1 2011-06-24 00:00:00 mrh00d has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2 2011-06-24 00:00:02 JRWR has joined
3 2011-06-24 00:00:03 JRWR has quit (Changing host)
4 2011-06-24 00:00:03 JRWR has joined
5 2011-06-24 00:00:27 DavidSJ has joined
6 2011-06-24 00:02:01 <sacarlson> WakiMiko: they seem to return the same number so they must be synonomos
7 2011-06-24 00:02:39 <WakiMiko> only because they return the same number NOW, doesnt mean they always do i guess :3
8 2011-06-24 00:02:47 <WakiMiko> the answer is IN THE SOURCE
9 2011-06-24 00:03:46 AgoristRadio has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
10 2011-06-24 00:03:53 theorbtwo has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
11 2011-06-24 00:04:00 TheZimm has quit (away!~TheZimm@c-98-226-5-69.hsd1.il.comcast.net|Excess Flood)
12 2011-06-24 00:04:04 TheZimm has joined
13 2011-06-24 00:04:23 theorbtwo has joined
14 2011-06-24 00:06:31 josephholsten has quit (Quit: josephholsten)
15 2011-06-24 00:07:39 AgoristRadio has joined
16 2011-06-24 00:07:42 Woellchen has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
17 2011-06-24 00:07:43 nidefawl_ has joined
18 2011-06-24 00:08:07 <gim> sacarlson, WakiMiko: source is the same for both calls
19 2011-06-24 00:08:36 <WakiMiko> i see
20 2011-06-24 00:08:38 <WakiMiko> thanks
21 2011-06-24 00:08:43 <WakiMiko> everyone
22 2011-06-24 00:09:43 sytse has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
23 2011-06-24 00:10:14 TheZimm has quit (Quit: When will we learn?)
24 2011-06-24 00:10:18 Workbench has joined
25 2011-06-24 00:10:21 TheZimm has joined
26 2011-06-24 00:10:25 Netto has joined
27 2011-06-24 00:11:01 nidefawl has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
28 2011-06-24 00:11:02 nidefawl_ is now known as nidefawl
29 2011-06-24 00:13:01 Gonzago has joined
30 2011-06-24 00:14:28 earthmeLon has joined
31 2011-06-24 00:16:29 sytse has joined
32 2011-06-24 00:17:23 <xtalmath> just checked the rpc source, indeed, copy pasta duplicity... why do we need this deprecent one or other please
33 2011-06-24 00:17:35 BTCTrader has quit (Quit: BTCTrader)
34 2011-06-24 00:19:16 Pinion has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
35 2011-06-24 00:20:24 <xtalmath> why does mingw makefile not link against pthread but only boost?
36 2011-06-24 00:21:27 karnac has joined
37 2011-06-24 00:22:08 DukeOfURL has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
38 2011-06-24 00:22:34 <xtalmath> also was it realized that I couldnt run .22 and .23 until i upgraded ubuntu 9.04 to lucid? or did somebody just decide compile / link against a higher version?
39 2011-06-24 00:23:08 Taveren93HGK has joined
40 2011-06-24 00:23:47 <xtalmath> I didnt use bitcoin for a few weeks this way, look at it from user perspective, average user doesnt care his os is a bit out of date, learns about bitcoin, has just enough enthousiasm to download but not upgrade os, when he upgrades os he might have forgotten about bitcoin
41 2011-06-24 00:24:44 <xtalmath> I know nothing about packaging, but I suspect there are tools so that you can check which OSes are supported depending on libraries linked in
42 2011-06-24 00:24:49 <JRWR> im running bitcoin inside a encrypted virtual machine
43 2011-06-24 00:25:18 <droud> JRWR: What do you mean, encrypted virtual machine?
44 2011-06-24 00:25:50 <xtalmath> we should just have the signing part on smartcard with display and buttons
45 2011-06-24 00:27:01 eianpsego has joined
46 2011-06-24 00:27:05 <JRWR> droud: its just virtual box running Damn Small Linux that is sitting on a encrypted LVS disk image
47 2011-06-24 00:27:07 <droud> xtalmath: That would reduce the anonymity factor drastically.
48 2011-06-24 00:27:18 <xtalmath> how?
49 2011-06-24 00:27:23 <droud> JRWR: No good, the host machine can read everything in memory on that virtual machine.
50 2011-06-24 00:27:48 <kunnis> it does require a virus written to target that situation though.
51 2011-06-24 00:27:49 <xtalmath> droud: not for in bank terminals but for cheap 15euro smartcard readers you plug in to your pc,
52 2011-06-24 00:28:17 <droud> JRWR: I recommend a crappity headless Linux machine with an encrypted partition and a stateless everything-but-bitcoind software firewall running.
53 2011-06-24 00:28:20 <xtalmath> how does that affect anonymity? you can still run client behind tor
54 2011-06-24 00:28:49 <droud> xtalmath: It limits the number of wallets you can have and prevents additional ones from being generated...most smart cards don't have the memory to store lots of wallet data.
55 2011-06-24 00:29:12 <droud> xtalmath: Plus, they don't use elliptic curve crypto so aren't compatible.
56 2011-06-24 00:29:26 <xtalmath> droud, they DO use elliptic curve crypto
57 2011-06-24 00:29:38 <xtalmath> ECDSA included
58 2011-06-24 00:29:39 <droud> xtalmath: Links to an EC smart card?
59 2011-06-24 00:29:55 <droud> I'm interested.
60 2011-06-24 00:30:22 <kunnis> there's stil ways it can be attacked. What prevents a .01 cent being made into a 10000 btc trasnaction, or user swtiching
61 2011-06-24 00:30:30 <kunnis> neither of those are really solved in that case
62 2011-06-24 00:31:41 Tim-7967 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
63 2011-06-24 00:31:50 <kunnis> if a smartcard solved most problems, I could see it being worth it.... . but not if it only solves a few
64 2011-06-24 00:31:51 <droud> kunnis: What do you mean?
65 2011-06-24 00:32:14 <xtalmath> http://www.athena-scs.com/pdf/Athena%20IDProtect%20Key%20v2%20LASER%20(01022011).pdf is just one example, with javacard ECDSA is supported anyhow, it just takes longer if theres no hardware acceleration. this one has acceleration over GF(2^n) fields but secp256k1 note p is for GF(p) fields, they exist
66 2011-06-24 00:32:27 <droud> kunnis: The transactions are validated from the block chain, there's no way to magimultiply funds.
67 2011-06-24 00:32:44 <kunnis> I'm talking about attacking the user's account.
68 2011-06-24 00:32:55 devserial has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
69 2011-06-24 00:33:37 devserial has joined
70 2011-06-24 00:33:50 <xtalmath> check http://bitcoincard.wikispot.org/ and http://groups.google.com/group/bitcoincard for some very preliminary research and discussions we had on the topic
71 2011-06-24 00:33:57 <kunnis> I'm super-rich user with a lot of btc. You manage to get a virus on my machine. Right now, it'll just send you the wallet.dat.
72 2011-06-24 00:34:44 <kunnis> the next time I do a transaction, plug in my smartcard, it steals all the funds. :(
73 2011-06-24 00:34:55 <xtalmath> right now well go for javacard with enough memory to play with, to estimate size requirements for later versions with hardware acceleration for GF(p)
74 2011-06-24 00:35:37 Quetzalcoatl_ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
75 2011-06-24 00:36:29 <xtalmath> we didnt even do thorough market search, if we crawl enough of the web and spec sheets we might notice a javacard that has the specific SEC2 curve,...
76 2011-06-24 00:36:31 <droud> xtalmath: That device is cool, it's also got space for maybe 720 key pairs I think.
77 2011-06-24 00:36:50 <xtalmath> I found one but didnt say explicitly if it supports javacard
78 2011-06-24 00:36:54 <droud> xtalmath: I'm also not sure about the ECC key lengths.
79 2011-06-24 00:37:14 <xtalmath> check block explorer :D
80 2011-06-24 00:38:22 <xtalmath> think its 2*32 bits for private keypair and another 32some bits for public key
81 2011-06-24 00:39:27 <xtalmath> but then theres also the space that the javacard bytecode will take
82 2011-06-24 00:39:30 <droud> xtalmath: There's no way the private key is only 32 or 64 bits. 109 bit ECC has been cracked, it needs to be at least 256b.
83 2011-06-24 00:39:39 <xtalmath> sorry bytes
84 2011-06-24 00:39:57 <xtalmath> 32*8=256 bits
85 2011-06-24 00:40:21 <xtalmath> so its about 100 bytes per adress
86 2011-06-24 00:40:40 <droud> ...720 keypairs.
87 2011-06-24 00:40:41 somuchwin2 has quit (Quit: Nettalk6 - www.ntalk.de)
88 2011-06-24 00:40:41 <xtalmath> other cards have much more memory
89 2011-06-24 00:41:02 somuchwin has joined
90 2011-06-24 00:41:27 <xtalmath> droud: the idea is you have pocket money accounts in wallet.dat and only use SC occasionally to refill pocket money account
91 2011-06-24 00:41:35 Ramokk has joined
92 2011-06-24 00:41:46 Klash_ has joined
93 2011-06-24 00:41:59 <xtalmath> so you dont need that many accounts, and the wallet code on smartcard may optionally reuse old adresses
94 2011-06-24 00:42:01 <droud> xtalmath: I think my main concern about using cards as cash is the possibility of damage or loss. I can back up encrypted bits.
95 2011-06-24 00:42:25 kW_ has joined
96 2011-06-24 00:42:35 <xtalmath> optionally with PIN there should be backup functionality, or even clone to other SC functionality
97 2011-06-24 00:42:39 <droud> I would assume the cards don't give up their private keys, so there wouldn't be a way to copy stuff around.
98 2011-06-24 00:42:40 RAM2012 has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
99 2011-06-24 00:42:45 <xtalmath> data retention in smartcards is like 10 years
100 2011-06-24 00:43:04 <droud> xtalmath: Approximately 10 years minus a two year old chewing on it.
101 2011-06-24 00:43:04 <xtalmath> droud: I also think copying keys would be bad
102 2011-06-24 00:43:14 <xtalmath> hehe
103 2011-06-24 00:43:42 <droud> Copying keys is a must, otherwise you can't make it redundant.
104 2011-06-24 00:43:57 <xtalmath> one could use cryptography and pin access to 2 cards to exchange data between cards using pc as public channel over which encrypted data is sent
105 2011-06-24 00:44:43 <droud> And you could communicate with your computer through a telegram, too...but it doesn't make it more secure.
106 2011-06-24 00:44:46 Kurtov has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
107 2011-06-24 00:45:06 <xtalmath> droud, I mean the card should have its own display
108 2011-06-24 00:45:15 eternal1 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
109 2011-06-24 00:45:19 <xtalmath> check out OTP credit cards,
110 2011-06-24 00:45:33 <xtalmath> theres segment and eink displays in credit cards
111 2011-06-24 00:45:57 <droud> Yeah but once again, storing wallet private keys on a card is something I would only use for pocket change.
112 2011-06-24 00:46:15 <droud> Because it's straight up cash, and you can lose it even if nobody else can use it.
113 2011-06-24 00:46:24 <xtalmath> one of the other guys on the group contacted a firm and they claimed they could provide these at 40$ a piece at individual pieces down to $10 at large volumes
114 2011-06-24 00:46:41 <xtalmath> droud: unless you back it up
115 2011-06-24 00:46:57 Gonzago has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
116 2011-06-24 00:47:39 <droud> Well, we just went full circle on that I guess.
117 2011-06-24 00:47:50 Quetzalcoatl_ has joined
118 2011-06-24 00:48:13 <xtalmath> theres no denying that next generation of bitcoin virus and malware will not simply read wallet.dat from drive but from RAM memory
119 2011-06-24 00:48:32 <xtalmath> how full circle, why do you think it cant be backed up?
120 2011-06-24 00:48:49 <xtalmath> to say another card? or do you like eating 2 cards at same time?
121 2011-06-24 00:49:08 <droud> If it can back up, then the private keys can be read from the card.
122 2011-06-24 00:49:12 <droud> *backed up
123 2011-06-24 00:49:16 <xtalmath> droud not true
124 2011-06-24 00:49:47 <xtalmath> card one after pin spits out RSA public key
125 2011-06-24 00:50:10 <xtalmath> card 2 reads public key and stores with PIN of card 2 entered
126 2011-06-24 00:50:15 Beccara has joined
127 2011-06-24 00:50:50 <xtalmath> card 2 encrypts its private ECDSA keys if PIN is correct
128 2011-06-24 00:50:52 <droud> Oh I'm familiar with public key data exchanges.
129 2011-06-24 00:51:14 RobboNZ has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
130 2011-06-24 00:51:17 <xtalmath> so the wallet can be exchanged from card to card even if PC is unsafe
131 2011-06-24 00:51:37 DiSTANT187 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
132 2011-06-24 00:51:45 <xtalmath> you have 2 cards in your hand, if they have displays and buttons
133 2011-06-24 00:51:49 kW_ has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
134 2011-06-24 00:52:35 <xtalmath> you could manually transfer their public keys now the cards can safely talk over a public channel (compromised pc) to exchange bitcoin privates
135 2011-06-24 00:52:43 <droud> In the end you could just probe the private keys out of the card's silicon, if it were worthwhile at all it would be easy.
136 2011-06-24 00:52:46 TheZimm has quit (Excess Flood)
137 2011-06-24 00:52:51 TheZimm has joined
138 2011-06-24 00:53:07 <xtalmath> i have yet to hear of a virus that probes private keys out of silicon
139 2011-06-24 00:53:18 <xtalmath> you are constantly changing threat model
140 2011-06-24 00:53:25 <xtalmath> thats not good security practice
141 2011-06-24 00:53:53 <droud> I'm just suggesting ways that such a system could be attacked.
142 2011-06-24 00:53:57 <xtalmath> ok good
143 2011-06-24 00:54:14 <droud> Because it would be, from any conceivable direction.
144 2011-06-24 00:54:56 <droud> But I'd still put drink money on a smart card.
145 2011-06-24 00:55:03 Sedra has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
146 2011-06-24 00:55:08 <xtalmath> but mostly from the internet, or meatspace trust breaking
147 2011-06-24 00:55:11 Sedra has joined
148 2011-06-24 00:55:13 <droud> I used to get a lot of free drinks from the smart cards at college. :o)
149 2011-06-24 00:55:19 <droud> They were super duper secure!
150 2011-06-24 00:55:25 <xtalmath> droud: you dont have a bank account? thats a smart card
151 2011-06-24 00:55:31 Cusipzzz has joined
152 2011-06-24 00:55:38 <lfm> droud banks have lots of money, if it is worthwhile to rob them, then it must be easy by your logic
153 2011-06-24 00:56:06 <droud> lfm: Replace banks with citizens.
154 2011-06-24 00:56:16 traviscj has joined
155 2011-06-24 00:56:19 <droud> lfm: And consider all the tools at an average robber's disposal.
156 2011-06-24 00:56:33 <lfm> you are not making sense
157 2011-06-24 00:56:39 <xtalmath> average robber has electron scanning tunneling microscope?
158 2011-06-24 00:57:19 RAM2012 has joined
159 2011-06-24 00:57:20 <droud> Alright, we were speaking about the theft of a smart card containing BTC.
160 2011-06-24 00:57:39 caedes has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
161 2011-06-24 00:58:09 <lfm> droud smartcards are not really easy to pry open and get their contents, its not like opening a wallet
162 2011-06-24 00:58:10 <xtalmath> droud: the main reason to shift to smart card is to have an independent processor running mini OS that doesnt just trust mountains of code like computer does
163 2011-06-24 00:58:18 <droud> xtalmath: You don't need that, just need strong solvents. And if there's a lot of money to be made with those solvents, they will become available.
164 2011-06-24 00:58:25 enquirer has joined
165 2011-06-24 00:58:37 <droud> xtalmath: I agree, like I said just playing devil's advocate.
166 2011-06-24 00:58:57 <lfm> droud solvents wont read the contents of a card
167 2011-06-24 00:59:00 TheZimm has quit (Quit: When will we learn?)
168 2011-06-24 00:59:09 <droud> Yeah but cheapass micro logic probes will.
169 2011-06-24 00:59:24 * xtalmath imagines droud solving bits out of onchip tamper resistant memory cells with just a bit of solven
170 2011-06-24 00:59:36 <lfm> droid I dont think they will
171 2011-06-24 00:59:50 devrandom has quit (Write error: Broken pipe)
172 2011-06-24 00:59:50 x6763 has quit (Write error: Broken pipe)
173 2011-06-24 01:00:02 Sedra has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
174 2011-06-24 01:00:05 <xtalmath> droud: the smartcard industry is constantly facing attacks on their smart cards, they stay up to date
175 2011-06-24 01:00:11 Sedra has joined
176 2011-06-24 01:00:25 <egecko> how many more blocks until the next difficulty?
177 2011-06-24 01:00:41 <xtalmath> if you require a crypto coprocessor then its made by people who know their stuff
178 2011-06-24 01:01:16 <xtalmath> also: think about landmines, why do they still exist? because its cheaper to make them in war than to clean them up during war.
179 2011-06-24 01:01:18 <upb> i read the thread on google groups and seems you want to put some special 'wallet' code on the card
180 2011-06-24 01:01:28 DiSTANT187 has joined
181 2011-06-24 01:01:29 <xtalmath> attacks tend to be costeffective, like timing attacks
182 2011-06-24 01:01:32 <lfm> egecko: Next Difficulty In: 119 blocks
183 2011-06-24 01:01:33 <upb> seems weird, all it needs is key generation, read public key and signing
184 2011-06-24 01:01:36 <droud> xtalmath: There's nothing that's secure against long term physical access, smart cards included.
185 2011-06-24 01:01:59 <droud> xtalmath: I agree, but prying cash out of stolen cards...there's a lot of cost effective going on there.
186 2011-06-24 01:02:07 <xtalmath> upb: then how do you send money if it doesnt have private keys?
187 2011-06-24 01:02:16 <upb> huh
188 2011-06-24 01:02:48 <upb> the card is told to generate a keypair, and the public key is read out
189 2011-06-24 01:02:52 <xtalmath> upb: are you saying you would be satisfied with just 1 bitcoin address per card (I would too), or something else?
190 2011-06-24 01:03:08 <upb> no, it can have many keypairs
191 2011-06-24 01:03:13 <xtalmath> so it has a wallet
192 2011-06-24 01:03:23 <upb> what im saying is that you dont need any specialized code, this is all standard stuff
193 2011-06-24 01:03:30 <xtalmath> when we mention wallet code we dont mean a lot more than what you just described
194 2011-06-24 01:03:33 <lfm> xtalmath: wallet and cpu
195 2011-06-24 01:03:40 <xtalmath> upb: we know
196 2011-06-24 01:03:42 <upb> yeah you dont need the lot more
197 2011-06-24 01:03:43 agricocb has joined
198 2011-06-24 01:03:51 <upb> ah ok
199 2011-06-24 01:04:11 oozyburglar has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
200 2011-06-24 01:04:27 <xtalmath> whoever proposes a transaction to the card is in his own interest to use most up to date transaction
201 2011-06-24 01:04:36 <droud> xtalmath: It needs balances per keypair to be used offline, or a trusted source of balance data.
202 2011-06-24 01:04:40 <xtalmath> as input for new transaction
203 2011-06-24 01:05:11 x6763 has joined
204 2011-06-24 01:05:14 devrandom has joined
205 2011-06-24 01:05:18 <xtalmath> what do you mean with used offline?
206 2011-06-24 01:05:36 <upb> it cannot be used offline without a central authority
207 2011-06-24 01:05:45 MtGox_Adam has joined
208 2011-06-24 01:05:52 <upb> otherwise you could just make a card that reports bogus balances
209 2011-06-24 01:05:54 <xtalmath> right, so we dont go that way, its just something in combination with bitcoin client
210 2011-06-24 01:05:55 <lfm> still cant really be used offline, at least the merchant still needs to be online
211 2011-06-24 01:06:09 <droud> Well, to use the card without an internet connection to it (and the resulting complexity), you'd need to store wallet balances too.
212 2011-06-24 01:06:11 Gonzago has joined
213 2011-06-24 01:06:12 <xtalmath> the project is NOT intended to be used offline
214 2011-06-24 01:06:29 <droud> So it's not intended to provide a cash-like BTC functionality?
215 2011-06-24 01:06:33 MtGox_Adam has quit (Client Quit)
216 2011-06-24 01:06:50 <lfm> still needs to be onl9ine
217 2011-06-24 01:06:54 <xtalmath> droud: bitcoin in general doesnt support offline transactions, or btc receiver end could be victim of double spend
218 2011-06-24 01:07:06 <xtalmath> so to whoever owns the SC this is not a problem
219 2011-06-24 01:07:31 <lfm> loading the card would be online too
220 2011-06-24 01:07:35 <xtalmath> yep
221 2011-06-24 01:07:41 MtGox_Adam has joined
222 2011-06-24 01:08:42 <xtalmath> droud: not cash like, i kept telling you not for pocket money but for secure storage
223 2011-06-24 01:08:45 <xtalmath> sigh
224 2011-06-24 01:09:19 <droud> Yeah, you'd have to change the architecture a bit for any offline support.
225 2011-06-24 01:09:25 <xtalmath> secure signing is a better word, unless we implement cloning
226 2011-06-24 01:09:38 <lfm> not like its a big problem to require a phone have internet access
227 2011-06-24 01:09:49 <xtalmath> droud: youd have to change from the concept of the blockchain against doublespending
228 2011-06-24 01:10:12 <xtalmath> connectivity to the p2p network is central to bitcoin
229 2011-06-24 01:10:43 <xtalmath> "a bit" is seriously underestimated
230 2011-06-24 01:11:57 Pinion has joined
231 2011-06-24 01:12:41 <xtalmath> btw i am looking up the smartcard stuff out of interest and just guiding the others there a bit with my advice, but I wont actively participate, dont hesitate to help them out...
232 2011-06-24 01:13:05 <lfm> back seat driver huh?
233 2011-06-24 01:13:12 <unclemantis> beep beep
234 2011-06-24 01:13:13 <droud> xtalmath: I'm actually using GoldKeys on a project right now.
235 2011-06-24 01:13:16 <unclemantis> road hog!
236 2011-06-24 01:13:28 * unclemantis gives the offender the bird
237 2011-06-24 01:13:43 <xtalmath> at moments im afraid their main objective is recreating the safe banking user experience without realising that keyboard pin code is no real step forward from wallet.dat
238 2011-06-24 01:14:17 Strom has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
239 2011-06-24 01:14:26 Strom has joined
240 2011-06-24 01:14:38 <upb> having a pinpad doesnt matter either if you use pc/sc
241 2011-06-24 01:14:40 <xtalmath> if i m not around keep an eye on them and scrutinize their implementation
242 2011-06-24 01:14:49 Juffo-Wup has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
243 2011-06-24 01:14:49 jmpespxoreax has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
244 2011-06-24 01:14:54 JRWR has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
245 2011-06-24 01:14:57 <xtalmath> upb: could you elaborate?
246 2011-06-24 01:15:12 <upb> well i studied the implementation of national id cards
247 2011-06-24 01:15:31 <upb> and with a pinpad the protocol is like this
248 2011-06-24 01:15:40 <xtalmath> you mean when using pc/sc secure pin pad is communicated??
249 2011-06-24 01:15:47 <upb> yes
250 2011-06-24 01:15:50 JRWR has joined
251 2011-06-24 01:15:57 Juffo-Wup has joined
252 2011-06-24 01:15:59 <xtalmath> could you give a reference, source or link
253 2011-06-24 01:16:09 <upb> pc sends a template command where the pin is substituted in by the pinpad
254 2011-06-24 01:16:16 <xtalmath> that makes no sense at all, if thats true secure pin pads are a lie
255 2011-06-24 01:16:18 <upb> the command is then sent to the card
256 2011-06-24 01:16:21 <droud> I'm pretty sure national ids weren't intended to be hard to read.
257 2011-06-24 01:16:27 <upb> and the card enters this mode, whatever its called
258 2011-06-24 01:16:50 <upb> now, a trojan on the pc can send other requests to sign in addition to the request sent by legit software
259 2011-06-24 01:17:06 <xtalmath> i live in belgium and think I know what you mean
260 2011-06-24 01:17:12 <upb> because the card doesnt revert out of this 'authenticated' or whatever mode after 1 request
261 2011-06-24 01:17:21 <xtalmath> i have obsessively read their docs but its actually a different situation
262 2011-06-24 01:17:21 <upb> yeah the system is the same in estonia as in belgium
263 2011-06-24 01:17:34 <freakazoid> cards really need a screen to display the request you're signing
264 2011-06-24 01:17:35 <xtalmath> thats indeed a bad implementation on the card side
265 2011-06-24 01:17:49 <freakazoid> you can't rely on a PC's display
266 2011-06-24 01:17:52 <freakazoid> or keyboard
267 2011-06-24 01:17:56 <xtalmath> the card could perfectly have been required to re enter pin for each signature
268 2011-06-24 01:17:56 Juffo-Wup has quit (Read error: No route to host)
269 2011-06-24 01:18:10 <freakazoid> or even display what you're signing and ask you to push a button
270 2011-06-24 01:18:13 <freakazoid> rather than entering your pin each time
271 2011-06-24 01:18:17 <upb> xtalmath: yep :)
272 2011-06-24 01:18:19 <xtalmath> freakazoid: true thats why we suggest the smart cards with display
273 2011-06-24 01:18:30 <lfm> YA BUT PEOPLE WOULD GET IMPATIENT WITH IT
274 2011-06-24 01:18:32 <freakazoid> smart card without display isn't very smart.
275 2011-06-24 01:18:36 <freakazoid> NO NEED TO YELL
276 2011-06-24 01:18:38 <xtalmath> upb: but that has nothing to do with pc/sc flawed
277 2011-06-24 01:18:39 <lfm> sorry damned capslock
278 2011-06-24 01:18:43 <unclemantis> WTF
279 2011-06-24 01:18:54 <upb> yeah its specific to this implementation
280 2011-06-24 01:18:55 * unclemantis staggers around with blood coming out of his eyes
281 2011-06-24 01:18:56 <WildSoil> estimated time for diffi increase ?
282 2011-06-24 01:19:19 <upb> which is already deployed large scale so its fucked
283 2011-06-24 01:19:19 <xtalmath> upb: the worst thing is they "fix" it in the optional middleware
284 2011-06-24 01:19:20 jmpespxoreax has joined
285 2011-06-24 01:19:21 samlander has joined
286 2011-06-24 01:19:22 <lfm> Next
287 2011-06-24 01:19:26 <samlander> MagicalTux: you around?
288 2011-06-24 01:19:27 <lfm> Difficulty In About: 10 hours, 53 minutes,
289 2011-06-24 01:19:37 <kunnis> <@gribble> Current Blocks: 132942 | Current Difficulty: 877226.66666667 | Next Difficulty At Block: 133055 | Next Difficulty In: 113 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 10 hours, 53 minutes, and 31 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1367065.01833952
290 2011-06-24 01:19:40 <upb> xtalmath: lol you mean the pc drivers ?
291 2011-06-24 01:19:42 <samlander> MtGox_Adam: you around?
292 2011-06-24 01:19:44 zapnap has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
293 2011-06-24 01:19:51 <xtalmath> and thats why you associate it to pc/sc because you can talk directly to the card
294 2011-06-24 01:19:51 <unclemantis> is anyone working on a long term wallet.dat backup solution that will outlast 50 years and a nuclear war?
295 2011-06-24 01:20:01 * unclemantis is serious
296 2011-06-24 01:20:02 <tcatm> unclemantis: I am.
297 2011-06-24 01:20:10 <tcatm> also serious
298 2011-06-24 01:20:26 Juffo-Wup has joined
299 2011-06-24 01:20:30 <unclemantis> tcatm the best idea i have come up with so far is punchedcards in a heat and fireproof box
300 2011-06-24 01:20:49 <tcatm> heh, good idea.
301 2011-06-24 01:20:51 <xtalmath> upb: yes, for windows I understand you can install a microsoft signed version and dissalllows pc/sc communication if eid is present unless its the middle ware but we all know this is crappy non portable fix
302 2011-06-24 01:21:06 <lfm> unclemantis: no thats just silly
303 2011-06-24 01:21:13 <unclemantis> lfm you're silly
304 2011-06-24 01:21:16 <upb> xtalmath: it doesnt even make any sense since the driver can be patched in memory
305 2011-06-24 01:21:22 <upb> its just a dll
306 2011-06-24 01:21:28 Rictoo_ is now known as Rictoo
307 2011-06-24 01:21:32 <tcatm> unclemantis: I'm currently thinking about a web service that encrypts the wallet securely (i.e. download only possible as gpg encrypted file) and also stores it securely encrypted in many different places
308 2011-06-24 01:21:44 <xtalmath> upb: its fucked for like a few years, in theory they could change the javacard applet which is opensource btw, to require new pin entry, or have this be an option settable by user
309 2011-06-24 01:21:49 <unclemantis> i see
310 2011-06-24 01:21:58 <lfm> unclemantis: bitcoins wont do you any good if there is no internet
311 2011-06-24 01:22:02 <phantomcircuit> unclemantis, you want bitcoins to outlast a nuclear war?
312 2011-06-24 01:22:03 <phantomcircuit> lol wat
313 2011-06-24 01:22:20 <unclemantis> i had an idea of uploading it into my gmail account but with the though of crackers getting into my account thanks to mtgox.com i tossed that idea away
314 2011-06-24 01:22:23 <kunnis> tcatm I think a web-based client might be better, you're almost there in what you're talking about
315 2011-06-24 01:22:30 <xtalmath> but every less than 5 years cards are replaced so they might fix that, but I read nothing of that sort its shameless
316 2011-06-24 01:22:30 hahuang65 has joined
317 2011-06-24 01:22:45 <tcatm> kunnis: well, not for a 10k+ BTC wallet ;)
318 2011-06-24 01:22:58 <samlander> I have to say im a little twisted that my account failed validation on gox
319 2011-06-24 01:23:01 <kunnis> If you have the wallet.dat, you might as well be a web-client
320 2011-06-24 01:23:08 <tcatm> kunnis: but I'll consider adding a small web interface for easier withdrawal
321 2011-06-24 01:23:32 <unclemantis> I heard 500k btc got stolen from mtgox this past weekend.
322 2011-06-24 01:23:32 gsathya has joined
323 2011-06-24 01:23:33 <samlander> my password was 8 characters and had a mix of upper lower and numbers, by definition that is a strong password :\
324 2011-06-24 01:23:37 <xtalmath> where can I find numbers where mining reward halves?
325 2011-06-24 01:23:39 <samlander> unclemantis: you heard wrong
326 2011-06-24 01:23:43 <samlander> unclemantis: it was more like 2k
327 2011-06-24 01:23:51 <unclemantis> 2k is still a lot
328 2011-06-24 01:23:54 <samlander> xtalmath: it halves every 210000 blocks
329 2011-06-24 01:24:23 DiSTANT187 has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
330 2011-06-24 01:24:53 <kunnis> the wallet.dat is the dangerous part to own. Just build a client, only user X can see the items in his "wallet", write a program to parse and seperate the wallet.dat down by user, and then only let users access their own files in the wallet.dat
331 2011-06-24 01:25:01 <kunnis> err accounts in the wallet.dat
332 2011-06-24 01:25:12 <xtalmath> samlander: and what is the final block value?
333 2011-06-24 01:25:20 accel has joined
334 2011-06-24 01:25:20 <samlander> there isnt
335 2011-06-24 01:25:27 <samlander> it halves into infinity
336 2011-06-24 01:25:28 <xtalmath> or at which block is it "halved" to 0
337 2011-06-24 01:25:32 <samlander> it doesnt
338 2011-06-24 01:25:36 <xtalmath> it doesnt?
339 2011-06-24 01:25:38 <samlander> no
340 2011-06-24 01:25:42 <samlander> it halves into infinity
341 2011-06-24 01:25:48 <accel> dumb question; if someone wants to sell a bitcoin at $19.00 and someone wants to buya bitcoin at $20.00 -- does mtgox make $1.00 on the transaction?
342 2011-06-24 01:25:51 <samlander> never quite reaching the max number of bitcoins
343 2011-06-24 01:25:53 <xtalmath> let me check the code do you know what file?
344 2011-06-24 01:26:03 <xtalmath> ok
345 2011-06-24 01:26:12 DontMindMe has joined
346 2011-06-24 01:26:12 <samlander> accel: no
347 2011-06-24 01:26:25 <kunnis> accel that's a good question :)
348 2011-06-24 01:26:26 vragnaroda has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
349 2011-06-24 01:26:37 <picci> does anyone use google CHROME here ? it leaks all dns queries that are supposed to run over socks5, any idea how to avoid it ?
350 2011-06-24 01:26:49 <accel> samlander: what is the btc sold at then?
351 2011-06-24 01:27:02 <samlander> whatever the ask is
352 2011-06-24 01:27:12 <samlander> the person who gains or loses is the user
353 2011-06-24 01:27:22 <samlander> if i buy at 19 and sell at 18, i've lost a dollar
354 2011-06-24 01:27:26 jtaylor has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
355 2011-06-24 01:27:31 <samlander> if i buy at 18 and sell at 20, i've made 2 dollars
356 2011-06-24 01:27:34 Leo_II has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
357 2011-06-24 01:27:38 jtaylor has joined
358 2011-06-24 01:27:40 <samlander> gox just take fees on the transaction
359 2011-06-24 01:27:42 <samlander> 0.65%
360 2011-06-24 01:27:56 <WildSoil> mtgox now workin g?
361 2011-06-24 01:28:00 <samlander> ADAM!!!! dammit come back to keys
362 2011-06-24 01:28:01 <phantomcircuit> picci, windows or linux
363 2011-06-24 01:28:09 <unclemantis> WildSoil supposidly tomorrow
364 2011-06-24 01:28:12 <kunnis> samlander You didn't understand accel's question. We're talking about one trade here.
365 2011-06-24 01:28:17 <samlander> i see
366 2011-06-24 01:28:26 <xtalmath> samlander: on which transaction? bank - mt gox or mtgoxUSD to mtggoxBTC?
367 2011-06-24 01:28:30 <accel> samlander: you tell mtgox you want to buy at $18.00. I tell mtbox I want to sell at $17.00. mtgox pairs us up. What is the btc sold at?
368 2011-06-24 01:29:11 <xtalmath> does mtgox match up pairs or do users accept bids/asks
369 2011-06-24 01:29:27 <samlander> it is done automatically
370 2011-06-24 01:29:29 evolute has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
371 2011-06-24 01:29:43 <ericmock> accel: that's an interesting question...
372 2011-06-24 01:29:50 <xtalmath> you have used mtgox? i would like to understand how the proces goes for a user
373 2011-06-24 01:30:03 <upb> accel: mtgox then you buy at 18
374 2011-06-24 01:30:15 <samlander> if i understand it correct if someone is willing to sell at 17 and you're willing to buy at 18, you can take all the bits up and to your max limit 18.00
375 2011-06-24 01:30:16 <upb> -mtgox
376 2011-06-24 01:30:39 <ericmock> samlander: that seems like the only logical thing
377 2011-06-24 01:30:43 <accel> so eos the person willing to sell at $17 ... get $18 or $17 ? (before fees)
378 2011-06-24 01:30:49 <upb> 18
379 2011-06-24 01:30:49 <xtalmath> so on mtgox you dont do bids and offers? how can it even trade if the spread is high?
380 2011-06-24 01:31:07 <samlander> it doesnt
381 2011-06-24 01:31:09 <ericmock> a) wants to buy at no more than 18, b) wants to sell at no less than 17
382 2011-06-24 01:31:33 Teslah has joined
383 2011-06-24 01:31:33 <samlander> people get tired of waiting and adust their prices to go within range of a sale or buy
384 2011-06-24 01:31:41 <upb> it works like a limit order on stock market
385 2011-06-24 01:31:47 <ericmock> I think that's the implicit assumption made
386 2011-06-24 01:31:49 Lexa has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
387 2011-06-24 01:31:53 <xtalmath> QUESTION: i never used mtgox, is the interface A) you have BTC and can convert it at rate mtgox offers or B) you see an order book of bids and asks and you can accept open bids and asks
388 2011-06-24 01:32:04 <samlander> neither
389 2011-06-24 01:32:11 <samlander> you enter what you're willing to sell for
390 2011-06-24 01:32:12 <ericmock> xtalmath: there's an order book
391 2011-06-24 01:32:15 <xtalmath> explain what it looks like
392 2011-06-24 01:32:30 <samlander> eric: yes, but it's not like you get to pick and choose.. it's automated
393 2011-06-24 01:32:42 <upb> its a bid/ask orderbook with only limit orders
394 2011-06-24 01:32:49 <xtalmath> ok I see
395 2011-06-24 01:32:49 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
396 2011-06-24 01:32:55 <samlander> upb: ding
397 2011-06-24 01:32:56 <xtalmath> that should never be allowed
398 2011-06-24 01:32:57 <ericmock> samlander: sure
399 2011-06-24 01:33:08 <samlander> xtal: why not
400 2011-06-24 01:33:13 <samlander> i think it works brilliantly
401 2011-06-24 01:33:20 <xtalmath> i mean its unacceptable from user view, only reason to accept it is its one of few exchanges
402 2011-06-24 01:33:24 Carandiru has joined
403 2011-06-24 01:33:32 <samlander> xtal: how is it unacceptable?
404 2011-06-24 01:33:36 <xtalmath> because its asking to get fucked by mtgox
405 2011-06-24 01:33:40 molecular has joined
406 2011-06-24 01:33:43 <samlander> i dont see that
407 2011-06-24 01:34:04 <samlander> and keep in mind im not a fan boi.. im pissed as hell at mark right now
408 2011-06-24 01:34:17 <samlander> but the system works well
409 2011-06-24 01:34:22 <samlander> when it's fuggin up that is
410 2011-06-24 01:34:28 <xtalmath> people trade how they valuate something, if your source of valuation (any values or graphs displayed) is the same source that processes your trades...
411 2011-06-24 01:34:52 <samlander> ADAM dammit man.. come back to keys... if you're not going to let me log in at least promise to erase my order book before you start trading again
412 2011-06-24 01:35:15 <accel> A wants to buy BTC at $18.00. B wants to sell BTC at $17.00. What prevents mtgox from selling a BTC to A at $18.00; buying a BTC from B at $17.00, and making a $1.00 profit automatically, in addition to fees ?
413 2011-06-24 01:35:22 <samlander> xtalmath: im sorry, were you under the assumption this was the DOW JONES?
414 2011-06-24 01:35:32 <samlander> xtalmath: gox is the biggest because their system *works*
415 2011-06-24 01:35:34 <ericmock> when mt gox is running, http://bitcoin.clarkmoody.com/order-book/ is a nice site for tracking orders
416 2011-06-24 01:35:48 <samlander> accel: ethics
417 2011-06-24 01:35:50 <xtalmath> just imagine you control the displayed value, and a small sinusoid nois and you can use quadrature and slowly rip off the mtgox users as a whole
418 2011-06-24 01:36:10 <samlander> xtalmath: there is no question he could be a complete asshole and milk the system dry
419 2011-06-24 01:36:14 <samlander> xtalmath: but he doesnt
420 2011-06-24 01:36:21 <xtalmath> how do you know?
421 2011-06-24 01:36:23 <ericmock> accel: there's usually more of a continuum of orders than that
422 2011-06-24 01:36:32 <samlander> xtalmath: because he's built a reputation and in on track to making MILLIONS of dollars from fees alone this year
423 2011-06-24 01:36:38 <samlander> why would you fuck that up by doing shady deals?
424 2011-06-24 01:36:55 <gjs278> implying anyone is going to use mtgox after this
425 2011-06-24 01:36:57 <xtalmath> hes making millions of dollars on fees,... so he s not ripping us off?
426 2011-06-24 01:37:07 <samlander> gjs278: look at the volume in the smaller markets
427 2011-06-24 01:37:17 <samlander> gjs278: i've no question that they stillr etain the lions share
428 2011-06-24 01:37:27 <xtalmath> why would you not if it "proves" even more hes not ripping you off?
429 2011-06-24 01:37:27 <samlander> xtalmath: no he's not ripping us off
430 2011-06-24 01:37:33 <samlander> fucks sake
431 2011-06-24 01:37:36 <xtalmath> :D jk
432 2011-06-24 01:37:40 <samlander> ignored
433 2011-06-24 01:38:04 <accel> how big is the mtgox team?
434 2011-06-24 01:38:10 <samlander> 2 people
435 2011-06-24 01:38:24 <accel> so 2 people + a couple sql databases ...
436 2011-06-24 01:38:30 <accel> and they're making millions from bitcoin transactions?
437 2011-06-24 01:38:32 <ericmock> other exchanges are coming online... http://hellobitcoin.com, etc.
438 2011-06-24 01:38:34 <upb> eehhee )
439 2011-06-24 01:38:37 <xtalmath> how do you even know you get the same values and graphs as me?
440 2011-06-24 01:38:46 <upb> indeed, you dont
441 2011-06-24 01:38:56 <upb> the broker and the exchange are one :)
442 2011-06-24 01:39:05 <xtalmath> yep
443 2011-06-24 01:39:51 Lexa has joined
444 2011-06-24 01:40:22 <accel> are they located in the US?
445 2011-06-24 01:40:26 gim has quit (Quit: Leaving)
446 2011-06-24 01:40:27 <accel> given how hard paypal was to start
447 2011-06-24 01:40:31 <ericmock> is his fee in btc or usd?
448 2011-06-24 01:40:34 <accel> I don't see how these guys have the proper licenses
449 2011-06-24 01:40:35 <ericmock> Japan
450 2011-06-24 01:40:42 <xtalmath> how do you even know a crash occured at all? suppose he sells secret premium accounts to those who also have a lot of money, they dont see crashes you do, you sell, tadaa
451 2011-06-24 01:40:43 wolfspraul has joined
452 2011-06-24 01:40:56 <samlander> how do you license somehing that doesnt 'live' anywhere in specific?
453 2011-06-24 01:41:16 <accel> well, Im pretty sure, in teh US
454 2011-06-24 01:41:25 <accel> it's illegal for me to wake up one morning and decide to create Accel's bank
455 2011-06-24 01:41:25 Heston_ has joined
456 2011-06-24 01:41:28 <ericmock> xtalmath: I think a lot of those questions are why people want more answers about this hack, and the mystery rich idiot
457 2011-06-24 01:41:30 <accel> which is just a couple rows in a sql database
458 2011-06-24 01:41:43 Leo_II has joined
459 2011-06-24 01:41:59 <xtalmath> common sense says that BTC=/=mtgoxBTC bitcoincharts shows the exchangecurrencies with respect to "BTC" but its exchangeBTCs
460 2011-06-24 01:42:08 Heston has quit (Disconnected by services)
461 2011-06-24 01:42:14 Heston_ is now known as heston
462 2011-06-24 01:42:16 fnord0 has joined
463 2011-06-24 01:42:20 heston is now known as Heston
464 2011-06-24 01:42:33 Heston has quit (Changing host)
465 2011-06-24 01:42:33 Heston has joined
466 2011-06-24 01:42:44 <ericmock> seriously, is his fee taken in btc or usd?
467 2011-06-24 01:42:47 <xtalmath> also, how can you really be buying BTC if the blockchain only updates every 10 minutes, the values that change on the market... are what?
468 2011-06-24 01:42:53 <accel> ask = what someone is willing to sell a BTC for, bid = what someone is willing to buy at BTC at?
469 2011-06-24 01:43:11 <samlander> ericmock: both
470 2011-06-24 01:43:15 <accel> xtalmath: in my understanding, when you buy at one of these exchagnes, they just update their internal rows
471 2011-06-24 01:43:28 segfault64 has joined
472 2011-06-24 01:43:31 <tcatm> xtalmath: well I think everybody is perfectly aware that buying happens with bitcoins in the exchanges' databases
473 2011-06-24 01:43:33 <accel> xtalmath: the BTCs do not get block chain updated until the money is transfered out; --- this is all from forum reading
474 2011-06-24 01:43:47 <xtalmath> whats a better excuse to cover this all up than to claim you were hacked... by someone from within the community!!!
475 2011-06-24 01:43:48 Taveren93HGK has quit ()
476 2011-06-24 01:43:50 * ericmock 's money is on mtgox itself being the mystery rich idiot
477 2011-06-24 01:44:26 DukeOfURL has joined
478 2011-06-24 01:44:29 DukeOfURL has quit (Client Quit)
479 2011-06-24 01:44:57 <xtalmath> tcatm: but they dont connect the dots that this means they are not trading in BTC community, just the people who are using mtgoxservice at the same time, influencing each others valuation of mtgoxbtc by staring at some graphs
480 2011-06-24 01:45:08 <xtalmath> up or down?
481 2011-06-24 01:45:17 vragnaroda has joined
482 2011-06-24 01:45:38 MC1984 has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
483 2011-06-24 01:45:41 <tcatm> xtalmath: erm, have you ever traded stock/forex?
484 2011-06-24 01:45:55 <xtalmath> same thing
485 2011-06-24 01:46:11 <tcatm> same thing as bitcoin trading, yes
486 2011-06-24 01:46:15 <kunnis> plus all the transactions would spam the blockchain :)
487 2011-06-24 01:46:27 <accel> why was the bitcoin protocol designed in a way
488 2011-06-24 01:46:29 MC1984 has joined
489 2011-06-24 01:46:31 <xtalmath> tcatm: not as bitcoin trading mtgoxBTC trading remember
490 2011-06-24 01:46:32 afed_ is now known as afed
491 2011-06-24 01:46:33 <accel> that can't hanle lots of transactions?
492 2011-06-24 01:46:34 mtrlt has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
493 2011-06-24 01:46:36 <tcatm> xtalmath: you basically have a bitcoin (and usd) account at the exchange and then trade within their database
494 2011-06-24 01:46:54 <phrontist> accel: it's a matter of inherent difficulty
495 2011-06-24 01:47:06 <xtalmath> so you are trading possesion of mtgoxBTC and mtgoxUSD
496 2011-06-24 01:47:18 <phrontist> it can handle a pretty astonishing number of transactions
497 2011-06-24 01:47:21 <kunnis> I'm willing to bet it's actually a matter of not paying transaction fees to the blockchain, while still getting everything executed
498 2011-06-24 01:47:36 <accel> phrontist: I don't see why having more transactions makes finding new blocks ahrder
499 2011-06-24 01:47:37 <kunnis> why pay transaction fees if you don't have to?
500 2011-06-24 01:47:42 <tcatm> xtalmath: no. you wouldn't be trading tcatmBTC either if you bought something with BTC from me
501 2011-06-24 01:47:45 <xtalmath> either way this is -dev and i dont feel like going to bitcoin to talk dev
502 2011-06-24 01:47:51 <accel> phrontist: in fact, i'm fairly convinced it's independent
503 2011-06-24 01:47:53 <phrontist> accel: have you read the satoshi paper?
504 2011-06-24 01:47:56 <accel> phrontist: I have
505 2011-06-24 01:48:01 evolute has joined
506 2011-06-24 01:48:10 <phrontist> each transaction requires some proof of work
507 2011-06-24 01:48:11 <accel> phrontist: it's a matter of finding some string such that conacenating it + taking the sha256 sum
508 2011-06-24 01:48:15 Lenovo01 has joined
509 2011-06-24 01:48:16 <accel> the value of smaller than some "difficulty value"
510 2011-06-24 01:48:17 gsathya has left ()
511 2011-06-24 01:48:21 <xtalmath> tcatm: according to some (close to dirty transactions etc) that actually IS the case
512 2011-06-24 01:48:29 kermit has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
513 2011-06-24 01:48:30 <accel> since sha256 is pseudorandom ... it should be independent of how long the transction is
514 2011-06-24 01:48:34 <accel> phrontist: what's your reasoning?
