1 2011-08-17 00:00:58 huk has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2 2011-08-17 00:03:03 huk has joined
3 2011-08-17 00:03:54 devon_hillard has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
4 2011-08-17 00:05:51 tynx has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
5 2011-08-17 00:05:55 KenArmitt has joined
6 2011-08-17 00:07:52 karnac has joined
7 2011-08-17 00:09:39 theorb has joined
8 2011-08-17 00:10:00 ephcon has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
9 2011-08-17 00:10:14 Rabbit67890_ has joined
10 2011-08-17 00:10:35 theorbtwo has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
11 2011-08-17 00:10:41 henchan has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
12 2011-08-17 00:10:42 theorb is now known as theorbtwo
13 2011-08-17 00:10:49 henchan has joined
14 2011-08-17 00:11:06 TheZimm has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
15 2011-08-17 00:12:53 normanrichards has joined
16 2011-08-17 00:13:34 sacarlson has joined
17 2011-08-17 00:13:54 Rabbit67890 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
18 2011-08-17 00:13:55 Rabbit67890_ is now known as Rabbit67890
19 2011-08-17 00:14:47 wolfspraul has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
20 2011-08-17 00:15:34 henchan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
21 2011-08-17 00:15:45 denisx has joined
22 2011-08-17 00:16:38 storrgie has joined
23 2011-08-17 00:16:59 nhodges has joined
24 2011-08-17 00:17:04 nhodges has quit (Excess Flood)
25 2011-08-17 00:17:20 nhodges has joined
26 2011-08-17 00:17:27 Rabbit67890 has quit (Quit: Rabbit67890)
27 2011-08-17 00:17:27 nhodges has quit (Excess Flood)
28 2011-08-17 00:17:46 nhodges has joined
29 2011-08-17 00:17:52 nhodges has quit (Excess Flood)
30 2011-08-17 00:18:07 nhodges has joined
31 2011-08-17 00:18:13 nhodges has quit (Excess Flood)
32 2011-08-17 00:18:15 pumpkin has joined
33 2011-08-17 00:18:28 nhodges has joined
34 2011-08-17 00:18:33 nhodges has quit (Excess Flood)
35 2011-08-17 00:18:48 nhodges has joined
36 2011-08-17 00:18:53 nhodges has quit (Excess Flood)
37 2011-08-17 00:19:11 nhodges has joined
38 2011-08-17 00:19:16 nhodges has quit (Excess Flood)
39 2011-08-17 00:19:34 nhodges has joined
40 2011-08-17 00:19:42 nhodges has quit (Excess Flood)
41 2011-08-17 00:20:23 karnac has quit (Quit: karnac)
42 2011-08-17 00:20:47 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
43 2011-08-17 00:20:59 pumpkin is now known as copumpkin
44 2011-08-17 00:21:23 AgoristRadio has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
45 2011-08-17 00:21:48 bawf_ has joined
46 2011-08-17 00:21:57 karnac has joined
47 2011-08-17 00:24:17 ephcon has joined
48 2011-08-17 00:24:44 BAWF has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
49 2011-08-17 00:25:09 nhodges has joined
50 2011-08-17 00:25:55 Rabbit67890 has joined
51 2011-08-17 00:27:23 wolfspraul has joined
52 2011-08-17 00:27:25 eastender2 has joined
53 2011-08-17 00:29:25 eastender has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
54 2011-08-17 00:31:15 denisx has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
55 2011-08-17 00:31:37 denisx has joined
56 2011-08-17 00:32:12 denisx has quit (Client Quit)
57 2011-08-17 00:33:55 Pinion has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
58 2011-08-17 00:34:24 Zarutian has joined
59 2011-08-17 00:34:54 denisx has joined
60 2011-08-17 00:35:23 denisx has quit (Client Quit)
61 2011-08-17 00:35:37 justmoon has quit (Quit: Leaving)
62 2011-08-17 00:38:12 amiller has joined
63 2011-08-17 00:39:21 AgoristRadio has joined
64 2011-08-17 00:39:33 denisx has joined
65 2011-08-17 00:40:57 BurtyB has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
66 2011-08-17 00:40:58 <denisx> luke-jr: which client supports your reason changes in push pool?
67 2011-08-17 00:41:15 <luke-jr> denisx: which one?
68 2011-08-17 00:41:37 <denisx> the last one ;)
69 2011-08-17 00:41:48 <luke-jr> which is?
70 2011-08-17 00:42:11 <denisx> luSend X-Reject-Reason with JSON-RPC share rejections
71 2011-08-17 00:42:47 clr_ is now known as c00w
72 2011-08-17 00:44:20 <luke-jr> denisx: DiabloMiner and my branch of poclbm
73 2011-08-17 00:45:08 <denisx> ok, so no mainstream client until now
74 2011-08-17 00:45:27 <luke-jr> â¦
75 2011-08-17 00:45:31 <luke-jr> DiabloMiner is pretty mainstream
76 2011-08-17 00:45:49 <denisx> yeah, maybe
77 2011-08-17 00:45:50 <lfm> "mainstream" is kinda subjective eh
78 2011-08-17 00:46:41 <denisx> luke-jr: I added the patch anyway to my push pool because I think it is important to know why a share is rejected
79 2011-08-17 00:46:48 Gekz has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
80 2011-08-17 00:46:56 Gekz has joined
81 2011-08-17 00:47:36 <lfm> denisx: which pool is yours?
82 2011-08-17 00:47:44 <denisx> lfm: btcmp
83 2011-08-17 00:48:08 cypherpunk01 has joined
84 2011-08-17 00:49:16 <luke-jr> denisx: it's upstream now
85 2011-08-17 00:53:42 KenArmitt has quit ()
86 2011-08-17 00:54:01 delson has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
87 2011-08-17 00:57:17 LobsterMan has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
88 2011-08-17 00:58:59 egecko has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
89 2011-08-17 00:59:08 <Plasma-> why is the rpc sendfrom command using a txn fee when I set the fee to 0 in the conf file :(
90 2011-08-17 00:59:13 <Plasma-> this is really unpredictable
91 2011-08-17 00:59:53 <lfm> Plasma-: yes, it is a nuicences noted here many times.
92 2011-08-17 01:00:43 <Plasma-> I dont have a problem paying fees, its just too unpredictable at the moment though for me to account for it
93 2011-08-17 01:01:28 <Plasma-> I think I may just compile my own client that wont send a fee... are there plans to make the fee system clearer in the next release?
94 2011-08-17 01:01:35 <Plasma-> or perhaps hard code a value or something
95 2011-08-17 01:01:57 <Plasma-> or are bitcoin clients going to ignore my transactions if I dont attach a fee?
96 2011-08-17 01:02:03 <cjdelisle> It's sort of a safety feature since a transaction can end up in a bad state if there is no fee and it is floating around with no miner willing to put it in the chain.
97 2011-08-17 01:02:07 TheZimm has joined
98 2011-08-17 01:03:01 <lfm> Plasma-: the problem is not clients ignoring you, it is miners ignoreing free txn
99 2011-08-17 01:03:47 <luke-jr> cjdelisle: it *should* throw an error instead
100 2011-08-17 01:03:49 <Plasma-> yeah I gathered as much. ok. Do you know if miner clients add txns that have any fee (eg the 0.0005 I saw mentioned?), or must the fee match a certain # of KB etc
101 2011-08-17 01:03:53 <luke-jr> I think latest versions do
102 2011-08-17 01:03:56 <lfm> Plasma-: free txn still are generally put thru eventually but it may takes days
103 2011-08-17 01:04:20 <luke-jr> Plasma-: Eligius accepts very low fees; you can merge my eligius_sendfee branch to take advantage of it
104 2011-08-17 01:04:25 <Plasma-> I saw there was an rpc method getinfo I think that would let me know how much I paid in fees for a txn; but thats after the fact, so its still a bit annoying
105 2011-08-17 01:05:04 <cjdelisle> Not having the feeling of total control of your money is a major UI problem though.
106 2011-08-17 01:05:19 <lfm> not getinfo, listtransactions maybe
107 2011-08-17 01:05:32 <Plasma-> perhaps it was gettransaction, I havent actually tried it yet
108 2011-08-17 01:05:47 <luke-jr> cjdelisle: I think someday the other clients will triumph over the original one ;p
109 2011-08-17 01:06:03 <lfm> Plasma-: ya gettransaction should do it
110 2011-08-17 01:06:28 <luke-jr> cjdelisle: probably at least one will display your actual coins and let you choose which ones to spend
111 2011-08-17 01:06:32 <luke-jr> let you sort them into containers, etc
112 2011-08-17 01:06:40 <lfm> luke-jr might be years still tho
113 2011-08-17 01:06:44 <cjdelisle> mm
114 2011-08-17 01:06:47 <luke-jr> lfm: maybe
115 2011-08-17 01:07:01 <Plasma-> okay; so what do people recommend. I dont want my txn's taking days, so a 0 fee is out. 1) Is it okay to perhaps send a fixed 0.0005 fee with every txn, regardless of size/age etc, or will miners still ignore it (I saw this figure mentioned somewhere), or, 2) Just accept the fee bitcoin client picks for me and adjust accounts accordingly on my end
116 2011-08-17 01:07:23 <luke-jr> coin tooltip "You received this from Joe 5 weeks ago as payment for rent."
117 2011-08-17 01:07:24 <kjj> I'd go with option 2
118 2011-08-17 01:07:45 <Plasma-> kjj, yes I think so, then I just play within the rules
119 2011-08-17 01:07:49 <kjj> I kinda like the option that flexcoin went with
120 2011-08-17 01:07:51 <luke-jr> Plasma-: if you don't mind waiting a few hours, you can get by with Eligius's lower fees
121 2011-08-17 01:07:58 <lfm> Plasma-: Id say set a small fee, as small as you feel like. then also use gettransaction after you send to see what the fee actually used was
122 2011-08-17 01:08:28 Superbest has quit (Quit: It's time to man up and end this)
123 2011-08-17 01:08:40 <kjj> flexcoin charges a fee every time, which is larger than the average actual fee
124 2011-08-17 01:08:53 <kjj> then then return 70% of the balance to depositors
125 2011-08-17 01:09:00 <Plasma-> Is there a way to estimate how much a fee will be? What decides what amount a fee will be? I noticed on the wiki that it could be a combination of factors, like how recently you received the funds your sending, the amount your sending also plays a part, etc? Im just confused about how to pick what fee to estimate I will be paying
126 2011-08-17 01:09:21 <Plasma-> luke-jr, noted thanks, ill check it out
127 2011-08-17 01:09:23 <lfm> kjj a fee larger than the actual fee? why doesnt it use the actual fee?
128 2011-08-17 01:09:40 <luke-jr> lfm: because it can't know the actual fee beforehand of course
129 2011-08-17 01:09:48 <kjj> because they don't know the fee in advance
130 2011-08-17 01:10:16 <kjj> and charging the actual fee isn't "fair"
131 2011-08-17 01:10:29 <lfm> Plasma-: it matters too how lrage the txn in kb will be determined by how many inputs it needs to use which is pretty hard for users to predict
132 2011-08-17 01:10:38 <kjj> Plasma-: like you noticed, it is complicated and depends on a lot of factors, so it is hard to estimate
133 2011-08-17 01:11:21 LobsterMan has joined
134 2011-08-17 01:11:21 LobsterMan has quit (Changing host)
135 2011-08-17 01:11:21 LobsterMan has joined
136 2011-08-17 01:11:37 <kjj> and there are complicated things you could do with a hacked client to avoid even more fees than usual
137 2011-08-17 01:11:55 <lfm> kjj so what if a miner just keeps the whole fee instead of refunding part?
138 2011-08-17 01:12:10 <luke-jr> lfm: he didn't mean that
139 2011-08-17 01:12:16 <kjj> lfm: the miner keeps the fee they get.
140 2011-08-17 01:12:39 <luke-jr> he means their code just docks their account the full 0.001 BTC or whatever, but lets bitcoind pick the real fee sent
141 2011-08-17 01:12:39 <lfm> ok I guess I misunderstood
142 2011-08-17 01:12:41 <kjj> lfm: flexcoin charges their customers a fee, and uses those fees to pay miners
143 2011-08-17 01:13:12 <lfm> kjj so there is a central authority?
144 2011-08-17 01:13:29 <kjj> ahh, I think I figured out the problem
145 2011-08-17 01:13:49 <kjj> flexcoin is a website, an online wallet provider. it isn't a different system
146 2011-08-17 01:14:04 <Plasma-> One use case I am confused about is handling the sending of 0.0007 BTC, that cost me a txn fee of 0.0008! - I sent 0.0007 to another account immediately after receiving some funds, so I assume that had some sort of impact?
147 2011-08-17 01:14:24 <lfm> oh, ok I thot it was a separate block chain bitcoin fork
148 2011-08-17 01:14:26 <Plasma-> should I perhaps just deal with at least 0.01 BTC or something to avoid paying so much, I dont know, its just confusing
149 2011-08-17 01:14:31 <Plasma-> and arbitrary
150 2011-08-17 01:15:09 <lfm> Plasma-: yup, thats what a lot of people conclude. bitcoin isnt really good for micro txn
151 2011-08-17 01:16:36 <kjj> yes, the fee system is currently rather strange. but bitcoin needs a lot more before it will be viable to move to a better system
152 2011-08-17 01:17:07 <Plasma-> fees should really be simpler, like a fixed percentage (perhaps tier'd?) or a base fee as well
153 2011-08-17 01:17:11 <kjj> and by more, I mean more everything. more nodes, more clients, more miners, more developers, more, more, more
154 2011-08-17 01:17:23 <Plasma-> considering 'per kb' blocks and other junk is too complicated
155 2011-08-17 01:17:53 <kjj> the reason it isn't simple is because it is doing a whole bunch of different jobs at once
156 2011-08-17 01:17:53 <Plasma-> then miners could simply process transactions in order of fee descending, so the higher the fee attached the faster your txn should get processed
157 2011-08-17 01:18:03 <lfm> Plasma-: yup I agree, they are trying to base fees on the cost of servicing txn and it is just confusing the users
158 2011-08-17 01:18:12 <Plasma-> yeah definitely
159 2011-08-17 01:19:21 <Plasma-> its a good example of where you need to pick a simpler logical approach (to people) versus being exactly right to please computers heh
160 2011-08-17 01:19:24 <kjj> luke-jr: before I forget, is your timestamp stuff an attempt to get a nonce that doesn't involve rehashing the entire block?
161 2011-08-17 01:19:49 <kjj> Plasma-: a simpler approach won't work... yet.
162 2011-08-17 01:20:07 <lfm> kjj thats not Luke's idea. It was/is in the original bitcoind getwork
163 2011-08-17 01:20:10 <luke-jr> kjj: yes, I give a different "second" to each miner
164 2011-08-17 01:20:26 <kjj> Plasma-: when everything has grown by 10x or 100x, a market system for fees will work
165 2011-08-17 01:20:46 <lfm> kjj it just allowed miners to increment the timestamp themselves
166 2011-08-17 01:21:01 <kjj> luke-jr: can't say I'm a big fan of munging the timestamps, though the network handles it fine
167 2011-08-17 01:21:15 <lfm> kjj Itd be nice if the major pools would get together and agree on a simpler fee system
168 2011-08-17 01:21:15 <luke-jr> kjj: me either, that's why I'm pushing noncerange :P
169 2011-08-17 01:21:19 <kjj> luke-jr: it'd be nice if there were two nonce fields in the header
170 2011-08-17 01:21:57 <luke-jr> kjj: maybe, but 32-bit nonce is 4 GH/s already
171 2011-08-17 01:22:03 <luke-jr> it's not *too* bad
172 2011-08-17 01:22:41 <luke-jr> the problem is that most miners waste it
173 2011-08-17 01:23:36 <lfm> well they cant do 4gh/s and if they wated till they did 4gh theyd always be stale
174 2011-08-17 01:23:43 <kjj> brb
175 2011-08-17 01:23:56 <luke-jr> lfm: that's why they shouldn't ask for 4 GH/s of work :P
176 2011-08-17 01:24:33 <lfm> thats a rate, not an amount
177 2011-08-17 01:24:43 <luke-jr> I know it's a rate.
178 2011-08-17 01:24:44 <lfm> but I think I know what you ment
179 2011-08-17 01:24:52 owowo has quit (Quit: Leaving)
180 2011-08-17 01:24:54 <luke-jr> obviously not.
181 2011-08-17 01:25:08 <luke-jr> since ntime changes every second, you start the nonces over every second
182 2011-08-17 01:25:15 <luke-jr> so it literally is work for 4 GH every second
183 2011-08-17 01:25:40 <lfm> well ya but a share isnt stale in one second, you can take a few sec to do it
184 2011-08-17 01:25:55 <luke-jr> â¦
185 2011-08-17 01:26:04 <luke-jr> but you start over every second
186 2011-08-17 01:26:17 ephcon has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
187 2011-08-17 01:26:20 <luke-jr> every second, ntime++; nonce = 0;
188 2011-08-17 01:26:43 <lfm> if you only ask for a getwork once every 10 sec and you use the full range of 4gh, thats not wasting the server time then is it?
189 2011-08-17 01:26:57 <luke-jr> it's not 4 GH. it's 4 GH/s
190 2011-08-17 01:27:40 <luke-jr> at least with rollntime
191 2011-08-17 01:28:04 <lfm> without rolltime you can return a share 10 sec late generally cant you?
192 2011-08-17 01:28:18 <luke-jr> noâ¦
193 2011-08-17 01:28:25 <lfm> 10 after you get it that is
194 2011-08-17 01:28:29 <luke-jr> but "late" means over 2 minutes after you got the work
195 2011-08-17 01:28:42 <luke-jr> yes, that's not late.
196 2011-08-17 01:28:44 <lfm> ok not late, 10 sec after you get it
197 2011-08-17 01:29:08 <luke-jr> but "without rollntime" should be discouraged.
198 2011-08-17 01:29:58 <lfm> well everyhting but long poll or whatever should I spoze be discouraged
199 2011-08-17 01:30:28 <luke-jr> â¦
200 2011-08-17 01:30:40 <luke-jr> an ideal miner needs longpoll + rollntime + noncerange
201 2011-08-17 01:30:46 <luke-jr> at least
202 2011-08-17 01:31:41 <luke-jr> then the miner tells the pool "OK, I got 100 kH/s. Gimme work." and the pool says "Ok, here's some work and a little over 100 kilo-nonces to try each second."
203 2011-08-17 01:31:44 Pinion has joined
204 2011-08-17 01:31:48 <lfm> well noncerange would be for very slow miners right?
205 2011-08-17 01:32:00 <luke-jr> noncerange is for all miners
206 2011-08-17 01:32:05 <luke-jr> unless you know of one that does 4 GH/s
207 2011-08-17 01:32:55 <lfm> WELL IF YOU THINK ITS IMPORTANT TO DO THE TIME ROLL EVERY SECOND PARHAPS
208 2011-08-17 01:33:09 <lfm> sorry caps lock
209 2011-08-17 01:33:09 <shadders> if they do the miner should be responsible for getting multiple works and processing serially each second
210 2011-08-17 01:33:48 noagendamarket has joined
211 2011-08-17 01:34:01 <lfm> shadders: we're talking about doing long polls so they only getwork once
212 2011-08-17 01:35:50 <luke-jr> lfm: it is. otherwise you waste it
213 2011-08-17 01:36:27 <luke-jr> shadders: 4 GH/s needs 1 work every 2 minuts
214 2011-08-17 01:36:38 <lfm> Im not clear on this concept of "waste" then. the problem is server resources irght?
215 2011-08-17 01:36:56 <luke-jr> lfm: more or less.
216 2011-08-17 01:37:39 <luke-jr> without noncerange, the pool makes 4 GH/s worth of work for every single miner
217 2011-08-17 01:37:41 <shadders> no I mean if a miner is more than 4gh/s...
218 2011-08-17 01:38:01 <lfm> so if it just does one long poll and uses the roll time to handle overflows, otherwise only does roll time once a min, what resources would it be wasting?
219 2011-08-17 01:38:31 <luke-jr> lfm: because it has 120 seconds worth of work and it's only using 2 seconds of it?
220 2011-08-17 01:39:15 <luke-jr> each getwork response is good for 515,396,075,520 hashes
221 2011-08-17 01:39:39 <luke-jr> actually, could be more even
222 2011-08-17 01:39:43 <lfm> the server resources have to make just one block header for each longpoll client tho no matter if they "use" all the second or not.
223 2011-08-17 01:39:59 <luke-jr> â¦â¦â¦
224 2011-08-17 01:40:04 <luke-jr> "just"
225 2011-08-17 01:40:14 <lfm> cant do less
226 2011-08-17 01:40:24 <luke-jr> when you're up over 500 GH/s worth of mostly slow miners, that takes seconds to do
227 2011-08-17 01:40:32 <luke-jr> yes you can
228 2011-08-17 01:40:37 <luke-jr> noncerange lets you do much less
229 2011-08-17 01:41:33 ByronJoh1son has joined
230 2011-08-17 01:42:01 <luke-jr> Eligius has 678 miners right now
231 2011-08-17 01:42:15 <lfm> hmmm, ok I guess I can see how that would be
232 2011-08-17 01:42:20 <luke-jr> so it's making 2.7 TH/s worth of work every longpoll
233 2011-08-17 01:42:31 <luke-jr> but it only gets ~590 MH/s of shares
234 2011-08-17 01:42:48 <luke-jr> with noncerange, it could easily get by with only ~650 GH/s of work
235 2011-08-17 01:42:52 <luke-jr> s/MH/GH
236 2011-08-17 01:43:09 <luke-jr> ~160 bitcoind-works instead of ~678
237 2011-08-17 01:44:31 <lfm> you you can share all the merkele tree generation amounst a bunch of slow miners. I am slowly starting to see what you mean. it takes a while to get thru the thick skull
238 2011-08-17 01:45:11 <luke-jr> yep
239 2011-08-17 01:45:23 <luke-jr> even 4 GPU miners easily
240 2011-08-17 01:46:26 <lfm> so the miners have to be real carefull with the nonces and the byteswaps on the getworks.
241 2011-08-17 01:46:47 <lfm> for noncerange
242 2011-08-17 01:46:55 <luke-jr> pretty much
243 2011-08-17 01:47:36 <lfm> I bet thats where a bunch of invalid returns are happening (just a gut fealing
244 2011-08-17 01:47:52 <luke-jr> they're not happening though.
245 2011-08-17 01:52:41 BlueMatt has joined
246 2011-08-17 01:53:09 andyroo has joined
247 2011-08-17 01:53:51 andyroo has quit (Client Quit)
248 2011-08-17 01:55:00 <lfm> well what percent of your users have noncerange?
249 2011-08-17 01:55:45 eastender2 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
250 2011-08-17 01:57:15 <bawf_> Are there any modified clients that allow multiple users and user privileges through RPC? Such as a "deposit only" user?
251 2011-08-17 01:57:20 <luke-jr> lfm: 0
252 2011-08-17 01:57:29 <luke-jr> bawf_: no
253 2011-08-17 01:57:39 <luke-jr> lfm: the spec isn't even finished
254 2011-08-17 01:57:48 <lfm> ok I see
255 2011-08-17 01:58:20 <luke-jr> lfm: I need to have a good chat with m0mchil or some other clueful person
256 2011-08-17 01:58:25 <lfm> bawf_: youd need to do wallet swapping or something actually I think
257 2011-08-17 01:58:27 <bawf_> Did no one add it because they are waiting on a good specification?
