1 2011-02-05 00:01:14 <tcatm> https://github.com/tcatm/oclminer opencl miner in plain c (unoptimized, does not work with pools)
2 2011-02-05 00:01:45 grondilu has joined
3 2011-02-05 00:02:17 grondilu has quit (Client Quit)
4 2011-02-05 00:05:26 noagendamarket has joined
5 2011-02-05 00:06:07 noagendamarket has quit (Changing host)
6 2011-02-05 00:06:07 noagendamarket has joined
7 2011-02-05 00:06:36 Cusipzzz has joined
8 2011-02-05 00:10:21 Dex has quit (Quit: Page closed)
9 2011-02-05 00:17:15 <presence> you cant game with the gpu and mine with the gpu
10 2011-02-05 00:17:28 <presence> unless you want a horrible mining and gaming experience
11 2011-02-05 00:17:49 <presence> I heard that windows doesnt let you turn xfire off either...and you cant mine with it on...
12 2011-02-05 00:18:03 <presence> 2nd hand info, so take it as you will
13 2011-02-05 00:18:06 <prax> hmm
14 2011-02-05 00:18:11 <prax> I have a crap vid card right now
15 2011-02-05 00:18:17 <prax> but planning on getting a new computer
16 2011-02-05 00:18:35 <prax> can't get 2 decent cards and use for regular web surfing type stuff + mine?
17 2011-02-05 00:19:20 <sipa> i have an onboard radeon chip which is connected to monitor, and an overclocked 4870 in a pcie slot that's continuously mining
18 2011-02-05 00:19:30 <sipa> i can watch a movie just fine :)
19 2011-02-05 00:20:13 <prax> hmm so maybe get an onboard video and simultaneously run 2 cards for mining, then switch if I game?
20 2011-02-05 00:20:13 <sipa> actually, i could do that when i was using the 4870 for video as well, but using -f 1000 or so then, slowing mining down
21 2011-02-05 00:20:18 <tcatm> Hashrate is much more constant with my c miner than poclbm or diablo's
22 2011-02-05 00:20:20 <prax> I have little time for video games anyhow
23 2011-02-05 00:20:47 <Syke> tcatm, does it support multiple cards?
24 2011-02-05 00:20:52 <tcatm> Syke: yep
25 2011-02-05 00:20:57 <Syke> i'll try it out
26 2011-02-05 00:20:59 <tcatm> will run on all GPUs it finds by default
27 2011-02-05 00:21:05 <ArtForz> tcatm: do you adjust worksize based on kernel runtime?
28 2011-02-05 00:21:05 davout has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
29 2011-02-05 00:21:22 <prax> link to your miner?
30 2011-02-05 00:21:23 <tcatm> ArtForz: not yet. fixed at ~1s on 5870
31 2011-02-05 00:21:29 <ArtForz> well, diablos and m0s do
32 2011-02-05 00:21:37 <tcatm> https://github.com/tcatm/oclminer
33 2011-02-05 00:22:21 <prax> ty, will check it out then
34 2011-02-05 00:22:22 <tcatm> I don't see a reason to adjust kernel runtime
35 2011-02-05 00:22:45 <sipa> for people who still want to use their graphic cards while mining :)
36 2011-02-05 00:22:54 <ArtForz> same here
37 2011-02-05 00:23:18 <ArtForz> I just have a globalworksize arg
38 2011-02-05 00:23:25 <Syke> tcatm, got a binary? I don't have the SDK installed
39 2011-02-05 00:23:33 <sipa> you need the sdk
40 2011-02-05 00:23:36 <sipa> no matter what
41 2011-02-05 00:23:57 <tcatm> Syke: nope, only source
42 2011-02-05 00:24:06 <sipa> but fixing it will on itself probably already decrease the variance in speed reported
43 2011-02-05 00:24:59 <ArtForz> yep
44 2011-02-05 00:25:27 <newsham> nanotube; so why do people use a web forum (re: bc-disc goog)
45 2011-02-05 00:25:42 <molecular> ;;bc,poolstats
46 2011-02-05 00:25:43 <gribble> {"active_workers": 390, "hashes_ps": 33275002600.409557, "getwork_ps": 134}
47 2011-02-05 00:25:46 <luke-jr> Kiba: fyi, I updated my prices to current market value
48 2011-02-05 00:26:13 <luke-jr> Kiba: I believe the plan you were looking at is now 14 BTC/mo
49 2011-02-05 00:26:22 <Syke> tcatm, are you testing a 5870? what's your hashrate?
50 2011-02-05 00:26:23 <luke-jr> err wait
51 2011-02-05 00:26:33 <tcatm> Syke: 343 Mhash/s @ 900 MHz
52 2011-02-05 00:26:50 <luke-jr> that's 14 áµTBC; in decimal, it's 52/mo XD
53 2011-02-05 00:29:18 <Syke> i'm only getting 285 @ 850 with diablo
54 2011-02-05 00:30:16 <tcatm> 557 Mhash/s on stock 5970
55 2011-02-05 00:30:20 <luke-jr> Syke: I get 265 on my stock 5850
56 2011-02-05 00:30:45 <tcatm> (increased kernel runtime to ~5 seconds)
57 2011-02-05 00:31:17 <luke-jr> tcatm: your miner better than m0m's?
58 2011-02-05 00:31:19 <tcatm> so this includes ~8MB of data copies from gpu->host every 5s
59 2011-02-05 00:31:31 <tcatm> luke-jr: I think so.
60 2011-02-05 00:31:36 <luke-jr> significantly?
61 2011-02-05 00:32:05 <tcatm> at least it doesn't drop nonces
62 2011-02-05 00:32:13 <molecular> tcatm, 557 Mh/s on stock 5970? what miner?
63 2011-02-05 00:32:23 <tcatm> molecular: my new c miner
64 2011-02-05 00:32:40 <luke-jr> drop nonces?
65 2011-02-05 00:32:41 <molecular> is that out in the open?
66 2011-02-05 00:32:49 <ArtForz> yep
67 2011-02-05 00:32:53 <tcatm> molecular: https://github.com/tcatm/oclminer
68 2011-02-05 00:32:59 <luke-jr> tcatm: how much faster?
69 2011-02-05 00:33:02 <molecular> thx
70 2011-02-05 00:33:22 <luke-jr> enough that it will make up for the 5-10 seconds between shutting off the m0m and starting yours? :P
71 2011-02-05 00:34:39 <luke-jr> miner.c:22:21: error: jansson.h: No such file or directory
72 2011-02-05 00:34:46 <Syke> tcatm, what stream sdk version?
73 2011-02-05 00:34:51 <luke-jr> oh well
74 2011-02-05 00:35:01 <tcatm> Syke: 2.1
75 2011-02-05 00:35:11 <tcatm> well actually a mix of 2.2 and 2.1
76 2011-02-05 00:35:27 <luke-jr> tcatm: jansson isn't available for Gentoo
77 2011-02-05 00:36:20 <tcatm> m0's and mine are about the same hashrate here
78 2011-02-05 00:36:23 <molecular> true, just installing it manually
79 2011-02-05 00:36:38 <luke-jr> â¦
80 2011-02-05 00:36:48 <luke-jr> tcatm: you just said yours was better
81 2011-02-05 00:36:54 <molecular> m0's does 550Mh/s on 725Mhz here
82 2011-02-05 00:37:22 <molecular> so that would be better by 1.27%
83 2011-02-05 00:38:43 devon_hillard has quit (Quit: Leaving)
84 2011-02-05 00:39:22 <luke-jr> tcatm: sorry, but this is fail -.-
85 2011-02-05 00:39:27 <luke-jr> 124.5 MH/s
86 2011-02-05 00:39:59 <tcatm> try using bitalign for rotate
87 2011-02-05 00:40:14 <luke-jr> wtf is that?
88 2011-02-05 00:40:27 <tcatm> #pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_amd_media_ops : enable
89 2011-02-05 00:40:27 <tcatm> #define rotr(x, n) amd_bitalign((uint)(x), (uint)(x), n)
90 2011-02-05 00:40:35 <tcatm> on top of oclminer.cl
91 2011-02-05 00:41:31 <luke-jr> 259.5
92 2011-02-05 00:41:58 <luke-jr> anything else before I go back to m0m's?
93 2011-02-05 00:42:16 <tcatm> try to hack your sdk
94 2011-02-05 00:42:32 <luke-jr> â¦
95 2011-02-05 00:42:33 <luke-jr> no thanks
96 2011-02-05 00:42:46 <jgarzik> tcatm: would you mind if I integrated your opencl stuff into cpuminer?
97 2011-02-05 00:42:51 <luke-jr> I don't have a clue anything about this proprietary SDK blob
98 2011-02-05 00:43:08 <tcatm> jgarzik: you'd have to rename your miner ;)
99 2011-02-05 00:43:13 <luke-jr> what's this "new best"?
100 2011-02-05 00:43:34 <tcatm> also it's hardcoded for 5870/5970 so it's not suited for a "demonstration" miner
101 2011-02-05 00:44:13 <jgarzik> tcatm: I think it's moved beyond demonstration, once I integrate opencl. But I think a C miner that supports both cpu and gpu would be useful.
102 2011-02-05 00:44:36 <jgarzik> would also make it easier for me to test push-mining
103 2011-02-05 00:44:42 <molecular> tcatm: the hashrate oclminer displays.. is that "per Cypress"?
104 2011-02-05 00:44:54 <tcatm> molecular: yes
105 2011-02-05 00:45:05 <molecular> tcatm, something's wrong here, it show 131000khash/s for both cypresses
106 2011-02-05 00:45:36 <molecular> that's 262 combined, wonder what's wrong, should be 557 right?
107 2011-02-05 00:45:54 <luke-jr> molecular: see the pragma he told me
108 2011-02-05 00:46:45 <molecular> #pragma OPENCL EXTENSION cl_amd_media_ops : enable ?
109 2011-02-05 00:48:51 megavolt has joined
110 2011-02-05 00:49:43 <molecular> allright, now it does 549Mhash/s
111 2011-02-05 00:51:00 <megavolt> when was dwollar last in here?
112 2011-02-05 00:51:05 <molecular> about the same as m0's (550)
113 2011-02-05 00:52:20 <molecular> maybe I need the ocl-compiler and maybe other stuff from 2.3...
114 2011-02-05 00:54:13 <tcatm> Error: Building Program (clBuildProgram)
115 2011-02-05 00:54:13 <tcatm> Error: Undeclared function index 1205
116 2011-02-05 00:54:16 <tcatm> ??? :)
117 2011-02-05 00:57:23 <molecular> slush, is it really necessary to hide the "found shares" in the "workers" table?
118 2011-02-05 00:57:33 dwdollar1 has joined
119 2011-02-05 00:57:52 <molecular> megavolt, about 15 secs ago
120 2011-02-05 00:58:43 <megavolt> :)
121 2011-02-05 00:58:48 mtgox has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
122 2011-02-05 01:01:37 <jgarzik> hrm
123 2011-02-05 01:01:48 <jgarzik> has anyone actually seeded the new genesis block out to testnet, yet?
124 2011-02-05 01:01:57 <tcatm> yep
125 2011-02-05 01:02:28 <jgarzik> ah, there we go
126 2011-02-05 01:03:48 theymos has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
127 2011-02-05 01:04:06 mtgox has joined
128 2011-02-05 01:07:17 <presence> yay I broke the 100btc barrier
129 2011-02-05 01:07:33 <sipa> mined?
130 2011-02-05 01:07:41 <presence> yeas
131 2011-02-05 01:08:33 <presence> ups is holding up my 5870s those jackasses
132 2011-02-05 01:09:35 <Kiba> we need a shipping price ar!
133 2011-02-05 01:09:39 <Kiba> s/ar/war
134 2011-02-05 01:09:52 <presence> Id prefer ups go away entirely
135 2011-02-05 01:09:57 <luke-jr> better than FedEx
136 2011-02-05 01:09:59 <presence> since they suck yet every damn vendor uses them
137 2011-02-05 01:10:10 <presence> Id take fedex over ups every time
138 2011-02-05 01:10:23 <luke-jr> FedEx holds onto the pkg to make it take the maximum delivery time
139 2011-02-05 01:10:27 <luke-jr> UPS just gets it there ASAP
140 2011-02-05 01:10:38 <luke-jr> so if I buy on Monday, UPS gets it to me by Wed usually
141 2011-02-05 01:10:39 <presence> at least if they attempt to deliver, you arent hosed
142 2011-02-05 01:10:43 <luke-jr> FedEx, I need to wait until next Mon
143 2011-02-05 01:10:56 <Kiba> somebody needs to cannibalize the USPS
144 2011-02-05 01:11:02 <presence> where as with ups you HAVE to wait for the next day, and if you arent there again, finally you can have them hold it
145 2011-02-05 01:11:04 <luke-jr> well, don't go out when you're expecting a pkg duh
146 2011-02-05 01:11:26 <presence> there is this thing called work...I hate going there, but for some reason I feel compelled
147 2011-02-05 01:11:35 <luke-jr> n00b, work from home
148 2011-02-05 01:11:44 <presence> and I work from home 3 out of 5 days, YET, thats always wwhen shit delivers
149 2011-02-05 01:12:12 <luke-jr> so get a wife :p
150 2011-02-05 01:12:23 <presence> I had one...she died...Im not getting another.
151 2011-02-05 01:12:30 <luke-jr> there's basically *no* time when someone isn't here
152 2011-02-05 01:12:39 * Kiba is trying to make it as a freelancer
153 2011-02-05 01:12:43 <Kiba> GIMME JOBS!
154 2011-02-05 01:13:02 <luke-jr> Kiba: can I hire you to promote Tonal?
155 2011-02-05 01:13:07 <presence> steve jobs is kinda indesposed
156 2011-02-05 01:13:20 <Kiba> luke-jr: 10 BTC in my signature space
157 2011-02-05 01:13:31 <luke-jr> lol
158 2011-02-05 01:13:51 <luke-jr> the irony of paying for Tonal promotion in decimal units XD
159 2011-02-05 01:14:05 <Kiba> well, gottach fix up my connection
160 2011-02-05 01:14:06 <Kiba> bbl
161 2011-02-05 01:14:32 * luke-jr considers offering 4 áµTBC
162 2011-02-05 01:14:51 <luke-jr> (10.73741824 BTC)
163 2011-02-05 01:17:12 <luke-jr> tcatm: what is the effect of throwing away nonces?
164 2011-02-05 01:17:27 <tcatm> luke-jr: reducing effective hashrate
165 2011-02-05 01:17:35 <presence> why does there need to be 100 different btc
166 2011-02-05 01:17:48 EvanR has quit (Changing host)
167 2011-02-05 01:17:48 EvanR has joined
168 2011-02-05 01:18:22 Kiba has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
169 2011-02-05 01:18:34 <luke-jr> tcatm: so, with m0m's I might see 6 MH/s more, but it's really less in practice?
170 2011-02-05 01:18:42 <tcatm> yep
171 2011-02-05 01:18:51 <luke-jr> any way to calculate the loss?
172 2011-02-05 01:19:14 <tcatm> see lastlog ~12h ago
173 2011-02-05 01:19:20 <OneFixt> luke-jr: mom fixed it, the code is in git
174 2011-02-05 01:19:27 <OneFixt> m0m*
175 2011-02-05 01:19:55 megavolt has quit (Quit: leaving)
176 2011-02-05 01:20:03 <luke-jr> OneFixt: the only recent fix I see in m0m's is pool-related
177 2011-02-05 01:20:17 <OneFixt> the effect was 3.5% for a card running around 300MHs at -f 1, now it's .02% or so
178 2011-02-05 01:20:37 <OneFixt> oh, you were asking something else?
179 2011-02-05 01:21:07 <OneFixt> what do you mean by throwing away nonces?
180 2011-02-05 01:21:59 <luke-jr> "This miner checks *all* solutions and doesn't throw away nonces like poclbm and DiabloMiner do to save bandwidth."
181 2011-02-05 01:22:06 bitanarchy has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.6.13/20101203075014])
182 2011-02-05 01:22:14 <luke-jr> same post: "Does not work with pools."
183 2011-02-05 01:22:31 <luke-jr> tcatm: I only see pool-related talk about 12h ago
184 2011-02-05 01:22:56 <OneFixt> it's much more efficient to "throw away nonces" than to work an extra second on a possibly stale block
185 2011-02-05 01:23:25 kiba has joined
186 2011-02-05 01:24:17 <kiba> so folks
187 2011-02-05 01:24:24 <kiba> resistance had been supported
188 2011-02-05 01:24:32 <kiba> err
189 2011-02-05 01:24:54 <kiba> resistance support is now at .82 USD with 11022 BTC
190 2011-02-05 01:25:18 <kiba> that mean it will takes 9000 USD before we start going downhill
191 2011-02-05 01:26:12 * kiba finally understood what the charts meant
192 2011-02-05 01:29:05 <kiba> luke-jr: you like my offer?
193 2011-02-05 01:29:22 <luke-jr> kiba: nah, you'd probably keep dissing Tonal despite the sig :P
194 2011-02-05 01:29:23 echelon has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
195 2011-02-05 01:29:24 <kiba> luke-jr: I have the most posts than anybody on the forum AND I have 11 posts a day
196 2011-02-05 01:29:46 CyanDynamo has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
197 2011-02-05 01:29:51 <kiba> luke-jr: I promise that I won't
198 2011-02-05 01:30:04 <kiba> because it is in my interest to have advertisers buy my signature space
199 2011-02-05 01:30:15 <luke-jr> I wouldn't know *how* to promote Tonal with a sig anyway
200 2011-02-05 01:30:26 <kiba> 1 BTC!
201 2011-02-05 01:30:31 <luke-jr> â¦
202 2011-02-05 01:30:55 <kiba> it's only like 82 cents
203 2011-02-05 01:30:58 <luke-jr> what does "1 BTC!" mean? :p
204 2011-02-05 01:31:16 <kiba> a month of signature advertising
205 2011-02-05 01:31:20 <EvanR> kiba: ill criticize tonal for you during your contract with luke-jr for .5BTC per remark, up to a max of 100 remarks
206 2011-02-05 01:31:26 <kiba> that mean, 30 days worth of advertising
207 2011-02-05 01:31:43 <luke-jr> EvanR: kiba knows you'd do it anyway
208 2011-02-05 01:32:05 <kiba> luke-jr: it's the most fantasic advertising deal
209 2011-02-05 01:32:09 <kiba> I have a high reputation
210 2011-02-05 01:32:10 <EvanR> yeah but i do it currently for more, im giving him a discount
211 2011-02-05 01:32:29 <luke-jr> kiba: but if you sell advertising for stuff you disagree with, won't that hurt your reputation? :P
212 2011-02-05 01:32:47 <kiba> No, because I am known to be a particularly greedy bitcoiner
213 2011-02-05 01:32:53 <kiba> who will do almost anything for bitcoin
214 2011-02-05 01:32:54 <luke-jr> XD
215 2011-02-05 01:33:02 <EvanR> reputation for profitable business? helps!
216 2011-02-05 01:33:26 <EvanR> kiba: like send naked pictures to xelister ?
217 2011-02-05 01:33:32 <kiba> No
218 2011-02-05 01:33:32 <luke-jr> kiba: convince me your sig-space is *capable* of promoting Tonal reasonably, and I'll pay 1 áµTBC ;)
219 2011-02-05 01:33:55 <kiba> highest post rate, highest number of posts, high reputation
220 2011-02-05 01:34:02 <luke-jr> yes, but it's still *just a sig*
221 2011-02-05 01:34:23 <EvanR> kiba: couldnt luke-jr just make an annoying post right after you on the forum?
222 2011-02-05 01:34:29 <EvanR> each time you post?
223 2011-02-05 01:34:51 <kiba> I only post when I want to and I post a lot!
224 2011-02-05 01:35:22 <kiba> right now, I am trying to pry bitcoins from luke-jr's hand
225 2011-02-05 01:35:27 <luke-jr> lol
226 2011-02-05 01:36:01 <kiba> he seem to be a rather hard fellow to pry bitcoins from
227 2011-02-05 01:36:22 <luke-jr> I'm cheap. :p
228 2011-02-05 01:36:40 <kiba> it's only a fricking bitcoin!
229 2011-02-05 01:36:44 <luke-jr> lol
230 2011-02-05 01:36:53 <kiba> how about .50 BTC?
231 2011-02-05 01:37:12 <kiba> half of a bitcoin
232 2011-02-05 01:37:14 <luke-jr> you forget .5 BTC was about a day's mining for me not long ago
233 2011-02-05 01:37:27 <kiba> .01 BTC
234 2011-02-05 01:37:30 <kiba> and that's it
235 2011-02-05 01:37:30 <EvanR> ill put an ad in my nick for 1BTC
236 2011-02-05 01:37:31 <luke-jr> lol fine XD
237 2011-02-05 01:37:41 <EvanR> EvanR-eat-at-joes
238 2011-02-05 01:37:44 <luke-jr> EvanR: that wasn't to you
239 2011-02-05 01:38:04 <EvanR> EvanR-use-tonal
240 2011-02-05 01:38:13 <kiba> so, luke-jr
241 2011-02-05 01:38:17 <kiba> do we have a deal?
242 2011-02-05 01:38:46 <luke-jr> fine fine kiba
243 2011-02-05 01:39:07 <kiba> I need to step up my neogitating skill :(
244 2011-02-05 01:39:42 <kiba> luke-jr: I'll just put "Luke-jr would like you to use tonal" with a link to the wiki entry on tonal system on the bitcoin wiki
245 2011-02-05 01:40:11 <luke-jr> x.x
246 2011-02-05 01:40:16 <luke-jr> everyone knows *that*
247 2011-02-05 01:42:36 <luke-jr> kiba: we need to think up a way to *promote* bitcoin, not just staticly say "Luke-Jr likes it!"
248 2011-02-05 01:43:03 <kiba> luke-jr: and it needs to fit my signature space
249 2011-02-05 01:44:07 echelon has joined
250 2011-02-05 01:44:29 satamusic has joined
251 2011-02-05 01:44:54 <luke-jr> so any ideas? :P
252 2011-02-05 01:45:03 <luke-jr> I'll send the moneys as soon as I fix my bitcoind
253 2011-02-05 01:45:06 <luke-jr> it appears to be buggy
254 2011-02-05 01:45:07 <luke-jr> x.x
255 2011-02-05 01:45:47 <presence> what is better about tonal bitcoin than bitcoin
256 2011-02-05 01:46:02 <presence> ultimately, if it translates to $$$ it doesnt matter if its bitcoin or sewercoin
257 2011-02-05 01:46:11 <luke-jr> presence: tonal and decimal are two number systems; bitcoin is common to both applications
258 2011-02-05 01:46:19 <presence> right
259 2011-02-05 01:46:25 <luke-jr> it's like why is decimal better than roman numerals
260 2011-02-05 01:46:36 <presence> for what?
261 2011-02-05 01:46:42 <luke-jr> â¦
262 2011-02-05 01:46:59 <presence> I dont care what it is because ultimately, unless some micronation picks up bitcoin, its going to be $
263 2011-02-05 01:48:24 <luke-jr> :p
264 2011-02-05 01:48:49 <luke-jr> presence: the tonal number system is designed to be more natural for humans, and thus, once learned, easier to work with
265 2011-02-05 01:49:42 <kiba> the network effect work against you, luke-jr!
266 2011-02-05 01:50:12 <luke-jr> kiba: ?
267 2011-02-05 01:51:13 <luke-jr> fixed & sent
268 2011-02-05 01:51:19 <luke-jr> bitcoind's JSON lib has a bug
269 2011-02-05 01:51:19 mtgox has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
270 2011-02-05 01:51:21 tg has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
271 2011-02-05 01:51:27 <luke-jr> worked around it :p
272 2011-02-05 01:53:04 <kiba> ok, I see the credit
273 2011-02-05 01:53:30 * kiba earned 16.61 BTC this month
274 2011-02-05 01:54:05 <kiba> clearly, it will be a continous struggle to find new jobs
275 2011-02-05 01:54:51 <luke-jr> kiba: since I do not wish to spend in decimal, I sent you 10 TBC
276 2011-02-05 01:55:05 <luke-jr> so⦠now the question is how to promote Tonal with a sig
277 2011-02-05 01:55:46 <luke-jr> I am not sure how, without setting up a website or wiki page explicitly advocating Tonal.
278 2011-02-05 01:56:50 <EvanR> wait you didnt do that yet?
279 2011-02-05 01:57:03 <luke-jr> no
280 2011-02-05 01:57:13 <luke-jr> but I know where to get good arguments âº
281 2011-02-05 01:57:32 <luke-jr> advocating Tonal might be off-topic for the wiki, dunno
282 2011-02-05 01:57:35 mtgox has joined
283 2011-02-05 01:57:42 <EvanR> just a little
284 2011-02-05 01:57:58 <luke-jr> Wiki seems to be more of a technology specification/explanation thing
285 2011-02-05 01:58:04 <luke-jr> not so much advocacy
286 2011-02-05 01:58:06 <EvanR> denotation of numbers is not applicable to every project on freenode that displays numbers somewhere
287 2011-02-05 01:58:29 <EvanR> such as bitcoin
288 2011-02-05 02:00:08 <kiba> who runs bitcoin bonus?
289 2011-02-05 02:00:40 andrew12 has joined
290 2011-02-05 02:00:44 phantomcircuit has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
291 2011-02-05 02:00:48 <andrew12> \o/ i've got ipv6 now :D
292 2011-02-05 02:00:58 <andrew12> thanks to hurricane electric
293 2011-02-05 02:01:05 <presence> I did thhat thursday
294 2011-02-05 02:01:31 <luke-jr> andrew12: congrats
295 2011-02-05 02:01:36 <andrew12> i wonder how hard it would be to make it work on my router
296 2011-02-05 02:01:38 <luke-jr> but nobody can see with a cloak :P
297 2011-02-05 02:01:43 <presence> whats the router?
298 2011-02-05 02:01:45 <luke-jr> andrew12: depends on your route
299 2011-02-05 02:01:47 <andrew12> ddwrt
300 2011-02-05 02:01:47 <luke-jr> r
301 2011-02-05 02:01:55 <luke-jr> IIRC DD-Wrt supports it again
302 2011-02-05 02:02:03 andrew12 has left ()
303 2011-02-05 02:02:03 andrew12 has joined
304 2011-02-05 02:02:05 <luke-jr> I had to switch to OpenWrt for half-working QoS tho
305 2011-02-05 02:02:09 <andrew12> did my host change?
306 2011-02-05 02:02:16 <luke-jr> andrew12: you're cloakedâ¦
307 2011-02-05 02:02:20 <andrew12> then wtf does +i do
308 2011-02-05 02:02:22 <andrew12> heh
309 2011-02-05 02:02:23 <luke-jr> nfc
310 2011-02-05 02:02:26 <luke-jr> oh
311 2011-02-05 02:02:30 <luke-jr> probably hides channels you're in
312 2011-02-05 02:02:32 <luke-jr> from /whois
313 2011-02-05 02:03:10 <dirtyfilthy> can someone look at this and tell me if i'm talking out my ass or not: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/OP_CHECKSIG
314 2011-02-05 02:04:28 <andrew12> so now that i'm using linux, what terminal do you guys suggest i use? :p
315 2011-02-05 02:04:40 <andrew12> xterm doesn't suffice
316 2011-02-05 02:04:42 <presence> putty
317 2011-02-05 02:04:44 <presence> :D
318 2011-02-05 02:05:01 <EvanR> i suggest you use xterm
319 2011-02-05 02:05:09 <andrew12> EvanR: make xterm not suck then
320 2011-02-05 02:05:09 <sipa> waaaah
321 2011-02-05 02:05:11 <sipa> [2/5/11 2:49:11 AM] [#1 1485] 0000000000004129b80489a1543d8362d198f826b1c2992506d12ab8a39f80f0 (score 257461.58)
322 2011-02-05 02:05:15 <EvanR> done
323 2011-02-05 02:05:26 <presence> xterm is completely tunable
324 2011-02-05 02:05:32 <andrew12> make it have a black background, and make alt+2 not do ²
325 2011-02-05 02:05:34 <presence> you can change it easily
326 2011-02-05 02:05:37 <EvanR> done
327 2011-02-05 02:06:01 <andrew12> i had it like that a while ago but that wasnt on this install
328 2011-02-05 02:06:03 <andrew12> lol
329 2011-02-05 02:06:19 <andrew12> cant remember how either
330 2011-02-05 02:06:21 <sipa> that's possibly the "best" block ever :o
331 2011-02-05 02:09:52 <EvanR> the slush pool doesnt show as much :(
332 2011-02-05 02:10:00 <EvanR> how long has it been since last block found
333 2011-02-05 02:10:24 <andrew12> ;;bc,stats
334 2011-02-05 02:10:26 <gribble> Current Blocks: 106265 | Current Difficulty: 22012.4941572 | Next Difficulty At Block: 106847 | Next Difficulty In: 582 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 3 days, 11 hours, 25 minutes, and 12 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 25098.33137567
335 2011-02-05 02:10:35 <andrew12> hm
336 2011-02-05 02:10:44 <EvanR> i mean, on the pool
337 2011-02-05 02:10:48 <andrew12> oh
338 2011-02-05 02:10:52 <andrew12> ;;bc,poolstats
339 2011-02-05 02:10:53 <gribble> {"active_workers": 391, "hashes_ps": 31275432994.362415, "getwork_ps": 121}
340 2011-02-05 02:10:57 <andrew12> not really useful
341 2011-02-05 02:10:58 <andrew12> heh
342 2011-02-05 02:11:15 <andrew12> hm
343 2011-02-05 02:11:50 <andrew12> does the pool always use the same address to put the 50 btc into before it actually sends it to the miners?
