1 2011-02-28 00:00:03 <luke-jr> hazek: no
   2 2011-02-28 00:00:04 <hazek> doesn't mater how small the chance is
   3 2011-02-28 00:00:09 <ArtForzZz> hazek: there's a chance the sun will explode tomorrow
   4 2011-02-28 00:00:11 <hazek> well yes
   5 2011-02-28 00:00:14 <luke-jr> hazek: that has the premise that time has no end
   6 2011-02-28 00:00:14 <hazek> that's how statistics work
   7 2011-02-28 00:00:17 ArtForzZz is now known as ArtForz
   8 2011-02-28 00:00:19 <luke-jr> hazek: however, time DOES have an end
   9 2011-02-28 00:00:34 <hazek> ArtForzZz if that's the case the sun will explode eventually
  10 2011-02-28 00:00:36 <lfm> if bitcoin lasts indefinatly yes. if the expected life of bitcoin is finite then IT MIGHT NEVER HAPPEN
  11 2011-02-28 00:00:37 <ArtForz> yep
  12 2011-02-28 00:00:49 <luke-jr> what lfm says too
  13 2011-02-28 00:00:49 <[Noodles]> eventually today
  14 2011-02-28 00:00:54 <luke-jr> bitcoin will eventually be obsolete
  15 2011-02-28 00:01:05 <luke-jr> bitcoin will eventually be exploitable.
  16 2011-02-28 00:01:12 <luke-jr> obsolete will happen first
  17 2011-02-28 00:01:16 <hazek> lfm: ok I agree with that
  18 2011-02-28 00:01:16 <luke-jr> then exploitable
  19 2011-02-28 00:01:28 <luke-jr> then a 6/confirmed tx being hijacked :P
  20 2011-02-28 00:01:37 <hazek> but I thought the point of bitcoinds was their durability
  21 2011-02-28 00:01:47 <lfm> hazek:  so wont you look silly in 200 years when you were worried all that time?
  22 2011-02-28 00:01:48 <hazek> if you want people to have faith in them
  23 2011-02-28 00:01:51 <hazek> that is
  24 2011-02-28 00:01:56 <edcba> hazek reminds me dumb and dumber movie
  25 2011-02-28 00:02:01 <hazek> but you have it all wrong
  26 2011-02-28 00:02:03 <luke-jr> hazek: it's far more durable than any other commodity
  27 2011-02-28 00:02:07 <hazek> it might happen tomorrow..
  28 2011-02-28 00:02:17 <luke-jr> the sun might explode tomorrow and destroy all gold
  29 2011-02-28 00:02:30 <hazek> luke-jr gold is more durable
  30 2011-02-28 00:02:32 <edcba> 'you have 1 chance in a million' 'but that's still one chance !!!'
  31 2011-02-28 00:02:33 <lfm> hazek: so? lots of unlikely crap MIGHT happen but we dont worry about it
  32 2011-02-28 00:02:43 <hazek> ugh
  33 2011-02-28 00:02:48 <luke-jr> hazek: and once again, even if it happened tomorrow, someone would have to know to try using it
  34 2011-02-28 00:03:08 <luke-jr> hazek: it's more likely the sun explodes and destroys all the gold, than someone undoes a 6/confirmed tx
  35 2011-02-28 00:03:15 <hazek> well then don't say it's a 1% chance
  36 2011-02-28 00:03:18 <luke-jr> fine
  37 2011-02-28 00:03:24 <hazek> you're doing the whole thing a big disservice
  38 2011-02-28 00:03:28 <ArtForz> luke-jr: well, by random chance
  39 2011-02-28 00:03:30 <hazek> what you have to say is
  40 2011-02-28 00:03:32 <luke-jr> I did say 1% *at most*
  41 2011-02-28 00:03:34 <edcba> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0109686/quotes?qt0383410
  42 2011-02-28 00:03:44 <pogden> what if someone finds a gigantic gold mine
  43 2011-02-28 00:03:54 <pogden> or a way to turn lead into gold
  44 2011-02-28 00:03:59 <hazek> "if someone was actually trying and if someone actually had enough CPU power, there would be a 1% chance it could happen" rendering it impossible
  45 2011-02-28 00:04:02 <pogden> gold value plummets
  46 2011-02-28 00:04:09 <luke-jr> pogden: then lead becomes the commodity :P
  47 2011-02-28 00:04:29 <lfm> hazek: that wrong too
  48 2011-02-28 00:04:31 <MacRohard> lead is already a good commodity
  49 2011-02-28 00:04:41 <ArtForz> we already know how to turn gold into lead ;)
  50 2011-02-28 00:04:42 <luke-jr> hazek: no, if someone has enough CPU power and was trying, it could be 100%
  51 2011-02-28 00:04:46 <ArtForz> yep
  52 2011-02-28 00:04:49 <pogden> lead has use value
  53 2011-02-28 00:05:04 <luke-jr> pogden: so does gold
  54 2011-02-28 00:05:06 <ArtForz> with enough cpu power, it is 100%
  55 2011-02-28 00:05:26 <lfm> yup old story of how to get 1 million dollars in just 5 days, easy start with 2 million dollars
  56 2011-02-28 00:05:31 <ArtForz> which... is all in the paper
  57 2011-02-28 00:05:33 <hazek> so what you're saying then that the chance someone gets enouigh cpu power and is actually trying is 1%?
  58 2011-02-28 00:06:12 <MacRohard> all someone has to do is break into the ati video card shipping warehouse and clean it out
  59 2011-02-28 00:06:41 <sipa> hazek: if someone has less than 50% of the computational power of the network, it is very hard to create alternate chains (but becomes more and more realistic as he approaches 50%)
  60 2011-02-28 00:06:56 <lfm> hazek: at this point my best guess is YOU are trying it and trying to mislead us
  61 2011-02-28 00:06:58 <hazek> I understand all that
  62 2011-02-28 00:07:07 <pogden> gold doesn't have use value
  63 2011-02-28 00:07:09 <luke-jr> hazek: it's *possible* to get it with a miniscule amount of CPU power, but immensely unlikely
  64 2011-02-28 00:07:09 <hazek> rofl :)
  65 2011-02-28 00:07:19 <pogden> at least not $1000/oz use value
  66 2011-02-28 00:07:19 <sipa> pogden: sure does, electronics, jewelry, ...
  67 2011-02-28 00:07:29 <sipa> but indeed less than what it is traded for now
  68 2011-02-28 00:07:30 <luke-jr> pogden: gold conducts electricity and doesn't rust.
  69 2011-02-28 00:07:41 <pogden> that's true
  70 2011-02-28 00:08:13 <pogden> but its use value in electronics is nowhere near it's market value
  71 2011-02-28 00:08:16 <ArtForz> yes, but the use value of gold is pretty small compared to market value
  72 2011-02-28 00:08:28 <pogden> and it doesn't underlie it's market value
  73 2011-02-28 00:08:29 <MacRohard> with peak oil all minerals will become scarce.. probably some industrial uses for gold will pay the market price for it
  74 2011-02-28 00:08:53 <edcba> lol
  75 2011-02-28 00:09:19 <lfm> MacRohard: I thot peak oil was 1977
  76 2011-02-28 00:09:20 <pogden> and some do, for miniscule amounts used in electronics
  77 2011-02-28 00:09:25 <ArtForz> they already have to pay market value, thats why its not used much...
  78 2011-02-28 00:09:26 <MacRohard> lfm, 2006
  79 2011-02-28 00:09:31 <pogden> but that has negligible effect on the gold market
  80 2011-02-28 00:09:49 <lfm> MacRohard: so gold is already worthless
  81 2011-02-28 00:10:02 <MacRohard> lfm, why do you say taht?
  82 2011-02-28 00:10:08 <pogden> gold has next to zero use-value
  83 2011-02-28 00:10:15 <ArtForz> otherwise we'd plate all connectors with 100u+ of gold and call it a day ;)
  84 2011-02-28 00:10:30 <hazek> except it has properties that make it ideal to use as exchange of value
  85 2011-02-28 00:10:39 <MacRohard> alot of precious metals will probably be replaced with complex nanocomposite materials taht are cheap to produce but haev similar properties to the pms
  86 2011-02-28 00:10:44 <lfm> peak oil was 2006 and with peak oil gold will only be sustained by industrial use?
  87 2011-02-28 00:10:59 <MacRohard> but there's very little gold in the world.. for some things it will always be the cheapest option
  88 2011-02-28 00:11:06 <pogden> if gold had exactly zero use-value, it wouldn't affect it's place as a store of value
  89 2011-02-28 00:11:12 <ArtForz> yep
  90 2011-02-28 00:11:17 <lfm> MacRohard: why do you use future tense? you said it was 2006
  91 2011-02-28 00:11:36 <MacRohard> lfm, people are working on replacement matrials now but they're not ready yet
  92 2011-02-28 00:11:43 <lfm> MacRohard: you do know it is 2011 now right?
  93 2011-02-28 00:11:54 <MacRohard> lfm, start making some sense
  94 2011-02-28 00:12:10 <lfm> is peak oil future or past?
  95 2011-02-28 00:12:15 <MacRohard> 2006 i told you
  96 2011-02-28 00:12:18 <ArtForz> lfm: yes ;)
  97 2011-02-28 00:12:44 <lfm> so the effects should be then too shouldnt they?
  98 2011-02-28 00:12:51 <jgarzik> We've hit peak oil several times, strictly speaking.  But improvements in extraction technology keeps pushing that back.
  99 2011-02-28 00:13:04 <jgarzik> frakking the bachan(sp?) oil fields is the hot new topic today
 100 2011-02-28 00:13:08 <MacRohard> lfm, they were.. then there was a massive economic collapse that reduced demand for oil
 101 2011-02-28 00:13:27 <lfm> oh so we're saved!
 102 2011-02-28 00:13:32 <MacRohard> lfm, and there will be another massive economic collapse right about now
 103 2011-02-28 00:13:51 <gasteve> what IDE do people recommend for C++ (and bitcoin development)?  (right now, my IDE is bash and vi)
 104 2011-02-28 00:13:54 <lfm> hmm, sounds like the end is nigh! again!
 105 2011-02-28 00:14:03 <luke-jr> gasteve: ide ftl
 106 2011-02-28 00:14:11 <luke-jr> but you could upgrade to vim
 107 2011-02-28 00:14:22 <gasteve> well, I am using vim actually
 108 2011-02-28 00:14:27 <luke-jr> :p
 109 2011-02-28 00:14:50 <lfm> MacRohard: I guess it kinda reminds one of the boy who cried wolf just a bit much
 110 2011-02-28 00:14:54 <ArtForz> vim here
 111 2011-02-28 00:15:22 <luke-jr> ArtForz: but you can't code for beans! if you deny this, show me calminer code to prove it
 112 2011-02-28 00:15:23 <luke-jr> <.<
 113 2011-02-28 00:15:45 <ArtForz> hey, I can write C in any language ;)
 114 2011-02-28 00:16:04 <luke-jr> …
 115 2011-02-28 00:16:06 <lfm> luke-jr why would Diable and M0mchil switch to Art's opencl if he was so bad?
 116 2011-02-28 00:16:16 <luke-jr> lfm: I'm just trying to get his calminer, don't mind me.
 117 2011-02-28 00:17:04 <ArtForz> good luck with that for now
 118 2011-02-28 00:17:12 <luke-jr> :P
 119 2011-02-28 00:17:42 <lfm> luke-jr youl prolly have to wait till its superceded at least
 120 2011-02-28 00:17:49 f3n has quit (Disconnected by services)
 121 2011-02-28 00:17:49 <luke-jr> lfm: it is :p
 122 2011-02-28 00:17:53 <luke-jr> he's got ASICs now
 123 2011-02-28 00:18:04 f4n has joined
 124 2011-02-28 00:18:05 <MacRohard> lfm, well.. get ready to be eaten i guess.
 125 2011-02-28 00:18:39 <ArtForz> which have a initial cost about 1.5x of GPUs and pretty much 0 resalve value
 126 2011-02-28 00:18:42 <ArtForz> *resale
 127 2011-02-28 00:19:49 <ArtForz> cheaper to stay with GPUs until $/Mhps/day drops by another factor of 4-5
 128 2011-02-28 00:20:00 <luke-jr> $?
 129 2011-02-28 00:20:04 <noagendamarket> If there is peak oil why do they worry about climate change ?
 130 2011-02-28 00:20:06 <noagendamarket> lol
 131 2011-02-28 00:20:16 <luke-jr> noagendamarket: that's political propaganda
 132 2011-02-28 00:20:23 <luke-jr> man can't change climate
 133 2011-02-28 00:20:26 <noagendamarket> it will solve itself
 134 2011-02-28 00:20:29 <luke-jr> short of maybe a nuclear strike
 135 2011-02-28 00:20:38 <noagendamarket> thats what im sayinmg
 136 2011-02-28 00:20:50 <MacRohard> noagendamarket, climate change the excuase they will give for why they're limiting oil use (when the real reason is peak oil)
 137 2011-02-28 00:20:50 <johnyh> ArtForz: will you be selling your devices? anytime soon?
 138 2011-02-28 00:20:58 <noagendamarket> the same people who believe in climate change also believe in peak oil
 139 2011-02-28 00:21:12 <noagendamarket> its a logical fallacy
 140 2011-02-28 00:21:25 <ArtForz> well, not believing in climate change would be pretty foolish
 141 2011-02-28 00:21:28 <noagendamarket> if peak oil exists you cant have climate change imo
 142 2011-02-28 00:21:31 <ArtForz> now, *man-made* climate change...
 143 2011-02-28 00:21:41 <MacRohard> noagendamarket, the difference between climate change and peak oil is that with climate change they can tax carbon emmissions (and naked short sell them and stael all the money) whereas with peak oil all the profits end up with the oil producers
 144 2011-02-28 00:21:48 <sipa> what is peak oil?
 145 2011-02-28 00:22:05 <noagendamarket> MacRohard I am on boadr with your worldview lol
 146 2011-02-28 00:22:49 <pogden> why can't they tax production instead of emissions?
 147 2011-02-28 00:22:56 <noagendamarket> I just bring that up when speaking to climate change nuts
 148 2011-02-28 00:22:58 <noagendamarket> usually they believe in both at the same time
 149 2011-02-28 00:23:09 <MacRohard> pogden, it would cause protests
 150 2011-02-28 00:23:21 <noagendamarket> and when you bring it up it freezes their brains lol
 151 2011-02-28 00:23:32 discHead has joined
 152 2011-02-28 00:23:35 <pogden> tax on big, evil oil companies?
 153 2011-02-28 00:23:35 <MacRohard> pogden, with carbon it plays into the 'green' environmental stuff and makes people feel like they're doing something nice
 154 2011-02-28 00:23:50 <MacRohard> pogden, whereas if you increase gasoline taxes everyone just hates you
 155 2011-02-28 00:24:06 <noagendamarket> ArtForz  the climate does change ...summer...winter..spring lol
 156 2011-02-28 00:24:11 <luke-jr> self-mining earnings: 133%
 157 2011-02-28 00:24:13 <MacRohard> pogden, but above that.. gasoline taxes don't offer an opportunity for the financial elite to naked short sell the tax and steal the money
 158 2011-02-28 00:24:15 <pogden> an emissions tax would necessitate a gas tax
 159 2011-02-28 00:24:37 <luke-jr> ArtForz: natural climate change is… natural :P
 160 2011-02-28 00:24:37 <noagendamarket> the retards down here are introducing carbon trading
 161 2011-02-28 00:24:49 <MacRohard> carbon emmissions are like the best thing ever to naked short sell because tehre's literally nothing to deliver
 162 2011-02-28 00:25:17 <noagendamarket> its a scheme to tax you for breathing imo
 163 2011-02-28 00:25:45 <noagendamarket> too bad mcdonalds creates all the cow farts and methane
 164 2011-02-28 00:25:48 <luke-jr> I shouldn't be taxed for breathing cuz I make my own air <.<
 165 2011-02-28 00:25:50 <noagendamarket> lol
 166 2011-02-28 00:26:31 discHead has quit (Client Quit)
 167 2011-02-28 00:26:59 RichardG has quit (Quit: Ping timeout: -1 seconds)
 168 2011-02-28 00:31:56 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 169 2011-02-28 00:33:58 JStoker has quit (Excess Flood)
 170 2011-02-28 00:34:29 <luke-jr> what? we're back down to .89? :/
 171 2011-02-28 00:35:11 <phantomcircuit> is it just me or does it seem like it takes a very long time for bitcoind to get to a usable state?
 172 2011-02-28 00:35:20 <xelister> luke-jr: I can sell you some for 1.10 if it makes you happier =)
 173 2011-02-28 00:35:30 <doublec> phantomcircuit: it can take a while to download the block chain
 174 2011-02-28 00:35:37 <luke-jr> xelister: I was looking to sell, actually :P
 175 2011-02-28 00:35:47 <xelister> luke-jr: I can buy some at 0.75... ;)
 176 2011-02-28 00:36:02 * xelister puts on his Jew hat
 177 2011-02-28 00:36:08 <xelister> me like a boss
 178 2011-02-28 00:36:08 <luke-jr> doublec: IMO, wallets should download the block chain starting at "now" and going back :p
 179 2011-02-28 00:36:25 <luke-jr> so they can skip the useless data
 180 2011-02-28 00:36:41 <luke-jr> xelister: sure, but I could sell on MtGox for .89 :p
 181 2011-02-28 00:37:02 <luke-jr> BCM has been .82 forever now
 182 2011-02-28 00:37:06 <luke-jr> there's nothing moving anymore
 183 2011-02-28 00:37:10 <xelister> I can throw in an anegdote and deliver your loot by a bank wire
 184 2011-02-28 00:37:12 <luke-jr> .82 bid, .97 ask
 185 2011-02-28 00:37:25 <luke-jr> xelister: bank wire costs me $10 to receieve
 186 2011-02-28 00:37:42 <xelister> and I will throw a myserious bonus to the loot
 187 2011-02-28 00:37:49 <luke-jr> is it a bobcat?
 188 2011-02-28 00:38:07 <xelister> >_>
 189 2011-02-28 00:38:10 JStoker has joined
 190 2011-02-28 00:38:11 <luke-jr> http://xkcd.com/325/
 191 2011-02-28 00:38:11 <verendus> you can get those as pets now, and/or declawed
 192 2011-02-28 00:38:29 <luke-jr> verendus: only when you're expecting them
 193 2011-02-28 00:39:15 molecular has joined
 194 2011-02-28 00:40:25 <luke-jr> actually, I have a pending purchase of 90 BTC for $90
 195 2011-02-28 00:43:15 Slix` has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
 196 2011-02-28 00:48:35 <jgarzik> BCM is unmoving because it closes March 1
 197 2011-02-28 00:48:45 <jgarzik> BCMv2 grand opening happens then
 198 2011-02-28 00:50:22 <luke-jr> jgarzik: the new one has nothing at all
 199 2011-02-28 00:50:50 [Noodles] has quit (Quit: Miranda IM! Smaller, Faster, Easier. http://miranda-im.org)
 200 2011-02-28 01:09:32 johnyh has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 201 2011-02-28 01:17:04 johnyh has joined
 202 2011-02-28 01:17:26 Lachesis has joined
 203 2011-02-28 01:29:57 Lachesis has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 204 2011-02-28 01:33:33 ApertureScience has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 205 2011-02-28 01:34:31 btcminer has quit (Quit: leaving)
 206 2011-02-28 01:35:28 diniska has joined
 207 2011-02-28 01:36:13 [Noodles] has joined
 208 2011-02-28 01:36:24 hazek has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
 209 2011-02-28 01:40:12 diniska has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
 210 2011-02-28 01:40:49 larsig has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 211 2011-02-28 01:41:27 ApertureScience has joined
 212 2011-02-28 01:45:39 <andrewh> hi
 213 2011-02-28 01:47:58 alkor has joined
 214 2011-02-28 01:54:28 alkor has quit (Quit: alkor)
 215 2011-02-28 01:54:39 larsig has joined
 216 2011-02-28 01:54:40 alystair has joined
 217 2011-02-28 02:03:49 [Noodles] has quit (Quit: Miranda IM! Smaller, Faster, Easier. http://miranda-im.org)
 218 2011-02-28 02:16:26 xelister has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 219 2011-02-28 02:22:32 pogden has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 220 2011-02-28 02:24:00 phantomcircuit has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 221 2011-02-28 02:24:07 phantomcircuit has joined
 222 2011-02-28 02:29:27 Lachesis has joined
 223 2011-02-28 02:47:56 james has joined
 224 2011-02-28 02:48:22 james is now known as Guest44256
 225 2011-02-28 02:49:55 bitcoiner has joined
 226 2011-02-28 02:50:19 <Lachesis> i'm getting the clGetPlatformIDs error on Ubuntu 10.10
 227 2011-02-28 02:50:24 <Lachesis> anyone know how to fix this?
 228 2011-02-28 02:50:57 <Lachesis> i've fixed this before but i forgot how
 229 2011-02-28 02:56:11 brunner has joined
 230 2011-02-28 02:59:48 temp1029 has joined
 231 2011-02-28 03:00:57 <temp1029> anyone here that could field a, probably simple, question?
 232 2011-02-28 03:01:14 <endian7000> ?
 233 2011-02-28 03:01:22 <Lachesis> shoot temp1029
 234 2011-02-28 03:02:25 <temp1029> how does bitcoin decide which transactions to include in a block?  and do the transactions my instance of bitcoin has included need to match with what all the other nodes have decided to include?
 235 2011-02-28 03:02:36 <Lachesis> for the second part, no
 236 2011-02-28 03:02:47 <Blitzboom> all transactions since the last block are included in the next block
 237 2011-02-28 03:04:32 <temp1029> so if i am working on making a new block and a transaction comes through do i then have to include it and start working on a "new" block or does a transaction like that go into some kind of queue, to be included in the block after the one i am working on?
 238 2011-02-28 03:06:30 <temp1029> if the way I wrote that makes any sense....
 239 2011-02-28 03:07:48 <luke-jr> temp1029: hybrid between #1 and #2
 240 2011-02-28 03:07:50 <luke-jr> ideally #1
 241 2011-02-28 03:08:08 <luke-jr> but you don't *have* to do anything I think
 242 2011-02-28 03:08:25 <ArtForz> you dont *have* to include any transactions
 243 2011-02-28 03:08:26 <TheKid> it's highly unlikely at the moment that a transaction comes in at the exact moment you find + broadcast your found block
 244 2011-02-28 03:08:59 <ArtForz> blocks not containing any transactions except for generation are perfectly ok
 245 2011-02-28 03:09:01 <TheKid> if it happens, it goes into the next block someone founds
 246 2011-02-28 03:09:05 <ArtForz> yep
 247 2011-02-28 03:09:20 * luke-jr considers hacking his bitcoind to only include tx with fees
 248 2011-02-28 03:09:24 <ArtForz> normal client only adds transactions to block once every 60 seconds
 249 2011-02-28 03:09:51 <luke-jr> ArtForz: what if it gets a block with the old tx list?
 250 2011-02-28 03:09:55 <luke-jr> does it still use it?
 251 2011-02-28 03:09:57 <ArtForz> ?
 252 2011-02-28 03:10:19 <luke-jr> eg, it updates the tx list, then gets results from miner
 253 2011-02-28 03:10:26 <luke-jr> results withouit that tx
 254 2011-02-28 03:10:38 <ArtForz> I think it does it the other way around
 255 2011-02-28 03:11:08 <luke-jr> so it only updates when it has a getwork, not every 60 s?
 256 2011-02-28 03:11:24 <ArtForz> well, getworks happen usually a lot more often than once a minute ...
 257 2011-02-28 03:11:29 <ArtForz> I think getwork caches old transaction list for a while
 258 2011-02-28 03:11:55 <luke-jr> think it'd piss people off or confuse them, if people started demanding fees?
 259 2011-02-28 03:11:58 <ArtForz> never really checked the internals too deeply, because the whole concept is backwards
 260 2011-02-28 03:12:15 <ArtForz> unless they happened to have a large % of the network... nope
 261 2011-02-28 03:13:11 <luke-jr> I mean multiple people :P
 262 2011-02-28 03:13:16 <luke-jr> maybe say 10%
 263 2011-02-28 03:13:23 <ArtForz> nah, not really
 264 2011-02-28 03:13:52 <ArtForz> you'd need more like 80% to make it really bothersome imo
 265 2011-02-28 03:14:49 <ArtForz> even then fee-less txes would get into one of 5 blocks on average = < 1h
 266 2011-02-28 03:15:43 <temp1029> thx ArtForz, your statement about generation only blocks tells me what i needed to know, i was having trouble wrapping my head around how all the nodes would be kept synchronous, but since the created clock is included with the solution it, they don't need to be
 267 2011-02-28 03:15:57 <temp1029> once again amazed by the elegance of Bitcoin!
 268 2011-02-28 03:16:09 <ArtForz> yep
 269 2011-02-28 03:17:34 <temp1029> one other question, after we reach approx 21mil Bitcoins, wouldn't it make sense to lock the target at it's easiest possible value, so as to generate blocks as fast as possible?  or am i missing something on that?
 270 2011-02-28 03:17:50 <ArtForz> erm, no
 271 2011-02-28 03:17:58 <[Tycho]> Then block will be generated way too fast.
 272 2011-02-28 03:18:10 <ArtForz> each block causes some overhead, so that be rather... bad
 273 2011-02-28 03:18:48 <nevezen> No more transactions after 21mil bitcoins?
 274 2011-02-28 03:18:51 <temp1029> ahhhh, got it, would overload many of the nodes with blocks being generated ever couple of minutes of seconds, right?
 275 2011-02-28 03:18:51 <ArtForz> ?
 276 2011-02-28 03:18:56 <ArtForz> yeah
 277 2011-02-28 03:18:58 <luke-jr> nevezen: …
 278 2011-02-28 03:19:09 <[Tycho]> Actually i think that waiting 10 min for each transaction is not nice :) But nothing can be done.
 279 2011-02-28 03:19:12 Lachesis has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
 280 2011-02-28 03:19:12 <luke-jr> temp1029: it would take the light speed problem home
 281 2011-02-28 03:19:21 <nevezen> when generation becomes irrelevant because of difficulty..
 282 2011-02-28 03:19:21 <ArtForz> also, you'd get way more blocks independently found by 2 nodes near-simultaneously
 283 2011-02-28 03:19:25 <ArtForz> = way more chain froks
 284 2011-02-28 03:19:33 <ArtForz> *forks
 285 2011-02-28 03:20:11 <ArtForz> reducing avg time/block increases forks, which lowers overall network strength
 286 2011-02-28 03:20:12 <temp1029> i was just thinking in terms of verifying the validity of a transaction for fast acceptence, as in retail outlets and such
 287 2011-02-28 03:20:29 <ArtForz> well, bit6coin really isnt designed for that
 288 2011-02-28 03:20:33 <ArtForz> *bitcoin
 289 2011-02-28 03:20:37 <luke-jr> temp1029: if you have blocks every minute, you would need 60 confirmations to be sure
 290 2011-02-28 03:20:42 <ArtForz> yep
 291 2011-02-28 03:20:47 <[Tycho]> There will be no retail outlets in such a distant future.
 292 2011-02-28 03:20:58 <luke-jr> lol
 293 2011-02-28 03:21:08 <temp1029> i like your thinking Tycho!
 294 2011-02-28 03:21:19 <temp1029> thanks for letting me pick your brains
 295 2011-02-28 03:21:22 <[Tycho]> May be you just missed the fact that the end of the world comes in 2012.
 296 2011-02-28 03:21:24 <luke-jr> already, you can order food and have it delivered
 297 2011-02-28 03:21:30 <[Tycho]> Not to mention World War III
 298 2011-02-28 03:21:48 <amiller> what's the significance of the 21 million
 299 2011-02-28 03:21:56 <amiller> is that number an optimal balance between some factors
 300 2011-02-28 03:21:56 <luke-jr> amiller: no significance
 301 2011-02-28 03:22:06 <temp1029> well the big bus driving down my street yesterday would disagree with you Tycho, its coming march 21st 2011....
 302 2011-02-28 03:22:09 <amiller> would 10 have been adequate
 303 2011-02-28 03:22:19 <luke-jr> amiller: 21million isn't adequate.
 304 2011-02-28 03:22:35 <luke-jr> it's not really 21 million either
 305 2011-02-28 03:22:45 <temp1029> although i could swear that same bus said the same thing about march 21st 2010.......
 306 2011-02-28 03:22:59 <amiller> i understand that since each one can be split into 8 decimal place parts, that the granularity is still very good
 307 2011-02-28 03:23:05 <luke-jr> it's 2,099,999,997,690,000
 308 2011-02-28 03:23:20 <temp1029> anyways, nite all, thx again
 309 2011-02-28 03:23:21 <endian7000> looking forward to buying pizza with mBTC...
 310 2011-02-28 03:23:29 temp1029 has quit (Quit: Page closed)
 311 2011-02-28 03:23:46 <luke-jr> endian7000: I'm looking forward to buying pizza with TBC :P
 312 2011-02-28 03:23:48 <amiller> luke-jr, you are saying that there are that many 10^15  indivisible units, is that right
 313 2011-02-28 03:23:59 <ArtForz> thats the total number of smallest units
 314 2011-02-28 03:24:12 <amiller> great, that makes sense to me
 315 2011-02-28 03:25:43 * luke-jr currently buys/sells hBTC
 316 2011-02-28 03:26:09 <amiller> what is TBC
 317 2011-02-28 03:26:17 <luke-jr> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Units
 318 2011-02-28 03:26:17 <amiller> i thought it was just a typo for btc
 319 2011-02-28 03:26:34 <ArtForz> luke-jr: hectobtc?
 320 2011-02-28 03:26:51 <luke-jr> ArtForz: yeah
 321 2011-02-28 03:27:12 <ArtForz> cool ;)
 322 2011-02-28 03:27:18 <luke-jr> I'd prefer to be buying/selling ᵇBTC ;)
 323 2011-02-28 03:27:19 <luke-jr> err
 324 2011-02-28 03:27:21 <luke-jr> I'd prefer to be buying/selling ᵇTBC ;)
 325 2011-02-28 03:29:53 <[Tycho]> mBTC... Mean Time Between Crashes ? :)
 326 2011-02-28 03:30:04 <luke-jr> [Tycho]: milli-bitcoin
 327 2011-02-28 03:30:13 <ArtForz> thatd be mtbc ;)
 328 2011-02-28 03:30:38 <luke-jr> ra-tam, ra-mill su-san fy-ton -bong, su-mill ni-san po-ton go and ni millths <-- total number of TBC ever :P
 329 2011-02-28 03:31:01 <luke-jr> ArtForz: ᵐTBC is 2.68435456 BTC
 330 2011-02-28 03:31:04 <amiller> i want to buy bong bitcoins
 331 2011-02-28 03:31:34 <luke-jr> amiller: I'll sell you 1 bong-bitcoin for 40 USD
 332 2011-02-28 03:32:45 <[Tycho]> What's the difference between "Tonal" and "Tonal as Hex" in that table ?
 333 2011-02-28 03:32:58 <luke-jr> [Tycho]: the characters used
 334 2011-02-28 03:33:08 <amiller> ie 42.94967 @ 0.931
 335 2011-02-28 03:33:25 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 336 2011-02-28 03:33:47 mtgox2 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 337 2011-02-28 03:35:56 <amiller> so a new block is made every 10 minutes
 338 2011-02-28 03:36:16 <TheKid> that's the target
 339 2011-02-28 03:36:23 <TheKid> lately it has been far more frequent
 340 2011-02-28 03:36:26 <amiller> everyone who is trying to generate blocks has a chance of winning each block
 341 2011-02-28 03:36:38 <amiller> people with more computer power are more likely to generate blocks
 342 2011-02-28 03:36:49 <amiller> do we know how much variety is in the people generating blocks?
 343 2011-02-28 03:37:09 <amiller> if there were on person in control of 50% of the network because they had a super computer generating blocks, would that be noticeable
 344 2011-02-28 03:37:35 ZenMondo1 has joined
 345 2011-02-28 03:37:35 ZenMondo has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 346 2011-02-28 03:38:01 ZenMondo1 is now known as ZenMondo
 347 2011-02-28 03:39:01 da2ce7 has joined
 348 2011-02-28 03:39:01 da2ce7 has quit (Changing host)
 349 2011-02-28 03:39:01 da2ce7 has joined
 350 2011-02-28 03:39:17 <amiller> wait, does someone win 50BTC every ten minutes, that can't be..
 351 2011-02-28 03:40:29 <[Tycho]> Why not ? They are working hard.
 352 2011-02-28 03:40:38 <jgarzik> amiller: on average, every 10 minutes they receive 50 BTC + transaction fees
 353 2011-02-28 03:41:47 Guest44256 has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 354 2011-02-28 03:42:58 <luke-jr> until 2013
 355 2011-02-28 03:43:21 james has joined
 356 2011-02-28 03:43:46 <amiller> i guess that's still not very much inflation given the current volume
 357 2011-02-28 03:43:47 james is now known as Guest40035
 358 2011-02-28 03:44:16 <[Tycho]> It's actually deflation, not inflation :)
 359 2011-02-28 03:45:53 <amiller> is there anyone aggregating all the statistics, that would show which addresses hold the most coins, things like that
 360 2011-02-28 03:46:13 <gasteve> adding more btc is inflation...however you have to consider that the more miners there are, the higher the cost of mining, which will put upward pressure on the value of btc...and the more miners, the broader those BTC are being distributed, which is a good thing overall
 361 2011-02-28 03:48:20 <endian7000> ...and GPUs get cheaper :)
 362 2011-02-28 03:48:43 <gasteve> http://bitcoinreport.blogspot.com/
 363 2011-02-28 03:50:37 <amiller> thanks gasteve that's exactly what i had in mind
 364 2011-02-28 03:51:48 <amiller> how will the block size be expected to grow?
 365 2011-02-28 03:51:53 <amiller> like if it takes me an hour to download it on a new machine now
 366 2011-02-28 03:52:10 <amiller> will it take twice as much space when there are twice as many bitcoin transactions
 367 2011-02-28 03:54:11 <greyface> hm, not sure if i like that my address is on that list
 368 2011-02-28 03:54:32 <greyface> maybe i should break my holdings up into smaller chunks
 369 2011-02-28 03:55:34 <amiller> is there anyone maintaining a watch list
 370 2011-02-28 03:55:46 <amiller> trying to match accounts to public personas, such as irc nicks
 371 2011-02-28 03:56:15 <amiller> something like that might actually be useful to help you audit your anonynimity
 372 2011-02-28 03:57:26 hexidigital has joined
 373 2011-02-28 03:57:27 <gasteve> a block actually only includes the root hash of a merkle tree of transaction hashes...in the bitcoin whitepaper, it states that at a rate of 10 minutes per block, the entire block chain would increate by 4.3mb / year
 374 2011-02-28 03:57:53 <hexidigital> hi, I have a small patch that fixes a missing newline in the latest available linux version: https://gist.github.com/846910
 375 2011-02-28 03:58:48 <endian7000> amiller: send me a penny to 1Pguqs4RVxM6YzTt8haZR1e5z57tqMZATE and I'll add you ;)
 376 2011-02-28 03:59:06 <hexidigital> also, "./bitcoind -?" breaks with the csh shell.  maybe '-help' would be a better argument?
 377 2011-02-28 03:59:21 <nevezen> only 4.3MB/year?
 378 2011-02-28 03:59:36 <ArtForz> for headers, yeah
 379 2011-02-28 03:59:37 <gasteve> today, clients download and store all transactions I believe (not 100% sure)...it's conceivable that a client could download and verify all transactions in a block, but only retain transactions that it cares about (i.e. ones in a particular wallet)
 380 2011-02-28 04:00:06 <gasteve> actually, 4.2MB/year (mistyped)
 381 2011-02-28 04:00:32 <amiller> are there any evil github projects
 382 2011-02-28 04:00:39 <amiller> containing code that is easy to run that would make the network worse for everyone
 383 2011-02-28 04:00:44 <nevezen> what's the current block size now? (in MB)?
 384 2011-02-28 04:00:44 <gasteve> but, again, that's just block headers...you would want a number of node in the network retaining all transactions
 385 2011-02-28 04:00:47 <tcatm> hexidigital: thanks!
 386 2011-02-28 04:01:06 <amiller> such as reference code for making people do too much work, making lots of spurious transactions things like that
 387 2011-02-28 04:01:07 <gasteve> about 80 bytes
 388 2011-02-28 04:01:27 <gasteve> (oh, you mean all blocks)
 389 2011-02-28 04:01:39 <nevezen> 80MB
 390 2011-02-28 04:01:45 <CIA-57> bitcoin: tcatm master * r6665aca / init.cpp : fix missing newline in help - http://bit.ly/g7Iq1w
 391 2011-02-28 04:02:17 <hexidigital> tcatm:  np
 392 2011-02-28 04:02:22 <nevezen> only transactions get added to a new block after each generation right?
 393 2011-02-28 04:02:30 <nevezen> only new transactions I mean..
 394 2011-02-28 04:02:37 <gasteve> 80MB is including the transactions...the headers only would be just under 9MB
 395 2011-02-28 04:03:17 <dirtyfilthy> 9mb really? 2000 headers is about 160k
 396 2011-02-28 04:03:24 <luke-jr> hexidigital: --help works
 397 2011-02-28 04:03:39 <hexidigital> luke-jr:  indeed, but the --help says to use -? :)
 398 2011-02-28 04:03:49 <luke-jr> :p
 399 2011-02-28 04:03:52 <luke-jr> -h is the standard
 400 2011-02-28 04:03:54 <dirtyfilthy> oh whoops, i'm thinking an order of magnitude out
 401 2011-02-28 04:03:57 scsich has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
 402 2011-02-28 04:03:59 <gasteve> I'm going by what the white paper says the header size of a block is
 403 2011-02-28 04:04:05 <gasteve> (80 bytes)
 404 2011-02-28 04:04:43 <dirtyfilthy> gasteve: yeah the block chain is ~ 100k blocks not 10k, i wasn't calculating properly
 405 2011-02-28 04:05:28 <gasteve> actually, if 2000 headers is 160k, then that would be in line with a total of a little under 9mb for all of the headers
 406 2011-02-28 04:06:38 <dirtyfilthy> yeh
 407 2011-02-28 04:06:56 Guest40035 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 408 2011-02-28 04:07:20 <endian7000> what if I spam the system with an epic amount of transactions?