258 2011-08-17 01:58:31 <luke-jr> and figure out the sanest way to do it
259 2011-08-17 01:58:47 <luke-jr> bawf_: we're not talking about your question
260 2011-08-17 01:59:28 <luke-jr> bawf_: noone added it because bitcoind code sucks
261 2011-08-17 01:59:39 <bawf_> I know, just wondering why its not there, seems like an obvious featre
262 2011-08-17 01:59:40 <luke-jr> bawf_: WalletBit has an independent JSON-RPC implementation outside bitcoind
263 2011-08-17 02:00:01 <luke-jr> because it's easier to put it somewhere else
264 2011-08-17 02:00:10 Pinion has quit (Quit: Has quit)
265 2011-08-17 02:00:20 yorick has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
266 2011-08-17 02:00:32 <lfm> bawf_: on linux you could actually have separate users each running bitcoin(d). they would each have their own full block cahin files and stuff tho
267 2011-08-17 02:00:48 <luke-jr> lfm: not really
268 2011-08-17 02:00:55 <luke-jr> lfm: they'd fight over ports and crap
269 2011-08-17 02:01:09 yorick has joined
270 2011-08-17 02:01:15 <lfm> only one could have incoming
271 2011-08-17 02:01:17 normanrichards has quit (Quit: normanrichards)
272 2011-08-17 02:01:18 wolfspraul has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
273 2011-08-17 02:01:41 <lfm> the -noincoming switch would be needed for the others I guess
274 2011-08-17 02:02:27 <lfm> and rpcport too, ya, the bitcoin-in-a-box kind proves its possible
275 2011-08-17 02:02:31 wolfspraul has joined
276 2011-08-17 02:02:38 <lfm> kinda
277 2011-08-17 02:03:39 <lfm> tesnet-in-a-box
278 2011-08-17 02:03:45 <lfm> testnet-in-a-box
279 2011-08-17 02:04:05 <bawf_> Can bitcoind be renamed or will it mess with stuff?
280 2011-08-17 02:04:16 <luke-jr> people rename it all the time
281 2011-08-17 02:07:34 Pinion has joined
282 2011-08-17 02:07:41 <zeropointo> lol
283 2011-08-17 02:08:43 BlueMatt has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
284 2011-08-17 02:09:25 WakiMiko has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
285 2011-08-17 02:11:01 Taveren93HGK has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
286 2011-08-17 02:11:33 WakiMiko has joined
287 2011-08-17 02:14:29 eastender has joined
288 2011-08-17 02:16:14 eian has joined
289 2011-08-17 02:16:24 eian has quit (Client Quit)
290 2011-08-17 02:16:41 c00w has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
291 2011-08-17 02:17:19 clr_ has joined
292 2011-08-17 02:17:35 <nanotube> luke-jr: #bitcoin-otc-ratings
293 2011-08-17 02:17:45 clr_ is now known as c00w
294 2011-08-17 02:18:20 <luke-jr> nanotube: -watch :p
295 2011-08-17 02:19:45 <nanotube> luke-jr: i'll see how it hoes on -ratings first. :)
296 2011-08-17 02:22:59 WakiMiko_ has joined
297 2011-08-17 02:23:55 dbitcoin has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
298 2011-08-17 02:24:00 RobinPKR_ has joined
299 2011-08-17 02:24:06 RobinPKR has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
300 2011-08-17 02:24:07 RobinPKR_ is now known as RobinPKR
301 2011-08-17 02:25:57 WakiMiko has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
302 2011-08-17 02:28:39 <vragnaroda> nanotube: *goes :p
303 2011-08-17 02:28:45 <vragnaroda> lol
304 2011-08-17 02:31:30 ewal-otg has joined
305 2011-08-17 02:33:52 Pinion has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
306 2011-08-17 02:34:01 Pinion has joined
307 2011-08-17 02:36:50 BurtyB has joined
308 2011-08-17 02:37:38 andyroo has joined
309 2011-08-17 02:38:28 delson has joined
310 2011-08-17 02:38:31 <andyroo> ;;ticker
311 2011-08-17 02:38:42 <gribble> Error: Failure to retrieve ticker. Try again later.
312 2011-08-17 02:38:51 <andyroo> big action on gox?
313 2011-08-17 02:39:22 MetaV has joined
314 2011-08-17 02:39:32 MetaV has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
315 2011-08-17 02:40:03 <andyroo> !ticker
316 2011-08-17 02:41:24 zeropointo is now known as vag-nimrod-a
317 2011-08-17 02:42:32 <andyroo> ;;ticker
318 2011-08-17 02:42:37 <gribble> Best bid: 10.9, Best ask: 10.96897, Bid-ask spread: 0.06897, Last trade: 10.91999, 24 hour volume: 18776, 24 hour low: 10.661, 24 hour high: 11.235
319 2011-08-17 02:43:14 normanrichards has joined
320 2011-08-17 02:43:37 ewal-otg has quit (Quit: ewal-otg)
321 2011-08-17 02:44:03 egecko has joined
322 2011-08-17 02:44:21 andyroo has quit (Quit: WeeChat 0.3.3)
323 2011-08-17 02:45:09 MetaV has joined
324 2011-08-17 02:45:32 MetaV has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
325 2011-08-17 02:45:40 MetaV has joined
326 2011-08-17 02:45:46 MetaV has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
327 2011-08-17 02:50:38 denisx has quit (Quit: denisx)
328 2011-08-17 02:52:08 Snapman has joined
329 2011-08-17 02:52:44 storrgie has quit (Quit: Leaving)
330 2011-08-17 02:53:33 <jgarzik> ;;seen ArtForz
331 2011-08-17 02:53:33 <gribble> ArtForz was last seen in #bitcoin-dev 9 weeks, 0 days, 4 hours, 31 minutes, and 10 seconds ago: <ArtForz> eternal beta. hah, satoshi is secretly a google employee!
332 2011-08-17 02:54:58 <JFK911> he vanished when the bubble burst
333 2011-08-17 02:55:04 <JFK911> alert #bitcoin-police
334 2011-08-17 02:55:56 cronopio has joined
335 2011-08-17 02:56:28 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Con Kolivas * r1e77f04481e4 cgminer/ (main.c miner.h util.c): Clean up the longpoll management to ensure the right paths go to the right pool and display whether we're connected to LP or not in the status line.
336 2011-08-17 02:56:51 gfinn has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
337 2011-08-17 02:57:04 theymos has joined
338 2011-08-17 02:59:32 traviscj has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
339 2011-08-17 03:00:12 Rabbit67890 has quit (Quit: Rabbit67890)
340 2011-08-17 03:00:21 <MrTiggr> someone mentioned the police ??
341 2011-08-17 03:00:24 <MrTiggr> sup ?
342 2011-08-17 03:01:25 dvide has joined
343 2011-08-17 03:03:20 Rabbit67890 has joined
344 2011-08-17 03:03:58 <JFK911> artforz has mysteriously vanished
345 2011-08-17 03:04:52 <MrTiggr> for how long ?
346 2011-08-17 03:05:05 <MrTiggr> and why is that news for the police ?
347 2011-08-17 03:05:47 <MrTiggr> ?? mebbe we should start a missing-persons division :D
348 2011-08-17 03:06:09 <noagendamarket> lol
349 2011-08-17 03:06:23 <noagendamarket> actually that wouldnt be a bad idea
350 2011-08-17 03:06:32 <MrTiggr> i knorite
351 2011-08-17 03:06:40 <noagendamarket> the guy who runs bitcoinmarket disapeared too
352 2011-08-17 03:06:56 <MrTiggr> i meant it as a joke nam but i have had a number of "Where s X he/she be gone since Y"
353 2011-08-17 03:07:07 gfinn has joined
354 2011-08-17 03:07:14 <MrTiggr> ^^ you went missing for a while; i got lots of "were's nam"
355 2011-08-17 03:07:22 <noagendamarket> heh
356 2011-08-17 03:07:43 <MrTiggr> so yeah ..mebbe a missing persons section where you can post "wanted" posters for people you missing
357 2011-08-17 03:14:23 <noagendamarket> (people could post bounties for scammers too)
358 2011-08-17 03:14:30 <noagendamarket> lol
359 2011-08-17 03:14:46 <noagendamarket> bounty hunters ftw
360 2011-08-17 03:15:02 * MrTiggr anyone got a last seen datetime on ArtForz ?
361 2011-08-17 03:15:36 <kjj> shit, that was my brother on the phone for the last 2 hours, so I missed the end of the getwork/nonce discussion
362 2011-08-17 03:16:01 <theymos> MrTiggr: Last active today on the forum.
363 2011-08-17 03:17:03 <MrTiggr> ? nice ..that means he is only IRC missing :D
364 2011-08-17 03:17:08 <MrTiggr> thanks theymos
365 2011-08-17 03:20:17 Rabbit67890 has quit (Quit: Rabbit67890)
366 2011-08-17 03:20:45 cronopio has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
367 2011-08-17 03:20:55 cronopio has joined
368 2011-08-17 03:22:41 TheZimm has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
369 2011-08-17 03:24:04 <noagendamarket> theymos are you sure thats art ?
370 2011-08-17 03:25:03 <theymos> Yes.
371 2011-08-17 03:25:27 Workbench has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
372 2011-08-17 03:25:30 rphlx has quit (Quit: Leaving)
373 2011-08-17 03:27:14 traviscj has joined
374 2011-08-17 03:27:43 <Graet> mm so will u start a "i'm afk " data base too so ppl can warn if they are going away and wont be regarded as "missing" :P
375 2011-08-17 03:28:22 <JFK911> oh i havent seen him on the forum.
376 2011-08-17 03:28:37 <JFK911> its interesting that artforz disappeared because he is the biggest miner
377 2011-08-17 03:28:48 <Graet> indeed
378 2011-08-17 03:29:59 nefario has joined
379 2011-08-17 03:30:05 Workbench has joined
380 2011-08-17 03:30:05 vag-nimrod-a is now known as vagnimroda
381 2011-08-17 03:30:15 <theymos> Is he still the biggest miner? The pictures of rooms full of graphics cards I've seen makes me think that might not be true any longer unless he's expanded.
382 2011-08-17 03:30:38 <noagendamarket> vladimir would have to be up there
383 2011-08-17 03:31:27 <shLONG> hey what do you guys use to build the bitcoin wallet atm
384 2011-08-17 03:31:51 <shLONG> and where is the makefile stored in the dir
385 2011-08-17 03:33:50 <JFK911> he can fit a room full of graphics cards into a single chassis, theymos
386 2011-08-17 03:37:57 vagnimroda is now known as zeropointo
387 2011-08-17 03:43:56 zeropointo has quit (Quit: brb)
388 2011-08-17 03:44:14 <nanotube> theymos: well, fwiw, his complete absence from both irc and forums since june12, and now his sudden appearance on forum on the i0coin thread, and doing pooled mining moreover, makes me suspect it's a jacked forum account.
389 2011-08-17 03:44:55 zeropointo has joined
390 2011-08-17 03:46:40 <theymos> Doubtful. He's using the same IP range that he's always used.
391 2011-08-17 03:52:31 <JFK911> artforz joined a pool?
392 2011-08-17 03:52:43 <JFK911> HA
393 2011-08-17 03:55:40 jimon has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
394 2011-08-17 03:57:20 osmosis has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
395 2011-08-17 03:57:36 <theymos> Does ArtForz have a public key published?
396 2011-08-17 03:58:30 <gjs278> if he signs onto irc as artforz that's good enough for me
397 2011-08-17 04:00:07 jimon has joined
398 2011-08-17 04:03:01 <theymos> Just in case, I banned him until he logs in here. Someone please email/PM me if he does, as I won't be here for much longer today.
399 2011-08-17 04:03:47 <gjs278> wow
400 2011-08-17 04:04:09 <kjj> Art has been known to throw hashing power at various pools
401 2011-08-17 04:04:22 <gjs278> ;;ident theymos
402 2011-08-17 04:04:22 <gribble> Nick 'theymos', with hostmask 'theymos!~theymos@unaffiliated/theymos', is not identified.
403 2011-08-17 04:04:25 <gjs278> hmm
404 2011-08-17 04:04:34 <gjs278> can I have an op ban theymos until he idents
405 2011-08-17 04:04:35 <theymos> He's coming from the same /24, so if it *is* a compromised account, the attacker probably has complete control over everything. But it doesn't hurt to take extra precautions...
406 2011-08-17 04:05:05 <theymos> I'm identified with Freenode...
407 2011-08-17 04:05:11 <gjs278> good enough
408 2011-08-17 04:05:20 owowo has joined
409 2011-08-17 04:05:23 * MrTiggr ^^ all this being noted ..if we see him login; will PM you theymos
410 2011-08-17 04:06:49 owowo has quit (Client Quit)
411 2011-08-17 04:06:53 asher^ has joined
412 2011-08-17 04:07:02 sytse has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
413 2011-08-17 04:07:07 sytse has joined
414 2011-08-17 04:11:47 eoss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
415 2011-08-17 04:12:50 Eremes has joined
416 2011-08-17 04:13:06 naypalm_ has joined
417 2011-08-17 04:14:26 maqr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
418 2011-08-17 04:16:44 AgoristRadio has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
419 2011-08-17 04:17:08 coblee has joined
420 2011-08-17 04:19:20 naypalm_ has left ()
421 2011-08-17 04:20:26 grbgout has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
422 2011-08-17 04:21:11 grbgout has joined
423 2011-08-17 04:21:25 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
424 2011-08-17 04:24:08 eastender has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
425 2011-08-17 04:25:04 Snapman__ has joined
426 2011-08-17 04:29:25 Snapman has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
427 2011-08-17 04:30:21 Katapult has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
428 2011-08-17 04:30:56 Snapman__ is now known as Snapman
429 2011-08-17 04:32:05 Katapult has joined
430 2011-08-17 04:32:06 AgoristRadio has joined
431 2011-08-17 04:37:31 osmosis has joined
432 2011-08-17 04:38:55 osmosis_ has joined
433 2011-08-17 04:41:45 osmosis has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
434 2011-08-17 04:42:59 <HaltingState> does anyone have experience with distutils?
435 2011-08-17 04:44:08 Rabbit67890 has joined
436 2011-08-17 04:44:10 Cablesaurus has quit (Quit: Clap on! , Clap off! Clap@#&$NO CARRIER)
437 2011-08-17 04:47:29 dr_win has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
438 2011-08-17 04:48:09 Cablesaurus has joined
439 2011-08-17 04:48:09 Cablesaurus has quit (Changing host)
440 2011-08-17 04:48:09 Cablesaurus has joined
441 2011-08-17 04:49:00 Snapman__ has joined
442 2011-08-17 04:49:19 Rabbit67890 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
443 2011-08-17 04:49:46 dr_win has joined
444 2011-08-17 04:49:58 <lfm> HaltingState: I expect someone does, whats your question anyway?
445 2011-08-17 04:51:22 <lfm> other than it doesnt sound like a bitcoin question yet
446 2011-08-17 04:51:42 Rabbit67890 has joined
447 2011-08-17 04:53:13 Snapman has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
448 2011-08-17 04:53:14 <HaltingState> lfm, nm; solved it through trial and error. i am trying to build a shared library with distutils
449 2011-08-17 04:53:19 Snapman__ is now known as Snapman
450 2011-08-17 04:56:54 AgoristRadio has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
451 2011-08-17 05:02:46 Eremes has left ()
452 2011-08-17 05:02:46 <lfm> whats with the "strange" output script in http://blockexplorer.com/t/7wZxwKGprr
453 2011-08-17 05:03:44 <theymos> Wrong public key size.
454 2011-08-17 05:03:48 cyberchriss_ has quit (Quit: Verlassend)
455 2011-08-17 05:04:01 <lfm> is it a redeemable output?
456 2011-08-17 05:04:19 <theymos> I don't know. It's possible.
457 2011-08-17 05:04:34 dr_win has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
458 2011-08-17 05:04:43 <theymos> Actually, probably not. All Bitcoin public keys begin with 04
459 2011-08-17 05:05:47 <lfm> so your considered opinion would be "someone messed up their txn"?
460 2011-08-17 05:06:56 <theymos> I've heard that you can embed information into public keys using the public key format that Bitcoin uses. I'm not familiar with this issue, but maybe this would also be a valid public key. Probably, however, someone was either embedding information like this or they're using broken code.
461 2011-08-17 05:07:50 <kjj> I understand that almost any stream of the right number of bits can be a public key
462 2011-08-17 05:08:08 <lfm> kjj this seems to be the wrong number of bits! hehe
463 2011-08-17 05:09:17 <kjj> what ends up in the block is a hash of the key, which is even worse
464 2011-08-17 05:09:36 AgoristRadio has joined
465 2011-08-17 05:09:37 <theymos> This is is a direct-to-pubkey transaction.
466 2011-08-17 05:09:41 Burgundy has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
467 2011-08-17 05:12:59 <theymos> This kind of transaction is considered standard by Bitcoin and will be relayed by default clients. Satoshi once suggested that embedding info like this would be a good way to use Bitcoin for general timestamping.
468 2011-08-17 05:13:31 <lfm> so it might be someone sending secret message or something
469 2011-08-17 05:14:06 <theymos> Could be.
470 2011-08-17 05:14:22 KenArmitt has joined
471 2011-08-17 05:14:22 c00w has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
472 2011-08-17 05:15:11 asher^ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
473 2011-08-17 05:15:44 <kjj> anyone feel like going all detective on the addresses?
474 2011-08-17 05:16:16 coblee has left ()
475 2011-08-17 05:16:19 <lfm> kjj: which address? the ones in th txn we're talking bout you mean or some others?
476 2011-08-17 05:16:27 <CIA-101> bitcoin: various * rc40f51..6bf4d7 cgminer/ (8 files): (6 commits)
477 2011-08-17 05:16:45 <kjj> the last address that received those coins
478 2011-08-17 05:17:59 <lfm> ok, It looks like it leads to a string of dust txns
479 2011-08-17 05:18:32 <lfm> but no more of those "strange" ones
480 2011-08-17 05:18:34 <theymos> Ah, they just forgot the 04. This address is the intended recipient: http://blockexplorer.com/address/1HSrPfMA5joCS5vTnRWQF7GyeodLQZHu6e
481 2011-08-17 05:18:51 <kjj> jackjack testing his offline signer?
482 2011-08-17 05:21:08 <bawf_> What does safemode do?
483 2011-08-17 05:21:10 <lfm> ya, looks like the correct addr shows up a little later
484 2011-08-17 05:21:35 <theymos> bawf_: It prevents certain RPC commands from functioning.
485 2011-08-17 05:21:36 <lfm> bawf_: prevents the trigger from fireing off the bullet
486 2011-08-17 05:21:53 <bawf_> Which?
487 2011-08-17 05:21:59 <lfm> on a gun?
488 2011-08-17 05:22:25 <theymos> bawf_: The ones that send/receive money.
489 2011-08-17 05:22:36 <kjj> grr. really wish the searchbox on the "last posts of: X" page searched that user's posts
490 2011-08-17 05:22:43 <theymos> If you are in safe mode, then the network is unreliable.
491 2011-08-17 05:23:08 <lfm> mswin also has a safemode
492 2011-08-17 05:23:18 <bawf_> really theymos?
493 2011-08-17 05:23:20 dr_win has joined
494 2011-08-17 05:23:23 <theymos> Yes.
495 2011-08-17 05:24:25 <theymos> Currently I believe you only enter safe mode when you see an invalid chain that is longer than the main chain. Maybe also when your time is seriously off.
496 2011-08-17 05:25:10 Sedra has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
497 2011-08-17 05:25:16 <lfm> or you try undocumented arg switch -testsafemode
498 2011-08-17 05:25:19 zeropointo has quit (Quit: installing linux)
499 2011-08-17 05:25:55 <theymos> Alerts used to be able to trigger safe mode, which I think was a really great idea. People could opt out if they didn't want to be affected by the "kill switch".
500 2011-08-17 05:26:08 <theymos> (But this was removed.)
501 2011-08-17 05:27:04 <lfm> ok thats when the whole safemode would have been invented then I spoze
502 2011-08-17 05:27:15 <theymos> Right.
503 2011-08-17 05:27:56 Sedra has joined
504 2011-08-17 05:29:55 <lfm> theymos: hmm, this may sound like an odd question but when you interpret a script, do you start at the last bit?
505 2011-08-17 05:30:13 <theymos> No.
506 2011-08-17 05:30:41 <lfm> ok so the 04 is actually a load key opcode ten sorta?
507 2011-08-17 05:31:10 <theymos> No, it's part of the public key. The pushdata opcodes are hidden from the "abstract" scripts shown on Bitcoin Block Explorer.
508 2011-08-17 05:31:10 <lfm> ten -then
509 2011-08-17 05:32:00 <lfm> oh ok, the pushdata has a length arg then?
510 2011-08-17 05:33:00 <theymos> Yes. It would be OP_PUSHDATA1 0x82 <pubkey> OP_CHECKSIG
511 2011-08-17 05:34:02 <lfm> k thanks
512 2011-08-17 05:34:04 <theymos> The pushdata opcodes take the next byte(s), unlike other opcodes.
513 2011-08-17 05:36:29 <lfm> ok I see, he used a 0x40 opcode instead of the 0x41 opcode normally used there
514 2011-08-17 05:36:30 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Con Kolivas * r1f1f2c3de18d cgminer/phatk110816.cl: Just use 256 sized output.
515 2011-08-17 05:36:31 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Con Kolivas * r93ff09e57739 cgminer/phatk110816.cl: Dos2unix.
516 2011-08-17 05:37:06 dr_win has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
517 2011-08-17 05:37:08 <lfm> or length code or whatever
518 2011-08-17 05:38:18 c00w has joined
519 2011-08-17 05:39:09 <theymos> Wouldn't that have gotten the 04 start of the pubkey?
520 2011-08-17 05:39:46 <lfm> normally it is 0x41 0x04 but he just has 0x40
521 2011-08-17 05:40:40 <theymos> Right, because the pubkey is shorter than normal.
522 2011-08-17 05:40:49 dr_win has joined
523 2011-08-17 05:40:53 <lfm> ya, missing the 04
524 2011-08-17 05:41:18 <kjj> that's now how I read the Script page on the wiki
525 2011-08-17 05:41:42 <theymos> I wrote the script page on the wiki :)
526 2011-08-17 05:41:46 karnac has quit (Quit: karnac)
527 2011-08-17 05:41:47 <kjj> Any opcode from 1 to 75 pushes that number of bytes
528 2011-08-17 05:42:01 <kjj> er, shit. lemme convert to hex before I go any further
529 2011-08-17 05:42:28 <lfm> kjj no, I thinks thats right
530 2011-08-17 05:43:21 Rabbit67890 has quit (Quit: Rabbit67890)
531 2011-08-17 05:43:22 <kjj> 0x40 = 64. 0x41 = 65. there would be no size number after it
532 2011-08-17 05:43:26 <kjj> either way
533 2011-08-17 05:43:54 <kjj> and I mistyped earlier. I meant "not" instead of "now"
534 2011-08-17 05:44:00 <theymos> You're right. I was thinking in hex characters before. There is no OP_PUSHDATA1.
535 2011-08-17 05:44:03 <lfm> ya, the opcode just kinda accidently on purpose is the same as the length of the following arg
536 2011-08-17 05:45:26 <kjj> according to the wiki, 0x4B <byte> pushes <byte> bytes
537 2011-08-17 05:46:16 <lfm> that would be for other lenghts no covered by the push64 and push65 codes?
538 2011-08-17 05:46:37 <kjj> then 0x4C <byte byte> would push <byte byte> bytes. after that, I'm guessing a confusion of endianness
539 2011-08-17 05:46:44 <lfm> or are we nuts
540 2011-08-17 05:46:49 <theymos> No, 0x4B pushes 0x4B bytes. 0x4C uses the next byte.
