1 2012-01-09 00:00:04 <midnightmagic> I like the sysiphus reference, that's awesome.
   2 2012-01-09 00:00:05 <luke-jr> midnightmagic: MtGox has never been responsible for Eligius.
   3 2012-01-09 00:00:23 <makomk> da2ce7: because the alternative is to be quickly and cheaply dominated by solo miners due to lower hash rate.
   4 2012-01-09 00:00:35 <luke-jr> midnightmagic: they pay the bill on the server, in exchange for a contract; nothing more
   5 2012-01-09 00:00:42 <midnightmagic> luke-jr: Words mean something different to you. Therefore, I am forced to conclude that your statement does not sever any possible link between you.
   6 2012-01-09 00:00:46 <k9quaint> why is the chain being "dominated" by the only people mining it a problem?
   7 2012-01-09 00:00:48 <midnightmagic> ah there it is.
   8 2012-01-09 00:01:29 <k9quaint> if the miners are the ones contributing to its growth, shouldn't they determine where it should go?
   9 2012-01-09 00:01:34 <luke-jr> k9quaint: because I stopped accepting others' blocks (they were making too many stales), and set a 100 CLC fee? ;)
  10 2012-01-09 00:01:34 <da2ce7> I'm reall intersted in makeing a chain that dosn't use mining as it's security. Insted it uses a distributed wot as the foundation.
  11 2012-01-09 00:01:42 <midnightmagic> luke-jr: If they stopped paying the bill, would Eligius stop functioning until you could find a new home?
  12 2012-01-09 00:02:06 <luke-jr> midnightmagic: no, I have many offers for additional servers, I just haven't bothered to take them up on it
  13 2012-01-09 00:02:28 <da2ce7> where transactions become valid, as nodes pull them into their tree. Confimations happen as many trusted nodes accept the transaction.
  14 2012-01-09 00:02:50 <k9quaint> luke-jr: a different pool could construct an "attack" chain that was longer than yours and put it forth
  15 2012-01-09 00:03:34 <luke-jr> k9quaint: indeed, doublec's pool is trying
  16 2012-01-09 00:03:51 <luke-jr> k9quaint: there are also technical counter-measures makomk could take in the software
  17 2012-01-09 00:04:30 <doublec> luke-jr: I've stopped once you got more than 100 gash
  18 2012-01-09 00:04:35 <doublec> s/gash/ghash
  19 2012-01-09 00:04:47 <cjdelisle> all blocks must contain the null terminated string "I am not luke"
  20 2012-01-09 00:05:22 <da2ce7> luke-jr: what happens if the nodes reject blocks if there are old valid transactions no being included?
  21 2012-01-09 00:05:35 <luke-jr> da2ce7: exactly
  22 2012-01-09 00:05:50 <luke-jr> cjdelisle: that'd be an ugly hack, and I'd bypass it easily :P
  23 2012-01-09 00:06:16 <doublec> all blocks must contain "the owner of this pool denies the existance of..."
  24 2012-01-09 00:06:18 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: how would you reach an agreement on the set of candidate transactions? it's another byzantine generals problem. use another blockchain? :)
  25 2012-01-09 00:06:21 agath has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
  26 2012-01-09 00:06:26 <doublec> where ... is something the owner believes strongly about
  27 2012-01-09 00:06:29 <k9quaint> cjdelisle: put the text "Jesus was just a man, not the son of god." in each block
  28 2012-01-09 00:06:49 <luke-jr> still, an ugly hack
  29 2012-01-09 00:06:55 <luke-jr> makomk should do something INNOVATIVE
  30 2012-01-09 00:06:59 <luke-jr> to technically counter it
  31 2012-01-09 00:07:03 <k9quaint> he could put that all in caps
  32 2012-01-09 00:07:04 <doublec> I've been playing around with allow nodes accept signed checkpoints
  33 2012-01-09 00:07:14 <doublec> you could use that to checkpoint off luke's chain
  34 2012-01-09 00:07:22 <doublec> and play juggling block chains for a while
  35 2012-01-09 00:07:23 theorb has joined
  36 2012-01-09 00:07:43 <luke-jr> ironically, it would only take a single checkpoint to break off my chain ;)
  37 2012-01-09 00:07:44 theymos has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
  38 2012-01-09 00:07:54 <luke-jr> but that again is easily bypassed
  39 2012-01-09 00:07:58 <da2ce7> well you would need to make the block chain 'sticky' when a node sees a chain of more than 100 blocks, any re-writes would be rejected.
  40 2012-01-09 00:08:11 <da2ce7> so nodes will put in automatic checkpoints.
  41 2012-01-09 00:08:37 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: you're just a fountain of already disproven bad ideas tonight. ;)
  42 2012-01-09 00:08:41 <luke-jr> da2ce7: that wouldn't help
  43 2012-01-09 00:08:49 <da2ce7> :S
  44 2012-01-09 00:08:52 theorbtwo has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
  45 2012-01-09 00:09:07 theorb is now known as theorbtwo
  46 2012-01-09 00:09:09 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: first, luke isn't killing CLC by rewriting it.  But ignoring that—
  47 2012-01-09 00:09:14 <graingert> change the difficulty requirement based on merged or not
  48 2012-01-09 00:09:20 <graingert> make it higher for merged mining
  49 2012-01-09 00:09:20 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: any kind of autolockin creates an awesome partitioning attack.
  50 2012-01-09 00:09:28 <luke-jr> personally, the easiest viable solution is to simply say "transactions waiting over 100 confirmations must be accepted"
  51 2012-01-09 00:10:01 <da2ce7> luke-jr: the you can just make high-fee spam transactions.
  52 2012-01-09 00:10:07 <da2ce7> as you are getting all the fees.
  53 2012-01-09 00:10:12 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: what you do is you create (perhaps with the helf of the real network) two X block long forks (where x is your lockin length) and you announce them both seperately at the same time to different parts of the network.
  54 2012-01-09 00:10:26 <luke-jr> da2ce7: that wouldn't beat it
  55 2012-01-09 00:10:28 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: then you've just forever partitioned the network: from two currencies you now have one.
  56 2012-01-09 00:10:48 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: if you make X high enough that you can't ever build a fork that long, then you didn't need the protection to begin with.
  57 2012-01-09 00:11:19 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: we could sit around all afternoon with you coming up with modifications, but every one of them gets killed by some form of a propagation time race.
  58 2012-01-09 00:11:48 <da2ce7> hmm... what happens if you have a system where people can say 'all block chains that I accept must include this tx' and people get to choose what chain they accept.
  59 2012-01-09 00:12:12 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: partitioning.
  60 2012-01-09 00:12:13 <da2ce7> so even if there is a re-write; if that tx is nolonger in it, that chain gets rejected.
  61 2012-01-09 00:12:36 <midnightmagic> and lots of cross-chatter. don't forget to disconnect from people who disagree with you about valid blocks.
  62 2012-01-09 00:12:43 <gmaxwell> The problem is you need a consensus mechenism for the set of txn. And you're back to having a blockchain in your blockchain.
  63 2012-01-09 00:12:45 <da2ce7> gmaxwell: sure... but people can agree on inportant tx; and the community can choose what chain they want.
  64 2012-01-09 00:13:10 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: if you have a working distribute agreement which is not a blockchain, why have a blockchain?
  65 2012-01-09 00:13:12 <Eliel> da2ce7: that requires a wot system
  66 2012-01-09 00:13:23 <Eliel> or blockchain
  67 2012-01-09 00:13:23 <midnightmagic> da2ce7: proportional to total users, luke-jr still has more, and can flood all equally.
  68 2012-01-09 00:13:51 <k9quaint> gmaxwell: you need a divine representative here on earth who can bless those blocks which are valid, and cast out those which are not
  69 2012-01-09 00:13:58 <k9quaint> PopeCoin
  70 2012-01-09 00:14:04 <da2ce7> lol
  71 2012-01-09 00:14:40 onelineproof has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
  72 2012-01-09 00:14:55 * k9quaint forgoes the obvious jokes about redeeming PopeCoins for young boys
  73 2012-01-09 00:14:56 <luke-jr> mmm, maybe I should make a new *coin just to show them how to do it right…
  74 2012-01-09 00:15:05 <makomk> Sadly we're stuck with random oracles, and even those we can only approximate.
  75 2012-01-09 00:15:11 * da2ce7 goes back to thinking about his hypothetical web-of-trust based coin.
  76 2012-01-09 00:16:02 <dub> I think this is just a really bad look for bitcoin, that a high profile 'trusted' dev acts like this
  77 2012-01-09 00:16:09 user has quit (Quit: Leaving)
  78 2012-01-09 00:16:32 <dub> then when people moan the forum cabal come and edit thier posts and shit? not sure if thats true but its the perception
  79 2012-01-09 00:16:37 <midnightmagic> if he's a trusted dev, then why are all his awesome patches languishing..? :)
  80 2012-01-09 00:17:10 <k9quaint> makomk: ugh, once again you failed to explain merged mining
  81 2012-01-09 00:17:16 <k9quaint> you said people cannot detect it
  82 2012-01-09 00:17:24 <makomk> k9quaint: sorry >.>
  83 2012-01-09 00:17:29 <luke-jr> dub: acts like what?
  84 2012-01-09 00:17:34 <dub> then luke-jr gets shitty that the retarded kids from teh paddling pool he just pissed in rant at him
  85 2012-01-09 00:17:57 <luke-jr> dub: oh, troll elsewhere
  86 2012-01-09 00:18:47 <da2ce7> makomk: well you need to include the referecne in the coinbase; so anyone who generates a block will know if they have also atempted to generate mm chains also or not.
  87 2012-01-09 00:18:52 <dub> luke-jr: taking it apon yourself to destroy someone elses work and the value of other currencies people are holding, using other peoples resources to do so without thier knowledge?
  88 2012-01-09 00:19:15 <k9quaint> dub: the currency had no value, the work is not destroyed
  89 2012-01-09 00:19:18 <dub> I know you don't understand why this looks bad, because you're an idiot
  90 2012-01-09 00:19:31 <gmaxwell> And if people actually wanted to support it, it would still be working fine.
  91 2012-01-09 00:19:34 <dub> k9quaint: he attacked more than one chain
  92 2012-01-09 00:19:40 <midnightmagic> dub: that's a little harsh. if people like myself were asked, I probably would've been fine with the effort. :)
  93 2012-01-09 00:19:45 <luke-jr> dub: as many people have already pointed out, it's probably more my work than makomk, and NOT the work of the people complaining at all
  94 2012-01-09 00:20:15 <luke-jr> dub: no, I didn't.
  95 2012-01-09 00:20:33 <gmaxwell> dub: So you're part of the "anyone who isn't fattening my wallet is attacking" club then? because processing another chain like normal and selling the coins isn't an attack in sane people's books.
  96 2012-01-09 00:20:39 pavel has quit (Disconnected by services)
  97 2012-01-09 00:20:42 <k9quaint> dub: the CLC work is not complete, as shown by its trials and tribulations at launch, but you can't destroy information
  98 2012-01-09 00:20:49 <dub> gmaxwell: his stated goal is to destroy them
  99 2012-01-09 00:21:02 hippich_ has joined
 100 2012-01-09 00:21:13 <dub> he mentioned in in #eligius several days before
 101 2012-01-09 00:21:18 <dub> it*
 102 2012-01-09 00:21:50 <gmaxwell> dub: This is what that complaint sounds like to me, "boo hoo, someone isn't playing along with my ponzi scheme! how dare they!"  (and I've said the same thing about people whining about bitcoin 'market manipulators')
 103 2012-01-09 00:22:05 <k9quaint> plus, its not really a cryptocurrency if it can be offline within 12 hours of launch
 104 2012-01-09 00:22:23 <k9quaint> its more like a crypto-promisefromacrackmonkey
 105 2012-01-09 00:22:32 agath has joined
 106 2012-01-09 00:22:36 <da2ce7> lol
 107 2012-01-09 00:22:55 <dub> gmaxwell: im not really concerned with the value of my scamcoins being destroyed (other than being a bit annoyed that I helped without my knowledge)
 108 2012-01-09 00:23:32 <k9quaint> one way of saying it: every miner in every pool mining BTC have provided that pool operator with the ability to attack CLC
 109 2012-01-09 00:23:40 <k9quaint> other way of saying it: CLC was insecure
 110 2012-01-09 00:24:08 <gmaxwell> perhaps this altcoin ponzi stuff could be fixed the same way we deal with bad speech: More speech. If there were a webform that made altcoins on demand perhaps it would stop being such an issue.
 111 2012-01-09 00:24:08 <cjdelisle> another way of saying it: it's a good thing it didn't take more people's money before being pwnd
 112 2012-01-09 00:24:14 <dub> its the way he acted, the support he recieved (ie, you whitknighting, editing posts etc, tycho saying he would do the same) and the way that refelcts on bitcoin
 113 2012-01-09 00:24:26 <gmaxwell> dub: I didn't edit any posts.
 114 2012-01-09 00:24:32 <gmaxwell> dub: or delete any
 115 2012-01-09 00:24:32 <da2ce7> well I do think that luke-jr owing all the coins of yet annother *chain is a mark of the new maturity of the bitcoin community.
 116 2012-01-09 00:24:39 <makomk> gmaxwell: Hmmmm. I'm tempted to release my genesis-block generator actually.
 117 2012-01-09 00:24:41 <k9quaint> gmaxwell: thats why I want to implement an altcoin with OP_EVAL, call it InceptionCoin
 118 2012-01-09 00:24:44 <gmaxwell> dub: or take any other moderator related action.
 119 2012-01-09 00:24:49 <dub> gmaxwell: well sorry then, but it seems like someone did
 120 2012-01-09 00:24:55 marf_away has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 121 2012-01-09 00:24:57 <da2ce7> as it shows that not any *coin can get a free ride by using mm
 122 2012-01-09 00:25:36 <da2ce7> *not that they are costing much, (other than a tiny cost to increased block size)
 123 2012-01-09 00:25:41 <gmaxwell> dub: You're sorry? you're eager to rub my reputation in the dirt and all I get is "well sorry then"
 124 2012-01-09 00:25:49 <k9quaint> every time inceptioncoin gets attacked, you just go one blockchain deeper
 125 2012-01-09 00:26:00 <da2ce7> lol
 126 2012-01-09 00:26:04 <k9quaint> gmaxwell: do you want him to rub something other than your rep? :P
 127 2012-01-09 00:26:09 <gmaxwell> oh baby.
 128 2012-01-09 00:26:15 <dub> gmaxwell: I stated before that I wasnt sure of the facts but reading the thread thats teh impression i got and others will do the same
 129 2012-01-09 00:26:31 <dub> whether it was you or another mod is irrelevant
 130 2012-01-09 00:26:45 <gmaxwell> dub: Yes, because the people attacking luke have repeated those lies over and over again. And when they're corrected they just start a new thread. ::shrugs::
 131 2012-01-09 00:26:53 <gmaxwell> dub: it sure as hell is relevant to me.
 132 2012-01-09 00:26:58 <k9quaint> its kind of relevant, especially if you want to be correct
 133 2012-01-09 00:27:10 <k9quaint> if you are a random number generator, not so relevant
 134 2012-01-09 00:27:29 <dub> gmaxwell: you put yourself in the position of luke's white knight, then posts get edited, conclusions are drawn, deal with it
 135 2012-01-09 00:27:39 <gmaxwell> dub: Where were you, mr. defender of the right and true when some of the folks there were suggesting raping luke's wife in the btc-e chat?
 136 2012-01-09 00:27:59 <da2ce7> OK.... in other news, has there been any progress on the statically analysable OP_EVAL replacement?
 137 2012-01-09 00:28:00 <dub> gmaxwell: luke wants every non catholic to die
 138 2012-01-09 00:28:11 <gmaxwell> *ploink*
 139 2012-01-09 00:28:22 <dub> gmaxwell: what people say about him is hardly surprising given his rhetoric
 140 2012-01-09 00:28:43 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: yes.
 141 2012-01-09 00:28:44 <da2ce7> *faceplam*
 142 2012-01-09 00:28:47 <da2ce7> :)
 143 2012-01-09 00:29:01 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: You're quite out of sync. :)
 144 2012-01-09 00:29:07 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_0016
 145 2012-01-09 00:29:15 <da2ce7> I know... I've been traveling in the UK
 146 2012-01-09 00:29:19 <luke-jr> da2ce7: it's just gotten worse
 147 2012-01-09 00:29:25 <da2ce7> :O
 148 2012-01-09 00:29:28 devrandom has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 149 2012-01-09 00:30:07 <k9quaint> I have been clamoring for a common lisp interpreter in the block chain ;)
 150 2012-01-09 00:30:41 erle- has quit (Quit: erle-)
 151 2012-01-09 00:31:03 <makomk> Though interestingly, both the serious issues I know of that were found in the OP_EVAL implementation weren't actually helped by replacing it with something that was staticly analysable.
 152 2012-01-09 00:31:47 <gmaxwell> makomk: the issue roconnor found was, however.
 153 2012-01-09 00:32:24 <makomk> Yeah, though that wasn't actually exploitable because it ran into the opcode limit.
 154 2012-01-09 00:32:51 <gmaxwell> makomk: the ones you found had no protocol implications either— they were straight implementaiton bugs.. e.g. could be fixed with absolutely zero chain for risk, not the roconnor though.
 155 2012-01-09 00:33:16 <gmaxwell> (I'm not trying to diss your findings, fwiw)
 156 2012-01-09 00:33:21 <gmaxwell> makomk: well, wasn't exploitable given the current process stacksizes and such, but might have been in other implementations.
