1 2011-09-17 00:00:26 zapnap has joined
2 2011-09-17 00:03:20 darksk1ez has joined
3 2011-09-17 00:04:56 pointbiz has joined
4 2011-09-17 00:06:15 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 259 seconds)
5 2011-09-17 00:07:12 eoss has joined
6 2011-09-17 00:07:13 eoss has quit (Changing host)
7 2011-09-17 00:07:13 eoss has joined
8 2011-09-17 00:09:04 pointbiz has quit (Client Quit)
9 2011-09-17 00:12:34 theorb has joined
10 2011-09-17 00:13:21 theorbtwo has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
11 2011-09-17 00:13:27 theorb is now known as theorbtwo
12 2011-09-17 00:14:06 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
13 2011-09-17 00:18:59 c00w has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
14 2011-09-17 00:19:16 clr_ has joined
15 2011-09-17 00:19:47 clr_ is now known as c00w
16 2011-09-17 00:21:03 Fairuser has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
17 2011-09-17 00:23:24 Fairuser has joined
18 2011-09-17 00:27:45 [detached] has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
19 2011-09-17 00:28:36 [detached] has joined
20 2011-09-17 00:29:14 Turing_i has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
21 2011-09-17 00:32:38 soap_ is now known as soap
22 2011-09-17 00:33:38 BTCTrader is now known as BTC_away__
23 2011-09-17 00:41:17 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 06367b62ed94 r74 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/ (7 files in 5 dirs):
24 2011-09-17 00:41:17 <CIA-101> poolserverj: - add fixed time worker cache eviction strategy. resolves issue #6
25 2011-09-17 00:41:17 <CIA-101> poolserverj: - Worker side implementation of longpoll connection counting - precursor to limiting LP connections per worker.
26 2011-09-17 00:42:35 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * e71d7f274ef1 r75 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/ (WorkerProxy.java conf/Conf.java): it helps if you save before committing,
27 2011-09-17 00:45:28 wardearia has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
28 2011-09-17 00:52:45 <dikidera> 35k blocks left to be imported
29 2011-09-17 00:53:13 MobiusL has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
30 2011-09-17 00:54:20 wardearia has joined
31 2011-09-17 00:58:52 MobiusL has joined
32 2011-09-17 00:59:03 MobiusL has quit (Changing host)
33 2011-09-17 00:59:03 MobiusL has joined
34 2011-09-17 00:59:17 SomeoneWeird has joined
35 2011-09-17 00:59:17 SomeoneWeird has quit (Changing host)
36 2011-09-17 00:59:17 SomeoneWeird has joined
37 2011-09-17 01:00:08 normanrichards has joined
38 2011-09-17 01:04:21 thesheff17 has joined
39 2011-09-17 01:05:00 <thesheff17> conman, quick question....does the phoenix miner go back to the primary pool if it comes back up with the -b option?
40 2011-09-17 01:10:50 Backburn has joined
41 2011-09-17 01:13:52 <flying> puscifer, vaginas, etc.
42 2011-09-17 01:18:28 c00w has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
43 2011-09-17 01:18:46 clr_ has joined
44 2011-09-17 01:19:37 clr_ is now known as c00w
45 2011-09-17 01:22:00 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
46 2011-09-17 01:23:13 normanrichards has quit (Quit: normanrichards)
47 2011-09-17 01:25:30 Clipse has joined
48 2011-09-17 01:30:51 SomeoneWeird has quit (Quit: Leaving)
49 2011-09-17 01:40:47 mologie_ has joined
50 2011-09-17 01:42:32 mologie has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
51 2011-09-17 01:42:32 mologie_ is now known as mologie
52 2011-09-17 01:56:38 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
53 2011-09-17 02:04:06 <conman> thesheff17, no idea, I wrote cgminer whcih supports infinite pools and multiple failover mechanisms.
54 2011-09-17 02:04:11 _sgstair has joined
55 2011-09-17 02:04:12 sgstair has quit (Disconnected by services)
56 2011-09-17 02:04:13 _sgstair is now known as sgstair
57 2011-09-17 02:04:34 <thesheff17> conman, sorry about that another guy told me you wrote phoenix
58 2011-09-17 02:04:35 <thesheff17> miner
59 2011-09-17 02:04:49 wasabi3 has joined
60 2011-09-17 02:04:55 <conman> np
61 2011-09-17 02:05:20 Nesetalis has joined
62 2011-09-17 02:05:29 <vsrinivas> for nodes already running ntp, would it make sense for GetAdjustedTime to return just the system time?
63 2011-09-17 02:05:46 K0lky has joined
64 2011-09-17 02:05:59 RobinPKR_ has joined
65 2011-09-17 02:06:49 <gmaxwell> vsrinivas: ntptime != network time, though it's close enough to work.
66 2011-09-17 02:06:54 <gmaxwell> I have some nodes running that way.
67 2011-09-17 02:07:55 <vsrinivas> gmaxwell: have any problems? also, they should be pretty close.
68 2011-09-17 02:08:12 drazak_ has joined
69 2011-09-17 02:08:15 upb__ has joined
70 2011-09-17 02:08:19 kabo69 has joined
71 2011-09-17 02:08:22 <gmaxwell> When I last looked network time was off my local gpsdo by a few seconds. Sure, close enough.
72 2011-09-17 02:08:31 t4ls0 has joined
73 2011-09-17 02:08:46 <gmaxwell> As far as doing that more widely, you'd want to query the local ntp to make sure that it at least thinks that its healthy...
74 2011-09-17 02:09:04 malaimo_ has joined
75 2011-09-17 02:09:31 Kolky has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
76 2011-09-17 02:09:31 wasabi2 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
77 2011-09-17 02:09:35 Wack0 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
78 2011-09-17 02:09:37 MVXA has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
79 2011-09-17 02:09:40 mquin has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
80 2011-09-17 02:09:41 RobinPKR has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
81 2011-09-17 02:09:41 Wack0 has joined
82 2011-09-17 02:09:47 kabo69_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
83 2011-09-17 02:09:48 Eliel has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
84 2011-09-17 02:09:48 `2Fast2BCn has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
85 2011-09-17 02:09:48 iz has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
86 2011-09-17 02:09:48 djoot has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
87 2011-09-17 02:09:49 Rennex has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
88 2011-09-17 02:09:49 Hadaka has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
89 2011-09-17 02:09:51 noagendamarket has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
90 2011-09-17 02:09:53 upb has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
91 2011-09-17 02:09:54 tomat has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
92 2011-09-17 02:09:54 kish has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
93 2011-09-17 02:09:54 Crshman has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
94 2011-09-17 02:09:54 malaimo has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
95 2011-09-17 02:09:54 jimb0 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
96 2011-09-17 02:09:55 acdb has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
97 2011-09-17 02:09:55 drazak has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
98 2011-09-17 02:09:55 sshc has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
99 2011-09-17 02:09:55 iz has joined
100 2011-09-17 02:09:55 Eliel has joined
101 2011-09-17 02:09:55 sshc has joined
102 2011-09-17 02:09:55 Rennex has joined
103 2011-09-17 02:09:55 djoot has joined
104 2011-09-17 02:09:56 Naked has joined
105 2011-09-17 02:09:56 jimb0 has joined
106 2011-09-17 02:09:56 MVXA has joined
107 2011-09-17 02:09:56 talso has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
108 2011-09-17 02:09:56 Naked is now known as Hadaka
109 2011-09-17 02:09:56 Crshman has joined
110 2011-09-17 02:09:57 Squirrel has joined
111 2011-09-17 02:09:57 nexes has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
112 2011-09-17 02:09:57 tomat has joined
113 2011-09-17 02:09:57 nexes has joined
114 2011-09-17 02:09:57 MrSam has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
115 2011-09-17 02:09:57 acdb has joined
116 2011-09-17 02:09:57 Squirrel is now known as MrSam
117 2011-09-17 02:09:57 sshc has quit (Changing host)
118 2011-09-17 02:09:57 sshc has joined
119 2011-09-17 02:09:57 RobinPKR_ is now known as RobinPKR
120 2011-09-17 02:09:58 MVXA has quit (Changing host)
121 2011-09-17 02:09:58 MVXA has joined
122 2011-09-17 02:09:59 <gmaxwell> Though I worry that it would be adding an unwelcome element of centeralization to bitcoin. I'm doubtful that most ntp users are all that independant. (well, obviously, just about everything is ultimately clocked off GPS these days)
123 2011-09-17 02:09:59 kish has joined
124 2011-09-17 02:11:12 noagendamarket has joined
125 2011-09-17 02:11:57 <gmaxwell> I'd almost kinda prefer to see a proper time protocol bolted onto the side of bitcoin the chrony implementation of NTP is small and excellent. ... but I'm certantly not going to be seriously proposing anything like that anytime soon.
126 2011-09-17 02:12:22 `2Fast2BCn has joined
127 2011-09-17 02:13:40 karnac has quit (Quit: karnac)
128 2011-09-17 02:13:57 mquin_ has joined
129 2011-09-17 02:14:13 <vsrinivas> there is an ad-hoc one now afterall. (averaging version time data)
130 2011-09-17 02:14:26 karnac has joined
131 2011-09-17 02:21:57 <gmaxwell> vsrinivas: taking the median in fact.
132 2011-09-17 02:22:03 <gmaxwell> (which is way better than averaging)
133 2011-09-17 02:22:04 cenuij has joined
134 2011-09-17 02:22:04 cenuij has quit (Changing host)
135 2011-09-17 02:22:04 cenuij has joined
136 2011-09-17 02:22:08 <gmaxwell> Though it does a number of things wrong too.
137 2011-09-17 02:22:23 <vsrinivas> sorry, my mistake; i only looked very briefly; what is it doing wrongly?
138 2011-09-17 02:23:19 <gmaxwell> It only remembers the first correction it gets from a particular IP. It's never influenced by future ones. It's influenced equally by IPs that connect to it as it connects to. It doesn't forget a correction after a peer disconnects.
139 2011-09-17 02:23:49 <gmaxwell> So the net effect is that if I have a bunch of distinct IPs I can just connect to your node once from each and set your network time to any value I like in the allowed window.
140 2011-09-17 02:24:56 <gmaxwell> This permits a kind of far out attack where I do this to both a miner and a bank-like target, drive their clocks ±70 minutes (the maximum) which is greater than the 2hours of mutual shift that the blockchain validation permits.
141 2011-09-17 02:25:31 <gmaxwell> This would allow me to cause a short lasting fork on demand, for as long as I can keep the clocks seperated.
142 2011-09-17 02:26:46 <bittwist> the fabled time warp
143 2011-09-17 02:26:52 <gmaxwell> It's not an especially pratical attack, more realistic is just driving people's network time to crazy values in order to DOS them.
144 2011-09-17 02:27:35 <gmaxwell> In any case, some minor fixes to the current network time would close the attack. (treat inbound differently, forget times when neighbors disconnect, etc)
145 2011-09-17 02:29:31 <vsrinivas> treating inbound differently would help; but if you control _a lot_ of IPs then there's still a chance an node falls into your trap.
146 2011-09-17 02:30:49 <gmaxwell> Sure, but it's an order of magnitude different. The maximum adjustment should also be reduced to the point where you can't create enough mutual skew to produce a fork.
147 2011-09-17 02:31:07 pickett has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
148 2011-09-17 02:32:12 <gmaxwell> Alternatively, the bitcoin RPC could return unconfirmed/0 on transactions while the skeq is unreasonably large or something like that.
149 2011-09-17 02:32:25 <gmaxwell> though it would make the attack a more powerful DOS vector.
150 2011-09-17 02:33:09 BTC_away is now known as BTCTrader
151 2011-09-17 02:33:22 c00w has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
152 2011-09-17 02:33:22 Diablo-D3 has joined
153 2011-09-17 02:33:49 <vsrinivas> if i understand ntp, its algorithm requires time sources to report intervals, not points? ;
154 2011-09-17 02:34:24 <gmaxwell> Right. There is an effort made to compensate for transmission delay.
155 2011-09-17 02:35:00 pickett has joined
156 2011-09-17 02:39:08 <Joric> damn flash won't connect to 8333 at all - SecurityErrorEvent, java applets atleast ask for permission (
157 2011-09-17 02:39:45 copumpkin has joined
158 2011-09-17 02:39:57 <gmaxwell> Joric: IIRC flash wants to be able to read a xml 'permissions' file on the same IP as its connecting to.
159 2011-09-17 02:40:51 <Joric> well, nobody would host those
160 2011-09-17 02:41:13 K0lky has quit (Quit: Bye bye!)
161 2011-09-17 02:41:42 <vsrinivas> gmaxwell: how could the time code get more than one correction from a source? the unix time is only sent in the version message iirc?
162 2011-09-17 02:41:52 <gmaxwell> of course not, no one wants flash based web zombie hordes connecting to them.
163 2011-09-17 02:42:04 Guest11344 is now known as imsaguy2
164 2011-09-17 02:42:09 imsaguy2 has quit (Changing host)
165 2011-09-17 02:42:09 imsaguy2 has joined
166 2011-09-17 02:42:10 tcoppi has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
167 2011-09-17 02:42:43 upb__ is now known as upb
168 2011-09-17 02:42:59 upb has quit (Changing host)
169 2011-09-17 02:42:59 upb has joined
170 2011-09-17 02:43:16 <gmaxwell> vsrinivas: Well, what I was referring to was that right now if you connect, give a connection, disconnect, and then later reconnect the peer will not take another / replace your original correction.