541 2011-08-17 05:47:10 osmosis_ has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
542 2011-08-17 05:47:10 <kjj> er, yeah. I was thinking 75, not 76
543 2011-08-17 05:47:59 <lfm> in the source it has OP_PUSHDATA1=76,
544 2011-08-17 05:49:00 <lfm> 76 == 0x4c
545 2011-08-17 05:50:31 <lfm> anything between 0 and 76 must be handled specially
546 2011-08-17 05:51:00 ThomasV_ has joined
547 2011-08-17 05:52:14 <lfm> if (b.size() < OP_PUSHDATA1)
548 2011-08-17 05:52:14 <lfm> {
549 2011-08-17 05:52:15 <lfm> insert(end(), (unsigned char)b.size());
550 2011-08-17 05:52:15 <lfm> }
551 2011-08-17 05:55:08 <lfm> if (opcode < OP_PUSHDATA1)
552 2011-08-17 05:55:08 <lfm> {
553 2011-08-17 05:55:08 <lfm> nSize = opcode;
554 2011-08-17 05:55:08 <lfm> }
555 2011-08-17 05:56:03 <lfm> look for "Immediate operand" in script.h
556 2011-08-17 05:56:28 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Con Kolivas * r0f782ba6bd23 cgminer/ (6 files): Update poclbm kernel to FF sized mask and only check that range.
557 2011-08-17 05:56:29 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Con Kolivas * r52e521a7c182 cgminer/main.c: Revert "Copy the work before returning from creating a thread in case we change the work before copying it."
558 2011-08-17 05:56:56 larsivi has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
559 2011-08-17 05:57:30 <lfm> so pushdata1 has a 1 byte length floows, and pushdata2 and pushdata4 you can guess. 0 to 75 has data immediatly following
560 2011-08-17 05:57:57 <lfm> floows -> follows
561 2011-08-17 05:58:51 <lfm> and zero pushes a zero
562 2011-08-17 05:59:36 AStove has joined
563 2011-08-17 06:00:34 <kjj> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1139081/BitcoinImg/PubKeyToAddr.png
564 2011-08-17 06:01:29 user_ has joined
565 2011-08-17 06:01:33 <lfm> now what does OP_CHECKSIG do when the key has no 04 on it?
566 2011-08-17 06:02:01 <kjj> pretty sure it fails
567 2011-08-17 06:02:08 <theymos> I think that it's just passed to OpenSSL unmodified. I don't know how OpenSSL will process it. Possibly it could be accepted.
568 2011-08-17 06:02:56 <kjj> the sequence 0x04 + 32 bytes + 32 bytes is fed into the hasher. without the 0x04, it'll be a different hash
569 2011-08-17 06:02:57 <theymos> kjj: 1 isn't added. It just happens to always exist there when the version is 0.
570 2011-08-17 06:02:58 <lfm> We should try to figure it out for sure, it could be exploitable ?
571 2011-08-17 06:04:18 nhodges has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
572 2011-08-17 06:04:30 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
573 2011-08-17 06:04:30 ThomasV_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
574 2011-08-17 06:04:31 <theymos> This was part of Kaminsky's slides on Bitcoin problems. Someone can modify public keys in transactions while in transit. This can't cause bitcoins to be stolen, but it creates strange versions of the transaction, which will confuse the sending and receiving client.
575 2011-08-17 06:04:56 <theymos> (This was known before Kaminsky's slides, as well.)
576 2011-08-17 06:05:41 <lfm> and "confused" client might be exploitable!
577 2011-08-17 06:06:01 Rabbit67890 has joined
578 2011-08-17 06:06:06 <theymos> Not in this case. It just won't recognize the transaction as its transaction at all.
579 2011-08-17 06:06:18 <kjj> I'm pretty sure they can only make meaningless modifications, like appending data after the script
580 2011-08-17 06:06:18 nhodges has joined
581 2011-08-17 06:06:59 <theymos> I'm don't know whether leaving out the 04 creates a usable public key. If I had to guess, I'd say that it does not, or else Bitcoin would be doing it to save space.
582 2011-08-17 06:07:36 ThomasV_ has joined
583 2011-08-17 06:07:39 DiabloD3 has joined
584 2011-08-17 06:10:22 zeropointo has joined
585 2011-08-17 06:10:53 <kjj> script.cpp is hard to follow, but I don't see any place where it adds a 0x04 if it is missing
586 2011-08-17 06:11:39 RazielZ has joined
587 2011-08-17 06:12:26 shLONG has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
588 2011-08-17 06:12:40 <lfm> // Hash type is one byte tacked on to the end of the signature
589 2011-08-17 06:13:21 <theymos> Normal transactions don't include a SIGHASH byte, IIRC.
590 2011-08-17 06:13:39 <theymos> Without the byte, it's SIGHASH_ALL.
591 2011-08-17 06:16:01 <kjj> pretty sure that "end" here means the other end
592 2011-08-17 06:16:18 <lfm> kjj littleendian?
593 2011-08-17 06:16:21 ThomasV_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
594 2011-08-17 06:16:26 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Con Kolivas * rcf54f9b850ff cgminer/ (5 files): Move to 256 sized buffers and don't risk overwrite by using only 127 mask.
595 2011-08-17 06:16:37 shawn-p has quit ()
596 2011-08-17 06:19:46 TbbW has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
597 2011-08-17 06:20:32 bawf_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
598 2011-08-17 06:21:13 bawf_ has joined
599 2011-08-17 06:22:36 delson has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
600 2011-08-17 06:23:30 <lfm> I cant find where it'd set or define a nHashType=4
601 2011-08-17 06:24:06 kish has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
602 2011-08-17 06:24:26 black888 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
603 2011-08-17 06:24:29 <kjj> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1139081/BitcoinImg/OpCheckSigDiagram.png
604 2011-08-17 06:24:48 Vladimir has joined
605 2011-08-17 06:24:53 black888 has joined
606 2011-08-17 06:25:01 <kjj> that shows the hashtype appended onto the signature, not at the beginning
607 2011-08-17 06:26:10 <kjj> I'm still pretty sure that the 0x04 at the start of the public key must be present in the transaction or the verify will fail
608 2011-08-17 06:27:26 koleg has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
609 2011-08-17 06:27:41 <Vladimir> bitcoin.org.uk daily roll
610 2011-08-17 06:27:46 <Vladimir> ;;dice 1d68
611 2011-08-17 06:27:46 <gribble> 59
612 2011-08-17 06:27:55 Akinava is now known as away!~lis@babylon.saf-14.ru|Akinava
613 2011-08-17 06:28:01 kish has joined
614 2011-08-17 06:28:50 <Vladimir> user peter won, congratulations
615 2011-08-17 06:30:00 wolfspraul has quit (Quit: leaving)
616 2011-08-17 06:30:29 <lfm> ya step 5 in the diagram shows hashTypeCode = 4
617 2011-08-17 06:31:38 <theymos> That's on a signature, not a public key.
618 2011-08-17 06:32:47 E-sense has quit (Quit: System.exit(0);)
619 2011-08-17 06:36:45 theymos has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
620 2011-08-17 06:41:45 <kjj> I'm out for tonight. been away from C++ for WAY too long to make sense of this without spending a couple of weeks on it
621 2011-08-17 06:42:10 markus_wanner has joined
622 2011-08-17 06:42:38 <lfm> kjj ok, bye
623 2011-08-17 06:42:46 kjj is now known as kjj_AFK
624 2011-08-17 06:42:54 dr_win has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
625 2011-08-17 06:44:13 dr_win has joined
626 2011-08-17 06:45:58 c00w has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
627 2011-08-17 06:46:33 dr_win has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
628 2011-08-17 06:47:45 dr_win has joined
629 2011-08-17 06:54:02 larsivi has joined
630 2011-08-17 06:54:14 bawf_ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
631 2011-08-17 06:55:39 Pinion has quit (Quit: Has quit)
632 2011-08-17 06:57:22 Rabbit67890 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
633 2011-08-17 07:02:23 dr_win has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
634 2011-08-17 07:02:53 zeropointo has quit (Quit: leaving)
635 2011-08-17 07:04:05 gjs278 has joined
636 2011-08-17 07:05:26 dr_win has joined
637 2011-08-17 07:06:31 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Con Kolivas * r5d517729e3a0 cgminer/NEWS: Update news for 1.5.6.
638 2011-08-17 07:06:34 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Con Kolivas * r4060ae37573c cgminer/configure.ac: Bump version number.
639 2011-08-17 07:07:52 dr_win has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
640 2011-08-17 07:09:05 dr_win has joined
641 2011-08-17 07:11:26 dr_win has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
642 2011-08-17 07:13:00 dr_win has joined
643 2011-08-17 07:13:52 dr_win has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
644 2011-08-17 07:14:15 TD has joined
645 2011-08-17 07:15:14 Rabbit67890 has joined
646 2011-08-17 07:15:47 dr_win has joined
647 2011-08-17 07:16:34 dr_win has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
648 2011-08-17 07:20:14 dr_win has joined
649 2011-08-17 07:21:33 dr_win has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
650 2011-08-17 07:21:50 nefario has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
651 2011-08-17 07:23:10 Kolky has quit (Quit: Bye bye!)
652 2011-08-17 07:23:54 hugolp has joined
653 2011-08-17 07:23:59 magn3ts has quit (Quit: Leaving)
654 2011-08-17 07:26:25 Rabbit67890 has quit (Quit: Rabbit67890)
655 2011-08-17 07:30:33 abragin has joined
656 2011-08-17 07:32:05 Vladimir has quit (Quit: Page closed)
657 2011-08-17 07:34:48 zeropointo has joined
658 2011-08-17 07:55:35 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
659 2011-08-17 07:57:15 huk has quit ()
660 2011-08-17 08:03:53 nr9 has joined
661 2011-08-17 08:07:22 ferrouswheel has joined
662 2011-08-17 08:07:34 larsivi has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
663 2011-08-17 08:09:50 mnc has joined
664 2011-08-17 08:10:29 ThomasV_ has joined
665 2011-08-17 08:14:28 RealSolid has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
666 2011-08-17 08:16:44 d1g1t4l has joined
667 2011-08-17 08:17:42 josephcp has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
668 2011-08-17 08:18:33 AlonzoTG has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
669 2011-08-17 08:19:50 Daniel0108 has joined
670 2011-08-17 08:20:05 RealSolid has joined
671 2011-08-17 08:20:40 cronopio has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
672 2011-08-17 08:26:23 cronopio has joined
673 2011-08-17 08:27:57 mrb_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
674 2011-08-17 08:28:29 erus` has joined
675 2011-08-17 08:29:21 fnord0 has joined
676 2011-08-17 08:30:47 AlonzoTG has joined
677 2011-08-17 08:40:57 ThomasV_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
678 2011-08-17 08:43:48 normanrichards has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
679 2011-08-17 08:43:58 normanrichards has joined
680 2011-08-17 08:48:11 Hail_eris has joined
681 2011-08-17 08:48:45 Hail_eris has quit (Client Quit)
682 2011-08-17 08:49:25 josephcp has joined
683 2011-08-17 08:54:06 iddo has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
684 2011-08-17 08:55:02 asuk has joined
685 2011-08-17 08:58:03 shadders has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
686 2011-08-17 08:59:06 ahbritto has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
687 2011-08-17 08:59:09 ahbritto_ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
688 2011-08-17 09:02:49 larsivi has joined
689 2011-08-17 09:06:55 EricJ2190 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
690 2011-08-17 09:06:57 clarkbox has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
691 2011-08-17 09:07:27 EricJ2190 has joined
692 2011-08-17 09:08:33 robblesz has quit (Quit: .)
693 2011-08-17 09:09:45 clarkbox has joined
694 2011-08-17 09:09:50 robblesz has joined
695 2011-08-17 09:10:32 shadders has joined
696 2011-08-17 09:13:40 ahbritto has joined
697 2011-08-17 09:16:09 ahbritto_ has joined
698 2011-08-17 09:17:57 josephcp has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
699 2011-08-17 09:20:35 Phoebus has joined
700 2011-08-17 09:20:47 Cablesaurus has quit (Quit: Don't push the red button!)
701 2011-08-17 09:24:29 black888 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
702 2011-08-17 09:25:20 black888 has joined
703 2011-08-17 09:28:37 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
704 2011-08-17 09:31:43 skeledrew has joined
705 2011-08-17 09:37:43 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
706 2011-08-17 09:38:22 TbbW has joined
707 2011-08-17 09:42:29 skeledrew has joined
708 2011-08-17 09:48:00 molecular has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
709 2011-08-17 09:48:24 molecular has joined
710 2011-08-17 09:50:29 peck has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
711 2011-08-17 09:51:27 <vegard> so I did some calculations on that break-even point
712 2011-08-17 09:52:01 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
713 2011-08-17 09:52:19 skeledrew has joined
714 2011-08-17 09:56:09 <vegard> assuming a price of 10 usd/btc, 50 btc/block reward, 0.5 Ghash/sec/miner, 0.3 kW/miner, and 0.1 usd/kWh, 100,000 miners will reach break even
715 2011-08-17 09:56:35 <vegard> fewer miners and each one will have a net income, more miners and each one will have a net loss
716 2011-08-17 09:57:49 <vegard> that's a hashing rate of 50 Thash/sec
717 2011-08-17 09:57:56 altamic has joined
718 2011-08-17 09:57:58 altamic has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
719 2011-08-17 09:58:43 <vegard> when the block reward drops to 25 btc, that hashing rate drops to 25 THash/sec
720 2011-08-17 09:59:01 <vegard> (not including fees)
721 2011-08-17 09:59:45 <vegard> at the moment we seem to have about 12.5 Ghash/sec
722 2011-08-17 09:59:49 peck has joined
723 2011-08-17 10:00:05 <hugolp> vegard: what level of transactions are you assuming?
724 2011-08-17 10:00:20 <vegard> none. I'm not including fees in the calculations
725 2011-08-17 10:01:37 <vegard> if the average total fees per block is 10, you can just put 60 as the btc/block reward. in that case, the current break-even hashing rate would be 60 Thash/sec
726 2011-08-17 10:01:48 <vegard> (still assuming the same specifications for the miners)
727 2011-08-17 10:02:55 <hugolp> well, the idea is that after the initial period there will be more fees, since there will be more trade in bitcoins. Otherwise, whats the point of the currency?
728 2011-08-17 10:04:17 <mtrlt> currently the fees are still negligible
729 2011-08-17 10:04:49 <vegard> yeah, so if we assume that we are at a break-even point now (it seems to be the case, since difficulty dropped), then sustaining the hashing rate when the block reward goes to 25 will require the average fee per block to rise by 25 btc
730 2011-08-17 10:05:23 erus` has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
731 2011-08-17 10:06:17 <vegard> sorry, not rise by 25 btc. rise by (25 - whatever the average fee per block is now)
732 2011-08-17 10:06:29 <mtrlt> naturally.
733 2011-08-17 10:07:04 <vegard> you think that will come from an increase in the number of transactions or an increase in the fee per transaction?
734 2011-08-17 10:08:03 <mtrlt> i think hashrate will drop
735 2011-08-17 10:12:32 raijin_ has joined
736 2011-08-17 10:12:51 raijin has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
737 2011-08-17 10:14:39 <gjs278> ;;bc,stats
738 2011-08-17 10:14:41 <gribble> Current Blocks: 141322 | Current Difficulty: 1805700.8361937 | Next Difficulty At Block: 143135 | Next Difficulty In: 1813 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 5 days, 19 hours, 42 minutes, and 23 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1783027.26943379
739 2011-08-17 10:16:41 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
740 2011-08-17 10:26:30 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Znort 987 * rf66dec74e62a cgminer/main.c: Fix a crash with --algo auto
741 2011-08-17 10:26:31 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Con Kolivas * r2e0ecb647569 cgminer/main.c: Merge pull request #35 from znort987/fix-autocpu-crash
742 2011-08-17 10:31:52 gjs278 has joined
743 2011-08-17 10:32:21 Lopuz has joined
744 2011-08-17 10:38:40 yorick has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
745 2011-08-17 10:46:57 raijin_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
746 2011-08-17 10:47:20 raijin_ has joined
747 2011-08-17 10:47:20 sacredchao has joined
748 2011-08-17 10:49:04 sacredchao has left ()
749 2011-08-17 10:50:07 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
750 2011-08-17 10:50:35 zeropointo has quit (Quit: leaving)
751 2011-08-17 10:53:08 gjs278 has joined
752 2011-08-17 10:53:23 zeropointo has joined
753 2011-08-17 10:53:48 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
754 2011-08-17 10:58:26 <vegard> mtrlt: right :)
755 2011-08-17 11:01:52 MetaVolutioN has joined
756 2011-08-17 11:05:44 josephcp has joined
757 2011-08-17 11:06:01 SISUbtcX has joined
758 2011-08-17 11:06:06 denisx has joined
759 2011-08-17 11:06:27 grondilu has joined
760 2011-08-17 11:07:42 <grondilu> Weird: the balance doesn't seem to match the received-sent transactions. Should I do a "rescan" or something?
761 2011-08-17 11:08:27 <grondilu> or maybe it's because I haven't downloaded all blocks yet.
762 2011-08-17 11:09:43 <grondilu> well, nevermind
763 2011-08-17 11:09:46 grondilu has quit (Client Quit)
764 2011-08-17 11:13:42 yorick has joined
765 2011-08-17 11:15:18 iddo has joined
766 2011-08-17 11:17:50 gjs278 has joined
767 2011-08-17 11:18:26 Burgundy has joined
768 2011-08-17 11:24:29 hugolp has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.1.1 Equilibrium http://www.kvirc.net/)
769 2011-08-17 11:26:40 zeropointo has quit (Quit: leaving)
770 2011-08-17 11:37:15 tower has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
771 2011-08-17 11:39:58 erus` has joined
772 2011-08-17 11:56:27 KenArmitt has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
773 2011-08-17 11:57:35 larsivi has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
774 2011-08-17 12:03:58 Clipse has joined
775 2011-08-17 12:08:48 Sedra has quit (Quit: ( IRC :: Quit ))
776 2011-08-17 12:08:55 larsivi has joined
777 2011-08-17 12:14:35 ThomasV has left ("Leaving")
778 2011-08-17 12:14:44 vigilyn has quit (Quit: Leaving)
779 2011-08-17 12:16:23 Sedra has joined
780 2011-08-17 12:19:43 wardearia has joined
781 2011-08-17 12:22:43 vigilyn has joined
782 2011-08-17 12:28:38 Akinava is now known as Akinava|away
783 2011-08-17 12:29:43 <vegard> mtrlt: and that's bad.
784 2011-08-17 12:30:39 kish has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
785 2011-08-17 12:31:13 <mtrlt> well, it's because satoshi decided that the network will suddenly reduce the reward by 50%
786 2011-08-17 12:31:36 <mtrlt> instead of the reward being continuously reduced
787 2011-08-17 12:31:40 kish has joined
788 2011-08-17 12:33:19 Incitatus has joined
789 2011-08-17 12:34:19 b4epoche has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
790 2011-08-17 12:34:19 b4_away is now known as b4epoche
791 2011-08-17 12:37:48 blishchrot has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
792 2011-08-17 12:37:56 <UukGoblin> it won't matter in the long term ;-]
793 2011-08-17 12:38:10 <mtrlt> :P
794 2011-08-17 12:38:16 <mtrlt> yea, in 150 years
795 2011-08-17 12:38:26 <mtrlt> or, more likely in a decade
796 2011-08-17 12:38:34 <UukGoblin> yup
797 2011-08-17 12:39:12 normanrichards has quit (Quit: normanrichards)
798 2011-08-17 12:39:48 <UukGoblin> sipa's graphs are b0rken :-<
799 2011-08-17 12:40:05 <mtrlt> :(
800 2011-08-17 12:40:29 <UukGoblin> they seem to stop on Monday morning
801 2011-08-17 12:41:49 KenArmitt has joined
802 2011-08-17 12:42:10 <UukGoblin> ;;bc,stats
803 2011-08-17 12:42:13 <gribble> Current Blocks: 141332 | Current Difficulty: 1805700.8361937 | Next Difficulty At Block: 143135 | Next Difficulty In: 1803 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 6 days, 0 hours, 31 minutes, and 12 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1743204.48393295
804 2011-08-17 12:42:43 <UukGoblin> further drops \o/
805 2011-08-17 12:46:17 b4epoche_ has joined
806 2011-08-17 12:46:29 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Con Kolivas * r3edc1dfe2aad cgminer/util.c: Test at appropriate target difficulty now.
807 2011-08-17 12:52:19 <vegard> what about the short term?
808 2011-08-17 12:53:28 <mtrlt> it will matter somewhat.
809 2011-08-17 12:54:37 <vegard> I'm sorry for harping on this. but I think it's an important point that people should be aware of
810 2011-08-17 12:55:13 <vegard> and I'm not sure how obvious it is. it wasn't obvious to me
811 2011-08-17 12:56:13 <mtrlt> we'll see when it's time
812 2011-08-17 12:56:17 <mtrlt> what happen.
813 2011-08-17 12:58:57 <vegard> that's like betting
814 2011-08-17 12:59:58 <UukGoblin> vegard, what's the problem with it anyway?
815 2011-08-17 13:00:19 <mtrlt> mining reward is suddenly reduced 50%.
816 2011-08-17 13:00:24 <UukGoblin> yes, and?
817 2011-08-17 13:00:36 <mtrlt> it will cause a significant drop in hashrate
818 2011-08-17 13:00:51 <mtrlt> dunno what's the problem there :P
819 2011-08-17 13:00:54 <UukGoblin> or increase in price
820 2011-08-17 13:00:59 <UukGoblin> or both
821 2011-08-17 13:01:01 <mtrlt> no increase in price
822 2011-08-17 13:01:17 <UukGoblin> more scarcity = higher price
823 2011-08-17 13:01:19 <mtrlt> no
824 2011-08-17 13:01:22 <vegard> the problem with difficulty going down is that it makes the block chain vulnerable
825 2011-08-17 13:01:31 <mtrlt> diff follows from price
826 2011-08-17 13:01:34 <mtrlt> not the other way around
827 2011-08-17 13:01:45 <vegard> I tend to agree with mtrlt
828 2011-08-17 13:02:42 <UukGoblin> well, strictly speaking, the two aren't exactly very correlated
829 2011-08-17 13:03:19 <mtrlt> they are.
830 2011-08-17 13:03:37 <mtrlt> look at what happened to diff when the price went to $30
831 2011-08-17 13:03:44 <UukGoblin> I agree this will probably cause more chaos than a gradual decline in reward, but after tx fees properly kick in, this won't be much of a problem
832 2011-08-17 13:03:47 <mtrlt> and what's happening now when the price went down
833 2011-08-17 13:04:01 <TuxBlackEdo> ;;bc,diffchage
834 2011-08-17 13:04:02 <gribble> Error: "bc,diffchage" is not a valid command.
835 2011-08-17 13:04:05 <TuxBlackEdo> ;;bc,diffchange
836 2011-08-17 13:04:05 <gribble> -3.93094536754 % estimated difficulty change this period
837 2011-08-17 13:04:13 <UukGoblin> mtrlt, they're not proportional at all
838 2011-08-17 13:04:26 <mtrlt> not?
839 2011-08-17 13:04:37 <mtrlt> http://bitcoin.atspace.com/income.html old graph but look at it.
840 2011-08-17 13:04:48 <mtrlt> btw i wanna have an updated version of that :p
841 2011-08-17 13:05:30 <mtrlt> and of course it takes time for people to buy new rigs when the price goes up
842 2011-08-17 13:05:47 <mtrlt> and mining is still profitable for most, so the diff isn't going that much down.
843 2011-08-17 13:05:52 <TuxBlackEdo> does bitcoin always try to send coins in such a way that no fees have to be paid, unless there is no way to send a transaction for free?
844 2011-08-17 13:06:04 <UukGoblin> TuxBlackEdo, no
845 2011-08-17 13:06:10 <mtrlt> you can always send a transaction for free
846 2011-08-17 13:06:17 <mtrlt> it might just take a lot of time before it gets into a block
847 2011-08-17 13:06:33 <vegard> UukGoblin: increased fees mean an increased number of miners at the break-even point
848 2011-08-17 13:06:52 <vegard> this helps secure the block chain
849 2011-08-17 13:07:00 <UukGoblin> mtrlt, I think what TuxBlackEdo is asking is: given a standard transaction fee (i.e. 0.0001 per kb above certain threshold), will bitcoin try to arrange your wallet in a way to minimize the requirement for fees
850 2011-08-17 13:07:09 <TuxBlackEdo> right
851 2011-08-17 13:07:43 <UukGoblin> i.e. send two smaller transactions instead of one big
852 2011-08-17 13:08:03 <UukGoblin> or wait until your coins mature to get a higher priority
853 2011-08-17 13:08:52 <mtrlt> don't the coins mature anyway independent of whether the tx has been sent or not.