515 2011-06-24 01:49:16 <phrontist> accel: no, sorry, I misunderstood your statement - more transactions will not be computationally more difficult from the perspective of a single node
516 2011-06-24 01:49:19 kermit has joined
517 2011-06-24 01:49:24 <phrontist> to authenticate
518 2011-06-24 01:49:43 wolfspraul has quit (Quit: leaving)
519 2011-06-24 01:49:44 segfault64 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
520 2011-06-24 01:49:48 <accel> phrontist: where do you consider the bottleneck to be?
521 2011-06-24 01:49:56 <phrontist> bottleneck?
522 2011-06-24 01:50:16 <phrontist> sorry - I just jumped into the conversation
523 2011-06-24 01:50:31 <phrontist> are you asking why mtgox and the like don't do everything through the blockchain?
524 2011-06-24 01:50:39 <accel> question: why can't the blockchain handle more transactions?
525 2011-06-24 01:50:47 <phrontist> ah
526 2011-06-24 01:50:56 <accel> I think exchanges avoid it (1) for fees (2) to not wait 10 minutes
527 2011-06-24 01:51:19 <accel> but i'm curious if the algorithm has a fundamental limit on how many transactions it can handle per block
528 2011-06-24 01:51:32 <phrontist> as the difficulty factor is increased, it takes a bit longer to get each bblock
529 2011-06-24 01:51:39 DukeOfURL has joined
530 2011-06-24 01:51:52 <phrontist> the difficutly factor is increased to keep the system secure
531 2011-06-24 01:52:05 <phrontist> that is, to prevent some three letter agency from running a competing mining operation
532 2011-06-24 01:52:06 mtrlt has joined
533 2011-06-24 01:52:10 <phrontist> and splitting the block-chain
534 2011-06-24 01:52:26 <phrontist> the perceived slowness of the network has nothing to do with the number of transactions
535 2011-06-24 01:52:32 <accel> err, i'm prety sure there are atleast 3 three-letter agencies that each have more computational power than the entire bitcoin network
536 2011-06-24 01:52:50 Lenovo01 has quit (Client Quit)
537 2011-06-24 01:52:59 <phrontist> I use that as a tounge-in-cheek american-libertarian-parody example
538 2011-06-24 01:53:07 <phrontist> I just mean "nefarious forces"
539 2011-06-24 01:53:30 <accel> sure
540 2011-06-24 01:53:36 <phrontist> but yes, as I understand it the whole system could be sped up dramatically
541 2011-06-24 01:53:36 <accel> so you're also not aware of any technical reasons
542 2011-06-24 01:53:38 freakazoid has quit (Quit: Textual IRC Client: http://www.textualapp.com/)
543 2011-06-24 01:53:41 T_X has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
544 2011-06-24 01:53:42 <accel> that limits the number of transactions
545 2011-06-24 01:53:44 <accel> per block?
546 2011-06-24 01:53:51 <phrontist> no
547 2011-06-24 01:53:57 xelister has joined
548 2011-06-24 01:54:09 <phrontist> I haven't read all the code
549 2011-06-24 01:54:15 freakazoid has joined
550 2011-06-24 01:54:26 <phrontist> but I very much doubt there is any limitation to the implementation
551 2011-06-24 01:54:38 DukeOfURL has quit (Client Quit)
552 2011-06-24 01:54:40 <phrontist> and there is certainly no algorithmic limitation, as you've identified
553 2011-06-24 01:54:48 <phrontist> though hashing will take more time with more data
554 2011-06-24 01:54:51 <kunnis> As a question, why are new blocks only done every 10 mins? Why was that number chosen?
555 2011-06-24 01:54:53 <phrontist> so each attempt gets a little slower
556 2011-06-24 01:55:07 <phrontist> kunnis: are they?
557 2011-06-24 01:55:21 <phrontist> I thought it was a probablistic thing that ends up being, on average, 10 minutes
558 2011-06-24 01:55:21 <accel> it is
559 2011-06-24 01:55:28 <accel> the hardness is adjusted so that ona verage
560 2011-06-24 01:55:31 <kunnis> well the difficulty is adjusted so that it takes 10 minutes.
561 2011-06-24 01:55:32 <accel> it's 10 minutes for a new block
562 2011-06-24 01:55:34 <phrontist> ah
563 2011-06-24 01:55:49 <phrontist> I knew it was adjusted, didn't know it was done so for time
564 2011-06-24 01:55:56 <accel> it is, every N blocks
565 2011-06-24 01:56:00 <accel> everyone gets together and is like
566 2011-06-24 01:56:03 <phrontist> they probably figured that was a reasonable tradeoff between latency and security
567 2011-06-24 01:56:05 <kunnis> yeah, that's why you hear people talk about the difficulty increases
568 2011-06-24 01:56:07 <accel> how many gigahashes can we, as a community, do
569 2011-06-24 01:56:17 <kunnis> <@gribble> Current Blocks: 132950 | Current Difficulty: 877226.66666667 | Next Difficulty At Block: 133055 | Next Difficulty In: 105 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 10 hours, 9 minutes, and 0 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1368778.81272354
570 2011-06-24 01:56:39 <phrontist> but difficulty is adjusted automatically, right?
571 2011-06-24 01:56:49 <phrontist> it's not literally a human-consensus thing, is it?
572 2011-06-24 01:57:01 <kunnis> Yeah, it's all automatic
573 2011-06-24 01:57:06 * phrontist wipes off brow
574 2011-06-24 01:57:11 <accel> bitcoin uses sha256 right?
575 2011-06-24 01:57:17 <lfm> accel: slightly over 1e13 hash/sec
576 2011-06-24 01:57:18 <freakazoid> it's based on the rate at which coins are being generated
577 2011-06-24 01:57:21 <accel> where can I read pseudocode for sha256 ?
578 2011-06-24 01:57:24 <xtalmath> did somebody graph supply inflation of bitcoins? i.e. irrespective of what users value BTC, the inflation of BTC over time because its being minted deterministally?
579 2011-06-24 01:57:25 <freakazoid> at the previous difficulty level
580 2011-06-24 01:57:46 <phrontist> xtalmath: yeah, it's in the satoshi paper
581 2011-06-24 01:57:51 <xtalmath> i.e. not total BTC over time, but inflation, i could calculate it though
582 2011-06-24 01:57:56 <xtalmath> it is?
583 2011-06-24 01:57:59 <lfm> accel try ifips for the standard paper
584 2011-06-24 01:58:06 <kunnis> but inflation I think is a poor term to descirbe that effect. It's how fast bitcoins will be created, but that's not inflation.
585 2011-06-24 01:58:14 <freakazoid> accel: http://tinyurl.com/62fowsm
586 2011-06-24 01:58:17 <lfm> accel fips
587 2011-06-24 01:58:17 <xelister> accel: wikipedia
588 2011-06-24 01:58:18 <phrontist> uh, if you're ignoring human value, isn't "inflation" just the reciprocal of BTC over time?
589 2011-06-24 01:58:24 <accel> lfm: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SHA-2#SHA-256_.28a_SHA-2_variant.29_pseudocode is also nice :-)
590 2011-06-24 01:58:33 <freakazoid> phrontist: haha no
591 2011-06-24 01:58:47 <freakazoid> phrontist: people have claimed it was the reciprocal of the gold price too
592 2011-06-24 01:58:54 <accel> freakazoid: nice; thanks :-)
593 2011-06-24 01:59:07 <freakazoid> phrontist: if you're ignoring "human value", inflation has no meaning
594 2011-06-24 01:59:10 <phrontist> freakazoid: so... what is this meaning of inflation you intend?
595 2011-06-24 01:59:20 <phrontist> freakazoid: sure
596 2011-06-24 01:59:24 <lfm> phrontist: bitcoin is subjet to speculation too
597 2011-06-24 01:59:30 <phrontist> but xtalmath seems to think otherwise?
598 2011-06-24 01:59:40 <phrontist> that is to say, he has some other usage for "inflation"
599 2011-06-24 01:59:49 <phrontist> "did somebody graph supply inflation of bitcoins? i.e. irrespective of what users value BTC"
600 2011-06-24 02:00:01 <freakazoid> phrontist: when I say it I usually mean a rise in the ratio of circulating currency relative to the total value of goods and services purchased with that currency
601 2011-06-24 02:00:17 <phrontist> ah
602 2011-06-24 02:00:30 <phrontist> as I recall there is a techical term econmetricists use for that
603 2011-06-24 02:00:40 <xelister> what was that constant to convert MH/sec into attempts/sec ?
604 2011-06-24 02:00:42 <freakazoid> well econometricists are frauds anyway
605 2011-06-24 02:00:57 <freakazoid> so you might as well ignore them
606 2011-06-24 02:01:04 <phrontist> freakazoid: let me guess, you have a raging hardon for hayek or something?
607 2011-06-24 02:01:05 <picci> phantomcircuit: win7
608 2011-06-24 02:01:06 <xtalmath> phrontist: inflation reciprocal of total bitcoins? are kidding?
609 2011-06-24 02:01:07 <phrontist> :-)
610 2011-06-24 02:01:07 <lfm> like numerology
611 2011-06-24 02:01:09 <kunnis> xelister Yeah 1MH/sec is 1,000,000 attempts/second
612 2011-06-24 02:01:17 <freakazoid> phrontist: no, just a brain
613 2011-06-24 02:01:19 <phrontist> xtalmath: I was just trying to understand your usage above
614 2011-06-24 02:01:33 <phrontist> i.e. "inflation irrespective of human value"
615 2011-06-24 02:01:36 <freakazoid> phrontist: a lot of fields spend the majority of their time trying to justify their existence
616 2011-06-24 02:01:54 <xtalmath> yep, I dont claim its usefull characteristic just curious what it would be
617 2011-06-24 02:01:58 <freakazoid> phrontist: and a bunch of people wanted the government to pay them for doing nothing useful, so they pretended they could measure the economy
618 2011-06-24 02:02:10 <freakazoid> phrontist: they are no different than the astrologers of old
619 2011-06-24 02:02:30 <phrontist> freakazoid: if you whois me you'll see I'm in DC. I have friends who do econometrics for assorted government agencies - they serve a useful descriptive role, I'd say.
620 2011-06-24 02:02:37 <freakazoid> phrontist: haha
621 2011-06-24 02:02:46 <xtalmath> and it actually is true inflation IF everybody used solely bitcoin
622 2011-06-24 02:02:49 <freakazoid> phrontist: of course you think that. It's hard to tell your friends their jobs are useless.
623 2011-06-24 02:03:11 <xelister> kunnis: no.... is it?
624 2011-06-24 02:03:13 <freakazoid> phrontist: also, you can tolerate living in DC, the epicenter of parasitism in the US
625 2011-06-24 02:03:14 <lfm> true most of the great astronomers back thru history were astrologers on the side to make money
626 2011-06-24 02:03:16 <phrontist> freakazoid: I actually did tell them this on several occasions
627 2011-06-24 02:03:20 KBme has joined
628 2011-06-24 02:03:31 <xelister> kunnis: nah it different. 1 mhash ~= 1 attempt/hour
629 2011-06-24 02:04:10 <phrontist> and after some discussion I realized that they have a very banal role to play in the administration of government purchasing a such
630 2011-06-24 02:04:25 <freakazoid> lfm: heh, that would tend to imply that people who want to study economics for a living become econometrists on the side to make money
631 2011-06-24 02:04:31 <freakazoid> lfm: which I totally believe
632 2011-06-24 02:04:34 Teslah has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
633 2011-06-24 02:04:41 <lfm> xelister: nope 1 mhash is 1 million attempt/sec
634 2011-06-24 02:04:47 <lfm> xelister: nope 1 mhash is 1 million attempt
635 2011-06-24 02:04:57 Teslah has joined
636 2011-06-24 02:05:05 <xelister> lfm: ATTEMPTS
637 2011-06-24 02:05:07 <xelister> not hashes
638 2011-06-24 02:05:13 <lfm> xelister: 1 hash is 1 attempt
639 2011-06-24 02:05:16 <freakazoid> phrontist: care to give an example?
640 2011-06-24 02:05:17 <accel> how does attempt and hash differ?
641 2011-06-24 02:05:18 <xelister> no
642 2011-06-24 02:05:25 <freakazoid> phrontist: I can be convinced I'm wrong.
643 2011-06-24 02:05:33 <lfm> xelist every attempt is a possible win
644 2011-06-24 02:05:33 <xelister> lfm: TARGET = 0x00000000FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFL
645 2011-06-24 02:05:34 sgstair has joined
646 2011-06-24 02:05:37 <xelister> this attempts
647 2011-06-24 02:05:40 <phrontist> freakazoid: the consumer price index?
648 2011-06-24 02:05:53 <freakazoid> phrontist: Oh, ok. You've convinced me I was right.
649 2011-06-24 02:06:00 <freakazoid> They're totally astrologers.
650 2011-06-24 02:06:01 <sacarlson> xtalmath: bitcoin is a deflationary currency
651 2011-06-24 02:06:38 <phrontist> freakazoid: elaborate?
652 2011-06-24 02:06:48 <freakazoid> phrontist: The CPI is nonsense.
653 2011-06-24 02:06:52 <lfm> xelister: we have not made that many attepts total since bitcoin started
654 2011-06-24 02:06:56 <freakazoid> every time it starts to embarrass the government they change it
655 2011-06-24 02:07:08 <xelister> lfm: you have no idea what Im talking about. meh
656 2011-06-24 02:07:11 jsnyder has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
657 2011-06-24 02:07:14 <xtalmath> sacarison: true in the real world, I was making the approximation of bitcoin only, and before its final state years from now
658 2011-06-24 02:07:16 <phrontist> freakazoid: not useful for measuring, uh, what things cost?
659 2011-06-24 02:07:18 dbasch_ has quit (Quit: dbasch_)
660 2011-06-24 02:07:20 <lfm> xelist you mean shares?
661 2011-06-24 02:07:32 <freakazoid> phrontist: No, it's not.
662 2011-06-24 02:07:36 <lfm> xelister you mean shares?
663 2011-06-24 02:07:38 <freakazoid> phrontist: Nor was it ever intended to do that.
664 2011-06-24 02:07:42 Teslah has quit (Client Quit)
665 2011-06-24 02:07:58 dfc has joined
666 2011-06-24 02:08:01 Teslah has joined
667 2011-06-24 02:08:15 <xelister> lfm: yea
668 2011-06-24 02:08:28 <freakazoid> phrontist: are you familiar with hedonic adjustment?
669 2011-06-24 02:08:35 <lfm> ok 2^32 hash -> 1 share
670 2011-06-24 02:08:50 <freakazoid> phrontist: the CPI considers a car with a donut spare to be $500 more car than a car with a full-size spare
671 2011-06-24 02:08:59 dbasch_ has joined
672 2011-06-24 02:09:03 <phrontist> freakazoid: in the sense of "the hedonic treadmill"?
673 2011-06-24 02:09:10 <freakazoid> phrontist: so if cars went up $500 but they all switched to donut spares, that would be considered 0 inflation
674 2011-06-24 02:09:33 T_X has joined
675 2011-06-24 02:09:38 <xelister> lfm: ok
676 2011-06-24 02:09:44 <freakazoid> phrontist: hedonic adjustment is a technique they use to finesse the CPI down to whatever level they want
677 2011-06-24 02:09:45 <phrontist> is this where I should be appalled at their ignorance?
678 2011-06-24 02:09:51 <phrontist> ah
679 2011-06-24 02:10:01 * phrontist shrugs
680 2011-06-24 02:10:07 <freakazoid> phrontist: they find a bunch of improvements that have been made, slap arbitrary values on them, and subtract that number from the price
681 2011-06-24 02:10:41 <phrontist> my understanding was that they tried to find similar products where those improvements had not been made to arrive at their "arbitrary values"
682 2011-06-24 02:10:43 <freakazoid> so in spite of the fact that I can't get a car for $5000, that's ok because I'm really getting 30k worth of car when I spend 11k on one
683 2011-06-24 02:10:50 <freakazoid> never mind that I can't get to work
684 2011-06-24 02:10:57 <sacarlson> freakazoid: but how much did a bottle of beer cost 10 years ago?
685 2011-06-24 02:11:04 <freakazoid> sacarlson: what do I look like, Google?
686 2011-06-24 02:11:08 dfc has quit (Client Quit)
687 2011-06-24 02:11:30 <freakazoid> phrontist: there is nothing remotely scientific about the CPI
688 2011-06-24 02:11:42 <lfm> can sorta measure inflation statisicly with a sampling of products, compare old price to new price.
689 2011-06-24 02:11:51 <sacarlson> freakazoid: you must be young and not remember I use that to judge inflation and when I travel how much a currency will buy
690 2011-06-24 02:11:53 TheSeven has quit (Disconnected by services)
691 2011-06-24 02:12:01 [7] has joined
692 2011-06-24 02:12:16 <freakazoid> sacarlson: No, I've just never paid attention to the price of beer.
693 2011-06-24 02:12:17 <phrontist> freakazoid: I don't think science (if by that you mean something like physics) is a good point of reference for this kind of thing
694 2011-06-24 02:12:22 B0g4r7_ has joined
695 2011-06-24 02:12:25 <freakazoid> sacarlson: also the taxes on beer have gone up over tme
696 2011-06-24 02:12:29 <sacarlson> freakazoid: I know you drink milk
697 2011-06-24 02:12:34 FellowTraveler has left ()
698 2011-06-24 02:12:35 <freakazoid> phrontist: right, because it's not science. It's astrology.
699 2011-06-24 02:12:36 <lfm> sacarlson: exchange rate can be very different from inflation
700 2011-06-24 02:12:46 <freakazoid> sacarlson: yeah but I don't pay attention to the price of it
701 2011-06-24 02:13:04 <sacarlson> freakazoid: what do yo know the value of?
702 2011-06-24 02:13:11 Teslah has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
703 2011-06-24 02:13:15 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
704 2011-06-24 02:13:15 <freakazoid> houses, cars, gas
705 2011-06-24 02:13:15 B0g4r7_ is now known as B0g4r7
706 2011-06-24 02:13:18 <phrontist> freakazoid: that seems a bit reductive, to say the least
707 2011-06-24 02:13:28 <lfm> can sorta measure inflation statisticly with a sampling of products, compare old prices to new prices.
708 2011-06-24 02:13:38 <freakazoid> phrontist: yeah but what if I'm right?
709 2011-06-24 02:13:39 <sacarlson> lfm: yes but I assume the judge inflation buy how much things change in price over time
710 2011-06-24 02:13:58 <phrontist> freakazoid: right or wrong, science or astrology, 0 or 1
711 2011-06-24 02:14:06 <phrontist> big on the sharp division, aren't you?
712 2011-06-24 02:14:19 <freakazoid> So you're saying it's a little bit useful
713 2011-06-24 02:14:20 rynx has quit (Ping timeout: 263 seconds)
714 2011-06-24 02:14:24 <unclemantis> how many confirmations should I wait for until I can call a transaction safe?
715 2011-06-24 02:14:32 <phrontist> I'm saying it's fairly useful, yeah
716 2011-06-24 02:14:33 <freakazoid> what good is a number that is just a bunch of guesses stacked on guesses?
717 2011-06-24 02:14:43 <lfm> sacarlson: you need to be very carefull trying to measure it, just one person's point of veiw can be subject to large errors
718 2011-06-24 02:14:48 <phrontist> freakazoid: tons of good
719 2011-06-24 02:14:52 <phrontist> I used to work in aerospace
720 2011-06-24 02:14:56 <freakazoid> I came to the conclusion several years ago that all you could look at is individual prices of commodities
721 2011-06-24 02:14:57 jimrandomh has joined
722 2011-06-24 02:15:01 <phrontist> guesses stacked on guesses keep you in the air :-)
723 2011-06-24 02:15:12 <sacarlson> lfm: I'm sure there is no perfect measure only an estimate
724 2011-06-24 02:15:14 <freakazoid> yeah but you can actually measure
725 2011-06-24 02:15:21 <freakazoid> what happens when they're wrong about the CPI? nothing.
726 2011-06-24 02:15:25 <freakazoid> they *can't* be wrong about the CPI
727 2011-06-24 02:15:26 segfault64 has joined
728 2011-06-24 02:15:51 <lfm> sacarlson: mainly there is no perfect measure cuz people (even economists) dont agree on a definition
729 2011-06-24 02:15:52 <freakazoid> sure, they can apply their methods incorrectly, but there's no way to test if their method actually does a good job of reflecting people's cost of living
730 2011-06-24 02:15:53 <phrontist> they can in the sense that people stop using it
731 2011-06-24 02:16:03 <freakazoid> phrontist: people don't use it.
732 2011-06-24 02:16:05 <phrontist> the CPI is used by private financial folks
733 2011-06-24 02:16:08 <phrontist> sure it is.
734 2011-06-24 02:16:08 <freakazoid> phrontist: not outside of the government
735 2011-06-24 02:16:12 <freakazoid> who uses it?
736 2011-06-24 02:16:23 <freakazoid> for any reason other than looking at what TIPS are gonna pay?
737 2011-06-24 02:16:29 <phrontist> quants and such
738 2011-06-24 02:16:41 <freakazoid> another useless fucking industry
739 2011-06-24 02:16:46 <freakazoid> fighting over the last cent
740 2011-06-24 02:16:52 <freakazoid> while providing no value to anyone
741 2011-06-24 02:17:02 <phrontist> freakazoid: lets talk about what you do approve of :-)
742 2011-06-24 02:17:03 <freakazoid> pricing derivatives is great, but stop there
743 2011-06-24 02:17:12 <sacarlson> lfm: on and I came up with onother posible method to secure a micro (very small) block chain net using only licenced minners
744 2011-06-24 02:17:15 <phrontist> you're in -dev, so I take it you write software?
745 2011-06-24 02:17:20 <freakazoid> I do!
746 2011-06-24 02:17:24 <phrontist> what kind?
747 2011-06-24 02:17:45 <sacarlson> lfm: would that work?
748 2011-06-24 02:17:48 <freakazoid> I just released a Python wrapper for Dan Bernstein's NaCl crypto library
749 2011-06-24 02:18:02 <unclemantis> 6 blocks
750 2011-06-24 02:18:04 <unclemantis> :)
751 2011-06-24 02:18:04 <freakazoid> I've written a tiny little bit of Facebook
752 2011-06-24 02:18:18 <phrontist> you work for facebook?
753 2011-06-24 02:18:23 <freakazoid> wrote a substantial fraction of Membase's cluster management code
754 2011-06-24 02:18:26 <freakazoid> yeah
755 2011-06-24 02:18:29 <phrontist> jesus, now there is some economic activity that angers me :-)
756 2011-06-24 02:18:38 <freakazoid> what, our ridiculous valuation?
757 2011-06-24 02:18:39 <lfm> sacarlson: I dont know why youd want to do that. I spoze it could work if they all used the same hardware and software
758 2011-06-24 02:18:48 <phrontist> freakazoid: the whole walled-garden business model
759 2011-06-24 02:19:03 <freakazoid> phrontist: yeah it doesn't make me that happy either
760 2011-06-24 02:19:16 <phrontist> some douchey harvard kid redirects a good chunk of the world's email and photosharing through datacenters he controls
761 2011-06-24 02:19:34 <freakazoid> he doesn't seem very power mad to me
762 2011-06-24 02:19:37 <phrontist> is nearly universally lauded for advancing the culture
763 2011-06-24 02:19:42 <freakazoid> he just wants to help people share more easily
764 2011-06-24 02:19:55 <freakazoid> and it seems like people like it
765 2011-06-24 02:20:08 <phrontist> he could have easily put out some open standard that let people host their profiles wherever
766 2011-06-24 02:20:10 <freakazoid> so you should blame our users for not wanting us to be more open :)
767 2011-06-24 02:20:13 <phrontist> federating, in other words
768 2011-06-24 02:20:23 <freakazoid> he could have, but previous attempts to do that haven't exactly gotten traction
769 2011-06-24 02:20:29 <sacarlson> lfm: for example my very small weeds chain it's not secure as is not the testnet since an overpowered minner could corrupt it. but what if you only gave out a small number of licenses enuf to provide redundancy to trusted group
770 2011-06-24 02:20:44 <phrontist> freakazoid: I'm not aware of previous examples
771 2011-06-24 02:21:10 <freakazoid> phrontist: there was xfn and foaf
772 2011-06-24 02:21:22 <lfm> sacarlson: I dont understand why you dont use regular bitcoin
773 2011-06-24 02:21:48 <freakazoid> the problem is regular users aren't interested in standards, they're interested in UI
774 2011-06-24 02:21:59 <phrontist> freakazoid: I meant examples of companies taking them up
775 2011-06-24 02:22:14 <phrontist> myspace, friendster, and now facebook have each ignored them, no?
776 2011-06-24 02:22:19 <freakazoid> google has played around with foaf
777 2011-06-24 02:22:31 <freakazoid> I don't know if FB uses foaf
778 2011-06-24 02:22:52 <phrontist> message passing would be the important thing
779 2011-06-24 02:23:00 <freakazoid> well we DO support XMPP
780 2011-06-24 02:23:07 <sacarlson> lfm: because bitcoin is unstable in price and I want to try to make the Beertokens small block chain network secure to make a posible stable crypto currency
781 2011-06-24 02:23:14 <phrontist> freakazoid: that's news to me
782 2011-06-24 02:23:19 <freakazoid> the people here definitely aren't anti-open-source or walled-gardeny
783 2011-06-24 02:23:20 <phrontist> I'll have to check that out
784 2011-06-24 02:23:46 <phrontist> any talk of bitcoin at Facebook? :-)
785 2011-06-24 02:23:47 <sacarlson> lfm: or do you mean just use bitcoin linked transactions?
786 2011-06-24 02:23:53 <freakazoid> I haven't heard any
787 2011-06-24 02:24:11 <phrontist> don't they have some token system?
788 2011-06-24 02:24:15 <freakazoid> facebook has pretty much ONE ideal, which is to help people share stuff with their friends
789 2011-06-24 02:24:24 <freakazoid> it's hard to have more than one ideal as an organization
790 2011-06-24 02:24:40 <phrontist> well, that and an obligation to shareholders, surely
791 2011-06-24 02:24:54 <lfm> sacarlson: I dont think you can make price stable by makeing a SMALLER bitcoin system
792 2011-06-24 02:24:57 <sacarlson> lfm: there's even the posibility to run a faster network in this manner maybe 10 confirms per minit
793 2011-06-24 02:25:15 testx0r has joined
794 2011-06-24 02:25:18 <testx0r> #bitcoin-otc
795 2011-06-24 02:25:19 <freakazoid> phrontist: "provide value to the shareholders" has traditionally not been a very good ideal for a company, because it doesn't give you any sense of direction
796 2011-06-24 02:25:35 <freakazoid> phrontist: companies that lose site of their core mission (NOT "provide shareholder value" die
797 2011-06-24 02:25:38 Teslah has joined
798 2011-06-24 02:25:57 <freakazoid> insertion of the closing parenthesis is left as an exercise for the reader.
799 2011-06-24 02:26:01 seventoes has quit (Quit: Linkinus - http://linkinus.com)
800 2011-06-24 02:26:08 <phrontist> that seems like a somewhat pollyanna view of capitalist behavior
801 2011-06-24 02:26:15 <sacarlson> lfm: no you can't but that parts taken care of in a different way with the beertokens exchange that acts like a private fed for The Trust http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=9493.msg138247#msg138247
802 2011-06-24 02:26:23 <phrontist> I mean, I don't think carnegie thought about mission statements :-)
803 2011-06-24 02:26:30 <freakazoid> phrontist: I'm not talking about morality
804 2011-06-24 02:26:37 <freakazoid> I'm just talking about what makes for successful companies
805 2011-06-24 02:26:41 <lfm> sacarlson: the real way you make price stable is take a huge wad of money and off a standard price for bitcoins then take a huge wad of btc and offer to sell them at nearly the same price (small profit margin is ok).
806 2011-06-24 02:26:45 <phrontist> neither am I
807 2011-06-24 02:26:53 <sacarlson> lfm: but at the begining the network is small so it doesn't have security like bitcoin has
808 2011-06-24 02:26:59 <phrontist> but it seems to me that quite a few companies do extremely well on the ideal of chasing whatever buck comes by
809 2011-06-24 02:27:01 <freakazoid> there was a study about this recently
810 2011-06-24 02:27:24 <phrontist> can't imagine how you'd study that
811 2011-06-24 02:27:28 <sacarlson> lfm: that's exactly what beertokens exchange does
812 2011-06-24 02:27:35 <freakazoid> phrontist: I'm sure there are examples of that, but if you don't sample on the dependent variable, you find that it's better to have a core mission
813 2011-06-24 02:28:16 <freakazoid> phrontist: i.e. companies that have a strong idea of who they are do better, on average, than companies that do as you say, chase whatever buck comes by
814 2011-06-24 02:28:20 traviscj has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
815 2011-06-24 02:28:32 <lfm> sacarlson: the "huge wad"s have to be quite large tho to not get blown away by the market
816 2011-06-24 02:28:36 <freakazoid> phrontist: Yahoo is a good example of a company that's lost its way
817 2011-06-24 02:28:42 <phrontist> but clearly facebook's putative "mission" of helping people share is sent into quite narrow channels by competition
818 2011-06-24 02:28:52 <sacarlson> lfm: the exchanges autobots buy up btc when it falls bellow the present value of what we want beertokens to be and starts to sell beertokens when btc becomes overpriced as compared to beertokens
819 2011-06-24 02:28:57 <freakazoid> phrontist: I don't understand what you mean, could you rephrase?
820 2011-06-24 02:28:58 traviscj has joined
821 2011-06-24 02:29:16 <phrontist> a system that would let competitors take users away, something more like openstatus, would lose them a hell of a lot of money
822 2011-06-24 02:29:30 <freakazoid> Oh, sure, you mean like publishing the whole social graph to the world?
823 2011-06-24 02:29:35 <phrontist> yeah
824 2011-06-24 02:29:40 <phrontist> just to start
825 2011-06-24 02:29:54 ZOP has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
826 2011-06-24 02:29:54 <freakazoid> Yeah, the mission is not just "help people share, in the short term, at any cost"
827 2011-06-24 02:29:56 <phrontist> I mean, at their core they're an advertising firm
828 2011-06-24 02:30:17 <sacarlson> lfm: the planed preminted beertokens shares are now at 29 billion units a hopefull amount to match the units of paypal float
829 2011-06-24 02:30:26 <freakazoid> I wouldn't say that's part of how we view ourselves
830 2011-06-24 02:30:28 <lfm> sacarlson: so you become the "issuer" and you pin the price to what you want. no need to actually change the software in such a case
831 2011-06-24 02:30:47 <phrontist> it's more like trying to come up with the most addictive way to commodify friendships to keep ad clickthroughs up
832 2011-06-24 02:30:56 jsnyder has joined
833 2011-06-24 02:31:02 <freakazoid> also, we make money on apps also
834 2011-06-24 02:31:04 <sacarlson> lfm: well then you don't know about the problems with double spending in testnet that I would have the same problem with when it was small
835 2011-06-24 02:31:06 <freakazoid> also also
836 2011-06-24 02:31:09 <freakazoid> and facebook credits
837 2011-06-24 02:31:13 <freakazoid> also
838 2011-06-24 02:31:47 <freakazoid> if you went back in time 50 years and tried to describe facebook to someone and you said "it's an advertising company" they would nod and think they knew what you were talking about but they would have no idea what Facebook is
839 2011-06-24 02:32:40 <phrontist> "it's like a phone company that will give you a hookup for free if they can insert ad blurbs into your calls"
840 2011-06-24 02:32:57 nobled has joined
841 2011-06-24 02:32:59 <freakazoid> wow I'm starting to get weird contacts on aim
842 2011-06-24 02:33:09 <freakazoid> "hi" from gptmafiaboyz and a wink from testgee
843 2011-06-24 02:33:33 <lfm> sacarlson: oh ok you dont really want bitcoin software at all then, you just want a cetrally issued currency that you print and only you can authorize txn. dont let ANYONE else run nodes
844 2011-06-24 02:34:18 <lfm> dont let enyone else run miners I mean, they can run nodes that dont mine
845 2011-06-24 02:35:28 <sacarlson> lfm: I just using a slightly modified version of bitcoin for this new chain
846 2011-06-24 02:36:03 <sacarlson> lfm: as I did to create weeds
847 2011-06-24 02:36:16 cosurgi has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
848 2011-06-24 02:37:23 Lenovo01 has joined
849 2011-06-24 02:37:43 <sacarlson> lfm: but you also put the work "you can" as all desision would fall on the group that hold The Trust
850 2011-06-24 02:37:47 <freakazoid> ah, spam bots
851 2011-06-24 02:37:53 <sacarlson> work = word
852 2011-06-24 02:38:30 <sacarlson> lfm: yall might work to replace you but yes
853 2011-06-24 02:39:06 <unclemantis> using testnet i performed a sendtoaddress and i did a listtransactions for the account i sent it to. The transaction is is there. When i did a getbalance for that account it comes up as 0.00000000 but when i do a getbalance for '' there is no change in balance either. Confirmations for the transactions are 0 and it has been a while. What's the deal? Why are confirmations not going up? I
854 2011-06-24 02:39:06 <unclemantis> have 2 instanances of bitcoind running like the testnet-in-a-box directions show. help. Thanks :)
855 2011-06-24 02:39:11 <lfm> sacarlson: so its not bitcoin, bitcoin software is wasted/overkill/doesnt make sense to me for what you want.
856 2011-06-24 02:40:20 <sacarlson> lfm: well to me bitcoin is still of value but I just thought there might be room for other posibilities, not only Beertokens, but they will all start small and need a way to be secure when they start
857 2011-06-24 02:40:35 <BitcoinForNewegg> souldnt mtgox be open now?
858 2011-06-24 02:41:16 <lfm> ya but it seems you dont want a distributed currency at all, you want a centralized currency. bitcoins is distributed
859 2011-06-24 02:41:18 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
860 2011-06-24 02:41:21 <sacarlson> lfm: beertokens is just a concept with room for change or complete rewrite
861 2011-06-24 02:41:39 Sylph has joined
862 2011-06-24 02:42:21 <sacarlson> lfm: so I'm puting these feature into my version of freecoin
863 2011-06-24 02:43:09 pyro_ has joined
864 2011-06-24 02:43:46 <lfm> sacarlson: freecoin? sounds more like slavecoin, you control price, you control how can mine. not free at all
865 2011-06-24 02:44:20 <sacarlson> lfm: if you read the article you would see that I suggested to hold 50 - 75% of the assets in BTC so I must have value for it
866 2011-06-24 02:44:42 <sacarlson> lfm: no freecoin is a multicrypto chain supported client
867 2011-06-24 02:44:59 pyro__ has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
868 2011-06-24 02:45:01 <sacarlson> lfm: you can create and it supports an infinite number of chains
869 2011-06-24 02:45:30 <sacarlson> lfm: including bitcoins testnet weeds beer
870 2011-06-24 02:46:01 <lfm> sacarlson: sorry, just sounds like buzzwords to me, doesnt sound like anything Id want to get anywhere near
871 2011-06-24 02:46:15 <sacarlson> lfm: with freecoin your group controls inflation as they desire without recompiling
872 2011-06-24 02:46:35 <lfm> sure! good luck with that!
873 2011-06-24 02:47:15 <sacarlson> lfm: yes we have a growing support group now we are having good luck
874 2011-06-24 02:48:47 <sacarlson> lfm: and thanks to grofer we will have p2p escrow incorporated very soon https://github.com/groffer/bitcoin/commit/83707c8dd4573bb958f9e504fb6263c8fa1ef942
875 2011-06-24 02:49:13 DiSTANT187 has joined
876 2011-06-24 02:50:22 <sacarlson> lfm: I guess you want us to be slaves to the developers of bitcoin?
877 2011-06-24 02:51:02 Fairuser is now known as AFK!~Fairuser@static-50-53-33-113.bvtn.or.frontiernet.net|Fairuser
878 2011-06-24 02:51:53 ezl_ has joined
879 2011-06-24 02:52:29 BlueMattBot has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
880 2011-06-24 02:52:32 accel has quit (Quit: leaving)
881 2011-06-24 02:53:21 RobboNZ has joined
882 2011-06-24 02:53:24 fpgaminer has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
883 2011-06-24 02:53:31 Lenovo01 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
884 2011-06-24 02:53:47 <lfm> sacarlson: hoh is that, it is open source?
885 2011-06-24 02:53:54 DiSTANT187 has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
886 2011-06-24 02:54:42 fpgaminer has joined
887 2011-06-24 02:55:31 <freakazoid> sacarlson: how do I download and compile the source code for your software?
888 2011-06-24 02:55:32 <sacarlson> lfm: yes opensource
889 2011-06-24 02:56:10 <lfm> sacarlson: the 50% of the computing power rule in bitcoin is a lot like the 50% vote rule in democracy. you may have tyrany of the majority but it still isnt dictatorship
890 2011-06-24 02:57:44 <sacarlson> lfm: this is my personal release but we also have a group release that isn't working yet https://github.com/sacarlson/freecoin
891 2011-06-24 02:58:32 <sacarlson> lfm: well with very little power a single entity can become a dictator
892 2011-06-24 02:58:57 <sacarlson> lfm: as my minner runs with only 300kh/sec to get one confirm every 10 min
893 2011-06-24 02:59:14 Sylph has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
894 2011-06-24 02:59:31 huk has joined
895 2011-06-24 02:59:49 segfault64 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
896 2011-06-24 03:00:36 <sacarlson> lfm: so in smaller scales you have to chose more trusted entites with more power
897 2011-06-24 03:01:02 <lfm> I dont think you have to
898 2011-06-24 03:01:18 <sacarlson> lfm: well that would be even better then how
899 2011-06-24 03:01:46 <lfm> do it like bitcoin, let people mine for reward, they will sign up in droves
900 2011-06-24 03:02:03 <lfm> let price float
901 2011-06-24 03:02:27 <sacarlson> lfm: it's been running now for 2 months I don't see them lineing up, trust isn't developed in a day
902 2011-06-24 03:03:14 <sacarlson> lfm: the price at present IS floating as stated in the rules of the bot since the rule uses mtgox data to set price and the feed is gone
903 2011-06-24 03:03:23 <lfm> true bitcoin has foothold, you arent BETTER so ...
904 2011-06-24 03:04:19 <sacarlson> lfm: so to start we start smaller and maybe later one or many others will catch on but they will all start small
905 2011-06-24 03:05:14 <sacarlson> lfm: I'm just going to try to provide the tools for the small ones to give it a try
906 2011-06-24 03:06:27 <sacarlson> and to allow on the edge stuf to be tested
907 2011-06-24 03:08:29 <sacarlson> lfm: by the way if you can find a way for people to lin up in droves for your chain you should create another one too
908 2011-06-24 03:10:26 BlueMattBot has joined
909 2011-06-24 03:12:14 alystair has joined
910 2011-06-24 03:15:13 ][nvisible1 has joined
911 2011-06-24 03:15:31 <][nvisible1> Hello Bitcoinians!
912 2011-06-24 03:17:13 copumpkin has joined
913 2011-06-24 03:17:14 dvide has joined
914 2011-06-24 03:17:20 huk has left ()
915 2011-06-24 03:17:50 Clipse has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
916 2011-06-24 03:18:54 egecko has quit (Quit: ~ Trillian Astra - www.trillian.im ~)
917 2011-06-24 03:19:54 pumpkin has joined
918 2011-06-24 03:20:10 ike-exe has joined
919 2011-06-24 03:21:03 DontMindMe has quit (Quit: Nettalk6 - www.ntalk.de)
920 2011-06-24 03:21:03 Cusipzzz has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.0.2 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
921 2011-06-24 03:21:43 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
922 2011-06-24 03:22:52 egecko has joined
923 2011-06-24 03:23:36 Clipse has joined
924 2011-06-24 03:24:45 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
925 2011-06-24 03:25:01 elnato is now known as midget
926 2011-06-24 03:25:22 midget is now known as elnato
927 2011-06-24 03:26:50 mmoya has joined
928 2011-06-24 03:27:08 Sylph has joined
929 2011-06-24 03:30:42 <nobled> hey, is there an option to pass to make to disable USE_UPNP when building?
930 2011-06-24 03:31:00 pumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
931 2011-06-24 03:31:05 <Backburn> USE_UPNP=
932 2011-06-24 03:31:10 <Backburn> just like that
933 2011-06-24 03:31:35 copumpkin has joined
934 2011-06-24 03:33:00 <nobled> ah, thanks
935 2011-06-24 03:33:03 TheZimm has joined
936 2011-06-24 03:35:19 ezl_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
937 2011-06-24 03:35:20 phearful has joined
938 2011-06-24 03:37:13 ezl_ has joined
939 2011-06-24 03:37:42 dbasch_ has quit (Quit: dbasch_)
940 2011-06-24 03:38:16 <nobled> is there a reason bitcoind links to gthread-2.0? it doesn't use glib does it?
941 2011-06-24 03:39:05 mrtnt1 has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
942 2011-06-24 03:40:27 Carandiru has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
943 2011-06-24 03:40:39 xtalmath has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
944 2011-06-24 03:44:42 eoss has joined
945 2011-06-24 03:46:13 dbitcoin has joined
946 2011-06-24 03:48:23 p0s has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
947 2011-06-24 03:54:13 sacarlson has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
948 2011-06-24 03:57:08 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
949 2011-06-24 04:00:56 <Optimo> anyone have any luck with gribble auth today?
950 2011-06-24 04:01:52 <Optimo> nvrmind I got it to work
951 2011-06-24 04:03:09 RazielZ has joined
952 2011-06-24 04:04:05 freakazoid has joined
953 2011-06-24 04:07:55 spirals has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
954 2011-06-24 04:09:06 sacarlson has joined
955 2011-06-24 04:18:42 AStove has joined
956 2011-06-24 04:19:01 phearful has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
957 2011-06-24 04:26:16 LameArse is now known as SuperArse
958 2011-06-24 04:26:36 DavidSJ has quit (Quit: DavidSJ)
959 2011-06-24 04:27:37 <SuperArse> When you need great shit to fall from the sky, call upon Super Arse, the all flying, all smoking, do nothing of steel!
960 2011-06-24 04:34:48 Teslah has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
961 2011-06-24 04:37:07 ezl_ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
962 2011-06-24 04:38:12 vragnaroda has quit (Quit: leaving)
963 2011-06-24 04:38:26 dbasch_ has joined
964 2011-06-24 04:39:10 mikejs has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
965 2011-06-24 04:39:34 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
966 2011-06-24 04:40:05 dbasch_ has quit (Client Quit)
967 2011-06-24 04:40:27 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
968 2011-06-24 04:40:27 koleg has joined
969 2011-06-24 04:41:02 mikejs has joined
970 2011-06-24 04:41:38 Beremaat has joined
971 2011-06-24 04:42:02 Beremat has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
972 2011-06-24 04:42:29 Gonzago has quit ()
973 2011-06-24 04:44:40 <CIA-103> bitcoin: James Burkle master * red2c014 / src/init.cpp : Edited init.cpp to include a check that -datadir exists - http://bit.ly/jYiscI
974 2011-06-24 04:44:41 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Jeff Garzik master * r77ba3ab / src/init.cpp :
975 2011-06-24 04:44:41 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Merge pull request #342 from jburkle/datadir_check
976 2011-06-24 04:44:41 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Edited init.cpp to include a check that -datadir exists - http://bit.ly/jkK0UT
977 2011-06-24 04:47:10 Netsniper has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
978 2011-06-24 04:59:16 devserial has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
979 2011-06-24 05:00:59 <sytse> wtf..
980 2011-06-24 05:01:34 * sytse learns for the first time that berkeley db is now called 'Oracle Berkeley DB 11gR2', and has SQL, XQuery and Java Object storage support....
981 2011-06-24 05:01:38 <sytse> nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
982 2011-06-24 05:02:13 <sytse> there is even a third party PL/SQL engine on top of berkeley db..
983 2011-06-24 05:06:02 ajcutshall has joined
984 2011-06-24 05:06:13 d1234 has joined
985 2011-06-24 05:07:52 <CIA-103> DiabloMiner: Patrick McFarland master * r5a3a372 / src/main/java/com/diablominer/DiabloMiner/DiabloMiner.java :
986 2011-06-24 05:07:52 <CIA-103> DiabloMiner: Finish async networking, now everything is async. getwork, sendwork, and
987 2011-06-24 05:07:52 <CIA-103> DiabloMiner: LP now use 1 thread per miner instance instead of 3 per GPU. - http://bit.ly/mGIome
988 2011-06-24 05:09:23 hipeopl is now known as hipeople
989 2011-06-24 05:09:33 bill_pepper has joined
990 2011-06-24 05:09:36 <bill_pepper> hello
991 2011-06-24 05:09:54 B0g4r7_ has joined
992 2011-06-24 05:10:00 <bill_pepper> only few of the bits of the sha2 hash is checked, right?
993 2011-06-24 05:10:09 <bill_pepper> for mining, that is
994 2011-06-24 05:10:29 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
995 2011-06-24 05:10:31 B0g4r7_ is now known as B0g4r7
996 2011-06-24 05:11:20 <jgarzik> bill_pepper: the mining check is "hash <= target", where hash and target are 256-bit integers
997 2011-06-24 05:11:42 <jgarzik> bill_pepper: most miners optimize to check simply the high 32 bits equal zero, leaving the rest of the check to upper layers of software
998 2011-06-24 05:12:24 devserial has joined
999 2011-06-24 05:12:47 <cacheson> jgarzik: has there been any progress on removing the forum from bitcoin.org? the place is getting worse every day
1000 2011-06-24 05:13:08 <jgarzik> cacheson: people keep going around and around in email :/
1001 2011-06-24 05:13:13 <jgarzik> cacheson: I agree w/ you
1002 2011-06-24 05:13:24 Sylph has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1003 2011-06-24 05:13:44 <cacheson> jgarzik: private emails, or on the mailing list?
1004 2011-06-24 05:14:00 dbasch_ has joined
1005 2011-06-24 05:14:28 dbasch_ has quit (Client Quit)
1006 2011-06-24 05:15:05 bill_pepper has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1007 2011-06-24 05:15:09 <jgarzik> cacheson: private emails among "most major people" that I could find
1008 2011-06-24 05:15:17 <cacheson> gotcha
1009 2011-06-24 05:15:44 <cacheson> well, I'm glad the issue at least hasn't been dropped. just hadn't heard much about it, so I was wondering
1010 2011-06-24 05:16:34 <jgarzik> cacheson: consensus seemed to be headed towards renaming current forum to forum.weusecoins.com, and replacing forum.bitcoin.org with something business friendly and moderated by someone with good PR sense
1011 2011-06-24 05:17:17 <JRWR> the current btc forums are kinda... slopy
1012 2011-06-24 05:17:37 <cacheson> jgarzik: heh, weusecoins seems like a nice site, it'd be a shame to dump this cesspool on it
1013 2011-06-24 05:18:43 crocopod has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1014 2011-06-24 05:19:10 <jrmithdobbs> jgarzik: i say remove the forum on bitcoin.org completely
1015 2011-06-24 05:19:18 <jrmithdobbs> there's a reason most major projects do not have one.