 157 2012-01-09 00:33:35 <makomk> True. On the other hand, the ones I found could be used to steal OP_EVAL protected coins, which is kind of a big deal.
 158 2012-01-09 00:34:10 <makomk> (Think what happens if all the OP_EVAL-enforcing mining power drops offline...)
 159 2012-01-09 00:35:03 <gmaxwell> makomk: anyone sane restarts their miners and the crash dumps the memory pool, so not quite that bad. But sure.
 160 2012-01-09 00:35:12 vigilyn has left ("Leaving")
 161 2012-01-09 00:35:23 agath has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
 162 2012-01-09 00:35:43 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
 163 2012-01-09 00:36:44 <da2ce7> if we just had it so the pools could decide what tx get accepted or not... blocks that cointain tx that take ages to process will get rejected by the other pools... so we don't need any hard 'limits' on operations... just a way to say 'if a block takes longer than 10sec to process; drop it'
 164 2012-01-09 00:37:08 <sipa> what if you drop a block
 165 2012-01-09 00:37:13 <sipa> but another miner includes it
 166 2012-01-09 00:37:26 <sipa> you still need to verify it, and lost potential fee and generation income
 167 2012-01-09 00:37:57 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: also means that you can beef up your processing .. and then put most of the competition out of business.
 168 2012-01-09 00:38:17 <da2ce7> sipa: becasue it it takes 30sec to check the block, none of the other pools will accept your blocks.
 169 2012-01-09 00:38:30 <da2ce7> and the pools can do their own risk-benifit analysis on accepting tx that takes a while to process; or not accepting the tx
 170 2012-01-09 00:38:37 <gmaxwell> The rules are also how all the non-mining users have a say in what happens in the chain that they too must validate if they wish to operate in a decenteralized zero trust way.
 171 2012-01-09 00:39:16 <gmaxwell> (must validate / transfer / and potentially store)
 172 2012-01-09 00:39:38 <sipa> da2ce7: if you don't accept a block that another has put in the chain, you are effectively killing yourself as a miner
 173 2012-01-09 00:39:57 <sipa> unless you have 50% or a coalition with other who do the same, that have 50% together
 174 2012-01-09 00:40:31 <da2ce7> sipa: no, but you will re-hop on the chain if it grows to more than 6 confimations than the one you are working on.
 175 2012-01-09 00:40:39 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: thats why I was earlier saying that your suggestion would require another blockchain to come to a consensus about your requirements.
 176 2012-01-09 00:40:52 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: and you'll have lost a load of processing in the process, for no good at all.
 177 2012-01-09 00:41:23 <da2ce7> gmaxwell: I think that it would happen to work naturaly... as if a pool produced a block that took 1 min to verifiy... then every other pool would reject it.
 178 2012-01-09 00:41:25 <sipa> da2ce7: that's just a waste of resources
 179 2012-01-09 00:41:56 <da2ce7> so the pools would naturaly decide what ammount of processing they are conftable with.
 180 2012-01-09 00:42:05 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: lets say they do accept it.. over and over again.. pools are big and strong, they could handle that.
 181 2012-01-09 00:42:32 <gmaxwell> but then you as a regular user wanting to avail yourself of the zero trust decenteralized security try to bring up your own full node...
 182 2012-01-09 00:42:45 <gmaxwell> good luck processing thousands of blocks that take a signficant fraction of a minute each.
 183 2012-01-09 00:43:28 <da2ce7> gmaxwell: well in the future tx are going to naturaly have two costs: size and time.  we just focus on the first one atm.
 184 2012-01-09 00:43:54 <gmaxwell> Part of the reason that bitcoin isn't already a failed expirement is because there are a great many full validating nodes, otherwise— you just have a two/three person majority control.
 185 2012-01-09 00:44:07 <da2ce7> however tranactions that take longer to process will collect higher fess as they push blocks quicker up the the 'time' buget that a block has.
 186 2012-01-09 00:44:12 RazielZ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 187 2012-01-09 00:44:48 <da2ce7> if we set it to something realistic as the defults; I suspect that the pools will choose to keep these values sane.
 188 2012-01-09 00:45:07 wizkid057 is now known as food!~wizkid057@c-71-226-219-178.hsd1.nj.comcast.net|wizkid057
 189 2012-01-09 00:45:23 <gmaxwell> Would you adopt a currency that was controled by [Tycho]+slush?  I'd rather have bernanke. But with all the full validating nodes, the miners can't do much more except DOS transactions or short reversals which are highly public attacks, which is kind of boring.
 190 2012-01-09 00:45:58 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: why would they? I can easily affort 10x the processing power of any typical computer for some nodes that are going to be doinging mining— because the mining is profitable.
 191 2012-01-09 00:46:10 <[Tycho]> Who is bernanke ?
 192 2012-01-09 00:46:34 <gmaxwell> So pools could have a pretty different definition of realistic than the rest of the zero trusting full nodes.
 193 2012-01-09 00:46:41 <gmaxwell> [Tycho]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Bernanke
 194 2012-01-09 00:46:46 <k9quaint> ben bernanke, fed chairman
 195 2012-01-09 00:46:55 <k9quaint> bane of austrians
 196 2012-01-09 00:47:00 <k9quaint> defender of the dollar
 197 2012-01-09 00:47:08 <k9quaint> captain of QE1 & QE2
 198 2012-01-09 00:47:12 <da2ce7> well in my mind there are two costs of a block: size and proessing time.   maybe we should introduce tx fess for transactions that are difficult to process.
 199 2012-01-09 00:47:20 <gmaxwell> No insult intended, of course. I'm just saying that trust in a few big pool ops is no improvement over trust in a few government appointed regulators or whatever. :)
 200 2012-01-09 00:47:24 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: we do, in fact.
 201 2012-01-09 00:47:33 <[Tycho]> I'm obviously better.
 202 2012-01-09 00:47:52 <k9quaint> gmaxwell: what if the pool ops are hawt wimmins?
 203 2012-01-09 00:47:53 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: because there is a rough proportionality between size and processing time, and there are default fee rules related to size.
 204 2012-01-09 00:48:19 <da2ce7> sure, but that is extremely crude.
 205 2012-01-09 00:48:47 graingert has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 206 2012-01-09 00:48:51 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: yes, but how uncrude does it need to be? any _normal_ txn processing is dirt cheap.
 207 2012-01-09 00:49:12 <gmaxwell> This is a currency, not digital calvinball. :)
 208 2012-01-09 00:50:03 <k9quaint> CalvinCoin, any math solves a block
 209 2012-01-09 00:50:13 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: if you're worried about computational costs for txns, setup a bounty for an FPGA ECDSA validator. :)
 210 2012-01-09 00:50:33 <da2ce7> people could make scripts that do anything (legal), and for ever fee 0.0001 we give them 100 cycles; paid to the next 6 blocks.
 211 2012-01-09 00:51:19 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: the only things worth accounting for are the signature checks and the number of inputs, everything else is basically free compared to them. (or at least compariable in cost to the accounting required to compute their fees)
 212 2012-01-09 00:53:56 <da2ce7> gmaxwell: what about fees giving a tx a 'budget' in time; nodes wont relay the tx if it takes more than '1ms per 0.1 btc' (1sec max) or something like that.
 213 2012-01-09 00:54:31 <[Tycho]> What slow TXes you are talking about ?
 214 2012-01-09 00:54:35 <da2ce7> and the then we don't need to worry about the branches or anything... just compute untill the time runs out.
 215 2012-01-09 00:54:38 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: then you have different implementations that have different ideas of the costs, and you can't reason at all about what will work.
 216 2012-01-09 00:55:02 <gmaxwell> da2ce7: I fear you're sepending a lot of time worrying about a non-issue.
 217 2012-01-09 00:55:29 <da2ce7> prob
 218 2012-01-09 00:56:03 <gmaxwell> There are all kinds of issues which are more material right now. Like the fact that it takes j-random user a day to start a full node.
 219 2012-01-09 00:56:04 <da2ce7> well I need to go to sleep anyway... got a flight tomorow.
 220 2012-01-09 00:56:10 <gmaxwell> Have a safe flight.
 221 2012-01-09 00:56:16 <da2ce7> :)
 222 2012-01-09 00:56:21 <da2ce7> back to AUS
 223 2012-01-09 01:02:05 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 224 2012-01-09 01:05:08 oww has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 225 2012-01-09 01:05:12 oww has joined
 226 2012-01-09 01:07:42 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
 227 2012-01-09 01:13:51 toffoo has quit ()
 228 2012-01-09 01:19:07 osmosis has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 229 2012-01-09 01:19:28 TransistOp has joined
 230 2012-01-09 01:21:31 Transisto has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 231 2012-01-09 01:27:12 chrisb__ has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
 232 2012-01-09 01:28:26 iocor has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
 233 2012-01-09 01:29:44 wasabi1 has joined
 234 2012-01-09 01:31:23 <diki> luke-jr:I am waiting...
 235 2012-01-09 01:31:29 osmosis has joined
 236 2012-01-09 01:32:06 wasabi3 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 237 2012-01-09 01:32:15 Turingi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 238 2012-01-09 01:32:52 user has joined
 239 2012-01-09 01:34:03 BlueMatt-mobile has joined
 240 2012-01-09 01:42:03 devrandom has joined
 241 2012-01-09 01:48:46 Cablesaurus has joined
 242 2012-01-09 01:48:46 Cablesaurus has quit (Changing host)
 243 2012-01-09 01:48:46 Cablesaurus has joined
 244 2012-01-09 01:49:46 BlueMatt-mobile has quit (Quit: BlueMatt)
 245 2012-01-09 01:51:49 <luke-jr> yawn
 246 2012-01-09 01:51:55 <luke-jr> anyone test 0.5.2rc1 yet?
 247 2012-01-09 01:53:47 sacarlson has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 248 2012-01-09 01:58:07 toffoo has joined
 249 2012-01-09 01:58:39 CIA-100 has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 250 2012-01-09 02:05:19 <k9quaint> too busy typing structured responses to radio static from the upper atmosphere
 251 2012-01-09 02:10:06 sacarlson has joined
 252 2012-01-09 02:11:45 user has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 253 2012-01-09 02:20:44 devrandom has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 254 2012-01-09 02:21:15 barmstrong has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 255 2012-01-09 02:31:17 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
 256 2012-01-09 02:36:10 agath has joined
 257 2012-01-09 02:36:47 CIA-100 has joined
 258 2012-01-09 02:44:48 agath has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 259 2012-01-09 02:45:42 <gmaxwell> Yet another person in #bitcoin who thought the blockchain download was starting over after a restart. :(
 260 2012-01-09 02:45:59 agath has joined
 261 2012-01-09 02:46:14 <k9quaint> it isn't?
 262 2012-01-09 02:46:31 Cryo has joined
 263 2012-01-09 02:46:34 <k9quaint> #bitcoin sounds like a fun channel, I should join it some time
 264 2012-01-09 02:47:20 <gmaxwell> It's full of (l)users.
 265 2012-01-09 02:50:14 <k9quaint> so I wouldn't fit since it is already full?
 266 2012-01-09 02:50:30 <gmaxwell> heh
 267 2012-01-09 02:52:03 copumpkin has joined
 268 2012-01-09 02:52:25 <gmaxwell> Hm. Why isn't there a gui interface to backupwallet yet?
 269 2012-01-09 02:53:09 <k9quaint> GUI's encourage users, and that just causes problems
 270 2012-01-09 02:53:21 booo has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 271 2012-01-09 02:55:27 cuqa has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 272 2012-01-09 02:59:38 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: where are the RCs ?
 273 2012-01-09 02:59:56 <luke-jr> [01:49:10] <BlueMatt> luke-jr: linux build http://dl.dropbox.com/u/29653426/bitcoin-0.5.2rc1.tar.bz2
 274 2012-01-09 02:59:58 <luke-jr> [02:37:15] <BlueMatt> luke-jr: second one http://dl.dropbox.com/u/29653426/bitcoin-0.5.2rc1-win32.tar.bz2
 275 2012-01-09 03:00:31 cuqa has joined
 276 2012-01-09 03:01:20 AlexWaters1 has joined
 277 2012-01-09 03:04:13 testbot2 has joined
 278 2012-01-09 03:07:14 jgarzik_wannabe is now known as jgarzik
 279 2012-01-09 03:12:10 cuqa has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
 280 2012-01-09 03:12:27 tonykay has joined
 281 2012-01-09 03:13:25 m00p has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 282 2012-01-09 03:14:57 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, the progress bar at the bottom should not be relative to the current position
 283 2012-01-09 03:15:44 testbot2 has quit ()
 284 2012-01-09 03:24:05 <gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: it is... and .. well, it kinda makes sense, I mean after first sync it would always be like 99% even if you're two days behind.
 285 2012-01-09 03:24:31 <luke-jr> http://eligius.st/~artefact2/5/12A5f5isBBcZFrjBnqT8cCoD47iT6q8rDh <-- BitForce Single with cgminer
 286 2012-01-09 03:29:17 TheSeven has quit (Disconnected by services)
 287 2012-01-09 03:29:42 [7] has joined
 288 2012-01-09 03:30:46 testbot2 has joined
 289 2012-01-09 03:31:32 RichardG has joined
 290 2012-01-09 03:32:15 tonykay__ has joined
 291 2012-01-09 03:32:22 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, yeah that's my point, it should start at mostly full
 292 2012-01-09 03:32:37 Wack0 has joined
 293 2012-01-09 03:32:47 tonykay has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 294 2012-01-09 03:32:47 tonykay__ is now known as tonykay
 295 2012-01-09 03:34:58 tonykay has quit (Client Quit)
 296 2012-01-09 03:36:33 traviscj has joined
 297 2012-01-09 03:37:32 b4epoche_ has joined
 298 2012-01-09 03:38:09 <gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: I think it shouldn't show any percent at all, but instead give an eta.
 299 2012-01-09 03:38:22 <phantomcircuit> should give both
 300 2012-01-09 03:38:27 <phantomcircuit> there is the room for it
 301 2012-01-09 03:38:27 b4epoche has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 302 2012-01-09 03:38:27 b4epoche_ is now known as b4epoche
 303 2012-01-09 03:38:34 <luke-jr> phantomcircuit: the % isn't even a %
 304 2012-01-09 03:38:40 <luke-jr> since it doesnt account for block sizes
 305 2012-01-09 03:39:05 <phantomcircuit> luke-jr, yeah well i dont expect to account for that
 306 2012-01-09 03:39:06 <phantomcircuit> but still
 307 2012-01-09 03:39:31 <gmaxwell> the percentage behavior makes people think its broken however.
 308 2012-01-09 03:39:39 <gmaxwell> "it got to xx percent fast and then got stuck!"
 309 2012-01-09 03:40:18 devrandom has joined
 310 2012-01-09 03:42:50 onelineproof has joined
 311 2012-01-09 03:43:14 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, true
 312 2012-01-09 03:43:20 <k9quaint> measure it in radians, not percentile
 313 2012-01-09 03:43:26 <k9quaint> nobody bothers to do the conversion
 314 2012-01-09 03:43:30 <phantomcircuit> possibly displaying how many transactions are waiting to be verified as well
 315 2012-01-09 03:43:59 m00p has joined
 316 2012-01-09 03:44:06 <gmaxwell> "where are you?"  "... umm 1 1/4th π ... is that good?"
 317 2012-01-09 03:48:59 <nanotube> heh, i like it
 318 2012-01-09 03:49:42 AlexWaters1 is now known as matth1a3
 319 2012-01-09 03:49:51 matth1a3 has quit (Changing host)
 320 2012-01-09 03:49:51 matth1a3 has joined
 321 2012-01-09 03:51:28 <roconnor> what is the LTC TX spam attack?
 322 2012-01-09 03:52:00 <gmaxwell> roconnor: boring.
 323 2012-01-09 03:52:18 <gmaxwell> roconnor: someone started sending 1e-8 litecoin to every address they'd seen on the network.
 324 2012-01-09 03:52:32 <gmaxwell> (well they weren't bothering to generate addresses from pay to pubkey)
 325 2012-01-09 03:53:06 <roconnor> why was LTC susceptable at not BTC?
 326 2012-01-09 03:53:14 <gmaxwell> roconnor: over and over and over again.. chain grew like 300 MB in a week or something, and lots of users had trouble sending txn due to coin selection picking a bunch of dust inputs and resulting in txn too big to use.
 327 2012-01-09 03:53:51 <roconnor> ok
 328 2012-01-09 03:54:04 <gmaxwell> roconnor: LTC chain rate 4x faster than bitcoin (so peak growth 4x faster), plus DOS rules unchained relative to the 4x faster rate and 200x (or whatever) less valuable currency.
 329 2012-01-09 03:54:14 <gmaxwell> er unchanged.
 330 2012-01-09 03:54:18 <roconnor> ok
 331 2012-01-09 03:54:39 <gmaxwell> Somewhat amusingly (?) I might have caused this attack. :(
 332 2012-01-09 03:55:08 <roconnor> well this thread blamed you, but I'm more interested in attacks themselves rather than who is responsible.
 333 2012-01-09 03:55:11 <gmaxwell> Because I posted patches equalizing the dos rules against bitcoin, and pointing out it was vulnerable, like two days before they started.
 334 2012-01-09 03:55:20 <gmaxwell> I certantly wasn't performing the attacks.
 335 2012-01-09 03:55:23 <roconnor> pfft
 336 2012-01-09 03:55:30 <roconnor> that isn't your fault at all then.
 337 2012-01-09 03:56:25 <k9quaint> clearly, you are to blame for everything that gavin doesn't hoover up
 338 2012-01-09 03:56:39 <gmaxwell> I didn't think of sending to existing addresses to gum up wallets either, so I can't even claim credit for fully forseeing it.
