1 2012-02-11 00:00:02 <BlueMatt> oh, I thought that was solidcoin...
   2 2012-02-11 00:00:04 <gmaxwell> Ahimoth: but even if the difficulty goes up the payout may not, because of the long term hardness increase. "power compensation"
   3 2012-02-11 00:00:12 <Ahimoth> the only restirction is you need 1q million coins to become a "trust" node
   4 2012-02-11 00:00:32 <BlueMatt> oh, sorry, solidcoin restricts mining to anyone with a million coins
   5 2012-02-11 00:00:35 <BlueMatt> ...wow
   6 2012-02-11 00:00:35 <josephcp> Idiot___: that made me lol in real life 10/10
   7 2012-02-11 00:00:44 <Ahimoth> gmaxwell: right, but we modeled that on cpu power growth and electricity inflation
   8 2012-02-11 00:00:51 <gmaxwell> Ahimoth: have you actually computed what it would take to get there, it's nuts now. it was nuts before the change to 0.07sc rewards.
   9 2012-02-11 00:00:51 marf_away has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
  10 2012-02-11 00:01:02 <Ahimoth> so in reality it should cost you about the same $ in elec today as it dow 5 years form now to create 1sc
  11 2012-02-11 00:01:04 <gmaxwell> Ahimoth: and implemented protocol rules using doubles. That was a good laugh.
  12 2012-02-11 00:01:17 <BlueMatt> wait, solidcoin does things in double???
  13 2012-02-11 00:01:21 <Ahimoth> gmaxwell: well if the difficulty goes up, it won't be so nuts
  14 2012-02-11 00:01:40 <Ahimoth> are you implying doubles == float?
  15 2012-02-11 00:01:44 <sipa> yes
  16 2012-02-11 00:01:58 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: Yes. The subsidy calculation.
  17 2012-02-11 00:02:11 <gmaxwell> It also uses pow().
  18 2012-02-11 00:02:23 <luke-jr> double is by definition a floating-point type
  19 2012-02-11 00:02:30 <BlueMatt> wait, so are coin totals using doubles or just its used in some calculations?
  20 2012-02-11 00:02:50 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: it's a protocol rule setting the subsidy.
  21 2012-02-11 00:03:00 <gmaxwell> because sc only has a few digits of precision, it's unlikely they'll split over it soon.. still, it boggled me.
  22 2012-02-11 00:03:15 <BlueMatt> heh, still, using floats in financial software...
  23 2012-02-11 00:03:25 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
  24 2012-02-11 00:03:27 <BlueMatt> (yea, bitcoin does in the api, but not in the protocol itself)
  25 2012-02-11 00:03:29 <gmaxwell> There was some crazy russian who did a lossy video compression format using float in the entropy coder.  Least portable code ever created.
  26 2012-02-11 00:03:59 <gmaxwell> but putting it in the protocol rules of a distributed currency has to be worse. :)
  27 2012-02-11 00:04:29 <BlueMatt> solidcoin may have some ideas that are semi-worth considering, but seriously, its so poorly done its not even funny
  28 2012-02-11 00:04:43 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: just don't read the code. it's not MIT-licensed
  29 2012-02-11 00:04:57 <luke-jr> I use grep for my own code to ensure I can't be accused of copying it
  30 2012-02-11 00:05:02 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: yea they put a restrictive for solidcoin use only on it.
  31 2012-02-11 00:05:04 agricocb has joined
  32 2012-02-11 00:05:09 <BlueMatt> oh, wow...
  33 2012-02-11 00:05:12 <gmaxwell> I only saw the subsidy rules because someone pasted them into the forum
  34 2012-02-11 00:05:31 <gmaxwell> (though I did go and look to make sure they really were the protocol rules)
  35 2012-02-11 00:05:33 <BlueMatt> not like anyone is gonna copy it if its using floats into bitcoin anyway...