 409 2011-02-28 04:07:32 <amiller> how many would you have to spam to be a problem
 410 2011-02-28 04:07:41 <amiller> and from how many iP addresses?
 411 2011-02-28 04:08:05 <endian7000> and is there some page summarizing aspects like this?
 412 2011-02-28 04:08:26 <amiller> (i'm sure all the information is there, i've spent all day bouncing between wikis and forums and whitepapers)
 413 2011-02-28 04:08:38 pwrgeek has quit ()
 414 2011-02-28 04:09:25 <amiller> how much would it cost for a government to 'shut down bitcoin' if desired
 415 2011-02-28 04:09:34 <dirtyfilthy> two fiddy
 416 2011-02-28 04:09:36 <Cusipzzz> bout tree fiddy
 417 2011-02-28 04:09:39 <hexidigital> 5 million bitcoins
 418 2011-02-28 04:09:41 <Cusipzzz> lol
 419 2011-02-28 04:10:14 <jgarzik> $5 mil to p0wn bitcoin, I'd say.
 420 2011-02-28 04:10:15 <endian7000> (network strength in 5970s) * (price of 5970) ?
 421 2011-02-28 04:10:23 <amiller> it seems clear to me that it's not profitable to 'cheat' at bitcoin, but it seems like it would be possible to make it slightly worse for linear cost
 422 2011-02-28 04:10:45 <dirtyfilthy> shutdowning down the main bitcoin site and the irc bootstrap would go a long way to fucking it up
 423 2011-02-28 04:11:02 <dirtyfilthy> *shutting down
 424 2011-02-28 04:11:08 <jgarzik> not really
 425 2011-02-28 04:11:37 <amiller> well in a lot of ways having more people use bitcoins and participating by hosting sites, the stronger it all gets
 426 2011-02-28 04:11:49 <jgarzik> yes
 427 2011-02-28 04:12:07 <gasteve> there is a maximum size to a block and a limit to the number of free transactions...a spammer would have to start paying bitcoins to get their transactions into blocks
 428 2011-02-28 04:12:24 <gasteve> (paying bitcoins in the form of a transaction fee)
 429 2011-02-28 04:12:29 <jgarzik> yes
 430 2011-02-28 04:12:31 <gasteve> (that a miner collects)
 431 2011-02-28 04:12:46 <endian7000> so a spammer could force everybody to pay transaction fees?
 432 2011-02-28 04:12:48 <amiller> well a spammer could ruin free transactions for everyone
 433 2011-02-28 04:12:49 <jgarzik> search the forums for MrBurns to see transaction spam
 434 2011-02-28 04:12:56 <jgarzik> amiller: yes
 435 2011-02-28 04:13:21 <amiller> well that would certainly slow down adoption...
 436 2011-02-28 04:13:27 <amiller> are there any other effects like that?
 437 2011-02-28 04:13:30 <endian7000> note to self: if I get into mining, it will be profitable for me to spam the network
 438 2011-02-28 04:13:57 <jgarzik> amiller: it's inevitable that fees will be required.  nobody should be assuming bitcoin transactions are / will always be free.
 439 2011-02-28 04:14:25 <amiller> in general, spammers can make the costs higher
 440 2011-02-28 04:14:42 <jgarzik> when I started, many blocks only had 1 transaction (the 50 BTC generation transaction).  Looking at http://blockexplorer.com/ the average is now ~10 transactions per block, quite often.
 441 2011-02-28 04:14:53 <jgarzik> even without spammers, the free slots will be used up.
 442 2011-02-28 04:15:05 <hexidigital> tcatm:  FYI, I'm running this on a FreeBSD system with no changes.  Nice work for cross-platform compatibility. :)
 443 2011-02-28 04:15:47 <endian7000> and we'll need sites/services to predict how much you'll need to pay
 444 2011-02-28 04:16:13 <tcatm> hexidigital: That's great to hear. CLI or wxGUI?
 445 2011-02-28 04:16:22 <endian7000>  /aspect-for-your-node
 446 2011-02-28 04:16:22 <hexidigital> tcatm:  It's a headless server, so CLI
 447 2011-02-28 04:16:45 <amiller> what is the largest number of transactions in a block
 448 2011-02-28 04:17:21 <amiller> what would happen if i made a thousand little addresses and gave them each .01BTC and had them all trade every minute
 449 2011-02-28 04:17:40 <amiller> would that A. use up all the free transactions and B. cause a significant amount more work or C. not have any effect or not be viable
 450 2011-02-28 04:17:42 <dirtyfilthy> you'd start paying transaction fees
 451 2011-02-28 04:18:02 <luke-jr> no
 452 2011-02-28 04:18:04 <luke-jr> everyone else would
 453 2011-02-28 04:18:13 <ArtForz> nope, your transactions wouldnt make it into a block
 454 2011-02-28 04:18:17 <luke-jr> and I would REALLY modify my miner to only include tx with fees
 455 2011-02-28 04:18:28 <ArtForz> tx with fees always get priority
 456 2011-02-28 04:18:40 <gasteve> btw, in anticipation of transaction fees, a good feature to have in the client is an ability to move keys between wallets (instead of using transactions to do that)
 457 2011-02-28 04:18:46 <luke-jr> I might even release a branch that prioritizes by tx amount
 458 2011-02-28 04:18:48 james has joined
 459 2011-02-28 04:18:54 <ArtForz> for the rest ,they're scored bage on age of inputs, amount of coins, size of transaction in bytes, ...
 460 2011-02-28 04:18:54 <amiller> so if i did that
 461 2011-02-28 04:19:02 <amiller> but only as a free transaction
 462 2011-02-28 04:19:11 <amiller> it would use up all of the free transactions for everyone indefinitely at no expense to me
 463 2011-02-28 04:19:14 james is now known as Guest79708
 464 2011-02-28 04:19:16 <ArtForz> you'd get about 10 transactions into every block
 465 2011-02-28 04:19:38 <luke-jr> ah, ArtForz has a good point
 466 2011-02-28 04:19:45 <luke-jr> your .01 coins would be newer than the rest
 467 2011-02-28 04:19:45 <jgarzik> Current bitcoin transaction flow rate:  2104 transactions over the past 24 hours.  If you assume one block every 10 minutes, that is ~15 transactions per block.  That's around 3k, and the free transaction space is 27k.
 468 2011-02-28 04:19:47 Diablo-D3 has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 469 2011-02-28 04:20:13 <amiller> it seems like i could make an app engine script that would use up all the free things once and for all
 470 2011-02-28 04:20:14 <jgarzik> it is inevitable that the free tx area will be full 100% of the time, in a few years.
 471 2011-02-28 04:20:24 bitcoiner has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.6.13/20101203075014])
 472 2011-02-28 04:20:37 <jgarzik> amiller: yep
 473 2011-02-28 04:20:48 <ArtForz> and you wouldnt be the first to try
 474 2011-02-28 04:21:08 <amiller> what happened to the others :p
 475 2011-02-28 04:21:33 <amiller> i suppose it would be rude to put up a bounty to do that
 476 2011-02-28 04:21:44 <ArtForz> they succeeded for a short wile, then we added rate limiting and free tx scoring
 477 2011-02-28 04:22:13 <amiller> is there going to be competition for transaction fees
 478 2011-02-28 04:22:23 <amiller> that seems like the natural sort of thing that would occur
 479 2011-02-28 04:22:26 <ArtForz> ?
 480 2011-02-28 04:22:41 <amiller> first everyone will start requiring transaction fees, then sorting by the fee amount
 481 2011-02-28 04:22:51 <hexidigital> tcatm:  I'm running the shipped binary with linux emulation.  I plan to see what's needed for native freebsd support in my "spare time" hopefully soon.  Interested in patches, assuming I can provide them?
 482 2011-02-28 04:23:06 <jgarzik> hexidigital: we are always interested in patches
 483 2011-02-28 04:23:12 <jgarzik> hexidigital: or clean pull requests
 484 2011-02-28 04:23:28 <luke-jr> jgarzik: yeah right, I still don't see my bugfix merged :p
 485 2011-02-28 04:23:28 <hexidigital> cool
 486 2011-02-28 04:33:48 Lachesis has joined
 487 2011-02-28 04:38:09 TheKid has left ()
 488 2011-02-28 04:38:45 TheKid has joined
 489 2011-02-28 04:38:52 TheKid has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 490 2011-02-28 04:40:25 TheKid has joined
 491 2011-02-28 04:45:37 doublec has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 492 2011-02-28 04:51:53 ApertureScience has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 493 2011-02-28 04:53:38 ApertureScience has joined
 494 2011-02-28 04:57:52 dirtyfilthy has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 495 2011-02-28 05:04:54 Guest79708 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 496 2011-02-28 05:09:24 endian7000 has quit (Quit: endian7000)
 497 2011-02-28 05:19:33 discHead has joined
 498 2011-02-28 05:35:53 hwolf has joined
 499 2011-02-28 05:36:13 u2time has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 500 2011-02-28 05:42:28 xelister has joined
 501 2011-02-28 05:42:28 xelister has quit (Changing host)
 502 2011-02-28 05:42:28 xelister has joined
 503 2011-02-28 05:51:09 u2time has joined
 504 2011-02-28 06:00:37 sabalaba has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 505 2011-02-28 06:06:23 jgarzik has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 506 2011-02-28 06:06:59 hacim has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 507 2011-02-28 06:07:00 CIA-57 has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 508 2011-02-28 06:07:34 hacim has joined
 509 2011-02-28 06:10:25 CIA-55 has joined
 510 2011-02-28 06:10:29 jgarzik has joined
 511 2011-02-28 06:24:51 alkor has joined
 512 2011-02-28 06:24:59 eTX-[u] has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 513 2011-02-28 06:26:29 MJD has quit (Quit: No Ping reply in 540 seconds.)
 514 2011-02-28 06:26:55 MJD has joined
 515 2011-02-28 06:33:10 amiller has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 516 2011-02-28 06:34:19 amiller_ has joined
 517 2011-02-28 06:38:38 alkor has quit (Quit: alkor)
 518 2011-02-28 06:40:27 u2time has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 519 2011-02-28 06:41:49 amiller_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 520 2011-02-28 06:42:57 alkor has joined
 521 2011-02-28 06:43:54 grondilu has joined
 522 2011-02-28 06:46:33 <grondilu> I tired to compile bitcoin-0.3.20 manually and it didn't go well.  I had to create the directory obj/nogui manually and finally I had no "bitcoind" executable created !?
 523 2011-02-28 06:46:47 <grondilu> s/tired/tried/
 524 2011-02-28 06:47:19 amiller_ has joined
 525 2011-02-28 06:48:32 bitcoiner has joined
 526 2011-02-28 06:49:19 <grondilu> this is messed up
 527 2011-02-28 06:49:22 <gasteve> grondilu: did you do make the "bitcoind" target?
 528 2011-02-28 06:49:51 <grondilu> yes, I ran "make -f makefile.unix bitcoind"
 529 2011-02-28 06:50:10 [Noodles] has joined
 530 2011-02-28 06:51:06 <gasteve> strange that you had to make that nogui directory...maybe it's permission related?
 531 2011-02-28 06:52:07 <gasteve> when I build (I've only built on osx) from the master branch (which is a bit newer than 0.3.20), nogui and the .o files instead were automatically created
 532 2011-02-28 06:52:25 <gasteve> s/instead/inside/
 533 2011-02-28 06:56:37 aMR-[u] has joined
 534 2011-02-28 06:56:38 Cusipzzz has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.0.2 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
 535 2011-02-28 06:56:52 <grondilu> well I have problems linking boost anyway
 536 2011-02-28 06:56:57 Lachesis has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 537 2011-02-28 06:57:00 <grondilu> even with 0.3.19
 538 2011-02-28 06:57:57 <grondilu> maybe it's because my libboost-all-dev version is 1.42.0.1 when then bitcoin install file tlaks about version 1.40
 539 2011-02-28 07:05:02 <grondilu> nevermind
 540 2011-02-28 07:05:04 grondilu has quit (Quit: leaving)
 541 2011-02-28 07:08:38 u2time has joined
 542 2011-02-28 07:08:54 amiller_ is now known as amiller
 543 2011-02-28 07:12:47 u2time has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 544 2011-02-28 07:15:36 jgarzik has quit (Changing host)
 545 2011-02-28 07:15:36 jgarzik has joined
 546 2011-02-28 07:17:00 u2time has joined
 547 2011-02-28 07:17:14 JFK911 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 548 2011-02-28 07:17:46 <alkor> Has anybody tried to compile bitcoind with clang++ on Mac OS X?
 549 2011-02-28 07:18:44 <mmagic> ;;bc,stats
 550 2011-02-28 07:18:46 <gribble> Current Blocks: 111029 | Current Difficulty: 55590.23763914 | Next Difficulty At Block: 112895 | Next Difficulty In: 1866 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 4 days, 1 hour, 23 minutes, and 12 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 65619.10652080
 551 2011-02-28 07:25:11 <mmagic> yay! I see concavity!
 552 2011-02-28 07:25:28 * mmagic high-fives all the cheesemonkeys!
 553 2011-02-28 07:28:14 u2time has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 554 2011-02-28 07:31:36 larsig has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 555 2011-02-28 07:36:29 bitcoiner has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.6.13/20101203075014])
 556 2011-02-28 07:43:10 larsig has joined
 557 2011-02-28 07:47:09 JFK911 has joined
 558 2011-02-28 07:51:50 alkor has quit (Quit: alkor)
 559 2011-02-28 07:54:15 alkor has joined
 560 2011-02-28 07:58:14 echelon has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 561 2011-02-28 08:07:47 verendus has quit (Quit: ( www.nnscript.com :: NoNameScript 4.22 :: www.esnation.com ))
 562 2011-02-28 08:15:45 ryepdx has joined
 563 2011-02-28 08:25:05 <necrodearia> Are there any charity organizations that actively participate in Bitcoin community?  e.g. are there any individuals representative of a charity that frequent this IRC channel?
 564 2011-02-28 08:25:14 <alkor> Where can I access the source for the latest release of bitcoin?
 565 2011-02-28 08:25:20 <necrodearia> alkor, http://bitcoin.org
 566 2011-02-28 08:25:44 <alkor> Can you point me to a .tar.gz or .zip file with the source?
 567 2011-02-28 08:25:49 <necrodearia> sure
 568 2011-02-28 08:25:59 <alkor> I can only see binaries on the front page.
 569 2011-02-28 08:26:24 <necrodearia> http://downloads.sourceforge.net/project/bitcoin/Bitcoin/bitcoin-0.3.20/bitcoin-0.3.20.01-linux.tar.gz?r=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bitcoin.org%2F&ts=1298881084&use_mirror=surfnet
 570 2011-02-28 08:27:15 ryepdx has quit (Quit: Page closed)
 571 2011-02-28 08:27:44 <mmagic> it's easier to get the source with git or svn
 572 2011-02-28 08:27:44 <edcba> aren't source included with install anymore ?
 573 2011-02-28 08:27:46 <necrodearia> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Trade#Donation-accepting_organizations_and_projects
 574 2011-02-28 08:28:48 <edcba> mmagic: yes of course :)
 575 2011-02-28 08:28:49 uni4dfx has joined
 576 2011-02-28 08:31:41 <mmagic> does mtgox LR withdrawal always go offline this time of day?
 577 2011-02-28 08:31:59 m86 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 578 2011-02-28 08:33:52 discHead has quit (Quit: discHead)
 579 2011-02-28 08:34:52 <uni4dfx> where can i buy ASICs?
 580 2011-02-28 08:35:34 <mmagic> pretty sure you can't.
 581 2011-02-28 08:36:09 <dissipate> uni4dfx, ArtForz is creating some supposedly
 582 2011-02-28 08:36:31 <mmagic> for sale?
 583 2011-02-28 08:36:35 <uni4dfx> well he better hurry up because if the diff keeps going up like it is now they'll be worthless no matter how powerful
 584 2011-02-28 08:37:10 <dissipate> mmagic, not that i know of, but if you contact him you can find out.
 585 2011-02-28 08:37:21 <dissipate> uni4dfx, why is that?
 586 2011-02-28 08:37:32 <mmagic> i'm pretty sure all art keeps saying is, "not now"
 587 2011-02-28 08:37:47 <edcba> uni4dfx: do you know vhdl ?
 588 2011-02-28 08:38:02 <uni4dfx> edcba no, who/what is that?
 589 2011-02-28 08:38:04 <mmagic> they're not powerful. they're about as fast as a single 5870. they just do it in 1/6 the power (apparently)
 590 2011-02-28 08:38:23 <uni4dfx> oh then they're already worthless
 591 2011-02-28 08:38:26 <mmagic> uni4dfx: he's roundabout saying that you will probably need to design your own chips.
 592 2011-02-28 08:38:27 <uni4dfx> power is the least expensive thing
 593 2011-02-28 08:38:36 <edcba> lol
 594 2011-02-28 08:38:45 <mmagic> what a strange way of looking at it.
 595 2011-02-28 08:39:00 m86 has joined
 596 2011-02-28 08:39:29 <edcba> but you should be able to get them cheaper than gpu cards if you buy enough theoritically
 597 2011-02-28 08:40:44 slush has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
 598 2011-02-28 08:40:51 <mmagic> the cheapness comes in when it's no longer power-economical to run gpu cards. else, you can run gpu for the life the card and be pretty much ok
 599 2011-02-28 08:42:04 <dissipate> my question is how many ASICs can you run in parallel, hooked up to 1 machine?
 600 2011-02-28 08:42:24 <edcba> a lot ?
 601 2011-02-28 08:42:54 <dissipate> then that is way cheaper than GPUs. you can only cram so many GPUs into one motherboard.
 602 2011-02-28 08:42:57 <mmagic> probably 100s
 603 2011-02-28 08:43:13 <dissipate> whereas with the ASICs you could stack them up pretty good
 604 2011-02-28 08:44:04 <mmagic> the infrastructure to run structured asic (because real asic is probably not feasible for a long, long time yet) is significant.
 605 2011-02-28 08:44:10 <dissipate> it seems the cost savings is also in being able to hook them all up to 1 box instead of needing multiple machines for the equivalent number of GPUs
 606 2011-02-28 08:45:12 <edcba> if you can daisy chain them i don't see why you'd need more than a box
 607 2011-02-28 08:45:43 <ArtForz> well, you're limited by airflow and PSUs
 608 2011-02-28 08:46:44 <ArtForz> my current design uses full speed usb to connect the ASIC modules to a PC
 609 2011-02-28 08:47:23 <mmagic> and controller chips and USB bus chains.. :)
 610 2011-02-28 08:47:40 <ArtForz> controller is a spartan6 lx16 fpga
 611 2011-02-28 08:47:52 <ArtForz> I dont even use a USB transceiver :P
 612 2011-02-28 08:49:53 <ArtForz> usb hubs are cheap as fuck
 613 2011-02-28 08:51:26 <ArtForz> each chip is ~7W, 8-chip module is ~64W, complete 2U unit is ~290W
 614 2011-02-28 08:51:39 <ArtForz> 2U unit gets 6.4Ghps
 615 2011-02-28 08:52:56 <dissipate> wow
 616 2011-02-28 08:53:02 <mmagic> oh, i thought you said power was 1/6 for equivalent hashing, and each chip got 300Mhash?
 617 2011-02-28 08:53:10 <mmagic> that's way less power..
 618 2011-02-28 08:53:11 <ArtForz> 200Mhash/chip
 619 2011-02-28 08:53:15 <dissipate> going to get some major coin with with that. :D
 620 2011-02-28 08:53:23 <mmagic> ahhh..  interesting
 621 2011-02-28 08:53:49 <ArtForz> I could up Vcore and clock, but I'm thermally limited
 622 2011-02-28 08:54:20 <mmagic> that's still more like 1/15 isn't it?
 623 2011-02-28 08:54:46 <ArtForz> I calculated efficiency at 11x my 5970s
 624 2011-02-28 08:55:07 <edcba> 200mhash with 16 fpga ?
 625 2011-02-28 08:55:08 <mmagic> are you disregarding the m/b + cpu of the PC?
 626 2011-02-28 08:55:16 <edcba> ouch
 627 2011-02-28 08:55:18 * edcba can't read
 628 2011-02-28 08:55:31 <ArtForz> pretty much
 629 2011-02-28 08:55:37 <ArtForz> mainboard is ~20W total
 630 2011-02-28 08:56:15 <ArtForz> and I only need one PC
 631 2011-02-28 08:56:51 <dissipate> i'm surprised others aren't jumping on the ASIC bandwagon
 632 2011-02-28 08:57:01 <ArtForz> master 2U contains mainboard, slave 2Us just have ASIC modules, PSU and external usb
 633 2011-02-28 08:57:32 <mmagic> the investment is significant, both in engineering resources and capital; the returns are volatile and risky.
 634 2011-02-28 08:57:35 <ArtForz> yep
 635 2011-02-28 08:57:39 <mmagic> i'm not surprised at all.
 636 2011-02-28 08:57:55 larsivi has joined
 637 2011-02-28 08:57:58 <mmagic> not really much of a bandwagon. :)
 638 2011-02-28 08:57:59 <ArtForz> and even at current difficulty GPUs still provide way better ROI
 639 2011-02-28 08:58:07 <dissipate> anyone operate a semiconductor company and can design and fabricate custom SHA256 chips? that would be upping the ante. :O
 640 2011-02-28 08:58:45 <mmagic> i'm thinking that they're better if they improve in speed+ability..
 641 2011-02-28 08:58:57 <dissipate> how much mhashes could one get with a real custom chip?
 642 2011-02-28 08:59:08 <ArtForz> about 1Ghps/chip shouldnt be too hard
 643 2011-02-28 08:59:27 <dissipate> wow
 644 2011-02-28 08:59:57 <dissipate> just an array of 500 chips and you could generate as much ghash as the entire bitcoin network.
 645 2011-02-28 09:00:01 <ArtForz> yep
 646 2011-02-28 09:00:18 <dissipate> if anyone has a few million dollars sitting around... :D
 647 2011-02-28 09:00:24 <ArtForz> and it'll only cost you ... about 2 million
 648 2011-02-28 09:00:34 <mmagic> if you're willing to spend that much there are much more lucrative things you could be doing with your money. :)
 649 2011-02-28 09:00:37 <ArtForz> yep
 650 2011-02-28 09:00:51 <dissipate> i have a friend who works at a semiconductor company. he is an RFIC designer. but he can't design and fabricate whatever he wants. haha.
 651 2011-02-28 09:01:15 <ArtForz> not to mention you could just buy a shitload of GPUs, pull the same stunt and sell the GPUs afterwards
 652 2011-02-28 09:01:46 <dissipate> well for 2 million the U.S. government could screw the bitcoin network.
 653 2011-02-28 09:02:03 <dissipate> that's not cool
 654 2011-02-28 09:02:08 <nevezen> and I bet 2 million is nothing for the government
 655 2011-02-28 09:02:23 <ArtForz> oh, you'd need way less than that with GPUs
 656 2011-02-28 09:02:30 Jeroenz0r has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 657 2011-02-28 09:02:32 <larsig> bitcoin price would go up:)
 658 2011-02-28 09:02:48 <nevezen> would it?
 659 2011-02-28 09:02:55 <larsig> i think so
 660 2011-02-28 09:02:55 <dissipate> why?
 661 2011-02-28 09:03:05 <nevezen> I'd think it'd go down
 662 2011-02-28 09:03:07 <ArtForz> you'd only need 2000 5870s or so
 663 2011-02-28 09:03:11 <dissipate> no, it would crash once people realized a hostile takeover was underway
 664 2011-02-28 09:03:14 <larsig> if they were to hold 2 million, 3 million woud be left in circulation
 665 2011-02-28 09:03:18 Jeroenz0r has joined
 666 2011-02-28 09:03:18 Jeroenz0r has quit (Changing host)
 667 2011-02-28 09:03:18 Jeroenz0r has joined
 668 2011-02-28 09:03:29 <larsig> uh, 19 million left
 669 2011-02-28 09:03:31 <dissipate> larsig, i'm not talking about them buying BTC
 670 2011-02-28 09:03:49 <larsig> no, generating coins and limiting the supply
 671 2011-02-28 09:03:59 <dissipate> larsig, i'm talking about them taking over the network by generating over 50% of total hash output.
 672 2011-02-28 09:04:13 <larsig> oh shit
 673 2011-02-28 09:04:16 <mmagic> ;;bc,stats
 674 2011-02-28 09:04:18 <gribble> Current Blocks: 111040 | Current Difficulty: 55590.23763914 | Next Difficulty At Block: 112895 | Next Difficulty In: 1855 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 4 days, 0 hours, 20 minutes, and 15 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 65386.34026033
 675 2011-02-28 09:04:27 <ArtForz> and once you have a majority of hashrate, you can prevent any transaction from going through and stop anyone else from finding blocks
 676 2011-02-28 09:04:31 <mmagic> still coming down, but barely..
 677 2011-02-28 09:04:44 <larsig> yikes, why 50%?
 678 2011-02-28 09:04:55 <dissipate> yep, network would be hosed
 679 2011-02-28 09:05:36 <dissipate> larsig, https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power
 680 2011-02-28 09:05:49 <nevezen> aside from a mining point of view, would bitcoins be worth anything if a 3rd (or 2/3) of coins mined out were thrown away?
 681 2011-02-28 09:06:14 <dissipate> larsig, you could generate the longest block chain, invalidating the original block chain
 682 2011-02-28 09:06:25 <larsig> taken that people were somewhat depending on them, i think so yes
 683 2011-02-28 09:06:34 <mmagic> larsig: they could, over time, create their own chain, work only on their own blocks, and their chain would grow faster, on average, than the main bitcoin network's chain. all they have to do is simply cease working on incoming blocks, and transmit their own blocks as they find them.
 684 2011-02-28 09:06:36 <larsig> i see..
 685 2011-02-28 09:07:10 <dissipate> nevezen, what do you mean by 'thrown away'?
 686 2011-02-28 09:07:47 <larsig> but can they refuse the other half of doing transactions?
 687 2011-02-28 09:07:49 <nevezen> they mining out of coins and then discarding their wallet.dat files :)
 688 2011-02-28 09:08:46 <dissipate> nevezen, that would be reducing the supply, causing the price to go up for a given demand.
 689 2011-02-28 09:08:49 <larsig> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_GjZ7i4A6M
 690 2011-02-28 09:09:23 TheKid has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 691 2011-02-28 09:09:29 <dissipate> i can see how throwing away blocks would not have been so bad back in the day, but now at nearly $1 per BTC, seems rather foolish. :P
 692 2011-02-28 09:10:49 <nevezen> It would be foolish
 693 2011-02-28 09:10:54 <larsig> hehe, maybe. but listen, if someone controls 50% of the network, can they stop transactions from coming into the block chain?
 694 2011-02-28 09:11:02 <nevezen> but not by an entity wish real money to burn
 695 2011-02-28 09:11:12 <mmagic> larsig: yes, they just mine for blocks and never put any transactions in them.
 696 2011-02-28 09:11:55 <nevezen> how is that different than what's happening at the moment, mmagic?
 697 2011-02-28 09:12:14 <mmagic> nevezen: i don't know what you're talking about?
 698 2011-02-28 09:12:40 <nevezen> "...them mining for blocks but never putting any transactions in them."
 699 2011-02-28 09:12:52 <mmagic> no, what's "happening at the moment"?
 700 2011-02-28 09:13:01 <dissipate> nevezen, at the moment no single person has control of the block chain, therefore they can only introduce blocks based on old blocks.
 701 2011-02-28 09:13:28 <nevezen> what about pooled mining?
 702 2011-02-28 09:13:32 <mmagic> nevezen: ah, i see what you're asking. what's happening now is people who mine for blocks are putting other peoples' transactions in the mined blocks willingly.
 703 2011-02-28 09:13:37 <nevezen> it would appear they have "more" control
 704 2011-02-28 09:13:57 <nevezen> as they're the ones outputting more hash/s than a single user
 705 2011-02-28 09:13:57 <dissipate> nevezen, no pool has over 50% of hash power. although slush's pool has come dangerously close as far as i know.
 706 2011-02-28 09:15:12 <dissipate> nevezen, you have to output more than 50% of total hash rate, not just a single user.
 707 2011-02-28 09:15:14 validus has joined
 708 2011-02-28 09:16:45 <nevezen> oh? what mechanism let's that happen mmagic?
 709 2011-02-28 09:17:02 <larsig> lets say I own 49% of the cpu power, then i will probably generate coins too?
 710 2011-02-28 09:17:18 <larsig> even if someone else owns 51%
 711 2011-02-28 09:17:29 <dissipate> larsig, nope
 712 2011-02-28 09:17:44 <larsig> yikes
 713 2011-02-28 09:17:50 <dissipate> larsig, as it was explained before, the longest block chain wins
 714 2011-02-28 09:17:51 <mmagic> nevezen: mutual consent.
 715 2011-02-28 09:18:05 <nevezen> I think it increases your chances of generating a block, but only "increases", not guarantees..
 716 2011-02-28 09:18:25 <dissipate> larsig, if i have over 50% of hash power i can generate the longest block chain and dominate the whole network without worrying about anyone else's blocks.
 717 2011-02-28 09:18:47 <dissipate> larsig, others might generate blocks and form their own chains, but i would dominate all of them.
 718 2011-02-28 09:18:48 <mmagic> larsig: yes, you may, but only for a certain time until the 51% person statistically kicks your ass and the long split that happened suddenly collides overtop and erases all the work of the 49% person.
 719 2011-02-28 09:19:02 <nevezen> I wonder what the distinction is between a bitcoin user whom doesn't generate blocks and those whom do..
 720 2011-02-28 09:19:27 <dissipate> larsig, the 49% guy might be able to keep up for awhile, but eventually he would be dominated, depending on how things played out.
 721 2011-02-28 09:19:36 <mmagic> nevezen: the distinction is one of them just passes stuff along, and one of them encodes the stuff in a block.
 722 2011-02-28 09:19:39 <nevezen> I recall someone mentioning a while back that the miners are the ones "supporting" the network via mining
 723 2011-02-28 09:19:55 <mmagic> nevezen: correct. mining is the only thing supporting the network.
 724 2011-02-28 09:20:07 xelister has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 725 2011-02-28 09:20:09 <larsig> will not the 49% guy be able to both generate and spend his transactions?
 726 2011-02-28 09:20:16 <dissipate> nevezen, they are. they generate blocks which secures the transactions on the network.
 727 2011-02-28 09:20:23 <nevezen> so in essence, just having the software without it generating does not contribute to the network at all?
 728 2011-02-28 09:20:33 <dissipate> larsig, no, he would be completely shut out.
 729 2011-02-28 09:20:34 <larsig> or will his transactions become invalid once taken over by a stronger chain?
 730 2011-02-28 09:20:35 <mmagic> larsig: yes, and then one day the 51% guy does 1 block more, and everyone just throws away all the 49% work.
 731 2011-02-28 09:20:46 <mmagic> larsig: that's it.
 732 2011-02-28 09:20:58 xelister has joined
 733 2011-02-28 09:20:58 xelister has quit (Changing host)
 734 2011-02-28 09:20:58 xelister has joined
 735 2011-02-28 09:21:05 <mmagic> nevezen: not really. just creates more nodes to pass data around.
 736 2011-02-28 09:21:12 <dissipate> nevezen, it does contribute by allowing others to connect and download the block chain and receive TXs being relayed across the network.
 737 2011-02-28 09:21:14 <xelister> interesting fact!!!
 738 2011-02-28 09:21:19 <xelister> Konrganizer sucks cocks in hell
 739 2011-02-28 09:21:24 <mmagic> nevezen: it does allow people to participate in the network directly.
 740 2011-02-28 09:21:30 <nevezen> so when do people start charging transaction fees realistically?
 741 2011-02-28 09:21:32 <xelister> running Korganizer while mining == instant crash of X server
 742 2011-02-28 09:22:03 <dissipate> nevezen, i believe they can charge tx fees now. but it seems the miners are content getting BTC.
 743 2011-02-28 09:22:07 <edcba> why it would be korganizer's fault ?
 744 2011-02-28 09:22:09 <dissipate> from mining alone
 745 2011-02-28 09:22:20 <nevezen> Why would you want to be running X when it's gpu mining?
 746 2011-02-28 09:22:28 <dissipate> xelister, what happened? scam?
 747 2011-02-28 09:22:29 <xelister> edcba: dunno
 748 2011-02-28 09:22:41 <xelister> nevezen: to use computer
 749 2011-02-28 09:23:15 <nevezen> I often attribute gpu mining to not using the X server at all..
 750 2011-02-28 09:23:20 <edcba> you mean you can multitask with your computer ?!!!
 751 2011-02-28 09:23:28 <xelister> edcba: hm?
 752 2011-02-28 09:23:29 <nevezen> just go headless
 753 2011-02-28 09:23:45 <xelister> you need at least one X screen to run miner afair
 754 2011-02-28 09:23:53 <nevezen> oh really?
 755 2011-02-28 09:24:01 * xelister gets gdb backtrace
 756 2011-02-28 09:24:01 <nevezen> can't you just do it via CLI?
 757 2011-02-28 09:24:06 <ArtForz> nope
 758 2011-02-28 09:24:15 <xelister> nevezen: can do it from CLI, but the CLI must be attached to X session
 759 2011-02-28 09:24:31 <nevezen> well that sucks. :]
 760 2011-02-28 09:24:36 <xelister> X.so +0FA3C suck(&cocks) + 0x38
 761 2011-02-28 09:24:43 <xelister> X.so +0CA3C hell() + 0x591
 762 2011-02-28 09:24:46 <xelister> ah! as I thought.
 763 2011-02-28 09:25:03 <nevezen> I'm assuming you're running KDE?
 764 2011-02-28 09:25:07 <xelister> nevezen: no
 765 2011-02-28 09:25:17 <nevezen> ok
 766 2011-02-28 09:25:45 <xelister> lets try it again.
 767 2011-02-28 09:25:54 <nevezen> I was thinking of controlling it via serial console
 768 2011-02-28 09:26:06 slush has joined
 769 2011-02-28 09:26:16 <xelister> ok it doesnt crash when not oc it seems
 770 2011-02-28 09:26:26 <xelister> so in other words...
 771 2011-02-28 09:26:55 <xelister> KDE generates as much GPU use something (I guess gpu-mem transfers?) as playing a movie (this is 2nd known thing to instcrash mining X).
 772 2011-02-28 09:26:59 <xelister> good job KDE developers
 773 2011-02-28 09:27:11 <nevezen> btw, where do you usually download the latest blocks from?
 774 2011-02-28 09:27:15 <nevezen> from other users?
 775 2011-02-28 09:27:37 <xelister> I think flat rates in Honk Kong will go way up, with all this developers lining up to suck a dong.
 776 2011-02-28 09:27:38 <nevezen> don't use kde
 777 2011-02-28 09:27:51 <xelister> nevezen: I dont use KDE de actually
 778 2011-02-28 09:28:05 <xelister> and korganizer is the less shitty TODO software linux has to offer
 779 2011-02-28 09:28:15 <mmagic> you can run X headless.
 780 2011-02-28 09:28:24 <nevezen> I don't really bother with those bloated desktop managers at all
 781 2011-02-28 09:28:29 <mmagic> you don't need actual monitors connected to your machine. but you do have to run X
 782 2011-02-28 09:28:36 <xelister> nevezen: I. Do. Not. Use. KDE. Desktop. Manager.
 783 2011-02-28 09:28:37 <mmagic> nevezen: me neither. dwm all the way!!
 784 2011-02-28 09:28:45 <mmagic> xelister: gnome?
 785 2011-02-28 09:28:47 <nevezen> dwm or ratpoison
 786 2011-02-28 09:28:52 <slush> bk128: ping
 787 2011-02-28 09:28:55 <ArtForz> WM? my miners dont have no window manager :P
 788 2011-02-28 09:28:59 <nevezen> oh but ratpoison, I think, still requires X
 789 2011-02-28 09:29:14 <xelister> nevezen: I bet korganizer will crash as well when executed inside ratpoison wm.
 790 2011-02-28 09:29:19 <mmagic> i use dwm for this mining machine on which I am irc'ing.
 791 2011-02-28 09:29:42 <nevezen> well I basically use screen, and console 100%
 792 2011-02-28 09:29:47 <ArtForz> my miners only have a minimal X server and xterm
 793 2011-02-28 09:29:53 <xelister> Sho_ sets a ban on *!*@unaffiliated/xelister
 794 2011-02-28 09:29:55 <xelister> what a fag
 795 2011-02-28 09:30:03 <mmagic> what channel?
 796 2011-02-28 09:30:06 <xelister> why developers take so persoanlly when we notice they suck dongs
 797 2011-02-28 09:30:08 <ArtForz> as VT switching with fglrx = bad idea
 798 2011-02-28 09:30:16 <xelister> mmagic: kde obviously
 799 2011-02-28 09:30:29 <mmagic> you just went in there to harp on them?
 800 2011-02-28 09:30:35 <xelister> mmagic: no, to call the fags
 801 2011-02-28 09:30:37 <xelister> =)
 802 2011-02-28 09:30:46 <xelister> them
 803 2011-02-28 09:30:54 <nevezen> does it make much of a difference in performance, between running and using X than just running it?
