1 2011-05-04 00:00:02 <ArtForz> windoze VM w/ RBE + atiflash on dos bootstick
   2 2011-05-04 00:00:21 <xelister> is windowze unavoidable?
   3 2011-05-04 00:00:26 <xelister> got image of the dos bootstick?
   4 2011-05-04 00:00:51 <ArtForz> nope
   5 2011-05-04 00:01:00 <xelister> windoze is just needed to make the bootstick?
   6 2011-05-04 00:01:01 <ArtForz> I'm pretty sure I got it around here somewhere though
   7 2011-05-04 00:01:07 <ArtForz> no, to edit the BIOS
   8 2011-05-04 00:01:14 <ArtForz> I made the dos bootstick from linux :P
   9 2011-05-04 00:01:43 <ArtForz> also, my format is *really* weird
  10 2011-05-04 00:01:54 <ArtForz> because that stick is old as fuck and shows up as a usb *floppy*
  11 2011-05-04 00:02:10 <molecular> RBE says there's clock info 00 through 04 (even to 09, but not filled). that's not the performance levels, is it?
  12 2011-05-04 00:02:16 <ArtForz> it kidna is
  13 2011-05-04 00:02:27 <xelister> doesnt the dosstick edit bios?
  14 2011-05-04 00:02:32 phantomcircuit has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
  15 2011-05-04 00:02:33 <ArtForz> no
  16 2011-05-04 00:02:37 <ArtForz> dos stick is for flashing
  17 2011-05-04 00:02:42 <ArtForz> editing is RBE
  18 2011-05-04 00:02:46 <xelister> RBE = ... ?
  19 2011-05-04 00:02:51 <xelister> radeon binary editor?
  20 2011-05-04 00:03:02 <ArtForz> Radeon Bios Editor
  21 2011-05-04 00:03:11 <xelister> Radeon, Buggedasfuck Edition?
  22 2011-05-04 00:03:12 <ArtForz> from techpowerup iirc
  23 2011-05-04 00:03:12 <xelister> oh
  24 2011-05-04 00:03:33 <ArtForz> thats the only reason you need 'doze, coz that doesn't like to run in WINE
  25 2011-05-04 00:03:54 <xelister> can you share the image of floppy? I can give you ready&easy to way to boot floppy from an (normal) usb(-hdd) stick
  26 2011-05-04 00:03:55 <ArtForz> well, actually it does run, but veeeeery sloooowly
  27 2011-05-04 00:04:36 <xelister> so first you edit the bios then you flash all over it? how falsinh does not erase settings. so what for is flashing, to get never firmware into r5970 card itself?
  28 2011-05-04 00:05:21 bitcoinbulletin has quit (Quit: bitcoinbulletin)
  29 2011-05-04 00:05:31 <ArtForz> *headdesk*
  30 2011-05-04 00:05:43 glassresistor has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
  31 2011-05-04 00:05:44 <gjs278> lol
  32 2011-05-04 00:05:47 <gjs278> wtf
  33 2011-05-04 00:05:47 <xelister> im new to this hardware stuff guys
  34 2011-05-04 00:05:55 <xelister> hm?
  35 2011-05-04 00:05:59 <gjs278> you can flash without the flash drive method
  36 2011-05-04 00:06:16 bk128 has quit (Quit: bk128)
  37 2011-05-04 00:06:20 <gjs278> if you're on windows that is
  38 2011-05-04 00:06:24 <gjs278> otherwise you need the dos flash
  39 2011-05-04 00:06:43 <xelister> I thought that RBE edits some setting saved inside radeon's ROM,  and later the radeon's ROM is flashed with upgrade of radeon-bios ?
  40 2011-05-04 00:06:58 <xelister> so the settings and radeon-firmware/bios are in separate space on the ROM? or how this works
  41 2011-05-04 00:07:04 <xelister> guys I never yet done this :<
  42 2011-05-04 00:07:36 <gjs278> neither did I
  43 2011-05-04 00:07:52 <gjs278> I'm guessing ArtForz also never flashed a video card before this because there was no need
  44 2011-05-04 00:08:00 <molecular> ArtForz, oh got: what I can set in perf-level 3 is dependant on the values in perf-level 2, hell!
  45 2011-05-04 00:08:03 <gjs278> you get your image dump from gpu-z
  46 2011-05-04 00:08:08 <gjs278> you edit it with rbe
  47 2011-05-04 00:08:16 <gjs278> you upload the image with atiflash or the dos method
  48 2011-05-04 00:08:17 theorb has joined
  49 2011-05-04 00:08:18 <gjs278> that's it
  50 2011-05-04 00:08:42 <xelister> gjs278: care to upload it somewhere?
  51 2011-05-04 00:08:44 theorbtwo has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
  52 2011-05-04 00:08:46 alkor has joined
  53 2011-05-04 00:08:48 <xelister> ArtForz: care to englihhten me:) ?
  54 2011-05-04 00:08:50 theorb is now known as theorbtwo
  55 2011-05-04 00:08:56 <gjs278> upload which part
  56 2011-05-04 00:09:03 gasteve_ has joined
  57 2011-05-04 00:09:07 <gjs278> rbe and ati flash you can download from techpowerup
  58 2011-05-04 00:09:18 <gjs278> I don't use the dos method
  59 2011-05-04 00:09:33 <gjs278> it's only easy if you have windows available on the machine
  60 2011-05-04 00:09:46 <molecular> ArtForz, HAHAAAAA: I can now set level 3 memory clock < 1000Mhz. just had to set the level 2 memclock <1000Mhz first.
  61 2011-05-04 00:10:34 <ArtForz> yeah, it's ... weird
  62 2011-05-04 00:11:12 <Diablo-D3> molecular: yes
  63 2011-05-04 00:11:15 <molecular> not really. it just say: clock on level n cannot be lower than on level n-1
  64 2011-05-04 00:11:21 <Diablo-D3> molecular: exactly
  65 2011-05-04 00:11:37 <Diablo-D3> the amd overclock thingy tool says that in the error
  66 2011-05-04 00:11:40 <molecular> argh: Diablo-D3 you tell me now you this, not before when I asked ;)
  67 2011-05-04 00:11:49 <molecular> *you know this
  68 2011-05-04 00:12:06 <molecular> ah, just says "-1" here, grrrr
  69 2011-05-04 00:12:16 <Diablo-D3> I didnt see you ask
  70 2011-05-04 00:12:26 <Diablo-D3> yes, high speed numbers cant be lower than middle
  71 2011-05-04 00:12:29 <Diablo-D3> and middle cant be lower than low
  72 2011-05-04 00:12:30 <molecular> awesome fucking shit, this runs like at least 5°C cooler
  73 2011-05-04 00:13:15 amiller has joined
  74 2011-05-04 00:13:40 <topi`> hehe
  75 2011-05-04 00:14:05 <Diablo-D3> yeah
  76 2011-05-04 00:14:08 <Diablo-D3> its rather interesting
  77 2011-05-04 00:14:11 <molecular> but also 8 mhps slower ;(
  78 2011-05-04 00:14:16 <molecular> maybe 300Mhz is too slow
  79 2011-05-04 00:14:24 <molecular> or I should use diablominer?
  80 2011-05-04 00:14:26 <Diablo-D3> molecular: you look at it wrong
  81 2011-05-04 00:14:30 <molecular> do I?
  82 2011-05-04 00:14:32 <gjs278> you just saved yourself
  83 2011-05-04 00:14:34 <gjs278> 5c
  84 2011-05-04 00:14:36 <Diablo-D3> 5C cooler means you can OC 5C more
  85 2011-05-04 00:14:37 <gjs278> 8hash is worth that
  86 2011-05-04 00:14:47 <gjs278> my card just locks up before I hit temp limits
  87 2011-05-04 00:14:49 <molecular> hmm, you think I can oc more now?
  88 2011-05-04 00:14:59 <Diablo-D3> molecular: you have less load on the VRMs
  89 2011-05-04 00:14:59 <molecular> mine locks up earlier
  90 2011-05-04 00:15:04 <molecular> hm, ok
  91 2011-05-04 00:15:06 <Diablo-D3> which seems to be the fuck you on cards typically
  92 2011-05-04 00:15:07 bitcoinbulletin has joined
  93 2011-05-04 00:15:13 <molecular> I thought it was the GPUs making errors that cause lockup
  94 2011-05-04 00:15:20 <Diablo-D3> well
  95 2011-05-04 00:15:23 <gjs278> my vrms on 5870 never get messed with but I still cant go stable past 950
  96 2011-05-04 00:15:26 <Diablo-D3> its really a voltage droop
  97 2011-05-04 00:15:35 <Diablo-D3> shit heats up, voltage goes down
  98 2011-05-04 00:15:40 MBS has quit (Quit: Lolbye)
  99 2011-05-04 00:15:41 <Diablo-D3> so you have to drive the voltage up
 100 2011-05-04 00:15:45 <Diablo-D3> which drives the heat up
 101 2011-05-04 00:15:57 <Diablo-D3> and then your house blows up
 102 2011-05-04 00:16:09 <molecular> miner is outside on balkony ;)
 103 2011-05-04 00:16:18 <molecular> might burn up the balkony, though
 104 2011-05-04 00:16:24 <molecular> I'll try ocing a little more
 105 2011-05-04 00:16:33 <Diablo-D3> well, on mine
 106 2011-05-04 00:16:46 <Diablo-D3> I ran my 4850 at 500mhz, lowest it'll go on memory
 107 2011-05-04 00:16:50 <Diablo-D3> then cranked gpu up high
 108 2011-05-04 00:17:32 <Diablo-D3> 625->700
 109 2011-05-04 00:18:01 <Diablo-D3> thats 993->500, btw
 110 2011-05-04 00:18:08 rlifchitz has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 111 2011-05-04 00:18:08 <Diablo-D3> it saves me about, eh, 3-4c
 112 2011-05-04 00:18:28 <topi`> Diablo-D3: I have to congratulate you on your miner. Even though it's java. It gets just as many mhash on my poor nvidia as poclbm, but it causes less jerky GUI
 113 2011-05-04 00:18:37 <molecular> someone said on the forums: poclbm needs higher memclock, diablominer is better with low memclock", is there truth to that?
 114 2011-05-04 00:18:44 <topi`> I can scroll fields around :)
 115 2011-05-04 00:18:59 <Diablo-D3> topi`: did you fiddle with say -f 1000/
 116 2011-05-04 00:19:12 <Diablo-D3> molecular: doesnt seem to be true
 117 2011-05-04 00:19:14 <topi`> I didn't use the -f switch at all
 118 2011-05-04 00:19:20 <gjs278> you have to -f
 119 2011-05-04 00:19:20 <Diablo-D3> topi`: try fiddling with -f 1000
 120 2011-05-04 00:19:27 <topi`> hmm
 121 2011-05-04 00:19:32 <Diablo-D3> lower mhash, but far better interactivity
 122 2011-05-04 00:19:32 <gjs278> -f 60 for me is very smooth, 360 I play games on it
 123 2011-05-04 00:19:35 <molecular> btw: Diablo-D3, did you catch up to phoenix/poclbm with the BFI_INT-stuff?
 124 2011-05-04 00:19:40 LightRider is now known as LightRider|afk
 125 2011-05-04 00:19:42 <Diablo-D3> molecular: no, still need a radeon 5xxx
 126 2011-05-04 00:19:47 <Diablo-D3> it looks rather easy to impl
 127 2011-05-04 00:19:53 <Diablo-D3> but I cant test it
 128 2011-05-04 00:20:02 <gjs278> buy the 5850 from newegg for 140
 129 2011-05-04 00:20:03 <molecular> damn, someone give Diablo-D3 a card
 130 2011-05-04 00:20:07 <gjs278> it will pay for itself
 131 2011-05-04 00:20:15 <gjs278> in like 30 days
 132 2011-05-04 00:20:17 <gjs278> or your money back
 133 2011-05-04 00:20:19 <Diablo-D3> well, hows this, send me 50 btc
 134 2011-05-04 00:20:33 <Diablo-D3> that'll round my donations out at 100 btc total
 135 2011-05-04 00:20:45 <gjs278> you have 50 right now?
 136 2011-05-04 00:20:47 <Diablo-D3> and should be enough to grab a decent card
 137 2011-05-04 00:20:50 <Diablo-D3> gjs278: well
 138 2011-05-04 00:20:56 <Diablo-D3> I have a habit of eating my btc :<
 139 2011-05-04 00:20:59 <Diablo-D3> like, literally
 140 2011-05-04 00:21:02 <gjs278> its so tasty
 141 2011-05-04 00:21:09 <Diablo-D3> Im like "oh Ill buy a video card"
 142 2011-05-04 00:21:13 <Diablo-D3> then I sell them and buy food :<
 143 2011-05-04 00:21:20 <molecular> btw, Diablo-D3: I made a site (not complete) for projects/developers to gather donations and have users vote on features at the same time. maybe you could use that to get some donations: http://bitpoll.dyndns.org
 144 2011-05-04 00:21:37 <noagendamarket> Diablo you could issue shares like dishwara is doing  :)-
 145 2011-05-04 00:21:48 <Diablo-D3> noagendamarket: yeah, how the fuck does that work
 146 2011-05-04 00:21:55 devon_hillard has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 147 2011-05-04 00:22:14 <noagendamarket> you upload a contract signed with your key
 148 2011-05-04 00:22:57 prax has joined
 149 2011-05-04 00:22:57 prax has quit (Changing host)
 150 2011-05-04 00:22:57 prax has joined
 151 2011-05-04 00:23:00 <noagendamarket> then issue the shares based on it.
 152 2011-05-04 00:23:14 <Diablo-D3> weird.
 153 2011-05-04 00:23:21 <noagendamarket> not really
 154 2011-05-04 00:23:30 <noagendamarket> contracts are contracts
 155 2011-05-04 00:23:32 <dirtyfilthy> does blackmarket come with a rep system?
 156 2011-05-04 00:23:40 <noagendamarket> it will be
 157 2011-05-04 00:23:42 <Diablo-D3> but yeah like
 158 2011-05-04 00:24:04 <Diablo-D3> actually, even 25BTC would be enough
 159 2011-05-04 00:24:13 <Diablo-D3> at the current >$3 value
 160 2011-05-04 00:24:29 <Diablo-D3> that could get me a decent 69xx
 161 2011-05-04 00:24:46 <noagendamarket> do you just need the card ?
 162 2011-05-04 00:24:51 <topi`> my little bro got a 6870 for 160 eur
 163 2011-05-04 00:25:00 <Diablo-D3> noagendamarket: yeah.
 164 2011-05-04 00:25:07 <topi`> that's decent for a new card in expensive europe
 165 2011-05-04 00:25:11 <noagendamarket> well that helps
 166 2011-05-04 00:25:24 <Diablo-D3> noagendamarket: I just need something thats actually in my machine so I can test the code
 167 2011-05-04 00:25:37 <noagendamarket> id need a whole new  computer to start mining
 168 2011-05-04 00:25:37 <Diablo-D3> I saw how it was added on poclbm, the codes really short
 169 2011-05-04 00:25:56 <Diablo-D3> well, Im never going to be able to afford to mine like Art does
 170 2011-05-04 00:26:07 <noagendamarket> not many can
 171 2011-05-04 00:27:21 <Diablo-D3> yeah but when this ride is over
 172 2011-05-04 00:27:24 <Diablo-D3> he'll be a millionare.
 173 2011-05-04 00:27:43 khalahan has quit (Ping timeout: 263 seconds)
 174 2011-05-04 00:28:02 <molecular> what the hell, getting 2*6mphs MORE with memclock 450 instead of 1000 (Volate and engine-clock the same) ????
 175 2011-05-04 00:28:02 khalahan has joined
 176 2011-05-04 00:28:07 <topi`> and we'll be begging on our knees :D
 177 2011-05-04 00:28:24 <Diablo-D3> molecular: might be hitting a good spot
 178 2011-05-04 00:28:39 <topi`> molecular: that's logical, since the GPUs might be having some wait states to the memory
 179 2011-05-04 00:28:39 <molecular> this is interesting
 180 2011-05-04 00:28:56 <Diablo-D3> btw
 181 2011-05-04 00:28:57 <molecular> hmm, that memclock is about half the engine-clock
 182 2011-05-04 00:29:02 <Diablo-D3> this might be where -w 256 might kick in well
 183 2011-05-04 00:29:12 <topi`> meaning that the GPU memcontroller is asynchronous
 184 2011-05-04 00:29:13 <davex__> how are you setting your memclock down that low?  aticonfig won't let me set it below 800 or something for my 5970
 185 2011-05-04 00:29:14 <Diablo-D3> on 300
 186 2011-05-04 00:29:32 <noagendamarket> you can get 20 if you give xelister a head job
 187 2011-05-04 00:29:35 <noagendamarket> lol
 188 2011-05-04 00:29:40 <Diablo-D3> davex__: amdoverdrivectrl
 189 2011-05-04 00:29:44 <molecular> davex__, self-made tool using AMD ADL sdk
 190 2011-05-04 00:29:50 <davex__> oh
 191 2011-05-04 00:30:03 <Diablo-D3> its basically like any windows oc tool
 192 2011-05-04 00:30:12 <molecular> davex__, if you need on linux, I can give this out later... but no fancy cmd-line stuff, just hardcoded values
 193 2011-05-04 00:30:13 <davex__> can you set voltage with that?
 194 2011-05-04 00:30:30 <molecular> I'm not sure.
 195 2011-05-04 00:30:34 <molecular> I can set voltage
 196 2011-05-04 00:30:37 <Diablo-D3> yes
 197 2011-05-04 00:30:38 <Diablo-D3> you can
 198 2011-05-04 00:30:40 <molecular> but I'm unsure it's really being set
 199 2011-05-04 00:30:41 <davex__> nice
 200 2011-05-04 00:30:49 MBS has joined
 201 2011-05-04 00:30:49 <Diablo-D3> can set fans too
 202 2011-05-04 00:30:51 <molecular> ArtForz said maybe it just _thinks_ it sets it
 203 2011-05-04 00:30:57 <davex__> ah
 204 2011-05-04 00:31:01 <Diablo-D3> molecular: well
 205 2011-05-04 00:31:17 stamit has left ()
 206 2011-05-04 00:31:19 <Diablo-D3> if you set it to a low voltage
 207 2011-05-04 00:31:22 <Diablo-D3> and it doesnt crash
 208 2011-05-04 00:31:26 <molecular> also I hacked the bios to be 1.12V and I can only set up to 1.05 using adl
 209 2011-05-04 00:31:38 <molecular> so I dont really know what voltage I'm running at
 210 2011-05-04 00:31:49 <molecular> that might be worth a try, Diablo-D3
 211 2011-05-04 00:32:23 <Diablo-D3> if it does crash, it works ;)
 212 2011-05-04 00:32:38 <Diablo-D3> if it sets itself on fire, well, we know not to touch that again
 213 2011-05-04 00:32:45 rlifchitz has joined
 214 2011-05-04 00:32:46 <ArtForz> is today *headdesk* day?
 215 2011-05-04 00:33:00 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: isnt every day?
 216 2011-05-04 00:33:05 <ArtForz> it can set voltage, to one of the 4 voltages set by VRM regs in bios
 217 2011-05-04 00:33:12 <davex__> figured
 218 2011-05-04 00:33:16 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: ahh
 219 2011-05-04 00:33:20 <Diablo-D3> so it just sets it to the nearest?
 220 2011-05-04 00:33:24 <ArtForz> yep
 221 2011-05-04 00:33:35 <Diablo-D3> thats not bad
 222 2011-05-04 00:33:43 <molecular> 0x15 thru 0x18 ?
 223 2011-05-04 00:33:50 <ArtForz> yeah
 224 2011-05-04 00:33:53 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: do me a favor
 225 2011-05-04 00:33:55 <Diablo-D3> go on newegg
 226 2011-05-04 00:33:57 Blitzboom has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 227 2011-05-04 00:33:58 <Diablo-D3> pick a video card for me.
 228 2011-05-04 00:34:18 <davex__> the 6990 switch on the board is just easier.  wish the 5970 had that
 229 2011-05-04 00:34:40 <ArtForz> problem is, overvolting 5970s is asking for trouble
 230 2011-05-04 00:34:45 <ArtForz> unless you have waterblocks
 231 2011-05-04 00:34:49 <Diablo-D3> actually
 232 2011-05-04 00:35:01 <Diablo-D3> its pretty much just 5850, 6950, and 6970, right?
 233 2011-05-04 00:35:04 Blitzboom has joined
 234 2011-05-04 00:35:04 Blitzboom has quit (Changing host)
 235 2011-05-04 00:35:04 Blitzboom has joined
 236 2011-05-04 00:35:04 <davex__> yeah wouldn't be surprised.  it already gets to 80-85 unless i have a big fan going
 237 2011-05-04 00:35:05 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: OH HEY
 238 2011-05-04 00:35:07 <Diablo-D3> HEY
 239 2011-05-04 00:35:16 <Diablo-D3> you know those 6750/6770s?
 240 2011-05-04 00:35:23 <ArtForz> they're 5750/70
 241 2011-05-04 00:35:26 <Diablo-D3> are they really rebadged ... yeah
 242 2011-05-04 00:35:30 <Diablo-D3> do they work with sdk 2.1?
 243 2011-05-04 00:35:33 <ArtForz> at least until 28nm 6750/70 comes out
 244 2011-05-04 00:35:54 <Diablo-D3> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102939
 245 2011-05-04 00:35:59 <Diablo-D3> look how fucking cheap that is
 246 2011-05-04 00:36:22 cuddlefish has joined
 247 2011-05-04 00:36:31 <ArtForz> well, it's a 5750
 248 2011-05-04 00:36:39 <Diablo-D3> oh.
 249 2011-05-04 00:36:52 <Diablo-D3> I thought they were 5850/5870 :<
 250 2011-05-04 00:36:58 <ArtForz> and those were like $110 a year ago
 251 2011-05-04 00:37:03 <ArtForz> nope
 252 2011-05-04 00:37:14 <cuddlefish> Hey, I invented a secure WOT, all it depends on is a reliable server that doesn't lose data easily: http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=7169.0
 253 2011-05-04 00:37:14 <Diablo-D3> so
 254 2011-05-04 00:37:17 <Diablo-D3> 5970 are out
 255 2011-05-04 00:37:21 <Diablo-D3> none in stock, and they dont fit anyhow
 256 2011-05-04 00:37:23 <ArtForz> 6750/70 is just rebadged juniper = 5750/70
 257 2011-05-04 00:37:24 <midnightmagic> all the unlockable 6850 seem to have disappeared from everywhere.
 258 2011-05-04 00:37:27 <Diablo-D3> 5870 is out
 259 2011-05-04 00:37:32 <ArtForz> midnightmagic: you mean 6950
 260 2011-05-04 00:37:33 <Diablo-D3> they fit, but none in stock
 261 2011-05-04 00:37:33 MBS has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 262 2011-05-04 00:37:41 <midnightmagic> right, the unlockable one..
 263 2011-05-04 00:37:48 <ArtForz> yea
 264 2011-05-04 00:37:50 <ArtForz> thats 6950
 265 2011-05-04 00:37:59 <ArtForz> pretty decent value if you can find one
 266 2011-05-04 00:38:13 <midnightmagic> they're gone from everywhere. At least where I'm comfortable buying them.
 267 2011-05-04 00:38:16 khalahan has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 268 2011-05-04 00:38:22 <midnightmagic> and I buy stuff from China directly all the time. :(
 269 2011-05-04 00:38:38 <midnightmagic> ah, dealextreme.. how I love thee..
 270 2011-05-04 00:38:58 <midnightmagic> free shipping and no taxes.
 271 2011-05-04 00:39:02 <midnightmagic> wordlwide.
 272 2011-05-04 00:39:11 <cuddlefish> Ayup, un-forgable possibly distributed WOT
 273 2011-05-04 00:39:16 <cuddlefish> pay no attention to me
 274 2011-05-04 00:39:20 <cuddlefish> i'm just going to sit over here
 275 2011-05-04 00:39:55 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: okay so
 276 2011-05-04 00:39:57 <Diablo-D3> if I cant buy
 277 2011-05-04 00:40:10 <Diablo-D3> a 5970
 278 2011-05-04 00:40:11 khalahan has joined
 279 2011-05-04 00:40:12 <Diablo-D3> and
 280 2011-05-04 00:40:17 <Diablo-D3> I cant buy a
 281 2011-05-04 00:40:19 <Diablo-D3> 5870
 282 2011-05-04 00:40:22 <Diablo-D3> so whats left?
 283 2011-05-04 00:40:27 <Diablo-D3> a 5850, or a 69xx?
 284 2011-05-04 00:40:33 <ArtForz> pretty much
 285 2011-05-04 00:40:44 <Diablo-D3> sigh.
 286 2011-05-04 00:41:00 <sipa> ;;bc,blocks
 287 2011-05-04 00:41:00 <gribble> 121702
 288 2011-05-04 00:41:45 <Diablo-D3> and 6850/6870 are still kinda fail, right?
 289 2011-05-04 00:44:31 MBS has joined
 290 2011-05-04 00:45:57 <Diablo-D3> 6870 has the wattage of a 5850 and... the bitcoin power of one. roughly. kind of.
 291 2011-05-04 00:46:02 <Diablo-D3> it might be worth considering those too
 292 2011-05-04 00:47:15 <Diablo-D3> I get free 3D power out of it
 293 2011-05-04 00:47:52 <Diablo-D3> hrm
 294 2011-05-04 00:48:25 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: do you think a 6870 is worth considering if 5850 is the low end of the goal?
 295 2011-05-04 00:49:32 eao has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 296 2011-05-04 00:50:08 <topi`> i think the 6870 has only slightly more cores than the 6850
 297 2011-05-04 00:50:10 <ArtForz> yea
 298 2011-05-04 00:50:39 <Diablo-D3> topi`: yeah, but Im trying to put in more options
 299 2011-05-04 00:50:50 bk128 has joined
 300 2011-05-04 00:50:52 <Diablo-D3> hrm, 6870s are still expensive though
 301 2011-05-04 00:53:48 <molecular> this is ridiculously awesome, I have 50 mhps more by reducing ramclock and being able to up engine clock. 800 mhps. lets see if this is stable
 302 2011-05-04 00:54:05 <molecular> thanks for that hint, Diablo-D3
 303 2011-05-04 00:54:16 <Diablo-D3> heh, its the whole point of underclocking ram =P
 304 2011-05-04 00:54:28 <Diablo-D3> you get lower temps and more budget left on the VRMs
 305 2011-05-04 00:54:36 <molecular> and the gpus are at 59.5°C haaaaa!
 306 2011-05-04 00:54:45 <Diablo-D3> wtf
 307 2011-05-04 00:54:49 <Diablo-D3> you have A LOT MORE budget
 308 2011-05-04 00:54:52 <xelister> noagendamarket: its girls only
 309 2011-05-04 00:55:04 <molecular> well, it's cold outside where the miner is
 310 2011-05-04 00:55:09 <molecular> will try more, though
 311 2011-05-04 00:55:31 <Diablo-D3> the worst case is you'll hit as far as the volts can take you
 312 2011-05-04 00:55:52 <Diablo-D3> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125318
 313 2011-05-04 00:55:54 <Diablo-D3> that one looks nice
 314 2011-05-04 00:56:13 <molecular> nope, one core locked up at 930 Mhz
 315 2011-05-04 00:56:24 <Diablo-D3> molecular: whats stock on your shit?
 316 2011-05-04 00:56:31 <molecular> 725
 317 2011-05-04 00:56:51 <xelister> molecular: you set r5970 to 930 ??
 318 2011-05-04 00:56:52 <xelister> how
 319 2011-05-04 00:57:10 <xelister> mine locks at 830 with X,  and other piece at 810 even no X
 320 2011-05-04 00:57:11 <molecular> up voltage to 1.2 or 1.25 (not sure)
 321 2011-05-04 00:57:24 <Diablo-D3> molecular: jesus
 322 2011-05-04 00:57:25 <molecular> yeah, with stock Voltage it was about the same here
 323 2011-05-04 00:57:35 <molecular> oh sorry
 324 2011-05-04 00:57:42 <molecular> looking at BIOS, it's 1.125
 325 2011-05-04 00:57:46 <Diablo-D3> 725 to 930
 326 2011-05-04 00:57:47 <Diablo-D3> holy fuck dude
 327 2011-05-04 00:57:52 <Diablo-D3> thats victorious
 328 2011-05-04 00:58:33 <ArtForz> pretty normal
 329 2011-05-04 00:58:41 <molecular> it's a sapphire, too. got lucky
 330 2011-05-04 00:59:47 <ntosme2> $185 is a lot for a 5850
 331 2011-05-04 01:00:40 <ntosme2> I paid more like $125
 332 2011-05-04 01:01:30 inductor has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 333 2011-05-04 01:02:45 tenach has quit (Quit: leaving)
 334 2011-05-04 01:03:38 <Diablo-D3> well
 335 2011-05-04 01:03:45 * Diablo-D3 sighs and gives up
 336 2011-05-04 01:04:07 Incitatus has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 337 2011-05-04 01:06:09 inductor has joined
 338 2011-05-04 01:09:43 <Diablo-D3> http://www.neworldit.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=GV-R597D5-2GD-B
 339 2011-05-04 01:09:44 <Diablo-D3> huh.
 340 2011-05-04 01:09:49 <Diablo-D3> interesting.
 341 2011-05-04 01:09:58 <molecular> "(EE) fglrx(0): Invalid video BIOS image, check sum error!" <- this does not look good to me ;(
 342 2011-05-04 01:10:01 <Diablo-D3> they still seem to have gigabyte 5970s in stock
 343 2011-05-04 01:10:05 <Diablo-D3> $657
 344 2011-05-04 01:10:18 <Diablo-D3> molecular: let it cool down for awhile first
 345 2011-05-04 01:10:27 <Diablo-D3> molecular: vrms could have overheated
 346 2011-05-04 01:10:35 <molecular> ok
 347 2011-05-04 01:10:37 <Aahzmundus> Arent 5870's the best bang for your buck?
 348 2011-05-04 01:10:43 amiller has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 349 2011-05-04 01:10:49 <Diablo-D3> Aahzmundus: unless you absolutely need the space
 350 2011-05-04 01:11:14 zylche has joined
 351 2011-05-04 01:11:14 zylche has quit (Excess Flood)
 352 2011-05-04 01:11:22 <Aahzmundus> space as in card slots?
 353 2011-05-04 01:11:38 <Diablo-D3> yeah
 354 2011-05-04 01:11:40 <Diablo-D3> http://www.provantage.com/msi-r5970-p2d2g~7MST90X2.htm
 355 2011-05-04 01:11:41 <Diablo-D3> oh shit
 356 2011-05-04 01:11:46 <Diablo-D3> it seems they still have these in stock
 357 2011-05-04 01:11:57 Incitatus has joined
 358 2011-05-04 01:12:56 <ntosme2> buy them out?
 359 2011-05-04 01:13:00 <Diablo-D3> oh wait, no they dont
 360 2011-05-04 01:13:03 <Diablo-D3> that first place does though
 361 2011-05-04 01:13:07 <luke-jr> Diablo-D3: http://www.youtube.com/user/LukeAbandonwareVid
 362 2011-05-04 01:13:25 Incitatus has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 363 2011-05-04 01:13:44 <Diablo-D3> TRACKING!
 364 2011-05-04 01:13:52 lumos has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 365 2011-05-04 01:14:24 Incitatus has joined
 366 2011-05-04 01:16:46 <Diablo-D3> luke-jr: this looks dumb
 367 2011-05-04 01:17:50 <Diablo-D3> http://www.platinummicro.com/product.asp?pf_id=GPGVR587UD1GD
 368 2011-05-04 01:17:56 <Diablo-D3> 5870s
 369 2011-05-04 01:18:13 <gjs278> way overpriced
 370 2011-05-04 01:18:14 <Diablo-D3> http://www.amuras.com/ssproduct.asp?pf_id=1016142622
 371 2011-05-04 01:18:19 <gjs278> those same 5870s were on newegg
 372 2011-05-04 01:18:19 genjix has joined
 373 2011-05-04 01:18:19 genjix has quit (Changing host)
 374 2011-05-04 01:18:19 genjix has joined
 375 2011-05-04 01:18:20 <gjs278> for like
 376 2011-05-04 01:18:22 <gjs278> $184
 377 2011-05-04 01:19:10 <Diablo-D3> heh
 378 2011-05-04 01:19:16 <gjs278> my asus 5870 was 250 in march and that actually has an okay cooler because it was impossible to buy reference
 379 2011-05-04 01:19:27 <gjs278> reference new that is
 380 2011-05-04 01:19:50 <Diablo-D3> well its not like I have very many options here
 381 2011-05-04 01:20:12 <gjs278> 59's are like $400 on hardforum
 382 2011-05-04 01:20:21 <gjs278> 5870 you can get maybe 190 easy on hard as well
 383 2011-05-04 01:20:27 <Diablo-D3> what, new?
 384 2011-05-04 01:20:33 <gjs278> oh definiely not new
 385 2011-05-04 01:20:36 <Diablo-D3> feh
 386 2011-05-04 01:20:39 <gjs278> and these guys probably oc'd it to shit
 387 2011-05-04 01:20:48 <gjs278> they always put every post "never oc'd"
 388 2011-05-04 01:20:50 <gjs278> lies
 389 2011-05-04 01:20:53 <luke-jr> tx spam time
 390 2011-05-04 01:21:24 * Diablo-D3 quickly shuts his bitcoin off
 391 2011-05-04 01:21:31 * xelister donates Diablo-D3 =)
 392 2011-05-04 01:21:35 <gjs278> I guess your best bet is with the xfx cards if you did have to buy used because at least then you can do that double warranty crap
 393 2011-05-04 01:22:13 <Diablo-D3> lets see how cheap I can get a 6870
 394 2011-05-04 01:22:25 <Diablo-D3> $200 seems to be it
 395 2011-05-04 01:23:24 <mrb_> 18:06 < Diablo-D3> http://www.provantage.com/msi-r5970-p2d2g~7MST90X2.htm
 396 2011-05-04 01:23:32 <mrb_> provantage has the worst stock tracking information on their site
 397 2011-05-04 01:23:40 <Diablo-D3> mrb_: I corrected myself, its out of stock
 398 2011-05-04 01:23:44 <mrb_> yep
 399 2011-05-04 01:23:46 <mrb_> but still
 400 2011-05-04 01:23:52 <Diablo-D3> Im kind of use to provatange's shit
 401 2011-05-04 01:24:05 <mrb_> a few days ago they showed 2 units available for this msi 6990
 402 2011-05-04 01:24:07 <mrb_> so I bought 2
 403 2011-05-04 01:24:35 <mrb_> 5 min later I receive an email saying "we are sorry, at the time of your purchase it was available, but is currently out of stock"
 404 2011-05-04 01:24:44 <gasteve_> Lol
 405 2011-05-04 01:24:44 <mrb_> restocking ETA is May 16
 406 2011-05-04 01:25:00 <Diablo-D3> mrb_: well, what do you think I should buy?
 407 2011-05-04 01:25:10 <Diablo-D3> the only thing in stock anymore is 5850s
 408 2011-05-04 01:25:41 <xelister> mother fucking undocumented feauture batman. What is -isolateDevice?  how to isolate X to 2 devices (and ignore other devices like nr 3 4 5) by PCI addr?
 409 2011-05-04 01:25:52 <mrb_> I dunno. I liquidated the 6990 stock of many retailers :)
 410 2011-05-04 01:25:59 <Diablo-D3> lawlz
 411 2011-05-04 01:26:08 <mrb_> although newegg still has some
 412 2011-05-04 01:26:14 <Diablo-D3> mrb_: I'd make you give me one, but IT WONT FIT IN MY CASE
 413 2011-05-04 01:26:14 <mrb_> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127574
 414 2011-05-04 01:26:15 <Diablo-D3> seriously
 415 2011-05-04 01:26:19 <Diablo-D3> that fucker is huge
 416 2011-05-04 01:26:20 <Diablo-D3> and I have a huge case
 417 2011-05-04 01:26:23 davex__ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 418 2011-05-04 01:26:37 <Diablo-D3> Im like half an inch short if I measured right
 419 2011-05-04 01:27:38 <ntosme2> I'm not even using cases lol, just shelves
 420 2011-05-04 01:27:42 <cuddlefish> Diablo-D3: o.O
 421 2011-05-04 01:27:54 <cuddlefish> Diablo-D3: how did you get to that in #bitcoin-dev?
 422 2011-05-04 01:27:59 <ntosme2> Diablo-D3: compensating for something?
 423 2011-05-04 01:28:04 <Diablo-D3> cuddlefish: get what?
 424 2011-05-04 01:28:29 Teslah has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 425 2011-05-04 01:28:55 <Diablo-D3> cuddlefish: 6990s are very long cards.
 426 2011-05-04 01:29:01 <Diablo-D3> so are 5970s
 427 2011-05-04 01:29:03 <cuddlefish> Diablo-D3: Ah.
 428 2011-05-04 01:29:06 <cuddlefish> Video cards.
 429 2011-05-04 01:29:09 <Diablo-D3> ...
 430 2011-05-04 01:29:15 <Diablo-D3> you're perverted.
 431 2011-05-04 01:29:22 <Diablo-D3> and yes, a 5970 is about as long as my dick.
 432 2011-05-04 01:29:23 <cuddlefish> the hell am I supposed to think when I walk into <Diablo-D3> Im like half an inch short if I measured right
 433 2011-05-04 01:29:29 inductor has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 434 2011-05-04 01:29:33 <molecular> pfff, something is awfully wrong with my miner. now the filesystem is fucked
 435 2011-05-04 01:29:48 <Diablo-D3> cuddlefish: jesus christ dude, what did I do, stick a ruler up some chicks twat?
 436 2011-05-04 01:29:53 <gjs278> hahaha
 437 2011-05-04 01:29:53 <ntosme2> which miner?
 438 2011-05-04 01:30:03 <molecular> my only miner ;(
 439 2011-05-04 01:30:05 <gjs278> my 5970
 440 2011-05-04 01:30:08 <gjs278> I had to take out my hard drive bay
 441 2011-05-04 01:30:11 <gjs278> it was retarded
 442 2011-05-04 01:30:13 <Diablo-D3> gjs278: yeah
 443 2011-05-04 01:30:17 <Diablo-D3> thats what I'd have to do on mine
 444 2011-05-04 01:30:23 <Diablo-D3> but I actually NEED that
 445 2011-05-04 01:30:36 <gjs278> I just stacked the drives under my cd drive
 446 2011-05-04 01:30:39 <Diablo-D3> if the pci-e slot was farther over
 447 2011-05-04 01:30:41 <gjs278> so they're going to die a horrible death
 448 2011-05-04 01:30:48 <Diablo-D3> it'd just go right into the empty 5.25" bays
 449 2011-05-04 01:30:51 <ntosme2> buy a spare motherboard for mining
 450 2011-05-04 01:30:57 <gjs278> nvr
 451 2011-05-04 01:31:03 <ntosme2> or 5
 452 2011-05-04 01:31:07 <Diablo-D3> shit dude
 453 2011-05-04 01:31:11 <Diablo-D3> lets do it Art style
 454 2011-05-04 01:31:11 gwillen is now known as mgwillen
 455 2011-05-04 01:31:14 <Diablo-D3> and buy like 50
 456 2011-05-04 01:31:20 LightRider is now known as afk!~LightRide@unaffiliated/lightrider|LightRider
 457 2011-05-04 01:31:31 inductor has joined
 458 2011-05-04 01:31:32 <gjs278> my problem was I had to fit a 5870 with an accelero on it too
 459 2011-05-04 01:31:38 <ntosme2> I'm really tempted to at this exchange rate
 460 2011-05-04 01:31:41 <gjs278> and it takes up to pci-e slots on my motherboard
 461 2011-05-04 01:31:47 <gjs278> so I had to rise the 5870 above the 5970
 462 2011-05-04 01:31:51 <gjs278> and balance it on top of it
 463 2011-05-04 01:32:14 <Diablo-D3> I only have one slot
 464 2011-05-04 01:32:15 <gjs278> because my motherboard is retarded and was downing my raid card to 1x
 465 2011-05-04 01:32:17 <ntosme2> does this stick out the side of your case?