344 2011-02-05 02:12:12 <EvanR> generation always uses a new address
345 2011-02-05 02:12:17 <andrew12> oic
346 2011-02-05 02:12:59 <dirtyfilthy> andrew12: what distro are you running?
347 2011-02-05 02:13:03 <andrew12> archlinux
348 2011-02-05 02:14:06 <dirtyfilthy> as a desktop os? heh.
349 2011-02-05 02:14:17 <andrew12> yes?
350 2011-02-05 02:14:25 <dirtyfilthy> masochistic :P
351 2011-02-05 02:14:44 <andrew12> what?
352 2011-02-05 02:14:52 <andrew12> i like having to do everything myself
353 2011-02-05 02:14:57 <dirtyfilthy> it's eh, *pretty minimal*
354 2011-02-05 02:15:04 <andrew12> heh
355 2011-02-05 02:15:06 <andrew12> indeed
356 2011-02-05 02:15:10 <andrew12> hm
357 2011-02-05 02:15:12 <presence> might as well run plan9 as a desktop
358 2011-02-05 02:15:34 * andrew12 knows not of plan9
359 2011-02-05 02:17:10 <andrew12> its mainly because I <3 pacman
360 2011-02-05 02:17:18 <andrew12> (i guess)
361 2011-02-05 02:17:18 <EvanR> arch is pretty far from having to do everything yourself
362 2011-02-05 02:17:24 <EvanR> it even breaks everything for you!
363 2011-02-05 02:17:38 <EvanR> pacman, eats your system
364 2011-02-05 02:17:41 <andrew12> heh
365 2011-02-05 02:17:42 <EvanR> wakka wakka
366 2011-02-05 02:17:53 <andrew12> there's also clyde
367 2011-02-05 02:19:23 <EvanR> i just reached 25 coins on the pool
368 2011-02-05 02:19:30 <EvanR> that means about a day has passed
369 2011-02-05 02:19:37 <EvanR> i should use this instead of clocks
370 2011-02-05 02:19:45 <echelon> your personal khps?
371 2011-02-05 02:20:06 <EvanR> 620M
372 2011-02-05 02:20:14 <echelon> :/
373 2011-02-05 02:21:53 akem has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
374 2011-02-05 02:22:27 <echelon> ati radeon 5970's sold out on newegg?
375 2011-02-05 02:22:46 <EvanR> heh
376 2011-02-05 02:22:51 <echelon> err.. there's two of them
377 2011-02-05 02:23:10 <echelon> one for $909.99 and another for $549.99
378 2011-02-05 02:23:15 <echelon> which one is the recommended one?
379 2011-02-05 02:23:30 <sipa> the first one is probably clocked at 850?
380 2011-02-05 02:23:31 <EvanR> what exactly is the one for 909?
381 2011-02-05 02:23:49 <echelon> yeah, 850
382 2011-02-05 02:23:57 <EvanR> thats shit
383 2011-02-05 02:24:13 <EvanR> the other one comes at 755 by default
384 2011-02-05 02:24:17 <echelon> but the 725 one says it can be up to +30% with ovevolt tool
385 2011-02-05 02:24:24 <sipa> 725
386 2011-02-05 02:24:25 <EvanR> 725?
387 2011-02-05 02:24:47 <sipa> normal 5970's are 725MHz
388 2011-02-05 02:25:21 <echelon> how does it compared to the nvidia tesla's?
389 2011-02-05 02:25:37 <sipa> far superior
390 2011-02-05 02:25:45 <sipa> for bitcoin mining at least
391 2011-02-05 02:25:46 <echelon> oh
392 2011-02-05 02:26:28 <sipa> nvidia hardware is better for less parallel things (doing more different things at once), and very bad at integer arith (which is needed for sha256)
393 2011-02-05 02:27:50 <ArtForz> actually they're not worse at integer than at single precision
394 2011-02-05 02:28:06 <ArtForz> they're simply that slow in general
395 2011-02-05 02:33:10 echelon has quit (Quit: Leaving)
396 2011-02-05 02:33:21 echelon has joined
397 2011-02-05 02:43:22 <presence> artforz gets 50btc from amd every time he says that :D
398 2011-02-05 02:43:23 * presence runs
399 2011-02-05 02:45:10 <x6763> dirtyfilthy: any idea how to deserialize and serialize private keys that are stored in the wallet?
400 2011-02-05 02:45:23 <x6763> w/ bouncycastle?
401 2011-02-05 02:45:57 <ArtForz> iirc they're standard DER encoded
402 2011-02-05 02:47:03 <presence> I hates you ups
403 2011-02-05 02:47:13 <presence> every waypoint ADVERSE WEATHER CONDITIONS[X]
404 2011-02-05 02:47:26 <presence> that might be good if the waypoint CHANGED FROM MEMPHIS, TN, US
405 2011-02-05 02:49:46 <x6763> ArtForz: thanks, i'll see if i can figure it out from that
406 2011-02-05 02:54:21 molecular has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
407 2011-02-05 02:55:56 molecular has joined
408 2011-02-05 03:00:43 xelister has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
409 2011-02-05 03:03:32 tg has joined
410 2011-02-05 03:05:27 mtgox has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
411 2011-02-05 03:09:38 <luke-jr> echelon: basically, Nvidia sucks
412 2011-02-05 03:09:38 tg has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
413 2011-02-05 03:09:48 <echelon> heh ok
414 2011-02-05 03:10:18 tg has joined
415 2011-02-05 03:16:21 tg has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
416 2011-02-05 03:19:39 <kiba> ya know...
417 2011-02-05 03:19:55 <kiba> we only have 2279 members on the bitcoin forum
418 2011-02-05 03:21:20 <kiba> luke-jr: thought of an advertising phrase?
419 2011-02-05 03:24:36 <luke-jr> kiba: hmm, not yet
420 2011-02-05 03:24:39 <echelon> kiba, came up with a name for the magazine?
421 2011-02-05 03:24:59 <kiba> The Bitcoin Weekly(sorry that I can't figure out something more novel)
422 2011-02-05 03:25:10 <echelon> :/
423 2011-02-05 03:25:21 <luke-jr> lol
424 2011-02-05 03:25:45 <kiba> anyway, the magazine is not going to write itself
425 2011-02-05 03:25:54 <luke-jr> kiba: I'll come up with something
426 2011-02-05 03:26:14 * luke-jr pulls out his hard-print Tonal System to begin writing propaganda.
427 2011-02-05 03:27:01 <kiba> you got until Monday until you at least write a rough draft
428 2011-02-05 03:27:04 <kiba> err
429 2011-02-05 03:27:15 <kiba> for at least a rough draft
430 2011-02-05 03:27:26 <echelon> what are the topics
431 2011-02-05 03:27:45 <kiba> political philosophy, economics, entrepenurship
432 2011-02-05 03:27:47 <kiba> hmm
433 2011-02-05 03:28:10 <kiba> and miscellenous
434 2011-02-05 03:28:11 <echelon> a lot of federal reserve bashing?
435 2011-02-05 03:28:36 <kiba> no ad hom
436 2011-02-05 03:29:07 <echelon> how about a comic strip
437 2011-02-05 03:30:58 <echelon> should adjust the price per issue depending on the market rate, and make older issues cheaper
438 2011-02-05 03:32:57 <echelon> i'm going to have to change my prices too for my website
439 2011-02-05 03:33:02 <dirtyfilthy> x6763: in the current wallet?
440 2011-02-05 03:33:16 <x6763> dirtyfilthy: yeah
441 2011-02-05 03:33:28 <luke-jr> kiba: hey, I'm the one paying. I make the rules :P
442 2011-02-05 03:34:14 <dirtyfilthy> x6763: https://github.com/dirtyfilthy/bc_key/blob/master/bc_key.c
443 2011-02-05 03:34:52 <dirtyfilthy> i have no idea in java with bouncy castle
444 2011-02-05 03:35:42 <luke-jr> btw, do you know why SI was adopted over Tonal?
445 2011-02-05 03:37:08 <x6763> dirtyfilthy: thanks
446 2011-02-05 03:38:42 <luke-jr> "We are, nevertheless, sorry that we cannot give it our support, having by the very constitution of our society, and from its first foundation, adopted the number 10 as the basis for such a system." -Vice President and Resident Secretary of the International Association
447 2011-02-05 03:39:20 <luke-jr> don't you just love such great excuses as "we already decided on 10 before opening for input, kthx"? :p
448 2011-02-05 03:40:25 tg has joined
449 2011-02-05 03:41:05 tg has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
450 2011-02-05 03:41:26 tg has joined
451 2011-02-05 03:42:12 tg has quit (Client Quit)
452 2011-02-05 03:44:46 devrandom has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
453 2011-02-05 03:45:48 devrandom has joined
454 2011-02-05 03:52:53 has joined
455 2011-02-05 03:54:24 Netsniper has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
456 2011-02-05 03:57:17 <EvanR> luke-jr: thats what i was going to say
457 2011-02-05 03:57:29 <EvanR> (the quote)
458 2011-02-05 03:57:53 <EvanR> its like saying lets have 25 hours days
459 2011-02-05 03:58:12 <EvanR> or lets drive on the left side of the road
460 2011-02-05 03:58:53 <andrew12> heh
461 2011-02-05 03:59:28 <luke-jr> LOL
462 2011-02-05 03:59:58 <Cusipzzz> we already decided on 10 before opening for input, kthx
463 2011-02-05 03:59:59 <Cusipzzz> imo
464 2011-02-05 04:00:03 <Cusipzzz> :)
465 2011-02-05 04:00:28 <luke-jr> EvanR: you DO realize most of the world drives on the left side of the road?
466 2011-02-05 04:00:45 <andrew12> let's make a system like the metric system that uses powers of 2 instead of powers of 10
467 2011-02-05 04:00:50 <EvanR> no i dont think they do
468 2011-02-05 04:00:57 <Cusipzzz> lol
469 2011-02-05 04:01:08 <presence> most countries do, most drivers dont
470 2011-02-05 04:01:27 <andrew12> most of the people with cars live in the us
471 2011-02-05 04:01:37 <presence> ding ding ding
472 2011-02-05 04:01:42 <andrew12> therefore most of the world drives on the right side
473 2011-02-05 04:01:49 <andrew12> q.e.d. bitches
474 2011-02-05 04:02:08 <andrew12> (ok that last part wasnt necessary)
475 2011-02-05 04:02:16 <EvanR> the british empire used to own 70% of the earths surface, and they drive on the left, so proof by proxy
476 2011-02-05 04:02:28 <presence> how much do they own now?
477 2011-02-05 04:02:31 <andrew12> emphasis on *used*
478 2011-02-05 04:02:35 <presence> and since cars were around?
479 2011-02-05 04:02:51 <EvanR> factored out the time dependence
480 2011-02-05 04:05:24 <luke-jr> yawn
481 2011-02-05 04:05:35 <luke-jr> you know what the number one biggest flaw with the Tonal System is?
482 2011-02-05 04:05:51 <Cusipzzz> it sucks ?
483 2011-02-05 04:05:52 <Cusipzzz> o.O
484 2011-02-05 04:06:03 <presence> noone uses it?
485 2011-02-05 04:06:08 <Cusipzzz> lol
486 2011-02-05 04:06:12 <Cusipzzz> that's #2
487 2011-02-05 04:06:15 <presence> more uses the klingon system
488 2011-02-05 04:06:23 <luke-jr> presence: that's not a problem with the system
489 2011-02-05 04:06:33 <luke-jr> Cusipzzz: your guess is false
490 2011-02-05 04:06:37 <luke-jr> any other guesses, before I say?
491 2011-02-05 04:06:45 <presence> you can have the most awesome system on the planet (like betamax) but still not be useful
492 2011-02-05 04:07:19 <luke-jr> presence: other people using it is only required for interaction with others
493 2011-02-05 04:07:52 <luke-jr> ok, no more guesses I take it
494 2011-02-05 04:08:01 <luke-jr> the biggest problem is the pronunciation of digits
495 2011-02-05 04:08:16 <presence> what, is there a derf?
496 2011-02-05 04:08:17 <luke-jr> by/vy especially
497 2011-02-05 04:08:34 <luke-jr> by/vy/fy
498 2011-02-05 04:08:42 <luke-jr> my daughter has a hard time with the difference
499 2011-02-05 04:09:01 <Cusipzzz> brainwashin early, eh? using a dvorak keyboard, too ?
500 2011-02-05 04:09:09 <luke-jr> Cusipzzz: a tonal dvorak keyboard
501 2011-02-05 04:09:12 <Cusipzzz> lol
502 2011-02-05 04:09:19 <luke-jr> http://luke.dashjr.org/education/tonal/keyboard/dvorak-tonal.png
503 2011-02-05 04:09:33 <Cusipzzz> wow
504 2011-02-05 04:09:55 <Cusipzzz> poor kid going to be lost in the real world
505 2011-02-05 04:10:08 <luke-jr> nah, she's learning decimal also
506 2011-02-05 04:10:17 <Cusipzzz> and qwerty?
507 2011-02-05 04:10:52 <luke-jr> no
508 2011-02-05 04:10:55 <luke-jr> qwerty is useless
509 2011-02-05 04:11:16 <presence> better have her carry a keyboard everywhere she goes with the proper interface
510 2011-02-05 04:12:22 <Cusipzzz> ps/2 connection !
511 2011-02-05 04:15:06 <luke-jr> presence: not difficult
512 2011-02-05 04:15:34 <luke-jr> we have handheld computers already today; by the time she ever needs one, they should be readily available I hope
513 2011-02-05 04:15:51 <luke-jr> in any case, it is not necessary to use computers anywhere but home really
514 2011-02-05 04:16:07 <luke-jr> certainly not often enough that looking at the keys would be a problem
515 2011-02-05 04:16:14 CyanDynamo has joined
516 2011-02-05 04:16:16 <luke-jr> besides, every major OS supports Dvorak remapping
517 2011-02-05 04:18:00 is now known as Netsniper|!~kvirc@adsl-76-240-202-5.dsl.ipltin.sbcglobal.net|Netsniper
518 2011-02-05 04:20:15 Guest79064 has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
519 2011-02-05 04:20:50 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
520 2011-02-05 04:21:43 <Cusipzzz> t is not necessary to use computers anywhere but home really ...i lol'd
521 2011-02-05 04:28:37 Vladimir has quit (Ping timeout: 242 seconds)
522 2011-02-05 04:31:11 sabalaba has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
523 2011-02-05 04:31:44 alystair has joined
524 2011-02-05 04:34:02 grondilu has joined
525 2011-02-05 04:35:30 sabalaba has joined
526 2011-02-05 04:35:31 sabalaba has quit (Max SendQ exceeded)
527 2011-02-05 04:36:47 sabalaba has joined
528 2011-02-05 04:36:49 grondilu has quit (Quit: leaving)
529 2011-02-05 04:47:22 <Syke> oclminer isn't detecting my 2nd gpu
530 2011-02-05 04:49:55 <Syke> tcatm, have you tried 2 gpus?
531 2011-02-05 04:50:04 genjix has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
532 2011-02-05 04:58:27 tg has joined
533 2011-02-05 05:02:03 draginx1 has left ()
534 2011-02-05 05:05:29 ArtForz has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
535 2011-02-05 05:05:57 ArtForz has joined
536 2011-02-05 05:13:04 <lfm> syke what OS ?
537 2011-02-05 05:13:21 <Syke> ubuntu
538 2011-02-05 05:13:32 <Syke> diablo finds both just fine
539 2011-02-05 05:13:37 <lfm> do both show up in lspci?
540 2011-02-05 05:14:52 <Syke> yes
541 2011-02-05 05:15:24 <lfm> are they crossfire connected?
542 2011-02-05 05:15:27 Cusipzzz has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.0.2 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
543 2011-02-05 05:15:30 <Syke> no
544 2011-02-05 05:15:59 <lfm> oh, use diablo then
545 2011-02-05 05:16:40 <Syke> does oclminer want them connected?
546 2011-02-05 05:17:15 <lfm> dunno, never tried it. does it have a threads arg?
547 2011-02-05 05:17:32 <Syke> doesn't list one
548 2011-02-05 05:18:14 <Syke> it does list how many detected gpus, and it only detects 1
549 2011-02-05 05:18:38 <Syke> i'd use diablo, but I can't get it to crank at a consistent hashrate
550 2011-02-05 05:20:16 andrew12 has quit (Quit: leaving)
551 2011-02-05 05:20:58 <lfm> have you tried m0m's miner?
552 2011-02-05 05:21:33 <citiz3n> do you think m0m's is the most popular for windows?
553 2011-02-05 05:21:48 <Syke> no, I haven't bothered to fix the python depencenies
554 2011-02-05 05:22:22 <Syke> the pyopencl package depends on nvidia drivers, which conflict with ati
555 2011-02-05 05:25:46 asdf30 has joined
556 2011-02-05 05:26:19 ArtForz has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
557 2011-02-05 05:26:40 <lfm> naw the nvidia drivers dont hurt anything they arnt used
558 2011-02-05 05:26:46 ArtForz has joined
559 2011-02-05 05:27:07 <Syke> but they conflict, you can't install them both
560 2011-02-05 05:27:41 <lfm> dont use the ubuntu fglrx, its broken for opencl
561 2011-02-05 05:27:56 <Syke> i'm using ati 10.2 from ati
562 2011-02-05 05:28:07 <lfm> use drivers downloaded from ati. 10-12 that is
563 2011-02-05 05:28:17 <Syke> yeah, 10.12
564 2011-02-05 05:28:55 <lfm> so thats fine, it doesnt care if the nvidia drivers are installed
565 2011-02-05 05:29:55 <Syke> hmm, thought I tried that, maybe not. I'll try it next time I re-install
566 2011-02-05 05:36:12 ForceMajeure has quit (Quit: Page closed)
567 2011-02-05 05:37:27 andrew__ has joined
568 2011-02-05 05:37:34 andrew__ is now known as andrew12
569 2011-02-05 05:37:43 <andrew12> see that ipv6? :p
570 2011-02-05 05:38:29 <andrew12> well its got a hostname :(
571 2011-02-05 05:40:10 ForceMajeure has joined
572 2011-02-05 05:43:27 <luke-jr> lol
573 2011-02-05 05:43:33 <luke-jr> andrew12: it's ok, mine has a hostname too
574 2011-02-05 05:43:37 <luke-jr> but mine is nicer
575 2011-02-05 05:43:42 <luke-jr> ishibashi.dashjr.org :p
576 2011-02-05 05:44:45 <andrew12> well, the cool thing about ipv6 is that you can make as many hostnames as you have addresses (and dns access)
577 2011-02-05 05:45:09 <andrew12> i.e. tons and tons of vhosts
578 2011-02-05 05:53:51 Slix` has joined
579 2011-02-05 05:54:34 <luke-jr> pfft
580 2011-02-05 05:54:56 <andrew12> s/the cool thing/one of the cool things/
581 2011-02-05 05:55:04 <luke-jr> ok fine :P
582 2011-02-05 05:55:34 <luke-jr> andrew12: one of the cool things about Tonal is that you can make squares for the tons, sans, mills, bongs places :P
583 2011-02-05 05:56:12 * andrew12 dies
584 2011-02-05 05:56:59 <luke-jr> I guess it's only practical for tons tho
585 2011-02-05 05:57:20 <luke-jr> I need to design some TBC coins
586 2011-02-05 06:00:27 noagendamarket has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
587 2011-02-05 06:03:44 <lfm> bongs are good
588 2011-02-05 06:04:51 Netsniper has quit (Quit: Anarchism, really stands for the liberation of the human mind from the dominion of religion; the liberation of the human body from the dominion of property; liberation from the shackles and restraint of government. -Emma Goldman)
589 2011-02-05 06:05:13 Netsniper has joined
590 2011-02-05 06:16:36 RazielZ has joined
591 2011-02-05 06:29:24 asdf30 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
592 2011-02-05 06:34:06 asdf30 has joined
593 2011-02-05 06:34:28 AAA_awright_ has joined
594 2011-02-05 06:36:05 puddinpop has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
595 2011-02-05 06:37:59 AAA_awright has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
596 2011-02-05 06:38:20 kiba has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
597 2011-02-05 06:42:50 AAA_awright_ is now known as AAA_awright
598 2011-02-05 06:50:15 Slix` has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
599 2011-02-05 07:05:44 <joe_1> bitcoins over 80 cents a coin
600 2011-02-05 07:06:15 <joe_1> next week: $1.50
601 2011-02-05 07:06:31 <joe_1> next month: $3
602 2011-02-05 07:06:56 <joe_1> june: $18
603 2011-02-05 07:07:00 <joe_1> next year: $100
604 2011-02-05 07:07:06 <RazielZ> 2012: THE WORLD
605 2011-02-05 07:07:15 <joe_1> exactly
606 2011-02-05 07:07:21 <RazielZ> ...yeah, you can buy the world with one bitcoin
607 2011-02-05 07:07:21 <RazielZ> :3
608 2011-02-05 07:07:36 <RazielZ> oh shit I don't have one bitcoin
609 2011-02-05 07:07:49 <joe_1> well, = world gold+silver value
610 2011-02-05 07:08:19 <joe_1> you dont have 1 coin?
611 2011-02-05 07:08:34 <AAA_awright> There's no possibility of this being a bubble?
612 2011-02-05 07:08:43 <joe_1> absolutely no possibility
613 2011-02-05 07:08:47 <AAA_awright> There's no capital backing it up, that either means it can't be, or must be
614 2011-02-05 07:08:51 <joe_1> could it be a local bubble? yes
615 2011-02-05 07:09:03 <AAA_awright> I would guess "must be"
616 2011-02-05 07:09:08 <AAA_awright> Local bubble?
617 2011-02-05 07:09:30 <joe_1> meaning yes it could go down to 50 cents and stay there for 3 weeks. but, over time the price is no where near it's resting place
618 2011-02-05 07:09:46 <Netsniper> kline-fogleman
619 2011-02-05 07:10:06 <AAA_awright> joe_1: If that happened to the housing market that would be a /major shock/
620 2011-02-05 07:10:42 <AAA_awright> That's a 38% fall
621 2011-02-05 07:10:55 <AAA_awright> And a bubble
622 2011-02-05 07:11:28 asdf30 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
623 2011-02-05 07:11:29 <joe_1> the market isnt dense enough we still have volatility the price seems to move 5, 10, 15 cents a day
624 2011-02-05 07:12:04 <joe_1> in fact the bid/ask spread is typically 5 cents
625 2011-02-05 07:14:49 asdf30 has joined
626 2011-02-05 07:18:11 midnightmagic_ has joined
627 2011-02-05 07:18:41 Diablo-D3 has joined
628 2011-02-05 07:18:48 molecular has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
629 2011-02-05 07:21:37 molecular has joined
630 2011-02-05 07:36:22 asdf30 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
631 2011-02-05 07:37:52 <LobsterMan> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=1334 new m0mchil miner, getting better hashrates with nvidia
632 2011-02-05 07:39:18 <Diablo-D3> probably the same reason mine does
633 2011-02-05 07:39:26 <Diablo-D3> m0 followed me and added art's kernel
634 2011-02-05 07:40:44 <LobsterMan> heh
635 2011-02-05 07:41:04 <LobsterMan> my desktop is slightly less responsive now though, it seems to be more aggressive with system resources
636 2011-02-05 07:41:09 <Diablo-D3> it is
637 2011-02-05 07:41:27 <LobsterMan> but i got like a roughly 15% speedup
638 2011-02-05 07:41:27 <Diablo-D3> apparently for every 65mhash, art's kernel adds another 15
639 2011-02-05 07:41:46 <LobsterMan> i went from 50->58
640 2011-02-05 07:41:55 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
641 2011-02-05 07:42:02 <Diablo-D3> well, someone in here reported that
642 2011-02-05 07:42:08 <Diablo-D3> so Im thinking closer to ~20% speedup
643 2011-02-05 07:42:10 <LobsterMan> ;;bc,calc 120000
644 2011-02-05 07:42:11 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 120000 Khps, given current difficulty of 22012.4941572 , is 1 week, 2 days, 2 hours, 50 minutes, and 57 seconds
645 2011-02-05 07:42:19 <LobsterMan> ;;bc,stats
646 2011-02-05 07:42:21 <gribble> Current Blocks: 106308 | Current Difficulty: 22012.4941572 | Next Difficulty At Block: 106847 | Next Difficulty In: 539 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 3 days, 4 hours, 39 minutes, and 28 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 25171.73293323
647 2011-02-05 07:42:24 <Diablo-D3> LobsterMan: nvidia's driver is extremely braindead though
648 2011-02-05 07:42:34 <Diablo-D3> on my miner -f 1000 -w 32 doesnt help for a lot of users
649 2011-02-05 07:42:38 <LobsterMan> nvidia's drivers always suck :P
650 2011-02-05 07:42:48 <LobsterMan> i use -w 256
651 2011-02-05 07:43:05 <Diablo-D3> low -w may or may not improve desktop interactivity
652 2011-02-05 07:43:16 <Diablo-D3> its somewhat random
653 2011-02-05 07:43:25 <LobsterMan> lower -w gives me lower hashrates :P
654 2011-02-05 07:43:30 <Diablo-D3> yes it does.
655 2011-02-05 07:43:36 molecular has joined
656 2011-02-05 07:46:44 <afed> 2188 khash/s
657 2011-02-05 07:47:02 <afed> laptop core 2
658 2011-02-05 07:47:03 <afed> lol
659 2011-02-05 07:47:06 <Diablo-D3> lolfail
660 2011-02-05 07:47:40 <prax> my pute is slightly worse
661 2011-02-05 07:47:55 <joe_1> <-- 28ghash/s
662 2011-02-05 07:48:07 <prax> how good of a system could I get for mining/office use for like $1K?
663 2011-02-05 07:48:12 <prax> or should I spend more?
664 2011-02-05 07:48:26 <prax> assuming i assemble it myself
665 2011-02-05 07:48:31 <Diablo-D3> prax: at least one 5970 in there ;)
666 2011-02-05 07:48:48 <prax> arent those like $600?
667 2011-02-05 07:48:58 <Diablo-D3> around there.
668 2011-02-05 07:49:00 <prax> I need to look what I have.. I have some parts..
669 2011-02-05 07:49:13 <prax> so what u guys were just talking about though
670 2011-02-05 07:49:20 <prax> it wont lag my stuff too bad to mine?
671 2011-02-05 07:49:25 <Diablo-D3> it wont.
672 2011-02-05 07:49:38 <Diablo-D3> nvidia drivers are shit, ati ones are fine
673 2011-02-05 07:49:48 <prax> well ati is a given i thought
674 2011-02-05 07:50:00 <Diablo-D3> yeah but theres a lot of stupid people
675 2011-02-05 07:50:09 <Diablo-D3> and a lot of people mining with nvidia so they can sell the coins to buy ati
676 2011-02-05 07:50:14 <LobsterMan> i can use my computer while i mine
677 2011-02-05 07:50:15 <prax> hah
678 2011-02-05 07:50:20 <LobsterMan> but i cannot play games unless i stop the miners
679 2011-02-05 07:50:26 <Diablo-D3> LobsterMan: yeah, guess what
680 2011-02-05 07:50:34 <Diablo-D3> with my newest version of my miner, I _can_ game
681 2011-02-05 07:50:35 <LobsterMan> well i can, but it's slow :P
682 2011-02-05 07:50:39 <Diablo-D3> I tried it the other day
683 2011-02-05 07:50:49 <LobsterMan> like i can get away with eve while mining, but not counter-strike lol
684 2011-02-05 07:50:53 <joe_1> so your miner doesnt take full advantage of the gpu?
685 2011-02-05 07:50:55 <Diablo-D3> CS is shit though
686 2011-02-05 07:51:09 <Diablo-D3> joe_1: it does, but it can drop the run length so slow that it'll mold around anything
687 2011-02-05 07:51:51 <LobsterMan> cs is not shit tyvm
688 2011-02-05 07:51:55 <LobsterMan> what do you play, WoW?
689 2011-02-05 07:51:57 <LobsterMan> :P
690 2011-02-05 07:51:59 <prax> could I run off onboard vid and then mine with 2 5970?
691 2011-02-05 07:52:04 <Diablo-D3> atm? supcom2
692 2011-02-05 07:52:07 <Diablo-D3> although it pisses me off
693 2011-02-05 07:52:20 <Diablo-D3> prax: yes
694 2011-02-05 07:52:27 <Diablo-D3> Im actually surprised more people dont
695 2011-02-05 07:52:45 <Diablo-D3> prax: problem is, if thats ati onboard, my miner will still use it if it supports opencl
696 2011-02-05 07:52:48 <LobsterMan> onboard graphics....
697 2011-02-05 07:52:49 <prax> I think I will just get one vid card to start, but try that
698 2011-02-05 07:52:50 <LobsterMan> /wrists
699 2011-02-05 07:52:59 <prax> I only have one 1080 monitor anyhow atm
700 2011-02-05 07:53:16 <joe_1> how many blocks a day do you get with a 5970
701 2011-02-05 07:53:28 <prax> .6?
702 2011-02-05 07:53:31 <prax> guessing
703 2011-02-05 07:53:34 <Diablo-D3> ;;bc,calc 615000
704 2011-02-05 07:53:35 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 615000 Khps, given current difficulty of 22012.4941572 , is 1 day, 18 hours, 42 minutes, and 8 seconds
705 2011-02-05 07:53:40 <Diablo-D3> that many.