 804 2011-02-28 09:30:59 <ArtForz> yes
 805 2011-02-28 09:31:01 <xelister> ArtForz: btw I checked, I do NOT run KMS and still vt switches gives instacrash
 806 2011-02-28 09:31:12 <mmagic> okay, that's pretty awesome.
 807 2011-02-28 09:31:17 <nevezen> by how much?
 808 2011-02-28 09:31:29 <xelister> nevezen: minimal desktop use takes like 2-3% of speed. so not big problem
 809 2011-02-28 09:31:32 <ArtForz> yep
 810 2011-02-28 09:32:08 <xelister> mmagic: I know, right? but by mistake I said the line reserved for ati developers normally
 811 2011-02-28 09:32:17 <ArtForz> worst for hashrate murdering is dragging windows around
 812 2011-02-28 09:32:31 <ArtForz> well, except for accelerated video playback and the pile of shit that is flash
 813 2011-02-28 09:32:32 <nevezen> dragging windows around with special effects :)
 814 2011-02-28 09:32:42 <xelister> ArtForz: or dragging a MOUSE CURSORT above kde application hehe. in older version of diablo/sdk especially
 815 2011-02-28 09:32:43 <nevezen> composite
 816 2011-02-28 09:32:47 <ArtForz> nope, just plain "dragging windows around"
 817 2011-02-28 09:32:51 <nevezen> or compviz, ehehe
 818 2011-02-28 09:32:54 <mmagic> xelister: fuckin-A man.
 819 2011-02-28 09:33:10 <xelister> although some may point out that actually macintosh users are the fags
 820 2011-02-28 09:33:25 <xelister> we need to invent new cursewords for software world.
 821 2011-02-28 09:34:38 <xelister> so what's new.  It seems no longer it makes sense to buy mining boxes and expeect them to return own value?
 822 2011-02-28 09:34:39 <mmagic> 27/02/2011 20:14, 0000da67, invalid or stale  <---- AAARG!
 823 2011-02-28 09:35:36 <xelister> mmagic: on what are you mining? when got last block?
 824 2011-02-28 09:36:04 <mmagic> xelister: like what hardware?
 825 2011-02-28 09:36:18 <nevezen> I'm beginning to see alot of invalid/stale states when using the slush pool
 826 2011-02-28 09:36:19 <xelister> yea
 827 2011-02-28 09:36:28 <mmagic> xelister: just a 5970..
 828 2011-02-28 09:36:29 <dissipate> xelister, once people start dominating with ASICs, time to dump GPUs.
 829 2011-02-28 09:36:32 <nevezen> I guess my hardware has finally become irrelevant?
 830 2011-02-28 09:36:48 <slush> nevezen: how long time ago?
 831 2011-02-28 09:36:52 <slush> nevezen: it started?
 832 2011-02-28 09:36:58 <mmagic> dissipate: gonna be a long time from now..
 833 2011-02-28 09:37:21 <dissipate> mmagic, how so? ArtForz is gearing up.
 834 2011-02-28 09:37:27 * edcba should run a concurrent mining pool...
 835 2011-02-28 09:37:42 <dissipate> mmagic, are you thinking of custom semiconductors?
 836 2011-02-28 09:38:04 <nevezen> Whenever I run m0mchil's opencl miner for about 15 hours, about 1/3 to 2/3's are stale
 837 2011-02-28 09:38:22 <nevezen> last I noticed was a few days ago
 838 2011-02-28 09:38:54 <mmagic> dissipate: one person, experimenting. everyone else is almost certainly using gpu
 839 2011-02-28 09:39:09 <dissipate> mmagic, true
 840 2011-02-28 09:39:25 <dissipate> mmagic, he will be the first or one of the first
 841 2011-02-28 09:39:31 <dissipate> mmagic, then others will jump on the bandwagon
 842 2011-02-28 09:39:47 <xelister> mmagic: you got the stale while mining solo?
 843 2011-02-28 09:40:03 <dissipate> nevezen, i would get that too. not sure what caused it.
 844 2011-02-28 09:40:08 <mmagic> xelister: yes.
 845 2011-02-28 09:40:12 <mmagic> xelister: second time.
 846 2011-02-28 09:40:14 <xelister> mmagic: auch
 847 2011-02-28 09:40:22 <mmagic> xelister: fucking tell me about it.. :-(
 848 2011-02-28 09:40:39 <xelister> mmagic: when did you mines last time? I can't mine any block since like a week+ on 5770. it was once per week then
 849 2011-02-28 09:40:43 <xelister> *suppoosed to be ;)
 850 2011-02-28 09:40:47 <xelister> a bit of bad luck I guess
 851 2011-02-28 09:41:08 <nevezen> I just assumed someone beat me to a proof faster than I did..
 852 2011-02-28 09:41:12 <mmagic> xelister: yesterday..  i have a few 5970 so i'll still be doing daily blocks for a while yet
 853 2011-02-28 09:41:26 <nevezen> therefore, old hardware
 854 2011-02-28 09:44:35 dissipate has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 855 2011-02-28 09:44:45 <mmagic> ... i hope. :-(
 856 2011-02-28 09:46:00 <nevezen> so why is it bad to be buying mining hardware now?
 857 2011-02-28 09:46:15 <nevezen> just that the return won't be as expected from all the hype? :)
 858 2011-02-28 09:48:12 rli has joined
 859 2011-02-28 09:48:31 <slush> nevezen: it's weird. There were some problems days ago, but now it should be fixed. Do you say you're still receiving invalid/stale?
 860 2011-02-28 09:48:47 <slush> nevezen: which nickname on the pool do you have?
 861 2011-02-28 09:49:31 <xelister> nevezen: yes
 862 2011-02-28 09:50:29 <mmagic> nevezen: there is a rapid drop in profit margins as miners get desperate to sell and are willing to take a hit in their profits to do so.
 863 2011-02-28 09:51:44 <mmagic> nevezen: if i hadn't started back in december i wouldn't have started now; expected returns are stretching out pretty long-term..
 864 2011-02-28 09:54:13 <nevezen> so miners are making/mining less coins
 865 2011-02-28 09:54:48 <nevezen> killing miners' enthusiasm perhaps? :)
 866 2011-02-28 09:54:53 <validus> whats a 6970 end up hitting near on khash/s?
 867 2011-02-28 09:55:04 <nevezen> slush: as is 'nevezen'
 868 2011-02-28 09:55:32 <nevezen> so it isn't slow hardware slush?
 869 2011-02-28 09:55:53 <slush> no, you should see only 1% of invalid in normal case
 870 2011-02-28 09:58:38 <slush> nevezen: you are not mining now, right?
 871 2011-02-28 09:58:54 <slush> nevezen: so your troubles are related to situation before many days...?
 872 2011-02-28 10:02:56 Expletive has joined
 873 2011-02-28 10:03:50 <Expletive> So I was wondering if anyone knew a motherboard that could run 4 or more PCI-E 2.0 cards all at x16 speed?
 874 2011-02-28 10:04:13 * edcba wonder why...
 875 2011-02-28 10:04:53 <Expletive> You know why.
 876 2011-02-28 10:05:53 alkor has quit (Quit: alkor)
 877 2011-02-28 10:05:57 <Expletive> Also, has anyone benchmarked hash rates for the 6970?
 878 2011-02-28 10:06:41 <ArtForz> yes, and yes.
 879 2011-02-28 10:08:04 TD has joined
 880 2011-02-28 10:08:59 <validus> whats it average?
 881 2011-02-28 10:09:45 <ArtForz> well, if you could avoid the sdk 2.3 opencl brokenness, it'd be exactly as fast as a 5870
 882 2011-02-28 10:10:54 <Expletive> Really?
 883 2011-02-28 10:10:59 ArtForzZz has joined
 884 2011-02-28 10:11:36 <Expletive> Also, what about that motherboard?
 885 2011-02-28 10:12:31 <ArtForzZz> asus p6t7 supercomputer
 886 2011-02-28 10:12:43 <Expletive> Thanks
 887 2011-02-28 10:13:03 <ArtForzZz> 7 x16 slots, up to 4 * 2.0 x16 or 1 * 2.0 x16 + 6* 2.0 x8
 888 2011-02-28 10:13:15 <ArtForzZz> and expensive as hell
 889 2011-02-28 10:15:07 ArtForz has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
 890 2011-02-28 10:15:14 ArtForzZz is now known as ArtForz
 891 2011-02-28 10:15:40 <Expletive> Well if you fill it with 7 5870s how long until it pays for itself?
 892 2011-02-28 10:15:47 <ArtForz> a loong while
 893 2011-02-28 10:15:54 <sipa> very hard to predict
 894 2011-02-28 10:16:01 <sipa> but definitely not immediately
 895 2011-02-28 10:16:01 <edcba> depends on bitcoin miners
 896 2011-02-28 10:16:06 devon_hillard has joined
 897 2011-02-28 10:16:11 <ArtForz> cheaper to just get a whole bunch of 2*x16 @ x8 boards
 898 2011-02-28 10:16:39 <Expletive> ArtForz: Then you have to get a bunch of CPUs/ PSUs/ETC
 899 2011-02-28 10:16:48 <ArtForz> you need multiple PSUs anyways
 900 2011-02-28 10:16:57 <ArtForz> and cpu+ram are pretty damn cheap
 901 2011-02-28 10:17:04 <Expletive> Also, how would you keep something like that cool, anyway?
 902 2011-02-28 10:17:06 <ArtForz> just get a sempron 140 and 1G of ddr3
 903 2011-02-28 10:17:31 <ArtForz> you need to use risers anyway, so spread the cards around
 904 2011-02-28 10:18:44 <Expletive> I'm just dreaming at the moment.
 905 2011-02-28 10:19:06 <Expletive> I only have a 6870 and I just found my first block today. So I'm excited.
 906 2011-02-28 10:19:36 <ArtForz> I have 6*5770, 8*5870, 28*5970, 2*6870, 2*6970
 907 2011-02-28 10:20:23 <xelister> Expletive: what MHash are you getting?
 908 2011-02-28 10:20:39 <Expletive> xelister: Around 230
 909 2011-02-28 10:21:41 <ArtForz> thats actually not too bad, considering you have to use a crap SDK version
 910 2011-02-28 10:23:19 <Expletive> I have catalyst 11.2
 911 2011-02-28 10:24:08 <Expletive> It's around 232 or so normally but I'm using -f 60 to not slow down desktop performance and I'm getting between 228 and 230 now
 912 2011-02-28 10:24:38 <Expletive> Took me a week to find my first block
 913 2011-02-28 10:25:49 <Expletive> It says it matures in 78 more blocks
 914 2011-02-28 10:26:01 <Expletive> What does that mean?
 915 2011-02-28 10:26:36 <ArtForz> it takes 120 blocks before you can spend a generation
 916 2011-02-28 10:26:43 <mmagic> Expletive: be careful you know in advance the growth curves for difficulty if you wanna get a big machine like that..
 917 2011-02-28 10:27:08 <Expletive> mmagic: I can't afford a big machine like that.
 918 2011-02-28 10:27:32 <ArtForz> well, imo its a bad idea to build something like that for bitcoin only with the way difficulty has been growing lately
 919 2011-02-28 10:27:33 <Expletive> But I told somebody about bitcoin and they want to get in on it.
 920 2011-02-28 10:27:38 <mmagic> Expletive: k. :)
 921 2011-02-28 10:27:50 <ArtForz> but if you want a badass box for fucking with GPGPU anyways... why not ;)
 922 2011-02-28 10:28:29 <Expletive> ArtForz: So how much money have you made so far?
 923 2011-02-28 10:29:15 <Expletive> I mean, with a setup like that you have to be making some bank, right?
 924 2011-02-28 10:29:16 <ArtForz> about -$20k
 925 2011-02-28 10:29:36 <Expletive> Dang.
 926 2011-02-28 10:29:36 satamusic has joined
 927 2011-02-28 10:29:40 <ArtForz> and yes, thats negative 20 grand
 928 2011-02-28 10:29:49 <xelister> yey, you can get like minus 20 all night vip hookers for that
 929 2011-02-28 10:30:10 <Expletive> Shit. What happened there?
 930 2011-02-28 10:30:20 <xelister> can you please donate thie -20k usd to Ati?
 931 2011-02-28 10:30:26 <ArtForz> mainly, $50k for ASICs happened
 932 2011-02-28 10:30:39 pogden has joined
 933 2011-02-28 10:30:57 <Expletive> You spent 50 grand on shoes?
 934 2011-02-28 10:31:03 <TD> :-)
 935 2011-02-28 10:31:03 <Expletive> What are you, a woman?
 936 2011-02-28 10:31:07 <ArtForz> before that I was about $20k ahead
 937 2011-02-28 10:31:16 <TD> ArtForz takes mining seriously
 938 2011-02-28 10:31:28 satamusic has quit (Changing host)
 939 2011-02-28 10:31:28 satamusic has joined
 940 2011-02-28 10:31:31 <xelister> ArtForz: if you are going to jump, donate the boxes to opensource first
 941 2011-02-28 10:32:03 pogden has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 942 2011-02-28 10:32:17 <Expletive> But what do mean by ASICs since you probably don't mean shoes
 943 2011-02-28 10:32:18 <xelister> with low W/hash you may still win right?
 944 2011-02-28 10:32:34 <ArtForz> application specific integrated circuit
 945 2011-02-28 10:32:40 <xelister> Expletive: AwesomeSexyIntegreatedCircuit
 946 2011-02-28 10:32:50 <ArtForz> basically got myself 20Ghps of custom chips
 947 2011-02-28 10:33:04 <satamusic> $50k in ASICs D:
 948 2011-02-28 10:33:10 <xelister> always you can later sell them to mafia working to crack SSLs
 949 2011-02-28 10:33:11 <xelister> =)
 950 2011-02-28 10:33:12 <Expletive> Oh, shit
 951 2011-02-28 10:33:39 <xelister>  - Hey Sang-Chang, that crazy dude from EU is calling again
 952 2011-02-28 10:33:43 <ArtForz> contemplating if I should sell off my GPUs and get another batch
 953 2011-02-28 10:33:43 <UukGoblin> ;;bc,stats
 954 2011-02-28 10:33:45 <gribble> Current Blocks: 111049 | Current Difficulty: 55590.23763914 | Next Difficulty At Block: 112895 | Next Difficulty In: 1846 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 3 days, 22 hours, 32 minutes, and 32 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 65540.00030519
 955 2011-02-28 10:34:29 <Expletive> I'll give you 50 BTC for a 5970
 956 2011-02-28 10:34:36 <UukGoblin> fuckin' harsh
 957 2011-02-28 10:34:46 <UukGoblin> people who make up these difficulties should be shot
 958 2011-02-28 10:34:49 <mmagic> difficulty estimate is up again. :)
 959 2011-02-28 10:34:53 <xelister> woot
 960 2011-02-28 10:35:10 <xelister> lets bet will it pass 100,000 in Marc
 961 2011-02-28 10:35:25 <xelister> and when it will be 1 milion =)
 962 2011-02-28 10:35:27 <ArtForz> guess I'll just pay the next batch out of pocket and sell the GPUs when I have those up
 963 2011-02-28 10:35:37 <Expletive> Why is difficulty going up so much?
 964 2011-02-28 10:35:49 <ArtForz> mainly... because price went up so much
 965 2011-02-28 10:36:06 <mmagic> it was slashdotted and a bunch of people didn't count on the fact that other people are as smart as they are.
 966 2011-02-28 10:36:48 <mmagic> and very few of them seem to be capable of rational projections. :)
 967 2011-02-28 10:37:06 <Keefe> good way to put it
 968 2011-02-28 10:37:07 <ArtForz> well, we should be back to <20%/period growth pretty soon
 969 2011-02-28 10:37:52 <ArtForz> at least if price doesnt rise much above $1/btc
 970 2011-02-28 10:37:52 <sipa> aha, my 3-day-window estimated speed decreased a bit, finally :)
 971 2011-02-28 10:37:55 <Keefe> many of the new miners probably just looked at current price and difficulty, and extended that indefinitely and said hey this will pay off in just 3 weeks
 972 2011-02-28 10:38:08 <mmagic> what i'm projecting is a lot of 5970 on ebay really soon by those people who bought outside their means.
 973 2011-02-28 10:38:20 <Expletive> So how much does a 5970 hash for?
 974 2011-02-28 10:38:24 <Keefe> 650 mhps
 975 2011-02-28 10:38:28 <Keefe> if OC'd
 976 2011-02-28 10:38:29 <mmagic> 650?
 977 2011-02-28 10:38:34 <ArtForz> about 560Mhps stock, 650 OCed
 978 2011-02-28 10:38:51 <mmagic> ... and well-cooled.
 979 2011-02-28 10:38:57 <ArtForz> yep
 980 2011-02-28 10:38:58 <Expletive> Why don't most GPUs support water cooling?
 981 2011-02-28 10:39:11 <Keefe> most do, if you replace the cooler :P
 982 2011-02-28 10:39:21 <ArtForz> ^...
 983 2011-02-28 10:39:21 <TD> ArtForz: how much of the 50k was one-off prep work vs the per unit chip price?
 984 2011-02-28 10:39:22 <mmagic> because water cooling is fiddly and nobody wants to be a plumber.
 985 2011-02-28 10:39:26 <ArtForz> 30k one-off
 986 2011-02-28 10:39:29 <TD> i mean will the next 20Gh cost you 50k too?
 987 2011-02-28 10:39:31 <lfm> water cooling just adds expense
 988 2011-02-28 10:39:31 <TD> ok
 989 2011-02-28 10:39:36 <ArtForz> 20k for 100 chips
 990 2011-02-28 10:39:45 <TD> so it's $1000 per gigahash?
 991 2011-02-28 10:40:09 <ArtForz> well, if support components, PCBs, cases, ... grow on trees, yes
 992 2011-02-28 10:40:13 <Keefe> you'd be better off putting a big box fan on your computer if you had to, instead of setting up water cooling
 993 2011-02-28 10:40:14 <TD> ok
 994 2011-02-28 10:40:28 <Expletive> So you did you mortgage your house to pay for that or what?
 995 2011-02-28 10:40:33 <UukGoblin> sipa, I've got a new graph idea: difficulty / price ;-]
 996 2011-02-28 10:40:54 <sipa> yeah, people have suggested that a few times
 997 2011-02-28 10:41:14 <ArtForz> people have already done that ;)
 998 2011-02-28 10:41:19 <sipa> indeed
 999 2011-02-28 10:41:26 <ArtForz> http://bitcoin.atspace.com/income.html
1000 2011-02-28 10:41:26 <Keefe> i have a chart of that, a week old iirc
1001 2011-02-28 10:41:58 <Keefe> ah there we go. just be aware it's log
1002 2011-02-28 10:42:00 <UukGoblin> aha! goes down!
1003 2011-02-28 10:42:18 <Expletive> Income seems to be going steadily down.
1004 2011-02-28 10:42:22 <mmagic> that is an irritatingly log graph
1005 2011-02-28 10:42:33 <ArtForz> yep
1006 2011-02-28 10:43:12 <ArtForz> still adjusting down for the Mhps/$ jump from GPU mining
1007 2011-02-28 10:43:33 <Expletive> So how long until difficulty rises so high it'd be impossible to see return without a significant hardware investment?
1008 2011-02-28 10:43:52 <ArtForz> that... depends on a lot of assumptions
1009 2011-02-28 10:43:53 <mmagic> Expletive: that's kinda the million-dollar question.
1010 2011-02-28 10:44:01 <UukGoblin> Expletive, 39 days, 4 hours, 32 minutes, 16 seconds
1011 2011-02-28 10:44:05 <ArtForz> if you got free power, "never" is a good guess
1012 2011-02-28 10:44:15 <UukGoblin> oh sorry no
1013 2011-02-28 10:44:18 <UukGoblin> 42!
1014 2011-02-28 10:44:22 <sipa> i
1015 2011-02-28 10:44:57 <Blitzboom> mmagic: why a million dollar
1016 2011-02-28 10:45:06 <UukGoblin> million bitcoin
1017 2011-02-28 10:45:06 <Blitzboom> a million bitcoin is more impressive
1018 2011-02-28 10:45:15 <mmagic> Blitzboom: just an expression, sheesh.
1019 2011-02-28 10:45:16 <mmagic> =]
1020 2011-02-28 10:45:23 <Blitzboom> change them ;)
1021 2011-02-28 10:45:27 <ArtForz> a millibitcoin... not so much ;)
1022 2011-02-28 10:45:51 <Keefe> it's the million dollar question cause that's about what it'd cost to get a totally custom chip fabbed :)
1023 2011-02-28 10:45:55 <sipa> now, if you'd say 42 megabitcoin...
1024 2011-02-28 10:46:00 <mmagic> i vote we overload megabit with one more meaning just to mock the SI people.
1025 2011-02-28 10:46:28 <Blitzboom> haha, we should really label all decimals
1026 2011-02-28 10:46:29 <Expletive> Also, if difficulty is there to prevent hardware from making bitcoin generation trivial, what is there to prevent sufficiently powerful hardware from counterfeiting bitcoins themselves?
1027 2011-02-28 10:46:40 <slush> is 850W psu enough for 3x5870 and 1x 5970 ? Without voltage tuning
1028 2011-02-28 10:46:49 <UukGoblin> mmagic, +1
1029 2011-02-28 10:47:00 <Keefe> Expletive: same thing
1030 2011-02-28 10:47:02 <mmagic> Expletive: lots of participation.
1031 2011-02-28 10:47:07 <ArtForz> slush: you like living dangerous, eh?
1032 2011-02-28 10:47:16 <UukGoblin> Expletive, more powerful hardware
1033 2011-02-28 10:47:16 <slush> hehe :)
1034 2011-02-28 10:47:33 <ArtForz> well, it *should* be enough at stock clocks
1035 2011-02-28 10:47:40 <slush> 2x 5870 are like single 5970 and I'm running two 5970 on single PSU
1036 2011-02-28 10:47:48 <ArtForz> OCed... probably not
1037 2011-02-28 10:47:59 <sipa> slush: we use a 850W psu for 2x 5970, and it's drawing 650W in total
1038 2011-02-28 10:48:01 <slush> so the question is if 5970 and 5870 on the same psu will work
1039 2011-02-28 10:48:10 * UukGoblin was running 3x 5970 on corsair AX850 and didn't notice anything burning
1040 2011-02-28 10:48:27 <sipa> so, i suppose it's possible to add another 150W to it, but no guarantees :)
1041 2011-02-28 10:48:37 <Expletive> ArtForz: So since you're getting rid of them, I'll give you 50 BTC for a 5970
1042 2011-02-28 10:48:46 <UukGoblin> 51!
1043 2011-02-28 10:48:50 <Keefe> 500
1044 2011-02-28 10:48:52 <ArtForz> well, AX850 is a pretty good PSU, can handle up to 950W or so before getting iffy
1045 2011-02-28 10:49:12 larsig has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1046 2011-02-28 10:49:34 <ArtForz> ripple gets worse quick beyond 100% load on +12 though
1047 2011-02-28 10:49:43 <slush> I have CORSAIR CMPSU-850TX
1048 2011-02-28 10:49:44 <ArtForz> and efficiency takes a massive nosedive
1049 2011-02-28 10:49:59 <Expletive> UukGoblin, Keefe he has 28 of them. It's not like he can't sell them to us for 50 BTC each.
1050 2011-02-28 10:50:04 <UukGoblin> ArtForz, ah, btw... if I want to test a cheap PSU, would be enough to plug it into a mobo and some gfx cards, and wire an oscilloscope to the +12V line in parallel and look for "noise"?
1051 2011-02-28 10:50:15 <ArtForz> UukGoblin: yup
1052 2011-02-28 10:50:18 <Keefe> but why should he, when he can sell them on ebay for over $500 each
1053 2011-02-28 10:50:37 <ArtForz> DMM to monitor absolute voltage, any old 'scope to look at ripple
1054 2011-02-28 10:51:02 * UukGoblin nods
1055 2011-02-28 10:51:06 <Keefe> but you can't measure whether the components are about to blow
1056 2011-02-28 10:51:09 <ArtForz> I use a mix of a active load and a bunch of 12V bulbs as dummy loads for testing
1057 2011-02-28 10:51:28 <Expletive> Keefe: The dollar is way down. It's hardly with the paper it's printed on. The bitcoin however, has nowhere to go but up.
1058 2011-02-28 10:51:50 <Keefe> Expletive: then he sells them for $500 and immediately buys 600 BTC with that
1059 2011-02-28 10:52:12 <eps> one thing i haven't seen yet, bitcoin loans
1060 2011-02-28 10:52:16 <xelister> or 6000 BTC if the bubble bursts =)
1061 2011-02-28 10:52:17 <UukGoblin> ah, 12V bulbs
1062 2011-02-28 10:52:20 <ArtForz> a box full of H4 bulbs from junkyard cost me less than a single 50W power resistor ;)
1063 2011-02-28 10:52:21 <Expletive> Keefe: Then he'd do it for altruism.
1064 2011-02-28 10:52:41 <Keefe> Expletive: when he's $20K in the hole? i don't think so :P
1065 2011-02-28 10:52:46 <UukGoblin> yeah these high-power resistors are... expensive
1066 2011-02-28 10:53:00 <Blitzboom> lol bitcoin loans
1067 2011-02-28 10:53:06 <Blitzboom> take one and in a year you’re broke
1068 2011-02-28 10:53:18 <mmagic> LOL
1069 2011-02-28 10:53:21 <ArtForz> well, you *can* get by with lower rated power Rs if you watercool em
1070 2011-02-28 10:53:29 <UukGoblin> hahah
1071 2011-02-28 10:53:48 <ArtForz> a 10W resistor handles 50W submerged without any problem
1072 2011-02-28 10:54:02 <UukGoblin> :-D
1073 2011-02-28 10:54:17 <UukGoblin> I'll stick to bulbs and real load then
1074 2011-02-28 10:54:20 <Expletive> Is there a difference between 2GB 5970s and 4GB 5970s?
1075 2011-02-28 10:54:28 <ArtForz> yes, 2GB and about $500
1076 2011-02-28 10:54:36 <mmagic> cheers all, time to sleep.
1077 2011-02-28 10:54:36 <xelister> not 4 mining
1078 2011-02-28 10:54:41 <mmagic> \o
1079 2011-02-28 10:54:58 <ArtForz> well, the 4GB ones usually are 5870x2, not 5970
1080 2011-02-28 10:55:06 <xelister> unless the 4gb ones would have /worse/ support in drivers... everything is possible with Ati
1081 2011-02-28 10:55:06 <Blitzboom> cu
1082 2011-02-28 10:55:21 <ArtForz> = 1.1625V core, 850MHz core, 1200Mhz mem
1083 2011-02-28 10:55:45 <Keefe> what's the 5970 stock V?
1084 2011-02-28 10:55:50 <ArtForz> 1.05
1085 2011-02-28 10:55:53 <Expletive> ArtForz: So you should totally open source those bitcoin ASICs
1086 2011-02-28 10:56:09 <ArtForz> and the 5870x2s have beefier VRMs
1087 2011-02-28 10:56:28 <UukGoblin> Expletive, I'm against... see what happened when ppl opensourced gfx miners?
1088 2011-02-28 10:56:35 <ArtForz> 5970 has 3*50A phases per GPU, 5870x2 has 4*50A phases
1089 2011-02-28 10:57:06 <Expletive> UukGoblin: Well if bitcoin values plummet, nobody will bother mining anymore.
1090 2011-02-28 10:57:08 <UukGoblin> oh so there is a bit more difference
1091 2011-02-28 10:57:27 <UukGoblin> Expletive, so the diff will go down
1092 2011-02-28 10:57:37 <Expletive> Exactly
1093 2011-02-28 10:57:40 <ArtForz> thats also the reason why OCed 5970s like to overheat their VRMs so much
1094 2011-02-28 10:57:40 <Keefe> same cores, just better power and default settings
1095 2011-02-28 10:57:44 <ArtForz> yep
1096 2011-02-28 10:57:45 satamusic has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1097 2011-02-28 10:58:04 <Expletive> Everyone will have a lot of bitcoins and they won't be worth anything
1098 2011-02-28 10:58:21 <ArtForz> the 3-phase VRM is run barely below spec at stock voltage/clocks
1099 2011-02-28 10:58:24 <Keefe> iirc, the 5970 ref boards have room for extra vrms and power connections
1100 2011-02-28 10:58:29 <ArtForz> yep
1101 2011-02-28 10:58:34 <Expletive> Also, how do you report income from bitcoin mining on your taxes?
1102 2011-02-28 10:58:37 <ArtForz> and the 5870x2s populate those ;)
1103 2011-02-28 10:59:41 <UukGoblin> Expletive, funnier: how do you report loss / bankruptcy! :-]
1104 2011-02-28 11:00:16 <ArtForz> same way you report income from goldfarming :P
1105 2011-02-28 11:00:23 <UukGoblin> if the gov't helps banks during crisis times... and honest people pay taxes off bitcoin income... why shouldn't the gov't help miners in times of high difficulty and low price!
1106 2011-02-28 11:01:23 <UukGoblin> free 5970s to lone mothers!
1107 2011-02-28 11:01:41 <xelister> mtgox too big to fall
1108 2011-02-28 11:06:39 larsig has joined
1109 2011-02-28 11:07:27 <eps> anyone here seen inside job?
1110 2011-02-28 11:08:06 <Expletive> I wish bitcoinsextoys.com had a better selection.
1111 2011-02-28 11:09:27 Ratchet has joined
1112 2011-02-28 11:12:14 juslee has joined
1113 2011-02-28 11:13:27 jusle has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1114 2011-02-28 11:17:35 juslee has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1115 2011-02-28 11:17:51 <Expletive> So why is the exchange rate from Bitcoins to Yen so terrible?
1116 2011-02-28 11:18:14 <MacRohard> what's terrible about it?
1117 2011-02-28 11:18:38 <MacRohard> probably just not alot of people trading in yen i guess
1118 2011-02-28 11:18:44 <Expletive> https://btcex.com/site/index/pair/5 I might be reading that chart but it seems way down
1119 2011-02-28 11:19:28 <MacRohard> yea looks like tehre's just no trades
1120 2011-02-28 11:19:52 <Expletive> Wasn't Bitcoin created by a japanese guy?
1121 2011-02-28 11:19:58 <Keefe> can you get JPY in and out of that exchange?
1122 2011-02-28 11:20:05 <MacRohard> maybe. maybe not.
1123 2011-02-28 11:20:21 <MacRohard> Keefe, bank wire to some japanese company
1124 2011-02-28 11:20:25 <Expletive> Who is Satoshi Nakamoto anyway?
1125 2011-02-28 11:20:34 <Blitzboom> noone knows
1126 2011-02-28 11:21:34 <Expletive> Is that because people like ArtForz might want to kill him?
1127 2011-02-28 11:22:13 <Blitzboom> uh … what?
1128 2011-02-28 11:22:52 <Keefe> wtf?
1129 2011-02-28 11:23:01 <Expletive> Well if not for Satoshi Nakamoto and bitcoin, ArtForz  wouldn't be $20k in the hole.
1130 2011-02-28 11:23:07 JFK911 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1131 2011-02-28 11:23:13 <Expletive> That seems like a good enough motive for murder.
1132 2011-02-28 11:23:15 <Blitzboom> ArtForz is in debt?
1133 2011-02-28 11:23:16 <sipa> Satoshi is everywhere. He is all around us, even now in this very room. You can see him when you at your screen or when you turn on your miner. You can feel him when you send a transaction, when you go to BBE, when you declare your income. He is the guy that you've been told created it all, to blind you from the truth.
1134 2011-02-28 11:23:27 <Keefe> no, ArtForz just made an investment
1135 2011-02-28 11:23:32 <Blitzboom> no, wait
1136 2011-02-28 11:23:42 <Keefe> which will likely pay off big time
1137 2011-02-28 11:23:43 hazek has joined
1138 2011-02-28 11:23:52 <hazek> sup people
1139 2011-02-28 11:23:53 <Blitzboom> satoshi is an entity created in the network
1140 2011-02-28 11:24:13 <ArtForz> yep, it's called a high risk investment
1141 2011-02-28 11:24:38 <Blitzboom> you must be pretty wealthy if you can afford to lose most of it
1142 2011-02-28 11:24:40 <knotwork> do miners need the genesis block or any past transactions or could they work on any blockchain
1143 2011-02-28 11:24:56 <ArtForz> well, not really wealthy, not really poor either
1144 2011-02-28 11:25:01 <Blitzboom> although it’s not really an investment, because you can always sell your hardware
1145 2011-02-28 11:25:13 <knotwork> on a whim just with latest head of chain info about next block tha chain wants solved?
1146 2011-02-28 11:25:29 <ArtForz> thats the main problem with the ASICs, no resale value
1147 2011-02-28 11:25:35 <Expletive> Who would buy $50K in bitcoin mining ASICs chips?
1148 2011-02-28 11:25:52 <ArtForz> GPU boxes you can resell at a 30% or so loss
1149 2011-02-28 11:26:27 <Blitzboom> so it’s not that high a risk
1150 2011-02-28 11:26:32 <ArtForz> yep
1151 2011-02-28 11:26:45 <Blitzboom> buying bitcoins is riskier
1152 2011-02-28 11:27:10 <ArtForz> I'd say yes
1153 2011-02-28 11:27:47 <ArtForz> while my ASICs arent really useful for anything besides bitcoin-sha256
1154 2011-02-28 11:28:04 <Blitzboom> i don’t think there’s any other scenario than bitcoin becoming either worthless or incredibly valuable
1155 2011-02-28 11:28:25 <Expletive> Who made that bitcoin income chart?
1156 2011-02-28 11:28:44 <knotwork> it shouldn't become worthless because the hashing power behind it should have value for
1157 2011-02-28 11:28:58 <knotwork> any competing / co-operating systems
1158 2011-02-28 11:29:09 <Blitzboom> meh, what value is that?
1159 2011-02-28 11:29:12 <slush> knotwork: hashing power itself has no value
1160 2011-02-28 11:29:34 <knotwork> anyone wanting to start such distributed systems needs a plan to try to secure them against attack
1161 2011-02-28 11:29:38 <slush> knotwork: the value has the final product, bitcoin, as transaction network
1162 2011-02-28 11:29:49 <knotwork> that could be lead toward a market in hashing
1163 2011-02-28 11:30:06 <Expletive> ArtForz: Are your ASICs running right now?
1164 2011-02-28 11:30:11 <knotwork> what currently keeps each nation in Freeciv Galactic Milieu from starting its own bitcoin fork
1165 2011-02-28 11:30:28 <comboy> ArtForz: they don't just compute sha256? can't you use them for breaking simlocks or something?
1166 2011-02-28 11:30:31 <ArtForz> Expletive: half of em are
1167 2011-02-28 11:30:33 <devon_hillard> Has anyone tested the HD 6970 yet?
1168 2011-02-28 11:30:34 <knotwork> to compete with the Martian's BotCoins is how to protect against the Martian miners taking over
1169 2011-02-28 11:30:42 <knotwork> the new national currency
1170 2011-02-28 11:30:45 <Expletive> Why only half?
1171 2011-02-28 11:31:17 <knotwork> but if many many many nations started such forks and miners shopped around looking for which
1172 2011-02-28 11:31:37 <ArtForz> comboy: the sl3 stuff is sha1
1173 2011-02-28 11:31:39 <knotwork> one to do a block for based on current exchange rates that might help them to stbilise
1174 2011-02-28 11:32:01 <ArtForz> the chips can do pbkdf-sha256... but no one uses that for anything
1175 2011-02-28 11:32:08 <devon_hillard> ArtForz: you use ASICs to crack hashes?
1176 2011-02-28 11:32:24 <comboy> ArtForz: oh, thought it's also 256
1177 2011-02-28 11:32:32 <ArtForz> devon_hillard: partially, yes
1178 2011-02-28 11:32:47 <devon_hillard> ArtForz: what sort?
1179 2011-02-28 11:33:00 <ArtForz> structured ASIC
1180 2011-02-28 11:33:13 <ArtForz> fully pipelined double-sha256 engine
1181 2011-02-28 11:34:08 <devon_hillard> sounds... expensive
1182 2011-02-28 11:34:12 <ArtForz> it is
1183 2011-02-28 11:34:24 <devon_hillard> I don't understand this 'intermediate between ASIC and FPGA'
1184 2011-02-28 11:34:40 <ArtForz> well, thats what it is
1185 2011-02-28 11:34:59 <devon_hillard> have you posted public info about it?
1186 2011-02-28 11:35:11 <ArtForz> nope
1187 2011-02-28 11:35:13 <ArtForz> in a true ASIC everything is custom
1188 2011-02-28 11:35:31 <ArtForz> in a FPGA hardware is fixed, you just load a bitstream into SRAM
1189 2011-02-28 11:35:31 <comboy> ArtForz: so currently it works like this opencl kernel? have you considered chip that would take getwork as input?
1190 2011-02-28 11:35:58 <devon_hillard> ArtForz: so you use the FPGA to do the number crunching and you interconnect them on a custom PCB?
1191 2011-02-28 11:36:03 <UukGoblin> comboy, nothing of the sort ;-]
1192 2011-02-28 11:36:25 <UukGoblin> it's hardware
1193 2011-02-28 11:36:28 <comboy> UukGoblin: you mean to difficult?
1194 2011-02-28 11:36:31 <UukGoblin> it takes logic signals as input
1195 2011-02-28 11:36:38 <Expletive> ArtForz: How many of these could you afford right now? http://www.bitcoinsextoys.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=170
1196 2011-02-28 11:36:40 <comboy> UukGoblin: wow
1197 2011-02-28 11:37:16 <UukGoblin> there has to be something that gets the sha stuff from the PC, possibly via some serial interface, and feeds it on the appropriate pins to the ASICs
1198 2011-02-28 11:37:23 <comboy> UukGoblin: I mean that currently there is thing to hash as input, but theoretically it could have work as input and iterate nonces itself, couldnt it?
