1 2011-06-30 00:00:03 TheZimm has joined
   2 2011-06-30 00:02:26 TheZimm has quit (Client Quit)
   3 2011-06-30 00:03:24 brunner has joined
   4 2011-06-30 00:04:22 Gonzago has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
   5 2011-06-30 00:05:30 theorb has joined
   6 2011-06-30 00:05:37 theymos has joined
   7 2011-06-30 00:05:39 theorbtwo has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
   8 2011-06-30 00:05:42 theorb is now known as theorbtwo
   9 2011-06-30 00:08:07 iToast has joined
  10 2011-06-30 00:08:08 <iToast> what is khash/s?
  11 2011-06-30 00:09:06 <theymos> Thousand hashes per second.
  12 2011-06-30 00:09:54 kish has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
  13 2011-06-30 00:10:21 kish has joined
  14 2011-06-30 00:11:20 Incitatus has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
  15 2011-06-30 00:12:11 <theymos> I really wish the IRC logs were available all on one page.
  16 2011-06-30 00:12:17 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: jrmithdobbs  made a walletlockcommand and added the portable mlock stuff https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/352/commits
  17 2011-06-30 00:14:54 <b4epoche_> theymos:  and searchable
  18 2011-06-30 00:14:58 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Quitte)
  19 2011-06-30 00:15:18 Strom has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
  20 2011-06-30 00:15:42 <theymos> b4epoche: That's mainly what I want it for. With the old log system, I used to search for mentions of Bitcoin Block Explorer, which was helpful in finding bugs.
  21 2011-06-30 00:16:15 <dbasch> if you want to make the irc logs searchable, I made this little tool
  22 2011-06-30 00:16:16 Michamus has joined
  23 2011-06-30 00:16:25 <dbasch> https://github.com/dbasch/irc_search
  24 2011-06-30 00:16:49 Gonzago has joined
  25 2011-06-30 00:17:04 <dbasch> it works like this: http://ogeid.com/irc.html
  26 2011-06-30 00:17:05 devon_hillard has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
  27 2011-06-30 00:17:38 * BlueMatt needs a vps to run all these things
  28 2011-06-30 00:17:58 <BlueMatt> I wonder if mt would offer up a free one for bitcoin stuff
  29 2011-06-30 00:18:07 <BlueMatt> irc logs, dnsseed, et al
  30 2011-06-30 00:18:15 <dbasch> my search page is static html
  31 2011-06-30 00:18:18 <BlueMatt> who runs irc logs now?
  32 2011-06-30 00:18:29 <dbasch> the indexer is just a bot that sends stuff to the api
  33 2011-06-30 00:18:54 <dbasch> you could run it for free on a number of places
  34 2011-06-30 00:18:59 AAA_awright_ has joined
  35 2011-06-30 00:19:44 <BlueMatt> Christian Decker, whos that again?
  36 2011-06-30 00:19:53 <BlueMatt> cdecker: oh
  37 2011-06-30 00:19:56 <BlueMatt> cdecker: ping
  38 2011-06-30 00:21:12 <dbasch> you an run one worker on Heroku for free I believe
  39 2011-06-30 00:21:32 <dbasch> so essentially you can create your own irc search engine for free
  40 2011-06-30 00:22:16 suriv_ is now known as suriv
  41 2011-06-30 00:22:22 AAA_awright has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
  42 2011-06-30 00:22:51 suriv is now known as suriv_
  43 2011-06-30 00:23:01 <BlueMatt> it would appear that only would work with static http
  44 2011-06-30 00:23:01 <tcatm> BlueMatt: how much RAM would you need?
  45 2011-06-30 00:23:04 ar4s has quit (Quit: ar4s)
  46 2011-06-30 00:23:06 <BlueMatt> tcatm: like 512
  47 2011-06-30 00:23:07 suriv_ is now known as suriv
  48 2011-06-30 00:23:19 <BlueMatt> less if dnsseed is static, which would work too
  49 2011-06-30 00:23:34 <tcatm> debian 6?
  50 2011-06-30 00:23:38 <BlueMatt> doesnt matter
  51 2011-06-30 00:23:43 <BlueMatt> if it can run a dnsserver
  52 2011-06-30 00:24:20 Gonzago has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
  53 2011-06-30 00:26:42 Gonzago has joined
  54 2011-06-30 00:27:57 ^1bitc0inplz has joined
  55 2011-06-30 00:29:54 Joric has joined
  56 2011-06-30 00:29:55 SecretSJ has quit (Quit: If you can't laugh at yourself, make fun of other people.)
  57 2011-06-30 00:30:23 lumos has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
  58 2011-06-30 00:30:34 <gmaxwell> apparently the people running .nz TLD have said that they won't allow random extra-legal US DHS domain seizure: http://internetnz.net.nz/news/blog/2011/nz-right-choice-Kiwis
  59 2011-06-30 00:30:39 <wardearia> heya phantomcircuit
  60 2011-06-30 00:30:46 <gmaxwell> So perhaps I'll register one of those to use as a dnsseed.
  61 2011-06-30 00:30:56 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: that would be a smart idea
  62 2011-06-30 00:31:13 <gmaxwell> Yea, gonna do that tonight.
  63 2011-06-30 00:31:27 tandy80 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
  64 2011-06-30 00:31:29 <Joric> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXBp79ClrV4#t=311s
  65 2011-06-30 00:31:33 <BlueMatt> we need a bitcoin foundation to grab a bunch of such tings
  66 2011-06-30 00:31:34 <BlueMatt> things*
  67 2011-06-30 00:31:58 <gmaxwell> (not that I consider this a major risk, but it's a good thing to be able to tell people who are concerned)
  68 2011-06-30 00:32:03 <doublec> gmaxwell: I have NZ domains that can be used as dnsseed's
  69 2011-06-30 00:32:14 <gmaxwell> tada.
  70 2011-06-30 00:33:27 tandy80 has joined
  71 2011-06-30 00:33:46 <gmaxwell> doublec: care to run one or do you want to just delegate a subdomain to me?
  72 2011-06-30 00:34:51 <doublec> gmaxwell: I can do either
  73 2011-06-30 00:35:00 <doublec> gmaxwell: where are the instructions for setting up a dnsseed?
  74 2011-06-30 00:35:28 luke-jr has quit (otg!~luke-jr@2001:470:5:265:222:4dff:fe50:4c49|Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
  75 2011-06-30 00:35:29 <BlueMatt> doublec: you have two options, dynamic and static
  76 2011-06-30 00:35:40 <BlueMatt> static just means a hostname which points to static list of nodes
  77 2011-06-30 00:35:44 <gmaxwell> .au/.nz/asian hosting for one of them would be good too.
  78 2011-06-30 00:35:47 <gmaxwell> doublec: https://github.com/TheBlueMatt/dnsseed/tree/8c048acc283f68704ddc1ddd1f823fed5c8d97d2
  79 2011-06-30 00:35:52 <BlueMatt> obviously easier but not quite as good for network
  80 2011-06-30 00:35:59 <BlueMatt> or you can use the software gmaxwell just linked you
  81 2011-06-30 00:36:03 luke-jr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
  82 2011-06-30 00:36:15 <BlueMatt> which dynamically fills a db with nodes for your dns server to pull from
  83 2011-06-30 00:36:28 <BlueMatt> by traversing the network to find nodes which accept incoming connections
  84 2011-06-30 00:37:14 <Cryo> hmm interesting
  85 2011-06-30 00:37:24 <doublec> gmaxwell: ok, I'm about to head out - I'll ping you when I get back about it if that's ok
  86 2011-06-30 00:37:55 luke-jr has joined
  87 2011-06-30 00:38:01 <gmaxwell> doublec: yep sounds good.
  88 2011-06-30 00:38:16 folklore has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
  89 2011-06-30 00:38:46 <gmaxwell> It would be really nice to switch off of irc bootstrap.
  90 2011-06-30 00:39:15 luke-jr has joined
  91 2011-06-30 00:39:17 eoss has joined
  92 2011-06-30 00:40:18 folklore has joined
  93 2011-06-30 00:41:01 BlueMattBot has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
  94 2011-06-30 00:41:04 freakazoid has joined
  95 2011-06-30 00:41:59 <MacRohard> hmm i was just thinking.. bitcoin shopping card systems shoudl generate one time receipt addresses, but then immediately forward the money to fixed offline address
  96 2011-06-30 00:42:26 tandy80 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
  97 2011-06-30 00:43:38 luke-jr has quit (otg!~luke-jr@2001:470:5:265:222:4dff:fe50:4c49|Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
  98 2011-06-30 00:43:45 luke-jr_ has joined
  99 2011-06-30 00:43:56 luke-jr has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 100 2011-06-30 00:44:44 luke-jr has joined
 101 2011-06-30 00:45:55 <gmaxwell> MacRohard: its possible to create new addresses without access to the backing private keys, but software hasn't been written for that yet.
 102 2011-06-30 00:46:37 <MacRohard> gmaxwell, presumably only by storing a large number of pregenerated public keys?
 103 2011-06-30 00:46:41 <gmaxwell> No.
 104 2011-06-30 00:47:02 <gmaxwell> MacRohard: I describe it here http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=19137.0  (second section, the type-2)
 105 2011-06-30 00:47:32 lumos has joined
 106 2011-06-30 00:48:05 <MacRohard> hmm i see what you mean
 107 2011-06-30 00:48:27 gavinandresen has joined
 108 2011-06-30 00:48:59 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: what is the policy on contributors adding their own name to the copyright headers on files?
 109 2011-06-30 00:49:05 Kolky has quit (Quit: Bye bye!)
 110 2011-06-30 00:51:08 <Cryo> *cough*
 111 2011-06-30 00:51:25 <Cryo> transfer copyright to the bitcoin foundation is the correct answer.
 112 2011-06-30 00:51:26 Strom has joined
 113 2011-06-30 00:51:49 <MacRohard> can't it be public domain?
 114 2011-06-30 00:51:53 <BlueMatt> thats what I was thinking, but gavinandresen committed something that went against that earlier
 115 2011-06-30 00:51:54 TheZimm has joined
 116 2011-06-30 00:52:03 <BlueMatt> MacRohard: public domain isnt legal in some countries
 117 2011-06-30 00:52:18 <MacRohard> is that important?
 118 2011-06-30 00:52:19 <gavinandresen> BlueMatt: there is no policy.  I saw Doug's copyright on the osx instructions... meh, whatever is my attitude.
 119 2011-06-30 00:52:22 <BlueMatt> Cryo: well obviously it has to be MIT, but the question is can someone ask that their name be added to the copyright message
 120 2011-06-30 00:52:23 luke-jr has quit (otg!~luke-jr@2001:470:5:265:222:4dff:fe50:4c49|Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 121 2011-06-30 00:53:03 vigilyn has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 122 2011-06-30 00:53:08 <gavinandresen> Copyright for what?  code?  Code I want to stay as just "Bitcoin Developers"
 123 2011-06-30 00:53:22 <Cryo> you'll die from everyone wanting "This source code contains work by foobar (blah@boo.tld)."
 124 2011-06-30 00:53:32 Stellar has joined
 125 2011-06-30 00:53:32 <BlueMatt> ah, so code has to be bitcoin developers, but docs can be anything?
 126 2011-06-30 00:53:54 <gavinandresen> Ok, sure, that seems like a good policy :)
 127 2011-06-30 00:54:05 <BlueMatt> lol, ok then
 128 2011-06-30 00:54:25 luke-jr__ has joined
 129 2011-06-30 00:54:30 <gavinandresen> (I have a very low lawyer tolerance, which will bite me in the butt someday)
 130 2011-06-30 00:54:43 luke-jr_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 131 2011-06-30 00:55:01 vigilyn has joined
 132 2011-06-30 00:55:14 luke-jr has joined
 133 2011-06-30 00:55:21 pogden has joined
 134 2011-06-30 00:55:41 <BlueMatt> as a side note, I nominate gmaxwell for the bitcoin qa post, if hes willing and we get around to making the foundation
 135 2011-06-30 00:56:25 <b4epoche_> I don't want him testing my unit ;-)
 136 2011-06-30 00:56:31 <gavinandresen> "We" don't need a foundation to hire a QA team.  "We" just need money.
 137 2011-06-30 00:57:37 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: then post a donation address
 138 2011-06-30 00:57:51 <Cryo> wait, how did qa and foundation get confused?
 139 2011-06-30 00:58:11 <BlueMatt> I was thinking before we ask for money, foundation would be nice
 140 2011-06-30 00:58:15 <b4epoche_> eh, qa = quality assurance?
 141 2011-06-30 00:58:24 <BlueMatt> and if "we" were to hire devs, foundation would be nice to do it under
 142 2011-06-30 00:58:37 <BlueMatt> b4epoche_: yea, to make sure we stop regressing so damn much
 143 2011-06-30 00:58:48 distant187 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 144 2011-06-30 00:58:55 <b4epoche_> just making sure...  otherwise my jokes makes even less sense
 145 2011-06-30 00:59:32 BlueMattBot has joined
 146 2011-06-30 01:00:01 <b4epoche_> just make the default send address in the client a 'foundation' address
 147 2011-06-30 01:00:14 <BlueMatt> that would be kinda nasty
 148 2011-06-30 01:00:53 Pinion has joined
 149 2011-06-30 01:01:02 <sanity> what does the bitcoind API report about a transaction that turns out to be fraudulent?
 150 2011-06-30 01:01:25 <gavinandresen> sanity: 0/unconfirmed forever
 151 2011-06-30 01:01:58 <sanity> gavinandresen: so basically the number of confirmations goes from some number higher than 0 back to 0?
 152 2011-06-30 01:02:23 mikejs has left ()
 153 2011-06-30 01:02:53 luke-jr has quit (otg!~luke-jr@2001:470:5:265:222:4dff:fe50:4c49|Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 154 2011-06-30 01:02:55 <gavinandresen> sanity: depends on why it was 'fraudulent'.
 155 2011-06-30 01:03:00 <gmaxwell> depends on what you mean by fradulent.
 156 2011-06-30 01:03:29 <sanity> well, when a transaction is described as "confirmed" - what is it "confirmed" that it isn't?
 157 2011-06-30 01:03:32 <gmaxwell> If it was on a split chain, and the eventual real chain has a conflicting respend, then it will go from non-zero to zero.
 158 2011-06-30 01:03:41 <sanity> gmaxwell: i see
 159 2011-06-30 01:03:46 redengin has joined
 160 2011-06-30 01:04:00 luke-jr has joined
 161 2011-06-30 01:04:04 luke-jr__ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 162 2011-06-30 01:04:10 <sanity> gmaxwell: is there a guaranteed time window within which a transaction, if valid, will have one or more confirmations?
 163 2011-06-30 01:04:15 luke-jr has joined
 164 2011-06-30 01:04:17 <gmaxwell> sanity: If you have not, you should read the bitcoin paper: http://www.bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
 165 2011-06-30 01:04:23 <sanity> gmaxwell: I have
 166 2011-06-30 01:04:26 Katapult has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 167 2011-06-30 01:04:38 <Cryo> the math is killer
 168 2011-06-30 01:04:53 <sanity> gmaxwell: i understand the theory, i'm just not clear on how bitcoind presents what has happened through the json-rpc API.  the API is rather under-documented :-/
 169 2011-06-30 01:04:57 <gmaxwell> sanity: no, because there are no promises that any miners will confirm it even if it is valid.
 170 2011-06-30 01:05:04 <Cryo> I'm still choking on satoshi-san's paper
 171 2011-06-30 01:05:10 lolwat` has joined
 172 2011-06-30 01:05:27 <ewal> sanity: no, no guarenteed time.  confirmation means miner found a block (and included the transaction).  since there is no guarentee how long it will take for a miner to find a block (only probabilities), there can be no guarenteed time for confirmations
 173 2011-06-30 01:05:41 <lolwat`> when will nLockTime work?
 174 2011-06-30 01:05:50 <sanity> ewal: is there a practical time within which you can be reasonably sure?
 175 2011-06-30 01:05:55 <gmaxwell> sanity: once a transaction gets its _first_ confirmation, they all procede linearly with the block count from there. unless its subject to some unequal chain split.
 176 2011-06-30 01:06:06 <sanity> gmaxwell: right, which is once every 10 minutes, approximately
 177 2011-06-30 01:06:29 <gmaxwell> sanity: on a quite long term average at least.
 178 2011-06-30 01:06:56 <ewal> sanity: if a transaction has sufficient priority (tx fees, age of inputs, etc), and the sending node has good connectivity to the network, the average time for the first confirmation should be 10 minutes
 179 2011-06-30 01:06:57 <sanity> so the only indication that a client was following a chain that later turned out to be invalid, is that the number of confirmations will suddenly decrease?
 180 2011-06-30 01:07:11 <sanity> ewal: gotchya
 181 2011-06-30 01:07:20 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: why don't we have some status "confirmed/-1" which says the txn is _conflicted_ by the current longest chain?
 182 2011-06-30 01:07:37 <gmaxwell> sanity: no, usually won't decrease.
 183 2011-06-30 01:07:38 <sanity> gmaxwell: that is what i was hoping for
 184 2011-06-30 01:07:40 <b4epoche_> confirmed/-1 = denied
 185 2011-06-30 01:07:51 <sanity> denied? what does that mean?
 186 2011-06-30 01:08:00 <lolwat`> why are there any min fees
 187 2011-06-30 01:08:11 <b4epoche_> denied = -confirmed
 188 2011-06-30 01:08:12 <lolwat`> why not just limit the block size and fees be an auction to jam as much shit into a block as you can
 189 2011-06-30 01:08:18 <gmaxwell> sanity: Usually the confirmations doesn't decrease when there is a split because the other chain contains mostly the same transactions
 190 2011-06-30 01:08:26 <ewal> lolwat`: to discourage spam transactions
 191 2011-06-30 01:08:40 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: it is limited, and it is an auction.
 192 2011-06-30 01:08:49 <sanity> gmaxwell: has there been examples of fraudulent transactions "in the wild"?  how long did their chains get before they were invalidated?
 193 2011-06-30 01:08:51 <lolwat`> last time I looked at source it wasn't simple
 194 2011-06-30 01:08:58 <lolwat`> it gave priorities for different reasons
 195 2011-06-30 01:09:08 <b4epoche_> what's preventing someone from building a client with no tx fees and then spamming?
 196 2011-06-30 01:09:13 <gmaxwell> But someon can flood the network with thousands of txn per second which would still need to be forwarded and memory pooled by everyone only to always lose the aution.
 197 2011-06-30 01:09:18 luke-jr has quit (otg!~luke-jr@2001:470:5:265:222:4dff:fe50:4c49|Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 198 2011-06-30 01:09:18 <lolwat`> why should it be anything other than packing them into the block prioritized by fee per KB?
 199 2011-06-30 01:09:21 <ewal> b4epoche_: other nodes won't relay the transactions
 200 2011-06-30 01:09:37 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, why fwd a tx that loses your auction?
 201 2011-06-30 01:09:39 <gmaxwell> sanity: I think you should stop saying "fraudulent transactions" because it's confusing you. :)
 202 2011-06-30 01:09:49 <sanity> gmaxwell: ok :-)
 203 2011-06-30 01:09:53 luke-jr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 204 2011-06-30 01:09:55 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: memory usage.
 205 2011-06-30 01:10:01 <lolwat`> ?
 206 2011-06-30 01:10:07 <sanity> gmaxwell: i mean, transactions which later are not part of the longest chain
 207 2011-06-30 01:10:39 <gavinandresen> sanity: you mean transactions that lose a double-spend race?
 208 2011-06-30 01:10:45 <sanity> gavinandresen: yes
 209 2011-06-30 01:11:05 <sanity> gavinandresen: have they happened in the wild?
 210 2011-06-30 01:11:17 kon is now known as Kothar
 211 2011-06-30 01:11:32 <lolwat`> another basic architecture question
 212 2011-06-30 01:11:40 <gavinandresen> sanity: darn good question... I think there was a website detecting attempted double-spends, but I can't recall the URL....
 213 2011-06-30 01:11:52 <lolwat`> why not have the merkleroot be the merkleroot of the *ENTIRE OPEN TX TREE*
 214 2011-06-30 01:12:00 <sanity> gavinandresen: i see, but evidently they aren't common
 215 2011-06-30 01:12:10 <lolwat`> then everyone needs only hold O(1) space
 216 2011-06-30 01:12:13 <lolwat`> the merkleroot
 217 2011-06-30 01:12:27 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: in bitcoin for most cases the open txn actually doesn't matter for lite node validations.
 218 2011-06-30 01:12:31 <sanity> gavinandresen: I'm working on a project where fast transactions are important.  I'm trying to figure out how fast i can make them :-)
 219 2011-06-30 01:12:34 <lolwat`> to make a TX you include branch off merkleroot
 220 2011-06-30 01:12:49 <lolwat`> this would make data transfer for TX increase by factor of log(n)
 221 2011-06-30 01:12:56 <lolwat`> but would mean you dont need to store *any* blockchain
 222 2011-06-30 01:12:58 <lolwat`> just the head
 223 2011-06-30 01:13:20 <sanity> i guess it raises another question: if it takes around an hour to confirm a bitcoin transaction, they aren't really a valid substitute for credit cards, for example
 224 2011-06-30 01:13:22 <gavinandresen> sanity: if you can guarantee good connectivity to the bitcoin network and your transactions are low-value enough that the Finney Attack doesn't make sense.....
 225 2011-06-30 01:13:28 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: and you don't more than the open txn once you've already validated them.
 226 2011-06-30 01:13:36 <sanity> gavinandresen: Hal Finney?
 227 2011-06-30 01:13:48 <b4epoche_> sanity:  my understanding is you're not going to get 'fast' tx's
 228 2011-06-30 01:13:53 <gavinandresen> sanity: then tens seconds or so should be plenty.  And yes, Hal on the forums is Hal Finney
 229 2011-06-30 01:13:56 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, in this scheme you store *NOTHING*, just the tip block header
 230 2011-06-30 01:14:04 <lolwat`> O(1) space nothing more
 231 2011-06-30 01:14:16 <sanity> gavinandresen: funny, he used to do a lot of stuff with another project i started
 232 2011-06-30 01:14:31 <gmaxwell> sanity: no, they can back credit card like things, or you can use other methods to quick validate transactions (escrow txn, and monitoring/insurance services).
 233 2011-06-30 01:14:39 <lolwat`> when you broadcast a block, you are updating the entire merkle tree, so you hand off merkle branches for the updated leaves
 234 2011-06-30 01:14:40 <sanity> gavinandresen: but its about an hour, right?
 235 2011-06-30 01:14:43 <sacarlson> sanity: I had what I would guess was a double spend event on testnet some time back that made 50 of my testnetBTC disapear not sure it was permanent or not
 236 2011-06-30 01:14:44 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: you still must store the open txn and the headers.
 237 2011-06-30 01:14:47 <gavinandresen> sanity:  ... although thinking about it, at better way to do it would be to try to get a couple hundred connections into the network to guage whether or not a double-spend is being accepted by most of the network or not.
 238 2011-06-30 01:14:49 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, no
 239 2011-06-30 01:14:59 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: Yes.
 240 2011-06-30 01:15:07 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, no, why?
 241 2011-06-30 01:15:39 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, a spender needs to give you a merkle branch from the current block header's merkle root proving his tx is in the open tx tree
 242 2011-06-30 01:15:42 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=21995.0 < Here is where I advocate holding the root of open txn, btw, because its actually very important for namecoin, but not really for bitcoin.
 243 2011-06-30 01:16:16 <lolwat`> yeah I saw that but I don't think you went all the way with it
 244 2011-06-30 01:16:38 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, explain why you store anything more than the block header if you're a miner
 245 2011-06-30 01:16:42 <lolwat`> in that model
 246 2011-06-30 01:17:03 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: Because you can't compute the whole merkle tree for open txn without having the entire set of validated open txn.
 247 2011-06-30 01:17:14 <gavinandresen> sanity: I think there might be a good business for the first person to tackle and solve the 'fast transaction' problem.
 248 2011-06-30 01:17:31 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, you just store the root, and when someone wants to spend a coin, they need to hand you the merklebranch off that merkleroot proving its in the tree
 249 2011-06-30 01:18:22 <sanity> gavinandresen: sure, its easy to do with centralization.  centralization is no fun though :-)
 250 2011-06-30 01:18:26 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: Sweet, how do they get the branch?
 251 2011-06-30 01:18:30 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, so a "block" in this scheme is a new merkle root hash and a list of the exact tree operations you performed
 252 2011-06-30 01:18:40 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, you store your branches for your coins
 253 2011-06-30 01:18:59 Katapult has joined
 254 2011-06-30 01:20:05 dr_win has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 255 2011-06-30 01:20:09 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: great, so someone gives me a new txn, and proves to me it was open in the prior block. How do I compute the new root without knowing the rest of the tree?
 256 2011-06-30 01:20:12 <gavinandresen> lolwat`: interesting idea.  So new "new transaction" message that contains txn and merkle roots for spent inputs...
 257 2011-06-30 01:20:20 Lexikahn has joined
 258 2011-06-30 01:20:24 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: see my forum post.
 259 2011-06-30 01:20:40 <gmaxwell> (http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=21995.0)
 260 2011-06-30 01:21:17 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, because a merklebranch ahs the siblings
 261 2011-06-30 01:21:26 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
 262 2011-06-30 01:21:43 <lolwat`> gavinandresen, er branches for spent inputs yes
 263 2011-06-30 01:22:16 <gavinandresen> (right, branches...)
 264 2011-06-30 01:22:18 Leo_II has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 265 2011-06-30 01:22:26 <lolwat`> so there is one problem
 266 2011-06-30 01:22:40 <lolwat`> if I go away
 267 2011-06-30 01:22:43 <lolwat`> the merkle path to my coins can change
 268 2011-06-30 01:22:47 davex__ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 269 2011-06-30 01:22:50 <gmaxwell> You'll never be able to get your stub back, yea.
 270 2011-06-30 01:22:57 <lolwat`> and I can't spend them until I get the new path
 271 2011-06-30 01:22:59 <gmaxwell> except by ... having the whole blockchain and replaying it all.
 272 2011-06-30 01:23:02 yellowhat has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 273 2011-06-30 01:23:03 <lolwat`> no
 274 2011-06-30 01:23:11 <lolwat`> so someone would need to store it
 275 2011-06-30 01:23:15 <gmaxwell> (so much for the space savings)
 276 2011-06-30 01:23:16 <lolwat`> but the point is, not everyone
 277 2011-06-30 01:23:22 meLon has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 278 2011-06-30 01:23:28 <gavinandresen> yeah, miners still need the entire block chain.
 279 2011-06-30 01:23:28 <gmaxwell> Not everyone needs to store it all now either.
 280 2011-06-30 01:23:38 <lolwat`> gavinandresen, no they dont
 281 2011-06-30 01:23:56 <gmaxwell> actually the miners don't, weirdly enough. But somone does.
 282 2011-06-30 01:24:36 <gavinandresen> Sure they do-- just because a transaction was open in block 11 doesn't help.  It might have been spent in block 42 (and now we're at block 666....)
 283 2011-06-30 01:24:37 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: you'd also have issues where a TXN must be constantly recreated when it fails to get into the most recent block, because it's tree stub will get broken.
 284 2011-06-30 01:24:50 <lolwat`> gavinandresen, basically you would have three choices: store the entire blockchain as now, stay online so you can see when your merkle siblings change, or pay someone else to keep track of your merkle branches for you
 285 2011-06-30 01:25:02 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: for a block to get into N they must provide a tree stub against the open txn summay in N-1.
 286 2011-06-30 01:25:18 <gavinandresen> ah, you're talking about a different merkle tree than the one we have now.
 287 2011-06-30 01:25:30 <gmaxwell> yes, one over the non-redeemed outputs.
 288 2011-06-30 01:25:33 <lolwat`> gavinandresen, maybe you missed the start, in this scheme the merkleroot represents the a hash tree of *ALL OPEN TX*
 289 2011-06-30 01:26:34 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, the thing is in this scheme there can be a few people storing the tree and answering merkle branch queries, even for a fee maybe
 290 2011-06-30 01:26:42 <gmaxwell> So to spend you'd provide a copy of your inputs, and then tree fragments to prove they were part of the open txn set in the prior block.
 291 2011-06-30 01:26:56 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, the point is NOT everyone would need to store the tree, most importantly NOT EVEN VERIFIERS
 292 2011-06-30 01:27:02 <gavinandresen> uh-huh.  I've been kind of actively ignoring spiffy new schemes for ultra-optimization because we haven't even done the dumb optimizations yet.
 293 2011-06-30 01:27:21 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, which is very important because as of now, you can't verify tx in "light mode".  In this mode, you can still verify txs
 294 2011-06-30 01:27:32 davex__ has joined
 295 2011-06-30 01:27:40 <dongs> who the fuck is lolwat
 296 2011-06-30 01:27:43 <dongs> thats my trademark
 297 2011-06-30 01:27:49 <lolwat`> lolumadbro
 298 2011-06-30 01:27:49 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: in any case, namecoin has an urgent need for an open txn tree, because you can't build a lite namecoin node using the bitcoin way of doing things.
 299 2011-06-30 01:27:59 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: so that would be a good excuse to start implementing this.
 300 2011-06-30 01:28:04 dr_win has joined
 301 2011-06-30 01:28:05 <lolwat`> i dont know much about namecoin
 302 2011-06-30 01:28:12 <lolwat`> stopped reading when they said they made their own blockchain
 303 2011-06-30 01:28:15 <dongs> lolwat`: ah another pumper i see
 304 2011-06-30 01:28:39 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: of course isn't another blockchain, it's for name registration, we don't want that shit flooding bitcoin.
 305 2011-06-30 01:28:44 <lolwat`> I had a design for something like namecoin but more general, arbitrary highly replicated storage
 306 2011-06-30 01:29:11 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, but you can still make it easy for miners to verify both simultaneously
 307 2011-06-30 01:29:34 <gmaxwell> in any case, the problem for namecoin is that a node can't give you a name not found result without having seen the whole history. So no trustless lite nodes.
 308 2011-06-30 01:29:43 <lolwat`> gmaxwell,  you don't need much to flood bitcoin, just a merkleroot.
 309 2011-06-30 01:29:47 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: thats planned for namecoin. Should be there in a few months as I understand it.
 310 2011-06-30 01:30:07 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, what exactly
 311 2011-06-30 01:30:13 <lolwat`> store merkleroot in bitcoin blockchain?
 312 2011-06-30 01:30:18 <lolwat`> so miners can hash it?
 313 2011-06-30 01:30:28 <lolwat`> this is a workaround
 314 2011-06-30 01:30:40 <gmaxwell> kinda, it's more a checkpoint procedure.
 315 2011-06-30 01:30:51 <lolwat`> the correct fix is to recognize bitcoin is a special case of this thing too
 316 2011-06-30 01:31:07 <lolwat`> and the general case is maintenance of a log-structured filesystem
 317 2011-06-30 01:31:17 koleg has quit (work!~kvirc@89.151.191.66|Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 318 2011-06-30 01:31:22 <lolwat`> bitcoin/namecoin are special cases
 319 2011-06-30 01:31:50 lumos is now known as chanoppp
 320 2011-06-30 01:31:50 <lolwat`> the right way is to allow people to mine a collection of named "filesystem heads" mapping names to merkleroots
 321 2011-06-30 01:31:59 chanoppp is now known as moderator
 322 2011-06-30 01:32:07 moderator is now known as m0derator
 323 2011-06-30 01:32:12 <lolwat`> bitcoin fs would point to tx log
 324 2011-06-30 01:32:18 <lolwat`> namecoin fs would point to name registratoin db
 325 2011-06-30 01:32:24 <lolwat`> whateverelse would point to whateverelse
 326 2011-06-30 01:32:41 koleg has joined
 327 2011-06-30 01:33:20 <gmaxwell> in any case, what you're proposting is _far_ from trivial. If the miner does't have the complete open txn set, then it's likely that your txn gets invalidated every block and would need to be reissued if it didn't make it in.
 328 2011-06-30 01:33:24 <b4epoche_> bitcoin fuse?
 329 2011-06-30 01:33:50 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, I dont understand
 330 2011-06-30 01:35:33 <gmaxwell> you provide the tree fragment connecting you to the root in block N.  You don't make it to a miner in time for N, we're now at N+1. Your fragment no longer correctly connects you to the root in N+1. The miner can't reconstruct it because he doesn't have the open txn.
 331 2011-06-30 01:35:51 <lolwat`> er
 332 2011-06-30 01:36:03 <lolwat`> if he verified getting from N to N+1
 333 2011-06-30 01:36:08 meLon has joined
 334 2011-06-30 01:36:15 <lolwat`> then he already has the path
 335 2011-06-30 01:36:41 RBecker has joined
 336 2011-06-30 01:36:47 pogden has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
 337 2011-06-30 01:36:48 <lolwat`> so
 338 2011-06-30 01:37:00 <lolwat`> a miner needs to keep track of merkle branches to txes in his memory pool
 339 2011-06-30 01:37:07 pogden has joined
 340 2011-06-30 01:37:09 <lolwat`> or he can forget about them but wont earn the fee
 341 2011-06-30 01:37:11 <gmaxwell> hm that would require blocks to repeat the inputs and the input fragments in addition to the outputs.
 342 2011-06-30 01:37:35 <lolwat`> huh?
 343 2011-06-30 01:37:42 <gmaxwell> (in the full block data, otherwise memoryless miners can't validate them)
 344 2011-06-30 01:38:04 Leo_II has joined
 345 2011-06-30 01:38:14 <lolwat`> i dont understand
 346 2011-06-30 01:38:19 <gmaxwell> You mined a block. You give it to me, How do I know its correct? you have to give me eveything you needed to know to mine it.
 347 2011-06-30 01:38:20 <lolwat`> when i give you a merkle branch
 348 2011-06-30 01:38:22 <lolwat`> it has that stuff in it
 349 2011-06-30 01:38:27 <lolwat`> yes exactly
 350 2011-06-30 01:38:43 RenaKunisaki has joined
 351 2011-06-30 01:38:57 zapnap has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 352 2011-06-30 01:39:11 <lolwat`> a "block" is a change of merkle root, together with a FULL proof including all info needed to verify that old root -> new root was a valid state transformation
 353 2011-06-30 01:39:31 <gmaxwell> Yes, thats what I'm saying, thats a lot more data than curently required.
 354 2011-06-30 01:39:43 <gmaxwell> So this trades off additional network bandwidth for storage.
 355 2011-06-30 01:39:46 <lolwat`> right
 356 2011-06-30 01:39:55 <lolwat`> bandwidth overhead would not be much
 357 2011-06-30 01:40:03 <lolwat`> factor of 2 or so using b-trees
 358 2011-06-30 01:40:06 <lolwat`> for the merkle trees
 359 2011-06-30 01:40:19 <lolwat`> use 2x more bandwidth in exchange for exponential reduction in storage...
 360 2011-06-30 01:40:21 <gmaxwell> Well you get a factor of two _minimum_ just from having to state the inputs.
 361 2011-06-30 01:40:26 davex__ has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
 362 2011-06-30 01:40:29 <gmaxwell> Lots of txn have many inputs too.
 363 2011-06-30 01:40:53 <lolwat`> yeah I mean if bandwidth is currently a bottleneck
 364 2011-06-30 01:40:54 <gmaxwell> I don't know what the average is... but I suspect it's closer to three than two.
 365 2011-06-30 01:40:55 <lolwat`> then this is no good
 366 2011-06-30 01:41:03 <lolwat`> yeah 3 is more likely
 367 2011-06-30 01:42:10 <lolwat`> gavinandresen, when will the random script verification hacks be removed? like disabling nLockTime and only allowing "simple" input scripts? this prevents all kinds of uses
 368 2011-06-30 01:42:43 <gmaxwell> I don't think nLockTime is disabled, is it? replacement is disabled.
 369 2011-06-30 01:43:01 <gmaxwell> It's certantly validated that nlocktime isn't violated in mined blocks.
 370 2011-06-30 01:43:09 <lfm> lolwat`: when it is shown/known that they cant be abused!
 371 2011-06-30 01:43:33 <lolwat`> well that sucks
 372 2011-06-30 01:43:35 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: someone needs to carefully prove that the disabled opcodes are safe for example.
 373 2011-06-30 01:43:50 <lolwat`> so
 374 2011-06-30 01:43:56 <lolwat`> how do they hurt anyone who doesn't use them
 375 2011-06-30 01:44:09 Gonzago has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
 376 2011-06-30 01:44:30 <lfm> lolwat`: if baddies can make "special" scripts to fould up the net of course
 377 2011-06-30 01:44:31 <gavinandresen> lolwat`: yup.  Show they're safe and useful on testnet, get general consensus that they're safe and useful, and then they'll get enabled on the main network.
 378 2011-06-30 01:44:32 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: like this: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Incidents#LSHIFT_and_RETURN_bugs
 379 2011-06-30 01:44:33 Tabmow has left ()
 380 2011-06-30 01:44:56 <gavinandresen> lolwat`:   See http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=4723.msg69022#msg69022
 381 2011-06-30 01:45:23 <lolwat`> the whole replacement thing is kind of weird imo a OP_TIME in the tx script to push the current time on the stack is more straightforward IMO
 382 2011-06-30 01:46:01 <lolwat`> but perhaps I'm missing something..
 383 2011-06-30 01:46:13 <lfm> show you cant make stacks overflow then?
 384 2011-06-30 01:46:44 <lolwat`> i don't understand this shift thing
 385 2011-06-30 01:46:45 <gavinandresen> It is very hard to get the core stuff exactly perfectly right.  OP_TIME is probably a very bad idea (because time in bitcoin is a very fuzzy concept)
 386 2011-06-30 01:47:13 <gmaxwell> Height is better than time.
 387 2011-06-30 01:47:16 <lolwat`> gavinandresen, could have OP_TIME or OP_BLOCKNUMBER to push blocknumber.  I agree it's fuzzy, but nLockTime supports it so its no different in that sense
 388 2011-06-30 01:47:39 <gmaxwell> it's not subject to stupidity like miners lying about the time in order to grab a txn fee on a block with a time limit. :)
 389 2011-06-30 01:47:55 <lolwat`> well if they do that it wont be accepted
 390 2011-06-30 01:48:06 Gonzago has joined
 391 2011-06-30 01:48:11 <gmaxwell> locktime only allows you to set the earliest time, not the latest.
 392 2011-06-30 01:48:32 <gmaxwell> The latest time has some weird properties like if you refuse to accept a txn for long enough it might not ever be accepted.
 393 2011-06-30 01:48:33 <lolwat`> is there something you can do with nLockTime/sequence numbers that you can't do with an OP_TIME/OP_BLOCKNUM?
 394 2011-06-30 01:48:37 wolfspraul has joined
 395 2011-06-30 01:48:44 <lfm> and fuzzing the time by 30 min is acceptable to most nodes
 396 2011-06-30 01:48:46 <gmaxwell> ^ that.
 397 2011-06-30 01:49:04 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, right but if you're hashing on a tx that is too early, that is a risk, you could score a block but noone would accept it because its not time yet
 398 2011-06-30 01:49:15 <jgarzik> lolwat`: OP_BLOCKNUMBER has known problems
 399 2011-06-30 01:49:26 <lolwat`> yeah this is another bad thing it should really use NTP
 400 2011-06-30 01:49:32 <gmaxwell> well you know what they'll accept timewise the rules need to be clear to prevnet splits.
 401 2011-06-30 01:50:00 <lfm> we do use ntp, you still cant enforce a block time more than a few minutes
 402 2011-06-30 01:50:00 <gmaxwell> NTP is not distributed, it would make the system vulnerable to depend on it.
 403 2011-06-30 01:50:04 <lolwat`> jgarzik, like? and are these problems that aren't in nLockTime?
 404 2011-06-30 01:50:19 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: I just pointed out an example!
 405 2011-06-30 01:50:32 Joric has left ()
 406 2011-06-30 01:50:39 sabalaba has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 407 2011-06-30 01:50:46 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, I dont see it
 408 2011-06-30 01:50:54 <gavinandresen> lolwat`: until the professional cryptographers get around to publishing an analysis of our existing opcodes I'm going to vote against adding more.
 409 2011-06-30 01:51:04 <BlueMatt> the problem with latest time isnt that it might not be accepted after a time (as that would be the goal) its that if a chain reorg happns a tx might become invalid after being valid
 410 2011-06-30 01:51:07 <lolwat`> ugh
 411 2011-06-30 01:51:15 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: nlocktime is one sided. OP_BLOCKNUMBER could be use to say say "no outputs after block 100".  We're at 90 now. I get a txn to spend it.. but I refuse to mine it because I'd rather it not get spent.
 412 2011-06-30 01:51:21 <BlueMatt> hence why satoshi specifically prevented a max time
 413 2011-06-30 01:51:34 <lfm> tx dont have timestamps at all
 414 2011-06-30 01:51:37 <BlueMatt> (and why it could potentially become a real problem)
 415 2011-06-30 01:51:41 <gmaxwell> ohh...
 416 2011-06-30 01:51:54 <jgarzik> lolwat`: see relevant thread, including satoshi comments: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=1786.msg22119#msg22119
 417 2011-06-30 01:51:56 <lolwat`> I'm not a professional cryptographer just a grad student with decent crypto knowledge, but these op codes would be very very useful
 418 2011-06-30 01:52:09 <lolwat`> I made a thread pointing out something you can do let me find ot
 419 2011-06-30 01:52:30 <lolwat`> http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=22581.0
 420 2011-06-30 01:52:46 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: thanks for the OP_BLOCKNUMBER thread.
 421 2011-06-30 01:53:05 kermit has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
 422 2011-06-30 01:53:06 <lolwat`> this is extremely important, the ability to do what I describe there is the *entire purpose* of cryptomoney: letting people transfer money for information without trust
 423 2011-06-30 01:53:32 <lolwat`> in general two parties A and B can exchange secrets SA and SB without any trust
 424 2011-06-30 01:53:42 <lolwat`> by proving to each other in zero knowledge they have the secrets
 425 2011-06-30 01:53:47 <lolwat`> trading the first bit
 426 2011-06-30 01:54:03 kermit has joined
 427 2011-06-30 01:54:08 <lolwat`> and then proving again in zero knowledge there is a secret matching that bit
 428 2011-06-30 01:54:10 kermit has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 429 2011-06-30 01:54:13 <lolwat`> then repeating
 430 2011-06-30 01:54:29 <lolwat`> the whole point of crypto-money is to let you use the same protocol to trade money for secrets
 431 2011-06-30 01:54:43 <BlueMatt> it is?
 432 2011-06-30 01:54:45 <gmaxwell> I think the whole point of crypto-money is ponies.
 433 2011-06-30 01:54:51 <gmaxwell> The blockchain should include ponies.
 434 2011-06-30 01:54:55 <gmaxwell> Ponies for everyone.
 435 2011-06-30 01:54:57 <BlueMatt> I think its to have crypto money
 436 2011-06-30 01:55:08 kermit has joined
 437 2011-06-30 01:55:12 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: no no. Crypto money with ponies.
 438 2011-06-30 01:55:20 <jgarzik> OP_PONY
 439 2011-06-30 01:55:25 <BlueMatt> I prefer with leprechauns, but pony works too
 440 2011-06-30 01:55:38 <phantomcircuit> gavinandresen, simply splitting up OP_CHECKSIG into 2 op codes would have a massive effect
 441 2011-06-30 01:55:52 <BlueMatt> phantomcircuit: wrt?
 442 2011-06-30 01:55:56 <lolwat`> there isn't much info on this shift bug
 443 2011-06-30 01:56:00 <jgarzik> phantomcircuit: Priority := Low
 444 2011-06-30 01:56:03 <lolwat`> how was lshift crashing machines
 445 2011-06-30 01:56:07 <jgarzik> "massive effect" on a non-problem
 446 2011-06-30 01:56:19 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: zero knoweldge information transfer is mostly of purely academic interest because you can't normally prove that you're actually transfering the information someone wants (and not junk) for most kinds of information.
 447 2011-06-30 01:56:19 <phantomcircuit> OP_CHECKSIG actually does 2 things it hashes the transaction and then checks the sig
 448 2011-06-30 01:56:25 <phantomcircuit> those should be 2 different ops
 449 2011-06-30 01:56:36 <jgarzik> and it's rather late to fix now
 450 2011-06-30 01:56:37 dbasch has quit (Quit: dbasch)
 451 2011-06-30 01:56:38 m0derator is now known as lumos
 452 2011-06-30 01:57:14 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, you can do it for any information verifiable by a computer
 453 2011-06-30 01:57:41 <BlueMatt> phantomcircuit: maybe satoshi never wanted pubkeys in the blocks until they have been used?
 454 2011-06-30 01:57:43 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, so you can trade money for solutions to problems, breaking crypto keys, etc
 455 2011-06-30 01:57:46 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: right, but the computer can't tell "hot babes.jpg" from "goatse.jpg"
 456 2011-06-30 01:57:48 <BlueMatt> but what does it give you anyway?
 457 2011-06-30 01:58:06 <phantomcircuit> blueadept, you wouldn't need to have pubkeys in the blocks until they're used
 458 2011-06-30 01:58:11 <phantomcircuit> BlueMatt, ^
 459 2011-06-30 01:58:16 <jgarzik> yep
 460 2011-06-30 01:58:25 <jgarzik> hash is safer and smaller
 461 2011-06-30 01:58:32 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: not having the pubkeys published makes the system somewhat more resistant to attacks on the asymetric crypto.
 462 2011-06-30 01:58:40 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: yea, thats my point
 463 2011-06-30 01:58:45 HardDisk_WP has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 464 2011-06-30 01:58:45 <BlueMatt> oh, nvm
 465 2011-06-30 01:58:46 <phantomcircuit> ffs im not saying to put the pubkey in the output script
 466 2011-06-30 01:59:02 <BlueMatt> no wait, we currently do that
 467 2011-06-30 01:59:09 <BlueMatt> Im saying what would it offer if we changed it?
 468 2011-06-30 01:59:15 <lfm> lolwat`: you can verify it after you can read it. thats normal
 469 2011-06-30 01:59:24 <phantomcircuit> im saying that the hashing of the transaction should be should be a separate op from the signature checking
 470 2011-06-30 01:59:31 <phantomcircuit> they're logically separate actions
 471 2011-06-30 01:59:34 kermit has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 472 2011-06-30 01:59:38 <gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: why does it matter though?
 473 2011-06-30 01:59:42 <BlueMatt> too late, and it offers no advantage
 474 2011-06-30 01:59:44 Joric has joined
 475 2011-06-30 01:59:45 <BlueMatt> even if it is more logical
 476 2011-06-30 01:59:46 <phantomcircuit> i forget lol
 477 2011-06-30 01:59:54 <gmaxwell> oh fffs.. get out.
 478 2011-06-30 01:59:54 <Joric> which one should i use? https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Category:Shopping_Cart_Interfaces
 479 2011-06-30 02:00:03 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, that is not clear to me at all.  i strongly suspect future computer vision algs to distinguish goatse from hot girls, in which case, you could encode that algorithm in a ZKP
 480 2011-06-30 02:00:06 <phantomcircuit> i had a scheme devised to use something other than pub key crypto iirc
 481 2011-06-30 02:00:07 MtGox_Adam has joined
 482 2011-06-30 02:00:31 <BlueMatt> oh
 483 2011-06-30 02:00:33 <phantomcircuit> MtGox_Adam, afternoon?
 484 2011-06-30 02:00:41 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: and then have every system in the bitcoin network all run the proof?
 485 2011-06-30 02:00:52 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, no thats the point people do these things offline
 486 2011-06-30 02:00:59 <phantomcircuit> BlueMatt, yeah that was it, if i had an OP_HASHTRANS i could devise a simple method using static keys
 487 2011-06-30 02:01:06 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: then you just use regular escrow for it.
 488 2011-06-30 02:01:07 <phantomcircuit> which would be a fuck ton faster than ecdsa
 489 2011-06-30 02:01:08 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, you can distill it down to trading money for a hash
 490 2011-06-30 02:01:22 <BlueMatt> phantomcircuit: and how would such a system work?
 491 2011-06-30 02:01:23 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, no, I can transform any money-for-info scheme to a money-for-hash scheme
 492 2011-06-30 02:01:33 <phantomcircuit> BlueMatt, i forget i had it all written down
 493 2011-06-30 02:01:38 <phantomcircuit> somewhere...
 494 2011-06-30 02:01:41 <BlueMatt> seems...not right
 495 2011-06-30 02:01:55 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, suppose I want to sell you an input x to some function f s.t. f(x) = 1
 496 2011-06-30 02:02:02 <gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: how do your have a third party mine it without stealing the money?
 497 2011-06-30 02:02:18 noagendamarket has joined
 498 2011-06-30 02:02:19 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, I pick a key K and send you y = ENC(K,x), and h = HASH(K)
 499 2011-06-30 02:02:29 <phantomcircuit> it was a proof of knowledge not a simple key in the transaction
 500 2011-06-30 02:02:42 <phantomcircuit> ill find it and post on the forum
 501 2011-06-30 02:02:42 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, I then prove to you in zero knowledge that there exists K s.t. f(DEC(K,y)) = 1 and h = HASH(k)
 502 2011-06-30 02:03:00 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, then we trade inverting H for money, which can be written to the blockchain as in that post I linked
 503 2011-06-30 02:03:08 Guest73569 has joined
 504 2011-06-30 02:03:16 <BlueMatt> phantomcircuit: you can do proof of knowledge on symmetric key?
 505 2011-06-30 02:03:39 <BlueMatt> I suppose some special algo?
 506 2011-06-30 02:04:01 <phantomcircuit> yeah it was hilariously convoluted
 507 2011-06-30 02:04:15 <BlueMatt> seems like it wouldnt be a ton faster than ecdsa
 508 2011-06-30 02:04:44 <lolwat`> phantomcircuit, BlueMatt what are you trying to speed up?
 509 2011-06-30 02:04:57 luke-jr has joined
 510 2011-06-30 02:04:59 <lfm> and if it uses extra communication handshakes then its no go
 511 2011-06-30 02:05:00 <BlueMatt> lolwat`: checking of sigs on transactions
 512 2011-06-30 02:05:03 somuchwin has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 513 2011-06-30 02:05:15 luke-jr has joined
 514 2011-06-30 02:05:39 TheSeven has quit (Disconnected by services)
 515 2011-06-30 02:05:53 [7] has joined
 516 2011-06-30 02:05:54 <Joric> downloading is very slow and uses disk as crazy, are you planning to fix it? bittorent does all that just fine
 517 2011-06-30 02:06:11 <BlueMatt> bittorrent is *very* different than bitcoin
 518 2011-06-30 02:06:17 somuchwin has joined
 519 2011-06-30 02:06:18 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: show me how to do these zero knoweldge proofs for random complicated non-linear functions.
 520 2011-06-30 02:06:29 <BlueMatt> Joric: but yea, its on the todo list
 521 2011-06-30 02:06:49 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, er you can prove anything in ZK
 522 2011-06-30 02:06:53 Guest73569 is now known as MBS
 523 2011-06-30 02:07:01 MBS has quit (Changing host)
 524 2011-06-30 02:07:01 MBS has joined
 525 2011-06-30 02:07:12 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, infact you can prove anything that you could normally "prove" just by writing a proof, with only one round of interaction in ZK
 526 2011-06-30 02:07:17 <lfm> prove 0==1
 527 2011-06-30 02:07:30 <lolwat`> lfm, prove anything provable
 528 2011-06-30 02:07:34 <lolwat`> infact that is the title of the paper
 529 2011-06-30 02:07:50 <lolwat`> http://crypto.cs.mcgill.ca/~crepeau/COMP647/2007/TOPIC04/BGGHKMR89.pdf
 530 2011-06-30 02:08:22 <jgarzik> Joric: bittorrent does not solve the validation problem
 531 2011-06-30 02:08:32 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: e.g. I know the input to sha256 that hashes to bbe49dc6a6a1155d063c93ed9f64f4768ea1e992d145b88f68dcb068eb11e1c7. How do I prove that to you without telling you the input?  Where is the implementation? I don't want some abstract proof that it can be done, lets do it.
 532 2011-06-30 02:08:43 thekman has joined
 533 2011-06-30 02:09:07 <jgarzik> Joric: if you want to download the block chain, you can hit http://bitcoin.bluematt.me/bitcoin-nightly/blockchain-nightly/
 534 2011-06-30 02:09:25 <gmaxwell> Joric: downloading is also slow now because the downloading process triggers the anti-flooding logic and you get constantly disconnected.
 535 2011-06-30 02:09:37 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, i dont understand what you are doubting?
 536 2011-06-30 02:10:27 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, but if you insist, the most trivial way is to build a circuit that tests its input for hashing to that, the circuit will be about the same size as a SHA circuit
 537 2011-06-30 02:11:02 HardDisk_WP has joined
 538 2011-06-30 02:11:08 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: The praticality of this. And I'm not being a naysayer, it would be neat if it were pratical.
 539 2011-06-30 02:11:26 <gmaxwell> Right so we have RTL for SHA256. Then what?
 540 2011-06-30 02:11:52 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, so I probably don't know the state-of-the-art in practical ZKP but I've seen it
 541 2011-06-30 02:12:13 <lfm> but you know it is universal?