  36 2012-02-11 00:05:57 JRWR has quit (Disconnected by services)
  37 2012-02-11 00:06:10 JRWR has joined
  38 2012-02-11 00:06:54 <Idiot___> i g2g sleep guys
  39 2012-02-11 00:06:59 att has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
  40 2012-02-11 00:07:03 <Idiot___> but dont forget solidcoin owns bitcoin
  41 2012-02-11 00:07:04 <Idiot___> :P
  42 2012-02-11 00:07:09 Idiot___ has quit ()
  43 2012-02-11 00:07:32 JRWR has quit (Disconnected by services)
  44 2012-02-11 00:07:43 JRWR has joined
  45 2012-02-11 00:08:34 c00w has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
  46 2012-02-11 00:10:09 theorb has joined
  47 2012-02-11 00:10:41 JRWR has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
  48 2012-02-11 00:11:35 RedEmerald has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
  49 2012-02-11 00:11:58 theorbtwo has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
  50 2012-02-11 00:12:08 theorb is now known as theorbtwo
  51 2012-02-11 00:13:21 RedEmerald has joined
  52 2012-02-11 00:13:54 RedEmerald has quit (Client Quit)
  53 2012-02-11 00:19:46 att has joined
  54 2012-02-11 00:20:29 booo has joined
  55 2012-02-11 00:22:12 merde has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
  56 2012-02-11 00:23:58 pingdrive has joined
  57 2012-02-11 00:25:46 ThomasV has joined
  58 2012-02-11 00:28:08 merde has joined
  59 2012-02-11 00:30:26 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
  60 2012-02-11 00:31:45 Cablesaurus has joined
  61 2012-02-11 00:31:46 Cablesaurus has quit (Changing host)
  62 2012-02-11 00:31:46 Cablesaurus has joined
  63 2012-02-11 00:32:41 copumpkin has joined
  64 2012-02-11 00:32:47 eoss has joined
  65 2012-02-11 00:32:48 eoss has quit (Changing host)
  66 2012-02-11 00:32:48 eoss has joined
  67 2012-02-11 00:32:52 Cablesaurus has quit (Client Quit)
  68 2012-02-11 00:32:58 ahihi2 has joined
  69 2012-02-11 00:34:06 danbri has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
  70 2012-02-11 00:34:07 danbri_ has joined
  71 2012-02-11 00:35:21 Cablesaurus has joined
  72 2012-02-11 00:35:22 Cablesaurus has quit (Changing host)
  73 2012-02-11 00:35:22 Cablesaurus has joined
  74 2012-02-11 00:36:24 iocor has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
  75 2012-02-11 00:41:03 ahihi2 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
  76 2012-02-11 00:41:37 splatster has quit (Quit: Leaving...)
  77 2012-02-11 00:50:20 m00p has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
  78 2012-02-11 00:51:30 ahihi2 has joined
  79 2012-02-11 00:53:11 rdponticelli has joined
  80 2012-02-11 00:53:13 trigliu has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
  81 2012-02-11 00:54:48 Cablesaurus has quit (Quit: There's nothing dirtier then a giant ball of oil)
  82 2012-02-11 00:55:33 FROTUSCI has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
  83 2012-02-11 00:58:59 <luke-jr> http://regmedia.co.uk/2001/09/12/398.gif
  84 2012-02-11 00:59:11 <Diablo-D3> wat
  85 2012-02-11 00:59:14 cryptoxchange has joined
  86 2012-02-11 01:01:19 <luke-jr> btw, if anyone believes in TCP checksums, download something popular from OpenNapster…
  87 2012-02-11 01:01:34 <luke-jr> you'll almost always find at least 2 or 3 varieties due to corruption
  88 2012-02-11 01:01:47 olp has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
  89 2012-02-11 01:02:07 <gmaxwell> thats probably on the end hosts aleast as much as the network.
  90 2012-02-11 01:02:09 Turingi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
  91 2012-02-11 01:02:40 pickett has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
  92 2012-02-11 01:02:44 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: did I point you at the bit squatting paper?
  93 2012-02-11 01:02:45 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: it occurred by network corruption originally I think
  94 2012-02-11 01:02:50 <luke-jr> no
  95 2012-02-11 01:03:02 <Diablo-D3> heh, no, network packet corruption happens
  96 2012-02-11 01:03:10 <Diablo-D3> because a lot of fucking gear out there on the net doesnt calculate checksums
  97 2012-02-11 01:03:18 pickett has joined
  98 2012-02-11 01:03:21 <luke-jr> well
  99 2012-02-11 01:03:31 <luke-jr> the problem wouldn't be so bad if stuff didn't "fix" checksums for you <.<
 100 2012-02-11 01:03:39 <Diablo-D3> yeah thats another thing
 101 2012-02-11 01:03:42 <luke-jr> then you could at least at the receiver's end discard corrupt packets
 102 2012-02-11 01:03:44 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: search for BH_US_11_Dinaburg_Bitsquatting_WP.pdf
 103 2012-02-11 01:03:46 <Diablo-D3> lots of shit tries to correct 1 bit errors
 104 2012-02-11 01:03:54 <Diablo-D3> problem is, most corrupted packets wont be 1 bit
 105 2012-02-11 01:04:06 <Diablo-D3> due to how the physical layer works, if its corrupted, you're fucked
 106 2012-02-11 01:04:32 <gmaxwell> Diablo-D3: I don't think pretty much anything does corrections, actually. (well the FEC in wifi does, but nothing else)
 107 2012-02-11 01:05:01 <luke-jr> anyone know how to get sane links out of Google?