1199 2011-02-28 11:37:27 <ArtForz> yes, a Spartan6 LX16 FPGA
1200 2011-02-28 11:38:22 <ArtForz> full-speed USB to host, 8 point-to-point synchronous serial links to ASICs
1201 2011-02-28 11:38:41 <UukGoblin> comboy, not really, the use case is a bit different here... regular sha chips will take data on input and produce sha on output quickly-ish
1202 2011-02-28 11:39:01 <UukGoblin> comboy, here we want one data and a gazillion sha sums and give a nonce on output if it produces a low enough sha result
1203 2011-02-28 11:39:23 <ArtForz> turns out using a FPGA there was a really good idea, as I managed to mess up the timing of the serial interface ...
1204 2011-02-28 11:39:44 <devon_hillard> ArtForz: how much computing power would a spartan 3e starter kit get me?
1205 2011-02-28 11:39:46 <comboy> UukGoblin: exactly, so that was my question, does it do that, or does it only compute double sha and the rest is outside
1206 2011-02-28 11:39:56 <ArtForz> devon_hillard: not much
1207 2011-02-28 11:39:57 <UukGoblin> ArtForz, well done :-)
1208 2011-02-28 11:40:23 <ArtForz> it does nonce-incrementing internally
1209 2011-02-28 11:40:31 <comboy> thanks
1210 2011-02-28 11:40:59 <ArtForz> a S6 LX150 in -3 speed grade gets about 70Mh/s
1211 2011-02-28 11:41:23 <devon_hillard> ArtForz: would you dare to guesstimate the hashes/s from spartan 3e or some other starter kit?
1212 2011-02-28 11:41:32 <ArtForz> pfff, thats a bit tricky
1213 2011-02-28 11:41:49 JFK911 has joined
1214 2011-02-28 11:41:54 <ArtForz> havent played with S3/E/A/... in a long time
1215 2011-02-28 11:41:57 <comboy> I'm curious about it too
1216 2011-02-28 11:42:06 <ArtForz> S6 is just way better in every regard
1217 2011-02-28 11:42:21 <devon_hillard> would be fun to have a verilog or vhdl bitcoin client
1218 2011-02-28 11:42:35 <eps> so i have 8600GT which i can run at work (free power) and gets be 6000 k/hash
1219 2011-02-28 11:42:39 <eps> is it worth bothering?
1220 2011-02-28 11:42:45 <comboy> daveparrish: miner would be enough
1221 2011-02-28 11:42:50 <ArtForz> ;;bc,gen 6000
1222 2011-02-28 11:42:51 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 6000 Khps, given current difficulty of 55590.23763914 , is 0.108561692481 BTC per day and 0.00452340385337 BTC per hour.
1223 2011-02-28 11:42:57 <devon_hillard> eps: if you don't pay for the power, sure
1224 2011-02-28 11:43:01 <devon_hillard> :)
1225 2011-02-28 11:43:28 <ArtForz> well, lets try a wild-ass guess
1226 2011-02-28 11:43:31 <devon_hillard> way better than hogging up the CPU with the default client
1227 2011-02-28 11:43:42 <eps> to clarify, i can only it run it 6000 overnight, during the day i need to use that machine so its runs at 3000
1228 2011-02-28 11:43:51 <eps> i am currently on slushs pool
1229 2011-02-28 11:44:02 <eps> but the rewards seem so low...
1230 2011-02-28 11:44:10 <devon_hillard> eps: just grab a 5570 or 5750
1231 2011-02-28 11:44:27 <devon_hillard> eps: low-power cards
1232 2011-02-28 11:44:30 <eps> it is my work desktop, can't really replace th graphics card
1233 2011-02-28 11:44:43 <ArtForz> I'd say... about 4Mhps for a S3E-500
1234 2011-02-28 11:44:56 akem has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1235 2011-02-28 11:44:59 <comboy> huh
1236 2011-02-28 11:45:02 <comboy> not much
1237 2011-02-28 11:45:34 akem has joined
1238 2011-02-28 11:45:39 <devon_hillard> eps: sure you can, unscrew the case, stick the other card in :)
1239 2011-02-28 11:45:42 <ArtForz> well, S3 isnt exactly a very fast arch
1240 2011-02-28 11:45:58 <eps> devon_hillard, open plan office :(
1241 2011-02-28 11:46:17 <devon_hillard> eps: just say the card is broken and you had a spare at home
1242 2011-02-28 11:46:52 <eps> i actually have a 5770 at home, was testing it last night got around 15000 khash
1243 2011-02-28 11:46:59 <eps> but i use that card
1244 2011-02-28 11:47:04 <ArtForz> thats way too low
1245 2011-02-28 11:47:11 <devon_hillard> should do much more than that
1246 2011-02-28 11:47:14 <comboy> and do you know maybe how much power this S6 LX150 consume?
1247 2011-02-28 11:47:20 <ArtForz> a 5770 should be getting around 150000
1248 2011-02-28 11:47:34 <eps> oh yeah, sorry i dropped a 0 ;)
1249 2011-02-28 11:47:39 <devon_hillard> about 10 times more, eps
1250 2011-02-28 11:47:53 <ArtForz> comboy: simulation says 6.something W
1251 2011-02-28 11:47:58 <eps> if i bought a card, would it pay for itself...
1252 2011-02-28 11:48:18 <comboy> ArtForz: thx
1253 2011-02-28 11:49:07 <devon_hillard> eps: if you have a card already, that's a sunk cost, so it's not hurting to be mining anyway
1254 2011-02-28 11:49:17 <comboy> huh, so that seems really nice
1255 2011-02-28 11:49:40 <comboy> I wonder how long it will take until we're gonna have open source vhdl miner
1256 2011-02-28 11:49:46 <ArtForz> well, hash/W it's pretty decent compared to GPUs, hash/$ it sucks
1257 2011-02-28 11:50:19 <devon_hillard> ArtForz: what timeframe would you suppose your setup would pay for itself?
1258 2011-02-28 11:50:41 <ArtForz> depends on future difficulty growth
1259 2011-02-28 11:50:56 <devon_hillard> assuming linear growth?
1260 2011-02-28 11:51:13 <ArtForz> 7 months
1261 2011-02-28 11:51:29 <comboy> so how much this  S6 LX150 cost? I cant really find anything
1262 2011-02-28 11:51:32 <Keefe> devon_hillard: you mean exponential?
1263 2011-02-28 11:51:47 <ArtForz> comboy: about $150 in bulk qty
1264 2011-02-28 11:52:06 <Keefe> iow, linear on a log graph
1265 2011-02-28 11:52:06 <comboy> that sounds quite good for this power consumption
1266 2011-02-28 11:52:43 <devon_hillard> ArtForz: of course, you can sell your services as a 'security consultant'... a hash-breaking machine must be valuable in that context
1267 2011-02-28 11:52:53 <comboy> maybe it will become next generation home heater after 5970 age :) or I guess it doesnt head as much with this power consumption
1268 2011-02-28 11:53:20 <comboy> *heat
1269 2011-02-28 11:53:24 <ArtForz> well, for general hash breaking something FPGA based imo makes more sense
1270 2011-02-28 11:53:24 <devon_hillard> in fact, the presence of these machines makes now any hash-based security scheme obsolete
1271 2011-02-28 11:54:11 <nextgens> devon_hillard> that's not true
1272 2011-02-28 11:54:16 <nextgens> you've iterated salted hashes
1273 2011-02-28 11:54:18 <devon_hillard> for any dollar you can spend, the NSA can spend 1 million
1274 2011-02-28 11:54:29 <nextgens> and you've costier hashes than the sha2 family
1275 2011-02-28 11:54:31 <comboy> daveparrish: do you know the difference between finding block and breaking sha256? :)
1276 2011-02-28 11:54:37 <devon_hillard> nextgens: salts only prevent rainbow tables
1277 2011-02-28 11:54:43 <nextgens> the NIST is selecting sha2 members depending on how fast they perform
1278 2011-02-28 11:54:44 <Keefe> devon_hillard: we're only "cracking" ~48 bits out of 256
1279 2011-02-28 11:55:11 <devon_hillard> Keefe: the assumption is that the attacker already knows your salt
1280 2011-02-28 11:55:29 <devon_hillard> that's the point of salts, to prevent rainbow attacks, even when they know your salt
1281 2011-02-28 11:55:36 <nextgens> yeah
1282 2011-02-28 11:55:39 <nextgens> salt is public
1283 2011-02-28 11:55:43 <ArtForz> ~48 bits is already > 8-char alphanum...
1284 2011-02-28 11:55:46 <devon_hillard> but when they know the salt, the search space is significantly less than 256 bits
1285 2011-02-28 11:55:58 <nextgens> ArtForz> that's why you use a hash
1286 2011-02-28 11:56:08 <devon_hillard> the password space is much smaller than what can fit in 256 bits
1287 2011-02-28 11:56:14 <ArtForz> the hash wont help you if the password is bad
1288 2011-02-28 11:56:15 <comboy> ArtForz: I dont think it counds this way, we break 48bits of sha, not sha of 48bits
1289 2011-02-28 11:56:24 <comboy> *counts, shit
1290 2011-02-28 11:56:26 <nextgens> ArtForz> I'm not disputing that :)
1291 2011-02-28 11:56:54 <nextgens> ArtForz> but the assumption for password cracking is that there's only so much entropy the humain brain remembers
1292 2011-02-28 11:56:59 <nextgens> and that doesn't grow over time
1293 2011-02-28 11:57:00 <ArtForz> simple fact is, we're doing ~500Gh/s, thats about equivalent to 1T sha256 hashes/sec ...
1294 2011-02-28 11:57:03 <nextgens> contrary to processing power
1295 2011-02-28 11:57:15 <devon_hillard> there is only one or two alternative to standard hashes: bcrypt and scrypt
1296 2011-02-28 11:57:28 <devon_hillard> or simply a public-key scheme
1297 2011-02-28 11:57:31 <nextgens> devon_hillard> no.
1298 2011-02-28 11:57:37 <nextgens> there's plenty of alternatives
1299 2011-02-28 11:57:39 philipwhiterm66 has joined
1300 2011-02-28 11:57:45 <devon_hillard> nextgens: like what?
1301 2011-02-28 11:58:03 johnyh has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1302 2011-02-28 11:58:05 <nextgens> you guys are using GPUs, just make a hashing scheme which has mandatory branches
1303 2011-02-28 11:58:09 <devon_hillard> nextgens: the main purpose of hashes should be to protect users from password reuse attacks
1304 2011-02-28 11:58:21 <nextgens> it doesn't have to be something complex, just beat the model of the GPUs and prevent them from being useful
1305 2011-02-28 11:58:39 <nextgens> devon_hillard> that's not the main purpose of hashing
1306 2011-02-28 11:58:42 akem has left ("Leaving")
1307 2011-02-28 11:58:49 <ArtForz> that'd be about 1h to try all passwords in charset alphanum-symbol20 up to 8 chars ...
1308 2011-02-28 11:58:54 <devon_hillard> nextgens: speaking strictly about storing user passwords
1309 2011-02-28 11:59:21 <comboy> We are Bitcoin.
1310 2011-02-28 11:59:25 <comboy> ;)
1311 2011-02-28 11:59:33 <ArtForz> whoops, make that about 34 min
1312 2011-02-28 11:59:34 <nextgens> yeah, we're going off topic here
1313 2011-02-28 11:59:47 <devon_hillard> one possible scheme is to use public-key encryption, throw away the private key and use the public key as a one-way function
1314 2011-02-28 12:00:12 <comboy> it would be cool to have some bitcoin paid service for distributed hash breaking
1315 2011-02-28 12:00:15 <nextgens> devon_hillard> no. that's still a hashcash
1316 2011-02-28 12:00:19 <comboy> would be nice fallback for all these miners
1317 2011-02-28 12:00:24 <nextgens> that's still something trivial to paralellize
1318 2011-02-28 12:01:07 <sipa> ArtForz: 72^8/(60*10^12) = 12
1319 2011-02-28 12:01:11 <sipa> so i guess 12 minutes?
1320 2011-02-28 12:01:11 <devon_hillard> the problem with branching is your branches have to be symmetrical, otherwise there are sidechannel (timing) attacks
1321 2011-02-28 12:01:35 <nextgens> sipa> +1
1322 2011-02-28 12:01:35 <ArtForz> sipa: 82 charset size, 52 + 10 + 20
1323 2011-02-28 12:01:47 * sipa forgot numbers
1324 2011-02-28 12:01:55 <sipa> yup, 34
1325 2011-02-28 12:02:10 <sipa> unless they use something like iterated hashing
1326 2011-02-28 12:02:15 <ArtForz> yup
1327 2011-02-28 12:02:25 <ArtForz> and thats assuming they use sha256 ...
1328 2011-02-28 12:02:34 <nextgens> devon_hillard> that's not something password storage should care about
1329 2011-02-28 12:02:42 <nextgens> devon_hillard> that's something the protocols on top should deal with
1330 2011-02-28 12:02:49 <ArtForz> iirc md5 is >2x faster
1331 2011-02-28 12:02:55 ENKI-[quit] has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1332 2011-02-28 12:02:58 <nextgens> devon_hillard> what we fight here is offline password cracking
1333 2011-02-28 12:03:02 <comboy> sipa: what's iterated hashing? any link?
1334 2011-02-28 12:03:14 <hazek> is by any chance any from MTGox in here?
1335 2011-02-28 12:03:19 <nextgens> comboy> WPA-PSK is a good example
1336 2011-02-28 12:03:28 <sipa> comboy: hash(hash(hash(hash(hash(password+salt)+salt)+salt)+salt)+salt)...
1337 2011-02-28 12:03:31 <ArtForz> comboy: wikipedia pbkdf2
1338 2011-02-28 12:03:31 <sipa> or something like that
1339 2011-02-28 12:03:35 <comboy> ah ah ok
1340 2011-02-28 12:03:44 <nextgens> comboy> it's PBKDF2-HMAC-SHA-1
1341 2011-02-28 12:03:50 <ArtForz> wpa2 is
1342 2011-02-28 12:04:24 <comboy> now that's a helpful channel :]
1343 2011-02-28 12:04:24 <nextgens> ArtForz> wpa1-psk too :)
1344 2011-02-28 12:04:56 <ArtForz> ;;seen mtgox
1345 2011-02-28 12:04:57 <gribble> mtgox was last seen in #bitcoin-dev 3 weeks, 5 days, 16 hours, 29 minutes, and 38 seconds ago: <mtgox> that would be my guess also
1346 2011-02-28 12:05:25 <hazek> does that exchange site actually work?
1347 2011-02-28 12:05:27 <hazek> do people use it?
1348 2011-02-28 12:05:31 <hazek> is it reliable?
1349 2011-02-28 12:05:32 <molecular> hazek, mtgox replies to mail pretty quickly
1350 2011-02-28 12:05:41 * molecular uses mtgox
1351 2011-02-28 12:05:44 <ArtForz> yep, better chances mailing him
1352 2011-02-28 12:05:44 <sipa> mtgox is the most-used btc exchanger i think
1353 2011-02-28 12:05:51 <ArtForz> yep
1354 2011-02-28 12:06:03 <hazek> so everyone is generally happy with that service?
1355 2011-02-28 12:06:10 Diablo-D3 has joined
1356 2011-02-28 12:06:17 <molecular> also putting euros to mtgox' finnish account worked like a charm
1357 2011-02-28 12:06:27 <ArtForz> well, except for the $1k/day withdrawal limit, yeah.
1358 2011-02-28 12:06:41 <molecular> what? $1k/day limit, why?
1359 2011-02-28 12:06:56 <sipa> tax issues, i suppose
1360 2011-02-28 12:07:05 <ArtForz> iirc to stay below AML regulation limits
1361 2011-02-28 12:07:09 <Diablo-D3> no, banking regulation rules
1362 2011-02-28 12:07:22 <molecular> i c
1363 2011-02-28 12:07:22 <UukGoblin> hazek, yeah, it's a well-reputable site and many people using, including me
1364 2011-02-28 12:07:26 <comboy> I would shit under myself having all these bitcoins mtgox have on my server, hacking was hardly ever that profitable ;)
1365 2011-02-28 12:07:29 <hazek> what would you say if I told you I know how to make http://whiterockcottage.com/open/index.php?q=article/anonymous-money-needs-anonymous-exchange
1366 2011-02-28 12:07:43 <ArtForz> it also applies to btc withdrawals, which... sucks
1367 2011-02-28 12:09:15 <UukGoblin> hazek, I have an idea how to make one too
1368 2011-02-28 12:09:22 <UukGoblin> but it'd be some investment
1369 2011-02-28 12:09:38 <UukGoblin> make an unmonitored room with loads of automated lockers
1370 2011-02-28 12:09:42 BlueMatt has joined
1371 2011-02-28 12:10:09 <UukGoblin> and make people physically deposit or withdraw real-world cash
1372 2011-02-28 12:10:16 <sipa> ;;bc,calc 1260000
1373 2011-02-28 12:10:17 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 1260000 Khps, given current difficulty of 55590.23763914 , is 2 days, 4 hours, 38 minutes, and 10 seconds
1374 2011-02-28 12:10:33 <UukGoblin> once a day a worker comes in and collects / deposits cash in the lockers and enters the amounts to the system
1375 2011-02-28 12:10:36 <hazek> your idea has that pesky weaknes of holding real cash for a short period
1376 2011-02-28 12:10:38 <hazek> mine doesn't
1377 2011-02-28 12:10:44 <hazek> weakness*
1378 2011-02-28 12:11:04 BlueMatt has quit (Client Quit)
1379 2011-02-28 12:11:21 <UukGoblin> hazek, I'm all ears :-]
1380 2011-02-28 12:11:35 <hazek> hehe
1381 2011-02-28 12:11:51 <hazek> I think i'll speak with mtgox first
1382 2011-02-28 12:11:58 mtgox has joined
1383 2011-02-28 12:12:08 <UukGoblin> talking about the wolf...
1384 2011-02-28 12:12:12 <hazek> cause I think it's good enough for me to partner with someone capable of actually writing the code
1385 2011-02-28 12:12:27 <UukGoblin> oh there's plenty of capable coders in this # ;-]
1386 2011-02-28 12:12:33 <hazek> yeah
1387 2011-02-28 12:12:37 <hazek> I'm not one of them
1388 2011-02-28 12:12:41 <UukGoblin> awesome
1389 2011-02-28 12:12:45 <hazek> lol
1390 2011-02-28 12:12:46 <UukGoblin> (you might be our first)
1391 2011-02-28 12:12:52 <UukGoblin> we need people like you :-]
1392 2011-02-28 12:13:09 <hazek> well all I learned was a bit of motorolla cpu code and basic C++ in highschool
1393 2011-02-28 12:13:09 <eps> i will vouch that UukGoblin can write code ;)
1394 2011-02-28 12:13:16 <hazek> but didn't bother with it after that :P
1395 2011-02-28 12:13:30 <UukGoblin> if I can be arsed, I can ;-]
1396 2011-02-28 12:18:55 philipwhiterm66 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1397 2011-02-28 12:27:06 jusle has joined
1398 2011-02-28 12:29:26 RazielZ has joined
1399 2011-02-28 12:41:01 citiz3n has quit ()
1400 2011-02-28 12:46:08 gasteve has quit (Quit: gasteve)
1401 2011-02-28 12:47:28 <edcba> i know how to make anonymous exchange too
1402 2011-02-28 12:47:57 <edcba> but i have to free some time implementing a new client :p
1403 2011-02-28 12:48:56 jusle has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1404 2011-02-28 12:52:13 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
1405 2011-02-28 13:03:25 genjix has joined
1406 2011-02-28 13:03:40 genjix has quit (Changing host)
1407 2011-02-28 13:03:40 genjix has joined
1408 2011-02-28 13:05:47 mmarker has joined
1409 2011-02-28 13:11:23 gasteve has joined
1410 2011-02-28 13:12:21 <mmarker> Morning all.
1411 2011-02-28 13:17:51 <lfm> hi
1412 2011-02-28 13:18:13 * mmarker hacks on the SSE2 code for jgarzik
1413 2011-02-28 13:18:37 <lfm> whatcha doin to it?
1414 2011-02-28 13:18:54 <mmarker> lfm: Porting it to Linux
1415 2011-02-28 13:19:14 <mmarker> MS and SysV (UNIX) have different calling conventions for x86_64
1416 2011-02-28 13:19:17 <mmarker> Soooooo
1417 2011-02-28 13:19:37 <mmarker> Need to slap this Win32 code into shape
1418 2011-02-28 13:19:57 <lfm> so mainly patching up the parameter passing
1419 2011-02-28 13:20:07 <mmarker> Yea, and I have to do some register saving
1420 2011-02-28 13:20:17 <mmarker> then test to see if it actually works
1421 2011-02-28 13:22:17 <mmarker> Copying some things from XVID to make sure the calling convention is AOK
1422 2011-02-28 13:22:32 <mmarker> then I have my fork of jgarzik's miner which handles testing quite well.
1423 2011-02-28 13:24:45 gasteve has quit (Quit: gasteve)
1424 2011-02-28 13:25:53 gasteve has joined
1425 2011-02-28 13:26:14 <UukGoblin> wasn't SSE2 implemented in the stock client?
1426 2011-02-28 13:26:44 <lfm> is it like the 4way code then?
1427 2011-02-28 13:27:07 <mmarker> Kinda, it looks a little better
1428 2011-02-28 13:27:39 <mmarker> What I found is that the SSE2 code in the client uses the intrinsics. What I found for ARM is that GCC sucks ass when it comes to using the intrinsics
1429 2011-02-28 13:27:49 <comboy> sorry for OT, but you often got some nice answers for me, why the fuck options in kernel menuconfig are not sorted alphabetically?
1430 2011-02-28 13:27:55 <mmarker> So hand coding it may be an improvement
1431 2011-02-28 13:27:56 <lfm> sounds cool
1432 2011-02-28 13:28:15 <ArtForz> yup, gcc is really bad at handling intrinsics
1433 2011-02-28 13:28:17 <mmarker> comboy: Bitch at jgarzik. He's the kernel hacker in here
1434 2011-02-28 13:28:19 <lfm> comboy: they are logiclly grouped
1435 2011-02-28 13:28:30 <mmarker> But yea, they are grouped by subsystem.
1436 2011-02-28 13:28:44 <Diablo-D3> comboy: they are sorted by age basically
1437 2011-02-28 13:28:48 <Diablo-D3> ie randomly
1438 2011-02-28 13:28:49 <ArtForz> likes to create shitloads of extraneous loads/stores/movs
1439 2011-02-28 13:28:50 <comboy> lfm: maybe, I got used to, but when I'm looking for something it makes me crazy, I often end up editing .config instead :/
1440 2011-02-28 13:29:07 <lfm> sure, grep the config file
1441 2011-02-28 13:29:27 <mmarker> ArtForz: Yup. You should look at the disasm of my NEON code. Damn GCC saves all the registers, then loads them back up IN THE NEXT GOD DAMN INSTRUCTION
1442 2011-02-28 13:29:36 * mmarker beats GCC
1443 2011-02-28 13:30:01 <comboy> jgarzik: I bitch you about it ;) maybe there is some Underlying Reason for this
1444 2011-02-28 13:30:46 <comboy> problem with grepping config is that in some tutorial pages they always show menuconfig option name
1445 2011-02-28 13:31:09 <comboy> and I'm not a win user, it makes me MAD when I see text, I cannot press / and I sit and look for a pattern WITH MY EYES
1446 2011-02-28 13:31:55 * comboy just realized "/" works in menuconfig, still won't find name that appears in menucnofig, but cool, I must confess 
1447 2011-02-28 13:32:03 <comboy> </bitchng>
1448 2011-02-28 13:33:21 <lfm> some options dont work till you enable the subsystem
1449 2011-02-28 13:34:42 <mmarker> Yea
1450 2011-02-28 13:34:58 <mmarker> Worse is when the subsystem is somewhere you least expect it.
1451 2011-02-28 13:35:04 larsig has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1452 2011-02-28 13:36:02 <comboy> "USB Lego Infrared Tower support" lovely :) (vanilla)
1453 2011-02-28 13:36:34 <lfm> hehe that open source for ya
1454 2011-02-28 13:36:40 BlueMatt has joined
1455 2011-02-28 13:37:27 <comboy> makes me wanna compile it in ;)
1456 2011-02-28 13:37:46 <mmarker> Crap. I have what may be fixed code, but now can't get it to my servers. Damn firewalls
1457 2011-02-28 13:40:21 <genjix> how can i handle mysql numeric types in php?
1458 2011-02-28 13:41:38 <BlueMatt> php autocasts, so you shouldnt need to think about it
1459 2011-02-28 13:42:29 <molecular> comboy, wow, slash really _does_ work in menuconfig "/", nice, thx for that!
1460 2011-02-28 13:42:49 <comboy> :)
1461 2011-02-28 13:43:33 Jeroenz0r_ has joined
1462 2011-02-28 13:44:46 puddinpop has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1463 2011-02-28 13:44:57 Jeroenz0r has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1464 2011-02-28 13:45:01 Jeroenz0r_ is now known as Jeroenz0r
1465 2011-02-28 13:45:28 <genjix> BlueMatt: yeah but the whole point of mysql numeric type is you don't get the problem with floats
1466 2011-02-28 13:45:48 <genjix> the i-forgot-the-name-inaccuracy problem
1467 2011-02-28 13:46:14 <lfm> round off? truncation?
1468 2011-02-28 13:46:24 <lfm> accuracy?
1469 2011-02-28 13:46:55 <genjix> yeah the rounding/accuracy
1470 2011-02-28 13:47:11 <luke-jr> genjix: you probably can't, and shouldn't need to
1471 2011-02-28 13:47:22 <genjix> mysql solves this by having a NUMERIC type which stores the decimal numbers as strings
1472 2011-02-28 13:47:22 gasteve has quit (Quit: gasteve)
1473 2011-02-28 13:47:24 <luke-jr> nothing internal should be using fractional values
1474 2011-02-28 13:47:49 <comboy> I think it's common in all ORMs, you have numeric with precision in db, it uses float, you want to handle it well in app part move decimal point and use integers, but if you are being so pedantic you possibly would want ta have logic on these numbers in db anyway
1475 2011-02-28 13:48:02 <BlueMatt> stores decimals as strings...?
1476 2011-02-28 13:48:02 <BlueMatt> just multiply by the precision you want
1477 2011-02-28 13:48:09 <lfm> decimal just has different round off accuracy problems, it doesnt really solve them
1478 2011-02-28 13:48:38 <genjix> decimal only has truncation afaik for problems
1479 2011-02-28 13:48:48 <genjix> and you specify the number of digits :p
1480 2011-02-28 13:48:49 <ArtForz> well, decimal has decimal round-off problems, floats have binary round-off problems ;)
1481 2011-02-28 13:48:54 <comboy> lfm: what do you mean? numeric with defined precision is stored like integer, what kind of problems?
1482 2011-02-28 13:49:00 <luke-jr> decimal can't store 1⁄3
1483 2011-02-28 13:49:11 skeledrew1 has quit (Quit: Instantbird 0.3a2pre)
1484 2011-02-28 13:49:13 <comboy> it cannot
1485 2011-02-28 13:49:16 <lfm> so like 1/3*3 = 0.999999
1486 2011-02-28 13:49:21 <genjix> 1/3 is not a precision decimal
1487 2011-02-28 13:49:26 <lfm> right
1488 2011-02-28 13:49:45 <luke-jr> someone needs to make a standard fraction type
1489 2011-02-28 13:49:51 <genjix> i mean like in floats:
1490 2011-02-28 13:49:57 skeledrew has joined
1491 2011-02-28 13:49:57 <ArtForz> yep, if you want to solve that, use fractional representation
1492 2011-02-28 13:50:01 <genjix> (a + b) + c != a + (b + c)
1493 2011-02-28 13:50:06 <lfm> there is a "rational" fraction type in the gmp libs
1494 2011-02-28 13:50:13 <genjix> but it is with NUMERIC/DECIMAL types
1495 2011-02-28 13:50:22 <genjix> lfm: aha gmp looks good. thanks.
1496 2011-02-28 13:50:48 <luke-jr> genjix: out of curiousity, why does it matter?
1497 2011-02-28 13:50:54 <genjix> for handling money
1498 2011-02-28 13:51:12 <lfm> duuno how gmp will fit with sql/php
1499 2011-02-28 13:51:25 <sipa> that would be nice actually, have each transaction declare a single denominator, and a separate numerator for each output
1500 2011-02-28 13:51:30 <genjix> i have this worry that bitcoins will inflate and then i'd need to increase precision
1501 2011-02-28 13:51:43 <BlueMatt> just do it the the way bitcoin does it -> multiply by 10000...
1502 2011-02-28 13:51:47 <BlueMatt> and move the decimal place
1503 2011-02-28 13:51:57 <genjix> so even 4 decimal places won't be enough...
1504 2011-02-28 13:52:15 <luke-jr> genjix: bitcoin should never be handled with decimal places
1505 2011-02-28 13:52:23 <ArtForz> sure can
1506 2011-02-28 13:52:34 <ArtForz> just use 8 decimal places and you have internal precision
1507 2011-02-28 13:52:34 <comboy> genjix: you will switch to postgres by this time ;)
1508 2011-02-28 13:52:41 <luke-jr> genjix: it should always be treated as integers, and only displayed as BTC
1509 2011-02-28 13:52:46 <mmarker> Grr. Stupid assembler
1510 2011-02-28 13:53:05 <genjix> ok. so a 64bit UINT is enough precision for bitcoin?
1511 2011-02-28 13:53:12 <sipa> yes
1512 2011-02-28 13:53:12 <BlueMatt> yes
1513 2011-02-28 13:53:18 <BlueMatt> that is the way bitcoin stores it
1514 2011-02-28 13:53:20 <genjix> and I multiply by 10^8?
1515 2011-02-28 13:53:25 <BlueMatt> yes
1516 2011-02-28 13:53:30 <genjix> k thanks :)
1517 2011-02-28 13:53:31 <sipa> 51 bits suffices
1518 2011-02-28 13:53:34 <BlueMatt> and move the decimal place when you show it
1519 2011-02-28 13:53:41 <ArtForz> guess how decimal is internally represented ...
1520 2011-02-28 13:53:56 <genjix> by large ints heh
1521 2011-02-28 13:54:33 <lfm> well depends on the machine. some old machines actually used decimal instead of binary
1522 2011-02-28 13:54:51 <ArtForz> yep, 51 bits is enough
1523 2011-02-28 13:55:01 <BlueMatt> woo ascii bcd
1524 2011-02-28 13:55:01 <BlueMatt> bcd*
1525 2011-02-28 13:55:12 <lfm> ebcdic
1526 2011-02-28 13:55:34 <sipa> or 33 trits!
1527 2011-02-28 13:56:10 <BlueMatt> god Im gonna kill myself...
1528 2011-02-28 13:56:11 <mmarker> Heh. I remeber the old joke, "The US Government wanted an encryption standard, and IBM created EBCDIC"
1529 2011-02-28 13:56:27 <BlueMatt> lol so true
1530 2011-02-28 13:56:41 <comboy> this is so fucking awesome, random knowledge I get from this channel is like exploring world make of choclate full of unicorns
1531 2011-02-28 13:56:55 <comboy> (it kinda sounds wrong)
1532 2011-02-28 13:57:00 <lfm> ebcdic was based on punch cards, ascii was based on puched paper tape
1533 2011-02-28 13:57:13 <BlueMatt> more like exploring a whole which makes you want to kill yourself...
1534 2011-02-28 13:57:29 <lfm> except for the baudau paper tape was different again
1535 2011-02-28 13:58:01 <BlueMatt> even though oses have problems agreeing on standards, its soo much better than it was
1536 2011-02-28 13:58:03 <mmarker> RTTY baby!
1537 2011-02-28 13:58:30 <lfm> 5 bit charset rules
1538 2011-02-28 13:59:11 <xelister> UTF-EBCDIC is a character encoding used to represent Unicode characters. It is meant to be EBCDIC-friendly
1539 2011-02-28 13:59:40 <genjix> you must be all very old :p
1540 2011-02-28 13:59:51 <genjix> punch cards and whatnot
1541 2011-02-28 14:00:11 <lfm> control data had their own 6 bit display code
1542 2011-02-28 14:00:25 <BlueMatt> Im glad Im studying computer science now, and not 20 years ago
1543 2011-02-28 14:00:34 <xelister> To produce the UTF-EBCDIC encoded version of a series of Unicode code points, an encoding based on UTF-8 (known in the specification as UTF-8-Mod) is applied first. The main difference between this encoding and UTF-8 is that it allows unicode code points U+0080 through U+009F (the C1 control codes) to be represented as a single byte and therefore later mapped to corresponding EBCDIC control codes. In order to achieve this 101XXXXX was used instead
1544 2011-02-28 14:00:36 <xelister> of 10XXXXXX as the format for later bytes in a multi-byte sequence. As this can only hold 5 bits rather than 6, UTF-EBCDIC will generally produce larger output for the same input data than UTF-8.
1545 2011-02-28 14:01:11 <genjix> computer science sucks balls
1546 2011-02-28 14:01:33 <mmarker> Wait
1547 2011-02-28 14:01:41 <mmarker> Someone made a Unicode EBCDIC?
1548 2011-02-28 14:01:42 <BlueMatt> and you studied?
1549 2011-02-28 14:01:51 <mmarker> Does SOMEONE want to get shot in the head?
1550 2011-02-28 14:02:35 <xelister> mmarker: yeap they made it
1551 2011-02-28 14:02:42 <sipa> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UTF-EBCDIC
1552 2011-02-28 14:03:00 slush has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1553 2011-02-28 14:03:37 <lfm> yup thats sad.
1554 2011-02-28 14:03:44 <comboy> UNICORNS!
1555 2011-02-28 14:05:43 <mmarker> Woohoo! It compiles
1556 2011-02-28 14:05:49 <mmarker> Now will it blend!
1557 2011-02-28 14:06:17 <BlueMatt> spoiler alert: everything blends, hence the commercial
1558 2011-02-28 14:06:20 <sipa> yes, but does it run linux?
1559 2011-02-28 14:06:55 <bd_> BlueMatt: Even really big diamonds?
1560 2011-02-28 14:07:15 pozic has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1561 2011-02-28 14:07:18 <mmarker> the BASS-O-MATIC
1562 2011-02-28 14:07:29 <mmarker> God, when SNL was actually funny.
1563 2011-02-28 14:07:41 <mmarker> Crap, meetings!
1564 2011-02-28 14:07:44 mmarker has quit (Quit: WeeChat 0.3.2)
1565 2011-02-28 14:08:13 Teppy has joined
1566 2011-02-28 14:08:47 <Teppy> Is there a fairly up to date graph of the difficulty over time?
1567 2011-02-28 14:09:03 <sipa> http://bitcoin.sipa.be
1568 2011-02-28 14:09:11 <lfm> or http://www3.telus.net/millerlf/hashes.png
1569 2011-02-28 14:09:53 <Teppy> Perfect, thanks.
1570 2011-02-28 14:11:26 gasteve has joined
1571 2011-02-28 14:17:42 BlueMatt has quit ()
1572 2011-02-28 14:22:33 KBme has quit (Excess Flood)
1573 2011-02-28 14:23:21 pozic has joined
1574 2011-02-28 14:23:27 satamusic has joined
1575 2011-02-28 14:24:30 KBme has joined
1576 2011-02-28 14:24:41 satamusic has quit (Changing host)
1577 2011-02-28 14:24:42 satamusic has joined
1578 2011-02-28 14:27:07 <pozic> If I run the Python miner as root, I get: RuntimeError: CommandQueue failed: out of host memory
1579 2011-02-28 14:27:24 <pozic> If I run it as a normal user, it does work.
1580 2011-02-28 14:27:31 <lfm> well, don't do that then
1581 2011-02-28 14:28:03 <pozic> Actually, I run it at start as su username -c 'commandtostartminer'
1582 2011-02-28 14:28:48 <pozic> So, that's slightly different, but I don't see why running something as the same user suddently stops working when you run it via su.
1583 2011-02-28 14:29:11 jusle has joined
1584 2011-02-28 14:29:20 <lfm> lots of X apps are that way too
1585 2011-02-28 14:29:55 <pozic> lfm: so, is there any other way to do this?
1586 2011-02-28 14:30:09 <lfm> just run it as your user
1587 2011-02-28 14:30:19 <pozic> lfm: I want it to run automatically.
1588 2011-02-28 14:30:29 genjix has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1589 2011-02-28 14:30:46 <lfm> ok I dont know that
1590 2011-02-28 14:31:29 <lfm> maybe have to have it boot right into your X session
1591 2011-02-28 14:38:15 <comboy> pozic: does running automatically means it cannot be as user? you can use sudo user -c "miner start"
1592 2011-02-28 14:38:29 Teppy has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1593 2011-02-28 14:38:42 <pozic> comboy: I don't need sudo to run the miner.
1594 2011-02-28 14:38:43 <comboy> uhm, I missed the line above
1595 2011-02-28 14:38:56 <pozic> comboy: I can just run it as ./miner in my shell.
1596 2011-02-28 14:39:18 <pozic> comboy: now, when I do su user -c ./miner I get RuntimeError: CommandQueue failed: out of host memory
1597 2011-02-28 14:39:36 slush has joined
1598 2011-02-28 14:39:50 <comboy> I think you have fresh env with -c
1599 2011-02-28 14:40:06 <comboy> so you may want to set up DISPLAY, maybe ATISDK and all stuff you may need
1600 2011-02-28 14:40:30 <pozic> comboy: ok, good suggestion.
1601 2011-02-28 14:40:50 <pozic> comboy: the software should really just say "Hey, idiot! You didn't set X, Y and Z."
1602 2011-02-28 14:41:15 <pozic> Instead of a bogus message like CommandQueue failed: out of host memory.