854 2011-08-17 13:09:12 cosurgi has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
855 2011-08-17 13:09:33 <UukGoblin> I'm not sure when priority is calculated
856 2011-08-17 13:09:48 <UukGoblin> but you might be right there...
857 2011-08-17 13:10:11 <TuxBlackEdo> if i ever age the coins it doesnt ask me a fee
858 2011-08-17 13:10:14 <mtrlt> if they don't, the system is bonkers
859 2011-08-17 13:10:15 <UukGoblin> I did have a case when sending a transaction returned that a fee is required... I waited 24hrs and the fee suddenly wasn't required anymore...
860 2011-08-17 13:10:35 <mtrlt> TuxBlackEdo: well, that's just because the client itself forces fees in some situations
861 2011-08-17 13:10:42 ThomasV has joined
862 2011-08-17 13:10:42 <mtrlt> the network does not
863 2011-08-17 13:10:56 <UukGoblin> well, the network consists of clietns
864 2011-08-17 13:11:26 <UukGoblin> assuming all clients require the same fees, the client could keep a wallet in such a way as to minimize the fees
865 2011-08-17 13:11:35 normanrichards has joined
866 2011-08-17 13:11:57 larsivi has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
867 2011-08-17 13:12:00 <UukGoblin> e.g. rather than having 50, 50, 50, 50 inputs in the wallet, the client would merge two 50s into a 100, and split one 50 into 25s, and 1 25 into 12.5s
868 2011-08-17 13:12:25 <makomk> nanotube: I'm guessing ArtForz was doing pooled mining because block propagation delays were a real killer on I0Coin...
869 2011-08-17 13:12:26 <UukGoblin> or whatever, depending on what size of the transaction the user is more likely to send
870 2011-08-17 13:14:26 stasis has joined
871 2011-08-17 13:14:43 asher^ has joined
872 2011-08-17 13:20:50 cronopio_ has joined
873 2011-08-17 13:21:31 TheAncientGoat has joined
874 2011-08-17 13:22:17 tcoppi has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
875 2011-08-17 13:22:41 Optimo_ has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
876 2011-08-17 13:23:35 minimoose has joined
877 2011-08-17 13:23:51 <epscy> ;;bc,stats
878 2011-08-17 13:23:53 <gribble> Current Blocks: 141337 | Current Difficulty: 1805700.8361937 | Next Difficulty At Block: 143135 | Next Difficulty In: 1798 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 5 days, 22 hours, 9 minutes, and 18 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1753837.64533232
879 2011-08-17 13:23:56 cronopio has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
880 2011-08-17 13:25:44 tcoppi has joined
881 2011-08-17 13:30:01 Superbest has joined
882 2011-08-17 13:30:05 <luke-jr> nanotube: ugly:P
883 2011-08-17 13:30:50 Xunie has joined
884 2011-08-17 13:32:55 Optimo_ has joined
885 2011-08-17 13:35:23 stasis has quit (Quit: leaving)
886 2011-08-17 13:38:00 gavinandresen has joined
887 2011-08-17 13:41:01 stasis has joined
888 2011-08-17 13:43:01 <nanotube> luke-jr: what's ugly?
889 2011-08-17 13:43:14 <luke-jr> nanotube: -ratings
890 2011-08-17 13:43:49 <nanotube> ugly how? lack of funky colors? :)
891 2011-08-17 13:43:55 peter345978 has left ()
892 2011-08-17 13:44:41 b4epoche_ has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
893 2011-08-17 13:49:38 <luke-jr> yeah, and abuse of >
894 2011-08-17 13:49:58 <nanotube> abuse?
895 2011-08-17 13:50:10 <nanotube> heh guess you'd rather see some fancy unicode arrows eh? :)
896 2011-08-17 13:50:11 Stellar has joined
897 2011-08-17 13:50:15 Stellar has quit (Client Quit)
898 2011-08-17 13:51:16 <UukGoblin> are the ratings in tonal? ;-]
899 2011-08-17 13:53:50 gp5st has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
900 2011-08-17 13:55:16 cosurgi has joined
901 2011-08-17 13:55:20 stasis has left ()
902 2011-08-17 13:58:07 <luke-jr> nanotube: if it were an arrow, it's pointing the wrong direction :P
903 2011-08-17 14:06:11 citiz3n has joined
904 2011-08-17 14:06:38 b4epoche has quit (Quit: Textual IRC Client: http://www.textualapp.com/)
905 2011-08-17 14:07:16 tower has joined
906 2011-08-17 14:08:49 b4epoche has joined
907 2011-08-17 14:09:00 gp5st has joined
908 2011-08-17 14:12:24 b4epoche_ has joined
909 2011-08-17 14:13:00 Clipse has quit (Quit: Clipse)
910 2011-08-17 14:14:27 cronopio_ has quit (Quit: leaving)
911 2011-08-17 14:15:07 b4epoche has quit (Quit: Textual IRC Client: http://www.textualapp.com/)
912 2011-08-17 14:15:07 b4epoche_ is now known as b4epoche
913 2011-08-17 14:15:10 KenArmitt has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
914 2011-08-17 14:15:43 cronopio has joined
915 2011-08-17 14:17:27 Mahkul_away has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
916 2011-08-17 14:17:36 KenArmitt has joined
917 2011-08-17 14:20:47 Mahkul_away has joined
918 2011-08-17 14:21:48 The_SLain_MAn has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
919 2011-08-17 14:23:41 <nanotube> luke-jr: why wrong direction? it's a rating from user on left to user on right...
920 2011-08-17 14:23:49 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Leaving)
921 2011-08-17 14:25:52 <luke-jr> [08:42:27] <gribble> New rating | chridi > 1 > phlogiston | smooth transaction
922 2011-08-17 14:26:00 <luke-jr> I guess it's the double arrow that's ugly
923 2011-08-17 14:26:16 <luke-jr> I'd do --( 1 )--> or smth :P
924 2011-08-17 14:26:34 <luke-jr> well, I'd do the coloured style I mentioned the other day
925 2011-08-17 14:26:38 <luke-jr> I mean if I were to use ASCII
926 2011-08-17 14:29:39 eastender has joined
927 2011-08-17 14:30:03 ThomasV has joined
928 2011-08-17 14:35:13 <nanotube> heh
929 2011-08-17 14:35:56 Clipse has joined
930 2011-08-17 14:37:45 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Gavin Andresen master * rc728611 / src/main.cpp : Remove unused ScanMessageStart function - http://bit.ly/q9W1Ai
931 2011-08-17 14:37:46 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Gavin Andresen master * r865ed8a / (src/net.h src/util.cpp src/util.h): Compile with DEBUG_LOCKORDER to detect inconsistent lock orderings that can cause deadlocks - http://bit.ly/oda9gR
932 2011-08-17 14:38:19 d1g1t4l has quit (Quit: Leaving)
933 2011-08-17 14:38:29 d1g1t4l has joined
934 2011-08-17 14:38:45 copumpkin has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
935 2011-08-17 14:39:11 copumpkin has joined
936 2011-08-17 14:40:08 imsaguy2 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
937 2011-08-17 14:40:36 wolfspraul has joined
938 2011-08-17 14:42:02 imsaguy2 has joined
939 2011-08-17 14:42:23 stasis has joined
940 2011-08-17 14:42:41 brooss has quit (Quit: Rage Quit)
941 2011-08-17 14:43:00 luke-jr_ has joined
942 2011-08-17 14:43:53 luke-jr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
943 2011-08-17 14:45:38 tcoppi has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
944 2011-08-17 14:51:39 tcoppi has joined
945 2011-08-17 14:57:03 devon_hillard has joined
946 2011-08-17 14:57:03 devon_hillard has quit (Changing host)
947 2011-08-17 14:57:03 devon_hillard has joined
948 2011-08-17 14:58:08 eastender has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
949 2011-08-17 15:03:29 TD has joined
950 2011-08-17 15:04:18 tcoppi has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
951 2011-08-17 15:06:14 pecket has joined
952 2011-08-17 15:06:38 peck has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
953 2011-08-17 15:08:01 stasis has left ()
954 2011-08-17 15:11:23 <b4epoche> what is the precise timing of the change in mining rewards relative to the following change in difficulty?
955 2011-08-17 15:12:26 <edcba> ?
956 2011-08-17 15:12:27 <JFK911> 1 block
957 2011-08-17 15:13:38 <b4epoche> at the end of this year (midnight 12/31? what tz?) the mining reward will drop in half, correct?
958 2011-08-17 15:13:52 <jtaylor> no after block 210.000
959 2011-08-17 15:14:06 <b4epoche> oh, it's a block count
960 2011-08-17 15:14:44 <edcba> yes block count is loosely based on time
961 2011-08-17 15:14:50 <b4epoche> sure
962 2011-08-17 15:15:03 <edcba> but you don't base anything on time
963 2011-08-17 15:15:11 <edcba> except block generation
964 2011-08-17 15:15:31 <edcba> hmm i don't know about tx
965 2011-08-17 15:15:43 <edcba> dunno if they are checked against time
966 2011-08-17 15:15:49 <b4epoche> so 2016 blocks between difficulty updates
967 2011-08-17 15:16:35 <b4epoche> so 210,000/2016 = 104.167
968 2011-08-17 15:16:59 <b4epoche> that's a little troubling if the dynamics plays out like one might expect
969 2011-08-17 15:19:21 <mtrlt> what do you mean?
970 2011-08-17 15:19:39 <b4epoche> well, there seems like there might be a negative feedback mechanism
971 2011-08-17 15:19:42 <jtaylor> if to many miner jump ship, one will ahve a few weeks of lower block creation frequency
972 2011-08-17 15:19:46 <jtaylor> just like namecoin
973 2011-08-17 15:19:51 <jtaylor> but probably less severe
974 2011-08-17 15:20:42 tcoppi has joined
975 2011-08-17 15:20:47 <b4epoche> so 336 blocks into a difficulty the reward changes
976 2011-08-17 15:21:21 delson has joined
977 2011-08-17 15:21:22 <b4epoche> so 1680 blocks need to be mined before a difficulty change
978 2011-08-17 15:21:27 tcoppi has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
979 2011-08-17 15:21:50 <b4epoche> what do people expect the fall off in hash rate to be?
980 2011-08-17 15:22:07 shLONG has joined
981 2011-08-17 15:22:31 <b4epoche> I'd say like 50% considering that it will probably be run up before the change
982 2011-08-17 15:22:35 <luke-jr_> ;;bc,stats
983 2011-08-17 15:22:37 <gribble> Current Blocks: 141345 | Current Difficulty: 1805700.8361937 | Next Difficulty At Block: 143135 | Next Difficulty In: 1790 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 6 days, 1 hour, 44 minutes, and 50 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1723275.93320648
984 2011-08-17 15:22:40 <jtaylor> depends on many factors
985 2011-08-17 15:22:46 AlonzoTG has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
986 2011-08-17 15:22:53 <b4epoche> although maybe not, considering mining rig owners still have the equipment
987 2011-08-17 15:22:54 <luke-jr_> IMO, it would make sense if the difficulty automatically divided itself in half when the reward halves
988 2011-08-17 15:23:01 <b4epoche> luke-jr_: ++
989 2011-08-17 15:23:18 <luke-jr_> or better yet, fix Bitcoin so it can handle big drops
990 2011-08-17 15:23:37 <jtaylor> the latter makes more sense to me
991 2011-08-17 15:23:48 <b4epoche> luke-jr_: have you ever looked at the distribution of mining rates in your pool?
992 2011-08-17 15:23:57 <jtaylor> I don't understand why there is no maximum period after which the difficulty will always adapt
993 2011-08-17 15:23:58 altamic has joined
994 2011-08-17 15:24:05 altamic has quit (Client Quit)
995 2011-08-17 15:24:07 <b4epoche> how many are big miners and how many are single GPU types?
996 2011-08-17 15:24:18 <kjj_AFK> there easily could be, and we have like 15 months or so to decide on a way to handle it
997 2011-08-17 15:24:27 kjj_AFK is now known as kjj
998 2011-08-17 15:25:00 Clipse has quit (Quit: Clipse)
999 2011-08-17 15:25:01 <b4epoche> my expectation is that more than half the hash power is in the single GPU (i.e. fickle) miners
1000 2011-08-17 15:25:42 tcoppi has joined
1001 2011-08-17 15:25:47 <lfm> the big miners will drop out too as soon as it doesn't pay
1002 2011-08-17 15:25:54 <kjj> if you look at dollars though, the block subsidy has already fallen by 66% from the $30 peak, and it didn't cause a mining exodus
1003 2011-08-17 15:26:03 <b4epoche> but I think the biggies will drop out slower
1004 2011-08-17 15:26:11 <b4epoche> they've already invested in the equipment
1005 2011-08-17 15:26:12 <luke-jr_> b4epoche: http://eligius.st/~artefact2/contrib
1006 2011-08-17 15:26:38 <b4epoche> kjj: because it still pays (just not as well)
1007 2011-08-17 15:26:45 <b4epoche> is 15 months correct?
1008 2011-08-17 15:26:46 shLONG has quit (Client Quit)
1009 2011-08-17 15:26:50 Clipse has joined
1010 2011-08-17 15:26:51 <luke-jr_> kjj: it never went *up* to the $30 peak
1011 2011-08-17 15:27:22 <b4epoche> I guess so.
1012 2011-08-17 15:27:34 <b4epoche> why were people talking end of the year yesterday?
1013 2011-08-17 15:27:35 pecket has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1014 2011-08-17 15:28:26 <b4epoche> luke-jr_: yep, a very long tail
1015 2011-08-17 15:28:38 <b4epoche> and a bug in your bar graph at the end ;-)
1016 2011-08-17 15:29:06 Phoebus has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1017 2011-08-17 15:29:07 <kjj> because people are bad at math. 68,000 blocks is (roughly) 476 days
1018 2011-08-17 15:29:30 Phoebus has joined
1019 2011-08-17 15:29:31 <b4epoche> kjj: and I didn't check for myself
1020 2011-08-17 15:29:55 <b4epoche> but here's the doomsday scenario:
1021 2011-08-17 15:30:02 <luke-jr_> b4epoche: not mine
1022 2011-08-17 15:30:11 <kjj> but I'm not comfortable predicting the exchange rate for tomorrow, much less a year or more out
1023 2011-08-17 15:30:37 <b4epoche> kjj: yea but I'm not sure it really depends much on exchange rate
1024 2011-08-17 15:30:55 <imsaguy2> luke-jr_, you should come in #bitcoin and put down some smack
1025 2011-08-17 15:31:33 luke-jr_ is now known as luke-jr
1026 2011-08-17 15:32:20 <kjj> ouch. I was there for like 10 seconds and my head already hurts
1027 2011-08-17 15:32:30 <b4epoche> say hash rate drops by 50%, that means reward rate actually drops to one fourth of what it was
1028 2011-08-17 15:32:49 <b4epoche> luke-jr: not your what? bug?
1029 2011-08-17 15:33:08 <kjj> if the hash rate drops at the same time as the subsidy change, then yes
1030 2011-08-17 15:33:24 peck has joined
1031 2011-08-17 15:33:36 <b4epoche> well, they're independent of course⦠just trying to use round numbers
1032 2011-08-17 15:33:48 <kjj> but everyone can see the subsidy change coming. it is at a known block number, so no one will be surprised by it
1033 2011-08-17 15:34:29 <kjj> I expect marginal miners to pull out gradually in advance of that, unlike the true believers
1034 2011-08-17 15:34:35 <b4epoche> so reward rate is now a quarter of what it was, more miners drop out⦠repeat until oblivion and inevitable armageddon ;-)
1035 2011-08-17 15:34:50 <b4epoche> kjj: that's part of the problem
1036 2011-08-17 15:34:59 <jtaylor> some miners will sta what
1037 2011-08-17 15:35:01 <lfm> I'd expect marginal miners to drop out after that
1038 2011-08-17 15:35:08 <b4epoche> I would expect hash rate to rise before change
1039 2011-08-17 15:35:16 <jtaylor> stay no matter what
1040 2011-08-17 15:35:38 <lfm> ya, miners with free power would still stay
1041 2011-08-17 15:35:40 <b4epoche> jtaylor: that's why I was asking about the breakdown of miner hash rate from luke-jr
1042 2011-08-17 15:36:08 <b4epoche> I think the big boys will stay⦠they have the rig
1043 2011-08-17 15:36:33 <kjj> my 2 gigahashes per second will remain until the cards die of old age
1044 2011-08-17 15:36:33 shLONG has joined
1045 2011-08-17 15:36:35 <b4epoche> and I wouldn't expect the exchange rate to fall below the cost to mine
1046 2011-08-17 15:36:40 TD has quit (Read error: No route to host)
1047 2011-08-17 15:36:43 <shLONG> hey
1048 2011-08-17 15:36:43 <lfm> the big boys are the ones who know if theyre making money or not and will drop out as soon as they're not
1049 2011-08-17 15:36:43 Rabbit67890 has joined
1050 2011-08-17 15:36:56 <b4epoche> lfm^^
1051 2011-08-17 15:37:08 TD has joined
1052 2011-08-17 15:37:37 <b4epoche> but there's an extremely long tail (see http://eligius.st/~artefact2/contrib)
1053 2011-08-17 15:38:12 <shLONG> whats that contributors for?
1054 2011-08-17 15:38:12 <lfm> a disproportional number of big boys mine for themselves, not for pools
1055 2011-08-17 15:38:39 <b4epoche> yea, that's true⦠and will certainly help.
1056 2011-08-17 15:38:46 <b4epoche> anyone have stats on that?
1057 2011-08-17 15:38:59 <b4epoche> I suppose we could figure it out, but...
1058 2011-08-17 15:39:10 Rabbit67890 has quit (Client Quit)
1059 2011-08-17 15:39:10 <lfm> hard to get data on that
1060 2011-08-17 15:39:32 <b4epoche> not hard to estimate though⦠given that a few pools dominate
1061 2011-08-17 15:40:18 <iddo> if $10 is a little more than production cost now, couldn't all the miners stay when the rewards becomes 25 by simply demanding $20+ when they sell?
1062 2011-08-17 15:40:27 <b4epoche> I just don't like the negative feedback mechanism that seems to be there
1063 2011-08-17 15:40:28 <luke-jr> am I calculating network hashrate wrong?
1064 2011-08-17 15:40:29 nhodges has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1065 2011-08-17 15:40:43 <luke-jr> almost 8k TH/s?
1066 2011-08-17 15:41:14 <[Tycho]> ;;bc,gen 200000
1067 2011-08-17 15:41:15 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 200000 Khps, given current difficulty of 1805700.8361937 , is 0.111405871939 BTC per day and 0.00464191133079 BTC per hour.
1068 2011-08-17 15:41:17 <lfm> ;;bc,nethash
1069 2011-08-17 15:41:17 <b4epoche> iddo: that's the other fun dynamic that will come into play
1070 2011-08-17 15:41:20 <[Tycho]> ;;bc,cakc 200000
1071 2011-08-17 15:41:21 <gribble> 12496.21706630554
1072 2011-08-17 15:41:21 <gribble> Error: "bc,cakc" is not a valid command.
1073 2011-08-17 15:41:22 <[Tycho]> ;;bc,calc 200000
1074 2011-08-17 15:41:23 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 200000 Khps, given current difficulty of 1805700.8361937 , is 1 year, 11 weeks, 6 days, 19 hours, 25 minutes, and 30 seconds
1075 2011-08-17 15:41:35 <luke-jr> or maybe 13 TH
1076 2011-08-17 15:41:39 <lfm> ;;bc,nethash
1077 2011-08-17 15:41:40 <gribble> 12496.21706630554
1078 2011-08-17 15:41:49 <lfm> 12.4 th/s
1079 2011-08-17 15:41:56 <lfm> 12.5
1080 2011-08-17 15:42:08 zapnap has joined
1081 2011-08-17 15:42:13 zapnap has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1082 2011-08-17 15:42:30 zapnap has joined
1083 2011-08-17 15:42:45 <lfm> ;;calc 12496217
1084 2011-08-17 15:42:47 <kjj> I don't see negative feedback in the system
1085 2011-08-17 15:43:01 <gribble> ...
1086 2011-08-17 15:43:06 <lfm> ;;bc,calc 12496217
1087 2011-08-17 15:43:07 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 12496217 Khps, given current difficulty of 1805700.8361937 , is 1 week, 0 days, 4 hours, 23 minutes, and 41 seconds
1088 2011-08-17 15:43:24 <lfm> ;;bc,calc 12496217066
1089 2011-08-17 15:43:54 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 12496217066 Khps, given current difficulty of 1805700.8361937 , is 10 minutes and 20 seconds
1090 2011-08-17 15:44:47 <b4epoche> kjj: not in general, no
1091 2011-08-17 15:45:15 erle- has joined
1092 2011-08-17 15:45:39 <epscy> jtaylor: I may be wrong about this, but I don't think the bitcoin network actually has a concept of time periods other than how many blocks have been mined
1093 2011-08-17 15:45:45 <b4epoche> but⦠(commercial interruption: Screaming Monkey with Woot Cape - $1.99)
1094 2011-08-17 15:46:07 <jtaylor> epscy: i0coin has a max difficulty period
1095 2011-08-17 15:46:37 <shLONG> http://coderrr.wordpress.com/2011/06/30/patching-the-bitcoin-client-to-make-it-more-anonymous/
1096 2011-08-17 15:46:41 <b4epoche> but, I think there is a negative feedback mechanism for the time between reward change and the following difficulty change
1097 2011-08-17 15:46:50 <shLONG> Whi is the bitcoin wallet lagging behind??
1098 2011-08-17 15:46:54 <lfm> epscy: it uses the time rather loosle to calculate a new difficulty
1099 2011-08-17 15:46:54 <b4epoche> but there seems to be plenty of time to fix it
1100 2011-08-17 15:46:58 <epscy> jtaylor: do you know how it is implemented?, the site isn't loading for me
1101 2011-08-17 15:47:09 <epscy> lfm: ahh thanks
1102 2011-08-17 15:47:41 <epscy> still seems a bit messy, the bitcoin way may not be perfect but it is more elegant
1103 2011-08-17 15:47:50 * b4epoche thinks that difficulty should be a moving average and change daily (or hourly)
1104 2011-08-17 15:47:52 <epscy> i don't really see this as a problem though
1105 2011-08-17 15:48:04 * b4epoche also hasn't really thought about the ramifications of that
1106 2011-08-17 15:48:14 <kjj> b4epoche: the problem is in network splits
1107 2011-08-17 15:48:22 <lfm> epscy plus or minus an hour (per 2016 blocks) is nto very significant
1108 2011-08-17 15:48:46 <epscy> lfm: are you talking about i0coin or bitcoin?
1109 2011-08-17 15:49:14 <lfm> I dont know what iocoin is/does
1110 2011-08-17 15:49:26 <epscy> lfm: presumably if the difficultly was very high and everyone stopped mining except me on my cpu, it would take a long time to reach 2016 blocks?
1111 2011-08-17 15:49:37 <lfm> epscy: yes
1112 2011-08-17 15:50:01 <noagendamarket> it retargets after 2 weeks or 2016
1113 2011-08-17 15:50:02 <epscy> so in that sense the network doesn't neccessarily know the time accurately
1114 2011-08-17 15:50:06 <lfm> fortunatly that is rather unlikely
1115 2011-08-17 15:50:25 <epscy> oh how does the network know two weeks have gone by?