 339 2012-01-09 03:57:01 <roconnor> I seem to recal a similar attack on bitcoin before
 340 2012-01-09 03:57:04 <roconnor> *recall
 341 2012-01-09 03:57:11 <gmaxwell> bitcoin has been attacked that way in the past though to a lesser degree, thats where the current antidos behavior comes from IIRC.
 342 2012-01-09 03:57:15 <gmaxwell> right.
 343 2012-01-09 03:58:16 <gmaxwell> It was just worse on litecoin because of the faster blockrate. They were also pretty slow to respond, I think because they didn't think it would continue or something. I dunno, it went from seeming like not much to being a lot rather quickly.
 344 2012-01-09 03:58:47 <gmaxwell> roconnor: what thread is blaming me? (I hadn't actually heard anyone blame me for it in any serious way)
 345 2012-01-09 03:59:16 <roconnor> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56791.msg677528#msg677528
 346 2012-01-09 03:59:51 <cjdelisle> caleb's law: the price of bitcoin is inversely purportional to the level of intellegence of the average forum user.
 347 2012-01-09 03:59:59 <roconnor> gmaxwell: I have no respect for bitlane from what I've read so his comments has little infulence on me.
 348 2012-01-09 04:02:45 <luke-jr> looks more like crediting gmaxwell to me :P
 349 2012-01-09 04:03:02 <gmaxwell> roconnor: thanks.
 350 2012-01-09 04:03:29 <gmaxwell> Well, whatever it is, its not credit I deserve. I forsaw the (part of) the attack though didn't carry it out.
 351 2012-01-09 04:04:52 * roconnor =<< sleep
 352 2012-01-09 04:10:07 [\\\] is now known as imsaguy
 353 2012-01-09 04:25:15 DaQatz has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 354 2012-01-09 04:28:41 <k9quaint> gmaxwell: you are no longer the litecoin dark pool!
 355 2012-01-09 04:30:59 wasabi2 has joined
 356 2012-01-09 04:31:40 RobinPKR_ has joined
 357 2012-01-09 04:32:16 wasabi1 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 358 2012-01-09 04:33:35 RobinPKR has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 359 2012-01-09 04:33:35 RobinPKR_ is now known as RobinPKR
 360 2012-01-09 04:36:05 kiba has joined
 361 2012-01-09 04:45:20 Diablo-D3 has joined
 362 2012-01-09 04:46:08 BlueMatt has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
 363 2012-01-09 04:50:12 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 364 2012-01-09 04:52:30 netxshare is now known as dhw
 365 2012-01-09 04:52:38 Joric has joined
 366 2012-01-09 05:05:11 testbot2 has quit ()
 367 2012-01-09 05:08:54 dhw is now known as netxshare
 368 2012-01-09 05:13:16 [Tycho] has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 369 2012-01-09 05:13:27 matth1a3 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
 370 2012-01-09 05:18:07 hippich_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 371 2012-01-09 05:22:08 slush has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 372 2012-01-09 05:31:23 wasabi1 has joined
 373 2012-01-09 05:32:20 wasabi2 has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 374 2012-01-09 05:35:03 WakiMiko has joined
 375 2012-01-09 05:38:12 WakiMiko_ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 376 2012-01-09 05:39:35 hippich_ has joined
 377 2012-01-09 05:46:07 hippich_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 378 2012-01-09 05:54:28 Lexa has joined
 379 2012-01-09 06:27:13 wizkid057 is now known as wizkid057|zZz
 380 2012-01-09 06:39:48 smtmnyz has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 381 2012-01-09 06:41:07 smtmnyz has joined
 382 2012-01-09 06:41:08 ForceMajeure has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 383 2012-01-09 06:41:20 EPiSKiNG- has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 384 2012-01-09 06:41:36 EPiSKiNG- has joined
 385 2012-01-09 06:42:20 ForceMajeure has joined
 386 2012-01-09 06:43:28 welterde has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 387 2012-01-09 06:44:28 OneFixt has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 388 2012-01-09 06:45:28 gwillen has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 389 2012-01-09 06:45:45 OneFixt has joined
 390 2012-01-09 06:46:08 mologie has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 391 2012-01-09 06:46:47 mologie has joined
 392 2012-01-09 06:54:19 gwillen_ has joined
 393 2012-01-09 06:54:49 ForceMajeure is now known as Guest30852
 394 2012-01-09 06:54:49 OneFixt is now known as Guest70934
 395 2012-01-09 06:55:12 Guest70934 has quit (Changing host)
 396 2012-01-09 06:55:12 Guest70934 has joined
 397 2012-01-09 06:55:44 Bwild has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 398 2012-01-09 06:57:21 imsaguy is now known as [\\\]
 399 2012-01-09 06:58:06 wizkid057_ has joined
 400 2012-01-09 06:58:13 Guest70934 is now known as OneFixt
 401 2012-01-09 07:00:42 larsivi has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 402 2012-01-09 07:01:34 wizkid057 has quit (zZz!~wizkid057@c-71-226-219-178.hsd1.nj.comcast.net|Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 403 2012-01-09 07:08:07 gwillen_ is now known as gwillen
 404 2012-01-09 07:11:48 RazielZ has joined
 405 2012-01-09 07:15:06 kiba` has joined
 406 2012-01-09 07:15:51 Bwild has joined
 407 2012-01-09 07:16:21 kiba has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 408 2012-01-09 07:16:32 AAA_awright has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 409 2012-01-09 07:18:15 AAA_awright has joined
 410 2012-01-09 07:20:08 pycke2 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 411 2012-01-09 07:31:13 lfm has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 412 2012-01-09 07:45:54 kiba`` has joined
 413 2012-01-09 07:47:14 kiba` has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 414 2012-01-09 07:49:49 b4epoche_ has joined
 415 2012-01-09 07:50:23 kiba``` has joined
 416 2012-01-09 07:51:03 b4epoche has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 417 2012-01-09 07:51:03 b4epoche_ is now known as b4epoche
 418 2012-01-09 07:51:42 kiba`` has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 419 2012-01-09 07:56:11 diki is now known as dikidera
 420 2012-01-09 07:56:26 theorb has joined
 421 2012-01-09 07:56:53 theorbtwo has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 422 2012-01-09 07:57:11 theorb is now known as theorbtwo
 423 2012-01-09 08:10:54 pycke2 has joined
 424 2012-01-09 08:11:57 larsivi has joined
 425 2012-01-09 08:12:09 larsivi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 426 2012-01-09 08:15:27 pycke2 has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 427 2012-01-09 08:20:38 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 428 2012-01-09 08:25:14 underscor has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 429 2012-01-09 08:32:53 molecular has joined
 430 2012-01-09 08:36:28 sacredchao has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 431 2012-01-09 08:39:20 dikidera has quit ()
 432 2012-01-09 08:45:23 underscor has joined
 433 2012-01-09 08:47:57 erus` has joined
 434 2012-01-09 08:54:54 justmoon has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 435 2012-01-09 08:55:46 justmoon has joined
 436 2012-01-09 08:59:54 justmoon has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 437 2012-01-09 09:04:42 abragin has joined
 438 2012-01-09 09:04:43 abragin has quit (Changing host)
 439 2012-01-09 09:04:43 abragin has joined
 440 2012-01-09 09:04:57 sacredchao has joined
 441 2012-01-09 09:08:48 erus` has left ()
 442 2012-01-09 09:10:52 ThomasV has joined
 443 2012-01-09 09:12:20 justmoon has joined
 444 2012-01-09 09:13:15 mologie has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 445 2012-01-09 09:16:13 lfm has joined
 446 2012-01-09 09:17:24 welterde has joined
 447 2012-01-09 09:33:12 wasabi2 has joined
 448 2012-01-09 09:35:29 wasabi1 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 449 2012-01-09 09:36:14 Cablesaurus has quit (Quit: Now if you will excuse me, I have a giant ball of oil to throw out my window)
 450 2012-01-09 09:37:54 Wizzleby has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 451 2012-01-09 09:38:18 mologie has joined
 452 2012-01-09 09:44:43 Wizzleby has joined
 453 2012-01-09 09:49:36 chrisb__ has joined
 454 2012-01-09 09:51:42 iocor has joined
 455 2012-01-09 09:51:48 bahk has joined
 456 2012-01-09 09:53:34 TD has joined
 457 2012-01-09 09:56:02 sytse has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 458 2012-01-09 10:00:58 oww has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 459 2012-01-09 10:03:22 sytse has joined
 460 2012-01-09 10:09:58 gronager has joined
 461 2012-01-09 10:14:29 marf_away has joined
 462 2012-01-09 10:18:31 sacredchao has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 463 2012-01-09 10:20:12 sacredchao has joined
 464 2012-01-09 10:29:50 DontMindMe has joined
 465 2012-01-09 10:29:54 Joric has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 466 2012-01-09 10:30:35 Joric has joined
 467 2012-01-09 10:30:36 Joric has quit (Changing host)
 468 2012-01-09 10:30:36 Joric has joined
 469 2012-01-09 10:33:11 riush has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 470 2012-01-09 10:39:27 riush has joined
 471 2012-01-09 10:52:42 theorb has joined
 472 2012-01-09 10:53:27 theorbtwo has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 473 2012-01-09 10:53:36 theorb is now known as theorbtwo
 474 2012-01-09 10:54:53 Fnar has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 475 2012-01-09 10:58:10 theorb has joined
 476 2012-01-09 10:58:20 theorbtwo has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 477 2012-01-09 10:58:31 theorb is now known as theorbtwo
 478 2012-01-09 11:00:53 slush has joined
 479 2012-01-09 11:06:12 iocor has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
 480 2012-01-09 11:08:00 iocor has joined
 481 2012-01-09 11:10:27 justmoon has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 482 2012-01-09 11:21:32 marf_away has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 483 2012-01-09 11:21:37 marf_away2 has joined
 484 2012-01-09 11:23:37 slush has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
 485 2012-01-09 11:23:39 theorbtwo has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 486 2012-01-09 11:27:14 booo has joined
 487 2012-01-09 11:34:10 wasabi1 has joined
 488 2012-01-09 11:36:06 DontMindMe has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 489 2012-01-09 11:36:06 wasabi2 has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 490 2012-01-09 11:39:27 theorbtwo has joined
 491 2012-01-09 11:44:19 asherkin has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 492 2012-01-09 11:54:46 Fnar has joined
 493 2012-01-09 11:56:55 josephcp has joined
 494 2012-01-09 12:01:18 josephcp has quit (Quit: leaving)
 495 2012-01-09 12:02:06 b4epoche_ has joined
 496 2012-01-09 12:02:53 josephcp has joined
 497 2012-01-09 12:03:09 b4epoche has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 498 2012-01-09 12:03:09 b4epoche_ is now known as b4epoche
 499 2012-01-09 12:06:38 vigilyn has joined
 500 2012-01-09 12:07:36 vigilyn has quit (Client Quit)
 501 2012-01-09 12:07:57 vigilyn has joined
 502 2012-01-09 12:09:31 m00p has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 503 2012-01-09 12:09:59 asherkin has joined
 504 2012-01-09 12:25:23 m00p has joined
 505 2012-01-09 12:29:41 gfinn has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 506 2012-01-09 12:35:42 ovidiusoft has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 507 2012-01-09 12:41:08 gfinn has joined
 508 2012-01-09 12:42:54 <Joric> does block contain metainformation eg signature of the miner or something
 509 2012-01-09 12:43:20 <phantomcircuit> Joric, the first transaction is special
 510 2012-01-09 12:43:48 <GMP> there is a field in coinbase transaction which can help to identify the miner
 511 2012-01-09 12:43:55 theorbtwo has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 512 2012-01-09 12:44:20 <GMP> and of course the address receiving 50 btc
 513 2012-01-09 12:45:34 <josephcp> also you can guess by when a peer announces a new block, i think that's how blockchain.info does it
 514 2012-01-09 12:45:43 <josephcp> based on IPs i mean
 515 2012-01-09 12:45:49 torsthaldo has joined
 516 2012-01-09 12:49:45 roconnor has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 517 2012-01-09 12:51:31 <Joric> thanks!
 518 2012-01-09 12:53:17 kiba```` has joined
 519 2012-01-09 12:54:35 kiba``` has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 520 2012-01-09 12:57:06 robblesz has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 521 2012-01-09 12:58:53 robblesz has joined
 522 2012-01-09 13:01:26 kiba```` has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 523 2012-01-09 13:06:07 diki has joined
 524 2012-01-09 13:06:44 diki is now known as dikidera
 525 2012-01-09 13:07:47 oww has joined
 526 2012-01-09 13:12:48 slush has joined
 527 2012-01-09 13:13:26 <dikidera> Just to ask...can bitcoin-qt be compiled under mingw(with the gui as well)?
 528 2012-01-09 13:13:36 <dikidera> bitcoinD can, but not sure about the qt stuff
 529 2012-01-09 13:15:34 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
 530 2012-01-09 13:17:06 <dikidera> And while I am talking about it, can a 64-bit version be compiled assuming I have a working mingw and how would that benefit the bitcoin client?
 531 2012-01-09 13:17:32 <JFK911> dont you want to answer the last question first
 532 2012-01-09 13:18:29 erle- has joined
 533 2012-01-09 13:20:33 <dikidera> How can I answer my own question?
 534 2012-01-09 13:22:26 <Diablo-D3> dikidera: dunno, the qt code should work under mingw
 535 2012-01-09 13:22:32 <Diablo-D3> I know of qt using projects that work under mingw
 536 2012-01-09 13:22:38 <Diablo-D3> so theoretically it applies to bitcoin as well
 537 2012-01-09 13:22:55 <Diablo-D3> dikidera: I think the official binaries are compiled with mingw, but Im not sure
 538 2012-01-09 13:23:05 <Diablo-D3> also, yes, you can compile a 64 bit version
 539 2012-01-09 13:23:09 <Diablo-D3> I use 64 bit binaries on linux
 540 2012-01-09 13:23:26 <Diablo-D3> there is just no real benefit
 541 2012-01-09 13:23:43 <Diablo-D3> they'd work on win64 only, and surprisingly most windows installs out there arent 64 yet
 542 2012-01-09 13:27:42 aga has joined
 543 2012-01-09 13:31:49 agath has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
 544 2012-01-09 13:38:18 Carmivore has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 545 2012-01-09 13:39:28 gronager has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
 546 2012-01-09 13:42:26 datagutt has joined
 547 2012-01-09 13:44:42 Carmivore has joined
 548 2012-01-09 13:51:32 p0s has joined
 549 2012-01-09 13:55:15 [Tycho] has joined
 550 2012-01-09 14:18:00 graingert has joined
 551 2012-01-09 14:21:50 roconnor has joined
 552 2012-01-09 14:25:37 [Tycho] has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 553 2012-01-09 14:27:10 hippich_ has joined
 554 2012-01-09 14:27:34 theorbtwo has joined
 555 2012-01-09 14:44:04 <andrew12> anyone around that can explain what exactly FGPA mining is?
 556 2012-01-09 14:44:54 <sipa> it means mining using an FPGA
 557 2012-01-09 14:45:09 <sipa> an FPGA is a programmable hardware device
 558 2012-01-09 14:45:15 <andrew12> oh
 559 2012-01-09 14:45:24 <andrew12> so it's a chip designed specifically for mining bitcoins?
 560 2012-01-09 14:45:38 <sipa> no, that would be an ASIC (which is also being looked into)
 561 2012-01-09 14:45:50 <andrew12> oh, but it's a chip you can program
 562 2012-01-09 14:46:02 <sipa> an FPGA is still programmable, but unlike a normal CPU, you can use 100% of the silicon all the time
 563 2012-01-09 14:46:11 <andrew12> neat
 564 2012-01-09 14:47:30 <gmaxwell> sipa: well, subject to the limitations of the fpga and your design's ability to fill it (e.g. typical miner on the xilinx s6 is far from 100% because it runs out of routing resources)
 565 2012-01-09 14:48:05 <sipa> sure, in practice it's always going to be less
 566 2012-01-09 14:48:20 <sipa> but in theory, you can use everything simultaneously
 567 2012-01-09 14:48:36 <sipa> instead of being bound by the von neumann cycle
 568 2012-01-09 14:52:23 hippich_ has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 569 2012-01-09 14:52:47 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
 570 2012-01-09 14:52:59 dvide has quit ()
 571 2012-01-09 14:53:53 <TD> hey
 572 2012-01-09 14:53:58 <TD> any git experts around?
 573 2012-01-09 14:54:00 wasabi1 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 574 2012-01-09 14:54:01 <TD> devrandom: poke
 575 2012-01-09 14:54:13 * TD always seems to end his git adventures with needing an expert :(
 576 2012-01-09 14:54:41 wasabi1 has joined
 577 2012-01-09 14:55:49 gp5st has joined
 578 2012-01-09 14:55:54 gp5st has left ()
 579 2012-01-09 14:56:32 gavinandresen has joined
 580 2012-01-09 14:56:48 <sipa> TD: no expert, but some experience at least
 581 2012-01-09 14:56:52 <Diablo-D3> [09:42:01] <sipa> an FPGA is still programmable, but unlike a normal CPU, you can use 100% of the silicon all the time
 582 2012-01-09 14:56:54 <Diablo-D3> no you cant
 583 2012-01-09 14:57:01 <Diablo-D3> they throw like 50% of the fucking chip away
 584 2012-01-09 14:57:06 <gavinandresen> morning y'all
 585 2012-01-09 14:57:09 <Diablo-D3> due to shit like network interfaces and other shit we dont use
 586 2012-01-09 14:57:38 theorb has joined
 587 2012-01-09 14:58:34 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 588 2012-01-09 14:58:36 theorbtwo has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 589 2012-01-09 14:58:49 theorb is now known as theorbtwo
 590 2012-01-09 15:01:02 <TD> sipa: i'm trying to figure out where a change went, in a branch.