1016 2011-06-24 05:19:30 <cacheson> jrmithdobbs: that's what I've been hoping for
1017 2011-06-24 05:19:45 <jrmithdobbs> jgarzik: that shit is beyond cesspool levels
1018 2011-06-24 05:20:12 Netsniper has joined
1019 2011-06-24 05:20:50 <cacheson> people have already set up competing forums, they'd probably do a lot better if they didn't have to compete with something officially sanctioned
1020 2011-06-24 05:24:47 Heston has left ("Leaving")
1021 2011-06-24 05:25:01 <CIA-103> DiabloMiner: Patrick McFarland master * r2d0ed85 / src/main/java/com/diablominer/DiabloMiner/DiabloMiner.java :
1022 2011-06-24 05:25:01 <CIA-103> DiabloMiner: Move execution threads to 2 down from 3 since getwork can no longer
1023 2011-06-24 05:25:01 <CIA-103> DiabloMiner: block execution threads - http://bit.ly/lMmNSL
1024 2011-06-24 05:25:21 <go1dfish> I agree with removing the official forums
1025 2011-06-24 05:28:41 <ajcutshall> stfu
1026 2011-06-24 05:29:02 <ajcutshall> go1dfish i hacked your server
1027 2011-06-24 05:29:05 JRWR has quit ()
1028 2011-06-24 05:29:10 <jgarzik> cacheson: yeah
1029 2011-06-24 05:29:30 <jgarzik> cacheson: definitely want to get the current forums off bitcoin.org main page
1030 2011-06-24 05:29:36 <jgarzik> they are an embarrassment
1031 2011-06-24 05:30:28 <ajcutshall> jgarzik you're embarrasing yourself right now.
1032 2011-06-24 05:32:08 <ajcutshall> problem?
1033 2011-06-24 05:32:27 <ajcutshall> well yeah you can shush if you want
1034 2011-06-24 05:33:32 ezl_ has joined
1035 2011-06-24 05:34:29 Sylph has joined
1036 2011-06-24 05:34:53 <doublec> removing the forums removes a lot of history and background of the project
1037 2011-06-24 05:35:00 <doublec> for example, discussions with satoshi
1038 2011-06-24 05:35:07 <jgarzik> doublec: the forums will -not- be removed
1039 2011-06-24 05:35:10 <cacheson> doublec: then they should be archived
1040 2011-06-24 05:35:17 <doublec> yeah that makes more sense
1041 2011-06-24 05:35:23 <jgarzik> doublec: only renamed to another hostname + not linked on main bitcoin.org page
1042 2011-06-24 05:35:28 stuhood has joined
1043 2011-06-24 05:35:42 <jgarzik> doublec: google will still find satoshi's posts, as will people in the community
1044 2011-06-24 05:35:51 <doublec> right, makes sense
1045 2011-06-24 05:36:04 <jgarzik> Just trying not to make the forums the first stop for every reporter ;-)
1046 2011-06-24 05:36:09 <jgarzik> or potential merchant
1047 2011-06-24 05:39:36 btceezey has joined
1048 2011-06-24 05:39:50 freakazoid has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
1049 2011-06-24 05:40:54 dbasch_ has joined
1050 2011-06-24 05:44:05 vigilyn has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1051 2011-06-24 05:45:29 vigilyn has joined
1052 2011-06-24 05:48:19 PHPCanDoAnything has joined
1053 2011-06-24 05:48:25 <PHPCanDoAnything> MagicalTux you fucking noob, notarize your crap code! are you sure you provided enough infoS?!?! you need more info to support the info?!? SUCK ON THIS FAG.
1054 2011-06-24 05:48:26 <PHPCanDoAnything> MagicalTux you fucking noob, notarize your crap code! are you sure you provided enough infoS?!?! you need more info to support the info?!? SUCK ON THIS FAG.
1055 2011-06-24 05:48:27 <PHPCanDoAnything> MagicalTux you fucking noob, notarize your crap code! are you sure you provided enough infoS?!?! you need more info to support the info?!? SUCK ON THIS FAG.
1056 2011-06-24 05:48:27 <PHPCanDoAnything> MagicalTux you fucking noob, notarize your crap code! are you sure you provided enough infoS?!?! you need more info to support the info?!? SUCK ON THIS FAG.
1057 2011-06-24 05:48:28 <PHPCanDoAnything> MagicalTux you fucking noob, notarize your crap code! are you sure you provided enough infoS?!?! you need more info to support the info?!? SUCK ON THIS FAG.
1058 2011-06-24 05:48:29 <PHPCanDoAnything> MagicalTux you fucking noob, notarize your crap code! are you sure you provided enough infoS?!?! you need more info to support the info?!? SUCK ON THIS FAG.
1059 2011-06-24 05:48:30 <PHPCanDoAnything> MagicalTux you fucking noob, notarize your crap code! are you sure you provided enough infoS?!?! you need more info to support the info?!? SUCK ON THIS FAG.
1060 2011-06-24 05:48:32 PHPCanDoAnything has quit (Client Quit)
1061 2011-06-24 05:49:20 cyberchriss has quit (Quit: Verlassend)
1062 2011-06-24 05:49:22 <cacheson> jgarzik: hey, at least the reporters and merchants don't come to IRC first ;)
1063 2011-06-24 05:49:47 <noagendamarket> heh
1064 2011-06-24 05:49:51 RobboNZ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1065 2011-06-24 05:50:46 <jgarzik> :)
1066 2011-06-24 05:55:28 koleg has quit (2!kvirc@79.133.141.14|Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1067 2011-06-24 05:55:55 Beccara_ has joined
1068 2011-06-24 05:57:26 zyb has quit (Quit: leaving)
1069 2011-06-24 05:57:35 zyb has joined
1070 2011-06-24 05:57:56 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1071 2011-06-24 05:58:11 <doublec> haha
1072 2011-06-24 05:58:22 copumpkin has joined
1073 2011-06-24 05:58:36 stuhood has left ()
1074 2011-06-24 05:58:44 Beccara has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1075 2011-06-24 06:00:17 LobsterMan has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1076 2011-06-24 06:00:26 TheZimm is now known as TheZimm|away
1077 2011-06-24 06:00:42 TheZimm is now known as away!~TheZimm@c-98-226-5-69.hsd1.il.comcast.net|TheZimm
1078 2011-06-24 06:00:51 <jrmithdobbs> cacheson: we'd probably be better off if they did
1079 2011-06-24 06:01:13 Beccara_ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1080 2011-06-24 06:01:21 Optimo has quit (Read error: No route to host)
1081 2011-06-24 06:01:25 Optimo_ has joined
1082 2011-06-24 06:01:30 LobsterMan has joined
1083 2011-06-24 06:01:30 LobsterMan has quit (Changing host)
1084 2011-06-24 06:01:30 LobsterMan has joined
1085 2011-06-24 06:01:46 maikmerten has joined
1086 2011-06-24 06:03:24 Klash_ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1087 2011-06-24 06:03:40 LobsterMan has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1088 2011-06-24 06:06:23 zyb has quit (Quit: leaving)
1089 2011-06-24 06:06:31 zyb has joined
1090 2011-06-24 06:07:51 Beccara has joined
1091 2011-06-24 06:07:55 koleg has joined
1092 2011-06-24 06:08:34 LobsterMan has joined
1093 2011-06-24 06:08:34 LobsterMan has quit (Changing host)
1094 2011-06-24 06:08:34 LobsterMan has joined
1095 2011-06-24 06:12:20 d1234 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1096 2011-06-24 06:13:15 AStove has quit ()
1097 2011-06-24 06:15:50 f33x has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1098 2011-06-24 06:19:22 has joined
1099 2011-06-24 06:19:40 TheZimm has quit (Quit: SLEEPING)
1100 2011-06-24 06:19:51 Netto has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1101 2011-06-24 06:21:51 Netsniper has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1102 2011-06-24 06:22:08 farbe has joined
1103 2011-06-24 06:22:47 doofus2 has joined
1104 2011-06-24 06:23:42 justmoon has joined
1105 2011-06-24 06:26:25 Taveren93HGK has joined
1106 2011-06-24 06:27:01 hachque has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1107 2011-06-24 06:27:04 devrandom has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1108 2011-06-24 06:27:30 devrandom has joined
1109 2011-06-24 06:27:37 xtalmath has joined
1110 2011-06-24 06:27:57 <Taveren93HGK> is there anyone around with experience underclocking with msi afterburner?
1111 2011-06-24 06:29:35 doofus2 has quit ()
1112 2011-06-24 06:30:53 farbe has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1113 2011-06-24 06:31:48 noagendamarket has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1114 2011-06-24 06:35:17 sgornick has joined
1115 2011-06-24 06:35:50 gsathya has joined
1116 2011-06-24 06:40:23 gsathya has left ()
1117 2011-06-24 06:40:50 <jgarzik> Taveren93HGK: might try #bitcoin-mining
1118 2011-06-24 06:42:36 Taveren93HGK has quit ()
1119 2011-06-24 06:43:01 denisx has joined
1120 2011-06-24 06:51:12 AnatolV has joined
1121 2011-06-24 06:54:32 crocopod has joined
1122 2011-06-24 06:54:39 Akinava has joined
1123 2011-06-24 06:59:21 <sacarlson> I got groffer's escrow now compiled into my test version of freecoin seem to be running ok, I'm doing preliminary testing before I release my git with the new additions
1124 2011-06-24 07:00:12 Kurtov has joined
1125 2011-06-24 07:02:59 TD has joined
1126 2011-06-24 07:05:01 Blitzboom has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1127 2011-06-24 07:05:16 Blitzboom has joined
1128 2011-06-24 07:05:16 Blitzboom has quit (Changing host)
1129 2011-06-24 07:05:16 Blitzboom has joined
1130 2011-06-24 07:05:20 dissipate has joined
1131 2011-06-24 07:05:58 <sacarlson> who will accept recieving one free tnbtc and return me .5 tnbtc for me to test?
1132 2011-06-24 07:08:20 m00p has joined
1133 2011-06-24 07:13:30 gjs278 has joined
1134 2011-06-24 07:15:03 hahuang65 has quit ()
1135 2011-06-24 07:15:30 Kurtov has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1136 2011-06-24 07:15:47 Kurtov has joined
1137 2011-06-24 07:18:23 cacheson has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1138 2011-06-24 07:18:49 cacheson has joined
1139 2011-06-24 07:19:25 MC1984 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1140 2011-06-24 07:22:28 xtalmath has left ()
1141 2011-06-24 07:23:45 testx0r has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1142 2011-06-24 07:24:49 erus` has joined
1143 2011-06-24 07:25:23 <erus`> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6458586/recieving-payments-from-users-with-bitcoin free karma
1144 2011-06-24 07:25:45 dbasch_ has quit (Quit: dbasch_)
1145 2011-06-24 07:25:55 phunction has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1146 2011-06-24 07:26:37 HaltingState has joined
1147 2011-06-24 07:27:48 ike-exe has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1148 2011-06-24 07:27:50 defaultman has joined
1149 2011-06-24 07:29:12 Lexa has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1150 2011-06-24 07:29:20 MC1984 has joined
1151 2011-06-24 07:30:34 btceezey has left ()
1152 2011-06-24 07:31:45 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
1153 2011-06-24 07:33:12 sekati has joined
1154 2011-06-24 07:33:37 ike-exe has joined
1155 2011-06-24 07:40:21 meelu has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1156 2011-06-24 07:40:51 meelu has joined
1157 2011-06-24 07:41:20 DaQatz has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1158 2011-06-24 07:41:24 TD has joined
1159 2011-06-24 07:41:26 DaQatz has joined
1160 2011-06-24 07:44:07 dissipate has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1161 2011-06-24 07:44:36 erus` has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1162 2011-06-24 07:45:09 ike-exe has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1163 2011-06-24 07:45:51 karnac has quit (Quit: karnac)
1164 2011-06-24 07:52:17 o_0oo has joined
1165 2011-06-24 07:57:47 sekati has left ("Leaving")
1166 2011-06-24 08:05:12 SuperArse has quit ()
1167 2011-06-24 08:05:23 ike-exe has joined
1168 2011-06-24 08:06:12 ike-exe has quit (Client Quit)
1169 2011-06-24 08:06:45 m00p has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1170 2011-06-24 08:08:05 peck has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1171 2011-06-24 08:09:31 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
1172 2011-06-24 08:11:38 Pathin has joined
1173 2011-06-24 08:11:50 <gmaxwell> 01:07 < upb> anyone figured out what is in here ? http://blockexplorer.com/rawtx/9173744691ac25f3cd94f35d4fc0e0a2b9d1ab17b4fe562acc07660552f95518
1174 2011-06-24 08:12:01 <gmaxwell> ^ this looks really quite anti-social
1175 2011-06-24 08:12:28 <gmaxwell> It's a txn with 0.01 input and a zillion 0 value outputs.
1176 2011-06-24 08:12:33 <unclemantis> gmaxwell are you messing around with testnet-in-a-box?
1177 2011-06-24 08:12:42 <gmaxwell> unclemantis: no.
1178 2011-06-24 08:12:50 <unclemantis> drat
1179 2011-06-24 08:12:51 sabalaba has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1180 2011-06-24 08:12:54 <unclemantis> anyone awake that is?
1181 2011-06-24 08:13:01 peck has joined
1182 2011-06-24 08:14:12 <num1> ahahahaha
1183 2011-06-24 08:14:37 <num1> the first attacker is running tests :P
1184 2011-06-24 08:14:48 stuhood has joined
1185 2011-06-24 08:14:52 <vegard> neat
1186 2011-06-24 08:14:54 <vegard> is that a bug?
1187 2011-06-24 08:15:01 stuhood has left ()
1188 2011-06-24 08:15:02 <unclemantis> what attacker?
1189 2011-06-24 08:15:10 <num1> joke
1190 2011-06-24 08:15:18 <unclemantis> not very funny :P
1191 2011-06-24 08:15:32 <num1> all my jokes are funny!
1192 2011-06-24 08:15:54 <upb> if transactions to public keys are considered standard aswell, then that would be a more efficient method of storing info in blockchain
1193 2011-06-24 08:16:26 spirals has joined
1194 2011-06-24 08:17:04 <unclemantis> num1 your momma is funny
1195 2011-06-24 08:17:14 <vegard> and a weird hash: "scriptPubKey":"OP_DUP OP_HASH160 0d0a000000000000000000000000000000000000 OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG"
1196 2011-06-24 08:18:02 <unclemantis> does setgenerate need to be true in order to confirmation transactions?
1197 2011-06-24 08:18:05 <num1> unclemantis have time to explain the blockchain to a newb? the wiki is annoying short
1198 2011-06-24 08:18:10 <upb> hmm thats a cr lf :D
1199 2011-06-24 08:18:20 <unclemantis> num1 only if you make it funny
1200 2011-06-24 08:18:31 elnato is now known as midget
1201 2011-06-24 08:18:33 midget is now known as elnato
1202 2011-06-24 08:18:42 <num1> your wish is my... pun
1203 2011-06-24 08:19:04 <vegard> upb: looks like your weird transaction has an embedded message?
1204 2011-06-24 08:19:44 <num1> so every block has a hash of the last block, and a list of transactions
1205 2011-06-24 08:19:48 <unclemantis> http://blockexplorer.com/
1206 2011-06-24 08:19:55 <unclemantis> knock yourself out
1207 2011-06-24 08:20:01 <unclemantis> really, please
1208 2011-06-24 08:20:11 <num1> lol
1209 2011-06-24 08:20:25 <unclemantis> muck around with that
1210 2011-06-24 08:20:35 <unclemantis> that should help you understand
1211 2011-06-24 08:20:41 <num1> sure thing
1212 2011-06-24 08:20:49 <num1> thanks
1213 2011-06-24 08:21:02 <unclemantis> horray!!! confirmations are going up!
1214 2011-06-24 08:21:17 <unclemantis> only miners can confirm transactions
1215 2011-06-24 08:21:43 <num1> what will the incentive be once all coins are mined? :P
1216 2011-06-24 08:22:02 <unclemantis> transaction fees
1217 2011-06-24 08:22:27 <unclemantis> and that will not even cover the cost of the electricity that these miners will need to stay functional!
1218 2011-06-24 08:22:36 <num1> makes sense, I can see how getting the fees from hundreds of transactions at once would be profitable
1219 2011-06-24 08:22:39 <joepie91> http://kerpia.cryto.net/pub
1220 2011-06-24 08:22:41 <joepie91> thoughts?
1221 2011-06-24 08:22:45 <unclemantis> or maybe.. who knows. I haven't done the math yet
1222 2011-06-24 08:23:17 <unclemantis> joepie91 awesome!
1223 2011-06-24 08:23:26 <unclemantis> resize would be nice :)
1224 2011-06-24 08:23:34 <joepie91> I'm basically working on a javascript desktop environment
1225 2011-06-24 08:23:41 <joepie91> that is made specifically for large amounts of data
1226 2011-06-24 08:23:49 <joepie91> with window management etc specifically made for that
1227 2011-06-24 08:23:55 <num1> the math on https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability gives the impression there will be *very many* transactions per block
1228 2011-06-24 08:23:57 <joepie91> as a sort of framework for people to build applications on
1229 2011-06-24 08:24:01 <unclemantis> i think i broke it
1230 2011-06-24 08:24:18 <joepie91> I think something like blockexplorer with an interface like this may be a good tool to seriously "investigate" transactions :P
1231 2011-06-24 08:24:20 <joepie91> broke it?
1232 2011-06-24 08:24:45 <unclemantis> yup
1233 2011-06-24 08:24:49 <joepie91> in what sense?
1234 2011-06-24 08:25:16 <unclemantis> whowhowooo!!! my accounts have balances now
1235 2011-06-24 08:25:35 <joepie91> (also, the entire visual part is CSS, so it would be skinnable however you like)
1236 2011-06-24 08:25:49 <vegard> upb: it does contain an embedded message
1237 2011-06-24 08:26:17 <vegard> it has "=yend size=8 776 crc32=a7ac8449" at the end
1238 2011-06-24 08:26:18 <upb> the last line of it is end size=8776 crc32=a7ac8449
1239 2011-06-24 08:26:19 <upb> yep
1240 2011-06-24 08:26:23 <vegard> but the rest seems to be binary data
1241 2011-06-24 08:27:04 xtalmath has joined
1242 2011-06-24 08:27:28 <xtalmath> what if I mistype an address where will the coins go?
1243 2011-06-24 08:27:48 <vegard> xtalmath: to that address. if nobody has the private key to it, the coins will be lost
1244 2011-06-24 08:28:00 <xtalmath> i mean if I mistype one character
1245 2011-06-24 08:28:05 <tcatm> xtalmath: try it!
1246 2011-06-24 08:28:06 <vegard> xtalmath: but addresses have a built-in check so there's a very small probability it will be accepted
1247 2011-06-24 08:28:16 <xtalmath> I know but I dont believe it anymore
1248 2011-06-24 08:28:35 <xtalmath> I did #grep "IsValidBitcoinAddress" .
1249 2011-06-24 08:28:51 <xtalmath> and it only returned 3 instances in base58.h, they arent called anywhere!
1250 2011-06-24 08:29:24 <vegard> upb: google says it's an "yEncode" file
1251 2011-06-24 08:29:38 <xtalmath> please check it, first I thought cscope was buggy, but after grepping the whole source dir ( . ) I discovered somehow it isnt called anymore
1252 2011-06-24 08:30:10 <tcatm> xtalmath: grepping is not a proper method to read source code. open a text editor and read the whole code.
1253 2011-06-24 08:30:18 <xtalmath> the function (2 versions of it) are defined in base58.h resulting in 3 instances of the string in the whole project, no other file contains it
1254 2011-06-24 08:30:37 <xtalmath> tcatm: then can you point me at exact file/line?
1255 2011-06-24 08:30:57 <num1> xtalmath the whole code doesn't have an exact line
1256 2011-06-24 08:31:01 cenuij has joined
1257 2011-06-24 08:31:01 cenuij has quit (Changing host)
1258 2011-06-24 08:31:02 cenuij has joined
1259 2011-06-24 08:32:00 <xtalmath> num1:? ok version .23 for example main.cpp:13, but it doesnt exist, tell me where
1260 2011-06-24 08:32:02 <upb> vegard: found a thread about it by goolging for the crc value http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=8114.0;all
1261 2011-06-24 08:32:05 <upb> heh
1262 2011-06-24 08:33:04 <xtalmath> please, someone help me
1263 2011-06-24 08:33:22 <unclemantis> xtalmath have you called your parole officer today?
1264 2011-06-24 08:33:42 <xtalmath> I give good evidence that the IsValidBitcoinAddress is called nowhere
1265 2011-06-24 08:33:59 <vegard> upb: ah.. nice
1266 2011-06-24 08:33:59 <xtalmath> I dont have a parole officer
1267 2011-06-24 08:34:00 <unclemantis> i object!
1268 2011-06-24 08:34:43 <upb> xtalmath: indeed, it doesnt seem to be called at all
1269 2011-06-24 08:34:47 <unclemantis> xtalmath! stop badgering the witness!
1270 2011-06-24 08:34:52 <xtalmath> see!
1271 2011-06-24 08:34:59 <tcatm> xtalmath: ui.cpp:1944 ... AddressToHash160(...) # but I hope you know you're being annoying...
1272 2011-06-24 08:35:18 <xtalmath> tcatm thats not IsValidBitcoinAddress
1273 2011-06-24 08:35:30 <upb> but you cant be sure!
1274 2011-06-24 08:35:45 <upb> the call might be obfuscated by macro magic so you need to read every line of source :)
1275 2011-06-24 08:35:52 <tcatm> xtalmath: well, sometimes programmers like to abstract things to make them simpler
1276 2011-06-24 08:36:00 <xtalmath> IVBA calls ATH160 not the other way around, its either useless code, or the check isnt done
1277 2011-06-24 08:36:01 <num1> xtalmath line 1942 // Parse bitcoin address # looks legit
1278 2011-06-24 08:37:41 <tcatm> xtalmath: you are very close to trolling
1279 2011-06-24 08:37:51 <unclemantis> when i add up all of my transactions i come up with a balance of 981.5514450000001 but when i call bitcoind getbalance for the account I get 981.55144500
1280 2011-06-24 08:38:04 <joepie91> the floats did it!
1281 2011-06-24 08:38:10 <unclemantis> is getbalance truncating or rounding?
1282 2011-06-24 08:38:12 * joepie91 trollface
1283 2011-06-24 08:38:19 <gmaxwell> ...
1284 2011-06-24 08:38:27 <gmaxwell> unclemantis: use integers.
1285 2011-06-24 08:38:38 <xtalmath> now I see that the check is of course the same as calling AddressToHash but why do we have 2 more functions doing the same?
1286 2011-06-24 08:38:53 <upb> so IsValidBitcoinAddress can be removed from the source to save 10 lines
1287 2011-06-24 08:38:59 abragin has joined
1288 2011-06-24 08:38:59 abragin has quit (Changing host)
1289 2011-06-24 08:38:59 abragin has joined
1290 2011-06-24 08:39:10 <gmaxwell> 981.5514450000001 < isn't even a possible bitcoin value.
1291 2011-06-24 08:39:35 <unclemantis> egad, you are correct wattson
1292 2011-06-24 08:40:14 <gmaxwell> unclemantis: bitcoins are integers. The dot is a convention for 100000000 satoshi. Use satoshi for all your calculations and you will be happier.
1293 2011-06-24 08:40:16 <unclemantis> so why the heck is my little calculator coming up with that amount?
1294 2011-06-24 08:40:16 <tcatm> xtalmath: the code has evolved and is usually considered "a mess". we're working on fixing that
1295 2011-06-24 08:40:26 <xtalmath> ok
1296 2011-06-24 08:40:31 karnac has joined
1297 2011-06-24 08:40:36 <joepie91> unclemantis: probably because you are using floats
1298 2011-06-24 08:40:43 <unclemantis> probably
1299 2011-06-24 08:40:58 <unclemantis> ok, so when i read in the amounts i should strip the decimal?
1300 2011-06-24 08:40:58 <joepie91> have to second gmaxwell here :P
1301 2011-06-24 08:41:08 <xtalmath> the reason I wanted to know is because im trying to clean it up myself but was not sure if it wasnt called
1302 2011-06-24 08:41:33 <erska> is the satoshi smallest possible unit in bitcoin, or can that be divided too?
1303 2011-06-24 08:41:35 <unclemantis> do the math that needs to be done and then put the decimal back in? how do i know where to put the decimal then?
1304 2011-06-24 08:41:39 <sipa> xtalmath: you're right be the way - IsValidBitcoinAddress is not called anywhere
1305 2011-06-24 08:42:19 <num1> AddressToHash160 takes a hash of the address, but it also returns false if the address was fat fingered at all
1306 2011-06-24 08:42:39 <num1> ah least, if the checksum fails
1307 2011-06-24 08:42:51 <sipa> indeed
1308 2011-06-24 08:43:02 <xtalmath> Seascope is really cool tool to surf through bitcoin
1309 2011-06-24 08:43:37 <unclemantis> gmaxwell?
1310 2011-06-24 08:44:53 <gmaxwell> unclemantis: you always put it at the same point.
1311 2011-06-24 08:45:03 <unclemantis> which is where?
1312 2011-06-24 08:45:06 <unclemantis> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Satoshi
1313 2011-06-24 08:45:10 <unclemantis> this doesn't help
1314 2011-06-24 08:45:15 <gmaxwell> 8 digits in. so that 100000000 = 1.0
1315 2011-06-24 08:47:04 <unclemantis> but the number of decimal places for a bitcoin is 11 isn't it?
1316 2011-06-24 08:47:51 <sipa> no
1317 2011-06-24 08:47:58 <sipa> the smallest unit is 0.00000001 BTC
1318 2011-06-24 08:48:09 <sipa> and every amount in bitcoin is an integer multiple of that
1319 2011-06-24 08:48:45 <sipa> that 1 you see at the 11th position is a rounding error caused by you using floating point arithmetic
1320 2011-06-24 08:48:57 <gmaxwell> and by 0.00000001 we mean actually 0.00000001 BTC and not whatever approximation of that a binary float gives you when you input 0.00000001.
1321 2011-06-24 08:49:19 enquirer has left ()
1322 2011-06-24 08:49:42 <upb> hahahahha
1323 2011-06-24 08:49:43 <upb> Earlier today I posted a link to the Japanese Consulate to Page 9 which list all the Japanese Consulates in the USA. I called the Japanese Consulate in NYC. The lady answering knew exactly what I was talking about as she said they have had a several dozen request and inquiries about Tibanne Ltd and Mt Gox. I was informed that neither Tibanne Ltd. or Mt.Gox are valid companies or corporations in Japan. Furthermore the addresses are bogus for either company a
1324 2011-06-24 08:49:50 <upb> I was advised since Mark Karpeles is a US Citizen to file a report with local authorities here also.
1325 2011-06-24 08:50:16 eoss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1326 2011-06-24 08:50:54 <sipa> upb: where do you read that?
1327 2011-06-24 08:51:15 <unclemantis> upb so when does the class action lawsuit start?
1328 2011-06-24 08:51:23 <gmaxwell> it's on the forum attached to the mtgox support ticket.
1329 2011-06-24 08:51:49 <gmaxwell> upb: unless you can confirm it, please don't propagate other people's trolling/fud.
1330 2011-06-24 08:52:52 larsivi has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1331 2011-06-24 08:53:11 <upb> k
1332 2011-06-24 08:53:14 <unclemantis> so is the number of decimal places 8 or 11?
1333 2011-06-24 08:53:35 <unclemantis> if it isn't reported by FOX NEWS then it isn't real
1334 2011-06-24 08:53:41 <sipa> unclemantis: please read
1335 2011-06-24 08:53:53 <sipa> 10:46:48 < sipa> the smallest unit is 0.00000001 BTC
1336 2011-06-24 08:54:02 <unclemantis> sipa i missed that
1337 2011-06-24 08:54:13 <unclemantis> where is that documented? I am reading that people want to extend it out
1338 2011-06-24 08:54:36 <gmaxwell> People are blathing about stuff that wouldn't be interesting for 20 years.
1339 2011-06-24 08:54:40 <sipa> can't be done without changing the protocol
1340 2011-06-24 08:54:50 <sipa> and i don't think it'll be necessary anytime soon
1341 2011-06-24 08:55:08 <unclemantis> so 8 decimal places and be done with it
1342 2011-06-24 08:55:32 <gmaxwell> unclemantis: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/FAQ#How_divisible_are_Bitcoins?
1343 2011-06-24 08:55:54 <unclemantis> gmaxwell thank you
1344 2011-06-24 08:56:03 <gmaxwell> unclemantis: or use decimal floating point, but I doubt your programing enviroment offers it.
1345 2011-06-24 08:56:57 minimoose has joined
1346 2011-06-24 08:56:58 <unclemantis> since it is coming in as a string, i am going to just remove the decimal and then convert it to an int
1347 2011-06-24 08:58:32 <gmaxwell> just make sure you count the digits so that 1.0 doesn't become 0.00000010 BTC.
1348 2011-06-24 08:58:45 <xtalmath> the next to biggest bitcoin has 17 decimal places: 209 999 999.000 000 01
1349 2011-06-24 08:59:09 <gmaxwell> And use a 64 bit integer, lest you be overflowed.
1350 2011-06-24 08:59:09 Eremes has quit (Changing host)
1351 2011-06-24 08:59:09 Eremes has joined
1352 2011-06-24 08:59:28 <lfm> note that 32 bits is not enuf, you should use 64 bits
1353 2011-06-24 08:59:45 <lfm> great minds think alike
1354 2011-06-24 08:59:53 <unclemantis> gmaxwell count the digits?
1355 2011-06-24 09:00:16 <Eremes> how to use gribble to calc my hashing with preffered difficulty ?
1356 2011-06-24 09:00:26 <unclemantis> hmm, seems like the amounts are being stored as floats not strings
1357 2011-06-24 09:00:26 <sipa> unclemantis: "so that 1.0 doesn't become 0.00000010 BTC."
1358 2011-06-24 09:00:47 <lfm> DO NOT USE FLOATS!!!!
1359 2011-06-24 09:01:06 <gmaxwell> if you simply remove the dot from 1.0 you'll get 10. This is not what you want. So count the digits after the . and truncate and pad (with zeros) to 8.
1360 2011-06-24 09:01:12 <xtalmath> err did type the wrong next to biggest possible bitcin though: 209 999 999.999 999 99
1361 2011-06-24 09:01:18 <unclemantis> lfm it is being automaticly converted!
1362 2011-06-24 09:01:25 <sipa> xtalmath: actually, wrong
1363 2011-06-24 09:01:31 <xtalmath> how so?
1364 2011-06-24 09:01:31 <unclemantis> so what i am doing is converting it to a string first and then removing the decimal
1365 2011-06-24 09:01:50 <lfm> if the lib is using floats drop it and use another lib or fix it
1366 2011-06-24 09:01:56 <kinlo> why does the bitcoin client uses floats in the json output? it requires conversion, and when using integers, no errors can be made
1367 2011-06-24 09:02:09 <unclemantis> gmaxwell count the zeros to the right of the decimal and pad
1368 2011-06-24 09:02:12 <sipa> kinlo: it is safe when you use IEEE 754 64-bit binary floats
1369 2011-06-24 09:02:14 <xtalmath> woops not 210 million, so it has 16 decimal places
1370 2011-06-24 09:02:35 <sipa> kinlo: as that has 53 significant digits, which is more than 21M*10^8
1371 2011-06-24 09:02:46 <gmaxwell> yea, 754 doubles happen to be accurate enough at bitcoin's full precision.
1372 2011-06-24 09:02:46 <lfm> sipa long doubles?
1373 2011-06-24 09:02:47 <xtalmath> sigh: 20 999 999.999 999 99
1374 2011-06-24 09:02:54 <sipa> the largest possible BTC amount is 20999999.9769, by the way
1375 2011-06-24 09:03:08 <kinlo> I'm using java double's which should do the trick
1376 2011-06-24 09:03:12 <gmaxwell> But doesn't make using doubles for it a grand idea either.
1377 2011-06-24 09:03:14 <xtalmath> sipa why?
1378 2011-06-24 09:03:18 <sipa> 20 999 999.976 900 00
1379 2011-06-24 09:03:19 <unclemantis> perhaps i should pad first and then strip
1380 2011-06-24 09:03:28 <gmaxwell> kinlo: it's still a bad idea. What json returns is string. Parse it.
1381 2011-06-24 09:03:29 <sipa> xtalmath: because that is the sum of all mining income
1382 2011-06-24 09:03:40 <kinlo> java's double: The double data type is a double-precision 64-bit IEEE 754 floating point
1383 2011-06-24 09:03:40 <sipa> gmaxwell: json returns a float
1384 2011-06-24 09:03:50 * unclemantis is using json
1385 2011-06-24 09:03:58 <sipa> well, no, json encodes it as a numeric type
1386 2011-06-24 09:04:02 <gmaxwell> sipa: json what ?
1387 2011-06-24 09:04:10 <gmaxwell> I mean json is just ascii bytes over the wire.
1388 2011-06-24 09:04:17 <xtalmath> yesterday I asked if mining at a certain block count multiple of 210 000 mines 0 coins and was answered no
1389 2011-06-24 09:04:21 <kinlo> gmaxwell: I'm converting it to a long, integer... that way I have no problems when doing math with it, but I need to convert the json to that first
1390 2011-06-24 09:04:29 <doublec> or hack the rpc interface to return a 64 bit int
1391 2011-06-24 09:04:33 <xtalmath> sipa: what is the block number of the last block?
1392 2011-06-24 09:04:42 <gmaxwell> There is no last block.
1393 2011-06-24 09:04:43 <sipa> 6929999
1394 2011-06-24 09:04:44 <xtalmath> that does reward a miner without fees
1395 2011-06-24 09:04:51 <sipa> that's the last block that has a reward
1396 2011-06-24 09:04:53 <gmaxwell> hm? there is a last block? why?
1397 2011-06-24 09:04:54 <gmaxwell> right
1398 2011-06-24 09:05:01 <lfm> the last coinbase?
1399 2011-06-24 09:05:03 <gmaxwell> there is a block where the reward goes from 1 to zero.
1400 2011-06-24 09:05:05 <sipa> it's definitely not the last block
1401 2011-06-24 09:05:15 <sipa> yes, 6930000 has reward 0
1402 2011-06-24 09:05:19 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
1403 2011-06-24 09:05:19 <sipa> but it will still have a coinbase
1404 2011-06-24 09:05:26 <unclemantis> what kind of reward is zero?
1405 2011-06-24 09:05:45 <sipa> unclemantis: there will still be mining fees collected through the coinbases
1406 2011-06-24 09:05:49 <kinlo> unclemantis: you get your rewards from the fees, so it's no problem, you will still mine
1407 2011-06-24 09:05:56 Daviey has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1408 2011-06-24 09:06:21 <xtalmath> so theres 33 iterations of divide by 2 after which 1/2=0 :D
1409 2011-06-24 09:06:28 <gmaxwell> (at least assuming the precision of bitcoin isn't extended before thenâ I assume it would be if bitcoin surrives the 130 years that will take.
1410 2011-06-24 09:06:33 <unclemantis> kinlo will it be worth the electricity?
1411 2011-06-24 09:06:38 <gmaxwell> )
1412 2011-06-24 09:06:47 <unclemantis> the fee dropped from 0.01 to 0.0005 recently
1413 2011-06-24 09:06:53 <kinlo> unclemantis: if you see that at this moment, fee's go up to 0.5 btc....
1414 2011-06-24 09:06:54 <gmaxwell> ...
1415 2011-06-24 09:07:04 <kinlo> unclemantis: the usage of bitcoin will go up
1416 2011-06-24 09:07:07 <sipa> no, the minimum required fee dropped from 0.01 to 0.0005 in 0.3.23
1417 2011-06-24 09:07:13 <sipa> in case of spammy transactions
1418 2011-06-24 09:07:14 <doublec> "Satoshi Nakamoto wants to be friends on Facebook" <--- Is this a new mtgox phishing spam?
1419 2011-06-24 09:07:16 <gmaxwell> unclemantis: The "the fee dropped from 0.01 to 0.0005 recently" is infuriatingly incorrect. Most transactions pay no fee, both before and now.
1420 2011-06-24 09:07:39 <unclemantis> the fee for transactions below 1btc
1421 2011-06-24 09:07:47 <kinlo> unclemantis: and you can always mine with only the transactions where the fee's are worth something
1422 2011-06-24 09:07:56 <gmaxwell> unclemantis: transactions with outputs below 0.01 BTC you mean.
1423 2011-06-24 09:08:19 ][nvisible1 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1424 2011-06-24 09:08:23 <kinlo> unclemantis: if the network only mine's transactions with higher fee's, then clients must set fee's or the money isn't payed as no miner will take it in a block
1425 2011-06-24 09:08:43 Daviey has joined
1426 2011-06-24 09:08:44 <kinlo> unclemantis: so it's not really a problem
1427 2011-06-24 09:08:45 * unclemantis is still new, sorry
1428 2011-06-24 09:08:58 <kinlo> so am I :p
1429 2011-06-24 09:09:14 <lfm> but after only 1470000 the "reward" will be less than 1 bitcent
1430 2011-06-24 09:09:36 Klash_ has joined
1431 2011-06-24 09:09:53 * unclemantis wonders what the proccessing power is going to be to discover the last block
1432 2011-06-24 09:09:59 <lfm> or 2100000 maybe
1433 2011-06-24 09:10:03 Kurtov has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1434 2011-06-24 09:10:33 <xtalmath> so difficulty is adjusted with timing mechanism and average block minting rate,... now this all assumes that the block minting rate depends on the cryptographic hardness, when blocks start containing many transactions, simply including transactions (i know, before searching a good hash) may start to outweigh the work of hashing. the network will punish with harder hashes.
1435 2011-06-24 09:10:50 <lfm> or (3rd guess) 1890000
1436 2011-06-24 09:11:00 <sipa> including a transaction is a marginal cost compared to mining itself
1437 2011-06-24 09:11:05 <xtalmath> right now it is
1438 2011-06-24 09:11:16 <unclemantis> difficulty will peak at sometime
1439 2011-06-24 09:11:17 <sipa> as the difficulty will rise, it will become only more so
1440 2011-06-24 09:11:32 karnac has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1441 2011-06-24 09:11:35 <unclemantis> my new total is 98155144500
1442 2011-06-24 09:11:49 <unclemantis> which is 981.55144500
1443 2011-06-24 09:11:51 <kinlo> xtalmath: eh, you want to say that people will not mine because there are too many transactions in the block and therefore the difficulty is too high?
1444 2011-06-24 09:11:51 <gmaxwell> xtalmath: the computation for the mining POW is over the fixed lengh block header, adding more txn doesn't increase the cost of it.
1445 2011-06-24 09:12:00 <kinlo> xtalmath: did you understand the merkle root? :)
1446 2011-06-24 09:12:06 Transformer has joined
1447 2011-06-24 09:12:10 <xtalmath> but suppose a large part of world economy switches to bitcoin, any block minted is supposed to carry all transactions of those 10 minutes (I know this is not enforced in protocol but thats what currency network is supposed to do)
1448 2011-06-24 09:12:13 <lfm> the big step will be 50 to 25 it seems. if everyone doesnt start demanding fees then they never will
1449 2011-06-24 09:12:17 Transformer has left ()
1450 2011-06-24 09:12:21 <kinlo> the number of transactions does not influence the power required to mine a block
1451 2011-06-24 09:12:36 <unclemantis> bitcoind says 981.55144500 so horray!
1452 2011-06-24 09:12:41 sipa has left ()
1453 2011-06-24 09:12:41 <xtalmath> gmaxwell: I am NOT stating that adding a transaction makes the hash bruteforcing harder
1454 2011-06-24 09:12:49 <unclemantis> gmaxwell thanks for pointing out my not so obvious problem
1455 2011-06-24 09:13:06 <lfm> kinko only very slightly since each txn added can is more bandwidth and disk space
1456 2011-06-24 09:13:42 <unclemantis> 564MB is the size of my appdata bitcoin folder
1457 2011-06-24 09:13:59 <xtalmath> kinlo: i am not saying that for a fixed difficulty it is harder to find a hash with more transactions, i AM saying that including transactions (just the bandwith) will start taking more time compared to finding the bruteforce hash
1458 2011-06-24 09:14:18 <gmaxwell> xtalmath: then bitcoin will be completely insecure.
1459 2011-06-24 09:14:49 minimoose has joined
1460 2011-06-24 09:14:54 <gmaxwell> xtalmath: if the cost of 250 bytes of data is greater than the cost of solving the POW then anyone can rewrite the blockchain however they want.
1461 2011-06-24 09:14:56 <lfm> like it would seem reasonable to only add free txn at the start of a new block perhaps, no sense interrupting the miners for nothing
1462 2011-06-24 09:15:30 <gmaxwell> lfm: or just when a non-free txn comes in, or when the timestamp increments or you need a new extranonce.
1463 2011-06-24 09:15:40 <xtalmath> its going to be 250*1000 000
1464 2011-06-24 09:15:59 <lfm> gmaxwell: no need to interrupt the miners for a new timestamp, they can update timestamps themselves
1465 2011-06-24 09:16:07 <xtalmath> ah now I realise why the fee is per KB
1466 2011-06-24 09:16:12 <xtalmath> jeezes
1467 2011-06-24 09:16:28 <xtalmath> of course per KB and not per BTC sent
1468 2011-06-24 09:17:06 <gmaxwell> lfm: true enough.
1469 2011-06-24 09:18:05 <lfm> yup just as easy to txn 10 million btc as 0.000001
1470 2011-06-24 09:20:18 Lexa has joined
1471 2011-06-24 09:20:48 <unclemantis> so what do you folks think of the max and lows for MtGox's first day back in business?
1472 2011-06-24 09:21:10 briareus has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1473 2011-06-24 09:21:17 <kish> it's back?
1474 2011-06-24 09:21:21 <lfm> of course naive users cant understand what influences the number of KB in a txn. It is even hard to predict for experts
1475 2011-06-24 09:21:23 <kinlo> not yet
1476 2011-06-24 09:21:25 <xtalmath> and my reasoning above was mistaken, it should be: lots of unprocessed transaction (processing proportional to KB) =>fees people are willing to pay rise=>miners want to include more transactions, but will start to use mining software that takes into account the processing of transactions i.e. people will not mine at just x MHash, but at (x MHash, y KB/s) each new block they didnt mine they resign all the unprocessed transactions they know of..., i
1477 2011-06-24 09:21:29 o_0oo_ has joined
1478 2011-06-24 09:22:54 <xtalmath> they will run software that finds the equilibrium of x,y that rewards most for their hardware.
1479 2011-06-24 09:23:12 <unclemantis> kish they say it is going back up satuday
1480 2011-06-24 09:23:20 <lfm> xtalmath: ya might be interesting if miners wont work on anything till the fees accumulate to cover costs
1481 2011-06-24 09:23:28 <unclemantis> thing is a lot of people have not gotten their acceptance email yet or have been rejected
1482 2011-06-24 09:23:46 o_0oo has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1483 2011-06-24 09:24:00 Lexa has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1484 2011-06-24 09:24:57 <unclemantis> gmaxwell so i should be storing btc as bigints then
1485 2011-06-24 09:25:13 <lfm> unclemantis: yup
1486 2011-06-24 09:25:17 <xtalmath> lfm: right, but I cant envision it happen that discrete, thats the power of decentralization, theres always somebody happy with the deal (either a miner with the fees of unprocessed transactions, or a trader with the fees miners seem to want), so the chain keeps going on
1487 2011-06-24 09:25:40 <lfm> or at least long long (in C) 64 bits.
1488 2011-06-24 09:25:41 <unclemantis> lfm and just convert for display use only?
1489 2011-06-24 09:25:51 <unclemantis> lfm what would i store in mysql?
1490 2011-06-24 09:25:59 <xtalmath> I now start seeing a market depth between bitcoin users and miners
1491 2011-06-24 09:26:22 <lfm> do not use floats at all, display x / 100000000 and x % 100000000
1492 2011-06-24 09:26:24 <xtalmath> only instead of the typical 1 dimensional price range a 2 dimensional x, y range
1493 2011-06-24 09:27:02 Lexa has joined
1494 2011-06-24 09:27:02 <lfm> unclemantis: I think mysql has 64 bit ints
1495 2011-06-24 09:28:42 <unclemantis> they have bigint
1496 2011-06-24 09:28:51 <lfm> xtalmath: I dont follow 2d?
1497 2011-06-24 09:29:07 <unclemantis> balance / 100000000 doesn't work
1498 2011-06-24 09:29:08 <xtalmath> hmm, since the miners choose the most rewarding 2 dimensional point, while users only have onedimensional influence, theres mathematical trouble: the mechanism as I understand it will guarantee new blocks and processing of payments, but not necessarily processing of all payments (even if they offer above the miners acceptable range)
1499 2011-06-24 09:29:14 <unclemantis> that just cuts off my decimal places
1500 2011-06-24 09:29:29 <lfm> unclemantis: integer division? floor(x/10000000000)
1501 2011-06-24 09:29:33 alystair has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1502 2011-06-24 09:29:38 <xtalmath> it might be happening already
1503 2011-06-24 09:29:47 <unclemantis> oh wait hold on
1504 2011-06-24 09:30:34 <unclemantis> ya
1505 2011-06-24 09:30:36 <unclemantis> integer
1506 2011-06-24 09:30:57 <unclemantis> i am storing 9815514450 as an integer
1507 2011-06-24 09:30:59 <lfm> xtalmath: what 2 dimentional? I dont follow!
1508 2011-06-24 09:31:38 <lfm> unclemantis: I dont think you get it yet
1509 2011-06-24 09:31:47 <unclemantis> and when i perform x / 100000000 i get 981
1510 2011-06-24 09:32:16 <unclemantis> I should have 981.5514450
1511 2011-06-24 09:32:19 Nexus7 has joined
1512 2011-06-24 09:32:25 <lfm> unclemantis: oh ok I put in too many zeros, ya
1513 2011-06-24 09:32:29 <xtalmath> the time dedicated to reach the hash target say T, and the time dedicated to include transactions P by processing them together (from scratch as every new block comes in to the miner)
1514 2011-06-24 09:32:29 <unclemantis> lol
1515 2011-06-24 09:32:45 <unclemantis> so lets try this again.. how many zeros LOL
1516 2011-06-24 09:32:50 <xtalmath> imagine you are a miner, T+P should be around 10 minutes
1517 2011-06-24 09:33:06 <lfm> unclemantis: 8 zeros
1518 2011-06-24 09:33:14 <unclemantis> that is 8
1519 2011-06-24 09:33:30 <unclemantis> x / 100000000
1520 2011-06-24 09:33:40 <unclemantis> that gives me 981
1521 2011-06-24 09:33:43 <lfm> xtalmath: I dont see that as 2 dimentions. that is just a sum of two parameters
1522 2011-06-24 09:33:50 AnatolV_ has joined
1523 2011-06-24 09:33:58 AnatolV has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1524 2011-06-24 09:34:22 <xtalmath> if you include few transaction (P<<T), you will increase your probability of being the first to hit target, if you include many transactions (P>>T) you could get a lot of fees but at lower probability of being first to hit target
1525 2011-06-24 09:34:25 fnord0 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1526 2011-06-24 09:34:49 <lfm> xtalmath: if total fees >= current estimated average cost to mine a block, then start work.
1527 2011-06-24 09:36:04 guest has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1528 2011-06-24 09:36:07 hipeople has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1529 2011-06-24 09:36:10 <lfm> xtalmath: the user will have trouble estimating miners costs, yes, since mining costs vary al lot from area to area (electricity prices vary a lot)
1530 2011-06-24 09:36:40 <xtalmath> lfm: say divide 10 minutes by 3 time units, T=2 and P=1 would have twice as much chance to mint but half as much reward, T=1 and P=2 would have half as much chance to mint and twice as much fees
1531 2011-06-24 09:36:50 <unclemantis> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Proper_Money_Handling_(JSON-RPC)
1532 2011-06-24 09:36:51 <lfm> xtalmath: it means miners would be starting work at all sorts of different times basiclly
1533 2011-06-24 09:36:53 <unclemantis> look what i found
1534 2011-06-24 09:38:01 <lfm> xtalmath: also fpga miners costs are lower than GPU miners cossts and so on
1535 2011-06-24 09:38:06 danbri has joined
1536 2011-06-24 09:38:35 <unclemantis> 981.551445
1537 2011-06-24 09:38:51 <lfm> unclemantis: what about it?