 466 2011-05-04 01:32:29 array has quit (Quit: leaving)
 467 2011-05-04 01:32:31 bluenemo_ has joined
 468 2011-05-04 01:32:41 <gjs278> if I put the side of my case on, eventually the fans on the accelero will get stuck from the pressure
 469 2011-05-04 01:32:42 <gjs278> so yes
 470 2011-05-04 01:32:48 <gjs278> like 1/4th an inch
 471 2011-05-04 01:32:50 wolfspraul has joined
 472 2011-05-04 01:32:56 <gjs278> I have to just move shit around a bit and I'll be fine
 473 2011-05-04 01:32:58 <bluenemo_> ArtForz, are you there? my partner just told me that you're using a fpga for mining. have you got some kind of howto for setting this up?
 474 2011-05-04 01:33:00 <gjs278> but I don't care right now
 475 2011-05-04 01:33:15 <gjs278> if he had a howto that would ruin his plans at an empire
 476 2011-05-04 01:33:20 <gjs278> an empire of virtual gold coins
 477 2011-05-04 01:33:32 <jgarzik> luke-jr: looking...
 478 2011-05-04 01:33:48 <bluenemo_> ah ok :)
 479 2011-05-04 01:34:10 <Diablo-D3> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102932
 480 2011-05-04 01:34:16 <Diablo-D3> is a 5850 even worth $140
 481 2011-05-04 01:34:18 <ArtForz> bluenemo_: write HDL, design PCBs, buy components, ???, profit!
 482 2011-05-04 01:34:19 <gjs278> yes
 483 2011-05-04 01:34:27 <gjs278> because a 5850 can do like
 484 2011-05-04 01:34:31 <gjs278> 280 mhash
 485 2011-05-04 01:34:34 <gjs278> maybe 300
 486 2011-05-04 01:34:34 <Diablo-D3> because I could chuck that hsf and throw mine on
 487 2011-05-04 01:34:38 <Diablo-D3> gjs278: not OC
 488 2011-05-04 01:34:41 <gjs278> hmm
 489 2011-05-04 01:34:42 <gjs278> no oc
 490 2011-05-04 01:34:48 <gjs278> 230?
 491 2011-05-04 01:34:50 <Diablo-D3> like around 250?
 492 2011-05-04 01:34:54 <gjs278> probably
 493 2011-05-04 01:34:57 <Diablo-D3> because a 6870 does around 250
 494 2011-05-04 01:35:12 <Diablo-D3> and thats $200
 495 2011-05-04 01:35:17 <gjs278> my brother bought a 5850 and it looks like it will pay itself off especially with this exchange rate
 496 2011-05-04 01:35:23 <gjs278> in like 30 days
 497 2011-05-04 01:35:33 <gjs278> thats including difficulty jump ahead
 498 2011-05-04 01:35:45 <Diablo-D3> hrrr,/
 499 2011-05-04 01:35:47 <Diablo-D3> er
 500 2011-05-04 01:35:48 <Diablo-D3> hrrm
 501 2011-05-04 01:35:58 wolfspra1l has joined
 502 2011-05-04 01:36:03 <gjs278> he got the gigabyte, not the sapphire
 503 2011-05-04 01:36:12 <gjs278> the gigabyte puts itself at 765 stock
 504 2011-05-04 01:36:45 <gjs278> but its also $180
 505 2011-05-04 01:36:47 <Diablo-D3> yeah but thats another yeah
 506 2011-05-04 01:37:02 <Diablo-D3> if I throw my heatsink on it
 507 2011-05-04 01:37:17 wolfspraul has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 508 2011-05-04 01:37:33 <gjs278> cooling hasnt been the biggest issue for me even with a 5970 with enough fans
 509 2011-05-04 01:37:37 ByteCoin has joined
 510 2011-05-04 01:37:39 <Diablo-D3> it should be able to be OC'ed far enough
 511 2011-05-04 01:37:51 ahbritto_ has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
 512 2011-05-04 01:37:53 ahbritto has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
 513 2011-05-04 01:37:59 <Diablo-D3> of course that gigabyte one
 514 2011-05-04 01:38:04 <Diablo-D3> looks like it already has a nice hsf
 515 2011-05-04 01:38:07 <gjs278> yeah
 516 2011-05-04 01:38:14 <gjs278> it's getting here tomorrow so I'll see how loud it is
 517 2011-05-04 01:38:18 <gjs278> and how hot it gets
 518 2011-05-04 01:38:20 <gjs278> his case is crappy
 519 2011-05-04 01:38:29 <gjs278> only one 80mm exhaust fan
 520 2011-05-04 01:38:31 <Diablo-D3> well its got copper heatpipes
 521 2011-05-04 01:38:33 <Diablo-D3> even mine doesnt
 522 2011-05-04 01:38:47 <ByteCoin> Anyone remember who posted on the forum the point the fact that the value of an attack on Bitcoin is not just the number of bitcoins won but also any profit made by swinging the price on the exchanges?
 523 2011-05-04 01:38:59 <ByteCoin> It was a good post but I lost it...
 524 2011-05-04 01:39:00 <gjs278> I have like 3 of these http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835186033 laying around so if it gets too hot I just connect these together
 525 2011-05-04 01:39:06 <gjs278> and blow away
 526 2011-05-04 01:39:24 <Diablo-D3> lol
 527 2011-05-04 01:39:29 <Diablo-D3> gjs278: I have a p180b case
 528 2011-05-04 01:39:57 <Diablo-D3> this is not my computer, but its setup like this
 529 2011-05-04 01:39:59 <Diablo-D3> http://fusetech.co.uk/lapping/DSC_1894-out.jpg
 530 2011-05-04 01:40:06 <gjs278> mine is lian li something
 531 2011-05-04 01:40:18 <gjs278> my cords are everywhere
 532 2011-05-04 01:40:33 <Diablo-D3> p180b case, thermalright ultra 120 heatsink, thermalright gt03 gpu heatsink
 533 2011-05-04 01:40:43 <Diablo-D3> the top of the case is on the right
 534 2011-05-04 01:40:48 <gjs278> I have no top fans
 535 2011-05-04 01:40:50 <Diablo-D3> so it blows the heat right out of the case
 536 2011-05-04 01:40:56 <Diablo-D3> all in one stack
 537 2011-05-04 01:41:01 <xelister> Diablo-D3: what gfx you have there
 538 2011-05-04 01:41:07 <Diablo-D3> xelister: thats not my box.
 539 2011-05-04 01:41:11 <Diablo-D3> its just setup exactly the same
 540 2011-05-04 01:41:16 <Diablo-D3> I came across it on the internet by chance
 541 2011-05-04 01:41:22 <gjs278> I bought a case with "silent" fans so they won't spin faster than like 600 rpm they are terrible
 542 2011-05-04 01:42:00 <Diablo-D3> gjs278: I use all scythe s-flex 120mm fans
 543 2011-05-04 01:42:03 <Netsniper> my case sounds like an F4 with afterburners on
 544 2011-05-04 01:42:05 <Diablo-D3> 1600rp, ones
 545 2011-05-04 01:42:14 <gjs278> I was thinking of getting those
 546 2011-05-04 01:42:17 <Netsniper> and the air comming out of it can toast bread
 547 2011-05-04 01:42:22 <Diablo-D3> hooked up to a fan controller
 548 2011-05-04 01:42:29 <Diablo-D3> turned up the whole way the case is silent
 549 2011-05-04 01:42:37 <Diablo-D3> turned down the whole way I cant really tell if the case is on
 550 2011-05-04 01:42:46 <Diablo-D3> and of course
 551 2011-05-04 01:42:47 <Diablo-D3> Art has like
 552 2011-05-04 01:42:54 <Diablo-D3> 6000rpm 120mm fans
 553 2011-05-04 01:43:07 <gjs278> the krazes
 554 2011-05-04 01:43:14 <Diablo-D3> some industrial shit
 555 2011-05-04 01:43:18 <gjs278> oh ok
 556 2011-05-04 01:43:21 <gjs278> krazes do like 3000
 557 2011-05-04 01:43:37 <ntosme2> I really need a garage to shove these in, the fan whine is getting on the nerves
 558 2011-05-04 01:44:29 <Diablo-D3> you know what I find fucking hilarious?
 559 2011-05-04 01:44:31 <gjs278> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835185054
 560 2011-05-04 01:44:35 <Diablo-D3> heatsinks for gpu vrms
 561 2011-05-04 01:44:38 <gjs278>     133.60 CFM
 562 2011-05-04 01:44:51 <gjs278> I had to buy those
 563 2011-05-04 01:44:57 <gjs278> because the ones from arctic didnt fit
 564 2011-05-04 01:45:03 <gjs278> it was like $20 for 20 of them
 565 2011-05-04 01:45:17 <gjs278> they're made of copper and impossible to get to stick
 566 2011-05-04 01:45:45 <Diablo-D3> gjs278: thats only 2x the airflow of mine
 567 2011-05-04 01:46:02 <Diablo-D3> at 45dba
 568 2011-05-04 01:46:02 <gjs278> yeah for     45.90 dBA too what a jet
 569 2011-05-04 01:46:13 <Diablo-D3> mine are only 28
 570 2011-05-04 01:46:27 <gjs278> I have 57cfm at 21dba
 571 2011-05-04 01:46:41 <gjs278> they're not sleeve, they're some 2ball lubricant crap
 572 2011-05-04 01:46:55 <gjs278> I tried buying gentle typhoons but nobody would stock them
 573 2011-05-04 01:47:08 <Diablo-D3> heh, mine are fluid ball bearings
 574 2011-05-04 01:47:21 <Diablo-D3> http://www.scythe-usa.com/product/acc/002/sflex_detail.html
 575 2011-05-04 01:47:31 <gjs278> I need a fan controller
 576 2011-05-04 01:47:41 <gjs278> right now I just 3 pin them and run at max speed
 577 2011-05-04 01:47:45 <Diablo-D3> heh
 578 2011-05-04 01:47:47 <Diablo-D3> I have one
 579 2011-05-04 01:47:54 <Diablo-D3> but really, any'll do
 580 2011-05-04 01:48:08 <Diablo-D3> I just bought the cheapest one thats black and isnt fugly
 581 2011-05-04 01:48:15 <Diablo-D3> and had enough spots
 582 2011-05-04 01:49:50 ahbritto__ has joined
 583 2011-05-04 01:50:49 eao has joined
 584 2011-05-04 01:50:53 <Diablo-D3> btw theres another thing
 585 2011-05-04 01:50:57 <Diablo-D3> that gigabyte card
 586 2011-05-04 01:51:05 <Diablo-D3> I could probably dissassemble the fan array
 587 2011-05-04 01:51:09 <Diablo-D3> and provide my own 92s
 588 2011-05-04 01:51:13 <gjs278> probably
 589 2011-05-04 01:52:03 IncitatusOnWater has joined
 590 2011-05-04 01:52:06 <netxshare> is anyone doing namecoins?
 591 2011-05-04 01:52:34 <gjs278> the VisionTek has the cooler that blows air out of the case but tbh it doesn't seem very effective ever
 592 2011-05-04 01:52:40 <gjs278> and it's a shitload too much
 593 2011-05-04 01:53:14 <gjs278> with any decent case airflow the gigabytes are better and just let the case fans handle the hot air
 594 2011-05-04 01:53:25 <Diablo-D3> yeah
 595 2011-05-04 01:53:54 <Diablo-D3> ;;bc,calc 250000
 596 2011-05-04 01:53:55 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 250000 Khps, given current difficulty of 109670.13329248 , is 3 weeks, 0 days, 19 hours, 21 minutes, and 58 seconds
 597 2011-05-04 01:53:58 tedreiia has joined
 598 2011-05-04 01:54:02 sneak has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 599 2011-05-04 01:54:03 dust1 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
 600 2011-05-04 01:54:08 <Diablo-D3> so it'd pay for itself in... 12 weeks.
 601 2011-05-04 01:54:22 <Diablo-D3> or about 3 months
 602 2011-05-04 01:54:42 ByteCoin has left ()
 603 2011-05-04 01:55:00 <tedreiia> MTGox down again?
 604 2011-05-04 01:55:03 <gjs278> how do you figure 12 weeks
 605 2011-05-04 01:55:06 <gjs278> coins are $3 each
 606 2011-05-04 01:55:16 <Diablo-D3> er
 607 2011-05-04 01:55:17 <Diablo-D3> oh right
 608 2011-05-04 01:55:25 <Diablo-D3> I keep forgetting we're not at $1 anymore
 609 2011-05-04 01:55:29 <gjs278> yeah
 610 2011-05-04 01:55:36 sneak has joined
 611 2011-05-04 01:55:43 amiller has joined
 612 2011-05-04 01:55:48 <gjs278> I saw the 3 weeks and was like oh fuck not waiting 3 months for him to pay this off
 613 2011-05-04 01:55:59 <gjs278> especially with difficulty rises
 614 2011-05-04 01:56:02 <gjs278> then I checked mtgox
 615 2011-05-04 01:56:02 sneak is now known as Guest3034
 616 2011-05-04 01:56:19 <gjs278> after 5 minutes of getting past the ddos I figure they'll be at least 3.30 when I go to sell
 617 2011-05-04 01:56:30 <Diablo-D3> so really
 618 2011-05-04 01:56:32 <Diablo-D3> a month
 619 2011-05-04 01:58:46 IncitatusOnWater has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 620 2011-05-04 01:58:51 <ntosme2> once you have a few cards, the btc start building up a lot faster.
 621 2011-05-04 01:59:08 <ntosme2> I'm net-positive so far, starting $400 in the hole
 622 2011-05-04 01:59:14 dust- has joined
 623 2011-05-04 02:00:06 <Diablo-D3> a few cards? dude
 624 2011-05-04 02:00:21 <Diablo-D3> you know what would happen if I built a mining rig?
 625 2011-05-04 02:00:22 bluenemo_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 626 2011-05-04 02:00:25 <Diablo-D3> the feds would bust us
 627 2011-05-04 02:00:35 <Diablo-D3> I have that sort of fucking luck
 628 2011-05-04 02:00:38 mgwillen is now known as gwillen
 629 2011-05-04 02:00:44 alkor has quit (Quit: alkor)
 630 2011-05-04 02:01:24 tedreiia has quit (Quit: Page closed)
 631 2011-05-04 02:01:54 <ntosme2> bust us for what?
 632 2011-05-04 02:02:08 <gjs278> minting a fake currency
 633 2011-05-04 02:02:10 toffoo has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
 634 2011-05-04 02:02:17 <Diablo-D3> I dunno man, I have that sort of luck
 635 2011-05-04 02:02:30 <noagendamarket> tell them its a game
 636 2011-05-04 02:02:36 bitcoiner has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86.1 [Firefox 3.6.17/20110420140830])
 637 2011-05-04 02:02:39 <ntosme2> I don't see how it's different from wow "gold"
 638 2011-05-04 02:02:47 <gjs278> I would never admit to wow gold either
 639 2011-05-04 02:03:02 <gjs278> if the police ask, I know nothing
 640 2011-05-04 02:03:10 <gjs278> what sa computer I bought this from best buy
 641 2011-05-04 02:03:10 <Diablo-D3> I mean
 642 2011-05-04 02:03:15 <Diablo-D3> everytime I think Im getting somwehere
 643 2011-05-04 02:03:18 <Diablo-D3> the world fucks me over
 644 2011-05-04 02:03:22 <Diablo-D3> its a fucking conspiracy
 645 2011-05-04 02:03:28 <Diablo-D3> like, I find a food at the supermarket I like
 646 2011-05-04 02:03:31 toffoo has joined
 647 2011-05-04 02:03:35 <Diablo-D3> soon as I decide I like it
 648 2011-05-04 02:03:37 <Diablo-D3> THE VERY INSTANT
 649 2011-05-04 02:03:39 NOTAL has joined
 650 2011-05-04 02:03:41 <Diablo-D3> they take it off the shelves
 651 2011-05-04 02:03:44 <Diablo-D3> never to be seen again
 652 2011-05-04 02:03:54 <Diablo-D3> I find a show on TV I like?
 653 2011-05-04 02:03:55 <Diablo-D3> BAMN
 654 2011-05-04 02:03:57 <Diablo-D3> canceled
 655 2011-05-04 02:04:07 <noagendamarket> heh
 656 2011-05-04 02:04:12 <ntosme2> I feel like I have decent luck, no major complaints
 657 2011-05-04 02:04:29 <ntosme2> except in women...sigh
 658 2011-05-04 02:04:39 <Diablo-D3> I find a way to make money through hard work?
 659 2011-05-04 02:04:40 <Diablo-D3> bam
 660 2011-05-04 02:04:41 <Diablo-D3> its illegal
 661 2011-05-04 02:05:06 B0g4r7 has joined
 662 2011-05-04 02:06:13 <ntosme2> clearly "the man" doesn't want us to climb to the status of significant influence aka wealth lol
 663 2011-05-04 02:06:41 <molecular> boy am I glad!
 664 2011-05-04 02:06:44 LightRider is now known as LightRider|afk
 665 2011-05-04 02:06:51 <molecular> it was just the filesystem, my card is still good ;)
 666 2011-05-04 02:07:05 <Diablo-D3> lol
 667 2011-05-04 02:07:09 <ntosme2> anyone had a card die on them?
 668 2011-05-04 02:07:24 <molecular> if you overvoltage, I think it can happen
 669 2011-05-04 02:07:34 <ntosme2> I've never seen a dead gfx card that was kept stock
 670 2011-05-04 02:08:00 Teslah has joined
 671 2011-05-04 02:09:01 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 672 2011-05-04 02:09:37 gjs278 has joined
 673 2011-05-04 02:10:00 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 674 2011-05-04 02:10:17 DukeOfURL has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 675 2011-05-04 02:11:17 gjs278 has joined
 676 2011-05-04 02:12:44 Aahzmundus has quit ()
 677 2011-05-04 02:14:10 slush1 has joined
 678 2011-05-04 02:14:47 jnd has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 679 2011-05-04 02:14:48 int0x27h has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 680 2011-05-04 02:14:48 <CIA-30> bitcoin: genjix * r73d9687560a2 intersango/ (help.php index.php): Donald: altered help text. http://tinyurl.com/3utu9mv
 681 2011-05-04 02:14:53 necrodearia has joined
 682 2011-05-04 02:14:54 <CIA-30> bitcoin: genjix * r6f41e27611fd intersango/www/footer.php: altered links wording slightly. http://tinyurl.com/3krf9uz
 683 2011-05-04 02:14:54 <CIA-30> bitcoin: genjix * rc0620bbffbe1 intersango/view_request.php: BUGFIX: cancel deposits = bad! http://tinyurl.com/3uhhqch
 684 2011-05-04 02:15:07 slush has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 685 2011-05-04 02:16:24 <molecular> "kernel: [  143.980772] do_IRQ: 0.84 No irq handler for vector (irq -1)" <- getting this in syslog when mining with poclbm. anyone know what that means?
 686 2011-05-04 02:16:24 int0x27h has joined
 687 2011-05-04 02:16:35 jnd has joined
 688 2011-05-04 02:16:57 B0g4r7 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 689 2011-05-04 02:17:06 <ArtForz> sounds like spurious IRQs
 690 2011-05-04 02:17:34 <molecular> could these come from the graphics-card?
 691 2011-05-04 02:18:01 <ArtForz> in theory, yes
 692 2011-05-04 02:18:47 B0g4r7 has joined
 693 2011-05-04 02:20:45 <molecular> "kernel: [  301.024026] EXT4-fs (sda2): initial error at 1296827262: ext4_mb_generate_buddy:718" <- something's awfully wrong here
 694 2011-05-04 02:20:54 <ArtForz> uh oh
 695 2011-05-04 02:21:07 <ArtForz> HD dieing?
 696 2011-05-04 02:21:11 <molecular> maybe
 697 2011-05-04 02:21:16 <molecular> made a backup before
 698 2011-05-04 02:21:21 <B0g4r7> best run badblocks
 699 2011-05-04 02:21:26 gasteve_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 700 2011-05-04 02:21:34 <ArtForz> smart showing anything unusual?
 701 2011-05-04 02:21:36 <B0g4r7> If all checks out, fsck.
 702 2011-05-04 02:21:47 <molecular> if I suspect a hd of failing, I dont run badblocks, I run to my trusted hw dealer ;)
 703 2011-05-04 02:22:06 <molecular> fscked before, looked like crap, many errors
 704 2011-05-04 02:22:11 <ArtForz> actually even near-dead HDs can last for a surprisingly long time
 705 2011-05-04 02:22:25 <B0g4r7> I first check with badblocks.
 706 2011-05-04 02:22:27 <molecular> they might, just dont like playing games at todays hd-prices
 707 2011-05-04 02:22:33 <B0g4r7> If there is a problem, then it's ddrescue.
 708 2011-05-04 02:22:55 <molecular> will do badblocks, at least then I know what I'm against
 709 2011-05-04 02:23:01 <molecular> *up against
 710 2011-05-04 02:23:08 <ArtForz> I have a 120GB samsung that likes to develop bad blocks by the dozen for testing unknown mainboards
 711 2011-05-04 02:24:07 <B0g4r7> You mean testing boards you think may kill your drive?
 712 2011-05-04 02:24:10 <ArtForz> yep
 713 2011-05-04 02:24:14 <B0g4r7> Or fot testing how well the controller handles physical errors?
 714 2011-05-04 02:24:17 <B0g4r7> ah.
 715 2011-05-04 02:24:46 <CIA-30> bitcoin: genjix * rb15cab8d4b33 intersango/view_request.php: no need to translate request type. http://tinyurl.com/3dsjlpd
 716 2011-05-04 02:25:19 Incitatus has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 717 2011-05-04 02:25:23 <ArtForz> basically a whole bunch of damaged stuff that's still good enough to do basic checking for magic smoke and getting up to BIOS or so
 718 2011-05-04 02:26:15 <molecular> it sucks: going to bed with the miner off ;(. no checking for a block tomorrow morning. gn8 guys
 719 2011-05-04 02:26:27 <B0g4r7> :(
 720 2011-05-04 02:26:28 <B0g4r7> nite
 721 2011-05-04 02:30:13 JSharp has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 722 2011-05-04 02:31:18 gasteve_ has joined
 723 2011-05-04 02:31:24 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
 724 2011-05-04 02:35:04 DavidSJ has joined
 725 2011-05-04 02:35:52 Cusipzzz has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.0.2 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
 726 2011-05-04 02:36:16 BlueMatt has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 727 2011-05-04 02:43:18 gasteve_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 728 2011-05-04 02:43:36 gasteve_ has joined
 729 2011-05-04 02:44:11 dust- has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 730 2011-05-04 02:44:49 <CIA-30> bitcoin: genjix exper * r982b72..76f3a9 intersango/ (22 files in 5 dirs): (6 commits) http://tinyurl.com/3dynz2e
 731 2011-05-04 02:47:50 dissipate has joined
 732 2011-05-04 02:48:31 dust1 has joined
 733 2011-05-04 02:49:14 DavidSJ has quit (Quit: DavidSJ)
 734 2011-05-04 02:53:26 gasteve_ has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPad - http://colloquy.mobi)
 735 2011-05-04 02:54:44 redengin has quit (Quit: AndroIRC)
 736 2011-05-04 02:54:48 <CIA-30> bitcoin: genjix exper * r26a8ddd151a9 intersango/db.php: unreverted revert of db.php using config file. http://tinyurl.com/6awoghh
 737 2011-05-04 02:54:58 <Diablo-D3> I... what?
 738 2011-05-04 03:01:28 BlueMatt has joined
 739 2011-05-04 03:01:58 <lulzplzkthx> lol.
 740 2011-05-04 03:02:03 <lulzplzkthx> "unreverted revert"
 741 2011-05-04 03:03:33 <genjix> :)
 742 2011-05-04 03:04:59 RenaKunisaki has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
 743 2011-05-04 03:05:47 <lulzplzkthx> So I recently realized I had an issue in my last pull request, so the tooltip worked correctly, but doesn't update the balance if there is a new transaction to you, and the UI hasn't been shown. So I just made a change localy, can someone send me a bitcent and tell me when it has 1 confirmation?
 744 2011-05-04 03:05:55 <lulzplzkthx> 1Q3YTpqDG9WX4THdhkvR8MQ9x3t334yqJs <-- This address.
 745 2011-05-04 03:07:02 RenaKunisaki has joined
 746 2011-05-04 03:09:29 <lulzplzkthx> No? :\
 747 2011-05-04 03:12:22 <da2ce7> https://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=7181.msg105408#msg105408
 748 2011-05-04 03:12:28 <da2ce7> Support the Poject
 749 2011-05-04 03:12:32 davex__ has joined
 750 2011-05-04 03:14:33 ahbritto has joined
 751 2011-05-04 03:15:59 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 752 2011-05-04 03:16:07 genjix has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 753 2011-05-04 03:17:56 skyewm has joined
 754 2011-05-04 03:19:28 phantomcircuit has joined
 755 2011-05-04 03:32:14 Teslah has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 756 2011-05-04 03:32:30 Teslah has joined
 757 2011-05-04 03:33:50 wolfspra1l has quit (Quit: leaving)
 758 2011-05-04 03:42:24 davex__ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 759 2011-05-04 03:42:31 <EPiSKiNG> what's the least expensive case I can get to house 2 5970 and an additional 5870?
 760 2011-05-04 03:42:42 <EPiSKiNG> are there like motherboard platters you can buy?
 761 2011-05-04 03:43:06 yogurt_truck has joined
 762 2011-05-04 03:43:32 davex__ has joined
 763 2011-05-04 03:43:36 <gjs278> my case can do a 5870 and two 5970s with a single riser and balancing the 5870 on top of the 5970 sideways
 764 2011-05-04 03:43:44 <gjs278> and then securing it to the back of the case with a zip tie
 765 2011-05-04 03:43:48 fimp has joined
 766 2011-05-04 03:44:03 <EPiSKiNG> riser to x1 lane?
 767 2011-05-04 03:44:06 <gjs278> no
 768 2011-05-04 03:44:13 <gjs278> I have 3 pci-e slots
 769 2011-05-04 03:44:14 xvilka has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 770 2011-05-04 03:44:19 <gjs278> so riser to the 3rd pci slot
 771 2011-05-04 03:44:25 <gjs278> 16x to 16x
 772 2011-05-04 03:44:45 <EPiSKiNG> and the power supply has enough cabling for 3 cards?
 773 2011-05-04 03:45:10 <gjs278> I have a tx850 and I have enough cables
 774 2011-05-04 03:45:15 <gjs278> but I don't think it's enough power
 775 2011-05-04 03:45:21 <gjs278> I know I can do two 5970's, but I only do 1
 776 2011-05-04 03:45:31 <EPiSKiNG> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130290  <--------- that one has 2 x16 slots and one x1... was figuring I could use a riser for the x1 lane
 777 2011-05-04 03:45:52 <gjs278> you can
 778 2011-05-04 03:46:01 <gjs278> they make 1x to 16x if you don't feel like hacking the plastic
 779 2011-05-04 03:46:30 <gjs278> you definitely have to rise that 1x, no way a card will fit there
 780 2011-05-04 03:47:25 <gjs278> my case is just a generic mid sized lian li, and I have to remove the hd bay to fit any 5970
 781 2011-05-04 03:47:37 <gjs278> so keep that in mind you'll probably have to get that out of the way and just put the hd in the 5.25 bay
 782 2011-05-04 03:48:10 <EPiSKiNG> yeah, but to fit 2 5970...
 783 2011-05-04 03:48:37 <EPiSKiNG> I have an Antec 900 two
 784 2011-05-04 03:48:45 <gjs278> whats your isse
 785 2011-05-04 03:48:48 <gjs278> issue
 786 2011-05-04 03:48:48 <EPiSKiNG> and it will fit 2 5970 with the cages out
 787 2011-05-04 03:48:52 phantomcircuit has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 788 2011-05-04 03:49:27 NOTAL has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 789 2011-05-04 03:49:28 <gjs278> I'll show you my ghetto pic
 790 2011-05-04 03:49:34 <EPiSKiNG> i'm just wondering if there's a cheaper way to set it up than to spend $120 on a case
 791 2011-05-04 03:49:41 <gjs278> http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/1626/photocpr.jpg
 792 2011-05-04 03:49:48 <gjs278> the 5870 is vertical in that pic
 793 2011-05-04 03:49:52 <gjs278> underneath it is 1 5970
 794 2011-05-04 03:49:56 <gjs278> but above that is my raid card
 795 2011-05-04 03:50:02 <gjs278> and if that were out, I could fit another 5970
 796 2011-05-04 03:50:27 <EPiSKiNG> yeah, my main PC is using a RevoDrive
 797 2011-05-04 03:50:28 <gjs278> the 5870 looks like its sticking out a lot, but thats only because I have an aftermarket cooler on it which is slightly larger
 798 2011-05-04 03:50:37 <gjs278> with stock cooler it would fit easily
 799 2011-05-04 03:50:52 <gjs278> I have a zip tie on the left side to secure it to the back of the case
 800 2011-05-04 03:51:34 <gjs278> so if you really wanted to you could copy this setup with a riser, just the card would be on top near the cpu cooler
 801 2011-05-04 03:52:10 <gjs278> case was like $90 but a similar size can be found for less
 802 2011-05-04 03:52:58 <EPiSKiNG> i'm looking now
 803 2011-05-04 03:56:08 <gjs278> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811112154 is mine
 804 2011-05-04 03:56:46 xvilka has joined
 805 2011-05-04 03:58:28 * [Tycho] just got some cases for $19 each new :)
 806 2011-05-04 03:59:12 <gjs278> that explains why the hashrate is almost 300hash now
 807 2011-05-04 03:59:31 <gjs278> you keep adding new miners to the mix
 808 2011-05-04 04:02:41 <EPiSKiNG> [Tycho] sell me one!
 809 2011-05-04 04:03:59 <EPiSKiNG> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811103038  <--- that looks like it'd fit 2 5970
 810 2011-05-04 04:04:02 <Diablo-D3> cases for what?
 811 2011-05-04 04:05:03 x5x`brb`brb is now known as x5x`brb
 812 2011-05-04 04:05:23 <EPiSKiNG> motherboards and GPUs
 813 2011-05-04 04:07:14 <gjs278> if you take out the hd bay
 814 2011-05-04 04:07:19 <gjs278> basically every midsized case will work
 815 2011-05-04 04:08:31 <gjs278> I have the 11.4 drivers now
 816 2011-05-04 04:08:35 <gjs278> going to check these things out
 817 2011-05-04 04:08:41 <gjs278> 397mhash is the number to beat
 818 2011-05-04 04:08:51 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 819 2011-05-04 04:08:52 <luke-jr> 1 grafut is seriously close to 2 tonal meters; I wonder if they're really exactly the same
 820 2011-05-04 04:08:53 fimp has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
 821 2011-05-04 04:09:31 gjs278 has joined
 822 2011-05-04 04:09:59 <gjs278> no change
 823 2011-05-04 04:10:57 LightRider is now known as afk!~LightRide@unaffiliated/lightrider|LightRider
 824 2011-05-04 04:11:11 sshirokov has quit (Quit: ZRC hit the fan!)
 825 2011-05-04 04:11:14 x5x`brb is now known as x5x`brb`brb
 826 2011-05-04 04:11:38 Blitzboom has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 827 2011-05-04 04:12:01 sshirokov has joined
 828 2011-05-04 04:12:05 hachiya has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 829 2011-05-04 04:12:50 hachiya has joined
 830 2011-05-04 04:14:10 <EPiSKiNG> a lot of mid-sized cases don't have removable drive bays
 831 2011-05-04 04:14:53 <luke-jr> ;;bc,calc [bc,eligius]
 832 2011-05-04 04:14:55 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 14617205.3641 Khps, given current difficulty of 109670.13329248 , is 8 hours, 57 minutes, and 4 seconds
 833 2011-05-04 04:15:05 <luke-jr> what! under 15 GH now?
 834 2011-05-04 04:15:14 an20 has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 835 2011-05-04 04:19:20 an20 has joined
 836 2011-05-04 04:20:30 Blitzboom has joined
 837 2011-05-04 04:20:30 Blitzboom has quit (Changing host)
 838 2011-05-04 04:20:30 Blitzboom has joined
 839 2011-05-04 04:41:33 <vorlov> are there currently any asics that can be modified to do mining
 840 2011-05-04 04:41:34 <vorlov> ?
 841 2011-05-04 04:41:44 eao has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 842 2011-05-04 04:41:45 <vorlov> has anybody come up with their own homebrew?
 843 2011-05-04 04:41:57 eao has joined
 844 2011-05-04 04:43:30 <[Tycho]> EPiSKiNG, shipping will be too expensive.
 845 2011-05-04 04:43:41 <gjs278> in mother russia, case ships you
 846 2011-05-04 04:44:16 mcwop23 has joined
 847 2011-05-04 04:44:42 <[Tycho]> They were marked as for video cards up to ~280 mm and i got my saw ready, but to my surprise 5970 fits nicely :)
 848 2011-05-04 04:44:48 an20 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 849 2011-05-04 04:44:59 dissipate has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 850 2011-05-04 04:45:18 <[Tycho]> So i'm going to buy more of them
 851 2011-05-04 04:45:42 <ArtForz> in some of my cheap cases the 5970s actually are *technically* too long, but fit nicely
 852 2011-05-04 04:46:17 <ArtForz> = the upper one ends up sitting nicely in the hd cage
 853 2011-05-04 04:47:24 cuddlefish has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 854 2011-05-04 04:48:21 <[Tycho]> Also it says "four 3.5 bays" but it's more like one at the very bottom of the case, one for floppy and two with mounting holes only on ONE side :)
 855 2011-05-04 04:48:23 an20 has joined
 856 2011-05-04 04:48:35 <midnightmagic> i hate towers like that.. so poorly designed..
 857 2011-05-04 04:48:51 <ArtForz> designed?
 858 2011-05-04 04:49:01 <[Tycho]> And it's my first PC case made out of 0.3 mm foil
 859 2011-05-04 04:49:03 <midnightmagic> "slapped together thoughtlessly"?
 860 2011-05-04 04:49:12 <ArtForz> yeah
 861 2011-05-04 04:49:38 <ArtForz> and yeah, the metal is *really* thin
 862 2011-05-04 04:50:16 <ArtForz> the side panels pretty much bend from looking at them
 863 2011-05-04 04:51:06 <[Tycho]> There was a 15 kg limit for shipping with a personal delivery. I imagine how that delivery guy found out that 14.5 kg order is a whole 5 cases :)
 864 2011-05-04 04:51:20 <ArtForz> lol
 865 2011-05-04 04:51:35 <midnightmagic> good for blood sacrifices anyway, which as we all know for those of us who've seen the old satanic.org, is the best way to increase uptime..
 866 2011-05-04 04:51:39 <ArtForz> really makes you wonder how they can make 4Us for $50
 867 2011-05-04 04:51:53 lyspooner has joined
 868 2011-05-04 04:52:15 <[Tycho]> Rack-mounts are very expensive here :(
 869 2011-05-04 04:52:19 lyspooner has quit (Client Quit)
 870 2011-05-04 04:52:28 mcwop23 has quit (Quit: Page closed)
 871 2011-05-04 04:52:31 <ArtForz> oh, they're pretty cheap, but shipping is a bitch
 872 2011-05-04 04:52:57 <[Tycho]> I don't think that i can find any at $100 or cheaper
 873 2011-05-04 04:53:03 <ArtForz> whoa
 874 2011-05-04 04:53:15 <ArtForz> I got a bunch for 40EUR + shipping
 875 2011-05-04 04:53:44 <ArtForz> okay, they're not exactly from a high-end store
 876 2011-05-04 04:54:14 <ArtForz> basically a small webshop selling 2nd rate cases and stock of discontinued stuff
 877 2011-05-04 04:54:34 <ArtForz> who the hell cares if their 4Us top panel has a scratch?
 878 2011-05-04 04:55:26 <[Tycho]> Initially i didn't wanted to use cases at all, but then figured out that $19 case is cheaper than my time sawing off pieces of alum. profile to make handmade cages.
 879 2011-05-04 04:55:44 <ArtForz> yup, pretty much
 880 2011-05-04 04:59:57 kika has joined
 881 2011-05-04 05:00:03 skyewm has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
 882 2011-05-04 05:04:27 kika has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 883 2011-05-04 05:07:52 Asunder8 has joined
 884 2011-05-04 05:14:59 m00p has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 885 2011-05-04 05:18:33 Teslah has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 886 2011-05-04 05:25:22 vorlov has quit (Quit: vorlov)
 887 2011-05-04 05:25:26 <LightRider> Will the client use IPv6?
 888 2011-05-04 05:25:47 sacarlson has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 889 2011-05-04 05:32:36 Asunder8 has quit (Quit: leaving)
 890 2011-05-04 05:37:05 <_ape> playing around with making a win7 gadget with c#/wpf
 891 2011-05-04 05:37:12 <_ape> they certainly didnt make it easy
 892 2011-05-04 05:37:23 <EPiSKiNG> ;;bc,stats
 893 2011-05-04 05:37:24 <gribble> Current Blocks: 121748 | Current Difficulty: 109670.13329248 | Next Difficulty At Block: 122975 | Next Difficulty In: 1227 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 6 days, 9 hours, 22 minutes, and 30 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 146256.50765492
 894 2011-05-04 05:39:42 dissipate has joined
 895 2011-05-04 05:40:04 sacarlson has joined
 896 2011-05-04 05:42:01 wolfspraul has joined
 897 2011-05-04 05:51:49 <cosurgi> luke-jr: do you have protection against sub mitting the same share/solution multiple times?
 898 2011-05-04 05:52:36 <cosurgi> luke-jr: if somebody is faking his hash strngth by submitting ver and over hen no wonder we cant find a block
 899 2011-05-04 05:53:14 <cosurgi> luke-jr: if somebody is faking his hash strngth by submitting over and over the same share, then no wonder we cant find a block
 900 2011-05-04 05:53:29 <[Tycho]> cosurgi, it can't stop or delay the pool from finding a block.
 901 2011-05-04 05:53:44 <[Tycho]> cosurgi, only the part of that user will be wasted.