 591 2012-01-09 15:01:16 <TD> sipa: http://code.google.com/r/hearn-bitcoinj/source/browse/#git%2Fsrc%2Fcom%2Fgoogle%2Fbitcoin%2Fcore
 592 2012-01-09 15:01:21 <TD> sipa: there is a class here called AlertMessage
 593 2012-01-09 15:01:29 <phantomcircuit> sipa, you merged 735 :)
 594 2012-01-09 15:01:32 <TD> on the pending-tx branch, which has been merged with master, it's gone.
 595 2012-01-09 15:01:33 <phantomcircuit> <3
 596 2012-01-09 15:01:49 <TD> http://code.google.com/r/hearn-bitcoinj/source/list?name=pending-tx&r=3023f2a4c5dac77875fdbda6cf1f6bcaea158a77&r=464b528175dc421422f91b3c60a6b3cc06a60c93&r=10c936c6019c7c05e4cc30f9c8d0597899b9fc7f&r=075602aafd383229eb364ee7d0a4c93ccaea4066&r=57d26107ded28b8d4ddea010c87683a8e1e1b674
 597 2012-01-09 15:02:00 <TD> you can see the commit that added it about half way down
 598 2012-01-09 15:02:05 <sipa> TD: git bisect?
 599 2012-01-09 15:02:09 <TD> "Support parsing and signature checking of alert messages"
 600 2012-01-09 15:02:16 <TD> i'm trying to figure out what happened from the logs first
 601 2012-01-09 15:03:42 <TD> i'm worried other changes have been rolled back without me realizing
 602 2012-01-09 15:03:58 <TD> at some point master was merged in: http://code.google.com/r/hearn-bitcoinj/source/detail?r=31d22fc0e76ec7d8eccc0ff4c5d5249d8b90f136&name=pending-tx
 603 2012-01-09 15:04:05 <TD> and that file appeared in the "Conflicts:" section
 604 2012-01-09 15:04:10 <TD> but it also says no files affected
 605 2012-01-09 15:04:24 <TD> so presumably i fudged a merge at some point and now the tree is in some state i don't understand (typical git, this is why i don't like it)
 606 2012-01-09 15:05:28 toffoo has quit ()
 607 2012-01-09 15:05:54 <sipa> TD: as far as i can see, AlertMessage.java is present in the master branch?
 608 2012-01-09 15:05:56 <TD> yes
 609 2012-01-09 15:06:00 <TD> not in pending-tx branch
 610 2012-01-09 15:06:01 <coderrr> TD, can't you just git log on that specific file ?
 611 2012-01-09 15:06:16 <TD> how?
 612 2012-01-09 15:06:22 <TD> $ git log src/com/google/bitcoin/core/AlertMessage.java
 613 2012-01-09 15:06:22 <TD> fatal: ambiguous argument 'src/com/google/bitcoin/core/AlertMessage.java': unknown revision or path not in the working tree.
 614 2012-01-09 15:06:29 kiba has joined
 615 2012-01-09 15:06:32 <TD> which is correct. it's not there anymore.
 616 2012-01-09 15:06:47 <coderrr> git log -- path i think
 617 2012-01-09 15:07:00 <TD> prints nothing
 618 2012-01-09 15:07:19 user has joined
 619 2012-01-09 15:07:27 <TD> ah, adding --follow prints some stuff
 620 2012-01-09 15:07:58 <coderrr> oh was a rename involved ?
 621 2012-01-09 15:08:15 <TD> hmm
 622 2012-01-09 15:08:18 <TD> i don't think so
 623 2012-01-09 15:08:32 <TD> ok. if you look here: http://code.google.com/r/hearn-bitcoinj/source/list?name=pending-tx&r=3023f2a4c5dac77875fdbda6cf1f6bcaea158a77&r=464b528175dc421422f91b3c60a6b3cc06a60c93&r=10c936c6019c7c05e4cc30f9c8d0597899b9fc7f&r=075602aafd383229eb364ee7d0a4c93ccaea4066&r=57d26107ded28b8d4ddea010c87683a8e1e1b674
 624 2012-01-09 15:08:39 <TD> the diagram of the merge is a bit confusing
 625 2012-01-09 15:08:46 <coderrr> there was some git bug a while ago where files dissapeared on renames during a merge or something
 626 2012-01-09 15:08:50 <TD> it seem the same commit somehow got duplicated on two branches with different descriptions
 627 2012-01-09 15:09:02 <TD> http://code.google.com/r/hearn-bitcoinj/source/detail?r=464b528175dc421422f91b3c60a6b3cc06a60c93&name=pending-tx
 628 2012-01-09 15:09:04 <TD> http://code.google.com/r/hearn-bitcoinj/source/detail?r=10c936c6019c7c05e4cc30f9c8d0597899b9fc7f&name=pending-tx
 629 2012-01-09 15:13:47 <coderrr> yea that looks pretty screwy, i mean the log shows  two creations, and yet the file isnt there
 630 2012-01-09 15:14:01 <TD> the entire commit is gone
 631 2012-01-09 15:14:17 <TD> i'll wait and see if miron can figure it out
 632 2012-01-09 15:14:19 <TD> he knows git better than me
 633 2012-01-09 15:14:31 <TD> no more complicated branching from now on, i think ....
 634 2012-01-09 15:14:47 copumpkin has joined
 635 2012-01-09 15:14:52 <coderrr> what git version have you been using ?
 636 2012-01-09 15:15:05 <TD> 1.7.4.1
 637 2012-01-09 15:15:18 <coderrr> http://benno.id.au/blog/2011/10/01/git-recursive-merge-broken
 638 2012-01-09 15:15:27 <coderrr> that dood says that bug started in 1.7.4
 639 2012-01-09 15:15:32 <coderrr> wonder if its related
 640 2012-01-09 15:16:00 <TD> oh crap
 641 2012-01-09 15:17:47 <TD> ok, i don't think i renamed any of these files
 642 2012-01-09 15:17:53 <TD> but this kind of thing doesn't make me trust git
 643 2012-01-09 15:19:28 <coderrr> :/
 644 2012-01-09 15:25:17 <andrew12> LOL Windows defender detected bitcoin miners as "potentnially harmful or unwanted software"
 645 2012-01-09 15:27:09 <JFK911> so?
 646 2012-01-09 15:27:16 <JFK911> didnt catch mine
 647 2012-01-09 15:27:28 gronager has joined
 648 2012-01-09 15:28:13 danbri has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 649 2012-01-09 15:29:31 <TD> that's botnet miners unfortunately
 650 2012-01-09 15:34:33 ovidiusoft has joined
 651 2012-01-09 15:34:48 <andrew12> lame
 652 2012-01-09 15:35:32 <Diablo-D3> yeah, but the botnets ship both DM and cgminer
 653 2012-01-09 15:35:34 <Joric> andrew12, that's really bad
 654 2012-01-09 15:35:45 <Diablo-D3> kind of ironic
 655 2012-01-09 15:35:56 <Diablo-D3> that basically flat out confirms DM and cgminer are the most used.
 656 2012-01-09 15:36:11 Internet13 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 657 2012-01-09 15:36:14 <Diablo-D3> it doesnt trigger on poclbm or phoenix
 658 2012-01-09 15:36:37 <andrew12> taht's what i downloaded when it popped up, DM
 659 2012-01-09 15:36:47 <andrew12> which doesn't appear to be working
 660 2012-01-09 15:36:55 Internet13 has joined
 661 2012-01-09 15:37:27 <andrew12> here, take this: https://gist.github.com/2a921255725715478744
 662 2012-01-09 15:37:47 <Diablo-D3> andrew12: make sure you're on newest version of nvidia drivers
 663 2012-01-09 15:37:52 <Diablo-D3> because thats clearly a driver bug
 664 2012-01-09 15:37:58 <andrew12> ic
 665 2012-01-09 15:38:56 <Diablo-D3> what args did you try?
 666 2012-01-09 15:39:36 <andrew12> -u <email> -p <pass> -o pit.deepbit.net -g 5
 667 2012-01-09 15:39:49 <Diablo-D3> this doesnt effect it, but you dont need -g 5
 668 2012-01-09 15:39:57 <Diablo-D3> DM ignores -g on LP pools
 669 2012-01-09 15:39:58 <andrew12> it didn't effect it :p
 670 2012-01-09 15:39:59 datagutt has quit (Quit: kthxbai)
 671 2012-01-09 15:40:29 <andrew12> i don't plan to mine for long on here, it's an nvidia card and won't get that much plus it's in a laptop
 672 2012-01-09 15:40:32 <andrew12> jw what i can get with it
 673 2012-01-09 15:40:43 <Diablo-D3> yeah, I dont even recommend mining on a laptop
 674 2012-01-09 15:40:45 <andrew12> but I should update my drivers regardless
 675 2012-01-09 15:40:58 <Diablo-D3> the heat output is too much for typical laptop cooling
 676 2012-01-09 15:41:05 <Diablo-D3> but yeah, update your drivers and see if you can reproduce it
 677 2012-01-09 15:41:15 datagutt has joined
 678 2012-01-09 15:44:00 <andrew12> weird
 679 2012-01-09 15:44:08 <andrew12> windows thinks the drivers are up to date
 680 2012-01-09 15:44:20 <andrew12> going to try running the installer from nvidia once it finishes downloading anyways though
 681 2012-01-09 15:44:42 <andrew12> ;;bc,blocks
 682 2012-01-09 15:44:42 <gribble> 161417
 683 2012-01-09 15:44:57 <andrew12> vps almost finished downloading le chain
 684 2012-01-09 15:45:42 chrisb__ has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
 685 2012-01-09 15:45:59 <Diablo-D3> andrew12: microsoft doesnt use the same drivers
 686 2012-01-09 15:46:11 <Diablo-D3> they use somewhat out of date specially tested drivers that miss all the features
 687 2012-01-09 15:46:18 <Diablo-D3> the only way to get newest is to download them from nvidia
 688 2012-01-09 15:46:20 <andrew12> i thought it was something like that
 689 2012-01-09 15:46:33 danbri has joined
 690 2012-01-09 15:46:55 [Tycho] has joined
 691 2012-01-09 15:47:42 <Diablo-D3> they do it to amd as well
 692 2012-01-09 15:47:50 <andrew12> this is a macbook fwiw
 693 2012-01-09 15:48:01 <andrew12> mbp
 694 2012-01-09 15:48:08 <Diablo-D3> erm
 695 2012-01-09 15:48:12 <Diablo-D3> and you're using windows?
 696 2012-01-09 15:48:16 <andrew12> yes
 697 2012-01-09 15:48:22 <Diablo-D3> thats never going to stop being weird.
 698 2012-01-09 15:48:26 <andrew12> lol
 699 2012-01-09 15:48:33 <andrew12> i use it for gaming
 700 2012-01-09 15:48:39 <andrew12> some games run better in windows and some are only for windows
 701 2012-01-09 15:48:49 <sipa> i'm sure minesweeper also exists for OSX
 702 2012-01-09 15:49:44 <andrew12> the only game that runs better on os x vs windows for me was minecrat
 703 2012-01-09 15:49:47 <andrew12> minecraft
 704 2012-01-09 15:49:51 <andrew12> but minecraft sucks, so....
 705 2012-01-09 15:50:02 <Diablo-D3> sipa++
 706 2012-01-09 15:50:37 <andrew12> i hope these drivers won't broked this
 707 2012-01-09 15:50:47 <andrew12> though i don't think they will
 708 2012-01-09 15:50:57 <andrew12> but apple is weird
 709 2012-01-09 15:51:07 <lfm> diablo will buy you a new laptop if it breaks
 710 2012-01-09 15:51:12 <andrew12> lol
 711 2012-01-09 15:51:56 <Diablo-D3> I will not.
 712 2012-01-09 15:52:20 <Diablo-D3> and he can just reboot windows in safe mode and roll back anyhow
 713 2012-01-09 15:54:08 <andrew12> or just reformat windows
 714 2012-01-09 15:54:20 <andrew12> but then i'd have to redownload stuff
 715 2012-01-09 15:54:28 <andrew12> rollback sounds easier
 716 2012-01-09 15:54:53 <andrew12> looks like it's done
 717 2012-01-09 15:55:53 <andrew12> woo miner works
 718 2012-01-09 15:56:03 <Diablo-D3> yay
 719 2012-01-09 15:56:06 <Diablo-D3> enjoy all 8 mhash.
 720 2012-01-09 15:56:20 <andrew12> 7
 721 2012-01-09 15:56:26 <Diablo-D3> I was close
 722 2012-01-09 15:56:38 <andrew12> oh neat
 723 2012-01-09 15:56:41 <andrew12> so i go to kill it
 724 2012-01-09 15:56:52 Zarutian has joined
 725 2012-01-09 15:56:53 <andrew12> then 'display driver stopped responding and has recovered'
 726 2012-01-09 15:57:12 <Diablo-D3> yeah, thats a known issue, nvidia is a little jumpy
 727 2012-01-09 15:57:17 <Diablo-D3> add like -f 120
 728 2012-01-09 15:59:31 <andrew12> that's better
 729 2012-01-09 16:00:28 imsaguy2 is now known as teravps
 730 2012-01-09 16:00:52 <andrew12> already got a share, heh
 731 2012-01-09 16:01:03 teravps is now known as megavps
 732 2012-01-09 16:01:04 theorbtwo has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
 733 2012-01-09 16:01:06 <gmaxwell> Diablo-D3: what thread are you telling people on the forum I split?
 734 2012-01-09 16:01:18 megavps is now known as kilovps
 735 2012-01-09 16:01:26 <Diablo-D3> didnt you split the eligius thread?
 736 2012-01-09 16:01:29 <Diablo-D3> because I know I didnt
 737 2012-01-09 16:01:43 <gmaxwell> No. I didn't.
 738 2012-01-09 16:01:43 <andrew12> ah
 739 2012-01-09 16:01:50 <andrew12> so never ever do -f 0 on nvidia
 740 2012-01-09 16:01:55 <andrew12> it freaks out.
 741 2012-01-09 16:01:57 <Diablo-D3> andrew12: never do -f 0 ever
 742 2012-01-09 16:02:04 <Diablo-D3> it'll increase the size forever until it reaches max
 743 2012-01-09 16:02:06 <Diablo-D3> which is bad
 744 2012-01-09 16:02:15 <Diablo-D3> I should actually error check for that
 745 2012-01-09 16:02:22 <gmaxwell> I won't take any even possible contentious moderation action wrt to that thread because it would be impossible to keep the accusations from flying. I already said this.
 746 2012-01-09 16:02:29 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: I wonder who did then
 747 2012-01-09 16:02:48 kilovps is now known as imsaguy2
 748 2012-01-09 16:03:02 <CIA-100> bitcoin: Matt Corallo master * r65c82be / (3 files in 2 dirs): Remove mentions on anonymity in debian folder. ... https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/65c82be0214c9480f12782284f9404dd7a6c1041
 749 2012-01-09 16:03:03 <CIA-100> bitcoin: Gavin Andresen master * r7501d61 / (3 files in 2 dirs): Merge pull request #750 from TheBlueMatt/anonymous ... https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/7501d61633d707331309a8f45c9a4190229b90e0
 750 2012-01-09 16:03:11 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: well Ive already recommended that goat and SAC be banned.
 751 2012-01-09 16:03:22 <CIA-100> bitcoin: Gavin Andresen master * r2e55523 / src/qt/forms/transactiondescdialog.ui : Merge pull request #746 from laanwj/tdesc_ro ... https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/2e555237d304c235b16c9460097703005d68cab0
 752 2012-01-09 16:04:09 <gmaxwell> Diablo-D3: can you toss an Edit: wasn't gmaxwell in there for me? thanks!
 753 2012-01-09 16:04:20 <Diablo-D3> already did
 754 2012-01-09 16:04:38 erle- has quit (Quit: erle-)
 755 2012-01-09 16:04:49 theorbtwo has joined
 756 2012-01-09 16:05:51 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: goat says its tysat
 757 2012-01-09 16:06:17 <Diablo-D3> whoever that is
 758 2012-01-09 16:08:06 Joric has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 759 2012-01-09 16:10:12 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: thread stays locked until theymos starts banning people.
 760 2012-01-09 16:10:32 <Diablo-D3> you'd think they'd wise up after the first one was banned.
 761 2012-01-09 16:10:47 <Diablo-D3> their kind is so annoying to deal with
 762 2012-01-09 16:11:53 Joric has joined
 763 2012-01-09 16:11:53 Joric has quit (Changing host)
 764 2012-01-09 16:11:53 Joric has joined
 765 2012-01-09 16:13:00 Guest30852 is now known as ForceMajeure
 766 2012-01-09 16:13:26 wasabi2 has joined
 767 2012-01-09 16:13:33 b4epoche_ has joined
 768 2012-01-09 16:14:28 b4epoche has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 769 2012-01-09 16:14:29 b4epoche_ is now known as b4epoche
 770 2012-01-09 16:21:21 user has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 771 2012-01-09 16:23:29 <dikidera> Anyone know how I can include this object file in cgminer? It needs to be included, but it's not
 772 2012-01-09 16:24:43 <Diablo-D3> learn how makefiles work
 773 2012-01-09 16:25:40 <dikidera> Would this not best be done when I actually do include the object file?