171 2011-09-17 02:43:22 tcoppi has joined
172 2011-09-17 02:43:36 tcoppi has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
173 2011-09-17 02:43:39 <vsrinivas> it won't? that seems odd. [that's by ip?]
174 2011-09-17 02:43:45 <gmaxwell> vsrinivas: but even on one connection it could do a version message ping pong every few hours per peer.
175 2011-09-17 02:43:55 <gmaxwell> It's by IP, yes.
176 2011-09-17 02:44:29 <gmaxwell> the code is intended to prevent a single IP from connecting over and over again to stuff the list of corrections.
177 2011-09-17 02:44:56 <gmaxwell> but it goes a bit beyond that. :)
178 2011-09-17 02:45:28 <gmaxwell> IIRC it doesn't bother tracking which peer gave it which correction. It just maintains a set of IPs its has corrections from.
179 2011-09-17 02:45:49 <Joric> looks like java applets allow both networking and filesystem, no wonder the dialog is so scary
180 2011-09-17 02:47:08 <gmaxwell> in any case, one consequence of this is that if your time is wrong at startup you'll get a bunch of big corrections (Good), and then if you/ntp fixes your time you'll keep using all those old big corrections (bad) and you'll pass out wrong time to everyone and you'll take a very long time to recover.
181 2011-09-17 02:48:19 tcoppi has joined
182 2011-09-17 02:53:07 karnac has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
183 2011-09-17 02:59:51 gp5st1 has joined
184 2011-09-17 03:00:10 <gp5st1> hello! could bitcoins ever be used for POS since it takes time to validate a tx?
185 2011-09-17 03:00:28 <gmaxwell> gp5st1: sure.
186 2011-09-17 03:00:30 <gp5st1> significant amount of time relative to the length of a POS tx*
187 2011-09-17 03:00:34 <gp5st1> gmaxwell: how?
188 2011-09-17 03:00:55 <gmaxwell> gp5st1: there are a half different proposed methods.
189 2011-09-17 03:01:04 <gp5st1> in the forums?
190 2011-09-17 03:01:46 <gp5st1> just seems very easy to fake
191 2011-09-17 03:01:48 <gmaxwell> gp5st1: I bullet pointed a bunch of them here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=28565.5;wap2
192 2011-09-17 03:02:07 <gmaxwell> (see that whole thread, or any of a bunch of other threads on the subject)
193 2011-09-17 03:02:21 <gp5st1> will do
194 2011-09-17 03:02:38 <gp5st1> i had been reading some others, but i can still evinsion attacks
195 2011-09-17 03:02:41 <gp5st1> invision*
196 2011-09-17 03:03:18 <gp5st1> thanks for the link
197 2011-09-17 03:05:45 [7] has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
198 2011-09-17 03:06:53 Detritus has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
199 2011-09-17 03:07:48 TheSeven has joined
200 2011-09-17 03:08:28 <gmaxwell> gp5st1: it's important to keep in mind that nothing exists in isolation. Bitcoin by itself doesn't do anything fantastic for POS, but think about that credit cards looked like at POS 15 years ago: a mechnical impression device. Any furhter validation required the vendors pick up a phone (and so it was only ever done on big spends).
201 2011-09-17 03:09:15 <gp5st1> this is true
202 2011-09-17 03:09:20 <gmaxwell> All the electronic validation we have for credit cards is an additional layer on top of what used to be a plastic card and carbon paper.
203 2011-09-17 03:09:23 <gmaxwell> :)
204 2011-09-17 03:09:39 <gp5st1> that's true
205 2011-09-17 03:09:50 <gmaxwell> So, I see nothing wrong with saying that optimal bitcoin POS will require any one or two of several possible add ons.
206 2011-09-17 03:10:12 <gp5st1> thanks
207 2011-09-17 03:10:14 <vsrinivas> hmm what would current bitcoin nodes do if they received a version message later in communications?
208 2011-09-17 03:10:21 <gp5st1> i have a bit more to read now
209 2011-09-17 03:10:52 <gmaxwell> vsrinivas: nothing. They write it into their logs and go on with life.
210 2011-09-17 03:11:08 <gmaxwell> There have been some bright bulbs out there sending psycho version messages in the past.
211 2011-09-17 03:11:46 <vsrinivas> ok.
212 2011-09-17 03:14:01 ymirhotfoot has quit (Quit: ERC Version 5.2 (IRC client for Emacs))
213 2011-09-17 03:16:54 <Joric> lol lol nobody loves flash http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/09/14/metro-style-browsing-and-plug-in-free-html5.aspx
214 2011-09-17 03:17:30 <Joric> ie10/win8 drop flash support
215 2011-09-17 03:17:54 <gmaxwell> Joric: of course microsoft doesn't want you to use adobe's propritary bugfest platform, ⦠they would prefer you use _their_ propritary bugfest platform.
216 2011-09-17 03:20:20 citiz3n has joined
217 2011-09-17 03:29:05 <Disposition> Joric: flash is terrible.
218 2011-09-17 03:33:46 <BTCTrader> can multiple bitcoind run on one host?
219 2011-09-17 03:33:56 <luke-jr> BTCTrader: if you tweak it right
220 2011-09-17 03:34:10 wtfman is now known as wtfman[away]
221 2011-09-17 03:34:11 <luke-jr> and have a single trusted instance
222 2011-09-17 03:34:11 <BTCTrader> it has to run a different port obviously, anything else?
223 2011-09-17 03:35:06 <Diablo-D3> AnniAFK: dont spawn extra threads for your pool.
224 2011-09-17 03:35:10 <BTCTrader> i dont understand, a single trusted instance?
225 2011-09-17 03:35:53 KArmitt has quit ()
226 2011-09-17 03:38:34 <BTCTrader> i should explain, i want to run two separate bitcoin services on one host, do i need 2 different bitcoind's to do that or would it messup the bitcoind accounts to use one for each service
227 2011-09-17 03:38:47 <BTCTrader> to use one bitcoind*
228 2011-09-17 03:39:58 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Con Kolivas * rb8ea0dd194b3 cgminer/ (adl.c main.c miner.h util.c): Update curses logging to allow LOG_WARNING and LOG_ERR messages to still go through while within the menu, and drop share message to LOG_NOTICE.
229 2011-09-17 03:42:03 phungus has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
230 2011-09-17 03:43:29 <luke-jr> BTCTrader: it'd only mess it up if you wrote it poorly
231 2011-09-17 03:50:02 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Con Kolivas * rd0901858f5e6 cgminer/NEWS: Update NEWS.
232 2011-09-17 03:50:02 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Con Kolivas * r1016ae4cd415 cgminer/configure.ac: Bump version number to 2.0.3.
233 2011-09-17 03:51:23 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 75ecf990c82a r76 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/conf/Conf.java: - trace logging with target groups for granular tracing.
234 2011-09-17 03:51:23 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 3f145b2facf3 r77 /bitcoin-jsonrpc/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/conf/Res.java: - trace logging pt 2
235 2011-09-17 03:51:24 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 32081d79a413 r78 /poolserverj-core/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/entity/Worker.java: uncommited from lp connection limits
236 2011-09-17 03:51:47 <Diablo-D3> lol
237 2011-09-17 03:52:17 <Diablo-D3> a .29% reject rate on btcguild so far
238 2011-09-17 03:52:26 <Diablo-D3> best pool ever
239 2011-09-17 03:52:43 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * b3f753e16639 r79 /bitcoin-jsonrpc/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/conf/Res.java: - trace framework updates
240 2011-09-17 03:53:25 <conman> Diablo-D3, yah pretty darn good
241 2011-09-17 03:55:06 <Diablo-D3> thats 2702 shares vs 8.
242 2011-09-17 03:55:48 pointbiz has joined
243 2011-09-17 03:56:32 <Diablo-D3> conman: so I think Ive proved conclusively that luke is on drugs
244 2011-09-17 03:56:38 <luke-jr> Diablo-D3: no u
245 2011-09-17 03:56:59 <Diablo-D3> luke-jr: go be gay for jesus somewhere else
246 2011-09-17 03:57:02 <luke-jr> Diablo-D3: no u
247 2011-09-17 03:58:20 <conman> alright, let's build a windows fail build and see if I can tag and release this
248 2011-09-17 03:58:31 thesheff17 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
249 2011-09-17 03:58:55 <Diablo-D3> >windows
250 2011-09-17 03:58:57 <Diablo-D3> >fail
251 2011-09-17 03:58:59 <Diablo-D3> redundant much?
252 2011-09-17 03:59:53 <conman> tautology here we come
253 2011-09-17 04:00:06 <Diablo-D3> http://hazuki.prolikewoah.com/img/#id53141
254 2011-09-17 04:00:30 <conman> hah
255 2011-09-17 04:00:36 <conman> never knew they had so much sun up there
256 2011-09-17 04:05:21 <sacarlson> BTCTrader: can you just run another virtualbox system on this single host to have another bitcoind running?
257 2011-09-17 04:05:44 <Diablo-D3> http://hazuki.prolikewoah.com/img/#45384
258 2011-09-17 04:06:00 <BTCTrader> it is already a xen
259 2011-09-17 04:06:13 <Diablo-D3> a big game sniper rifle? goddamnit
260 2011-09-17 04:06:19 <sacarlson> BTCTrader: I would also think you could have multiple services just use a single bitcoind as just keep track of accounts with mysql
261 2011-09-17 04:09:58 <Diablo-D3> accurate representation of con: http://hazuki.prolikewoah.com/img/#22964
262 2011-09-17 04:11:29 MobiusL has quit (Quit: Leaving)
263 2011-09-17 04:20:16 <conman> lulz
264 2011-09-17 04:22:19 sacarlson has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
265 2011-09-17 04:25:14 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
266 2011-09-17 04:32:31 MobiusL has joined
267 2011-09-17 04:32:32 MobiusL has quit (Changing host)
268 2011-09-17 04:32:32 MobiusL has joined
269 2011-09-17 04:33:03 KArmitt has joined
270 2011-09-17 04:35:17 phungus has joined
271 2011-09-17 04:36:49 sacarlson has joined
272 2011-09-17 04:39:37 gp5st1 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
273 2011-09-17 04:43:22 WakiMiko has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
274 2011-09-17 04:44:48 WakiMiko has joined
275 2011-09-17 04:48:53 <flying> btw, vaginas.
276 2011-09-17 04:53:12 <gmaxwell> flying: According to my logs you prior messages in here have consisted only of of "afk/beer", "hooray for tor", "stupid irc client.", "kittens!", "guise...", "puscifer, vaginas, etc.". This channel is for bitcoin development. Perhaps you want #random
277 2011-09-17 04:56:04 Burgundy has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
278 2011-09-17 04:57:04 <Blitzboom> gmaxwell: u jelly?
279 2011-09-17 04:58:30 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * ffe9a54cc4bc r80 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/ (7 files in 4 dirs): native longpolling listener alpha implementation
280 2011-09-17 04:58:31 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 5d937584802d r81 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/NativeLongpollListener.java: add listener class
281 2011-09-17 04:58:31 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 5557d5df3e6b r82 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/PoolServer.java: native lp shutdown
282 2011-09-17 04:58:31 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 0e79c2c9843a r83 /poolserverj-main/doc/config-samples/local-daemon.properties:
283 2011-09-17 04:58:31 <CIA-101> poolserverj: - clean up of sample properties file
284 2011-09-17 04:58:32 <CIA-101> poolserverj: - add new config options
285 2011-09-17 04:58:32 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 630bb074cb90 r84 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/ (BlockChainTracker.java LongpollHandler.java WorkerProxy.java): - implement enforcement of longpoll connection limits.
286 2011-09-17 04:58:33 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * cebd73b6b0b3 r85 /bitcoin-jsonrpc/ (.classpath src/test/java/PingTest.java): get rid of useless empty file causing build errors
287 2011-09-17 04:58:33 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * e8c0541e3419 r86 /poolserverj-core/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/entity/Worker.java: - implement enforcement of longpoll connection limits.
