1 2011-05-27 00:04:14 GarrettB has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2 2011-05-27 00:05:02 DontMindMe has quit (Quit: Nettalk6 - www.ntalk.de)
3 2011-05-27 00:05:08 random_cat has quit (Quit: WeeChat 0.3.2)
4 2011-05-27 00:07:50 necrodearia has joined
5 2011-05-27 00:08:49 theorbtwo has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
6 2011-05-27 00:09:12 aphelion27 has joined
7 2011-05-27 00:10:06 theorbtwo has joined
8 2011-05-27 00:10:13 <lianj> diki: thats the point of bcrypt
9 2011-05-27 00:11:35 sacarlson has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
10 2011-05-27 00:12:40 JRW has joined
11 2011-05-27 00:13:00 JRW has quit (Client Quit)
12 2011-05-27 00:13:21 JRW has joined
13 2011-05-27 00:14:06 <hybriz_> lol i have this bitcoind that keeps showing difficulty 1.0000 :(
14 2011-05-27 00:16:04 <Xenland> diki: How's that pool going?
15 2011-05-27 00:17:16 aphelion27 has quit (Quit: Page closed)
16 2011-05-27 00:18:29 toffoo has quit ()
17 2011-05-27 00:19:11 eternal1 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
18 2011-05-27 00:19:35 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: ping
19 2011-05-27 00:19:38 JRW has quit (Quit: Click here : http://bc.x14.eu/s/105 To tip me with BitCoins)
20 2011-05-27 00:21:52 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: pong
21 2011-05-27 00:22:44 BurtyB has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
22 2011-05-27 00:22:55 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: ok, well I did a basic handling of dpi for win32 so it wont fail so spectacularly
23 2011-05-27 00:23:06 <BlueMatt> I dont care to put any effort into making it perfect, but it works fine enough
24 2011-05-27 00:23:23 <BlueMatt> after that, I think its time for another rc
25 2011-05-27 00:23:28 <Xenland> login for open source pushpool front end finished :)
26 2011-05-27 00:23:53 <BlueMatt> sipa: ping
27 2011-05-27 00:24:47 traviscj has joined
28 2011-05-27 00:24:48 LobsterMan has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
29 2011-05-27 00:25:42 toffoo has joined
30 2011-05-27 00:26:17 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: can you fix the commit msg?
31 2011-05-27 00:26:33 sacarlson has joined
32 2011-05-27 00:26:42 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: your one-line commit description is "Not ideal, icons for send and address book don't show, just the"
33 2011-05-27 00:27:00 <BlueMatt> huh? oops sorry 1 sec
34 2011-05-27 00:27:13 <jgarzik> Xenland: cool
35 2011-05-27 00:27:40 <BlueMatt> oh lol, I started a line with a # to indicate the bug number...that didnt work so well...
36 2011-05-27 00:27:48 <Xenland> Nobody be brute forcing these logins lol!
37 2011-05-27 00:27:59 <Xenland> I heard that happens alot with deepbit, or atleast they display that allot on there
38 2011-05-27 00:28:15 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: heh
39 2011-05-27 00:28:40 ar4s has quit (Quit: ar4s)
40 2011-05-27 00:29:11 <BlueMatt> ok that should work now
41 2011-05-27 00:30:41 <gjs278> my system tray icon is always blank for me on the client
42 2011-05-27 00:30:52 <gjs278> it also doesn't do anything for me because I click it and theres no options
43 2011-05-27 00:31:11 Xenland has quit (Quit: Leaving)
44 2011-05-27 00:31:33 <SerajewelKS> where's gavin been?
45 2011-05-27 00:31:53 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Matt Corallo master * rbd39b48 / src/ui.cpp :
46 2011-05-27 00:31:53 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Handle high DPI a bit more gracefully on Win32. #243
47 2011-05-27 00:31:53 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Not ideal, icons for send and address book don't show, just the
48 2011-05-27 00:32:03 <jeremid> in his mansion donig coke w/hookers
49 2011-05-27 00:32:05 <jeremid> probably
50 2011-05-27 00:32:14 <SerajewelKS> ah, right
51 2011-05-27 00:32:24 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: or do you want to wait for the difficulty fix?
52 2011-05-27 00:32:30 <noagendamarket> gavin is probably pulling back from being seen as the technical lead a bit
53 2011-05-27 00:32:49 <noagendamarket> it makes you a target
54 2011-05-27 00:32:55 <SerajewelKS> well he needs to approve my pull request! :(
55 2011-05-27 00:32:59 <BlueMatt> oh god...how the hell did the bitcoin miner bust due to high power usage get on /. ???
56 2011-05-27 00:32:59 <noagendamarket> I think thats a good thing
57 2011-05-27 00:33:13 <noagendamarket> BlueMatt its memeworthy
58 2011-05-27 00:33:15 eternal1 has joined
59 2011-05-27 00:33:18 <phantomcircuit> BlueMatt, its lulzy
60 2011-05-27 00:33:22 <SerajewelKS> BlueMatt: because FUD sells
61 2011-05-27 00:33:32 <noagendamarket> Imagine if they had shot the guys dogs in the process
62 2011-05-27 00:33:34 <BlueMatt> wtf???
63 2011-05-27 00:33:43 <BlueMatt> diablo commented on the original story that it was fake
64 2011-05-27 00:33:55 <phantomcircuit> considering the people most likely to be mining btc
65 2011-05-27 00:34:03 <noagendamarket> yep
66 2011-05-27 00:34:03 <phantomcircuit> id be more worried about the sheriffs getting shot
67 2011-05-27 00:34:14 <Diablo-D3> and then I commented on the slashdot it was fake
68 2011-05-27 00:34:17 <Diablo-D3> and then when CNN covers it
69 2011-05-27 00:34:21 <Diablo-D3> I'll do it again
70 2011-05-27 00:34:27 LobsterMan has joined
71 2011-05-27 00:34:59 <phantomcircuit> well and either way there needs to be suspicion enough to get the warrant for the records anyways
72 2011-05-27 00:35:00 <BlueMatt> I knew mainstream media was fucking stupid as hell, but the fact that so many sites have picked this up and ran with it...god kill me now
73 2011-05-27 00:35:08 <phantomcircuit> so simply mining isn't going to bring the cops
74 2011-05-27 00:35:11 <jgarzik> SerajewelKS: as noted on forum, Gavin's vacationing in France
75 2011-05-27 00:35:18 sacarlson has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
76 2011-05-27 00:35:25 <SerajewelKS> jgarzik: ah, i don't read all areas of the forums
77 2011-05-27 00:35:28 <noagendamarket> whatever came of the cias meeting ?
78 2011-05-27 00:36:07 <BlueMatt> noagendamarket: if something had come of it, not even gavin would know
79 2011-05-27 00:36:08 <jgarzik> SerajewelKS: sipa, tcatm, BlueMatt or I can approve pull requests, but right now, we're frozen in 0.3.22 release candidate mode
80 2011-05-27 00:36:25 <jgarzik> SerajewelKS: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=8894.0
81 2011-05-27 00:36:27 <SerajewelKS> jgarzik: ah gotcha
82 2011-05-27 00:36:52 kreal- has quit (Read error: No route to host)
83 2011-05-27 00:37:53 GarrettB has joined
84 2011-05-27 00:37:57 GarrettB has quit (Changing host)
85 2011-05-27 00:37:57 GarrettB has joined
86 2011-05-27 00:38:08 <noagendamarket> when is the interface on the bitcoin client going to get a facelift ?
87 2011-05-27 00:38:41 <noagendamarket> so it fits the new website at bitcoin.org
88 2011-05-27 00:38:49 Ramen has left ()
89 2011-05-27 00:39:48 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: -rc5 tagged in git, and source tarball uploaded to https://sourceforge.net/projects/bitcoin/files/Bitcoin/bitcoin-0.3.22/test/
90 2011-05-27 00:40:36 <jgarzik> noagendamarket: patches accepted :)
91 2011-05-27 00:40:47 <noagendamarket> jgarzik :)-
92 2011-05-27 00:40:58 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: when does gavin get back, do you know?
93 2011-05-27 00:41:01 <jgarzik> noagendamarket: and no, gavin's not backing away from being technical lead, he's on vacation ;)
94 2011-05-27 00:41:07 <noagendamarket> have you seen witcoin ? lol
95 2011-05-27 00:41:11 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: see forum thread :)
96 2011-05-27 00:41:12 draaglom has joined
97 2011-05-27 00:41:16 <jgarzik> noagendamarket: I try not to :)
98 2011-05-27 00:41:21 <noagendamarket> haha
99 2011-05-27 00:41:22 <luke-jr> lol
100 2011-05-27 00:41:33 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: ah, sorry
101 2011-05-27 00:41:46 <noagendamarket> I should really have a design competition
102 2011-05-27 00:42:18 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: wait, which tread?
103 2011-05-27 00:42:29 <noagendamarket> http://www.empireavenue.com/bitcoin :)-
104 2011-05-27 00:42:43 <luke-jr> jgarzik: would it be possible to stick to a single version? :p
105 2011-05-27 00:43:13 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: ?
106 2011-05-27 00:43:27 <luke-jr> ie 0.3.22rc5 (source tgz) or 0.3.22-rc5 (source dir)
107 2011-05-27 00:43:57 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
108 2011-05-27 00:45:21 darbsllim has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
109 2011-05-27 00:45:24 traviscj has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
110 2011-05-27 00:47:54 BitterTea has joined
111 2011-05-27 00:47:55 DrewSJ has quit ()
112 2011-05-27 00:48:06 sacarlson has joined
113 2011-05-27 00:48:34 Sargun_Screen has left ()
114 2011-05-27 00:49:16 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: building, now with more win32 ssl and less win32 libeay32.dll
115 2011-05-27 00:49:56 johnnympereira5 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
116 2011-05-27 00:50:31 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: cool
117 2011-05-27 00:51:50 cat_ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
118 2011-05-27 00:51:58 mologie has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
119 2011-05-27 00:53:34 <BlueMatt> did sipa go to bed?
120 2011-05-27 00:54:51 Netsniper has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
121 2011-05-27 00:55:30 io_error_ is now known as io_error
122 2011-05-27 00:55:45 <lfm> bluematt looks like sipa put in my patch for difficulty inacurate calculation so you can ignore my email.
123 2011-05-27 00:55:50 io_error has quit (Changing host)
124 2011-05-27 00:55:50 io_error has joined
125 2011-05-27 00:57:45 <BlueMatt> lfm: yea, I put mine in earlier and the commit has your name on it on mine, but not on his
126 2011-05-27 00:57:51 <BlueMatt> though I think he tweaked it
127 2011-05-27 00:58:09 <BlueMatt> so I was wondering if he had tweaked it enough to warrant a name change, hence the desire to contact him
128 2011-05-27 00:58:13 <lfm> oh, ok, so long as its fixed. thanks for your trouble
129 2011-05-27 00:58:13 diki has quit ()
130 2011-05-27 00:58:33 <BlueMatt> important to give credit where credit is due
131 2011-05-27 01:00:23 <lfm> was just minor tweaks like re-adding my handle or something afaik.
132 2011-05-27 01:01:02 <BlueMatt> meh, well I like to have the right autors for git blame as well ;)
133 2011-05-27 01:01:18 <BlueMatt> though frankly I do it mostly because some people get mad when their name gets removed
134 2011-05-27 01:01:34 <lfm> ok, I think Ill go on a holliday or something now then
135 2011-05-27 01:01:39 prax has joined
136 2011-05-27 01:01:39 prax has quit (Changing host)
137 2011-05-27 01:01:39 prax has joined
138 2011-05-27 01:02:31 <lfm> ya technical copyright stuff is good to get right I spoze even if its too minor for me to care
139 2011-05-27 01:02:35 redengin has joined
140 2011-05-27 01:03:05 <BlueMatt> meh, if you dont care, neither do I
141 2011-05-27 01:04:30 mologie has joined
142 2011-05-27 01:04:33 <BlueMatt> ok, Im off to bed, 0.3.22 rc5 should be up by morning, but there are already 2 pull requests for rc6...god it just keeps going. We need some holy alpaca pee soon to stop this madness
143 2011-05-27 01:04:46 <lfm> k bye
144 2011-05-27 01:05:39 brunner has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
145 2011-05-27 01:05:42 kika_ has joined
146 2011-05-27 01:05:49 <kika_> is bitcoin legal?
147 2011-05-27 01:06:07 <noagendamarket> :x
148 2011-05-27 01:06:11 <lfm> We think it is but your local laws may be special
149 2011-05-27 01:06:28 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr split * r15d5390fd67a gentoo/net-p2p/ (4 files in 2 dirs): net-p2p/bitcoind and net-p2p/wxbitcoin: someone deleted the 0.3.21rc tgz, so it must go http://tinyurl.com/3jazzg2
150 2011-05-27 01:06:29 theymos has joined
151 2011-05-27 01:06:59 <kika_> lfm: why my local laws special?
152 2011-05-27 01:07:13 hereforfun has joined
153 2011-05-27 01:07:17 <lfm> kika_: laws are different everywhere
154 2011-05-27 01:07:22 <theymos> http://culubas.blogspot.com/2011/05/timejacking-bitcoin_802.html <- This attack is quite difficult, but I think the "max minutes adjustable by peers" should be reduced from 70 minutes to 40 minutes for safety.
155 2011-05-27 01:07:48 <noagendamarket> yes
156 2011-05-27 01:07:58 <noagendamarket> I was wondering about that
157 2011-05-27 01:08:21 <XX01XX> That doesn't really fix it.
158 2011-05-27 01:08:28 <XX01XX> It just shortens the time it's effective.
159 2011-05-27 01:09:08 <theymos> Why?
160 2011-05-27 01:10:17 <noagendamarket> because of the way the client gets its timestamps ?
161 2011-05-27 01:11:10 Netsniper has joined
162 2011-05-27 01:11:38 <noagendamarket> if a node has a different timestamp than the network
163 2011-05-27 01:11:53 eternal1 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
164 2011-05-27 01:11:53 z310 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
165 2011-05-27 01:12:35 WakiMiko_ has joined
166 2011-05-27 01:12:43 <theymos> The most an attacker could do is get all miners do have a timestamp+40, and you to have a timestamp-40. That doesn't add up to the 2-hour "future block" limit.
167 2011-05-27 01:13:15 <ArtForzZz> I think he's talking about a different variant
168 2011-05-27 01:13:43 prax_ has joined
169 2011-05-27 01:14:19 <ArtForzZz> but yeha, I dont see how it's still possible then
170 2011-05-27 01:14:57 <theymos> Do you think it's possible now with 70, assuming an attacker can trick like 75% of mining power to have really late timestamps?
171 2011-05-27 01:15:07 <ArtForzZz> yep
172 2011-05-27 01:15:14 WakiMiko has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
173 2011-05-27 01:15:33 <ArtForzZz> because you can at least cause +-70 offset in the network, which is > the 120 min "block in future" limit
174 2011-05-27 01:15:45 <theymos> Bitcoin should just have an option to ignore net time. I know my clock is correct.
175 2011-05-27 01:16:07 prax has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
176 2011-05-27 01:16:16 sethsethseth___ has joined
177 2011-05-27 01:16:35 <ArtForzZz> anyways, limiting it to +-40 would fix the problem
178 2011-05-27 01:16:55 sethsethseth__ has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
179 2011-05-27 01:17:22 <XX01XX> theymos... so what sort of malicious options does that open by people adjusting their clock incorrectly?
180 2011-05-27 01:17:49 <ArtForzZz> XX01XX: mainly not being able to not properly participate in the network
181 2011-05-27 01:17:53 <ArtForzZz> - not
182 2011-05-27 01:18:05 <theymos> Bitcoin could still warn you about having a seemingly-wrong clock, as it does now.
183 2011-05-27 01:18:14 <ArtForzZz> the basic attack is "get a few nodes to -70, everyone else to +70, now those nodes will ignore blocks everyone else mines thanks to the +120 rule"
184 2011-05-27 01:18:53 vsrinivas has joined
185 2011-05-27 01:19:00 <ArtForzZz> change the range to +-40 and it doesn't work anymore
186 2011-05-27 01:21:23 jeremid has left ()
187 2011-05-27 01:22:13 <luke-jr> jgarzik: wx Bitcoin 0.3.22rc5 doesn't build fyi
188 2011-05-27 01:22:21 <luke-jr> ui.cpp:2364: error: âbitcoin_xpmâ was not declared in this scope
189 2011-05-27 01:23:58 skeledrew has quit (Quit: Instantbird 0.3a3pre)
190 2011-05-27 01:25:20 ar4s has joined
191 2011-05-27 01:25:20 Xenland has joined
192 2011-05-27 01:25:22 skeledrew has joined
193 2011-05-27 01:27:05 traviscj has joined
194 2011-05-27 01:28:22 phlippcoin has quit (Quit: Leaving...)
195 2011-05-27 01:29:06 darbsllim has joined
196 2011-05-27 01:29:09 <falafell> has anyone used this 'bitcoin mobile' app?
197 2011-05-27 01:29:46 Kiba has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
198 2011-05-27 01:30:38 wolfspraul has joined
199 2011-05-27 01:30:54 davex_r has joined
200 2011-05-27 01:31:38 slush1 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
201 2011-05-27 01:35:25 jivvz has quit (Quit: Lämnar)
202 2011-05-27 01:36:52 <ar4s> is it for iphone or android?
203 2011-05-27 01:39:39 <devrandom> sipa - there?
204 2011-05-27 01:40:29 <devrandom> never mind... blockexplorer is theymos
205 2011-05-27 01:40:51 <theymos> ?
206 2011-05-27 01:41:06 <devrandom> I think http://blockexplorer.com/q/nethash has a bug
207 2011-05-27 01:41:34 <devrandom> each row has 144 samples
208 2011-05-27 01:41:40 <devrandom> which evenly divides 2016
209 2011-05-27 01:42:03 <devrandom> which means that avgTargetSinceLast should be equal to target
210 2011-05-27 01:42:23 phlippcoin has joined
211 2011-05-27 01:42:30 <devrandom> and I think that means that netHashPerSecond is off on an interval that ends with a diff change
212 2011-05-27 01:43:11 backwardation25 has joined
213 2011-05-27 01:43:29 <theymos> I seem to remember trying to fix this before and coming up with some reason by the current system is better. It definitely is off, as you can see at http://blockexplorer.com/q/nethash/2016 .
214 2011-05-27 01:43:48 <theymos> I will reinvestigating it on my to-do list, though.
215 2011-05-27 01:44:08 Blitzboom_ has joined
216 2011-05-27 01:45:25 <devrandom> oh, on a diff change, the ave difficulty for the interval should be the previous diff
217 2011-05-27 01:45:43 <devrandom> since the diff changed just after the last block in the interval
218 2011-05-27 01:46:17 Blitzboom has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
219 2011-05-27 01:46:46 <devrandom> and the nethashpersec is just the previous diff divided by average block spacing
220 2011-05-27 01:48:48 kika_ has quit (Quit: Page closed)
221 2011-05-27 01:49:27 Blitzboom_ is now known as Blitzboom
222 2011-05-27 01:49:46 Blitzboom has quit (Changing host)
223 2011-05-27 01:49:46 Blitzboom has joined
224 2011-05-27 01:49:59 <Xenland> I heard you must use float or varchar in order to properly use bitcoins balance in mysql any confirmations?
225 2011-05-27 01:50:43 ezl has joined
226 2011-05-27 01:51:07 <bd_> Xenland: the bitcoin balance is properly an integer. However, 1 BTC = somebignumber of the underlying units
227 2011-05-27 01:51:18 <devrandom> 1e8
228 2011-05-27 01:51:35 <bd_> So you can store it in an integer as long as you perform proper scaling conversions
229 2011-05-27 01:51:39 <bd_> (in theory)
230 2011-05-27 01:51:51 <bd_> Floats are generally not a good idea for any sort of currency
231 2011-05-27 01:52:11 <Xenland> lol in theory. Is rounding an issue when useing mysql and php that you know of?
232 2011-05-27 01:52:43 <bd_> rounding is always a problem with floats
233 2011-05-27 01:52:47 [1]currentB has joined
234 2011-05-27 01:53:21 <ArtForzZz> yes, see mtgox ;)
235 2011-05-27 01:54:19 <Xenland> ;P
236 2011-05-27 01:54:47 glicth-mod has joined
237 2011-05-27 01:55:06 currentB has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
238 2011-05-27 01:55:06 [1]currentB is now known as currentB
239 2011-05-27 01:55:21 <devrandom> Xenland - multiply by 1e8
240 2011-05-27 01:55:41 <Xenland> E
241 2011-05-27 01:56:49 <falafell> ar4s, for android
242 2011-05-27 01:57:05 fabianhjr has joined
243 2011-05-27 01:57:05 <Neskia> wtf... some one is making a run on virwox exchange... driving the price of BTC through the roof..
244 2011-05-27 01:57:20 <fabianhjr> Ok, already posted it on the forums. Somebody wants to sell me a Gift code for Minecraft?
245 2011-05-27 01:57:23 <Xenland> virwox huh.... Damn nazi's
246 2011-05-27 01:57:31 <ar4s> falafell: ahh, I'm an iPhone user (for now) otherwise I'd try it and report back
247 2011-05-27 01:57:41 <fabianhjr> 2.5 BTC at current exchange. Feel free to ask for a bit more.
248 2011-05-27 01:57:45 <Neskia> er... what does nazi have to do with virwox? O.o
249 2011-05-27 01:57:54 <falafell> ar4s, i have the bad feeling i got scammed xD
250 2011-05-27 01:58:06 <Xenland> Exactly, what they want you to think and tell everyone
251 2011-05-27 01:58:28 <ar4s> you mean, that sinking feeling that you get when things just don't seem right.
252 2011-05-27 01:58:32 <ar4s> :(:(
253 2011-05-27 01:58:43 <Neskia> i'll put it this way... some one managed to sell atleast 5 btc at 38 USD a piece through virwox o.o
254 2011-05-27 01:58:51 <Neskia> cause some one is fucking with the system
255 2011-05-27 01:58:55 <ar4s> I assume android has a rating system for the market place?
256 2011-05-27 01:58:57 <Neskia> i think the admins are asleep
257 2011-05-27 01:59:03 <Xenland> You know what would be cool if there was a company or person that ran a website that you requested you wanted to purchase an item online for BTC and that company/person purchases it and ships it to that person
258 2011-05-27 01:59:12 <fabianhjr> nanotube: are you there?
259 2011-05-27 01:59:26 <falafell> ar4s, the app is not on market, just on their site
260 2011-05-27 01:59:59 <Xenland> any way to get sharelogs to get the id associated with the username and use the id instead
261 2011-05-27 02:00:17 <fabianhjr> jgarzik: are you there?
262 2011-05-27 02:00:38 <Xenland> nope don't see'em on the list
263 2011-05-27 02:00:42 <fabianhjr> theymos: you there?
264 2011-05-27 02:00:54 <theymos> Yes.
265 2011-05-27 02:01:18 <fabianhjr> theymos: can you buy me a minecraft giftcode for BTC? ;)
266 2011-05-27 02:01:30 <fabianhjr> I will pay 2.5 or a bit higher for the hassle.
267 2011-05-27 02:01:39 <jgarzik> da
268 2011-05-27 02:01:40 <fabianhjr> It is currently 15 EUR, 21 USD.
269 2011-05-27 02:02:27 <fabianhjr> jgarzik: smae offer, just ask yiour price.
270 2011-05-27 02:03:00 <theymos> I'll do it for 3.
271 2011-05-27 02:03:14 <Xenland> hey jgarzik: any way to make sharelogs use the `id` thats associated with the `username`?
272 2011-05-27 02:03:44 <fabianhjr> jgarzik: want to offer lower?
273 2011-05-27 02:04:19 <fabianhjr> (It is open to anybody else with OTC rating or eBay rating)
274 2011-05-27 02:04:34 <jgarzik> fabianhjr: might want to ask on #bitcoin-otc
275 2011-05-27 02:04:46 <luke-jr> Xenland: LOL, now you understand XD
276 2011-05-27 02:04:48 <fabianhjr> No, it is just quickly, I want it _now_ :P
277 2011-05-27 02:05:20 <Xenland> luke-jr: lol hey pushpool was giving meh problem mate
278 2011-05-27 02:05:29 <fabianhjr> theymos: PM me an address if no one gets it in 10 secs.
279 2011-05-27 02:06:11 discHead has joined
280 2011-05-27 02:06:28 discHead has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
281 2011-05-27 02:06:50 discHead has joined
282 2011-05-27 02:06:50 discHead has quit (Changing host)
283 2011-05-27 02:06:50 discHead has joined
284 2011-05-27 02:08:36 <fabianhjr> Ok, it went for theymos for 3 BTC. Enjoy your earnings. xD
285 2011-05-27 02:09:57 broker has quit (Quit: zisch)
286 2011-05-27 02:11:04 davex_r has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
287 2011-05-27 02:11:11 dfc_ has joined
288 2011-05-27 02:11:45 dfc_ has quit (Client Quit)
289 2011-05-27 02:12:03 jeremid has joined
290 2011-05-27 02:12:07 <jeremid> just got home
291 2011-05-27 02:12:11 hereforfun has quit (Quit: Leaving)
292 2011-05-27 02:12:15 <io_error> Damnit, I wasn't looking for trade offers in here :P
293 2011-05-27 02:12:39 dfc_ has joined
294 2011-05-27 02:14:13 <fabianhjr> Night
295 2011-05-27 02:14:16 fabianhjr has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86.1 [Firefox 4.0.1/20110413222027])
296 2011-05-27 02:14:51 jargon has joined
297 2011-05-27 02:16:19 ezl has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
298 2011-05-27 02:17:10 DukeOfURL has joined
299 2011-05-27 02:18:23 ar4s has left ()
300 2011-05-27 02:20:24 davex_r has joined
301 2011-05-27 02:21:26 [7] has quit (Disconnected by services)
302 2011-05-27 02:21:28 TheSeven has joined
303 2011-05-27 02:23:28 mos has quit (work!~mos@217.22.80.82|Read error: Connection reset by peer)
304 2011-05-27 02:25:44 citiz3n has joined
305 2011-05-27 02:26:19 <theymos> I think that possibly BBE testnet's reorg handling is finally fixed now. I simplified the code so I can hopefully rely on it without testing (now it does a full rescan whenever it sees a long reorg -- previously it tried to incrementally go back to find the fork).
306 2011-05-27 02:27:14 mtrlt has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
307 2011-05-27 02:29:56 discHead has quit (Quit: discHead)
308 2011-05-27 02:31:34 <karnac> i keep getting this error: platforms = cl.get_platforms()
309 2011-05-27 02:31:41 <karnac> pyopencl.LogicError: clGetPlatformIDs failed: invalid/unknown error code
310 2011-05-27 02:31:51 <luke-jr> theymos: sounds more like a workaround than a fix
311 2011-05-27 02:31:54 <luke-jr> imo
312 2011-05-27 02:32:07 <karnac> does anyone know how to get the nvidia drivers disabled in ubuntu
313 2011-05-27 02:32:16 <luke-jr> install Debian?
314 2011-05-27 02:32:22 <luke-jr> this isn't #bitcoin-mining :P
315 2011-05-27 02:33:23 EPiSKiNG has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
316 2011-05-27 02:33:53 <theymos> luke-jr: I don't really care about DB update performance, and it's better than spending hours trying to get a real solution. This should hopefully work fine.
317 2011-05-27 02:33:57 mesees has joined
318 2011-05-27 02:34:24 <theymos> And to implement it, I just put in a goto that restarted the process with a different variable...
319 2011-05-27 02:37:23 mesees has quit (Client Quit)
320 2011-05-27 02:38:09 DukeOfURL has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
321 2011-05-27 02:38:49 <CIA-103> DiabloMiner: Patrick McFarland master * rd25a57b / (2 files in 2 dirs):
322 2011-05-27 02:38:49 <CIA-103> DiabloMiner: Rolled back previous change and kept some of it... apparently it doesn't
323 2011-05-27 02:38:49 <CIA-103> DiabloMiner: work right with vectors - http://bit.ly/mdgt3a
324 2011-05-27 02:38:49 Teslah has joined
325 2011-05-27 02:41:03 BlueMatt has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
326 2011-05-27 02:41:06 BlueMattBot has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
327 2011-05-27 02:41:13 davex_r has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
328 2011-05-27 02:43:02 ar4s has joined
329 2011-05-27 02:44:56 has joined
330 2011-05-27 02:48:02 Netsniper has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
331 2011-05-27 02:48:40 theymos has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
332 2011-05-27 02:49:06 <Neskia> did the difficulty rise in the last day or two? confirmations taking for ever... 4 blocks in an hour and a half.
333 2011-05-27 02:49:26 <gmaxwell> It went up today.
334 2011-05-27 02:49:36 <Neskia> ahh ok
335 2011-05-27 02:49:49 johnnympereira5 has joined
336 2011-05-27 02:50:18 <stuhood> things were looking smoother earlier in the day
337 2011-05-27 02:50:33 Neskia is now known as Nesetalis
338 2011-05-27 02:50:45 <io_error> Search eBay for GPUs, sort by newly listed
339 2011-05-27 02:50:50 <stuhood> =P
340 2011-05-27 02:51:02 <Nesetalis> hah
341 2011-05-27 02:51:03 <io_error> It sure FEELS like a bunch of people stopped mining
342 2011-05-27 02:51:46 <stuhood> is there a reasonable way to monitor the liveness of all of the pools using only the bitcoin protocol?
343 2011-05-27 02:51:47 <stuhood> yea
344 2011-05-27 02:52:34 <stuhood> an output block is the only thing i can think of
345 2011-05-27 02:52:46 <falafell> not unexpected, i sold my cards too, its just expensive to do right now
346 2011-05-27 02:53:04 <Nesetalis> BTCMine has dropped about 20,000Mhash since yesterday... but its currently at 235691Mhash
347 2011-05-27 02:53:05 <JRWR> ok, i must be going insane, can bitcoind be ran in userland (nonroot) on linux amd64
348 2011-05-27 02:53:14 <io_error> JRWR: of course
349 2011-05-27 02:53:22 <Xenland> so eh, bitcoin-php can, check my wallet balance, and send it to a supplied address is this correct?
350 2011-05-27 02:53:40 * JRWR hates himself...
351 2011-05-27 02:53:48 <JRWR> mine keeps segfaulting when i try
352 2011-05-27 02:53:55 ahbritto has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
353 2011-05-27 02:53:56 <io_error> JRWR: Compiled it yourself?
354 2011-05-27 02:54:42 <JRWR> nope
355 2011-05-27 02:54:55 <JRWR> thats the fun part, im using the static bins that where in the archive
356 2011-05-27 02:54:58 Rudycoin has joined
357 2011-05-27 02:55:05 ahbritto has joined
358 2011-05-27 02:55:45 is now known as Netsniper|!~kvirc@adsl-76-252-1-253.dsl.ipltin.sbcglobal.net|Netsniper
359 2011-05-27 02:56:36 <io_error> JRWR: They ought to be fine, though I compiled my own (needed some patches)
360 2011-05-27 02:56:56 Rudycoin has quit (Client Quit)
361 2011-05-27 02:56:57 <JRWR> 0x00007ffff6cf3974 in fclose () from /lib/libc.so.6
362 2011-05-27 02:57:01 <JRWR> never a good sign
363 2011-05-27 02:57:26 <io_error> JRWR: That the whole backtrace?
364 2011-05-27 02:57:43 <Nesetalis> hmm virwox is still way high.. but stabilized finally :p
365 2011-05-27 02:58:22 <Nesetalis> there were people buying BTC for 30$ per for a few minutes... insanity :p so wish i had some left on the site.
366 2011-05-27 02:58:24 BlueMattBot has joined
367 2011-05-27 02:58:28 <JRWR> thats the only thing gdb gave me...
368 2011-05-27 02:59:00 Slix` has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
369 2011-05-27 02:59:06 <io_error> JRWR: Time to look for filesystem corruption or hardware issues?
370 2011-05-27 02:59:14 <stuhood> is there an existing service for monitoring the sources of blocks? if you could gather that information, you could watch liveness over time, and keep a scoreboard (of ips at least⦠although pool operators might want to claim their ip)
371 2011-05-27 02:59:22 <ArtForzZz> maybe check perms on .bitcoin first
372 2011-05-27 03:01:34 <JRWR> ArtForzZz: you are correct, perms on .bitcoin where wrong (stupid me)
373 2011-05-27 03:01:35 johnnympereira5 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
374 2011-05-27 03:01:42 <JRWR> bitcoin should handle that a little better...
375 2011-05-27 03:01:52 * ArtForzZz pats his debugging crystal ball
376 2011-05-27 03:02:15 johnnympereira5 has joined
377 2011-05-27 03:02:17 <ArtForzZz> yeah
378 2011-05-27 03:02:31 <ArtForzZz> needs check and error message
379 2011-05-27 03:03:06 <JRWR> leave it to me to find a bug
380 2011-05-27 03:04:15 ar4s has quit (Quit: ar4s)
381 2011-05-27 03:05:00 acfrazier has joined
382 2011-05-27 03:06:01 <Xenland> any suggestions on how to get sharelog in pushpool to use userId's with the supplied username?
383 2011-05-27 03:06:51 BlueMatt has joined
384 2011-05-27 03:07:21 <luke-jr> Xenland: hack the code. and hope they don't have blasters.
385 2011-05-27 03:07:43 <Xenland> :P
386 2011-05-27 03:08:03 <Xenland> I just might have to this is a huge performance work around issue for front-end interfaces
387 2011-05-27 03:09:53 <citiz3n> is it normal to not get confirmations even after new blocks have been found?
388 2011-05-27 03:09:54 <citiz3n> :\
389 2011-05-27 03:10:49 <io_error> citiz3n: If the miner rejected your transaction
390 2011-05-27 03:11:06 <citiz3n> why would it
391 2011-05-27 03:11:08 <io_error> Looks like some miners out there are rejecting free transactions
392 2011-05-27 03:11:10 NZbitminers has joined
393 2011-05-27 03:11:17 <io_error> I had one tonight that took 2 blocks to get accepted by somebody
394 2011-05-27 03:11:24 <citiz3n> ahhh
395 2011-05-27 03:11:26 <jgarzik> miners don't "reject". they might ignore
396 2011-05-27 03:11:40 <io_error> jgarzik: The effect is the same, is it not? :)
397 2011-05-27 03:11:58 <NZbitminers> Any clues as to why the price has been going up the last few days ?
398 2011-05-27 03:11:59 <io_error> Fail to include the transaction in the block, how about that
399 2011-05-27 03:12:08 <io_error> NZbitminers: More people are buying than selling.
400 2011-05-27 03:12:09 <NZbitminers> What is driving the demand for BTC/USD?
401 2011-05-27 03:12:24 <citiz3n> new people finding out about bitcoin
402 2011-05-27 03:12:40 <NZbitminers> through purchasing or just coming across the mining program?
403 2011-05-27 03:12:48 <stuhood> the media
404 2011-05-27 03:12:51 <NZbitminers> I hope its becomming more popular
405 2011-05-27 03:12:52 <citiz3n> purchasing
406 2011-05-27 03:12:59 <citiz3n> people see a story, they want to get ahold of some coins
407 2011-05-27 03:13:08 <citiz3n> the first thing you do when you discover bitcoin is you want to get your hands on some coins - at least a few :)
408 2011-05-27 03:13:48 <NZbitminers> are you guys actively trying to spread the word?
409 2011-05-27 03:13:57 <noagendamarket> yes
410 2011-05-27 03:14:04 <NZbitminers> if it makes the price go higher, it'd make this whole thing a lot more profitable... ?
411 2011-05-27 03:14:06 <noagendamarket> like a cult
412 2011-05-27 03:14:43 <NZbitminers> also. Does anyone have a clue about the 2TH increase overnight? :P thats pretty sweet
413 2011-05-27 03:15:02 darbsllim is now known as bradmills
414 2011-05-27 03:15:06 bradmills is now known as darbsllim
415 2011-05-27 03:15:08 <io_error> I don't care, I care about the $1 increase over night :)
416 2011-05-27 03:15:30 <darbsllim> NZbitminers seriously thats a major increase
417 2011-05-27 03:15:35 <ArtForzZz> yes, wrong stat calcs
418 2011-05-27 03:15:56 <gmaxwell> NZbitminers: there was not a 2TH overnight increase.
419 2011-05-27 03:16:00 <NZbitminers> thats the amount of increase though, am I right? no?
420 2011-05-27 03:16:01 <gmaxwell> bitcoinwatch's numbers are buste.
421 2011-05-27 03:16:05 <ArtForzZz> yup
422 2011-05-27 03:16:13 <NZbitminers> any more reliable course?
423 2011-05-27 03:16:15 <darbsllim> ah
424 2011-05-27 03:16:15 <NZbitminers> source*
425 2011-05-27 03:16:16 <ArtForzZz> yes
426 2011-05-27 03:16:18 <ArtForzZz> http://bitcoin.sipa.be/speed-lin-2k.png
427 2011-05-27 03:16:47 <darbsllim> ArtForzZz I just had an electrician over - looks like it will be difficult to add more circuits
428 2011-05-27 03:16:49 sethsethseth___ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
429 2011-05-27 03:16:51 <jrmithdobbs> ArtForzZz: you get your new asics or something?
430 2011-05-27 03:16:53 <jrmithdobbs> ha
431 2011-05-27 03:16:57 sethsethseth_ has joined
432 2011-05-27 03:17:00 <ArtForzZz> jrmithdobbs: I wish
433 2011-05-27 03:17:08 <jrmithdobbs> really curious who the hell that is
434 2011-05-27 03:17:35 <ArtForzZz> 8wk+ lead times at the speed bitcoin is growing = teh suck
435 2011-05-27 03:17:38 <citiz3n> 3 blocks and still no confirmation
436 2011-05-27 03:17:41 <jrmithdobbs> darbsllim: residential power is a fuckin joke
437 2011-05-27 03:17:46 <gmaxwell> NZbitminers: all the measurements are not that reliable, because they're all fuzzed up with noise from the whole process variance.
438 2011-05-27 03:18:01 <stuhood> citiz3n: were you disconnected when you sent the transaction?
439 2011-05-27 03:18:03 <citiz3n> are we going to have to start including fees in transactions?
440 2011-05-27 03:18:09 <jrmithdobbs> yes
441 2011-05-27 03:18:10 <gmaxwell> ArtForzZz: poor poor art, having to wait weeks to get custom nano-scale manufacturing doneâ¦
442 2011-05-27 03:18:17 <citiz3n> stuhood, yes
443 2011-05-27 03:18:23 <darbsllim> ArtForzZz whats an 8wk lead time?
444 2011-05-27 03:18:32 <jrmithdobbs> citiz3n: welcome to xfering newly minted coins right after a diff change
445 2011-05-27 03:18:34 <jrmithdobbs> citiz3n: it sucks.
446 2011-05-27 03:18:38 <stuhood> citiz3n: ah. yea⦠i had that happen the other day. it will eventually retry
447 2011-05-27 03:19:02 <citiz3n> anything i can do to speed it up?
448 2011-05-27 03:19:11 <jrmithdobbs> citiz3n: not a thing
449 2011-05-27 03:19:20 <jrmithdobbs> citiz3n: not once the txn has hit the p2p network
450 2011-05-27 03:19:22 <stuhood> citiz3n: the transaction is in your walletâ¦i don't know what the retry time is, but it will notice that it hasn't seen word about the tx, and it will rebroadcast
451 2011-05-27 03:19:31 <stuhood> jrmithdobbs: it hasn't
452 2011-05-27 03:19:36 <ArtForzZz> should be 1 block + 5-30 min
453 2011-05-27 03:19:49 <jrmithdobbs> that code is so convoluted
454 2011-05-27 03:19:58 <io_error> Blocks are being generated quite slowly right now, and it appears some miners aren't including free tx's
455 2011-05-27 03:20:04 <citiz3n> redownloading blocks won't fix it either?