 774 2012-01-09 16:25:52 <dikidera> Finish work, learn later
 775 2012-01-09 16:26:01 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: Mac 0.5.2rc1 yet?
 776 2012-01-09 16:26:56 btc_novice has joined
 777 2012-01-09 16:27:12 <dikidera> One suggestion for bitcoin as well
 778 2012-01-09 16:27:21 <dikidera> Proper handling of Ctrl+C exiting
 779 2012-01-09 16:27:37 <dikidera> the headless version
 780 2012-01-09 16:27:48 <helo> i think it does handle it, it just isn't very fast about handling it
 781 2012-01-09 16:27:54 <dikidera> It doesn't
 782 2012-01-09 16:27:57 <dikidera> causes a crash
 783 2012-01-09 16:28:06 <helo> hmm
 784 2012-01-09 16:31:18 danbri_ has joined
 785 2012-01-09 16:33:37 danbri has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 786 2012-01-09 16:35:20 topace has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 787 2012-01-09 16:36:27 wasabi3 has joined
 788 2012-01-09 16:37:18 wasabi1 has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 789 2012-01-09 16:43:38 danbri_ is now known as danbri
 790 2012-01-09 16:44:00 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 791 2012-01-09 16:44:33 Turingi has joined
 792 2012-01-09 16:44:56 darkee has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 793 2012-01-09 16:45:43 darkee has joined
 794 2012-01-09 16:49:42 topace has joined
 795 2012-01-09 16:51:16 traviscj has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 796 2012-01-09 16:51:20 darkee has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 797 2012-01-09 16:51:43 darkee has joined
 798 2012-01-09 16:55:10 m00p has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 799 2012-01-09 16:55:41 BlueMatt has joined
 800 2012-01-09 16:56:32 [Tycho] has quit (Changing host)
 801 2012-01-09 16:56:32 [Tycho] has joined
 802 2012-01-09 16:59:26 <BlueMatt> when are the meetings again?
 803 2012-01-09 16:59:50 <sipa> BlueMatt: tuesdays 21:00 GMT
 804 2012-01-09 17:00:48 sipa has quit (Changing host)
 805 2012-01-09 17:00:48 sipa has joined
 806 2012-01-09 17:05:41 <gmaxwell> I normally don't idle in there with @ specifically because of that disruption, fwiw.
 807 2012-01-09 17:06:17 <BlueMatt> idle in...?
 808 2012-01-09 17:06:23 <sipa> #bitcoin
 809 2012-01-09 17:06:27 user has joined
 810 2012-01-09 17:06:57 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: luke-jr opened pull request 13 on bitcoin/bitcoin.org <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.org/pull/13>
 811 2012-01-09 17:08:00 traviscj has joined
 812 2012-01-09 17:09:40 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: happy?
 813 2012-01-09 17:10:48 <gmaxwell> I wasn't complaining, just providing some background there.
 814 2012-01-09 17:12:35 <BlueMatt> I dont know why nanotube set my +O, I thought I used to be +o in #bitcoin...
 815 2012-01-09 17:15:02 <BlueMatt> oh, jgarzik gave it to me...now why did he do that???
 816 2012-01-09 17:18:28 traviscj has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 817 2012-01-09 17:18:39 _Fireball has joined
 818 2012-01-09 17:22:12 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: /topic Main: http://bitcoin.org/ | Wiki: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/ | Latest version: 0.5.2 *VERSIONS BEFORE 0.4.1 HARM THE NETWORK AND YOUR SECURITY* | Bitcoin Development - We're here to help develop the Bitcoin system. All related discussions are welcome. | If you have a question, simply ask and wait for a reply. | Main support/discussion chan #bitcoin | Public channel logs: bit.ly/iPFi3X
 819 2012-01-09 17:22:29 <JFK911> harms your security
 820 2012-01-09 17:22:30 <JFK911> lolz
 821 2012-01-09 17:22:40 <dikidera> Now that you guys mentioned it
 822 2012-01-09 17:22:48 <luke-jr> JFK911: well, they do
 823 2012-01-09 17:22:57 <luke-jr> actually
 824 2012-01-09 17:22:57 <JFK911> because wallet is not crypted ?
 825 2012-01-09 17:22:59 <dikidera> it was in the suggestion page on freenode that OP status should only be on when you need it
 826 2012-01-09 17:22:59 user has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 827 2012-01-09 17:23:06 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: /topic Main: http://bitcoin.org/ | Wiki: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/ | Latest version: 0.5.2 *VERSIONS BEFORE 0.4.3 HARM THE NETWORK AND YOUR SECURITY* | Bitcoin Development - We're here to help develop the Bitcoin system. All related discussions are welcome. | If you have a question, simply ask and wait for a reply. | Main support/discussion chan #bitcoin | Public channel logs: bit.ly/iPFi3X
 828 2012-01-09 17:23:09 <jrmithdobbs> is current github HEAD fixed with OP_EVAL pulled out and everything?
 829 2012-01-09 17:23:23 <luke-jr> JFK911: because there are security bugs
 830 2012-01-09 17:23:37 theorb has joined
 831 2012-01-09 17:23:46 <jrmithdobbs> luke-jr: what security bugs?
 832 2012-01-09 17:23:49 <luke-jr> jrmithdobbs: I forget.
 833 2012-01-09 17:23:57 <JFK911> it's all clear now.
 834 2012-01-09 17:24:10 theorbtwo has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 835 2012-01-09 17:24:18 theorb is now known as theorbtwo
 836 2012-01-09 17:24:29 <CIA-100> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr 0.5.x * r9b53650a455c bitcoind-stable/ (6 files in 4 dirs): Merge branch '0.5.0.x' into 0.5.x http://tinyurl.com/7v5hdfc
 837 2012-01-09 17:24:44 BlueMatt has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 838 2012-01-09 17:26:02 pickett has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 839 2012-01-09 17:26:49 BlueMatt has joined
 840 2012-01-09 17:36:42 wasabi1 has joined
 841 2012-01-09 17:38:34 wasabi3 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 842 2012-01-09 17:39:41 theorb has joined
 843 2012-01-09 17:40:30 theorbtwo has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 844 2012-01-09 17:40:41 theorb is now known as theorbtwo
 845 2012-01-09 17:44:57 [7] has quit (Disconnected by services)
 846 2012-01-09 17:45:11 TheSeven has joined
 847 2012-01-09 17:46:11 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: also, were you going to build 0.4.3 and/or 0.5.0.3 ?
 848 2012-01-09 17:46:20 <luke-jr> (between those two, I prefer 0.4.3)
 849 2012-01-09 17:47:38 TheSeven has quit (Disconnected by services)
 850 2012-01-09 17:47:51 pickett has joined
 851 2012-01-09 17:47:57 [7] has joined
 852 2012-01-09 17:49:49 BurtyB has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 853 2012-01-09 17:50:08 BurtyB has joined
 854 2012-01-09 17:50:44 [7] has quit (Disconnected by services)
 855 2012-01-09 17:50:48 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: you have a bad habit of reminding me when I cant build...ping me again when I get back to my dorm (like 5pm)
 856 2012-01-09 17:51:04 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: hehe, ok ☺
 857 2012-01-09 17:51:08 TheSeven has joined
 858 2012-01-09 17:51:20 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: /topic Main: http://bitcoin.org/ | Wiki: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/ | Latest version: 0.5.2 *VERSIONS BEFORE 0.4.3 HARM THE NETWORK AND YOUR SECURITY* | Bitcoin Development - We're here to help develop the Bitcoin system. All related discussions are welcome. | If you have a question, simply ask and wait for a reply. | Main support/discussion chan #bitcoin | Public channel logs: bit.ly/iPFi3X
 859 2012-01-09 17:51:35 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: also, wait, 5 PM what timezone? ;)
 860 2012-01-09 17:51:50 <BlueMatt> est
 861 2012-01-09 17:52:22 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: can you update the topic now, or should I wait for the files to be pushed out to sourceforge?
 862 2012-01-09 17:52:31 <BlueMatt> 0.5.2?
 863 2012-01-09 17:52:34 <luke-jr> yeah
 864 2012-01-09 17:52:41 <BlueMatt> wait till the files are out (I thought we were still on rc)?
 865 2012-01-09 17:52:52 <luke-jr> no problems with the RC, so it can be renamed
 866 2012-01-09 17:53:05 <BlueMatt> ok, well dont reup those tars as-is
 867 2012-01-09 17:53:07 oww has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 868 2012-01-09 17:53:12 <BlueMatt> the sigs need removed (for release)
 869 2012-01-09 17:53:12 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: ?
 870 2012-01-09 17:53:23 <BlueMatt> check release-process.txt
 871 2012-01-09 17:53:31 <BlueMatt> (those tars arent quite in the normal format)
 872 2012-01-09 17:53:50 <luke-jr> o
 873 2012-01-09 17:54:01 <luke-jr> the tars you sent aren't what go on the site anyway though?
 874 2012-01-09 17:54:09 <BlueMatt> correct
 875 2012-01-09 17:54:10 <luke-jr> at least the win32 one
 876 2012-01-09 17:54:16 <BlueMatt> yea
 877 2012-01-09 17:54:26 <BlueMatt> its close, but just check and compare to previous tars
 878 2012-01-09 17:54:42 <luke-jr> win32 is exe + zip ;)
 879 2012-01-09 17:54:46 <BlueMatt> yea
 880 2012-01-09 17:55:20 <luke-jr> anyhow, it's tagged, and I've got announcements written up and a pullreq for .org
 881 2012-01-09 17:55:26 <luke-jr> so just a matter of getting the downloads in place
 882 2012-01-09 17:55:55 <BlueMatt> ok, nice
 883 2012-01-09 17:56:48 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: care to read/ACK the announcemnet? https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.org/pull/13
 884 2012-01-09 17:57:15 graingert has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 885 2012-01-09 18:00:00 abragin has left ()
 886 2012-01-09 18:04:30 _Fireball has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 887 2012-01-09 18:05:20 _Fireball has joined
 888 2012-01-09 18:06:19 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 889 2012-01-09 18:06:22 abragin has joined
 890 2012-01-09 18:06:33 abragin has quit (Changing host)
 891 2012-01-09 18:06:33 abragin has joined
 892 2012-01-09 18:08:05 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
 893 2012-01-09 18:13:58 ovidiusoft has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 894 2012-01-09 18:14:37 h4ckm3 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 895 2012-01-09 18:17:47 Wizzleby has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 896 2012-01-09 18:18:14 theorb has joined
 897 2012-01-09 18:18:18 theorbtwo has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 898 2012-01-09 18:18:22 theorb is now known as theorbtwo
 899 2012-01-09 18:21:58 Wizzleby has joined
 900 2012-01-09 18:22:56 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: TheBlueMatt opened issue 751 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/751>
 901 2012-01-09 18:26:53 h4ckm3 has joined
 902 2012-01-09 18:27:29 pickett has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 903 2012-01-09 18:28:39 PK has joined
 904 2012-01-09 18:32:50 pickett has joined
 905 2012-01-09 18:40:28 pickett has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 906 2012-01-09 18:42:04 pickett has joined
 907 2012-01-09 18:43:16 Wizzleby has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 908 2012-01-09 18:44:03 larsivi has joined
 909 2012-01-09 18:44:17 <CIA-100> libbitcoin: genjix * rc6e3040fa381 /include/bitcoin/utility/threads.hpp: threaded_service will not be deprecated. changed my mind here. http://tinyurl.com/6lnsrwr
 910 2012-01-09 18:45:26 pickett has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 911 2012-01-09 18:48:58 Wizzleby has joined
 912 2012-01-09 18:51:11 pickett has joined
 913 2012-01-09 18:51:58 copumpkin has joined
 914 2012-01-09 18:55:47 toffoo has joined
 915 2012-01-09 18:57:53 ovidiusoft has joined
 916 2012-01-09 18:58:31 onelineproof has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 917 2012-01-09 19:00:42 DontMindMe has joined
 918 2012-01-09 19:15:00 p0s- has joined
 919 2012-01-09 19:15:18 osmosis has joined
 920 2012-01-09 19:18:16 p0s has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 921 2012-01-09 19:19:46 Folklore has joined
 922 2012-01-09 19:20:04 <Folklore> I wanna be apart of #bitcoin, but one of the 1000 ops they added there needs to fix the content
 923 2012-01-09 19:20:18 <Folklore> what they were just talkin about isn't right, it's not funny, it's sick
 924 2012-01-09 19:20:20 <Folklore> and it's illegal
 925 2012-01-09 19:21:09 <Folklore> leaving my client and coming back to that kinda stuff isn't cool,anything else idc, but that was taking it too far
 926 2012-01-09 19:21:34 * BlueMatt doesnt feel like reading logs, what was being discussed?
 927 2012-01-09 19:21:57 <BlueMatt> plus /me doesnt read #bitcoin...its too oft
 928 2012-01-09 19:22:26 <Folklore> young children.
 929 2012-01-09 19:22:57 <Folklore> it wasn't graphic but even hinting at that kinda stuff isn't ok IMHO
 930 2012-01-09 19:24:06 onelineproof has joined
 931 2012-01-09 19:25:02 <Folklore> a simple don't talk about this would be nice, coming from an op so I can idle in that channel like before
 932 2012-01-09 19:26:42 <BlueMatt> yea, ok thats just wrong...
 933 2012-01-09 19:27:27 pickett has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 934 2012-01-09 19:27:57 <dub> dont listen to the troll
 935 2012-01-09 19:29:14 <Folklore> and who would be the "troll"
 936 2012-01-09 19:29:18 <Folklore> myself?
 937 2012-01-09 19:29:32 <Folklore> because keep in mind, logs speak for themselves
 938 2012-01-09 19:30:51 <dub> you are the troll
 939 2012-01-09 19:31:19 <Folklore> and why is that? because I don't think that kind of sick stuff is amusing?
 940 2012-01-09 19:34:18 osmosis has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 941 2012-01-09 19:39:03 imsaguy2 is now known as [\\\\]
 942 2012-01-09 19:42:57 pickett has joined
 943 2012-01-09 19:47:19 Turingi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 944 2012-01-09 19:48:06 <PK> what did I miss?
 945 2012-01-09 19:48:06 aga is now known as agath
 946 2012-01-09 19:54:46 <Folklore> not much
 947 2012-01-09 19:55:30 <PK> looks like, I read through the four pages of log and didn't spot anything.
 948 2012-01-09 19:57:28 <Folklore> they were trying to mock luke
 949 2012-01-09 19:57:38 <Folklore> two of them, just the way they did it wasn't right
 950 2012-01-09 19:57:55 <Folklore> like i said it wasn't graphic, thankfully, but even hintin at that is no good
 951 2012-01-09 19:58:32 <Folklore> and while dub may think i'm a "troll" for not finding it the least bit amusing, I bet you the 400+ people in #bitcoin didn't come in there for that either
 952 2012-01-09 19:59:19 <PK> the part about where luck said he'd never join a large pool?
 953 2012-01-09 20:01:10 <Folklore> no him and the boys comment
 954 2012-01-09 20:01:36 <Folklore> that two individuals felt the need to joke about, after I asked the first to not talk about that kinda stuff
 955 2012-01-09 20:02:03 <Folklore> anyway I don't wanna go on all day about this, I just wish someone else had stepped in and been like don't do that
 956 2012-01-09 20:02:06 <Folklore> not here, and moved on
 957 2012-01-09 20:02:24 <luke-jr> Folklore: it's mainly 1 person, who hates me because I stopped him from scamming people
 958 2012-01-09 20:03:47 coingenuity has joined
 959 2012-01-09 20:04:40 chmod755 has joined
 960 2012-01-09 20:04:50 <Folklore> well his comments aren't cool, not for the channel or anyone.
 961 2012-01-09 20:05:08 <jgarzik> whee, identity theft!
 962 2012-01-09 20:05:34 <jgarzik> time to file fraud/police/etc. reports :/
 963 2012-01-09 20:06:17 <roconnor> heh, for a bunch of cryptoanarchists, the people on the bitcoin forums do like to talk about going to the police an awful lot.
 964 2012-01-09 20:06:46 <chmod755> go to the #bitcoin-police instead
 965 2012-01-09 20:07:08 <roconnor> hah, it is real
 966 2012-01-09 20:07:35 <chmod755> ofc
 967 2012-01-09 20:07:40 <dub> really retarded
 968 2012-01-09 20:08:13 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: ouch...that really sucks...
 969 2012-01-09 20:08:30 <roconnor> BTW, anyone know where I can find technical details on how namecoin works?
 970 2012-01-09 20:08:36 * BlueMatt thinks credit cards/ssn need a shitton more security...
 971 2012-01-09 20:09:02 <jgarzik> roconnor: no one would ever confuse me with a cryptoanarchist
 972 2012-01-09 20:09:11 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: don't you have ops in #bitcoin ?
 973 2012-01-09 20:09:13 <Folklore> roconnor #namecoin may help, I think they have some good stuff on their homesite
 974 2012-01-09 20:09:22 <Folklore> www.namecoin.org/
 975 2012-01-09 20:09:24 bakh has joined
 976 2012-01-09 20:09:40 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: and?
 977 2012-01-09 20:09:42 <Folklore> wish namecoin creator wasn't so greedy, he wants a lot for .bit's
 978 2012-01-09 20:09:51 <Folklore> but I guess if people are willing to pay it
 979 2012-01-09 20:09:55 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: and there's a troll cussing random people out for a while now?
 980 2012-01-09 20:10:02 <roconnor> jgarzik: ah sorry. I didn't mean to refer to you.
