
1641 2011-01-03 06:31:50 <ArtForz> yep
1642 2011-01-03 06:31:54 <Diablo-D3> not only is nvidia crippling physx, they wont let games ship that can actually use physx on the cpu
1643 2011-01-03 06:31:57 <Sami345> Diablo-D3, when where?
1644 2011-01-03 06:32:01 <ArtForz> or they're too incompetent to use SIMD on CPUs
1645 2011-01-03 06:32:12 <Diablo-D3> they make them throw in useless effects that _already work without physx_
1646 2011-01-03 06:32:15 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|Diablo-D3: your irc client's ignore is as good as TSA security
1647 2011-01-03 06:32:26 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|also, happy 2011 \o/
1648 2011-01-03 06:32:27 <ArtForz> = CPU physx uses x87 insns
1649 2011-01-03 06:32:46 <Diablo-D3> yup, they disable sse usage
1650 2011-01-03 06:32:48 <Diablo-D3> its idiotic
1651 2011-01-03 06:33:02 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|I wonder will anyone ever see difference between normal good effects and actually physx animation??
1652 2011-01-03 06:33:04 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|what can they do?
1653 2011-01-03 06:33:05 <ArtForz> well, kinda
1654 2011-01-03 06:33:23 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|make slow motion of 100000 grains of dirt from explosion hit the ground and bounce realistically?
1655 2011-01-03 06:33:27 <ArtForz> physix doesnt really work too well on GPUs either, too much branching
1656 2011-01-03 06:33:45 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|make super exact water animation when 1000 small objects fall into it?
1657 2011-01-03 06:33:53 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: well
1658 2011-01-03 06:33:54 <Diablo-D3> the irony is
1659 2011-01-03 06:33:58 <Diablo-D3> it'd work better on AMD
1660 2011-01-03 06:33:58 <nanotube> ArtForz: how's your asic project going?
1661 2011-01-03 06:34:02 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|it should be noticible in like 5% of places for gamers, right??
1662 2011-01-03 06:34:04 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|or less
1663 2011-01-03 06:34:06 <ArtForz> well, not much happening
1664 2011-01-03 06:34:43 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|btw, so how well can 5970 do branching? would normal fixed-point math program with some simple physics work well?
1665 2011-01-03 06:35:10 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|also lots of memory accesses to see if particles hit detailed world and eachother
1666 2011-01-03 06:36:13 <ArtForz> end result is, a modern multicore CPU with craploads of cache would probably perform on-par with a high-end GPU
1667 2011-01-03 06:36:15 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|where is physix actually usefull?
1668 2011-01-03 06:36:25 <ArtForz> no clue
1669 2011-01-03 06:36:26 james_ has joined
1670 2011-01-03 06:36:37 <ArtForz> not to mention theres plenty other physics engines
1671 2011-01-03 06:36:42 <Sami345> xelister|smoking, water
1672 2011-01-03 06:36:49 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|Sami345: as I said. what water?
1673 2011-01-03 06:36:52 james__ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1674 2011-01-03 06:36:56 <ArtForz> but then you dont get brib... errr... help from nvida for using those
1675 2011-01-03 06:37:02 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|water in silent hunter III/IV looks damn cool and uses no shit
1676 2011-01-03 06:37:05 <Diablo-D3> physics is mostly overrated anyhow
1677 2011-01-03 06:37:37 <EvanR> i dont like shit in my water anyway
1678 2011-01-03 06:37:37 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|Sami345: water as in, 10000 objects droped into totally calm lake and you watch 2000x1200 px animcation of the ripples expanding and bouncing? really any game needs that?
1679 2011-01-03 06:37:44 <Sami345> well I have seen one game, there was additional map pack by NVidia
1680 2011-01-03 06:37:50 <Sami345> it was all abotu water :D
1681 2011-01-03 06:38:01 <Sami345> water everywhere
1682 2011-01-03 06:38:04 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|I KNOW WHERE WE NEED PHYSX
1683 2011-01-03 06:38:08 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|Duke Nukem
1684 2011-01-03 06:38:09 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|3D
1685 2011-01-03 06:38:15 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|taking a high quality piss
1686 2011-01-03 06:38:21 <EvanR> hahahah
1687 2011-01-03 06:38:25 <Sami345> lol
1688 2011-01-03 06:38:31 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|it would look like this http://www.ozone3d.net/benchmarks/physx-fluidmark/images/physx-fluidmark-01-400x335.jpg
1689 2011-01-03 06:38:33 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|:D
1690 2011-01-03 06:39:38 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|even HighLife 1 got water quite fine working without any such crap
1691 2011-01-03 06:39:43 Zarutian has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1692 2011-01-03 06:40:07 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|I thnik we are at point where we do not need any better gfx to have totally nicelly looking games
1693 2011-01-03 06:40:34 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|like, any more effects are just gimmicks that can be noticed < 1% of the time and dont change experience of the game what so ever
1694 2011-01-03 06:40:40 <Sami345> xelister|smoking, we need! we want!
1695 2011-01-03 06:41:29 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|I would instead like a really good innovative FUN gameplay
1696 2011-01-03 06:41:32 <EvanR> come on. you dont want your games looking like the matrix 2?
1697 2011-01-03 06:41:41 <EvanR> lol
1698 2011-01-03 06:42:04 <EvanR> (the movies looks worse than most games now)
1699 2011-01-03 06:42:25 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|in fact, EvanR
1700 2011-01-03 06:42:34 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|oh I got another thing where we would need good fluids
1701 2011-01-03 06:42:38 <Sami345> One thing to improve would be human faces
1702 2011-01-03 06:42:43 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|but I dont want to pissoff Diablo-D3 more with sister jokes
1703 2011-01-03 06:42:43 ApertureScience has joined
1704 2011-01-03 06:42:51 <EvanR> Sami345: theres no way out of the uncanny valley
1705 2011-01-03 06:43:04 <EvanR> xelister|smoking: lol
1706 2011-01-03 06:43:44 <Sami345> One nice that is coming to games: descruptible enviroment
1707 2011-01-03 06:43:54 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|today standard games look better then 5-10 years ago super video hits in biggest movies for milions of USD. cool? sad?
1708 2011-01-03 06:44:46 Zarutian has joined
1709 2011-01-03 06:44:54 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|Sami345: yeah Red Factor did that, like 7 year ago. was quite fun gimming for a moment. also it should run on CPU not GPU imo (large structure) well we could animate perahps the debre particles but again that is just gimmick
1710 2011-01-03 06:45:03 <ArtForz> red faction was relased like 7 years ago
1711 2011-01-03 06:45:19 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|s/factor/faction
1712 2011-01-03 06:46:25 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|ArtForz: did you also shoot, with cheatcodes, tunnel so long that games basically hanged rendering it? ;)
1713 2011-01-03 06:46:44 <ArtForz> yup
1714 2011-01-03 06:46:47 <EvanR> red faction not that great
1715 2011-01-03 06:47:18 <ArtForz> dude, back then it was fucking revolutionary
1716 2011-01-03 06:47:29 <EvanR> no, lemmings was revolutionary xD
1717 2011-01-03 06:47:31 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|or animation of pentagon getting explode'd woth planes into debree :P
1718 2011-01-03 06:47:58 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|oh crap did I said pentagon? as if we are not already suspected terrorists here on bitcoin
1719 2011-01-03 06:48:14 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|shit, did I just said bitcoin and terrorists over insecure channel? keep forgetting that is not FREENET
1720 2011-01-03 06:48:22 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|oh my.
1721 2011-01-03 06:48:23 * kiba remembers his friends and kiba were blasting tunnel in Red Fraction
1722 2011-01-03 06:48:43 <EvanR> lol
1723 2011-01-03 06:48:45 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|kiba: "blasting" you are going totally with me son
1724 2011-01-03 06:49:03 <ArtForz> also fun was putting a metric shitload of mines all over a room and then blowing it up
1725 2011-01-03 06:49:06 <kiba> or was it Red Fractor
1726 2011-01-03 06:49:19 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|Faction Fraction Factor...
1727 2011-01-03 06:49:28 <EvanR> Functor
1728 2011-01-03 06:49:31 <ArtForz> frak?
1729 2011-01-03 06:49:34 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Faction
1730 2011-01-03 06:49:54 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|Red Faction is a first-person shooter video game that was released in 2001
1731 2011-01-03 06:49:56 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|2001 !!
1732 2011-01-03 06:50:01 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|shit, we're all old
1733 2011-01-03 06:50:04 <ArtForz> ... 10 years ago
1734 2011-01-03 06:50:13 <ArtForz> wow, time flies
1735 2011-01-03 06:50:14 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|I demand my rockingchair
1736 2011-01-03 06:50:32 <EvanR> lets play golden eye on n64
1737 2011-01-03 06:50:37 <kiba> 10 years old, I was a 9 years old
1738 2011-01-03 06:50:43 <EvanR> oh
1739 2011-01-03 06:50:47 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|As of August 5, 2009, Red Faction has been made available through the Steam platform
1740 2011-01-03 06:50:48 <EvanR> too young
1741 2011-01-03 06:50:54 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|well good timing there, marketing department!
1742 2011-01-03 06:51:02 <EvanR> lol
1743 2011-01-03 06:51:07 <kiba> actually
1744 2011-01-03 06:51:11 <kiba> I think I was a 10 years old
1745 2011-01-03 06:51:16 <kiba> this year, I turn the magical 20 years
1746 2011-01-03 06:51:30 <kiba> with most of my childhood wasted in babysitting center known as school
1747 2011-01-03 06:51:31 <kiba> oh well
1748 2011-01-03 06:52:05 james_ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1749 2011-01-03 06:52:44 * xelister smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|pats kiba
1750 2011-01-03 06:53:04 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|there there, come have a candy
1751 2011-01-03 06:53:09 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|in my van
1752 2011-01-03 06:53:11 * EvanR puts xelister|smoking out
1753 2011-01-03 06:53:17 <xelister> smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|that belongs to my catholic church in irland
1754 2011-01-03 06:53:24 james_ has joined
1755 2011-01-03 06:53:48 xelister is now known as smoking!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|xelister|ashes
1756 2011-01-03 06:59:04 <xelister> ashes!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|I cocked my NIC gigabyte card
1757 2011-01-03 06:59:09 <xelister> ashes!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|coocked even
1758 2011-01-03 06:59:19 <xelister> ashes!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|cooked. damn typos
1759 2011-01-03 06:59:27 <xelister> ashes!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|anyway, and/or my PCI slot
1760 2011-01-03 07:06:04 james_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1761 2011-01-03 07:06:40 <EvanR> xelister|ashes: cocking your nic doesnt sound like a good idea
1762 2011-01-03 07:07:22 james_ has joined
1763 2011-01-03 07:07:38 zeroxz has joined
1764 2011-01-03 07:11:39 <xelister> ashes!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|:{
1765 2011-01-03 07:13:36 <AnonymousUser> Hey, I only have 0.1 bit coin. What if I want to give it out as a limited commodaty? What happens when a tiny economy needs to pop up when only such a small supply is available?
1766 2011-01-03 07:13:52 <ArtForz> better than nicking your cock
1767 2011-01-03 07:14:14 <kiba> AnonymousUser: 8 place percision beyond the decimal
1768 2011-01-03 07:14:27 <AnonymousUser> but right now we only go to 2
1769 2011-01-03 07:14:29 <kiba> therefore, the current economy would do perfectly fine if it have to trade only 1 bitcoin
1770 2011-01-03 07:14:53 <kiba> AnonymousUser: that's mostly what the client only allow
1771 2011-01-03 07:15:06 <AnonymousUser> what if i legitimately need to use more than 2 in the near future?
1772 2011-01-03 07:15:37 <AnonymousUser> or what if a country becomes so poor that it's people only collectively have a tiny amount and need to go beyond 8?
1773 2011-01-03 07:18:26 <kiba> is there any use in discussing hypothetical scenerio that doesn't exists?
1774 2011-01-03 07:18:37 <kiba> err
1775 2011-01-03 07:18:39 <kiba> won't happen
1776 2011-01-03 07:19:21 <AnonymousUser> See, once I finally finish my mining stint and make my 1 btc, i'm going to use it to set up a small economy between my friends. 1 btc is a very short supply when i can only divide it up 100 ways
1777 2011-01-03 07:21:51 <Sami345> AnonymousUser, 1 BTC is not much
1778 2011-01-03 07:21:59 <AnonymousUser> also, i hope to profit if my friends every realize that they're worth something and they buy more from me (i'll hopefully have more by then)
1779 2011-01-03 07:22:06 james_ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1780 2011-01-03 07:22:59 <Sami345> AnonymousUser, best way is you start to sell something for bitcoins
1781 2011-01-03 07:23:21 james has joined
1782 2011-01-03 07:23:30 <AnonymousUser> yeah... that's what i hear
1783 2011-01-03 07:23:36 <AnonymousUser> i need to get it from the guys who have it
1784 2011-01-03 07:23:48 james is now known as Guest49271
1785 2011-01-03 07:23:53 zeroxz has quit (Quit: Page closed)
1786 2011-01-03 07:24:01 <Sami345> the guy who don't have it can just buy them from someone
1787 2011-01-03 07:24:15 <Sami345> *doesn't
1788 2011-01-03 07:24:31 <afed> bitcoins are currently not accepted by any whore houses or drug dealers on planet earth
1789 2011-01-03 07:24:46 <Sami345> afed, :/
1790 2011-01-03 07:24:46 <AnonymousUser> they should be
1791 2011-01-03 07:25:14 <AnonymousUser> i can give someone my wallet on a usb stick and they can transfer it to theirs anonymously
1792 2011-01-03 07:25:34 <afed> the most pragmatic standard of currency is, "can i buy the things i need as a human with this stuff?"
1793 2011-01-03 07:25:55 <afed> food, water, pussy, belonging, fulfilment, etc
1794 2011-01-03 07:26:20 <Sami345> client need this: you can save money to file and then read the file with another client to get it
1795 2011-01-03 07:27:00 <Sami345> it would be simple, client just would create account, transfer money to it and then save it's keys to a file
1796 2011-01-03 07:27:45 <Sami345> result: bitcoins in a file
1797 2011-01-03 07:27:56 <AnonymousUser> ja, i came up with that a few days ago
1798 2011-01-03 07:28:06 <afed> ultimately that does not satisfy any human need
1799 2011-01-03 07:28:10 <AnonymousUser> i mean, not the program, but the idea of bitcoins in a file
1800 2011-01-03 07:28:19 <AnonymousUser> it satisfies my drug dealer's needs
1801 2011-01-03 07:28:33 <afed> you don't even use drugs
1802 2011-01-03 07:28:49 <AnonymousUser> wait
1803 2011-01-03 07:28:51 <AnonymousUser> you're right
1804 2011-01-03 07:29:02 <AnonymousUser> no wait, you're wrong
1805 2011-01-03 07:29:08 <AnonymousUser> i drink alcohol
1806 2011-01-03 07:29:25 <afed> sure, i get jacked up on a drug every morning before i go to work
1807 2011-01-03 07:29:27 <afed> caffiene
1808 2011-01-03 07:29:36 <Diablo-D3> hurrr
1809 2011-01-03 07:30:17 <Sami345> This sounds so interesting that I could try to create a bitcoin client
1810 2011-01-03 07:30:45 <Sami345> the network doesn't ban me if I send wrong kind of messages accidently? right?
1811 2011-01-03 07:33:11 <Sami345> oen solution would ofcourse use bitcoind
1812 2011-01-03 07:33:44 <AnonymousUser> so anyway, i'm going to make a service where people can play games and trade bitcoins among themselves and use the bitcoins to buy in game goods. i only have 0.1 bitcoins... i can't exactly only have 10 people playing games...
1813 2011-01-03 07:34:11 <AnonymousUser> i'm essentially a poor country
1814 2011-01-03 07:35:43 <AnonymousUser> if my games suck and no one with many bitcoins play them, then i can't make an ingame economy because i have too few coins
1815 2011-01-03 07:35:53 chuck251 has joined
1816 2011-01-03 07:35:59 <kiba> AnonymousUser: just internally use them
1817 2011-01-03 07:36:20 <kiba> just do internal accounting
1818 2011-01-03 07:37:40 <AnonymousUser> i don't understand how that solves anything
1819 2011-01-03 07:38:39 <kiba> it's just a really long decimal
1820 2011-01-03 07:39:40 darrob has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1821 2011-01-03 07:44:54 RazielZ has joined
1822 2011-01-03 07:47:33 <joe_1> anonymoususer won't the players have to deposit coins to you before they can exchange them in your game?
1823 2011-01-03 07:49:02 <AnonymousUser> joe_1: No, the in game economy is communistic.
1824 2011-01-03 07:49:41 <AnonymousUser> at least until it makes sense to make it capitalistic
1825 2011-01-03 07:50:25 <joe_1> so how does your in-game currency relate to bitcoin? is your in-game currency going to be bitcions?
1826 2011-01-03 07:50:34 <AnonymousUser> no no no
1827 2011-01-03 07:50:42 <AnonymousUser> the in game currency is bitcoin
1828 2011-01-03 07:50:50 <AnonymousUser> the in came economy is communistic
1829 2011-01-03 07:51:08 <AnonymousUser> basically, everything is cheap to the point that it's free
1830 2011-01-03 07:51:36 <AnonymousUser> and i give out the tiny amount i have to fund people using it
1831 2011-01-03 07:51:55 Guest49271 has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1832 2011-01-03 07:51:59 <Sami345> could I cheat other clients by sending them false blocks?
1833 2011-01-03 07:52:22 <AnonymousUser> no, they will use bitcoin clients
1834 2011-01-03 07:52:38 darrob has joined
1835 2011-01-03 07:52:44 <Sami345> I mean
1836 2011-01-03 07:52:47 <AnonymousUser> no one has bitcoin yet and so very few people trade in it. the economy only makes sense before people realize that the stuff is worth something
1837 2011-01-03 07:53:03 <Sami345> Does bitcoind check
1838 2011-01-03 07:53:12 <Sami345> the block from multiple people
1839 2011-01-03 07:53:12 james_ has joined
1840 2011-01-03 07:53:52 <joe_1> sami yes each person checks the block
1841 2011-01-03 07:54:05 <AnonymousUser> sorry...
1842 2011-01-03 07:54:31 <joe_1> anonymoususer: will it be possible for the people in your economy to withdraw their funds and receive the actual bitcoins?
1843 2011-01-03 07:54:47 <AnonymousUser> joe_1: yes
1844 2011-01-03 07:54:56 <joe_1> ok.
1845 2011-01-03 07:55:44 <joe_1> all you need to do is keep track of the bitcoins internally to your game
1846 2011-01-03 07:56:25 <AnonymousUser> but then they have to trust me
1847 2011-01-03 07:57:04 <joe_1> yes. alternatively you can go through mybitcoin.com. they should go down to lower fractions than 0.00000001
1848 2011-01-03 07:57:10 <AnonymousUser> really?
1849 2011-01-03 07:57:11 <AnonymousUser> oh cool
1850 2011-01-03 08:05:54 <mizerydearia> Is it better to use "Bitcoin" or "bitcoin" when referring to a "Bitcoin address?"
1851 2011-01-03 08:06:31 <mizerydearia> e.g. "email address" isn't capitalized, so I figure it should be similar for "bitcoin address."
1852 2011-01-03 08:07:10 <kiba> I would call it bitcoin address
1853 2011-01-03 08:07:27 <jgarzik> the standard seems to be: "bitcoin" is the currency, "Bitcoin" is the software.
1854 2011-01-03 08:07:54 <jgarzik> therefore "bitcoin address"
1855 2011-01-03 08:10:10 <Sami345> does anybody know what is the irc server and channel that Bitcoin uses?
1856 2011-01-03 08:10:17 james_ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1857 2011-01-03 08:11:32 james_ has joined
1858 2011-01-03 08:17:05 <mizerydearia> Sami345, LFNet / #bitcoin
1859 2011-01-03 08:17:08 <mizerydearia> irc.lfnet.org
1860 2011-01-03 08:17:24 m0mchil has joined
1861 2011-01-03 08:27:58 james has joined
1862 2011-01-03 08:28:05 james_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1863 2011-01-03 08:28:24 james is now known as Guest74568
1864 2011-01-03 08:31:01 xelister has joined
1865 2011-01-03 08:31:02 tjgillies_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1866 2011-01-03 08:31:48 bobdole has joined
1867 2011-01-03 08:31:55 bobdole is now known as Alystair
1868 2011-01-03 08:32:45 <Sami345> Unconfirmed reward: 2.19259601 :)
1869 2011-01-03 08:35:06 xelister has quit (ashes!~xe@ip-1-157.gemini.net.pl|Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1870 2011-01-03 08:43:52 james_ has joined
1871 2011-01-03 08:44:05 Guest74568 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1872 2011-01-03 08:46:56 TD has joined
1873 2011-01-03 08:56:26 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
1874 2011-01-03 08:58:15 james__ has joined
1875 2011-01-03 08:58:29 james_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1876 2011-01-03 09:10:43 HarryS is now known as K-Lined
1877 2011-01-03 09:11:01 <da2ce7> G'day! Happy New Year Bitcoiners!
1878 2011-01-03 09:11:22 K-Lined is now known as HarryS
1879 2011-01-03 09:12:37 james_ has joined
1880 2011-01-03 09:13:35 james__ has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1881 2011-01-03 09:17:34 Amiga4000 has joined
1882 2011-01-03 09:29:01 james has joined
1883 2011-01-03 09:29:16 james_ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1884 2011-01-03 09:29:27 james is now known as Guest29156
1885 2011-01-03 09:30:25 slush has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1886 2011-01-03 09:32:59 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
1887 2011-01-03 09:41:55 james_ has joined
1888 2011-01-03 09:42:05 Guest29156 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1889 2011-01-03 09:47:41 altamic has joined
1890 2011-01-03 09:50:45 theymos has joined
1891 2011-01-03 09:53:28 akem has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1892 2011-01-03 10:00:46 james__ has joined
1893 2011-01-03 10:01:27 james_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1894 2011-01-03 10:02:25 TD has joined
1895 2011-01-03 10:10:04 chuck251 has quit ()
1896 2011-01-03 10:13:05 TheAncientGoat has joined
1897 2011-01-03 10:15:08 james_ has joined
1898 2011-01-03 10:15:19 <da2ce7> ;;bc,stats
1899 2011-01-03 10:15:21 <gribble> Current Blocks: 100841 | Current Difficulty: 16307.48285682 | Next Difficulty At Block: 102815 | Next Difficulty In: 1974 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 2 days, 7 hours, 10 minutes, and 18 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 24598.80273542
1900 2011-01-03 10:15:24 james__ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1901 2011-01-03 10:19:13 <lfm> ;bc,calc 33000
1902 2011-01-03 10:19:28 <lfm> ;;bc,calc 33000
1903 2011-01-03 10:19:30 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 33000 Khps, given current difficulty of 16307.48285682 , is 3 weeks, 3 days, 13 hours, 33 minutes, and 47 seconds
1904 2011-01-03 10:19:39 <sipa> oh, i missed the retarget increase
1905 2011-01-03 10:19:43 <sipa> when was it?
1906 2011-01-03 10:19:51 <sipa> -increase
1907 2011-01-03 10:20:09 <lfm> 40 blocks ago
1908 2011-01-03 10:20:51 <Amiga4000> ;;bc,calc 700000
1909 2011-01-03 10:20:52 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 700000 Khps, given current difficulty of 16307.48285682 , is 1 day, 3 hours, 47 minutes, and 37 seconds
1910 2011-01-03 10:20:58 <Amiga4000> yeah, fits.