 108 2012-02-11 01:05:18 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: no, some shit does
 109 2012-02-11 01:05:20 <Diablo-D3> Ive seen it advertised
 110 2012-02-11 01:05:22 <Diablo-D3> Im like, wtf
 111 2012-02-11 01:05:26 <Diablo-D3> who the fuck buys this shit
 112 2012-02-11 01:05:46 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: they are encoded in the url, just look
 113 2012-02-11 01:05:50 <luke-jr> http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCQQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fhakim.ws%2FBHUS2011%2Fmaterials%2FDinaburg%2FBH_US_11_Dinaburg_Bitsquatting_WP.pdf&ei=2bw1T53IOcOdgQeK49XoBQ&usg=AFQjCNHOEKtp5fi-u99P3bqbyEbqcf6i9g&sig2=-2JveUcoXeIEMDeaktGd4A
 114 2012-02-11 01:05:57 <luke-jr> I don't want to have to decode this crap
 115 2012-02-11 01:06:19 <BlueMatt> right arrow, copy paste plain text version
 116 2012-02-11 01:06:28 pingdrive has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 117 2012-02-11 01:06:28 <luke-jr> bad enough that Chromium won't embed Okular
 118 2012-02-11 01:06:51 <luke-jr> right arrow does nothing
 119 2012-02-11 01:07:05 <BlueMatt> the right arrow to the right of each result
 120 2012-02-11 01:07:06 <NxTitle> luke-jr: can you not just save as?
 121 2012-02-11 01:07:08 <BlueMatt> that you can hover over
 122 2012-02-11 01:07:13 <NxTitle> then read the file from the disk
 123 2012-02-11 01:07:13 <luke-jr> NxTitle: I don't *want* to save it
 124 2012-02-11 01:07:33 <NxTitle> ah
 125 2012-02-11 01:07:41 <NxTitle> well you could run it through urldecode or something, I dunno
 126 2012-02-11 01:09:11 <sipa> luke-jr, gmaxwell: i did a few minor changes to addrman, in particular when exiting; any of you want to run it for a while (possibly in gdb or valgrind, maybe with -DDEBUG_ADDRMAN) ?
 127 2012-02-11 01:09:35 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: LOL @ iPhone being "high-end"
 128 2012-02-11 01:09:50 <luke-jr> sipa: I'll readd it to next-test next rebuild
 129 2012-02-11 01:10:14 <sipa> ok, thanks
 130 2012-02-11 01:10:42 <luke-jr> sipa: did you change anythign that looked possibly a bug?
 131 2012-02-11 01:10:49 <gmaxwell> sipa: I'll test.
 132 2012-02-11 01:11:19 <sipa> luke-jr: yes, but only when exiting (it was possible the dump thread was killed while busy)
 133 2012-02-11 01:13:21 splatster has joined
 134 2012-02-11 01:16:49 seco has joined
 135 2012-02-11 01:17:41 smickles is now known as smickles|idle
 136 2012-02-11 01:18:17 olp has joined
 137 2012-02-11 01:19:04 darkskiez has quit (Quit: Client exiting)
 138 2012-02-11 01:19:34 darkskiez has joined
 139 2012-02-11 01:21:58 <gavinandresen> https://github.com/gavinandresen/bitcoin-git/tree/discourageblocks   could use code review before I turn it into a pull request
 140 2012-02-11 01:22:04 zeiris has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 141 2012-02-11 01:24:57 <luke-jr> +    // Discouraging a block means declining to announce it to peers
 142 2012-02-11 01:24:59 <luke-jr>  	 1629
 143 2012-02-11 01:25:00 <luke-jr> +    // (unless they ask about it) and refusing to build directly
 144 2012-02-11 01:25:02 <luke-jr>  	 1630
 145 2012-02-11 01:25:03 <luke-jr> +    // on top of it.
 146 2012-02-11 01:25:05 <luke-jr>  	 1631
 147 2012-02-11 01:25:06 <luke-jr> this definition is problematic
 148 2012-02-11 01:25:12 <luke-jr> if you refuse to build on top of them, then you make an orphan
 149 2012-02-11 01:25:31 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: wait, we are supposed to get code review _before_ pull requesting? damn ive been doing it wrong all along
 150 2012-02-11 01:26:22 <Diablo-D3> luke-jr: no
 151 2012-02-11 01:26:25 smickles is now known as idle!~michael@cpe-071-070-169-083.nc.res.rr.com|smickles
 152 2012-02-11 01:26:25 <sipa> luke-jr: they are accepted as soon as someone else builds on top of them
 153 2012-02-11 01:26:26 <Diablo-D3> it depends on WHY it was rejected
 154 2012-02-11 01:26:37 <luke-jr> sipa: relevance?
 155 2012-02-11 01:26:54 <gavinandresen> luke-jr: "you make an orphan" -- you mean YOUR block will be an orphan, or the block you're discouraging?
 156 2012-02-11 01:27:02 <luke-jr> nobody else will take my block unless it's based on the "discouraged" block by default
 157 2012-02-11 01:27:06 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: your block
 158 2012-02-11 01:27:19 <gavinandresen> luke-jr: right, you need 50+% of the network with the same 'discourage' rules.
 159 2012-02-11 01:27:46 <sipa> gavinandresen: "unless they ask for it" ... where is that implemented?
 160 2012-02-11 01:27:50 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: safer to take it in steps IMO
 161 2012-02-11 01:28:37 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: an idea: add an option to half-discourage ie discourage if its in a part of a chain which has the same height as another chain so that miners are more willing to accept it
 162 2012-02-11 01:28:37 <gavinandresen> sipa:  good catch, old comment from previous version of the code....