 981 2012-01-09 20:10:12 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: I rarely read #bitcoin, plus Im in class...
 982 2012-01-09 20:10:19 <luke-jr> i c
 983 2012-01-09 20:10:22 <luke-jr> gmaxwell took care of it
 984 2012-01-09 20:10:57 <PK> for cryptoanarchists I miss gpg signed posts in the forum... so much about "someone edited my post"
 985 2012-01-09 20:11:49 <gmaxwell> PK: :)
 986 2012-01-09 20:11:49 ski_ has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 987 2012-01-09 20:11:56 <gmaxwell> actually that would be a neat policy.
 988 2012-01-09 20:12:05 <gmaxwell> don't sign your messages? free game for amusing editing.
 989 2012-01-09 20:12:09 BlueMatt has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
 990 2012-01-09 20:12:16 <luke-jr> you know the trolls would post unsigned messages and claim they were edited
 991 2012-01-09 20:12:25 <gmaxwell> Sounds like a personal problem.
 992 2012-01-09 20:12:29 <luke-jr> :P
 993 2012-01-09 20:12:30 <Folklore> BlueMatt do you run a Tor hidden service? sounds like a familiar exit node
 994 2012-01-09 20:12:30 <gmaxwell> (if the rule were understood)
 995 2012-01-09 20:12:43 <gmaxwell> matt != mage.
 996 2012-01-09 20:12:44 <Folklore> or exit node rather, not hidden service
 997 2012-01-09 20:13:08 <Folklore> is it bluemage? thought was maggie, no blue
 998 2012-01-09 20:13:08 <PK> always quote important parts and never mess with the admins because they can still edit your quoted text :)
 999 2012-01-09 20:14:06 <makomk> How would they be able to prove the mods hadn't edited their signed messages and replaced them with unsigned versions, and how would the mods be able to prove they hadn't?
1000 2012-01-09 20:14:11 <Folklore> yeah is blutmagie :P
1001 2012-01-09 20:15:17 <gmaxwell> makomk: sign everything and make it clear that you always will.
1002 2012-01-09 20:16:47 <makomk> It'd basically just come down to trust then - do you trust the person to follow their policy of always signing messages more or less than you trust the mods not to strip out signatures?
1003 2012-01-09 20:21:40 <PK> dump that forum and write a new one, p2p forum. Each posts needs to be signed by 10 other peers before it's valid and then unchangable. Link the posts in a chain so no one can remove any. That's what I would execpt of cryptoanarchists
1004 2012-01-09 20:22:04 <PK> postcoin or forumcoin if you like.
1005 2012-01-09 20:22:33 <Folklore> love to see the size of *that database :p
1006 2012-01-09 20:22:36 <gmaxwell> PK: eKafkaForum.
1007 2012-01-09 20:22:48 <luke-jr> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=57325.0
1008 2012-01-09 20:23:11 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
1009 2012-01-09 20:23:12 <Diablo-D3> [03:18:54] <TyGrrGoat> you fail lol fag
1010 2012-01-09 20:23:15 <Diablo-D3> _heh_
1011 2012-01-09 20:23:17 <luke-jr> PK: how would you get 10 other peers to sign it if they never see it? ;)
1012 2012-01-09 20:23:31 <gmaxwell> Diablo-D3: ssh. don't feed the troll.
1013 2012-01-09 20:23:52 <chmod755> PK: and I get rewarded to sort out spam posts?
1014 2012-01-09 20:23:56 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: well, he apparently wants me to shove my dick up his ass, and I always feed my dates first.
1015 2012-01-09 20:24:18 <CIA-100> libbitcoin: genjix * rf0283f8a8898 / (10 files in 7 dirs): Abstracted away subscription from channel into generic utility. http://tinyurl.com/74efbsl
1016 2012-01-09 20:25:02 <lfm> obviously you would stand around the entrance to shops and ask passerby to please sign you message on a clipboard
1017 2012-01-09 20:25:03 <PK> luke-jr: they see it as "unverified post"
1018 2012-01-09 20:25:18 <luke-jr> PK: I don't get the point.
1019 2012-01-09 20:25:30 <luke-jr> PK: a single signature by the author is proof that he wrote it
1020 2012-01-09 20:25:42 b4epoche_ has joined
1021 2012-01-09 20:25:45 Raziel_ has joined
1022 2012-01-09 20:26:24 b4epoche has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1023 2012-01-09 20:26:25 b4epoche_ is now known as b4epoche
1024 2012-01-09 20:26:49 <PK> luke-jr: true, but then you have to trust the forum operator, like you have to trust the goverment issuing money or the bank storing it for you. I was just pointing out how some people are almost paranoid about their "money" but completely trust other people over their posted threads and reputation.
1025 2012-01-09 20:27:38 <PK> luke-jr: I would expect that the same people would be interested in creating a secure form of "forum" that can't be controlled by a single individual.
1026 2012-01-09 20:29:16 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1027 2012-01-09 20:29:47 toffoo has quit ()
1028 2012-01-09 20:30:27 datagutt has quit (Quit: kthxbai)
1029 2012-01-09 20:30:44 <chmod755> PK: luke-jr will take it over
1030 2012-01-09 20:30:49 <chmod755> lol
1031 2012-01-09 20:30:50 <luke-jr> lol
1032 2012-01-09 20:31:15 toffoo has joined
1033 2012-01-09 20:33:25 <PK> the more I think about it, the more I like it. Operators can't simply block a p2p forum if they don't like a content, mods can't simply delete posts. It's true freedom of speech.
1034 2012-01-09 20:34:14 <chmod755> luke-jr: "The problem is not Luke attacking altcoins but Luke  using his pool for attacking altcoins without his pool users knowing.  This is a breach of trust." << did you use your pool?
1035 2012-01-09 20:34:42 <Diablo-D3> chmod755: basically, its a bunch of trolls who wont let it go
1036 2012-01-09 20:34:47 <cjdelisle> PK: that distributed forum idea was implemented in one of the i2p based programs
1037 2012-01-09 20:34:52 <Diablo-D3> luke went to add all the alt coins, and then all the alt coins crashed and burned
1038 2012-01-09 20:34:56 <Diablo-D3> because the diff massively spiked
1039 2012-01-09 20:34:57 <cjdelisle> I can't remember what it was called though
1040 2012-01-09 20:35:01 <Diablo-D3> and now they blame luke
1041 2012-01-09 20:35:03 <Diablo-D3> its hilarious
1042 2012-01-09 20:35:04 <chmod755> LOL
1043 2012-01-09 20:35:09 Cablesaurus has joined
1044 2012-01-09 20:35:10 Cablesaurus has quit (Changing host)
1045 2012-01-09 20:35:10 Cablesaurus has joined
1046 2012-01-09 20:35:21 <chmod755> "Anyone up for a MM pool that DOS's Rogue Pools on the side?  After all  its in the open and you get the added benefit of protecting  cryptocurrency from D-Bags."
1047 2012-01-09 20:35:24 Ahimoth_ has joined
1048 2012-01-09 20:35:24 Folklore has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1049 2012-01-09 20:35:33 <cjdelisle> basicly it ended because the "forum" got spammed to oblivian
1050 2012-01-09 20:35:40 amiller has quit (Excess Flood)
1051 2012-01-09 20:35:50 Ahimoth has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1052 2012-01-09 20:35:55 amiller has joined
1053 2012-01-09 20:35:59 Folklore has joined
1054 2012-01-09 20:36:17 <PK> <reverse-trolling>well done luke-jr, thanks a lot. Use more miners on alt chains. The lowers the difficults on the main chain for me</reverse-trolling>
1055 2012-01-09 20:36:30 <chmod755> LOL
1056 2012-01-09 20:36:36 Raziel_ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1057 2012-01-09 20:37:00 <luke-jr> chmod755: Eligius miners were not involved in the CLC nonsense
1058 2012-01-09 20:37:44 <chmod755> luke-jr: keep solidcoin 2.0 alive... it's good to get idiots away from bitcoin
1059 2012-01-09 20:37:52 <luke-jr> chmod755: sorry
1060 2012-01-09 20:38:07 <luke-jr> chmod755: I already filed a DMCA takedown with GitHub, and if SOPA passes I'm going after their domain.
1061 2012-01-09 20:38:18 RazielZ has joined
1062 2012-01-09 20:38:19 <chmod755> luke-jr: you actually did?
1063 2012-01-09 20:38:30 <chmod755> ok, but it's legit
1064 2012-01-09 20:38:32 BlueMatt has joined
1065 2012-01-09 20:38:37 <makomk> chmod755: Eligius was used for the CLC DOS and luke-jr needed its miners to achieve it. Be very careful how you read luke-jr's statements; they're technically true but misleading.
1066 2012-01-09 20:38:53 <luke-jr> makomk: please stop spreading FUD
1067 2012-01-09 20:39:29 <Diablo-D3> makomk: it never happened.
1068 2012-01-09 20:39:37 <Diablo-D3> go away already
1069 2012-01-09 20:39:45 <roconnor> ??
1070 2012-01-09 20:39:48 <makomk> Diablo-D3: I have CLC blocks that use the same POW as Eligius-mined Bitcoin blocks.
1071 2012-01-09 20:39:54 <roconnor> isn't makomk right?
1072 2012-01-09 20:39:54 <Diablo-D3> yeah, who cares.
1073 2012-01-09 20:40:18 <Diablo-D3> if you dont like the diff spike, then quit trying to be popular.
1074 2012-01-09 20:40:53 <cjdelisle> If a chain can be pwnd by recycling unused shares then it really needs to die IMO
1075 2012-01-09 20:40:56 <makomk> Diablo-D3: he's refusing to process CLC transactions and ignoring blocks anyone else mines.
1076 2012-01-09 20:41:16 <Diablo-D3> good for him.
1077 2012-01-09 20:41:24 <Diablo-D3> I still dont want to hear it.
1078 2012-01-09 20:41:26 <chmod755> yep
1079 2012-01-09 20:41:32 <Diablo-D3> and neither does anyone else
1080 2012-01-09 20:41:33 <cjdelisle> anyone could have done that using info gleaned from p2pool
1081 2012-01-09 20:41:39 <makomk> Diablo-D3: then stop spreading misinformation.
1082 2012-01-09 20:42:10 <Diablo-D3> Im not
1083 2012-01-09 20:42:13 <Diablo-D3> there is just zero useful evidence.
1084 2012-01-09 20:42:43 <PK> One question: What's bitcoin (and the alt-chains) about? if one! person, luke-jr can (if he actually did) mess with it like that. What could a gov do with the same intention?
1085 2012-01-09 20:42:45 <luke-jr> makomk: you're the one spreading misinformation
1086 2012-01-09 20:43:04 <makomk> PK: they could shut down Bitcoin for a few million dollars, as I recall.
1087 2012-01-09 20:43:07 <luke-jr> PK: bitcoin and the "alt-chains" are two different things
1088 2012-01-09 20:43:10 <makomk> That's old news though.
1089 2012-01-09 20:43:16 <luke-jr> makomk: I shut down CoiledCoin for free
1090 2012-01-09 20:43:38 wizkid057_ is now known as wizkid057
1091 2012-01-09 20:44:07 <PK> luke-jr: so are you and a gov.
1092 2012-01-09 20:44:13 <chmod755> point your miners to federalreserve.gov  --> shut down --> PROFIT
1093 2012-01-09 20:44:36 <Diablo-D3> makomk: about $250m could shut it down forever, yes.
1094 2012-01-09 20:44:41 <Diablo-D3> I would own ALL the hashes
1095 2012-01-09 20:45:02 <cjdelisle> an interesting point is that if someone has a chain which is so insecure that waste information from bitcoin can be used to ruin it, at what point does it become fraud through grose neglegence?
1096 2012-01-09 20:45:04 <roconnor> luke-jr: but you said Eligius miners were not invovled, but they were involved weren't they?  They were not harmed, but they were involved.
1097 2012-01-09 20:45:50 <luke-jr> roconnor: no, they were not involved.
1098 2012-01-09 20:45:56 <roconnor> !
1099 2012-01-09 20:46:35 <makomk> roconnor: luke-jr's going by the argument that since they didn't know what was going on and it didn't affect them, they weren't involved. I think.
1100 2012-01-09 20:47:02 <roconnor> oh sorry; I was under the impression you were MergeMining empty CoiledCoin tranasctions with the Eligius network.
1101 2012-01-09 20:47:08 pickett has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1102 2012-01-09 20:47:45 <Diablo-D3> roconnor: no, hes mining by typical pool rules
1103 2012-01-09 20:48:03 <Diablo-D3> also, he uses specially designed blocks to send output to people
1104 2012-01-09 20:48:07 <makomk> roconnor: he was, the evidence proving it is in the blockchain, he just doesn't consider it relevant to his members.
1105 2012-01-09 20:48:08 <PK> legally speaking, if they were "involved" that would imply they knew about it and are also guilty of accompliceship or connivance?
1106 2012-01-09 20:48:10 <Diablo-D3> instead of using send TXes, he uses multiple gen txes
1107 2012-01-09 20:48:23 <Diablo-D3> it probably isnt inputting alt chain txes right yet
1108 2012-01-09 20:49:12 chrisb__ has joined
1109 2012-01-09 20:49:16 <makomk> Diablo-D3: nope, he intentionally modified the code to (a) not include transactions and (b) ignore others' blocks. We know this because he said he did it, and he said why he did it.
1110 2012-01-09 20:49:27 <Diablo-D3> makomk: I wouldnt say intentionally
1111 2012-01-09 20:49:30 <roconnor> okay, well anyhow; I have no problem with luke-jr's actions; I just wanted to make sure I had a proper understanding of the situtation.
1112 2012-01-09 20:49:33 <Diablo-D3> I would say you got trolled for beliving him
1113 2012-01-09 20:49:36 <luke-jr> roconnor: Eligius miners's involvement in the CLC stuff is the same as Eligius's miner's invovlement in arbitrary Bitcoin transactions.
1114 2012-01-09 20:49:38 <Diablo-D3> luke just isnt that good of a coder.
1115 2012-01-09 20:49:52 <makomk> Diablo-D3: OK, now I know you're trolling.
1116 2012-01-09 20:49:55 <luke-jr> makomk: that's out of order, and neither of those violate the protocol rules
1117 2012-01-09 20:50:09 baxter- has joined
1118 2012-01-09 20:50:11 <luke-jr> makomk: I ignored others' blocks because they were making my own stale too fast.
1119 2012-01-09 20:50:23 <roconnor> luke-jr: okay.
1120 2012-01-09 20:50:30 <luke-jr> makomk: and I ignored transactions with low fees because they weren't worth processing
1121 2012-01-09 20:50:50 <Ahimoth_> ok, so now that the difficulty is up, are you gonna start accepting outside tx and blocks?
1122 2012-01-09 20:50:58 Ahimoth_ is now known as Ahimoth
1123 2012-01-09 20:51:40 <luke-jr> Ahimoth: why?
1124 2012-01-09 20:51:57 hippich has joined
1125 2012-01-09 20:52:00 hippich_ has joined
1126 2012-01-09 20:52:02 <Ahimoth> [12:46:01] <luke-jr> makomk: I ignored others' blocks because they were making my own stale too fast.
1127 2012-01-09 20:52:06 hippich_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1128 2012-01-09 20:52:08 <Ahimoth> that is not a problem now right?
1129 2012-01-09 20:52:09 pickett has joined
1130 2012-01-09 20:52:43 wizkid057 is now known as wizkid057|out
1131 2012-01-09 20:52:53 <PK> luke-jr: can I ask how much that fun was costing you? You probably paid a lot for bitcoin shares to your miners while making blocks of a now probably quite worthless chain?
1132 2012-01-09 20:53:11 <makomk> PK: it's merged mining, the Bitcoin shares were still valid.
1133 2012-01-09 20:53:17 <roconnor> PK: merged mining is free
1134 2012-01-09 20:53:30 <PK> ah, ok
1135 2012-01-09 20:53:41 <luke-jr> Ahimoth: dunno
1136 2012-01-09 20:53:56 <luke-jr> PK: it cost me nothing
1137 2012-01-09 20:53:58 Joric has quit ()
1138 2012-01-09 20:54:09 <luke-jr> PK: except what I could have scammed people out of by selling them all
1139 2012-01-09 20:54:25 <luke-jr> but then I wouldn't be stopping the scammers, just replacing them
1140 2012-01-09 20:55:13 <PK> the "scammers" were merged mining but their pools only paying the alt coins while keeping the bitcoins?
1141 2012-01-09 20:56:09 pycke2 has joined
1142 2012-01-09 20:56:45 <luke-jr> PK: no, the scammers were actually solo mining just CLC for some reason
1143 2012-01-09 20:56:59 <luke-jr> PK: the problem is the pump-and-dump pyramid scheme
1144 2012-01-09 20:57:43 <chmod755> http://qkme.me/35ocgw
1145 2012-01-09 20:57:48 p0s- is now known as p0s
1146 2012-01-09 20:58:18 p0s is now known as p0s-
1147 2012-01-09 20:58:39 <dub> what about i0/ix?