1911 2011-01-03 10:21:16 <Amiga4000> btw, if I overread it: where does the "transport fee" voins go into?
1912 2011-01-03 10:21:20 <Amiga4000> coins, even.
1913 2011-01-03 10:21:42 <sipa> to the client which finds the block it ends up in
1914 2011-01-03 10:22:08 <lfm> amiga transaction fees get added to the 50 coin block finder fee
1915 2011-01-03 10:22:40 <Amiga4000> ah ok, thank you.
1916 2011-01-03 10:23:06 <Amiga4000> got 12 blocks in 3 weeks time, if I count right
1917 2011-01-03 10:23:21 <lfm> wtg
1918 2011-01-03 10:26:08 sgornick has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1919 2011-01-03 10:26:30 <da2ce7> Next Difficulty Estimate: 24598
1920 2011-01-03 10:26:34 <da2ce7> wtf...
1921 2011-01-03 10:26:40 <da2ce7> did heaps just come online/
1922 2011-01-03 10:26:41 <da2ce7> ?
1923 2011-01-03 10:27:00 <lfm> estimates are less accurate just after a diff change
1924 2011-01-03 10:27:13 sgornick has joined
1925 2011-01-03 10:34:55 james_ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1926 2011-01-03 10:34:56 <Sami345> If always when client gets a transaction, it sends it to everyone it know, wouldn't transactions stay on network foreveR?
1927 2011-01-03 10:35:40 <theymos> Nodes don't relay transactions that they've already relayed once. It travels through the network only once.
1928 2011-01-03 10:36:10 james has joined
1929 2011-01-03 10:36:36 james is now known as Guest11746
1930 2011-01-03 10:37:02 <sipa> mrb__: you look at the number of blocks in the previous two weeks, compare that to the optimal 2016, and use the result as a growth rate which you multiply with the current difficulty?
1931 2011-01-03 10:37:06 slush has joined
1932 2011-01-03 10:39:29 <lfm> sipa slight correction there - you look at the time it took for that last 2016 blocks, not the number of blocks in two weeks
1933 2011-01-03 10:40:26 <sipa> lfm: i'm not talking about the real difficulty, but about the output from the bot
1934 2011-01-03 10:40:55 <lfm> ok well it should too
1935 2011-01-03 10:41:23 <theymos> The estimate uses data from the last retarget. Using data before the retarget would be inaccurate, as those blocks were created faster than they are now.
1936 2011-01-03 10:41:50 <sipa> theymos: well you should clearly give blocks before the retarget less weight
1937 2011-01-03 10:42:00 <sipa> proportional to their difficulty
1938 2011-01-03 10:42:27 <lfm> current calcs just ignore them afaik
1939 2011-01-03 10:44:10 <sipa> the best estimate would be: sum(block.difficulty,block from [currentblock-2015..currentblock])/2016*(two weeks)/(time needed for past 2016 blocks)
1940 2011-01-03 10:46:53 davout has joined
1941 2011-01-03 10:47:14 <davout> hi all
1942 2011-01-03 10:52:24 <theymos> The standard estimate approach is more accurate most of the time. If you look behind the last retarget, you'll be getting old, irrelevant data unless you're very close to the retarget.
1943 2011-01-03 10:53:09 <sipa> but the retarget itself *also* takes old, irrelevant data in to account
1944 2011-01-03 10:53:30 <sipa> if we're talking about a realistic guess of the current network speed, you are right
1945 2011-01-03 10:56:31 <theymos> If it's 500 blocks since the last retarget, why look at 1000 and introduce more irrelevant data?
1946 2011-01-03 10:56:33 acous has joined
1947 2011-01-03 10:56:36 acous has quit (Changing host)
1948 2011-01-03 10:56:36 acous has joined
1949 2011-01-03 10:57:03 james_ has joined
1950 2011-01-03 10:57:27 Guest11746 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1951 2011-01-03 10:57:34 devon_hillard has joined
1952 2011-01-03 10:59:56 <mrb__> sipa: the bot reports the estimated difficulty based on how many blocks have been solved since the last difficulty re-adjustment. so difficulty * 2**32 gives how many hashes have to be computed on average to solve a block
1953 2011-01-03 11:00:52 <mrb__> since, by design, this difficulty is computed so that one block is solved every 600 second, divide this value by 600 to get the global hash rate of the network
1954 2011-01-03 11:01:31 <theymos> More accurate way: http://blockexplorer.com/q/hashestowin divided by http://blockexplorer.com/q/interval
1955 2011-01-03 11:01:38 <devon_hillard> "The trouble with backups is that you always have to do them before you need them"
1956 2011-01-03 11:02:14 <mrb__> theymos: how is 'interval' computed by BBE?
1957 2011-01-03 11:02:31 <devon_hillard> "My boss said something about backups, but never about 'restores'"
1958 2011-01-03 11:02:37 <mrb__> averag over the same how many blocks?
1959 2011-01-03 11:03:10 <mrb__> average over how many blocks?
1960 2011-01-03 11:03:36 <theymos> mrb__: It takes the time between each block in a range and averages these times. 1000 blocks by default, but you can specify: http://blockexplorer.com/q/interval/100
1961 2011-01-03 11:04:08 <mrb__> ok, so yes this is more accurate than gribble
1962 2011-01-03 11:04:57 <theymos> Gribble uses my pages. Its ETA comes from http://blockexplorer.com/q/eta , which uses the same interval calculation.
1963 2011-01-03 11:05:20 <theymos> My estimate doesn't use this interval calculation, but just looks at time since last retarget.
1964 2011-01-03 11:05:33 <mrb__> so why is gribble so inaccurate in the hours immediately following a target readjustment?
1965 2011-01-03 11:05:39 <mrb__> oh
1966 2011-01-03 11:05:46 <mrb__> so it does not use /q/interval
1967 2011-01-03 11:06:21 <theymos> No, and it shouldn't, since interval before a retarget is totally different from the interval after it.
1968 2011-01-03 11:06:53 <theymos> My ETA also never looks before the last retarget, even if you tell it to do so.
1969 2011-01-03 11:07:17 james_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1970 2011-01-03 11:07:20 <mrb__> got it.
1971 2011-01-03 11:07:28 james_ has joined
1972 2011-01-03 11:07:33 <mrb__> would be nice if it was able to span a retarget
1973 2011-01-03 11:08:15 <sipa> every block found corresponds to 2^32*difficulty hashes, on average
1974 2011-01-03 11:08:28 <mrb__> ie. if the last 900 blocks were solved with difficulty X and the last 100 with difficulty Y, have /q/interval computes a weight average
1975 2011-01-03 11:08:46 <mrb__> between the rate for X (weight 9) and the rate for Y (weight 1)
1976 2011-01-03 11:08:56 <sipa> theymos: i see what you mean - you don't want to include data that will not be used in the effective next retarget calculation
1977 2011-01-03 11:09:20 <mrb__> so that way /q/interval would always return smoothly varying values over time
1978 2011-01-03 11:09:32 <mrb__> regardless of when retargets occur
1979 2011-01-03 11:09:39 <sipa> but then the question is: at what point do you stop using the old data?
1980 2011-01-03 11:10:11 <sipa> if you want it smooth, it should probably be never
1981 2011-01-03 11:10:19 <sipa> (which is what i suggested)
1982 2011-01-03 11:10:27 <theymos> /q/interval does return real intervals regardless of retarget. It's /q/eta and /q/estimate that are restricted.
1983 2011-01-03 11:11:05 <sipa> btw: the current target corresponds to a hashing speed op 116.7Ghash/s
1984 2011-01-03 11:11:22 <sipa> in reality, i think it's closer to 118-120 already
1985 2011-01-03 11:12:16 <mrb__> theymos: I understand now. by "which uses the same interval calculation." you meant a calculation that was different from /q/interval
1986 2011-01-03 11:13:20 <sipa> theymos: btw, have you ever thought about calculating a "generation count", an average number of transactions between a given one and the generation of the coins that end up in it?
1987 2011-01-03 11:13:24 <sipa> in BBE
1988 2011-01-03 11:13:51 <theymos> mrb__: /q/eta uses the exact same function, though the "lookback" parameter is limited. /q/estimate doesn't use interval at all, just time since last retarget.
1989 2011-01-03 11:14:58 remmy_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1990 2011-01-03 11:15:43 <theymos> sipa: That would be computationally difficult. Transactions branch a lot.
1991 2011-01-03 11:16:15 <sipa> theymos: if you do it incrementally, it's quite easy
1992 2011-01-03 11:16:45 ArtForz has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
1993 2011-01-03 11:16:50 <sipa> that is, calculate it as soon as a new block appears, for the transactions in that block; that's a O(n) computation per transaction, with n the number of inputs
1994 2011-01-03 11:17:19 ArtForz has joined
1995 2011-01-03 11:17:57 <theymos> Yes; I could calculate "distance from coinbase" for every transaction easily. But then I'm wasting DB space.
1996 2011-01-03 11:18:59 * davout just announced bitcoin-central.net's opensourcing, see http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=2585.0
1997 2011-01-03 11:19:01 <bitbot> Bitcoin Central going open source ! Open your own trading site for free !
1998 2011-01-03 11:19:27 <sipa> theymos: ok, i don't know your implementation of course
1999 2011-01-03 11:20:22 <sipa> theymos: put in a graph, it looks like this: http://sipa.be/static/bitcoin/spending.pdf
2000 2011-01-03 11:22:37 <da2ce7> what is that graph? 'spending vs bitcoin ammount"
2001 2011-01-03 11:22:38 <da2ce7> ?
2002 2011-01-03 11:23:04 <sipa> da2ce7: it shows how much BTC has been through how many transactions
2003 2011-01-03 11:23:15 <sipa> 1 means it's only been generated and never transferred further
2004 2011-01-03 11:23:37 <da2ce7> can you easly do a graph where it shows the number of bitcoin'
2005 2011-01-03 11:23:48 <da2ce7> 'transfered once' vs. time.
2006 2011-01-03 11:24:52 <da2ce7> so a graph of 'total bitcoins (excluding unsepent generated bitcoins) vs. time'
2007 2011-01-03 11:30:14 james_ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
2008 2011-01-03 11:30:25 Remmy has joined
2009 2011-01-03 11:31:29 james has joined
2010 2011-01-03 11:31:55 james is now known as Guest67840
2011 2011-01-03 11:40:33 lpconf has joined
2012 2011-01-03 11:41:16 lpconf has quit (Client Quit)
2013 2011-01-03 11:43:47 akem has joined
2014 2011-01-03 11:44:24 james_ has joined
2015 2011-01-03 11:44:29 Guest67840 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2016 2011-01-03 11:45:24 <LobsterMan> ;;bc,stats
2017 2011-01-03 11:45:26 <gribble> Current Blocks: 100850 | Current Difficulty: 16307.48285682 | Next Difficulty At Block: 102815 | Next Difficulty In: 1965 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 3 days, 16 hours, 32 minutes, and 30 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 21459.91605708
2018 2011-01-03 11:47:13 darrob has quit (Disconnected by services)
2019 2011-01-03 11:47:26 darrob has joined
2020 2011-01-03 11:48:16 ArtForz has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
2021 2011-01-03 11:48:44 ArtForz has joined
2022 2011-01-03 11:48:48 theymos has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2023 2011-01-03 11:49:15 <davout> altamic: around?
2024 2011-01-03 11:49:21 <altamic> hello davout
2025 2011-01-03 11:49:44 <altamic> I've been busy with life
2026 2011-01-03 11:50:02 <altamic> not so much around here
2027 2011-01-03 11:52:25 <altamic> davout: congrats for the release of bitcoin central
2028 2011-01-03 11:52:44 <davout> just wanted to see if you wanted to contribute to it
2029 2011-01-03 11:52:46 <davout> :)
2030 2011-01-03 11:52:52 <davout> thank you !
2031 2011-01-03 11:53:49 <altamic> davout: I would be pleased to do so
2032 2011-01-03 11:56:01 <davout> ok sweet,
2033 2011-01-03 11:56:28 <davout> i'll release it in beginning feb, but i'm opening the source earlier to potential contributors
2034 2011-01-03 11:56:34 <davout> here we go !
2035 2011-01-03 11:57:24 mtgox has joined
2036 2011-01-03 11:59:47 <altamic> have you realized that today
2037 2011-01-03 12:00:12 <altamic> is the first birthday of bitcoin blocks?
2038 2011-01-03 12:00:23 <davout> \o/
2039 2011-01-03 12:02:38 <altamic> https://github.com/gavinandresen/bitcoin-git/blob/804506abab94f87ab8e37d5a10a8933fefd193fb/main.cpp#L1783
2040 2011-01-03 12:03:00 <altamic> ops
2041 2011-01-03 12:03:04 <altamic> the second
2042 2011-01-03 12:04:32 <altamic> out for lunch brb
2043 2011-01-03 12:05:26 altamic has quit (Quit: altamic)
2044 2011-01-03 12:09:19 james__ has joined
2045 2011-01-03 12:09:41 james_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2046 2011-01-03 12:23:44 james_ has joined
2047 2011-01-03 12:24:05 james__ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2048 2011-01-03 12:28:53 noagendamarket has joined
2049 2011-01-03 12:37:13 Bth8 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2050 2011-01-03 12:41:10 james__ has joined
2051 2011-01-03 12:41:18 james_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2052 2011-01-03 12:47:33 Alystair has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
2053 2011-01-03 12:49:37 <mizerydearia> Would anyone be up for further testing of http://witcoin.com/ ?
2054 2011-01-03 12:49:57 RazielZ has joined
2055 2011-01-03 12:52:20 james__ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
2056 2011-01-03 12:53:40 james_ has joined
2057 2011-01-03 13:01:35 akem has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2058 2011-01-03 13:08:05 james__ has joined
2059 2011-01-03 13:08:30 james_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2060 2011-01-03 13:09:57 akem has joined
2061 2011-01-03 13:09:57 akem has quit (Changing host)
2062 2011-01-03 13:09:57 akem has joined
2063 2011-01-03 13:11:17 <AAA_awright> Hahaha
2064 2011-01-03 13:11:25 <AAA_awright> Is that seriously in the source?
2065 2011-01-03 13:12:49 <noagendamarket> what is?
2066 2011-01-03 13:15:43 <AAA_awright> const char* pszTimestamp = "The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks";
2067 2011-01-03 13:16:56 <sipa> it looks like a proof that the genesis block cannot have been generated before 3 jan 2009
2068 2011-01-03 13:17:42 darrob has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2069 2011-01-03 13:17:48 <sipa> and thus that no one can have had a head start
2070 2011-01-03 13:21:09 <mizerydearia> yep
2071 2011-01-03 13:23:19 <noagendamarket> yes its true
2072 2011-01-03 13:25:29 <davout> yay! bitcoin charts reports higher volume on BC than on mtgox for today
2073 2011-01-03 13:25:53 <tcatm> cool
2074 2011-01-03 13:26:13 <tcatm> btw, could you add orderbook json support?
2075 2011-01-03 13:27:14 <davout> yea sure
2076 2011-01-03 13:27:32 <davout> order book, depth of market or both ?
2077 2011-01-03 13:27:48 <davout> can you email me the format you're already handling ?
2078 2011-01-03 13:28:02 <tcatm> raw order book
2079 2011-01-03 13:28:06 <davout> ok
2080 2011-01-03 13:29:48 <edcba> what if satoshi knew someone at the times !!!!
2081 2011-01-03 13:31:26 <tcatm> format: {'bids': {'timestamp': unixtime, 'price': 4234.23, 'volume': 100.00}, 'asks': { same format }}
2082 2011-01-03 13:31:39 james__ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
2083 2011-01-03 13:32:06 darrob has joined
2084 2011-01-03 13:32:07 <tcatm> davout: would be best if there were multiple urls, one for each currency
2085 2011-01-03 13:32:51 <davout> tcatm: what i can easily do is this format + a "currency" attribute
2086 2011-01-03 13:32:57 james_ has joined
2087 2011-01-03 13:33:10 <davout> tcatm: with a currency specified as a GET parameter would you want to filter
2088 2011-01-03 13:33:42 <davout> so you'd just have a GET https://bc.net/trade_orders/book.json?currency=LRUSD
2089 2011-01-03 13:33:54 <tcatm> should work :)
2090 2011-01-03 13:33:59 <davout> sweet
2091 2011-01-03 13:34:08 <davout> you should be ashamed
2092 2011-01-03 13:34:22 <davout> my day job tasks will be longer to complete with this request
2093 2011-01-03 13:34:23 <davout> xD
2094 2011-01-03 13:35:09 <tcatm> most of us have that problem ;)
2095 2011-01-03 13:37:32 akem has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2096 2011-01-03 13:37:47 akem has joined
2097 2011-01-03 13:37:48 akem has quit (Changing host)
2098 2011-01-03 13:37:48 akem has joined
2099 2011-01-03 13:52:28 slush has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2100 2011-01-03 13:54:54 slush has joined
2101 2011-01-03 14:02:16 noagendamarket has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2102 2011-01-03 14:09:16 ArtForz has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
2103 2011-01-03 14:09:43 ArtForz has joined
2104 2011-01-03 14:17:19 ciuciu has joined
2105 2011-01-03 14:25:12 ThomasV has joined
2106 2011-01-03 14:26:19 james has joined
2107 2011-01-03 14:26:36 james_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2108 2011-01-03 14:26:45 james is now known as Guest80332
2109 2011-01-03 14:34:01 <luke-jr> davout: huh? I see .29
2110 2011-01-03 14:35:54 <davout> what ?
2111 2011-01-03 14:36:18 <luke-jr> misread you
2112 2011-01-03 14:36:20 <luke-jr> what's BC?
2113 2011-01-03 14:36:45 <sipa> bitcoin, maybe?
2114 2011-01-03 14:36:57 <luke-jr> [08:22:26] <davout> yay! bitcoin charts reports higher volume on BC than on mtgox for today
2115 2011-01-03 14:38:12 <sipa> oh, bitcoin central
2116 2011-01-03 14:42:12 james_ has joined
2117 2011-01-03 14:42:18 Guest80332 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2118 2011-01-03 14:42:45 <EvanR-work> BC vs BCM, confusing
2119 2011-01-03 14:42:56 <EvanR-work> how about BCC
2120 2011-01-03 14:43:58 <ThomasV> davout: when will you publish charts ?
2121 2011-01-03 14:52:53 <davout> bcc is ublgy
2122 2011-01-03 14:52:58 <davout> *ugly
2123 2011-01-03 14:53:06 <davout> thomasv: asap
2124 2011-01-03 14:53:20 <ThomasV> davout: or raw data ...
2125 2011-01-03 14:53:22 <davout> hopefully in less than 12h
2126 2011-01-03 14:53:30 <davout> which raw data
2127 2011-01-03 14:53:51 <ThomasV> trades
2128 2011-01-03 14:54:11 <davout> https://bitcoin-central.net/trades/all_trades.xml
2129 2011-01-03 14:54:14 <davout> https://bitcoin-central.net/trades/all_trades.json
2130 2011-01-03 14:55:05 james__ has joined
2131 2011-01-03 14:55:09 Amiga4000 is now known as amiga4000
2132 2011-01-03 14:55:18 james_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2133 2011-01-03 14:55:42 <davout> https://bitcoin-central.net/account/trade_orders/book.json
2134 2011-01-03 14:55:47 <davout> something else ?
2135 2011-01-03 14:55:52 <davout> tcatm: order book ready
2136 2011-01-03 14:56:08 <davout> pass a currency (LRUSD|LREUR) param
2137 2011-01-03 14:56:19 <davout> no param will output the whole book
2138 2011-01-03 14:56:25 <davout> brb preparing XML output
2139 2011-01-03 14:56:30 <ThomasV> nice
2140 2011-01-03 15:05:37 <davout> https://bitcoin-central.net/account/trade_orders/book.xml
2141 2011-01-03 15:05:38 <davout> ugh
2142 2011-01-03 15:05:44 <davout> chrome claims it's not valid xml
2143 2011-01-03 15:05:53 <davout> like
2144 2011-01-03 15:06:03 <davout> is it mandatory that i have a single root node ??
2145 2011-01-03 15:06:49 <EvanR-work> xml >_<
2146 2011-01-03 15:07:03 <davout> xml is nice too come on
2147 2011-01-03 15:07:20 * davout likes XML, it'a nice
2148 2011-01-03 15:07:21 <EvanR-work> ehhhh no
2149 2011-01-03 15:07:30 <davout> whatever, the more options the better
2150 2011-01-03 15:07:33 <EvanR-work> i have a question about the mining pool
2151 2011-01-03 15:07:42 <EvanR-work> how does it work?
2152 2011-01-03 15:07:45 <EvanR-work> lol
2153 2011-01-03 15:07:56 james_ has joined
2154 2011-01-03 15:07:58 <EvanR-work> what is a share
2155 2011-01-03 15:08:13 james__ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2156 2011-01-03 15:08:25 <sipa> read https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Pooled_mining
2157 2011-01-03 15:10:12 <EvanR-work> ah
2158 2011-01-03 15:10:56 <EvanR-work> sipa: do miners coordinate on which nonces to try?
2159 2011-01-03 15:10:59 <davout> the same way fucking magnets do
2160 2011-01-03 15:11:09 <sipa> EvanR-work: no
2161 2011-01-03 15:11:15 <sipa> EvanR-work: each gets a different one
2162 2011-01-03 15:11:25 <tcatm> davout: thanks!
2163 2011-01-03 15:11:41 <EvanR-work> different what
2164 2011-01-03 15:11:47 <EvanR-work> block header?
2165 2011-01-03 15:11:48 <MT`AwAy> Notice for everyone who speaks chinese: https://zh-cn.bitcoin.it/ has been open
2166 2011-01-03 15:12:14 <sipa> EvanR-work: both the block header and the transactions themselves contain a nonce
2167 2011-01-03 15:12:27 <sipa> different miners get a different nonce in the transactions
2168 2011-01-03 15:12:37 <sipa> and each tries all nonces in the header
2169 2011-01-03 15:12:43 <sipa> then asks for more work
2170 2011-01-03 15:12:48 <tcatm> davout: btw, can you fix the 403 when wget'ing bitcoin-central.net?
2171 2011-01-03 15:12:48 <EvanR-work> ok so they are coordinating ._.
2172 2011-01-03 15:13:02 <EvanR-work> to avoid redundant work
2173 2011-01-03 15:13:05 <sipa> no there is no coordination, they just get different ones
2174 2011-01-03 15:13:08 <EvanR-work> ...