706 2011-02-05 07:53:54 <Diablo-D3> so its closer to one every 2 days
707 2011-02-05 07:53:56 <joe_1> so you get about 25 bucks per day
708 2011-02-05 07:54:08 <joe_1> let's see.. the chip costs 600
709 2011-02-05 07:54:15 <joe_1> it takes 24 days to pay for the chip
710 2011-02-05 07:54:24 <Diablo-D3> yeah, funny isnt it
711 2011-02-05 07:54:24 Netsniper has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
712 2011-02-05 07:54:43 Netsniper has joined
713 2011-02-05 07:55:25 <joe_1> i cant afford one
714 2011-02-05 07:55:38 <prax> I need a computer which can run one too
715 2011-02-05 07:55:45 <LobsterMan> i think that there are some people artificially proping up the bitcoin prices atm
716 2011-02-05 07:55:47 <prax> what i have now is horrid
717 2011-02-05 07:55:55 <joe_1> are there any stores that will give you a store card and you can buy a 5970. does best buy offer credit
718 2011-02-05 07:56:00 <LobsterMan> and a lot of it is still all up in arms about the compromised mtgox accounts
719 2011-02-05 07:56:13 <Diablo-D3> joe_1: opening new credit just for that is lame
720 2011-02-05 07:56:26 <joe_1> ok then could you send me a 5970
721 2011-02-05 07:56:45 <prax> u dont work?
722 2011-02-05 07:57:09 <joe_1> i just dont have the money yes i do work
723 2011-02-05 07:57:09 <LobsterMan> down with the system!
724 2011-02-05 07:57:33 <LobsterMan> do the new nvidia gtx580's get shit for hashrates too?
725 2011-02-05 07:58:38 <lfm> better to go for the 5770
726 2011-02-05 07:59:24 <prax> you guys got any suggestions for a system to go with 2x 5970?
727 2011-02-05 07:59:31 <prax> can look around, just curious
728 2011-02-05 07:59:47 <prax> like cpu/mobo
729 2011-02-05 08:01:00 <joe_1> diablo: please send about 850-900 coins to 1xyPiUrEjGJWBmQNrYhAw1wdXzCtjX9jv this will be enough for my 5970. i will pay you back as blocks are generated until it's paid back.
730 2011-02-05 08:01:45 <Diablo-D3> joe_1: you actually think I have that many?
731 2011-02-05 08:02:19 <joe_1> i would assume so. i always thought you were right behind artforz in terms of 5970 ownership
732 2011-02-05 08:03:20 <LobsterMan> ArtForz owns all
733 2011-02-05 08:03:40 <lfm> joe_1: you havnt been paying attention
734 2011-02-05 08:04:46 <joe_1> so who is behind artforz
735 2011-02-05 08:05:33 <LobsterMan> actually the pool i think is leading in raw hashrate right now
736 2011-02-05 08:05:48 <Syke> Diablo-D3, you got a good miner. I sent you 10 btc.
737 2011-02-05 08:06:56 <joe_1> i think we all just sort of thought diablo had 5970s because his miner and keeps working on it and everything...
738 2011-02-05 08:07:22 <lfm> joe_1: we?
739 2011-02-05 08:07:30 <joe_1> i
740 2011-02-05 08:08:39 <lfm> I think Diablo-D3 's development machine is still a 47xx
741 2011-02-05 08:08:53 <joe_1> should we createa a fund for him to get one so he can actually profit off of the miner he wrote?
742 2011-02-05 08:09:48 <joe_1> i'll start it off with 2 coins
743 2011-02-05 08:10:00 sgornick has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
744 2011-02-05 08:10:34 davout has joined
745 2011-02-05 08:11:06 sgornick has joined
746 2011-02-05 08:11:24 <joe_1> Error: Recipient is not accepting transactions sent by IP address
747 2011-02-05 08:11:40 <lfm> huh?
748 2011-02-05 08:12:06 <joe_1> i was trying to send 2 coins to diablo and i got that error message
749 2011-02-05 08:12:23 <Syke> why bother with a fund, just send a donation to his forum sig address
750 2011-02-05 08:13:58 <lfm> DiabloMiner | Like my miner? Donate: 1DbeWKCxnVCt3sRaSAmZLoboqr8pVyFzP1
751 2011-02-05 08:14:32 <echelon> that's lfm's address D:
752 2011-02-05 08:15:07 <echelon> jk
753 2011-02-05 08:15:07 <LobsterMan> haha
754 2011-02-05 08:15:09 <lfm> https://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=1976.msg44561#msg44561
755 2011-02-05 08:15:16 <echelon> ^_^
756 2011-02-05 08:15:34 <joe_1> i sent coins hope it gets to him
757 2011-02-05 08:15:48 <echelon> is it possible to make your address spell out words?
758 2011-02-05 08:16:15 <lfm> possible but not easy
759 2011-02-05 08:16:15 <echelon> they have a tool that does that for tor hidden service addresses
760 2011-02-05 08:16:33 <echelon> works like brute forcing
761 2011-02-05 08:17:25 <prax> theres no problem in generating addresses right
762 2011-02-05 08:17:37 <joe_1> with bitDNS it will be possible to link plaintext names to your coin address
763 2011-02-05 08:17:59 <prax> I stopped following bitdns
764 2011-02-05 08:18:15 <prax> was one thing I was reading about right after I took another look at bitcoin
765 2011-02-05 08:18:24 <prax> seemed nobody was working on it at begin of year
766 2011-02-05 08:19:43 <joe_1> i've been quietly working on it the past few days.
767 2011-02-05 08:21:09 <prax> cool, will have to check out the thread again
768 2011-02-05 08:21:12 <midnightmagic_> what's this about mtgox compromised accounts?
769 2011-02-05 08:21:43 <joe_1> somebody dictionary attacked mtgox last i heard.
770 2011-02-05 08:22:19 <lfm> some really poor passwords were guessed
771 2011-02-05 08:22:21 <prax> yeah so they put a small delay on the login
772 2011-02-05 08:22:48 <prax> I use all pain int he ass long generated passwords for this crap
773 2011-02-05 08:23:18 <prax> do they know how much $ was compro?
774 2011-02-05 08:23:25 <LobsterMan> i think that is a large part of why mtgox spiked again
775 2011-02-05 08:23:32 <LobsterMan> i think people liquidated a lot of their assets on mtg
776 2011-02-05 08:24:56 <joe_1> people faced with danger moved into bitcoins. that's a good sign for bitcoin.
777 2011-02-05 08:25:04 <Diablo-D3> [03:02:41] <lfm> I think Diablo-D3 's development machine is still a 47xx\
778 2011-02-05 08:25:07 <Diablo-D3> its a 4850
779 2011-02-05 08:25:17 <Diablo-D3> [02:56:21] <joe_1> i would assume so. i always thought you were right behind artforz in terms of 5970 ownership
780 2011-02-05 08:25:18 <Diablo-D3> nope
781 2011-02-05 08:25:27 <Diablo-D3> only like 3 people have farms like his, and Im not one of them
782 2011-02-05 08:25:44 <LobsterMan> isn't he going for some sort of fpga thing now?
783 2011-02-05 08:25:49 <Diablo-D3> yeah
784 2011-02-05 08:25:50 <Diablo-D3> just to pull ahead
785 2011-02-05 08:26:00 <Diablo-D3> also, my address is in my forum posts
786 2011-02-05 08:26:56 <joe_1> i donated 2 coins to your 5970 fund
787 2011-02-05 08:27:05 <midnightmagic_> no, not fpga. and i think he's doing it because he's projected out useful participation in the future of the network and how much power his microchp can actually produce and done some simple arithmetic.
788 2011-02-05 08:27:16 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic_: its almost fpga
789 2011-02-05 08:27:19 <midnightmagic_> he's using a structured asic
790 2011-02-05 08:27:20 <Diablo-D3> its those fixed silicon things
791 2011-02-05 08:27:22 <Diablo-D3> yeah
792 2011-02-05 08:27:51 <Diablo-D3> its still not as hardcore as fabbing new silicon for it
793 2011-02-05 08:27:59 <midnightmagic_> it never occurred to me that fpga was too expensive to be a computational workhorse for something task-specific.
794 2011-02-05 08:28:08 <Diablo-D3> heh, really?
795 2011-02-05 08:28:17 <Diablo-D3> it costs about $3000 to get a 5870 worth of power
796 2011-02-05 08:28:28 <midnightmagic_> that would cost more than the current value of all the bitcoins in the network at their deflated prices right now! :-)
797 2011-02-05 08:28:53 <midnightmagic_> right, but that's ignoring the fact that video card designs aren't static.
798 2011-02-05 08:29:07 <Diablo-D3> that just makes them even more flexible
799 2011-02-05 08:29:07 sotto has joined
800 2011-02-05 08:29:18 <LobsterMan> can you get higher hashrates with fpga/asic?
801 2011-02-05 08:29:28 <Diablo-D3> LobsterMan: asic? yes
802 2011-02-05 08:29:39 <midnightmagic_> not really with fpga, but you can with a *structured* asic. that's not a real asic.
803 2011-02-05 08:29:46 <midnightmagic_> real asic would be very, very expensive.
804 2011-02-05 08:29:54 <Diablo-D3> well, its a "real" asic
805 2011-02-05 08:29:59 <Diablo-D3> in the sense that its not fuck expensive
806 2011-02-05 08:30:25 <Diablo-D3> its just not nearly as flexible design wise
807 2011-02-05 08:30:33 <midnightmagic_> it's like a static fpga that can't be reprogrammed
808 2011-02-05 08:30:37 <Diablo-D3> exactly
809 2011-02-05 08:30:43 <lfm> and its not a lot faster, the main advantage is low power consumption
810 2011-02-05 08:30:50 <midnightmagic_> it's supposed to be for short-run design fab testing
811 2011-02-05 08:30:50 <Diablo-D3> but this also means it uses less power
812 2011-02-05 08:31:05 <midnightmagic_> it's significantly faster than an fpga
813 2011-02-05 08:31:07 <Diablo-D3> his chips are EXTREMELY power efficient per hash
814 2011-02-05 08:31:42 <Diablo-D3> a 5970 is ~1.8 mhash/w, his chips are like 4 or 5 mhash/w
815 2011-02-05 08:32:04 <midnightmagic_> and, once designed, he says will cost him about $300 or so.
816 2011-02-05 08:32:14 <midnightmagic_> currently they are "$500"
817 2011-02-05 08:32:17 <midnightmagic_> each.
818 2011-02-05 08:32:28 <LobsterMan> is he contracting out the design work somewhere?
819 2011-02-05 08:32:39 <Diablo-D3> yeah but his problem is powering them and cooling them
820 2011-02-05 08:32:41 <LobsterMan> i don't even know what would go into designing something like that for bitcoin use only
821 2011-02-05 08:32:43 <midnightmagic_> Diablo-D3: that's an interesting compute:watt ratio because that's exactly what nVidia says their maxwell chipset will deliver.
822 2011-02-05 08:32:51 <lfm> i think he designed them himself
823 2011-02-05 08:33:04 <midnightmagic_> LobsterMan: no, he apparenrtly did most of it himself, and had some chip guys help him with the final layout
824 2011-02-05 08:33:06 <Diablo-D3> he designed them himself and has some ghetto fab fabbing them
825 2011-02-05 08:33:12 <LobsterMan> lol
826 2011-02-05 08:33:21 <LobsterMan> what does he do aside from running bitcoin clusters?
827 2011-02-05 08:33:21 <Diablo-D3> but he wont say which
828 2011-02-05 08:33:25 <LobsterMan> is he a student or anything?
829 2011-02-05 08:33:28 <midnightmagic_> I got a kick out of how he's presenting the expected failure rate of the chips. :)
830 2011-02-05 08:33:30 <Diablo-D3> LobsterMan: apparently do crypto shit professionally
831 2011-02-05 08:33:36 <midnightmagic_> no, he's an engineer.
832 2011-02-05 08:33:39 <lfm> not very ghetto, 90 nm I think he said
833 2011-02-05 08:33:52 <Diablo-D3> lfm: yeah, but he chose the cheapest option, whatever it might have been
834 2011-02-05 08:33:57 <midnightmagic_> Diablo-D3: huh? no, he's a book printing machine designer.
835 2011-02-05 08:33:59 <Diablo-D3> btw, nvidia wont survive to maxwell
836 2011-02-05 08:34:10 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic_: well, hes in the wrong line of work then
837 2011-02-05 08:34:21 <LobsterMan> lol
838 2011-02-05 08:34:21 <midnightmagic_> nvidia was considering buying AMD just about two years ago. they're going to be around for a while.
839 2011-02-05 08:35:26 <midnightmagic_> Diablo-D3: there's no money in the hardcore crypto. Not everyone can be a Rivest.. :)
840 2011-02-05 08:35:31 <prax> isnt nvidia doing well in mobile?
841 2011-02-05 08:35:34 <prax> tegra2 or something
842 2011-02-05 08:35:39 <lfm> I have a odd sense that theres more demand for book printing machines than bitcoin miners
843 2011-02-05 08:35:55 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic_: no, its doing already existing shit quickly
844 2011-02-05 08:35:55 <LobsterMan> bitcoin is an up and coming thing ^________________^
845 2011-02-05 08:36:08 <midnightmagic_> nvidia is a customer of my employer's. from the inside, they are developing stuff faster than I've ever seen them go. it's really a sight..
846 2011-02-05 08:36:10 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic_: there are companies that would like to have a fast efficient sha256(sha256()) engine
847 2011-02-05 08:36:29 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic_: btw, nvidia, financially, is fucked
848 2011-02-05 08:36:35 <midnightmagic_> Diablo-D3: that's just coder optimization.. that's not what i thought you meant when you said crypto. my mistake.
849 2011-02-05 08:37:02 <LobsterMan> the whole world is financially fucked imo
850 2011-02-05 08:37:05 <midnightmagic_> they sunk billions into the new designs. there's too much riding on them. if they have to leverage themselves to the hilt, they'll ship maxwell. :)
851 2011-02-05 08:37:13 <LobsterMan> we're just waiting for the collapse now :P
852 2011-02-05 08:37:25 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic_: yeah, but if their drivers continue to be shit, no one will care
853 2011-02-05 08:37:57 <midnightmagic_> what irritates the hell out of me is that AMD doesn't seem to have any new announcements about their APU that are crowning moments of awesome the way the 5970 was..
854 2011-02-05 08:37:58 <Diablo-D3> the current generation of geforce (8000 through 500) would be much faster in both 3D and OpenCL if they improved their drivers
855 2011-02-05 08:38:10 <midnightmagic_> at least they have dma..
856 2011-02-05 08:38:15 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic_: new? its shipping. how much newer do you want
857 2011-02-05 08:38:19 <midnightmagic_> does ati have dma yet?
858 2011-02-05 08:38:33 <Diablo-D3> ati is missing dma on opencl on linux
859 2011-02-05 08:38:42 <Diablo-D3> which is a long standing bug amd inherited from ati
860 2011-02-05 08:38:49 <midnightmagic_> their APU is slow as shit. i mean, fast shit, that freaks people out and makes hardcore lusers drool.
861 2011-02-05 08:39:00 <midnightmagic_> just on Linux? not on windows?
862 2011-02-05 08:39:05 <Diablo-D3> windows all over is dma
863 2011-02-05 08:39:17 <midnightmagic_> fuck. that hardly seems fair.
864 2011-02-05 08:39:17 <Diablo-D3> its only on linux that opencl has that small issue
865 2011-02-05 08:39:21 <Diablo-D3> and I think they fixed it in 2.3
866 2011-02-05 08:39:29 <midnightmagic_> it's a pretty big issue if you're working with large datasets..?
867 2011-02-05 08:39:30 <Diablo-D3> but 2.3 is slower for mining
868 2011-02-05 08:39:35 <Diablo-D3> its not really
869 2011-02-05 08:39:52 <Diablo-D3> I was experimenting with pushing large data back and forth, the lack of DMA didnt really effect it
870 2011-02-05 08:40:10 <midnightmagic_> the academic parallel algos i read require fast system<->card data rates.
871 2011-02-05 08:40:20 <Diablo-D3> and the lack of DMA only effects pushing it back and forth between cpu and gpu
872 2011-02-05 08:40:27 <midnightmagic_> damn i wish i had my research credentials still.
873 2011-02-05 08:40:31 <midnightmagic_> *snif*
874 2011-02-05 08:40:33 <Diablo-D3> it doesnt effect, say, opengl<->opencl, or on card buffers that are passed between kernels
875 2011-02-05 08:40:44 <Diablo-D3> and like I said, I think they fixed it in 2.3
876 2011-02-05 08:40:51 <Diablo-D3> the lack of dma 100% does not effect mining
877 2011-02-05 08:40:59 <midnightmagic_> no, definitely not. :)
878 2011-02-05 08:41:27 <midnightmagic_> was it you who was telling me about an attack you dreamed up re: the time spent in a miner working on a stale block?
879 2011-02-05 08:41:50 <Diablo-D3> wasnt my idea, but I think I was part of that conversation
880 2011-02-05 08:41:56 <Diablo-D3> it doesnt seem like it should work
881 2011-02-05 08:42:21 <midnightmagic_> yeah i was thinking about it some more and i don't understand how delaying the odd person in the network would grant you an advantage.
882 2011-02-05 08:42:33 <Diablo-D3> well, timestamps are not strict in bitcoin
883 2011-02-05 08:42:48 <Diablo-D3> bitcoin also accepts blocks from the future too
884 2011-02-05 08:43:25 <Diablo-D3> so no matter how badly you skew network response or even the spacetime continuum itself, you cant screw it up
885 2011-02-05 08:43:39 <Diablo-D3> theres no way to gain an edge
886 2011-02-05 08:44:04 <Diablo-D3> the only way to win is to generate a new block and get as many nodes accepting it as possible
887 2011-02-05 08:44:12 <Diablo-D3> before someone beats you to it
888 2011-02-05 08:44:31 <midnightmagic_> the only thing i can think he was referring to is the possibility of making *other* people work slightly longer on their stale blocks because you're DDoS'ing them, while you are already switched up to the new block. but i don't really see how even that would do it because they still have to confirm everything.
889 2011-02-05 08:44:43 <Diablo-D3> well
890 2011-02-05 08:44:48 <Diablo-D3> if you ddossed, say, half the network
891 2011-02-05 08:44:54 <Diablo-D3> so THEY couldnt spam their new blocks
892 2011-02-05 08:45:09 <midnightmagic_> it'd be so they don't get the updated new blocks.
893 2011-02-05 08:45:12 <Diablo-D3> and they would also slow down on new blocks coming to them
894 2011-02-05 08:45:19 <Diablo-D3> its a two way attack
895 2011-02-05 08:45:29 <midnightmagic_> yeah, i was hoping for some more explanation about that..
896 2011-02-05 08:45:33 <Diablo-D3> the other half of the network, the network you're not slowing down, would accept your blocks
897 2011-02-05 08:45:51 <midnightmagic_> ah i see..
898 2011-02-05 08:45:57 <Diablo-D3> so the ddossed half would not only be unable to generate new blocks that are actually new but would always be falling behind on updates
899 2011-02-05 08:45:59 <Diablo-D3> BUT
900 2011-02-05 08:46:09 <Diablo-D3> you cannot know a significant number of nodes
901 2011-02-05 08:46:15 <Diablo-D3> and many sit behind tor
902 2011-02-05 08:46:28 <Diablo-D3> and you also dont know whos the powerful nodes
903 2011-02-05 08:46:31 <midnightmagic_> i wonder what would happen if i reset the connection count to 50 or 100.
904 2011-02-05 08:46:39 <Diablo-D3> merely ddossing half wont help you if you ddos the slowest half
905 2011-02-05 08:46:49 <midnightmagic_> yeah, that makes sense.
906 2011-02-05 08:47:01 <Diablo-D3> its also a waste of resources to nuke that many
907 2011-02-05 08:47:09 <Diablo-D3> it'd be easier to just knock people like art off the net
908 2011-02-05 08:47:17 <midnightmagic_> :-)
909 2011-02-05 08:47:28 <Diablo-D3> the attack as originally described doesnt work
910 2011-02-05 08:47:37 <midnightmagic_> hey when you said "only 3" people have mining farms like art's, who were you talking about?
911 2011-02-05 08:47:50 <Diablo-D3> Keefe has a bunch of cards
912 2011-02-05 08:47:57 <Diablo-D3> and theres another guy but I forget who
913 2011-02-05 08:48:04 <Diablo-D3> and now like half the channel has at least one 5970
914 2011-02-05 08:48:26 <Diablo-D3> I think the bitcoin community wiped out the world supply of 5970s
915 2011-02-05 08:48:44 <midnightmagic_> HAHA yeah, i can't find any supply of them anywhere here in canada it's really pissing me off.
916 2011-02-05 08:49:02 <Syke> most of the manufacturers of 5970s have stopped producing them
917 2011-02-05 08:49:03 <midnightmagic_> powercolor 5970 are on backorder everywhere, and sapphire doesn't even make them anymore.
918 2011-02-05 08:49:06 <lfm> drove the price up from 500 to 1000 bucks
919 2011-02-05 08:49:07 <Diablo-D3> Syke: all
920 2011-02-05 08:49:10 <Diablo-D3> the coins all ran out
921 2011-02-05 08:49:11 <midnightmagic_> i don't understand why that is.
922 2011-02-05 08:49:15 <Diablo-D3> errr
923 2011-02-05 08:49:17 <Diablo-D3> the chips ran out
924 2011-02-05 08:49:34 <Diablo-D3> there was very few low loss chips out of the 5870s
925 2011-02-05 08:49:38 <Diablo-D3> so there wasnt many cards to be made
926 2011-02-05 08:50:01 <midnightmagic_> powercolor 5970 are still selling up here for about $700CAD but they're on backorder.
927 2011-02-05 08:50:47 <Syke> if no ones making them, then those backorders aren't likely to ever be filled
928 2011-02-05 08:50:51 <lfm> and powercooler is a junky cheap brand imho
929 2011-02-05 08:51:00 <midnightmagic_> according to my guy at NCIX he can get more for me.. i guess i'll have to double-check.
930 2011-02-05 08:51:14 <Diablo-D3> Syke: nope
931 2011-02-05 08:51:16 <midnightmagic_> i have a powercolor running here and it's working cooler than the sapphires.
932 2011-02-05 08:51:29 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic_: well
933 2011-02-05 08:51:34 <Diablo-D3> all the normal 5970s are the same
934 2011-02-05 08:51:41 <Diablo-D3> probably all sapphire built too
935 2011-02-05 08:52:07 <Diablo-D3> sapphire has a custom 5970 as well that is high tier 5970 chips, which they themselves are high tier 58xx chips
936 2011-02-05 08:52:14 <prax> isnt anything else close in Mhash/$?
937 2011-02-05 08:52:29 <Diablo-D3> so they sold them in very expensive OC-friendly cards
938 2011-02-05 08:52:31 <midnightmagic_> prax: no. cheap supercomputing is pretty niche.
939 2011-02-05 08:52:38 <lfm> prax 5770
940 2011-02-05 08:52:49 <Diablo-D3> like, all those 5870x2s on the market? they're OC friendly cards
941 2011-02-05 08:52:56 <midnightmagic_> interesting..
942 2011-02-05 08:52:57 <Diablo-D3> prax: 5970 then 5770 then 5850 and 5870
943 2011-02-05 08:53:17 <prax> k ty
944 2011-02-05 08:53:43 <prax> 5770 is pretty damn cheap
945 2011-02-05 08:53:56 <Diablo-D3> yeah, and the 5770 is barely worth buying
946 2011-02-05 08:54:19 <prax> lol... my dad bought a new pc from a client of his I was sooooo pissed
947 2011-02-05 08:54:29 <prax> spent like $750+ on some POS that had 2 gigs of memory
948 2011-02-05 08:54:48 <prax> didnt tell me he was getting a new computer just bought some total garbage
949 2011-02-05 08:54:59 <Keefe> so add 2gb more for $21? :P
950 2011-02-05 08:55:08 <Diablo-D3> for speed btw, its 5770, 6850, 6870/5850, 6950, 6970, 5870, 6990, 5970
951 2011-02-05 08:55:14 <prax> yeah the pos mobo had problems accepting a 2nd stick
952 2011-02-05 08:55:22 TheAncientGoat has joined
953 2011-02-05 08:55:28 <prax> eventually found the error was one of the $30 vid cards he bought for like $80
954 2011-02-05 08:55:29 <midnightmagic_> 6990 is the one that isn't out yet isn't it?
955 2011-02-05 08:55:39 <Diablo-D3> 6990 is dual 6970
956 2011-02-05 08:55:41 <Keefe> yep
957 2011-02-05 08:55:45 <Diablo-D3> its the replacement for 5970
958 2011-02-05 08:55:52 <midnightmagic_> "replacement". bah.
959 2011-02-05 08:55:59 <Diablo-D3> its flat out faster than a 6990 theoretically
960 2011-02-05 08:56:00 * midnightmagic_ shakes his fist uselessly at the sky.
961 2011-02-05 08:56:05 <Diablo-D3> but you have to use sdk 2.3
962 2011-02-05 08:56:06 <echelon> so how many mhps can you get on a single 5770?
963 2011-02-05 08:56:08 <Diablo-D3> which .... eehhhh
964 2011-02-05 08:56:09 <prax> anyhow ok, 1x 5970 is probably best to start anyhow
965 2011-02-05 08:56:34 <midnightmagic_> 156Mhash/sec on 5770 according to The Chart.
966 2011-02-05 08:56:35 <lfm> echelon: 160 or so
967 2011-02-05 08:56:52 <echelon> hmm kk
968 2011-02-05 08:56:53 <Keefe> i'd sell you my extra 5970 for $500 but i kinda already promised it to someone else
969 2011-02-05 08:56:55 <Diablo-D3> the chart is kinda screwed now
970 2011-02-05 08:57:11 <Diablo-D3> my miner, and now m0's, uses art kernel
971 2011-02-05 08:57:17 <prax> that's okay I need to save for a system to run it too
972 2011-02-05 08:57:24 <Keefe> but i have an extra 5770 for sale :)
973 2011-02-05 08:57:27 <Diablo-D3> so everyone is getting faster
974 2011-02-05 08:57:28 <prax> oyea... how many watts does ieach need?
975 2011-02-05 08:57:29 <midnightmagic_> who made the chart and on what software then?
976 2011-02-05 08:57:35 <Diablo-D3> prax: see the chart
977 2011-02-05 08:57:39 <Keefe> 300W for the 5970, 110W for the 5770
978 2011-02-05 08:57:46 <midnightmagic_> 108 watts for 5770
979 2011-02-05 08:57:58 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic_: the chart was originally art estimates
980 2011-02-05 08:58:06 <prax> oh my bad forgot that had W
981 2011-02-05 08:58:28 <Diablo-D3> but art's new kernel is 3-6% higher than those numbers
982 2011-02-05 08:58:35 <Diablo-D3> and my miner due to kernel cramming is a tiny bit higher too
983 2011-02-05 08:58:43 <Diablo-D3> on top of art's I mean
984 2011-02-05 08:58:57 <Diablo-D3> and then art has his CAL miner
985 2011-02-05 08:59:09 <Diablo-D3> which is faster yet
986 2011-02-05 08:59:15 <Diablo-D3> and also doesnt suffer from sdk 2.3 sucks problems
987 2011-02-05 08:59:30 devon_hillard has joined
988 2011-02-05 08:59:34 <midnightmagic_> hrm...
989 2011-02-05 08:59:43 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic_: btw, I was looking at maxwell
990 2011-02-05 08:59:52 <Diablo-D3> nvidia is a bunch of liars
991 2011-02-05 08:59:59 <Diablo-D3> they're pushing DP performance so much
992 2011-02-05 09:00:27 <midnightmagic_> can the texture units be used as well as the stream processing units?
993 2011-02-05 09:00:28 <Diablo-D3> maybe if they'd quit intentionally breaking DP performance things wouldnt be so bad
994 2011-02-05 09:00:43 <Diablo-D3> no, the tex unit is useless
995 2011-02-05 09:00:48 alystair has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
996 2011-02-05 09:00:56 <Diablo-D3> nvidia also STILL has shit integer performance
997 2011-02-05 09:01:01 <Diablo-D3> even with kepler and maxwell its going to suck
998 2011-02-05 09:01:36 <midnightmagic_> kepler will definitely suck. kinda no point to that, but, i dunno. that /watt performance stuff is pretty awesome.
999 2011-02-05 09:01:56 <Diablo-D3> yeah, but if they make all their ALUs DP native, then yes, maxwell will have good DP performance
1000 2011-02-05 09:02:22 <Diablo-D3> but as it stands, fermi consumer is 1/8 of SP, fermi in tesla boxes is 1/2 of SP but costs 10x more
1001 2011-02-05 09:02:34 <Diablo-D3> so radeon 69xx is STILL raping nvidia
1002 2011-02-05 09:02:54 <Diablo-D3> 1/4th of SP, but its far more efficient and costs a shitload less
1003 2011-02-05 09:05:04 <Diablo-D3> and to be honest
1004 2011-02-05 09:05:15 <Diablo-D3> no one cares about efficiency per watt
1005 2011-02-05 09:05:22 <Diablo-D3> they care about combined efficiency per watt AND per dollar
1006 2011-02-05 09:05:42 <Diablo-D3> AMD hugs the curve on that one, nvidia is somewhere in the stands
1007 2011-02-05 09:05:46 <midnightmagic_> .. i care.. :)
1008 2011-02-05 09:05:58 <Diablo-D3> Im just saying, they use both metrics, just not the one
1009 2011-02-05 09:06:11 <tcatm> Syke: what does oclminer -n output?
1010 2011-02-05 09:06:13 <Diablo-D3> if the device cost is extremely high, its cheaper to just waste money on more power
1011 2011-02-05 09:06:31 <Syke> tcatm, 1
1012 2011-02-05 09:06:43 <tcatm> both ATI?
1013 2011-02-05 09:06:52 <Syke> identical 5870s
1014 2011-02-05 09:06:57 <tcatm> strange
1015 2011-02-05 09:07:06 <tcatm> DISPLAY=:0 oclminer -n is the same?
1016 2011-02-05 09:07:27 <Syke> nope, that's 2!