1148 2012-01-09 20:59:16 <Ahimoth> I was just mining them at mmpool, and immediately selling them at btc-e
1149 2012-01-09 20:59:30 <Ahimoth> I actually made quite a few btc
1150 2012-01-09 20:59:43 <Ahimoth> which I immediately sold for SC
1151 2012-01-09 21:00:11 <luke-jr> …
1152 2012-01-09 21:00:26 <Ahimoth> then luke pops into btc-e chat and says its dead
1153 2012-01-09 21:00:28 <luke-jr> [15:55:13] <Ahimoth> I was just mining them at mmpool, and immediately selling them at btc-e [15:55:28] <Ahimoth> I actually made quite a few btc <-- this is because you abused the pump-and-dump system
1154 2012-01-09 21:00:40 <Ahimoth> people wanted to buy them
1155 2012-01-09 21:00:43 <Ahimoth> I was willign to sell them
1156 2012-01-09 21:00:58 <luke-jr> yeah, people want to buy most pyramid schemes at first too
1157 2012-01-09 21:01:04 <Ahimoth> I mine btc for the same reason
1158 2012-01-09 21:01:07 <Ahimoth> so I can sell em
1159 2012-01-09 21:01:13 <luke-jr> that's how they work
1160 2012-01-09 21:01:16 <dub> luke-jr: so you're not merged mining io/ix with eligius?
1161 2012-01-09 21:01:27 <luke-jr> dub: that is not a benefit Eligius offers.
1162 2012-01-09 21:01:31 <dub> and dumping them to destroy value
1163 2012-01-09 21:01:36 <Ahimoth> hah check out the i0x and ixc hashrates
1164 2012-01-09 21:01:42 <dub> (and line your pocket)
1165 2012-01-09 21:01:48 <Ahimoth> they oddly are aextremely close to clc hashrate
1166 2012-01-09 21:02:09 <luke-jr> nor do I intend to offer any scamcoins
1167 2012-01-09 21:02:20 <Ahimoth> btw, why is this conversation happening in bitcoin-dev?
1168 2012-01-09 21:02:21 <dub> luke-jr: remember you started doing this days after I asked you to add mm support for them, and you told me you would destroy them instead
1169 2012-01-09 21:02:33 <makomk> Ahimoth: I forget...
1170 2012-01-09 21:03:50 <PK> luke-jr: I quite like your way of choosing words :)
1171 2012-01-09 21:04:00 <Ahimoth> btw, I should thank you luke, you have sucessfully proven why a system such as Solidcoin2's trust nodes, or as in doublec's concept, checkpoint nodes, is ebenficial
1172 2012-01-09 21:05:05 <Ahimoth> although I don't know how doublec's checkpoint system will work out, as the users get to randomly choose any key to trust from a list of advertized checkpoint nodes
1173 2012-01-09 21:05:15 <Ahimoth> sounds like a fork nightmare
1174 2012-01-09 21:07:29 <luke-jr> Ahimoth: might as well use the Fed
1175 2012-01-09 21:07:46 <Ahimoth> I understand the argument
1176 2012-01-09 21:09:21 <doublec> Ahimoth: the command line switch to change keys was more to allow miners to adjust if they decide the current key holder is evil, or if it's comprimised
1177 2012-01-09 21:09:36 <doublec> Ahimoth: it wouldn't work for multiple nodes with different keys
1178 2012-01-09 21:09:52 <doublec> Ahimoth: I'm also unsure quite when the messages should be relayed
1179 2012-01-09 21:10:10 <doublec> I was going to have it that nodes don't relay messages that fail signature verification
1180 2012-01-09 21:10:30 <doublec> but then changing the key will result in checkpoints never propogating
1181 2012-01-09 21:10:43 <Ahimoth> yeah, that would kill the multiple authorized key logic
1182 2012-01-09 21:10:44 <doublec> always checking means people can DOS a node by having it check signatures constantly
1183 2012-01-09 21:10:51 <doublec> so it needs flood control
1184 2012-01-09 21:10:52 <Ahimoth> yep
1185 2012-01-09 21:10:57 <doublec> summary is more work needed
1186 2012-01-09 21:11:07 <Ahimoth> and not checking them would allow the network to flood itself
1187 2012-01-09 21:11:12 <doublec> right
1188 2012-01-09 21:11:20 <Ahimoth> yeah, but I see where you are going with it
1189 2012-01-09 21:11:32 <doublec> hopefully something interesting will come of it
1190 2012-01-09 21:11:36 <doublec> if not, oh well :)
1191 2012-01-09 21:11:50 <Ahimoth> I do however think it is far more centralized than SC's trust nodes
1192 2012-01-09 21:11:57 <doublec> yes it is
1193 2012-01-09 21:11:57 <gmaxwell> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-January/161007.html  < bitcoin to become easier to support on RedHat/Fedora, hopefully.
1194 2012-01-09 21:11:58 <Ahimoth> , seeing as how the network determines who to trust
1195 2012-01-09 21:12:07 <Ahimoth> and any user could potentially become a trust node
1196 2012-01-09 21:12:42 <doublec> right, but it's no different from a developer saying "download new code with built in checkpoint"
1197 2012-01-09 21:13:03 <doublec> which is how I justify it in my mind :)
1198 2012-01-09 21:13:21 <Ahimoth> true
1199 2012-01-09 21:13:33 p0s- has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1200 2012-01-09 21:13:38 <Ahimoth> you are correct, it is no worse than Gav issuing a new btc client
1201 2012-01-09 21:13:39 <doublec> so really it's a user friendly gavin for alt chains
1202 2012-01-09 21:13:44 <Ahimoth> yep
1203 2012-01-09 21:13:59 <gmaxwell> doublec: 'developer saying' is a horrific centeralized measure, and it's really only acceptable because there is no actual chain compeition as far back as checkpoints are set.
1204 2012-01-09 21:14:28 <Ahimoth> gmaxwell: do you have a better alternative?
1205 2012-01-09 21:14:31 <doublec> gmaxwell: I agree it's horrific
1206 2012-01-09 21:14:33 <gmaxwell> (and because it's such a slow and lossy measure, it's not that useful for chain selection regardless)
1207 2012-01-09 21:14:39 <doublec> gmaxwell: but it's what all the chains do manually
1208 2012-01-09 21:14:55 <doublec> something not requiring checkpoints would be awesome
1209 2012-01-09 21:15:05 <doublec> hopefully roconnor is doing something about that
1210 2012-01-09 21:15:42 <Ahimoth> I see the alt chains as a child... when that are babies, they need a baby-sitter, once they grow up (large and distributed hash power), they can go out on their own
1211 2012-01-09 21:15:55 <gmaxwell> doublec: bitcoin's checkpoints have never been set anywhere near a point where a checkpoint could reasonable select a chain, thats not the purpose they're serving in bitcoin. Unless you're expecting attackers with city level electrical consumption. ;)
1212 2012-01-09 21:16:00 <roconnor> doublec: I'm pretty satisfied with "it is likely possible" for the time being.
1213 2012-01-09 21:16:30 <doublec> gmaxwell: bitcoin doesn't get attacked in the same way other chains do
1214 2012-01-09 21:16:34 gruez has joined
1215 2012-01-09 21:16:50 <gruez> just wondering...
1216 2012-01-09 21:17:15 <doublec> gmaxwell: but I do agree it's a horrible solution. nevertheless it's something interesting to try.
1217 2012-01-09 21:17:29 <gruez> is there a reason why a transaction is only broadcast through 19 nodes, when i'm connected to 26?
1218 2012-01-09 21:17:40 <Ahimoth> and its something that can be disable when the difficulty goes above a certain level
1219 2012-01-09 21:17:44 <doublec> yes
1220 2012-01-09 21:17:55 <doublec> any node can disable it - it's disabled by default
1221 2012-01-09 21:17:57 <gruez> is it because by the time i'm broadcasting to the 20th client, he has already recived the transaction from another person?
1222 2012-01-09 21:18:00 <sipa> gruez: some of your peers may be connected to eachother, and have exchanged your tx before you got to them yourself
1223 2012-01-09 21:18:04 <gmaxwell> Ahimoth: yes I suggested that. ::shrugs::
1224 2012-01-09 21:18:22 <gmaxwell> Ahimoth: but even more importantly, stop building systems that add nothing and they'll see more rapid investment.
1225 2012-01-09 21:18:24 <gruez> ok sipa, makes sense
1226 2012-01-09 21:18:33 <gmaxwell> (investment in terms of security resources)
1227 2012-01-09 21:18:42 <doublec> gmaxwell: I agree that would be better
1228 2012-01-09 21:18:48 <Ahimoth> yeah, have a setpoint in the code.. if the diffiuclty goes above X, permanently disable the auot-checkpointing system
1229 2012-01-09 21:18:52 <doublec> gmaxwell: but others will still try and attack it
1230 2012-01-09 21:19:00 <doublec> gmaxwell: so even then something would be needed
1231 2012-01-09 21:19:12 <Ahimoth> well coild was supposed to test the workability of op_eval
1232 2012-01-09 21:19:17 <gmaxwell> doublec: maybe, e.g. merged mining was enough for namecoin which had broad interest.
1233 2012-01-09 21:19:28 <luke-jr> makomk: I encourage you to find a solution for CLC, but not by verbal attacks and FUD.
1234 2012-01-09 21:20:00 <gruez> another thing: is there a way to force bitcoin to rebroadcast transactions?
1235 2012-01-09 21:20:06 <sipa> no
1236 2012-01-09 21:20:09 <gruez> let's say you sent a payment, but the internet is down
1237 2012-01-09 21:20:17 <gruez> i know it will automatically rebroadcast
1238 2012-01-09 21:20:29 <gruez> :/
1239 2012-01-09 21:20:35 <gmaxwell> Ahimoth: op_eval runs in testnet. Spawning a new 'currency' for every random feature doesn't really scale.
1240 2012-01-09 21:20:37 <luke-jr> gruez: patch very welcome
1241 2012-01-09 21:20:48 <Ahimoth> doublec: I'm curious, why did you diable clc entirely. I would simply have turned off payouts, but kept mining it in the background.. this way, if another pool or two implemented werged mine over the next few days, they could overthrow luke's monopoly
1242 2012-01-09 21:21:01 <doublec> Ahimoth: I did for a while
1243 2012-01-09 21:21:15 <Ahimoth> doublec: ahhh I was hoping/assuming you were
1244 2012-01-09 21:21:16 <doublec> Ahimoth: but makomk decided not to pursue the chain so no point
1245 2012-01-09 21:21:42 <doublec> Ahimoth: and 350 ghash is a lot of hash to find
1246 2012-01-09 21:21:49 <Ahimoth> yes it is
1247 2012-01-09 21:21:57 ski_ has joined
1248 2012-01-09 21:22:29 <Ahimoth> but I think we might be able to find a few hundred more gh
1249 2012-01-09 21:22:58 <Ahimoth> overthrow the opressive tyrant
1250 2012-01-09 21:23:02 <gmaxwell> slush or btcguild picking it up would have ended the dispute right quick, but I think sensible bitcoiners aren't just _neutral_ about 'competative' currencies at least ones which are just near duplicates of bitcoin, but somewhat negative.
1251 2012-01-09 21:23:03 <luke-jr> tbh, the main reason I'm still mining CLC is in hopes a solution is found ;)
1252 2012-01-09 21:23:08 <doublec> I don't think it's worth it - better to a) find a way to solve the issue and/or b) improve the chain such that people don't want to destroy it
1253 2012-01-09 21:23:29 <gmaxwell> (at least that's part of my position)
1254 2012-01-09 21:23:39 <doublec> gmaxwell: right, even if clc got 300 more ghash what's to stop someone else saying "luke is right" and then adding more to help him
1255 2012-01-09 21:23:48 <Ahimoth> well right now all the solutiona have the bitcoiners crying "centralization!!! booo!!!"
1256 2012-01-09 21:24:00 <gruez> peer to pool?
1257 2012-01-09 21:24:01 <luke-jr> doublec: I've had numerous people contact me asking to help 'next time'
1258 2012-01-09 21:24:09 <gruez> best solution :p
1259 2012-01-09 21:24:11 <gmaxwell> doublec: right. fundimentally if you're going to build a system which is potentially harmful to the btc ecosystem you simply can't count on bitcoiner's for protection.
1260 2012-01-09 21:24:17 <luke-jr> doublec: also, donations are way up
1261 2012-01-09 21:24:48 <doublec> luke-jr: evil people often manage to get more money for their actions
1262 2012-01-09 21:24:58 <doublec> the world is weird that way
1263 2012-01-09 21:25:01 <luke-jr> doublec: true, but not in this case :p
1264 2012-01-09 21:25:12 <luke-jr> in this case, I'm stopping the evil people
1265 2012-01-09 21:25:24 <gmaxwell> gruez: p2pool is nice but not really a solution. Consider, if there was no pool was mining CLC then there are quite a few solominers who could outpace the CLC advocates.
1266 2012-01-09 21:25:33 <Ahimoth> slay the monster by becoming the monster yourself eh?
1267 2012-01-09 21:25:48 <luke-jr> Ahimoth: I didn't have to become a monster, though
1268 2012-01-09 21:25:51 <gmaxwell> (I mean p2pool isn't a solution to _this_ it's a centeralization solution overall, but the problem here isn't centeralization)
1269 2012-01-09 21:26:02 <luke-jr> Ahimoth: everything I'm doing with CLC is valid by the rules
1270 2012-01-09 21:26:06 <doublec> anyway this isn't the place for the moral side of the argument, I apologise for bringing it up
1271 2012-01-09 21:26:14 <Ahimoth> protocol rules, sure
1272 2012-01-09 21:26:23 <Ahimoth> ok, so lets come up with a solution
1273 2012-01-09 21:26:27 <luke-jr> sounds good
1274 2012-01-09 21:26:55 <Ahimoth> we got auto-checkpoints, we got "trust nodes" (which are basically auto checkpoints every other block)
1275 2012-01-09 21:26:58 <gmaxwell> The problem is that new chains are completely valueless, and it costs resources to mine them...  So if people have any negative feelings they'll fall to attack easily.
1276 2012-01-09 21:27:00 <Ahimoth> what else we got?
1277 2012-01-09 21:27:21 <gmaxwell> Ahimoth: do what bitcoin did: be economically savvy.
1278 2012-01-09 21:27:28 <doublec> gmaxwell: even something with value is valueless for others - or vulnerable to "just for fun" attacks
1279 2012-01-09 21:27:30 caedes_ has joined
1280 2012-01-09 21:27:36 <Ahimoth> hahah but bitcoin has the advantage of organic growth
1281 2012-01-09 21:27:45 <gmaxwell> Bitcoin resisted attacks in part because cooperating is more worthwhile than defecting.
1282 2012-01-09 21:27:55 <gruez> is there a disadvantage to setting the queue in cgminer higher?
1283 2012-01-09 21:27:58 <gruez> --queue|-Q <arg>    Minimum number of work items to have queued (0 - 10) (default: 1)
1284 2012-01-09 21:28:13 <gruez> it should reduce the amount of "pool not providing work fast enough", right?
1285 2012-01-09 21:28:18 <luke-jr> Ahimoth: auto-checkpoints won't help at all
1286 2012-01-09 21:28:23 <Ahimoth> oh?
1287 2012-01-09 21:28:25 <luke-jr> Ahimoth: trust nodes aren't a good solution
1288 2012-01-09 21:28:43 <luke-jr> gruez: yes, it's already absurdly high by default
1289 2012-01-09 21:28:56 <luke-jr> gruez: "pool not providing work fast enough" is IIRC a cgminer bug
1290 2012-01-09 21:29:02 <Ahimoth> well trust nodes prevent the clc situation
1291 2012-01-09 21:29:05 <gruez> luke-jr: so what does it really mean?
1292 2012-01-09 21:29:16 <gruez> luke-jr: 1 is absurdly high?
1293 2012-01-09 21:29:17 <[Tycho]> "cjdelisle: basicly it ended because the "forum" got spammed to oblivian" - that's what we need POWs for :)
1294 2012-01-09 21:29:23 <luke-jr> gruez: you can try my cgminer version, to see if it helps
1295 2012-01-09 21:29:29 <Ahimoth> auto-checkpointing would cause many temporary forks
1296 2012-01-09 21:29:36 <luke-jr> gruez: --queue is a MINIMUM. in practice, it's always higher :/
1297 2012-01-09 21:30:09 <luke-jr> Ahimoth: auto-checkpointing would either cause many permanent forks, or do nothing
1298 2012-01-09 21:30:17 <luke-jr> depending on the checkpoint criteria
1299 2012-01-09 21:30:17 <Ahimoth> doublec: have you considere that? the constant forking cause by the auto-checkpoint
1300 2012-01-09 21:30:19 <gruez> luke-jr: will setting it higher increase stales?
1301 2012-01-09 21:30:26 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: he means centeralized control checkpoints.
1302 2012-01-09 21:30:36 <luke-jr> gruez: it could. try my cgminer patches :P
1303 2012-01-09 21:30:44 <Ahimoth> well in doublec's model, its not so "auto" necessarily
1304 2012-01-09 21:30:45 amiller has quit (Excess Flood)
1305 2012-01-09 21:30:46 <gruez> luke-jr: link?
1306 2012-01-09 21:30:48 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: well, that's not auto :P
1307 2012-01-09 21:30:55 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: it's auto like SC.
1308 2012-01-09 21:31:03 <luke-jr> gruez: https://github.com/ckolivas/cgminer/pull/69
1309 2012-01-09 21:31:07 <doublec> Ahimoth: the checkpoits aren't auto, they're manually sent out by a human
1310 2012-01-09 21:31:10 <luke-jr> gruez: https://github.com/ckolivas/cgminer/pull/68 also will get you 0.4% more shares
1311 2012-01-09 21:31:11 <Ahimoth> exactly
1312 2012-01-09 21:31:15 <doublec> Ahimoth: presumably to values to reduce forking
1313 2012-01-09 21:31:35 <luke-jr> doublec: in other words, a human would pick a non-hostile chain?
1314 2012-01-09 21:31:44 chmod755 has left ("Leaving.")