288 2011-09-17 04:58:55 _Maru_ has joined
289 2011-09-17 05:01:15 RazielZ has joined
290 2011-09-17 05:05:37 <Diablo-D3> http://hazuki.prolikewoah.com/img/#46821
291 2011-09-17 05:08:35 BurtyBB has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
292 2011-09-17 05:09:49 theymos has joined
293 2011-09-17 05:13:00 BurtyB has joined
294 2011-09-17 05:26:52 LightRider has joined
295 2011-09-17 05:28:27 pointbiz has quit (Quit: Page closed)
296 2011-09-17 05:33:07 ThomasV has joined
297 2011-09-17 05:38:30 amiller has joined
298 2011-09-17 05:42:17 SomeoneWeird has joined
299 2011-09-17 05:42:17 SomeoneWeird has quit (Changing host)
300 2011-09-17 05:42:17 SomeoneWeird has joined
301 2011-09-17 05:44:10 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
302 2011-09-17 05:44:36 copumpkin has joined
303 2011-09-17 05:44:43 _sgstair has joined
304 2011-09-17 05:44:43 sgstair has quit (Disconnected by services)
305 2011-09-17 05:44:44 _sgstair is now known as sgstair
306 2011-09-17 06:32:48 E-sense has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
307 2011-09-17 06:48:49 theymos has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
308 2011-09-17 06:50:11 altamic has joined
309 2011-09-17 06:53:28 altamic has quit (Client Quit)
310 2011-09-17 07:02:20 magn3ts has quit (Quit: Leaving)
311 2011-09-17 07:04:03 SomeoneWeird is now known as SomeoneWeirdAFK
312 2011-09-17 07:04:30 B0g4r7__ has joined
313 2011-09-17 07:07:19 cenuij has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
314 2011-09-17 07:07:34 B0g4r7_ has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
315 2011-09-17 07:07:35 Tim7 has joined
316 2011-09-17 07:07:41 Tim7 has quit (Client Quit)
317 2011-09-17 07:17:58 larsivi has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
318 2011-09-17 07:19:15 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
319 2011-09-17 07:20:07 molecular has joined
320 2011-09-17 07:26:35 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
321 2011-09-17 07:30:44 GMP has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
322 2011-09-17 07:33:22 RazielZ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
323 2011-09-17 07:34:51 fnord0 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
324 2011-09-17 07:37:54 <flying> mmmngh, aenima
325 2011-09-17 07:38:53 fnord0 has joined
326 2011-09-17 07:40:40 AStove has joined
327 2011-09-17 07:41:20 mquin_ is now known as mquin
328 2011-09-17 07:43:27 zamgo has joined
329 2011-09-17 07:45:08 EskimoBob has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
330 2011-09-17 07:50:13 MobiusL has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
331 2011-09-17 07:57:28 larsivi has joined
332 2011-09-17 07:57:30 MobiusL has joined
333 2011-09-17 07:57:31 MobiusL has quit (Changing host)
334 2011-09-17 07:57:31 MobiusL has joined
335 2011-09-17 08:05:07 dissipate has joined
336 2011-09-17 08:05:07 dissipate has quit (Changing host)
337 2011-09-17 08:05:07 dissipate has joined
338 2011-09-17 08:10:40 abragin has joined
339 2011-09-17 08:10:41 abragin has quit (Changing host)
340 2011-09-17 08:10:41 abragin has joined
341 2011-09-17 08:21:42 fnord0 has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
342 2011-09-17 08:27:58 fnord0 has joined
343 2011-09-17 08:29:12 ThomasV has joined
344 2011-09-17 08:33:09 gjs278 has joined
345 2011-09-17 08:45:57 dvide has joined
346 2011-09-17 08:46:11 erle- has joined
347 2011-09-17 08:50:43 datagutt has joined
348 2011-09-17 08:51:42 zeta-51b` has joined
349 2011-09-17 08:52:27 thermal has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
350 2011-09-17 08:53:10 log0s has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
351 2011-09-17 08:54:36 thermal has joined
352 2011-09-17 08:55:18 log0s has joined
353 2011-09-17 08:55:23 erus` has joined
354 2011-09-17 08:55:54 zeta-51b has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
355 2011-09-17 08:57:49 qscgy has joined
356 2011-09-17 09:04:38 dissipate has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
357 2011-09-17 09:05:58 marf_away has joined
358 2011-09-17 09:15:46 SomeoneWeirdAFK is now known as SomeoneWeird
359 2011-09-17 09:18:24 zamgo has quit (Quit: Page closed)
360 2011-09-17 09:20:59 AStove has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
361 2011-09-17 09:29:23 AStove has joined
362 2011-09-17 09:34:44 mosimo has joined
363 2011-09-17 09:36:32 iocor has joined
364 2011-09-17 09:39:56 Joric has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
365 2011-09-17 09:40:11 zamgo has joined
366 2011-09-17 09:41:35 Turing_i has joined
367 2011-09-17 09:44:01 qscgy has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
368 2011-09-17 09:49:10 fnord0 has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
369 2011-09-17 09:50:54 fnord0 has joined
370 2011-09-17 09:53:12 RazielZ has joined
371 2011-09-17 09:54:54 erus` has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
372 2011-09-17 10:02:52 erus` has joined
373 2011-09-17 10:11:33 piotrp has joined
374 2011-09-17 10:16:28 cande has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
375 2011-09-17 10:18:11 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
376 2011-09-17 10:23:26 gjs278 has joined
377 2011-09-17 10:23:54 <flying> wtf?
378 2011-09-17 10:30:01 AAA_awright has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
379 2011-09-17 10:39:12 E-sense has joined
380 2011-09-17 10:43:14 TheAncientGoat has joined
381 2011-09-17 10:45:25 yorick has joined
382 2011-09-17 10:53:51 datagutt is now known as datagutt2
383 2011-09-17 10:54:12 datagutt2 is now known as datagutt
384 2011-09-17 10:58:58 karnac has joined
385 2011-09-17 11:05:08 Clipse has quit (Quit: Clipse)
386 2011-09-17 11:13:54 Joric has joined
387 2011-09-17 11:14:07 Joric has quit (Changing host)
388 2011-09-17 11:14:07 Joric has joined
389 2011-09-17 11:14:23 Joric has quit (Client Quit)
390 2011-09-17 11:37:14 piotrp has quit (Quit: piotrp)
391 2011-09-17 11:39:12 dikidera has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
392 2011-09-17 11:42:49 RobinPKR has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
393 2011-09-17 11:56:09 jimb0 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
394 2011-09-17 11:56:20 <tcatm> neofutur: it looks like the API bandwidth is limited to about 100..200kb/s. can this be fixed?
395 2011-09-17 11:57:37 RobinPKR has joined
396 2011-09-17 11:59:18 <phantomcircuit> tcatm, hey
397 2011-09-17 11:59:53 <phantomcircuit> tcatm, can you add intrsngGBP and intrsngPLN
398 2011-09-17 11:59:58 <phantomcircuit> intrsngPLN hasn't had a trade yet
399 2011-09-17 12:00:43 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
400 2011-09-17 12:01:27 <tcatm> phantomcircuit: I need website URL, currency, and urls for trades and orderbook
401 2011-09-17 12:02:06 <phantomcircuit> https://intersango.com/ GBP https://intersango.com/api/trades.php?currency_id=1
402 2011-09-17 12:02:15 <tcatm> phantomcircuit: also is intrsngGBP == britcoinGBP?
403 2011-09-17 12:02:24 <phantomcircuit> https://intersango.com/ PLN https://intersango.com/api/trades.php?currency_id=4
404 2011-09-17 12:02:33 <phantomcircuit> tcatm, they're trading in parallel so no
405 2011-09-17 12:02:52 jimb0 has joined
406 2011-09-17 12:03:12 <phantomcircuit> rather than trying to seamlessly migrate users we're operating in parallel
407 2011-09-17 12:03:22 <tcatm> phantomcircuit: does your API ensure that tids are alway increasing and newer trades will always have higher tids than the previous trades?
408 2011-09-17 12:03:27 <phantomcircuit> the structure of trade info is so different on britcoin it didn't seem like a good idea
409 2011-09-17 12:03:33 zamgo has quit (Quit: Page closed)
410 2011-09-17 12:03:34 <phantomcircuit> yes it does
411 2011-09-17 12:04:48 <tcatm> if you like to save some bandwidth you could accept a since=$tid GET argument. That will be part of the new API revision (the old one will still be supported)
412 2011-09-17 12:05:42 <phantomcircuit> sure
413 2011-09-17 12:06:20 bstation_ has joined
414 2011-09-17 12:07:35 <tcatm> https://intersango.com/api/trades.php?currency_id=1 has a strange format. looks like it's all wrapped in a dict?
415 2011-09-17 12:08:00 <Gekz> it's called JSON.
416 2011-09-17 12:08:21 Tim7 has joined
417 2011-09-17 12:08:30 <tcatm> it's supposed to be json, but with a toplevel array of dicts
418 2011-09-17 12:08:43 wpl has joined
419 2011-09-17 12:09:04 mortikia has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
420 2011-09-17 12:10:44 mortikia has joined
421 2011-09-17 12:13:13 <phantomcircuit> tcatm, oh my bad
422 2011-09-17 12:13:21 <phantomcircuit> tcatm, https://intersango.com/api/trades.php?currency_pair_id=1
423 2011-09-17 12:13:26 <phantomcircuit> https://intersango.com/api/trades.php?currency_pair_id=4
424 2011-09-17 12:13:46 <phantomcircuit> without currency_pair_id it just gives you the last 1000 trades for all of them
425 2011-09-17 12:14:15 <phantomcircuit> https://intersango.com/api/depth.php?currency_pair_id=4
426 2011-09-17 12:14:17 <phantomcircuit> https://intersango.com/api/depth.php?currency_pair_id=1
427 2011-09-17 12:20:51 <tcatm> added
428 2011-09-17 12:21:48 CaptainDDL has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
429 2011-09-17 12:29:48 brooss__ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
430 2011-09-17 12:30:04 brooss__ has joined
431 2011-09-17 12:36:44 piotrp has joined
432 2011-09-17 12:37:00 Cokein has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
433 2011-09-17 12:37:55 <flying> -.-
434 2011-09-17 12:45:10 cande has joined
435 2011-09-17 12:46:02 gp5st1 has joined
436 2011-09-17 12:49:49 cosurgi has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
437 2011-09-17 12:55:21 erle- has quit (Quit: CETERVMÂAVTEMÂCENSEOÂCVTTENBERCÂESSEÂDELENDVM)
438 2011-09-17 12:58:09 Burgundy has joined
439 2011-09-17 13:00:22 huk has quit ()
440 2011-09-17 13:00:43 <phantomcircuit> flying, ^_^
441 2011-09-17 13:02:56 Kolky has joined
442 2011-09-17 13:05:27 ThomasV has joined
443 2011-09-17 13:07:26 conman has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
444 2011-09-17 13:14:33 gp5st1 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
445 2011-09-17 13:18:40 c00w has joined
446 2011-09-17 13:24:06 gp5st1 has joined
447 2011-09-17 13:27:16 <bstation_> Hi there! My pool just went "officially online" and awaits your testrun! Returning users as well as test users are both very welcome! Visit https://bitcoin-station.com
448 2011-09-17 13:28:34 gp5st1 has left ()
449 2011-09-17 13:28:56 kakobrekla has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
450 2011-09-17 13:29:16 kakobrekla has joined
451 2011-09-17 13:32:10 erle- has joined
452 2011-09-17 13:36:02 c00w has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
453 2011-09-17 13:36:32 MUILTFN has joined
454 2011-09-17 13:36:34 erus` has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
455 2011-09-17 13:43:21 Joric has joined
456 2011-09-17 13:44:08 QueryTom3000 has joined
457 2011-09-17 13:44:50 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
458 2011-09-17 13:48:21 Cokein has joined
459 2011-09-17 13:50:13 Mad7Scientist has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
460 2011-09-17 13:51:08 Tamo has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
461 2011-09-17 13:54:05 <bstation_> Hi, can you please tell me the procedure to list a pool on bitcointalk.org? Thx!
462 2011-09-17 13:57:42 The_SLain_MAn has left ()
463 2011-09-17 14:06:41 erus` has joined
464 2011-09-17 14:15:02 <sipa> list?
465 2011-09-17 14:15:11 <sipa> it's a forum
466 2011-09-17 14:17:15 <Joric> pools are listed here btw https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Comparison_of_mining_pools
467 2011-09-17 14:19:43 <bstation_> Thanks for the replies. I found out it's made that way that the post-count has to be high enough to start threads on the "mining" subforum.
468 2011-09-17 14:24:42 <soap> forums which reward post-count tend to get what they deserve. ;)
469 2011-09-17 14:35:40 maikmerten has joined
470 2011-09-17 14:36:05 asher^ has joined
471 2011-09-17 14:37:08 asher^ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
472 2011-09-17 14:37:59 QueryTom3000 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
473 2011-09-17 14:40:05 mosimo has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
474 2011-09-17 14:41:29 GMP has joined
475 2011-09-17 14:43:06 Detritus has joined
476 2011-09-17 14:43:30 Cablesaurus has quit (Quit: It's a dud! It's a dud! It's a du...)
477 2011-09-17 14:44:51 MUILTFN has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
478 2011-09-17 14:57:51 BTCTrader has quit (Quit: BTCTrader)
479 2011-09-17 15:02:15 iocor has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
480 2011-09-17 15:03:33 iocor has joined
481 2011-09-17 15:06:08 BTCTrader_ has joined
482 2011-09-17 15:06:08 BTCTrader_ has quit (Changing host)
483 2011-09-17 15:06:08 BTCTrader_ has joined
484 2011-09-17 15:11:49 Cokein has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
485 2011-09-17 15:13:55 mosimo has joined
486 2011-09-17 15:18:54 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * d3651fc58d78 r87 /poolserverj-main/ (2 files in 2 dirs): bad properties file
487 2011-09-17 15:18:54 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * f7cf48ade656 r88 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/logging/ShareLogger.java: - fix: nullpointer if share output file not specified.
488 2011-09-17 15:18:54 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 57a088e14cac r89 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/logging/WorkRequestLogger.java: - fix: nullpointer if request output file not specified.