1538 2011-06-24 09:38:56 fnord0 has joined
1539 2011-06-24 09:39:01 <unclemantis> lfm about what? the URL?
1540 2011-06-24 09:39:33 <lfm> or the number?
1541 2011-06-24 09:40:05 <vegard> <kinlo> unclemantis: if the network only mine's transactions with higher fee's, then clients must set fee's or the money isn't payed as no miner will take it in a block
1542 2011-06-24 09:40:19 <lfm> well that url is sure usefull! not.
1543 2011-06-24 09:40:47 <unclemantis> lfm 98155144500 is what i am getting and then when i do x / 1e8 i get 981.551445
1544 2011-06-24 09:41:29 <unclemantis> lfm how is that url NOT useful?
1545 2011-06-24 09:41:49 <lfm> vegard: I suspect miners will still throw in a few free txn out of charities sake to keep the interest of the most people
1546 2011-06-24 09:41:57 bobd0bb has joined
1547 2011-06-24 09:42:28 <unclemantis> lfm so there will be fees on every single transaction?
1548 2011-06-24 09:43:04 <lfm> unclemantis: No, but free txn will be subject to unpredictable delays
1549 2011-06-24 09:43:43 <lfm> like miners might only let a few free txn into each block, and let any extra wait
1550 2011-06-24 09:43:55 <unclemantis> lfm could take longer than a bank money wire LOL
1551 2011-06-24 09:44:05 <lfm> hehe yup
1552 2011-06-24 09:44:30 <unclemantis> well now that would suck
1553 2011-06-24 09:44:53 <lfm> the miners will want to motivate people to include fees somehow
1554 2011-06-24 09:45:59 <lfm> and nice big fees could really motivate big miners to move you to the front of all the queues to get your TXN processes promptly
1555 2011-06-24 09:46:14 <xtalmath> processing transactions will likely stay cpu work?
1556 2011-06-24 09:46:17 <unclemantis> and now the btc to game token exchange begins
1557 2011-06-24 09:46:22 vragnaroda has joined
1558 2011-06-24 09:46:30 <xtalmath> or will also end up in fpga?
1559 2011-06-24 09:47:24 <lfm> xtalmath: naw, just the central core of the mining hash calculations would get fpga treatment
1560 2011-06-24 09:48:33 <unclemantis> so if 1 btc is = to 1000 game tokens then i need to take 100000000 and just divide by 1e4
1561 2011-06-24 09:48:37 <unclemantis> does that make sence?
1562 2011-06-24 09:48:49 <xtalmath> in theory, i am not proposing this, generated blocks with n transactions could be rejected by a client that has heard of 2n transactions, however forking would have to be prevented
1563 2011-06-24 09:49:04 <lfm> depends on the game, poker can just play with btc as they are
1564 2011-06-24 09:49:26 <unclemantis> well that didn't work
1565 2011-06-24 09:49:36 <unclemantis> 10000.0 is 100000000 / 1e4
1566 2011-06-24 09:49:57 <unclemantis> 100000000 / 1e8 is 1.0
1567 2011-06-24 09:50:12 <lfm> if you want to translate some mmfrpg coppers to btc you are on your own
1568 2011-06-24 09:50:50 <lfm> unclemantis: there you go! using floats again! you are in a state of SIN! repent!
1569 2011-06-24 09:50:53 <unclemantis> i am building a conversion to tokens the same reason that casinos have you cash in for chips. One it is safer and two, people play more when they are spending fake money
1570 2011-06-24 09:51:14 <unclemantis> lfm i am not using floats!
1571 2011-06-24 09:51:20 <unclemantis> 100000000 is a BIGINT
1572 2011-06-24 09:51:22 <lfm> 1e4 is a float
1573 2011-06-24 09:51:33 <lfm> 1.0 is a float
1574 2011-06-24 09:51:41 <unclemantis> grrrrrrr
1575 2011-06-24 09:52:32 <unclemantis> i need the decimals
1576 2011-06-24 09:52:35 <unclemantis> i can't truncate
1577 2011-06-24 09:52:43 <lfm> 1e4 is a float, 1000 is a int
1578 2011-06-24 09:52:56 <lfm> say what you mean
1579 2011-06-24 09:53:56 <unclemantis> say someone comes in with 100.00000001 BTC
1580 2011-06-24 09:54:03 <lfm> ok when you say 1.0 BTC thats not a float but I didnt see you say BTC there
1581 2011-06-24 09:54:15 <unclemantis> i convert 100.00000001 to 10000000001
1582 2011-06-24 09:54:40 <unclemantis> i then run 10000000001 / 100000000 i get 100 not 100.00000001
1583 2011-06-24 09:54:58 <unclemantis> lfm don't mind me
1584 2011-06-24 09:55:22 <unclemantis> so using 1e8 to convert OUT to BTC again is fine
1585 2011-06-24 09:55:55 <unclemantis> but if i convert to game tokens i should use / 1000 if i want my demoninations to be 1btc per 1000 tokens
1586 2011-06-24 09:55:57 <unclemantis> correct?
1587 2011-06-24 09:55:58 cosurgi has joined
1588 2011-06-24 09:56:28 <lfm> ok if you want to work with 100.00000001 BTC as 10000000001 then display "%u.%08u", floor(value / 100000000), value % 100000000
1589 2011-06-24 09:56:41 bliket has joined
1590 2011-06-24 09:56:50 <lfm> or "%lu.%08lu"
1591 2011-06-24 09:56:51 <xtalmath> my claim at mt gox was accepted!
1592 2011-06-24 09:57:06 <xtalmath> but then again my balance was 0 - 0
1593 2011-06-24 09:57:09 <lfm> assuming you are using C (thats what I use)
1594 2011-06-24 09:57:27 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1595 2011-06-24 09:58:01 <lfm> not really using floor() tho since thats actuallty a float function
1596 2011-06-24 09:58:51 meelu has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1597 2011-06-24 10:01:07 <unclemantis> i want to convert 100.001 BTC from the gettransactions array. So I do what?
1598 2011-06-24 10:01:21 <unclemantis> i want to convert 100.001 to 100.00100000
1599 2011-06-24 10:01:24 <unclemantis> i want to convert 100.001 to 10000100000
1600 2011-06-24 10:01:28 <lfm> unclemantis: ok are you using C?
1601 2011-06-24 10:01:31 <unclemantis> ruby
1602 2011-06-24 10:01:36 <unclemantis> same difference
1603 2011-06-24 10:01:50 <lfm> well sorry I dont know the right way to do it in ruby.
1604 2011-06-24 10:01:58 <unclemantis> and then i want to convert it back from 10000100000 to 100.001
1605 2011-06-24 10:02:09 <lfm> ok have unsigned long long value;
1606 2011-06-24 10:02:21 <lfm> value = 10000100000;
1607 2011-06-24 10:02:26 <unclemantis> i also want to convert 10000100000 to tokens where 1000 tokens is equal to 1btc
1608 2011-06-24 10:02:35 droud has left ()
1609 2011-06-24 10:02:48 <unclemantis> lfm stop
1610 2011-06-24 10:03:08 <lfm> printf("%llu.%08llu\n", value / 100000000LU, value % 100000000LU);
1611 2011-06-24 10:03:10 <unclemantis> how do i turn the 100.001 float that is coming in from json into 10000100000 bitint
1612 2011-06-24 10:04:09 <unclemantis> it is ugly but this is what i am doing right now
1613 2011-06-24 10:04:17 <unclemantis> value = sprintf("%.8f", transaction['amount']).to_s.sub('.','').to_i
1614 2011-06-24 10:04:23 <lfm> unclemantis: well thats a bit trickier. first make sure it is a char string, then pad the end till it has exactly 8 decimal places.
1615 2011-06-24 10:04:36 <unclemantis> so what i am doing is fine?
1616 2011-06-24 10:04:40 <unclemantis> read left to right
1617 2011-06-24 10:04:55 * unclemantis smells coffee
1618 2011-06-24 10:05:04 * unclemantis needs to go go investigate
1619 2011-06-24 10:05:10 <lfm> %.8f IS A FLOATING POINT display it will be inacurate!
1620 2011-06-24 10:07:22 <unclemantis> ok. so how the fuck do i pad?
1621 2011-06-24 10:07:40 <unclemantis> do i have to get the location of the decimal manualy some how?
1622 2011-06-24 10:08:08 <lfm> unclemantis: its a bunch of char string operations in C. ruby would be totally different I spoze.
1623 2011-06-24 10:08:32 <unclemantis> try me
1624 2011-06-24 10:09:31 <lfm> well I hope we're not driving away people who want to actually talk about bitcoin instead of junior shmuck programmer lessons ...
1625 2011-06-24 10:10:00 <unclemantis> lfm shall i move this into #ruby
1626 2011-06-24 10:10:15 hybriz_ has quit (Quit: .)
1627 2011-06-24 10:10:15 <unclemantis> or do you want to still help out and we can move this to a PM
1628 2011-06-24 10:10:19 <lfm> in C I would start with a char * str = "100.001"; or somthing like it I spoze.
1629 2011-06-24 10:10:42 <unclemantis> so convert float to string
1630 2011-06-24 10:10:46 <unclemantis> .to_s
1631 2011-06-24 10:10:47 <unclemantis> now what
1632 2011-06-24 10:10:49 <lfm> then find the decimal char *dp = index(str, '.');
1633 2011-06-24 10:11:08 <lfm> split it into two strings by *dp = 0; dp++;
1634 2011-06-24 10:11:10 <unclemantis> .sub('.','')
1635 2011-06-24 10:11:37 <unclemantis> two strings?
1636 2011-06-24 10:11:53 <unclemantis> what would the value look like?
1637 2011-06-24 10:12:12 <lfm> the while (strlen(dp) < 8) dp = strcat(dp, "0");
1638 2011-06-24 10:12:34 <lfm> so then dp == "00100000"
1639 2011-06-24 10:12:44 <lfm> and str = "100";
1640 2011-06-24 10:13:06 <lfm> got it?
1641 2011-06-24 10:13:15 <unclemantis> we are SPLITING not REPLACING
1642 2011-06-24 10:13:25 <unclemantis> ok
1643 2011-06-24 10:13:54 <unclemantis> and then i check the length of the right side string
1644 2011-06-24 10:14:06 <unclemantis> and add x number of zeros
1645 2011-06-24 10:14:12 <lfm> and padd it to 8 places , ya
1646 2011-06-24 10:14:15 <unclemantis> and then combine them back?
1647 2011-06-24 10:14:30 <unclemantis> and then convert to bigint
1648 2011-06-24 10:16:05 <lfm> sscanf(str, "%llu", &wholepart); sscanf(dp, "%llu", &fracpart); and total = wholepart * 100000000LLU + farctpart;
1649 2011-06-24 10:16:30 <lianj> "%s%8s" % ("%.8f" % 100.001).split(".")
1650 2011-06-24 10:16:39 datagutt has joined
1651 2011-06-24 10:16:39 datagutt has quit (Changing host)
1652 2011-06-24 10:16:39 datagutt has joined
1653 2011-06-24 10:16:46 Sylph has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1654 2011-06-24 10:17:08 <lfm> llan%f is floating point, we dont want to use floating point cuz it will underflow
1655 2011-06-24 10:17:34 <lfm> lianj %f is floating point, we dont want to use floating point cuz it will underflow
1656 2011-06-24 10:18:28 <lianj> isnt the value of type float anw?
1657 2011-06-24 10:19:21 * unclemantis got accepted into the new mtgox
1658 2011-06-24 10:19:21 <lfm> well if you think so then you are not going to have an accurate total if you start working with 10 million BTC amounts and 8 digit fractional parts
1659 2011-06-24 10:19:34 f33x has joined
1660 2011-06-24 10:19:58 <unclemantis> problem is, i have btc not USD and current trading at tradehill is 15.40 and I really have no clue if market it going to go sky rocket or nose dive
1661 2011-06-24 10:20:03 <unclemantis> for mtgox that is
1662 2011-06-24 10:20:10 <lianj> lfm: only if you calc on it
1663 2011-06-24 10:20:30 <lfm> lianj: or try to display it
1664 2011-06-24 10:22:06 <lianj> ok, so what does unclemantis want? coins are represented as sathosis in the protocol
1665 2011-06-24 10:22:52 <lfm> lianj: ya, and he needs to figure out how to work with stoshi and display BTC without using floats
1666 2011-06-24 10:22:55 torsthaldo has joined
1667 2011-06-24 10:23:13 <xtalmath> hmm upon second thought pools will tend to absorb each other once the network is fee driven, the merkle root hash has to be computed only once and can be shared with all members of the pool, pools will have a dedicated high bandwith server, to process transactions and only send the hash to the members.
1668 2011-06-24 10:23:38 <lianj> lfm: oh ok :)
1669 2011-06-24 10:24:00 torsthaldo_ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1670 2011-06-24 10:24:18 <lfm> xtalmath: you should not really share the merkle root between members of the pool. every member should have their own unique block header to work on
1671 2011-06-24 10:24:34 <xtalmath> lfm: how is that?
1672 2011-06-24 10:24:57 <Raccoon> merkle root?
1673 2011-06-24 10:25:07 <Raccoon> sounds like something from world of warcraft
1674 2011-06-24 10:25:31 <xtalmath> lfm: why wouldnt members share the same merkle root?
1675 2011-06-24 10:25:33 <lfm> if you give everyone the same block header they can only find the same block and only the fastest will ever get a share, the slower ones will just duplicate the work
1676 2011-06-24 10:25:53 <xtalmath> lfm not true, i am not saying same block header, only merkle root
1677 2011-06-24 10:26:00 <lfm> the merkle root is how you give different block headers to each miner
1678 2011-06-24 10:26:10 <xtalmath> ?
1679 2011-06-24 10:26:22 <lfm> xtalmath: how else would you do it?
1680 2011-06-24 10:26:34 ghtdak has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1681 2011-06-24 10:26:46 <lfm> xtalmath: everything else MUST be the same
1682 2011-06-24 10:26:46 <xtalmath> the header contains the merkle root, not other way around
1683 2011-06-24 10:26:56 <xtalmath> are you talking about eligius?
1684 2011-06-24 10:27:05 <lfm> xtalmath: everything else in the block header MUST be the same
1685 2011-06-24 10:27:20 <xtalmath> the same as what?
1686 2011-06-24 10:27:28 <lfm> the same for everyone
1687 2011-06-24 10:27:47 <lfm> you need to give unique block headers to each pool member
1688 2011-06-24 10:28:06 <xtalmath> err, no nonce and timestamp are supposed to be different between miners
1689 2011-06-24 10:28:12 <xtalmath> err expected
1690 2011-06-24 10:28:28 <lfm> the nonce starts at zero for every member
1691 2011-06-24 10:28:57 <lfm> the timestamp should be the same for everyone too (or basiclly the same correct time)
1692 2011-06-24 10:29:21 <xtalmath> yes
1693 2011-06-24 10:29:45 kW_ has joined
1694 2011-06-24 10:29:46 <lfm> so you need to vary the merkle root to get unique block headers
1695 2011-06-24 10:30:05 <xtalmath> so everybody MAY have same merkleroot and different nonce, timestamp,...
1696 2011-06-24 10:30:39 devserial has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1697 2011-06-24 10:30:45 <lfm> nope. the merkle root is how you figure out who gets credit for the solutions too
1698 2011-06-24 10:30:48 <xtalmath> the merkle root just changes when transactions are accepted by the miner or mining pool
1699 2011-06-24 10:31:07 <xtalmath> so you ARE talking about eligius
1700 2011-06-24 10:31:21 devserial has joined
1701 2011-06-24 10:31:30 <lfm> xtalmath: well there is a little thing called "extranonce" in the coinbase transaction that you probably need to use
1702 2011-06-24 10:32:03 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1703 2011-06-24 10:32:06 <lfm> I am talking about any pool or miner server really
1704 2011-06-24 10:32:15 Xunie has joined
1705 2011-06-24 10:33:38 <xtalmath> consider following setup: all members mine in name of pool organizers address, then would add all transactions and update merkle root for each transaction, ... this can be done on a high bandwith server and spares the members from streaming and processing these transactions
1706 2011-06-24 10:35:23 <lfm> you're maybe half way there
1707 2011-06-24 10:35:37 f33x_ has joined
1708 2011-06-24 10:35:43 <unclemantis> lfm i finally have my VALUE
1709 2011-06-24 10:35:49 <unclemantis> 98155144500
1710 2011-06-24 10:36:02 <lfm> unclemantis: yay
1711 2011-06-24 10:36:06 <xtalmath> where a standalone miners merkle root is updated (by processing the new transaction) when a new transaction came in, in the future a pool server receives a transaction and updates merkle root => sends to members => members continue hashing on new merkle root without processing a lot of transactions
1712 2011-06-24 10:36:07 <unclemantis> when i do 98155144500 / 100000000 I get 981
1713 2011-06-24 10:36:10 B0g4r7 has joined
1714 2011-06-24 10:36:23 <unclemantis> 98155144500 is a BIGINT
1715 2011-06-24 10:37:07 devserial has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1716 2011-06-24 10:37:14 <lfm> xtalmath: that would work ok for one user but you want separate coinbase txn and merkle root for each user, really, beleive it!
1717 2011-06-24 10:37:31 darrob has joined
1718 2011-06-24 10:37:35 f33x has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1719 2011-06-24 10:37:38 f33x__ has joined
1720 2011-06-24 10:37:48 devserial has joined
1721 2011-06-24 10:38:50 <xtalmath> you mean to identify who contributed?
1722 2011-06-24 10:38:53 <xtalmath> or why?
1723 2011-06-24 10:38:58 <lfm> xtalmath: you can use the same bitcoin key for the coinbase but you need to use the extranonce stuff to make each user have a different coinbase and different merkle tree root
1724 2011-06-24 10:39:18 <xtalmath> but why is that necessary?
1725 2011-06-24 10:39:27 <lfm> xtalmath: yes to identify them and for proper operation of the whole system
1726 2011-06-24 10:39:48 ghtdak has joined
1727 2011-06-24 10:39:57 <lfm> xtalmath: like I said, it is the only way to make each blockheader for each user unique
1728 2011-06-24 10:39:59 <xtalmath> I thought they were rewarded with 32 bit difficulty hashes
1729 2011-06-24 10:40:11 f33x_ has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1730 2011-06-24 10:40:45 <lfm> xtalmath: ya, the hash of the block header target is like 32 zero bits
1731 2011-06-24 10:41:01 <xtalmath> so keep coinbase equal for everyone and add in a single transaction to the merkle root from server, thats processing 1 transaction to identify yourself to spare having to process all transactions
1732 2011-06-24 10:41:06 nefario has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1733 2011-06-24 10:41:10 vokoda has joined
1734 2011-06-24 10:41:19 <lfm> xtalmath: huh?
1735 2011-06-24 10:41:52 <lfm> add in what txn? that IS the coinbase txn is the only one you can actually play with
1736 2011-06-24 10:42:39 <xtalmath> miners have bitcoins, they can send to self, and register that address to pool so it doesnt get included in block
1737 2011-06-24 10:42:52 <lfm> every time you want to add a new txn to a block you will need to recalc the merkle tree for every user. you have no choice
1738 2011-06-24 10:42:55 <xtalmath> and they dont send that transaction into the network, only pool server
1739 2011-06-24 10:43:07 <xtalmath> or well let them, it stays their money
1740 2011-06-24 10:43:14 <xtalmath> yes
1741 2011-06-24 10:43:18 <unclemantis> would be cool to get this :) http://www.mobilepc.com/Electronics/Asus-ATI-Radeon-HD5770-1-GB-DDR5-PCI-E-Graphics-Card
1742 2011-06-24 10:43:21 <xtalmath> for every user
1743 2011-06-24 10:43:26 <lfm> yup
1744 2011-06-24 10:43:37 MC1984 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1745 2011-06-24 10:43:51 <xtalmath> what originally was T transactions * U users is now 1 transaction * U users
1746 2011-06-24 10:44:13 <xtalmath> +T transactions * 1 user at server
1747 2011-06-24 10:44:46 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1748 2011-06-24 10:44:49 lorenzoIT has joined
1749 2011-06-24 10:44:50 <xtalmath> this is T*U vs T+U, which will be important in the fee driven future
1750 2011-06-24 10:44:51 <unclemantis> 981.55144500
1751 2011-06-24 10:44:53 <unclemantis> horrary
1752 2011-06-24 10:45:00 <lfm> xtalmath: yup if you insist on updateing for every txn you see, that is your cost. that is why some pools wait before adding new txn to batch up a few before a change
1753 2011-06-24 10:45:04 <xtalmath> miners will be economically pressured to join a pool
1754 2011-06-24 10:46:09 <xtalmath> lfm: say you update half the time: T/2*U is still >> T/2 + U
1755 2011-06-24 10:46:10 seventoes has joined
1756 2011-06-24 10:46:16 <lfm> xtalmath: in fact you could just ignore new txn unless they have a real nice fee untill the next block comes in
1757 2011-06-24 10:46:29 <xtalmath> and in fee driven network you DONT want to miss out on transaction count
1758 2011-06-24 10:46:52 <xtalmath> i am not talking about current generation driven mining
1759 2011-06-24 10:47:02 <lfm> xtalmath: well ya, if it has a juicy fee then you pay the price
1760 2011-06-24 10:47:30 <lfm> the price is new merkle trees for everyone
1761 2011-06-24 10:47:49 <xtalmath> and the effort difference stays U*T >> U+T
1762 2011-06-24 10:48:28 <unclemantis> 100000000 == 1BTC. How do I make 1000 Game Tokens == 1BTC or should i just make 1BTC == 100000000 game tokens LOL
1763 2011-06-24 10:48:32 <lfm> well you MAY be able to save a bit of calculation by just updateing part of the tree that needs to be updated for a new txn
1764 2011-06-24 10:49:13 <lfm> unclemantis: whats a "game token"? I have no idea
1765 2011-06-24 10:49:22 <unclemantis> game chip
1766 2011-06-24 10:49:29 <xtalmath> if you have the merkle _root_ from the pool server that processes transactions, you only have to do add in 1 transaction that differentiates you
1767 2011-06-24 10:49:30 <unclemantis> alternative currency
1768 2011-06-24 10:49:47 <unclemantis> lets say 1BTC == 1000USD
1769 2011-06-24 10:49:52 <lfm> well you make it any price you want. prolly best if you count the price in satoshis
1770 2011-06-24 10:49:57 <unclemantis> how do i convert 15BTC to USD
1771 2011-06-24 10:49:59 o_0oo_ has quit ()
1772 2011-06-24 10:50:12 <lfm> unclemantis: very carefully
1773 2011-06-24 10:50:14 <xtalmath> lfm: multiplicative vs additive difference is not a bit of calculation
1774 2011-06-24 10:50:32 <unclemantis> lfm funny guy! see! you CAN make people laugh
1775 2011-06-24 10:50:57 <lfm> xtalmath: yes well you need unique merkle trees for every pool member, sorry, no getting around it
1776 2011-06-24 10:51:11 <xtalmath> unclemantis 15000USD
1777 2011-06-24 10:51:20 <xtalmath> lfm: I agreed to that
1778 2011-06-24 10:51:52 <unclemantis> LOL
1779 2011-06-24 10:52:00 HarryS has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1780 2011-06-24 10:52:00 <xtalmath> they can make it unique by adding one transaction into merkle root, instead of T
1781 2011-06-24 10:52:06 <lfm> xtalmath: ok so when you want to add a txn with a fee you want to claim you need to update all those merkle trees too right?
1782 2011-06-24 10:52:28 <unclemantis> say i have 1BTC and I am storing it as 100000000. I want 100000000 == 1000 TOKENS
1783 2011-06-24 10:52:38 <xtalmath> what?
1784 2011-06-24 10:52:43 <unclemantis> exactly
1785 2011-06-24 10:52:51 <lfm> xtalmath: add WHAT txn? the only txb you are actually free to fool around with is the coinbase
1786 2011-06-24 10:53:46 <lfm> xtalmath: you DO not want to start inventing extra TXN just to make users different. thats what the coinbase xtranonce is for!
1787 2011-06-24 10:54:41 <xtalmath> lfm: everybodys free to fool with his own money, each pool member has their address publicly listed on the pool web page, the server only combines transactions not including these, each miner "signs it" by moving money at that transaction
1788 2011-06-24 10:55:23 <xtalmath> yes thats what its for, but it will be more lucrative for miners to add the personal detail last
1789 2011-06-24 10:56:13 gim has joined
1790 2011-06-24 10:56:31 <lfm> xtalmath: well that is no longer a pool then. ech miner can just mine solo if thats how you want to do it.
1791 2011-06-24 10:56:59 HarryS has joined
1792 2011-06-24 10:57:01 <xtalmath> if the pool server doesnt provide the pre merkle "root" youd have less processing power = less target hits = less reward
1793 2011-06-24 10:57:35 <lfm> I dont see that working, sorry
1794 2011-06-24 10:58:25 <xtalmath> lfm: no if you are alone you are the server and you dont enjoy the preprocessing of transactions
1795 2011-06-24 10:58:58 <lfm> thats a minor cost compared to the nonce hashing. it really is minor
1796 2011-06-24 10:59:05 <xtalmath> it is NOW
1797 2011-06-24 10:59:23 <lfm> if you do it right it stays minor
1798 2011-06-24 10:59:36 darrob has quit (Quit: WeeChat 0.3.5)
1799 2011-06-24 10:59:42 <xtalmath> my investigation relates to future FEE motivated mining, post quasi 0reward blocks era
1800 2011-06-24 11:00:25 <lfm> yes for pool servers you start to need a powerfull machine to serve all those merkle trees but you arnt going to get around it that way from anything I understand
1801 2011-06-24 11:00:30 AStove has joined
1802 2011-06-24 11:01:47 <xtalmath> mining expected reward R: now based on hashing power, later based on hashin power * processing power
1803 2011-06-24 11:02:52 <lfm> agreed, eventually those processing costs will get significant and need to be factored into the cost of mining and creating blocks.
1804 2011-06-24 11:03:05 <xtalmath> hash at half the rate and your chances of minting halve for fixed transaction content, process half transaction content and your reward of minting halves for fixed hashing power
1805 2011-06-24 11:03:19 <lfm> but they would still be pretty small for solo miners I think
1806 2011-06-24 11:03:43 <xtalmath> now R=Hashpower. future R=Hashpower*Processpower
1807 2011-06-24 11:04:06 AnatolV_ has quit ()
1808 2011-06-24 11:04:16 MC1984 has joined
1809 2011-06-24 11:04:44 AnatolV has joined
1810 2011-06-24 11:05:00 ndeee has quit (Quit: c-u)
1811 2011-06-24 11:05:22 <xtalmath> lfm: transactions in a network scale quadratically not linearly a transaction is between 2 persons, 10 times more people on network can result in 100 times more transactions
1812 2011-06-24 11:05:51 <xtalmath> processing costs will become big
1813 2011-06-24 11:06:01 <lfm> we have seen roughly what to expect I think with the spam txn. current nodes can handle 1000s of txn per block and still not fall over. It should only get better with more sofisticated txn filtering and whatnot
1814 2011-06-24 11:06:31 <xtalmath> i am not talking about spam but legitimate use
1815 2011-06-24 11:06:43 <xtalmath> or do you filter that away as well?
1816 2011-06-24 11:06:46 RobboNZ has joined
1817 2011-06-24 11:07:49 <lfm> yup, high levels of legitimate TXN would probably look a lot like spam I figure. just we wont want to discourage nice proper TXN like we are trying to do with the current spam
1818 2011-06-24 11:07:57 MC1984 has quit (Client Quit)
1819 2011-06-24 11:08:15 <xtalmath> legitimate transaction rate will scale quadratically with the network
1820 2011-06-24 11:08:26 <xtalmath> with amount of nodes in network
1821 2011-06-24 11:08:30 <lfm> duuno what that means
1822 2011-06-24 11:09:16 <xtalmath> it means 3 times as many people=> 9 times more transactions, 100 times as many people => 10 000 more transactions
1823 2011-06-24 11:10:07 <lfm> why? seems to me like 3 times the people is 3 times the TXN
1824 2011-06-24 11:10:32 ionspin has joined
1825 2011-06-24 11:10:56 <xtalmath> nope in a 3 times smaller network less people find somebody they want to trade a service or good with
1826 2011-06-24 11:11:02 Geebus has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1827 2011-06-24 11:11:27 <xtalmath> trading is mutually agreeing
1828 2011-06-24 11:11:40 k^^ has joined
1829 2011-06-24 11:11:55 <lfm> I dont think everyone deals with everyone. once you are doing ALL your deals on the net, adding more people will not make you do more txn
1830 2011-06-24 11:12:04 <xtalmath> im not saying that somebody will spend 3 times more btc netto just because the network grows
1831 2011-06-24 11:12:32 <lfm> so its less than x^2
1832 2011-06-24 11:13:01 <xtalmath> of course it is, I never said it was =x^2, scaling means =c*x^2
1833 2011-06-24 11:13:26 <lfm> well your earlier examples impleid x^2
1834 2011-06-24 11:13:36 <xtalmath> implied =c*x^2
1835 2011-06-24 11:13:48 <lfm> nodes^2
1836 2011-06-24 11:14:06 <xtalmath> have you heard of algorithmic complexity?
1837 2011-06-24 11:14:22 <lfm> #txn is proportional to node^2 ??
1838 2011-06-24 11:15:01 <RobboNZ> im too drunk for a maths lesson
1839 2011-06-24 11:15:13 <RobboNZ> lets talk shit
1840 2011-06-24 11:15:20 <lfm> well ya, the number of possible pairs of nodes in a TXN grows as nodes^2 but the actuall TXN need not grow that way
1841 2011-06-24 11:15:43 <lfm> RobboNZ: what do you want to talk about?
1842 2011-06-24 11:16:02 <RobboNZ> where is the fucking snow!
1843 2011-06-24 11:16:22 <lfm> snow? its summer here! or do you mean cocain?
1844 2011-06-24 11:16:22 <RobboNZ> its nearly july and there is no snow in queenstown
1845 2011-06-24 11:16:39 <xtalmath> lfm take your c=0.001: c*10^2=0.1 and c*100^2=10, the network grew from 10 to 100 nodes (*10) the transactions grew by 100 (0.1 to 10)
1846 2011-06-24 11:17:36 <lfm> xtalmath: by that logic if the net grows to 1000 then every node will do a million txn per time period?
1847 2011-06-24 11:17:42 <xtalmath> yes
1848 2011-06-24 11:17:53 <xtalmath> but will the net grow 1000 times?
1849 2011-06-24 11:17:59 <xtalmath> nobody knows
1850 2011-06-24 11:18:23 <xtalmath> how many nodes are performing transactions now?
1851 2011-06-24 11:18:45 <lfm> well I dont see that, the nodes each have a limit on the number of txn they would do. I am not going to be doing a million txn
1852 2011-06-24 11:19:07 <xtalmath> your going to do a thousand not a million
1853 2011-06-24 11:19:20 <xtalmath> youll have soft that launders your BTC
1854 2011-06-24 11:19:29 <xtalmath> or someone else will do it for you
1855 2011-06-24 11:20:14 <xtalmath> as industry adapts to mining it will become cheaper, allowing microtransactions
1856 2011-06-24 11:20:15 <lfm> and once again, once I am doing ALL my txn on the net I wont do more TXN just cuz the net keep growing. TXN are kinda localized generally to certain partners
1857 2011-06-24 11:20:30 larsivi has joined
1858 2011-06-24 11:22:29 <xtalmath> websites will feature per minute payment systems, and theyll bill you
1859 2011-06-24 11:22:32 <xtalmath> :D
1860 2011-06-24 11:22:43 <lfm> the traffic I think will tend tward a growth rate directly proportional to the number of nodes, not exponetial. it would be much more linear
1861 2011-06-24 11:23:36 <xtalmath> the same discussion happened when people started the internet, "its not because the network grows that I will want to see more words"
1862 2011-06-24 11:24:21 <xtalmath> given the opportunity to view different kind of information you will request many small pieces of information from many different sites
1863 2011-06-24 11:25:39 <xtalmath> given the opportunity of worldwide microtransactions without considerable fees you WILL pay for more little things on the web
1864 2011-06-24 11:25:59 <lfm> well ya, the net is still adjusting to people veiwing full motion video over the net. not sure how much heavier it can get tho
1865 2011-06-24 11:26:31 <lfm> like 3d video is at worst twice the data
1866 2011-06-24 11:26:40 koleg has quit (2!kvirc@79.133.149.222|Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1867 2011-06-24 11:26:55 <lfm> and 3d stuff mostly sucks so far
1868 2011-06-24 11:27:19 <Happy0> upb: where would you have been if i hadn't highlighted you? u mad?
1869 2011-06-24 11:27:23 <Happy0> sorry, that was a terrible joke
1870 2011-06-24 11:27:27 <xtalmath> now I dont believe it will cripple bitcoin network, if it gets to slow even though fees, it will become less attractive => smaller network => feasible to process most txns....
1871 2011-06-24 11:28:06 <xtalmath> but transaction processing will become a new bottleneck for miners
1872 2011-06-24 11:28:19 <xtalmath> unless they cooperate in pools
1873 2011-06-24 11:28:45 MC1984 has joined
1874 2011-06-24 11:29:14 somuchwin2 has joined
1875 2011-06-24 11:29:15 <lfm> xtalmath: and it seems bitcoin is not really suitable for many txn. Im not sure it can adjust to handle a lot of what some people want it to do. we may well need some new currency inventions outside of bitcoin to handle some of those applications
1876 2011-06-24 11:29:16 prof7bit has joined
1877 2011-06-24 11:29:32 <prof7bit> good morning
1878 2011-06-24 11:30:16 lorenzoIT has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1879 2011-06-24 11:30:46 crocopod has quit (Quit: whatever)
1880 2011-06-24 11:30:50 <lfm> hi
1881 2011-06-24 11:30:55 somuchwin has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1882 2011-06-24 11:31:27 <RobboNZ> yeah has anyone managed to send 0.001 of a bit coin yet?
1883 2011-06-24 11:31:33 koleg has joined
1884 2011-06-24 11:31:40 <unclemantis> lfm because i am now dealing with 100000000 instead of 1.00000000 I am having trouble convering 1.00000000 BTC to 1000 game tokens
1885 2011-06-24 11:31:45 <RobboNZ> i tried 0.01 and it tried to chage me to send it
1886 2011-06-24 11:31:47 <lfm> RobboNZ: I think lots have
1887 2011-06-24 11:32:09 <lfm> RobboNZ: well ya it will try to charge you for the privlege
1888 2011-06-24 11:32:11 <RobboNZ> how do you send suh a small amount?
1889 2011-06-24 11:32:14 <xtalmath> think about before internet, its easy to imagine disbelief is somebody claims the network load will grow quadratically (viewing a website seems like a private relation, I will not start reading more because the net grows) but we dont read more, we read from more sources
1890 2011-06-24 11:32:35 subpar has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1891 2011-06-24 11:32:44 <RobboNZ> why cant you send small amounts without charges?
1892 2011-06-24 11:33:12 <unclemantis> because then people would send 10000 transactions of .0001 to get around the fee
1893 2011-06-24 11:33:13 <Happy0> RobboNz: to stop people maliciously flooding the network with small transactions between their own accounts
1894 2011-06-24 11:33:17 <Happy0> i think
1895 2011-06-24 11:33:27 <unclemantis> Happy0 i aggree
1896 2011-06-24 11:33:44 <lfm> RobboNZ: well the idea that bitcoin TXN are free is actually an illution. there are limits what people will support.
1897 2011-06-24 11:33:44 <xtalmath> in reality its a binary relation, interest proportional to both (I want to read) * (sources to read from)... nothing forces you to read the whole page before clicking a link
1898 2011-06-24 11:33:51 <RobboNZ> ok so how do we let honest transactions of such mounts through?
1899 2011-06-24 11:33:53 <Happy0> RobboNz but it's also annoying me, because i've only got 0.005 bit coins, and i want to test my program =p
1900 2011-06-24 11:33:57 <Happy0> but i can't get the testnet working
1901 2011-06-24 11:34:22 <lfm> RobboNZ: well you let them thru by paying fees
1902 2011-06-24 11:34:41 <RobboNZ> so your telling me the system is fucked if too many people try to send too many small transactions?
1903 2011-06-24 11:34:51 <unclemantis> Happy0 what is wrong with your testnet
1904 2011-06-24 11:34:52 <RobboNZ> i thought that was the point of bitcoin?
1905 2011-06-24 11:34:58 <lfm> like maybe a fee of 0.0001
1906 2011-06-24 11:35:09 <prof7bit> this is a hopeless situation: http://imagebin.org/159781 <-- CPU mining on old pentiums
1907 2011-06-24 11:35:11 <xtalmath> if viewing information content will be charged => you will not spend more money a day, but you will make more smaller transaction a day
1908 2011-06-24 11:35:20 <Happy0> unclemantis: maybe i don't understand how testnet works, but when i start bitcoind with the -testnet flag, it's just my normal account data that's there
1909 2011-06-24 11:35:23 <WildSoil> estimated time for difficult increase ?
1910 2011-06-24 11:35:41 segfault64 has joined
1911 2011-06-24 11:35:45 <lfm> RobboNZ: not really. its more like the drug dealer who will tell you "the first one is free!"
1912 2011-06-24 11:36:11 Stellar has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1913 2011-06-24 11:36:13 <xtalmath> le moral: wanna get rich, dont create content (linear reward), distribute content (quadratic reward),
1914 2011-06-24 11:36:19 <RobboNZ> why are you cou mining?
1915 2011-06-24 11:36:23 <RobboNZ> cpu
1916 2011-06-24 11:36:33 <RobboNZ> its fucked is what it is
1917 2011-06-24 11:36:42 <RobboNZ> theres no free small transactions
1918 2011-06-24 11:36:48 <RobboNZ> so its fucked
1919 2011-06-24 11:36:51 <unclemantis> Happy0 http://sourceforge.net/projects/bitcoin/files/Bitcoin/testnet-in-a-box/
1920 2011-06-24 11:37:00 <lfm> RobboNZ: thems the breaks
1921 2011-06-24 11:37:07 <RobboNZ> i was told that its a great currency because you can send such small amounts...
1922 2011-06-24 11:37:10 <Happy0> unclemantis: someone told me there was a possibility that might interfer with my normal client? :S
1923 2011-06-24 11:37:14 <Happy0> so that put me off =p
1924 2011-06-24 11:37:20 <RobboNZ> but you cant, without massive feeds
1925 2011-06-24 11:37:21 <RobboNZ> fees
1926 2011-06-24 11:37:33 <prof7bit> can anybody please be so kind and point his powerful GPU miner to -u prof7bit_thankyou -p xxxx -o http://nl2.btcguild.com:8332 for only a FEW MINUTES to help me reach the minimum of 0.01 so i can finally stop this useless cpu mining experiment?
1927 2011-06-24 11:37:53 <prof7bit> http://imagebin.org/159781
1928 2011-06-24 11:37:57 <xelister> Diablo-D3: your newer miner (current git) appears -20 Mhash slower then older (2 weeks?) one
1929 2011-06-24 11:37:58 <RobboNZ> im about to switch my miner off and sell all my bitcoins
1930 2011-06-24 11:38:04 <xelister> Diablo-D3: on 5970 sdk2.1
1931 2011-06-24 11:38:07 <lfm> prof7bit: lol
1932 2011-06-24 11:38:09 <Happy0> xD
1933 2011-06-24 11:38:11 <xelister> RobboNZ: why
1934 2011-06-24 11:38:13 f33x__ has quit (Quit: f33x__)
1935 2011-06-24 11:38:18 <RobboNZ> becuase having no free small transactions is going to fuck bit coin
1936 2011-06-24 11:38:19 <xelister> lol @ massive feds :P
1937 2011-06-24 11:38:50 <RobboNZ> yeah its not a massive fee now... but if bitcoin grows as its supposed to... then it will be
1938 2011-06-24 11:38:52 <xtalmath> RobboNZ you CAN send for free now and before
1939 2011-06-24 11:38:52 <lfm> RobboNZ: you can still do free btc if you know what you're doing
1940 2011-06-24 11:39:02 <xelister> prof7bit: I will. do you have an usb camera and hot sis
1941 2011-06-24 11:39:17 <Happy0> xtalmath: can i configure my bitcoind client to send without a fee?
1942 2011-06-24 11:39:19 <lfm> xelister: now now!
1943 2011-06-24 11:39:20 <prof7bit> just in case you ask yourself why you would help some random stranger, i am not a random stranger, I am the author of TorChat, so I am not a complete leecher
1944 2011-06-24 11:39:24 <unclemantis> Happy0 will not interfear because you can't have both running at the same time, they both use the same port
1945 2011-06-24 11:39:44 <Happy0> unclemantis: i thought testnet used a port in the high 10,000's
1946 2011-06-24 11:39:47 <xtalmath> send it to me with the fee, ill pay you back the fee
1947 2011-06-24 11:39:48 <Happy0> but fair enough =p
1948 2011-06-24 11:40:11 <Happy0> xtalmath: haha, what's your address? :P
1949 2011-06-24 11:40:19 <RobboNZ> but the client tried to chage you 0.01
1950 2011-06-24 11:40:34 <RobboNZ> so if im sending 0.01 thats a 100% fee
1951 2011-06-24 11:40:59 <lfm> RobboNZ: set your fee to 0.0001
1952 2011-06-24 11:41:05 <RobboNZ> where?
1953 2011-06-24 11:41:08 <xtalmath> err first of thats 0.01 per KB
1954 2011-06-24 11:41:21 <xtalmath> and second check your source code
1955 2011-06-24 11:41:36 hachque has joined
1956 2011-06-24 11:41:45 <lfm> xtalmath: ya, most txn are like 1/4 KB
1957 2011-06-24 11:41:47 <RobboNZ> i cant send it without the fee
1958 2011-06-24 11:42:00 <RobboNZ> i clicked "no i dont want to pay the fee"
1959 2011-06-24 11:42:02 <xtalmath> yes you can
1960 2011-06-24 11:42:04 <RobboNZ> but it wont let me
1961 2011-06-24 11:42:22 <lfm> RobboNZ: you maybe have a buggy version
1962 2011-06-24 11:42:24 <RobboNZ> im using the windows client
1963 2011-06-24 11:42:40 <xtalmath> its the user interface, to prevent spam, but a real spammer doesnt give a shit about the user interface, this design decision is just annoying to legit users
1964 2011-06-24 11:42:40 <RobboNZ> maybe but i thought of that and downloaded the latest version
1965 2011-06-24 11:42:55 <lfm> RobboNZ: ya, the new ones are buggy
1966 2011-06-24 11:42:58 <Happy0> prof7bit: just googled 'torchat'... impressive stuff! :P
1967 2011-06-24 11:42:59 <RobboNZ> so it is a "feature"
1968 2011-06-24 11:43:20 <xtalmath> also newcomers are bound to experiment with small amounts to learn how to use it, this is a real showstopper for newcomers
1969 2011-06-24 11:43:28 <RobboNZ> yeah shit
1970 2011-06-24 11:43:42 <RobboNZ> this shit needs to be aimed at joe sixpack
1971 2011-06-24 11:43:52 <xtalmath> RobboNZ, you can send without fee
1972 2011-06-24 11:43:58 <RobboNZ> otherwise its not going to gain grownd as a currency
1973 2011-06-24 11:43:59 <xtalmath> just find out how
1974 2011-06-24 11:44:03 <RobboNZ> ok how
1975 2011-06-24 11:44:09 <lfm> oh ya, you start doing those tiny txn it trys to thrttle you to one a day or something silly
1976 2011-06-24 11:44:13 <RobboNZ> somebody give me their adress
1977 2011-06-24 11:44:22 <RobboNZ> i'll gladly send 0.01 if there is no fee
1978 2011-06-24 11:44:38 <prof7bit> 17WaV2pr3c2rWFeCC1r7q6tuVYpYDdTnGo
1979 2011-06-24 11:44:59 <go1dfish> if you send without the gui does it add fees by default?
1980 2011-06-24 11:45:08 <xtalmath> let him find out, the more people understand inner workings the better
1981 2011-06-24 11:45:10 <RobboNZ> i cant do it
1982 2011-06-24 11:45:30 <RobboNZ> it says "do you want to send without the fee?" i click yes... nothing happens
1983 2011-06-24 11:45:55 <lfm> yup, buggy
1984 2011-06-24 11:45:59 <RobboNZ> oh shut
1985 2011-06-24 11:46:01 <xtalmath> robbonz: look at your balance, did it decrease?
1986 2011-06-24 11:46:05 <RobboNZ> i just paid the fee
1987 2011-06-24 11:46:08 <xtalmath> haha
1988 2011-06-24 11:46:13 <RobboNZ> i just paid the fee by accident
1989 2011-06-24 11:46:15 <RobboNZ> hahahaha
1990 2011-06-24 11:46:18 <RobboNZ> im drunk
1991 2011-06-24 11:46:20 <Happy0> guys: see if i use the 'sendfrom' command in bitcoind, does it send from your full balance, or only the balance associated with that account?
1992 2011-06-24 11:46:25 <xtalmath> did it decrease before the fee already?
1993 2011-06-24 11:46:34 <RobboNZ> yeah i sent it now
1994 2011-06-24 11:46:47 <RobboNZ> i now have 7.5395 BTC
1995 2011-06-24 11:46:51 <prof7bit> unfortunately i wont see any incoming transaction because i am still downloading the block chain since Wednesday and tonight i had a disk full and it stopped for a few hours.
1996 2011-06-24 11:46:54 <xtalmath> next time find out how to do without
1997 2011-06-24 11:47:04 <xtalmath> i have 0.22
1998 2011-06-24 11:47:04 <RobboNZ> fuck thats shit
1999 2011-06-24 11:47:06 <lfm> Happy0: it sends the amount you say and subtracts that amount from that account even if the account goes into the red
2000 2011-06-24 11:47:14 <RobboNZ> i clicked "no fee"
2001 2011-06-24 11:47:15 <Happy0> lfm: great, thanks :)
2002 2011-06-24 11:47:18 <RobboNZ> and then it wouldnt send
2003 2011-06-24 11:47:21 <RobboNZ> however
2004 2011-06-24 11:47:30 <RobboNZ> the fee has gone down a lot since last time i tried
2005 2011-06-24 11:47:36 <prof7bit> the account can go into the red?
2006 2011-06-24 11:47:43 <RobboNZ> before the fee was 0.01
2007 2011-06-24 11:47:51 <RobboNZ> now its 0.0005 or somtheing
2008 2011-06-24 11:47:58 <RobboNZ> which isnt too bad
2009 2011-06-24 11:48:07 <lfm> RobboNZ: ya, it matters how often and how long since the last one you try
2010 2011-06-24 11:48:07 bliket has quit (Quit: Page closed)
2011 2011-06-24 11:48:23 <xtalmath> lfm: ?
2012 2011-06-24 11:48:38 <RobboNZ> really?
2013 2011-06-24 11:48:41 <xtalmath> liquidity of small transfers is taken in account?
2014 2011-06-24 11:48:50 <RobboNZ> so if i send a lot, i get lower fees?