1315 2012-01-09 21:31:50 <Ahimoth> yes, but if you issue a checkpoint, and some 51% attacker accpets the checkpoint and starts another fork from there
1316 2012-01-09 21:31:50 <luke-jr> anyhow, that doesn't seem like a real solution to me
1317 2012-01-09 21:31:58 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: Call the feature Fed-lock.
1318 2012-01-09 21:32:04 <Ahimoth> repeats every time you checkpoint
1319 2012-01-09 21:32:11 <doublec> luke-jr: I haven't been considering it as a 'pick a chain' checkpoint, but a no need to constantly send out new clients with checkpoints
1320 2012-01-09 21:32:18 <luke-jr> perhaps better would be to try to detect different miners, and when there's a fork, prefer a different miner
1321 2012-01-09 21:32:19 <doublec> which i0coin suffers from and it's a drag
1322 2012-01-09 21:32:26 <gmaxwell> No, the solution is to have the right overall incentives, and that means providing lasting value rather than dorking bitcoin clones for people to speculate on.
1323 2012-01-09 21:32:50 <doublec> but if I was "pick a chain" i'd have a JSON-RPC command that returns the checkpoint and have people know anything beyond that is dangerous
1324 2012-01-09 21:32:50 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: that's one, but I think a technical solution would be cool too
1325 2012-01-09 21:33:05 <gruez> luke-jr: how hard is it to build cgminer?
1326 2012-01-09 21:33:07 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: IIRC you don't think that exists, but it can't hurt for them to try
1327 2012-01-09 21:33:08 <Ahimoth> gmaxwell: I think there will always be someone to poop on a project purely for entertainment, if the cost to them is low
1328 2012-01-09 21:33:10 <luke-jr> gruez: Linux?
1329 2012-01-09 21:33:16 <Ahimoth> as it was in the clc case
1330 2012-01-09 21:33:17 <gruez> windows
1331 2012-01-09 21:33:18 <gruez> :(
1332 2012-01-09 21:33:21 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: There isn't one. If you have a decenteralized agreement that works, you could just use it instead of the chain. :)
1333 2012-01-09 21:33:22 <luke-jr> gruez: good luck
1334 2012-01-09 21:33:25 <gruez> mingw should be ok?
1335 2012-01-09 21:33:28 <gmaxwell> Ahimoth: if its valuable the cost won't be low.
1336 2012-01-09 21:33:40 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: assuming it doesn't depend on the chain
1337 2012-01-09 21:33:45 <gmaxwell> and value doesn't just mean an exchange rate, I mean— people will work to protect the system.
1338 2012-01-09 21:33:54 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: deterministic auto-lockin might work
1339 2012-01-09 21:33:55 Joric has joined
1340 2012-01-09 21:33:55 Joric has quit (Changing host)
1341 2012-01-09 21:33:55 Joric has joined
1342 2012-01-09 21:33:56 amiller has joined
1343 2012-01-09 21:33:58 <Ahimoth> yeah, the value of clc was actually pretty good at launch (for an alt-chain)
1344 2012-01-09 21:34:06 <Ahimoth> but it cost luke pretty m,uch nothing to shut it down
1345 2012-01-09 21:34:08 <doublec> gmaxwell: a coin with such a solution would have value
1346 2012-01-09 21:34:08 <gruez> OH SHIT
1347 2012-01-09 21:34:12 <gruez> tons of dependencies
1348 2012-01-09 21:34:12 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: any such scheme people have suggested is vulnerable to lightcone paritioning.
1349 2012-01-09 21:34:18 <gruez>  /ragequit
1350 2012-01-09 21:34:18 osearth has joined
1351 2012-01-09 21:34:42 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: ie, if you receive two block 500s within a 10 minute window, stick to the one with the lower hash
1352 2012-01-09 21:35:01 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: e.g. you make two forks right at the limits and then annouce them to different parts of the network at the same time.
1353 2012-01-09 21:35:15 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: ?
1354 2012-01-09 21:35:17 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: then I fork chains by constantly targeting a slightly higher difficulty.
1355 2012-01-09 21:35:36 <gruez> gmaxwell: dont you lose some coins?
1356 2012-01-09 21:35:36 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: I don't mean the 'bits'
1357 2012-01-09 21:35:41 <Ahimoth> gmaxwell: doesn't that only work if the p2p network is split?
1358 2012-01-09 21:35:41 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: I mean the actual block hash
1359 2012-01-09 21:36:00 <gmaxwell> Ahimoth: No. The speed of light is finite.
1360 2012-01-09 21:36:21 <gmaxwell> Ahimoth: (and the finiteness of the speed of light is what makes all of this hard)
1361 2012-01-09 21:36:35 <Ahimoth> umm maybe I missed something, but won't one half of the network take block A, and the other half take block B, the side with the most hash power will win in short order
1362 2012-01-09 21:36:51 <gmaxwell> Ahimoth: 13:29 < luke-jr> gmaxwell: deterministic auto-lockin might work
1363 2012-01-09 21:37:05 <Ahimoth> ahhh ther messages were coming in too fast
1364 2012-01-09 21:37:13 osmosis has joined
1365 2012-01-09 21:37:18 Folklore2 has joined
1366 2012-01-09 21:37:44 <makomk> I think RealSolid tried some kind of limit on the size of reorganizations in SC2 and quickly abandoned it, presumably because someone pointed this out.
1367 2012-01-09 21:38:15 <gmaxwell> Yes, well it was pointed out and he did it anyways. The later 'fix' was to hide reorgs in the client.
1368 2012-01-09 21:38:32 <BlueMatt> ;;seen gavinandresen
1369 2012-01-09 21:38:33 <gribble> gavinandresen was last seen in #bitcoin-dev 6 hours, 41 minutes, and 24 seconds ago: <gavinandresen> morning y'all
1370 2012-01-09 21:38:33 <gmaxwell> (e.g. double spent coins vanish instead of showing unconfirmed forever)
1371 2012-01-09 21:38:35 <Ahimoth> no, I think we ahev it locked to 6
1372 2012-01-09 21:39:13 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: so what was wrong with my solution? :p
1373 2012-01-09 21:39:46 Folklore has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1374 2012-01-09 21:39:57 Folklore2 is now known as Folklore
1375 2012-01-09 21:40:00 <doublec> gmaxwell: IIRC that wasn't done as a 'fix', it was done because he genuinely believes it to be a big to have 0 confirmation transactions that will never resolve and can't be deleted
1376 2012-01-09 21:40:04 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: the attacker will just make sure they get a higher hash. e.g. by tossing the loser.. if they are mining in advance, they'll just target higher values so that they still have >50% apparent power.
1377 2012-01-09 21:40:08 <doublec> s/big/bug
1378 2012-01-09 21:40:44 <gmaxwell> doublec: hm. Showing them as "dead" or "invalid" makes sense to me, vanishing them.. meh.
1379 2012-01-09 21:41:03 <gmaxwell> doublec: good to know in any case.
1380 2012-01-09 21:41:17 <doublec> yeah I made the point that if dong it his way was normal then I'd never have noticed the double spends on my exchange
1381 2012-01-09 21:41:21 <doublec> s/dong/doing
1382 2012-01-09 21:41:37 <doublec> since the transactions would be gone
1383 2012-01-09 21:41:47 <Ahimoth> well thats a wallet issue
1384 2012-01-09 21:41:51 <makomk> Come to think of it, when  pools started finding their blocks were becoming invalid after more confirmations than they should RS just got them to not report the blocks.
1385 2012-01-09 21:42:32 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: they won't get a higher hash all the time…
1386 2012-01-09 21:42:42 <Ahimoth> we had a re-org issue with the trust nodes at first
1387 2012-01-09 21:42:58 <luke-jr> targetting a higher difficulty will just make it take longer to recover
1388 2012-01-09 21:43:04 <Ahimoth> which was part of the reason for the invalids
1389 2012-01-09 21:49:50 Levino has joined
1390 2012-01-09 21:50:10 <Levino> Hey Guys. Anyone set up bitcoinjs and webcoin?
1391 2012-01-09 21:50:25 ahihi2 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1392 2012-01-09 21:51:28 erle- has joined
1393 2012-01-09 21:56:50 Folklore2 has joined
1394 2012-01-09 21:57:58 Folklore has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1395 2012-01-09 21:58:10 ahihi2 has joined
1396 2012-01-09 22:00:07 gavinandresen has quit (Quit: gavinandresen)
1397 2012-01-09 22:03:06 gfinn has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1398 2012-01-09 22:03:07 Folklore2 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1399 2012-01-09 22:03:22 Folklore2 has joined
1400 2012-01-09 22:03:23 Folklore2 has quit (Client Quit)
1401 2012-01-09 22:03:40 <BlueMatt> does anyone have a copy of the wiki Network page?
1402 2012-01-09 22:03:52 <BlueMatt> nevermind, it finally loaded...wtf?
1403 2012-01-09 22:06:39 <BlueMatt> goddamit gavin, come back
1404 2012-01-09 22:07:43 Carmivore has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1405 2012-01-09 22:08:36 <sipa> BlueMatt: what you need him for?
1406 2012-01-09 22:09:03 roconnor has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1407 2012-01-09 22:14:09 Carmivore has joined
1408 2012-01-09 22:14:30 gfinn has joined
1409 2012-01-09 22:18:29 PK has quit (Quit: good night, see you tomorrow.)
1410 2012-01-09 22:23:44 toffoo has quit ()
1411 2012-01-09 22:38:08 edcba_ has joined
1412 2012-01-09 22:39:27 gruez has quit (Quit: Page closed)
1413 2012-01-09 22:40:11 edcba has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1414 2012-01-09 22:41:05 saberman_4 has joined
1415 2012-01-09 22:41:10 saberman_4 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1416 2012-01-09 22:41:35 toffoo has joined
1417 2012-01-09 22:43:48 <CIA-100> bitcoin: Pieter Wuille master * ra4902c9 / src/wallet.h : Remove unused definition - http://git.io/46kWzg https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/a4902c9e7c70ca17d5b6a8c628e0f6e095afb508
1418 2012-01-09 22:46:15 kam1l has joined
1419 2012-01-09 22:46:43 <kam1l> hey all, I am trying to tweak the CPU RPC miner to function, it currently makes getwork calls to the pool, but it doesn't send back any shares
1420 2012-01-09 22:46:49 <kam1l> is this a known issue?
1421 2012-01-09 22:47:02 <sipa> which cpu rpc miner?
1422 2012-01-09 22:48:13 bakh has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1423 2012-01-09 22:48:18 Cablesaurus has quit (Quit: Now if you will excuse me, I have a giant ball of oil to throw out my window)
1424 2012-01-09 22:48:30 <doublec> how long did you wait? Depending on the CPU it might take an hour for it to have a share for the pool
1425 2012-01-09 22:49:00 <kam1l> poclbm, and I waited for a few hours for the check
1426 2012-01-09 22:49:10 <sipa> which pool?
1427 2012-01-09 22:49:15 <kam1l> my own
1428 2012-01-09 22:49:22 <sipa> your own bitcoind?
1429 2012-01-09 22:49:25 <kam1l> yes
1430 2012-01-09 22:49:27 <kam1l> pool is setup properly
1431 2012-01-09 22:49:29 <doublec> I thought poclbm was a gpu miner
1432 2012-01-09 22:49:32 <kam1l> works perfectly fine with phoenix
1433 2012-01-09 22:49:43 <sipa> poclbm is a gpu miner
1434 2012-01-09 22:49:45 <kam1l> sec
1435 2012-01-09 22:50:02 <sipa> kam1l: are you running pool software, or just directly connecting to bitcoind?
1436 2012-01-09 22:52:16 <kam1l> pushpool
1437 2012-01-09 22:52:34 <kam1l> along with simplecoin frontend and latest bitcoind, all running fine
1438 2012-01-09 22:52:44 <kam1l> ok, it is rpc miner
1439 2012-01-09 22:52:47 <kam1l> not poclbm*
1440 2012-01-09 22:53:04 <sipa> what hash rate?
1441 2012-01-09 22:53:05 <doublec> is that puddinpop's miner? That's the only thing I know called 'rpc miner'
1442 2012-01-09 22:53:14 <kam1l> yes
1443 2012-01-09 22:53:22 <luke-jr> …
1444 2012-01-09 22:53:32 <luke-jr> puddingpop's miners didn't use standard JSON-RPC at all
1445 2012-01-09 22:53:33 <doublec> that's pretty old
1446 2012-01-09 22:53:43 <doublec> luke-jr: puddinpop released a JSON-RPC series of miners too
1447 2012-01-09 22:53:43 <kam1l> good to know luke
1448 2012-01-09 22:53:47 <luke-jr> doublec: oh?
1449 2012-01-09 22:53:49 <kam1l> I may have to update
1450 2012-01-09 22:53:50 <doublec> luke-jr: they were called the RPC miners
1451 2012-01-09 22:54:00 <doublec> luke-jr: the other ones were the non-rpc miners
1452 2012-01-09 22:54:06 <kam1l> :)
1453 2012-01-09 22:54:09 <vsrinivas> non-rpc? how did those work?
1454 2012-01-09 22:54:14 <kam1l> this one I do believe built for this
1455 2012-01-09 22:54:30 <doublec> vsrinivas: custom pool software and bitcoind - they predated getwork
1456 2012-01-09 22:54:49 <sipa> they didn't even use the diff-1 trick used by pool shares now
1457 2012-01-09 22:54:57 <doublec> vsrinivas: I used to run a pool using it here: http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz/bitcoin-pool/
1458 2012-01-09 22:55:04 <luke-jr> sipa: I never understood how they worked…
1459 2012-01-09 22:55:07 [\\\] is now known as imsaguy
1460 2012-01-09 22:55:33 <vsrinivas> they had a custom bitcoind, you mean?
1461 2012-01-09 22:55:51 <sipa> yes
1462 2012-01-09 22:55:55 <luke-jr> vsrinivas: pool miners don't talk to bitcoind
1463 2012-01-09 22:56:11 <sipa> they can, at least
1464 2012-01-09 22:56:12 <vsrinivas> not even ultimately?
1465 2012-01-09 22:56:25 <luke-jr> sipa: bitcoind doesn't support what pools require
1466 2012-01-09 22:56:39 <luke-jr> vsrinivas: that is implementation-specific
1467 2012-01-09 22:56:44 <vsrinivas> ok.
1468 2012-01-09 22:56:54 <kam1l> pool miner -> pool json -> bitcoind rpc -> network
1469 2012-01-09 22:56:55 <kam1l> iirc
1470 2012-01-09 22:57:04 <luke-jr> vsrinivas: Eloipool, PoolServerJ, and ecoinpool all support internal work generation
1471 2012-01-09 22:57:06 <kam1l> at least thats what I use
1472 2012-01-09 22:57:43 <vsrinivas> ok. but even w/ internal generation, they talked to bitcoind periodically to get some state?
1473 2012-01-09 22:57:51 <luke-jr> vsrinivas: only to get transactions, mostly
1474 2012-01-09 22:58:01 <vsrinivas> oh huh.
1475 2012-01-09 22:58:07 <sipa> and get generated blocks out?
1476 2012-01-09 22:58:26 <luke-jr> sipa: no, they make their own blocks
1477 2012-01-09 22:58:49 <luke-jr> because jgarzik is taking too long to merge coinbaser, people are going to outside-bitcoind solutions
1478 2012-01-09 23:02:18 slush has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1479 2012-01-09 23:04:00 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: I'm outside bitcoin now— but thats a fault of the delay.
1480 2012-01-09 23:04:26 <kam1l> luke
1481 2012-01-09 23:04:28 <gmaxwell> (it's because p2pool is mature enough that I'd probably never bother to 'solo mine'  without it)
1482 2012-01-09 23:04:30 <kam1l> do you use a dedi?
1483 2012-01-09 23:04:31 <kam1l> or do you vps?
1484 2012-01-09 23:05:18 _Fireball has quit (Quit:  HydraIRC -> http://www.hydrairc.com <- Go on, try it!)
1485 2012-01-09 23:05:57 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: ?
1486 2012-01-09 23:06:10 <luke-jr> kam1l: dedis
1487 2012-01-09 23:06:19 <kam1l> did you make it yourself?
1488 2012-01-09 23:06:41 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: I'm not using coinbaser anymore for my solosetup because my solosetup is not p2pool. (which assembles the block externally)
1489 2012-01-09 23:06:53 <luke-jr> kam1l: what?
1490 2012-01-09 23:07:07 <kam1l> the dedi
1491 2012-01-09 23:07:10 <kam1l> or did you buy it readymade
1492 2012-01-09 23:07:21 <luke-jr> rented
1493 2012-01-09 23:07:29 <luke-jr> owning dedis is silly
1494 2012-01-09 23:11:00 <luke-jr> (mainly because it's cheaper to rent them)
1495 2012-01-09 23:11:00 kam1l has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1496 2012-01-09 23:12:40 Turingi has joined
1497 2012-01-09 23:16:52 tower has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1498 2012-01-09 23:20:12 Joric has quit ()
1499 2012-01-09 23:20:27 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
1500 2012-01-09 23:21:15 rdponticelli has joined
1501 2012-01-09 23:23:06 tower has joined
1502 2012-01-09 23:39:16 Levino has left ()
1503 2012-01-09 23:39:22 Jocke_ has joined
1504 2012-01-09 23:44:59 copumpkin has joined
1505 2012-01-09 23:45:33 oww has joined
1506 2012-01-09 23:47:14 baxter- has quit (Quit: Bye!)
1507 2012-01-09 23:47:30 devrandom has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1508 2012-01-09 23:53:57 devrandom has joined