1603 2011-02-28 14:42:33 <comboy> pozic: msg should actually be different with no display set, so that's just a wild guess
1604 2011-02-28 14:44:38 <comboy> pozic: and maybe it should, but these guys are creating it for free in their free time and sharing it instead of mining for themselves, so I guess they may be happy about some userfriendliness patches
1605 2011-02-28 14:44:52 <ArtForz> you usually need at least DISPLAY and XAUTHORITY
1606 2011-02-28 14:45:07 <Diablo-D3> pozic: btw, no
1607 2011-02-28 14:45:12 <Diablo-D3> it shouldnt say that
1608 2011-02-28 14:45:32 <pozic> Diablo-D3: it should provide proof for why it doesn't work.
1609 2011-02-28 14:45:46 <pozic> I am clearly not out of host memory.
1610 2011-02-28 14:45:54 <Diablo-D3> why would a miner bitch about no X when using an opencl impl that doesnt need X?
1611 2011-02-28 14:45:57 <pozic> It just failed to initialize some stuff to make host memory available.
1612 2011-02-28 14:46:03 <Diablo-D3> and which miner is that?
1613 2011-02-28 14:46:03 <ArtForz> y<ou do realize it's just handing on a opencl error, right?
1614 2011-02-28 14:46:15 <Diablo-D3> because that sounds like a bs opencl error
1615 2011-02-28 14:46:19 <Diablo-D3> steam sdk doesnt say that
1616 2011-02-28 14:46:20 <pozic> Diablo-D3: I didn't say anything about X.
1617 2011-02-28 14:46:35 <Diablo-D3> at least, it doesnt say it on mine
1618 2011-02-28 14:46:38 <Diablo-D3> mine bails out much earlier
1619 2011-02-28 14:46:48 <pozic> The Python script says that when no stream devices have been found, IIRC>
1620 2011-02-28 14:46:57 <Diablo-D3> it shouldnt
1621 2011-02-28 14:47:01 <pozic> Anyway, the point is that there is now a discussion instead of a working program.
1622 2011-02-28 14:47:03 <Diablo-D3> it should just say none have been found and then quit
1623 2011-02-28 14:47:17 <Diablo-D3> pozic: you do realize opencl isnt ready for use by noobs, right?
1624 2011-02-28 14:47:27 <pozic> Diablo-D3: what kind of argument is that?
1625 2011-02-28 14:47:38 <Diablo-D3> read the fucking instructions, shit wont break.
1626 2011-02-28 14:47:42 <Diablo-D3> being a noob is not an excuse.
1627 2011-02-28 14:47:49 <ArtForz> so what is an app *supposed* to do when a closed source library seems to return error codes completely unrelated to the actual problem?
1628 2011-02-28 14:48:16 <Diablo-D3> you need a valid X session to run steam sdk. thats just the way it is.
1629 2011-02-28 14:48:22 <Diablo-D3> dont like it? dont mine.
1630 2011-02-28 14:48:34 <edcba> or mine with your cpu
1631 2011-02-28 14:48:41 <Diablo-D3> edcba: I dont really recommend that
1632 2011-02-28 14:48:41 <pozic> ArtForz: bug the developers of the closed source libraries and put a message up on the Internet saying what kind of idiots the developers of the closed source library are?
1633 2011-02-28 14:48:43 <Diablo-D3> its just a waste of time
1634 2011-02-28 14:48:53 <edcba> why ?
1635 2011-02-28 14:48:54 riush has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1636 2011-02-28 14:48:54 <ArtForz> pozic: go cry to AMD then
1637 2011-02-28 14:49:05 <Diablo-D3> edcba: you cant possibly get any coins out of it
1638 2011-02-28 14:49:06 <edcba> it's waste of power
1639 2011-02-28 14:49:10 <edcba> not of time :)
1640 2011-02-28 14:49:11 <Diablo-D3> its a massive waste of power
1641 2011-02-28 14:49:17 <pozic> ArtForz: in this case, the developers could simply check for the environment variable themselves.
1642 2011-02-28 14:49:22 <Diablo-D3> pozic: and also, fuck you
1643 2011-02-28 14:49:28 <comboy> Diablo-D3: while you typing, any hints about nonce saturation? I don't get why is it happening, integer seems to be much bigger than what I can do per second
1644 2011-02-28 14:49:36 <pozic> That is whoever wrote the Python miner.
1645 2011-02-28 14:49:37 <comboy> Diablo-D3: wow, that's a bad mood
1646 2011-02-28 14:49:40 <comboy> :)
1647 2011-02-28 14:49:47 <comboy> maybe I should have asked other day ;
1648 2011-02-28 14:49:53 <pozic> Diablo-D3: have you already taken your vitamins today?
1649 2011-02-28 14:49:56 <Diablo-D3> pozic: miners should NOT check for $DISPLAY, not all opencl impls require X!
1650 2011-02-28 14:49:58 <ArtForz> pozic: well, why don't you write a patch to do that?
1651 2011-02-28 14:50:15 <pozic> Diablo-D3: I never said anything about any specific variable.
1652 2011-02-28 14:50:17 <Diablo-D3> for example, nvidia doesnt, and stream sdk running on the cpu doesnt.
1653 2011-02-28 14:50:22 <ArtForz> not to mention miners run cross-platform
1654 2011-02-28 14:50:34 <Diablo-D3> nor does it ever need it on anything on osx, or anything on windows
1655 2011-02-28 14:50:38 <ArtForz> yep
1656 2011-02-28 14:50:40 <pozic> Diablo-D3: sure, someone with a GPU wants to run a miner on his CPU.
1657 2011-02-28 14:50:46 <Diablo-D3> comboy: nonce saturation happens at 2^31
1658 2011-02-28 14:51:01 <Diablo-D3> comboy: it can happen on fast enough gpus on my miner
1659 2011-02-28 14:51:13 <Diablo-D3> comboy: all it does on mine is trigger getwork early
1660 2011-02-28 14:51:24 <pozic> Anyway, if my programs do not work, they always say why they do not work.
1661 2011-02-28 14:51:25 <Diablo-D3> comboy: its not an error condition
1662 2011-02-28 14:51:33 <pozic> Otherwise I don't tell the world I wrote a program.
1663 2011-02-28 14:51:37 <Diablo-D3> pozic: opencl is not ready for noobs.
1664 2011-02-28 14:51:41 <Diablo-D3> dont like it? fuck off.
1665 2011-02-28 14:51:42 <pozic> There is just no point in releasing it then.
1666 2011-02-28 14:51:49 <pozic> Diablo-D3: I am not even using your miner.
1667 2011-02-28 14:51:55 <Expletive> Diablo-D3: Hi
1668 2011-02-28 14:52:00 <Diablo-D3> no, but you're flooding a channel I'm in with shit
1669 2011-02-28 14:52:04 <Diablo-D3> so that makes it my business
1670 2011-02-28 14:52:10 <Diablo-D3> Expletive: hi
1671 2011-02-28 14:52:27 <Expletive> I found my first block
1672 2011-02-28 14:52:30 <pozic> Diablo-D3: I cannot stop anyone from sending other shit.
1673 2011-02-28 14:52:33 <Diablo-D3> Expletive: congradulations
1674 2011-02-28 14:52:35 sabalaba has joined
1675 2011-02-28 14:52:59 <Expletive> I'm waiting for it to mature
1676 2011-02-28 14:53:05 <ArtForz> pozic: bullshit
1677 2011-02-28 14:53:14 <comboy> Diablo-D3: yes, but it's happenning very often if I was trying to force it to something below -f 1 or when trying to set worksize to 256, many times per second, is this expected? I dont think I'm doing 2^31 hashes per sec
1678 2011-02-28 14:53:23 <pozic> The word shit seems to be popular here.
1679 2011-02-28 14:53:30 <EvanR> shit
1680 2011-02-28 14:53:36 <Diablo-D3> comboy: -f nor -w has no control over that
1681 2011-02-28 14:53:53 <Diablo-D3> comboy: whats your hash rate?
1682 2011-02-28 14:54:08 <comboy> Diablo-D3: well that was hapenning on just above 300M
1683 2011-02-28 14:54:31 <comboy> (I'm runnnig separate miners for each gpu, seems to work better)
1684 2011-02-28 14:54:45 <Diablo-D3> comboy: it should happen every 7.15 seconds on average
1685 2011-02-28 14:54:53 <ArtForz> yep, low tolerance for smartass fucking leeches here
1686 2011-02-28 14:55:09 <Diablo-D3> comboy: on my miner, it'll happen in batches of 3 if you see it
1687 2011-02-28 14:55:16 <Diablo-D3> comboy: (so 3, then 21 seconds or so)
1688 2011-02-28 14:55:18 <comboy> Diablo-D3: so with getwork everysecond it should not happen at all, right?
1689 2011-02-28 14:55:24 <Diablo-D3> comboy: it shouldnt.
1690 2011-02-28 14:55:43 <comboy> with worksize 256 for example, I get looots of it
1691 2011-02-28 14:55:47 <Diablo-D3> dont use 256
1692 2011-02-28 14:55:54 <comboy> yes I know
1693 2011-02-28 14:56:04 <comboy> but I'm just trying to understand why does it happen
1694 2011-02-28 14:56:07 mmarker has joined
1695 2011-02-28 14:56:49 <Diablo-D3> comboy: well, unless I screwed up the math, it should never happen on most hardware
1696 2011-02-28 14:57:25 <comboy> than I'll try reading some more code
1697 2011-02-28 14:57:26 * Diablo-D3 runs with -d -g 1000 and sees when it triggers for him
1698 2011-02-28 14:57:31 <xelister>  <ArtForz> so what is an app *supposed* to do when a closed source library seems to return error codes completely unrelated to the actual problem?
1699 2011-02-28 14:57:34 <xelister> "call it a day" ?
1700 2011-02-28 14:57:40 <comboy> so btw, on really fast hardware more often getworks will be required then?
1701 2011-02-28 14:57:45 <mmarker> xelister: pretty much
1702 2011-02-28 14:57:51 <Diablo-D3> comboy: yes, but this is handled normally
1703 2011-02-28 14:58:04 <Diablo-D3> comboy: getwork is triggers when you submit a block, you nonce saturate, or 5 seconds passes
1704 2011-02-28 14:58:08 <ArtForz> well, mine prints "AIEEE" and dies... ;)
1705 2011-02-28 14:58:40 <ArtForz> or just segfaults, depending on mood
1706 2011-02-28 14:58:46 <comboy> Diablo-D3: yeah I'm running with -d all the time, ok anyway thx for expl
1707 2011-02-28 14:58:53 <Diablo-D3> okay so
1708 2011-02-28 14:59:01 <Diablo-D3> [2/28/11 9:49:16 AM] Added ATI RV770 (#1) (10 CU, local work size of 64)
1709 2011-02-28 14:59:01 <xelister> this is what my brother's program driving pacemaker wrote
1710 2011-02-28 14:59:01 <Diablo-D3> [2/28/11 9:50:40 AM] DEBUG: Forcing getwork update due to nonce saturation
1711 2011-02-28 14:59:06 <xelister> I think he changed jobs since
1712 2011-02-28 14:59:28 <Diablo-D3> 84 seconds
1713 2011-02-28 14:59:35 <mmarker> Heh. a segfaulting pacemaker
1714 2011-02-28 14:59:38 <mmarker> I LOVE IT
1715 2011-02-28 14:59:43 * xelister calls Diablo-D3 fag for using usafags idiotic date format
1716 2011-02-28 14:59:58 <xelister> hm
1717 2011-02-28 14:59:59 <ArtForz> it's probably using locale...
1718 2011-02-28 15:00:04 <comboy> :D
1719 2011-02-28 15:00:09 <xelister> yea I was about to write that, ArtForz
1720 2011-02-28 15:00:15 noagendamarket has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1721 2011-02-28 15:00:17 xelister is now known as retsilex
1722 2011-02-28 15:00:30 <ArtForz> ISO date FTW
1723 2011-02-28 15:00:32 <retsilex> Diablo-D3: you're a fag for using americafags idiotic date format
1724 2011-02-28 15:00:46 <retsilex> Diablo-D3: and don't cry about locale, hand-format the string like a man =)
1725 2011-02-28 15:00:46 <Diablo-D3> 75000000 * 84 = 6300000000
1726 2011-02-28 15:00:48 retsilex is now known as xelister
1727 2011-02-28 15:01:12 <Diablo-D3> /3 = 2100000000
1728 2011-02-28 15:01:31 <xelister> what where Americans thinking when inventing this format
1729 2011-02-28 15:01:34 <xelister> how people can be so stupid
1730 2011-02-28 15:01:45 <Diablo-D3> which is almost 2^31
1731 2011-02-28 15:01:55 <Diablo-D3> its half a second away from 2^31
1732 2011-02-28 15:02:07 <Diablo-D3> so I think my math is right.
1733 2011-02-28 15:02:19 <comboy> ok so 300M with w64 about 20secs that seems ok
1734 2011-02-28 15:02:34 <Diablo-D3> -w doesnt effect hash rate
1735 2011-02-28 15:02:45 <Diablo-D3> not for this calc anyways
1736 2011-02-28 15:04:02 <comboy> yeah I'm not trying to optimize just playing
1737 2011-02-28 15:04:14 * Diablo-D3 turns loops on and checks again
1738 2011-02-28 15:04:36 jusle has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1739 2011-02-28 15:04:47 <mmarker> hmm, this SSE2 bitcoin-miner C++ code is...ugly
1740 2011-02-28 15:05:02 <Diablo-D3> lol this might take awhile
1741 2011-02-28 15:05:11 <Diablo-D3> 1500 khash/sec
1742 2011-02-28 15:05:42 <comboy> ok so it seems that with w 256 it takes  about 4 times less to saturate, is this expected?
1743 2011-02-28 15:05:54 <Expletive> So paypal's ToS forbid "the sale of traveler’s checks or money orders, currency exchanges or check cashing" so does bitcoin count as currency?
1744 2011-02-28 15:06:08 <Diablo-D3> Expletive: "yes"
1745 2011-02-28 15:06:11 <comboy> or maybe 64 is just hardcoded somewhere currently since you force it in running script and I should not change it to 256 because of it
1746 2011-02-28 15:06:20 <Diablo-D3> Expletive: paupal doesnt adhere to their own ToS... they just close accounts because they feel like it
1747 2011-02-28 15:06:29 <Diablo-D3> comboy: -w does _not_ effect this
1748 2011-02-28 15:06:43 <Diablo-D3> comboy: its not used anywhere in calculations anywhere
1749 2011-02-28 15:06:55 <Diablo-D3> comboy: its for the hardware's use only
1750 2011-02-28 15:07:10 <Diablo-D3> comboy: x number of hashes will complete no matter what the -w is, I hash count only.
1751 2011-02-28 15:07:36 <comboy> Diablo-D3: yes, so it should not affect time of nonce saturation, correct?
1752 2011-02-28 15:07:43 <Diablo-D3> yes, it doesnt
1753 2011-02-28 15:07:54 <comboy> it does on my machine
1754 2011-02-28 15:07:56 <Diablo-D3> comboy: do -d -g 1000, and give me those two lines I pasted
1755 2011-02-28 15:08:12 <comboy> getwork 1000s, and nonce saturation takes 4 times less
1756 2011-02-28 15:08:21 <Diablo-D3> give me the lines =P
1757 2011-02-28 15:08:27 <Expletive> So why does everyone use paypal to sell bitcoins if it violates Paypal's ToS?
1758 2011-02-28 15:08:30 <comboy> oh, other monitor other machine
1759 2011-02-28 15:08:34 <Diablo-D3> Expletive: most of us dont
1760 2011-02-28 15:08:41 satamusic has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1761 2011-02-28 15:08:55 <comboy> just believe me 3 nonce saturation infos every 20s for w64 and every ~5s for w256
1762 2011-02-28 15:09:10 <Diablo-D3> comboy: and you're doing 300 mhash?
1763 2011-02-28 15:09:10 <Expletive> How do you recommend turning bitcoins into USD then?
1764 2011-02-28 15:09:24 <comboy> Diablo-D3: yeah, 320 to be precise
1765 2011-02-28 15:10:01 <Diablo-D3> 2^31 - (320000000 * 20) / 3 = almost 0
1766 2011-02-28 15:10:04 <Diablo-D3> so thats correct.
1767 2011-02-28 15:10:06 jusle has joined
1768 2011-02-28 15:10:15 <Diablo-D3> comboy: I wonder if its just fucking kernels over
1769 2011-02-28 15:10:26 RichardG has joined
1770 2011-02-28 15:10:46 <mmarker> Expletive: Because people don't care.
1771 2011-02-28 15:11:08 <mmarker> Course, I can say "Hey, this guy provided me a service. He calculated some SHA256 hashes for me, and sent me the result"
1772 2011-02-28 15:11:10 <mmarker> *cough*
1773 2011-02-28 15:11:38 <Diablo-D3> comboy: I cant figure out a way that kernel fucking wouldnt also involve very high hash rates
1774 2011-02-28 15:11:43 <Diablo-D3> comboy: since the same number goes both places
1775 2011-02-28 15:12:01 <Diablo-D3> comboy: not only that, its only 4 times higher.
1776 2011-02-28 15:12:07 <pozic> Diablo-D3: poclbm doesn't even come with a README.
1777 2011-02-28 15:12:18 <Diablo-D3> pozic: neither does mine.
1778 2011-02-28 15:12:26 <Diablo-D3> both m0 and I use the threads as READMEs.
1779 2011-02-28 15:12:50 <pozic> I would call that n00b behaviour.
1780 2011-02-28 15:13:22 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: whats the command to force fans to 100%?
1781 2011-02-28 15:13:33 <Expletive> mmarker: So how would you recommend I turn these bitcoins I found into USD?
1782 2011-02-28 15:13:36 <ArtForz> --pplib-cmd 'set fanspeed 0 100'
1783 2011-02-28 15:13:52 <mmarker> Expletive: Buy something with them! :D
1784 2011-02-28 15:14:02 <mmarker> Also check bitcoin-otc
1785 2011-02-28 15:14:10 <mmarker> someone there may be able to cash you out as well
1786 2011-02-28 15:14:17 <dsg> pozic: If you send m0 a nicely-formatted README I'm sure he'll include it.
1787 2011-02-28 15:14:35 <Diablo-D3> comboy: I suspect kernel fucking is going on, though.
1788 2011-02-28 15:14:57 <ArtForz> pozic: write a better miner then, with magic error code interpretation, 400 pages of docs and a pony
1789 2011-02-28 15:15:01 RichardG has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1790 2011-02-28 15:15:14 <Diablo-D3> pozic: you forget one thing, we all do this for free
1791 2011-02-28 15:15:19 <Diablo-D3> none of us have been paid for this
1792 2011-02-28 15:15:19 <pozic> dsg: that was not the structure of this conversation. The structure of this conversation was comparing dick sizes. Wasn't that obvious?
1793 2011-02-28 15:15:42 <pozic> That does not entitle you to be rude.
1794 2011-02-28 15:15:42 <mmarker> Yea, all I get is abouse from people saying I'm wasting my time...
1795 2011-02-28 15:15:45 <mmarker> ...wait, I AM
1796 2011-02-28 15:15:49 <dsg> pozic: Uh, sure. I'll take your word for it.
1797 2011-02-28 15:15:50 <comboy> Diablo-D3: I'll try to dive more into source to try to understand it better, please ping me if you have any idea about this, need to go away now, meeting, bbl
1798 2011-02-28 15:16:22 <Diablo-D3> comboy: Im staring right at the code, I dont see a bug.
1799 2011-02-28 15:16:30 <Diablo-D3> comboy: so *shrug*
1800 2011-02-28 15:16:40 <eps> pozic, diablo, am i detecting some sexual tension between you two?
1801 2011-02-28 15:16:43 <ArtForz> pozic: arguments are room 21B, this is abuse.
1802 2011-02-28 15:17:44 mmarker has quit (Quit: WeeChat 0.3.2)
1803 2011-02-28 15:18:09 mmarker has joined
1804 2011-02-28 15:19:28 <mmarker> Grrr
1805 2011-02-28 15:19:58 <mmarker> Hmm, who's the guy who wrote blockexplorer...I remember seeing his nick here, and talking about it...but don't remember the nick
1806 2011-02-28 15:20:21 <sipa> theymos?
1807 2011-02-28 15:21:49 malfy has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1808 2011-02-28 15:22:26 <mmarker> That's him
1809 2011-02-28 15:22:30 <eps> i had a look at trying to read the blockchain this weekend
1810 2011-02-28 15:23:02 <mmarker> He made a post on the forums I need some clarification about, and wanted to ask him about TOS for blockexplorer.
1811 2011-02-28 15:23:05 <eps> it is a CDB file, i wanted to do it in ruby and the rubygem was broken my box
1812 2011-02-28 15:23:42 <eps> might use it as an excuse to learn python
1813 2011-02-28 15:23:47 <mmarker> Hmm, eps, are you releasing the source?
1814 2011-02-28 15:23:58 <eps> i haven't written anything yet :)
1815 2011-02-28 15:24:01 <mmarker> I'm curious.
1816 2011-02-28 15:24:12 <eps> but yeah, it is a just for fun type project
1817 2011-02-28 15:24:30 <eps> happy to open source it if it becomes useful
1818 2011-02-28 15:24:39 <mmarker> Oh, I did get C2DM working this weekend, so I can get messages passed around Android phones. Need to finish up some java code, and then I get a beeper for bitcoin blocks.
1819 2011-02-28 15:24:53 <lfm> I did some C code without bdb that just reads blk0001.dat sequentially
1820 2011-02-28 15:25:04 <mmarker> theymos had a post on how to do the transactions via mobile...which would be interesting.
1821 2011-02-28 15:25:15 <eps> i want to figure out how many bitcoins are being hoarded, kinda difficult i know
1822 2011-02-28 15:25:38 <mmarker> Oh, and kinda ported bouncycastle bits over. Ugh, damn you Google for using BC in Android...and not obscuring the namespace!
1823 2011-02-28 15:25:41 * mmarker shakes fist.
1824 2011-02-28 15:25:46 <lfm> number of unspent generated transactions: 51850
1825 2011-02-28 15:26:07 <eps> tricky to distinguish between transactions sent by one person to themself or one person to another person
1826 2011-02-28 15:26:19 <mmarker> eps: yup
1827 2011-02-28 15:26:25 <eps> lfm, that number is quite low
1828 2011-02-28 15:26:32 <lfm> ya my number is only the txn which have never been moved
1829 2011-02-28 15:26:49 <lfm> they are 50.00 btc each
1830 2011-02-28 15:27:01 <mmarker> Yea, surprised by it as well
1831 2011-02-28 15:27:05 <eps> it seems like an interesting porject though, could apply some heurstics and make some wild guesses
1832 2011-02-28 15:27:56 malfy has joined
1833 2011-02-28 15:28:10 <pozic> Diablo-D3: it was some environment variable, btw, so I don't see why your crusade against n00bs has been necessary.
1834 2011-02-28 15:28:12 <hazek> question: what would happen if for some odd reason durring the aprox. 10min it takes to get a new block no transactions took place? What would that block contain?
1835 2011-02-28 15:28:43 <hazek> this just randomly popped into my mind so no worries if no one has an answer
1836 2011-02-28 15:28:55 <eps> i have wondered that before as well
1837 2011-02-28 15:29:02 <eps> would be good to get an answer
1838 2011-02-28 15:29:30 RichardG has joined
1839 2011-02-28 15:29:53 <mmarker> There IS an answer
1840 2011-02-28 15:29:58 <Diablo-D3> the crusade against noobs is never over.
1841 2011-02-28 15:29:59 <sipa> hazek, eps: just a generation tx
1842 2011-02-28 15:30:02 <mmarker> Lemme find it. We had a block like that yesterday
1843 2011-02-28 15:30:10 <lfm> hazek: that happens all the time, there is just a "generate" txn then for 50.00
1844 2011-02-28 15:30:11 <sipa> most blocks until some months ago were like that
1845 2011-02-28 15:30:23 <hazek> right....
1846 2011-02-28 15:30:24 BlueMatt has joined
1847 2011-02-28 15:30:24 BlueMatt has quit (Changing host)
1848 2011-02-28 15:30:24 BlueMatt has joined
1849 2011-02-28 15:30:27 <hazek> forgot about that one :)
1850 2011-02-28 15:30:51 <hazek> so there's at least that 1 txn for the 50 reward
1851 2011-02-28 15:31:00 <lfm> right
1852 2011-02-28 15:31:00 <sipa> yes
1853 2011-02-28 15:31:08 <hazek> what about after all of the coins are "minted"?
1854 2011-02-28 15:31:13 <mmarker> Grr, can't find it....but hazek has it
1855 2011-02-28 15:31:15 <hazek> ah nvm
1856 2011-02-28 15:31:17 <hazek> fees
1857 2011-02-28 15:31:20 <mmarker> hazek: Fees!
1858 2011-02-28 15:31:26 <hazek> yea yea
1859 2011-02-28 15:31:29 <hazek> got it
1860 2011-02-28 15:31:31 <mmarker> I've seen some blocks with fees recently.
1861 2011-02-28 15:31:54 <sipa> hazek: then there will still be blocks, but with no generation tx, or just 0 as reward
1862 2011-02-28 15:31:57 <lfm> hazek: good quetion, I guess you would still need the generate txn for 0.00 then
1863 2011-02-28 15:32:11 <sipa> i believe a block without any tx can be valid
1864 2011-02-28 15:32:28 <lfm> sipa the hash tree needs at least one txn I think
1865 2011-02-28 15:32:41 <hazek> i doubt there will ever be blocks generated without an incentive
1866 2011-02-28 15:32:49 <sipa> lfm: the code has a check for calculating the merkle root of an empty list
1867 2011-02-28 15:32:55 <hazek> so there will always either be a reward by "minting" or by fees
1868 2011-02-28 15:32:55 <sipa> and return 00000... in that case
1869 2011-02-28 15:33:31 <lfm> sipa ok, I dont really like it but I guess it could be done like that
1870 2011-02-28 15:34:13 <mmarker> Hopefilly at that point, you'll have transactions of people buying things...
1871 2011-02-28 15:35:04 <hazek> any of you know how long does mtgox usually take to reply to an email?
1872 2011-02-28 15:35:20 <lfm> ya miners might just wait till they get a fee in a txn before they even try to mine
1873 2011-02-28 15:42:27 jav__ has joined
1874 2011-02-28 15:44:28 <jav__> Hi there! .. Is it correct that from just looking at a single transaction I can't see how much fees it includes? .. instead, I have to look up the balance of the input addresses in the block chain to see the difference to the total outgoing amount?
1875 2011-02-28 15:44:54 <lfm> jav__: true
1876 2011-02-28 15:45:33 <jav__> I see, thx
1877 2011-02-28 15:46:39 Lachesis has joined
1878 2011-02-28 15:56:36 TheAncientGoat has joined
1879 2011-02-28 15:59:07 TheKid has joined
1880 2011-02-28 16:02:25 Lachesis has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1881 2011-02-28 16:08:50 brunner has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1882 2011-02-28 16:19:19 pozic has quit (Quit: leaving)
1883 2011-02-28 16:24:15 RichardG has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1884 2011-02-28 16:29:47 alkor has joined
1885 2011-02-28 16:30:11 alkor has quit (Client Quit)
1886 2011-02-28 16:30:47 alkor has joined
1887 2011-02-28 16:31:24 Lachesis has joined
1888 2011-02-28 16:31:57 <alkor> What are the differences between berkeley-db v5 and v4? Are there plans to move the official client to v5? Any particular reason it is still using v4?
1889 2011-02-28 16:32:20 echelon has joined
1890 2011-02-28 16:33:21 <Diablo-D3> alkor: oracle bought sleepycat and produced v5
1891 2011-02-28 16:33:26 <Diablo-D3> its no longer bsd licensed
1892 2011-02-28 16:33:30 <Diablo-D3> theres also zero reason to upgrade
1893 2011-02-28 16:33:46 <Diablo-D3> most brand new bdb apps use some version of 4.x
1894 2011-02-28 16:33:58 <Diablo-D3> 4.x is the last real bdb
1895 2011-02-28 16:35:00 <alkor> Is it only the wallet.dat that depends on the version of the db, or most of the files in ~/.bitcoin?
1896 2011-02-28 16:35:40 <Diablo-D3> just .dat files
1897 2011-02-28 16:35:43 <Diablo-D3> alkor: btw
1898 2011-02-28 16:35:46 <Diablo-D3> you CAN upgrade
1899 2011-02-28 16:35:49 <Diablo-D3> but you cant downgrade
1900 2011-02-28 16:35:57 <Diablo-D3> and your files wont be compatible with everybody else's bitcoin
1901 2011-02-28 16:36:09 <alkor> What did Oracle change the license to?
1902 2011-02-28 16:36:14 <alkor> GPL or something else?
1903 2011-02-28 16:36:41 <Diablo-D3> the sleepycat license (as its called) was a bsd license that had custom wording, but its otherwise a bsd 3 clause
1904 2011-02-28 16:37:02 <Diablo-D3> oracle changed it to adding a really bad 4th clause that basically assigns them all patents and other bullshit
1905 2011-02-28 16:37:12 <Diablo-D3> theres a writeup of it on the internet but i cant find it
1906 2011-02-28 16:37:18 <Diablo-D3> its a really really ugly license
1907 2011-02-28 16:37:18 <uni4dfx> what exactly are miners calculating? is it something useful like folding@home or just some nonsense to find the coins?
1908 2011-02-28 16:37:32 <edcba> nonsense
1909 2011-02-28 16:37:34 <Diablo-D3> uni4dfx: its almost nonsense, its potential block headers
1910 2011-02-28 16:37:37 Lachesis has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1911 2011-02-28 16:37:42 <edcba> so a FAQ
1912 2011-02-28 16:37:52 <nanotube> ;;bc,wiki how bitcoin works
1913 2011-02-28 16:37:52 <gribble> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/How_bitcoin_works | Jan 15, 2011 ... This page explains the basic framework of how Bitcoin works. Ideally, it'll be accessible to the "literate layman". ...
1914 2011-02-28 16:38:02 <uni4dfx> tnx
1915 2011-02-28 16:38:11 <alkor> Diablo-D3: Thanks for clarifying.
1916 2011-02-28 16:39:30 <edcba> i really wonder if we could find some "useful" hashcash problem
1917 2011-02-28 16:40:44 <BlueMatt> people have asked whether it is possible, but no one has come up with a workable idea
1918 2011-02-28 16:40:50 <alkor> Diablo-D3: The issue you mention is described here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley_DB
1919 2011-02-28 16:41:02 <alkor> Apparently oracle uses a dual license.
1920 2011-02-28 16:41:18 <alkor> "Software that is not distributed can use the Sleepycat License, as can free and open source software. Proprietary software can use Berkeley DB only under a commercial license agreement between Oracle and the application's publisher."
1921 2011-02-28 16:41:23 <molecular> ;;bc,gen 666666
1922 2011-02-28 16:41:24 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 666666 Khps, given current difficulty of 55590.23763914 , is 12.0623982133 BTC per day and 0.502599925552 BTC per hour.
1923 2011-02-28 16:42:57 <Diablo-D3> alkor: its a little worse than that
1924 2011-02-28 16:43:03 <Diablo-D3> theres additional language on top of that
1925 2011-02-28 16:43:47 <Diablo-D3> they would have been better off just CDDLing it or something
1926 2011-02-28 16:43:48 <alkor> Maybe I am a little ignorant, but is there any deep reason as to why Berkeley Db is used instead of say sqlite?
1927 2011-02-28 16:43:57 <Diablo-D3> it needs a kv store
1928 2011-02-28 16:44:12 <Diablo-D3> and sqlite's storage backend is a little deficient
1929 2011-02-28 16:44:22 <Diablo-D3> oracle actually ships a version of sqlite that uses bdb 5.x as the storage backend
1930 2011-02-28 16:44:28 <BlueMatt> bdb is more elegant and simple and more resilient to weired stuff going on
1931 2011-02-28 16:44:35 <alkor> What is KV store?
1932 2011-02-28 16:44:39 <BlueMatt> key-value store
1933 2011-02-28 16:44:42 <Diablo-D3> alkor: key value
1934 2011-02-28 16:44:44 <alkor> Thanks.
1935 2011-02-28 16:45:00 <Diablo-D3> you really wanna compare bdb vs tokyo cabienet
1936 2011-02-28 16:46:03 <Diablo-D3> alkor: oh, and as a side note, bdb-je is not anything like bdb
1937 2011-02-28 16:46:07 <Diablo-D3> its absolutely crap code
1938 2011-02-28 16:46:08 TheKid has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1939 2011-02-28 16:46:12 <Diablo-D3> and its all oracle-ware
1940 2011-02-28 16:46:17 <alkor> Interestingly, python has removed the bsddb module which is the interface to the Berkeley DB library, but they have ratainted the pysqlite module.
1941 2011-02-28 16:46:23 TheKid has joined
1942 2011-02-28 16:46:23 <alkor> http://docs.python.org/library/bsddb.html
1943 2011-02-28 16:46:54 <Diablo-D3> it doesnt say waht they suggest replacing it with
1944 2011-02-28 16:47:12 <alkor> Yes, that's what I am looking for as well.
1945 2011-02-28 16:47:28 amiller has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1946 2011-02-28 16:47:49 <Diablo-D3> ooh, kyoto cabinet is out now
1947 2011-02-28 16:48:19 <Diablo-D3> kc is the replacement for tokyo caibnet, but it wasnt ready for production use last time I looked
1948 2011-02-28 16:48:23 <Diablo-D3> alkor: but yeah, theres options
1949 2011-02-28 16:48:28 <Diablo-D3> bdb 4.x is one of them
1950 2011-02-28 16:48:45 <dsg> alkor: http://docs.python.org/library/gdbm.html
1951 2011-02-28 16:49:03 <Diablo-D3> the hell?
1952 2011-02-28 16:49:10 <Diablo-D3> why would they recommend gdbm over bdb 4.x?
1953 2011-02-28 16:49:20 <alkor> "The gdbm module has been renamed to dbm.gnu in Python 3.0."
1954 2011-02-28 16:49:27 <alkor> I wonder what else is available in dbm
1955 2011-02-28 16:49:35 <Diablo-D3> alkor: well, these are all dbms
1956 2011-02-28 16:49:52 <Diablo-D3> dbm was the original C kv store
1957 2011-02-28 16:50:03 <Diablo-D3> bdb is the rewrite of it during the at&t->bsd phase
1958 2011-02-28 16:50:25 <Diablo-D3> gdbm is the gnu work-alike, and its a pile of shit
1959 2011-02-28 16:50:26 <alkor> http://docs.python.org/py3k/library/dbm.html?highlight=dbm#dbm
1960 2011-02-28 16:50:29 <Diablo-D3> I dont recommend anyone should ever use it
1961 2011-02-28 16:50:36 Zarutian has joined
1962 2011-02-28 16:50:44 <alkor> "dbm is a generic interface to variants of the DBM database — dbm.gnu or dbm.ndbm. If none of these modules is installed, the slow-but-simple implementation in module dbm.dumb will be used. There is a third party interface to the Oracle Berkeley DB."
1963 2011-02-28 16:52:01 <Diablo-D3> wtf
1964 2011-02-28 16:52:05 <Diablo-D3> but it supports ndbm
1965 2011-02-28 16:52:32 <eps> i have used tokyo cabinet and kyoto, good software
1966 2011-02-28 16:52:38 <lfm> are they all just plug compatible?
1967 2011-02-28 16:52:50 <Diablo-D3> lfm: no
1968 2011-02-28 16:52:55 <Diablo-D3> all use very similar apis
1969 2011-02-28 16:53:03 <Diablo-D3> I mean, they all do the same fucking thing
1970 2011-02-28 16:53:04 <Diablo-D3> its a kv store
1971 2011-02-28 16:53:09 <Diablo-D3> theres only so many ways of coding an API for this
1972 2011-02-28 16:53:25 <jgarzik> tokyo cabinet's author talks about all sorts of tokyo cabinet limitations, in pimping his new software
1973 2011-02-28 16:53:47 <Diablo-D3> lfm: the big difference is the file formats are all incompatible
1974 2011-02-28 16:54:02 <jgarzik> Kyoto Cabinet, it is called
1975 2011-02-28 16:54:09 <alkor> Why is dbm gnu a pile of shit?
1976 2011-02-28 16:54:23 <Diablo-D3> alkor: its inferior to bdb
1977 2011-02-28 16:54:26 <alkor> Is its file format incompatible with the current bitcoin version?
1978 2011-02-28 16:54:35 <Diablo-D3> in usability, in performance, and in stability
1979 2011-02-28 16:54:43 <lfm> ya the database files are incompatible but you could benchmark em all off a common code base?
1980 2011-02-28 16:54:47 Brakk has joined
1981 2011-02-28 16:54:56 <Diablo-D3> lfm: a pretty similar one, yes
1982 2011-02-28 16:54:59 <alkor> Hmm, it's strange that python has removed the berkeley db then.
1983 2011-02-28 16:55:00 <Diablo-D3> alkor: yes.
1984 2011-02-28 16:55:10 <Diablo-D3> python is a project built on politics
1985 2011-02-28 16:55:11 <alkor> I wonder if it is because of a patent threat or something like that from Oracle.
1986 2011-02-28 16:55:17 <Diablo-D3> alkor: well
1987 2011-02-28 16:55:25 <Diablo-D3> notice it says 4.0 to 4.7
1988 2011-02-28 16:55:33 <Diablo-D3> 4.7 is the last truly free bdb.