1116 2011-08-17 15:50:35 <b4epoche> see, fall in reward -> fall in hash rate -> further fall in reward rate -> fall in hash rate -> repeat
1117 2011-08-17 15:50:37 <lfm> it knows and will adjust AFTER 2016 blocks
1118 2011-08-17 15:50:47 <kjj> epscy: that part is easy, the hard part is agreement between the nodes on the passage of time
1119 2011-08-17 15:51:03 <epscy> kjj: yeah that is what i mean by the network
1120 2011-08-17 15:51:17 <lfm> b4epoche: and difficulty falls -> more miners find it prifitable
1121 2011-08-17 15:51:21 <kjj> anyhow, I'm out. got to drive a 5 hour round-trip for what I suspect will be a 90 minute meeting. :(
1122 2011-08-17 15:51:42 <epscy> so how does bitcoin work at the moment?, just after ever 2016 blocks? or does it automatically retarget every two weeks as well?
1123 2011-08-17 15:51:59 <lfm> epscy: just 2016 blocks
1124 2011-08-17 15:52:05 <b4epoche> lfm: but that's after two week
1125 2011-08-17 15:52:08 <b4epoche> almost
1126 2011-08-17 15:52:11 <epscy> lfm: thanks, as i thought
1127 2011-08-17 15:52:25 <b4epoche> the reward rate falls not long after a difficulty change
1128 2011-08-17 15:52:49 kjj is now known as kjj_AFK
1129 2011-08-17 15:53:19 <b4epoche> lfm: it's not a long term negative feedback situation, but a short term one
1130 2011-08-17 15:53:32 <lfm> the problem has been seen on testnet, if too much mining power drops out suddenly, it can take months or years to get to the next difficulty adjustment
1131 2011-08-17 15:53:54 <b4epoche> yep
1132 2011-08-17 15:54:00 <epscy> i think what people are worried about is the network getting stuck with a high difficulty, all the big miners leaving and then no new blocks being created for a very long period
1133 2011-08-17 15:54:08 dr_win has joined
1134 2011-08-17 15:54:12 <b4epoche> yep again
1135 2011-08-17 15:54:24 <b4epoche> and I think the reward change will be a test of that
1136 2011-08-17 15:54:30 <lfm> ya thats what they worry about. I wont worry till I see it happen
1137 2011-08-17 15:54:57 <b4epoche> I suppose the network could just be rebooted
1138 2011-08-17 15:55:12 <b4epoche> but at what difficulty rate
1139 2011-08-17 15:55:19 <lfm> well if you wanna throw away all the old bitcoins
1140 2011-08-17 15:55:20 * b4epoche can imagine the arguments over that
1141 2011-08-17 15:55:44 <b4epoche> lfm: it's actually not the big miners I worry about
1142 2011-08-17 15:56:04 pickett has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1143 2011-08-17 15:56:05 <b4epoche> they have the hardware (and I don't suppose it can be used for much else)
1144 2011-08-17 15:56:08 <epscy> i think this is only a problem if bitcoins aren't valued very highly
1145 2011-08-17 15:56:29 <lfm> GPUs can be resold pretty easily
1146 2011-08-17 15:56:31 <b4epoche> and I can't imagine the exchange rate dropping enough to make the marginal cost to mine unprofitable
1147 2011-08-17 15:56:33 <epscy> and by very highly i mean less than a couple of dollars
1148 2011-08-17 15:57:26 <b4epoche> maybe there's enough damping in the system of people just being to lazy to shut down their miners that the transition will be smooth
1149 2011-08-17 15:57:56 <lfm> there is a lot of variation in the costs of power also
1150 2011-08-17 15:58:07 <epscy> b4epoche: it seems to me unlikely that all the big miners would shut down at exactly the same time
1151 2011-08-17 15:58:15 <epscy> even accounting for the drop in reward
1152 2011-08-17 15:59:02 <noagendamarket> what do people think about the trojan that uses gpu to mine for btc ?
1153 2011-08-17 15:59:16 pickett has joined
1154 2011-08-17 15:59:20 <epscy> i didn't think that was news
1155 2011-08-17 15:59:22 <edcba> ;;bc,mtgox
1156 2011-08-17 15:59:23 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":11.23499,"low":10.661,"avg":10.983170215,"vwap":10.965407596,"vol":16969,"last":10.96881,"buy":10.96881,"sell":10.977}}
1157 2011-08-17 15:59:34 <epscy> but apparently it is the first to use the gpu
1158 2011-08-17 15:59:56 <noagendamarket> yes
1159 2011-08-17 16:00:04 <epscy> it can be hard to use the gpu without the user noticing though
1160 2011-08-17 16:00:12 <epscy> especially with nvidia cards
1161 2011-08-17 16:00:18 <epscy> i wonder how they handle that
1162 2011-08-17 16:00:32 <edcba> they can spike usage sometimes
1163 2011-08-17 16:00:51 <edcba> or wait for screensaver etc etc
1164 2011-08-17 16:01:01 <lfm> run as screensaver only when the user would be away
1165 2011-08-17 16:01:10 <lfm> doh
1166 2011-08-17 16:01:32 erus` has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1167 2011-08-17 16:01:56 <b4epoche> epscy: it need not be at exactly the same time
1168 2011-08-17 16:02:25 <Eliel> epscy: if it's the block reward dropping you're worried about, big miners are bound to be prepared for that in advance somehow.
1169 2011-08-17 16:02:29 <b4epoche> even over a week would be a problem since the following diff change will be almost two weeks
1170 2011-08-17 16:02:32 Xunie has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1171 2011-08-17 16:02:36 <epscy> b4epoche: i guess, depending on how high the diificulty is and the percentage of the network they make up
1172 2011-08-17 16:02:53 <b4epoche> epscy: yea, that's why I was trying to get stats from the pools
1173 2011-08-17 16:02:55 <epscy> b4epoche: yeah and the diff change can't drop too far
1174 2011-08-17 16:03:11 <lfm> if it "just" halves, it would be no big deal
1175 2011-08-17 16:03:23 <epscy> so it could still leave the diff very high if the miner made up a significant part of the hashing power
1176 2011-08-17 16:03:35 <b4epoche> and like I said, it's not the big miners I worry about much. the fickle single GPU folks still make up a large percentage
1177 2011-08-17 16:03:43 <b4epoche> and can shut down quickly
1178 2011-08-17 16:03:55 <Eliel> on the other hand, it's also possible that it'll make it necessary for users to pay bigger fees for a while.
1179 2011-08-17 16:04:08 <epscy> are there any stats on who makes up the hashing power?
1180 2011-08-17 16:04:29 <Eliel> many pools provide such statistics
1181 2011-08-17 16:04:36 <b4epoche> e.g. http://eligius.st/~artefact2/contrib
1182 2011-08-17 16:04:57 <lfm> but they're always fickle not matter what the environment. its not really much different than the exchange rate dropping to half it previous value
1183 2011-08-17 16:05:16 Joric has joined
1184 2011-08-17 16:05:52 <b4epoche> fickle but in a random way (leaving /and/ joining)
1185 2011-08-17 16:06:07 <shLONG> Hey guys I had GCC installed, but I downloaded MingW anyway, how do I compile this bitcoin makefile?
1186 2011-08-17 16:06:08 <lfm> and so many of them they average out
1187 2011-08-17 16:06:15 <shLONG> or feed the make file into mingw
1188 2011-08-17 16:06:26 <Joric> C++0x is now an International Standard (since aug 12)
1189 2011-08-17 16:06:41 <Eliel> the only difference to the exchange rate dropping to half (or more like, to half the mining costs, not the same thing) is that reward drop is predictable.
1190 2011-08-17 16:08:32 <b4epoche> lfm: but the reward change probably shifts that dynamic to many more leaving
1191 2011-08-17 16:10:04 <Eliel> if we're lucky it might happen close to the exchange rate going up.
1192 2011-08-17 16:10:11 <Graet> that will depend on txn fees
1193 2011-08-17 16:10:19 <lfm> so if the supply is gonna be reduced, the logical thing would be to start hoarding in advance of the change, the hoarding would drive the price up I think
1194 2011-08-17 16:10:30 <Graet> deepbit already had 1 block with 16btc txn in it
1195 2011-08-17 16:10:42 <lfm> 16btc fee ya
1196 2011-08-17 16:10:47 <Graet> some pools already payout the txn
1197 2011-08-17 16:11:14 <Graet> this will become more common and help aupport miners
1198 2011-08-17 16:11:20 <Graet> support*
1199 2011-08-17 16:11:59 <lfm> Graet: might take more time for the fees to build tho. I dont think they'll be really significant for years and years yet
1200 2011-08-17 16:12:13 <shLONG> guys can anyone help me I have no idea how to compile this .mingw makefile
1201 2011-08-17 16:12:23 <shLONG> i've tried gcc, mingw-make
1202 2011-08-17 16:12:26 TheAncientGoat has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1203 2011-08-17 16:12:35 <Graet> well i think the 1st 16btc one is a sign of things to come, and quicker than i expected
1204 2011-08-17 16:12:39 <lfm> shLONG: I thot it was cross compiled on linux
1205 2011-08-17 16:13:11 <shLONG> what do you mean? I have to install mingw on linux?
1206 2011-08-17 16:13:18 <shLONG> and it will compile all the osx, windows bins etc
1207 2011-08-17 16:13:56 <shLONG> is there a tutorial page or something for compiling it bitcoin client
1208 2011-08-17 16:14:05 <lfm> shLONG: Im not sure, I dont care that much about mswin
1209 2011-08-17 16:14:41 <shLONG> well I can install linux
1210 2011-08-17 16:14:45 <shLONG> whatever
1211 2011-08-17 16:14:51 <shLONG> as long as I can get it to build
1212 2011-08-17 16:14:54 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1213 2011-08-17 16:14:56 <shLONG> and work on the source code
1214 2011-08-17 16:15:03 <lfm> why not just get the .exe?
1215 2011-08-17 16:15:09 <shLONG> i want to make changes
1216 2011-08-17 16:15:23 <shLONG> O_o
1217 2011-08-17 16:15:29 <lfm> shLONG: ok, then linux is a good idea for ya
1218 2011-08-17 16:16:18 <shLONG> so once in linux I install mingw and just compile the linux-mingw makefile?
1219 2011-08-17 16:16:21 SISUbtcX has left ()
1220 2011-08-17 16:16:23 <Eliel> Graet: if it's necessary, I believe the bigger exchanges could potentially help smooth the drop by sponsoring pools enough to make the drop smooth.
1221 2011-08-17 16:16:32 <Eliel> should be in their interests.
1222 2011-08-17 16:16:49 <lfm> phhp! I dont see that
1223 2011-08-17 16:16:59 <Graet> Eliel another possibility, if any exchanges are listening i'm open to suggestions :P
1224 2011-08-17 16:18:39 <Eliel> of course, another possibility would be to retool the client now so that the total amount of BTC generated overall stays the same but that after block 210000, it drops linearly rather than halving every 210000 blocks.
1225 2011-08-17 16:19:27 copumpkin has joined
1226 2011-08-17 16:21:29 <Eliel> would fix all the drops and not just one.
1227 2011-08-17 16:22:36 <Eliel> that'd potentially split the network though.
1228 2011-08-17 16:23:00 <lfm> Eliel: may be not as simple as it looks, its all rather carefully tuned and any mucking about is all to probable to cause unexpected side effects
1229 2011-08-17 16:23:23 <shLONG> What linux distros would you guys reccomend for me to use?
1230 2011-08-17 16:23:28 <Eliel> ubuntu
1231 2011-08-17 16:23:39 <shLONG> i was thinking ubuntu
1232 2011-08-17 16:24:37 <lfm> changing the upper limit from 21 million can cause overflows in unexpected places and as we saw, overflows are actually a security vunerability to the net
1233 2011-08-17 16:24:42 p0s has joined
1234 2011-08-17 16:25:11 <Eliel> lfm: I meant keeping the limit but only adjusting the way the reward goes down.
1235 2011-08-17 16:25:22 <TD> gavinandresen: superb stuff! exactly what's needed to find the deadlocks
1236 2011-08-17 16:25:28 <lfm> that would change the limit
1237 2011-08-17 16:27:02 <shLONG> how about arch linux
1238 2011-08-17 16:27:15 <Eliel> lfm: how about making the network halve the difficulty at the point of change?
1239 2011-08-17 16:27:26 <Eliel> but let it develop freely after that?
1240 2011-08-17 16:27:33 <epscy> Eliel: what do you mean by linearly?, reduce the reward payout for each winning block?
1241 2011-08-17 16:27:40 <Eliel> epscy: yes
1242 2011-08-17 16:27:45 <Joric> i've lost half of my savings on mybitcoin.com, what ewallet would you recommend now?
1243 2011-08-17 16:28:01 <Eliel> Joric: I'd recommend no webwallets
1244 2011-08-17 16:28:01 <epscy> i will look after your bitcoins for you
1245 2011-08-17 16:28:11 <luke-jr> Joric: MtGox
1246 2011-08-17 16:28:13 <lianj> epscy: lol
1247 2011-08-17 16:28:28 <lfm> Joric: run your own wallet
1248 2011-08-17 16:28:30 <Eliel> but if you have to, MtGox with the yubikey. Yes.
1249 2011-08-17 16:28:36 <lianj> Joric: did mybitcoin start their reclaim process?
1250 2011-08-17 16:28:39 <lianj> *didnt
1251 2011-08-17 16:28:49 <MrTiggr> yes
1252 2011-08-17 16:28:54 <MrTiggr> 49% return
1253 2011-08-17 16:28:54 <epscy> lianj: i am assuming he only got half back
1254 2011-08-17 16:29:05 <lfm> 40%?
1255 2011-08-17 16:29:09 <lianj> oh, haha now thats sad
1256 2011-08-17 16:29:28 <lfm> oh 49
1257 2011-08-17 16:29:49 <MrTiggr> yes - we are still chasing the bastards over in #bitcoin-police :S sad indeed
1258 2011-08-17 16:30:11 <Eliel> MrTiggr: any progress?
1259 2011-08-17 16:30:16 <epscy> MrTiggr: what is the latest with that?, do people still think it was the site owner or not?
1260 2011-08-17 16:30:31 <Joric> are there any sites selling firearms for BTC? i'm gonna hunt tom williams down
1261 2011-08-17 16:30:47 <lfm> Joric: not funny
1262 2011-08-17 16:31:00 <lianj> Joric: wait until the claim process is over. then youre free to do so
1263 2011-08-17 16:31:12 <UukGoblin> heh
1264 2011-08-17 16:31:15 <UukGoblin> by what law? ;-]
1265 2011-08-17 16:31:15 log0s has joined
1266 2011-08-17 16:31:16 * MrTiggr http://bitcoin.crimeunit.net/wiki/index.php/MyBitcoin and http://bitcoin.crimeunit.net/wiki/index.php/MyBitcoin_Summary pretty much say it all
1267 2011-08-17 16:31:19 <lianj> like someone should have done with mtgox
1268 2011-08-17 16:31:39 p0s has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1269 2011-08-17 16:31:48 <MrTiggr> we have had some request for our info from the FBI via mr wagner
1270 2011-08-17 16:31:57 <MrTiggr> thats about all we have for now
1271 2011-08-17 16:32:11 <lfm> ok all you guys advocating shooting people please tell us your real names , addresses, and phone numbers ....
1272 2011-08-17 16:32:56 <b4epoche> yea, enough with this anonymous crap
1273 2011-08-17 16:33:10 <UukGoblin> lfm, Mark Smith, 140 Forest Avenue, SE13 8AR, London, 020 8834 3945
1274 2011-08-17 16:33:18 <copumpkin> my name is John David Smith
1275 2011-08-17 16:33:23 <copumpkin> oh wait
1276 2011-08-17 16:33:28 * b4epoche knows that's a lie
1277 2011-08-17 16:33:30 <UukGoblin> you can't be Smith, I've taken it
1278 2011-08-17 16:33:37 <lianj> ^^
1279 2011-08-17 16:33:43 <copumpkin> okay
1280 2011-08-17 16:33:50 <copumpkin> John David Baker
1281 2011-08-17 16:33:51 <b4epoche> Mr. Peebody
1282 2011-08-17 16:33:53 <Joric> Bond, James Bond
1283 2011-08-17 16:33:59 <copumpkin> is Baker okay?
1284 2011-08-17 16:34:08 <lfm> joric ok, your free to go, you have a licence
1285 2011-08-17 16:34:10 <copumpkin> either way, it's pretty trivial to find my real name if you search
1286 2011-08-17 16:34:11 <UukGoblin> yeah, you can be Baker
1287 2011-08-17 16:34:27 <lianj> Gabriel Gray
1288 2011-08-17 16:34:34 <b4epoche> first clue on copumpkin ^^
1289 2011-08-17 16:34:37 <UukGoblin> Heisenberg
1290 2011-08-17 16:34:45 p0s has joined
1291 2011-08-17 16:34:53 <copumpkin> b4epoche's real name is B. Epoche the 4th
1292 2011-08-17 16:34:59 <UukGoblin> Werner Heisenberg
1293 2011-08-17 16:35:03 <copumpkin> where B is Benjamin
1294 2011-08-17 16:35:24 <b4epoche> no, b4epoche just means I'm old ;-)
1295 2011-08-17 16:35:30 <copumpkin> I figured :P
1296 2011-08-17 16:35:30 <epscy> Sir Stanley Tarquin Bumlove of the Devonshire Bumloves
1297 2011-08-17 16:35:32 <UukGoblin> anyway what is this, a thoughtcrime investigation?
1298 2011-08-17 16:35:39 * copumpkin calls the thoughpolice
1299 2011-08-17 16:36:02 thoughtpolice has joined
1300 2011-08-17 16:36:06 <copumpkin> there
1301 2011-08-17 16:36:11 <copumpkin> [12:29:14 PM] <@UukGoblin> anyway what is this, a thoughtcrime investigation?
1302 2011-08-17 16:36:16 <Graet> omg b4epoche another old person?
1303 2011-08-17 16:36:16 freerodent has joined
1304 2011-08-17 16:36:17 <copumpkin> thoughtpolice: your services are needed
1305 2011-08-17 16:36:24 <b4epoche> what's the German word⦠gedogin
1306 2011-08-17 16:36:24 <lfm> do the thought police NEED to read irc?
1307 2011-08-17 16:36:27 <b4epoche> something like that
1308 2011-08-17 16:36:42 <epscy> thoughtpolice: he was thinking, i am almost certain of it, now arrest him
1309 2011-08-17 16:37:11 <lianj> thoughtpolice: he even googled it
1310 2011-08-17 16:37:24 <b4epoche> Gedanken
1311 2011-08-17 16:37:26 * Graet wonders how old the olsest bitcoiner is
1312 2011-08-17 16:37:35 <lfm> 99.5
1313 2011-08-17 16:37:37 <thoughtpolice> copumpkin: so they are
1314 2011-08-17 16:37:46 <epscy> what is a bitcoiner?, someone who holds some?
1315 2011-08-17 16:38:06 <Graet> would have expected more decimals lfm ;)
1316 2011-08-17 16:38:15 b4epoche is now known as Gedankenpolizei
1317 2011-08-17 16:38:31 p0s has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1318 2011-08-17 16:38:35 * Joric wonders how old the average bitcoiner is
1319 2011-08-17 16:38:41 <luke-jr> 3
1320 2011-08-17 16:38:41 <Joric> 13?
1321 2011-08-17 16:38:58 <lfm> luke-jr you're biased running a pool
1322 2011-08-17 16:38:59 <epscy> you think bitcoin is like lord of the flies?
1323 2011-08-17 16:39:20 <freerodent> 28yrs 4mths 18days 3hrs 45mins 12secs
1324 2011-08-17 16:39:43 <Joric> deepbit should collect stats like that :)
1325 2011-08-17 16:39:49 <freerodent> epscy: no
1326 2011-08-17 16:39:53 <epscy> aah 28, it is all downhill once you reach 29 you know...
1327 2011-08-17 16:40:03 <freerodent> yes
1328 2011-08-17 16:40:10 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1329 2011-08-17 16:40:36 <lfm> you cant really appreciate bitcoin till you're over 28yrs 4mths 18days 3hrs 45mins 12secs
1330 2011-08-17 16:40:43 <freerodent> lol
1331 2011-08-17 16:42:15 wolfspraul has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1332 2011-08-17 16:42:27 <Graet> mm
1333 2011-08-17 16:43:26 <copumpkin> thoughtpolice: I guess the investigation was called off :(
1334 2011-08-17 16:43:44 <Joric> two 14 yo guys will go aswell
1335 2011-08-17 16:44:12 <Gedankenpolizei> how the heck is mtgox covering the bitomat losses?
1336 2011-08-17 16:44:16 <thoughtpolice> copumpkin: there is no 'called off.' i was brought here, and i'm gathering the datas as we speak!
1337 2011-08-17 16:44:31 Gedankenpolizei is now known as b4epoche
1338 2011-08-17 16:44:38 <thoughtpolice> it'll only be a matter of time before you never see the IRC names mentioned again, before they slowly fade away in either a netsplit or just disconnects
1339 2011-08-17 16:45:24 <thoughtpolice> copumpkin: AND YOU WILL BE LEFT TO WONDER, BWAHAHAHAHAHA
1340 2011-08-17 16:45:26 <freerodent> Gedankenpolizei/b4epoche: i wish i knew
1341 2011-08-17 16:45:55 d1g1t4l has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1342 2011-08-17 16:46:03 <Graet> lol b4epoche rather easily i imagine ;)
1343 2011-08-17 16:46:05 <epscy> i didn't know they were
1344 2011-08-17 16:46:15 <jrmithdobbs> b4epoche: because the guy has more money than he knows what to do with
1345 2011-08-17 16:46:21 <Graet> ^^
1346 2011-08-17 16:46:22 <jrmithdobbs> b4epoche: and likes wasting it
1347 2011-08-17 16:46:26 <freerodent> hmm
1348 2011-08-17 16:46:31 <b4epoche> MagicalTux?
1349 2011-08-17 16:46:37 <epscy> how much was lost during with bitomat?
1350 2011-08-17 16:46:44 <b4epoche> 17,000 btc
1351 2011-08-17 16:46:45 <freerodent> 17,000 BTC
1352 2011-08-17 16:46:48 mosi has joined
1353 2011-08-17 16:46:50 <jrmithdobbs> b4epoche: basically they're doing it in order to buy their banking accounts because they can't figure out how to stop pissing banks off and keep theirs open
1354 2011-08-17 16:46:56 <epscy> and mtgox are covering all of that?
1355 2011-08-17 16:47:03 <jrmithdobbs> b4epoche: dead serious
1356 2011-08-17 16:47:13 <freerodent> epscy: yes
1357 2011-08-17 16:47:24 <epscy> that is a significant dollar amount
1358 2011-08-17 16:47:29 <b4epoche> to bank accounts?
1359 2011-08-17 16:47:34 <b4epoche> s/to/buy
1360 2011-08-17 16:47:39 <Joric> what happened with bitomat? corrupted wallet.dat?
1361 2011-08-17 16:47:40 <b4epoche> in Poland?
1362 2011-08-17 16:47:48 <epscy> do mtgox give you bitcoins or dollars?
1363 2011-08-17 16:47:51 <epscy> i assume bitcoins
1364 2011-08-17 16:47:52 <b4epoche> Joric: idiocy happened
1365 2011-08-17 16:47:55 <imsaguy2> Joric, they use(d) Amazon and weren't paying for storage
1366 2011-08-17 16:48:06 <imsaguy2> so when the virtual machine restarted, it went to original state
1367 2011-08-17 16:48:06 <epscy> this kinda sounds like market interference...
1368 2011-08-17 16:48:21 <freerodent> epscy: yes
1369 2011-08-17 16:48:32 <epscy> no wonder the price has been so stable
1370 2011-08-17 16:48:49 <lfm> huh?