 163 2012-02-11 01:28:58 <BlueMatt> (obv has to be optional)
 164 2012-02-11 01:29:11 <sipa> BlueMatt: not sure i get that
 165 2012-02-11 01:29:27 <BlueMatt> ie dont discourage until someone else has discouraged
 166 2012-02-11 01:29:45 <sipa> how do you observe that someone else discouraged it?
 167 2012-02-11 01:29:50 <gavinandresen> ... until somebody else has discouraged and announced an alternative?
 168 2012-02-11 01:29:55 <BlueMatt> ie there is currently a fork both with the same height
 169 2012-02-11 01:30:06 <BlueMatt> yea, if there is an alternative with the same height
 170 2012-02-11 01:30:13 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 171 2012-02-11 01:30:17 <BlueMatt> that way miners would be more willing to accept it
 172 2012-02-11 01:30:38 <gmaxwell> but an alternative won't exist if people don't create an orphan there.. alas.
 173 2012-02-11 01:30:55 <BlueMatt> as currently only eg p2pool users who dont know any better would add discourage imho
 174 2012-02-11 01:31:32 <BlueMatt> in fact, competitive mining pools may deliberately make discouraged blocks to give others orphans
 175 2012-02-11 01:31:59 ThomasV has joined
 176 2012-02-11 01:32:24 <gavinandresen> Mmm.... I think convincing the big pools to agree on 'discourage' rules is the way to go.
 177 2012-02-11 01:32:37 <BlueMatt> agreed, Im just not sure how easy that would be to do
 178 2012-02-11 01:33:19 <gavinandresen> Well, assuming everybody agrees it is a good idea I don't think it will be hard.
 179 2012-02-11 01:33:30 <sipa> wild assumption
 180 2012-02-11 01:33:59 <gavinandresen> I'm open to other suggestions on handling the duplicate coinbase problem
 181 2012-02-11 01:34:25 <BlueMatt> well, no I think this is probably the way to go for now
 182 2012-02-11 01:34:30 <BlueMatt> but in general for discourage ideas
 183 2012-02-11 01:34:30 <sipa> make it illegal, deployed alongside bip16
 184 2012-02-11 01:34:40 <BlueMatt> an optional half-discourage might help adoption
 185 2012-02-11 01:34:43 <gavinandresen> luke-jr: re: take it in steps:   I think that's what discourage blocks does.  First, set a date by which we want 50+% discouraging.
 186 2012-02-11 01:34:58 <BlueMatt> sipa: not really possible (pruning becomes harder)
 187 2012-02-11 01:35:05 <gavinandresen> Then, set a much farther-out date by which 50+% will outright reject blocks with dup coinbases.
 188 2012-02-11 01:35:07 <BlueMatt> well ok possible, just not ideal
 189 2012-02-11 01:35:16 <sipa> BlueMatt: not true
 190 2012-02-11 01:35:25 <BlueMatt> you cant prune coinbases then
 191 2012-02-11 01:35:32 <sipa> BlueMatt: the rule should be: disallow duplicate coinbase if the previous wasn't completely spent
 192 2012-02-11 01:35:35 <BlueMatt> or coinbase hash
 193 2012-02-11 01:35:51 <BlueMatt> that doesnt solve the actual problem, does it?
 194 2012-02-11 01:36:03 <sipa> it does
 195 2012-02-11 01:36:14 <BlueMatt> by completely spent you mean x deep?
 196 2012-02-11 01:36:18 <sipa> no
 197 2012-02-11 01:36:23 <sipa> i mean all txouts marked spent
 198 2012-02-11 01:36:36 <sipa> one block deep suffices
 199 2012-02-11 01:37:13 <sipa> in that case, disconnectblock will bring the state back to exactly what it was before during a reorg
 200 2012-02-11 01:37:52 <gavinandresen> Alternative plan:  get 50+% of miners to agree to put previous-block-hash in their coinbase transactions, and discourage blocks that don't....
 201 2012-02-11 01:37:54 <BlueMatt> mmm, ok fair enough
 202 2012-02-11 01:38:12 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: I kinda prefer that-ish
 203 2012-02-11 01:38:15 plutonic has quit (Quit: plutonic)
 204 2012-02-11 01:38:21 <BlueMatt> but coinbase is so useful for eg side chain
 205 2012-02-11 01:39:04 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: thats not exclusive.
 206 2012-02-11 01:39:05 <gavinandresen> 8 bytes of the hash should be plenty enough to keep people from creating duplicates on purpose....
 207 2012-02-11 01:39:15 <gavinandresen> (if we're worried about space in the coinbase)
 208 2012-02-11 01:39:24 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: true...