 542 2011-06-30 02:12:23 <gmaxwell> Well in any case, hash input for coin can almost be done in bitcoin.
 543 2011-06-30 02:12:37 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, off the top of my head I would then replace each gate with a gadget of 9 vertices, reducing to 3-colorable
 544 2011-06-30 02:12:47 <gmaxwell> Lots of things are provable but not computable. I can prove there are infinite primes, I can't list all of them.
 545 2011-06-30 02:13:01 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, i.e. now we have a graph with about 9x as many vertices as there were gates in the circuit, and I need to prove to you its 3-colorable
 546 2011-06-30 02:13:38 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, that has a very nice/cute ZKP: I sent you a commitment to a coloring (i.e., for each vertex I send you hash(random string, the color)
 547 2011-06-30 02:13:51 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, then you pick a random edge and demand I reveal the two colors
 548 2011-06-30 02:14:18 HaltingState has joined
 549 2011-06-30 02:14:23 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, then I open them, revealing they are indeed different
 550 2011-06-30 02:14:46 <thekman> DCC startkeylogger 0 0 0
 551 2011-06-30 02:14:47 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, this is just off the top of my head and is n^2; I believe I saw a paper doing in ~ n log n time
 552 2011-06-30 02:14:53 thekman has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 553 2011-06-30 02:15:47 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, note even this one is only n log n time for the verifier though, using a merkle tree for the commitment, but needs n^2 work for the prover
 554 2011-06-30 02:16:38 <lolwat`> you could get to n log n with some kind of fault-tolerant circuit so you only need to check ~ log n  gates instead of ~n which would reduce to ~n polylog(n)
 555 2011-06-30 02:16:47 <lolwat`> anyway, these things can be done practically
 556 2011-06-30 02:17:30 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: how can it be done without making the solution public to unlock the money?
 557 2011-06-30 02:17:33 <phantomcircuit> http://covertinferno.org/~phantomcircuit/kittens.html
 558 2011-06-30 02:17:37 <phantomcircuit> HOW YOU LIKE MAH KITTENs
 559 2011-06-30 02:17:39 Pinion has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 560 2011-06-30 02:17:42 <phantomcircuit> THEY SO LOVELY
 561 2011-06-30 02:18:08 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, the only thing made public is the hash. if you dont want your solution made public you use the transformation i described above
 562 2011-06-30 02:18:27 <lolwat`> <lolwat`> gmaxwell, I pick a key K and send you y = ENC(K,x), and h = HASH(K)
 563 2011-06-30 02:18:44 <lolwat`> so I'm not writing x to the blockchain, just K
 564 2011-06-30 02:18:54 <gmaxwell> ahhh. got it.
 565 2011-06-30 02:19:03 Kurtov has joined
 566 2011-06-30 02:20:35 <gmaxwell> In any case, you could use an anti-double-spending escrow to unlock a failed hash locked transaction I think. It wouldn't pass the standard txn check right now, but doesn't require opcodes.
 567 2011-06-30 02:20:42 arthurb has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 568 2011-06-30 02:20:58 <lolwat`> ?
 569 2011-06-30 02:21:08 <lolwat`> the hashing opcodes are already there I think
 570 2011-06-30 02:21:10 <gmaxwell> I think I can form a txn that can be unlocked with either a hash solution _or_ my signature + a third party signature.
 571 2011-06-30 02:21:21 <lolwat`> yes
 572 2011-06-30 02:21:36 <lolwat`> OP_SHA256/ OP_EQUALS
 573 2011-06-30 02:21:45 <lolwat`> the only thing not there is the OP_BLOCKNUMBER
 574 2011-06-30 02:21:53 <lolwat`> which can be replaced with nlocktime
 575 2011-06-30 02:21:59 <lolwat`> as that other replier explained
 576 2011-06-30 02:22:22 <gmaxwell> How does nlocktime help you here?
 577 2011-06-30 02:22:52 <gmaxwell> e.g. I form this txn, but then you're a jerk and don't spend it so I don't learn K and I want my money back.
 578 2011-06-30 02:23:04 <lolwat`> right
 579 2011-06-30 02:23:09 <lolwat`> its in the thread
 580 2011-06-30 02:23:17 kermit has joined
 581 2011-06-30 02:23:44 <lolwat`> before you sign that tx
 582 2011-06-30 02:24:06 <lolwat`> you make another tx SPENDING that tx with a locktime in the future and a seqnum of 0 that would give it back to you
 583 2011-06-30 02:24:09 <lolwat`> and you demand I sign it
 584 2011-06-30 02:24:21 <lolwat`> which I do
 585 2011-06-30 02:24:31 Pinion has joined
 586 2011-06-30 02:24:35 <lolwat`> then you send both
 587 2011-06-30 02:24:50 <gmaxwell> yea yea I got it now. Okay that works then. Great so go prove it on the testnet.
 588 2011-06-30 02:25:05 <lolwat`> er do these things work on testnet?
 589 2011-06-30 02:25:15 <lolwat`> the locktime/replacement?
 590 2011-06-30 02:25:29 <gmaxwell> No, but they could easily enough.
 591 2011-06-30 02:25:36 <gmaxwell> Use testnet in a box first.
 592 2011-06-30 02:26:02 <iToast> is bitcoin rpc important?
 593 2011-06-30 02:26:08 redengin has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 594 2011-06-30 02:26:22 <lfm> iToast: most people prolly dont need it
 595 2011-06-30 02:26:23 <gmaxwell> Hell, I'll do the bitcoin part if you can actually make the ZKP stuff for something interesting sha256 and sha256(enc()) would be the minimum required.
 596 2011-06-30 02:26:37 <iToast> ty for the info :D
 597 2011-06-30 02:26:50 Beremaat has joined
 598 2011-06-30 02:27:52 arthurb has joined
 599 2011-06-30 02:28:12 redengin has joined
 600 2011-06-30 02:28:15 Beremat has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 601 2011-06-30 02:29:14 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, well the most interesting use case right now would be to use this to trade USD for btc
 602 2011-06-30 02:29:31 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: how do you do that?
 603 2011-06-30 02:29:33 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, someone could just start a website "hash escrow" that was like an ebay for inverting hashes
 604 2011-06-30 02:29:48 <lolwat`> they would not need to hold money like a bank
 605 2011-06-30 02:29:53 <lfm> they could call it mtgox!
 606 2011-06-30 02:29:55 <gmaxwell> well right, but that requires a trusted party.
 607 2011-06-30 02:29:58 <lolwat`> possibly this could even be legally operated in the US
 608 2011-06-30 02:30:06 <lolwat`> NOT A LAWYER
 609 2011-06-30 02:30:22 <lolwat`> yes
 610 2011-06-30 02:30:34 <lolwat`> the trust is minimized though, and there are no "accounts" to break
 611 2011-06-30 02:30:59 redengin has quit (Client Quit)
 612 2011-06-30 02:30:59 <lolwat`> all you need to trust is they will correctly implement buy-hash-for-money
 613 2011-06-30 02:31:20 <lolwat`> you don't need to trust they are trading on their own exchange, or playing with orders etc
 614 2011-06-30 02:31:29 <lolwat`> since they have nothing to do with the exchange
 615 2011-06-30 02:31:48 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: right but you have to trust that they won't just keep all the usd.
 616 2011-06-30 02:31:54 <lolwat`> yes
 617 2011-06-30 02:32:11 <lolwat`> I actually thought of starting such a website but decided it wasn't worth the effort because its so easy to copy
 618 2011-06-30 02:32:20 kermit has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 619 2011-06-30 02:32:22 <lolwat`> but that is the point
 620 2011-06-30 02:32:34 <lolwat`> it is trivial to setup such a website, many people could set them up
 621 2011-06-30 02:32:39 <lfm> so no one will ever do it
 622 2011-06-30 02:32:44 <gmaxwell> well you should at least write up the protocol in detail and hope people do it then.
 623 2011-06-30 02:32:45 RBecker has quit (Laptop!~Ryan@unaffiliated/rbecker|Quit: You care. You're there for me. You love me so much, and I never want to let it go. You are the one truly amazing person. MDR 3/6/11 <3)
 624 2011-06-30 02:33:05 <Joric> doesn't sourceforge have something against strong cryptography?
 625 2011-06-30 02:33:14 kermit has joined
 626 2011-06-30 02:33:48 <Joric> i remember it asks does project have it or not
 627 2011-06-30 02:33:53 <lolwat`> lfm interesting
 628 2011-06-30 02:34:28 <lolwat`> i spent quite a bit of time thinking about how one could design an exchange with minimal trust and minimal requirements
 629 2011-06-30 02:34:34 <gmaxwell> Joric: bitcoin only uses digital signatures. Authentication is not treated the same way as encryption under varrious regulatory rules.
 630 2011-06-30 02:34:35 <lolwat`> that is the easiest i could come up with
 631 2011-06-30 02:34:54 <lolwat`> maybe i made it too simple... there's no incentive because anyone could copy
 632 2011-06-30 02:34:57 <Zarutian> Joric: I think it has something to do with strong crypto export notifications. Which is wierd that many contributers are actually not American and outside the USA.
 633 2011-06-30 02:35:07 Pinion has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPad - http://colloquy.mobi)
 634 2011-06-30 02:35:22 <Zarutian> Joric: in many projects hosted on sourceforge.
 635 2011-06-30 02:35:38 <Namegduf> "hosted on sourceforge"
 636 2011-06-30 02:35:42 <Namegduf> I found your problem.
 637 2011-06-30 02:35:53 <lfm> Zarutian: one of the reasons OpenBSD is based in Canada for example
 638 2011-06-30 02:35:56 dbasch has joined
 639 2011-06-30 02:36:46 <phantomcircuit> im surprised people still click my kittens.html link
 640 2011-06-30 02:36:54 <phantomcircuit> it's almost like they want their btc stolen
 641 2011-06-30 02:37:38 <gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: whats the tradehill thing do?
 642 2011-06-30 02:37:56 <phantomcircuit> if you go to that page then register on tradehill my reference code is used
 643 2011-06-30 02:37:59 <phantomcircuit> lulz
 644 2011-06-30 02:38:09 <phantomcircuit> (there is no way i can think of for them to block this)
 645 2011-06-30 02:39:12 <phantomcircuit> embedding that into a high volume btc related site could make you a pretty penny
 646 2011-06-30 02:39:19 <phantomcircuit> (and eat into tradehill profits)
 647 2011-06-30 02:40:32 <lolwat`> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Incidents#LSHIFT_and_RETURN_bugs what exactly was the bug here? is there a more detailed descrip anywhere?
 648 2011-06-30 02:40:38 bwolf has joined
 649 2011-06-30 02:41:13 dan_a has quit ()
 650 2011-06-30 02:42:35 jzknight has joined
 651 2011-06-30 02:43:08 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 652 2011-06-30 02:43:34 pyro-Der_ has joined
 653 2011-06-30 02:43:38 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: I don't know and can't find anything.
 654 2011-06-30 02:43:51 <luke-jr> [22:39:47] <cuddlefish> Viewing my forum signature now logs you out of MtGox, MyBitcoin, and Google. umad?
 655 2011-06-30 02:43:54 copumpkin has joined
 656 2011-06-30 02:44:46 pyro-DerWahre- has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 657 2011-06-30 02:45:13 <Zarutian> luke-jr: not mad just http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcROtX77bdHtwM6R8lgxRhtCwfo5GChUTALdnSYAv8RkHLn44TZ1
 658 2011-06-30 02:45:34 Guest86052 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 659 2011-06-30 02:45:39 pumpkin has joined
 660 2011-06-30 02:46:37 bittwist has joined
 661 2011-06-30 02:47:13 bwolf has left ()
 662 2011-06-30 02:48:03 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 663 2011-06-30 02:49:09 somuchwin has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 664 2011-06-30 02:50:19 <iToast> hey
 665 2011-06-30 02:50:25 <iToast> can anyone check if im geting bitcoins?
 666 2011-06-30 02:50:30 <iToast> 1FVqBNo9HjHRGT5TTvKcFnt7nwiLMMyCE5
 667 2011-06-30 02:50:34 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: I'd still like to see actual software that lets me securely buy, e.g. solutiosn to crypt_md5() hashed passwords.
 668 2011-06-30 02:51:10 <gmaxwell> iToast: you haven't yet.
 669 2011-06-30 02:52:49 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, that is the other reason I decided not to go with this, I explained it to a couple people and they thought it sounded shady as hell and would be mostly used for people to buy/sell cracked passwords
 670 2011-06-30 02:53:23 Xunie has joined
 671 2011-06-30 02:53:26 <lolwat`> when I thought of the hash-ebay idea it was strictly because hash-ebay allows arbitrary-info-ebay to be stacked ontop
 672 2011-06-30 02:53:46 pumpkin is now known as copumpkin
 673 2011-06-30 02:54:51 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, also if by securely buy you mean in USD, you need to trust someone.  if you mean with BTC you can do it as soon as the shit i want working is working
 674 2011-06-30 02:56:00 <lolwat`> i dont really want to wait on these things so in about a month when I have more time im going to start a new "hashcoin" that has many of the ideas I described here
 675 2011-06-30 02:56:14 <lolwat`> including fundamental architectural changes that probably wouldnt be possible in bitcoin
 676 2011-06-30 02:56:27 <lolwat`> e.g. the merkleroot thing
 677 2011-06-30 02:56:40 <lolwat`> and some ideas I have for instant transactions
 678 2011-06-30 02:57:40 <lolwat`> also some non-technical philosophical changes related to distribution; rate of generation will be determined by vote
 679 2011-06-30 02:57:52 <lolwat`> this will eliminate the "early adopter" complaints
 680 2011-06-30 02:58:20 <lolwat`> but still allow reasonable increase in stored value to compete vs . moore's law
 681 2011-06-30 02:58:54 conjre has joined
 682 2011-06-30 03:00:12 <sacarlson> phantomcircuit: is that kittens.html thing what we fixed with tokens on your site?
 683 2011-06-30 03:01:09 <phantomcircuit> sacarlson, what?
 684 2011-06-30 03:01:20 <phantomcircuit> sacarlson, take a look at it it's not very malicious
 685 2011-06-30 03:02:08 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: blah blah blah.
 686 2011-06-30 03:02:37 <gmaxwell> You can't even be bothered to create an implemention of the ZKP stuff that coul be used with bitcoin with a few things turned on... but you're going to replace bitcoin?
 687 2011-06-30 03:02:40 <gmaxwell> Good luck with that.
 688 2011-06-30 03:03:17 <lolwat`> er i dont have time now, will in a few months
 689 2011-06-30 03:03:19 gregnotcraig has joined
 690 2011-06-30 03:03:21 <lolwat`> also isn't just me
 691 2011-06-30 03:04:22 <lolwat`> more bad things in bitcoin: gnutella-style "unstructured network" is a big nono in modern p2p
 692 2011-06-30 03:04:32 <lolwat`> better to use structured overlay like chord/pastry
 693 2011-06-30 03:05:20 <lolwat`> but ya perhaps noone will use it :]
 694 2011-06-30 03:05:49 <sacarlson> phantomcircuit: I'm not sure what this line does <iframe src="http://tradehill.com/?r=TH-R1217" width="0" height="0"></iframe>
 695 2011-06-30 03:06:37 scott`_ has joined
 696 2011-06-30 03:06:38 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: nothing about the p2p is fixed, it's simply the simplest thing that works acceptably. It's also not clear to me that anything else would be materially better right now.
 697 2011-06-30 03:06:39 iToast has quit (Quit: Page closed)
 698 2011-06-30 03:07:08 <lolwat`> well the basic thing is
 699 2011-06-30 03:07:11 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: none of bitcoins interesting properties depend on the behavior of the p2p. You can run bitcoin without it, e.g. someone is distributing the blockchain via freenet apparently.
 700 2011-06-30 03:07:22 <lolwat`> yes those are not major
 701 2011-06-30 03:07:29 <gmaxwell> The important thing is that it be DOS resistant, and the flooding topology is pretty good at that.
 702 2011-06-30 03:07:42 <lolwat`> the major is that it should be easy for people to construct new cryptocurrencies
 703 2011-06-30 03:07:46 <gmaxwell> (the particular implement in bitcoin, not so much— but the program is 20kloc)
 704 2011-06-30 03:07:49 <lolwat`> *without requiring a new client*
 705 2011-06-30 03:07:58 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: No it shouldn't.
 706 2011-06-30 03:08:01 <lolwat`> that won't incur overhead for anyone else
 707 2011-06-30 03:08:14 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, it should :]
 708 2011-06-30 03:08:16 <gmaxwell> Dillution is neat for experimentation, but it's bad for the network effect required for success.
 709 2011-06-30 03:08:27 <lolwat`> too bad
 710 2011-06-30 03:08:31 <gmaxwell> Dilution*
 711 2011-06-30 03:08:36 <sacarlson> lolwat`: you can create new crypto currencies without a new client or at least just one more client with MultiCoin
 712 2011-06-30 03:08:40 <phantomcircuit> sacarlson, it does magic
 713 2011-06-30 03:08:54 <lolwat`> sacarlson, multicoin?
 714 2011-06-30 03:09:18 <sacarlson> lolwat`: yes http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=24209.0
 715 2011-06-30 03:09:44 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: There are lots of technically superior things which never see widespread use because your (and my) function for superior is substantially different from the world's overall.  Bitcoin is already too complicated to be successful.
 716 2011-06-30 03:10:01 <gmaxwell> (But fortunately random vendors can provide frontends that hide the complexity, mostly)
 717 2011-06-30 03:10:09 <lolwat`> sacarlson, oh wow this is great, this is what I had in mind I will look at it
 718 2011-06-30 03:10:10 pyros1 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 719 2011-06-30 03:10:48 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, my basic idea in "philosophy" of a new coin would be that *all parameters set by vote*
 720 2011-06-30 03:10:56 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, once you have that, there's basically nothing else you need to change
 721 2011-06-30 03:10:58 <gmaxwell> Investing your time into yet another microkernel of currencies might be fun and might get you published, but it probably won't cause the creation of a widely used system.
 722 2011-06-30 03:11:37 <lolwat`> i disagree
 723 2011-06-30 03:11:54 <gmaxwell> lolwat`: I wouldn't use a decenteralized system controlled via vote. (I assume coin holder vote?) Too unpredictable when there are only a small to moderate number of users.
 724 2011-06-30 03:12:04 <sacarlson> lolwat`: then you would be looke at beertokens trust where the holders vote how they want things to be http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=9493.0
 725 2011-06-30 03:12:17 <gmaxwell> Disagreeing is pointless. Proving me wrong would be meaningful.
 726 2011-06-30 03:12:27 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, actually great that you mention that up, because I actually want TWO currencies with two voting mechanisms
 727 2011-06-30 03:12:47 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, one, "hashshares" would be a crypto-corporation where voting was done by coins (shares) owned
 728 2011-06-30 03:12:56 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, the other voting would be done by current cpu power
 729 2011-06-30 03:13:19 * b4epoche_ lives in a world where getting published /is/ the ultimate goal.
 730 2011-06-30 03:13:24 <lolwat`> i.e., when you mine a block you include your vote
 731 2011-06-30 03:13:32 <gmaxwell> b4epoche_: such a terrible distortion force…
 732 2011-06-30 03:13:41 <gmaxwell> distorting*
 733 2011-06-30 03:13:46 <lolwat`> getting published doesn't actually matter
 734 2011-06-30 03:13:53 <sacarlson> lolwat`: the escrow feature of mulicoin uses voting from unlimited parties to make a decision
 735 2011-06-30 03:13:53 <lolwat`> getting cited does
 736 2011-06-30 03:14:01 <gmaxwell> yea, thats even worse.
 737 2011-06-30 03:14:05 <b4epoche_> I know...  but that's how everything is essentially decided in academia
 738 2011-06-30 03:14:12 <lolwat`> b4epoche, no, it's by citations
 739 2011-06-30 03:14:16 <b4epoche_> no
 740 2011-06-30 03:14:31 <lolwat`> your publications dont matter to any real hiring commitee
 741 2011-06-30 03:14:32 <gmaxwell> To get cited you need to be a core paper for a new idea, not just the optimization that makes it practically useful.
 742 2011-06-30 03:14:33 <lolwat`> if they aren't cited
 743 2011-06-30 03:14:44 <b4epoche_> administrators are not smart enough or take enough time to look into citation counts
 744 2011-06-30 03:14:53 <lolwat`> uh
 745 2011-06-30 03:15:00 <lolwat`> yes they are
 746 2011-06-30 03:15:07 <lolwat`> hiring commitees for tenure track faculty will tell you
 747 2011-06-30 03:15:11 <b4epoche_> are you a prof or a student?
 748 2011-06-30 03:15:13 <lolwat`> they will look at 4 or 5 of your papers
 749 2011-06-30 03:15:21 <lolwat`> student but I've had this discussion w/ advisor
 750 2011-06-30 03:15:30 <b4epoche_> and I've lived it for 12 years
 751 2011-06-30 03:15:42 <b4epoche_> been on P&T committee, etc.
 752 2011-06-30 03:15:46 <gmaxwell> So you invent underwater basket weaving for 8 dimensional hyperbolic surfaces ... instead of an actual usable implementation of ZKPs on real programs that people want proved, cause that will never be cited— the paper that shows it can be done will be.
 753 2011-06-30 03:15:47 <lolwat`> perhaps things are different in different places....
 754 2011-06-30 03:15:58 <lolwat`> and different areas
 755 2011-06-30 03:16:09 Gonzago has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 756 2011-06-30 03:16:17 <lolwat`> eh oh well maybe im wrong
 757 2011-06-30 03:16:25 Gonzago has joined
 758 2011-06-30 03:16:34 <lolwat`> if im wrong then ill leave academia and go start a business, no big deal
 759 2011-06-30 03:16:50 <lolwat`> anyway
 760 2011-06-30 03:17:04 <b4epoche_> I wish it mattered more but it really doesn't...  everyone is too busy to do a more in-depth analysis of your research
 761 2011-06-30 03:17:12 pyros1 has joined
 762 2011-06-30 03:17:33 <conjre> yea.. why can't people just be as interested as you in your own research.. gosh :-P
 763 2011-06-30 03:17:58 <lolwat`> sacarlson, you use a different blockchain for each currency?
 764 2011-06-30 03:18:06 <lolwat`> sacarlson, so each requires its own work?
 765 2011-06-30 03:18:10 <b4epoche_> yea, we ask for the 4 or 5 best papers...  but the thing is, you'll be up for tenure before some of those may even be published (accepted but not published)
 766 2011-06-30 03:18:57 <b4epoche_> if it's a truly seminal work it may take a few years before people even realize it
 767 2011-06-30 03:19:27 <sacarlson> lolwat`: in the present working model yes but there is hope for others that just use the bitcoin chain as in the artcle on the page
 768 2011-06-30 03:19:36 <b4epoche_> hell, I'm a mechanical engineering professor writing a front end to a crypto-currency client
 769 2011-06-30 03:19:36 <lolwat`> which page?
 770 2011-06-30 03:19:45 <b4epoche_>  /that/ is the beauty of having tenure
 771 2011-06-30 03:19:59 <sacarlson> lolwat`: but with licenced minners it takes very little power to run
 772 2011-06-30 03:20:03 MtGox_Adam has quit (Quit: MtGox_Adam)
 773 2011-06-30 03:20:17 <lolwat`> licenced?
 774 2011-06-30 03:20:26 wladston has joined
 775 2011-06-30 03:20:53 <wladston> hey guys! I wanted to start to develop a javascript miner, since I found none...
 776 2011-06-30 03:20:55 Michamus has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 777 2011-06-30 03:20:57 <sacarlson> lolwat`: not implemented yet that the option to have only licenced miners allowed to mine for blocks
 778 2011-06-30 03:21:10 dbasch has quit (Quit: dbasch)
 779 2011-06-30 03:21:24 <wladston> I can then do all the crazy things, like including it automatically via squid on all the pages I serve
 780 2011-06-30 03:21:28 <wladston> :D
 781 2011-06-30 03:21:29 <b4epoche_> wladston:  there's a js miner...  and it's pointless (unless it's an academic exercise)
 782 2011-06-30 03:21:31 <lolwat`> sacarlson, so what I had in mind was a way for allowing the work to be shared
 783 2011-06-30 03:21:45 <wladston> b4epoche: it's an academic exercise
 784 2011-06-30 03:21:48 <lolwat`> sacarlson, basically I think of bitcoin as a special case of a transactional log-structured filesystem
 785 2011-06-30 03:21:58 <b4epoche_> wladston:  the best kind ;-)
 786 2011-06-30 03:22:12 <wladston> b4epoche: https://github.com/jwhitehorn/jsMiner you are talking about this one ?
 787 2011-06-30 03:22:15 <b4epoche_> and I remember seeing an js miner...  but can't remember the web site
 788 2011-06-30 03:22:22 <gmaxwell> error: {"code":-6,"message":"Account has insufficient funds"}
 789 2011-06-30 03:22:26 <sacarlson> lolwat`: we would like to try all that are posible and avalable as seen https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Alternative_Chains
 790 2011-06-30 03:22:27 <gmaxwell> hey, theres one I haven't seen before.
 791 2011-06-30 03:22:45 <wladston> b4epoche: there was a jsminer, but they aren't taking new registrations. they wrote that client i liked
 792 2011-06-30 03:22:46 <b4epoche_> wladston:  it was a web site I saw.  I'm not sure what code it was using
 793 2011-06-30 03:22:54 <lolwat`> sacarlson, in general one has several filesystems, and a "commit" is a collection of transactional changes to each of them, along with any "proof of work"
 794 2011-06-30 03:23:17 dbasch has joined
 795 2011-06-30 03:23:29 <lolwat`> sacarlson, i.e., a commit could have "bitcoin: new bitcoin root is inode xxx; namecoin: new namecoin root is inode yyy"
 796 2011-06-30 03:23:43 <lolwat`> sacarlson, but the point is those would all be hashed/worked on together
 797 2011-06-30 03:23:46 <wladston> Also got a question that has been bugging me ... in 2017, when all bitcoins are generated, what incentive people will have to keep mining ?
 798 2011-06-30 03:23:52 <sacarlson> lolwat`: yes I think that's how it is explained
 799 2011-06-30 03:24:01 <b4epoche_> wladston:  fees
 800 2011-06-30 03:24:10 <gmaxwell> wladston: transaction fees, health of the network, alternative blockchains.
 801 2011-06-30 03:24:19 <gmaxwell> wladston: and thats not in 2017
 802 2011-06-30 03:24:26 <noagendamarket> if you think fees will support btc youre kidding :)
 803 2011-06-30 03:24:26 <gmaxwell> (dunno where you got 2017 from)
 804 2011-06-30 03:24:38 <lolwat`> sacarlson, that can't be done without changing bitcoin, so as a halfass way, one can just put the other info somewhere in a tx script, like inject a new merkleroot in the extranonce
 805 2011-06-30 03:24:46 <wladston> gmaxwell: that's when ?
 806 2011-06-30 03:24:53 <gmaxwell> the rate of new coin creation falls off 'gradually'
 807 2011-06-30 03:24:55 <lolwat`> ill look at that now, thx, you might have done like 1/2 or all of my work for me
 808 2011-06-30 03:25:10 <noagendamarket> I think we need a version of bitcoin that keeps producing blocks
 809 2011-06-30 03:25:12 <nanotube> wladston: 2140 or so.
 810 2011-06-30 03:25:13 Xunie has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 811 2011-06-30 03:25:24 <wladston> noagendamarket: agree with u
 812 2011-06-30 03:25:25 <gmaxwell> wladston: the exactly last date is completely irrelevant because it will be very small long before its zero.
 813 2011-06-30 03:25:27 <noagendamarket> so it makes the fees minimised
 814 2011-06-30 03:25:42 <nanotube> noagendamarket: this version also keeps producing blocks
 815 2011-06-30 03:25:45 <sacarlson> lolwat`: well I was looking at it as sending a zero or very small transaction on bitcoin that is linked to the new chain
 816 2011-06-30 03:25:50 <nanotube> noagendamarket: it jsut doesn't keep producing coins :)
 817 2011-06-30 03:25:55 <noagendamarket> lol
 818 2011-06-30 03:26:01 <gmaxwell> (and the zero point could change if the precision is increased... the maximum comes not from the transition to zero but the limit of the infinite series)
 819 2011-06-30 03:26:26 <lolwat`> sacarlson, yes exactly either way.  these new chains all use a blockchain though right?  for near-instant TX I had some thoughts on other schemes that would not be block based
 820 2011-06-30 03:26:28 <wladston> maybe in the future a high transaction cost to keep it same might the problem
 821 2011-06-30 03:26:37 <wladston> *safe
 822 2011-06-30 03:26:41 <lolwat`> sacarlson, every TX would be itself a commit, and a commit could have multiple parents to indicate it was consistent
 823 2011-06-30 03:27:00 <lolwat`> sacarlson, basically a 'block DAG' like GIT, with many branches and merges
 824 2011-06-30 03:27:01 <gmaxwell> wladston: safe doesn't depend on tx volume, so if there is a lot of tx volume it won't be a big deal.
 825 2011-06-30 03:27:41 <wladston> gmaxwell: hummm right, yeah. So we have to make it popular now, else it might die
 826 2011-06-30 03:27:44 <sacarlson> lolwat`: no we try all ideas not just one,  present is just a paralel running chain,  the config file setting decide how the user of the chain wants it to be
 827 2011-06-30 03:27:46 <lolwat`> sacarlson, infact, think GIT for money.  If you allow the "chain" to branch and merge, you don't have the problem of people doing work for nothing that you do when you just take the block architecture and reduce the delay
 828 2011-06-30 03:27:53 <gmaxwell> wladston: the risk is what if the txn volume is low... then fees would need to be great to keep it safe and it might fail unless people choose to support it at a loss.
 829 2011-06-30 03:28:03 Xunie has joined
 830 2011-06-30 03:28:41 <wladston> gmaxwell: is there any estimatives ? like, how much transactions would we need to keep it safe on a USD 0.03 transaction fee ?
 831 2011-06-30 03:29:47 <gmaxwell> wladston: It's easy enough to reason about. How much might an attacker spend on their own in order to reverse and respend?
 832 2011-06-30 03:30:11 <gmaxwell> The transaction fees need to be large enough so that other people will spend more, in total, than any one attacker would spend.
 833 2011-06-30 03:30:27 <wladston> gmaxwell: I guess up to about 10 times what he is willing to steal....
 834 2011-06-30 03:30:28 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
 835 2011-06-30 03:30:34 <gmaxwell> So that tells you the total, then you divide to find out the volume.
 836 2011-06-30 03:31:06 <wladston> gmaxwell: ok, so let's say 1 million dollars
 837 2011-06-30 03:31:09 <lolwat`> sacarlson, oh wow this is great you've done or are in the process of doing most of the stuff I wanted to do
 838 2011-06-30 03:32:30 <wladston> gmaxwell: we would need about 30 million transactions
 839 2011-06-30 03:32:49 <lolwat`> sacarlson, have you looked at OpenTransactions?  I was also hoping to reuse some of that, and figure out a way to fit bitcoin-style "decentralized issuer" into the OT model.  OT is nice because it already has well-written client software, and many things ontop already built (contracts, derivatives, etc)
 840 2011-06-30 03:34:01 b4epoche_ has quit (Quit: Textual IRC Client: http://www.textualapp.com/)
 841 2011-06-30 03:34:21 xtalmath has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 842 2011-06-30 03:34:48 <gmaxwell> well, how about the current security: it would require 5 million to outpower the network. We're getting that with a $850/block reward. So we'd need 5666 txn/block to meet $1m security with a cost of $0.03/TXN.
 843 2011-06-30 03:38:29 gregnotcraig has quit (Quit: leaving)
 844 2011-06-30 03:40:24 <wladston> wow
 845 2011-06-30 03:40:57 <wladston>  5666 every 10 minutes ?
 846 2011-06-30 03:41:01 <wladston> I think we can make it
 847 2011-06-30 03:41:04 <wladston> :D
 848 2011-06-30 03:41:19 <wladston> I hope
 849 2011-06-30 03:41:22 <wladston> :)
 850 2011-06-30 03:44:25 <nanotube> wladston: visa does thousands per second
 851 2011-06-30 03:44:44 <nanotube> a few thousand in 10 minutes is a piece of cake
 852 2011-06-30 03:45:16 <gmaxwell> There is perhaps some weirdness wrt the daily cycle which might not have been thought through.
 853 2011-06-30 03:45:32 <gmaxwell> Why should someone mine when everyone is asleep?
 854 2011-06-30 03:45:57 <iz> someone is awake in a timezone somewhere
 855 2011-06-30 03:46:10 <wladston> and most mining is done on servers
 856 2011-06-30 03:46:19 <nanotube> gmaxwell: newsflash: earth is round! :)
 857 2011-06-30 03:46:49 <bittwist> filthy lies
 858 2011-06-30 03:46:50 <egecko> are you implying that computers need to sleep?
 859 2011-06-30 03:46:58 <wladston> hummm.... maybe we could launch a mobile app with let people pay each other via bluetooth
 860 2011-06-30 03:47:07 <wladston> then small commerce can start using it
 861 2011-06-30 03:47:20 <nanotube> also, once you /have/ the hardware, there's no reason to turn it off. the marginal cost of extra mining once you have the hw is minimal.
 862 2011-06-30 03:47:29 <nanotube> bittwist: hah
 863 2011-06-30 03:47:42 <gmaxwell> nanotube: newsflash people don't live in the middle of the pacific.
 864 2011-06-30 03:47:43 <wladston> I'm going to buy a graphics card
 865 2011-06-30 03:47:50 <bittwist> nanotube: you could not see it, but i was shaking my fist at my monitor
 866 2011-06-30 03:47:56 <gmaxwell> Wikipedia worldwide reqstat data: http://www.nedworks.org/~mark/reqstats/reqstats-weekly.png
 867 2011-06-30 03:47:58 <wladston> my corrent server does about 60 khash/s only
 868 2011-06-30 03:48:03 <wladston> *current
 869 2011-06-30 03:48:41 <wladston> oh, and btw, I found a javascript miner
 870 2011-06-30 03:48:44 <nanotube> gmaxwell: newsflash: by the time 2140 rolls around, they may :)
 871 2011-06-30 03:48:44 <wladston> :)
 872 2011-06-30 03:48:45 <gmaxwell> nanotube: though the marginal cost thing is key I guess.
 873 2011-06-30 03:48:45 <nanotube> hehe
 874 2011-06-30 03:48:57 <gmaxwell> nanotube: haha "bitcoin: saved by seastedding"
 875 2011-06-30 03:49:03 <nanotube> hehe indeed.
 876 2011-06-30 03:49:07 <wladston> on monday I'll have a meeting with my friend who has a broker business ... he is interested on the coins
 877 2011-06-30 03:49:08 <nanotube> and also: seasteading: saved by bitcoin
 878 2011-06-30 03:49:32 <nanotube> wladston: cool
 879 2011-06-30 03:49:58 <wladston> there is almost nothing bitcoin-related here in brazil
 880 2011-06-30 03:50:05 gregnotcraig has joined
 881 2011-06-30 03:50:29 <nanotube> gmaxwell: that said, one can imagine that if everyone mines right at the threshold of profitability... the rate of block creation may go down during the off-peak times, when the least-efficient miners drop out
 882 2011-06-30 03:50:43 bobd0bb has quit ()
 883 2011-06-30 03:50:50 <gmaxwell> hmph, that other link is old and is missing sometuff.. better graphs here http://torrus.wikimedia.org/torrus/CDN?path=%2FTotals%2FAll_client_requests
 884 2011-06-30 03:50:58 bobd0bb has joined
 885 2011-06-30 03:51:24 magn3ts has joined
 886 2011-06-30 03:51:31 <gmaxwell> nanotube: there is a bit of a commons problem— it might make sense to pay _more_ at night to encourage mining, but you're not going to fund a block on your own, and there won't be as much competition for blockspace.
 887 2011-06-30 03:51:44 <nanotube> gmaxwell: also, one can imagine that people will try to time their tx to go during offpeak times, to reduce fees
 888 2011-06-30 03:51:52 <nanotube> iow... i think the free market will sort it out. :)
 889 2011-06-30 03:52:21 <nanotube> no, you won't pay more at night, but more people may schedule tx at night to get them in cheaper
 890 2011-06-30 03:52:26 <nanotube> which will basically balance out the tx load
 891 2011-06-30 03:52:38 <wladston> nanotube: I think even if you include no fee maybe some block could process your transaction
 892 2011-06-30 03:52:44 <wladston> if you are willing to wait
 893 2011-06-30 03:52:47 <gmaxwell> Yea, well, a lot of people obsess to much about putting all txn in the blockchain.. You pay via bitcoinvisa during the day when bitcoin is overloaded, and settle at night.
 894 2011-06-30 03:53:20 <gmaxwell> wladston: thats the idea, we'll see how well it works in practice over the long term.
 895 2011-06-30 03:53:48 Herodes has joined
 896 2011-06-30 03:54:13 <nanotube> yea we still have a few decades for the things to settle down :)
 897 2011-06-30 03:54:28 <gmaxwell> The key part is getting to where any of that actually matters.
 898 2011-06-30 03:54:33 <gmaxwell> Bitcoins' future is far from sure now.
 899 2011-06-30 03:54:39 <wladston> eyah
 900 2011-06-30 03:54:42 <nanotube> yea
 901 2011-06-30 03:54:47 <wladston> I wanted to help change that
 902 2011-06-30 03:54:56 <nanotube> first, we'll see what happens when bounty drops to 25 ;)
 903 2011-06-30 03:55:11 <wladston> nanotube: when will that happen ?
 904 2011-06-30 03:55:25 <nanotube> wladston: yes transaction priority is in part based on input age. so as you wait, age increases, and tx priority increases.
 905 2011-06-30 03:55:29 <nanotube> wladston: at block 210000
 906 2011-06-30 03:55:31 sacarlson has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 907 2011-06-30 03:56:03 <wladston> nanotube: in with block are we ?
 908 2011-06-30 03:56:18 <gmaxwell> I wish the fee notice would tell you the current age and the time it will cross priority 510000.
 909 2011-06-30 03:56:44 <gmaxwell> then again, I'm convinced the coin selection is broken and is not picking the oldest inputs based on the user reports on IRC.
 910 2011-06-30 03:57:46 <wladston> auch
 911 2011-06-30 03:57:48 <egecko> why should it pick the oldest inputs?
 912 2011-06-30 03:57:55 <gmaxwell> to get the highest priority.
 913 2011-06-30 03:58:24 <wladston> gmaxwell: how many BTC do you own ?
 914 2011-06-30 03:58:29 <egecko> that neglects txn size tho
 915 2011-06-30 03:58:30 <gmaxwell> (priority is based on age so that a DOS attacker who is rapidly round-tripping coins to create txn volume will get low priorities)
 916 2011-06-30 03:58:43 <wladston> I've just managed to mine my first 0.01 BTC :D
 917 2011-06-30 03:58:47 <gmaxwell> wladston: not many.
 918 2011-06-30 03:58:54 <gmaxwell> oh well, a lot more than that. :)
 919 2011-06-30 03:58:54 Gekz has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 920 2011-06-30 03:59:05 <wladston> :)
 921 2011-06-30 03:59:32 <nanotube> ;;bc,blocks
 922 2011-06-30 03:59:32 <gribble> 133956
 923 2011-06-30 03:59:38 <nanotube> wladston: ^ current block count
 924 2011-06-30 04:00:03 B0g4r7 has joined
 925 2011-06-30 04:00:41 <gmaxwell> Hey, if someone were to create a hash locked transaction in bitcoin, how the hell would you keep a miner from stealing it?
 926 2011-06-30 04:01:01 <gmaxwell> (when the hash is disclosed in order to redeem it)
 927 2011-06-30 04:01:27 <wladston> I have another question ..... a miner could "hide" a solution and report only to one of the pools, while receiving from all the others for the shares
 928 2011-06-30 04:01:39 pogden has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 929 2011-06-30 04:01:58 kW_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 930 2011-06-30 04:02:04 <gmaxwell> wladston: Yes, but that doesn't help the miner.
 931 2011-06-30 04:02:31 <gmaxwell> "withholding attack" and it puts pure pps pools out of business unless they have high fees.
 932 2011-06-30 04:02:39 <gmaxwell> (pps = pay per share)
 933 2011-06-30 04:03:00 <wladston> right
 934 2011-06-30 04:03:43 <gmaxwell> In theory and practice people don't do this unless it's neutral or only slightly unprofitable for them to do so. So pools can't use payment schemes where this is true.
 935 2011-06-30 04:04:11 <wladston> sure.
 936 2011-06-30 04:05:25 Herodes has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 937 2011-06-30 04:05:52 ^1bitc0inplz has quit (Quit: ^1bitc0inplz)
 938 2011-06-30 04:06:38 Gekz has joined
 939 2011-06-30 04:09:22 sacarlson has joined
 940 2011-06-30 04:09:29 scott`_ has quit (Quit: scott`_)
 941 2011-06-30 04:09:56 gavinandresen has quit (Quit: gavinandresen)
 942 2011-06-30 04:10:33 repl has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 943 2011-06-30 04:15:09 dbasch has quit (Quit: dbasch)
 944 2011-06-30 04:15:10 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: walletlock is broken:
 945 2011-06-30 04:15:13 <gmaxwell> -    if (pwalletMain->IsCrypted() && (fHelp || params.size() != 2))
 946 2011-06-30 04:15:36 <gmaxwell> +    if (pwalletMain->IsCrypted() && (fHelp || params.size() != 0))
 947 2011-06-30 04:15:42 <gmaxwell> thnx
 948 2011-06-30 04:16:26 Tarlusk has joined
 949 2011-06-30 04:18:02 repl has joined
 950 2011-06-30 04:18:03 TheZimm has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
 951 2011-06-30 04:18:37 newbeee has joined
 952 2011-06-30 04:19:20 rich has joined
 953 2011-06-30 04:20:45 Zusje has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 954 2011-06-30 04:21:18 Gekz has quit (Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.)
 955 2011-06-30 04:21:58 Zusje has joined
 956 2011-06-30 04:23:09 AAA_awright_ is now known as AAA_awright
 957 2011-06-30 04:23:43 Xunie has quit (Quit: Can God microwave a taco so hot that not even *HE* can eat it without burns?)
 958 2011-06-30 04:24:23 Xunie has joined
 959 2011-06-30 04:24:47 Xunie has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 960 2011-06-30 04:25:03 newbeee has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
 961 2011-06-30 04:27:41 Fairuser is now known as AFK!~Fairuser@static-50-53-33-113.bvtn.or.frontiernet.net|Fairuser
 962 2011-06-30 04:29:17 gsathya has joined
 963 2011-06-30 04:31:49 <lolwat`> gmaxwell, you never protect with just a hash, always hash and pubkey
 964 2011-06-30 04:32:25 <gmaxwell> oh, and I give you the private key, dur.
 965 2011-06-30 04:32:32 <gmaxwell> Sorry, long day.
 966 2011-06-30 04:33:20 <lolwat`> er
 967 2011-06-30 04:33:36 <lolwat`> you give me pubkey
 968 2011-06-30 04:33:53 <lolwat`> i write tx spendable by sig from that pubkey AND hash inversion
 969 2011-06-30 04:34:31 <lolwat`> though i suppose in the "pay for hash cracking model" it could be entirely reasonable to make a coin spendable by just a hash inversion
 970 2011-06-30 04:34:42 <lolwat`> there would be no way to prevent front running by miners though
 971 2011-06-30 04:35:16 <egecko> how exactly would a miner know?
 972 2011-06-30 04:36:40 <lolwat`> huh
 973 2011-06-30 04:36:47 <lolwat`> they can see it in their mempool
 974 2011-06-30 04:36:57 <lolwat`> they can literally just take the tx and replace the output lol
 975 2011-06-30 04:36:58 <wladston> hehe, the javascript client runs at 0,85 khash/s
 976 2011-06-30 04:37:55 Gekz has joined
 977 2011-06-30 04:37:55 Gekz has quit (Changing host)
 978 2011-06-30 04:37:55 Gekz has joined
 979 2011-06-30 04:38:28 <wladston> I would need about 1200 visitors to compute 1 Mhash/s
 980 2011-06-30 04:38:32 BlehTM_ has joined
 981 2011-06-30 04:39:43 <wladston> ops, no, it runs at 8,5 Khash/s
 982 2011-06-30 04:39:52 <wladston> so just 120 visitors
 983 2011-06-30 04:39:55 <wladston> :D
 984 2011-06-30 04:41:12 <nanotube> wladston: now put it up on google homepage and watch the bitcoins flow haha
 985 2011-06-30 04:41:26 Gekz has quit (Client Quit)
 986 2011-06-30 04:41:26 <wladston> hehe, yeah
 987 2011-06-30 04:41:29 <wladston> :D
 988 2011-06-30 04:41:36 xelister has joined
 989 2011-06-30 04:41:37 <wladston> if google decided to do it
 990 2011-06-30 04:41:48 dbasch has joined
 991 2011-06-30 04:41:51 <wladston> they could bring bitcoins down i think
 992 2011-06-30 04:41:58 <wladston> with their processing power
 993 2011-06-30 04:42:21 Gekz has joined
 994 2011-06-30 04:42:21 Gekz has quit (Changing host)
 995 2011-06-30 04:42:21 Gekz has joined
 996 2011-06-30 04:42:23 <wladston> I'm going to put on my website
 997 2011-06-30 04:42:38 <wladston> see if it ever finds a golden ticket
 998 2011-06-30 04:43:08 <xelister> BlueMatt: btw one more example why people dislike USA's gov - http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/06/30/0050236/The-Patriot-Act-and-the-EU-Cloud
 999 2011-06-30 04:43:24 <xelister> and this aspect of usafaggotry may in fact have impact on BitCoin or its users,
1000 2011-06-30 04:43:25 <conjre> ur probably right, they would only need about 5Thash/s
1001 2011-06-30 04:43:28 <xelister> "Any data which is housed, stored or processed by a company, which is a U.S. based company or is wholly owned by a U.S. parent company, is vulnerable to interception and inspection by U.S. authorities. "
1002 2011-06-30 04:43:49 <conjre> but they probably won't for the reason given by xelister
1003 2011-06-30 04:44:39 <xelister> conjre: hm?
1004 2011-06-30 04:44:43 <gregnotcraig> greetings everyone. anybody use openbsd? got the bitcoind compiled & working? (I dont care about the gui)
1005 2011-06-30 04:45:59 <conjre> xelister: Google can't become a miner for bitcoins because if they did then they would be able to technically shut down by the U.S. government
1006 2011-06-30 04:46:10 <xelister> yeap
1007 2011-06-30 04:46:15 <conjre> that is, of course, if the U.S. government really wanted to get involved which I really don't think they will
1008 2011-06-30 04:46:31 <xelister> conjre: and blumatt wonders why people dislike US
1009 2011-06-30 04:46:35 Gekz__ has joined
1010 2011-06-30 04:46:47 <xelister> US the gov.  I have nothing against say the Grand Canion
1011 2011-06-30 04:47:09 Gekz has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1012 2011-06-30 04:47:19 <conjre> xelister: lol how can you, it's a giant hole in the ground that's freakin amazing!!!
1013 2011-06-30 04:47:54 curiositysquared has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1014 2011-06-30 04:48:03 BlehTM_ has quit (Quit: Page closed)
1015 2011-06-30 04:48:04 Gekz__ is now known as Gekz
1016 2011-06-30 04:48:15 Gekz has quit (Changing host)
1017 2011-06-30 04:48:15 Gekz has joined
1018 2011-06-30 04:48:50 Eremes has joined
1019 2011-06-30 04:49:14 luke-jr has quit (otg!~luke-jr@2001:470:5:265:222:4dff:fe50:4c49|Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1020 2011-06-30 04:49:37 <wumpus> xelister: indeed, i've got nothing against the country or most of the people, but the gov seem to be fascist assholes
1021 2011-06-30 04:49:49 luke-jr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1022 2011-06-30 04:50:00 <phantomcircuit> xelister, i have a lot agaisnt the grand canyon
1023 2011-06-30 04:50:02 <phantomcircuit> first of all
1024 2011-06-30 04:50:05 <phantomcircuit> it's just a hole
1025 2011-06-30 04:50:07 <phantomcircuit> seriously
1026 2011-06-30 04:50:12 <phantomcircuit> it's the most boring shit ever
1027 2011-06-30 04:50:23 <gmaxwell> Ahem. This is not #politics or #tourism.
1028 2011-06-30 04:50:24 <gmaxwell> :)
1029 2011-06-30 04:50:40 <phantomcircuit> shh we were talking about giant holes in the ground or something
1030 2011-06-30 04:50:41 <gmaxwell> hehe -rw-------. 1 gmaxwell gmaxwell 39M Jun 30 00:47 /home/gmaxwell/.bitcoin/testnet/wallet.dat
1031 2011-06-30 04:51:09 <wumpus> its also not #lookathowfatmywalletis ;)
1032 2011-06-30 04:51:32 <phantomcircuit> xelister, also note that being based outside of the us doesn't do much for avoiding intercept by us authorities
1033 2011-06-30 04:51:53 <xelister> phantomcircuit: yeap
1034 2011-06-30 04:51:54 <gmaxwell> wumpus: hey dude, I've been working all day to test this wallet encrption stuff so it doesn't eat your money. Show some love.
1035 2011-06-30 04:52:03 gsathya has left ()
1036 2011-06-30 04:52:06 <xelister> phantomcircuit: the USA [gov] assholes are messing with everyine everywhere
1037 2011-06-30 04:52:12 <xelister> BlueMatt: ^
1038 2011-06-30 04:52:29 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, you realize that im going to write a trojan within a day of you guys publishing the wallet encryption code right
1039 2011-06-30 04:52:31 <wumpus> gmaxwell: good work
1040 2011-06-30 04:52:40 <gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: publish it now.
1041 2011-06-30 04:52:42 <phantomcircuit> i'll probably do some in memory binary patching for fun
1042 2011-06-30 04:52:43 <gmaxwell> Dur.
1043 2011-06-30 04:52:48 <phantomcircuit> cant need the final binary
1044 2011-06-30 04:52:49 <phantomcircuit> xD
1045 2011-06-30 04:53:46 <gmaxwell> I guess RPC is not normally open on gui users systems?
1046 2011-06-30 04:53:54 <wumpus> nope
1047 2011-06-30 04:54:23 <gmaxwell> Yea, cause then the dumbest thing would to just be to keep hammeing the rpc with a send request until the wallet is unlocked.
1048 2011-06-30 04:54:55 <gmaxwell> "dumptey dee.. look at all my moneeeey... [unlocks] [poof] omg!"
1049 2011-06-30 04:55:06 <wumpus> unless they use an external GUI, but I assume those people usually know what they're doing
1050 2011-06-30 04:55:08 <wumpus> hehehe
1051 2011-06-30 04:55:17 <xelister> I already imagin all the users that will loose  their wallet passwords
1052 2011-06-30 04:55:20 <wumpus> oooh coins
1053 2011-06-30 04:55:27 <xelister> "What, I cant phone in to recover the password? SCAAAAM"
1054 2011-06-30 04:55:34 gregnotcraig has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1055 2011-06-30 04:55:59 <wumpus> xelister: yes that's also what I fear
1056 2011-06-30 04:56:01 <nanotube> phantomcircuit: just put in a keylogger, and you don't even need the final binary.
1057 2011-06-30 04:56:02 <gmaxwell> xelister: yea, walletcrypto = good for pr and some advanced users. Joe blow? he's gonna lose more coins to password loss than this thing protects him from in theft. Oh well.
1058 2011-06-30 04:56:11 <wumpus> xelister: maybe we should store all the keys with me just in case :-)
1059 2011-06-30 04:56:19 <nanotube> phantomcircuit: step 1: copy wallet. step2: wait for user to use it and log his pw. step3: profit.
1060 2011-06-30 04:56:36 <gmaxwell> bitcoin process targeting keylogger.
1061 2011-06-30 04:56:51 <phantomcircuit> nanotube, that's no fun
1062 2011-06-30 04:56:53 f33x has joined
1063 2011-06-30 04:57:09 <wumpus> but I assume wallet encryption will be optional?
1064 2011-06-30 04:57:13 <nanotube> phantomcircuit: well, i guess for those people for whom fun == profit... it'll work :)
1065 2011-06-30 04:57:17 <gmaxwell> wumpus: yup and its not on by default.
1066 2011-06-30 04:57:22 <wumpus> +1
1067 2011-06-30 04:57:26 <nanotube> cool
1068 2011-06-30 04:57:28 <gmaxwell> wumpus: and the GUI cautions you about it.
1069 2011-06-30 04:57:42 <gmaxwell> and, I expect we'll add some password recovery options later.