 902 2011-05-04 05:54:29 <cosurgi> yes, but  he will get higher reward, because he submitted "more" shares
 903 2011-05-04 05:56:48 LightRider is now known as LightRider|notat
 904 2011-05-04 05:56:56 LightRider is now known as notat!~LightRide@unaffiliated/lightrider|LightRider
 905 2011-05-04 06:00:37 JSharp has joined
 906 2011-05-04 06:04:32 phantomcircuit has joined
 907 2011-05-04 06:05:14 ForceDestroyer has joined
 908 2011-05-04 06:05:58 `2Fast2BCn has joined
 909 2011-05-04 06:08:59 Kicchiri has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 910 2011-05-04 06:13:07 kseistrup is now known as kas
 911 2011-05-04 06:18:34 kas is now known as kseistrup
 912 2011-05-04 06:21:53 dsg has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 913 2011-05-04 06:23:16 dsg has joined
 914 2011-05-04 06:34:51 dissipate has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 915 2011-05-04 06:36:15 JSharp has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 916 2011-05-04 06:38:34 alystair has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
 917 2011-05-04 06:48:49 JSharp has joined
 918 2011-05-04 06:51:04 danbri has joined
 919 2011-05-04 06:55:44 Andrevan has joined
 920 2011-05-04 06:58:38 DD- has joined
 921 2011-05-04 07:03:45 eao has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 922 2011-05-04 07:05:17 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 923 2011-05-04 07:05:53 gjs278 has joined
 924 2011-05-04 07:07:36 <Andrevan> amiller, you here?
 925 2011-05-04 07:07:46 <amiller> hello
 926 2011-05-04 07:07:53 <Andrevan> ok, I have questions about this but hold on
 927 2011-05-04 07:11:19 <amiller> ok, i'm excited to talk about this topic - i hope we can get a lot further than i got on my own
 928 2011-05-04 07:11:25 <Andrevan> cool
 929 2011-05-04 07:11:32 <Andrevan> I'm a software engineer about to graduate from college btw
 930 2011-05-04 07:12:14 <amiller> i'm a phd student in a mostly unrelated field of CS - computer vision and graphics
 931 2011-05-04 07:13:02 da2ce7 is now known as fat_hairy_chick
 932 2011-05-04 07:13:12 threepio has joined
 933 2011-05-04 07:16:27 <Andrevan> amiler, cool stuff, where are you studying?
 934 2011-05-04 07:17:53 <gjs278> AMDOverdriveCtrl is such a piece of shit
 935 2011-05-04 07:18:01 <gjs278> why the hell isn't there a set fan speed to 100% option
 936 2011-05-04 07:18:18 <gjs278> it constantly fucks with me and keeps setting like 30% everytime I make a move with this damn program
 937 2011-05-04 07:19:01 <ersi> Andrevan: Ask questions and someone might be able to answer :)
 938 2011-05-04 07:19:42 <amiller> we're going to discuss building a securities/futures trading system in a secure/crypto way, possibly based on FellowTraveler's jvaa implementation of ricardian contracts
 939 2011-05-04 07:19:59 <Andrevan> will do ersi
 940 2011-05-04 07:20:09 JFK911 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 941 2011-05-04 07:20:15 <Andrevan> yeah ersi I came in here because amiller mentioned this java contract implementation
 942 2011-05-04 07:20:21 <Andrevan> I was asking about options/futures trading
 943 2011-05-04 07:20:31 <Andrevan> we're chattign in query on off topic stuff atm
 944 2011-05-04 07:20:39 <ersi> traffic here is a bit random though, just giving you a heads up. Sometimes lots of activity, sometimes less activity.
 945 2011-05-04 07:20:47 <ersi> ah, alrighty :)
 946 2011-05-04 07:21:27 <Andrevan> cool, thanks for the heads up
 947 2011-05-04 07:22:05 <ersi> and it's quite a mix of developers, users, hard-core users and such in here
 948 2011-05-04 07:25:10 duosrx has joined
 949 2011-05-04 07:28:31 <npouillard> netxshare: yes (about namecoins)
 950 2011-05-04 07:31:57 patapper has left ()
 951 2011-05-04 07:36:37 eao has joined
 952 2011-05-04 07:37:53 x5x`brb`brb is now known as x5x`brb
 953 2011-05-04 07:38:40 Guest3034 is now known as sneak
 954 2011-05-04 07:38:44 sneak has quit (Changing host)
 955 2011-05-04 07:38:44 sneak has joined
 956 2011-05-04 07:42:52 fat_hairy_chick is now known as da2ce7
 957 2011-05-04 07:44:08 devon_hillard has joined
 958 2011-05-04 07:44:22 devon_hillard has quit (Changing host)
 959 2011-05-04 07:44:22 devon_hillard has joined
 960 2011-05-04 07:45:31 jackmcbarn has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 961 2011-05-04 07:45:53 TD_ has joined
 962 2011-05-04 07:46:30 <EPiSKiNG> ;;bc,stats
 963 2011-05-04 07:46:32 <gribble> Current Blocks: 121764 | Current Difficulty: 109670.13329248 | Next Difficulty At Block: 122975 | Next Difficulty In: 1211 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 6 days, 7 hours, 2 minutes, and 19 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 146697.42464560
 964 2011-05-04 07:58:09 TD_ has quit (Quit: TD_)
 965 2011-05-04 07:59:30 danlucraft has joined
 966 2011-05-04 08:05:55 TheAncientGoat has joined
 967 2011-05-04 08:06:05 TheKid has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 968 2011-05-04 08:16:22 ion- has quit (Quit: leaving)
 969 2011-05-04 08:23:10 dishwara has joined
 970 2011-05-04 08:36:38 fetokun has joined
 971 2011-05-04 08:39:35 <fetokun> is there anyone alive in here?
 972 2011-05-04 08:41:32 <retinal> there better not be any survivors
 973 2011-05-04 08:41:42 <retinal> if you see any, let me know
 974 2011-05-04 08:42:01 BurtyB has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
 975 2011-05-04 08:44:17 <fetokun> =D
 976 2011-05-04 08:44:38 <fetokun> I need help testing this website I've just finnished to buy/sell bitcoins using BRL (brazilian reals)
 977 2011-05-04 08:46:07 <_ape> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/6281166/btccharts_gadget_wip.png
 978 2011-05-04 08:46:12 <_ape> workin on a little gadget for fun
 979 2011-05-04 08:47:50 amiller has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 980 2011-05-04 08:48:12 devrandom has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 981 2011-05-04 08:49:17 amiller has joined
 982 2011-05-04 08:49:28 dishwara has quit (Quit: See u soon)
 983 2011-05-04 08:50:25 <tcatm> _ape: cool. let me know if there's any data missing in markets.json :)
 984 2011-05-04 08:51:07 <_ape> some of them had null for something, i will check what it was after i implement this update timer
 985 2011-05-04 08:51:11 <_ape> probably going to post the code up on github
 986 2011-05-04 08:51:47 <tcatm> can you open a socket in your applet? telnet to bitcoincharts.com 27007 for a realtime stream
 987 2011-05-04 08:52:27 <_ape> haha
 988 2011-05-04 08:52:29 <_ape> that would be fun
 989 2011-05-04 08:52:31 <_ape> i will look into it
 990 2011-05-04 08:52:41 <_ape> i was just using your json as a test for adding other json rpc stuff
 991 2011-05-04 08:52:51 <_ape> to make sure it works
 992 2011-05-04 09:01:59 devrandom has joined
 993 2011-05-04 09:04:06 BurtyB has joined
 994 2011-05-04 09:06:35 bgeron has joined
 995 2011-05-04 09:25:19 Zarutian has joined
 996 2011-05-04 09:25:31 <BlueMatt> a tx sig is just the signed sha256 correct?
 997 2011-05-04 09:25:50 ahbritto__ has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
 998 2011-05-04 09:25:54 <sipa> depends
 999 2011-05-04 09:25:54 <molecular> ArtForz, Diablo-D3 setting the Voltage definitely works. setting it down to 1.038 @880 -> instant crash. Its possible, though, that art is right and it sets no nearest register setting from BIOS.
1000 2011-05-04 09:26:06 <BlueMatt> sipa: on?
1001 2011-05-04 09:26:42 <sipa> BlueMatt: oh, you mean the signature itself, or the scriptSig ?
1002 2011-05-04 09:26:53 <BlueMatt> the sig itself is just signing the hash of the tx?
1003 2011-05-04 09:27:29 <sipa> it signs the hash of the tx after removing the signatures from it
1004 2011-05-04 09:27:40 <BlueMatt> oh, shit, ok
1005 2011-05-04 09:27:58 <BlueMatt> then Im completely against the current sign-verify pull
1006 2011-05-04 09:28:12 <sipa> why?
1007 2011-05-04 09:28:27 <BlueMatt> Id much rather see sha512 or 384 or some other size thing so that any break still means sign cant sign a tx accidentally
1008 2011-05-04 09:29:15 <sipa> i'm not sure
1009 2011-05-04 09:29:31 <BlueMatt> (obviously sha256 would have to be broke)
1010 2011-05-04 09:29:37 <sipa> i don't think we should be using separate algorithms just because something "needs to be different"
1011 2011-05-04 09:29:53 <sipa> increases security, yes, that's a good reason for several algorithms
1012 2011-05-04 09:30:03 <BlueMatt> but if sha256 is broken sign is f'd.  why not sha384, its pretty much the same algo
1013 2011-05-04 09:30:14 FabianB has joined
1014 2011-05-04 09:30:19 <sipa> chances are that if sha256 is broken, sha384 is broken as well
1015 2011-05-04 09:30:32 <sipa> it's the same algorithm, but on 64-bit numbers instead of 32-bit ones
1016 2011-05-04 09:30:41 <topi`> if sha256 is broken, then the whole bitcoin is pointless
1017 2011-05-04 09:30:43 <BlueMatt> yes, but then I cant trick you into signing a tx
1018 2011-05-04 09:30:45 <sipa> exactly
1019 2011-05-04 09:30:50 <BlueMatt> (if its somewhat broken)
1020 2011-05-04 09:31:01 <sipa> if a flaw is found it sha2, we need to switch to something different anyway
1021 2011-05-04 09:31:05 <BlueMatt> ie I can generate  a plaintext for a given hash)
1022 2011-05-04 09:31:21 <BlueMatt> but what about the time in between?
1023 2011-05-04 09:31:29 FabianB_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1024 2011-05-04 09:31:34 <topi`> in between sha256 broken and?
1025 2011-05-04 09:31:42 <BlueMatt> switching to new hash
1026 2011-05-04 09:31:43 <topi`> well, just sell all your btc as fast as you can :D
1027 2011-05-04 09:31:56 <BlueMatt> still better to be that tiny bit more secure
1028 2011-05-04 09:32:08 <topi`> secure or obscure?
1029 2011-05-04 09:32:20 `2Fast2BCn has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1030 2011-05-04 09:32:20 <BlueMatt> secure from signing tx via sign+verify
1031 2011-05-04 09:33:34 <sipa> what about using ECDSA(HASH(address + fixed str + message) XOR fixed_uint256) ?
1032 2011-05-04 09:33:43 danlucraft has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1033 2011-05-04 09:33:56 <sipa> with fixed_uint256 standardized to only be used for proving ownership of an address
1034 2011-05-04 09:34:38 <BlueMatt> or ECDSA(HASH(address + fixed str + message) + one extra fixed bit)
1035 2011-05-04 09:35:24 <BlueMatt> because in your suggestion, an attack who can calculate a given sha just has to change his sha
1036 2011-05-04 09:37:39 dick has joined
1037 2011-05-04 09:37:48 <dick> hey where can i trace peoples transactions
1038 2011-05-04 09:37:54 <BlueMatt> blockexplorer.com
1039 2011-05-04 09:37:58 <BlueMatt> if you know the address
1040 2011-05-04 09:38:15 <_ape> there think i got the timer working right
1041 2011-05-04 09:38:16 <sipa> BlueMatt: ecdsa implicitly does a hash, because it can only sign fixed-sized data
1042 2011-05-04 09:38:35 <sipa> if you want more, you need two separate signatures
1043 2011-05-04 09:38:38 <BlueMatt> I thought it was fixed length * x
1044 2011-05-04 09:38:58 <BlueMatt> ie you can just add another fixed length to the end
1045 2011-05-04 09:39:05 <BlueMatt> then you dont need another hash algo
1046 2011-05-04 09:39:14 <dick> thanks
1047 2011-05-04 09:39:28 <sipa> the input to the cryptographic part of ecdsa is a 256-bit number
1048 2011-05-04 09:39:36 <sipa> and when verifying, you need this number
1049 2011-05-04 09:39:53 danlucraft has joined
1050 2011-05-04 09:40:35 <BlueMatt> Ah, ok then nevermind.  That doesnt help...
1051 2011-05-04 09:41:16 <BlueMatt> What about ECDSA(128-bit 0000+first half of resulting hash)+ECDSA(second half of resulting hash+128-bit 00000)
1052 2011-05-04 09:41:20 <BlueMatt> or similar
1053 2011-05-04 09:42:08 <sipa> all that just to be sure you don't accidentally generate a tx hash?
1054 2011-05-04 09:42:14 <sipa> it's a 256-bit space
1055 2011-05-04 09:42:14 <BlueMatt> yes
1056 2011-05-04 09:42:22 <sipa> you don't just randomly end up having the same hash
1057 2011-05-04 09:42:23 <BlueMatt> not accidentally though
1058 2011-05-04 09:42:42 <BlueMatt> ie if sha has a slight break which allows calculation of a chosen hash
1059 2011-05-04 09:42:55 <sipa> slight break?
1060 2011-05-04 09:42:59 <sipa> that'd be completely broken
1061 2011-05-04 09:43:12 <BlueMatt> but if it takes longer than to mine, bitcoin would still be fairly secure
1062 2011-05-04 09:45:16 <BlueMatt> anyway, I need to be studying as I have an exam in 2 hours
1063 2011-05-04 09:46:21 <sipa> good luck
1064 2011-05-04 09:46:50 <dick> hey, why in the getdifficulty does it show the longest block count and not the mean
1065 2011-05-04 09:47:20 <sipa> ?
1066 2011-05-04 09:48:24 <dick> sipa, nm
1067 2011-05-04 09:56:03 <BlueMatt> sipa: please comment: http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=6428.0;all on my suggestion there
1068 2011-05-04 09:57:33 <sipa> BlueMatt: how do you define "a full sha break" then, if not vulnerable to a preimage attack?
1069 2011-05-04 09:57:35 LightRider is now known as LightRider|afk
1070 2011-05-04 09:58:28 Pander has joined
1071 2011-05-04 09:58:58 <UukGoblin> hrm
1072 2011-05-04 09:59:02 <UukGoblin> what'd be /really/ useful
1073 2011-05-04 09:59:09 <UukGoblin> is to add a transaction that signs a message ;-]
1074 2011-05-04 09:59:26 <BlueMatt> sipa: one where the time to calculate it would be < mining
1075 2011-05-04 09:59:30 <UukGoblin> any idea when will non-standard transactions be accepted into a block by mainstream client?
1076 2011-05-04 09:59:35 <BlueMatt> (for bitcoin, for everything else, that is a full sha-break)
1077 2011-05-04 09:59:36 <sipa> BlueMatt: for cryptography, that doesn't matter
1078 2011-05-04 09:59:52 <BlueMatt> this is bitcoin, not general cryptography though
1079 2011-05-04 09:59:54 <Pander> In order to get Bitcoin currency BTC and currency symbol more widely supported (e.g. Unicode, gnucash, etc.) please request http://www.currency-iso.org/iso_index.htm to add BTC to the ISO 4217 list if Currency Codes.
1080 2011-05-04 09:59:59 <sipa> BlueMatt: as soon as you can do a preimage attack with less than O(2^N) complexity, it is considered broken
1081 2011-05-04 10:00:10 <BlueMatt> but not for bitcoin ;)
1082 2011-05-04 10:00:27 <sipa> so? if it is broken we should change algorithms anyway
1083 2011-05-04 10:00:52 <BlueMatt> yes, but then we dont go crazy and block all txes after the break, we just do it at block x
1084 2011-05-04 10:01:01 <BlueMatt> meaning it still needs to be secure for a while longer
1085 2011-05-04 10:01:26 <sipa> if a preimage attack is possible, you can already fake any transaction to be signed with any public key that has already made a signature
1086 2011-05-04 10:02:50 <BlueMatt> only sort of, txes have to be pretty specific in terms of structure, signing doesnt
1087 2011-05-04 10:03:05 <BlueMatt> plus if IsStandard is till on then (I hope it isnt) its even harder
1088 2011-05-04 10:03:25 <BlueMatt> and more calculation is required as you have to be able to figure out a tx which is spendable by you
1089 2011-05-04 10:06:46 <BlueMatt> obviously this is all very speculative and absolutely insane that a preimage attack would be found with these requirements...but, that doesnt mean we shouldnt add a couple extra lines of code to make it that much more secure
1090 2011-05-04 10:06:54 <BlueMatt> any way, please respond on the topic as Im off to my exam
1091 2011-05-04 10:08:19 Pander has left ()
1092 2011-05-04 10:08:30 <UukGoblin> can I repeat my question? :-) will non-standard transactions be accepted into blocks by the mainstream client please? especially if they have a fee? :-)
1093 2011-05-04 10:14:22 <sipa> UukGoblin: not very soon, i think
1094 2011-05-04 10:14:32 <UukGoblin> any reason why not?
1095 2011-05-04 10:14:46 * molecular pokes xelister
1096 2011-05-04 10:14:49 <UukGoblin> if I submitted a patch, would it be controversial to add it? :-)
1097 2011-05-04 10:16:21 <sipa> it would be without very good argumentation why and how it would still prevent attacks
1098 2011-05-04 10:17:25 <UukGoblin> I don't want it to prevent attacks, I want it to enhance the blockchain's functionality. A requirement of a fee should be good enough attack prevention, shouldn't it?
1099 2011-05-04 10:17:36 <sipa> no
1100 2011-05-04 10:17:58 <UukGoblin> what sort of attack then?
1101 2011-05-04 10:18:17 <sipa> well, yes, it all depends on how much one is willing to spend of course
1102 2011-05-04 10:18:41 <UukGoblin> well imho
1103 2011-05-04 10:18:46 <UukGoblin> the fees should be configurable
1104 2011-05-04 10:18:56 <UukGoblin> everyone should have a say in what fees they require
1105 2011-05-04 10:19:08 <UukGoblin> but there's a slight problem
1106 2011-05-04 10:19:18 <sipa> i agree
1107 2011-05-04 10:19:33 <UukGoblin> if everyone sets arbitrary fees, then the client has no way of knowing if a fee is actually required with a transaction
1108 2011-05-04 10:19:46 <sipa> but even if most miners do not accept a feelees non-standard transaction, it would have to be relayed through the network
1109 2011-05-04 10:19:48 <UukGoblin> so it'd need some way of querying the peers about that
1110 2011-05-04 10:19:50 <sipa> and that is the dangerous part
1111 2011-05-04 10:20:27 <UukGoblin> ok I agree to not propagate feeles non-standards
1112 2011-05-04 10:20:38 <UukGoblin> but non-standards with a fee... why not? there's a fee in there for the miners
1113 2011-05-04 10:20:52 <sipa> what if the fee is 0.00000001 ?
1114 2011-05-04 10:21:02 <sipa> would that be relayed?
1115 2011-05-04 10:21:05 <UukGoblin> it should be like the current default fee, e.g. 0.01
1116 2011-05-04 10:21:12 <UukGoblin> but again, should be configurable in future
1117 2011-05-04 10:21:14 <sipa> maybe there is some miner who is happy with 0.00000001
1118 2011-05-04 10:21:19 <UukGoblin> maybe.
1119 2011-05-04 10:21:31 <sipa> even while it may be deadly to the network to allow it
1120 2011-05-04 10:22:02 <UukGoblin> ok so the way I see it
1121 2011-05-04 10:23:23 <UukGoblin> if we enable configurable fees, we also make a setting for configurable 'relaying' of transactions. If Alice wants to send out a transaction, it first queries her peers to see if they're mining and if they'd require a fee for her transaction. If they don't know, they might ask their peers or their peers' peers (but not too deep) to get a general idea. All this can be cached.
1122 2011-05-04 10:23:56 <sipa> i don't think that should be done within the network
1123 2011-05-04 10:24:08 <sipa> miners will have policies, and announce these
1124 2011-05-04 10:24:24 <sipa> sites will track what payment fees are required for what kind of transaction
1125 2011-05-04 10:24:47 <UukGoblin> ok, so you use a different network for the policy updates
1126 2011-05-04 10:25:01 <UukGoblin> which relies on sites to be up
1127 2011-05-04 10:25:48 <UukGoblin> I mean, your solution uses a different network
1128 2011-05-04 10:26:28 <UukGoblin> what I'm saying is that Satoshi's original idea that miners can set their own fees is currently not directly implementable
1129 2011-05-04 10:26:57 <UukGoblin> also, I recall hearing that transactions can be reversed if they don't get included in a number of blocks, is that right?
1130 2011-05-04 10:27:04 <UukGoblin> (or a fee can be added later)
1131 2011-05-04 10:27:34 <sipa> transactions can not ever be reversed
1132 2011-05-04 10:27:59 <sipa> but they can be updated - you can send a new version of a transaction, with possibly more fees, if it doesn get included after a while
1133 2011-05-04 10:28:07 <UukGoblin> right, ok
1134 2011-05-04 10:28:38 <UukGoblin> ok, that's cool
1135 2011-05-04 10:29:02 <UukGoblin> but I do think we need some scheme to allow for miners to be able to set their fee policies
1136 2011-05-04 10:29:12 <UukGoblin> and other clients to understand these policies
1137 2011-05-04 10:29:16 <UukGoblin> do you agree?
1138 2011-05-04 10:29:32 dick has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1139 2011-05-04 10:29:57 <UukGoblin> announcing on forums and relying on coders to update the mainstream client accordingly is just not sustainable
1140 2011-05-04 10:29:58 <sipa> yes, but that is something for later
1141 2011-05-04 10:30:39 <UukGoblin> well that 'later' seems quite long for now
1142 2011-05-04 10:31:06 <UukGoblin> I've been talking about it on the forum in february
1143 2011-05-04 10:31:26 <UukGoblin> but I didn't make it clear enough in the post
1144 2011-05-04 10:31:52 <UukGoblin> so, if I made a patch, do you agree that this 'later' could become 'sooner'? :-)
1145 2011-05-04 10:32:26 <UukGoblin> now, one solution I see is this: when a miner announces a block, she also announces her fee policy with it
1146 2011-05-04 10:32:55 <UukGoblin> clients gather these policies and make guesses based on most recently visible data
1147 2011-05-04 10:33:18 <UukGoblin> we need a reasonable language for communicating these policies
1148 2011-05-04 10:33:25 <sipa> as i said, i don't think that is a problem for now, and i don't think it needs to be done through the bitcoin network
1149 2011-05-04 10:33:45 <UukGoblin> what other network do you propose it should be done through?
1150 2011-05-04 10:34:00 <sipa> supply and demand :)
1151 2011-05-04 10:34:07 <UukGoblin> it is a bit problematic right now imho, as the default 0.01 fee might soon become very large
1152 2011-05-04 10:34:37 <UukGoblin> i.e. when 1 BTC is traded for $100, the default fee will be $1, which is quite large compared to what it is now
1153 2011-05-04 10:34:55 <UukGoblin> supply and demand network? how do you send a packet there?
1154 2011-05-04 10:35:11 <sipa> by noticing it does not get included
1155 2011-05-04 10:35:26 <sipa> these are changes that happen very slowly
1156 2011-05-04 10:35:58 <UukGoblin> not that very imho ;-]
1157 2011-05-04 10:36:08 <UukGoblin> they do happen anyway
1158 2011-05-04 10:38:00 <sipa> ;;bc,blocks
1159 2011-05-04 10:38:00 <gribble> 121786
1160 2011-05-04 10:39:31 <UukGoblin> also, given that currently non-standard transactions are not accepted, and there are no plans to add them in future, if I wanted to develop a BitDNS type of thing, the first thing I'd have to push for is these fee policies to become implemented, I think.
1161 2011-05-04 10:39:36 Kiba has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1162 2011-05-04 10:40:33 <jgarzik> UukGoblin: it's better to use namecoin for that, or another block chain
1163 2011-05-04 10:40:37 <UukGoblin> if I implemented them and set my miners to allow a BitDNS non-standard transactions, that could kick my BitDNS project off, as long as I generate a block every now and then (and then slowly others could start to follow)
1164 2011-05-04 10:40:49 <UukGoblin> jgarzik, I do not believe it is so
1165 2011-05-04 10:41:14 <jgarzik> currency users don't need that spam in the main chain
1166 2011-05-04 10:41:28 <UukGoblin> but they don't have to worry about it either
1167 2011-05-04 10:41:33 <jgarzik> false.  it has been demonstrated that it raises fees for -everyone-
1168 2011-05-04 10:41:51 <UukGoblin> where/how was it demonstrated?
1169 2011-05-04 10:42:02 <jgarzik> read the forums.  this has been covered extensively.
1170 2011-05-04 10:42:03 <noagendamarket> that makes your system a leech UukGoblin
1171 2011-05-04 10:42:10 <jgarzik> yep
1172 2011-05-04 10:42:14 <noagendamarket> or a parasite
1173 2011-05-04 10:42:33 <UukGoblin> in my view, it makes mining more profitable by creating more fees for the miners
1174 2011-05-04 10:42:37 <noagendamarket> why do we have to pay more fees ?
1175 2011-05-04 10:42:43 <UukGoblin> you don't?
1176 2011-05-04 10:42:55 <UukGoblin> fees wouldn't be changed for standard bitcoin transactions
1177 2011-05-04 10:43:02 <UukGoblin> you'd only require fees for non-standard stuff
1178 2011-05-04 10:43:21 <jgarzik> false.  read the forum threads on BitX and BitDNS.  block sizes increase, fees increase for everyone.
1179 2011-05-04 10:43:39 <noagendamarket> it pushes out currency fees
1180 2011-05-04 10:43:59 <noagendamarket> the non standard ones then replace it
1181 2011-05-04 10:44:21 <UukGoblin> then the fee algorithm you're proposing is wrong
1182 2011-05-04 10:44:28 <UukGoblin> non-standard ones shouldn't replace them
1183 2011-05-04 10:44:39 <jgarzik> there is no "proposing" -- this is the fee schedule as it currently exists
1184 2011-05-04 10:44:45 <noagendamarket> you need a separate block chain and a client that sits on top and can choose whichever blcok chain it desires
1185 2011-05-04 10:44:58 <jgarzik> these are the fee rules of the current, mainnet block chain
1186 2011-05-04 10:45:03 <noagendamarket> and one that mines both chains
1187 2011-05-04 10:45:12 <UukGoblin> creating a separate blockchain is not feasible
1188 2011-05-04 10:45:17 <jgarzik> BitDNS increases data load for the entire network, and -all- users suffer increased fees
1189 2011-05-04 10:45:30 <noagendamarket> you can mine all the chains at once
1190 2011-05-04 10:45:34 <jgarzik> more data traffic total == more fees
1191 2011-05-04 10:45:40 <jgarzik> obvious
1192 2011-05-04 10:45:47 <sipa> i like the idea of bitdns, but it does not need a full bitcoin block chain like system, that is overengineered for it
1193 2011-05-04 10:45:54 <UukGoblin> noagendamarket, can you?
1194 2011-05-04 10:46:09 <jgarzik> UukGoblin: yes.  read the forums!
1195 2011-05-04 10:46:11 <sipa> and i definitely don't want it in the main blockhain
1196 2011-05-04 10:46:13 <noagendamarket> yes
1197 2011-05-04 10:46:16 <jgarzik> UukGoblin: satoshi described how to do it.
1198 2011-05-04 10:46:35 <noagendamarket> god how many times do we have to argue about it ?
1199 2011-05-04 10:46:36 <UukGoblin> jgarzik, forums aren't easy to read
1200 2011-05-04 10:46:44 <UukGoblin> jgarzik, unless you have a link
1201 2011-05-04 10:46:48 <noagendamarket> I created a thread
1202 2011-05-04 10:47:01 <noagendamarket> it has everything satoshi wrote about bitdns
1203 2011-05-04 10:47:39 <noagendamarket> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=6197.0
1204 2011-05-04 10:47:45 <noagendamarket> I suggest you read it
1205 2011-05-04 10:47:54 <UukGoblin> jgarzik, I disagree about more data traffic total equalling more fees for standard transactions.
1206 2011-05-04 10:47:57 <UukGoblin> noagendamarket, thanks
1207 2011-05-04 10:48:12 <jgarzik> UukGoblin: it's simple math under the current fee schedule.
1208 2011-05-04 10:48:31 <jgarzik> UukGoblin: and that schedule won't be changing
1209 2011-05-04 10:48:51 <noagendamarket> this is why they created namecoin  not squashed it into bitcoin
1210 2011-05-04 10:48:54 <UukGoblin> jgarzik, current fee schedule is to drop all non-standard transactions
1211 2011-05-04 10:49:09 <noagendamarket> eventually they will create multi miners
1212 2011-05-04 10:49:15 <UukGoblin> jgarzik, so the math is: bitdns's in current fee schedule cost is 0
1213 2011-05-04 10:49:27 <jgarzik> UukGoblin: miners may insert non-std tx's
1214 2011-05-04 10:49:44 <UukGoblin> jgarzik, yes
1215 2011-05-04 10:49:55 <UukGoblin> jgarzik, but they wouldn't use the current fee schedule
1216 2011-05-04 10:50:12 <jgarzik> UukGoblin: it is self-evident that -- if bitdns data is stuffed into the main chain, somehow -- total average block size increases.  when total avg blk size increases, fees increase for everyone.
1217 2011-05-04 10:50:42 <jgarzik> not just bitdns users
1218 2011-05-04 10:50:44 <UukGoblin> how's that? is the current fee based on total avg blk size?
1219 2011-05-04 10:50:46 <jgarzik> all data has a carrying cost
1220 2011-05-04 10:50:50 genjix has joined
1221 2011-05-04 10:50:50 genjix has quit (Changing host)
1222 2011-05-04 10:50:50 genjix has joined
1223 2011-05-04 10:50:55 <jgarzik> UukGoblin: yes
1224 2011-05-04 10:51:03 <UukGoblin> ok, I didn't know that, that's weird
1225 2011-05-04 10:52:19 <UukGoblin> I'd have to read up about the current fee policy
1226 2011-05-04 10:52:40 <jgarzik> UukGoblin: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_fees
1227 2011-05-04 10:53:49 <jgarzik> UukGoblin: as block size increases, fees increase.  it is only logical:  more data on the network means more resource costs for each node.
1228 2011-05-04 10:54:42 <UukGoblin> jgarzik, the 4 bullets under 'Current "Default" Rules for the regular Bitcoin client' don't contain any reference to total average block size
1229 2011-05-04 10:55:04 <jgarzik> UukGoblin: no, just block size
1230 2011-05-04 10:55:39 <UukGoblin> hrm, we have a misunderstanding here
1231 2011-05-04 10:56:07 <cdecker> ;;seen TD
1232 2011-05-04 10:56:07 <gribble> TD was last seen in #bitcoin-dev 19 hours, 16 minutes, and 3 seconds ago: <TD> BlueMatt: there's nothing magical about a bitcoin key. why should i have to create two and link them via some third party site?
1233 2011-05-04 10:56:28 <UukGoblin> my proposition is to alter the standard rules to set a 0.01+ fee for all non-standard transactions. All the standard transactions would be unaffected
1234 2011-05-04 10:56:41 <jgarzik> UukGoblin: irrelevent.  that still increases block size.
1235 2011-05-04 10:56:58 <UukGoblin> i.e. calculations of block size for the purpose of determining a fee for a standard transactions would not count the nonstandard transactions' size
1236 2011-05-04 10:57:33 <jgarzik> UukGoblin: that's not how things current work, and I don't see that logic changing ever
1237 2011-05-04 10:57:33 <TD> cdecker: i'm here
1238 2011-05-04 10:57:36 <Diablo-D3> UukGoblin: I hate the large tx fees.
1239 2011-05-04 10:57:47 <Diablo-D3> because of xelister's little 1000 of 0.01 tx stunt
1240 2011-05-04 10:57:48 <jgarzik> UukGoblin: increased block size costs everyone, so that incentive does not need changing
1241 2011-05-04 10:57:56 <Diablo-D3> I paid almost 4btc to send 685 to mtgox
1242 2011-05-04 10:58:10 <TD> cdecker: sup?
1243 2011-05-04 10:58:17 <Diablo-D3> and I had to send it over multiple tx because the 0.01 tx would FILL UP MY TX TO MTGOX
1244 2011-05-04 10:58:17 <cdecker> Hi Mike
1245 2011-05-04 10:58:27 <UukGoblin> jgarzik, ok let me phrase this simply: every non-standard transaction requires a fee, so all the increased block size is paid for!
1246 2011-05-04 10:58:37 <cdecker> Just wanted to ask whether  CouchDB would be an option for the blockchain on Android
1247 2011-05-04 10:59:01 <TD> "Apache CouchDB is a document-oriented database that can be queried and indexed in a MapReduce fashion using JavaScript."
1248 2011-05-04 10:59:03 <TD> that one ?
1249 2011-05-04 10:59:09 <cdecker> Yup
1250 2011-05-04 10:59:18 <cdecker> They just released an iOS version
1251 2011-05-04 10:59:29 <cdecker> And apparently an Android version will follow soon
1252 2011-05-04 10:59:30 <TD> written in erlang? it sounds more like it's intended for server side usage
1253 2011-05-04 10:59:55 <UukGoblin> separate blockchain seems the wrong solution to me, even if it can be mined using the same CPU power
1254 2011-05-04 11:00:03 <cdecker> What's most interesting is that they keep memory usage really low
1255 2011-05-04 11:00:15 <jgarzik> UukGoblin: OK, enjoy spinning your wheels
1256 2011-05-04 11:00:24 <sipa> and many people agree that the block chain should not be used for anything but bitcoin money transfers
1257 2011-05-04 11:00:29 <UukGoblin> I want this sort of functionality: "I want the bitcoin network to sign this-and-that message for me. Here's your bitpenny in reward"
1258 2011-05-04 11:00:36 <TD> hrmm, well it must be a totally different system to the one they are describing then .... their website says it uses a javascript based query language and can only be accessed via http
1259 2011-05-04 11:00:37 <Diablo-D3> cdecker: uh, what the fuck dude
1260 2011-05-04 11:00:39 <Diablo-D3> what is wrong with you
1261 2011-05-04 11:00:45 <Diablo-D3> couchdb is a slow bloated pile of shit
1262 2011-05-04 11:00:50 <Diablo-D3> we're storing a few mb of data
1263 2011-05-04 11:00:57 <Diablo-D3> use sqlite or bdb and stop being a noob.
1264 2011-05-04 11:01:21 <cdecker> No need to get offensive
1265 2011-05-04 11:01:24 <TD> cdecker: the bitcoinj implementation just lays out blocks one after the other. for android we'll need a slightly different implementation that also stores the calculated data in StoredBlock
1266 2011-05-04 11:01:30 dinox_ has joined
1267 2011-05-04 11:01:39 <TD> cdecker: i haven't looked much at how many bits we'll require to hold the bnChainWork field
1268 2011-05-04 11:01:56 <TD> once that's figured out it's easy to seek back and forth in the chain
1269 2011-05-04 11:02:09 <sipa> the total amount of work in the block chain?
1270 2011-05-04 11:02:17 <cdecker> So you still keep the full blockchain?
1271 2011-05-04 11:02:45 <UukGoblin> this namecoin solution doesn't allow for more than 50 domains every 10 minutes if I'm reading this correctly
1272 2011-05-04 11:02:50 <TD> sipa: yeah
1273 2011-05-04 11:03:00 <UukGoblin> or some other arbitrarily set number
1274 2011-05-04 11:03:02 <TD> cdecker: no just the headers+some extra calculated data
1275 2011-05-04 11:03:10 <UukGoblin> what if you need to register a thousand domains in 10 minutes?
1276 2011-05-04 11:03:24 <UukGoblin> simple solution with a merged blockchain: you spend a thousand bitcoins
1277 2011-05-04 11:03:46 _W_ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1278 2011-05-04 11:03:46 <cdecker> I was hoping to only store blocks with inputs for my own addresses
1279 2011-05-04 11:03:49 <UukGoblin> having a separate blockchain will complicate trading, people will have to start trading namecoins for bitcoins
1280 2011-05-04 11:03:59 <cdecker> And accept incoming confirmed transactions
1281 2011-05-04 11:04:05 <TD> the wallet stores all relevant transactions
1282 2011-05-04 11:04:11 <TD> in both c++ bitcoin and bitcoinj
1283 2011-05-04 11:04:18 <UukGoblin> also a blockchain for namecoins would be different, as you don't want to only have 21 million domain names ever
1284 2011-05-04 11:04:25 <TD> UukGoblin: the "namecoin" thing is just an artifact of how the guy implemented it
1285 2011-05-04 11:04:33 <TD> UukGoblin: he forked the code and renamed some stuff but otherwise made minimal changes
1286 2011-05-04 11:04:51 <TD> UukGoblin: it's not necessarily the best/right design for a distributed naming service .... but he at least did some work instead of just talking about it :-)
1287 2011-05-04 11:04:52 <sipa> TD: it seems to be the sum of the difficulties, but based at 0xffffff... instead of at 0x00000000ffff0000....
1288 2011-05-04 11:04:56 <UukGoblin> TD, and I think it's all wrong by design
1289 2011-05-04 11:05:13 <Diablo-D3> [06:56:31] <cdecker> No need to get offensive
1290 2011-05-04 11:05:18 <Diablo-D3> when it comes to nosql? yes I do.
1291 2011-05-04 11:05:19 <UukGoblin> TD, I'm just scared that even if I do work it'd get rejected by the mainstream community
1292 2011-05-04 11:05:21 <TD> sipa: yes it's a measure of estimated hashes done, iirc. so it's going to need to be a very big number :-)
1293 2011-05-04 11:05:34 <sipa> ;;bc,diff
1294 2011-05-04 11:05:35 <gribble> 109670.13329248
1295 2011-05-04 11:05:39 <UukGoblin> TD, and I don't understand it as I can almost prove that it wouldn't do any harm to the regular bitcoin network
1296 2011-05-04 11:05:40 <sipa> ;;bc,blocks
1297 2011-05-04 11:05:41 <gribble> 121794
1298 2011-05-04 11:05:46 <cdecker> Diablo-D3: I do in fact administer a 1 TB Apache Cassandra cluster
1299 2011-05-04 11:05:49 <TD> UukGoblin: well, bitcoin mainstream isn't really focused on DNS right now. if you want to use the code i'm sure people will help you. if you try to subvert the financial block chain then your'e gonna get flamed
1300 2011-05-04 11:05:52 <cdecker> And we're doing very well
1301 2011-05-04 11:06:19 <UukGoblin> TD, yes, exactly, everyone's just talking about subverting the financial block chain
1302 2011-05-04 11:06:30 <sipa> TD: assuming the difficulty was always the current number, it'd need a 66 bit number now
1303 2011-05-04 11:06:31 <TD> UukGoblin: no, sorry, people who understand bitcoin better than you disagree. satoshi is correct, trying to merge every possible proof of work quorum into a single chain doesn't scale and is bad engineering. the tx format used in bitcoin is specifically for finance.
1304 2011-05-04 11:06:31 <UukGoblin> TD, which is bullshit to me
1305 2011-05-04 11:06:32 <cdecker> NoSQL does have its place, just like RDBMS have
1306 2011-05-04 11:06:48 <TD> UukGoblin: a DNS system would/should use totally different block contents
1307 2011-05-04 11:06:56 <jgarzik> TD: indeed
1308 2011-05-04 11:06:57 <UukGoblin> agreed
1309 2011-05-04 11:07:01 jackmcbarn has joined
1310 2011-05-04 11:07:04 <TD> the only part of BitCoin you'd really want to reuse is the block chain header format and some of the split handling logic
1311 2011-05-04 11:07:08 <UukGoblin> but not a different block chain
1312 2011-05-04 11:07:13 <TD> everything else can be fresh (and should be!)