1371 2011-08-17 16:48:56 hugolp has joined
1372 2011-08-17 16:49:11 <epscy> lfm: i assume mtgox had to buy 17,000 btc
1373 2011-08-17 16:49:25 <epscy> and then they are giving the btc to bitomat customers
1374 2011-08-17 16:49:37 <b4epoche> I doubt buy
1375 2011-08-17 16:49:54 <b4epoche> I'm assuming MagicalTux was an early adopter
1376 2011-08-17 16:49:58 <lfm> Id assume mtgox would have 17000btc is their slush account
1377 2011-08-17 16:50:08 <epscy> hmm i suppose
1378 2011-08-17 16:50:09 <freerodent> maybe the whole bitomat failure was a stunt
1379 2011-08-17 16:50:16 <epscy> still would affect the market though
1380 2011-08-17 16:50:39 <MagicalTux> [01:42:53] <epscy> lfm: i assume mtgox had to buy 17,000 btc <- we forbid ourselves from buying or selling any BTC
1381 2011-08-17 16:51:01 <MagicalTux> (mostly because we know too much about the market)
1382 2011-08-17 16:51:02 <Joric> one not doing backups, another uses php
1383 2011-08-17 16:51:11 <Graet> <epscy> do mtgox give you bitcoins or dollars? <, they never give me any, but i have traded on the biggest btc exchange
1384 2011-08-17 16:51:15 <copumpkin> thoughtpolice: lol
1385 2011-08-17 16:51:25 <da2ce7> MagicalTux, would you feel that it is inmorall if you say traded on tradehill?
1386 2011-08-17 16:51:34 <epscy> MagicalTux: thanks for the clarification, so the bitcoins you gave came out of your bitcoin profits/reserves?
1387 2011-08-17 16:51:43 <MagicalTux> epscy: exactly
1388 2011-08-17 16:51:53 <MagicalTux> da2ce7: there are too many bots acting between exchanges
1389 2011-08-17 16:51:59 <da2ce7> ahh
1390 2011-08-17 16:52:20 <MagicalTux> anyway we found something productive to do with some of the bitcoins cumulated so far
1391 2011-08-17 16:52:49 <freerodent> oh, MagicalTux = Mt Gox :) right?
1392 2011-08-17 16:53:00 <Graet> was a great pr move if nothing else
1393 2011-08-17 16:53:02 <da2ce7> freerodent, correct
1394 2011-08-17 16:53:05 <epscy> MagicalTux: ok, that is a nice gesture and i guess 17,000 isn't a huge portion of the 6 million plus btc in existence
1395 2011-08-17 16:53:07 <lfm> so I was closer to accuracte saying it was a slush fund! (grin)
1396 2011-08-17 16:53:16 <epscy> so won't move the market too much
1397 2011-08-17 16:54:36 <lfm> freerodent: you are right but for the wrong reasons
1398 2011-08-17 16:54:44 <imsaguy2> now if only mtgox will cover mytbitcoin losses ;)
1399 2011-08-17 16:54:49 maikmerten has joined
1400 2011-08-17 16:54:56 <MagicalTux> imsaguy2: we don't have that much
1401 2011-08-17 16:55:09 <imsaguy2> I'm just playing
1402 2011-08-17 16:55:29 <epscy> how much was lost in mybitcoin?
1403 2011-08-17 16:55:30 <MagicalTux> if it was possible we may have done so if there was no doubt about what happened
1404 2011-08-17 16:55:45 <MagicalTux> epscy: https://www.mybitcoin.com/accounting.txt
1405 2011-08-17 16:55:59 <MagicalTux> (basically, 75k btc lost)
1406 2011-08-17 16:56:26 <epscy> interesting
1407 2011-08-17 16:56:27 p0s has joined
1408 2011-08-17 16:56:42 EricJ2190_ has joined
1409 2011-08-17 16:56:47 <MagicalTux> and not "destroyed" but "stolen"
1410 2011-08-17 16:56:56 <lfm> so bruce w. was prolly the biggest account there
1411 2011-08-17 16:57:04 AlonzoTG has joined
1412 2011-08-17 16:58:03 SISUbtc has joined
1413 2011-08-17 16:58:12 <epscy> yeah, it is still far too murky to get involved the mybitcoin fiasco
1414 2011-08-17 16:58:44 ThomasV has joined
1415 2011-08-17 17:00:01 EricJ2190 has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1416 2011-08-17 17:00:58 <TD> MagicalTux: the explanation williams provided didn't sound solid to me, did it to you? surely it would have required repeated, auditable attacks by a pool operator to pull off
1417 2011-08-17 17:01:22 p0s has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1418 2011-08-17 17:01:35 <MagicalTux> TD: and it would have left proof in the form of aborted blockchain parts
1419 2011-08-17 17:01:43 <b4epoche> unless as some noted they were taking 0 confirms
1420 2011-08-17 17:01:45 <TD> yes. i think the block explorer would have those
1421 2011-08-17 17:01:51 <TD> b4epoche: their website says they waited 1 block
1422 2011-08-17 17:01:59 <TD> so to override that, you'd need to find at least 2 blocks in a row
1423 2011-08-17 17:02:17 <b4epoche> TD: yea, but some here think they weren't even waiting that long
1424 2011-08-17 17:02:25 * theorbtwo wonders if it's possible to trace *what* bitcoins were stolen, and not generate blocks that try to transfer them.
1425 2011-08-17 17:02:29 <Graet> wow all these potential "attacks" by pools i hear about
1426 2011-08-17 17:02:53 SomeoneWeird has joined
1427 2011-08-17 17:03:08 <TD> surely it's easy to check how many blocks they were waiting? they DID have users, right
1428 2011-08-17 17:03:16 <Graet> yes
1429 2011-08-17 17:03:17 SISUbtc has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1430 2011-08-17 17:03:27 <lfm> Graet: most of them are only feasible cuz people think they can short circuit the 6 block confirmation period
1431 2011-08-17 17:03:30 SISUbtc has joined
1432 2011-08-17 17:03:31 <b4epoche> yea, that's why people here thought less than 1
1433 2011-08-17 17:03:44 <b4epoche> deposits showing up nearly instantly
1434 2011-08-17 17:03:44 <Graet> but not many users come forward, and those that have dont neccesarily want to reaveal too much
1435 2011-08-17 17:04:10 <Graet> lfm yep, i run a pool, i'm interested in facts ;)
1436 2011-08-17 17:04:33 <Joric> "A GIFT TO THE COMMUNITY" "After the claims have all been filed and dealt with we will be releasing the entire MyBitcoin processing engine into the public domain"
1437 2011-08-17 17:04:39 <Joric> haha thanks but no thanks
1438 2011-08-17 17:04:40 <TD> i guess it was because the issue existed in their shopping cart. i can imagine that had fewer users
1439 2011-08-17 17:04:49 <b4epoche> TD: I can't remember who were speculating on 0 confirms but they were 'reliable'
1440 2011-08-17 17:05:21 <theorbtwo> 0 confirmations is just silly.
1441 2011-08-17 17:05:32 <lfm> I was speculating 0 but it was just that, speculation
1442 2011-08-17 17:05:52 * b4epoche doesn't consider lfm reliable
1443 2011-08-17 17:05:59 <b4epoche> must not have been you ;-)
1444 2011-08-17 17:06:07 <lfm> good
1445 2011-08-17 17:06:10 <theorbtwo> ...though I do wonder if, as a shop owner, I can start production at at least 1 confirmation, and only ship at 6.
1446 2011-08-17 17:06:31 <b4epoche> seriously tho, someone said they saw evidence repeatedly of 0 confirms
1447 2011-08-17 17:06:43 <lfm> theorbtwo: if you can back out then I think so
1448 2011-08-17 17:07:02 <theorbtwo> I expect that exchanges are much more tempting targets then sellers of physical goods.
1449 2011-08-17 17:07:17 <lfm> could be they thought they were doing 1 and it was actually 0
1450 2011-08-17 17:07:47 <theorbtwo> lfm: Well, if somebody buys something, I make it, and the transaction gets reverted before 6 confirmations, I'm left with a lump of plastic I don't paticularly want.
1451 2011-08-17 17:07:48 brunner has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1452 2011-08-17 17:07:58 johnlockwood_ has joined
1453 2011-08-17 17:08:00 <b4epoche> still, the timing they give seems off
1454 2011-08-17 17:08:23 <b4epoche> the were drained of all 'available' coins in a couple days and didn't notice?
1455 2011-08-17 17:08:24 <Graet> a lot of what they have given seems off
1456 2011-08-17 17:08:42 <Graet> i think thats why bitcoin-police havent stopped digging for info
1457 2011-08-17 17:08:58 <lfm> theorbtwo: oh like a makerbot? cool. ya, you will have to figure out the costs of aborting and the expected frequency of the need to abort
1458 2011-08-17 17:08:59 <Graet> b4epoche being drunk was the excuse
1459 2011-08-17 17:09:16 <Graet> then when noticed got drunk for 5 days to cover the pain
1460 2011-08-17 17:09:35 <theorbtwo> lfm: Quite a bit like a makerbot, yeah.
1461 2011-08-17 17:09:45 <Joric> i was on vacation personally, and it happened when i was in the train :)
1462 2011-08-17 17:10:08 <theorbtwo> Graet: Or they were on vaction, or simply lost interest in the project when it seemed to be running itself.
1463 2011-08-17 17:10:31 <Graet> theorbtwo indeed, but thats what they said
1464 2011-08-17 17:10:42 <b4epoche> shouldn't mybitcoin know what coins are missing?
1465 2011-08-17 17:10:49 <Graet> ......
1466 2011-08-17 17:11:13 <Graet> shouldnt they come forward and do what they said they would?
1467 2011-08-17 17:11:18 <theorbtwo> Depends on how good they were about keeping records.
1468 2011-08-17 17:11:44 <Graet> or wether they were hacked or decided it was time to rake the money and run
1469 2011-08-17 17:11:49 <b4epoche> did they charge a fee?
1470 2011-08-17 17:11:50 <Graet> too much speculation
1471 2011-08-17 17:11:55 <Graet> goodnight :)
1472 2011-08-17 17:12:34 <shLONG> is it possible to send a message with your bitcoin payment
1473 2011-08-17 17:12:40 <shLONG> if not, why hasnt this been made possible?
1474 2011-08-17 17:12:54 <Joric> don't think ewallets use fee they just don't work with subcents
1475 2011-08-17 17:12:55 SISUbtc has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1476 2011-08-17 17:12:55 <shLONG> like a message ox 128 chars max, or 256
1477 2011-08-17 17:13:01 asher^ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1478 2011-08-17 17:13:05 SISUbtc has joined
1479 2011-08-17 17:13:13 ThomasV has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1480 2011-08-17 17:13:25 <lfm> shLONG: if you want to send a message send email. bitcoin is for money not for messages
1481 2011-08-17 17:13:54 <lfm> email, sms, titter whatever
1482 2011-08-17 17:13:59 <lfm> twitter
1483 2011-08-17 17:14:00 p0s has joined
1484 2011-08-17 17:16:12 <theorbtwo> shLONG: The normal reason for that sort of "memo line" is to note what the payment is for. That's not neccessary for bitcoin; the reciever can simply use a different address for each expected payment.
1485 2011-08-17 17:16:21 <lfm> btw there was a message facility linked to the send btc to ip address feature but it has been depreciated
1486 2011-08-17 17:16:45 iddo has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1487 2011-08-17 17:25:46 huk has joined
1488 2011-08-17 17:31:28 Joric has quit ()
1489 2011-08-17 17:33:33 nr9 has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
1490 2011-08-17 17:34:53 Kolky has joined
1491 2011-08-17 17:34:58 SISUbtc has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPad - http://colloquy.mobi)
1492 2011-08-17 17:37:12 tcoppi has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1493 2011-08-17 17:38:24 tcoppi has joined
1494 2011-08-17 17:39:21 nhodges has joined
1495 2011-08-17 17:39:52 nhodges has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1496 2011-08-17 17:40:13 nhodges has joined
1497 2011-08-17 17:42:30 SomeoneWeird has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1498 2011-08-17 17:42:59 tcoppi has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1499 2011-08-17 17:44:14 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1500 2011-08-17 17:45:40 osmosis has joined
1501 2011-08-17 17:46:59 gjs278 has joined
1502 2011-08-17 17:47:29 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1503 2011-08-17 17:48:13 erus` has joined
1504 2011-08-17 17:48:29 Taveren93HGK has joined
1505 2011-08-17 17:48:55 tcoppi has joined
1506 2011-08-17 17:49:02 agent-x has joined
1507 2011-08-17 17:49:21 Superbest has quit (Quit: It's time to man up and end this)
1508 2011-08-17 17:50:44 gjs278 has joined
1509 2011-08-17 17:50:58 BCBot has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1510 2011-08-17 17:51:08 superman2016 has joined
1511 2011-08-17 17:52:23 agent-x has left ()
1512 2011-08-17 17:55:24 slush has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1513 2011-08-17 17:56:07 eao has joined
1514 2011-08-17 17:56:27 asif has joined
1515 2011-08-17 17:56:35 <asif> hi
1516 2011-08-17 17:58:37 BCBot has joined
1517 2011-08-17 18:03:02 ewal-otg has joined
1518 2011-08-17 18:04:58 denisx has quit (Quit: denisx)
1519 2011-08-17 18:06:39 dr_win has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1520 2011-08-17 18:08:17 Mahkul_away is now known as Mahkul
1521 2011-08-17 18:08:34 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1522 2011-08-17 18:08:36 Zarutian has joined
1523 2011-08-17 18:11:22 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
1524 2011-08-17 18:13:44 normanrichards has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1525 2011-08-17 18:13:54 larsivi has joined
1526 2011-08-17 18:14:23 normanrichards has joined
1527 2011-08-17 18:16:17 hugolp has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.1.1 Equilibrium http://www.kvirc.net/)
1528 2011-08-17 18:18:11 Graet has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1529 2011-08-17 18:20:25 TiggrBot has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1530 2011-08-17 18:20:33 cronopio has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1531 2011-08-17 18:20:54 eao has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1532 2011-08-17 18:20:55 cronopio has joined
1533 2011-08-17 18:21:22 Guest76731 has joined
1534 2011-08-17 18:26:46 bk128 has quit (Quit: bk128)
1535 2011-08-17 18:28:09 random_cat has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1536 2011-08-17 18:30:18 jackmcbarn has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
1537 2011-08-17 18:30:57 jackmcbarn has joined
1538 2011-08-17 18:31:34 erle- has quit (Quit: CETERVMÂAVTEMÂCENSEOÂCVTTENBERCÂESSEÂDELENDVM)
1539 2011-08-17 18:33:24 TbbW has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1540 2011-08-17 18:33:51 <Mahkul> anyone around?
1541 2011-08-17 18:34:07 <erus`> im round like a quater pound
1542 2011-08-17 18:34:07 TheZimm has joined
1543 2011-08-17 18:34:09 ByronJoh1son has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1544 2011-08-17 18:34:49 <Mahkul> How can I list sent transactions using bitcoind api? I have one particular transaction that didn't come through for some reason and I would like to check whether it was sent at all
1545 2011-08-17 18:35:05 ByronJoh1son has joined
1546 2011-08-17 18:36:18 eao has joined
1547 2011-08-17 18:36:44 gjs278 has joined
1548 2011-08-17 18:38:06 <erus`> have u checked listtransactions or whatever?
1549 2011-08-17 18:38:15 <erus`> also what did the call return?
1550 2011-08-17 18:38:21 <erus`> you might get an error
1551 2011-08-17 18:41:31 <Mahkul> got by gettransaction; luckily I had txid
1552 2011-08-17 18:41:34 <Mahkul> thanks anyway
1553 2011-08-17 18:41:42 normanrichards has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1554 2011-08-17 18:42:58 normanrichards has joined
1555 2011-08-17 18:43:08 normanrichards has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1556 2011-08-17 18:43:38 ThomasV_ has joined
1557 2011-08-17 18:43:49 evelyn66 has joined
1558 2011-08-17 18:43:53 normanrichards has joined
1559 2011-08-17 18:44:35 Joric has joined
1560 2011-08-17 18:48:12 iddo has joined
1561 2011-08-17 18:54:15 DOUGHTY has joined
1562 2011-08-17 18:55:31 eao has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1563 2011-08-17 18:57:22 darksk1ez has joined
1564 2011-08-17 18:58:37 GMP has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1565 2011-08-17 18:59:20 bonsaikitten has quit (Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.)
1566 2011-08-17 18:59:24 bonsaikitten has joined
1567 2011-08-17 18:59:39 BurtyB has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1568 2011-08-17 19:00:01 zeropointo has joined
1569 2011-08-17 19:00:09 AgoristRadio has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1570 2011-08-17 19:00:13 johnlockwood_ is now known as johnlockwood
1571 2011-08-17 19:00:13 jtaylor has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1572 2011-08-17 19:00:25 jtaylor has joined
1573 2011-08-17 19:00:31 welterde has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1574 2011-08-17 19:00:59 zyb has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1575 2011-08-17 19:01:03 pwrcycle has joined
1576 2011-08-17 19:01:15 random_cat has joined
1577 2011-08-17 19:01:20 zyb has joined
1578 2011-08-17 19:01:49 <pwrcycle> any suggestions on an API for accepting Bitcoins as payment now that mybitcoin.com is gone?
1579 2011-08-17 19:02:11 bitcoiner has joined
1580 2011-08-17 19:02:33 MobiusL has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1581 2011-08-17 19:04:11 noagendamarket has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1582 2011-08-17 19:05:34 p0s has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1583 2011-08-17 19:06:53 someone42 has joined
1584 2011-08-17 19:07:10 <sgornick> pwrcycle: There are some options here: http://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Category:Shopping_Cart_Interfaces
1585 2011-08-17 19:08:04 TheAncientGoat has joined
1586 2011-08-17 19:11:27 Paas__ has joined
1587 2011-08-17 19:11:55 amiller has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1588 2011-08-17 19:12:26 AgoristRadio has joined
1589 2011-08-17 19:12:38 osmosis has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1590 2011-08-17 19:14:55 robblesz has quit (Quit: .)
1591 2011-08-17 19:15:01 RazielZ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1592 2011-08-17 19:15:31 darkmethod has joined
1593 2011-08-17 19:16:21 brunner has joined
1594 2011-08-17 19:18:37 KenArmitt has quit ()
1595 2011-08-17 19:19:52 robblesz has joined
1596 2011-08-17 19:21:20 ByronJoh1son has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
1597 2011-08-17 19:21:20 ByronJohnson has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
1598 2011-08-17 19:22:05 ByronJohnson has joined
1599 2011-08-17 19:22:53 brunner has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1600 2011-08-17 19:23:54 Joric has quit ()
1601 2011-08-17 19:24:29 welterde has joined
1602 2011-08-17 19:25:25 owowo has joined
1603 2011-08-17 19:28:34 tcoppi has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1604 2011-08-17 19:31:45 dvide has quit ()
1605 2011-08-17 19:34:50 tcoppi has joined
1606 2011-08-17 19:40:51 datagutt has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
1607 2011-08-17 19:40:55 copumpkin is now known as Samwell
1608 2011-08-17 19:41:22 Paas__ has quit (Quit: Paas__)
1609 2011-08-17 19:43:25 BTCTrader has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1610 2011-08-17 19:44:25 SISUbtc has joined
1611 2011-08-17 19:45:31 BTCTrader has joined
1612 2011-08-17 19:45:47 BTCTrader has quit (Changing host)
1613 2011-08-17 19:45:47 BTCTrader has joined
1614 2011-08-17 19:45:54 zeropointo has quit (Quit: leaving)
1615 2011-08-17 19:46:11 blishchrot has joined
1616 2011-08-17 19:52:34 Phoebus_ has joined
1617 2011-08-17 19:53:48 maikmerten has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1618 2011-08-17 19:53:57 darksk1ez has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1619 2011-08-17 19:55:39 SISUbtc has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPad - http://colloquy.mobi)
1620 2011-08-17 19:55:59 Phoebus has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1621 2011-08-17 19:57:34 erle- has joined
1622 2011-08-17 20:01:24 Qatz is now known as DaQatz
1623 2011-08-17 20:01:27 Joric has joined
1624 2011-08-17 20:05:00 MobiusL has joined
1625 2011-08-17 20:09:57 amiller has joined
1626 2011-08-17 20:10:23 TheZimm has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
1627 2011-08-17 20:14:54 twobitcoins has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1628 2011-08-17 20:18:43 maqr has joined
1629 2011-08-17 20:21:18 mnc has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
1630 2011-08-17 20:23:13 sgornick has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1631 2011-08-17 20:26:39 Phoebus_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1632 2011-08-17 20:28:41 maqr has quit (Quit: irssi fail)
1633 2011-08-17 20:28:42 delson has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1634 2011-08-17 20:28:56 Phoebus has joined
1635 2011-08-17 20:29:27 delson has joined
1636 2011-08-17 20:29:27 clr_ has joined
1637 2011-08-17 20:30:18 erle- has quit (Quit: CETERVMÂAVTEMÂCENSEOÂCVTTENBERCÂESSEÂDELENDVM)
1638 2011-08-17 20:36:49 tcoppi has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1639 2011-08-17 20:37:36 tcoppi has joined
1640 2011-08-17 20:37:52 tcoppi has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1641 2011-08-17 20:39:00 AgoristRadio has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1642 2011-08-17 20:39:51 sytse has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1643 2011-08-17 20:40:45 amiller has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1644 2011-08-17 20:42:37 tcoppi has joined
1645 2011-08-17 20:43:10 <lfm> [5*3]
1646 2011-08-17 20:44:51 <neofutur> hi all, any ideas on this :
1647 2011-08-17 20:44:51 <neofutur> Aug 17 22:37:37 localhost kernel: grsec: From 94.27.68.82: denied resource overstep by requesting 81920 for RLIMIT_MEMLOCK against limit 65536 for /usr/bin/bitcoind[bitcoind:24888] uid/euid:101/101 gid/egid:246/246, parent /sbin/init[init:1] uid/euid:0/0 gid/egid:0/0
1648 2011-08-17 20:45:26 <jjjrmy> anyone know Android App Inventor?
1649 2011-08-17 20:45:45 <lfm> ulimit -l?
1650 2011-08-17 20:45:54 abragin has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1651 2011-08-17 20:46:27 <neofutur> yup, but isnt 64k a default ?
1652 2011-08-17 20:46:47 <lfm> ya mine is 64 too
1653 2011-08-17 20:46:48 dbosk has joined
1654 2011-08-17 20:47:24 <neofutur> so could be cool to have bitcoind use blocks of 64k ?
1655 2011-08-17 20:47:48 abragin has joined
1656 2011-08-17 20:48:05 <lfm> dunno why yours want 81920
1657 2011-08-17 20:48:25 <lfm> I think they are blocks of 4k really
1658 2011-08-17 20:48:58 Samwell is now known as copumpkin
1659 2011-08-17 20:48:58 <lfm> jjjrmy: I dont
1660 2011-08-17 20:49:53 <lfm> maybe most linux dont enforce ulimit -l
1661 2011-08-17 20:52:16 AgoristRadio has joined
1662 2011-08-17 20:52:34 <neofutur> luke-jr: any ideas ?
1663 2011-08-17 20:52:41 <luke-jr> ?
1664 2011-08-17 20:52:51 <neofutur> lfm: yes you wont see thoses logs if not using a grsec kernel
1665 2011-08-17 20:53:30 <neofutur> luke-jr: 64k is a defult for ulimit -l, any ideas why bitcoind is requesting bigger blocks ?
1666 2011-08-17 20:53:32 sytse has joined
1667 2011-08-17 20:53:43 <neofutur> could be a patch or default stock bitcoind code ?
1668 2011-08-17 20:53:56 <luke-jr> neofutur: likely stock
1669 2011-08-17 20:54:40 <lfm> it could be dbd buffers or mmap?