1017 2011-02-05 09:08:00 <Syke> simple tweak
1018 2011-02-05 09:08:23 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic_: like, if I need DP performance, I can buy like 4x more DP performance per dollar by getting 69xx
1019 2011-02-05 09:08:30 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic_: vs tesla boxes
1020 2011-02-05 09:08:40 <tcatm> My miner found a block on mainnet after running for about 8 hours
1021 2011-02-05 09:08:51 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic_: and the watt efficiency on DP is similar between the two
1022 2011-02-05 09:08:55 <Diablo-D3> so its obvious who I'd buy
1023 2011-02-05 09:09:06 <Syke> tcatm, ugh, performance is bouncing from 150M to 300M and back
1024 2011-02-05 09:09:37 <tcatm> Hm? For one GPU or one GPU at 300 and one at 150?
1025 2011-02-05 09:10:44 <Syke> looks about random, both gpus go up and down
1026 2011-02-05 09:10:52 <tcatm> shouldn't happen
1027 2011-02-05 09:11:20 <tcatm> do you have another miner running?
1028 2011-02-05 09:11:22 bertodsera has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1029 2011-02-05 09:11:24 <Syke> no
1030 2011-02-05 09:11:41 <tcatm> latest git?
1031 2011-02-05 09:12:03 <Syke> in the last few hours
1032 2011-02-05 09:12:22 sotto has quit (Quit: Quitte)
1033 2011-02-05 09:13:58 <tcatm> does aticonfig --adapter=all --odgt show similar frequency changes?
1034 2011-02-05 09:14:01 bertodsera has joined
1035 2011-02-05 09:14:05 <tcatm> --odgc, sorry
1036 2011-02-05 09:14:32 <Syke> same
1037 2011-02-05 09:14:38 <midnightmagic_> http://developer.amd.com/zones/OpenCLZone/publications/assets/MakingOpenCLSimplewithHaskell.pdf <---HAHAHA!
1038 2011-02-05 09:14:48 <Diablo-D3> >opencl
1039 2011-02-05 09:14:49 <Diablo-D3> >haskell
1040 2011-02-05 09:14:54 <Diablo-D3> OH GOD MY BRAIN IS MELTING
1041 2011-02-05 09:15:12 <tcatm> Syke: so clock frequency changes?
1042 2011-02-05 09:15:54 <midnightmagic_> so awesome..
1043 2011-02-05 09:18:54 <Syke> while miner is running, they both clock up to 850/1200, but only show about 50% load.
1044 2011-02-05 09:20:06 <Syke> with 1 gpu active, it clocks up to 850/1200 also, but 99% load
1045 2011-02-05 09:20:34 <tcatm> that's strange
1046 2011-02-05 09:20:42 <tcatm> same after reboot?
1047 2011-02-05 09:20:47 <Syke> yeah
1048 2011-02-05 09:22:52 <tcatm> does commit 6ddc290b86ff4c9ffdd1 work better (git checkout 6ddc290b86ff4c9ffdd1 && make)
1049 2011-02-05 09:28:01 davout has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1050 2011-02-05 09:28:36 <Syke> nope
1051 2011-02-05 09:29:40 <Syke> it's fine at the start, but as soon as I see "2 miner threads started" it tanks
1052 2011-02-05 09:29:53 <tcatm> SDK 2.1?
1053 2011-02-05 09:30:17 <Syke> yes, 64bit 2.1
1054 2011-02-05 09:30:26 <tcatm> same here. strange
1055 2011-02-05 09:30:32 <Syke> you have dual gpus?
1056 2011-02-05 09:30:56 <tcatm> 3x 5870 in one box, 2x dual-5970
1057 2011-02-05 09:31:06 <tcatm> working fine
1058 2011-02-05 09:42:51 <tcatm> Syke: you might try my hacked SDK http://dl.dropbox.com/u/10284953/sdk2.1-hacked.tbz2
1059 2011-02-05 09:43:57 <Syke> yeah, might try that tomorrow. I've re-installed all sorts of stuff, something is strange, about time for a clean re-install of the whole system
1060 2011-02-05 09:46:03 Syke is now known as Syke|afk
1061 2011-02-05 09:46:58 <midnightmagic_> hrm.. I haven't thanked Art recently for answering so many of my questions: Thank you, Art! I really appreciate it! :-D
1062 2011-02-05 09:54:15 davout has joined
1063 2011-02-05 09:57:56 jwalck has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1064 2011-02-05 10:01:02 davout has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
1065 2011-02-05 10:05:05 prax has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1066 2011-02-05 10:08:42 noagendamarket has joined
1067 2011-02-05 10:10:43 noagendamarket has quit (Changing host)
1068 2011-02-05 10:10:43 noagendamarket has joined
1069 2011-02-05 10:11:08 Syke has quit (afk!~Syke@173-11-125-162-SFBA.hfc.comcastbusiness.net|Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1070 2011-02-05 10:11:45 prax has joined
1071 2011-02-05 10:17:04 sotto has joined
1072 2011-02-05 10:24:33 TD has joined
1073 2011-02-05 10:52:29 akem has joined
1074 2011-02-05 10:54:54 sotto has quit (Quit: Quitte)
1075 2011-02-05 11:01:03 Sami345 has joined
1076 2011-02-05 11:01:57 <Sami345> slush, why you have removed so many things from your pool?
1077 2011-02-05 11:04:26 <slush> Sami345: read the forum, many answers here
1078 2011-02-05 11:04:36 <slush> molecular: and yes, I had to remove also workers shares
1079 2011-02-05 11:04:49 <slush> Sami345: will be back soon
1080 2011-02-05 11:05:19 <Sami345> have you ever thought temporally directing all bitcoins toyour wallet :D
1081 2011-02-05 11:05:41 <slush> of course
1082 2011-02-05 11:05:44 <Sami345> you would get bitcoins for like $1000 in just one day :D
1083 2011-02-05 11:06:09 <slush> I'm doing this time to time, so you, poor users, see those >100k blocks :-P
1084 2011-02-05 11:06:16 <slush> *rounds
1085 2011-02-05 11:10:20 <dsg> ;;bc,estimate
1086 2011-02-05 11:10:20 <gribble> 25109.04273604
1087 2011-02-05 11:11:44 <Sami345> :(
1088 2011-02-05 11:11:47 <Sami345> evil
1089 2011-02-05 11:11:52 <tcatm> slush: I added a poolmode to my miner
1090 2011-02-05 11:11:59 <Sami345> now I will stop using your service :>
1091 2011-02-05 11:12:12 <slush> tcatm: which does what?
1092 2011-02-05 11:12:32 <tcatm> submit all H==0 results but does not request new work
1093 2011-02-05 11:12:39 <slush> great
1094 2011-02-05 11:12:51 <tcatm> you should fix your latency
1095 2011-02-05 11:13:13 <Sami345> slush, btw could you service be hacked: one worker send the same blocks as many workers
1096 2011-02-05 11:13:24 <tcatm> sometimes getworks take ~1s (avg is still a few ms)
1097 2011-02-05 11:13:53 <slush> Sami345: no, pool has quite good prevention against cheating
1098 2011-02-05 11:13:54 <tcatm> I can only hide ~0.7s of latency
1099 2011-02-05 11:14:25 <slush> tcatm: I know, unfortunately there are some peaks, which I cannot handle effectively
1100 2011-02-05 11:15:02 <tcatm> how does your verify getwork code look?
1101 2011-02-05 11:15:09 <slush> tcatm: those 130 rq/s is only average
1102 2011-02-05 11:15:11 <tcatm> maybe rewriting it in C will help
1103 2011-02-05 11:15:25 <slush> Not a problem, it can handle >1000 rq/s
1104 2011-02-05 11:15:58 <slush> but when it meet, for example, sending rewards or so, server can be dead for a second
1105 2011-02-05 11:16:09 <tcatm> hm
1106 2011-02-05 11:16:25 <tcatm> what causes that?
1107 2011-02-05 11:16:32 <slush> tcatm: it's still vps
1108 2011-02-05 11:16:39 <slush> not standalone server
1109 2011-02-05 11:17:17 mtgox has joined
1110 2011-02-05 11:18:01 <slush> I think I'm squeezing the vps to it's max, there is no necessary (and significant) overhead
1111 2011-02-05 11:19:36 <slush> cat /proc/loadavg: 0.16 0.10 0.09
1112 2011-02-05 11:19:44 <slush> from 4 CPUs
1113 2011-02-05 11:20:33 <slush> average app speed isn't problem at all
1114 2011-02-05 11:20:48 <da2ce7> ;;bc,mtgox
1115 2011-02-05 11:20:49 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":0.9,"low":0.671,"vol":54580,"buy":0.8251,"sell":0.9167,"last":0.8999}}
1116 2011-02-05 11:21:41 <Sami345> slush, I have collected 73.50 from your pool with found blocks 0 :>
1117 2011-02-05 11:22:25 <Sami345> just collecting from other users blocks ;D
1118 2011-02-05 11:22:46 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
1119 2011-02-05 11:23:15 <slush> Sami345: yes, that's normal. There are also many CPU users, which found a block, but their reward is around single bitcoin :)
1120 2011-02-05 11:24:40 Myckel has joined
1121 2011-02-05 11:24:41 Myckel has quit (Changing host)
1122 2011-02-05 11:24:41 Myckel has joined
1123 2011-02-05 11:32:37 TD has joined
1124 2011-02-05 11:32:44 <Sami345> ,,calc 160000
1125 2011-02-05 11:32:44 <gribble> (calc <expression>) -- Uses Google's calculator to calculate the value of <expression>.
1126 2011-02-05 11:32:58 <Sami345> ,,bccalc 160000
1127 2011-02-05 11:32:59 <gribble> Error: "bccalc" is not a valid command.
1128 2011-02-05 11:33:12 <Sami345> what was the command for estimate block find
1129 2011-02-05 11:33:25 <tcatm> ;;bc,calc 160000
1130 2011-02-05 11:33:26 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 160000 Khps, given current difficulty of 22012.4941572 , is 6 days, 20 hours, 8 minutes, and 13 seconds
1131 2011-02-05 11:43:29 joe_1 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1132 2011-02-05 11:47:14 joe_1 has joined
1133 2011-02-05 12:00:37 <slush> Diablo-D3: hi, newest miner version does not work for me :(
1134 2011-02-05 12:00:55 <slush> Diablo-D3: I see hashrate, but no submitted shares
1135 2011-02-05 12:00:57 <slush> for looong time
1136 2011-02-05 12:01:17 <da2ce7> ;;bc,mtgox
1137 2011-02-05 12:01:18 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":0.9,"low":0.671,"vol":54440,"buy":0.8253,"sell":0.9167,"last":0.8999}}
1138 2011-02-05 12:01:53 <slush> Looks like checking of hashes is broken
1139 2011-02-05 12:02:14 <Diablo-D3> slush: works for me.
1140 2011-02-05 12:02:54 <slush> I'm running it with the same params as previous version. -w 64 -f 5
1141 2011-02-05 12:03:04 <Diablo-D3> [2/5/11 6:56:47 AM] Block 226 found on ATI RV770 (#1)
1142 2011-02-05 12:03:36 <slush> prev version is without moving avg hashrate, so I don't know _how old_ is it
1143 2011-02-05 12:03:55 <slush> hmm
1144 2011-02-05 12:04:13 <slush> I tested it on two machines, same result. I'll try debug mode
1145 2011-02-05 12:05:03 <Diablo-D3> aahahhaah
1146 2011-02-05 12:05:05 <tcatm> slush: try my miner :)
1147 2011-02-05 12:05:06 <Diablo-D3> I forced loops on
1148 2011-02-05 12:05:06 <Diablo-D3> and
1149 2011-02-05 12:05:11 <Diablo-D3> 25706167/16689513 khash/sec
1150 2011-02-05 12:05:12 <slush> tcatm: link?
1151 2011-02-05 12:05:23 <tcatm> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=3177.0
1152 2011-02-05 12:05:47 <tcatm> and use the hacked sdk from post #4 (will break m0's and diablo's)
1153 2011-02-05 12:06:23 <lfm> tcatm: whatd you change in the sdk?
1154 2011-02-05 12:06:50 <slush> Diablo-D3: same result, no additional printings in debug mode
1155 2011-02-05 12:06:58 <tcatm> lfm: compiler from 2.2, libs from 2.1 (= multi gpu support)
1156 2011-02-05 12:06:58 <Diablo-D3> slush: is the meter correct?
1157 2011-02-05 12:07:13 <slush> Diablo-D3: yes, ~1.2 ghash
1158 2011-02-05 12:07:14 <Diablo-D3> tcatm: you should upgrade yours to 2.3
1159 2011-02-05 12:07:30 <tcatm> not worth it
1160 2011-02-05 12:07:47 <Diablo-D3> tcatm: it is for 69xx users.
1161 2011-02-05 12:07:58 <Diablo-D3> a working 69xx SDK would be very nice
1162 2011-02-05 12:08:11 <tcatm> buy me a 69xx :P
1163 2011-02-05 12:10:00 <Diablo-D3> slush: with loops on I just found a block
1164 2011-02-05 12:10:07 <Diablo-D3> except now my hash meter is going apeshit
1165 2011-02-05 12:10:49 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1166 2011-02-05 12:12:00 <Diablo-D3> slush: how many cards do you have? 2 5970?
1167 2011-02-05 12:12:11 <slush> Diablo-D3: I've no idea what is broken
1168 2011-02-05 12:12:16 <slush> yes
1169 2011-02-05 12:12:25 molecular has joined
1170 2011-02-05 12:15:02 <Diablo-D3> do you see a lot of nonce exhaustion messages?
1171 2011-02-05 12:16:30 <slush> no, I don't see any logs
1172 2011-02-05 12:16:39 <slush> only 4 lines about devices + hashmeter
1173 2011-02-05 12:16:48 <Diablo-D3> with -d on?
1174 2011-02-05 12:16:53 <slush> yes
1175 2011-02-05 12:19:27 davout has joined
1176 2011-02-05 12:25:35 MetSynVar has joined
1177 2011-02-05 12:31:15 fahadsadah has quit (Excess Flood)
1178 2011-02-05 12:34:39 <Diablo-D3> oh duh
1179 2011-02-05 12:34:45 <Diablo-D3> it helps if I turne loops on when trying to force them on
1180 2011-02-05 12:35:00 <slush> ?
1181 2011-02-05 12:35:09 <Diablo-D3> 4xxx doesnt use loops, so to test I have to force them on
1182 2011-02-05 12:38:10 Zarutian has joined
1183 2011-02-05 12:42:00 fahadsadah has joined
1184 2011-02-05 12:45:29 <Diablo-D3> slush: there are bugs, but nothing that effects yours
1185 2011-02-05 12:45:56 <slush> that means, there is more bugs than you see now ;)
1186 2011-02-05 12:46:15 <Diablo-D3> no, that means theres no bug
1187 2011-02-05 12:47:38 <slush> ok, can I help somehow to trace my problem?
1188 2011-02-05 12:47:51 <nathan7> na na na na na na na
1189 2011-02-05 12:48:03 <Diablo-D3> I set loops to 1, with loop behavior on, I just generated a block
1190 2011-02-05 12:48:21 <Diablo-D3> two! two blocks! wha ha ha ha ha!
1191 2011-02-05 12:48:54 <Diablo-D3> so lets see what happens when I do 2 loops
1192 2011-02-05 12:49:40 <slush> hmm, I didn't catch the loops thing so I don't know what are you talking about. but nvm :)
1193 2011-02-05 12:50:02 <Diablo-D3> 5xxx uses loops
1194 2011-02-05 12:50:19 <Diablo-D3> 4xxx and nvidia dont
1195 2011-02-05 12:50:26 <slush> well, loops of what
1196 2011-02-05 12:50:38 <Diablo-D3> of the miner kernel
1197 2011-02-05 12:50:40 <Diablo-D3> it loops internally
1198 2011-02-05 12:51:10 <slush> ok
1199 2011-02-05 12:52:24 MetSynVar has quit (Quit: Page closed)
1200 2011-02-05 12:53:11 <joe_1> how can it not have loops. without loops what does it try one nonce then give up forever?
1201 2011-02-05 12:53:30 <tcatm> yes
1202 2011-02-05 12:53:42 <tcatm> except that it tries a few million nonces in parallel
1203 2011-02-05 12:53:42 <Diablo-D3> joe_1: yes.
1204 2011-02-05 12:53:52 <Diablo-D3> oh duh, thanks art
1205 2011-02-05 12:54:00 <Diablo-D3> he said OH HEY LETS USE & 0xFF
1206 2011-02-05 12:55:15 <joe_1> wow. yeah, looping should really help
1207 2011-02-05 12:55:21 * tcatm adds network support to his miners so they can be synchronized
1208 2011-02-05 12:56:00 <Diablo-D3> slush: found the bug
1209 2011-02-05 12:56:07 <slush> great!
1210 2011-02-05 12:57:40 noot has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1211 2011-02-05 12:58:27 <slush> > slush: that means, there is more bugs than you see now ;) <--- I like to be true
1212 2011-02-05 12:58:55 <slush> :)
1213 2011-02-05 12:59:06 <Diablo-D3> yeah, but at least I didnt write that one
1214 2011-02-05 13:00:47 <joe_1> if only we could work backwards from the hash to the input block somehow, and deterministically generate blocks
1215 2011-02-05 13:01:57 <rlifchitz> anybody has a recent bitcoind binary for redhat?
1216 2011-02-05 13:02:34 <rlifchitz> lots of compilation issues...
1217 2011-02-05 13:05:55 <CIA-98> DiabloMiner: Patrick McFarland master * r658ef00 / (2 files in 2 dirs): Fix bug on Radeon 5xxx looping - http://bit.ly/eaz1KB
1218 2011-02-05 13:07:06 <joe_1> do all those millioin hashes get driven by the same clock
1219 2011-02-05 13:07:32 <Diablo-D3> joe_1: "yes"
1220 2011-02-05 13:07:44 <Diablo-D3> the instructions all take the same time to finish
1221 2011-02-05 13:09:21 <joe_1> is the data for the next batch already ready to go or does the cpu have to come in and set everything up again for the next cycle
1222 2011-02-05 13:10:02 <Diablo-D3> slush: so there.\
1223 2011-02-05 13:10:14 <Diablo-D3> joe_1: "yes"
1224 2011-02-05 13:10:34 <Diablo-D3> you have kernel run lengths in the millions, it obviously isnt executing all of those at the same time
1225 2011-02-05 13:12:48 <slush> Diablo-D3: binary updated?
1226 2011-02-05 13:13:16 <tcatm> new feature in my miner: press return on stdin to force a getwork
1227 2011-02-05 13:13:25 <Diablo-D3> slush: yes
1228 2011-02-05 13:14:18 <joe_1> how hard would it be to adapt the miner if 32 bytes of extra data were added to block headers?
1229 2011-02-05 13:14:32 <Diablo-D3> joe_1: the miner doesnt handle that.
1230 2011-02-05 13:14:54 <Diablo-D3> mines the only one that'd be effected because I hash the entire header on double check
1231 2011-02-05 13:15:05 <Diablo-D3> and thats'd be like, fix 3 lines
1232 2011-02-05 13:15:21 <Diablo-D3> maybe 4
1233 2011-02-05 13:15:44 <Diablo-D3> they're all in 2 places, so its a really easy fix
1234 2011-02-05 13:15:46 <cosurgi> slush: why did you remove shares from my profile?
1235 2011-02-05 13:16:06 <Diablo-D3> I think he removed the shares field
1236 2011-02-05 13:16:17 <cosurgi> yes, but why?
1237 2011-02-05 13:16:25 <Diablo-D3> because what use is it
1238 2011-02-05 13:16:26 <slush> cosurgi: read forum
1239 2011-02-05 13:16:43 <cosurgi> I liked to use it as a confirmation that I'm connected.
1240 2011-02-05 13:16:54 <slush> cosurgi: last share timestamp still works
1241 2011-02-05 13:17:02 <cosurgi> slush: can you give me a forum link?
1242 2011-02-05 13:17:06 <cosurgi> to thread
1243 2011-02-05 13:17:26 <prax> dumb question for u guys:
1244 2011-02-05 13:17:36 <prax> there is some benefit to the length of bitcoin's block chain?
1245 2011-02-05 13:17:37 <slush> cosurgi: follow link on pool HP menu
1246 2011-02-05 13:18:20 <joe_1> prax yes it shows the world that bitcoin is a non-arbitrary currency
1247 2011-02-05 13:18:47 <Diablo-D3> prax: yes, its how proof of work works.
1248 2011-02-05 13:19:08 genjix has joined
1249 2011-02-05 13:19:13 <genjix> sup
1250 2011-02-05 13:19:16 <slush> Diablo-D3: thanks a lot, it works now
1251 2011-02-05 13:19:22 hundfred has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1252 2011-02-05 13:21:10 <joe_1> diablo: miners are not affected by extra data because bitcoin gives the miner the whole sha256 block which won't change size?
1253 2011-02-05 13:21:25 <Diablo-D3> joe_1: the midstate, yes
1254 2011-02-05 13:21:35 <genjix> is there any performance advantage to having multiple partitions?
1255 2011-02-05 13:21:43 <Diablo-D3> genjix: ... no?
1256 2011-02-05 13:21:51 <slush> genjix: for mining?
1257 2011-02-05 13:21:56 <genjix> no, in general
1258 2011-02-05 13:22:01 <Diablo-D3> genjix: no
1259 2011-02-05 13:22:07 <genjix> im getting pissed at running out of / space
1260 2011-02-05 13:22:09 <genjix> thanks Diablo-D3
1261 2011-02-05 13:22:23 <Diablo-D3> / running out of space? BUY A BIGGER DRIVE
1262 2011-02-05 13:22:32 <genjix> my drive is big enough
1263 2011-02-05 13:22:53 <genjix> but i gave / 10 GB (ubuntu forums, #ubuntu and ubuntu help pages said that's enough space)
1264 2011-02-05 13:23:10 <genjix> now 1 year down the line and i've reached 10 G
1265 2011-02-05 13:23:15 <Diablo-D3> ubuntu is retarded
1266 2011-02-05 13:23:19 <Diablo-D3> also, try apt-get clean
1267 2011-02-05 13:23:28 <genjix> i did
1268 2011-02-05 13:23:36 <Diablo-D3> and you cleaned out /tmp?
1269 2011-02-05 13:23:43 <Diablo-D3> (ie rebooted lately)
1270 2011-02-05 13:23:45 <genjix> anyway it's about time i did a reinstall
1271 2011-02-05 13:23:48 <Diablo-D3> but yeah
1272 2011-02-05 13:23:52 <Diablo-D3> I dont fucking use multiple partitions
1273 2011-02-05 13:23:53 <genjix> yeah, it cleans on reboot
1274 2011-02-05 13:23:55 <Diablo-D3> its stupid
1275 2011-02-05 13:24:02 <genjix> i agree
1276 2011-02-05 13:24:02 <Diablo-D3> I have "two" partitions
1277 2011-02-05 13:24:09 <Diablo-D3> / which is a 2 drive raid 0
1278 2011-02-05 13:24:10 <genjix> we have backup systems now
1279 2011-02-05 13:24:14 <genjix> and swap?
1280 2011-02-05 13:24:16 <Diablo-D3> /infinity which is a 2.1TB raid 5.
1281 2011-02-05 13:24:23 <cosurgi> slush: ok, it's clear now and makes sense.
1282 2011-02-05 13:24:34 <Diablo-D3> / is 200 gigs, and has /home on it
1283 2011-02-05 13:24:35 <genjix> nice :)
1284 2011-02-05 13:25:00 <Diablo-D3> if I could boot raid 5, I wouldnt have that raid 1.
1285 2011-02-05 13:25:14 <Diablo-D3> but grub is retarded
1286 2011-02-05 13:25:21 <genjix> why the ubuntu page then recommends 10 partitions for /var /home /boot /usr / .etc is beyond me
1287 2011-02-05 13:25:31 <Diablo-D3> because its ancient recommendations
1288 2011-02-05 13:25:35 <Diablo-D3> I mean REALLY old
1289 2011-02-05 13:25:37 <genjix> especially if there's no performance advantage
1290 2011-02-05 13:25:49 <Diablo-D3> and it didnt make sense 20 years ago either.
1291 2011-02-05 13:25:54 <genjix> if my system breaks then i'll just boot a livecd, back it up and reinstall
1292 2011-02-05 13:26:02 hundfred has joined
1293 2011-02-05 13:26:11 <genjix> not going to boot into a limited system to patch it up...
1294 2011-02-05 13:26:14 <Diablo-D3> I have never split up /, and I never will
1295 2011-02-05 13:26:24 <genjix> sound advice.
1296 2011-02-05 13:26:30 <Diablo-D3> I mean, fuck, I remember when we had debian boot FLOPPIES
1297 2011-02-05 13:26:35 <Diablo-D3> I fixed my shit like a man
1298 2011-02-05 13:26:36 <genjix> thanks dude
1299 2011-02-05 13:27:23 <Diablo-D3> [2/5/11 8:18:26 AM] Block 9 found on ATI RV770 (#1)
1300 2011-02-05 13:27:23 <Diablo-D3> [2/5/11 8:18:26 AM] Block 10 found on ATI RV770 (#1)
1301 2011-02-05 13:27:32 <Diablo-D3> multiple buckets == best idea ever
1302 2011-02-05 13:27:41 <luke-jr> what ever happened to marioxcc?
1303 2011-02-05 13:28:05 <Diablo-D3> also, I fucking hate hg
1304 2011-02-05 13:28:16 <genjix> most of my stuff is on the net too (documentaries from bittorrent, code in github, writings on wiki) or just junk files. not too bothered if i loose my home
1305 2011-02-05 13:28:26 <Diablo-D3> why the fuck cant I tell it to sort commits by date of commit not by date of merge
1306 2011-02-05 13:28:43 <Diablo-D3> feb 2011, july 2010, feb 2011 HOW IS THIS USEFUL
1307 2011-02-05 13:29:02 <genjix> how does hg differ to git?
1308 2011-02-05 13:29:03 <Diablo-D3> genjix: well, if I lose my /home, people die
1309 2011-02-05 13:29:10 <genjix> :D
1310 2011-02-05 13:29:12 <Diablo-D3> this is also why I have a 2.1TB backup drive.
1311 2011-02-05 13:29:20 <luke-jr> Diablo-D3: everything except git sorts by date of merge, which is really what most people want
1312 2011-02-05 13:29:37 <genjix> i like what git does
1313 2011-02-05 13:29:40 <Diablo-D3> luke-jr: except I want to know whats happened recently, not what happened 4309853095 months ago
1314 2011-02-05 13:29:49 <joe_1> haha
1315 2011-02-05 13:30:00 <luke-jr> if the merge happened recently, that's what happened
1316 2011-02-05 13:30:14 <cosurgi> Diablo-D3: well I had to use my debian boot floppy last week :P
1317 2011-02-05 13:30:14 <Diablo-D3> yeah except I dont fucking care about firefox politics
1318 2011-02-05 13:30:26 <Diablo-D3> cosurgi: I dont even have a floppy drive anymore
1319 2011-02-05 13:30:33 <luke-jr> â¦
1320 2011-02-05 13:30:36 <Diablo-D3> I didnt have room in my case, and I dont think my mobo even has a plug for it
1321 2011-02-05 13:30:38 <luke-jr> who said anything about firefox?
1322 2011-02-05 13:30:39 <cosurgi> I had to connect a floppy drive first, but what the hell, it worked. Was faster than fidning some working CD drive
1323 2011-02-05 13:30:41 <Diablo-D3> luke-jr: hg.
1324 2011-02-05 13:30:52 <Diablo-D3> luke-jr: the only project anyone gives a fuck about that uses hg is firefox
1325 2011-02-05 13:30:58 <luke-jr> screw hg
1326 2011-02-05 13:31:10 <luke-jr> Subversion, Bazaar, etc all sort by merge time too
1327 2011-02-05 13:31:17 <cosurgi> it was lying upside down on PSU, when connected it.
1328 2011-02-05 13:31:56 <Diablo-D3> now lets see if fucking firefox has fixed the fucking gcc bug, fuck
1329 2011-02-05 13:32:07 <joe_1> fuck hg
1330 2011-02-05 13:32:52 <prax> thx joe just trying to understand
1331 2011-02-05 13:33:10 <genjix> anyone know how to save git config --global settings for backup?
1332 2011-02-05 13:33:11 <prax> chrome needs multi row tabs
1333 2011-02-05 13:33:12 <luke-jr> you must love hg a lot if you want babies with it
1334 2011-02-05 13:33:17 <prax> why the hell do they not have this yet
1335 2011-02-05 13:34:04 <genjix> ok found it
1336 2011-02-05 13:34:11 <genjix> try this in your ~/.gitconfig
1337 2011-02-05 13:34:13 <genjix> [alias] lol = log --pretty=oneline --abbrev-commit --graph --decorate
1338 2011-02-05 13:34:26 <genjix> then type git lol
1339 2011-02-05 13:34:42 <genjix> (random tip)
1340 2011-02-05 13:35:13 <Diablo-D3> heh
1341 2011-02-05 13:36:45 <genjix> Diablo-D3: wait, why don't you have swap-space?
1342 2011-02-05 13:36:54 <genjix> your memory too large?