 209 2012-02-11 01:39:39 <BlueMatt> still not a "clean" solution
 210 2012-02-11 01:41:07 <BlueMatt> also... gavinandresen on after 5??? wow
 211 2012-02-11 01:41:46 <gavinandresen> yeah, I'm tired... about to turn into a pumpkin
 212 2012-02-11 01:41:47 erle- has quit (Quit: erle-)
 213 2012-02-11 01:42:17 <josephcp> if you can get 51%, can't you reject duplicate coinbases up to a depth of 6 blocks today? that would be a pretty strong discouragement because it's close to impossible
 214 2012-02-11 01:43:00 <josephcp> acutally 3 or 4 would probably make more sense
 215 2012-02-11 01:43:31 <sipa> adding 64 bits of the prevhash to the coinbase makes it 1.8*10^19 times harder to mine a block with a duplicate coinbase
 216 2012-02-11 01:43:39 <sipa> i think 16 bits suffices, actually
 217 2012-02-11 01:43:50 <sipa> wait
 218 2012-02-11 01:44:22 <sipa> never mind
 219 2012-02-11 01:44:30 <BlueMatt> 1.8*10^19x harder than nothing is still...nothing
 220 2012-02-11 01:44:35 <gmaxwell> thats not right.
 221 2012-02-11 01:44:49 <sipa> no, i'm wrong
 222 2012-02-11 01:45:28 <gmaxwell> It's just the odds that the value repeats. You only get to try it once per block.
 223 2012-02-11 01:45:30 <sipa> it means you'd just need to wait until the (prevhash % N) is equal to that of the coinbase you're trying to duplicaye
 224 2012-02-11 01:45:48 graingert has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 225 2012-02-11 01:46:17 <gmaxwell> yes. We could alternatively use the height there.
 226 2012-02-11 01:46:26 <gmaxwell> And then that won't collide.
 227 2012-02-11 01:46:51 <sipa> gmaxwell: that's the solution!
 228 2012-02-11 01:47:15 <sipa> gavinandresen: ^
 229 2012-02-11 01:47:17 <gmaxwell> (and it's helpfully small for the forseeable future)
 230 2012-02-11 01:47:45 booo has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 231 2012-02-11 01:47:50 <gavinandresen> good idea
 232 2012-02-11 01:48:26 <BlueMatt> ack
 233 2012-02-11 01:49:12 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: is there a positioning requirement for mm that would keep us from sticking a counter in a particlar location?
 234 2012-02-11 01:49:57 <BlueMatt> is it sad when someone asks you what today is on a 7-day scale and your first instinct is 13th of feb instead of friday?
 235 2012-02-11 01:50:12 Cablesaurus has joined
 236 2012-02-11 01:50:12 Cablesaurus has quit (Changing host)
 237 2012-02-11 01:50:12 Cablesaurus has joined
 238 2012-02-11 01:52:06 <BlueMatt> timeline for such a change?
 239 2012-02-11 01:52:30 <Diablo-D3> blueMatt: yes, especially when its the 10th.
 240 2012-02-11 01:52:34 * BlueMatt suggests >=80% of mining power to avoid a drastic drop in mining power on the switch
 241 2012-02-11 01:52:42 <BlueMatt> Diablo-D3: 10 base 7 == 13
 242 2012-02-11 01:52:47 <BlueMatt> 10 base 10 == 13 base 7
 243 2012-02-11 01:52:57 <Diablo-D3> the.... what?
 244 2012-02-11 01:53:01 <Diablo-D3> how...
 245 2012-02-11 01:53:03 <Diablo-D3> jus
 246 2012-02-11 01:53:04 <Diablo-D3> erjarwr
 247 2012-02-11 01:53:05 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: step 1 could be, when there's two competing blocks, prefer the one that isn't discouraged
 248 2012-02-11 01:53:06 <Diablo-D3> qawrjaprjoltqwt
 249 2012-02-11 01:53:08 <Diablo-D3> qweotjpiwatjrawpjrw
 250 2012-02-11 01:53:11 <Diablo-D3> wrfkaofkwoakakrfagtqwrasr
 251 2012-02-11 01:53:14 <Diablo-D3> trpijrtoqjwrja
 252 2012-02-11 01:53:17 * Diablo-D3 passes out
 253 2012-02-11 01:53:21 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: I don't understand the question
 254 2012-02-11 01:53:27 <gavinandresen> luke-jr: sure.  But there is rarely two competing blocks.
 255 2012-02-11 01:53:38 <sipa> luke-jr: where is the mm hash placed in the coinbase?
 256 2012-02-11 01:53:42 <sipa> luke-jr: does that matter?
 257 2012-02-11 01:53:54 <BlueMatt> gotta go, see yall later
 258 2012-02-11 01:53:56 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: in the coinbase, can the mm be at any location? e.g. can we require the counter to be first?
 259 2012-02-11 01:54:04 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: there won't be, if step 2 (this) gets deployed anywhere
 260 2012-02-11 01:54:08 graingert has joined
 261 2012-02-11 01:54:18 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: it can be any place, provided the magic prefix is there
 262 2012-02-11 01:54:23 <gmaxwell> great.
