1 2011-03-05 00:00:51 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: In any case, Im off to bed, thanks for the effort
2 2011-03-05 00:03:00 <farzong> A nation with a trade deficit will experience reduction in its foreign exchange reserves, which ultimately lowers (depreciates) the value of its currency.
3 2011-03-05 00:03:35 brocktice has joined
4 2011-03-05 00:05:02 <mmarker> ;;bc,blocks
5 2011-03-05 00:05:03 <gribble> 111841
6 2011-03-05 00:05:27 <farzong> so you want ppl to keep spending within the bitcoin network.. so if a business is using bitcoin, its vertical integration and supply chain should be accessible through bitcoin
7 2011-03-05 00:06:20 <mmarker> hmm, wish the client could export all the transactions into a CSV format
8 2011-03-05 00:07:26 <farzong> has anyone estimated how much network traffic would be required in a $100 mm / day transaction volume situation
9 2011-03-05 00:07:57 <farzong> at that point youd have to move beyond irc
10 2011-03-05 00:08:08 <Diablo-D3> http://www.theclearpill.com/
11 2011-03-05 00:08:12 <Diablo-D3> what the fuck
12 2011-03-05 00:08:28 <Syke_> irc really isn't important to the network
13 2011-03-05 00:08:37 <farzong> Syke_: true dat
14 2011-03-05 00:09:12 <OneFixt> Diablo-D3: lol did you hear those side-effects?
15 2011-03-05 00:09:17 <OneFixt> lol, gotta be a joke
16 2011-03-05 00:09:19 <Diablo-D3> it seems to be a movie ad
17 2011-03-05 00:09:21 <xelister> Diablo-D3: LSD?
18 2011-03-05 00:09:23 <Diablo-D3> but I cant figure out for what movie
19 2011-03-05 00:09:26 <Syke_> that's a movie
20 2011-03-05 00:09:27 <Diablo-D3> because I wanna avoid it whatever it is
21 2011-03-05 00:09:37 <OneFixt> that makes sense
22 2011-03-05 00:09:53 <OneFixt> right, "film is not yet rated" at the bottom
23 2011-03-05 00:10:01 <Diablo-D3> yeah I saw that
24 2011-03-05 00:10:03 <Diablo-D3> but what movie/
25 2011-03-05 00:10:09 <Diablo-D3> because it looks shitty and uninspired
26 2011-03-05 00:10:12 <mmarker> Diablo: Limitless
27 2011-03-05 00:10:25 * Diablo-D3 writes that down on his do not watch list
28 2011-03-05 00:10:35 <mmarker> De Niro is in it
29 2011-03-05 00:10:41 * Diablo-D3 writes that down on his do not watch list TWICE
30 2011-03-05 00:10:41 <FreeMoney> is anyone else still getting the "forbidden" message at mtgox?
31 2011-03-05 00:10:43 <mmarker> He must need some more cash for something
32 2011-03-05 00:10:48 <FreeMoney> I can get the site on my phone, but not the computer
33 2011-03-05 00:10:49 <Diablo-D3> FreeMoney: I was
34 2011-03-05 00:10:50 <Syke_> that's a great promo website
35 2011-03-05 00:10:51 <OneFixt> there are going to be a bunch of people asking their doctor about it
36 2011-03-05 00:10:53 <Diablo-D3> too lazy to check
37 2011-03-05 00:10:59 <farzong> now how much traffic would an intergalactic bitcoin require(say if multiple solar systems / galaxies with 1 septillion users
38 2011-03-05 00:11:07 <Diablo-D3> farzong: wont work
39 2011-03-05 00:11:17 <farzong> why not..
40 2011-03-05 00:11:20 <Diablo-D3> TCP doesnt scale past half way between mars and the belt
41 2011-03-05 00:11:43 <Syke_> the bitcoin network is dependent on time
42 2011-03-05 00:12:09 <farzong> Diablo-D3: we will be using IPN
43 2011-03-05 00:12:29 <Syke_> unless you find a way around the speed of light, it ain't gonna work
44 2011-03-05 00:13:52 noagendamarket has joined
45 2011-03-05 00:14:03 <farzong> distant planets would be working on their own chains.. as tx's fro faraway places make it to them, they then incorporate
46 2011-03-05 00:14:17 sabalaba has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
47 2011-03-05 00:15:23 <farzong> i dunno.. i guess youd have to respect multiple chains at that point
48 2011-03-05 00:15:40 <Syke_> as long as they are distinct chains, then exchanges can facilitate transactions between them
49 2011-03-05 00:15:55 <Syke_> no different than btc to pp
50 2011-03-05 00:15:59 <farzong> yeah you could scale up logarithmically
51 2011-03-05 00:16:44 <FreeMoney> they don't need to incorporate, that changes all kinds of stuff. Just have EarthCoin, MarsCoin, etc and there can be exchanges at whatever speed is possible
52 2011-03-05 00:16:44 BlueMatt has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
53 2011-03-05 00:16:54 mmarker has quit (Quit: mmarker)
54 2011-03-05 00:16:58 <paz> what about stargates?
55 2011-03-05 00:17:03 <farzong> i mean, the future pan-galactic civilization may trade bitcoins (or some computational unit)
56 2011-03-05 00:17:38 altamic has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
57 2011-03-05 00:17:41 <farzong> since transmitting energy is a lot more difficult than transmitting signal
58 2011-03-05 00:17:58 <farzong> carrying big boulders arond vs. seashells as currency
59 2011-03-05 00:18:42 <farzong> actually there was one island that used large stones weighing up to 4 tons as their currency
60 2011-03-05 00:18:47 <farzong> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rai_stones
61 2011-03-05 00:18:52 <[Tycho]> Those calculations of bitcoin value are based at least on assumption that NO other cryptocurrency will be created.
62 2011-03-05 00:19:16 <farzong> [Tycho]: true i suppose
63 2011-03-05 00:19:22 <[Tycho]> Which is far from be guaranted.
64 2011-03-05 00:19:57 <farzong> the other known approaches require trusted mints
65 2011-03-05 00:20:29 <farzong> they still provide anonymity / security
66 2011-03-05 00:21:15 <[Tycho]> No, there may be created other distributed p2p system.
67 2011-03-05 00:21:33 <[Tycho]> With some advantages.
68 2011-03-05 00:21:35 <farzong> yeah.. then you just have a cryptocoin which is a basket weighted by the circulation of the various p2p systems
69 2011-03-05 00:21:56 <farzong> but bitcoin has the headstart and a big network already
70 2011-03-05 00:22:01 <noagendamarket> googlecoins
71 2011-03-05 00:22:16 <jrabbit> haha
72 2011-03-05 00:22:24 <jrabbit> my rss downloader is smarter than me!
73 2011-03-05 00:22:59 <farzong> i do not see any corporation/soveriegn ever issuing cryptocoins.. why would they reduce their own control / deal with uncharted regulatory areas
74 2011-03-05 00:23:03 noagendamarket has quit (Quit: Leaving)
75 2011-03-05 00:23:13 <farzong> i mean it could happen.. but it seems like more of a bottom-up thing
76 2011-03-05 00:23:40 noagendamarket has joined
77 2011-03-05 00:23:42 <TD> google will be releasing an open source implementation of bitcoin next week
78 2011-03-05 00:23:44 yebyen has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
79 2011-03-05 00:24:00 <farzong> examples of corporate digital currency like virtual goods in second life.. which are awful stored value systems
80 2011-03-05 00:24:35 yebyen has joined
81 2011-03-05 00:25:31 <phantomcircuit_> TD, lol you're joking right
82 2011-03-05 00:25:43 <TD> i'll bet you 100 BTC on it
83 2011-03-05 00:25:55 <farzong> [Tycho]: if other systems pop up, that would actually be evidence that the concept is taking hold.. so youd expect the entire market to be wider
84 2011-03-05 00:26:15 <farzong> if no-one tried to copy bitcoin, then that would be perhaps an indication bitcoin isnt that popular
85 2011-03-05 00:26:19 <farzong> so copycats are probably a good sign
86 2011-03-05 00:26:57 theymos has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
87 2011-03-05 00:27:12 <farzong> TD: is there a page at gogle for bitcoin?
88 2011-03-05 00:27:42 <noagendamarket> bitcoin is already open source
89 2011-03-05 00:27:44 Raulo_ has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
90 2011-03-05 00:27:45 <TD> http://www.google.com/search?q=bitcoin
91 2011-03-05 00:27:58 <farzong> haha
92 2011-03-05 00:28:04 <noagendamarket> It doesnt need google to open source it lol
93 2011-03-05 00:29:29 <TD> phantomcircuit_: so you gonna take the bet? ;)
94 2011-03-05 00:29:55 devon_hillard has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
95 2011-03-05 00:30:34 <molecular> ;;bc,stats
96 2011-03-05 00:30:37 <gribble> Current Blocks: 111845 | Current Difficulty: 55590.23763914 | Next Difficulty At Block: 112895 | Next Difficulty In: 1050 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 6 days, 2 hours, 7 minutes, and 30 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 66646.52111168
97 2011-03-05 00:30:38 <phantomcircuit_> TD, as in their own implementation, or hosting one?
98 2011-03-05 00:30:51 <TD> their own implementation, written by employees
99 2011-03-05 00:32:12 <phantomcircuit_> lol i dont know
100 2011-03-05 00:32:14 <phantomcircuit_> but i gtg
101 2011-03-05 00:32:22 <phantomcircuit_> TD, did you see my implementation?
102 2011-03-05 00:32:23 <phantomcircuit_> it's sexy
103 2011-03-05 00:32:30 <TD> i didn't
104 2011-03-05 00:32:32 <phantomcircuit_> but lol incomplete
105 2011-03-05 00:32:33 <TD> is that the python one ?
106 2011-03-05 00:32:41 <phantomcircuit_> http://github.com/phantomcircuit/bitcoin-alt
107 2011-03-05 00:32:52 <phantomcircuit_> so far i just have the network protocol
108 2011-03-05 00:33:19 <TD> did you see http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=4084.0
109 2011-03-05 00:33:21 <bitbot> Announcing Pycoin, a (partial) bitcoin protocol implementation in python3 Connection refused.
110 2011-03-05 00:33:30 <farzong> \
111 2011-03-05 00:33:36 <TD> there are quite a few python protocol implementations
112 2011-03-05 00:33:38 <phantomcircuit_> TD, yeah frankly it's terrible
113 2011-03-05 00:33:41 <TD> heh
114 2011-03-05 00:33:59 <phantomcircuit_> i wouldnt admit to having written that
115 2011-03-05 00:34:35 <phantomcircuit_> anyways
116 2011-03-05 00:34:37 <phantomcircuit_> ill be back
117 2011-03-05 00:34:50 <phantomcircuit_> and will probably finish the block/tx storage portion of my client when i return
118 2011-03-05 00:36:44 <farzong> if one client becomes very popular, would the vendor essentially decide to fork bitcoin (make up his own chains since he has so many users, they constitute a plurality)
119 2011-03-05 00:37:10 <farzong> that is, the seed file installed with the client would be proprietary to that network
120 2011-03-05 00:37:55 <farzong> and he could mimic transactions from one exchange to the other (so users still can use bitcoins)
121 2011-03-05 00:40:26 Cusipzzz has joined
122 2011-03-05 00:40:34 <farzong> actually a DOS isn't that hard.. you simply announce you've extended the chain by 30 MB or whatever
123 2011-03-05 00:40:50 <farzong> now the other clients will verify it by hashing 30MB.. which ties them up for a few seconds
124 2011-03-05 00:44:48 <Syke_> blocks are limited in size
125 2011-03-05 00:44:56 <farzong> ahh riytte
126 2011-03-05 00:45:01 <molecular> damnit, my bitcoin isn't connecting... since 20 minutes
127 2011-03-05 00:45:05 <Syke_> and they don't hash the entire block
128 2011-03-05 00:46:31 sabalaba has joined
129 2011-03-05 00:47:16 <TD> farzong: hashing is fast
130 2011-03-05 00:47:19 <TD> that is not the DoS issue
131 2011-03-05 00:47:23 <TD> ECDSA verification is
132 2011-03-05 00:47:40 <farzong> yeah thats pretty slow
133 2011-03-05 00:47:45 * TD -> bed
134 2011-03-05 00:47:47 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
135 2011-03-05 00:49:10 <eps> are bitcoins a fiat currency?
136 2011-03-05 00:49:20 <farzong> no...
137 2011-03-05 00:49:42 <farzong> its more like the gold standard..
138 2011-03-05 00:49:46 <eps> they are backed by computing power, which doesn't seem very substantial
139 2011-03-05 00:49:52 <farzong> but actually "mining" bitcoins is much harder than mining gold
140 2011-03-05 00:50:14 <molecular> ;;bc,calc 666000
141 2011-03-05 00:50:14 sethsethseth__ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
142 2011-03-05 00:50:15 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 666000 Khps, given current difficulty of 55590.23763914 , is 4 days, 3 hours, 34 minutes, and 55 seconds
143 2011-03-05 00:50:18 <Mango-chan> http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/bar/2246878268.html
144 2011-03-05 00:50:20 <Mango-chan> LOL
145 2011-03-05 00:50:48 <farzong> without someone breaking sha-256 (or whatever the hash is) its very difficult to mine coins
146 2011-03-05 00:50:54 <farzong> and at some point 21 million coins is th elimit
147 2011-03-05 00:51:00 sethsethseth__ has joined
148 2011-03-05 00:52:23 <eps> so its potential value is due to the fact that it is a limited resource
149 2011-03-05 00:52:27 <eps> like gold
150 2011-03-05 00:52:28 <farzong> yeah
151 2011-03-05 00:52:35 <eps> except intangible
152 2011-03-05 00:52:41 <farzong> yeah
153 2011-03-05 00:53:00 <Syke_> Mango-chan, I hate seeing scams like that. Mine for yourself and get $250, or mine for him and get $45. poor fools who get scammed.
154 2011-03-05 00:53:21 <Mango-chan> get his card and run away
155 2011-03-05 00:53:21 <Mango-chan> duh
156 2011-03-05 00:54:00 <molecular> well, if he pays $45 a month indefinitely it might not be such a bad deal
157 2011-03-05 00:54:04 <molecular> but I guess he's not
158 2011-03-05 00:54:56 <farzong> i dont know much about bitcoin
159 2011-03-05 00:54:58 <farzong> but i know its awesome
160 2011-03-05 00:55:23 <molecular> is anybody else having trouble connecting to bitcoin network?
161 2011-03-05 00:56:23 <Syke_> nope, just started a client and got 1 connection
162 2011-03-05 00:56:42 <molecular> weirdly, I also got 1 connection (for 10 minutes now), but stuck at block 111844
163 2011-03-05 00:57:16 <molecular> is there a way to see the connections?
164 2011-03-05 00:57:23 <farzong> ./coingoat.exe
165 2011-03-05 00:57:24 <Syke_> up to 5 connections atm
166 2011-03-05 00:57:37 <molecular> ok, so it's just here, I assume
167 2011-03-05 00:58:16 <Syke_> and I have no ports open, so those are all outgoing. do you have your port open?
168 2011-03-05 00:58:24 <lfm> ;;bc,blocks
169 2011-03-05 00:58:25 <gribble> 111849
170 2011-03-05 00:58:50 <molecular> yeah, got 8333 open
171 2011-03-05 00:58:59 <molecular> seeing some "trying connection lastseen=-0.9hrs lasttry=-360912.8hrs" in the log
172 2011-03-05 01:00:24 <molecular> duh, wow. just restarted to delete the debug.log and it's up in like 10 seconds, 5 connections
173 2011-03-05 01:00:25 <lfm> i got 92 connections (with port open)
174 2011-03-05 01:01:21 <molecular> ok, I'm back in the net ;). bad feeling to be disconnected ;)
175 2011-03-05 01:01:49 <molecular> and the miner crunching numbers uselessly on stale data ;(
176 2011-03-05 01:05:52 grondilu has joined
177 2011-03-05 01:06:12 <grondilu> midnightmagic: u there?
178 2011-03-05 01:06:47 <farzong> whitepixel
179 2011-03-05 01:10:59 <phantomcircuit_> molecular, uselessly? not really, the merkle_root can be pretty old, so as long as the timestamp is getting updated...
180 2011-03-05 01:11:55 Daviey has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
181 2011-03-05 01:12:02 <phantomcircuit_> i wonder if i can fit a 5870 in this gateway dx4840-11e
182 2011-03-05 01:12:49 JunK-Y has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
183 2011-03-05 01:12:56 skeledrew has joined
184 2011-03-05 01:14:24 nextgens has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
185 2011-03-05 01:14:26 twobitcoins_ has joined
186 2011-03-05 01:14:28 nextgens_ has joined
187 2011-03-05 01:14:55 gwillen has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
188 2011-03-05 01:14:55 knotwork has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
189 2011-03-05 01:15:25 gwillen has joined
190 2011-03-05 01:15:26 gwillen has quit (Changing host)
191 2011-03-05 01:15:26 gwillen has joined
192 2011-03-05 01:15:38 JunK-Y has joined
193 2011-03-05 01:16:07 skeledrew1 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
194 2011-03-05 01:16:20 <farzong> how do i join a mining camp
195 2011-03-05 01:16:31 twobitcoins has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
196 2011-03-05 01:16:57 <phantomcircuit_> oh btw what the hell is the poing of the nonce in the version message? i dont see it used anywhere else
197 2011-03-05 01:16:58 knotwork has joined
198 2011-03-05 01:18:26 Daviey has joined
199 2011-03-05 01:21:57 <molecular> phantomcircuit_, isnt the previous block's hash part of a block? so if my client is stuck on some old block, wont the connected miner be mining on stale data?
200 2011-03-05 01:22:39 <molecular> farzong, what's a mining camp? a pool?
201 2011-03-05 01:22:45 <farzong> yea
202 2011-03-05 01:23:01 <molecular> follow the instructions on the pool's web-page?
203 2011-03-05 01:23:18 noagendamarket has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
204 2011-03-05 01:23:25 <molecular> "mining camp" is a pretty cool name
205 2011-03-05 01:23:42 <molecular> you can see the sunset in the desert and the campfire and shit, lol
206 2011-03-05 01:23:54 <lfm> a nonce in the version message? never heard of that one
207 2011-03-05 01:25:13 <lfm> molecular: yes if your block chain is stale your mining effort is wasted
208 2011-03-05 01:25:31 <Diablo-D3> slush: you here?
209 2011-03-05 01:25:37 <slush> yes
210 2011-03-05 01:26:09 <Diablo-D3> slush: every time a pool client getworks... does the bitcoind backend getwork too?
211 2011-03-05 01:26:33 <slush> yrd
212 2011-03-05 01:26:35 <slush> yes
213 2011-03-05 01:26:36 <slush> :)
214 2011-03-05 01:26:51 <slush> at this time, pool is just proxy around original getwork
215 2011-03-05 01:27:05 <Diablo-D3> wtf
216 2011-03-05 01:27:18 <farzong> found out seti @ home was actually generating bitcoins
217 2011-03-05 01:27:45 <lfm> farzong: you been punked
218 2011-03-05 01:27:48 <slush> farzong: mining camp is yet another pool? On which URL?
219 2011-03-05 01:28:02 <slush> Diablo-D3: wtf wtf?
220 2011-03-05 01:29:24 <slush> Diablo-D3: is anything unclear?
221 2011-03-05 01:29:42 <Diablo-D3> slush: it takes like 5 lines of code to make ap ool then
222 2011-03-05 01:29:53 <slush> literally, yes
223 2011-03-05 01:30:07 <Diablo-D3> well guess what! pools done!
224 2011-03-05 01:30:11 <Diablo-D3> easiest 10 lines ever
225 2011-03-05 01:31:33 <slush> Just expose JSON-RPC "getwork" method and once somebody call that, take parameters and resend it to local bitcoind. And you're done!
226 2011-03-05 01:31:40 <Diablo-D3> yeah exactly
227 2011-03-05 01:31:46 <Diablo-D3> and I literally did it in like 10 lines
228 2011-03-05 01:32:02 hazek has joined
229 2011-03-05 01:32:09 <slush> But it does nothing then :)
230 2011-03-05 01:32:10 <hazek> sup
231 2011-03-05 01:32:21 <Diablo-D3> slush: it doesnt track shit or anything yet, no
232 2011-03-05 01:32:43 <slush> There is calculating of share difficulty, some security, accounting, user management, in my case score calculations
233 2011-03-05 01:32:56 <Diablo-D3> slush: yeah but thats the easy part
234 2011-03-05 01:33:00 <hazek> quick dumb question: is 1Mh/s = 1000kh/s?
235 2011-03-05 01:33:06 <Diablo-D3> hazek: yes!
236 2011-03-05 01:33:15 <hazek> ok, just making sure :P
237 2011-03-05 01:33:25 <slush> Diablo-D3: and you have to avoid double spending
238 2011-03-05 01:33:36 <slush> Diablo-D3: I never said that it is too hard
239 2011-03-05 01:33:46 <Diablo-D3> slush: double spending isnt hard to deal with
240 2011-03-05 01:34:07 <slush> but in fact, there were a lot of troubles. Now when the whole ecosystem is optimized, write another pool is really easy
241 2011-03-05 01:38:51 <Diablo-D3> heh
242 2011-03-05 01:46:48 noagendamarket has joined
243 2011-03-05 01:47:09 <Mango-chan> slush how's that new protocol coming along
244 2011-03-05 01:47:34 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
245 2011-03-05 01:47:51 <slush> Mango-chan: that's finally not about protocol; but yes, it is going well
246 2011-03-05 01:48:06 <slush> Mango-chan: before you ask - no, there is no known date :)
247 2011-03-05 01:48:12 <Mango-chan> when--
248 2011-03-05 01:48:44 molecular has joined
249 2011-03-05 01:54:18 citiz3n has joined
250 2011-03-05 01:54:52 <JunK-Y> slush: you really rock the hall of fame!
251 2011-03-05 01:55:30 <slush> JunK-Y: yeah, because I'm on the pool from the beginning (surprise!)
252 2011-03-05 01:55:43 <slush> JunK-Y: but there are currently stronger rigs than mine :)
253 2011-03-05 01:55:46 hazek has quit (Quit: Page closed)
254 2011-03-05 01:56:16 <JunK-Y> change the hall of hame from 20 to like 50, that will put more competition for those who aren't in that top20 yet :)
255 2011-03-05 01:56:50 <[Tycho]> farzong, what GPU do you have ?
256 2011-03-05 01:57:47 <slush> More likely I add paging here to allow full listing
257 2011-03-05 01:57:58 <JunK-Y> excellent idea yeah.
258 2011-03-05 01:58:41 <JunK-Y> your backend is perl, python, php?
259 2011-03-05 01:58:46 <slush> python
260 2011-03-05 01:58:59 <JunK-Y> cool
261 2011-03-05 02:02:14 larsig has joined
262 2011-03-05 02:03:41 `Jaka has joined
263 2011-03-05 02:05:57 Edogaa has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
264 2011-03-05 02:06:27 noagenda_ has joined
265 2011-03-05 02:06:56 Mango-chan has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
266 2011-03-05 02:07:11 grondilu has quit (Quit: leaving)
267 2011-03-05 02:08:20 genjix has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
268 2011-03-05 02:09:22 jwalck- has joined
269 2011-03-05 02:09:35 lfm has quit (Quit: bye)
270 2011-03-05 02:09:55 Orbixx has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
271 2011-03-05 02:10:00 Orbixx has joined
272 2011-03-05 02:10:00 Orbixx has quit (Changing host)
273 2011-03-05 02:10:00 Orbixx has joined
274 2011-03-05 02:12:14 sabalaba has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
275 2011-03-05 02:14:34 sabalabas has joined
276 2011-03-05 02:19:26 Syke_ has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
277 2011-03-05 02:21:44 citiz3n has joined
278 2011-03-05 02:22:22 Syke_ has joined
279 2011-03-05 02:37:52 <gasteve> googletest looks like a pretty good unit test framework for c++ ...anyone used it? http://code.google.com/p/googletest/
280 2011-03-05 02:40:16 <farzong> bitcoin rules
281 2011-03-05 02:40:36 <[Tycho]> farzong, what GPU do you have ?
282 2011-03-05 02:41:56 <farzong> lemme check
283 2011-03-05 02:47:48 <farzong> HGC - hercules graphics card
284 2011-03-05 02:48:05 <[Tycho]> That's pretty old one.
285 2011-03-05 02:48:20 <farzong> hehe j/k .. i have some intel hd thingamajig
286 2011-03-05 02:48:32 <farzong> i dont think its very powerful
287 2011-03-05 02:48:51 <farzong> compared to nvidia
288 2011-03-05 02:48:52 <[Tycho]> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mining_hardware_comparison
289 2011-03-05 02:49:20 <[Tycho]> nvidia is many times slower than ATI :)
290 2011-03-05 02:49:32 <farzong> intreesting
291 2011-03-05 02:49:35 paz has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
292 2011-03-05 02:50:33 EvanR has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
293 2011-03-05 02:52:18 EvanR has joined
294 2011-03-05 03:09:00 <x6763> phantomcircuit_: i believe the nonce in the version message is to detect connections to yourself
295 2011-03-05 03:09:05 skeledrew1 has joined
296 2011-03-05 03:09:43 Cusipzzz has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
297 2011-03-05 03:11:16 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
298 2011-03-05 03:23:16 anatoly_l has joined
299 2011-03-05 03:23:25 <anatoly_l> ;;bc,estimate
300 2011-03-05 03:23:26 <gribble> 67579.84296571
301 2011-03-05 03:23:50 <anatoly_l> ;;bc,estimate
302 2011-03-05 03:23:51 <gribble> 67579.84296571
303 2011-03-05 03:24:20 <citiz3n> ;;bc,stats
304 2011-03-05 03:24:23 <gribble> Current Blocks: 111880 | Current Difficulty: 55590.23763914 | Next Difficulty At Block: 112895 | Next Difficulty In: 1015 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 5 days, 19 hours, 16 minutes, and 50 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 67579.84296571
305 2011-03-05 03:24:50 Lachesis has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
306 2011-03-05 03:26:35 anatoly_l has quit (Client Quit)
307 2011-03-05 03:27:02 Slix` has joined
308 2011-03-05 03:33:00 Cusipzzz has joined
309 2011-03-05 03:34:45 <sgornick> MT`BNC: wiki is having issues
310 2011-03-05 03:39:24 skeledrew1 has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
311 2011-03-05 03:41:24 <slush> 25 blocks in last two hours
312 2011-03-05 03:41:45 <[Tycho]> He took all my luck !
313 2011-03-05 03:41:59 <slush> from sipa's graph, it looks like hashrate is again climbing up
314 2011-03-05 03:42:10 <slush> my luck too :(
315 2011-03-05 03:42:28 Lachesis has joined
316 2011-03-05 03:42:59 <[Tycho]> We should announce "No Mining Day" as a protest against rising difficulty !
317 2011-03-05 03:43:05 <slush> :)
318 2011-03-05 03:43:10 <[Tycho]> :)
319 2011-03-05 03:43:33 <slush> well, we can make an agreement and switch down both pools :)
320 2011-03-05 03:43:37 <MT`BNC> sgornick: let me see
321 2011-03-05 03:44:06 <MT`BNC> aw shit
322 2011-03-05 03:44:13 <MT`BNC> load average: 172.16, 134.67, 80.14
323 2011-03-05 03:44:30 <slush> looks like your machine is really busy
324 2011-03-05 03:44:38 <slush> except if it isn't 200 cpu bitch
325 2011-03-05 03:45:08 <[Tycho]> Someone started mining there.
326 2011-03-05 03:45:13 <MT`BNC> fixed
327 2011-03-05 03:45:43 <slush> [Tycho]: definitely, I'm little suspicious about hashrate last few days
328 2011-03-05 03:46:10 <slush> [Tycho]: oh,you mean the load
329 2011-03-05 03:46:14 <[Tycho]> Yes.
330 2011-03-05 03:46:29 <[Tycho]> From sipa's graph, it looks like someone had a couple of blackout days in their DC
331 2011-03-05 03:46:36 <tcatm> http://bitcoincharts.com/bitcoin/
332 2011-03-05 03:46:56 <slush> tcatm: cooL!
333 2011-03-05 03:46:58 <[Tycho]> tcatm, cool.
334 2011-03-05 03:47:37 <[Tycho]> Doesn't works correctly in IE6 but fine otherwise.
335 2011-03-05 03:47:58 <slush> tcatm: I see bullets without any text in FF. Is that correct?
336 2011-03-05 03:48:01 noagenda_ has quit (Changing host)
337 2011-03-05 03:48:01 noagenda_ has joined
338 2011-03-05 03:48:21 <tcatm> slush: yep
339 2011-03-05 03:48:27 <[Tycho]> A see bullets without text for some of txs
340 2011-03-05 03:48:41 <tcatm> I changed data format and those are TX I stored with the old format
341 2011-03-05 03:48:46 <slush> oh
342 2011-03-05 03:49:16 <tcatm> hm I broke something
343 2011-03-05 03:50:00 <slush> 4.30 am here, I'm going to bed
344 2011-03-05 03:50:03 <slush> gn!
345 2011-03-05 03:50:30 <[Tycho]> gn
346 2011-03-05 03:50:57 skeledrew has joined
347 2011-03-05 03:51:16 noagenda_ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
348 2011-03-05 03:53:14 noagendamarket has joined
349 2011-03-05 03:53:29 <[Tycho]> "2341000001 uBTCents" ?
350 2011-03-05 03:55:48 lfm has joined
351 2011-03-05 03:56:55 MT`BNC is now known as MT`AwAy
352 2011-03-05 03:56:56 MT`AwAy has quit (Changing host)
353 2011-03-05 03:56:56 MT`AwAy has joined
354 2011-03-05 03:57:21 <tcatm> [Tycho]: 1 uBTCents = 1e-8 BTC
355 2011-03-05 03:58:41 <[Tycho]> Nowadays you can expect any browser to support U+03BC character if you mean it :)
356 2011-03-05 03:59:02 <[Tycho]> µ in HTML
357 2011-03-05 03:59:03 <gribble> Error: "micro;" is not a valid command.