489 2011-09-17 15:18:54 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 04f44ec89562 r90 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/servlet/AbstractJsonRpcServlet.java: - rollback forced http keep-alive change. This breaks nginx and probably violates the http protocol.
490 2011-09-17 15:18:55 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 5294dffa6f2c r91 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/servlet/auth/WorkerAuthenticator.java: - addresses issue #7. When setting worker IP first check X-Forwarded-For header then falls back to remoteAddr. This covers situations where the server is behind a load balancing proxy.
491 2011-09-17 15:18:55 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 31652a5c13b9 r92 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/WorkerProxy.java:
492 2011-09-17 15:18:55 <CIA-101> poolserverj: - use username.intern() to gain a per user canonical sync lock object. Prevents
493 2011-09-17 15:18:55 <CIA-101> poolserverj: an obscure bug where two near simultaneous initial connections from one worker
494 2011-09-17 15:19:47 <CIA-101> poolserverj: can result in multiple db lookups where one hasn't been put into the cache
495 2011-09-17 15:19:47 <CIA-101> poolserverj: before the other is looked up.
496 2011-09-17 15:19:47 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 3fec2e75e437 r93 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/PSJExchange.java: - some slightly more useful logging on unknown exceptions in http exchanges.
497 2011-09-17 15:19:47 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 8abe57b9a0a9 r94 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/servlet/PsjQosFilter.java: ?
498 2011-09-17 15:19:47 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * c5950bd9d926 r95 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/PoolServer.java: null check for nativeLongpollListener shutdown
499 2011-09-17 15:19:48 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * d052bea0f491 r96 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/BlockChainTracker.java:
500 2011-09-17 15:20:47 <CIA-101> poolserverj: tidy longpoll limit enforement.
501 2011-09-17 15:20:47 <CIA-101> poolserverj: native longpoll handling improvements
502 2011-09-17 15:20:47 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 3fb825d32b52 r97 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/servlet/auth/WorkerAuthenticator.java: documented getRealIp method
503 2011-09-17 15:20:47 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * a7de33aee6e3 r98 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/source/WorkSource.java: add WorkSource toString
504 2011-09-17 15:20:47 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 361aef21b639 r99 /poolserverj-core/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/entity/Worker.java: fix: longpoll connection counters getting out of sync
505 2011-09-17 15:20:47 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * e19d226716fe r100 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/servlet/PoolServerJLongpollServlet.java: tidy up and enable longpoll conn limit enforcement
506 2011-09-17 15:20:48 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * f22a0168c240 r101 /poolserverj-main/doc/config-samples/local-daemon.properties: yet more sample config fixes... this time a 30000 second timeout on work cache.
507 2011-09-17 15:23:36 Joric has quit ()
508 2011-09-17 15:26:07 ThomasV has joined
509 2011-09-17 15:34:00 p0s has joined
510 2011-09-17 15:34:09 p0s has quit (Changing host)
511 2011-09-17 15:34:09 p0s has joined
512 2011-09-17 15:34:43 Cablesaurus has joined
513 2011-09-17 15:34:43 Cablesaurus has quit (Changing host)
514 2011-09-17 15:34:43 Cablesaurus has joined
515 2011-09-17 15:35:48 wardearia has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
516 2011-09-17 15:37:46 E-sense has quit (Quit: System.exit(0);)
517 2011-09-17 15:40:47 clr_ has joined
518 2011-09-17 15:45:15 clr_ is now known as c00w
519 2011-09-17 15:50:47 wardearia has joined
520 2011-09-17 15:52:47 wpl has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
521 2011-09-17 15:54:02 wpl has joined
522 2011-09-17 15:54:10 wpl has quit (Changing host)
523 2011-09-17 15:54:10 wpl has joined
524 2011-09-17 15:54:51 <Lolcust> Sorry for disturbance guys, while playing with various "coins" behind a router (a shitty one, D-Link DIR-615 Wireless N) and I get much more incoming connections on any coin client (tested with bitcoind namecoin and yeah, my fork too) if the router is configured to allow ICMP. Meanwhile, uTorrent does not care and gives a lot of incoming in both cases.
525 2011-09-17 15:55:19 <Lolcust> relevant ports are forwarded in both cases. Is that "normal" ?
526 2011-09-17 15:55:30 <sipa> that's strange
527 2011-09-17 15:55:37 <Diablo-D3> ICMP isnt really useful here
528 2011-09-17 15:55:47 <Lolcust> Yeah, that's why I ask
529 2011-09-17 15:55:48 <sipa> are you sure it is related to ICMP?
530 2011-09-17 15:55:48 <Diablo-D3> although blocking ICMP is a good way of not being able to connect to the internet.
531 2011-09-17 15:55:56 <SomeoneWeird> ^
532 2011-09-17 15:56:20 <sipa> as in, not to some random element such as where you connect first?
533 2011-09-17 15:56:23 <Lolcust> Well, it connects to the ISP irregardless of this setting
534 2011-09-17 15:57:03 <Lolcust> generally, it's one hell of a weird router, so probably shenanigans.
535 2011-09-17 15:57:34 <Lolcust> I was just wondering if bitcoin wants to ping listener guys for some reason, or something.
536 2011-09-17 15:57:47 <sipa> afaik it only uses TCP
537 2011-09-17 15:58:14 <Lolcust> well, I sort of know that / think that, that;s why this behavior is so surprising
538 2011-09-17 15:58:45 <Lolcust> Anyways, DIR615 sucks and is stupidly hot, so I'll get her change it for something less sucky anyways
539 2011-09-17 16:02:37 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
540 2011-09-17 16:05:37 MrTiggr is now known as MrTiggrAFK
541 2011-09-17 16:19:20 noagendamarket has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
542 2011-09-17 16:20:13 Daniel0108 has joined
543 2011-09-17 16:20:26 Zarutian has joined
544 2011-09-17 16:21:26 SomeoneWeird has quit (Quit: Leaving)
545 2011-09-17 16:24:21 piotrp has quit (Quit: piotrp)
546 2011-09-17 16:24:45 <luke-jr> considering ping requires root (until very recently), I don't think Bitcoin could ping if it wanted to
547 2011-09-17 16:25:39 piotrp has joined
548 2011-09-17 16:28:28 <lfm> ping still requires root (suid root)
549 2011-09-17 16:28:49 BTCTrader_ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
550 2011-09-17 16:29:32 <cjdelisle> the kernel will send an arp packet if it can't find the location on the ethernet but nothing with icmp
551 2011-09-17 16:29:38 BTCTrader_ has joined
552 2011-09-17 16:29:38 BTCTrader_ has quit (Changing host)
553 2011-09-17 16:29:38 BTCTrader_ has joined
554 2011-09-17 16:29:50 <luke-jr> lfm: no, Linux supports ping without root now
555 2011-09-17 16:30:08 <lfm> newer than 2.6.32?
556 2011-09-17 16:30:11 <cjdelisle> the ping utility is setuid IIRC
557 2011-09-17 16:30:11 <luke-jr> yes
558 2011-09-17 16:30:32 <lfm> k thats what I have
559 2011-09-17 16:31:07 <lfm> ping can be kinda dangerous is why I think it needs root in the past
560 2011-09-17 16:31:15 cande has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
561 2011-09-17 16:33:15 <phantomcircuit> luke-jr, bitcoin could call ping heh
562 2011-09-17 16:33:56 <luke-jr> Summary: Besides a new version numbering scheme, Linux 3.0 also has several new features: â¦, unprivileged ICMP_ECHO, â¦
563 2011-09-17 16:33:57 <lfm> oh, you use capabilities instead of suid root! It is still privledged
564 2011-09-17 16:34:09 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Dean Lee master * r67c6994 / locale/zh_cn/LC_MESSAGES/bitcoin.po : Update to the Chinese Simp translation - http://git.io/zFhUNQ
565 2011-09-17 16:34:09 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Jeff Garzik master * r7337b34 / locale/zh_cn/LC_MESSAGES/bitcoin.po :
566 2011-09-17 16:34:09 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Merge pull request #519 from dabaopku/master
567 2011-09-17 16:34:09 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Chinese Simp translation update - http://git.io/Rnkeuw
568 2011-09-17 16:34:33 <luke-jr> http://kernelnewbies.org/LinuxChanges
569 2011-09-17 16:34:39 <lfm> ok well I dunno about 3.0 you could be right then
570 2011-09-17 16:35:00 ThomasV has joined
571 2011-09-17 16:38:51 <lfm> its still optional and disabled by default , for compatibility I spzoe.
572 2011-09-17 16:41:09 <luke-jr> â¦
573 2011-09-17 16:41:19 <luke-jr> *everything* is optional, and Linux doesn't really have defaults
574 2011-09-17 16:41:47 <luke-jr> I presume <your-distro>'s default is based on whether they support it or not
575 2011-09-17 16:41:55 <luke-jr> ie, with a ping tool that uses it
576 2011-09-17 16:44:40 IO- has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
577 2011-09-17 16:47:34 <lfm> I was just reading the desc of 3.0 , I dont have it. it sez linux will boot with the traditional handling of ICMP stuff and you can enable the rootless ping feature "at bootup".
578 2011-09-17 16:48:36 IO- has joined
579 2011-09-17 16:49:28 <luke-jr> "traditional handling" = raw sockets
580 2011-09-17 16:51:42 MUILTFN has joined
581 2011-09-17 17:00:42 minimoose has joined
582 2011-09-17 17:08:13 cande has joined
583 2011-09-17 17:11:48 cande has quit (Client Quit)
584 2011-09-17 17:11:57 <flying> kittens.
585 2011-09-17 17:13:16 c00w has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
586 2011-09-17 17:24:51 MUILTFN has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
587 2011-09-17 17:26:41 normanrichards has joined
588 2011-09-17 17:33:28 c00w has joined
589 2011-09-17 17:34:57 <BCBot> Stats: http://bit.ly/bitcoin-irc-stats
590 2011-09-17 17:43:32 <BGL> heh that url is a 404
591 2011-09-17 17:43:51 <BGL> the redirect anyways
592 2011-09-17 17:46:08 wtfman[away] is now known as wtfman
593 2011-09-17 17:53:14 Internet13 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
594 2011-09-17 18:03:06 c00w has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
595 2011-09-17 18:03:24 Internet13 has joined
596 2011-09-17 18:04:56 <b4epoche_> damn it, did someone run up the testnet difficulty and leave?
597 2011-09-17 18:06:48 <phantomcircuit> yes
598 2011-09-17 18:12:53 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Quitte)
599 2011-09-17 18:15:39 E-sense has joined
600 2011-09-17 18:16:15 <b4epoche_> are they testing miners?
601 2011-09-17 18:16:27 <b4epoche_> maybe we should have a separate 'mining' testnet
602 2011-09-17 18:16:47 cande has joined
603 2011-09-17 18:16:48 <b4epoche_> at this point I'm trying to debug stuff and the testnet is useless
604 2011-09-17 18:17:40 <kinlo> ?
605 2011-09-17 18:17:49 <kinlo> what's not usefull about the testnet?
606 2011-09-17 18:18:58 pickett has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
607 2011-09-17 18:20:39 <phantomcircuit> b4epoche, i believe they just thought it was funny
608 2011-09-17 18:20:50 pickett has joined
609 2011-09-17 18:21:16 <b4epoche_> kinlo: the fact that a block hasn't been found in 2 hours
610 2011-09-17 18:21:35 <b4epoche_> maybe the testnet should have a fixed difficulty
611 2011-09-17 18:21:45 <kinlo> create testnet in a box and mine yourself
612 2011-09-17 18:22:10 <kinlo> a low-end gpu can create blocks every minute then
613 2011-09-17 18:23:19 <b4epoche_> kinlo: testnet in a box can't be used in all situations
614 2011-09-17 18:23:21 XX01XX has joined
615 2011-09-17 18:24:15 <kinlo> you can if you're a bit creative :)
616 2011-09-17 18:25:25 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
617 2011-09-17 18:25:49 cande has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
618 2011-09-17 18:25:57 <b4epoche_> and have a network of computers sitting around
619 2011-09-17 18:28:02 <kinlo> sure :P
620 2011-09-17 18:28:09 <kinlo> ok, I've enabled my miner on the testnet
621 2011-09-17 18:28:12 <kinlo> it's only a cpu miner
622 2011-09-17 18:28:33 <kinlo> but now I can feel good, thinking that I've helped you, knowing that I will generate a block within one week from now :p
623 2011-09-17 18:30:46 <vsrinivas> testnet is reset periodically, no?
624 2011-09-17 18:31:05 <kinlo> sometimes when there is a new release
625 2011-09-17 18:31:11 <kinlo> so periodically is a big word
626 2011-09-17 18:31:28 <luke-jr> vsrinivas: not really, no
627 2011-09-17 18:31:36 <luke-jr> vsrinivas: but you can reset it yourself
628 2011-09-17 18:34:30 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr * r1e34b503c83c gentoo/net-p2p/wxbitcoin/ (4 files): net-p2p/wxbitcoin: 0.4+ require wxGTK >=2.9.1
629 2011-09-17 18:41:05 <lfm> b4epoche "testnet-in-a-box" is designed to run on a single computer!