1343 2011-02-05 13:36:57 <Diablo-D3> I do
1344 2011-02-05 13:37:02 <Diablo-D3> but thats not a real partition
1345 2011-02-05 13:37:08 <Diablo-D3> 16GB on raid1
1346 2011-02-05 13:37:17 <Diablo-D3> on top of my 8GB of memory
1347 2011-02-05 13:37:56 <genjix> ok
1348 2011-02-05 13:38:53 <genjix> so I will do : 220 GB / ext4 and 2 GB swap
1349 2011-02-05 13:39:51 <Diablo-D3> HOLY FUCKING SHIT
1350 2011-02-05 13:40:05 <genjix> thanks for your help
1351 2011-02-05 13:40:10 <Diablo-D3> FUCKING MOZILLA FIXED A FUCKING BUILD BUG THATS BEEN THERE OVER A YEAR
1352 2011-02-05 13:40:10 <genjix> what
1353 2011-02-05 13:40:15 <Diablo-D3> IT ONLY TOOK THEM
1354 2011-02-05 13:40:16 <genjix> :p
1355 2011-02-05 13:40:17 <Diablo-D3> OVER A YEAR
1356 2011-02-05 13:40:37 <Diablo-D3> genjix: btw, your drive is that small?
1357 2011-02-05 13:40:43 <genjix> laptop
1358 2011-02-05 13:40:50 <genjix> google "firefox use webkit"
1359 2011-02-05 13:40:59 <genjix> and you'll find out why firefox doesn't use webkit:
1360 2011-02-05 13:41:15 <genjix> "we're already using gecko and firefox is so big that we cannot change"
1361 2011-02-05 13:41:23 <Diablo-D3> heh, I have 200GB in my powerbook
1362 2011-02-05 13:41:26 <Diablo-D3> genjix: erm
1363 2011-02-05 13:41:27 <Diablo-D3> you do realize
1364 2011-02-05 13:41:28 <Diablo-D3> that
1365 2011-02-05 13:41:32 <joe_1> but isn't gecko better than webkit?
1366 2011-02-05 13:41:37 <Diablo-D3> firefox _uses_ the gecko platform, right?
1367 2011-02-05 13:41:42 <Diablo-D3> as in, it was written "in" gecko
1368 2011-02-05 13:41:47 <genjix> no, webkit passes the acid test better
1369 2011-02-05 13:41:54 <genjix> more compliant with standard
1370 2011-02-05 13:41:56 <Diablo-D3> firefox passes the newest acid test
1371 2011-02-05 13:42:34 <genjix> webkit is used by a ton of browsers including safari and konqueror
1372 2011-02-05 13:42:43 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1373 2011-02-05 13:42:57 <luke-jr> joe_1: Gecko sucks
1374 2011-02-05 13:43:07 <joe_1> what does chrome use
1375 2011-02-05 13:43:11 <luke-jr> WebKit
1376 2011-02-05 13:43:11 <Diablo-D3> gecko isnt nearly as bad as people think it is
1377 2011-02-05 13:43:22 <luke-jr> genjix: no, Konqueror uses KHTML
1378 2011-02-05 13:43:23 <Diablo-D3> and webkit suffers from being apple garbage
1379 2011-02-05 13:43:28 <genjix> WebKit is a really easy to use api
1380 2011-02-05 13:43:29 <Diablo-D3> luke-jr: actually
1381 2011-02-05 13:43:32 <Diablo-D3> they're moving it to webkit
1382 2011-02-05 13:43:35 <luke-jr> Diablo-D3: Gecko isn't even CSS 2 compliant
1383 2011-02-05 13:43:35 <joe_1> yes i dont like webkit because it's apple
1384 2011-02-05 13:43:40 <luke-jr> Diablo-D3: prove it.
1385 2011-02-05 13:43:50 <genjix> luke-jr: ok but konqueror is deprecated. the new konqueror konq (or something) uses webkit
1386 2011-02-05 13:43:56 <Diablo-D3> luke-jr: erm, even slashdot covered it
1387 2011-02-05 13:43:57 <luke-jr> genjix: prove it.
1388 2011-02-05 13:44:03 <genjix> rekonq
1389 2011-02-05 13:44:08 <luke-jr> Diablo-D3: slashdot covers lots of n00b rumours
1390 2011-02-05 13:44:09 <genjix> http://rekonq.sourceforge.net/
1391 2011-02-05 13:44:16 <genjix> this is default in all new KDE installs
1392 2011-02-05 13:44:20 <luke-jr> genjix: prove rekonq replaces konqeurorr
1393 2011-02-05 13:44:22 <luke-jr> no
1394 2011-02-05 13:44:23 <luke-jr> it's 3rd partyh
1395 2011-02-05 13:44:40 <genjix> kubuntu ships it instead of konqueror
1396 2011-02-05 13:44:50 <luke-jr> Canonical are idiots
1397 2011-02-05 13:44:52 <luke-jr> not KDE
1398 2011-02-05 13:45:33 molecular has joined
1399 2011-02-05 13:45:33 <genjix> why are they idiots?
1400 2011-02-05 13:45:41 <luke-jr> genjix: because they can't do anything much right
1401 2011-02-05 13:45:42 <genjix> rekonq is a clearly superior browser to konqueror
1402 2011-02-05 13:45:47 <luke-jr> genjix: not clearly.
1403 2011-02-05 13:45:52 <Diablo-D3> I think we're missing an important point here
1404 2011-02-05 13:45:55 <Diablo-D3> KDE is for fags.
1405 2011-02-05 13:45:58 <Diablo-D3> So why are we discussing this?
1406 2011-02-05 13:46:08 <luke-jr> Diablo-D3: you can say that only when there is a DE superior to KDE
1407 2011-02-05 13:47:22 davout has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1408 2011-02-05 13:47:32 <genjix> i think it's preference. i have 2 sisters- one prefers gnome, the other KDE
1409 2011-02-05 13:47:44 <Diablo-D3> gnome sucks just as bad
1410 2011-02-05 13:47:51 <Diablo-D3> real men use xfce
1411 2011-02-05 13:47:59 <genjix> im using awesome :)
1412 2011-02-05 13:48:04 <luke-jr> XFCE is GNOME
1413 2011-02-05 13:48:04 <genjix> beat that :~
1414 2011-02-05 13:48:23 <genjix> and ubuntu is making it's own new desktop environment now
1415 2011-02-05 13:48:48 <genjix> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unity_(desktop_environment)
1416 2011-02-05 13:48:56 <genjix> waiting to see where they go with this.
1417 2011-02-05 13:49:22 <Diablo-D3> lol do people actually think xfce is gnome?
1418 2011-02-05 13:49:24 <Diablo-D3> lolololol
1419 2011-02-05 13:49:32 davout has joined
1420 2011-02-05 13:50:36 <genjix> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAVN9isBBok&feature=player_embedded
1421 2011-02-05 13:52:19 <luke-jr> Diablo-D3: I consider GTK identical to GNOME
1422 2011-02-05 13:53:17 <luke-jr> or perhaps vice-versa: my main objection to GNOME is that it is GTK-based
1423 2011-02-05 13:55:27 <genjix> qt is a better lib :)
1424 2011-02-05 13:59:36 <slush> ;;bc,estimate
1425 2011-02-05 13:59:37 <gribble> 25143.73388598
1426 2011-02-05 14:00:16 <jrabbit> gribble: QT is awesome it can even render GTK.
1427 2011-02-05 14:00:37 <jrabbit> I think QT can act as a gtk engine AND output to gtk
1428 2011-02-05 14:15:10 davout has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1429 2011-02-05 14:16:38 <da2ce7> ;;bc,calc 500000
1430 2011-02-05 14:16:40 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 500000 Khps, given current difficulty of 22012.4941572 , is 2 days, 4 hours, 31 minutes, and 25 seconds
1431 2011-02-05 14:17:30 <genjix> yep
1432 2011-02-05 14:25:15 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1433 2011-02-05 14:25:32 gejohn has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1434 2011-02-05 14:26:31 <luke-jr> I'm not sure both at the same time makes sense
1435 2011-02-05 14:28:10 Cusipzzz has joined
1436 2011-02-05 14:31:02 noagendamarket has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1437 2011-02-05 14:32:04 <luke-jr> looks like PS2 emulation requires I drop to 90 MH/s XD
1438 2011-02-05 14:34:27 gejohn has joined
1439 2011-02-05 14:35:22 da2ce7 has joined
1440 2011-02-05 14:44:11 <Diablo-D3> luke-jr: so you consider something that has nothing to do with gnome and predates gnome identical to gnome?
1441 2011-02-05 14:44:14 <Diablo-D3> how does that work?
1442 2011-02-05 14:44:24 <luke-jr> :p
1443 2011-02-05 14:44:31 <luke-jr> part of the GNOME family
1444 2011-02-05 14:44:35 <Diablo-D3> nope, it isnt.
1445 2011-02-05 14:44:47 <Diablo-D3> but thanks for playing
1446 2011-02-05 14:45:49 Cusipzzz has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1447 2011-02-05 14:46:08 Cusipzzz has joined
1448 2011-02-05 14:49:01 Cusipzzz has quit (Changing host)
1449 2011-02-05 14:49:01 Cusipzzz has joined
1450 2011-02-05 14:58:02 mtgox has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1451 2011-02-05 15:02:52 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
1452 2011-02-05 15:07:03 puddinpop has joined
1453 2011-02-05 15:18:29 altamic has joined
1454 2011-02-05 15:24:14 davex__ has joined
1455 2011-02-05 15:25:07 blablaa has joined
1456 2011-02-05 15:25:10 luke-jr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1457 2011-02-05 15:26:56 Jivin has joined
1458 2011-02-05 15:27:08 Daviey has quit (Excess Flood)
1459 2011-02-05 15:34:07 hundfred has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1460 2011-02-05 15:37:31 luke-jr has joined
1461 2011-02-05 15:37:57 Daviey has joined
1462 2011-02-05 15:38:31 blablaa has quit ()
1463 2011-02-05 15:38:52 davout has joined
1464 2011-02-05 15:40:17 redMBA has joined
1465 2011-02-05 15:41:25 <luke-jr> any simple way to specify GPU by name?
1466 2011-02-05 15:41:42 <luke-jr> every time I accidentally mine on my Intel GPU, my system inevitably hangs
1467 2011-02-05 15:42:18 x6763 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1468 2011-02-05 15:42:59 <luke-jr> ]later tell m0m* any simple way to specify GPU by name? every time I accidentally mine on my Intel GPU, my system inevitably hangs
1469 2011-02-05 15:43:07 <luke-jr> ;;later tell m0m* any simple way to specify GPU by name? every time I accidentally mine on my Intel GPU, my system inevitably hangs
1470 2011-02-05 15:43:07 <gribble> The operation succeeded.
1471 2011-02-05 15:56:51 luke-jr has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1472 2011-02-05 15:57:30 <davex__> ;;estimate
1473 2011-02-05 15:57:32 <gribble> Error: "estimate" is not a valid command.
1474 2011-02-05 15:57:46 <davex__> ;;bc,estimate
1475 2011-02-05 15:57:47 <gribble> 25211.03652308
1476 2011-02-05 15:57:58 <davex__> ;;bc,stats
1477 2011-02-05 15:58:00 <gribble> Current Blocks: 106367 | Current Difficulty: 22012.4941572 | Next Difficulty At Block: 106847 | Next Difficulty In: 480 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 2 days, 20 hours, 8 minutes, and 0 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 25211.03652308
1478 2011-02-05 15:59:01 <EvanR> mmmmm 2 days
1479 2011-02-05 15:59:14 <EvanR> 3 days
1480 2011-02-05 16:01:48 <EvanR> has anyone used mybitcoin api ? is it good, reliable?
1481 2011-02-05 16:06:11 luke-jr has joined
1482 2011-02-05 16:08:22 <luke-jr> x.x
1483 2011-02-05 16:12:32 x6763 has joined
1484 2011-02-05 16:14:36 <rlifchitz> Diablo-D3: any idea why i have poor performance with diablominer on a hd5970?
1485 2011-02-05 16:14:53 <rlifchitz> 27819/28040 khash/sec
1486 2011-02-05 16:16:38 <davex__> rlifchitz, i have the same prob.
1487 2011-02-05 16:17:09 <davex__> havent figured it out yet
1488 2011-02-05 16:17:26 <rlifchitz> :(
1489 2011-02-05 16:18:10 <davex__> art / diab suggested running stream sdk 2.1
1490 2011-02-05 16:18:22 <rlifchitz> i use 2.1
1491 2011-02-05 16:18:29 <davex__> but didn't seem to fix it for me anyway
1492 2011-02-05 16:18:44 <rlifchitz> ok thx
1493 2011-02-05 16:18:45 <davex__> what driver version?
1494 2011-02-05 16:18:56 <rlifchitz> 10-10
1495 2011-02-05 16:19:01 <davex__> same
1496 2011-02-05 16:19:21 <davex__> does the java process peg out cpu usage?
1497 2011-02-05 16:19:41 <hacim> slush: any chance the daily reward graphs will get updated more frequently? they seem to be 3 days old
1498 2011-02-05 16:20:16 <davex__> and you are running linux, right?
1499 2011-02-05 16:20:24 <rlifchitz> davex__: 3-4%
1500 2011-02-05 16:20:32 <rlifchitz> yes, debian 64bits
1501 2011-02-05 16:20:53 <davex__> i'm also on 64bit ubuntu
1502 2011-02-05 16:22:05 <molecular> hacim: the graphs don't seem to be old here, newest entry is Feb 24th.
1503 2011-02-05 16:22:53 <EvanR> molecular: can we use that graph on mtgox?
1504 2011-02-05 16:23:00 <EvanR> id like to see the price on feb 24th
1505 2011-02-05 16:23:29 <molecular> EvanR, you can't really see a price average for 1 day on mtgox
1506 2011-02-05 16:25:28 <molecular> EvanR, hacim was talking about the statistics on mining.bitcoin.cz
1507 2011-02-05 16:26:01 <EvanR> i know
1508 2011-02-05 16:26:17 <EvanR> it was a joke
1509 2011-02-05 16:26:23 <EvanR> feb 24 is several weeks from now
1510 2011-02-05 16:26:47 <davex__> good one
1511 2011-02-05 16:26:50 <molecular> EvanR, ah, try the "oracle of delphi" or something
1512 2011-02-05 16:26:58 <Diablo-D3> rlifchitz: hey
1513 2011-02-05 16:27:06 <hacim> molecular: feb. 24th?!
1514 2011-02-05 16:27:07 <Diablo-D3> you shouldnt have problems
1515 2011-02-05 16:27:10 <Diablo-D3> try running with -w 64
1516 2011-02-05 16:27:16 <molecular> EvanR, sorry, meant feb 4th
1517 2011-02-05 16:27:23 <molecular> hacim, ^
1518 2011-02-05 16:27:24 <hacim> molecular: you mean hacim
1519 2011-02-05 16:27:25 <hacim> heh
1520 2011-02-05 16:27:27 <molecular> yes
1521 2011-02-05 16:27:28 <molecular> heh
1522 2011-02-05 16:27:33 <EvanR> confusion??!
1523 2011-02-05 16:27:45 <molecular> I'm a little ill, that explains my confusion
1524 2011-02-05 16:27:45 <hacim> ah you are right. i was looking at the x axis
1525 2011-02-05 16:28:00 <rlifchitz> Diablo-D3: already tested, not working either unfortunately
1526 2011-02-05 16:28:05 <hacim> i wonder at what time those are based off of
1527 2011-02-05 16:28:22 <Diablo-D3> rlifchitz: okay so
1528 2011-02-05 16:28:25 <Diablo-D3> just to make sure
1529 2011-02-05 16:28:34 <rlifchitz> Diablo-D3: tested with 64,128,256
1530 2011-02-05 16:28:38 <rlifchitz> same problem
1531 2011-02-05 16:28:41 <Diablo-D3> sdk 2.1, not 11.1, not 10.12
1532 2011-02-05 16:28:53 <molecular> Diablo-D3, people reported problem with DiabloMiner last night... do you want me to test or you have enough info?
1533 2011-02-05 16:28:53 <Diablo-D3> and you have crossfire off correctly
1534 2011-02-05 16:28:58 <rlifchitz> yes, sdk 2.1, driver 10-10
1535 2011-02-05 16:29:06 <rlifchitz> crossfire disabled
1536 2011-02-05 16:29:13 <Diablo-D3> molecular: if its the "no shares ever generated" bug, I fixed that
1537 2011-02-05 16:29:18 <Diablo-D3> rlifchitz: how did you disable it?
1538 2011-02-05 16:29:20 <molecular> allright
1539 2011-02-05 16:29:42 <rlifchitz> Diablo-D3: with aticonfig, before starting xorg
1540 2011-02-05 16:29:49 <slush> hacim: ?
1541 2011-02-05 16:29:54 <slush> hacim: It's generated online
1542 2011-02-05 16:29:58 <Diablo-D3> rlifchitz: aticonfig --initial --adapters=all?
1543 2011-02-05 16:30:02 <rlifchitz> m0mchil's implementation works well with full performance
1544 2011-02-05 16:30:03 * molecular is testing newest DiabloMiner
1545 2011-02-05 16:30:19 <slush> hacim: so after 0:00 UTC you see reward from previous day
1546 2011-02-05 16:30:29 <hacim> slush: ah ok, that was what I was wondering
1547 2011-02-05 16:30:50 <EvanR> slush: i like the 'duration so far of current block' :(
1548 2011-02-05 16:30:54 <EvanR> liked*
1549 2011-02-05 16:30:58 <rlifchitz> Diablo-D3: aticonfig --initial --adapter=all -f
1550 2011-02-05 16:31:08 <Diablo-D3> rlifchitz: and your xorg.conf contains multiple devices?
1551 2011-02-05 16:31:20 <rlifchitz> Diablo-D3: of course
1552 2011-02-05 16:31:21 <molecular> EvanR, slush deliberately removed that, so people cannot do "pool switching"
1553 2011-02-05 16:31:27 <EvanR> eh?
1554 2011-02-05 16:31:28 <rlifchitz> diablominer sees the 2 GPUs
1555 2011-02-05 16:31:28 <Diablo-D3> rlifchitz: hmmmm.
1556 2011-02-05 16:31:35 <hacim> EvanR: he is working on some replacement stats
1557 2011-02-05 16:31:35 <Diablo-D3> Thats very odd.
1558 2011-02-05 16:31:37 <Diablo-D3> Whats the cpu?
1559 2011-02-05 16:31:39 <rlifchitz> and m0mchil manages to reach 550Mh/s
1560 2011-02-05 16:31:41 <EvanR> and how does share count lead to cheating
1561 2011-02-05 16:32:05 <molecular> EvanR, people can switch to another pool when sharecount > some value
1562 2011-02-05 16:32:12 <Diablo-D3> rlifchitz: because the only thing I can think of is export DISPLAY=:0 and then run my miner
1563 2011-02-05 16:32:14 <molecular> EvanR, I'm not even convinced it works
1564 2011-02-05 16:32:14 <rlifchitz> Diablo-D3: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Extreme CPU X9650 @ 3.00GHz (* 2)
1565 2011-02-05 16:32:19 <slush> EvanR: read the forum
1566 2011-02-05 16:32:23 <rlifchitz> Diablo-D3: done too
1567 2011-02-05 16:32:26 <Diablo-D3> huh.
1568 2011-02-05 16:32:32 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: you around?
1569 2011-02-05 16:32:40 <hacim> EvanR: http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=3165.0
1570 2011-02-05 16:32:43 <molecular> slush, which forum topic?
1571 2011-02-05 16:32:43 <EvanR> molecular: well you can still count your own shares
1572 2011-02-05 16:33:00 altamic has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1573 2011-02-05 16:33:03 <molecular> EvanR, but I dont know when a new round starts
1574 2011-02-05 16:33:31 <slush> molecular: pool thread and http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=3165.0
1575 2011-02-05 16:33:41 strattog has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1576 2011-02-05 16:33:43 <slush> molecular: that's the point
1577 2011-02-05 16:34:11 <luke-jr> I need a node
1578 2011-02-05 16:34:15 <molecular> slush, thx. and I got the point, trying to explain it to EvanR
1579 2011-02-05 16:34:15 <luke-jr> my bitcoind isn't connecting
1580 2011-02-05 16:34:32 <slush> molecular: oh i see :)
1581 2011-02-05 16:34:48 <luke-jr> nvm, i got it
1582 2011-02-05 16:35:07 <Diablo-D3> rlifchitz: I cant think of any reason why that'd do that.
1583 2011-02-05 16:35:13 <Diablo-D3> rlifchitz: how much cpu is the miner using/
1584 2011-02-05 16:35:21 <rlifchitz> 3-4%
1585 2011-02-05 16:35:28 <Diablo-D3> Hmmmmmmmm.
1586 2011-02-05 16:35:33 <rlifchitz> yes that's strange
1587 2011-02-05 16:37:33 jmafcd has joined
1588 2011-02-05 16:37:50 <EvanR> technically you do know right now
1589 2011-02-05 16:37:54 <EvanR> slush provides that
1590 2011-02-05 16:38:28 <rlifchitz> Diablo-D3: i'm running Debian
1591 2011-02-05 16:38:33 <slush> EvanR how?
1592 2011-02-05 16:39:04 <slush> EvanR maybe there is still some leak of info, but I don't know it yet
1593 2011-02-05 16:39:19 jmafcd has left ()
1594 2011-02-05 16:39:33 <EvanR> poll the stats page
1595 2011-02-05 16:39:41 <slush> EvanR really?
1596 2011-02-05 16:39:45 <EvanR> the table shows blocks
1597 2011-02-05 16:39:52 <EvanR> it updates, did you delay that
1598 2011-02-05 16:39:55 <EvanR> or*
1599 2011-02-05 16:40:14 <slush> not to hard to check it youself
1600 2011-02-05 16:40:21 <slush> *yourself
1601 2011-02-05 16:40:25 strattog has joined
1602 2011-02-05 16:40:57 <slush> *too :)
1603 2011-02-05 16:40:59 <EvanR> eh? if the table updates when a block is found
1604 2011-02-05 16:41:04 <slush> "if"
1605 2011-02-05 16:41:09 <EvanR> it doesnt, ok
1606 2011-02-05 16:41:15 <EvanR> random delay i guess
1607 2011-02-05 16:41:35 <slush> EvanR hey, why did you ask and not visit the page first?
1608 2011-02-05 16:41:42 <EvanR> i did
1609 2011-02-05 16:41:48 <Diablo-D3> rlifchitz: half the people in here are on debian, and so am I
1610 2011-02-05 16:41:52 <EvanR> i cant read your time column
1611 2011-02-05 16:42:02 <slush> ?
1612 2011-02-05 16:42:08 <EvanR> i dont know the time zone
1613 2011-02-05 16:42:18 <slush> well, firstly, it does not matter
1614 2011-02-05 16:42:19 <Diablo-D3> rlifchitz: do you see high cpu usage on event/0 through 4?
1615 2011-02-05 16:42:23 <EvanR> ?
1616 2011-02-05 16:42:35 <slush> EvanR because this text: "List of found blocks is delayed for two hours." is still here
1617 2011-02-05 16:42:38 <rlifchitz> Diablo-D3: not at all
1618 2011-02-05 16:42:42 <EvanR> oh well
1619 2011-02-05 16:42:57 <EvanR> it doesnt jump out of newly altered texet
1620 2011-02-05 16:43:07 <Diablo-D3> I cant figure it out
1621 2011-02-05 16:43:13 <Diablo-D3> rlifchitz: you're using the absolute newest version of my miner?
1622 2011-02-05 16:43:14 <slush> and yes, I should write here all times are UTC
1623 2011-02-05 16:43:14 <EvanR> i dont see 99% of things on the computer, i saw them so many timtes
1624 2011-02-05 16:43:27 <slush> it was here, but it is hidden because of stats reducing
1625 2011-02-05 16:43:45 <rlifchitz> Diablo-D3: http://adterrasperaspera.com/images/DiabloMiner.zip this one I re-downloaded an hour ago
1626 2011-02-05 16:44:02 <molecular> does anyone know how big the bitcoin network currently is? is there a way to tell?
1627 2011-02-05 16:44:10 <Diablo-D3> I cant figure it out.
1628 2011-02-05 16:44:13 <Diablo-D3> Anyone else have any ideas?
1629 2011-02-05 16:44:36 <rlifchitz> molecular: http://bitcoinwatch.com/
1630 2011-02-05 16:46:03 <molecular> rlifchitz, does it tell you the network size? I don't see that
1631 2011-02-05 16:46:28 <rlifchitz> what do you call size?
1632 2011-02-05 16:46:32 <rlifchitz> number of nodes?
1633 2011-02-05 16:46:33 <slush> molecular: well, depends on what you mean by 'size'. hash power, merchants, bitcoin clients?
1634 2011-02-05 16:46:35 <rlifchitz> hashing power?
1635 2011-02-05 16:46:37 <molecular> how many nodes in the network
1636 2011-02-05 16:47:22 <slush> molecular: nobody knows. MT`AwAy did some stats of listening nodes
1637 2011-02-05 16:47:26 <satamusic> what happens if i'm generating, cpu or gpu, and i turn off generation, then turn it on again a while later, do i lose all previous work (and chances to get a block)?
1638 2011-02-05 16:47:28 <EvanR> bitcoinwatch dont have bitcoincentral
1639 2011-02-05 16:47:32 <slush> molecular: which may or may not be similar to maximum nodes count
1640 2011-02-05 16:47:47 <EvanR> satamusic: no
1641 2011-02-05 16:47:54 <rlifchitz> molecular: up to 8k nodes
1642 2011-02-05 16:48:00 <rlifchitz> depends on the hour of the day
1643 2011-02-05 16:48:06 <EvanR> satamusic: it would be like taking a break from the slot machine
1644 2011-02-05 16:48:41 <sgornick> molecular: This is the chart I believe others are referring to.
1645 2011-02-05 16:48:42 <sgornick> http://stats.bitcoin.it/rrd/nodes_total-day.png
1646 2011-02-05 16:48:57 <EvanR> is a node a client? a computer? an ip address?
1647 2011-02-05 16:49:04 <EvanR> a gpu?
1648 2011-02-05 16:49:10 <EvanR> a core?
1649 2011-02-05 16:49:24 <rlifchitz> molecular: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Bitcoin_Map
1650 2011-02-05 16:49:43 <lfm> satamusic: while it is on you have a chance to find a block, when it is off you dont
1651 2011-02-05 16:50:01 <sgornick> EvanR. represent the total number of unique IPs seen within the last 3 hours on the network.
1652 2011-02-05 16:50:06 <satamusic> ah, thanks
1653 2011-02-05 16:50:11 <EvanR> ok
1654 2011-02-05 16:50:14 hundfred has joined
1655 2011-02-05 16:50:19 <molecular> rlifchitz, allrigh! thanks, that's cool
1656 2011-02-05 16:50:30 <rlifchitz> here is the full data: https://dump.bitcoin.it/misc/201102/
1657 2011-02-05 16:50:31 <rlifchitz> :)
1658 2011-02-05 16:51:14 <lfm> EvanR note that there are some "nodes" that you can never see on private nets and stuff. You only see one while there could be many
1659 2011-02-05 16:51:25 <EvanR> right
1660 2011-02-05 16:51:47 <EvanR> on bitcoinwatch, whats this total USD thing, btc times current mtgox price?
1661 2011-02-05 16:52:01 <molecular> but also, some nodes count multiple times when they switch dynamic ip address
1662 2011-02-05 16:56:55 <molecular> Diablo-D3, newest DiabloMiner runs fine here
1663 2011-02-05 17:01:16 <Diablo-D3> yeah I dont get it
1664 2011-02-05 17:01:32 Lachesis has joined
1665 2011-02-05 17:12:38 Lachesis has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1666 2011-02-05 17:14:45 <EvanR> runs fine here too
1667 2011-02-05 17:14:54 <EvanR> but not as fast as the python miner
1668 2011-02-05 17:16:48 <molecular> not quite, but detects all cypresses ;)
1669 2011-02-05 17:20:56 <genjix> EvanR: correct.
1670 2011-02-05 17:21:22 <EvanR> whres the gold price from
1671 2011-02-05 17:21:30 <EvanR> er amount of gold
1672 2011-02-05 17:22:17 noot has joined
1673 2011-02-05 17:34:21 noot has quit (Quit: leaving)
1674 2011-02-05 17:34:31 noot has joined
1675 2011-02-05 17:35:54 joe_1 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1676 2011-02-05 17:39:18 Vladimir has joined
1677 2011-02-05 17:42:47 mtgox has joined
1678 2011-02-05 17:44:46 citiz3n is now known as citiz2n
1679 2011-02-05 17:44:51 <cosurgi> Diablo-D3: nah, rox+sawfish ios the Best Combo Ever
1680 2011-02-05 17:45:12 <Diablo-D3> diaf.
1681 2011-02-05 17:45:51 citiz2n is now known as citiz3n
1682 2011-02-05 17:46:58 <cosurgi> xfce is for girls :p~
1683 2011-02-05 17:46:59 <cosurgi> ;)
1684 2011-02-05 17:47:27 <Diablo-D3> is that before or after I have hardcore lesbian sex as my desktop background?
1685 2011-02-05 17:47:53 <luke-jr> ;;getrating "your mom"
1686 2011-02-05 17:47:53 <gribble> User your mom was created on Sat Feb 5 09:40:37 2011, and has a cumulative rating of -1, from a total of 1 ratings. Of these, 0 are positive and 1 are negative. This user has also sent 0 positive ratings, and 0 negative ratings to others.
1687 2011-02-05 17:48:56 sabalaba has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
1688 2011-02-05 17:53:30 <cosurgi> ;-)
1689 2011-02-05 17:58:48 Syke has joined
1690 2011-02-05 18:00:21 Jivin2 has joined
1691 2011-02-05 18:01:13 <cosurgi> slush: would you add a 0.5% donation option?
1692 2011-02-05 18:01:27 <slush> no
1693 2011-02-05 18:01:31 <cosurgi> slush: I'm too greedy for 2%, sorry. But I would be fine with 0.5%
1694 2011-02-05 18:01:35 <cosurgi> why?