358 2011-03-05 03:59:34 <[Tycho]> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu_(letter)#Computing
359 2011-03-05 04:00:48 <[Tycho]> So it was 23.41000001 BTC ? I would recommend writing it that way if it's more that 1 at least :)
360 2011-03-05 04:01:01 <[Tycho]> And by the way someone has problems with binary floats :)
361 2011-03-05 04:02:07 * tcatm switches code to Decimal
362 2011-03-05 04:02:41 <luke-jr> tcatm: fail
363 2011-03-05 04:02:44 <[Tycho]> You can also add "fee" field to your table.
364 2011-03-05 04:03:05 <tcatm> calculating the fee isn't that easy ;)
365 2011-03-05 04:03:21 <[Tycho]> Why ?
366 2011-03-05 04:03:30 <tcatm> I don't know the inputs
367 2011-03-05 04:03:40 <[Tycho]> Oh. Why ?
368 2011-03-05 04:03:56 <tcatm> I don't keep a complete blockchain (yet)
369 2011-03-05 04:03:59 <luke-jr> tcatm: probably worth making the u the correct Unicode char tho
370 2011-03-05 04:04:18 <mmagic> LOL i was just looking into whether there was a problem with my bitcoind (no generating in a while) and one of my miners popped. :) okay I'm happy.
371 2011-03-05 04:04:19 <tcatm> I'll just switch to decimals and remove the tonal code
372 2011-03-05 04:04:24 <luke-jr> tcatm: then you're lame
373 2011-03-05 04:04:29 <mmagic> stupid probability anyway
374 2011-03-05 04:04:43 <luke-jr> tcatm: 2341000001 isn't BTC
375 2011-03-05 04:05:00 <mmagic> how can we actually know, for sure, that our miners are doing proper work?
376 2011-03-05 04:05:17 <[Tycho]> mmagic, watchin shares usually helps.
377 2011-03-05 04:05:19 <luke-jr> tcatm: 65536 is even less BTC
378 2011-03-05 04:05:27 <mmagic> [Tycho]: I don't mine in a pool.
379 2011-03-05 04:05:42 <[Tycho]> mmagic, you can modify your miner.
380 2011-03-05 04:06:13 <[Tycho]> [23:26] <Raulo_> slush: I run a modified miner that uses difficulty 1, just like the pool
381 2011-03-05 04:06:26 <mmagic> [Tycho]: I would have to probably modify bitcoind to dole out easier difficulties and then as long as it's solving those, assume the miner is working properly.
382 2011-03-05 04:07:07 <luke-jr> tcatm: if you really want to fall back to BTC, you could just replace s = "%d uBTCents" % (n,);
383 2011-03-05 04:07:22 <luke-jr> with: return formatBTC(Bitcoin2BTC(n), addSign);
384 2011-03-05 04:07:41 <luke-jr> but then you're showing 23.41000001 BTC, which isn't really right either
385 2011-03-05 04:08:04 <[Tycho]> Why isn't ?
386 2011-03-05 04:08:20 <luke-jr> cuz BTC only has 2 decimal places of precision right now
387 2011-03-05 04:08:25 <luke-jr> maybe 4 soon
388 2011-03-05 04:08:28 <luke-jr> but certainly not 8
389 2011-03-05 04:08:34 <[Tycho]> Looks like faucet.
390 2011-03-05 04:08:39 <tcatm> changed to decimals. list is messed up until old TX confirm, though
391 2011-03-05 04:09:01 <luke-jr> tcatm: fine, so I have to write my own bot to give proper values now and compete with -monitor?
392 2011-03-05 04:09:37 <[Tycho]> tcatm, you can make "BTC" not bold. Leave only numbers in bold.
393 2011-03-05 04:10:13 <mmagic> to whoever it was last night comparing compression ratios: 23068726 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1533905 2011-03-03 23:34 big_file.paq8 <-- was a 2GB text file. :-P
394 2011-03-05 04:10:14 <tcatm> luke-jr: -monitor will still show uBTCents
395 2011-03-05 04:10:24 <luke-jr> tcatm: then what are we even talking about? O.o
396 2011-03-05 04:10:39 kermit has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
397 2011-03-05 04:11:13 <tcatm> luke-jr: http://bitcoincharts.com/bitcoin/
398 2011-03-05 04:11:25 <Cusipzzz> tcatm: looks great
399 2011-03-05 04:11:53 <luke-jr> tcatm: your new version looks buggy
400 2011-03-05 04:12:12 <tcatm> I removed all TX, switched format again
401 2011-03-05 04:12:27 <tcatm> This time formatting is done in template :)
402 2011-03-05 04:12:47 <luke-jr> but does it still work with TBC?
403 2011-03-05 04:12:59 <tcatm> nope
404 2011-03-05 04:13:05 <luke-jr> then it's broken
405 2011-03-05 04:13:09 <tcatm> shows full pricision, though
406 2011-03-05 04:13:10 <luke-jr> also, it's still buggy even for BTC
407 2011-03-05 04:13:26 <[Tycho]> Why it's broken if there are no TBCs ?
408 2011-03-05 04:13:32 <tcatm> luke-jr: write a django template tag that parses a string with amount to BTC/TBC
409 2011-03-05 04:13:32 <luke-jr> it *shouldn't* show full precision when there is none
410 2011-03-05 04:13:41 <luke-jr> tcatm: where is that even spec'd
411 2011-03-05 04:13:54 <luke-jr> [Tycho]: because it shouldn't show BTC when it's TBC
412 2011-03-05 04:14:17 <[Tycho]> Isn't TBC and BTC made of same bitcoins ?
413 2011-03-05 04:14:18 <luke-jr> unless the end user specifically configures it to (which isn't the case when there's no config)
414 2011-03-05 04:14:29 <luke-jr> [Tycho]: yes, but they represent very different values
415 2011-03-05 04:14:53 <[Tycho]> Then why TBC can't be expressed in BTCs ?
416 2011-03-05 04:15:47 <luke-jr> [Tycho]: it can, but it's not right to express it in BTC when it's intended to be TBC generally
417 2011-03-05 04:15:52 <mmagic> they can be. luke's just a one-man-against-the-world promoter of a strange way of looking at numbers with weird symbols and names nobody seems to be able to learn let alone remember.
418 2011-03-05 04:16:05 <Cusipzzz> mmagic: lol
419 2011-03-05 04:16:41 <luke-jr> mmagic: your own inabilities != everyone
420 2011-03-05 04:16:44 <[Tycho]> luke-jr, people will want to see everything in BTC because otherwise it would be hard to compare and use.
421 2011-03-05 04:16:49 <mmagic> what surprises me is how accommodating tcatm is being.
422 2011-03-05 04:17:05 <Cusipzzz> luke-jr: code you own, you can do it faster than we can, with your dvorak keyboard imo
423 2011-03-05 04:17:07 <luke-jr> [Tycho]: it's unconfirmed tx. there's nothing to compare.
424 2011-03-05 04:17:19 <[Tycho]> I'm talking in general.
425 2011-03-05 04:17:36 <mmagic> luke-jr: says the guy who thinks three days of pool mining equals a sample size large enough to make a decision about how pool mining nets "35%" less.
426 2011-03-05 04:17:48 <mmagic> or I guess 65% less.
427 2011-03-05 04:17:54 <lfm> luke is nuts, ignore him
428 2011-03-05 04:18:00 <[Tycho]> luke-jr, and you should understand that even if hex system is better (which is pretty possible), most people will not use it because of many reasons.
429 2011-03-05 04:18:03 CoachIT has joined
430 2011-03-05 04:18:19 <mmagic> [Tycho]: here we go again..! wheeeeee! put your hardhat on bro.
431 2011-03-05 04:18:22 <luke-jr> [Tycho]: that isn't really an excuse to persecute people who do
432 2011-03-05 04:18:36 <mmagic> persecution complex! 10 points!
433 2011-03-05 04:19:01 <luke-jr> tcatm: Django's template language looks utterly useless
434 2011-03-05 04:19:10 <luke-jr> and impossible to do anything beyond trivial loops
435 2011-03-05 04:19:20 <luke-jr> either that or poorly documented
436 2011-03-05 04:19:49 <tcatm> yep that's the point: no code in template except simple loops and conditional processing
437 2011-03-05 04:20:04 <luke-jr> tcatm: except you just told me to put code in template
438 2011-03-05 04:20:10 <tcatm> if you want to do more, you write a template tag or do it in the view/controller
439 2011-03-05 04:20:28 <lfm> tcatm: loops and conditionals are all there is to computing
440 2011-03-05 04:20:32 <tcatm> http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/howto/custom-template-tags/
441 2011-03-05 04:21:16 <tcatm> lfm: yep, in theory you can do much with it but django's template engine doesn't even support assigning variables let alone do calculations
442 2011-03-05 04:21:36 <tcatm> and the if can only check for true or false, no if x == y
443 2011-03-05 04:21:43 <lfm> tcatm pure lisp has no assignments or variables
444 2011-03-05 04:21:57 <luke-jr> tcatm: whatever, you had it working fine 10 minutes ago.
445 2011-03-05 04:22:20 <luke-jr> now it doesn't work even remotely sane
446 2011-03-05 04:22:24 <tcatm> it's working even better now
447 2011-03-05 04:22:31 <luke-jr> it's not
448 2011-03-05 04:22:44 <luke-jr> it's showing 8 decimal places even for normal/real BTC values
449 2011-03-05 04:22:50 <luke-jr> and BTC isn't bold like it should be
450 2011-03-05 04:22:51 <[Tycho]> Yes, but you should drop zeroes.
451 2011-03-05 04:23:03 <[Tycho]> BTC shouldn't be bold.
452 2011-03-05 04:23:06 <luke-jr> it should.
453 2011-03-05 04:23:08 <luke-jr> it's part of the value
454 2011-03-05 04:23:09 <[Tycho]> No.
455 2011-03-05 04:23:22 <luke-jr> yes
456 2011-03-05 04:23:34 <luke-jr> "50" by itself is much much smaller than "50 BTC"
457 2011-03-05 04:23:45 <luke-jr> "50" = "0.0000005 BTC"
458 2011-03-05 04:23:46 <lfm> hehe
459 2011-03-05 04:24:03 <Cusipzzz> my god whata nit.. BTC does not need to be bold
460 2011-03-05 04:24:03 <lfm> such a sad case.
461 2011-03-05 04:24:11 <[Tycho]> Looks like he is totally wrong.
462 2011-03-05 04:24:14 <Cusipzzz> looks fine
463 2011-03-05 04:24:33 <luke-jr> Cusipzzz: everyone knows you're a troll to persecute Tonal users, why do you even try?
464 2011-03-05 04:24:50 <lfm> Me too! me too!?
465 2011-03-05 04:24:51 <[Tycho]> Did you mean "Tonal user" ?
466 2011-03-05 04:24:58 <luke-jr> [Tycho]: no, I didn't.
467 2011-03-05 04:25:09 <Cusipzzz> persecute...lol. whatever you do in the privacy in your own home is fine, when you bring this crap out here, i can't let it go.
468 2011-03-05 04:25:13 <[Tycho]> Which one is the other ?
469 2011-03-05 04:25:22 <lfm> is "user" supposed to be bold?
470 2011-03-05 04:25:22 <luke-jr> [Tycho]: most of them aren't using BitCoin. guess why.
471 2011-03-05 04:25:40 <tcatm> So how many tonal bitcoin users are there?
472 2011-03-05 04:25:42 <[Tycho]> How he can troll them then ?
473 2011-03-05 04:25:46 <Cusipzzz> lol
474 2011-03-05 04:25:56 <luke-jr> tcatm: at least 2 at the moment.
475 2011-03-05 04:26:03 <Cusipzzz> your family does not count
476 2011-03-05 04:26:13 <luke-jr> Cusipzzz: I met the other one in -otc
477 2011-03-05 04:26:13 <lfm> luke and his son
478 2011-03-05 04:26:15 <tcatm> Okay, maybe I'm one of them as I received a Tonal Bitcoin once and I still have it.
479 2011-03-05 04:26:34 <luke-jr> tcatm: you would be the 3rd I know of
480 2011-03-05 04:26:37 <luke-jr> if you do
481 2011-03-05 04:26:41 <[Tycho]> tcatm, how do you keep it ?
482 2011-03-05 04:27:05 <Cusipzzz> he keeps it to laugh at imo
483 2011-03-05 04:27:20 <luke-jr> of course, if Cusipzzz et al keep it up, why would Tonal users ever care to use Bitcoin?
484 2011-03-05 04:27:23 <luke-jr> what's the point?
485 2011-03-05 04:27:28 <luke-jr> (NONE)
486 2011-03-05 04:27:34 <tcatm> [Tycho]: haven't sent it yet
487 2011-03-05 04:27:46 <[Tycho]> Bitcoins are a nice savings box. You can lock the safe (bury youe private keys in garden) and still add more money there :)
488 2011-03-05 04:27:50 <Cusipzzz> what tonal users? there are none.. what about the sanskrit bitcoin users! think of them!
489 2011-03-05 04:27:53 <lfm> I agree, its gettin funnier by the moment
490 2011-03-05 04:28:19 <[Tycho]> tcatm, how can you keep some specific bitcoins from redeeming ?
491 2011-03-05 04:28:29 <Cusipzzz> the bushmen of the kalahari would like to use bitcoins too.. how bout working for them ??
492 2011-03-05 04:28:32 <lfm> or mixing
493 2011-03-05 04:28:32 <luke-jr> Cusipzzz: sorry, I shouldn't assume you have a brain. I'll just start ignoring your nonsense.
494 2011-03-05 04:28:48 <lfm> I want some Canadian bitcoin
495 2011-03-05 04:28:57 <tcatm> [Tycho]: pure luck. I have so many coins in my wallet bitcoin didn't sent it yet
496 2011-03-05 04:29:32 <[Tycho]> Canadian bitcoin, eh ?
497 2011-03-05 04:30:19 <tcatm> but i just discovered bitcoin sent some of it
498 2011-03-05 04:30:48 <[Tycho]> Oh, you have infected someone !
499 2011-03-05 04:30:58 <luke-jr> tcatm: how does that work? stock bitcoin won't send any of it without throwing the rest away.
500 2011-03-05 04:31:28 <luke-jr> [Tycho]: do you want bitcoin to be adopted by real people or not?
501 2011-03-05 04:31:33 <tcatm> hm true
502 2011-03-05 04:31:53 <tcatm> I misinterpreted bbe data
503 2011-03-05 04:31:57 <tcatm> I still have it
504 2011-03-05 04:32:03 <lfm> tonal aint real tho, its a figment in luke's mind
505 2011-03-05 04:32:06 malfy has joined
506 2011-03-05 04:32:06 <luke-jr> [Tycho]: if you troll every reason for using bitcoin that you personally don't care about, only people who have the same interests as you will be interested
507 2011-03-05 04:32:07 <tcatm> http://blockexplorer.com/tx/afb99fffbed3f594cd49f7bbed107fb15c06b43f92ffa4a9486dbf5db49a2cc1#o0
508 2011-03-05 04:32:20 <[Tycho]> Real people in that sense ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_number
509 2011-03-05 04:32:20 <luke-jr> [Tycho]: hint: most people don't share the same interests
510 2011-03-05 04:32:40 <mizerydearia> Who runs #bc-news?
511 2011-03-05 04:33:10 <[Tycho]> tcatm, what is this ?
512 2011-03-05 04:33:15 <mizerydearia> neozilla
513 2011-03-05 04:33:42 <mizerydearia> who seemingly hasn't been around for a while
514 2011-03-05 04:33:50 <luke-jr> tcatm: maybe you merged my fix
515 2011-03-05 04:34:00 <tcatm> [Tycho]: output 0 is the tonal bitcoin I own
516 2011-03-05 04:34:02 <luke-jr> tcatm: or maybe I sent you the unredeemed coin
517 2011-03-05 04:34:10 <luke-jr> output 0 is not redeemed
518 2011-03-05 04:34:17 <tcatm> yep
519 2011-03-05 04:34:21 <tcatm> I haven't spent it yet
520 2011-03-05 04:34:51 <luke-jr> tcatm: btw, your chart doesn't even show all unconfirmed tx
521 2011-03-05 04:34:51 nefario has joined
522 2011-03-05 04:35:06 <tcatm> chart?
523 2011-03-05 04:35:10 <luke-jr> http://bitcoincharts.com/bitcoin/
524 2011-03-05 04:35:19 <tcatm> it shows all my node knows about
525 2011-03-05 04:35:31 <luke-jr> your node is ignoring mine :p
526 2011-03-05 04:35:33 <[Tycho]> That bitcoind spent my 0.0004 fee from faucet ! What a bad bitcoind... http://blockexplorer.com/tx/04d93bf4fad686cd60d503f798494b8d1cfbe35c5b8b414d85090fe3417606a2
527 2011-03-05 04:36:05 <tcatm> luke-jr: -addnode=173.255.224.227
528 2011-03-05 04:36:21 <luke-jr> [Tycho]: blame gavin for not merging my fix sooner :P
529 2011-03-05 04:36:33 <luke-jr> tcatm: if it's stock, it will still ignore mine
530 2011-03-05 04:36:34 <[Tycho]> What fix ?
531 2011-03-05 04:36:44 <luke-jr> [Tycho]: to not throw it away
532 2011-03-05 04:37:01 <tcatm> luke-jr: that's okay :)
533 2011-03-05 04:37:11 <[Tycho]> You are hiding your fixes :)
534 2011-03-05 04:37:15 <luke-jr> tcatm: it's < 0.01 BTC, and no fee
535 2011-03-05 04:37:18 <luke-jr> [Tycho]: I am not.
536 2011-03-05 04:37:26 <luke-jr> [Tycho]: it's been published for over a month now
537 2011-03-05 04:37:28 <luke-jr> probably over 2 months
538 2011-03-05 04:38:08 <[Tycho]> Yeah, i asked you a couple of days ago :)
539 2011-03-05 04:38:10 <luke-jr> tcatm: it's 1 TBC sent to the other known Tonal BitCoin user
540 2011-03-05 04:38:19 <luke-jr> [Tycho]: you asked for a different fix.
541 2011-03-05 04:38:26 <luke-jr> actually, that one's more of a feature
542 2011-03-05 04:38:27 <[Tycho]> So if there was i fee it shouldn't drop anything ?
543 2011-03-05 04:38:47 <luke-jr> [Tycho]: that 0.0004 was not required for any fee
544 2011-03-05 04:38:58 <luke-jr> your bitcoind just threw it away because of a bug
545 2011-03-05 04:39:38 <[Tycho]> 0.0004 weren't dropped, they were accounted as fee.
546 2011-03-05 04:39:52 <luke-jr> [Tycho]: that's dropped.
547 2011-03-05 04:40:01 <luke-jr> "fee" is nothing other than dropped moneys
548 2011-03-05 04:40:06 <[Tycho]> I mean - not destroyed.
549 2011-03-05 04:40:12 <luke-jr> I didn't say destroyed.
550 2011-03-05 04:40:23 <luke-jr> http://gitorious.org/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/11682130e54df89a8a44241013845c148a4fd235 <-- that's the feature you asked me for btw
551 2011-03-05 04:41:27 <luke-jr> https://github.com/tcatm/bitcoin/commit/a14bf1946dfade7c615cd41924c7cd41abdbc119 <-- that's the bugfix
552 2011-03-05 04:41:38 <[Tycho]> Thanks. (I already did it myself, but thanks anyway).
553 2011-03-05 04:42:20 nefario has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.6.13/20101203075014])
554 2011-03-05 04:48:38 <Lachesis> Î¼à ¸¿
555 2011-03-05 04:49:04 * luke-jr thinks it would be pretty sweet to have a client with windows to view blocks (ala Block Explorer) and tx (incl unconfirmed) :p
556 2011-03-05 04:49:14 <luke-jr> maybe even a GUI to construct a new custom tx
557 2011-03-05 04:53:28 bencoder has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
558 2011-03-05 04:58:10 <phantomcircuit_> luke-jr, well if you contribute to my loverly python code....
559 2011-03-05 05:01:05 bencoder has joined
560 2011-03-05 05:03:32 Lachesis has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
561 2011-03-05 05:13:08 amiller has joined
562 2011-03-05 05:17:05 Joshoph has quit (Quit: Miranda IM! Smaller, Faster, Easier. http://miranda-im.org)
563 2011-03-05 05:18:59 Bistre has joined
564 2011-03-05 05:20:12 <A1ex1> ;;bc,calcd 2550 1
565 2011-03-05 05:20:13 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 2550 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 1, is 28 minutes and 4 seconds
566 2011-03-05 05:22:12 Z32i has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
567 2011-03-05 05:23:37 Bistre has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
568 2011-03-05 05:25:47 Cusipzzz has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.0.2 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
569 2011-03-05 05:38:53 <x6763> why does bitcoind say the difficulty is 55590.23763914, but according to the wiki's calculations and blockexplorer say 55589.518126 ?
570 2011-03-05 05:39:13 <tcatm> maybe rounding
571 2011-03-05 05:42:35 dazoe has quit ()
572 2011-03-05 05:43:12 A1ex1 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
573 2011-03-05 05:44:05 <x6763> hmm...i suppose if blockexplorer and i are calculating form the nBits value, while bitcoind is calculating from the actual time it took to generate the 2016 blocks at the previous difficulty, the numbers would likely be slightly different
574 2011-03-05 05:44:30 <x6763> calculating *from*
575 2011-03-05 05:44:57 <tcatm> well, bitcoin is open source so we can just see what it does
576 2011-03-05 05:45:33 <x6763> yeah, i was looking right at the not-so-easy-to-read code...open source only matters when you can understand the source
577 2011-03-05 05:45:59 <tcatm> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/rpc.cpp GetDifficulty
578 2011-03-05 05:47:26 <phantomcircuit_> x6763, yeah the explains the difference
579 2011-03-05 05:47:36 <x6763> i was looking at GetNextWorkRequired in main.cpp and GetCompact in bignum.h...i didn't look at the related rpc code
580 2011-03-05 05:47:52 gasteve has quit (Quit: gasteve)
581 2011-03-05 05:47:59 gasteve has joined
582 2011-03-05 05:51:41 <x6763> anyway, thanks guys...i think i understand my problem a little better...time for sleep
583 2011-03-05 05:55:33 Slix` has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
584 2011-03-05 06:00:58 phantomcircuit_ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
585 2011-03-05 06:01:05 phantomcircuit has joined
586 2011-03-05 06:09:15 noagendamarket has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
587 2011-03-05 06:12:19 RazielZ has joined
588 2011-03-05 06:21:51 HarryS has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
589 2011-03-05 06:22:36 sabalabas has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
590 2011-03-05 06:37:53 phantomcircuit has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
591 2011-03-05 06:38:15 Blitzboom_ is now known as Blitzboom
592 2011-03-05 06:38:20 Blitzboom has quit (Changing host)
593 2011-03-05 06:38:20 Blitzboom has joined
594 2011-03-05 06:43:27 afed has quit (Quit: leaving)
595 2011-03-05 06:51:37 Shfork has joined
596 2011-03-05 06:53:04 Shfork has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
597 2011-03-05 06:57:25 <knotwork> lfm: Canadian Bitcoin (actually termed Canadian Digital Notes, = CDN) is one of the currencies in my bots
598 2011-03-05 06:58:04 <knotwork> But, I am having problems with the bitcoind instances hanging, no longer responding to any commands
599 2011-03-05 06:58:57 <knotwork> often a bitcoind will respond to a listaccounts even to balance but as soon as it is asked for an address boom
600 2011-03-05 06:59:10 <knotwork> it hangs and will no longer respond to any commands not even to stop
601 2011-03-05 06:59:57 <knotwork> the instance being used to talk to the daemon instance hangs, so the bot itself calling it would have too
602 2011-03-05 07:00:08 <lfm> huh
603 2011-03-05 07:00:12 <knotwork> were it not firing up its commandline commands in background
604 2011-03-05 07:00:39 <knotwork> as it is, a whole lot of background bitcoind instances end up piled up from attempts to communicate
605 2011-03-05 07:00:46 <knotwork> with hung daemon
606 2011-03-05 07:01:07 <lfm> sounds like you got one flakey system there
607 2011-03-05 07:01:41 <knotwork> I read something about a recent patch that clobbered bitcoind by moving some xwidget stuff in a way
608 2011-03-05 07:01:58 <knotwork> that actually also removed one thing the commandline version does actually need
609 2011-03-05 07:02:14 <knotwork> I am thinking that might be a possibility for why this happens
610 2011-03-05 07:02:23 <jgarzik> mrb_: PM sent
611 2011-03-05 07:02:58 <hwolf> ;;bc,calcd 300000
612 2011-03-05 07:02:59 <gribble> (bc,calcd <an alias, 2 arguments>) -- Alias for "echo The average time to generate a block at $1 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of $2, is [time elapsed [math calc 1/((2**224-1)/$2*$1*1000/2**256)]]".
613 2011-03-05 07:03:40 <hwolf> ;;bc,calcd 300000 55000
614 2011-03-05 07:03:41 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 300000 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 55000, is 1 week, 2 days, 2 hours, 43 minutes, and 30 seconds
615 2011-03-05 07:03:59 nameless has quit (!~root@weowntheinter.net|Read error: Operation timed out)
616 2011-03-05 07:04:03 ivan has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
617 2011-03-05 07:04:04 rcorreia has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
618 2011-03-05 07:04:14 <hwolf> ;;bc,calcd 3000000 55000
619 2011-03-05 07:04:15 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 3000000 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 55000, is 21 hours, 52 minutes, and 21 seconds
620 2011-03-05 07:04:16 <tcatm> 5353
621 2011-03-05 07:04:19 rcorreia has joined
622 2011-03-05 07:05:31 <hwolf> what is the command to calculate with current difficulty?
623 2011-03-05 07:05:45 <hwolf> ;;calcd 200000
624 2011-03-05 07:05:45 <gribble> Error: "calcd" is not a valid command.
625 2011-03-05 07:05:52 <hwolf> ;;bc 200000
626 2011-03-05 07:05:53 <gribble> Error: "bc" is not a valid command.
627 2011-03-05 07:06:05 <tcatm> ;;bc,calc 200000
628 2011-03-05 07:06:07 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 200000 Khps, given current difficulty of 55590.23763914 , is 1 week, 6 days, 19 hours, 36 minutes, and 31 seconds
629 2011-03-05 07:06:09 <Blitzboom> hwolf: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Gribble
630 2011-03-05 07:07:15 <validus> dragon tale giveaway
631 2011-03-05 07:07:28 <knotwork> I think bitnickels might be more interesting than canadian bitcoin. based on idea of old nickel nickels now worth 7 cents
632 2011-03-05 07:07:41 <Blitzboom> what’s canadian bitcoin?
633 2011-03-05 07:07:58 <knotwork> so not always 20 per coin. but pegged to coin so that you might get less than 20 nickels to a coin but not more
634 2011-03-05 07:08:17 <Blitzboom> local fiat money backed by bitcoins?
635 2011-03-05 07:08:22 <knotwork> canadian is just one of the nations players in Galactic Milieu wanted. others are martian and czech
636 2011-03-05 07:08:48 <Blitzboom> some kind of RPG?
637 2011-03-05 07:08:50 <knotwork> not really earth-local-fiat, no, here on earth they are just another blockchain of bitcoins
638 2011-03-05 07:09:02 nameless has joined
639 2011-03-05 07:09:06 <hwolf> ;;bc,calc 7000000
640 2011-03-05 07:09:07 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 7000000 Khps, given current difficulty of 55590.23763914 , is 9 hours, 28 minutes, and 28 seconds
641 2011-03-05 07:09:09 ivan has joined
642 2011-03-05 07:09:13 <Blitzboom> ah, they want their own blockchain?
643 2011-03-05 07:09:18 <knotwork> yes, a RPG whose worlds are done on strategic scale using freeciv
644 2011-03-05 07:09:18 <Aciid> I have a crossfire setup , and my +12V shows 6.5v. should I go straight to 1kW or 850W?
645 2011-03-05 07:09:39 <knotwork> yes they want their own blockchain because they hope to actually back their currency
646 2011-03-05 07:10:02 <knotwork> and they dont see having millions of it in the hands of foreign miners as helping them back it,
647 2011-03-05 07:10:21 <knotwork> that is just an expense they dont need if they keep the mining private to a banking network
648 2011-03-05 07:10:30 Travex has joined
649 2011-03-05 07:10:42 <Blitzboom> alright, not a bad thing
650 2011-03-05 07:10:49 <Blitzboom> they’ll get familiar with bitcoins and might use it
651 2011-03-05 07:10:50 <knotwork> they can keep the difficulty at 1 if they don't have greedy miners fighting each other to increase difficulty
652 2011-03-05 07:11:19 <Travex> Hi guys
653 2011-03-05 07:11:24 <knotwork> exactly, in Freeciv is a "fictional" nation known as Hackers, with people like Linus Torvalds as leaders
654 2011-03-05 07:11:30 <Travex> Anybody can tell me how to fix the bitcoin clock please ?
655 2011-03-05 07:11:40 <knotwork> I am asking them if Satoshi qualifies as a leader too for that
656 2011-03-05 07:11:55 <Travex> everytime I start the program, it always says : Please check my computer date....
657 2011-03-05 07:12:00 <knotwork> in the gam I assume the hacker nation uses "real" bitcoins
658 2011-03-05 07:12:20 <[Tycho]> Aciid, are you using mgf's voltage metering software or BIOS Setup ?
659 2011-03-05 07:12:32 <knotwork> but they gave or sold the tech to the Martians, who implemented Martian BotCoins and then went on to
660 2011-03-05 07:12:34 <Travex> Hello \D
661 2011-03-05 07:12:40 <Travex> Anybody can tell me how to fix the bitcoin clock please ?
662 2011-03-05 07:13:17 <hwolf> bc,totalbc
663 2011-03-05 07:13:20 <hwolf> ;;bc,totalbc
664 2011-03-05 07:13:21 <gribble> 5595700.00000000
665 2011-03-05 07:13:22 <knotwork> resell it to Canadians (CDN), British (United Kingdom Bitcash) and Czech (CZech Bitcash)
666 2011-03-05 07:14:11 <knotwork> also the Galactic United Nations wants to try to implement shares with it, periodically paying dividends to
667 2011-03-05 07:14:20 <Travex> Anybody can tell me how to fix the bitcoin clock please ?