2015 2011-06-24 11:48:59 <lfm> if you wait a few days it should let you do a free one again
2016 2011-06-24 11:49:04 <RobboNZ> fuck where is this documented?
2017 2011-06-24 11:49:12 somuchwin2 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2018 2011-06-24 11:49:13 <RobboNZ> i tell ya this is bullshit
2019 2011-06-24 11:49:28 <RobboNZ> when u join a bank you get a fucking leaflet!
2020 2011-06-24 11:49:31 Maged has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2021 2011-06-24 11:49:37 <RobboNZ> where is my fucking bitcoin leaflet?!?!
2022 2011-06-24 11:49:39 <xtalmath> RobboNZ, the developers have no advantage in this, they do it to PROTECT your money from network overload attacks
2023 2011-06-24 11:49:47 <RobboNZ> ok
2024 2011-06-24 11:49:51 <RobboNZ> so its for my own good
2025 2011-06-24 11:49:54 <RobboNZ> well im glad
2026 2011-06-24 11:50:01 somuchwin has joined
2027 2011-06-24 11:50:17 <xtalmath> otherwise the fed would buy a reasonable amount and split it in 10^8 millicoins and send that around every 10 minutes
2028 2011-06-24 11:50:18 <RobboNZ> cos my drunkan ass cant look after his own wallet never mind his imaginary one
2029 2011-06-24 11:50:37 <xtalmath> err "micro" coins even
2030 2011-06-24 11:50:40 <RobboNZ> ok and the network cant cope with the fed doing that?
2031 2011-06-24 11:50:44 <lfm> I have a solution! send all your BTC to me and Ill look after it for ya
2032 2011-06-24 11:50:57 <RobboNZ> so what happens if thats wallmart and and thats wallmarts employees pay?
2033 2011-06-24 11:51:16 <xtalmath> we dunno, I think it can
2034 2011-06-24 11:51:18 <lfm> walmart will want even BIGGER fees
2035 2011-06-24 11:51:29 <prof7bit> <xtalmath> otherwise the fed would... <-- they still could if they wanted, it would cost them some money but they have as many dollars at their disposal as they need.
2036 2011-06-24 11:51:30 <RobboNZ> sorry we cant pay all wallmart employees cos it would flood the network?
2037 2011-06-24 11:51:53 <RobboNZ> well thats a fundamental flaw
2038 2011-06-24 11:52:01 <RobboNZ> and im an early adopter
2039 2011-06-24 11:52:11 <lfm> yup we have a drunk filter and drunks pay double
2040 2011-06-24 11:52:15 <RobboNZ> so i need to have some confidence in this shit
2041 2011-06-24 11:52:32 Blitzboom has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2042 2011-06-24 11:52:35 <RobboNZ> ok well as a drunk im used to getting fleeced so no worries, where do i send mt BTC
2043 2011-06-24 11:52:37 <xtalmath> since average user would just have to spend even a miniscule fee to stride over the fed coins, it would cost them a LOT of money if they tried to surpass the miniscule fees real people would be willing to pay
2044 2011-06-24 11:52:50 Blitzboom has joined
2045 2011-06-24 11:52:50 Blitzboom has quit (Changing host)
2046 2011-06-24 11:52:50 Blitzboom has joined
2047 2011-06-24 11:52:58 <RobboNZ> ah ok
2048 2011-06-24 11:53:16 <RobboNZ> so the fee is there to bust people who try to fuck the system
2049 2011-06-24 11:53:38 <RobboNZ> as in i cant flood when each transaction costs me 0.0005
2050 2011-06-24 11:54:03 <xtalmath> their coins would just be ignored by miners, unless they have time to process them
2051 2011-06-24 11:54:53 <luke-jr> ;;bc,stats
2052 2011-06-24 11:54:53 <xtalmath> I dont believe the fees are necessary yet, they dont need to be centrally determined
2053 2011-06-24 11:55:01 <prof7bit> xtalmath: they can spam the system even with paying fees because "cost" of any dimension is not a factor for somebody like the fed
2054 2011-06-24 11:55:05 <gribble> Current Blocks: 133056 | Current Difficulty: 1379223.4296725 | Next Difficulty At Block: 135071 | Next Difficulty In: 2015 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 3 weeks, 2 days, 23 hours, 57 minutes, and 15 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 5516782.99327646
2055 2011-06-24 11:55:05 <RobboNZ> so what happens when you need to send 0.00000001 BTC when it costs you 0.0005 to send it
2056 2011-06-24 11:55:11 jivvz has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2057 2011-06-24 11:56:11 Lexa has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2058 2011-06-24 11:56:39 <xtalmath> prof7bit what do you understand as spam the system: some of their useless transactions getting in the blockchain when miners agree to take the KB's? or useless transactions being proposed to miners?
2059 2011-06-24 11:56:41 Txyru has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2060 2011-06-24 11:56:56 Txyru has joined
2061 2011-06-24 11:57:19 <xtalmath> well they would enter information in the network, but the cant halt the network with this attack, it would only cost money
2062 2011-06-24 11:58:13 <prof7bit> if they start sending 1000 transactions per second transferring money around on their own addresses, each tx with 0.001 fee which will cost them 1BTC per second, this is *nothing* for someone like the fed if the goal is to destroy bitcoin
2063 2011-06-24 11:59:06 <Zoiah> Their attack would fund the miners, allowing them to use more hardware.
2064 2011-06-24 11:59:16 <xtalmath> you dont take in account how miner software would react
2065 2011-06-24 11:59:20 <Zoiah> I know.
2066 2011-06-24 11:59:20 <prof7bit> this attack would end bitcoin completely.
2067 2011-06-24 11:59:24 <tcatm> prof7bit: they can't do that forever
2068 2011-06-24 11:59:33 hachque has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2069 2011-06-24 12:00:53 <prof7bit> they just need to do this a few weeks without pause and bitcoin is dead.
2070 2011-06-24 12:00:58 <tcatm> each block would be worth 650 BTC thus mining becomes very profitable and difficulty and price rises
2071 2011-06-24 12:01:04 phunction has joined
2072 2011-06-24 12:01:06 <andyfletcher> I thought that was the reason you could opt to pay a transaction fee
2073 2011-06-24 12:01:47 Beccara has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2074 2011-06-24 12:01:57 <prof7bit> the blockchain would be a few hundred GB and nobodies client would be able to catch up with the latest block anymore. 1000 tx per second would bring it to its knees. completely.
2075 2011-06-24 12:02:14 <tcatm> there's a hard limit for blocksize
2076 2011-06-24 12:02:18 <andyfletcher> if someone floods the network with tiny transactions those who opted to pay a little would get processed first.
2077 2011-06-24 12:02:44 <prof7bit> the attacker would pay a little too
2078 2011-06-24 12:02:45 <xtalmath> prof7bit, that is why it was designed with merkle roots from start, you dont need to have all the transactions, just the proof that the hashing power was invested
2079 2011-06-24 12:02:48 <andyfletcher> Ah, we would have to prune the old transactions out of the block
2080 2011-06-24 12:03:43 <prof7bit> there is no software available to prune the blocks
2081 2011-06-24 12:03:47 <prof7bit> not yet
2082 2011-06-24 12:03:55 <prof7bit> not in the only existing client
2083 2011-06-24 12:04:00 <xtalmath> so what?
2084 2011-06-24 12:04:18 <prof7bit> if the attack happens today then bitcoin can't deal with it, it would simply die.
2085 2011-06-24 12:04:19 <xtalmath> the clients wont be able to use the network, but miners continue their proof of work
2086 2011-06-24 12:04:54 <xtalmath> if this happens the pruning will become top priority and within hours/days the new client doesnt put GB on users pcs
2087 2011-06-24 12:05:30 <xtalmath> the clients just retrieve proof of work, and check blocks if it pertains to their wallets
2088 2011-06-24 12:05:45 <num1> I like the circle of life going on here, I witnessed xtalmath figure this all out just hours ago :D
2089 2011-06-24 12:05:57 <prof7bit> you would still have to deal with the boadcasting of 1000tx/sec to all clients and their verifying of them in real time. on average hardware this is not possible.
2090 2011-06-24 12:05:58 <xtalmath> :D
2091 2011-06-24 12:06:00 pensan has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2092 2011-06-24 12:06:38 <tcatm> prof7bit: don't worry, there's code in place that prevents bad side effects of flooding
2093 2011-06-24 12:06:58 <xtalmath> tx of what? 250 bytes, thats 250KB/s
2094 2011-06-24 12:07:20 <prof7bit> verifying each of them takes the longest time
2095 2011-06-24 12:08:08 <xtalmath> sadly verifying will be left to trusted nodes anyhow, since growing network without attacks will lead to same problem
2096 2011-06-24 12:08:24 JRWR has joined
2097 2011-06-24 12:08:50 Guest32867 has joined
2098 2011-06-24 12:09:33 <num1> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability might help out
2099 2011-06-24 12:09:42 <xtalmath> actually, each client could verify on basis of own random generator one out of 1000 blocks, and report to rest of network transactions that are wrong
2100 2011-06-24 12:09:52 <prof7bit> is it even possible at the moment to write a client that acts as "thin" client? are all needed p2p messages for this implemented in the "full" client already?
2101 2011-06-24 12:10:10 Katapult has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2102 2011-06-24 12:10:17 <num1> prof7bit there's a halfway stage that is being actively worked on
2103 2011-06-24 12:10:30 <num1> prof7bit JMiner implements it if you want to look into it more
2104 2011-06-24 12:11:14 <Guest32867> What do you people (who develop bitcoin) think about creating a system similar to bitcoin which would use more than one names (like stocks on the stock market)?
2105 2011-06-24 12:11:36 <Guest32867> Just use the same transaction principle of p2p..
2106 2011-06-24 12:11:39 <prof7bit> but i imagine this would need protocol messages in the standard client too and it needs to distinguish between other connected full clients and other connected thin clients
2107 2011-06-24 12:11:40 <tcatm> Guest32867: how do you motivate miners?
2108 2011-06-24 12:11:43 <num1> Guest32867 elaborate?
2109 2011-06-24 12:11:57 <prof7bit> two types of p2p connections
2110 2011-06-24 12:12:22 <Guest32867> It would be used to create (in the start worthless) stocks for virtual companies (and similar stuff)
2111 2011-06-24 12:12:26 <tcatm> prof7bit: for thin clients the protocol needs a few new features
2112 2011-06-24 12:12:31 <num1> there actually is something similiar to what you mentioned, bitcoin is really a set of protocols AND a special chain
2113 2011-06-24 12:12:37 <Guest32867> the value would be from outside
2114 2011-06-24 12:12:44 <Guest32867> (value by trust)
2115 2011-06-24 12:12:57 <num1> so there is, for example, a #namecoin chain that performs a function similiar to DNS
2116 2011-06-24 12:13:00 <tcatm> Guest32867: you should write a paper to make your thoughts clear
2117 2011-06-24 12:13:04 <Guest32867> num1: didn't know that
2118 2011-06-24 12:13:12 fahadsadah has quit (Quit: ZNC - http://znc.sourceforge.net)
2119 2011-06-24 12:13:23 <num1> google it the mechanics are similiar to what you're saying :)
2120 2011-06-24 12:13:39 <Guest32867> num1: 10q :)
2121 2011-06-24 12:13:53 <num1> Guest32867 https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Alternative_Chains also has a lot of good info
2122 2011-06-24 12:14:35 AnatolV has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2123 2011-06-24 12:15:26 <Guest32867> do people use these alternative chains?
2124 2011-06-24 12:15:55 <num1> the only three chains that are being used by quite a few people are the bitcoin chain, the testnet chain, and the namecoin chain
2125 2011-06-24 12:16:09 <num1> I'm certain there are more, but they aren't very popular
2126 2011-06-24 12:16:49 <prof7bit> i am still thinking (I'm only in the thinking stage yet) about writing my own client (thin client) completely from scratch
2127 2011-06-24 12:17:17 <num1> prof7bit go for it!
2128 2011-06-24 12:17:23 <num1> I think the official word is don't do it
2129 2011-06-24 12:17:25 <prof7bit> but only if the protocol is complete
2130 2011-06-24 12:17:34 <num1> but there should be variety!
2131 2011-06-24 12:17:45 <num1> the protocol is as complete as you make it
2132 2011-06-24 12:17:50 <lfm> depends what you mean "people"?
2133 2011-06-24 12:18:11 AnatolV has joined
2134 2011-06-24 12:18:18 <num1> lfm an irc entity upon #bitcoin and #bitcoin-dev
2135 2011-06-24 12:18:49 <lfm> num1 that could be just about anything
2136 2011-06-24 12:19:02 <prof7bit> <num1> the protocol is as complete as you make it <-- i need to communicate with the standard client and the standard client needs to know that i am not a full client. you said the protocol needs a few more features, i guess the standard clinet needs to implement them too
2137 2011-06-24 12:19:07 <num1> lfm so my definition is more loose than yours, sue me
2138 2011-06-24 12:20:14 <num1> prof7bit here's what I know
2139 2011-06-24 12:20:20 <num1> http://code.google.com/p/bitcoinj/ exists
2140 2011-06-24 12:20:30 <num1> "BitCoinJ implements the "simplified payment verification" mode of Satoshis paper. It does not store a full copy of the block chain, rather, it stores what it needs in order to verify transactions with the aid of an untrusted peer node."
2141 2011-06-24 12:20:33 Katapult has joined
2142 2011-06-24 12:20:39 <num1> so somewhere out there is a paper
2143 2011-06-24 12:20:47 <num1> that I assume specifies it
2144 2011-06-24 12:20:52 <num1> good luck and happy hunting
2145 2011-06-24 12:21:03 ElectricBill has left ("Leaving")
2146 2011-06-24 12:21:04 <num1> if you find said paper please report back, I would love to read it as well :)
2147 2011-06-24 12:22:34 <prof7bit> satoshis paper, should be easy to find, there is only one afaik
2148 2011-06-24 12:22:57 <num1> well in that case you're out of luck
2149 2011-06-24 12:23:15 <num1> the one I've read only briefly mentions pruning things out
2150 2011-06-24 12:23:16 <Guest32867> are there really encryption algorithm weaknesses that can not easily be fixed?
2151 2011-06-24 12:23:33 <lfm> prof7bit: there is no way inb the standard procol to let other nodes know you are not a full client
2152 2011-06-24 12:23:43 <Guest32867> because i read somewhere that bitcoin relies on some soon to be weak encryption
2153 2011-06-24 12:23:46 <num1> Guest32867 not in the algorithms we currently use, that we know o
2154 2011-06-24 12:23:49 <num1> know of*
2155 2011-06-24 12:23:54 <prof7bit> lfm: this is what i meant
2156 2011-06-24 12:24:11 <num1> Guest32867 yeah some methods go out of date as computers get stronger and we get smarter
2157 2011-06-24 12:24:29 <lfm> Guest32867: you can read all sorts of things on the internet. you cant beleive them all
2158 2011-06-24 12:24:37 <num1> Guest32867 I'd have to see a link to tell you more though, there're a lot of crpytographic primitives that bitcoin uses
2159 2011-06-24 12:24:47 <JRWR> the day we crack SHA256 is going to be a egg on face world with all these passwords / btc floating around
2160 2011-06-24 12:24:51 <Guest32867> lfm: that's why i check at the source ;)
2161 2011-06-24 12:25:06 <prof7bit> if 99% of people start using the thin client the standard client would have a hard time finding other full clients and it would spend a lot of time asking other thin clinets for stuff they don't have or don't implement
2162 2011-06-24 12:25:45 <JRWR> I could see using the thin client for well... thin devices
2163 2011-06-24 12:25:51 <JRWR> cellphones come to mine
2164 2011-06-24 12:26:04 TheAncientGoat has joined
2165 2011-06-24 12:26:14 <lfm> Guest32867: well no one has shown any real problems with the algoithms we use yet but it is theoreticlly possible someone could I guess. just we havnt heard anything credible t that effect yet.
2166 2011-06-24 12:27:00 <prof7bit> soon all "normal" devices will be thin compared to what is needed to run a full node. My Thinkpad T40 is ust on the brink of becoming too thin for bitcoin. a few more months and my hardware is too thin.
2167 2011-06-24 12:27:12 <JRWR> Nothing is impossiable, just unlikely
2168 2011-06-24 12:27:42 <JRWR> prof7bit: im running the bitcoin client on a lenovo s10e ( atom netbook 1.60ghz)
2169 2011-06-24 12:27:48 DiSTANT187 has joined
2170 2011-06-24 12:28:06 <prof7bit> i have only 1.3GHz and only 30GB harddisk and only 500MB RAM
2171 2011-06-24 12:28:10 <BitcoinForNewegg> mine only uses like 130 meg of ram
2172 2011-06-24 12:28:30 <BitcoinForNewegg> but the usage required coudl increase at 1 GB per week
2173 2011-06-24 12:28:30 <prof7bit> and only 1000kbit/s DSL line
2174 2011-06-24 12:28:34 <num1> prof7bit it gets worse too
2175 2011-06-24 12:28:43 <lfm> prof7bit: by that time a new model of you hardware will be out that will not be too thin
2176 2011-06-24 12:28:47 <num1> some of the people on the project did a little math and wrote https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability
2177 2011-06-24 12:28:52 <BitcoinForNewegg> anyone here do programming for bitcoins?
2178 2011-06-24 12:29:00 fahadsadah has joined
2179 2011-06-24 12:29:06 <num1> prof7bit they estimated something like 1.7G per block
2180 2011-06-24 12:29:19 <Guest32867> num1: link: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=10015.20
2181 2011-06-24 12:29:23 <num1> just distributing a solved block would cost dollars
2182 2011-06-24 12:29:38 <RobboNZ> yea i program for BTC
2183 2011-06-24 12:29:39 <Guest32867> num1: what "Basiley" said
2184 2011-06-24 12:29:43 <lfm> num1 how you figure that?
2185 2011-06-24 12:30:03 <Guest32867> num1: Basiley: "if EC -basecd crypto not considered unsecure in half-year or about.
2186 2011-06-24 12:30:03 <Guest32867> which is debatable from EC introduction[late 90's XX]itself."
2187 2011-06-24 12:30:24 <lfm> num1 unless you are adding up the cost for all the nodes together
2188 2011-06-24 12:30:25 <phantomcircuit> num1, the cost to distribute a solved block can be significantly reduced however by implemented a dht for the transactions and indexing them based on which addresses are effected (unfortunately this is vulnerable to sybil attacks)
2189 2011-06-24 12:30:26 <num1> Guest32867 hmm eliptic curve crypto... give me a sec
2190 2011-06-24 12:30:38 <num1> lfm you have to push it out to more than one node
2191 2011-06-24 12:30:52 <num1> lfm 1Gb costs roughly $0.10
2192 2011-06-24 12:31:14 <num1> lfm so assuming you give your solved block to at least 10 other nodes in the network, that's $1.00 of bandwidth charges alone
2193 2011-06-24 12:31:17 <lfm> num1: note you are NOT required to add all the TXN you see to your blocks.
2194 2011-06-24 12:31:30 <num1> lfm this is a great point
2195 2011-06-24 12:32:17 <lfm> num1 max block is 1 mb anyway
2196 2011-06-24 12:33:55 <num1> Guest32867 yeah I have no idea what he was talking about, elliptic curve crypto is used everywhere. As a general class of solution I don't see it going away or "getting cracked" anytime soon
2197 2011-06-24 12:34:35 <num1> solving EC would be like someone suddenly solving how to factor primes
2198 2011-06-24 12:35:08 <lfm> he may have meant sha256 getting "cracked" so it would be much easier to find hases with lots of leading zeros
2199 2011-06-24 12:35:09 JRWR has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2200 2011-06-24 12:35:24 <lfm> hashes
2201 2011-06-24 12:35:43 <num1> right if he had been yelling at sha256 I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss
2202 2011-06-24 12:36:57 <phantomcircuit> ;;bc,stats
2203 2011-06-24 12:37:12 <gribble> Current Blocks: 133059 | Current Difficulty: 1379223.4296725 | Next Difficulty At Block: 135071 | Next Difficulty In: 2012 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 3 weeks, 1 day, 13 hours, and 16 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1139828.83366818
2204 2011-06-24 12:37:21 <Guest32867> is it possible to replace sha256 in use with something stronger if need be, and to make a smooth transition in usage
2205 2011-06-24 12:37:27 <phantomcircuit> num1, well there is some wiggle room with sha256 being partially broken
2206 2011-06-24 12:37:52 <phantomcircuit> Guest32867, contrary to popular belief yes, but only if there is a globally agreed upon reason to do so
2207 2011-06-24 12:38:21 <num1> Guest32867 bitcoin is an evolving standard yes any part of it could be changed, but it would take a *hell* of a lot of effort
2208 2011-06-24 12:38:55 <phantomcircuit> num1, well yes and no
2209 2011-06-24 12:39:07 <num1> yeh?
2210 2011-06-24 12:39:19 <phantomcircuit> changing the hashing method requires incrementing the block version count, after a certain block number
2211 2011-06-24 12:39:21 <lfm> ya replaceing sha256 would mean everyone updating before a certain point in the block chain I guess
2212 2011-06-24 12:39:31 <phantomcircuit> and then synchronizing between all client before that block is hit
2213 2011-06-24 12:39:56 <phantomcircuit> which could be very difficult, but fortunately any break in sha256 is likely to have plenty of warning
2214 2011-06-24 12:39:59 <num1> makes sense
2215 2011-06-24 12:40:33 <num1> I mean it does sound like a bitch to make sure everybody has updated
2216 2011-06-24 12:40:50 <num1> although when the network switches over and you don't you'll find out pretty soon I bet
2217 2011-06-24 12:40:57 <prof7bit> they will update
2218 2011-06-24 12:41:04 <lfm> well people who didnt update would get shut out of the net kinda
2219 2011-06-24 12:41:07 <prof7bit> because they must
2220 2011-06-24 12:41:10 <num1> right
2221 2011-06-24 12:42:01 <lfm> all their base be ignored
2222 2011-06-24 12:42:34 <Guest32867> i think that that mechanism is adequate
2223 2011-06-24 12:43:07 <Guest32867> if someone would calculate hashes with the wrong hash algorithm, his hashes would all be wrong in the eyes of majority of the rest
2224 2011-06-24 12:43:11 <xtalmath> the first main, that receives the arguments, is the one in init.cpp right? since theres no main in main.cpp
2225 2011-06-24 12:43:41 WildSoil has quit ()
2226 2011-06-24 12:44:08 <Guest32867> (although i don't know that, but intuitively sounds like that to me)
2227 2011-06-24 12:44:29 <Guest32867> i think it is important that there is a way out, because in the long run, there must be
2228 2011-06-24 12:45:18 <lfm> xtalmath: right
2229 2011-06-24 12:45:54 BlueMattBot has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
2230 2011-06-24 12:45:59 <lfm> Guest32867: well the other "way out" is bitcoin is suddenly wiped out
2231 2011-06-24 12:47:44 <num1> the magic of bitcoins. by using them you're putting faith in the power of math
2232 2011-06-24 12:48:07 suriv_ has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2233 2011-06-24 12:48:09 <Guest32867> you're putting faith in P!=NP
2234 2011-06-24 12:48:23 <phantomcircuit> Guest32867, seems like a good bet
2235 2011-06-24 12:48:37 <xtalmath> why is the this main surrounded by #ifndef GUI ?
2236 2011-06-24 12:48:49 <phantomcircuit> if someone can show a general proof that P=NP then fuck money we'll be masters of the universe
2237 2011-06-24 12:48:50 <ericmock> that's the cli main
2238 2011-06-24 12:48:54 Lexa has joined
2239 2011-06-24 12:49:04 <phantomcircuit> xtalmath, lollllllll welcome to bitcoin mainline
2240 2011-06-24 12:49:31 <lfm> xtalmath: bitcoind would have another main then
2241 2011-06-24 12:49:33 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2242 2011-06-24 12:49:59 <ericmock> it's embedded in Wx crap
2243 2011-06-24 12:50:04 <xtalmath> so what main is called with gui?
2244 2011-06-24 12:50:08 <xtalmath> nein
2245 2011-06-24 12:50:10 <ericmock> the 'other main'
2246 2011-06-24 12:50:23 <xtalmath> where is it?
2247 2011-06-24 12:50:32 <ericmock> outside
2248 2011-06-24 12:50:36 suriv has joined
2249 2011-06-24 12:50:40 <lfm> oh in wxwidgets
2250 2011-06-24 12:50:45 <Guest32867> phantom: why would we be masters of the universe?
2251 2011-06-24 12:50:52 <xtalmath> ok whats the main callback
2252 2011-06-24 12:51:05 <lfm> Guest32867: phantomcircuit likes to dream
2253 2011-06-24 12:51:10 * ericmock spent much time sorting that crap out too
2254 2011-06-24 12:51:12 <xtalmath> AppInit?
2255 2011-06-24 12:51:20 <ericmock> Wx init
2256 2011-06-24 12:51:28 <ericmock> AppInit2?
2257 2011-06-24 12:51:31 <ericmock> Wx init2
2258 2011-06-24 12:52:18 <xtalmath> urgh
2259 2011-06-24 12:52:23 <num1> hey now, P=NP has some pretty profound implications :)
2260 2011-06-24 12:52:37 <xtalmath> so Im required to read wxApi ?
2261 2011-06-24 12:52:37 <phantomcircuit> Guest32867, being able to solve P problems in NP time would make fusion power plants possible :P
2262 2011-06-24 12:52:48 <phantomcircuit> (just one example)
2263 2011-06-24 12:52:56 <ericmock> my mtgox proof was rejected and I gave them Dwolla account #?
2264 2011-06-24 12:53:09 <xtalmath> I just want to get a call tree of the real main
2265 2011-06-24 12:53:14 <ericmock> xtalmath: what are you trying to do?
2266 2011-06-24 12:53:22 <prof7bit> <xtalmath> so Im required to read wxApi <-- if you are writing wx applications, then yes, you are required to know wx
2267 2011-06-24 12:53:33 <Guest32867> phantom: would you please elaborate?
2268 2011-06-24 12:53:38 <prof7bit> but wx is pretty easy
2269 2011-06-24 12:53:48 <prof7bit> straightforward
2270 2011-06-24 12:54:04 <xtalmath> is it similar to win32 stuff? I used to do that as a kid in my REA days
2271 2011-06-24 12:54:07 denisx has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
2272 2011-06-24 12:54:09 TbbW has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2273 2011-06-24 12:54:17 <prof7bit> easier
2274 2011-06-24 12:54:24 k^^ has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep)
2275 2011-06-24 12:54:48 <prof7bit> but many things lean on concepts of win32
2276 2011-06-24 12:55:10 <prof7bit> but it has a nice OO wrapping around it
2277 2011-06-24 12:55:32 <phantomcircuit> Guest32867, containing a fusion reaction with magnets is a problem which is significantly more difficult than O(n)
2278 2011-06-24 12:55:36 <xtalmath> "wxWidgets is a C++ library that lets developers create applications for Windows, OS X, Linux and UNIX on 32-bit and 64-bit architectures as well as several mobile platforms including Windows Mobile, iPhone SDK and embedded GTK+."
2279 2011-06-24 12:55:37 jivvz has joined
2280 2011-06-24 12:56:03 <xtalmath> why are people trying to port to cell phones,... if its already ported?
2281 2011-06-24 12:56:35 <ericmock> has anyone had their mtgox account recovered successfully ?
2282 2011-06-24 12:57:02 <xtalmath> ericmock: yes, but the site still looks like support
2283 2011-06-24 12:57:11 <xtalmath> want me to PM the mail?
2284 2011-06-24 12:57:19 <jrmithdobbs> ;;bc,blocks
2285 2011-06-24 12:57:19 <gribble> 133059
2286 2011-06-24 12:57:20 <phantomcircuit> ericmock, yes he underestimated how many would have to be done manually
2287 2011-06-24 12:57:20 <Guest32867> phantom: for every size of a problem, there is surely an adequate equivalent PTime algorithm (my belief)
2288 2011-06-24 12:57:24 <ericmock> xtalmath: what 'proof' did you use?
2289 2011-06-24 12:57:48 <xtalmath> well did you have money on your account?
2290 2011-06-24 12:58:03 <ericmock> my proof was rejected... and I'm a little 'suspicious'
2291 2011-06-24 12:58:08 <Guest32867> phantom: finding that algorithm is usually called "intelligence" :)
2292 2011-06-24 12:58:09 <xtalmath> your not going to like my answer :)
2293 2011-06-24 12:58:17 <phantomcircuit> Guest32867, not all problems :P
2294 2011-06-24 12:58:29 <xtalmath> my proof was simply that I remembered my balance was 0 - 0
2295 2011-06-24 12:58:51 <ericmock> anyone else want to say what their proof was?
2296 2011-06-24 12:59:01 <lfm> xtalmath: bitcoin is more than just wxwidgets
2297 2011-06-24 12:59:20 <phantomcircuit> Guest32867, however the better algorithms are almost never exhaustive, they're almost always heuristics
2298 2011-06-24 12:59:32 <xtalmath> you mean its the size requirements or OS support thats lacking?
2299 2011-06-24 12:59:40 segfault64 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2300 2011-06-24 12:59:44 <Guest32867> phantom: but heuristics will always be enough for real world problems
2301 2011-06-24 12:59:51 <ericmock> okay, to get more to the point; has anyone been approved by mtgox without have to provide their balance?
2302 2011-06-24 13:00:14 <Guest32867> phantom: humans use them and survive..
2303 2011-06-24 13:00:15 <xtalmath> ericmock: i didnt have to provide my balance, just saw I could and did
2304 2011-06-24 13:00:16 <MtGox_Adam> Yes.
2305 2011-06-24 13:00:40 <xtalmath> ericmock: you unsure what it was? or impossible to guess depending on when the rollback was?
2306 2011-06-24 13:00:50 <ericmock> let me rephrase: okay, to get more to the point; has anyone been approved by mtgox without providing their balance?
2307 2011-06-24 13:01:16 <xtalmath> apparently not
2308 2011-06-24 13:01:29 <xtalmath> how much did you lose?
2309 2011-06-24 13:01:32 <ericmock> no, I know basically what it was, but wonder if mtgox does?
2310 2011-06-24 13:01:51 <Guest32867> phantom: I really think that for fusion one should use heuristics
2311 2011-06-24 13:01:53 <ericmock> my balance wasn't large
2312 2011-06-24 13:02:02 <xtalmath> yeah, also, if you remember too high theyll just ask you to remember better, and if too low theyll just agree
2313 2011-06-24 13:02:20 <Guest32867> phantom: they probably are, but have not found enough of them so fra
2314 2011-06-24 13:02:22 <Guest32867> far
2315 2011-06-24 13:02:24 <ericmock> xtalmath: you've seen that happen?
2316 2011-06-24 13:02:45 <xtalmath> its what id fear, but havent seen it happen
2317 2011-06-24 13:03:08 <ericmock> what I fear is that they really don't know what people's balances were
2318 2011-06-24 13:03:09 <xtalmath> on the internet nobody nows mtgox is a dog
2319 2011-06-24 13:03:33 BlueMattBot has joined
2320 2011-06-24 13:03:33 <ericmock> I mean, why wouldn't giving them my Dwolla account information be enough proof?
2321 2011-06-24 13:03:40 <xtalmath> true dat
2322 2011-06-24 13:03:49 denisx has joined
2323 2011-06-24 13:04:13 <ericmock> and if my balance winds up being the rough estimate I gave them...
2324 2011-06-24 13:04:24 <ericmock> well, I'll be pissed that I didn't lie more ;-)
2325 2011-06-24 13:04:27 <xtalmath> tell mtgox to pay the hackers ransom of data
2326 2011-06-24 13:04:44 <CIA-103> bitcoinj: hearn@google.com * r101 /trunk/ (2 files in 2 dirs): Fix PeerAddress serialization and add a test. Patch from Noa Resare. Fixes issue 29.
2327 2011-06-24 13:04:54 Nexus_7 has joined
2328 2011-06-24 13:04:54 <xtalmath> ericmock, magicaltux is right here
2329 2011-06-24 13:04:56 Nexus7 has quit (Disconnected by services)
2330 2011-06-24 13:05:04 Nexus_7 is now known as Nexus7
2331 2011-06-24 13:05:05 Nexus7 has quit (Changing host)
2332 2011-06-24 13:05:05 Nexus7 has joined
2333 2011-06-24 13:05:05 <ericmock> I know he is
2334 2011-06-24 13:05:14 Stellar has joined
2335 2011-06-24 13:05:38 <Guest32867> why isn't there decentralized bitcoin hosting
2336 2011-06-24 13:05:39 <ericmock> and honestly seems like a really nice guy but there are some 'fishy' things that just don't make sense
2337 2011-06-24 13:05:40 <Guest32867> ?
2338 2011-06-24 13:05:45 <MagicalTux> ericmock: no, your balance and history will be exactly as you left those
2339 2011-06-24 13:05:55 <Guest32867> u already have dns (of some sort)
2340 2011-06-24 13:05:57 <xtalmath> Guest: there is
2341 2011-06-24 13:06:20 <Guest32867> is there a bitcoin market that is p2p hosted with bitcoin dns?
2342 2011-06-24 13:06:33 <Guest32867> ups
2343 2011-06-24 13:06:39 <xtalmath> depending on what exactly you mean: BitDNS/Namecoin or webhosting you can pay with bitcoin
2344 2011-06-24 13:06:55 <xtalmath> it has to be market too now?
2345 2011-06-24 13:07:03 istat has joined
2346 2011-06-24 13:07:04 <Guest32867> no, I mean that the users of bitcoin p2p network share space and host pages
2347 2011-06-24 13:07:18 <Guest32867> p2p hosting
2348 2011-06-24 13:07:29 <xtalmath> why would that have to work with namecoin?
2349 2011-06-24 13:07:33 <ericmock> MagicalTux: okay... and, btw, I think you've handled this situation fairly well. And I do realize you need to take things slow and be careful.
2350 2011-06-24 13:07:48 <Guest32867> so it can't be taken down
2351 2011-06-24 13:07:54 <prof7bit> just made some measurements here:
2352 2011-06-24 13:07:57 <prof7bit> height=130400 time=13:00:00
2353 2011-06-24 13:07:57 <prof7bit> height=131041 time=15:00:00
2354 2011-06-24 13:07:57 <prof7bit> 320 blocks/h my thinkpad T40 can verify
2355 2011-06-24 13:07:57 <prof7bit> 6 blocks/h will be created
2356 2011-06-24 13:07:57 <prof7bit> ==> 60 times more traffic than today and I will be lost
2357 2011-06-24 13:08:28 <xtalmath> and who pays for the hosting?
2358 2011-06-24 13:08:38 <xtalmath> if they can put stuff on freenet?
2359 2011-06-24 13:08:40 <ericmock> MagicalTux: I was just surprised and a little surprised that a Dwolla account wasn't enough proof
2360 2011-06-24 13:08:41 <Guest32867> the users of the exchange
2361 2011-06-24 13:08:41 <prof7bit> 53 times
2362 2011-06-24 13:08:58 <Guest32867> or of any other site that wants to be hosted
2363 2011-06-24 13:08:59 <xtalmath> and who would visit the hosted sites if you need to have a bitDNS resolver
2364 2011-06-24 13:09:02 rasengan has joined
2365 2011-06-24 13:09:42 <Guest32867> we could integrate a web browser into bitcoin
2366 2011-06-24 13:09:48 <Guest32867> or the other way around
2367 2011-06-24 13:09:58 <xtalmath> i think that is a good idea
2368 2011-06-24 13:10:43 <coderrr> yea, so we can get remote code exec vulns every few months
2369 2011-06-24 13:10:43 <xtalmath> spam chain, adds that stay for 10 minutes (approximately)
2370 2011-06-24 13:11:10 <xtalmath> looking at it will give you money (provided you solve captchas at a certain rate)
2371 2011-06-24 13:12:22 <xtalmath> hmm distributed captcha solving for democratic prices
2372 2011-06-24 13:12:23 happyface has joined
2373 2011-06-24 13:12:35 VastLite has joined
2374 2011-06-24 13:12:38 <lfm> like the javascript miner?
2375 2011-06-24 13:12:55 <happyface> 'bc,calc 38000000
2376 2011-06-24 13:12:59 <xtalmath> the javascript miner lets you solve captchas?
2377 2011-06-24 13:13:09 <happyface> bc,calc 38000000
2378 2011-06-24 13:13:24 <happyface> y u no calc
2379 2011-06-24 13:13:35 <lfm> naw, just lets you use visitors cpu to mine btc for your web site
2380 2011-06-24 13:13:39 <happyface> ;;bc,calc 38000000
2381 2011-06-24 13:13:41 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 38000000 Khps, given current difficulty of 1379223.4296725 , is 1 day, 19 hours, 18 minutes, and 7 seconds
2382 2011-06-24 13:13:42 <Guest32867> happy : ;; in front
2383 2011-06-24 13:13:48 <ericmock> okay... I think there should be a policy that you only send gribble private messages.
2384 2011-06-24 13:14:00 <happyface> 38,000,000 is 38 GH/s right?
2385 2011-06-24 13:14:12 <ericmock> unless it's something the entire channel needs to see
2386 2011-06-24 13:14:24 <happyface> ericmock, sorry :(
2387 2011-06-24 13:14:47 <ericmock> no problem... what you did seems to be the norm.
2388 2011-06-24 13:15:33 <lfm> ericmock: everyone needs to see bc.stats about once per 10 minutes tho really!
2389 2011-06-24 13:15:44 <prof7bit> gribble should simply be changed so it will always answer in a /query and then the user can continue his dialog there
2390 2011-06-24 13:15:57 <ericmock> lfm: really?
2391 2011-06-24 13:16:53 <lfm> ericmock: and bc,mtgox too
2392 2011-06-24 13:17:19 <ericmock> then have /topic updated with that
2393 2011-06-24 13:17:20 JRWR has joined
2394 2011-06-24 13:17:21 JRWR has quit (Changing host)
2395 2011-06-24 13:17:21 JRWR has joined
2396 2011-06-24 13:17:25 <lfm> when its working at least
2397 2011-06-24 13:17:39 mrtnt1 has joined
2398 2011-06-24 13:18:07 <lfm> ericmoc you can always just /ignore gribble all if you wish
2399 2011-06-24 13:18:22 <Guest32867> coderrr: couldn't the browser and bitcoin be loosely together?
2400 2011-06-24 13:18:26 <ericmock> yes, I'm aware
2401 2011-06-24 13:18:44 AnatolV_ has joined
2402 2011-06-24 13:19:31 <lfm> Guest32867: sure, you can make any app into a web app if you wish
2403 2011-06-24 13:19:51 <Guest32867> lfm: i don't mean a web app
2404 2011-06-24 13:20:05 <ericmock> and use webgl to start mining in the web app
2405 2011-06-24 13:20:11 AnatolV has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2406 2011-06-24 13:20:20 <lfm> a plugin then? not so sure about that
2407 2011-06-24 13:20:21 <Guest32867> lfm: just put them in the same package and use bitcoin's dns service
2408 2011-06-24 13:20:39 <Guest32867> and call it BitBrowser :)
2409 2011-06-24 13:21:08 <lfm> bitcoin doesnt have a dns service afaik
2410 2011-06-24 13:21:36 <Guest32867> than it should have it
2411 2011-06-24 13:22:52 kermit has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
2412 2011-06-24 13:22:56 cyberchriss has joined
2413 2011-06-24 13:23:18 <prof7bit> don't forget IM, voip and video chat. encrypted.
2414 2011-06-24 13:23:42 <Guest32867> lfm: (in the alternative chains, as suggested)
2415 2011-06-24 13:23:57 <prof7bit> and everything that was ever said logged and recorded into the chain
2416 2011-06-24 13:23:59 <lfm> ya we should replicate youtube while we're at it. make it p2p decentralized
2417 2011-06-24 13:24:23 kermit has joined
2418 2011-06-24 13:24:31 <Guest32867> if you have decentralized dns, everything is automatically decentralized
2419 2011-06-24 13:24:36 <ericmock> doesn't cnn use a p2p decentralized video client
2420 2011-06-24 13:24:45 <ericmock> can't remember the name
2421 2011-06-24 13:24:57 <ericmock> somehting with akamai
2422 2011-06-24 13:24:58 <lfm> I dont think so
2423 2011-06-24 13:25:21 <Guest32867> lfm: why not?
2424 2011-06-24 13:25:40 <Guest32867> lfm: because of the ip address control?
2425 2011-06-24 13:25:41 <lfm> it just uses flash videos like everyone else afaik
2426 2011-06-24 13:26:06 JRWR has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2427 2011-06-24 13:26:26 <prof7bit> btw: if any of you should ever need a decentral instant messenger there is this: http://code.google.com/p/torchat/
2428 2011-06-24 13:27:22 ahbritto has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
2429 2011-06-24 13:27:46 <lfm> ;;bc,diff
2430 2011-06-24 13:27:46 <gribble> 1379223.4296725
2431 2011-06-24 13:27:50 <lfm> cool
2432 2011-06-24 13:28:09 <ericmock> and I needed to know that, why?
2433 2011-06-24 13:28:11 <ericmock> ;-)
2434 2011-06-24 13:28:27 JRWR has joined
2435 2011-06-24 13:28:27 JRWR has quit (Changing host)
2436 2011-06-24 13:28:28 JRWR has joined
2437 2011-06-24 13:28:44 Guest32867 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2438 2011-06-24 13:28:57 Herodes has joined
2439 2011-06-24 13:29:05 <Happy0> prof7bit: how long did that take you to make, seems like a great idea =]
2440 2011-06-24 13:29:38 <Happy0> i'm at uni the now, and our team project this year was an instant messenger... and everyone kept asking "is it peer 2 peer, or client server?"
2441 2011-06-24 13:29:41 <Happy0> and they seemed disappointed
2442 2011-06-24 13:29:46 <Happy0> when we said that it was client server =p
2443 2011-06-24 13:29:58 <Happy0> so, peer 2 peer must be all the rage these days xD
2444 2011-06-24 13:30:55 <ericmock> it was called octo-player or something...
2445 2011-06-24 13:31:19 <phantomcircuit> prof7bit, lol that must be slow as fuck
2446 2011-06-24 13:31:31 <prof7bit> its not slow at all
2447 2011-06-24 13:31:35 meelu has joined
2448 2011-06-24 13:31:36 meelu has quit (Changing host)
2449 2011-06-24 13:31:36 meelu has joined
2450 2011-06-24 13:31:42 <phantomcircuit> what tor needs is ipv6 mapped onion nodes
2451 2011-06-24 13:31:42 AStove has quit ()
2452 2011-06-24 13:31:51 <phantomcircuit> that would make interfacing with tor infinitely easier
2453 2011-06-24 13:31:58 <prof7bit> usually round trip one or two seconds with a good connection
2454 2011-06-24 13:32:19 <lfm> thats kinda slow actually
2455 2011-06-24 13:32:23 <phantomcircuit> lol yeah
2456 2011-06-24 13:32:27 <prof7bit> not for text messaging
2457 2011-06-24 13:32:28 <ericmock> woot! you can now send btc with CocoaCoin
2458 2011-06-24 13:32:42 <phantomcircuit> prof7bit, add 1 or 2 seconds to irc and see how annoying it is
2459 2011-06-24 13:33:48 <prof7bit> group chat is still missing. normal one-to-one messaging is quite ok
2460 2011-06-24 13:33:55 happyface has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2461 2011-06-24 13:34:18 <prof7bit> its actually working far better than i initially expected
2462 2011-06-24 13:34:48 <ericmock> is there a meaning to 'prof7bit'?
2463 2011-06-24 13:35:03 ahbritto has joined
2464 2011-06-24 13:35:17 <lfm> ericmock: ya its his password for facebook
2465 2011-06-24 13:35:29 <ericmock> and mtgox?
2466 2011-06-24 13:35:29 <prof7bit> they always called me "professor" since i can remember
2467 2011-06-24 13:35:49 <ericmock> oh, thought you might be one
2468 2011-06-24 13:35:58 <ericmock> you can only remember 7 bits?
2469 2011-06-24 13:36:00 <lfm> 7bit ascii?
2470 2011-06-24 13:36:16 <ericmock> binhex!
2471 2011-06-24 13:36:29 pyro_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2472 2011-06-24 13:36:48 <lfm> the 8th bit is just a parity bit
2473 2011-06-24 13:36:51 <prof7bit> 7bit is a long story, to complicated to tell
2474 2011-06-24 13:37:23 <prof7bit> it has to do with the non-ascii characters in my name
2475 2011-06-24 13:38:19 WildSoil has joined
2476 2011-06-24 13:38:51 abragin has quit ()
2477 2011-06-24 13:39:05 <ericmock> btw, real professors can't remember shit ;-)
2478 2011-06-24 13:39:28 <prof7bit> thats why they all call me "professor"
2479 2011-06-24 13:39:53 num1 has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
2480 2011-06-24 13:40:00 <ericmock> because you can't remember anything?
2481 2011-06-24 13:40:05 <prof7bit> lol
2482 2011-06-24 13:40:14 tandy80 has joined
2483 2011-06-24 13:40:50 agricocb has joined
2484 2011-06-24 13:40:58 JRWR has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2485 2011-06-24 13:41:06 <prof7bit> if you look at my source code, it is full of comments to help me remember what the hell I was thinking when I wrote it
2486 2011-06-24 13:41:14 <xtalmath> erm first time that I think about it but... a call tree only shows that it can call a subcall, not the order since the function can branch etc
2487 2011-06-24 13:41:43 <lfm> n = 2 + 2; /* ad 2 to 2 and store the result */
2488 2011-06-24 13:41:51 zapnap has joined
2489 2011-06-24 13:42:46 JRWR has joined
2490 2011-06-24 13:42:56 <ericmock> /*debugger says the result is 4 */
2491 2011-06-24 13:43:22 <lfm> every time I tried it so far
2492 2011-06-24 13:43:22 <prof7bit> only things that are not obvious without scrolling more than 2 screen pages away
2493 2011-06-24 13:44:00 oozyburglar has joined
2494 2011-06-24 13:44:19 <prof7bit> also comments are good for nasty rants about suboptimal frameworks or other developers
2495 2011-06-24 13:44:19 <lfm> "obvious" is pretty reletive
2496 2011-06-24 13:47:12 <prof7bit> http://www.cenqua.com/commentator/
2497 2011-06-24 13:48:17 <xtalmath> _("Bitcoin version") + " " what effect does _( somestring) have?
2498 2011-06-24 13:48:30 <ericmock> localization stuff.
2499 2011-06-24 13:49:01 <xtalmath> who comes up with this stuff
2500 2011-06-24 13:49:48 <ericmock> it's kinda convenient notation (I don't use it though)
2501 2011-06-24 13:49:58 <prof7bit> its short, not much typing involved
2502 2011-06-24 13:50:19 num1 has joined
2503 2011-06-24 13:50:34 <xtalmath> couldnt we use a string with "blablabla %s blanbabl" so that we dont have to break up the hole thing?
2504 2011-06-24 13:50:35 <ericmock> reminds me of @"something" in Cocoa
2505 2011-06-24 13:50:58 <prof7bit> yes
2506 2011-06-24 13:51:08 <xtalmath> and in localization have different strings, and plug that in?
2507 2011-06-24 13:51:13 diki has quit ()
2508 2011-06-24 13:51:17 <xtalmath> or afraid of varargs?