2175 2011-01-03 15:13:19 <EvanR-work> if there were no coordinate they would end up trying the same nonces
2176 2011-01-03 15:13:32 <EvanR-work> ok my question is answered
2177 2011-01-03 15:13:39 <EvanR-work> you just dont know it yet
2178 2011-01-03 15:13:57 <sipa> you'd have to ask slush for details, but i suppose they just get random nonces
2179 2011-01-03 15:14:14 <EvanR-work> how is that 'different'
2180 2011-01-03 15:14:20 <EvanR-work> sounds like 'partially the same' to me
2181 2011-01-03 15:14:40 <sipa> i don't call that coordination - that's just hoping to be lucky and not generate the same random number twice :)
2182 2011-01-03 15:15:02 <EvanR-work> youre right
2183 2011-01-03 15:15:39 <EvanR-work> but at 1Mhash per second and 100 miners, sounds pretty stupid to choose that many random from 0-2^32-1
2184 2011-01-03 15:16:28 <sipa> the nonce in the coinbase is an arbitrary string, i believe, so there are way more possibilities than 2^32
2185 2011-01-03 15:16:47 <sipa> but maybe only 2^32 are used + timestamp
2186 2011-01-03 15:16:48 <EvanR-work> sipa: stand alone miners just increment nonce right? not random
2187 2011-01-03 15:17:07 <sipa> they ask for more work every few seconds from the client
2188 2011-01-03 15:17:10 <EvanR-work> MT`AwAy: not much there yet ;)
2189 2011-01-03 15:17:26 <EvanR-work> yes i mean per second
2190 2011-01-03 15:17:32 <sipa> yes
2191 2011-01-03 15:17:49 <sipa> their inner loops just increments the nonce in the block header
2192 2011-01-03 15:17:51 <MT`AwAy> EvanR-work: nope, but someone is willing to add chinese content
2193 2011-01-03 15:18:02 <EvanR-work> ive been calling the 32 bit number the nonce
2194 2011-01-03 15:18:10 <EvanR-work> and the timestamp the timestamp
2195 2011-01-03 15:18:33 <sipa> sure, there is a 32-bit nonce in the block header, and a 32-bit timestamp in the block header
2196 2011-01-03 15:19:01 <sipa> but inside the coinbase of the transactions (and hence indirectly influencing the block header through the merkle root), is another nonce
2197 2011-01-03 15:19:15 <sipa> and that last one is different in each call to getwork()
2198 2011-01-03 15:19:58 <EvanR-work> so theres no way to accelerate cooperation?
2199 2011-01-03 15:20:09 <sipa> how do you mean?
2200 2011-01-03 15:20:42 <EvanR-work> these details seem to conspire to make the process more and more random, bringing it closer to the theoretical distribution
2201 2011-01-03 15:21:06 <EvanR-work> which is good i guess. but maybe theres a way to make the clients cooperate on the same header
2202 2011-01-03 15:21:14 <sipa> why would you want to?
2203 2011-01-03 15:21:21 <EvanR-work> to increase the speed of the pool
2204 2011-01-03 15:21:26 <sipa> it won't
2205 2011-01-03 15:21:31 <davout> tcatm: 403 is normal behaviour on / path
2206 2011-01-03 15:21:41 <davout> i'm redirecting to the account page
2207 2011-01-03 15:21:53 <EvanR-work> why not?
2208 2011-01-03 15:22:01 <EvanR-work> you can try more unique hashes per second
2209 2011-01-03 15:22:05 <davout> i need a real "hello unlogged user" page for it to have a nice 200
2210 2011-01-03 15:22:20 <tcatm> davout: you should use 301
2211 2011-01-03 15:22:22 <davout> that's why you get 403,
2212 2011-01-03 15:22:23 <sipa> you're simply making sure that all miners are 1) continually working and 2) the chance that a same hash is tried twice is astronomically small
2213 2011-01-03 15:22:32 <davout> yea but that wouldn't be quite right
2214 2011-01-03 15:22:32 <sipa> it doesn't what who tries what
2215 2011-01-03 15:22:42 <tcatm> davout: or maybe 302
2216 2011-01-03 15:23:02 <davout> tcatm: you're forbidden to access to account page unless logged, therefore 403
2217 2011-01-03 15:23:13 <TD> is slushs pool down?
2218 2011-01-03 15:23:27 <davout> tcatm: I guess I could map / to the faq until there's real content on the front page
2219 2011-01-03 15:23:28 <EvanR-work> i guess theres no guarantee that a given block can possibly be hashed in under the target allowing only the 2^32 different changes
2220 2011-01-03 15:23:46 <sipa> no guarantee at all
2221 2011-01-03 15:23:51 <EvanR-work> i was thinking if you had that guarantee you should concentrate on the same 2^32 set
2222 2011-01-03 15:24:07 <sipa> the chances for finding something are exactly the same
2223 2011-01-03 15:24:36 <sipa> whether you work in a 2^32 nonce range, or any other set of 2^32 different inputs
2224 2011-01-03 15:24:37 <TD> ah, oso it is
2225 2011-01-03 15:28:00 <afed> MORE GPUS AARRHAHHAHAHHA
2226 2011-01-03 15:28:40 Remmy has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2227 2011-01-03 15:31:09 <devon_hillard> I understand SLI or CrossfireX doesn't play very well with bitcoin miners
2228 2011-01-03 15:31:31 <devon_hillard> can you just use each card separately for mining, even if they're not connected by SLI/Crossfire bridges?
2229 2011-01-03 15:32:22 <devon_hillard> or using 2 video cards, of which only one is connected to a monitor
2230 2011-01-03 15:32:42 <sipa> i believe that mining on two cards *only* works if they are not using crossfire
2231 2011-01-03 15:33:24 <sipa> and for the 5970, which is internally two 5870's, you need to disable crossfire explicitly to use it
2232 2011-01-03 15:34:07 <davout> tcatm: / should give you 200 or 302 now
2233 2011-01-03 15:34:21 <devon_hillard> is there a guide on multi-gpu mining?
2234 2011-01-03 15:37:07 <tcatm> davout: thanks
2235 2011-01-03 15:37:32 <tcatm> now I can add a link from bitcoincharts to your exchange :)
2236 2011-01-03 15:39:42 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2237 2011-01-03 15:40:08 <davout> yay
2238 2011-01-03 15:47:47 james has joined
2239 2011-01-03 15:48:05 james_ has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2240 2011-01-03 15:48:13 james is now known as Guest89251
2241 2011-01-03 15:48:30 * davout needs to work on SEO
2242 2011-01-03 15:48:50 * davout needs 750k EUR in order to open a legit financial institution XD
2243 2011-01-03 15:49:18 * pankkake needs 750k EUR for blackjack and hookers
2244 2011-01-03 15:52:24 <slush> TD: pool server has some load problems (peaks from other services on server), so I move it to separate server this week.
2245 2011-01-03 15:53:14 <slush> TD: Still nothing dramatic, it is only time to time, ~10 second peaks on database
2246 2011-01-03 15:53:17 <afed> devon_hillard: i am operating a pair of 5770 cards with an SLI bridge
2247 2011-01-03 15:53:38 <afed> as far as i can tell, SLI doesn't come in to play
2248 2011-01-03 15:53:47 <afed> i simply run two opencl miners
2249 2011-01-03 15:54:10 <afed> s/SLI/crossfire
2250 2011-01-03 15:54:21 <afed> whatever you call it
2251 2011-01-03 15:54:51 <devon_hillard> afed, you mean crossfire bridge
2252 2011-01-03 15:55:09 <devon_hillard> ah, yes
2253 2011-01-03 15:55:38 <afed> i don't necessarily endorse crossfire or 5770 cards for mining
2254 2011-01-03 15:55:51 <afed> that's what i chose for gaming before i discovered bitcoin
2255 2011-01-03 16:01:41 jackmcbarn has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2256 2011-01-03 16:04:39 <TD> slush: thanks. it's working now
2257 2011-01-03 16:08:06 Guest89251 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2258 2011-01-03 16:08:12 james_ has joined
2259 2011-01-03 16:10:38 slush has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
2260 2011-01-03 16:14:34 ThomasV has joined
2261 2011-01-03 16:16:57 gavinandresen has joined
2262 2011-01-03 16:18:53 <kiba> the new bitcoin central is sure seeing lot of new activity
2263 2011-01-03 16:19:13 <kiba> even more than MtGox
2264 2011-01-03 16:20:49 <ThomasV> lots of trades @ 1btc, though
2265 2011-01-03 16:21:21 <kiba> still more volume than MtGox
2266 2011-01-03 16:21:29 <kiba> although their is in paypal dollars
2267 2011-01-03 16:21:51 <ThomasV> I think it is LR
2268 2011-01-03 16:22:19 int0x27h has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2269 2011-01-03 16:23:38 <kiba> bitcoin central is PPUSD
2270 2011-01-03 16:23:43 <kiba> mtgox is LRUSD
2271 2011-01-03 16:24:20 <ThomasV> are you sure ?
2272 2011-01-03 16:24:30 <kiba> yeah
2273 2011-01-03 16:24:47 <sipa> How can I add funds to my account?
2274 2011-01-03 16:24:48 <sipa> You can simply transfer Liberty Reserve USD or EUR by using the relevant menu option.
2275 2011-01-03 16:24:53 <sipa> -- bitcoin-central.net
2276 2011-01-03 16:26:07 <ThomasV> kiba: I wrote this thing (not only for you..) : https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Controlled_inflation
2277 2011-01-03 16:26:24 int0x27h has joined
2278 2011-01-03 16:26:43 cdecker has joined
2279 2011-01-03 16:27:02 <cdecker> Some protocol guru here?
2280 2011-01-03 16:27:14 <cdecker> I'm having trouble with the checksum in the proto
2281 2011-01-03 16:27:27 <kiba> ThomasV: the only problem I see here is attracting early adopters and people who save
2282 2011-01-03 16:27:36 <cdecker> As far as I understand it's the first 4 bytes of the SHA256 hash of the payload
2283 2011-01-03 16:27:39 <kiba> people will still be looking to bitcoin as a store of wealth
2284 2011-01-03 16:27:43 <cdecker> Is that about right?
2285 2011-01-03 16:27:46 <sipa> cdecker: correct
2286 2011-01-03 16:27:59 <cdecker> Great, back to coding the client :D
2287 2011-01-03 16:28:02 <cdecker> Thanks ^^
2288 2011-01-03 16:28:37 james__ has joined
2289 2011-01-03 16:28:54 james_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2290 2011-01-03 16:28:57 <ThomasV> kiba: the current bitcoin, with its bounded supply, will attract early adopters
2291 2011-01-03 16:30:03 <sipa> why don't you want to attract early adopters?
2292 2011-01-03 16:30:35 <kiba> anybody who save in the bitcoin economy is quite literally an automatic winner
2293 2011-01-03 16:30:44 <ThomasV> kiba: once bitcoin is more developed, new adopters will see that it is not in their interest to make us so rich
2294 2011-01-03 16:31:04 <sipa> i understand the idea that maybe it feels less fair that late newcomers have a much harder time collecting btc than early adopters
2295 2011-01-03 16:31:08 <ThomasV> they will thus prefer a currency with controlled inflation
2296 2011-01-03 16:31:10 <kiba> everyone get rich if they save
2297 2011-01-03 16:31:39 <davout> bitcoin, the new N-dimensional self alimenting ponzi scheme
2298 2011-01-03 16:31:39 <sipa> but also note that for early adopters, the value of a BTC was much lower, and they had less reason to believe it was going to be popular
2299 2011-01-03 16:32:00 <davout> ThomasV: check out that 10kBTC pizza story
2300 2011-01-03 16:32:07 <ThomasV> I know it
2301 2011-01-03 16:32:16 <kiba> bitcoin is not a ponzi scheme
2302 2011-01-03 16:32:27 <kiba> as long deflation is continious, if you save, your money will increase in value
2303 2011-01-03 16:32:32 <x6763> the computer industry has been experiencing price deflation for many decades, yet it seems to be doing just fine
2304 2011-01-03 16:32:52 <davout> bitcoin is a ponzi scheme, so is gold
2305 2011-01-03 16:32:55 <davout> XD
2306 2011-01-03 16:33:02 <kiba> how is it a ponzi scheme?
2307 2011-01-03 16:33:24 <kiba> ThomasV: saving is required for long term capital formation
2308 2011-01-03 16:33:39 <x6763> "inflation is necessary" is based on nothing more than fallacies
2309 2011-01-03 16:33:48 <davout> kiba: nvm
2310 2011-01-03 16:34:04 <davout> kiba: also wtf are you talking about, bitcoin central is LRUSD
2311 2011-01-03 16:34:21 <kiba> davout: you're right
2312 2011-01-03 16:34:34 <kiba> I was wrong and inept
2313 2011-01-03 16:34:34 <sipa> LRUSD + LREUR
2314 2011-01-03 16:34:36 <davout> kiba: i better be :)
2315 2011-01-03 16:34:50 <davout> sipa: and now cash in the mail and wire EUR
2316 2011-01-03 16:34:50 <kiba> Liberty Reserve Euro?
2317 2011-01-03 16:34:58 <ThomasV> kiba: we can just make such a bitcoin variant exist ; I do not think that it will trade at zero bitcoins :-)
2318 2011-01-03 16:35:09 <sipa> davout: how fast is wire EUR?
2319 2011-01-03 16:35:12 <ThomasV> all the rest is theories
2320 2011-01-03 16:35:19 <davout> yea, but LREUR is a pain in the ass to get, so i've started accepting actual EUR cash
2321 2011-01-03 16:35:26 <davout> sipa: i have no idea
2322 2011-01-03 16:35:30 <kiba> ThomasV: correct logical deducation is correct
2323 2011-01-03 16:35:36 <davout> sipa: where are you located at ?
2324 2011-01-03 16:35:38 <sipa> belgium
2325 2011-01-03 16:35:39 <kiba> all else is unnnecesary
2326 2011-01-03 16:35:45 <kiba> deduction*
2327 2011-01-03 16:35:52 <davout> sipa: it shouldn't be too long
2328 2011-01-03 16:36:04 <davout> sipa: i guess you'll need to try out
2329 2011-01-03 16:36:07 <davout> :)
2330 2011-01-03 16:36:29 <sipa> i'll first wait till my money arrives at your competitor who shall not be hilighted :)
2331 2011-01-03 16:36:43 <devon_hillard> <davout> ThomasV: check out that 10kBTC pizza story
2332 2011-01-03 16:37:01 <kiba> so davout got rich today
2333 2011-01-03 16:37:15 <kiba> 450 BTC + unknown contribution
2334 2011-01-03 16:37:38 <TD> pizza
2335 2011-01-03 16:37:44 <TD> pizza??
2336 2011-01-03 16:37:57 <kiba> pizza for bitcoin :D
2337 2011-01-03 16:38:11 <TD> ah the exchange thing
2338 2011-01-03 16:39:13 <ThomasV> kiba: sure, but what does your theory predict about inflationnary bitcoins ? that their value will be zero ?
2339 2011-01-03 16:39:59 <sipa> currently, much of a bitcoins value comes from the fact that it's known to be rare, and if it becomes popular, it will be worth much
2340 2011-01-03 16:40:18 <kiba> ThomasV: nobody will keep their saving in your currency
2341 2011-01-03 16:40:22 <kiba> they will keep their in bitcoin
2342 2011-01-03 16:41:01 <kiba> and they might as well spend their wealth in bitcoin instead of your inflatecoin
2343 2011-01-03 16:41:12 <sipa> in an inflating bitcoin, people would invest their money in mining, to get the 2% inflation back
2344 2011-01-03 16:41:19 <ThomasV> I am not talking about their savings. I am talking about how the market will value it
2345 2011-01-03 16:41:41 <sipa> an infinitely-inflating bitcoin would currently be valued less, i think
2346 2011-01-03 16:41:48 <kiba> ThomasV: the value of inflationary bitcoin will tend to 0
2347 2011-01-03 16:41:52 <sipa> assuming that was the only one that existed
2348 2011-01-03 16:42:12 <sipa> if you're new to the game, i think it will be worth even less
2349 2011-01-03 16:42:27 <ThomasV> kiba: sure, it will tend to zero as time tends to infinity. but "tend to" is not an enswer
2350 2011-01-03 16:42:29 <sipa> (indepent of which one were first)
2351 2011-01-03 16:42:29 <kiba> welcome to the world of currency market
2352 2011-01-03 16:42:56 <kiba> ThomasV: that mean your currency will be outcompeted over time
2353 2011-01-03 16:43:11 <ThomasV> no, because its volume will grow
2354 2011-01-03 16:44:15 <kiba> why would I want to use your currency if your currency erode it values by 2% each eyar?
2355 2011-01-03 16:45:03 <ThomasV> why would you want not to spend it then ? :-)
2356 2011-01-03 16:45:12 <kiba> ThomasV: I would spend bitcoin.
2357 2011-01-03 16:45:27 <kiba> the purpose of bitcoin and all money is not about hoarding it..it's about using it
2358 2011-01-03 16:45:29 <nanotube> ThomasV: why would you want to acquire it in the first place, in the more important question :)
2359 2011-01-03 16:45:50 <kiba> with bitcoin, I don't feel the rush to spend
2360 2011-01-03 16:45:50 <davout> if there is a constant amount of inflation, inflation rate will tend to zero
2361 2011-01-03 16:45:55 <kiba> I can spend it at any time I like
2362 2011-01-03 16:45:58 <davout> constant inflation rate is sthg different
2363 2011-01-03 16:46:22 <kiba> you see, your currency doesn't allow me to have a time preference that I like
2364 2011-01-03 16:46:27 <kiba> instead, it's dictated by the currency
2365 2011-01-03 16:46:30 <sipa> ThomasV proposes a constant inflation rate
2366 2011-01-03 16:46:30 <davout> with 50BTC/block in 100 years inflation would be almost zero
2367 2011-01-03 16:46:43 <sipa> not constant inflation in absolute terms
2368 2011-01-03 16:46:47 <davout> ok
2369 2011-01-03 16:47:08 <davout> you don't need a cryptocurrency for a constant inf. rate
2370 2011-01-03 16:47:14 <davout> zimabwean dollar will do :)
2371 2011-01-03 16:47:24 <kiba> everybody in the bitcoin economy knows that if they save, the value of bitcoin wil lnaturaully grow up
2372 2011-01-03 16:47:34 <kiba> including the newcomers
2373 2011-01-03 16:47:37 <kiba> that's a nice thought
2374 2011-01-03 16:47:38 <nanotube> davout: sipa: well, if anything, i'd prefer the constant inflation in absolute terms. new coins replace old lost one... but over time, inflation rate tends to approximately zero.
2375 2011-01-03 16:47:48 <ThomasV> kiba: at some point there is no more newcomers
2376 2011-01-03 16:47:49 <nanotube> (prefer it to constant percent inflation)
2377 2011-01-03 16:48:05 <kiba> ThomasV: and everybody can still win if they save, provide that the economy is still growing
2378 2011-01-03 16:48:41 <davout> kiba: or that newcomers are still coming
2379 2011-01-03 16:48:45 <kiba> You see, you're so focused on the rich people
2380 2011-01-03 16:48:53 <kiba> that you don't see the benefit for yourself!
2381 2011-01-03 16:50:54 <luke-jr> "Using the bitcoin system there will obviously no loans granted since it won't be possible to hold anyone liable for the resulting debt repayments."
2382 2011-01-03 16:50:56 <luke-jr> why not?
2383 2011-01-03 16:51:06 <kiba> that's bullshit
2384 2011-01-03 16:51:07 cervanto is now known as canjorlt
2385 2011-01-03 16:51:10 <luke-jr> I agree
2386 2011-01-03 16:51:15 <kiba> there's reputation
2387 2011-01-03 16:51:17 <kiba> to be had
2388 2011-01-03 16:51:27 <luke-jr> bitcoins work no different from any other currency in that regard IMO
2389 2011-01-03 16:51:29 <kiba> suppose if you don't pay on time, that person will call out everyone that this person is a cheater
2390 2011-01-03 16:51:34 <nanotube> luke-jr: where did you get that?
2391 2011-01-03 16:51:35 <luke-jr> nobody can *force* you to hand over cash
2392 2011-01-03 16:51:37 <luke-jr> but you're still liable
2393 2011-01-03 16:51:41 <luke-jr> https://bitcoin-central.net/frequently_asked_questions
2394 2011-01-03 16:51:48 * sipa agrees
2395 2011-01-03 16:51:55 <nanotube> luke-jr: point that out to davout :)
2396 2011-01-03 16:52:12 <luke-jr> anyone want to loan me 5 BTC?
2397 2011-01-03 16:52:26 <luke-jr> :p
2398 2011-01-03 16:52:29 <sipa> luke-jr: will you pay me back 6?
2399 2011-01-03 16:52:29 <kiba> nanotube loaned me 300 btc in all total
2400 2011-01-03 16:52:40 <luke-jr> sipa: 6? 5 isn't worth 6.
2401 2011-01-03 16:52:43 <kiba> I pay the interest and princpal back...all of it
2402 2011-01-03 16:52:52 * davout wonders why people point out this crappy faq when most of the dev time is spent on useful functionality
2403 2011-01-03 16:53:13 <luke-jr> sipa: if BTC drops in value to where 6 is what 5 is today, then yes
2404 2011-01-03 16:53:16 <davout> yep, my faq is crappy, so what ? :)
2405 2011-01-03 16:53:18 <ThomasV> davout: because all we see is this c... faq
2406 2011-01-03 16:53:22 <kiba> most of us aren't cryptography or networking expert, methink
2407 2011-01-03 16:53:37 <sipa> luke-jr: no, but let's say i estimate an 1/6 chance you don't pay me back
2408 2011-01-03 16:53:41 <davout> oh god, users...
2409 2011-01-03 16:53:42 <davout> :)
2410 2011-01-03 16:53:42 slush has joined
2411 2011-01-03 16:53:48 <sipa> luke-jr: i still want to compensate for that
2412 2011-01-03 16:54:02 <davout> yea, i'm actually thinking about loans
2413 2011-01-03 16:54:05 <luke-jr> sipa: that's nonsense. if I don't pay you back, you don't get any of it, let alone 6
2414 2011-01-03 16:54:13 <davout> but with some collateral
2415 2011-01-03 16:54:21 <sipa> luke-jr: on average, it's the same
2416 2011-01-03 16:54:33 <luke-jr> sipa: so you mean, you want the honest guy to pay for the dishonest guy
2417 2011-01-03 16:54:38 <sipa> no
2418 2011-01-03 16:54:40 <luke-jr> yes
2419 2011-01-03 16:54:44 <sipa> you need money, i need trust
2420 2011-01-03 16:54:52 <sipa> you pay me for my trust in you
2421 2011-01-03 16:55:02 <luke-jr> demanding an unfair exchange, is not trust
2422 2011-01-03 16:55:16 <sipa> there's nothing unfair about it - you don't need to agree
2423 2011-01-03 16:55:18 <kiba> there is no such thing as unfair or fair in market exchange
2424 2011-01-03 16:55:24 <luke-jr> 5 != 6
2425 2011-01-03 16:55:25 <sipa> you may find it excessive
2426 2011-01-03 16:55:25 <kiba> only consent is golden
2427 2011-01-03 16:55:31 akem has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2428 2011-01-03 16:55:36 <sipa> and that would probably be right
2429 2011-01-03 16:55:44 <kiba> it's not like luke-jr would have to accept it
2430 2011-01-03 16:55:49 <luke-jr> it's called usury.
2431 2011-01-03 16:55:49 <kiba> he could look for better loan deal
2432 2011-01-03 16:56:01 <luke-jr> you're charging me not only for the 5 BTC you loan, but you're charging me 1 BTC to use it too
2433 2011-01-03 16:56:03 <sipa> i can keep my 5 btc, and do what i want with it, instead of giving it to you
2434 2011-01-03 16:56:18 <sipa> what benefit is there for me, if you just pay me back the same amount?
2435 2011-01-03 16:56:30 <luke-jr> sipa: merit (aka karma)
2436 2011-01-03 16:56:41 <sipa> that counts for something indeed
2437 2011-01-03 16:56:54 <kiba> to me, these things count for very little :P
2438 2011-01-03 16:57:09 <luke-jr> kiba: then you're just selfish >:P
2439 2011-01-03 16:57:21 <x6763> i'd lend money to a friend interest free...not to a stranger, however
2440 2011-01-03 16:57:29 <sipa> x6763: indeed
2441 2011-01-03 16:57:50 <x6763> but that's just a personal preference
2442 2011-01-03 16:58:04 <x6763> anyone can charge whatever they want
2443 2011-01-03 16:58:15 <davout> kiba: then you're prob not a very happy person :)
2444 2011-01-03 16:58:20 <luke-jr> ideally, one should lend freely without expecting to be paid back :p
2445 2011-01-03 16:58:20 <kiba> davout: what?