1670 2011-08-17 20:55:12 BurtyB has joined
1671 2011-08-17 20:55:25 <lfm> bdb
1672 2011-08-17 20:56:09 <luke-jr> neofutur: I presume you don't have an 80k passphrase?
1673 2011-08-17 20:56:23 <neofutur> clerly not ;)
1674 2011-08-17 20:56:34 <neofutur> clerly
1675 2011-08-17 20:56:44 <neofutur> grrr my "a" key is dying
1676 2011-08-17 20:56:46 <luke-jr> got a backtrace? is this 9999?
1677 2011-08-17 20:56:50 <neofutur> clearly
1678 2011-08-17 20:57:01 <neofutur> yes 9999 running since yesterday
1679 2011-08-17 20:57:16 <luke-jr> b
1680 2011-08-17 20:57:17 <luke-jr> bt
1681 2011-08-17 20:57:34 <neofutur> I have this error messages every 10 to 11 mins
1682 2011-08-17 20:58:01 <neofutur> so i can strace it if needed , or just tell me what you could need
1683 2011-08-17 20:58:02 <luke-jr> so paste the backtrace
1684 2011-08-17 20:58:12 <luke-jr> strace has nothing to do with backtrace
1685 2011-08-17 20:58:17 <neofutur> how do I get your backtrace ?
1686 2011-08-17 20:58:22 <luke-jr> gdb
1687 2011-08-17 20:58:28 <neofutur> ( bitcoind is not crashing )
1688 2011-08-17 20:58:29 kakobrekla has joined
1689 2011-08-17 20:58:40 <luke-jr> â¦
1690 2011-08-17 20:58:48 <neofutur> this is just a warning
1691 2011-08-17 20:58:55 <lfm> oh it ignore mem lock fail
1692 2011-08-17 20:58:56 <luke-jr> o
1693 2011-08-17 20:58:58 <neofutur> every 10 mins
1694 2011-08-17 20:58:59 <luke-jr> fun
1695 2011-08-17 20:59:08 <luke-jr> so in other words, wallet encryption is silently broken
1696 2011-08-17 20:59:19 <luke-jr> yep
1697 2011-08-17 20:59:24 <luke-jr> bitcoind ignores mlock failure
1698 2011-08-17 20:59:32 <lfm> mem is not locked but program continues with unlocked mem
1699 2011-08-17 20:59:34 <neofutur> or just retry with smaller block ?
1700 2011-08-17 21:00:07 <lfm> ah, depends on wallet size?
1701 2011-08-17 21:00:41 <neofutur> its an empty wallet with 0 btc, new bitcoind on new server
1702 2011-08-17 21:01:10 <lfm> ls -l ~/.bitcoin/wallet.dat ?
1703 2011-08-17 21:01:12 <luke-jr> conclusion: wallet crypto is a false sense of security
1704 2011-08-17 21:01:46 <neofutur> ls -l /var/lib/bitcoin/.bitcoin/wallet.dat
1705 2011-08-17 21:01:47 <neofutur> -rw------- 1 bitcoin bitcoin 94208 Aug 17 22:38 /var/lib/bitcoin/.bitcoin/wallet.dat
1706 2011-08-17 21:01:58 <lfm> it would have the 100 pre-rolled keys I spoze
1707 2011-08-17 21:02:08 <neofutur> ah yes the size seems to be related to the size in the error message
1708 2011-08-17 21:02:39 <lfm> do you have a nice big old wallet to try it with?
1709 2011-08-17 21:02:49 <Joric> jackjack-jj forked mee :(( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oF52V6xxCy8
1710 2011-08-17 21:02:50 <neofutur> yup i could
1711 2011-08-17 21:02:54 <Joric> forked me hard
1712 2011-08-17 21:03:13 <samr7> lol
1713 2011-08-17 21:03:45 <samr7> luke-jr, is an mlock failure really that big of a deal?
1714 2011-08-17 21:03:49 <neofutur> a 528k one
1715 2011-08-17 21:04:12 <gavinandresen> ... if your machine is rooted mlock won't save you...
1716 2011-08-17 21:04:36 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: then just take mlock out? :p
1717 2011-08-17 21:04:53 <lfm> samr7: can be security implications running swapped decrypted data
1718 2011-08-17 21:04:55 <neofutur> samr7: perhaps not a big deal on most linux not enforcing ulimit -l
1719 2011-08-17 21:04:56 <gavinandresen> mlock adds a tiny whisper of extra security.
1720 2011-08-17 21:05:05 <Joric> actually i was thinking of submitting a bitcointools push request instead of maintaining pywallet
1721 2011-08-17 21:05:13 <samr7> ^^^ exactly, a whisper
1722 2011-08-17 21:05:14 <neofutur> but on gentoo hardened, this fill the logs pretty fast and give a bad reputtion to bitcoin ;)
1723 2011-08-17 21:05:16 <luke-jr> lfm: bitcoind doesn't even *try* to mlock the passphrase, soâ¦
1724 2011-08-17 21:05:24 <luke-jr> neofutur: I bet Linux enforces it *silently*
1725 2011-08-17 21:05:38 <neofutur> yes, grsec add more log messages
1726 2011-08-17 21:05:38 <lfm> samr7: your private keys might be accesible in the swap partition or something
1727 2011-08-17 21:05:48 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: wallet encryption in general is only a whisper of extra security
1728 2011-08-17 21:06:08 <Joric> plus it needs aes decoding now
1729 2011-08-17 21:06:32 <luke-jr> that new Bitcoin API looks promising
1730 2011-08-17 21:06:40 <gavinandresen> luke-jr: I disagree-- it protects you from "my little brother stole my bitcoins when I left bitcoin open" attacks.
1731 2011-08-17 21:07:12 <kakobrekla> new bitcoin api?
1732 2011-08-17 21:07:13 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: if you don't lock your screen, he'll just use a keylogger
1733 2011-08-17 21:07:14 <kakobrekla> urlpls?
1734 2011-08-17 21:07:28 sgornick has joined
1735 2011-08-17 21:07:42 <luke-jr> kakobrekla: search forum for BCCAPI
1736 2011-08-17 21:08:02 <luke-jr> kakobrekla: it sends your pubkeys (only) to a service which tracks your balance for you
1737 2011-08-17 21:08:04 <kakobrekla> searchubg
1738 2011-08-17 21:08:07 <kakobrekla> bah
1739 2011-08-17 21:08:10 <kakobrekla> searching*
1740 2011-08-17 21:08:12 <luke-jr> kakobrekla: so you only need to do networking when there's a change to it, or you spend
1741 2011-08-17 21:08:55 <samr7> luke-jr, it will protect against the current batch of trojans that blindly copy wallet.dat
1742 2011-08-17 21:09:12 <luke-jr> samr7: sure, but not the next
1743 2011-08-17 21:10:02 <neofutur> its not really an issue, its easy to raise the limits in /etc/security/limits.conf, but I wanted to report it in case it can be useful
1744 2011-08-17 21:10:09 TheAncientGoat has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1745 2011-08-17 21:10:22 <Joric> don't know for blocks, but wallet could be in a text format, easily
1746 2011-08-17 21:11:18 <neofutur> but even to raise the limit for bitcoin user, i d like toknow wht I should set the limit to
1747 2011-08-17 21:11:43 <neofutur> 128k ? 256k ? will this always get bigger with no limit ?
1748 2011-08-17 21:11:48 <lfm> neofutur: try 5 times the size of wallet.dat
1749 2011-08-17 21:12:23 <neofutur> and walet.dat will always grow, so its mostly unlimited ?
1750 2011-08-17 21:13:07 <lfm> ya, depends how much you use it of course
1751 2011-08-17 21:13:15 ThomasV_ has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1752 2011-08-17 21:14:38 <lfm> maybe should be recoded to encypt/decrypt a block at a time (16k block maybe?)
1753 2011-08-17 21:15:07 <neofutur> or 64k since this seems to be the default limit
1754 2011-08-17 21:15:21 <lfm> or just not lock since it is marginal utility
1755 2011-08-17 21:16:18 denisx has joined
1756 2011-08-17 21:16:58 <samr7> luke-jr, your standards for wallet security are very high indeed.
1757 2011-08-17 21:18:27 <denisx> luke-jr: is your pushpool also eating memory like crazy?
1758 2011-08-17 21:18:44 <lfm> samr7: if someone targets you, keylogger might be amoungst the first things they bestow on you
1759 2011-08-17 21:21:25 <samr7> lfm, exactly, and there isn't much bitcoin can do about that.
1760 2011-08-17 21:21:25 <samr7> or is there?
1761 2011-08-17 21:21:51 ThomasV_ has joined
1762 2011-08-17 21:22:16 johnlockwood has quit (Quit: johnlockwood)
1763 2011-08-17 21:23:24 <mtrlt> use a separate machine for signing.
1764 2011-08-17 21:23:35 <cypherpunk01> Look Ma! No txns! 00000000000008cd88308e116cfd65b434ba43385f0d36d0ebf1c31e885cd9fc:
1765 2011-08-17 21:23:45 <neofutur> samr7: luke-jr is a gentoo user, so security is important to him ;)
1766 2011-08-17 21:23:52 <mtrlt> one that is not, has never, and never will be networked.
1767 2011-08-17 21:24:06 <mtrlt> has never been*
1768 2011-08-17 21:24:47 <mtrlt> you'll have to physically carry an usb stick or something to sign shit, but it's quite secure :-)
1769 2011-08-17 21:25:05 <lfm> cypherpunk01: actually that is one txn
1770 2011-08-17 21:25:14 sneak has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1771 2011-08-17 21:25:44 <neofutur> lfm: most kkeyloggers need root access afaik, and userspace keyloggers wont work on a grsec box ;)
1772 2011-08-17 21:26:22 <neofutur> s/on a grsec/on a well configure grsec/
1773 2011-08-17 21:26:55 <iddo> mtrlt: how do you broadcast the signed txn without network?
1774 2011-08-17 21:27:06 <lfm> neofutur: actually you can run a keylogger as a X window app to log all keys that go thru X
1775 2011-08-17 21:27:58 <mtrlt> iddo: you just sign the transaction on the offline computer, then transfer the signed tx back to the online computer.
1776 2011-08-17 21:28:40 Phoebus has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1777 2011-08-17 21:28:44 <iddo> can you do it with the current bitcoin client?
1778 2011-08-17 21:28:50 <mtrlt> nope
1779 2011-08-17 21:28:55 <iddo> :)
1780 2011-08-17 21:28:58 <mtrlt> but i hope it will become possible at some point :p
1781 2011-08-17 21:29:04 <Eliel> mtrlt: I'd expect many businesses to use that model for payments. first pile up some payments and then take them all to the computer that is never networked to be signed.
1782 2011-08-17 21:29:04 Phoebus has joined
1783 2011-08-17 21:29:07 <mtrlt> i think i don't have the necessary security skills to implement it
1784 2011-08-17 21:29:32 Joric has quit ()
1785 2011-08-17 21:29:34 <mtrlt> Eliel: yep, sounds good.
1786 2011-08-17 21:29:37 <neofutur> lfm: could be true for X but i dont run X on my secure boxes :p
1787 2011-08-17 21:30:12 <lfm> neofutur: prolly good idea.
1788 2011-08-17 21:31:19 cronopio has quit (Quit: leaving)
1789 2011-08-17 21:32:01 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
1790 2011-08-17 21:32:53 Phoebus_ has joined
1791 2011-08-17 21:32:54 Phoebus has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1792 2011-08-17 21:33:20 <slush1> hello, is here anybody willing to send me a few testnet coins, please?
1793 2011-08-17 21:33:48 erle- has joined
1794 2011-08-17 21:34:12 <lfm> slush1: I can
1795 2011-08-17 21:34:30 <slush1> lfm: great! Please send few coins to mpKwG2QW7z14uLt6DfS6Q3e4T6zMy5q4Vm
1796 2011-08-17 21:34:51 <slush1> 1 BTC is far enough ;)
1797 2011-08-17 21:35:06 Taveren93HGK has quit ()
1798 2011-08-17 21:36:57 <lfm> slush1: oops missed the '.'
1799 2011-08-17 21:37:09 <lfm> jk
1800 2011-08-17 21:37:40 <slush1> heh, missed what? O:-)
1801 2011-08-17 21:37:58 <lfm> 1.00 btc right?
1802 2011-08-17 21:38:08 <slush1> yes, it is enough
1803 2011-08-17 21:38:43 <lfm> dunno how frequent blocks are on testnet now
1804 2011-08-17 21:38:44 <slush1> oh, now I see :)
1805 2011-08-17 21:38:46 <slush1> thanks ;)
1806 2011-08-17 21:39:28 E-sense has joined
1807 2011-08-17 21:39:48 <Lopuz> o.o
1808 2011-08-17 21:40:59 <lfm> Average interval last 144 blocks: 74.47 min
1809 2011-08-17 21:41:09 tcoppi has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1810 2011-08-17 21:42:12 <lfm> ok looks like we got your txn in a block.
1811 2011-08-17 21:42:22 <quellhorst> slush1: i seem to find many more blocks on your pool than btc i get paid :(
1812 2011-08-17 21:42:49 <quellhorst> i blame pool hoppers but dunno maybe i should solo
1813 2011-08-17 21:42:58 <lfm> quellhorst: share age on slush pool?
1814 2011-08-17 21:43:38 <Eliel> quellhorst: your luck at a particular pool has nothing to do with the luck you'd have mining solo, unfortunately.
1815 2011-08-17 21:43:52 <quellhorst> Eliel: people keep saying that
1816 2011-08-17 21:44:05 <slush1> quellhorst: because it is true ;)
1817 2011-08-17 21:44:09 <quellhorst> but i think its bullshit, because i used to solo mine until the huge run up in may
1818 2011-08-17 21:44:21 <mtrlt> quellhorst: it is not bullshit. math doesn't lie.
1819 2011-08-17 21:44:40 <quellhorst> no, the reason i say its bullshit is because i probably have enough cards to solo.
1820 2011-08-17 21:44:47 <lfm> mtrlt: so what are you saying the math says?
1821 2011-08-17 21:44:52 <quellhorst> like 40 something. lost count.
1822 2011-08-17 21:44:56 <mtrlt> lfm: that it's random
1823 2011-08-17 21:45:18 <Eliel> mtrlt: well, more accurately, math gets you the right result as long as the inputs are all right and none are missing :P
1824 2011-08-17 21:45:22 <mtrlt> lfm: of course, we assume SHA-256 is a perfect hash function (or smth like that) but it's close enough
1825 2011-08-17 21:45:28 sneak has joined
1826 2011-08-17 21:45:39 <mtrlt> Eliel: you have to use math correctly too yea :p
1827 2011-08-17 21:45:56 <quellhorst> i just gave pools a chance and its just not worth the lower total payouts a month
1828 2011-08-17 21:46:05 <mtrlt> quellhorst: on the long run it's the same.
1829 2011-08-17 21:46:14 <quellhorst> mtrlt: nope
1830 2011-08-17 21:46:18 <mtrlt> yepe
1831 2011-08-17 21:46:19 <lfm> mtrlt: also assumes people understand the math involved and dont try to use their favorite superstition to justifiy whatever they are trying to say.
1832 2011-08-17 21:46:21 <mtrlt> barring pool downtime etc
1833 2011-08-17 21:46:33 <mtrlt> lfm: nope.
1834 2011-08-17 21:46:36 <quellhorst> mtrlt: pools have fees, so it will never be the same. pools also have downtime. another point of failure.
1835 2011-08-17 21:46:40 <mtrlt> lfm: people not understanding math is not math's fault.
1836 2011-08-17 21:46:55 <mtrlt> quellhorst: your miners could also have downtime. pools have negligible fees (tx fees only)
1837 2011-08-17 21:47:06 <lfm> mtrlt: but those things influence what you hear
1838 2011-08-17 21:47:13 <mtrlt> lfm: but they don't influence math
1839 2011-08-17 21:47:20 <quellhorst> so a pool has a built in tax on your earninings. it will nevre be the same. not even with free pools. also you get transaction fees when you solo.
1840 2011-08-17 21:47:20 <mtrlt> which is what matters
1841 2011-08-17 21:47:34 <mtrlt> quellhorst: tx fees are negligible.
1842 2011-08-17 21:47:36 twobitcoins has joined
1843 2011-08-17 21:47:37 <mtrlt> as i said.
1844 2011-08-17 21:47:37 tcoppi has joined
1845 2011-08-17 21:47:42 <quellhorst> mtrlt: all of these things add up.
1846 2011-08-17 21:47:51 <lfm> the math seems to have little influence on waht is said tho
1847 2011-08-17 21:47:51 <mtrlt> from my viewpoint it's just one thing: tx fees
1848 2011-08-17 21:47:55 <mtrlt> what am i missing?
1849 2011-08-17 21:48:02 <mtrlt> lfm: because people are stupid
1850 2011-08-17 21:48:05 <Eliel> quellhorst: if you have enough mining power, then sure, go ahead and solo.
1851 2011-08-17 21:48:17 <samr7> mtrlt, mining solo you can be certain that blocks aren't being withheld
1852 2011-08-17 21:48:26 <mtrlt> samr7: true.
1853 2011-08-17 21:48:36 <quellhorst> mtrlt: recent block with 16 BTC in fees http://blockexplorer.com/block/00000000000000b536694efbd2b78574b489c8c8e4b27a9c9fbf24fdf61cf73b
1854 2011-08-17 21:48:40 <mtrlt> i don't think it's a practical concern though.
1855 2011-08-17 21:48:44 <lfm> Eliel: that is one of the things people say without proper math to back it up
1856 2011-08-17 21:48:50 <Eliel> quellhorst: yes, the only one.
1857 2011-08-17 21:48:51 <mtrlt> quellhorst: yes i'm aware. but that's certainly not common :p
1858 2011-08-17 21:49:08 <quellhorst> oh right ,also the fraud risk with pools too, of course.
1859 2011-08-17 21:49:25 ThomasV_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1860 2011-08-17 21:49:32 <quellhorst> mtrlt: so anyway, you are too quick to say "nope" when you are the one who is wrong.
1861 2011-08-17 21:49:32 <Eliel> lfm: which is?
1862 2011-08-17 21:49:37 <lfm> quellhorst: check what the second largest fee was ever!
1863 2011-08-17 21:49:37 <mtrlt> quellhorst: nope
1864 2011-08-17 21:49:45 <mtrlt> quellhorst: (that was a joke)
1865 2011-08-17 21:49:52 <quellhorst> whatever
1866 2011-08-17 21:50:12 <mtrlt> quellhorst: none of us is wrong.
1867 2011-08-17 21:50:19 <mtrlt> quellhorst: it's just a matter of what we deem important
1868 2011-08-17 21:50:20 * copumpkin is wrong
1869 2011-08-17 21:50:32 <lfm> Eliel: the amount of power you have does not alter your reletive chances for pool vs solo
1870 2011-08-17 21:50:36 <mtrlt> i meant me and quellhorst exclusively. :p
1871 2011-08-17 21:50:48 <copumpkin> mtrlt: oh okay
1872 2011-08-17 21:50:52 <mtrlt> matter of priority.
1873 2011-08-17 21:50:57 <copumpkin> then I was wrong about my wrongness being relevant, too
1874 2011-08-17 21:51:14 <mtrlt> i don't think losing on tx fees is really a big deal
1875 2011-08-17 21:51:26 Ten98 has joined
1876 2011-08-17 21:51:27 AStove has quit ()
1877 2011-08-17 21:51:39 <mtrlt> and backup pools are for pool downtime.
1878 2011-08-17 21:52:12 <mtrlt> then again, there are not that many good pools :p
1879 2011-08-17 21:52:15 <lfm> another factor of pools vs solo (not nameing anyone specificly) is fraud
1880 2011-08-17 21:52:17 <Eliel> lfm: there's a lot of difference in chances (and potential reward). If there was infinite time, then you'd be correct, but we obviously don't have. Pool mining gives very predictable income. solo mining doesn't.
1881 2011-08-17 21:52:41 <mtrlt> lfm: yes, that was mentioned. i said it was not a practical concern. (as always, i might be wrong)
1882 2011-08-17 21:52:54 <lfm> Eliel: well I have some math that says different
1883 2011-08-17 21:52:59 <mtrlt> it's certainly a theoretical one.
1884 2011-08-17 21:53:06 <Ten98> I have some meth that says hi
1885 2011-08-17 21:53:26 <mtrlt> Eliel: assuming 0 tx fees.
1886 2011-08-17 21:53:30 <mtrlt> (from soloing)
1887 2011-08-17 21:53:50 <Eliel> lfm: the chance I mine for a month and end up with nothing is much higher with solo mining. with pool mining, it's close enough to 0 to not matter.
1888 2011-08-17 21:53:50 <Ten98> solo mining makes a lot of sense when you ahve more than about 10 ghash I think
1889 2011-08-17 21:54:03 <Ten98> zero pool fees
1890 2011-08-17 21:54:04 <samr7> lfm, do tell
1891 2011-08-17 21:54:05 <mtrlt> i'd prefer like 30GH before i could solo.
1892 2011-08-17 21:54:08 <Ten98> no pool downtime
1893 2011-08-17 21:54:09 <lfm> Eliel: irrelevant
1894 2011-08-17 21:54:12 <mtrlt> also, if you solo, you have to setup your own pool anyway
1895 2011-08-17 21:54:15 <Eliel> lfm: not at all irrelevant
1896 2011-08-17 21:54:17 <mtrlt> maintaining it could be a PITA
1897 2011-08-17 21:54:31 <Ten98> why do you have to ?
1898 2011-08-17 21:54:48 <mtrlt> using just the default getwork from bitcoind is buggy and slow
1899 2011-08-17 21:55:00 <mtrlt> and doesn't support roll-ntime or long polling
1900 2011-08-17 21:55:11 <lfm> Eliel: so 0.000001 BTC per day is better than 50 BTC per year?
1901 2011-08-17 21:55:34 <mtrlt> lfm: if people expect to be able to pay the power bill and one month they get no BTC, it's a very bad situation.
1902 2011-08-17 21:55:35 <Eliel> lfm: you said that, not me :P
1903 2011-08-17 21:55:35 <Ten98> you wont get 50btc a year tho at such a low hashrate
1904 2011-08-17 21:55:49 <Ten98> you might get nothing for 10 years
1905 2011-08-17 21:55:59 <mtrlt> lfm: that's why i would pool even at many tens of GH/s
1906 2011-08-17 21:56:03 <lfm> Eliel: you said it, you think the number of days with zero income is an important consideration!
1907 2011-08-17 21:56:22 <mtrlt> lfm: there is a point where the variance is just too much.
1908 2011-08-17 21:56:26 <Eliel> lfm: no I didn't. Would you please stop putting words in my mouth.
1909 2011-08-17 21:56:28 <mtrlt> i already explained why.
1910 2011-08-17 21:56:53 <lfm> Eliel: and I said it was irrelevant, now which is closer to the proper math?
1911 2011-08-17 21:57:20 <Ten98> you're nutty
1912 2011-08-17 21:57:35 <mtrlt> lfm: you're thinking too theoretically. people actually mine in practice :-)
1913 2011-08-17 21:57:49 <lfm> well is the number of days with zero income important to you or not?
1914 2011-08-17 21:58:12 <mtrlt> variance is important. too much will kill the money supply and i can't pay the power bill.
1915 2011-08-17 21:58:26 <mtrlt> okay, will probably kill
1916 2011-08-17 21:58:37 <mtrlt> but much more probably when solo mining versus pool.
1917 2011-08-17 21:59:25 <mtrlt> i don't care if i'm expected to break even in 100 years
1918 2011-08-17 21:59:30 <mtrlt> if i have to pay the power bill in a month :p
1919 2011-08-17 21:59:31 <lfm> well if you depend on btc for your power bill I feel sorry for you.