630 2011-09-17 18:41:32 <lfm> thats what "in a box" means, just one box
631 2011-09-17 18:41:36 <b4epoche_> sure
632 2011-09-17 18:41:54 <b4epoche_> but if you need a network it's not particularly useful
633 2011-09-17 18:42:17 <kinlo> b4epoche_: what are you trying to do?
634 2011-09-17 18:42:44 <lfm> well it is anetwork in one box
635 2011-09-17 18:42:48 <kinlo> in any case, the difficulty on the testnet is usually too high
636 2011-09-17 18:42:53 <b4epoche_> kinlo: at the moment something that I can use 'box' for
637 2011-09-17 18:43:04 <kinlo> but not much one can do about it
638 2011-09-17 18:43:26 <b4epoche_> well, it could be set to a fixed difficulty
639 2011-09-17 18:43:37 <lfm> if you really need blocks on testnet I can put a gpu on there
640 2011-09-17 18:43:39 <b4epoche_> it's not like it matters
641 2011-09-17 18:43:49 <kinlo> b4epoche_: dunno, set up several boxes all in a fixed testnet setup
642 2011-09-17 18:43:50 <b4epoche_> lfm: no need atm
643 2011-09-17 18:43:53 Firefly007 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
644 2011-09-17 18:44:20 <kinlo> would be nicer if nobody set a gpu on it so the difficulty keeps dropping :)
645 2011-09-17 18:44:32 <kinlo> that cpu miners would still make a difference on the testnet
646 2011-09-17 18:45:14 <lfm> kinlo, I dont think there is any reasonable way to do that, gpu's need testing too
647 2011-09-17 18:45:16 <b4epoche_> yea, I see this as a bit of a bitcoin flaw...
648 2011-09-17 18:45:26 <kinlo> lfm: true...
649 2011-09-17 18:45:31 <b4epoche_> lfm: thus, my suggestion of two testnets
650 2011-09-17 18:45:33 <kinlo> b4epoche_: it's not a bitcoin flaw :)
651 2011-09-17 18:45:45 <b4epoche_> kinlo: yes, it is
652 2011-09-17 18:45:56 <kinlo> but perhaps the bitcoin client should be adjusted to accept any difficulty blocks on the testnet
653 2011-09-17 18:46:07 <kinlo> and a special override switch so you can override the difficulty
654 2011-09-17 18:46:21 <lfm> b4epoche ya but you see it wrong! (grin)
655 2011-09-17 18:46:37 <b4epoche_> see what wrong?
656 2011-09-17 18:46:44 <lfm> as a flaw
657 2011-09-17 18:47:12 <b4epoche_> it a feature that if enough miners drop out the entire thing goes down?
658 2011-09-17 18:47:45 <lfm> it doesnt go down, it just slows down
659 2011-09-17 18:48:09 <b4epoche_> and winds up in a death spiral as more miners drop out
660 2011-09-17 18:48:35 <kinlo> b4epoche_: I don't think you understand the concept of the difficulty
661 2011-09-17 18:48:39 <lfm> it doesnt happen on the real bitnet cuz people come back when it goes down
662 2011-09-17 18:49:05 <b4epoche_> kinlo: I don't think you're understanding actually
663 2011-09-17 18:49:18 <b4epoche_> lfm: depends on the times
664 2011-09-17 18:49:22 <b4epoche_> s/times/timing
665 2011-09-17 18:49:45 <lfm> we know it slows down when the mining partisipation drops till the diff adjust catches up
666 2011-09-17 18:50:49 <b4epoche_> so half the mining power drops⦠now it's 20 minutes per block⦠and four weeks to a difficulty update
667 2011-09-17 18:51:36 <lfm> on the real bitnet not everyone drops out at the same time because electricity prices are different and stuff like that
668 2011-09-17 18:52:05 <b4epoche_> lfm: yea, but what happens when reward drops to 25?
669 2011-09-17 18:52:39 <lfm> it is totally predictable so people prepare for it
670 2011-09-17 18:52:58 <b4epoche_> by modifying how the difficulty gets adjusted
671 2011-09-17 18:53:15 <lfm> no, by adjusting their mining behaviour
672 2011-09-17 18:53:28 <lfm> no need to change the system
673 2011-09-17 18:53:30 <b4epoche_> and how will they adjust?
674 2011-09-17 18:53:48 <lfm> some will drop out, some wont
675 2011-09-17 18:53:53 <b4epoche_> by deciding it isn't worth it any more and dropping out
676 2011-09-17 18:53:59 <MacRohard> by spending less money on mining i guess - until the value catches up
677 2011-09-17 18:54:04 <b4epoche_> I'm not saying all have to drop out...
678 2011-09-17 18:54:16 <b4epoche_> but if a significant fraction do, it could be an issue
679 2011-09-17 18:54:23 <lfm> so what if it is 20 min per block for a while?!
680 2011-09-17 18:54:47 <b4epoche_> the problem is what the feedback mechanism is...
681 2011-09-17 18:55:04 <MacRohard> it's sortof a shame that it doesn't adjust more gradually but it will work itself out
682 2011-09-17 18:55:15 <lfm> sometimes NOW it takes an hour for the next block and bitcoin doesnt crash!
683 2011-09-17 18:55:35 <b4epoche_> will people see 20 minutes per reward and think, this is even worse?
684 2011-09-17 18:55:43 <b4epoche_> worse for mining that is
685 2011-09-17 18:55:54 <b4epoche_> now it's 25 btc ever 20 minutes
686 2011-09-17 18:56:02 <lfm> b4epoche thats only temporary, for 1 month at most
687 2011-09-17 18:56:30 <b4epoche_> lfm: depends on whether the feedback is positive or negative
688 2011-09-17 18:56:38 <lfm> prolly less cuz of the people who have free power
689 2011-09-17 18:56:39 <b4epoche_> and it's not clear to me which it is
690 2011-09-17 18:57:04 <lfm> with free power they will keep on no matter what
691 2011-09-17 18:57:23 <b4epoche_> sure, but what percent has free power?
692 2011-09-17 18:57:45 <lfm> look at the pools, how many cpus are still mining?
693 2011-09-17 18:58:02 <b4epoche_> there's a very long tail...
694 2011-09-17 18:58:11 <b4epoche_> that accounts for a very small percentage
695 2011-09-17 18:58:57 <lfm> how many nvidia are mining? I doubt they are cost effective unless they have free power
696 2011-09-17 18:59:37 copumpkin has joined
697 2011-09-17 19:00:19 <b4epoche_> free power or parents power
698 2011-09-17 19:00:38 Firefly007 has joined
699 2011-09-17 19:00:43 <lfm> how many use the waste heat to offset heating bills in the winter? their power is nearly free too.
700 2011-09-17 19:01:13 <b4epoche_> heating with electricity is ridiculously costly
701 2011-09-17 19:01:16 <b4epoche_> but sureâ¦
702 2011-09-17 19:01:57 <b4epoche_> all I'm saying is that if like, 20% of miners drop out it could cause a negative feedback loop causing more to drop
703 2011-09-17 19:02:15 <luke-jr> nonsense
704 2011-09-17 19:02:24 <luke-jr> 20% of miners drop out, it just makes it more profitable for everyone else
705 2011-09-17 19:02:36 <b4epoche_> how?
706 2011-09-17 19:02:59 <b4epoche_> and before you say 'difficulty changes' read above
707 2011-09-17 19:03:09 <lfm> yup, and its possible some of the early bird miners could dump a ton of bitcoins into the market and drive the price down to 5 cents too. but I dont think it will
708 2011-09-17 19:04:00 <b4epoche_> a ton of things could happen⦠I'm just saying that having difficulty changes tied to the number of blocks found could be an issue/flaw
709 2011-09-17 19:04:22 <mtrlt> the problem is that the diff periods are too long
710 2011-09-17 19:04:38 B0g4r7_ has joined
711 2011-09-17 19:04:39 <b4epoche_> and tied to blocks found, not time
712 2011-09-17 19:04:58 <mtrlt> it's tied to blocks found for a reason
713 2011-09-17 19:05:21 <b4epoche_> not really
714 2011-09-17 19:05:48 <b4epoche_> other than that blocks found substitutes for time
715 2011-09-17 19:05:58 <lfm> b4epoche You think Satoshi didnt think about it before he implemented it?
716 2011-09-17 19:06:14 <b4epoche_> lfm: I think he thought about it a ton
717 2011-09-17 19:06:42 <mtrlt> but for example solidcoin has a 12h average diff period instead of bitcoin's 2 weeks. it's a lot better.
718 2011-09-17 19:07:21 <lfm> mtrlt: well, we'll see how solidcoin does compared to bitcoin in the long run.
719 2011-09-17 19:08:06 RazielZ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
720 2011-09-17 19:08:09 B0g4r7__ has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
721 2011-09-17 19:08:34 <mtrlt> well it's not the only change :P
722 2011-09-17 19:08:49 <mtrlt> but i think the diff period change is a positive one
723 2011-09-17 19:09:38 <b4epoche_> I think that Satoshi realized that what's best at the beginning is not necessarily what's best at steady state⦠and parameters will have to evolve
724 2011-09-17 19:10:14 <lfm> I think the 2 week period is working really very well.
725 2011-09-17 19:10:25 <mtrlt> lfm: so far
726 2011-09-17 19:10:32 <lfm> yup
727 2011-09-17 19:10:36 <mtrlt> lfm: it has been disastrous for other networks when people jumped out
728 2011-09-17 19:10:55 <b4epoche_> yea, so far⦠but I foresee that it could be a problem
729 2011-09-17 19:10:59 <lfm> yup, thats good too. we dont want other nets
730 2011-09-17 19:11:42 <b4epoche_> brilliant⦠flaws in the system that take down other networks are good?
731 2011-09-17 19:12:14 <lfm> a unified bitcoin is stronger than a ton of "me too"s
732 2011-09-17 19:12:44 <b4epoche_> well, the "me toos" can provide some information
733 2011-09-17 19:13:09 <lfm> so long as you dont interpret the info the wrong way
734 2011-09-17 19:14:01 <phantomcircuit> b4epoche_, other networks are economically infeasible
735 2011-09-17 19:14:37 <phantomcircuit> it's in the best interest of large bitcoin miners to difficulty spike the other networks regardless of the re-target threshold
736 2011-09-17 19:14:43 <phantomcircuit> so it will always happen
737 2011-09-17 19:15:33 <gjs278> ;;bc,stats
738 2011-09-17 19:15:36 <gribble> Current Blocks: 145753 | Current Difficulty: 1755425.3203287 | Next Difficulty At Block: 147167 | Next Difficulty In: 1414 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 3 days, 8 hours, 14 minutes, and 8 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1669004.11911234
739 2011-09-17 19:16:08 <b4epoche_> phantomcircuit: sure
740 2011-09-17 19:16:19 pointbiz has joined
741 2011-09-17 19:17:09 jix has joined
742 2011-09-17 19:17:20 <phantomcircuit> b4epoche, realistically the only solution is merged mining
743 2011-09-17 19:17:39 <b4epoche_> for other networks?
744 2011-09-17 19:17:53 <pigeons> b4epoche_: absolutely
745 2011-09-17 19:17:55 <phantomcircuit> yes
746 2011-09-17 19:18:00 <b4epoche_> I'm not advocating other networks⦠but I hope they keep popping up and keep dying
747 2011-09-17 19:18:12 <b4epoche_> because they 'test' things
748 2011-09-17 19:18:26 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
749 2011-09-17 19:18:58 <b4epoche_> where are the rc binaries?
750 2011-09-17 19:19:01 <b4epoche_> where are the rc binaries?
751 2011-09-17 19:19:37 <lfm> ok, bitcoin maybe isn't perfect but it is good enuf that with its head start, it seem nothing can replace it.
752 2011-09-17 19:20:06 <b4epoche_> lfm: agreed, but I think it'll need tweaked along the way
753 2011-09-17 19:20:31 <mtrlt> lfm: nothing can replace it? there's no-one that has even tried
754 2011-09-17 19:20:46 mosimo has quit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
755 2011-09-17 19:20:54 mosimo has joined
756 2011-09-17 19:21:04 <b4epoche_> well, depends on the time-scales we're talking about
757 2011-09-17 19:21:04 <lfm> mtrlt: well Id say you havnt been paying attention, theres been many who tried
758 2011-09-17 19:21:24 <b4epoche_> something /will/ replace it at some point
759 2011-09-17 19:24:00 <mtrlt> lfm: namecoin? ixcoin?
760 2011-09-17 19:24:12 <mtrlt> solidcoin is the first that seems to be trying
761 2011-09-17 19:25:21 CaptainDDL has joined
762 2011-09-17 19:26:59 <mtrlt> but we'll see once 2.0 is released
763 2011-09-17 19:27:26 <lfm> what solidcoin 2.0? vs bitcoin 0.4?