2446 2011-01-03 16:58:33 <davout> kiba: if you don't care about karma
2447 2011-01-03 16:58:40 <x6763> luke-jr: according to your personal ideals
2448 2011-01-03 16:59:19 <kiba> davout: caring very little for things like that enable me to make impossible ethical decisions in others
2449 2011-01-03 16:59:42 <kiba> I perserve my thought for far more improtant events
2450 2011-01-03 16:59:55 <ThomasV> such as... ?
2451 2011-01-03 17:00:18 <kiba> gathering the courage to save somebody's ass
2452 2011-01-03 17:00:31 <ThomasV> who is that ?
2453 2011-01-03 17:00:47 <davout> kiba: if you care about feeling good about it that means you care about karma to some extent i guess
2454 2011-01-03 17:00:48 <kiba> I don't know. It could be a stranger, friend, or family
2455 2011-01-03 17:01:10 <davout> anyway, just be happy, and happy new year everyone !!
2456 2011-01-03 17:01:16 <kiba> davout: no, saving somebody life is far more improtant than charging people a low interest rate just because I am nice
2457 2011-01-03 17:01:19 <devon_hillard> strictly speaking the world's supply of gold is growing, but very slowly
2458 2011-01-03 17:01:23 <devon_hillard> maybe 1% annualized
2459 2011-01-03 17:01:38 <davout> kiba: oh yea, definitely
2460 2011-01-03 17:01:41 <devon_hillard> BTC and other fixed tokens are the first fixed-supply money
2461 2011-01-03 17:02:06 <devon_hillard> but there are also some losses from losing wallet.dat
2462 2011-01-03 17:02:14 <luke-jr> yeah, not fixed
2463 2011-01-03 17:02:15 <ThomasV> devon_hillard: so why does the value of gold not tend towards zero ? :-D
2464 2011-01-03 17:02:16 <luke-jr> capped
2465 2011-01-03 17:02:23 <luke-jr> ThomasV: it does
2466 2011-01-03 17:02:30 <luke-jr> ThomasV: just slower than fiat currency
2467 2011-01-03 17:02:36 <devon_hillard> ThomasV: it's growing very slowly, much slower than the money supply
2468 2011-01-03 17:03:01 <devon_hillard> but some gold is also lost annually
2469 2011-01-03 17:03:05 <luke-jr> ThomasV: compare cost of water with gold
2470 2011-01-03 17:03:35 <luke-jr> or maybe organic food
2471 2011-01-03 17:03:36 <kiba> water become more plentiful over time
2472 2011-01-03 17:03:38 <ThomasV> how about a cryptocurrency whose money supply increases of 1% annualy ?
2473 2011-01-03 17:03:44 * luke-jr tries to think of some fairly static priced item
2474 2011-01-03 17:03:52 <sipa> bread?
2475 2011-01-03 17:03:53 <kiba> as comets burn up in our atmosphere's planet
2476 2011-01-03 17:04:00 <luke-jr> sipa: bread has too many factors IMO
2477 2011-01-03 17:04:27 <luke-jr> actually, gold might be increasing in value
2478 2011-01-03 17:04:36 <luke-jr> with as many cell phones are destroyed regularly
2479 2011-01-03 17:04:39 <kiba> application of gold in electronics
2480 2011-01-03 17:04:42 <luke-jr> each containing a few cents of gold
2481 2011-01-03 17:05:15 <devon_hillard> no central bank can print BTC at a whim
2482 2011-01-03 17:06:00 <luke-jr> of course, this all just means we'll be fully aware of taxation :p
2483 2011-01-03 17:06:32 <devon_hillard> although I'd say the most perverse aspect of central banking is not strictly money printing
2484 2011-01-03 17:06:35 <luke-jr> how can I tell my client to confirm 100761 ? :P
2485 2011-01-03 17:06:44 <devon_hillard> but the fact that they can manipulate it secretly
2486 2011-01-03 17:07:02 <devon_hillard> besides the obvious collusion with commercial banks
2487 2011-01-03 17:07:17 <sipa> luke-jr: define confirm?
2488 2011-01-03 17:07:32 <luke-jr> sipa: dunno, mine sez 1 more confirm before I get paid
2489 2011-01-03 17:07:33 <luke-jr> :p
2490 2011-01-03 17:07:43 <sipa> so, wait one block, and you have it
2491 2011-01-03 17:07:48 <luke-jr> oh
2492 2011-01-03 17:07:55 <luke-jr> so confirm = blocks built on top?
2493 2011-01-03 17:07:58 <davout> yep
2494 2011-01-03 17:07:58 <sipa> yes
2495 2011-01-03 17:08:06 <sipa> more blocks on top = harder to revert
2496 2011-01-03 17:08:08 <devon_hillard> Friedman proposed replacing the central bank with a computer and fixing the money supply growth at something like 2% annually
2497 2011-01-03 17:08:19 <devon_hillard> total transparency
2498 2011-01-03 17:08:23 MT`AwAy is now known as MagicalTux
2499 2011-01-03 17:08:38 <luke-jr> devon_hillard: that would require BTC 2.0 at this point I think
2500 2011-01-03 17:08:48 <luke-jr> BTC doesn't seem built to scale
2501 2011-01-03 17:09:12 <devon_hillard> but now, with the science of cryptography, we can have money that is truly tamper-proof
2502 2011-01-03 17:09:28 <devon_hillard> even gold-backed currency can be dilluted secretly
2503 2011-01-03 17:09:30 <ThomasV> devon_hillard: interesting
2504 2011-01-03 17:09:57 <ThomasV> do you have a ref about that Friedman idea ?
2505 2011-01-03 17:10:29 <devon_hillard> ThomasV: http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2006/08/milton_friedman.html
2506 2011-01-03 17:10:36 <ThomasV> I'll add it to the wiki article
2507 2011-01-03 17:10:44 <ThomasV> thanks
2508 2011-01-03 17:11:35 <devon_hillard> "Milton Friedman: I don't know. I've always been puzzled by why they insist on using the interest rate rather than the quantity of money.
2509 2011-01-03 17:11:36 <devon_hillard> If you really carried out the logic concerning the quantity of money, you deprive the Federal Reserve of anything to do. Suppose the Federal Reserve said it was going to increase the quantity of money by 4 percent a year, year after year, week after week, month after month. That would be a purely mechanical project. You could program a computer to do that."
2510 2011-01-03 17:12:10 <devon_hillard> now, as for the proof-of-work systems
2511 2011-01-03 17:12:31 <devon_hillard> it would be interesting if there would be an application, like protein folding
2512 2011-01-03 17:13:01 <sipa> Though opposed to the existence of the Federal Reserve, Friedman argued that, given that it does exist, a steady, small expansion of the money supply was the only wise policy, and he warned against efforts by a treasury or central bank to do otherwise.
2513 2011-01-03 17:13:06 <sipa> -- wikipedia
2514 2011-01-03 17:14:53 <ThomasV> hmm 4% a year is twice more than what I proposed
2515 2011-01-03 17:15:16 <devon_hillard> it's still smaller than a typical central bank
2516 2011-01-03 17:15:21 <x6763> the number is arbitrary
2517 2011-01-03 17:15:24 <luke-jr> so what's the max # of BTC?
2518 2011-01-03 17:15:27 <luke-jr> exactly
2519 2011-01-03 17:15:31 <devon_hillard> and a healthy economy will grow by 3-5% annually
2520 2011-01-03 17:15:31 <sipa> 21000000
2521 2011-01-03 17:15:39 <luke-jr> isn't 21000000 approx?
2522 2011-01-03 17:15:42 akem has joined
2523 2011-01-03 17:15:42 <sipa> no
2524 2011-01-03 17:15:47 <sipa> 21000000.00000000
2525 2011-01-03 17:15:49 <x6763> devon_hillard: a healthy economy could grow at any rate
2526 2011-01-03 17:15:54 <ThomasV> devon_hillard: yes, it depends on countries
2527 2011-01-03 17:16:06 <noot> actually it is a little less i learned a few days ago
2528 2011-01-03 17:16:17 <sipa> noot!
2529 2011-01-03 17:16:33 <sipa> where did you read that?
2530 2011-01-03 17:16:45 <ThomasV> but measuring the gdp in dollars is not the best way to measure its growth
2531 2011-01-03 17:16:50 <devon_hillard> x6763: true, without artificially cheap money, whatever rate is the correct rate
2532 2011-01-03 17:16:50 <noot> just a sec
2533 2011-01-03 17:17:16 <devon_hillard> with cheapened money you have to worry about things like overheating
2534 2011-01-03 17:17:31 <noot> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ#How_long_will_it_take_to_generate_all_the_coins?
2535 2011-01-03 17:18:31 <sipa> hmm, interesting
2536 2011-01-03 17:18:45 <noot> i'm not really convinced but still
2537 2011-01-03 17:18:47 <gavinandresen> RE: money supply: I like Scott Sumner's nominal GDP targeting using a futures market proposal...
2538 2011-01-03 17:19:52 <sipa> noot: i am :)
2539 2011-01-03 17:20:21 <gavinandresen> ... second best would be constant inflation. Third best is what bitcoin does. And I think third best will be plenty good enough.
2540 2011-01-03 17:20:22 <x6763> and then there's the question of what the definition of a "healthy economy" is...health is subjective, dependent on what a person says something *ought* to be
2541 2011-01-03 17:20:41 <sipa> not the precise amount, but as soon as the gain from a single generated block go (rounded) below 0.0000001, no more btc is created
2542 2011-01-03 17:20:47 <sipa> *goes
2543 2011-01-03 17:21:31 <noot> makes sense indeed
2544 2011-01-03 17:21:51 <noot> i was assuming that the balances were stored in exact numbers
2545 2011-01-03 17:22:19 MagicalTux is now known as MT`AwAy
2546 2011-01-03 17:22:22 <sipa> they are, everything is stored as multiples of 0.0000001 BTC
2547 2011-01-03 17:23:10 <sipa> 50BTC / 2^9 cannot be represented anymore as an exact multiple of that
2548 2011-01-03 17:23:37 <sipa> 2^10 actually
2549 2011-01-03 17:24:35 <davout> hmm, so generation might start again the day the precision is increased
2550 2011-01-03 17:24:42 <sipa> yes
2551 2011-01-03 17:25:10 <noot> well yes, but i thought that the reward-halving was designed such that when the mining gain drops below the accuracy of representation, exactly 21000000 were generated
2552 2011-01-03 17:26:03 davout_ has joined
2553 2011-01-03 17:26:27 <davout_> oops
2554 2011-01-03 17:26:59 davout has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
2555 2011-01-03 17:27:02 <sipa> let's start over, with rewards that are powers of two of the unit coin!
2556 2011-01-03 17:27:10 <sipa> luke-jr will be happy!
2557 2011-01-03 17:27:27 <sipa> *powers of two times
2558 2011-01-03 17:27:27 <noot> so the final btc will be mined only in 2140
2559 2011-01-03 17:27:39 <luke-jr> just reward 1 áµTBTC each
2560 2011-01-03 17:27:44 <sipa> most likely earlier
2561 2011-01-03 17:28:14 <ThomasV> áµTBTC ?
2562 2011-01-03 17:28:58 <luke-jr> ThomasV: 42.94967296 BTC
2563 2011-01-03 17:29:29 <ThomasV> what is that ?
2564 2011-01-03 17:29:46 <luke-jr> bongTBTC
2565 2011-01-03 17:29:54 <noot> sipa: why earlier?
2566 2011-01-03 17:31:37 <sipa> noot: every 2016 blocks there is a retarget, correcting the difficulty
2567 2011-01-03 17:32:17 <sipa> but this is not precise, as long as there is growth (even a constant rate) of computational power, each group of 2016 blocks will somewhat less than 2 weeks
2568 2011-01-03 17:32:32 <sipa> *last
2569 2011-01-03 17:33:03 james has joined
2570 2011-01-03 17:33:19 james__ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2571 2011-01-03 17:33:29 james is now known as Guest88637
2572 2011-01-03 17:34:53 <lfm> if the hash rate is actually constant, the difficulty will stableize after two corrections
2573 2011-01-03 17:35:24 <sipa> yes
2574 2011-01-03 17:35:30 <noot> i see
2575 2011-01-03 17:35:33 <lfm> ;;bc,stats
2576 2011-01-03 17:35:35 <sipa> but i doubt the hash rate will ever be very constant
2577 2011-01-03 17:35:35 <gribble> Current Blocks: 100885 | Current Difficulty: 16307.48285682 | Next Difficulty At Block: 102815 | Next Difficulty In: 1930 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 4 days, 16 hours, 23 minutes, and 10 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 18912.27392820
2578 2011-01-03 17:36:29 <lfm> the last two corrections have been smaller than typical but we are still growing at a high rate
2579 2011-01-03 17:37:50 <sipa> 0.957% daily growth on average between the last two retargets
2580 2011-01-03 17:37:58 <larsig> damn miners:P
2581 2011-01-03 17:40:03 <lfm> I have plot od daily hash rate at http://www3.telus.net/millerlf/hashes.png but it is a few days old now
2582 2011-01-03 17:40:42 <sipa> lfm: http://sipa.be/static/bitcoin/speed.pdf
2583 2011-01-03 17:41:14 <lfm> pdf is evil
2584 2011-01-03 17:41:39 <sipa> i can make a png if you really want to as well, but this is more accurate
2585 2011-01-03 17:42:57 <sipa> anyway, you can see that the difficulty always lags behind on the real hashing speed
2586 2011-01-03 17:44:29 <lfm> cool how you can see sometimes significant drop after some difficulty increases like someone big drops out but the overall groth continues
2587 2011-01-03 17:45:44 <larsig> shouldnt the drop rate be smooth ideally?
2588 2011-01-03 17:46:27 james_ has joined
2589 2011-01-03 17:46:37 <lfm> nothing smooth if some company gets shut down or something
2590 2011-01-03 17:46:53 Guest88637 has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2591 2011-01-03 17:48:26 <lfm> some people try running big farms and then get discouraged
2592 2011-01-03 17:48:44 davout_ is now known as davout
2593 2011-01-03 17:49:08 tylergillies has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2594 2011-01-03 17:49:26 marioxcc has joined
2595 2011-01-03 17:49:28 <kiba> I see that the hashrate is 135.38 GH/s
2596 2011-01-03 17:49:32 <kiba> that's a lot of hashing
2597 2011-01-03 17:49:49 <lfm> about 1000 average GPUs
2598 2011-01-03 17:50:26 comboy has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2599 2011-01-03 17:50:36 <kiba> average GPUs?
2600 2011-01-03 17:50:41 comboy has joined
2601 2011-01-03 17:50:51 <lfm> the ati 5770 can do 150 mh/s
2602 2011-01-03 17:51:50 <kiba> so about a 100 5770 ati GPU?
2603 2011-01-03 17:52:04 <lfm> more than that
2604 2011-01-03 17:52:10 <Diablo-D3> 135 ghash?
2605 2011-01-03 17:52:18 <kiba> bitcoincharts.com
2606 2011-01-03 17:52:25 <lfm> network total
2607 2011-01-03 17:52:52 <Diablo-D3> 431 5870s.
2608 2011-01-03 17:52:57 <kiba> 150 mh/s * 100 is 150 mh/s?
2609 2011-01-03 17:53:10 <kiba> is
2610 2011-01-03 17:53:12 <kiba> gh/s
2611 2011-01-03 17:54:15 <lfm> or 900 5770s
2612 2011-01-03 17:54:46 <marioxcc> hello
2613 2011-01-03 17:54:52 <lfm> mario hi
2614 2011-01-03 17:54:57 <marioxcc> why do
2615 2011-01-03 17:54:59 AnonymousUser has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2616 2011-01-03 17:55:10 <marioxcc> the bitcoin client stripes the sub cent part?
2617 2011-01-03 17:55:22 <lfm> mario not needed
2618 2011-01-03 17:55:45 <marioxcc> well, that's subjetive
2619 2011-01-03 17:55:52 <marioxcc> but why have them been striped
2620 2011-01-03 17:56:00 <marioxcc> some technical limitation?
2621 2011-01-03 17:56:04 <kiba> because bitcoin is so worthless
2622 2011-01-03 17:56:07 <kiba> that we don't need them
2623 2011-01-03 17:56:16 <lfm> 0.01 btc is about us$0.003 which is not enuf to worry about
2624 2011-01-03 17:57:00 <luke-jr> right now
2625 2011-01-03 17:57:08 <lfm> mario just policy by Satoshi. not technical limit. the rest is reserved for future possible uses
2626 2011-01-03 17:57:26 <marioxcc> what a shame
2627 2011-01-03 17:57:30 <marioxcc> to add an artificial limitation
2628 2011-01-03 17:57:34 <marioxcc> to the software quality
2629 2011-01-03 17:57:35 <marioxcc> :(
2630 2011-01-03 17:57:47 <marioxcc> if the software support it, let the user decide
2631 2011-01-03 17:57:51 <luke-jr> if BTC ever becomes popular, the standard unit will need to be at most 0.0006 BTC
2632 2011-01-03 17:57:57 <Diablo-D3> its not an artificial limitation
2633 2011-01-03 17:58:02 <Diablo-D3> its a printf.
2634 2011-01-03 17:58:03 <lfm> mario not a shame to not have to type 8 00000000 s all the time
2635 2011-01-03 17:58:15 <marioxcc> you don't need to print these
2636 2011-01-03 17:58:23 <marioxcc> only when need
2637 2011-01-03 17:58:35 <lfm> ok so he is not printing them, he doesnt have to
2638 2011-01-03 17:58:44 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
2639 2011-01-03 17:58:53 <marioxcc> I disagree
2640 2011-01-03 17:59:01 <davout> i disagree too
2641 2011-01-03 17:59:10 <lfm> I have never in my life NEEDED $0.003
2642 2011-01-03 17:59:11 <Diablo-D3> no one really cares if you disagree
2643 2011-01-03 17:59:16 <davout> i collected 0.006xxxx tx fee last time
2644 2011-01-03 17:59:25 <Diablo-D3> the number is fake
2645 2011-01-03 17:59:34 <Diablo-D3> its internally stored with the full precision in integer form
2646 2011-01-03 17:59:36 <lfm> davout not worth worrying about
2647 2011-01-03 17:59:40 <davout> how is it fake ?
2648 2011-01-03 17:59:42 <marioxcc> bear in mind it is a significant lost in micro payments
2649 2011-01-03 17:59:51 <Diablo-D3> marioxcc: see above.
2650 2011-01-03 18:00:06 <davout> yea i know i'm not worrying about the loss, i'm disagreeing with the software paying that as a tx fee without my consent
2651 2011-01-03 18:00:07 <Diablo-D3> the number you see is the actual value divided by 8 places.
2652 2011-01-03 18:00:13 <marioxcc> but the user can't use them Diablo-D3
2653 2011-01-03 18:00:21 <Diablo-D3> marioxcc: yes they can.
2654 2011-01-03 18:00:24 <marioxcc> how?
2655 2011-01-03 18:00:27 <davout> no they can't
2656 2011-01-03 18:00:28 <jgarzik> davout: feel free to mention me
2657 2011-01-03 18:00:30 <Diablo-D3> type the value in.
2658 2011-01-03 18:00:31 <lfm> davout it is open source, you can change it if you care that much
2659 2011-01-03 18:00:37 <jgarzik> davout: WRT the open source pledge I made
2660 2011-01-03 18:00:52 <davout> what does wrt stand for ?
2661 2011-01-03 18:00:56 <lfm> marioxcc it is open source, you can change it if you care that much
2662 2011-01-03 18:01:01 <jgarzik> davout: "with regards to"
2663 2011-01-03 18:01:06 <Diablo-D3> 8 BTC is stored as 800000000 uBTC internally
2664 2011-01-03 18:01:15 <Diablo-D3> thats how it works
2665 2011-01-03 18:01:20 <Diablo-D3> no magic limitations
2666 2011-01-03 18:01:24 <davout> jgarzik: what do you mean ?
2667 2011-01-03 18:01:51 <jgarzik> davout: I mean you do not have to censor my name, when talking about the open sourcing of bitcoin central. I want people to know how I help the bitcoin community.
2668 2011-01-03 18:02:13 <davout> i don't really *care* about the amount, i just find it funny that the client pays a tx fee without my consent
2669 2011-01-03 18:02:29 <lfm> marioxcc if the user accumulates enuf little bits to make a whole btc 0.01 then they can spend it
2670 2011-01-03 18:02:47 <marioxcc> i'm back
2671 2011-01-03 18:03:00 <marioxcc> lfm: can you pay 0.15?
2672 2011-01-03 18:03:03 <davout> jgarzik: oh yea i see, i felt i shouldn't state who it was without the donators consent :)
2673 2011-01-03 18:03:06 <marioxcc> *0.015
2674 2011-01-03 18:03:23 <lfm> marioxcc yes
2675 2011-01-03 18:03:32 <marioxcc> (i know it is open source, i prefer the term free software, but my question was why it was chosen, not whether i can change it, which I will do)
2676 2011-01-03 18:03:32 <lfm> marioxcc no
2677 2011-01-03 18:03:36 <kiba> I didn't even get the chance to build an open source currency market exchange, oh well
2678 2011-01-03 18:03:49 <marioxcc> lfm: so you have to round to 0.02 or 0.01
2679 2011-01-03 18:03:49 <Diablo-D3> marioxcc: you could hack your client to display uBTC
2680 2011-01-03 18:03:52 <marioxcc> it is a significant loss
2681 2011-01-03 18:03:57 <Diablo-D3> dude
2682 2011-01-03 18:03:59 <Diablo-D3> theres no loss
2683 2011-01-03 18:04:03 <davout> it does display it :)
2684 2011-01-03 18:04:05 <Diablo-D3> go read the fucking source
2685 2011-01-03 18:04:10 <Diablo-D3> goddamned fucking noobs
2686 2011-01-03 18:04:15 <lfm> marioxcc it was chosen since smaller would be a waste of time and people are used to hundreths in currency I guess
2687 2011-01-03 18:04:21 <helmut> the source is ugly
2688 2011-01-03 18:04:26 <marioxcc> you're helpless Diablo-D3
2689 2011-01-03 18:04:48 <marioxcc> lfm: ok
2690 2011-01-03 18:04:57 <kiba> marioxcc is whining about stuff that we won't use in a year, or two year for that matter
2691 2011-01-03 18:05:07 <davout> Diablo-D3: yea.. goddamned fucking noobs will probably turn bitcoin into an economy eventually...
2692 2011-01-03 18:05:21 <lfm> diablo-d3 it currently throws away the fraction in a fee if you make certain transactions
2693 2011-01-03 18:05:38 <sipa> lfm: that *is* a limitation, but an intentional one
2694 2011-01-03 18:05:46 <sipa> to discourage very small transactions
2695 2011-01-03 18:05:52 <Diablo-D3> lfm: except thats a broken client then
2696 2011-01-03 18:06:09 <sipa> it is not, it is correct behaviour
2697 2011-01-03 18:06:13 <lfm> ya I think it is a mistake too
2698 2011-01-03 18:06:23 <Diablo-D3> you cant violate the transactional integrity
2699 2011-01-03 18:06:28 <helmut> where can I get the non broken client? ;-)
2700 2011-01-03 18:06:34 <sipa> please
2701 2011-01-03 18:06:35 <davout> if it's to prevent spam thats sensible, but what's the rationale behind turning me sending 50.00XXX BTC into me receiving 50.00 BTC and paying a 0.00XXX tx fee
2702 2011-01-03 18:06:37 <sipa> there is nothing broken
2703 2011-01-03 18:06:43 <Diablo-D3> you cant _destroy_ coins.