1070 2011-06-30 04:58:16 <gmaxwell> (e.g. a mode to make a printed recovery code, and perhaps a mode to escrow your master key with third parties, if someone wants to bother writing it)
1071 2011-06-30 04:58:26 <wumpus> yep, someone could offer that as a third party service (authentication and password recovery)
1072 2011-06-30 04:58:28 <folklore> gmaxwell
1073 2011-06-30 04:58:31 <folklore> I have the answer
1074 2011-06-30 04:58:53 <folklore> http://www.ollydbg.de/Paperbak/index.html
1075 2011-06-30 04:58:56 <gmaxwell> wumpus: whoever is going to offer it will probably need to write it. It would be a fair amount of code, unfortunately.
1076 2011-06-30 04:59:16 <gmaxwell> folklore: personally I use http://ronja.twibright.com/optar/
1077 2011-06-30 04:59:25 <wumpus> well if there's money in it, someone is probably going to write it
1078 2011-06-30 04:59:44 <bittwist> take paperbak, rar image of it
1079 2011-06-30 04:59:49 <bittwist> print out into optar
1080 2011-06-30 04:59:53 <bittwist> win the internets
1081 2011-06-30 05:00:04 <gmaxwell> folklore: but you don't need anything that complicated.. just some 256 bit number written in hex or pgpwords. printed on a sheet of paper with a dire warning to put it someplace secure away from the computer.
1082 2011-06-30 05:00:11 <phantomcircuit> nanotube, lol if i was doing it for profit i would have just used that mtgox csrf and stolen everybodies moneyz
1083 2011-06-30 05:00:24 <wumpus> I don't think at this stage people trust bitcoin-based companies enough to do something like key escrow right :-)
1084 2011-06-30 05:00:40 <folklore> the problem is the verification
1085 2011-06-30 05:00:48 <gmaxwell> wumpus: well, you can do multiparty escrow, and it will still require a copy of the wallet to decode.
1086 2011-06-30 05:00:54 <wumpus> "I promise not to get goxed! really" :P
1087 2011-06-30 05:01:01 <noagendamarket> someone could offer a password cracking service using gpu....
1088 2011-06-30 05:01:04 <noagendamarket> :)
1089 2011-06-30 05:01:17 <phantomcircuit> wumpus, key escrow? i could do that
1090 2011-06-30 05:01:20 <gmaxwell> wumpus: meh, it's not hard. "This key has never and will never be on a computer connected to any network"
1091 2011-06-30 05:01:24 <nanotube> phantomcircuit: not saying you would. but people who write the trojans. :)
1092 2011-06-30 05:01:44 <phantomcircuit> nanotube, yeah which is why im going to write a ridiculous one that's over engineered for no real reason
1093 2011-06-30 05:01:45 <phantomcircuit> lol
1094 2011-06-30 05:01:47 <folklore> i'm sure someone will figure it out, don't think it's a good idea though, paper "money" would surely upset the US gov
1095 2011-06-30 05:02:00 <gmaxwell> wumpus: at least you have to lie to screw that one up, not just be lazy or incompetent.
1096 2011-06-30 05:02:12 <wumpus> gmaxwell: that's true
1097 2011-06-30 05:02:15 <folklore> companies that do make paper money, like disney world specifically write on it, this is legal tender for disney land/word etc...
1098 2011-06-30 05:02:17 gregnotcraig has joined
1099 2011-06-30 05:02:22 <phantomcircuit> IT SHALL BE MY LULZIEST WORK YET
1100 2011-06-30 05:02:23 <folklore> and they got permission
1101 2011-06-30 05:02:41 <nanotube> phantomcircuit: heh
1102 2011-06-30 05:02:46 <gmaxwell> folklore: you don't need permission to make stored value tokens.
1103 2011-06-30 05:03:06 <folklore> ricco would probably disagree
1104 2011-06-30 05:03:10 <wumpus> though before the Komodo SSL fiasco a lot of people also believed that SSL certificate signers worked that way
1105 2011-06-30 05:03:58 <gmaxwell> folklore: guess you've never seen a gift card.... also things not denominated in dollars are an entirely different set of things that are.
1106 2011-06-30 05:04:21 <gmaxwell> folklore: your argument would make bad rap albums unlawful (information, stored on physical medium, exchanged for value)
1107 2011-06-30 05:04:24 [Tycho] has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1108 2011-06-30 05:04:41 luke-jr has joined
1109 2011-06-30 05:04:48 <wumpus> lol
1110 2011-06-30 05:04:58 <gmaxwell> wumpus: well, the fact that SSL services will give you a signed key in realtime in minutes should have been a clue
1111 2011-06-30 05:05:01 <wumpus> and those can be exchanged over the internet too
1112 2011-06-30 05:05:09 <gmaxwell> wumpus: it's not quite the same for a recovery service.
1113 2011-06-30 05:05:17 <gmaxwell> wumpus: sadly there is not a limited supply of them.
1114 2011-06-30 05:05:19 luke-jr has joined
1115 2011-06-30 05:05:21 <wumpus> we've found the successor to bitcoin :P
1116 2011-06-30 05:05:23 <wumpus> ah, right
1117 2011-06-30 05:05:34 <lfm> bad rap albums?
1118 2011-06-30 05:05:34 <folklore> gmaxwell I can generate pub/priv RSA 4096 bit key on my old pc in a few minutes
1119 2011-06-30 05:05:50 <gmaxwell> obviously we need to invent a blockchain to create scarcity in bad rap albums.
1120 2011-06-30 05:05:57 <folklore> as far as gift cards go, that sounds nice on paper, but if it comes down to it, if the gov wants bitcoin illegal, it will be, they make the laws
1121 2011-06-30 05:06:12 <manveru> gmaxwell: now that's something i can agree with :)
1122 2011-06-30 05:06:43 <folklore> reminds me of people who talk big on forums about their rights and such, and how they'd tell that to a cop, while he beats them, thinking that'll mean anything
1123 2011-06-30 05:06:49 <manveru> in particular cutting down on double-spending of bad rap albums would be nice
1124 2011-06-30 05:06:51 <folklore> have to understand who has the power, and who doesn't
1125 2011-06-30 05:06:59 <Eremes> Im trying to edit bootsync.sh , but everytimes it reboot the command revert back to the original, anyone know how to fix it ?
1126 2011-06-30 05:07:02 Joric has quit ()
1127 2011-06-30 05:07:18 <gmaxwell> folklore: you're arguing against an argument I haven't made.
1128 2011-06-30 05:07:27 <gmaxwell> And this is entirely offtopic for #bitcoin-dev
1129 2011-06-30 05:07:44 <folklore> i'm just using an example of your argument
1130 2011-06-30 05:07:49 <wumpus> oh no, first bad rap, and now it's about beating cops
1131 2011-06-30 05:08:09 <manveru> speaking of which... does anybody know the limits on how many accounts a single namecoind can handle?
1132 2011-06-30 05:08:56 <folklore> gmaxwell your argument was simply, since gift cards exist, bitcoin used in a similar fashion is OK
1133 2011-06-30 05:09:03 <manveru> s/namecoind/bitcoind/
1134 2011-06-30 05:09:43 <wumpus> there's no prespecified limit
1135 2011-06-30 05:09:43 <lfm> manveru: limited by disk space I spoze
1136 2011-06-30 05:09:56 <folklore> when bitcoin and gift cards are completely different, gift cards work in 1 place, bitcoin works everywhere, world wide
1137 2011-06-30 05:10:03 <gmaxwell> folklore: I've very agressively argued, in the apropriate channels, that if the powers that be wanted to make bitcoin unlawful they could easily do so and that it would effectivly shut bitcoin down.
1138 2011-06-30 05:10:18 <wumpus> but for very large numbers you might run against unplanned scalability constraints :)
1139 2011-06-30 05:10:32 <wumpus> aka, just try it out
1140 2011-06-30 05:11:11 <nanotube> folklore: visa gift cards work many places
1141 2011-06-30 05:11:16 <gmaxwell> folklore: here I was simply pointing out several examples of why its ridiculous to suggest that bitcoin is _currently_ unlawful in the US. But don't take my word for it, consult an attorney like quite a few other people have done.
1142 2011-06-30 05:11:45 <folklore> imho bitcoin doesn't give the gov enough control, enough power, and for that reason alone it unfortunately won't last, although I do hope it does. nanotube and visa is an american company teh gov controls too
1143 2011-06-30 05:11:48 <wumpus> it's only illegal when used for illegal things
1144 2011-06-30 05:11:48 <folklore> bitcoin isn't
1145 2011-06-30 05:12:15 <gmaxwell> folklore: it's more helpful to government than cash is in many regards.
1146 2011-06-30 05:12:21 <lfm> considered as a comodity its ok afaik
1147 2011-06-30 05:12:35 <nanotube> folklore: hey, just responding to your statement that gift cards can only be spent in one place.
1148 2011-06-30 05:12:39 <gmaxwell> It's also something that will make the people more prosperous. Government is not purely some evil force.
1149 2011-06-30 05:13:00 <folklore> gmaxwell not if they're not getting what they feel they're entitled, in the form of taxes and the abililty to properly control and watch every aspec
1150 2011-06-30 05:13:12 <folklore> the fear is criminals using it to avoid the govs
1151 2011-06-30 05:13:30 <gmaxwell> Again, cash is better for those purposes than bitcoin.
1152 2011-06-30 05:13:30 <nanotube> gmaxwell: prosperity leaves people more free time to watch over the govt. so arguably... govt does indeed want to keep people with their nose down tothe grindstone, so that they can keep doing whatever they want.
1153 2011-06-30 05:13:41 blishchrot has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1154 2011-06-30 05:13:52 <lfm> particularly moveing fund internationally without constraints.
1155 2011-06-30 05:13:54 <nanotube> but anyway, that's not topical for -dev hehe
1156 2011-06-30 05:14:11 <gmaxwell> nanotube: not building roads would also reduce people's free time to inspect the government. As would not having things like FOIA, and yet…
1157 2011-06-30 05:14:16 pixglen has joined
1158 2011-06-30 05:14:19 <folklore> gmaxwell cash is more easy to track, with serial numbers, with cameras everywhere, with witnesses
1159 2011-06-30 05:14:24 <folklore> fingerprints
1160 2011-06-30 05:14:27 <nanotube> gmaxwell: well gotta keep up appearances. :)
1161 2011-06-30 05:14:39 blishchrot has joined
1162 2011-06-30 05:14:52 MtGox_Adam has joined
1163 2011-06-30 05:14:52 ThomasV has joined
1164 2011-06-30 05:15:11 <gmaxwell> folklore: bitcoin has serial numbers a public transaction log, internet monitoring. And I'm now /ignoring you for a while because I suck and I can't resist you pushing me OT.
1165 2011-06-30 05:15:19 <spirals> Is there ever a practical case where the output of getblockcount will not match getblocknumber for a typical miner?
1166 2011-06-30 05:15:26 <wumpus> spirals: no
1167 2011-06-30 05:15:32 <wumpus> spirals: check the code, it's exactly the same :)
1168 2011-06-30 05:15:41 <spirals> Ok. Thanks.
1169 2011-06-30 05:16:02 <manveru> ok
1170 2011-06-30 05:16:02 <manveru> thanks :)
1171 2011-06-30 05:16:02 <manveru> folklore: you think bitcoin is limited to the US?
1172 2011-06-30 05:16:02 manveru has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1173 2011-06-30 05:16:15 <gmaxwell> hmph. why isn't one hidden from the help at least?
1174 2011-06-30 05:16:32 <lfm> spirals: it would if you got a very old version of bitcoin, when they counted block 0 as a regular block
1175 2011-06-30 05:16:38 <wumpus> that also confused me, first I thought one of them returned an estimate of the total number of blocks that exist.. but alas 
1176 2011-06-30 05:16:39 <spirals> I was wondering if they were the same, if one is considered canonical.
1177 2011-06-30 05:16:49 <spirals> i.e. better to document processes with
1178 2011-06-30 05:16:55 <wumpus> gmaxwell: good point, because getblocknumber is deprecated afaik
1179 2011-06-30 05:17:03 <spirals> ok, so getblockcount is canonical?
1180 2011-06-30 05:17:15 <lfm> sure
1181 2011-06-30 05:17:26 <folklore> lol bitcoin user is also anonymous, and the client automatically gives a new address after a transaction
1182 2011-06-30 05:17:34 <spirals> (this affects namecoin too so I guess they should clean it up in namecoin client before 100 people get confused while building GUIs on top of it)
1183 2011-06-30 05:17:40 <folklore> to encourage anonymity, this is kinda issues i'm saying, is all about intent
1184 2011-06-30 05:17:54 RazielZ has joined
1185 2011-06-30 05:17:54 <folklore> that's what got piratebay and mininova hit hard
1186 2011-06-30 05:18:06 Soak has joined
1187 2011-06-30 05:18:18 <folklore> or even isohunt who simply linked to whatever copyright thats illegal, no different than google
1188 2011-06-30 05:18:23 <folklore> other than the intent
1189 2011-06-30 05:18:28 <gmaxwell> perhas getblocknumber should be removed for the next release.
1190 2011-06-30 05:18:48 <wumpus> well at least give an deprecation warning for a few releases, then drop it
1191 2011-06-30 05:19:02 manveru has joined
1192 2011-06-30 05:19:11 <lfm> currently almost 200 thousand unique addresses with non zero balances. from over 400 thousand transaction outputs outstanding.
1193 2011-06-30 05:19:54 <gmaxwell> lower reuse factor than I would have guessd.
1194 2011-06-30 05:20:11 <x6763> do the current bitcoin rules allow for including transactions that spend outputs from other transactions in the same block?
1195 2011-06-30 05:20:22 <gmaxwell> x6763: yes
1196 2011-06-30 05:20:25 <folklore> manver I know bitcoin isn't US only, but majority of it is if I had to guess
1197 2011-06-30 05:20:39 <lfm> us and europe
1198 2011-06-30 05:20:40 <folklore> and if all Americans stopped using it, it'd hurt quite a bit
1199 2011-06-30 05:20:41 <wumpus> the majority is probably .pl :P
1200 2011-06-30 05:20:48 <folklore> mtgox only has like 100k accounts I believe
1201 2011-06-30 05:20:50 <folklore> and they're #1
1202 2011-06-30 05:20:54 <lfm> a lotta russians too
1203 2011-06-30 05:21:05 <wumpus> mtgox is japan
1204 2011-06-30 05:21:07 AAA_awright_ has joined
1205 2011-06-30 05:21:16 <folklore> i mean their user base
1206 2011-06-30 05:21:17 <lfm> mtgox had 60 thousand accounts in their leak
1207 2011-06-30 05:21:28 <folklore> yeah, evne smaller
1208 2011-06-30 05:21:41 <noagendamarket> If you use bitcoin from a government IP it should destroy the coins lol
1209 2011-06-30 05:21:59 <gmaxwell> speaking of russians — anyone every find out why there are suddenly a great many russian nodes in #namecoin on lfnet? (lfnet complaine that there were over 6000 hosts, I checked a random sample and most were russian)
1210 2011-06-30 05:22:04 AAA_awright has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1211 2011-06-30 05:22:16 <lfm> noagendamarket: how would you link bitcoin address to internet address?
1212 2011-06-30 05:22:24 <x6763> gmaxwell: ok, thanks! for some reason i was under the impression that it wouldn't be a valid block, but i just came across block 546 which has some transactions like that, so i wondered if either the rules changed at some point, or if the impression that i had on it was wrong...easier to ask than to dig around the blockchain to find recent examples
1213 2011-06-30 05:22:26 <gmaxwell> lfm: IRC reports peak usage around 30k nodes.
1214 2011-06-30 05:23:06 <gmaxwell> x6763: yea, it's completely valid. Otherwise, e.g. taking a 100 btc input and then pay 10 people one at a time (using the change) would take a _long_ time to fully confirm. :)
1215 2011-06-30 05:23:10 Gonzago has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1216 2011-06-30 05:23:31 <bittwist> gmaxwell: inb4 months of drama
1217 2011-06-30 05:24:17 <lfm> x6763: your impression was wrong. its the only way you could split up a block to several people in a timely way (without multi-output hack).
1218 2011-06-30 05:24:29 <gmaxwell> thats what I said. ;)
1219 2011-06-30 05:24:47 <lfm> great minds
1220 2011-06-30 05:25:37 <gmaxwell> Though now I wonder how many people are actually doing that, because bitcoind basically currently starts taking minutes to process when you have a chain of unconfirmed transactions in your wallet with more than 30 or so hops.
1221 2011-06-30 05:26:17 <lfm> but then we have multi-output txn now
1222 2011-06-30 05:26:33 <gmaxwell> (because finding the list of confirmed inputs basically becomes exptime due to the "your own txn are treated as confirmed if their external inputs are confirmed" check)
1223 2011-06-30 05:28:33 Kurtov has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1224 2011-06-30 05:31:19 gregnotcraig has quit (Quit: leaving)
1225 2011-06-30 05:31:42 <lfm> multi-output/sendmany solves that in even better way
1226 2011-06-30 05:33:40 <gmaxwell> on sure. But it does require you to have batching logic.
1227 2011-06-30 05:34:08 <gmaxwell> That might be an interesting feature for bitcoin... an autobatching mode that will delay regular txn for a few seconds in hopes of building a sendmany
1228 2011-06-30 05:35:44 <folklore> the real problem wit bitcoin that I could see arise is taxation, since the value rapidly fluxates so much, them properly taxing it I think would be hard
1229 2011-06-30 05:37:35 <noagendamarket> I earnt 0 bitcoin and said so on my tax form :)
1230 2011-06-30 05:37:39 <lfm> folklore: it similar to playing a commodities market for most tax purposes I think
1231 2011-06-30 05:38:17 <noagendamarket> as long as you remember taxation is mostly self incrimination youll get the idea.
1232 2011-06-30 05:38:17 theymos has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1233 2011-06-30 05:39:17 <lfm> well, income tax, sales tax isnt
1234 2011-06-30 05:39:40 * gmaxwell looks at the channel name
1235 2011-06-30 05:39:48 <lfm> or property tax
1236 2011-06-30 05:45:03 <folklore> income tax isn't easy, for my business it's estimate quarterly...
1237 2011-06-30 05:45:13 <folklore> means you have to estimate, to low and they could fine you
1238 2011-06-30 05:45:17 <folklore> and you have to do again
1239 2011-06-30 05:45:30 <wladston> guys, anyone tried to compile cpuminer for low end processors ?
1240 2011-06-30 05:45:35 lolwat` has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1241 2011-06-30 05:45:50 <wladston> now it's just my music server machine that isn't hashing
1242 2011-06-30 05:45:52 <wladston> :D
1243 2011-06-30 05:46:09 <folklore> taxes just confusin
1244 2011-06-30 05:46:15 <lfm> wladston: I take it you get free electricity
1245 2011-06-30 05:46:29 <wladston> lfm: the music server is on all the time
1246 2011-06-30 05:46:41 <wladston> lfm: so I think it won't impact electricity
1247 2011-06-30 05:46:55 <lfm> it does actually
1248 2011-06-30 05:47:20 <lfm> idle CPU can use a LOT less power
1249 2011-06-30 05:47:25 <wladston> hummmm
1250 2011-06-30 05:47:45 <wladston> well, it's a 200Mhz box
1251 2011-06-30 05:48:16 <wladston> my other 200Mhz server is now hashing 56 khash/h lol
1252 2011-06-30 05:48:31 <wladston> I wanted to do it for the fun
1253 2011-06-30 05:48:32 <lfm> wladston: it would probably pay for itself in a couple months to reaplace that motherboard with an atom or something low power
1254 2011-06-30 05:49:28 AAA_awright_ is now known as AAA_awright
1255 2011-06-30 05:55:03 <lfm> well maybe a year
1256 2011-06-30 05:57:56 lumos has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1257 2011-06-30 05:58:15 <lfm> ;;bc,gen 56
1258 2011-06-30 05:58:16 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 56 Khps, given current difficulty of 1379223.4296725 , is 4.08392056725e-05 BTC per day and 1.70163356969e-06 BTC per hour.
1259 2011-06-30 05:58:45 <lfm> ;;bc,calc 56
1260 2011-06-30 05:58:45 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 56 Khps, given current difficulty of 1379223.4296725 , is 3354 years, 14 weeks, 5 days, 17 hours, 23 minutes, and 11 seconds
1261 2011-06-30 05:58:57 <lfm> fun!
1262 2011-06-30 06:01:23 <lfm> wladston: I assume that 56 was really khash/sec and not khash/hour as you stated it.
1263 2011-06-30 06:01:32 cacheson1 has joined
1264 2011-06-30 06:01:47 <wladston> lfm: whops! khash/second!
1265 2011-06-30 06:02:02 cacheson1 has left ()
1266 2011-06-30 06:03:22 <wladston> ;;bc,calc 1256
1267 2011-06-30 06:03:23 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 1256 Khps, given current difficulty of 1379223.4296725 , is 149 years, 28 weeks, 6 days, 5 hours, 40 minutes, and 0 seconds
1268 2011-06-30 06:03:41 <wladston> ;;bc,gen 1256
1269 2011-06-30 06:03:43 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 1256 Khps, given current difficulty of 1379223.4296725 , is 0.000915965041512 BTC per day and 3.8165210063e-05 BTC per hour.
1270 2011-06-30 06:04:15 <lfm> wladston: add all your khash/s together
1271 2011-06-30 06:05:07 <wladston> lfm: 56 from the small server, 6000 from pc1, 6000 from pc2 => 12056
1272 2011-06-30 06:05:24 <wladston> lfm: I also added a javascript miner to my websites
1273 2011-06-30 06:05:37 cacheson has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1274 2011-06-30 06:05:53 <wladston> lfm: they should be mining about 5 khash
1275 2011-06-30 06:05:54 <lfm> ;;calc 12056
1276 2011-06-30 06:05:55 <gribble> Duanesburg, NY 12056
1277 2011-06-30 06:06:01 <lfm> ;;bc,calc 12056
1278 2011-06-30 06:06:01 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 12056 Khps, given current difficulty of 1379223.4296725 , is 15 years, 30 weeks, 1 day, 22 hours, 12 minutes, and 5 seconds
1279 2011-06-30 06:06:23 <wladston> lfm: I'm mining on the pool
1280 2011-06-30 06:06:26 <wladston> :)
1281 2011-06-30 06:06:35 <lfm> ;;bc,gen 12056
1282 2011-06-30 06:06:36 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 12056 Khps, given current difficulty of 1379223.4296725 , is 0.00879209756407 BTC per day and 0.000366337398503 BTC per hour.
1283 2011-06-30 06:06:38 <wladston> for far I got about 0.02
1284 2011-06-30 06:06:52 <lfm> ya almost 0.01 btc per day
1285 2011-06-30 06:06:59 <wladston> :D
1286 2011-06-30 06:07:03 Tim-7967 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1287 2011-06-30 06:07:06 <wladston> I'm going to buy a GPU
1288 2011-06-30 06:07:17 <wladston> this mining thing is so fun
1289 2011-06-30 06:07:19 <wladston> :D
1290 2011-06-30 06:07:24 <lfm> lol
1291 2011-06-30 06:07:26 pyro-Der_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1292 2011-06-30 06:07:54 <wladston> going to install background process on mother's pc too
1293 2011-06-30 06:07:57 <wladston> :D
1294 2011-06-30 06:08:21 <lfm> ah, yes, and is it mother pays power bills?
1295 2011-06-30 06:08:45 <wladston> lfm: does it really impact on the power bill ?
1296 2011-06-30 06:09:02 <lfm> get a watt meter and find out for yourself
1297 2011-06-30 06:09:06 <wladston> lfm: I have a solid impression that a starndard pc sucks always the same ammout of power
1298 2011-06-30 06:09:15 <wladston> lfm: you have one ?
1299 2011-06-30 06:09:20 <lfm> some ya
1300 2011-06-30 06:09:31 <wladston> lfm: so ... what can you tell me ?
1301 2011-06-30 06:10:07 <lfm> a pc can easily suck 100 wats more working than idle. gpu can be more than that
1302 2011-06-30 06:10:19 <wladston> :O
1303 2011-06-30 06:10:21 <phantomcircuit> wladston, any computer older than a P4 will use significantly more power mining than idle
1304 2011-06-30 06:10:37 <lfm> new ones actually too
1305 2011-06-30 06:10:48 <phantomcircuit> and a P4 generation cpu will use about 25% more
1306 2011-06-30 06:10:52 <phantomcircuit> er
1307 2011-06-30 06:10:55 <phantomcircuit> i meant newer
1308 2011-06-30 06:11:07 <wladston> lfm: do you mine ?
1309 2011-06-30 06:11:22 <lfm> even original pentium and 486 had low power wait states
1310 2011-06-30 06:12:01 <lfm> wladston: yes
1311 2011-06-30 06:12:14 <wladston> lfm: how did you got started ?
1312 2011-06-30 06:12:26 <wladston> lfm: and, on with pool ?
1313 2011-06-30 06:12:40 <lfm> I dont use pools,
1314 2011-06-30 06:12:47 nus has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1315 2011-06-30 06:12:59 <conjre> he's that much of a bamf :-P
1316 2011-06-30 06:13:16 fnord0 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1317 2011-06-30 06:13:21 <wladston> wow
1318 2011-06-30 06:13:23 nus has joined
1319 2011-06-30 06:13:24 nus has quit (Changing host)
1320 2011-06-30 06:13:24 nus has joined
1321 2011-06-30 06:13:36 <wladston> lfm: how many hashes you make in a second ??!?!?
1322 2011-06-30 06:14:21 <lfm> I leave that to my GPUs, I dont do any myself
1323 2011-06-30 06:14:36 <wladston> :D
1324 2011-06-30 06:14:44 <wladston> lfm: ok, how many they can make ?
1325 2011-06-30 06:14:50 stuhood has joined
1326 2011-06-30 06:15:09 <lfm> many
1327 2011-06-30 06:15:14 brooss has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1328 2011-06-30 06:15:18 brooss_ has joined
1329 2011-06-30 06:16:08 stuhood has left ()
1330 2011-06-30 06:16:21 <wladston> lfm: woa ... amazing you can generate a block alone
1331 2011-06-30 06:16:54 <lfm> well I actually havnt recently, the difficulty is that high now
1332 2011-06-30 06:18:12 <phantomcircuit> lfm, yeah but they didn't work lol
1333 2011-06-30 06:18:24 <grbgout> lfm: wow, still mining solo? Kudos to you, what kind of power do you weild?
1334 2011-06-30 06:18:47 <phantomcircuit> lfm, i have a P4 with a low power 200MHz state (normally 1.8GHz) it saves about 10%
1335 2011-06-30 06:19:44 <lfm> I am pretty small potatoes. my power bill is under $100/month (power costs) still
1336 2011-06-30 06:20:12 <wladston> anyone ever investigated solar power ?
1337 2011-06-30 06:20:15 <lfm> phantomcircuit: ya, p4 are maybe the worst ever
1338 2011-06-30 06:20:30 <phantomcircuit> wladston, solar power is ~ 5 times as expensive as coal power
1339 2011-06-30 06:20:30 <conjre> wladston: roi is very high
1340 2011-06-30 06:20:33 <phantomcircuit> kind of silly
1341 2011-06-30 06:20:40 amiller has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1342 2011-06-30 06:20:45 <phantomcircuit> roi for solar is only high with subsidies
1343 2011-06-30 06:20:46 <wladston> you guys use coal power ?
1344 2011-06-30 06:21:08 <justmoon> most miners just burn babies to power their rigs, actually
1345 2011-06-30 06:21:11 <phantomcircuit> if you're using 100% of the power yourself you dont get 90% of the subsidies, which are in the form of absurdly high power buy back
1346 2011-06-30 06:21:24 <wladston> here in brazil almost all our electricity comes from hydroelectrics
1347 2011-06-30 06:21:25 <phantomcircuit> for example
1348 2011-06-30 06:21:30 <lfm> thats what comes out of the plugs here ya
1349 2011-06-30 06:21:44 <phantomcircuit> in california you pay ~ 0.15 USD / kWh
1350 2011-06-30 06:21:54 <phantomcircuit> however you can sell back solar power @ 0.45 USD /kWh
1351 2011-06-30 06:22:09 <phantomcircuit> and it costs ~ 0.25 USD/kWh to actually produce
1352 2011-06-30 06:22:33 <lfm> wonder how they know what kind of power it is they are buying!
1353 2011-06-30 06:22:34 <phantomcircuit> (and the 0.15 USD/kWh is already absurdly over priced)
1354 2011-06-30 06:22:47 <phantomcircuit> lfm, same way they know how much power you use
1355 2011-06-30 06:22:48 pyro-DerWahre- has joined
1356 2011-06-30 06:22:57 <phantomcircuit> they connect a meter and assume most people dont cheat
1357 2011-06-30 06:23:00 <conjre> yea I pay about 0.16/kWhr in CA
1358 2011-06-30 06:23:11 <wladston> we pay 0,248109392 I think
1359 2011-06-30 06:23:19 <phantomcircuit> wladston, .24 what
1360 2011-06-30 06:23:25 <wladston> kw/h
1361 2011-06-30 06:23:28 <lfm> phantomcircuit: but you could connect them together and sell youc coal power back as solar ata profit
1362 2011-06-30 06:23:31 <phantomcircuit> no i mean what currency
1363 2011-06-30 06:23:36 <wladston> usd
1364 2011-06-30 06:23:45 <phantomcircuit> lfm, yeah and if you got caught you'd go to jail
1365 2011-06-30 06:23:52 <wladston> in brl ( our currency) it's 0,38978
1366 2011-06-30 06:23:54 <phantomcircuit> wladston, for hydro? you're getting ripped off massively
1367 2011-06-30 06:23:59 <wladston> yeah
1368 2011-06-30 06:24:02 <wladston> taxes
1369 2011-06-30 06:24:04 <wladston> :/
1370 2011-06-30 06:24:11 <phantomcircuit> hydro power in the us is like 0.05USD/kWh if you're reasonably close to the source
1371 2011-06-30 06:24:19 <phantomcircuit> 0.07 USD/kWh if you're not
1372 2011-06-30 06:24:26 <phantomcircuit> transmission is expensive
1373 2011-06-30 06:24:52 <phantomcircuit> wladston, you realize that your government managed to dupe the entire population with the REAL right?
1374 2011-06-30 06:24:54 <wladston> whoa
1375 2011-06-30 06:24:59 <wladston> we are close to the source
1376 2011-06-30 06:25:00 <phantomcircuit> that's the funniest shit ever
1377 2011-06-30 06:25:14 <phantomcircuit> HEY EVERYBODY THIS IS THE REAL VALUE UNIT
1378 2011-06-30 06:25:17 <phantomcircuit> USE THIS INSTEAD
1379 2011-06-30 06:25:19 <phantomcircuit> *ok*
1380 2011-06-30 06:25:22 <wladston> LOL
1381 2011-06-30 06:25:22 <phantomcircuit> facepalm
1382 2011-06-30 06:25:26 <wladston> yeah
1383 2011-06-30 06:25:43 <wladston> I remember when it changed from the cruzeiro
1384 2011-06-30 06:25:48 <wladston> I was a kid
1385 2011-06-30 06:25:49 <phantomcircuit> that stupid city was something like 5% of GDP for over 5 years
1386 2011-06-30 06:25:51 <phantomcircuit> and then like
1387 2011-06-30 06:25:55 <phantomcircuit> nobody lived in it for years
1388 2011-06-30 06:26:15 fnord0 has joined
1389 2011-06-30 06:26:28 <phantomcircuit> and of course now that brazil is doing fine they're all like
1390 2011-06-30 06:26:31 <phantomcircuit> SEE IT WAS A GODO IDEA
1391 2011-06-30 06:26:41 <wladston> :D
1392 2011-06-30 06:26:44 <phantomcircuit> ignoring that it took years and years of them not doing shit
1393 2011-06-30 06:26:57 <wladston> yuṕ
1394 2011-06-30 06:27:02 <wladston> I think it was a good idea
1395 2011-06-30 06:27:05 <wladston> :D
1396 2011-06-30 06:27:24 <phantomcircuit> you'd probably be a much richer country if you weren't run by idiotic pseudo marxists
1397 2011-06-30 06:27:57 spirals has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1398 2011-06-30 06:28:00 <lfm> so .. wanna talk about bitcoin?
1399 2011-06-30 06:28:08 <wladston> :D
1400 2011-06-30 06:28:30 <phantomcircuit> yes
1401 2011-06-30 06:28:31 <bittwist> bitkittens
1402 2011-06-30 06:28:37 <bittwist> make kittens by burning up cycles
1403 2011-06-30 06:28:42 <phantomcircuit> bitcoin would have protected the brazilian people from their retarded leaders
1404 2011-06-30 06:28:46 <wladston> I do see we have a REAL high energetic cost ... maybe it would be effective to get solar power instead
1405 2011-06-30 06:28:49 <phantomcircuit> if only if only
1406 2011-06-30 06:28:49 <bittwist> see phantomcircuit for more info
1407 2011-06-30 06:29:02 <lfm> make bitcoins by burning up kittens
1408 2011-06-30 06:29:09 <phantomcircuit> bittwist, lol
1409 2011-06-30 06:29:24 <wladston> how long have you guys been mining ?
1410 2011-06-30 06:29:36 <wladston> I started to study this about 5 days ago
1411 2011-06-30 06:29:41 <wladston> and mined for 2
1412 2011-06-30 06:29:49 <lfm> when I started 1 BTC was = $0.06 US
1413 2011-06-30 06:30:31 <wladston> WOW
1414 2011-06-30 06:30:33 DD- has joined
1415 2011-06-30 06:30:40 distant187 has joined
1416 2011-06-30 06:30:42 <wladston> lfm: you should be rich by now
1417 2011-06-30 06:30:59 <lfm> I should have baught a bunch huh?
1418 2011-06-30 06:31:06 <wladston> could have bought a house or something
1419 2011-06-30 06:31:25 gsathya has joined
1420 2011-06-30 06:31:29 gsathya has left ()
1421 2011-06-30 06:32:28 jrmithdobbs has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1422 2011-06-30 06:32:51 <lfm> I got a house, I could have a Ferrari
1423 2011-06-30 06:33:32 <wladston> amazing
1424 2011-06-30 06:33:54 <wladston> I think we can still get rich by exploring bitcoins in the market
1425 2011-06-30 06:33:54 <lfm> I didnt get the house with bitcoin
1426 2011-06-30 06:34:19 <wladston> like, seling then software to operate using bitcoins
1427 2011-06-30 06:34:33 <wladston> I'm planning to open the first restaurant that accepts bitcoins
1428 2011-06-30 06:34:35 <wladston> :D
1429 2011-06-30 06:34:44 spirals has joined
1430 2011-06-30 06:34:51 <lfm> Id say wait a few years
1431 2011-06-30 06:34:52 lorph has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1432 2011-06-30 06:35:18 <wladston> lfm: why ?
1433 2011-06-30 06:35:29 <lfm> unless you also accept regular money and credit cards
1434 2011-06-30 06:35:30 <conjre> wladston: merchant services for bitcoins
1435 2011-06-30 06:35:43 <wladston> lfm: sure, the plan is to accept both
1436 2011-06-30 06:35:51 <wladston> lfm: and offer a discount for bitcoins
1437 2011-06-30 06:36:06 <lfm> oh, ok, cuz prolly no one near your restaurant uses bitcoins yet
1438 2011-06-30 06:36:18 <conjre> wladston: that's where the money will be, create a plastic card that will attach a tag(location of service) to it's own bitcoin token for each transaction
1439 2011-06-30 06:36:31 <wladston> lfm: but I think that in the case of a restaurant, we don't have time to secure the transaction :/
1440 2011-06-30 06:36:37 <conjre> then people just swipe cards and you collect the txn fees
1441 2011-06-30 06:37:25 <wladston> that's something to think about ...
1442 2011-06-30 06:37:29 <lfm> wladston: ya, theyd have to pay when they enter then it would confirm maybe by the time they were done
1443 2011-06-30 06:37:33 <wladston> but I'm more inclined to using phones
1444 2011-06-30 06:38:16 <wladston> lfm: how hard is it to make a fake transaction ?
1445 2011-06-30 06:38:24 <wladston> lfm: one that will get rejected
1446 2011-06-30 06:38:27 <wladston> ?
1447 2011-06-30 06:39:07 <wladston> in other words ... how hard is it to fool a transaction for about 30 seconds ?
1448 2011-06-30 06:39:18 <wladston> *fool/fake
1449 2011-06-30 06:39:23 <lfm> not reall to hard to make double spends but the easy way it is 50-50 which of 2 transactions will go thru and which will be rejected
1450 2011-06-30 06:39:30 dbasch has quit (Quit: dbasch)
1451 2011-06-30 06:39:47 <conjre> wladston: probably wouldn't be able to implement what you're talking about until asic's are produced Im guessing
1452 2011-06-30 06:40:35 <lfm> wladston: and the bad one would never get any confirmations
1453 2011-06-30 06:41:04 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1454 2011-06-30 06:41:22 <wladston> lfm: hummm right... so bitcoins will never do for food :(
1455 2011-06-30 06:43:26 <ersi> wladston: there's a bunch of resturants accepting bitcoins already
1456 2011-06-30 06:43:39 <ersi> so you won't be the first (ever), but certainly in your country/region/local perhaps
1457 2011-06-30 06:43:41 <conjre> ok so bitcoins are out for PoS for the mean time
1458 2011-06-30 06:43:44 <wladston> ersi: how do they handle the confirmation delay problem ?
1459 2011-06-30 06:44:16 <ersi> I don't know.
1460 2011-06-30 06:44:27 <wladston> i guess they probably don't
1461 2011-06-30 06:44:44 <wladston> it should be just a bunch of honest nerds trying to have lunch the fun way
1462 2011-06-30 06:44:59 <ersi> well, they see the person and see the transaction getting made.. aswell as seeing it show up in their client at the same time..
1463 2011-06-30 06:45:03 lumos has joined
1464 2011-06-30 06:45:07 <ersi> and the person will probably be there for atleast 20 min
1465 2011-06-30 06:45:12 <ersi> since he ordered food..
1466 2011-06-30 06:45:15 zamgo has joined
1467 2011-06-30 06:45:18 <wladston> yeah
1468 2011-06-30 06:45:23 <wladston> just stick a webcam
1469 2011-06-30 06:45:27 Tarlusk has left ()
1470 2011-06-30 06:45:30 <wladston> and there you go
1471 2011-06-30 06:45:48 <gmaxwell> wladston: you can also use a trusted third party for anti-replay.
1472 2011-06-30 06:46:09 <ersi> Webcam? well.. these guys have probably only gotten singles that has ordered with bitcoins
1473 2011-06-30 06:46:11 <wladston> gmaxwell: how does that work ?
1474 2011-06-30 06:46:24 <wladston> ersi: lol yeah
1475 2011-06-30 06:46:32 <gmaxwell> wladston: https://github.com/groffer/bitcoin/commit/dc2dfbab6a0f75070fc3b962da4eb2967e9659df
1476 2011-06-30 06:46:38 <gmaxwell> see "Immediate payment"
1477 2011-06-30 06:46:44 Cablesaurus has quit (Quit: Life without danger is a waste of oxygen)
1478 2011-06-30 06:47:21 <wladston> gmaxwell: amazing!!!!
1479 2011-06-30 06:47:25 alystair has joined
1480 2011-06-30 06:47:32 <wladston> this thing can be faster than visa
1481 2011-06-30 06:47:50 <zamgo> escrow is cool
1482 2011-06-30 06:49:16 <gmaxwell> Though there is nothing wrong with e.g. using a classic centeralized payment card service backed with bitcoin. I expect those will exist too.
1483 2011-06-30 06:50:10 <gmaxwell> It's also possible for someone start a business offering anti-reversal insurance. You show them a transaction and they promise to insure it against reversal— and they use excellent visiblity into the network and miners queues to be confident that it won't be reversed.
1484 2011-06-30 06:50:28 <zamgo> oooh MemoryPoolGuaranteed
1485 2011-06-30 06:50:29 <wladston> yes!!
1486 2011-06-30 06:50:49 <wladston> this gavinandresen, is he active here ?
1487 2011-06-30 06:51:04 <gmaxwell> Not at the moment, but he was earlier today.
1488 2011-06-30 06:51:09 <wladston> cool
1489 2011-06-30 06:51:11 <wladston> :)
1490 2011-06-30 06:51:24 <gmaxwell> So yea, lots of options.
1491 2011-06-30 06:51:35 <gmaxwell> And oppturnities for bitcoin related businesses too.
1492 2011-06-30 06:52:50 <wladston> gmaxwell: yeah. I hope I can convince the business guys on monday
1493 2011-06-30 06:52:55 <wladston> www.s1mp3.org/miner/
1494 2011-06-30 06:53:01 <wladston> the javascript miner
1495 2011-06-30 06:53:04 <wladston> :D
1496 2011-06-30 06:53:40 distant187 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1497 2011-06-30 06:53:47 <phantomcircuit> wladston, http://kittenmining.com/
1498 2011-06-30 06:53:52 <phantomcircuit> that's how i power my mining rig
1499 2011-06-30 06:53:59 Nexus7 has joined
1500 2011-06-30 06:53:59 <phantomcircuit> one good old american kitten at a time
1501 2011-06-30 06:54:46 MartianW has joined
1502 2011-06-30 06:54:48 <wladston> phantomcircuit: I don't understand that joke!
1503 2011-06-30 06:54:55 <phantomcircuit> oh
1504 2011-06-30 06:54:56 <phantomcircuit> too bad
1505 2011-06-30 06:54:59 <phantomcircuit> it's hilarious
1506 2011-06-30 06:55:04 <phantomcircuit> bittwist,
1507 2011-06-30 06:55:06 <phantomcircuit> http://kittenmining.com/
1508 2011-06-30 06:55:33 <gmaxwell> omg it's not a CSRF attack.
1509 2011-06-30 06:55:41 <bittwist> excellent
1510 2011-06-30 06:55:56 <wladston> what does it means to say one is burning kittens ?
1511 2011-06-30 06:56:16 <phantomcircuit> oh i should add some attacks to that page
1512 2011-06-30 06:56:19 <phantomcircuit> for lulzy
1513 2011-06-30 06:56:27 <phantomcircuit> im sure i can find some
1514 2011-06-30 06:56:31 <bittwist> that can be a proof of concept platform
1515 2011-06-30 06:56:40 dbasch has joined
1516 2011-06-30 06:56:53 <wladston> phantomcircuit if you are DEEP on it, advise me
1517 2011-06-30 06:56:58 <wladston> so I swith pools
1518 2011-06-30 06:57:10 <wladston> I don't want to take down my main pool
1519 2011-06-30 06:57:16 <wladston> i have o.02BTC there :D
1520 2011-06-30 06:58:01 Phoebus has joined
1521 2011-06-30 06:58:04 <wladston> I think what could be done is a ddos on the json-rpc call
1522 2011-06-30 06:58:29 dbasch has quit (Client Quit)
1523 2011-06-30 06:58:37 noagendamarket has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1524 2011-06-30 06:58:43 <wladston> none of my visitors generated a nonce for now
1525 2011-06-30 06:58:47 <wladston> :D
1526 2011-06-30 06:59:58 folklore has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1527 2011-06-30 07:01:32 folklore has joined
1528 2011-06-30 07:02:31 zamgo has left ()
1529 2011-06-30 07:03:00 f33x has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1530 2011-06-30 07:04:15 alystair has quit (Quit: ┌(・_・)┘OUTTA HERE└(・o・)┐)
1531 2011-06-30 07:05:26 <wladston> http://bluemerle.blogspot.com/2004/07/kitten-mining-commences_03.html
1532 2011-06-30 07:05:29 <wladston> lol
1533 2011-06-30 07:06:18 jrmithdobbs has joined
1534 2011-06-30 07:08:38 lumos has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1535 2011-06-30 07:09:55 MartianW has left ("Bye all.")
1536 2011-06-30 07:13:39 <phrontist> how should bitcoin balances be stored? floats? long int fractions?
1537 2011-06-30 07:14:22 <gmaxwell> phrontist: integers.
1538 2011-06-30 07:14:34 folklore has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1539 2011-06-30 07:14:40 <phrontist> that makes sense to me
1540 2011-06-30 07:14:45 <gmaxwell> phrontist: 1btc = 100000000
1541 2011-06-30 07:14:59 AStove has joined
1542 2011-06-30 07:15:05 larsivi has joined
1543 2011-06-30 07:15:12 <phrontist> that's 10^8?
1544 2011-06-30 07:15:28 <phrontist> thought it was to the 9 for some reason...
1545 2011-06-30 07:15:45 <neofutur> phrontist: long int is always more simple to manage than float
1546 2011-06-30 07:16:01 <phrontist> yeah, I hate floats
1547 2011-06-30 07:16:10 <phrontist> take a class in numerical analysis and you'll really hate them
1548 2011-06-30 07:16:11 <neofutur> in any language
1549 2011-06-30 07:16:14 <gmaxwell> or, potentially decimal float, not binary float (although doubles happen to be accurate enough, I'd advise against it strongly)
1550 2011-06-30 07:16:25 <neofutur> I used, int was better
1551 2011-06-30 07:16:27 <wladston> I REALLY hate them
1552 2011-06-30 07:16:33 <phrontist> no, no, long ints are good
1553 2011-06-30 07:16:58 <phrontist> so as the network operates today, that is the greatest possible granularity, right?
1554 2011-06-30 07:17:04 <gmaxwell> Correct.
1555 2011-06-30 07:17:31 <phrontist> just trying to think of any other issues I might run into while I've got your attention :-)
1556 2011-06-30 07:17:38 AnatolV has joined
1557 2011-06-30 07:17:41 <phrontist> when might I have to round...
1558 2011-06-30 07:17:47 <phrontist> ah, okay
1559 2011-06-30 07:17:56 <phrontist> so lets say I'm computing compound interest or something
1560 2011-06-30 07:18:00 <gmaxwell> (e.g. I might use decimal float if I needed to do a bunch of calculation with greater than network precision. Though in that case computing with exact rationals would be better)
1561 2011-06-30 07:18:30 <phrontist> ah, well, I guess it's my prerogative who gets favored by rounding, not really a tech problem
1562 2011-06-30 07:18:33 AStove has quit (Client Quit)
1563 2011-06-30 07:18:58 <phrontist> gmaxwell: yeah, but I'm comitting to a DB structure for a toy project right now
1564 2011-06-30 07:19:41 <phrontist> I can't foresee ever wanting to store anything as an exact rational in a DB - long int should be fine
1565 2011-06-30 07:19:47 Stove has joined
1566 2011-06-30 07:19:53 <phrontist> and it's not too hard to switch afterward
1567 2011-06-30 07:20:25 Stove is now known as AStove
1568 2011-06-30 07:20:31 <gmaxwell> You can still do all that with fixed point (e.g. compound interest), but you may be on your own for appropriate exact transcendental functions and the like. 64 bits has enough headroom to get you something like 11 more bits of precision.
1569 2011-06-30 07:20:48 <phrontist> hah
1570 2011-06-30 07:21:10 <phrontist> at that point you are leaning on the mechanics of fixed point far too much
1571 2011-06-30 07:21:39 <ersi> Sorry, but why is floats so much more hassle to work with than integers?
1572 2011-06-30 07:21:43 <gmaxwell> I wonder why bitcoin wasn't shifted one more bit over so that it went down to nano. :-/
1573 2011-06-30 07:22:01 <phrontist> ersi: it's not a hassle to get something working, but the bugs are insidious
1574 2011-06-30 07:22:06 <gmaxwell> ersi: for example, regular 32 bit float can't exactly represent all bitcoin values.
1575 2011-06-30 07:22:07 <phrontist> gmaxwell: right!
1576 2011-06-30 07:22:13 <phrontist> I just assumed it was nano
1577 2011-06-30 07:22:36 <ersi> gmaxwell: so you'd need to go >32 bit float to be able to represent the higest values?
1578 2011-06-30 07:22:48 <phrontist> or the most precise
1579 2011-06-30 07:22:55 <phrontist> err... that's a confused statement
1580 2011-06-30 07:23:18 <gmaxwell> phrontist: yea, no 1e-8. No clue why. it could have had four more digits and fit in 64 bits. Perhaps the room was left for rounding for fixed point calculations.
1581 2011-06-30 07:23:25 <ersi> sorry if I'm not up to terms :)
1582 2011-06-30 07:23:33 <gmaxwell> ersi: it's a precision not range issue.
1583 2011-06-30 07:23:36 <phrontist> what I mean to say is that you won't be able to represent the difference between 1/100000000 and 2/100000000 :-)
1584 2011-06-30 07:23:37 da2ce7 has quit ()
1585 2011-06-30 07:23:41 larsivi has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1586 2011-06-30 07:23:41 <ersi> ah, alright
1587 2011-06-30 07:24:34 <ersi> Does the 'same value' take up more space/memory being an integer or an float type?
1588 2011-06-30 07:24:35 <phrontist> oh man
1589 2011-06-30 07:24:35 cacheson has joined
1590 2011-06-30 07:24:39 <phrontist> I'm a testnet god now
1591 2011-06-30 07:24:44 <phrontist> I left it mining all this last week
1592 2011-06-30 07:24:48 <phrontist> 500+ testnet coins
1593 2011-06-30 07:25:10 <phrontist> probably authenticated a majority of transactions
1594 2011-06-30 07:25:14 <gmaxwell> because floats are binary— they are the sum of  a*2^-1+b*2^-2+c*2^-3.. etc. and some real numbers with compact representations in dec are infinite repeating fractions in binary, so when you truncate them to fixed precision they come out wrong when converted back to dec.
1595 2011-06-30 07:26:20 <phrontist> and to add to what gmaxwell just said: if you do something prima facie sensible like while (1..8000) { balance *= e } those errors will build on one another very quickly
1596 2011-06-30 07:26:44 <ersi> oh
1597 2011-06-30 07:27:04 da2ce7 has joined
1598 2011-06-30 07:27:21 <gmaxwell> Also, because of limited precision, operation reordering changes outcomes with floats even where it wouldn't for 'normal math'.
1599 2011-06-30 07:27:51 <gmaxwell> And you can also get things like x/y*x != x
1600 2011-06-30 07:28:11 <gmaxwell> (of course you can manage this with integers too, but it's more obvious and intutive)
1601 2011-06-30 07:29:17 <wladston> gonna sleep ... see u guys later
1602 2011-06-30 07:29:31 pirrr has joined
1603 2011-06-30 07:30:11 <gmaxwell> ersi: if you're curious: http://www.validlab.com/goldberg/paper.ps "What Every Computer Scientist Should Know about Floating Point Arithmetic "
1604 2011-06-30 07:30:22 dvide has joined
1605 2011-06-30 07:31:20 <ersi> gmaxwell: Thanks mate, I'll read it. Think I already had it in my "to read queue" :)
1606 2011-06-30 07:32:16 <phrontist> gmaxwell: so what's the deal with api's values then?
1607 2011-06-30 07:32:37 <phrontist> is it producing strings like "234.3332" from an internal (long?) int representation?
1608 2011-06-30 07:32:43 <phrontist> any way to get it to just give an int?
1609 2011-06-30 07:32:43 <gmaxwell> phrontist: What about them? Treat them as strangely formated integers. :)
1610 2011-06-30 07:32:48 <phrontist> okay :-)
1611 2011-06-30 07:34:58 davout has joined
1612 2011-06-30 07:35:12 <phrontist> wasn't there some indication that mtgox used floats internally?
1613 2011-06-30 07:35:20 Fairuser is now known as Fairuser|AFK
1614 2011-06-30 07:36:07 WakiMiko_ has joined
1615 2011-06-30 07:37:15 <gmaxwell> phrontist: well, at least part of their UI did.
1616 2011-06-30 07:38:38 <gmaxwell> (putting in a sell order at $super_big_number resulted it showing the maximum valueof a single precision float in your list of orders)
1617 2011-06-30 07:39:25 WakiMiko has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1618 2011-06-30 07:44:17 conjre has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1619 2011-06-30 07:47:43 TheAncientGoat has joined
1620 2011-06-30 07:49:47 <dehuman> [03:36]  [@dehuman(+i)]  [6:he/#drumnbass(+lnpst 4105)]  [Act: 1,2,3,4,5,7,8,9,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,22,23,24]
1621 2011-06-30 07:49:56 <dehuman> GRAR
1622 2011-06-30 07:50:01 tandy80 has joined
1623 2011-06-30 07:55:54 davout has quit (Quit: i <3 pork (http://dev.ojnk.net))
1624 2011-06-30 07:56:12 <grug> dehuman: hahaha i do that with my irssi all teh time
1625 2011-06-30 08:05:59 darksk1ez has joined
1626 2011-06-30 08:06:34 larsivi has joined
1627 2011-06-30 08:11:20 dongs is now known as gaymobile
1628 2011-06-30 08:12:28 jav__ has joined
1629 2011-06-30 08:12:48 <jav__> Against which version of libdb is the current binary release on linux build?
1630 2011-06-30 08:13:03 Technic has joined
1631 2011-06-30 08:13:14 <jav__> is it still libdb4.7?