764 2011-09-17 19:28:04 datagutt has quit (Quit: kthxbai)
765 2011-09-17 19:28:52 <mtrlt> we'll see if there are actually any changes that matter in it :p
766 2011-09-17 19:28:55 <mtrlt> in sc 2.0
767 2011-09-17 19:29:03 chuck has quit (Excess Flood)
768 2011-09-17 19:29:38 chuck has joined
769 2011-09-17 19:29:53 <phantomcircuit> mtrlt, solidcoin is a failure
770 2011-09-17 19:29:58 <lfm> seems kind amusing sc thinks they are on v 2.0 based on code from btc 0.3.x
771 2011-09-17 19:29:59 <phantomcircuit> that's pretty clear
772 2011-09-17 19:30:06 <phantomcircuit> realsolid is in a word incompetent
773 2011-09-17 19:30:27 <copumpkin> incompetent is fine if you aren't also a douchebag
774 2011-09-17 19:30:32 Turing_i has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
775 2011-09-17 19:30:44 <copumpkin> I'd prefer not douchebag + not incompetent
776 2011-09-17 19:30:53 <sipa> i don't mind people trying alternatives
777 2011-09-17 19:31:29 <mtrlt> lfm: it's just a number
778 2011-09-17 19:31:31 <sipa> as long as they are aware they're experimenting
779 2011-09-17 19:31:34 <lfm> trying alts is fine but try not to get delusional about taking over the world
780 2011-09-17 19:31:40 <sipa> inded
781 2011-09-17 19:31:48 <mtrlt> lfm: the same applies to bitcoin ;-)
782 2011-09-17 19:31:53 <lfm> true
783 2011-09-17 19:32:03 <sipa> i consider bitcoin an experiment like everything else
784 2011-09-17 19:32:21 <sipa> but at least one which already survives for two years
785 2011-09-17 19:32:33 <mtrlt> yeah
786 2011-09-17 19:32:41 <mtrlt> but people don't have to invent it all over again
787 2011-09-17 19:32:52 <mtrlt> so bitcoin really does not have a 2 year advantage over others :p
788 2011-09-17 19:33:00 cosurgi has joined
789 2011-09-17 19:33:06 <lfm> no, its 2.5+
790 2011-09-17 19:33:19 <sipa> they have network effect of two years to fight against
791 2011-09-17 19:33:27 <sipa> that's harder than reinventing, imho
792 2011-09-17 19:33:28 d1234 has joined
793 2011-09-17 19:33:34 <mtrlt> more like network effect of slightly over a year
794 2011-09-17 19:33:39 <sipa> agree
795 2011-09-17 19:33:57 <mtrlt> but the community is still small
796 2011-09-17 19:34:03 <sipa> sure
797 2011-09-17 19:34:11 d1234 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
798 2011-09-17 19:34:16 <lfm> over a year since the first big slashdot infusion
799 2011-09-17 19:34:48 <mtrlt> and there are hardly any places that i've seen that accept bitcoin
800 2011-09-17 19:34:48 <sipa> i've been here for 10 months now
801 2011-09-17 19:34:48 <mtrlt> :P
802 2011-09-17 19:38:05 datagutt has joined
803 2011-09-17 19:39:30 maikmerten has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
804 2011-09-17 19:44:25 <luke-jr> mtrlt: SC 2.0 requires new miner software
805 2011-09-17 19:45:57 <sipa> how so?
806 2011-09-17 19:48:38 huk has joined
807 2011-09-17 19:49:14 <k9quaint> has anything specific about SC 2 has been published? or is it still just claims instead of source code?
808 2011-09-17 19:50:30 <sipa> obviously it will solve the 51% attack problem
809 2011-09-17 19:50:55 <k9quaint> by building in a successful 51% attack by one individual :)
810 2011-09-17 19:54:12 datagutt has quit ()
811 2011-09-17 19:54:17 <luke-jr> sipa: dunno, I just heard conman ranting how cgminer won't add support for it :P
812 2011-09-17 19:55:01 <k9quaint> is CH even going to post the source? or just release binaries?
813 2011-09-17 19:55:13 <luke-jr> probably not
814 2011-09-17 19:57:48 <phantomcircuit> ch?
815 2011-09-17 19:58:03 <k9quaint> CoinHunter/RealSolid
816 2011-09-17 19:58:03 * tcatm didn't know bitcoin would accept addreses from .bitcoin/addr.txt for initial seeding. I wonder if we should use that feature, remove it or keep it...
817 2011-09-17 19:59:02 nutcase has joined
818 2011-09-17 19:59:04 datagutt has joined
819 2011-09-17 19:59:07 datagutt has quit (Changing host)
820 2011-09-17 19:59:07 datagutt has joined
821 2011-09-17 20:12:14 <lfm> tcatm: addr.dat seems like a good idea for binaries that havnt been updated in a long time, builtin lists would be too old after a while. I spoze the dns lists are still good but addr.dat doesnt hurt to have extra insurance
822 2011-09-17 20:13:41 localhost has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
823 2011-09-17 20:13:59 <phantomcircuit> lfm, addr.txt not .dat
824 2011-09-17 20:14:33 <lfm> doh, ok, I didnt know that either then
825 2011-09-17 20:16:17 <lfm> cant help but wonder if it has ever been used!
826 2011-09-17 20:16:24 <tcatm> probably not
827 2011-09-17 20:16:48 <tcatm> maybe it doesn't even work?
828 2011-09-17 20:17:19 localhost has joined
829 2011-09-17 20:18:32 <lfm> looks like it just adds the ip addresses to the database with a timestamp of zero
830 2011-09-17 20:19:22 <tcatm> works
831 2011-09-17 20:24:42 datagutt has quit (Quit: kthxbai)
832 2011-09-17 20:24:58 <flying> bbiab
833 2011-09-17 20:31:23 <pointbiz> satoshi said it was more redundant to have IRC and a built in list for bootstrapping
834 2011-09-17 20:32:14 <phantomcircuit> lol the irc points to a single irc server
835 2011-09-17 20:32:14 <pointbiz> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=84.msg1579#msg1579
836 2011-09-17 20:32:41 <pointbiz> he mentions having a list of long standing nodes shipped with the client
837 2011-09-17 20:33:29 <phantomcircuit> choosing the right peers is actually a fairly complex problem
838 2011-09-17 20:33:32 <lfm> pointbiz: yes, that list is in the source
839 2011-09-17 20:34:42 <phantomcircuit> you want to have beens on the extremes of latency and location, you dont want to connect to the same individual or group more than once, and you need to be able to drop peers that are simply spamming you
840 2011-09-17 20:34:55 <phantomcircuit> doing all of that is more complex than it would seem
841 2011-09-17 20:35:10 Burgundy has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
842 2011-09-17 20:35:58 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
843 2011-09-17 20:36:34 <pointbiz> satoshi mentioned just getting a list of addresses from the seed nodes and not to connect to them. but i agree it's not a simple problem.
844 2011-09-17 20:36:39 Burgundy has joined
845 2011-09-17 20:37:08 <phantomcircuit> pointbiz, getting a list of peers is actually fairly easy assuming that you have made at least 1 connection to a legitimate peer
846 2011-09-17 20:37:21 <phantomcircuit> the current client doesn't do this but it should
847 2011-09-17 20:37:32 <phantomcircuit> some connections should be stable and some should be rotating
848 2011-09-17 20:39:30 <Lolcust> With all due respect and pardons for possible ignorance on my part, isn't complex, sybil-resistant peer selections kinda moot when several pools amounting to ( -I am still trying to get indication approximately how many, but likely couple hundred or so- ) nodes define the operation of the network ?
849 2011-09-17 20:39:59 Cablesaurus has quit (Quit: On the other hand, you have different fingers.)
850 2011-09-17 20:40:50 <tcatm> Big pools are a problem. I'd love to see a distributed pool but that's not easy to do.
851 2011-09-17 20:41:33 <sipa> it's not that hard
852 2011-09-17 20:41:48 <Lolcust> Well, I agree that big pools disagree ^__^ with bitcoin philosophy
853 2011-09-17 20:41:48 <sipa> not sure how much of it is implemented though
854 2011-09-17 20:42:13 <Lolcust> Still, their current existence makes "robust peer selection" a foregone conclusion it seems to me
855 2011-09-17 20:42:39 <sipa> satoshi envisioned a newtwork where +- all full nodes were miners
856 2011-09-17 20:42:52 Burgundy has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
857 2011-09-17 20:42:59 <Lolcust> Well, yeah, I sort of got that feel from the paper )
858 2011-09-17 20:43:00 <sipa> we're indeed far from that today
859 2011-09-17 20:43:15 Burgundy has joined
860 2011-09-17 20:43:25 <tcatm> I don't think satoshi ever envisioned difficulty at 1755888 :)
861 2011-09-17 20:43:35 <sipa> ;;bc,diff
862 2011-09-17 20:43:36 <gribble> 1755425.3203287
863 2011-09-17 20:43:45 Cokein has joined
864 2011-09-17 20:44:08 <tcatm> Hrm, why is my calculation different?
865 2011-09-17 20:44:20 <sipa> how do you calculate it?
866 2011-09-17 20:44:42 <tcatm> float(0x00000000FFFF0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000>>193) / float(target)
867 2011-09-17 20:45:08 <tcatm> with target = ((c & 0xFFFFFFL) << (8 * ((c >> 24) - 3))) >> 193
868 2011-09-17 20:45:27 <sipa> that should be correct
869 2011-09-17 20:45:36 <luke-jr> tcatm: gribble is wrong IIRC
870 2011-09-17 20:46:03 <sipa> gribble's result is bitcoin'd getinfo
871 2011-09-17 20:46:12 <sipa> bitcoind's
872 2011-09-17 20:46:12 <luke-jr> old bitcoind was wrong
873 2011-09-17 20:46:23 <sipa> yes, but way more off than this
874 2011-09-17 20:48:18 Burgundy has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
875 2011-09-17 20:48:40 Burgundy has joined
876 2011-09-17 20:48:41 <lfm> sipa, what do you get?
877 2011-09-17 20:49:39 <lfm> 1a098ea5 = 1755425.32 by my calcs
878 2011-09-17 20:49:51 <sipa> ;;bc,target
879 2011-09-17 20:49:52 <gribble> Error: "bc,target" is not a valid command.
880 2011-09-17 20:49:57 <sipa> ;;bc,hextarget
881 2011-09-17 20:49:57 <gribble> 000000000000098EA50000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
882 2011-09-17 20:50:26 <lfm> ;;bc,hextarget
883 2011-09-17 20:50:27 <gribble> 000000000000098EA50000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
884 2011-09-17 20:50:50 Burgundy has quit (Client Quit)
885 2011-09-17 20:51:46 <sipa> bitcoind's getinfo result is exactly right
886 2011-09-17 20:51:51 <sipa> all decimals of it
887 2011-09-17 20:52:22 <lfm> huh? would only be accurate to 5 or so decimals really
888 2011-09-17 20:53:15 <sipa> i get 1755425.320328702735410902367879477792
889 2011-09-17 20:53:34 _Burgundy has joined
890 2011-09-17 20:53:35 <sipa> with arbitrary-precision calculation
891 2011-09-17 20:54:13 <lfm> ya well the 98ea5 is only 16 to 23 bits of significance
892 2011-09-17 20:55:12 <tcatm> fixed. the >> 193 was truncating the 0xA5
893 2011-09-17 20:56:15 <luke-jr> 1755425.320328702735410902367879478
894 2011-09-17 20:56:42 <luke-jr> actually
895 2011-09-17 20:56:46 p0s has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
896 2011-09-17 20:56:47 <luke-jr> it goes on for a long way
897 2011-09-17 20:57:12 <luke-jr> possibly infinite
898 2011-09-17 20:57:28 <lfm> naw, it is rational
899 2011-09-17 20:57:46 <lfm> might repeat eventually
900 2011-09-17 20:58:20 <gmaxwell> It's a sum of ratio of integers, of course it's rational. :)
901 2011-09-17 20:58:37 <gmaxwell> could have a really long period though
902 2011-09-17 20:58:49 <lfm> ya so it repeats eventially one way or another
903 2011-09-17 20:59:02 <luke-jr> 1î§î§î§21.52010î§î§637î§î§6î§î§326î§î§528î§6306î§î§î§64î§35444î§0416î§î§î§î§148î§î§47î§î§î§8î§435î§2î§î§î§71î§î§î§6î§05î§0014î§î§î§î§40î§61225î§î§3î§2î§
904 2011-09-17 20:59:09 <lfm> eventually
905 2011-09-17 20:59:41 <lfm> what the heck are those chicken scratches?
906 2011-09-17 21:00:11 <luke-jr> Tonal shows more precision in less characters :P
907 2011-09-17 21:00:23 <lfm> oh right, of course
908 2011-09-17 21:00:39 <luke-jr> 1755425.320328702735410902367879477792448522450230784828072886814051770521169778124057023250912841407476119
909 2011-09-17 21:00:53 <luke-jr> or by pool accounting
910 2011-09-17 21:00:54 <luke-jr> 1755452.106402103646416249295511550417424374262582203623904550396668842079389781299997458350422241473219503
911 2011-09-17 21:01:02 _Burgundy has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
912 2011-09-17 21:01:12 karnac has quit (Quit: karnac)
913 2011-09-17 21:01:21 <lfm> its not real precicision tho when its only significant to 16 to 23 bits
914 2011-09-17 21:02:00 <luke-jr> ?