1313 2011-05-04 11:07:20 <sipa> TD: exactly
1314 2011-05-04 11:07:25 <UukGoblin> TD, I want to pay for other stuff in bitcoins
1315 2011-05-04 11:07:35 <UukGoblin> not in namecoins or xcoins or whatever
1316 2011-05-04 11:07:38 <TD> UukGoblin: you can't have different formats of blocks in the same chain. but what you can do is share the computational power so it's possible to work on both simultaneously
1317 2011-05-04 11:07:47 <Diablo-D3> [07:00:55] <cdecker> Diablo-D3: I do in fact administer a 1 TB Apache Cassandra cluster
1318 2011-05-04 11:07:49 <TD> UukGoblin: you can also link the chains logically, if you want
1319 2011-05-04 11:07:50 <Diablo-D3> cdecker: I dont like you anymore.
1320 2011-05-04 11:07:58 <cdecker> Goddamn I got that wrong
1321 2011-05-04 11:08:03 <cdecker> It's 1 PB
1322 2011-05-04 11:08:13 <UukGoblin> TD, that multi-chain solution would have different difficulties, from what I read
1323 2011-05-04 11:08:17 <TD> UukGoblin: so you can buy domain names with bitcoins without needing any intermediate currencies
1324 2011-05-04 11:08:27 <cdecker> Diablo-D3: why what do you prefer?
1325 2011-05-04 11:08:35 <TD> UukGoblin: it'd have its own difficulty, potentially its own target time (not 10 minutes) etc
1326 2011-05-04 11:08:37 <npouillard> UukGoblin: no there could be a lot more than 21 million domainnames with namecoin
1327 2011-05-04 11:08:42 <TD> cdecker, Diablo-D3: guys guys guys
1328 2011-05-04 11:08:53 <TD> stop fighting. i routinely lose 1PB of storage down the back of the sofa.
1329 2011-05-04 11:09:01 <cdecker> rofl
1330 2011-05-04 11:09:12 <npouillard> UukGoblin: namecoins is the currency to pay fees to get domain names
1331 2011-05-04 11:09:27 <Diablo-D3> TD: lol
1332 2011-05-04 11:09:36 <cdecker> I'd love to get your sofa when you're done with it then :D
1333 2011-05-04 11:09:37 <Diablo-D3> 1 PB? thats... not really that much.
1334 2011-05-04 11:09:47 <UukGoblin> ok thanks for the input anyhow, I'll try to read up about that multichain solution, maybe it'll change my mind
1335 2011-05-04 11:09:55 `2Fast2BCn has joined
1336 2011-05-04 11:09:58 <cdecker> It's more than most RDBMS will scale to
1337 2011-05-04 11:10:20 <TD> UukGoblin: it's not as complex as it sounds. i'm happy to explain the details.
1338 2011-05-04 11:10:21 <UukGoblin> but you have to realise that at some point this "subverting" of the main blockchain will be inevitable anyway
1339 2011-05-04 11:10:29 <npouillard> UukGoblin: then the current implementation represents the ownership of a domain by a 0.01 NC, but it could be 0.00000001 NC
1340 2011-05-04 11:10:29 <TD> if only because this "let's put DNS into the financial chain" thing keeps coming up
1341 2011-05-04 11:10:36 <TD> and we need to kill it :)
1342 2011-05-04 11:10:52 <UukGoblin> TD, no, I only used DNS as an example
1343 2011-05-04 11:11:05 <TD> dns, ssl certs, voting systems, etc ....
1344 2011-05-04 11:11:11 <UukGoblin> npouillard, ok, but you can't buy namecoins with bitcoins unless you have willing traders
1345 2011-05-04 11:11:24 <Diablo-D3> well
1346 2011-05-04 11:11:27 <Diablo-D3> namecoin would work
1347 2011-05-04 11:11:28 <jgarzik> TD: what is the "extra data" that goes into BitDNS block header?
1348 2011-05-04 11:11:31 <Diablo-D3> if they'd get their own fucking network
1349 2011-05-04 11:11:36 <_ape> ok does anyone want to see if my bitcoin charts gadget works
1350 2011-05-04 11:11:37 <_ape> https://github.com/apeape/Bitcoin-Charts-Gadget
1351 2011-05-04 11:11:41 <Diablo-D3> its not hard
1352 2011-05-04 11:11:42 <cdecker> Anyway, I'll drop the couchdb idea then :D
1353 2011-05-04 11:11:43 <TD> namecoins is its own network
1354 2011-05-04 11:11:46 <_ape> i uploaded the .gadget in the downloads section
1355 2011-05-04 11:11:49 <npouillard> UukGoblin: sure, but I can sell you some :)
1356 2011-05-04 11:11:52 <jgarzik> TD: http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=1790.msg28715#msg28715
1357 2011-05-04 11:11:54 <Diablo-D3> select a) your own port pair, b) your own genesis block
1358 2011-05-04 11:11:55 * sipa proposes an alternative chain, with generation transactions replaces by contracts "i, <name>, consider the holder(s) of the coin(s) descending from this generation, owners of <physical or virtual property>", with the ability to link to a bitcoin transaction, and the ability to be signed by both sender and receiver
1359 2011-05-04 11:12:00 <Diablo-D3> no other real modifications needed to bitcoin
1360 2011-05-04 11:12:21 <UukGoblin> so basically you need to invent a new currency for each BitX project if you have separate blockchains
1361 2011-05-04 11:12:25 <Diablo-D3> shove the dns ip/name itself into the comment block thats already in bitcoin
1362 2011-05-04 11:12:31 <sipa> that way you could implement trading of any goods, as long as people trust the issuer of that contract, in atomic transactions for bitcoins
1363 2011-05-04 11:12:43 <jgarzik> I was tempted to commit a "guide to starting your own block chain", because namecoin neglected to change the address format :(
1364 2011-05-04 11:12:50 <UukGoblin> and if one of the projects is very unpopular, you're screwed, you can't really use it
1365 2011-05-04 11:12:56 <UukGoblin> cause you'll be the only one mining
1366 2011-05-04 11:12:56 <sipa> it could be used for DNS names (though not as authorative db)
1367 2011-05-04 11:12:57 <TD> jgarzik: the basic approach is to extend BitCoin C++ with a new set of RPCs that let you place a hash into the txin of the current coinbase transaction.
1368 2011-05-04 11:12:59 <Diablo-D3> jgarzik: well
1369 2011-05-04 11:13:02 <Diablo-D3> it'd be really interesting
1370 2011-05-04 11:13:08 <Diablo-D3> if you could supply an xml document
1371 2011-05-04 11:13:08 <npouillard> UukGoblin: not with cross-mining
1372 2011-05-04 11:13:20 <Diablo-D3> that you just feed it to bitcoin and it automatically loads the foreign network
1373 2011-05-04 11:13:23 <TD> jgarzik: you also need a way of telling BitCoin to spit out blocks found according to a different difficulty level
1374 2011-05-04 11:13:26 <noagendamarket> the key is sharing the load
1375 2011-05-04 11:13:31 <jgarzik> TD: yep
1376 2011-05-04 11:13:34 <UukGoblin> npouillard, with cross-mining you'd still have to convince others to mine for your project
1377 2011-05-04 11:13:55 <npouillard> UukGoblin: there is an incentive for it
1378 2011-05-04 11:13:56 <Diablo-D3> its a list of the genesis block name, difficulty settings, time between block settings, and the port number, and a list of well known peers
1379 2011-05-04 11:13:56 <TD> jgarzik: then you write a totally new codebase that just the nakamoto block chain algorithm, but is otherwise independent. it's not that hard actually, the hard part is determining the rules for transactions and how they link together
1380 2011-05-04 11:14:02 <UukGoblin> npouillard, what sort of incentive?
1381 2011-05-04 11:14:09 <TD> which in bitcoin is super complex but that's because it's a complete distributed financial contracts system :-)
1382 2011-05-04 11:14:14 <TD> names would be simpler
1383 2011-05-04 11:14:15 <Diablo-D3> [07:09:05] <Diablo-D3> its a list of the genesis block name, difficulty settings, time between block settings, and the port number, and a list of well known peers
1384 2011-05-04 11:14:17 <Diablo-D3> seriously
1385 2011-05-04 11:14:20 <UukGoblin> npouillard, I invent a shitty chain, no-one wants my shitcoins, why would they mine my block?
1386 2011-05-04 11:14:20 <Diablo-D3> thats all you have to do
1387 2011-05-04 11:14:24 <npouillard> UukGoblin: trading the X currency you have for bitcoins
1388 2011-05-04 11:14:33 <npouillard> UukGoblin: no they won't
1389 2011-05-04 11:14:35 <UukGoblin> npouillard, but X is shit, no-one wants to buy or sell it
1390 2011-05-04 11:14:46 <npouillard> like with any currency
1391 2011-05-04 11:14:47 <jgarzik> TD: I'm just referring to, specifically, the mining-for-multiple-chains-at-same-time part.  The other parts fall out naturally, once you have that one bit.
1392 2011-05-04 11:14:56 <TD> when BitCoin C++ spits out a bitcoin format block header that is sufficient to meet the namecoin difficulty (regardless of whether it matches bitcoins difficulty), your new network takes it, and broadcasts it as part of its own "block found" message
1393 2011-05-04 11:15:19 <TD> after the bitcoin block header, you just append whatever data you want
1394 2011-05-04 11:15:22 sgornick has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1395 2011-05-04 11:15:32 <TD> it doesn't even have to have any concept of transactions
1396 2011-05-04 11:15:34 <UukGoblin> npouillard, yes, and a single-block solution would benefit every miner because every now and then I'd send a shitcoin transaction and include a bitcoin fee with it
1397 2011-05-04 11:15:36 <TD> though it probably would
1398 2011-05-04 11:15:56 <UukGoblin> s/single-block/single-blockchain/
1399 2011-05-04 11:15:58 <npouillard> UukGoblin: but you polute everyone with it
1400 2011-05-04 11:16:11 <TD> other nodes in the DnsCoin network receive that bitcoin format block header, verify it matches the dns chains difficulty, verify their own data beneath it and verify the txin hash is correct
1401 2011-05-04 11:16:13 <UukGoblin> npouillard, why is everyone using the word 'polute'?
1402 2011-05-04 11:16:25 <UukGoblin> npouillard, I'd pay for the storage of my transaction!
1403 2011-05-04 11:16:29 <TD> (so dnscoin distributes the bitcoin block header, the coinbase tx and the merkle branch needed to link the two together)
1404 2011-05-04 11:16:36 <TD> that's where satoshis 200 bytes comes from
1405 2011-05-04 11:16:36 <UukGoblin> like every other bitcoiner does if he wants to send a large transaction
1406 2011-05-04 11:16:43 <npouillard> UukGoblin: Satoshi also mentioned that we may want different fates for different projects
1407 2011-05-04 11:16:47 <jgarzik> TD: tnx
1408 2011-05-04 11:16:49 _W_ has joined
1409 2011-05-04 11:16:49 <TD> it's the size of the bitcoin format block header + the coinbase tx. perhaps also the merkle branch too, i never calculated it for sure
1410 2011-05-04 11:17:20 <sipa> afaik merkle branches aren't stored anywhere
1411 2011-05-04 11:17:26 <sipa> in the block chain
1412 2011-05-04 11:17:27 * jgarzik wishes satoshi would release bitcoin.org to somebody
1413 2011-05-04 11:17:29 <TD> UukGoblin: yes, you'd have to convince miners to take part. but if all it involves is running a program with a --bitcoin-node=localhost:18333 switch, why would they not do it?
1414 2011-05-04 11:17:30 <jgarzik> to fix SSL cert
1415 2011-05-04 11:17:31 <sipa> only the merkle root
1416 2011-05-04 11:17:46 <TD> UukGoblin: assuming they think your code is good
1417 2011-05-04 11:17:55 <TD> UukGoblin: bear in mind only a handful of miners control nearly half a terahash of power!
1418 2011-05-04 11:18:00 <noagendamarket> if its shit it deserves to fail
1419 2011-05-04 11:18:01 <TD> UukGoblin: you don't have to convince many people to take part.
1420 2011-05-04 11:18:03 <noagendamarket> anyway
1421 2011-05-04 11:18:07 <UukGoblin> TD, they'd have to do that for every small single project
1422 2011-05-04 11:18:11 ersi has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1423 2011-05-04 11:18:17 ersi has joined
1424 2011-05-04 11:18:18 <TD> sipa: yes. you'd have to define your own format for distributing the data, eg a protobuf like:
1425 2011-05-04 11:18:24 <TD> message DnsCoinBlock {
1426 2011-05-04 11:18:28 <UukGoblin> which would quickly become unmanageable
1427 2011-05-04 11:18:31 <TD>   required bytes bitcoin_header = 1;
1428 2011-05-04 11:18:39 <TD>   required bytes bitcoin_coinbase_tx = 2;
1429 2011-05-04 11:18:46 <TD>   required bytes coinbase_merkle_branch = 3;
1430 2011-05-04 11:18:54 <TD>   required DnsCoinData data = 4;
1431 2011-05-04 11:18:54 <TD> }
1432 2011-05-04 11:18:59 <UukGoblin> anyway whatever you can say about poluting
1433 2011-05-04 11:19:03 <TD> UukGoblin: there aren't going to be that many chains
1434 2011-05-04 11:19:04 <UukGoblin> you can't stop me :-]
1435 2011-05-04 11:19:11 <TD> UukGoblin: it's hard to come up with use cases for even 3 or 4
1436 2011-05-04 11:19:27 <UukGoblin> TD, I want a way to sign events from a MMORPG game
1437 2011-05-04 11:19:43 <TD> why?
1438 2011-05-04 11:19:52 <UukGoblin> to be able to prove that mmorpg servers don't cheat
1439 2011-05-04 11:20:06 sgornick has joined
1440 2011-05-04 11:20:17 <TD> so your MMORPG would send every game event like "user logged in", "user moved from X to Y" to be timestamped?
1441 2011-05-04 11:20:30 <UukGoblin> TD, in an aggregated fashion, yes
1442 2011-05-04 11:20:43 <genjix> cool
1443 2011-05-04 11:20:49 <sipa> i don't see the point
1444 2011-05-04 11:20:59 <UukGoblin> i.e. store the whole message in a DHT of some sort, compute the shasum, and get the shasum signed by the bitcoin network
1445 2011-05-04 11:20:59 <TD> UukGoblin: hrmm. bitcoin of today isn't a good fit for that use case anyway.
1446 2011-05-04 11:21:00 <sipa> the mmorpg can claim whatever it likes
1447 2011-05-04 11:21:08 <TD> UukGoblin: you can't really establish orderings for events within a block
1448 2011-05-04 11:21:21 <UukGoblin> TD, just an example
1449 2011-05-04 11:21:42 <UukGoblin> the generic problem that I can see the bitcoin blockchain solving is this: sign me a message for a fee
1450 2011-05-04 11:21:49 <TD> well, that's my point :) coming up with use cases that actually do fit the block chain system isn't so easy. for a MMORPG operator who wanted to prove their honesty a trusted timestamp server is more appropriate
1451 2011-05-04 11:21:56 <TD> because it's much higher performance
1452 2011-05-04 11:22:04 <UukGoblin> ok, this could be a separate BitSign chain
1453 2011-05-04 11:22:09 <jgarzik> UukGoblin: sounds like a great application for another chain
1454 2011-05-04 11:22:18 <noagendamarket> like a sslchain
1455 2011-05-04 11:22:21 <noagendamarket> :)
1456 2011-05-04 11:22:31 <UukGoblin> or BitStamp
1457 2011-05-04 11:22:40 <npouillard> indeed I would like a BitSign chain
1458 2011-05-04 11:22:42 <noagendamarket> fuck verisign
1459 2011-05-04 11:22:52 <TD> like this:
1460 2011-05-04 11:22:52 <TD> http://www.thales-esecurity.com/en/Products/Time%20Stamping/Time%20Stamp%20Server.aspx
1461 2011-05-04 11:22:56 <UukGoblin> ok, let me ask this: why would a miner have to care about all the chains? All he wants is bitcoins.
1462 2011-05-04 11:23:00 <TD> if i was running an MMORPG i'd use that
1463 2011-05-04 11:23:13 <UukGoblin> TD, dude
1464 2011-05-04 11:23:17 <UukGoblin> TD, that's like owned by someone
1465 2011-05-04 11:23:22 <UukGoblin> I want a p2p mmorpg
1466 2011-05-04 11:23:27 <UukGoblin> not "operated" by someone
1467 2011-05-04 11:23:31 <TD> that's a totally different and much harder problem :-)
1468 2011-05-04 11:23:35 <TD> i know because i tried to build one once, haha
1469 2011-05-04 11:23:39 <noagendamarket> lol
1470 2011-05-04 11:23:50 <UukGoblin> TD, good :-] I was talking about building one once too ;-]
1471 2011-05-04 11:23:51 <TD> once you successfully build a P2P MMORPG get back to us about making it trustworthy using distributed timestamping
1472 2011-05-04 11:24:07 <UukGoblin> well I won't until I know that bitcoin can work with it
1473 2011-05-04 11:24:16 <TD> anyway you just answered your own question - miners who care can join your other network. miners who don'
1474 2011-05-04 11:24:27 <UukGoblin> TD, yes but why do they have to care?
1475 2011-05-04 11:24:30 <TD> who don't care, won't want you trying to stuff your MMORPG data into their financial database
1476 2011-05-04 11:24:36 <TD> because they are paying for the costs of running a node
1477 2011-05-04 11:24:48 <TD> that's fundamental. you're trying to externalize the costs of your project onto other people who may or may not want to pay them
1478 2011-05-04 11:24:50 <UukGoblin> TD, if you asked every miner around if they want an extra 0.01 for each block they generate, I'm sure the answer would be 100% yes
1479 2011-05-04 11:24:59 <TD> if they do, you can make setup literally one line they copy/paste into a terminal
1480 2011-05-04 11:25:12 <TD> no, probably not if the cost is an additional 100txns per second of processing cost
1481 2011-05-04 11:25:19 <UukGoblin> if it costs them more than 0.01 to store my transaction, OK, I'll pay that much more
1482 2011-05-04 11:25:58 <TD> no you won't. your game is entirely theoretical and needs the ability to timestamp events to very high precision at a rate of potentially thousands of events per second
1483 2011-05-04 11:26:09 <TD> the Thales hardware I linked to can do that and more.
1484 2011-05-04 11:26:18 <UukGoblin> forget about a game
1485 2011-05-04 11:26:19 <TD> bitcoin can't even approach that level of accuracy and throughput today.
1486 2011-05-04 11:26:32 <UukGoblin> I don't want it to approach that level of accuracy and throughput
1487 2011-05-04 11:26:44 <UukGoblin> the only way I could use bitcoin is to sign aggregated many-minute event logs
1488 2011-05-04 11:27:08 RenaKunisaki has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1489 2011-05-04 11:27:08 <UukGoblin> anyway
1490 2011-05-04 11:27:14 <UukGoblin> I have to go soon
1491 2011-05-04 11:27:22 <noagendamarket> it would be like trying to cram twitter into the block chain
1492 2011-05-04 11:27:47 <noagendamarket> think how many fail whales that would bring
1493 2011-05-04 11:27:53 <UukGoblin> but one last question: Do you people agree that the mainstream bitcoin client not allowing the user to set his own fees for mining is a bug?
1494 2011-05-04 11:29:17 <dinox_> UukGoblin: what do you mean by that? fees for mining?
1495 2011-05-04 11:29:32 <TD> you mean minimum inclusion fees?
1496 2011-05-04 11:30:01 <UukGoblin> dinox_, I mean that currently fees for transactions are set up arbitrarily by satoshi, gavin, etc. If I wanted to run a mining node using my own fee policy, I'd have to modify the client's code, rather than set my fees in a config.
1497 2011-05-04 11:30:34 <dinox_> Aha, to only include tansactions with fees, for example?
1498 2011-05-04 11:30:37 <TD> yeah, mining for fees doesn't really happen today and i suspect by the time it becomes popular there'll be a bunch of very different models
1499 2011-05-04 11:30:38 <UukGoblin> yes
1500 2011-05-04 11:30:48 <TD> (like the one i proposed on the tx fee equilibrium thread)
1501 2011-05-04 11:31:01 <TD> it's probably premature to try and make it all settable via a config file
1502 2011-05-04 11:31:09 <sipa> i'd call it a limitation indeed
1503 2011-05-04 11:31:13 <sipa> not a bug
1504 2011-05-04 11:31:15 <dinox_> UukGoblin: That's more like a missing feature
1505 2011-05-04 11:31:25 <TD> if your understanding of bitcoin is good enough to want to mine with custom rules, it's probably good enough to edit the code today.
1506 2011-05-04 11:31:36 <UukGoblin> sipa, original satoshi's paper talks about miners being able to set fees on their own, and that's not implemented, hence bug
1507 2011-05-04 11:31:40 <TD> given that you'd be spending a lot in order to mine at sufficient speeds anyway
1508 2011-05-04 11:31:54 <TD> UukGoblin: satoshis paper discusses a lot of things that are not implemented
1509 2011-05-04 11:32:08 <TD> "bug" means "software is not acting the way it was intended to" rather than "software could be improved by doing X"
1510 2011-05-04 11:32:14 <TD> though usually it's all tracked in a bug database
1511 2011-05-04 11:32:19 <sipa> it seems the design of the system is/was miles ahead of the implementation
1512 2011-05-04 11:32:23 <UukGoblin> "bug" means "software does not match specification" in my language
1513 2011-05-04 11:32:23 <TD> yeah
1514 2011-05-04 11:32:36 <TD> satoshis paper is so far from a specification :-(
1515 2011-05-04 11:32:38 <UukGoblin> ok missing feature/bug/whatever
1516 2011-05-04 11:32:41 <sipa> which is actually very rare
1517 2011-05-04 11:32:43 <TD> huge chunks of the system don't even appear in it
1518 2011-05-04 11:32:50 <UukGoblin> if I coded it and submitted a patch, why would it not get included?
1519 2011-05-04 11:33:06 <TD> it might do
1520 2011-05-04 11:33:12 <TD> try asking gavin
1521 2011-05-04 11:33:15 <UukGoblin> ok
1522 2011-05-04 11:33:25 <TD> i'm not sure many people would use that feature, mind you
1523 2011-05-04 11:33:26 <UukGoblin> I can already see people shouting at me that it polutes bitcoin and what not
1524 2011-05-04 11:33:34 sgornick has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1525 2011-05-04 11:33:43 <TD> why?
1526 2011-05-04 11:33:56 RenaKunisaki has joined
1527 2011-05-04 11:33:57 <sipa> wait, are you talking about setting mining fees, or about allowing nonstandard tx's for a fee?
1528 2011-05-04 11:33:58 <UukGoblin> because it'll allow miners to set arbitrary fees for non-standard transactions
1529 2011-05-04 11:34:02 sgornick has joined
1530 2011-05-04 11:34:18 <TD> there's a difference between making the default min fee configurable, and changing the tx inclusion rules
1531 2011-05-04 11:34:19 <UukGoblin> sipa, mining fees in general include rules about non-standard transactions
1532 2011-05-04 11:34:21 <TD> that's really two separate changes
1533 2011-05-04 11:34:34 <UukGoblin> the way I see it, both should be configurable
1534 2011-05-04 11:34:36 <TD> no, i don't think gavin would accept the latter change
1535 2011-05-04 11:34:41 <sipa> UukGoblin: 1) rules for relaying transactions 2) rules for accepting transactions
1536 2011-05-04 11:34:49 <UukGoblin> sipa, yes. two things
1537 2011-05-04 11:34:50 <TD> but of course you're free to modify your code to do that. luke-jr has done it.
1538 2011-05-04 11:34:52 <UukGoblin> both configurable
1539 2011-05-04 11:35:14 <UukGoblin> ok, well thanks again for the input
1540 2011-05-04 11:35:16 <sipa> making 2) configurable is reasonable i think
1541 2011-05-04 11:35:26 <sipa> making 1) configurable will need a lot more discussion
1542 2011-05-04 11:35:43 <UukGoblin> I still do not understand why you want to reject a transaction with a fee, it's beyond my comprehension, but I'll try to read up about it, maybe I'll understand at some point
1543 2011-05-04 11:35:56 <TD> you mean a non standard transaction with a fee
1544 2011-05-04 11:36:00 <UukGoblin> yes
1545 2011-05-04 11:36:02 JSharp has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1546 2011-05-04 11:36:13 <TD> because everyone has to pay the cost of a block, not just the miner
1547 2011-05-04 11:36:30 <sipa> blocks and transactions are verified by everyone
1548 2011-05-04 11:36:41 <TD> if I accept a 1 gigabyte transaction for a fee of 0.05 bit cents, it might be profitable for _me_, but it's just a cost to everyone else who has to download, process and index the chain
1549 2011-05-04 11:36:46 <sipa> if the script in it is computationall very hard to execute, that's huge load on the system
1550 2011-05-04 11:37:01 <UukGoblin> so the miner's decision in english would be "Oh I'd love to have extra money, but because I'm sooo altruistic I'll chuck it in the bin so that others are happy"?
1551 2011-05-04 11:37:11 <TD> we all accept that shared cost today because everyone agrees they want to take part in a financial system
1552 2011-05-04 11:37:25 <TD> if your gigantic complicated transaction is to do with mmorpgs or dns or whatever, it breaks that implied social contract.
1553 2011-05-04 11:37:27 <sipa> don't do to others what you don't want others to do to you
1554 2011-05-04 11:37:52 <UukGoblin> TD, of course, who said about 1GB costing 0.05
1555 2011-05-04 11:38:01 <TD> it's just an example to make a point.
1556 2011-05-04 11:38:01 <UukGoblin> I'd want 1KB to cost about 0.01, like it does now
1557 2011-05-04 11:38:08 <TD> it's not just about storage size.
1558 2011-05-04 11:38:13 <TD> it's about processing power and other things.
1559 2011-05-04 11:39:09 <TD> look, with all due respect as you're clearly a bright guy, i'm not sure what's so hard to understand about this. people install and run bitcoin [miners] to take part in a financial system. we've explained to you how to extend that system so those who want to can take part in others, without having to split their computational work done
1560 2011-05-04 11:39:37 <TD> it is a win/win situation. new networks can easily leverage the hard work done by miners in setting up GPU clusters or pools or whatever
1561 2011-05-04 11:39:44 Kicchiri has joined
1562 2011-05-04 11:39:44 ForceDestroyer has quit (Disconnected by services)
1563 2011-05-04 11:39:55 <TD> but for end users, merchants, people who aren't mining, etc - they don't have to worry about it
1564 2011-05-04 11:40:00 <TD> people are free to make their own decisions
1565 2011-05-04 11:40:20 <TD> and realistically you'd be able to get a very secure network with minimal marketing. just convincing five or six guys would get you enormous amounts of hash power.
1566 2011-05-04 11:40:28 <UukGoblin> I'm not discarding that solution, I'm saying that "polution" of the main blockchain isn't necessarily bad either. I do have to read up about the multi-chain solution more though.
1567 2011-05-04 11:41:06 <TD> there isn't much written about it unfortunately. satoshi appears to have invented it a long time after he wrote bitcoin itself, in response to peoples desire to generalize the system.
1568 2011-05-04 11:41:21 <TD> but i (finally) understand what he meant, so i'm happy to discuss it with you here or on the forums
1569 2011-05-04 11:41:27 <UukGoblin> ok, cool
1570 2011-05-04 11:41:47 <UukGoblin> I think forums might be slightly more organized than here, but a wiki-type article would be best
1571 2011-05-04 11:41:47 RazielZ has joined
1572 2011-05-04 11:42:05 <TD> if you start a thread i'll try and write out a clearer explanation than what satoshi provided so far.
1573 2011-05-04 11:42:12 <UukGoblin> ok cool
1574 2011-05-04 11:42:15 <UukGoblin> gotta go now
1575 2011-05-04 11:42:27 <TD> later
1576 2011-05-04 11:42:42 <UukGoblin> thanks very much for your input and please don't be offended, I don't want to make anyone's chain dirty ;-]
1577 2011-05-04 11:43:09 <TD> great, good to hear that :-)
1578 2011-05-04 11:43:43 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1579 2011-05-04 11:43:47 B0g4r8 has joined
1580 2011-05-04 11:45:21 dinox_ has quit (Quit: leaving)
1581 2011-05-04 11:45:47 <cdecker> TD you'll be there this weekend right?
1582 2011-05-04 11:47:43 mikehawkburn has joined
1583 2011-05-04 11:47:52 <TD> that's my plan
1584 2011-05-04 11:48:32 <cdecker> Great, looking forward to it ^^
1585 2011-05-04 11:48:50 JSharp has joined
1586 2011-05-04 11:50:11 mikehawkburn is now known as sc8nt4u
1587 2011-05-04 11:51:29 <TD> UukGoblin: actually i'll just make a post myself today, whilst i'm thinking about it.
1588 2011-05-04 11:54:27 mologie has joined
1589 2011-05-04 11:55:26 sc8nt4u has quit ()
1590 2011-05-04 11:55:31 sc8nt4u has joined
1591 2011-05-04 11:56:28 mologie has quit (Client Quit)
1592 2011-05-04 11:56:43 mologie has joined
1593 2011-05-04 12:00:52 Speeder has joined
1594 2011-05-04 12:02:49 <CIA-30> bitcoinj: hearn@google.com * r70 /trunk/build.xml: Fix the ant build.xml file to include SLF4J
1595 2011-05-04 12:04:48 <CIA-30> bitcoin: genjix exper * r6fdcb41cf8a9 intersango/www/ (config.php index.php): purge config.php http://tinyurl.com/6zfnteh
1596 2011-05-04 12:14:51 <CIA-30> bitcoin: genjix exper * r5001f4fd9e57 intersango/login.php: BUGFIX: remove duplicate header include in login. http://tinyurl.com/623gngo
1597 2011-05-04 12:18:20 <luke-jr> sipa: changing rules for accepting transactions almost depends on changing rules for relaying
1598 2011-05-04 12:25:02 bgeron has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1599 2011-05-04 12:25:05 nefario has joined
1600 2011-05-04 12:26:58 <nefario> questions about transaction fees for bitcoind
1601 2011-05-04 12:26:59 <nefario> Using version 3210, which is the latest binary on the site.
1602 2011-05-04 12:27:01 <nefario> I've set transaction fees to be 0.01btc, but have a fee here for 0.03btc
1603 2011-05-04 12:27:02 <nefario> It's messing up my accounting.
1604 2011-05-04 12:27:32 <sipa> it's 0.01 BTC/kbyte
1605 2011-05-04 12:27:41 <nefario> oh
1606 2011-05-04 12:28:03 <nefario> so how do I account for a variable transaction fee then?
1607 2011-05-04 12:28:24 <sipa> how do you mean?
1608 2011-05-04 12:29:06 <nefario> well in my app, I need to record transaction fees
1609 2011-05-04 12:29:13 <nefario> and account for them
1610 2011-05-04 12:30:14 <nefario> how do I get the fee?
1611 2011-05-04 12:31:02 <sipa> listtransactions will show you the fee
1612 2011-05-04 12:31:32 marlowe has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1613 2011-05-04 12:32:03 <nefario> facepalm
1614 2011-05-04 12:32:36 <nefario> when I run sendfrom what is the return value?
1615 2011-05-04 12:33:21 <sipa> hmmm, a sendfrom that returns the created transaction may be useful
1616 2011-05-04 12:33:36 <nefario> it would be very very usefull
1617 2011-05-04 12:35:33 <Diablo-D3> ;;bc,diff
1618 2011-05-04 12:35:34 <gribble> 109670.13329248
1619 2011-05-04 12:38:08 <nefario> I guess I just have to disable fees
1620 2011-05-04 12:38:27 <nefario> and block sending anything less than 1btc so it doesn't incure a fee
1621 2011-05-04 12:38:31 <Diablo-D3> okay so
1622 2011-05-04 12:38:35 <Diablo-D3> if I do constant share value
1623 2011-05-04 12:38:39 <Diablo-D3> and use diff 1 shares
1624 2011-05-04 12:39:08 <Diablo-D3> 50 / current diff is the share value, right?
1625 2011-05-04 12:39:10 x5x`brb is now known as xxxxxxx
1626 2011-05-04 12:39:12 <sipa> yes
1627 2011-05-04 12:39:24 studybot_ has joined
1628 2011-05-04 12:39:55 xxxxxxx is now known as x5x
1629 2011-05-04 12:47:37 skeledrew has joined
1630 2011-05-04 12:49:35 ivan has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1631 2011-05-04 12:50:01 ivan has joined
1632 2011-05-04 12:51:57 <genjix> MagicalTux: hey
1633 2011-05-04 12:52:12 <genjix> any chance to get an Ubuntu natty narwhal added to autovps?
1634 2011-05-04 12:52:27 <genjix> lenny breaks when i do a fresh install and try to upgrade
1635 2011-05-04 12:53:16 <genjix> *lucid lynx\
1636 2011-05-04 12:54:07 DukeOfURL has joined
1637 2011-05-04 12:54:48 <luke-jr> jgarzik: I actually see a lot of double-solutions in the share db… too many to be intentional cheating I think
1638 2011-05-04 12:55:07 bgeron has joined
1639 2011-05-04 12:55:11 dvide has quit ()
1640 2011-05-04 12:55:23 WakiMiko has joined
1641 2011-05-04 12:58:09 WakiMiko_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1642 2011-05-04 12:58:49 sc8nt4u has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1643 2011-05-04 13:01:51 studybot__ has joined
1644 2011-05-04 13:04:14 studybot_ has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1645 2011-05-04 13:04:15 studybot__ is now known as studybot_
1646 2011-05-04 13:04:33 <sipa> ;;bc,calc [bc,eligius]
1647 2011-05-04 13:04:34 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 14789004.0559 Khps, given current difficulty of 109670.13329248 , is 8 hours, 50 minutes, and 49 seconds
1648 2011-05-04 13:09:00 <genjix> ;;seen MagicalTux
1649 2011-05-04 13:09:00 <gribble> MagicalTux was last seen in #bitcoin-dev 23 hours, 47 minutes, and 48 seconds ago: <MagicalTux> yes, it is
1650 2011-05-04 13:09:11 <MagicalTux> yes, it's me
1651 2011-05-04 13:09:20 <genjix> :p
1652 2011-05-04 13:10:21 <genjix> so is it possible to update the Ubuntu CD on autovps to Natty Narwhal?
1653 2011-05-04 13:10:37 <genjix> Lucid Lynx breaks on upgrade and is really old.
1654 2011-05-04 13:11:20 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1655 2011-05-04 13:12:20 jeremias has joined
1656 2011-05-04 13:12:46 jonny has joined
1657 2011-05-04 13:13:13 mologie has quit (Quit: Nettalk6 - www.ntalk.de)
1658 2011-05-04 13:13:39 <genjix> ;;seen MagicalTux
1659 2011-05-04 13:13:39 <gribble> MagicalTux was last seen in #bitcoin-dev 4 minutes and 27 seconds ago: <MagicalTux> yes, it's me
1660 2011-05-04 13:13:49 DukeOfURL has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1661 2011-05-04 13:14:42 <MagicalTux> yes, it's me
1662 2011-05-04 13:14:54 <MagicalTux> genjix: I'll open a ticket
1663 2011-05-04 13:15:42 <luke-jr> ;;bc,calc [bc,eligius]
1664 2011-05-04 13:15:44 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 14345190.7686 Khps, given current difficulty of 109670.13329248 , is 9 hours, 7 minutes, and 15 seconds
1665 2011-05-04 13:16:31 <luke-jr> any ideas how to modify my SQL query to eliminate duplicate solutions?
1666 2011-05-04 13:16:45 <sipa> what is the query now?
1667 2011-05-04 13:16:46 <luke-jr> select username,count() from shares where our_result = "Y" group by username
1668 2011-05-04 13:16:57 <MagicalTux> genjix: ticket open
1669 2011-05-04 13:17:08 <sipa> use count distinct?
1670 2011-05-04 13:17:16 arturh has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1671 2011-05-04 13:17:17 <genjix> oh, so you don't own autovps? you resell it?
1672 2011-05-04 13:17:26 <genjix> luke-jr: select distinct
1673 2011-05-04 13:17:30 <MagicalTux> genjix: It's not my own servers at this time
1674 2011-05-04 13:17:33 <luke-jr> that didn't help, and took 10 times longer….
1675 2011-05-04 13:17:35 <genjix> ok
1676 2011-05-04 13:17:47 <MagicalTux> luke-jr: you're not happy with group by username?
1677 2011-05-04 13:17:57 <ersi> genjix: Lucid isn't.. *that* old :p
1678 2011-05-04 13:17:59 jonny has quit (Client Quit)
1679 2011-05-04 13:18:01 skyewm has joined
1680 2011-05-04 13:18:06 <genjix> luke-jr: you want select distinct
1681 2011-05-04 13:18:09 <luke-jr> MagicalTux: apparently some solutions are getting multiple shares
1682 2011-05-04 13:18:21 <genjix> but you need the primary key
1683 2011-05-04 13:19:11 <luke-jr> problem #2 is that the db is growing fast
1684 2011-05-04 13:19:16 <luke-jr> already like 1 GB
1685 2011-05-04 13:19:18 <UukGoblin> TD, cool, please give me a URL once you do :-)
1686 2011-05-04 13:19:34 <genjix> you can use a sub-query like select * from blaa where column in (select distinct column from blaa);
1687 2011-05-04 13:20:02 <sipa> luke-jr: that query is used for what?
1688 2011-05-04 13:20:28 <luke-jr> sipa: counting shares
1689 2011-05-04 13:20:51 <sipa> so you need to do it continuously?
1690 2011-05-04 13:20:58 <luke-jr> pretty much
1691 2011-05-04 13:20:59 <genjix> ersi: yeah but lucid sucks
1692 2011-05-04 13:21:47 <sipa> luke-jr: but the rows in the databse are marked with what round they are for?
1693 2011-05-04 13:22:08 <luke-jr> not exactly
1694 2011-05-04 13:22:14 <UukGoblin> I'm back anyway
1695 2011-05-04 13:22:30 studybot_ has quit (Quit: studybot_)
1696 2011-05-04 13:22:31 <sipa> then what do they contain?
1697 2011-05-04 13:22:44 <luke-jr> hold on, having a problem here
1698 2011-05-04 13:22:47 <luke-jr> pushpoold is frozen
1699 2011-05-04 13:22:49 <luke-jr> jgarzik: ^
1700 2011-05-04 13:23:09 <UukGoblin> and I've made up a new argument point: currently, to sign any document using the bitcoin blockchain, you can destroy your money and send 0.01 to a non-existing address that's at the same time a signature of your stuff
1701 2011-05-04 13:23:35 skyewm has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1702 2011-05-04 13:23:37 <UukGoblin> with my proposed solution, that 0.01 will go to the block miner instead of being wasted
1703 2011-05-04 13:24:03 <UukGoblin> do you think it's better to get currency destructed than to transfer it to people who support the network? :-P
1704 2011-05-04 13:24:17 skyewm has joined
1705 2011-05-04 13:25:07 <cdecker> Both options have advantages :D
1706 2011-05-04 13:25:25 <cdecker> As a miner I'd like to get my hands on that destroyed currency
1707 2011-05-04 13:25:45 <cdecker> As a speculator I'd love it to get destroyed ^^
1708 2011-05-04 13:26:01 <UukGoblin> hm. :-]
1709 2011-05-04 13:26:29 <UukGoblin> HM.