 263 2012-02-11 01:54:38 <luke-jr> without the prefix, within the first 20 octets
 264 2012-02-11 01:54:40 <gmaxwell> putting it first makes sense to me, using the bitcoin variable length integer coding, I guess.
 265 2012-02-11 01:55:07 splatster has quit (Quit: Leaving...)
 266 2012-02-11 01:55:08 <gavinandresen> So it could be: discourage block if first 5 bytes of coinbase aren't push-4-bytes and then the 32-bit height
 267 2012-02-11 01:55:19 maqr_ has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to nap.)
 268 2012-02-11 01:55:29 <Diablo-D3> gavinandresen: er
 269 2012-02-11 01:55:31 <Diablo-D3> wat?
 270 2012-02-11 01:55:40  has quit (Clown|!Clown@static-87-79-93-140.netcologne.de|Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 271 2012-02-11 01:56:23 <gavinandresen> ... and I suppose it would make sense to start discouraging in block races right away... (only danger would be a little more code to write/test)
 272 2012-02-11 01:56:39 <gavinandresen> Diablo-D3: what what?
 273 2012-02-11 01:57:08 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: with step 1 in place, participating miners don't risk orphans before 50%, and there's no timely coordination required
 274 2012-02-11 01:57:39 <gavinandresen> yes, but it gives almost zero protection from an attacker trying to split the chain
 275 2012-02-11 01:58:12 <Diablo-D3> gavinandresen: I have no clue what you just said
 276 2012-02-11 01:58:15 <Diablo-D3> what does that do?
 277 2012-02-11 01:58:37 <gavinandresen> Putting the block height in the coinbase?  Prevents somebody from creating duplicates on purpose
 278 2012-02-11 01:58:49 <Diablo-D3> oh, that thing gmaxwell found earlier?
 279 2012-02-11 01:59:35 <Diablo-D3> I still dont get how thats useful, wont spend, dupe, spend dupe still get caught?
 280 2012-02-11 01:59:36 <gmaxwell> roconner not me.
 281 2012-02-11 01:59:38 <Diablo-D3> i mean normally
 282 2012-02-11 01:59:44 <Diablo-D3> well, someone found it
 283 2012-02-11 01:59:56 <gmaxwell> Diablo-D3: it's complicated.
 284 2012-02-11 02:00:30 <k9quaint> gmaxwell: can you explain it with interpretive dance?
 285 2012-02-11 02:00:32 userggj has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 286 2012-02-11 02:02:05 <sipa> if you have a coinbase tx, and in a chain-split that is only seen by part of the network a dupe is created with the same coinbase tx afterwards
 287 2012-02-11 02:02:25 <sipa> and that fork gets reorged away, the original coinbase tx is gone from the database
 288 2012-02-11 02:02:34 <sipa> while it is still there for those that didn't see the fork
 289 2012-02-11 02:02:59 <sipa> if someone now tries to spend it, you got a split
 290 2012-02-11 02:04:59 <gavinandresen> I'm a pumpkin.  See y'all later.
 291 2012-02-11 02:05:18 gavinandresen has quit (Quit: gavinandresen)
 292 2012-02-11 02:05:19 <sipa> cya
 293 2012-02-11 02:05:47 <sipa> it's only a real problem if the majority of mining power didn't see the reorg and accepts the spend
 294 2012-02-11 02:07:28 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 295 2012-02-11 02:07:45 <Diablo-D3> sipa: but the spend is ...
 296 2012-02-11 02:07:46 <Diablo-D3> oh right
 297 2012-02-11 02:07:49 <Diablo-D3> the stupidity with tx ids
 298 2012-02-11 02:08:33 sacarlson has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 299 2012-02-11 02:08:36 ThomasV has joined
 300 2012-02-11 02:10:23 gfinn has joined
 301 2012-02-11 02:11:21 bertu has joined
 302 2012-02-11 02:13:53 userggj has joined
 303 2012-02-11 02:15:12 b4epoche has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 304 2012-02-11 02:16:13 gp5st has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 305 2012-02-11 02:16:38 b4epoche has joined
 306 2012-02-11 02:22:38 bertu has left ()
 307 2012-02-11 02:24:00 smickles is now known as smickles|idle
 308 2012-02-11 02:24:21 sacarlson has joined
 309 2012-02-11 02:29:55 pickett has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 310 2012-02-11 02:33:53 pickett has joined
 311 2012-02-11 02:35:06 smickles is now known as idle!~michael@cpe-071-070-169-083.nc.res.rr.com|smickles
 312 2012-02-11 02:36:17 darkee has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 313 2012-02-11 02:48:33 darkee has joined
 314 2012-02-11 02:49:26 <userggj> will this be possible?; https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=750.0
 315 2012-02-11 02:50:41 <luke-jr> already is
 316 2012-02-11 02:52:29 <userggj> implemented?
 317 2012-02-11 02:52:38 <userggj> on gui?
 318 2012-02-11 02:52:42 <luke-jr> no
 319 2012-02-11 02:53:04 <userggj> any reason why not?