915 2011-09-17 21:02:28 <luke-jr> that's 399 bits of precision there
916 2011-09-17 21:02:34 <luke-jr> for the tonal one, at least
917 2011-09-17 21:03:42 <lfm> ok you're starting with the 0x098ea5 part of the compressed diff. you can tell how many significant digits if you assume the next bit is either a zero or a one, you dont really know. calculate it both ways and youll see it makes everything but the first 7 digits or so change
918 2011-09-17 21:04:18 <luke-jr> â¦
919 2011-09-17 21:04:22 sshc has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
920 2011-09-17 21:04:31 <luke-jr> there are no next bits
921 2011-09-17 21:04:37 <luke-jr> the "compressed diff" is all that matters
922 2011-09-17 21:04:50 <lfm> ok then just add one and see how much of a change it is
923 2011-09-17 21:05:05 <luke-jr> why
924 2011-09-17 21:05:07 <luke-jr> it doesn't prove anything
925 2011-09-17 21:05:26 <lfm> because after that the rest of the digits are a waste of time
926 2011-09-17 21:07:57 <lfm> see we have 1a098ea5 -> 1755425.32 and 1a098ea6 would give you 1755422.518 so the fractional part is totally insignificant
927 2011-09-17 21:10:00 * Eliel wonders what kind of significance lfm means here.
928 2011-09-17 21:10:24 <lfm> if you were to start with 1755425 and convert back with any fraction you want you would still get 1a098ea5
929 2011-09-17 21:10:43 <sipa> you're comparing two real difficulties
930 2011-09-17 21:11:07 <sipa> so you get indeed that a few decimals suffices to distinguish difficulties
931 2011-09-17 21:11:22 <sipa> but the actual probabilities behind them do have much higher precision
932 2011-09-17 21:11:26 <sipa> infinite precision even
933 2011-09-17 21:11:37 <lfm> Im just saying the faction is pointless to report
934 2011-09-17 21:11:44 <lfm> fraction
935 2011-09-17 21:12:48 <tcatm> should we add a enhanced download page to bitcoin.org with unstable versions like 0.4rc2?
936 2011-09-17 21:13:00 dvide has quit ()
937 2011-09-17 21:13:12 <lfm> well its not really infinite precision either. you acually compare the 256 bit values, so there is 256 significant bits there, not infinite
938 2011-09-17 21:19:03 <luke-jr> â¦..
939 2011-09-17 21:19:50 <lfm> Eliel: by insignificant I mean you can calculate a number but you dont really know what the trailing digits should be after a point because the number you started with did not supply that much accuracy to you for the input value.
940 2011-09-17 21:20:35 abragin has quit ()
941 2011-09-17 21:21:28 <Eliel> lfm: that's fine for physical and analog stuff but... I don't think it's exactly applicable in this case.
942 2011-09-17 21:21:56 <luke-jr> lfm: the bits are perfectly accurate
943 2011-09-17 21:22:03 gjs278 has joined
944 2011-09-17 21:22:44 <lfm> well it is cuz the compressed difficulty is a tracation of a calculation of the time it took for the last 2016 blocks. It could have had more accuracy that was thrown away to stor it in the 32 bit word special format
945 2011-09-17 21:23:04 <lfm> tracation -> truncation
946 2011-09-17 21:23:22 <luke-jr> it doesn't have more accuracy
947 2011-09-17 21:23:31 <luke-jr> if you try to use more accuracy, your blocks will be rejected
948 2011-09-17 21:23:49 <luke-jr> the truncation is part of the calculation
949 2011-09-17 21:23:49 <lfm> ya well the time is only accurate to one second out of two weeks so ...
950 2011-09-17 21:25:06 <lfm> and of course those times depend on the clock settings of various computers which could be much less than one second accuracy
951 2011-09-17 21:26:02 <lfm> luke-jr I'm just trying to formalize how many digits of the difficulty it makes sense to report.
952 2011-09-17 21:26:16 <luke-jr> lfm: depends what it's being used for
953 2011-09-17 21:26:22 <luke-jr> for PPS calculations, quite a bit
954 2011-09-17 21:26:37 <lfm> after a certain point it doesnt matter what its used for tho
955 2011-09-17 21:26:55 <lfm> pps?
956 2011-09-17 21:26:58 <Eliel> yes, for PPS calculation, you'd want as much accuracy as you can.
957 2011-09-17 21:27:05 <Eliel> PPS = Pay Per Share
958 2011-09-17 21:27:21 Daniel0108 has quit (Quit: good night!)
959 2011-09-17 21:27:30 <lfm> but just calculating extra digits blindly doe not give you any extra accuracy really
960 2011-09-17 21:28:04 <lfm> it becomes arbitrary, not accurate
961 2011-09-17 21:28:35 <Eliel> it does, because you're interested in the network's characteristics, not the semantics of the difficulty calculation.
962 2011-09-17 21:28:53 <luke-jr> it's not blind
963 2011-09-17 21:29:14 <Eliel> the network does the comparison with quite some bits of accuracy.
964 2011-09-17 21:29:25 abragin has joined
965 2011-09-17 21:29:26 abragin has quit (Changing host)
966 2011-09-17 21:29:26 abragin has joined
967 2011-09-17 21:30:00 <lfm> eliel when you have the "compressed" diff of 1a098ea5 you cant reall tell what the real fraction is because it was thrown away. doing extra calculations is arbitrary, not informative
968 2011-09-17 21:30:28 <Eliel> like I was just saying, the "real fraction" doesn't matter.
969 2011-09-17 21:30:43 <Eliel> what matters is the fraction used by the nodes on the network
970 2011-09-17 21:30:56 <luke-jr> lfm: wrong.
971 2011-09-17 21:31:03 <Eliel> for that, you need equal accuracy to the nodes
972 2011-09-17 21:31:04 TheAncientGoat has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
973 2011-09-17 21:31:25 <luke-jr> lfm: 1a098ea5 is the compressed form of 98ea500000000000000000â¦
974 2011-09-17 21:31:35 <luke-jr> exactly
975 2011-09-17 21:31:40 <lfm> all you know is it somewhere between 1a098ea4 and 1a098ea6 really. any extra significance is totally arbitrary
976 2011-09-17 21:31:41 BitcoinExchange has joined
977 2011-09-17 21:31:44 <luke-jr> lfm: wrong
978 2011-09-17 21:31:50 <luke-jr> 1a098ea5 is exact
979 2011-09-17 21:32:18 Turing_i has joined
980 2011-09-17 21:32:18 Turing_i has quit (Changing host)
981 2011-09-17 21:32:18 Turing_i has joined
982 2011-09-17 21:32:59 <Eliel> lfm: 1a098ea5 stores the actual difficulty used by the network and it does so exactly.
983 2011-09-17 21:33:44 <lfm> but if you convert it to decimal. it doesnt grow all those fraction digits outa thin air. they are an articat of the base conversion
984 2011-09-17 21:33:55 <lfm> artifcat
985 2011-09-17 21:34:00 <luke-jr> lfm: no, they aren't
986 2011-09-17 21:34:03 <lfm> artifact
987 2011-09-17 21:34:06 <luke-jr> because difficulty is not just a conversion to decimal
988 2011-09-17 21:34:13 <luke-jr> difficulty is a division
989 2011-09-17 21:34:25 <lfm> and division is inacurate
990 2011-09-17 21:34:29 <luke-jr> no
991 2011-09-17 21:34:33 <luke-jr> division does not need to be inaccurate
992 2011-09-17 21:34:38 <luke-jr> lrn2math
993 2011-09-17 21:34:39 <lfm> you round off or truncate the result
994 2011-09-17 21:34:56 <luke-jr> you don't need to
995 2011-09-17 21:35:10 <lfm> well you did to get the 098ea5
996 2011-09-17 21:35:16 <luke-jr> nope
997 2011-09-17 21:35:34 <luke-jr> 98ea5⦠is EXACT
998 2011-09-17 21:35:47 <luke-jr> how you got at that target is irrelevant
999 2011-09-17 21:35:52 <lfm> and you try divideing those seconds by 2016 or whatever it is and you will need to truncate somewhere
1000 2011-09-17 21:35:56 <luke-jr> the network doesn't care about that
1001 2011-09-17 21:36:02 <luke-jr> the network only cares that it's 98ea5â¦
1002 2011-09-17 21:37:16 <lfm> and how did it get the 098ea5? a divide and truncate operation, ie throw away all those fractional digits that you think you are reinventing
1003 2011-09-17 21:37:19 <luke-jr> irrelevant
1004 2011-09-17 21:37:28 <luke-jr> no, we're not reinventing those
1005 2011-09-17 21:37:31 <luke-jr> they were discarded
1006 2011-09-17 21:37:33 <luke-jr> they are not relevant
1007 2011-09-17 21:39:01 <lfm> yes they were discarded, but when you report a 100 digits of difficulty you seem to be pretending that you have recovered them
1008 2011-09-17 21:39:07 piuk has joined
1009 2011-09-17 21:39:34 <luke-jr> nope
1010 2011-09-17 21:39:42 <luke-jr> those 100 digits are part of the truncated target
1011 2011-09-17 21:40:42 <lfm> so you would say that if I use a 32 bit float I can print out 100 bigits of fraction and it is usefull?
1012 2011-09-17 21:42:28 <luke-jr> no
1013 2011-09-17 21:42:31 <lfm> I am saying if you report a difficulty of 1755425.3 or 1755425.4 you are actually reporting the same exact difficulty and you shouldnt really even put any fraction there
1014 2011-09-17 21:42:32 <luke-jr> I would say you have no clue
1015 2011-09-17 21:43:12 nhodges has joined
1016 2011-09-17 21:44:22 agricocb has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1017 2011-09-17 21:44:36 <gmaxwell> lfm: Eh, from the perspective of calculating e.g. payoff odds one is more accurate than the other.
1018 2011-09-17 21:45:00 <gmaxwell> lfm: most people don't give a !@#!@ about "difficulty as the measurement of an interval"
1019 2011-09-17 21:45:03 <lfm> when you calculate you pps how many digits (or bits) do you use?
1020 2011-09-17 21:45:45 <sipa> the point is that you can calculate the expected income from mining at a given hash rate up to infinite precision
1021 2011-09-17 21:45:52 <gmaxwell> "enough to hit the bitcoin precision with conservative rounding"
1022 2011-09-17 21:45:59 <sipa> ignoring stale blocks
1023 2011-09-17 21:46:33 <sipa> it wouldn't be meaningful
1024 2011-09-17 21:46:39 <sipa> but it would be correct
1025 2011-09-17 21:47:46 <lfm> "with conservative rounding" means you are rounding off somewhere. just another way of assuming a certain level of accuracy in a calculation
1026 2011-09-17 21:48:16 <gmaxwell> Sure, but thats output limited.
1027 2011-09-17 21:48:17 <sipa> we're talking about different things
1028 2011-09-17 21:49:16 <gmaxwell> e.g. if I'm going to pay you something and the smallest I can pay you is 1e-8 the I just need enough precision to calculate to that with the required rounding.
1029 2011-09-17 21:50:14 <lfm> sure so long as you calculate some value out to a satoshi you figure it must be the right number?
1030 2011-09-17 21:50:20 <sipa> your claim is this: there are only a limited number of possible targets, and they are quite far apart, thus it is not meaningful to calculate difficulties up to more precision
1031 2011-09-17 21:50:21 <gmaxwell> so if I were figuring out pps for a pool I was running, I'd calculate it out to coin unit integer and round down.
1032 2011-09-17 21:50:44 <gmaxwell> If I used more than that I'd expect to lose money on average, and greater than that I'd be cheating the users.
1033 2011-09-17 21:51:25 chuck has quit (Changing host)
1034 2011-09-17 21:51:25 chuck has joined
1035 2011-09-17 21:51:31 <gmaxwell> (and I'm still taking more than I should most of the time, but thats not my fault)
1036 2011-09-17 21:52:10 <lfm> gmaxwell: actually you could keep track of fractions of a satoshi and save them up till you get whole ones to credit to your users.
1037 2011-09-17 21:52:35 <gmaxwell> I could, sure, but I was assuming there was a constant PPS amount.
1038 2011-09-17 21:53:12 <gmaxwell> I could also add uniform zero mean random numbers with a scale equal to the payment quantization step for each payment.
1039 2011-09-17 21:54:13 tcatm has quit (Changing host)
1040 2011-09-17 21:54:13 tcatm has joined
1041 2011-09-17 21:54:49 <gmaxwell> (a memoryless way of adding up to exactly the right amount)
1042 2011-09-17 21:54:54 <lfm> or you could use the gmp (gnu multi-precision) ration numbers option and calculate the 256 bit target ratio to the 0x00000000ffff000... number and do all the calculations exact in rational arithmetic.
1043 2011-09-17 21:54:57 <gmaxwell> (in infinite time :) )
1044 2011-09-17 21:55:12 <gmaxwell> lfm: I'm still forced to quantize eventually.
1045 2011-09-17 21:55:20 <gmaxwell> (in order to make a payment)
1046 2011-09-17 21:55:22 <lfm> naw gmp does that stuff quite quick
1047 2011-09-17 21:55:39 piuk has quit (Quit: Page closed)
1048 2011-09-17 21:56:17 clr_ has joined
1049 2011-09-17 21:56:18 <lfm> it still silly to report 100 digits for the difficulty
1050 2011-09-17 21:56:32 <sipa> silly: definitely
1051 2011-09-17 21:56:40 <gmaxwell> Agreed.
1052 2011-09-17 21:56:43 <sipa> but not wrong
1053 2011-09-17 21:56:55 <sipa> and it does have more information than using less digits
1054 2011-09-17 21:57:09 <gmaxwell> Better to report the target instead.