2704 2011-01-03 18:06:53 <sipa> no, it just puts them in a fee
2705 2011-01-03 18:07:01 <marioxcc> sending 0.015 to myself
2706 2011-01-03 18:07:04 <marioxcc> "eror in ammount
2707 2011-01-03 18:07:08 <lfm> sipa try it of your total balance is 0.015 you will give away a fee of 0.005 and get 0.01 btc transaction
2708 2011-01-03 18:07:09 <marioxcc> oops
2709 2011-01-03 18:07:20 <marioxcc> i have to either send 0.01 or 0.02
2710 2011-01-03 18:07:25 <marioxcc> so there is a loss because of rounding
2711 2011-01-03 18:07:27 <marioxcc> on my side
2712 2011-01-03 18:07:38 <Diablo-D3> marioxcc: because the client checks not to let you do that
2713 2011-01-03 18:07:41 <marioxcc> i can't pay 0.015, even the the client internally handles that
2714 2011-01-03 18:07:45 <sipa> we're talking about two completely different issues
2715 2011-01-03 18:07:53 <sipa> one is the fee for very small transactions
2716 2011-01-03 18:07:54 <davout> will such txns just not get included in blocks mined by the standard client, or will blocks containing these get rejected altogether by the whole network ?
2717 2011-01-03 18:08:04 <marioxcc> Diablo-D3: but I can't
2718 2011-01-03 18:08:07 <marioxcc> it won't let me
2719 2011-01-03 18:08:08 ArtForz has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
2720 2011-01-03 18:08:09 <marioxcc> that's the point
2721 2011-01-03 18:08:13 <Diablo-D3> marioxcc: remove the check.
2722 2011-01-03 18:08:17 <sipa> the other is the current UI which doesn't handle precision below 0.01
2723 2011-01-03 18:08:30 <marioxcc> Diablo-D3: what in other's clients?
2724 2011-01-03 18:08:34 <lfm> marioxcc actually you can pay 0.015 if you change the program and your carefull your "change" is at least 0.01 also
2725 2011-01-03 18:08:36 <Diablo-D3> no, in your own
2726 2011-01-03 18:08:36 <marioxcc> will they see 0.015?
2727 2011-01-03 18:08:43 ArtForz has joined
2728 2011-01-03 18:08:50 <marioxcc> that's the problem
2729 2011-01-03 18:09:01 <Diablo-D3> theres no problem
2730 2011-01-03 18:09:04 <Diablo-D3> its all UI
2731 2011-01-03 18:09:09 <sipa> i don't think there's a problem either
2732 2011-01-03 18:09:12 <marioxcc> it is a limited UI
2733 2011-01-03 18:09:15 <sipa> that is true
2734 2011-01-03 18:09:15 <davout> will the blocks containing micro txns be accepted by the network ? even if a standard client won't include them in its mined blocks ?
2735 2011-01-03 18:09:18 <Diablo-D3> the internal representation is an integer.
2736 2011-01-03 18:09:20 <marioxcc> artificiallly limitd
2737 2011-01-03 18:09:25 <sipa> davout: yes
2738 2011-01-03 18:09:27 <Diablo-D3> marioxcc: there you go with that word again
2739 2011-01-03 18:09:28 <lfm> marioxcc actually you can pay 0.015 if you change the program and your carefull your "change" is at least 0.01 also, there is no fee neded
2740 2011-01-03 18:09:48 <marioxcc> lfm: hmm,change?
2741 2011-01-03 18:09:54 <Diablo-D3> davout: clients shouldnt reject micro txns
2742 2011-01-03 18:10:03 <marioxcc> Diablo-D3: that is what it is, naturally, it will allow the user to access all the decimals
2743 2011-01-03 18:10:08 <marioxcc> but it don't
2744 2011-01-03 18:10:09 <lfm> marioxcc the part of the input transactions returned to you
2745 2011-01-03 18:10:16 <jgarzik> we need a wiki page for change transactions
2746 2011-01-03 18:10:31 <sipa> marioxcc: as soon as a need arises for more than two decimals of precision, someone will implement it in the client
2747 2011-01-03 18:10:42 <davout> jgarzik: yea, this part took time to make sense to me
2748 2011-01-03 18:10:43 <sipa> just rest assured that nothing is lost
2749 2011-01-03 18:11:15 <Diablo-D3> marioxcc: its a UI issue
2750 2011-01-03 18:11:26 <Diablo-D3> marioxcc: it has nothing to do with how btc works
2751 2011-01-03 18:11:26 <sipa> and the UI is limited, yes
2752 2011-01-03 18:11:40 <sipa> Diablo-D3: that's his point, i think
2753 2011-01-03 18:11:41 <lfm> sipa try it of your total balance is 0.015 you will give away a fee (lose!) of 0.005 and get 0.01 btc transaction
2754 2011-01-03 18:11:43 <luke-jr> got a question⦠why do mines wait for rewards to be confirmed?
2755 2011-01-03 18:12:04 <noot> who is getting the fee then?
2756 2011-01-03 18:12:04 <sipa> luke-jr: a block chain split can occur
2757 2011-01-03 18:12:10 <sipa> noot: the miner
2758 2011-01-03 18:12:19 <sipa> who puts the transaction in a block
2759 2011-01-03 18:12:26 <noot> mm ok
2760 2011-01-03 18:12:34 <luke-jr> sipa: but if the reward payment is based on the complete block, then if that block is de-verified, so is the payment?
2761 2011-01-03 18:12:50 <luke-jr> therefore, even if it pays out immediately, it's undone if the reward is un-earned
2762 2011-01-03 18:12:53 <marioxcc> Diablo-D3: the UI is where the users do enter the payments
2763 2011-01-03 18:13:01 <sipa> luke-jr: yes
2764 2011-01-03 18:13:03 <Diablo-D3> marioxcc: no, its A place to enter payments
2765 2011-01-03 18:13:14 <marioxcc> Diablo-D3: the one most will use
2766 2011-01-03 18:13:25 <Diablo-D3> the one SOME will use
2767 2011-01-03 18:13:35 <marioxcc> some=90%?
2768 2011-01-03 18:13:55 <sipa> marioxcc: if you think this is an issue, fix it, or send a bug report
2769 2011-01-03 18:14:09 <kiba> do we even have a bug tracker?
2770 2011-01-03 18:14:10 <sipa> let the ones in control of the program know that this feels as a mistake to you
2771 2011-01-03 18:14:23 <sipa> if enough people do, it will be changed
2772 2011-01-03 18:14:40 <marioxcc> is there a bug tracker?
2773 2011-01-03 18:14:46 <sipa> i doubt it
2774 2011-01-03 18:14:48 <luke-jr> sipa: therefore, mines should pay out immediately? :P
2775 2011-01-03 18:15:01 <sipa> luke-jr: i don't know what you mean
2776 2011-01-03 18:15:02 <lfm> marioxcc the forums are the bug tracker
2777 2011-01-03 18:15:21 Zarutian has joined
2778 2011-01-03 18:15:28 <luke-jr> sipa: since the payout is contingent on the block earning it, the mine should payout rewards immediately without verification
2779 2011-01-03 18:15:48 <sipa> but the block may not end up in the final block chain
2780 2011-01-03 18:15:54 <luke-jr> then neithre will the payout
2781 2011-01-03 18:16:00 <sipa> yes
2782 2011-01-03 18:16:02 <luke-jr> since the payout is based on that block
2783 2011-01-03 18:16:03 <davout> bug tracker is at github
2784 2011-01-03 18:16:18 <marioxcc> lfm: :/
2785 2011-01-03 18:16:24 <luke-jr> or can transactions not specify the block it's based on?
2786 2011-01-03 18:16:30 samfisher has joined
2787 2011-01-03 18:16:30 <sipa> luke-jr: no
2788 2011-01-03 18:16:42 <sipa> the miners decide in which block it goes
2789 2011-01-03 18:16:46 <samfisher> hello
2790 2011-01-03 18:16:49 <samfisher> happy new year
2791 2011-01-03 18:16:50 <luke-jr> o
2792 2011-01-03 18:16:50 <sipa> not the client who issues it
2793 2011-01-03 18:16:53 <luke-jr> well yeah
2794 2011-01-03 18:16:57 <luke-jr> which block it goes INTO
2795 2011-01-03 18:17:10 <luke-jr> but that block must be based on the last block (which it was earned in)â¦
2796 2011-01-03 18:17:15 <sipa> of course
2797 2011-01-03 18:17:22 <sipa> but that still doesn't mean it survives
2798 2011-01-03 18:17:31 <sipa> a split in the chain could have occurred
2799 2011-01-03 18:17:33 <luke-jr> so if LastBlock doesn't survive, neither does the block with the transaction
2800 2011-01-03 18:17:36 <sipa> some blocks before
2801 2011-01-03 18:17:42 <sipa> and the other chain wins
2802 2011-01-03 18:17:54 <luke-jr> but the other chain doesn't have the payout either
2803 2011-01-03 18:18:03 <sipa> that's the problem!
2804 2011-01-03 18:18:19 <sipa> you do NOT want to have spent money which suddenly doesn't exist anymore
2805 2011-01-03 18:18:26 <nanotube> jgarzik: yea, page for 'change outputs' is not a bad idea.
2806 2011-01-03 18:18:36 <lfm> people mlike to think bitcoin transactions are final
2807 2011-01-03 18:18:45 <luke-jr> sipa: well, the spending would get unravelled too ofc
2808 2011-01-03 18:19:01 <sipa> define unravalled?
2809 2011-01-03 18:19:05 <sipa> unravelled
2810 2011-01-03 18:19:12 <sipa> undone?
2811 2011-01-03 18:19:13 <lfm> if you go around unwinding too many you loose that property
2812 2011-01-03 18:19:21 <luke-jr> yeah
2813 2011-01-03 18:19:28 <sipa> well
2814 2011-01-03 18:19:36 <sipa> you do not want to spend money which may not exist
2815 2011-01-03 18:19:42 <sipa> if i buy a bread
2816 2011-01-03 18:19:47 <luke-jr> but if it doesn't exist, then you didn't spend it either
2817 2011-01-03 18:19:54 <sipa> and some minutes later the money i spent on it doesn't exist
2818 2011-01-03 18:19:56 <luke-jr> since spending occurs in a block further down that same chain
2819 2011-01-03 18:20:01 <sipa> there is a problem, since i still have my bread
2820 2011-01-03 18:20:09 <lfm> luke we dont want to have to unwind anything is we can help it
2821 2011-01-03 18:20:11 akem has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2822 2011-01-03 18:20:16 lolcat has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2823 2011-01-03 18:20:24 <luke-jr> lfm: I'm aware of that.
2824 2011-01-03 18:20:36 <luke-jr> but we're discussing a scenario where it's already being unwound
2825 2011-01-03 18:20:46 <lfm> luke so be patient and let the block mature
2826 2011-01-03 18:20:57 <sipa> we're at block 1000
2827 2011-01-03 18:21:04 <sipa> both me and you generate block 1001
2828 2011-01-03 18:21:08 <sipa> so there is a split
2829 2011-01-03 18:21:31 <sipa> i go to the grocery and buy some potatoes with the money i gain from my block mining
2830 2011-01-03 18:21:34 <luke-jr> now if I sent 50 BTC to Joe, that transaction is part of a block 1002 based on my block 1001
2831 2011-01-03 18:21:39 <sipa> it ends up in my chain
2832 2011-01-03 18:21:43 <sipa> in block 1002
2833 2011-01-03 18:21:46 <luke-jr> so if for any reason my block 1001 loses, so does that transaction to Joe
2834 2011-01-03 18:21:47 ApertureScience has quit (Quit: This a triumph,I'm making a note here HUHE SUCCESS!)
2835 2011-01-03 18:22:00 <lfm> thats why you cant spend generated blocks for a while
2836 2011-01-03 18:22:17 <sipa> however, soon your chain takes over, and generates blocks 1002 and 1003, without the spending of my potatoes
2837 2011-01-03 18:22:24 <sipa> so the grocery loses its money
2838 2011-01-03 18:22:34 <sipa> even though it already sold me potatoes
2839 2011-01-03 18:22:56 <lfm> and the "unconfirmed" transactions are soft, smart grocers will know this
2840 2011-01-03 18:23:26 <luke-jr> all I'm saying is
2841 2011-01-03 18:23:33 <luke-jr> the rewards should sit unconfirmed in my account
2842 2011-01-03 18:23:36 <luke-jr> not unconfirmed in the mine's
2843 2011-01-03 18:23:44 <luke-jr> and then wait 200 blocks, then get sent to me
2844 2011-01-03 18:23:51 <luke-jr> then wait in mine for another N blocks to be confirmed
2845 2011-01-03 18:23:56 <sipa> you are talking about the pool?
2846 2011-01-03 18:23:59 <luke-jr> sure
2847 2011-01-03 18:24:02 <sipa> oh, ok
2848 2011-01-03 18:24:22 <lfm> thats totally up to the pool manager. join a different pool if you dont like it
2849 2011-01-03 18:24:25 <sipa> but slush can't send you the money himself
2850 2011-01-03 18:24:27 <luke-jr> the pool should just send rewards on immediately, and they sit unconfirmed in my own balance
2851 2011-01-03 18:24:36 <sipa> that's indeed a possibilty
2852 2011-01-03 18:24:42 <sipa> but it's technically a lot harder
2853 2011-01-03 18:24:58 <luke-jr> lfm: there's more than oneâ
2854 2011-01-03 18:25:24 <sipa> btw, i was confused by your usage of the word miner: you run a miner, slush runs the pool + client
2855 2011-01-03 18:25:32 <lfm> luke I think pudnpop's pool will give you rewads right away
2856 2011-01-03 18:25:46 <sipa> indeed, but i'm not sure whether it's still operational
2857 2011-01-03 18:26:12 <lfm> start your own pool then
2858 2011-01-03 18:26:16 <luke-jr> lol
2859 2011-01-03 18:26:29 <luke-jr> I can't compete against real pools
2860 2011-01-03 18:26:58 <lfm> luke oh? you are an artificial person? wow! I always wanted to meet one
2861 2011-01-03 18:27:38 <sipa> yes! yes! yes! i got a block!!!
2862 2011-01-03 18:27:38 <luke-jr> they use GPUs and such cheating
2863 2011-01-03 18:27:40 <sipa> [03/01/2011 17:46] 00000000000309AC4D29574A4970934805C2E6791D03A8B96B0A89A0A38A90E3: score 21573.6; accepted
2864 2011-01-03 18:27:52 <lfm> wtg
2865 2011-01-03 18:28:22 <lfm> luke so they have outlawed GPUs in your country?
2866 2011-01-03 18:28:44 <luke-jr> lfm: there's no free GPU miner!
2867 2011-01-03 18:28:52 <lfm> luke false
2868 2011-01-03 18:28:58 <sipa> the miner is free, some of the software to run it isn't
2869 2011-01-03 18:29:27 <lfm> oh the gpu driver. it is free as in beer, not free like freedom true
2870 2011-01-03 18:29:54 <sipa> indeed, and i have all respect for people who do not want to use it for that reason
2871 2011-01-03 18:29:58 <sipa> i don't care myself, though
2872 2011-01-03 18:30:07 <luke-jr> the point is, I'd never get anything
2873 2011-01-03 18:30:15 <luke-jr> because the competition has much more powerful machiens
2874 2011-01-03 18:30:27 <lfm> luke but you are FREE! that is your choice
2875 2011-01-03 18:30:55 <lfm> dont tell us you dont like your choice
2876 2011-01-03 18:31:43 <lfm> luke you dont have to envy them cuz they are slaves to ATI proprietory software drivers
2877 2011-01-03 18:32:13 <sipa> luke-jr: you could start an own pool, only for cpu miners if you want to, and i'm sure you'd get people joining you
2878 2011-01-03 18:32:22 <sipa> but it's quite an effort to create such a thing
2879 2011-01-03 18:32:53 WonTu has joined
2880 2011-01-03 18:33:07 WonTu has left ()
2881 2011-01-03 18:33:19 <lfm> luke note that when GPU joins pools they get the same advantage as when they work alone
2882 2011-01-03 18:33:48 <luke-jr> except that 0.01 BTC is more than 0 BTC
2883 2011-01-03 18:33:48 <sipa> yes, if i get a faster GPU, i will still be using slush' pool
2884 2011-01-03 18:34:08 <sipa> luke-jr: more power in the pool means more frequent payouts
2885 2011-01-03 18:34:16 <lfm> people with GPUs will take most of the pool money too
2886 2011-01-03 18:34:33 <sipa> your % of the pool will go down, and so the payouts will go down for you
2887 2011-01-03 18:34:39 <sipa> but they will become more frequent as well
2888 2011-01-03 18:36:50 <nanotube> slush: ping?
2889 2011-01-03 18:38:00 <lfm> is 0.0005btc more than 0 btc? depends on your UI
2890 2011-01-03 18:38:24 <slush> nanotube: pong
2891 2011-01-03 18:38:54 <nanotube> how long until my confirmed reward gets sent? i just set my threshold to .01, so i can get my generated coin... :)
2892 2011-01-03 18:39:16 <sipa> every hour, i think?
2893 2011-01-03 18:39:16 <slush> nanotube: every hour at 0min
2894 2011-01-03 18:39:19 Diablo-D3 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2895 2011-01-03 18:39:32 <marioxcc> slush: do you round payments?
2896 2011-01-03 18:39:39 <slush> marioxcc: no
2897 2011-01-03 18:39:44 <marioxcc> ok
2898 2011-01-03 18:39:48 <sipa> slush: you round them to 0.01 BTC, no?
2899 2011-01-03 18:39:50 <nanotube> slush: ah ok cool. :)
2900 2011-01-03 18:40:07 <slush> sipa: yep, sending is rounded to 0.01, but rest is still on site
2901 2011-01-03 18:40:25 davout has left ()
2902 2011-01-03 18:40:33 <marioxcc> slush: so unless I get a multiple of 0.01 you will always retain some of our coins?
2903 2011-01-03 18:41:13 <slush> marioxcc: the rest is still in your 'reward' on site
2904 2011-01-03 18:41:14 <lfm> seems reasonable to me
2905 2011-01-03 18:41:33 <marioxcc> slush: but if you round to 0.01 we will be never able to get out these
2906 2011-01-03 18:41:39 <luke-jr> so who runs the pool I use?
2907 2011-01-03 18:41:43 <lfm> marioxcc ya he gets to keep the interest
2908 2011-01-03 18:41:44 <sipa> luke-jr: slush
2909 2011-01-03 18:41:51 <sipa> lfm: haha
2910 2011-01-03 18:41:53 <luke-jr> slush: why not payout immediately? :P
2911 2011-01-03 18:42:00 <luke-jr> slush: see my arguemnt above^^
2912 2011-01-03 18:42:06 <nanotube> slush: since you'll keep getting the subcent amounts, they'll eventually add up to .01.
2913 2011-01-03 18:42:06 <sipa> luke-jr: i told you, it's technically difficult
2914 2011-01-03 18:42:12 <nanotube> er... marioxcc --^
2915 2011-01-03 18:42:24 <slush> I don't keep any from your rewards
2916 2011-01-03 18:42:38 <nanotube> yea, that was to mario, slush :)
2917 2011-01-03 18:42:52 <slush> When the rest after sending will be 0.001 and then you mine for 0.999, next transaction will be 1BTC
2918 2011-01-03 18:42:55 <marioxcc> but my point is
2919 2011-01-03 18:43:03 <marioxcc> until I do get a multiple of 0.01
2920 2011-01-03 18:43:05 <marioxcc> when I want to leave
2921 2011-01-03 18:43:05 <sipa> marioxcc: yes he will always keep *something*
2922 2011-01-03 18:43:07 <marioxcc> you will retain some
2923 2011-01-03 18:43:25 <slush> marioxcc: Yeah, I will keep your 0.001111 btc forever then :)
2924 2011-01-03 18:43:36 <marioxcc> hmm
2925 2011-01-03 18:43:36 <luke-jr> 0.00999999999*
2926 2011-01-03 18:43:40 <lfm> marioxcc ya if he shuts it down he will get to keep a few cents
2927 2011-01-03 18:43:44 <luke-jr> 0.00999999*
2928 2011-01-03 18:43:44 <nanotube> marioxcc: yes, he'll retain a rolling amount of (x<.01btc) * number of participants.
2929 2011-01-03 18:43:49 james has joined
2930 2011-01-03 18:44:07 james_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2931 2011-01-03 18:44:15 james is now known as Guest87650
2932 2011-01-03 18:44:52 <slush> marioxcc: Many people told that my pool is scam. Now you see it really is :)
2933 2011-01-03 18:45:04 <slush> I'm micro-scamming rewards from people who leave the pool ;)
2934 2011-01-03 18:45:21 <marioxcc> i see
2935 2011-01-03 18:45:30 <sipa> slush: i just found my first block, after being payed 48.94 BTC already by the pool
2936 2011-01-03 18:45:35 <luke-jr> slush: nah, just call it an account maintenance fee
2937 2011-01-03 18:45:41 <slush> marioxcc: Well, if you can, I will send you 0.001 in separate transaction
2938 2011-01-03 18:45:58 <sipa> nicely close to the statistical average
2939 2011-01-03 18:46:08 <lfm> sipa thats pretty close to average! hehe
2940 2011-01-03 18:46:17 <marioxcc> slush: "if [I] can, ..." do what?
2941 2011-01-03 18:46:20 <marioxcc> uh?
2942 2011-01-03 18:46:44 TD has joined
2943 2011-01-03 18:46:56 <slush> marioxcc: If somebody think that I'm scammer and his reward will be under 0.01, I can send the rest to the network manually
2944 2011-01-03 18:47:03 <slush> :)
2945 2011-01-03 18:47:43 <lfm> mario and you can use it if you modify bitcoin sources
2946 2011-01-03 18:47:49 <luke-jr> slush: will you lower the minimum when 0.0006 becomes of value?
2947 2011-01-03 18:47:55 <marioxcc> lfm: which I will do anyway
2948 2011-01-03 18:48:14 <slush> marioxcc: If you really think that I'm working on pool because I want to steal those microcents, you have to be crazy
2949 2011-01-03 18:48:15 <nanotube> luke-jr: obviously, whenever the 'smallest no-fee transaction amount' lowers, so will slush's limit.
2950 2011-01-03 18:48:26 <marioxcc> slush: no, i'm just nothing you do
2951 2011-01-03 18:48:30 <luke-jr> wait, transactions can require a fee?
2952 2011-01-03 18:48:32 <marioxcc> even if you don't do in bad faith
2953 2011-01-03 18:48:37 <slush> luke-jr: Of course. 0.01 limit is just because not to lose cents in network
2954 2011-01-03 18:48:38 <nanotube> luke-jr: yes they can.
2955 2011-01-03 18:48:42 <nanotube> ;;bc,wiki transaction fee
2956 2011-01-03 18:48:43 <gribble> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_fees | Dec 19, 2010 ... Transaction fees may be included with any transfer of bitcoins from one address to another. At the moment, many transactions are typically ...