456 2011-05-27 03:20:09 Cusipzzz has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.0.2 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
457 2011-05-27 03:20:14 <jrmithdobbs> io_error: correct
458 2011-05-27 03:20:21 <NZbitminers> so the main force for "buy" orders on the BTC/USD is customers buying stuff with bitcoins?
459 2011-05-27 03:20:23 <jrmithdobbs> io_error: that trend started a couple weeks ago
460 2011-05-27 03:20:24 gmturner has quit (Quit: Leaving)
461 2011-05-27 03:20:32 <io_error> citiz3n: Do you see your transaction here? http://bitcoincharts.com/bitcoin/
462 2011-05-27 03:20:34 <jrmithdobbs> NZbitminers: hardly
463 2011-05-27 03:20:41 <stuhood> citiz3n: it was around an hour before the transaction i had was retried
464 2011-05-27 03:20:43 <citiz3n> mostly speculation i would say, NZbitminers
465 2011-05-27 03:20:44 <jrmithdobbs> NZbitminers: in an ideal world you would be correct, but that is not currently the case
466 2011-05-27 03:20:57 <NZbitminers> I see
467 2011-05-27 03:21:03 Teslah has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
468 2011-05-27 03:21:09 <io_error> I'm buying stuff with bitcoins!
469 2011-05-27 03:21:11 <NZbitminers> shouldnt we spam this shit?
470 2011-05-27 03:21:11 <NZbitminers> lol
471 2011-05-27 03:21:28 <jrmithdobbs> seeing as silk road killed registration there's not much you can buy with btc really
472 2011-05-27 03:21:33 <jrmithdobbs> well, not much worth buying, at least
473 2011-05-27 03:21:34 <noagendamarket> http://www.pri.org/business/bitcoins-and-the-future-of-the-monetary-system4075.html radio interview about bitcoin
474 2011-05-27 03:21:37 <ArtForzZz> alpaca socks?
475 2011-05-27 03:21:42 <io_error> jrmithdobbs: When did that happen?
476 2011-05-27 03:21:51 <stuhood> i bought a landscape print the other day =P
477 2011-05-27 03:21:54 <noagendamarket> when did jason calacanis become bitcoin spokesperson? lol
478 2011-05-27 03:21:56 <jrmithdobbs> (they killed registration because of all the press and the grey/black market items that proliferate there)
479 2011-05-27 03:22:02 <stuhood> and one of these: http://www.nerdmeritbadges.com/products/bitcoin
480 2011-05-27 03:22:32 <jrmithdobbs> noagendamarket: he's just grabbing all the press he can even though he has nothing to do with anything
481 2011-05-27 03:22:48 <noagendamarket> yea
482 2011-05-27 03:22:55 <jrmithdobbs> noagendamarket: it's called "running a shit 'media' organization with no content making grab for marketing eyeballs"
483 2011-05-27 03:23:04 <jrmithdobbs> p common tactic to latch on to some fad
484 2011-05-27 03:23:15 phlippcoin has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
485 2011-05-27 03:24:00 shane_ has joined
486 2011-05-27 03:24:05 <anarchyx> ;;bc,stats
487 2011-05-27 03:24:06 <gribble> Current Blocks: 127082 | Current Difficulty: 434882.7217497 | Next Difficulty At Block: 129023 | Next Difficulty In: 1941 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 2 days, 4 hours, 31 minutes, and 9 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 646305.08126905
488 2011-05-27 03:24:06 shane_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
489 2011-05-27 03:24:26 twobitcoins has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
490 2011-05-27 03:24:46 <jrmithdobbs> noagendamarket: i don't get why people are listening to him though
491 2011-05-27 03:24:50 <jrmithdobbs> he doesn't even understand the system
492 2011-05-27 03:24:52 twobitcoins has joined
493 2011-05-27 03:24:55 <jrmithdobbs> let alone have any association
494 2011-05-27 03:24:57 jeremid has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
495 2011-05-27 03:25:16 <stuhood> he's a douchebag, but he's also a very successful investor
496 2011-05-27 03:25:18 <gmaxwell> jason calacanis is a fad-leech.
497 2011-05-27 03:25:28 <noagendamarket> ya
498 2011-05-27 03:25:47 <noagendamarket> just trying to ride the coat tails
499 2011-05-27 03:25:53 <gmaxwell> I'm somewhat dubius about the claims of his success he doesn't have the taste or the tact of someone who is successfulâ¦
500 2011-05-27 03:26:03 <jrmithdobbs> if he calls bitcoins anonymous one more time i may have to track him down and punch him in the face
501 2011-05-27 03:26:37 wekka has joined
502 2011-05-27 03:27:02 backwardation25 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
503 2011-05-27 03:27:14 <stuhood> so hey: totally hacky idea
504 2011-05-27 03:27:48 <stuhood> could you use the nonce in a block to determine how much work a node did to find it?
505 2011-05-27 03:28:20 <stuhood> or might different algorithms increment vs decrement, etc
506 2011-05-27 03:28:38 <Nesetalis> 7 blocks in 2 hours :p i think the difficulty is going to be a bit painful for the next week XD
507 2011-05-27 03:28:41 <io_error> stuhood: no, since they may be done in parallel (e.g. on a GPU) or in any particular oder
508 2011-05-27 03:28:43 <io_error> order
509 2011-05-27 03:28:44 <Nesetalis> -wanders off to bed-
510 2011-05-27 03:28:47 Nesetalis is now known as Nes-asleep
511 2011-05-27 03:28:55 <ArtForzZz> yep
512 2011-05-27 03:28:56 <stuhood> io_error: they'd be roughly increasing though, right?
513 2011-05-27 03:29:01 <ArtForzZz> I'm doing my nonces bass-ackwards
514 2011-05-27 03:29:05 <stuhood> doh
515 2011-05-27 03:29:14 <ArtForzZz> as it saves a byteswap in the inner loop
516 2011-05-27 03:31:31 <stuhood> would there be any security reason not to add a method of determining who generated a given block?
517 2011-05-27 03:31:37 <stuhood> which ip
518 2011-05-27 03:31:56 malnilion has joined
519 2011-05-27 03:32:09 <jargon> how am I in here if I was banned some weeks ago?
520 2011-05-27 03:32:18 <ArtForzZz> jargon: magic!
521 2011-05-27 03:32:33 <io_error> stuhood: a LOT of people would abandon bitcoin, or fork, if you did that
522 2011-05-27 03:32:53 <ArtForzZz> io_error: you can already mostly do that, at least for miners finding a decent % of blocks
523 2011-05-27 03:33:06 wolfspraul has quit (Quit: leaving)
524 2011-05-27 03:33:09 <stuhood> io_error: because it would associate the block reward with an ip?
525 2011-05-27 03:33:15 <ArtForzZz> block propagation between nodes takes a few 100ms
526 2011-05-27 03:33:25 <io_error> ah, doh, I was thinking of transactions
527 2011-05-27 03:33:30 <ArtForzZz> so if you are connected to everyone, you know who generated the block
528 2011-05-27 03:33:30 <stuhood> yea
529 2011-05-27 03:33:38 <stuhood> ArtForzZz: right
530 2011-05-27 03:33:50 <io_error> And why are we STORING IP addresses?
531 2011-05-27 03:34:13 <ArtForzZz> io_error: because connecting to a pubkey doesn't exactly work?
532 2011-05-27 03:34:26 <stuhood> for monitor-ability, as a defensive measure
533 2011-05-27 03:34:31 <io_error> ArtForzZz: No, I mean why would you want to store them in the block chain?
534 2011-05-27 03:34:39 <ArtForzZz> no clue
535 2011-05-27 03:34:49 <ArtForzZz> sounds pointless
536 2011-05-27 03:34:58 ar4s has joined
537 2011-05-27 03:35:08 <stuhood> we only know who has the largest pool right now because they are friendly
538 2011-05-27 03:35:18 <ArtForzZz> stuhood: wrong
539 2011-05-27 03:35:42 malnilion has quit (Client Quit)
540 2011-05-27 03:35:44 <ArtForzZz> iirc MM was traced with simple timing analysis
541 2011-05-27 03:35:47 <stuhood> ArtForzZz: because you can estimate who is creating the blocks?
542 2011-05-27 03:36:02 <stuhood> if it isn
543 2011-05-27 03:36:09 <stuhood> 't a vulnerability
544 2011-05-27 03:36:16 <stuhood> then it could be very helpful to know
545 2011-05-27 03:36:25 <ArtForzZz> well, it is a vuln, but really hard to fix
546 2011-05-27 03:36:45 <jrabbit> ArtForzZz: who/where
547 2011-05-27 03:36:47 <jrabbit> deetz
548 2011-05-27 03:36:53 <ArtForzZz> what?
549 2011-05-27 03:37:09 <jrabbit> who was it and where was the timing anaylsis done
550 2011-05-27 03:37:22 <ArtForzZz> MM?
551 2011-05-27 03:37:26 <stuhood> ArtForzZz: i mean, associating transactions with ips sucks⦠but blocks?
552 2011-05-27 03:37:41 <ArtForzZz> well, it's not like he wasnt generating enough of em...
553 2011-05-27 03:37:43 <ArtForzZz> http://bitcoin.atspace.com/mysteryminer.html
554 2011-05-27 03:38:05 <jrabbit> ArtForzZz: thanks :D
555 2011-05-27 03:38:40 has joined
556 2011-05-27 03:38:41 <ArtForzZz> and here's his main wallet address: http://blockexplorer.com/address/12YZ8ubTBJHeWRtxFnRpmrgJuxaUv2nCQY
557 2011-05-27 03:39:06 Netsniper has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
558 2011-05-27 03:39:14 <jrabbit> oh .... I thoguht someone identified him based off thsat info
559 2011-05-27 03:39:31 <ArtForzZz> well, someone has his IP
560 2011-05-27 03:39:32 <jrabbit> and correlated with something
561 2011-05-27 03:39:40 <jrabbit> oh I see
562 2011-05-27 03:40:05 <ArtForzZz> about an hour after discussion in this chan, he stopped.
563 2011-05-27 03:40:20 <stuhood> spooky
564 2011-05-27 03:40:49 ar4s has quit (Quit: ar4s)
565 2011-05-27 03:41:00 <jrabbit> I forget is it easy to asociateaddr to ip addr?
566 2011-05-27 03:41:10 ar4s has joined
567 2011-05-27 03:41:30 <ArtForzZz> nope
568 2011-05-27 03:41:40 <ArtForzZz> imo pretty near impossible after the fact
569 2011-05-27 03:42:17 fimp has joined
570 2011-05-27 03:43:17 <vegard> how were you able to make that graph?
571 2011-05-27 03:43:45 <ArtForzZz> I didnt
572 2011-05-27 03:43:50 <ArtForzZz> someone else did
573 2011-05-27 03:43:55 peck has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
574 2011-05-27 03:44:08 <ArtForzZz> well, because his blocks were slightly different than anybody elses
575 2011-05-27 03:44:17 <ArtForzZz> and ebcause he sent all generations to one wallet address
576 2011-05-27 03:44:26 <vegard> how are they different?
577 2011-05-27 03:44:43 <stuhood> he signed them with a burning Z
578 2011-05-27 03:44:44 <ArtForzZz> everyone else used 1 or 2-byte bnExtranconce in coinbase, he used 4
579 2011-05-27 03:44:52 stahi has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
580 2011-05-27 03:45:42 <vegard> you mean the values go up to 2^32 instead of just 2^16 ?
581 2011-05-27 03:45:46 <Blitzboom> ArtForzZz, arenât electricity prices comparably high in germany or is it negligible for your venture?
582 2011-05-27 03:46:18 <jrabbit> maybe he was using novel hashing afterall :P
583 2011-05-27 03:46:32 * Blitzboom is curious
584 2011-05-27 03:46:41 <ArtForzZz> doesnt matter much
585 2011-05-27 03:46:55 <sacarlson> what is the best safety measure I could add to protect against the lost transactions I saw yestarday in -testnet transactions. maybe stop transactions when I see more than 1 block created every 2 minits? or maybe just auto add more confirms as the rate increase?
586 2011-05-27 03:47:13 <Blitzboom> i want to invest my bitcoins in ArtForzZz
587 2011-05-27 03:47:39 * Xenland wonders how do run a function with BitcoinClient() in bitcoin-php
588 2011-05-27 03:47:43 <JRWR> my god, Pool rate: 1430 Gh/s for deepbit
589 2011-05-27 03:47:45 <Blitzboom> you should pool community resources and build something epic
590 2011-05-27 03:48:21 <stuhood> sacarlson: a minimum amount of time and a minimum number of confirmations?
591 2011-05-27 03:49:16 <ArtForzZz> stuhood: doesn't help much when an attacker forks the chain from more than a few blocks back
592 2011-05-27 03:49:29 Netsniper has joined
593 2011-05-27 03:49:32 peck has joined
594 2011-05-27 03:50:18 <stuhood> ArtForzZz: yea⦠that's a bit of a different problem though, right? diverse connections are the only way to protect against something like that
595 2011-05-27 03:50:24 has quit (Netsniper|!~kvirc@adsl-76-251-231-245.dsl.ipltin.sbcglobal.net|Read error: Connection reset by peer)
596 2011-05-27 03:50:42 <ArtForzZz> won't help either if the attacker has more hashpower
597 2011-05-27 03:51:11 <stuhood> indeed =p
598 2011-05-27 03:51:16 <JRWR> so someone cheated?
599 2011-05-27 03:51:35 <ArtForzZz> yep, on testnet
600 2011-05-27 03:51:50 <ArtForzZz> which takes... about a 5870 really
601 2011-05-27 03:52:06 <JRWR> lol
602 2011-05-27 03:52:11 <noagendamarket> lawl
603 2011-05-27 03:52:14 <noagendamarket> ;)
604 2011-05-27 03:52:16 <JRWR> had me scared for a moment
605 2011-05-27 03:53:12 <sacarlson> stuhood: then I guess I need to write a tool that monitors block creation rate in a 5 min window with that number used to shutdown transactions and or change confirms
606 2011-05-27 03:54:32 <stuhood> sacarlson: yea maybe⦠don't know your usecase. a hardcoded minimum would work 9 times out of ten
607 2011-05-27 03:54:39 <gmaxwell> I was hoping to totally take over testnet because the blocks aren't pinned in the client by starting at the genesis block and playing forward with fudged timestamps to retain a difficulty of one... and I was saddened by the fact that longest chain is actually measured by sum effective difficulty.
608 2011-05-27 03:54:58 <ArtForzZz> gmaxwell: yup
609 2011-05-27 03:55:04 <ArtForzZz> still doesnt take too much effor to do though
610 2011-05-27 03:55:19 <gmaxwell> well, like 10x more. :)
611 2011-05-27 03:55:40 <stuhood> sacarlson: basically, you could require at least N minutes per confirmation: 5 confirmations, at least 25 minutes
612 2011-05-27 03:55:47 <stuhood> â¦for n = 5
613 2011-05-27 03:55:48 <sacarlson> stuhood: well my other networks are identicle to testnet and even easier to break with less minning power so the same method could be used to break my nets
614 2011-05-27 03:56:02 <ArtForzZz> I kidna wanted to do that with old testnet after I accidentlly 24 5970s for 2 days and difficulty was north of 400
615 2011-05-27 03:56:23 <sacarlson> stuhood: but part of my action with other networks was to make them faster not slower
616 2011-05-27 03:56:31 <gmaxwell> sacarlson: so you have a hashchain which isn't testnet that you want to protect?
617 2011-05-27 03:56:33 sethsethseth__ has joined
618 2011-05-27 03:56:47 <sacarlson> gmaxwell: yes
619 2011-05-27 03:56:49 <gmaxwell> sacarlson: marry it to the bitcoin network to protect it.
620 2011-05-27 03:56:56 <ArtForzZz> yep
621 2011-05-27 03:57:05 <sacarlson> gmaxwell: not sure how I would do that
622 2011-05-27 03:57:14 <ArtForzZz> in the meantime, use checkpoints. frequently.
623 2011-05-27 03:57:27 <gmaxwell> sacarlson: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=7219.0
624 2011-05-27 03:57:33 <ArtForzZz> at least that way someone can't rewrite all of history
625 2011-05-27 03:57:37 <sacarlson> gmaxwell: I've hardcoded a checkpoint already at a point after all the coins have been minted
626 2011-05-27 03:58:16 DaSpawn has joined
627 2011-05-27 03:58:27 <sacarlson> gmaxwell: my networks has no created coins they have a static number of coins from block 10
628 2011-05-27 03:59:16 <gmaxwell> sacarlson: k. In any case, that post I linked to tells you how to slave another blockchain on bitcoin without gunking up bitcoin.
629 2011-05-27 03:59:19 <sacarlson> so the only danger is having lost transactions so to protect from that a shutdown policy would have to be inacted
630 2011-05-27 03:59:35 <DaSpawn> had a thought wanted to run by devs about if somehow the bitcoin network/chain was commpromised somehow...
631 2011-05-27 03:59:37 sethsethseth_ has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
632 2011-05-27 03:59:51 <sacarlson> gmaxwell: ok I'll take a read
633 2011-05-27 04:00:10 Xenland has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
634 2011-05-27 04:00:13 <DaSpawn> if actual bitcoin network was comprimised through some hole in the chain and code, isn;t all bitcoins trackable from where they are generated to everywhere spent?
635 2011-05-27 04:00:25 <gmaxwell> sacarlson: in the long long term it's important for bitcoin's continued health that people start slaving other chains on it... so it would be good to get that all worked out sooner rather than later.
636 2011-05-27 04:00:36 <gmaxwell> DaSpawn: ... no.
637 2011-05-27 04:00:52 <gmaxwell> DaSpawn: there is no encryption in bitcoin. The system itself doesn't hide any data, really.
638 2011-05-27 04:01:13 <gmaxwell> DaSpawn: the privacy comes from never transmitting anything private for the most part.
639 2011-05-27 04:01:20 <sacarlson> gmaxwell: I try to look outside the box sometimes at other posible solutions
640 2011-05-27 04:01:25 <gmaxwell> I suppose if you could hack all bitcoin nodes you could see what if any wallets they had locally.
641 2011-05-27 04:01:30 <DaSpawn> right, but is it possible to check everywhere a coin went or somehow eliminate it from a new network?
642 2011-05-27 04:02:11 <DaSpawn> I would imagine if somehow btc was broken, a new network would quickly come up, eliminating the hole
643 2011-05-27 04:02:23 <DaSpawn> but being able to convert all legitimate coins to new network easily..
644 2011-05-27 04:02:30 <gmaxwell> DaSpawn: I think you don't have a clear enough idea of what you're asking in order to ask yet. :)
645 2011-05-27 04:02:53 <gmaxwell> DaSpawn: you don't even need a net network. You need clients that speak the fixed protocol and can also parse the old data.
646 2011-05-27 04:03:00 <gmaxwell> then you just swap out the clients.
647 2011-05-27 04:03:09 <DaSpawn> trying to think about what would/could happen if bitcoin chain was brokem through a unforseen hole...
648 2011-05-27 04:03:13 <gmaxwell> In most cases thats all that would be required.
649 2011-05-27 04:03:18 backwardation25 has joined
650 2011-05-27 04:03:39 <gmaxwell> Well, it's rather difficult to forsee the unforseeable by definition.
651 2011-05-27 04:03:54 <DaSpawn> right :)
652 2011-05-27 04:04:03 has joined
653 2011-05-27 04:04:17 <gmaxwell> The security assumptions in the system are pretty conservative. The biggest risks I think are a remote exploit in the node code which could get a lot of wallets stolen.
654 2011-05-27 04:04:25 <DaSpawn> I have been asked the same question by every person I have talked to about bitcoins
655 2011-05-27 04:04:37 <gmaxwell> Odd. No one seems to ask me that.
656 2011-05-27 04:04:40 <DaSpawn> what happens if something completely breaks the bitcoins process/network
657 2011-05-27 04:04:50 <darbsllim> gmaxwell do you think a site like mybitcoins.com for security?
658 2011-05-27 04:05:25 <DaSpawn> if bitcoins are to be adopted, can not only be geeks that use it...
659 2011-05-27 04:05:33 <gmaxwell> DaSpawn: that's far too vague to answer.
660 2011-05-27 04:05:45 <gmaxwell> Different specific cases have different responses.
661 2011-05-27 04:06:00 Netsniper has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
662 2011-05-27 04:06:06 <DaSpawn> I think I am trying to figure out a better answer I guess thean "I don't know"
663 2011-05-27 04:06:10 <JRWR> i guess he is asking, what would bitcoind users do if someone said, HAHA I CAN MAKE AS MANY COINS AS I WISH AT ONCE
664 2011-05-27 04:06:13 <gmaxwell> DaSpawn: the non-geeks certantly don't ask technical compromise related questions, they just assume it's completely secure forever in my expirence.
665 2011-05-27 04:06:17 <DaSpawn> that does not bestow much confidence in a technology..
666 2011-05-27 04:06:32 <stuhood> only time will do that
667 2011-05-27 04:06:40 <DaSpawn> this is small business owners I have been speaking to that have asked the answer
668 2011-05-27 04:06:50 <DaSpawn> * question
669 2011-05-27 04:07:02 _Netsniper_ has joined
670 2011-05-27 04:07:26 <DaSpawn> but yes, others I have talked to that have basic computer skills do not ask that..
671 2011-05-27 04:07:27 <gmaxwell> JRWR: Depends on how they are doing it. Lets just say they found out that in addition to allowing 50 BTC they found that clients permitted blocks that paid out 5000000 BTC due to a bug.
672 2011-05-27 04:07:28 <sacarlson> gmaxwell: ya that seems likely for the windows packages as most of the code is black boxes
673 2011-05-27 04:07:57 ForceDestroyer has joined
674 2011-05-27 04:07:58 <gmaxwell> if that happened a patch would quickly be written and distributed to the biggest miners (and everyone else) and the crazy blocks would effectively be erased from the TX history.
675 2011-05-27 04:08:31 <DaSpawn> oh, so they can be eliminated from existiing network by repairing the chain/blacklisting coins?
676 2011-05-27 04:08:35 <gmaxwell> (even without updating all the software)
677 2011-05-27 04:08:37 <DaSpawn> (potentially)
678 2011-05-27 04:08:52 <gmaxwell> DaSpawn: by making sure that the big miners were ignoring the bad blocks the chain would automatically heal itself.
679 2011-05-27 04:09:22 has quit (Netsniper|!~kvirc@adsl-76-251-236-5.dsl.ipltin.sbcglobal.net|Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
680 2011-05-27 04:09:29 <gmaxwell> (because everyone will already ignore everything but the longest chain, so just by virtue of making the good chain the longest you'll prevent bad blocks from mattering)
681 2011-05-27 04:09:41 <JRWR> because it acts like voting system, if most of the system thinks the blocks are wrong, then everyone bleaves they ae
682 2011-05-27 04:09:43 <JRWR> are
683 2011-05-27 04:09:50 <DaSpawn> excellent... so basic answer that would solve their curiorisity about this would be "the network can see the bad coins and ignore them"
684 2011-05-27 04:09:51 has joined
685 2011-05-27 04:09:56 <gmaxwell> In the future there will be more software diversity so it will be unlikely that there will be a single bug impacting most hosts to begin with, but even if one cropped up it could be dealt with.
686 2011-05-27 04:10:34 <DaSpawn> absolutely, but as network grows is possibility.. trying to get small business interested to invest/accept the currency...
687 2011-05-27 04:10:42 <gmaxwell> DaSpawn: yes, it already does that too. I was hypothesizing a situation where there was a bug in that logic and something slipped through. By fixing the bug the bad coins would vanish.
688 2011-05-27 04:11:06 fimp has quit (Quit: Leaving)
689 2011-05-27 04:11:11 Vandroiy has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
690 2011-05-27 04:11:13 <DaSpawn> just what I was looking for :)
691 2011-05-27 04:11:19 _Netsniper_ has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
692 2011-05-27 04:11:51 <DaSpawn> but all hypothetically... just like Macs are hypothetically free from viruses, at least in Apples eyes :)
693 2011-05-27 04:11:56 johndoe0711 has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
694 2011-05-27 04:12:15 <DaSpawn> thank you much for info again
695 2011-05-27 04:12:18 <gmaxwell> JRWR: two types of voting system, in fact, which veto each other: Miners vote with hashpower, and all the other nodes and clients vote with their enforcement behavior.
696 2011-05-27 04:12:43 <gmaxwell> JRWR: any action must be permitted by both groups in order to be permitted by the network as a whole.
697 2011-05-27 04:12:50 <DaSpawn> very nice
698 2011-05-27 04:12:52 backwardation25 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
699 2011-05-27 04:15:09 jhulten_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
700 2011-05-27 04:16:51 johndoe0711 has joined
701 2011-05-27 04:18:00 <JRWR> bitcoins remind me of the senate :)
702 2011-05-27 04:18:51 <stuhood> there is a third component that has veto power: the software itself.
703 2011-05-27 04:19:00 <stuhood> the more implementations of the protocol, the better
704 2011-05-27 04:19:38 mmoya has joined
705 2011-05-27 04:20:43 <DaSpawn> oh, another one, if that situation were to occur, that would mean the conformations received are not legitimate, once network is "healed" would those confirmations disappear?
706 2011-05-27 04:20:58 <gmaxwell> right. With enough software diversity any bugs will automatically be vetoed by the other processes because of users running the other software.
707 2011-05-27 04:20:59 <stuhood> yes
708 2011-05-27 04:21:18 <stuhood> yes DaSpawn
709 2011-05-27 04:21:22 <gmaxwell> DaSpawn: yes, confirmations on the bad fork would be erased and replaced with confirmations on the good fork.
710 2011-05-27 04:21:36 <gmaxwell> This is why it would be imporant to get miners on fixed software as fast as possible.
711 2011-05-27 04:21:57 <gmaxwell> (and, perhaps, its the only reason that big pools are actually good for securityâ we actually could get them to upgrade fast)
712 2011-05-27 04:22:19 <stuhood> double edged sword, for sure
713 2011-05-27 04:22:51 ar4s has quit (Quit: ar4s)
714 2011-05-27 04:22:52 <gmaxwell> in the case of "too much being permitted" getting the big pools to upgrade would mostly fix the issue by itself.
715 2011-05-27 04:23:18 phlippcoin has joined
716 2011-05-27 04:23:51 <DaSpawn> than bitcoins are totally stable in the long run (unless encryption has a flaw, but that would be bad for everything), and potential problems only mean be careful what transactions are accepted or wait untill problem fixed.. but people could be burned by not waiting long enough for confirmations.... would immagine a "breach" would be detected quickly by everyone and worked out within a few days or less...
717 2011-05-27 04:24:16 ar4s has joined
718 2011-05-27 04:24:33 <DaSpawn> but all hypothetical.. but great for pitching to businesses the stability of the currency (in terms of technology, not conversion rates)
719 2011-05-27 04:25:56 Kiba` has joined
720 2011-05-27 04:26:07 jmpespxoreax has joined
721 2011-05-27 04:26:20 ar4s has quit (Client Quit)
722 2011-05-27 04:27:24 Akiron has joined
723 2011-05-27 04:27:59 <Akiron> has anyone tracked the amount of "turnover" of bitcoins?
724 2011-05-27 04:28:33 <io_error> Akiron: to some extent
725 2011-05-27 04:28:43 <gmaxwell> DaSpawn: I full expect transaction insurance companies to exist that solve the confirmation waiting problem.
726 2011-05-27 04:28:57 <io_error> Akiron: https://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=9300.0
727 2011-05-27 04:28:57 <Akiron> io_error: to what extent? =)
728 2011-05-27 04:29:53 NZbitminers has quit (Quit: Page closed)
729 2011-05-27 04:29:56 <stuhood> gmaxwell: yea⦠good idea. could attach it to an otherwise free escrow
730 2011-05-27 04:29:57 <Akiron> io_error: Thanks!
731 2011-05-27 04:30:16 <io_error> Akiron: I made 10BTC doing just that, so :)
732 2011-05-27 04:30:26 MemoryException has joined
733 2011-05-27 04:30:42 JRWR has quit (Quit: Click here : http://bc.x14.eu/s/105 To tip me with BitCoins)
734 2011-05-27 04:30:53 <Akiron> io_error: good to know, so if this isn't what i'm looking for, I can bug you for further development =)
735 2011-05-27 04:31:34 <io_error> Akiron: Sure, but bring bitcoins if you want me to interrupt my sooper sekrit project I've been hacking at for the last 3 or 4 days
736 2011-05-27 04:31:42 <io_error> :DS
737 2011-05-27 04:31:44 <io_error> :D
738 2011-05-27 04:31:52 <Akiron> io_error: i would think of doing nothing else =)
739 2011-05-27 04:31:54 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
740 2011-05-27 04:33:42 <io_error> Akiron: Great. Now, back to sorting out left joins for me :)
741 2011-05-27 04:35:13 <stuhood> gmaxwell: speaking of ideas⦠are you going to implement that insured escrow?
742 2011-05-27 04:36:33 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr coinbaser * r11b4b8b97269 bitcoind-personal/src/main.cpp: Execute command specified by -coinbaser when creating a new block, which can output data to control where the generation goes http://tinyurl.com/3zvpe3o
743 2011-05-27 04:36:34 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Jeff Garzik combo * rb1ad9eeeaef2 bitcoind-personal/rpc.cpp: Add 'getblockbycount' dumping RPC http://tinyurl.com/3fah6fk
744 2011-05-27 04:36:34 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr coinbaser * rd593adfd364d bitcoind-personal/src/main.cpp: coinbaser: replace %d in command line with available funds http://tinyurl.com/3etcbd4
745 2011-05-27 04:36:35 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr policy * ra0a3fb8e50a5 bitcoind-personal/src/ (main.cpp main.h): policy changes http://tinyurl.com/3qy6fbo
746 2011-05-27 04:36:35 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Jeff Garzik combo * r12de418b7db9 bitcoind-personal/rpc.cpp: s/getblockbycount/dumpblock/ http://tinyurl.com/3hpsjdd
747 2011-05-27 04:37:20 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr policy * r081ce519b78a bitcoind-personal/src/main.h: Waive the fee in a tonal-sized "free tranaction area" if at least one output is TBC (and under 512 bytes) ;) http://tinyurl.com/3ue6mkn
748 2011-05-27 04:37:20 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr combo * rbe2b892ae611 bitcoind-personal/rpc.cpp: Merge remote branch 'remotes/jgarzik/dumpblock' into combo http://tinyurl.com/3kwvvwy
749 2011-05-27 04:37:20 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr policy * r92dbd20260fb bitcoind-personal/src/main.h: Charge extra for ridiculously tiny outputs (if any output is under 256 Satoshi, fee is 1048576 Satoshi per 512 bytes) http://tinyurl.com/3curb5u
750 2011-05-27 04:37:59 <jgarzik> luke-jr: anything in personal I should pull, for pushpool?
751 2011-05-27 04:38:06 <jgarzik> luke-jr: I think I've narrowed down an fd leak, btw
752 2011-05-27 04:38:54 EPiSKiNG has joined
753 2011-05-27 04:39:14 <luke-jr> jgarzik: I don't think anything new in my pushpool
754 2011-05-27 04:40:11 <citiz3n> is there a proper and improper way to handle wallet.dat in windows?
755 2011-05-27 04:40:14 <luke-jr> why the heck did CIA post all that?
756 2011-05-27 04:40:23 <citiz3n> shutting down bitcoin, renaming/moving/etc the wallet.dat
757 2011-05-27 04:40:32 <citiz3n> then running bitcoin.exe creates a new wallet.dat file
758 2011-05-27 04:40:42 <citiz3n> is there any reason why one shouldn't use this new wallet?
759 2011-05-27 04:41:17 <luke-jr> citiz3n: â¦
760 2011-05-27 04:41:27 <luke-jr> citiz3n: just don't lose the old one with coins
761 2011-05-27 04:41:38 <DaSpawn> gmaxwell: transaction insurance, great idea, would that insure the sender or recipient?
762 2011-05-27 04:41:39 Stabaho has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
763 2011-05-27 04:41:48 <citiz3n> luke of course not
764 2011-05-27 04:41:52 <citiz3n> but i can use the new one, can't i?
765 2011-05-27 04:41:57 <citiz3n> and switch back and forth between the new/old one?
766 2011-05-27 04:42:05 <citiz3n> close the program, swap the files, open again
767 2011-05-27 04:42:15 <stuhood> DaSpawn: the recipient
768 2011-05-27 04:42:34 <DaSpawn> or it would basically insure against bogus transactions allowing to not wait for confirmations?
769 2011-05-27 04:42:48 Xenland has joined
770 2011-05-27 04:42:51 is now known as Netsniper|!~kvirc@adsl-76-240-207-180.dsl.ipltin.sbcglobal.net|Netsniper
771 2011-05-27 04:42:58 <DaSpawn> how many confirmations before the bitcoins are allowed to be spent (or is that client restriction?)
772 2011-05-27 04:43:06 <citiz3n> 1
773 2011-05-27 04:43:09 Stabaho has joined
774 2011-05-27 04:43:26 <DaSpawn> so max about 10 minutes to confirm at minimum then?
775 2011-05-27 04:43:27 <stuhood> it's actually only a client restriction⦠i think?
776 2011-05-27 04:43:33 <DaSpawn> well average 10 min
777 2011-05-27 04:43:55 <citiz3n> ive been waiting hours and still don't have a confirmation
778 2011-05-27 04:43:58 <citiz3n> this has never happened to me before
779 2011-05-27 04:44:02 <DaSpawn> would be good to wait for at least one... but I would immagine client restricction...
780 2011-05-27 04:44:04 <luke-jr> citiz3n: pay more fee
781 2011-05-27 04:44:07 <jrmithdobbs> citiz3n: txn id?
782 2011-05-27 04:44:08 <midnightmagic> average supposed to be more like 5 min..
783 2011-05-27 04:44:43 <luke-jr> ;;bc,blocks
784 2011-05-27 04:44:43 <gribble> 127088
785 2011-05-27 04:44:46 <DaSpawn> if you do transaction in middle of block gen would give average 5, yes? so it could be much less, like 1 min or less?
786 2011-05-27 04:45:06 <DaSpawn> (if high enough transaction fee)
787 2011-05-27 04:45:56 <DaSpawn> extremely important transactions would encourage higher transaction fees if could have possibility of 1 min transaction..
788 2011-05-27 04:46:00 <midnightmagic> blocks are supposed to arrive approx. 10 minutes apart on average. therefore, you are on average, assuming miners consider your txn to be worthy of including, going to wait something like 5 minutes in that ideal world.
789 2011-05-27 04:46:16 <citiz3n> this is the receiving address: 15iGR51QCgWCXukkvgmtQcA4Zsb2DDwjD2
790 2011-05-27 04:46:24 <DaSpawn> ok.. been telling everyone 10 min...
791 2011-05-27 04:46:36 <Stabaho> anyone here setup a shopping cart with zencart and the bitcoin zencart module?
792 2011-05-27 04:46:41 <midnightmagic> well, again the miners have this little priority calculation.
793 2011-05-27 04:47:03 <stuhood> citiz3n: you confirmed that you were _offline_ when you initially sent it, right?
794 2011-05-27 04:47:09 <citiz3n> correct
795 2011-05-27 04:47:35 <citiz3n> i created a new wallet for this transaction
796 2011-05-27 04:47:36 nadolph has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86.1 [Firefox 4.0.1/20110413222027])
797 2011-05-27 04:47:50 <citiz3n> copied the receiving address
798 2011-05-27 04:47:51 <stuhood> the problematic one?
799 2011-05-27 04:47:55 <citiz3n> correct
800 2011-05-27 04:48:14 <citiz3n> then closed bitcoin
801 2011-05-27 04:48:23 <citiz3n> the transaction was initiated sometime later
802 2011-05-27 04:48:33 <citiz3n> hours later
803 2011-05-27 04:48:40 <citiz3n> then loaded up the same wallet again
804 2011-05-27 04:48:46 <citiz3n> the transaction appeared, but won't confirm
805 2011-05-27 04:49:00 <citiz3n> and now there are two addresses in my "address book"
806 2011-05-27 04:49:01 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
807 2011-05-27 04:49:03 <citiz3n> 2 receiving addresses
808 2011-05-27 04:49:09 <citiz3n> although I don't recall ever creating a second one
809 2011-05-27 04:49:14 <stuhood> and your block count in the GUI matches the block count in the explorer?
810 2011-05-27 04:49:26 <citiz3n> 127088
811 2011-05-27 04:49:29 <citiz3n> ;;bc,stats
812 2011-05-27 04:49:32 <gribble> Current Blocks: 127089 | Current Difficulty: 434882.7217497 | Next Difficulty At Block: 129023 | Next Difficulty In: 1934 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 2 days, 18 hours, 13 minutes, and 44 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 594265.96894452
813 2011-05-27 04:49:50 <citiz3n> 127089 now
814 2011-05-27 04:50:11 <citiz3n> i really hope i don't lose these coins
815 2011-05-27 04:50:46 <stuhood> keep all of your wallets
816 2011-05-27 04:51:24 <stuhood> i'm a bit confusedâ¦. you ended up sending two transactions? because you don't think the first one actually reached the network?
817 2011-05-27 04:51:25 dekbit has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
818 2011-05-27 04:51:48 <Akiron> io_error: you around?
819 2011-05-27 04:51:59 <citiz3n> this was a pool payout
820 2011-05-27 04:52:17 <citiz3n> so the pay button was clicked, with the receiving address of the new wallet.dat file
821 2011-05-27 04:52:34 <stuhood> oh⦠well assuming you have all your wallets, with valid addresses, the coins can't be lost?
822 2011-05-27 04:53:16 <stuhood> sorry, i thought you were _sending_ a transaction.
823 2011-05-27 04:53:31 <citiz3n> nope, just receiving
824 2011-05-27 04:53:44 <citiz3n> according to the block explorer, this transaction WAS included in a block?
825 2011-05-27 04:53:50 <citiz3n> so it should have 1 confirmation, shouldn't it?
826 2011-05-27 04:54:04 <stuhood> yes
827 2011-05-27 04:54:12 <erbs> confir2
828 2011-05-27 04:54:22 <citiz3n> perhaps redownloading the blocks would bring it through?
829 2011-05-27 04:54:29 <erbs> OK
830 2011-05-27 04:54:36 ezl has joined
831 2011-05-27 04:55:28 <stuhood> citiz3n: yes⦠but i personally don't know the best way to do that
832 2011-05-27 04:58:38 Rudycoin has joined
833 2011-05-27 04:59:08 neoeinstein_ has joined
834 2011-05-27 05:02:35 neoeinstein__ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
835 2011-05-27 05:03:03 dissipate has joined
836 2011-05-27 05:03:04 meLon has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
837 2011-05-27 05:03:38 Kiba` is now known as kiba`
838 2011-05-27 05:04:16 kiba` is now known as kiba
839 2011-05-27 05:06:02 <gmaxwell> citiz3n: hm? the client will spend a tx with no confirmations, though perhaps only as a last resort.
840 2011-05-27 05:06:07 has joined
841 2011-05-27 05:07:00 <gmaxwell> DaSpawn: insure the reciever that a transaction won't vanish later.
842 2011-05-27 05:07:20 <gmaxwell> (or if it does they'll get paid regardless)
843 2011-05-27 05:08:30 <gmaxwell> DaSpawn: there are things you can do beyond just waiting for a TX to have high confidence. For example, if you have good network visibility and you're aware of what txn are in the big miners workqueues then you can be more confident that a TXN will not be reversed and doublespent.