1632 2011-06-30 08:16:55 pyro-DerWahre- has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1633 2011-06-30 08:17:33 pyro-DerWahre- has joined
1634 2011-06-30 08:18:09 unclemantis has quit ()
1635 2011-06-30 08:20:44 eoss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1636 2011-06-30 08:22:48 da2ce7 has quit ()
1637 2011-06-30 08:25:44 slush1 has joined
1638 2011-06-30 08:26:16 d1g1t4l has joined
1639 2011-06-30 08:27:56 da2ce7 has joined
1640 2011-06-30 08:30:41 karnac has quit (Quit: karnac)
1641 2011-06-30 08:30:52 Gonzago has joined
1642 2011-06-30 08:36:39 roconnor has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1643 2011-06-30 08:37:58 B0g4r7_ has joined
1644 2011-06-30 08:38:47 Kothar is now known as kon
1645 2011-06-30 08:40:10 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1646 2011-06-30 08:40:11 B0g4r7_ is now known as B0g4r7
1647 2011-06-30 08:50:10 abragin has joined
1648 2011-06-30 08:53:58 Eremes has quit ()
1649 2011-06-30 08:55:56 Grouver has joined
1650 2011-06-30 08:57:22 devon_hillard has joined
1651 2011-06-30 09:04:19 LightRider has joined
1652 2011-06-30 09:22:24 MtGox_Adam has quit (Quit: MtGox_Adam)
1653 2011-06-30 09:23:24 SomeoneWeird has joined
1654 2011-06-30 09:23:34 <SomeoneWeird> Can someone please help me setup pushpool? :\
1655 2011-06-30 09:23:37 <SomeoneWeird> it's being really gay
1656 2011-06-30 09:27:49 <SomeoneWeird> 1btc bounty?
1657 2011-06-30 09:28:20 <MrSam> lol
1658 2011-06-30 09:28:29 <MrSam> 1btc, i don't get even out of my bed for that !
1659 2011-06-30 09:28:40 <MrSam> but i can do it from here if you want :P
1660 2011-06-30 09:28:48 minus has quit (Quit: Bye)
1661 2011-06-30 09:29:17 BurtyB has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1662 2011-06-30 09:29:35 datagutt has joined
1663 2011-06-30 09:29:40 Shuro has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1664 2011-06-30 09:30:22 Shuro has joined
1665 2011-06-30 09:30:26 Choko has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1666 2011-06-30 09:31:05 Choko has joined
1667 2011-06-30 09:31:21 minus has joined
1668 2011-06-30 09:32:46 <SomeoneWeird> MrSam; heh how much you want for it?
1669 2011-06-30 09:32:48 <SomeoneWeird> :P
1670 2011-06-30 09:33:35 <SomeoneWeird> well everythings setup and installed, but all im getting is "Unable to connect to RPC server" on my miners
1671 2011-06-30 09:33:39 Gonzago has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1672 2011-06-30 09:36:29 B0g4r7 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1673 2011-06-30 09:36:30 <MrSam> hmm
1674 2011-06-30 09:36:40 <MrSam> netstat -natup |grep pushpool
1675 2011-06-30 09:37:13 <MrSam> you should get something like
1676 2011-06-30 09:37:14 <MrSam> # netstat -natup |grep pushpool | grep LIST
1677 2011-06-30 09:37:14 <MrSam> tcp        0      0 127.0.0.1:8338          0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN      7567/pushpoold
1678 2011-06-30 09:37:18 <MrSam> tcp6       0      0 :::8342                 :::*                    LISTEN      7567/pushpoold
1679 2011-06-30 09:37:21 <MrSam> tcp6       0      0 :::8344                 :::*                    LISTEN      7567/pushpoold
1680 2011-06-30 09:37:24 <MrSam> tcp6       0      0 :::8347                 :::*                    LISTEN      7567/pushpoold
1681 2011-06-30 09:37:53 [Tycho] has joined
1682 2011-06-30 09:40:06 <SomeoneWeird> pushpool doesn't wanna run
1683 2011-06-30 09:40:13 <SomeoneWeird> i run it, and it quits.
1684 2011-06-30 09:40:17 <MrSam> yeah
1685 2011-06-30 09:40:21 <MrSam> great debug mode there
1686 2011-06-30 09:40:26 <MrSam> check /var/log/syslog
1687 2011-06-30 09:40:59 <MrSam> do you want to give me access to your system or ?
1688 2011-06-30 09:41:38 MC1984 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1689 2011-06-30 09:41:45 <SomeoneWeird> Jun 30 08:43:40 x-Test pushpoold[31561]: Listening on host :: port 8342
1690 2011-06-30 09:41:45 <SomeoneWeird> Jun 30 08:43:40 x-Test pushpoold[31561]: Listening on host :: port 8347
1691 2011-06-30 09:41:45 <SomeoneWeird> Jun 30 08:43:40 xTest pushpoold[31561]: Listening on host :: port 8344
1692 2011-06-30 09:41:45 <SomeoneWeird> Jun 30 08:43:40 x-Test pushpoold[31561]: Listening on host 127.0.0.1 por
1693 2011-06-30 09:41:52 dan_a has joined
1694 2011-06-30 09:41:53 <ersi> "They can't connect!" "It isn't running"
1695 2011-06-30 09:42:01 <SomeoneWeird> not really, you got teamviewer or something MrSam?
1696 2011-06-30 09:43:09 tandy80 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1697 2011-06-30 09:44:58 altamic has joined
1698 2011-06-30 09:45:59 <SomeoneWeird> lol yeah, it's not running ersi; thats a problem >.>
1699 2011-06-30 09:46:30 lorph has joined
1700 2011-06-30 09:47:18 tandy80 has joined
1701 2011-06-30 09:48:44 <SomeoneWeird> MrSam?
1702 2011-06-30 09:50:52 erus` has joined
1703 2011-06-30 09:51:18 enquirer has joined
1704 2011-06-30 09:52:01 <MrSam> ?
1705 2011-06-30 09:52:15 <MrSam> yes ?
1706 2011-06-30 09:52:22 <ersi> "< SomeoneWeird> not really, you got teamviewer or something MrSam?"
1707 2011-06-30 09:52:33 <MrSam> i have ssh ?
1708 2011-06-30 09:52:46 * SomeoneWeird is confused
1709 2011-06-30 09:53:33 <ersi> SomeoneWeird: It looks quite silly offering VNC/Graphical remote control instead of text-based (ie. a shell through ssh or such)
1710 2011-06-30 09:53:40 <ius> SomeoneWeird: run it with -FE
1711 2011-06-30 09:53:43 <SomeoneWeird> no
1712 2011-06-30 09:53:49 <ius> And it should tell you what's wrong
1713 2011-06-30 09:54:05 <SomeoneWeird> ersi; i don't want to give him ssh, i have teamviewer running on my system that's ssh'ed into the server.
1714 2011-06-30 09:54:13 <SomeoneWeird> ok ius
1715 2011-06-30 09:54:26 <ersi> yes, I figured. still very lolly
1716 2011-06-30 09:54:32 <SomeoneWeird> >.>
1717 2011-06-30 09:55:40 <SomeoneWeird> someoneweird@x-Test:/pushpool-src$ sudo ./pushpoold -FE
1718 2011-06-30 09:55:40 <SomeoneWeird> [2011-06-30 09:52:35.764047] Listening on host :: port 8342
1719 2011-06-30 09:55:40 <SomeoneWeird> [2011-06-30 09:52:35.764303] Listening on host :: port 8347
1720 2011-06-30 09:55:40 <SomeoneWeird> [2011-06-30 09:52:35.764406] Listening on host :: port 8344
1721 2011-06-30 09:55:40 <SomeoneWeird> [2011-06-30 09:52:35.764496] Listening on host 127.0.0.1 port 8338
1722 2011-06-30 09:55:41 <SomeoneWeird> someoneweird@x-Test:/pushpool-src$
1723 2011-06-30 09:55:43 <SomeoneWeird> someoneweird@x-Test:/pushpool-src$ ps aux | grep push
1724 2011-06-30 09:55:45 <SomeoneWeird> someoneweird     31990  0.0  0.0   6220   588 pts/1    S+   09:52   0:00 grep --color=auto push
1725 2011-06-30 09:55:47 <SomeoneWeird> someoneweird@x-Test:/pushpool-src$
1726 2011-06-30 09:56:21 <ersi> I'd recommend using pastie.org pastebin.com or similar services for any output from a program
1727 2011-06-30 09:56:21 <MrSam> :)
1728 2011-06-30 09:56:31 <MrSam> pfft
1729 2011-06-30 09:56:31 altamic has quit (Quit: altamic)
1730 2011-06-30 09:56:54 <MrSam> SomeoneWeird: show me $cat server.json  | grep rpc.url
1731 2011-06-30 09:57:05 <MrSam> and do a telnet to that result
1732 2011-06-30 09:58:03 <MrSam> is your bitcoind running as server etc
1733 2011-06-30 09:58:24 <SomeoneWeird> you dont have to run bitcoind as server do you?
1734 2011-06-30 09:58:33 <MrSam> are you kidding me
1735 2011-06-30 09:58:39 <SomeoneWeird> >.<
1736 2011-06-30 09:58:42 <MrSam> bleh
1737 2011-06-30 09:58:48 <SomeoneWeird> i thought you had to for bitcoin but not bitcoind?
1738 2011-06-30 09:59:08 <MrSam> why does every one thinks because guiminer exist that they are 'l33tsys3m3n1n33rs"
1739 2011-06-30 09:59:18 <ersi> because they
1740 2011-06-30 09:59:24 <SomeoneWeird> ...
1741 2011-06-30 09:59:32 <ersi> 're people who don't care
1742 2011-06-30 10:00:40 Nexus_7 has joined
1743 2011-06-30 10:00:41 Nexus7 has quit (Disconnected by services)
1744 2011-06-30 10:00:48 <MrSam> every one wants to create a pool these days
1745 2011-06-30 10:00:49 Nexus_7 is now known as Nexus7
1746 2011-06-30 10:00:50 Nexus7 has quit (Changing host)
1747 2011-06-30 10:00:50 Nexus7 has joined
1748 2011-06-30 10:00:56 <MrSam> and setting up pushpool is the easy part
1749 2011-06-30 10:01:07 <ersi> yeah, no doubt.
1750 2011-06-30 10:01:09 <MrSam> nobody thinks about the payouts , fee's checking for transactions
1751 2011-06-30 10:01:10 <kinlo> you're better creating a minipool at triplemining :p
1752 2011-06-30 10:01:22 <MrSam> that my friend is absolutely right ! :P
1753 2011-06-30 10:01:28 <ersi> the frontend and management backend is the bitches
1754 2011-06-30 10:01:42 <kinlo> ersi: you have experience?
1755 2011-06-30 10:02:24 <ersi> a bit, yes.
1756 2011-06-30 10:02:45 <kinlo> :)
1757 2011-06-30 10:02:54 <kinlo> it is indeed a lot of work
1758 2011-06-30 10:03:23 <ius> So with that out of the way
1759 2011-06-30 10:03:30 <SomeoneWeird> MrSam, thsts not what with is for :)
1760 2011-06-30 10:04:23 <MrSam> so
1761 2011-06-30 10:04:31 <MrSam> do you allready have a bitcoin client running in server mode ?
1762 2011-06-30 10:04:35 <SomeoneWeird> ok im running it as server and it's still not working
1763 2011-06-30 10:04:51 <MrSam> so if you run netstat -natup |grep bitcoin | grep LIST
1764 2011-06-30 10:05:00 <ius> I'm sending a 'getblocks' message to the network, payload size (version(4) + start_count(1) + block_locator(32) + hash_stop(32) = 69), according to wiki. But my local node's debug log says the stream read fails due to being out of data..
1765 2011-06-30 10:05:04 <MrSam> you see that it's listening on port 8332 ?
1766 2011-06-30 10:05:23 <SomeoneWeird> tcp        0      0 127.0.0.1:8332          0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN      32106/bitcoind
1767 2011-06-30 10:05:52 <MrSam> SomeoneWeird: and you have pushpool configured with rpc.url" : "http://127.0.0.1:8332" ?
1768 2011-06-30 10:06:00 <SomeoneWeird> yes
1769 2011-06-30 10:06:10 <MrSam> you created a rcpuser en rpcpassword in bitcoin.conf ?
1770 2011-06-30 10:06:22 <SomeoneWeird> yes
1771 2011-06-30 10:06:32 <MrSam> also an allowedhost thing ?
1772 2011-06-30 10:06:37 <SomeoneWeird> yep
1773 2011-06-30 10:06:50 <ersi> Have you doubled checked these values, or are you just writing yes?
1774 2011-06-30 10:06:56 <MrSam> start pushpool with ./pushpoold -D 2 -E --foreground and check syslog again
1775 2011-06-30 10:07:09 <SomeoneWeird> i've checked and doublechecked erso
1776 2011-06-30 10:07:11 <SomeoneWeird> ok
1777 2011-06-30 10:07:15 <ersi> 'k.
1778 2011-06-30 10:07:20 <SomeoneWeird> ersi*
1779 2011-06-30 10:07:24 <SomeoneWeird> sorry ;p
1780 2011-06-30 10:07:27 <ersi> Just feels wrong when you were so quick to answer.
1781 2011-06-30 10:07:37 <MrSam> have you doublechecked that you can mysql -u username -p your_table to whatever is in your server.json ?
1782 2011-06-30 10:07:44 <ersi> Since I've worked in Support, it usually means the moron on the other end is blatantly lying, like they usually do :)
1783 2011-06-30 10:07:50 <MrSam> ersi: :))
1784 2011-06-30 10:08:03 <MrSam> PEBCAK !
1785 2011-06-30 10:08:07 <ersi> Why the fuck would you call support if you don't want your god damn problem solved
1786 2011-06-30 10:08:10 <SomeoneWeird> haha
1787 2011-06-30 10:08:23 * ersi draws a nostalgia facepalm
1788 2011-06-30 10:08:29 <MrSam> SomeoneWeird: so .. ?
1789 2011-06-30 10:08:40 <SomeoneWeird> wait someone rebooted it >.>
1790 2011-06-30 10:09:04 <MrSam> so the reward was 1btc for every new hour of support started right ?
1791 2011-06-30 10:09:06 vokoda has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1792 2011-06-30 10:09:12 <SomeoneWeird> -.-
1793 2011-06-30 10:09:18 <ersi> There's no weird firewall rules that's blocking local traffic? (iptables -L)
1794 2011-06-30 10:09:27 <MrSam> ersi: not possible if it's localhost
1795 2011-06-30 10:09:44 <ersi> Really? I've seen a few done
1796 2011-06-30 10:10:01 <MrSam> but we could make him do a iptables -P INPUT DROP;iptables -F :P
1797 2011-06-30 10:10:08 <SomeoneWeird> funny.
1798 2011-06-30 10:10:12 <MrSam> dont do it btw
1799 2011-06-30 10:10:14 <ersi> I mean, if you're using an network socket and not just a unix socket
1800 2011-06-30 10:10:32 <MrSam> pushpool doesnt work with unix sockets
1801 2011-06-30 10:10:34 <MrSam> not yet :/
1802 2011-06-30 10:10:56 <MrSam> SomeoneWeird: so, where are we ?
1803 2011-06-30 10:11:29 <SomeoneWeird> MrSam; http://pastebin.com/5tBtQxEh
1804 2011-06-30 10:11:50 <MrSam> but it's not listening ? it crashed ?
1805 2011-06-30 10:11:57 <MrSam> did you check the mysql connection ?
1806 2011-06-30 10:12:09 <SomeoneWeird> wait
1807 2011-06-30 10:12:17 <MrSam> is mysqld even running on 127.0.0.1 ?
1808 2011-06-30 10:12:55 <SomeoneWeird> yes
1809 2011-06-30 10:13:57 <prof7bit> "AddAddress()" (as seen in the log file, haven't looked into the code yet) seems really *extremely* slow and very disk-io bound. Is there really no faster way of maintaining a sorted list of these few addresses?
1810 2011-06-30 10:14:05 <ersi> and you're able to log on with "mysql -u<what's in your config -p<what's in your config>"
1811 2011-06-30 10:14:08 <ersi> ?
1812 2011-06-30 10:15:09 <MrSam> even more
1813 2011-06-30 10:15:17 <MrSam> did you even bother to create the right tables in mysql
1814 2011-06-30 10:15:28 <SomeoneWeird> yes i did -.-
1815 2011-06-30 10:15:30 <MrSam> ok
1816 2011-06-30 10:16:05 <MrSam> does : ls /tmp/*log
1817 2011-06-30 10:16:10 <MrSam> return something ?
1818 2011-06-30 10:16:51 <SomeoneWeird> yeah the requests and shares log
1819 2011-06-30 10:17:11 <SomeoneWeird> ok mysql seems to be fine, but i think the problem is in pushpool <-> bitcoind
1820 2011-06-30 10:17:12 <MrSam> both empty ?
1821 2011-06-30 10:17:13 Backburn has quit ()
1822 2011-06-30 10:17:16 <SomeoneWeird> yep
1823 2011-06-30 10:17:40 <MrSam> but you can do a 'telnet 127.0.0.1 8332' ?
1824 2011-06-30 10:18:26 <SomeoneWeird> Trying 127.0.0.1...
1825 2011-06-30 10:18:27 <SomeoneWeird> Connected to 127.0.0.1.
1826 2011-06-30 10:18:47 <MrSam> hmm
1827 2011-06-30 10:19:13 <MrSam> and ./configure didn't give you any fails ?
1828 2011-06-30 10:19:16 <SomeoneWeird> nope
1829 2011-06-30 10:20:30 <SomeoneWeird> :\
1830 2011-06-30 10:21:26 <MrSam> hmm
1831 2011-06-30 10:21:50 <SomeoneWeird> ok now im getting '[2011-06-30 10:19:26.086833] client host ::ffff:1<ip> port 11049 connected
1832 2011-06-30 10:21:51 <SomeoneWeird> ' in the console when i try connect, but on my end it's still can't connect to rpc
1833 2011-06-30 10:22:07 <MrSam> so pushpool is running ?
1834 2011-06-30 10:22:09 MtGox_Adam has joined
1835 2011-06-30 10:22:37 <iz> SomeoneWeird: does that bitcoind have all the blocks already?
1836 2011-06-30 10:22:45 <MrSam> show me
1837 2011-06-30 10:22:46 <MrSam> netstat -natup |grep 3306 |grep push
1838 2011-06-30 10:23:01 <SomeoneWeird> nothing
1839 2011-06-30 10:23:11 <SomeoneWeird> 3306 is mysql?
1840 2011-06-30 10:23:11 <MrSam> so pushpool isn't connected to mysql
1841 2011-06-30 10:23:17 <SomeoneWeird> oh right
1842 2011-06-30 10:23:19 <SomeoneWeird> hmm
1843 2011-06-30 10:23:26 <MrSam> you should get
1844 2011-06-30 10:23:27 <MrSam> tcp        0      0 127.0.0.1:58738         127.0.0.1:3306          ESTABLISHED 7567/pushpoold
1845 2011-06-30 10:23:32 <SomeoneWeird> iz; yes it does
1846 2011-06-30 10:23:42 <MrSam> show me
1847 2011-06-30 10:23:46 <MrSam> netstat -natup |grep 3306 |grep LIST
1848 2011-06-30 10:24:33 <SomeoneWeird> tcp        0      0 127.0.0.1:3306          0.0.0.0:*               LISTEN      -
1849 2011-06-30 10:24:49 <MrSam> bleh
1850 2011-06-30 10:24:51 <SomeoneWeird> 5394/mysqld
1851 2011-06-30 10:24:55 <SomeoneWeird> didn't run it as root
1852 2011-06-30 10:25:50 <MrSam> connect to mysql console and pastebin me the output of 'desc shares'
1853 2011-06-30 10:26:05 <SomeoneWeird> ok wait
1854 2011-06-30 10:26:25 AAA_awright has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1855 2011-06-30 10:26:39 <MrSam> your very lucky i'm in jesus mode today
1856 2011-06-30 10:27:10 <SomeoneWeird> http://pastebin.com/EC3iVqz8
1857 2011-06-30 10:27:16 <SomeoneWeird> yeah i appreciate it
1858 2011-06-30 10:28:21 <MrSam> kinlo: here ?
1859 2011-06-30 10:28:32 <SomeoneWeird> sw@x-Test:/bitcoin/bin/64$ ./bitcoind -server &
1860 2011-06-30 10:28:32 <SomeoneWeird> [1] 2550 sw@Nx:/bitcoin/bin/64$ ./bitcoind getblockcount
1861 2011-06-30 10:28:32 <SomeoneWeird> error: couldn't connect to server
1862 2011-06-30 10:28:38 <MrSam> wo wow
1863 2011-06-30 10:28:38 <SomeoneWeird> wtf ^
1864 2011-06-30 10:28:43 <MrSam> dont do it like that dude
1865 2011-06-30 10:28:52 <MrSam> ./bitcoind -server -daemon
1866 2011-06-30 10:29:03 <MrSam> and then ./bitcoind getinfo
1867 2011-06-30 10:29:26 <SomeoneWeird> ok thanks
1868 2011-06-30 10:29:30 <MrSam> works ?
1869 2011-06-30 10:29:41 <SomeoneWeird> still same rpc error
1870 2011-06-30 10:29:52 <SomeoneWeird> but yes bitcoind works
1871 2011-06-30 10:30:20 <MrSam> and you restarted pushpool afterwards ?
1872 2011-06-30 10:30:42 <SomeoneWeird> pushpool listens on 8338 yes?
1873 2011-06-30 10:30:47 <MrSam> no
1874 2011-06-30 10:30:52 <MrSam> euh
1875 2011-06-30 10:31:03 <SomeoneWeird> ?
1876 2011-06-30 10:31:20 <MrSam> cat server.json |grep port
1877 2011-06-30 10:31:23 <MrSam> those ports
1878 2011-06-30 10:31:29 <SomeoneWeird> yeah, which one though?
1879 2011-06-30 10:31:53 <MrSam> i connect to 8344
1880 2011-06-30 10:31:57 <MrSam> with my miner
1881 2011-06-30 10:32:25 <SomeoneWeird> omg yay, a new error! >.>
1882 2011-06-30 10:32:31 <SomeoneWeird> [2011-06-30 10:30:32.284267] mysql pwdb query failed at fetch
1883 2011-06-30 10:32:34 <MrSam> nice
1884 2011-06-30 10:32:35 <MrSam> thats good
1885 2011-06-30 10:32:44 <MrSam> do you have users in your users table?
1886 2011-06-30 10:33:08 <SomeoneWeird> oh, no. didn't get that far, wait a sec
1887 2011-06-30 10:33:20 <MrSam> pool_worker i think
1888 2011-06-30 10:33:32 <MrSam> password is cleartext
1889 2011-06-30 10:33:33 <SomeoneWeird> yeah
1890 2011-06-30 10:34:10 <SomeoneWeird> awesome, all working.
1891 2011-06-30 10:34:13 <SomeoneWeird> address?
1892 2011-06-30 10:34:43 <MrSam> 12EAFQavGcKGman3oYtovrftPtTfR95oMo
1893 2011-06-30 10:35:05 <kinlo> MrSam: yes
1894 2011-06-30 10:35:10 <MrSam> don't forget to firewall all your ports except for the pushpool port
1895 2011-06-30 10:35:32 <SomeoneWeird> yeah we'll get to that, we just needed to get this working first :)
1896 2011-06-30 10:35:34 erus` has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1897 2011-06-30 10:35:49 <SomeoneWeird> sent :)
1898 2011-06-30 10:36:11 <MrSam> thank you sir
1899 2011-06-30 10:36:25 <SomeoneWeird> thank you for your help
1900 2011-06-30 10:36:34 <SomeoneWeird> even though i have no idea what the problem was
1901 2011-06-30 10:36:54 <MrSam> well you didn't start bitcoind as a -daemon
1902 2011-06-30 10:37:03 <SomeoneWeird> ah
1903 2011-06-30 10:37:06 <SomeoneWeird> ok
1904 2011-06-30 10:37:07 <MrSam> so i guess it's that
1905 2011-06-30 10:37:30 <MrSam> but pushpool really sucks for debug
1906 2011-06-30 10:37:38 <MrSam> it's really a 'if it works don't touch thing'
1907 2011-06-30 10:38:34 <SomeoneWeird> haha ok
1908 2011-06-30 10:38:46 stalled has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1909 2011-06-30 10:40:13 sacredchao has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1910 2011-06-30 10:40:38 wolfspraul has quit (Quit: leaving)
1911 2011-06-30 10:41:13 <SomeoneWeird> MrSam; does a share only get inputted into the table when it's completed?
1912 2011-06-30 10:41:19 <SomeoneWeird> *added
1913 2011-06-30 10:41:27 <MrSam> are you working with easy shares ?
1914 2011-06-30 10:41:33 <SomeoneWeird> err.
1915 2011-06-30 10:41:35 <MrSam>    # rewrite returned 'target' to difficulty-1?
1916 2011-06-30 10:41:35 <MrSam>   "rpc.target.rewrite" : true
1917 2011-06-30 10:41:39 <SomeoneWeird> yes
1918 2011-06-30 10:41:41 <SomeoneWeird> thats true
1919 2011-06-30 10:41:42 <SomeoneWeird> why?
1920 2011-06-30 10:42:04 jav__ has quit (Quit: leaving)
1921 2011-06-30 10:42:12 <MrSam> if that is true your miners will get easy shares
1922 2011-06-30 10:42:21 <MrSam> and every complete will be in the shares log
1923 2011-06-30 10:42:31 <MrSam> if it's false, every share found would be a bitcoin block
1924 2011-06-30 10:43:00 <MrSam> but you don't want that
1925 2011-06-30 10:43:11 <MrSam> so yes, when completed
1926 2011-06-30 10:43:16 <MrSam> also in /tmp/shares.log
1927 2011-06-30 10:43:18 <SomeoneWeird> oh ok thanks
1928 2011-06-30 10:43:29 danbri has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1929 2011-06-30 10:47:58 stalled has joined
1930 2011-06-30 10:50:05 pyro-DerWahre- has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1931 2011-06-30 10:53:45 <dan_a> Hi all, I'm trying to build the QT client under Windows and had problems (http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=15276.msg301371#msg301371) - does anyone know what shlobj.h and shlwapi.h are used for in the original client? Is it safe just to not include them?
1932 2011-06-30 10:55:06 danbri has joined
1933 2011-06-30 11:03:26 <ius> ..is getblocks even supposed to work? I've pretty much duplicated what the reference client sends (0x65 bytes payload) and it *still* reaches end-of-stream reading the payload
1934 2011-06-30 11:05:53 bobd0bb has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1935 2011-06-30 11:07:34 kon is now known as Kothar
1936 2011-06-30 11:10:53 bobd0bb has joined
1937 2011-06-30 11:16:11 Moral_ has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1938 2011-06-30 11:17:48 pyro-DerWahre- has joined
1939 2011-06-30 11:20:51 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: walletlock fixed, damn copy/paste errors
1940 2011-06-30 11:24:15 Tim-7967 has joined
1941 2011-06-30 11:24:15 Tim-7967 has quit (Changing host)
1942 2011-06-30 11:24:15 Tim-7967 has joined
1943 2011-06-30 11:24:58 BurtyB has joined
1944 2011-06-30 11:28:00 bwr has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1945 2011-06-30 11:28:05 alanp has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1946 2011-06-30 11:29:59 Incitatus has joined
1947 2011-06-30 11:33:03 altamic has joined
1948 2011-06-30 11:33:18 altamic has quit (Client Quit)
1949 2011-06-30 11:37:11 Grouver has quit (Quit: Page closed)
1950 2011-06-30 11:39:53 IncitatusOnWater has joined
1951 2011-06-30 11:40:01 <coderrr> i wish you could use the link http header to specify stylesheets
1952 2011-06-30 11:41:49 <ius> Gah, the serialization stuff is hard to track down with all the macros
1953 2011-06-30 11:42:11 Incitatus has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1954 2011-06-30 11:42:12 wardearia has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1955 2011-06-30 11:43:34 <ius> Which line should I look for unserialization in CBlockLocator?
1956 2011-06-30 11:44:01 MC1984 has joined
1957 2011-06-30 11:46:18 Clipse has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1958 2011-06-30 11:46:48 <Shuro> Hi there, i test with two bitcoin-clients on testnet, everything with the headless-variant of the client, but if i transfer 1 bitcoin, i have to pay 0.005 fee without permission
1959 2011-06-30 11:47:16 f33x has joined
1960 2011-06-30 11:48:01 meelu has joined
1961 2011-06-30 11:48:50 <meelu> i want to start the genesis block, recomended specs people?
1962 2011-06-30 11:49:43 <ius> You're not making much sense I'm afraid - what?
1963 2011-06-30 11:51:02 <MrSam> :P
1964 2011-06-30 11:51:33 <sacarlson> meelu: try Multicoin
1965 2011-06-30 11:52:17 <sacarlson> meelu: you can setup a preminted set of coins or set a rate you want them to be produced
1966 2011-06-30 11:52:39 <sacarlson> meelu: what do you want to use it for?
1967 2011-06-30 11:52:59 <meelu> well setting up my own currency with the open source of bitcoin sacarlson
1968 2011-06-30 11:53:10 <SomeoneWeird> sacarlson, got a link to multicoin?
1969 2011-06-30 11:53:24 <sacarlson> meelu: SomeoneWeird: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=24209.0
1970 2011-06-30 11:53:27 <meelu> http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=24209.0
1971 2011-06-30 11:53:35 <sacarlson> yes
1972 2011-06-30 11:53:39 <meelu> https://github.com/sacarlson/MultiCoin
1973 2011-06-30 11:54:17 <meelu> sacarlson, you seem to have the most knowledge about this
1974 2011-06-30 11:54:19 <sacarlson> meelu: ok for one thing you will need to put a base on your IRC bootstrap address
1975 2011-06-30 11:54:29 <meelu> should i setup an irc server?
1976 2011-06-30 11:54:41 <sacarlson> meelu: you could be you don't need to
1977 2011-06-30 11:54:46 <sacarlson> but
1978 2011-06-30 11:54:54 <meelu> i would rather control it though right
1979 2011-06-30 11:55:41 <sacarlson> meelu: ok then you can do that,  also
1980 2011-06-30 11:56:11 <meelu> because il be starting a new service and only going to accept my own currency, plus bitcoin
1981 2011-06-30 11:56:15 <sacarlson> meelu: I don't have a version for licenced minners yet but when it is released you should move to that for a small network
1982 2011-06-30 11:56:31 f33x has quit (Quit: f33x)
1983 2011-06-30 11:57:15 <sacarlson> meelu: did you read the documents in the release about createing a new block?
1984 2011-06-30 11:57:24 <meelu> i did but not fully
1985 2011-06-30 11:57:48 <sacarlson> meelu: well how far did you get?
1986 2011-06-30 11:57:56 <sacarlson> meelu: can you send me a weeds?
1987 2011-06-30 11:58:05 <meelu> no i havent gotten that far
1988 2011-06-30 11:58:30 wardearia has joined
1989 2011-06-30 11:58:43 <sacarlson> meelu: well if you can't even test the client with the weedsnet I would hold off making a new currency
1990 2011-06-30 11:59:15 <meelu> i can, i just havent gotten time till now to actually use it, i have bitcoind running and all
1991 2011-06-30 11:59:51 <sacarlson> meelu: ok with what config file?
1992 2011-06-30 12:00:45 <sacarlson> meelu: for this you should move our chat to #mulitcoin  as this is for bitcoin
1993 2011-06-30 12:01:12 <topi`> we need more hot chicks advocating bitcoin like the one in the "rocketboom bitcoin" youtube video :)
1994 2011-06-30 12:01:36 <ius> Hmmf, made some progress.
1995 2011-06-30 12:01:37 <topi`> preferably with a I like BTC shirt instead of "I like NY" ;)
1996 2011-06-30 12:01:47 <topi`> although nothing wrong with NYC, I was there once
1997 2011-06-30 12:02:09 <ius> Can anyone explain main.h:1258 (nType & SER_GETHASH) - where's nType coming from?
1998 2011-06-30 12:02:15 viggi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1999 2011-06-30 12:04:29 EPiSKiNG- has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2000 2011-06-30 12:05:07 f33x has joined
2001 2011-06-30 12:07:15 viggi has joined
2002 2011-06-30 12:08:17 <pixglen> qn: if i receive bitcoins on 10 addresses, and then send them out from my wallet (e.g. using the JSONRPC API), which one if any of the addresses does it pick to send from??
2003 2011-06-30 12:08:43 <ersi> ;;bc,blocks
2004 2011-06-30 12:08:43 <gribble> 134019
2005 2011-06-30 12:08:57 <ersi> bleh, updating blockchain sucks
2006 2011-06-30 12:09:37 <SomeoneWeird> pixglen; if it's more than the amount of bitcoins in one address it uses another; i /THINK/ it's random though. (or it might be the address with the most coins in it, to save on fees)
2007 2011-06-30 12:11:32 Nexus7 has quit ()
2008 2011-06-30 12:11:42 agricocb has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
2009 2011-06-30 12:11:48 <pixglen> just wondering whether it's possible to secure a server this way: pre-gen a stack of addresses so that you can assign them to new incoming accounts, then have your wallet on a (physically) separate server
2010 2011-06-30 12:11:54 EPiSKiNG- has joined
2011 2011-06-30 12:11:54 stalled has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2012 2011-06-30 12:12:13 Nexus7 has joined
2013 2011-06-30 12:12:39 <pixglen> problem is, the separate server will still have to tell the public server whether particular addresses/accounts had money coming in or not
2014 2011-06-30 12:12:59 <SomeoneWeird> pixglen; still don't think hachque's way will work? ;) but yes, that will work, if you gen the addresses on the seperate server then get the priv keys on the main server
2015 2011-06-30 12:13:30 mmoya has joined
2016 2011-06-30 12:13:32 <SomeoneWeird> pixglen; no, if theres only a limited number of addresses you could have a job running every minute or so to check blockexplorer or something
2017 2011-06-30 12:14:05 <pixglen> SomeoneWeird: oh i'm sure it will work, at least if the private keys are sent down to the bitcoin API or you create a different client to talk the protocol, it just that it's a lot of work and will need a lot of verification
2018 2011-06-30 12:14:06 abragin has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2019 2011-06-30 12:14:44 <SomeoneWeird> pixglen; we don't need a seperate client; php + curl.
2020 2011-06-30 12:15:21 <jrmithdobbs> ;;bc,blocks
2021 2011-06-30 12:15:21 <gribble> 134020
2022 2011-06-30 12:15:46 <pixglen> the frustrating thing is, so many of the API's don't actually involve the private key in any way shape or form -- you could almost cleave off the dangerous spending API's from the discovery API's
2023 2011-06-30 12:15:48 suriv_ has joined
2024 2011-06-30 12:15:53 <Shuro> MMavipc: Are you here?
2025 2011-06-30 12:16:20 abragin has joined
2026 2011-06-30 12:16:22 abragin has quit (Changing host)
2027 2011-06-30 12:16:22 abragin has joined
2028 2011-06-30 12:16:37 <pixglen> SomeoneWeird: how so? you will write something that talks the bitcoin protocol in php + curl? at the very least isn't that a binary protocol through TCP/IP sockets?
2029 2011-06-30 12:16:42 wolfspraul has joined
2030 2011-06-30 12:17:21 <pixglen> SomeoneWeird: whereas, you would be 90% of the way there already with the existing bitcoin sources
2031 2011-06-30 12:17:36 <pixglen> SomeoneWeird: still, getting the last 10% right will be a bugger
2032 2011-06-30 12:17:46 <Shuro> MMavipc: i saw in the bitcoin-forum a question from you "to calculate the transaction-fee with php", did you found a solution?
2033 2011-06-30 12:17:51 <SomeoneWeird> pixglen; yeah I suppose, but it shouldn't be that hard to code a function in the client that uses the priv address to send coins; then just adding a rpc control for it
2034 2011-06-30 12:18:18 <SomeoneWeird> pixglen; yes, but thats not what we want todo, we're locking this thing down from the start
2035 2011-06-30 12:19:01 suriv has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2036 2011-06-30 12:20:35 <SomeoneWeird> pixglen; im pretty sure you can use tcpip in curl
2037 2011-06-30 12:20:58 stalled has joined
2038 2011-06-30 12:21:08 erus` has joined
2039 2011-06-30 12:21:21 <Shuro> how can i calculate the fee for (not yet sent) transactions
2040 2011-06-30 12:21:22 <Shuro> ?
2041 2011-06-30 12:23:53 <BlueMatt> currently, you cant
2042 2011-06-30 12:24:10 <BlueMatt> only in the gui will it prompt you if you want to send
2043 2011-06-30 12:24:20 <BlueMatt> however, have I got a branch for you ;)
2044 2011-06-30 12:24:44 <BlueMatt> its not updated against CWallet so it wont apply to master, but it works if you reset to it
2045 2011-06-30 12:24:50 <BlueMatt> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/289
2046 2011-06-30 12:24:59 <BlueMatt> specifically the 3rd commit
2047 2011-06-30 12:26:10 <Shuro> CWallet?
2048 2011-06-30 12:26:18 <BlueMatt> latest git head
2049 2011-06-30 12:26:26 <BlueMatt> it was a major restructure of wallet code
2050 2011-06-30 12:28:06 <Shuro> Okay, that seems nice, but i'am no good coder and git user, how can i build a client with this Client-Branch?
2051 2011-06-30 12:28:50 <BlueMatt> git remote add TheBlueMatt https://github.com/TheBlueMatt/bitcoin.git; git fetch TheBlueMatt; git checkout TheBlueMatt/feefix; cd src; make -f makefile.unix -j2 USE_UPNP= bitcoind
2052 2011-06-30 12:28:51 <BlueMatt> :)
2053 2011-06-30 12:29:07 <Shuro> Thank you!!
2054 2011-06-30 12:29:20 <ius> BlueMatt: Do you know where 'nType' comes from in serialization functions? The unserialization for CBlockLocator only seems to read a version field if SER_GETHASH is set in nType..
2055 2011-06-30 12:29:50 <BlueMatt> iirc it comes from VERSION
2056 2011-06-30 12:30:11 <BlueMatt> no sorry
2057 2011-06-30 12:30:12 <BlueMatt> its always 0
2058 2011-06-30 12:30:13 <ius> From the services field?
2059 2011-06-30 12:30:18 <ius> Oh
2060 2011-06-30 12:30:28 <BlueMatt> as its the first version of serialization
2061 2011-06-30 12:30:41 <BlueMatt> look in serialize.h #define IMPLEMENT_SERIALIZE(statements)
2062 2011-06-30 12:30:47 <ius> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_specification#getblocks says there's a version field though
2063 2011-06-30 12:31:07 <ius> But it never reads that field if SER_HASH isn't set
2064 2011-06-30 12:31:11 meelu has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2065 2011-06-30 12:31:28 <BlueMatt> no clue, the wiki might be wrong
2066 2011-06-30 12:32:04 <ius> Mmyeah, the client itself does include the version field indeed as far as I can see.. :|
2067 2011-06-30 12:32:18 <BlueMatt> is SER_HASH set?
2068 2011-06-30 12:32:26 <BlueMatt> no, nevermind shouldnt be
2069 2011-06-30 12:33:21 <ius> Well, currently it's choking on my packet, as it reads the size of the block_locator[] it actually gets a byte from the version field
2070 2011-06-30 12:33:52 <ius> Which means the version field is never read (for my implementation?) - I do have services=1 like the reference client
2071 2011-06-30 12:34:00 <Shuro> BlueMatt: did i need something else for this? make makes errors :-(  headers.h:43:20: fatal error: db_cxx.h: Datei oder Verzeichnis nicht gefunden
2072 2011-06-30 12:34:21 <BlueMatt> Shuro: you need to install bdb c++ headers
2073 2011-06-30 12:35:13 Speeder has joined
2074 2011-06-30 12:35:27 b4epoche_ has joined
2075 2011-06-30 12:36:28 tandy80 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2076 2011-06-30 12:36:41 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
2077 2011-06-30 12:37:49 mmoya has joined
2078 2011-06-30 12:38:36 <Shuro> BlueMatt: Okay...i only need to find them in opensuse rep
2079 2011-06-30 12:39:24 <BlueMatt> Shuro: not sure about opensuse, but for debian package names look at doc/build_unix.txt
2080 2011-06-30 12:39:38 <BlueMatt> they are probably similar
2081 2011-06-30 12:41:26 meelu has joined
2082 2011-06-30 12:41:27 meelu has quit (Changing host)
2083 2011-06-30 12:41:27 meelu has joined
2084 2011-06-30 12:41:58 agricocb has joined
2085 2011-06-30 12:43:09 denisx has joined
2086 2011-06-30 12:43:39 EPiSKiNG- has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2087 2011-06-30 12:49:44 EPiSKiNG- has joined
2088 2011-06-30 12:51:26 meelu has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2089 2011-06-30 12:52:02 storrgie has joined
2090 2011-06-30 12:52:43 tandy80 has joined
2091 2011-06-30 12:55:40 wolfspraul has quit (Quit: leaving)
2092 2011-06-30 12:57:41 datagutt has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
2093 2011-06-30 12:59:30 MetaV has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2094 2011-06-30 13:00:44 IncitatusOnWater has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2095 2011-06-30 13:03:44 MtGox_Adam has quit (Quit: MtGox_Adam)
2096 2011-06-30 13:05:43 <ius> Solved it, somehow my services field was borked (all zeroes, so the NODE_NETWORK flag was missing)
2097 2011-06-30 13:05:49 `10` has joined
2098 2011-06-30 13:06:08 scott`_ has joined
2099 2011-06-30 13:07:26 falafell has joined
2100 2011-06-30 13:08:00 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2101 2011-06-30 13:08:01 nocreativenick1 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2102 2011-06-30 13:08:41 nocreativenick1 has joined
2103 2011-06-30 13:08:58 p0s has joined
2104 2011-06-30 13:11:22 <Shuro> BlueMatt: i've compiled your changes, but now i get "[8118003.310442] bitcoind[25608]: segfault at 0 ip 080af198 sp b5fc64b0 error 4 in bitcoind[8048000+374000"
2105 2011-06-30 13:12:06 <ius> Run it with gdb attached and get a backtrace
2106 2011-06-30 13:12:11 datagutt has joined
2107 2011-06-30 13:12:55 <Shuro> ius: i really dont know what you meen, how do i do that?
2108 2011-06-30 13:14:15 <BlueMatt> you get a segfault when doing what?
2109 2011-06-30 13:14:34 <BlueMatt> just opening?
2110 2011-06-30 13:14:54 <Shuro> when i try a sendfrom after "setautocommit false
2111 2011-06-30 13:15:03 <BlueMatt> hm...odd
2112 2011-06-30 13:15:28 Incitatus has joined
2113 2011-06-30 13:15:43 Nexus7 has quit ()
2114 2011-06-30 13:16:16 <Shuro> okay, it crashes everytome at "sendfrom"
2115 2011-06-30 13:16:19 Nexus7 has joined
2116 2011-06-30 13:16:52 b4epoche_ has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
2117 2011-06-30 13:18:29 <Shuro> okay, ive installed gdb, how do i use it that it helps you?
2118 2011-06-30 13:19:47 <SomeoneWeird> Shuro; gdb bitcoind <args>
2119 2011-06-30 13:19:55 <SomeoneWeird> then run it and do a backtrace
2120 2011-06-30 13:19:56 <SomeoneWeird> :P
2121 2011-06-30 13:19:59 <ius> gdb --args ./bitcoind <args>
2122 2011-06-30 13:20:02 <ius> run
2123 2011-06-30 13:20:07 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
2124 2011-06-30 13:20:09 <ius> <wait for segfault> bt
2125 2011-06-30 13:20:40 <MrSam> hmm
2126 2011-06-30 13:20:44 <MrSam> anyone from guiminer here ?
2127 2011-06-30 13:23:40 <Shuro> here the output from gdb  http://pastebin.com/str1X1nU
2128 2011-06-30 13:24:39 <Shuro> BlueMatt: did i eventuelly need another bitcoin-branch for your branch?
2129 2011-06-30 13:24:59 <BlueMatt> no, let me go debug that in a sec
2130 2011-06-30 13:25:01 <Shuro> BlueMatt: you said something about CWallet?
2131 2011-06-30 13:25:27 <BlueMatt> no, on purpose you didnt apply to latest master
2132 2011-06-30 13:25:38 <BlueMatt> which would break it
2133 2011-06-30 13:25:54 <Shuro> Okay, is it because i use the testnet?
2134 2011-06-30 13:26:05 <BlueMatt> no
2135 2011-06-30 13:26:27 <Shuro> ok, now its avaible: http://pastebin.com/str1X1nU
2136 2011-06-30 13:27:13 larsivi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2137 2011-06-30 13:28:31 larsivi has joined
2138 2011-06-30 13:29:32 <BlueMatt> ok, that makes no sense
2139 2011-06-30 13:30:17 <BlueMatt> it claims it cant access nIndex which is defined...period
2140 2011-06-30 13:30:42 <BlueMatt> let me go build it...
2141 2011-06-30 13:30:52 <Shuro> at begin ive made a "git clone https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.git", did ive got a to new version of bitcoin-client?
2142 2011-06-30 13:31:04 <BlueMatt> no
2143 2011-06-30 13:32:04 f33x has quit (Quit: f33x)
2144 2011-06-30 13:33:01 <Shuro> are the files in ~/.bitcoin/* compatible to modded versions of the client?
2145 2011-06-30 13:35:13 b4epoche_ has joined
2146 2011-06-30 13:35:37 DukeOfURL has joined
2147 2011-06-30 13:36:07 <BlueMatt> yea
2148 2011-06-30 13:36:38 <b4epoche> so, BlueMatt, what got you started on btc?
2149 2011-06-30 13:37:04 <BlueMatt> the security now episode a couple months ago
2150 2011-06-30 13:37:09 <BlueMatt> its a very interesting project
2151 2011-06-30 13:38:24 DukeOfURL is now known as xxx
2152 2011-06-30 13:38:35 <BlueMatt> Shuro: ah, found it
2153 2011-06-30 13:38:35 xxx is now known as xxx123
2154 2011-06-30 13:38:39 <b4epoche> yea, that was an interesting episode…  I watched it recently
2155 2011-06-30 13:38:44 <xelister> BlueMatt: what about Think About The Children
2156 2011-06-30 13:39:09 <xelister> how can you sleep at nights, according to your gov. it may be the worst thing ever for the Childreeeen besides Tor Freenet and Wikileaks
2157 2011-06-30 13:39:10 <Shuro> BlueMatt: can you fix it?
2158 2011-06-30 13:39:22 <HardDisk_WP> hey
2159 2011-06-30 13:39:28 <BlueMatt> Shuro: yea, 1 sec
2160 2011-06-30 13:39:36 <HardDisk_WP> i've got a bugreport for win7 x64 bitcoin gui
2161 2011-06-30 13:39:38 <xelister> ...and smoking a bit of medical mango or seeing a naked butt
2162 2011-06-30 13:39:44 <gmaxwell> heh: -rw-------. 1 gmaxwell gmaxwell 156M Jun 30 09:37 /home/gmaxwell/.bitcoin/testnet/wallet.dat
2163 2011-06-30 13:39:45 <HardDisk_WP> it doesnt respect the dpi setting...
2164 2011-06-30 13:39:50 xxx123 has quit (Client Quit)
2165 2011-06-30 13:40:02 <BlueMatt> xelister: I think Ill survive
2166 2011-06-30 13:40:07 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: god damn
2167 2011-06-30 13:40:19 <HardDisk_WP> the options window is layouted wrong, the "fee" inputbox isnt visible
2168 2011-06-30 13:40:20 <BlueMatt> HardDisk_WP: yea, well it mostly does
2169 2011-06-30 13:40:24 <xelister> BlueMatt: sure you will, but the children?
2170 2011-06-30 13:40:40 <xelister> they can buy drugs for the first time ever thanks to BitCoin
2171 2011-06-30 13:40:40 <BlueMatt> xelister: nope, they will all die, this is the last generation
2172 2011-06-30 13:41:19 <xelister> or buy purn on see a naked boobie
2173 2011-06-30 13:41:24 <xelister> think of the horrible consequences
2174 2011-06-30 13:41:28 <Shuro> BlueMatt: cool! if it fits my requirements i will donate you 10 btc! (from my testnet-account....sorry, i have no real btc's at all)
2175 2011-06-30 13:41:38 <xelister> apparently every one that does that then becomes a rapist and murderer
2176 2011-06-30 13:41:49 Blitzboom_ has joined
2177 2011-06-30 13:42:15 <xelister> they should just join the army to not become murderer or rapist. Some people say >10% of soliders in army are raped but thoes are the terrorists propaganda
2178 2011-06-30 13:42:34 <b4epoche> well, if /everyone's/ a murderer or rapist, then everyone will be fine
2179 2011-06-30 13:42:46 <Shuro> xelister: sounds like usa propaganda for me
2180 2011-06-30 13:42:54 Blitzboom has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2181 2011-06-30 13:42:54 <xelister> Shuro: oh you usa hater you
2182 2011-06-30 13:43:10 <b4epoche> wow, this channel really brings out the nuts
2183 2011-06-30 13:43:41 <b4epoche> #bitcoin-psycho
2184 2011-06-30 13:44:03 <xelister> indeed b4epoche, we should all be now working the taxes or helping motherland by enlisting, not making undermine currency like terrorists
2185 2011-06-30 13:44:22 <Shuro> xelister: yeah, germans must hate the usa! ;-) because of the usa we have lost the war (warning, only fun)
2186 2011-06-30 13:44:22 <xelister> s/undermine/undermining
2187 2011-06-30 13:44:43 <b4epoche> Shuro: war/s/
2188 2011-06-30 13:45:13 * xelister </irony>
2189 2011-06-30 13:46:11 <BlueMatt> Shuro: alright; git fetch TheBlueMatt; git checkout TheBlueMatt/feefix; make -f makefile.unix -j2 USE_UPNP= bitcoind; ???; PROFIT
2190 2011-06-30 13:46:13 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: okay, so it survived the overnight abuse... I left it running overnight doing constant lock/unlock,sending from random accounts to new addesses, changing passwords, moving funds between accounts
2191 2011-06-30 13:46:35 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: nice :)
2192 2011-06-30 13:46:48 <b4epoche> gmaxwell:  what tools do you use for testing?
2193 2011-06-30 13:47:11 <Shuro> BlueMatt: did you miss the "cd src"? :-)
2194 2011-06-30 13:47:15 <b4epoche> just custom builds?
2195 2011-06-30 13:47:16 <BlueMatt> Shuro: and if you have extra testnet coins to throw around, just send them over to the faucet: miGuMc6qtVEKS6Pf1jKddaa81DeHjMzkpB
2196 2011-06-30 13:47:24 <BlueMatt> Shuro: oh yea, that too
2197 2011-06-30 13:48:06 <gmaxwell> I have not tested sendmany, generate, or anything to do with the gui.
2198 2011-06-30 13:48:07 <Shuro> BlueMatt: i do so if iam finish (there is the place where i get them ^^)
2199 2011-06-30 13:48:29 <gmaxwell> b4epoche: a bunch of adhoc stuff made just for testing this.
2200 2011-06-30 13:49:12 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: well all those should be pretty dumb and work just fine...
2201 2011-06-30 13:49:21 <Shuro> It worx!
2202 2011-06-30 13:49:22 <BlueMatt> should being the key word there...
2203 2011-06-30 13:49:47 <gmaxwell> yea, well right, all of it is should. :)
2204 2011-06-30 13:50:12 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: the commit message for "Add wallet privkey encryption" stil says password.
2205 2011-06-30 13:50:13 <SomeoneWeird> Anyone know if pushpool caches user credentials? or does it check the database everytime a request is made?
2206 2011-06-30 13:50:22 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: oh, yea still didnt do that
2207 2011-06-30 13:52:23 Blitzboom_ is now known as Blitzboom
2208 2011-06-30 13:52:31 <Shuro> BlueMatt: is a function like "listalluncommitedtransactions" ?
2209 2011-06-30 13:52:38 Blitzboom has quit (Changing host)
2210 2011-06-30 13:52:38 Blitzboom has joined
2211 2011-06-30 13:53:09 <BlueMatt> Shuro: no, never did that
2212 2011-06-30 13:53:25 shLONG has joined
2213 2011-06-30 13:53:41 shLONG has quit (Client Quit)
2214 2011-06-30 13:53:50 shLONG has joined
2215 2011-06-30 13:54:29 <Shuro> ok, one error : ./bitcoind getinfo
2216 2011-06-30 13:54:39 <Shuro> answer: error: {"code":-1,"message":"ReserveKeyFromKeyPool() : read failed"}
2217 2011-06-30 13:55:25 shLONG has quit (Client Quit)
2218 2011-06-30 13:55:33 shLONG has joined
2219 2011-06-30 13:57:15 Huge_Troll has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
2220 2011-06-30 13:57:19 slush1 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
2221 2011-06-30 13:57:29 <Shuro> BlueMatt: whould it be possible?