1989 2011-02-28 16:55:51 <Diablo-D3> and oracle cant own patents on whats essentially 30 year old cod.e
1990 2011-02-28 16:55:52 <Diablo-D3> *code
1991 2011-02-28 16:56:43 <jgarzik> bdb is not really a generic K/V store anymore...  it's a multi-dimensional, transactional K/V store that might or might not be ordered or a queue :)
1992 2011-02-28 16:56:58 <Diablo-D3> hee
1993 2011-02-28 16:57:01 <Diablo-D3> bdb is really nice
1994 2011-02-28 16:57:29 Brakk has left ()
1995 2011-02-28 16:57:59 <Diablo-D3> oh, and dont forget, it also journals and is transactional safe with multiple apps accessing it
1996 2011-02-28 16:58:11 <Diablo-D3> there really is no competitor for bdb for apps that use it's full potential
1997 2011-02-28 16:58:13 brakk has joined
1998 2011-02-28 17:00:08 <alkor> Python goes for its own
1999 2011-02-28 17:00:12 <alkor> shelve module
2000 2011-02-28 17:00:12 <alkor> http://docs.python.org/library/shelve.html
2001 2011-02-28 17:00:18 <Diablo-D3> yeah screw python
2002 2011-02-28 17:00:23 <alkor> "A “shelf” is a persistent, dictionary-like object. The difference with “dbm” databases is that the values (not the keys!) in a shelf can be essentially arbitrary Python objects — anything that the pickle module can handle. "
2003 2011-02-28 17:00:26 <Diablo-D3> no one whos doing real coding is using python.
2004 2011-02-28 17:00:44 <alkor> What do real-coders use?
2005 2011-02-28 17:00:52 <alkor> :)
2006 2011-02-28 17:01:15 <Diablo-D3> C, Java, etc
2007 2011-02-28 17:01:18 jav__ has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
2008 2011-02-28 17:02:18 <eps> ruby
2009 2011-02-28 17:02:22 <eps> ;)
2010 2011-02-28 17:02:41 <dsg> The trolls are out in full force today, I see.
2011 2011-02-28 17:03:08 <lfm> assembler
2012 2011-02-28 17:03:16 <alkor> I do like python quite a lot actually - it is pretty good for prototyping before writing your application in compiled languages.
2013 2011-02-28 17:03:55 <bk128> Diablo-D3: know if there's a way to start your miner when you only have ssh access? (on debian)
2014 2011-02-28 17:04:16 <eps> it is all about the right tool for the job, sometimes a scripting language is performant enough, easier to maintain and will get you to the finishing line quicker
2015 2011-02-28 17:04:36 <EvanR> real coders use java. and will hopefully be stuffed into an asylum for it
2016 2011-02-28 17:04:59 <EvanR> after the reformation
2017 2011-02-28 17:05:10 <eps> other times, you have no option other than etch the 0s and 1s on to the surface of your hard disk individually
2018 2011-02-28 17:05:46 <EvanR> 'scripting languages' usually means lack of type checking and other sane features, making maintainability harder
2019 2011-02-28 17:06:29 <eps> you can name your variables int_foo if you want
2020 2011-02-28 17:06:39 <EvanR> variable names are irrelevant
2021 2011-02-28 17:07:40 <eps> good developers will always sanitize their inputs regardless of the issue
2022 2011-02-28 17:07:55 <eps> s/issue/language/
2023 2011-02-28 17:08:02 <TheKid> lol what
2024 2011-02-28 17:08:06 <eps> sorry bit of a brainfart there
2025 2011-02-28 17:08:06 <TheKid> java != real code
2026 2011-02-28 17:08:44 <TheKid> unless of course your definition of real code means it runs like shit
2027 2011-02-28 17:09:08 <bk128> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=581176 fuuuu
2028 2011-02-28 17:09:14 <alkor> But isn't the bitcoin coding sytle that variable names should follow some kind of a hungarian notation?
2029 2011-02-28 17:09:20 <bk128> cant start my miner
2030 2011-02-28 17:09:20 amiller has joined
2031 2011-02-28 17:09:28 <eps> alkor, yeah i noticed that
2032 2011-02-28 17:09:41 <Diablo-D3> bk128: uh, quite a few people run my miner through ssh
2033 2011-02-28 17:09:54 <Diablo-D3> bk128: start X as your user, then export DISPLAY=:0 and run the miner
2034 2011-02-28 17:10:21 <EvanR> TheKid: i wouldnt use performance as a metric for code or reality
2035 2011-02-28 17:10:41 <TheKid> EvanR: what would you use then?
2036 2011-02-28 17:11:03 <EvanR> sanity
2037 2011-02-28 17:11:04 <lfm> so dont let xdm or kdm or gdm start. use startx instead
2038 2011-02-28 17:13:06 mtgox has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2039 2011-02-28 17:13:21 <bk128> so I should do /etc/init.d/gdm stop?
2040 2011-02-28 17:13:28 <bk128> gdm3*
2041 2011-02-28 17:13:29 Hardwarez has joined
2042 2011-02-28 17:13:35 mekel has joined
2043 2011-02-28 17:14:07 <Diablo-D3> bk128: erm, why is it running if the box is headless?
2044 2011-02-28 17:14:40 <bk128> yeah, box is remote now
2045 2011-02-28 17:14:53 Lachesis has joined
2046 2011-02-28 17:15:05 <Diablo-D3> so just uninstall gdm
2047 2011-02-28 17:15:11 <Diablo-D3> you'll never use it again
2048 2011-02-28 17:15:36 <luke-jr> I use: X -sharevts -novtswitch :2
2049 2011-02-28 17:16:17 <lfm> luke-jr ya the startx script does that I think
2050 2011-02-28 17:16:28 <luke-jr> nope
2051 2011-02-28 17:17:21 <Diablo-D3> startx does enough.
2052 2011-02-28 17:17:51 <luke-jr> only on a headless bod
2053 2011-02-28 17:17:52 <luke-jr> box*
2054 2011-02-28 17:18:18 <BlueMatt> though some Xes are set up to start gdm/kdm when you call startx (incl Ubuntu iirc)
2055 2011-02-28 17:18:45 <lfm> BlueMatt: I never seen that
2056 2011-02-28 17:18:47 mtgox has joined
2057 2011-02-28 17:19:17 <bk128> http://pastie.org/1617446
2058 2011-02-28 17:19:27 <BlueMatt> x can be set up to use whatever dm you want, incl gdm/kdm so...
2059 2011-02-28 17:19:32 <bk128> looks like my ssh is locked up
2060 2011-02-28 17:19:57 <BlueMatt> bk128: if X isnt running do as it says and remove the lock
2061 2011-02-28 17:20:04 <BlueMatt> if it is, kill it or use it
2062 2011-02-28 17:20:30 <bk128> how do I check if it is?
2063 2011-02-28 17:20:35 <lfm> and startx runs X without any of xdm/kdm/gdm
2064 2011-02-28 17:20:36 <BlueMatt> ps aux | grep X
2065 2011-02-28 17:21:00 <BlueMatt> startx can call user defined scripts iirc?
2066 2011-02-28 17:21:30 <luke-jr> lfm: startx genereally runs X, plus KDE or GNOME
2067 2011-02-28 17:22:00 <BlueMatt> and iirc, startx is setup to call gdm on ubuntu (though I may be terribly wrong)
2068 2011-02-28 17:22:11 <lfm> they all call user scripts on start if they exist
2069 2011-02-28 17:22:36 <Ratchet> startx usually uses .xinitrc for this
2070 2011-02-28 17:23:08 <Diablo-D3> yeah, but you dont really need that
2071 2011-02-28 17:23:11 <luke-jr> and if they don't exist, startx uses the system's scripts
2072 2011-02-28 17:23:15 <Diablo-D3> just startx &
2073 2011-02-28 17:27:08 <mmarker> Heh. I just cheat and use Xvfb.
2074 2011-02-28 17:28:00 gasteve has quit (Quit: gasteve)
2075 2011-02-28 17:28:39 Hardwarez has quit (Quit: Page closed)
2076 2011-02-28 17:29:06 Hardwarez has joined
2077 2011-02-28 17:29:30 <mmarker> and afternoon peeps
2078 2011-02-28 17:29:42 <luke-jr> mmarker: Xvfb isn't going to work for mining…
2079 2011-02-28 17:30:24 <mmarker> luke-jr: It does for some drivers. nVidia's linux drivers don't care , it seems
2080 2011-02-28 17:30:35 <luke-jr> wtf
2081 2011-02-28 17:30:42 <mmarker> they'll hack OpenCL w/o a real display.
2082 2011-02-28 17:31:00 <mmarker> probably they also geared some of that for people using said cards for clusters, IIRC.
2083 2011-02-28 17:31:15 <luke-jr> then why do they require a DISPLAY at all
2084 2011-02-28 17:31:32 <mmarker> luke-jr: it may be the userspace code...
2085 2011-02-28 17:31:44 <mmarker> "I don't see a valid DISPLAY, I'm bailing"
2086 2011-02-28 17:32:32 <mmarker> Due to the old assumption "you need GLX to use GL on Unix"
2087 2011-02-28 17:32:47 <mmarker> which nowadays, is a bad assumption
2088 2011-02-28 17:32:53 <lfm> but OpenCL is not OpenGL
2089 2011-02-28 17:32:53 <BlueMatt> lazy programmers: if there is a valid DISPLAY the drivers must be loaded, so I should be able to run
2090 2011-02-28 17:32:59 <luke-jr> CL != GL
2091 2011-02-28 17:33:06 <mmarker> Yes
2092 2011-02-28 17:33:15 <mmarker> but see what BM said. People are lazy
2093 2011-02-28 17:33:26 <Diablo-D3> are we still talking about this?
2094 2011-02-28 17:33:33 <mmarker> "Look, you aren't doing any graphics, so whay should I do any work period"
2095 2011-02-28 17:34:04 <Diablo-D3> the user app shouldnt give a shit about DISPLAY
2096 2011-02-28 17:34:04 <lfm> I suspect nvida does it different cuz of their extra experience with tesla clusters and such
2097 2011-02-28 17:34:10 <Diablo-D3> lfm: and no
2098 2011-02-28 17:34:15 <Diablo-D3> its because nvidia is a bunch of fucking idiots
2099 2011-02-28 17:34:29 <Diablo-D3> nvidia is going to be closed out of linux because of their shit
2100 2011-02-28 17:36:24 <lfm> well it seems ati is uninterested in the headless compute cluster scenarios
2101 2011-02-28 17:36:34 sgornick has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2102 2011-02-28 17:36:58 sgornick has joined
2103 2011-02-28 17:39:21 <mmarker> Grr. People who use variables unitiliazed shold go die in a fire
2104 2011-02-28 17:40:13 <tectonic> join #security
2105 2011-02-28 17:40:16 <tectonic> crap
2106 2011-02-28 17:40:57 <mmarker> Could be worse.
2107 2011-02-28 17:42:29 <Diablo-D3> lfm: no
2108 2011-02-28 17:43:00 <Diablo-D3> ati isnt interested in fglrx.
2109 2011-02-28 17:43:19 <bk128> ok, removed gdm3 and gdm, now I get this http://pastie.org/1617519
2110 2011-02-28 17:44:33 <Diablo-D3> they're interested in gallium
2111 2011-02-28 17:44:36 <Diablo-D3> BEHOLD!
2112 2011-02-28 17:44:42 <Diablo-D3> THE COMPUTE ENVIRONMENT VARIABLE!
2113 2011-02-28 17:44:44 <bk128> gallium spoons?
2114 2011-02-28 17:44:59 <Diablo-D3> bk128: er, so?
2115 2011-02-28 17:45:05 <Diablo-D3> whats the issue?
2116 2011-02-28 17:45:53 <bk128> now my ssh term is locked up, ctrl c doesnt even do anything.  just close it and try to start diablominer in a new ssh session?
2117 2011-02-28 17:46:31 <bk128> or ctrl c kills x
2118 2011-02-28 17:46:40 <Diablo-D3> bk128: uh, why didnt you startx &?
2119 2011-02-28 17:46:58 <bk128> because I forgot that trick :)
2120 2011-02-28 17:47:47 RazielZ has quit ()
2121 2011-02-28 17:48:12 Hardwarez has quit (Quit: Page closed)
2122 2011-02-28 17:48:22 * Diablo-D3 facepalms
2123 2011-02-28 17:48:42 <bk128> I bet you do a lot of that around me
2124 2011-02-28 17:49:31 brunner has joined
2125 2011-02-28 17:49:31 <bk128> I thought the latest did export display automatically.  still getting "exception in main... can't conect to x11 window server using ' ' as the value of the display variable
2126 2011-02-28 17:51:02 mekel has quit (Quit: Page closed)
2127 2011-02-28 17:51:03 <bk128> so just tried export display 0 and now it says cant connect to x11 window server using ':0' as value of Display
2128 2011-02-28 17:51:20 <Diablo-D3> because you probably screwed up
2129 2011-02-28 17:51:29 <bk128> most likely.
2130 2011-02-28 17:51:34 <Diablo-D3> try not screwing up in future iterations
2131 2011-02-28 17:52:16 <bk128> any other ideas?
2132 2011-02-28 17:52:38 <Diablo-D3> is X actually running on :0?
2133 2011-02-28 17:53:40 <bk128> how do i check that?
2134 2011-02-28 17:55:51 luke-jr has quit (otg!~luke-jr@ishibashi.dashjr.org|Read error: Operation timed out)
2135 2011-02-28 17:57:38 luke-jr has joined
2136 2011-02-28 17:57:45 <bk128> I *think* it's running on :0 http://pastie.org/1617575
2137 2011-02-28 17:57:55 Zarutian has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2138 2011-02-28 18:00:25 Lachesis has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2139 2011-02-28 18:01:40 alkor has quit (Quit: alkor)
2140 2011-02-28 18:04:49 gasteve has joined
2141 2011-02-28 18:05:04 <Diablo-D3> yes
2142 2011-02-28 18:05:12 Zarutian has joined
2143 2011-02-28 18:05:19 <Diablo-D3> bk128: but thats not yours
2144 2011-02-28 18:05:23 <Diablo-D3> thats the one started by gdm
2145 2011-02-28 18:06:04 <bk128> thought I uninstalled gdm
2146 2011-02-28 18:07:45 f4n is now known as f3n
2147 2011-02-28 18:07:52 f3n has quit (Changing host)
2148 2011-02-28 18:07:52 f3n has joined
2149 2011-02-28 18:09:02 larsig has joined
2150 2011-02-28 18:10:40 amiller has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2151 2011-02-28 18:11:15 <Diablo-D3> bk128: but did you ever bother actually stopping it first?
2152 2011-02-28 18:11:23 <bk128> yes.
2153 2011-02-28 18:11:28 <bk128> and i've rebooted since
2154 2011-02-28 18:11:28 <bk128> http://pastie.org/1617632
2155 2011-02-28 18:11:29 <Diablo-D3> protip: /etc/init.d/stop gdm while waiting at the login window does NOT stop it
2156 2011-02-28 18:11:44 <Diablo-D3> bk128: you nimrod.
2157 2011-02-28 18:11:46 <bk128> init.d/gdm stop?
2158 2011-02-28 18:11:59 <Diablo-D3> why are you sudo startx?
2159 2011-02-28 18:12:04 <bk128> oh
2160 2011-02-28 18:12:12 <Diablo-D3> you dont want it running as root! you want it running as you!
2161 2011-02-28 18:12:42 <bk128> Diablo-D3: X: user not authorized to run the X server, aborting. (unless I'm root)
2162 2011-02-28 18:13:43 <Diablo-D3> guess what
2163 2011-02-28 18:13:48 <Diablo-D3> you're an ubuntu user
2164 2011-02-28 18:13:59 <bk128> :( trying to be a debian user
2165 2011-02-28 18:14:04 <Diablo-D3> I already told you not to use ubuntu
2166 2011-02-28 18:14:09 <Diablo-D3> you are beyond help
2167 2011-02-28 18:14:14 <bk128> Diablo-D3: this is debian...
2168 2011-02-28 18:14:38 <Diablo-D3> Im not aware of any such bugs in debian
2169 2011-02-28 18:14:51 <Diablo-D3> bk128: try running xinit instead
2170 2011-02-28 18:14:54 <bk128> bill@miner1:~$ cat /etc/debian_version
2171 2011-02-28 18:14:54 <bk128> 6.0
2172 2011-02-28 18:15:11 <bk128> still "X: user not authorized to run the X server, aborting."
2173 2011-02-28 18:16:12 <Diablo-D3> I give up.
2174 2011-02-28 18:16:26 <Diablo-D3> no one else has this problem.
2175 2011-02-28 18:16:36 <Diablo-D3> wait
2176 2011-02-28 18:16:43 <Diablo-D3> bk128: did you forget to add your user to group video?
2177 2011-02-28 18:16:58 <bk128> forget to? I have no idea what that even means
2178 2011-02-28 18:17:09 * bk128 *facepalms* also
2179 2011-02-28 18:17:25 <Diablo-D3> as root, adduser bk128 video
2180 2011-02-28 18:17:30 <Diablo-D3> and then log out and log back in
2181 2011-02-28 18:18:00 <bk128> already a member
2182 2011-02-28 18:18:44 <bk128> should i just do everything as root? :)
2183 2011-02-28 18:19:11 * Diablo-D3 prods lfm and luke-jr and ArtForz 
2184 2011-02-28 18:19:23 <bk128> lol
2185 2011-02-28 18:19:31 <TheKid> bk128: just use windows for your mining machine ;)
2186 2011-02-28 18:19:38 <bk128> about to...
2187 2011-02-28 18:19:42 <TheKid> much simpler
2188 2011-02-28 18:19:45 <TheKid> and everything just works
2189 2011-02-28 18:19:52 <bk128> ....
2190 2011-02-28 18:20:06 <bk128> TheKid: you're gonna get your ass kicked here.  be careful
2191 2011-02-28 18:20:17 <bk128> :)
2192 2011-02-28 18:20:55 slush1 has joined
2193 2011-02-28 18:21:12 <lfm> I'd never do it as root but some people don't care
2194 2011-02-28 18:21:20 <[Tycho]> Oh, ufasoft's miner sends his shares in capital letters :)
2195 2011-02-28 18:21:26 <bk128> lfm: any ideas then?
2196 2011-02-28 18:21:31 <bk128> all I have is ssh
2197 2011-02-28 18:21:47 <bk128> no physical access or anything now
2198 2011-02-28 18:22:25 slush has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2199 2011-02-28 18:22:34 <lfm> I'd use su user -c startx and then .xinitrc or whatever its called to start the miner
2200 2011-02-28 18:26:51 <bk128> what do you mean .xinit to start the miner?
2201 2011-02-28 18:27:03 <luke-jr> I mine as root. I think.
2202 2011-02-28 18:27:08 <luke-jr> But I mine inside a VM
2203 2011-02-28 18:29:22 rgm3 has joined
2204 2011-02-28 18:29:29 <rgm3> good afternoon
2205 2011-02-28 18:29:52 <lfm> To  determine  the  client to run, startx first looks for a file called
2206 2011-02-28 18:29:52 <lfm>        .xinitrc in the userâs home directory.  If that is not found,  it  uses
2207 2011-02-28 18:29:52 <lfm>        the file xinitrc in the xinit library directory.
2208 2011-02-28 18:30:40 <lfm> or maybe:        $(HOME)/.xserverrc       Server to run.  The default is X.
2209 2011-02-28 18:31:12 <bk128> I have a .xauthority file
2210 2011-02-28 18:31:14 <rgm3> I've been using Bitcoin since Friday.  I have it installed on OSX (desktop) and Ubuntu Linux (laptop).  Is it possible for me to copy my wallet.dat file to both machines, so that both installations have the same "identity" ?
2211 2011-02-28 18:31:39 <TheKid> rgm3: yes
2212 2011-02-28 18:31:44 <lfm> bk128: xauthority wont do it, its not a script afaik
2213 2011-02-28 18:31:47 <TheKid> but careful not to double spend
2214 2011-02-28 18:32:22 <rgm3> TheKid -- good tip.  The wallets should synchronize after they each get a new block, right?
2215 2011-02-28 18:32:37 <bk128> lfm: ok, gotta go for a bit bit.  I'll work on this later
2216 2011-02-28 18:32:39 bk128 has left ()
2217 2011-02-28 18:32:39 <lfm> bk128: you create ~/.xinitrc or .xserverrc with a text editor
2218 2011-02-28 18:32:42 <rgm3> i'm only ever on one computer at a time, so hopefully that wouldn't happen
2219 2011-02-28 18:32:47 <TheKid> I'm not sure but it they should sync up after 1 block
2220 2011-02-28 18:33:51 <rgm3> You guys prolly all have this on your wishlists, but it'd be nice if the client used UPnP to help with the port forwarding.  It'd be even better if a STUN setup existed to make the port forward unecessary
2221 2011-02-28 18:35:04 discHead has joined
2222 2011-02-28 18:35:04 discHead has quit (Changing host)
2223 2011-02-28 18:35:04 discHead has joined
2224 2011-02-28 18:35:19 <rgm3> oooh, and eventually Bitcoin clients could use Bonjour / mDNS to announce themselves to neighbors -- then when you walked into a store or were standing next to a friend it'd be easy to find their address
2225 2011-02-28 18:40:55 bk128 has joined
2226 2011-02-28 18:41:16 <bk128> using root works :)
2227 2011-02-28 18:41:53 <bk128> do I have to keep the ssh session alive?
2228 2011-02-28 18:42:24 <bk128> forgot how to use screen
2229 2011-02-28 18:49:30 Diablo-D3 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2230 2011-02-28 18:49:40 <rgm3> do you guys envision "well-known" BTC addresses?
2231 2011-02-28 18:49:57 <rgm3> or do you expect BTC addresses to be in constant flux for any given identity
2232 2011-02-28 18:50:22 <rgm3> if they're in constant flux, then the address becomes kind of like a "transaction identifier"
2233 2011-02-28 18:51:35 T_X has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2234 2011-02-28 18:51:46 T_X has joined
2235 2011-02-28 18:51:51 T_X has quit (Changing host)
2236 2011-02-28 18:51:51 T_X has joined
2237 2011-02-28 18:52:24 <rgm3> so, I picture that a store like Apple would generate an address for me to use to buy my computer.  I'd scan the QR-code for it with my phone, then send the BTC.  We'd both associate that address with a record in our payment system "rgm3 bought an Macbook Pro for 2000BTC using addy XXXX at <timestamp>"
2238 2011-02-28 18:52:45 <rgm3> the problem is -- who is "rgm3."  Have you guys thought about digital identities and WoT?
2239 2011-02-28 18:56:32 <TheKid> rgm3: #bitcoin-otc
2240 2011-02-28 18:56:56 <mmarker> God damn crackmonkey MS people who thought to be different
2241 2011-02-28 18:58:22 <rgm3> that's the other thing -- it takes about 10 minutes for a transaction to be "confirmed", right?
2242 2011-02-28 18:58:37 <rgm3> so like, a merchant wouldn't let me leave the store until that happened
2243 2011-02-28 18:59:55 <Keefe> merchants will probably want to receive payment thru an ewallet like mybitcoin
2244 2011-02-28 19:00:02 <mmarker> rgm3: Actually, to be safe, you'd need a few more than a block.
2245 2011-02-28 19:00:14 <rgm3> yipes.
2246 2011-02-28 19:00:28 <mmarker> rgm3: there's a bitcoin escrow service which would be useful as well
2247 2011-02-28 19:00:34 <rgm3> so like, if you're buying a computer (or something expensive) it could take 30 minutes to clear?
2248 2011-02-28 19:00:42 <rgm3> hmm.
2249 2011-02-28 19:01:05 * mmarker is still fighting with that SSE2 code
2250 2011-02-28 19:01:06 <Keefe> payments within mybitcoin are instant, afaik
2251 2011-02-28 19:01:22 <mmarker> People who mix C++ with templates and asm need to be examined.
2252 2011-02-28 19:01:41 <rgm3> I can't imagine a retailer relying on a 3rd party escrow.  they'd probably want to run their own escrow.
2253 2011-02-28 19:01:51 <Keefe> of course if the customer doesn't already have btc in mybitcoin, there's the delay confirming the xfer into mybitcoin
2254 2011-02-28 19:02:01 <rgm3> or verify my trust by checking out my digital identity / transaction history / something
2255 2011-02-28 19:02:35 slush1 is now known as slush
2256 2011-02-28 19:02:47 slush has quit (Changing host)
2257 2011-02-28 19:02:47 slush has joined
2258 2011-02-28 19:03:46 amiller has joined
2259 2011-02-28 19:06:15 <lfm> rgm3: if the escrow was a lawyer or bank you were familiar with I can see it
2260 2011-02-28 19:08:03 <phantomcircuit> the mainline client is sending inv before i've sent verack
2261 2011-02-28 19:08:08 <phantomcircuit> and isn't sending verack
2262 2011-02-28 19:08:35 <lfm> did you send ver
2263 2011-02-28 19:08:59 <phantomcircuit> yeah i did
2264 2011-02-28 19:09:01 <lfm> did you send verack
2265 2011-02-28 19:09:07 <phantomcircuit> no i didnt
2266 2011-02-28 19:09:33 <phantomcircuit> which is why it's odd that the client is sending inv before verack
2267 2011-02-28 19:09:48 <lfm> a bit odd yup
2268 2011-02-28 19:09:56 bitcoiner has joined
2269 2011-02-28 19:10:45 <phantomcircuit> http://codepad.org/WkIwmF1d
2270 2011-02-28 19:10:52 <brakk> I just noticed bitcoin version 0.3.20.01 was out. Where can I find the changelog? I've looked for it.
2271 2011-02-28 19:11:21 <lfm> changelog?
2272 2011-02-28 19:11:42 <lfm> we dont have no stinkin changelog
2273 2011-02-28 19:11:49 <phantomcircuit> brakk, http://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin
2274 2011-02-28 19:12:12 <phantomcircuit> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commits/master
2275 2011-02-28 19:13:29 pozic has joined
2276 2011-02-28 19:13:58 <pozic> Is it normal that the Python miner uses 40% CPU continuously?
2277 2011-02-28 19:14:19 <lfm> pozic: depends, which sdk do you have?
2278 2011-02-28 19:14:26 <rgm3> Does my private key ever change?   It's one key per address, right?
2279 2011-02-28 19:14:52 <lfm> rgm3: yes
2280 2011-02-28 19:15:09 <lfm> and yes
2281 2011-02-28 19:15:23 <rgm3> hmm... so really there's nothing "constant" about my identity, other than the list of previously used addresses in my wallet.
2282 2011-02-28 19:15:42 <phantomcircuit> rgm3, precisely
2283 2011-02-28 19:16:18 <pozic> lfm: 2.3
2284 2011-02-28 19:16:19 <lfm> rgm3: ya, your wallet is changing a lot
2285 2011-02-28 19:16:51 <lfm> pozic ya that is something that happens with 2.3.   which video card do you have?
2286 2011-02-28 19:17:01 <pozic> lfm: 5770
2287 2011-02-28 19:17:08 <phantomcircuit> lfm, did you see my network dump?
2288 2011-02-28 19:17:14 <lfm> pozic: try the older sdk 2.1 then
2289 2011-02-28 19:17:26 <lfm> phantomcircuit: no
2290 2011-02-28 19:17:28 <pozic> lfm: what causes it?
2291 2011-02-28 19:17:35 discHead has quit (Quit: discHead)
2292 2011-02-28 19:17:39 <pozic> lfm: just some Epic FAIL by AMD?
2293 2011-02-28 19:17:43 <lfm> pozic: a bug I guess
2294 2011-02-28 19:18:00 <pozic> How people can release newer software that works worse is really beyond me.
2295 2011-02-28 19:18:01 <phantomcircuit> lfm, http://codepad.org/WkIwmF1d
2296 2011-02-28 19:18:18 <pozic> lfm: thanks.
2297 2011-02-28 19:18:23 <edcba> pozic you are not developper i guess ? :)
2298 2011-02-28 19:18:31 Syke has joined
2299 2011-02-28 19:18:31 <pozic> edcba: I am a developer.
2300 2011-02-28 19:18:44 <pozic> edcba: it is just that all my releases are always better than the previous one.
2301 2011-02-28 19:18:55 <lfm> pozic: ya, they were adding features and adding support for new vid cards
2302 2011-02-28 19:18:59 <edcba> must be some good work gonditions you have :)
2303 2011-02-28 19:21:34 <pozic> edcba: I think those are pretty much independent of what I would produce.
2304 2011-02-28 19:21:46 <mmarker> ok, in a getwork, the data: field...is what's in that field documented on the wiki?
2305 2011-02-28 19:22:44 <phantomcircuit> lfm, lol either i really fucked something up compiling or this is totally wrong
2306 2011-02-28 19:23:52 <phantomcircuit> the length field in this inv packet is \x49, but the payload itself is only
2307 2011-02-28 19:23:53 <phantomcircuit> oh
2308 2011-02-28 19:23:54 <phantomcircuit> wait
2309 2011-02-28 19:24:03 <phantomcircuit> the checksum is counted as part of the payload length
2310 2011-02-28 19:24:04 <phantomcircuit> facepalm
2311 2011-02-28 19:24:16 sabalaba has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2312 2011-02-28 19:25:08 <bk128> http://tech.slashdot.org/story/11/02/28/0420203/Gmail-Accidentally-Resets-150000-Accounts#comments
2313 2011-02-28 19:25:14 * bk128 backs up gmail
2314 2011-02-28 19:26:21 Diablo-D3 has joined
2315 2011-02-28 19:26:26 <brakk> that's bad. i think i'll do the same thing
2316 2011-02-28 19:27:02 davex__ has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
2317 2011-02-28 19:31:26 towerX is now known as tower
2318 2011-02-28 19:33:46 <phantomcircuit> lol looks like checksums are being calculated differently
2319 2011-02-28 19:34:49 <phantomcircuit> i pulled data from wireshark and ran the checksum for each packet on it
2320 2011-02-28 19:35:34 <phantomcircuit> and it doesnt match the checksum in the packet
2321 2011-02-28 19:35:43 M4v3R has joined
2322 2011-02-28 19:36:14 <M4v3R> Hello all
2323 2011-02-28 19:36:35 <M4v3R> I have a problem with 2 transactions not confirming in my Bitcoin client
2324 2011-02-28 19:37:06 <M4v3R> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=3835 - on the forums, this issue was reported by two other people
2325 2011-02-28 19:37:22 <nanotube> M4v3R: mention that they are in the block chain :)
2326 2011-02-28 19:37:41 <M4v3R> Oh yes, they are in block explorer
2327 2011-02-28 19:38:12 <M4v3R> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1127246/Screenshots/6psg.png - here's how the tx'es look in the client
2328 2011-02-28 19:38:36 <M4v3R> http://blockexplorer.com/address/1CzDTHdYy9wnV4dQH8ABi3UbCrCkAT7CGx - here's one of the addresses in BlockExplorer
2329 2011-02-28 19:39:50 sgornick has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
2330 2011-02-28 19:39:58 <M4v3R> Funny thing is, the other one does NOT show in blockexplorer
2331 2011-02-28 19:40:14 sgornick has joined
2332 2011-02-28 19:40:24 <M4v3R> I mean, there are earlier tx'es for this address, but there's no current one
2333 2011-02-28 19:40:55 <phantomcircuit> anybody?
2334 2011-02-28 19:41:21 <M4v3R> I guess the devs are not here atm
2335 2011-02-28 19:41:42 <M4v3R> I'll be around, if anyone could provide some help, please tell me
2336 2011-02-28 19:42:16 <M4v3R> It's not that I lost something big (these were Bitcoin Faucet tx'es), I'm just curious what happened and if it's a bug, I'll hapily help to debug it
2337 2011-02-28 19:43:35 CyanDynamo has joined
2338 2011-02-28 19:44:33 <phantomcircuit> http://codepad.org/qr04EQZ5
2339 2011-02-28 19:45:03 <rli> M4v3R: bitcoin faucet "buffers" the transactions
2340 2011-02-28 19:45:08 <rli> and send them in batch
2341 2011-02-28 19:45:31 <rli> so it's possible they are still being processed by the website itself
2342 2011-02-28 19:45:33 uni4dfx has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2343 2011-02-28 19:45:35 f3n has quit (Disconnected by services)
2344 2011-02-28 19:45:37 <rli> and not already sent
2345 2011-02-28 19:45:45 <M4v3R> rli: They show up in the client
2346 2011-02-28 19:45:51 f4n has joined
2347 2011-02-28 19:45:51 <M4v3R> Which means they are sent
2348 2011-02-28 19:45:55 <M4v3R> From what I understand
2349 2011-02-28 19:46:06 <rli> i thought you couldn't see them in blockexplorer...
2350 2011-02-28 19:46:29 <M4v3R> One is in the blockexplorer, other isn't
2351 2011-02-28 19:46:34 <M4v3R> Both are in the client
2352 2011-02-28 19:46:38 <rli> ok
2353 2011-02-28 19:46:41 <rli> weird...
2354 2011-02-28 19:47:12 <rli> they can show in the client even if they are not in blockexplorer
2355 2011-02-28 19:47:27 <rli> because they are received but not confirmed
2356 2011-02-28 19:47:51 <rli> you have to wait for them to be confirmed
2357 2011-02-28 19:48:00 <rli> and/or rescan the block
2358 2011-02-28 19:48:17 <rli> if they appear confirmed in blockexplorer but not in your client
2359 2011-02-28 19:48:34 <rli> but sometimes transaction get confirmed 24h later
2360 2011-02-28 19:48:53 <phantomcircuit> he's right the second one doesnt show up in block explorer
2361 2011-02-28 19:49:14 <rli> this occurs often when amount is small
2362 2011-02-28 19:49:23 <rli> confirmation can be quite slow
2363 2011-02-28 19:50:25 <phantomcircuit> so is it just me or is the checksum in this packet wrong http://codepad.org/qr04EQZ5
2364 2011-02-28 19:51:21 <lfm> what checksum algo is it?
2365 2011-02-28 19:51:47 <phantomcircuit> the network checksum
2366 2011-02-28 19:51:50 rli has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
2367 2011-02-28 19:51:57 <phantomcircuit> sha256(sha256(payload))[:4]
2368 2011-02-28 19:52:00 <phantomcircuit> basically
2369 2011-02-28 19:54:42 TheAncientGoat has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2370 2011-02-28 19:55:42 mmarker has quit (Quit: Dooooooom!)
2371 2011-02-28 19:57:06 <phantomcircuit> eh so nobody knows?
2372 2011-02-28 19:57:37 tower is now known as again
2373 2011-02-28 19:58:58 brunner has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
2374 2011-02-28 20:00:47 emada has joined
2375 2011-02-28 20:03:09 rgm3 has quit (Quit: rgm3)
2376 2011-02-28 20:07:45 <phantomcircuit> strange
2377 2011-02-28 20:07:52 <phantomcircuit> checksums work once i send a verack
2378 2011-02-28 20:07:55 <phantomcircuit> >.>
2379 2011-02-28 20:08:13 <phantomcircuit> i dont even want to know why
2380 2011-02-28 20:08:50 sabalaba has joined
2381 2011-02-28 20:09:00 <emada> Can anyone point me to a setup guide for bitcoind? i would like it to use the address the GUI version gave me and mine but i cant tell if its doing anything when i run it.
2382 2011-02-28 20:12:04 <edcba> phantomcircuit: because prior versions didn't have checksum iirc
2383 2011-02-28 20:12:33 <phantomcircuit> edcba, except im sending 32002 as my version
2384 2011-02-28 20:13:13 <edcba> :)
2385 2011-02-28 20:13:19 altamic has joined
2386 2011-02-28 20:13:32 <edcba> you still need to send it without checksum
2387 2011-02-28 20:13:47 <phantomcircuit> huh
2388 2011-02-28 20:13:55 <phantomcircuit> im not sending version with a checksum
2389 2011-02-28 20:14:02 <edcba> ie you have to be compatible with older clients
2390 2011-02-28 20:14:08 <phantomcircuit> the client is sending me an inv before i've verack'd
2391 2011-02-28 20:14:41 <lfm> ya Id try useing an existing versaion nu,mber
2392 2011-02-28 20:14:45 discHead has joined
2393 2011-02-28 20:14:46 discHead has quit (Changing host)
2394 2011-02-28 20:14:46 discHead has joined
2395 2011-02-28 20:15:09 <edcba> phantomcircuit: it shouldn't send you anything before you veracked iirc
2396 2011-02-28 20:15:23 <edcba> is it official client ?
2397 2011-02-28 20:15:23 <phantomcircuit> edcba, exactly my point :P
2398 2011-02-28 20:15:44 <phantomcircuit> yes it is
2399 2011-02-28 20:15:52 <phantomcircuit> http://codepad.org/WkIwmF1d
2400 2011-02-28 20:16:02 <phantomcircuit> indented portion is from the official client
2401 2011-02-28 20:16:28 <phantomcircuit> wait
2402 2011-02-28 20:16:38 <phantomcircuit> crap maybe i am sending the checksum with the version packet
2403 2011-02-28 20:17:43 <phantomcircuit> oh
2404 2011-02-28 20:17:44 <phantomcircuit> rofl
2405 2011-02-28 20:17:51 <phantomcircuit> non obvious bug is non obvious
2406 2011-02-28 20:19:01 <hazek> wow I just discovered that thread where mtgox froze an account with $45k
2407 2011-02-28 20:19:13 <hazek> do people still strust that site for exchange after this debacle?
2408 2011-02-28 20:19:35 <Keefe> i still have a few k there as usual
2409 2011-02-28 20:19:46 <hazek> dollars?
2410 2011-02-28 20:21:50 <phantomcircuit> hazek, link?