844 2011-05-27 05:09:06 Netsniper has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
845 2011-05-27 05:09:14 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
846 2011-05-27 05:09:27 Netsniper has joined
847 2011-05-27 05:10:17 parus has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
848 2011-05-27 05:10:59 sipa has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
849 2011-05-27 05:11:36 has quit (Netsniper|!~kvirc@adsl-76-240-199-41.dsl.ipltin.sbcglobal.net|Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
850 2011-05-27 05:12:15 parus has joined
851 2011-05-27 05:12:46 sipa has joined
852 2011-05-27 05:13:36 MemoryException has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
853 2011-05-27 05:13:39 sethsethseth__ has quit (Quit: ~ Trillian Astra - www.trillian.im ~)
854 2011-05-27 05:14:28 <Xenland> Is it okay for pushpool to be listening on all addresses and no set ip address when running: netstat -an | grep "LISTEN "
855 2011-05-27 05:15:08 sethsethseth_ has joined
856 2011-05-27 05:15:15 sethsethseth_ has quit (Client Quit)
857 2011-05-27 05:15:18 <Xenland> Let me re-word that, when i run: netstat -an | grep "LISTEN "; I get tcp6 0 0 ::8347
858 2011-05-27 05:15:37 <stuhood> gmaxwell: imo, that's something the escrow should do anyway
859 2011-05-27 05:15:38 <Xenland> that to me means that it dosne't bind to an ip address
860 2011-05-27 05:15:44 FabianB_ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
861 2011-05-27 05:15:47 <Xenland> idk if thats bad or good
862 2011-05-27 05:16:11 sethsethseth_ has joined
863 2011-05-27 05:18:10 <DaSpawn> gmaxwell: very true.. so sonfidence service can be built that "guarantees" transactions and to protect their interests monitors many parts of bitcoins, in turn also securing the entire network since they could also have an alert service...
864 2011-05-27 05:18:38 <DaSpawn> and would cause malicious activity to be caught very quickly..
865 2011-05-27 05:19:12 <gmaxwell> Yep. And making money in the process. win win win.
866 2011-05-27 05:19:30 <Xenland> Whats the maximum length of a bitcoin address?
867 2011-05-27 05:19:54 <jlewis> jrmithdobbs: ping?
868 2011-05-27 05:20:03 <DaSpawn> sha hash, 40 isn't it?
869 2011-05-27 05:20:06 <jrmithdobbs> jlewis: what's up?
870 2011-05-27 05:20:28 <DaSpawn> (checking)
871 2011-05-27 05:20:39 FabianB has joined
872 2011-05-27 05:20:46 <jrmithdobbs> jlewis: oh, about my comment on your pull i'm sure. ;P
873 2011-05-27 05:20:48 <jlewis> thanks for commenting on my asio pull - do you have any ideas about how to benchmark it? people on the forum want to see some of that and i wasn't able to do a very good job
874 2011-05-27 05:21:19 <jrmithdobbs> jlewis: just tell them to run bitcoind with miners capable of about 4-5Ghash/s hitting rpc directly
875 2011-05-27 05:21:27 iera has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
876 2011-05-27 05:21:31 <jrmithdobbs> jlewis: it's an obvious improvement
877 2011-05-27 05:22:03 <jrmithdobbs> jlewis: you go from "problem connecting to rpc" at least once every 3-4 seconds to barely seeing it at all
878 2011-05-27 05:22:06 <jlewis> do you think you could make a forum post about it? that's great that it's actually working well, but so far i haven't been able to demonstrate it, lacking the access to 5 ghash/s miners and stuff
879 2011-05-27 05:22:07 lamuguo has joined
880 2011-05-27 05:22:14 <lamuguo> Hi
881 2011-05-27 05:22:19 <jlewis> lemme get the link
882 2011-05-27 05:22:19 <lamuguo> Have a question related to mining
883 2011-05-27 05:22:34 <jlewis> your testimony would improve it's merging chances i think
884 2011-05-27 05:22:52 <lamuguo> I sent request to get a work as {"method":"getwork","params":[],"id":0}
885 2011-05-27 05:22:59 <jrmithdobbs> jlewis: just tell them that eligius and all the pools have had to custom implement something similar or they can't feed the miner proxy, lol
886 2011-05-27 05:23:01 <DaSpawn> Xenland: I am not sure, better someone answers...
887 2011-05-27 05:23:09 iera has joined
888 2011-05-27 05:23:12 <stuhood> jlewis, jrmithdobbs: isn't there the equivalent of a ping request that you could benchmark with?
889 2011-05-27 05:23:12 <jrmithdobbs> jlewis: link to thread? are people really arguing it's usefulness?
890 2011-05-27 05:23:16 <lamuguo> And the work response is: {"id":"1","result":{"hash1":"00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000008000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000010000","data":"0000000139e578abffef211aa3268996eb74fc801b7c914401c3aaa10000221a000000006ddc5ba78b6c1b04493a18f16226e9eb03c5fe14a947441628a1990ed1cb296f4ddf31281a2694210000000000000080000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
891 2011-05-27 05:23:18 <stuhood> or something that does a bit of io at least
892 2011-05-27 05:23:27 <jlewis> https://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=7757.msg113094#msg113094
893 2011-05-27 05:23:35 <jlewis> jrmithdobbs: no one's aruging, there's just no proof yet..
894 2011-05-27 05:23:56 has joined
895 2011-05-27 05:23:57 <lamuguo> d"data":"0000000139e578abffef211aa3268996eb74fc801b7c914401c3aaa10000221a000000006ddc5ba78b6c1b04493a18f16226e9eb03c5fe14a947441628a1990ed1cb296f4ddf31281a26942100000000000000800000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000080020000",
896 2011-05-27 05:24:44 <lamuguo> And I mine out one block as: "0000000139e578abffef211aa3268996eb74fc801b7c914401c3aaa10000221a00000000f2f60262c58e2b9b540b4dc899e61acbc94ebe2a8c6ebe111f415267d46ea8ac4ddf31141a2694218ed39c8d000000800000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000080020000"
897 2011-05-27 05:25:13 da2ce7 has joined
898 2011-05-27 05:26:10 <lamuguo> But once I submit result request as: {"method":"getwork","params":["0000000139e578abffef211aa3268996eb74fc801b7c914401c3aaa10000221a000000006ddc5ba78b6c1b04493a18f16226e9eb03c5fe14a947441628a1990ed1cb296f4ddf31281a2694214e3b78f5000000800000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000080020000"],"id":1}
899 2011-05-27 05:26:20 <lamuguo> The server send me a new request for mining.
900 2011-05-27 05:26:33 <lamuguo> Is there anyone know what is the problem? Thanks!
901 2011-05-27 05:26:36 Netsniper has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
902 2011-05-27 05:29:39 <io_error> Akiron: What's up?
903 2011-05-27 05:30:14 <Akiron> bitcoin days is an interesting measure
904 2011-05-27 05:30:31 <doublec> lamuguo: what server?
905 2011-05-27 05:30:44 <io_error> Akiron: It wasn't my idea, I just wrote a script to walk the block chain :)
906 2011-05-27 05:31:00 <Akiron> but i guess what i imagine might be insightful would be a histogram of bitcoins per number of times transacted
907 2011-05-27 05:31:20 <lamuguo> http://mining.bitcoin.cz:8332
908 2011-05-27 05:31:25 <lamuguo> Server is: http://mining.bitcoin.cz:8332
909 2011-05-27 05:31:42 <lamuguo> And I use a test account: j16sdiz.gaeminer / unconfiged
910 2011-05-27 05:32:06 <io_error> Akiron: My sooper sekrit project I"m in the middle of might be able to do that
911 2011-05-27 05:32:41 * io_error rethinks all the database indexes
912 2011-05-27 05:32:56 <Akiron> interesting, will it be public or proprietary?
913 2011-05-27 05:33:04 <io_error> Akiron: It will be a web service
914 2011-05-27 05:33:39 <Akiron> ooooooh, where can i sign up to your mailing list? =)
915 2011-05-27 05:33:45 <io_error> Akiron: Though, after a certain point, a bitcoin has been spent so many times that it looks like a tree
916 2011-05-27 05:33:52 <io_error> trying to track where the money went
917 2011-05-27 05:34:00 <lamuguo> @doublec any thought on this?
918 2011-05-27 05:34:03 <io_error> The same for backtracking
919 2011-05-27 05:34:16 <doublec> lamuguo: no idea, sorry.
920 2011-05-27 05:34:24 <Akiron> right, but i don't care about the fate of any particular bitcoin, just the number that have been spent 5 times, 6 times, etc.
921 2011-05-27 05:34:43 <io_error> Akiron: Hmmm. I think that's probably impossible
922 2011-05-27 05:35:00 <lamuguo> sigh...
923 2011-05-27 05:35:03 <io_error> Akiron: When they say destroyed, they really mean it - every transaction destroys the original bitcoins and makes new ones
924 2011-05-27 05:35:04 <lamuguo> Will send out mail to ask
925 2011-05-27 05:35:27 twobitcoins has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
926 2011-05-27 05:35:37 <doublec> lamuguo: what miner are you using?
927 2011-05-27 05:35:51 <io_error> Akiron: Let's say you have two 50BTC generated coins, and you decide to spend 73 BTC on a 6990 video card. The two 50BTC are consumed, and two new coins, a 73BTC and a 27BTC are created
928 2011-05-27 05:36:05 <lamuguo> I wrote myself
929 2011-05-27 05:36:10 twobitcoins has joined
930 2011-05-27 05:36:30 <doublec> lamuguo: does it work against the standard bitcoin client?
931 2011-05-27 05:36:38 <BitterTea> io_error: Ah, that's a much more intuitive way of stating it, thanks for that
932 2011-05-27 05:37:15 <Akiron> ok, to me that would be 100 BTC that have been transacted twice
933 2011-05-27 05:37:15 <io_error> BitterTea: Thanks, I made it up myself :)
934 2011-05-27 05:37:37 <io_error> Akiron: Well, you have the generation, and then the spend, so that's twice.
935 2011-05-27 05:37:51 <BitterTea> Akiron: It's a chain of transactions
936 2011-05-27 05:37:58 <Akiron> right, i get that
937 2011-05-27 05:38:00 <io_error> Akiron: I can measure the AMOUNT of bitcoins being spent, obviously, but this makes it impossible to track any single "coin"
938 2011-05-27 05:38:24 <Akiron> yes, i get that, but what i think i overlooked is circularity
939 2011-05-27 05:38:30 OneFixt_ has joined
940 2011-05-27 05:38:31 <BitterTea> In another sense though io, it's kind of unintuitive actually
941 2011-05-27 05:38:37 OneFixt_ has quit (Changing host)
942 2011-05-27 05:38:37 OneFixt_ has joined
943 2011-05-27 05:38:43 OneFixt is now known as Guest47535
944 2011-05-27 05:38:43 <BitterTea> Well, nvm
945 2011-05-27 05:38:56 OneFixt_ is now known as OneFixt
946 2011-05-27 05:38:56 <BitterTea> I was going to say that each output had a corresponding input but it's a many-many relationship
947 2011-05-27 05:39:08 <Akiron> like suppose you have 50 BTC, and you spend 25 and send 25 back to the wallet
948 2011-05-27 05:39:13 <io_error> BitterTea: Yeah, it's not intuitive, but I've been around a while. Chaum's DigiCash did the same thing, only it was the bank that split and recombined the coins.
949 2011-05-27 05:39:34 <io_error> With Bitcoin, the miner does it
950 2011-05-27 05:39:47 <Akiron> i mean address
951 2011-05-27 05:40:00 <io_error> Akiron: From an outside observer it's difficult to figure out which address is the "change"
952 2011-05-27 05:40:08 <io_error> bitcoin intentionally randomizes it
953 2011-05-27 05:40:09 Guest47535 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
954 2011-05-27 05:40:50 <io_error> It didn't do this originally; the earliest blocks in the chain show plenty of tx where the change went back to the original address.
955 2011-05-27 05:40:53 <BitterTea> It could be more random though. Isn't it generally the smaller output out of two?
956 2011-05-27 05:41:06 <io_error> BitterTea: Not necessarily.
957 2011-05-27 05:41:17 <io_error> BitterTea: Depends on how much BTC you spent :)
958 2011-05-27 05:41:42 <Akiron> yeah, maybe the wallet should randomly split itself up periodically
959 2011-05-27 05:41:59 <Akiron> into completely random amounts
960 2011-05-27 05:42:06 MasterChief has quit (Quit: Leaving)
961 2011-05-27 05:42:19 <Akiron> although, i guess with transaction fees, that's not cost free
962 2011-05-27 05:42:35 karnac has quit (Quit: karnac)
963 2011-05-27 05:42:47 <BitterTea> There are theoretical and actual mixing services which would essentially do that
964 2011-05-27 05:42:48 <Akiron> io_error: i think you've convinced me that it can't really be done the way i imagined it
965 2011-05-27 05:42:52 <io_error> Akiron: The thing is, if you want to track a coin, you have to know which one is the change, and it's not presently knowable by any means I know of
966 2011-05-27 05:43:14 <Akiron> i don't really care which is change
967 2011-05-27 05:43:25 <BitterTea> io_error: Have you seen this thread? http://forum.bitcoin.org/?topic=5559.0
968 2011-05-27 05:43:32 <Akiron> just how many transactions are occuring in a chain
969 2011-05-27 05:43:33 <BitterTea> ;;http://forum.bitcoin.org/?topic=5559.0
970 2011-05-27 05:43:34 <gribble> Error: "http://forum.bitcoin.org/?topic=5559.0" is not a valid command.
971 2011-05-27 05:44:31 <io_error> BitterTea: Been a while since I read that thread.
972 2011-05-27 05:44:54 <io_error> Though, I suppose with generated coins it's easy to figure out which is the change. For instance http://blockexplorer.com/tx/dc418dec5ff18e55b27df1544983f085593ecc121c8e31e13cea6f6e59e95e00
973 2011-05-27 05:45:05 <io_error> Three guesses which is the change, and the first two don't count.
974 2011-05-27 05:45:26 <io_error> (I wish I still had those coins)
975 2011-05-27 05:46:18 <Akiron> but then again it's not acyclical
976 2011-05-27 05:46:43 <lamuguo> @doublec What do you mean against?
977 2011-05-27 05:46:45 <gmaxwell> io_error: the change is pretty obvious sometimes.
978 2011-05-27 05:46:46 is now known as Netsniper|!~kvirc@adsl-69-208-137-60.dsl.ipltin.ameritech.net|Netsniper
979 2011-05-27 05:46:53 <lamuguo> I just follow the protocol
980 2011-05-27 05:47:04 <lamuguo> And wrote a parallel miner myself.
981 2011-05-27 05:47:10 <gmaxwell> io_error: e.g. if the input wasn't round to the cents, but one of the outputs is the other output is almost certantly the change.
982 2011-05-27 05:47:12 <BitterTea> io_error: I have no idea which is which
983 2011-05-27 05:47:21 <BitterTea> Unless I assume the smaller
984 2011-05-27 05:47:32 <io_error> BitterTea: Look at the inputs :)
985 2011-05-27 05:47:41 <doublec> lamuguo: have you tested it mining connecting with the standard bitcoin client instead of with a pool
986 2011-05-27 05:47:52 <io_error> BitterTea: If one was the spend, the inputs would be different
987 2011-05-27 05:48:02 <io_error> gmaxwell: Sure, you can often guess.
988 2011-05-27 05:48:13 <luke-jr> jgarzik: oh, now I remember!
989 2011-05-27 05:48:15 <gmaxwell> io_error: also if a coin is ever in a shared input with another coin from address that originated it then it was the change in the prior tx.
990 2011-05-27 05:48:18 <luke-jr> jgarzik: I fixed the MySQL build errors
991 2011-05-27 05:48:28 <doublec> lamuguo: to isolate whether it is a pool problem vs your miners problem
992 2011-05-27 05:48:35 <gmaxwell> (this analysis becomes more powerful as you kink more accounts from shared origination)
993 2011-05-27 05:48:40 <BitterTea> io_error: I'm not getting it :(
994 2011-05-27 05:48:40 <lamuguo> ok, got it. Thanks!
995 2011-05-27 05:48:44 <lamuguo> Let me try it
996 2011-05-27 05:49:05 <BitterTea> Good thing I'm not a bitcoin transaction investigator
997 2011-05-27 05:49:22 <io_error> gmaxwell: Good point. I think I have some code to write :)
998 2011-05-27 05:49:34 <io_error> BitterTea: You still looking at the 54/46 split?
999 2011-05-27 05:50:05 <io_error> BitterTea: If 46 was the spend, and 54 the change, what would the inputs look like?
1000 2011-05-27 05:50:07 <gmaxwell> io_error: ideally you want some whole graph coloring thing that puts addresses into clusters and minimizes the cross-contamination from joint sends.
1001 2011-05-27 05:50:28 <BitterTea> io_error: :)
1002 2011-05-27 05:50:33 MemoryException has joined
1003 2011-05-27 05:50:33 <gmaxwell> io_error: but once the contamination happens it should merge the clusters and freely join from them (since it's already too late)
1004 2011-05-27 05:50:44 <io_error> gmaxwell: Well now I have some good ideas; I even have some ideas to tie addresses together, just gotta build the DB now :)
1005 2011-05-27 05:50:46 <BitterTea> Was staring right at, but not seeing, it
1006 2011-05-27 05:51:22 <BitterTea> Would it make the links more difficult to follow if you, say, used twice as many inputs as necessary and had multiple change outputs?
1007 2011-05-27 05:51:25 <io_error> This chat has been really good.
1008 2011-05-27 05:51:40 wolfspraul has joined
1009 2011-05-27 05:51:44 <gmaxwell> io_error: also, it can be adventagious to reuse change addresses. e.g. if I send twice to the same address, I should reuse the same change. Change is often identifyable by the fact that it only gets input once.
1010 2011-05-27 05:51:45 <io_error> BitterTea: Absolutely! Fortunately one can hack the client to use extra inputs and extra outputs.
1011 2011-05-27 05:52:11 <lamuguo> doublec do you have any client for connecting?
1012 2011-05-27 05:52:13 <BitterTea> That's a good point
1013 2011-05-27 05:52:34 <BitterTea> Both of those combined could make it much more difficult to identify from the actual exchange
1014 2011-05-27 05:52:53 <doublec> lamuguo: just use the address and port of your locally running bitcoind instance and your miner will use that
1015 2011-05-27 05:52:56 <io_error> gmaxwell: True, but that could also be used to associate transactions together.
1016 2011-05-27 05:53:21 <gmaxwell> io_error: you detect the cases where they can already be associated and only do it there.
1017 2011-05-27 05:53:47 <io_error> gmaxwell: That gives me a headache. :)
1018 2011-05-27 05:53:50 <gmaxwell> io_error: e.g. A->B,C (c is change) if A->B over and over again but the change chages then the change becomes increasingly obvious.
1019 2011-05-27 05:54:04 <gmaxwell> but if you constantly do A->B,C no additional information leaks.
1020 2011-05-27 05:54:37 <gmaxwell> Then it's very important that C never be used in a TX with A or any other address which has ever been a source with A.
1021 2011-05-27 05:54:42 <io_error> gmaxwell: I think Bitcoin could do that.
1022 2011-05-27 05:54:54 <jine> Anyone awake and willing to help me? Issue with calc hash/sec on a pool, based on shares: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=10121.msg145438#msg145438
1023 2011-05-27 05:55:14 <io_error> Though it's also a problem in that people don't often pay the same address over and over (unless they're mining pools)
1024 2011-05-27 05:55:34 <BitterTea> I could see having an account with a company
1025 2011-05-27 05:55:43 <BitterTea> Your address is your account number, and you pay your bills there
1026 2011-05-27 05:55:47 <doublec> jine: have you seen this http://forum.bitcoin.org/?topic=7613.0
1027 2011-05-27 05:56:07 <BitterTea> It would be easy for them to watch for payments and associate them to your account
1028 2011-05-27 05:56:16 <io_error> Even mtgox won't give me the same receiving address if I send bitcoins to mtgox
1029 2011-05-27 05:56:19 <BitterTea> Compared to generating a new address for each bill
1030 2011-05-27 05:56:45 <BitterTea> I'd say that's more sensitive information than your internet bill, say ;)
1031 2011-05-27 05:56:56 Kurtov has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1032 2011-05-27 05:56:56 <gmaxwell> Getting new addresses helps anonymity but you can bet people won't always do that.
1033 2011-05-27 05:57:29 <io_error> BitterTea: Probably so :)
1034 2011-05-27 05:57:37 <citiz3n> omg, my coins are here :D
1035 2011-05-27 05:57:40 <io_error> Though bitcoin has broken my anonymity in a few non-obvious ways
1036 2011-05-27 05:57:48 <citiz3n> just had to redownload the whole blockchain again
1037 2011-05-27 05:58:06 <io_error> For instance I signed up with bitcoin toss referral program and every couple of days they send me a 0.01 when somebody loses their money
1038 2011-05-27 05:58:16 <io_error> That's the only place I used that particular address.
1039 2011-05-27 05:58:28 <io_error> But yesterday when i sent some bitcoins to someone else entirely, that address was used as the sending address
1040 2011-05-27 05:59:20 <gmaxwell> it would be nice if you could quarantine accountsâ so they could never draw from any addresses in other accounts or vice versa.
1041 2011-05-27 05:59:23 has joined
1042 2011-05-27 05:59:34 <io_error> Which now that I think of it is normal, but it was unexpected.
1043 2011-05-27 05:59:47 <erbs> ArtForzZz is a genius
1044 2011-05-27 06:00:24 <gmaxwell> Right now, for ease of use sake my wallet has an account with a public non-profit's address in it that I'm in charge of collection for. I sometimes worry that my spending getting drawn from that is going to end up in the blockchain and someone might see a known payment address and think the non-profit is misspending funds.
1045 2011-05-27 06:00:47 Blue_Helix has joined
1046 2011-05-27 06:00:58 Blue_Helix has left ()
1047 2011-05-27 06:01:13 <gmaxwell> so it would be nice to just quarantine that account so I don't have to worry about keeping a seperate wallet to avoid conflated spending.
1048 2011-05-27 06:01:16 <erbs> jus giv me the coinz
1049 2011-05-27 06:01:24 <erbs> i will keep them safes
1050 2011-05-27 06:01:31 <gmaxwell> io_error: a lot of people think bitcoin is more anonymous than it is, which is going to get someone hurt eventually.
1051 2011-05-27 06:01:42 mtrlt has joined
1052 2011-05-27 06:02:16 Netsniper has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1053 2011-05-27 06:02:19 stuhood has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1054 2011-05-27 06:02:39 <jine> doublec: Trying to solve it, its not working the way i want to :// Strange.
1055 2011-05-27 06:03:46 is now known as Netsniper|!~kvirc@adsl-76-251-229-217.dsl.ipltin.sbcglobal.net|Netsniper
1056 2011-05-27 06:03:53 Akiron has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1057 2011-05-27 06:04:30 sethsethseth_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1058 2011-05-27 06:05:29 <io_error> gmaxwell: well, maybe this will help find some ways to make bitcoin a bit more anonymous.
1059 2011-05-27 06:06:00 <io_error> citiz3n: Have you seen this? https://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=9991
1060 2011-05-27 06:06:37 <gmaxwell> io_error: I think it's fundimentally hard. At best a TX has two interaction points. If you can deanonymize one you can walk the chain back.
1061 2011-05-27 06:07:21 <io_error> gmaxwell: Oh sure, i can go back all the way to the generation of every coin. Akiron's more interesting problem was walking forward and learning anything useful.
1062 2011-05-27 06:08:00 <erbs> how many buttcoins do neee?
1063 2011-05-27 06:08:15 twobitcoins has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1064 2011-05-27 06:11:06 <io_error> Buttcoins?
1065 2011-05-27 06:11:58 twobitcoins has joined
1066 2011-05-27 06:12:54 <Xenland> io_error: is that what the prostitutes call 'em now?
1067 2011-05-27 06:13:54 <io_error> Xenland: I wouldn't mind paying a prostitute with buttcoins! er, bitcoins
1068 2011-05-27 06:15:00 dissipate has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1069 2011-05-27 06:15:14 <Xenland> XD
1070 2011-05-27 06:15:48 <Xenland> here's 20 buttcoins now play with this shake-weight
1071 2011-05-27 06:17:39 <erbs> i prefer titcoin
1072 2011-05-27 06:17:51 Marcel has joined
1073 2011-05-27 06:18:13 kseistrup has quit (Quit: bbl...)
1074 2011-05-27 06:21:24 <glicth-mod> How can a miner charge transaction fees?
1075 2011-05-27 06:22:49 BitterTea has quit (Quit: leaving)
1076 2011-05-27 06:23:52 danbri has joined
1077 2011-05-27 06:24:57 <io_error> glicth-mod: by including transactions which have the fees they want, and skipping the rest
1078 2011-05-27 06:25:01 <Xenland> glicth-mod: i wonder.....
1079 2011-05-27 06:25:20 kluge has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1080 2011-05-27 06:25:44 <erbs> do i need a coinbit acc to use mygox?
1081 2011-05-27 06:26:30 <glicth-mod> Is this something I can implement on my rig?
1082 2011-05-27 06:26:32 BMoney has quit ()
1083 2011-05-27 06:28:54 <erbs> yes
1084 2011-05-27 06:29:34 <glicth-mod> How?
1085 2011-05-27 06:30:29 <gmaxwell> glicth-mod: not if you're part of a pool
1086 2011-05-27 06:30:47 Rudycoin has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1087 2011-05-27 06:30:50 <gmaxwell> if you're part of a poll you're not a real minerâ you're a mining slave. Slaves don't set the policy they just work. Work slave work!
1088 2011-05-27 06:32:25 <gmaxwell> glicth-mod: if you're actually mining solo, you'll get transaction fees when they come, you don't need to change anything.
1089 2011-05-27 06:32:26 Rudycoin has joined
1090 2011-05-27 06:32:27 <erbs> zarbalarba
1091 2011-05-27 06:32:33 <gmaxwell> The software already prefers tx with fees.
1092 2011-05-27 06:32:47 <glicth-mod> I see
1093 2011-05-27 06:33:04 MemoryException has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.0.4 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
1094 2011-05-27 06:33:53 <glicth-mod> My rig does a steady 1.5 gigahashes would it be wise to break from the pool?
1095 2011-05-27 06:33:59 <erbs> no
1096 2011-05-27 06:34:05 <erbs> your rig is miniscule
1097 2011-05-27 06:34:11 <glicth-mod> i kno :(
1098 2011-05-27 06:34:12 <erbs> pool big
1099 2011-05-27 06:34:36 <erbs> theres no profit in mining im afraid.. unless you run a "pool" and can skim fees
1100 2011-05-27 06:34:58 <gmaxwell> wise depends on your risk tolerance, the expected returns are the same (to slightly better, depending) when solo but the risk is higher.
1101 2011-05-27 06:35:21 <Xenland> does slush charge 1BTC per block or per worker/block found?
1102 2011-05-27 06:35:36 blueadept has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1103 2011-05-27 06:37:33 <gmaxwell> per block.. 2%.
1104 2011-05-27 06:39:52 <erbs> (% of a total that could be a lie)
1105 2011-05-27 06:40:07 <erbs> the total is a billion! your % is 0.000000 sorry :(
1106 2011-05-27 06:41:23 kseistrup has joined
1107 2011-05-27 06:42:04 Rudycoin has quit (Read error: No route to host)
1108 2011-05-27 06:42:08 danbri has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1109 2011-05-27 06:42:43 danbri has joined
1110 2011-05-27 06:42:51 kseistrup has left ()
1111 2011-05-27 06:44:07 z310 has joined
1112 2011-05-27 06:44:27 redengin has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1113 2011-05-27 06:45:04 <erbs> do i need a private keys
1114 2011-05-27 06:46:25 <erbs> http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-04-scientists-spacetime-dimension.html
1115 2011-05-27 06:46:27 <erbs> time does not exist
1116 2011-05-27 06:50:23 xenland_ has joined
1117 2011-05-27 06:50:53 twobitcoins has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1118 2011-05-27 06:51:18 AnatolV has joined
1119 2011-05-27 06:51:30 twobitcoins has joined
1120 2011-05-27 06:52:06 danbri has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1121 2011-05-27 06:52:12 danbri has joined
1122 2011-05-27 06:52:29 io_error has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1123 2011-05-27 06:52:39 <gmaxwell> The duplicate generations it the lost coin thread are pretty hilarious.
1124 2011-05-27 06:52:49 <erbs> duplk?
1125 2011-05-27 06:53:05 stuhood has joined
1126 2011-05-27 06:55:20 <erbs> hood you old zebra!
1127 2011-05-27 06:57:30 MasterChief has joined
1128 2011-05-27 06:59:08 xenland_ has quit (Quit: IRC for iPhone)
1129 2011-05-27 06:59:48 larsivi has joined
1130 2011-05-27 06:59:55 <soultcer> I've read your contributions in the last few hours, erbs. There has not been a single one that was useful in any way
1131 2011-05-27 07:00:26 <wumpus> so we have a new clown in our channel
1132 2011-05-27 07:01:05 <soultcer> A silent cloin, that is
1133 2011-05-27 07:01:10 <soultcer> *clown
1134 2011-05-27 07:02:31 twobitcoins has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1135 2011-05-27 07:02:51 danbri_ has joined
1136 2011-05-27 07:02:59 danbri has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1137 2011-05-27 07:03:40 twobitcoins has joined
1138 2011-05-27 07:07:07 sgstair has quit (Read error: No route to host)
1139 2011-05-27 07:07:33 sgstair has joined
1140 2011-05-27 07:10:12 Jere_Jones has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1141 2011-05-27 07:10:15 neoeinstein_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1142 2011-05-27 07:10:20 has joined
1143 2011-05-27 07:10:23 neoeinstein_ has joined
1144 2011-05-27 07:10:36 Jere_Jones has joined
1145 2011-05-27 07:11:35 Netsniper has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1146 2011-05-27 07:12:09 danbri_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1147 2011-05-27 07:12:38 devon_hillard has joined
1148 2011-05-27 07:12:38 devon_hillard has quit (Changing host)
1149 2011-05-27 07:12:38 devon_hillard has joined
1150 2011-05-27 07:15:46 lamuguo has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1151 2011-05-27 07:17:24 is now known as Netsniper|!~kvirc@adsl-76-240-204-141.dsl.ipltin.sbcglobal.net|Netsniper
1152 2011-05-27 07:18:23 larsivi has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1153 2011-05-27 07:21:23 Phoebus has joined
1154 2011-05-27 07:26:39 eoss has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1155 2011-05-27 07:27:50 krekbwoy has joined
1156 2011-05-27 07:28:38 larsivi has joined
1157 2011-05-27 07:30:00 <Phoebus> Watching all the bitcoin mining videos on youtube is pretty exciting, especially given I don't have the time to do this.
1158 2011-05-27 07:30:10 has joined
1159 2011-05-27 07:32:01 Netsniper has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1160 2011-05-27 07:32:52 jargon has quit (Disconnected by services)
1161 2011-05-27 07:36:35 legion050 has joined
1162 2011-05-27 07:36:56 kreal- has joined
1163 2011-05-27 07:39:48 pirrr has joined
1164 2011-05-27 07:43:22 krekbwoy has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1165 2011-05-27 07:44:56 danbri has joined
1166 2011-05-27 07:49:50 mosi has joined
1167 2011-05-27 07:52:39 phuzion has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1168 2011-05-27 07:53:29 phuzion has joined
1169 2011-05-27 07:54:37 f1nack has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1170 2011-05-27 07:55:39 mos has joined
1171 2011-05-27 07:56:56 tcoppi has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1172 2011-05-27 07:57:20 mosi has quit (work!~mos@217.22.80.82|Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1173 2011-05-27 07:57:42 tcoppi has joined
1174 2011-05-27 08:01:36 f1nack has joined
1175 2011-05-27 08:04:08 erik__ has joined
1176 2011-05-27 08:04:11 erik__ is now known as krekbwoy
1177 2011-05-27 08:05:08 johnnympereira5 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1178 2011-05-27 08:05:15 <stuhood> zebra?
1179 2011-05-27 08:05:28 <stuhood> i swear erbs was human yesterday
1180 2011-05-27 08:06:06 <phantomcircuit> stuhood, lies
1181 2011-05-27 08:07:53 GarrettB has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1182 2011-05-27 08:12:24 <gjs278> ;;bc,stats
1183 2011-05-27 08:12:26 <gribble> Current Blocks: 127114 | Current Difficulty: 434882.7217497 | Next Difficulty At Block: 129023 | Next Difficulty In: 1909 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 2 days, 13 hours, 36 minutes, and 37 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 608604.33312815
1184 2011-05-27 08:15:20 dvide has joined
1185 2011-05-27 08:16:03 discHead has joined
1186 2011-05-27 08:16:09 Stellar has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1187 2011-05-27 08:19:52 Stellar has joined
1188 2011-05-27 08:25:55 draag has joined
1189 2011-05-27 08:27:20 draaglom has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1190 2011-05-27 08:28:45 eao has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1191 2011-05-27 08:28:56 Mononofu has joined
1192 2011-05-27 08:31:48 mmoya has joined
1193 2011-05-27 08:37:30 noagendamarket has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1194 2011-05-27 08:40:55 AStove has joined
1195 2011-05-27 08:46:04 <sacarlson> crap I didn't set the transaction fee on my testnet so I guess that transaction will never move? I sent another one but seems testnet is slow today
1196 2011-05-27 08:47:36 <sacarlson> oh well good excuse to do my laundry, transaction should be done by then
1197 2011-05-27 08:48:46 <JFK911> ;;bc,mtgox
1198 2011-05-27 08:48:46 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":8.92,"low":8.201,"vol":20206,"buy":8.79,"sell":8.83,"last":8.83}}
1199 2011-05-27 08:49:16 <eps1> ;;bc,stats
1200 2011-05-27 08:49:18 <gribble> Current Blocks: 127116 | Current Difficulty: 434882.7217497 | Next Difficulty At Block: 129023 | Next Difficulty In: 1907 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 3 days, 2 hours, 4 minutes, and 59 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 576428.27251580
1201 2011-05-27 08:49:24 <eps1> ;;bc,mtgox
1202 2011-05-27 08:49:24 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":8.92,"low":8.201,"vol":20206,"buy":8.79,"sell":8.83,"last":8.83}}
1203 2011-05-27 08:50:38 jivvz has joined
1204 2011-05-27 08:51:39 <Stabaho> anyone setup a wordpress shopping cart to use bitcoin in here?
1205 2011-05-27 08:55:36 discHead has left ()
1206 2011-05-27 08:56:14 <phantomcircuit> Stabaho, i dont believe there is anyway to do so yet
1207 2011-05-27 08:57:24 d1g1t4l has joined
1208 2011-05-27 08:57:32 <Stabaho> ive found some addon, http://www.nostate.com/3971/bitcoin-for-wp-e-commerce-shopping-cart-for-wordpress/
1209 2011-05-27 08:57:41 <Stabaho> just having trouble getting it to see my rpc server
1210 2011-05-27 08:58:29 <Stabaho> im hosting my bitcoind rpc server at home, and not locally on the website
1211 2011-05-27 08:58:59 <gjs278> you'll have to port forward
1212 2011-05-27 08:59:08 <gjs278> it would also be a good idea to keep it local to the website
1213 2011-05-27 08:59:15 <Stabaho> i have my router setup to forward the port
1214 2011-05-27 08:59:15 <gjs278> because if your main pc is down, your website would be nonfunctional
1215 2011-05-27 08:59:31 <Stabaho> its not on my main pc, its on a old server i have
1216 2011-05-27 08:59:59 <Stabaho> im using a free hosting atm, and i dont think i can run bitcoind on the hosting server
1217 2011-05-27 09:00:04 <gjs278> well anyways
1218 2011-05-27 09:00:09 <gjs278> what's the problem it's facing
1219 2011-05-27 09:00:12 <gjs278> trying to connect
1220 2011-05-27 09:00:55 <Stabaho> it doesnt give a good error message, just The Bitcoin server is presently unavailable.
1221 2011-05-27 09:01:09 <Stabaho> i was hoping to find someone else who had tried
1222 2011-05-27 09:04:31 <CIA-103> DiabloMiner: Patrick McFarland master * rfbd225b / (2 files in 2 dirs): Fixed bug with mtrlt's code, recomitting it - http://bit.ly/jW71ca
1223 2011-05-27 09:05:38 gsathya has quit (Quit: gsathya)
1224 2011-05-27 09:10:18 <Phoebus> What happens when a wallet hasn't been online for say half a year?
1225 2011-05-27 09:10:44 <Stabaho> it has to download some updates
1226 2011-05-27 09:10:57 <Phoebus> And should be fine.
1227 2011-05-27 09:11:09 <Phoebus> Cuz I have my old wallet in an external sata drive.
1228 2011-05-27 09:12:26 <eps1> a wallet doesn't need to be online until you want to spend no?
1229 2011-05-27 09:12:51 <eps1> you can recieve ragardless
1230 2011-05-27 09:13:22 <Phoebus> The contents will update when you get the latest.
1231 2011-05-27 09:13:53 <Phoebus> Now given the wallet is a file, what happens when duplicates get accessed?
1232 2011-05-27 09:14:06 <Phoebus> The state of the wallet is on the distributed network, agreed.
1233 2011-05-27 09:14:07 <eps1> it is the same private key
1234 2011-05-27 09:14:12 <sipa> the first one to spend a coin gets it
1235 2011-05-27 09:14:19 <Phoebus> But having 2 files, means 2 people have the right to spend from it?
1236 2011-05-27 09:14:25 <Phoebus> ah
1237 2011-05-27 09:19:44 stuhood1 has joined
1238 2011-05-27 09:21:22 stuhood1 has quit (Client Quit)
1239 2011-05-27 09:22:27 stuhood has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1240 2011-05-27 09:25:09 Kurtov has joined
1241 2011-05-27 09:25:22 wekka has left ()
1242 2011-05-27 09:25:29 <topi`_> 1 private key, 1 chance of spending the coin in question.
1243 2011-05-27 09:25:30 ntosme21 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1244 2011-05-27 09:25:42 <topi`_> you can have 2 files but they probably contain the same privkeys.
1245 2011-05-27 09:25:56 <sipa> wrong
1246 2011-05-27 09:26:06 <sipa> same address -> both chance to spend it
1247 2011-05-27 09:26:13 <sipa> the private key does not need to be identical
1248 2011-05-27 09:26:23 <topi`_> the avg blocks/hour is 10.00 so the difficulty is still going to climb up
1249 2011-05-27 09:26:30 <topi`_> sipa: where were your difficulty plots?
1250 2011-05-27 09:26:38 <sipa> bitcoin.sipa.be
1251 2011-05-27 09:26:43 <topi`_> thx
1252 2011-05-27 09:27:14 <topi`_> the mystery miner of march is now showing as a tiny spike down below :)
1253 2011-05-27 09:27:23 <wumpus> now that's a j-curve
1254 2011-05-27 09:27:51 <Kurtov> Does anyone have any experience with unlocking the shaders on a 6950? I need urgent help
1255 2011-05-27 09:28:02 <topi`_> I guess it just shows that there are more people coming every day, AND they are purchasing their local comp stores empty of radeon 5xxx's :)
1256 2011-05-27 09:28:31 d1g1t4l has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1257 2011-05-27 09:28:46 d1g1t4l has joined
1258 2011-05-27 09:29:49 dbitcoin has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1259 2011-05-27 09:30:10 datagutt has joined
1260 2011-05-27 09:30:10 datagutt has quit (Changing host)
1261 2011-05-27 09:30:10 datagutt has joined
1262 2011-05-27 09:30:33 Kurtov has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1263 2011-05-27 09:30:36 <EPiSKiNG> it's a damn shame
1264 2011-05-27 09:39:20 Clipse has joined
1265 2011-05-27 09:42:15 Sylph has joined
1266 2011-05-27 09:48:30 <UukGoblin> "DNS transactions may not contain change outputs. Inputs should be chosen in such a way that no change is required." <- nanotube, theymos: why?