1710 2011-05-04 13:26:59 <cdecker> Or even better hardcode it to my address ^^
1711 2011-05-04 13:28:32 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1712 2011-05-04 13:28:49 <UukGoblin> ok I have to say, I'm more of a miner than speculator
1713 2011-05-04 13:29:01 <UukGoblin> so maybe I see things slightly skewed ;-]
1714 2011-05-04 13:29:02 x5x is now known as x5x`brb
1715 2011-05-04 13:29:10 molecular has joined
1716 2011-05-04 13:29:41 <UukGoblin> but then again... it should be up to the user. Speculators should get no say on the rules of the network. As a speculator, you'd rather change the rules to give /you/ the initial 21 million.
1717 2011-05-04 13:31:02 <luke-jr> ok wtf
1718 2011-05-04 13:31:07 <luke-jr> some major I/O bottlenecking
1719 2011-05-04 13:32:59 BurtyB has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1720 2011-05-04 13:42:28 studybot_ has joined
1721 2011-05-04 13:43:12 draag has joined
1722 2011-05-04 13:47:17 DukeOfURL has joined
1723 2011-05-04 13:51:31 <UukGoblin> hmm, is the "re-sending a transaction with a higher fee" functionality implemented yet? is that the purposeful double-spend stuff?
1724 2011-05-04 13:54:01 vorlov has joined
1725 2011-05-04 13:54:21 da2ce7 is now known as fat_hairy_chick
1726 2011-05-04 13:56:50 studybot__ has joined
1727 2011-05-04 13:57:22 eternal1 has joined
1728 2011-05-04 13:57:45 <UukGoblin> ok I'm gonna stop saying BitDNS
1729 2011-05-04 13:57:51 <UukGoblin> cause it causes too much confusion
1730 2011-05-04 13:57:52 <UukGoblin> BitStamp
1731 2011-05-04 13:57:55 <xelister> what bitdns
1732 2011-05-04 13:57:55 <UukGoblin> simple service
1733 2011-05-04 13:58:02 skyewm has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1734 2011-05-04 13:58:04 <UukGoblin> tiny transaction
1735 2011-05-04 13:58:07 <UukGoblin> and a fee
1736 2011-05-04 13:58:14 <UukGoblin> what. on. earth. is. it. polluting and how.
1737 2011-05-04 13:58:45 <UukGoblin> (with just the BitStamp alone, you can do BitDNS, my mmorpg, and all the other crap)
1738 2011-05-04 13:58:53 studybot_ has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1739 2011-05-04 14:00:51 <UukGoblin> xelister, I started arguing about it at 10:54 BST (9:54 GMT), read the backlog if you want to know what I'm talking about :-]
1740 2011-05-04 14:01:05 <xelister> k ;)
1741 2011-05-04 14:01:26 studybot__ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1742 2011-05-04 14:01:30 bgeron has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1743 2011-05-04 14:03:10 <TD> UukGoblin: please let me know if this is insufficient:
1744 2011-05-04 14:03:11 <TD> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=7219.0
1745 2011-05-04 14:03:26 <TD> also if something isn't clear let me know so I can improve the article. eventually i'll stick it on the wiki.
1746 2011-05-04 14:03:59 skyewm has joined
1747 2011-05-04 14:04:07 <TD> i realize it's quite a lot to read
1748 2011-05-04 14:04:25 <TD> but it should outline everything needed to create alternative chains .... except for scaling it up to many possible chains using a second merkle tree
1749 2011-05-04 14:04:32 <TD> i felt it was getting too long and complex without discussing that
1750 2011-05-04 14:06:14 Marcel has joined
1751 2011-05-04 14:07:28 studybot_ has joined
1752 2011-05-04 14:09:12 <UukGoblin> TD, nice intro, I keep reading :-)
1753 2011-05-04 14:09:51 pnicholson has joined
1754 2011-05-04 14:10:53 <TD> oops, just realized i left an obvious field out of NameTx, editing ...
1755 2011-05-04 14:11:54 <cdecker> Sounds pretty interesting :-)
1756 2011-05-04 14:11:59 studybot__ has joined
1757 2011-05-04 14:13:16 <xelister> molecular: you alive? ;)   seeing my jabber?
1758 2011-05-04 14:13:48 studybot_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1759 2011-05-04 14:13:51 bgeron has joined
1760 2011-05-04 14:14:30 studybot_ has joined
1761 2011-05-04 14:14:31 <UukGoblin> TD, OK, I agree about a lot of stuff
1762 2011-05-04 14:15:07 <UukGoblin> TD, the actual DNS data SHOULD NOT be stored in the bitcoin blockchain, the DNS rules SHOULD NOT be verified by stock clients
1763 2011-05-04 14:15:16 <UukGoblin> reading on
1764 2011-05-04 14:16:21 studybot__ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1765 2011-05-04 14:16:33 <UukGoblin> TD, HEY! the last paragraph, you've described almost exactly what I wanted to to
1766 2011-05-04 14:16:40 <UukGoblin> s/to to/to do/
1767 2011-05-04 14:17:52 <UukGoblin> and you even said exactly what I wanted to say: "In reality burning BitCoins isn't smart and a much better system could be devised using scripts."
1768 2011-05-04 14:17:57 glassresistor has joined
1769 2011-05-04 14:18:00 <UukGoblin> which is exactly what I'd like to do instead of burning them
1770 2011-05-04 14:18:23 <UukGoblin> burning is already kinda implemented in the stock client, but it's a bit silly
1771 2011-05-04 14:18:49 <UukGoblin> I'm proposing upgrading the default tx fee rules slightly to allow to transfer the money to the first guy to find a next block
1772 2011-05-04 14:19:01 studybot_ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1773 2011-05-04 14:19:16 <UukGoblin> and while we're at it, I'm proposing making the tx fee rules slightly more customizable by the user, because it seems that's what satoshi wanted in his paper
1774 2011-05-04 14:19:22 bgeron has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1775 2011-05-04 14:19:41 <UukGoblin> I find it unfair that tx fee rules are set by a centralized group of devs without the users having any say in it
1776 2011-05-04 14:19:42 <TD> best way is to send patches to gavin, they can be discussed then
1777 2011-05-04 14:19:56 <TD> in practice fees are only a concern of miners who are nearly all devs anyway, currently :-)
1778 2011-05-04 14:19:59 bgeron has joined
1779 2011-05-04 14:20:07 <UukGoblin> great :-]
1780 2011-05-04 14:20:20 <UukGoblin> ok, we have an understanding then :-]
1781 2011-05-04 14:20:21 <UukGoblin> now
1782 2011-05-04 14:20:38 <UukGoblin> in order to write a patch (I'm not saying I have enough time to write one), we'd have to agree on how we do it
1783 2011-05-04 14:20:51 <UukGoblin> cause there are many ways
1784 2011-05-04 14:21:07 <TD> indeed. well, i'm afraid i don't have time to do that myself.
1785 2011-05-04 14:21:17 <TD> i wasn't actually intending to do anything bitcoin related today at all :-)
1786 2011-05-04 14:21:26 <TD> but if you do have the energy and time, go for it
1787 2011-05-04 14:21:45 <UukGoblin> regarding signing/timestamping, I suggest that a simple non-standard transaction be accepted that contains no outputs, a few inputs, a fee of 0.01 BTC for each KB (or something like that), and arbitrary data
1788 2011-05-04 14:22:19 <UukGoblin> nah, I'm afraid I only have the energy to talk about it for now; I might do some simple patch but definitely don't sign up for writing a fee policy language
1789 2011-05-04 14:23:01 <UukGoblin> if you're too scared about arbitrary data, then we can limit the transaction size to 256 bits which is enough to post a SHA256 signature (but 512 might be needed later)
1790 2011-05-04 14:23:13 <TD> that sounds like a reasonable thing
1791 2011-05-04 14:23:17 <UukGoblin> now, these transactions ideally shouldn't be counted for the block size when determining fees for standard transactions
1792 2011-05-04 14:24:10 <UukGoblin> because they already require fees (i.e. you should be able to send as many free standard transactions in a block with a non-standard stamping transaction as you'd be in a one without it)
1793 2011-05-04 14:24:16 studybot_ has joined
1794 2011-05-04 14:24:20 skyewm has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1795 2011-05-04 14:25:50 sabalaba has joined
1796 2011-05-04 14:26:04 <UukGoblin> jgarzik, sipa, npouillard, Diablo-D3 - can you please read what I've just written and comment? :-)
1797 2011-05-04 14:27:41 <UukGoblin> continuing, the timestamping feature is pretty simple to implement and I even could try writing a patch for it this weekend, if you say it has a chance of getting accepted
1798 2011-05-04 14:28:38 studybot__ has joined
1799 2011-05-04 14:28:41 wolfspraul has quit (Quit: leaving)
1800 2011-05-04 14:28:57 studybot_ has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1801 2011-05-04 14:28:58 studybot__ is now known as studybot_
1802 2011-05-04 14:28:59 <UukGoblin> but all this leads me to the higher picture of a more complicated feature of allowing the user to set transaction fees to his liking. Currently, because all clients use the same rules, it's very easy to pop up a dialog for my granny saying "Yo! I think you're transaction is too large, do you want to pay 0.01 fee to get it processed in the next block?"
1803 2011-05-04 14:29:32 <UukGoblin> when everyone starts setting their own transaction fees, such a dialog won't be easily possible
1804 2011-05-04 14:30:58 <BlueMatt> MagicalTux: still around?
1805 2011-05-04 14:31:19 <MagicalTux> yup
1806 2011-05-04 14:31:33 <BlueMatt> MagicalTux: did you get the gribble message from a couple days ago?
1807 2011-05-04 14:31:42 <UukGoblin> to make it possible, I propose that miners include their policy (in full, a URL to it, a SHAsum to be looked up in DHT - to be decided exactly) with each block they generate. Then end-user clients can examine the last N (say, 100) blocks and estimate what the network's general view on fees is, and pop up a dialog of something like "Yo! you're transaction is kinda large! if you don't set a fee, it might take 10 blocks to get a confirmation. If yo
1808 2011-05-04 14:31:59 <BlueMatt> MagicalTux: was wondering if you might release the script you use to make the map of nodes (Im too lazy to write such a thing)
1809 2011-05-04 14:32:00 <MagicalTux> BlueMatt: what do you mean by addr.dat ?
1810 2011-05-04 14:32:20 <BlueMatt> I was assuming it pulls addresses out of addr.dat/the node itself?
1811 2011-05-04 14:32:29 noagendamarket has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1812 2011-05-04 14:32:33 <sipa> ;;bc,blocks
1813 2011-05-04 14:32:33 <gribble> 121824
1814 2011-05-04 14:32:36 <sipa> ;;bc,diff
1815 2011-05-04 14:32:36 <gribble> 109670.13329248
1816 2011-05-04 14:32:39 <sipa> ;;bc,estimate
1817 2011-05-04 14:32:39 <MagicalTux> I connect to a node, pull address list, update a mysql table, then go to next node
1818 2011-05-04 14:32:39 <gribble> 146979.02882968
1819 2011-05-04 14:32:43 <MagicalTux> (connect via the network)
1820 2011-05-04 14:32:55 <MagicalTux> and it goes on and on forever
1821 2011-05-04 14:32:57 <BlueMatt> ah, well that is almost exactly what I was hoping it does...
1822 2011-05-04 14:33:04 <MagicalTux> (initially I connected to my own node only)
1823 2011-05-04 14:33:04 <BlueMatt> would you mind releasing it?
1824 2011-05-04 14:33:16 <MagicalTux> well, just a simple crappy bitcoin protocol implementation in php
1825 2011-05-04 14:33:40 studybot__ has joined
1826 2011-05-04 14:34:35 <UukGoblin> gah, I think I need a forum thread about that. Or 2.
1827 2011-05-04 14:36:17 studybot___ has joined
1828 2011-05-04 14:36:51 MartianW has joined
1829 2011-05-04 14:37:38 studybot_ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1830 2011-05-04 14:38:06 studybot__ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1831 2011-05-04 14:39:08 bitcoiner has joined
1832 2011-05-04 14:39:53 BurningToad has joined
1833 2011-05-04 14:40:44 <UukGoblin> TD, now, carrying on with the idea of "burning" or an upgrade to send the coins as a tx fee - I don't think a Distributed DNS needs any blockchain at all... It just needs a DHT of some sort, and the bitcoin blockchain to provide timestamping of data
1834 2011-05-04 14:41:06 studybot___ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1835 2011-05-04 14:41:16 Incitatus has joined
1836 2011-05-04 14:41:31 <UukGoblin> store the NS records in a DHT created and stored by participating servers, and for each new NS record or renewal, provide a bitcoin fee
1837 2011-05-04 14:41:56 <UukGoblin> it could even be made so that the more popular a domain is, the higher fee is required to pay for bandwidth / storage / stuff
1838 2011-05-04 14:42:28 <UukGoblin> slight problem there though, is that the fee goes to the bitcoin miners and not the people who maintain the nameservers
1839 2011-05-04 14:43:59 Kiba has joined
1840 2011-05-04 14:45:48 <npouillard> UukGoblin: what you propose would still make grow the chain faster (and so more disk space), but at least this does not imply directly higher fees
1841 2011-05-04 14:46:22 <UukGoblin> npouillard, agreed.
1842 2011-05-04 14:46:50 <UukGoblin> npouillard, but not significantly faster than for regular bitcoin transactions. And all the extra growth would be paid for in fees.
1843 2011-05-04 14:46:52 <npouillard> I still prefer the separate chains + cross-mining
1844 2011-05-04 14:47:29 <npouillard> nop only paid to the miner of the block, but everyone has to keep the chain
1845 2011-05-04 14:48:06 <UukGoblin> from a technological standpoint, it doesn't make sense for me to invent a new currency, namecoins, that can be used for only one purpose (oh wait! but you can trade it for other currencies!), if all you need is... a currency. That btw already exists.
1846 2011-05-04 14:48:13 jroot_ has joined
1847 2011-05-04 14:48:50 <UukGoblin> cross-mining is a nice idea, it can be used for something
1848 2011-05-04 14:49:13 <UukGoblin> npouillard, same as standard transaction fees are paid only to the miner of the block, but everyone has to keep them.
1849 2011-05-04 14:49:24 jroot has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1850 2011-05-04 14:49:49 <UukGoblin> ideally with DNS, you'd make a transaction that would actually pay the people who support the DNS database and nameservers.
1851 2011-05-04 14:50:02 MartianW has quit (Quit: Bye all.)
1852 2011-05-04 14:50:11 <grbgout> UukGoblin: have you been following the namecoin forum thread?
1853 2011-05-04 14:50:22 <UukGoblin> some kind of consensus could be made on who to pay how much, perhaps based on number of requests served, etc, but that's all outside the scope of bitcoins
1854 2011-05-04 14:50:43 <UukGoblin> grbgout, not much
1855 2011-05-04 14:50:52 <UukGoblin> grbgout, I stopped reading after "separate chain"
1856 2011-05-04 14:51:50 <UukGoblin> correct me if I'm wrong, but making a separate chain would create a separate currency, and it'd just create more cross-currency trading. We don't need a separate currency, bitcoins are fine as they are.
1857 2011-05-04 14:52:45 <Diablo-D3> [10:21:13] <UukGoblin> jgarzik, sipa, npouillard, Diablo-D3 - can you please read what I've just written and comment? :-)
1858 2011-05-04 14:52:47 <Diablo-D3> url or gtfo
1859 2011-05-04 14:53:00 <xelister> yea, tits or gtfo
1860 2011-05-04 14:53:15 <UukGoblin> I'd rather pay for my domain, game, or whatever, in bitcoins, than having to find a trader that'd sell me namecoins at a shady rate
1861 2011-05-04 14:53:22 <xelister> tits CHK@ OR GTFO!!!
1862 2011-05-04 14:53:25 <UukGoblin> Diablo-D3, I wrote it all in the # unfortunately
1863 2011-05-04 14:54:32 <grbgout> UukGoblin: indeed, there are links in the namecoin thread where someone (noagendamarket, I think) had collected satoshi's thought on how a bitcoin DNS project might/should work.
1864 2011-05-04 14:55:13 devon_hillard has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1865 2011-05-04 14:55:25 <grbgout> I believe the namecoin project was turned into a separate chain because it adds different/new transaction types, which makes it incompatible with bitcoin.
1866 2011-05-04 14:55:53 <grbgout> If I remember correctly, the difficulty for namecoin isn't intended to change, but I'm not certain on that one.
1867 2011-05-04 14:56:30 BlueMatt has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1868 2011-05-04 14:57:03 <molecular> there was a solution to that problem suggested to make a seperate chain but piggy-back it on bitcoin-chain somehow
1869 2011-05-04 14:57:09 TD_ has joined
1870 2011-05-04 14:57:20 <molecular> ask ArtForz
1871 2011-05-04 14:57:36 <sipa> molecular: read the post by TD
1872 2011-05-04 14:57:46 devon_hillard has joined
1873 2011-05-04 15:02:42 <grbgout> sipa: url?
1874 2011-05-04 15:03:22 <sipa> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=7219.0
1875 2011-05-04 15:03:22 DD- has quit ()
1876 2011-05-04 15:05:20 <npouillard> grbgout: "the difficulty for namecoin isn't intended to change" <- URL?
1877 2011-05-04 15:08:59 <UukGoblin> grbgout, ah yes I did read that noagendamarket's recollection of satoshi's posts
1878 2011-05-04 15:09:01 fat_hairy_chick is now known as da2ce7
1879 2011-05-04 15:09:23 zq has joined
1880 2011-05-04 15:11:45 sanesmith has joined
1881 2011-05-04 15:14:54 lumos has joined
1882 2011-05-04 15:15:41 mologie has joined
1883 2011-05-04 15:16:25 <grbgout> npouillard: I think I read it in the forum thread, but I don't quite recall.  As I said in the very line you're quoting, I'm not certain on that.
1884 2011-05-04 15:16:28 <grbgout> sipa: thanks.
1885 2011-05-04 15:16:30 <vorlov> ;;bc,mtgox
1886 2011-05-04 15:16:30 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":3.58,"low":3.2,"vol":19737,"buy":3.471,"sell":3.56,"last":3.47}}
1887 2011-05-04 15:16:46 <grbgout> npouillard: do you not have the namecoin thread URL handy?
1888 2011-05-04 15:16:53 JSharp has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1889 2011-05-04 15:18:46 <cosurgi> and another fan died
1890 2011-05-04 15:19:56 <grbgout> cosurgi: person or machine?
1891 2011-05-04 15:21:00 <npouillard> grbgout: http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=6017.0
1892 2011-05-04 15:21:20 <Kiba> ;;authenticate kiba
1893 2011-05-04 15:21:21 <gribble> Error: "authenticate" is not a valid command.
1894 2011-05-04 15:21:25 <Kiba> ;;verify kiba
1895 2011-05-04 15:21:26 <gribble> Error: 'kiba' is not a valid http url.
1896 2011-05-04 15:21:26 <npouillard> grbgout: on of the first sentence is "The starting difficulty is 512, so CPU mining is still viable."
1897 2011-05-04 15:21:28 <grbgout> npouillard: lol, thanks.  I wasn't asking for the url.
1898 2011-05-04 15:21:41 <npouillard> I think difficulty will augment
1899 2011-05-04 15:21:49 <grbgout> npouillard: have you read the entire thread?
1900 2011-05-04 15:21:58 <npouillard> it would be to easy for spammers otherwise
1901 2011-05-04 15:22:04 <grbgout> indeed
1902 2011-05-04 15:22:05 <npouillard> most of it
1903 2011-05-04 15:22:31 <UukGoblin> forgive my ignorance, but what does namecoin use to pay for domains?
1904 2011-05-04 15:23:13 <MacRohard> UukGoblin, namecoins i believe
1905 2011-05-04 15:23:21 <grbgout> npouillard: I was asking you if you had the url, and if not I was going to provide it to you --- since you asked me for it.
1906 2011-05-04 15:23:36 <npouillard> UukGoblin: please read this document at least https://github.com/vinced/namecoin/blob/master/DESIGN-namecoin.md
1907 2011-05-04 15:23:59 <MacRohard> presumably people will exchange bitcoin <-> namecoins
1908 2011-05-04 15:24:06 <npouillard> grbgout: Oh, I meant a precise URL not a multi page thread
1909 2011-05-04 15:24:16 <npouillard> MacRohard: indeed
1910 2011-05-04 15:24:24 <npouillard> I sell some actually
1911 2011-05-04 15:24:28 <UukGoblin> hang on... so a new currency has been started... why do I mine bitcoins then...
1912 2011-05-04 15:24:45 <npouillard> UukGoblin: bitcoin worth more currently
1913 2011-05-04 15:25:04 <npouillard> since more people accept it, and that the network is stronger
1914 2011-05-04 15:26:07 <npouillard> I consider the existence of namecoins to be auxiliary but solve the DNS problem
1915 2011-05-04 15:26:17 <UukGoblin> npouillard, but not necessarily true in far future, people might actually need domains more
1916 2011-05-04 15:26:40 <npouillard> Future will tell
1917 2011-05-04 15:26:46 <npouillard> I have to go
1918 2011-05-04 15:26:51 <UukGoblin> right, so am I wrong thinking namecoins are like a new branch of bitcoins, you just burn them instead of bitcoins when you want to register a domain?
1919 2011-05-04 15:27:24 <MacRohard> UukGoblin, well i'm sure am arket for them will develop (assuming they get some traction that is)
1920 2011-05-04 15:27:41 <MacRohard> right now proly less than 50 people use namecoin i'd say
1921 2011-05-04 15:28:06 <grbgout> npouillard: well, it should have been clear from the few mentions that I couldn't recall for certain if it was true that I didn't have a precise url.
1922 2011-05-04 15:28:24 <grbgout> it was just something I vaguelly recalled after having read the entire thread several weeks ago.
1923 2011-05-04 15:28:30 <UukGoblin> and probably namecoins can sign my arbitrary data
1924 2011-05-04 15:28:34 <grbgout> vaguely*
1925 2011-05-04 15:28:45 <UukGoblin> so I can use them for timestamping
1926 2011-05-04 15:28:54 <UukGoblin> so namecoins are simply bitcoin 2.0
1927 2011-05-04 15:29:01 <UukGoblin> meh.
1928 2011-05-04 15:29:31 zq_ has joined
1929 2011-05-04 15:29:41 <UukGoblin> how do I mine them?
1930 2011-05-04 15:30:00 <UukGoblin> if they can do everything that bitcoin can and more, we should all start using them instead...
1931 2011-05-04 15:30:26 zq has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1932 2011-05-04 15:30:35 <Kiba> namecoins have intrinstic value!
1933 2011-05-04 15:30:35 <UukGoblin> but it makes me think that someone, at some point, got some stuff horribly wrong... meh... will have to post about it
1934 2011-05-04 15:30:39 <Kiba> unlike bitcoin
1935 2011-05-04 15:31:13 <Kiba> plus I think the money supply inflate forever
1936 2011-05-04 15:31:30 <Kiba> so it's not as good as bitcoin for store of wealth
1937 2011-05-04 15:31:54 skyewm has joined
1938 2011-05-04 15:32:16 <netxshare> I was looking at that Kiba
1939 2011-05-04 15:32:23 <netxshare> saw someone selling 1000nc for 7btc
1940 2011-05-04 15:32:33 <netxshare> thought about buying them
1941 2011-05-04 15:32:46 Incitatus has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1942 2011-05-04 15:33:21 <iera> is there a latex beamer template which matches bitcoin looks?
1943 2011-05-04 15:33:45 <UukGoblin> oh hang on
1944 2011-05-04 15:33:56 <UukGoblin> can namecoins be mined using the same cpu power that mines bitcoins?
1945 2011-05-04 15:34:00 <Kiba> namecoin don't even have their own website
1946 2011-05-04 15:34:05 <UukGoblin> or is that "yet to be implemented"?
1947 2011-05-04 15:35:18 <Kiba> namecoin mining works the same way, UukGoblin
1948 2011-05-04 15:35:22 <Kiba> unless you mean cross-mining
1949 2011-05-04 15:35:37 <UukGoblin> Kiba, I do mean cross-mining (I think...)
1950 2011-05-04 15:35:48 <UukGoblin> I mean using the same CPU power to mine both bitcoins and namecoins
1951 2011-05-04 15:35:53 <Kiba> namecoin is basically bitcoin technology approriated for a truly distributed domain name registration system
1952 2011-05-04 15:35:56 <UukGoblin> (why "cross"?)
1953 2011-05-04 15:36:08 <Kiba> UukGoblin: because you're mining for BTC and namecoin at the same time
1954 2011-05-04 15:36:45 AStove has joined
1955 2011-05-04 15:36:58 <UukGoblin> I mean I only know this meaning of "cross-" from "cross-compilation", where you're compiling something on one platform that'll work on another... no "same time" thing there
1956 2011-05-04 15:37:14 <UukGoblin> how's "cross" related to "same time"?
1957 2011-05-04 15:37:16 <netxshare> Kiba, does namecoind use wallet.dat?
1958 2011-05-04 15:37:21 <netxshare> or did he change the filename
1959 2011-05-04 15:37:31 <Kiba> it's also wallet.dat
1960 2011-05-04 15:37:40 <netxshare> okay
1961 2011-05-04 15:37:41 <netxshare> thanks
1962 2011-05-04 15:38:29 <netxshare> I rather not use my bitcoin wallet when running it
1963 2011-05-04 15:38:57 <cosurgi> what's the strongest card now? 6990 or 5970 ?
1964 2011-05-04 15:39:03 BlueMatt has joined
1965 2011-05-04 15:39:03 BlueMatt has quit (Changing host)
1966 2011-05-04 15:39:03 BlueMatt has joined
1967 2011-05-04 15:39:11 <sipa> the highest reported speed for a
1968 2011-05-04 15:39:23 <sipa> the highest reported speed for a 6990 is slightly higher than for 5970, afaik
1969 2011-05-04 15:39:46 <cosurgi> does 6990 require different SDK ?
1970 2011-05-04 15:39:53 <sipa> yes
1971 2011-05-04 15:40:05 <sipa> 5970 runs on 2.1 (and faster), 6990 requires 2.4
1972 2011-05-04 15:40:05 <cosurgi> which one?
1973 2011-05-04 15:40:08 <cosurgi> ok.
1974 2011-05-04 15:40:15 <cosurgi> so I can't have both in single PC
1975 2011-05-04 15:40:22 <netxshare> I do
1976 2011-05-04 15:40:30 <cosurgi> netxshare: how?
1977 2011-05-04 15:40:34 <UukGoblin> sipa meant 2.1 (and newer)
1978 2011-05-04 15:40:47 <sipa> yes, but 5970 is slower on 2.4 than on 2.1
1979 2011-05-04 15:40:50 <netxshare> I just change the location in my path I use when i wish to switch sdks
1980 2011-05-04 15:41:03 <netxshare> you have to change the opencl files tho
1981 2011-05-04 15:41:15 <netxshare> but 2.4 has backsupport for 2.3
1982 2011-05-04 15:41:31 <luke-jr> crap
1983 2011-05-04 15:41:47 <luke-jr> stupid pool found a block while I was doing the switchover -.-
1984 2011-05-04 15:41:57 <netxshare> >_<
1985 2011-05-04 15:42:02 sgornick has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1986 2011-05-04 15:43:11 <cosurgi> luke-jr: what switchover?
1987 2011-05-04 15:43:16 <cosurgi> luke-jr: why I'm not there http://blockexplorer.com/block/00000000000059d7cee0accc7811acc247596bacde6362fd8164255752dfb557 ?
1988 2011-05-04 15:43:17 <luke-jr> cosurgi: Sqlite -> MySQL
1989 2011-05-04 15:43:33 <cosurgi> I had ~3 BTC payout.
1990 2011-05-04 15:43:42 DukeOfURL has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1991 2011-05-04 15:43:45 <luke-jr> cosurgi: how do you know that was Eligius btw? :p
1992 2011-05-04 15:43:55 <luke-jr> oh, duh
1993 2011-05-04 15:44:01 <cosurgi> http://oku.heroku.com/bitcoin-pools/luke-jr
1994 2011-05-04 15:44:05 <luke-jr> cosurgi: bug during the switchover
1995 2011-05-04 15:44:09 <cosurgi> from here.
1996 2011-05-04 15:44:20 BurtyB has joined
1997 2011-05-04 15:44:20 <cosurgi> luke-jr: so I will get my ~3BTC on next block?
1998 2011-05-04 15:44:22 <luke-jr> not exactly sure why the pool took it all, but I'll get it sorted out eventually
1999 2011-05-04 15:44:33 <luke-jr> should
2000 2011-05-04 15:44:45 <luke-jr> should've gotten *something* that block, not sure why it failed completely
2001 2011-05-04 15:45:03 <cosurgi> why do you say it failed?
2002 2011-05-04 15:45:09 <cosurgi> I see that this block was generated
2003 2011-05-04 15:45:27 <cosurgi> the payouts are all wrong?
2004 2011-05-04 15:45:52 <netxshare> I think he is saying it did not payout and the pool has the 50BTC
2005 2011-05-04 15:46:03 <cosurgi> btw - I'm sorry but I stopped using your pool. Too much complications. So I will only take my last BTCs from remaining shares. And perhaps join later, when it gets stable
2006 2011-05-04 15:46:33 <cosurgi> luke-jr: are you checking for duplicate submissions of shares?
2007 2011-05-04 15:46:40 Incitatus has joined
2008 2011-05-04 15:46:56 <cosurgi> luke-jr: I could quickly hack a miner and test if you do, but it's faster to just ask.
2009 2011-05-04 15:47:06 jroot_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2010 2011-05-04 15:47:41 jroot has joined
2011 2011-05-04 15:49:00 mmoya has joined
2012 2011-05-04 15:50:32 <luke-jr> cosurgi: not currently
2013 2011-05-04 15:50:33 <UukGoblin> in namecoin's design, under "Network fees", what's "res"?
2014 2011-05-04 15:50:42 <luke-jr> when I get the MySQL stuff all done, I can easily check that
2015 2011-05-04 15:50:47 <luke-jr> actually, yes currently
2016 2011-05-04 15:50:55 <luke-jr> but it doesn't know *why* it's rejecting them
2017 2011-05-04 15:51:03 <cosurgi> ok.
2018 2011-05-04 15:51:07 Kiba has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2019 2011-05-04 15:51:26 <cosurgi> must important is that it rejects, so that people will not bump their share count up with duplicates.
2020 2011-05-04 15:51:30 <sipa> ;;bc,blocks
2021 2011-05-04 15:51:30 <gribble> 121833
2022 2011-05-04 15:51:33 <luke-jr> cosurgi: I'll post again, when the pool is stable
2023 2011-05-04 15:51:37 <cosurgi> sure
2024 2011-05-04 15:51:44 <luke-jr> sorry for the inconvenience
2025 2011-05-04 15:51:48 <cosurgi> :)
2026 2011-05-04 15:51:50 <cosurgi> no problem
2027 2011-05-04 15:52:10 <luke-jr> the I/O issue was just getting too bad, that my miner was idle a lot
2028 2011-05-04 15:52:16 <luke-jr> I imagine others saw it too
2029 2011-05-04 15:52:55 <luke-jr> ugh, dunno what to do with this 50.03 BTC chunk :/
2030 2011-05-04 15:52:58 <luke-jr> maybe just a sendmany
2031 2011-05-04 15:53:06 <luke-jr> but then I need to implement code to tell the pool I did it
2032 2011-05-04 15:53:23 * luke-jr was expecting it to just be a little over/underpayment to miners
2033 2011-05-04 15:53:58 <sipa> luke-jr: what you could do, is delay things
2034 2011-05-04 15:54:06 <luke-jr> sipa: ?
2035 2011-05-04 15:54:10 <sipa> people are paid for the reward of the previous round
2036 2011-05-04 15:54:20 <luke-jr> sipa: well, it will automatically do that
2037 2011-05-04 15:54:29 <luke-jr> but I mean to get caught up
2038 2011-05-04 15:54:33 <sipa> so you never get anything for the first round you participate it
2039 2011-05-04 15:54:34 <sipa> *in
2040 2011-05-04 15:54:35 <vorlov> luke-jr: why does it show 0 hashrate right now on eligius?
2041 2011-05-04 15:54:43 <luke-jr> vorlov: hashrate is still all sqlite
2042 2011-05-04 15:55:03 <vorlov> i see
2043 2011-05-04 15:56:57 <Blitzboom> so should i stop mining on eligius?
2044 2011-05-04 15:57:21 * sipa has temporarily moved away for eligius, but may come back
2045 2011-05-04 15:57:22 <lianj> luke-jr: is your pool down?
2046 2011-05-04 15:57:29 <UukGoblin> HEY! from theymos himself: "I'd just put the data in the Bitcoin chain and rely on Bitcoin's transaction fees, though."
2047 2011-05-04 15:59:26 <luke-jr> lianj: only parially now
2048 2011-05-04 15:59:28 <luke-jr> partially
2049 2011-05-04 15:59:31 <luke-jr> Blitzboom: no
2050 2011-05-04 15:59:55 <luke-jr> Blitzboom: only stats are broken atm
2051 2011-05-04 16:00:11 <Blitzboom> okay
2052 2011-05-04 16:01:24 rasengan has joined
2053 2011-05-04 16:02:00 <jgarzik> TD: nice... tnx for posting design notes
2054 2011-05-04 16:02:26 pnicholson has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2055 2011-05-04 16:02:56 pnicholson has joined
2056 2011-05-04 16:03:02 <TD> jgarzik: no problem. glad you like them
2057 2011-05-04 16:03:02 <luke-jr> ;;bc,eligius
2058 2011-05-04 16:03:03 <gribble> 11882742.8523
2059 2011-05-04 16:03:39 <UukGoblin> ;;bc,gen 290000
2060 2011-05-04 16:03:40 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 290000 Khps, given current difficulty of 109670.13329248 , is 2.65970525989 BTC per day and 0.110821052495 BTC per hour.
2061 2011-05-04 16:06:53 bgeron has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
2062 2011-05-04 16:08:25 <cdecker> ;;bc,gen 800000
2063 2011-05-04 16:08:26 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 800000 Khps, given current difficulty of 109670.13329248 , is 7.33711795832 BTC per day and 0.305713248263 BTC per hour.
2064 2011-05-04 16:10:31 Incitatus has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2065 2011-05-04 16:10:47 <luke-jr> cosurgi: Blitzboom: sipa: et al: https://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=6667.msg106036#msg106036
2066 2011-05-04 16:11:41 <UukGoblin> we've exceeded 100k messages on the forum? :-D
2067 2011-05-04 16:12:58 Incitatus has joined
2068 2011-05-04 16:14:40 <vorlov> is bitcoinwatch.com down
2069 2011-05-04 16:14:40 Incitatus has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2070 2011-05-04 16:14:42 <vorlov> ?
2071 2011-05-04 16:14:43 <vorlov> sorry
2072 2011-05-04 16:15:28 <UukGoblin> ;;isitdown bitcoinwatch.com
2073 2011-05-04 16:15:33 <gribble> http://bitcoinwatch.com Is Up -> Check if your website is up or down?
2074 2011-05-04 16:15:49 Incitatus has joined
2075 2011-05-04 16:18:24 TheAncientGoat has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2076 2011-05-04 16:20:33 BlueMatt has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2077 2011-05-04 16:22:29 kika has joined
2078 2011-05-04 16:23:27 <kika> on inputs there is a scriptSig
2079 2011-05-04 16:23:36 <kika> when someone wants to send a transfer
2080 2011-05-04 16:23:52 <kika> that someone creates an input
2081 2011-05-04 16:24:05 <kika> basically that someone has to create a valid scriptSig
2082 2011-05-04 16:24:14 <kika> that matches a valid scriptPubKey
2083 2011-05-04 16:24:16 <kika> right?
2084 2011-05-04 16:24:46 <kika> they need to make sure that the scriptSig matches the scriptPubKey of an output that belongs to themselves, to prove they are able to spend the output
2085 2011-05-04 16:24:49 <sipa> that's the idea, scriptSig serves as input that will be validated by scriptPubKey
2086 2011-05-04 16:25:04 <kika> my question is...
2087 2011-05-04 16:25:15 <kika> i readed that scriptSig: <sig> <pubKey>
2088 2011-05-04 16:25:29 <kika> the pubKey there should be the public key of the sender right?
2089 2011-05-04 16:25:35 <sipa> yes
2090 2011-05-04 16:25:38 <kika> and the signature is the signature of the sender, right ?
2091 2011-05-04 16:25:41 <sipa> yes
2092 2011-05-04 16:25:50 <sipa> eh no
2093 2011-05-04 16:25:53 <sipa> wait
2094 2011-05-04 16:25:56 <kika> my question is, the sender how the senders creates the sig?
2095 2011-05-04 16:26:28 <kika> sipa: ?
2096 2011-05-04 16:26:29 <sipa> if you have a transaction A that consumes output B:n
2097 2011-05-04 16:26:34 <kika> yes
2098 2011-05-04 16:26:51 <sipa> and B:n's txout has a scriptPubKey that needs both a signature and a pubkey
2099 2011-05-04 16:27:05 <sipa> (like the one created by default when sending to an address)
2100 2011-05-04 16:27:06 BERRI has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2101 2011-05-04 16:27:07 <kika> sipi: yup exactly
2102 2011-05-04 16:27:11 <UukGoblin> what's bitcoin using for crypto-signing of data?
2103 2011-05-04 16:27:28 <kika> sipa: thats exactly what i mean
2104 2011-05-04 16:27:28 <jgarzik> UukGoblin: ECDSA
2105 2011-05-04 16:27:35 <UukGoblin> jgarzik, thanks
2106 2011-05-04 16:27:46 <sipa> A's input scriptSig will contain the pubkey corresponding to the address B:n was directed to, plus a signature with that pubkey
2107 2011-05-04 16:27:48 <kika> sipa: in that case my asumptions are correct right
2108 2011-05-04 16:27:50 <kika> ?
2109 2011-05-04 16:28:10 <UukGoblin> just accidentally stumbled upon Merkle Signature Scheme in wikipedia, it seems to be quantum-computing resistant signature scheme
2110 2011-05-04 16:28:18 <kika> sipe: yes exactly so suppose the output B is a coinbase output that generates 50 btc for the sender
2111 2011-05-04 16:28:39 <kika> basically user A would generate a coinbase output B that gives user A 50 btc
2112 2011-05-04 16:28:55 <kika> then user A wants to send those 50 btc to someone else so user A creates an input
2113 2011-05-04 16:29:26 <kika> basically in that scenario out B would have the scriptPubKey that needs both a signature and a pubkey ( the pubkey of user B )
2114 2011-05-04 16:29:37 <sipa> actually, no
2115 2011-05-04 16:29:49 <kika> and the input would have the signature of user A and the pubkey of user A?
2116 2011-05-04 16:29:55 <sipa> the default client uses a different scriptPubKey that directly encodes the public key, for coinbases
2117 2011-05-04 16:30:19 <kika> sipa: yes it hashes the pubkey, right?