2411 2011-02-28 20:22:20 <hazek> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=3712.0
2412 2011-02-28 20:23:05 <hazek> i'm not judging mtgox because I didn't even read the whole thing to find out how it got resolved if it was at all
2413 2011-02-28 20:23:20 <hazek> but I'm just asking people in here if they still trust that site or not :)
2414 2011-02-28 20:23:32 <hazek> trying to gauge their market share
2415 2011-02-28 20:23:40 <hazek> while maybe prepearing my own service ;)
2416 2011-02-28 20:24:21 <Keefe> my holding there shifts between usd and btc as needed
2417 2011-02-28 20:26:20 hwolf has left ()
2418 2011-02-28 20:26:27 <bk128> aha, another use for my ATI cards :) http://code.google.com/p/pyrit/
2419 2011-02-28 20:26:36 <Keefe> afaik, the situation isn't resolved yet, and i'm certainly looking forward to the conclusion, but i generally feel MtGox is doing his best, and if i accidentally touched dirty funds he'd eventually get it worked out fairly
2420 2011-02-28 20:27:01 discHead has quit (Quit: discHead)
2421 2011-02-28 20:30:25 <hazek> Keefe: ty for the info
2422 2011-02-28 20:33:14 larsig has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2423 2011-02-28 20:40:52 <phantomcircuit> well i definitely screwed something up, but the client is 100% sending stuff before verack
2424 2011-02-28 20:45:12 <amiller> i made my bitcoin client go really slow by creating 30 transactions
2425 2011-02-28 20:50:04 emada has quit (Quit: Page closed)
2426 2011-02-28 20:50:06 <hazek> question: is there a way to see how many nodes are active at any given time?
2427 2011-02-28 20:52:06 Lachesis has joined
2428 2011-02-28 20:52:15 <soultcer> hazek: Yes
2429 2011-02-28 20:52:27 <soultcer> Although not 100% accurate of course
2430 2011-02-28 20:52:37 <hazek> rough estimate is fine
2431 2011-02-28 20:52:45 <hazek> would you mind telling me how
2432 2011-02-28 20:52:45 <hazek> ?
2433 2011-02-28 20:53:11 <soultcer> Write a custom client that a) accepts all incoming connections b) makes outgoing connections to every node it hears about, then see how many connections you got total
2434 2011-02-28 20:53:36 <hazek> oh I see
2435 2011-02-28 20:54:17 <hazek> did maybe someone already do that and put it up on a webpage or something?
2436 2011-02-28 20:54:22 <hazek> I'm not a programer :P
2437 2011-02-28 20:54:25 <pozic> hazek: for ipv6, you can just connect to every machine on the Internet.
2438 2011-02-28 20:54:30 <pozic> hazek: er ipv4
2439 2011-02-28 20:54:55 <soultcer> pozic: Nah, would take way too long
2440 2011-02-28 20:54:58 <soultcer> hazek: Unfortunately not
2441 2011-02-28 20:55:17 <pozic> soultcer: 4billion is a small number for computers.
2442 2011-02-28 20:55:33 <Lachesis> someone has done that before, actually
2443 2011-02-28 20:55:33 <soultcer> 4 billion * 65535
2444 2011-02-28 20:55:35 <Lachesis> looong time ago
2445 2011-02-28 20:55:39 <Lachesis> assume port 8333
2446 2011-02-28 20:55:41 <Lachesis> probably safe
2447 2011-02-28 20:55:53 <soultcer> Nah, bitcoin can be on other ports as well
2448 2011-02-28 20:56:02 <Lachesis> yeah but 99% of people are probably running on 8333
2449 2011-02-28 20:56:03 <Lachesis> however
2450 2011-02-28 20:56:03 <soultcer> Problem is that a lot of nodes are behind NAT/firewall/...
2451 2011-02-28 20:56:08 <Lachesis> you'll miss a ton of those prople
2452 2011-02-28 20:56:10 <Lachesis> yeah
2453 2011-02-28 20:56:11 <Lachesis> people*
2454 2011-02-28 20:56:15 <pozic> soultcer: that is not a problem.
2455 2011-02-28 20:56:21 <Lachesis> pozic, why?
2456 2011-02-28 20:56:21 <hazek> are there estimates?
2457 2011-02-28 20:56:26 <Lachesis> hazek, hold one
2458 2011-02-28 20:56:29 <hazek> k
2459 2011-02-28 20:56:52 <pozic> Lachesis: because one can connect in the same way as any other client.
2460 2011-02-28 20:57:06 <pozic> Lachesis: it is a completely irrelevant statement.
2461 2011-02-28 20:57:06 <Lachesis> there are ~3,275 clients in the IRC channel
2462 2011-02-28 20:57:33 <Lachesis> pozic, what? if you try to port scan 8333 on everyone's computer, you'll miss everyone who doesn't have that port open
2463 2011-02-28 20:57:47 <pozic> So, doesn't that mean there are only 3275 users?
2464 2011-02-28 20:57:54 <Lachesis> hazek, that's an underestimate of the number of active clients right now
2465 2011-02-28 20:58:00 <Lachesis> a lot of people run without IRC on
2466 2011-02-28 20:58:07 <pozic> How do you disable the IRC?
2467 2011-02-28 20:58:12 <Lachesis> -noirc
2468 2011-02-28 20:58:16 <Lachesis> as a command line option
2469 2011-02-28 20:58:32 <pozic> Lachesis: to which nodes does it connect then?
2470 2011-02-28 20:58:41 malfy has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2471 2011-02-28 20:58:41 <Lachesis> only ones in its internal cache
2472 2011-02-28 20:58:42 <pozic> Lachesis: since I thought it got peers via IRC.
2473 2011-02-28 20:58:52 <Lachesis> pozic, nah, it just uses IRC to seed its cache
2474 2011-02-28 20:58:56 <hazek> I mean it would be interesting to find one what the spread of the current 5,5mio of BTC actually is
2475 2011-02-28 20:59:04 <hazek> findout*
2476 2011-02-28 20:59:12 <Lachesis> it gets peers by exchanging them with neighbors (the addr message)
2477 2011-02-28 20:59:14 <hazek> if it's just 10k people
2478 2011-02-28 20:59:22 Lachesis has left ("Leaving")
2479 2011-02-28 20:59:27 Lachesis has joined
2480 2011-02-28 20:59:56 <Lachesis> hazek, yeah
2481 2011-02-28 21:00:03 <hazek> then on avarage people own 550 BTCs
2482 2011-02-28 21:00:11 <Lachesis> you can find the distibution using the block chain
2483 2011-02-28 21:00:16 <Lachesis> well
2484 2011-02-28 21:00:21 <Lachesis> distribution of coins to addresses
2485 2011-02-28 21:00:30 <Lachesis> no way to know how many addresses each person has
2486 2011-02-28 21:00:57 <hazek> that's why I wasn't even thinking a long that route
2487 2011-02-28 21:00:59 <pozic> I think a small minority has almost all BTCs.
2488 2011-02-28 21:01:06 <Lachesis> pozic, quite possible
2489 2011-02-28 21:01:07 <pozic> I.e. >80%.
2490 2011-02-28 21:01:11 mmarker has joined
2491 2011-02-28 21:01:12 <hazek> pozic: that would be my point
2492 2011-02-28 21:01:23 <Lachesis> pozic, a bunch of people joined when bitcoin broke the dollar
2493 2011-02-28 21:01:31 malfy has joined
2494 2011-02-28 21:01:34 <Lachesis> they probably have < 50 BTC each
2495 2011-02-28 21:01:44 <Lachesis> even more people joined when we first got slashdotted
2496 2011-02-28 21:01:53 <Lachesis> back then, CPU mining was only just profitable
2497 2011-02-28 21:02:05 <hazek> shalshdotted?
2498 2011-02-28 21:02:09 <hazek> what's that
2499 2011-02-28 21:02:11 <mmarker> slashdotted
2500 2011-02-28 21:02:11 <Lachesis> it's a tech news site
2501 2011-02-28 21:02:16 <mmarker> The effect of being on slashdot
2502 2011-02-28 21:02:29 <hazek> ah i see
2503 2011-02-28 21:02:32 <Lachesis> when you get to the first page of slashdot.com
2504 2011-02-28 21:02:43 * mmarker had a Oracle benchmark someone posted a looong time back...and watched what Slashdot could do with a machine.
2505 2011-02-28 21:02:49 <mmarker> It was pretty.
2506 2011-02-28 21:02:50 <Netsniper> prostrate spurge
2507 2011-02-28 21:02:50 <tectonic> 550 BTC average sounds like a good estimate
2508 2011-02-28 21:03:14 <hazek> yeah but I'm pretty sure it's highly skewed
2509 2011-02-28 21:03:28 <pozic> tectonic: there is no way that it is uniformly distributed.
2510 2011-02-28 21:03:31 <lfm> the slashdot event last july is pretty obvious from this graph: http://www3.telus.net/millerlf/hashes.png
2511 2011-02-28 21:03:39 <Lachesis> it would be interesting to count the number of coins that never got traded
2512 2011-02-28 21:03:43 <pozic> Some people started GPU mining before all others.
2513 2011-02-28 21:03:45 <Lachesis> got generated and then never touched
2514 2011-02-28 21:03:55 <tectonic> pozic: well yes, hence average
2515 2011-02-28 21:03:56 <mmarker> Lachesis: Someone just posted that this morning
2516 2011-02-28 21:04:02 <mmarker> some 50000 transactions or so
2517 2011-02-28 21:04:02 <pozic> Now some people are building custom chips before all others.
2518 2011-02-28 21:04:04 <Lachesis> mmarker, o rly?
2519 2011-02-28 21:04:07 <mmarker> But no date limit on that
2520 2011-02-28 21:04:09 <lfm> number of unspent generated transactions: 51850
2521 2011-02-28 21:04:11 <bk128> hazek: this post got a lot of people into bitcoin http://news.slashdot.org/story/11/02/10/189246/Online-Only-Currency-BitCoin-Reaches-Dollar-Parity?from=rss
2522 2011-02-28 21:04:18 <pozic> tectonic: uhm, by definition that is the average.
2523 2011-02-28 21:04:21 <hazek> ty
2524 2011-02-28 21:04:22 <mmarker> lfm: For bonus points, how many in the last year
2525 2011-02-28 21:04:24 <pozic> tectonic: it is not an estimate.
2526 2011-02-28 21:04:37 TD has joined
2527 2011-02-28 21:04:46 <Lachesis> pozic, the ASICs that Art is making are not that much better than GPU in hashes/$.
2528 2011-02-28 21:04:47 <mmarker> Afternoon or evening TD
2529 2011-02-28 21:04:50 <Lachesis> way better in hashes/watt
2530 2011-02-28 21:04:57 <TD> hi mmarker. it's evening here :-)
2531 2011-02-28 21:05:01 <TD> g'day to you too
2532 2011-02-28 21:05:03 <mmarker> <-- the guy doing the Android app on the forums
2533 2011-02-28 21:05:10 <mmarker> My OTHER identity
2534 2011-02-28 21:05:27 <TD> ah, what is your name on the forums sorry?
2535 2011-02-28 21:05:28 <Lachesis> mmarker, is that shippable yet?
2536 2011-02-28 21:05:28 <pozic> lfm: what is the vertical axis?
2537 2011-02-28 21:05:31 <mmarker> lachesis: Yea, the ASIC is probably more cost effective..
2538 2011-02-28 21:05:41 <mmarker> Lachesis: I'm too busy trying to collect other bounties
2539 2011-02-28 21:05:51 <mmarker> But I did get the last piece/part put together, the crypto
2540 2011-02-28 21:05:55 <Lachesis> mmarker, if you have free power, GPUs are still better, at least if you don't have 25k for startup costs.
2541 2011-02-28 21:05:56 <TD> heh
2542 2011-02-28 21:05:58 <Lachesis> nice
2543 2011-02-28 21:06:01 <mmarker> chromicant.
2544 2011-02-28 21:06:02 <TD> i wonder how many java impls of the crypto side there are now
2545 2011-02-28 21:06:05 <TD> ah ha
2546 2011-02-28 21:06:10 <mmarker> Lachesis: I no longer have free wattage :(
2547 2011-02-28 21:06:19 <TD> so you have a full implementation of blockchain partial verification, you can handle chain splits etc?
2548 2011-02-28 21:06:30 <TD> man. i wonder if it's even worth open sourcing my code at this rate
2549 2011-02-28 21:06:37 <mmarker> TD: Basically using bouncycastle renamed...since Google was good and reused said code...but stripped out the good stuff :\
2550 2011-02-28 21:06:45 <TD> yes, i know
2551 2011-02-28 21:06:48 <TD> i work for google :-)
2552 2011-02-28 21:06:52 <lfm> pozic: hashes/s (of the whole BTC net)
2553 2011-02-28 21:06:56 <TD> and found the same issue
2554 2011-02-28 21:07:04 <TD> but, how much have you implemented of the bitcoin system?
2555 2011-02-28 21:07:07 <TD> cuz it's pretty big and subtle
2556 2011-02-28 21:07:31 <tectonic> what is Google doing with bitcoins?
2557 2011-02-28 21:07:44 <TD> nothing. it's just me.
2558 2011-02-28 21:07:45 <Lachesis> mmarker, yeah i don't either, but one of my friends does and offered to host my boxes for a cut of the cash
2559 2011-02-28 21:07:46 <TD> 20% time
2560 2011-02-28 21:07:55 <tectonic> TD: cool
2561 2011-02-28 21:07:56 <mmarker> TD: not much. Looking at it in a different way, honestly. I have a rough messaging system for transactions, but stripping down a bitcoind to do the protocol handling
2562 2011-02-28 21:08:02 <TD> ah i see
2563 2011-02-28 21:08:13 <TD> running a full bitcoind on the system is an interesting approach. it's definitely worth trying both
2564 2011-02-28 21:08:16 <Lachesis> it's always going to be hard to compete with GPUs because they're mass produced
2565 2011-02-28 21:08:18 <TD> i went for native java impl but not convinced i am right
2566 2011-02-28 21:08:18 <pozic> There was a bounty on something and then someone already implemented it for free.
2567 2011-02-28 21:08:22 <mmarker> Said bitcoind would watch for events an Android device would register, then using C2DM to wake the phone up to react
2568 2011-02-28 21:08:43 <Lachesis> mmarker, wait, the bitcoind is running on android or on a server somewhere?
2569 2011-02-28 21:08:44 <mmarker> No, the bitcoind + C2DM service would be running on a public, external machine
2570 2011-02-28 21:08:47 <Lachesis> ah
2571 2011-02-28 21:08:50 <TD> ah i see
2572 2011-02-28 21:08:52 <Lachesis> hrm
2573 2011-02-28 21:08:52 <TD> ok
2574 2011-02-28 21:08:58 <Lachesis> so it's a frontend with push?
2575 2011-02-28 21:09:02 <TD> yeah i'm aiming for fully independent
2576 2011-02-28 21:09:07 <mmarker> Basically, yea.
2577 2011-02-28 21:09:09 <TD> just needs a node to connect to like any other
2578 2011-02-28 21:09:18 <TD> but that's a crapload of work and lots of potential to screw up
2579 2011-02-28 21:09:26 <mmarker> When you want to do a transaction, the phone pushes that out
2580 2011-02-28 21:09:27 <TD> an android ui that relies on you running your own server will get results faster
2581 2011-02-28 21:09:41 again is now known as tower
2582 2011-02-28 21:09:49 <mmarker> I also want the bitcoind to just be a protocol listener, so it can be public...i.e. no wallet
2583 2011-02-28 21:09:52 <TD> so the android app talks the rpc protocol?
2584 2011-02-28 21:09:57 <TD> right
2585 2011-02-28 21:09:58 <mmarker> TD: yup
2586 2011-02-28 21:10:02 <TD> holding the wallet on the phone is the harder part ;)
2587 2011-02-28 21:10:09 <TD> if you want some resistance against bad network nodes
2588 2011-02-28 21:10:17 <mmarker> But what it would need to do via RPC is really very minimal. Using to to register events for a device.
2589 2011-02-28 21:10:31 <mmarker> Yea, that's the one thing that makes me feel queasy.
2590 2011-02-28 21:11:02 <mmarker> Encrypted data store...but...ugh
2591 2011-02-28 21:11:13 <mmarker> Maybe some form of secret sharing
2592 2011-02-28 21:11:37 <TD> well, the trick is that if the phone downloads blocks itself, it doesn't need to trust the remote node. the PoW is effectively the "proof" that you really received the coins
2593 2011-02-28 21:11:39 purpleposeidon has quit (Excess Flood)
2594 2011-02-28 21:11:45 purpleposeidon has joined
2595 2011-02-28 21:11:47 <TD> see simplified payment verification in satoshis paper
2596 2011-02-28 21:11:57 <mmarker> I need to reread that a bit more.
2597 2011-02-28 21:11:58 <TD> it's more complex but then, it needs no setup
2598 2011-02-28 21:12:04 <Lachesis> are there any good open source pool implementations out there right now?
2599 2011-02-28 21:12:06 <TD> you just have a list of seed nodes in the client and go
2600 2011-02-28 21:12:12 <mmarker> Lachesis: jgarzik's
2601 2011-02-28 21:12:21 dirtyfilthy has joined
2602 2011-02-28 21:12:22 <Lachesis> mmarker, have you worked with it before?
2603 2011-02-28 21:12:24 <mmarker> TD: Was going to use this IRC library I've worked up :D
2604 2011-02-28 21:12:33 <mmarker> Lachesis: a little. It's rough. Very rough.
2605 2011-02-28 21:12:33 <Lachesis> also mmarker do you know mmagic ?
2606 2011-02-28 21:12:41 <mmarker> Nope.
2607 2011-02-28 21:12:44 <Lachesis> he shares the first 3 letters of your name, making autocomplete a pain :)
2608 2011-02-28 21:12:49 <mmarker> HAHA
2609 2011-02-28 21:12:53 mmarker is now known as chromicant
2610 2011-02-28 21:12:55 <chromicant> Better?
2611 2011-02-28 21:13:05 <Lachesis> chromicant, yeah, except now i won't remember who i'm talking to :)
2612 2011-02-28 21:13:07 Lachesis has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2613 2011-02-28 21:13:11 <chromicant> Haha
2614 2011-02-28 21:13:32 <pozic> Lachesis: good IRC clients complete based on the last time you spoke to someone.
2615 2011-02-28 21:13:50 <TD> brb
2616 2011-02-28 21:14:11 pozic has quit (Quit: leaving)
2617 2011-02-28 21:14:13 TD has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2618 2011-02-28 21:14:23 TD has joined
2619 2011-02-28 21:16:56 pozic has joined
2620 2011-02-28 21:17:13 <pozic> What is the horizontal axis here? http://www3.telus.net/millerlf/hashes.png
2621 2011-02-28 21:17:43 <bk128> hmm? date?
2622 2011-02-28 21:17:48 <pozic> It must be some kind of time, but then it should have started in 2009 or something like that.
2623 2011-02-28 21:18:16 <pozic> Ah, never mind.
2624 2011-02-28 21:18:21 <bk128> i think it's year, month
2625 2011-02-28 21:18:24 <pozic> It does make sense.
2626 2011-02-28 21:18:46 <pozic> I figured "we are not in April yet", but indeed the graph doesn't run there.
2627 2011-02-28 21:20:12 <bk128> http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html  what does everyone use for a workstation?  I know intel wins all the benchmarks but is the i7 really significantly faster than the phenom II x4?
2628 2011-02-28 21:21:29 <pozic> bk128: how many hashes can a phenom do?
2629 2011-02-28 21:21:55 <bk128> pozic: not talking about using it for hashing.  just for a general purpose computer, amd vs intel
2630 2011-02-28 21:22:07 <pozic> bk128: I read somewhere that the hexacore could do 15000.
2631 2011-02-28 21:22:20 <bk128> yeah, I think 15mhash is pretty much the max for a cpu
2632 2011-02-28 21:22:43 <pozic> bk128: if that is correct, then it is 3 times faster than a core i5.
2633 2011-02-28 21:22:57 <pozic> bk128: or rather all the 4 cores ;)
2634 2011-02-28 21:23:30 <bk128> lol
2635 2011-02-28 21:23:49 <pozic> bk128: it sound rather unlikely, though that AMD is 3 times faster.
2636 2011-02-28 21:24:10 <pozic> I did the measurements myself for the 5000 number. The 15000 comes from the forum.
2637 2011-02-28 21:24:43 <Keefe> ;;bc,gen 15000
2638 2011-02-28 21:24:44 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 15000 Khps, given current difficulty of 55590.23763914 , is 0.271404231202 BTC per day and 0.0113085096334 BTC per hour.
2639 2011-02-28 21:26:09 <Keefe> not worth mining with if you pay more than 12c/kwh
2640 2011-02-28 21:26:10 <lfm> my 4 core 3ghz phenom is 11 Mhash/s
2641 2011-02-28 21:26:17 <Keefe> assuming 95W
2642 2011-02-28 21:26:33 <lfm> using the 4way sse algo
2643 2011-02-28 21:26:41 <bk128> basically, I'm just looking at building a new workstation.  wanted to know if intel was significantly faster than amd for general desktop use
2644 2011-02-28 21:26:51 Lachesis has joined
2645 2011-02-28 21:28:39 <pozic> I guess Intel is just slow then for that benchmark.
2646 2011-02-28 21:28:52 <lfm> bk128: if you look at per dollar for sure amd is faster
2647 2011-02-28 21:30:59 <bk128> lfm: ok.  but is the top of the line phenom significantly /noticeably slower than the best i7??
2648 2011-02-28 21:34:56 M4v3R has quit (Quit: M4v3R)
2649 2011-02-28 21:35:02 <dirtyfilthy> what are you going to do with your workstation?
2650 2011-02-28 21:35:56 <comboy> slush: aronud?
2651 2011-02-28 21:36:20 <slush> yes
2652 2011-02-28 21:36:39 <bk128> dirtyfilthy: just a general purpose computer.  maybe games on occasion (I want to see what these graphics cards can do)
2653 2011-02-28 21:36:49 <comboy> slush: do you have some spare ip? any chance for pool on port 80?
2654 2011-02-28 21:36:51 <bk128> will be running a few VM's
2655 2011-02-28 21:43:57 alkor has joined
2656 2011-02-28 21:45:53 doublec has joined
2657 2011-02-28 21:46:50 <necrodearia> Can someone help me to understand what this means?  "You defend bitcoin as if it is yours to defend, yet you claim no ownership of it. This also indicates pride, and if you own that pride, i.e. Accept that it is there and that it is your pride, you may be more able to communicate the worth of the currency"
2658 2011-02-28 21:47:08 Ratchet has left ("Follow the blue rabbit - http://freenetproject.org")
2659 2011-02-28 21:47:42 <jgarzik> bk128: ping
2660 2011-02-28 21:51:26 alkor has quit (Quit: alkor)
2661 2011-02-28 21:55:04 <hazek> necrodearia where did you get that from? :)
2662 2011-02-28 21:55:21 <bk128> ArtForz: http://www.sparkfun.com/products/251 know where to get thermocouples cheaper?
2663 2011-02-28 21:55:22 <necrodearia> hazek, sms discussion I am having with someone.
2664 2011-02-28 21:55:38 <quellhorst> what is the higher up model to the radeon hd 5870 thats hard to find now?
2665 2011-02-28 21:56:11 <bk128> quellhorst: 5970
2666 2011-02-28 21:56:15 <necrodearia> hazek, They initially declared bitcoin as "fake money" and in responding with information indicating otherwise, they then suggested that I am trying to sell it to them.
2667 2011-02-28 21:57:14 <quellhorst> bk128: ok, because i saw some hd 6970s that were not too expensive.
2668 2011-02-28 21:57:21 <brakk> all money is "fake" until someone applies value to it.
2669 2011-02-28 21:57:30 <bk128> quellhorst: 6970
2670 2011-02-28 21:57:41 <bk128> 6970's aren't as fast at mining
2671 2011-02-28 21:57:47 <hazek> necrodearia: i think what it means is that when talking about bitcoins you should talk as if you have something to lose so that you can better show your passion and motivate others to join in eventhough you dont own the "system"
2672 2011-02-28 21:58:36 Tritonio has joined
2673 2011-02-28 21:58:48 <bk128> quellhorst: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mining_hardware_comparison
2674 2011-02-28 21:58:56 <bk128> guess the 6970 isnt on there yet
2675 2011-02-28 21:59:57 <ArtForz> bk128: nope, at least not for 1 or 2
2676 2011-02-28 22:00:14 <bk128> what's the min qty? 10?
2677 2011-02-28 22:00:19 <bk128> or thousands
2678 2011-02-28 22:00:40 <ArtForz> iirc 120
2679 2011-02-28 22:01:01 Tritonio has quit (Client Quit)
2680 2011-02-28 22:01:53 <bk128> ok.  probably buying from sparkfun then :)
2681 2011-02-28 22:02:14 <bk128> they have the max6675 $2 cheaper than digikey
2682 2011-02-28 22:02:19 <ArtForz> iirc we paid about $10 per with a miniplug
2683 2011-02-28 22:04:21 <ArtForz> at least for single ones, yes
2684 2011-02-28 22:04:41 pozic has quit (Quit: leaving)
2685 2011-02-28 22:04:43 <ArtForz> at 100 qty digikey is $2/unit cheaper...
2686 2011-02-28 22:04:43 gasteve has quit (Quit: gasteve)
2687 2011-02-28 22:05:44 <luke-jr> anyone know if I can have rulers made for bitcoins?
2688 2011-02-28 22:06:15 <ArtForz> but then digikey has free shipping > 65EUR
2689 2011-02-28 22:06:20 <bk128> ArtForz: where do you see that?  looks like $6.75 @ 2500 http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Cat=2556696&k=max6675
2690 2011-02-28 22:06:43 <Lachesis> anyone set up ipv6 for their network using ubuntu yet?
2691 2011-02-28 22:06:53 <ArtForz> http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail&name=MAX6675ISA%2B-ND
2692 2011-02-28 22:07:00 <Lachesis> I can't get any of my systems to pick up the right default route
2693 2011-02-28 22:07:10 <Lachesis> radvd must be screwing up or something
2694 2011-02-28 22:07:55 <ArtForz> yeah... tube sticks are cheaper than T&R... go figure
2695 2011-02-28 22:08:08 <necrodearia> I suggested "usd: it can and has been created out of thin air by the federal reserve company" and response I got was "And that is definitely hearsay and unresearched bias." <-- is this true?
2696 2011-02-28 22:08:23 <Lachesis> hey necrodearia, perhaps you ought to give up on this guy
2697 2011-02-28 22:08:33 <necrodearia> before I do, is the last statement accurate?
2698 2011-02-28 22:08:57 <luke-jr> necrodearia: yours or his?
2699 2011-02-28 22:09:11 <necrodearia> I suggested "mine" response I got was "his"
2700 2011-02-28 22:09:13 <Lachesis> my understanding is that USD wasn't really "created out of thin air", but I have no really good argument to back it up
2701 2011-02-28 22:09:13 <luke-jr> necrodearia: his is definitely true. yours, depends on interpretation
2702 2011-02-28 22:09:19 <necrodearia> are either statements accurate?
2703 2011-02-28 22:09:25 <necrodearia> hmm
2704 2011-02-28 22:09:54 <luke-jr> necrodearia: the fact that you have to ask, means your statement was made of hearsay and not research :P
2705 2011-02-28 22:10:04 <bk128> ArtForz: I'd only be complaining about that if I had a pick&place
2706 2011-02-28 22:10:21 <bk128> you prefer tape?
2707 2011-02-28 22:10:58 <ArtForz> overall, yea
2708 2011-02-28 22:11:03 <bk128> why?
2709 2011-02-28 22:11:48 <bk128> ooh these look cheaper http://www.adafruit.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=35&products_id=270
2710 2011-02-28 22:12:20 <chromicant> bk128: Thermocouples tend to be dirt cheap
2711 2011-02-28 22:12:29 <bk128> chromicant: you'd think
2712 2011-02-28 22:12:34 <chromicant> bk128: I'd usually price Omega if you go that route as well.
2713 2011-02-28 22:12:45 <bk128> ok, i'll check there
2714 2011-02-28 22:13:04 <chromicant> Granted, we buy in bulk for process control, so we get a decent rate.
2715 2011-02-28 22:14:55 RichardG has joined
2716 2011-02-28 22:15:07 <brakk> "Today, like the currency of most nations, the dollar is fiat money, unbacked by any physical asset. A holder of a federal reserve note has no right to demand an asset such as gold or silver from the government in exchange for a note"
2717 2011-02-28 22:15:15 <brakk> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_dollar
2718 2011-02-28 22:15:24 BlueMatt has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
2719 2011-02-28 22:16:20 <bk128> chromicant: omega is all >10 except the washer types http://www.omega.com/ppt/pptsc.asp?ref=WT
2720 2011-02-28 22:16:43 <bk128> >$10
2721 2011-02-28 22:17:42 <chromicant> Yea, saw that.
2722 2011-02-28 22:17:50 <bk128> ArtForz: are the bead type ones okay?  is the thermocouple supposed to be pressing against the board to measure the temp or floating?
2723 2011-02-28 22:18:00 alystair has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2724 2011-02-28 22:19:12 chromicant has quit (Quit: WeeChat 0.3.2)
2725 2011-02-28 22:19:50 <ArtForz> I use bead type in contact with board
2726 2011-02-28 22:21:07 <bk128> thanks
2727 2011-02-28 22:21:25 <ArtForz> for figuring out offsets I ran a few junk boards
2728 2011-02-28 22:22:22 <bk128> what kind of solderpaste do you use? and do you make your own stencils?
2729 2011-02-28 22:23:32 <ArtForz> fine grid SAC305, lasercut 100 or 150u stainless stencils
2730 2011-02-28 22:25:10 <ArtForz> fine grid = type 4
2731 2011-02-28 22:25:25 <luke-jr> O.o
2732 2011-02-28 22:25:31 <luke-jr> can I use those for rulers?
2733 2011-02-28 22:27:07 gasteve has joined
2734 2011-02-28 22:27:57 <ArtForz> in my experience type 4 is simply a lot easier to work with manually
2735 2011-02-28 22:28:12 <bk128> where can you buy that stuff
2736 2011-02-28 22:28:31 afterthought2 has joined
2737 2011-02-28 22:29:20 bk128 has left ()
2738 2011-02-28 22:29:26 bk128 has joined
2739 2011-02-28 22:29:26 bk128 has left ()
2740 2011-02-28 22:29:41 <afterthought2> Hi, I have a transaction thats been at 1/unconfirmed for a while now. If it fails, do the bitcoins re-appear in the sender's account (and I can ask them to end again)?
2741 2011-02-28 22:29:48 <ArtForz> finding a decent online supplier is a bit tricky
2742 2011-02-28 22:30:23 bk128 has joined
2743 2011-02-28 22:30:28 <ArtForz> whoops
2744 2011-02-28 22:30:30 <ArtForz> finding a decent online supplier is a bit tricky
2745 2011-02-28 22:31:07 <ArtForz> my method: find local sales rep, ask ;)
2746 2011-02-28 22:31:07 <bk128> does SAC305 have flux/rosin mixed in?
2747 2011-02-28 22:31:21 <ArtForz> all SMD pastes already contain flux
2748 2011-02-28 22:31:24 <bk128> i'm not too familiar with reflow soldering
2749 2011-02-28 22:31:30 <ArtForz> they'd be pretty useless otherwise...
2750 2011-02-28 22:31:39 <bk128> is it noclean?
2751 2011-02-28 22:31:42 <ArtForz> yep
2752 2011-02-28 22:32:04 <ArtForz> for modern packages noclean is pretty much the only option
2753 2011-02-28 22:32:15 <bk128> yeah, it's pretty much impossible to find online
2754 2011-02-28 22:32:33 <ArtForz> try getting flux residue out from under a leadless package ...
2755 2011-02-28 22:32:41 <bk128> :)
2756 2011-02-28 22:34:43 <bk128> ArtForz: http://www.wassco.com/Products/Kester-NXG1-Lead-Free-No-Clean-Solder-Paste--SAC305--500g-Jar__KEP-7032130810.aspx that it?
2757 2011-02-28 22:35:07 <bk128> still only 8mo shelf life, can you freeze it?
2758 2011-02-28 22:36:03 <ArtForz> no
2759 2011-02-28 22:36:10 <ArtForz> just keep it in a fridge
2760 2011-02-28 22:36:16 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
2761 2011-02-28 22:36:17 <Lachesis> why is bitcoin still so slow to download blocks?
2762 2011-02-28 22:36:23 <ArtForz> and mfg shelf life is highly underestimated
2763 2011-02-28 22:36:29 <Lachesis> i've got it downloading straight from my local network
2764 2011-02-28 22:36:37 <Lachesis> and it's going at like 1 block a second
2765 2011-02-28 22:36:44 <bk128> ArtForz: it doesnt say type 4 or fine grid or anything
2766 2011-02-28 22:36:47 <ArtForz> yeah
2767 2011-02-28 22:36:48 afterthought2 has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
2768 2011-02-28 22:36:51 <ArtForz> probably standard type 3
2769 2011-02-28 22:37:23 <bk128> ah.  does it make a big difference?
2770 2011-02-28 22:37:30 <ArtForz> not really
2771 2011-02-28 22:37:44 <ArtForz> type 4 seems to flow a lot smoother
2772 2011-02-28 22:38:13 <bk128> ok
2773 2011-02-28 22:38:18 <ArtForz> generally you use type 3 down to 0.4mm pitch, 0.3mm if you're feeling adventurous
2774 2011-02-28 22:39:18 <ArtForz> main difference is solder particle size and paste viscosity
2775 2011-02-28 22:39:32 <bk128> yeah, reading this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solder_paste
2776 2011-02-28 22:40:04 <ArtForz> but in my experience type 4 is a lot less bitchy to work with
2777 2011-02-28 22:40:40 <bk128> well, I'm not going to be doing anything too complex for a while.  I'm probably just going to be dispensing paste by hand
2778 2011-02-28 22:40:48 <ArtForz> well, then type 3 is plenty
2779 2011-02-28 22:41:31 <ArtForz> btw, once you do SMDs manually with paste, you never want to go back to rosin core wire solder ;)
2780 2011-02-28 22:41:44 <ArtForz> as suddenly you don't need 3 hands anymore
2781 2011-02-28 22:41:54 <Lachesis> ArtForz, sounds good :)
2782 2011-02-28 22:41:56 <Lachesis> i hate soldering
2783 2011-02-28 22:42:52 <ArtForz> especially for doing 0603s and 0402s with a iron
2784 2011-02-28 22:42:56 AmpEater has joined
2785 2011-02-28 22:43:56 <ArtForz> dab some paste on pads, place part with tweezers, hold down part with tweezers, touch both pads with reasonably clean and pre-tinned iron tip, done
2786 2011-02-28 22:44:16 <phantomcircuit> lol oh wow i think i might have gone overboard with this python client
2787 2011-02-28 22:44:20 <phantomcircuit> oh well
2788 2011-02-28 22:44:27 <bk128> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OIMmQkAuDQ&feature=related
2789 2011-02-28 22:45:46 <jgarzik> phantomcircuit: full bitcoin client in python?  Is it capable enough to handle switching between multiple block chains?
2790 2011-02-28 22:45:52 <jgarzik> and the fallout that results :)
2791 2011-02-28 22:46:11 <bk128> wow youtube comments "Can I use a hairdryer for air flow?" (reflow)
2792 2011-02-28 22:46:54 <phantomcircuit> jgarzik, oh not even im just making the networking code rock freaking solid right now
2793 2011-02-28 22:47:00 <phantomcircuit> which isn't not because im fail
2794 2011-02-28 22:47:02 <phantomcircuit> lol
2795 2011-02-28 22:47:41 <ArtForz> uhhh
2796 2011-02-28 22:47:57 <ArtForz> unless theres some standoffs not shown, thats a good way to warp a board...
2797 2011-02-28 22:48:57 <ArtForz> also looks like all he has there are 0805s and 50-mil soics
2798 2011-02-28 22:49:07 <phantomcircuit> my hands arent steady enough to do that
2799 2011-02-28 22:49:15 <phantomcircuit> i always end up with shorts
2800 2011-02-28 22:50:00 * [Tycho] never tried paste soldering :)
2801 2011-02-28 22:50:15 afed has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
2802 2011-02-28 22:50:52 <ArtForz> and a bunch of MELFs
2803 2011-02-28 22:51:14 bitcoiner has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.6.13/20101203075014])
2804 2011-02-28 22:51:56 <phantomcircuit> ArtForz, you ever get shorts?
2805 2011-02-28 22:52:18 <ArtForz> mostly on 0.5mm ICs
2806 2011-02-28 22:52:36 <jgarzik> For my kernel stuff, I always wanted to make a pci-express card that behaves like a SATA host controller + SSD, using volatile DRAM for data storage.  I suppose that would require these IP cores: pci, dram, microcontroller for firmware.  Is technology sufficiently advanced that I could simply upload VHDL and PCB layout, and receive PCI cards 12 months later?  ie. no gluing or manual labor for me :)
2807 2011-02-28 22:52:45 <ArtForz> but those are easy enough to fix with braid + iron
2808 2011-02-28 22:53:16 <jgarzik> I know uploading chip designs are standard practice... but what about the entire product (a pci card w/ dram and custom SoC, in this case)?
2809 2011-02-28 22:53:40 <ArtForz> usually I get bridges when I fuck up placement
2810 2011-02-28 22:53:57 <phantomcircuit> feels like i always screw it up
2811 2011-02-28 22:54:10 <phantomcircuit> indeed i cant remember the last time i got it right...
2812 2011-02-28 22:55:15 <[Tycho]> jgarzik, why don't you want to buy a SATA DRAM drive ?
2813 2011-02-28 22:55:16 Necr0s has joined
2814 2011-02-28 22:55:40 <phantomcircuit> why would you do that?
2815 2011-02-28 22:55:45 <jgarzik> [Tycho]: because it's not quite the same, and, I want to learn
2816 2011-02-28 22:55:53 <phantomcircuit> you can put like 16GB of ram on most systems now
2817 2011-02-28 22:56:12 <ArtForz> mainly because DRAM behind sata is a major waste of dram bandwidth
2818 2011-02-28 22:56:14 afed has joined
2819 2011-02-28 22:56:23 * jgarzik has a shelf full of battery-backed SATA RAM devices.  That's not new.