1267 2011-05-27 09:48:57 RazielZ has joined
1268 2011-05-27 09:50:36 <Diablo-D3> UukGoblin: less bullshit spam for one
1269 2011-05-27 09:51:56 <UukGoblin> Diablo-D3, err, more, imho. You need to send one more transaction and get it confirmed, to prepare your inputs accordingly
1270 2011-05-27 09:52:22 <Diablo-D3> if your inputs match your outputs
1271 2011-05-27 09:52:25 <Diablo-D3> then less data in the block
1272 2011-05-27 09:52:28 <Diablo-D3> ergo, less chance of a fee
1273 2011-05-27 09:52:40 <UukGoblin> chance of a fee? a fee is /required/
1274 2011-05-27 09:52:58 <nevezen> ;;bc,calc 989342
1275 2011-05-27 09:52:58 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 989342 Khps, given current difficulty of 434882.7217497 , is 3 weeks, 0 days, 20 hours, 25 minutes, and 28 seconds
1276 2011-05-27 09:53:01 <Diablo-D3> you know what I mean
1277 2011-05-27 09:53:25 <Diablo-D3> and with no change, it churns spare addresses in wallets less
1278 2011-05-27 09:53:50 <UukGoblin> spare addresses in wallets are the same, because you first need to prepare your input
1279 2011-05-27 09:54:00 * Diablo-D3 shrugs
1280 2011-05-27 09:54:01 <Diablo-D3> w/e
1281 2011-05-27 09:54:03 <UukGoblin> say you have an address that contains 50 bitcoins
1282 2011-05-27 09:54:11 <UukGoblin> you want to spend 10 bitcoins for a domain registration
1283 2011-05-27 09:54:11 f1nack has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1284 2011-05-27 09:54:22 <nevezen> ;;bc,calc 1702332
1285 2011-05-27 09:54:22 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 1702332 Khps, given current difficulty of 434882.7217497 , is 1 week, 5 days, 16 hours, 46 minutes, and 44 seconds
1286 2011-05-27 09:54:32 <UukGoblin> with this restriction, you need to first create a regular bitcoin transaction which will split the 50 bitcoins into 10 and 40
1287 2011-05-27 09:54:43 <UukGoblin> and then a second transaction that uses the 10 for domain
1288 2011-05-27 09:54:54 <UukGoblin> without this restriction, it'd all be one transaction only
1289 2011-05-27 09:54:54 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1290 2011-05-27 09:55:19 <UukGoblin> same number of addresses, less network overhead, faster, simpler.
1291 2011-05-27 09:55:37 <UukGoblin> (and less data in the blockchain)
1292 2011-05-27 09:55:40 <nevezen> ;;bc,calc 5940111
1293 2011-05-27 09:55:41 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 5940111 Khps, given current difficulty of 434882.7217497 , is 3 days, 15 hours, 20 minutes, and 39 seconds
1294 2011-05-27 09:58:20 <UukGoblin> hrm, also, the four "fee adjusts within ten blocks of the registration transaction" are dodgy
1295 2011-05-27 09:58:37 neoeinstein has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1296 2011-05-27 09:58:38 <UukGoblin> if you don't manage to send them properly within 10 blocks, you'll have lost all the money you've spent on a domain
1297 2011-05-27 10:03:22 Kurtov has joined
1298 2011-05-27 10:08:26 f1nack has joined
1299 2011-05-27 10:09:52 <UukGoblin> the 'other' pool is threatening the security of bitcoins!
1300 2011-05-27 10:10:09 <UukGoblin> it has over 50% of the total bitcoin hashrate! ;-P
1301 2011-05-27 10:11:18 <mtrlt> yep, it was sneaky of them to call their pool that :o
1302 2011-05-27 10:12:56 draaglom has joined
1303 2011-05-27 10:15:11 draag has quit (away!~draaglom@78.148.146.80|Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1304 2011-05-27 10:17:26 d1g1t4l has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1305 2011-05-27 10:19:13 Sedra- has joined
1306 2011-05-27 10:23:06 Sedra has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1307 2011-05-27 10:23:17 <wumpus> yes they grew really quick :p
1308 2011-05-27 10:23:31 <wumpus> first they were the smallest pool
1309 2011-05-27 10:23:42 TheAncientGoat has joined
1310 2011-05-27 10:24:22 <wumpus> well at least deepbit is no longer a threat...
1311 2011-05-27 10:24:49 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: ping
1312 2011-05-27 10:25:23 <BlueMatt> the "other" pool?
1313 2011-05-27 10:26:23 <BlueMatt> oh, lol
1314 2011-05-27 10:27:00 <wumpus> <tinfoil> maybe tycho secretly lowered the reported mhash/s </tinfoil>
1315 2011-05-27 10:27:15 Akinava has quit (Quit: УÑ
Ð¾Ð¶Ñ Ñ Ð¾Ñ Ð²Ð°Ñ)
1316 2011-05-27 10:27:31 <topi`_> ok, now somebody has released an open source fpga miner in github
1317 2011-05-27 10:27:50 <topi`_> but it seems it uses >90k lut so it would mean an expensive FPGA chip
1318 2011-05-27 10:33:02 <UukGoblin> 80Mhash for ... how much $?
1319 2011-05-27 10:33:09 <UukGoblin> and what's the power consumption of it?
1320 2011-05-27 10:33:22 genjix has joined
1321 2011-05-27 10:33:24 <genjix> ;;seen tcatm
1322 2011-05-27 10:33:24 <gribble> tcatm was last seen in #bitcoin-dev 23 hours, 29 minutes, and 44 seconds ago: <tcatm> I'd vote for 3 and switch to 0.0005 fees once most parts of the network allow smaller fees
1323 2011-05-27 10:34:09 <BlueMatt> ;;seen jgarzik
1324 2011-05-27 10:34:09 <gribble> jgarzik was last seen in #bitcoin-dev 5 hours, 56 minutes, and 1 second ago: <jgarzik> luke-jr: I think I've narrowed down an fd leak, btw
1325 2011-05-27 10:35:29 darrob has joined
1326 2011-05-27 10:35:34 <BlueMatt> BlueMattBot: status Bitcoin
1327 2011-05-27 10:35:34 <BlueMattBot> Bitcoin: last build: 33 (14 hr ago): SUCCESS: http://www.bluematt.me/jenkins/job/Bitcoin/33/
1328 2011-05-27 10:39:50 <topi`_> UukGoblin: that dev board (with >110k luts) is approx $600
1329 2011-05-27 10:39:57 meLon has joined
1330 2011-05-27 10:40:04 <topi`_> the power consumption is probably < 10 watts
1331 2011-05-27 10:41:06 Sylph has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1332 2011-05-27 10:41:36 <UukGoblin> topi`_, lut? lookup table?
1333 2011-05-27 10:43:21 Sylph has joined
1334 2011-05-27 10:43:25 <UukGoblin> topi`_, ok so assuming it's 10 watts, it's about 3.5x more power efficient than a 5970
1335 2011-05-27 10:44:04 <BlueMatt> sipa: tcatm ping
1336 2011-05-27 10:45:03 <sipa> BlueMatt: pang
1337 2011-05-27 10:45:34 * BlueMatt broke the build :(
1338 2011-05-27 10:45:44 <BlueMatt> pull dpifix
1339 2011-05-27 10:46:34 <BlueMatt> dont really get it though, isnt gcc supposed to optimize away stuff that cant be possible due to static const's...
1340 2011-05-27 10:48:17 genjix has left ()
1341 2011-05-27 10:49:58 <nanotube> UukGoblin: back before sendmany was introduced, it was felt best to stick to at most two outputs per tx. not so important now that we have sendmany
1342 2011-05-27 10:50:34 <sipa> BlueMatt: it may optimize it away, but the source must still be compilable
1343 2011-05-27 10:50:37 larsivi has quit (Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.)
1344 2011-05-27 10:50:38 <UukGoblin> nanotube, indeed.
1345 2011-05-27 10:50:47 <BlueMattBot> Project Bitcoin build #34: ABORTED in 5 min 18 sec: http://www.bluematt.me/jenkins/job/Bitcoin/34/
1346 2011-05-27 10:50:54 BlueMattBot has quit ()
1347 2011-05-27 10:51:05 larsivi has joined
1348 2011-05-27 10:51:21 <BlueMatt> sipa: hm, it isnt for upnp, but that still works...oh well just needs pulled, simple ifdef fix
1349 2011-05-27 10:51:34 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Matt Corallo master * raf531f0 / src/ui.cpp : Fix GUI build on UNIX. - http://bit.ly/mlnpP9
1350 2011-05-27 10:51:35 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Pieter Wuille master * ra452d9e / src/ui.cpp : Merge remote branch 'bluematt/dpifix' - http://bit.ly/mKwCTx
1351 2011-05-27 10:51:46 <UukGoblin> nanotube, ok, what happens if you don't manage to get your 4 fee-adjusts into the first 10 blocks, i.e: your internet connection drops, or the miners are just being picky?
1352 2011-05-27 10:51:52 <sipa> BlueMatt: where in upnp?
1353 2011-05-27 10:51:58 <UukGoblin> nanotube, do you lose your investment on the domain?
1354 2011-05-27 10:52:10 <jindel> when the network switches to only being supported by fees instead of bitcoin creation, would it be possible or nodes to simply ignore transactions that have a fee below a threshhold and publish solved blocks that only include transactions included a fee over their threshold? -effectivly imposing a minimum fee for the network?
1355 2011-05-27 10:52:16 BlueMattBot has joined
1356 2011-05-27 10:52:23 <sipa> jindel: yes
1357 2011-05-27 10:52:25 <jindel> s/or nodes/for nodes/
1358 2011-05-27 10:52:30 <sipa> supply and demand
1359 2011-05-27 10:52:31 <BlueMatt> sipa: IIRC the if(fHaveUPnP) stuff might be incompatible in a couple places
1360 2011-05-27 10:52:36 <nanotube> UukGoblin: yes, currently that is the case
1361 2011-05-27 10:52:40 <BlueMatt> but I might be wrong
1362 2011-05-27 10:53:13 <jindel> sipa, isn't that a terrible situation though?? -allowing people to impose a minimum transaction fee onto others in the network?
1363 2011-05-27 10:53:31 <sipa> i'm more concerned about them not doing so
1364 2011-05-27 10:53:39 <sipa> making mining unprofitable
1365 2011-05-27 10:54:11 <jindel> sipa, e.g. if I have enough hashing power I can probably delay many transactions from entering the chain if I simply don't include them in my block solutions
1366 2011-05-27 10:54:16 <sipa> jindel: anyone can mine, if you can mine for a cheaper price, you're probably able to accept more transactions with a lower fee than someone else
1367 2011-05-27 10:54:24 <BlueMatt> also, sipa, do you think its a good idea to start a 0.4.0 branch on git to start pulling all this stuff...it might be a considerable amount of work to rebase half of the pull requests onto each other
1368 2011-05-27 10:54:50 <UukGoblin> hm, accepting transactions doesn't translate to mining power
1369 2011-05-27 10:55:01 <sipa> UukGoblin: no, the dynamics of it all are very unclear
1370 2011-05-27 10:55:06 * BlueMatt would like to see a permanent devel-head branch with other branches to slow devel on beta/rcs
1371 2011-05-27 10:55:16 <sipa> BlueMatt: agree
1372 2011-05-27 10:55:27 <UukGoblin> since the cpu/gpu power is usually a limiting factor, I think it's best interest for all miners to simply include all transactions with a fee
1373 2011-05-27 10:55:33 <jindel> UukGoblin, no, I'm saying that if I have a large enough chance of winning the block race, I can choose to simply not include transactions with "too small" of a fee.
1374 2011-05-27 10:55:43 <sipa> jindel: then the next miner will include them
1375 2011-05-27 10:55:45 <UukGoblin> jindel, yes, you can
1376 2011-05-27 10:55:58 <jindel> sipa, good point
1377 2011-05-27 10:56:05 <BlueMatt> sipa: if you dont mind, Im gonna start pulling these pull req's into a temp repo of mine and see what happens
1378 2011-05-27 10:56:05 <sipa> unless you have over 50%, you cannot permanently prevent a tx from being included
1379 2011-05-27 10:56:37 <sipa> BlueMatt: sure, try - i don't think 0.3.22 is that far off though, so it won't be long before we can start on 0.4.0
1380 2011-05-27 10:56:54 <BlueMatt> yep, but why wait 2 days when we can start now :)
1381 2011-05-27 10:57:02 <jindel> sipa, yeah.. good point.. my "pruned blocks" would likely die off of the chain as people provide solutions that included the $0 transactions, too (that were longer than my block)
1382 2011-05-27 10:57:17 <sipa> BlueMatt: have you had a look at my walletclass branch?
1383 2011-05-27 10:57:20 lumos has joined
1384 2011-05-27 10:57:30 <BlueMatt> sipa: not yet, but Id like to see that on 0.4.0
1385 2011-05-27 10:57:35 <jindel> s/$0 transactions/transactions with no fee included/
1386 2011-05-27 10:57:42 <UukGoblin> also, there's a few concerns I have with the 1MB block limit: on one hand, miners can just fill up blocks up to 1MB to include their dodgy data into the block chain, leading to about 500TB block chain after 10 years if everyone did that; on the other hand, 1MB block can only support about 500k transactions per day, which might not be enough in the future
1387 2011-05-27 10:58:09 <BlueMatt> sipa: I suppose thats the first to be merged...then everything gets rebased onto that
1388 2011-05-27 10:59:00 <jindel> UukGoblin, hmrm.. 500k/day sounds small. isn't visa like 4k transactions per second, and ~8.5k per second during holidays?
1389 2011-05-27 10:59:02 <BlueMatt> ?
1390 2011-05-27 10:59:27 <sipa> BlueMatt: it will already be quite some work to rebase walletclass to master, and it definitely needs testing
1391 2011-05-27 10:59:46 <BlueMatt> how out of date is it?
1392 2011-05-27 11:00:04 <jindel> 500k/day isn't even enough to handle the ~46tps that paypal does
1393 2011-05-27 11:00:16 Clipse has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1394 2011-05-27 11:00:20 <sipa> 15 days
1395 2011-05-27 11:00:47 <BlueMatt> cant be *that* bad...famous last words
1396 2011-05-27 11:00:50 Mononofu has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1397 2011-05-27 11:01:10 <sipa> well, it's not worse than redoing it from scratch, which took me "only" 2 weekends :)
1398 2011-05-27 11:01:11 <BlueMatt> anyway, IMHO that is a huge addition that probably takes prio over anything else due for 0.4.0 so...
1399 2011-05-27 11:01:29 <sipa> BlueMatt: anyway, it introduces a CKeystore class, which may be useful for your encryption stuff
1400 2011-05-27 11:01:36 lumos has quit (Client Quit)
1401 2011-05-27 11:01:38 <phantomcircuit> jindel, do you actually have hard facts on credit card volume?
1402 2011-05-27 11:01:50 <jindel> phantomcircuit, looking.
1403 2011-05-27 11:02:05 <BlueMatt> sipa: yea, was thinking about that this morning, Ill go try to rebase your branch, then rebase crypter onto it
1404 2011-05-27 11:02:08 Clipse has joined
1405 2011-05-27 11:02:09 Clipse has quit (Excess Flood)
1406 2011-05-27 11:02:29 Clipse has joined
1407 2011-05-27 11:02:45 <Alexees> I tried to install ubuntu using my new 5970, after the installation finished, I cant get to ubuntu welcome screen, its all black
1408 2011-05-27 11:02:53 <Alexees> trying to reinstall couple times, same results here
1409 2011-05-27 11:02:55 <jindel> phantomcircuit,http://corporate.visa.com/media-center/press-releases/press960.jsp
1410 2011-05-27 11:03:01 <Alexees> does ubuntu support 5970 ?
1411 2011-05-27 11:03:24 <jindel> http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/59438/visa_customers_reap_benefits_ip_network/
1412 2011-05-27 11:03:34 d1g1t4l has joined
1413 2011-05-27 11:05:03 <jindel> phantomcircuit, https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability
1414 2011-05-27 11:06:08 <jindel> ("Today the BitCoin network is restricted to about 7 tps by some artificial limits." = 60*60*24*7 ~= 605k transactions/day )
1415 2011-05-27 11:06:41 <phantomcircuit> jindel, that is just the max block size, which can be increased but never decreased
1416 2011-05-27 11:06:44 <jindel> spose, the sentence after it says why the limit and that it CAN be lifted.
1417 2011-05-27 11:06:47 <phantomcircuit> http://corporate.visa.com/media-center/press-releases/press960.jsp
1418 2011-05-27 11:06:52 <jindel> phantomcircuit, aah, yeah.
1419 2011-05-27 11:07:21 <phantomcircuit> jindel, so currently there is a fairly conservative value chosen for the max block size
1420 2011-05-27 11:07:52 <jindel> phantomcircuit, I see now. -not a hardcoded limit. able to increase as needed by modifying clients.
1421 2011-05-27 11:09:40 <sipa> BlueMatt: i'll first do some cleanup inside walletclass itself - it contains dutch commit messages now :)
1422 2011-05-27 11:10:09 <BlueMatt> sipa: arg, I just got started...oh well tell me when you are dont
1423 2011-05-27 11:10:10 <BlueMatt> e
1424 2011-05-27 11:10:21 <BlueMatt> (plus commits get rebased anyway, so commitmsgs dont matter)
1425 2011-05-27 11:10:37 <jindel> I guess the only thing that would worry me is someone getting 51% of the hashing power. -by DoS'ing the (easily obtainable list of?) miners and getting ahold of a quantum computer (http://vr-zone.com/articles/d-wave-one-released-the-first-commercial-quantum-computer/12303.html) for a few hours, before "trustworthy" people add one to the network
1426 2011-05-27 11:11:50 <sipa> BlueMatt: ok, go ahead, but i think manually backporting all intermediate changes done to the master branch will be easier than using rebase
1427 2011-05-27 11:12:15 <sipa> my git-fu isn't that good yet though, so maybe there are better wats
1428 2011-05-27 11:12:16 <sipa> ways
1429 2011-05-27 11:12:22 <BlueMatt> sipa: ok Ill look into it
1430 2011-05-27 11:12:30 <BlueMatt> cherry-pick each one and see what doesnt merge :)
1431 2011-05-27 11:12:39 <sipa> great
1432 2011-05-27 11:13:07 Kurtov has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1433 2011-05-27 11:14:33 Mononofu has joined
1434 2011-05-27 11:15:53 marlowe has joined
1435 2011-05-27 11:16:16 soossii has joined
1436 2011-05-27 11:19:59 krekbwoy has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1437 2011-05-27 11:20:07 Phoebus has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1438 2011-05-27 11:20:28 Speeder has joined
1439 2011-05-27 11:22:56 mtrlt has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1440 2011-05-27 11:35:04 Kurtov has joined
1441 2011-05-27 11:40:21 da2ce7 has quit ()
1442 2011-05-27 11:43:42 d1g1t4l has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1443 2011-05-27 11:44:16 <topi`_> maybe the max block size could be bound to the size of the mining bounty? i.e. now 50 btc, after 200k blocks 25btc, and after 400k block 12.5 btc
1444 2011-05-27 11:44:38 <topi`_> so that at the 1st level, max block is 1M, then after 200k blocks max=2M, then 4M, 8M etc
1445 2011-05-27 11:44:55 <topi`_> this anticipates the progress made in networks and storage hardware through the years
1446 2011-05-27 11:44:57 mtrlt has joined
1447 2011-05-27 11:45:07 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: how goes builds? I saw the build fix...
1448 2011-05-27 11:45:18 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: building now, linux done..win32 soon
1449 2011-05-27 11:45:42 <BlueMatt> Im working on rebasing sipa's walletclass onto master and hope to start pulling all the 0.4.0 stuff on top of that to get us started
1450 2011-05-27 11:45:54 <BlueMatt> (with 0.4.0)
1451 2011-05-27 11:49:51 <phantomcircuit> topi`_, well really the issue is that large blocks cost everybody time/money but cost the miners nothing
1452 2011-05-27 11:50:04 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: let's see what Gavin says, before assuming. we might want to pull everything but the wallet class, because we sure do have a ton of pull requests pending, and rewriting all those will be a pain
1453 2011-05-27 11:50:06 <phantomcircuit> topi`_, it's a distributed cost with a centralized production point (ie it doesn't scale well)
1454 2011-05-27 11:50:45 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: yea but either way, walletclass should be pulled and why rewrite later when it can be done now, probably easier
1455 2011-05-27 11:50:45 <phantomcircuit> jgarzik, i got the distinct impression he had no intention of pulling most of them
1456 2011-05-27 11:51:15 <BlueMatt> phantomcircuit: when did you speak with him on the subject?
1457 2011-05-27 11:51:49 <phantomcircuit> BlueMatt, there are comments on a lot of them basically saying not gonna happen
1458 2011-05-27 11:52:10 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: update 1 patch (wallet class) versus update N patches... I know what I would pick.
1459 2011-05-27 11:52:18 <BlueMatt> phantomcircuit: thats true, but there are also a ton of pull req that absolutely will be pulled
1460 2011-05-27 11:52:44 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: well either way Im working on rebaseing walletclass to master now, and thats gonna be a decent amount of work...
1461 2011-05-27 11:52:55 <BlueMatt> that needs to happen no matter what
1462 2011-05-27 11:54:13 <jgarzik> agreed
1463 2011-05-27 11:54:29 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: disappearing for a while. will watch email for builds as usual
1464 2011-05-27 11:54:30 <BlueMatt> anyway, I want to get a head start on 0.4.0 as all these pull req conflict with each other anyway
1465 2011-05-27 11:54:39 <BlueMatt> alright, will email
1466 2011-05-27 11:55:36 <sipa> BlueMatt: is it doable?
1467 2011-05-27 11:55:36 <topi`_> phantomcircuit: that's true, and that's why there needs to be limits to the block size. but, as I suggested, the costs of hardware will go down, and hence the max block size could be shifted upwards with a mathematical rule to allow more transactions in the future
1468 2011-05-27 11:55:53 <BlueMatt> sipa: yea, mostly just missing std:: and such after that pull that added all of those
1469 2011-05-27 11:56:10 <sipa> oh right, that one
1470 2011-05-27 11:56:18 <phantomcircuit> topi`_, yeah
1471 2011-05-27 11:56:21 <sipa> that's automatable with some search-replace, no?
1472 2011-05-27 11:56:57 <BlueMatt> sipa: yea, but it also creates conflicts when you try to cherry-pick/patch
1473 2011-05-27 11:57:16 Sylph has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1474 2011-05-27 11:57:17 <sipa> right
1475 2011-05-27 11:58:53 sgornick has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1476 2011-05-27 11:59:33 <topi`_> so, can such a ruleset be introduced in bitcoin 0.4.0? namely that the max block size gets bigger by time
1477 2011-05-27 12:00:01 <topi`_> ideally we should be able to do at least as many tx's per second as paypal.
1478 2011-05-27 12:00:20 <sipa> topi`_: first we need header-only mode
1479 2011-05-27 12:00:31 <sipa> that will increase the potential network speed a lot
1480 2011-05-27 12:01:15 sgornick has joined
1481 2011-05-27 12:01:26 <topi`_> how does header-only work?
1482 2011-05-27 12:03:10 Sylph has joined
1483 2011-05-27 12:03:44 x6763 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1484 2011-05-27 12:05:03 x6763 has joined
1485 2011-05-27 12:07:07 Clipse has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1486 2011-05-27 12:12:07 nzbtc has joined
1487 2011-05-27 12:12:35 agricocb has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1488 2011-05-27 12:13:04 djoot has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1489 2011-05-27 12:13:21 da2ce7 has joined
1490 2011-05-27 12:17:32 danbri has joined
1491 2011-05-27 12:19:54 danbri has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1492 2011-05-27 12:20:54 crystalblue66 has joined
1493 2011-05-27 12:21:00 <crystalblue66> www.xxxlivecam.info
1494 2011-05-27 12:21:38 DaSpawn has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1495 2011-05-27 12:23:10 <UukGoblin> BlueMatt, nice response time
1496 2011-05-27 12:24:44 <BlueMatt> :)
1497 2011-05-27 12:25:27 <BlueMatt> thats why you pay me...oh wait, damn
1498 2011-05-27 12:25:31 <UukGoblin> ;-D
1499 2011-05-27 12:26:00 Akinava has joined
1500 2011-05-27 12:26:27 <BlueMatt> yay rpc-ssl on win32 tested and working on rc5
1501 2011-05-27 12:28:20 Marcel has left (HSD!~Marcel|HS@router2.hsdev.com|)
1502 2011-05-27 12:28:32 Marcel has joined
1503 2011-05-27 12:33:18 <BlueMatt> sipa: why does walletclass make getinfo so slow?
1504 2011-05-27 12:33:31 <BlueMatt> ie why does it appear to be opening wallet.dat each time?
1505 2011-05-27 12:34:13 tom___ has joined
1506 2011-05-27 12:35:08 djoot has joined
1507 2011-05-27 12:35:17 dissipate has joined
1508 2011-05-27 12:35:17 dissipate has quit (Changing host)
1509 2011-05-27 12:35:17 dissipate has joined
1510 2011-05-27 12:36:00 <Diablo-D3> http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/upload/2011/05/may21.jpeg
1511 2011-05-27 12:37:07 Astriks has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1512 2011-05-27 12:37:20 <BlueMatt> ok sipa its rebased onto master
1513 2011-05-27 12:39:10 <sipa> BlueMatt: i noticed that too, didn't look into though
1514 2011-05-27 12:39:32 <BlueMatt> well according to stdout/err its opening wallet.dat every time, but hell if I know
1515 2011-05-27 12:40:03 danbri has joined
1516 2011-05-27 12:40:08 <BlueMatt> I want to see it for 0.4.0 but it needs touchup ;) cant make it slower just for cleaner code
1517 2011-05-27 12:40:26 <sipa> obviously it shouldn't, and if it does, it's a bug
1518 2011-05-27 12:40:39 noagendamarket has joined
1519 2011-05-27 12:40:57 <sipa> but the wallet db handling changed quite a bit, so it's possible
1520 2011-05-27 12:41:01 <BlueMatt> do you happen to know when gavin gets back?
1521 2011-05-27 12:41:37 <sipa> soon, i believe
1522 2011-05-27 12:45:48 <BlueMatt> alright, well Im gonna go see how much effort it would take to rebase stuff onto walletclass and maybe come out with a 0.4.0 beta
1523 2011-05-27 12:46:25 <BlueMatt> because ever patch needs changed for walletclass and its either rebase them or rebase walletclass, either way its the same work
1524 2011-05-27 12:47:32 devrandom1 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1525 2011-05-27 12:48:32 devrandom1 has joined
1526 2011-05-27 12:51:26 <sipa> ;;bc,stats
1527 2011-05-27 12:51:27 <gribble> Current Blocks: 127150 | Current Difficulty: 434882.7217497 | Next Difficulty At Block: 129023 | Next Difficulty In: 1873 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 2 days, 21 hours, 14 minutes, and 48 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 576530.13258944
1528 2011-05-27 12:53:06 <sipa> BlueMatt: getinfo is incredibly slow indeed
1529 2011-05-27 12:54:06 <sipa> BlueMatt: and i know why
1530 2011-05-27 12:54:23 <BlueMatt> care to pull from my branch and fix?
1531 2011-05-27 12:55:07 <sipa> already pulled your branch
1532 2011-05-27 12:55:28 khalahan- has joined
1533 2011-05-27 12:55:40 <sipa> thing is... previously keypool information was kept in a global, now it is in cwalletdb
1534 2011-05-27 12:55:53 <sipa> problem: cwalletdb objects are created all the time, all to access the same db
1535 2011-05-27 12:56:22 <sipa> so i guess the right place is to store it inside cwallety
1536 2011-05-27 12:56:24 <sipa> *cwallet
1537 2011-05-27 12:56:35 <sipa> but that means moving more things around
1538 2011-05-27 12:56:45 <BlueMatt> ok, have fun :)
1539 2011-05-27 12:56:51 <sipa> not now
1540 2011-05-27 12:57:25 <BlueMatt> whenever you get around to it
1541 2011-05-27 13:00:20 agricocb has joined
1542 2011-05-27 13:01:13 <jgarzik> release candidate #5 released. hopefully the last one. please test: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=8894.msg145962#msg145962
1543 2011-05-27 13:01:27 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: there are already 2 pulls for rc6
1544 2011-05-27 13:01:38 <BlueMatt> (well technically one, the other is already in 5)
1545 2011-05-27 13:02:13 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: which one(s)?
1546 2011-05-27 13:02:35 <BlueMatt> the difficulty fix one, and the rpc-ssl stuff which is already in rc5, its just a change to the makefile
1547 2011-05-27 13:03:30 <sipa> i'm not sure the difficulty fix is required for 0.3.22
1548 2011-05-27 13:03:50 <BlueMatt> meh, the bug was tagged 0.3.22, I dont care just thought jgarzik wanted it
1549 2011-05-27 13:03:59 <sipa> oh ok
1550 2011-05-27 13:04:00 <BlueMatt> very minor bug either way
1551 2011-05-27 13:04:25 <BlueMatt> we have to wait for gavin to get back before we release 0.3.22 final anyway so...
1552 2011-05-27 13:05:09 stahi has joined
1553 2011-05-27 13:05:16 Astriks has joined
1554 2011-05-27 13:05:45 khalahan_ has quit (Quit: Quitte)
1555 2011-05-27 13:06:36 <topi`_> do we have a plan for testing the client before final release?
1556 2011-05-27 13:06:43 <topi`_> i.e. a bunch of guys running the client in a testnet
1557 2011-05-27 13:06:49 <jgarzik> BlueMatt, sipa: the 0.3.22 github issue list was just a quick tagging of "might be a bug warranting 0.3.22"
1558 2011-05-27 13:07:05 f1nack has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1559 2011-05-27 13:07:19 <jgarzik> not a straight jacket nor a strict to-fix list
1560 2011-05-27 13:08:10 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: Gavin said he would be ok with ACK'ing the final release from France
1561 2011-05-27 13:08:21 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: just need holy Gavin pee, not his return to US shores :)
1562 2011-05-27 13:10:11 Mononofu has left ()
1563 2011-05-27 13:10:15 Mononofu has joined
1564 2011-05-27 13:10:33 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: ok well in that case, Im happy with rc5 being final afaict, ita ACKable from here
1565 2011-05-27 13:10:58 <BlueMatt> (and Im happy with the build system, those guys with cpu complaints never got back, so Im assuming it was not a bug)
1566 2011-05-27 13:11:33 <BlueMatt> also, sipa tcatm when we push 0.3.22 final, Id like to see builds from both of you as well (or gitian signatures on the results that is)
1567 2011-05-27 13:11:54 f1nack has joined
1568 2011-05-27 13:11:58 DontMindMe has joined
1569 2011-05-27 13:14:38 <Diablo-D3> ;;bc,mtgox
1570 2011-05-27 13:14:39 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":8.92,"low":8.35,"vol":20497,"buy":8.6106,"sell":8.66,"last":8.6106}}
1571 2011-05-27 13:15:24 <Diablo-D3> ;;bc,sum 300000
1572 2011-05-27 13:15:24 <gribble> Error: "bc,sum" is not a valid command.
1573 2011-05-27 13:15:30 <Diablo-D3> ;;bc,gen 300000
1574 2011-05-27 13:15:31 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 300000 Khps, given current difficulty of 434882.7217497 , is 0.693861813965 BTC per day and 0.0289109089152 BTC per hour.
1575 2011-05-27 13:15:45 <Diablo-D3> ;;bc,gen 368000/24*16
1576 2011-05-27 13:15:46 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 368000/24*16 Khps, given current difficulty of 434882.7217497 , is 0.567424772309 BTC per day and 0.0236426988462 BTC per hour.
1577 2011-05-27 13:15:56 <Diablo-D3> ;;bc,gen 368000/24*16*30
1578 2011-05-27 13:15:57 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 368000/24*16*30 Khps, given current difficulty of 434882.7217497 , is 17.0227431693 BTC per day and 0.709280965386 BTC per hour.
1579 2011-05-27 13:16:07 <Diablo-D3> ;;bc,gen 368000/24*16*30*8.61
1580 2011-05-27 13:16:08 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 368000/24*16*30*8.61 Khps, given current difficulty of 434882.7217497 , is 146.565818687 BTC per day and 6.10690911198 BTC per hour.
1581 2011-05-27 13:16:12 <Diablo-D3> heh thats not so bad
1582 2011-05-27 13:16:15 <BlueMatt> Diablo-D3: come on, not in the chan
1583 2011-05-27 13:16:28 <Diablo-D3> I SHALL SPAM IF I WANT TO
1584 2011-05-27 13:16:35 <retinal> gross, it's all over the place
1585 2011-05-27 13:19:32 tom___ has quit (Quit: Page closed)
1586 2011-05-27 13:20:19 f1nack has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1587 2011-05-27 13:21:06 * UukGoblin ;;bc,gens privately. ;-P
1588 2011-05-27 13:22:10 <Optimo> what is this 'x matures in 100 more blocks'
1589 2011-05-27 13:22:11 FellowTraveler has joined
1590 2011-05-27 13:22:41 <UukGoblin> Optimo, it takes 100 (up to 120) blocks to "confirm" (mature) a generation
1591 2011-05-27 13:24:05 <Optimo> that's what I figured... just never expected to see this from a pool
1592 2011-05-27 13:24:29 <Optimo> pool can bestow a generation value onto me..
1593 2011-05-27 13:24:54 <Optimo> I thought the pool was collecting the generated moneys and giving out shares
1594 2011-05-27 13:25:15 <Optimo> eligius different from deepbit
1595 2011-05-27 13:26:57 darrob has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1596 2011-05-27 13:28:13 karnac has joined
1597 2011-05-27 13:28:16 zef has joined
1598 2011-05-27 13:28:22 darrob has joined
1599 2011-05-27 13:29:24 <Diablo-D3> Optimo: luke has his pool hacked to instantly pay right in the gen tx
1600 2011-05-27 13:29:30 <Diablo-D3> by using multiple pay tx
1601 2011-05-27 13:29:45 <Optimo> very cool
1602 2011-05-27 13:29:45 <Diablo-D3> his plan, not so clever
1603 2011-05-27 13:29:49 Teslah has joined
1604 2011-05-27 13:30:02 <Optimo> it's different..thats ok
1605 2011-05-27 13:31:12 <Diablo-D3> and now I go to bed
1606 2011-05-27 13:31:14 <Diablo-D3> night all
1607 2011-05-27 13:31:46 DukeOfURL has joined
1608 2011-05-27 13:35:22 Diablo-D3 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1609 2011-05-27 13:36:41 f1nack has joined
1610 2011-05-27 13:40:18 djoot has quit (Changing host)
1611 2011-05-27 13:40:18 djoot has joined
1612 2011-05-27 13:43:30 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1613 2011-05-27 13:43:43 molecular has joined
1614 2011-05-27 13:46:21 GarrettB has joined
1615 2011-05-27 13:46:28 GarrettB has quit (Changing host)
1616 2011-05-27 13:46:28 GarrettB has joined
1617 2011-05-27 13:47:04 <GarrettB> so do we have any idea why bootstrapping is sometimes taking longer these days?
1618 2011-05-27 13:47:07 peck has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1619 2011-05-27 13:48:32 diki has joined
1620 2011-05-27 13:48:39 <diki> ;;bc,stats
1621 2011-05-27 13:48:41 <gribble> Current Blocks: 127158 | Current Difficulty: 434882.7217497 | Next Difficulty At Block: 129023 | Next Difficulty In: 1865 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 2 days, 18 hours, 9 minutes, and 40 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 581470.72354441
1622 2011-05-27 13:49:00 johnnympereira5 has joined
1623 2011-05-27 13:49:09 <diki> Can someone tell me, what conditions is needed for there to be a drop in diff?
1624 2011-05-27 13:49:15 <diki> *condition
1625 2011-05-27 13:49:33 <johnnympereira5> diki: was wondering the same thing
1626 2011-05-27 13:49:37 <gmaxwell> diki: it needs to take longer than 14 days to find 2016 blocks.
1627 2011-05-27 13:49:37 <mtrlt> umm, network hashpower decrease?
1628 2011-05-27 13:49:44 <sipa> ;;bc,nethash
1629 2011-05-27 13:49:45 <gribble> 4196.7299444756563
1630 2011-05-27 13:50:02 <mtrlt> just like diff increases when network hashpower increases
1631 2011-05-27 13:50:02 <diki> so that means....after 1 million diff?
1632 2011-05-27 13:50:08 <mtrlt> who knows :P
1633 2011-05-27 13:50:58 Teslah has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1634 2011-05-27 13:51:04 <sipa> ;;bc,spotestimate
1635 2011-05-27 13:51:05 <gribble> 586496.055235
1636 2011-05-27 13:51:14 <johnnympereira5> does anyone know if there is any performance difference with mining on windows 7 or ubuntu?
1637 2011-05-27 13:51:19 <diki> Last night i put my miner in solo hoping for extreme mega luck
1638 2011-05-27 13:51:24 <diki> no dice though
1639 2011-05-27 13:51:41 <gmaxwell> Kids these days... no patience.
1640 2011-05-27 13:52:49 peck has joined
1641 2011-05-27 13:53:43 <GarrettB> johnnympereira5: not as far as I know
1642 2011-05-27 13:54:11 <GarrettB> any dev here able to give me a quick summary of the important things that have happened this last week?
1643 2011-05-27 13:54:15 <diki> I wonder if there will be any point in getting another 5850
1644 2011-05-27 13:54:16 <GarrettB> in development, I mean
1645 2011-05-27 13:54:22 <diki> will it be able to pay itself...
1646 2011-05-27 13:54:25 <GarrettB> diki: if you can run it profitably, yes
1647 2011-05-27 13:54:32 jaz has joined
1648 2011-05-27 13:54:33 <johnnympereira5> thank GarrettB
1649 2011-05-27 13:54:34 <diki> what is that supposed to mean?
1650 2011-05-27 13:55:59 <mtrlt> if i had money to spare, i'd buy a quad 5850 or 5870 rig
1651 2011-05-27 13:56:06 <sipa> GarrettB: release candidates for 0.3.22, you can look at the git repository if you want to know details
1652 2011-05-27 13:56:24 <diki> sipa what rig do you got?
1653 2011-05-27 13:58:13 <diki> Actually, i was thinking of maybe getting a 6950
1654 2011-05-27 13:59:07 <diki> than a 5850
1655 2011-05-27 13:59:21 <sipa> BlueMatt: fixed
1656 2011-05-27 13:59:29 <BlueMatt> sipa: cool
1657 2011-05-27 13:59:53 <sipa> BlueMatt: see my walletclass
1658 2011-05-27 13:59:58 lulzplzkthx has quit (Quit: leaving)
1659 2011-05-27 14:00:04 lulzplzkthx has joined
1660 2011-05-27 14:00:24 lulzplzkthx has quit (Client Quit)
1661 2011-05-27 14:00:28 <sipa> it's definitely cleaner this way too
1662 2011-05-27 14:00:30 lulzplzkthx has joined
1663 2011-05-27 14:00:30 lulzplzkthx has quit (Changing host)
1664 2011-05-27 14:00:30 lulzplzkthx has joined
1665 2011-05-27 14:01:00 <BlueMatt> sipa: cool, can you rebase (somehow I removed your name on the original commit, not sure how that happened, you can edit the commit and git --ammend --author="...")
1666 2011-05-27 14:01:28 lulzplzkthx has quit (Client Quit)
1667 2011-05-27 14:01:34 lulzplzkthx has joined
1668 2011-05-27 14:02:02 lulzplzkthx has quit (Client Quit)
1669 2011-05-27 14:02:08 lulzplzkthx has joined
1670 2011-05-27 14:02:19 <BlueMatt> BlueMattBot: status Bitcoin
1671 2011-05-27 14:02:20 <BlueMattBot> Bitcoin: last build: 35 (3 hr 9 min ago): SUCCESS: http://www.bluematt.me/jenkins/job/Bitcoin/35/
1672 2011-05-27 14:03:13 <sipa> hmm, this is strange
1673 2011-05-27 14:03:37 * diki thinks Slush is getting DDoSed
1674 2011-05-27 14:04:07 <BlueMatt> sipa: ?
1675 2011-05-27 14:06:34 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1676 2011-05-27 14:07:52 <slush> diki: why?