668 2011-03-05 07:14:28 <knotwork> all addresses that have balances based on share of total shares so far issued
669 2011-03-05 07:14:46 <knotwork> (Sorry I hae no idea what a bitcoin clock even is)
670 2011-03-05 07:14:51 <[Tycho]> ;;bc,poolstats
671 2011-03-05 07:14:58 <gribble> {"ghashes_ps": "93.207", "shares": 97342, "active_workers": 896, "round_duration": "1:16:36", "score": "22148.0515", "round_started": "2011-03-05 05:49:29", "shares_cdf": "82.64", "getwork_ps": 480}
672 2011-03-05 07:15:26 <[Tycho]> bc,timetonext
673 2011-03-05 07:15:29 <[Tycho]> ;;bc,timetonext
674 2011-03-05 07:15:30 <gribble> 5 days, 14 hours, 4 minutes, and 12 seconds
675 2011-03-05 07:15:45 bitcoiner has joined
676 2011-03-05 07:16:33 <[Tycho]> ;;bc,prob 36000000 1d
677 2011-03-05 07:16:33 <gribble> 0.99999780077
678 2011-03-05 07:16:50 <Travex> Anybody can tell me how to fix the bitcoin clock please ?
679 2011-03-05 07:17:21 TheAncientGoat has joined
680 2011-03-05 07:17:34 <magnetron> Travex: please elaborate
681 2011-03-05 07:18:32 <Travex> Everytime I run bitcoin client
682 2011-03-05 07:18:35 <Travex> I have the message
683 2011-03-05 07:18:36 <Travex> Please check that your computer's date and time are correct. If your clock is wrong Bitcoin will not work properly
684 2011-03-05 07:18:44 <Travex> My computer clock is fine
685 2011-03-05 07:18:53 <Travex> Up-to-date
686 2011-03-05 07:19:03 <Keefe> check time zone
687 2011-03-05 07:19:05 <knotwork> maybe time locale is not what bitcoins is used to
688 2011-03-05 07:19:40 <Travex> So how do I fix this mate ?
689 2011-03-05 07:19:44 <knotwork> (hope its not tonal time-locale hahahaha)
690 2011-03-05 07:20:43 <Travex> knotwork do you know how to fix this ?
691 2011-03-05 07:20:45 <lfm> Travex: so your clock or date or timezone are set wriong, It is the system clock, not a "bitcoin" clock
692 2011-03-05 07:21:26 <knotwork> I am thinking the locale of the time might be one bitcoin isnt familiar with maybe?
693 2011-03-05 07:21:28 <Keefe> Travex: what OS?
694 2011-03-05 07:21:37 <Travex> awesome guys
695 2011-03-05 07:21:40 <Travex> i fixed it =D
696 2011-03-05 07:21:50 <Travex> actually i set my computer clock to US time zone clock
697 2011-03-05 07:21:54 <lfm> knotwork: nope, nothing to do with locale
698 2011-03-05 07:21:56 <Travex> but im living in australia
699 2011-03-05 07:22:07 <Travex> ive changed it over to the proper time zone
700 2011-03-05 07:22:12 <lfm> Travex: thats your problem
701 2011-03-05 07:22:12 <Travex> and the message disappeared
702 2011-03-05 07:22:16 <Travex> yep
703 2011-03-05 07:22:20 <knotwork> bitcoin doesnt look at the + or - from zulu time?
704 2011-03-05 07:22:21 <Travex> didnt pay attention to that
705 2011-03-05 07:22:36 <Travex> yeah now its fixed
706 2011-03-05 07:22:42 <Travex> no more lame message =D
707 2011-03-05 07:22:44 oneman_ has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
708 2011-03-05 07:22:46 <lfm> you're welcome
709 2011-03-05 07:22:51 <Travex> oh..........
710 2011-03-05 07:22:52 <Travex> my bad
711 2011-03-05 07:22:53 <knotwork> ahhh you had us time on your machine but it knew you are in australia?
712 2011-03-05 07:22:54 <Travex> still
713 2011-03-05 07:23:03 <Travex> yeah
714 2011-03-05 07:23:08 <Travex> still, not fixed lol
715 2011-03-05 07:23:11 <Travex> poped up again
716 2011-03-05 07:23:18 <knotwork> proper way to do that is set your zone, not mess with the clock
717 2011-03-05 07:23:23 <lfm> knotwork: actually bitcoin just uses UTC
718 2011-03-05 07:23:33 <knotwork> ah
719 2011-03-05 07:23:40 <Travex> so do you guys
720 2011-03-05 07:23:55 HarryS has joined
721 2011-03-05 07:23:55 <Travex> have the message under the bitcoin task bar everytime you runt the client ?
722 2011-03-05 07:24:00 <knotwork> at install or sometime one gets to set whether system clock should be UTC or adjusted to zone
723 2011-03-05 07:24:09 <Keefe> it doesn't matter what time zone you set your clock to display in, as long as the time is correct
724 2011-03-05 07:24:17 <lfm> so "date -u" should give you Sat Mar 5 07:15:26 UTC 2011
725 2011-03-05 07:24:38 <knotwork> yeah but what is correct depends on if system thinks bios / hardware clock is set at UTC or for your zone
726 2011-03-05 07:24:50 <Keefe> if you set your time zone to display US Pacific, it better display 11:16pm right now or something's wrong
727 2011-03-05 07:25:01 <lfm> knotwork: just set your timezone and clock CORRECTLY
728 2011-03-05 07:25:27 <Travex> hmm how am i suppose to do that
729 2011-03-05 07:25:27 <knotwork> I set mine to use timeservers, set and forget years ago many versions of fedora ago
730 2011-03-05 07:25:49 <Keefe> and ya, if you use linux, just run "date -u" and make sure it says Mar 5 7:17am
731 2011-03-05 07:26:08 <lfm> travex do you know what timezone you are in?
732 2011-03-05 07:26:15 <Travex> yep
733 2011-03-05 07:26:17 <Travex> UTC+10
734 2011-03-05 07:26:21 <Travex> ive synched
735 2011-03-05 07:26:24 <Travex> my clock
736 2011-03-05 07:26:27 <lfm> do you know what date and time it is there?
737 2011-03-05 07:26:31 <Travex> yes
738 2011-03-05 07:26:33 <Travex> with this address
739 2011-03-05 07:26:34 <Travex> time-nw.nist.gov
740 2011-03-05 07:26:37 <Travex> windows clock actually
741 2011-03-05 07:26:37 <Keefe> Travex: just tell us the output from date -u
742 2011-03-05 07:26:43 <Travex> ok
743 2011-03-05 07:26:44 <Keefe> oh, windows
744 2011-03-05 07:27:05 <Travex> windows clock just synced with this
745 2011-03-05 07:27:06 <Travex> time-nw.nist.gov
746 2011-03-05 07:27:13 <lfm> ok if you are synced to nist.gov it should be ok
747 2011-03-05 07:27:26 <Travex> okey, im gonna run the client again
748 2011-03-05 07:29:22 <Travex> yep
749 2011-03-05 07:29:28 <Travex> seem to be its running fine =D
750 2011-03-05 07:29:41 <Travex> cool, thx guys
751 2011-03-05 07:29:42 <Travex> D
752 2011-03-05 07:29:58 <Travex> oh and by the way
753 2011-03-05 07:30:14 <Travex> my computer got crashed few time during bitconing
754 2011-03-05 07:30:29 <Travex> is there any problem with this ?
755 2011-03-05 07:30:35 <lfm> sounds like you got a flakey computer then
756 2011-03-05 07:30:42 <Travex> actually not because
757 2011-03-05 07:30:51 <Travex> im using gpu miner
758 2011-03-05 07:31:07 <Travex> always 99% gpu usage
759 2011-03-05 07:31:19 <Travex> and when i visit youtube
760 2011-03-05 07:31:25 <Travex> the computer just hang up
761 2011-03-05 07:31:40 <Travex> maybe the gpu miner is conflicting with youtube/flash player i suppose
762 2011-03-05 07:31:41 <Keefe> overclocked?
763 2011-03-05 07:31:51 <Travex> nope, stock
764 2011-03-05 07:31:58 <Travex> i think its just software conflitcting
765 2011-03-05 07:32:06 <lfm> ya, that adboe software is just full of bugs, havnt you heard?
766 2011-03-05 07:32:15 <Travex> lol, no wonder
767 2011-03-05 07:32:25 <Travex> but in the end, is there any problem with mining ?
768 2011-03-05 07:32:33 <Travex> i mean after few crashed
769 2011-03-05 07:32:38 <Travex> crashes*
770 2011-03-05 07:32:58 <lfm> travex there may also be some bugs in the ATI drivers
771 2011-03-05 07:33:13 <Syke_> may be?
772 2011-03-05 07:33:32 <lfm> of course we will claim that bitcoin is 100% bug free garanteed or double you money back
773 2011-03-05 07:33:45 <Travex> yeah alrite
774 2011-03-05 07:34:00 <Travex> ATI driver for HD 6970
775 2011-03-05 07:34:03 <Travex> is full of bugs
776 2011-03-05 07:34:05 <Travex> indeed
777 2011-03-05 07:34:18 <Syke_> mining will drive your card hard, be careful to have adequate cooling
778 2011-03-05 07:34:20 <lfm> and we dont trust microsoft much either
779 2011-03-05 07:34:27 <Travex> yeah thx =D
780 2011-03-05 07:34:33 <Travex> yep i do not =D
781 2011-03-05 07:34:39 <Travex> oh another question please
782 2011-03-05 07:34:49 <Travex> I have 340 confirmations in my client now
783 2011-03-05 07:34:51 <Travex> what does this mean ?
784 2011-03-05 07:35:17 <Syke_> each confirmation means someone has solved a block after yours
785 2011-03-05 07:35:46 <Travex> ah I see
786 2011-03-05 07:35:54 <Travex> so it has nothing to do with me right
787 2011-03-05 07:35:55 <Syke_> so about every 10 minutes your see another confirmation as another block is solved
788 2011-03-05 07:36:06 <Travex> Oh , i got it
789 2011-03-05 07:36:21 <Travex> I have 40 connections now, too few or good enough ?
790 2011-03-05 07:36:22 <lfm> travex once you got "confirmed" you are fine
791 2011-03-05 07:36:41 <Syke_> 40 is plenty
792 2011-03-05 07:36:41 <Travex> confirmed in the client or in the GPU miner dos windows mate ?
793 2011-03-05 07:36:41 oneman_ has joined
794 2011-03-05 07:36:43 <lfm> the extra ones are just gravy
795 2011-03-05 07:37:45 <Travex> lsf you mean i got confirmed in the gpu 's windows then i got my block right ?
796 2011-03-05 07:37:57 <Travex> GPU miner's dos windows*
797 2011-03-05 07:38:31 <Syke_> do you have the bitcoin gui running too?
798 2011-03-05 07:39:03 <Syke_> the miner won't see confirmations
799 2011-03-05 07:39:39 <Travex> yeah
800 2011-03-05 07:39:47 <Travex> I do have bitcoin client gui running too
801 2011-03-05 07:39:54 <Travex> So its in bitcoin client right ?
802 2011-03-05 07:39:59 <Syke_> yeah
803 2011-03-05 07:40:11 <Syke_> 0-5 confirmations will show as "unconfirmed"
804 2011-03-05 07:40:11 <Travex> awesome, thx mate =D
805 2011-03-05 07:40:27 <Travex> oh arighty
806 2011-03-05 07:40:49 <Travex> thank guys
807 2011-03-05 07:42:19 <Travex> lelw, 2 more blocks got solved
808 2011-03-05 07:42:21 CoachIT has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
809 2011-03-05 07:54:16 <Travex> oh guys
810 2011-03-05 07:54:20 <Travex> one quick question
811 2011-03-05 07:54:43 <Travex> anybody knows how to low GPU usage in momchild gpu miner ? Which command ?
812 2011-03-05 07:55:57 <magnetron> Travex: pkill python
813 2011-03-05 07:59:45 <Travex> Yeah but i want to keep it running, while watching movie or such
814 2011-03-05 07:59:53 <Travex> like 80% usage for minning
815 2011-03-05 07:59:56 <Travex> the rest for etc...
816 2011-03-05 08:00:30 <tcatm> that's what the -f switch is for
817 2011-03-05 08:00:54 <Travex> can you explain more clearly please ?
818 2011-03-05 08:02:58 <tcatm> start the miner with -f 10 or higher
819 2011-03-05 08:03:22 <tcatm> it'll split up the work in smaller chunks
820 2011-03-05 08:06:20 <lfm> Travex: are you using sdk 2.1?
821 2011-03-05 08:06:49 <Travex> im using sdk 2.2
822 2011-03-05 08:06:59 <Travex> ah ah
823 2011-03-05 08:07:01 <lfm> ok cuz 2.1 tends to use less cpu
824 2011-03-05 08:07:10 <Travex> GPu you meant ?
825 2011-03-05 08:07:23 <lfm> cpu, gpu is 100%
826 2011-03-05 08:08:02 <Travex> my cpu is almost zero usage now !
827 2011-03-05 08:08:07 <Travex> only GPU is ~ 99%
828 2011-03-05 08:08:13 <lfm> oh ok never mind
829 2011-03-05 08:08:22 <Travex> eh, :D
830 2011-03-05 08:08:44 <Travex> @tcatm tried -f 10 but doesnt change anything mate
831 2011-03-05 08:09:29 <lfm> try -f 60 or 120
832 2011-03-05 08:09:53 <magnetron> changing the workload size shouldn't really nice the GPU usage
833 2011-03-05 08:10:18 <lfm> ya there isnt really any nice for gpu afaik
834 2011-03-05 08:10:31 <Travex> hmm
835 2011-03-05 08:10:36 <Travex> tried -150
836 2011-03-05 08:10:46 <Travex> actually the usage decreased to 96% =D
837 2011-03-05 08:10:56 bitcoiner has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.6.14/20110218125750])
838 2011-03-05 08:11:00 <lfm> there ya go
839 2011-03-05 08:12:00 <Travex> yeah, thx guys, with f - 250 the usage is lower even more =D
840 2011-03-05 08:20:07 FellowTraveler has joined
841 2011-03-05 08:20:15 <FellowTraveler> Hi all.
842 2011-03-05 08:20:16 Travex has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
843 2011-03-05 08:23:19 mtve has joined
844 2011-03-05 08:31:15 altamic has joined
845 2011-03-05 08:31:15 altamic has quit (Changing host)
846 2011-03-05 08:31:15 altamic has joined
847 2011-03-05 08:35:00 Daviey has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
848 2011-03-05 08:36:01 Daviey has joined
849 2011-03-05 08:39:29 dazoe has joined
850 2011-03-05 08:40:01 <lfm> hi
851 2011-03-05 08:41:21 <[Tycho]> Hello.
852 2011-03-05 08:41:54 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
853 2011-03-05 08:43:14 <dazoe> [Tycho]: deepbit hasn't gotten a block in a long time...
854 2011-03-05 08:44:26 <Syke_> we're running at 11 blocks per hour. someone's getting lots of blocks
855 2011-03-05 08:46:01 <dazoe> who is it? hehe i know you cant really tell. unless you managed to watch the bitcoin protocol
856 2011-03-05 08:46:22 Bistre has joined
857 2011-03-05 08:46:29 <Syke_> ArtForz probably fired up a new bank of chips
858 2011-03-05 08:46:56 <ArtForz> nope
859 2011-03-05 08:47:41 <ArtForz> my guess is a large miner dropped out for a few days and is now back up again
860 2011-03-05 08:49:33 <ArtForz> I'd say ~150-200Gh/s or so
861 2011-03-05 08:49:42 <tcatm> how many hashes are you contributing?
862 2011-03-05 08:50:03 oneman_ has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
863 2011-03-05 08:50:07 <ArtForz> ~35Gh/s
864 2011-03-05 08:50:14 mekel has joined
865 2011-03-05 08:50:33 <mekel> yoyo was up was up
866 2011-03-05 08:51:04 <tcatm> and you think there's a large miner with 150..200?
867 2011-03-05 08:51:08 <ArtForz> yep
868 2011-03-05 08:52:20 <tcatm> http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?chs=480x256&cht=p&chtt=Hashrate Distribution&chd=s:GN9hNy&chxl=0:|known users|ArtForz|large miner|slush|deepbit|?|&chxt=x
869 2011-03-05 08:53:06 <mrb_> not all of your chips are online then? must be doing 19 Gh/s on gpus and 16 Gh/s with the chips
870 2011-03-05 08:53:14 <ArtForz> 24Gh/s on GPUs
871 2011-03-05 08:53:23 <ArtForz> 11.2 on chips
872 2011-03-05 08:53:31 <mrb_> hmm that's low for 28 5970s
873 2011-03-05 08:53:41 <mrb_> unless you scaled back the o/c
874 2011-03-05 08:54:19 <mrb_> nm. misread you.
875 2011-03-05 08:55:05 <tcatm> I wonder what happened to TX 5e2d7862796068973471626ae8c47e92c3f104cd636efd92001a8d1fbffe989d
876 2011-03-05 08:55:07 <ArtForz> hopefully 12.8 on ASICs by end of today, aka yay 2nd box complete!
877 2011-03-05 08:55:48 <mrb_> didn't realize your quantity of non-5970 gpus
878 2011-03-05 08:56:08 <mrb_> was not negligible
879 2011-03-05 08:56:12 <ArtForz> yeah
880 2011-03-05 08:56:32 <mekel> hey guys, im runnin the hd 6950.in diablo miner i hav -f set to 35 and im pullin 5000khashes/s, BUT its raisin the card temp to 65c.. does that sound a little high temp for just 5000khashes/s??
881 2011-03-05 08:56:51 <ArtForz> btw, official 6990 release date is mar 8th ;)
882 2011-03-05 08:57:06 <mekel> uber wonder that the price tag will be
883 2011-03-05 08:57:15 <ArtForz> wild-ass guess, 699
884 2011-03-05 08:58:07 <mekel> pricetag 699?
885 2011-03-05 08:58:13 <ArtForz> yea
886 2011-03-05 08:58:15 <mekel> lordy
887 2011-03-05 08:58:24 <ArtForz> well, it's a dual 6970 ...
888 2011-03-05 08:59:12 <mekel> so the one card is better than havin dual 6970's?
889 2011-03-05 08:59:33 <ArtForz> well, considering you only need half the # of mainboards ...
890 2011-03-05 08:59:40 <mekel> tru
891 2011-03-05 08:59:55 <mekel> what card are u runnin now art?
892 2011-03-05 09:00:00 <mekel> or whhat is the main card
893 2011-03-05 09:00:05 <ArtForz> 5970
894 2011-03-05 09:00:13 <mekel> whats the avg core temp of that
895 2011-03-05 09:00:16 <mekel> at full power
896 2011-03-05 09:00:30 <ArtForz> currently 77°C at 40-55% fan
897 2011-03-05 09:00:46 <mekel> alright
898 2011-03-05 09:00:57 <mekel> my psu is underpowered
899 2011-03-05 09:01:05 <ArtForz> but my setups have pretty crazy case fans, so YMMV
900 2011-03-05 09:01:15 <mekel> so until i get a new a one im tryin to see how many khashes i can get with out it bein unstable and crashes
901 2011-03-05 09:01:17 <mekel> crashing*
902 2011-03-05 09:01:26 <mekel> or damn
903 2011-03-05 09:01:29 <mekel> oh*
904 2011-03-05 09:01:36 <mekel> i hav just a open shell for cooling
905 2011-03-05 09:02:40 oneman_ has joined
906 2011-03-05 09:05:21 <ArtForz> 3*ultra kaze 3kRPM for the quad 5970 boxes, 1*delta afb1212vhe for the dual card and 2*5970+2*5770 boxes
907 2011-03-05 09:05:22 MartianW has joined
908 2011-03-05 09:05:22 MartianW has quit (Changing host)
909 2011-03-05 09:05:22 MartianW has joined
910 2011-03-05 09:07:15 <ArtForz> in the process of replacing the ultra kazes with afb1212hhe
911 2011-03-05 09:08:09 <ArtForz> vhe is 4kRPM 8.2W, hhe is 2.9kRPM 4.8W
912 2011-03-05 09:09:50 <mekel> anyone know the diablo source well?
913 2011-03-05 09:11:08 <ArtForz> hhe moves more air than UK3k, uses ~same power, less noise, ball bearings, costs about twice as much
914 2011-03-05 09:13:48 <sipa> mekel: a bit, though not the latest revision
915 2011-03-05 09:14:13 <mekel> im just tryin to find where the -f and -w commands take place in it
916 2011-03-05 09:14:36 <mekel> im chekin the diablominer.java but not even sure if its the right place
917 2011-03-05 09:14:46 <sipa> yes it is
918 2011-03-05 09:15:06 <mekel> do u kno the general area in it?
919 2011-03-05 09:15:43 <sipa> the parsing of the command lines is near the start
920 2011-03-05 09:15:56 <mekel> actually i found it
921 2011-03-05 09:16:11 <mekel> options.addOption("w", "worksize", true, "override worksize"); ?
922 2011-03-05 09:16:29 <mekel> thx mate
923 2011-03-05 09:17:09 <mekel> how do u kno if u need to increase ur getwork
924 2011-03-05 09:19:00 <sipa> worksize?
925 2011-03-05 09:19:23 <sipa> there are known optimal values for each card
926 2011-03-05 09:19:33 <mekel> o rly
927 2011-03-05 09:19:52 <mekel> i was curious about worksize, and getwork : "g", "getwork", true, "seconds between getwork refresh"
928 2011-03-05 09:19:52 <sipa> or just try a bit
929 2011-03-05 09:20:38 <sipa> getwork is basically a trade-off between mining speed and desktop responsiveness
930 2011-03-05 09:21:17 <mekel> so if i increased the refresh time on getwork, my desktop would be slower?
931 2011-03-05 09:21:27 <sipa> oh wait
932 2011-03-05 09:21:38 <sipa> that is -f
933 2011-03-05 09:21:43 <sipa> not -g
934 2011-03-05 09:21:55 <mekel> im tryin to figure these out
935 2011-03-05 09:22:07 <sipa> what hardware?
936 2011-03-05 09:22:16 <mekel> hd 6950 ftw
937 2011-03-05 09:22:53 <sipa> and do you use that card for video as well?
938 2011-03-05 09:23:04 <mekel> video? for tv?
939 2011-03-05 09:23:07 <sipa> no
940 2011-03-05 09:23:12 <mekel> it is strcitly dedicated to mining bitcoins
941 2011-03-05 09:23:17 <sipa> just do you use it
942 2011-03-05 09:23:19 <sipa> ok
943 2011-03-05 09:23:41 <sipa> use -f 1 -g 5 -w 64
944 2011-03-05 09:24:02 <sipa> you could try -w 128 as well
945 2011-03-05 09:24:05 <mekel> alright
946 2011-03-05 09:24:10 <mekel> here is my main problem though
947 2011-03-05 09:24:23 <mekel> i temporarily have an underpowered psu
948 2011-03-05 09:24:33 <mekel> and if i run it just toooo hard.. it dies
949 2011-03-05 09:24:44 <sipa> then underclock you gpu
950 2011-03-05 09:24:45 <mekel> but if i run it not too hard, it will stay stable
951 2011-03-05 09:24:51 <mekel> so im tryin find the medium..
952 2011-03-05 09:25:04 <mekel> maximum khashs without killin the psu
953 2011-03-05 09:25:08 <mekel> till i get a new psy
954 2011-03-05 09:25:11 <mekel> psu*
955 2011-03-05 09:25:27 <mekel> just underclock it?
956 2011-03-05 09:25:55 <sipa> how else will you control its hashrate?
957 2011-03-05 09:26:09 <mekel> hmm
958 2011-03-05 09:26:18 <mekel> that is a really good point
959 2011-03-05 09:26:26 <sipa> lol
960 2011-03-05 09:26:29 <mekel> i havnt researched underclocking.. can it be dmged just as easily as overclocking
961 2011-03-05 09:26:50 <sipa> no it is very safe
962 2011-03-05 09:27:11 <sipa> it just makes it slow
963 2011-03-05 09:27:13 <sipa> er
964 2011-03-05 09:27:13 <mekel> as in i can set the settings to like 0 and it nothing will hapen?
965 2011-03-05 09:27:23 <sipa> no
966 2011-03-05 09:27:57 <mekel> hm.
967 2011-03-05 09:28:17 <sipa> you cant set it to 0, that would effectively stop yoyur card
968 2011-03-05 09:28:24 <mekel> tru
969 2011-03-05 09:28:25 <sipa> your
970 2011-03-05 09:28:47 <sipa> but you can set it to lower values than the default
971 2011-03-05 09:29:08 <mekel> how low is too low
972 2011-03-05 09:29:18 <sipa> nothinv
973 2011-03-05 09:29:32 <sipa> just set it to the lowest possible
974 2011-03-05 09:29:44 <mekel> 1?
975 2011-03-05 09:30:09 <sipa> *sigh*
976 2011-03-05 09:30:34 <sipa> just open the program, and see what the lowest possible is
977 2011-03-05 09:30:41 <mekel> its on linux
978 2011-03-05 09:30:43 <mekel> its cmd line
979 2011-03-05 09:30:54 <mekel> not sure if it will tell me the minimum
980 2011-03-05 09:30:58 <sipa> aticonfig --odgc
981 2011-03-05 09:31:04 <mekel> kk one sec
982 2011-03-05 09:31:09 <sipa> that will tell you the minimum
983 2011-03-05 09:31:28 <mekel> oh tru it does
984 2011-03-05 09:31:36 <mekel> werd
985 2011-03-05 09:31:38 <mekel> thot it only showed max
986 2011-03-05 09:31:49 <mekel> leet this will be interesting
987 2011-03-05 09:32:09 <sipa> l33t?
988 2011-03-05 09:32:17 <mekel> 1337
989 2011-03-05 09:32:21 <sipa> k
990 2011-03-05 09:33:58 <mekel> k
991 2011-03-05 09:34:00 <mekel> od enabled
992 2011-03-05 09:34:04 <mekel> moving to phase 2
993 2011-03-05 09:36:15 larsig has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
994 2011-03-05 09:38:56 altamic has quit (Quit: altamic)
995 2011-03-05 09:42:32 <mekel> sipa
996 2011-03-05 09:42:37 <mekel> ur plan worked brilianrtly
997 2011-03-05 09:42:39 <mekel> <3
998 2011-03-05 09:43:39 Zarutian has joined
999 2011-03-05 09:43:54 <mekel> is there any psu voltage software that acutally works o_o
1000 2011-03-05 09:45:09 <sipa> software?
1001 2011-03-05 09:45:18 <mekel> yyes
1002 2011-03-05 09:45:42 <sipa> for the psu?
1003 2011-03-05 09:45:54 <mekel> no not like that
1004 2011-03-05 09:46:05 <mekel> nvm
1005 2011-03-05 09:49:58 <mekel> so underclocked at minimum specs
1006 2011-03-05 09:50:08 <mekel> gettin 140khashes/s avg not bad
1007 2011-03-05 09:50:09 Syke_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1008 2011-03-05 09:50:15 <mekel> i wonder if my psu can run stable with that
1009 2011-03-05 09:50:24 <mekel> its only 200wats >_<
1010 2011-03-05 09:50:30 <mekel> dedicated psu just for the card
1011 2011-03-05 09:53:23 <magnetron> i run windows ME on my PSU
1012 2011-03-05 09:53:35 <mekel> o0
1013 2011-03-05 09:54:20 <magnetron> with some untested software i can adjust the voltages
1014 2011-03-05 09:54:53 <sipa> cool PSU, it is able to run a operating system that never even managed to run reasonably on intel cpu's ;)
1015 2011-03-05 09:55:21 <magnetron> sipa: it's a very powerful PSU
1016 2011-03-05 09:55:26 <sipa> apprently!
1017 2011-03-05 09:55:28 <magnetron> sipa: 1200W
1018 2011-03-05 09:55:50 <mekel> that is powerful
1019 2011-03-05 09:55:52 Raulo has joined
1020 2011-03-05 09:57:19 <mekel> whats the cmd again for eta of block, with 142khash/s
1021 2011-03-05 09:57:39 <mekel> 142,000
1022 2011-03-05 09:57:44 <magnetron> echo "forever"
1023 2011-03-05 09:59:19 <sipa> ;;bc,calc 142000
1024 2011-03-05 09:59:21 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 142000 Khps, given current difficulty of 55590.23763914 , is 2 weeks, 5 days, 11 hours, 3 minutes, and 16 seconds
1025 2011-03-05 09:59:39 <lfm> I like this idea: http://www.itworld.com/hardware/138740/asus-motherboard-box-doubles-a-pc-case
1026 2011-03-05 09:59:40 <mekel> koo koo tty
1027 2011-03-05 09:59:48 MartianW has quit (Quit: Bye all.)
1028 2011-03-05 09:59:55 <mekel> haha neat
1029 2011-03-05 10:01:07 dissipate has joined
1030 2011-03-05 10:01:07 dissipate has quit (Changing host)
1031 2011-03-05 10:01:07 dissipate has joined
1032 2011-03-05 10:02:07 BitterTea has joined
1033 2011-03-05 10:02:24 <BitterTea> Hey guys, quick question. How is this channel logged? Gribble?
1034 2011-03-05 10:02:40 <mekel> yes
1035 2011-03-05 10:02:42 <mekel> >
1036 2011-03-05 10:02:52 Bob___ has joined
1037 2011-03-05 10:02:55 <mekel> mt
1038 2011-03-05 10:03:01 Bob___ has quit (Client Quit)
1039 2011-03-05 10:03:19 <dissipate> BitterTea, Gribble is watching your every move. ^_^
1040 2011-03-05 10:08:54 <magnetron> escaping the grip of paypal
1041 2011-03-05 10:08:59 BitterTea has left ()
1042 2011-03-05 10:09:03 <magnetron> into the surveillance of gribble
1043 2011-03-05 10:10:27 BlueMatt has joined
1044 2011-03-05 10:10:28 BlueMatt has quit (Changing host)
1045 2011-03-05 10:10:28 BlueMatt has joined
1046 2011-03-05 10:11:12 <magnetron> BlueMatt: ipv6 addresses starting with 2001: are routed via IPv4, right?
1047 2011-03-05 10:11:27 <BlueMatt> magnetron: ?