2957 2011-01-03 18:48:45 <nanotube> luke-jr: --^
2958 2011-01-03 18:48:49 <nanotube> see that for current fee schedule
2959 2011-01-03 18:48:59 <luke-jr> who sets it?
2960 2011-01-03 18:49:06 <nanotube> it's hard coded in the client
2961 2011-01-03 18:49:09 <marioxcc> luke-jr: i think it is agreed
2962 2011-01-03 18:49:10 <nanotube> read the wiki
2963 2011-01-03 18:49:11 <marioxcc> by the nodes
2964 2011-01-03 18:49:14 <lfm> luke miners set fees
2965 2011-01-03 18:49:28 <sipa> miners are those who eventually decide yes
2966 2011-01-03 18:49:30 <marioxcc> you can think the other way: this is the specification of when a miner will include a Tx
2967 2011-01-03 18:49:33 <sipa> it's part of the economy
2968 2011-01-03 18:50:40 <slush> nanotube: your reward is on the way
2969 2011-01-03 18:50:45 fabianhjr has joined
2970 2011-01-03 18:50:47 <slush> nanotube: I started reward script manually now
2971 2011-01-03 18:50:49 <fabianhjr> Hi, sup?
2972 2011-01-03 18:50:53 <marioxcc> hello fabianhjr
2973 2011-01-03 18:52:02 <nanotube> slush: wooo :)
2974 2011-01-03 18:52:04 ApertureScience has joined
2975 2011-01-03 18:52:12 <nanotube> slush: i got the tx in my client. nice. :)
2976 2011-01-03 18:52:45 <nanotube> slush: dunno if i'll ever be claiming the subcents, cuz my vps guys told me to stop hogging cpu... but maybe someday, when bitcoins become much more valuable and the no-fee-size decreases. :D
2977 2011-01-03 18:53:20 <slush> nanotube: but then the target will be near 100.000 ;)
2978 2011-01-03 18:53:24 <slush> ..difficulty
2979 2011-01-03 18:53:34 <nanotube> slush: haha yes... but i'll be able to claim my balance! :)
2980 2011-01-03 18:53:42 <slush> oh so :)
2981 2011-01-03 18:54:02 <nanotube> so, my first and only mined bitcoins... 0.97 btc. i'll treasure it forever. :)
2982 2011-01-03 18:55:01 <slush> nanotube: don't forget deflation; sometimes this will become big wealth :)
2983 2011-01-03 18:55:40 grondilu has joined
2984 2011-01-03 18:55:47 m0mchil has quit ()
2985 2011-01-03 18:55:52 grondilu has left ()
2986 2011-01-03 18:56:00 <nanotube> slush: haha yea
2987 2011-01-03 18:57:15 <luke-jr> can miners refuse to collect transaction fees?
2988 2011-01-03 18:57:20 <luke-jr> if so, what happens to them? :P
2989 2011-01-03 18:57:55 <lfm> luke I suppose they could refuse all txn with fees in them but it would be stupid
2990 2011-01-03 18:58:10 <luke-jr> lfm: well, could they assign them to the sender or recipient?
2991 2011-01-03 18:58:13 <luke-jr> or anyone at random?
2992 2011-01-03 18:58:19 <lfm> luke the txn would be delayed till a regular miner included them
2993 2011-01-03 18:59:01 <lfm> ya I guess they could forward the fees to someone else
2994 2011-01-03 18:59:02 <luke-jr> for example, could a pool assign the txn fees such that it makes micro-payouts without paying a fee itself?
2995 2011-01-03 18:59:09 <luke-jr> can they split the fees up for that?
2996 2011-01-03 19:00:03 ArtForz has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
2997 2011-01-03 19:00:19 <lfm> can only forward them if they are 0.01 or more tho
2998 2011-01-03 19:00:37 <luke-jr> well, I don't mean a new transaction
2999 2011-01-03 19:00:43 ArtForz has joined
3000 2011-01-03 19:00:50 <luke-jr> can they just plug in the other person's address for fee recipient?
3001 2011-01-03 19:00:57 <lfm> but it would be yet another new transaction
3002 2011-01-03 19:01:41 <sipa> luke-jr: the generation transaction can do whatever it likes with the 50BTC + fees
3003 2011-01-03 19:02:01 <sipa> send it to one address, send it to 1000 addresses, split it to extremely tiny amounts, ...
3004 2011-01-03 19:02:07 <lfm> they might want to wait till the block matures tho
3005 2011-01-03 19:02:49 <luke-jr> hmm
3006 2011-01-03 19:03:07 <lfm> and yes they could return it to the address it came from or the "to" address in the txn it cam e from
3007 2011-01-03 19:03:42 <lfm> it would be a big effort for small thanks I suspect
3008 2011-01-03 19:05:36 <luke-jr> XD
3009 2011-01-03 19:06:21 <luke-jr> so a pool could distribute the rewards for BlockA, by changing the transfers into exact distributions in BlockB generate/feeâ¦
3010 2011-01-03 19:06:38 <sipa> indeed
3011 2011-01-03 19:07:02 <luke-jr> thus doing micropayments w/o fees, in effect :P
3012 2011-01-03 19:07:45 <sipa> well, it could have fees
3013 2011-01-03 19:07:51 <sipa> but it would collect it itself :)
3014 2011-01-03 19:08:26 <lfm> sipa do it like pudinpops pool server put em all in the generate txn output
3015 2011-01-03 19:08:33 <sipa> i know
3016 2011-01-03 19:08:51 <sipa> slush could do it as well, but not with the standard client he's using now
3017 2011-01-03 19:08:58 <sipa> so that's for him to decide :)
3018 2011-01-03 19:09:48 <lfm> yes the pool manager sets the policy in the end, you put up or leave really is your choice
3019 2011-01-03 19:10:10 <luke-jr> lfm: pudinpops has a pool doing just thatâ
3020 2011-01-03 19:10:25 <sipa> had
3021 2011-01-03 19:10:32 <lfm> if its still running, i dont know
3022 2011-01-03 19:10:32 <slush> I still don't understand why is everybody so interested in including rewards into block itself. I still see it as cosmetic improvement.
3023 2011-01-03 19:10:41 <sipa> slush: i agree
3024 2011-01-03 19:10:45 <sipa> it's a minor detail
3025 2011-01-03 19:10:55 <slush> It was MUCH MORE simple to make it as standard transaction and collect them on site side
3026 2011-01-03 19:11:11 <slush> There is no magic included; it was just easiest way how to deploy pool for me
3027 2011-01-03 19:11:16 <sipa> yes
3028 2011-01-03 19:11:27 <lfm> they are all concerned about the micro fractions liek an accountant makeing balances to the penny no matter why
3029 2011-01-03 19:11:35 <sipa> indeed
3030 2011-01-03 19:11:47 <slush> but for some reason there is question to this every day... it's boring
3031 2011-01-03 19:11:54 <lfm> hehe
3032 2011-01-03 19:12:04 * sipa will not repeat it again - ever
3033 2011-01-03 19:13:09 <lfm> maybe BIG LETTERS when they sign in YOU WILL GET NOTHING till it is a whole bitcent. fractions are saved for later
3034 2011-01-03 19:13:14 james_ has joined
3035 2011-01-03 19:13:52 <lfm> prolly still get questions tho of course
3036 2011-01-03 19:14:01 Guest87650 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3037 2011-01-03 19:14:39 <slush> well, in whole accounting system there are currently 0.38878628 from accounts with reward < 0.01. We are talking hours about $0.166
3038 2011-01-03 19:15:24 altamic has joined
3039 2011-01-03 19:15:35 <luke-jr> :o
3040 2011-01-03 19:15:42 <lfm> so about 10 us cents "sacmmed" by slush. stop the presses!
3041 2011-01-03 19:15:53 <luke-jr> lol
3042 2011-01-03 19:16:53 <luke-jr> slush: find out how much of that is inactive accounts and donate to EFF :P
3043 2011-01-03 19:17:28 <lfm> oh yay EFF will keep their lawyer going a long time for 10 cents
3044 2011-01-03 19:18:03 <fabianhjr> lfm: if everyone gives 10 cents it would be for a lot of time. xD
3045 2011-01-03 19:18:06 <slush> luke-jr: oh no! I see the post "SLUSH IS SCAMMER! I come to pool after 1 year any my reward is ZERO instead 0.000123 BTCs" :-D
3046 2011-01-03 19:18:39 <sipa> slush: just keep up the good work, and don't bother with all the complainers
3047 2011-01-03 19:18:53 <sipa> i think you're doing a great service for the bitcoin community
3048 2011-01-03 19:18:54 <luke-jr> XD
3049 2011-01-03 19:19:02 <lfm> ya my Atom CPU used $100 of electricity in that time!
3050 2011-01-03 19:19:23 <slush> thanks guys. I'm breathing for bitcoins for last few months
3051 2011-01-03 19:19:30 <slush> I mean for bitcoin project ;)
3052 2011-01-03 19:21:25 <lfm> fabianhjr if all the pools donate their "slush" fund EFF will have 30 cents!
3053 2011-01-03 19:22:01 <luke-jr> lol
3054 2011-01-03 19:22:44 <luke-jr> oh hey
3055 2011-01-03 19:22:49 <luke-jr> I have Reward finally
3056 2011-01-03 19:22:58 <kiba> for the love of god, Bitcoin is not backed by CPU cycle!
3057 2011-01-03 19:23:02 <lfm> note I like EFF and think everyone should donate, just its not worth anyones efforts for tiny amounts
3058 2011-01-03 19:23:06 <luke-jr> does that go down, when it gets sent?
3059 2011-01-03 19:23:13 <luke-jr> is there a total-rewards counter? XD
3060 2011-01-03 19:23:28 <luke-jr> lfm: I was joking. I don't like EFF because they associate with ACLU.
3061 2011-01-03 19:23:50 <lfm> luke oh you hate blacks too
3062 2011-01-03 19:23:58 <luke-jr> no, just ACLU
3063 2011-01-03 19:24:03 <luke-jr> when was ACLU a race?
3064 2011-01-03 19:24:29 <kiba> luke-jr: they associate with anybody that is backing up liberty?
3065 2011-01-03 19:24:34 <lfm> civil liberties are kinda associated with blcks
3066 2011-01-03 19:24:44 <luke-jr> lfm: nonsense
3067 2011-01-03 19:24:48 <luke-jr> ACLU persecutes Christians
3068 2011-01-03 19:25:02 <kiba> luke-jr is a nutjob Christians
3069 2011-01-03 19:25:06 <lfm> cristians persecute everyone equally
3070 2011-01-03 19:25:08 <kiba> I know him from my #anime day
3071 2011-01-03 19:26:27 <luke-jr> http://www.cmri.org/02-antisemitism.html
3072 2011-01-03 19:26:40 <lfm> oh anime is devils work I supose
3073 2011-01-03 19:27:05 <kiba> oh he love anime
3074 2011-01-03 19:27:10 <kiba> he's just a nutjob Christian
3075 2011-01-03 19:27:15 tylergillies has joined
3076 2011-01-03 19:27:16 <lfm> hehe
3077 2011-01-03 19:28:09 james_ has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
3078 2011-01-03 19:28:13 <kiba> so
3079 2011-01-03 19:28:14 <lfm> sorry I shouldnt laugh at nujob. shouldnt call nutjob names even to nutjobs
3080 2011-01-03 19:28:28 <kiba> I heard democracy actually work in Switzerland
3081 2011-01-03 19:28:34 <luke-jr> lfm: if he was anything but dead wrong, I'd be insulted :P
3082 2011-01-03 19:28:35 <kiba> lfm: we're all nutjobs
3083 2011-01-03 19:29:01 <kiba> because bitcoin is a nutjob idea
3084 2011-01-03 19:29:06 <lfm> yay swiss
3085 2011-01-03 19:29:09 <luke-jr> lol
3086 2011-01-03 19:29:09 <kiba> because the mainstream think it's nutjob
3087 2011-01-03 19:29:51 <kiba> turns out the mainstream is not very accurate anyway
3088 2011-01-03 19:30:07 <kiba> they have to be accurate if they want a Western civilization
3089 2011-01-03 19:30:18 <lfm> kiba mainstream thinks obama is african or something
3090 2011-01-03 19:31:11 <luke-jr> I think Obama is huamn
3091 2011-01-03 19:31:12 <luke-jr> human
3092 2011-01-03 19:31:21 <lfm> mainstream thinks green pictures on paper is better money that sha256
3093 2011-01-03 19:31:28 <lfm> than
3094 2011-01-03 19:31:53 <kiba> mainstream also think life extension, cyronic, and living indefintely a nutjob idea
3095 2011-01-03 19:31:54 <luke-jr> how long until we have BTC private key cards?
3096 2011-01-03 19:32:27 <kiba> the mainstream is not very bright with the exception of sustaining western civilization and they're not very good at it
3097 2011-01-03 19:32:29 <lfm> just need visa to recognise btc as a valid currency
3098 2011-01-03 19:32:41 <luke-jr> lfm: no, then we're trusting Visa!
3099 2011-01-03 19:32:55 <luke-jr> lfm: I mean to directly make BTC transactions in a store
3100 2011-01-03 19:32:57 <luke-jr> :p
3101 2011-01-03 19:33:14 <kiba> smartphone will supersecde dumbphone
3102 2011-01-03 19:33:25 <lfm> visa or someone like them, you will need to trust the card maker if you want cards
3103 2011-01-03 19:33:27 <kiba> everyone will have smartphone, even those Africans
3104 2011-01-03 19:33:46 <luke-jr> smartphone is dumb
3105 2011-01-03 19:35:06 TheAncientGoat has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
3106 2011-01-03 19:36:31 <kiba> progress in computing have to stop at some point right?
3107 2011-01-03 19:37:33 <kiba> it would boggle my mind if we continue moore's law
3108 2011-01-03 19:37:53 <kiba> beyond 30 years into 50,60,70 then...hundred of years
3109 2011-01-03 19:38:23 <kiba> unimaginable...
3110 2011-01-03 19:38:26 <kiba> computing power
3111 2011-01-03 19:40:27 CyanDynamo has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
3112 2011-01-03 19:40:31 <luke-jr> kiba: the sad thing is, even Moore's law can't keep up with software bloat
3113 2011-01-03 19:41:42 <kiba> luke-jr: that's because there is no need to be intelligent about algorithm optimization when you can just brute force it
3114 2011-01-03 19:42:32 CyanDynamo has joined
3115 2011-01-03 19:43:21 fabianhjr_ has joined
3116 2011-01-03 19:43:51 <kiba> frankly, I rather just brute force everythinjg
3117 2011-01-03 19:45:01 <TD> moores law hasn't held for a decade
3118 2011-01-03 19:45:11 <TD> the "progress" has just shifted around
3119 2011-01-03 19:45:31 <sipa> i suppose moore's law still holds for GPU's
3120 2011-01-03 19:45:40 <TD> not sure, maybe.
3121 2011-01-03 19:45:59 fabianhjr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
3122 2011-01-03 19:46:03 fabianhjr_ is now known as fabianhjr
3123 2011-01-03 19:46:56 <sipa> 8-Core Xeon Nehalem-EX has 2.3 billion transistors, according to wikipedia
3124 2011-01-03 19:47:30 <kiba> well, people don't need that much CPU anyway
3125 2011-01-03 19:47:33 <sipa> Core 2 Duo had 291 million in 2006
3126 2011-01-03 19:47:40 <kiba> I mean, most of the time, my CPU are merely idling
3127 2011-01-03 19:47:54 <nanotube> kiba: maybe you should generate bitcoins ;D
3128 2011-01-03 19:47:57 <sipa> that's *2 every 18 months
3129 2011-01-03 19:48:00 <kiba> I am
3130 2011-01-03 19:48:06 <Sami345> 19 confirmations left
3131 2011-01-03 19:48:07 <nanotube> so... not idling, then. :)
3132 2011-01-03 19:48:10 <Sami345> I want my money
3133 2011-01-03 19:48:17 <kiba> nanotube: for average people, it's idling
3134 2011-01-03 19:48:37 darrob has quit (Quit: quit)
3135 2011-01-03 19:49:14 <Sami345> maybe average people will not buy that kind of processors?
3136 2011-01-03 19:49:26 <nanotube> kiba: well... the bandwidth of your toilet is also idling most of the time. but you sure are glad to have it available when you need it. :D
3137 2011-01-03 19:50:24 <luke-jr> lol
3138 2011-01-03 19:51:07 <kiba> nanotube: at some point, low-end CPU will be all what people needs for the rest of their life
3139 2011-01-03 19:51:45 <nanotube> kiba: no... microsoft will come out with windows 8, which will eat twice as many resources just sitting there doing nothing!
3140 2011-01-03 19:52:08 <nanotube> windows 8: twice as much nothing as windows 7, for only 1.5 times the price!
3141 2011-01-03 19:52:11 <nanotube> buy it today!
3142 2011-01-03 19:53:55 <luke-jr> kiba: I'm already there
3143 2011-01-03 19:54:08 <luke-jr> the only reason I'm upgrading my 6 year old desktop this year, is for more memory
3144 2011-01-03 19:54:13 <luke-jr> the CPU works fine
3145 2011-01-03 19:54:18 <kiba> agreed, memory is the problem
3146 2011-01-03 19:54:26 <nanotube> yea, same here pretty much. my 7 year old p4m 3ghz laptop is chugging along fine.
3147 2011-01-03 19:55:10 <kiba> if you don't need all those graphic glitz, even gaming isn't a problem
3148 2011-01-03 19:55:22 RazielZ has quit ()
3149 2011-01-03 19:56:47 <slush> yeah, I'm using low ends computers for years, only increasing RAM.
3150 2011-01-03 19:57:10 <slush> I only sometimes buy fastest GPU, of course :)
3151 2011-01-03 19:57:45 AAA_awright_ has joined
3152 2011-01-03 19:57:56 <kiba> it's more about finding way to make use of your idling CPU
3153 2011-01-03 19:58:08 <kiba> generating bitcoin seem to be a good way of making use of your idling CPU
3154 2011-01-03 19:59:19 <sipa> then it's not really idling anymore
3155 2011-01-03 19:59:22 <kiba> now, my Ti-84 text instructment calculator
3156 2011-01-03 19:59:29 <kiba> on the other hand..
3157 2011-01-03 19:59:34 AAA_awright has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
3158 2011-01-03 19:59:34 <kiba> is not very cheap
3159 2011-01-03 19:59:38 <kiba> and not very powerful either
3160 2011-01-03 20:04:52 <xelister> kiba: better just run freenet node
3161 2011-01-03 20:04:55 <xelister> or i2p or tor
3162 2011-01-03 20:05:02 <kiba> but I don't make money!
3163 2011-01-03 20:05:26 <xelister> well, with cpu mining you are not really making any noticible money
3164 2011-01-03 20:06:00 <xelister> you can probably get more by simple steps
3165 2011-01-03 20:06:02 <xelister> - turn off cpu miner
3166 2011-01-03 20:06:07 <xelister> - turn off or logout from computer
3167 2011-01-03 20:06:09 <xelister> - go outside
3168 2011-01-03 20:06:18 <xelister> - look on the sidewalk for any quoters lying around
3169 2011-01-03 20:08:08 <xelister> kiba: how much did you so far made with cpu mining?
3170 2011-01-03 20:08:28 <slush> I must agree with xelister (noooo!) that burning CPU cycles for bitcoins is probably worse than let CPU be in idle
3171 2011-01-03 20:08:38 <kiba> 100 something in my time spent in the bitcoin economy
3172 2011-01-03 20:08:49 <xelister> you generated 2 blocks with CPU ?
3173 2011-01-03 20:08:54 <sipa> more than what i made with gpu mining already?
3174 2011-01-03 20:08:56 <sipa> !
3175 2011-01-03 20:08:57 <xelister> ok that is possible, but that was before the GPU era?
3176 2011-01-03 20:08:58 <kiba> way before it become so difficult
3177 2011-01-03 20:09:04 <xelister> right
3178 2011-01-03 20:09:15 <xelister> and in last 3 months, you made how much USD on cpu mining?
3179 2011-01-03 20:09:24 * xelister ~300 ?
3180 2011-01-03 20:09:28 * xelister (gpu)
3181 2011-01-03 20:09:29 <kiba> less than 30 cents
3182 2011-01-03 20:09:43 * kiba doesn't have a GPU
3183 2011-01-03 20:10:04 altamic has quit (Quit: altamic)
3184 2011-01-03 20:10:40 <xelister> kiba: what cpu, how much hdd space, how much mem, computer is 24/24 hours?
3185 2011-01-03 20:10:42 <kiba> it help that I earn bitcoin in other ways
3186 2011-01-03 20:12:06 fabianhjr has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
3187 2011-01-03 20:17:08 <xelister> kiba: I can pay you x3 then that probably ;) or more, pm me
3188 2011-01-03 20:18:10 * luke-jr peers
3189 2011-01-03 20:23:36 lolcat has joined
3190 2011-01-03 20:23:51 <kiba> pay me what?
3191 2011-01-03 20:24:02 <lolcat> bc,trade;
3192 2011-01-03 20:24:08 <sipa> ;;bc,trade
3193 2011-01-03 20:24:08 <gribble> Error: "bc,trade" is not a valid command.
3194 2011-01-03 20:24:08 * kiba grumble about fucking nonsense that people sprout about bitcoin on twitter
3195 2011-01-03 20:24:20 <lolcat> what is the prive of bitcoin?
3196 2011-01-03 20:24:26 <sipa> prive?
3197 2011-01-03 20:24:28 <lolcat> kiba: like?
3198 2011-01-03 20:24:34 <lolcat> sipa: price
3199 2011-01-03 20:24:42 <kiba> bitcoin is backed by CPU cycle!!!!1111
3200 2011-01-03 20:25:05 <kiba> and the guy have the ball to think that I am economic illiterate
3201 2011-01-03 20:25:07 <sipa> not backed by, but does need cpu cycles to survive
3202 2011-01-03 20:25:32 <lolcat> sipa: and to mine
3203 2011-01-03 20:25:50 <sipa> lolcat: depends what you want to trade it for
3204 2011-01-03 20:26:02 <EvanR-work> kiba: i have 1 btc, i would like 135 straight hours of doom please
3205 2011-01-03 20:26:10 <sipa> on mtgox it's 0.298$ per BTC
3206 2011-01-03 20:26:24 <marioxcc> and taxes
3207 2011-01-03 20:26:26 <marioxcc> i think
3208 2011-01-03 20:27:01 <marioxcc> is was 0.65% or something
3209 2011-01-03 20:27:08 <lolcat> EvanR-work: damn, I only have homosexual houres of doom
3210 2011-01-03 20:27:25 <EvanR-work> what?
3211 2011-01-03 20:27:44 <EvanR-work> oh
3212 2011-01-03 20:27:46 <EvanR-work> ._.