1677 2011-05-27 14:09:16 <sipa> BlueMatt: done
1678 2011-05-27 14:09:46 skeledrew1 has joined
1679 2011-05-27 14:10:43 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1680 2011-05-27 14:11:36 glassresistor has joined
1681 2011-05-27 14:11:36 glassresistor has quit (Changing host)
1682 2011-05-27 14:11:36 glassresistor has joined
1683 2011-05-27 14:16:30 <GarrettB> BlueMatt: for the details on one of the changes, it says it made the include files more modular - is that just separating functions out into multiple files?
1684 2011-05-27 14:17:00 <BlueMatt> no, just more modular files, see the commitdiff
1685 2011-05-27 14:17:07 <sipa> GarrettB: which commit in particular?
1686 2011-05-27 14:17:26 <GarrettB> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/223b6f1ba4819e9a146e7aa451d546726d0bc714
1687 2011-05-27 14:17:28 <BlueMatt> sipa: the std:: one which also adds #ifndef BITCOIN_..._H
1688 2011-05-27 14:17:34 <BlueMatt> to each header file
1689 2011-05-27 14:17:44 <sipa> ah that one, yes
1690 2011-05-27 14:18:03 <BlueMatt> just makes each file slightly easier to include in other projects, ie more modular
1691 2011-05-27 14:18:52 <GarrettB> oh okay
1692 2011-05-27 14:18:52 <GarrettB> thanks
1693 2011-05-27 14:20:08 <diki> zomg i found a block on slush's pool
1694 2011-05-27 14:20:14 <diki> what extreme unluck..
1695 2011-05-27 14:20:59 <diki> Unluck, cause i was mining all night in solo. Yet i found a block in a matter of minutes in the pool
1696 2011-05-27 14:21:37 <diki> Just my 50BTC.
1697 2011-05-27 14:22:37 <ersi> You probably didn't contribute many shares to solving that block.
1698 2011-05-27 14:22:39 <slush> :)
1699 2011-05-27 14:23:05 <sipa> how do you know you found a block?
1700 2011-05-27 14:23:12 Akinava has quit (Quit: УÑ
Ð¾Ð¶Ñ Ñ Ð¾Ñ Ð²Ð°Ñ)
1701 2011-05-27 14:23:25 <ersi> It's probably in his statistics @ slush's pool or something
1702 2011-05-27 14:23:26 <slush> one guy mined for week or two with huge rig (few 5970) solo and didn't found a block. Then he joined pool and find two in one day :)
1703 2011-05-27 14:23:35 <lulzplzkthx> lol
1704 2011-05-27 14:23:49 <lulzplzkthx> Django is beautiful...
1705 2011-05-27 14:23:59 <ersi> I know Deepbit displays "Blocks found: " atleast. Wouldn't suprise me if slush does as well
1706 2011-05-27 14:24:20 <slush> ersi: sipa: There is 'found blocks' on profile page on my pool
1707 2011-05-27 14:24:39 <GarrettB> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/2bfda1be11a079f7b468c79d79a91ddb30369557
1708 2011-05-27 14:24:41 <ersi> ye
1709 2011-05-27 14:24:51 <GarrettB> with that change, is it saying that to create a tx you'll still need to pay .01?
1710 2011-05-27 14:25:02 <GarrettB> or was the relay fee changed down further than .005
1711 2011-05-27 14:25:18 <sipa> GarrettB: 0.01 will still be the default base fee in calculations for transactions created with 0.3.22
1712 2011-05-27 14:25:51 <sipa> however, the version after that one will change them to 0.0005, and 0.3.22 will already accept transactions created with the 0.0005-based formula
1713 2011-05-27 14:25:56 <GarrettB> okay
1714 2011-05-27 14:26:00 <diki> it should be block id 4874
1715 2011-05-27 14:26:11 <diki> if not then 4873
1716 2011-05-27 14:27:39 <slush> diki: what's your pool username?
1717 2011-05-27 14:27:39 dissipate has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1718 2011-05-27 14:28:45 <GarrettB> sipa: why not just change both at the same time? spur more adoption of the new fee ruleset before changing?
1719 2011-05-27 14:29:07 <sipa> GarrettB: because a lot of transactions will simply be dropped immediately
1720 2011-05-27 14:29:11 <sipa> *would
1721 2011-05-27 14:29:54 <sipa> as 0.3.21 clients consider transactions with a subcent output and less than 0.01 fee abusive
1722 2011-05-27 14:29:54 larsivi has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1723 2011-05-27 14:30:08 <sipa> so we first need to have the network ready for those
1724 2011-05-27 14:30:13 <GarrettB> okay
1725 2011-05-27 14:30:50 neoeinstein has joined
1726 2011-05-27 14:31:05 <sipa> see http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=7749.msg145030#msg145030
1727 2011-05-27 14:33:25 <diki> So you guys removed the fees right?
1728 2011-05-27 14:33:50 slush has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1729 2011-05-27 14:33:57 <sipa> learn to read
1730 2011-05-27 14:34:22 <ersi> diki: try clicking on the link
1731 2011-05-27 14:34:29 <ersi> I know it's hard, but just try it.
1732 2011-05-27 14:34:48 <diki> I see, so it's been reduced to that amount
1733 2011-05-27 14:35:08 neoeinstein has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1734 2011-05-27 14:35:12 <diki> but why not completely remove it?
1735 2011-05-27 14:35:49 kluge has joined
1736 2011-05-27 14:38:06 <UukGoblin> ah, smart, I guess
1737 2011-05-27 14:38:30 <UukGoblin> not a change I like though ;-]
1738 2011-05-27 14:39:18 <Namegduf> diki: Because it has a purpose
1739 2011-05-27 14:39:21 <UukGoblin> bye bye fees :-[
1740 2011-05-27 14:39:25 DukeOfURL has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1741 2011-05-27 14:39:26 <Namegduf> Thus why it was originally added
1742 2011-05-27 14:39:27 <GarrettB> what network/channel is the bitcoin bootstrap?
1743 2011-05-27 14:39:47 <BlueMatt> GarrettB: lfnet #bitcoin (now #bitcoin00 - #bitcoin99 )
1744 2011-05-27 14:40:01 <GarrettB> irc.lfnet.net?
1745 2011-05-27 14:40:07 <BlueMatt> I think so
1746 2011-05-27 14:40:23 <BlueMatt> irc.lfnet.org
1747 2011-05-27 14:40:24 <sipa> indeed
1748 2011-05-27 14:41:07 <GarrettB> ah, any way to know how many people are in there?
1749 2011-05-27 14:41:11 <GarrettB> just joining isn't doing it for me
1750 2011-05-27 14:41:23 <BlueMatt> list the users on the chan
1751 2011-05-27 14:41:26 <BlueMatt> /list
1752 2011-05-27 14:41:33 <BlueMatt> no...wait
1753 2011-05-27 14:41:39 <BlueMatt> /userlist
1754 2011-05-27 14:41:45 <jmpespxoreax> /names
1755 2011-05-27 14:41:57 <ersi> /quit
1756 2011-05-27 14:42:03 <BlueMatt> that works better
1757 2011-05-27 14:42:43 <GarrettB> lol, nearly froze my irc client :P
1758 2011-05-27 14:42:52 ntosme2 has joined
1759 2011-05-27 14:43:18 <BlueMatt> lol mindspring, I feel sorry for you ntosme2
1760 2011-05-27 14:43:33 <sipa> ?
1761 2011-05-27 14:43:46 <gmaxwell> It would be nice if 0.22 was more compelling. In the future why not tie the behavior change to a block number?
1762 2011-05-27 14:43:51 <BlueMatt> ntosme2's host is mindspring
1763 2011-05-27 14:44:07 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: why?
1764 2011-05-27 14:44:15 <ntosme2> comcast technically
1765 2011-05-27 14:44:27 <gmaxwell> e.g. 0.0005 for forwarding now, imposed fee changes once the highest block hits N where N is a couple weeks from now.
1766 2011-05-27 14:44:31 <BlueMatt> that has no advantage, and if we dont, its easier to adjust based on network conditions we cant predict
1767 2011-05-27 14:45:03 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: more reason to upgradeâ I assume that some people are going to go "oh, meh, it hasn't chainged yetâ I'll wait until the next one"
1768 2011-05-27 14:45:09 <GarrettB> do we have any idea why some users have trouble bootstrapping?
1769 2011-05-27 14:45:10 <gmaxwell> s/chainged/changed/
1770 2011-05-27 14:45:33 <BlueMatt> GarrettB: % of nodes not accepting incoming connections + client turnover
1771 2011-05-27 14:45:36 uikki has joined
1772 2011-05-27 14:46:14 <GarrettB> client turnover?
1773 2011-05-27 14:46:18 <diki> one thing i've also noticed whit the client is very slow startup
1774 2011-05-27 14:46:27 <diki> maybe speed it up a bit?
1775 2011-05-27 14:46:31 <BlueMatt> client that used to be up and is in your cache, but is no longer up
1776 2011-05-27 14:46:51 <BlueMatt> diki: sounds good, any suggestions?
1777 2011-05-27 14:47:10 <gmaxwell> GarrettB: people turn off their clients after losing interest.
1778 2011-05-27 14:47:21 <BlueMatt> or just dont run them 24/7
1779 2011-05-27 14:47:36 <BlueMatt> or maybe get their ip changed, or, or, or
1780 2011-05-27 14:47:47 <sipa> let's list the changes: translation, fee rule, irc channel split, dns lookups in -address, -port option, settxfee rpc call, listtransaction-from rpc call, removal of 4way and gui generation, a few bug fixes
1781 2011-05-27 14:47:59 <diki> Bluematt:??
1782 2011-05-27 14:48:26 <gmaxwell> Have nodes attest in IRC to other nodes they see as working. Setup the node selection to pick at least one working node if it doesn't have a good connection yet?
1783 2011-05-27 14:48:32 <BlueMatt> diki: have any ways to make it faster, please make it faster isnt a bug report or a feature request
1784 2011-05-27 14:49:06 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: better way: use dns seed servers which scan the network for up nodes using irc and other peer-gathering mechanisms
1785 2011-05-27 14:49:07 <sipa> slow startup... do you mean loading the program, or connecting?
1786 2011-05-27 14:49:13 <BlueMatt> then default to dns seed
1787 2011-05-27 14:49:18 <diki> Dude are you feeling okay? I think you need some rest
1788 2011-05-27 14:50:08 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: didn't suggest something like that simply because the dns seed is rather not-decentralized. Tor has a lot of solution for these sorts of issues in a semi-centralized manner.
1789 2011-05-27 14:50:27 <sipa> dns seed is more decentralized than irc
1790 2011-05-27 14:50:29 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: and irc isnt centralized?
1791 2011-05-27 14:51:03 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: point.
1792 2011-05-27 14:52:22 <gmaxwell> another thought I had was making the IRC names have a boolean value indicating if the client is synced up as far as the high watermark fixed in the code.
1793 2011-05-27 14:52:37 <BlueMatt> why?
1794 2011-05-27 14:52:46 <BlueMatt> that is currently no where near a problem
1795 2011-05-27 14:52:48 <gmaxwell> And then only attempt to connect to nodes which claim to be that far.
1796 2011-05-27 14:52:53 Teslah has joined
1797 2011-05-27 14:53:01 <sipa> seeding is not for finding peers
1798 2011-05-27 14:53:10 <sipa> seeding is for finding an entry point in the network
1799 2011-05-27 14:53:15 <sipa> the network will give you peers
1800 2011-05-27 14:53:35 <gmaxwell> sipa: not if you keep trying to connect to isolated peers
1801 2011-05-27 14:54:55 <GarrettB> BlueMatt: when I say the network has been modularized, that means it is easier to call those functions elsewhere in the code, and possibly easier to call those functions from an external program?
1802 2011-05-27 14:55:21 <sipa> currently, the improvement is almost nothing
1803 2011-05-27 14:55:26 <sipa> but it's a first step
1804 2011-05-27 14:55:58 <sipa> towards separating the concerns in the bitcoin program, eventually possibly leading to a libbitcoin
1805 2011-05-27 14:56:34 skeledrew1 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1806 2011-05-27 14:56:41 skeledrew has joined
1807 2011-05-27 14:59:07 diki has quit ()
1808 2011-05-27 14:59:23 lyarick has joined
1809 2011-05-27 15:03:18 Kurtov has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1810 2011-05-27 15:03:37 skeledrew1 has joined
1811 2011-05-27 15:04:02 uikki has quit (Quit: Page closed)
1812 2011-05-27 15:04:27 wolfspraul has quit (Quit: leaving)
1813 2011-05-27 15:04:37 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1814 2011-05-27 15:04:41 fimp has joined
1815 2011-05-27 15:07:36 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: how did you build Linux?
1816 2011-05-27 15:08:04 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: gitian
1817 2011-05-27 15:08:47 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: no, I mean at all
1818 2011-05-27 15:08:50 <luke-jr> it doesn't compile for me
1819 2011-05-27 15:08:55 <luke-jr> with wx enabled
1820 2011-05-27 15:09:00 <BlueMatt> there was a fix committed this morning
1821 2011-05-27 15:09:16 <BlueMatt> the rc5 tag doesnt build, but head does
1822 2011-05-27 15:10:52 Sylph has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1823 2011-05-27 15:11:33 Sylph has joined
1824 2011-05-27 15:13:00 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: I was referring to jgarzik's -src.tgz
1825 2011-05-27 15:13:13 <BlueMatt> which is the rc5 tag, and hence doesnt build
1826 2011-05-27 15:13:22 f1nack has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1827 2011-05-27 15:13:22 <BlueMatt> the binaries are head
1828 2011-05-27 15:14:06 Teslah has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1829 2011-05-27 15:14:57 <GarrettB> sipa: could you explain https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/264 a bit for me?
1830 2011-05-27 15:15:14 <GarrettB> the problem is that change lower than .01 was unspendable?
1831 2011-05-27 15:15:32 f1nack has joined
1832 2011-05-27 15:15:58 Teslah has joined
1833 2011-05-27 15:16:48 has quit (Netsniper|!~kvirc@adsl-76-252-22-204.dsl.ipltin.sbcglobal.net|Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1834 2011-05-27 15:17:09 LumpyFungus has joined
1835 2011-05-27 15:17:17 <sipa> GarrettB: when creating a transaction
1836 2011-05-27 15:17:23 <sipa> after input coins have been selected
1837 2011-05-27 15:17:39 <LumpyFungus> Hello. Is this the right channel for me to ask a tech question regarding DiabloMiner?
1838 2011-05-27 15:17:42 has joined
1839 2011-05-27 15:17:42 <sipa> there is the question whether the excess should go into a fee, or into change
1840 2011-05-27 15:18:18 <jrmithdobbs> i think fee, at current rates, is appropriate imho
1841 2011-05-27 15:18:29 <jrmithdobbs> that's gonna need revaluation if prices keep going up though.
1842 2011-05-27 15:18:42 <gmaxwell> neither are great. making it change is stupid and not helpful for the user, making it fee tends to surprise them and make them angry.
1843 2011-05-27 15:18:58 <sipa> GarrettB: earlier, it was easy: if the excess is less than 0.01, it should become fee - otherwise make it into change
1844 2011-05-27 15:19:02 <soultcer> LumpyFungus: Either here on in #bitcoin-mining will work
1845 2011-05-27 15:19:11 <jrmithdobbs> yes, either way it needs to be documented in BIG BOLD RED LETTERS in the gui at txn time
1846 2011-05-27 15:19:39 <LumpyFungus> I'm having trouble with DiabloMiner and stale shares. Supposedly it has long polling support, but I get 2-3% stales vs. poclbm with < 0.5%...?
1847 2011-05-27 15:19:47 <sipa> GarrettB: this will have to change to: above 0.01 -> entirely change, between 0.01 and 0.0005 -> 0.0005 as fee and the rest change, below 0.0005 -> entirely change
1848 2011-05-27 15:19:51 <LumpyFungus> Is there something I'm doing wrong?
1849 2011-05-27 15:21:05 <gmaxwell> jrmithdobbs: telling people that the system will take their precious 0.000001231 bitcoins as fees tends to make them bent if they can't say no.
1850 2011-05-27 15:21:15 <gmaxwell> I dunno if it's even any better than not telling them.
1851 2011-05-27 15:21:31 <gmaxwell> (since if you don't tell them you at least have the chance that they won't notice)
1852 2011-05-27 15:21:43 mmoya has joined
1853 2011-05-27 15:21:53 traviscj has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1854 2011-05-27 15:22:35 <jrmithdobbs> pretty big fan of full disclosure no matter the issue so i think notifying is best policy
1855 2011-05-27 15:22:57 <sipa> gmaxwell: "making it change is stupid and not helpful for the user" -> huh?
1856 2011-05-27 15:23:45 <sipa> GarrettB: oh, mistake: below 0.0005 -> entirely fee
1857 2011-05-27 15:23:47 <gmaxwell> sipa: Er, sorry that I wasn't clear... giving user bitcoindust that the client can't spend without fees isn't helpful.
1858 2011-05-27 15:25:25 AnatolV has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1859 2011-05-27 15:26:33 MemoryException has joined
1860 2011-05-27 15:26:40 soossii has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1861 2011-05-27 15:26:44 <neoeinstein_> Would it be worth trying to grab another input to make larger change?
1862 2011-05-27 15:27:13 <neoeinstein_> Instead of doing bitcoindust change
1863 2011-05-27 15:27:19 <sipa> yes, but it already does that
1864 2011-05-27 15:27:23 Nes-asleep is now known as Nesetalis
1865 2011-05-27 15:27:45 <sipa> but eg. when spending your entire wallet, this isn't possible
1866 2011-05-27 15:27:53 <neoeinstein_> So this is in that last case where there is no other input, and we just have bitdust leftover
1867 2011-05-27 15:27:55 jmorton has joined
1868 2011-05-27 15:28:02 <neoeinstein_> *available
1869 2011-05-27 15:28:57 jaz has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1870 2011-05-27 15:30:47 DontMindMe has quit (Quit: Nettalk6 - www.ntalk.de)
1871 2011-05-27 15:32:27 <FellowTraveler> announcement: Moneychanger Java GUI now supports Open Transactions AND Bitcoin: https://github.com/FellowTraveler/Moneychanger
1872 2011-05-27 15:33:13 is now known as Netsniper|!~kvirc@76.251.232.157|Netsniper
1873 2011-05-27 15:34:21 blueadept has joined
1874 2011-05-27 15:34:23 pnicholson has quit (Quit: pnicholson)
1875 2011-05-27 15:36:36 khalahan has quit (Quit: Bye)
1876 2011-05-27 15:36:36 khalahan- is now known as khalahan
1877 2011-05-27 15:37:45 ntosme21 has joined
1878 2011-05-27 15:39:11 fimp has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
1879 2011-05-27 15:39:32 ar4s has joined
1880 2011-05-27 15:39:51 ntosme2 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1881 2011-05-27 15:40:26 soossii has joined
1882 2011-05-27 15:40:33 hortence has joined
1883 2011-05-27 15:43:33 gribble has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1884 2011-05-27 15:44:14 gribble has joined
1885 2011-05-27 15:45:53 <GarrettB> there are no paid developers correct?
1886 2011-05-27 15:46:24 <BlueMatt> yep
1887 2011-05-27 15:46:35 <noagendamarket> well gaving got 3 grand to speak to the cia lol
1888 2011-05-27 15:47:11 <soultcer> I assume both satoshi and sirius-m (first two developers) have a big stack of bitcoins in their wallets.
1889 2011-05-27 15:47:43 <neoeinstein_> I accept bit dust donations to OP_TRUE
1890 2011-05-27 15:47:59 <BlueMatt> neoeinstein_: have you ever gotten any?
1891 2011-05-27 15:49:04 LumpyFungus has left ()
1892 2011-05-27 15:49:31 <neoeinstein_> The current client doesn't put non-standard scripts into blocks right now, so I haven't seen any scripts where the scriptPubKey was just"OP_TRUE
1893 2011-05-27 15:49:59 traviscj has joined
1894 2011-05-27 15:50:34 <neoeinstein_> But I so want to generate some :-P
1895 2011-05-27 15:50:41 <neoeinstein_> And see who picks them up.
1896 2011-05-27 15:51:09 <molecular> noagendamarket, 3 grand BTC?
1897 2011-05-27 15:51:22 <noagendamarket> no fiat
1898 2011-05-27 15:51:25 <molecular> meh
1899 2011-05-27 15:51:31 <molecular> :)
1900 2011-05-27 15:51:39 <hybriz_> soultcer: big stack of coins is not big stack of fiat currency :p
1901 2011-05-27 15:52:29 <molecular> would've been awesome of the cia to whip out bitcoin client (like in rolex replica watch or sth) and pay him in btc
1902 2011-05-27 15:53:24 <soultcer> hybriz_: Well, at the moment it is possible to exchange that stack of coins to fiat currency. That means, if they are interested, they will be able to profit from their early bitcoin use/contributions
1903 2011-05-27 15:54:13 <hybriz_> kinda
1904 2011-05-27 15:54:22 <hybriz_> you'd have to go through mtgox or similar :b
1905 2011-05-27 15:54:31 <hybriz_> and it's not really anonymous to do that
1906 2011-05-27 15:54:37 <hybriz_> but then again, fiat currency isnt anonymous
1907 2011-05-27 15:55:30 <UukGoblin> uh?
1908 2011-05-27 15:55:42 <UukGoblin> I go to a shop, I pay with cash, I don't need to give up my name or anything...
1909 2011-05-27 16:00:11 johnnympereira5 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1910 2011-05-27 16:01:30 DukeOfURL has joined
1911 2011-05-27 16:02:43 noagendamarket has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1912 2011-05-27 16:02:56 <hybriz_> pay ?
1913 2011-05-27 16:03:00 <hybriz_> the other way around
1914 2011-05-27 16:03:02 <hybriz_> to get the cash
1915 2011-05-27 16:03:08 <hybriz_> imagine u have 10 BTC and you want EURP
1916 2011-05-27 16:03:26 <hybriz_> it's tied to your person when you get it in "real" coin
1917 2011-05-27 16:03:47 <sipa> i buy a bitbill with my BTC
1918 2011-05-27 16:04:02 <sipa> and sell the bitbill to some anonymous person on the street for EUR? :)
1919 2011-05-27 16:05:02 Rudycoin has joined
1920 2011-05-27 16:05:21 pnicholson has joined
1921 2011-05-27 16:05:38 sethsethseth_ has joined
1922 2011-05-27 16:05:51 <UukGoblin> hybriz_, not necessarily, I can arrange an IRL meetup with someone from bitcoin-otc and get paid in cash
1923 2011-05-27 16:06:04 <hybriz_> and that someone can track u :p they seen ur face
1924 2011-05-27 16:06:09 <hybriz_> where u meet, you have mobile phones
1925 2011-05-27 16:06:20 <hybriz_> the IMSI+location identifies u and the person
1926 2011-05-27 16:06:26 <hybriz_> if you are in london, you also have CCTV footage :p
1927 2011-05-27 16:06:35 <hybriz_> (paranoia mode lol)
1928 2011-05-27 16:06:39 <UukGoblin> well, I have an unregistered prepaid mobile
1929 2011-05-27 16:06:44 DukeOfURL has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1930 2011-05-27 16:06:54 <UukGoblin> and well if you don't like the face aspect I guess you can try to disguise it ;-]
1931 2011-05-27 16:07:07 <UukGoblin> but then you might be suspected terrorist or sth, unless it's winter and very cold
1932 2011-05-27 16:08:55 <anarchyx> ;;bc,stats
1933 2011-05-27 16:08:57 <gribble> Current Blocks: 127178 | Current Difficulty: 434882.7217497 | Next Difficulty At Block: 129023 | Next Difficulty In: 1845 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 2 days, 14 hours, 37 minutes, and 30 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 582934.46744617
1934 2011-05-27 16:09:22 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1935 2011-05-27 16:12:12 has joined
1936 2011-05-27 16:14:11 Netsniper has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1937 2011-05-27 16:15:29 is now known as Netsniper|!~kvirc@adsl-76-252-43-89.dsl.ipltin.sbcglobal.net|Netsniper
1938 2011-05-27 16:17:05 kermit has quit (Disconnected by services)
1939 2011-05-27 16:18:31 <hortence> soultcer is an austrian nazi. he quieted me so hell be receiving some complimentary newsletter subscriptions at David Triendl <david@triendl.name>, soultcer@fastmail.fm. (address: Weineckstra[Ge 4, A-6170 Zirl, Austria, cell: +43/699/12296578)
1940 2011-05-27 16:18:35 <hortence> profile: "David lives together with his parents and his 14-year-old sister Julia who plays the flute" http://www.latsta.nu/getunited/artikel.asp?oid=16004 im sure his parents Ernst and Margret (tel: 05238 533 45, cell 05223/8506-356) will be proud to hear that their son spends his time trolling irc all day.
1941 2011-05-27 16:18:39 diki has joined
1942 2011-05-27 16:18:40 <hortence> soultcer is an austrian nazi. he quieted me so hell be receiving some complimentary newsletter subscriptions at David Triendl <david@triendl.name>, soultcer@fastmail.fm. (address: Weineckstra[Ge 4, A-6170 Zirl, Austria, cell: +43/699/12296578)
1943 2011-05-27 16:18:44 <hortence> profile: "David lives together with his parents and his 14-year-old sister Julia who plays the flute" http://www.latsta.nu/getunited/artikel.asp?oid=16004 im sure his parents Ernst and Margret (tel: 05238 533 45, cell 05223/8506-356) will be proud to hear that their son spends his time trolling irc all day.
1944 2011-05-27 16:18:49 hortence has left ()
1945 2011-05-27 16:18:59 sethsethseth_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1946 2011-05-27 16:19:00 vikarti has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1947 2011-05-27 16:19:07 <diki> Lololo
1948 2011-05-27 16:19:44 <diki> Sure would like to see that sister tho
1949 2011-05-27 16:20:28 <diki> Back to business now
1950 2011-05-27 16:20:44 has joined
1951 2011-05-27 16:21:05 <diki> Running multiple miners on the card seems to give me better results, but i have to wait to confirm this
1952 2011-05-27 16:21:44 <hybriz_> ?
1953 2011-05-27 16:21:47 <hybriz_> lol
1954 2011-05-27 16:23:17 Netsniper has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1955 2011-05-27 16:23:18 <soultcer> Guess he didn't respond too well to me taking his talking privileges away ;-)
1956 2011-05-27 16:23:30 <diki> lol
1957 2011-05-27 16:24:21 Rudycoin has quit (Read error: No route to host)
1958 2011-05-27 16:25:11 <UukGoblin> does namecoin reward servers who respond to authoritative queries at all?
1959 2011-05-27 16:25:53 <soultcer> Apparently he did the same with nanotube
1960 2011-05-27 16:26:07 <Xenland> Okay when you mine solo, You just get 50BTC right, no magic or cenfetti or output of somesort? Becuase im wondering how Slush knows when his pool solved a block to reset the share count
1961 2011-05-27 16:26:16 <nanotube> soultcer: yes he or another guy did.
1962 2011-05-27 16:26:29 <nanotube> soultcer: who did you mute, what's was the guy's hostmask?
1963 2011-05-27 16:26:56 <UukGoblin> nanotube, I'm trying to solve the incentive-to-run-root-dns problem ;-]
1964 2011-05-27 16:27:40 AStove has quit ()
1965 2011-05-27 16:27:43 <soultcer> nanotube: erbs, he is still online btw
1966 2011-05-27 16:27:56 <nanotube> soultcer: ah yes, same guy.
1967 2011-05-27 16:27:58 traviscj has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1968 2011-05-27 16:28:00 <UukGoblin> I'm thinking of some gigantic web-of-trust kind of thing where you could say "yay, server with pgp <insert-key-here> replied to 1000 of my queries! I like him!" and if a server gets enough trust this way, the next bitdns registration fee would partially go to him
1969 2011-05-27 16:28:01 <soultcer> but he spammed some stuff as "hortence ~cervanto 63-246-141-158.static.sagonet.net "
1970 2011-05-27 16:28:35 d1g1t4l has joined
1971 2011-05-27 16:29:36 DukeOfURL has joined
1972 2011-05-27 16:29:49 <BlueMatt> soultcer: how do you know that was erbs?
1973 2011-05-27 16:30:51 <soultcer> Because he told me he was searching for my home address
1974 2011-05-27 16:31:00 <BlueMatt> erbs: ?
1975 2011-05-27 16:31:10 <soultcer> He won't answer, I set him +q
1976 2011-05-27 16:31:12 <UukGoblin> I wonder if that was PSN hack data
1977 2011-05-27 16:31:24 <BlueMatt> soultcer: wait, you took away erbs' voice and then he went off on another host and posted that?
1978 2011-05-27 16:31:52 <soultcer> yeah
1979 2011-05-27 16:33:43 <soultcer> First I took his voice here, then he threatened me and kept trolling so i took it in #bitcoin too.
1980 2011-05-27 16:33:53 nzbtc has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1981 2011-05-27 16:34:04 <BlueMatt> how did you take his voice here?
1982 2011-05-27 16:34:23 nzbtc has joined
1983 2011-05-27 16:34:41 <BlueMatt> ah
1984 2011-05-27 16:35:09 traviscj has joined
1985 2011-05-27 16:35:58 <Xenland> Anyone care to tell me the diff between share and score based mining?
1986 2011-05-27 16:36:11 <Xenland> I would like to have both options in my pushpool-frontend
1987 2011-05-27 16:36:18 <diki> you get paid X per share submitted
1988 2011-05-27 16:36:27 <diki> as for score...
1989 2011-05-27 16:36:30 <Xenland> ?
1990 2011-05-27 16:36:50 <diki> I still havent understood it, but it prevents pool hopping
1991 2011-05-27 16:36:55 <sipa> Xenland: score-based means later shares are more influencial
1992 2011-05-27 16:36:57 f1nack has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1993 2011-05-27 16:37:11 <sipa> Xenland: if people don't hop pools, it makes almost no difference
1994 2011-05-27 16:37:20 <sipa> but it significantly limits how much you can get through hopping
1995 2011-05-27 16:37:35 <Xenland> how is score calculated?
1996 2011-05-27 16:37:39 <luke-jr> IF you mine 24/7
1997 2011-05-27 16:37:52 <luke-jr> diki: it doesn't prevent hopping
1998 2011-05-27 16:38:01 <diki> Huh? Slush says it does
1999 2011-05-27 16:38:07 <diki> 100% prevention
2000 2011-05-27 16:38:10 broker has joined
2001 2011-05-27 16:38:11 <luke-jr> it doesn't
2002 2011-05-27 16:38:12 <sipa> it doesn't
2003 2011-05-27 16:38:13 <luke-jr> at all
2004 2011-05-27 16:38:14 shankest has joined
2005 2011-05-27 16:38:22 <sipa> it limits how much you can gain from hopping
2006 2011-05-27 16:38:24 <luke-jr> as sipa said, it just prevents hoppers from earning as much
2007 2011-05-27 16:38:38 <sipa> you can still gain a tiny bit though
2008 2011-05-27 16:38:40 <luke-jr> making it less efficient a strategy
2009 2011-05-27 16:38:59 <sipa> Xenland: score is sum of shares, each multiplied by a weight
2010 2011-05-27 16:39:09 <sipa> and the weight goes up as round gets longer
2011 2011-05-27 16:39:25 <Xenland> hmmm intresting...
2012 2011-05-27 16:39:42 <luke-jr> diki: in fact, score-based really just inverts the hopping algorithm
2013 2011-05-27 16:40:12 <Xenland> thanks mate. That helps alot. Now to figure out how to support both methods on the same server with out fooking up anyones money gained
2014 2011-05-27 16:40:12 <luke-jr> if you hop to the score-based pool with the longest-running block, you can efficiently hop between score-based pools
2015 2011-05-27 16:40:12 <diki> i have this score currently 13200.8797
2016 2011-05-27 16:40:16 <diki> it does squat relly
2017 2011-05-27 16:40:22 <diki> *really
2018 2011-05-27 16:40:42 <luke-jr> Xenland: that's pointless
2019 2011-05-27 16:40:45 <diki> Score goes higher, but my reward lower
2020 2011-05-27 16:41:20 <Xenland> which part? support both or trying not to fook up anybodyes balance to be gained
2021 2011-05-27 16:41:29 <luke-jr> Xenland: allowing the miner to choose between them
2022 2011-05-27 16:41:41 <Xenland> I ment the admin being able to pick
2023 2011-05-27 16:41:46 <luke-jr> o
2024 2011-05-27 16:41:48 <Xenland> :)
2025 2011-05-27 16:41:57 <luke-jr> FWIW, I am working on a new system for Eligius
2026 2011-05-27 16:42:10 <diki> Is it Skynet?
2027 2011-05-27 16:42:20 <luke-jr> no, I mean for earnings
2028 2011-05-27 16:42:36 <diki> if you make it so we earn more...great
2029 2011-05-27 16:42:48 <luke-jr> unlikely you'll earn more
2030 2011-05-27 16:42:55 <diki> no need then
2031 2011-05-27 16:42:58 DukeOfURL has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2032 2011-05-27 16:43:02 <luke-jr> it will just level the playing field so that hoppers don't earn more than non-hoppers
2033 2011-05-27 16:44:45 <diki> sometimes it takes a miner a bit long to submit a share
2034 2011-05-27 16:44:57 <diki> so a user earns less cause a share failed to submit
2035 2011-05-27 16:45:47 <diki> My score on slush is 28641.8797
2036 2011-05-27 16:45:59 <diki> earnings: 0.02042738
2037 2011-05-27 16:46:12 <diki> why does it increase if it makes my earnings less...
2038 2011-05-27 16:46:22 <diki> that was a rhetorical question btw
2039 2011-05-27 16:46:22 <sipa> because other people's scores increase as well
2040 2011-05-27 16:46:35 <diki> now i get 502 Bad Gateway lol
2041 2011-05-27 16:47:58 glassresistor has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2042 2011-05-27 16:49:40 glassresistor has joined
2043 2011-05-27 16:49:40 glassresistor has quit (Changing host)
2044 2011-05-27 16:49:40 glassresistor has joined
2045 2011-05-27 16:50:28 larsivi has joined
2046 2011-05-27 16:50:41 d1g1t4l has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2047 2011-05-27 16:51:25 f1nack has joined
2048 2011-05-27 16:52:31 eta has joined
2049 2011-05-27 16:53:31 fimp has joined
2050 2011-05-27 16:54:07 fluffluff has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
2051 2011-05-27 16:54:44 vikarti has joined
2052 2011-05-27 16:55:49 <Xenland> diki: you get your dedicated pool running yet?
2053 2011-05-27 16:56:04 skeledrew has joined
2054 2011-05-27 16:57:19 skeledrew1 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2055 2011-05-27 17:00:06 is now known as Netsniper|!~kvirc@76.252.18.10|Netsniper
2056 2011-05-27 17:00:19 billy_ran_away has quit (Read error: No route to host)
2057 2011-05-27 17:01:38 <Xenland> Okay so last night, out of the blue my g/f goes so why is is going to be harder to mine bitcoins soon? Well, when your mining gold its kind of a guessing game where the gold might be, she goes "Mhhhmmm"; So i continue on and im like when theres tons of people mining the same spot its harder to mine gold becuase other people will be finding gold as well. lol the funny part was when she tried pretending like she already kn
2058 2011-05-27 17:01:38 <Xenland> ew and repeated everything in the last part as i said it... friggin hilarious
2059 2011-05-27 17:02:34 <UukGoblin> girlfriends, don't go hard on 'em ;-]
2060 2011-05-27 17:03:08 glassresistor has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2061 2011-05-27 17:04:40 bitlife has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2062 2011-05-27 17:05:09 <ersi> Or by all means, go hard on them if they like it ;)
2063 2011-05-27 17:05:29 <Xenland> hah!
2064 2011-05-27 17:05:48 <Xenland> bitcoins, improving every aspect of your life one at a time.
2065 2011-05-27 17:05:56 <Xenland> LOL
2066 2011-05-27 17:05:56 has joined
2067 2011-05-27 17:06:24 <Xenland> if bitcoin-php is a wrapper for bitcoind, that means funds can't be sent unless there confirmed right?
2068 2011-05-27 17:06:35 <Xenland> Do you even need to wait for confirmations when your mining ?
2069 2011-05-27 17:07:13 kika_ has joined
2070 2011-05-27 17:07:38 <sipa> yes
2071 2011-05-27 17:08:09 Netsniper has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2072 2011-05-27 17:08:09 <sipa> freshly mined coins need 100-120 confirmations
2073 2011-05-27 17:08:16 <Xenland> DAMN!
2074 2011-05-27 17:08:29 Titeuf_87 has joined
2075 2011-05-27 17:08:29 glassresistor has joined
2076 2011-05-27 17:08:29 glassresistor has quit (Changing host)
2077 2011-05-27 17:08:29 glassresistor has joined
2078 2011-05-27 17:08:43 <neoeinstein_> It's just ~20 hours. Can't wait a day before burning a hole in your wallet, can you? :-P
2079 2011-05-27 17:09:11 <shankest> http://reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/hlmu9/david_triendl_aka_soultcer_is_a_bitcoin_troll/ hilarious
2080 2011-05-27 17:11:54 karnac has quit (Quit: karnac)
2081 2011-05-27 17:14:04 glassresistor has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2082 2011-05-27 17:14:18 <kika_> so COINBASE_MATURITY is 120
2083 2011-05-27 17:14:22 <kika_> ?
2084 2011-05-27 17:14:43 <BlueMatt> its 100, but the client makes you wait 100, as it could cause other problems
2085 2011-05-27 17:14:51 <BlueMatt> sorry, makes you wait 120
2086 2011-05-27 17:15:31 <kika_> i see
2087 2011-05-27 17:16:55 mosimo has joined
2088 2011-05-27 17:19:24 _Netsniper_ has joined
2089 2011-05-27 17:21:17 has quit (Netsniper|!~kvirc@adsl-76-251-233-178.dsl.ipltin.sbcglobal.net|Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2090 2011-05-27 17:22:00 _Netsniper_ is now known as Netsniper
2091 2011-05-27 17:25:15 kika_ has quit (Quit: Page closed)
2092 2011-05-27 17:34:36 sethsethseth_ has joined
2093 2011-05-27 17:37:26 Slix` has joined
2094 2011-05-27 17:39:31 <Xenland> i wonder how one can be alerted that they found a 50BTC
2095 2011-05-27 17:39:40 ezl has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2096 2011-05-27 17:39:54 TheAncientGoat has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2097 2011-05-27 17:40:05 nzbtc_ has joined
2098 2011-05-27 17:41:44 glassresistor has joined
2099 2011-05-27 17:41:45 glassresistor has quit (Changing host)
2100 2011-05-27 17:41:45 glassresistor has joined
2101 2011-05-27 17:42:08 ezl has joined
2102 2011-05-27 17:42:33 marlowe has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
2103 2011-05-27 17:43:52 fimp has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
2104 2011-05-27 17:44:00 nzbtc has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2105 2011-05-27 17:45:17 devrandom1 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2106 2011-05-27 17:45:18 devrandom has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2107 2011-05-27 17:46:28 devrandom has joined
2108 2011-05-27 17:48:04 ezl has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2109 2011-05-27 17:48:25 sabalaba has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2110 2011-05-27 17:50:34 Sedra- has quit (Quit: ( www.nnscript.com :: NoNameScript 4.22 :: www.esnation.com ))
2111 2011-05-27 17:53:07 legion050 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
2112 2011-05-27 17:54:47 pnicholson has quit (Quit: pnicholson)
2113 2011-05-27 17:56:22 ArtForzZz is now known as ArtForz
2114 2011-05-27 17:59:09 DontMindMe has joined
2115 2011-05-27 17:59:53 jargon has joined
2116 2011-05-27 18:00:07 lumos has joined
2117 2011-05-27 18:00:07 DukeOfURL has joined
2118 2011-05-27 18:00:18 slush has joined
2119 2011-05-27 18:00:21 lumos is now known as sixyearolds
2120 2011-05-27 18:00:37 <Xenland> Any idea to know when you found a block?
2121 2011-05-27 18:01:27 <CydeWeys> Xenland: You should be in #bitcoin
2122 2011-05-27 18:01:29 <diki> I was thinking maybe something like this.