2509 2011-06-24 13:51:26 <prof7bit> you ust need the same amount of %s in your translated strings
2510 2011-06-24 13:52:05 <xtalmath> _("Bitcoin version") + " " + FormatFullVersion() + "\n\n" +
2511 2011-06-24 13:52:05 <xtalmath> _("Usage:") + "\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n" +
2512 2011-06-24 13:52:18 <xtalmath> almost a contest
2513 2011-06-24 13:52:21 <prof7bit> this is wrong usage
2514 2011-06-24 13:52:41 <lfm> i like this one: //goddamit I need some freaking coffee
2515 2011-06-24 13:54:12 <prof7bit> s/wrong/suboptimal
2516 2011-06-24 13:54:25 <lfm> secret messages meaningful only to people as whacked out as you are good too
2517 2011-06-24 13:55:04 <xtalmath> we need a rewrite in PureData
2518 2011-06-24 13:55:13 <xtalmath> at least artists will understand the code
2519 2011-06-24 13:57:41 <xtalmath> "every app should define a new class derived from wxApp" where is our class?
2520 2011-06-24 13:58:10 JRWR has quit ()
2521 2011-06-24 13:58:11 GuitarJJ has joined
2522 2011-06-24 13:58:14 <xtalmath> or we are conforming and non conforming at the same time?
2523 2011-06-24 13:59:02 <lfm> we need a prolog version of bitcoin
2524 2011-06-24 13:59:44 gruez has joined
2525 2011-06-24 14:00:06 GuitarJJ has quit (Client Quit)
2526 2011-06-24 14:00:43 <prof7bit> unfortunately i cannot help improving it because the way the code is currently organized if I try to compile it blows up the RAM usage of gcc to almost obscene levels, starts swapping and takes two hours to compile.
2527 2011-06-24 14:00:49 sipa has joined
2528 2011-06-24 14:01:22 <lfm> prof7bit: hehe that means you need a new computer is all
2529 2011-06-24 14:02:27 zertam has joined
2530 2011-06-24 14:02:52 gsathya has joined
2531 2011-06-24 14:03:01 gsathya has left ()
2532 2011-06-24 14:03:09 <prof7bit> and after these two hours I have missed 12 blocks and need to wait another hour to catch up again
2533 2011-06-24 14:03:37 meelu has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2534 2011-06-24 14:04:56 <prof7bit> yes, i need new computer(s): 17WaV2pr3c2rWFeCC1r7q6tuVYpYDdTnGo
2535 2011-06-24 14:06:30 xtalmath has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
2536 2011-06-24 14:07:14 <gmaxwell> "ecause the way the code is currently organized" meaning written in C++ and using boost? :)
2537 2011-06-24 14:09:21 kiba has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2538 2011-06-24 14:09:50 pirrr has joined
2539 2011-06-24 14:12:15 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, meaning a fucking mess
2540 2011-06-24 14:12:35 <vegard> ...wait, you can't even compile bitcoin?
2541 2011-06-24 14:12:39 <phantomcircuit> prof7bit, yes gcc will peak at ~500 MB
2542 2011-06-24 14:12:50 <phantomcircuit> and the link stage will get higher
2543 2011-06-24 14:13:15 <vegard> is there a bitcoin library (in C/C++)?
2544 2011-06-24 14:13:28 <phantomcircuit> is there a bitcoin library?lolno
2545 2011-06-24 14:13:30 RobboNZ has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2546 2011-06-24 14:13:45 <vegard> butbutbut... YOU registered libbtc.org!
2547 2011-06-24 14:14:06 <phantomcircuit> yes there will be a bitcoin library
2548 2011-06-24 14:14:33 <vegard> are you writing it?
2549 2011-06-24 14:14:36 <prof7bit> vegard: two days ago I finally managed to compile it. Since then I am trying to get up to date with the block chain. 2000 more blocks an I am done. another 7 hours and I can finally use it again.
2550 2011-06-24 14:14:48 <phantomcircuit> yes
2551 2011-06-24 14:15:01 <vegard> is it open source? is it online?
2552 2011-06-24 14:15:06 Aexoden has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2553 2011-06-24 14:15:07 <vegard> how far did you get?
2554 2011-06-24 14:15:08 <phantomcircuit> not yet
2555 2011-06-24 14:15:52 <phantomcircuit> basic structures/ non functional but getting there scripting (parsing works) / network code kind of working but im nto sure because that's not the part im working on
2556 2011-06-24 14:15:56 gruez has quit (Quit: Return false;)
2557 2011-06-24 14:16:25 <phantomcircuit> release will occur when we have something that actually works
2558 2011-06-24 14:16:27 <sipa> the intent is to turn the current bitcoin codebase into a library as well
2559 2011-06-24 14:16:38 <sipa> but it needs lots of cleanups in the code before that's reasonable
2560 2011-06-24 14:16:46 <phantomcircuit> sipa, that's pretty much a pipe dream
2561 2011-06-24 14:16:54 <vegard> lol
2562 2011-06-24 14:17:04 ericmock has quit (Quit: ericmock)
2563 2011-06-24 14:17:36 <sipa> phantomcircuit: not really
2564 2011-06-24 14:17:44 <phantomcircuit> uh huh
2565 2011-06-24 14:17:59 <sipa> it's definitely not something that will be done next month
2566 2011-06-24 14:18:21 <vegard> I started working on script evaluation yesterday... I implemented the opcodes required for standard transactions, but not much else
2567 2011-06-24 14:18:54 <phantomcircuit> sipa, it took a couple of days to do what we have so far and then we got side tracked
2568 2011-06-24 14:18:56 <vegard> but scripting is actually one of the more stand-alone parts of the current codebase
2569 2011-06-24 14:19:11 <phantomcircuit> a fully functional bitcoin library could be done in a few weeks
2570 2011-06-24 14:19:23 <phantomcircuit> days if you were doing nothing but writting it
2571 2011-06-24 14:19:39 <phantomcircuit> vegard, you get to op_checksig yet?
2572 2011-06-24 14:19:51 <vegard> yes
2573 2011-06-24 14:19:58 <phantomcircuit> you implement it?
2574 2011-06-24 14:20:03 glassresistor has joined
2575 2011-06-24 14:20:20 <vegard> I only need to blank out the signature from scriptSig...
2576 2011-06-24 14:20:40 <phantomcircuit> vegard, it includes the opcode for pushing it btw
2577 2011-06-24 14:20:47 <phantomcircuit> something i missed
2578 2011-06-24 14:21:44 <vegard> the opcode (the signature length, really) should be removed as well, right?
2579 2011-06-24 14:21:52 <phantomcircuit> yes
2580 2011-06-24 14:22:10 <phantomcircuit> but the opcode that is used to push it has some logic behind it to save a few bytes
2581 2011-06-24 14:22:12 <vegard> speaking of which, I don't see how this is going to work for long signatures
2582 2011-06-24 14:22:31 <sipa> phantomcircuit: if i have a few weeks, i'm sure i can turn the current codebase into a library as well
2583 2011-06-24 14:22:55 <phantomcircuit> vegard, there's a function in CScript which decides which opcode to use based on the size of the data being pushed
2584 2011-06-24 14:23:15 <vegard> because you can only specify a value of up to 75 bytes. so if your signature is bigger you would have to push twice and concatenate them or something
2585 2011-06-24 14:23:29 <vegard> OP_CAT, right? and then how can you blank it out...
2586 2011-06-24 14:23:35 <phantomcircuit> vegard, no you can specify up to 4 GB
2587 2011-06-24 14:23:42 <vegard> really? hm
2588 2011-06-24 14:23:48 <phantomcircuit> just need to use OP_PUSHDATA4
2589 2011-06-24 14:23:57 Xunie has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2590 2011-06-24 14:23:59 <vegard> aha
2591 2011-06-24 14:24:04 <vegard> well, it's no problem, then!
2592 2011-06-24 14:24:32 <vegard> I was thinking of standard transaction scripts only :)
2593 2011-06-24 14:24:53 wolfspraul has joined
2594 2011-06-24 14:25:11 <vegard> so you could even use OP_PUSHDATA4 in an otherwise standard transaction. would it still be recognised as standard?
2595 2011-06-24 14:25:22 BlueMattBot has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2596 2011-06-24 14:25:56 LobsterMan has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
2597 2011-06-24 14:26:09 <phantomcircuit> vegard, no idea, find IsStandard
2598 2011-06-24 14:26:27 <prof7bit> whats the practical purpose (real world use case) of these scripts?
2599 2011-06-24 14:26:44 <sipa> verifying transactions
2600 2011-06-24 14:26:50 <sipa> they are used, in practice
2601 2011-06-24 14:27:07 <sipa> for each and every transaction input
2602 2011-06-24 14:27:10 <prof7bit> why does one need a scripting language to do this?
2603 2011-06-24 14:27:39 <sipa> flexibility
2604 2011-06-24 14:27:52 <sipa> bitcoin transaction scripts can do a lot more than simply "pay to address"
2605 2011-06-24 14:27:59 <sipa> only it's not yet implemented in the client
2606 2011-06-24 14:28:01 <phantomcircuit> well
2607 2011-06-24 14:28:02 meelu has joined
2608 2011-06-24 14:28:03 <phantomcircuit> they CAN
2609 2011-06-24 14:28:12 Nexus_7 has joined
2610 2011-06-24 14:28:12 <prof7bit> what else can they do than pay money from A to B?
2611 2011-06-24 14:28:13 <sipa> yes, for now, they don't
2612 2011-06-24 14:28:14 Nexus7 has quit (Disconnected by services)
2613 2011-06-24 14:28:21 Nexus_7 is now known as Nexus7
2614 2011-06-24 14:28:22 Nexus7 has quit (Changing host)
2615 2011-06-24 14:28:22 Nexus7 has joined
2616 2011-06-24 14:28:32 <sipa> prof7bit: read mike's thread on designing distributed contracts in the forum
2617 2011-06-24 14:28:59 <prof7bit> contracts?
2618 2011-06-24 14:29:20 <sipa> the terminology is a bit weird
2619 2011-06-24 14:29:22 <sipa> but just read it
2620 2011-06-24 14:29:24 <prof7bit> and if one does not fulfill his part my money comes back to me?
2621 2011-06-24 14:29:47 <sipa> no
2622 2011-06-24 14:29:53 <sipa> well, possibly
2623 2011-06-24 14:29:56 <prof7bit> so its just to annoy the receiver?
2624 2011-06-24 14:29:59 <sipa> but contracts is just what satoshi called it
2625 2011-06-24 14:30:14 <sipa> bitcoin transactions are always irreversible, so no
2626 2011-06-24 14:30:15 dbasch_ has joined
2627 2011-06-24 14:30:24 <sipa> please, just read it, it's a lot more clear than if i try to explain it now
2628 2011-06-24 14:30:38 Kiba has joined
2629 2011-06-24 14:31:15 md2k7 has joined
2630 2011-06-24 14:32:05 <prof7bit> so let me summarize what i have understood so far (without reading it what I will do next): with scripts you can find a zillion ways to bully the receiver of the money but they are of absolutely no use for the sender at all.
2631 2011-06-24 14:32:57 <sipa> no
2632 2011-06-24 14:33:16 <sipa> it's just more complex forms of payment
2633 2011-06-24 14:33:36 <sipa> where eg. a signature from an escrow is needed before money can be spent
2634 2011-06-24 14:33:46 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
2635 2011-06-24 14:34:09 <prof7bit> but this is no use for the sender
2636 2011-06-24 14:34:21 <prof7bit> if the money is gone anyways
2637 2011-06-24 14:34:34 <sipa> the receiver can be equal to the sender
2638 2011-06-24 14:34:42 <sipa> so, no
2639 2011-06-24 14:34:45 <sipa> just read it
2640 2011-06-24 14:36:04 Aexoden has joined
2641 2011-06-24 14:36:58 Soak has joined
2642 2011-06-24 14:41:18 scott`_ has joined
2643 2011-06-24 14:44:24 ericmock has joined
2644 2011-06-24 14:44:52 BlueMattBot has joined
2645 2011-06-24 14:48:01 <dinox> anyone having a testnet node up?
2646 2011-06-24 14:49:28 Zarutian has joined
2647 2011-06-24 14:53:08 Clipse has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2648 2011-06-24 14:55:09 wolfspraul has quit (Quit: leaving)
2649 2011-06-24 14:56:30 <dinox> or knowing someone has, I'm trying to connect but don't get any connections
2650 2011-06-24 14:56:46 minus has joined
2651 2011-06-24 14:56:58 <sipa> dinox: bitcoin.sipa.be runs a testnet node
2652 2011-06-24 14:57:14 torsthaldo has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2653 2011-06-24 14:57:16 <minus> from what account of the wallet does sendtoaddress take the money?
2654 2011-06-24 14:57:28 <sipa> ""
2655 2011-06-24 14:57:28 copumpkin has joined
2656 2011-06-24 14:58:05 <dinox> thanks sipa, worked great
2657 2011-06-24 14:58:56 <dinox> is there a testnet blockexplorer?
2658 2011-06-24 14:59:04 <prof7bit> doesn't this incredibly complicate and slow down the verifying of transactions (if there are multiple transactions and inputs and outputs that supersede each other, the client has to check the entire block chain for all other versions of the same transaction until it finally decides which one is valid? what if a client is buggy and messes up this overly complex multi-dimensional scripting stuff?)
2659 2011-06-24 14:59:24 <sipa> dinox: www.blockexplorer.com/testnet
2660 2011-06-24 14:59:47 <sipa> prof7bit: all other versions of the same transaction?
2661 2011-06-24 14:59:56 <sipa> there can only be one version in the blockchain at all
2662 2011-06-24 14:59:57 <prof7bit> yes
2663 2011-06-24 14:59:59 Herodes has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2664 2011-06-24 15:00:46 wardearia has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
2665 2011-06-24 15:00:51 <prof7bit> it talks about "replacing transactions"
2666 2011-06-24 15:01:16 <prof7bit> and later it talks about "changing" inputs
2667 2011-06-24 15:01:23 samlander has quit (Disconnected by services)
2668 2011-06-24 15:01:29 <sipa> transactions can only be replaced as long as they are not in the block chain
2669 2011-06-24 15:01:56 md2k7 has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
2670 2011-06-24 15:02:41 <prof7bit> but where are they if they are not in the block chain?
2671 2011-06-24 15:03:06 <vegard> limbo XD
2672 2011-06-24 15:03:20 <sipa> prof7bit: the memory pool
2673 2011-06-24 15:03:29 meelu has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2674 2011-06-24 15:03:52 <sipa> basically the temporary store for all 0-confirmation transactions
2675 2011-06-24 15:03:57 <prof7bit> so in the examope from the wiki the "contract" stays in the memory pool for 6 months?
2676 2011-06-24 15:04:23 Pinion has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
2677 2011-06-24 15:04:26 <prof7bit> the example with depositing the money for 6 months
2678 2011-06-24 15:05:01 freakazoid has joined
2679 2011-06-24 15:06:01 gavinandresen has joined
2680 2011-06-24 15:06:25 <prof7bit> how can it be prevented that i spend my money the "normal" way while these "contracts" will never enter the block chain and cannot be seen by the other clients?
2681 2011-06-24 15:08:23 Clipse has joined
2682 2011-06-24 15:09:50 <sipa> prof7bit: Tx1 is put in the block chain, if i understand it correctly
2683 2011-06-24 15:10:13 <sipa> so its output can only be spent by a transaction that both the user and the site agree upon
2684 2011-06-24 15:10:35 <sipa> and such a transaction already exists, so the user knows he can use that if nothing changes
2685 2011-06-24 15:11:51 defaultman has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2686 2011-06-24 15:13:45 <prof7bit> it seems i'm still having problems understanding the exact steps involved in verifying a transaction. is there anywhere a simple "plain english" procedural explanation of the exact steps the client does when checking a transaction?
2687 2011-06-24 15:14:24 <prof7bit> for example when looking at an output how do i know it is not already spent elsewhere?
2688 2011-06-24 15:15:04 <prof7bit> the inputs are pointing to previous outputs somewhere, correct?
2689 2011-06-24 15:15:35 p0s has joined
2690 2011-06-24 15:15:44 xtalmath has joined
2691 2011-06-24 15:15:45 AStove has joined
2692 2011-06-24 15:15:46 <prof7bit> do i have to go through *all* inputs ever created since this output to check if it isn't used anywhere?
2693 2011-06-24 15:15:57 <x6763> prof7bit: yes
2694 2011-06-24 15:16:11 <x6763> prof7bit: typically you *index* the block chain, so lookups like that are easier and more efficient
2695 2011-06-24 15:16:15 <xtalmath> wait, in theory thats not necesary
2696 2011-06-24 15:16:57 AnatolV_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2697 2011-06-24 15:17:03 Soak has quit ()
2698 2011-06-24 15:17:18 <x6763> someone needs to make sure the transaction is not double spending
2699 2011-06-24 15:17:34 <sipa> prof7bit: you keep a table with all unspent transaction outputs
2700 2011-06-24 15:17:39 <sipa> at least, all full nodes do
2701 2011-06-24 15:17:48 <sipa> in the future, this will be far from everyone
2702 2011-06-24 15:17:49 aristidesfl has joined
2703 2011-06-24 15:18:07 wardearia has joined
2704 2011-06-24 15:20:15 TheZimm has joined
2705 2011-06-24 15:20:20 TheZimm has quit (Client Quit)
2706 2011-06-24 15:20:34 TheZimm has joined
2707 2011-06-24 15:20:46 TheZimm has quit (Client Quit)
2708 2011-06-24 15:20:50 <prof7bit> and the script that is contained in a specific output is evaluated when an input wants to spend it (evaluated with the data that is contained in the input)?
2709 2011-06-24 15:21:00 <sipa> indeed
2710 2011-06-24 15:21:14 <sipa> the input script and the output script are concatenated
2711 2011-06-24 15:21:19 <sipa> and the result should evaluate to true
2712 2011-06-24 15:21:36 <sipa> the input script basically pushes some data on the stack, which is verified by the output script
2713 2011-06-24 15:22:18 <x6763> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Script
2714 2011-06-24 15:22:22 <x6763> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/OP_CHECKSIG
2715 2011-06-24 15:23:26 Diablo-D3 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2716 2011-06-24 15:24:21 rokj has joined
2717 2011-06-24 15:24:29 <rokj> hi
2718 2011-06-24 15:25:39 <rokj> when i do bitcoind listtransactions it gives me list of transactions with time key. time is in int since epoch ?
2719 2011-06-24 15:26:04 <sipa> yes
2720 2011-06-24 15:26:04 <tcatm> rokj: yes
2721 2011-06-24 15:26:14 <rokj> thx
2722 2011-06-24 15:26:57 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Gavin Andresen master * rc774b16 / (src/main.cpp src/main.h): Merge branch 'totalblocksestimate1' of https://github.com/laanwj/bitcoin - http://bit.ly/iGCC3L
2723 2011-06-24 15:27:11 <emock> what's the 'sent to IP address' functionality do/for?
2724 2011-06-24 15:27:22 <sipa> emock: it's deprecated
2725 2011-06-24 15:27:30 <emock> excellent!
2726 2011-06-24 15:27:36 <emock> less to implement!
2727 2011-06-24 15:28:42 pyro_ has joined
2728 2011-06-24 15:30:19 <gavinandresen> sipa: why 128 for PRIVKEYVERSION?
2729 2011-06-24 15:30:37 <jrmithdobbs> cause it makes the begining a pretty 5 always
2730 2011-06-24 15:30:53 johnlockwood_ has joined
2731 2011-06-24 15:30:53 freakazoid has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
2732 2011-06-24 15:30:59 <sipa> gavinandresen: i thought of use <128 for addresses and >128 for corresponding private keys
2733 2011-06-24 15:31:11 <sipa> using
2734 2011-06-24 15:31:33 <jrmithdobbs> and really why not, there's enough magic numbers in bitcoin anyways, one more wont hurt ;p
2735 2011-06-24 15:31:45 viggi_ has joined
2736 2011-06-24 15:31:56 viggi has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
2737 2011-06-24 15:32:07 hipeopl has joined
2738 2011-06-24 15:32:09 <denisx> dinox: still looking for a testnet node?
2739 2011-06-24 15:32:44 <gavinandresen> sipa: ok, makes sense. And just add 111 for testnet versions....
2740 2011-06-24 15:32:55 <jrmithdobbs> sipa: is showwallet rebased on wallet class yet?[5~[5~[5~[5~[6~[6~[6~[6~[6~[6~[6~[6~[6~[6~
2741 2011-06-24 15:33:18 <jrmithdobbs> stupid irssi
2742 2011-06-24 15:33:22 <sipa> jrmithdobbs: yes, but not pushed to github yet, i need to make some more changes
2743 2011-06-24 15:33:41 Kebert has quit ()
2744 2011-06-24 15:35:19 yukto has joined
2745 2011-06-24 15:35:30 gnutun has joined
2746 2011-06-24 15:36:14 viggi_ is now known as viggi
2747 2011-06-24 15:36:44 viggi is now known as Guest94317
2748 2011-06-24 15:36:58 Guest94317 has quit (Quit: leaving)
2749 2011-06-24 15:37:15 jimrandomh has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2750 2011-06-24 15:37:43 karnac has joined
2751 2011-06-24 15:38:57 <jrmithdobbs> sipa: did you fix the == 32 instead of >=31 thing for import?
2752 2011-06-24 15:39:02 weinerk has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2753 2011-06-24 15:40:02 <sipa> jrmithdobbs: hmm i'm sure i did, but don't see it now in the code anymore
2754 2011-06-24 15:40:14 <sipa> thanks for remining
2755 2011-06-24 15:40:16 <jrmithdobbs> ya i know we'd talked about it, heh
2756 2011-06-24 15:41:13 <sipa> i'll do the cleanup of showwallet this weekend
2757 2011-06-24 15:41:34 gsathya has joined
2758 2011-06-24 15:41:39 gsathya has left ()
2759 2011-06-24 15:41:54 Twoheaded has joined
2760 2011-06-24 15:43:06 <minus> is there anything like "list transactions from block x that belong to my wallet"-api?
2761 2011-06-24 15:44:17 Pinion has joined
2762 2011-06-24 15:44:48 weinerk has joined
2763 2011-06-24 15:45:12 WildSoil has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
2764 2011-06-24 15:45:12 <Optimo_> yay my claim was accepted
2765 2011-06-24 15:45:13 Klash_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2766 2011-06-24 15:45:44 <emock> me too⦠after I had to provide balance info
2767 2011-06-24 15:45:54 segfault64 has joined
2768 2011-06-24 15:46:47 <Optimo_> so I was just imagining ruining some -otc people's auth by just requesting a new challenge string from the bot on behalf of their nick...
2769 2011-06-24 15:46:51 <Optimo_> seems plausible
2770 2011-06-24 15:47:21 <Optimo_> emock try this for me /msg gribble ;;auth Optimo
2771 2011-06-24 15:47:36 <emock> here or in foyer?
2772 2011-06-24 15:47:42 <Optimo_> to the bot
2773 2011-06-24 15:48:03 <minus> why is noone answering my questions :(
2774 2011-06-24 15:48:04 <emock> pm to the bot?
2775 2011-06-24 15:48:08 <Optimo_> yea
2776 2011-06-24 15:48:26 kasdlsak has joined
2777 2011-06-24 15:48:29 <emock> gribble: Request successful for user Optimo, hostmask emock!~ericmock@dssl.mne.psu.edu. Your challenge string is: freenode:#bitcoin-otc:2512d82d8a8dc2a6d2c0bbe39c300145b40780badb8b067ed99d58bb
2778 2011-06-24 15:48:45 <Optimo_> minus, well the basic client is a sufficient ledger
2779 2011-06-24 15:48:45 <emock> hacked!
2780 2011-06-24 15:48:52 weinerk has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2781 2011-06-24 15:49:09 <Optimo_> but you want something pointing into the block, I think I ran across someting recently..
2782 2011-06-24 15:49:13 <gmaxwell> So, why doesn't bitcoin also include a merkel tree of the open transactions in the coinbase? Right now you can only use pruned data if you have a trusted party (e.g. you) do the pruning using all the data.
2783 2011-06-24 15:49:28 <minus> eh, i mean RPC-wise Optimo_
2784 2011-06-24 15:49:34 <Optimo_> emock; damn that actually worked
2785 2011-06-24 15:49:41 pyro_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2786 2011-06-24 15:49:46 <Optimo_> gribble shortsightedness
2787 2011-06-24 15:49:49 <emock> Optimo_: you see my message on irc.saurik.com?
2788 2011-06-24 15:49:56 <gmaxwell> But if there was a tree of open transactions, then you could just have the block headers, and the last N blocks, and then the tree paths for the transaction you're interested for the last N blocks and you can be pretty confident that the TXN is legit.
2789 2011-06-24 15:49:56 <Optimo_> it kicked me out of -otc
2790 2011-06-24 15:50:05 <gmaxwell> minus: I don't think there is one that does that.
2791 2011-06-24 15:50:13 <gmaxwell> minus: What do you want it for?
2792 2011-06-24 15:50:13 <yukto> Are there any existing tools for generating and then serializing a bitcoin transaction for sending to the network at a later point in time?
2793 2011-06-24 15:50:29 pyro_ has joined
2794 2011-06-24 15:50:47 <Optimo_> emock: uh no. ? goto our chatroom
2795 2011-06-24 15:51:03 Rabbit67890 has joined
2796 2011-06-24 15:51:13 josephholsten has joined
2797 2011-06-24 15:51:17 <yukto> particularly useful if you want to deal with your private keys on a completely isolated machine, sending transactions from a different computer
2798 2011-06-24 15:51:25 <minus> gmaxwell: see if there's new transactions to me and what account they belong to
2799 2011-06-24 15:51:45 <sipa> gmaxwell: what do you mean with open transactions?
2800 2011-06-24 15:51:54 <minus> you can list the last x transaction but not transaction since <date>
2801 2011-06-24 15:52:23 <x6763> yukto: that's certainly possible to do, but i haven't heard of any tools that do that, yet
2802 2011-06-24 15:52:54 <yukto> x6763: are there libraries that expose the necessary functionality?
2803 2011-06-24 15:53:06 earthmeLon has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2804 2011-06-24 15:53:10 nanook7 has joined
2805 2011-06-24 15:53:58 <Optimo_> that's a flaw in gribble maybe
2806 2011-06-24 15:54:03 <gmaxwell> sipa: ones which have not been redeemed. E.g. ones that you might wish to redeem ina new transaction.
2807 2011-06-24 15:54:13 <Optimo_> I can do ;;auth on your behalf and it kicks you out of -otc
2808 2011-06-24 15:54:29 <minus> even listtransactions does not work globally but on accounts only
2809 2011-06-24 15:54:29 <sipa> gmaxwell: in every block, a merkle tree of *all* unredeemed transactions?
2810 2011-06-24 15:54:49 weinerk has joined
2811 2011-06-24 15:56:04 <gmaxwell> sipa: so, unless I misunderstand it. In lite mode you could validate that txn X is indeed in block Y. But you can't tell that X wasn't already redeemed in block Y+10. The obvious implication of this is that e.g. w/ namecoin it's impossible to validate a domain without the complete block chain.
2812 2011-06-24 15:56:19 * emock goes to kick everyone out of otc so he can trade with himself
2813 2011-06-24 15:56:21 <gmaxwell> Though it also means for bitcoin that you can't validate a transaction until its mined.
2814 2011-06-24 15:56:41 <gmaxwell> sipa: yes, well, the root. The tree itself need not be placed in a block.
2815 2011-06-24 15:57:01 <x6763> yukto: no idea...i have my own code that could easily be adapted to do that, but i don't have plans on releasing until i'm finished writing my client
2816 2011-06-24 15:57:09 phearful has joined
2817 2011-06-24 15:57:20 <sipa> gmaxwell: interesting... a bit too tired now to think about clearly
2818 2011-06-24 15:57:27 <gmaxwell> If the root of such a tree were placed in a block, I could ask a peer to give me the tree leading to an open txn and the be pretty confident that the txn is still open.
2819 2011-06-24 15:57:35 <gmaxwell> sipa: Okay, I'll post on the forum about it.
2820 2011-06-24 15:57:39 <gmaxwell> I might just be being stupid.
2821 2011-06-24 15:58:07 Titeuf_87 has joined
2822 2011-06-24 16:00:35 <dinox> sipa: Does your importprivkey function scan for transactions to that privkey? If I'll import a key which owns some keys my balance is not updated after import
2823 2011-06-24 16:00:54 <sipa> dinox: yes
2824 2011-06-24 16:00:59 <dinox> hmm
2825 2011-06-24 16:01:18 <sipa> it should
2826 2011-06-24 16:01:28 <sipa> but it's quite possible there are still problems with it
2827 2011-06-24 16:02:06 Zyrkon has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2828 2011-06-24 16:02:10 <dinox> yep, I think so.. I'll take a look and notify you if I find something
2829 2011-06-24 16:02:13 <x6763> for this key import/export stuff, is it just doing the 256-bit private keys, or are you guys throwing all kinds of redundant information in the exports, too?
2830 2011-06-24 16:02:32 <x6763> (like all of the redundant key info in the wallet file)
2831 2011-06-24 16:02:54 hahuang65 has joined
2832 2011-06-24 16:02:58 <sipa> x6763: there is a dumpwallet and a dumpprivkey
2833 2011-06-24 16:03:18 <sipa> the first creates a json formatted dump with a lot of wallet information in
2834 2011-06-24 16:03:41 <sipa> the second only creates a base58 formatted private key (just the 256 bits + 32 bit checksum)
2835 2011-06-24 16:05:05 <gim> "you can't validate a transaction until its mined" yes
2836 2011-06-24 16:05:25 <gim> also you can tell a transaction is incompatible with the current main chain
2837 2011-06-24 16:06:11 <gim> but you can never tell for sure if a transaction is compatible with the current chain
2838 2011-06-24 16:06:41 <x6763> sipa: ah, i see
2839 2011-06-24 16:07:08 <Leo_II> gim: the miner decides what gets in the chain and what not. all unconfirmed tx are not accepted by any miner.
2840 2011-06-24 16:07:39 <gim> what do you mean by "accepted"
2841 2011-06-24 16:07:40 <Leo_II> still all those unconfirmed tx can be tested to be valid candidates to get accepted by a miner later
2842 2011-06-24 16:07:52 <gim> of course they accept unconfirmed transactions
2843 2011-06-24 16:08:03 <gim> it's their job to confirm them
2844 2011-06-24 16:08:07 <copumpkin> gim: he probably means "uncomfirmed means that no miner has accepted them"
2845 2011-06-24 16:08:10 <Leo_II> it is to the miner's sole discretion to add tx to a block or not
2846 2011-06-24 16:08:12 <copumpkin> in a rather roundabout way
2847 2011-06-24 16:08:24 <Leo_II> copumpkin: :) yes
2848 2011-06-24 16:08:34 <yukto> Are there any tools to see transactions sent/recieved by a specific public address, and see the number of confirmations?
2849 2011-06-24 16:08:42 <copumpkin> blockexplorer
2850 2011-06-24 16:08:54 <yukto> copumpkin: I don't see anything regarding confirmations
2851 2011-06-24 16:09:05 <copumpkin> oh yeah, not confirmations as far as I know
2852 2011-06-24 16:09:15 <Leo_II> confirmations is how many blocks came after it
2853 2011-06-24 16:09:31 <Titeuf_87> You can look at what block number it is in and subtract that from the highest block.
2854 2011-06-24 16:09:37 <yukto> It would also be nice to not to have to trust a single 3rd party..
2855 2011-06-24 16:09:37 <Leo_II> so if it is not in a block itself, it has 0 conf.
2856 2011-06-24 16:09:44 <gim> copumpkin: blockexplorer + substraction :)
2857 2011-06-24 16:09:51 <copumpkin> :)
2858 2011-06-24 16:09:51 <Leo_II> lol
2859 2011-06-24 16:09:56 <aristidesfl> how much space a block with 10899 transaction would take on disk?
2860 2011-06-24 16:10:01 <yukto> Is there not a way of doing it by downloading the data yourself from the network?
2861 2011-06-24 16:10:18 <Leo_II> yukto: your client does that for you
2862 2011-06-24 16:10:44 <Leo_II> in the client you see "n confirmations" and that says exactly that difference
2863 2011-06-24 16:10:57 <yukto> Leo_II: how do I get the account into the client without the private key?
2864 2011-06-24 16:10:59 <gim> aristidesfl: it depend on the size of the transactions
2865 2011-06-24 16:11:27 <Leo_II> ah you mean for unrelated tx?
2866 2011-06-24 16:11:51 <aristidesfl> gim: lets consider an average transaction size
2867 2011-06-24 16:12:06 <Leo_II> yukto: well ... good point. don't know if you can search the block chain easily without blockexplorer
2868 2011-06-24 16:12:27 <gim> yukto: yep the client could do that
2869 2011-06-24 16:12:28 <x6763> yukto: you could write some code to open the blkindex.db BDB file and lookup transaction IDs and find the height of the block they're in, and then lookup the height of the blockchain head
2870 2011-06-24 16:12:30 <yukto> Leo_II: if you have a savings account for which you don't want to expose the priv key on a computer connected to the internet, but you want to be able to monitor funds it has recieved using only the public key.
2871 2011-06-24 16:13:07 segfault64 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2872 2011-06-24 16:13:29 <gim> aristidesfl: average tx size can be found here http://blockexplorer.com/q/avgtxsize
2873 2011-06-24 16:13:30 nanook7 has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPhone - http://colloquy.mobi)
2874 2011-06-24 16:13:38 <Leo_II> yukto: i would do as x6763 suggested although i don't know the tools (yet) ;)
2875 2011-06-24 16:14:43 viggi_ has joined
2876 2011-06-24 16:14:54 <x6763> i suspect it could be done relatively quickly in python
2877 2011-06-24 16:15:20 <x6763> i suppose if you're looking for an address, rather than a transaction id, it might be more complicated
2878 2011-06-24 16:15:51 <gim> aristidesfl: (and disk storage overhead is low)
2879 2011-06-24 16:17:36 dbasch_ has quit (Quit: dbasch_)
2880 2011-06-24 16:18:19 Teslah has joined
2881 2011-06-24 16:18:46 BTCTrader has joined
2882 2011-06-24 16:18:53 Zyrkon has joined
2883 2011-06-24 16:19:11 BTCTrader is now known as Guest46534
2884 2011-06-24 16:19:22 <CIA-103> bitcoinj: hearn@google.com * r102 /trunk/src/com/google/bitcoin/core/Block.java:
2885 2011-06-24 16:19:22 <CIA-103> bitcoinj: De-Satoshize the buildMerkleTree function:
2886 2011-06-24 16:19:22 <CIA-103> bitcoinj: - Clarify the terminology in the existing explanation.
2887 2011-06-24 16:19:22 <CIA-103> bitcoinj: - Add an explanation of what the point of the structure is.
2888 2011-06-24 16:19:22 <CIA-103> bitcoinj: - Note how non-power-of-two transaction list sizes are handled.
2889 2011-06-24 16:19:22 <CIA-103> bitcoinj: - Rename variables to be more helpful than i,i2,j etc.
2890 2011-06-24 16:19:23 <CIA-103> bitcoinj: - Add a more detailed explanation of each step of the algorithm.
2891 2011-06-24 16:19:24 viggi_ is now known as viggi
2892 2011-06-24 16:19:36 <luke-jr> jgarzik: dumpblock should include "is in the main chain" somewhere :P
2893 2011-06-24 16:19:53 <gim> "de-satohsize" ? :)
2894 2011-06-24 16:20:06 <Optimo_> sigh
2895 2011-06-24 16:20:15 <Optimo_> bitcoin 'the wikileaks of money'
2896 2011-06-24 16:20:20 <prof7bit> I'm just browsing through bitcoinj source code and noticed it is not just some random dude writing some code, it is "Copyright 2011 Google Inc."
2897 2011-06-24 16:20:34 <Optimo_> it's TD iirc
2898 2011-06-24 16:20:40 <Optimo_> user in here
2899 2011-06-24 16:20:50 <Optimo_> works for gmail I think
2900 2011-06-24 16:24:02 sabalaba has joined
2901 2011-06-24 16:24:26 <prof7bit> I' trying to find out how they can quote:"not store a full copy of the block chain" and at the same time provide the functionality to plug in a wallet and use it to show the balance and even send transactions
2902 2011-06-24 16:25:28 <Optimo_> compressing 'old' blocks
2903 2011-06-24 16:25:33 <Optimo_> 'compressing'
2904 2011-06-24 16:26:35 <Optimo_> if the tx are suitably old the full info wouldn't be needed. and if your wallet has rolled over and made it's money newer then the old blocks are really not needed to see your own balance
2905 2011-06-24 16:27:08 <Optimo_> that bitcoinj that prof7bit alludes to is that project IINM
2906 2011-06-24 16:28:02 <Optimo_> I'm not sure if that means seeing balances accurately always, but should at least allow for sending tx
2907 2011-06-24 16:28:25 <CIA-103> bitcoinjs/node-bitcoin-p2p: Stefan Thomas master * rd1d4a36 / (lib/settings.js lib/util.js):
2908 2011-06-24 16:28:25 <CIA-103> bitcoinjs/node-bitcoin-p2p: Added compatibility with Node.js 0.4.8.
2909 2011-06-24 16:28:25 <CIA-103> bitcoinjs/node-bitcoin-p2p: Removed dependency on 0.5.0-pre Buffer "hex" encoding support. - http://bit.ly/jt9oEE
2910 2011-06-24 16:28:28 <Optimo_> the network still has to verify that
2911 2011-06-24 16:28:40 <Optimo_> ooh node'ified
2912 2011-06-24 16:29:09 mosimo has joined
2913 2011-06-24 16:29:31 <prof7bit> how would I do it with the current p2p protocol? I would have to start with the newest block and download the entire block and then the block before and so on until I have found all my transactions, there could even be a transaction for me in block #0 so i have to download essentially all blocks
2914 2011-06-24 16:29:56 ketsa has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2915 2011-06-24 16:30:15 <Optimo_> if you wanted to see the balance from older wallet yeah I think so
2916 2011-06-24 16:30:39 <Optimo_> but if the money being claimed by the wallet is in neer blocks that is not the case
2917 2011-06-24 16:30:44 <Optimo_> newer
2918 2011-06-24 16:31:15 <aristidesfl> gim: in which unit is that size in?
2919 2011-06-24 16:31:23 <Optimo_> aybe the idea is that there would be a compressed block chain to download
2920 2011-06-24 16:32:10 <prof7bit> if there were a "give me all tx for this address" message in the protocol
2921 2011-06-24 16:32:35 <Optimo_> it doesn't work like that, it's more like a web
2922 2011-06-24 16:32:46 kasdlsak is now known as pusle
2923 2011-06-24 16:32:58 Teslah has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2924 2011-06-24 16:33:03 <Optimo_> the coins I have are only valid if the person who gave them to me had them validated, and so frth back in time
2925 2011-06-24 16:33:20 <Optimo_> or if I just mined them, those would be very new coins
2926 2011-06-24 16:34:06 hahuang65 has quit ()
2927 2011-06-24 16:35:14 hahuang65 has joined
2928 2011-06-24 16:35:39 ionspin has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2929 2011-06-24 16:36:34 ar4s has joined
2930 2011-06-24 16:38:54 Nexus7 has quit (Disconnected by services)
2931 2011-06-24 16:39:27 gjs278 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2932 2011-06-24 16:40:37 sgstair has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2933 2011-06-24 16:40:45 gjs278 has joined
2934 2011-06-24 16:41:03 sgstair has joined
2935 2011-06-24 16:42:24 k^^ has joined
2936 2011-06-24 16:43:08 sanity has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2937 2011-06-24 16:43:18 ketsa has joined
2938 2011-06-24 16:46:54 bencoder has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2939 2011-06-24 16:47:07 b1U\-\a10 has joined
2940 2011-06-24 16:47:13 Nachtwind has joined
2941 2011-06-24 16:47:47 Optimo_ is now known as Optimo
2942 2011-06-24 16:48:04 b1U\-\a10 has quit (Client Quit)
2943 2011-06-24 16:48:22 <Nachtwind> i have a small question about the bitcoin blockchain.. is it possible for the "leaders" of bitcoin to modify it in any way?
2944 2011-06-24 16:48:33 <Nachtwind> like removing transactions or blocks from it?
2945 2011-06-24 16:48:38 <Optimo> no
2946 2011-06-24 16:48:55 b1U\-\a10 has joined
2947 2011-06-24 16:49:02 <Nachtwind> ok, fast answer ^^
2948 2011-06-24 16:49:03 <tcatm> if we can convince 50% of the users, yes.
2949 2011-06-24 16:49:11 <Optimo> all the clients on the network have to agree to any changes
2950 2011-06-24 16:49:16 <Optimo> or yeah 50% ;)
2951 2011-06-24 16:49:16 b1U\-\a10 has quit (Client Quit)
2952 2011-06-24 16:49:18 <Nachtwind> ok, because that was my second question
2953 2011-06-24 16:49:32 Soak has joined
2954 2011-06-24 16:49:39 <tcatm> targeting a single transaction would be hard
2955 2011-06-24 16:49:54 Soak has quit (Client Quit)
2956 2011-06-24 16:49:54 <Nachtwind> so what would stop big pools from combining their users in order to get a sufficiently high number of "power" in order to create their own blocks?
2957 2011-06-24 16:50:03 <Optimo> recommend reading the original idea on teh pdf
2958 2011-06-24 16:50:07 <tcatm> but should there be a transaction exploiting a bug we would fix it and the transaction/block would become invalid
2959 2011-06-24 16:50:14 Soak has joined
2960 2011-06-24 16:50:18 <Optimo> polls getting too big is a general concern
2961 2011-06-24 16:50:46 <Optimo> it's still a lot of coordination involved. and the righteous half can just start a new valid chain if it came to that
2962 2011-06-24 16:51:22 Teslah has joined
2963 2011-06-24 16:51:49 <tcatm> I think pools should regulate themselves once they approach 20..30% of the network
2964 2011-06-24 16:52:01 <Optimo> that's tough right
2965 2011-06-24 16:52:11 <Optimo> they could only restrict further nodes from conencting
2966 2011-06-24 16:52:13 <Nachtwind> they arent in the majority?
2967 2011-06-24 16:52:22 <Optimo> but any one node could add super workrate
2968 2011-06-24 16:52:24 <tcatm> or throttling getworks
2969 2011-06-24 16:52:30 <Nachtwind> i have no ideas about numbers, but i had thought most people are on pools
2970 2011-06-24 16:52:32 <Optimo> throttling sounds good
2971 2011-06-24 16:52:42 <tcatm> Nachtwind: see piechart on bitcoinwatch.com
2972 2011-06-24 16:52:47 <Optimo> pools operating separately
2973 2011-06-24 16:53:31 <Nachtwind> uff.. they ARE in the majority if that site is watching all data from the network, arent they?
2974 2011-06-24 16:53:35 <justmoon> tcatm: miners have been regulating pools just fine, when deepbit went over 50%, it took a few days until enough miners switched away so they were under 50% again
2975 2011-06-24 16:53:42 <Optimo> 'they'?
2976 2011-06-24 16:53:47 <justmoon> tcatm: if a pool abused it's power it would go even quicker
2977 2011-06-24 16:53:53 <Optimo> who is they?
2978 2011-06-24 16:54:13 <Nachtwind> So, just say slush and deepbit would "fork" the chain and introduce a much lower difficulty. are there measures possible to stop that? I am just curious after reading some stuff about btc in general
2979 2011-06-24 16:54:15 <tcatm> justmoon: now that may work... but in the future when most people who mine don't understand that?
2980 2011-06-24 16:54:22 <Optimo> none of those single slices is in the majority currently
2981 2011-06-24 16:54:24 <Nachtwind> "they" pools
2982 2011-06-24 16:54:45 <Optimo> you're talking about slush and deepbit 'joining forces' but that hasn't happened
2983 2011-06-24 16:54:54 <Nachtwind> and it wont
2984 2011-06-24 16:54:55 <justmoon> tcatm: don't be ridiculous, miners will always understand mining - if anything they'll get more sophisticated, not less
2985 2011-06-24 16:54:57 <slush> and won't :)
2986 2011-06-24 16:55:12 <Nachtwind> its just theory.. i am just wondering why this hasent happened already *G*
2987 2011-06-24 16:55:24 <aristidesfl> gim: in which unit is that size in?
2988 2011-06-24 16:55:38 <Optimo> it's one of the perceived 'weaknesses' of the protocol
2989 2011-06-24 16:55:43 <Nachtwind> i have seen many projects come and go that dies of people starting to do their own thing and i would have guessed that in the beginning of btcs pools had higher percentages of users
2990 2011-06-24 16:55:49 <Optimo> but there are real people that would work together to remedy that
2991 2011-06-24 16:55:51 <Nachtwind> oh, i see
2992 2011-06-24 16:56:22 <Nachtwind> so, it is a calculable threat that is as possible as godzilla walking the earth?
2993 2011-06-24 16:56:26 <slush> It is economically better for me and for tycho to be 'good guys' than cheaters
2994 2011-06-24 16:56:27 <Optimo> the longer this current chain becomes, the hard it should be to fake it too
2995 2011-06-24 16:56:52 <Nachtwind> oh, hi slush, dont take it personal, just used your pol as an example for big pools
2996 2011-06-24 16:57:03 <slush> I don't take it personal ;)
2997 2011-06-24 16:57:14 <Optimo> it will be more pools, more competition
2998 2011-06-24 16:57:17 eternal1 has joined
2999 2011-06-24 16:57:54 bencoder has joined
3000 2011-06-24 16:58:15 <Nachtwind> hm, ok
3001 2011-06-24 16:58:47 freakazoid has joined
3002 2011-06-24 16:58:49 datagutt has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
3003 2011-06-24 16:58:52 <Nachtwind> damn ... btc is such an interestering "project".. wish i had known it earlier ><
3004 2011-06-24 16:58:54 <Optimo> then there's the theoretical work that woudl need to be done to create a second fake chain - it's blocks still have to all validate properly - it's a LOT of work
3005 2011-06-24 16:59:11 <Optimo> it's extrememly interesting it tickles your geekbones
3006 2011-06-24 16:59:34 <Nachtwind> but wouldnt a fake chain be able to validate itself by itself?
3007 2011-06-24 16:59:40 <Optimo> a money system based on trust instead of the shit we deal with inthe world now
3008 2011-06-24 16:59:54 <Optimo> a fake chain is extremely complex to build
3009 2011-06-24 17:00:02 <Nachtwind> "geekbones" is a nice word.. have been working far too long now outside the computer science world ,0)
3010 2011-06-24 17:00:17 phearful has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
3011 2011-06-24 17:00:27 <Optimo> you would need a big portion of that mining power jsut to work on the fake chain
3012 2011-06-24 17:00:32 <Optimo> to get it ready
3013 2011-06-24 17:00:52 <Optimo> 'proof of work'
3014 2011-06-24 17:01:30 <Nachtwind> hm.. ok
3015 2011-06-24 17:01:31 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Chris Howie * r022d547f4d96 mining-proxy/ (8 files in 7 dirs): Add DB schema migration infrastructure and script
3016 2011-06-24 17:02:24 kevinJ has joined
3017 2011-06-24 17:02:36 hahuang65 has quit ()
3018 2011-06-24 17:02:47 <Nachtwind> well, thanks for explaining it to me.. it was really i kept on wondering about
3019 2011-06-24 17:03:22 <Nachtwind> i thought it was as simple to "get the majority of miners" and introduce one's own blocks and validate by poor majority
3020 2011-06-24 17:03:26 zapnap has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3021 2011-06-24 17:03:36 <Nachtwind> umm
3022 2011-06-24 17:03:37 <Nachtwind> pure
3023 2011-06-24 17:03:56 <gim> aristidesfl: bytes
3024 2011-06-24 17:04:05 <aristidesfl> gim thanls
3025 2011-06-24 17:04:06 <aristidesfl> thanks
3026 2011-06-24 17:04:26 <x6763> Optimo: what's so complex about building a fake chain/branch?