1920 2011-08-17 21:59:52 <Ten98> lfm
1921 2011-08-17 21:59:53 <mtrlt> it was more of a theoretical example from the viewpoint of getting profit from mining
1922 2011-08-17 21:59:56 <Ten98> are you just trollingh
1923 2011-08-17 21:59:59 <Ten98> or are you serious
1924 2011-08-17 22:00:05 <Ten98> how many ghash have you got?
1925 2011-08-17 22:00:28 <lfm> I am serious. people claim they are being logical and mathematiclly correct. they arnt
1926 2011-08-17 22:00:34 <Ten98> about what
1927 2011-08-17 22:00:39 <Ten98> pool being better than solo?
1928 2011-08-17 22:00:40 <mtrlt> lfm: did you even read what *i* said
1929 2011-08-17 22:00:48 <lfm> they are just trying to justify their gambling habit with fake math
1930 2011-08-17 22:00:52 <mtrlt> or was it too difficult to understand
1931 2011-08-17 22:00:56 <mtrlt> i'd not be surprised
1932 2011-08-17 22:01:00 <Ten98> huh?
1933 2011-08-17 22:01:21 <mtrlt> solo is more gambling than pool.
1934 2011-08-17 22:01:27 <Ten98> pooled gives you fewer stales and better chance of racing a block
1935 2011-08-17 22:01:44 <Ten98> solo gives you pure income
1936 2011-08-17 22:01:57 <Eliel> what's racing a block?
1937 2011-08-17 22:01:57 <lfm> mtrlt: ya, you depend on regular btc infusions to pay your power bill, that is motre important to you than the total income
1938 2011-08-17 22:01:58 <mtrlt> for w/e definition of "pure"?
1939 2011-08-17 22:02:02 <Ten98> I'd say on average, pooled is 0.05% more profitable than solo on an infinite timeline
1940 2011-08-17 22:02:29 <Eliel> Ten98: calculated how?
1941 2011-08-17 22:02:30 <mtrlt> lfm: i want to profit from mining.
1942 2011-08-17 22:02:33 <Ten98> just guessing
1943 2011-08-17 22:02:39 <Ten98> there's very little in it either way
1944 2011-08-17 22:02:41 <lfm> Ten98: and 99% of stats are pulled out of the ass.
1945 2011-08-17 22:02:42 <mtrlt> Ten98: don't guess things like this.
1946 2011-08-17 22:02:45 <Ten98> why
1947 2011-08-17 22:02:50 ThomasV_ has joined
1948 2011-08-17 22:02:52 <mtrlt> because guesses are worthless
1949 2011-08-17 22:02:53 <Ten98> it's so small that it's not even worth talkinga bout
1950 2011-08-17 22:02:55 <mtrlt> even educated ones
1951 2011-08-17 22:02:57 <Ten98> put it that way
1952 2011-08-17 22:03:09 <Ten98> solo is good if you've got a lot of hash power
1953 2011-08-17 22:03:13 <mtrlt> yep
1954 2011-08-17 22:03:19 <Ten98> cos it's fun to wake up in the morning and find you have 50btc
1955 2011-08-17 22:03:27 <Ten98> also you get paid in nice round numbers
1956 2011-08-17 22:03:40 <mtrlt> lol
1957 2011-08-17 22:03:49 <Ten98> can be a total drag to go months without finding a block though
1958 2011-08-17 22:03:51 <lfm> and the math says different. you will make more solo no matter how small your khash/s
1959 2011-08-17 22:03:55 <Ten98> if you only have 1ghash
1960 2011-08-17 22:04:00 <Ten98> pff
1961 2011-08-17 22:04:05 <Ten98> if u mine in khash
1962 2011-08-17 22:04:07 <mtrlt> lfm: but the variance is greater with lower hash/s
1963 2011-08-17 22:04:12 <Ten98> then u will never make anything
1964 2011-08-17 22:04:15 <mtrlt> lfm: do you understand the concept of variance?
1965 2011-08-17 22:04:31 <Ten98> under 1ghash and chances are you'll die before finding a block
1966 2011-08-17 22:04:48 <Eliel> lfm: there's also another risk factor (whether it's real or imagined, I can't say) when mining solo. As long as you haven't found a block, you have no way of knowing for sure if you have everything setup and running correctly.
1967 2011-08-17 22:05:00 <lfm> mtrlt: ya, and if variance is more important to you than your total income, then you are forfeiting some income for your preferance
1968 2011-08-17 22:05:14 <Ten98> variance is very important when you start talking in years
1969 2011-08-17 22:05:19 <mtrlt> lfm: well variance will inevitably become more important at some point.
1970 2011-08-17 22:05:27 <mtrlt> lfm: we do not live for infinite time
1971 2011-08-17 22:05:32 <Ten98> since bitcoin is only 2 years old, who knows if it will even still be around by the time you find a block
1972 2011-08-17 22:05:34 <mtrlt> therefore we don't have infinite time
1973 2011-08-17 22:05:57 <lfm> no infinities are needed for the math
1974 2011-08-17 22:06:01 <mtrlt> yes there are
1975 2011-08-17 22:06:12 <Ten98> you have to put an end on your timeline
1976 2011-08-17 22:06:13 <mtrlt> do you mean i would get more mining solo on for example 1GH/s?
1977 2011-08-17 22:06:22 <Eliel> lfm: there's a reasonable chance that there is no income forfeited by pooled mining.
1978 2011-08-17 22:06:23 <mtrlt> or 100MH/s?
1979 2011-08-17 22:06:26 <lfm> on average
1980 2011-08-17 22:06:36 <Ten98> but you give up long polling
1981 2011-08-17 22:06:37 <mtrlt> lfm: yes on average _given infinite time_
1982 2011-08-17 22:06:40 <mtrlt> lfm: i know the math.
1983 2011-08-17 22:06:43 paraipanakos has joined
1984 2011-08-17 22:06:44 <Ten98> so I think you make less
1985 2011-08-17 22:06:47 <Ten98> solo
1986 2011-08-17 22:06:51 <Ten98> than you do pooled
1987 2011-08-17 22:07:01 <mtrlt> lfm: the less hashrate, the bigger the average time needed will become to get within x% of expected reward
1988 2011-08-17 22:07:09 <Eliel> Ten98: without long polling, it's 5 seconds per getwork.
1989 2011-08-17 22:07:24 <mtrlt> Ten98: unless you setup your own private pool :p
1990 2011-08-17 22:07:27 <Ten98> so 5 seconds with no work?
1991 2011-08-17 22:07:28 <mtrlt> Ten98: and i count that as soloing
1992 2011-08-17 22:07:30 <lfm> given any period of time, finite period are all I am talking about, in fact if you mine for one day with 1khash / s your AVERAGE income will be greater solo
1993 2011-08-17 22:07:43 <mtrlt> lfm: average income given infinite time or infinite tries
1994 2011-08-17 22:07:45 <Eliel> Ten98: no, 5 seconds, maximum with old work. average 2.5 seconds
1995 2011-08-17 22:07:48 <mtrlt> lfm: you can't get around that.
1996 2011-08-17 22:07:52 <Ten98> still
1997 2011-08-17 22:07:53 <lfm> give 1 DAY
1998 2011-08-17 22:07:54 hahuang65_ has joined
1999 2011-08-17 22:07:55 Phoebus_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2000 2011-08-17 22:07:59 <mtrlt> lfm: 1 day given infinite tries
2001 2011-08-17 22:08:02 <Ten98> enough time for your GPU usage to drop to zero for a second or 2
2002 2011-08-17 22:08:08 <mtrlt> lfm: we don't have infinite days
2003 2011-08-17 22:08:11 <Ten98> temps drop massively
2004 2011-08-17 22:08:14 <Ten98> card killer
2005 2011-08-17 22:08:16 <lfm> 1 khash/s for 1 day! figure it out
2006 2011-08-17 22:08:25 <Ten98> if u mine 1khash for 1 day
2007 2011-08-17 22:08:27 <Ten98> u make 0
2008 2011-08-17 22:08:29 <mtrlt> lfm: yes i agree soloing will be better even at 1khash/s if you have a billion years to wait
2009 2011-08-17 22:08:39 <mtrlt> lfm: but we don't.
2010 2011-08-17 22:08:44 <lfm> average you will get more solo
2011 2011-08-17 22:08:46 <Eliel> lfm: what you're ignoring there is that for a single miner, there is no average income. There is either income, or there isn't (only possible if you solo)
2012 2011-08-17 22:08:49 <mtrlt> lfm: it's a practical thing, not a theoretical thing
2013 2011-08-17 22:09:02 <mtrlt> lfm: i think you've just heard that somewhere and decided it's true.
2014 2011-08-17 22:09:09 <mtrlt> lfm: i don't blame you, that's how religions get started
2015 2011-08-17 22:09:10 <Ten98> hehe
2016 2011-08-17 22:09:12 <lfm> Eliel: I am talking math
2017 2011-08-17 22:09:16 <Ten98> it's not true
2018 2011-08-17 22:09:21 <Ten98> math has no place in the real world
2019 2011-08-17 22:09:29 <mtrlt> Ten98: it does.
2020 2011-08-17 22:09:31 <Ten98> there's no such thing as a perfect circle
2021 2011-08-17 22:09:35 <Ten98> pi is irrelevant
2022 2011-08-17 22:09:43 <Eliel> lfm: math is useless if it's not applied to real world circumstances.
2023 2011-08-17 22:09:43 <mtrlt> and math is all about pi and circles
2024 2011-08-17 22:09:45 <mtrlt> ? :)
2025 2011-08-17 22:09:54 <lfm> eliel ok, now you are talking your feelings again, not math
2026 2011-08-17 22:10:15 <Ten98> at 1khash
2027 2011-08-17 22:10:18 <mtrlt> lfm: i agree soloing will be better even at 1khash/s if you have a billion years to wait
2028 2011-08-17 22:10:25 <mtrlt> lfm: you don't.
2029 2011-08-17 22:10:28 <Ten98> the statistical average time in which you will find a block
2030 2011-08-17 22:10:32 <mtrlt> lfm: it's the concept of variance you don't seem to get
2031 2011-08-17 22:10:32 <Ten98> is much longer than 1 lifetime
2032 2011-08-17 22:10:34 <lfm> Ten98: are you capable of actually figureing it out?
2033 2011-08-17 22:10:35 <Ten98> so therefore
2034 2011-08-17 22:10:37 <Ten98> statistically
2035 2011-08-17 22:10:43 <Ten98> u have 0 chance of finding a block before you die
2036 2011-08-17 22:10:47 <Eliel> lfm: it's fun to talk about purely imaginary things, like math, but ... mining isn't something to do purely with imaginary things.
2037 2011-08-17 22:10:48 <Ten98> ergo
2038 2011-08-17 22:10:49 <Ten98> 0 chance
2039 2011-08-17 22:10:49 <mtrlt> Ten98: nearly 0 ;-)
2040 2011-08-17 22:11:02 <mtrlt> but for all practical purposes, it is zero indeed
2041 2011-08-17 22:11:10 <Ten98> near 0 = 0
2042 2011-08-17 22:11:18 <mtrlt> for practical purposes in this situation
2043 2011-08-17 22:11:21 <mtrlt> but not in general
2044 2011-08-17 22:11:26 <lfm> you have 1/10000000 or whatever of gettin 50 btc vs 1/2 chance of gettin 0.00001 or whatever
2045 2011-08-17 22:11:40 <Ten98> in a large pool
2046 2011-08-17 22:11:42 <mtrlt> lfm: yes and you don't have enough time to evaluate that 1/10000000 enough times to get anything
2047 2011-08-17 22:11:43 <Ten98> u have 100% chance
2048 2011-08-17 22:11:48 <Ten98> of getting a small payout
2049 2011-08-17 22:11:59 hahuang65_ has quit (Client Quit)
2050 2011-08-17 22:11:59 <mtrlt> lfm: please go and learn the concept of variance and come back
2051 2011-08-17 22:12:02 <Ten98> rather than a infintesimally small chance of getting a large payout
2052 2011-08-17 22:12:11 <mtrlt> i'm outta this discussion.
2053 2011-08-17 22:12:21 <lfm> mtrlt: you have the same chance of getting 50 btc with your fist HASH as you do with your trilionth hash
2054 2011-08-17 22:12:39 <Ten98> you're not gonna to a trillion hashes on a khash machine though
2055 2011-08-17 22:12:42 <Ten98> not before you die
2056 2011-08-17 22:13:14 <Ten98> but yeah
2057 2011-08-17 22:13:18 <Ten98> the is the internet
2058 2011-08-17 22:13:25 <Eliel> lfm: technically true, but you're ignoring something there.
2059 2011-08-17 22:13:26 <Ten98> in an argument on the internet, everyone loses.
2060 2011-08-17 22:13:31 <lfm> mtrlt: if I dont care about your variance and I just want the best average income
2061 2011-08-17 22:13:33 <Eliel> something very relevant
2062 2011-08-17 22:13:39 <Ten98> holy shit
2063 2011-08-17 22:13:45 <Ten98> are you deliberatly being dumb?
2064 2011-08-17 22:14:01 <Ten98> average over what time period?
2065 2011-08-17 22:14:07 <Ten98> you can't have an average without a period
2066 2011-08-17 22:14:24 <lfm> over the period that I partisipate, be it one day or 1000 years
2067 2011-08-17 22:14:31 <Ten98> and what will that be??
2068 2011-08-17 22:14:45 <Ten98> if you solo for one day
2069 2011-08-17 22:14:49 Maged has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2070 2011-08-17 22:14:50 <Ten98> your rate will be zero
2071 2011-08-17 22:15:04 <Ten98> if you solo for 1000 years, your rate is going to be about the same as pooled
2072 2011-08-17 22:15:10 <lfm> ten you can have an average over 1 day with a cance of 1/ a trillion if you want
2073 2011-08-17 22:15:13 <Ten98> maybe slightly lower due to pool mining being more efficient
2074 2011-08-17 22:15:27 <Ten98> chance and actual income are two different things though
2075 2011-08-17 22:15:40 <Ten98> probability of income vs probability of finding a block
2076 2011-08-17 22:15:46 <Ten98> 100% vs less than 0
2077 2011-08-17 22:15:48 <lfm> Ten98: I am not claiming is is a big difference. I am just saying which one is larger
2078 2011-08-17 22:15:53 <Ten98> minus a million percent
2079 2011-08-17 22:16:02 <Ten98> I think pooled is larger
2080 2011-08-17 22:16:08 <Ten98> if you go for a pool with very little or no fees
2081 2011-08-17 22:16:09 <lfm> it is not negative, it is just small
2082 2011-08-17 22:16:15 <jrmithdobbs> when did this become #bitcoin-ifailedstatistics
2083 2011-08-17 22:16:31 <Ten98> and long polling
2084 2011-08-17 22:16:56 <Ten98> plus less detrimental on hardware
2085 2011-08-17 22:17:01 peck has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2086 2011-08-17 22:17:02 <Ten98> so u need to buy fewer GPUs
2087 2011-08-17 22:17:29 hahuang65_ has joined
2088 2011-08-17 22:17:29 peck has joined
2089 2011-08-17 22:17:40 <lfm> ok, I gotta go. bye - afk
2090 2011-08-17 22:17:41 WildSoil has joined
2091 2011-08-17 22:18:20 hahuang65_ has quit (Client Quit)
2092 2011-08-17 22:18:57 <mtrlt> finally :P
2093 2011-08-17 22:19:54 <Ten98> hehe
2094 2011-08-17 22:20:03 <Ten98> now he goes away and starts mining solo
2095 2011-08-17 22:20:09 <Ten98> and finds a block within 10 mins
2096 2011-08-17 22:20:12 <Ten98> and comes back and says
2097 2011-08-17 22:20:13 <Ten98> SEE
2098 2011-08-17 22:20:19 <Ten98> I TOLD U GUYS
2099 2011-08-17 22:21:00 <mtrlt> :)
2100 2011-08-17 22:21:48 <mtrlt> ahh, i wanna build my offline-signing thing >_>
2101 2011-08-17 22:22:20 <mtrlt> build as in code.
2102 2011-08-17 22:25:54 <Eliel> mtrlt: better start a public dialog about how it should work first?
2103 2011-08-17 22:26:32 hahuang65_ has joined
2104 2011-08-17 22:27:17 <mtrlt> i'm not good at dialog
2105 2011-08-17 22:27:25 <mtrlt> :p
2106 2011-08-17 22:28:08 denisx has quit (Quit: denisx)
2107 2011-08-17 22:28:18 abragin has quit ()
2108 2011-08-17 22:29:16 ThomasV_ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
2109 2011-08-17 22:29:44 erle- has quit (Quit: CETERVMÂAVTEMÂCENSEOÂCVTTENBERCÂESSEÂDELENDVM)
2110 2011-08-17 22:30:50 black888 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2111 2011-08-17 22:31:15 black888 has joined
2112 2011-08-17 22:31:42 random_cat has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2113 2011-08-17 22:31:42 gfinn has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2114 2011-08-17 22:32:08 devrandom has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2115 2011-08-17 22:33:23 zapnap has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2116 2011-08-17 22:33:23 <CIA-101> bitcoinjs/node-bitcoin-exit: Stefan Thomas master * rf95d05f / pubkeys.js :
2117 2011-08-17 22:33:23 <CIA-101> bitcoinjs/node-bitcoin-exit: Fix a bug when a transaction comes in to an empty chain.
2118 2011-08-17 22:33:23 <CIA-101> bitcoinjs/node-bitcoin-exit: Added a try/catch to prevent exit-node related error from bubbling up
2119 2011-08-17 22:33:23 <CIA-101> bitcoinjs/node-bitcoin-exit: to the block chain handling.
2120 2011-08-17 22:33:23 <CIA-101> bitcoinjs/node-bitcoin-exit: Simplified some code. - http://bit.ly/p0C3yJ
2121 2011-08-17 22:34:31 raijin__ has joined
2122 2011-08-17 22:34:54 ThomasV_ has joined
2123 2011-08-17 22:36:14 mosi has quit (out!~mos@hooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooge.dongs.dtegaming.com|Read error: Connection reset by peer)
2124 2011-08-17 22:36:39 nhodges has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2125 2011-08-17 22:37:36 raijin_ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2126 2011-08-17 22:37:41 Cablesaurus has joined
2127 2011-08-17 22:37:41 Cablesaurus has quit (Changing host)
2128 2011-08-17 22:37:41 Cablesaurus has joined
2129 2011-08-17 22:39:20 Counsel has joined
2130 2011-08-17 22:39:52 storrgie has joined
2131 2011-08-17 22:40:28 gp5st has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
2132 2011-08-17 22:41:01 eoss has joined
2133 2011-08-17 22:41:06 eoss has quit (Changing host)
2134 2011-08-17 22:41:06 eoss has joined
2135 2011-08-17 22:41:27 ThomasV_ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
2136 2011-08-17 22:42:02 zapnap has joined
2137 2011-08-17 22:45:06 Vladimir_ has joined
2138 2011-08-17 22:45:08 gfinn has joined
2139 2011-08-17 22:45:34 <Vladimir_> bitcoin.org.uk daily raffle roll
2140 2011-08-17 22:45:40 <Vladimir_> ;;roll 1d68
2141 2011-08-17 22:45:40 <gribble> Error: "roll" is not a valid command.
2142 2011-08-17 22:45:49 <Vladimir_> ;;dice 1d68
2143 2011-08-17 22:45:50 <gribble> 52
2144 2011-08-17 22:46:52 log0s has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2145 2011-08-17 22:47:48 random_cat has joined
2146 2011-08-17 22:51:02 devrandom has joined
2147 2011-08-17 22:53:07 twobitcoins has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
2148 2011-08-17 22:54:04 owowo has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2149 2011-08-17 22:56:44 b4epoche_ has joined
2150 2011-08-17 22:57:30 ThomasV_ has joined
2151 2011-08-17 22:58:52 twobitcoins has joined
2152 2011-08-17 23:01:05 ThomasV_ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
2153 2011-08-17 23:01:09 b4epoche_ has quit (Client Quit)
2154 2011-08-17 23:01:46 Vladimir_ has quit (Quit: Page closed)
2155 2011-08-17 23:02:13 Rabbit67890 has joined
2156 2011-08-17 23:05:00 twobitcoins has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2157 2011-08-17 23:05:18 clr_ is now known as c00w
2158 2011-08-17 23:07:23 Rabbit67890_ has joined
2159 2011-08-17 23:09:39 Rabbit67890 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2160 2011-08-17 23:09:39 Rabbit67890_ is now known as Rabbit67890
2161 2011-08-17 23:10:35 int0x27h has quit (Changing host)
2162 2011-08-17 23:10:35 int0x27h has joined
2163 2011-08-17 23:11:22 Daniel0108 has quit (Quit: Did I really quit? :o)
2164 2011-08-17 23:12:18 normanrichards has quit (Quit: normanrichards)
2165 2011-08-17 23:13:10 sgornick has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
2166 2011-08-17 23:19:22 devon_hillard has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2167 2011-08-17 23:19:31 shLONG has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2168 2011-08-17 23:19:50 tcoppi has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
2169 2011-08-17 23:20:02 tcoppi has joined
2170 2011-08-17 23:20:14 marf_away has joined
2171 2011-08-17 23:20:15 tcoppi has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2172 2011-08-17 23:22:29 KenArmitt has joined
2173 2011-08-17 23:25:02 tcoppi has joined
2174 2011-08-17 23:25:16 Sedra- has joined
2175 2011-08-17 23:25:38 twobitcoins has joined
2176 2011-08-17 23:25:52 marf_away has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2177 2011-08-17 23:26:54 marf_away has joined
2178 2011-08-17 23:28:01 Sedra has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2179 2011-08-17 23:29:13 nhodges has joined
2180 2011-08-17 23:29:46 Rabbit67890 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2181 2011-08-17 23:29:58 Counsel has quit (Quit: Leaving)
2182 2011-08-17 23:31:01 twobitcoins has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2183 2011-08-17 23:32:31 markus_w1nner has joined
2184 2011-08-17 23:33:09 RickyC has joined
2185 2011-08-17 23:35:28 markus_wanner has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2186 2011-08-17 23:35:46 nemesis51 is now known as away!~nemesis@178-25-127-144-dynip.superkabel.de|nemesis51
2187 2011-08-17 23:40:15 Cusipzzz has joined
2188 2011-08-17 23:41:00 nhodges has quit ()
2189 2011-08-17 23:42:15 paraipanakos has left ("Saliendo")
2190 2011-08-17 23:43:30 nhodges has joined
2191 2011-08-17 23:43:35 nhodges has quit (Excess Flood)
2192 2011-08-17 23:43:55 nhodges has joined
2193 2011-08-17 23:44:56 dbosk has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2194 2011-08-17 23:45:01 dbosk has joined
2195 2011-08-17 23:47:35 tcoppi has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
2196 2011-08-17 23:48:05 tcoppi has joined
2197 2011-08-17 23:48:49 erus` has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
2198 2011-08-17 23:50:27 shLONG has joined
2199 2011-08-17 23:51:28 bk128 has joined
2200 2011-08-17 23:52:18 shLONG has quit (Client Quit)
2201 2011-08-17 23:53:10 marf_away has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
2202 2011-08-17 23:53:17 shLONG has joined
2203 2011-08-17 23:55:12 toffoo has joined
2204 2011-08-17 23:56:52 <CIA-101> bitcoinjs/node-bitcoin-p2p: Stefan Thomas master * r6e19cbc / lib/peermanager.js : Added TODO about bug. - http://bit.ly/qDsAP2
2205 2011-08-17 23:57:31 <CIA-101> bitcoinjs/node-bitcoin-p2p: Stefan Thomas master * r998cb05 / (lib/bitcoin.js package.json): Bump version to 0.0.9. - http://bit.ly/mPGuO0
2206 2011-08-17 23:58:56 Plasma_ has joined
2207 2011-08-17 23:59:00 sacarlson has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
2208 2011-08-17 23:59:16 Plasma- has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)