2222 2011-06-30 14:00:18 vokoda has joined
2223 2011-06-30 14:00:47 xtalmath has joined
2224 2011-06-30 14:01:18 kermit has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
2225 2011-06-30 14:01:34 sacredchao has joined
2226 2011-06-30 14:01:35 Saab- has joined
2227 2011-06-30 14:02:16 NickelBot has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2228 2011-06-30 14:02:23 kermit has joined
2229 2011-06-30 14:02:26 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: ok, reworded, added some more stuff and added a comment to rpc.cpp
2230 2011-06-30 14:02:55 T_X has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
2231 2011-06-30 14:03:43 <BlueMatt> Shuro: sorry, I dont really feel like working more on this...its not gonna be merged for a while (if ever) so I dont really feel like rewriting it again and again
2232 2011-06-30 14:03:56 NickelBot has joined
2233 2011-06-30 14:03:58 Akinava has quit (Quit: Ухожу я от вас)
2234 2011-06-30 14:04:12 <BlueMatt> though specifically the commit and autocommit stuff that you are using might be merged eventually so maybe sometime I will work to rebase it
2235 2011-06-30 14:04:22 <BlueMatt> but right now, Ive got other stuff I need to work on
2236 2011-06-30 14:04:58 WildSoil has joined
2237 2011-06-30 14:06:41 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2238 2011-06-30 14:07:47 glassresistor has joined
2239 2011-06-30 14:07:54 <gmaxwell> dunno if you care about typos in the commit message: "could cuase the passphrase" -> "could cause the passphrase"
2240 2011-06-30 14:08:06 <Shuro> BlueMatt: ok, but i think i've got another bug
2241 2011-06-30 14:08:09 <BlueMatt> damn I cant spell
2242 2011-06-30 14:08:33 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: ok should be fixed
2243 2011-06-30 14:09:04 <upb> haha https://mtgox.com/press_release_20110630.html
2244 2011-06-30 14:09:14 Clipse has joined
2245 2011-06-30 14:10:17 liltoe has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
2246 2011-06-30 14:10:25 <xelister> "Late last week we discovered a SQL injection vulnerability in the mtgox.com code that we suspect is responsible for allowing an attacker to gain read-only access to the Mt. Gox user database."
2247 2011-06-30 14:10:34 <xelister> so it was not the myserious auditor
2248 2011-06-30 14:10:41 minimoose has joined
2249 2011-06-30 14:11:11 <BlueMatt> it was a mysterious auditor, but not a security auditor
2250 2011-06-30 14:11:22 <xelister> "We can attempt to blame the owner of the compromised account for the recent events but..."
2251 2011-06-30 14:11:24 <xelister> ^- ????????????????
2252 2011-06-30 14:11:31 <xelister> uh, no... you can not
2253 2011-06-30 14:11:36 <BlueMatt> never believe anything you hear before a but
2254 2011-06-30 14:12:05 <xelister> "The admin account responsible had more permissions than necessary" <-- so auditor account was compromised? or now some other admin?
2255 2011-06-30 14:12:17 <b4epoche_> so, what's this PayPal Policy Update they sent me email about?
2256 2011-06-30 14:12:28 <xelister> b4epoche_: what? somethin about bitcoin>?
2257 2011-06-30 14:12:31 <BlueMatt> xelister: clearly referring to the auditor/adming auditor
2258 2011-06-30 14:12:44 <BlueMatt> b4epoche_: probably spam
2259 2011-06-30 14:12:51 <BlueMatt> remember the entire db was released including your email
2260 2011-06-30 14:12:55 <b4epoche_> PayPal recently posted a new Policy Update. You can view this Policy Update by logging in to your PayPal account. To log in to your account, go to https://www.paypal.com and enter your member log in information. Once you are logged in, look at the Notifications section on the top right side of the page for the latest Policy Updates.
2261 2011-06-30 14:13:02 <xelister> "please do not hesitate to contact us. We’re reading every message"  someone will need a shrink and vacation
2262 2011-06-30 14:13:24 <BlueMatt> no shit
2263 2011-06-30 14:13:44 <xelister> probaly 100 hate emails / day
2264 2011-06-30 14:13:52 <BlueMatt> probably more
2265 2011-06-30 14:13:58 <BlueMatt> hopefully they have a binned response
2266 2011-06-30 14:14:10 <BlueMatt> or two or three
2267 2011-06-30 14:14:16 <Shuro> BlueMatt:  http://pastebin.com/5srP0XD2
2268 2011-06-30 14:14:31 <xelister> they could send out hand-signed paper latters with appology
2269 2011-06-30 14:15:05 <xelister> BlueMatt: is your President lending that autosign-automat that was used to sincerly massproduce 'personal' letters to RIP solider's families :>
2270 2011-06-30 14:15:24 <xelister> Sincerly, Mark.  ~M~a~r~k~
2271 2011-06-30 14:15:44 <BlueMatt> xelister: what would you expect, he kind of has a ton of stuff to be doing...
2272 2011-06-30 14:15:55 <Shuro> never saw this "./bitcoind listaccounts"  returns {"" : -2.00100000
2273 2011-06-30 14:16:00 <Shuro> }
2274 2011-06-30 14:16:10 <kinlo> that's normal
2275 2011-06-30 14:16:10 * b4epoche_ thinks he's handled this situation brilliantly
2276 2011-06-30 14:16:22 <xelister> BlueMatt: like... sending MORE soliders to die invading others for oilz? :}   well - how about not lying it was hand signed
2277 2011-06-30 14:16:28 <Shuro> kinlo: is it normal too if you have only one account?
2278 2011-06-30 14:16:34 <gmaxwell> xelister: are you ever on topic?
2279 2011-06-30 14:16:51 <b4epoche_> xelister:  what pos country you in/from?
2280 2011-06-30 14:16:56 * BlueMatt thinks this letter should have been released a while ago, or at least some of the info in it, but mark did handle it well aside from not very good communication
2281 2011-06-30 14:16:57 <xelister> gmaxwell: yeap, Im on the best 'topic'.  From silkroad :}
2282 2011-06-30 14:17:01 <kinlo> Shuro: you have your default account, which is always named ""
2283 2011-06-30 14:17:06 <xelister> b4epoche_: pos?
2284 2011-06-30 14:17:15 <kinlo> unless you have more then your default account, it looks just fine
2285 2011-06-30 14:17:26 <b4epoche_> xelister:  lrn2urbandictionary
2286 2011-06-30 14:17:42 <xelister> well Im in Poland
2287 2011-06-30 14:17:49 <b4epoche_> BlueMatt:  good communication takes time
2288 2011-06-30 14:17:50 <xelister> and Im not affraid to admit it sucks a huge dick
2289 2011-06-30 14:17:59 <Shuro> kinlo: i mean not the name "", i mean that it is negative
2290 2011-06-30 14:18:28 prof7bit has quit (Quit: erection reset by beer)
2291 2011-06-30 14:18:37 <BlueMatt> b4epoche: yes but "an auditor" should have been specified then people would have understood why the auditor was given so much control over the db unlike what an auditor would normally have been given
2292 2011-06-30 14:18:43 <b4epoche_> in fact, Mark probably spoke too soon about the 'auditor'
2293 2011-06-30 14:19:02 <xelister> BlueMatt: why hashes was given to auditor
2294 2011-06-30 14:19:05 <xelister> this was really bad idea
2295 2011-06-30 14:19:09 Diablo-D3 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2296 2011-06-30 14:19:25 <BlueMatt> xelister: it wasnt, as a requirement of the purchas mt had to leave the guy on an admin account on the db
2297 2011-06-30 14:19:29 <BlueMatt> hence the fail
2298 2011-06-30 14:19:36 <BlueMatt> but Im sure his account is read-only now
2299 2011-06-30 14:19:58 cacheson has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
2300 2011-06-30 14:20:07 <xelister> BlueMatt: read-only with limited view
2301 2011-06-30 14:20:12 <BlueMatt> yea
2302 2011-06-30 14:20:16 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: so when does this patch make it onto bitcoin git head?
2303 2011-06-30 14:20:34 molecular has joined
2304 2011-06-30 14:20:36 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: when you ack and gavin and jgarzik have a chance to look it over more thoroughly
2305 2011-06-30 14:20:50 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: if you do agree, could you post an ack to github and/or the mailing list?
2306 2011-06-30 14:22:52 <Shuro> i dont understand this T_T ./bitcoind getbalance says 14.999, and ./bitcoind getbalance "" says -2.001, but i have only the "" account
2307 2011-06-30 14:23:13 <BlueMatt> ShadeS: what does listaccounts show?
2308 2011-06-30 14:24:31 <gmaxwell> That sounds like something related to that "accounts don't show up until after daemon restart" thing that I haven't seen since applying that account patch.
2309 2011-06-30 14:24:48 huk has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2310 2011-06-30 14:24:52 <jeremias> what use are accounts, anyway
2311 2011-06-30 14:24:58 <b4epoche> BlueMatt:  I'm sure Mark was worried about placing blame on the old owner (since there still seems to be some loose ends with the transition of ownership)
2312 2011-06-30 14:24:59 pixglen has quit (Quit: pixglen)
2313 2011-06-30 14:25:00 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: what letter?  ("this letter should have been released a while ago")
2314 2011-06-30 14:25:07 <Shuro> listaccounts shows {     "" : -2.00100000; }
2315 2011-06-30 14:25:13 tower has joined
2316 2011-06-30 14:25:22 <b4epoche> https://mtgox.com/press_release_20110630.html
2317 2011-06-30 14:25:23 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: https://mtgox.com/press_release_20110630.html
2318 2011-06-30 14:25:45 <Shuro> BlueMatt: listaccounts shows { "" : -2.00100000; }
2319 2011-06-30 14:26:14 <BlueMatt> b4epoche: true, but he could have said, at a minimum "it wasnt an ordinary auditor, when we do finish figuring this all out, you will see that the auditor needed full access"
2320 2011-06-30 14:26:21 <BlueMatt> or not used the word auditor
2321 2011-06-30 14:26:29 copumpkin has joined
2322 2011-06-30 14:26:32 <BlueMatt> just say "someone who had admin access had his computer compromised"
2323 2011-06-30 14:27:06 larsivi has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
2324 2011-06-30 14:27:12 <xelister> also it needs to be explained wadup with DEAfags involvments
2325 2011-06-30 14:27:24 <xelister> allaged
2326 2011-06-30 14:27:45 <xelister> some users could be 1000% pissed about  this
2327 2011-06-30 14:27:55 <BlueMatt> ok xelister thats enough on this topic please
2328 2011-06-30 14:28:04 Gonzago has joined
2329 2011-06-30 14:28:13 <xelister> why BlueMatt this actually is important for some part of economy it seems
2330 2011-06-30 14:28:15 <BlueMatt> it really gets old
2331 2011-06-30 14:28:32 <BlueMatt> but its way off topic and gets *really* old
2332 2011-06-30 14:28:35 <xelister> leaking our data to authorities actually is rarerly discussed
2333 2011-06-30 14:28:45 SomeoneWeird has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2334 2011-06-30 14:29:01 <BlueMatt> but it shouldnt be discussed here
2335 2011-06-30 14:30:36 <b4epoche> give him a break, living in Poland has got to make you crazy paranoid ;-)
2336 2011-06-30 14:30:47 <Shuro> BlueMatt: did you know why there are different results for "getbalance"?
2337 2011-06-30 14:30:48 nerdyjim has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2338 2011-06-30 14:31:15 <BlueMatt> Shuro: nfc
2339 2011-06-30 14:32:06 NickelBot has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2340 2011-06-30 14:33:14 <xelister> b4epoche: most security aware users are in pl it seems
2341 2011-06-30 14:33:44 <xelister> and most lazy people not carying about huge inflation or being turned slowly into slaves are you know where ;)
2342 2011-06-30 14:34:55 <Netsniper> they are in california
2343 2011-06-30 14:35:01 <b4epoche> lotsa great innovations coming from Poland these days…
2344 2011-06-30 14:35:17 <gmaxwell> xelister: What does that have to do with the development of bitcoin software?
2345 2011-06-30 14:35:24 <jgarzik> gents,
2346 2011-06-30 14:35:26 <Netsniper> i like their sausage
2347 2011-06-30 14:35:34 <jgarzik> just /ignore xelister and have a happy life :)
2348 2011-06-30 14:35:56 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: whats this rumor of you writing a dns seed daemon?
2349 2011-06-30 14:36:08 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: I'll be rather lonely if I also ignore all the people he goads into talking to him! :)
2350 2011-06-30 14:36:35 <xelister> gmaxwell: since where we are not discussing economy here?
2351 2011-06-30 14:37:43 <Shuro> BlueMatt: nfc?
2352 2011-06-30 14:37:50 <ersi> jgarzik: That's such a great suggestion. +1 :)
2353 2011-06-30 14:38:05 <BlueMatt> ShadeS: no fucking clue
2354 2011-06-30 14:38:13 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: 50% true :)  writing something that looks at addr.dat, verifies working nodes, puts into another database, and then filters a random selection of -those- addresses.  the random selection is passed to djb's tinydns, which accepts a flat-file database of names/addresses.  tinydns data may be changed on the fly, without restarting the process.
2355 2011-06-30 14:38:26 <jgarzik> same code could be used with BIND + nsupdate with some hacking, I imagine
2356 2011-06-30 14:38:53 <jgarzik> I'm writing the "bitcoin address database -> address list" part
2357 2011-06-30 14:38:56 <BlueMatt> oh, well I was just rewriting mine to use sqlite db and put it in bind file
2358 2011-06-30 14:39:21 <BlueMatt> which doesnt use and addr dbs but just walks the network and calls getaddr on all the nodes it finds
2359 2011-06-30 14:39:38 <Shuro> BlueMatt: as shown in http://pastebin.com/5srP0XD2, i think the "denied" 3 btc transaction should not listet in listtransactions, or?
2360 2011-06-30 14:39:43 <BlueMatt> damn effort duplication
2361 2011-06-30 14:41:13 <denisx> has this todo with namecoin?
2362 2011-06-30 14:41:43 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: should I bother continuing or just wait a couple days for yours?
2363 2011-06-30 14:41:54 cosurgi has joined
2364 2011-06-30 14:42:05 <BlueMatt> (hint: mine kinds sucks: its php)
2365 2011-06-30 14:42:55 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: as a side note: what if a dnsseed host doesnt want to run a full bitcoin node?
2366 2011-06-30 14:43:06 xelister has joined
2367 2011-06-30 14:43:11 * xelister kicks BlueMatt in the balls
2368 2011-06-30 14:43:20 freakazoid has joined
2369 2011-06-30 14:43:39 <gmaxwell> running a full node would preclude low memory vpses which would otherwise be okay. Dunno if it matters much.
2370 2011-06-30 14:44:00 <BlueMatt> yea, that my problem
2371 2011-06-30 14:44:01 traviscj has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
2372 2011-06-30 14:44:16 <BlueMatt> I dont want to use a ton of resources on a vps which was donated by x or y to help bitcoin
2373 2011-06-30 14:44:20 Sedra has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2374 2011-06-30 14:44:25 cacheson has joined
2375 2011-06-30 14:44:29 Sedra has joined
2376 2011-06-30 14:48:36 Zarutian has joined
2377 2011-06-30 14:49:12 Incitatus has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2378 2011-06-30 14:50:43 <ius> Heh just re-pulled wallet key im/export and it doesn't compile
2379 2011-06-30 14:50:45 <ius> sipa, sipa..
2380 2011-06-30 14:50:55 MC1984 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2381 2011-06-30 14:51:35 <ius> ...which is not his fault
2382 2011-06-30 14:56:48 <Shuro> BlueMatt: Seems like it breaked my Wallet
2383 2011-06-30 14:57:23 ar4s has joined
2384 2011-06-30 14:58:17 lumos has joined
2385 2011-06-30 14:58:39 <BlueMatt> Shuro: that makes no sense, but sorry I really dont have time to examine it right now
2386 2011-06-30 14:58:48 <BlueMatt> its probably just some stupid code on my fault
2387 2011-06-30 15:00:05 <Shuro> BlueMatt: sad, but its okay
2388 2011-06-30 15:00:48 <Shuro> i hope your branch gets included soon, the idea behind this is awsome
2389 2011-06-30 15:01:10 <BlueMatt> well thats just one part of it, but its probably the only part that would be worth rewriting to get it merged
2390 2011-06-30 15:03:41 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: it's a fair question...  ultimately you only need bitcoin P2P node addresses on a dns seed.  the dns seed could call out and query a remote process for that information.  I was pondering a bitcoin RPC "get random P2P node addresses, with a decent freshness"
2391 2011-06-30 15:05:00 acfrazier has quit (Quit: ZNC - http://znc.sourceforge.net)
2392 2011-06-30 15:05:40 Phoebus has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2393 2011-06-30 15:05:43 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: yea, thats not a bad idea either, in any case, if you are working on that currently, how far off is it, ie should I wait for it and hack it up, or keep writing a shitty php one?
2394 2011-06-30 15:06:19 <xelister> BlueMatt: current irc seeding is not good enough then? hm indeed I do see long periods of 0 nodes on startup
2395 2011-06-30 15:06:30 <xelister> also it seems -addpeer and -connect options are not working too well
2396 2011-06-30 15:06:32 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: at the moment it is all thoughts and plans spit out to IRC, with zero code attached
2397 2011-06-30 15:06:44 acfrazier has joined
2398 2011-06-30 15:06:56 <BlueMatt> xelister: yea, I think eventually we will disable irc by default and move to dnsseed
2399 2011-06-30 15:07:19 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: ok, then Ill just wrap this php crap up really quick then and not put too much effort into it
2400 2011-06-30 15:08:03 <xelister> why disable and not use both?
2401 2011-06-30 15:08:13 Phoebus has joined
2402 2011-06-30 15:08:13 <BlueMatt> well, ok just default to dnsseed
2403 2011-06-30 15:08:35 darksk1ez has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2404 2011-06-30 15:08:38 <BlueMatt> and irc as a backup/not the default to pull addresses from
2405 2011-06-30 15:08:41 <xelister> btw Im done swifly kicking you just because I realized the on-topic thing I ment to say was not yet said ;)
2406 2011-06-30 15:08:50 <xelister> arent dnsseeds more easly blocked
2407 2011-06-30 15:09:05 <gmaxwell> xelister: to end the "omg bitcoin is a botnet" stuff
2408 2011-06-30 15:09:12 <xelister> you always read about govs seesing domains... close to the "rewritting DNSes" things
2409 2011-06-30 15:09:13 traviscj has joined
2410 2011-06-30 15:09:17 <xelister> gmaxwell: how this helps in any way?
2411 2011-06-30 15:09:19 <BlueMatt> not really, its just as easy to ban the ips or our irc servers
2412 2011-06-30 15:09:31 <xelister> gmaxwell: make a pool connect all zombies there
2413 2011-06-30 15:09:44 ar4s has quit (Quit: zZzZZz)
2414 2011-06-30 15:09:47 <gmaxwell> xelister: because bitcoin's irc activity is actually indistinguishable from a botnet.
2415 2011-06-30 15:09:51 <xelister> BlueMatt: sure technically but at least in nes more often you see DNS blocking in aciton
2416 2011-06-30 15:10:35 <gmaxwell> (funny storry: it was mentioned in #namecoin that #namecoin on lfnet had hit 6000 users, one of the namecoin users went and looked and came back 'omg there is a huge botnet in there!!')
2417 2011-06-30 15:10:36 <BlueMatt> xelister: true, so its probably best to leave irc as a backup maybe
2418 2011-06-30 15:10:48 <BlueMatt> xelister: but we also need tld diversity which we will work to get so...
2419 2011-06-30 15:11:02 warpi has joined
2420 2011-06-30 15:11:04 <xelister> BlueMatt: we could later add seeding tcp-nodes as another function of btcfn
2421 2011-06-30 15:11:04 <gmaxwell> xelister: thats not so! the irc is _already_ being blocked.
2422 2011-06-30 15:11:15 <warpi> hello, does anyone know who is running "bitcoin watch" ?
2423 2011-06-30 15:11:33 <xelister> overall freenet is the most uncensorable used thing today
2424 2011-06-30 15:11:33 <BlueMatt> warpi: tcatm iirc
2425 2011-06-30 15:11:35 <gmaxwell> xelister: it was blocked on verizon for ~24 hours a few weeks ago, for example.
2426 2011-06-30 15:11:41 <warpi> thx
2427 2011-06-30 15:11:42 <xelister> gmaxwell: noobs. reason?
2428 2011-06-30 15:11:55 <gmaxwell> Because someone connected and saw a botnet.
2429 2011-06-30 15:11:56 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Joerie de Gram * rd6a3611297c1 pushpool/server.c: cjson_decode: properly pass destination buffer size to uncompress http://tinyurl.com/3vuzttl
2430 2011-06-30 15:11:59 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Jeff Garzik * rbf4d2fbf4c03 pushpool/server.c: Merge pull request #39 from ius/devel http://tinyurl.com/3wwvy2s
2431 2011-06-30 15:12:01 <gmaxwell> (presumably)
2432 2011-06-30 15:12:28 <xelister> I dont get this irc==botnet stupid stereotype
2433 2011-06-30 15:12:30 <gmaxwell> xelister: we already have "seeding tcp-nodes", thats the network itself.
2434 2011-06-30 15:12:44 <gmaxwell> xelister: it's not just irc==botnet, bitcoin looks exactly like a botnet.
2435 2011-06-30 15:12:47 <BlueMatt> xelister: because many botnets (used to) use irc as a cc server
2436 2011-06-30 15:12:57 <xelister> gmaxwell: will not work if all seednodes are firewallet by national fw
2437 2011-06-30 15:13:14 Phoebus has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2438 2011-06-30 15:13:23 Heckie has joined
2439 2011-06-30 15:13:37 <gmaxwell> xelister: you're making a mistake in thinking that bitcoin is at all blocking resistant. It's not. Introductions are not the most of its problems by far.
2440 2011-06-30 15:13:48 folklore has joined
2441 2011-06-30 15:13:50 <gmaxwell> xelister: and I was just responding to your comment saying it should be added.
2442 2011-06-30 15:14:19 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: In any case, I think the IRC code should stay, but (eventually) be disabled by default.
2443 2011-06-30 15:14:32 <BlueMatt> agreed
2444 2011-06-30 15:14:50 <xelister> gmaxwell: I hope with #btcfn bitcoin will be totally unstopable
2445 2011-06-30 15:14:58 <xelister> like batman;  of the economy >_>
2446 2011-06-30 15:15:06 <BlueMatt> if anyone ever bothers to get around to writing it
2447 2011-06-30 15:15:07 <BlueMatt> ;)
2448 2011-06-30 15:15:35 <gmaxwell> or figuring out how you could actually mine and not constantly split using just it.
2449 2011-06-30 15:15:52 <gmaxwell> Or how transactions could be processed in reasonable time using it.
2450 2011-06-30 15:16:04 <xelister> mining in shadows will be ~-5% less profitable
2451 2011-06-30 15:16:10 dbasch has joined
2452 2011-06-30 15:16:13 <xelister> latency is ~30 seconds best, out of 10 minutes
2453 2011-06-30 15:17:01 TheZimm has joined
2454 2011-06-30 15:17:12 <xelister> but I guess in future there will be much more users
2455 2011-06-30 15:17:14 <xelister> then miners
2456 2011-06-30 15:17:30 <gmaxwell> 30 seconds sounds really fast for freenet.
2457 2011-06-30 15:18:03 <gmaxwell> (from an an initial publication to being successfully pulled from fetching nodes)
2458 2011-06-30 15:18:03 Gonzago has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2459 2011-06-30 15:18:14 DD- has quit ()
2460 2011-06-30 15:18:33 <xelister> yeap it may be longer, but FN is improving in tha area
2461 2011-06-30 15:18:52 <xelister> on Flip (freenet irc) pings as low as 30 sec back and forth where working
2462 2011-06-30 15:19:00 flykoko has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2463 2011-06-30 15:19:14 <xelister> but for now I think most importantly: there will be many users taht are not miners
2464 2011-06-30 15:19:18 bittwist has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2465 2011-06-30 15:19:28 <xelister> for mining itself TOR will be better probably
2466 2011-06-30 15:19:29 bittwist has joined
2467 2011-06-30 15:19:33 Workbench has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2468 2011-06-30 15:19:36 <xelister> unless TOR is tottally blocked too
2469 2011-06-30 15:19:42 <gmaxwell> It has to be much smaller than the mean time between blocks, or an attacker who just ignores the network and extens his own (0 invalids) will eventually produce the longest chain.
2470 2011-06-30 15:19:53 iToast has joined
2471 2011-06-30 15:20:02 <gmaxwell> well, good luck.
2472 2011-06-30 15:20:12 <gmaxwell> s/extens/extend/
2473 2011-06-30 15:20:12 <iToast> http://tinyurl.com/3brtz45 - DDWRT bitcoin
2474 2011-06-30 15:20:20 ar4s has joined
2475 2011-06-30 15:20:30 <diki> cool -> http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3a%2f%2fforum%2ebitcoin%2eorg%2findex%2ephp%3ftopic%3d17004%2e120
2476 2011-06-30 15:20:50 Workbench has joined
2477 2011-06-30 15:21:58 tower has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
2478 2011-06-30 15:26:05 Heckie has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2479 2011-06-30 15:26:14 warpi has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2480 2011-06-30 15:26:31 <gmaxwell> iToast: wtf. spam.
2481 2011-06-30 15:26:42 <iToast> XD
2482 2011-06-30 15:26:50 <iToast> If you say gulable slowly, it sounds like orange..
2483 2011-06-30 15:27:00 <iToast> btw
2484 2011-06-30 15:27:04 <iToast> i was ripped off my mining
2485 2011-06-30 15:27:05 <iToast> -_-
2486 2011-06-30 15:28:13 NickelBot has joined
2487 2011-06-30 15:31:26 cryptocnt has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2488 2011-06-30 15:31:32 tower has joined
2489 2011-06-30 15:31:33 anu has joined
2490 2011-06-30 15:32:06 darksk1ez has joined
2491 2011-06-30 15:32:18 mmoya has joined
2492 2011-06-30 15:32:59 prg3 has left ()
2493 2011-06-30 15:34:54 nhodges has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2494 2011-06-30 15:35:33 denisx has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2495 2011-06-30 15:36:06 iToast has quit (Quit: Page closed)
2496 2011-06-30 15:38:17 warpi has joined
2497 2011-06-30 15:38:40 warpi has quit (Client Quit)
2498 2011-06-30 15:39:01 warpi has joined
2499 2011-06-30 15:41:08 denisx has joined
2500 2011-06-30 15:41:10 bobke_ is now known as bobke
2501 2011-06-30 15:41:24 NickelBot has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2502 2011-06-30 15:41:43 freakazoid has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
2503 2011-06-30 15:44:12 lumos has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
2504 2011-06-30 15:45:00 wardearia has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2505 2011-06-30 15:45:47 NickelBot has joined
2506 2011-06-30 15:46:31 Backburn has joined
2507 2011-06-30 15:47:58 <xelister> when do you think countries may start to block FN on global network level... 3 months? year? more?
2508 2011-06-30 15:48:47 <b4epoche> FN?  regardless, I say never
2509 2011-06-30 15:48:50 <xelister> erm
2510 2011-06-30 15:48:53 <xelister> Bitcoin
2511 2011-06-30 15:49:00 <xelister> when do you think countries may start to block  *Bitcoin*  on global network level... 3 months? year? more?
2512 2011-06-30 15:49:13 <b4epoche> my answer stands
2513 2011-06-30 15:49:33 Titeuf_87 has joined
2514 2011-06-30 15:49:43 <xelister> b4epoche: hmm unfortunatelly FN is already blocked. Afair mainly in china
2515 2011-06-30 15:49:46 <Gekz> GLOBAL NETWORK LEVEL
2516 2011-06-30 15:49:46 <xelister> so TOR
2517 2011-06-30 15:50:00 <Gekz> xelister: which layer will they block it t
2518 2011-06-30 15:50:01 <Gekz> at
2519 2011-06-30 15:50:05 <xelister> Gekz: that means nationall firewall
2520 2011-06-30 15:50:18 <falafell> xelister, i think we need more users for that, big sites that start accepting it, then it will be shutdown
2521 2011-06-30 15:50:22 <upb> its a layer 9 firewall
2522 2011-06-30 15:50:28 <Gekz> layer 9?
2523 2011-06-30 15:50:30 <upb> yep
2524 2011-06-30 15:50:32 <Gekz> POWERFUL
2525 2011-06-30 15:50:32 <upb> osi layer 9
2526 2011-06-30 15:50:34 <Gekz> HOLY SHIT
2527 2011-06-30 15:50:43 <Gekz> like, even Chuck Norris couldnt break through that
2528 2011-06-30 15:51:13 <b4epoche> countries?  I thought you meant countries of importance
2529 2011-06-30 15:51:31 <Gekz> like AMERICA
2530 2011-06-30 15:51:35 <Gekz> or TEXAS
2531 2011-06-30 15:51:45 <upb> texas is an importan country
2532 2011-06-30 15:51:51 <b4epoche> Canada
2533 2011-06-30 15:52:14 ar4s has quit (Quit: ar4s)
2534 2011-06-30 15:52:18 * xelister calls SilkRoad to take the stuff away from this #
2535 2011-06-30 15:52:49 <b4epoche> anyone see Colbert Report earlier this week?  Bit about Texas being an uncontrollable rebel region?
2536 2011-06-30 15:54:46 karnac has joined
2537 2011-06-30 15:55:22 <xelister> b4epoche: didnt Texas opposed TSA recently, but eventually backed down?
2538 2011-06-30 15:55:38 amiller has joined
2539 2011-06-30 15:56:01 <b4epoche> recalls something like that...
2540 2011-06-30 15:56:20 <xelister> Alex Jones was involved?
2541 2011-06-30 15:56:25 <xelister> he needs to take BTC donations =)
2542 2011-06-30 15:56:36 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2543 2011-06-30 15:56:36 lumos has joined
2544 2011-06-30 15:57:17 kermit has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2545 2011-06-30 15:57:27 da2ce7 has joined
2546 2011-06-30 15:58:07 <b4epoche> actually, xelister, see last nights Colbert Report about Texas cities canceling fireworks for 4th of July
2547 2011-06-30 15:58:14 Kolky has joined
2548 2011-06-30 15:58:21 <xelister> b4epoche: why they did that
2549 2011-06-30 15:58:25 erus` has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2550 2011-06-30 15:58:33 <b4epoche> fireworks start fires
2551 2011-06-30 15:58:55 Phoebus has joined
2552 2011-06-30 15:59:23 conjre has joined
2553 2011-06-30 15:59:34 <xelister> ...
2554 2011-06-30 15:59:49 wardearia has joined
2555 2011-06-30 15:59:53 lumos has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2556 2011-06-30 16:00:05 AnatolV has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2557 2011-06-30 16:00:21 <b4epoche> hilarious bit…  watching it at comedycentral.com
2558 2011-06-30 16:00:22 TD has joined
2559 2011-06-30 16:02:33 <xelister> trviall bounty -> I will pay 0.20 btc for someone to calculate (;;bc,gend) how much 700 Mhash should generated (expected) during last 10 days and how much 1100 should since say 7 days. There was a diff change in the middle so you need 4 calculations. Rate me on -otc when done, pastebin how it was exactly calculated. Can do it myself ofc. but anyone want? :)
2560 2011-06-30 16:03:14 <xelister> days are a bit different I will tell
2561 2011-06-30 16:03:15 <xelister> days are a bit different I will tell
2562 2011-06-30 16:03:17 <Happy0> no, but i can offer you a pathetic derranged dance instead, for that fee?
2563 2011-06-30 16:03:32 <Happy0> here's a 5 second free sample
2564 2011-06-30 16:03:40 <lolcat> xelister: 12 and 18
2565 2011-06-30 16:03:42 <xelister> Happy0: are you nice topless girl with webcam
2566 2011-06-30 16:03:45 <Happy0> *dances derrangedly*
2567 2011-06-30 16:03:47 <Happy0> no =p
2568 2011-06-30 16:03:49 <xelister> meh
2569 2011-06-30 16:04:08 <lolcat> xelister: Want my bitcoin adress?
2570 2011-06-30 16:04:26 <lolcat> xelister: 1JtMJq7q611Thi9XmEcwfjfmVvSZXwxNBD
2571 2011-06-30 16:04:36 <lolcat> I will be expecting your 0.2 btc
2572 2011-06-30 16:04:36 <Happy0> lolcat: i believe he asked for you to list the calculations :P
2573 2011-06-30 16:04:50 <lolcat> xelister: I solved it in my head
2574 2011-06-30 16:05:02 <Happy0> haha, but surely you went through some process in your head
2575 2011-06-30 16:05:04 <Happy0> write it down =p
2576 2011-06-30 16:05:29 <Happy0> www.pastie.org
2577 2011-06-30 16:05:34 <xelister> you can send me your head tgoo
2578 2011-06-30 16:05:38 <lolcat> Hmmm -> I want those bitcoins -> numbers -> 12 is the first -> add 50%ish and I get 18
2579 2011-06-30 16:05:56 <Happy0> rofl
2580 2011-06-30 16:06:00 <Happy0> i give up
2581 2011-06-30 16:06:13 <xelister> meh fine I calc it myself
2582 2011-06-30 16:06:16 <lolcat> That was my thougth process
2583 2011-06-30 16:06:36 <lolcat> xelister: I need those bitcoins or I will have to give you a negative rating
2584 2011-06-30 16:06:42 <lolcat> For LYING
2585 2011-06-30 16:06:47 <Happy0> lolcat: he didn't lie
2586 2011-06-30 16:06:54 <Happy0> he clearly said "pastebin how it was exactly calculated"
2587 2011-06-30 16:06:59 <lolcat> He got a service and didn't pay
2588 2011-06-30 16:07:05 <Happy0> and you didn't specify 'exactly' how
2589 2011-06-30 16:07:09 <Happy0> you said vaguely =p
2590 2011-06-30 16:07:10 <Happy0> not exactly
2591 2011-06-30 16:07:15 <lolcat> Happy0: He did not say to post the pastebin anywhere
2592 2011-06-30 16:07:28 <Happy0> xelister: i will be expecting a 0.01 defence fee :D
2593 2011-06-30 16:07:29 <Happy0> joking
2594 2011-06-30 16:07:43 <Happy0> lolcat: you didn't sign anything, either...
2595 2011-06-30 16:07:48 <Happy0> if we're going to be that pedantic =p
2596 2011-06-30 16:08:12 nhodges has joined
2597 2011-06-30 16:08:33 <lolcat> Happy0: I did post it, the calculations and the answer
2598 2011-06-30 16:08:50 <lolcat> No place did it state you had to show him the result
2599 2011-06-30 16:10:15 <Happy0> lmao
2600 2011-06-30 16:10:23 <Happy0> epic troll is epi
2601 2011-06-30 16:10:23 <Happy0> c
2602 2011-06-30 16:11:08 <Happy0> lolcat: he also didn't specify who he would paid 0.2 coins to
2603 2011-06-30 16:11:12 <Happy0> only that he'd pay it
2604 2011-06-30 16:11:33 <Happy0> so, you shouldn't expect any coins
2605 2011-06-30 16:11:34 <Happy0> u mad?
2606 2011-06-30 16:11:39 <Happy0> pay*
2607 2011-06-30 16:12:02 <Happy0> xelister: i think you should give me those 0.2 coins just to spite him :D
2608 2011-06-30 16:14:50 coderrr is now known as coderrr`brb
2609 2011-06-30 16:15:02 coderrr`brb is now known as coderrr
2610 2011-06-30 16:15:14 tandy80 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2611 2011-06-30 16:15:19 <lolcat> Happy0: fuuu
2612 2011-06-30 16:15:25 snowing has joined
2613 2011-06-30 16:15:28 <Happy0> xD
2614 2011-06-30 16:16:07 <lolcat> Does anyone know a site where you can order condoms in printed packages?
2615 2011-06-30 16:16:17 josephholsten has joined
2616 2011-06-30 16:16:57 <ersi> lolcat: yeah, printed-fucking-bitcoin-development-condoms.com
2617 2011-06-30 16:17:21 <lolcat> ersi: -.-"
2618 2011-06-30 16:17:45 <lolcat> I want it to say: "Hey my name is $name" and on the other side "Want to be my friend?"
2619 2011-06-30 16:17:52 <ersi> what kind of question is that anyhow
2620 2011-06-30 16:17:54 <xelister> yeap -dev channel definatelly is more about development nowdays
2621 2011-06-30 16:18:06 <ersi> developing aids perhaps
2622 2011-06-30 16:18:11 luke-jr has quit (otg!~luke-jr@2001:470:5:265:222:4dff:fe50:4c49|Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2623 2011-06-30 16:19:12 B0g4r7 has joined
2624 2011-06-30 16:19:21 luke-jr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2625 2011-06-30 16:20:41 <lolcat> Self development perhaps
2626 2011-06-30 16:21:16 warpi has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2627 2011-06-30 16:21:41 Mononofu has joined
2628 2011-06-30 16:22:14 elnato is now known as midget
2629 2011-06-30 16:22:36 <gmaxwell> I'm guilty of the OT chatter too, for sure,  but it's obnoxious when you're trying to do actual development work and the useful chatter is being scrolled off by hitlergodwinlolcatfedhotdogs.
2630 2011-06-30 16:22:44 midget is now known as Guest36796
2631 2011-06-30 16:24:00 <b4epoche_> yea, I enjoy OT banter but it's good to only have it during idle time
2632 2011-06-30 16:24:18 p0s has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2633 2011-06-30 16:24:36 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2634 2011-06-30 16:24:41 MetaV has joined
2635 2011-06-30 16:25:09 warpi has joined
2636 2011-06-30 16:25:10 amiller has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2637 2011-06-30 16:26:14 karnac has quit (Quit: karnac)
2638 2011-06-30 16:26:38 da2ce7 has joined
2639 2011-06-30 16:27:46 rich has quit (Quit: rich)
2640 2011-06-30 16:30:39 Guest36796 is now known as elnato
2641 2011-06-30 16:31:13 karnac has joined
2642 2011-06-30 16:31:24 erus` has joined
2643 2011-06-30 16:35:06 Cherothald has joined
2644 2011-06-30 16:35:35 pklaus has joined
2645 2011-06-30 16:36:02 d1g1t4l has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2646 2011-06-30 16:36:13 <xelister> how to backup wallet to paper?
2647 2011-06-30 16:36:28 <copumpkin> open it in a hex editor and print it out
2648 2011-06-30 16:36:44 <xelister> copumpkin: isnt there mosetinhf more advanced
2649 2011-06-30 16:37:00 <xelister> something
2650 2011-06-30 16:39:41 <xelister> how to dump a private key for given transaction so that I can import it later to another wallet?
2651 2011-06-30 16:39:56 a4kj55 has joined
2652 2011-06-30 16:40:00 zapnap has joined
2653 2011-06-30 16:40:24 nhodges has quit (Disconnected by services)
2654 2011-06-30 16:40:28 a4kj55 is now known as nhodges
2655 2011-06-30 16:40:58 pklaus has left ()
2656 2011-06-30 16:43:10 B0g4r7_ has joined
2657 2011-06-30 16:43:20 <snowing> xelister: http://ronja.twibright.com/optar/ maybe?
2658 2011-06-30 16:43:29 <xelister> snowing: yea seen it.. hm.
2659 2011-06-30 16:44:19 sammal has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2660 2011-06-30 16:45:32 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2661 2011-06-30 16:45:33 B0g4r7_ is now known as B0g4r7
2662 2011-06-30 16:45:35 traviscj has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2663 2011-06-30 16:46:34 brunner has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2664 2011-06-30 16:46:43 glassresistor has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2665 2011-06-30 16:46:48 Gonzago has joined
2666 2011-06-30 16:47:08 meelu has joined
2667 2011-06-30 16:47:41 sacredchao has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2668 2011-06-30 16:47:51 xxx123 has joined
2669 2011-06-30 16:48:04 pyro-DerWahre- has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2670 2011-06-30 16:48:54 spirals is now known as Sqirals
2671 2011-06-30 16:49:57 Mononofu has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2672 2011-06-30 16:50:07 kermit has joined
2673 2011-06-30 16:50:24 Sqirals is now known as spirals
2674 2011-06-30 16:50:42 <phantomcircuit> xelister, you really only need the bignum private key
2675 2011-06-30 16:50:47 <phantomcircuit> which should onyl be 256 bits
2676 2011-06-30 16:50:58 <phantomcircuit> you have to find it first though
2677 2011-06-30 16:51:41 meelu has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
2678 2011-06-30 16:51:43 glassresistor has joined
2679 2011-06-30 16:51:48 xxx123 is now known as DukeOfURL
2680 2011-06-30 16:51:49 denisx has quit (Quit: denisx)
2681 2011-06-30 16:53:15 traviscj has joined
2682 2011-06-30 16:53:30 <xelister>  ~/bitcoind listaccounts
2683 2011-06-30 16:53:31 <xelister> {    "" : -121.02000000,
2684 2011-06-30 16:53:34 <xelister> what kind of mocker is this
2685 2011-06-30 16:54:07 <xelister> it includes all things ever sent?
2686 2011-06-30 16:54:33 warpi has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2687 2011-06-30 16:55:18 <phantomcircuit> xelister, no it's the default account
2688 2011-06-30 16:55:31 <phantomcircuit> so you have other accounts you have "move"d funds to
2689 2011-06-30 16:55:41 <xelister> why is it negative, it includes debits?
2690 2011-06-30 16:55:49 <xelister> it means I totally sent out 121 coins?
2691 2011-06-30 16:55:59 <phantomcircuit> not necessarily
2692 2011-06-30 16:56:00 <phantomcircuit> lol
2693 2011-06-30 16:56:07 <phantomcircuit> listtransactions ""
2694 2011-06-30 16:56:34 <xelister> when moving between accounts using "move" RPC, this is visible later in blockchain?
2695 2011-06-30 16:56:54 <phantomcircuit> no not at all
2696 2011-06-30 16:56:58 <phantomcircuit> it's an internal accounting
2697 2011-06-30 16:58:28 eternal1 has joined
2698 2011-06-30 17:02:47 traviscj has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2699 2011-06-30 17:04:12 warpi has joined
2700 2011-06-30 17:04:14 MtGox_Adam has joined
2701 2011-06-30 17:04:49 <xelister> I ahve 0 connections
2702 2011-06-30 17:04:52 <xelister> :[
2703 2011-06-30 17:04:53 Technic has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
2704 2011-06-30 17:05:39 Mononofu has joined
2705 2011-06-30 17:07:48 dan_a has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2706 2011-06-30 17:08:28 MtGox_Adam has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2707 2011-06-30 17:13:04 conjre has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2708 2011-06-30 17:13:13 RobinPKR has joined
2709 2011-06-30 17:13:28 freakazoid has joined
2710 2011-06-30 17:13:57 scott`_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2711 2011-06-30 17:16:29 pyro-DerWahre- has joined
2712 2011-06-30 17:17:28 josephholsten has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2713 2011-06-30 17:24:23 dbasch has quit (Quit: dbasch)
2714 2011-06-30 17:26:04 sabalaba has joined
2715 2011-06-30 17:31:11 darbsllim has joined
2716 2011-06-30 17:32:49 Phoebus has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2717 2011-06-30 17:36:04 flykoko has joined
2718 2011-06-30 17:36:54 traviscj has joined
2719 2011-06-30 17:40:04 NickelBot has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2720 2011-06-30 17:41:29 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2721 2011-06-30 17:42:18 NickelBot has joined
2722 2011-06-30 17:42:42 scott` has joined
2723 2011-06-30 17:43:06 <Zarutian> ;;bc,stats
2724 2011-06-30 17:43:08 scott` is now known as Guest44186
2725 2011-06-30 17:43:12 <gribble> Current Blocks: 134068 | Current Difficulty: 1379223.4296725 | Next Difficulty At Block: 135071 | Next Difficulty In: 1003 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 6 days, 4 hours, 29 minutes, and 59 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1554223.28131361
2726 2011-06-30 17:43:26 da2ce7 has joined
2727 2011-06-30 17:43:36 traviscj has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2728 2011-06-30 17:43:44 kish has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
2729 2011-06-30 17:43:47 kish_ has joined
2730 2011-06-30 17:44:14 traviscj has joined
2731 2011-06-30 17:44:36 brunner has joined
2732 2011-06-30 17:45:43 <_W_> Do big sites that receive bitcoins (e.g. exchanges) just do it through a bitcoind instance running that it talks to? No problems in that with supporting tons of addresses?
2733 2011-06-30 17:45:55 warpi has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2734 2011-06-30 17:48:10 <gmaxwell> _W_: it eventually gets a bit slow to send once you have thousands of addresses.
2735 2011-06-30 17:48:26 <gmaxwell> well, maybe not even if they have no open txn.
2736 2011-06-30 17:49:23 <_W_> are there alternatives, beyond writing client code of your ownh?
2737 2011-06-30 17:49:53 <xelister> BlueMatt: you know what we ened
2738 2011-06-30 17:49:55 <gmaxwell> _W_: just groom the wallet from time to time.
2739 2011-06-30 17:50:20 <gmaxwell> _W_: send all the coins in it someplace else then swap in a new wallet file.
2740 2011-06-30 17:50:24 <_W_> I guess you could reuse addresses
2741 2011-06-30 17:50:29 <_W_> or that, yes
2742 2011-06-30 17:50:31 <xelister> -friendnode=IP|HOST - connect to this node, try all the time to re-connect
2743 2011-06-30 17:50:33 <gmaxwell> (I know mtgox has done this)
2744 2011-06-30 17:50:59 <xelister> -lovenode=IP|HOST - connect to this node, try all the time to re-connect, discard any speed or connections or port or IP limits or penalties: help it as much as possible to connect
2745 2011-06-30 17:51:02 <xelister> cool?
2746 2011-06-30 17:51:07 <gmaxwell> xelister: yea, I'd suggsted 'trusted nodes' where it does that _and_ it reserves a connection slot for them
2747 2011-06-30 17:51:28 assassindrake has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
2748 2011-06-30 17:51:29 <xelister> gmaxwell: anyway maxconnections option seems to be removed now so no need to reserve a slot?
2749 2011-06-30 17:51:45 <gmaxwell> xelister... no it's not.
2750 2011-06-30 17:51:58 <xelister> dont see it in sources in list of options
2751 2011-06-30 17:52:18 <gmaxwell> Connections will always be limited.
2752 2011-06-30 17:52:22 kluge has joined
2753 2011-06-30 17:52:33 <xelister> NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnoooooooooooooooooooo
2754 2011-06-30 17:52:39 <xelister> </vader>
2755 2011-06-30 17:52:44 <gmaxwell> (if nothing else you'd eventually run out of memory :) )
2756 2011-06-30 17:53:07 <xelister> would be nice if bitcoin net would be so big it could exhaust 8 GB ram server in that fashion =)
2757 2011-06-30 17:53:18 <gmaxwell>             nMaxOutboundConnections = min(nMaxOutboundConnections, (int)GetArg("-maxconnections", 125));
2758 2011-06-30 17:53:21 <gmaxwell> it's still there.
2759 2011-06-30 17:53:33 <xelister> oh 125 default now
2760 2011-06-30 17:53:45 <gmaxwell> it's been 125 default for a long time.
2761 2011-06-30 17:55:02 <gmaxwell> xelister: I also think the flood protection/priortization should be different for nodes you connected to vs ones that connected to you.
2762 2011-06-30 17:55:16 <xelister> yea
2763 2011-06-30 17:55:36 <gmaxwell> there are lots of little tweaks which would be helpful.. just takes time to code and validate them.
2764 2011-06-30 17:55:41 oozyburglar has joined
2765 2011-06-30 17:55:44 <xelister> also a data dir where we can expect pre-downloaded block chain or part of it
2766 2011-06-30 17:55:47 <gmaxwell> One thing we lack is a good testing infrastructure for this kind of stuff.
2767 2011-06-30 17:55:51 <xelister> actually this one could be done as part of #btcfn work
2768 2011-06-30 17:55:57 oozyburglar has quit (Client Quit)
2769 2011-06-30 17:56:16 oozyburglar has joined
2770 2011-06-30 17:56:32 <xelister> with RPC call like push_block - receive a block into the chain (e.g. from a transport plugin)
2771 2011-06-30 17:56:36 Kothar is now known as kon
2772 2011-06-30 17:56:45 <gmaxwell> eh, I don't agree.
2773 2011-06-30 17:56:49 freakazoid has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
2774 2011-06-30 17:56:51 <BlueMatt> xelister: isnt -addnode connect to this node and always try to reconnect?
2775 2011-06-30 17:57:00 <gmaxwell> You can easily write a bit of code that fakes the p2p protocol, then add it as a trusted peer.
2776 2011-06-30 17:57:15 <xelister> BlueMatt: something is not working. like 4 nodes in lan all with -addnode to eachother, and many have 0 connections even if all run at once. NATed lan btw
2777 2011-06-30 17:57:19 * Zarutian fires up bitcoin in months, isnt getting new blocks yet.
2778 2011-06-30 17:57:42 <xelister> Zarutian: hm? are you mining? with cpu?
2779 2011-06-30 17:57:45 <BlueMatt> xelister: well iirc addnode will always try to reconnect, but its towards the bottom of net.cpp if you want to check
2780 2011-06-30 17:57:56 <xelister> I can later not now
2781 2011-06-30 17:58:09 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: no. the addnode stuff isn't inside the main reconnect loop
2782 2011-06-30 17:58:13 <xelister> gmaxwell: why not a nice clean RPC call?!
2783 2011-06-30 17:58:20 Guest44186 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2784 2011-06-30 17:58:30 <BlueMatt> oh, didnt know that...
2785 2011-06-30 17:58:31 <Zarutian> xelister: not mining, just havent run the bitcoin node software for a while and I am not getting new blocks _from_ the network
2786 2011-06-30 17:58:33 <BlueMatt> it should be though
2787 2011-06-30 17:58:37 warpi has joined
2788 2011-06-30 17:58:38 <xelister> the more RPC calls the more nicer 3rd party addons to bitcoinD we can get
2789 2011-06-30 17:58:55 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: the main reconnect loop also strongly prefers trying nodes that recently joined the irc channel, makes it waste a lot of time.
2790 2011-06-30 17:58:59 <xelister> btw also rpc calls to add friends would be nice, and dump friends
2791 2011-06-30 17:59:01 <xelister> well, peers
2792 2011-06-30 17:59:03 <gmaxwell> (and promotes network partitioning :-/)
2793 2011-06-30 17:59:36 <xelister> add-peer [bw-limit when we want something] [bw-limit when he wants something] [max reconnect retries per hour]
2794 2011-06-30 17:59:46 <xelister> add-peer IP|Host [bw-limit when we want something] [bw-limit when he wants something] [max reconnect retries per hour]
2795 2011-06-30 17:59:50 <gmaxwell> I've got a bunch of patches to the connection management, but I have no good way to test them to prove they help.
2796 2011-06-30 17:59:50 <xelister> list-peers
2797 2011-06-30 17:59:52 <xelister> del-peer
2798 2011-06-30 18:00:04 <xelister> gmaxwell: implements the above?
2799 2011-06-30 18:00:08 <BlueMatt> wed need to to a ton of work to bw limit in net.cpp
2800 2011-06-30 18:00:17 <BlueMatt> which Im totally in favor of, but someone has to volunteer to do it
2801 2011-06-30 18:00:19 <xelister> BlueMatt: but there is some limiting already, no?
2802 2011-06-30 18:00:30 <gmaxwell> xelister: it moves addnode into the reconnet loop, changes the peer selection logic (to not prefer IRC among other things)
2803 2011-06-30 18:00:30 <BlueMatt> not bw limit, limit per request iirc
2804 2011-06-30 18:00:31 <xelister> BlueMatt: someone has to volunteer some moneyz =)
2805 2011-06-30 18:00:43 <BlueMatt> then its not gonna be you doing it ;)
2806 2011-06-30 18:00:49 karnac has quit (Quit: karnac)
2807 2011-06-30 18:00:50 <Zarutian> gmaxwell: the "send new txns to the node I recived last block" behaviour in those patches?
2808 2011-06-30 18:00:56 <xelister> wonder why Satoshi didnt yet started like Bitcoin Developers Bounties Fundation and donates like 100,000 of his early btc=)
2809 2011-06-30 18:00:56 <BlueMatt> work for free or go home
2810 2011-06-30 18:01:07 <xelister> BlueMatt: lolz
2811 2011-06-30 18:01:13 <BlueMatt> welcome to floss
2812 2011-06-30 18:01:22 <xelister> BlueMatt: lolz
2813 2011-06-30 18:01:26 * xelister gives BlueMatt some clue
2814 2011-06-30 18:01:27 <ius> jrmithdobbs, gmaxwell: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=24727.0
2815 2011-06-30 18:01:32 <gmaxwell> Zarutian: no, but it was on my list of course... doing that move to front sorting of peers based on hearing new blocks from them.
2816 2011-06-30 18:01:36 <xelister> lookup funding, sallaries of kernel developers
2817 2011-06-30 18:01:38 <xelister> firefox developers
2818 2011-06-30 18:01:40 <xelister> etc
2819 2011-06-30 18:01:49 <BlueMatt> xelister: kernel and bitcoin are very different projects
2820 2011-06-30 18:01:51 <BlueMatt> as is ff
2821 2011-06-30 18:01:53 <b4epoche> it's a factor of 10^8 going from internally stored (int64) btc values and the UI, right?