3027 2011-06-24 17:04:26 <aristidesfl> gim: btw, is it 6 block per hour the target rate?
3028 2011-06-24 17:04:38 <gim> yes
3029 2011-06-24 17:04:44 <gim> now we're more at 10
3030 2011-06-24 17:04:50 <aristidesfl> sure
3031 2011-06-24 17:05:19 <Optimo> x6763, well complex meaning proof of work...
3032 2011-06-24 17:05:31 <Optimo> but maybe you're saying a kept-low difficulty would make that less work?
3033 2011-06-24 17:05:31 <x6763> Optimo: oh, so you mean "difficult"
3034 2011-06-24 17:05:35 <Optimo> yea
3035 2011-06-24 17:06:37 hahuang65 has joined
3036 2011-06-24 17:07:10 <jgarzik> luke-jr: send me a patch :)
3037 2011-06-24 17:07:12 * jgarzik wakes up
3038 2011-06-24 17:07:43 <x6763> yeah, to build a "fake" chain would require a lot of work (you'd need more hashing power than is being put towards the normal branch)
3039 2011-06-24 17:08:01 <Optimo> makes sense
3040 2011-06-24 17:08:18 Nidils has joined
3041 2011-06-24 17:08:22 CrazyEddy has joined
3042 2011-06-24 17:08:54 bencoder has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
3043 2011-06-24 17:09:52 <Nidils> Hello, I have a problem. My friend sent me a bitcoin and I didn't get it. http://blockexplorer.com/address/1BiNTnXacb3wvk2tTKC7y77zZXKvoR7bWA
3044 2011-06-24 17:09:57 bencoder has joined
3045 2011-06-24 17:10:27 B0g4r7_ has joined
3046 2011-06-24 17:10:49 burp_ has joined
3047 2011-06-24 17:11:28 <Optimo> Nidils, is your client app 'caught up' on the whole block chain?
3048 2011-06-24 17:11:41 <Optimo> currently over 133,000 blocks total
3049 2011-06-24 17:12:28 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
3050 2011-06-24 17:12:32 B0g4r7_ is now known as B0g4r7
3051 2011-06-24 17:13:34 <Nidils> Optimo: i dont know, i'm new in this
3052 2011-06-24 17:13:50 <Optimo> the app should show 1 or more 'connections' and 133,000+ blocks in the status line
3053 2011-06-24 17:14:20 <Nidils> yes, it show
3054 2011-06-24 17:14:26 <Optimo> if you aren't caught up, you can't yet see or claim the money from blcok 133088
3055 2011-06-24 17:14:49 <assassindrake> Optimo a while ago i heard someone suggest that the client be preloaded with past blocks is that something that has happened or do you need to download all 133K for a new install?
3056 2011-06-24 17:14:57 Joric has joined
3057 2011-06-24 17:15:04 <Optimo> there's a periodic torrent of the whole block chain
3058 2011-06-24 17:15:10 <Optimo> someplace has a link to one..
3059 2011-06-24 17:15:32 <Nidils> app show me a 129840 block
3060 2011-06-24 17:15:36 <josephholsten> Optimo: does that include all the orphaned branches?
3061 2011-06-24 17:15:38 <Optimo> alternatively, use a service like mybitcoin perhaps
3062 2011-06-24 17:15:49 <Optimo> josephholsten, good Q I dunno
3063 2011-06-24 17:15:55 <assassindrake> but nothing in the download of the client?
3064 2011-06-24 17:15:58 <Optimo> Nidils, you'll need to wait longer
3065 2011-06-24 17:16:25 <Nidils> and keep app on?
3066 2011-06-24 17:16:27 <Optimo> assassindrake, you would get a .dat file and copy it into the app's resource fodler and restart the app
3067 2011-06-24 17:16:47 <Joric> did anyone work with mybitcoin merchant service?
3068 2011-06-24 17:16:57 <Optimo> Nidils, you keep it on if you want to 'see' the money with your own eyes. the mere fact that it's been putinto a block means the oney is sent ok
3069 2011-06-24 17:17:23 <Optimo> so long as you keep tabs on your wallet file, that money is secure
3070 2011-06-24 17:17:35 jsnyder has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
3071 2011-06-24 17:17:56 <Nidils> :)
3072 2011-06-24 17:18:07 <Nidils> thanks for help i will waiting
3073 2011-06-24 17:18:11 Nidils has quit (Quit: Page closed)
3074 2011-06-24 17:18:13 <Optimo> the 0.23 version of teh app client is much better at connecting, much better at getting blocks.
3075 2011-06-24 17:18:14 Guest46534 is now known as BTCTrader
3076 2011-06-24 17:18:25 <Optimo> than .21
3077 2011-06-24 17:18:41 Reinon has joined
3078 2011-06-24 17:18:42 md2k7 has joined
3079 2011-06-24 17:18:52 stuhood has joined
3080 2011-06-24 17:19:01 <assassindrake> didnt there used to be an option to generate blocks with the old client?
3081 2011-06-24 17:19:18 <Optimo> that is 'mining'
3082 2011-06-24 17:19:23 <Optimo> and yes
3083 2011-06-24 17:19:23 denisx has quit (Quit: denisx)
3084 2011-06-24 17:19:24 Joric has left ()
3085 2011-06-24 17:19:27 stuhood has quit (Client Quit)
3086 2011-06-24 17:19:37 assassindrake has left ()
3087 2011-06-24 17:19:40 <Optimo> but it was really an old option when mining was still effective on your PC's cpu
3088 2011-06-24 17:19:43 <Optimo> doh
3089 2011-06-24 17:19:43 <burp_> too late :P
3090 2011-06-24 17:20:50 jivvz has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
3091 2011-06-24 17:21:15 Reinon has left ()
3092 2011-06-24 17:21:20 <kevinJ> hello, I'm curious as to how we're supposed to go about mining coins currently.
3093 2011-06-24 17:21:34 <kevinJ> would any of you know of a good resource?
3094 2011-06-24 17:21:37 <Optimo> get hardware that is efficient at that
3095 2011-06-24 17:21:44 <Optimo> read teh bitcoin wiki section on mining
3096 2011-06-24 17:21:50 <kevinJ> but we have to use the official client
3097 2011-06-24 17:21:51 <Optimo> join a pool
3098 2011-06-24 17:22:00 <Optimo> is that a question?
3099 2011-06-24 17:22:00 <kevinJ> or have specialized aps been developed?
3100 2011-06-24 17:22:12 <Optimo> mining tools exist, yes
3101 2011-06-24 17:22:28 <kevinJ> any websites to recommend for research?
3102 2011-06-24 17:22:36 <Optimo> the bitcoin wiki section on mining
3103 2011-06-24 17:22:48 <kevinJ> thank you kindly
3104 2011-06-24 17:22:51 assassindrake has joined
3105 2011-06-24 17:22:57 <Optimo> and #bitcoin-mining room maybe
3106 2011-06-24 17:23:10 TheAncientGoat has quit (Read error: No route to host)
3107 2011-06-24 17:23:11 <kevinJ> great, thx
3108 2011-06-24 17:23:17 <kevinJ> I'm going to check those out now. Bye
3109 2011-06-24 17:23:25 kevinJ has left ("http://quassel-irc.org - Chat comfortably. Anywhere.")
3110 2011-06-24 17:23:30 <assassindrake> Colloquy crashed
3111 2011-06-24 17:23:53 TheAncientGoat has joined
3112 2011-06-24 17:24:53 <Optimo> but it was really an old option when mining was still effective on your PC's cpu
3113 2011-06-24 17:24:57 <Optimo> assassindrake^
3114 2011-06-24 17:25:28 ezl_ has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
3115 2011-06-24 17:25:36 <assassindrake> oh
3116 2011-06-24 17:25:36 octarine has joined
3117 2011-06-24 17:25:48 <assassindrake> is pooled mining the only way now?
3118 2011-06-24 17:25:54 octarine has left ()
3119 2011-06-24 17:25:59 <unclemantis> how do i remove an account and all of it's addresses from bitcoind
3120 2011-06-24 17:26:15 <unclemantis> i want to also delete all the transactions too
3121 2011-06-24 17:26:32 * unclemantis is using testnet-in-a-box
3122 2011-06-24 17:27:41 <Optimo> assassindrake, pooled mining is the easiest way to get regular coinflow
3123 2011-06-24 17:27:53 <Optimo> mining colo is bigger prize but much less frequent win
3124 2011-06-24 17:28:00 <Optimo> solo*
3125 2011-06-24 17:28:02 <unclemantis> just read i can't delete an account
3126 2011-06-24 17:28:04 <assassindrake> about how many coins can an average personal computer generate that way?
3127 2011-06-24 17:28:16 <unclemantis> ok.... how the hell do i just nuke the whole efin thing then?
3128 2011-06-24 17:28:26 <Optimo> unclemantis, 'account's are psuedonymous
3129 2011-06-24 17:28:43 <Optimo> you could send all your money to a new wallet
3130 2011-06-24 17:28:50 <prof7bit> is there a wiki page or forum thread where possible extensions to the network protocol are discussed (for example protocol messages that would allow "thin clients" to ask other nodes to look up things for them in their block chain, etc.)?
3131 2011-06-24 17:29:04 <unclemantis> Optimo i am dealing with a testnet
3132 2011-06-24 17:29:06 <Optimo> your addresses are only tied to your person if you made that link public
3133 2011-06-24 17:29:23 <Optimo> assassindrake read the wiki section on mining
3134 2011-06-24 17:29:55 <Optimo> prof7bit what data are you looking for? the blockexplorer provides a lot of tools
3135 2011-06-24 17:30:42 stuhood has joined
3136 2011-06-24 17:31:17 <Optimo> assassindrake, your personal computer is probably not good for mining much at all
3137 2011-06-24 17:31:21 maikmerten has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3138 2011-06-24 17:31:26 <Optimo> most miners use graphics cards
3139 2011-06-24 17:31:47 <Optimo> the wiki thankfully touches on this
3140 2011-06-24 17:31:49 <assassindrake> yeah the wiki mostly says things in Mhash/s which i have no idea what a personal computer would get
3141 2011-06-24 17:32:02 freakazoid has quit (Quit: Textual IRC Client: http://www.textualapp.com/)
3142 2011-06-24 17:32:03 <Optimo> it also lists graphics cards
3143 2011-06-24 17:32:12 <Optimo> your CPU is woefully not good for mining by comparison
3144 2011-06-24 17:32:26 freakazoid has joined
3145 2011-06-24 17:32:33 <Optimo> the chart shows, for example, an intel i7 hashrate
3146 2011-06-24 17:33:24 <Optimo> it's surely a waste of electricity. you'd be paying $ for electricity probably more than just buying coins from someone
3147 2011-06-24 17:33:50 <assassindrake> haha ok
3148 2011-06-24 17:33:51 <Optimo> but if you have a graphics card you can be an efficient miner
3149 2011-06-24 17:34:08 <Optimo> ATI preferably
3150 2011-06-24 17:34:17 <assassindrake> i was hoping someone could tell me how many bitcoins i would get
3151 2011-06-24 17:34:30 <Optimo> how much hashrate do you get?
3152 2011-06-24 17:34:33 stuhood has left ()
3153 2011-06-24 17:34:46 <Optimo> do you know any of your pc specs?
3154 2011-06-24 17:35:21 <assassindrake> based on table i think i woud be around 1-4Mhash/s
3155 2011-06-24 17:35:26 <Optimo> if it's not an extreme gaming pc from the last year you will get less than 0.0001 coins per day (rough rough guess)
3156 2011-06-24 17:35:28 <assassindrake> i cant recall my specs
3157 2011-06-24 17:35:30 <Optimo> that's not worth it
3158 2011-06-24 17:35:54 <assassindrake> yeah def not worth it unless bitcoins are worth a lot more
3159 2011-06-24 17:35:54 <Optimo> mining at this point should be a significant investment
3160 2011-06-24 17:35:56 <prof7bit> Optimo: I have something in mind where one node (without block chain) could ask another node something like "give me all block numbers where address xxxxx appears has an unspent output" or "give be the block yyyy but strip it from everything except tx with xxxx"
3161 2011-06-24 17:36:00 pnicholson has joined
3162 2011-06-24 17:36:24 traviscj has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
3163 2011-06-24 17:36:45 <Optimo> prof7bit, to what end? I mean, what do you hope to get from that to use in some way?
3164 2011-06-24 17:36:48 xtalmath has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
3165 2011-06-24 17:36:55 B0g4r7_ has joined
3166 2011-06-24 17:36:56 <prof7bit> a thin client
3167 2011-06-24 17:37:20 <pusle> always ultra!
3168 2011-06-24 17:37:25 <Optimo> that's loose terminology
3169 2011-06-24 17:37:31 <Optimo> mybitcoin.com is a thin client
3170 2011-06-24 17:37:50 <prof7bit> a client that can operate without the full block chain
3171 2011-06-24 17:38:23 <prof7bit> not a web service, a real client
3172 2011-06-24 17:38:28 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
3173 2011-06-24 17:38:31 B0g4r7_ is now known as B0g4r7
3174 2011-06-24 17:38:36 <Optimo> I think you need a representation of the full chain, even with 'compressed' blocks
3175 2011-06-24 17:39:13 <Optimo> but if you're requesting chain info from a peer, why not use a peer that is full caught-up, liek a mybitcoin
3176 2011-06-24 17:39:23 <Optimo> or any similar web service could expose api for you
3177 2011-06-24 17:39:33 <prof7bit> from reading the paper i need all headers and additionally i need to know which blocks are relevant for me and i need to have the relevant data for these blocks
3178 2011-06-24 17:39:55 <pusle> distributed confirmation/verification query would be nice
3179 2011-06-24 17:39:59 <Optimo> remember thre's no reason to shy from a web service, we're operating on a network that is IP
3180 2011-06-24 17:40:24 Lachesis has joined
3181 2011-06-24 17:40:28 <Optimo> blcokexplorer is accessible, maybe that could be expanded
3182 2011-06-24 17:40:39 <Lachesis> is there some way to mitigate memory usage in bitcoind?
3183 2011-06-24 17:40:45 <Lachesis> it's already passed the limits of a few of my servers
3184 2011-06-24 17:40:51 <prof7bit> i have no use for a web service when i am just in the process of evaluating what I need in order to WRITE a client application
3185 2011-06-24 17:40:55 <Lachesis> and even my blade is struggling (up to 500M real / 800M virtual)
3186 2011-06-24 17:41:20 <Optimo> prof7bit, but you're talking about requesting data from a peer on the network - isn't that the same thing?
3187 2011-06-24 17:42:02 <prof7bit> a peer on the netwok is a peer on the network, a web service something-dot-com is a website that can disappear tomorrow.
3188 2011-06-24 17:42:27 <Optimo> uh.. but those are backed by a pper on teh network
3189 2011-06-24 17:42:40 kish_ has joined
3190 2011-06-24 17:42:47 <Optimo> they get their info from the network and even without dns they are still connected
3191 2011-06-24 17:42:50 ultrixx has joined
3192 2011-06-24 17:43:02 <prof7bit> i dontr want to communicate with websites, i want to make it communitate only wit hother p2p clients
3193 2011-06-24 17:43:38 <Optimo> blockexplorer has an http api that you could access without thinking of it liek a website, it's just another ip
3194 2011-06-24 17:43:51 <Optimo> but maybe I'm clouding the issue
3195 2011-06-24 17:43:58 <prof7bit> blockexplorer is a website. i want to use p2p
3196 2011-06-24 17:44:07 <prof7bit> difficult to understand?
3197 2011-06-24 17:44:10 <Optimo> blockexplorer is also a node
3198 2011-06-24 17:44:18 <Optimo> it's an ip address
3199 2011-06-24 17:44:42 <prof7bit> there are only other bitcoin nodes. no websites.
3200 2011-06-24 17:45:05 <prof7bit> no centrl servers
3201 2011-06-24 17:45:05 kish has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
3202 2011-06-24 17:45:18 <prof7bit> only other peers, each one as good as the other.
3203 2011-06-24 17:45:47 <BTCTrader> blockexplorer is only a website:)
3204 2011-06-24 17:45:48 <prof7bit> therefore i need to know where the protocol spec and changes to it are discussed
3205 2011-06-24 17:45:51 <Optimo> I get it. but all those peers would have to be running something you haven't invented yet
3206 2011-06-24 17:45:54 <Optimo> cool
3207 2011-06-24 17:45:57 <Optimo> I follow
3208 2011-06-24 17:46:29 <BTCTrader> a node and a client are different words for the same thing
3209 2011-06-24 17:46:59 <BTCTrader> see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSI_model for an example of the 7 layer OSI model
3210 2011-06-24 17:47:21 <BTCTrader> a node is network level, client application level
3211 2011-06-24 17:47:51 <prof7bit> i could download all blocks and prune them myself but this would not help with the network traffic, only with local disk storage
3212 2011-06-24 17:48:04 <Optimo> I thought bitcoinj (or the idea about compressing older blocks) was the best way to look at teh problem
3213 2011-06-24 17:48:15 <prof7bit> to reduce network traffic there is help needed from the other peers
3214 2011-06-24 17:48:26 <Optimo> you raise an interesting idea
3215 2011-06-24 17:49:39 <Optimo> the thing is, most of these nodes can elect to be totally passive, no? currently there's nothing that says a client should have to send you anything except parts of the blockchain
3216 2011-06-24 17:49:48 <Optimo> you want to introduce some kind of on-deman api, right?
3217 2011-06-24 17:49:55 <prof7bit> basically what would be needed would be the following two messages:
3218 2011-06-24 17:50:36 <Optimo> the network woudl just get DOS'd I think
3219 2011-06-24 17:51:00 <prof7bit> "give me a list of block numbers relevant for address xxxx" and "give me block yyyy pruned for xxxx"
3220 2011-06-24 17:51:22 <Optimo> so that's an explicit request. and I suppose that would be abused
3221 2011-06-24 17:51:51 <Optimo> whereas now it's more like dumb nodes braodcasting blocks
3222 2011-06-24 17:52:21 <vegard> you could impose a rate limit for each client
3223 2011-06-24 17:52:34 <prof7bit> network for only one block is more expensive than searching the entire block index in microseconds
3224 2011-06-24 17:53:04 traviscj has joined
3225 2011-06-24 17:53:52 karnac has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3226 2011-06-24 17:54:26 TheAncientGoat has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
3227 2011-06-24 17:55:07 oelewapperke has joined
3228 2011-06-24 17:55:14 vokoda has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3229 2011-06-24 17:55:20 <oelewapperke> I have a question : is it possible to cancel an unconfirmed transaction ?
3230 2011-06-24 17:55:20 md2k7 has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
3231 2011-06-24 17:55:23 <Optimo> the actual bitcoin protocol can't be changed... right? just the end client stuff
3232 2011-06-24 17:55:34 maqr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
3233 2011-06-24 17:56:01 * AlonzoTG is making progress on his highly reliable ADA server implementation. =)
3234 2011-06-24 17:56:03 <Optimo> oelewapperke, 0/unconfirmed means it's been entered into teh network and waiting for the next block. the money is already sent
3235 2011-06-24 17:56:13 <prof7bit> or maybe "give me all tx for address xxxxx between block #aaa and #bbb" and "give me the merkle tree for block #aaa"
3236 2011-06-24 17:56:28 <[Tycho]> ;;bc,stats
3237 2011-06-24 17:56:30 <gribble> Current Blocks: 133095 | Current Difficulty: 1379223.4296725 | Next Difficulty At Block: 135071 | Next Difficulty In: 1976 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 5 days, 7 hours, 51 minutes, and 4 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1575846.43997494
3238 2011-06-24 17:56:40 <Lachesis> why does bitcoind use so much ram?
3239 2011-06-24 17:56:43 <Optimo> [Tycho] woo next diff is here :(
3240 2011-06-24 17:56:47 <Lachesis> does it keep the whole block chain in ram?
3241 2011-06-24 17:57:08 <oelewapperke> Optimo: I made the mistake of sending without having set a tx fee, so that means it's probably going to take a while, right ?
3242 2011-06-24 17:57:35 <Optimo> it will probably be in teh next block
3243 2011-06-24 17:57:37 ByteCoin has joined
3244 2011-06-24 17:57:53 <Optimo> but the client won't show 'cofirmed' until ti gets to 6 blocks
3245 2011-06-24 17:58:17 <oelewapperke> so there is a fixed waiting period for transactions that's 6 blocks ?
3246 2011-06-24 17:58:18 karnac has joined
3247 2011-06-24 17:58:19 <prof7bit> and of course in the version message: "i am a thin client, don't ask me for blocks"
3248 2011-06-24 17:58:27 <oelewapperke> and that means 6 hashes are found
3249 2011-06-24 17:58:39 <oelewapperke> how long should that take ?
3250 2011-06-24 17:58:59 <Optimo> oelewapperke, the money is verified after one block, but to double-verify it takes 2 blocks, and so forth. the client app says 6 is pretty safe
3251 2011-06-24 17:59:07 <Optimo> it's usually 10 minutes per block
3252 2011-06-24 17:59:46 <oelewapperke> can you make the client show in what block it was entered ?
3253 2011-06-24 17:59:58 <Optimo> I thikn the 6 block arbitrary figure is to discourage people sending around 'dirty' money. the fees help with that
3254 2011-06-24 18:00:14 <Optimo> oelewapperke. it's an uncertainty until the block is solved
3255 2011-06-24 18:00:16 <oelewapperke> how do the fees help ?
3256 2011-06-24 18:00:32 vokoda has joined
3257 2011-06-24 18:00:34 <oelewapperke> I understand the transaction fee goes to the solver of the block
3258 2011-06-24 18:00:45 <Optimo> some miner might liek to process even 'dirty' money for a fee
3259 2011-06-24 18:01:01 * AlonzoTG needs docs on all of this cuz I'm trying to make an implementation.
3260 2011-06-24 18:01:12 <Optimo> it's open source...
3261 2011-06-24 18:01:22 misterpurrr has joined
3262 2011-06-24 18:01:27 mmoya has joined
3263 2011-06-24 18:02:14 vokoda has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3264 2011-06-24 18:02:48 <prof7bit> of course i could abuse blockexplorer for this but i think they would not like it if it gets bombarded by millions of clients with such queries. and it would be a single point of failure.
3265 2011-06-24 18:03:30 <D0han> prof7bit: i thought the same, bitcoin is lacking of such thin clients
3266 2011-06-24 18:04:07 n4m347yp3 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
3267 2011-06-24 18:04:13 <Optimo> compressed blockchain is not good idea?
3268 2011-06-24 18:04:27 <Optimo> it needs to be realised
3269 2011-06-24 18:04:41 <D0han> compression is not enough
3270 2011-06-24 18:05:10 <prof7bit> part of the blockexplorer functionality allowing such queries sould be built into each full client so every full client can be bothered to do such queries on behalf of the thin clients
3271 2011-06-24 18:05:28 <Optimo> just seems to me if you rely on regular nodes for critical data explicitly it will be a target of attack. but very cool discussion
3272 2011-06-24 18:05:55 MartianW has joined
3273 2011-06-24 18:06:03 <oelewapperke> how can you read out the block log ? I imagine every bitcoind should have the full transaction log of everyone, right ?
3274 2011-06-24 18:06:15 MartianW has quit (Client Quit)
3275 2011-06-24 18:06:20 <Optimo> prof7bit, what if there was a node trying to poison these requests?
3276 2011-06-24 18:06:26 <prof7bit> a thin client could be connected to more than one full node and query the same info from all of them
3277 2011-06-24 18:06:31 brunner has joined
3278 2011-06-24 18:06:32 <Optimo> oelewapperke blockexplorer.com
3279 2011-06-24 18:06:55 Ramen has joined
3280 2011-06-24 18:07:06 <Ramen> ;;bc,stats
3281 2011-06-24 18:07:08 <gribble> Current Blocks: 133096 | Current Difficulty: 1379223.4296725 | Next Difficulty At Block: 135071 | Next Difficulty In: 1975 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 5 days, 14 hours, 17 minutes, and 5 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1504908.04970120
3282 2011-06-24 18:07:08 <oelewapperke> Optimo: can't I read it from bitcoind ?
3283 2011-06-24 18:07:29 <Optimo> oelewapperke, you want a log of your own client actions?
3284 2011-06-24 18:08:03 <oelewapperke> no the whole shebang
3285 2011-06-24 18:08:33 <Optimo> yeah it's possible, but you need a tool I think - blockexplorer uses such tools
3286 2011-06-24 18:08:36 <Optimo> jgarzik tools
3287 2011-06-24 18:08:41 misterpurrr has quit (Quit: Page closed)
3288 2011-06-24 18:09:14 Rabbit67890 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
3289 2011-06-24 18:09:17 <Optimo> 'bitcointools'
3290 2011-06-24 18:09:25 <prof7bit> and when sending a transaction based on the information the worst thing is it would simply not be accepted by the network. and this can be seen if it does not show up in one of the confirmed blocks (like it is outlined in the paper)
3291 2011-06-24 18:11:15 <AlonzoTG> Is https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Original_Bitcoin_client/API_Calls_list still current?
3292 2011-06-24 18:11:57 <[Tycho]> What is the minimal number of outputs of a transaction ?
3293 2011-06-24 18:13:14 Rabbit67890 has joined
3294 2011-06-24 18:13:43 <ByteCoin> Tycho : 0
3295 2011-06-24 18:16:32 <ByteCoin> Ok. I lied
3296 2011-06-24 18:17:26 <ByteCoin> I'm pretty sure there has to be one output. You can send 0 coins to it though... and it doesn't have to contain a full script
3297 2011-06-24 18:17:32 brunner has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
3298 2011-06-24 18:21:22 hahuang65 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3299 2011-06-24 18:21:27 <oelewapperke> this seems a bit of a dangerous assumption : bitcoin's security depends on the processing power of the bitcoin network being >> than the processing power available to any single entity
3300 2011-06-24 18:21:53 TYDIRocks has joined
3301 2011-06-24 18:21:58 <oelewapperke> so for bitcoin to be secure, the mining network needs to be >> 50% of the computing power on the planet
3302 2011-06-24 18:22:03 <TYDIRocks> Hello
3303 2011-06-24 18:22:24 <oelewapperke> (although that's for faking a single block, for faking multiple blocks you'd need more than 50%, but not much more)
3304 2011-06-24 18:22:53 <oelewapperke> all you'd need to do to "unspend" money is to take a block before your spending and then catch up to the network
3305 2011-06-24 18:23:23 <TYDIRocks> Can someone help me I have a question about mining
3306 2011-06-24 18:25:22 Clipse has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3307 2011-06-24 18:25:25 <TYDIRocks> anyone?
3308 2011-06-24 18:26:59 <AlonzoTG> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elliptic_Curve_DSA << SEE SECTION CALLED "SECURITY"!!!!
3309 2011-06-24 18:27:05 datagutt has joined
3310 2011-06-24 18:27:05 datagutt has quit (Changing host)
3311 2011-06-24 18:27:05 datagutt has joined
3312 2011-06-24 18:27:20 zertam_ has joined
3313 2011-06-24 18:27:34 <TYDIRocks> Can someone help me
3314 2011-06-24 18:28:02 <TYDIRocks> Why is no one responding? Is everyone afk?
3315 2011-06-24 18:28:18 <AlonzoTG> never ask to ask; just ask.
3316 2011-06-24 18:28:35 ajvpot has quit (Quit: ZNC - http://znc.sourceforge.net)
3317 2011-06-24 18:28:58 <TYDIRocks> Is there a difference in the amount of bitcoins I'll get depending on the manufacturer?
3318 2011-06-24 18:29:40 <Optimo> #bitcoin-mining
3319 2011-06-24 18:29:54 <Optimo> TYDIRocks read teh wiki section on minnig it compares hardware
3320 2011-06-24 18:29:58 <AlonzoTG> I don't know what that is supposed to mean, I haven't tried mining yet, but I think it has to deal with how many hashes your can compute per second.
3321 2011-06-24 18:30:09 <TYDIRocks> Optimo that doesn't have to do with my question :P
3322 2011-06-24 18:30:15 <TYDIRocks> I said the manufacturer
3323 2011-06-24 18:30:19 <TYDIRocks> Not different cards
3324 2011-06-24 18:30:40 <Optimo> you're sure my answer has nothign to do with your question?
3325 2011-06-24 18:30:56 zertam has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
3326 2011-06-24 18:30:57 zertam_ is now known as zertam
3327 2011-06-24 18:30:59 <AlonzoTG> Nobody cares about manufacturers.
3328 2011-06-24 18:31:04 traviscj has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3329 2011-06-24 18:31:04 Pinion has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPad - http://colloquy.mobi)
3330 2011-06-24 18:31:13 <TYDIRocks> Yes
3331 2011-06-24 18:31:14 <AlonzoTG> The only thing that matters is how quickly you can compute the SHA-256 algorithm.
3332 2011-06-24 18:31:16 <Optimo> ATI or nvida.. just go with ATI - the wiki says why
3333 2011-06-24 18:31:22 <TYDIRocks> No dude
3334 2011-06-24 18:31:25 <TYDIRocks> The manufacturer
3335 2011-06-24 18:31:30 <Optimo> of what?
3336 2011-06-24 18:31:32 <TYDIRocks> Such as Sapphire or Diamond
3337 2011-06-24 18:31:40 <TYDIRocks> A card
3338 2011-06-24 18:31:51 <x6763> AlonzoTG: the ECC security thing is interesting...bitcoin devs should read that
3339 2011-06-24 18:31:52 <AlonzoTG> doesn't matter; nobody cares.
3340 2011-06-24 18:32:11 <Optimo> if there was any difference at all it would mean liek 0.0000000001 coin difference
3341 2011-06-24 18:32:21 <x6763> "OpenSSL leaks ECDSA private key through a remote timing attack" - https://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/536044
3342 2011-06-24 18:32:24 sshirokov has quit (Quit: ZRC hit the fan!)
3343 2011-06-24 18:32:27 <Optimo> the big differences are probably in cooling
3344 2011-06-24 18:32:32 TD has joined
3345 2011-06-24 18:32:32 <AlonzoTG> Yeah, I was going through the spec to figure out what parts my code will have to implement and I came across that security issue.
3346 2011-06-24 18:32:39 tandy80 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3347 2011-06-24 18:33:02 <AlonzoTG> but it seems to be a timing attack, so a countermeasure should be rather straightforward -- force the time to = 100msec no matter what or something.
3348 2011-06-24 18:33:13 <TYDIRocks> So you're saying the only difference is the cooling, not the speed and mhashs/sec I'll get?
3349 2011-06-24 18:33:34 sshirokov has joined
3350 2011-06-24 18:33:44 TheZimm has joined
3351 2011-06-24 18:33:54 <Optimo> please read the wiki articel on mining hardware
3352 2011-06-24 18:34:06 <x6763> "Remote Timing Attacks are Still Practical" - http://eprint.iacr.org/2011/232 - http://eprint.iacr.org/2011/232.pdf
3353 2011-06-24 18:34:06 <jgarzik> ;;bc,stats
3354 2011-06-24 18:34:08 <gribble> Current Blocks: 133099 | Current Difficulty: 1379223.4296725 | Next Difficulty At Block: 135071 | Next Difficulty In: 1972 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 6 days, 3 hours, 31 minutes, and 12 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1493282.37166132
3355 2011-06-24 18:34:14 <Optimo> if it has any bearing on the speeds it's very small
3356 2011-06-24 18:34:23 <AlonzoTG> Yeah, TYDI, RTFM and then come back if you still have questions that make sense.
3357 2011-06-24 18:35:16 <upb> 24 14:26 < Happy0> upb: where would you have been if i hadn't highlighted you? u mad? <- wat ?:P
3358 2011-06-24 18:35:30 <Happy0> rofl
3359 2011-06-24 18:35:39 <Happy0> it was a bad joke =p
3360 2011-06-24 18:35:43 <Happy0> and here you are
3361 2011-06-24 18:35:47 <Happy0> hours after i had forgotten doing that =p
3362 2011-06-24 18:35:49 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: cute. the first pull request with "Signed-off-by", another kernel practice imported :) http://kerneltrap.org/node/3180
3363 2011-06-24 18:35:57 <jgarzik> not suggesting that for bitcoin, necessarily
3364 2011-06-24 18:35:59 <jgarzik> just FYI
3365 2011-06-24 18:36:00 ThisDB has joined
3366 2011-06-24 18:36:08 <Happy0> upb: when i was younger my mum used to shout me in my room... then i'd come downstairs to the kitchen and she'd say
3367 2011-06-24 18:36:14 <Happy0> 'where would you have been if i hadn't shouted you?'
3368 2011-06-24 18:36:20 <Happy0> wasteing my time =p
3369 2011-06-24 18:36:46 TYDIRocks has quit (Quit: Page closed)
3370 2011-06-24 18:37:56 Tim-7967 has joined
3371 2011-06-24 18:38:32 <upb> hahahaha
3372 2011-06-24 18:39:04 <upb> yea seems this experience caused you trauma so that now you inflict it on others :P
3373 2011-06-24 18:39:47 vokoda has joined
3374 2011-06-24 18:40:17 <gavinandresen> x6763: I think there's a forum thread about that. Not a burning issue for bitcoin.
3375 2011-06-24 18:40:21 md2k7 has joined
3376 2011-06-24 18:40:34 O31 has joined
3377 2011-06-24 18:40:42 TheZimm has quit (Quit: When will we learn?)
3378 2011-06-24 18:40:50 TheZimm has joined
3379 2011-06-24 18:42:00 dbasch_ has joined
3380 2011-06-24 18:42:54 <gavinandresen> x6763: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=9495.0
3381 2011-06-24 18:43:40 misterpurrr has joined
3382 2011-06-24 18:43:46 <x6763> gavinandresen: ah, good
3383 2011-06-24 18:44:14 Wayno has joined
3384 2011-06-24 18:44:25 <Happy0> upb: lmao... indeed =p
3385 2011-06-24 18:45:21 <Wayno> Hi, i am wondering wat the code for a invlid block is shown.
3386 2011-06-24 18:45:38 TheAncientGoat has joined
3387 2011-06-24 18:48:42 Teslah has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
3388 2011-06-24 18:50:26 Storagewars has joined
3389 2011-06-24 18:51:00 TheAncientGoat has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
3390 2011-06-24 18:52:27 JRWR has joined
3391 2011-06-24 18:53:49 abragin has joined
3392 2011-06-24 18:53:49 abragin has quit (Changing host)
3393 2011-06-24 18:53:49 abragin has joined
3394 2011-06-24 18:54:07 koleg has quit (2!kvirc@79.133.156.62|Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3395 2011-06-24 18:55:21 JRWR has quit (Client Quit)
3396 2011-06-24 18:55:54 misterpurrr has left ()
3397 2011-06-24 18:58:13 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
3398 2011-06-24 19:01:25 wolever has joined
3399 2011-06-24 19:01:33 <wolever> Would someone holding BTC on testnet mind sending me a couple?
3400 2011-06-24 19:02:35 <phantomcircuit> TTC
3401 2011-06-24 19:04:40 Teslah has joined
3402 2011-06-24 19:04:46 <emock> wolever: address
3403 2011-06-24 19:04:52 <wolever> n3P4PiRNqGTCURxvMbUau7zSrWfNYFyF26
3404 2011-06-24 19:05:45 <wolever> emock: thanks
3405 2011-06-24 19:05:53 <emock> they show up?
3406 2011-06-24 19:06:10 <emock> also: https://testnet.freebitcoins.appspot.com/
3407 2011-06-24 19:06:54 <wolever> Ah, good to know. Clearly my google foo is failing me today. Thanks.
3408 2011-06-24 19:07:46 Storagewars has quit ()
3409 2011-06-24 19:07:46 pyro_ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
3410 2011-06-24 19:08:16 <Nachtwind> short question: Trying to build bitcoind on Debian 5 but having this error: main.h:854: error: 'BOOST_FOREACH' was not declared in this scope
3411 2011-06-24 19:08:24 <Nachtwind> got boost APTed.. any advises?
3412 2011-06-24 19:08:55 is now known as Netsniper|!~se@adsl-69-208-129-235.dsl.ipltin.ameritech.net|Netsniper
3413 2011-06-24 19:09:00 <gjs278> change boost versions
3414 2011-06-24 19:10:10 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
3415 2011-06-24 19:10:11 eoss has joined
3416 2011-06-24 19:11:25 <Nachtwind> grmpf.. ok ok.. fingers off the SSH now. Been working 10 hours straight now - no wonder i dont even see the most obvious stuff thats already biting my nose..
3417 2011-06-24 19:11:28 <Nachtwind> thanks
3418 2011-06-24 19:12:52 wolever has quit (Quit: wolever)
3419 2011-06-24 19:13:53 Clipse has joined
3420 2011-06-24 19:14:04 Wayno has left ()
3421 2011-06-24 19:14:23 TbbW has joined
3422 2011-06-24 19:16:04 pyro_ has joined
3423 2011-06-24 19:16:14 seventoes has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3424 2011-06-24 19:16:55 seventoes has joined
3425 2011-06-24 19:19:05 devon_hillard has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3426 2011-06-24 19:20:17 rokj has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
3427 2011-06-24 19:20:54 JRWR has joined
3428 2011-06-24 19:20:54 JRWR has quit (Changing host)
3429 2011-06-24 19:20:54 JRWR has joined
3430 2011-06-24 19:21:05 pyro_ is now known as pyro_der_wahre
3431 2011-06-24 19:23:27 Nachtwind has left ()
3432 2011-06-24 19:23:56 gjs278 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3433 2011-06-24 19:24:12 rokj has joined
3434 2011-06-24 19:24:47 JRWR has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3435 2011-06-24 19:24:58 gjs278 has joined
3436 2011-06-24 19:25:28 JRWR has joined
3437 2011-06-24 19:25:28 JRWR has quit (Changing host)
3438 2011-06-24 19:25:29 JRWR has joined
3439 2011-06-24 19:25:53 m00p has joined
3440 2011-06-24 19:26:53 gavinandresen has quit (Quit: gavinandresen)
3441 2011-06-24 19:27:09 md2k7 has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
3442 2011-06-24 19:28:58 hahuang65 has joined
3443 2011-06-24 19:30:46 RazielZ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
3444 2011-06-24 19:33:04 <genewitch> is there a howto of how to point my pool to another pool?
3445 2011-06-24 19:33:23 traviscj has joined
3446 2011-06-24 19:33:37 <genewitch> or do i need something other than pushpoold
3447 2011-06-24 19:34:18 rgm3 has joined
3448 2011-06-24 19:35:19 pyro_der_wahre is now known as pyro-DerWahre-
3449 2011-06-24 19:36:12 <x6763> how does bitcoin determine N in blk000N.dat? is it going to switch every 210,000 blocks, or after it hits a certain file size or is choosing N not even implemented?
3450 2011-06-24 19:36:26 <[Tycho]> "<ByteCoin> I'm pretty sure there has to be one output. You can send 0 coins to it though... and it doesn't have to contain a full script" - what should it contain then ?
3451 2011-06-24 19:37:23 <ByteCoin> just something so that vout is not empty() in checktransaaction in main.cpp
3452 2011-06-24 19:38:34 <jgarzik> x6763: size-based. 1GB file size, IIRC.
3453 2011-06-24 19:38:34 k^^ has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep)
3454 2011-06-24 19:38:43 <x6763> jgarzik: ah, ok
3455 2011-06-24 19:40:04 k^^ has joined
3456 2011-06-24 19:40:11 gjs278 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3457 2011-06-24 19:41:04 gjs278 has joined
3458 2011-06-24 19:41:31 DaQatz has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3459 2011-06-24 19:41:35 Qatz has joined
3460 2011-06-24 19:41:57 Qatz is now known as DaQatz
3461 2011-06-24 19:43:57 sabalaba has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
3462 2011-06-24 19:44:26 poisonedy has joined
3463 2011-06-24 19:44:38 <poisonedy> hi all
3464 2011-06-24 19:46:56 denisx has joined
3465 2011-06-24 19:48:31 jsnyder has joined
3466 2011-06-24 19:49:02 phatsphere has joined
3467 2011-06-24 19:52:50 dbasch_ has quit (Quit: dbasch_)
3468 2011-06-24 19:53:18 pnicholson has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
3469 2011-06-24 19:53:45 diki has joined
3470 2011-06-24 19:55:18 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
3471 2011-06-24 19:56:23 ByteCoin has left ()
3472 2011-06-24 19:57:37 justmoon has quit (Quit: Leaving)
3473 2011-06-24 19:57:48 falcnor-away is now known as falcnor
3474 2011-06-24 19:58:31 pnicholson has joined
3475 2011-06-24 19:59:33 Juggie has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
3476 2011-06-24 20:00:50 brunner has joined
3477 2011-06-24 20:00:52 brunner has quit (Changing host)
3478 2011-06-24 20:00:52 brunner has joined
3479 2011-06-24 20:03:02 BlueMatt has joined
3480 2011-06-24 20:03:14 falcnor is now known as falcnor-away
3481 2011-06-24 20:05:14 k^^ has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep)
3482 2011-06-24 20:05:14 Teslah has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3483 2011-06-24 20:05:28 dbasch_ has joined
3484 2011-06-24 20:06:14 paul_nicholson has joined
3485 2011-06-24 20:06:22 <Ramen> ;;bc,gen 170000
3486 2011-06-24 20:06:23 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 170000 Khps, given current difficulty of 1379223.4296725 , is 0.123976160077 BTC per day and 0.00516567333655 BTC per hour.
3487 2011-06-24 20:06:48 pnicholson has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
3488 2011-06-24 20:06:49 paul_nicholson is now known as pnicholson
3489 2011-06-24 20:09:09 <Ramen> ;;bc,gen 7200000
3490 2011-06-24 20:09:11 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 7200000 Khps, given current difficulty of 1379223.4296725 , is 5.25075501504 BTC per day and 0.21878145896 BTC per hour.
3491 2011-06-24 20:09:34 <Ramen> ;;bc,help
3492 2011-06-24 20:09:35 <gribble> Alias bc,24hprc, Alias bc,avgprc, Alias bc,bcm, Alias bc,blocks, Alias bc,btceur, Alias bc,btcgbp, Alias bc,btcguild, Alias bc,btcrub, Alias bc,btcto, Alias bc,calc, Alias bc,calcd, Alias bc,channels, Alias bc,convert, Alias bc,deepbit, Alias bc,diff, Alias bc,diffchange, Alias bc,eligius, Alias bc,estimate, Alias bc,fx, Alias bc,gen, Alias bc,gend, Alias bc,help, Alias bc,hextarget, Alias (1 more message)
3493 2011-06-24 20:09:47 <Ramen> ;;bc,block 7200000
3494 2011-06-24 20:09:48 <gribble> Error: "bc,block" is not a valid command.
3495 2011-06-24 20:09:53 dbasch_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
3496 2011-06-24 20:14:24 k^^ has joined
3497 2011-06-24 20:15:09 md2k7 has joined
3498 2011-06-24 20:16:17 <Netsniper> http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_llxf6mWge61qzdl0oo1_500.png
3499 2011-06-24 20:16:19 <somuchwin> ;;bc,gen 650000
3500 2011-06-24 20:16:21 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 650000 Khps, given current difficulty of 1379223.4296725 , is 0.474026494413 BTC per day and 0.0197511039339 BTC per hour.
3501 2011-06-24 20:17:33 k^^ has quit (Client Quit)
3502 2011-06-24 20:20:13 md2k7 has left ()
3503 2011-06-24 20:22:05 Ramen has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
3504 2011-06-24 20:22:28 Pinion has joined
3505 2011-06-24 20:26:13 quellhorst has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
3506 2011-06-24 20:26:23 <burp_> lol Netsniper
3507 2011-06-24 20:27:10 <diki> ;;bc,stats
3508 2011-06-24 20:27:12 <gribble> Current Blocks: 133110 | Current Difficulty: 1379223.4296725 | Next Difficulty At Block: 135071 | Next Difficulty In: 1961 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 6 days, 10 hours, 28 minutes, and 32 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1463076.73445598
3509 2011-06-24 20:27:33 <burp_> is that a reliable estimate yet? :/
3510 2011-06-24 20:27:40 <diki> herp derp, yeah
3511 2011-06-24 20:27:54 <diki> usually it's way high
3512 2011-06-24 20:27:57 <diki> this time, it's not
3513 2011-06-24 20:28:54 Maged has joined
3514 2011-06-24 20:30:00 Sylph has joined
3515 2011-06-24 20:30:20 <MVXA> anyone here who would be so kind and give me the md5sum of bitcoin-0.3.23-linux.tar.gz ?
3516 2011-06-24 20:32:18 brooss has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3517 2011-06-24 20:32:36 brooss has joined
3518 2011-06-24 20:33:09 traviscj has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3519 2011-06-24 20:35:39 <poisonedy> ;;bc,gen 472000
3520 2011-06-24 20:35:40 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 472000 Khps, given current difficulty of 1379223.4296725 , is 0.344216162097 BTC per day and 0.0143423400874 BTC per hour.
3521 2011-06-24 20:37:35 traviscj has joined
3522 2011-06-24 20:37:53 segfault64 has joined
3523 2011-06-24 20:40:00 Ramen has joined
3524 2011-06-24 20:40:48 <Zoiah> ;;bc,gen 1000000\
3525 2011-06-24 20:40:49 <gribble> Error: unexpected character after line continuation character (<string>, line 1)
3526 2011-06-24 20:40:50 <Zoiah> ;;bc,gen 1000000
3527 2011-06-24 20:40:51 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 1000000 Khps, given current difficulty of 1379223.4296725 , is 0.729271529867 BTC per day and 0.0303863137444 BTC per hour.
3528 2011-06-24 20:41:03 AStove has quit ()
3529 2011-06-24 20:42:26 <diki> one problem i see with bitcoin is that BTC can be destroyed
3530 2011-06-24 20:42:39 <diki> and it can never come back
3531 2011-06-24 20:44:32 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3532 2011-06-24 20:46:21 <burp_> so can anything else
3533 2011-06-24 20:46:55 <yorick> can I verify a bitcoin address from javascript?
3534 2011-06-24 20:46:55 nocreati1enick1 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3535 2011-06-24 20:47:01 <yorick> diki: so can dollars
3536 2011-06-24 20:47:22 niekie has quit (Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.)
3537 2011-06-24 20:47:31 nocreativenick1 has joined
3538 2011-06-24 20:47:33 <diki> sure
3539 2011-06-24 20:47:45 <diki> but trust me, you wont be able to
3540 2011-06-24 20:47:51 <diki> but bitcoins...easy as pie
3541 2011-06-24 20:48:06 <assassindrake> i can destroy dollars
3542 2011-06-24 20:48:10 <burp_> I can too
3543 2011-06-24 20:48:16 <assassindrake> easy as pie
3544 2011-06-24 20:48:30 zapnap has joined
3545 2011-06-24 20:48:36 <burp_> strictly speaking you can't destroy bitcoins
3546 2011-06-24 20:48:36 <yorick> diki: light them on fire?
3547 2011-06-24 20:48:56 <assassindrake> brup_ you can only lose track or them
3548 2011-06-24 20:49:06 <burp_> yes
3549 2011-06-24 20:49:09 <yorick> diki: the others will go up in value
3550 2011-06-24 20:49:33 <yorick> can I verify a bitcoin address from javascript?
3551 2011-06-24 20:49:59 segfault64 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3552 2011-06-24 20:50:21 <copumpkin> <snarky CS sophomore>
3553 2011-06-24 20:50:22 <copumpkin> turing
3554 2011-06-24 20:50:25 <copumpkin> </snarky CS sophomore>
3555 2011-06-24 20:50:27 <upb> yorick: sure
3556 2011-06-24 20:50:46 <upb> if you reimplement the base58 and hash code
3557 2011-06-24 20:50:48 makomk has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
3558 2011-06-24 20:50:58 <yorick> upb: no one has done that already?