3213 2011-01-03 20:28:03 <lolcat> It was a bad joke
3214 2011-01-03 20:30:13 MT`AwAy is now known as MagicalTux
3215 2011-01-03 20:30:27 MagicalTux is now known as MT`AwAy
3216 2011-01-03 20:31:08 james has joined
3217 2011-01-03 20:31:39 james is now known as Guest11842
3218 2011-01-03 20:37:05 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Quitte)
3219 2011-01-03 20:38:24 AAA_awright_ is now known as AAA_awright
3220 2011-01-03 20:45:49 akem has joined
3221 2011-01-03 20:53:02 james_ has joined
3222 2011-01-03 20:53:14 Guest11842 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
3223 2011-01-03 20:53:18 <nanotube> sipa: fyi: bc,markets, or bc,mtgox
3224 2011-01-03 20:53:42 <nanotube> kiba: yea, if you're paying for electric... you're spending more than you ever earn
3225 2011-01-03 20:53:47 <nanotube> (by cpu mining)
3226 2011-01-03 20:58:31 riush has joined
3227 2011-01-03 21:00:52 <kiba> nanotube: but my parents is subsidizing it ;P
3228 2011-01-03 21:01:52 <slush> kiba: hey, stop spamming twitter :-))
3229 2011-01-03 21:01:57 larsig has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
3230 2011-01-03 21:02:23 <kiba> the idea of virtual currenly completed uncoupled with real world economies is utter BS
3231 2011-01-03 21:03:20 ArtForz has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
3232 2011-01-03 21:03:44 ArtForz has joined
3233 2011-01-03 21:04:10 <TD> i wonder how many times i'm going to find that an interop issue with the official client is due to endiannness
3234 2011-01-03 21:05:11 <sipa> it's a mess :)
3235 2011-01-03 21:07:04 devon_hillard has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3236 2011-01-03 21:08:55 james___ has joined
3237 2011-01-03 21:09:17 james_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
3238 2011-01-03 21:09:47 davout has joined
3239 2011-01-03 21:11:12 int0x27h has quit (Changing host)
3240 2011-01-03 21:11:12 int0x27h has joined
3241 2011-01-03 21:11:55 <nanotube> kiba: so... you may do better to just ask your parents for some cash to buy bitcoins... rather than silently waste their money via electricity consumption.
3242 2011-01-03 21:13:39 <sipa> "hi mom and dad, i'm going to make some money by using your electricity to help a peer to peer cryptocurrency... can i just buy some instead?"
3243 2011-01-03 21:14:13 <kiba> they probablly think bitcoin is monopoly money of some sort
3244 2011-01-03 21:14:16 <kiba> and laugh at it
3245 2011-01-03 21:14:43 <slush> world was great place to live when difficulty was 4 and less; I have 200 blocks on testnet in last hour :(
3246 2011-01-03 21:14:45 <sipa> "how do you mean, you don't get any notes?"
3247 2011-01-03 21:15:19 <sipa> slush: and a BTC was worth 0.000001$ ?
3248 2011-01-03 21:16:02 <slush> sipa: I know, but now it is 0.3 :)
3249 2011-01-03 21:16:17 <davout> hi
3250 2011-01-03 21:18:04 <lucky> Hehe, I normally run a spaceheater in winter anyway. :P
3251 2011-01-03 21:21:26 jav has joined
3252 2011-01-03 21:22:48 <nanotube> kiba: regardless... you can be like, "ok, i can burn 10usd per month of electricity... or you can just give me 10usd and i won't"
3253 2011-01-03 21:22:58 james___ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
3254 2011-01-03 21:23:00 <nanotube> kiba: or hell, make them a deal, and ask for only 8. :)
3255 2011-01-03 21:23:10 <nanotube> for a net savings to parents
3256 2011-01-03 21:23:17 <nanotube> it's an offer they can't refuse. :)
3257 2011-01-03 21:23:41 <kiba> I am cold, so the computers ARE the space heater
3258 2011-01-03 21:24:09 <TD> slush: i used to have hundreds of coins, threw them away :(
3259 2011-01-03 21:24:11 <TD> oh well
3260 2011-01-03 21:24:15 james_ has joined
3261 2011-01-03 21:24:53 * nanotube waits until he accidentally generates an address which has a bunch of coins in it... a long long wait... :)
3262 2011-01-03 21:25:29 <davout> jgarzik: ping
3263 2011-01-03 21:25:40 <TD> holy crap
3264 2011-01-03 21:25:51 <TD> slush: thanks for being on the testnet ... you're making my own testing a lot faster :)
3265 2011-01-03 21:25:53 <lucky> 10 USD per month of electricity?
3266 2011-01-03 21:25:54 <TD> 2 confirmations already
3267 2011-01-03 21:25:57 <TD> 3
3268 2011-01-03 21:26:02 <TD> 4
3269 2011-01-03 21:26:04 <TD> nuts ....
3270 2011-01-03 21:26:09 <nanotube> heh
3271 2011-01-03 21:26:10 <slush> TD: lol, you are the second one who generates on testnet? ;)
3272 2011-01-03 21:26:12 AAA_awright_ has joined
3273 2011-01-03 21:26:18 <slush> TD: thank you, too :))
3274 2011-01-03 21:26:19 <sipa> are testnet bitcoins worth anything? ;)
3275 2011-01-03 21:26:22 <lucky> heh! i couldn't use the testnet yesterday because no one was generating.
3276 2011-01-03 21:26:24 <TD> haha, not generating at the moment actually
3277 2011-01-03 21:26:25 <nanotube> davout: how's the bc order book looking?
3278 2011-01-03 21:26:26 <TD> it's probably gavin
3279 2011-01-03 21:26:31 <lucky> It was really frustrating.
3280 2011-01-03 21:26:44 <slush> somebody generated 40 blocks before few minutes; it helped me, too
3281 2011-01-03 21:26:55 <lucky> if kiba can afford enough GPUs and computers to burn $10 / month of electricity he shouldn't need to beg his parents for permission to use their electricity ;p
3282 2011-01-03 21:27:18 <nanotube> lucky: hey, i'm just pulling numbers out of my ... something. :)
3283 2011-01-03 21:27:29 <lucky> I figure both my GPU and CPU is about 80 watts or $40 / year.
3284 2011-01-03 21:27:59 AAA_awright has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
3285 2011-01-03 21:28:22 <lucky> well if the test net is generating that means i finally have my test faucet coins and can get back to programming :D
3286 2011-01-03 21:28:26 <nanotube> lucky: that's really low... i'd venture to guess that a cpu+gpu at 100% as opposed to idle will use more than that.
3287 2011-01-03 21:28:53 <nanotube> probably no less than 100
3288 2011-01-03 21:29:28 <nanotube> plus, if you add that you otherwise would just turn off the comp at night, but with gen, you run 24/7... that adds an extra 300w for the night
3289 2011-01-03 21:30:01 <nanotube> by my calc, with an avg of 200w extra consumption... 200*24*30/1000*.1 = 14.4 usd per month
3290 2011-01-03 21:30:15 <lucky> TDP of my CPU is 45 W and GPU is 50 W though i don't personally load them to 100%. I haven't actually kill-a-watted it at 100%
3291 2011-01-03 21:30:18 <lucky> butit's about 100 W idle
3292 2011-01-03 21:30:23 <nanotube> heh, so my 10usd out-of-thin-air estimate was pretty decent.
3293 2011-01-03 21:30:44 <jav> If you receive a payement from an untrusted source, what is the recommendation on how long to wait to have the transaction verified?
3294 2011-01-03 21:30:47 <lucky> TD, what's your test net address?
3295 2011-01-03 21:31:04 <lucky> jav, most of the brokers seem to wait until 6 confirmations
3296 2011-01-03 21:31:06 <lucky> is my undersatnding
3297 2011-01-03 21:31:12 <lfm> jav 6
3298 2011-01-03 21:31:20 <TD> current one is mzsQ7wyyYjGejbR638Vi89XmHhVEc1tQFA
3299 2011-01-03 21:31:24 <lucky> TD, let's test this ;P
3300 2011-01-03 21:31:27 <jav> 6 confirmations means one hour? am I understand that correctly?
3301 2011-01-03 21:31:34 <jav> understanding*
3302 2011-01-03 21:31:36 <TD> jav: it depends how much assurance you want. imho 6 is way overkill
3303 2011-01-03 21:31:44 <lucky> TD, sent
3304 2011-01-03 21:31:52 <TD> received
3305 2011-01-03 21:31:54 <lucky> hurr.
3306 2011-01-03 21:31:56 <lfm> average 1 hr maybe tiny bit less
3307 2011-01-03 21:32:05 <TD> it's 0/unconfirmed currently
3308 2011-01-03 21:32:08 <lucky> same
3309 2011-01-03 21:32:11 <TD> lucky: testing anything specifically?
3310 2011-01-03 21:32:23 <lucky> TD, API for my program
3311 2011-01-03 21:32:25 <lfm> td so wait an hour fropm npow
3312 2011-01-03 21:32:26 <TD> jav: if you're moving very large amounts of currency then 6 gives you very high levels of assurance that the transaction will not reverse
3313 2011-01-03 21:32:37 <lucky> TD, 1 confirmation
3314 2011-01-03 21:32:39 <TD> lucky: what does your program do? there we go, now it's confirmed
3315 2011-01-03 21:32:40 <lucky> that's zippy.
3316 2011-01-03 21:32:44 <TD> yeah :)
3317 2011-01-03 21:32:59 <TD> jav: for smaller amounts you don't actually need any confirmations at all
3318 2011-01-03 21:33:09 <TD> jav: the chance of the tx reversing once it's been broadcast is already low by this point
3319 2011-01-03 21:33:23 <lucky> TD, i'm attempting to write a bitcoin lottery
3320 2011-01-03 21:33:31 <TD> heh, sweet :-)
3321 2011-01-03 21:33:31 <marioxcc> jav: I would wait 2
3322 2011-01-03 21:33:37 <lucky> For charity!
3323 2011-01-03 21:33:38 <jav> I see.. but even if I'm fine with just 1 confirmation, it would still take about 10 minutes, right? (or 5 minutes on average)
3324 2011-01-03 21:33:40 <marioxcc> payment reversing is really hard to do
3325 2011-01-03 21:33:44 <lucky> I swear :P
3326 2011-01-03 21:33:54 <lfm> td if you dont care if you lose it you can ingnore all that and accept them, they arnt really offten backed off
3327 2011-01-03 21:33:59 <marioxcc> jav: you can't really know
3328 2011-01-03 21:34:04 <marioxcc> when the next block will arrive
3329 2011-01-03 21:34:10 <marioxcc> it may take 1 s or 1 day
3330 2011-01-03 21:34:13 <marioxcc> both very unlikley
3331 2011-01-03 21:34:38 <lucky> the current benefactor i'm thinking is the EFF
3332 2011-01-03 21:34:45 AAA_awright_ is now known as AAA_awright
3333 2011-01-03 21:34:50 <lucky> what better way to convince them to throw their weight behind bitcoin than if it's a steady revenue stream for them :P
3334 2011-01-03 21:34:55 <TD> jav: the network aims for 10 mins
3335 2011-01-03 21:36:12 <lfm> jav it is 10 mins on average, not 5
3336 2011-01-03 21:36:27 <jav> aw, right
3337 2011-01-03 21:36:45 <marioxcc> lucky: what do you mean?
3338 2011-01-03 21:36:46 <lfm> jav and sometimes it can take more than 1 hr for just one new block
3339 2011-01-03 21:37:00 <marioxcc> lfm: that's what I just said
3340 2011-01-03 21:37:16 <lfm> so did i
3341 2011-01-03 21:37:33 <slush> kiba: "I suggest you to write a blog post on why bitcoin idea sucks instead of writing short contextless twitter messages."
3342 2011-01-03 21:37:44 <slush> kiba: You should use this argument before 1/2 hour ;)
3343 2011-01-03 21:38:46 <jav> TD, you say that for small amounts confirmation is not that important? .. but is double-spending without a confirmation really that hard? let's say as the one paying, I know which nodes the receiver is connected to. I transmit my transaction to those nodes and the receiver sees the money, while at the same time spreading conflicting transactions to a bunch of other nodes on the network ... or am I missing something?
3344 2011-01-03 21:38:53 <sipa> 0.16% is takes less than 1 second, 2.89*10^(-61)% it takes more than a day ;)
3345 2011-01-03 21:39:21 <marioxcc> jav: if you're really interested on the double spending issue read the bitcoin paper by statoshi
3346 2011-01-03 21:39:33 <lfm> jav thats right~
3347 2011-01-03 21:39:33 <jav> I just read the paper
3348 2011-01-03 21:39:45 <jgarzik> davout: pong
3349 2011-01-03 21:39:52 <TD> jav: yes. now consider is that attack really a high likelyhood attack.
3350 2011-01-03 21:39:59 <kiba> slush: I bet he still won't make sense to me
3351 2011-01-03 21:40:04 <marioxcc> jav: then read the source code :)
3352 2011-01-03 21:40:11 <TD> jav: it requires you to know something you usually don't AND very precise timing.
3353 2011-01-03 21:40:25 <slush> kiba: Don't waste energy to people who don't want to understand...
3354 2011-01-03 21:40:26 <TD> so my comments were from the perspective of how a non technical user would see it
3355 2011-01-03 21:40:27 <jgarzik> jav: it's a race to propagate a double-spend to the most nodes
3356 2011-01-03 21:40:38 <jgarzik> jav: very difficult after only a couple seconds
3357 2011-01-03 21:40:53 <TD> from the PoV of an end user, a bounced transaction is imho a lot less likely than having your credit card declined
3358 2011-01-03 21:41:02 <lfm> td so non technical users should be cheated?
3359 2011-01-03 21:41:17 <kiba> slush: do you grok any of his arguments? seriously?
3360 2011-01-03 21:41:35 <kiba> he say bitcoin is a currency not an economy?
3361 2011-01-03 21:41:48 <sipa> what's the difference?
3362 2011-01-03 21:41:56 Daviey has quit (Excess Flood)
3363 2011-01-03 21:42:10 <kiba> doesn't the bitcoin economy consists of everyone that use bitcoin?
3364 2011-01-03 21:42:19 <TD> slush: are you still generating on the testnet ?
3365 2011-01-03 21:42:39 <kiba> sipa: I don't know. I am waiting for his blog post if he make any
3366 2011-01-03 21:42:51 <slush> TD: I stopped now
3367 2011-01-03 21:42:54 <TD> ok
3368 2011-01-03 21:42:55 <kiba> I dislike monentary crackpots
3369 2011-01-03 21:43:01 <kiba> but then I should stop hating them so much
3370 2011-01-03 21:43:18 <sipa> http://xkcd.com/386/
3371 2011-01-03 21:43:33 <djoot> wp kiba :)
3372 2011-01-03 21:43:38 <kiba> wp?
3373 2011-01-03 21:43:42 <djoot> well played
3374 2011-01-03 21:43:56 <slush> kiba: It is really difficult to explain anything in 140 characters..
3375 2011-01-03 21:44:25 * sipa still has the latest block in slush's pool?
3376 2011-01-03 21:44:26 noagendamarket has joined
3377 2011-01-03 21:44:29 <slush> kiba: twitter is great for spreading some announcement, but you don't explain bitcoin idea with it
3378 2011-01-03 21:44:31 <sipa> what an honor
3379 2011-01-03 21:44:45 <kiba> slush: yet this is what percisely tthat people like me do
3380 2011-01-03 21:44:49 <kiba> I should have used the FAQ
3381 2011-01-03 21:45:12 lolcat has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
3382 2011-01-03 21:45:23 <kiba> understanding is more improtant than winning
3383 2011-01-03 21:45:27 <kiba> anyway
3384 2011-01-03 21:45:29 <djoot> slush: but you quickly make them look ridiculous when you realize they haven
3385 2011-01-03 21:45:38 <djoot> 't even read the FAQ
3386 2011-01-03 21:45:54 noagendamarket has quit (Changing host)
3387 2011-01-03 21:45:54 noagendamarket has joined
3388 2011-01-03 21:46:03 <kiba> do we have a bitcoin myth page?
3389 2011-01-03 21:46:10 <slush> djoot: Right, this is the reason why I step back from twitter flamewars ;)
3390 2011-01-03 21:46:22 <marioxcc> 140 chars only can be used to link to a complete explanion
3391 2011-01-03 21:46:24 <slush> kiba: good idea!
3392 2011-01-03 21:46:40 <marioxcc> of the news/entry whatever
3393 2011-01-03 21:46:54 <djoot> you just have to know when to stop and leave the last moronic statement hanging in the air :)
3394 2011-01-03 21:47:57 Daviey has joined
3395 2011-01-03 21:48:00 <kiba> ok, bitcoin is backed by CPU
3396 2011-01-03 21:48:29 <jav> hm, I'm thinking of the scenario where a supermarket would like to allow its customers to pay with bitcoins. Seems like they can't wait around at the checkout for a confirmation to be generated... so how fast could just a payement be done without the supermarket feeling uneasy about being cheated easily?
3397 2011-01-03 21:49:18 <noagendamarket> Kiba - bitcoin is a pyramid scam
3398 2011-01-03 21:49:21 <noagendamarket> lol
3399 2011-01-03 21:49:27 <kiba> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Bitcoin_Myth
3400 2011-01-03 21:49:48 <davout> bitcoin does not scale
3401 2011-01-03 21:50:03 <noagendamarket> There is only 21 million coins
3402 2011-01-03 21:50:05 <noagendamarket> lol
3403 2011-01-03 21:50:15 <TD> jav: see the snack machine thread on the forums for a discussion of this
3404 2011-01-03 21:50:19 <marioxcc> there are fewer actually
3405 2011-01-03 21:50:38 <noagendamarket> they leave out the divisible by 8 part
3406 2011-01-03 21:50:45 <TD> jav: the supermarket does not have an issue. nobody is going to perform an attack of the level of sophistication required for the sort of sums supermarkets deal with
3407 2011-01-03 21:50:59 <noagendamarket> or more with an software update...
3408 2011-01-03 21:51:27 <AAA_awright> "Is gold backed by anything? No!" wth?
3409 2011-01-03 21:51:44 <TD> jav: to cheat the supermarket with such an attack, you would need to hijack their internet connection
3410 2011-01-03 21:51:49 <AAA_awright> Bitcoin is not backed by anything becasue Bitcoins are not /exchangable/ for anything
3411 2011-01-03 21:51:52 <marioxcc> TD: what if they double-spend the money payed on several market trades?
3412 2011-01-03 21:52:10 <sipa> saying that bitcoin is backed by cpu cycles is like saying that gold is backed by goldminers
3413 2011-01-03 21:52:12 <TD> marioxcc: you mean for things like stock markets?
3414 2011-01-03 21:52:31 <sipa> but there is a small difference: bitcoin does need cpu cycles to survive
3415 2011-01-03 21:52:54 <kiba> AAA_awright: I can exchange bitcoin for dollars?
3416 2011-01-03 21:52:56 <marioxcc> TD: yes
3417 2011-01-03 21:53:08 <jav> TD, I'm not sure I agree that this attack is all that difficult.. but thanks for the linkt to thread, looks interesting, I'll look into it
3418 2011-01-03 21:53:12 <AAA_awright> kiba: Yeah, why?
3419 2011-01-03 21:53:24 <marioxcc> <AAA_awright> Bitcoin is not backed by anything becasue Bitcoins are not /exchangable/ for anything
3420 2011-01-03 21:53:29 <marioxcc> quote
3421 2011-01-03 21:53:32 <AAA_awright> What about it?
3422 2011-01-03 21:53:34 <kiba> because people accept bitcoin for dollars?
3423 2011-01-03 21:53:38 <AAA_awright> I'm talking about the definition of Bitcoins, of course
3424 2011-01-03 21:53:43 <marioxcc> they are exchangeable
3425 2011-01-03 21:53:54 <marioxcc> there is people willing to exchange them :)
3426 2011-01-03 21:53:54 <AAA_awright> But it's subjective
3427 2011-01-03 21:53:56 <kiba> you need a better word than exchangable
3428 2011-01-03 21:53:56 <nanotube> kiba: good idea for a page. i moved it though. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Bitcoin_myths
3429 2011-01-03 21:54:11 <kiba> maybe bitcoin is not promised for anything?
3430 2011-01-03 21:54:28 <TD> jav: i'm pretty sure supermarkets lose much more to petty theft than they'd lose to this kind of attack
3431 2011-01-03 21:54:54 <TD> jav: bear in mind that you can detect double spends within seconds of them happening, as transactions are globally broadcast
3432 2011-01-03 21:54:58 <jgarzik> "backed" traditional definition is directly exchangable via some central authority for another hard good (ie. gold). not thew more general "exchangeable for currency" definition.
3433 2011-01-03 21:55:07 <TD> so the supermarket can just require customers to wait 10, 20, 30 seconds. or whatever.
3434 2011-01-03 21:55:27 <TD> marioxcc: that's a good question. i think very high speed trading would require a separate mechanism
3435 2011-01-03 21:55:42 <marioxcc> ok
3436 2011-01-03 21:55:43 <TD> marioxcc: like basically a bitcoin bank
3437 2011-01-03 21:55:57 <marioxcc> hmm :/
3438 2011-01-03 21:56:07 <marioxcc> why has 6 blocks per hour selected, BTW?
3439 2011-01-03 21:56:11 <marioxcc> why not 1 per minute?
3440 2011-01-03 21:56:13 <marioxcc> for instance
3441 2011-01-03 21:56:17 <marioxcc> that could make things easier
3442 2011-01-03 21:56:19 <TD> it's a tradeoff between p2p propagation time and convenience
3443 2011-01-03 21:56:44 <TD> and also block chain size
3444 2011-01-03 21:57:18 <marioxcc> ok
3445 2011-01-03 21:57:39 <TD> lucky: what is your testnet address?
3446 2011-01-03 22:00:08 darrob has joined
3447 2011-01-03 22:00:54 devon_hillard has joined
3448 2011-01-03 22:03:28 cosurgi has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
3449 2011-01-03 22:04:43 cosurgi has joined
3450 2011-01-03 22:07:22 lolcat has joined
3451 2011-01-03 22:07:42 samfisher has quit (Quit: exit error code 434)
3452 2011-01-03 22:09:05 <Sami345> 4 confirmations left
3453 2011-01-03 22:09:09 <Sami345> I want my money!
3454 2011-01-03 22:09:44 james_ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
3455 2011-01-03 22:10:29 * jgarzik wants an open source tool that creates double-spend scenarios
3456 2011-01-03 22:10:58 james has joined
3457 2011-01-03 22:11:13 * davout wants clear instructions on how to compile it
3458 2011-01-03 22:11:25 james is now known as Guest82018
3459 2011-01-03 22:13:31 * TD wants a network simulator
3460 2011-01-03 22:13:34 <TD> and a pony :)
3461 2011-01-03 22:16:32 <Sami345> Unconfirmed reward: 5.96603718 :)
3462 2011-01-03 22:17:33 * kiba ponders
3463 2011-01-03 22:17:43 <lfm> davout step 1 starting with ubuntu?
3464 2011-01-03 22:17:58 <kiba> ya know, I think part of the reason I accept ideas like bitcoin so easily is because I am not that skeptical about strange ideas
3465 2011-01-03 22:18:26 <lfm> kiba the word you're looking for is gullable?
3466 2011-01-03 22:18:27 acous has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3467 2011-01-03 22:18:55 <jav> or maybe we are all visionaries
3468 2011-01-03 22:19:13 <jav> I prefer that view on things ;-)
3469 2011-01-03 22:19:15 <nanotube> lfm: haha
3470 2011-01-03 22:19:42 acous has joined
3471 2011-01-03 22:21:38 <kiba> lfm: I am sure gullable
3472 2011-01-03 22:21:56 <kiba> but then I don't believe in alternative med, pyschic ability, or ghosts
3473 2011-01-03 22:22:08 <kiba> nor have I ever fallen to spam
3474 2011-01-03 22:22:58 jgarzik has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
3475 2011-01-03 22:23:00 Sirius_ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
3476 2011-01-03 22:23:06 Sirius has joined
3477 2011-01-03 22:23:26 jgarzik has joined
3478 2011-01-03 22:25:19 <lfm> there is a 50% chance that time will end within the next 3.7 billion years
3479 2011-01-03 22:26:59 <TD> yeah!