2123 2011-05-27 18:01:35 <luke-jr> ;;bc,stats
2124 2011-05-27 18:01:37 <gribble> Current Blocks: 127194 | Current Difficulty: 434882.7217497 | Next Difficulty At Block: 129023 | Next Difficulty In: 1829 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 2 days, 12 hours, 7 minutes, and 1 second | Next Difficulty Estimate: 584461.82777139
2125 2011-05-27 18:01:51 <Xenland> CydeWeys: but its for bitcoin development
2126 2011-05-27 18:01:59 <diki> When a block is found, pushpool sends an http request via curl to the cronjob which will initiate the check process
2127 2011-05-27 18:02:09 <diki> and check if a block is found
2128 2011-05-27 18:02:21 <luke-jr> cron isn't a webserver
2129 2011-05-27 18:02:24 soap has joined
2130 2011-05-27 18:02:28 Lachesis has joined
2131 2011-05-27 18:02:37 <diki> Luke, dont try to make me dumb
2132 2011-05-27 18:02:42 <diki> I know what i am saying
2133 2011-05-27 18:03:00 devrandom1 has joined
2134 2011-05-27 18:03:10 <Xenland> diki: any ideas on where that source-code might be to make pushpool do this?
2135 2011-05-27 18:03:14 TD has joined
2136 2011-05-27 18:03:24 <Xenland> there is alot of source-code files you know
2137 2011-05-27 18:03:26 <diki> Yeah, msg.c in the submit_work function
2138 2011-05-27 18:03:35 <Xenland> cool, i'll check that out
2139 2011-05-27 18:04:42 <Lachesis> has anyone made a bitcoin mixer yet?
2140 2011-05-27 18:04:50 <diki> mixer?
2141 2011-05-27 18:04:54 <Lachesis> that anonymizes bitcoins and pays them out again?
2142 2011-05-27 18:05:03 <diki> Xenland: your interest should be focused on if (*json_result)
2143 2011-05-27 18:05:09 <CydeWeys> Lachesis: How would that work?
2144 2011-05-27 18:05:12 <CydeWeys> You need to think that out a bit more.
2145 2011-05-27 18:05:23 <Lachesis> it accepts coins from various parties
2146 2011-05-27 18:05:27 <CydeWeys> Regardless of how many spam transactions you have in the middle, the inputs and outputs will be well-defined.
2147 2011-05-27 18:05:30 <Lachesis> combines them into one txn
2148 2011-05-27 18:05:36 <Lachesis> then splits them and pays to everyone
2149 2011-05-27 18:05:43 <Lachesis> or better yet, to different addresses
2150 2011-05-27 18:05:47 <CydeWeys> So it would require a group of people to trust each other?
2151 2011-05-27 18:05:54 <Lachesis> *necessarily to different addresses
2152 2011-05-27 18:05:55 <CydeWeys> They'd all have to trust whoever is running the mixer.
2153 2011-05-27 18:05:57 <Lachesis> yes
2154 2011-05-27 18:06:04 <neoeinstein_> http://app.bitlaundry.com/
2155 2011-05-27 18:06:17 <gmaxwell> CydeWeys: which isn't a good mixture because the mixer operator needs to be invulnerable to authorities or the mixer will be compromised.
2156 2011-05-27 18:06:32 <neoeinstein_> But you'd need to trust the laundry
2157 2011-05-27 18:06:37 <Lachesis> yeah
2158 2011-05-27 18:06:47 <gmaxwell> "So, I'm supposted to give my money to an anonymous person who operates outside of the law⦠with no promise that he'll give it back?"
2159 2011-05-27 18:06:48 <Lachesis> gmaxwell, good point
2160 2011-05-27 18:08:02 <gmaxwell> And, of course, if it isn't operated in secret then the various authorities send ninjas to insist that the mixer log all txn and send them the data. Win for the ninjas, since they only have to spy at one location to get the most interesting txn.
2161 2011-05-27 18:09:23 <shankest> a good way to launder coins would be to send them to another address, then post a tx that includes a steganographically encoded private key for the dest account
2162 2011-05-27 18:09:34 <diki> i dont understand what is all this fascination with python
2163 2011-05-27 18:09:42 <neoeinstein_> snake love
2164 2011-05-27 18:09:47 <diki> why is every person writing in python...
2165 2011-05-27 18:09:54 <BlueMatt> oh dont get this chan started on language wars
2166 2011-05-27 18:09:58 <Lachesis> diki, lol
2167 2011-05-27 18:09:59 <phantomcircuit> diki, it's an excellent language?
2168 2011-05-27 18:10:02 <Xenland> BlueMatt :)
2169 2011-05-27 18:10:18 <BlueMatt> and here...we...go
2170 2011-05-27 18:10:24 deegozzz has joined
2171 2011-05-27 18:10:32 <deegozzz> Question: Say, I use bitcoind -server with rpcport set to 7777 in bitcoin.conf. That only changes the *listen* part. Now, to test, I try bitcoin getwork. But, the *connect-to* part was never changed. So, it still tries 8332, and fails. Any hints for me? thanks.
2172 2011-05-27 18:10:54 <ArtForz> http://xkcd.com/353/
2173 2011-05-27 18:11:11 <BlueMatt> deegozzz: -rpcport will set connect to and listen, also please ask on #bitcoin next time
2174 2011-05-27 18:11:24 glassresistor has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2175 2011-05-27 18:11:50 <soap> he did :(
2176 2011-05-27 18:11:54 <Xenland> BlueMatt: i think nobody gave him an answer
2177 2011-05-27 18:11:58 <BlueMatt> oh...
2178 2011-05-27 18:12:07 <BlueMatt> we need better supporters on #bitcoin
2179 2011-05-27 18:12:11 <soap> he waited 1 minute.
2180 2011-05-27 18:12:14 <diki> What is the probability to find a block if i have split up my work in 4 miners?
2181 2011-05-27 18:12:20 glassresistor has joined
2182 2011-05-27 18:12:20 glassresistor has quit (Changing host)
2183 2011-05-27 18:12:20 glassresistor has joined
2184 2011-05-27 18:12:38 <BlueMatt> diki: the same as the prob of each added together, and that also probably belongs on #bitcoin
2185 2011-05-27 18:12:51 <diki> you seem very serious today
2186 2011-05-27 18:13:17 <diki> Alrighty, let the language wars begin!
2187 2011-05-27 18:13:30 <BlueMatt> meh, trying to keep the chan a bit clearer, there is a ton of crap on here, and too little bitcoin dev talk
2188 2011-05-27 18:13:45 <BlueMatt> as with the "dev" forum
2189 2011-05-27 18:14:19 <diki> Let's discuss bitcoin then. I specifically want bitcoin optimized to work with pools
2190 2011-05-27 18:14:21 <deegozzz> BlueMatt: ok, sorry. And, thanks. It worked, I don't know why it didn't work a sec ago (pebkac).
2191 2011-05-27 18:14:25 <neoeinstein_> Soooo, how 'bout them semicolons?
2192 2011-05-27 18:14:45 <soap> Then change the topic from "If you have a question, simply ask and wait for a reply." to "Support in #bitcoin, dev discussion only in here".
2193 2011-05-27 18:14:47 <diki> so that when i use listransactions i actually have a criteria to search for
2194 2011-05-27 18:14:50 trekdanne has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2195 2011-05-27 18:15:42 ArtForzZz has joined
2196 2011-05-27 18:15:57 <gmaxwell> soap: are you ruleslawyering this channel too? 0_o
2197 2011-05-27 18:16:03 <BlueMatt> happy?
2198 2011-05-27 18:16:45 <BlueMatt> I dont mind discussion, but too many simple questions...
2199 2011-05-27 18:16:51 <soap> just don't understand why general questions are unexpected when they are explicitly asked for, that's all.
2200 2011-05-27 18:17:34 <deegozzz> thanks, bluematt, everyone. Bye
2201 2011-05-27 18:17:35 deegozzz has left ("ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)")
2202 2011-05-27 18:17:36 <BlueMatt> (though I dont mind people asking here if they have already asked on #bitcoin )
2203 2011-05-27 18:18:21 johndoe0711 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2204 2011-05-27 18:19:09 ArtForz has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2205 2011-05-27 18:19:18 ArtForzZz is now known as ArtForz
2206 2011-05-27 18:19:22 <Lachesis> ArtForz, how's it going>?
2207 2011-05-27 18:19:34 <Lachesis> how's the asic build working out?
2208 2011-05-27 18:19:46 ar4s has quit (Quit: ar4s)
2209 2011-05-27 18:20:03 <ArtForz> fine, 40Ghps online, waiting for next 20Ghps of chips
2210 2011-05-27 18:20:23 <diki> Woah there rump ranger. No need for them gigahaashes yet
2211 2011-05-27 18:20:33 Slix` has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
2212 2011-05-27 18:20:49 <diki> *ghashes
2213 2011-05-27 18:21:00 <Namegduf> Nice.
2214 2011-05-27 18:21:55 Slix` has joined
2215 2011-05-27 18:28:53 agent-x has joined
2216 2011-05-27 18:30:02 <peterpansen_> isn't bitcoin a botnet?
2217 2011-05-27 18:30:14 <Namegduf> No.
2218 2011-05-27 18:30:18 <peterpansen_> type of i mean
2219 2011-05-27 18:30:20 <Namegduf> No.
2220 2011-05-27 18:30:39 <peterpansen_> i have no control over whats beeing calculated...
2221 2011-05-27 18:30:44 <Namegduf> Yes you do.
2222 2011-05-27 18:30:50 <Namegduf> Your local bitcoin software does.
2223 2011-05-27 18:31:01 <Namegduf> No other node can issue commands to yours.
2224 2011-05-27 18:31:08 datagutt_ has joined
2225 2011-05-27 18:31:27 <peterpansen_> it could break the md5 hashes of stolen passwords for someone?
2226 2011-05-27 18:31:35 <peterpansen_> i talking about that mining part
2227 2011-05-27 18:31:45 <Pilate> false
2228 2011-05-27 18:31:58 <peterpansen_> i.e. i'm using a rpc-miner and get my blocks from outside
2229 2011-05-27 18:32:12 <Pilate> whats done with those blocks is known
2230 2011-05-27 18:32:21 <peterpansen_> ah ok
2231 2011-05-27 18:32:47 datagutt has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2232 2011-05-27 18:33:13 <peterpansen_> maybe it would be a future use of gpu power? like a giant hashbreaker?
2233 2011-05-27 18:33:33 <peterpansen_> i mean, someone could pay me in btc for that in fact...
2234 2011-05-27 18:34:07 <peterpansen_> i still dont understand the system i think
2235 2011-05-27 18:34:38 <peterpansen_> every calculation done is for the transactions verify?
2236 2011-05-27 18:34:59 <peterpansen_> or what is exactly calculated?
2237 2011-05-27 18:35:01 datagutt_ is now known as datagutt
2238 2011-05-27 18:35:23 pnicholson has joined
2239 2011-05-27 18:36:27 <BlueMatt> peterpansen_: yes, its a sort of hash breaker, but nothing that could be exploited to find someone's password
2240 2011-05-27 18:36:38 <BlueMatt> its very dissimilar in that regard
2241 2011-05-27 18:36:59 DrewSJ has joined
2242 2011-05-27 18:38:40 agent-x has left ()
2243 2011-05-27 18:39:19 <peterpansen_> i'm not talking about MY password, i'm talking about DBs stolen on Web...
2244 2011-05-27 18:39:30 <BlueMatt> still no
2245 2011-05-27 18:39:36 <peterpansen_> Ok, thx
2246 2011-05-27 18:40:05 <peterpansen_> so every calc done is just for "the network" to work?
2247 2011-05-27 18:40:32 <BlueMatt> the goal of mining is just that, to prove that you did work
2248 2011-05-27 18:40:46 <peterpansen_> aha, ok
2249 2011-05-27 18:40:56 <BlueMatt> that way you can force a limit on how fast blocks can be generated
2250 2011-05-27 18:41:07 <BlueMatt> because everyone has to prove that they did work
2251 2011-05-27 18:41:15 <peterpansen_> ok
2252 2011-05-27 18:41:17 <BlueMatt> well, thats the idea
2253 2011-05-27 18:41:22 <DrewSJ> what happens when all transactions stop
2254 2011-05-27 18:41:29 <DrewSJ> can miners still generate and create new blocks?
2255 2011-05-27 18:41:34 <BlueMatt> yea
2256 2011-05-27 18:41:43 Netsniper has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2257 2011-05-27 18:41:44 <neoeinstein_> Yes. Every block contains a coinbase transaction.
2258 2011-05-27 18:41:46 <DrewSJ> There would be no new information to compute
2259 2011-05-27 18:41:51 <BlueMatt> but if all txes have stopped, bitcoin has probably been abandoned, and its of no use
2260 2011-05-27 18:42:06 <neoeinstein_> And even if there weren't, blocks could still be generated.
2261 2011-05-27 18:42:11 <BlueMatt> yep
2262 2011-05-27 18:42:21 AStove has joined
2263 2011-05-27 18:42:42 <peterpansen_> what if the nsa puts up a supercomputer for mining?
2264 2011-05-27 18:43:00 <BlueMatt> bitcoin already has more total network power than any super computer, by a very large margin
2265 2011-05-27 18:43:12 <BlueMatt> so they would just contribute to the network's security
2266 2011-05-27 18:43:37 <peterpansen_> ah, ok
2267 2011-05-27 18:43:40 eta has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2268 2011-05-27 18:43:51 Netsniper has joined
2269 2011-05-27 18:43:56 <peterpansen_> they wouldn't earn ALL the coins?
2270 2011-05-27 18:44:19 <BlueMatt> they would earn coins proportional to the % of network power they hold
2271 2011-05-27 18:44:22 <BlueMatt> just like anyone else
2272 2011-05-27 18:44:29 <peterpansen_> ok
2273 2011-05-27 18:44:42 <peterpansen_> hmm, thx for your explanations!
2274 2011-05-27 18:44:46 <BlueMatt> also, these are probably better questions to ask on #bitcoin
2275 2011-05-27 18:44:51 <peterpansen_> the project is very interesting
2276 2011-05-27 18:45:15 <peterpansen_> but you are one of the codes, aren't you?
2277 2011-05-27 18:45:48 <BlueMatt> yea, but #bitcoin is the noob/discussion/question chan, this is more for discussion about the development of the project
2278 2011-05-27 18:46:05 <BlueMatt> though if they cant answer, you can gladly come back here
2279 2011-05-27 18:46:29 <peterpansen_> This project seems to me like: Too good to be true. But I will look at it..!
2280 2011-05-27 18:46:30 <peterpansen_> thx
2281 2011-05-27 18:46:42 eao has joined
2282 2011-05-27 18:46:56 <BlueMatt> a lot of people think that, but, so far, no one has found any problems...
2283 2011-05-27 18:47:05 <BlueMatt> at least not serious ones
2284 2011-05-27 18:47:06 <peterpansen_> BTW: Do you know someone from Germany, who is into this project for a time?
2285 2011-05-27 18:47:16 <BlueMatt> me, why do you ask?
2286 2011-05-27 18:47:22 <peterpansen_> Looking for someone to Interview for a podcast
2287 2011-05-27 18:47:25 <BlueMatt> and several others
2288 2011-05-27 18:47:34 <peterpansen_> Kennst du Chaosradio?
2289 2011-05-27 18:47:43 <BlueMatt> nein
2290 2011-05-27 18:47:53 <BlueMatt> but Im also an american living in germant and my german aint that great
2291 2011-05-27 18:48:01 <BlueMatt> germany*
2292 2011-05-27 18:48:11 sethsethseth__ has joined
2293 2011-05-27 18:48:20 <luke-jr> jgarzik: btw, why doesn't pushpoold use diff 1?
2294 2011-05-27 18:48:22 <peterpansen_> it's a podcast project from people behind CCC
2295 2011-05-27 18:48:32 <BlueMatt> ah, nice
2296 2011-05-27 18:48:51 <peterpansen_> I think a episode about Bitcoin would be great!
2297 2011-05-27 18:49:12 <BlueMatt> well gavin always does podcasts, but hes on vacation in france atm, and he doesnt speak germany
2298 2011-05-27 18:49:18 <BlueMatt> (Im assuming that is a requirement)
2299 2011-05-27 18:49:41 <peterpansen_> Yes, it's like a talk-radio where people can call in
2300 2011-05-27 18:50:02 sethsethseth___ has joined
2301 2011-05-27 18:50:07 <BlueMatt> I dont think ArtForz would be willing to, but he might?
2302 2011-05-27 18:50:31 <BlueMatt> there are a couple dutch who would...
2303 2011-05-27 18:50:56 sethsethseth_ has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
2304 2011-05-27 18:52:01 <BlueMatt> dunno, if you hang around and keep asking, Im sure someone will turn up...
2305 2011-05-27 18:53:23 Dekbit has joined
2306 2011-05-27 18:53:23 sethsethseth__ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2307 2011-05-27 18:54:52 Xenland has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2308 2011-05-27 18:56:25 <diki> So do you guys think i should invest in another card for mining?
2309 2011-05-27 18:56:43 <diki> I know this is for #bitcoin, but still
2310 2011-05-27 18:56:45 <TD> BlueMatt: mind if I run a thought by you?
2311 2011-05-27 18:57:50 <BlueMatt> TD: by all means, please do
2312 2011-05-27 18:58:20 <BlueMatt> diki: meh, do the math and take a guess...thats all anyone can tell you
2313 2011-05-27 18:58:46 <diki> any formulas?
2314 2011-05-27 18:59:09 <TD> i've been thinking and talking a lot about what happens after inflation. the speed of the network will be set by fees. but there's no "right" speed for everyone. different types of transactions have different risk levels. because fees are allowed by the protocol to be anything, attempting to set a min fee requires, effectively, a miner cartel, but one in which participants have strong incentives to drop out
2315 2011-05-27 18:59:12 <BlueMatt> diki: the only one is how much you generate per watt...
2316 2011-05-27 18:59:40 <TD> having a single speed also opens us up to (more) accusations of wasting energy. if it's too high (there are never any transaction reversals) then arguably too much energy is spent to secure too little value.
2317 2011-05-27 18:59:50 <TD> if it's too low bitcoin stops being reliable and people might as well just use credit cards
2318 2011-05-27 19:00:11 <TD> one alternative that pops to mind is having multiple chains, running at different (fixed) difficulties.
2319 2011-05-27 19:00:16 <TD> with fixed fees.
2320 2011-05-27 19:00:35 Mononofu has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2321 2011-05-27 19:00:35 <TD> if your transaction isn't that important (selling an mp3 or whatever), you'd go in the low difficulty, low fee chain
2322 2011-05-27 19:00:54 <TD> if you're transferring a million bucks as part of a business deal with a competitor, you'd put it in the highest difficulty chain, with the highest fee
2323 2011-05-27 19:00:54 <BlueMatt> hmmm...interesting
2324 2011-05-27 19:01:10 <TD> if a block appeared in a chain containing transactions of the wrong fee level, it'd be considered invalid
2325 2011-05-27 19:01:30 <TD> ie, the fee rules would NOT be flexible, so there cannot be a race to the bottom.
2326 2011-05-27 19:01:39 <TD> however you can still choose how much you pay by choosing a different chain
2327 2011-05-27 19:02:06 <BlueMatt> very interesting...what does fixed diff on each chain offer, why not scaling diff with different time/block?
2328 2011-05-27 19:02:06 <TD> i'm not totally sure it really solves the problems
2329 2011-05-27 19:02:36 <TD> well, fixed difficulties mean the chains don't simply become equivalent
2330 2011-05-27 19:02:52 <TD> imagine that inflation stopped tomorrow but we wanted to preserve this nice 4THash/sec security
2331 2011-05-27 19:02:58 <TD> bitcoin probably wouldn't be usable for micropayments anymore
2332 2011-05-27 19:03:05 <BlueMatt> very true
2333 2011-05-27 19:03:14 <TD> that'd be a shame.
2334 2011-05-27 19:03:20 <TD> but if there was a chain of a fixed, low difficulty
2335 2011-05-27 19:03:31 <TD> and a chain for high difficulty
2336 2011-05-27 19:03:37 <TD> we could potentially support both
2337 2011-05-27 19:03:51 <TD> (in practice there might be lots of chains or even a flexible number)
2338 2011-05-27 19:04:05 <TD> to be clear this idea is really half baked
2339 2011-05-27 19:04:07 <TD> barely a quarter baked
2340 2011-05-27 19:04:13 <diki> Make sure those chains dont get rusty tho
2341 2011-05-27 19:04:46 <BlueMatt> you would have to have some kind of scaling diff to make sure you still get *some* miners on each chain, because even low-fee txes need confirmations
2342 2011-05-27 19:05:12 <TD> as long as the fee is higher than the cost of verification, somebody, somewhere, will work on it
2343 2011-05-27 19:05:19 <BlueMatt> yea
2344 2011-05-27 19:05:26 <TD> (assuming the difficulty is low enough)
2345 2011-05-27 19:05:52 <BlueMatt> I agree some kind of separation of the security provided to high-fee txes and low-prio txes could be added, but Im not entirely sure about multi-chains
2346 2011-05-27 19:05:57 <TD> me neither
2347 2011-05-27 19:06:01 skeledrew1 has joined
2348 2011-05-27 19:06:16 <TD> one obvious question is, if you have fixed difficulties, what happens when a big powerful miner mines on the low diff chain
2349 2011-05-27 19:06:20 <TD> multiple blocks per second?
2350 2011-05-27 19:06:40 <BlueMatt> yea, thats why Im not a big fan of fixed diff
2351 2011-05-27 19:06:47 <TD> another question is, do miners work on multiple chains and if so, which ones. all of them?
2352 2011-05-27 19:06:50 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2353 2011-05-27 19:07:03 <BlueMatt> it would have to scale, but then you could get huge changes as miners move back and forth between chains
2354 2011-05-27 19:07:12 <TD> super fast block creation times aren't necessarily harmful, per se, but they do result in wasted work as side chains constantly form and are discarded
2355 2011-05-27 19:07:33 <TD> however there isn't any incentive to mine empty blocks
2356 2011-05-27 19:07:37 <TD> this is intended for a post inflation world
2357 2011-05-27 19:07:47 <TD> so a block with no transcations in doesn't have any use to the miner
2358 2011-05-27 19:07:58 <TD> it means a chain would not make forward progress unless there was a transaction pending
2359 2011-05-27 19:08:15 <TD> once a tx becomes available on a chain, miners all start trying to find a block with it in. the first one to find it wins.
2360 2011-05-27 19:08:17 <BlueMatt> but one might assume that miners still go to wherever they have the biggest chance of payout, so theoretically you would get miners all working on all of them as they become more valuble
2361 2011-05-27 19:08:34 <TD> hrmmm
2362 2011-05-27 19:08:54 <BlueMatt> one might assume, because it is so easy to switch chains, that each chain would get blocks in order
2363 2011-05-27 19:09:00 <TD> well
2364 2011-05-27 19:09:06 <BlueMatt> as it becomes the most valuable
2365 2011-05-27 19:09:16 <TD> right
2366 2011-05-27 19:09:22 <TD> on the other hand
2367 2011-05-27 19:09:28 <BlueMatt> though Im not sure that is such a terrible thing...
2368 2011-05-27 19:09:36 io_error has joined
2369 2011-05-27 19:09:36 io_error has quit (Changing host)
2370 2011-05-27 19:09:36 io_error has joined
2371 2011-05-27 19:09:37 <TD> if everyone piles on to one chain, you stand a much better chance of picking up a lower value chain because nobody else is working on it
2372 2011-05-27 19:09:56 Marcel has left (HSD!~Marcel|HS@router2.hsdev.com|)
2373 2011-05-27 19:10:04 <BlueMatt> if the diff scaling is done properly, you could still get as many blocks as you want on any given chain
2374 2011-05-27 19:10:06 Marcel has joined
2375 2011-05-27 19:10:18 <TD> yeah, ok. so maybe it still works if diffs float.
2376 2011-05-27 19:10:24 <TD> it just segregates power by fee
2377 2011-05-27 19:10:39 <BlueMatt> Id kind of rather see some kind of higher security setting within existing bitcoin or as an attached side chain
2378 2011-05-27 19:10:50 Slix` has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2379 2011-05-27 19:11:02 <BlueMatt> Im not sure how much more security an artificially high diff chain could give to txes
2380 2011-05-27 19:11:09 <TD> well. i'm sort of hand-wavingingly assuming it could be done in a backwards compatible manner :)
2381 2011-05-27 19:11:21 <BlueMatt> yes, of course
2382 2011-05-27 19:11:34 <TD> the problem is the "fee death spiral"
2383 2011-05-27 19:11:41 <TD> if to get high security you HAVE to pay a high fee
2384 2011-05-27 19:11:47 <TD> and this is enforced by everyones software
2385 2011-05-27 19:12:00 <TD> then you can't get miners undercutting each other ever so slightly in order to get the business
2386 2011-05-27 19:12:28 mosi has joined
2387 2011-05-27 19:12:32 <TD> it's a bit like the proposals floating around to just require a min fee, or a floating fee calculated by looking at the recent average fee
2388 2011-05-27 19:12:42 <BlueMatt> yea
2389 2011-05-27 19:12:53 <TD> it tries to solve the race to the bottom with a new network rule. but "one fee fits all" excludes a lot of potentially interesting transactions
2390 2011-05-27 19:12:56 <TD> it'll either be too low or too high
2391 2011-05-27 19:13:19 <BlueMatt> Im still not convinced it has any huge advantages over other potential solutions, but I agree one fee fits all/one block system fits all is also broken
2392 2011-05-27 19:14:11 <BlueMatt> what if we simply leave the artificial block-size limit in?
2393 2011-05-27 19:14:18 mos has quit (work!~mos@217.22.80.82|Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2394 2011-05-27 19:14:26 Mononofu has joined
2395 2011-05-27 19:14:32 <TD> it artificially stops bitcoin achieving its full potential. at some point new users will start finding it takes ages to buy anything
2396 2011-05-27 19:14:38 <TD> and they'll just go back to credit cards
2397 2011-05-27 19:14:42 <BlueMatt> sorry, stupid idea
2398 2011-05-27 19:15:43 <BlueMatt> though one might create custom rulesets on which txes make it into a block and in what space in a block for the client to accept it to disk?
2399 2011-05-27 19:15:50 <TD> i guess the diffs would have to float on each chain, but the fixed fee (can't be lower or higher) means the difficulty would naturally settle at whatever the mining equilibrium is for that profit level
2400 2011-05-27 19:16:07 <BlueMatt> if you want to support microtxes, say "x space in the block must be microtxes, or the block is invalid"
2401 2011-05-27 19:16:13 <BlueMatt> or that space must be left empty
2402 2011-05-27 19:16:17 tlrobinson has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2403 2011-05-27 19:16:19 <TD> yeah, but deciding on these values is tough
2404 2011-05-27 19:16:30 <TD> there have to be some magic numbers, bitcoin has them
2405 2011-05-27 19:16:31 stuhood has joined
2406 2011-05-27 19:16:32 <BlueMatt> as is deciding how to float the diffs on each chain
2407 2011-05-27 19:16:37 <TD> but each magic number throws up tons of questions, always.
2408 2011-05-27 19:16:54 <TD> well, i think the diff would settle naturally
2409 2011-05-27 19:17:11 <TD> it'd effectively be some market-set function of (traffic levels * fixed fee level / price of a gigahash)
2410 2011-05-27 19:17:12 <TD> or something
2411 2011-05-27 19:17:22 <TD> a better question is how many chains do you have?
2412 2011-05-27 19:17:34 <TD> and can it change?
2413 2011-05-27 19:17:40 <BlueMatt> Im not so sure about that...
2414 2011-05-27 19:17:54 DrewSJ has quit ()
2415 2011-05-27 19:18:07 BMoney has joined
2416 2011-05-27 19:18:12 <diki> what exactly do you want to do TD?
2417 2011-05-27 19:18:41 <BlueMatt> if you envision the system as all miners work on all chains based on the highest expected payout, the mining might still fall to the low fees, providing less security, but more volume to be made in fees
2418 2011-05-27 19:18:43 <TD> find a convincing model for how bitcoin can work in ~15 years when inflation has dropped to very small amounts
2419 2011-05-27 19:18:48 <BlueMatt> prices could still race to the bottom
2420 2011-05-27 19:19:20 <BlueMatt> not race, but fall to lower chains
2421 2011-05-27 19:19:35 <TD> yeah. i guess all that means is that there aren't many tx reversers around
2422 2011-05-27 19:19:40 tippenein has joined
2423 2011-05-27 19:19:53 <BlueMatt> you would have to, say, give the high-fee chains faster block times, so that confirms happen faster
2424 2011-05-27 19:20:03 <TD> if there are so many transactions that tiny fees offer unbeatable security, you don't really need the higher fee chains
2425 2011-05-27 19:20:05 <diki> i honestly still dont understand all the chain mumbo jumbo
2426 2011-05-27 19:20:06 <BlueMatt> but that means lower diff and less security
2427 2011-05-27 19:20:22 kiba has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2428 2011-05-27 19:20:37 <BlueMatt> or the confirmations mean half as much, so in the end its the same
2429 2011-05-27 19:20:45 <TD> high value transactions usually don't need instant confirmation
2430 2011-05-27 19:21:01 <TD> i don't know if it's a rule, exactly, but my gut feeling is that desired transaction time is inversely proportional to value transferred
2431 2011-05-27 19:21:13 <TD> diki: yeah it's complicated and confusing
2432 2011-05-27 19:21:15 f1nack has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
2433 2011-05-27 19:21:17 <BlueMatt> I would say thats true
2434 2011-05-27 19:21:34 <BlueMatt> but then what advantage is there to getting your tx in a high-fee chain?
2435 2011-05-27 19:21:45 <TD> it's harder to reverse
2436 2011-05-27 19:21:49 <BlueMatt> how so?
2437 2011-05-27 19:22:01 <BlueMatt> if you limit diff high, less blocks to reverse, if you dont, less diff
2438 2011-05-27 19:22:37 DrewSJ has joined
2439 2011-05-27 19:22:40 <TD> the high fees motivate more people to compete over them, i guess
2440 2011-05-27 19:22:48 <TD> same as how high-valued blocks today motivate more people to compete over them
2441 2011-05-27 19:22:51 <TD> well
2442 2011-05-27 19:22:55 <TD> more gpu cores
2443 2011-05-27 19:23:06 <BlueMatt> hm...
2444 2011-05-27 19:23:11 f1nack has joined
2445 2011-05-27 19:23:13 Sedra has joined
2446 2011-05-27 19:23:27 <TD> i dunno
2447 2011-05-27 19:23:33 <TD> i think i need to ponder it more
2448 2011-05-27 19:23:45 <BlueMatt> you would have to give "high-value" a pretty low definition imo to get the volume to not give low fee more prio
2449 2011-05-27 19:23:52 <BlueMatt> imho
2450 2011-05-27 19:23:53 dbitcoin has joined
2451 2011-05-27 19:24:15 <TD> the key question for me is, does some alternative system solve the free rider/incentive problem
2452 2011-05-27 19:24:15 <BlueMatt> I dont know stats, but Id assume the vast majority of txes irl are fairly low value, and would carry a low, if any fee
2453 2011-05-27 19:24:24 <TD> yeah
2454 2011-05-27 19:24:45 <BlueMatt> and Im not convinced it does
2455 2011-05-27 19:25:14 <Dekbit> desired transaction time inversely proportional to value? So your saying if someone buys a car with btc you'd think they wouldnt care if the tx didnt go through for half a day? Wow. Imagine if Credit cards were like that
2456 2011-05-27 19:25:25 <BlueMatt> though if you set the bar low for high-prio chain, maybe
2457 2011-05-27 19:25:41 <TD> if you're buying a car, half a day is probably survivable. unless you're so rich you buy cars on impulse
2458 2011-05-27 19:25:44 <Dekbit> I can see the btc commercials now: "the more you spend the longer it takes!"
2459 2011-05-27 19:25:51 <TD> if you're buying a cheeseburger, you want it right now
2460 2011-05-27 19:25:57 <Mononofu> well, it's actually true
2461 2011-05-27 19:25:59 <TD> Dekbit: well, no, it'd always be a choice
2462 2011-05-27 19:26:10 <TD> Dekbit: you don't HAVE to wait longer, if you trust your counterparty
2463 2011-05-27 19:26:22 <BlueMatt> Dekbit: 99% of people who buy a car already wait more than a day for their bank to give them a loan and then deal with all the paperwork
2464 2011-05-27 19:26:24 <TD> if you're buying a car from a friend, you don't really need the block chain. you trust the other guy.
2465 2011-05-27 19:26:32 kristianpaul has joined
2466 2011-05-27 19:26:34 <TD> so you could just pay a tiny fee
2467 2011-05-27 19:26:40 <Dekbit> Trust? I thought bitcoin was a system built on 0 trust.
2468 2011-05-27 19:26:46 <BlueMatt> it can be
2469 2011-05-27 19:26:57 <Dekbit> if you paid a tiny fee then youd have tiny security if i understand you right
2470 2011-05-27 19:27:00 <Dekbit> much easier to double spend, etc
2471 2011-05-27 19:27:04 <kristianpaul> Can bitcoing be forked for people who want a offline coin?
2472 2011-05-27 19:27:05 <TD> yeah. it lets you trade without trust. but if you have that trust, you can use it to optimize.
2473 2011-05-27 19:27:06 <Dekbit> in that fork of the chain
2474 2011-05-27 19:27:19 <TD> Dekbit: sure. but if you know the other guy won't try and double spend, you can use a tiny fee
2475 2011-05-27 19:27:29 <TD> if you think he might try to screw you, pay a higher fee
2476 2011-05-27 19:27:34 <Dekbit> yeah i hear ya
2477 2011-05-27 19:27:37 <Dekbit> interesting idea
2478 2011-05-27 19:27:38 <BlueMatt> anyway, TD, I think it could solve the problem, but in the end you would effectively be setting a client-enforced minfee for a block to be valid, which could be done identically now imo
2479 2011-05-27 19:27:47 <TD> kristianpaul: bitbills.com
2480 2011-05-27 19:28:09 <TD> BlueMatt: yeah it could and that's one way to solve the death spiral problem. it's just inflexible and i don't like that much
2481 2011-05-27 19:28:13 <kristianpaul> TD: cool !
2482 2011-05-27 19:29:09 <BlueMatt> TD: yea, I agree...but I dont see many chains for different fees to be that huge of an advantage either, it could be done just as flexible in single blocks as it could be done in many chains
2483 2011-05-27 19:29:12 <TD> somebody (ie gavin) has to pick the "right" difficulty level. it's kind of like the central bank choosing the "right" interest rate
2484 2011-05-27 19:29:36 <diki> td my suggestion is wait. You could put a lot of effort into something that might not exist
2485 2011-05-27 19:29:45 <TD> BlueMatt: how so? if I pay a tiny fee and still get included, then my tx is secured by the efforts of the people paying high fees
2486 2011-05-27 19:29:49 <TD> i get something for nothing
2487 2011-05-27 19:29:56 pirrr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2488 2011-05-27 19:30:00 <diki> no, you don't get anything
2489 2011-05-27 19:30:00 <BlueMatt> diki: if it means more adoption, it should be discussed at length
2490 2011-05-27 19:30:04 <TD> diki: oh sure. i'm not going to implement this anytime soon. and it'd be an extension to bitcoin
2491 2011-05-27 19:30:15 <TD> diki: we've got _years_ until this starts to become a priority
2492 2011-05-27 19:30:22 <diki> point is 15 years is a long time
2493 2011-05-27 19:30:29 <diki> wait a few
2494 2011-05-27 19:30:29 <TD> it's more the case of, people are raising this as a concern, and it's legitimate, so there should be some kind of convincing plan
2495 2011-05-27 19:30:52 toffoo has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2496 2011-05-27 19:30:55 <TD> diki: the "i get something for nothing" remark was meant for BlueMatt, sorry
2497 2011-05-27 19:31:18 <TD> i meant "today, if I pay a low fee and get included, but everyone else is paying high fees, i get the benefit of their spending 'for free'"
2498 2011-05-27 19:31:26 toffoo has joined
2499 2011-05-27 19:31:31 <TD> because there's no way to give me lower security than the high payers
2500 2011-05-27 19:31:44 <TD> that's the free rider problem that gets brought up from time to time
2501 2011-05-27 19:31:46 <BlueMatt> yea...
2502 2011-05-27 19:32:04 <Dekbit> not sure why thats a problem
2503 2011-05-27 19:32:21 <TD> why would I ever pay a high fee?
2504 2011-05-27 19:32:26 <TD> somebody else is going to do it
2505 2011-05-27 19:32:29 <TD> until ...... nobody does
2506 2011-05-27 19:32:35 <BlueMatt> hm, well I cant poke a hole in it TD, its a very interesting solution to an interesting problem to say the least
2507 2011-05-27 19:32:39 <Dekbit> because you want faster priority processing?
2508 2011-05-27 19:32:46 <BlueMatt> Ill keep chewing on it and see what comes out...
2509 2011-05-27 19:33:00 <TD> what is priority? "priority" today is just an ugly hack to try and stop people blowing up the chain before SPV is ready
2510 2011-05-27 19:33:11 RazielZ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2511 2011-05-27 19:33:14 <BlueMatt> SPV?
2512 2011-05-27 19:33:18 <TD> headers only mode
2513 2011-05-27 19:33:19 <TD> client mode
2514 2011-05-27 19:33:22 <BlueMatt> ah yes
2515 2011-05-27 19:33:25 <TD> simplified payment verification
2516 2011-05-27 19:33:59 <BlueMatt> Id be willing to bet 1.0 will be the next major release number after 0.4.0
2517 2011-05-27 19:34:01 <TD> priority doesn't really work because the transactions you want to go through instantly also tend to be the lower value ones
2518 2011-05-27 19:34:15 <Dekbit> seems like people would pay tx fees because each miner has a threshhold fee they will accept, such as the pools today only accepting fee tx
2519 2011-05-27 19:34:26 <Dekbit> and more miners working on your tx means faster processing? no?
2520 2011-05-27 19:34:31 <TD> no
2521 2011-05-27 19:34:32 <BlueMatt> Dekbit: no
2522 2011-05-27 19:34:37 <TD> well
2523 2011-05-27 19:34:40 <Dekbit> how come
2524 2011-05-27 19:34:42 <TD> "yes"
2525 2011-05-27 19:34:43 <BlueMatt> well the second part, yes
2526 2011-05-27 19:34:46 <TD> qualified
2527 2011-05-27 19:34:46 <BlueMatt> the first part no
2528 2011-05-27 19:34:49 <Dekbit> lol
2529 2011-05-27 19:35:06 <TD> if your transaction is only accepted by one miner out of 10, it'll be accepted ten times slower than if everyone accepted it
2530 2011-05-27 19:35:13 <TD> the problem with the cartel approach is it's unstable
2531 2011-05-27 19:35:13 <BlueMatt> miners will include very low fee txes because something is better than nothing
2532 2011-05-27 19:35:30 <TD> let's say there are 10 miners and they agree to only accept transactions with a 0.10 btc fee
2533 2011-05-27 19:35:45 <TD> this is fine for a while, until one miner decides to secretly start breaking the agreement and including lower fee transactions.