2118 2011-05-04 16:30:30 <sipa> no
2119 2011-05-04 16:30:54 <sipa> send to address: scriptpubkey contains address, scriptsig contains pubkey + signature
2120 2011-05-04 16:31:03 duosrx has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
2121 2011-05-04 16:31:08 <sipa> send to pubkey: scriptpubkeu contains pubkey, scriptsig contains signature
2122 2011-05-04 16:31:34 <kika> sipa: okay, so basically on a coinbase scriptpubkey would have the address of the reedemer, i mean the user that generated the block, right?
2123 2011-05-04 16:31:40 ahbritto_ has joined
2124 2011-05-04 16:31:46 <sipa> no it does not have an address
2125 2011-05-04 16:31:49 <sipa> it has the pubkey
2126 2011-05-04 16:32:00 dishwara has joined
2127 2011-05-04 16:32:03 <kika> sipa: okay it has the pubkey of the user that generated the block right
2128 2011-05-04 16:32:04 <kika> ?
2129 2011-05-04 16:32:07 <sipa> yes
2130 2011-05-04 16:32:12 <kika> okay not suppose
2131 2011-05-04 16:32:13 <kika> that user
2132 2011-05-04 16:32:16 <sipa> or whoever he wanted to credit with that
2133 2011-05-04 16:32:24 <kika> wants to send his 50 earned btcs to someone else
2134 2011-05-04 16:32:30 <kika> *now suppose
2135 2011-05-04 16:32:34 <sipa> ok
2136 2011-05-04 16:32:43 <kika> in that case as i understand
2137 2011-05-04 16:32:53 DukeOfURL has joined
2138 2011-05-04 16:32:56 <kika> he will have to create an input referencing the coinbase output
2139 2011-05-04 16:32:57 <kika> right?
2140 2011-05-04 16:33:00 <sipa> yes
2141 2011-05-04 16:33:23 <kika> basically the input that he will have to create will need to have his signature and his pubkey right?
2142 2011-05-04 16:33:33 BlueMatt has joined
2143 2011-05-04 16:33:41 <sipa> no, only the signature
2144 2011-05-04 16:33:50 <sipa> 18:26:03 < sipa> send to address: scriptpubkey contains address, scriptsig contains pubkey + signature
2145 2011-05-04 16:33:53 <BlueMatt> MagicalTux: sorry, my net cut out.  Did you comment further as to the publish-node-map-script? If not, I really dont mean to ask again, sorry I can wait till you have free time (I know you are really busy with mtgox)
2146 2011-05-04 16:33:53 <sipa> 18:26:16 < sipa> send to pubkey: scriptpubkeu contains pubkey, scriptsig contains signature
2147 2011-05-04 16:34:10 <kika> sipa: scriptpubkey is for outputs
2148 2011-05-04 16:34:16 <kika> sipa: scriptsig is for inputs
2149 2011-05-04 16:34:17 <sipa> kika: yes
2150 2011-05-04 16:34:40 <kika> sipa: so when the user creates the input he will need the scriptsig contains pubkey + signature
2151 2011-05-04 16:34:41 <kika> right?
2152 2011-05-04 16:34:42 <UukGoblin> BlueMatt, you want some backlogs?
2153 2011-05-04 16:34:51 <sipa> kika: yes, when it is a send to address
2154 2011-05-04 16:34:53 <BlueMatt> UukGoblin: no the script used to generate
2155 2011-05-04 16:35:06 <sipa> kika: if it is a send to pubkey, the scriptsig only has a signature
2156 2011-05-04 16:35:09 <kika> sipa: yes exactly so here signature means the signature of the user that owns the 50 btc
2157 2011-05-04 16:35:16 <BlueMatt> UukGoblin: or any script which gets a full list of all nodes and can check if they are accepting incoming connections
2158 2011-05-04 16:35:16 <sipa> yes
2159 2011-05-04 16:35:25 <BlueMatt> UukGoblin: because Im too lazy to write one myself
2160 2011-05-04 16:35:32 <kika> sipa: and the pubkey would be the pubkey of the user that owns the 50 btc too right ?
2161 2011-05-04 16:35:37 <sipa> yes
2162 2011-05-04 16:35:44 <kika> sipa: so basically my question is
2163 2011-05-04 16:36:04 <UukGoblin> doesn't seem like MagicalTux posted anything after you parted ;-]
2164 2011-05-04 16:36:11 <kika> sipa: how is this signature created? basically the user that owns the 50 btc hashes a random string with his private key ?
2165 2011-05-04 16:36:31 <sipa> it uses ecdsa to sign the consuming signature with that pubkey
2166 2011-05-04 16:36:38 <BlueMatt> UukGoblin: ok, well he could also have seen the part and not posted ;)
2167 2011-05-04 16:36:44 <sacarlson> MagicalTux: parted?  did he go to the bahama's yet?
2168 2011-05-04 16:36:48 <UukGoblin> BlueMatt, yup.
2169 2011-05-04 16:36:58 <sipa> kika: the hash of the consuming transaction, actually
2170 2011-05-04 16:36:58 <kika> sipa: what would be the consuming signature?
2171 2011-05-04 16:37:00 <UukGoblin> sacarlson, BlueMatt /parted.
2172 2011-05-04 16:37:07 <sipa> the one that has the scriptSig in it
2173 2011-05-04 16:37:07 <UukGoblin> or /quit, actually
2174 2011-05-04 16:37:15 <UukGoblin> don't suppose there's /pingtimeout
2175 2011-05-04 16:37:16 <sipa> sorry, gotta go
2176 2011-05-04 16:37:19 <kika> sipa: i see so basically it encrypts the ahsh of the consuming transaction with his private key right ?
2177 2011-05-04 16:37:20 <BlueMatt> more like /pingtimeout
2178 2011-05-04 16:37:33 <sipa> kika: ECDSA does *not* encrypt anything
2179 2011-05-04 16:37:34 <sacarlson> UukGoblin: sorry didn't read into that
2180 2011-05-04 16:37:40 phantomcircuit_ has joined
2181 2011-05-04 16:37:40 <sipa> it is a signature only scheme
2182 2011-05-04 16:37:47 <sipa> it cannot be used to encrypt things
2183 2011-05-04 16:38:02 <jgarzik> yeah.  usually it is paired with ElGamal, to crypt
2184 2011-05-04 16:38:31 <kika> sipa: i see but ECDSA to be able to sign something it needs a private key to sign with and a message that is going to be signed ( in this case the consuming transaction hash ) right ? and it outputs a signature
2185 2011-05-04 16:38:42 <sipa> yes
2186 2011-05-04 16:38:46 <kika> sipa: cool
2187 2011-05-04 16:38:47 <jgarzik> correct
2188 2011-05-04 16:39:29 phantomcircuit has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2189 2011-05-04 16:39:36 phantomcircuit_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2190 2011-05-04 16:39:39 phantomcircuit has joined
2191 2011-05-04 16:39:56 <kika> sipa: so basically to validate inputs every node checks if the signature was created from a user that has the corresponding public key associated
2192 2011-05-04 16:40:04 <sacarlson> kika:  when we going to have you help us with escrow in bitcoin?  when you got it figured let me know
2193 2011-05-04 16:40:06 brooss has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2194 2011-05-04 16:40:53 <kika> sacarlson: very soon im 95% ready with bitcoin ready
2195 2011-05-04 16:41:02 <kika> sipa: so basically...
2196 2011-05-04 16:41:12 <kika> sacarlson: as soon as i figure it out 100%
2197 2011-05-04 16:42:18 <kika> sipa: so basically every node to check if the input is valid it will every node will try to apply ECSDA to the hash of the consuming transaction, and compare that output with the output of the signature to see if the signature is valid for that public key appearing on the input right ?
2198 2011-05-04 16:42:37 <sacarlson> kika: cool my c++ skill is growing but am stuck with a few things not related to bitcoin if you have any project you have plans with I would like to hear about it
2199 2011-05-04 16:42:48 <kika> sacarlson: i have 6 years c++ experience
2200 2011-05-04 16:42:55 <kika> sacarlson: i have 14 years programming experience
2201 2011-05-04 16:43:13 <kika> sacarlson: 8 years php linux and stuff
2202 2011-05-04 16:43:28 <kika> sacarlson: im 24 years old
2203 2011-05-04 16:43:57 <kika> sacarlson: yes i have many projects we can work on!
2204 2011-05-04 16:44:02 <jgarzik> kika: last week somebody told me he had 14 years unix experience, yet he wanted handholding for simply chasing dependencies and compiling a package (my pushpool server)
2205 2011-05-04 16:44:07 <sacarlson> kika: I was more into high level lang like perl, ruby, php  and older c but this project has my interest in that I'm into encryption and economics
2206 2011-05-04 16:44:09 <jgarzik> so never believe those numbers
2207 2011-05-04 16:44:13 <jgarzik> believe ability
2208 2011-05-04 16:44:22 <kika> jgarzik: lol i fixed all that stuff, nvm
2209 2011-05-04 16:44:38 <kika> jgarzik: yes i know number dont matter
2210 2011-05-04 16:44:40 <jgarzik> kika: it wasn't you :)
2211 2011-05-04 16:44:52 <kika> jgarzik: i found a bug on your blkmond
2212 2011-05-04 16:44:57 <BlueMatt> add me to the list of "give me projects to work on" for noob c++ers but programmers
2213 2011-05-04 16:45:03 <kika> lol
2214 2011-05-04 16:45:13 <kika> jgarzik: i sent you the message on github
2215 2011-05-04 16:45:18 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: add IV to #crypter :)
2216 2011-05-04 16:45:19 <kika> jgarzik: its crashing
2217 2011-05-04 16:45:21 Teslah has joined
2218 2011-05-04 16:45:33 <kika> jgarzik: did you have time to investigate it ?
2219 2011-05-04 16:45:44 <jgarzik> kika: the submission seemed sane
2220 2011-05-04 16:45:54 <kika> jgarzik: and why it crashed?
2221 2011-05-04 16:46:02 <kika> jgarzik: that happens me very oftenly
2222 2011-05-04 16:46:03 <jgarzik> kika: you root caused it, IIRC
2223 2011-05-04 16:46:10 <kika> jgarzik: root ?
2224 2011-05-04 16:46:15 <kika> jgarzik: which root?
2225 2011-05-04 16:46:25 <jgarzik> kika: 14 years... really?
2226 2011-05-04 16:46:28 <Diablo-D3> ;;bc,mtgox
2227 2011-05-04 16:46:29 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":3.58,"low":3.2,"vol":17847,"buy":3.46,"sell":3.4999,"last":3.4999}}
2228 2011-05-04 16:46:29 <kika> jgarzik: ill need to connect to another node?
2229 2011-05-04 16:46:32 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: mmm, was planning on looking at crypter, but you said you were working on it so I didnt want to duplicate effort, but if not...
2230 2011-05-04 16:46:32 <kika> jgarzik: yes
2231 2011-05-04 16:46:36 <Diablo-D3> ;;bc,calc 3000 1
2232 2011-05-04 16:46:37 <gribble> Error: invalid syntax (<string>, line 1)
2233 2011-05-04 16:46:38 <Diablo-D3> er
2234 2011-05-04 16:46:42 <kika> jgarzik: i started creating videogames 3D stuff
2235 2011-05-04 16:46:46 <Diablo-D3> how do I calc this?
2236 2011-05-04 16:46:47 <kika> jgarzik: c++
2237 2011-05-04 16:46:49 <jgarzik> kika: When investigating a problem, you strive to find the "root cause" of any problem
2238 2011-05-04 16:47:02 <jgarzik> kika: after which, the fixing may begin
2239 2011-05-04 16:47:05 <kika> jgarzik: i see so basically what caused my problem?
2240 2011-05-04 16:47:15 <kika> jgarzik: on blkmond
2241 2011-05-04 16:47:21 <kika> jgarzik: its throwing an exception
2242 2011-05-04 16:47:23 nefario has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.6.16/20110319135224])
2243 2011-05-04 16:47:25 pirrr has joined
2244 2011-05-04 16:47:29 <kika> jgarzik: and crashes
2245 2011-05-04 16:47:34 <sacarlson> jgarzik: I worked with phd people where I worked that were tops in programing but asked me to help them with simple unix problems,  but I still respect him way above me
2246 2011-05-04 16:47:38 <kika> jgarzik: because of invalid output
2247 2011-05-04 16:47:45 <kika> jgarzik: but if you say the input is valid
2248 2011-05-04 16:47:54 <kika> jgarzik: then there is a bug on the code that checks of the input is valid
2249 2011-05-04 16:47:58 <jgarzik> kika: I never claimed any input is valid
2250 2011-05-04 16:47:58 <kika> *of
2251 2011-05-04 16:48:12 <kika> [13:40] <jgarzik> kika: the submission seemed sane <-- sorry i meant submission
2252 2011-05-04 16:48:13 <Diablo-D3> guys
2253 2011-05-04 16:48:23 <Diablo-D3> whats the gribble syntax to calc mhash for a specific diff
2254 2011-05-04 16:48:31 <kika> jgarzik: so you mean my bug submission is correct? its really a new bug, right ?
2255 2011-05-04 16:48:35 <jgarzik> kika: the submission of the problem report
2256 2011-05-04 16:48:41 <kika> jgarzik: oh i see
2257 2011-05-04 16:48:49 <kika> jgarzik: can i help you to fix it?
2258 2011-05-04 16:48:54 <kika> jgarzik: do you have idea what can be causing it?
2259 2011-05-04 16:49:11 <kika> sacarlson: we are going to code very cool things! :)
2260 2011-05-04 16:49:15 twilno has joined
2261 2011-05-04 16:49:18 <twilno> sup bros
2262 2011-05-04 16:49:24 <twilno> bitcoin is awesome
2263 2011-05-04 16:49:34 <Diablo-D3> ;;bc,calcd 3000 1
2264 2011-05-04 16:49:34 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 3000 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 1, is 23 minutes and 51 seconds
2265 2011-05-04 16:49:36 <Diablo-D3> ahaaaa
2266 2011-05-04 16:49:37 <jgarzik> kika: are you m4x51 on github?
2267 2011-05-04 16:49:41 <kika> jgarzik: yes
2268 2011-05-04 16:49:43 <Diablo-D3> ;;bc,calcd 3000 10
2269 2011-05-04 16:49:43 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 3000 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 10, is 3 hours, 58 minutes, and 36 seconds
2270 2011-05-04 16:49:52 <Diablo-D3> ;;bc,calcd 3000 8
2271 2011-05-04 16:49:52 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 3000 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 8, is 3 hours, 10 minutes, and 53 seconds
2272 2011-05-04 16:49:54 <Diablo-D3> hrrrm.
2273 2011-05-04 16:49:54 <kika> jgarzik: thats my real nickname
2274 2011-05-04 16:49:59 <sacarlson> kika:  well what are your fatasies of what you would like to happen?
2275 2011-05-04 16:50:00 * Diablo-D3 ponders a diff of 8
2276 2011-05-04 16:50:14 <kika> sacarlson: improve pushpoold
2277 2011-05-04 16:50:22 <UukGoblin> ;;bc,calcd 290000 512
2278 2011-05-04 16:50:22 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 290000 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 512, is 2 hours, 6 minutes, and 22 seconds
2279 2011-05-04 16:50:24 <kika> jgarzik: im using your pushpoold
2280 2011-05-04 16:50:24 <jgarzik> kika: your email on April 26 starting "blkmond is throwing an exception and crashing..." successfully diagnosed the problem, AFAICS
2281 2011-05-04 16:50:34 * Diablo-D3 ponders a diff of 16
2282 2011-05-04 16:50:36 <kika> jgarzik: excatly!
2283 2011-05-04 16:50:39 <kika> *exactly!
2284 2011-05-04 16:50:48 <Diablo-D3> ;;bc,calcd 3000 16
2285 2011-05-04 16:50:48 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 3000 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 16, is 6 hours, 21 minutes, and 46 seconds
2286 2011-05-04 16:51:08 bryan has joined
2287 2011-05-04 16:51:14 mmoya has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2288 2011-05-04 16:51:20 <sacarlson> kika: minning?  small return the whole world as a group only create 7200 bitcoin per day what return improvments can you see in that?
2289 2011-05-04 16:51:34 bryan is now known as Guest10225
2290 2011-05-04 16:51:41 <jgarzik> kika: given that, I did not understand why you were asking me "so basically what caused my problem?" and "do you have idea what can be causing it?" because you already answered those questions yourself ;-)
2291 2011-05-04 16:51:49 Guest10225 is now known as NOTAL
2292 2011-05-04 16:51:54 <kika> jgarzik: also setup your pushpoold on a server however im trying to conenct some diablominers and other miners to it, and its mining very slow, i dont know whats the bottleneck science if i use those same miners to mine on for example deepbit, it mines 20 times faster
2293 2011-05-04 16:52:24 <jgarzik> kika: yeah, dunno what's up with that.  diablominer is weird, and doesn't support long polling.
2294 2011-05-04 16:52:35 <jgarzik> kika: -that- could use some diagnosis.
2295 2011-05-04 16:52:42 <Diablo-D3> bullshit
2296 2011-05-04 16:52:45 <Diablo-D3> it supports LP
2297 2011-05-04 16:52:54 <kika> Diablo-D3: you added LP support?
2298 2011-05-04 16:52:58 <Diablo-D3> YES.
2299 2011-05-04 16:52:59 <Diablo-D3> HELLO.
2300 2011-05-04 16:53:09 <kika> Diablo-D3: is it on github ?
2301 2011-05-04 16:53:16 <Diablo-D3> YESSSSSSSS
2302 2011-05-04 16:53:16 <kika> Diablo-D3: when you added LP support? :)
2303 2011-05-04 16:53:26 <Diablo-D3> DONT MAKE ME USE THE CROWBAR
2304 2011-05-04 16:53:27 <kika> sacarlson: what are your ideas?
2305 2011-05-04 16:53:33 <Diablo-D3> GITHUB SHOWS THE GIT LOG
2306 2011-05-04 16:53:39 <kika> Diablo-D3: lol ok
2307 2011-05-04 16:53:43 <jgarzik> kika: did you create a local fix for blkmond, along the lines described in your email?
2308 2011-05-04 16:54:05 <kika> jgarzik: not yet, just wondering if i place a "continue;" there instead of the throw exception stuff would work ?
2309 2011-05-04 16:54:23 <jgarzik> kika: python doesn't want a semi-colon
2310 2011-05-04 16:54:27 <UukGoblin> heheh
2311 2011-05-04 16:54:27 <kika> jgarzik: i woudnt need to re-initialize variables or someting?
2312 2011-05-04 16:54:27 <jgarzik> kika: but yes, it's worth a try
2313 2011-05-04 16:54:51 <UukGoblin> Diablo-D3, java sucks! ;-)
2314 2011-05-04 16:54:56 <kika> jgarzik: i have to check if i have to re-initialize variables before the "continue", because the variables might contain invalid data after a crash
2315 2011-05-04 16:55:03 <Diablo-D3> UukGoblin: so does your mother.
2316 2011-05-04 16:55:14 <jgarzik> kika: if there is a crash, there are no variables
2317 2011-05-04 16:55:26 <jgarzik> kika: the script and script interpreter stops executing
2318 2011-05-04 16:55:31 <kika> jgarzik: so basically ill try placing the "continue" do you think we can commit that fix?
2319 2011-05-04 16:55:50 <UukGoblin> Diablo-D3, have you tried Scala btw?
2320 2011-05-04 16:55:57 <jgarzik> kika: you've really been programming for 14 years?
2321 2011-05-04 16:56:00 <kika> jgarzik: yes
2322 2011-05-04 16:56:00 <jgarzik> kika: commit after testing
2323 2011-05-04 16:56:04 <jgarzik> kika: ALWAYS
2324 2011-05-04 16:56:05 <sacarlson> kika: I'm off the path to create new posible coin the more stable buying power and or connecting groups of coins together to create faster transaction speed
2325 2011-05-04 16:56:07 <kika> jgarzik: i started when i was 10 years old
2326 2011-05-04 16:56:08 <Diablo-D3> UukGoblin: cant stand it.
2327 2011-05-04 16:56:14 <kika> jgarzik: doing C++ stuff, im autodidact
2328 2011-05-04 16:56:20 <Diablo-D3> jgarzik: thats bad advice
2329 2011-05-04 16:56:23 <Diablo-D3> test after testing.
2330 2011-05-04 16:56:26 <Diablo-D3> and then test some more.
2331 2011-05-04 16:56:30 IncitatusOnWater has joined
2332 2011-05-04 16:56:36 Incitatus has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2333 2011-05-04 16:56:42 <kika> jgarzik: im 24 years old now
2334 2011-05-04 16:57:01 <UukGoblin> huh
2335 2011-05-04 16:57:03 <sacarlson> kika: people won't be happy waiting 10 minits to transact they will move to the faster safer method of transaction
2336 2011-05-04 16:57:06 skeledrew1 has joined
2337 2011-05-04 16:57:08 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2338 2011-05-04 16:57:14 <UukGoblin> jgarzik, I do commit before testing sometimes
2339 2011-05-04 16:57:23 <UukGoblin> quite often, actually
2340 2011-05-04 16:57:25 <jgarzik> kika: standard software engineering -- you test before assuming the fix works
2341 2011-05-04 16:57:26 RyanPy has joined
2342 2011-05-04 16:57:27 <kika> sacarlson: what would be the faster method of transaction?
2343 2011-05-04 16:57:38 <kika> jgarzik: okay ill test it
2344 2011-05-04 16:57:40 <jgarzik> kika: if it works, we can commit the fix
2345 2011-05-04 16:57:46 <kika> jgarzik: and then we will see if i we commit it :
2346 2011-05-04 16:57:49 <kika> :)
2347 2011-05-04 16:57:51 <Diablo-D3> UNIT TESTING 4EVER
2348 2011-05-04 16:57:55 <jgarzik> kika: if it does not work, then no, we won't commit :)
2349 2011-05-04 16:57:59 <UukGoblin> code, code, commit, test, notice a bug, break some code, notice more bugs, revert to the commit
2350 2011-05-04 16:58:00 <kika> lol
2351 2011-05-04 16:58:01 <kika> k
2352 2011-05-04 16:58:11 <kika> UukGoblin: coofee in the middle
2353 2011-05-04 16:58:12 <kika> :P
2354 2011-05-04 16:58:23 <UukGoblin> I don't use coffee actually, maybe I'm weird
2355 2011-05-04 16:58:32 <sacarlson> kika: well at this point my only idea for that it to have parallel coins run that auto transact between each other with the same method of transaction recording
2356 2011-05-04 16:58:37 <kika> UukGoblin: you are ok, coffee isnt good
2357 2011-05-04 16:58:52 <jgarzik> s/coffee/Pepsi/ here
2358 2011-05-04 16:59:00 <jgarzik> or, Pepsi == coffee
2359 2011-05-04 16:59:06 <UukGoblin> kika, do you want to implement something cool for me? ;-]
2360 2011-05-04 16:59:21 <kika> sacarlson: so you say we need to improve the bitcoin protocol to perform faster transfers?
2361 2011-05-04 16:59:33 <kika> UukGoblin: it depends, what do you need to implement?
2362 2011-05-04 16:59:48 <sacarlson> kika:  yes don't you think so?
2363 2011-05-04 16:59:59 <UukGoblin> kika, forwarding and accepting into blocks of a simple non-standard transaction with a fee
2364 2011-05-04 17:00:11 <sacarlson> kika it can't compete with other currency until you can get instant transcations
2365 2011-05-04 17:00:13 <jgarzik> sacarlson: disagree -- big players will naturally form a backbone for that
2366 2011-05-04 17:00:14 <kika> sacarlson: yes it would be cool right now the people has to wait until 6 confirmations, right ? ( 6 generated blocks )
2367 2011-05-04 17:00:35 <jgarzik> sacarlson: so the current payment network with confirmations is great, and highly secure after X confirmations
2368 2011-05-04 17:00:43 <UukGoblin> you can have instant bitcoin transactions already
2369 2011-05-04 17:00:44 <Diablo-D3> ;;bc,getinfo
2370 2011-05-04 17:00:45 <gribble> Error: "bc,getinfo" is not a valid command.
2371 2011-05-04 17:00:46 <kika> sacarlson: so basically right now 6 blocks are generated in 10 min ?
2372 2011-05-04 17:00:47 <UukGoblin> just use mybitcoin or mtgox
2373 2011-05-04 17:00:47 <Diablo-D3> bah
2374 2011-05-04 17:00:56 <jgarzik> kika: 6 blocks == 1 hour
2375 2011-05-04 17:01:00 <jgarzik> kika: 1 block == 10 minutes
2376 2011-05-04 17:01:02 <kika> UukGoblin: sure
2377 2011-05-04 17:01:20 <sacarlson> kika: my proto coin takes only 2 confirmations but with paralele we can add more confirmations on each with escrow to pull transactions that have already happend
2378 2011-05-04 17:01:42 <kika> sacarlson: thats cool im going to help you :)
2379 2011-05-04 17:01:48 <UukGoblin> kika, was that the answer to implementing that non-standard tx stuff? :-)
2380 2011-05-04 17:01:54 <kika> UukGoblin: yes
2381 2011-05-04 17:02:02 <UukGoblin> cool :-]
2382 2011-05-04 17:02:07 <UukGoblin> you must have loads of free time ;-]
2383 2011-05-04 17:02:09 agricocb has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
2384 2011-05-04 17:02:12 <kika> UukGoblin: as soon as i grasp bitcoin 100% ill surely help everyone
2385 2011-05-04 17:02:12 <sacarlson> kika:  well it's only a idea far from reality
2386 2011-05-04 17:02:21 <RyanPy> Does mtgox really ear $6500USD/day? http://bitcoincharts.com puts their volume at $1millino and their cut is 0.65%
2387 2011-05-04 17:02:35 <kika> sacarlson: why do you say it cant compete with any other currency ?
2388 2011-05-04 17:02:41 <RyanPy> Why can't they afford decent servers
2389 2011-05-04 17:02:47 <UukGoblin> kika, awesome ;-] my idea is just a bit controversial ;-]
2390 2011-05-04 17:03:12 bgeron has joined
2391 2011-05-04 17:03:17 <UukGoblin> RyanPy, their cut is actually 1.3% by my count... 0.65% on each side of the trade.
2392 2011-05-04 17:03:24 <sacarlson> kika:  bitcoin?  it can already compete with other currency but the future will require faster verification
2393 2011-05-04 17:03:25 TD_ has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
2394 2011-05-04 17:03:33 <kika> jgarzik: what would i need to improve to pushpoold so that biablominer for example and all other miners works as fast as they do on deepbit ?
2395 2011-05-04 17:03:57 <jgarzik> kika: no idea why you're seeing problems with diablominer
2396 2011-05-04 17:04:04 <jgarzik> kika: all other miners run 100% performance
2397 2011-05-04 17:04:08 <kika> sacarlson: yes i know in the future people will only be rewarded to run a bitcoin node by their transaction fees, right ?
2398 2011-05-04 17:04:24 <kika> jgarzik: poclbm included?
2399 2011-05-04 17:04:26 RyanPy has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.0.4 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
2400 2011-05-04 17:04:33 fetokun has quit (Quit: Sto andando via)
2401 2011-05-04 17:04:36 <kika> jgarzik: does poclbm works with pushpoold right ?
2402 2011-05-04 17:04:36 <jgarzik> kika: poclbm runs at peak performance, yes
2403 2011-05-04 17:04:40 <jgarzik> kika: yes
2404 2011-05-04 17:04:50 <kika> jgarzik: well, i tested it with poclbm and it ran slow
2405 2011-05-04 17:04:51 <jgarzik> kika: as do many other miners
2406 2011-05-04 17:04:57 <kika> jgarzik: ill re-test btw
2407 2011-05-04 17:05:00 <jgarzik> kika: sounds like maybe your setup has problems
2408 2011-05-04 17:05:07 <jgarzik> kika: maybe you forgot memcached and your database is slow
2409 2011-05-04 17:05:09 <sacarlson> kika:  yes my curency is already that way will you can't make any money mining it's already simulating what bitcoin will be in the future
2410 2011-05-04 17:05:15 <kika> jgarzik: do you know how much bandwidth i need for a pocbml miner?
2411 2011-05-04 17:05:18 <jgarzik> kika: luke-jr runs pushpoold and doesn't see such behavior
2412 2011-05-04 17:05:31 <kika> jgarzik: i have memcached and mysql, however
2413 2011-05-04 17:05:33 <jgarzik> kika: very little, but latency can get nasty over WAN
2414 2011-05-04 17:05:49 <kika> jgarzik: i had to create the database tables my hand because there is no .sql with the table structure anywhere
2415 2011-05-04 17:06:04 <kika> jgarzik: do you think you can commit a .sql with the db structure?
2416 2011-05-04 17:06:07 <sacarlson> kika my present proto curency has zero inflation
2417 2011-05-04 17:06:19 <kika> jgarzik: im mining over the internet
2418 2011-05-04 17:06:54 <kika> jgarzik: ill re-test and let you know
2419 2011-05-04 17:07:04 <jgarzik> kika: database structure is up to you.  pushpool was built to be completely flexible.  you can specify the SQL string yourself.
2420 2011-05-04 17:07:16 <jgarzik> kika: that also means database is yours to screw up, or optimize :)
2421 2011-05-04 17:07:24 <kika> jgarzik: i think the problem might be because i need to enable the SET NULL for the columns of the shares table, right?
2422 2011-05-04 17:07:25 danlucraft1 has joined
2423 2011-05-04 17:07:41 <kika> jgarzik: because right now its not inserting the shares there
2424 2011-05-04 17:07:48 <kika> jgarzik: its giving a database error
2425 2011-05-04 17:07:55 <kika> jgarzik: that might be slowing it down maybe
2426 2011-05-04 17:08:10 <jgarzik> kika: yeah sounds like you have db troubles, not miner troubles
2427 2011-05-04 17:08:48 kika has quit (Quit: Page closed)
2428 2011-05-04 17:10:01 skyewm has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
2429 2011-05-04 17:11:10 danlucraft has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2430 2011-05-04 17:11:15 danlucraft1 has quit (Client Quit)
2431 2011-05-04 17:13:19 <jgarzik> RyanPy: 1.3% of 18577 is 241
2432 2011-05-04 17:20:52 pnicholson is now known as soaring_eagle
2433 2011-05-04 17:21:42 agricocb has joined
2434 2011-05-04 17:26:54 zyb has joined
2435 2011-05-04 17:28:21 zyb_ has joined
2436 2011-05-04 17:30:53 d4de has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
2437 2011-05-04 17:30:57 zyb has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2438 2011-05-04 17:31:35 marlowe has joined
2439 2011-05-04 17:31:59 yogurt_truck has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
2440 2011-05-04 17:34:35 <Diablo-D3> grr
2441 2011-05-04 17:34:47 <Diablo-D3> how do I calculate difficulty by hand
2442 2011-05-04 17:36:20 <genjix> Diablo-D3: current target / min target
2443 2011-05-04 17:36:50 <Diablo-D3> thats not what I mean
2444 2011-05-04 17:37:02 <Diablo-D3> fucking giant numbers
2445 2011-05-04 17:38:00 <Diablo-D3> although I bet I could always use BigNumber shit
2446 2011-05-04 17:38:26 skyewm has joined
2447 2011-05-04 17:42:51 jeremias has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2448 2011-05-04 17:43:16 <cosurgi> Diablo-D3: use apcalc, it's arbitrary precision.
2449 2011-05-04 17:43:34 <cosurgi> I use it frequently for 2^256 and stuff.
2450 2011-05-04 17:43:40 <Diablo-D3> cosurgi: this is for java
2451 2011-05-04 17:43:50 <Diablo-D3> and BigDecimal and BigInteger are arbitrary precision
2452 2011-05-04 17:43:54 <cosurgi> ok
2453 2011-05-04 17:43:55 flok has quit (Read error: Connection refused)
2454 2011-05-04 17:43:59 <cosurgi> Diablo-D3: what are you coding?
2455 2011-05-04 17:44:16 flok99 has joined
2456 2011-05-04 17:45:50 bitcoiner has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2457 2011-05-04 17:46:43 flok has joined
2458 2011-05-04 17:48:16 bitcoiner has joined
2459 2011-05-04 17:49:06 flok99 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2460 2011-05-04 17:49:06 sgornick has joined
2461 2011-05-04 17:50:52 Marcel has left (HSD!~Marcel|HS@router2.hsdev.com|)
2462 2011-05-04 17:51:07 Marcel has joined
2463 2011-05-04 17:51:21 <Diablo-D3> "Are you a multiplicand or a multipliCANT?"
2464 2011-05-04 17:51:59 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: hm, pulling crypter into current master makes it not init (something about construct NULL not valid)
2465 2011-05-04 17:52:10 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: hm, it also doesnt open when I just checkout jgarzik/crypter
2466 2011-05-04 17:54:21 <x6763> Diablo-D3: that difficulty stuff is a pain...i spent hours looking at the wiki, bitcoin source code, bitcoinj source code, and openssl source code to try to figure it out...if i remember right, i wrote some code to do it, but there's no way i could explain how it works right now
2467 2011-05-04 17:55:33 <Diablo-D3> x6763: its called writing your own big integer impl
2468 2011-05-04 17:55:39 sc8nt4u has joined
2469 2011-05-04 17:55:40 <Diablo-D3> parsing it is easy
2470 2011-05-04 17:56:26 <cosurgi> bc,diff
2471 2011-05-04 17:56:29 <cosurgi> bc,hextarget
2472 2011-05-04 17:56:39 <cosurgi> you are talking about converting diff into hextarget?
2473 2011-05-04 17:56:41 <cosurgi> ;;bc,diff
2474 2011-05-04 17:56:42 <gribble> 109670.13329248
2475 2011-05-04 17:56:43 <cosurgi> ;;bc,hextarget
2476 2011-05-04 17:56:44 <gribble> 00000000000098FA000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
2477 2011-05-04 17:56:52 <Diablo-D3> no, target into diff
2478 2011-05-04 17:58:22 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: sounds like bugs exist :)
2479 2011-05-04 17:58:35 <cosurgi> it works.
2480 2011-05-04 17:58:49 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: sounds like a new project...fair enough, I was just hoping you might know what was up
2481 2011-05-04 17:59:02 <cosurgi> python:
2482 2011-05-04 17:59:06 <cosurgi> >>> a=int("00000000000098FA000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000",16)
2483 2011-05-04 17:59:08 <cosurgi> >>> b=2**(256-32)
2484 2011-05-04 17:59:11 <cosurgi> >>> b*1.0/a
2485 2011-05-04 17:59:14 <cosurgi> 109671.80675144272
2486 2011-05-04 17:59:26 <cosurgi> anything else I can help with? :-P
2487 2011-05-04 17:59:36 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: not off the top of my head, unfortunately
2488 2011-05-04 17:59:38 <cosurgi> but I can't help with java :)
2489 2011-05-04 17:59:50 sc8nt4u has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2490 2011-05-04 17:59:51 <Diablo-D3> cosurgi: I already have it done, actually
2491 2011-05-04 18:00:10 <Diablo-D3> I just need someone to confirm the actual value of 1 diff
2492 2011-05-04 18:01:47 <cosurgi> value of one share? hmm..
2493 2011-05-04 18:01:51 <Diablo-D3> because it seems like it should be 2^(224-16)
2494 2011-05-04 18:03:22 <cosurgi> yes, I think that would be 50/diff
2495 2011-05-04 18:03:36 <cosurgi> at diff=1 each share generates 50 BTC
2496 2011-05-04 18:03:53 <Diablo-D3> cosurgi: thats not what I asked
2497 2011-05-04 18:04:00 <cosurgi> at any other difficulty on average you need difficulty-number of shares.
2498 2011-05-04 18:04:24 <cosurgi> I don't get it: "actual value of 1 diff" "it should be 2^(224-16)"
2499 2011-05-04 18:04:41 <cosurgi> 2**(224-16)=411376139330301510538742295639337626245683966408394965837152256
2500 2011-05-04 18:04:44 <Diablo-D3> you dont understand numbers then.
2501 2011-05-04 18:05:10 <cosurgi> I don't understand what you need
2502 2011-05-04 18:05:16 <Diablo-D3> the actual value of 1 diff
2503 2011-05-04 18:05:27 <cosurgi> value in BTC ?
2504 2011-05-04 18:05:40 <Diablo-D3> value in integers.
2505 2011-05-04 18:05:45 eternal1 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
2506 2011-05-04 18:06:06 <cosurgi> 1 diff == int("00000000FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF",16)
2507 2011-05-04 18:06:10 <cosurgi> is that what you mean?
2508 2011-05-04 18:06:30 <cosurgi> 2^(256-32)
2509 2011-05-04 18:06:38 fahadsadah has quit (Excess Flood)
2510 2011-05-04 18:06:52 <Diablo-D3> hrm, but it doesnt seem it should be 2^224
2511 2011-05-04 18:06:53 <cosurgi> how did you come to 2^(224-16) ?
2512 2011-05-04 18:07:15 <cosurgi> calculation seems to be correct
2513 2011-05-04 18:07:24 yogurt_truck has joined
2514 2011-05-04 18:07:28 <cosurgi> >>> a=int("00000000FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF",16)
2515 2011-05-04 18:07:32 <cosurgi> >>> b=2**(256-32)
2516 2011-05-04 18:07:34 <cosurgi> >>> b*1.0/a
2517 2011-05-04 18:07:37 <cosurgi> 1.0
2518 2011-05-04 18:07:41 <Diablo-D3> because a diff 1 share does not mean H == 0
2519 2011-05-04 18:07:58 <cosurgi> huh?
2520 2011-05-04 18:08:06 <cosurgi> where did you get this information from?
2521 2011-05-04 18:08:16 <Diablo-D3> jgarzik, ArtForz: where are you two
2522 2011-05-04 18:08:43 <cosurgi> well.. actually, I remember what ArtForz said. diff one is:
2523 2011-05-04 18:08:59 <Diablo-D3> cosurgi: and whats with all the FFFFs? its 00000000FFFF0000 and the rest 0s
2524 2011-05-04 18:09:08 <cosurgi> a=int("00000000FFFF0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000",16)
2525 2011-05-04 18:09:32 Marcel has left (HSD!~Marcel|HS@router2.hsdev.com|)
2526 2011-05-04 18:09:34 <cosurgi> >>> b*1.0/a
2527 2011-05-04 18:09:35 <cosurgi> 1.0000152590218967
2528 2011-05-04 18:09:36 ArtForzZz has joined
2529 2011-05-04 18:09:37 <cosurgi> hmmm...
2530 2011-05-04 18:09:43 Marcel has joined
2531 2011-05-04 18:09:56 <x6763> Diablo-D3: yeah, i guess what i was trying to figure out that I had a hard time with was how to go from a 256-bit target to the 32-bit "compressed" form of that number...at least at the time i couldn't find any documentation that explained it, so i had to look at a bunch of code to see exactly what was being done...i think everything else was easy
2532 2011-05-04 18:10:17 <Diablo-D3> cosurgi; or 1/65536th more.
2533 2011-05-04 18:10:30 <luke-jr> Diablo-D3: that's 1/1,0000 in tonal!