2820 2011-02-28 22:56:45 <Necr0s> Man, I'm Well I'm sure not having any luck with the mining thing lately.
2821 2011-02-28 22:56:48 <ArtForz> iirc there already are dram-based PCIe SSDs emulating a host controller + drive
2822 2011-02-28 22:56:57 <bk128> ArtForz: board warps if the bottom stays cool when you heat the top?
2823 2011-02-28 22:57:02 <Necr0s> Yeah, OCZ RevoDrive.
2824 2011-02-28 22:57:07 <jgarzik> the VHDL would be implementing mostly host controller logics
2825 2011-02-28 22:57:10 <Necr0s> They present a SCSI controller to the host.
2826 2011-02-28 22:57:14 davex__ has joined
2827 2011-02-28 22:57:30 <ArtForz> bk128: he's heating bottom, too
2828 2011-02-28 22:57:35 RichardG has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2829 2011-02-28 22:57:42 <ArtForz> but notice the board is only supported at the ends
2830 2011-02-28 22:57:45 <Necr0s> I've been eunning a 5970 continuously and have not had a yield since 15-Feb.
2831 2011-02-28 22:58:13 <Necr0s> That's quite a bit past the 95% mark the calculator shows.
2832 2011-02-28 22:58:13 <[Tycho]> Necr0s, join some pool.
2833 2011-02-28 22:58:23 AmpEater has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPad - http://colloquy.mobi)
2834 2011-02-28 22:58:23 <ArtForz> and then you apply local heating from top
2835 2011-02-28 22:58:37 <[Tycho]> Gigabyte i-RAM
2836 2011-02-28 22:58:37 <bk128> is that how you do rework?
2837 2011-02-28 22:58:46 <ArtForz> yep, pretty much
2838 2011-02-28 22:58:50 RichardG has joined
2839 2011-02-28 22:58:53 <bk128> what kind of heater is under it?
2840 2011-02-28 22:59:00 <jgarzik> [Tycho]: have several of those, straight from the manufacturer
2841 2011-02-28 22:59:12 AmpEater has joined
2842 2011-02-28 22:59:16 <ArtForz> thats usually a simple resistive heater under a wire mesh screen
2843 2011-02-28 22:59:25 <[Tycho]> jgarzik, didn't liked it ?
2844 2011-02-28 22:59:29 <bk128> http://sra-solder.com/product.php/6367/102
2845 2011-02-28 22:59:38 <[Tycho]> I wanted to buy it some years ago...
2846 2011-02-28 22:59:53 <molecular> not that it currently matters, but shouldn't it be "return 1" instead of "return G" in m0mchill's miner, BitcoinMiner.cl, line 50 ?
2847 2011-02-28 22:59:58 <ArtForz> I personally dont like IR heaters
2848 2011-02-28 23:00:26 <bk128> hot plate? electric fry pan?
2849 2011-02-28 23:00:28 <ArtForz> mainly because they heat the FR4 a lot more than the copper traces
2850 2011-02-28 23:00:44 <bk128> that's pointless :)
2851 2011-02-28 23:01:00 <ArtForz> pretty obvious really
2852 2011-02-28 23:01:11 <ArtForz> FR4 absorbs IR pretty well, bare copper... doesn't
2853 2011-02-28 23:01:43 <ArtForz> I built my own bottom heater
2854 2011-02-28 23:01:47 <bk128> from what?
2855 2011-02-28 23:01:52 jusle has quit (Quit: Lähdössä)
2856 2011-02-28 23:01:55 <ArtForz> bunch of power resistors
2857 2011-02-28 23:01:59 <Blitzboom> why are a lot of people not getting their transactions confirmed? i am too, now
2858 2011-02-28 23:02:12 <Blitzboom> blockexplorer also doesn’t show them, so it can’t be me
2859 2011-02-28 23:02:24 <bk128> lol.  avr pid control again?
2860 2011-02-28 23:02:31 <Blitzboom> the oldest non-confirmed for five hours now
2861 2011-02-28 23:03:00 <ArtForz> no pid control there, simple thermostat
2862 2011-02-28 23:03:22 <Blitzboom> i don’t get it …
2863 2011-02-28 23:03:24 <ArtForz> I dont really care if my bottom heater is at 135 or 140°C
2864 2011-02-28 23:03:28 <Blitzboom> and it’s annoying
2865 2011-02-28 23:05:25 <ArtForz> Blitzboom: hmmm... dunno
2866 2011-02-28 23:05:26 noagendamarket has joined
2867 2011-02-28 23:05:53 <lfm> Blitzboom: is that 0.3.20?
2868 2011-02-28 23:05:58 <Blitzboom> yes
2869 2011-02-28 23:06:09 <Blitzboom> and no, rescan won’t help as the transaction isn’t even shown in blockexplorer
2870 2011-02-28 23:06:30 <Blitzboom> so it’s not in a block
2871 2011-02-28 23:06:31 <molecular> so it didn't get out from your node?
2872 2011-02-28 23:06:41 <Blitzboom> it’s coming in transactions
2873 2011-02-28 23:06:44 <Blitzboom> slush’s pool
2874 2011-02-28 23:06:52 <molecular> do you see it on bitcoinmonitor.com?
2875 2011-02-28 23:07:13 <Blitzboom> no, blockexplorer should suffice
2876 2011-02-28 23:07:30  has joined
2877 2011-02-28 23:07:39 <luke-jr> Assuming my changes are sane, I am now accepting non-standard transactions into my blocks with appropriate fees
2878 2011-02-28 23:07:52 <luke-jr> I have also changed my fee structure
2879 2011-02-28 23:08:01 <luke-jr> 1 TBC per BË¢
2880 2011-02-28 23:08:04 <molecular> uhm, but that would tell you wether the tx is broadcast to the network or not
2881 2011-02-28 23:08:18 <luke-jr> which is significantly less than the 0.01 BTC per KB
2882 2011-02-28 23:08:46 asherkin_ has joined
2883 2011-02-28 23:09:14 hacim_ has joined
2884 2011-02-28 23:09:18 DrEeevil has joined
2885 2011-02-28 23:09:38 comboy_ has joined
2886 2011-02-28 23:09:44 <lfm> Blitzboom: dose Slush know about it?
2887 2011-02-28 23:09:54 <Blitzboom> no, didn’t contact him yet
2888 2011-02-28 23:10:00 JStoker has quit (Disconnected by services)
2889 2011-02-28 23:10:12 kelvie_` has joined
2890 2011-02-28 23:10:15 <lfm> it might be a problem at his end then
2891 2011-02-28 23:10:29 yebyen_ has joined
2892 2011-02-28 23:10:50 <Blitzboom> you there, slush?
2893 2011-02-28 23:11:05 puddinpop has joined
2894 2011-02-28 23:11:39 AmpEater has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPad - http://colloquy.mobi)
2895 2011-02-28 23:11:45 kupo_ has joined
2896 2011-02-28 23:12:04 <molecular> Blitzboom, do the unconfirmed transactions have to do with slush's pool? how?
2897 2011-02-28 23:12:10 purpleposeidon has quit (Excess Flood)
2898 2011-02-28 23:12:16 purpleposeidon has joined
2899 2011-02-28 23:12:16 <Blitzboom> they are my payments
2900 2011-02-28 23:12:28 <lfm> Blitzboom: I have the same blocks as blockexporer so I expect everyone is the same
2901 2011-02-28 23:12:34 slush1 has joined
2902 2011-02-28 23:12:40 EvanR__ has joined
2903 2011-02-28 23:12:44 <molecular> Blitzboom, and the other people's unconfirmed transactions you talked about also?
2904 2011-02-28 23:12:46 <Lachesis> ;;bc,status
2905 2011-02-28 23:12:47 <gribble> Error: "bc,status" is not a valid command.
2906 2011-02-28 23:12:49 <Lachesis> ;;bc,stats
2907 2011-02-28 23:12:51 <gribble> Current Blocks: 111133 | Current Difficulty: 55590.23763914 | Next Difficulty At Block: 112895 | Next Difficulty In: 1762 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 3 days, 17 hours, 56 minutes, and 14 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 63533.10986523
2908 2011-02-28 23:12:56 <Blitzboom> slush1: http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=3835.msg57031#msg57031
2909 2011-02-28 23:13:04 <lfm> ;;bc,poolstats
2910 2011-02-28 23:13:05 <gribble> {"ghashes_ps": "89.263", "shares": 14249, "active_workers": 930, "round_duration": "0:12:36", "score": "14026.4723", "round_started": "2011-02-28 22:52:14", "shares_cdf": "22.61", "getwork_ps": 842}
2911 2011-02-28 23:13:13 <Lachesis> which pool?
2912 2011-02-28 23:13:20 <Lachesis> slush's?
2913 2011-02-28 23:13:37 <Lachesis> also, how is it counting gh/s?
2914 2011-02-28 23:13:58 nameless1 has joined
2915 2011-02-28 23:14:08 <lfm> prolly estimate from the number of "shares" comming in
2916 2011-02-28 23:14:16 <Lachesis> lfm, yeah
2917 2011-02-28 23:14:19 <ArtForz> simple reason TX are not getting though, theres a huge backlog
2918 2011-02-28 23:14:30 <Blitzboom> why ArtForz?
2919 2011-02-28 23:14:44 <slush1> Blitzboom: blockexplorer does not show unconfirmed txes
2920 2011-02-28 23:14:53 <Blitzboom> i know
2921 2011-02-28 23:14:57 bonsaikitten has quit (Disconnected by services)
2922 2011-02-28 23:15:03 <ArtForz> because theres more non-fee transactions being sent than getting into blocks
2923 2011-02-28 23:15:07 DrEeevil is now known as bonsaikitten
2924 2011-02-28 23:15:18 bd__ has joined
2925 2011-02-28 23:15:27 Daviey_ has joined
2926 2011-02-28 23:15:34 <slush1> Blitzboom: do you see your transaction in the client?
2927 2011-02-28 23:15:44 <ArtForz> looks like theres something like 550 transactions queued up...
2928 2011-02-28 23:15:48 <Blitzboom> see query, slush1
2929 2011-02-28 23:15:55 <Lachesis> ArtForz, where are you seeing that?
2930 2011-02-28 23:16:01 <slush1> query?
2931 2011-02-28 23:16:09 <ArtForz> my not-a-node
2932 2011-02-28 23:16:09 <lfm> someone Running BitcoinMiner with 7 transactions in block
2933 2011-02-28 23:16:09 asherkin_ is now known as asherkin
2934 2011-02-28 23:16:09 <Lachesis> oh my
2935 2011-02-28 23:16:12 Daviey_ is now known as Daviey
2936 2011-02-28 23:16:24 tectonic_ has joined
2937 2011-02-28 23:16:32 tectonic_ is now known as tectonic
2938 2011-02-28 23:16:43 <slush1> Blitzboom: if you see tx in your client, then it is not a problem of the pool, sorry
2939 2011-02-28 23:16:49 <Lachesis> ArtForz, you have a bitcoin monitor program?
2940 2011-02-28 23:16:54 <ArtForz> yea
2941 2011-02-28 23:17:03 <Blitzboom> wtf?
2942 2011-02-28 23:17:12 <Lachesis> ArtForz, source available?
2943 2011-02-28 23:17:13 <lfm> someone dusting the net?
2944 2011-02-28 23:17:14 <phantomcircuit> the official client appears to be completely ignoring verack
2945 2011-02-28 23:17:15 JStoker has joined
2946 2011-02-28 23:17:24 <ArtForz> well, for the network layer, yes
2947 2011-02-28 23:17:27 <Blitzboom> slush1: why? it should be in a block
2948 2011-02-28 23:17:33 <Blitzboom> how can my client influence that?
2949 2011-02-28 23:17:47 <Lachesis> phantomcircuit, what does verack do again?
2950 2011-02-28 23:17:59 <slush1> I also see your address in outcoming payments
2951 2011-02-28 23:18:04 <phantomcircuit> supposed to be acknowledgement that the version is acceptable
2952 2011-02-28 23:18:13 <ArtForz> http://pastebin.com/ZSM7iHZw
2953 2011-02-28 23:18:19 <phantomcircuit> although there is no way to tell the other side their version isn't acceptable...
2954 2011-02-28 23:18:24 <slush1> And I don't see a reason why it should be problem of the pool... more users have problems with sending tx
2955 2011-02-28 23:18:41 <Blitzboom> ok, but who’s fault is it then?
2956 2011-02-28 23:19:09 <lfm> its the whole net being delayed
2957 2011-02-28 23:19:39 <Lachesis> people are trying to send tons of Tx without a fee that should require one?
2958 2011-02-28 23:19:46 <Blitzboom> why is it delayed, lfm?
2959 2011-02-28 23:19:54 puddinpop has quit ()
2960 2011-02-28 23:19:55 <molecular> Blitzboom, just because your client sees the transaction, doesn't mean it's in a block. it sees them before that
2961 2011-02-28 23:20:03 <Blitzboom> i know, molecular
2962 2011-02-28 23:20:03 bk128 has joined
2963 2011-02-28 23:20:05 <Blitzboom> that’s the point
2964 2011-02-28 23:20:05 <molecular> ok
2965 2011-02-28 23:20:11 <slush1> Lachesis: I don't see any huge numbers on bitcoinmonitor.com...
2966 2011-02-28 23:20:12 <lfm> someone sending loads of txn I guess
2967 2011-02-28 23:20:14 <phantomcircuit> also sending getdata doesnt appear to do anything
2968 2011-02-28 23:20:14 <Blitzboom> why is it not in a block for five hours?
2969 2011-02-28 23:20:30 <ArtForz> problem is, theres simply too many fee-less transactions getting sent
2970 2011-02-28 23:20:37 puddinpop has joined
2971 2011-02-28 23:20:48 <Blitzboom> will my transactions ever come through?
2972 2011-02-28 23:21:04 <phantomcircuit> Blitzboom, how many confirmations do you have?
2973 2011-02-28 23:21:15 <molecular> is there a limit on the number of non-fee-transactions a "normal node" will include in a block?
2974 2011-02-28 23:21:18 <Blitzboom> 0, 0, 0 and 0
2975 2011-02-28 23:21:34 <Blitzboom> and as i said, blockexplorer doesn’t show them
2976 2011-02-28 23:21:36 <ArtForz> yes
2977 2011-02-28 23:21:38 <Blitzboom> they are not in a block
2978 2011-02-28 23:21:44 <lfm> according to my debug.log I only have 7 txn backlogged
2979 2011-02-28 23:21:54 <molecular> ArtForz, yes to my question?
2980 2011-02-28 23:22:00 <Lachesis> lfm, how did you query that?
2981 2011-02-28 23:22:01 <ArtForz> molecular: yes
2982 2011-02-28 23:22:07 <molecular> what's that limit?
2983 2011-02-28 23:22:20 <ArtForz> 27kB in general
2984 2011-02-28 23:22:24 <lfm> Lachesis: just saw a message Running BitcoinMiner with 8 transactions in block
2985 2011-02-28 23:22:29 <molecular> roughly how many tx is that?
2986 2011-02-28 23:22:32 <ArtForz> 4kB for low-scoring transactions
2987 2011-02-28 23:22:33 <Lachesis> lfm ah thx
2988 2011-02-28 23:22:36 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
2989 2011-02-28 23:22:44 <Lachesis> yeah i've got 8 too
2990 2011-02-28 23:22:50 <ArtForz> weird
2991 2011-02-28 23:22:56 <Lachesis> where's the 550 number coming from?
2992 2011-02-28 23:23:01 <molecular> so non-fee-transactions are queueing up
2993 2011-02-28 23:23:08 <ArtForz> my node
2994 2011-02-28 23:23:11 da2ce7 has joined
2995 2011-02-28 23:23:14 <lfm> they may be giant txn I spoze
2996 2011-02-28 23:23:18 <molecular> can one see this in a "normal node" somehow?
2997 2011-02-28 23:23:29 <ArtForz> probably not
2998 2011-02-28 23:23:38 f4n has joined
2999 2011-02-28 23:23:38 daveparrish has joined
3000 2011-02-28 23:23:38 da2ce7 has joined
3001 2011-02-28 23:23:43 <molecular> but the normal nodes store these, dont they?
3002 2011-02-28 23:23:45 nameless1 has left ()
3003 2011-02-28 23:23:45 nameless1 has joined
3004 2011-02-28 23:23:50 <nameless1> umm
3005 2011-02-28 23:23:51 <ArtForz> in ram, yes
3006 2011-02-28 23:23:52 <nameless1> ahh
3007 2011-02-28 23:23:55 nameless1 is now known as nameless|
3008 2011-02-28 23:23:58 <Lachesis> lfm, could we maybe be seeing only the number that clients would let in a block?
3009 2011-02-28 23:24:00 nameless has left (!~root@weowntheinter.net|)
3010 2011-02-28 23:24:00 <lfm> molecular: if you have linux : tail -f ~/.bitcoin/debug.log
3011 2011-02-28 23:24:05 <ArtForz> but they dont save them over a restart
3012 2011-02-28 23:24:07 <Lachesis> out client*
3013 2011-02-28 23:24:19 <ArtForz> and yes, my miner also says "8 transactions in block"
3014 2011-02-28 23:24:29 Jeroenz0r has quit ()
3015 2011-02-28 23:24:34 <Lachesis> ArtForz, is that the max number it'll give us?
3016 2011-02-28 23:24:37 jnd has joined
3017 2011-02-28 23:24:37 nameless has joined
3018 2011-02-28 23:24:37 sabalaba has joined
3019 2011-02-28 23:24:40 <ArtForz> and right now it has ... 572 queued
3020 2011-02-28 23:24:51 <Blitzboom> 572 transactions queued?!
3021 2011-02-28 23:24:58 <ArtForz> yup
3022 2011-02-28 23:25:02 <Blitzboom> wtf
3023 2011-02-28 23:25:07 <Lachesis> will blocks bigger than the normal limit still be valid?
3024 2011-02-28 23:25:10 <molecular> that's pretty bad
3025 2011-02-28 23:25:12 <ArtForz> yes
3026 2011-02-28 23:25:12 <Lachesis> why did we restrict it to something so low?
3027 2011-02-28 23:25:19 <Lachesis> s/we/Satoshi
3028 2011-02-28 23:25:21 Jeroenz0r has joined
3029 2011-02-28 23:25:21 Jeroenz0r has quit (Changing host)
3030 2011-02-28 23:25:21 Jeroenz0r has joined
3031 2011-02-28 23:25:24 <ArtForz> to limit block chain bloat from TX spam
3032 2011-02-28 23:25:28 BCBot has joined
3033 2011-02-28 23:25:39 <Lachesis> ArtForz, hrm but now we've made TX spam able to shut down the network
3034 2011-02-28 23:25:42 <Blitzboom> nice, so bitcoin will probably take longer than a bank wire now
3035 2011-02-28 23:25:50 <ArtForz> just dont create spammy-looking transactions
3036 2011-02-28 23:25:54 <lfm> Lachesis: usually you can get like 200 in one block unless there is txn with huge number of inputs
3037 2011-02-28 23:25:56 <Blitzboom> if the transactions ever come through, that is
3038 2011-02-28 23:26:19 <Lachesis> so what can we do to resolve this current issue?
3039 2011-02-28 23:26:24 <molecular> hmm, so slush and faucet are spammy-looking?
3040 2011-02-28 23:26:24 amiller has joined
3041 2011-02-28 23:26:34 <ArtForz> overall, yes
3042 2011-02-28 23:26:46 <ArtForz> low age of inputs, small amounts
3043 2011-02-28 23:26:51 <luke-jr> connect your bitcoin Peer to nat.router.dashjr.org port 8333, to send non-standard tx!
3044 2011-02-28 23:27:06 <molecular> how does a node select the transactions to put in a block? first come, first server?
3045 2011-02-28 23:27:07 <nanotube> ArtForz: what do you think about the idea of storing the queue on disk? disk is cheaper than ram... so sending a shitload of spam-tx to a node is less likely to take the node down if the buffer is on disk.
3046 2011-02-28 23:27:41 <lfm> molecular: if there are no fees then ya. txn with fees can jump the queue I think, not sure
3047 2011-02-28 23:27:56 <Lachesis> luke-jr, what's a non-standard tx?
3048 2011-02-28 23:28:05 <ArtForz> iirc sort by score
3049 2011-02-28 23:28:28 <ArtForz> check the priority stuff in CreateNewBlock
3050 2011-02-28 23:28:32 <luke-jr> Lachesis: a transaction that doesn't fit the generic "to such-and-such an address" form
3051 2011-02-28 23:28:41 <amiller> are transactions necessarily processed in order
3052 2011-02-28 23:28:41 larsivi has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
3053 2011-02-28 23:28:46 <lfm> Lachesis: non-standard txn have odd scripts for instance
3054 2011-02-28 23:28:56 sethsethseth has joined
3055 2011-02-28 23:28:57 <amiller> like i made 30 transactions with no fee, and then a transaction with 0.03 fee
3056 2011-02-28 23:29:07 <amiller> will the 0.03 fee one get priority and bring all the earlier ones with it
3057 2011-02-28 23:29:28 <lfm> amiller: yes and no (i think)
3058 2011-02-28 23:29:28 <amiller> or will the 0.03 be rejected because it has a previous link that would have to be validated by including all the others
3059 2011-02-28 23:29:59 <ArtForz> basically tx priority = (sum of (# of coins * # of confirmations) for each input) / size of TX in bytes
3060 2011-02-28 23:31:12 <amiller> well how about the ordering
3061 2011-02-28 23:31:15 <molecular> "// Priority is sum(valuein * age) / txsize"
3062 2011-02-28 23:31:19 <amiller> does my node broadcast my transactions one at a time or as a batch
3063 2011-02-28 23:31:31 altamic has quit (Quit: altamic)
3064 2011-02-28 23:31:33 <molecular> so larger amount transactions are prioritized
3065 2011-02-28 23:31:42 <ArtForz> yes
3066 2011-02-28 23:31:47 <molecular> hehe
3067 2011-02-28 23:31:54 <ArtForz> and so are transactions with older inputs
3068 2011-02-28 23:32:03 <amiller> that's interesting, those seem like two very different definitions for the priority
3069 2011-02-28 23:32:10 <ArtForz> not really
3070 2011-02-28 23:32:51 devon_hillard has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
3071 2011-02-28 23:32:55 <[Tycho]> And where is fee in this definition ?
3072 2011-02-28 23:33:12 <molecular> amiller, I think the dependen transactions are pulled in, yes, but am not sure
3073 2011-02-28 23:33:14 <ArtForz> it isn't
3074 2011-02-28 23:33:19 <ArtForz> doesnt have to be
3075 2011-02-28 23:33:31 <ArtForz> priority is only used for fee-less transactions
3076 2011-02-28 23:33:45 <[Tycho]> Transactions with fee always pass ?
3077 2011-02-28 23:33:57 <Syke> msg gribble bc;;stats
3078 2011-02-28 23:33:58 <ArtForz> not always
3079 2011-02-28 23:34:08 <Syke> doh
3080 2011-02-28 23:34:14 <ArtForz> see GetMinFee in main.h
3081 2011-02-28 23:34:34 <Syke> ;;bc,stats
3082 2011-02-28 23:34:36 <gribble> Current Blocks: 111134 | Current Difficulty: 55590.23763914 | Next Difficulty At Block: 112895 | Next Difficulty In: 1761 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 3 days, 19 hours, 15 minutes, and 30 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 63208.65603108
3083 2011-02-28 23:34:49 <Syke> yikes
3084 2011-02-28 23:34:50 <nanotube> ArtForz: i thought it was just that it checks for min fee required to reject tx that don't have it... and other than that, just sorts on that priority regardless of fee?
3085 2011-02-28 23:35:00 <ArtForz> errr... not quite
3086 2011-02-28 23:35:07 <nanotube> mm
3087 2011-02-28 23:35:08 <Blitzboom> just one question: will i ever get my payment?
3088 2011-02-28 23:35:20 <ArtForz> Blitzboom: yes, might take a while though...
3089 2011-02-28 23:35:29 <Blitzboom> alright
3090 2011-02-28 23:35:32 <molecular> / To limit dust spam, require a 0.01 fee if any output is less than 0.01
3091 2011-02-28 23:36:23 <amiller> if i had a wallet of 1000 btc
3092 2011-02-28 23:36:32 <nanotube> so... is the era of free tx over?
3093 2011-02-28 23:36:35 <amiller> i think i'd want to constantly shuffle around various amounts smaller than that as a way of probing the network
3094 2011-02-28 23:36:46 <nanotube> or do we increase size of block to accommodate higher tx traffic?
3095 2011-02-28 23:37:17 <Blitzboom> i hope something will be done about it
3096 2011-02-28 23:37:28 baldahin has joined
3097 2011-02-28 23:37:43 <baldahin> Hi, all
3098 2011-02-28 23:38:29 <molecular> Blitzboom, how high your payout treshold @slush?
3099 2011-02-28 23:38:53 <Blitzboom> 0.15 the smallest
3100 2011-02-28 23:38:59 <Blitzboom> 0.37 highest atm
3101 2011-02-28 23:39:15 <[Tycho]> I think that was another question :)
3102 2011-02-28 23:39:16 <molecular> you have different ones?
3103 2011-02-28 23:39:20 <baldahin> Could i ask about support here?
3104 2011-02-28 23:39:28 <Blitzboom> you, you mean the threshold
3105 2011-02-28 23:39:30 <Blitzboom> 0.01
3106 2011-02-28 23:39:33 <molecular> baldahin, just ask
3107 2011-02-28 23:39:48 <[Tycho]> So it's all Blitzboom's fault !
3108 2011-02-28 23:39:55 <molecular> well, maybe putting that a little higher might help, since transactions with higher amount are preferred
3109 2011-02-28 23:40:00 <Blitzboom> haha, no. i always had it this way
3110 2011-02-28 23:40:09 <ArtForz> this is a wild guess, but I have the feeling that this may be slush pool generated tx spam ...
3111 2011-02-28 23:40:16 <molecular> yeah, but the situation is now different
3112 2011-02-28 23:40:23 <Blitzboom> why is it different?
3113 2011-02-28 23:40:38 <molecular> because now we have transactions queueing up
3114 2011-02-28 23:40:42 <molecular> for some reason
3115 2011-02-28 23:40:46 <ArtForz> which means, it's working as intended, low-value stuff is pushed back by higher value transactions
3116 2011-02-28 23:40:48 <Blitzboom> but alright, i’ll increase it to … 1 BTC?
3117 2011-02-28 23:40:56 <molecular> sound good
3118 2011-02-28 23:41:08 <Blitzboom> ok, thanks
3119 2011-02-28 23:41:08 <[Tycho]> Hmm, looks like a should implement once per day payment for small thresholds and once per hour for big ones :)
3120 2011-02-28 23:41:34 <amiller> i made a pastebin of my experiment here http://pastebin.com/yx7tB8e8
3121 2011-02-28 23:42:55 <ArtForz> amiller: yawn
3122 2011-02-28 23:43:05 <molecular> If one looks at recent blocks, there's not a lot of small amounts in there
3123 2011-02-28 23:43:19 <amiller> ArtForz, :p
3124 2011-02-28 23:43:41 Mango-chan has joined
3125 2011-02-28 23:43:41 Mango-chan has quit (Changing host)
3126 2011-02-28 23:43:41 Mango-chan has joined
3127 2011-02-28 23:43:45 Mango-chan has quit (Client Quit)
3128 2011-02-28 23:44:02 <ArtForz> molecular: because those trigger the 4kB "low value TX" limit
3129 2011-02-28 23:44:02 <molecular> hmm, just made a payment to myself, it's already confirmed (1 block)
3130 2011-02-28 23:44:04 Mango-chan has joined
3131 2011-02-28 23:44:04 Mango-chan has quit (Changing host)
3132 2011-02-28 23:44:04 Mango-chan has joined
3133 2011-02-28 23:44:20 <molecular> small payment, I mean, 0.01
3134 2011-02-28 23:44:24 <ArtForz> bool fAllowFree = (nBlockSize + nTxSize < 4000 || dPriority > COIN * 144 / 250);
3135 2011-02-28 23:44:55 <baldahin> I'm using bitcoind on linuxbox, and i'm expecting to mine some coins. Everything seems fine, a have connections and blocks, but hashespersec is always zero and my cpu isn't hardly using. Could anybody explain?
3136 2011-02-28 23:45:02 <molecular> so my small paymet got lucky to get into the 4kb limit?
3137 2011-02-28 23:45:13 <ArtForz> or maybe it wasnt that small
3138 2011-02-28 23:45:21 <molecular> it was split off from a 0.05 input
3139 2011-02-28 23:45:31 <Blitzboom> three of my due payments are >0.3 BTC
3140 2011-02-28 23:45:42 <ArtForz> http://blockexplorer.com/tx/581ee5fbe985acee8ca058ad6876028c760c0c7baa1f62303e0562466cd091fc ?
3141 2011-02-28 23:45:46 <molecular> don't know how slush pays out? to what decimal digit does he round?
3142 2011-02-28 23:45:50 <nanotube> baldahin: bitcoind setgenerate true
3143 2011-02-28 23:46:05 <ArtForz> note that your input was in block 102546
3144 2011-02-28 23:46:34 <slush1> molecular: I round to 0.01
3145 2011-02-28 23:46:39 <molecular> ArtForz, thats the one
3146 2011-02-28 23:46:39 <baldahin> nanotube: /bitcoind getgenerate true
3147 2011-02-28 23:46:43 <ArtForz> now remember that score = age of input * value of input ;)
3148 2011-02-28 23:46:58 <nanotube> slush1: set min payout threshold to 1btc or something like that. please. :)
3149 2011-02-28 23:47:02 <doublec> baldahin: do you have all the blocks downloaded?
3150 2011-02-28 23:47:16 <nanotube> baldahin: pastebin output of 'bitcoind getinfo'
3151 2011-02-28 23:47:16 <slush1> nanotube: why? People will complain about that :)
3152 2011-02-28 23:47:17 <molecular> ArtForz, ok, I understand... kinda hard to produce a transaction that will queue up nicely
3153 2011-02-28 23:47:17 <ArtForz> so a 1000-block old 0.05 input is scored as high as a 1-block old 50.00 input
3154 2011-02-28 23:47:26 <nanotube> slush1: let them complain.
3155 2011-02-28 23:47:34 <slush1> maybe 0.1, but 1 is too high, for many cpu users
3156 2011-02-28 23:47:35 <molecular> would've liked to test the hypothesis that using the output of it in another transaction with a fee would pull it in
3157 2011-02-28 23:47:41 <EvanR> slush1 is spamming the network, and it cant handle it?
3158 2011-02-28 23:47:45 <nanotube> slush1: either they'll complain about that, or they'll complain that their transactions are not getting confirmed.
3159 2011-02-28 23:48:02 <baldahin> doublec, how can i figure out it?
3160 2011-02-28 23:48:03 <amiller> that's very interesting
3161 2011-02-28 23:48:11 `Jaka has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
3162 2011-02-28 23:48:13 <slush1> 30 tx every hour is spamming the network? :-O
3163 2011-02-28 23:48:20 <EvanR> yeah i dont understand
3164 2011-02-28 23:48:23 <nanotube> baldahin: current total blocks ,,bc,blocks :
3165 2011-02-28 23:48:25 <gribble> 111136
3166 2011-02-28 23:48:33 <luke-jr> I have a low-fee miner :p
3167 2011-02-28 23:48:34 * [Tycho] recently received 5+ BTC from slush
3168 2011-02-28 23:48:35 <Blitzboom> i don’t understand what’s different now than every day before
3169 2011-02-28 23:48:40 <slush1> the max of tx sent by pool was about 100
3170 2011-02-28 23:48:41 <doublec> baldahin: bitcoind getblockcount
3171 2011-02-28 23:48:43 <slush1> in one batch
3172 2011-02-28 23:48:50 <doublec> baldahin: should be 111136 or so
3173 2011-02-28 23:48:59 <nanotube> slush1: remember you're not the only pool. :) so it's 30tx per hour, /in addition/ to all the other pools, and /in addition/ to all the non-pool tx.
3174 2011-02-28 23:49:00 <phantomcircuit> looks to me like the checksum on this is right, but bitcoind is throwing checksum errors for it, ideas? http://codepad.org/6TUjloV1
3175 2011-02-28 23:49:05 <baldahin> http://pastebin.com/Pqa0DfH2
3176 2011-02-28 23:49:27 <nanotube> baldahin: aha, not all blocks yet
3177 2011-02-28 23:49:30 <nanotube> should be 111136
3178 2011-02-28 23:49:38 <slush1> nanotube: ok, if all pools agree on minimal payout 1 BTC, I have no problem with that ;)
3179 2011-02-28 23:49:48 <ArtForz> why the fuck arent pools always accepting their own transactions?
3180 2011-02-28 23:49:57 <baldahin> ok, i'll wait. thanks =)
3181 2011-02-28 23:50:13 <[Tycho]> ArtForz, great idea :)
3182 2011-02-28 23:50:14 <molecular> ArtForz, nice idea
3183 2011-02-28 23:50:21 <luke-jr> not a new idea :P
3184 2011-02-28 23:50:37 <amiller> i wonder if i could get a measure of my wallet's 'coin diversity' and use mybitcoin to get new ones
3185 2011-02-28 23:50:46 <slush1> nanotube: but once I will do anything "against users", there will be many trolls complaining and threating with their own pools ;)
3186 2011-02-28 23:51:04 <molecular> ArtForz, it's work to implement?
3187 2011-02-28 23:51:11 <slush1> ArtForz: Because I'm still using stock bitcoind
3188 2011-02-28 23:51:17 <nanotube> slush1: mm well... maybe make sure to always accept transactions originating from your own pool
3189 2011-02-28 23:51:19 <slush1> But I plan it in the future
3190 2011-02-28 23:51:21 <nanotube> to reduce the queue
3191 2011-02-28 23:51:25 <doublec> slush1: if you change to 1btc minimum you'll definitely get a backlash from the smaller miners. On the other hand load on your server might reduce.
3192 2011-02-28 23:51:34 <phantomcircuit> uint256 hash = Hash(vRecv.begin(), vRecv.begin() + nMessageSize);
3193 2011-02-28 23:51:35 <phantomcircuit> wtf
3194 2011-02-28 23:51:38 <nanotube> slush1: also, changing minimum to .1 would probably be just fine.
3195 2011-02-28 23:51:40 <phantomcircuit> the hash is only 32 bits
3196 2011-02-28 23:51:53 <ArtForz> well, looks like on average about 10 free transactions fit in a block
3197 2011-02-28 23:52:04 <ArtForz> low scoring free tx, that is
3198 2011-02-28 23:52:17 <ArtForz> so beyond 60 or so tx/h, shit starts to queue up
3199 2011-02-28 23:52:17 <slush1> not too much...
3200 2011-02-28 23:52:31 <doublec> that strikes me as being pretty low
3201 2011-02-28 23:52:31 <ArtForz> yeah
3202 2011-02-28 23:52:48 <amiller> how are you all observing the queueing
3203 2011-02-28 23:52:52 <amiller> debug.log?
3204 2011-02-28 23:52:54 <ArtForz> well, it kinda does its job
3205 2011-02-28 23:53:05 <Blitzboom> why is it that low?
3206 2011-02-28 23:53:12 <ArtForz> low-age low-value transactions *do* look like tx spam
3207 2011-02-28 23:53:36 <ArtForz> to reduce block chain growth from tx spam
3208 2011-02-28 23:53:58 <Blitzboom> you mean the size of a block?
3209 2011-02-28 23:54:01 <ArtForz> yes
3210 2011-02-28 23:54:21 <Blitzboom> ok, but it will queue up forever if this goes on
3211 2011-02-28 23:54:23 * luke-jr wonders how long until his miner actually includes tx now
3212 2011-02-28 23:54:34 <doublec> ArtForz: how do you know how much is queued?
3213 2011-02-28 23:54:37 <Blitzboom> i mean, it’s getting longer, isn’t it?
3214 2011-02-28 23:54:55 <ArtForz> doublec: I have a python not-a-node logging that stuff hanging off my main node
3215 2011-02-28 23:55:27 <doublec> nice
3216 2011-02-28 23:55:48 <ArtForz> currently at... 580 unconfirmed tx
3217 2011-02-28 23:56:01 <slush1> lol
3218 2011-02-28 23:56:05 <doublec> ArtForz: so are you tracking all transactions, removing those that don't appear in blocks and the rest are the queue?
3219 2011-02-28 23:56:12 <doublec> s/don't//
3220 2011-02-28 23:56:16 <ArtForz> yep
3221 2011-02-28 23:56:23 <amiller> that's very interesting
3222 2011-02-28 23:56:30 <doublec> that'd be an interesting stat for bitcoinwatch
3223 2011-02-28 23:56:38 <slush1> doublec: basically I'm doing this in my new pool code, too
3224 2011-02-28 23:56:40 <Blitzboom> second that
3225 2011-02-28 23:56:41 <amiller> bitcoinwatch, didn't know of that
3226 2011-02-28 23:56:56 <luke-jr> would anyone be interested in my policy changes? :P
3227 2011-02-28 23:57:06 <amiller> i am
3228 2011-02-28 23:57:20 <amiller> (irrelevantly)
3229 2011-02-28 23:57:35 <luke-jr> ?
3230 2011-02-28 23:57:39 <slush1> comboy_: oh, are you here? Sent you and email
3231 2011-02-28 23:58:18 <luke-jr> http://luke.dashjr.org/tmp/code/0001-policy-changes.patch
3232 2011-02-28 23:58:58 <necrodearia> luke-jr, thanks for clarifying as you did earlier.
3233 2011-02-28 23:59:11 <luke-jr> necrodearia: ?
3234 2011-02-28 23:59:24 <necrodearia> regarding hearsay/research
3235 2011-02-28 23:59:59 <luke-jr> ah