3480 2011-01-03 22:27:13 <TD> my implementation just sent its first transaction
3481 2011-01-03 22:28:33 <lolcat> implentation?
3482 2011-01-03 22:28:47 * lolcat has a phobia against implentations
3483 2011-01-03 22:29:40 <nanotube> TD: \o/
3484 2011-01-03 22:31:24 <TD> are there any other from scratch implementations that can send and receive transactions, that you know of ?
3485 2011-01-03 22:35:46 larsig has joined
3486 2011-01-03 22:37:15 jackmcbarn has joined
3487 2011-01-03 22:37:18 Orbixx_ has joined
3488 2011-01-03 22:38:23 larsivi_ has joined
3489 2011-01-03 22:41:15 ApertureScience has joined
3490 2011-01-03 22:43:55 <cosurgi> slush: what's happening? server frequently restarts, and I've just lost several hundreds of shares. They are reset to 0.
3491 2011-01-03 22:44:12 <slush> cosurgi: lost shares? How?
3492 2011-01-03 22:44:24 <cosurgi> I don't know, they just disappeared.
3493 2011-01-03 22:44:25 <slush> cosurgi: they were on profile page and now they are 0?
3494 2011-01-03 22:44:31 <cosurgi> yes
3495 2011-01-03 22:44:44 <cosurgi> the 'current shares'
3496 2011-01-03 22:44:45 <slush> cosurgi: it was at 16:47 UTC, correct? ;)
3497 2011-01-03 22:44:54 <cosurgi> no.
3498 2011-01-03 22:44:56 <slush> err, 22:06 UTC
3499 2011-01-03 22:45:27 <cosurgi> hold on, a new block was found on 22:06 ?
3500 2011-01-03 22:45:33 <slush> cosurgi: ;)
3501 2011-01-03 22:45:38 <cosurgi> aaha, sorry :)
3502 2011-01-03 22:46:03 <cosurgi> I saw that 16:47, and missed that 22:06
3503 2011-01-03 22:46:10 <cosurgi> but what about frequent restarts?
3504 2011-01-03 22:46:15 <cosurgi> [03.01.11 20:57:16] ERROR: Can't connect to Bitcoin: Failed to communicate with bitcoind: {"id": "1", "result": null, "error": {"message": "Server temporarily down for maintenance", "code": -131}}
3505 2011-01-03 22:46:20 <cosurgi> [03.01.11 23:39:24] ERROR: Can't connect to Bitcoin: Failed to communicate with bitcoind: {"id": "1", "result": null, "error": {"message": "Server temporarily down for maintenance", "code": -131}}
3506 2011-01-03 22:46:31 <slush> cosurgi: server is overloaded. As I wrote to forum, I'll move pool to standalone server tomorrow
3507 2011-01-03 22:46:34 <cosurgi> that's Diablo's miner
3508 2011-01-03 22:46:39 <cosurgi> OK.
3509 2011-01-03 22:46:41 <slush> I'm sorry for that
3510 2011-01-03 22:47:01 <cosurgi> no problem. You're the master here, on that server. You do what you can and want to do, and nothing more.
3511 2011-01-03 22:47:09 <cosurgi> You have no obligations :) You should remember that :)
3512 2011-01-03 22:47:21 kermit has joined
3513 2011-01-03 22:50:11 <cosurgi> hmm.. could you add to statistics, a summary of how much I earn per hour? Just divide total earned bitcoins by time since the creation of account.
3514 2011-01-03 22:50:32 <slush> cosurgi: I have implemented 'reward per block' to block history
3515 2011-01-03 22:50:37 <cosurgi> Tha could shown in a field below the current "Reward"
3516 2011-01-03 22:50:57 <cosurgi> where is it? :)
3517 2011-01-03 22:50:57 <slush> and it will be on site in 1 hour (I'm just in the middle of living process)
3518 2011-01-03 22:51:03 <cosurgi> ok :)
3519 2011-01-03 22:52:30 <cosurgi> that "Reward speed" would be most interesting. It can be used by people to verify that statisically they are getting BTC proportionally to their computing power. It's an easy check, with calculator. I did it, to verify that there is no cheating by some hackers, or such.
3520 2011-01-03 22:52:34 <cosurgi> And it is correct.
3521 2011-01-03 22:52:54 larsig has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
3522 2011-01-03 22:53:37 <slush> cosurgi: I have all stats bounded to blocks, not to hour or so. But I'll provide graphs of statistical distribution of blocks soon...
3523 2011-01-03 22:54:49 <cosurgi> in fact, you could also implement this check globally, get the average time for finding blocks, divide by total time, and look for big deviations. That would be a warning system for you if somebody is cheating. The drawback is that you will discover cheating after few days, not earlier -> when block should be discovered with 99.999% but still wasn't.
3524 2011-01-03 22:55:12 <TD> man. there hasn't been a testnet block for ages now .....
3525 2011-01-03 22:55:23 <slush> TD Do you need a block?
3526 2011-01-03 22:55:30 <TD> it'd be nice
3527 2011-01-03 22:55:35 <nanotube> jgarzik: btw, there already is a section about change on the transaction page on the wiki. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction#Output
3528 2011-01-03 22:55:51 <TD> i have a pending transaction generated by my java client :)
3529 2011-01-03 22:55:59 <slush> TD: it's yours :-)
3530 2011-01-03 22:56:06 <cosurgi> jgarzik: you have limited yout miner to 24 bits, on the purpose of connecting with server every 10 seconds?
3531 2011-01-03 22:56:07 <TD> haha
3532 2011-01-03 22:56:08 <TD> thanks
3533 2011-01-03 22:56:10 <TD> that's insane
3534 2011-01-03 22:56:19 larsig has joined
3535 2011-01-03 22:56:21 <TD> how much hash power did you just throw at that?
3536 2011-01-03 22:56:25 <slush> 600mhash
3537 2011-01-03 22:56:30 <TD> that's your gpus?
3538 2011-01-03 22:56:34 <slush> yep
3539 2011-01-03 22:56:42 <slush> back in the pool now :)
3540 2011-01-03 22:56:52 <TD> thanks
3541 2011-01-03 22:57:33 <cosurgi> oops. must leave now, bye.
3542 2011-01-03 23:01:04 <TD> huzzah
3543 2011-01-03 23:01:04 <TD> http://blockexplorer.com/testnet/tx/61ed8503cb56834ec2ced168756cef9bb63894258dd747ba4d4aba79be30ea60
3544 2011-01-03 23:01:13 <TD> the first tx produced by my prototype android client :-)
3545 2011-01-03 23:02:03 <slush> well done :)
3546 2011-01-03 23:03:17 <jav> cool stuff... are you implementing the 'lightweight' version where just the headers are downloaded, TD?
3547 2011-01-03 23:03:26 <TD> actually not exactly
3548 2011-01-03 23:03:33 <TD> it downloads the full block chain currently, but does not store it
3549 2011-01-03 23:03:41 <TD> it has to download the full blocks to know when it's received coins
3550 2011-01-03 23:04:50 <jav> ok ... so far this ligthweight version is just a theoretical possibilty, right? there isn't actual an implementation that does that yet, is there?
3551 2011-01-03 23:05:33 <TD> satoshi is implementing it in the official client
3552 2011-01-03 23:05:40 <TD> but it's primarily just a way to speed up the initial block download
3553 2011-01-03 23:05:43 <TD> for people who don't want to generate
3554 2011-01-03 23:05:50 <TD> i suspect at some point the "generate coins" option will disappear
3555 2011-01-03 23:06:11 <TD> that said the client i'm working on will be lighter weight than the full client
3556 2011-01-03 23:06:13 ciuciu has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
3557 2011-01-03 23:06:49 <da2ce7> slush, good work on the pooled miner, my m0's clients have been rock solid for 4 days straght now.
3558 2011-01-03 23:07:16 <slush> da2ce7: It's a miracle, because pool is in those two days unstable as hell :))
3559 2011-01-03 23:07:24 james has joined
3560 2011-01-03 23:07:50 james is now known as Guest25030
3561 2011-01-03 23:07:57 Guest82018 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
3562 2011-01-03 23:08:15 <da2ce7> slush, well I dont' mind miracle's of the good kind :)
3563 2011-01-03 23:08:48 <da2ce7> what bugs have you had?
3564 2011-01-03 23:09:07 <slush> da2ce7: No bug, only stupid Drupals and Joomlas on the same server
3565 2011-01-03 23:09:29 <slush> da2ce7: Developers of those shits makes me crazy; I'll definitely move pool to standalone server
3566 2011-01-03 23:11:03 <da2ce7> in the future the I sugest the json server should be inderpendant to the web interface.
3567 2011-01-03 23:11:22 <slush> da2ce7: It currently is
3568 2011-01-03 23:11:34 <slush> It is separate process on separate core
3569 2011-01-03 23:12:04 <slush> and may run on completely another machine
3570 2011-01-03 23:13:25 <da2ce7> slush, I was thinking lots about your pooled miner. I came to the conclusion that you should make your proffit from keeping transaction fees for yourself. Untill they become more than 25BTC or somthing.
3571 2011-01-03 23:13:47 <sipa> da2ce7: he *does* keep the transaction fees for himself :)
3572 2011-01-03 23:13:55 <slush> da2ce7: I'm currently keeping them
3573 2011-01-03 23:13:58 <sipa> all 0.03BTC so far :p
3574 2011-01-03 23:13:58 <da2ce7> :D
3575 2011-01-03 23:14:00 <sipa> or something
3576 2011-01-03 23:14:07 <da2ce7> well done.
3577 2011-01-03 23:14:12 <slush> but it is not final intention;
3578 2011-01-03 23:14:15 virp has joined
3579 2011-01-03 23:14:24 <da2ce7> but you need to say that with big letters on the site.
3580 2011-01-03 23:14:30 <slush> it is just because fees are so small that I don't want to spend time to make some better solution
3581 2011-01-03 23:14:32 <da2ce7> otherwise you'll get accused of being not honest.
3582 2011-01-03 23:16:06 <slush> da2ce7: well, when pool will be on stable server and I won't have 10x complaints about pool stability every day, I will have time to work on this :)
3583 2011-01-03 23:16:20 <slush> I really spent last 4 days on patching f*****g Drupals
3584 2011-01-03 23:16:54 <slush> and yes, I think fees are something like 0.03BTC so far
3585 2011-01-03 23:16:55 ThomasV_ has joined
3586 2011-01-03 23:17:02 <slush> so it is pointless for now :)
3587 2011-01-03 23:17:16 ThomasV_ has quit (Client Quit)
3588 2011-01-03 23:17:34 ThomasV has joined
3589 2011-01-03 23:20:49 <da2ce7> slush, do you force trasaction fees on your BTC main miner client?
3590 2011-01-03 23:21:10 <slush> da2ce7: what do you mean by 'force'?
3591 2011-01-03 23:21:39 <da2ce7> ah, drop transactions that don't have a transaction fee?
3592 2011-01-03 23:21:49 <slush> no, of course no
3593 2011-01-03 23:23:19 <sipa> slush!!
3594 2011-01-03 23:23:28 <sipa> your interface just changed
3595 2011-01-03 23:23:33 <slush> yep ;)
3596 2011-01-03 23:23:34 <da2ce7> well that is cool, I'd personaly would. But then I'm somebody who beleves in getting the netork used to transaction fees as soon as possible.
3597 2011-01-03 23:24:18 <newsham> are there many transactions volunteering to pay fees on the net?
3598 2011-01-03 23:24:37 <da2ce7> oh yeah, the final thing under 'my account' would be a 'Total Sent BTC' display ammount.
3599 2011-01-03 23:25:44 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Quitte)
3600 2011-01-03 23:26:17 james_ has joined
3601 2011-01-03 23:26:38 Guest25030 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
3602 2011-01-03 23:26:51 <Sami345> slush, everything break
3603 2011-01-03 23:27:00 <slush> sorry for web interface outage :)
3604 2011-01-03 23:27:37 <Sami345> what
3605 2011-01-03 23:27:40 <Sami345> it need password
3606 2011-01-03 23:28:38 <Sami345> {"error": {"message": "Unknown login Sami345", "code": -129}, "id": "1", "result": null}
3607 2011-01-03 23:28:42 <Sami345> ´lol
3608 2011-01-03 23:28:48 <slush> Sami345: add worker suffix to login
3609 2011-01-03 23:28:53 <slush> Sami345.workerID
3610 2011-01-03 23:29:00 <Sami345> slush, web page gives that :D
3611 2011-01-03 23:29:11 <slush> hehe
3612 2011-01-03 23:29:13 <slush> wait a minute
3613 2011-01-03 23:30:34 <Sami345> you accidently started your mining pool server in port 80? :D
3614 2011-01-03 23:31:15 virp has quit (Quit: Page closed)
3615 2011-01-03 23:31:17 <slush> yep, I started debug mode :)
3616 2011-01-03 23:32:15 cdecker has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3617 2011-01-03 23:32:34 cdecker has joined
3618 2011-01-03 23:35:03 jav has quit (Quit: Verlassend)
3619 2011-01-03 23:35:36 rapacity has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
3620 2011-01-03 23:36:33 eureka^ has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
3621 2011-01-03 23:36:55 <luke-jr> slush: your pool webserver sucks -.-
3622 2011-01-03 23:37:09 <slush> I just stop that, sorry
3623 2011-01-03 23:37:13 <slush> Strange things happen
3624 2011-01-03 23:37:16 <luke-jr> XD
3625 2011-01-03 23:37:42 <luke-jr> wtf
3626 2011-01-03 23:37:48 <luke-jr> every time i reload my account now it's different
3627 2011-01-03 23:37:53 aximilation has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
3628 2011-01-03 23:38:14 <Sami345> slush, when will I get my money, when your web server was up a short time, it told block was confirmed
3629 2011-01-03 23:38:39 <Sami345> I have to wait you get your webserver back up?
3630 2011-01-03 23:38:43 <sipa> Sami345: it's sent once per hour
3631 2011-01-03 23:38:44 eureka^ has joined
3632 2011-01-03 23:38:49 <sipa> so be patient :)
3633 2011-01-03 23:38:53 <Sami345> ok :)
3634 2011-01-03 23:39:18 rapacity has joined
3635 2011-01-03 23:39:21 aximilation has joined
3636 2011-01-03 23:39:36 <luke-jr> slush: btw, your default probably aren't so great an idea :p
3637 2011-01-03 23:40:54 <Sami345> slush, why donation default :(
3638 2011-01-03 23:41:03 <Sami345> many people won't like
3639 2011-01-03 23:41:23 <luke-jr> not that I mind donating in general, but ⦠I don't even have 1 BTC mined yet -.-
3640 2011-01-03 23:41:43 <slush> oh, looks like we are back again. I prepared live few hours and then shot myself to feet; I forgot to add link to correct Django version :-/
3641 2011-01-03 23:41:47 * sipa just selected 6%
3642 2011-01-03 23:41:54 mahadri has quit (Quit: leaving)
3643 2011-01-03 23:42:08 <marioxcc> so here is when centralized pool becomes profitable
3644 2011-01-03 23:42:25 <Sami345> slush, why doesn't the block's reward show up in confirmed reward?
3645 2011-01-03 23:42:32 <Sami345> is it avery hour too?
3646 2011-01-03 23:42:35 <luke-jr> slush: based on Stats page, I should have 0.037 reward confirmed, but my account only says 0.00
3647 2011-01-03 23:42:36 <Sami345> *every
3648 2011-01-03 23:42:36 <luke-jr> slush: based on Stats page, I should have 0.037 reward confirmed, but my account only says 0.004
3649 2011-01-03 23:42:54 <slush> marioxcc: people are complaining when I have free service, people complaining when it is paid service; I cannot fit everyone's needs :)
3650 2011-01-03 23:43:14 <slush> luke-jr: Do you have this as unconfirmed reward?
3651 2011-01-03 23:43:21 <luke-jr> also, because the webserver crapped out, I missed the last 2 found blocks entirely :/
3652 2011-01-03 23:43:25 <luke-jr> slush: I think so
3653 2011-01-03 23:43:26 <marioxcc> slush: i don't meant to complain
3654 2011-01-03 23:43:37 <marioxcc> please don't interpret it that way
3655 2011-01-03 23:43:38 <marioxcc> :)
3656 2011-01-03 23:43:39 <slush> luke-jr: so it is ok. validation is done by server every hour
3657 2011-01-03 23:43:44 <luke-jr> ok
3658 2011-01-03 23:44:00 <luke-jr> slush: IMO, you should have a textbox for donation %, default to 0 :p
3659 2011-01-03 23:44:09 <slush> marioxcc: donation it is voluntary; you can still use pool for 0% fee
3660 2011-01-03 23:44:36 <sipa> slush: i have no problem with donating, but making it the default may piss of some people, i fear
3661 2011-01-03 23:44:44 <sipa> *off
3662 2011-01-03 23:45:41 <luke-jr> what is the difference between 'account' and 'label'?
3663 2011-01-03 23:45:53 <sipa> a label is a name for an account
3664 2011-01-03 23:46:13 <luke-jr> â¦
3665 2011-01-03 23:46:19 <slush> I changed default to 0; But I don't expect that too many people change it to something else ;)
3666 2011-01-03 23:46:38 <luke-jr> is it a problem that I named my new address 'from miningbitcoin.cz pool'?
3667 2011-01-03 23:46:45 <sipa> no
3668 2011-01-03 23:46:48 <sipa> a label is private
3669 2011-01-03 23:46:52 <luke-jr> can I rename it to add the . in there? :P
3670 2011-01-03 23:47:04 <sipa> it's just a name you give to it, nobody else sees it
3671 2011-01-03 23:47:10 <marioxcc> luke-jr: account?
3672 2011-01-03 23:47:12 <sipa> yes
3673 2011-01-03 23:47:20 <luke-jr> how?
3674 2011-01-03 23:47:21 <marioxcc> this is the first time i saw that
3675 2011-01-03 23:47:31 <luke-jr> marioxcc: listreceivedbyaddress shows it
3676 2011-01-03 23:47:42 <sipa> slush: i think you could send a mail to all to encourage people to donate
3677 2011-01-03 23:47:47 <marioxcc> maybe they mean address
3678 2011-01-03 23:47:56 <marioxcc> the label is private
3679 2011-01-03 23:47:58 <luke-jr> marioxcc: no, it's the same as label
3680 2011-01-03 23:48:01 <luke-jr> the content of hte field tha tis
3681 2011-01-03 23:48:04 <marioxcc> ok
3682 2011-01-03 23:48:13 <luke-jr> "account" : "from miningbitcoin.cz pool",
3683 2011-01-03 23:48:14 <luke-jr> "label" : "from miningbitcoin.cz pool",
3684 2011-01-03 23:48:15 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
3685 2011-01-03 23:48:24 <sipa> oh
3686 2011-01-03 23:48:25 <sipa> hmmm
3687 2011-01-03 23:48:40 <marioxcc> maybe bug
3688 2011-01-03 23:48:42 <slush> sipa: even kiva.org and another have 'default donation' and anybody can change it to smaller...
3689 2011-01-03 23:49:09 james__ has joined
3690 2011-01-03 23:49:18 <luke-jr> slush: but did they add it to existing accounts?
3691 2011-01-03 23:49:32 <luke-jr> how about this: make the default 4%, but set all existing accts to 0%?
3692 2011-01-03 23:49:41 james_ has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
3693 2011-01-03 23:49:43 <sipa> i agree with luke-jr
3694 2011-01-03 23:49:49 <Sami345> me too
3695 2011-01-03 23:49:53 <slush> nice idea
3696 2011-01-03 23:50:01 <slush> you like it because you are already registered, right? :-D
3697 2011-01-03 23:50:09 <luke-jr> I already set mine to 0%
3698 2011-01-03 23:50:17 <luke-jr> maybe if I ever make anything significant I'll increase;)
3699 2011-01-03 23:50:23 <sipa> slush: i set mine to 6%, and for now i'll leave it that way
3700 2011-01-03 23:50:42 <slush> luke-jr: that's bad thinking. slow miners make the same server load as big players
3701 2011-01-03 23:50:42 <Sami345> I want option: 0.01% :D
3702 2011-01-03 23:50:57 <slush> sipa: thanks
3703 2011-01-03 23:51:00 <luke-jr> slush: but slow miners don't have BTC to spare :/
3704 2011-01-03 23:51:11 <slush> luke-jr: it is %, not fixed amount
3705 2011-01-03 23:51:25 <slush> luke-jr: it is not relevent if you earn 100BTC or 1BTC
3706 2011-01-03 23:51:34 <luke-jr> slush: oh well, I can always send via the donation address too
3707 2011-01-03 23:51:37 <slush> luke-jr: but it is your decision, of course :)
3708 2011-01-03 23:52:25 <sipa> is the donation thing already implemented, or not?
3709 2011-01-03 23:52:36 <slush> sipa: now it is only settings
3710 2011-01-03 23:52:44 <sipa> though so
3711 2011-01-03 23:53:01 larsig has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
3712 2011-01-03 23:53:02 <slush> sipa: I will announce settings so everybody can change it for own needs; then I will switch it on
3713 2011-01-03 23:53:09 noagendamarket has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.6.13/20101203075014])
3714 2011-01-03 23:54:23 <lfm> slush make it pulic, shame the freeloaders
3715 2011-01-03 23:55:06 <Sami345> but pool must as much users as possible
3716 2011-01-03 23:55:18 <Sami345> pool with two users doesn't work very well
3717 2011-01-03 23:55:47 <slush> Sami345: currently 10% people makes 90% of mhashes :)
3718 2011-01-03 23:56:14 <lfm> sami348 so people who dont use pools are wrong?
3719 2011-01-03 23:56:16 larsig has joined
3720 2011-01-03 23:56:16 <slush> CPU miners have something around 160mhashes
3721 2011-01-03 23:56:34 <nanotube> ;;bc,calc 160000
3722 2011-01-03 23:56:34 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 160000 Khps, given current difficulty of 16307.48285682 , is 5 days, 1 hour, 35 minutes, and 50 seconds
3723 2011-01-03 23:56:37 <da2ce7> slush, damit a donation option! :D now I need to choose how generous I am!
3724 2011-01-03 23:56:38 <nanotube> slush: not too bad. :)
3725 2011-01-03 23:56:39 <luke-jr> supposedly I have 2.7 mhash/s :|
3726 2011-01-03 23:56:56 <luke-jr> btw, I know a hack for the donation stuff
3727 2011-01-03 23:57:00 <Sami345> I have 140 mhash/s when I run
3728 2011-01-03 23:57:07 <Sami345> But Idon't run 24/7
3729 2011-01-03 23:57:10 <marioxcc> wath kind of hack?
3730 2011-01-03 23:57:31 <luke-jr> go to the top of your account settings
3731 2011-01-03 23:57:41 <luke-jr> where it says "Wallet", put '1FNTpsLm8Mitdd99YC1tHSyN2dVMdQiWYo'
3732 2011-01-03 23:57:47 <luke-jr> then you've managed to donate 100%
3733 2011-01-03 23:57:55 <luke-jr> far more than the 6% limit
3734 2011-01-03 23:57:56 <luke-jr> :P
3735 2011-01-03 23:59:02 <Sami345> slush, does the server check for values if I manually add a new option byt editing HTML?
3736 2011-01-03 23:59:51 <Sami345> and what will happen if I set like 200% :D