2534 2011-05-04 18:10:36 <Diablo-D3> er 1/65535th
2535 2011-05-04 18:10:44 joepie92 has joined
2536 2011-05-04 18:11:11 <Diablo-D3> so I could do 2^224 + 1
2537 2011-05-04 18:11:16 <Diablo-D3> and get what I want
2538 2011-05-04 18:11:38 <Diablo-D3> wait 2^224 - 1
2539 2011-05-04 18:12:35 kelvie_ is now known as kelvie`
2540 2011-05-04 18:13:03 ArtForz has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2541 2011-05-04 18:13:05 kelvie` is now known as kelvie_
2542 2011-05-04 18:14:32 amiller has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2543 2011-05-04 18:16:30 <cosurgi> watch this:
2544 2011-05-04 18:16:35 <cosurgi> >>> a=int("0000000100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000",16)
2545 2011-05-04 18:16:38 <cosurgi> >>> b=int("00000000FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF",16)
2546 2011-05-04 18:16:41 <cosurgi> >>> b*1.0/a
2547 2011-05-04 18:16:43 <cosurgi> 1.0
2548 2011-05-04 18:16:52 fahadsadah has joined
2549 2011-05-04 18:16:53 <cosurgi> no, that's stupid.
2550 2011-05-04 18:17:01 <Diablo-D3> thats also impossible.
2551 2011-05-04 18:17:40 diki has joined
2552 2011-05-04 18:17:41 <diki> ;;bc,gen
2553 2011-05-04 18:17:41 <gribble> (bc,gen <an alias, 1 argument>) -- Alias for "echo The expected generation output, at $1 Khps, given current difficulty of [bc,diff], is [math calc 50*24*60*60 / (1/((2**224-1)/[bc,diff]*$1*1000/2**256))] BTC per day and [math calc 50*60*60 / (1/((2**224-1)/[bc,diff]*$1*1000/2**256))] BTC per hour.".
2554 2011-05-04 18:17:50 <luke-jr> input your hashrate
2555 2011-05-04 18:18:04 <cosurgi> that's actually: 0.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999629079384931257861426826473845236 :)
2556 2011-05-04 18:18:40 <diki> ;;bc,gen 305000
2557 2011-05-04 18:18:41 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 305000 Khps, given current difficulty of 109670.13329248 , is 2.79727622161 BTC per day and 0.1165531759 BTC per hour.
2558 2011-05-04 18:18:48 AStove has quit ()
2559 2011-05-04 18:19:07 <luke-jr> diki: you seem to be getting more than you should lol
2560 2011-05-04 18:20:13 zylche has joined
2561 2011-05-04 18:20:28 toffoo has quit ()
2562 2011-05-04 18:20:51 x5x`brb is now known as x5x
2563 2011-05-04 18:21:40 TD_ has joined
2564 2011-05-04 18:21:44 toffoo has joined
2565 2011-05-04 18:21:50 dishwara has quit (Quit: See u soon)
2566 2011-05-04 18:22:34 <cosurgi> there's definitely -1/65535, but I don't know why
2567 2011-05-04 18:22:47 <cosurgi> and it's not 2^224 - 1
2568 2011-05-04 18:25:37 <B0g4r8> Hmm, I'm trying to get mining going on linux w/ ati, but it's not cooperating.
2569 2011-05-04 18:25:41 <Diablo-D3> cosurgi: because its FFFF0000
2570 2011-05-04 18:25:58 <cosurgi> it doesn't help
2571 2011-05-04 18:26:09 <Diablo-D3> it'd be -1 if it was FFFFFFFF
2572 2011-05-04 18:26:29 <Diablo-D3> and it'd be 2^224 if it was 100000000
2573 2011-05-04 18:26:38 <B0g4r8> CLInfo says terminate called after throwing an instance of 'cl::Error',  what():  clGetPlatformIDs
2574 2011-05-04 18:26:42 <cosurgi> ;;bc,diff
2575 2011-05-04 18:26:43 <gribble> 109670.13329248
2576 2011-05-04 18:26:48 <cosurgi> your'right!
2577 2011-05-04 18:26:52 <cosurgi> >>> a=int("00000000000098FA000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000",16)
2578 2011-05-04 18:26:55 <cosurgi> >>> b=int("00000000FFFF0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000",16)
2579 2011-05-04 18:26:59 <cosurgi> >>> b*1.0/a
2580 2011-05-04 18:27:01 <cosurgi> 109670.1332924774
2581 2011-05-04 18:27:02 <BlueMatt> can I get some testnet coins to do some testing?mo9dAt5KMg4cA7DgFor394AFCwNttfkV37
2582 2011-05-04 18:27:03 <B0g4r8> It looks like it's looking for libGLU bit not finding it...
2583 2011-05-04 18:27:03 <cosurgi> look :)
2584 2011-05-04 18:27:45 <cosurgi> all decimal places are correct
2585 2011-05-04 18:27:47 <BlueMatt> nope mr5xRaypTMmX2VTnUM6XitawrcytnEiZe9 instead
2586 2011-05-04 18:27:51 <cosurgi> Diablo-D3: !
2587 2011-05-04 18:28:28 <molecular> BlueMatt, sent some
2588 2011-05-04 18:28:28 ArtForzZz is now known as ArtForz
2589 2011-05-04 18:28:50 <cosurgi> so diff=1 is 00000000FFFF0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
2590 2011-05-04 18:29:15 <Diablo-D3> cosurgi: yes, I fucking said that earlier
2591 2011-05-04 18:29:24 <Diablo-D3> eight 0s, four Fs, the rest 0s.
2592 2011-05-04 18:30:40 <topi`> hmm, my bitcoin segfaulted
2593 2011-05-04 18:30:43 <cosurgi> and it's not 2^224 - 1 but it's 2^224-2^208
2594 2011-05-04 18:30:54 <Diablo-D3> I already said its not 2^224.
2595 2011-05-04 18:30:54 <cosurgi> Diablo-D3: and you fucking didn't say that :-p
2596 2011-05-04 18:31:11 <B0g4r8> segfaulted at launch, or randomly thereafter?
2597 2011-05-04 18:31:15 <Diablo-D3> [02:04:06] <Diablo-D3> cosurgi: and whats with all the FFFFs? its 00000000FFFF0000 and the rest 0s
2598 2011-05-04 18:31:20 <x6763> Diablo-D3: what are you trying to figure out? or did you already?
2599 2011-05-04 18:31:31 <Diablo-D3> x6763: the human readable value of diff 1.
2600 2011-05-04 18:31:48 <cosurgi> ok. so we both have it. good :)
2601 2011-05-04 18:32:54 <BlueMatt> molecular: thanks
2602 2011-05-04 18:33:07 dinox has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2603 2011-05-04 18:33:08 <x6763> Diablo-D3: human readable? the "bits" value in a block header?
2604 2011-05-04 18:33:40 <Diablo-D3> x6763: more decimally
2605 2011-05-04 18:33:46 dinox has joined
2606 2011-05-04 18:33:55 <Diablo-D3> it should be 0xFFFF0000 * 2^192
2607 2011-05-04 18:34:52 <cosurgi> it is.
2608 2011-05-04 18:35:05 <cosurgi> >>> hex(int("FFFF0000",16)*2**192)
2609 2011-05-04 18:35:07 <cosurgi> 0xffff0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
2610 2011-05-04 18:35:13 <topi`> B0g4r8: after like opening the Receiving addresses window and copying one address from there
2611 2011-05-04 18:35:21 <cosurgi> ok, time to go.
2612 2011-05-04 18:35:23 <topi`> well, it crashed at exiting
2613 2011-05-04 18:36:15 <B0g4r8> Mmm.
2614 2011-05-04 18:36:27 <topi`> but this is the OSX client, stupid wxwidgets
2615 2011-05-04 18:36:45 <B0g4r8> I was going to suggest using strace, but I doubt it would offer any hints about that sort of crash.
2616 2011-05-04 18:36:59 <B0g4r8> oh...yeah, and strace isn't avail on OS X anyway.
2617 2011-05-04 18:37:02 <molecular> >>> hex((2**16-1)*2**192)
2618 2011-05-04 18:37:12 <topi`> thread 5 crashed, DbTxn::set_parent(DbTxn*) + 1721492
2619 2011-05-04 18:37:23 <x6763> Diablo-D3: you're looking for a decimal representation that's not the normal (max-target / current-target)?
2620 2011-05-04 18:37:30 <B0g4r8> Just don't ever close the program.
2621 2011-05-04 18:37:43 <Diablo-D3> x6763: yeah
2622 2011-05-04 18:37:46 <molecular> >>> hex((2**16-1)*2**208)
2623 2011-05-04 18:37:46 <topi`> B0g4r8: there's a log dumped that shows all the states of the different threads and backtraces
2624 2011-05-04 18:38:05 <Diablo-D3> which would be 65535 * 2**208 I think
2625 2011-05-04 18:38:12 <topi`> what is this DbTxn:: class anyways?
2626 2011-05-04 18:39:31 <molecular> Diablo-D3, or 2**224 - 2**208, yes
2627 2011-05-04 18:39:55 TD__ has joined
2628 2011-05-04 18:40:21 * Diablo-D3 shrugs.
2629 2011-05-04 18:42:34 TD_ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2630 2011-05-04 18:44:04 RazielZ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2631 2011-05-04 18:45:25 <jlewis> luke-jr: hmm, why is current-block.json not showing my address when hashrate.php?addr=<myaddress> seems normal?
2632 2011-05-04 18:45:36 <luke-jr> jlewis: which address?
2633 2011-05-04 18:45:40 <jlewis> ....aog
2634 2011-05-04 18:46:11 <luke-jr> jlewis: it's delayed due to the 17 BTC shortage
2635 2011-05-04 18:46:22 <luke-jr> jlewis: should come through eventually
2636 2011-05-04 18:46:25 <luke-jr> check balances.json
2637 2011-05-04 18:46:26 <jlewis> 'k :)
2638 2011-05-04 18:46:34 <jlewis> yeah, i did, i was just curious
2639 2011-05-04 18:46:48 <luke-jr> https://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=6667.msg106036#msg106036
2640 2011-05-04 18:47:04 <jlewis> thanks
2641 2011-05-04 18:47:53 <luke-jr> jlewis: hmm, you've been delayed already, haven't you? :|
2642 2011-05-04 18:48:18 <luke-jr> jlewis: would you rather I offset you the full amount, and just send it manually when it reaches 100 confirmations?
2643 2011-05-04 18:48:29 <jlewis> no, i don't really care
2644 2011-05-04 18:48:33 <luke-jr> ok
2645 2011-05-04 18:48:37 <luke-jr> would you mind if I do? ;P
2646 2011-05-04 18:48:44 <luke-jr> would help the pool get back on track…
2647 2011-05-04 18:48:45 <jlewis> whatever you want :)
2648 2011-05-04 18:49:02 x5x is now known as x5x`brb
2649 2011-05-04 18:55:01 theorb has joined
2650 2011-05-04 18:59:16 <jlewis> btw i finished asio'ing the rpc server. https://github.com/jordanlewis/bitcoin/commit/5606ec39485859045fc551546b13d1f0da29a8ba
2651 2011-05-04 18:59:31 <UukGoblin> there. TD, Diablo-D3, sipa, jgarzik & co.: http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=7219.msg106194#msg106194
2652 2011-05-04 18:59:32 theorbtwo has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2653 2011-05-04 18:59:33 theorb is now known as theorbtwo
2654 2011-05-04 18:59:42 <jlewis> it's not ready to be pulled yet because i want to make it multithreaded as well, but that's the main work
2655 2011-05-04 19:00:48 <luke-jr> jlewis: you might want to check my branch for that
2656 2011-05-04 19:01:31 <xelister> ArtForz: any idea which options in RBE where to allow underclokcing of ram?
2657 2011-05-04 19:02:10 <jlewis> i looked at it a while ago - it looks like all you did was spin off ThreadRPCServer3 in a new thread? but maybe you've changed it since then
2658 2011-05-04 19:02:29 <jgarzik> jlewis: pull requests prefer baby steps.  easier to review, easier to get accepted.
2659 2011-05-04 19:02:35 <luke-jr> well, ThreadRPCServer3 handled the request ;)
2660 2011-05-04 19:03:02 <luke-jr> I agree with jgarzik though, no reason to put these in the same pull
2661 2011-05-04 19:03:06 <jlewis> ok
2662 2011-05-04 19:03:54 <jlewis> well it's already a bit  bigger than i'd like - do people prefer a patch series that shows incremental development? or just one that completes the feature?
2663 2011-05-04 19:04:21 <jlewis> to be clear, none of the subpatches in such a patch series would be suitable for pulling by themselves
2664 2011-05-04 19:04:26 <luke-jr> jlewis: one commit per logical change, IMO.
2665 2011-05-04 19:05:26 <luke-jr> if it's a bunch of otherwise-useless-by-itself changes in different areas, I'd probably combine them
2666 2011-05-04 19:06:06 <luke-jr> but if it's a "refactor code to more easily do async", then "async" touching the same code, I might do two steps
2667 2011-05-04 19:07:59 <jlewis> is there any way i can test the build on windows machines before i submit? i don't have any windows development environments to play with
2668 2011-05-04 19:08:15 <phantomcircuit> vmware?
2669 2011-05-04 19:09:17 <jlewis> can you use MSVC etc in vmware? i've never done any windows development before:)
2670 2011-05-04 19:09:42 lyspooner has joined
2671 2011-05-04 19:10:05 B0g4r8 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2672 2011-05-04 19:12:46 <phantomcircuit> jlewis, yes you can
2673 2011-05-04 19:13:15 jroot has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2674 2011-05-04 19:13:50 antivigilante has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
2675 2011-05-04 19:14:44 <luke-jr> jlewis: afaik, Windows version is built on Linux now
2676 2011-05-04 19:14:49 antivigilante has joined
2677 2011-05-04 19:14:50 <CIA-30> bitcoin: genjix exper * rb06a148475b0 intersango/profile.php: fully displaying transfers from and to me in profile. http://tinyurl.com/3hbc5nj
2678 2011-05-04 19:15:00 agricocb1 has joined
2679 2011-05-04 19:15:13 agricocb1 has quit (Client Quit)
2680 2011-05-04 19:16:03 kelvie_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2681 2011-05-04 19:16:14 lumos has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2682 2011-05-04 19:16:31 int0x27h has quit (Changing host)
2683 2011-05-04 19:16:31 int0x27h has joined
2684 2011-05-04 19:17:43 kelvie_ has joined
2685 2011-05-04 19:18:13 agricocb has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2686 2011-05-04 19:20:40 jaybny has joined
2687 2011-05-04 19:21:18 jackmcbarn has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2688 2011-05-04 19:21:38 jackmcbarn has joined
2689 2011-05-04 19:23:27 FellowTraveler has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2690 2011-05-04 19:24:09 amiller has joined
2691 2011-05-04 19:25:00 kseistrup has quit (Quit: Coyote finally caught me)
2692 2011-05-04 19:25:03 ezl has joined
2693 2011-05-04 19:26:25 <jaybny> e
2694 2011-05-04 19:26:28 <jaybny> test
2695 2011-05-04 19:26:39 <jaybny> \join #bitcoin-otc
2696 2011-05-04 19:27:32 chmod755 has joined
2697 2011-05-04 19:28:19 LightRider is now known as afk!~LightRide@unaffiliated/lightrider|LightRider
2698 2011-05-04 19:28:52 citiz3n has joined
2699 2011-05-04 19:29:11 <ne0futur> jaybny: /join not backslash
2700 2011-05-04 19:30:11 JFK911 has joined
2701 2011-05-04 19:31:24 <JFK911> ;;bc,calc 12000
2702 2011-05-04 19:31:24 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 12000 Khps, given current difficulty of 109670.13329248 , is 1 year, 12 weeks, 5 days, 7 hours, 27 minutes, and 49 seconds
2703 2011-05-04 19:31:51 AStove has joined
2704 2011-05-04 19:31:58 <UukGoblin> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=7240.0
2705 2011-05-04 19:32:21 Kiba has joined
2706 2011-05-04 19:32:33 cenuij has joined
2707 2011-05-04 19:32:33 cenuij has quit (Changing host)
2708 2011-05-04 19:32:33 cenuij has joined
2709 2011-05-04 19:32:35 fimp has joined
2710 2011-05-04 19:32:44 <topi`> can someone compile me jgarzik's minerd with the sse2_x64 miner for core2?
2711 2011-05-04 19:32:56 Teslah has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2712 2011-05-04 19:33:01 <BlueMatt> UukGoblin: I dont think that was the intention
2713 2011-05-04 19:33:14 <topi`> I could do it myself on my virtual machine, but the wife took over my macbook to watch a dvd.
2714 2011-05-04 19:33:30 <BlueMatt> UukGoblin: I think what is needed more is something along the lines of add more fee if its not being accepted
2715 2011-05-04 19:34:03 genjix has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2716 2011-05-04 19:34:07 <JFK911> we should get some sci fi writers to include bitcoin in the plots of new books
2717 2011-05-04 19:34:29 <JFK911> maybe douglas adams will mention btc in the 90th hhgtg book
2718 2011-05-04 19:35:32 Teslah has joined
2719 2011-05-04 19:35:35 d4de has joined
2720 2011-05-04 19:35:47 <Andrevan> heh
2721 2011-05-04 19:35:53 <Kiba> wat about cultiviating our own crop of science fiction writers?
2722 2011-05-04 19:36:00 <Andrevan> the new hitchhiker book they wrote after he died sucked
2723 2011-05-04 19:36:11 <Andrevan> I would give bitcoin to see it destroyed forever
2724 2011-05-04 19:36:17 Teslah has quit (Client Quit)
2725 2011-05-04 19:36:36 Teslah has joined
2726 2011-05-04 19:39:40 rcorreia_ has quit (Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.)
2727 2011-05-04 19:39:43 <wumpus> great, bitcoin fanfic :P
2728 2011-05-04 19:40:17 larsivi has joined
2729 2011-05-04 19:40:55 rcorreia has joined
2730 2011-05-04 19:41:01 original_speeder has joined
2731 2011-05-04 19:42:13 <Diablo-D3> BWHAHAHA
2732 2011-05-04 19:42:19 <Diablo-D3> oh dude
2733 2011-05-04 19:42:22 <Diablo-D3> I got my diff code working
2734 2011-05-04 19:42:36 <Diablo-D3> ;;bc,diff
2735 2011-05-04 19:42:36 <gribble> 109670.13329248
2736 2011-05-04 19:42:45 <luke-jr> …
2737 2011-05-04 19:42:47 <Diablo-D3> 109670.13329247740156273939022521832388539911138348398958173739849854450743067259077677340278841734334303661712884939482151064808
2738 2011-05-04 19:43:03 Kiba has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2739 2011-05-04 19:43:21 Speeder has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2740 2011-05-04 19:43:22 original_speeder is now known as Speeder
2741 2011-05-04 19:43:37 <Diablo-D3> I do believe I have exceeded the precision I originally needed.
2742 2011-05-04 19:43:37 agricocb has joined
2743 2011-05-04 19:43:38 Kiba has joined
2744 2011-05-04 19:43:46 <JFK911> mine goes to four more places.
2745 2011-05-04 19:45:11 ProgVal has joined
2746 2011-05-04 19:45:20 <ProgVal> Hi
2747 2011-05-04 19:45:28 <ProgVal> I cannot compile bitcoin (from svn) on Debian Sid: http://paste.pocoo.org/show/382987/
2748 2011-05-04 19:46:11 xxx_xxx has joined
2749 2011-05-04 19:46:22 lulzplzkthx has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
2750 2011-05-04 19:47:07 manifold has joined
2751 2011-05-04 19:48:35 <luke-jr> ProgVal: use the package?
2752 2011-05-04 19:49:43 jackmcbarn has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
2753 2011-05-04 19:50:20 Speeder has quit (Quit: Speeder)
2754 2011-05-04 19:50:47 jackmcbarn has joined
2755 2011-05-04 19:50:56 lulzplzkthx has joined
2756 2011-05-04 19:52:22 <xelister> new IRC channel
2757 2011-05-04 19:52:27 <xelister> #btcfn
2758 2011-05-04 19:52:27 manifold has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2759 2011-05-04 19:52:29 <xelister> Bitcoin-over-Freenet and other cryptonets | NEW protocols to transport BitCoin (blockchain, TX, seeds) over FreeNet, i2p, tor, etc | http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=7181.0
2760 2011-05-04 19:52:48 mac-mini has quit (Excess Flood)
2761 2011-05-04 19:53:46 <ProgVal> luke-jr: I get "EXCEPTION: 22DbRunRecoveryException
2762 2011-05-04 19:53:47 <ProgVal> DbEnv::open: DB_RUNRECOVERY: Fatal error, run database recovery
2763 2011-05-04 19:53:48 <ProgVal> bitcoin in AppInit()   "
2764 2011-05-04 19:55:38 mac-mini has joined
2765 2011-05-04 19:55:59 jaybny has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2766 2011-05-04 19:57:11 manifold has joined
2767 2011-05-04 19:58:30 <luke-jr> ProgVal: if your wallet has no money, delete it
2768 2011-05-04 20:00:16 <ProgVal> thanks
2769 2011-05-04 20:00:21 <BlueMatt> anyone else bothered to try jgarzik's wallet crypt?
2770 2011-05-04 20:00:23 <topi`> ProgVal: check the dependencies, I think your openssl-dev library is too old for compiling bitcoin
2771 2011-05-04 20:00:36 <ProgVal> I think it is too recent
2772 2011-05-04 20:00:41 <topi`> BlueMatt: i'm just finding out how his pool code works :)
2773 2011-05-04 20:00:46 eluos has quit (Quit: eluos)
2774 2011-05-04 20:02:22 plato has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2775 2011-05-04 20:02:36 danlucraft has joined
2776 2011-05-04 20:05:04 manifold has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2777 2011-05-04 20:07:03 eao has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2778 2011-05-04 20:07:45 <sipa> grrr i've once had bitcoin segfault when closing it
2779 2011-05-04 20:07:49 <sipa> but i cannot reproduce it
2780 2011-05-04 20:09:13 <sipa> ;;bc,hextarget
2781 2011-05-04 20:09:13 <gribble> 00000000000098FA000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
2782 2011-05-04 20:09:53 Marcel has left (HSD!~Marcel|HS@router2.hsdev.com|)
2783 2011-05-04 20:10:03 <UukGoblin> BlueMatt, yeah, adding more fees if the stuff is not being accepted should definitely stay.
2784 2011-05-04 20:10:03 Marcel has joined
2785 2011-05-04 20:10:40 <UukGoblin> BlueMatt, but I believe that also isn't implemented yet, I recall a satoshi's post that mentioned special-case support for intentional double-spending, and everything in the current client being coded against any double-spending
2786 2011-05-04 20:11:59 <BlueMatt> UukGoblin: I also really agree with TD's comments that txes could eventually be dealt with by miners outside of the network
2787 2011-05-04 20:12:07 <_ape> k just ordered 2ghash worth of hw for $1485 lol
2788 2011-05-04 20:12:10 <_ape> hope it turns a profit :(
2789 2011-05-04 20:12:32 <sipa> it may
2790 2011-05-04 20:12:48 <_ape> it will probably take 2 months
2791 2011-05-04 20:12:53 <_ape> but i hope the value keeps going up with the difficulty
2792 2011-05-04 20:12:55 <sipa> you don't know
2793 2011-05-04 20:12:55 <_ape> thats the only hope lol
2794 2011-05-04 20:13:01 <sipa> ;;bc,calc [bc,eligius]
2795 2011-05-04 20:13:02 <_ape> still a gamble
2796 2011-05-04 20:13:04 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 12584254.1773 Khps, given current difficulty of 109670.13329248 , is 10 hours, 23 minutes, and 50 seconds
2797 2011-05-04 20:13:24 <UukGoblin> BlueMatt, I just commented on that actually, but... wouldn't it be weird? Say you have 10 consortiums. A user sends a transaction to one of the consortiums, using his account with that consortium, and pays a relatively small fee agreed with that consortium.
2798 2011-05-04 20:13:55 <UukGoblin> BlueMatt, but that consortium would only be able to confirm the transaction after ~10 blocks, because there are 9 competitors!
2799 2011-05-04 20:14:07 <UukGoblin> BlueMatt, the user would be far better off just sending his transaction to everyone.
2800 2011-05-04 20:14:14 <diki> lol, stealthcoin
2801 2011-05-04 20:14:20 <_ape> did anyone get around to checking if my gadget works
2802 2011-05-04 20:14:25 <_ape> lol
2803 2011-05-04 20:14:27 <_ape> i have only tested it here :X
2804 2011-05-04 20:14:30 plato has joined
2805 2011-05-04 20:14:33 <diki> so it...starts the bitcoin generator without displaying it?
2806 2011-05-04 20:14:47 <BlueMatt> UukGoblin: well I agree to a slightly modified version.  Normal txes will go through the network as now (ie if I send some btc to my friend for whatever) but for merchants, they will use some kind of payment processor who will deal with mining on their behalf
2807 2011-05-04 20:15:00 <_ape> https://github.com/apeape/Bitcoin-Charts-Gadget
2808 2011-05-04 20:15:02 <_ape> if anyone wants to test it for me <3
2809 2011-05-04 20:15:09 <_ape> the .gadget is in downloads
2810 2011-05-04 20:15:19 <BlueMatt> and users will send their txes over the network as normal but if its to a merchant on this pp, their txes will be processed with  a much higher prio
2811 2011-05-04 20:15:59 <UukGoblin> BlueMatt, oh, fine, if it's only about prioritization...
2812 2011-05-04 20:16:10 <UukGoblin> yeah, I don't see a reason why not
2813 2011-05-04 20:16:20 <Diablo-D3> 109670.13329248
2814 2011-05-04 20:16:22 <UukGoblin> that would be a special type of arrangement though
2815 2011-05-04 20:16:23 <Diablo-D3> what precision is that? a float?
2816 2011-05-04 20:16:30 <diki> i'd have to ask..do you have it compiled?
2817 2011-05-04 20:16:34 <UukGoblin> that wouldn't have to be catered for in the mainstream client
2818 2011-05-04 20:16:48 <UukGoblin> Diablo-D3, I think a float, yes
2819 2011-05-04 20:16:49 sethsethseth_ has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2820 2011-05-04 20:16:58 <UukGoblin> Diablo-D3, I mean, maybe a double?
2821 2011-05-04 20:17:02 <UukGoblin> Diablo-D3, dunno ;-]
2822 2011-05-04 20:17:10 <BlueMatt> UukGoblin: and I see no reason why any kind of such things should be catered for in the main client
2823 2011-05-04 20:17:21 <diki> Im actually amazed that almost every miner has some knowledge of programming
2824 2011-05-04 20:17:30 <_ape> yeah the .gadget is the compiled ver
2825 2011-05-04 20:17:34 <_ape> .gadget is just a renamed zip file
2826 2011-05-04 20:17:36 <BlueMatt> At max, the option to add more fee to a already sent tx
2827 2011-05-04 20:17:46 <_ape> should be in the dl section
2828 2011-05-04 20:18:12 <Diablo-D3> UukGoblin: I dont think its a double.
2829 2011-05-04 20:18:14 <_ape> yeah mining seems to attract a lot of coders/game botters etc
2830 2011-05-04 20:18:18 <sipa> Diablo-D3: what isn't?
2831 2011-05-04 20:18:25 <sipa> 109670.13329248?
2832 2011-05-04 20:18:31 <Diablo-D3> sipa: yes
2833 2011-05-04 20:18:34 marlowe has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2834 2011-05-04 20:18:36 <Diablo-D3> the output of diff from getinfo
2835 2011-05-04 20:18:42 <sipa> i think it is
2836 2011-05-04 20:18:51 <sipa> let me have a look
2837 2011-05-04 20:19:16 <sipa> obj.push_back(Pair("difficulty",    (double)GetDifficulty()));
2838 2011-05-04 20:19:21 <sipa> yup, double :)
2839 2011-05-04 20:19:27 <Diablo-D3> hrm
2840 2011-05-04 20:19:39 <Diablo-D3> but a double only has 16 decimal digits
2841 2011-05-04 20:19:43 <sipa> yes
2842 2011-05-04 20:19:57 wereHamster has quit (Changing host)
2843 2011-05-04 20:19:57 wereHamster has joined
2844 2011-05-04 20:19:59 <Diablo-D3> s/only//
2845 2011-05-04 20:20:05 <Diablo-D3> well then again a float is 7
2846 2011-05-04 20:20:07 <Diablo-D3> so maybe it is a double
2847 2011-05-04 20:20:16 <diki> i dont see a gadget file
2848 2011-05-04 20:20:18 <diki> mostly xml
2849 2011-05-04 20:20:34 <Diablo-D3> sipa: okay, lets say Im keeping track of per share value
2850 2011-05-04 20:20:37 <Diablo-D3> 50/diff
2851 2011-05-04 20:20:55 <Diablo-D3> does that exceed the precision required for accurate satoshis?
2852 2011-05-04 20:21:19 <sipa> it should be
2853 2011-05-04 20:21:37 <sipa> since 21M*10^8 is less than 2^53
2854 2011-05-04 20:22:14 <Diablo-D3> what a long double might look like: 109670.1332924774015627393902252183
2855 2011-05-04 20:22:14 <Diablo-D3> ;)
2856 2011-05-04 20:22:41 <Diablo-D3> 128 glorious bits.
2857 2011-05-04 20:24:33 <UukGoblin> BlueMatt, by 'any kind of such things', what do you mean exactly?
2858 2011-05-04 20:24:55 <UukGoblin> BlueMatt, do you mean some DNS verification, or do you mean accepting a simple non-standard transaction with a fee?
2859 2011-05-04 20:24:58 <diki> anyone who can tell me, in the bitcoin app, what <char> means I mean char is a data type however it is encapsulated with <> and sometimes it's like this as well <string, rpcfn_type>
2860 2011-05-04 20:24:59 <BlueMatt> UukGoblin: fancy things for tx fee determination
2861 2011-05-04 20:25:15 <UukGoblin> BlueMatt, oh, you're talking about that fee policy post, ok
2862 2011-05-04 20:25:50 <BlueMatt> yea, got to go anyway, seeya
2863 2011-05-04 20:25:53 <UukGoblin> well the whole reason for it to be there is for this window: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/File:Lfm_fee.png to provide more accurate data
2864 2011-05-04 20:25:56 <Diablo-D3> sipa: no one is going to notice if a few small digits are wrong, right?
2865 2011-05-04 20:28:23 <sipa> Diablo-D3: (int)(50*100000000/(double) + 0.5) should be correct, i believe
2866 2011-05-04 20:28:27 <diki> suddenly got quiet...
2867 2011-05-04 20:29:01 <Diablo-D3> sipa: whats that prove?
2868 2011-05-04 20:29:42 <sipa> ow
2869 2011-05-04 20:29:48 <luke-jr> ;;bc,gen 480000
2870 2011-05-04 20:29:49 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 480000 Khps, given current difficulty of 109670.13329248 , is 4.40227077499 BTC per day and 0.183427948958 BTC per hour.
2871 2011-05-04 20:29:49 <sipa> (double)difficulty, that should be
2872 2011-05-04 20:30:11 tenach has joined
2873 2011-05-04 20:30:11 tenach has quit (Changing host)
2874 2011-05-04 20:30:11 tenach has joined
2875 2011-05-04 20:31:27 <luke-jr> jlewis: did you stop mining? -.-
2876 2011-05-04 20:32:11 agricocb has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
2877 2011-05-04 20:32:19 genjix has joined
2878 2011-05-04 20:32:20 genjix has quit (Changing host)
2879 2011-05-04 20:32:20 genjix has joined
2880 2011-05-04 20:32:24 <diki> luke you got 116 or 117 now, right?
2881 2011-05-04 20:32:27 <diki> miners i mean
2882 2011-05-04 20:33:15 <luke-jr> don't think so
2883 2011-05-04 20:33:38 <diki> i looked the balance file and i see about 116 people there
2884 2011-05-04 20:34:49 <luke-jr> O.o already
2885 2011-05-04 20:34:55 <genjix> sacarlson: haha http://exchange.surething.biz/
2886 2011-05-04 20:34:56 <genjix> omg im laughing so much
2887 2011-05-04 20:35:15 <luke-jr> about 50 mining this block
2888 2011-05-04 20:35:48 antivigilante has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2889 2011-05-04 20:36:33 <sipa> luke-jr: 50 people?
2890 2011-05-04 20:36:50 <luke-jr> addresses
2891 2011-05-04 20:37:01 <luke-jr> nfc how many are unique people
2892 2011-05-04 20:37:30 <diki> what kind of cpu is your server powered with?
2893 2011-05-04 20:38:36 pirrr has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2894 2011-05-04 20:39:50 <diki> I am with the Phenom II 955 and with the crappy stock cooler
2895 2011-05-04 20:39:53 <CIA-30> bitcoin: genjix exper * rcd2fb9562562 intersango/view_transfer.php: view transfer to view details of a transfer. http://tinyurl.com/4xf3fto
2896 2011-05-04 20:40:00 <CIA-30> bitcoin: genjix exper * rfcbcd0ac7508 intersango/ (lib/transfer.php transfer.php util.php view_transfer.php): can accept transfers now. http://tinyurl.com/3dhuqzf
2897 2011-05-04 20:40:07 <chmod755> genjix: lawl
2898 2011-05-04 20:40:08 <Diablo-D3> 16:35:05,705 INFO  [STDOUT] 6428
2899 2011-05-04 20:40:08 <Diablo-D3> 16:35:09,712 INFO  [STDOUT] 6428
2900 2011-05-04 20:40:10 <Diablo-D3> sipa: ^
2901 2011-05-04 20:40:19 <sipa> what's that?
2902 2011-05-04 20:40:22 <Diablo-D3> long double vs double
2903 2011-05-04 20:40:41 <sipa> in number of microcents?
2904 2011-05-04 20:40:42 <Diablo-D3> 50 * satoshis / diff
2905 2011-05-04 20:40:49 <sipa> hmmm
2906 2011-05-04 20:40:57 <sipa> that's unexpected
2907 2011-05-04 20:41:02 <Diablo-D3> why?
2908 2011-05-04 20:41:04 genjix has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2909 2011-05-04 20:41:18 <Diablo-D3> thats cast to a long, btw
2910 2011-05-04 20:41:28 <sipa> sure
2911 2011-05-04 20:42:00 <sipa> maybe rounding errors in your calculation of difficulty?
2912 2011-05-04 20:42:14 <Diablo-D3> rounding erros? the numbers are exact.
2913 2011-05-04 20:42:24 <Diablo-D3> they're both 6428
2914 2011-05-04 20:42:30 <sipa> difficulty isn't exactly representable
2915 2011-05-04 20:42:44 <Diablo-D3> it is when you have unlimited precision
2916 2011-05-04 20:43:05 <sipa> then where is there a double/long double in the calculation?
2917 2011-05-04 20:43:19 <Diablo-D3> I just call it a long double
2918 2011-05-04 20:43:48 <Diablo-D3> its done BigDecimal then I have to define an exact precision at one point because its repeating digits
2919 2011-05-04 20:43:54 <Diablo-D3> so I gave it 34
2920 2011-05-04 20:43:55 eao has joined
2921 2011-05-04 20:44:03 <sipa> ok, then where is there a double in the calculation?
2922 2011-05-04 20:44:06 <Diablo-D3> whats defined by the IEEE spec for 128bit floats
2923 2011-05-04 20:44:10 <Diablo-D3> long double == 128 bits
2924 2011-05-04 20:44:14 <sipa> yes yes
2925 2011-05-04 20:44:56 * Kiba goes read his javascript book so he will be a better javascript programmer
2926 2011-05-04 20:45:05 <Kiba> and programmer in general!
2927 2011-05-04 20:45:12 <Diablo-D3> 16:40:09,343 INFO  [STDOUT] 6428.666427529183
2928 2011-05-04 20:45:12 <Diablo-D3> 16:40:13,388 INFO  [STDOUT] 6428.666427529031
2929 2011-05-04 20:45:24 <TD__> sipa: did your patches to extract keys ever get in?
2930 2011-05-04 20:45:41 <sipa> TD__: no, i never turned it into a pull request
2931 2011-05-04 20:45:43 <Diablo-D3> the first is BigDecimal.doubleValue, the second is doubles.
2932 2011-05-04 20:46:00 <sipa> Diablo-D3: oh, so it's good :D
2933 2011-05-04 20:46:12 <Diablo-D3> yeah, the precision is... hrm.
2934 2011-05-04 20:46:23 <Diablo-D3> I wonder if I should calculate satoshis in doubles
2935 2011-05-04 20:46:30 <sipa> Diablo-D3: sorry, i thought 6428 was the difference between the calculation in doubles or long doubles
2936 2011-05-04 20:46:35 <Diablo-D3> sipa: no
2937 2011-05-04 20:46:38 <sipa> but it's the result :D
2938 2011-05-04 20:46:38 <Diablo-D3> its the answer
2939 2011-05-04 20:47:09 Joozero has joined
2940 2011-05-04 20:47:26 <sipa> TD__: i want to have the whole dumpwallet/dumpkey/importwallet/importkey as a single working solution
2941 2011-05-04 20:47:49 <Diablo-D3> sipa: http://pastebin.com/5Vp8e2LJ
2942 2011-05-04 20:48:51 <luke-jr> ;;bc,calc [bc,eligius]
2943 2011-05-04 20:48:52 <sipa> TD__: and there were quite some problems with that in bitcoin, so i've been fixing those one by one (spent per txout, spend by copy, auto rescan, conflicts with block chain)
2944 2011-05-04 20:48:53 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 12698786.6385 Khps, given current difficulty of 109670.13329248 , is 10 hours, 18 minutes, and 12 seconds
2945 2011-05-04 20:49:02 genjix has joined
2946 2011-05-04 20:49:08 genjix has quit (Client Quit)
2947 2011-05-04 20:49:53 <Diablo-D3> UukGoblin, cosurgi, x6763, molecular: http://pastebin.com/5Vp8e2LJ
2948 2011-05-04 20:50:34 <Diablo-D3> set 34 in both of those MathContexts to any number, it controls final output precision
2949 2011-05-04 20:50:39 <Diablo-D3> but... thats insane :D
2950 2011-05-04 20:51:30 <sipa> Diablo-D3: in any case, the error will be less than 0.5 microcent (sorry, i don't like calling it satoshi's) if you do it in double precision, so nobody will worry about it
2951 2011-05-04 20:51:48 genjix has joined
2952 2011-05-04 20:52:29 <UukGoblin> Diablo-D3, what? What's that? Part of a miner or something?
2953 2011-05-04 20:52:55 larsivi has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2954 2011-05-04 20:55:58 TD__ has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
2955 2011-05-04 20:56:07 Joozero has quit ()
2956 2011-05-04 20:59:19 TD_ has joined
2957 2011-05-04 21:00:05 larsivi has joined
2958 2011-05-04 21:00:24 <nanotube> sipa: microcent is ok... but i'm leaning toward ucBTC :)
2959 2011-05-04 21:00:25 TD_ has quit (Client Quit)
2960 2011-05-04 21:01:21 <lyspooner> won't the minimum increment just be renamed Bitcoin
2961 2011-05-04 21:02:40 xxx_xxx has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2962 2011-05-04 21:03:03 fimp has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
2963 2011-05-04 21:03:55 <nanotube> lyspooner: no, that'd be confusing
2964 2011-05-04 21:04:16 TD_ has joined
2965 2011-05-04 21:04:19 <nanotube> i would prefer a dropdown in the client for units. BTC, cBTC, mBTC, uBTC, ucBTC
2966 2011-05-04 21:04:28 <lyspooner> ok
2967 2011-05-04 21:04:44 <sipa> i don't think we need names for every 10-fold
2968 2011-05-04 21:10:10 <EvanR> scientific notation
2969 2011-05-04 21:10:40 <EvanR> no whole number part greater than 9 or less than 1 !