2822 2011-06-30 18:01:57 <zapnap> hey, anyone here using pushpool?
2823 2011-06-30 18:02:00 <xelister> hint: 80% of kernel is nowdays payed for by big corps, IBM, RedHat, Suse, etc
2824 2011-06-30 18:02:02 <zapnap> got a couple questions
2825 2011-06-30 18:02:04 <Zarutian> gmaxwell: good. Shame if that fell by the wayside ;)
2826 2011-06-30 18:02:07 <BlueMatt> lookup salaries of the developer of xterm
2827 2011-06-30 18:02:17 <BlueMatt> or some other random program
2828 2011-06-30 18:02:22 <zapnap> (or maybe i should ask in #bitcoin-mining...)
2829 2011-06-30 18:02:29 <xelister> BlueMatt: what wrong with funding development?
2830 2011-06-30 18:02:45 <BlueMatt> nothing, Im just saying it shouldnt be your primary goal
2831 2011-06-30 18:02:49 <BlueMatt> Ill do this when I get paid
2832 2011-06-30 18:02:59 <BlueMatt> thats not gonna get you anywhere
2833 2011-06-30 18:03:06 <Zarutian> xelister: how are you going to measure developement work? by patches submitted?
2834 2011-06-30 18:03:08 <xelister> oh ok
2835 2011-06-30 18:03:11 <xelister> I will do it for free
2836 2011-06-30 18:03:17 <xelister> while being kicked out of apartment
2837 2011-06-30 18:03:18 <gmaxwell> If you want it, do it.
2838 2011-06-30 18:03:18 <xelister> that will work
2839 2011-06-30 18:03:32 <xelister> oh ok I will do it in free time!
2840 2011-06-30 18:03:32 <gmaxwell> Otherwise don't whine and expect other people to do it for you.
2841 2011-06-30 18:03:37 <gmaxwell> Ideas are cheap.
2842 2011-06-30 18:03:40 <gmaxwell> (mine too)
2843 2011-06-30 18:03:41 <BlueMatt> xelister: thats what floss is, you go live under a bridge, lose all hygine, and work 24/7 ;)
2844 2011-06-30 18:03:41 <xelister> I have 8 hours per day of free time
2845 2011-06-30 18:03:49 <xelister> but wait, this assumes I quited the job.
2846 2011-06-30 18:03:56 erus` has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2847 2011-06-30 18:04:05 <Zarutian> yay! the block counter in my bitcoin node software instance is mm* forward! (* metric ;)
2848 2011-06-30 18:04:08 <xelister> BlueMatt: that is RMS and Hurd =) we all know how this went
2849 2011-06-30 18:04:09 meelu has joined
2850 2011-06-30 18:04:20 <BlueMatt> lol
2851 2011-06-30 18:04:26 <xelister> even rms demanded payment
2852 2011-06-30 18:04:34 <xelister> in form of barter, e.g. place to stay on traveling
2853 2011-06-30 18:05:21 <xelister> I think the army of qualified, full-free-time, rich (don't have to work ever)  developers, that are interested in FOSS, is not as big as one may think ;)
2854 2011-06-30 18:05:24 <gmaxwell> welp, find someone to pay you then. Good luck.
2855 2011-06-30 18:05:35 <b4epoche> wx UI code issue:
2856 2011-06-30 18:05:35 <BlueMatt> lol, no shit
2857 2011-06-30 18:05:37 <b4epoche>     int64 nPrevTransactionFee = nTransactionFee;
2858 2011-06-30 18:05:37 <b4epoche>     if (ParseMoney(m_textCtrlTransactionFee->GetValue(), nTransactionFee) && nTransactionFee != nPrevTransactionFee)
2859 2011-06-30 18:05:57 <xelister> there where already many bounties in btc world
2860 2011-06-30 18:05:58 <BlueMatt> whats wrong with that?
2861 2011-06-30 18:06:11 <BlueMatt> xelister: people got really stingy when the price went up
2862 2011-06-30 18:06:16 <b4epoche> if is always false
2863 2011-06-30 18:06:29 <BlueMatt> b4epoche: why?
2864 2011-06-30 18:06:32 <xelister> BlueMatt: where is satoshi, he must be sitting on tons of btc =_)
2865 2011-06-30 18:06:51 <BlueMatt> xelister: I wish...
2866 2011-06-30 18:06:57 <xelister> BlueMatt: or he could like throw say 5000 BTC @ freenet and have it going another half year. or wikileaks
2867 2011-06-30 18:06:59 <BlueMatt> b4epoche: ParseMoney changes nTransactionFee
2868 2011-06-30 18:07:22 freakazoid has joined
2869 2011-06-30 18:07:38 <b4epoche> ah
2870 2011-06-30 18:09:25 AAA_awright has joined
2871 2011-06-30 18:11:13 amiller has joined
2872 2011-06-30 18:15:18 TheZimm has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2873 2011-06-30 18:15:42 TheZimm has joined
2874 2011-06-30 18:16:48 dbasch has joined
2875 2011-06-30 18:17:08 karnac has joined
2876 2011-06-30 18:17:57 darbsllim has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2877 2011-06-30 18:18:47 sabalaba has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2878 2011-06-30 18:19:21 WildSoil has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2879 2011-06-30 18:19:57 darbsllim has joined
2880 2011-06-30 18:21:41 dbasch has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2881 2011-06-30 18:21:52 denisx has joined
2882 2011-06-30 18:23:27 sabalaba has joined
2883 2011-06-30 18:25:19 amiller has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
2884 2011-06-30 18:25:57 Grouver has joined
2885 2011-06-30 18:26:00 <repl> will 0.3.24 have an encrypted wallet.dat?
2886 2011-06-30 18:26:06 <Grouver> Hello
2887 2011-06-30 18:26:18 nefario has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2888 2011-06-30 18:26:26 <Grouver> Is there any way to get the balance of a address that is not yours?
2889 2011-06-30 18:26:41 <Grouver> I did some research.. but i just cannot find a way.
2890 2011-06-30 18:27:07 <gmaxwell> Grouver: block explorer will do this for you.
2891 2011-06-30 18:27:25 dbasch has joined
2892 2011-06-30 18:27:52 <Grouver> gmaxwell: With the blockexplorer API you can only retrieve recceived coins for each address.
2893 2011-06-30 18:28:06 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2894 2011-06-30 18:28:25 sabalaba has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2895 2011-06-30 18:28:34 da2ce7 has joined
2896 2011-06-30 18:28:42 <Grouver> Also.. blockexplorer uses the getblock patch by jgarzik. I installed it myself here. But i cannot find out how to calculate a balance of X address.
2897 2011-06-30 18:29:01 <gmaxwell> Grouver: by finding all the open transactions for it.
2898 2011-06-30 18:29:10 <Grouver> The only way seems to import the enitre block chain into a database and update all address each time a block is generated.
2899 2011-06-30 18:29:19 <gmaxwell> Grouver: I don't know what the api offers, but the wepages themselves report balances.
2900 2011-06-30 18:29:19 dbasch has quit (Client Quit)
2901 2011-06-30 18:29:33 <gmaxwell> Grouver: yes? and?
2902 2011-06-30 18:29:49 <gmaxwell> Grouver: the system doesn't maintain balances normally, it's going to be additional computation to do it.
2903 2011-06-30 18:29:56 <Grouver> gmaxwell: Yeah, but since I am developing some thing that might grow big I don't want to be dependand of blockexplorer there bandwidth and speed.
2904 2011-06-30 18:30:02 viggi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2905 2011-06-30 18:30:03 <gmaxwell> Normally there is no reason to index open transactions by address.
2906 2011-06-30 18:31:10 <Grouver> Why not?
2907 2011-06-30 18:31:23 <Grouver> To calculate takes more time.
2908 2011-06-30 18:31:26 mosimo has joined
2909 2011-06-30 18:31:45 nefario has joined
2910 2011-06-30 18:31:46 <Grouver> If you just run each 10 minutes your script that retrieves all new blocks and its transactions.. you just update each address that is in your db.
2911 2011-06-30 18:32:21 <Grouver> But there also orphan block chains ... so i guess thats not gonna work though.
2912 2011-06-30 18:32:27 T_X has joined
2913 2011-06-30 18:32:32 <Grouver> You cannot index them that easily.
2914 2011-06-30 18:32:45 T_X has quit (Changing host)
2915 2011-06-30 18:32:45 T_X has joined
2916 2011-06-30 18:33:00 <gmaxwell> Grouver: because your node doesn't care at all about an open transaction until its used.
2917 2011-06-30 18:33:09 <gmaxwell> Grouver: the bitcoin system never keeps track of a balance.
2918 2011-06-30 18:33:17 <gmaxwell> Balances aren't relevant, transactions are.
2919 2011-06-30 18:33:20 karnac has quit (Quit: karnac)
2920 2011-06-30 18:33:32 <gmaxwell> (well, other than your own balances, of course)
2921 2011-06-30 18:33:53 <Grouver> Hmm well why does blockexplorer displays your balance then?
2922 2011-06-30 18:34:58 viggi has joined
2923 2011-06-30 18:36:14 dbasch has joined
2924 2011-06-30 18:36:39 <gmaxwell> Grouver: because it's computing it, of course.
2925 2011-06-30 18:37:19 <knotwork> $depth btc
2926 2011-06-30 18:37:21 <NickelBot> Current BTC depth:
2927 2011-06-30 18:37:25 <NickelBot> 0.00000000 BTC, 0.00000000 CDN, 0.00000000 CZB, 0.00000000 GMC, 0.00000000 GRF, 0.00000000 MBC, 0.00000000 NMC, 0.00000000 NKL, 0.00000000 UKB, 0.00000000 UNS
2928 2011-06-30 18:37:26 <NickelBot> Transaction fee per kilobyte here is set to 0.01
2929 2011-06-30 18:37:55 <knotwork> $depth nmc
2930 2011-06-30 18:37:57 <NickelBot> Current NMC depth:
2931 2011-06-30 18:38:00 <NickelBot> 0.00000000 BTC, 0.00000000 CDN, 1000.00000000 CZB, 0.00000000 GMC, 0.00000000 GRF, 0.00000000 MBC, 0.00000000 NMC, 0.00000000 NKL, 0.00000000 UKB, 0.00000000 UNS
2932 2011-06-30 18:38:01 <Grouver> gmaxwell: Right, but then it takes time to computing it.What if you index all of that when computing at the first place.
2933 2011-06-30 18:38:03 <NickelBot> Transaction fee per kilobyte here is set to 0.01
2934 2011-06-30 18:38:21 <Grouver> Sounds like double work to me if somebody pulls X transaction from bloxkexplorer.
2935 2011-06-30 18:38:25 <Grouver> block*
2936 2011-06-30 18:38:34 <Grouver> Ofcourse your DB will be huge.
2937 2011-06-30 18:38:36 <gmaxwell> Grouver: I have no clue what blockexplorer is doing internally.
2938 2011-06-30 18:38:53 <gmaxwell> But this isn't something the bitcoin software should do.
2939 2011-06-30 18:39:07 <gmaxwell> (because it's not work that it would ever need for anything _except_ this)
2940 2011-06-30 18:39:10 amiller has joined
2941 2011-06-30 18:39:21 <xelister> davout is not on irc?
2942 2011-06-30 18:39:21 <Grouver> I am not talking about the software itself.
2943 2011-06-30 18:39:28 <gmaxwell> also, balances for an address are a fuzzy concept.
2944 2011-06-30 18:39:47 <gmaxwell> What happens when I form a txn that can be decoded by any two of three addresses? what are their balances?
2945 2011-06-30 18:40:50 MetaV has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2946 2011-06-30 18:40:57 karnac has joined
2947 2011-06-30 18:41:06 <jrmithdobbs> ius: ya already saw
2948 2011-06-30 18:41:44 larsivi has joined
2949 2011-06-30 18:43:55 xtalmath has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
2950 2011-06-30 18:44:11 karnac has quit (Client Quit)
2951 2011-06-30 18:44:46 DukeOfURL has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
2952 2011-06-30 18:45:33 karnac has joined
2953 2011-06-30 18:48:09 jhudgins has joined
2954 2011-06-30 18:48:42 oozyburglar has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2955 2011-06-30 18:49:03 oozyburglar has joined
2956 2011-06-30 18:50:44 <ius> jrmithdobbs: Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if the 'ex-admin was auditor' access actually meant 'we forgot to remove his admin flags'
2957 2011-06-30 18:51:05 <ius> Besides, seems like he had too many capabilities anyway if he actually was an auditor ;)
2958 2011-06-30 18:51:26 nefario1 has joined
2959 2011-06-30 18:51:54 <warpi> yo... have anyone tried bitpay? https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BitPay
2960 2011-06-30 18:52:49 wardearia has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
2961 2011-06-30 18:53:01 ahihi2 has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
2962 2011-06-30 18:54:10 Gonzago has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2963 2011-06-30 18:54:29 nefario has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2964 2011-06-30 18:54:45 <ShadeS> who hollard
2965 2011-06-30 18:56:18 karnac has quit (Quit: karnac)
2966 2011-06-30 18:56:34 nefario1 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2967 2011-06-30 18:56:35 liltoe has joined
2968 2011-06-30 18:56:49 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2969 2011-06-30 18:57:13 karnac has joined
2970 2011-06-30 18:57:29 copumpkin has joined
2971 2011-06-30 18:59:18 nefario has joined
2972 2011-06-30 18:59:29 Grouver has quit (Quit: Page closed)
2973 2011-06-30 19:00:35 zamgo has joined
2974 2011-06-30 19:01:53 <xelister> so is tehre any existing patch to dump private keys, at least to given account, or all?
2975 2011-06-30 19:02:27 <jrmithdobbs> xelister: sipa's showwallet branch
2976 2011-06-30 19:02:38 <denisx> yeah, a friend of me makes a radioshow and I'm invited to call-in and make promotion for my pool ;)
2977 2011-06-30 19:02:44 <CIA-103> bitcoinj: hearn@google.com * r116 /trunk/tests/com/google/bitcoin/discovery/IrcDiscoveryTest.java: Fix a typo bug in IrcDiscoveryTest. Patch from Nathan Baulch. Resolves issue 33.
2978 2011-06-30 19:02:52 <denisx> a radioshow about bitcoin
2979 2011-06-30 19:03:18 <zapnap> warpi: that looks nice
2980 2011-06-30 19:04:14 <zapnap> installing
2981 2011-06-30 19:04:19 <xelister> jrmithdobbs: neat
2982 2011-06-30 19:04:39 <warpi> zapnap, thx :)
2983 2011-06-30 19:05:01 <warpi> its not perfect, but it really makes bitcoin more useful IRL :)
2984 2011-06-30 19:05:09 <zapnap> could use a little theming but very cool
2985 2011-06-30 19:05:36 <warpi> hehe, definitely :)
2986 2011-06-30 19:05:53 <zapnap> i like the idea of using qr codes as transports
2987 2011-06-30 19:05:54 <jrmithdobbs> xelister: it should be in the next release
2988 2011-06-30 19:05:56 karnac has quit (Quit: karnac)
2989 2011-06-30 19:06:01 <xelister> jrmithdobbs: :)
2990 2011-06-30 19:06:11 <nathan7> hrmpf
2991 2011-06-30 19:06:17 <gmaxwell> it would need to be updated for wallet crypto.
2992 2011-06-30 19:06:23 <nathan7> That highlighted me, damn't
2993 2011-06-30 19:06:34 <zapnap> all the current breed of ewallet services kinda spook me tho
2994 2011-06-30 19:06:35 <warpi> zapnap, yepp, its very convinient and exact... im thinking of using sound aswell for transport... can work better in sunny-conditions
2995 2011-06-30 19:06:43 <xelister> nathan7: the release?
2996 2011-06-30 19:06:48 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: yes but gavin already said crypto & import/export are the priorities for next release
2997 2011-06-30 19:07:04 <gmaxwell> sounds fine to me.
2998 2011-06-30 19:07:13 <nathan7> The commit notification, xelister.
2999 2011-06-30 19:07:22 <warpi> zapnap, but we need ewallets for these small and instant transactions... we should not load bitcoin network with that
3000 2011-06-30 19:07:48 karnac has joined
3001 2011-06-30 19:07:48 karnac has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3002 2011-06-30 19:08:08 <warpi> for storing a lot of bitcoins and getting salery etc, we should definitely use bitcoin network directly
3003 2011-06-30 19:08:26 <zapnap> would it  not be ideal for everyone with an address to be running a lightweight client on their mobile?
3004 2011-06-30 19:08:53 <warpi> zapnap, i dont think so....
3005 2011-06-30 19:09:12 <folklore> warpi not until you can pay rent etc...with it
3006 2011-06-30 19:09:14 <zapnap> warpi: no i'm honestly curious.
3007 2011-06-30 19:09:21 wardearia has joined
3008 2011-06-30 19:09:23 <folklore> until then is too dangerous and only good for some things
3009 2011-06-30 19:09:24 karnac has joined
3010 2011-06-30 19:09:25 <zapnap> like, what is the downside of that? it isn't a burden to the network per se is it?
3011 2011-06-30 19:09:34 <warpi> ewallet is instant (no confirmations is needed), using minimal cpu-resources, bandwidth, memory and power for running
3012 2011-06-30 19:09:54 <zapnap> right, i get that. if you want someone backing an instant transaction you need an ewallet who is willing to put up for you.
3013 2011-06-30 19:10:20 <zapnap> but if the instant nature of it isn't an issue for a mobile payment, is there any harm is advocating that people have a full fledged (but lightweight) client running on their phones?
3014 2011-06-30 19:10:21 <gmaxwell> zapnap: well, ewallet's are not the only way to do secured instant transactions, they're probably the most efficient.
3015 2011-06-30 19:10:28 <warpi> zapnap, slow transactions (60 minutes), requires a lot of bandwidth, memory etc... just take the oposite of what i wrote above :)
3016 2011-06-30 19:10:46 <zapnap> warpi: i'm not knocking what you wrote. it's a larger question :)
3017 2011-06-30 19:11:06 kluge has quit (Quit: ....)
3018 2011-06-30 19:11:10 <zapnap> gmaxwell: i thought to do an instant transaction you'd need a third party like an ewallet essentially vouching for the transaction. how else would you do that?
3019 2011-06-30 19:11:22 <warpi> zapnap, hehe... i think, even in the large picture... using ewallets for small transactions is just advantages... both for induviduals and bitcoin network
3020 2011-06-30 19:11:36 <zapnap> certainly for individuals that need instant transactions
3021 2011-06-30 19:11:42 <Namegduf> zapnap: Phones won't be able to run real clients if bitcoin takes off.
3022 2011-06-30 19:11:44 <gmaxwell> zapnap: multisig with a trusted signer.
3023 2011-06-30 19:12:00 <zapnap> but i'm just thinking, in terms of getting bitcoin into the hands of the 'common people', mobile clients seems like the obvious always-on easy-to-install client option
3024 2011-06-30 19:12:01 <warpi> zapnap, but... for small transactions, its not good to load the bitcoin network.. it will just increase the fees
3025 2011-06-30 19:12:06 <Namegduf> They just can't handle the bandwidth involved in that many transactions a second.
3026 2011-06-30 19:12:18 <gmaxwell> Or an non-blockchain insurance service (they take a fee and pay you if the txn is reversed)
3027 2011-06-30 19:12:18 <zapnap> Namegduf: ok, that was my question
3028 2011-06-30 19:12:45 <gmaxwell> zapnap: see https://github.com/groffer/bitcoin/commit/dc2dfbab6a0f75070fc3b962da4eb2967e9659df 'Immediate payment' for the first thing I described.
3029 2011-06-30 19:12:48 <Namegduf> zapnap: Scalability documentations for bitcoin actually suggest moving over to a multiple-server-per-node model for main nodes, actually
3030 2011-06-30 19:12:52 <zapnap> gmaxwell: great, thanks!
3031 2011-06-30 19:13:06 <zapnap> Namegduf: really? got a link?
3032 2011-06-30 19:13:07 <Namegduf> i.e. desktops might not be able to keep up, either.
3033 2011-06-30 19:13:19 <gmaxwell> Namegduf: I thought he said liteclients above.
3034 2011-06-30 19:13:23 <gmaxwell> Not full validators.
3035 2011-06-30 19:13:24 dbasch has quit (Quit: dbasch)
3036 2011-06-30 19:13:31 <Namegduf> zapnap: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Scalability
3037 2011-06-30 19:13:31 <zapnap> Namegduf: is it possible the future lies in separating transactional nodes from client / receiving (monitoring) nodes?
3038 2011-06-30 19:13:31 <gmaxwell> Just ones with headers and your own txn inputs.
3039 2011-06-30 19:13:35 <zapnap> Namegduf: awesome
3040 2011-06-30 19:13:54 <gmaxwell> zapnap: bitcoin is designed to allow lite clients that don't do full validation.
3041 2011-06-30 19:14:12 <zapnap> gmaxwell: ok, so in that case, is there still an argument against 'lite' mobile clients longer-term?
3042 2011-06-30 19:14:32 <Namegduf> I think lite clients, depending on form, could work on most anything
3043 2011-06-30 19:14:39 <zapnap> gotcha
3044 2011-06-30 19:14:45 <gmaxwell> zapnap: sure no argument, but they may not be that useful.
3045 2011-06-30 19:14:54 <gmaxwell> E.g. do you have a check-card for your savings account?
3046 2011-06-30 19:14:56 <zapnap> thanks, btw, still a relative noob. this channel is immensely helpful.
3047 2011-06-30 19:14:58 <Namegduf> Lite clients rely on a trusted non-lite client.
3048 2011-06-30 19:15:11 <zapnap> Namegduf: right, perhaps a 'bank' model
3049 2011-06-30 19:15:15 <zapnap> or an evolution of the ewallet
3050 2011-06-30 19:15:20 Happy0 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
3051 2011-06-30 19:15:27 <Namegduf> zapnap: Kinda sorta, but best looked at as a thing on its own.
3052 2011-06-30 19:15:27 <gmaxwell> Namegduf: You can make a lite client that doesn't have to trust.
3053 2011-06-30 19:15:42 <zapnap> Namegduf: yeah just trying to use a familiar name to qualify it. but i know what you mean. the relationship isn't the same.
3054 2011-06-30 19:15:52 scott`_ has joined
3055 2011-06-30 19:16:05 <zapnap> the trust relationship there is interesting
3056 2011-06-30 19:16:16 <Namegduf> gmaxwell: Reliably? The scalability page is iffy on it.
3057 2011-06-30 19:16:46 <Namegduf> It says it could put " its faith in high difficulty as a proxy for proof of validity", but never explains how reliable that is or even what that means.
3058 2011-06-30 19:16:47 <gmaxwell> Namegduf: you'd want more confirmations before you were confident if you didn't trust your peers.
3059 2011-06-30 19:17:13 <gmaxwell> Namegduf: meaning that badguys can't just make up blockheaders. But the whole network already depends on that.
3060 2011-06-30 19:17:30 <Namegduf> gmaxwell: Still insufficient.
3061 2011-06-30 19:17:34 <gmaxwell> It's not.
3062 2011-06-30 19:17:40 <Namegduf> The information you're giving is, I mean.
3063 2011-06-30 19:17:53 <Namegduf> Start at the beginning; what information does it have, what information does it verify
3064 2011-06-30 19:18:01 OneFixt has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
3065 2011-06-30 19:18:01 <gmaxwell> Basically today someone who can mine a fork can reverse & respend, which screws you, so you trust difficulty to protect you.
3066 2011-06-30 19:18:02 <zapnap> you're talking just for instant / semi-instant transactions?
3067 2011-06-30 19:18:22 <Namegduf> Light clients and instant are unrelated
3068 2011-06-30 19:18:24 <warpi> zapnap, did you understand how to make instant transfers without ewallet?
3069 2011-06-30 19:18:33 <Namegduf> I think, anyway.
3070 2011-06-30 19:18:40 <zapnap> warpi: you'd still need a third party
3071 2011-06-30 19:18:49 <gmaxwell> But with a lite client you have the block headers, a txn payment to you, and the merkle tree fragment connecting that payment to the block that includes it.
3072 2011-06-30 19:18:49 <zapnap> whether or not it's an ewallet
3073 2011-06-30 19:19:03 <warpi> zapnap, ok.
3074 2011-06-30 19:19:04 <zapnap> so lite clients just do no transaction verification?
3075 2011-06-30 19:19:08 <zapnap> sorry, trying to understand the difference
3076 2011-06-30 19:19:11 <Namegduf> gmaxwell: Right, you trust they won't be able to maintain a fork more than a certain length.
3077 2011-06-30 19:19:18 <warpi> zapnap, sounds like a ewallet interface :)
3078 2011-06-30 19:19:23 <warpi> ok.. time to sleep... cya guys
3079 2011-06-30 19:19:24 <gmaxwell> So if someone mines a fork they can reverse&respend and they can _also_ mine completely batshit crazy transactions. The difficulty protects you.
3080 2011-06-30 19:19:43 <gmaxwell> So the difference is that the scope of the attack is brodened but the defense is the same.
3081 2011-06-30 19:19:47 <Namegduf> Hmm.
3082 2011-06-30 19:20:09 <zapnap> but since those transactions never make it into the actual chain, how is that an issue? sorry if that's a naive question.
3083 2011-06-30 19:20:11 <Namegduf> You rely on all the OTHER nodes rejecting the batshit crazy transaction block
3084 2011-06-30 19:20:19 <Namegduf> And forcing a fork
3085 2011-06-30 19:20:19 <gmaxwell> e.g. they could mine a 21million btc payment to you, and you wouldn't know it was bogus. :)  but their inability to extend the fork long enough would clue you in.
3086 2011-06-30 19:20:27 <zapnap> ah right
3087 2011-06-30 19:20:27 <gmaxwell> ding ding ding. :)
3088 2011-06-30 19:20:30 <zapnap> so short term issue
3089 2011-06-30 19:20:44 <gmaxwell> So you might want to wait a bit longer just to be more sure because respend isn't the only attack.
3090 2011-06-30 19:20:44 <zapnap> that's why i was asking if it was solely an issue for 'instant' or 'semi-instant' transactions
3091 2011-06-30 19:20:48 <Namegduf> They don't create a fork per se, they just make a bad block and everyone else rejects it.
3092 2011-06-30 19:20:52 warpi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3093 2011-06-30 19:21:09 <Namegduf> Which means everyone *else* makes the real next block... yeah, makes sense.
3094 2011-06-30 19:21:11 <zapnap> so the number of confirmations before a transaction is confirmed isn't a concrete thing at all
3095 2011-06-30 19:21:14 Happy0 has joined
3096 2011-06-30 19:21:14 <gmaxwell> Namegduf: well if you need more than one to consider it confirmed, they'd need to continue to mine on their fork.
3097 2011-06-30 19:21:21 <Namegduf> Yeah.
3098 2011-06-30 19:21:30 <gmaxwell> And they'd need to keep you from hearing of the real blockchain from anyone else.
3099 2011-06-30 19:21:40 <zapnap> gmaxwell: how would they be able to do that though?
3100 2011-06-30 19:21:49 <zapnap> (prevent you from communicating wit the rest of the nodes that know about the real chain)
3101 2011-06-30 19:21:50 <gmaxwell> Controlling your network, which isn't that hard.
3102 2011-06-30 19:21:52 <Namegduf> zapnap: With some but not enough difficulty, IMO.
3103 2011-06-30 19:21:55 <Namegduf> Yeah.
3104 2011-06-30 19:22:02 <Namegduf> Laziest way to do it?
3105 2011-06-30 19:22:05 <Namegduf> Make lots of nodes
3106 2011-06-30 19:22:06 <zapnap> i mean if you're on an isolated network segment, sure
3107 2011-06-30 19:22:08 <Namegduf> Make them major enough
3108 2011-06-30 19:22:20 <zapnap> but if we're talking a mobile client on a mobile carrier, much harder to do?
3109 2011-06-30 19:22:22 <Namegduf> Then do the attack to the unlucky set of nodes which you know/guess are only connected to you
3110 2011-06-30 19:22:41 <Namegduf> Which is a likely quite large number.
3111 2011-06-30 19:22:44 DukeOfURL has joined
3112 2011-06-30 19:22:49 <gmaxwell> zapnap: if the attacker is working at your carrier?
3113 2011-06-30 19:22:49 <zapnap> is there a way to pubilcly identify which nodes another node is connected to?
3114 2011-06-30 19:22:53 <zapnap> gmaxwell: truth
3115 2011-06-30 19:22:56 <Namegduf> Not sure.
3116 2011-06-30 19:22:58 <zapnap> not saying it's impossible. just unlikely.
3117 2011-06-30 19:23:03 cryptocnt has joined
3118 2011-06-30 19:23:09 <Namegduf> You can't rely on it being unlikely.
3119 2011-06-30 19:23:24 <zapnap> sure. but we're talking about something for a relatively short time period too
3120 2011-06-30 19:23:25 <Namegduf> See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sybil_attack
3121 2011-06-30 19:23:45 <Namegduf> There are no protections in bitcoin against introducing very very large numbers of malicious nodes to the network.
3122 2011-06-30 19:24:04 <gmaxwell> There really can't be.
3123 2011-06-30 19:24:08 <zapnap> as i understand it, yeah there really ca't be
3124 2011-06-30 19:24:09 <Namegduf> No, there can't.
3125 2011-06-30 19:24:18 <zapnap> it's part of the design of the system
3126 2011-06-30 19:24:20 <gmaxwell> Thats why we don't use node-voting for timestamping.
3127 2011-06-30 19:24:21 <Namegduf> Any assumption that "most" nodes will be fine
3128 2011-06-30 19:24:32 <zapnap> the faith that the large number of involved nodes will always outweigh those controlled by a single malicious entity
3129 2011-06-30 19:24:40 <Namegduf> No.
3130 2011-06-30 19:24:42 carli2 has joined
3131 2011-06-30 19:24:42 <Namegduf> No such faith is made.
3132 2011-06-30 19:24:55 <Namegduf> To do so is a horrible security fault.
3133 2011-06-30 19:24:55 <carli2> hi. what is the hashGenisisBlock?
3134 2011-06-30 19:24:58 <gmaxwell> The faith is the the majority of mining power does.
3135 2011-06-30 19:25:08 <Namegduf> Right.
3136 2011-06-30 19:25:16 <Namegduf> And mining power is a lot harder to make lots of than nodes.
3137 2011-06-30 19:25:18 <phantomcircuit> it's pretty easily to stop sybil attacks
3138 2011-06-30 19:25:29 <gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: It's not.
3139 2011-06-30 19:25:45 <gmaxwell> carli2: hm? 000000000019d6689c085ae165831e934ff763ae46a2a6c172b3f1b60a8ce26f
3140 2011-06-30 19:25:52 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, with bitcoin it is assuming that the isp is trsuted
3141 2011-06-30 19:25:55 <zapnap> Namegduf: regardless, that was my argument :D. if i control the majority of the mining power, that's that
3142 2011-06-30 19:26:04 <carli2> gmaxwell: i mean what it means... is the first block with a fixed hash?
3143 2011-06-30 19:26:05 <zapnap> which is to say, that's a core tenant, no?
3144 2011-06-30 19:26:12 <zamgo> why are settings saved (upnp,minimizetotray,onstart,etc) in wallet.dat?   Is there any thought to moving them out?
3145 2011-06-30 19:26:14 <Namegduf> THAT is, yes, but it's got no connection to the conversation.
3146 2011-06-30 19:26:36 <Namegduf> zapnap: My point is that it's a horrible mistake to assume that most nodes are okay, so you "probably" won't be connected to just malicious nodes.
3147 2011-06-30 19:26:36 <zamgo> would make sense to get them out of wallet
3148 2011-06-30 19:26:49 <Namegduf> Because it is *UNSAFE* in the bitcoin model to assume that most nodes are not malicious
3149 2011-06-30 19:26:54 <gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: Bitcoin makes no such assumption. Are you talking about the /16 limit on outgoing connections?
3150 2011-06-30 19:26:58 <Namegduf> Or even that most nodes are not run by the same person.
3151 2011-06-30 19:27:19 <zapnap> Namegduf: i wasn't arguing that it was ok :). my point was just that, any such trickery would only (as i understand it) affect instant transactions or balances in the short term. eventually the network would right the wrong, no?
3152 2011-06-30 19:27:27 <zapnap> (i'm not trying to be argumentative, trying to understand)
3153 2011-06-30 19:27:34 pogden has joined
3154 2011-06-30 19:27:40 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, no im talking about changing to a stable/hopping peers configuration
3155 2011-06-30 19:27:54 <carli2> the genesis is the prev-value of the first block?
3156 2011-06-30 19:28:09 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, say 4 peers are stable and 4 peers hop every 30 seconds, pulling off a sybil attack is then basically impossible
3157 2011-06-30 19:28:14 eternal1 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
3158 2011-06-30 19:28:26 <phantomcircuit> (since you only need 1 real peer every 10 minutes)
3159 2011-06-30 19:28:46 erus` has joined
3160 2011-06-30 19:28:57 <Namegduf> I'm not sure whether it'd right itself or not, I just know that saying that it's unlikely to be just malicious nodes is not an assumption the bitcoin model permits.
3161 2011-06-30 19:29:15 <Namegduf> And it's quite possible for someone to make it "likely".
3162 2011-06-30 19:29:27 <Namegduf> I don't know what a light node isolated from the real blockchain could do.
3163 2011-06-30 19:29:32 <Namegduf> Or have done to it.
3164 2011-06-30 19:29:44 freakazoid has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
3165 2011-06-30 19:30:03 <Namegduf> I think you could forge transactions to it.
3166 2011-06-30 19:30:17 <gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: there are a lot of reasons to do that, (though not quite that fast perhaps) But I don't think it meaningfully increases attack resistance...simply because it's so easy to intercept the connectivity of high value targets right now.
3167 2011-06-30 19:30:21 <zapnap> Namegduf: wouldn't that transaction not end up in the 'right' block chain?
3168 2011-06-30 19:30:31 <Namegduf> zapnap: I don't know the details well enough to say.
3169 2011-06-30 19:30:34 <zapnap> kk
3170 2011-06-30 19:30:40 <zapnap> I don't either :) hence the questions!
3171 2011-06-30 19:30:49 <Namegduf> Transactions when emitted by the sender are not already in a block
3172 2011-06-30 19:30:59 <Namegduf> Or have a specific block they will be in
3173 2011-06-30 19:31:05 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, well like i said, it prevents sybil attacks which are not based on mitm
3174 2011-06-30 19:31:05 sabalaba has joined
3175 2011-06-30 19:31:08 <zapnap> right. but they'd need to be confirmed by the network at large, no?
3176 2011-06-30 19:31:18 <phantomcircuit> although you could still run my connection slot filling attack
3177 2011-06-30 19:31:20 <zapnap> i guess i'm still a little fuzzy on how the end up in the blockchain itself
3178 2011-06-30 19:31:30 <Namegduf> zapnap: The transaction is broadcast and received by other nodes.
3179 2011-06-30 19:31:42 <Namegduf> zapnap: When a miner makes a block, it sticks transactions it knows about in it.
3180 2011-06-30 19:32:01 <gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: and you could ddos off good nodes too.
3181 2011-06-30 19:32:05 <zapnap> right, but those transactions must have passed some confirmation threshold no?
3182 2011-06-30 19:32:09 <Namegduf> No.
3183 2011-06-30 19:32:16 <Namegduf> This is before confirmations.
3184 2011-06-30 19:32:29 <carli2> i want to start a new currency with bitcoin. what do i have to set up that my client does not sync itself with the network?
3185 2011-06-30 19:32:30 <gmaxwell> mining is what confirms them.
3186 2011-06-30 19:32:36 <Namegduf> Confirmations are just blocks generated subsequent to that block in the same chain, they don't really do anything specific to that transaction, they just make forking the chain at the block including the transaction harder.
3187 2011-06-30 19:32:41 <zapnap> ok. so how does the miner minting the new block decide on transaction legitimacy? once it's recorded in the block that's that, no?
3188 2011-06-30 19:32:48 <Namegduf> It checks it.
3189 2011-06-30 19:32:49 <b4epoche> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1041468/CocoaBitcoin.app.zip
3190 2011-06-30 19:32:52 <gmaxwell> carli2: if you have to ask that here you're not qualified to do so yet...
3191 2011-06-30 19:32:54 <Namegduf> Transactions are signed by the sender's key.
3192 2011-06-30 19:33:08 <b4epoche> have at it if you're on OSX 10.6+
3193 2011-06-30 19:33:09 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, ddos all of the good nodes? good luck
3194 2011-06-30 19:33:10 datagutt has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
3195 2011-06-30 19:33:15 <zapnap> ok so we assume all transactions are valid as long as they're signed.
3196 2011-06-30 19:33:22 <zapnap> (and that validates)
3197 2011-06-30 19:33:25 <zapnap> which is easy to check
3198 2011-06-30 19:33:42 <Namegduf> All transactions are signed, all must be valid to be propagated and get into a block.
3199 2011-06-30 19:33:46 <carli2> gmaxwell: i have to delete my .bitcoin folder and plug out the network cable. but is there a better way?
3200 2011-06-30 19:33:50 <gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: there are only a few thousand. and since a node won't try to connect to ones in /16s they aren't already connected to you only need to get ones in /16s you don't have nodes on
3201 2011-06-30 19:33:51 <Namegduf> So the sender definitely authorised that send of money.
3202 2011-06-30 19:34:00 <Namegduf> What's not essentially known is whether the sender tried to send that money twice.
3203 2011-06-30 19:34:08 <Namegduf> A given node will only accept one of two conflicting transactions.
3204 2011-06-30 19:34:09 <b4epoche> cocoabitcoin uses testnet (always) atm
3205 2011-06-30 19:34:14 <zapnap> so at each block minting time, there are many transactions floating about that the miner that does the minting doesn't know about. they propagate though, and end up in the next block, even if those occurred before
3206 2011-06-30 19:34:16 <zapnap> ?
3207 2011-06-30 19:34:18 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, easier to just hold open a few million connections
3208 2011-06-30 19:34:25 <gmaxwell> carli2: set testnet mode, change the port number, change the testnet genesis block.
3209 2011-06-30 19:34:30 <knotwork> carli2 you need to hack the source code at least a little otherwise whenever it *does* somehow end up in contact with the real network it will try to resolve which branch is authoritative
3210 2011-06-30 19:34:31 <Namegduf> zapnap: Yes.
3211 2011-06-30 19:34:55 <Namegduf> zapnap: It is not guaranteed that a transaction will be confirmed by the next block.
3212 2011-06-30 19:34:56 <zapnap> i guess that's where i get confused about double-spending though. it's possible transaction B propagates to me (the miner minting the block) before transaction A, right?
3213 2011-06-30 19:34:56 <gmaxwell> carli2: change the ircchannel name in irc.cpp
3214 2011-06-30 19:34:59 lumos has joined
3215 2011-06-30 19:34:59 freakazoid has joined
3216 2011-06-30 19:35:03 <Namegduf> zapnap: Yes.
3217 2011-06-30 19:35:10 <Namegduf> zapnap: What happens is, if you double spend
3218 2011-06-30 19:35:15 <carli2> gmaxwell: can i keep the same genesis block while doing this?
3219 2011-06-30 19:35:17 <Namegduf> Some nodes get one, some nodes get the other.
3220 2011-06-30 19:35:23 <Namegduf> Whichever node generates the next block
3221 2011-06-30 19:35:26 <zapnap> right. but the 'actual' recipient is the one that ends up in the block
3222 2011-06-30 19:35:28 <zapnap> gotcha
3223 2011-06-30 19:35:30 <gmaxwell> carli2: you shouldn't.
3224 2011-06-30 19:35:33 <Namegduf> Yep.
3225 2011-06-30 19:35:40 <b4epoche> thinking about submitting it to the MacAppStore soon to see what Apple has to say.
3226 2011-06-30 19:35:48 rich_ has joined
3227 2011-06-30 19:35:48 <carli2> gmaxwell: but i would find bitcoins then?
3228 2011-06-30 19:35:56 <knotwork> carli2 look up multicoin, previously known as freecoin, it lets you use config file instead of code hack to make new currencies
3229 2011-06-30 19:35:58 <zapnap> Namegduf: thanks for the explanations
3230 2011-06-30 19:35:59 <Namegduf> Confirmations aren't a thing that happens before being in a block, no.
3231 2011-06-30 19:36:11 <Namegduf> The reason for them is, if two blocks are generated at once.
3232 2011-06-30 19:36:14 <zapnap> yeah my perception of that before was incorrect. this explains a lot.
3233 2011-06-30 19:36:19 <Namegduf> Both with different transactions in.
3234 2011-06-30 19:36:23 <Namegduf> This is a "fork"
3235 2011-06-30 19:36:44 <Namegduf> And lets the double spend persist temporarily, each in a block and thus with 1 confirmation.
3236 2011-06-30 19:36:46 <gmaxwell> carli2: you would find carlicoins.
3237 2011-06-30 19:36:48 <zapnap> but those orphan blocks can keep getting built on top of as well, presumably
3238 2011-06-30 19:37:01 <Namegduf> Whichever side of a split generates the next block
3239 2011-06-30 19:37:03 <carli2> gmaxwell: one each 10 minutes?
3240 2011-06-30 19:37:09 <Namegduf> Wins.
3241 2011-06-30 19:37:11 <Namegduf> The longer chain wins.
3242 2011-06-30 19:37:17 <zapnap> right. eventually the next miner goes "chain A is longer than chain B"
3243 2011-06-30 19:37:27 <Namegduf> Eventually every node does that.
3244 2011-06-30 19:37:28 <gmaxwell> carli2: a block of 50 .. probably much faster, depends on how much hash power you have.
3245 2011-06-30 19:37:30 <knotwork> carli2 I am interested in what features you plan for your new currency, NickelBot so far only supports ten currencies, havent put beertokesn nor weeds in it yet, tell me about yours
3246 2011-06-30 19:37:39 <zapnap> but at some point those transactions in B need to get re-merged into chain A
3247 2011-06-30 19:37:42 <Namegduf> No.
3248 2011-06-30 19:37:46 <Namegduf> I don't think they are.
3249 2011-06-30 19:37:47 <zapnap> no?
3250 2011-06-30 19:37:57 <Namegduf> Or maybe they are and just conflicting ones are dropped?
3251 2011-06-30 19:37:59 <Namegduf> I'm not sure.
3252 2011-06-30 19:37:59 <gmaxwell> Namegduf: what are you talking about?
3253 2011-06-30 19:38:05 <zapnap> i thought every transaction had to be recorded in the singular authoritative block chain history
3254 2011-06-30 19:38:13 <gmaxwell> yes nodes try really hard to remerge non-conflicting transactions from forks.
3255 2011-06-30 19:38:13 <carli2> say, i'm faster than the official network, and i started from genesis block, can i delete all other transactions of the old network?
3256 2011-06-30 19:38:16 <Namegduf> zapnap: They do.
3257 2011-06-30 19:38:26 <zapnap> gmaxwell: "try really hard"?
3258 2011-06-30 19:38:30 <knotwork> $depth nkl
3259 2011-06-30 19:38:30 <zapnap> can you elaborate?
3260 2011-06-30 19:38:32 <NickelBot> Current NKL depth:
3261 2011-06-30 19:38:33 <NickelBot> 0.00000000 BTC, 0.00000000 CDN, 0.00000000 CZB, 0.00000000 GMC, 0.00000000 GRF, 0.00000000 MBC, 0.00000000 NMC, 0.00000000 NKL, 0.00000000 UKB, 0.00000000 UNS
3262 2011-06-30 19:38:35 <NickelBot> Transaction fee per kilobyte here is set to 0.01
3263 2011-06-30 19:38:45 <xelister> if I have bitcoin insstalled
3264 2011-06-30 19:38:48 SecretSJ has joined
3265 2011-06-30 19:38:55 <xelister> how to make another install without redowloading chain from scratch
3266 2011-06-30 19:39:01 <Namegduf> The key thing is that the interesting other transaction, the double-spend, is dropped.
3267 2011-06-30 19:39:09 <gmaxwell> carli2: no, due to the checkpoints. (and that would _also_ require buying many millions of dollars of hardware, even absent the checkpoints)
3268 2011-06-30 19:39:14 * xelister pokes BlueMatt with a "?"
3269 2011-06-30 19:39:16 <zapnap> Namegduf: right
3270 2011-06-30 19:39:27 erle- has joined
3271 2011-06-30 19:39:27 <zapnap> but which one of those is the dup is somewhat arbitrary
3272 2011-06-30 19:39:31 <gmaxwell> zapnap: they remember them and they keep putting them back into the blocks they are attempting.
3273 2011-06-30 19:39:34 <zapnap> depends on which reached the miner that mints the next block first
3274 2011-06-30 19:39:35 <Namegduf> Entirely arbitrary, yes.
3275 2011-06-30 19:39:38 <carli2> gmaxwell: what are the checkpoints? are that gard coded block hashes?
3276 2011-06-30 19:39:43 enquirer has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
3277 2011-06-30 19:39:45 <gmaxwell> carli2: yes.
3278 2011-06-30 19:39:48 <zapnap> gmaxwell: gotcha. so at some point it's guaranteed that they all make it into the official block chain
3279 2011-06-30 19:39:50 <Namegduf> Thus why you wait for confirmations.
3280 2011-06-30 19:40:01 <zapnap> Namegduf: gotcha.
3281 2011-06-30 19:40:11 <gmaxwell> zapnap: well, not guaranteed. all miners might choose to shun a txn for whatever reason.
3282 2011-06-30 19:40:15 <carli2> gmaxwell: where is the checkpoint list?
3283 2011-06-30 19:40:30 <Namegduf> To make a fork persist beyond a single block, you have to have your evil node
3284 2011-06-30 19:40:31 <zapnap> gmaxwell: in which case it... never actually happened?
3285 2011-06-30 19:40:34 <Namegduf> Ignore the new blockchain
3286 2011-06-30 19:40:44 <Namegduf> And continue trying to make the other one longer again
3287 2011-06-30 19:40:47 <Namegduf> I think.
3288 2011-06-30 19:40:51 <zapnap> Namegduf: ok so theoretically though, i can keep minting blocks in the 'bad' chain if i have enough power
3289 2011-06-30 19:40:52 <Namegduf> I'm not sure exactly.
3290 2011-06-30 19:40:57 <zapnap> right
3291 2011-06-30 19:41:02 <zapnap> sorry you're a step ahead of me :)
3292 2011-06-30 19:41:03 <Namegduf> Maybe it has to generate it first and release at exactly the same time.
3293 2011-06-30 19:41:06 lumos has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
3294 2011-06-30 19:41:11 <Namegduf> That would definitely do it.
3295 2011-06-30 19:41:17 <zapnap> of course, i'd have to have a lot of mining power to do that
3296 2011-06-30 19:41:20 <zapnap> but it's still plausible
3297 2011-06-30 19:41:31 wardearia has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
3298 2011-06-30 19:41:34 <Namegduf> To do it indefinitely you need 50% of the network mining powe.r
3299 2011-06-30 19:41:47 <zapnap> yup.
3300 2011-06-30 19:41:53 lumos has joined
3301 2011-06-30 19:42:00 <zapnap> which seems unlikely... but brings us back around to our original discussion :D
3302 2011-06-30 19:42:09 <Namegduf> No, not really.
3303 2011-06-30 19:42:26 <gmaxwell> carli2: main.cpp, search for checkpoint
3304 2011-06-30 19:42:28 <Namegduf> You're confusing 50% of mining power with a majority of the nodes.
3305 2011-06-30 19:42:34 <zapnap> nono, i mispoke before
3306 2011-06-30 19:42:37 nefario has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
3307 2011-06-30 19:42:38 <zapnap> thought i clarified that
3308 2011-06-30 19:42:46 nefario has joined
3309 2011-06-30 19:43:02 <gmaxwell> Well there is a big difference between node majority and mining power majority.
3310 2011-06-30 19:43:06 <BlueMatt> xelister: yes?
3311 2011-06-30 19:43:09 <zapnap> understood
3312 2011-06-30 19:43:17 <zapnap> nodes majority shouldn't matter at all
3313 2011-06-30 19:43:21 <carli2> nearly everything is in main.cpp.... it's kinda confusing. most projects only have a startup code in main
3314 2011-06-30 19:43:26 <Namegduf> Node majority is trivial software to get.
3315 2011-06-30 19:43:43 <gmaxwell> carli2: it's not in main()  it's in the main.cpp file but it's another function.
3316 2011-06-30 19:43:45 <Namegduf> Mining power majority is an insane amount of processing power and you just can't do it a faster way.
3317 2011-06-30 19:44:01 <zapnap> there are definitely organizations on the planet that could flip a switch and do that, though
3318 2011-06-30 19:44:06 <gmaxwell> carli2: also bitcoin is something like 20kloc, it's a fairly small piece of software.
3319 2011-06-30 19:44:07 <zapnap> well ok, not flip a switch :) but you know what i mean
3320 2011-06-30 19:44:18 <xelister>         // Only connect to one address per a.b.?.? range.
3321 2011-06-30 19:44:18 <Namegduf> There are people who could "make it happen"
3322 2011-06-30 19:44:19 <xelister>         // Do this here so we don't have to critsect vNodes inside mapAddresses critsect.
3323 2011-06-30 19:44:28 <xelister> oh man the network shit really needs rework
3324 2011-06-30 19:44:37 <carli2> gmaxwell: with main i mean that most project's main.cpp only contains main() which contains only an event loop
3325 2011-06-30 19:44:39 <xelister> e.g. be very nice for LAN peers, and not limit them
3326 2011-06-30 19:44:53 <zapnap> Namegduf: anyway, thank you for clarifying a few questions i had. very much appreciated.
3327 2011-06-30 19:44:55 <gmaxwell> xelister: thats just for outbound connection selection.
3328 2011-06-30 19:45:00 <Namegduf> No problem.
3329 2011-06-30 19:45:07 TD has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
3330 2011-06-30 19:45:07 <zapnap> some of this is a little heady ;-)
3331 2011-06-30 19:45:08 <gmaxwell> xelister: it has nothing to do with addnodes, for example.
3332 2011-06-30 19:45:14 <Namegduf> Sorry for a fuzzy memory at points. :P
3333 2011-06-30 19:45:29 <zapnap> which is of course why it's fun
3334 2011-06-30 19:45:43 <cdecker> BlueMatt: why were you asking about me?
3335 2011-06-30 19:45:56 <zapnap> alllssooo if anyone is using pushpool, i'd love to bounce a few things off of you :D
3336 2011-06-30 19:46:07 <BlueMatt> cdecker: oh, people were complaining that they cant search irc logs as they are no longer on one page...
3337 2011-06-30 19:46:15 <BlueMatt> cdecker: was wondering if you could do something about that?
3338 2011-06-30 19:46:25 <zapnap> at least i finally got whitelisted on the bitcoin.org forums, heh
3339 2011-06-30 19:46:37 <cdecker> Should I just put everything on one page then?
3340 2011-06-30 19:46:56 <BlueMatt> cdecker: that would probably be the easiest way
3341 2011-06-30 19:47:14 <cdecker> And there I was thinking I had a nice paging for the logs
3342 2011-06-30 19:47:15 <cdecker> :D
3343 2011-06-30 19:47:38 <BlueMatt> oh well
3344 2011-06-30 19:47:52 <cdecker> I'll add a variable page size (including an ALL size)
3345 2011-06-30 19:47:59 <BlueMatt> sounds good
3346 2011-06-30 19:48:02 <BlueMatt> thanks
3347 2011-06-30 19:48:07 <zamgo> anyone doing a 'blockchain download only' client?   If not, i started one:   http://github.com/zamgo/bitcoin-downloader
3348 2011-06-30 19:48:10 <cdecker> Since nobody really seems to care about deeplinking anyway
3349 2011-06-30 19:48:42 <BlueMatt> zamgo: can I ask why?
3350 2011-06-30 19:48:54 Speeder has quit (Quit: Speeder)
3351 2011-06-30 19:48:55 TD has joined
3352 2011-06-30 19:48:58 <nanotube> zamgo: what do you get out of 'blockchain downloader' client?
3353 2011-06-30 19:48:59 <zamgo> because I wanted a 'safe' client to run on few machines.. for personal block explorer
3354 2011-06-30 19:49:09 <BlueMatt> oh, ok
3355 2011-06-30 19:49:09 <cdecker> Thanks BlueMatt wouldn't have known about the complains if you'd not mentioned my nick ^^
3356 2011-06-30 19:49:11 <zamgo> with no sending functionality, no keys, etc
3357 2011-06-30 19:49:11 <nanotube> zamgo: you can just run the stock client wit ha fresh wallet you don't use
3358 2011-06-30 19:49:19 <zamgo> no nanotube.. that is not safe
3359 2011-06-30 19:49:25 <BlueMatt> cdecker: and thanks for actually leaving something useful in whois ;)
3360 2011-06-30 19:49:27 <zamgo> we need No addresses
3361 2011-06-30 19:49:30 <nanotube> zamgo: why not? what are they gonna do, steal your empty wallet?