2534 2011-05-27 19:35:56 <Dekbit> sure thats good thats competition among miners
2535 2011-05-27 19:36:08 <Dekbit> they wont lower fee below cost to process
2536 2011-05-27 19:36:09 <TD> once he starts doing this, people will notice that they can only pay 0.09 btc and they don't have to wait a whole lot longer
2537 2011-05-27 19:36:09 <BlueMatt> miners are competing to include low-fee txes now
2538 2011-05-27 19:36:25 <TD> lots of people will start paying only 0.09 btc and that miner will grab tons of business
2539 2011-05-27 19:36:30 DontMindMe has quit (Quit: Nettalk6 - www.ntalk.de)
2540 2011-05-27 19:36:31 <TD> now the other miners are incentivised to only charge 0.09 as well
2541 2011-05-27 19:36:35 <Dekbit> IMO thats how it should be i dont see the problem
2542 2011-05-27 19:36:44 marlowe has joined
2543 2011-05-27 19:36:51 <Dekbit> sorry if i am dense here
2544 2011-05-27 19:36:53 <TD> because it repeats itself until there's little mining being done
2545 2011-05-27 19:37:07 <TD> now all the miners are charging 0.09 btc instead of 0.10 btc, they have to switch off a few gpus to still be profitable
2546 2011-05-27 19:37:14 <BlueMatt> you work towards low hash power and low fees
2547 2011-05-27 19:37:18 <TD> transactions got cheaper and they all confirm at the same speed
2548 2011-05-27 19:37:19 <Dekbit> I dont think that is true just because at a point it becomes unprofitable to mine and therefor the miners would equalize at that point
2549 2011-05-27 19:37:22 <TD> but the security got lower
2550 2011-05-27 19:37:24 <BlueMatt> and low hash power could mean security holes
2551 2011-05-27 19:37:40 <TD> yeah
2552 2011-05-27 19:37:50 <TD> so the fees settle at the lowest possible level that supports a tiny profit
2553 2011-05-27 19:37:55 <TD> creating a weak and fragile chain
2554 2011-05-27 19:38:13 <TD> if i have a super important tx, I can pay a huge fee myself, and some idle equipment might spin up and give you a temporary speed boost
2555 2011-05-27 19:38:24 <TD> the fee would have to pay for multiple blocks to give lots of security though
2556 2011-05-27 19:38:32 <Dekbit> hmmm
2557 2011-05-27 19:38:56 <BlueMatt> all this said, I still stand by my original answer-if bitcoin gets large backers ie paypal style payment processors, who see large payments coming through, mining for them becomes not a way to make money, but a cost of doing business with bitcoins, just like paying bank transfer fees are to paypal currently
2558 2011-05-27 19:39:04 <TD> the problem then is, if I want my own big transaction to be secure but I don't really care when it goes through (ie it's for a car or a house), I can just wait until I see somebody else give a giant high fee tx
2559 2011-05-27 19:39:06 <TD> and sneak in behind them
2560 2011-05-27 19:39:13 <TD> effectively getting that security "for free"
2561 2011-05-27 19:39:20 <TD> because they can't avoid securing my tx at the same time as they secure theirs
2562 2011-05-27 19:39:23 bitcoiner has joined
2563 2011-05-27 19:39:48 <TD> if bitcoin ends up centralizing around a few big players, the block chain isn't necessary at all
2564 2011-05-27 19:40:01 <TD> because they can just trust each other not to double spend (write contracts, sue each other if they violate, etc)
2565 2011-05-27 19:40:02 <BlueMatt> true only in theory
2566 2011-05-27 19:40:05 <TD> they can transact for free
2567 2011-05-27 19:40:10 <TD> well, that's what happened with banks :-)
2568 2011-05-27 19:40:34 <Dekbit> Can i ask another question. This usually gets accusations of communism hurled at me for even asking but.... Why aren't miners incentivized to participate in the network by distributing block generations and tx fees among all miners who are participating in the system at a level relative to their worth to the network. Similar to how pools pay out. Miners aren't competing per se but
2569 2011-05-27 19:40:34 <Dekbit> collaborating and everyone profits equal to the hardware they put in?
2570 2011-05-27 19:40:54 <Dekbit> i understand over time its the same
2571 2011-05-27 19:41:00 <Dekbit> but for small participants its not
2572 2011-05-27 19:41:07 <TD> you mean a super-pool ?
2573 2011-05-27 19:41:12 <Dekbit> yeah if that is what you want to call it
2574 2011-05-27 19:41:40 <TD> i don't see how it's different to today. new money and fees are distributed roughly in proportion to how much work you do to secure the network
2575 2011-05-27 19:41:44 <Namegduf> Dekbit: You'd have to come up with a way for that to be implemented.
2576 2011-05-27 19:41:54 <TD> ie, distributed according to your worth to the network
2577 2011-05-27 19:42:00 <Namegduf> Dekbit: Right now, the way pools work is by mining at effectively difficulty 1
2578 2011-05-27 19:42:07 <Namegduf> And the pool checking for validity
2579 2011-05-27 19:42:07 <Dekbit> Really its only different because small participants arnt going to generate for a year for a single block but they will join a pool to get 0.1 btc a day
2580 2011-05-27 19:42:15 <BlueMatt> if there are several huge payment processors using bitcoin, there would still be enough people using their own client/smaller payment processor/bitcoin bank that the big guys would have to take their money, money is money.
2581 2011-05-27 19:42:30 <Dekbit> and the way it is now small participants pool together and then there is the 50% hashing power issue constantly coming up
2582 2011-05-27 19:42:37 f1nack has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2583 2011-05-27 19:42:46 <BlueMatt> they might try to deincentivize it, but imo they would never have enough power
2584 2011-05-27 19:43:06 <Namegduf> Dekbit: In short:
2585 2011-05-27 19:43:07 <BlueMatt> actually...
2586 2011-05-27 19:43:13 <TD> Dekbit: that's only because [a] people value reduced variability and [b] due to how pools are implemented today. there are proposals for building pools that don't allow the pool operators to bend the rules
2587 2011-05-27 19:43:14 <Namegduf> Pools require a central trusted point to work.
2588 2011-05-27 19:43:18 <Namegduf> The bitcoin network as a whole cannot.
2589 2011-05-27 19:43:25 <Namegduf> Their approach cannot work for bitcoin as a whole.
2590 2011-05-27 19:43:29 <Namegduf> You would need to find a new one.
2591 2011-05-27 19:43:43 <Namegduf> Figure out if that's even possible, then it's worth examining your idea for how to do that.
2592 2011-05-27 19:43:48 <Dekbit> Ok it may be impossible to implement i dont know
2593 2011-05-27 19:44:00 <Dekbit> that is a good point namegduf but it is just something i have thought of and been curious about
2594 2011-05-27 19:44:26 <TD> it's not impossible to implement a decentralized pool
2595 2011-05-27 19:44:29 <TD> it just hasn't happened yet
2596 2011-05-27 19:44:38 <Dekbit> TD: that makes sense; i think a is just part of human nature. and as for B) probably a good idea
2597 2011-05-27 19:44:38 <BlueMatt> meh, no need for it
2598 2011-05-27 19:45:01 <Namegduf> You'll be getting an average of a block a day with...
2599 2011-05-27 19:45:02 <TD> BlueMatt: well, but if the big payment processors don't need trust, they won't mine very much
2600 2011-05-27 19:45:15 <Namegduf> 1/144th of the network
2601 2011-05-27 19:45:17 <BlueMatt> TD: imo they will need trust
2602 2011-05-27 19:45:35 <TD> sorry, that was badly phrased
2603 2011-05-27 19:45:56 <BlueMatt> there will (should) be enough bitcoin banks that the "big guys" will need to accept from shady clients
2604 2011-05-27 19:45:56 <TD> i mean, if the big processors can trade bitcoins between each other without much hash power, because they trust each other, they won't bother mining
2605 2011-05-27 19:46:23 <BlueMatt> the problem with that model is when the pps start buying the banks...
2606 2011-05-27 19:46:39 <BlueMatt> and incentivising the use of their bank
2607 2011-05-27 19:47:02 <BlueMatt> but that is a general problem with bitcoin and any currency
2608 2011-05-27 19:47:08 diki has quit ()
2609 2011-05-27 19:47:30 <BlueMatt> if we get enough traction to get payment processors...
2610 2011-05-27 19:47:39 <TD> yeah. satoshis general design goal was that there'd be no need for such a thing as a payment processor
2611 2011-05-27 19:47:49 <BlueMatt> but there always will be
2612 2011-05-27 19:47:50 <TD> some stuff sure is easier to solve if you have them though :-)
2613 2011-05-27 19:48:09 <TD> i suppose it depends what you mean by payment processor
2614 2011-05-27 19:48:13 <TD> is a miner a processor?
2615 2011-05-27 19:48:26 <BlueMatt> no, I mean someone who handles payments for sites
2616 2011-05-27 19:48:48 <TD> oh, right
2617 2011-05-27 19:48:49 <BlueMatt> any given business is going to want insurance from tx reversal, even now
2618 2011-05-27 19:49:06 <TD> *shrug* not sure. i wouldn't set up such a business now, because there'd be no customers.
2619 2011-05-27 19:49:16 <TD> there have been (afaik) zero malicious tx reversals in bitcoins history
2620 2011-05-27 19:49:26 <TD> except for the overflow tx, but that was the good guys reversing it :)
2621 2011-05-27 19:49:33 <TD> so why would you take out insurance against something that never happened
2622 2011-05-27 19:49:48 <stuhood> aren't we due for one then? =p
2623 2011-05-27 19:49:57 <BlueMatt> currently, with ccs, businesses have to calculate in malicious purchases into cost of doing business
2624 2011-05-27 19:49:58 <stuhood> "touche salesman"
2625 2011-05-27 19:50:05 <TD> yeah
2626 2011-05-27 19:50:11 <Dekbit> Sounds like the perfect business to be in lol
2627 2011-05-27 19:50:17 <Dekbit> whatever customers you get are pure profit ;)
2628 2011-05-27 19:50:19 <TD> with bitcoin merchants have to take into account the cost of inflation :-)
2629 2011-05-27 19:50:27 <TD> boils down to different ways to do the same thing
2630 2011-05-27 19:50:36 <TD> people pay for security
2631 2011-05-27 19:50:50 <BlueMatt> merchants want their money in the currency of their supply, and that is, and always will be govt-backed fiat
2632 2011-05-27 19:51:27 <TD> sure to some extent
2633 2011-05-27 19:51:39 <BlueMatt> there are so many advantages for any given merchant to use some kind of processor on their behalf
2634 2011-05-27 19:51:50 <BlueMatt> imo that is the only way forward
2635 2011-05-27 19:51:55 <TD> if you are an online shop builder and sell your services for bitcoins, you could then turn around and pay for web hosting with some of those coins
2636 2011-05-27 19:52:06 <TD> i dunno. i don't see many such processors today
2637 2011-05-27 19:52:09 <TD> mybitcoin is the only one
2638 2011-05-27 19:52:24 <TD> the only service such processors provide is avoiding the need to do a bit of json-rpc programming
2639 2011-05-27 19:52:25 <BlueMatt> even a perfect software package wont get many merchants on baord
2640 2011-05-27 19:52:28 <TD> and in fairness it's not like it's easy
2641 2011-05-27 19:52:49 <BlueMatt> most merchants dont want to handle payment processing on their own, no matter how it might work
2642 2011-05-27 19:52:50 <stuhood> TD: json-rpc, and potentially a much more diverse connection to the network
2643 2011-05-27 19:52:53 <BlueMatt> they get hacked, oh shit?
2644 2011-05-27 19:53:19 <TD> handling your own payments doesn't mean they have to store the companies full value on their server
2645 2011-05-27 19:53:35 <TD> i'm sure there'll be a market for banks, payment processors etc
2646 2011-05-27 19:53:35 <BlueMatt> thats just the way it is, good, trust able, pps /banks will be needed for the network to catch on
2647 2011-05-27 19:53:43 <TD> but those orgs will compete against DIY ops
2648 2011-05-27 19:53:44 <BlueMatt> and imo they will be the ones to mine
2649 2011-05-27 19:54:04 <BlueMatt> the good ones will be big enough that mining is a very small cost
2650 2011-05-27 19:54:39 <Dekbit> i doubt most merchants will be doing their own JSON-RPC programming if BTC ever takes off commercially
2651 2011-05-27 19:54:39 <BlueMatt> take, say, google. If they in 5 years, or whenever accept bitcoin as part of google checkout
2652 2011-05-27 19:54:47 <stuhood> mm
2653 2011-05-27 19:55:01 Speeder has quit (Quit: Speeder)
2654 2011-05-27 19:55:05 <BlueMatt> Dekbit: hopefully by then we will have replaced json-rpc with something better, or at least made it much better
2655 2011-05-27 19:55:26 <BlueMatt> for google, setting up a 100GHs mining op costs nothing
2656 2011-05-27 19:55:29 <BlueMatt> less than nothing
2657 2011-05-27 19:56:01 <BlueMatt> why would they not if they are handling large amounts of bitcoin payments?
2658 2011-05-27 19:56:09 nanotube has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2659 2011-05-27 19:56:11 <BlueMatt> you just hire ArtForz and be done with it ;)
2660 2011-05-27 19:56:14 <Dekbit> lol
2661 2011-05-27 19:56:31 gribble has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2662 2011-05-27 19:56:48 <TD> so what happens when you want to buy your house via google checkout, but the network only runs at 100 ghs
2663 2011-05-27 19:56:48 <BlueMatt> what do you think TD?
2664 2011-05-27 19:57:22 nanotube has joined
2665 2011-05-27 19:57:39 <BlueMatt> if tx reversal ever becomes a problem, pps would be forced to increase their mining asap
2666 2011-05-27 19:57:52 <TD> right
2667 2011-05-27 19:57:55 <TD> now consider the case of 2 pps
2668 2011-05-27 19:57:58 <BlueMatt> and the small merchants who arent using pps would instantly all flock to buying insurance
2669 2011-05-27 19:57:59 <TD> google and facebook ;)
2670 2011-05-27 19:58:03 <BlueMatt> lol
2671 2011-05-27 19:58:12 <TD> somebody reverses a transaction. sadness.
2672 2011-05-27 19:58:24 <TD> google increases mining speed. facebook doesn't. facebooks customers benefit from googles spending
2673 2011-05-27 19:58:31 <TD> facebook wins, right?
2674 2011-05-27 19:58:41 <BlueMatt> wait, is the tx reversed a fb one or a google one. If its fb, I dont care, if its google, oh noes
2675 2011-05-27 19:58:53 pusle has joined
2676 2011-05-27 19:59:00 gribble has joined
2677 2011-05-27 19:59:10 <TD> why does it matter?
2678 2011-05-27 19:59:16 <BlueMatt> TD: because I hate fb?
2679 2011-05-27 19:59:19 <TD> heh
2680 2011-05-27 19:59:26 Diablo-D3 has joined
2681 2011-05-27 19:59:32 <stuhood> =)
2682 2011-05-27 19:59:42 <TD> ok, google and "save the whales inc"
2683 2011-05-27 19:59:57 <TD> who may just be mining regular blocks
2684 2011-05-27 20:00:05 xenland has joined
2685 2011-05-27 20:00:06 <TD> you have no idea who created the block holding the unlucky tx
2686 2011-05-27 20:00:08 <stuhood> PETA might end up with a petahash cluster
2687 2011-05-27 20:00:14 <TD> and besides, the reversal means redoing blocks from both companies
2688 2011-05-27 20:00:22 <BlueMatt> TD: true...but I look at it in the same way I see the oss community. When ubuntu doesnt spend money on kernel dev, they win out in the same way. But there will always exist companies who have enough money that they still see advantage to paying for other's non-payment
2689 2011-05-27 20:00:36 io_error has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2690 2011-05-27 20:00:43 vorlov has joined
2691 2011-05-27 20:00:47 <Diablo-D3> tl;dr: people are dicks, and rich people are bigger dicks
2692 2011-05-27 20:01:15 <BlueMatt> companies who will look like "good Samaritans" if they spend some % of their profit that rounds off to 0 to "support the community"
2693 2011-05-27 20:01:43 <Diablo-D3> support the community is bullshit anyhow
2694 2011-05-27 20:01:47 <TD> i'm not sure advertising Bitcoin as "A secure digital currency, supported by good samaritans. Donate today!" is a winning strategy
2695 2011-05-27 20:01:56 <BlueMatt> Diablo-D3: yes, but it still works to help pr
2696 2011-05-27 20:02:01 x5x has quit (Quit: Terminated with extreme prejudice - dircproxy 1.0.5)
2697 2011-05-27 20:02:08 <Diablo-D3> any community that is worth having supports itself
2698 2011-05-27 20:02:18 <BlueMatt> TD: oh I agree, but it will work out that way
2699 2011-05-27 20:02:21 <Diablo-D3> and you can tell the difference in 30 seconds between the two
2700 2011-05-27 20:02:41 <Diablo-D3> generally, if the company is suing or fighting its own community, the community is strong
2701 2011-05-27 20:02:48 <Dekbit> Its a valid point though that there are plenty of for-profit companies today supporting OSS projects
2702 2011-05-27 20:02:49 xenland has quit (Client Quit)
2703 2011-05-27 20:02:58 <Dekbit> even with the same downfall of supporting "Freeloaders"
2704 2011-05-27 20:03:04 <Diablo-D3> Dekbit: it depends
2705 2011-05-27 20:03:13 <Diablo-D3> there are "un-companies" who dont sell a product
2706 2011-05-27 20:03:22 <Diablo-D3> or sell a very fringe product
2707 2011-05-27 20:03:35 <Diablo-D3> and just give away their shit as foss constantly
2708 2011-05-27 20:03:39 <Diablo-D3> example: redhat
2709 2011-05-27 20:03:40 <TD> yeah it's usually because either
2710 2011-05-27 20:03:55 <Diablo-D3> redhat is now a million dollar company
2711 2011-05-27 20:03:56 <TD> - they are made up from people ideologically committed to open source
2712 2011-05-27 20:03:58 <Dekbit> what about sun
2713 2011-05-27 20:04:04 <TD> - it achieves some other strategic goal
2714 2011-05-27 20:04:04 xenland has joined
2715 2011-05-27 20:04:11 <Diablo-D3> Dekbit: the sw half? it was before oracle took over
2716 2011-05-27 20:04:12 <TD> - they are forced to by the GPL
2717 2011-05-27 20:04:19 <Dekbit> oh ya oracle lol
2718 2011-05-27 20:04:22 <TD> the first is fringe
2719 2011-05-27 20:04:22 <Diablo-D3> sun had plans on fossing ALL their software
2720 2011-05-27 20:04:30 <Dekbit> sure there are always REASONS they do what they do TD my point is just that they do it :)
2721 2011-05-27 20:04:31 <Diablo-D3> now oracle is trying to un-GPL java through patents
2722 2011-05-27 20:04:44 <Diablo-D3> and they closed opensolaris forever, and they threw OOO out
2723 2011-05-27 20:04:47 <TD> anyway. i'm gonna go scavange some dinner then head out
2724 2011-05-27 20:04:52 <TD> ttyl
2725 2011-05-27 20:04:55 <BlueMatt> TD: as long as bitcoin catches on before we start losing too much coin generation on blocks, there will be companies large enough that as a part of the insurance they provide to their customers
2726 2011-05-27 20:04:57 <Diablo-D3> google does dumb shit too btw
2727 2011-05-27 20:05:03 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
2728 2011-05-27 20:05:26 <BlueMatt> Diablo-D3: yes, but at least half of their employees fall under the ideologically committed part
2729 2011-05-27 20:05:38 <BlueMatt> and they have the money to support that
2730 2011-05-27 20:06:08 <BlueMatt> anyway, Im off for a while... been a good discussion
2731 2011-05-27 20:06:10 <Diablo-D3> well, theres a difference
2732 2011-05-27 20:06:16 Netsniper has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2733 2011-05-27 20:06:25 <gjs278> next time on #bitcoin-dev
2734 2011-05-27 20:06:34 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr getwork_dedupe * r3a8029f0335d bitcoind-personal/rpc.cpp: Update nTime after nExtraNonce to avoid potential race (extraNonce being reset due to just-occurred time change after nTime is set) http://tinyurl.com/42wdsv8
2735 2011-05-27 20:06:35 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr getwork_dedupe * raa4a9c5250f9 bitcoind-personal/main.cpp: Reset extraNonce only every 15 seconds, just in case some miner is updating time himself and stuff http://tinyurl.com/3lbljkn
2736 2011-05-27 20:06:40 <luke-jr> yay major problem ^
2737 2011-05-27 20:06:40 <BlueMatt> be another couple weeks before another really good one happens again ;)
2738 2011-05-27 20:06:44 <luke-jr> anyone care to help figure out why that breaks?
2739 2011-05-27 20:06:47 Tie-fighter_ has joined
2740 2011-05-27 20:07:26 <Diablo-D3> heh, miners should not update time even connected to bitcoin imp
2741 2011-05-27 20:07:28 <Diablo-D3> imo
2742 2011-05-27 20:08:02 <luke-jr> Diablo-D3: they can/do, and it's a good feature
2743 2011-05-27 20:08:21 <Tie-fighter_> Hi there
2744 2011-05-27 20:08:30 <Tie-fighter_> What is irc.lfnet.org?
2745 2011-05-27 20:08:36 <Diablo-D3> luke-jr: no, I mean, bitcoin SHOULD emit that new header that goes with xpoll
2746 2011-05-27 20:08:50 <Diablo-D3> Tie-fighter_: an unrelated network that we have a bootstrap channel on
2747 2011-05-27 20:08:59 <luke-jr> Diablo-D3: yeah, ok, I agree
2748 2011-05-27 20:09:03 <luke-jr> in the meantime, I have a crisis :P
2749 2011-05-27 20:09:37 <Diablo-D3> luke-jr: has anyone added support to their pool for it and written a spec?
2750 2011-05-27 20:09:49 <luke-jr> Diablo-D3: my pool supports it
2751 2011-05-27 20:10:04 <Diablo-D3> but no one else?
2752 2011-05-27 20:10:24 <luke-jr> nfc
2753 2011-05-27 20:10:39 <luke-jr> anyone else who uses pushpoold after I added it
2754 2011-05-27 20:11:24 johnnympereira5 has joined
2755 2011-05-27 20:12:24 Marcel has left (HSD!~Marcel|HS@router2.hsdev.com|)
2756 2011-05-27 20:12:35 Marcel has joined
2757 2011-05-27 20:14:07 henchan has joined
2758 2011-05-27 20:14:44 Tie-fighter_ has quit (Quit: Page closed)
2759 2011-05-27 20:17:23 <xenland> Supose you had a data base with all the bitcoin blalances for address what could we do with this information
2760 2011-05-27 20:17:26 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: help? ;.;
2761 2011-05-27 20:17:43 <luke-jr> xenland: everyone basically does
2762 2011-05-27 20:17:59 henchan has quit (Client Quit)
2763 2011-05-27 20:18:04 toffoo has quit ()
2764 2011-05-27 20:18:17 kristianpaul has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
2765 2011-05-27 20:18:27 <xenland> So could i know any givin bitcoin balance right now?
2766 2011-05-27 20:18:30 toffoo has joined
2767 2011-05-27 20:18:42 <luke-jr> xenland: yes
2768 2011-05-27 20:18:57 <xenland> How?
2769 2011-05-27 20:19:32 <luke-jr> magic
2770 2011-05-27 20:19:34 <jlewis> luke-jr: what's the problem?
2771 2011-05-27 20:19:48 <luke-jr> jlewis: Europe pool's bitcoind has been rejecting good blocks for the past few days
2772 2011-05-27 20:19:51 <jlewis> xenland: blockexplorer.com
2773 2011-05-27 20:20:02 <jlewis> :c
2774 2011-05-27 20:20:16 <luke-jr> jlewis: and I don't see how it's possible :/
2775 2011-05-27 20:20:52 <jlewis> you mean someone finds a good hash and it gets rejected?
2776 2011-05-27 20:20:53 henchan has joined
2777 2011-05-27 20:20:56 <luke-jr> jlewis: yep
2778 2011-05-27 20:21:05 <xenland> Well i kind of ment like know the blances and transactions that this adress went to
2779 2011-05-27 20:21:15 <xenland> Easily available
2780 2011-05-27 20:21:18 <Dekbit> Yeah you need to import the block chain into a relational database
2781 2011-05-27 20:21:29 <xenland> With out tracing the links
2782 2011-05-27 20:21:29 kristianpaul has joined
2783 2011-05-27 20:21:29 kristianpaul has quit (Changing host)
2784 2011-05-27 20:21:29 kristianpaul has joined
2785 2011-05-27 20:21:30 <jlewis> xenland: just paste an addressi nto blockexplorer
2786 2011-05-27 20:21:41 <Dekbit> blockexplorer is too hard to use for large number of blocks
2787 2011-05-27 20:21:47 <Dekbit> doesnt work well for data mining
2788 2011-05-27 20:21:50 ntosme2 has joined
2789 2011-05-27 20:21:52 <jlewis> luke-jr: why is it broken for eu but not us?
2790 2011-05-27 20:22:00 <mtrlt> you can just write your own software to traverse the block chain :P
2791 2011-05-27 20:22:09 <luke-jr> jlewis: apparently I forgot to deploy an update to US ^^;;
2792 2011-05-27 20:22:18 <jlewis> oh... well good! :P
2793 2011-05-27 20:22:20 <luke-jr> [15:59:35] <CIA-103> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr getwork_dedupe * r3a8029f0335d bitcoind-personal/rpc.cpp: Update nTime after nExtraNonce to avoid potential race (extraNonce being reset due to just-occurred time change after nTime is set) http://tinyurl.com/42wdsv8
2794 2011-05-27 20:22:21 <luke-jr> [15:59:37] <CIA-103> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr getwork_dedupe * raa4a9c5250f9 bitcoind-personal/main.cpp: Reset extraNonce only every 15 seconds, just in case some miner is updating time himself and stuff http://tinyurl.com/3lbljkn
2795 2011-05-27 20:22:37 <jlewis> which of those patches does it?
2796 2011-05-27 20:22:39 inforgu has joined
2797 2011-05-27 20:22:40 <luke-jr> jlewis: these changes were supposed to reduce stale, and I don't see how they possibly break things
2798 2011-05-27 20:22:41 ntosme2 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2799 2011-05-27 20:22:44 <luke-jr> dunno
2800 2011-05-27 20:22:45 <jlewis> if you don't know you should find out
2801 2011-05-27 20:22:48 ntosme2 has joined
2802 2011-05-27 20:22:49 <luke-jr> bisecting costs a block
2803 2011-05-27 20:22:52 <jlewis> true
2804 2011-05-27 20:23:00 <jlewis> testnet
2805 2011-05-27 20:23:08 <luke-jr> hmm
2806 2011-05-27 20:23:13 <luke-jr> actually, testnet locally might work
2807 2011-05-27 20:23:16 <xenland> Mtrlt: thats what i was asking could this type of software be used for something, such as figuringout who the adress belongs too for instanced
2808 2011-05-27 20:23:29 <mtrlt> xenland: maybe
2809 2011-05-27 20:23:34 <mtrlt> xenland: you need external information though
2810 2011-05-27 20:23:35 <jlewis> luke-jr: alternatively you can fake it by not connecting to any nodes at startup with a blank db, or something, right?
2811 2011-05-27 20:23:38 ntosme21 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2812 2011-05-27 20:23:55 <luke-jr> jlewis: that sounds harder :P
2813 2011-05-27 20:24:03 <jlewis> yeah i guess
2814 2011-05-27 20:24:35 <jlewis> i'm reading your patches
2815 2011-05-27 20:24:48 <mtrlt> xenland: for example if someone has blurted on IRC that he has address X, then you can do analysis like that :P
2816 2011-05-27 20:25:11 <jlewis> mtrlt: the real question is what strategic advantage it would give you if any... >_>
2817 2011-05-27 20:25:34 <xenland> Mtrlt: i think with nsa's super computing we should all be carefull about our bitcoin doings i think
2818 2011-05-27 20:25:34 <mtrlt> jlewis: i'd do it just because i can :P
2819 2011-05-27 20:25:37 <jrabbit> soultcer: thats an entire vps host.....
2820 2011-05-27 20:25:54 <soultcer> I know
2821 2011-05-27 20:25:56 <jlewis> soultcer: indeed, i have a shell there, please don't ban it all
2822 2011-05-27 20:25:59 pirrr has joined
2823 2011-05-27 20:26:04 <soultcer> And as long as they don't clean up their act they won't be on here anymore
2824 2011-05-27 20:26:08 davout has joined
2825 2011-05-27 20:26:16 <jlewis> what's the matter?
2826 2011-05-27 20:26:20 <jrabbit> ^
2827 2011-05-27 20:26:25 * jrabbit hasn't noticed anything
2828 2011-05-27 20:26:29 * mtrlt neither
2829 2011-05-27 20:26:54 <jlewis> luke-jr: i don't see why that would break things either
2830 2011-05-27 20:26:54 <jrabbit> hm UPS has my package in state but won't get it here until tuesday
2831 2011-05-27 20:26:55 <soultcer> Look in your scrollback for erbs and hortence and you will know why
2832 2011-05-27 20:27:10 <jlewis> oh if it's about banning erbs i'm ok with anything
2833 2011-05-27 20:27:15 <jlewis> that guy is a master troll
2834 2011-05-27 20:27:43 <luke-jr> LOL
2835 2011-05-27 20:27:51 <gjs278> no
2836 2011-05-27 20:27:57 <gjs278> it's impossible to be a master troll
2837 2011-05-27 20:28:00 <soultcer> Well, if you are on SiD.net, feel free to ask them about turning over the paypal address of that guy
2838 2011-05-27 20:28:00 <gjs278> and to be identified as one
2839 2011-05-27 20:28:08 <gjs278> a master troll would never be called a troll
2840 2011-05-27 20:28:22 TD has joined
2841 2011-05-27 20:28:25 <jlewis> true that
2842 2011-05-27 20:28:27 TD has quit (Client Quit)
2843 2011-05-27 20:29:05 <jlewis> soultcer: why his paypal?
2844 2011-05-27 20:29:15 <soultcer> Because you need a valid paypal account to sign up
2845 2011-05-27 20:29:36 xenland has quit (Quit: IRC for iPhone)
2846 2011-05-27 20:29:44 <inforgu> so can anyone point me to some docs... with simple explanation of what happens for 1 hash loop while generating? ie... with the getdata information, what happens then?
2847 2011-05-27 20:29:44 <jlewis> luke-jr: what race were you trying to avoid exactly?
2848 2011-05-27 20:29:59 <luke-jr> jlewis: I forget. :P
2849 2011-05-27 20:30:15 <jlewis> i'd say just revert those changes =)
2850 2011-05-27 20:30:17 <luke-jr> maybe extranonce NOT being updated because time is the same
2851 2011-05-27 20:30:25 <luke-jr> and then the new time being set
2852 2011-05-27 20:30:47 Kiba has joined
2853 2011-05-27 20:31:30 <jlewis> well extranonce is always updated, isn't it? it's not always rolled back to 1 but it changes on each loop regardless
2854 2011-05-27 20:32:16 <davout> hi all
2855 2011-05-27 20:34:25 Blue_Helix has joined
2856 2011-05-27 20:35:30 asyn_ has joined
2857 2011-05-27 20:35:34 Marcel has left (HSD!~Marcel|HS@router2.hsdev.com|)
2858 2011-05-27 20:36:45 <Blue_Helix> I got little trouble with SDk i guess
2859 2011-05-27 20:36:53 <Blue_Helix> ./CLInfo | grep CL_DEVICE_TYPE_GPU
2860 2011-05-27 20:36:53 <Blue_Helix> does not deliver anything
2861 2011-05-27 20:39:19 asyn_ has quit (Client Quit)
2862 2011-05-27 20:39:49 <luke-jr> ;;bc,calcd 2000 20
2863 2011-05-27 20:39:51 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 2000 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 20, is 11 hours, 55 minutes, and 49 seconds
2864 2011-05-27 20:40:01 <luke-jr> crap
2865 2011-05-27 20:41:35 <luke-jr> ;;bc,calcd 298000 20
2866 2011-05-27 20:41:36 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 298000 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 20, is 4 minutes and 48 seconds
2867 2011-05-27 20:42:19 Jere_Jones has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
2868 2011-05-27 20:42:46 <luke-jr> wtf
2869 2011-05-27 20:42:49 <luke-jr> it works with testnet
2870 2011-05-27 20:43:08 <mtrlt> how long did you tes
2871 2011-05-27 20:43:09 <mtrlt> t
2872 2011-05-27 20:45:00 Jere_Jones has joined
2873 2011-05-27 20:46:20 JRWR has joined
2874 2011-05-27 20:46:30 JRWR has quit (Changing host)
2875 2011-05-27 20:46:30 JRWR has joined
2876 2011-05-27 20:49:02 skeledrew1 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2877 2011-05-27 20:49:36 <inforgu> ;;bc,calcd 1200 1265
2878 2011-05-27 20:49:37 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 1200 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 1265, is 7 weeks, 3 days, 9 hours, 40 minutes, and 11 seconds
2879 2011-05-27 20:49:48 <inforgu> ;;bc,calcd 10000 1265
2880 2011-05-27 20:49:49 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 10000 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 1265, is 6 days, 6 hours, 55 minutes, and 13 seconds
2881 2011-05-27 20:50:15 <jargon> ;;bc,calcd 1 1
2882 2011-05-27 20:50:17 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 1 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 1, is 7 weeks, 0 days, 17 hours, 2 minutes, and 47 seconds
2883 2011-05-27 20:50:30 <jargon> see told you it was bogus
2884 2011-05-27 20:50:54 <inforgu> heh
2885 2011-05-27 20:51:08 <inforgu> ;;bc,cald 10 100000000000000000000000000000000000
2886 2011-05-27 20:51:10 <gribble> Error: "bc,cald" is not a valid command.
2887 2011-05-27 20:51:18 <inforgu> ;;bc,calcd 10 100000000000000000000000000000000000
2888 2011-05-27 20:51:19 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 10 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 100000000000000000000000000000000000, is 1361925195332318877079942016753647 years, 3 weeks, 6 days, 15 hours, and 16 seconds
2889 2011-05-27 20:51:23 <Dekbit> lol
2890 2011-05-27 20:51:30 <inforgu> ;;bc,calcd 10 -100000
2891 2011-05-27 20:51:31 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 10 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of -100000, is 1361 years, 48 weeks, 1 day, 16 hours, 42 minutes, and 40 seconds ago
2892 2011-05-27 20:51:41 <Dekbit> ;;bc,calcd 80000 1
2893 2011-05-27 20:51:42 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 80000 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 1, is 53 seconds
2894 2011-05-27 20:51:57 <Dekbit> ;;bc,calcd 80000 4
2895 2011-05-27 20:51:58 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 80000 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 4, is 3 minutes and 34 seconds
2896 2011-05-27 20:51:58 dukeleto has quit (Excess Flood)
2897 2011-05-27 20:52:10 <inforgu> ;;bc,calcd 1200 10
2898 2011-05-27 20:52:14 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 1200 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 10, is 9 hours, 56 minutes, and 31 seconds
2899 2011-05-27 20:52:24 <inforgu> testnet is at 9.7 diff
2900 2011-05-27 20:52:29 dukeleto has joined
2901 2011-05-27 20:53:12 ezl has joined
2902 2011-05-27 20:53:23 darbsllim has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
2903 2011-05-27 20:53:44 <inforgu> in other news... I got php exec working in windows... now I can semi-control bitcoind via the web
2904 2011-05-27 20:54:29 <inforgu> 4-7 seconds for apache/php on windows to just execute and return 'bitcoind --help'
2905 2011-05-27 20:54:37 <inforgu> so slow
2906 2011-05-27 20:55:13 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: what are you complaining about breaking?
2907 2011-05-27 20:59:01 Cusipzzz has joined
2908 2011-05-27 20:59:24 <Dekbit> [15:50] <@ljrbot> Txn 40526a909437a4e585a5dcdaece9c42ec471aef0f1fa02ad63c5ae6f3fabd896: 185RqQiW95f4GR8zX6ZoczR37iaW4dKkvv 16î§36 TBC, 1Jk7PFuyaJDC5gxyj4QxjYrieo8ZY7ANCP 0.01 BTC
2909 2011-05-27 20:59:24 johnnympereira5 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2910 2011-05-27 20:59:26 <Dekbit> What is a TBC?
2911 2011-05-27 20:59:44 <luke-jr> Dekbit: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Units
2912 2011-05-27 20:59:47 <BlueMatt> tonal...dont ask
2913 2011-05-27 20:59:58 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: for some reason, bitcoind is rejecting valid blocks
2914 2011-05-27 21:00:09 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: I can't reproduce it in testnet locally :/
2915 2011-05-27 21:00:15 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: after those patches?
2916 2011-05-27 21:00:33 <Dekbit> lol wtf
2917 2011-05-27 21:00:34 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: yes
2918 2011-05-27 21:00:39 <Dekbit> why do people do trades in tonal bitcoins
2919 2011-05-27 21:00:46 <BlueMatt> Dekbit: luke-jr does
2920 2011-05-27 21:00:47 <luke-jr> Dekbit: probably that part was change
2921 2011-05-27 21:00:47 <Cusipzzz> Dekbit: they don't, just luke does
2922 2011-05-27 21:00:51 <BlueMatt> dont get him started...please
2923 2011-05-27 21:01:03 <luke-jr> Dekbit: change can be basically anything
2924 2011-05-27 21:01:03 <inforgu> that is super geeky TBC
2925 2011-05-27 21:01:10 <Dekbit> that is ridiculous!!!! "One bitcoin", "two bitcoin", etc is decimal, but "an bitcoin", "de bitcoin" is tonal. hahahah
2926 2011-05-27 21:01:18 henchan has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
2927 2011-05-27 21:01:19 <Dekbit> ok thanks for info
2928 2011-05-27 21:01:21 Blue_Helix has left ()
2929 2011-05-27 21:02:13 <Dekbit> that table is hilarious thanks for the link
2930 2011-05-27 21:02:37 <Dekbit> Finally I know that 0.00000001btc is actually a Bitcoin-bong
2931 2011-05-27 21:02:47 henchan has joined
2932 2011-05-27 21:04:00 <FellowTraveler> Any Bitcoin dev experts that can help me out with a problem connecting over JSON -Rpc ?
2933 2011-05-27 21:04:36 <FellowTraveler> basically I know the bitcoin server is started correctly, and I know I'm connecting to it properly, but I keep getting an error message on Mac (works on Windows)
2934 2011-05-27 21:04:46 <Dekbit> what is the msg?
2935 2011-05-27 21:04:55 <FellowTraveler> May 27, 2011 1:55:07 PM org.apache.commons.httpclient.auth.AuthChallengeProcessor selectAuthScheme
2936 2011-05-27 21:04:55 <davout> ;;bc,calcd 300000 20
2937 2011-05-27 21:04:56 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 300000 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 20, is 4 minutes and 46 seconds
2938 2011-05-27 21:05:05 <FellowTraveler> INFO: basic authentication scheme selected
2939 2011-05-27 21:05:06 henchan has left ()
2940 2011-05-27 21:05:12 <FellowTraveler> ru.paradoxs.bitcoin.http.exceptions.HttpSessionException: HTTP Status - Not Found (404)
2941 2011-05-27 21:05:15 <FellowTraveler> that's it.
2942 2011-05-27 21:06:31 <Dekbit> So youve got your bitcoin.conf all set up to allow your client's IP?
2943 2011-05-27 21:07:39 <FellowTraveler> bitcoin conf has rpcport=8332 and rpcuser=testuser and rpcpassword=testpassword and rpcconnect=127.0.0.1 and server=1
2944 2011-05-27 21:07:57 <Dekbit> yeah thats right
2945 2011-05-27 21:08:05 <FellowTraveler> I also tried running at the command line with those options like this: ./bitcoin -server -rpcuser=testuser -rpcpassword=testpassword -rpcport=8332
2946 2011-05-27 21:08:21 <FellowTraveler> I don't understand cause it worked before, and I wonder if it's since upgrading to latest version.
2947 2011-05-27 21:08:22 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2948 2011-05-27 21:08:29 <JRWR> were is a good place to file bug reports for bitcoin
2949 2011-05-27 21:08:30 <FellowTraveler> anyway to debug this?
2950 2011-05-27 21:08:34 <JRWR> Ive got a few to file
2951 2011-05-27 21:08:47 <JRWR> most are just nik pick things,
2952 2011-05-27 21:09:09 <FellowTraveler> surely inability to connect to Rpc is a big bug, if it's a bug.
2953 2011-05-27 21:09:12 <JRWR> like, if .bitcoin has wrong permissions, bitcoind segfaults
2954 2011-05-27 21:09:58 <luke-jr> jgarzik: what might pushpoold do if bitcoind returns a JSONRPC error?