 320 2012-02-11 02:53:39 <luke-jr> nobody's taken the time to do it
 321 2012-02-11 02:53:53 <userggj> ha ok
 322 2012-02-11 02:55:09 FROTUSCI has joined
 323 2012-02-11 02:58:04 trigliu has joined
 324 2012-02-11 02:59:48 trigliu has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 325 2012-02-11 03:00:03 phantomfake has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 326 2012-02-11 03:00:21 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 327 2012-02-11 03:01:57 phantomfake has joined
 328 2012-02-11 03:01:59 trigliu has joined
 329 2012-02-11 03:03:22 trigliu has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 330 2012-02-11 03:07:36 minimoose has joined
 331 2012-02-11 03:08:14 graingert has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 332 2012-02-11 03:08:20 <josephcp> userggj: a working example, https://blockchain.info/wallet/escrow
 333 2012-02-11 03:08:44 <userggj> will see
 334 2012-02-11 03:09:08 trigliu has joined
 335 2012-02-11 03:11:11 trigliu has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 336 2012-02-11 03:12:56 trigliu has joined
 337 2012-02-11 03:12:56 Ferroh has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 338 2012-02-11 03:13:31 splatster has joined
 339 2012-02-11 03:14:06 SomeoneWeirdzzzz is now known as SomeoneWeird
 340 2012-02-11 03:17:12 TheSeven has quit (Disconnected by services)
 341 2012-02-11 03:17:24 [7] has joined
 342 2012-02-11 03:21:44 ThomasV has joined
 343 2012-02-11 03:22:59 Ferroh has joined
 344 2012-02-11 03:24:02 lolcat_ has quit (Changing host)
 345 2012-02-11 03:24:02 lolcat_ has joined
 346 2012-02-11 03:24:07 lolcat_ is now known as lolcat
 347 2012-02-11 03:27:07 plutonic has joined
 348 2012-02-11 03:27:36 Ferroh has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 349 2012-02-11 03:31:23 plutonic has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 350 2012-02-11 03:33:03 phantomfake has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 351 2012-02-11 03:34:58 phantomfake has joined
 352 2012-02-11 03:35:13 phantomfake has quit (Excess Flood)
 353 2012-02-11 03:37:11 seco has quit (Quit: seco)
 354 2012-02-11 03:37:57 userggj has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 355 2012-02-11 03:38:26 att_ has joined
 356 2012-02-11 03:38:27 att_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 357 2012-02-11 03:39:25 CaptainDDL has joined
 358 2012-02-11 03:39:37 CaptainDDL has quit (Changing host)
 359 2012-02-11 03:39:37 CaptainDDL has joined
 360 2012-02-11 03:39:42 phantomfake has joined
 361 2012-02-11 03:39:53 vigilyn2 has joined
 362 2012-02-11 03:42:12 vigilyn has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 363 2012-02-11 03:45:03 phantomfakeBNC has joined
 364 2012-02-11 03:45:10 phantomfakeBNC has quit (Excess Flood)
 365 2012-02-11 03:47:04 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 366 2012-02-11 03:48:38 _phantomfake has joined
 367 2012-02-11 03:51:43 phantomfake has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 368 2012-02-11 03:54:21 h4ckm3 has joined
 369 2012-02-11 03:55:36 vigilyn2 has left ("Leaving")
 370 2012-02-11 03:55:57 vigilyn has joined
 371 2012-02-11 03:56:29 _phantomfake is now known as phantomfakeBNC
 372 2012-02-11 03:58:29 eoss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 373 2012-02-11 03:59:12 dr_win has joined
 374 2012-02-11 04:02:07 phantomfake has joined
 375 2012-02-11 04:02:25 freewil has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 376 2012-02-11 04:10:18 Hunterbunter has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 377 2012-02-11 04:10:55 dissipate has joined
 378 2012-02-11 04:13:13 sacarlson has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 379 2012-02-11 04:13:36 sacarlson has joined
 380 2012-02-11 04:17:23 dissipate has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 381 2012-02-11 04:20:16 RobinPKR_ has joined
 382 2012-02-11 04:22:53 RobinPKR has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 383 2012-02-11 04:22:54 RobinPKR_ is now known as RobinPKR
 384 2012-02-11 04:23:41 jamescarr has joined
 385 2012-02-11 04:26:24 gjs278 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 386 2012-02-11 04:27:04 gjs278 has joined
 387 2012-02-11 04:28:00 smickles is now known as smickles|idle
 388 2012-02-11 04:28:03 smickles is now known as idle!~michael@cpe-071-070-169-083.nc.res.rr.com|smickles
 389 2012-02-11 04:28:17 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
 390 2012-02-11 04:29:15 Rabbit67890 has joined
 391 2012-02-11 04:29:44 plutonic has joined
 392 2012-02-11 04:32:56 CRichard has joined
 393 2012-02-11 04:42:51 JRWR has joined
 394 2012-02-11 04:54:07 CRichard has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 395 2012-02-11 04:57:04 smickles is now known as smickles|idle
 396 2012-02-11 05:02:55 smickles is now known as idle!~michael@cpe-071-070-169-083.nc.res.rr.com|smickles
 397 2012-02-11 05:04:41 [Tycho] has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 398 2012-02-11 05:06:00 <etotheipi_> is there a way to use 20-byte addresses in P2SH scripts?