1048 2011-03-05 10:11:31 <BlueMatt> how would that work
1049 2011-03-05 10:12:10 <Diablo-D3> 6to4
1050 2011-03-05 10:12:25 <BlueMatt> 2001: is a standard address space, it could be anything
1051 2011-03-05 10:12:33 <Diablo-D3> and no
1052 2011-03-05 10:12:35 <Diablo-D3> its 2002
1053 2011-03-05 10:12:41 <BlueMatt> 2001:470 is he, which is typically 6to4, but they are also anything
1054 2011-03-05 10:12:54 <magnetron> Diablo-D3: ah
1055 2011-03-05 10:13:02 <BlueMatt> no 2001: is not anything special
1056 2011-03-05 10:13:03 <BlueMatt> at all
1057 2011-03-05 10:13:18 <Diablo-D3> 2002::ip::ip::whatever
1058 2011-03-05 10:13:33 <Diablo-D3> its a /16
1059 2011-03-05 10:13:33 <magnetron> how can i findout who registered a specific ipv6 address
1060 2011-03-05 10:13:47 <Diablo-D3> magnetron: other than asking arin?
1061 2011-03-05 10:13:57 <BlueMatt> magnetron: whois ip
1062 2011-03-05 10:13:58 <magnetron> i can ask arin? ok
1063 2011-03-05 10:14:11 <Diablo-D3> magnetron: and btw, it converts to ipv4 at the last possible step
1064 2011-03-05 10:14:17 nefario has joined
1065 2011-03-05 10:15:26 larsig has joined
1066 2011-03-05 10:16:06 <magnetron> Diablo-D3: i thought it was at the FIRST possible step. so if your IPv6 router supports 6to4 it would transport it over ipv4 instead
1067 2011-03-05 10:16:36 <Diablo-D3> no
1068 2011-03-05 10:16:39 <Diablo-D3> its last
1069 2011-03-05 10:17:10 <magnetron> what would be the LAST ipv6 router
1070 2011-03-05 10:18:15 <Diablo-D3> last ipv6 router that offers the anycast gateway you mean
1071 2011-03-05 10:19:46 <magnetron> sounds counterintuitive
1072 2011-03-05 10:19:54 <magnetron> that the packets would be routed the longest way possible
1073 2011-03-05 10:24:08 <magnetron> i wonder what my switch would do if i tried running IPv6 on my Ethernet
1074 2011-03-05 10:26:47 <mekel> im tryin to understand how -worksize effects the miner
1075 2011-03-05 10:27:01 <mekel> like what exactly is it changing
1076 2011-03-05 10:28:21 nefario has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.6.13/20101203075014])
1077 2011-03-05 10:28:27 <[Tycho]> mekel, depengs on your GPU
1078 2011-03-05 10:28:38 <[Tycho]> *d
1079 2011-03-05 10:28:40 gwillen has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1080 2011-03-05 10:28:45 <mekel> ya iv learned about that much
1081 2011-03-05 10:29:14 <mekel> AMD cards only run good on multiples of 32 worksize to my understanding
1082 2011-03-05 10:29:20 gwillen has joined
1083 2011-03-05 10:29:21 gwillen has quit (Changing host)
1084 2011-03-05 10:29:21 gwillen has joined
1085 2011-03-05 10:29:26 <mekel> but this worksize.. what is the work size
1086 2011-03-05 10:29:52 <mekel> i hav the hd6950, is there a spec worksize i should be usin
1087 2011-03-05 10:30:12 <tcatm> mekel: read the datasheet
1088 2011-03-05 10:30:30 <tcatm> "worksize" is a complex topic
1089 2011-03-05 10:30:32 <mekel> can u point me in the right direction of that
1090 2011-03-05 10:30:35 <[Tycho]> Default works fine for me.
1091 2011-03-05 10:31:06 <mekel> sipa was tellin me 128 would be good for me
1092 2011-03-05 10:31:35 <mekel> where is this data sheet
1093 2011-03-05 10:31:37 <tcatm> mekel: http://developer.amd.com/gpu_assets/ATI_Stream_SDK_OpenCL_Programming_Guide.pdf
1094 2011-03-05 10:31:44 <mekel> ty
1095 2011-03-05 10:31:44 <BlueMatt> shouldnt we use mapped ipv4 instead of 6to4?
1096 2011-03-05 10:31:48 <sipa> no i said you should try 128 :)
1097 2011-03-05 10:32:05 <mekel> srry to construe words
1098 2011-03-05 10:32:34 <sipa> does anyone know what precisely is used in signatures in txin'?
1099 2011-03-05 10:33:34 <tcatm> first read chapter 1, then chapter 4.8
1100 2011-03-05 10:33:49 FellowTraveler has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1101 2011-03-05 10:34:00 <BlueMatt> 1 BTC if someone can help me test -port option
1102 2011-03-05 10:35:11 <mekel> how do i help u test bud
1103 2011-03-05 10:35:38 Ratchet has joined
1104 2011-03-05 10:35:53 <BlueMatt> mekel: can you compile with the default port set to 9635?
1105 2011-03-05 10:36:20 <mekel> hm
1106 2011-03-05 10:36:24 <mekel> does it compile in windows
1107 2011-03-05 10:36:44 <BlueMatt> youll have to figure out how to do that yourself - ive never messed with bitcoin in windows
1108 2011-03-05 10:36:51 <mekel> no it is gunna be an issue to set up i feel lik
1109 2011-03-05 10:37:00 <mekel> if u wanna wait for lik 30 minutes i could prbably get it goin lol
1110 2011-03-05 10:37:14 <BlueMatt> probably, anyone who can compile bitcoin/use linux want to help test?
1111 2011-03-05 10:37:25 <BlueMatt> I can provide a linux build
1112 2011-03-05 10:39:28 <lfm> compiling bitcoin in windows is a major project
1113 2011-03-05 10:39:54 <sipa> BlueMatt: sure
1114 2011-03-05 10:40:05 <sipa> which version?
1115 2011-03-05 10:40:13 <BlueMatt> sipa: latest, or really ant
1116 2011-03-05 10:40:15 <BlueMatt> any*
1117 2011-03-05 10:40:25 <BlueMatt> just compile with default port as 9635
1118 2011-03-05 10:41:07 <mekel> hey sip -w 64 is gettin 5000khashes more
1119 2011-03-05 10:42:15 <[Tycho]> I would like to compile bitcoin in windows, but not sure if this is even possible.
1120 2011-03-05 10:43:49 <sipa> mekel: yes, that's what i assumed
1121 2011-03-05 10:44:17 <magnetron> [Tycho]: mingw perhaps?
1122 2011-03-05 10:44:28 <sipa> BlueMatt: compiling
1123 2011-03-05 10:44:45 <[Tycho]> magnetron, i think it will need additional libs.
1124 2011-03-05 10:44:58 <magnetron> [Tycho]: yes, mingw is just the compiler
1125 2011-03-05 10:45:07 <[Tycho]> I know :)
1126 2011-03-05 10:45:15 <magnetron> then we both know
1127 2011-03-05 10:46:39 <BlueMatt> sipa: tell me when you launch it
1128 2011-03-05 10:46:45 <sipa> it's running
1129 2011-03-05 10:46:50 <sipa> i'll open that port on my nat
1130 2011-03-05 10:46:54 <BlueMatt> sipa: no need
1131 2011-03-05 10:47:09 <sipa> ok, even better
1132 2011-03-05 10:47:20 <BlueMatt> sipa: wait, sorry was running the packet capture wrong
1133 2011-03-05 10:47:23 <BlueMatt> sipa: can you close it
1134 2011-03-05 10:47:27 <BlueMatt> sipa: and reopen?
1135 2011-03-05 10:47:34 <sipa> closed
1136 2011-03-05 10:47:47 <sipa> reopend
1137 2011-03-05 10:48:14 <BlueMatt> sipa: thanks, incoming connection works great
1138 2011-03-05 10:48:50 <BlueMatt> the only problem left is the 2h delay a non-modified client imposes
1139 2011-03-05 10:49:04 <BlueMatt> hopefully this will make it into the next build
1140 2011-03-05 10:49:06 <sipa> your IP ends in .125?
1141 2011-03-05 10:49:19 <BlueMatt> sipa: yes
1142 2011-03-05 10:49:24 <sipa> haha
1143 2011-03-05 10:49:30 <sipa> fine, i'll close it?
1144 2011-03-05 10:49:33 <BlueMatt> sipa: sure
1145 2011-03-05 10:49:41 <BlueMatt> sipa: or run it on a different port if you want
1146 2011-03-05 10:53:19 Bistre has quit ()
1147 2011-03-05 10:55:41 legion050 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1148 2011-03-05 10:57:32 genjix has joined
1149 2011-03-05 10:57:32 genjix has quit (Changing host)
1150 2011-03-05 10:57:32 genjix has joined
1151 2011-03-05 11:03:18 dishwara has joined
1152 2011-03-05 11:04:44 noagendamarket has joined
1153 2011-03-05 11:05:26 noagendamarket has quit (Changing host)
1154 2011-03-05 11:05:26 noagendamarket has joined
1155 2011-03-05 11:23:50 dishwara has quit (Quit: Miranda IM! Smaller, Faster, Easier. http://miranda-im.org)
1156 2011-03-05 11:30:24 baxter has joined
1157 2011-03-05 11:39:32 akem has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1158 2011-03-05 11:41:11 TheAncientGoat has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1159 2011-03-05 11:42:01 <sipa> ;;bc,estimate
1160 2011-03-05 11:42:02 <gribble> 69078.74288287
1161 2011-03-05 11:43:00 <Blitzboom> ;;bc,stats
1162 2011-03-05 11:43:02 <gribble> Current Blocks: 111964 | Current Difficulty: 55590.23763914 | Next Difficulty At Block: 112895 | Next Difficulty In: 931 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 5 days, 4 hours, 54 minutes, and 33 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 69078.74288287
1163 2011-03-05 11:43:13 <Blitzboom> hm, not too far away
1164 2011-03-05 11:43:52 <Raulo> This drop in difficulty estimate at the beginning of the current round was temporary. We are going for 75000-80000 next difficulty
1165 2011-03-05 11:44:22 <sipa> yes indeed
1166 2011-03-05 11:44:22 <Blitzboom> i guess so: http://bitcoin.sipa.be/speed-lin.png
1167 2011-03-05 11:44:39 <Blitzboom> this is impressing
1168 2011-03-05 11:44:44 <Raulo> Indeed, as ArtForz said a big player dropped for s while and is back
1169 2011-03-05 11:44:50 <Raulo> With increased capacity
1170 2011-03-05 11:44:53 <Blitzboom> ah, that was him? i see
1171 2011-03-05 11:45:10 <BlueMatt> Art said a "big player" as in Art himself?
1172 2011-03-05 11:45:14 <sipa> no
1173 2011-03-05 11:45:17 <Blitzboom> oh, didn’t read right
1174 2011-03-05 11:45:22 baxter has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1175 2011-03-05 11:45:23 <sipa> art doesn't have that much, i think
1176 2011-03-05 11:45:35 <Raulo> 200 GH/s for this nbew player is a lot
1177 2011-03-05 11:45:37 <BlueMatt> how many "big players" are there anyway?
1178 2011-03-05 11:45:49 <sipa> it must be the NSA!
1179 2011-03-05 11:46:01 <BlueMatt> one of the major banks is investing in btc!
1180 2011-03-05 11:46:12 <Blitzboom> haha
1181 2011-03-05 11:46:18 <Blitzboom> oh man, that’d be terrible
1182 2011-03-05 11:46:20 <Raulo> I wonder if it's real or a bot
1183 2011-03-05 11:46:21 Diablo-D3 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1184 2011-03-05 11:46:31 <BlueMatt> a botnet?
1185 2011-03-05 11:46:54 <Raulo> 200 GH/s is like 100 kW of power
1186 2011-03-05 11:47:07 <Raulo> And 200 k$ inversed in GPUs
1187 2011-03-05 11:47:08 <hwolf> how can you tell 200Gh/s?
1188 2011-03-05 11:47:31 <sipa> http://bitcoin.sipa.be/speed-large-lin-10k.png
1189 2011-03-05 11:47:32 <hwolf> how can you tell its one person?
1190 2011-03-05 11:47:37 <sipa> it may be close to 200GH/s indeed
1191 2011-03-05 11:48:33 <Raulo> "[09:41] <ArtForz> I'd say ~150-200Gh/s"
1192 2011-03-05 11:48:50 <Raulo> I looked at my traffic sniffing logs and it is quite possible
1193 2011-03-05 11:48:51 <magnetron> at least they're not computing a different block chain
1194 2011-03-05 11:49:23 <hwolf> can you tell what IP's?
1195 2011-03-05 11:49:25 <sipa> how can you measure the mining speed of connected node by sniffing?
1196 2011-03-05 11:49:36 <Raulo> I can't be sure
1197 2011-03-05 11:49:41 <Raulo> But it's a good estimate
1198 2011-03-05 11:49:48 <Raulo> If you are connected to many nodes
1199 2011-03-05 11:50:10 <Raulo> And you get a block from an IP
1200 2011-03-05 11:50:24 <Raulo> It's very likely it is the node that found the block first
1201 2011-03-05 11:50:43 <sipa> right, so you can measure how many blocks seem to be coming from the same IP
1202 2011-03-05 11:50:50 <Raulo> Yes.
1203 2011-03-05 11:50:50 <BlueMatt> Raulo: have you traced that ip?
1204 2011-03-05 11:50:59 <sipa> haha
1205 2011-03-05 11:51:06 <Raulo> Yes, but I'm not sure it's I good idea to publish it here
1206 2011-03-05 11:51:15 <sipa> maybe it isn't
1207 2011-03-05 11:51:18 <Raulo> He may start to obfuscate and I love sniffing :)
1208 2011-03-05 11:51:34 <BlueMatt> Raulo: fair enough, though is it something special? like .gov or .edu or something?
1209 2011-03-05 11:52:26 <hwolf> is it in virginia?
1210 2011-03-05 11:52:28 <Raulo> No. It's a telecom, ie DSL or cable connection
1211 2011-03-05 11:52:38 <Raulo> Europe
1212 2011-03-05 11:52:44 <BlueMatt> germany?
1213 2011-03-05 11:52:47 <Raulo> Yep
1214 2011-03-05 11:53:01 <Raulo> And it's not Arforz of course
1215 2011-03-05 11:53:20 <BlueMatt> XXXX.dip.t-dialin.net?
1216 2011-03-05 11:53:58 <Raulo> No
1217 2011-03-05 11:54:11 <BlueMatt> oh, ok well nice
1218 2011-03-05 11:58:37 mekel has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1219 2011-03-05 11:58:49 nextgens_ is now known as nextgens
1220 2011-03-05 11:58:55 nextgens is now known as nextgens_
1221 2011-03-05 11:59:00 nextgens_ has quit (Changing host)
1222 2011-03-05 11:59:00 nextgens_ has joined
1223 2011-03-05 11:59:05 nextgens_ is now known as nextgens
1224 2011-03-05 12:03:09 <knotwork> it seems pretty much all my bitcoind instances except the Martian BotCoins one hang on getaccountaddress
1225 2011-03-05 12:05:51 akem has joined
1226 2011-03-05 12:10:36 <molecular> m0mchil has me completely confused now: http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=1334.msg60115#msg60115
1227 2011-03-05 12:10:37 <bitbot> python OpenCL bitcoin miner Connection refused.
1228 2011-03-05 12:27:58 <dazoe> anyone know what the 0.007 is in the lower right corner of deepbit?
1229 2011-03-05 12:29:36 <tcatm> the time it took to render the page
1230 2011-03-05 12:30:28 <andrewh> yeah, lots of sites have stuff like that
1231 2011-03-05 12:30:59 andrewh has left ()
1232 2011-03-05 12:31:17 andrewh has joined
1233 2011-03-05 12:31:19 <andrewh> whoops
1234 2011-03-05 12:35:04 <andrewh> hm
1235 2011-03-05 12:35:14 <andrewh> i think i might run a separate irssi for freenode
1236 2011-03-05 12:35:36 <andrewh> so i dont have 30 windows
1237 2011-03-05 12:35:44 <andrewh> yeah, I'm gonna do that. brb
1238 2011-03-05 12:35:48 andrewh has quit (Quit: I must've accidentally /quit or something. :x)
1239 2011-03-05 12:36:12 andrew_ has joined
1240 2011-03-05 12:36:36 andrew_ has quit (Changing host)
1241 2011-03-05 12:36:36 andrew_ has joined
1242 2011-03-05 12:36:37 andrew_ is now known as Guest88274
1243 2011-03-05 12:36:40 Guest88274 is now known as andrewh
1244 2011-03-05 12:37:09 TheAncientGoat has joined
1245 2011-03-05 12:37:24 andrewh is now known as andrew12
1246 2011-03-05 12:45:21 dazoe has quit (Changing host)
1247 2011-03-05 12:45:21 dazoe has joined
1248 2011-03-05 13:29:36 x6763 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1249 2011-03-05 13:49:00 bxc_ is now known as bxc
1250 2011-03-05 13:50:48 altamic has joined
1251 2011-03-05 13:50:49 altamic has quit (Changing host)
1252 2011-03-05 13:50:49 altamic has joined
1253 2011-03-05 13:56:59 <Raulo> I dag dipper into this mysterious miner and this IP number I found was just a relay. It's not the miner. But it was the only node I was connected to that was directly connected to the mysterious miner
1254 2011-03-05 13:57:42 <Raulo> So I still don't know where it is and what it is but I strongly beleive it is a single person/organization
1255 2011-03-05 13:58:04 <Raulo> And it's getting 150-250 GH/s
1256 2011-03-05 13:58:19 <tcatm> that's about 50% of the network
1257 2011-03-05 13:58:29 <Raulo> 35%
1258 2011-03-05 13:58:37 <Raulo> We are at 700GH/s now
1259 2011-03-05 13:59:50 <BlueMatt> bitcoincharts says 500 GH/s
1260 2011-03-05 14:00:12 <tcatm> bitcoincharts uses data from bbe and doesn't extrapolate
1261 2011-03-05 14:00:14 <BlueMatt> could it not be art? if its a german node that you are always connected to?
1262 2011-03-05 14:00:51 <ArtForz> my current estimate says 697Gh/s total
1263 2011-03-05 14:00:52 <Raulo> No, it's not Art. Art's IP is knows and his GH/s is known
1264 2011-03-05 14:00:58 <ArtForz> yep
1265 2011-03-05 14:01:14 <tcatm> how do you calculate the network hashrate?
1266 2011-03-05 14:01:21 <BlueMatt> fair enough, but who would bother with a relay?
1267 2011-03-05 14:01:37 <ArtForz> someone who doesnt want his bitcoin mining to get noticed?
1268 2011-03-05 14:02:37 <tcatm> how do you know it's not the miner but a relay?
1269 2011-03-05 14:02:59 <Raulo> @tacm: Because it stopped giving me new blocks
1270 2011-03-05 14:03:13 <Raulo> But still gives me new transactions so it's online
1271 2011-03-05 14:03:51 <tcatm> and another node is giving you blocks now?
1272 2011-03-05 14:04:22 <Raulo> Yes. Gavin
1273 2011-03-05 14:04:39 <Raulo> Well, not all but large fraction
1274 2011-03-05 14:05:14 <Raulo> So the mysterious miner (MM) is probably connected to Gavin now
1275 2011-03-05 14:05:50 <Raulo> Or who know. Gavin is a falback node so he is connected to a lot of nodes
1276 2011-03-05 14:06:08 <noagendamarket> strange
1277 2011-03-05 14:06:20 <Blitzboom> 700 gh/s? wow
1278 2011-03-05 14:06:51 <BlueMatt> didnt someone mention something about using a supercomputer on here a couple weeks ago?
1279 2011-03-05 14:06:56 <citiz3n> why the hell is tracker.thepiratebay.org pointing to loopback
1280 2011-03-05 14:07:13 <BlueMatt> they shutdown the tracker a long time ago
1281 2011-03-05 14:07:25 <citiz3n> how long ago?
1282 2011-03-05 14:07:26 <BlueMatt> they expect you to use dht and pex
1283 2011-03-05 14:07:31 <BlueMatt> iirc like a year ago
1284 2011-03-05 14:07:53 <noagendamarket> BlueMatt yes they did
1285 2011-03-05 14:08:39 <BlueMatt> youd think they would be smart enough to point to 0.0.0.0 or remove the dns records instead of pointing to localhost
1286 2011-03-05 14:09:01 <magnetron> BlueMatt: and tracker.openbittorrent.org
1287 2011-03-05 14:09:28 <BlueMatt> magnetron: ;; ANSWER SECTION:
1288 2011-03-05 14:09:28 <BlueMatt> tracker.openbittorrent.com. 3327 IN A 95.215.62.5
1289 2011-03-05 14:09:28 <BlueMatt> tracker.openbittorrent.com. 3327 IN A 95.215.62.26
1290 2011-03-05 14:09:30 <BlueMatt> not for me
1291 2011-03-05 14:09:41 <magnetron> BlueMatt: why?
1292 2011-03-05 14:10:22 <BlueMatt> magnetron: making everyone try to connect to localhost is more anoying for end users than just 0.0.0.0 it can cause problems
1293 2011-03-05 14:10:40 MingusDew has joined
1294 2011-03-05 14:10:47 <magnetron> BlueMatt: i think it's supposed to fail as hard as possible
1295 2011-03-05 14:10:50 <BlueMatt> who knows whats listening on port 80
1296 2011-03-05 14:11:03 <BlueMatt> magnetron: 0.0.0.0 would fail much harder than 127.0.0.1
1297 2011-03-05 14:11:05 x6763 has joined
1298 2011-03-05 14:11:59 <BlueMatt> the setaccount rpc command will create an account even if supplied with an invalid address...should that not be changed?
1299 2011-03-05 14:12:09 <BlueMatt> ie create an account w/o an address
1300 2011-03-05 14:13:39 <tcatm> that's a bug
1301 2011-03-05 14:15:26 <tcatm> open an issue at github
1302 2011-03-05 14:15:37 <BlueMatt> tcatm: how about I send a pull request instead ;)
1303 2011-03-05 14:15:55 <tcatm> that
1304 2011-03-05 14:15:58 <tcatm> 's even better
1305 2011-03-05 14:25:50 genjix_ has joined
1306 2011-03-05 14:27:00 genjix_ has quit (Client Quit)
1307 2011-03-05 14:28:09 TD has joined
1308 2011-03-05 14:28:18 <knotwork> I tried adding -rescan to all my scripts that use bitcoind to ask the daemonised bitcoind to do things for them
1309 2011-03-05 14:28:39 <knotwork> but still the daemon hangs when asked for an address
1310 2011-03-05 14:28:46 <tcatm> -rescan is not a RPC command
1311 2011-03-05 14:29:27 <knotwork> oh sorry, correct, I added it to the initial firing up of the daemon, not to the later calls to have it do things
1312 2011-03-05 14:29:37 hwolf has left ()
1313 2011-03-05 14:30:11 <xelister> is mtgox going to be fixed?
1314 2011-03-05 14:30:20 <ArtForz> ?
1315 2011-03-05 14:30:20 <xelister> MegaChart on mtgox is broken for days
1316 2011-03-05 14:30:30 <knotwork> this way every time I resort to kill -9 to kill a hung daemon there will be a -rescan when I fire it back up
1317 2011-03-05 14:30:38 <knotwork> but that isnt preventing the hanging
1318 2011-03-05 14:31:03 skeledrew has quit (Quit: Instantbird 0.3a2pre)
1319 2011-03-05 14:31:21 <ArtForz> probbaly got broken with the server move, mail jed
1320 2011-03-05 14:31:38 <knotwork> I have a nice bot ready to do currency trading but in most currencies its commands dont work due to hung daemon
1321 2011-03-05 14:32:17 <knotwork> first thing it usually does is look up account whose name is user's nick, to find address to tell user
1322 2011-03-05 14:32:39 <knotwork> so user can send funds to the account. but, that asking for address usually hangs the daemon.
1323 2011-03-05 14:33:07 <knotwork> for some reason the Martian BotCoin instance of the daemon is responding fine with an address
1324 2011-03-05 14:33:10 <Ad0> is the difficulty for blocks controlled by a central authority?
1325 2011-03-05 14:33:29 <knotwork> but all the others, invluding standard normal bitcoins, hang when asked for address
1326 2011-03-05 14:33:31 <genjix> Ad0: no
1327 2011-03-05 14:33:33 <Ad0> ok
1328 2011-03-05 14:33:44 <genjix> Ad0: its an algorithm that everyone agrees on
1329 2011-03-05 14:33:47 <Ad0> it's something automatic and predictable
1330 2011-03-05 14:33:51 <Ad0> right?
1331 2011-03-05 14:33:53 <genjix> yep hardcoded
1332 2011-03-05 14:33:56 <Ad0> good
1333 2011-03-05 14:34:14 <genjix> the only central authority in bitcoin is during the bootstrapping stage
1334 2011-03-05 14:34:25 <Ad0> ok
1335 2011-03-05 14:34:27 <genjix> it searches for other clients by connecting to an irc channel on lfnet
1336 2011-03-05 14:34:43 <genjix> but you could include a list of clients in the software if you so wished
1337 2011-03-05 14:34:57 <Ad0> 12:35 < Raulo> This drop in difficulty estimate at the beginning of the current round was temporary. We are going for 75000-80000 next difficulty
1338 2011-03-05 14:35:08 <knotwork> there is a list of like mahybe 320 or more addresses coded into net.h
1339 2011-03-05 14:35:20 skeledrew has joined
1340 2011-03-05 14:35:28 <Ad0> that sounds like someone decides the difficulty
1341 2011-03-05 14:35:35 <ArtForz> nope
1342 2011-03-05 14:35:53 <Ad0> ok cause I was kind of getting the central bank vibe on that one :D
1343 2011-03-05 14:35:55 <tcatm> knotwork: how big is your wallet.dat?
1344 2011-03-05 14:36:21 <ArtForz> just someone with a lot of hashrate
1345 2011-03-05 14:37:37 <knotwork> martian botcoin wallet is 98304, all the others on that machine are 16384
1346 2011-03-05 14:38:21 jnd has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1347 2011-03-05 14:39:21 <Raulo> Ad0: the difficulty altgorithm is embedded in the bitcoin network. The difficulty is just an average of the global hashrate during last 2016 blocks expressed in some units
1348 2011-03-05 14:39:34 <Ad0> ok
1349 2011-03-05 14:39:35 <Ad0> :)
1350 2011-03-05 14:39:56 <Raulo> Everybody can contribute to the difficulty. A small player a little, a large one a lot
1351 2011-03-05 14:40:04 <Ad0> hehe :) cool
1352 2011-03-05 14:40:19 <Ad0> awesome
1353 2011-03-05 14:40:23 <xelister> slush: :<
1354 2011-03-05 14:40:33 <xelister> slush: still your slush pool seem to loose around 5% or shares
1355 2011-03-05 14:40:59 <Blitzboom> you mean stale shares?
1356 2011-03-05 14:41:00 <xelister> e.g. now I have: 112 shares reported, 5 lost (error while sending work to RPC)
1357 2011-03-05 14:41:23 <Blitzboom> i’ve got 2.5% loss
1358 2011-03-05 14:41:26 <Blitzboom> over several days
1359 2011-03-05 14:41:34 <Blitzboom> not too bad
1360 2011-03-05 14:41:43 <xelister> Blitzboom: did you modified miner to report this stats? :)
1361 2011-03-05 14:41:45 * xelister did
1362 2011-03-05 14:41:54 <Blitzboom> no, i use the gui miner :P
1363 2011-03-05 14:42:01 <xelister> which one
1364 2011-03-05 14:42:08 <Blitzboom> the only one?
1365 2011-03-05 14:42:13 <xelister> uh, what is the url?
1366 2011-03-05 14:42:23 <Blitzboom> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=3878.0
1367 2011-03-05 14:42:24 <bitbot> GUI frontend for poclbm released - looking for testers Connection refused.
1368 2011-03-05 14:42:32 <xelister> cool
1369 2011-03-05 14:43:13 TD has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1370 2011-03-05 14:43:20 <slush> 2.5% is still in normal, 5% looks pretty high
1371 2011-03-05 14:43:21 <slush> I have to go
1372 2011-03-05 14:43:21 TD has joined
1373 2011-03-05 14:43:31 <xelister> perhaps I had bad luck
1374 2011-03-05 14:43:43 <xelister> by normal we mean that this is the well known imperfection of the pool?
1375 2011-03-05 14:43:49 <knotwork> I had the impression that getaccount address was creating an address when asked about an account that never yet existed
1376 2011-03-05 14:44:20 <knotwork> but now I am wondering if really the case in which it hangs is precisely the case of no such account exists yet
1377 2011-03-05 14:45:37 <slush> xelister: no, it is known imperfection of getwork mining
1378 2011-03-05 14:45:43 <slush> xelister: which affect all current miners
1379 2011-03-05 14:46:36 <xelister> slush: is this because not informing soon enough about that we are mining for new block?
1380 2011-03-05 14:46:54 <slush> yes
1381 2011-03-05 14:47:15 <xelister> each 6 minutes we should loose 1 share imo?
1382 2011-03-05 14:47:17 <knotwork> hmm the damon that doesnt exhibit the hang problem does come up with addresses for newly invented account names
1383 2011-03-05 14:47:27 citiz3n has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1384 2011-03-05 14:47:38 kermit has joined
1385 2011-03-05 14:47:47 Jeroenz0r has quit ()
1386 2011-03-05 14:48:03 <xelister> each 6 minutes we should loose on average 5sec/2 = 2.5 seconds of work of a 1 share
1387 2011-03-05 14:48:11 <xelister> assuming we pool server each 5 sec
1388 2011-03-05 14:48:16 <slush> xelister: with 5 second of ask rate, you lose 5/600 of hash power
1389 2011-03-05 14:48:28 <slush> xelister: but it expect there is one block every 600 second in average
1390 2011-03-05 14:48:40 <slush> xelister: with higly rising hashpower, they come more often than 600
1391 2011-03-05 14:49:58 slush has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1392 2011-03-05 14:50:03 TD_ has joined
1393 2011-03-05 14:50:37 Jeroenz0r has joined
1394 2011-03-05 14:50:38 Jeroenz0r has quit (Changing host)
1395 2011-03-05 14:50:38 Jeroenz0r has joined
1396 2011-03-05 14:50:56 <xelister> 5/600 is just 0.8% not 2.5
1397 2011-03-05 14:51:27 <xelister> that formula is correct? with more hash power the lost is lower 5/100 = 0.5%
1398 2011-03-05 14:51:33 <xelister> 5/1000
1399 2011-03-05 14:52:30 <xelister> btw, what happens if we send new getwork with new ntime, but a milisecond later a solution with old ntime comes in? is that solution (share) lost?