3362 2011-06-30 19:49:48 <BlueMatt> cdecker: and for running the logs, that too
3363 2011-06-30 19:49:55 <nanotube> an empty unused wallet is nothing more than a bunch of random bits nobody needs
3364 2011-06-30 19:49:55 <zamgo> safe is safe... unsafe is unsafe
3365 2011-06-30 19:50:15 <cdecker> You're welcome, I'm probably my best user since I don't hang around IRC that much anymore
3366 2011-06-30 19:50:20 <nanotube> exactly. and an empty wallet is as safe as your desktop background
3367 2011-06-30 19:50:27 <nanotube> i.e., you don't care what happens to it
3368 2011-06-30 19:50:30 <nanotube> so it is safe by definition
3369 2011-06-30 19:50:37 eyu100 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
3370 2011-06-30 19:50:40 <zamgo> whatever
3371 2011-06-30 19:50:41 <carli2> signing the transactions should be done in a secure gadget, not a PC
3372 2011-06-30 19:50:45 <nanotube> hey, whatever makes you happy :)
3373 2011-06-30 19:50:46 <carli2> s/in/on
3374 2011-06-30 19:50:51 <zamgo> "no wallets allowed"
3375 2011-06-30 19:51:03 <nanotube> just saying that you're wasting effort. if you want to make something useful, make a client that can run with /only public keys/
3376 2011-06-30 19:51:11 <zamgo> if it wasn't for the settings saved in wallet (which I find weird?) then I'd already get rid of wallet.dat completely
3377 2011-06-30 19:51:13 <nanotube> so it can monitor blockchain for transactions and keep your balance
3378 2011-06-30 19:51:17 <nanotube> but cannot spend anything
3379 2011-06-30 19:51:25 <zamgo> nanotube: this is very usefull FOR ME
3380 2011-06-30 19:51:28 <zamgo> if you don't like it... don't use it
3381 2011-06-30 19:52:05 <nanotube> well, i just explained why it has no use to anyone for any rational reasons. if it has use to you for some other reasons, you're of course more than welcome to it. :)
3382 2011-06-30 19:52:15 <zamgo> wow, what a dick
3383 2011-06-30 19:52:28 <nanotube> hah
3384 2011-06-30 19:52:35 <nanotube> ok, quick poll
3385 2011-06-30 19:52:39 zamgo has left ()
3386 2011-06-30 19:52:53 TD_ has joined
3387 2011-06-30 19:53:11 <nanotube> does anyone else see the point in a client that has no wallet? as compared to a client that you run with a fresh empty wallet?
3388 2011-06-30 19:53:15 <nanotube> am i really missing something here?
3389 2011-06-30 19:53:26 <gmaxwell> nanotube: No. Thats silly.
3390 2011-06-30 19:53:29 <copumpkin> what is zamgo's supposed use case?
3391 2011-06-30 19:53:36 <nanotube> that's what i thought, gmaxwell :)
3392 2011-06-30 19:53:46 <BlueMatt> I would say its pointless
3393 2011-06-30 19:53:52 <nanotube> <zamgo> because I wanted a 'safe' client to run on few machines.. for personal block explorer
3394 2011-06-30 19:53:55 <nanotube> copumpkin: ^
3395 2011-06-30 19:53:55 <nanotube> that
3396 2011-06-30 19:54:02 <copumpkin> hmm!
3397 2011-06-30 19:54:05 <copumpkin> :P
3398 2011-06-30 19:54:05 <nanotube> i suggested that he can just do the same with stock client, and a fresh empty wallet
3399 2011-06-30 19:54:06 <gmaxwell> nanotube: maybe if it was written e.g. with provable techniques, so you could use it as a kind of bastion proxy.
3400 2011-06-30 19:54:13 anu has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3401 2011-06-30 19:54:17 * copumpkin codes up a client in agda
3402 2011-06-30 19:54:21 coderrr is now known as coderrr`brb
3403 2011-06-30 19:54:22 <copumpkin> not that I'd want to write any of the proofs about it
3404 2011-06-30 19:54:29 coderrr`brb is now known as coderrr
3405 2011-06-30 19:54:31 <gmaxwell> copumpkin: spark! yea.
3406 2011-06-30 19:54:47 <gmaxwell> copumpkin: or ATS.
3407 2011-06-30 19:54:47 <nanotube> gmaxwell: yea well, id he'd said something like that... but he didn't.
3408 2011-06-30 19:54:55 <nanotube> anyway, some people just have thin skin, oh well.
3409 2011-06-30 19:55:02 meelu has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
3410 2011-06-30 19:55:03 <gmaxwell> nanotube: right, for a block explorer.. wtf. just use a regular client.
3411 2011-06-30 19:55:13 <copumpkin> gmaxwell: ATS doesn't really give you the ability to write arbitrary proofs, although it has "dependent types" to a certain extent
3412 2011-06-30 19:55:21 nhodges has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
3413 2011-06-30 19:55:24 coderrr is now known as coderrr`brb
3414 2011-06-30 19:55:37 TD has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
3415 2011-06-30 19:55:37 TD_ is now known as TD
3416 2011-06-30 19:56:42 <gmaxwell> copumpkin: hm. some of the examples had me thinking it could.
3417 2011-06-30 19:56:43 wardearia has joined
3418 2011-06-30 19:56:48 <copumpkin> hmm
3419 2011-06-30 19:57:21 <copumpkin> I should play with it someday, but the stuff I read on it made it look like it only had "dependent" integers with built-in constraint solvers for them
3420 2011-06-30 19:57:34 <copumpkin> some sort of auto-lifting of value-level integers to type-level ones
3421 2011-06-30 19:57:57 erus` has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
3422 2011-06-30 19:58:03 <carli2> the checkpoint thing is evil
3423 2011-06-30 19:58:12 <gmaxwell> copumpkin: nah, http://www.ats-lang.org/EXAMPLE/PCPV/bsearch_arr.dats
3424 2011-06-30 19:58:26 <carli2> it destroys all my ideas
3425 2011-06-30 19:58:41 erle- has quit (Quit: CETERVM•AVTEM•CENSEO•CVTTENBERC•ESSE•DELENDVM)
3426 2011-06-30 19:58:47 <gmaxwell> s/evil/preventing your evil/
3427 2011-06-30 19:58:54 <copumpkin> gmaxwell: what proofs are in there? I can't really read the horrific syntax :)
3428 2011-06-30 19:59:03 <copumpkin> oh, ISORD
3429 2011-06-30 19:59:18 Nexus7 has quit ()
3430 2011-06-30 19:59:23 <copumpkin> hmm, not a proof of that
3431 2011-06-30 20:00:09 <gmaxwell> carli2: the highest difficutly decisision means that anything you could actually do that didn't involve isolating nodes wouldn't have worked in any case.
3432 2011-06-30 20:00:11 dbasch has joined
3433 2011-06-30 20:00:12 dbasch has quit (Client Quit)
3434 2011-06-30 20:00:31 erus` has joined
3435 2011-06-30 20:00:34 <gmaxwell> carli2: e.g. mining an alternative chain all at difficulty 1 wouldn't attract any clients who were exposed to the real network.
3436 2011-06-30 20:01:14 stuhood has joined
3437 2011-06-30 20:02:20 <carli2> gmaxwell: i think it would have worked, because my chain would be accepted because it would be much older
3438 2011-06-30 20:02:44 <gmaxwell> No.
3439 2011-06-30 20:03:00 <jrmithdobbs> you can't make it old enough to make it all diff1 in a way that'll validate
3440 2011-06-30 20:03:06 <gmaxwell> The nodes will always choose the chain with the highest sum difficulty.
3441 2011-06-30 20:03:10 <jrmithdobbs> since you have to start at the last checkpoint block that's hard coded
3442 2011-06-30 20:03:17 <gmaxwell> even ignoring the checkpoints.
3443 2011-06-30 20:03:42 meatsim has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
3444 2011-06-30 20:03:48 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: what i mean is, to get it old enough to all be diff one and be longer than the real chain it'd have to be dated like 2002ish (guestimate)
3445 2011-06-30 20:03:51 meatsim has joined
3446 2011-06-30 20:03:52 <carli2> so the depth is calculated not from the number but from the difficulty, too
3447 2011-06-30 20:04:01 stuhood has left ()
3448 2011-06-30 20:04:18 <gmaxwell> carli2: correct. If the difficulty is the same (like it is in the real chain) then it's just length.
3449 2011-06-30 20:04:27 micha__ has joined
3450 2011-06-30 20:04:49 <carli2> so CIA could steal all money that was mined after 118000 when they build a nice hashing farm
3451 2011-06-30 20:05:00 <gmaxwell> but if you had some deep fork with lower difficulty it would have to be MUCH longer to be accepted. And you can't have dates in the future. And the genesis would always be pinned even without the other checkpoints.
3452 2011-06-30 20:05:04 <carli2> s/steal/destroy/
3453 2011-06-30 20:05:27 <gmaxwell> carli2: there are cheaper ways to blow up bitcoin, e.g. sign a piece of paper that makes it unlawful.
3454 2011-06-30 20:05:49 <gmaxwell> the checkpoints get advanced with new releases as well.
3455 2011-06-30 20:06:11 <carli2> gmaxwell: since bitcoins cant be traced, it wouldnt destroy the trust in bitcoins
3456 2011-06-30 20:06:20 <gmaxwell> ...
3457 2011-06-30 20:06:45 <gmaxwell> They certantly can be traced. And mining at a scale bit enough to secure the system is pretty conspicuous.
3458 2011-06-30 20:07:36 micha_ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
3459 2011-06-30 20:07:45 <gmaxwell> People who think that somehow bitcoin could really usefully withstand an active attack by the state serious underestimate the state's power.
3460 2011-06-30 20:07:56 <gmaxwell> seriously*
3461 2011-06-30 20:08:42 <carli2> signing a paper  would bring more attention to bitcoins.
3462 2011-06-30 20:09:17 <gmaxwell> So would performing a conspicious and highly public unlawful attack on it.
3463 2011-06-30 20:09:36 meelu has joined
3464 2011-06-30 20:09:36 meelu has quit (Changing host)
3465 2011-06-30 20:09:36 meelu has joined
3466 2011-06-30 20:09:42 <carli2> but hacker attacks are not broadcast in tv or newspaper.
3467 2011-06-30 20:10:03 nhodges has joined
3468 2011-06-30 20:10:31 <cdecker> Damn , just found out they won't let me do my master thesis on Bitcoin...
3469 2011-06-30 20:10:44 <gmaxwell> cdecker: sorry to hear that!
3470 2011-06-30 20:11:03 <nanotube> cdecker: why not?
3471 2011-06-30 20:11:05 <carli2> bitcoins is against the new system :D
3472 2011-06-30 20:11:11 <cdecker> And I had such great plans to take over the network
3473 2011-06-30 20:11:14 <gmaxwell> carli2: that attack could also be undone, ::shrugs::
3474 2011-06-30 20:11:43 <cdecker> Well they prefer having master students do the dirty work for their PHDs instead of letting them do creative stuff
3475 2011-06-30 20:11:53 <nanotube> cdecker: that sucks heh.
3476 2011-06-30 20:12:02 <nanotube> who's they, what uni/department are you in
3477 2011-06-30 20:12:15 <nanotube> also - convince a phd student to work on bitcoin, and bam, your problems are solved :)
3478 2011-06-30 20:12:18 <cdecker> Well, who knows maybe they let me do it as a PHD
3479 2011-06-30 20:12:20 <gmaxwell> (simply release an update, which everyone would quickly and eagerly apply, that codes a new checkpoint on the real chain)
3480 2011-06-30 20:12:42 <copumpkin> I dunno
3481 2011-06-30 20:12:42 <carli2> it would be easier to request ip information for every connected bitcoin member (like they do for other forbidden p2p networks)
3482 2011-06-30 20:12:48 <copumpkin> lots of phd students are pretty shitty
3483 2011-06-30 20:12:48 <copumpkin> :)
3484 2011-06-30 20:13:02 <cdecker> On that shock I need a beer
3485 2011-06-30 20:13:06 <gmaxwell> carli2: as an attack? sure. Thats what I was saying.
3486 2011-06-30 20:13:23 <cdecker> See you ^^
3487 2011-06-30 20:13:34 cdecker is now known as cdecker|awy
3488 2011-06-30 20:13:35 <carli2> gmaxwell: that's the way politicians fight cyber crime
3489 2011-06-30 20:13:37 <ersi> cdecker: Just disguise the work
3490 2011-06-30 20:13:44 <gmaxwell> carli2: Bitcoin is not an anti-government system. If you want to attack goverments you need to be subtle, not conspicuous.
3491 2011-06-30 20:13:49 <ersi> cdecker|awy: like "Finding collisions in SHA256"
3492 2011-06-30 20:13:52 <cdecker> awy!~cdecker@77-58-144-68.dclient.hispeed.ch|Hehe, was thinking about that too
3493 2011-06-30 20:13:57 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: people who think bitcoin could withstand a serious attack from the state seriously overestimate the importance of technical aspects in such a situation ;p
3494 2011-06-30 20:13:59 <cdecker> awy!~cdecker@77-58-144-68.dclient.hispeed.ch|I'm more on the networking side
3495 2011-06-30 20:13:59 <ersi> cdecker|awy: heh ;)
3496 2011-06-30 20:14:01 pogden has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3497 2011-06-30 20:14:12 <ersi> cdecker|awy: Ambigiousity is the shizzle
3498 2011-06-30 20:14:18 <cdecker> awy!~cdecker@77-58-144-68.dclient.hispeed.ch|I'd have loved to create a decent topology for bitcoin
3499 2011-06-30 20:14:21 <carli2> gov hackers are noobs.
3500 2011-06-30 20:14:32 <jrmithdobbs> carli2: gov DAs aren't tho
3501 2011-06-30 20:14:33 <cdecker> awy!~cdecker@77-58-144-68.dclient.hispeed.ch|Anyway see you around ^^
3502 2011-06-30 20:14:45 <ersi> cdecker|awy: See ya and good luck choosing something to work on! :)
3503 2011-06-30 20:14:52 <cdecker> awy!~cdecker@77-58-144-68.dclient.hispeed.ch|thx
3504 2011-06-30 20:15:14 <gmaxwell> jrmithdobbs: yea. I mean really. The state's unwillngness to be stupid is the backstop here. Not technology. "Anyone caught with bitcoin will be executed on the spot" is within state power, but it would be horrible and moronic... but effective as hell. :)
3505 2011-06-30 20:15:39 freakazoid has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
3506 2011-06-30 20:15:54 <carli2> german gov hackers write down ip addresses in bit torrent, visit the person behind the ip and take away their computers for a while to analize it with some FAT32 Tools
3507 2011-06-30 20:15:58 <jrmithdobbs> wouldn't even need to go that far
3508 2011-06-30 20:16:01 <ersi> gmaxwell: Certainly.
3509 2011-06-30 20:16:14 <jrmithdobbs> "anyone caught trafficing in bitcoins gets 5-10"
3510 2011-06-30 20:16:16 phatsphere has joined
3511 2011-06-30 20:16:17 <jrmithdobbs> end of bitcoin right there
3512 2011-06-30 20:16:22 <ersi> Yup.
3513 2011-06-30 20:16:23 <jrmithdobbs> trafficking
3514 2011-06-30 20:16:40 <jrmithdobbs> and that's completely plausible ;p
3515 2011-06-30 20:16:52 lyt has joined
3516 2011-06-30 20:17:20 <b4epoche> anyone caught trafficking in tulips gets 5-10…  end of Dutch culture
3517 2011-06-30 20:17:43 <zapnap> jrmithdobbs: +1
3518 2011-06-30 20:17:44 RazielZ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
3519 2011-06-30 20:18:01 <b4epoche> what's the penalty for trafficking in Cuban cigars?
3520 2011-06-30 20:18:06 <zapnap> it seems much more likely that they'd make examples of people based on tax evasion (which is completely within their right) rather than try to outlaw it as an alternative currency
3521 2011-06-30 20:18:13 <zapnap> but i wouldn't be horribly surprised either
3522 2011-06-30 20:18:26 <lyt> Hello world. Geek world. I have a question for the software geeks, i wonder how to tap the advantage of  around 600 users in a dc++ hub i run? Any way at all?
3523 2011-06-30 20:18:43 <lyt> I hope this is the right place to ask this question.
3524 2011-06-30 20:18:53 <b4epoche> tap?  fleece?
3525 2011-06-30 20:18:53 <ersi> lyt: Besides.. you know, chatting them up?
3526 2011-06-30 20:19:00 <gmaxwell> zapnap: sure, that makes sense. I've told lots of people that they are idiots if they don't pay taxes on their bitcoin trades as required.
3527 2011-06-30 20:19:12 <gmaxwell> zapnap: I certantly am.
3528 2011-06-30 20:19:14 <ersi> lyt: Otherwise; no, unless you find some remote connection in to your users.
3529 2011-06-30 20:19:35 <lyt> Yeah tap as in "shave some of their processing power when they connect" in my hub.
3530 2011-06-30 20:19:36 dbasch has joined
3531 2011-06-30 20:20:00 <gmaxwell> lyt: make them run a miner program, firewall off people won don't.
3532 2011-06-30 20:20:28 <gmaxwell> s/won/who/
3533 2011-06-30 20:20:32 <lyt> No way of making them run a script in the dc++ app itself?
3534 2011-06-30 20:20:48 <lyt> I can't ask each of the 600 people to run the miner for me
3535 2011-06-30 20:21:14 <zapnap> gmaxwell: same
3536 2011-06-30 20:21:50 <b4epoche> what's so good about your hub that will keep them?
3537 2011-06-30 20:21:56 <zapnap> but i can see people being 'pessimistic' about it for similar legislative reasons ("as a vendor, i'm accepting bitcoins... but it's "hard" for me to track them and services for merchants are immature, etc")
3538 2011-06-30 20:22:14 <zapnap> not saying that's a strong argument, but i can see people being scared of it for that reason
3539 2011-06-30 20:22:15 <b4epoche> when they start realizing their electricity bill is high because of you?
3540 2011-06-30 20:22:20 <lyt> Yeah, i run the only one in  my college that has zero share limit.
3541 2011-06-30 20:22:34 <zapnap> alright, bbl
3542 2011-06-30 20:22:37 zapnap has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3543 2011-06-30 20:22:59 <lyt> Rest of the hubowners all have 10Gb min share limit
3544 2011-06-30 20:23:05 <b4epoche> Oregon, eh?
3545 2011-06-30 20:23:23 <b4epoche> is that OSU or UofO?
3546 2011-06-30 20:23:36 <lyt> No no i'm from India
3547 2011-06-30 20:24:01 <b4epoche> ah, I see, coming through Oregon
3548 2011-06-30 20:24:15 <gmaxwell> 13:20 < zapnap> not saying that's a strong argument, but i can see people being scared of it for that reason
3549 2011-06-30 20:24:15 <lyt> Lot's of untapped computers in my college, all are high end/medium end laptops
3550 2011-06-30 20:24:35 <gmaxwell> zapnap: thus the justification for the earlier adopter windfall (too bad he left)
3551 2011-06-30 20:24:42 <b4epoche> so, what would one bitcoin buy you in India?
3552 2011-06-30 20:25:05 <b4epoche> I mean, assuming it's worth ~$20
3553 2011-06-30 20:25:08 <xelister> how to run 2nd node on same machine?
3554 2011-06-30 20:25:10 <lyt> Indian market is totally new to the bitcoin
3555 2011-06-30 20:25:11 <xelister> ./bitcoind -server -daemon -rpcport 8330 -port 8334
3556 2011-06-30 20:25:12 <xelister> error: couldn't connect to server
3557 2011-06-30 20:25:18 <xelister> (it is on another system user)
3558 2011-06-30 20:25:43 <lyt> Not even a single person i know even has heard of the bitcoin
3559 2011-06-30 20:25:58 <b4epoche> no, I'm more interested in what mining for, say, 1 btc/week would be worth
3560 2011-06-30 20:26:24 <lyt> You mean in our local currency? 1000 INR
3561 2011-06-30 20:26:32 <b4epoche> what are the economics of getting ~20 USD per week
3562 2011-06-30 20:26:40 <lyt> That would feed a family of 6 for the whole week.
3563 2011-06-30 20:26:47 <lyt> Power usage wise?
3564 2011-06-30 20:26:54 <b4epoche> well, that too
3565 2011-06-30 20:27:30 <lyt> Power usage wise, from what i've calculated, i just about break even, at .8btc/week
3566 2011-06-30 20:27:35 * b4epoche is just wondering if mining will become only viable in 'third-world' countries…  not, saying India, is 3rd world.
3567 2011-06-30 20:27:50 <lyt> Yeah i feel you.
3568 2011-06-30 20:28:16 <lyt> Bitcoin is viable as long as you don't have any asspots regulating your economics
3569 2011-06-30 20:28:25 <b4epoche> reminds me of ebay…  it's stupid to sell stuff on there if you're from the US
3570 2011-06-30 20:28:29 <gmaxwell> "Bitcoin mining difficulty up? First world problems"
3571 2011-06-30 20:29:17 <lyt> The catch is i get free power in my college, I pay about a dollar a semester for power.
3572 2011-06-30 20:29:19 <lyt> That's it.
3573 2011-06-30 20:29:29 <lyt> So i want to make the best use of it while i can
3574 2011-06-30 20:29:56 <gmaxwell> lyt: heh well, you can probably only get 10amps at least before you start blowing breakers and catching unwanted attention.
3575 2011-06-30 20:30:00 storrgie has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3576 2011-06-30 20:30:08 josephholsten has joined
3577 2011-06-30 20:30:08 <lyt> I can easily access my computer centre. I plan to run my PC all day.
3578 2011-06-30 20:30:12 <lyt> Yeah yeah i know
3579 2011-06-30 20:30:19 <lyt> :D
3580 2011-06-30 20:30:36 * b4epoche has been eyeing the idle computer labs at his university ;-)
3581 2011-06-30 20:30:40 <lyt> The computers are any ways on all the time
3582 2011-06-30 20:30:43 <lyt> ;)
3583 2011-06-30 20:30:50 <b4epoche> but as I'm faculty, I'd like to keep my job
3584 2011-06-30 20:30:55 <lyt> I can access the mainframe if i try hard.
3585 2011-06-30 20:30:57 <lyt> O.o
3586 2011-06-30 20:31:09 <lyt> But is it worth the risk?
3587 2011-06-30 20:31:11 <b4epoche> on doesn't mean keeping the GPU at 90C
3588 2011-06-30 20:31:24 <gmaxwell> No. Don't mine on equipment that doesn't belong to you. Thats stupid.
3589 2011-06-30 20:31:28 <b4epoche> only GPU mining makes any sense
3590 2011-06-30 20:31:36 acfrazier is now known as hansneon
3591 2011-06-30 20:31:39 hansneon is now known as HansNeon
3592 2011-06-30 20:32:01 <b4epoche> 'belong to you'?  this is a state-run school ;-)
3593 2011-06-30 20:32:04 <lyt> True, but i can always take control for a day or so and reap the benifits?
3594 2011-06-30 20:32:23 <lyt> Yeah nothing except my own laptop is my own.
3595 2011-06-30 20:32:28 <gmaxwell> lyt: would you enter a public, logged, IRC channel and say "their maintance department leaves the pumps running at night, should I start filling up cars?"
3596 2011-06-30 20:32:48 HansNeon is now known as acfrazier
3597 2011-06-30 20:33:02 <lyt> Point taken. All i've been asking is hypothetical of course.
3598 2011-06-30 20:33:10 Soak has quit ()
3599 2011-06-30 20:33:22 <lyt> Just for my own curiosity.
3600 2011-06-30 20:34:00 <ersi> lyt: By the way, this is a public IRC channel with logs up on the 'net.
3601 2011-06-30 20:34:07 <lyt> I know i know.
3602 2011-06-30 20:34:25 <lyt> I'm kinda anon.
3603 2011-06-30 20:34:29 <lyt> Using tor
3604 2011-06-30 20:34:31 <b4epoche> technically, I doubt he'd be doing anything illegal
3605 2011-06-30 20:34:53 <lyt> Yeah the computers are for usage of students.
3606 2011-06-30 20:34:54 <b4epoche> against school policy, probably
3607 2011-06-30 20:35:13 <lyt> People use them for facebook all the time, that is not frowned upon.
3608 2011-06-30 20:35:19 <lyt> Facebook/gaming/
3609 2011-06-30 20:35:22 <b4epoche> lyt:  just say you're testing a miner and learning to program GPUs
3610 2011-06-30 20:35:23 <lyt> Movies.
3611 2011-06-30 20:35:52 <CIA-103> bitcoinj: hearn@google.com * r117 /trunk/ (15 files in 3 dirs):
3612 2011-06-30 20:35:52 <CIA-103> bitcoinj: Use Sha256Hash more consistently, improve the class a bit.
3613 2011-06-30 20:35:52 <CIA-103> bitcoinj: Note that the endianness of the hashes is still very ad-hoc and messy. Next step is to pick an endianness and stick with it, to reduce the number of times reverseBytes is used.
3614 2011-06-30 20:35:52 <lyt> Nice.
3615 2011-06-30 20:35:52 <gmaxwell> Facebook doesn't make you a bunch of money due to using a bunch more power. ::shrugs:: In any case this is offtopic.. perhaps to #bitcoin-mining?'
3616 2011-06-30 20:35:58 <b4epoche> seriously, writing a bitcoin GPU miner seems like a really good way to learn and benchmark your skills
3617 2011-06-30 20:36:10 <lyt> Right?
3618 2011-06-30 20:36:17 <lyt> I'm just starting
3619 2011-06-30 20:36:19 <gmaxwell> b4epoche: sure, and running it on one system…
3620 2011-06-30 20:36:33 <gmaxwell> b4epoche: running a bunch of it is less excusable.
3621 2011-06-30 20:36:36 <b4epoche> yea, didn't say a bot-miner
3622 2011-06-30 20:37:10 <b4epoche> btw, is miner dev'ing OnT or OffT?
3623 2011-06-30 20:38:00 <gmaxwell> ontopic, but potentially boring.
3624 2011-06-30 20:38:04 <ersi> b4epoche: I could argue for several boring crimes
3625 2011-06-30 20:38:07 <gmaxwell> (IIRC)
3626 2011-06-30 20:38:09 <ersi> Embezzlement perhaps
3627 2011-06-30 20:38:51 <lyt> No, as a student, i believe they would just leave such a caught person with a slap on the wrist perhaps.
3628 2011-06-30 20:38:57 <b4epoche> but like the guy said, the same argument could be made for watching movies
3629 2011-06-30 20:39:01 carli2 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
3630 2011-06-30 20:39:05 sipa has joined
3631 2011-06-30 20:39:14 <ersi> Probably, depends on what impression they get from this MAGICAL TERRORIST DRUG CURRENCY
3632 2011-06-30 20:39:24 <ersi> Depends how it gets spinned
3633 2011-06-30 20:39:33 <b4epoche> lyt:  I'm sure you'd just get a, 'don't do it anymore' and maybe a 'you want to work for the IT department?'
3634 2011-06-30 20:40:01 <lyt> India is famed for it's IT. It would take more than a botminer to get me an invite
3635 2011-06-30 20:40:20 <lyt> I know too many IT whizguys to be confident
3636 2011-06-30 20:40:52 <iz> mtgox
3637 2011-06-30 20:41:16 <lyt> I wonder what would happen after another mtgox crash?
3638 2011-06-30 20:41:39 ahihi2 has joined
3639 2011-06-30 20:41:39 <lyt> People can get extremely rich on such a crash again.
3640 2011-06-30 20:42:28 T_X has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
3641 2011-06-30 20:43:51 hvala has joined
3642 2011-06-30 20:43:56 <folklore> how lyt
3643 2011-06-30 20:44:05 <Zarutian> ersi: better to spin it as UNTAXABLE, NOT ONLY FOR THE FATCATS!
3644 2011-06-30 20:44:28 <lyt> @folklore
3645 2011-06-30 20:44:57 <lyt> You buy lots of btc at .01$ and sell when they come up to 15$
3646 2011-06-30 20:45:52 <justmoon> those buys at .01$ got reversed, can't make money on a trade that gets reversed after the crash
3647 2011-06-30 20:46:26 <ersi> Zarutian: That'll get 'em shakin' in their boots
3648 2011-06-30 20:46:27 <ersi> ;p
3649 2011-06-30 20:47:04 <lyt> Damn
3650 2011-06-30 20:47:06 <lyt> Didn't know that
3651 2011-06-30 20:47:08 <ersi> lyt: Assuming everyone continues to trust bitcoins itself, and valuate it higher than 0.01 , yes
3652 2011-06-30 20:47:16 <ersi> lyt: fail
3653 2011-06-30 20:47:23 <ersi> Keep up with the times man
3654 2011-06-30 20:47:31 <justmoon> ersi: don't be an asshole bro
3655 2011-06-30 20:47:35 <lyt> Yeah, fault. Major fail.
3656 2011-06-30 20:47:56 <lyt> Thing is, this is my first time on IRC
3657 2011-06-30 20:48:05 <gmaxwell> 13:44 < justmoon> those buys at .01$ got reversed, can't make money on a trade that gets reversed after the crash
3658 2011-06-30 20:48:06 <ersi> Well, to be less harsh - It was published within a few hours of the 'mtgox crash' happening
3659 2011-06-30 20:48:10 <ersi> and has been everywhere.
3660 2011-06-30 20:48:31 <lyt> And i've learnt about bitcoin only yesterday
3661 2011-06-30 20:48:35 <ersi> E v e r y o n e, practically - have been fucking nagging about the (internal, mtgox) transaction reversal
3662 2011-06-30 20:48:46 <ersi> lyt: Oh, sorry then. Then you couldn't possibly have known
3663 2011-06-30 20:48:58 <ersi> (but it seems weird that you know about the mtgox crash.. without knowing THAT >_>)
3664 2011-06-30 20:49:19 <lyt> It mentioned in the article in wiki
3665 2011-06-30 20:49:47 <lyt> :P
3666 2011-06-30 20:51:00 <TD> sup justmoon
3667 2011-06-30 20:51:19 <justmoon> TD: hey working on chain download from multiple peers - have you worked on that yet?
3668 2011-06-30 20:51:33 <TD> you mean to speed it up?
3669 2011-06-30 20:51:46 <justmoon> just to make it more robust
3670 2011-06-30 20:51:51 <TD> nope, haven't worked on that yet.
3671 2011-06-30 20:51:56 <justmoon> also I'm running into the flood limits
3672 2011-06-30 20:51:59 <TD> yeah
3673 2011-06-30 20:52:03 <justmoon> so I need to at least handle getting disconnected
3674 2011-06-30 20:52:09 <TD> i'm surprised gavin/jeff didn't release an emergency fix yet
3675 2011-06-30 20:52:15 <TD> because the c++ client will hit that too
3676 2011-06-30 20:52:20 <TD> it's another "oh shit the network is breaking" moment
3677 2011-06-30 20:52:52 <TD> i think the next thing i work on will be trying to simplify/rationalize the endianness of hashes inside the library
3678 2011-06-30 20:53:03 <TD> it should speed things up a lot on android if that can be simplified
3679 2011-06-30 20:53:07 <justmoon> have fun ^^
3680 2011-06-30 20:53:17 <TD> and after that, probably getheaders for the initial download
3681 2011-06-30 20:53:31 <TD> just trying to get the initial startup time for a fresh wallet reasonable
3682 2011-06-30 20:53:35 <justmoon> how does getheaders help you?
3683 2011-06-30 20:53:38 <justmoon> SPV?
3684 2011-06-30 20:53:56 <TD> if there are no keys in your wallet created before a certain time, there's no point downloading block bodies before that time
3685 2011-06-30 20:54:02 <justmoon> gotcha
3686 2011-06-30 20:54:08 <BlueMatt> TD: wait, whats broken?
3687 2011-06-30 20:54:17 <TD> BlueMatt: see the thread on bitcoin-development
3688 2011-06-30 20:54:20 <TD> flood limits again
3689 2011-06-30 20:55:09 <BlueMatt> oh, damn email...
3690 2011-06-30 20:55:53 <BlueMatt> wait, which thread?
3691 2011-06-30 20:55:55 <BlueMatt> I dont see one?
3692 2011-06-30 20:56:02 Pinion has joined
3693 2011-06-30 20:56:07 <BlueMatt> http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development
3694 2011-06-30 20:56:55 <TD> http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=BANLkTik78Lokrm_09RW5EBkq2mJC3kMzxA%40mail.gmail.com&forum_name=bitcoin-development
3695 2011-06-30 20:57:14 torsthaldo has joined
3696 2011-06-30 20:57:31 wasabi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3697 2011-06-30 20:57:34 torsthaldo has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3698 2011-06-30 20:58:26 <BlueMatt> oh, the old one
3699 2011-06-30 20:58:58 <BlueMatt> well I think the reason an emergency release wasnt done to fix that was because its not reliable in occuring, is it?
3700 2011-06-30 20:59:11 <gmaxwell> it happens on every new node bringup many times.
3701 2011-06-30 20:59:30 <gmaxwell> and I think it's also causing nodes to get connected to idiot islands, but I don't know how to prove its the cause.
3702 2011-06-30 20:59:35 <TD> it is
3703 2011-06-30 20:59:49 <sipa> so, easy fix: increase buffer size
3704 2011-06-30 20:59:51 <TD> it's now guaranteed to happen when downloading the block chain for the firs time, afaik
3705 2011-06-30 20:59:53 <gmaxwell> (e.g. you'll get disconnected from all the peers that actually have the blocks, and so you'll have all 8 slots full of nodes that don't)
3706 2011-06-30 20:59:56 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: ok, so why has this not happened?
3707 2011-06-30 20:59:56 <TD> sipa: no, we did that last time
3708 2011-06-30 20:59:59 <BlueMatt> or sipa can as well
3709 2011-06-30 21:00:00 <sipa> real solution: don't use a buffer
3710 2011-06-30 21:00:01 <TD> i thought 10mb was "plenty"
3711 2011-06-30 21:00:13 <TD> i think upping the buffer size AND reducing the batch size will buy more time
3712 2011-06-30 21:00:14 <BlueMatt> TD: well yea, its not a solution, but its a temporary fix
3713 2011-06-30 21:00:21 <TD> like, going from 500 to 50 blocks per push
3714 2011-06-30 21:00:29 <BlueMatt> that would kill initial download
3715 2011-06-30 21:00:48 meelu has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
3716 2011-06-30 21:00:51 aptRipley has joined
3717 2011-06-30 21:00:54 <gmaxwell> This kills initial download too....
3718 2011-06-30 21:01:02 <justmoon> maybe a batch size limit based on bytes rather than blocks?
3719 2011-06-30 21:01:30 <gmaxwell> worse, any fix won't help quickly, because it's not the new nodes that need to be fixed. :(
3720 2011-06-30 21:01:32 huk has joined
3721 2011-06-30 21:01:52 <TD> justmoon: that works too
3722 2011-06-30 21:01:59 <gmaxwell> justmoon: I like that.
3723 2011-06-30 21:02:02 <justmoon> gmaxwell: well for new nodes the fix would be to retry if the download gets stuck
3724 2011-06-30 21:02:08 <TD> justmoon: the code that builds up the block data message just needs to keep track of how much space it used so far
3725 2011-06-30 21:02:16 <gmaxwell> justmoon: they do retry...
3726 2011-06-30 21:02:19 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: well if we push a release, nodes will get updated quicker than waiting for 0.4 ;)
3727 2011-06-30 21:02:23 torsthaldo has joined
3728 2011-06-30 21:02:46 <gmaxwell> but they'll end up connected to idiot nodes due to reconnecting.
3729 2011-06-30 21:02:55 <justmoon> gmaxwell: ahhh, ok got you
3730 2011-06-30 21:03:03 hvala has left ("Leaving")
3731 2011-06-30 21:03:04 Xunie has joined
3732 2011-06-30 21:03:46 <gmaxwell> I like justmoon's selection a lot. let it put 5MBytes in the the response then stop... and wait for the next request.
3733 2011-06-30 21:03:55 <sipa> gmaxwell: agree
3734 2011-06-30 21:03:58 <BlueMatt> yep
3735 2011-06-30 21:04:03 <TD> well it's not quite that simple. the other side asked for 500 blocks
3736 2011-06-30 21:04:09 <TD> it won't ask again until it gets those 500 blocks
3737 2011-06-30 21:04:13 <TD> so you need to track it .....
3738 2011-06-30 21:04:32 <BlueMatt> oh, I thought it allowed you to specify an end to the stream
3739 2011-06-30 21:04:33 <justmoon> won't the other side ask again based on the "tickle" inv?
3740 2011-06-30 21:04:37 <BlueMatt> ...well then thats a pain
3741 2011-06-30 21:04:49 <gmaxwell> the other side asked for hash 0
3742 2011-06-30 21:04:52 flykoko has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3743 2011-06-30 21:05:03 wasabi has joined
3744 2011-06-30 21:05:14 <gmaxwell> hm? I don't think the other side knows about the 500 limit, does it?
3745 2011-06-30 21:05:43 <BlueMatt> it always asks for 500
3746 2011-06-30 21:06:00 <justmoon> I know that my client doesn't care how many blocks it receives, it starts the next download once it receives that "special inv"
3747 2011-06-30 21:06:02 <gmaxwell> The getblocks has a starting point and an ending hash. IIRC
3748 2011-06-30 21:06:07 <TD> oh, right
3749 2011-06-30 21:06:10 <justmoon> (not very robust, I know, it's a todo)
3750 2011-06-30 21:06:13 <TD> yes i'm wrong
3751 2011-06-30 21:06:23 <gmaxwell> And if you don't know the ending hash you request zero.
3752 2011-06-30 21:06:26 <TD> the serving node always controls how many blocks are requested in a batch
3753 2011-06-30 21:06:45 <TD> so it could be reduced
3754 2011-06-30 21:06:48 <BlueMatt> oh, then yea we should do justmoon's original suggestion
3755 2011-06-30 21:07:26 glassresistor has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3756 2011-06-30 21:07:46 <gmaxwell> Could potentially reduce the buffer size eventually too... but not an issue for now.
3757 2011-06-30 21:07:46 nocreativenick1 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3758 2011-06-30 21:08:12 <BlueMatt> so, add a counter to keep track of size sent and stop when we hit 10m?
3759 2011-06-30 21:08:39 nocreativenick1 has joined
3760 2011-06-30 21:09:11 lyt has quit (Quit: Page closed)
3761 2011-06-30 21:09:15 <gmaxwell> Well, not so simple, I think this works for the 0 target case but might not for the known target case.
3762 2011-06-30 21:09:27 enquirer has joined
3763 2011-06-30 21:09:33 <justmoon> gmaxwell, well known target is still subject to a limit
3764 2011-06-30 21:09:43 <gmaxwell> ah okay
3765 2011-06-30 21:09:52 <sipa> BlueMatt: indeed, seems trivial to implement
3766 2011-06-30 21:09:54 <BlueMatt> will that confuse the client?
3767 2011-06-30 21:09:54 <gmaxwell> I don't remember that code.
3768 2011-06-30 21:10:02 <BlueMatt> Ill go hack it and see what happens
3769 2011-06-30 21:11:24 caedes has joined
3770 2011-06-30 21:11:29 caedes has quit (Changing host)
3771 2011-06-30 21:11:29 caedes has joined
3772 2011-06-30 21:12:14 glassresistor has joined
3773 2011-06-30 21:12:41 sabalaba has quit (Quit: Leaving)
3774 2011-06-30 21:13:08 <sipa> hmm, is there no easier way to find the size of a block than completely unserializing it from disk?
3775 2011-06-30 21:13:22 <TD> apparently not
3776 2011-06-30 21:13:28 Pinion has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPad - http://colloquy.mobi)
3777 2011-06-30 21:13:31 <TD> it might be a pain
3778 2011-06-30 21:13:40 <TD> maybe another thread is necessary
3779 2011-06-30 21:14:02 <TD> the problem is that the vSend buffer is written out asynchronously
3780 2011-06-30 21:14:09 <justmoon> sipa: in my client i ended up storing the block size in the database - can recommend that choice, optimizes things in a couple of places
3781 2011-06-30 21:14:33 <TD> so if you want to keep its size small, you have to add some blocks to the vSend buffer, wait for it to drain, repeat ..... could be nasty
3782 2011-06-30 21:14:54 <TD> it might be better to introduce some kind of change to net.cpp
3783 2011-06-30 21:15:10 <TD> where in the send loop, it's possible for the SocketHandler thread to load from disk and write out directly
3784 2011-06-30 21:15:17 <TD> bypassing vSend completely
3785 2011-06-30 21:15:43 <sipa> jgarzik's suggestion on the mailinglist, you mean?
3786 2011-06-30 21:15:54 abragin has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3787 2011-06-30 21:15:58 <BlueMatt> net code need serious work...
3788 2011-06-30 21:16:07 <TD> i was thinking more of a quick, block send specific hack
3789 2011-06-30 21:16:13 <TD> but yeah
3790 2011-06-30 21:16:14 <TD> that's the general idea
3791 2011-06-30 21:16:45 <justmoon> is there anything other than the block chain download that could conceivably run into the limit some day?
3792 2011-06-30 21:16:55 <justmoon> (just curious)
3793 2011-06-30 21:16:56 <TD> i don't think so
3794 2011-06-30 21:16:58 <TD> well
3795 2011-06-30 21:17:00 <TD> hmm
3796 2011-06-30 21:17:04 <TD> wait. i'm wrong.
3797 2011-06-30 21:17:05 <gmaxwell> actual floods.
3798 2011-06-30 21:17:14 <TD> in theory almost anything could cause this, if for some reason the network got bogged down
3799 2011-06-30 21:17:28 <TD> if you're not fast enough at receiving traffic then vSend will start backing up
3800 2011-06-30 21:17:33 <justmoon> mmh true
3801 2011-06-30 21:17:37 <TD> eg for transaction relays
3802 2011-06-30 21:17:55 abragin has joined
3803 2011-06-30 21:17:56 abragin has quit (Changing host)
3804 2011-06-30 21:17:56 abragin has joined
3805 2011-06-30 21:17:56 <justmoon> but that's the case the limit is there for, i.e. the network is under too much load so we want to at least not have everybody crash
3806 2011-06-30 21:17:58 <gmaxwell> but thats what its for.
3807 2011-06-30 21:17:59 <TD> the problem here is a specific case of that - the blocks are loaded from disk and "sent" much faster than you can actually receive them
3808 2011-06-30 21:18:30 <sipa> you actually want an output buffer not with the actual data to send, but with objects that can serialize to the data being sent
3809 2011-06-30 21:18:47 <knotwork> $buying
3810 2011-06-30 21:18:49 <NickelBot> buying btc, buying cdn, buying czb, buying mbc, buying nmc, buying nkl, buying ukb or buying uns
3811 2011-06-30 21:18:52 <justmoon> sipa: why? sounds complex
3812 2011-06-30 21:18:54 <knotwork> $buying mbc
3813 2011-06-30 21:18:55 <TD> i'm not sure it's really needed, honestly.
3814 2011-06-30 21:18:55 <NickelBot> Buying MBC: BTC buys 15.00, CZB buys 0.99, GMC buys 0.99, GRF buys 0.99, NMC buys 0.005, NKL buys 0.05, UKB buys 0.99, UNS buys 0.99
3815 2011-06-30 21:18:56 <NickelBot> Transaction fee per kilobyte here is set to 0.01
3816 2011-06-30 21:18:57 wasabi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3817 2011-06-30 21:19:01 <gmaxwell> justmoon: so you don't send partial objects.
3818 2011-06-30 21:19:04 <TD> most servers slow down and stop before they actually run out of memory
3819 2011-06-30 21:19:11 <MrSam> hmm
3820 2011-06-30 21:19:22 <justmoon> gmaxwell: is that a problem though?
3821 2011-06-30 21:19:33 <sipa> justmoon: all the data is there, easily available, why copy it in a buffer?
3822 2011-06-30 21:19:50 <justmoon> sipa: ah, so to save some extra memory copying?
3823 2011-06-30 21:19:55 <BlueMatt> yep, it also means one node can scale a ton more
3824 2011-06-30 21:20:01 <justmoon> gotcha
3825 2011-06-30 21:20:22 <TD> perhaps the cleanest fix is another thread indeed
3826 2011-06-30 21:20:27 <BlueMatt> now thats something I cant hack together...
3827 2011-06-30 21:20:30 <TD> that pushes some blocks, measures the size of vsend
3828 2011-06-30 21:20:35 <TD> sleeps when it's full, until it gets empty again
3829 2011-06-30 21:20:39 <BlueMatt> yep
3830 2011-06-30 21:20:55 <BlueMatt> but you cant do it per node
3831 2011-06-30 21:21:19 <knotwork> $buying
3832 2011-06-30 21:21:21 <NickelBot> buying btc, buying cdn, buying czb, buying gmc, buying grf, buying mbc, buying nmc, buying nkl, buying ukb or buying uns
3833 2011-06-30 21:21:45 <gmaxwell> a seperate topic, but can the new release move the checkpoints forward? difficulty has increased 16.7x since the highest one there.
3834 2011-06-30 21:22:05 <sipa> knotwork: does that need to be in here?
3835 2011-06-30 21:22:10 TheAncientGoat has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
3836 2011-06-30 21:22:22 <gmaxwell> knotwork: are you actually a human?
3837 2011-06-30 21:22:41 <BlueMatt> a bot talking to a bot?
3838 2011-06-30 21:22:48 <knotwork> yes I am human. I am developing trading bots
3839 2011-06-30 21:23:01 <neofutur> open source ones ?
3840 2011-06-30 21:23:08 b4epoche_ has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
3841 2011-06-30 21:23:11 <BlueMatt> gribble is open source
3842 2011-06-30 21:23:25 <neofutur> gribble is not a trading bot afaik
3843 2011-06-30 21:23:32 meelu has joined
3844 2011-06-30 21:23:33 meelu has quit (Changing host)
3845 2011-06-30 21:23:33 meelu has joined
3846 2011-06-30 21:23:42 <BlueMatt> oh you mean do full trades in a bot, not just otc
3847 2011-06-30 21:23:45 <knotwork> probably I guess, yeah. bash scripts run by eggdrop (via its tcl scripts)
3848 2011-06-30 21:23:45 RenaKunisaki has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
3849 2011-06-30 21:24:16 <knotwork> an otc bot. but i doesnt yet know how to get back into -otc
3850 2011-06-30 21:24:39 <diki> ;;bc,stats
3851 2011-06-30 21:24:40 <gribble> Current Blocks: 134098 | Current Difficulty: 1379223.4296725 | Next Difficulty At Block: 135071 | Next Difficulty In: 973 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 5 days, 22 hours, 58 minutes, and 37 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1562255.12912287
3852 2011-06-30 21:24:54 RenaKunisaki has joined
3853 2011-06-30 21:24:55 <knotwork> its not intended to do market-clearing, instead people wanting to offer different prices would tell their own instance of such a bot the prices they offer
3854 2011-06-30 21:25:00 <BlueMatt> ok, so is anyone gonna volunteer to overhaul how networking sends?
3855 2011-06-30 21:25:11 <bittwist> not it
3856 2011-06-30 21:25:21 <[Tycho]> ;;bc,stats
3857 2011-06-30 21:25:22 <gribble> Current Blocks: 134098 | Current Difficulty: 1379223.4296725 | Next Difficulty At Block: 135071 | Next Difficulty In: 973 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 5 days, 22 hours, 58 minutes, and 37 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1562255.12912287
3858 2011-06-30 21:25:42 <denisx> yeah, in berlin someone sells burger for bitcoins and one btc ist 15.5€ to support the system
3859 2011-06-30 21:26:24 <BlueMatt> nice, I might be going to berlin in a couple weeks, have to figure out where he is
3860 2011-06-30 21:27:15 BitterTea has joined
3861 2011-06-30 21:27:15 BitterTea has quit (Changing host)
3862 2011-06-30 21:27:15 BitterTea has joined
3863 2011-06-30 21:27:35 <sipa> i wonder whether just a deserialize+checksize test isn't enough for now
3864 2011-06-30 21:27:46 <sipa> to send smaller chunks
3865 2011-06-30 21:27:59 <sipa> the deserialization would have to be done anyway
3866 2011-06-30 21:28:10 TheZimm has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
3867 2011-06-30 21:28:16 <gmaxwell> just check after and stop when it reaches some safe total.
3868 2011-06-30 21:28:21 <sipa> indeed
3869 2011-06-30 21:28:26 <gmaxwell> if it goes a bit over thats fine.
3870 2011-06-30 21:28:27 <sipa> just implemented it, building now
3871 2011-06-30 21:28:55 <BlueMatt> in any case, net restructure is something that needs done sometime in the near future
3872 2011-06-30 21:29:20 <BlueMatt> could be redone and keep in mind some kind of centralized notification interface to move towards libbitcoin in one step too
3873 2011-06-30 21:29:31 <gmaxwell> grep flood debug.log | wc -l
3874 2011-06-30 21:29:32 <gmaxwell> 201
3875 2011-06-30 21:29:42 <BlueMatt> ouch
3876 2011-06-30 21:29:49 <gmaxwell> heh I'd be glad to test a patch. :)
3877 2011-06-30 21:30:07 <gmaxwell> I wish these logs had timestamps so I could figure out the rate easier.
3878 2011-06-30 21:30:21 wasabi has joined
3879 2011-06-30 21:31:17 <sipa> gmaxwell: my branch limitblocksend
3880 2011-06-30 21:31:36 Diablo-D3 has joined
3881 2011-06-30 21:33:07 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
3882 2011-06-30 21:33:48 da2ce7 has joined
3883 2011-06-30 21:34:02 <gmaxwell> gogo git stash...
3884 2011-06-30 21:34:58 darbsllim has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
3885 2011-06-30 21:35:10 <sipa> it's actually pretty nifty, bitcoin sends an inv back if there are not-downloaded blocks left for a particular peer
3886 2011-06-30 21:35:22 glassresistor has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
3887 2011-06-30 21:35:29 <BlueMatt> you didnt push anything at limitblocksend
3888 2011-06-30 21:35:33 <sipa> huh
3889 2011-06-30 21:35:39 <BlueMatt> https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/commits/limitblocksend
3890 2011-06-30 21:35:50 <sipa> damnit
3891 2011-06-30 21:36:04 <sipa> forgot to commit
3892 2011-06-30 21:36:51 <BlueMatt> anyone else think the animations when you roll over results on google are ridiculously annoying
3893 2011-06-30 21:36:51 <sipa> fixed
3894 2011-06-30 21:37:05 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: YES
3895 2011-06-30 21:37:12 <gmaxwell> sipa: okay, starting it and going to dinner....
3896 2011-06-30 21:38:10 <gmaxwell> it runs...
3897 2011-06-30 21:38:34 <sipa> let another fresh node connect to it and download the chain?
3898 2011-06-30 21:40:12 wasabi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
3899 2011-06-30 21:40:42 agricocb has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
3900 2011-06-30 21:41:45 wasabi has joined
3901 2011-06-30 21:43:07 <BlueMatt> yay legit-hosted dnsseed based on live nodes pulled from network up: dnsseed.bluematt.me
3902 2011-06-30 21:43:40 b4epoche_ has joined
3903 2011-06-30 21:44:52 T_X has joined
3904 2011-06-30 21:45:16 T_X has quit (Changing host)
3905 2011-06-30 21:45:16 T_X has joined
3906 2011-06-30 21:45:25 <sipa> BlueMatt: requirements?
3907 2011-06-30 21:45:34 <BlueMatt> sipa: requirements?
3908 2011-06-30 21:45:41 <sipa> to run it :)
3909 2011-06-30 21:45:47 <upb> hah so before it was hosted on a fast flux network of compromised boxes?:p
3910 2011-06-30 21:45:50 <copumpkin> BlueMatt: are you a member of the blue man group?
3911 2011-06-30 21:46:00 <BlueMatt> sipa: modify bitcoin client to include that name in net.cpp
3912 2011-06-30 21:46:08 <BlueMatt> or wait for a release with that in it
3913 2011-06-30 21:46:14 <BlueMatt> copumpkin: uh...no
3914 2011-06-30 21:46:14 <sipa> BlueMatt: lol
3915 2011-06-30 21:46:20 <copumpkin> oh okay
3916 2011-06-30 21:46:23 <copumpkin> just thought I'd check
3917 2011-06-30 21:46:25 <sipa> BlueMatt: i mean, requirements to run such a dnsseed :D
3918 2011-06-30 21:46:38 <upb> dnsseed.bluematt.me     nameserver = dnsseedns.bluematt.me.
3919 2011-06-30 21:46:39 <upb> o_O
3920 2011-06-30 21:46:40 <BlueMatt> sipa: or you can grab the code which I hacked to use sqlite and bind and fill db via php, or use mysql and powerdns
3921 2011-06-30 21:46:51 <BlueMatt> upb: yea...well it works fine so...
3922 2011-06-30 21:47:00 mtrlt has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
3923 2011-06-30 21:47:01 <upb> ahhhh misread :D tricky name
3924 2011-06-30 21:47:09 <upb> +ns
3925 2011-06-30 21:47:11 <BlueMatt> upb: no, its not its own ns
3926 2011-06-30 21:47:15 <upb> yeah
3927 2011-06-30 21:47:21 <BlueMatt> that might not quite work...