2955 2011-05-27 21:10:37 Jere_Jones has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2956 2011-05-27 21:10:56 Netsniper has joined
2957 2011-05-27 21:14:47 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: arent you using some kind of async io?
2958 2011-05-27 21:14:55 <BlueMatt> with multiple threads serving json-rpc?
2959 2011-05-27 21:15:19 glassresistor has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2960 2011-05-27 21:16:10 nzbtc_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2961 2011-05-27 21:17:46 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: sortof
2962 2011-05-27 21:18:05 <BlueMatt> so you dont need a lock around all the block updating stuff?
2963 2011-05-27 21:21:20 <BlueMatt> at this point, would it not be simpler to just make a thread which handles nTime then just do nonce in the threads in a lock?
2964 2011-05-27 21:21:33 <BlueMatt> keep as little as possible out of the getwork thread
2965 2011-05-27 21:21:50 <luke-jr> even single-threaded has a race on the time
2966 2011-05-27 21:21:58 <luke-jr> since it uses two syscalls to get the time
2967 2011-05-27 21:22:05 <jlewis> no he's not doing asynchronous io, if you want to see async io please see my patch http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=7757.0 :p
2968 2011-05-27 21:22:34 <BlueMatt> jlewis: I dont want to see it, Im trying to debug his specific problem, not anything general here
2969 2011-05-27 21:22:55 <BlueMatt> though, I do like the idea of async io in general for bitcoin in the future
2970 2011-05-27 21:23:06 <BlueMatt> but that is not the current topic
2971 2011-05-27 21:23:21 <jlewis> excuse me for interrupting on this public channel :p
2972 2011-05-27 21:23:49 <jlewis> but thanks maybe you could use your clout among the devs to get the patch reviewed at some point.
2973 2011-05-27 21:23:57 <ersi> JRWR: There is no bug tracking that I know of, make a forum post or poke people in here. Or patch it up and send a pull request on gitbub
2974 2011-05-27 21:24:15 <BlueMatt> have you done any benchmarking, me thinks it will be pulled if there are clear benchmarks on the matter
2975 2011-05-27 21:24:18 BurningToad has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2976 2011-05-27 21:24:33 BurningToad has joined
2977 2011-05-27 21:24:34 <ArtForz> ersi: stop trolling
2978 2011-05-27 21:24:36 <BlueMatt> ersi: JRWR there is a bug list on github you should use
2979 2011-05-27 21:24:43 <ArtForz> yep
2980 2011-05-27 21:24:54 datagutt has quit (Quit: kthxbai)
2981 2011-05-27 21:24:56 <ersi> there is?
2982 2011-05-27 21:25:00 <ersi> Well, I didn't know that
2983 2011-05-27 21:25:10 <BlueMatt> just right of the pull requests tab
2984 2011-05-27 21:25:21 pusle has quit ()
2985 2011-05-27 21:25:33 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: what, exactly is the race here?
2986 2011-05-27 21:25:38 yebyen has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2987 2011-05-27 21:25:40 <ersi> I don't use github and I don't contribute to the Bitcoin source. Gee, I'm sorry. Atleast he got an answer now.
2988 2011-05-27 21:25:58 runejuhl has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2989 2011-05-27 21:26:33 <jlewis> BlueMatt: there's already anecdotal evidence that it provides a substantial performance boost. and it's obvious that it increases performance if you understand how the old network code worked.
2990 2011-05-27 21:26:51 yebyen has joined
2991 2011-05-27 21:27:13 runejuhl has joined
2992 2011-05-27 21:27:15 johnnympereira5 has joined
2993 2011-05-27 21:27:17 lulzplzkthx has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2994 2011-05-27 21:27:56 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: if the second changes across the two time-get syscalls
2995 2011-05-27 21:28:02 <BlueMatt> jlewis: hm, tbu I havent looked through your patch, but that is because nothing major is really up for review until we start full-stream on 0.4.0. Every pull req on the list will be reviewed for 0.4.0 though, so expect ACKs/NACKs soon
2996 2011-05-27 21:28:18 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: I'm not sure if there is a problem, or if there is, that it's related to those changes
2997 2011-05-27 21:28:34 Astrohacker has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2998 2011-05-27 21:28:55 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: so what if the time changes? what does that break?
2999 2011-05-27 21:29:16 <BlueMatt> oh, nvm
3000 2011-05-27 21:29:16 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: it's possible the worker might end up repeating work already done
3001 2011-05-27 21:29:23 <BlueMatt> you mean update extra nonce and not ntime?
3002 2011-05-27 21:29:30 <luke-jr> yeah
3003 2011-05-27 21:29:35 <BlueMatt> oh, ok
3004 2011-05-27 21:30:39 <jgarzik> luke-jr: returns an 'upstream json error' json error
3005 2011-05-27 21:30:57 <BlueMatt> hm, well I see nothing in these patches that should cause anything to go awry, but then again Im by no means a talented c++ developer
3006 2011-05-27 21:31:15 <BlueMatt> and it might be a regression based on something you changed elsewhere that is just now showing up
3007 2011-05-27 21:31:17 <luke-jr> jgarzik: any way to log/get the contents of the upstream error? :p
3008 2011-05-27 21:32:03 <luke-jr> ie, some way to find out just WHY upstream is rejecting it
3009 2011-05-27 21:33:00 sixyearolds has quit (Quit: Leaving)
3010 2011-05-27 21:35:55 lulzplzkthx has joined
3011 2011-05-27 21:38:28 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: I'm somehow very confused right now
3012 2011-05-27 21:38:47 <jgarzik> luke-jr: sure, it's json. just need to log the stuff in RAM
3013 2011-05-27 21:38:57 <luke-jr> my "go back and check shares" script is telling me USA bitcoind rejected 7382 could-have-been-blocks for its first 17
3014 2011-05-27 21:39:11 <luke-jr> there's no way that would have been overlooked if it happened
3015 2011-05-27 21:39:24 legion050 has joined
3016 2011-05-27 21:39:38 <jlewis> that seems rather unlikely
3017 2011-05-27 21:40:12 <luke-jr> so, besides being over the target, or being orphan, what else? :/
3018 2011-05-27 21:40:35 eth00 has joined
3019 2011-05-27 21:41:02 manveru has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
3020 2011-05-27 21:41:33 Astrohacker has joined
3021 2011-05-27 21:41:33 manveru has joined
3022 2011-05-27 21:42:30 <luke-jr> for example⦠http://blockexplorer.com/block/000000000000813ee2618686b0c447f7791c0297a88b282dce01ca478a36c483
3023 2011-05-27 21:42:42 <luke-jr> we supposedly found that block long before the other guy
3024 2011-05-27 21:42:45 <luke-jr> at 1303983459
3025 2011-05-27 21:42:53 <luke-jr> 0000000147f71159e2c3fad2e7f88b948f8d02aeab852e966283e69e0000873300000000f54b41c5945228ba1e33c7600b536cef4c771e627666e9caded317876cd047d64db935611b00b5ac8988a4af000000800000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000080020000
3026 2011-05-27 21:43:05 <luke-jr> hashes to: 00000000002e236ccd3c08f5338d20ca73c2e6eb1a9ba4018f84ba5a6152ad50
3027 2011-05-27 21:43:15 <luke-jr> target is: 0000000000acb500000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
3028 2011-05-27 21:43:50 <luke-jr> actually, can someone confirm that target is right? bits=1b00b5ac
3029 2011-05-27 21:44:48 <Kiba> o/join #bitcoin
3030 2011-05-27 21:45:08 <ArtForz> luke-jr: your target looks byteswapped
3031 2011-05-27 21:45:17 <luke-jr> hmmmm
3032 2011-05-27 21:45:46 <ArtForz> that might be ebcause getwork target *is* byteswapped
3033 2011-05-27 21:46:27 <ArtForz> real target should be 0xb5ac << 192
3034 2011-05-27 21:48:38 <ArtForz> which is 0x000000000000b5ac000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
3035 2011-05-27 21:51:00 nzbtc has joined
3036 2011-05-27 21:51:51 <luke-jr> yep
3037 2011-05-27 21:51:54 <luke-jr> that was my whole problem
3038 2011-05-27 21:52:00 <luke-jr> Europe has just been extremely unlucky I guess
3039 2011-05-27 21:55:22 davout has quit (Quit: i <3 pork (http://dev.ojnk.net))
3040 2011-05-27 21:55:59 Sylph has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
3041 2011-05-27 21:56:37 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Chris Howie * r3805dcfe96ef mining-proxy/htdocs/admin/index.php: Optimize recent-submissions and recent-failed-submissions queries to avoid a full table scan http://tinyurl.com/3gnexp5
3042 2011-05-27 21:57:50 pirrr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
3043 2011-05-27 21:58:30 discHead has joined
3044 2011-05-27 21:59:31 Sylph has joined
3045 2011-05-27 21:59:42 sethsethseth_ has joined
3046 2011-05-27 22:00:07 zef has quit (Quit: Page closed)
3047 2011-05-27 22:00:54 sethsethseth____ has joined
3048 2011-05-27 22:01:00 zef has joined
3049 2011-05-27 22:01:02 johnnympereira5 has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
3050 2011-05-27 22:02:24 sethsethseth___ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
3051 2011-05-27 22:04:13 sethsethseth_ has quit (Ping timeout: 263 seconds)
3052 2011-05-27 22:07:45 <tippenein> why would a transaction stay at 0/unconfirmed for over an hour?
3053 2011-05-27 22:08:07 <Dekbit> no tx fee?
3054 2011-05-27 22:08:15 <tippenein> ah! I see
3055 2011-05-27 22:08:21 <tippenein> that's it
3056 2011-05-27 22:08:57 <tippenein> w/o fee you just get the payment slower?
3057 2011-05-27 22:09:19 <BlueMatt> pretty much
3058 2011-05-27 22:09:40 <BlueMatt> unless the tx is of large value, in which case you get higher prio anyway
3059 2011-05-27 22:10:16 <Dekbit> some miners wont accept your tx w/o a fee
3060 2011-05-27 22:10:24 <Dekbit> some entire pools wont accept it
3061 2011-05-27 22:11:09 <BlueMatt> (only luke's)
3062 2011-05-27 22:11:21 <BlueMatt> wait, no luke's accepts w/o fee, just likes small fees
3063 2011-05-27 22:11:57 zef has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
3064 2011-05-27 22:12:54 Mononofu has left ()
3065 2011-05-27 22:16:01 [Tycho] has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
3066 2011-05-27 22:16:42 zq_ has joined
3067 2011-05-27 22:16:43 zq has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
3068 2011-05-27 22:17:00 dukeleto has quit (Excess Flood)
3069 2011-05-27 22:17:30 dukeleto has joined
3070 2011-05-27 22:17:58 Xenland has joined
3071 2011-05-27 22:19:23 peterpansen__ has joined
3072 2011-05-27 22:21:36 peterpansen_ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
3073 2011-05-27 22:21:46 <sipa> BlueMatt: walletclass has a bug, it doesn't show incoming payments, it seems :)
3074 2011-05-27 22:22:01 <BlueMatt> sipa: hm, well that would be a serious bug...
3075 2011-05-27 22:22:09 <sipa> nah, hardly anyone uses that feature :p
3076 2011-05-27 22:22:32 <BlueMatt> lol
3077 2011-05-27 22:24:00 <jgarzik> BlueMatt, sipa: everybody happy with rc5?
3078 2011-05-27 22:24:17 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: ACK here
3079 2011-05-27 22:24:36 <sipa> ACK
3080 2011-05-27 22:24:54 <sipa> wait, rc5 still had the linux build bug?
3081 2011-05-27 22:25:17 <BlueMatt> what build bug?
3082 2011-05-27 22:25:49 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: the commit that missed the rc5 tag, but made your builds, I presume?
3083 2011-05-27 22:25:53 <sipa> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/a452d9ee2dea7e606ec102b0a1a411da4e5e5a91
3084 2011-05-27 22:26:07 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: yes, it doesnt build otherwise so...thats what rc5 actually got built with
3085 2011-05-27 22:27:16 <jgarzik> BlueMatt, sipa: so need to see what Gavin wants RE TX fee. I'll write an email later tonight. Then, tag HEAD as -final, ask for Gavin's ACK, and post the release.
3086 2011-05-27 22:27:28 <BlueMatt> sounds good
3087 2011-05-27 22:27:59 <BlueMatt> In that case, sipa tcatm devrandom1 devrandom start up your gitian-builders
3088 2011-05-27 22:27:59 <sipa> i'll answer to the mail as well - the auto-detect based on versions of peers sounds way too complicated to implement now
3089 2011-05-27 22:28:18 jargon has left ()
3090 2011-05-27 22:28:24 <BlueMatt> I dont even agree with it to begin with
3091 2011-05-27 22:28:24 <jgarzik> sipa: agreed
3092 2011-05-27 22:28:31 <sipa> maybe we can still do a 0.3.23 if 0.3.22 gets used enough, but 0.4.0 takes too long
3093 2011-05-27 22:29:01 <BlueMatt> I plan on spending all next week on 0.4.0 once we get a list of pulls acked
3094 2011-05-27 22:29:05 <jgarzik> I bet we have enough for 0.4 already
3095 2011-05-27 22:29:10 <jgarzik> with all the pull reqs
3096 2011-05-27 22:29:10 <sipa> more than enough
3097 2011-05-27 22:29:12 <BlueMatt> more than enough
3098 2011-05-27 22:30:01 <sipa> but depending on what we want in 0.4.0, i guess it may still take a while
3099 2011-05-27 22:30:23 <BlueMatt> yea what 2, 3 of the commits are so broad they conflict in several places
3100 2011-05-27 22:30:29 <BlueMatt> *many
3101 2011-05-27 22:31:29 <BlueMatt> speaking of which, can we get ACKs on pull reqs with a 0.4.0 mentioned so we can get started now?
3102 2011-05-27 22:31:55 <jgarzik> FWIW: Linux kernel merge model: When Linus sprinkles holy penguin pee on version X, tags git and uploaded tarball to kernel.org, he immediately starts going through pull requests. He pulls for ~a week, and then creates version (X+1)-rc1. From that point on (usually 2-3 months, for the kernel), it is bug fix only. New development is expected to be done in side trees.
3103 2011-05-27 22:32:24 <BlueMatt> also, jgarzik, can we begin doing releases a bit more structured? Keep master always moving but branch off when we get close to a release for beta + rc testing
3104 2011-05-27 22:32:41 <jgarzik> Applied to bitcoin, that would be: release 0.3.22, immediately pull a bunch of pull reqs, wait a few days for dust to settle, then do -rc1
3105 2011-05-27 22:32:45 <BlueMatt> I prefer my model...less conflicts on merge
3106 2011-05-27 22:33:07 <sipa> that means certain bugfixes are applied twice, though
3107 2011-05-27 22:33:15 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: that model is called the "impatient model" :)
3108 2011-05-27 22:33:24 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: and?
3109 2011-05-27 22:33:25 <sipa> but bitcoin is far from linux kernel scale yet
3110 2011-05-27 22:33:26 <jgarzik> works better if devs are focused on fixing bugs during certain periods
3111 2011-05-27 22:33:39 <sipa> not sure what is best
3112 2011-05-27 22:33:50 <jgarzik> sipa: agreed. that's why I'm not proposing a 2-3 month beta test period :)
3113 2011-05-27 22:34:04 <sipa> of course, time frames can be different
3114 2011-05-27 22:34:19 <jgarzik> just describing what another project does. inevitably, some stuff is applicable and some not.
3115 2011-05-27 22:34:23 <BlueMatt> hm, though focus on bugfixes is an important problem...
3116 2011-05-27 22:34:34 <jgarzik> creating release branches, though, is a huge pain
3117 2011-05-27 22:34:47 <BlueMatt> git branch; git push ?
3118 2011-05-27 22:35:23 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: ; git maintain branch <<-- the real cost
3119 2011-05-27 22:35:36 <BlueMatt> yea...
3120 2011-05-27 22:35:56 <jgarzik> IMO just focus on fast releases, and fast receiving of community feedback
3121 2011-05-27 22:36:15 <BlueMatt> either way you run into problem of patches/pull reqs that conflict with each other
3122 2011-05-27 22:36:16 <jgarzik> keep the iteration cycles short
3123 2011-05-27 22:36:33 <BlueMatt> well when we end up with a situation like with 0.3.22, that becomes hard to do
3124 2011-05-27 22:36:41 <sipa> with really large changes, a separate branch may be a good idea
3125 2011-05-27 22:36:56 <sipa> like when headers-only would be implemented
3126 2011-05-27 22:37:02 <BlueMatt> and the majority of developers dont care about focused stuff, thats just us. The majority just do what they see a need for
3127 2011-05-27 22:37:53 kermit has joined
3128 2011-05-27 22:37:58 <jgarzik> devel should be done outside bitcoin/bitcoin.git, so there shouldn't be any problem in simply pausings for a time, then resuming pulls
3129 2011-05-27 22:38:09 <jgarzik> devel continues unabated in branches and trees
3130 2011-05-27 22:38:16 <jgarzik> *pausing
3131 2011-05-27 22:38:18 <BlueMatt> but pull becomes a huge pita then
3132 2011-05-27 22:38:28 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: not really
3133 2011-05-27 22:38:43 <sipa> only when restructurings are taking place, really
3134 2011-05-27 22:38:57 <sipa> and we have two of these now
3135 2011-05-27 22:39:02 <BlueMatt> sipa: which, with bitcoin, is somewhat often
3136 2011-05-27 22:39:03 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: this is what git is good at. devel and maturation takes place outside the main tree, then push when ready.
3137 2011-05-27 22:39:13 <jgarzik> git merges beautifully
3138 2011-05-27 22:39:33 <BlueMatt> a more fundamental problem of bitcoin: the code isnt set up to change dramatically, making merge break things
3139 2011-05-27 22:40:32 * jgarzik isn't worried. I've done plenty of merging, far worse than this.
3140 2011-05-27 22:41:07 <BlueMatt> ok, well I really dont mind doing it either way, I just prefer fast moving right now for bitcoin, because imo that is what is needed
3141 2011-05-27 22:41:23 dx398 has joined
3142 2011-05-27 22:41:25 <BlueMatt> bitcoin is a tad on the messy side, and fast moving devel is what can fix that
3143 2011-05-27 22:42:02 <BlueMatt> but in the end, the result is nearly identical, so its best to stick with what you are used to, as Im not used to either ;)
3144 2011-05-27 22:42:27 <sipa> maybe there is really a need for a dev branch in which things can be pushed a bit further than only doing incremental small changes - not sure
3145 2011-05-27 22:42:42 <sipa> i don't have much experience with collaboration in software projects either
3146 2011-05-27 22:44:08 <BlueMatt> either way...if we can get gavin's ack on 0.3.22 this weekend and push release before monday, we can rapidly pull for 0.4.0 next week
3147 2011-05-27 22:44:25 <BlueMatt> think you can get walletclass 100% by then sipa?
3148 2011-05-27 22:44:32 <BlueMatt> personally, Id like to start with that
3149 2011-05-27 22:44:50 <BlueMatt> as all other patches need to be, at the least, reconsidered to check that they dont conflict there
3150 2011-05-27 22:44:55 <sipa> i think the problems with it are small things
3151 2011-05-27 22:45:01 <sipa> and will soon be apparent
3152 2011-05-27 22:45:57 eoss has joined
3153 2011-05-27 22:46:08 <luke-jr> http://it.slashdot.org/story/11/05/27/1956231/OpenSSL-Timing-Attack-Can-Intercept-Private-Keys
3154 2011-05-27 22:46:13 <luke-jr> ECDSA keys, that is
3155 2011-05-27 22:46:25 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: and how do you propose to time-attack bitcoin?
3156 2011-05-27 22:46:32 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: nfc
3157 2011-05-27 22:46:44 <sipa> that's still only a few signatures
3158 2011-05-27 22:46:49 <sipa> (one per input)
3159 2011-05-27 22:46:56 <BlueMatt> doesnt really apply to bitcoin, still good to get ossl patched asap
3160 2011-05-27 22:47:14 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: sure someone can't send your address a few hand-crafted coins?
3161 2011-05-27 22:47:31 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: you have to know when someone clicks send and when it finished
3162 2011-05-27 22:47:38 <BlueMatt> finished is easy, when the command was sent...
3163 2011-05-27 22:47:52 twobitcoins_ has joined
3164 2011-05-27 22:48:48 discHead has quit (Quit:)
3165 2011-05-27 22:50:41 twobitcoins has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
3166 2011-05-27 22:51:55 twobitcoins_ is now known as twobitcoins
3167 2011-05-27 22:53:59 skeledrew has joined
3168 2011-05-27 22:56:48 Xenland has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3169 2011-05-27 23:02:03 psymin has quit (Quit: Leaving)
3170 2011-05-27 23:02:33 <hybriz_> does bytecoin from the forum come to freenode ?
3171 2011-05-27 23:03:13 f1nack has joined
3172 2011-05-27 23:03:42 <soultcer> ;;seen bytecoin
3173 2011-05-27 23:03:42 <gribble> bytecoin was last seen in #bitcoin-dev 3 weeks, 2 days, 21 hours, 22 minutes, and 32 seconds ago: <ByteCoin> It was a good post but I lost it...
3174 2011-05-27 23:04:37 vorlov has quit (Quit: vorlov)
3175 2011-05-27 23:04:44 <hybriz_> 10x :)
3176 2011-05-27 23:06:02 <hybriz_> i was wondering about transaction anonymity and i've read multiple ideas about mixnets and such
3177 2011-05-27 23:06:55 Cusipzzz has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.0.2 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
3178 2011-05-27 23:08:04 <hybriz_> bytecoins idea sounds nice but transactions are always visible and i dont see how his idea could help
3179 2011-05-27 23:08:19 AStove has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
3180 2011-05-27 23:08:47 AStove has joined
3181 2011-05-27 23:16:51 Netsniper has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
3182 2011-05-27 23:17:40 <EvanR> bytecoins == 8 bitcoins?
3183 2011-05-27 23:17:49 <luke-jr> lol
3184 2011-05-27 23:18:29 <gjs278> thats actually not a bad idea
3185 2011-05-27 23:18:55 <gjs278> well actually it would confuse people trying to do 1024 conversions when we have kilobytecoins
3186 2011-05-27 23:18:56 <BlueMatt> oh god, like we need more units
3187 2011-05-27 23:19:03 <EvanR> we need 1/256 bitcoins
3188 2011-05-27 23:19:14 <gjs278> I'm opposed to calling them satoshis
3189 2011-05-27 23:19:19 <EvanR> me too
3190 2011-05-27 23:19:26 <gjs278> I don't want to give the impression that these are some kind of anime coins
3191 2011-05-27 23:19:28 <BlueMatt> then call them ubc cents
3192 2011-05-27 23:19:40 <EvanR> centimicrocoins
3193 2011-05-27 23:19:41 <EvanR> lol
3194 2011-05-27 23:19:49 <EvanR> use that if you like lots of syllables
3195 2011-05-27 23:20:10 <BlueMatt> ubc is pretty much the official for 10^-6 so ubc cents == base units
3196 2011-05-27 23:20:55 <EvanR> 1 or 2 syllables is the only acceptable terminology for money units
3197 2011-05-27 23:21:13 <BlueMatt> microbitcents
3198 2011-05-27 23:21:21 <Diablo-D3> no
3199 2011-05-27 23:21:32 <gjs278> can we name them after characters in dragonball-z thanks
3200 2011-05-27 23:21:33 <Diablo-D3> you want satoshis
3201 2011-05-27 23:21:39 <gjs278> cell coins
3202 2011-05-27 23:21:44 <EvanR> gokus
3203 2011-05-27 23:21:52 <Diablo-D3> gjs278: dude, nobody during or after the freeza saga kthx
3204 2011-05-27 23:21:54 <gjs278> selling 9000 vegetas
3205 2011-05-27 23:22:08 <EvanR> lol
3206 2011-05-27 23:22:15 <Diablo-D3> that means no fucking cell or buu saga
3207 2011-05-27 23:22:18 <EvanR> ill take a few hercules
3208 2011-05-27 23:22:19 <vegard> crebits ^^
3209 2011-05-27 23:22:25 <gjs278> fine no cell
3210 2011-05-27 23:22:34 <gjs278> rename mtgox to hyperbolic chamber
3211 2011-05-27 23:22:43 <EvanR> i hate dbz
3212 2011-05-27 23:22:52 dukeleto has quit (Excess Flood)
3213 2011-05-27 23:22:55 <gjs278> rename wallet.dat to dragon.ball
3214 2011-05-27 23:23:09 <luke-jr> gjs278: then call them Bitcoin-bongs
3215 2011-05-27 23:23:12 <luke-jr> gjs278: that seems popular
3216 2011-05-27 23:23:21 <EvanR> >_>
3217 2011-05-27 23:23:22 dukeleto has joined
3218 2011-05-27 23:23:26 <gjs278> I'm going to enter the freemarket of ideas with my own names
3219 2011-05-27 23:25:32 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
3220 2011-05-27 23:25:38 <Diablo-D3> [07:11:56] <gjs278> well actually it would confuse people trying to do 1024 conversions when we have kilobytecoins
3221 2011-05-27 23:25:41 <Diablo-D3> THIS ISNT FUCKING TONAL
3222 2011-05-27 23:25:49 Kiba has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3223 2011-05-27 23:26:04 <gjs278> that will be one megabitcoin please
3224 2011-05-27 23:26:28 Kiba has joined
3225 2011-05-27 23:27:11 <gjs278> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820233181 finally got added
3226 2011-05-27 23:27:20 <gjs278> but now I have to wait for the 60gb version
3227 2011-05-27 23:27:47 pnicholson has quit (Quit: pnicholson)
3228 2011-05-27 23:28:12 f1nack has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
3229 2011-05-27 23:28:46 noagendamarket has joined
3230 2011-05-27 23:29:22 <Diablo-D3> heh
3231 2011-05-27 23:29:27 <Diablo-D3> Im still waiting for cheap 512gb drives
3232 2011-05-27 23:31:12 <BlueMattBot> Project Bitcoin Testset build #2: FAILURE in 0.63 sec: http://www.bluematt.me/jenkins/job/Bitcoin%20Testset/2/
3233 2011-05-27 23:31:19 <gjs278> I plan on raiding them and I really can't fill 240gb
3234 2011-05-27 23:31:29 <gjs278> I only need 120 - 180 max
3235 2011-05-27 23:31:46 <Dekbit> srsly?
3236 2011-05-27 23:31:57 <gjs278> yes
3237 2011-05-27 23:31:59 <BlueMattBot> Project Bitcoin Testset build #3: STILL FAILING in 89 ms: http://www.bluematt.me/jenkins/job/Bitcoin%20Testset/3/
3238 2011-05-27 23:32:12 <BlueMatt> f off bot
3239 2011-05-27 23:32:17 <gjs278> kill your bot
3240 2011-05-27 23:32:19 <gjs278> with your gun
3241 2011-05-27 23:32:20 <Diablo-D3> gjs278: I want replacements for my boot raid1
3242 2011-05-27 23:32:30 <gjs278> my raid1 is on the really shitty marvell controller
3243 2011-05-27 23:32:44 <gjs278> two uhh 2tb hitachi 7200 drives
3244 2011-05-27 23:32:51 darrob has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3245 2011-05-27 23:33:08 <Diablo-D3> yeah, its a fucking boot drive
3246 2011-05-27 23:33:09 <gjs278> my boot is so small I just make images of it
3247 2011-05-27 23:33:19 <Diablo-D3> 512gb is enough
3248 2011-05-27 23:33:31 <gjs278> my / right now is 11.9gb
3249 2011-05-27 23:33:39 <gjs278> rest is on /mnt/media and crap
3250 2011-05-27 23:33:51 Netsniper has joined
3251 2011-05-27 23:33:51 <BlueMatt> /home?
3252 2011-05-27 23:33:57 vorlov has joined
3253 2011-05-27 23:34:08 <gjs278> /home is /root and it's part of the 11.9
3254 2011-05-27 23:34:16 <gjs278> I just image it and send it off
3255 2011-05-27 23:34:22 <BlueMatt> wait, you use root as your normal user?
3256 2011-05-27 23:34:24 <gjs278> yes
3257 2011-05-27 23:34:33 <gmaxwell> 0_o
3258 2011-05-27 23:34:35 darrob has joined
3259 2011-05-27 23:34:35 <BlueMatt> wait, is this your desktop or a server?
3260 2011-05-27 23:34:39 <gjs278> desktop
3261 2011-05-27 23:34:46 <gjs278> I'm typing this as root
3262 2011-05-27 23:34:48 * BlueMatt *facepalm*
3263 2011-05-27 23:34:55 <gmaxwell> gjs278: do you use lindows?
3264 2011-05-27 23:34:56 <gjs278> come hack me bro
3265 2011-05-27 23:35:01 <gjs278> gentoo
3266 2011-05-27 23:35:05 * BlueMatt *facepalm*
3267 2011-05-27 23:35:14 <gmaxwell> -funroll-security
3268 2011-05-27 23:35:21 Kurtov has joined
3269 2011-05-27 23:35:21 <BlueMatt> lol
3270 2011-05-27 23:35:32 <sipa> -femit-broken-code
3271 2011-05-27 23:35:38 <gjs278> anything of value is in /root anyways
3272 2011-05-27 23:35:43 <gmaxwell> hah
3273 2011-05-27 23:35:46 <gjs278> this just saves me the trouble of ever typing sudo
3274 2011-05-27 23:35:54 <BlueMatt> -f-killme
3275 2011-05-27 23:35:58 <sipa> your choice :)
3276 2011-05-27 23:36:23 <gmaxwell> gjs278: it also means that little bugs in applications are more fatal than they'd otherwise be.
3277 2011-05-27 23:36:34 <gjs278> never really had a problem as of yet
3278 2011-05-27 23:36:50 <BlueMatt> and Ive never had a problem using win7 w/o av, doesnt mean its smart
3279 2011-05-27 23:36:54 <gjs278> vlc blocked it from running under the root account
3280 2011-05-27 23:36:54 <gmaxwell> Yes, this is what anyone would say until they've had a problem! :)
3281 2011-05-27 23:37:03 <gjs278> I would never run windows with an av either
3282 2011-05-27 23:37:05 johnnympereira5 has joined
3283 2011-05-27 23:37:12 * BlueMatt *facepalm*
3284 2011-05-27 23:37:29 <BlueMatt> and you run w/o firewall and put your desktop on dmz too?
3285 2011-05-27 23:37:31 <gjs278> av won't save you from program bugs that blast away your computer
3286 2011-05-27 23:37:55 <Kiba> anybody read Bitcoin is Worse is Better article yet?
3287 2011-05-27 23:38:02 <gjs278> I don't have a firewall on the desktop level, only the router level
3288 2011-05-27 23:38:09 <gjs278> I have like 1 iptables rule for routing minecraft crap
3289 2011-05-27 23:38:14 <BlueMatt> well atleast you got one thing right
3290 2011-05-27 23:38:26 <BlueMatt> you run a minecraft server as root too?
3291 2011-05-27 23:38:32 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: they should have never made --preserve-root a default for rm⦠users like gjs278 self correct much slower these days.
3292 2011-05-27 23:38:34 <gjs278> that's just asking for it
3293 2011-05-27 23:38:39 <gjs278> I've never
3294 2011-05-27 23:38:45 <gjs278> needed preserve-root
3295 2011-05-27 23:39:14 <gmaxwell> Used to be that if you ran everything as root eventually some poorly written shell script would manage to rm -rf / because you forgot to give it a parameter
3296 2011-05-27 23:40:01 <BlueMatt> I think Im gonna put a backdoor in the next bitcoin release which only works when running as root, just to hack gjs278
3297 2011-05-27 23:40:05 <gjs278> ok
3298 2011-05-27 23:40:06 <gjs278> do it
3299 2011-05-27 23:40:33 <BlueMatt> though since you are gentoo, Im assuming you recompile bitcoin yourself just to use -O3
3300 2011-05-27 23:40:35 lumos has joined
3301 2011-05-27 23:40:58 <gjs278> I don't use the binaries but thats only due to it not finding libraries correctly sometimes
3302 2011-05-27 23:41:17 <gjs278> I O2
3303 2011-05-27 23:41:30 <BlueMatt> and...let me guess -march=...
3304 2011-05-27 23:41:33 <gjs278> -O2 -march=native -pipe -j16
3305 2011-05-27 23:41:38 <BlueMatt> of course
3306 2011-05-27 23:41:43 <BlueMatt> goddamn gentoo users
3307 2011-05-27 23:41:51 <gjs278> well I mean what would you use besides native
3308 2011-05-27 23:41:52 <BlueMatt> though Im surprised you dont use -O3
3309 2011-05-27 23:42:00 AStove has quit ()
3310 2011-05-27 23:42:07 <sipa> -j16 :i
3311 2011-05-27 23:42:09 <sipa> :o
3312 2011-05-27 23:42:12 <gjs278> 980x
3313 2011-05-27 23:42:13 <sipa> oh
3314 2011-05-27 23:42:16 <BlueMatt> sipa: what you dont have 16 cores?
3315 2011-05-27 23:42:20 <BlueMatt> gjs278: oooo, nice
3316 2011-05-27 23:42:21 <sipa> that's gcc, not make
3317 2011-05-27 23:42:38 <BlueMatt> sipa: you dont have 16 16 core-procs on your machine?
3318 2011-05-27 23:42:46 <sipa> nope!
3319 2011-05-27 23:42:48 <sipa> dual-core!
3320 2011-05-27 23:42:51 <BlueMatt> ha, that sucks
3321 2011-05-27 23:42:56 <sipa> good enough
3322 2011-05-27 23:43:03 <BlueMatt> oh, actually 2-core kinda does suck
3323 2011-05-27 23:43:09 <gjs278> hardware has taken over my life
3324 2011-05-27 23:43:12 <BlueMatt> well, depends highly on the proc
3325 2011-05-27 23:43:27 <BlueMatt> some 2-cores can be fast, others slower than 1-cores
3326 2011-05-27 23:43:48 <gjs278> my pentium D was a beast
3327 2011-05-27 23:43:52 <BlueMatt> lol
3328 2011-05-27 23:44:04 <BlueMatt> gjs278: how much $ you got locked in your comp?
3329 2011-05-27 23:44:11 <gjs278> too much...
3330 2011-05-27 23:44:17 <BlueMatt> clearly...
3331 2011-05-27 23:44:19 <gjs278> 2k at least
3332 2011-05-27 23:44:24 <BlueMatt> only?
3333 2011-05-27 23:44:27 <BlueMatt> what gcard?
3334 2011-05-27 23:44:28 <gjs278> it's more than that
3335 2011-05-27 23:44:31 <gmaxwell> -O2 -funroll-joints -ftree-vectorize-bonsai -frandomize-pointers -funsafe-bytesex-optimizations
3336 2011-05-27 23:44:40 <gjs278> well 5970 but thats only because of bitcion
3337 2011-05-27 23:44:41 <BlueMatt> if you have a 980x, Id assume you have more like 2.5k+
3338 2011-05-27 23:44:45 F4C3 has quit (Read error: No route to host)
3339 2011-05-27 23:44:48 <gjs278> I'll add it up
3340 2011-05-27 23:44:56 <BlueMatt> -ffuck-my-life
3341 2011-05-27 23:45:59 wolfspraul has joined
3342 2011-05-27 23:46:06 * BlueMatt wishes he had the money needed to build a rig like that
3343 2011-05-27 23:46:18 ]AoA[darbsllim has joined
3344 2011-05-27 23:47:14 <gjs278> 2960 including the $650 spent on gfx exclusively for bitcoining
3345 2011-05-27 23:47:57 <BlueMatt> thought it would be something like that...
3346 2011-05-27 23:48:00 FellowTraveler has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
3347 2011-05-27 23:48:02 <BlueMatt> you, sir, have too much money
3348 2011-05-27 23:48:05 <gjs278> yeah
3349 2011-05-27 23:48:06 <BlueMatt> or no use for it
3350 2011-05-27 23:48:17 <BlueMatt> you can always send a couple this way ;)
3351 2011-05-27 23:48:17 <gjs278> living the dream by living at home and working from home
3352 2011-05-27 23:48:35 vorlov has quit (Quit: vorlov)
3353 2011-05-27 23:49:59 f1nack has joined
3354 2011-05-27 23:50:15 inforgu has left ()
3355 2011-05-27 23:50:39 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: someoen should setup a build bot that makes a new binary set for every commit
3356 2011-05-27 23:50:49 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: and announces it on IRC when it's done
3357 2011-05-27 23:50:53 <luke-jr> or yells at the idiot who broke it
3358 2011-05-27 23:50:54 <luke-jr> :D
3359 2011-05-27 23:50:57 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: have you seen bitcoin.org/jenkins ?
3360 2011-05-27 23:51:03 <BlueMatt> sorry bluematt.me/jenkins
3361 2011-05-27 23:51:11 <luke-jr> no
3362 2011-05-27 23:51:27 <BlueMatt> well it does *exactly* what you just said
3363 2011-05-27 23:51:38 <luke-jr> does not
3364 2011-05-27 23:51:45 <luke-jr> I haven't seen any bot on here yelling at developers
3365 2011-05-27 23:51:56 <sipa> 01:24:59 < BlueMattBot> Project Bitcoin Testset build #3: STILL FAILING in 89 ms: http://www.bluematt.me/jenkins/job/Bitcoin%20Testset/3/
3366 2011-05-27 23:51:56 <BlueMatt> BlueMattBot: status Bitcoin
3367 2011-05-27 23:51:57 <luke-jr> that's like the main feature
3368 2011-05-27 23:51:57 <BlueMattBot> Bitcoin: last build: 35 (12 hr ago): SUCCESS: http://www.bluematt.me/jenkins/job/Bitcoin/35/
3369 2011-05-27 23:51:58 <gjs278> it should keep a running total as well
3370 2011-05-27 23:52:05 <BlueMatt> it complains every time it fails
3371 2011-05-27 23:52:07 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: it needs to call them out by name
3372 2011-05-27 23:52:17 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: it does, when there is a commit to call
3373 2011-05-27 23:52:23 <luke-jr> >.>
3374 2011-05-27 23:52:42 <luke-jr> if it does it every commit, there's always a commit to call
3375 2011-05-27 23:52:52 <BlueMatt> yep
3376 2011-05-27 23:53:36 <gjs278> so if I sent a pull request, and you guys accepted it, and it failed to compile, that bot would yell at me
3377 2011-05-27 23:53:38 <BlueMatt> actually, now that I look at the log, it might not call out the commit, but its easy to see, it gives a link
3378 2011-05-27 23:53:53 <BlueMatt> gjs278: it would yell, and give a link so you can see the broken commit
3379 2011-05-27 23:54:11 <BlueMatt> (though it broke last night...sorry about that)
3380 2011-05-27 23:54:21 <gjs278> someone in this world has a fetish where robots yell at him
3381 2011-05-27 23:54:32 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: ?
3382 2011-05-27 23:54:48 <gjs278> that bot would fullfil their wildest dreams
3383 2011-05-27 23:56:02 simplecoin has joined
3384 2011-05-27 23:56:49 <luke-jr> :P
3385 2011-05-27 23:56:56 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: my code doesn't break :D
3386 2011-05-27 23:57:07 <luke-jr> the point is to yell at *you guys* :D
3387 2011-05-27 23:57:43 <gjs278> thankfully all of my bugs compile, they just core dump
3388 2011-05-27 23:57:50 <BlueMatt> hey the last time the build broke was...oh, last night
3389 2011-05-27 23:58:09 <BlueMatt> gjs278: no, as of today, it at least checks it can run and download the first 100000 blocks
3390 2011-05-27 23:58:16 <gjs278> sweet
3391 2011-05-27 23:59:17 mosimo has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3392 2011-05-27 23:59:37 <Kiba> funny: Sorry. For some reason, we fail.
3393 2011-05-27 23:59:48 vorlov has joined
3394 2011-05-27 23:59:48 mmoya has joined