1400 2011-03-05 14:53:34 <xelister> also, is it how it works now? miner pauses calculation between asking and getting new getwork?
1401 2011-03-05 14:53:36 TD has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1402 2011-03-05 14:53:37 TD_ is now known as TD
1403 2011-03-05 14:54:11 Jeroenz0r has quit (Client Quit)
1404 2011-03-05 14:54:30 Jeroenz0r has joined
1405 2011-03-05 14:54:31 Jeroenz0r has quit (Changing host)
1406 2011-03-05 14:54:31 Jeroenz0r has joined
1407 2011-03-05 14:55:03 jnd has joined
1408 2011-03-05 14:56:31 <gasteve> ArtForz: curious about your ASIC work...are you planning to keep it to yourself for mining or sell them to others to let them mine (wondering if selling them wouldn't be more profitable with manufacturing costs and what not)
1409 2011-03-05 14:57:26 <gasteve> (and wondering whether it could even be done at a cost/hash rate that is competitive with a 5870)
1410 2011-03-05 14:57:34 <ArtForz> nope
1411 2011-03-05 14:58:21 <ArtForz> component costs alone are already at ~5970 levels
1412 2011-03-05 14:58:39 <gasteve> but how does the hash rate compare?
1413 2011-03-05 14:58:49 <ArtForz> well, for equivalent hash rate I meant
1414 2011-03-05 14:58:52 <gasteve> ic
1415 2011-03-05 14:59:20 <gasteve> is it more power efficient than a 5970 though?
1416 2011-03-05 14:59:30 <gasteve> (for equivalent hash rate)
1417 2011-03-05 14:59:32 <ArtForz> yup, by a factor of 12 or so
1418 2011-03-05 14:59:33 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
1419 2011-03-05 14:59:51 <knotwork> higher hash rate simply means higher end cost since cost per actual hash done, in power, is higher
1420 2011-03-05 15:00:16 <knotwork> so 5970 can eat more money faster once it is running :)
1421 2011-03-05 15:00:24 <ArtForz> yes
1422 2011-03-05 15:00:47 <magnetron> knotwork: but the difficulty isn't continously adjusted
1423 2011-03-05 15:00:56 <gasteve> the economics are interesting...if you could make them in volume and reduce the costs...I think it would be beneficial to the community to get dedicated mining hardware out there...makes the network even more resilient...consume less power, etc
1424 2011-03-05 15:00:58 <ArtForz> and it takes ~ 2 years until power eats back the difference in initial cost at $0.10/kWh
1425 2011-03-05 15:01:28 x6763 has quit (Quit: leaving)
1426 2011-03-05 15:01:39 <gasteve> yeah, and my costs are $0.037/kWh
1427 2011-03-05 15:01:47 <flok> i have the feeling something goes wrong with locking or so. the default 64bit binary for linux won't work anywhere on my systems, and the build from source one runs only on 3 out of 4
1428 2011-03-05 15:01:50 <ArtForz> and that ignores that GPUs have resale value...
1429 2011-03-05 15:02:29 <gasteve> good point...don't guess custom bitcoin mining hardware would have any resale value (except for other miners and then the resale value equation changes)
1430 2011-03-05 15:19:21 <flok> ok this is stupid: only by adding extensive logging i found that bitcoind returns 0-byte replies (rpc) because there's a ip restriction....but i'm connecting from localhost and did not define any restrictions!
1431 2011-03-05 15:21:01 <magnetron> flok: are you connecting by SSL
1432 2011-03-05 15:21:56 <flok> magnetron: i did not select ssl in the config-file. and also i'm using the same bitcoind-binary and configfile so it should work directly
1433 2011-03-05 15:22:18 <flok> also some more logging would be helpful, not everybody knows enough about c++ to add his own logging
1434 2011-03-05 15:22:41 Tril has joined
1435 2011-03-05 15:23:14 <magnetron> flok: well why not log with wireshark?
1436 2011-03-05 15:24:06 <flok> magnetron: you cannot expect regular users to use wireshark and understand what is happening
1437 2011-03-05 15:24:12 <flok> really there should be more logging
1438 2011-03-05 15:26:10 <magnetron> flok: i guess regular users are expected to not have this problem
1439 2011-03-05 15:30:12 <knotwork> if you specify an IP to allow, will localhost still work or must it then also be explicitly specified?
1440 2011-03-05 15:34:55 ApertureScience has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1441 2011-03-05 15:35:55 <flok> magnetron: well i'm not doing anything special: i have a config-file with only rpcuser/password and that's it.
1442 2011-03-05 15:36:46 <knotwork> I found that putting -rpcuser=username on commandline gave me problems,
1443 2011-03-05 15:37:05 altamic has quit (Quit: altamic)
1444 2011-03-05 15:37:09 <knotwork> I have two different users who talk to the daemon via a non daemon call of bitcoind,
1445 2011-03-05 15:37:37 <knotwork> and the one who didn't run the daemon, whose username is not what daemon was started with,
1446 2011-03-05 15:38:03 <knotwork> has to not care who the user is, not in conf file, not on commandline. user just doesnt seem to matter,
1447 2011-03-05 15:38:29 <knotwork> provided the password is given it works, but if tries to specify use errors keep wanting a config file but
1448 2011-03-05 15:38:36 <knotwork> never like any ocnfig file the user makes
1449 2011-03-05 15:41:12 <knotwork> user also doesnt change the hanging, no matter which user asks for address, it hangs
1450 2011-03-05 15:41:13 ApertureScience has joined
1451 2011-03-05 15:51:28 sabalaba has joined
1452 2011-03-05 15:54:13 <xelister> interesting fact
1453 2011-03-05 15:55:08 towerX is now known as tower
1454 2011-03-05 15:55:53 <xelister> americacunts from pentagon are apparently taking steps to censor the Apache Video showing war-crimes of USA (killing unarmed civilians, leaving a dying girl they where ALREADY CARRYING to die instead taking her to medevac as they easly could. also, shes dying because they shoot car she was in). Google apache killings and collateral demage. Some time ago it shown videos of America war crimes easly. Now, almost all first-links are soemthing else,
1455 2011-03-05 15:55:55 <xelister> and the YT video requires to log-in. PR/censorship effort? :)
1456 2011-03-05 15:56:53 <magnetron> xelister: well YT was bought by an US company
1457 2011-03-05 15:57:06 <magnetron> xelister: one which is known for censorship
1458 2011-03-05 15:57:13 <xelister> magnetron: google?
1459 2011-03-05 15:57:25 <magnetron> so you've heard of them
1460 2011-03-05 15:57:30 <xelister> yeap
1461 2011-03-05 15:57:41 <xelister> interesting fact #2 - google donated to Freenet
1462 2011-03-05 15:57:58 <xelister> I guess they are paying pennies to get some argument in protection of theri corporate evil name?
1463 2011-03-05 16:06:12 <lfm> so thats been there almost a year now, you just find out?
1464 2011-03-05 16:06:29 BlueMatt has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1465 2011-03-05 16:07:32 <xelister> lfm: what was there?
1466 2011-03-05 16:07:38 <xelister> I was not googling this vid recently
1467 2011-03-05 16:07:53 <lfm> the youtube video from wikileaks
1468 2011-03-05 16:08:11 <xelister> in 2010 results afair where more correct
1469 2011-03-05 16:09:13 BlueMatt has joined
1470 2011-03-05 16:09:14 BlueMatt has quit (Changing host)
1471 2011-03-05 16:09:14 BlueMatt has joined
1472 2011-03-05 16:17:24 <genjix> magnetron: lol who hasn't heard of google?
1473 2011-03-05 16:17:27 <genjix> xD
1474 2011-03-05 16:20:08 <bitbot> New news from bitcoinsvn: gavinandresen made 5 file-release changes
1475 2011-03-05 16:22:28 <genjix> MT`AwAy: check pm ;)
1476 2011-03-05 16:27:17 TD has joined
1477 2011-03-05 16:32:51 <noagendamarket> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIcSL1EaODY
1478 2011-03-05 16:34:32 <knotwork> looks like regularly throwing away an address helps prevent hanging on getting address
1479 2011-03-05 16:35:05 <knotwork> I do getnewaddress throwaways each time a script is called, before trying getaccountaddress nick
1480 2011-03-05 16:35:21 <knotwork> that seems to do the trick
1481 2011-03-05 16:35:39 <knotwork> seems silly though
1482 2011-03-05 16:36:11 <knotwork> but at least my bot can actually get responses now
1483 2011-03-05 16:37:04 <CIA-55> bitcoin: tcatm master * r8e5aaad / (init.cpp net.cpp rpc.cpp util.cpp): Merge branch 'setaccountfix' of https://github.com/TheBlueMatt/bitcoin into TheBlueMatt-setaccountfix - http://bit.ly/ek5SKe
1484 2011-03-05 16:37:09 <CIA-55> bitcoin: Matt Corallo master * r279ab5e / rpc.cpp :
1485 2011-03-05 16:37:09 <CIA-55> bitcoin: setaccount should return if an invalid address is provided.
1486 2011-03-05 16:37:09 <CIA-55> bitcoin: This prevents setaccount from creating new accounts which do not have any addresses. - http://bit.ly/ggEvf2
1487 2011-03-05 16:41:29 xelister has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1488 2011-03-05 16:47:32 xelister has joined
1489 2011-03-05 16:47:32 xelister has quit (Changing host)
1490 2011-03-05 16:47:32 xelister has joined
1491 2011-03-05 16:52:22 CoachIT has joined
1492 2011-03-05 16:52:30 T_X has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1493 2011-03-05 16:52:38 T_X has joined
1494 2011-03-05 16:52:38 T_X has quit (Changing host)
1495 2011-03-05 16:52:38 T_X has joined
1496 2011-03-05 16:59:21 jrabbit has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1497 2011-03-05 17:07:28 Jeroenz0r has quit ()
1498 2011-03-05 17:12:36 Jeroenz0r has joined
1499 2011-03-05 17:12:37 Jeroenz0r has quit (Changing host)
1500 2011-03-05 17:12:37 Jeroenz0r has joined
1501 2011-03-05 17:13:29 sshc has joined
1502 2011-03-05 17:22:45 noagendamarket has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1503 2011-03-05 17:24:32 riush has joined
1504 2011-03-05 17:28:23 <Blitzboom> what’s new about 0.3.2.2?
1505 2011-03-05 17:29:12 jrabbit has joined
1506 2011-03-05 17:33:27 TD has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1507 2011-03-05 17:33:30 <tcatm> Blitzboom: important bugfix
1508 2011-03-05 17:33:36 <Blitzboom> which?
1509 2011-03-05 17:33:48 <Blitzboom> the transaction thing?
1510 2011-03-05 17:34:03 <tcatm> 0.3.20.1 clients not being able to download the block chain from other 0.3.20.1 clients)
1511 2011-03-05 17:34:07 <Blitzboom> nvm thread is there
1512 2011-03-05 17:34:08 <tcatm> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=4167.0
1513 2011-03-05 17:34:09 <bitbot> Version 0.3.20.2 released Connection refused.
1514 2011-03-05 17:35:08 <Blitzboom> best to deainstall before or just install it over the old?
1515 2011-03-05 17:35:27 <tcatm> just install over the old
1516 2011-03-05 17:35:33 <Blitzboom> alright, thanks
1517 2011-03-05 17:35:35 <tcatm> it's even enough to replace the binary
1518 2011-03-05 17:35:46 jrabbit has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1519 2011-03-05 17:36:10 TD has joined
1520 2011-03-05 17:37:28 jrabbit has joined
1521 2011-03-05 17:42:36 jrabbit has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1522 2011-03-05 17:52:43 <TD> Blitzboom: bugfix
1523 2011-03-05 17:53:57 <Blitzboom> >The whole transaction prioritization scheme was written by Satoshi after I suggested that de-prioritizing "small new" transactions might help the spamming problem. In the last couple of days we've exchanged email about possibly modifying it
1524 2011-03-05 17:54:06 <Blitzboom> so satoshi is still active?
1525 2011-03-05 17:55:23 <TD> he responds to mail from a few developers. i've mailed him a few times about things.
1526 2011-03-05 17:55:29 <TD> he isn't coding or taking part in the forums right now
1527 2011-03-05 17:55:47 <Blitzboom> so he’ll get back sometime, i guess
1528 2011-03-05 17:56:16 <TD> probably
1529 2011-03-05 17:56:33 <TD> i think there are quite a few people in the community now with a good understanding of what work is required
1530 2011-03-05 18:06:01 jrabbit has joined
1531 2011-03-05 18:11:51 jrabbit has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1532 2011-03-05 18:14:50 riush has quit (Changing host)
1533 2011-03-05 18:14:50 riush has joined
1534 2011-03-05 18:15:51 devon_hillard has joined
1535 2011-03-05 18:15:51 devon_hillard has quit (Changing host)
1536 2011-03-05 18:15:51 devon_hillard has joined
1537 2011-03-05 18:16:25 genjix_ has joined
1538 2011-03-05 18:18:43 jrabbit has joined
1539 2011-03-05 18:22:35 jrabbit has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1540 2011-03-05 18:25:33 dishwara has joined
1541 2011-03-05 18:28:18 Cusipzzz has joined
1542 2011-03-05 18:28:57 genjix has quit (Quit: leaving)
1543 2011-03-05 18:29:22 jrabbit has joined
1544 2011-03-05 18:31:06 genjix has joined
1545 2011-03-05 18:31:07 genjix has quit (Changing host)
1546 2011-03-05 18:31:07 genjix has joined
1547 2011-03-05 18:33:57 MacRohard has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1548 2011-03-05 18:36:43 oneman_ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1549 2011-03-05 18:37:59 <comboy_> reward per found block schould be getting lower and lower is that right? if so when will it start to happen?
1550 2011-03-05 18:40:35 <[Tycho]> Why they do that ? :) http://blockexplorer.com/block/000000000000e70491fe9da5891133130cb60eeeb0e756dda7cf6bdeaca2f519
1551 2011-03-05 18:41:32 <Cusipzzz> spammers
1552 2011-03-05 18:42:09 <[Tycho]> Looks like they did it intentionally.
1553 2011-03-05 18:43:07 <Cusipzzz> yep, they did. same addresses, so not pool payout spam
1554 2011-03-05 18:43:30 <sgornick> comboy_: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ#What_s_the_current_total_amount_of_Bitcoins_in_existence block 210,000 around Jan 2013 will be when it drops to 25 BTC per block.
1555 2011-03-05 18:44:10 <comboy_> sgornick: that's what I was looking for, thanks
1556 2011-03-05 18:44:20 <sgornick> you're welcome.
1557 2011-03-05 18:44:32 <sgornick> [Tycho]: Not everyone wants bitcoin to succeed, I presume.
1558 2011-03-05 18:46:24 <sgornick> s/presume/ believe could be one explanation/
1559 2011-03-05 18:46:57 TheAncientGoat has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1560 2011-03-05 18:47:02 dishwara has quit (Quit: Miranda IM! Smaller, Faster, Easier. http://miranda-im.org)
1561 2011-03-05 18:48:52 <TD> i'd rather believe in bugs
1562 2011-03-05 18:49:08 <TD> either that or somebody is doing something that results in tons of 0.1 payments being sent to them
1563 2011-03-05 18:49:12 <TD> and now they are consolidating
1564 2011-03-05 18:49:24 <TD> big transactions != spam, really
1565 2011-03-05 18:50:16 <Cusipzzz> they spam the blockchain getting payments of < 1 btc from same sources.at same time should be consolidated.
1566 2011-03-05 18:50:46 <TD> just means somebody is accepting payments of small amounts and wants to be able to spend it
1567 2011-03-05 18:51:13 <TD> the idea that small tx values == spam is one we need to crush. these aren't even very big transactions. the fact that bitcoin currently doesn't scale doesn't mean these sorts of txns are bad
1568 2011-03-05 18:51:18 <Cusipzzz> it's blockchain spam, poorly deigned app, malicious, whatever
1569 2011-03-05 18:51:42 anatoly_l has joined
1570 2011-03-05 18:51:49 <TD> or just legitimate business
1571 2011-03-05 18:51:51 <anatoly_l> ;;bc,stats
1572 2011-03-05 18:51:53 <gribble> Current Blocks: 112057 | Current Difficulty: 55590.23763914 | Next Difficulty At Block: 112895 | Next Difficulty In: 838 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 4 days, 10 hours, 36 minutes, and 44 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 71470.91608007
1573 2011-03-05 18:51:56 <xelister> I will give 5 BTC to anyone
1574 2011-03-05 18:52:02 <Cusipzzz> multiple small value transactions with same inputs and outputs is blockchain spam, period.
1575 2011-03-05 18:52:48 <TD> they don't have the same outputs
1576 2011-03-05 18:52:55 <TD> which transaction are you talking about?
1577 2011-03-05 18:53:16 <Cusipzzz> 1 sec.. i saw two .5 btc tx's that were identical
1578 2011-03-05 18:53:19 <Cusipzzz> in that block
1579 2011-03-05 18:53:20 <xelister> 5 BTC bounty for someont that is good in discussion. anyone?
1580 2011-03-05 18:54:31 <genjix> xelister: ?
1581 2011-03-05 18:54:33 <ArtForz> legitimate blockchain spam is still blockchain spam
1582 2011-03-05 18:55:19 * nameless !~root@weowntheinter.net|chains someone spam
1583 2011-03-05 18:55:24 <nameless> !~root@weowntheinter.net|TRY EATING THAT NOW
1584 2011-03-05 18:55:28 <nameless> !~root@weowntheinter.net|YEAH
1585 2011-03-05 18:55:30 nameless has left (!~root@weowntheinter.net|)
1586 2011-03-05 18:55:30 nameless has joined
1587 2011-03-05 18:55:35 <genjix> maybe it's mtux coding his client
1588 2011-03-05 18:55:38 <nameless> !~root@weowntheinter.net|nameless|: op me
1589 2011-03-05 18:55:45 <genjix> he has had some bugs before like that
1590 2011-03-05 18:56:09 <xelister> 5 BTC for asksing logicall questions to morallfag <ipatrol> on ##freenet-chan (he things USA is good and just, that war crimes like apache killing is ok but say coyping a song on internet is a big crime and all ;) ask questions to get him either logically explain correctly that he is right, or have him admit he was wrong
1591 2011-03-05 18:56:11 <xelister> genjix: ^
1592 2011-03-05 18:56:23 anatoly_l has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1593 2011-03-05 18:56:45 <ArtForz> hmmm... something smells
1594 2011-03-05 18:56:48 <ArtForz> brb
1595 2011-03-05 18:57:05 <genjix> xelister: meh, he sounds like a fool. why not just ignore him? ^^
1596 2011-03-05 18:57:16 <xelister> genjix: I would like to know why some americunts are moralfags
1597 2011-03-05 18:57:31 <xelister> because this is surprisingly common desiese even mongst otherwise intelligent people
1598 2011-03-05 18:57:32 <genjix> it baffles me too
1599 2011-03-05 18:57:45 <xelister> for example afair even jgarzik thinks USA is good and all
1600 2011-03-05 18:57:53 <xelister> at least to some point (didnt got reply to more quesitons ;)
1601 2011-03-05 18:58:20 <genjix> i also never got the religion thing :p
1602 2011-03-05 18:58:33 <genjix> but live and let live as they say
1603 2011-03-05 18:58:40 <xelister> also the ipatrol guy, says he is running tor and freenet nodes (altruisticly) because he belives in freedom
1604 2011-03-05 18:58:46 <xelister> and then he says things like that
1605 2011-03-05 18:58:48 <xelister> what the fuck
1606 2011-03-05 18:59:09 <xelister> genjix: but moralfags do not let live
1607 2011-03-05 18:59:24 <xelister> they start wars like USA, or opress everyone with stupid copryrights and patents shit (oh, again, USA)
1608 2011-03-05 18:59:39 <xelister> or patent drugs to let milions die in Affrica (USA, surprisingly)
1609 2011-03-05 18:59:57 <xelister> (the last thing being less of a crime because its more about not-helping then attacking)
1610 2011-03-05 19:00:56 Netsniper has joined
1611 2011-03-05 19:01:28 has joined
1612 2011-03-05 19:01:48 <Cusipzzz> without patents there would be no drugs for anyone.. you prefer everyone dies?
1613 2011-03-05 19:02:12 <ArtForz> proof?
1614 2011-03-05 19:02:15 <genjix> not sure i believe that
1615 2011-03-05 19:02:19 Netsniper has quit (Client Quit)
1616 2011-03-05 19:02:30 <Cusipzzz> where's the incentive to r&d and test the drugs
1617 2011-03-05 19:03:05 <genjix> could say the same thing about software
1618 2011-03-05 19:03:09 <genjix> or science
1619 2011-03-05 19:03:15 <knotwork> ah why get famous inventing new medical something when one can buty the formula so joe down the block discovers it instead
1620 2011-03-05 19:03:25 <knotwork> s/buty/bury/
1621 2011-03-05 19:03:59 <ArtForz> wheres the incentive to r&d and build particle accelerators?
1622 2011-03-05 19:04:07 <knotwork> in fact why bother doing research when some crapload of lawyers is gonna patent it out from under you anyway
1623 2011-03-05 19:04:21 <xelister> Cusipzzz: are you fucking stupid?
1624 2011-03-05 19:04:23 <knotwork> look at all our software they retroactively patented
1625 2011-03-05 19:04:27 * xelister btichslaps Cusipzzz with a cluebat
1626 2011-03-05 19:04:29 <Cusipzzz> grants...go ahead, lets see how many new drugs are created from grants
1627 2011-03-05 19:04:37 <Cusipzzz> lolol
1628 2011-03-05 19:04:46 <xelister> Cusipzzz: still corps would get $$$ to cover R&D, just perhaps they would be less super-rich
1629 2011-03-05 19:04:52 <knotwork> nearly every obvious idea that we got into computing to do, some crapload of lawyers years later has patented against us
1630 2011-03-05 19:05:20 <ArtForz> dont forget the crapload of "X, but over the internet" patents
1631 2011-03-05 19:05:22 is now known as Netsniper|!~kvirc@adsl-69-208-131-10.dsl.ipltin.ameritech.net|Netsniper
1632 2011-03-05 19:05:55 <lfm> yup let universities do research instead of private companies. the proffs do it for scientific fame and prestige. anyone can use results
1633 2011-03-05 19:05:55 <knotwork> as if morse code over a phone or radio is a new idea
1634 2011-03-05 19:06:39 <genjix> that would be a nice world :)
1635 2011-03-05 19:07:17 <ArtForz> it's completely BS and probably wouldnt hold up in court, but it seems patent examiners got replaced by a very short shell script quite a while ago ...
1636 2011-03-05 19:07:18 <genjix> it's a shame there's so much brain drain of scientists going to work on wall street or as code monkeys
1637 2011-03-05 19:07:22 <Cusipzzz> ya, meanwhile in the real world. money is important
1638 2011-03-05 19:07:36 <genjix> not to scientists
1639 2011-03-05 19:07:56 <Cusipzzz> haha, what scientists? they work at unis for free?
1640 2011-03-05 19:08:04 Diablo-D3 has joined
1641 2011-03-05 19:08:23 BlueMatt_ has joined
1642 2011-03-05 19:08:32 <genjix> you think that's their primary reason for studying science?
1643 2011-03-05 19:08:48 <genjix> there's a bit more to it than that
1644 2011-03-05 19:08:51 <knotwork> scientists invent money, if we need more we'll fork the code
1645 2011-03-05 19:08:54 <Cusipzzz> if it paid minimum wage, they'd probably do something else
1646 2011-03-05 19:09:12 <genjix> in the same way that people write free software because they enjoy creating something
1647 2011-03-05 19:09:31 <Cusipzzz> sure.. as a hobby.. very few people do it for a living
1648 2011-03-05 19:09:41 <knotwork> where is that animation that explains the research about what really motivates people at jobs etc
1649 2011-03-05 19:09:46 <genjix> and science isn't a hobby?
1650 2011-03-05 19:09:54 <genjix> imagine your day job being a hobby
1651 2011-03-05 19:09:57 <lfm> and people live just fine on professor's saleries
1652 2011-03-05 19:10:01 <Cusipzzz> no, it's a vocation for most.
1653 2011-03-05 19:10:22 <knotwork> they can't pay us enough not to do it so they might as well pay us to do it
1654 2011-03-05 19:10:34 <genjix> even subjects like paleontology or astronomy?
1655 2011-03-05 19:11:14 <genjix> there's a bit more to it than being able to afford your mortgage
1656 2011-03-05 19:11:16 <ArtForz> found it, PSU of the dual-6870 box blew up
1657 2011-03-05 19:11:21 <lfm> if their is students to pay tuition (with gov subsidies) then they can pay profs in those subjects
1658 2011-03-05 19:11:21 <knotwork> oh sure only reason people go into paleontology or astronomy is to get rich quick
1659 2011-03-05 19:11:55 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: wtf happened?
1660 2011-03-05 19:12:00 <Cusipzzz> not rich..but comfortable. some of them probably wanted to be artsits, but needed a paycheck
1661 2011-03-05 19:12:08 <ArtForz> no clue, something smelled like magic smoke
1662 2011-03-05 19:12:31 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: man, dont you have 120mm fans blowing into the psus?
1663 2011-03-05 19:12:45 <ArtForz> yes
1664 2011-03-05 19:13:10 <ArtForz> well, the duallies have a shared 8.2W 120x38mm intake fan for everything
1665 2011-03-05 19:14:12 <Raulo> ArtForz: What brand of PSU?
1666 2011-03-05 19:15:05 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: well, time to replace it with that psu you found thats shit proof
1667 2011-03-05 19:16:47 <Diablo-D3> Im surprised you havent bought like ten of those
1668 2011-03-05 19:16:49 <Diablo-D3> just for spares
1669 2011-03-05 19:17:01 <Diablo-D3> btw, you know what would be nice?
1670 2011-03-05 19:17:15 <Diablo-D3> a standardized version of removable cables
1671 2011-03-05 19:17:25 <Diablo-D3> every OEM seems to use a different one
1672 2011-03-05 19:17:37 <ArtForz> cooler master silent pro gold 600W
1673 2011-03-05 19:17:50 <Diablo-D3> bah coolermaster is faaaaaiiillll
1674 2011-03-05 19:17:55 <Diablo-D3> no wonder it blew up
1675 2011-03-05 19:18:26 <genjix> http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/03/05/1824220/Facebook-Offers-Easy-Commenting-Alternative
1676 2011-03-05 19:18:30 <genjix> fuck
1677 2011-03-05 19:18:31 <genjix> world is doomed
1678 2011-03-05 19:18:45 <ArtForz> box is back up with a SF 750W
1679 2011-03-05 19:18:57 <Diablo-D3> but yeah
1680 2011-03-05 19:19:02 <Diablo-D3> if we all used the same cabling
1681 2011-03-05 19:19:09 <Diablo-D3> we could swap a psu without having to rewire everything
1682 2011-03-05 19:19:22 <Diablo-D3> sort of a ghetto hotswap rig, but without the hotswap
1683 2011-03-05 19:19:33 <ArtForz> yep
1684 2011-03-05 19:19:42 <ArtForz> some 1/2U PSUs are heading that direction
1685 2011-03-05 19:19:47 <Diablo-D3> genjix: not really, they're just trying to attack disqus
1686 2011-03-05 19:20:30 phantomcircuit has joined
1687 2011-03-05 19:20:31 <ArtForz> standard wiring harness connected with mini-fits
1688 2011-03-05 19:21:06 <Diablo-D3> yeah it'd be a great idea
1689 2011-03-05 19:21:23 <ArtForz> so replacing a non-hotswap PSU is just 2 screws and 2 largish molex mini-fits
1690 2011-03-05 19:21:34 <ArtForz> *mini-fit jr
1691 2011-03-05 19:21:35 <Diablo-D3> 2? hrrrrm
1692 2011-03-05 19:21:38 <ArtForz> yep
1693 2011-03-05 19:21:42 <Diablo-D3> not sure if want
1694 2011-03-05 19:21:52 <Diablo-D3> because I'd like trees dedicated for molex and sata trees
1695 2011-03-05 19:22:06 <Diablo-D3> so I could get rid of all the fucking molex trees Im not using
1696 2011-03-05 19:22:09 <Diablo-D3> and get a 4 sata tree
1697 2011-03-05 19:22:18 <Diablo-D3> actually 2 4 sata trees, and a single molex tree
1698 2011-03-05 19:22:22 <Diablo-D3> that'd do my whole box
1699 2011-03-05 19:22:27 <ArtForz> iirc a 30 pin for atx/eps and another 26 or so for drives
1700 2011-03-05 19:22:49 <Diablo-D3> 6 hd, 2 dvd, and all the fans are plugged into a fan controller that takes a single molex
1701 2011-03-05 19:23:15 <ArtForz> I fucking hate 5.25" molexes
1702 2011-03-05 19:23:23 <lfm> ok so now we have at least 3 "standards" for you guys already
1703 2011-03-05 19:23:50 <ArtForz> well, the actual molex ones are nice, the chinese knockoffs... not so much
1704 2011-03-05 19:24:09 <Diablo-D3> I dont get why the fucking put molexes on sata trees
1705 2011-03-05 19:24:12 <Diablo-D3> it makes no sense
1706 2011-03-05 19:24:29 <ArtForz> usually the molex is close to PSU
1707 2011-03-05 19:25:04 <lfm> for another fan?
1708 2011-03-05 19:25:23 <ArtForz> for stuff in 5.25" bays I guess
1709 2011-03-05 19:25:28 <Diablo-D3> no I mean
1710 2011-03-05 19:25:31 <Diablo-D3> you have a tree
1711 2011-03-05 19:25:33 <ArtForz> fanbus, dvd, ...
1712 2011-03-05 19:25:34 <Diablo-D3> with sata AND molex on it
1713 2011-03-05 19:25:36 <ArtForz> yes
1714 2011-03-05 19:25:39 <Diablo-D3> WHHHYYYY
1715 2011-03-05 19:25:48 <ArtForz> pretty useful if you need *one* 5.25"
1716 2011-03-05 19:25:54 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: no
1717 2011-03-05 19:26:00 <Diablo-D3> because then you have a tree with molexes on it
1718 2011-03-05 19:26:18 <Diablo-D3> and we'd all be happier if it was ALL sata, with a couple sata->molex in the box
1719 2011-03-05 19:26:27 <ArtForz> so now I need to use the whole molex tree just to get that single one I need for my fanbus, yay
1720 2011-03-05 19:26:34 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: yes.