1695 2011-02-05 18:01:36 <luke-jr> lol
1696 2011-02-05 18:01:53 <slush> cosurgi: are you also greedy with 10% tips at restaurant? :)
1697 2011-02-05 18:02:10 <luke-jr> I don't tip at restaurant usually. :P
1698 2011-02-05 18:02:16 <cosurgi> yes. In fact I never go to restaurant, it's damn too expensive.
1699 2011-02-05 18:02:23 <luke-jr> lol
1700 2011-02-05 18:02:28 sabalaba has joined
1701 2011-02-05 18:02:29 Jivin has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1702 2011-02-05 18:02:36 <slush> then I understand your desire for 0.5% ;)
1703 2011-02-05 18:02:46 <cosurgi> I',m going to milk-bar, or whatever it's called, cheap home food at good price, mass made.
1704 2011-02-05 18:03:54 <cosurgi> in fact it's better food than at home, my wife hates making food.
1705 2011-02-05 18:04:38 <luke-jr> â¦
1706 2011-02-05 18:05:10 <slush> I spent hundreds of dollars in restaurants per month and usually >10% at tips :)
1707 2011-02-05 18:05:48 <cosurgi> well, so we're different :)
1708 2011-02-05 18:06:06 <slush> doesn't matter
1709 2011-02-05 18:06:17 <slush> my reason for minimal donation at 2% is pure psychological
1710 2011-02-05 18:06:57 <cosurgi> as you want. Possible that more people would donate if you had 0.5%, but also possible that in total you will get less.
1711 2011-02-05 18:07:23 <slush> yes, many people refuse to donate even if it will be 0.5%
1712 2011-02-05 18:07:55 <citiz3n> i would donate if you could do it at .1% slush
1713 2011-02-05 18:07:55 <luke-jr> I refuse to participate, since I only get 50% of what I should be mining :P
1714 2011-02-05 18:08:14 <cosurgi> heh...
1715 2011-02-05 18:08:19 <citiz3n> jk :D
1716 2011-02-05 18:08:50 <slush> luke-jr: but you still eat pool resources
1717 2011-02-05 18:08:59 <slush> luke-jr: so if you don't like service, disconnect from it :)
1718 2011-02-05 18:09:07 <luke-jr> slush: I did.
1719 2011-02-05 18:09:14 <slush> that's ok, of course
1720 2011-02-05 18:09:47 <luke-jr> actually, I think I still have a cpuminer somewhere on it
1721 2011-02-05 18:09:48 <citiz3n> i like the fact that the pool pays out constantly
1722 2011-02-05 18:10:03 <luke-jr> citiz3n: me too, but not at a 50% loss
1723 2011-02-05 18:10:15 <cosurgi> luke-jr: I didn't register any 50% loss.
1724 2011-02-05 18:10:31 <sgornick> citiz3n: http://krigman.casinocitytimes.com/articles/10510.html
1725 2011-02-05 18:11:23 <sgornick> amblers "are not dreaming about small, relatively frequent reinforcement. The lure is hitting the jackpot." But, once begun, interest is kept up by the variable interval reinforcement of the modest returns. "This 'schedule-induced behavior' is so potent," he adds, "it is often regarded as an addiction."
1726 2011-02-05 18:11:40 <citiz3n> yeah i read it
1727 2011-02-05 18:12:17 <sgornick> so hopefully slush is allocating some of those donations for additional treatment rehab facility.
1728 2011-02-05 18:12:35 <cosurgi> luke-jr: my average time for a block is 1s10h. I am getting right now about 31 BTC per day on average, while I "should" be receiving (50/34)*24=35 BTC per day. So I'm making 88%.
1729 2011-02-05 18:12:45 Lachesis has joined
1730 2011-02-05 18:13:03 <luke-jr> wtf is 1s?
1731 2011-02-05 18:13:08 <cosurgi> 1 day 10 hours, I mean.
1732 2011-02-05 18:13:09 <citiz3n> day
1733 2011-02-05 18:13:11 <citiz3n> typo
1734 2011-02-05 18:13:12 <luke-jr> o
1735 2011-02-05 18:13:19 redMBA has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1736 2011-02-05 18:13:55 <cosurgi> But I am particularly unlucky here, so I feel that I am benefitting from the pool. No blck for two weeks, imagine that.
1737 2011-02-05 18:14:01 redMBA has joined
1738 2011-02-05 18:14:22 <cosurgi> Then I joined the pool, and made two blocks the second day. and third. But it is still below the average.
1739 2011-02-05 18:16:40 <cosurgi> well, actually in two weeks of slolo mining I made 3 blocks, but it all happened on the first two days of those two weeks.
1740 2011-02-05 18:17:25 <EvanR> yeah im all for the pool now
1741 2011-02-05 18:17:35 <EvanR> as long as slush stays transparent
1742 2011-02-05 18:18:40 <luke-jr> stays?
1743 2011-02-05 18:18:44 <luke-jr> he never has been
1744 2011-02-05 18:18:50 <cosurgi> well, most transparent would be opensource, but we cannot have everything at once :) slush is the master here ;)
1745 2011-02-05 18:19:10 <luke-jr> no, open source is the FIRST step to transparency :p
1746 2011-02-05 18:19:15 <cosurgi> until some competition appears, and one of them will be opensource....
1747 2011-02-05 18:19:25 <luke-jr> jgarzik's pool is open source
1748 2011-02-05 18:19:48 <cosurgi> oh, I didn't know about another pool
1749 2011-02-05 18:19:59 <slush> many people ask if there is any overhead on the pool, because their rewards does not fit theoretical expectations. But I still don't have an evidence, that mining on the own bitcoin fit this theoretical expectation...
1750 2011-02-05 18:20:02 <luke-jr> he's closing it after it finds the next block
1751 2011-02-05 18:20:31 <cosurgi> oh, that one... which is closed for a month or so?
1752 2011-02-05 18:20:40 <slush> well, I still don't understand the hype behind opensourced pool. It's not about source, it is about operator
1753 2011-02-05 18:20:51 <luke-jr> slush: everything is about source
1754 2011-02-05 18:21:11 <luke-jr> if it isn't open source, I don't use it.
1755 2011-02-05 18:21:24 <cosurgi> yes, if I can verify the source, I can trust 100%, I only need to be sure that you are running the same source that you gave everyone to look at ;-)
1756 2011-02-05 18:21:25 <slush> luke-jr: so shut down your computer
1757 2011-02-05 18:21:32 <slush> because at 99% you are using proprietary bios
1758 2011-02-05 18:21:56 <cosurgi> heh, never had time to try linuxbios, but I subscribed to their mailing list!
1759 2011-02-05 18:22:06 <luke-jr> cosurgi: it's called coreboot now
1760 2011-02-05 18:22:21 <slush> ok, 5970 bios is also proprietary
1761 2011-02-05 18:22:26 <lfm> no need for tips if you dont use pool
1762 2011-02-05 18:22:26 <cosurgi> oh, right, rename few years ago :)
1763 2011-02-05 18:22:33 <cosurgi> *renamed
1764 2011-02-05 18:23:12 <slush> btw is here anybody with enough statistics with mining on own bitcoind, who can confirm that long-term stats are the same as theoretical distribution?
1765 2011-02-05 18:23:15 <cosurgi> the best would be a p2p pool. could be running in parallel to bitcoind
1766 2011-02-05 18:23:32 <cosurgi> that would be ArtForz
1767 2011-02-05 18:23:44 <slush> but he's not using standard stack, afaik
1768 2011-02-05 18:23:55 <slush> I mean bitcoind
1769 2011-02-05 18:24:22 <lfm> ;;bc,stats
1770 2011-02-05 18:24:25 <gribble> Current Blocks: 106382 | Current Difficulty: 22012.4941572 | Next Difficulty At Block: 106847 | Next Difficulty In: 465 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 2 days, 18 hours, 15 minutes, and 45 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 25187.38056979
1771 2011-02-05 18:24:25 <slush> the stack itself is pretty complicated to be sure there is no bug in whole process
1772 2011-02-05 18:24:41 <lfm> gribble down?
1773 2011-02-05 18:25:31 mtgox has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1774 2011-02-05 18:25:56 <slush> for example, last problem with skipped shares inside the same second. Such single think change stats for 3%. If you don't mine against the pool, you probably never have enough stats to find this
1775 2011-02-05 18:26:04 <slush> s/think/thing/
1776 2011-02-05 18:26:49 lfm has quit (Quit: brb)
1777 2011-02-05 18:29:13 <cosurgi> slush: did you change the frequency of paying out the rewards?
1778 2011-02-05 18:29:44 <slush> cosurgi: no
1779 2011-02-05 18:30:16 <cosurgi> perhaps your temporary lag added to statistics, changed the time when rewards get confirmed..
1780 2011-02-05 18:30:30 <cosurgi> I ask, becuase I have unusually high unconfirmed rewards
1781 2011-02-05 18:30:58 <slush> cosurgi: because you don't see the pool is quite lucky
1782 2011-02-05 18:31:27 <cosurgi> oh. fine.
1783 2011-02-05 18:32:08 <cosurgi> maybe that's my inability fo find blocks for two weeks is paying out, right now :)
1784 2011-02-05 18:33:28 <slush> cosurgi: but, you should see unconfirmed reward only from blocks which are already in block history
1785 2011-02-05 18:33:38 <slush> cosurgi: so please check, if it +- fits
1786 2011-02-05 18:34:01 <cosurgi> ok...
1787 2011-02-05 18:35:30 <cosurgi> I'm not seeing whole block history, I mean - the history is shorter than unconfirmed rewards
1788 2011-02-05 18:36:13 <cosurgi> I should have about 4 or 5 more unconfirmed blocks in the hidden history, and then it will fit.
1789 2011-02-05 18:36:34 <slush> oh, you find a hole ;)
1790 2011-02-05 18:36:41 <cosurgi> what hole?
1791 2011-02-05 18:36:53 <slush> I have typo in calculating unconfirmed rewards
1792 2011-02-05 18:37:03 <slush> which leads you also see rewards from fresh blocks
1793 2011-02-05 18:37:12 <cosurgi> omg, noooo. I will get a smaller reward? :)
1794 2011-02-05 18:37:16 <slush> no
1795 2011-02-05 18:37:20 <cosurgi> oh. ok.
1796 2011-02-05 18:37:28 <cosurgi> heheh.
1797 2011-02-05 18:37:28 <slush> but attacker now can see the new block was found ;)
1798 2011-02-05 18:37:35 <slush> so I'll fix it asap
1799 2011-02-05 18:38:16 <cosurgi> that attacker would need to be quite sophisticated. To script connecting/diconnecting to pool, based on html content of you website.
1800 2011-02-05 18:38:25 <slush> not so hard
1801 2011-02-05 18:38:31 <cosurgi> hmm... actually not that difficult.
1802 2011-02-05 18:38:42 <cosurgi> curl, awk would do that..
1803 2011-02-05 18:38:43 <slush> give me 10 minute and I'll write you script to finding this
1804 2011-02-05 18:39:06 <slush> (no, I'm not working on this. I'll fix this hole instead ;) )
1805 2011-02-05 18:39:13 <cosurgi> better :)
1806 2011-02-05 18:40:11 davout has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1807 2011-02-05 18:41:02 sabalaba has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1808 2011-02-05 18:43:52 <slush> cosurgi: fixed
1809 2011-02-05 18:44:08 <slush> you should see lower unconfirmed reward now
1810 2011-02-05 18:44:25 <cosurgi> umm, I don't
1811 2011-02-05 18:44:37 <cosurgi> or I didn't notice the difference.
1812 2011-02-05 18:44:55 <slush> how much is your unconfirmed reward now?
1813 2011-02-05 18:45:10 <cosurgi> 25.52918512
1814 2011-02-05 18:45:20 <cosurgi> before, I remember was around 25
1815 2011-02-05 18:46:03 <cosurgi> don't ask why my username is so stupid ;)
1816 2011-02-05 18:46:20 <slush> and now?
1817 2011-02-05 18:46:33 <cosurgi> now it's higher
1818 2011-02-05 18:46:35 <cosurgi> 28
1819 2011-02-05 18:46:48 <cosurgi> hmmm. if found three blocks when you started working on that..?
1820 2011-02-05 18:46:53 fredix has joined
1821 2011-02-05 18:46:55 <cosurgi> s/if/it/
1822 2011-02-05 18:46:57 <slush> so it works well
1823 2011-02-05 18:47:24 <midnightmagic_> slush: i'm pretty sure even a few hundred thousand samples isn't enough to show whether reality is equivalent to theory. i think it had to be proven from the other way around
1824 2011-02-05 18:47:28 <cosurgi> ok. so the pool found three blocks in last 10 minutes
1825 2011-02-05 18:47:31 <cosurgi> ?
1826 2011-02-05 18:47:43 <slush> no in 10 minutes
1827 2011-02-05 18:47:54 <slush> in two hours
1828 2011-02-05 18:47:55 <slush> which is delay
1829 2011-02-05 18:48:18 <slush> and I just switched on/off the delay filter on the unconfirmed reward
1830 2011-02-05 18:48:23 <slush> to check, if it works
1831 2011-02-05 18:48:52 <cosurgi> When I started complaining, there was 25. Still above average, that's why I asked in the first place.
1832 2011-02-05 18:49:25 <slush> cosurgi: those 25 now must fit to blocks in block history, which you see on page
1833 2011-02-05 18:49:37 <slush> oh, one possibility:
1834 2011-02-05 18:49:46 <slush> "confirmations" on the stats page are realtime
1835 2011-02-05 18:49:56 <slush> it's computed against current bitcoin block
1836 2011-02-05 18:50:16 <slush> but unconfirmed reward in profile is calculated from database and checked every hour
1837 2011-02-05 18:50:27 <slush> so the sum does not need to fit all the time
1838 2011-02-05 18:50:35 <slush> *those sums
1839 2011-02-05 18:50:41 <cosurgi> ok.
1840 2011-02-05 18:50:57 <cosurgi> the block history is too short for me, to verify that it equals the unconfirmed reward
1841 2011-02-05 18:52:13 <cosurgi> The last block in history is: 754, 2011-02-05 05:23:24, 1:52:43, 45882, 1.34475392, 106294, 28 confirmations left
1842 2011-02-05 18:52:35 <slush> midnightmagic_: that's the point. Pool has millions of diff1 shares, so it is enough to make some conclusion. But nobody know how are the real stats for mining locally, against bitcoind, full difficulty and long term
1843 2011-02-05 18:52:47 devrandom has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1844 2011-02-05 18:53:24 <slush> cosurgi: http://mining.bitcoin.cz/stats/?history=100
1845 2011-02-05 18:54:10 devrandom has joined
1846 2011-02-05 18:54:35 Syke has quit (afk!~Syke@c-67-188-195-154.hsd1.ca.comcast.net|Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1847 2011-02-05 18:54:54 <slush> well, I should increase default history size from 20 to something bigger. 20 was enough when pool was smaller
1848 2011-02-05 18:54:57 <midnightmagic_> i'm pretty sure a few million dataset isn't enough either..?
1849 2011-02-05 18:55:28 <cosurgi> thanks
1850 2011-02-05 18:56:46 <cosurgi> hmm... reward is still higher thank history would indicate
1851 2011-02-05 18:56:50 <cosurgi> *than
1852 2011-02-05 18:57:15 <cosurgi> 26 vs. 23
1853 2011-02-05 18:57:36 <cosurgi> ah, no.
1854 2011-02-05 18:57:52 <cosurgi> it's ok. Some perhaps was confirmed already but wasn;t paid out
1855 2011-02-05 18:58:28 <cosurgi> but confirmed reward is http://mining.bitcoin.cz/stats/?history=100
1856 2011-02-05 18:58:31 <cosurgi> oops
1857 2011-02-05 18:58:38 <cosurgi> 0.00244939
1858 2011-02-05 18:59:09 <slush> yes, that's the point. In history, you may see some blocks as "confirmed", but in profile they are still in unconfirmed
1859 2011-02-05 18:59:16 <slush> because it is calculated every hour
1860 2011-02-05 19:00:07 <cosurgi> ok
1861 2011-02-05 19:00:11 <cosurgi> no problem then
1862 2011-02-05 19:00:57 <cosurgi> why did you remove hall of fame?
1863 2011-02-05 19:05:59 <newsham> anyone planning a btc dollar parity party?
1864 2011-02-05 19:06:10 <newsham> looks like it might coincide with the superbowl ;-)
1865 2011-02-05 19:06:44 <slush> cosurgi: counts of found blocks were here
1866 2011-02-05 19:06:54 <slush> cosurgi: those most famous miners have >60% of the network
1867 2011-02-05 19:06:58 <slush> *pool
1868 2011-02-05 19:07:06 <slush> and no easy solution to delay those stats
1869 2011-02-05 19:08:39 <cosurgi> ok..
1870 2011-02-05 19:21:05 enky has joined
1871 2011-02-05 19:22:24 enky has quit (Client Quit)
1872 2011-02-05 19:24:49 <newsham> http://www.thenewsh.com/~newsham/x/mtgox/depth.txt
1873 2011-02-05 19:25:32 sabalaba has joined
1874 2011-02-05 19:26:33 TheAncientGoat has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1875 2011-02-05 19:27:27 <newsham> you can buy the whole mtgox book for about $30k at about parity
1876 2011-02-05 19:30:57 <slush> newsham: not necessary true. I know about many people which are ready to sell at >1 USD
1877 2011-02-05 19:31:05 <slush> newsham: but they didn't put orders yet
1878 2011-02-05 19:31:40 <newsham> slush: right, its not in the book
1879 2011-02-05 19:31:54 <newsham> als there are many orders >1USD, but the avg for the whole buy book is $1.04
1880 2011-02-05 19:32:06 <newsham> since many orders are also <$1
1881 2011-02-05 19:32:40 <ArtForz> ?
1882 2011-02-05 19:33:48 <ArtForz> that makes no sense
1883 2011-02-05 19:34:23 <newsham> if you bought all the orders in the mtgox ask queue, you would pay about $30k and your average price would be $1.04
1884 2011-02-05 19:34:32 <ArtForz> http://bitcoincharts.com/markets/mtgoxUSD.html
1885 2011-02-05 19:34:35 <ArtForz> really?
1886 2011-02-05 19:34:41 <newsham> http://www.thenewsh.com/~newsham/x/mtgox/depth.txt
1887 2011-02-05 19:34:41 <ArtForz> is that including the 5k @ $99 ?
1888 2011-02-05 19:35:47 <newsham> i didnt have a 5k@$99 in my data set when i did that calc
1889 2011-02-05 19:36:10 <ArtForz> yes, because mtgox only exposes a partial order book via its normal API
1890 2011-02-05 19:36:30 <newsham> that makes sense i guess
1891 2011-02-05 19:37:10 <newsham> so how do you get the full book? :)
1892 2011-02-05 19:37:16 <ArtForz> iirc limits to last trade +-30% or so
1893 2011-02-05 19:37:16 <rlifchitz> ArtForz: is it in the dark pool ?
1894 2011-02-05 19:37:21 <ArtForz> no
1895 2011-02-05 19:37:36 <ArtForz> dark pool orders dont appear in order book (duh)
1896 2011-02-05 19:38:14 <tcatm> newsham: http://bitcoincharts.com/markets/mtgoxUSD.html
1897 2011-02-05 19:38:24 <ArtForz> iirc bitcoincharts uses some private mtgox interface to get the whole orderbook
1898 2011-02-05 19:38:24 <newsham> right so where did bitcoincharts get that data?
1899 2011-02-05 19:38:42 <ArtForz> by nicely asking mtgox for it?
1900 2011-02-05 19:38:55 <tcatm> it's a public interface
1901 2011-02-05 19:39:05 <tcatm> it's just not documented
1902 2011-02-05 19:39:05 <ArtForz> okay, public but badly documented :P
1903 2011-02-05 19:39:48 <ArtForz> kinda weird definition of public :P
1904 2011-02-05 19:39:52 <newsham> seems there are lots of undocumented interfaces on mtgox
1905 2011-02-05 19:39:59 <newsham> like the streaming one (which they told me about which is handy)
1906 2011-02-05 19:40:33 <newsham> "unauthenticated" prob he means
1907 2011-02-05 19:40:36 <rlifchitz> a streaming interface like in bitcoin-central?
1908 2011-02-05 19:40:37 <rlifchitz> nice
1909 2011-02-05 19:40:51 <ArtForz> yeah, makes more sense
1910 2011-02-05 19:40:51 <rlifchitz> newsham: any info on this?
1911 2011-02-05 19:41:19 <ArtForz> iirc theres a forum post on the streaming interface
1912 2011-02-05 19:41:35 <tcatm> http://pastebin.com/hZJPeUYA
1913 2011-02-05 19:41:40 <tcatm> some code for that interface
1914 2011-02-05 19:42:10 <rlifchitz> thx tcatm
1915 2011-02-05 19:43:05 <ArtForz> nice pythonic code
1916 2011-02-05 19:43:47 <newsham> rlifchitz: its a websocket api. you can see it in this page http://www.thenewsh.com/~newsham/x/mtgox/
1917 2011-02-05 19:44:01 <newsham> in the init() function.
1918 2011-02-05 19:44:23 <newsham> i can answer questions if you have some, but not now, gotta run.. bbl
1919 2011-02-05 19:45:13 <rlifchitz> nice
1920 2011-02-05 19:45:19 <rlifchitz> thx too
1921 2011-02-05 19:55:31 Lachesis has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1922 2011-02-05 20:01:00 davex__ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1923 2011-02-05 20:05:08 davex__ has joined
1924 2011-02-05 20:06:00 marioxcc has joined
1925 2011-02-05 20:23:53 <slush> ;;bc,calcd 1200 1
1926 2011-02-05 20:23:53 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 1200 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 1, is 59 minutes and 39 seconds
1927 2011-02-05 20:24:01 <slush> Cusipzzz: ---^
1928 2011-02-05 20:24:15 <Cusipzzz> slush: ty sir
1929 2011-02-05 20:28:08 satamusic has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1930 2011-02-05 20:35:56 <newsham> re
1931 2011-02-05 20:38:43 <newsham> tcatm: nice, i was wondering if ther's a good python websocket lib.
1932 2011-02-05 20:43:15 <andrew12> ;;bc,stats
1933 2011-02-05 20:43:17 <gribble> Current Blocks: 106399 | Current Difficulty: 22012.4941572 | Next Difficulty At Block: 106847 | Next Difficulty In: 448 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 2 days, 14 hours, 58 minutes, and 8 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 25206.44971212
1934 2011-02-05 20:56:00 <midnightmagic_> i wonder who the 400k BTC owner is. :)
1935 2011-02-05 20:56:04 * midnightmagic_ looks at Art.
1936 2011-02-05 21:00:22 <davex__> there's 400k for sale?
1937 2011-02-05 21:01:21 <Cusipzzz> satoshi ldo
1938 2011-02-05 21:02:26 <EvanR> ldo??
1939 2011-02-05 21:02:38 <EvanR> to ud!
1940 2011-02-05 21:03:26 <Cusipzzz> ;;ud ldo
1941 2011-02-05 21:03:27 <gribble> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=ldo | Like, duh, obviously. A new popular acroynm spreading like wildfire through internet message boards.
1942 2011-02-05 21:03:38 <EvanR> nice
1943 2011-02-05 21:03:50 <EvanR> kind of disappointing that it actually answered the question
1944 2011-02-05 21:03:54 <Cusipzzz> haha
1945 2011-02-05 21:04:12 xelister has joined
1946 2011-02-05 21:04:13 xelister has quit (Changing host)
1947 2011-02-05 21:04:13 xelister has joined
1948 2011-02-05 21:04:50 <presence> ;; bc,calcd 750000 25206.44971212
1949 2011-02-05 21:04:51 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 750000 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 25206.44971212, is 1 day, 16 hours, 5 minutes, and 47 seconds
1950 2011-02-05 21:05:38 <midnightmagic_> no, there's 400k bitcoins consolidated into a single address.
1951 2011-02-05 21:05:56 <midnightmagic_> Mr. Moneybags
1952 2011-02-05 21:06:09 <EvanR> thats like the fort knox of bitcoin
1953 2011-02-05 21:06:13 <EvanR> only it has stuff in it
1954 2011-02-05 21:11:24 RazielZ has quit ()
1955 2011-02-05 21:14:25 sabalaba has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1956 2011-02-05 21:19:08 <midnightmagic_> wouldn't that be hilarious. satoshi builds a currency specifically just to live off it.
1957 2011-02-05 21:19:17 <midnightmagic_> ..in the distant future.
1958 2011-02-05 21:19:20 sabalaba has joined
1959 2011-02-05 21:24:03 <EvanR> or the current future
1960 2011-02-05 21:24:23 <newsham> if you thought you could live off of a currency you built, wouldnt you build it?
1961 2011-02-05 21:24:32 <newsham> sounds like a long shot to me though
1962 2011-02-05 21:25:00 <newsham> also i imagine $/btc is a speculative bubble.. will he still get great prices 5yrs from now?
1963 2011-02-05 21:25:03 <newsham> i guess we'll see
1964 2011-02-05 21:26:28 <EvanR> in 5 yrs it could be more valuable than USD
1965 2011-02-05 21:26:59 Syke has joined
1966 2011-02-05 21:27:04 <dirtyfilthy> you still can't really, uh, buy anything with bitcoin
1967 2011-02-05 21:27:13 <newsham> dollars.
1968 2011-02-05 21:27:39 <tcatm> there's a lot you can do with bitcoins
1969 2011-02-05 21:27:44 <newsham> evanr: valuable? next week it could be >$1/btc.
1970 2011-02-05 21:28:45 <EvanR> yeah but i mean, buy food with it
1971 2011-02-05 21:28:50 <EvanR> pay rent with it
1972 2011-02-05 21:28:53 <EvanR> etc
1973 2011-02-05 21:29:45 <ArtForz> *applies same argument to gold*
1974 2011-02-05 21:29:50 altamic has joined
1975 2011-02-05 21:29:50 altamic has quit (Changing host)
1976 2011-02-05 21:29:50 altamic has joined
1977 2011-02-05 21:30:00 <Cusipzzz> you can buy alpaca gloves with bitcoins. that's when i knew btc was for real :)
1978 2011-02-05 21:30:08 <newsham> i doubt that i'll be buying daily staples with anything other than dollars in 5 yrs
1979 2011-02-05 21:30:17 <newsham> but you can dream I guess. who knows..
1980 2011-02-05 21:30:22 <EvanR> lol newsham
1981 2011-02-05 21:30:38 <davex__> think dollars will hold up for 5 more years?
1982 2011-02-05 21:30:51 <Cusipzzz> dollar yes, euro, prob not
1983 2011-02-05 21:30:51 <ArtForz> probably, yes
1984 2011-02-05 21:30:55 <EvanR> zimbabwe had dollars at one point too you know
1985 2011-02-05 21:30:57 <newsham> cusipzzz: do they constantly update the price?
1986 2011-02-05 21:31:19 <Cusipzzz> newsham: not sure. they were overpriced to start, probably insanely overpriced now, but still...
1987 2011-02-05 21:31:23 <newsham> davex: I do. I also think euros will still be the currency in europe.
1988 2011-02-05 21:31:29 <ArtForz> yup
1989 2011-02-05 21:31:52 <davex__> i think so too. but don't think it's certain.
1990 2011-02-05 21:32:01 <Cusipzzz> euro will split within 5 years..no way germany continues to carry greece, portugal, and ireland that long
1991 2011-02-05 21:32:01 <ArtForz> they'll probably inflate a bit faster, but meh.
1992 2011-02-05 21:32:10 <newsham> definitely not certain. but i would put dollar collapse into the "black swan" category.
1993 2011-02-05 21:32:19 <davex__> yeah
1994 2011-02-05 21:33:01 <newsham> i keep thinking inflation, but i see a lot of signs of deflation.
1995 2011-02-05 21:33:19 <Cusipzzz> stagflation
1996 2011-02-05 21:33:32 <newsham> amusing to think that 1% bank rate might be the best rate on cash in my lifetime. (2% over inflation!)
1997 2011-02-05 21:34:00 <newsham> ok maybe not lifetime.. :)
1998 2011-02-05 21:36:48 <EvanR> 1%? thats horrible
1999 2011-02-05 21:36:57 <newsham> actually my bank pays out 0.75%
2000 2011-02-05 21:37:06 <newsham> have to buy a CD to get >= 1%
2001 2011-02-05 21:37:27 <EvanR> if you got the dough, then there should be plenty of competing banks who want it
2002 2011-02-05 21:37:55 <newsham> money market pays out 0.01% right now :)
2003 2011-02-05 21:39:25 <davex__> idk how there's deflation, unless you take food/energy out
2004 2011-02-05 21:40:01 <davex__> er, i should say appreciation not deflation
2005 2011-02-05 21:40:47 <EvanR> ;;bc,calc 620000 25500
2006 2011-02-05 21:40:48 <gribble> Error: invalid syntax (<string>, line 1)
2007 2011-02-05 21:41:02 <EvanR> ;;bc,calc 620000 25500.0
2008 2011-02-05 21:41:03 <gribble> Error: invalid syntax (<string>, line 1)
2009 2011-02-05 21:41:16 <newsham> ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/cpi/cpiai.txt
2010 2011-02-05 21:41:16 <Diablo-D3> you know
2011 2011-02-05 21:41:20 <Diablo-D3> I think this is pretty amazing
2012 2011-02-05 21:41:28 <Diablo-D3> I can game with the miner running
2013 2011-02-05 21:41:54 <Diablo-D3> btw, did anyone figure out what was wrong with rlifchitz's setup?
2014 2011-02-05 21:42:23 <EvanR> ;;bc,calcd 620000 25500
2015 2011-02-05 21:42:23 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 620000 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 25500, is 2 days, 1 hour, 4 minutes, and 7 seconds
2016 2011-02-05 21:43:46 <davex__> Diablo-D3, i have the same thing, trying to set it up on a damn small linux partition to see if i'm somehow using wrong libs
2017 2011-02-05 21:43:56 Raulo has joined
2018 2011-02-05 21:44:45 <davex__> Diablo-D3, although for me m0mchil's miner gives me about 230Mh total for both cores. so my problem may be something different.