3559 2011-06-24 20:51:01 <upb> haha copumpkin :)
3560 2011-06-24 20:51:16 <upb> dunno
3561 2011-06-24 20:51:21 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
3562 2011-06-24 20:51:40 <upb> shouldnt take longer than 30 min anyway
3563 2011-06-24 20:51:58 <upb> hash code is surely available
3564 2011-06-24 20:52:18 makomk has joined
3565 2011-06-24 20:52:38 Lachesis has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
3566 2011-06-24 20:53:20 pusle has quit (Quit: Leaving)
3567 2011-06-24 20:53:22 da2ce7 has joined
3568 2011-06-24 20:54:20 JRWR has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3569 2011-06-24 20:54:39 JRWR has joined
3570 2011-06-24 20:58:11 JRWR has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3571 2011-06-24 20:58:41 Kobier has joined
3572 2011-06-24 20:59:24 zapnap has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3573 2011-06-24 21:00:15 dbasch_ has joined
3574 2011-06-24 21:05:13 hahuang65 has quit ()
3575 2011-06-24 21:08:58 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
3576 2011-06-24 21:12:36 datagutt has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3577 2011-06-24 21:13:06 accel has joined
3578 2011-06-24 21:13:51 Rabbit67890 has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
3579 2011-06-24 21:14:04 <prof7bit> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Talk:Protocol_specification#Proposing_additional_protocol_messages
3580 2011-06-24 21:14:48 <prof7bit> this is a first rough idea how to solve my problem
3581 2011-06-24 21:14:57 <accel> why is there no stuff happening in $bitcoin-market ?
3582 2011-06-24 21:15:08 <prof7bit> s/my/our
3583 2011-06-24 21:15:17 noagendamarket has joined
3584 2011-06-24 21:15:22 <BlueMatt> accel: because mtgox is down...
3585 2011-06-24 21:15:44 <accel> isn't mtgox only one of the many big players?
3586 2011-06-24 21:16:01 <BlueMatt> there is some th action, but its really low volume
3587 2011-06-24 21:16:13 <BlueMatt> and b7 and bitomat and others
3588 2011-06-24 21:16:21 <BlueMatt> only mtgox is big volume
3589 2011-06-24 21:16:46 abragin has quit ()
3590 2011-06-24 21:17:39 <gmaxwell> Exchanges are natural monopolies.
3591 2011-06-24 21:18:25 <BlueMatt> unless you have a ton of brokers that people start using...yep
3592 2011-06-24 21:18:42 <BlueMatt> ie brokers that just post to a ton of exchanges to trade
3593 2011-06-24 21:18:59 pogden has joined
3594 2011-06-24 21:19:44 scott`_ has quit (Quit: scott`_)
3595 2011-06-24 21:19:47 abragin has joined
3596 2011-06-24 21:19:48 abragin has quit (Changing host)
3597 2011-06-24 21:19:48 abragin has joined
3598 2011-06-24 21:22:49 <minus> Ãû
3599 2011-06-24 21:23:04 istat has quit (Quit: Leaving)
3600 2011-06-24 21:23:49 niekie has joined
3601 2011-06-24 21:24:15 freakazoid has joined
3602 2011-06-24 21:25:32 d1234 has joined
3603 2011-06-24 21:27:13 gleon has joined
3604 2011-06-24 21:27:33 glassresistor has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3605 2011-06-24 21:28:55 <BitcoinForNewegg> any java programmers wana make some bitcoins?
3606 2011-06-24 21:30:44 <Happy0> BitcoinForNewegg, go on...
3607 2011-06-24 21:30:44 <Happy0> :P
3608 2011-06-24 21:30:59 <BitcoinForNewegg> the stuff that google programmer wrote, finish it please
3609 2011-06-24 21:31:12 <nidefawl> link?
3610 2011-06-24 21:31:17 <BitcoinForNewegg> took me like 2 hours to use that code to make a transaction
3611 2011-06-24 21:31:22 <BlueMatt> you mean bitcoinj? how is it not finished?
3612 2011-06-24 21:31:26 TheZimm has quit (Quit: When will we learn?)
3613 2011-06-24 21:31:34 <BitcoinForNewegg> or document it better?
3614 2011-06-24 21:31:36 <BlueMatt> also, mike still works on bitcoinj 20% time
3615 2011-06-24 21:31:59 <minus> Ãû
3616 2011-06-24 21:32:02 <BlueMatt> so...ask TD to write better docs when hes no next
3617 2011-06-24 21:32:04 <BlueMatt> minus: wtf?
3618 2011-06-24 21:32:10 <minus> Ãû
3619 2011-06-24 21:32:30 <gmaxwell> ÏηαÏâ½
3620 2011-06-24 21:32:43 <BitcoinForNewegg> I want to have a collection of wallets each of which can tell me how much it has, can send to a specified address, and show last transactions, along with generatign and storing its wallet addresses
3621 2011-06-24 21:33:02 devon_hillard has joined
3622 2011-06-24 21:33:34 <BlueMatt> tbh, I havent spent much time with bitcoinj, but you can ask TD when hes on next
3623 2011-06-24 21:33:59 <minus> blishchrot: xchat bugs... happens when i get/send dcc files
3624 2011-06-24 21:34:03 <BitcoinForNewegg> how much bitcoins per hour u guys work for?
3625 2011-06-24 21:34:09 pirrr has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
3626 2011-06-24 21:35:56 rokj has quit (Quit: Leaving)
3627 2011-06-24 21:36:18 JRWR has joined
3628 2011-06-24 21:36:29 accel has quit (Quit: leaving)
3629 2011-06-24 21:38:01 dbasch_ has quit (Quit: dbasch_)
3630 2011-06-24 21:38:08 <blishchrot> and what precisely is this in reference to, minus?
3631 2011-06-24 21:38:46 <minus> blishchrot: i meant BlueMatt, sorry, way too many users here
3632 2011-06-24 21:38:48 <BlueMatt> blishchrot: I believe it was a tab-fail to me
3633 2011-06-24 21:39:07 <BlueMatt> minus: hey, better to have too many than too few
3634 2011-06-24 21:39:35 agricocb has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
3635 2011-06-24 21:40:15 abragin has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
3636 2011-06-24 21:40:16 <blishchrot> i suppose that i see which bugs are being mentioned
3637 2011-06-24 21:40:49 <blishchrot> control characters perhaps
3638 2011-06-24 21:41:07 <minus> the thing is it braodcasts that to every open window in xchat
3639 2011-06-24 21:42:47 ericmock has quit (Quit: ericmock)
3640 2011-06-24 21:42:53 vragnaroda has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
3641 2011-06-24 21:44:38 vragnaroda has joined
3642 2011-06-24 21:45:24 Titeuf_87 has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
3643 2011-06-24 21:46:45 caedes has joined
3644 2011-06-24 21:46:46 caedes has quit (Changing host)
3645 2011-06-24 21:46:46 caedes has joined
3646 2011-06-24 21:47:25 <prof7bit> The Bitcoin Faucet has run dry!
3647 2011-06-24 21:48:07 <gmaxwell> It was recently undry?
3648 2011-06-24 21:48:45 <BlueMatt> when is the ridiculous amount from the eff gonna show up on the faucet?
3649 2011-06-24 21:49:38 <lfm> doest the eff need it?
3650 2011-06-24 21:49:41 <prof7bit> i got 0.001 btc out of it (my first bitcoins ever) 2 days ago
3651 2011-06-24 21:50:03 traviscj has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3652 2011-06-24 21:50:11 <BlueMatt> lfm: they rejected them for a variety of reasons, check their blog post
3653 2011-06-24 21:50:24 <BlueMatt> they will no longer accept btc donations, and will be sending all donated btc to the faucet
3654 2011-06-24 21:50:33 <sanchaz> i seriously didnt understand they just chickened out
3655 2011-06-24 21:50:42 <BlueMatt> not really, its a valid point
3656 2011-06-24 21:50:59 <BlueMatt> they dont want to be the target of legal action, they prefer to protect others
3657 2011-06-24 21:51:06 <gmaxwell> sanchaz: They don't run tor exits because they don't feel they could defend tor exit operators if they were a plantiff themselves.
3658 2011-06-24 21:51:14 <gmaxwell> So, this would be the same logic.
3659 2011-06-24 21:51:51 __robin__ has left ()
3660 2011-06-24 21:51:56 <gmaxwell> Though I think they could have equally cashed it all out and no longer held any, and then they not likely have any conflict.
3661 2011-06-24 21:52:21 <BlueMatt> but the address will continue to exist and get donations, not matter how much they say stop
3662 2011-06-24 21:52:44 <gmaxwell> They could publish the private key.
3663 2011-06-24 21:53:00 <BlueMatt> lol, that would be terrible
3664 2011-06-24 21:53:17 <gmaxwell> It would be hilarious.
3665 2011-06-24 21:53:24 <BlueMatt> then you get some douche getting all kinds of money that was intended for the eff
3666 2011-06-24 21:53:33 <xelister> then each miner would always transfer all into self in each mined block
3667 2011-06-24 21:53:46 <xelister> BlueMatt: well no, each miner
3668 2011-06-24 21:53:52 <BlueMatt> oh, yea, sorry
3669 2011-06-24 21:53:53 <xelister> ok, each /competent/ miner
3670 2011-06-24 21:54:08 <gmaxwell> Well no one has bothered to write miner code to take unconditional transactions AFAIK.
3671 2011-06-24 21:54:10 <xelister> it may be a not bad idea
3672 2011-06-24 21:54:27 <xelister> then each bitcoin donation to eff would... sponsor bitcoin (by adding value for miners) lol
3673 2011-06-24 21:54:31 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: it wouldnt be difficult
3674 2011-06-24 21:54:49 <BlueMatt> if there were incentive, it would happen quick
3675 2011-06-24 21:54:53 <gmaxwell> They could also destroy the key securely, and then anything sent there would be lost. (effectively given to all bitcoin users)
3676 2011-06-24 21:55:11 <BlueMatt> thats a very theoretical argument
3677 2011-06-24 21:55:43 <gmaxwell> (or at least sponsoring demonstrations of attacks on the account!)
3678 2011-06-24 21:56:21 <pisi> are there any other tutorials on bitcoin *software* design than the source code ?
3679 2011-06-24 21:56:25 <gmaxwell> do we have any great big accidental bounty addresses with disclosed public keys? The 8999 one never spent.
3680 2011-06-24 21:56:26 <pisi> like a newcomers tutorial ?
3681 2011-06-24 21:56:54 <xelister> pisi: doubt it
3682 2011-06-24 21:57:25 <gmaxwell> pisi: welcome to the bleeding edge. :)
3683 2011-06-24 21:57:35 storrgie has joined
3684 2011-06-24 21:57:44 __robin__ has joined
3685 2011-06-24 21:57:44 __robin__ has quit (Client Quit)
3686 2011-06-24 21:57:45 __robin___ has joined
3687 2011-06-24 21:57:51 * BlueMatt keeps forgetting who amir is
3688 2011-06-24 21:58:06 <upb> damn, i was trying to write AddressToHash160 in js
3689 2011-06-24 21:58:18 <upb> this base58 is a real pain to get right, have to use some bignum lib
3690 2011-06-24 21:58:18 <BlueMatt> what does amir taki go by again?
3691 2011-06-24 21:58:31 DrDeke_ has joined
3692 2011-06-24 21:58:53 Juffo-Wup has quit (Disconnected by services)
3693 2011-06-24 21:58:55 DrDeke_ is now known as Juffo-Wup
3694 2011-06-24 21:59:12 <gmaxwell> upb: eh, coward. :)
3695 2011-06-24 21:59:49 <upb> well how can you do it without one ?:P
3696 2011-06-24 21:59:50 johnlockwood_ has left ()
3697 2011-06-24 21:59:55 brunner has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
3698 2011-06-24 22:00:02 <BlueMatt> write your own bignum lib :)
3699 2011-06-24 22:00:07 <copumpkin> upb: use a real language :P
3700 2011-06-24 22:00:11 <upb> there is no common easy size like for base64 :)
3701 2011-06-24 22:00:12 <copumpkin> </troll>
3702 2011-06-24 22:00:12 <upb> haha
3703 2011-06-24 22:00:43 <upb> well yorick wanted it in js so i thought wth how hard can it be
3704 2011-06-24 22:00:57 <BlueMatt> have you looked in that js client thing?
3705 2011-06-24 22:01:02 <BlueMatt> it must have such a thing
3706 2011-06-24 22:02:01 ericmock has joined
3707 2011-06-24 22:02:09 <pisi> gmaxwell: I'm still thinking about throwing a smart card to the wallet problem.
3708 2011-06-24 22:02:23 <pisi> Actually bitcoin is much readable (at first sight) than freenet :)
3709 2011-06-24 22:03:03 <upb> some guys have a google group for it
3710 2011-06-24 22:03:07 <BlueMatt> the problem is...if you are sending a coin, and your pc is compromised, you are fucked, doesnt matter if you use a smart card, run wallet crypto, anything...you are fucked
3711 2011-06-24 22:03:50 <pisi> whenever there are private keys in question, I like to have them somewhere where I can easily physically control them.
3712 2011-06-24 22:03:59 <BlueMatt> well theres that
3713 2011-06-24 22:04:00 <pisi> the matter of a comprimised host is a different one.
3714 2011-06-24 22:04:05 <gmaxwell> pisi: I think the software is perfectly readable. ::shrugs::
3715 2011-06-24 22:04:11 <upb> LOL
3716 2011-06-24 22:04:11 <BlueMatt> but you can store crypted wallet on a flash drive
3717 2011-06-24 22:04:24 <MrSam> :)
3718 2011-06-24 22:04:28 <rgm3> Isn't it possible for a process to both verify its own integrity and also lock memory that's not accessible by other processes?
3719 2011-06-24 22:04:29 <edcba> BlueMatt: unless you use crypto dongles
3720 2011-06-24 22:04:51 <lfm> Twitter is over capacity. Is it being ddosed?
3721 2011-06-24 22:04:54 <BlueMatt> the software is mostly readable, but code paths can be really inefficient, confusing, and poorly done
3722 2011-06-24 22:04:55 <upb> pisi: http://groups.google.com/group/bitcoincard
3723 2011-06-24 22:05:03 <egecko> if you are walking down the street and have your life savings in your wallet when you happen to be mugged, you're gonna lose it all
3724 2011-06-24 22:05:07 <BlueMatt> edcba: no, I just change the address that is being sent to
3725 2011-06-24 22:05:08 <upb> maybe you can help them with your token expertise :P
3726 2011-06-24 22:05:21 <prof7bit> pisi: here are parts of the code translated into plain english https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_rules
3727 2011-06-24 22:05:21 <BlueMatt> edcba: if your host is compromised, you are fucked...period
3728 2011-06-24 22:05:37 p0s has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3729 2011-06-24 22:05:58 <egecko> zactly, you have to draw a line in the sand somewhere and i call that line individual responsibility
3730 2011-06-24 22:06:04 <edcba> BlueMatt: then you need some hardware to display the tx
3731 2011-06-24 22:06:08 <upb> well with a token you have to be compromised at the moment you do a transaction
3732 2011-06-24 22:06:08 <edcba> ie receiver and amount
3733 2011-06-24 22:06:55 <pisi> upb: maybe.
3734 2011-06-24 22:07:06 <BlueMatt> edcba: you can do that, but users are too stupid to double check, plus the addr can be changed on your comp screen to think you are sending to me, but actually to the mitm...its sort of possible, but really, really inefficient and hard to do
3735 2011-06-24 22:07:20 <gmaxwell> I wonder if it would be profitable to buy up a zillion and one of sold old model smartphone or pocket pc (like sharp zaurus or openmoko) then lock it down and sell it as a safe wallet.
3736 2011-06-24 22:07:55 <edcba> better use some really old phones
3737 2011-06-24 22:08:02 <edcba> ie 3310 etc
3738 2011-06-24 22:08:03 eternal1 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
3739 2011-06-24 22:08:12 <egecko> just have a secured wallet that's stored in the cloud
3740 2011-06-24 22:08:17 <gmaxwell> Give it some very carefully hardened code to import/export txn via usb/wifi/bluetooth/etc. (do people still use irda?)
3741 2011-06-24 22:08:30 <pisi> upb: indeed, that's what I'm after. Will read the existing threads tomorrow.
3742 2011-06-24 22:08:33 <pisi> http://groups.google.com/group/bitcoincard/browse_thread/thread/29df8f58d4a2b36d
3743 2011-06-24 22:08:34 <gmaxwell> Cloud is another word that should be banned.
3744 2011-06-24 22:08:34 <BlueMatt> egecko: and if your comp is compromised?
3745 2011-06-24 22:08:56 Silverpike has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3746 2011-06-24 22:08:58 <gmaxwell> egecko: mtgox users had "wallets stored in the cloud", hows that working out? ;)
3747 2011-06-24 22:09:10 <pisi> and the whole thread is basically as old as my musings on the topic...
3748 2011-06-24 22:09:14 <egecko> then you have bigger problems than technology can solve ;)
3749 2011-06-24 22:09:15 <pisi> world grows fast..
3750 2011-06-24 22:09:16 Silverpike has joined
3751 2011-06-24 22:09:16 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: well it wasnt proper wallets, just balances
3752 2011-06-24 22:09:25 <dinox> gmaxwell: I think they missed the "secured"
3753 2011-06-24 22:09:36 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: a wallet in the cloud, means crypted locally then uploaded
3754 2011-06-24 22:09:37 <egecko> there was 1 account compromised and it limited the damage to $1000
3755 2011-06-24 22:09:38 <BlueMatt> like that js-ui
3756 2011-06-24 22:09:45 <BlueMatt> the js-client I mean
3757 2011-06-24 22:09:45 <egecko> why was there more than $1000 in that account?
3758 2011-06-24 22:10:05 <egecko> why did the fool have $500K attached to one account?
3759 2011-06-24 22:10:13 <edcba> $1000 limit is by account ?
3760 2011-06-24 22:10:15 <gmaxwell> In any case, the idea of using some old smartphone device is that it could be locked very tightly, so no risk of keyboard sniffing trojan.
3761 2011-06-24 22:10:23 <egecko> $1000 limit was the withdrawl limit
3762 2011-06-24 22:10:39 <gmaxwell> ericmock: not $500k. several hundred thousand btc. Which sounds weird.
3763 2011-06-24 22:10:45 <edcba> what if attacker creates 250 accounts ?
3764 2011-06-24 22:10:50 Pinion has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPad - http://colloquy.mobi)
3765 2011-06-24 22:10:53 <egecko> sure, but you could get malicious code on the device if the user is stupid
3766 2011-06-24 22:10:54 <upb> indeed
3767 2011-06-24 22:11:01 <upb> and this 'one account compromised' is fud bs
3768 2011-06-24 22:11:05 <gmaxwell> The person who lost "$500k" in btc lost it from his local machine.
3769 2011-06-24 22:11:06 <ericmock> eh?
3770 2011-06-24 22:11:12 <ericmock> oh egecko
3771 2011-06-24 22:12:03 <prof7bit> i have a lot of free email accounts with draft folders (like gmail, gmx, etc) and I have GPG. this is my cloud for many other personal stuff too.
3772 2011-06-24 22:12:06 <egecko> no, his machine was compromised and a hacker had read-only access to mtgox's db, the auditor whose box was hacked was obviously not running a ecure box
3773 2011-06-24 22:12:15 Lexa has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3774 2011-06-24 22:12:27 <upb> bla bla bla any of that cant be believed
3775 2011-06-24 22:12:34 <gmaxwell> egecko: who are you saying no to?
3776 2011-06-24 22:12:44 <gmaxwell> oh upb.
3777 2011-06-24 22:12:47 <egecko> the guy who got his btc stolen, didnt have anything to do with it
3778 2011-06-24 22:12:48 <ericmock> that auditor story makes no sense
3779 2011-06-24 22:12:56 <BlueMatt> upb: I prefer to believe magicaltux instead of...you
3780 2011-06-24 22:13:03 <BlueMatt> ericmock: how so?
3781 2011-06-24 22:13:04 <upb> BlueMatt: your choise :)
3782 2011-06-24 22:13:05 sytse has quit (Read error: No route to host)
3783 2011-06-24 22:13:07 <egecko> lol
3784 2011-06-24 22:13:12 <BlueMatt> also...all of this is ot...
3785 2011-06-24 22:13:19 * edcba prefers to believe upb
3786 2011-06-24 22:13:36 <Happy0> quick, let's contextualise it
3787 2011-06-24 22:13:39 <ericmock> BlueMatt: first because the hacker would have had to know who the auditor was, and then what computer he was using
3788 2011-06-24 22:13:44 <Happy0> blah blah, develop more security blah blah bitcoin
3789 2011-06-24 22:13:46 <gmaxwell> shhhh.
3790 2011-06-24 22:13:49 <Happy0> sorted
3791 2011-06-24 22:13:49 <Happy0> =p
3792 2011-06-24 22:14:34 <ericmock> and apparently MagTux didn't know what computer he was using since he said he would never have let him have the db on a Windows machine
3793 2011-06-24 22:14:41 <edcba> now that ppl are aware that having your computer pwned is bad for their bitcoins they'll make more attention
3794 2011-06-24 22:14:47 <BlueMatt> ericmock: and you think thats impossible because...?
3795 2011-06-24 22:14:48 Lexa has joined
3796 2011-06-24 22:15:07 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: you're feeding the OT. ;)
3797 2011-06-24 22:15:08 <BlueMatt> I would agree mt did a lot of stupid things since he took over, but that doesnt mean hes lying
3798 2011-06-24 22:15:22 <ericmock> no impossible, just highly unlicked
3799 2011-06-24 22:15:31 <ericmock> unlicked? wtf?
3800 2011-06-24 22:15:34 <ericmock> unlikely
3801 2011-06-24 22:15:34 <upb> hah
3802 2011-06-24 22:15:42 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: ok, fine, discussion over then
3803 2011-06-24 22:15:53 <ericmock> I mean that would take some detective work
3804 2011-06-24 22:15:57 <egecko> so you leave your debit card with a sticky note containing the pin on your coffee table, a friend and his acquaintance come over. when they leave you see your card is gone and the acquaintance goes off to an atm and tries to withdraw all your money but cant 'cause the banks wont let you have that much cash out of an atm. same thing here except the friend was the auditor of mtgox and the aquaintance was some malicious hacker who got in
3805 2011-06-24 22:16:18 <ericmock> BlueMatt: and I'm not saying he's lying. I think he doesn't necessarily now
3806 2011-06-24 22:16:26 <BlueMatt> now that I would believe
3807 2011-06-24 22:16:28 <upb> yep i agree just would like to add that its more likely a php can do anything site ridden with csrf and sql injection got pwned vs some 'auditor' with access to live db got pwned
3808 2011-06-24 22:16:34 Gonzago has joined
3809 2011-06-24 22:16:46 <ericmock> and has apparently admitted that an sqli might be the cause.
3810 2011-06-24 22:17:08 <edcba> "might"
3811 2011-06-24 22:17:11 <ericmock> but I think he's not really wanted to admit to an sqli because of the "I told you so." response he'll get
3812 2011-06-24 22:17:13 JRWR has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3813 2011-06-24 22:17:24 <BlueMatt> in any case, whats done is done, hes on a new codebase now, which should (hopefully) make attacks much harder...and hell be more careful with auditors
3814 2011-06-24 22:17:32 <ericmock> well, in the past he's said it was not an sqli
3815 2011-06-24 22:17:34 <gmaxwell> We obviously need an MTGOX flash crash "Rogers Commission".
3816 2011-06-24 22:18:01 <gmaxwell> (But who will play Feynman?)
3817 2011-06-24 22:18:05 <egecko> my only point to this whole thing is, you can spend all day trying to develop a solution for every single possibility and you wont make any real progress, or you can accept the system, have people be responsible for their own money, and make progress in more important areas
3818 2011-06-24 22:18:50 <gmaxwell> egecko: ... giving people tools is how you help them become responsible.
3819 2011-06-24 22:18:56 <prof7bit> there was no auditor. for what purpose would he have had an auditor audit the financial integrity of his system if the results of this audit were never published?
3820 2011-06-24 22:19:16 * ericmock still thinks the rich idiot with ~100k btc was an 'insider'
3821 2011-06-24 22:19:27 <gmaxwell> Not having a compromised system is hard. Giving people a dongle that makes their wallet secure even if their system is compromised allows them to be more responsible (by using the device)
3822 2011-06-24 22:19:30 <BlueMatt> prof7bit: since when do all auditors publish results?
3823 2011-06-24 22:19:44 <BlueMatt> in fact, since when do the majority of auditors publish results?
3824 2011-06-24 22:19:46 <gmaxwell> prof7bit: he might have just been hired by a big customer.
3825 2011-06-24 22:20:16 <upb> true, for example the same one who had 500K btc in a site where you can withdraw 1000$ a day
3826 2011-06-24 22:20:26 <gmaxwell> If I had 100k btc in mtgox I'd tell mtgox that they'd allow me to hire an auditor of our mutual acceptance or I'd move my funds to tradehill.
3827 2011-06-24 22:20:39 ByteCoin has joined
3828 2011-06-24 22:20:39 <egecko> iirc they are operating out of taiwan, so most likely it was some chinese govt lacky auditor who was just supposed to make sure there wasnt anything super evil going on that was going to impact china
3829 2011-06-24 22:20:56 Lexa has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3830 2011-06-24 22:21:22 <egecko> servers are stateside at least
3831 2011-06-24 22:21:25 <ericmock> Japan
3832 2011-06-24 22:22:02 <gmaxwell> I'm 44ms to mtgox.com, there is no way it's in japan.
3833 2011-06-24 22:22:15 <egecko> their servers are in the us
3834 2011-06-24 22:22:24 <BlueMatt> its incorporated in japan
3835 2011-06-24 22:22:28 <egecko> yep
3836 2011-06-24 22:22:38 <ericmock> isn't MagTux in Japan too?
3837 2011-06-24 22:22:39 <gmaxwell> "Prolexic Technologies, Inc" hm. do I know those people?
3838 2011-06-24 22:22:53 <egecko> so they fall under the perview of the japanese govt, so it was probably a required auditor
3839 2011-06-24 22:22:56 <upb> its an anti ddos hosting service
3840 2011-06-24 22:23:06 <gmaxwell> ah, yes.
3841 2011-06-24 22:23:12 <ericmock> Prophylactic Technologies?
3842 2011-06-24 22:23:18 <gmaxwell> yea, so who knows where the servers are...
3843 2011-06-24 22:24:19 O31 has left ()
3844 2011-06-24 22:24:55 <egecko> there was some video of a call w/ the mtgox folks last sunday night.. one of the questions asked was why they allowed someone with remote access to their data instead of requiring them to be on-site. the answer was that since all their servers are in the US everyone has to have remote access
3845 2011-06-24 22:25:33 james has joined
3846 2011-06-24 22:25:46 <egecko> they're probably at some datacenter run by rackspace or amazon's US ec
3847 2011-06-24 22:25:57 topace has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
3848 2011-06-24 22:26:00 james is now known as Guest5622
3849 2011-06-24 22:26:09 <joepie91> prolexic is not a hosting service
3850 2011-06-24 22:26:12 <upb> yeah and since they are using mysql and probably clueless about configuring it, it has to be all-or-nothing access
3851 2011-06-24 22:26:15 <joepie91> just an insanely well ddos-protected reverse proxy service
3852 2011-06-24 22:26:21 <joepie91> sony used it during opsony.
3853 2011-06-24 22:26:23 <egecko> hopefully they arent running out of joe's bait, tackle & data hosting in po-dunk arkansas tho
3854 2011-06-24 22:26:40 MC1984 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
3855 2011-06-24 22:27:21 <egecko> maybe its running on some old p2 233 the cat sleeps on.. hehe
3856 2011-06-24 22:27:58 brunner has joined
3857 2011-06-24 22:29:59 sytse has joined
3858 2011-06-24 22:30:13 abragin has joined
3859 2011-06-24 22:30:14 abragin has quit (Changing host)
3860 2011-06-24 22:30:14 abragin has joined
3861 2011-06-24 22:31:03 segfault64 has joined
3862 2011-06-24 22:32:55 wasabi1 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
3863 2011-06-24 22:33:12 Ramen has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
3864 2011-06-24 22:33:17 nidefawl has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3865 2011-06-24 22:33:45 ByteCoin has left ()
3866 2011-06-24 22:35:48 abragin has quit ()
3867 2011-06-24 22:36:55 clojure has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3868 2011-06-24 22:39:02 Teslah has joined
3869 2011-06-24 22:39:31 gleon has quit (Quit: WeeChat 0.3.5)
3870 2011-06-24 22:41:54 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
3871 2011-06-24 22:42:13 mmoya has joined
3872 2011-06-24 22:42:58 phatsphere has quit (Quit: Leaving)
3873 2011-06-24 22:44:30 segfault64 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3874 2011-06-24 22:44:46 kakazza has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
3875 2011-06-24 22:46:14 scott` has joined
3876 2011-06-24 22:46:41 scott` is now known as Guest23717
3877 2011-06-24 22:47:04 <ericmock> anyone want to test CocoaBitcoin?
3878 2011-06-24 22:47:27 <BlueMatt> its an rpc client correct?
3879 2011-06-24 22:47:27 danbri has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
3880 2011-06-24 22:47:45 <ericmock> no
3881 2011-06-24 22:47:47 <ericmock> full
3882 2011-06-24 22:48:21 <BlueMatt> really, using existing code, or rewriting bitcoin ground-up?
3883 2011-06-24 22:48:45 WakiMiko_ has joined
3884 2011-06-24 22:48:52 <ericmock> existing code with Cocoa frontend
3885 2011-06-24 22:49:03 <ericmock> I'm ripping off ui.cpp
3886 2011-06-24 22:49:09 <luke-jr> lame :p
3887 2011-06-24 22:49:16 <BlueMatt> ah, ok
3888 2011-06-24 22:49:27 <luke-jr> but since JSON-RPC isn't usable for a client, can't blame you
3889 2011-06-24 22:49:54 <ericmock> although at one point I thought it might be easier to rewrite from ground up than to understand what was going on in existing code
3890 2011-06-24 22:49:55 * BlueMatt thinks its time to generalize each rpc command into a single or two c++ calls, touching no internal data structures
3891 2011-06-24 22:50:06 <BlueMatt> lol, no way
3892 2011-06-24 22:50:17 <BlueMatt> just ask td how much work that was
3893 2011-06-24 22:50:27 <ericmock> yea, it was a fleeting thought
3894 2011-06-24 22:51:04 <BlueMatt> I mean if just rpc + ui was updated to not touch internal data structures and make calls back and forth to CWallet or similar, it could pretty much be declared libbitcoin without *too* much work...
3895 2011-06-24 22:51:08 <ericmock> that rejected iOS app was rpc
3896 2011-06-24 22:51:25 kreal- has quit (Quit: leaving)
3897 2011-06-24 22:51:44 quellhorst has joined
3898 2011-06-24 22:51:47 WakiMiko has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
3899 2011-06-24 22:52:03 <assassindrake> someone know how to download all the block data really quick?
3900 2011-06-24 22:52:10 Kiba has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3901 2011-06-24 22:52:26 <upb> its impossible since you cant parallelize it
3902 2011-06-24 22:52:35 JRWR has joined
3903 2011-06-24 22:52:35 kreal- has joined
3904 2011-06-24 22:52:35 JRWR has quit (Changing host)
3905 2011-06-24 22:52:35 JRWR has joined
3906 2011-06-24 22:52:37 <upb> afaik
3907 2011-06-24 22:52:40 kakazza has joined
3908 2011-06-24 22:52:43 <BlueMatt> assassindrake: bitcoin.bluematt.me
3909 2011-06-24 22:52:48 <BlueMatt> much quicker
3910 2011-06-24 22:52:58 <ericmock> ah, a hoster
3911 2011-06-24 22:53:01 kakazza has quit (Changing host)
3912 2011-06-24 22:53:01 kakazza has joined
3913 2011-06-24 22:53:06 danbri has joined
3914 2011-06-24 22:53:15 <ericmock> was thinking about doing that...
3915 2011-06-24 22:53:30 <assassindrake> downloading the last file and putting in the correct directory should get me up to speed?
3916 2011-06-24 22:53:52 <BlueMatt> yep
3917 2011-06-24 22:54:21 <ericmock> so, I have not messed with RPC and don't really now much about it besides what the acronym tells me. What is it used for in Bitcoin? i.e. rpc.cpp vs. net.cpp
3918 2011-06-24 22:54:23 <assassindrake> thanks!
3919 2011-06-24 22:55:24 danbri has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3920 2011-06-24 22:55:31 SuperArse has joined
3921 2011-06-24 22:55:31 SuperArse is now known as LameArse
3922 2011-06-24 22:55:54 skeledrew has joined
3923 2011-06-24 22:57:21 <jandd> ericmock: you can use RPC to remote control bitcoind using $FAVOURITE_LANGUAGE
3924 2011-06-24 22:58:06 <ericmock> so bitcoind binds to some port and you can send it messages?
3925 2011-06-24 22:58:29 Xunie has joined
3926 2011-06-24 22:58:36 <ericmock> and you could strip that completely out of a GUI client?
3927 2011-06-24 22:58:51 cosurgi has quit (Quit: leaving)
3928 2011-06-24 22:58:59 <upb> hmm, can anyone tell me what '1BitcoinEaterAddressDontSendf59kuE' is in base256?
3929 2011-06-24 22:59:09 cosurgi has joined
3930 2011-06-24 22:59:16 <upb> is [161, 216, 171, 94, 249, 5, 63, 62, 244, 251, 104, 156, 241, 153, 157, 158, 59, 151, 30, 9, 119, 102, 157, 117] correct
3931 2011-06-24 22:59:53 JRWR has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3932 2011-06-24 22:59:55 rgm3 has quit (Quit: rgm3)
3933 2011-06-24 23:00:01 magn3ts has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3934 2011-06-24 23:00:46 Diablo-D3 has joined
3935 2011-06-24 23:01:21 <upb> cant be correct since the first byte is supposed to be 1 :/
3936 2011-06-24 23:01:45 PI_314 has joined
3937 2011-06-24 23:02:05 Guest23717 has quit (Quit: Guest23717)
3938 2011-06-24 23:02:29 <lfm> upb first byte should be zero really, should be 25 bytes
3939 2011-06-24 23:02:54 <lfm> so that could be right
3940 2011-06-24 23:03:08 <lfm> 24 bytes there plus leading zero bytes
3941 2011-06-24 23:03:08 <upb> ahhhhhh
3942 2011-06-24 23:03:09 gleon has joined
3943 2011-06-24 23:03:22 <upb> well how the hell do i get a leading zero byte
3944 2011-06-24 23:03:30 <upb> since its a number
3945 2011-06-24 23:03:48 <lfm> just add leading zeros to fill it out to 25 btes
3946 2011-06-24 23:04:29 <upb> so DecodeBase58 is not really a base58 decoder
3947 2011-06-24 23:04:36 <luke-jr> w00t
3948 2011-06-24 23:04:38 <upb> but a 25 byte data base58 decoder
3949 2011-06-24 23:04:43 <luke-jr> we found a way to calculate time till next block
3950 2011-06-24 23:04:51 <luke-jr> gonna add it to stats page
3951 2011-06-24 23:05:08 <luke-jr> I mean, next block the pool finds
3952 2011-06-24 23:05:26 <lfm> also can tell bye leading '1' digits in address, the number of leading '1' digits in address should be the same as the number of leading zero bytes in the binary
3953 2011-06-24 23:05:41 <upb> ahhhh yes makes sense
3954 2011-06-24 23:05:52 <luke-jr> anyone else want the code?
3955 2011-06-24 23:05:52 <upb> thx
3956 2011-06-24 23:06:21 <upb> lfm: but that cant be right actually
3957 2011-06-24 23:06:32 <upb> since its base58 leading zeroes not base256 leading zeroes
3958 2011-06-24 23:06:37 <lfm> upb ya base58 is special bitcoin only code , not really a general number base
3959 2011-06-24 23:06:53 f33x has joined
3960 2011-06-24 23:07:03 <upb> so its Base58Leading1s * 58 / 256 :P
3961 2011-06-24 23:07:08 <upb> which doesnt make sense
3962 2011-06-24 23:07:27 f33x has quit (Client Quit)
3963 2011-06-24 23:08:20 scottj has joined
3964 2011-06-24 23:08:20 eternal1 has joined
3965 2011-06-24 23:08:28 danbri has joined
3966 2011-06-24 23:08:36 <lfm> upb: note the 25 byte binary can then be decoded further, the leading zero byte means it is a main bitcoin net address as opposed to testnet which uses a "111" byte there. the last 4 bytes are a checksum (custom bitcoin checksum algo) and the remaining 20 bytes are the public key signature
3967 2011-06-24 23:09:12 <upb> yep i read that much
3968 2011-06-24 23:09:45 <upb> i have that done already :)
3969 2011-06-24 23:09:45 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3970 2011-06-24 23:09:56 TheMaskedMan has left ("WeeChat 0.3.5")
3971 2011-06-24 23:10:30 <lfm> the leading '1's need to be treated special actually. it just a leading zero byte for every '1' in the address
3972 2011-06-24 23:10:41 josephholsten has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
3973 2011-06-24 23:10:51 PI_314 has left ()
3974 2011-06-24 23:11:13 LobsterMan has joined
3975 2011-06-24 23:11:13 LobsterMan has quit (Changing host)
3976 2011-06-24 23:11:13 LobsterMan has joined
3977 2011-06-24 23:11:22 <upb> seems like a hack
3978 2011-06-24 23:11:32 <upb> but i suppose if thats how it was designed so be it
3979 2011-06-24 23:11:58 <lfm> or just use the fact that you know its always 25 bytes, ya its yet another silly redundancy in the address that might be used to detect invalid addresses I spoze
3980 2011-06-24 23:12:01 TD has joined
3981 2011-06-24 23:12:27 zertam has quit (Quit: zertam)
3982 2011-06-24 23:12:31 Netto has joined
3983 2011-06-24 23:12:50 TD has quit (Client Quit)
3984 2011-06-24 23:13:52 <dinox> If I have a pub address, priv key and an offline computer, I still cant make a transaction due to the need of the txouts corresponding to the address, right?
3985 2011-06-24 23:14:59 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
3986 2011-06-24 23:15:05 josephholsten has joined
3987 2011-06-24 23:15:18 <lfm> dinox ya, youd need the hash of the txn input and it's "output number" for txn with multiple outputs
3988 2011-06-24 23:15:30 <gmaxwell> dinox: you'd have to carry the inputs to the offline wallet.
3989 2011-06-24 23:16:38 hipeopl is now known as hipeople
3990 2011-06-24 23:18:11 Joric has joined
3991 2011-06-24 23:18:20 <lfm> basiclly what the code calls the 36 byte cout value
3992 2011-06-24 23:18:28 mosimo has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3993 2011-06-24 23:19:09 <lfm> coutp
3994 2011-06-24 23:19:43 <Joric> i noticed mybitcoin.com accepts transactions immediately and you can withdraw funds right after that
3995 2011-06-24 23:19:44 Soak has quit ()
3996 2011-06-24 23:19:46 Lachesis has joined
3997 2011-06-24 23:20:01 <Joric> what will happen with a fake transaction?
3998 2011-06-24 23:20:04 <lfm> COutPoint
3999 2011-06-24 23:20:23 <Joric> isn't it too risky
4000 2011-06-24 23:20:48 <lfm> joric try it, yes it seems risky on mybitcoin's part
4001 2011-06-24 23:20:54 <dinox> hmm
4002 2011-06-24 23:21:08 <BlueMatt> sipa: jgarzik tcatm what do you guys think of doing a psudo-libbitcoin for 0.5 by just abstracting the stuff rpc/ui calls to just one or two functions each and hiding internal data structures?
4003 2011-06-24 23:21:24 <dinox> trying to make a offline signer in python, would be nice for those super paraniod people
4004 2011-06-24 23:22:17 <nanotube> dinox: gmaxwell: see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/271
4005 2011-06-24 23:22:39 <lfm> bluemattsounds reasonable. perhpas you could work around the json problems with trying to use floats for transaction amounts.
4006 2011-06-24 23:24:24 <sipa> BlueMatt: fine by me
4007 2011-06-24 23:24:39 <BlueMatt> lfm: well the idea is then anyone can very easily create their own rpc alternative
4008 2011-06-24 23:24:49 <BlueMatt> or different ui very well and all that such
4009 2011-06-24 23:24:57 <sipa> BlueMatt: by the way, how far are you with the new crypter implementation?
4010 2011-06-24 23:25:25 <BlueMatt> sipa: well I got a ways on the plane, but havent touched it since, been dealing with general back-from-vacation stuff
4011 2011-06-24 23:25:35 <BlueMatt> but plan on doing some work tomorrow
4012 2011-06-24 23:25:38 <BlueMatt> for quite a while
4013 2011-06-24 23:26:03 <sipa> BlueMatt: i had some ideas about a small restructuring keystore to make it easier to support other backends
4014 2011-06-24 23:26:28 <BlueMatt> well if you feel like it I can start again...again, its not like I got *that* far
4015 2011-06-24 23:27:01 <ericmock> cocoaBitcoin testers?
4016 2011-06-24 23:27:18 <ericmock> all kinds of 'sure' yesterday...
4017 2011-06-24 23:28:05 <ericmock> nothing tonight... since only one person actually tested, I don't think I scared people off
4018 2011-06-24 23:28:51 scottj has left ()
4019 2011-06-24 23:28:53 Kurtov has joined
4020 2011-06-24 23:30:03 pierce has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
4021 2011-06-24 23:30:59 <luke-jr> ericmock: can I run it on GNUStep?
4022 2011-06-24 23:31:33 <ericmock> wow... probably not, but maybe
4023 2011-06-24 23:31:43 Breign has quit ()
4024 2011-06-24 23:32:25 <luke-jr> actually
4025 2011-06-24 23:32:28 <luke-jr> I have a Mac for work
4026 2011-06-24 23:32:30 <luke-jr> link me
4027 2011-06-24 23:32:31 JRWR has joined
4028 2011-06-24 23:32:32 JRWR has quit (Changing host)
4029 2011-06-24 23:32:32 JRWR has joined
4030 2011-06-24 23:34:08 <ericmock> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1041468/CocoaBitcoin.app.zip
4031 2011-06-24 23:35:18 <dinox> sipa: in ScanForWalletTransactions, what does the fUpdate variable do?
4032 2011-06-24 23:36:02 <ericmock> luke-jr: it uses ~/.bitcoin as the base directory
4033 2011-06-24 23:36:16 kermit has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
4034 2011-06-24 23:36:27 Coinstacker has joined
4035 2011-06-24 23:36:54 <sipa> dinox: if that's true, transactions already in the wallet will be checked for updates as well
4036 2011-06-24 23:37:01 josephholsten has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
4037 2011-06-24 23:37:34 <Coinstacker> Is it appropriate to discuss mining code here? (It seems related)
4038 2011-06-24 23:38:06 <dinox> sipa: ah, that would be a good feature if you removed private keys from wallet
4039 2011-06-24 23:38:11 <dinox> thanks
4040 2011-06-24 23:38:17 <luke-jr> Coinstacker: yes
4041 2011-06-24 23:39:10 <luke-jr> ericmock: "Safari can�t open the file �CocoaBitcoin� because no available application can open it."
4042 2011-06-24 23:39:59 <BlueMatt> Coinstacker: #bitcoin-mining
4043 2011-06-24 23:41:31 <ericmock> luke-jr: eh? you got nothing to uncompress a zip?
4044 2011-06-24 23:41:33 _ape has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
4045 2011-06-24 23:41:46 <luke-jr> ericmock: I think it automatically unzipped
4046 2011-06-24 23:41:51 <luke-jr> ericmock: it doesn't like the .app
4047 2011-06-24 23:41:52 <Coinstacker> The vectors code in pheonix miner seems a bit strange to me. I'm new to opencl but it seems that W[3].x and W[3].y should be exactly the same value do to the fact that every command exacuted on vectors in that code is replicated into both X and Y ?
4048 2011-06-24 23:42:04 <ericmock> can you run it from Finder?
4049 2011-06-24 23:42:08 <luke-jr> ericmock: no
4050 2011-06-24 23:42:21 RobboNZ has joined
4051 2011-06-24 23:42:28 <Diablo-D3> Coinstacker: thats wrong
4052 2011-06-24 23:42:30 <ericmock> you get a warning trying that?
4053 2011-06-24 23:42:38 <Diablo-D3> Coinstacker: the entire chain is started with different nonces
4054 2011-06-24 23:42:42 <luke-jr> "You cannot use this version of the application CocoaBitcoin with this version of Mac OS X."
4055 2011-06-24 23:42:56 devrandom has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
4056 2011-06-24 23:42:59 <Diablo-D3> luke-jr: universal binary fail
4057 2011-06-24 23:43:34 <ericmock> what OS version you have?
4058 2011-06-24 23:43:38 <luke-jr> dunno
4059 2011-06-24 23:43:49 <luke-jr> 10.5.8
4060 2011-06-24 23:43:56 <ericmock> PPC?
4061 2011-06-24 23:44:00 <luke-jr> no, Intel
4062 2011-06-24 23:44:05 <Coinstacker> Diablo-D3: could you point me to the place where the chain starts?
4063 2011-06-24 23:44:08 <luke-jr> Core2
4064 2011-06-24 23:44:11 <ericmock> hmm... I built for 10.6
4065 2011-06-24 23:44:13 <Diablo-D3> Coinstacker: at the very top.
4066 2011-06-24 23:44:25 <ericmock> dinner time... will build for 10.5 after
4067 2011-06-24 23:44:31 subpar has joined
4068 2011-06-24 23:45:04 <lianj> osx is so great, isnt it?
4069 2011-06-24 23:45:29 <Coinstacker> Diablo-D3: At the very top of the openCL porgram or somewhere in the python?
4070 2011-06-24 23:47:11 Teslah has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
4071 2011-06-24 23:47:29 <Diablo-D3> Coinstacker: at the very top of the kernel
4072 2011-06-24 23:51:03 <Coinstacker> Diablo-D3: In kernel.cl for phatk the onlymention of the nonces is at the very bottom
4073 2011-06-24 23:52:20 LightRider has quit ()
4074 2011-06-24 23:52:35 kermit has joined
4075 2011-06-24 23:52:45 <Diablo-D3> nope, its at the top
4076 2011-06-24 23:53:47 <Coinstacker> Diablo-D3: can I trouble you for a line number?
4077 2011-06-24 23:54:07 <Coinstacker> I would buy you a beer for your help if I could
4078 2011-06-24 23:54:33 dfc has joined
4079 2011-06-24 23:54:45 <Diablo-D3> on the newest one, its line 136 through 140
4080 2011-06-24 23:54:49 <Diablo-D3> my kernel has similar code
4081 2011-06-24 23:56:21 <Coinstacker> Diablo-D3: are you refering to W[3] = ((base + get_global_id(0))<<1) + (uint2)(0, 1)
4082 2011-06-24 23:56:38 <Diablo-D3> yes
4083 2011-06-24 23:56:51 gjs278 has joined
4084 2011-06-24 23:57:23 <Coinstacker> I'm must be misunderstanding the way opencl deals with arrays, to me this looks like just an address adjustment?
4085 2011-06-24 23:57:29 <ericmock> lianj: it is..
4086 2011-06-24 23:58:16 <Coinstacker> 0 being X 1 bing Y
4087 2011-06-24 23:58:22 pogden has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)