1721 2011-03-05 19:26:36 <Diablo-D3> basically.
1722 2011-03-05 19:26:44 <Diablo-D3> but you know what really pisses me off?
1723 2011-03-05 19:26:47 <Diablo-D3> trees with 3 plugs.
1724 2011-03-05 19:26:55 <ArtForz> and btw, whoever came up with sata power connectors should be shot
1725 2011-03-05 19:27:03 <ArtForz> why? even 3 is overkill
1726 2011-03-05 19:27:06 <Diablo-D3> I have 6 drives, 2 dvd drives, and they all take sata.
1727 2011-03-05 19:27:22 <Diablo-D3> one tree of four could do the lower enclosure, one tree of four could do the top 2 enclosures
1728 2011-03-05 19:27:34 <ArtForz> wiring gauge, mainly
1729 2011-03-05 19:27:48 <Diablo-D3> yeah but the way its now
1730 2011-03-05 19:28:01 <Diablo-D3> my case has a mobo plane with a gap between it and the case
1731 2011-03-05 19:28:11 <Diablo-D3> so Im hiding tons of wiring I dont want behind it
1732 2011-03-05 19:28:17 <Diablo-D3> just because its in the fucking way
1733 2011-03-05 19:28:53 <Diablo-D3> like, the bottom four drives, its 3 sata and a molex->sata
1734 2011-03-05 19:29:03 <Diablo-D3> off of 2 trees
1735 2011-03-05 19:29:10 <Diablo-D3> and virtually all of those trees is hidden
1736 2011-03-05 19:29:14 <Diablo-D3> just because its in the way
1737 2011-03-05 19:32:18 <ArtForz> okay... something weird is going on with that box, shut off again
1738 2011-03-05 19:32:27 <Raulo> I made a graph of total hash processed in the current blockchain: http://bitcoin.atspace.com/hashprocessed.png
1739 2011-03-05 19:32:33 <Raulo> Currently 1700 PH
1740 2011-03-05 19:32:41 <Raulo> Form the origin
1741 2011-03-05 19:33:01 <lfm> the thing about detachable cables is you lose em and when you go to upgrade you cant find the extra cables so it winds up you need a new psu anyway
1742 2011-03-05 19:33:23 <Raulo> *From the block origin
1743 2011-03-05 19:33:37 <ArtForz> lfm: decent PSUs come with a bag for the cables...
1744 2011-03-05 19:34:29 <lfm> so you stuff the bag in some corner of the case so you dont lose it?
1745 2011-03-05 19:34:36 <ArtForz> yep
1746 2011-03-05 19:34:48 <ArtForz> usually tie it into empty 5.25" bays
1747 2011-03-05 19:35:26 <lfm> seems like you might as well just stuff the regular connected cables into some unused bay or something just about as neet and cheaper
1748 2011-03-05 19:35:28 <Diablo-D3> lfm: I have a giant box of cables.
1749 2011-03-05 19:35:41 <Diablo-D3> dedicated to the task of not losing cables.
1750 2011-03-05 19:36:08 <ArtForz> ahhh, the good old spaghetti box
1751 2011-03-05 19:36:09 <Raulo> If someone has 1000 GH/s of spare capacity, one can overtake the current blockchain in 20 days.
1752 2011-03-05 19:36:37 orion has joined
1753 2011-03-05 19:36:40 <orion> Hi. My friend sent me 1.23 BTC, yet I have not received it yet.
1754 2011-03-05 19:36:41 <orion> I've opened up port 8333 (TCP), yet it still does not appear.
1755 2011-03-05 19:37:04 <TD> orion: when did he send it to you
1756 2011-03-05 19:37:11 <ArtForz> Raulo: yep
1757 2011-03-05 19:37:26 <orion> TD: 30 minutes ago.
1758 2011-03-05 19:37:35 <TD> orion: is your client still downloading the block chain ?
1759 2011-03-05 19:37:36 <ArtForz> actually... nope
1760 2011-03-05 19:37:45 <orion> I think so.
1761 2011-03-05 19:37:54 <Diablo-D3> ;;bc,blocks
1762 2011-03-05 19:37:55 <gribble> 112067
1763 2011-03-05 19:37:57 <orion> Is there a faster way to download these blocks?
1764 2011-03-05 19:37:59 <Diablo-D3> does your client say that?
1765 2011-03-05 19:38:11 <orion> I am at 98,000.
1766 2011-03-05 19:38:13 <lfm> orion: opening the incominmg port shouldnt really matter
1767 2011-03-05 19:38:15 <orion> 99,000 now.
1768 2011-03-05 19:38:18 <TD> orion: you have to wait a bit longer then
1769 2011-03-05 19:38:25 <TD> orion: the coins will arrive, don't panic :)
1770 2011-03-05 19:38:27 <lfm> ;;bc,blocks
1771 2011-03-05 19:38:28 <gribble> 112067
1772 2011-03-05 19:38:33 <TD> no faster way right now i'm afraid
1773 2011-03-05 19:38:38 <TD> this is a known issue with the current implementation
1774 2011-03-05 19:38:44 <lfm> oprion you need to get to 112067 or so
1775 2011-03-05 19:38:44 <ArtForz> Raulo: 1TH/s *more* than the current network
1776 2011-03-05 19:38:47 <TD> the fix is only partly complete though. so for now, you have to wait.
1777 2011-03-05 19:39:01 <orion> So, the more that people spend BTC, the faster all the transactions go?
1778 2011-03-05 19:39:09 <TD> not exactly
1779 2011-03-05 19:39:16 <TD> the block chain grows at a roughly "fixed" speed
1780 2011-03-05 19:39:16 <Raulo> ArtForz: yes + spome spare capacity for network increase
1781 2011-03-05 19:39:29 <ArtForz> yeah... so about 2Th/s
1782 2011-03-05 19:39:29 <TD> you're downloading nearly two years worth of economic transaction history :)
1783 2011-03-05 19:39:47 <Raulo> This mysterious miner is so close to half of the network so I start to worry
1784 2011-03-05 19:40:05 <ArtForz> at ~4200kop/s ... thats about 8.4Pflops
1785 2011-03-05 19:40:33 <ArtForz> = about the same size as F@H
1786 2011-03-05 19:40:36 <TD> Raulo: you mean the guy who dumped 100GHash/sec and then switched it off again?
1787 2011-03-05 19:40:50 ApertureScience has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1788 2011-03-05 19:40:53 <Raulo> TD: Yep. And I'm afraid he is getting more and more
1789 2011-03-05 19:41:03 <ArtForz> probably not
1790 2011-03-05 19:41:16 <orion> What number should I get to?
1791 2011-03-05 19:41:37 <orion> 112067?
1792 2011-03-05 19:41:37 <TD> orion: 112,067 is the latest block
1793 2011-03-05 19:41:39 <TD> yaeh
1794 2011-03-05 19:41:51 <TD> Raulo: could it have been slushs pool? that's nearly 100Ghash
1795 2011-03-05 19:42:01 <TD> or possibly vladimirs contracts
1796 2011-03-05 19:42:05 ApertureScience has joined
1797 2011-03-05 19:42:08 <lfm> ;;bc,blocks
1798 2011-03-05 19:42:08 <ArtForz> TD: http://bitcoin.sipa.be/speed-lin.png
1799 2011-03-05 19:42:08 <gribble> 112067
1800 2011-03-05 19:42:14 <TD> yeah i have that graph open
1801 2011-03-05 19:42:22 <Raulo> No, slush's pool block are known
1802 2011-03-05 19:43:03 <ArtForz> looks like MM has about 200Gh/s total
1803 2011-03-05 19:43:11 <TD> MM?
1804 2011-03-05 19:43:16 <TD> oh
1805 2011-03-05 19:43:18 <TD> mystery miner
1806 2011-03-05 19:43:18 <lfm> nto 51% tho
1807 2011-03-05 19:43:25 <ArtForz> the Mystery Miner ;)
1808 2011-03-05 19:43:41 <TD> yeah if you assume all of the growth after the dip is the same guy
1809 2011-03-05 19:44:00 <ArtForz> which it probably isnt
1810 2011-03-05 19:44:08 <TD> right. i guess we could set up a crawl of the network to find out the IPs of the blocks that are being generated. not that it changes much.
1811 2011-03-05 19:44:29 mortalis has joined
1812 2011-03-05 19:44:34 <orion> so, would it be accorate to say that there are about 2,700 bitcoin users out there?
1813 2011-03-05 19:44:41 <ArtForz> lets say it's 100-200Gh/s
1814 2011-03-05 19:44:49 <andrew12> hi
1815 2011-03-05 19:44:52 <TD> orion: not really.
1816 2011-03-05 19:44:57 <lfm> orion nope, you/we cannot tell that
1817 2011-03-05 19:45:05 <ArtForz> thats still at least top20 level ;)
1818 2011-03-05 19:45:07 <TD> orion: there are several thousand nodes at least. but there are people using the system who don't run their own nodes, or not all the time.
1819 2011-03-05 19:45:19 <Cusipzzz> and some people run multiple nodes
1820 2011-03-05 19:45:23 <orion> What happens if the feds take down the irc server?
1821 2011-03-05 19:45:36 <andrew12> orion: bitcoin will still worl
1822 2011-03-05 19:45:37 <TD> nothing. the software has a hard coded list of a few hundred seeds nodes in it.
1823 2011-03-05 19:45:38 <andrew12> work*
1824 2011-03-05 19:45:46 <lfm> orion: not much there is several levels of backup in place
1825 2011-03-05 19:45:47 <TD> and nodes record IPs addresses they see
1826 2011-03-05 19:45:50 <andrew12> also hi
1827 2011-03-05 19:46:13 <TD> anyway, "the feds" have no particular reason or legal justification with which to do that
1828 2011-03-05 19:46:18 <TD> bitcoin is not - as far as anyone can tell - illegal
1829 2011-03-05 19:46:33 <orion> The feds do not need reason or legal justification to do anything. :(
1830 2011-03-05 19:46:40 <lfm> even if Satoshi has gone into hiding
1831 2011-03-05 19:46:53 BlueMatt_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1832 2011-03-05 19:47:16 genjix__ has joined
1833 2011-03-05 19:47:57 <TD> orion: it'd actually be very interesting if they did try. all that'd happen is the irc network used for bootstrapping would change in the next release, we'd get tons of free press, the EFF would probably challenge it in court and lots of people would hear about BitCoin for the first time
1834 2011-03-05 19:48:44 <Diablo-D3> The Feds dont need a reason to do shit
1835 2011-03-05 19:49:16 <orion> True.
1836 2011-03-05 19:49:17 <Diablo-D3> they could declare WoW gold an illegal currency that could be confused with USD and raid Blizzard
1837 2011-03-05 19:49:20 <Raulo> If my math and method is correct (but it was OK for getting most of slush's blocks correct). The MM got 61 out of last 116 blocks implying 53% of the network or 350-400 GH/s
1838 2011-03-05 19:49:24 <orion> haha
1839 2011-03-05 19:49:28 <orion> Diablo-D3: No pun intended.
1840 2011-03-05 19:49:33 <Cusipzzz> satoshi is just charlie sheen, without the press
1841 2011-03-05 19:49:54 MacRohard has joined
1842 2011-03-05 19:50:01 <Diablo-D3> <Satoshi> WINNING, now with extra Japanese accent
1843 2011-03-05 19:50:08 <Cusipzzz> haha, exactly
1844 2011-03-05 19:50:17 <TD> Raulo: how do you know which blocks are his?
1845 2011-03-05 19:51:28 <Raulo> Clusters of blocks from the same IP. Listened on a few different bitcoin deamons with a few IP numbers
1846 2011-03-05 19:52:04 <ArtForz> or maybe you're seeing a bunch of the main relaying nodes
1847 2011-03-05 19:52:08 <Raulo> It's not perfect but I got 90% of slush's blocks when he started publishing delayed statistics
1848 2011-03-05 19:52:09 <orion> :|
1849 2011-03-05 19:52:17 <orion> These blocks are taking forever to download.
1850 2011-03-05 19:52:45 <Diablo-D3> orion: bitcoin doesnt yet download blocks from multiple peers
1851 2011-03-05 19:52:47 <TD> hmm
1852 2011-03-05 19:52:49 <Diablo-D3> which is kind of absurd
1853 2011-03-05 19:52:52 <orion> wtf
1854 2011-03-05 19:52:53 <TD> Raulo: so what is the ip of the MM?
1855 2011-03-05 19:52:55 <ArtForz> Diablo-D3: agree
1856 2011-03-05 19:52:59 <orion> This shouls be as fast as bittorrent.
1857 2011-03-05 19:53:00 <TD> orion: it's not bandwidth constrained
1858 2011-03-05 19:53:04 <orion> should*
1859 2011-03-05 19:53:10 <Diablo-D3> orion: isnt that what I just said?
1860 2011-03-05 19:53:11 <TD> orion: it's cpu/disk constrained
1861 2011-03-05 19:53:24 <TD> orion: it can still take a few minutes to download even when connected to a local server (over loopback)
1862 2011-03-05 19:53:29 <ArtForz> well, kinda, somewhat, not really
1863 2011-03-05 19:53:36 <ArtForz> few minutes != several hours
1864 2011-03-05 19:53:41 <TD> orion: see the discussions in the forum of "client mode" for the solution to this. it still needs more work.
1865 2011-03-05 19:53:53 <Diablo-D3> td: its somebody else's bandwidth constrained
1866 2011-03-05 19:53:55 <Raulo> TD: I don't have its IP. He is probably firewalled but I get blocks from the nodes he is connected to
1867 2011-03-05 19:53:58 <Diablo-D3> hes downloading from ONE peer
1868 2011-03-05 19:54:08 <Diablo-D3> someone whos obviously slower than his downstream
1869 2011-03-05 19:54:18 <TD> yes if you get unlucky then sure .... you can always restart the node to try and get a faster one
1870 2011-03-05 19:54:26 <TD> or forcibly connect to a known high bandwidth peer :-)
1871 2011-03-05 19:54:27 <Diablo-D3> thats not a solution
1872 2011-03-05 19:54:35 <Diablo-D3> it should download from multiple peers
1873 2011-03-05 19:54:56 <ArtForz> yep
1874 2011-03-05 19:55:02 <TD> the real solution is client mode :-)
1875 2011-03-05 19:55:13 <TD> the way the getblocks protocol works makes it kind of a pain to download from multiple clients
1876 2011-03-05 19:55:18 <ArtForz> why?
1877 2011-03-05 19:55:36 <TD> because you don't specify what to download using block indexs
1878 2011-03-05 19:55:41 <TD> it's based on hash lists
1879 2011-03-05 19:55:41 <ArtForz> use one peer for getblocks, use multiple for getdata()
1880 2011-03-05 19:56:02 <ArtForz> the 500 hashes getblocks returns are a LOT smaller than getdata for 500 blocks
1881 2011-03-05 19:56:11 <Diablo-D3> yeah
1882 2011-03-05 19:56:16 <Diablo-D3> art should submit a patch
1883 2011-03-05 19:56:19 <TD> heh
1884 2011-03-05 19:57:49 <TD> Raulo: i wonder if this guy even knows he is such a huge proportion of the network
1885 2011-03-05 19:58:10 <Raulo> Let's hope he doesn't
1886 2011-03-05 19:58:15 grondilu has joined
1887 2011-03-05 19:58:16 <TD> for that matter i wonder if anyone would even detect attempts to reverse transactions
1888 2011-03-05 19:58:22 <TD> maybe theymos
1889 2011-03-05 19:58:51 BitterTe1 has joined
1890 2011-03-05 20:00:05 <BitterTe1> Anyone familiar with reading the GPG keyring files?
1891 2011-03-05 20:00:59 <grondilu> BitterTe1: what do you need?
1892 2011-03-05 20:01:15 <mortalis> the guy is probably in this channel
1893 2011-03-05 20:01:34 <BitterTe1> I'm using BouncyCastle (C#) to open the skeyring
1894 2011-03-05 20:01:52 <grondilu> can't help. Don't know this stuff
1895 2011-03-05 20:02:09 <BitterTe1> I then save a list of the key id and user name, so the user can select a key to encrypt with
1896 2011-03-05 20:02:45 <orion> I wish there was some advanced tool we could use to visualize the network.
1897 2011-03-05 20:02:48 <orion> Or make queries.
1898 2011-03-05 20:03:03 <BitterTe1> orion: Like what? I've been thinking about ways to do that
1899 2011-03-05 20:03:34 <orion> Is there a way to see how many hops a bitcoin took to get to you? I'm new to this.
1900 2011-03-05 20:03:39 <orion> That would be really awesome.
1901 2011-03-05 20:04:00 <BitterTe1> Kind of
1902 2011-03-05 20:04:19 <BitterTe1> Every transaction has one or more inputs, which each have one or more previous outputs
1903 2011-03-05 20:04:31 <BitterTe1> No, just one previous output
1904 2011-03-05 20:04:36 grondilu has quit (Quit: leaving)
1905 2011-03-05 20:04:40 <TD> orion: blockexplorer.com
1906 2011-03-05 20:04:58 <TD> orion: so did you catch up with the head of the chain yet?
1907 2011-03-05 20:05:06 xelister has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1908 2011-03-05 20:05:15 <orion> Almost -- 111000.
1909 2011-03-05 20:05:16 <BitterTe1> If you follow each previous output to the last transaction, you could create a sort of tree
1910 2011-03-05 20:05:47 <TD> yes
1911 2011-03-05 20:05:53 <TD> you could visualize it as a graph
1912 2011-03-05 20:05:59 <orion> How often does a new block get generated? Evert 50 transactions?
1913 2011-03-05 20:06:00 <BitterTe1> Ok... IRC question now, somehow I'm online from a previous session and I can't use my normal name, is there a way I can fix this?
1914 2011-03-05 20:06:22 <TD> BitterTe1: if you registered with nickserv, you can ask it to ghost your old nick
1915 2011-03-05 20:06:26 <lfm> orion: nominally every 10 minutes
1916 2011-03-05 20:06:31 <orion> Is that hard coded?
1917 2011-03-05 20:06:35 <TD> BitterTe1: if your old nick is not registered with nickserv, you'll just have to wait for it to time out
1918 2011-03-05 20:06:42 <TD> orion: yes. but it's a moving average.
1919 2011-03-05 20:06:47 Cusipzzz has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.0.2 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
1920 2011-03-05 20:06:58 <TD> orion: over time it should average to 10 mins. in fact right now it's a little less because the power of the network keeps growing
1921 2011-03-05 20:06:59 <BitterTe1> TD: It's registered
1922 2011-03-05 20:07:13 <lfm> orion: it is random and readjusted once every 2016 blocks to get it back on track for 6 blocks/hour
1923 2011-03-05 20:07:13 <TD> BitterTe1: so talk to nickserv, like this: /msg nickserv ghost BitterTea password
1924 2011-03-05 20:07:35 BitterTe1 is now known as Bittertea
1925 2011-03-05 20:07:38 Bittertea is now known as BitterTea
1926 2011-03-05 20:07:46 <BitterTea> Sweet, thanks.
1927 2011-03-05 20:07:46 <orion> It would be cool if I could see the date as it downloads the blocks.
1928 2011-03-05 20:07:50 <TD> np
1929 2011-03-05 20:07:53 <orion> It would be like traveling through time.
1930 2011-03-05 20:07:59 <TD> orion: that would be kind of cool yes. wanna make a patch? :-)
1931 2011-03-05 20:08:03 <orion> haha
1932 2011-03-05 20:08:08 <lfm> orion: there are random variations tho so it can be widely varying for individual blocks
1933 2011-03-05 20:08:11 <TD> it's probably pretty easy
1934 2011-03-05 20:08:15 <orion> I will when you guys put out a FreeBSD port.
1935 2011-03-05 20:08:16 <TD> as blocks include (an estimate of) the date
1936 2011-03-05 20:09:42 <orion> 111200.
1937 2011-03-05 20:09:52 <orion> So close to receiving my payment.
1938 2011-03-05 20:10:02 <TD> nearly there :)
1939 2011-03-05 20:10:29 <lfm> orion: I think some people have it running on freebsd now but I dont know how hard it is to get it going
1940 2011-03-05 20:10:38 <orion> yay
1941 2011-03-05 20:12:35 <orion> Now, how come I see: "From: unknown"?
1942 2011-03-05 20:13:20 <lfm> you didnt name the address
1943 2011-03-05 20:13:36 <orion> Ahh
1944 2011-03-05 20:13:39 <orion> It appeared automatically.
1945 2011-03-05 20:13:59 <TD> there's no real concept of from-ness in bitcoin
1946 2011-03-05 20:14:10 BlueMatt_ has joined
1947 2011-03-05 20:14:23 <lfm> ya accually that from: field is only if you use the old send to ip number method
1948 2011-03-05 20:14:30 <TD> if you want to know who sent you coins, you have to create a new address specifically for each person who might want to send you coins
1949 2011-03-05 20:14:31 <orion> Ahh, I see.
1950 2011-03-05 20:14:38 <TD> then when you get coins sent to that address, you know who it's from.
1951 2011-03-05 20:14:51 <Blitzboom> isn’t that generally the best approach?
1952 2011-03-05 20:14:58 <Blitzboom> create a new address for every transaction?
1953 2011-03-05 20:15:12 <TD> that's how merchants do it yes. and it's easy to do in the official client.
1954 2011-03-05 20:15:17 <TD> it's not very intuitive though
1955 2011-03-05 20:15:28 <orion> hmm
1956 2011-03-05 20:15:32 <TD> most peoples first guess at how bitcoin works is to think of an address like a bank account number
1957 2011-03-05 20:15:40 <TD> rather than a label for coin flows
1958 2011-03-05 20:15:43 <Blitzboom> yes, that is misleading
1959 2011-03-05 20:15:43 <orion> I just randomly had a new receiving address created.
1960 2011-03-05 20:15:56 <TD> yes. the client rotates through them every so often. the idea is to improve privacy.
1961 2011-03-05 20:16:01 <Blitzboom> because actually, every address is an account
1962 2011-03-05 20:16:02 <TD> the old one is still available and working
1963 2011-03-05 20:16:16 <TD> you can see it if you open the address book
1964 2011-03-05 20:16:47 <Blitzboom> my adress book is going to get cluttered soon though
1965 2011-03-05 20:18:18 theymos has joined
1966 2011-03-05 20:18:33 <orion> hmm
1967 2011-03-05 20:18:51 <orion> How long does it take to generate a bitcoin? 4 hours?
1968 2011-03-05 20:19:01 <TD> no. more coins are generated with each block. so average of ~10 mins
1969 2011-03-05 20:19:04 <TD> hey theymos
1970 2011-03-05 20:19:07 <theymos> Hi.
1971 2011-03-05 20:19:19 <TD> theymos: quick question. if somebody forked the block chain and removed a transaction, would blockexplorer.com notice?
1972 2011-03-05 20:19:24 <TD> post re-org
1973 2011-03-05 20:19:28 <orion> I thought that a block was just a quantized list of transactions?
1974 2011-03-05 20:20:10 <TD> the first tx in every block is special and creates new coins
1975 2011-03-05 20:20:13 <TD> it is called the coinbase transaction
1976 2011-03-05 20:20:30 <TD> whoever mines the block gets to keep the coins, hence the motivation to mine
1977 2011-03-05 20:20:38 <Diablo-D3> TD: blockexplorer just shows the canonical chain
1978 2011-03-05 20:20:58 <theymos> TD: It would only notice if they go back farther than 5 blocks. Then BBE stops updating so I can see what's wrong.
1979 2011-03-05 20:21:01 <orion> so then in theory there is a chance that you will never get any bitcoins.
1980 2011-03-05 20:21:01 <Diablo-D3> if every single bitcoin user nuked a tx, then yes, blockexplorer would change too
1981 2011-03-05 20:21:06 <TD> theymos: ok. thanks.
1982 2011-03-05 20:21:12 <Diablo-D3> theymos: wait, what?
1983 2011-03-05 20:21:26 <TD> orion: you only have a chance to get coins if you mine. no mining means no coining.
1984 2011-03-05 20:21:44 <TD> orion: mining is an increasingly difficult activity. when bitcoin was brand new i did a bit with my cpu, but i don't bother anymore.
1985 2011-03-05 20:21:49 <orion> TD: But even if you do mine, there is a chance that the block will go to someone else, right?
1986 2011-03-05 20:21:55 <TD> i just trade them for state backed currencies
1987 2011-03-05 20:21:59 <theymos> Diablo-D3: I made BBE preserve most of the chain in such cases so that if an attacker is able to destroy all block databases due to a Bitcoin bug, the records are still preserved at least on BBE.
1988 2011-03-05 20:22:08 <Diablo-D3> theymos: thats good
1989 2011-03-05 20:22:10 <riush> at which point exactly would it fail, if a miner tried to pay himself more than that 50 BTC? would the network not just accept it, or is there more?
1990 2011-03-05 20:22:12 <TD> orion: yes. your chance of solving a block and thus winning the coins is proportional to your contribution to the networks total power
1991 2011-03-05 20:22:22 <TD> riush: network would not accept it, other miners would not build on it.
1992 2011-03-05 20:22:33 <riush> ok
1993 2011-03-05 20:22:42 <TD> orion: if you were to contribute 10% of the networks total power, you'd win 10% of the minted coins.
1994 2011-03-05 20:22:57 <orion> Is that an average?
1995 2011-03-05 20:23:00 <TD> yes
1996 2011-03-05 20:23:02 <TD> on average
1997 2011-03-05 20:23:13 <TD> it's all probabilistic
1998 2011-03-05 20:23:15 <orion> So, there is luck involved too.
1999 2011-03-05 20:23:24 <Blitzboom> there’s mainly luck involved
2000 2011-03-05 20:23:30 <BitterTea> orion: The clutter will be solved with a better GUI, but if it really bothers you before then, you could create a new wallet and transfer all the coins there, and keep the old one as just a record (and in case someone sends you BTC to an old address)
2001 2011-03-05 20:23:32 <TD> yes, mining is like playing the lottery
2002 2011-03-05 20:23:53 <orion> And why does it get increasingly difficult?
2003 2011-03-05 20:24:12 <TD> it doesn't have to. it can get less difficult. your chance of winning is proportional to total power of the network
2004 2011-03-05 20:24:16 BlueMatt_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2005 2011-03-05 20:24:23 <TD> for as long as more miners are throwing more power into the network, difficulty increases
2006 2011-03-05 20:24:29 <orion> Ahh
2007 2011-03-05 20:24:32 <BitterTea> Every 2016 blocks, the network determines the past average rate of block generation, and adjusts the difficulty to keep an average of a block every ten minutes
2008 2011-03-05 20:24:33 <TD> if one day interest in mining started to wane, difficulty would stabilize and start to decline
2009 2011-03-05 20:24:38 <Blitzboom> http://bitcoin.sipa.be/speed-lin.png
2010 2011-03-05 20:25:06 <orion> So, if everyone stopped generating blocks except for me I'd become pretty rich.
2011 2011-03-05 20:25:12 <TD> eventually
2012 2011-03-05 20:25:29 <TD> difficulty adjustments are bracketed
2013 2011-03-05 20:25:46 <TD> so it'd take a while for difficulty to decay down to a point where you could get lots of coins without huge amounts of hash power
2014 2011-03-05 20:25:50 <BitterTea> Going down in difficulty is much harder than going up, it seems. I wonder if that could become a problem.
2015 2011-03-05 20:26:08 <orion> Maybe it should be a rolling average.
2016 2011-03-05 20:26:17 <TD> that's pretty much what difficulty is
2017 2011-03-05 20:26:43 <BitterTea> If for whatever reason the network's computing power permanently decreased, I suppose a fork would be created?
2018 2011-03-05 20:26:56 <TD> no why would it?
2019 2011-03-05 20:27:24 <BitterTea> If it became prohibitively difficult to generate blocks, the confirmation mechanism disappears
2020 2011-03-05 20:27:54 <orion> How does the client know what is an what is not a valid address?
2021 2011-03-05 20:28:05 <TD> addresses contain checksums
2022 2011-03-05 20:28:11 <TD> BitterTea: nothing in the software would cause a fork
2023 2011-03-05 20:28:21 <orion> ahh. nice
2024 2011-03-05 20:28:27 <BitterTea> TD: I know, I mean a forked client and/or block chain would be necessary
2025 2011-03-05 20:28:41 <BitterTea> (it seems to me)
2026 2011-03-05 20:28:43 <TD> if so much power evaporated overnight it'd just mean bitcoin had failed to gain traction i guess
2027 2011-03-05 20:28:53 <orion> hmm
2028 2011-03-05 20:29:03 <orion> So, is there really much point in generating bitcoins anymore?
2029 2011-03-05 20:29:08 <orion> It's likely that I won't get them.
2030 2011-03-05 20:29:14 <TD> BitterTea: what you describe happened recently with the testnet
2031 2011-03-05 20:29:18 <TD> BitterTea: and it was indeed reset
2032 2011-03-05 20:29:39 <TD> orion: with your cpu? not very likely. if you have a good gpu you could put it to work in a pool and get some coins
2033 2011-03-05 20:29:46 xelister has joined
2034 2011-03-05 20:29:46 xelister has quit (Changing host)
2035 2011-03-05 20:29:46 xelister has joined
2036 2011-03-05 20:29:50 <orion> It's 50 BTC, right?
2037 2011-03-05 20:29:53 <orion> per block
2038 2011-03-05 20:29:56 <TD> yes
2039 2011-03-05 20:29:57 <xelister> orion: yes
2040 2011-03-05 20:30:00 <TD> currently
2041 2011-03-05 20:30:02 <TD> it'll go down in future
2042 2011-03-05 20:30:06 <xelister> for new few years
2043 2011-03-05 20:30:24 <Blitzboom> but in a pool, you’ll get your share out of every block the pool solves
2044 2011-03-05 20:30:55 <orion> How do the clients know that *I* got the answer?
2045 2011-03-05 20:31:09 <orion> Wouldn't it be in the clients' best interest to not tell anyone that I got the right answer, since they want it for themself?
2046 2011-03-05 20:31:18 <TD> you mean in a pool?