3928 2011-06-30 21:48:06 <BlueMatt> sipa: its being run on a vps graciously provided by tcatm that has 512m allocated, but isnt using nearly that much, maybe needs 384
3929 2011-06-30 21:48:37 <BlueMatt> speaking of which: tcatm I actually dont need 512, less appears to work, and is the cpu load fine, I can change some config to try to drop that if its too much?
3930 2011-06-30 21:49:22 mtrlt has joined
3931 2011-06-30 21:49:24 dbasch has quit (Quit: dbasch)
3932 2011-06-30 21:50:14 <tcatm> BlueMatt: this is the host's cpu usage. the spike was during installation of the VPS: http://eu1.bitcoincharts.com/munin/bitcoincharts.com/eu1.bitcoincharts.com/cpu-day.png
3933 2011-06-30 21:50:21 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
3934 2011-06-30 21:50:34 Titeuf_87 has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
3935 2011-06-30 21:50:34 <BlueMatt> tcatm: ok, so I suppose what Im using isnt bad then?
3936 2011-06-30 21:50:53 dbasch has joined
3937 2011-06-30 21:50:54 <tcatm> almost not noticable :)
3938 2011-06-30 21:51:09 dan_a has joined
3939 2011-06-30 21:51:26 <BlueMatt> tcatm: no you can see it, its all the iowait stuff, but ok then Ill set up init scripts and make it workable and if you want you can reboot it to drop the ram
3940 2011-06-30 21:52:16 f33x has joined
3941 2011-06-30 21:52:17 <sipa> TD: see the '// Message: inventory' part of SendMessages
3942 2011-06-30 21:52:33 f33x has quit (Client Quit)
3943 2011-06-30 21:53:05 <sipa> TD: i wonder if it's not possible to limit that function to stop running if the send buffer is over N% full
3944 2011-06-30 21:53:07 Mononofu has left ()
3945 2011-06-30 21:53:33 darbsllim has joined
3946 2011-06-30 21:53:34 abragin has quit ()
3947 2011-06-30 21:53:45 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Matt Corallo master * rf03c31d / src/net.cpp :
3948 2011-06-30 21:53:45 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Add new DNSSeed dnsseed.bluematt.me.
3949 2011-06-30 21:53:45 <CIA-103> bitcoin: This seed will pull a random set of 20 nodes from the network which
3950 2011-06-30 21:53:45 <CIA-103> bitcoin: are tested to be online instead of a static list. - http://bit.ly/ih55py
3951 2011-06-30 21:53:45 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Jeff Garzik master * r44d1632 / src/net.cpp :
3952 2011-06-30 21:53:46 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Merge pull request #367 from TheBlueMatt/dnsseed
3953 2011-06-30 21:53:47 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Add new DNSSeed dnsseed.bluematt.me. - http://bit.ly/linHc8
3954 2011-06-30 21:55:07 caedes has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
3955 2011-06-30 21:55:59 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: you're welcome to add dnsseed helper code to contrib/
3956 2011-06-30 21:56:11 <BlueMatt> damn ./bitcoin -dnsseed -noirc has connections by the time ui is open
3957 2011-06-30 21:56:22 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: no need for there to Be Only One
3958 2011-06-30 21:56:42 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: its kind of ugly code, Id prefer to keep it out of bitcoin tree, but its on my github as dnsseed
3959 2011-06-30 21:57:23 <jgarzik> ok
3960 2011-06-30 21:59:06 lumos has quit (Quit: Leaving)
3961 2011-06-30 22:01:44 <sipa> BlueMatt: in newenc, if the wallet is already unlocked, and you send a walletpassphrase rpc with an invalid passphrase, it succeeds
3962 2011-06-30 22:01:54 <sipa> i think it should fail and lock
3963 2011-06-30 22:02:10 <BlueMatt> I see no reason for any kind of automated scripts to fail if someone fails to unlock
3964 2011-06-30 22:02:18 <BlueMatt> any attacker would test if its locked first anyway
3965 2011-06-30 22:02:40 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
3966 2011-06-30 22:02:58 <sipa> if anyone who has access is able to do an incorrect guess, i think it's a safe precaution to lock your wallet
3967 2011-06-30 22:03:24 <gjs278> ;;bc,stats
3968 2011-06-30 22:03:25 <BlueMatt> hmmm
3969 2011-06-30 22:03:28 <gribble> Current Blocks: 134101 | Current Difficulty: 1379223.4296725 | Next Difficulty At Block: 135071 | Next Difficulty In: 970 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 5 days, 22 hours, 32 minutes, and 10 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1559273.00319230
3970 2011-06-30 22:03:28 topi` has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
3971 2011-06-30 22:03:28 <sipa> but independent from that, it's counterintuitive that the call succeeds (people might use it to test wehther they still know the password)
3972 2011-06-30 22:03:43 <BlueMatt> yea, it should error if wallet is currently unlocked
3973 2011-06-30 22:04:12 <sipa> either "Wallet is already unlocked", or just retry unlocking, and if applicable fail with "wrong passphrase"
3974 2011-06-30 22:04:34 topi` has joined
3975 2011-06-30 22:05:18 <sipa> the rpc call 'walletlock' doesn't seem to change the getinfo field "unlocked_until"
3976 2011-06-30 22:05:31 <bittwist> while raising the bar to deter the lowest of the malicious coders is a good thing
3977 2011-06-30 22:05:33 <BlueMatt> oh, oops yea forgot that
3978 2011-06-30 22:05:35 jzknight has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
3979 2011-06-30 22:05:44 <bittwist> after a bit tweaks like ubertriplequadmasterlocking does not help
3980 2011-06-30 22:06:17 <bittwist> i like what some sites do if you visit the login page when currently logged in, "lol yo already in bro" *redirect to main*
3981 2011-06-30 22:06:24 agricocb has joined
3982 2011-06-30 22:06:24 agricocb has quit (Changing host)
3983 2011-06-30 22:06:24 agricocb has joined
3984 2011-06-30 22:06:33 storrgie has joined
3985 2011-06-30 22:06:36 <bittwist> so a confirmation of status
3986 2011-06-30 22:07:04 <BlueMatt> I agree, hence my position here, however it is a bit of a false connection
3987 2011-06-30 22:07:13 <BlueMatt> logging into a website != specifying the password
3988 2011-06-30 22:07:32 <BlueMatt> its like the user entering the wrong password at login page even though they are already in
3989 2011-06-30 22:08:11 <bittwist> time to see what a few sites do when that happens then
3990 2011-06-30 22:08:35 <sipa> BlueMatt: also, if i click 'cancel' in the enter old or enter new password field in the GUI, i don't want to see an error "Incorrect password"
3991 2011-06-30 22:08:38 <BlueMatt> sipa: ok, both fixed
3992 2011-06-30 22:08:58 <xelister> how to start bitcoind in 2nd instance - as another user of system - on same box?
3993 2011-06-30 22:09:09 <xelister> ./bitcoind -port 8334 -rpcport 8332
3994 2011-06-30 22:09:10 <xelister> fServer=1
3995 2011-06-30 22:09:12 <bittwist> BlueMatt: seems logging out is the norm indeed
3996 2011-06-30 22:09:12 <xelister> error: incorrect rpcuser or rpcpassword (authorization failed)
3997 2011-06-30 22:09:14 <BlueMatt> sipa: yea, thats one Im not sure about, iirc it will return empty string, and if a user inputs empty string it should compain, if they hit cancel, it shouldnt
3998 2011-06-30 22:09:27 <BlueMatt> bittwist: it is, but its still a different case this
3999 2011-06-30 22:09:27 TheZimm has joined
4000 2011-06-30 22:09:42 <sipa> BlueMatt: hmm, i see
4001 2011-06-30 22:09:58 <sipa> it's only a minor issue, don't spend too much time on it
4002 2011-06-30 22:10:00 <xelister> ./bitcoind -server -port 8334 -rpcport 8332   causes  fServer=1  but still it behaves like if it was trying to execute RPC command instead of becoming the server?
4003 2011-06-30 22:11:32 <BlueMatt> sipa: Ill leave it unless you think its better to not complain on empty string
4004 2011-06-30 22:12:14 <sipa> BlueMatt: leave it
4005 2011-06-30 22:12:43 karnac has quit (Quit: karnac)
4006 2011-06-30 22:12:53 Ramokk has quit ()
4007 2011-06-30 22:13:09 <CIA-103> bitcoinjs/node-bitcoin-p2p: Stefan Thomas master * rd3b3911 / lib/checkpoints.js : Added checkpoints constants (not used yet). (+7 more commits...) - http://bit.ly/lBWSpu
4008 2011-06-30 22:13:19 karnac has joined
4009 2011-06-30 22:13:30 <sipa> BlueMatt: in CCryptoKeyStore::EncryptKeys
4010 2011-06-30 22:13:39 <sipa> there is a check if (!mapCryptedKeys.empty() || IsCrypted())
4011 2011-06-30 22:14:10 <sipa> if mapCryptedKeys is not enpty, IsCrypted() should always be true - there should even be an assert for that, i think
4012 2011-06-30 22:14:46 <sipa> so i wonder, did you write that as a precaution, or was there an actual situation where it made a difference during testing?
4013 2011-06-30 22:15:01 <BlueMatt> nope, precaution
4014 2011-06-30 22:15:07 <BlueMatt> I suppose it should be assert instead of if
4015 2011-06-30 22:15:24 <BlueMatt> but I prefer to be over-careful here as a fuckup could mean the loss of privkeys
4016 2011-06-30 22:16:12 <b4epoche_> thoughts on adding 'market feeds' and possibly trading to cocoabitcoin UI?
4017 2011-06-30 22:16:21 <BlueMatt> and iirc IsCrypted cant be set to true if mapCryptedKeys is not empty always as something to do with how keys get readded during wallet encryption process
4018 2011-06-30 22:16:45 <BlueMatt> though I may be forgetting
4019 2011-06-30 22:16:57 <BlueMatt> I just know I had to tweak stuff around there to get it to add keys right
4020 2011-06-30 22:17:09 <sipa> also, vMasterKey is private in CCryptoKeyStore, so its cs_ should be private too
4021 2011-06-30 22:17:16 <sipa> no?
4022 2011-06-30 22:17:18 <sipa> no need to expose it
4023 2011-06-30 22:17:50 <BlueMatt> no, its used all over the place eg when you want to do anything that requires crypto thats a two-step process, you lock that
4024 2011-06-30 22:18:23 storrgie has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
4025 2011-06-30 22:18:24 <sipa> hmm, yes, that's a valid concern
4026 2011-06-30 22:18:30 <BlueMatt> eg if you want to encrypt something, you lock that then you check (!IsLocked()) then do your stuff in the lock
4027 2011-06-30 22:18:36 <sipa> yes, i see it
4028 2011-06-30 22:18:38 <BlueMatt> that way it wont lock between IsLocked() and you stuff
4029 2011-06-30 22:18:58 <sipa> but still, exposing a critical section over an internal data structure is... dirty
4030 2011-06-30 22:19:02 jhudgins has quit (Quit: jhudgins)
4031 2011-06-30 22:19:12 dbasch has quit (Quit: dbasch)
4032 2011-06-30 22:19:14 <BlueMatt> yea, got a better way?
4033 2011-06-30 22:19:20 <sipa> just lock cs_KeyStore
4034 2011-06-30 22:19:20 <BlueMatt> well, I could rename it
4035 2011-06-30 22:19:37 BurningToad has joined
4036 2011-06-30 22:19:49 <BlueMatt> but that seems like a different use case sometimes...
4037 2011-06-30 22:19:55 <sipa> it is
4038 2011-06-30 22:20:23 <sipa> but it's a balance between exposing internal representation cs. fine-grained locked
4039 2011-06-30 22:20:25 <BlueMatt> so that would be over-locking
4040 2011-06-30 22:20:27 <sipa> vs.
4041 2011-06-30 22:21:00 <sipa> well, is there a case while cs_vMasterKey is now locked for a significant amount of time?
4042 2011-06-30 22:21:12 <sipa> eg. in the gui between a user enters the old password and the new one?
4043 2011-06-30 22:21:18 <BlueMatt> yea
4044 2011-06-30 22:21:24 <BlueMatt> that
4045 2011-06-30 22:21:28 eao has joined
4046 2011-06-30 22:21:35 pirrr has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
4047 2011-06-30 22:22:22 nefario has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
4048 2011-06-30 22:22:48 <sipa> ok, just leave it or rename it
4049 2011-06-30 22:22:55 <BlueMatt> Ill rename it
4050 2011-06-30 22:22:58 <BlueMatt> in a minute
4051 2011-06-30 22:23:46 tandy80 has joined
4052 2011-06-30 22:24:05 storrgie has joined
4053 2011-06-30 22:24:10 <sipa> is there no other way to do the critical part entirely within CCryptoKeyStore ?
4054 2011-06-30 22:25:33 <sipa> hmm no, you need it in many places
4055 2011-06-30 22:25:49 <BlueMatt> not really, as things like CreateTransaction dont return an int so we can know if its an error because wallet is locked or some other crap
4056 2011-06-30 22:25:54 theymos has joined
4057 2011-06-30 22:25:58 <BlueMatt> otherwise, the islocked check could be handled there
4058 2011-06-30 22:26:09 <sipa> indeed, i see
4059 2011-06-30 22:26:18 Ramokk has joined
4060 2011-06-30 22:26:47 james has joined
4061 2011-06-30 22:27:06 <sipa> it would be much nicer if there was an error code for creating transactions
4062 2011-06-30 22:27:13 james is now known as Guest76559
4063 2011-06-30 22:27:34 <sipa> eg. to support future "my keys for which i don't have the private key right here" features
4064 2011-06-30 22:27:44 <sipa> so a creation could fail with 'private key not available'
4065 2011-06-30 22:27:56 <BlueMatt> yea, but that seems to fall outside the scope of newenc
4066 2011-06-30 22:28:03 <sipa> indeed, agree
4067 2011-06-30 22:28:48 <xelister> CRASH
4068 2011-06-30 22:28:50 <xelister> btc @ 0.0
4069 2011-06-30 22:28:52 <xelister>  http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/mtgoxUSD#rg1zig5-minzvztgSza1gWMAzm1g5za2gEMAzm2g40zi1gMFI
4070 2011-06-30 22:29:45 tower is now known as again
4071 2011-06-30 22:30:25 Guest76559 is now known as topace
4072 2011-06-30 22:31:13 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
4073 2011-06-30 22:32:14 <b4epoche_> miner sell-off...  need weekend cash for chicks and beer
4074 2011-06-30 22:33:08 <topace> if only hookers took BTC :p
4075 2011-06-30 22:33:37 <sipa> BlueMatt: seen http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=24841.0 ?
4076 2011-06-30 22:33:52 <sipa> i've seen a few reports of that problem
4077 2011-06-30 22:33:53 <josephholsten> topace: they do, but johns won't wait for confirmation
4078 2011-06-30 22:34:00 <sipa> not sure if it still exists though
4079 2011-06-30 22:34:13 <BlueMatt> sipa: will do for 0.4
4080 2011-06-30 22:34:23 <topace> hahaha
4081 2011-06-30 22:34:37 pklaus has joined
4082 2011-06-30 22:39:35 <BlueMatt> sipa: hm, appears to be something a bit futher down in mingw, not strictly something we are doing...Ill do a bit more research but it might not be easily fixable
4083 2011-06-30 22:39:47 <phantomcircuit> xelister, mtgox should really be processing orders like that all in 1 go
4084 2011-06-30 22:41:59 karnac has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
4085 2011-06-30 22:42:22 Pinion has joined
4086 2011-06-30 22:42:23 MetaV has joined
4087 2011-06-30 22:42:25 MetaV_ has joined
4088 2011-06-30 22:42:43 MetaV_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
4089 2011-06-30 22:42:43 MetaV has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
4090 2011-06-30 22:42:47 karnac has joined
4091 2011-06-30 22:42:48 MetaV has joined
4092 2011-06-30 22:44:47 dbasch has joined
4093 2011-06-30 22:45:01 pklaus has left ()
4094 2011-06-30 22:46:19 eternal1 has joined
4095 2011-06-30 22:49:43 <Kobier> ;;bc;status
4096 2011-06-30 22:49:43 <gribble> Error: "bc;status" is not a valid command.
4097 2011-06-30 22:49:47 <xelister> if the transaction is reveresed due to chain split,
4098 2011-06-30 22:49:49 <Kobier> ;;bc;help
4099 2011-06-30 22:49:53 <xelister> then you have to refund by doing the john
4100 2011-06-30 22:49:58 <gribble> Error: "bc;help" is not a valid command.
4101 2011-06-30 22:50:08 <xelister> so better avoid big black pimps >_>
4102 2011-06-30 22:50:15 lumos has joined
4103 2011-06-30 22:50:19 <Kobier> ;;bc
4104 2011-06-30 22:50:19 <gribble> Error: "bc" is not a valid command.
4105 2011-06-30 22:50:28 <xelister> Kobier: /msg gribble
4106 2011-06-30 22:50:33 kermit has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
4107 2011-06-30 22:50:34 AStove has quit ()
4108 2011-06-30 22:50:39 again is now known as yebok
4109 2011-06-30 22:51:53 tandy80 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
4110 2011-06-30 22:54:37 kermit has joined
4111 2011-06-30 22:57:09 LtBrenton has joined
4112 2011-06-30 22:57:44 Saab- has quit (Quit: Saab-)
4113 2011-06-30 23:00:35 scott`_ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
4114 2011-06-30 23:00:54 skeledrew has joined
4115 2011-06-30 23:01:27 torsthaldo has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
4116 2011-06-30 23:01:59 roconnor has joined
4117 2011-06-30 23:02:19 <roconnor> sipa: hi
4118 2011-06-30 23:07:29 scott` has joined
4119 2011-06-30 23:07:55 scott` is now known as Guest39365
4120 2011-06-30 23:09:07 dobalina has joined
4121 2011-06-30 23:09:44 zapnap has joined
4122 2011-06-30 23:11:18 B0g4r7_ has joined
4123 2011-06-30 23:13:24 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
4124 2011-06-30 23:13:24 B0g4r7_ is now known as B0g4r7
4125 2011-06-30 23:13:41 aptRipley has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
4126 2011-06-30 23:13:51 <B0g4r7> Wow, check #bitcoin-market.
4127 2011-06-30 23:14:07 <B0g4r7> Someone's flooding teh gox with 0.1 BTC orders.
4128 2011-06-30 23:14:40 <BlueMatt> flooded*
4129 2011-06-30 23:14:43 <MrSam> what a waste of diskspace to my logfiles
4130 2011-06-30 23:14:45 tltRipley has joined
4131 2011-06-30 23:15:07 <BlueMatt> damn, still goind
4132 2011-06-30 23:15:10 <BlueMatt> g
4133 2011-06-30 23:15:19 Cablesaurus has joined
4134 2011-06-30 23:15:19 Cablesaurus has quit (Changing host)
4135 2011-06-30 23:15:19 Cablesaurus has joined
4136 2011-06-30 23:15:27 <iz> are there any known bugs for odd account behavior?  like this: http://pastebin.com/aA8URh3V
4137 2011-06-30 23:15:38 <dobalina> so how tried and tested is this bitcoin?
4138 2011-06-30 23:16:00 dbitcoin has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
4139 2011-06-30 23:16:01 <dobalina> has the code been properly audited by any external reputable 3rd parties?
4140 2011-06-30 23:16:09 <dobalina> i see no mention on the site
4141 2011-06-30 23:16:13 <BlueMatt> nope
4142 2011-06-30 23:16:32 <bittwist> reputable like who
4143 2011-06-30 23:16:33 brunner has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
4144 2011-06-30 23:16:33 <BlueMatt> but it has been thoroughly looked through by many people
4145 2011-06-30 23:16:35 <bittwist> RSA? :>
4146 2011-06-30 23:16:40 <BlueMatt> I said no one has done a full audit
4147 2011-06-30 23:16:55 <jrmithdobbs> ;;bc,blocks
4148 2011-06-30 23:16:56 <BlueMatt> but many reputable people have looked through most of the code
4149 2011-06-30 23:16:57 <gribble> 134115
4150 2011-06-30 23:17:36 <dobalina> like who the NSA, PLA or the russian mafia? ;)
4151 2011-06-30 23:17:38 <dobalina> i kid i kid
4152 2011-06-30 23:17:51 phatsphere has quit (Quit: Leaving)
4153 2011-06-30 23:18:05 <dobalina> how many lines of code are taklinga bout here?
4154 2011-06-30 23:18:55 <dobalina> roughly
4155 2011-06-30 23:19:15 <BlueMatt> 26 751
4156 2011-06-30 23:19:30 <BlueMatt> oh thats my encryption branch, oh well that will be merged soon
4157 2011-06-30 23:19:41 <BlueMatt> plus various libraries
4158 2011-06-30 23:19:57 <dobalina> i'm literally brand new to bitcoin so bear with all my questions ;)
4159 2011-06-30 23:20:04 <dobalina> that seems fairly tight
4160 2011-06-30 23:20:11 <BlueMatt> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin :)
4161 2011-06-30 23:20:12 <dobalina> only 1 official client yehah?
4162 2011-06-30 23:20:20 <BlueMatt> no official clients
4163 2011-06-30 23:20:27 <dobalina> what do you mean?
4164 2011-06-30 23:20:27 <BlueMatt> only one client with a full implementation
4165 2011-06-30 23:20:32 <dobalina> right
4166 2011-06-30 23:20:51 <BlueMatt> several other client libraries but they cant mine
4167 2011-06-30 23:20:55 <jrmithdobbs> jesus christ so annoying
4168 2011-06-30 23:20:56 <dobalina> i literally just installed it and it's been thrashing the shit out of my wd raptor for the last 10 mins plus now
4169 2011-06-30 23:20:57 <BlueMatt> as they dont store full blockchain
4170 2011-06-30 23:21:16 <BlueMatt> yea, it does that while it initially download the block chain
4171 2011-06-30 23:21:19 <jrmithdobbs> connect, exchange stupid address shit i don't care about because i'm using -connect, get 4-5 blocks, get flooded off
4172 2011-06-30 23:21:20 enquirer has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
4173 2011-06-30 23:21:22 <BlueMatt> check out bitcoin.bluematt.me
4174 2011-06-30 23:21:41 <dobalina> i had to close firefox sorry i'll check it later ;)
4175 2011-06-30 23:21:53 <BlueMatt> where you can download the block chain then you dont have to thrash your disk
4176 2011-06-30 23:21:58 <bittwist> http://bitcoin.bluematt.me/bitcoin-nightly/blockchain-nightly/ :o
4177 2011-06-30 23:22:00 <bittwist> niace
4178 2011-06-30 23:22:00 <BlueMatt> as its a nightly of the chain
4179 2011-06-30 23:22:01 <dobalina> bitcoin + active firefox browing = hdd disaster even on a 10k rpm drive
4180 2011-06-30 23:22:02 <dobalina> :-/
4181 2011-06-30 23:22:11 <jrmithdobbs> dobalina: it's gonna be at least 3-72 hours before you get the whole chain if you don't do it from an external source
4182 2011-06-30 23:22:13 <dobalina> i really need solid state :'(
4183 2011-06-30 23:22:16 <BlueMatt> stop bitcoin, download nightly chain, install that, restart bitcoin
4184 2011-06-30 23:22:21 <BlueMatt> then no disk thrashing
4185 2011-06-30 23:22:24 <jrmithdobbs> dobalina: at least 3-12 hours just for the last ~8192 blocks
4186 2011-06-30 23:22:26 <jrmithdobbs> ugh
4187 2011-06-30 23:22:26 <BlueMatt> well, reduced disk trashing
4188 2011-06-30 23:22:44 <dobalina> 72 hrs ??? waaaat?
4189 2011-06-30 23:22:52 <dobalina> how much data are we talking about here?
4190 2011-06-30 23:22:54 <jrmithdobbs> dobalina: that's a conservative estimate, ya
4191 2011-06-30 23:22:59 <BlueMatt> not much data, just a lot of work
4192 2011-06-30 23:23:00 <jrmithdobbs> not as much as that would imply.
4193 2011-06-30 23:23:06 <dobalina> i've got quad core
4194 2011-06-30 23:23:08 <dobalina> hmmm
4195 2011-06-30 23:23:12 <BlueMatt> disk-limited work
4196 2011-06-30 23:23:12 <dobalina> 72 hrs huh
4197 2011-06-30 23:23:17 <jrmithdobbs> and broken block xferring code that floods you off after 3-5 blocks
4198 2011-06-30 23:23:18 <BlueMatt> latest tar is 279.3M
4199 2011-06-30 23:23:26 <jrmithdobbs> once you get up to the more recent larg blocks
4200 2011-06-30 23:23:29 jhudgins has joined
4201 2011-06-30 23:23:49 <dobalina> well cpu intensive i can handle but it shouldn't take 72 hrs to place under 300 mb of data what the hell is it doing exactly>?
4202 2011-06-30 23:24:03 <jrmithdobbs> dobalina: 72 hours is conservative, like i said.
4203 2011-06-30 23:24:09 <sipa> it is verifying all transactions in it
4204 2011-06-30 23:24:16 <BlueMatt> it is going through for each block and checking that each transaction in it is valid
4205 2011-06-30 23:24:24 <sipa> which is cpu and disk intensive
4206 2011-06-30 23:24:26 IncitatusOnWater has joined
4207 2011-06-30 23:24:39 <BlueMatt> that means check ecdsa sigs on several inputs, and check that the inputs exist in the chain that is currently on disk
4208 2011-06-30 23:24:54 <jrmithdobbs> sipa: no, the problem is there's a whole bunch of big blocks near the end of the chain, you seriously trigger the flood protection logic trying to grab as few as 3 at once in a few place
4209 2011-06-30 23:24:59 <jrmithdobbs> s
4210 2011-06-30 23:25:00 <dobalina> cpu has basically been below 1 $% re bitcoin.exe but the hdd just won't let up
4211 2011-06-30 23:25:22 <jrmithdobbs> sipa: which means a reconnect + addr exchange + 3-5 more blocks + start over
4212 2011-06-30 23:25:32 nhodges has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
4213 2011-06-30 23:25:39 <sipa> i think i have a solution for the flood protection
4214 2011-06-30 23:25:48 <jrmithdobbs> sendfile/mmap?
4215 2011-06-30 23:25:50 <b4epoche_> BlueMatt:  what's data allowance on .me?
4216 2011-06-30 23:25:50 <jrmithdobbs> ;p
4217 2011-06-30 23:25:54 <sipa> no
4218 2011-06-30 23:26:09 <jrmithdobbs> what?
4219 2011-06-30 23:26:16 <BlueMatt> b4epoche_: what do you mean .me, you mean on bitcoin.bluematt.me? nfc, I just upload it two two mirrors that people gave me
4220 2011-06-30 23:26:17 <BlueMatt> :)
4221 2011-06-30 23:26:41 enquirer has joined
4222 2011-06-30 23:26:43 tandy80 has joined
4223 2011-06-30 23:26:44 <sipa> just trickle the sending of inv responses, based on output buffer size
4224 2011-06-30 23:26:50 folklore has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
4225 2011-06-30 23:27:12 <sipa> as apparently sending of blocks is already using that mechamlnism
4226 2011-06-30 23:27:31 <b4epoche_> BlueMatt:  nm...  sorry to make you answer a dumb q...  was thinking something else
4227 2011-06-30 23:27:33 <sipa> only is there no trickle logic for 'block' messages
4228 2011-06-30 23:28:21 folklore has joined
4229 2011-06-30 23:28:21 <jrmithdobbs> we need to stop sending/requesting addr when using -connect= too
4230 2011-06-30 23:28:43 <dobalina> this is an interesting project i'll give you that - i can't wait to take a look at the code :)
4231 2011-06-30 23:29:02 meelu has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
4232 2011-06-30 23:29:02 <BlueMatt> dobalina: most of it is a mess...
4233 2011-06-30 23:29:11 <jrmithdobbs> you will regret those words ;p
4234 2011-06-30 23:29:13 <BlueMatt> dobalina: that is the current development effort, clean up old code
4235 2011-06-30 23:29:31 lumos has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
4236 2011-06-30 23:29:49 <dobalina> i'm just a bit skeptical
4237 2011-06-30 23:29:58 <BlueMatt> of which part, exactly?
4238 2011-06-30 23:30:15 <dobalina> the main guy the japanese dude who started all this ... why is he so "secretive" supposedly?
4239 2011-06-30 23:30:23 <dobalina> does he not stand behind his work?
4240 2011-06-30 23:30:25 <BlueMatt> no one knows, hes gone
4241 2011-06-30 23:30:29 <dobalina> or is he scared of something?
4242 2011-06-30 23:30:31 <dobalina> he's gone huh
4243 2011-06-30 23:30:33 <jrmithdobbs> because he didn't want anyone to hunt him down for his netcode
4244 2011-06-30 23:30:37 <BlueMatt> hasnt commented publicly or responded to emails in quite a while
4245 2011-06-30 23:30:48 <dobalina> so the origin source of all this is unknown?
4246 2011-06-30 23:30:50 <BlueMatt> because bitcoin is potentially illegal in some jurisdictions
4247 2011-06-30 23:30:59 <dobalina> and there was nothign like it before?
4248 2011-06-30 23:31:08 <BlueMatt> no, there were
4249 2011-06-30 23:31:20 <b4epoche_> is there really any reason to keep rpc/json stuff in CocoaBitcoin?
4250 2011-06-30 23:31:23 <dobalina> that's a tad more reassuring
4251 2011-06-30 23:31:23 <BlueMatt> not a unique idea, just a particularly well-implemented version
4252 2011-06-30 23:31:42 yebok is now known as tower
4253 2011-06-30 23:31:50 <dobalina> who was the forefather of this p2p currency idea?
4254 2011-06-30 23:31:53 kluge has joined
4255 2011-06-30 23:31:56 <roconnor> sipa: interesting tid-bit: because of the double sha256, only about 63% of the 2^256 hashes are achieveable.
4256 2011-06-30 23:32:10 <dobalina> where did the japanese guy get his initial insipiration from?
4257 2011-06-30 23:32:19 <dobalina> and what happened to that system
4258 2011-06-30 23:32:24 <sipa> roconnor: i calculated exactly the same thing
4259 2011-06-30 23:32:29 <roconnor> :D
4260 2011-06-30 23:32:31 <sipa> roconnor: yestersay
4261 2011-06-30 23:32:37 erus` has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.87 [Firefox 5.0/20110615151330])
4262 2011-06-30 23:32:38 <sipa> 1-1/e
4263 2011-06-30 23:32:40 <roconnor> sipa: that's crazy
4264 2011-06-30 23:32:48 <roconnor> that you did the same calculation
4265 2011-06-30 23:32:57 <roconnor> I'm glad you are thinking hard about bitcoin ^_^
4266 2011-06-30 23:33:05 DoomDumas has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
4267 2011-06-30 23:33:09 <sipa> hehe
4268 2011-06-30 23:33:17 <BlueMatt> b4epoche_: preferably, yes, that way its a smaller change for merge, have you rebased onto latest head?
4269 2011-06-30 23:33:29 <BlueMatt> roconnor: what calculation is this?
4270 2011-06-30 23:34:13 <roconnor> BlueMatt: because of the double sha256, the second sha256 will only ever be able to receive 2^256 possible inputs.
4271 2011-06-30 23:34:16 <BlueMatt> dobalina: if you do some digging about crypto currencies, there is discussion dating quite a way back
4272 2011-06-30 23:34:26 Donald__ has joined
4273 2011-06-30 23:34:41 enquirer1 has joined
4274 2011-06-30 23:34:44 <roconnor> BlueMatt: some of those inputs will collide and hence some other output hashes will be impossible.
4275 2011-06-30 23:34:52 DoomDumas has joined
4276 2011-06-30 23:34:53 DoomDumas has quit (Changing host)
4277 2011-06-30 23:34:53 DoomDumas has joined
4278 2011-06-30 23:34:58 <BlueMatt> roconnor: oh, interesting, but why does that mean only 63% are achievable, or is that probabilistic?
4279 2011-06-30 23:35:02 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: does your DNS seed verify that listed addresses support incoming 8333 ?
4280 2011-06-30 23:35:15 <dobalina> yeah i don't doubt that but hte only way something like this will work is if there's some legitimacy behind it
4281 2011-06-30 23:35:19 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: yep port has to be 8333 and version has to be 0.3.19 minimum
4282 2011-06-30 23:35:21 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: that was my one big concern, with simply dumping addr.dat addresses into DNS
4283 2011-06-30 23:35:25 <roconnor> BlueMatt: it is an estimate based on the assumptions that each sha256 output is equally likely.
4284 2011-06-30 23:35:26 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: good
4285 2011-06-30 23:35:27 <dobalina> and i'm not talking "legal" but rather people willing to stand behind their ideas and values
4286 2011-06-30 23:35:30 wardearia has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
4287 2011-06-30 23:35:33 <BlueMatt> roconnor: ok
4288 2011-06-30 23:35:40 IncitatusOnWater has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
4289 2011-06-30 23:35:42 <dobalina> otherwise it comes across as suspicious to say the least
4290 2011-06-30 23:35:50 enquirer has quit (Ping timeout: 241 seconds)
4291 2011-06-30 23:36:12 <BlueMatt> dobalina: true, but satoshi really wasnt the kind of person to do that, he appears to not have been too much of a people-person
4292 2011-06-30 23:36:19 <BlueMatt> thats why we have gavin :)
4293 2011-06-30 23:36:27 <roconnor> sipa: I was trying to think of a way to take advantage of this, but it doesn't seem very helpful.
4294 2011-06-30 23:36:39 <b4epoche_> BlueMatt:  I'm more talking about the functionality than the files...
4295 2011-06-30 23:36:53 <dobalina> if he was a "people person" he would stand behind it no?
4296 2011-06-30 23:36:53 <b4epoche_> I can certainly keep the files around, just not build/link them
4297 2011-06-30 23:36:53 <BlueMatt> dobalina: and iirc there was a guy on here a month or two ago talking about a research paper he did on crypto currencies about a year before bitcoin came out...he even mostly implemented one
4298 2011-06-30 23:36:54 <sipa> ;;calc256-log(1-1/e)/log(2)
4299 2011-06-30 23:36:55 <gribble> Error: "calc256-log(1-1/e)/log(2)" is not a valid command.
4300 2011-06-30 23:37:24 <dobalina> yeah there seems to be a lot of mainstream media coverage of late
4301 2011-06-30 23:37:27 <BlueMatt> b4epoche_: well its not enabled by default you have to -server, so why not just leave it in?
4302 2011-06-30 23:37:29 <sipa> ;;calc 256-log(1-1/e)/log(2)
4303 2011-06-30 23:37:30 <gribble> 256 - (log(1 - (1 / e)) / log(2)) = 256.661728
4304 2011-06-30 23:37:39 <dobalina> that particularly can ring some alarm bells if you catch my drift
4305 2011-06-30 23:37:46 <BlueMatt> dobalina: maybe, hard to say
4306 2011-06-30 23:37:46 <b4epoche_> BlueMatt:  and, no, I have not rebased.  Is the header situation fixed?
4307 2011-06-30 23:37:57 sanity has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
4308 2011-06-30 23:38:01 <BlueMatt> dobalina: probably, but it appeared he just didnt like dealing with people, so he didnt...
4309 2011-06-30 23:38:07 <dobalina> well i'm letting the software run so i have some "faith" dont' get me wrong ;)
4310 2011-06-30 23:38:07 <b4epoche_> There's no reason for it to be there, so I'm axing it.
4311 2011-06-30 23:38:09 sanity has joined
4312 2011-06-30 23:38:19 <dobalina> and i haven't even looked at the source code yet so
4313 2011-06-30 23:38:26 <dobalina> :p
4314 2011-06-30 23:38:30 <sipa> ;;calc 256-log(1-1/e)/log(0.5)
4315 2011-06-30 23:38:30 <jrmithdobbs> can we just drop the number of blocks sent on an empty request to max out at 25 instead of 500?
4316 2011-06-30 23:38:31 <gribble> 256 - (log(1 - (1 / e)) / log(0.5)) = 255.338272
4317 2011-06-30 23:38:33 <dobalina> what's this coded in btw?
4318 2011-06-30 23:38:41 freakazoid has joined
4319 2011-06-30 23:38:42 <BlueMatt> dobalina: C++ boost
4320 2011-06-30 23:38:43 cygnus2112 has joined
4321 2011-06-30 23:38:49 <jrmithdobbs> err on a 0 end, i mean
4322 2011-06-30 23:39:04 <BlueMatt> b4epoche_: can you start and then inform us of exactly which files have headers missing? I dont think anyone is gonna take a ton of time to check all the headers since it builds if you build it normally...
4323 2011-06-30 23:39:15 <dobalina> c++ is either a bad sign or a really good one :)
4324 2011-06-30 23:39:17 <BlueMatt> dobalina: with ui in wx
4325 2011-06-30 23:39:18 <dobalina> glad to hear it tho
4326 2011-06-30 23:39:20 enquirer1 has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
4327 2011-06-30 23:39:23 <jrmithdobbs> dobalina: awful sign
4328 2011-06-30 23:39:26 <dobalina> loll
4329 2011-06-30 23:39:31 <b4epoche_> BlueMatt:  built it normally?
4330 2011-06-30 23:39:40 DoomDumas has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
4331 2011-06-30 23:39:42 <gmaxwell> roconnor: yea, I pointed out before that internal cancellation is why I like widepipe hashes.
4332 2011-06-30 23:39:43 <jrmithdobbs> dobalina: see: header discussion. half of bitcoin is implemented in .h files :(
4333 2011-06-30 23:39:52 <BlueMatt> dobalina: not even normal wx, but a developer release meaning we cant get into regular software channels...
4334 2011-06-30 23:39:56 <b4epoche_> that's what I was trying to do the other night
4335 2011-06-30 23:40:03 DoomDumas has joined
4336 2011-06-30 23:40:03 DoomDumas has quit (Changing host)
4337 2011-06-30 23:40:03 DoomDumas has joined
4338 2011-06-30 23:40:07 <BlueMatt> b4epoche_: ie building regular bitcoin wx
4339 2011-06-30 23:40:08 <dobalina> i wish i could do something else at the moment but all my hdd can seem to handle is letting bitcoin do wtvr the hell it's doing ;)
4340 2011-06-30 23:40:08 <roconnor> gmaxwell: what is a widepipe hash?
4341 2011-06-30 23:40:16 <b4epoche_> BlueMatt:  yes
4342 2011-06-30 23:40:28 <b4epoche_> well, after, I couldn't build CocoaBitcoin
4343 2011-06-30 23:40:30 <BlueMatt> dobalina: so stop it and download the blockchain nightly ;) save yourself an hour
4344 2011-06-30 23:40:32 <roconnor> gmaxwell: it relieves me that people have alreay thought about this.
4345 2011-06-30 23:40:40 <dobalina> if i wasn't so risky i would have done my digging and testing first but alas i'm impatient like the rest of us ;)
4346 2011-06-30 23:40:57 <dobalina> can i stop it mid sequence?
4347 2011-06-30 23:41:03 <dobalina> just kill the process?
4348 2011-06-30 23:41:04 <BlueMatt> yea
4349 2011-06-30 23:41:08 <dobalina> cool will do
4350 2011-06-30 23:41:26 <dobalina> alright yay i can use my computer again :)
4351 2011-06-30 23:41:32 <dobalina> GOD I HATE HARD DRIVES seriously
4352 2011-06-30 23:41:33 <sipa> gmaxwell: any test result from limitedblock replies?
4353 2011-06-30 23:41:40 <dobalina> hit me with a link plz
4354 2011-06-30 23:41:45 <gmaxwell> sipa: Just sat back down and about to look
4355 2011-06-30 23:41:47 <dobalina> or do i check th emain site?
4356 2011-06-30 23:41:54 <BlueMatt> dobalina: http://bitcoin.bluematt.me/bitcoin-nightly/blockchain-nightly/
4357 2011-06-30 23:41:55 <roconnor> there are so many peculiar aspects to bitcoin; it makes me a little nervous.
4358 2011-06-30 23:41:58 <BlueMatt> dobalina: read the readme
4359 2011-06-30 23:42:03 <BlueMatt> and download the latest
4360 2011-06-30 23:42:20 <gmaxwell> sipa: _zero_ floodoffs in the debug log since I restarted.
4361 2011-06-30 23:42:30 <gmaxwell> sipa: and it appears to be working okay.
4362 2011-06-30 23:42:32 <sipa> gmaxwell: good
4363 2011-06-30 23:42:39 <jrmithdobbs> sipa: where is that patch
4364 2011-06-30 23:42:50 <sipa> any noticable slowdown?
4365 2011-06-30 23:42:58 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: nice, jgarzik do we want to emergency push this as 0.3.24 or just wait for 0.4, it does appear to be an issue as of late?
4366 2011-06-30 23:43:04 <BlueMatt> and sipa and tcatm ^
4367 2011-06-30 23:43:28 <jrmithdobbs> please do a 0.3.24
4368 2011-06-30 23:43:28 <dobalina> they don't link it off the offical site?
4369 2011-06-30 23:43:37 <gmaxwell> sipa: node seems coupletely responsive. I think it's using more cpu than it was before, but this is probably because its doing more actual good work.
4370 2011-06-30 23:43:51 <BlueMatt> dobalina: no, its only become a problem as of late, a month ago it took maybe an hour to download
4371 2011-06-30 23:43:51 aldiyen has joined
4372 2011-06-30 23:44:00 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: define "it"
4373 2011-06-30 23:44:01 zapnap has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
4374 2011-06-30 23:44:12 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: blockchain download throttle
4375 2011-06-30 23:44:30 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: it's definitely a Clear And Present Problem.  do we have a patch to fix?
4376 2011-06-30 23:44:35 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: see https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/commit/df94ed7ac0ed7bb3a96cf434ca3c64c4b475e37e
4377 2011-06-30 23:44:47 theymos has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
4378 2011-06-30 23:44:52 <sipa> i'm fine with 0.3.24 with block limiting + 0-connection bugfix
4379 2011-06-30 23:44:53 <dobalina> yeah but bluematt you're giving me a link to your personal site or what?
4380 2011-06-30 23:45:04 <BlueMatt> dobalina: yea pretty much
4381 2011-06-30 23:45:09 <dobalina> not that i don't trust you but i literally just met ya ;)
4382 2011-06-30 23:45:14 <gmaxwell> I've been running that patch for a bit over two hours.
4383 2011-06-30 23:45:19 <dobalina> i'm not even sure what i'm downloading here
4384 2011-06-30 23:45:25 <gmaxwell> Should .24 enable upnp and dnsseed too?
4385 2011-06-30 23:45:28 <BlueMatt> dobalina: if you dont trust me, download it, and then run bitcoin with...wait let me look up the option
4386 2011-06-30 23:45:37 <jgarzik> BlueMatt, sipa: patch looks good to me.  is it in a pull req?
4387 2011-06-30 23:45:39 <dobalina> lol
4388 2011-06-30 23:45:42 <gmaxwell> since those were the other connectivity fixes we have pending right now.
4389 2011-06-30 23:45:54 <dobalina> so you're personal site is the ONLY option to skip the hdd thrashing excercise?
4390 2011-06-30 23:46:00 lumos has joined
4391 2011-06-30 23:46:09 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: need to get gavin's ACK on upnp
4392 2011-06-30 23:46:10 <BlueMatt> dobalina: currently, yea pretty much
4393 2011-06-30 23:46:12 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: ^^
4394 2011-06-30 23:46:13 <dobalina> that's a problem right there for wider adoption
4395 2011-06-30 23:46:19 <dobalina> we need to do something about that then
4396 2011-06-30 23:46:20 <jrmithdobbs> dobalina: would you go whine in #bitcoin so that the actual dev talk trying to be done can continue? thanks.
4397 2011-06-30 23:46:27 xtalmath has joined
4398 2011-06-30 23:46:31 <jrmithdobbs> dobalina: if you'd pay attention they're talking about a fix for it right now
4399 2011-06-30 23:46:33 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: ok, if you guys dont mind, Im gonna go post a 0.3.24 discussion to mailing list
4400 2011-06-30 23:46:41 <dobalina> fair enough
4401 2011-06-30 23:46:44 <gmaxwell> I'm still pretty concerned about the irc-paritioning issue that I had a (now cancled) pull request on, but I haven't had a chance to figure out how to test the damn thing.
4402 2011-06-30 23:46:52 <jgarzik> dobalina: the current client, in general, is not ready for general consumption, if ever...  full nodes will be increasingly out of reach of normal people as the network grows
4403 2011-06-30 23:47:02 <gmaxwell> but it might be less of an issue with the disconnect issue fixed
4404 2011-06-30 23:47:09 <sipa> i'm not sure upnp is the right thing to make default
4405 2011-06-30 23:47:13 <gmaxwell> sipa: have you tried bringing up a new node with -connect and seeing if it syncs fast?
4406 2011-06-30 23:47:15 <BlueMatt> sipa: why not?
4407 2011-06-30 23:47:25 wardearia has joined
4408 2011-06-30 23:47:27 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: i'm about to try
4409 2011-06-30 23:47:28 <BlueMatt> can we all ack dnsseed on by default though?
4410 2011-06-30 23:47:30 <sipa> gmaxwell: not yet
4411 2011-06-30 23:47:45 <tcatm> BlueMatt: ack
4412 2011-06-30 23:47:46 <jgarzik> sipa: I initially said "no", but if major P2P software such as skype or BT does upnp by default, I don't see why we should not follow suit...
4413 2011-06-30 23:47:53 <roconnor> gribble: so the double sha256 turns it into a 255.338272 bit hash instead of a 256 bit hash?
4414 2011-06-30 23:48:01 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: are we happy with the current state of DNS seeds?
4415 2011-06-30 23:48:01 <jrmithdobbs> i have a node stuck at ~133381
4416 2011-06-30 23:48:02 <sipa> BlueMatt: ack on dnsseed
4417 2011-06-30 23:48:03 <gmaxwell> sipa: we must do something soon, because we're within a factor of two ish of running out of sockets, I believe.
4418 2011-06-30 23:48:06 <roconnor> sipa: so the double sha256 turns it into a 255.338272 bit hash instead of a 256 bit hash?
4419 2011-06-30 23:48:06 <jrmithdobbs> give me a sec
4420 2011-06-30 23:48:12 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: I am
4421 2011-06-30 23:48:20 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: vlad (list of fallback nodes), me (list of fallback nodes), you (dynamic list)
4422 2011-06-30 23:48:27 <dobalina> well i might be able to help out i hope so bear with me... like i said i literally just dl'd and am trying it for first time... i dont' mean to come across as spammy
4423 2011-06-30 23:48:33 <sipa> roconnor: exactly
4424 2011-06-30 23:48:37 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: Im happy with anything that moves toward non-irc
4425 2011-06-30 23:49:08 <roconnor> sipa: let's not add any more iterations :)
4426 2011-06-30 23:49:31 <BlueMatt> dobalina: hm, I suppose there isnt that option, I thought it was, in any case, if you dont trust me, download that and check out https://github.com/gavinandresen/bitcointools and run dbdump.py with --check-block-chain
4427 2011-06-30 23:49:46 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: how many good listening nodes does your tool find now?
4428 2011-06-30 23:49:48 <BlueMatt> dobalina: which will do the disk-intensive stuff, but in a better way as it already has all the blocks
4429 2011-06-30 23:50:04 <jrmithdobbs> sipa: i have it building on my node that's caught up, i'll see if it fixes sending to my behind node
4430 2011-06-30 23:50:17 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: currently has 1265 but I just started it tonight, probably around 3000 in the next couple days
4431 2011-06-30 23:50:20 <sipa> jrmithdobbs: please do
4432 2011-06-30 23:50:24 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: https://github.com/jgarzik/bitcoin/tree/initblocks
4433 2011-06-30 23:50:30 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: the one I had been testing on on my lan has like 4000
4434 2011-06-30 23:50:33 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: imports block chain w/ verf
4435 2011-06-30 23:50:34 dr_win has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
4436 2011-06-30 23:50:40 <jrmithdobbs> sipa: if i'm reading this right it's sender-side change and i shouldn't need to update the client from .23 right?
4437 2011-06-30 23:50:44 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: -initblocks=FILENAME
4438 2011-06-30 23:50:46 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: oh, nice good to know
4439 2011-06-30 23:51:06 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: and thats not too dynamic ip inflated? (e.g. actually got version on all 4k within a day or so?)
4440 2011-06-30 23:51:06 copumpkin has joined
4441 2011-06-30 23:51:10 <sipa> jrmithdobbs: only sender side, indeed
4442 2011-06-30 23:51:17 josephholsten has quit (Quit: josephholsten)
4443 2011-06-30 23:51:29 <jrmithdobbs> good cause the osx gui build takes a while ;p
4444 2011-06-30 23:51:51 <denisx> is it possible that phoenix does not keep the LP connection open?
4445 2011-06-30 23:52:00 <sipa> jrmithdobbs: also, let me know if there are still disconnects
4446 2011-06-30 23:52:12 <jrmithdobbs> will do
4447 2011-06-30 23:52:13 eao has quit (Quit: Leaving)
4448 2011-06-30 23:52:15 <dobalina> the project homepage only lists 6 project developers and you're saying Satoshi Nakamoto isn't even active anymore?
4449 2011-06-30 23:52:24 <denisx> I cant see them in netstat -nat
4450 2011-06-30 23:52:25 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: all nodes are checked every 6 hours and the dns updates every 2 minutes with ttl of 1 minute
4451 2011-06-30 23:53:13 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: though I might increase that to 3 or 4 hours later after it slows down due to the initial-build crazyness
4452 2011-06-30 23:53:23 sabalaba has joined
4453 2011-06-30 23:53:26 <gmaxwell> Lfnet is currently 32843, which is up 1793 from about 48 hours ago.
4454 2011-06-30 23:53:43 <jrmithdobbs> sipa: started, lets see what the client does
4455 2011-06-30 23:54:04 <BlueMatt> magicaltux's db knows about 2370 "up" nodes ie accepting
4456 2011-06-30 23:54:05 <gmaxwell> So 262744 outbound connections.. which needs a minimum of 2101 listening nodes assuming perfect fill.
4457 2011-06-30 23:54:18 <gmaxwell> (in order to get all 8 outbounds up)
4458 2011-06-30 23:54:36 <gmaxwell> In reality due to /16 clustering and shot noise we obviously need more than that.
4459 2011-06-30 23:54:43 <jrmithdobbs> sipa: that is nice.
4460 2011-06-30 23:54:58 <jrmithdobbs> it's still fairly slow sync'ing
4461 2011-06-30 23:55:10 <jrmithdobbs> but it's working
4462 2011-06-30 23:55:25 <gmaxwell> jrmithdobbs: it was pretty much stuck before, right?
4463 2011-06-30 23:55:47 call-cc has joined
4464 2011-06-30 23:55:55 <jrmithdobbs> ya, it'd been stuck around 133381 for like 45 minutes
4465 2011-06-30 23:56:09 <jrmithdobbs> and it's already up to 1335XX
4466 2011-06-30 23:56:11 <jrmithdobbs> and climbing
4467 2011-06-30 23:56:11 <dobalina> http://www.whois.net/whois/bitcoin.org
4468 2011-06-30 23:56:14 <dobalina> anyways
4469 2011-06-30 23:56:17 <jrmithdobbs> in <5 min
4470 2011-06-30 23:56:31 <jrmithdobbs> don't have the fastest link to that box at the moment
4471 2011-06-30 23:56:47 wardearia has quit (Changing host)
4472 2011-06-30 23:56:47 wardearia has joined
4473 2011-06-30 23:57:46 <jrmithdobbs> i've seen one disconnect since bitcoind came up on this code but i think that was a client getting closed because only one where i'd usually have at least 10-20 by now (and 3-5 from my own separate node, for that matter)
4474 2011-06-30 23:58:26 <jrmithdobbs> and that disconnect wasn't triggered by flood code
4475 2011-06-30 23:58:43 <gmaxwell> sipa: so based if we assume that the last two days of lfnet growth is representative, and that there are 4000 good listening nodes right now, we'll run out of sockets in a bit over 30 days.  This is very rough numbers, of course, but I think it makes it clear that doing something to increase listening nodes is important.
4476 2011-06-30 23:59:11 call-cc has left ()
4477 2011-06-30 23:59:25 <gmaxwell> sipa: we can probably extend this a good bit by getting a number of nodes to increase max connections. And the world doesn't end if it's not possible to get all 8 outbound up...
4478 2011-06-30 23:59:30 <jrmithdobbs> ;;bc,blocks
4479 2011-06-30 23:59:31 <gribble> 134121
4480 2011-06-30 23:59:44 <gmaxwell> jrmithdobbs: any idea where the bottleneck is now?
4481 2011-06-30 23:59:54 <gmaxwell> jrmithdobbs: is the cpu pegged on the syncing machine?
4482 2011-06-30 23:59:55 <jrmithdobbs> ok ya, i'm almost caught up