2970 2011-05-04 21:10:43 xvilka has left ()
2971 2011-05-04 21:12:10 <luke-jr> nanotube: you forgot TBC and ZBC!
2972 2011-05-04 21:14:22 larsivi has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2973 2011-05-04 21:14:47 agricocb has joined
2974 2011-05-04 21:15:15 larsivi has joined
2975 2011-05-04 21:15:26 <nanotube> luke-jr: hehe well i wouldn't count on those in the official client (just yet) :)
2976 2011-05-04 21:16:55 * sipa proposes UBC - ubercoin, the base-phi representation of an amount in ucBTC
2977 2011-05-04 21:17:04 larsivi has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2978 2011-05-04 21:17:09 antivigilante has joined
2979 2011-05-04 21:17:13 chmod755 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
2980 2011-05-04 21:17:28 <UukGoblin> hey! nanotube! you've got a better DNS proposal written up with theymos and you didn't tell me about it!
2981 2011-05-04 21:17:37 sabalaba has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2982 2011-05-04 21:17:39 * UukGoblin is delighted
2983 2011-05-04 21:18:45 <sipa> the current block subsidy is (exactly) 1011111101011111101111011101010110101011101011.1010111010110111111101101111010101111011111101 UBC, for example
2984 2011-05-04 21:18:47 <nanotube> UukGoblin: i told everyone. and i'm glad you like, and i also think it is pretty good. :)
2985 2011-05-04 21:19:21 <nanotube> are you interested in helping out?
2986 2011-05-04 21:19:41 <UukGoblin> nanotube, I like that sort of questions :-D
2987 2011-05-04 21:19:49 <UukGoblin> nanotube, dunno
2988 2011-05-04 21:19:57 <UukGoblin> nanotube, BUT I've now got something to ask my manager about :-]
2989 2011-05-04 21:20:03 <sipa> nanotube: link?
2990 2011-05-04 21:20:11 <sipa> (or very short summary)
2991 2011-05-04 21:20:16 <UukGoblin> sipa, http://privwiki.dreamhosters.com/wiki/Bitcoin_DNS_System_Proposal
2992 2011-05-04 21:20:16 <nanotube> sipa: haha base phi indeed.
2993 2011-05-04 21:20:26 <nanotube> yes, that one what UukGoblin posted
2994 2011-05-04 21:21:16 <nanotube> wow, only took a few months for someone to notice. :)
2995 2011-05-04 21:21:28 <UukGoblin> so basically, nanotube, you must agree with me that this 'namecoin' by vinced is all wrong?
2996 2011-05-04 21:21:58 <sipa> looks like a huge hack to somehow get arbitrary data in the block chain :S
2997 2011-05-04 21:21:59 <nanotube> well, not "all wrong" but simply has drawbacks, mostly with the fragmentation of mining power.
2998 2011-05-04 21:22:05 <UukGoblin> nanotube, maybe it's got something to do with the fact that it's not on bitcoin.it? :->
2999 2011-05-04 21:22:19 <nanotube> sipa: yes it is pretty much that.
3000 2011-05-04 21:22:44 <nanotube> UukGoblin: i posted it on forums and stuff though :)
3001 2011-05-04 21:23:05 <sipa> i can't say i like that - either get arbitrary data officially supported (which i'm not a proponent, but others may), or put it in a separate chain use cross mining
3002 2011-05-04 21:23:28 <UukGoblin> nanotube, I have to say, I'm not very good with forums
3003 2011-05-04 21:24:00 <UukGoblin> sipa, looks like arbitrary data IS officially supported: http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=7219.msg106409#msg106409
3004 2011-05-04 21:24:57 <sipa> interesting
3005 2011-05-04 21:25:10 <sipa> but that's not what i mean with arbitrary data
3006 2011-05-04 21:25:18 <sipa> i was talking about metadata for transactions
3007 2011-05-04 21:25:31 zyb_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
3008 2011-05-04 21:25:48 <sipa> but this is another way (and maybe easier) to get arbitrary data in the chain indeed
3009 2011-05-04 21:25:56 <luke-jr> nanotube: there is no such thing as official
3010 2011-05-04 21:26:05 jrabbit has quit (Quit: Reconnecting)
3011 2011-05-04 21:26:14 lyspooner has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86.1 [Firefox 3.6.17/20110420140830])
3012 2011-05-04 21:26:22 jrabbit has joined
3013 2011-05-04 21:26:28 <sipa> maybe i should write out my own proposal too :p
3014 2011-05-04 21:26:46 <luke-jr> sipa: I actually threw together a "UBC" thing on the wiki, that could be adopted if people wanted to, but not something I care to suggest
3015 2011-05-04 21:27:06 danlucraft has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
3016 2011-05-04 21:27:08 <luke-jr> sipa: basically, it's a unit that works in all 3 radices with a basis for use
3017 2011-05-04 21:27:13 <xelister> oh USA faggots you :)
3018 2011-05-04 21:27:26 <Kiba> hmm
3019 2011-05-04 21:27:29 <luke-jr> http://luke.dashjr.org/education/tonal/ruler.png
3020 2011-05-04 21:27:31 <xelister> in usa, people are suing eachother for infiging on.... tatoos.
3021 2011-05-04 21:27:42 <nanotube> UukGoblin: ooh new thread there from googlemike... i'll read. though i am a fan of our piggyback-bitdns scheme, i do have /some/ reservations about increasing tx volume due to non-financial tx. it seems mike may have come up with something interesting there to get the best of both worlds, i'll have to read it in detail and think.
3022 2011-05-04 21:28:16 <jlewis> luke-jr: no, i didn't stop mining
3023 2011-05-04 21:28:21 * Kiba yawn
3024 2011-05-04 21:28:33 <TD_> nanotube: it's really satoshi who came up with it
3025 2011-05-04 21:28:38 <Kiba> namecoin is the only viable implementation for a distributed domain name registration system
3026 2011-05-04 21:28:40 <TD_> i just tried to explain it more clearly
3027 2011-05-04 21:28:42 <UukGoblin> nanotube, yes, the private key re-use is interesting... but it still requires a transaction, so I don't see much difference tbh
3028 2011-05-04 21:29:00 <Kiba> everybody else are just talkers
3029 2011-05-04 21:29:24 marlowe has joined
3030 2011-05-04 21:29:42 <nanotube> TD_: yes, and i never understood really what exactly he meant :) other than stuffing the side-chain blockhash into the mainchain coinbase, but that makes it impossible to 'tie' sidechain to bitcoin as far as cost. from a brief skim, i saw you had something proposed to do that.
3031 2011-05-04 21:30:02 <jlewis> luke-jr: my output is pretty variable during the day, so maybe you're seeing the effects of that
3032 2011-05-04 21:30:12 <luke-jr> o
3033 2011-05-04 21:30:23 <sipa> ;;bc,eligius
3034 2011-05-04 21:30:25 <gribble> 12927851.561
3035 2011-05-04 21:31:13 <luke-jr> sipa: think I should up the fee to 1% just to have some breathing room? :P
3036 2011-05-04 21:32:21 <sipa> luke-jr: if you want breathing room (to prevent people from going below 0, i'd suggest just delaying the payouts a bit)
3037 2011-05-04 21:32:28 <sipa> if you want income, i won't object to a fee
3038 2011-05-04 21:32:59 <sipa> though if there is a fee, i'd like some nice site with statistics and graphs as well :D
3039 2011-05-04 21:33:04 <luke-jr> sipa: well, there's already a 1% delay now
3040 2011-05-04 21:33:25 <luke-jr> sipa: hehe, I did suggest people manually donate for that stuff :P
3041 2011-05-04 21:33:38 <luke-jr> rather than forcing everyone to pay for what they might not care about
3042 2011-05-04 21:33:49 <sipa> that's a good point
3043 2011-05-04 21:34:04 <luke-jr> by 'breathing room', I mean so I'm not infinitely in trouble when the pool screws up like that block earlier
3044 2011-05-04 21:34:23 <jlewis> what exactly is causing the difficulties, luke-jr? is it mostly dealing with <1 btc/block miners?
3045 2011-05-04 21:34:23 glassresistor has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
3046 2011-05-04 21:34:35 <jlewis> i read the thread on the forums, but i didn't totally understand
3047 2011-05-04 21:34:45 <luke-jr> jlewis: no, the difficulty earlier was originally that SQLite couldn't keep up
3048 2011-05-04 21:34:58 <jlewis> with the getworks/s?
3049 2011-05-04 21:34:58 <luke-jr> and while I was migrating it to MySQL, the pool found a block and gave it to the pool account instead of the miners
3050 2011-05-04 21:35:05 <jlewis> ah
3051 2011-05-04 21:35:07 <luke-jr> creating a huge debt to the miners
3052 2011-05-04 21:35:32 <luke-jr> and with the (basically) full 50 BTC going to miners, that means it's a continuous 50 BTC debt
3053 2011-05-04 21:35:49 <luke-jr> if only 49.5 BTC went to the miners, it could be paid off 0.5 BTC per block
3054 2011-05-04 21:35:58 <luke-jr> (eg, 100 blocks to payoff)
3055 2011-05-04 21:36:00 xxx_xxx has joined
3056 2011-05-04 21:36:58 <jlewis> and manually redistibuting the 50 btc the pool got is out of the question?
3057 2011-05-04 21:37:03 <luke-jr> so I'm basically left manually offsetting the balances, and sending the debt manually in a normal txn after 100 confirms
3058 2011-05-04 21:37:10 <luke-jr> no, that's the current plan
3059 2011-05-04 21:37:14 <jlewis> got it
3060 2011-05-04 21:37:16 <luke-jr> but it's a hack :P
3061 2011-05-04 21:37:19 <jlewis> yeah
3062 2011-05-04 21:37:33 <jlewis> well hacks are how the world goes round
3063 2011-05-04 21:37:48 <jlewis> (unfortunately)
3064 2011-05-04 21:37:54 <luke-jr> the <1BTC miners are easy to deal with
3065 2011-05-04 21:38:24 <luke-jr> if there are 5 people making 0.2 BTC every block, the first to 1 BTC gets 5 people's worth of the 50 BTC total
3066 2011-05-04 21:38:29 <luke-jr> then they take turns
3067 2011-05-04 21:38:30 <luke-jr> :p
3068 2011-05-04 21:38:59 <Kiba> compiling take 4ever on my netbook!
3069 2011-05-04 21:39:07 <luke-jr> actually, if they all made it to 1 BTC first, it would give it to all of them since they were waiting longer
3070 2011-05-04 21:39:17 <luke-jr> and make one of the bigger miners wait for his 4 BTC till next blociks
3071 2011-05-04 21:39:22 <jlewis> cool
3072 2011-05-04 21:40:27 LightRider is now known as LightRider|afk
3073 2011-05-04 21:41:39 <nanotube> UukGoblin: don't see much difference between what and what?
3074 2011-05-04 21:42:52 * TD_ facepalms at theymos and goblin
3075 2011-05-04 21:43:12 <TD_> not awesome. the DNS stuff is what led to the IsStandard checks being added in the first place.
3076 2011-05-04 21:43:24 <UukGoblin> nanotube, between sending a transaction to yourself and using the private key for something else in some other system (like TD_ proposed) and between just sending out a transaction with a fee and some arbitrary data
3077 2011-05-04 21:43:41 <UukGoblin> nanotube, both types of transactions cost the bitcoin network and blockchain pretty much exactly the same
3078 2011-05-04 21:43:59 <luke-jr> TD_: not true
3079 2011-05-04 21:44:15 <UukGoblin> I believe SPAM was what might have triggered such a check
3080 2011-05-04 21:44:25 FellowTraveler has joined
3081 2011-05-04 21:44:31 <luke-jr> IsStandard was prompted by CPU-busying spam
3082 2011-05-04 21:44:45 <nanotube> UukGoblin: well i have saved the more detailed reading for later. but i think the main idea is to keep extra data, and extra transaction volume, out of the main chain as much as possible. but anyway, i'll read up then see :)
3083 2011-05-04 21:45:10 <nanotube> UukGoblin: but maybe i'll end up leaning toward piggyback bitdns after all... maybe not, dunno yet :)
3084 2011-05-04 21:45:30 <UukGoblin> nanotube, I much prefer your+theymos "piggyback" scheme. It's good for the miners, it's good for the DNSers.
3085 2011-05-04 21:45:40 <UukGoblin> I'm not convinced it's bad for anyone.
3086 2011-05-04 21:45:47 <TD_> did you guys even read what i wrote?
3087 2011-05-04 21:46:05 <UukGoblin> TD_, did you even read what I've been trying to tell you in replies? ;-)
3088 2011-05-04 21:46:10 <nanotube> TD_: i have not yet, as i said, i don't have time saving it for later. but i'm hopeful :)
3089 2011-05-04 21:46:12 <TD_> you're forgetting about all the other people using bitcoin, who just want to trade and not mine or replace DNS
3090 2011-05-04 21:46:26 <Kiba> hmm?
3091 2011-05-04 21:46:27 <UukGoblin> TD_, and they'd be affected... how?
3092 2011-05-04 21:46:30 <TD_> your ideas make bitcoin worse for _everyone else_
3093 2011-05-04 21:46:33 <Kiba> what seems to be the issue here?
3094 2011-05-04 21:46:41 <TD_> that's the whole reason to use alternative chains
3095 2011-05-04 21:46:54 <nanotube> UukGoblin: well, it would raise the tx fees for regular tx. since the dns tx will have higher fees and will take up space in the blocks. so i can see that argument.
3096 2011-05-04 21:46:57 <Kiba> namecoin is a whole alternative chain
3097 2011-05-04 21:47:01 <UukGoblin> TD_, a standard trader who uses mtgox or mybitcoin to store their wallet will not be affected at all
3098 2011-05-04 21:47:02 <TD_> namecoin is fine
3099 2011-05-04 21:47:03 <Kiba> and nanotube have not implemented anything
3100 2011-05-04 21:47:05 <Kiba> so I don't care
3101 2011-05-04 21:47:08 <luke-jr> I think unregulated DNS is a receipe for failure
3102 2011-05-04 21:47:18 <TD_> UukGoblin: standard traders run their own nodes today, mostly
3103 2011-05-04 21:47:24 <TD_> and that will probably continue to be true in future
3104 2011-05-04 21:47:34 <Kiba> regulated DNS is the whole receipe for disaster
3105 2011-05-04 21:47:38 <UukGoblin> nanotube, well I already mentioned a solution to this. Just don't include transactions with fees in them to determine the number of free transactions.
3106 2011-05-04 21:47:44 <sipa> it seems to work kinda well, regulated DNS
3107 2011-05-04 21:47:45 <TD_> merchants probably already do outnumber miners quite a bit, and certainly will in future
3108 2011-05-04 21:48:09 <TD_> sipa: yes, there's no actual reason to try and replace DNS. but i'm not even getting into that argument ....
3109 2011-05-04 21:48:11 <sipa> not that i oppose to experiments with unregulated DNS, on the contrary
3110 2011-05-04 21:48:20 <UukGoblin> TD_, ok, these people who run their nodes today, would be slightly affected by a higher number of traffic, that's all
3111 2011-05-04 21:48:22 <Kiba> TD: no actual reason?
3112 2011-05-04 21:48:26 <Kiba> there's the issue of censorship
3113 2011-05-04 21:48:32 <luke-jr> Kiba: nothing wrong with censorship
3114 2011-05-04 21:48:35 <TD_> what censorship? wikileaks is reachable just fine
3115 2011-05-04 21:48:41 <TD_> it had to move tld, oh dear.
3116 2011-05-04 21:49:06 <UukGoblin> TD_, their clients wouldn't know anything about DNS and not do a single thing about them except for just getting them with downloaded blocks
3117 2011-05-04 21:49:11 mologie has quit (Quit: Nettalk6 - www.ntalk.de)
3118 2011-05-04 21:49:33 <Kiba> namecoin is a more predictable environment for doing business
3119 2011-05-04 21:49:42 <nanotube> UukGoblin: well, the fee schedule right now takes into account various things... and it would probably be fine for quite a while. just saying that "eventually" stuffing more tx into blocks will raise fees for everyone. more volume == higher fees. but anyway, i am of course partial to piggyback bitdns myself :) but will reserve further talk until i read TD_'s post in more detail.
3120 2011-05-04 21:49:46 <Kiba> no annoying government fags to deal with that suddenly decide your domain should be size
3121 2011-05-04 21:49:52 <CIA-30> bitcoin: droidbird exper * r0d782a6d6499 intersango/ (view_util.php www/exchanger.js): add a timer so the pulldown coin selector closes down automatically. http://tinyurl.com/3lp4l3d
3122 2011-05-04 21:49:53 <UukGoblin> TD_, besides, did you see my argument? Your way of signing the outside-of-chain transaction inside the bitcoin chain is pretty much EXACTLY THE SAME in terms of size as putting arbitrary data in a transaction
3123 2011-05-04 21:49:58 tenach has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3124 2011-05-04 21:50:14 <TD_> i think by "arbitrary data" you mean "hash" right? which isn't actually arbitrary
3125 2011-05-04 21:50:33 <UukGoblin> nanotube, you could also check out my proposal at http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=7240.0
3126 2011-05-04 21:50:47 <UukGoblin> TD_, yes, hash, or a small NS record
3127 2011-05-04 21:51:09 <TD_> if all you want to store is a 160 bit hash then you're right, it's the same in terms of size, assuming you use a zero value output.
3128 2011-05-04 21:51:31 <TD_> you need a lot more than 20 bytes of text to implement DNS on top of BitCoin
3129 2011-05-04 21:51:48 <TD_> but anyway, you wouldn't need to pay for timestamping arbitrary events
3130 2011-05-04 21:51:49 <UukGoblin> I think it's 256 bits for a sha256
3131 2011-05-04 21:52:06 <TD_> but outputs are defined in terms of addresses, which use ripemd160
3132 2011-05-04 21:52:10 <TD_> so it's not that much
3133 2011-05-04 21:52:18 <UukGoblin> TD_, in a basic DNS sense, 256 bits for 0.01 is very OK for a DNS
3134 2011-05-04 21:52:20 <nanotube> TD_: well, fwiw, piggyback bitdns is actually quite compact. have you taken a look?
3135 2011-05-04 21:52:32 <UukGoblin> ok 160 bits is a bit small, you'd need 2 outputs 160 bits each
3136 2011-05-04 21:52:40 <TD_> there you go. now it's not the same.
3137 2011-05-04 21:52:50 <TD_> for timestamping in an alternative chain there's no need to pay
3138 2011-05-04 21:52:52 <UukGoblin> but it could be enough
3139 2011-05-04 21:53:08 <UukGoblin> 20 bytes... 4 bytes for an IPv4 address, 16 bytes for a compressed name... should be good
3140 2011-05-04 21:53:11 <TD_> unless you're trying to timestamp tens of thousands of events per second, running the software would be ~free
3141 2011-05-04 21:53:22 <TD_> so just convince a few big bitcoin miners of how important your system is -> done
3142 2011-05-04 21:53:43 <UukGoblin> TD_, but what for? timestamping is already done
3143 2011-05-04 21:53:51 <UukGoblin> no need to change or convince anyone
3144 2011-05-04 21:54:02 <TD_> no it's not done. bitcoin doesn't do that today. you're talking about abusing the protocol in order to do it, with custom software.
3145 2011-05-04 21:54:07 <TD_> that's a very slippery slope as you've seen
3146 2011-05-04 21:54:19 <TD_> it ends with, well, I need just a _bit_ more data so I guess two or three more zero-value outputs will be OK
3147 2011-05-04 21:54:30 <TD_> and before you know it some asshat is uploading his movie collection into the block chain
3148 2011-05-04 21:54:36 <UukGoblin> TD_, well your second-chain solution abuses the protocol in much the same way!
3149 2011-05-04 21:54:47 <TD_> the bitcoin chain is for finance. period.
3150 2011-05-04 21:54:50 <UukGoblin> TD_, (if you want to pay for stuff in bitcoins that is)
3151 2011-05-04 21:54:56 <UukGoblin> TD_, PAYING FOR A DOMAIN IS FINANCE!!!
3152 2011-05-04 21:55:14 <TD_> well, if you're paying for things then that's fine - but then NS records wouldn't be relevant would they?
3153 2011-05-04 21:55:25 <UukGoblin> TD_, if some asshat wants to upload a movie collection to the blockchain and pay 100k BTC for it, fine!
3154 2011-05-04 21:55:30 <TD_> not fine
3155 2011-05-04 21:55:39 <TD_> i'm tired of arguing about this
3156 2011-05-04 21:56:00 <TD_> you didn't understand what i wrote in the rationale section of my post, it seems. it doesn't matter how much somebody pays in fees. uploading arbitrary sized chunks of data isn't ok.
3157 2011-05-04 21:56:01 <UukGoblin> TD_, if NS record is as big as its hash...
3158 2011-05-04 21:56:25 <UukGoblin> TD_, well you can't really stop them can you...
3159 2011-05-04 21:56:44 <UukGoblin> if they're willing to spam and spend their bitcoins, they can and will always be able to
3160 2011-05-04 21:56:46 <lianj> TD_: ack
3161 2011-05-04 21:56:50 <TD_> yes, any additional flexibility the protocol has can be removed, just like IsStandard came in when people abused the current levels of flexibility
3162 2011-05-04 21:56:53 <TD_> that would be a huge shame
3163 2011-05-04 21:56:53 <UukGoblin> TD_, and it's a different discussion
3164 2011-05-04 21:56:57 <TD_> especially as ways to avoid it have been explained repeatedly
3165 2011-05-04 21:57:01 <TD_> but that's what happens with abuse
3166 2011-05-04 21:57:18 <UukGoblin> TD_, and in the end, it should be down to the user
3167 2011-05-04 21:57:33 <UukGoblin> TD_, if someone is concerned about this "pollution", they configure the client to drop these txs
3168 2011-05-04 21:57:43 <UukGoblin> if someone wants bitdns to work, they don't
3169 2011-05-04 21:57:51 <UukGoblin> it's not a decision to be made by a group of developers
3170 2011-05-04 21:57:56 <sipa> the problem is that fees reward the miner, but miners are the gatekeepers for the network
3171 2011-05-04 21:58:09 <TD_> yes, oddly enough that already happened and IsStandard came into existence. good luck transmitting random transactions today.
3172 2011-05-04 21:58:09 <sipa> and their interests are not exactly the same
3173 2011-05-04 21:58:14 <Kiba> they like things that make them money
3174 2011-05-04 21:58:19 <Kiba> not what satisfy the users
3175 2011-05-04 21:58:19 <TD_> the community already decided. not many people accept non standard transactions today.
3176 2011-05-04 21:58:22 <UukGoblin> part of a problem with bitcoin is that forwarding a transaction is not rewarded
3177 2011-05-04 21:58:22 <TD_> only luke i think.
3178 2011-05-04 21:58:45 <UukGoblin> TD_, from what theymos said it's possible
3179 2011-05-04 21:59:31 <UukGoblin> TD_, it's apparently impossible to distinguish between a standard and non-standard here
3180 2011-05-04 21:59:45 <TD_> read the last section of his wiki page
3181 2011-05-04 21:59:51 <TD_> "Thirdly, we could push off the data handling bits to the root dns servers themselves. "
3182 2011-05-04 22:00:01 <TD_> this is basically what satoshi proposed with his plan for alternate chains
3183 2011-05-04 22:00:18 <TD_> bitcoin would deal with the spending of coins and nothing else. registration, renewal, whatever, would be a different system
3184 2011-05-04 22:00:54 <lianj> i tried putting the complete block-chain as json into git, with a commit for each block found. it was a 274M pack file at 120000 blocks already :|
3185 2011-05-04 22:01:28 <UukGoblin> TD_, you're essentially arguing that burning bitcoins is better than giving them to miners. I strongly disagree.
3186 2011-05-04 22:01:49 <UukGoblin> TD_, registration/renewal/and stuff IS a different system
3187 2011-05-04 22:01:53 <TD_> no, i went back and changed my first post to describe how to not burn them
3188 2011-05-04 22:01:55 <UukGoblin> bitcoin WOULD NOT deal with that
3189 2011-05-04 22:02:15 <TD_> you just prove they aren't spent
3190 2011-05-04 22:02:25 <UukGoblin> TD_, and your after your update, the impact on the network is identical with my proposal
3191 2011-05-04 22:02:54 Marcel has left (HSD!~Marcel|HS@router2.hsdev.com|)
3192 2011-05-04 22:03:12 <TD_> what you want keeps changing so i don't know what your proposal is. it's gone from wanting to timestamp events, to stuffing compressed NS records into things that are supposed to be hashes.
3193 2011-05-04 22:03:19 dick has joined
3194 2011-05-04 22:03:36 Kiba has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
3195 2011-05-04 22:04:19 <UukGoblin> TD_, do you seriously think that 2 bitcoin transactions to make a domain are that radically different from 1 transaction to make a domain?
3196 2011-05-04 22:04:27 <UukGoblin> it's just a constant
3197 2011-05-04 22:04:28 <midnightmagic> point of order: the community did NOT decide.
3198 2011-05-04 22:04:52 <UukGoblin> TD_, timestamping events is required by BitDNS
3199 2011-05-04 22:05:03 <UukGoblin> TD_, timestamping events solves BitDNS and a bunch of other problems
3200 2011-05-04 22:05:12 <UukGoblin> and timestamping events is currently provided by bitcoin for a fee
3201 2011-05-04 22:05:25 antivigilante has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
3202 2011-05-04 22:06:06 <UukGoblin> IF the bitcoin network decides that 32 bytes costs 0.01 BTC, and to register a domain you need 128 bytes, then you just pay 0.04 BTC for it. I see no problem with it at all.
3203 2011-05-04 22:06:14 amiller has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
3204 2011-05-04 22:07:03 <TD_> it's late and i'm tired of these arguments. there's something fundamentally bogus about somebody entering a community and coming up with weird hacks to abuse that communities shared resources. block chain is not a fee based file storage system and that should have been made abundantly clear by the design of it, the IsStandard checks and other verifications.
3205 2011-05-04 22:07:43 <TD_> if you want to try and abuse bitcoin for things it wasn't designed for go ahead, but don't expect any help. i already explained how to do this correctly.
3206 2011-05-04 22:07:54 TD_ has left ()
3207 2011-05-04 22:08:26 floyd2 has joined
3208 2011-05-04 22:08:39 <UukGoblin> hey, I already got help from theymos and nanotube
3209 2011-05-04 22:08:51 eao has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3210 2011-05-04 22:09:02 <UukGoblin> I wanna go sleep too btw
3211 2011-05-04 22:09:10 <lianj> he is gone
3212 2011-05-04 22:09:14 <UukGoblin> I know
3213 2011-05-04 22:09:46 <lianj> is timestamping really provided by bitcoin atm?
3214 2011-05-04 22:10:14 <tcatm> with ~10min resolution, yes
3215 2011-05-04 22:10:17 <UukGoblin> it appears it could be, and without changing all the clients
3216 2011-05-04 22:10:34 dick has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
3217 2011-05-04 22:10:34 Marcel has joined
3218 2011-05-04 22:10:44 <luke-jr> would be interesting to try Bitcoin as a timestamp in copyright court
3219 2011-05-04 22:10:56 <UukGoblin> yes
3220 2011-05-04 22:10:59 <lianj> prev_block.time < block.time isnt always true
3221 2011-05-04 22:10:59 <UukGoblin> very
3222 2011-05-04 22:11:05 <genjix> yeah please don't fuck with the blockchain
3223 2011-05-04 22:11:26 <UukGoblin> genjix, yeah, so stop sending bitcoin transactions, you're fucking with the blockchain!
3224 2011-05-04 22:11:44 <luke-jr> only 0.00004096 BTC to get your random crap in the block chain ;)
3225 2011-05-04 22:11:48 <lulzplzkthx> lol
3226 2011-05-04 22:11:54 <lianj> duh
3227 2011-05-04 22:11:55 <UukGoblin> copyright timestamping only needs about a day's worth of resolution so bitcoin is perfect
3228 2011-05-04 22:12:14 <luke-jr> UukGoblin: heck, even week resolution would probably work
3229 2011-05-04 22:13:12 <UukGoblin> ok, looks like I've got some supporters as well as enemies... life.
3230 2011-05-04 22:13:14 <UukGoblin> gonna go to sleep ;-)
3231 2011-05-04 22:14:14 eternal1 has joined
3232 2011-05-04 22:14:26 dvide has joined
3233 2011-05-04 22:17:25 draaglom has joined
3234 2011-05-04 22:18:55 draag has quit (away!~draaglom@78.148.146.62|Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
3235 2011-05-04 22:19:12 NOTAL has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3236 2011-05-04 22:19:14 Jim__ has joined
3237 2011-05-04 22:19:17 ProgVal has left ("WeeChat 0.3.5-rc2")
3238 2011-05-04 22:19:45 sgornick has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
3239 2011-05-04 22:19:51 <CIA-30> bitcoin: droidbird exper * r4122b3e883a5 intersango/view_util.php: render currency code before flag and name to avoid flow errors in chrome. http://tinyurl.com/42u4jcj
3240 2011-05-04 22:23:56 bgeron has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
3241 2011-05-04 22:28:31 BaltarNZ has quit (Quit: Textual IRC Client: http://www.textualapp.com/)
3242 2011-05-04 22:29:47 <CIA-30> bitcoin: PLATO * r13eaed712bc1 supybot-bitcoin-marketmonitor/GPG/gpgsigner.py3.py: Added gpgsigner.py3.py for python 3 users http://tinyurl.com/3v4xndg
3243 2011-05-04 22:29:48 <CIA-30> bitcoin: nanotube * re87743d2636d supybot-bitcoin-marketmonitor/GPG/gpgsigner.py3.py: Merge pull request #10 from therealplato/master http://tinyurl.com/3vcsg6q
3244 2011-05-04 22:35:15 <Diablo-D3> you know what
3245 2011-05-04 22:35:17 <Diablo-D3> I was thinking
3246 2011-05-04 22:35:31 <Diablo-D3> if the value of a share right now is about 6528
3247 2011-05-04 22:35:33 <Diablo-D3> er 6428
3248 2011-05-04 22:35:45 <Diablo-D3> that precision is awfully low
3249 2011-05-04 22:36:21 soaring_eagle has quit (Quit: soaring_eagle)
3250 2011-05-04 22:36:34 <sipa> ;;bc,diff
3251 2011-05-04 22:36:35 <gribble> 109670.13329248
3252 2011-05-04 22:37:01 <sipa> should be around 45591, if i calculate it myself...
3253 2011-05-04 22:37:47 <sipa> and there is a trick you can use when the accuracy really gets to low
3254 2011-05-04 22:38:27 <sipa> if you want to award someone 2.3 units, you generate a random number between 0 and 1, and if it is below 0.3, you give 2, if it is above, you give 3
3255 2011-05-04 22:38:50 <sipa> uhm, the other way around, actually
3256 2011-05-04 22:39:51 <CIA-30> bitcoin: droidbird exper * r42aa22af384b intersango/ (5 files in 2 dirs): move config including to base.php (new file) and changed api files to include config through it. http://tinyurl.com/3rwlvy7
3257 2011-05-04 22:42:11 Marcel has left (HSD!~Marcel|HS@router2.hsdev.com|)
3258 2011-05-04 22:42:41 noagendamarket has joined
3259 2011-05-04 22:43:29 Teslah has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3260 2011-05-04 22:43:44 Teslah has joined
3261 2011-05-04 22:47:13 antivigilante has joined
3262 2011-05-04 22:47:17 <xelister> ArtForz: in RBE, which values you set to what, on r5970, to get higher voltage to core, and allow low memory clock? and possibly also lower mem V?
3263 2011-05-04 22:49:03 draaglom has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
3264 2011-05-04 22:49:40 jnd has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
3265 2011-05-04 22:49:41 <xelister> Diablo-D3: ^ :)
3266 2011-05-04 22:49:50 <CIA-30> bitcoin: droidbird exper * rb99b32f281b9 intersango/withdraw.php: reafactored some common code into its own function. http://tinyurl.com/3l25lsa
3267 2011-05-04 22:50:46 <xelister> btw, when over-voltating,  how to know if it is bad for the card or not?   e.g. I assume with high V the temp can stay fine and yet the card may be destroyed?
3268 2011-05-04 22:50:49 <Diablo-D3> RBE?
3269 2011-05-04 22:51:02 <Diablo-D3> overvolting will shorten part life
3270 2011-05-04 22:51:13 <Diablo-D3> although if you keep it excessively cool it might not matter
3271 2011-05-04 22:51:37 <Diablo-D3> and you'll run out of VRM budget
3272 2011-05-04 22:51:47 <Diablo-D3> the 300mhz memory trick really gets a fair bit more speed out
3273 2011-05-04 22:52:01 <Diablo-D3> drops 10c on some cards
3274 2011-05-04 22:52:08 <Diablo-D3> and gives you more vrm budget
3275 2011-05-04 22:52:08 jnd has joined
3276 2011-05-04 22:52:17 <sipa> from what i understood from artforz is that there are voltages which will not damage your card by itself, but the higher temperature can always be dangerous
3277 2011-05-04 22:52:41 <Diablo-D3> well, voltages increase temps faster than anything else
3278 2011-05-04 22:52:47 <Diablo-D3> minor nudges wont hurt it
3279 2011-05-04 22:52:57 <Diablo-D3> 5970s have a problem that they increase heat A LOT with minor nudges
3280 2011-05-04 22:53:02 <Diablo-D3> since they use low leakage chips
3281 2011-05-04 22:53:18 <Diablo-D3> what makes them work so well undervolted is also what makes them suck overvolted
3282 2011-05-04 22:53:39 <Diablo-D3> 5970s should work fine at standard 5870 voltages if you can keep the fuckers cool
3283 2011-05-04 22:54:13 Stellar has quit (Quit: w00t)
3284 2011-05-04 22:55:07 <da2ce7> Diablo-D3, my cards are stable at 1.037V running at 800MHz
3285 2011-05-04 22:55:25 <da2ce7> way less power is used @ 1.037V
3286 2011-05-04 22:56:04 <Diablo-D3> well thats also another thing, if you dont want to OC you can try undervolting
3287 2011-05-04 22:56:23 Stellar has joined
3288 2011-05-04 22:59:49 <CIA-30> bitcoin: Daniel Folkinshteyn * rcb9bd7d4df12 supybot-bitcoin-marketmonitor/GPG/ (4 files in 2 dirs): GPG: move helper scripts into a subdir http://tinyurl.com/3f7ns2c
3289 2011-05-04 22:59:52 <CIA-30> bitcoin: Daniel Folkinshteyn * rf8b0f1f406d7 supybot-bitcoin-marketmonitor/GPG/helperscripts/gpgsigner.rb: GPG: add ruby signer helper script thanks mattsmith for the contribution http://tinyurl.com/4xewx8w
3290 2011-05-04 22:59:55 <CIA-30> bitcoin: Daniel Folkinshteyn * r18d0ddb24db1 supybot-bitcoin-marketmonitor/GPG/helperscripts/bitcoin-otc-gpgauth-irssi-script.pl: GPG: add irssi helper script for auth thanks deuxpi! http://tinyurl.com/3awj3l2
3291 2011-05-04 22:59:58 <CIA-30> bitcoin: Daniel Folkinshteyn * rfebe7019e0b7 supybot-bitcoin-marketmonitor/GPG/helperscripts/bitcoin-otc-gpgauth-colloquy.applescript: GPG: add colloquy applescript for gpg auth thanks m4v3r! http://tinyurl.com/3jmyrlt
3292 2011-05-04 23:03:32 <xelister> Diablo-D3: will the voltage damage card direcly, or is it safe as long as temps stay low (say <70 C) ?
3293 2011-05-04 23:03:53 <xelister> da2ce7, Diablo-D3, anyone knows which values exactly to input where in that RBE? >_>
3294 2011-05-04 23:03:53 <Diablo-D3> xelister: too much and it fries.
3295 2011-05-04 23:04:13 <xelister> Diablo-D3: so just V can damage parts.. ok, any ide what limit is totally safe? 1.05 is default...
3296 2011-05-04 23:04:20 <xelister> *idea
3297 2011-05-04 23:06:53 skyewm has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
3298 2011-05-04 23:07:18 sgornick has joined
3299 2011-05-04 23:07:24 jnd has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
3300 2011-05-04 23:07:54 <Diablo-D3> xelister: maybe 5% max
3301 2011-05-04 23:08:11 BERRI has joined
3302 2011-05-04 23:09:14 amiller has joined
3303 2011-05-04 23:10:06 Jim__ has left ()
3304 2011-05-04 23:12:15 <dirtyfilthy>  /win 16
3305 2011-05-04 23:13:58 plato has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
3306 2011-05-04 23:14:09 RenaKunisaki has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
3307 2011-05-04 23:14:16 ragga_ has joined
3308 2011-05-04 23:15:28 antivigilante_ has joined
3309 2011-05-04 23:15:41 antivigilante has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
3310 2011-05-04 23:15:41 RenaKunisaki has joined
3311 2011-05-04 23:16:08 ragga has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
3312 2011-05-04 23:17:16 Netsniper has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3313 2011-05-04 23:17:40 eternal1 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
3314 2011-05-04 23:18:18 eternal1 has joined
3315 2011-05-04 23:18:27 AStove has quit ()
3316 2011-05-04 23:19:21 redMBA has joined
3317 2011-05-04 23:19:21 ragga_ has quit ()
3318 2011-05-04 23:20:54 TheKid has joined
3319 2011-05-04 23:20:54 TheKid has quit (Changing host)
3320 2011-05-04 23:20:54 TheKid has joined
3321 2011-05-04 23:20:58 Netsniper has joined
3322 2011-05-04 23:21:33 jnd has joined
3323 2011-05-04 23:22:12 eternal1 has quit (Client Quit)
3324 2011-05-04 23:27:24 bitcoiner has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86.1 [Firefox 3.6.17/20110420140830])
3325 2011-05-04 23:30:26 gjs278 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3326 2011-05-04 23:30:31 gjs278 has joined
3327 2011-05-04 23:35:13 bitcoiner has joined
3328 2011-05-04 23:39:49 devon_hillard has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3329 2011-05-04 23:39:49 <CIA-30> bitcoin: genjix exper * r9e019b59e482 intersango/view_transfer.php: ability to reject + cancel transfers. http://tinyurl.com/3ju9gjq
3330 2011-05-04 23:42:10 DukeOfURL has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
3331 2011-05-04 23:42:30 llama has joined
3332 2011-05-04 23:43:34 Cusipzzz has joined
3333 2011-05-04 23:46:01 steve____ has joined
3334 2011-05-04 23:48:24 sc8nt4u has joined
3335 2011-05-04 23:48:49 sc8nt4u has quit (Client Quit)
3336 2011-05-04 23:48:55 sc8nt4u has joined
3337 2011-05-04 23:49:42 llama has quit (Quit: llama)
3338 2011-05-04 23:49:53 <CIA-30> bitcoin: various exper * rca54e6..8d6864 intersango/ (place_order.php lib/transfer.php util.php view_transfer.php): (6 commits) http://tinyurl.com/3dynz2e
3339 2011-05-04 23:52:48 brooss has joined
3340 2011-05-04 23:55:22 vorlov has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3341 2011-05-04 23:55:41 vorlov has joined
3342 2011-05-04 23:56:40 <lulzplzkthx> ;;bc,mtgox
3343 2011-05-04 23:56:41 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":3.58,"low":3.25,"vol":17436,"buy":3.4015,"sell":3.4061,"last":3.4061}}