2047 2011-03-05 20:31:26 <TD> or generally
2048 2011-03-05 20:31:55 <TD> you might want to read satoshis technical paper to learn the details of how it works
2049 2011-03-05 20:32:17 echelon has joined
2050 2011-03-05 20:33:00 phantomcircuit has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2051 2011-03-05 20:33:08 <orion> I see.
2052 2011-03-05 20:33:10 phantomcircuit has joined
2053 2011-03-05 20:33:36 <orion> My friend got my payment... but both of us have 0 confirmations. Does this imply that we are peered with each other?
2054 2011-03-05 20:33:51 <TD> no
2055 2011-03-05 20:33:57 <TD> it just means there hasn't been a block yet
2056 2011-03-05 20:34:06 <TD> number of confirmations == number of blocks since tx was sent
2057 2011-03-05 20:34:07 <orion> then how did he find out about it?
2058 2011-03-05 20:34:15 Slix` has joined
2059 2011-03-05 20:34:19 <TD> txns are broadcast through the network
2060 2011-03-05 20:34:20 <theymos> Transactions spread through the network. All peers get them.
2061 2011-03-05 20:34:58 <Blitzboom> otherwise it wouldn’t be possible to include them in a block, would it?
2062 2011-03-05 20:35:05 <phantomcircuit> Blitzboom, exactly
2063 2011-03-05 20:35:26 <orion> hmm
2064 2011-03-05 20:35:29 <riush> until the next block is generated to confirm that transaction, you could theoretically spend the coins twice
2065 2011-03-05 20:35:44 <orion> riush: What would happen in that case?
2066 2011-03-05 20:35:47 <TD> that attack is complicated though
2067 2011-03-05 20:35:47 <phantomcircuit> riush, not just theoretically
2068 2011-03-05 20:36:01 <TD> it has afaik never been observed in the wild
2069 2011-03-05 20:36:19 <phantomcircuit> brb running attack
2070 2011-03-05 20:36:25 <TD> orion: your coins would stay at 0/unconfirmed forever and you'd be unable to spend them, i think
2071 2011-03-05 20:36:27 <TD> heh
2072 2011-03-05 20:36:33 <phantomcircuit> actually i cant generate a valid tx yet so
2073 2011-03-05 20:36:39 <phantomcircuit> bbl running attack
2074 2011-03-05 20:36:40 <dissipate> riush, it is possible that whoever finds the next block will be selfish and only include the tx for their 50 coins
2075 2011-03-05 20:36:53 BlueMatt_ has joined
2076 2011-03-05 20:36:54 <orion> So, who gets to decide what the next "problem" is?
2077 2011-03-05 20:37:05 <phantomcircuit> orion, ?
2078 2011-03-05 20:37:09 <TD> miners
2079 2011-03-05 20:37:18 <phantomcircuit> orion, the problem is fixed, the input to the problem is not
2080 2011-03-05 20:37:27 <orion> Oh, what's the input?
2081 2011-03-05 20:37:28 <riush> yes, not just theoretically.. but to my knowledge there is no publicly available software that can do it
2082 2011-03-05 20:37:47 <riush> dissipate, sure, i meant the next block it is included in ('confirmed')
2083 2011-03-05 20:37:48 <TD> the proof of work is a hash over the current block
2084 2011-03-05 20:37:57 <TD> miners decide which transactions make it into the block they are working on
2085 2011-03-05 20:38:06 <AAA_awright> I think I'm missing out on why the generated blocks can't include _all_ the transactions
2086 2011-03-05 20:38:11 <TD> if a tx doesn't make it into a solved block, it sticks around in memory waiting for some miner to include it in the next one
2087 2011-03-05 20:38:12 <dissipate> riush, oh ok
2088 2011-03-05 20:38:19 <phantomcircuit> orion, https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Introduction
2089 2011-03-05 20:38:32 <TD> AAA_awright: they usually do.
2090 2011-03-05 20:38:45 <Blitzboom> i second AAA_awright’s question
2091 2011-03-05 20:38:53 <AAA_awright> Why not as a mandantory part of generating a block
2092 2011-03-05 20:38:58 <TD> because that's racy
2093 2011-03-05 20:39:07 <TD> what if i broadcast a tx 0.1 seconds before you broadcast a block
2094 2011-03-05 20:39:07 <Blitzboom> nvm, because of spam i guess
2095 2011-03-05 20:39:26 <AAA_awright> What spam? It's an address and an amount
2096 2011-03-05 20:39:27 <TD> blocks take time to propagate through the network
2097 2011-03-05 20:39:48 <TD> you can't take a tx and say "this should have made it into a block but didn't" because you don't know whether the tx had propagated to the miner or not when the block was found
2098 2011-03-05 20:40:03 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, the tx's in a block are limited to 1MB to avoid spam, including all tx's would result in a pretty trivial DoS
2099 2011-03-05 20:40:14 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2100 2011-03-05 20:40:19 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, also verifying tx's is very expensive (read 'slow')
2101 2011-03-05 20:40:30 molecular has joined
2102 2011-03-05 20:40:45 <AAA_awright> I've been researching that and there's no reason for me to believe that has to be the case
2103 2011-03-05 20:40:50 <TD> it does not
2104 2011-03-05 20:40:58 <TD> see https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability
2105 2011-03-05 20:41:23 <AAA_awright> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=2035.0
2106 2011-03-05 20:41:25 <bitbot> Hash-based chainless transactions theory Connection refused.
2107 2011-03-05 20:42:02 genjix__ has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2108 2011-03-05 20:42:18 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, the problem is the signature verification is a very expensive operation, if every tx that was broadcast was included in the block, it would be trivial to DoS every peer with tx's back and forth
2109 2011-03-05 20:42:45 <AAA_awright> If all a block does is record the state there's no reason it can't include an unlimited number of transactions, so is it recording states?
2110 2011-03-05 20:42:49 <phantomcircuit> An ECDSA verification of a transaction input takes around 3msec on a modern Intel core.
2111 2011-03-05 20:43:12 <orion> mm
2112 2011-03-05 20:43:28 <orion> So, what's the difference between 2/unconfirmed and 2/confirmations?
2113 2011-03-05 20:43:41 <[Tycho]> Nothing.
2114 2011-03-05 20:43:42 <TD> that's not quite correct phantomcircuit
2115 2011-03-05 20:43:45 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, if a block includes unlimited number of transactions then an attacker can convert their network bandwidth into every other peers permanent storage
2116 2011-03-05 20:43:55 <TD> nodes do ECDSA verification whether they mine or niot
2117 2011-03-05 20:44:23 <phantomcircuit> TD, yeah im aware, but nodes also reject obviously spammy tx's before they do the verification iirc
2118 2011-03-05 20:44:30 <TD> orion: "unconfirmed" is just the softwares way of telling you it won't spend the coins yet. it waits for 6 blocks, but that's fairly arbitrary.
2119 2011-03-05 20:44:38 <AAA_awright> phantomcircuit: How does that follow? I'm describing a hash algorithm, not an encoding or compression algorithm
2120 2011-03-05 20:44:40 <TD> phantomcircuit: nope.
2121 2011-03-05 20:44:47 <phantomcircuit> TD, oh really?
2122 2011-03-05 20:44:51 <phantomcircuit> TD, jeez
2123 2011-03-05 20:45:04 <TD> phantomcircuit: there are lots of ways to DoS ("spam") the network today. the existing mitigations only stop you creating giant blocks.
2124 2011-03-05 20:45:34 <Blitzboom> TD: it’s one block actually in the original client
2125 2011-03-05 20:45:56 <orion> hmm
2126 2011-03-05 20:46:01 <Blitzboom> then you’ll be able to spend it. after six blocks it just says it’s confirmed
2127 2011-03-05 20:46:06 <riush> well, it would cost you (or at least delay your money for some time) because it wouldnt get in a block and thus you cant use *that* bitcoins for the next spam transactions
2128 2011-03-05 20:46:08 <TD> ah right, sory
2129 2011-03-05 20:46:12 <orion> Each client individually calculates the difficulty, right?
2130 2011-03-05 20:46:16 <TD> *sorry. i don't remember all the rules exactly.
2131 2011-03-05 20:46:22 <TD> orion: yes
2132 2011-03-05 20:46:25 <orion> hmm
2133 2011-03-05 20:46:27 <riush> so you at least can't DoS the whole network with 1 btc
2134 2011-03-05 20:46:48 BlueMatt_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2135 2011-03-05 20:46:49 <theymos> Bitcoin will spend coins with 1-5 confirmations, though it uses older coins if they are available. 6 confirmations are the number that attackers with less than 50% of the network computational power can't reverse.
2136 2011-03-05 20:47:03 <phantomcircuit> riush, and why would you even need valid tx's?
2137 2011-03-05 20:47:08 <orion> It's cool... this whole network works because people voluntarily follow the rules.
2138 2011-03-05 20:47:17 <phantomcircuit> if the attack is simple to DoS the tx verification
2139 2011-03-05 20:48:14 <JFK911> ;;bc,stat
2140 2011-03-05 20:48:14 <gribble> Error: "bc,stat" is not a valid command.
2141 2011-03-05 20:48:16 <JFK911> ;;bc,stats
2142 2011-03-05 20:48:18 <orion> I guess you could ddos the network by having two clients send a bitcoin back and forth in an infinite loop?
2143 2011-03-05 20:48:19 <riush> phantomcircuit, ah yes of course..
2144 2011-03-05 20:48:19 <gribble> Current Blocks: 112079 | Current Difficulty: 55590.23763914 | Next Difficulty At Block: 112895 | Next Difficulty In: 816 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 4 days, 7 hours, 8 minutes, and 0 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 71902.86211745
2145 2011-03-05 20:48:34 <TD> AAA_awright: i didn't really read your whole post, but you may wish to look at paillier cryptography
2146 2011-03-05 20:48:39 <JFK911> 71902!!!
2147 2011-03-05 20:48:45 <phantomcircuit> TD, assuming the 3ms/verification is right, i could DoS a node from my home DSL
2148 2011-03-05 20:48:49 <riush> orion, not regular clients, but if you modified it, yes
2149 2011-03-05 20:48:52 <phantomcircuit> TD, maybe 2 if i stretched it
2150 2011-03-05 20:48:59 <TD> AAA_awright: if that doesn't suffice, gentry lattice crypto may provide what you need
2151 2011-03-05 20:49:07 <TD> phantomcircuit: yes like i said, it's trivial to DoS nodes today.
2152 2011-03-05 20:49:10 <AAA_awright> orion: The idea of compression is that you can compress/hash all of those transactions to the final state
2153 2011-03-05 20:49:20 <AAA_awright> I thought the block chain did that
2154 2011-03-05 20:49:42 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, what?
2155 2011-03-05 20:50:06 <AAA_awright> orion: What would be harder to prevent is to send 0.0001BTC to a thousand addresses each
2156 2011-03-05 20:50:12 <orion> http://developer.wolframalpha.com/widgets/gallery/view.jsp?id=76444b3132fda0e2aca778051d776f1c
2157 2011-03-05 20:50:14 <JFK911> oh i think i got transaction fees
2158 2011-03-05 20:50:15 <AAA_awright> And next block, send them all back
2159 2011-03-05 20:50:26 <JFK911> thank you, those who flow fees freely
2160 2011-03-05 20:50:29 <JFK911> for these bit pennies
2161 2011-03-05 20:51:24 <orion> Based on that difficulty, it seems that it will take 2 days to generate a block.
2162 2011-03-05 20:51:27 <AAA_awright> phantomcircuit: What about what?
2163 2011-03-05 20:51:34 <phantomcircuit> <AAA_awright> orion: The idea of compression is that you can compress/hash all of those transactions to the final state
2164 2011-03-05 20:51:42 <phantomcircuit> wat?
2165 2011-03-05 20:51:43 <Blitzboom> ;;bc,stats
2166 2011-03-05 20:51:45 <gribble> Current Blocks: 112081 | Current Difficulty: 55590.23763914 | Next Difficulty At Block: 112895 | Next Difficulty In: 814 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 4 days, 6 hours, 52 minutes, and 50 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 71987.22402869
2167 2011-03-05 20:51:48 <JFK911> ;;bc,calc 400000
2168 2011-03-05 20:51:50 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 400000 Khps, given current difficulty of 55590.23763914 , is 6 days, 21 hours, 48 minutes, and 15 seconds
2169 2011-03-05 20:51:54 <orion> hmm
2170 2011-03-05 20:51:55 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, you mean pruning ?
2171 2011-03-05 20:51:56 <JFK911> ;;bc,calcd 400000 72000
2172 2011-03-05 20:51:57 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 400000 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 72000, is 1 week, 1 day, 22 hours, 44 minutes, and 54 seconds
2173 2011-03-05 20:52:00 <JFK911> LOL
2174 2011-03-05 20:52:13 <AAA_awright> phantomcircuit: If you send 1BTC back and forth between two addresses, the final state is as if that never happened
2175 2011-03-05 20:52:22 <orion> I am going at 1000khash/s.
2176 2011-03-05 20:52:26 <AAA_awright> It doesn't represent a change in who owns what, at the end
2177 2011-03-05 20:52:27 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, yes you're referring to pruning
2178 2011-03-05 20:52:30 <AAA_awright> It's conservative
2179 2011-03-05 20:52:46 <phantomcircuit> compression means something else entirely
2180 2011-03-05 20:52:56 <orion> ;;bc,calc 1063
2181 2011-03-05 20:52:57 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 1063 Khps, given current difficulty of 55590.23763914 , is 7 years, 6 weeks, 2 days, 15 hours, 5 minutes, and 51 seconds
2182 2011-03-05 20:53:04 <orion> Whoa whoa wait. Wtf.
2183 2011-03-05 20:53:16 <jrabbit> [Tycho]: any luck with user json data?
2184 2011-03-05 20:53:26 <orion> 7 years!? There is absolutely no incentive to generate hashes at this point.
2185 2011-03-05 20:53:39 <phantomcircuit> yeah you can speed up a lot of the tx stuff by treating the tx chains as a DAG
2186 2011-03-05 20:53:45 <jrabbit> orion: cooprative mining is feasible though.
2187 2011-03-05 20:53:55 <AAA_awright> phantomcircuit: Uh, what sense of compression? I don't mean the computer science meaning
2188 2011-03-05 20:54:01 <TD> orion: that's why people use GPUs
2189 2011-03-05 20:54:15 <TD> orion: and yes we're probably going to remove the mining menu option in the gui
2190 2011-03-05 20:54:18 <jrabbit> orion: a bout a month ago single cpus stopepd being sane
2191 2011-03-05 20:54:35 <AAA_awright> TD: I wish people would stop the attack on the GUI is there any good reason to do that?
2192 2011-03-05 20:54:42 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, compression usually refers to something where you can retrieve the original data, what you're talking about is pruning the tx graph
2193 2011-03-05 20:54:49 <TD> AAA_awright: as orion observes, it's pretty useless
2194 2011-03-05 20:55:04 <Blitzboom> mining shouldn’t be feasible
2195 2011-03-05 20:55:04 <JFK911> orion: you can thank slashdot
2196 2011-03-05 20:55:11 <orion> haha, why?
2197 2011-03-05 20:55:15 <orion> Too much publicity?
2198 2011-03-05 20:55:17 <JFK911> slashdot ruined it
2199 2011-03-05 20:55:19 <JFK911> right
2200 2011-03-05 20:55:21 <TD> i submitted a story about reaching parity with the dollar
2201 2011-03-05 20:55:27 <JFK911> thanks td
2202 2011-03-05 20:55:31 <Blitzboom> haha
2203 2011-03-05 20:55:34 <TD> slashdottings have a habit of dramatically increasing difficulty as so many new people get involved
2204 2011-03-05 20:55:34 <phantomcircuit> JFK911, ruined? no i learned about BTC from /.
2205 2011-03-05 20:55:38 <TD> JFK911: you're welcome ;)
2206 2011-03-05 20:55:41 <phantomcircuit> JFK911, and im CLEARLY an asset ;)
2207 2011-03-05 20:55:44 <TD> haha
2208 2011-03-05 20:55:46 <TD> :)
2209 2011-03-05 20:55:48 <JFK911> hope you are happy about your new lower mining productivity :D
2210 2011-03-05 20:55:54 <Blitzboom> pfft
2211 2011-03-05 20:56:01 <Blitzboom> higher difficulty’s good
2212 2011-03-05 20:56:02 * TD hasn't mined for years so he doesn't care
2213 2011-03-05 20:56:16 <Blitzboom> i would worry if it stays low
2214 2011-03-05 20:56:20 <orion> What do you guys estimate the conversion rate is?
2215 2011-03-05 20:56:25 <JFK911> 0.90 usd
2216 2011-03-05 20:56:26 <phantomcircuit> JFK911, more people == harder mining, more people == better exchange rates, more people == less chance of collapse
2217 2011-03-05 20:56:26 <orion> (to/from USDs)
2218 2011-03-05 20:56:30 <phantomcircuit> JFK911, it's a trade off
2219 2011-03-05 20:56:35 <AAA_awright> phantomcircuit: If you're going to complain about using "compression" correctly we could at least choose a better word than "pruning"
2220 2011-03-05 20:56:49 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, pruning is actually the computer science term
2221 2011-03-05 20:56:52 <orion> JFK911: Is that your own personal rate?
2222 2011-03-05 20:56:52 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, LO
2223 2011-03-05 20:56:54 <TD> orion: bitcoincharts.com
2224 2011-03-05 20:57:01 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, (:/) :P
2225 2011-03-05 20:57:03 <bk128> ;;bc,stats
2226 2011-03-05 20:57:04 <JFK911> orion: no i think i saw that on mtgox today
2227 2011-03-05 20:57:05 <gribble> Current Blocks: 112082 | Current Difficulty: 55590.23763914 | Next Difficulty At Block: 112895 | Next Difficulty In: 813 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 4 days, 6 hours, 45 minutes, and 15 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 72030.68728407
2228 2011-03-05 20:57:10 <JFK911> ;;bc,mtgox
2229 2011-03-05 20:57:11 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":0.9189,"low":0.9005,"vol":4734,"buy":0.9006,"sell":0.9105,"last":0.901}}
2230 2011-03-05 20:57:22 <bk128> did the network speed really just jump to 700ghash?
2231 2011-03-05 20:57:25 <AAA_awright> phantomcircuit: Nay, the state of the network is conservative, right? The final state of who owns what is not dependent on how it got there
2232 2011-03-05 20:57:28 <JFK911> actually it looks to me like the difficulty adjustment is off
2233 2011-03-05 20:57:37 <JFK911> but im not really looking deep into it
2234 2011-03-05 20:57:40 <TD> bk128: apparently there's someone controlling 100-200ghash who switched it on and off
2235 2011-03-05 20:57:50 <Raulo> bk128: last 24h average is 746 MH/s
2236 2011-03-05 20:57:53 <AAA_awright> We need a block chain that reflects that, pruning shouldn't be necessary
2237 2011-03-05 20:57:53 <TD> then back on again
2238 2011-03-05 20:57:55 <Raulo> GH/s*
2239 2011-03-05 20:58:03 <TD> the speed increases in recent weeks have been amazing
2240 2011-03-05 20:58:10 <bk128> shit
2241 2011-03-05 20:58:19 <JFK911> yeah
2242 2011-03-05 20:58:26 <JFK911> is it all from compute4cash
2243 2011-03-05 20:58:33 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, not at any one point, but for that to be meaningful you have to get a current snapshot from someone you trust, which in a truly decentralized system is nobody
2244 2011-03-05 20:58:38 <orion> haha
2245 2011-03-05 20:58:43 <orion> bitcoincharts.com looks so official.
2246 2011-03-05 20:59:09 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, so you can keep a current state for speed, however all true nodes will have to also keep at the very least a pruned tree going all the way back to the first block
2247 2011-03-05 20:59:10 <JFK911> oh you can trade btc for webmoney rubles?!
2248 2011-03-05 20:59:14 <bk128> JFK911: really? connected clients on compute4cash hasnt risen at all
2249 2011-03-05 20:59:30 <JFK911> people arent biting?
2250 2011-03-05 20:59:34 <Raulo> JFK911: if compute4cash stats are correct, he has only about 20GH/s
2251 2011-03-05 20:59:42 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, otherwise you're just trusting whoever gave you the snapshot
2252 2011-03-05 20:59:45 <JFK911> wow i thought lemmings would jump on it
2253 2011-03-05 20:59:45 <AAA_awright> phantomcircuit: All that matters is who generates the block, that's who we trust
2254 2011-03-05 20:59:54 <AAA_awright> The block is the snapshot
2255 2011-03-05 21:01:15 <AAA_awright> We don't just trust, of course, but verify
2256 2011-03-05 21:01:28 <AAA_awright> Verification is why we trust
2257 2011-03-05 21:01:52 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, sure and how does a node new to the network verify the current transactions?
2258 2011-03-05 21:02:16 <phantomcircuit> they have to download every single block and every single tx in those blocks since the origin block
2259 2011-03-05 21:02:23 <phantomcircuit> otherwise they're just trusting someone
2260 2011-03-05 21:02:32 <TD> are you guys even still discussing bitcoin or is this awrights half baked alternative?
2261 2011-03-05 21:02:53 <phantomcircuit> TD, you mean his magical non existent hash one?
2262 2011-03-05 21:02:58 <TD> right
2263 2011-03-05 21:03:04 <AAA_awright> phantomcircuit: What about that? I'm not calling for an end to that (not right here at least)
2264 2011-03-05 21:03:08 <phantomcircuit> no i think this is srs btc
2265 2011-03-05 21:03:30 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, that's exactly what you're calling for
2266 2011-03-05 21:03:31 <phantomcircuit> nvm
2267 2011-03-05 21:03:36 <phantomcircuit> </conversation>
2268 2011-03-05 21:04:35 <orion> https://bitcoin-central.net/
2269 2011-03-05 21:04:41 <orion> https://bitcoin-central.net/images/500.jpg
2270 2011-03-05 21:04:58 <AAA_awright> phantomcircuit: Uh, no, I'm questioning the necessity of recording the exchanges instead of verification of the final state
2271 2011-03-05 21:05:00 <orion> I guess Ruby on Rails is being a bitch for them.
2272 2011-03-05 21:05:30 <xelister> TD: what alternative
2273 2011-03-05 21:05:34 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, lulz those are one and the same
2274 2011-03-05 21:05:45 <phantomcircuit> orion, lulz
2275 2011-03-05 21:06:19 <AAA_awright> phantomcircuit: Because transactions are conservative, you don't need to record each one to calculate the final state
2276 2011-03-05 21:06:19 <phantomcircuit> orion, RoR is simultaneously easy and impossible
2277 2011-03-05 21:06:19 <orion> The website won't let me log on.
2278 2011-03-05 21:06:29 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, actually you do
2279 2011-03-05 21:06:34 <orion> Tell me about it. I am building a site in Sinatra right now.
2280 2011-03-05 21:06:36 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, if you're a new node
2281 2011-03-05 21:06:45 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, if you've already done the calculatiosn you dont have to
2282 2011-03-05 21:06:57 <orion> phantomcircuit: For what reasons do you like/not like Ror?
2283 2011-03-05 21:07:03 <phantomcircuit> orion, they probably lost their db
2284 2011-03-05 21:07:32 <phantomcircuit> orion, it has a tendency to explode in fantastical ways, and they deprecate stuff more often than any other tech i've ever used
2285 2011-03-05 21:07:47 <phantomcircuit> ffs they stop providing security updates 6 months after release
2286 2011-03-05 21:07:52 <phantomcircuit> nobody does that
2287 2011-03-05 21:08:20 <jrabbit> phantomcircuit: lol nobody uses ROR 6 months after release.
2288 2011-03-05 21:08:52 <AAA_awright> phantomcircuit: If a transaction is conservative, then it is not necessary to know each change, only knowing the final state is enough. In my post I discuss eliminating the block chain, but right now I'm discussing the hash itself, a method of also being able to *cryptographically verify* that the final hash is *valid*
2289 2011-03-05 21:09:06 <orion> phantomcircuit: What about other frameworks like sinatra?
2290 2011-03-05 21:09:17 <phantomcircuit> jrabbit, cPanel doesn't support 3.x yet, so if you have a cpanel dedicated host you're 100% guaranteed running vulnerable software
2291 2011-03-05 21:09:24 <phantomcircuit> orion, haven't tried it
2292 2011-03-05 21:09:32 <orion> Do you do any Ruby coding?
2293 2011-03-05 21:09:50 <phantomcircuit> im the lead dev for a start up working in RoR
2294 2011-03-05 21:09:56 <jrabbit> phantomcircuit: its targeted at rapid development so this makes sense
2295 2011-03-05 21:10:10 <phantomcircuit> i actually found one of the RoR devs in sf and yelled at him
2296 2011-03-05 21:10:12 <phantomcircuit> that was fun
2297 2011-03-05 21:10:17 <AAA_awright> If transactions were not conservative then it would be necessary to know each transaction because receiving 1BTC then sending it back would _not_ be the same as never making the transactions at all
2298 2011-03-05 21:10:39 <phantomcircuit> jrabbit, yes but then you have rapidly developed something you have to migrate every 4 months
2299 2011-03-05 21:10:51 <phantomcircuit> jrabbit, low initial cost with huge long term costs
2300 2011-03-05 21:11:03 <AAA_awright> I argue it might be possible to also validate a transaction based on the final hash only
2301 2011-03-05 21:11:25 <orion> phantomcircuit: The problem I had with RoR is that I always found myself fighting the framework.
2302 2011-03-05 21:11:25 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, you're proposing a hypothetical system, but have not proposed a way to stop double spending
2303 2011-03-05 21:11:29 <orion> I want to do things MY way.
2304 2011-03-05 21:11:32 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, it's harder than you think
2305 2011-03-05 21:11:33 <BitterTea> AAA_awright: Isn't that what the merkel root hash is, basically?
2306 2011-03-05 21:11:52 <jrabbit> phantomcircuit: You're not the target developer, get over it
2307 2011-03-05 21:12:08 <phantomcircuit> jrabbit, yeah im aware that im not their target developer
2308 2011-03-05 21:12:19 <AAA_awright> BitterTea: A merkel tree, a hash tree, encodes the history of transactions into it, that makes it nonconservative, and transactions are conservative so it doesn't make sense to do so
2309 2011-03-05 21:12:36 larsig has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
2310 2011-03-05 21:12:49 * phantomcircuit goes back to python
2311 2011-03-05 21:12:59 <phantomcircuit> which will be supported for about 3 years
2312 2011-03-05 21:13:06 <phantomcircuit> ;)
2313 2011-03-05 21:13:07 <AAA_awright> conservative meaning how you get there doesn't change the outcome
2314 2011-03-05 21:13:25 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, yes but proving the outcome is *hard*, that's the entire point of btc
2315 2011-03-05 21:13:31 <BitterTea> AAA_awright: But there is a difference between sending & receiving and not receiving at all
2316 2011-03-05 21:13:32 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, how do you not understand this?
2317 2011-03-05 21:13:49 <BitterTea> At least, based on my understanding of BTC
2318 2011-03-05 21:14:04 <AAA_awright> phantomcircuit: What do you mean by proving? Verifying is easy, breaking it is mathematically hard
2319 2011-03-05 21:14:24 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, verifying is not easy
2320 2011-03-05 21:14:37 <BitterTea> phantomcircuit: How so?
2321 2011-03-05 21:14:39 <AAA_awright> phantomcircuit: Verification is done in polynomial time, therefore it's easy
2322 2011-03-05 21:14:56 <AAA_awright> Or is that wrong?
2323 2011-03-05 21:15:00 <phantomcircuit> lol
2324 2011-03-05 21:15:11 <phantomcircuit> AAA_awright, verification with a block chain is relatively easy
2325 2011-03-05 21:15:27 <phantomcircuit> verification without a full transaction history is impossible
2326 2011-03-05 21:15:27 <BitterTea> Then what are you talking about?
2327 2011-03-05 21:15:34 <BitterTea> Ah
2328 2011-03-05 21:15:46 <phantomcircuit> BitterTea, he wants to eliminate the transaction history
2329 2011-03-05 21:15:54 <phantomcircuit> BitterTea, which is basically to eliminate bitcoin
2330 2011-03-05 21:15:59 * phantomcircuit is amused
2331 2011-03-05 21:16:10 <AAA_awright> phantomcircuit: Has that been proven? I want to argue that you can create a conservative hash tree where you get the same hash no matter how the final state was achieved
2332 2011-03-05 21:16:18 <AAA_awright> That's the crux of my post
2333 2011-03-05 21:16:28 <BitterTea> AAA_awright: Explain how that would work?
2334 2011-03-05 21:16:41 <BitterTea> (or could possibly)
2335 2011-03-05 21:17:02 <BitterTea> btw, I watched this video by Ronald Rivest last night... quite fascinating http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/879
2336 2011-03-05 21:18:04 <AAA_awright> BitterTea: Instead of hashing the previous block, you hash the previous state, such that HASH(CONCAT(HASH(A), AB)) == HASH(B),
2337 2011-03-05 21:18:21 <AAA_awright> That's possible, but can you make it cryptohraphically hard to break
2338 2011-03-05 21:18:25 <AAA_awright> That's not known
2339 2011-03-05 21:18:48 <AAA_awright> hmm
2340 2011-03-05 21:18:55 <AAA_awright> How can I better explain that,
2341 2011-03-05 21:18:56 <phantomcircuit> i can practically guarantee you that it's not
2342 2011-03-05 21:19:08 akem has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2343 2011-03-05 21:19:18 <AAA_awright> phantomcircuit: It's almost certianly not with a constant size hash
2344 2011-03-05 21:19:56 <BitterTea> I think the strong point of the block chain is that you can trace the history backwards to generation
2345 2011-03-05 21:20:49 <BitterTea> AAA_awright: What benefits would a conservative hash tree have?
2346 2011-03-05 21:21:31 <AAA_awright> BitterTea: You can leave out individual transactions, from which follows anonymity and privacy... (to a degree)
2347 2011-03-05 21:21:36 Necr0s has joined
2348 2011-03-05 21:21:40 Necr0s has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2349 2011-03-05 21:21:50 theymos has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2350 2011-03-05 21:21:51 <AAA_awright> The storage and initial download you would have to do would be greatly reduced
2351 2011-03-05 21:22:13 <BitterTea> For the storage concerns, a light client would be similar benefit
2352 2011-03-05 21:22:17 <AAA_awright> And arguably transactions could be accepted fast enough to use for day to day transactions
2353 2011-03-05 21:22:32 Omnifarious has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
2354 2011-03-05 21:22:48 <BitterTea> How would transactions be confirmed more quickly? Because storage is not as much a concern, increase generation rate?