1055 2011-09-17 21:57:16 <gmaxwell> Infinite precision.
1056 2011-09-17 21:57:16 <sipa> indeed
1057 2011-09-17 21:57:48 <gmaxwell> And anyone that really wants 100 digits probably wants to do the calculation with exact rational math.
1058 2011-09-17 21:58:05 <lfm> I wouldnt call it infinite prescision. I would perhaps call the hex value the exact value. it is still only 16-23 digits precision
1059 2011-09-17 21:58:28 <gmaxwell> lfm: it's infinite for the purpose of calculating what bitcoin mining returns are.
1060 2011-09-17 21:58:41 <gmaxwell> The mean of that distibution is exactly thus.
1061 2011-09-17 21:59:16 <lfm> well with the terminology I am used to it is exact but not infinitly precise
1062 2011-09-17 21:59:31 BitcoinExchange has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1063 2011-09-17 21:59:38 <da2ce7> well it is exzact percisicon
1064 2011-09-17 21:59:53 <da2ce7> lol
1065 2011-09-17 22:00:05 clr_ is now known as c00w
1066 2011-09-17 22:00:18 <gmaxwell> lfm: I don't see why you say that. The decision to accept a block is compared exactly to a figure produced from that determinstically.
1067 2011-09-17 22:00:23 <lfm> da2ce7: exact but not precice according to the definitions of the terms that I use
1068 2011-09-17 22:00:50 <gmaxwell> If you were to diminish it by any fraction you would be less correct.
1069 2011-09-17 22:01:31 <da2ce7> anyway. just pass the target. we should be doing all our calculations based upon that.
1070 2011-09-17 22:02:03 lady_awk has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1071 2011-09-17 22:02:25 <lfm> there is no fraction in the 1a098ea5 value. it is a fixed binary value like : ;;bc,hextarget
1072 2011-09-17 22:02:39 <lfm> ;;bc,hextarget
1073 2011-09-17 22:02:40 <gribble> 000000000000098EA50000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
1074 2011-09-17 22:03:44 <gmaxwell> lfm: I know. But if you were to add one it could only make the value calculated for the mean of the distribution of the time between hashes less accurate.
1075 2011-09-17 22:03:49 <lfm> see, no fraction and all those zeros are just placeholders, not "precision".
1076 2011-09-17 22:05:27 <da2ce7> why don't we just use big-int?
1077 2011-09-17 22:05:33 <da2ce7> and use floor?
1078 2011-09-17 22:05:52 <lfm> da2ce7: we do for some cases
1079 2011-09-17 22:07:59 <lfm> the zeros in the hextarget are not precision because we cannot have a hextarget of 000000000000098EA50000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 <- see htere, thats not allowed. the spec does not carry that "precision".
1080 2011-09-17 22:09:09 iocor has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
1081 2011-09-17 22:09:15 <lfm> and same for all the other trailing zeros, they are required to be zeros, not other digits
1082 2011-09-17 22:09:41 <da2ce7> they are just padding.
1083 2011-09-17 22:10:03 <lfm> padding or filler or placeholders, call them what you want.
1084 2011-09-17 22:11:13 <gmaxwell> It doesn't really matter whats allowed.
1085 2011-09-17 22:11:35 <gmaxwell> The target is what it is.
1086 2011-09-17 22:12:09 <gmaxwell> If you convert it to a format that allows more precision and you fill any of that precision with anything but zero you've made the figure less accurate.
1087 2011-09-17 22:12:28 <lfm> huh?
1088 2011-09-17 22:13:05 <da2ce7> well: (hex)target > (bigInt)target > do calculations > (floor) to format you want.
1089 2011-09-17 22:13:20 <da2ce7> or something like that.
1090 2011-09-17 22:13:55 <lfm> the spec might specify those filler digits should be Fs or 5 or anything, it happens to specifiy 0s
1091 2011-09-17 22:14:31 <gmaxwell> You're not at all following what I'm saying.
1092 2011-09-17 22:16:00 <lfm> gmaxwell: true, I am not following what your definition of the term "accurate" is. yo you mean exact or do you mean precise? (as I use those terms) I suspect you dont knwo which you mean.
1093 2011-09-17 22:16:21 <gmaxwell> If difficulty values could only be e.g. 1.234450 -> 1.234900 (e.g. I'm giving too much precision here) you would get incorrect answers if you computed the expected operations between solutions using 1.2344 instead of 1.234450.
1094 2011-09-17 22:17:18 <gmaxwell> No, I mean accurate. You would get results which are incorrect up to available precision, which is infinite for the mean of the distribution of operations between solutions.
1095 2011-09-17 22:18:10 <gmaxwell> Just because the spec can't expres intermedate target values doesn't mean that bitcoin clients might use them rather than the actual target.
1096 2011-09-17 22:18:31 <lfm> gmaxwell: well computers cannot really do infinatly accurate calculations you know. they are always limited usually by avalable memory.
1097 2011-09-17 22:19:15 <gmaxwell> It's all rational,â finite in finite out.
1098 2011-09-17 22:20:04 AAA_awright has joined
1099 2011-09-17 22:20:06 <gmaxwell> And I do infinite precision calculations all the time. Using exact rational arithemetic, which is something that every computer algebra system is perfectly comfortable with.
1100 2011-09-17 22:20:20 <lfm> and rounding off all the time and with maximums and minimums beyond which any givven format will overflow or underflow.
1101 2011-09-17 22:21:00 <sipa> lfm let me make an analogy
1102 2011-09-17 22:21:11 <lfm> you only handle a small subset of possible values tho, nothing like infinite.
1103 2011-09-17 22:21:18 JFK911 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1104 2011-09-17 22:21:23 JFK911 has joined
1105 2011-09-17 22:21:50 <sipa> the only speed limits that exist here (belgium) are 10, 20, 30, 50, 70, 90 and 120 km/h
1106 2011-09-17 22:22:15 <sipa> does that mean it is impossible to drive 40km in hour?
1107 2011-09-17 22:22:24 <lfm> if you have a single number that fills up your memory you cant do much more. thats not do ing infinite numbers. that is still finite.
1108 2011-09-17 22:22:50 iocor has joined
1109 2011-09-17 22:23:12 <sipa> it's entirely irrelevant
1110 2011-09-17 22:23:46 <lfm> sipa pretty much impossible ya. Id say you almost certainly are either going faster than 40 km/h or slower. It may in fact be impossible to go exactly 40 km/h
1111 2011-09-17 22:23:57 <sipa> no
1112 2011-09-17 22:23:59 <sipa> i mean
1113 2011-09-17 22:24:15 <sipa> if i am describing a speed limit
1114 2011-09-17 22:24:28 <sipa> it suffices that i give you the multiple of 10km/h
1115 2011-09-17 22:24:51 piotrp has quit (Quit: piotrp)
1116 2011-09-17 22:24:56 <lfm> and if you dont know exactly how fast you are going then how can you know if you are speeding?
1117 2011-09-17 22:24:57 <sipa> as there is no 15km/h limit, it suffices to say "oh it's 1-something per hour"
1118 2011-09-17 22:25:05 <sipa> agree?
1119 2011-09-17 22:25:07 <sipa> just bear with me
1120 2011-09-17 22:26:47 <sipa> lfm: agree?
1121 2011-09-17 22:26:54 <lfm> so whats the question?
1122 2011-09-17 22:27:02 <sipa> there is no 15km/h limit
1123 2011-09-17 22:27:09 <lfm> ok
1124 2011-09-17 22:27:29 <sipa> so if i'm describing a speed limit, and say "it is 1-something km per hour", you know i can only mean 10km/h
1125 2011-09-17 22:27:32 <sipa> right?
1126 2011-09-17 22:28:04 <lfm> unless you mean 19.9999 ... (with the 9s repeating) then it is equal to 20
1127 2011-09-17 22:28:25 <sipa> technically, you're right
1128 2011-09-17 22:28:38 <lfm> sorry, I know what you wanted me to say
1129 2011-09-17 22:28:49 <sipa> rephrase: "it is 3-something km per hour", then you know i can only mean 30km/h
1130 2011-09-17 22:29:15 <sipa> however, that doesn't mean 32km/h is an impossible or meaningless number
1131 2011-09-17 22:29:31 <sipa> speeds are also relevant for other things than describing speed limits
1132 2011-09-17 22:29:51 <da2ce7> lfm. take two rational numbers and proform the inverse product fuction (division).
1133 2011-09-17 22:30:01 <da2ce7> what is the most complicated result you can obtain?
1134 2011-09-17 22:30:03 <lfm> in the sense that 32 is like in a range of 31.5 to 32.5 or something
1135 2011-09-17 22:30:23 <sipa> no, just 32 on itself is a useful metric that can occur in calculations
1136 2011-09-17 22:30:28 <da2ce7> this will show the ABS_maths memory limits.
1137 2011-09-17 22:30:36 <sipa> even if there are no roads where exactly that speed is enforced
1138 2011-09-17 22:30:40 <lfm> da2ce7: what you mean complicated?
1139 2011-09-17 22:31:02 <da2ce7> for two 256bit numbers the limit is 512bit complexity.
1140 2011-09-17 22:31:37 <lfm> da2ce7: ya, I guess, assuming your using rational numbers or something
1141 2011-09-17 22:31:51 <da2ce7> yes... the target is a rational number...
1142 2011-09-17 22:31:56 <sipa> lfm: for the difficulty it is exactly the same: yes, there exists no difficulty between 14423.5 and 14423.51, but that doesn't mean the first one isn't less accurate
1143 2011-09-17 22:33:06 <lfm> sipa your confusing accurate with exact or precise. it may be less exact but no more precise.
1144 2011-09-17 22:33:28 <pointbiz> tcatm: bitcoin.org should promote stability. people who should try a release candidate probably know how to get it.
1145 2011-09-17 22:34:54 <sipa> i agree
1146 2011-09-17 22:35:21 <tcatm> what's the correct way to get it with the forums being "unofficial"? -dev mailinglist?
1147 2011-09-17 22:36:50 <lfm> you mean like announcing "official" release candidates?
1148 2011-09-17 22:37:07 <sipa> tcatm: i suppose
1149 2011-09-17 22:37:26 epscy has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1150 2011-09-17 22:37:38 <tcatm> lfm: yes. basically copying gavin's forum post to bitcoin.org
1151 2011-09-17 22:37:55 abragin has quit ()
1152 2011-09-17 22:40:43 theorbtwo has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1153 2011-09-17 22:45:32 Jefff has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1154 2011-09-17 22:50:45 karnac has joined
1155 2011-09-17 22:54:31 ymirhotfoot has joined
1156 2011-09-17 22:55:17 <ymirhotfoot> ;;ticker
1157 2011-09-17 22:55:18 <gribble> Best bid: 4.7508, Best ask: 4.788, Bid-ask spread: 0.0372, Last trade: 4.7507, 24 hour volume: 21174, 24 hour low: 4.7, 24 hour high: 4.93
1158 2011-09-17 22:55:28 zapnap has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1159 2011-09-17 22:55:42 AStove has quit ()
1160 2011-09-17 23:04:48 epscy has joined
1161 2011-09-17 23:09:27 epscy has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1162 2011-09-17 23:09:52 Jefff has joined
1163 2011-09-17 23:12:32 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
1164 2011-09-17 23:20:44 Clipse has joined
1165 2011-09-17 23:21:15 agricocb has joined
1166 2011-09-17 23:22:18 epscy has joined
1167 2011-09-17 23:26:57 epscy has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1168 2011-09-17 23:27:52 c00w has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1169 2011-09-17 23:31:03 Cokein has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1170 2011-09-17 23:36:12 Pinion has joined
1171 2011-09-17 23:36:56 sshc has joined
1172 2011-09-17 23:37:21 <pointbiz> should there be official release candidate? that would be more software for gavin to support
1173 2011-09-17 23:37:33 <pointbiz> be an*
1174 2011-09-17 23:39:44 <pointbiz> average user doesn't know that "RC" means Release Candidate
1175 2011-09-17 23:41:29 <pointbiz> i guess you could add a developer tab on bitcoin.org
1176 2011-09-17 23:41:58 <pointbiz> some of the comments about the website not being very appealing for the mainstream might be true
1177 2011-09-17 23:42:08 <pointbiz> i like the new design, but i'm a coder
1178 2011-09-17 23:42:10 Pinion has quit (Quit: Has quit)
1179 2011-09-17 23:43:08 <pointbiz> why is the word "experimental" used on the home page? isn't that just an opinion?
1180 2011-09-17 23:44:18 mosimo has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1181 2011-09-17 23:45:05 <jgarzik> pointbiz: there are multiple release candidates, leading up to the release itself
1182 2011-09-17 23:46:44 <tcatm> pointbiz: most developers (all?) consider bitcoin still experimental
1183 2011-09-17 23:47:30 normanrichards has quit (Quit: normanrichards)
1184 2011-09-17 23:53:37 erle- has quit (Quit: CETERVMÂAVTEMÂCENSEOÂCVTTENBERCÂESSEÂDELENDVM)
1185 2011-09-17 23:55:43 pickett has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1186 2011-09-17 23:59:49 D0han has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1187 2011-09-17 23:59:56 D0han has joined