2019 2011-02-05 21:44:52 <newsham> tinycore ftw
2020 2011-02-05 21:45:37 <davex__> oh, didn't look at that one.
2021 2011-02-05 21:45:55 <Diablo-D3> davex__: yeah for you it sounds like you either dont have crossfire off properly or you're accidentally assigning both m0miners to the same core
2022 2011-02-05 21:46:19 <slush> oh, finally found working pyopencl installer for win: http://www.lfd.uci.edu/~gohlke/pythonlibs/
2023 2011-02-05 21:46:57 <davex__> Diablo-D3, how do i ensure crossfire is off again?
2024 2011-02-05 21:47:08 <Diablo-D3> aticonfig --initial --devices=all
2025 2011-02-05 21:47:14 <Diablo-D3> or if you've already done that
2026 2011-02-05 21:47:16 <davex__> ok, yeah did that
2027 2011-02-05 21:47:19 <Diablo-D3> xorg.conf should have multiple devices
2028 2011-02-05 21:47:31 <Diablo-D3> and my miner, with export DISPLAY=:0, should list all your devices
2029 2011-02-05 21:49:03 <Raulo> slush: I have a made an alpha version "pool block guesser" and it says during last 2 hours, the pool found blocks 106399, 106401 and 106404 and nothing between and nothing after 106382
2030 2011-02-05 21:49:34 <Raulo> There may be some false positives. So far, it was 75% accurate
2031 2011-02-05 21:50:03 <slush> Raulo: nice, you're almost right
2032 2011-02-05 21:50:12 <slush> Raulo: sniffing bitcoin traffic?
2033 2011-02-05 21:50:18 <Raulo> Yep
2034 2011-02-05 21:50:29 <slush> well, so I have to obfuscate it a little bit
2035 2011-02-05 21:50:37 <Raulo> Don't bother
2036 2011-02-05 21:50:48 <Raulo> It won't work
2037 2011-02-05 21:50:53 <slush> no prob, is in my todo. Just I have to do also something useful
2038 2011-02-05 21:50:57 <slush> Raulo: how so?
2039 2011-02-05 21:51:06 davex__ has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
2040 2011-02-05 21:51:19 <citiz3n> are there any low profile mining cards?
2041 2011-02-05 21:51:26 <Raulo> I have an algorithm that will give you 10% cheating income even if it was completely blind
2042 2011-02-05 21:51:39 <slush> hehe
2043 2011-02-05 21:51:55 <EvanR> interesting...
2044 2011-02-05 21:52:15 <Raulo> Well, 10% with current pool size.
2045 2011-02-05 21:52:24 <slush> which principe?
2046 2011-02-05 21:52:27 sabalaba has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2047 2011-02-05 21:52:32 <Raulo> If the pool becomes less important, it will drop
2048 2011-02-05 21:53:25 <Raulo> It all stems from the fact that cheating function I(lambda) (see my paper) is positive
2049 2011-02-05 21:53:27 davex__ has joined
2050 2011-02-05 21:53:39 <Raulo> The only hard thing is to find when the round starts
2051 2011-02-05 21:53:54 <Raulo> But you know it can only start when last blcok was found
2052 2011-02-05 21:54:02 <Raulo> And it is enough for cheating
2053 2011-02-05 21:54:20 <slush> Raulo: so if you don't know when round started, it is not useful?
2054 2011-02-05 21:54:41 <slush> so not "completely blind"
2055 2011-02-05 21:54:41 <Raulo> No. You only need to know with some probability that it started
2056 2011-02-05 21:55:00 <slush> well, what you don't know when you don't have your guesser
2057 2011-02-05 21:55:11 <EvanR> you know when blocks in general are found, and theres a known probability that it was the pool
2058 2011-02-05 21:55:19 <newsham> where does the extra 10% come out of?
2059 2011-02-05 21:55:22 <newsham> the pool operator?
2060 2011-02-05 21:55:29 <newsham> or all participants?
2061 2011-02-05 21:55:36 <Raulo> newsham: out of all the others
2062 2011-02-05 21:56:11 <newsham> what would happen if all particpants cheat in the same way?
2063 2011-02-05 21:56:17 <newsham> would the edge go away?
2064 2011-02-05 21:56:22 <Raulo> Slush: with current pool size, the round started with the last block with about 16% probability
2065 2011-02-05 21:56:30 <Raulo> newsham: the pool will stop mining :)
2066 2011-02-05 21:56:37 <newsham> ahh thats not good
2067 2011-02-05 21:56:42 mtgox has joined
2068 2011-02-05 21:56:43 <newsham> so the cheater isnt doing productive work
2069 2011-02-05 21:56:49 <EvanR> newsham: thats what makes it cheating as opposed to competing
2070 2011-02-05 21:56:57 <Raulo> Cheater cheats big way
2071 2011-02-05 21:57:05 <cosurgi> slush: you can simply deny connection when in the first 43% of current block. And unhide everything
2072 2011-02-05 21:57:07 <slush> Raulo: yes, but guessing based on new bitcoin block is far from exact
2073 2011-02-05 21:57:15 <newsham> evanr: i can imagine a cheating type where he just gets more than his fair share but still does productive work
2074 2011-02-05 21:57:27 <slush> currently you have ~20% probability that you tip it
2075 2011-02-05 21:57:29 <EvanR> sounds more like optimization
2076 2011-02-05 21:57:31 <newsham> if it were just to overstate his share of th epie, then everyone could cheat in the same way and make the problem go away
2077 2011-02-05 21:57:32 <Raulo> Slush: it does not need to be exact. It has to be non zero
2078 2011-02-05 21:57:34 <cosurgi> conenction denien, plese try reconnect in, roughly X minutes.
2079 2011-02-05 21:57:37 <cosurgi> *denied
2080 2011-02-05 21:57:41 <EvanR> newsham: right thats not really cheating
2081 2011-02-05 21:57:53 <newsham> evanr: sure it is
2082 2011-02-05 21:57:55 <newsham> dont be silly
2083 2011-02-05 21:58:14 <slush> EvanR I will ask you if it is or isn't cheating when you ask me why your daily reward is so low ;)
2084 2011-02-05 21:58:15 <Raulo> Contrubuted pools are inherintly prone to cheating
2085 2011-02-05 21:58:33 <EvanR> slush: as long as i know how it works and can implement it
2086 2011-02-05 21:58:37 <Raulo> Because only winning has is worth 50 BTC. All the others are worthless
2087 2011-02-05 21:58:45 <Raulo> winning hash*
2088 2011-02-05 21:59:11 <Raulo> And all past shares are worthless
2089 2011-02-05 21:59:30 <slush> Raulo: of course
2090 2011-02-05 21:59:34 <newsham> raulo: cheater has a way to capture the entire 50btc occasionally?
2091 2011-02-05 21:59:38 <cosurgi> slush: you would happily allow everyone to work continuously, only connecting to the pool would be restricted - must happen after 43% of block.
2092 2011-02-05 21:59:43 <slush> newsham: no
2093 2011-02-05 21:59:52 <EvanR> newsham: is figuring out how to compute btc faster cheating?
2094 2011-02-05 21:59:55 <newsham> cheater just has a way to provide false pool proof of work?
2095 2011-02-05 22:00:08 <newsham> evanr: no. its not. and i'm done arguing with you.
2096 2011-02-05 22:00:23 <Raulo> newsham: cheater simply gest paid for something that did not help the pool find the block
2097 2011-02-05 22:00:30 <slush> newsham: no, read the paper about cheating
2098 2011-02-05 22:00:36 <newsham> ok
2099 2011-02-05 22:00:47 <slush> Raulo: no, it's not correct
2100 2011-02-05 22:00:48 <EvanR> Raulo: yeah, so if everyone did it, the pool would fail
2101 2011-02-05 22:01:00 <slush> Raulo: because even cheater can find the valid block; nobody know who it will be
2102 2011-02-05 22:01:17 <cosurgi> guys, are you deaf? Can you argue why my solution won't work?
2103 2011-02-05 22:01:19 <slush> Raulo: of course, you can use cheating techniques and hides also valid blocks
2104 2011-02-05 22:01:37 <slush> cosurgi: but it is not fair for slow miner
2105 2011-02-05 22:01:46 <slush> cosurgi: it does not hurt you with strong card
2106 2011-02-05 22:02:18 <cosurgi> hmm.. slow miner contributes once per few hours
2107 2011-02-05 22:02:33 <Raulo> I thing the only way to make the pool cheating-resistant is to go into some "connected" mode
2108 2011-02-05 22:02:35 <cosurgi> but he continuosly getworks,so you kon that he is alive
2109 2011-02-05 22:02:50 <Raulo> Only count last 1000 shares or so
2110 2011-02-05 22:02:53 <Raulo> Or even less
2111 2011-02-05 22:03:12 <Raulo> There will be more variance
2112 2011-02-05 22:03:21 <cosurgi> s/kon/know/
2113 2011-02-05 22:03:28 <Raulo> But anyway orders of magnitute less than mining solo for slow miners
2114 2011-02-05 22:04:35 <cosurgi> yes, also a not bad solution..
2115 2011-02-05 22:04:48 <cosurgi> or... use a weighted average
2116 2011-02-05 22:04:58 <cosurgi> last shares have more weight
2117 2011-02-05 22:05:18 Myckel_Habets has joined
2118 2011-02-05 22:05:54 <newsham> exp(-n / C)
2119 2011-02-05 22:06:07 <newsham> C=1000?
2120 2011-02-05 22:06:13 <Raulo> slush: during typing I missed block 106402. So the pool found 106399, 106401, 106402 and 106404
2121 2011-02-05 22:06:23 <slush> yes
2122 2011-02-05 22:06:36 sabalaba has joined
2123 2011-02-05 22:06:48 <Raulo> Cool, isn't it?
2124 2011-02-05 22:07:10 <ArtForz> pretty simple really
2125 2011-02-05 22:07:18 <slush> not bad, but you know IP of pool
2126 2011-02-05 22:07:27 <slush> and you can connect to it
2127 2011-02-05 22:07:38 <ArtForz> plain old timing attack
2128 2011-02-05 22:07:38 <Raulo> Even if you blcoked it
2129 2011-02-05 22:07:44 sabalaba has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2130 2011-02-05 22:07:45 <cosurgi> a half of a gauss bell curve for weighted average would be good. It has area of exactly 0.5, so the denominator will not be necessary. Just say that time to block is the 'x' argument.
2131 2011-02-05 22:07:59 <Raulo> I will get it by analyzing traffic in a more subtle way
2132 2011-02-05 22:08:01 <newsham> proxy to another IP?
2133 2011-02-05 22:08:15 <ArtForz> shouldnt matter
2134 2011-02-05 22:08:16 <Raulo> With less accuracy
2135 2011-02-05 22:08:30 <Raulo> But for cheating, accuracy does not need to be perfect
2136 2011-02-05 22:08:39 <ArtForz> yep
2137 2011-02-05 22:08:40 <marioxcc> hi
2138 2011-02-05 22:08:42 <ArtForz> and you can still pull the same trick essentially
2139 2011-02-05 22:08:49 <slush> how you will detect it when pool has unknown IP?
2140 2011-02-05 22:08:50 Myckel has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2141 2011-02-05 22:09:00 <Raulo> Contributed pool counting is inherently broken
2142 2011-02-05 22:09:09 <marioxcc> Raulo: I think they alredy talked about cheating, unless you mean something different
2143 2011-02-05 22:09:09 <ArtForz> easy
2144 2011-02-05 22:09:10 <Raulo> And security via obscurity does not work
2145 2011-02-05 22:09:18 <marioxcc> keeping good blocks is costly for the attacker
2146 2011-02-05 22:09:37 <cosurgi> "keeping"?
2147 2011-02-05 22:09:43 <marioxcc> not sending
2148 2011-02-05 22:09:45 <newsham> you're confusing design obscurity (not security) and secret parameters (security)
2149 2011-02-05 22:09:56 <marioxcc> the attackr don't get those 50 BTC
2150 2011-02-05 22:09:57 <newsham> security through hidden secrets works.
2151 2011-02-05 22:10:04 <newsham> ie. private keys.
2152 2011-02-05 22:10:26 <Raulo> newsham: but slush has to connect to bitcoin network and cannot hide the pool found the block
2153 2011-02-05 22:10:27 <ArtForz> be connected to a lot of nodes, record which node broadcasts a block first, look which blocks the pool found, correlate, you found the pools "exit node"
2154 2011-02-05 22:11:03 <ArtForz> avoiding timing attacks is *hard*
2155 2011-02-05 22:11:17 <newsham> pool could change ips frequently if necessary
2156 2011-02-05 22:11:25 <newsham> might not be through a large pool of ip addrs though
2157 2011-02-05 22:11:37 <Raulo> I don;t even need to connect to slush. Connecting to his neighbors will be enough for finding correlation
2158 2011-02-05 22:11:37 <marioxcc> the easiest way is to add a random delay
2159 2011-02-05 22:11:42 <ArtForz> yep
2160 2011-02-05 22:11:49 <davex__> ;;bc,stats
2161 2011-02-05 22:11:50 <marioxcc> what are you talking about, exactly?
2162 2011-02-05 22:11:51 <gribble> Current Blocks: 106409 | Current Difficulty: 22012.4941572 | Next Difficulty At Block: 106847 | Next Difficulty In: 438 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 2 days, 13 hours, 48 minutes, and 24 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 25191.36939779
2163 2011-02-05 22:11:56 <newsham> pool could send blocks to artforz to mix with his pool, for a small cut :)
2164 2011-02-05 22:12:24 <Raulo> marioxcc: guessing when pool found the block by analyzing bitcoin traffic
2165 2011-02-05 22:12:32 <marioxcc> ok
2166 2011-02-05 22:12:41 <newsham> artforz == central currency authority :)
2167 2011-02-05 22:13:18 <newsham> could the pool somehow depend on one of the pool participants to submit the block?
2168 2011-02-05 22:13:20 <citiz3n> when using bitcoind how can you keep track of your miners' work?
2169 2011-02-05 22:13:29 <newsham> without huge cheating risk?
2170 2011-02-05 22:13:30 <citiz3n> eg. how to track if a miner has gone offline etc
2171 2011-02-05 22:14:22 <ArtForz> newsham: theoretically, yes
2172 2011-02-05 22:14:40 <newsham> because the pool has a large number of IPs
2173 2011-02-05 22:14:47 <newsham> why not take advantage of that
2174 2011-02-05 22:15:04 <cosurgi> slush: I think that you could unhide everything, show in profile currently found shares, and add a second column: "current shares score", it would be calculated using following foruma: fore each share found by the user use time_dist (from current share) and calculate sum: (1/sqrt(2*pi*C^2))*exp(-time_delay^2/(2*C^2))
2175 2011-02-05 22:15:13 <newsham> you'd have to be careful that it didnt get droped on thefloor, but you can submit the same one multiple times right?
2176 2011-02-05 22:15:19 <ArtForz> yep
2177 2011-02-05 22:15:34 <tcatm> the pool could broadcast blocks only to one (random) node
2178 2011-02-05 22:16:03 <ArtForz> actually that should work as well
2179 2011-02-05 22:16:34 <tcatm> so it would look like that node found the block
2180 2011-02-05 22:16:42 <cosurgi> slush: where constant "C" would be taking 66.6% of total area under the bell curve. So if you set it to 1000, then last 1000 shares are taking 66.6% of total importance.
2181 2011-02-05 22:16:48 <newsham> you mean instead of flooding to all neighbors, send to a single neighbor?
2182 2011-02-05 22:16:56 <tcatm> yep
2183 2011-02-05 22:17:04 <ArtForz> send to a single neighbor, see if other neighbors get it
2184 2011-02-05 22:17:06 <tcatm> and let him broadcast the block to the network
2185 2011-02-05 22:17:12 <ArtForz> after a short timeout, try another neighbor
2186 2011-02-05 22:17:15 <cosurgi> slush: correction: "use time_dist (from current share)" to "use time_dist (from current UTC time)"
2187 2011-02-05 22:17:29 <newsham> would suck if in the short timeout you lost the block to a competitor
2188 2011-02-05 22:17:40 <ArtForz> yep
2189 2011-02-05 22:18:03 <newsham> i guess that shouldnt hapen too often since timeout would be << 10min
2190 2011-02-05 22:18:11 <newsham> gotta run.
2191 2011-02-05 22:18:14 <ArtForz> I was thinking 2 seconds or so
2192 2011-02-05 22:18:18 <presence> if cheating becomes common pools are going to be dangerous, and it pretty much means the purge or disinterst of most small calc miners
2193 2011-02-05 22:18:23 <tcatm> that's the price you pay for not solving the problem correctly
2194 2011-02-05 22:18:31 <cosurgi> slush: compare with formula for bell curve, to make sure that I didn't make stupid mistake in typing :)
2195 2011-02-05 22:19:12 <ArtForz> imo large pools are dangerous period
2196 2011-02-05 22:19:45 <presence> dangerous because of the steering capability?
2197 2011-02-05 22:19:54 zygf has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2198 2011-02-05 22:20:02 <ArtForz> that, and you create a nice target for an attacker to temporarily take out a decent chunk of total hashrate
2199 2011-02-05 22:20:10 <cosurgi> slush: another correction, the dimension of "C' would be the same as dimension time_delay, e.g. [seconds], so you cannot set C=1000 shares, but rather express in seconds, what it takes to find 1000 shares.
2200 2011-02-05 22:20:41 <cosurgi> slush: the you go - a complete solution. Now decide whether you do like it :)
2201 2011-02-05 22:20:44 <Raulo> ArtForz: you are as dangerouns as pools :)
2202 2011-02-05 22:20:54 <ArtForz> yup
2203 2011-02-05 22:21:00 <presence> hes actually more dangerous
2204 2011-02-05 22:21:08 <presence> because he cant have a mutiny unless hes insane
2205 2011-02-05 22:22:44 <Raulo> slush: do you want my Monte Carlo stript for pool cheating without any knowledge about round start?
2206 2011-02-05 22:22:50 <Raulo> I can PM you
2207 2011-02-05 22:23:08 <cosurgi> I geuss that he went to coding
2208 2011-02-05 22:23:16 <Raulo> s/pool cheating/pool cheating simulation/
2209 2011-02-05 22:23:20 <cosurgi> I just wonder what he is coding :)
2210 2011-02-05 22:24:29 <cosurgi> Raulo: with my approach the reward for cheating is still positive but is decreasing at exponential speed :)
2211 2011-02-05 22:24:48 <Raulo> cosurgi: it will help a lot
2212 2011-02-05 22:25:09 <Raulo> cosurgi: even simple cutoof (1000 shares helps a lot)
2213 2011-02-05 22:25:27 <Raulo> without any weighting
2214 2011-02-05 22:25:34 <cosurgi> yes.
2215 2011-02-05 22:26:24 <Raulo> With 1000 shares and current difficulty, cheater's gain is about 2% only
2216 2011-02-05 22:26:38 <Raulo> It's probably not worth bothering
2217 2011-02-05 22:26:40 <cosurgi> in fact if you calculate convolution of contributing first 43% with the bell curve, cheaters area is nearly nullified. Unless he didn't cheat by accident, and participated until the block was found.
2218 2011-02-05 22:27:18 <Raulo> Especially since switching from pool to solo and back costs some hashes
2219 2011-02-05 22:27:39 <cosurgi> slush: heard that? :)
2220 2011-02-05 22:27:44 <tcatm> Why does switching cost hashes?
2221 2011-02-05 22:27:51 <cosurgi> cos it costs time
2222 2011-02-05 22:28:01 <slush> cosurgi: yes
2223 2011-02-05 22:28:05 * slush is thinking
2224 2011-02-05 22:28:22 * citiz3n hums the jeopardy theme song
2225 2011-02-05 22:28:31 <tcatm> My getwork multiplexer can switch at every getwork.
2226 2011-02-05 22:28:35 <cosurgi> slush: well, you only need a timestamp for each share. Then calculate the formula I gave you above.
2227 2011-02-05 22:28:45 <tcatm> Completely transparent to miner
2228 2011-02-05 22:29:01 <Raulo> @tcatm: it;s hard not to lose a few seconds
2229 2011-02-05 22:29:02 <cosurgi> (or just cut at 1000, if you wish, but then it will bve 2% gain for cheaters)
2230 2011-02-05 22:29:23 <presence> hmm
2231 2011-02-05 22:29:52 <presence> my pool daily reward has dropped by almost 50% in 4 days
2232 2011-02-05 22:30:06 <presence> and the difficulty hasnt gone up
2233 2011-02-05 22:31:07 <Raulo> presence: pool had a very unlucky day yesterday
2234 2011-02-05 22:31:50 <presence> but what about the two days before that
2235 2011-02-05 22:32:03 <presence> I should average 6/day, and Im at 4/day
2236 2011-02-05 22:32:24 <presence> Im not accusing of questionable activity
2237 2011-02-05 22:32:29 <presence> just alot of changes
2238 2011-02-05 22:32:41 comboy has joined
2239 2011-02-05 22:33:04 <Raulo> presense: what's your hash rate?
2240 2011-02-05 22:33:15 <Raulo> If low, you have additional variability
2241 2011-02-05 22:33:15 <presence> 130M/s
2242 2011-02-05 22:33:57 <Raulo> Can you count your daily shares?
2243 2011-02-05 22:34:11 sabalaba has joined
2244 2011-02-05 22:34:21 <presence> I can
2245 2011-02-05 22:34:34 <presence> I need to just do the math
2246 2011-02-05 22:34:35 <Diablo-D3> there is a small problem with the... ahem, problem
2247 2011-02-05 22:34:46 <Diablo-D3> you need to know WHEN the next block is coming
2248 2011-02-05 22:34:56 <cosurgi> slush: then for calculating rewards you would use "current shares score" instead of "contributed shares". SO the rest of you framework remains intact.
2249 2011-02-05 22:34:57 <Diablo-D3> I mean, down to the very second
2250 2011-02-05 22:34:59 noagendamarket has joined
2251 2011-02-05 22:35:00 <Diablo-D3> which is impossible
2252 2011-02-05 22:35:02 <Raulo> Count shares, and see the varability
2253 2011-02-05 22:35:07 <Diablo-D3> you know the probability
2254 2011-02-05 22:35:13 <Diablo-D3> but you dont know exactly when
2255 2011-02-05 22:35:25 <Raulo> Diablo-D3: I know when round must start. When bitcoin finds the block
2256 2011-02-05 22:35:35 <Diablo-D3> so if you, say, mine EXACTLY when the new block starts
2257 2011-02-05 22:35:37 <Diablo-D3> for say
2258 2011-02-05 22:35:37 <presence> diablo: only to be most optimal
2259 2011-02-05 22:35:40 <Raulo> It is enough for all kind of cheating
2260 2011-02-05 22:35:40 <Diablo-D3> 5 minutes
2261 2011-02-05 22:35:42 <presence> you still do ok if you get close
2262 2011-02-05 22:35:45 <slush> cosurgi: if I understand, you propose to calculate some weight for every share?
2263 2011-02-05 22:35:49 <Diablo-D3> and then switch to private mining until block is found
2264 2011-02-05 22:35:54 <Diablo-D3> you can edge out the system in theory
2265 2011-02-05 22:36:01 <Diablo-D3> however
2266 2011-02-05 22:36:09 <cosurgi> slush: yes. And this weight will change over time.
2267 2011-02-05 22:36:12 <Diablo-D3> you can STILL edge out the system by NOT POOL MINING AT ALL
2268 2011-02-05 22:36:20 <Diablo-D3> so the entire problem is retarded
2269 2011-02-05 22:37:08 <presence> its only retarded for those that can earn 50btc in a reasonable time
2270 2011-02-05 22:37:09 <Raulo> Diablo-D3: the problem is, you can edge the system even more by switching from pool mining and solo mining
2271 2011-02-05 22:37:11 <slush> cosurgi: I cannot implement that, it's too difficult to calculate in realtime
2272 2011-02-05 22:37:14 <presence> cpu miners are hosed
2273 2011-02-05 22:37:22 <cosurgi> slush: that could add some extra cpu load to the server, especially for users that refresh www every few seconds. So depends if you can afford the cpu cycles, just to display them their current score. But the important calculation would happen, at when the share was found.
2274 2011-02-05 22:37:45 <Raulo> slush: simple cutoff is almost as good
2275 2011-02-05 22:38:13 <slush> Raulo: calculate only shares from last hour?
2276 2011-02-05 22:38:18 <slush> I still don't like that
2277 2011-02-05 22:38:26 <slush> but it is probably the easier solution
2278 2011-02-05 22:38:35 <slush> and I'm not going to rewrite entire application
2279 2011-02-05 22:38:36 <Raulo> slush: It's too long. Calculate only last 1000 shares
2280 2011-02-05 22:38:57 <Diablo-D3> Raulo: yes but
2281 2011-02-05 22:39:10 <Diablo-D3> you can ALSO edge the system by, assuming 43% is the optimum...
2282 2011-02-05 22:39:26 <Diablo-D3> mining on the pool with 43% of your power, the rest privately
2283 2011-02-05 22:39:28 <Diablo-D3> concurrently.
2284 2011-02-05 22:39:35 <Diablo-D3> it should have the same effect.
2285 2011-02-05 22:39:40 <Raulo> Diablo-D3: No. It won't
2286 2011-02-05 22:39:45 <Raulo> Math is funny :)
2287 2011-02-05 22:39:46 <Diablo-D3> bet it will
2288 2011-02-05 22:39:51 <cosurgi> slush: you could cache thisw calculation for www, and do the calculating loop every few minutes for each user. Then calculate it when share was found. That loop is pretty simple actually. I gave you the exact formula :)
2289 2011-02-05 22:39:55 <Diablo-D3> because the next block generation event is random
2290 2011-02-05 22:40:35 <Raulo> Diablo-D3: But the pool share payout formula is inherently broken
2291 2011-02-05 22:40:46 <Raulo> Cheaters exploit this part
2292 2011-02-05 22:41:03 <Raulo> Diablo-D3: you get paid for work which is useless to pool
2293 2011-02-05 22:41:09 <cosurgi> slush: that's the solution, if you really don't like the cutoff. But CPU intensive, so of course up to you :)
2294 2011-02-05 22:41:21 <Diablo-D3> Raulo: except its not useless in that sense
2295 2011-02-05 22:41:28 <Diablo-D3> you cant label it useless after the fact
2296 2011-02-05 22:41:45 <Diablo-D3> while doing the kernel run you dont know if you have a winner.
2297 2011-02-05 22:41:52 <Raulo> Diablo-D3: only winning hash is useful. All past shares are worthless
2298 2011-02-05 22:42:01 <Diablo-D3> also, the concept of the share is wrong in that problem description
2299 2011-02-05 22:42:06 <Diablo-D3> the "share" is proof of work.
2300 2011-02-05 22:42:12 <Raulo> So paying for past shares begs for exploits
2301 2011-02-05 22:42:25 <Raulo> But the share is difficulty 1 proof of work
2302 2011-02-05 22:42:35 <Diablo-D3> no, I mean, literally, its proof you did work
2303 2011-02-05 22:42:43 <Raulo> And is mostly not difficult enough
2304 2011-02-05 22:43:00 <Diablo-D3> its too difficult actually
2305 2011-02-05 22:43:11 <Diablo-D3> but I dont recommend dipping into H either
2306 2011-02-05 22:43:21 <cosurgi> slush: you could try a benchmark, and run a loop calculating "score", and see how much time it takes. If it's less than a 1ms then it should be fine to run.
2307 2011-02-05 22:43:23 <Diablo-D3> the share is an abstract concept that represents the work you did
2308 2011-02-05 22:43:30 <Diablo-D3> as in, you ARE paid for TRYING
2309 2011-02-05 22:43:40 <Diablo-D3> thats the social contract of the pool
2310 2011-02-05 22:43:47 <Raulo> Diablo-D3: I know. But this is inherently broken
2311 2011-02-05 22:43:53 <Diablo-D3> the person who tried the most gets the largest part of the share
2312 2011-02-05 22:43:57 <Raulo> Only 50 BTC for the winner is fair
2313 2011-02-05 22:44:24 <Diablo-D3> then you reject pools altogether
2314 2011-02-05 22:44:34 <Diablo-D3> this isnt about fairness, however
2315 2011-02-05 22:45:15 <Diablo-D3> since, in the context of an infinite length of time, the amount of coins you earn privately mining will closely approximate the number of coins you will earn in a pool
2316 2011-02-05 22:45:18 <Raulo> Pools that use "contributed" method are inherently prone to exploits
2317 2011-02-05 22:45:32 altamic has quit (Quit: altamic)
2318 2011-02-05 22:45:34 <presence> diablo: only after alot of time
2319 2011-02-05 22:45:50 <Diablo-D3> presence: what part of infinite length of time did you miss?
2320 2011-02-05 22:45:57 * slush is thinking about closing the pool for public audience
2321 2011-02-05 22:46:02 Myckel_Habets has quit (Quit: Ik ga weg)
2322 2011-02-05 22:46:10 <presence> right, but we dont have infinite time
2323 2011-02-05 22:46:23 <Diablo-D3> no, which is why the pool wins for all involved
2324 2011-02-05 22:46:28 <presence> and also, as the difficulty goes up, those with lower end capabilities lose
2325 2011-02-05 22:46:30 <tcatm> slush: how would that help?
2326 2011-02-05 22:46:34 <cosurgi> slush: that won't help, in fact.