2355 2011-03-05 21:23:31 Omnifarious has joined
2356 2011-03-05 21:24:04 JackRabiit has joined
2357 2011-03-05 21:24:12 <JackRabiit> Hello?
2358 2011-03-05 21:24:17 <BitterTea> Hi
2359 2011-03-05 21:24:20 <AAA_awright> BitterTea: Possibly yes
2360 2011-03-05 21:24:32 discHead has joined
2361 2011-03-05 21:25:03 <BitterTea> AAA_awright: The tradeoff would be (I think), an increased risk of attack by concentrated generating power
2362 2011-03-05 21:25:07 <AAA_awright> BitterTea: 6MB/hr is quite a lot of data to store for all eternity
2363 2011-03-05 21:25:31 <BitterTea> Since the difficulty is lower... you'd just have to wait for more confirmations anyway
2364 2011-03-05 21:25:43 <JackRabiit> Im trying to have my ATi 6870 help gen BTC's, i have a program todo so, but i have nowhere to mine. http://mining.bitcoin.cz/ is full.
2365 2011-03-05 21:26:04 Slix` has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
2366 2011-03-05 21:26:10 <[Tycho]> JackRabiit, http://deepbit.net
2367 2011-03-05 21:26:18 <AAA_awright> JackRabiit: What do you mean nowhere? Anyone can mine
2368 2011-03-05 21:26:24 <BitterTea> AAA_awright: Not all clients need to store the full block chain. There are ideas for light (only block headers), and ultra light (and pruned merkel trees)
2369 2011-03-05 21:26:29 <BitterTea> *client
2370 2011-03-05 21:26:54 <AAA_awright> BitterTea: The privacy issue still stands
2371 2011-03-05 21:27:10 <JackRabiit> thankyou!, by nowhere i mean i cant find anywhere, i am currently running the bitcoin software and i am mining as of this moment, but without my GPU
2372 2011-03-05 21:27:12 <BitterTea> JackRabiit: Check this out http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=3878.0
2373 2011-03-05 21:27:14 <bitbot> GUI frontend for poclbm released - looking for testers Connection refused.
2374 2011-03-05 21:27:47 <BitterTea> Not mine, but I'm using it. Pretty slick
2375 2011-03-05 21:28:25 Slix` has joined
2376 2011-03-05 21:28:43 Slix` has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2377 2011-03-05 21:30:48 larsig has joined
2378 2011-03-05 21:31:27 <TD> you don't have to join a pool to mine
2379 2011-03-05 21:31:29 <TD> you can go solo
2380 2011-03-05 21:31:33 <TD> there are other pools than slushs anyway
2381 2011-03-05 21:32:13 <orion> hmm
2382 2011-03-05 21:32:20 <orion> The weakness in bitcoin is only at the beginning.
2383 2011-03-05 21:32:48 <JackRabiit> okay so im on http://deepbit.net/ and i've register'd now whats the connection address?
2384 2011-03-05 21:32:50 <orion> If I joined bitcoin from the start with a huge cluster, I would effectively get rich really quick, while all the latecomers are stuck.
2385 2011-03-05 21:34:01 <[Tycho]> JackRabiit, try reading main page.
2386 2011-03-05 21:34:08 <JackRabiit> El Oh El
2387 2011-03-05 21:34:10 <TD> orion: pretty much
2388 2011-03-05 21:34:18 <TD> orion: at the start you didn't need a huge cluster
2389 2011-03-05 21:34:22 <TD> cpu mining was fine
2390 2011-03-05 21:34:30 <TD> when i first discovered bitcoin, there were probably <10 nodes
2391 2011-03-05 21:34:37 <TD> i mined a bunch of coins then threw them away. whoops.
2392 2011-03-05 21:37:17 <BitterTea> TD: Similar story, but I found it probably early 2010, but never downloaded the client
2393 2011-03-05 21:37:34 <BitterTea> Rediscovered and facepalmed in December
2394 2011-03-05 21:37:38 <TD> heh
2395 2011-03-05 21:37:54 <TD> we're still right at the start of this thing
2396 2011-03-05 21:37:58 <TD> so it's no biggie
2397 2011-03-05 21:38:17 <BitterTea> Yeah, dolar parity is a big mental barrier
2398 2011-03-05 21:38:38 <BitterTea> I keep thinking, what's the point of buying more bitcoin, they're already worth more than a dollar
2399 2011-03-05 21:38:46 <[Tycho]> Why do you think that it should cost more than USD ?
2400 2011-03-05 21:38:58 <BitterTea> Then I remember that I have disposable income and they are way more useful than a dollar per bitcoin
2401 2011-03-05 21:39:14 <BitterTea> Because USD is worthless
2402 2011-03-05 21:39:26 <BitterTea> To some, and probably soon to all
2403 2011-03-05 21:40:20 <JackRabiit> WOW! thankyou Tycho and Bittertea! im getting 220Mhash/sec!
2404 2011-03-05 21:40:23 <JackRabiit> how good is that?
2405 2011-03-05 21:40:24 <JackRabiit> lol
2406 2011-03-05 21:41:13 <BitterTea> pretty good :)
2407 2011-03-05 21:41:27 <JackRabiit> Oh my, thats only my gpu
2408 2011-03-05 21:41:32 <JackRabiit> my cpu isnt added in there
2409 2011-03-05 21:41:37 <JackRabiit> lawl how do i add my cpu?
2410 2011-03-05 21:41:39 <BitterTea> Yeah, but I find it slows down my gpu hashing
2411 2011-03-05 21:41:51 <[Tycho]> ;;bc,expected
2412 2011-03-05 21:41:52 <gribble> Error: "bc,expected" is not a valid command.
2413 2011-03-05 21:41:57 <[Tycho]> ;;bc,newdiff
2414 2011-03-05 21:41:58 <gribble> Error: "bc,newdiff" is not a valid command.
2415 2011-03-05 21:42:01 <BitterTea> Besides, IIRC it doesn't throttle well, so it will slow down your regular computer usage
2416 2011-03-05 21:42:19 <[Tycho]> JackRabiit, you don't need to use CPU
2417 2011-03-05 21:42:21 Necr0s has joined
2418 2011-03-05 21:42:37 <Necr0s> Generated (50.01 matures in 101 more blocks)
2419 2011-03-05 21:42:42 <Necr0s> Why is it 50.01 this time?
2420 2011-03-05 21:42:51 <[Tycho]> 0.01 is added fee
2421 2011-03-05 21:43:02 <[Tycho]> from txes in your block
2422 2011-03-05 21:43:10 <Necr0s> A transaction fee I collected somehow huh?
2423 2011-03-05 21:43:15 <TD> yes
2424 2011-03-05 21:43:20 <[Tycho]> Yes. Your block did.
2425 2011-03-05 21:43:22 <TD> maybe from the faucet
2426 2011-03-05 21:43:44 <BitterTea> You can examine it in blockexplorer
2427 2011-03-05 21:43:47 <[Tycho]> What is next expected diff ?
2428 2011-03-05 21:43:51 <BitterTea> See the transaction that gave you the fee, I think
2429 2011-03-05 21:45:27 <ArtForz> [Tycho]: a lot
2430 2011-03-05 21:45:29 <Necr0s> http://blockexplorer.com/b/112078
2431 2011-03-05 21:45:32 <Necr0s> I think it's that one.
2432 2011-03-05 21:45:42 <Necr0s> 50.01000001
2433 2011-03-05 21:45:48 <Necr0s> heh
2434 2011-03-05 21:46:26 <ArtForz> ;;bc,estimate
2435 2011-03-05 21:46:28 <gribble> 72509.82171799
2436 2011-03-05 21:46:40 <[Tycho]> Not nice.
2437 2011-03-05 21:47:20 <ArtForz> and thats actually still WAY low
2438 2011-03-05 21:48:34 <BitterTea> Necr0s: How does your client show that? Just 50.01?
2439 2011-03-05 21:48:50 <Necr0s> Think we'll hit 7 digit difficulty this year?
2440 2011-03-05 21:49:00 <Necr0s> yeah.
2441 2011-03-05 21:49:17 <Necr0s> Well, it doesn't show in the total yet. It has to mature first.
2442 2011-03-05 21:49:17 <BitterTea> What if you do a JSON-RPC call to the daemon?
2443 2011-03-05 21:49:25 <ArtForz> ~900Gh/s now ..., correct diff for that would be >125k
2444 2011-03-05 21:49:39 <Necr0s> uh...
2445 2011-03-05 21:49:40 <BitterTea> I'm curious if that would show 50.010000001 or not
2446 2011-03-05 21:49:46 <TD> 900?
2447 2011-03-05 21:49:51 <ArtForz> yup
2448 2011-03-05 21:49:54 <Necr0s> If I knew the call format I coudl try.
2449 2011-03-05 21:50:10 <TD> sipas graph still shows ~650
2450 2011-03-05 21:50:40 <ArtForz> last 100 blocks took 25626 sec
2451 2011-03-05 21:50:46 <TD> jesus
2452 2011-03-05 21:51:00 <TD> well this is good :)
2453 2011-03-05 21:51:43 <Keefe> ArtForz: so that 900 ghps is figured over just 100 blocks?
2454 2011-03-05 21:51:48 <ArtForz> yes
2455 2011-03-05 21:51:57 <ArtForz> so ofc HUGE margin of error
2456 2011-03-05 21:52:39 <ArtForz> could very well just be a lucky run at 650~700Gh/s
2457 2011-03-05 21:52:41 <Keefe> still, we might yet see 100k next diff
2458 2011-03-05 21:54:08 <ArtForz> probably not
2459 2011-03-05 21:54:44 <Blitzboom> ;;bc,stats
2460 2011-03-05 21:54:46 <gribble> Current Blocks: 112099 | Current Difficulty: 55590.23763914 | Next Difficulty At Block: 112895 | Next Difficulty In: 796 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 4 days, 3 hours, 43 minutes, and 16 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 72575.98702220
2461 2011-03-05 21:54:50 <JackRabiit> Tycho, Thankyou for all your help, you seem to be Very well versed in the matters i bring up. A question: when using deepbit.net how will i recieve the bitcoins that i've theoretically mined? is it; A.)they will auto send to you at a settable value B.) you have the ability to ask for them whenever C.)they are stored ona deepbit wallet D.) a better answer
2462 2011-03-05 21:55:28 <[Tycho]> JackRabiit, are you using proportional or pay-per-share mode ?
2463 2011-03-05 21:55:38 <JackRabiit> Proportional it would seem
2464 2011-03-05 21:55:58 <JackRabiit> aswell as i am unaware of the pay-per-share method
2465 2011-03-05 21:56:53 <[Tycho]> JackRabiit, your balance will be incremented in a hour after each block is generated. If your balance will be greater than your payment threshold, you will receive payment once per day.
2466 2011-03-05 21:57:13 <JackRabiit> Thankyou and okay.
2467 2011-03-05 21:57:46 <[Tycho]> JackRabiit, if you'll need your money urgently, you can PM me for forced payment.
2468 2011-03-05 21:57:52 <JackRabiit> is there a way to request micro amounts of bitcoins of two decimal places (eg:0.42BTC)
2469 2011-03-05 21:58:15 <[Tycho]> Yes, but at least 0.01
2470 2011-03-05 21:58:16 <JackRabiit> Thanks Tycho, i'll keep that in mind
2471 2011-03-05 21:58:32 <[Tycho]> Bigger txes are better for network.
2472 2011-03-05 22:00:47 ApertureScience has quit (Quit: Linux: because a PC is a terrible thing to waste)
2473 2011-03-05 22:01:00 <JackRabiit> what is this Pay-per-share method you mentiond?, and how might i add a tax to my >?do i want to do so....? i want to help the network but im clueless asto weather or not poolmining uses taxes?< pool miner
2474 2011-03-05 22:02:14 <Keefe> ArtForz: if i'm doing the math right, to get 100k diff, we'd need to average 715 ghps since last diff?
2475 2011-03-05 22:02:35 <ArtForz> yup
2476 2011-03-05 22:03:08 Necr0s has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2477 2011-03-05 22:05:00 Slix` has joined
2478 2011-03-05 22:05:42 <jrabbit> TD: maybe if the GUI deprecates generrating, we could put in some kind of BOINC thing?
2479 2011-03-05 22:05:51 <jrabbit> i.e. use the pwoer for good :P
2480 2011-03-05 22:06:37 <lfm> jrabbit: we ARE using it. it makes the currency system work
2481 2011-03-05 22:07:05 <jrabbit> lfm: no I know but TD was saying he wanted to actually remove the generation feature from the gui.
2482 2011-03-05 22:07:48 <mrb_> lfm: you created this graph, right? http://www3.telus.net/millerlf/hashes.png
2483 2011-03-05 22:08:03 <lfm> mrb_: ya
2484 2011-03-05 22:08:32 <mrb_> I am officially asking for permission to include this graph on my blog, with a reference to you
2485 2011-03-05 22:08:41 <jrabbit> lol
2486 2011-03-05 22:08:45 <mrb_> how should I cite you :)
2487 2011-03-05 22:08:46 <lfm> mrb_: feel free
2488 2011-03-05 22:09:22 <mrb_> k
2489 2011-03-05 22:09:28 <lfm> just lfm from the bitcoin-dev channel or bitcoin forum is fine
2490 2011-03-05 22:11:39 <lfm> mrb_: whats your block url?
2491 2011-03-05 22:11:44 <lfm> blog
2492 2011-03-05 22:11:58 <mrb_> blog.zorinaq.com
2493 2011-03-05 22:16:10 <mrb_> can't find the historical difficulty data right now. nullvoid.org/difficultiez.php is down
2494 2011-03-05 22:16:31 <Raulo> mrb_: I have a copy. Just a second
2495 2011-03-05 22:17:08 <mrb_> oh thx, that would be even better
2496 2011-03-05 22:17:48 <Raulo> http://bitcoin.atspace.com/difficultiez.txt
2497 2011-03-05 22:18:04 <Raulo> What do you need it for?
2498 2011-03-05 22:18:28 <mrb_> make some graphs
2499 2011-03-05 22:19:19 JackRabiit has quit (Quit: Page closed)
2500 2011-03-05 22:19:38 <mrb_> hmm actually I prefer lfm's graph
2501 2011-03-05 22:20:50 <mrb_> lfm: can I send you 10 BTC?
2502 2011-03-05 22:22:17 <genjix> i made this, http://images.4chan.org/b/src/1299363177668.jpg
2503 2011-03-05 22:22:22 <genjix> hope u enjoy
2504 2011-03-05 22:23:02 <lfm> 192SJbE3jxXDDwuamT3GUeWDPBTDU1h3Jx
2505 2011-03-05 22:23:48 <mrb_> done
2506 2011-03-05 22:24:51 <lfm> mrb_: thanks
2507 2011-03-05 22:25:04 <bk128> ArtForz: did the sASIC company steal your design and set up a room full of miners
2508 2011-03-05 22:25:09 <bk128> :p
2509 2011-03-05 22:25:26 <ArtForz> unlikely
2510 2011-03-05 22:25:31 <phantomcircuit> bk128, something tells me they could have done the design all themselves ...
2511 2011-03-05 22:25:51 <ArtForz> well, it's not rocket science
2512 2011-03-05 22:25:53 <lfm> they'd need docs to know how to use em
2513 2011-03-05 22:26:01 <Raulo> What if this is an exploit? I can't believe somebody brought 200 GH/s almost overnight
2514 2011-03-05 22:26:09 <ArtForz> well, actually... looking at the papers on SHA256 on FPGA... maybe it is
2515 2011-03-05 22:26:28 <bk128> I know. But people are still just learning about bitcoin
2516 2011-03-05 22:26:40 <lfm> so might be a botnet?
2517 2011-03-05 22:26:43 <phantomcircuit> was there a massive spike in mining traffic?
2518 2011-03-05 22:27:00 <lfm> not that massive imho
2519 2011-03-05 22:27:11 <ArtForz> they *still* try to use CSAs, about the fastest possible way to get routing congestion
2520 2011-03-05 22:27:40 <ArtForz> using CSAs hasnt been a good idea since... the original virtex
2521 2011-03-05 22:27:42 <phantomcircuit> ArtForz, CSA?
2522 2011-03-05 22:27:48 <ArtForz> carry save adders
2523 2011-03-05 22:27:54 <phantomcircuit> oh
2524 2011-03-05 22:28:56 <lfm> so how do you handle carry ripple? just downclocking?
2525 2011-03-05 22:29:16 <ArtForz> that and pipelining
2526 2011-03-05 22:29:21 dissipate has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2527 2011-03-05 22:30:24 <ArtForz> adding a pipeline stage in the round helps quite a bit
2528 2011-03-05 22:31:37 <lfm> so you essentially do 16 bit carry ripple per clock?
2529 2011-03-05 22:31:50 <phantomcircuit> question, if you managed to break ECDSA you would not be able to spend coins that have already been spent right?
2530 2011-03-05 22:32:22 <phantomcircuit> so even if ECDSA was broken the client could move to a new signature algorithm
2531 2011-03-05 22:32:43 <ArtForz> errr... no
2532 2011-03-05 22:33:05 <phantomcircuit> ArtForz, how so?
2533 2011-03-05 22:33:23 <BitterTea> a break is just a method faster than brute force
2534 2011-03-05 22:33:38 <edcba_> let's speculate on what to do when ecdsa is broken :)
2535 2011-03-05 22:33:56 <ArtForz> critical path in a simple pileined impl is a = so + maj + h + s1 + ch + k + w
2536 2011-03-05 22:33:56 <phantomcircuit> BitterTea, assume a substantial break allowing for calculating valid signatures sometime this decade ;)
2537 2011-03-05 22:34:01 <ArtForz> *pipelined
2538 2011-03-05 22:34:12 <phantomcircuit> ArtForz, oh not talking to me :P
2539 2011-03-05 22:34:22 <ArtForz> and yes, thats a 7-input 32-bit adder
2540 2011-03-05 22:34:55 <ArtForz> though you can calculate h + k + w in the prev round
2541 2011-03-05 22:35:25 <ArtForz> so it's "only" a = s0 + maj + s1 + ch + hkw
2542 2011-03-05 22:35:54 <ArtForz> which is... a 5-input adder, better, but not by much
2543 2011-03-05 22:37:09 <BitterTea> phantomcircuit: I happened to find this post by Satoshi today, http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=202.msg2133#msg2133
2544 2011-03-05 22:37:12 <bitbot> Major Meltdown Connection refused.
2545 2011-03-05 22:37:37 <ArtForz> add another set of registers, put t0 = s0 + maj; t1 = s1 + ch; in the first stage, bunch of regs to carry along a..h and hkw
2546 2011-03-05 22:37:45 <phantomcircuit> BitterTea, yeah that's what i though
2547 2011-03-05 22:38:05 <phantomcircuit> so the only way to cryptographically break bitcoin would be by breaking sha256
2548 2011-03-05 22:38:07 <ArtForz> now your ciritcal path is simply a = t0 + t1 + t_hkw
2549 2011-03-05 22:38:43 <BitterTea> Even then, I think another hashing algorithm could be used
2550 2011-03-05 22:39:09 <phantomcircuit> BitterTea, uh how?
2551 2011-03-05 22:39:34 <ArtForz> nice part is, the logically "intensive" stuff s0/maj/s1/ch just feeds into simple 2-input 32 bit adders
2552 2011-03-05 22:40:22 <BitterTea> phantomcircuit: I don't know, why not?
2553 2011-03-05 22:40:47 <ArtForz> problem is, it's still nearly impossible to route on a FPGA
2554 2011-03-05 22:41:50 <ArtForz> sure, for a single round on a otherwise empty chip the tools usually find a placement that gives at least a halfway decent clock
2555 2011-03-05 22:41:52 <lfm> ArtForz: ok thanks, I think I get it as much as I likely will at my level of familiarity with hardware etc
2556 2011-03-05 22:43:20 <ArtForz> try the same with enough 1-round engines to fill half the chip or a single multi-round engine and place/route tools pretty much give up
2557 2011-03-05 22:44:24 <BitterTea> Interesting... just watching this video explaining no key cryptography
2558 2011-03-05 22:44:36 <BitterTea> http://mitworld.mit.edu/video/42
2559 2011-03-05 22:45:32 <lfm> BitterTea: I think its still one key, just the key may be too simplistic to recognize
2560 2011-03-05 22:45:33 <BitterTea> Requires a commutable cipher. Alice encrypts a message, sends it to Bob. Bob encrypts it, sends it back. Alice decrypts it and sends it back. Bob decrypts it and reads the message.
2561 2011-03-05 22:45:52 <BitterTea> No sharing of keys, I think is the meaning
2562 2011-03-05 22:47:13 <lfm> BitterTea: ok thats public key. still has keys
2563 2011-03-05 22:47:35 <phantomcircuit> BitterTea, lulz worst dye job ever
2564 2011-03-05 22:47:45 <BitterTea> lfm: No, there's no public key, only a private. The cipher used has to be commutable, so they can be applied and removed in any order with the same result.
2565 2011-03-05 22:48:20 <ArtForz> erm... it provides 0 authentication
2566 2011-03-05 22:48:40 <BitterTea> You could pass a message along a P2P network this way... though it might be bandwidth intensive
2567 2011-03-05 22:48:40 <phantomcircuit> what ArtForz said
2568 2011-03-05 22:48:48 <ArtForz> and if you have to use PK for auth anyways... why not use DH?
2569 2011-03-05 22:49:24 <ArtForz> or some other key agreement scheme
2570 2011-03-05 22:51:06 <Keefe> hmm, to get 100k next diff, we'd have to find 791 blocks in just 30 hours, which would require 1749 ghps with average luck
2571 2011-03-05 22:51:17 <ArtForz> yep, very unlikely
2572 2011-03-05 22:51:38 <ArtForz> diff-after-next should hit 100k though
2573 2011-03-05 22:51:44 <BitterTea> ArtForz: It could be a way of securely transmitting information even if there is an easier way to factor large numbers
2574 2011-03-05 22:52:03 <ArtForz> BitterTea: trivial to MITM
2575 2011-03-05 22:52:19 * jgarzik wants to see some non-mining business appear in the bitcoin economy, otherwise it really will be a pyramid scheme
2576 2011-03-05 22:52:48 <BitterTea> Yeah, it is
2577 2011-03-05 22:53:11 <ArtForz> so... whats the point again?
2578 2011-03-05 22:53:13 <BitterTea> Wait, are you sure? I don't think it matters who transports the message, they'll never be able to see it
2579 2011-03-05 22:53:38 <ArtForz> E intercepts message from A, encrypts it, sends it back to A, gets back decrypted message, decrypts it, now E has plaintext, E then proceeds to impersonate A towards B
2580 2011-03-05 22:54:39 <ArtForz> = you still need public key crypto to provide authentication
2581 2011-03-05 22:54:50 <BitterTea> Or like you said, some other method
2582 2011-03-05 22:55:00 <Diablo-D3> I just had a horrid idea
2583 2011-03-05 22:55:08 <Diablo-D3> you know how python lurves whitespace?
2584 2011-03-05 22:55:20 <Diablo-D3> encode a whitespace progarm in the whitespace.
2585 2011-03-05 22:55:27 <ArtForz> but then why not use the same "some other method" to do key exchange?
2586 2011-03-05 22:55:36 <lfm> Diablo-D3: well horrid ideas seem to be your specialty
2587 2011-03-05 22:56:48 <BitterTea> ArtForz: Haha, I should have continued watching the video
2588 2011-03-05 22:57:02 <BitterTea> It was a straw man
2589 2011-03-05 22:57:09 <BitterTea> I just thought it was an interesting idea
2590 2011-03-05 22:57:35 <ArtForz> well, it sounded like a very complicated way to do pretty much nothing
2591 2011-03-05 22:57:45 <BitterTea> It's a talk titled "Cryptography - Science or Magic?", I got fooled by the magic
2592 2011-03-05 22:58:38 m86 has joined
2593 2011-03-05 23:00:48 <lfm> clarke's law?
2594 2011-03-05 23:04:07 Syke_ has joined
2595 2011-03-05 23:04:49 sethsethseth__ has quit (Quit: ~ Trillian Astra - www.trillian.im ~)
2596 2011-03-05 23:06:02 JackRabiit has joined
2597 2011-03-05 23:06:14 <JackRabiit> Hello everyone!, i have a question.
2598 2011-03-05 23:06:52 <JackRabiit> what is the server for the solo bitcoin mining
2599 2011-03-05 23:06:58 <JackRabiit> does anyone know?
2600 2011-03-05 23:06:58 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2601 2011-03-05 23:07:06 molecular has joined
2602 2011-03-05 23:07:22 <BitterTea> JackRabiit: If you set it up already, it's 127.0.0.1:8332
2603 2011-03-05 23:07:44 <JackRabiit> Really? you just set the internal ip? and you start solo bitcoin mining?
2604 2011-03-05 23:07:53 <JackRabiit> erm
2605 2011-03-05 23:08:02 <JackRabiit> set it too the internal ip
2606 2011-03-05 23:08:05 <BitterTea> You have to set rpcuser and rpcpass in bitcoin.conf
2607 2011-03-05 23:08:11 <JackRabiit> 127.xx being the internal one
2608 2011-03-05 23:08:12 <BitterTea> Then start bitcoind or bitcoin -server
2609 2011-03-05 23:08:25 <BitterTea> Then you can point your miner at that IP to begin mining
2610 2011-03-05 23:08:34 <xelister> jgarzik: what is on your mind in this area
2611 2011-03-05 23:08:35 <BitterTea> Bitcoin has a JSON-RPC server, the miner uses that to get work
2612 2011-03-05 23:08:43 <TD> 127.0.0.1 is your own computer JackRabiit
2613 2011-03-05 23:08:49 <JackRabiit> yes i undetstand that
2614 2011-03-05 23:08:51 Spenvo has joined
2615 2011-03-05 23:09:06 <JackRabiit> im using deepbit.net for pool mining
2616 2011-03-05 23:09:19 <JackRabiit> i want to set the server to the solo mining one
2617 2011-03-05 23:09:26 <BitterTea> it's one or the other
2618 2011-03-05 23:09:31 <JackRabiit> Yar
2619 2011-03-05 23:09:43 <JackRabiit> what is the solo mining one
2620 2011-03-05 23:09:50 <Syke_> you are the solo
2621 2011-03-05 23:09:53 <BitterTea> The solo mining what?
2622 2011-03-05 23:09:56 <JackRabiit> server
2623 2011-03-05 23:10:02 <JackRabiit> 127?
2624 2011-03-05 23:10:04 <BitterTea> 127.0.0.1:8332
2625 2011-03-05 23:10:08 <JackRabiit> Wow.
2626 2011-03-05 23:10:13 <JackRabiit> what the hell am i connecting to then
2627 2011-03-05 23:10:29 <BitterTea> You either connect to the pool, OR your local bitcoin server
2628 2011-03-05 23:10:50 <JackRabiit> i get: Problem communicating with the bitcoins server
2629 2011-03-05 23:11:12 <BitterTea> Connecting to deepbit or localhost?
2630 2011-03-05 23:11:22 <Syke_> start the bitcoin client with "bitcoin -server"
2631 2011-03-05 23:12:40 AAA_awright_ has joined
2632 2011-03-05 23:13:26 Necr0s has joined
2633 2011-03-05 23:15:01 <xelister> I bet Hans Solo was mining solo
2634 2011-03-05 23:16:22 AAA_awright has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2635 2011-03-05 23:16:54 <BitterTea> xelister: Nope, Franz Solo
2636 2011-03-05 23:18:35 <sipa> Han Solo+
2637 2011-03-05 23:18:36 <sipa> ?
2638 2011-03-05 23:21:00 <xelister> =)
2639 2011-03-05 23:23:24 sethsethseth has joined
2640 2011-03-05 23:23:57 bk128 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2641 2011-03-05 23:26:36 bk128 has joined
2642 2011-03-05 23:27:09 Sami345 has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
2643 2011-03-05 23:27:14 Sami345 has joined
2644 2011-03-05 23:31:22 sethsethseth has quit (Quit: ~ Trillian Astra - www.trillian.im ~)
2645 2011-03-05 23:33:22 sethsethseth has joined
2646 2011-03-05 23:34:17 <sethsethseth> i just downgraded to sdk 2.1 and when i fire up the gui miner it says "no opencl devices found" hmmmmm
2647 2011-03-05 23:37:33 <keystroke> how many bits needs to be hashed? is it 512 bits 3 times?
2648 2011-03-05 23:38:17 <sipa> yes
2649 2011-03-05 23:38:47 <sipa> it's a 640 bit message that's hashed twice
2650 2011-03-05 23:39:01 <sipa> so you need 2 sha256 blocks for the first hash
2651 2011-03-05 23:39:12 <sipa> and then a third one for the second hash
2652 2011-03-05 23:42:35 <keystroke> thanks sipa :)
2653 2011-03-05 23:42:51 Slix` has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
2654 2011-03-05 23:42:54 <keystroke> just trying to do some calculations as most papers speak about hashing in Mbps
2655 2011-03-05 23:42:59 Slix` has joined
2656 2011-03-05 23:43:15 Raulo has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
2657 2011-03-05 23:43:16 <sipa> but bitcoin miners do only 120 hash rounds
2658 2011-03-05 23:43:25 <sipa> instead of 192
2659 2011-03-05 23:43:34 <sipa> since some can be precalculated or ignored
2660 2011-03-05 23:45:40 <sipa> so a 1 Mbps sha256 hasher does 1953 sha blocks per second, or 125000 sha256 rounds per second
2661 2011-03-05 23:46:19 <sipa> which corresponds to +- 1.04 bitcoin kH/s
2662 2011-03-05 23:49:04 <ArtForz> yup
2663 2011-03-05 23:50:13 <ArtForz> = even a CPU core can do the equivalent of a few Gbit/s worth of sha256 rounds
2664 2011-03-05 23:54:51 jav has joined
2665 2011-03-05 23:55:10 <ArtForz> also explains why commercial IP cores are designed for small size and not high throughput, a single round engine at 66 clocks/block and 130MHz is > 1Gbit/s
2666 2011-03-05 23:56:35 <keystroke> ahhh interesting