2327 2011-02-05 22:46:42 <Diablo-D3> slush: that'll just make people quit the pool
2328 2011-02-05 22:46:46 <necrodearia> I updated http://witcoin.com
2329 2011-02-05 22:46:47 <slush> how so? No pool, no cheating :)
2330 2011-02-05 22:46:56 <cosurgi> slush: you would still need to manually observe if the "chosen ones" aren't cheating.
2331 2011-02-05 22:47:17 <cosurgi> oh, you just want to close it?
2332 2011-02-05 22:47:45 <cosurgi> aha, use it only for ypurself, and few close friends. Not too stupid.
2333 2011-02-05 22:47:46 <Diablo-D3> if slush closes it, Im going to kick his ass
2334 2011-02-05 22:47:55 <slush> cosurgi: run only for few trusted users; and anti-cheating monitoring is very easy on 20 users
2335 2011-02-05 22:48:01 <Diablo-D3> because he made me waste time making my miner perform better on pools
2336 2011-02-05 22:48:18 <Diablo-D3> slush: and shit, you might as well say Im cheating
2337 2011-02-05 22:48:31 <Diablo-D3> Ive only submitted 3 blocks to the pool
2338 2011-02-05 22:48:45 <Diablo-D3> yet I think Ive crossed 150 btc by a wide margin
2339 2011-02-05 22:48:45 <tcatm> slush: how much hashing power comes from CPUs in your pool?
2340 2011-02-05 22:49:25 <Diablo-D3> hrm
2341 2011-02-05 22:49:26 <Diablo-D3> Im wrong
2342 2011-02-05 22:49:28 <necrodearia> If bitcoin were listed at dmoz.org, what category would it exist under?
2343 2011-02-05 22:49:40 <necrodearia> or categories?
2344 2011-02-05 22:49:46 <Diablo-D3> Ive gotten 112 btc from the pool
2345 2011-02-05 22:49:49 <slush> tcatm: only about 3 ghash
2346 2011-02-05 22:49:50 <Diablo-D3> clearly the pool owes me some
2347 2011-02-05 22:49:53 <slush> maybe less
2348 2011-02-05 22:50:00 <cosurgi> slush: if you want to close it, you might as well release the source. Someone else will open, and maybe implemnt this or another anticheating measure, and also: Diablo won't kick you in the ass. Worth a try :)
2349 2011-02-05 22:50:03 <Diablo-D3> necrodearia: financial or whatever
2350 2011-02-05 22:50:11 <tcatm> oh that's more than I thought
2351 2011-02-05 22:50:24 <Diablo-D3> cosurgi: I still will
2352 2011-02-05 22:50:29 <Diablo-D3> because no one wants to run a pool
2353 2011-02-05 22:50:30 <Diablo-D3> and you know what
2354 2011-02-05 22:50:33 <Diablo-D3> I dont care if people cheat
2355 2011-02-05 22:50:48 <Diablo-D3> because I dont believe it actually works
2356 2011-02-05 22:50:59 <Diablo-D3> if you edge the system out by a handful of percent, who cares
2357 2011-02-05 22:50:59 <tcatm> slush: what about dropping GPUs from the pool?
2358 2011-02-05 22:51:06 <Diablo-D3> 2-3%? pssh.
2359 2011-02-05 22:51:13 <Diablo-D3> I got more out of using arts kernel.
2360 2011-02-05 22:51:32 <Raulo> Diablo-D3: 2-3% is after countermeasures
2361 2011-02-05 22:51:38 <Raulo> 28% without any
2362 2011-02-05 22:51:42 <Raulo> 28% is a lot
2363 2011-02-05 22:51:53 <cosurgi> IIRC it is 10% right now, and would be 2% if slush implemented a cutoff at last 1000 shares.
2364 2011-02-05 22:51:54 <davex__> ArtForz, what do you use to cool 5970's?
2365 2011-02-05 22:52:07 <Diablo-D3> so what, reverse weight it so shares closer to the start of the block are worth less?
2366 2011-02-05 22:52:20 <cosurgi> exactly.
2367 2011-02-05 22:52:26 <Diablo-D3> then I'd just "cheat" by self mining early in the block, and then pool mine near the end
2368 2011-02-05 22:52:28 <tcatm> davex__: DISPLAY=:0.0 aticonfig --pplib-cmd 'set fanspeed 0 100'
2369 2011-02-05 22:52:48 <davex__> haha
2370 2011-02-05 22:52:51 <Raulo> Diablo-D3: This method has negative payof but you are welcome to do it this way :)
2371 2011-02-05 22:52:56 <cosurgi> but the formula (1/sqrt(2*pi*C^2))*exp(-time_delay^2/(2*C^2)) seems complex for slush, and too CPU consuming, while also he doesn't like a simple cutoff at 1000.
2372 2011-02-05 22:52:58 <davex__> tcatm: yeah i did notice it had a huge fan
2373 2011-02-05 22:53:18 <Diablo-D3> Raulo: not at all
2374 2011-02-05 22:53:24 <tcatm> davex__: and did you force the fanspeed to >= 70%?
2375 2011-02-05 22:53:42 <Diablo-D3> mine for myself, and then, using statistics, see when the last 1000 shares should happen and start mining there
2376 2011-02-05 22:53:44 <davex__> tcatm, no i didn't have it plugged in properly initially, so it maxed out the fan.
2377 2011-02-05 22:53:49 <Raulo> Diablo-D3: You will miss all short rounds which are most profitable
2378 2011-02-05 22:54:05 <davex__> tcatm, so is that adequate even if you OC it?
2379 2011-02-05 22:54:13 <Diablo-D3> Raulo: yes, but I will waste less time on shares that wont earn me anything
2380 2011-02-05 22:54:35 <Raulo> Diable-D3: you will still lose
2381 2011-02-05 22:54:57 <tcatm> davex__: I run my 5970s at 800 MHz / 55..70°C
2382 2011-02-05 22:55:05 <davex__> ok
2383 2011-02-05 22:55:20 <slush> cosurgi: I give it the last try. I set up accounting of last 1000 shares.
2384 2011-02-05 22:55:42 <tcatm> depends on ambient temperature. GPUs add about 60K and the limit is ~85°C
2385 2011-02-05 22:55:48 <slush> If it does not help, I'll close the business
2386 2011-02-05 22:56:01 TD has joined
2387 2011-02-05 22:56:04 <slush> This is full time job for me. For very bad money, actually
2388 2011-02-05 22:56:15 <cosurgi> slush: then you can unhide everything, right Raulo?
2389 2011-02-05 22:56:39 <Raulo> slush: I'm sorry I started this mess. But if it wasn't me, somebody would have started it
2390 2011-02-05 22:56:49 <slush> Raulo: I don't take it personally
2391 2011-02-05 22:56:55 <slush> if there is the possibility, it's good to know
2392 2011-02-05 22:57:38 <tcatm> you could leave everything as is and tell your users they'll get 28% less than mining solo
2393 2011-02-05 22:57:44 <cosurgi> I didn't do the calculation as you did, but I was feeling that such a thing is possible. Just didn't investigate this before :)
2394 2011-02-05 23:00:51 sabalaba has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2395 2011-02-05 23:04:19 mtgox has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2396 2011-02-05 23:06:09 bertodsera has left ("Ceréja a tuti bela gent!")
2397 2011-02-05 23:06:57 <davex__> tcatm, how many watts does the 5970 pull if you overclock it?
2398 2011-02-05 23:08:32 <genjix> hey MT`AwAy, how's it going?
2399 2011-02-05 23:08:41 <tcatm> Haven't measured.
2400 2011-02-05 23:09:05 <davex__> tcatm, you're running two on an 850 watt psu?
2401 2011-02-05 23:09:13 <tcatm> yep
2402 2011-02-05 23:09:15 <davex__> ok
2403 2011-02-05 23:09:21 <genjix> what happened between raulo and slus?
2404 2011-02-05 23:09:39 <presence> the most they can pull by spec is 150 right
2405 2011-02-05 23:09:42 <tcatm> Tried a cheap 800W PSU and it just turned the system off when the miner was started
2406 2011-02-05 23:09:51 <presence> so overclocking just brings that up by whatever percent
2407 2011-02-05 23:10:19 <ArtForz> ~280W per card stock
2408 2011-02-05 23:10:27 <davex__> ah 280 is OC'd. thought that was spec.
2409 2011-02-05 23:10:37 <ArtForz> OCed it's about 300
2410 2011-02-05 23:10:43 <presence> 280 per gpu
2411 2011-02-05 23:10:48 <presence> 5970 is 2 gpu
2412 2011-02-05 23:10:58 <presence> sorry 150 per gpu
2413 2011-02-05 23:11:04 <slush> 1000 shares is less than last 5 minutes of pool work
2414 2011-02-05 23:11:11 <davex__> ok
2415 2011-02-05 23:11:23 <slush> it's too low, variance will be strange
2416 2011-02-05 23:11:32 <ArtForz> overvolt to 1.15 and you're looking at > 350W per card
2417 2011-02-05 23:11:33 <presence> and the 5970 is slightly underclocked compared to the 5870 in most cases because of that 150W limit
2418 2011-02-05 23:11:40 <ArtForz> yep
2419 2011-02-05 23:11:41 <slush> cosurgi: ^
2420 2011-02-05 23:11:44 <ArtForz> mainly undervolted
2421 2011-02-05 23:11:48 * jgarzik offers to sell: 1000 BTC for brand new 5970's, shipped anywhere in the world.
2422 2011-02-05 23:11:56 <ArtForz> 5870 runs @ 1.1625V core
2423 2011-02-05 23:12:02 <ArtForz> 5970 @ 1.05
2424 2011-02-05 23:12:20 <presence> but thats because they dont want to go beyond 300W
2425 2011-02-05 23:12:24 <ArtForz> yep
2426 2011-02-05 23:13:11 <genjix> jgarzik: isn't that a little above market price?
2427 2011-02-05 23:13:20 <ArtForz> at 1.1625 V and OCed you're pretty much at 400W and cooling becomes next to impossible
2428 2011-02-05 23:13:52 <jgarzik> genjix: when including international shipping, not really
2429 2011-02-05 23:13:56 <presence> safer to run the card lower and get a steady rate without burning up the card
2430 2011-02-05 23:14:01 <ArtForz> yep
2431 2011-02-05 23:14:10 <ArtForz> you also get a lot better efficiency at stock V
2432 2011-02-05 23:14:22 <ArtForz> probably could do even better by lowering voltage below stock
2433 2011-02-05 23:14:44 <ArtForz> most cards seem fine at well > 800MHz @ 1.05V
2434 2011-02-05 23:15:20 <EvanR> jgarzik: i almost want another one ;)
2435 2011-02-05 23:15:22 <ArtForz> wonder where max clock and power draw at 1.0V or 0.975V would be
2436 2011-02-05 23:15:38 jav has joined
2437 2011-02-05 23:15:56 <ArtForz> dynamic power usually goes voltage squared, static power voltage cubed
2438 2011-02-05 23:18:39 <cosurgi> slush: yes, it will hurt CPU miners. Any kind of solution like this cutoff, or bell curve, will hurt CPU miners. The only way to help them is to track their getworks to know that they stay connected. Of course it's possible to fake getworks, but CPU miners will not do that. The cheaters must be using GPUs, otherwise, their solo effort is totally lost in the noise.
2439 2011-02-05 23:19:56 <EvanR> or the cheater has a very large number of cpu ;)
2440 2011-02-05 23:20:07 <cosurgi> slush, Raulo: but, hmm if we allow counting shares beyond cutoff for CPU miners, then they are not equal with other miners, they get extra score. Which is bad also.
2441 2011-02-05 23:20:28 <cosurgi> CPU miners will be discoraged if they get no reward, true.
2442 2011-02-05 23:21:12 <cosurgi> but I think that this might be the best solution. The variance will be strange, but it will be even overall - after many shares are done and rewarded.
2443 2011-02-05 23:21:23 <slush> cosurgi: but single card can act as hundreds of cpu miners
2444 2011-02-05 23:21:26 <slush> cosurgi: so, fail
2445 2011-02-05 23:21:32 <andrew12> heh
2446 2011-02-05 23:22:13 <cosurgi> slush: so, what I'm saying, is - do the cutoff, don't care about variance, therewards will all be fair overall.
2447 2011-02-05 23:22:22 <Syke> afk!~Syke@173-11-125-162-SFBA.hfc.comcastbusiness.net|cpu miners are history
2448 2011-02-05 23:22:29 <EvanR> haha
2449 2011-02-05 23:22:32 <cosurgi> slush: just a bit more for one block, and bit less for another.
2450 2011-02-05 23:22:36 <slush> cosurgi: why just 1000 shares?
2451 2011-02-05 23:22:58 <cosurgi> slush: oh, ok. that could be more.
2452 2011-02-05 23:22:58 <EvanR> Syke|afk: just 100 cpu miners is one gpu
2453 2011-02-05 23:23:26 <cosurgi> slush: if you increase it, the reward for cheating gets bigger. So decided what maximum reward for cheaters you are going to allow.
2454 2011-02-05 23:23:41 <cosurgi> and that will give you maximum shares.
2455 2011-02-05 23:23:59 riush has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2456 2011-02-05 23:24:00 <slush> I don't see it, probably
2457 2011-02-05 23:24:19 <slush> if cheating is based on 43% cutoff from start of the block
2458 2011-02-05 23:24:41 <slush> 43% from current difficulty
2459 2011-02-05 23:24:52 <slush> ...and pool counts only few last shares...
2460 2011-02-05 23:24:58 riush has joined
2461 2011-02-05 23:24:59 <slush> how cheater know why to stop/start?
2462 2011-02-05 23:25:41 sabalaba has joined
2463 2011-02-05 23:25:48 <cosurgi> you mean, with hidden stats? That's a time attack. It's possible to spy and detect pool's block, so he knows when to start/stop
2464 2011-02-05 23:26:01 <presence> I say find them, block them, change nothing
2465 2011-02-05 23:26:14 <cosurgi> not a bad solution too.
2466 2011-02-05 23:26:20 <slush> no, I mean with open stats
2467 2011-02-05 23:26:37 <jav> jgarzik, you used to run the 'Bitcoin store', right? what happened to it?
2468 2011-02-05 23:26:43 <necrodearia> <someone> well the newcastle trip turned out pretty well. Also, stop using dropbox unless you're encrypting anything you put on it. Major flaw that they've knew for 6 months yet haven't fixed.
2469 2011-02-05 23:26:53 <slush> if cheater is cheating from start of the round and he stop after some time
2470 2011-02-05 23:27:07 <slush> ...so when pool is rewarding only few last shares, say 10000
2471 2011-02-05 23:27:10 <cosurgi> oh, with open stats it's easy. Join the pool when a new block starts, and stop after 43% of time has passed. Then mine solo.
2472 2011-02-05 23:27:33 <slush> cheater spend much time for nothing, because once he disconnect, his reward is going down rapidly
2473 2011-02-05 23:27:52 <slush> cosurgi: no, I'm not talking about current accounting
2474 2011-02-05 23:27:52 <necrodearia> dropbox flaw: if you work out the sha256 of a file a user has and have their userid you can create the download url the download url is a slightly modified base64 of a sha256 hash.
2475 2011-02-05 23:28:07 <jgarzik> jav: I shut down Bitcoin Store because I did not want to deal with being an MSB
2476 2011-02-05 23:28:18 <EvanR> necrodearia: thats retarded
2477 2011-02-05 23:28:18 <cosurgi> slush: oh, ok. got it. He disconnects and a block is found within 5 minutes
2478 2011-02-05 23:28:23 <jav> jgarzik, what is an MSB?
2479 2011-02-05 23:28:27 <EvanR> im glad i dont use dropbox
2480 2011-02-05 23:28:35 <noagendamarket> money services business
2481 2011-02-05 23:28:41 <jav> aw, I see
2482 2011-02-05 23:28:50 <slush> cosurgi: so?
2483 2011-02-05 23:28:53 <noagendamarket> dropbbox is easy thats why people use it
2484 2011-02-05 23:29:15 <noagendamarket> have you tried to us tahoe lafs ?
2485 2011-02-05 23:29:19 <noagendamarket> eek!
2486 2011-02-05 23:29:34 <slush> noagendamarket: I'm using tahoe lafs
2487 2011-02-05 23:29:36 <slush> for long time
2488 2011-02-05 23:29:38 <necrodearia> also, if you delete something from dropbox it stays on the server, think of it like a harddrive when it just removes the name from the filesystem - data is still downloadable
2489 2011-02-05 23:29:56 <EvanR> necrodearia: if you can sha256 the file
2490 2011-02-05 23:30:03 <EvanR> dont you already have the file
2491 2011-02-05 23:30:22 <slush> EvanR not necessary
2492 2011-02-05 23:30:31 <slush> EvanR you can have sha from another source
2493 2011-02-05 23:30:39 <slush> but, usually, you're right
2494 2011-02-05 23:31:02 <EvanR> i regularly stop us from implementing random uses of hashes for random stuff at work
2495 2011-02-05 23:31:16 <EvanR> and suggest we use real security
2496 2011-02-05 23:31:18 <cosurgi> slush: for 10000 shares that would be "pool finds a block within 50 minutes". Well 50 minutes is quite long. The cheater gets almost full reward.
2497 2011-02-05 23:31:27 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
2498 2011-02-05 23:31:33 <jav> jgarzik: may I ask what discouraged you? was there a lot of fraud going on?
2499 2011-02-05 23:31:52 <slush> cosurgi: because he was mining all the time
2500 2011-02-05 23:31:56 <slush> *almost
2501 2011-02-05 23:32:10 <noagendamarket> slush can your mum use it ?
2502 2011-02-05 23:32:11 <noagendamarket> lol
2503 2011-02-05 23:32:18 <slush> noagendamarket: no :)
2504 2011-02-05 23:32:25 <slush> noagendamarket: oh, she is using it
2505 2011-02-05 23:32:27 <noagendamarket> fail
2506 2011-02-05 23:32:32 <slush> noagendamarket: but she don't know how to install it ;)
2507 2011-02-05 23:32:43 <noagendamarket> trouble is easy isnt always secure
2508 2011-02-05 23:32:51 <noagendamarket> look at windows lol
2509 2011-02-05 23:33:05 <EvanR> i dont find windows easy
2510 2011-02-05 23:33:09 <EvanR> or secure
2511 2011-02-05 23:33:31 <cosurgi> slush: sorry, I had a big lag for few minutes.
2512 2011-02-05 23:33:47 <slush> cosurgi: but there is the point, if pool rewards for last, say (50% of current difficulty) blocks, when you stop mining, your already found shares lost the value
2513 2011-02-05 23:34:23 <slush> cosurgi: not only because they have smaller % from all shares, but because the first one are not calculated at all
2514 2011-02-05 23:34:46 <slush> Raulo: ^ ?
2515 2011-02-05 23:36:22 <cosurgi> slush: I think that this is fine. May seem unfair, but it isn't. Only last shares count. If you are a permanent contributor, then you contributes roughly the same shares in last 5 minutes, as usual. Only people wouldn't like to disconnect often. Eg - it is safe to disconnect only right after a block was found. Otherwise your work is lost. And this makes it quite similar to solo mining.
2516 2011-02-05 23:37:04 <cosurgi> But, not exactly similar, because you are still getting a reward even if you haven't found a block. So a pool with cutoff is still better than solo.
2517 2011-02-05 23:37:07 <presence> its easy
2518 2011-02-05 23:37:41 <presence> you calculate how many miners quit at between 38% and 48% of the pool on a regular basis, and they cant connect again
2519 2011-02-05 23:37:43 <slush> cosurgi: are you talking about calculating only x last shares?
2520 2011-02-05 23:37:53 <cosurgi> slush: yes.
2521 2011-02-05 23:38:05 <slush> cosurgi: but current question is "what is the best x"
2522 2011-02-05 23:38:12 <slush> presence: not possible
2523 2011-02-05 23:38:16 <presence> why not?
2524 2011-02-05 23:38:17 <slush> presence: registration is anonymous
2525 2011-02-05 23:38:30 <presence> ech miner doesnt come from the same IP?
2526 2011-02-05 23:38:43 <slush> presence: that's just another kind of obfuscation
2527 2011-02-05 23:38:49 <cosurgi> ;;bc,calc 32000000
2528 2011-02-05 23:38:50 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 32000000 Khps, given current difficulty of 22012.4941572 , is 49 minutes and 14 seconds
2529 2011-02-05 23:38:58 <slush> presence: what if there is more honest miners behind nat?
2530 2011-02-05 23:39:02 <slush> presence: and one cheater?
2531 2011-02-05 23:39:03 <cosurgi> slush: 10 minutes, for example.
2532 2011-02-05 23:39:10 <presence> in the same nat pool?
2533 2011-02-05 23:39:18 <presence> so what they are mining from a corp?
2534 2011-02-05 23:39:45 <slush> presence: whole village can be behind one NAT when admins are dumb
2535 2011-02-05 23:39:46 <presence> or are you saying a family of 50 has one cheater
2536 2011-02-05 23:39:59 <presence> I think thats pretty unlikely
2537 2011-02-05 23:40:00 <slush> presence: natting is quite popular in my country
2538 2011-02-05 23:40:01 <cosurgi> slush: so, 2000 shares.
2539 2011-02-05 23:40:24 <presence> I cant imagine that the powers that be want everyone to look as if they all come from a single ip
2540 2011-02-05 23:40:32 <slush> cosurgi: why static number of shares? With rising pool size, it is still smaller window for cpu miners
2541 2011-02-05 23:40:33 <citiz3n> well, time to go see Sactum 3D :O
2542 2011-02-05 23:40:36 <citiz3n> anyone else seen it?
2543 2011-02-05 23:40:46 <presence> since ipv4 is out of space, natting is popular everywhere
2544 2011-02-05 23:40:57 <slush> cosurgi: why is 50% of diff worse?
2545 2011-02-05 23:41:14 citiz3n is now known as citiz3n_afk
2546 2011-02-05 23:41:21 <cosurgi> slush: then ok. Use number of shares calculated as 10% of total estimated time.
2547 2011-02-05 23:41:53 <cosurgi> slush: I don;t know how exactly Raulo calculated those 2% reward, but in general I see that his calculations are correct.
2548 2011-02-05 23:42:16 * cosurgi thinks why not 50%..
2549 2011-02-05 23:43:24 <slush> cosurgi: basically the idea is that stopping mining with pool leads to cutting your reward from already spent GPU time
2550 2011-02-05 23:43:44 <presence> what about those people who close the miner to do other stuff
2551 2011-02-05 23:43:56 <slush> cosurgi: because when you mine with the pool, you cannot use the same power for another pool/solo
2552 2011-02-05 23:43:59 <presence> those guys get hosed without warning
2553 2011-02-05 23:44:13 <jgarzik> jav: I just told you what discouraged me :)
2554 2011-02-05 23:44:24 <cosurgi> presence: yes.
2555 2011-02-05 23:44:28 <slush> presence: with bigger window of calculating shares, they will get only some variance
2556 2011-02-05 23:44:50 <cosurgi> slush: hmm ok. I'm not sure, maybe 50% would be fine, and the cheaters reward will go down fast enough.
2557 2011-02-05 23:45:07 <jgarzik> jav: being an MSB, complying with FinCEN, ...
2558 2011-02-05 23:45:12 <presence> osunds like the cure is worse than th eproblem
2559 2011-02-05 23:45:30 <slush> presence: I have no choice
2560 2011-02-05 23:45:40 <presence> I understand.
2561 2011-02-05 23:46:00 <cosurgi> I am only sure that the larger the cutoff the larger the cheaters reward.
2562 2011-02-05 23:46:09 <slush> presence: I have complaining geeks about hole in pool on one side. And complaining users that their reward is lower than expected and maybe the reason are those cheating geeks :-D
2563 2011-02-05 23:47:23 <cosurgi> exactly :)
2564 2011-02-05 23:48:12 <cosurgi> probability is a bitch
2565 2011-02-05 23:48:37 <cosurgi> treats everyone the same: everyone may be lucky or not.
2566 2011-02-05 23:48:55 <slush> looks like pool has new record today
2567 2011-02-05 23:49:09 <cosurgi> slush: ok, I would say then - just cut off 20% and keep the stats hidden.
2568 2011-02-05 23:49:34 <slush> cosurgi: raulo has the script which detect new block with 100% probability ;)
2569 2011-02-05 23:49:42 <slush> And I know it isn't hard to do
2570 2011-02-05 23:49:48 <cosurgi> slush: it is possible that Raulo discovered this cheating method yesterday and tested it, that's why the pool was "down", and now it is "up" because cheating is more difficult ;)
2571 2011-02-05 23:50:06 <cosurgi> ah, ok.
2572 2011-02-05 23:50:10 <presence> if they dont like the pool, they are free to mine singly
2573 2011-02-05 23:50:24 <slush> cosurgi: I don't think raulo has enough mining power to move stats
2574 2011-02-05 23:50:40 <cosurgi> right.
2575 2011-02-05 23:50:46 <presence> unless he runs a botnet or two
2576 2011-02-05 23:50:59 <presence> however botnets can make better money elsewhere
2577 2011-02-05 23:51:06 ApertureScience has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2578 2011-02-05 23:51:17 <slush> I'm watching stats pretty often and I can say there were no big changes in hashrate yesterday
2579 2011-02-05 23:51:26 <slush> not so big to do this
2580 2011-02-05 23:51:48 <Raulo> cosurgi and slush: I was off the pool for a few days except one lousy CPU miner
2581 2011-02-05 23:52:14 <slush> Raulo: I don't suspect you
2582 2011-02-05 23:52:23 ApertureScience has joined
2583 2011-02-05 23:52:24 <cosurgi> slush: in fact you could make a plot of hashrate versus time, and mark time when a block was found. If there are spikes in hashrate after block is found then you have a proof that such cheating took place.
2584 2011-02-05 23:52:32 <slush> I more suspect tcatm which disclaimed he has working multiplexer yesterday :-D
2585 2011-02-05 23:52:42 sotto has joined
2586 2011-02-05 23:52:49 <Raulo> I need to catcup with the last hour's discussion
2587 2011-02-05 23:53:29 <cosurgi> slush: if there are no spikes on such plot, then nothing to worry about. You don't even need to know "who" make the spikes. The question is if they are present.
2588 2011-02-05 23:53:32 <jav> jgarzik: so Bitcoins are already accepted by the rest of the world to be a full-blown currency and fall under these regulations? ... I thought they would more likely be considered some form of virtual good by non-Bitcoin-enthusiasts
2589 2011-02-05 23:53:51 <molecular> jav: regu-what?
2590 2011-02-05 23:54:07 <slush> cosurgi: well, pool has some speed variance all the time. +- 1 ghash is not significant change
2591 2011-02-05 23:54:45 <cosurgi> slush: then observe for +-2 Ghs spikes.
2592 2011-02-05 23:54:59 <cosurgi> slush: or if spikes correlate with time when blocks are found,.
2593 2011-02-05 23:55:16 <slush> Raulo: basically I'm waiting if you say "amen" to solution with counting % of last shares per round :-D
2594 2011-02-05 23:55:24 <cosurgi> he did.
2595 2011-02-05 23:55:37 <cosurgi> Raulo: just say how many %
2596 2011-02-05 23:55:39 <slush> I don't know how he calculated 2% cheating possibility
2597 2011-02-05 23:55:40 <molecular> slush, can you make the block history list longer. in some cases it's too short (like now)
2598 2011-02-05 23:55:55 <slush> molecular: I already rised up from 20 to 30
2599 2011-02-05 23:56:02 <slush> molecular: will be online after next update
2600 2011-02-05 23:56:04 sotto has quit (Client Quit)
2601 2011-02-05 23:56:15 <molecular> slush, thx
2602 2011-02-05 23:56:16 <jav> molecular: like FinCEN for example, as jgarzik mentioned
2603 2011-02-05 23:56:23 <cosurgi> slush: it's not "possibility". It's the 2% cheater's reward if you cuoff at 1000 shares, versus 28% reward if you don't cut off.
2604 2011-02-05 23:56:43 <slush> cosurgi: oh, I know. I used bad words
2605 2011-02-05 23:56:45 <molecular> slush, while you're at it, what's with the "* New features will be activated within a few days". it's been there since I use the pool ;)
2606 2011-02-05 23:57:13 <slush> molecular: lol, because I solve another things all those days :)
2607 2011-02-05 23:57:26 <molecular> jav, thanks for the hint
2608 2011-02-05 23:57:44 <slush> I think anti-cheating strategies have higher priority than sending emails
2609 2011-02-05 23:57:45 <molecular> slush, I know, but you must've stumbled over that ;)
2610 2011-02-05 23:57:53 <cosurgi> ok, sorry I should go get some sleep. last words on % of shares belong to Raulo :)
2611 2011-02-05 23:57:56 <cosurgi> Raulo: ^
2612 2011-02-05 23:58:22 <frewsxcv> i gave up on trying to get my gpu to mine on windows, so i'm trying on linux. where do i start?
2613 2011-02-05 23:58:25 <slush> cosurgi: gn
2614 2011-02-05 23:58:38 <cosurgi> slush: gn
2615 2011-02-05 23:58:51 <molecular> frewsxcv, ati-sdk, fglrx, get X to start
2616 2011-02-05 23:58:59 <Raulo> Slush: the less, the better
2617 2011-02-05 23:59:09 <frewsxcv> molecular: x has started
2618 2011-02-05 23:59:31 <molecular> get m0mchill's miner or DiabloMiner and try starting it
2619 2011-02-05 23:59:32 <Raulo> But 5% of current difficulty will give only 2% cheating income
2620 2011-02-05 23:59:37 <frewsxcv> how can i tell if the ati drivers are working?
2621 2011-02-05 23:59:40 <slush> Raulo: but when pool does not calculate first shares of cheater, I think calculations must be changed...
2622 2011-02-05 23:59:41 <Raulo> Which is low enough to not bother