 399 2012-02-11 05:06:46 <gmaxwell> '20 byte addresses'?
 400 2012-02-11 05:06:58 <etotheipi_> hash160 strings
 401 2012-02-11 05:07:14 Rabbit67890 has quit (Quit: Rabbit67890)
 402 2012-02-11 05:07:26 Rabbit67890 has joined
 403 2012-02-11 05:07:47 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: not usefully.
 404 2012-02-11 05:07:56 <luke-jr> etotheipi_: P2SH is always hash160…
 405 2012-02-11 05:08:12 <gmaxwell> no e.g. pay to pay to script to pay hash160 pubkey
 406 2012-02-11 05:08:13 CRichard has joined
 407 2012-02-11 05:08:17 <etotheipi_> I meant, using hash160 instead of public keys
 408 2012-02-11 05:08:28 <luke-jr> …
 409 2012-02-11 05:08:28 <gmaxwell> which would be dumb unless you don't know the pubkey, but if you don't you can't write the redemption script.
 410 2012-02-11 05:08:40 <gmaxwell> if we had key recovery you could usefully do that.
 411 2012-02-11 05:09:09 <etotheipi_> oh, right
 412 2012-02-11 05:09:28 <etotheipi_> wait, I haven't looked into it much
 413 2012-02-11 05:10:22 <etotheipi_> doesn't the necessity to use full public keys detract from one of the reasons not to use full multi-sig to begin with?  transferring super long strings?
 414 2012-02-11 05:10:56 <etotheipi_> wait, don't tell me how stupid I am, I need to read more before I start a real argument
 415 2012-02-11 05:11:06 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: I have you trained. Good.
 416 2012-02-11 05:11:24 <etotheipi_> it's just a natural impulse to ask first...
 417 2012-02-11 05:11:28 Rabbit67890 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 418 2012-02-11 05:11:47 <luke-jr> :P
 419 2012-02-11 05:13:07 cryptoxchange has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 420 2012-02-11 05:13:18 JRWR has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 421 2012-02-11 05:13:45 JRWR has joined
 422 2012-02-11 05:13:47 Hunterbunter has joined
 423 2012-02-11 05:15:11 <CRichard> gmaxwell: do you think it would be a useful addition to have something like a bayeux server implemented in full bitcoin nodes?
 424 2012-02-11 05:15:31 <CRichard> gmaxwell: so that lightweight clients could talk to them via http requests and long polling
 425 2012-02-11 05:16:50 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 426 2012-02-11 05:17:43 <etotheipi_> so you do have to have everyone's public keys in order to construct the P2SH script
 427 2012-02-11 05:18:23 Rabbit67890 has joined
 428 2012-02-11 05:18:35 <etotheipi_> does this not bother anyone else?
 429 2012-02-11 05:18:44 <Diablo-D3> hrm
 430 2012-02-11 05:18:52 <Diablo-D3> I think I might have gotten bitcoind to compile on alpine
 431 2012-02-11 05:19:36 <etotheipi_> maybe I just haven't thought about it enough, but it bothers me that using P2SH requires a "different" addressing system
 432 2012-02-11 05:20:09 <etotheipi_> as long as we were changing isStandard, why couldn't we also add a isStandard script for using hash160 strings in P2SH scripts?
 433 2012-02-11 05:20:17 smickles is now known as smickles|idle
 434 2012-02-11 05:21:53 <etotheipi_> now I wish I hadn't waited to so long to start reading up on BIP 0016
 435 2012-02-11 05:22:43 <Diablo-D3> nope, doesnt work
 436 2012-02-11 05:24:45 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell, is there a reason for not allowing hash160-based multi-sig tx?  (besides the more-complicated internal scripts which will eventually be pruned)
 437 2012-02-11 05:26:01 sacarlson has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
 438 2012-02-11 05:28:09 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: Are you tired? You're asking a kind of stupid question.
 439 2012-02-11 05:28:46 <etotheipi_> probably
 440 2012-02-11 05:28:48 sacarlson has joined
 441 2012-02-11 05:28:51 <gmaxwell> P2SH is a pay to H(spending script). So you have to know the spending script to create a P2SH address.
 442 2012-02-11 05:28:55 <etotheipi_> what did I miss?
 443 2012-02-11 05:29:12 random_cat has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 444 2012-02-11 05:29:12 comboy has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 445 2012-02-11 05:29:19 comboy has joined
 446 2012-02-11 05:29:19 <gmaxwell> The spending script must include the pubkey, because we couldn't validate the signature otherwise (lacking key recovery).
 447 2012-02-11 05:29:38 <gmaxwell> So if you are authoring a p2sh address you must know the pubkey. Pay to hash160 makes no sense there.
 448 2012-02-11 05:29:51 draco49 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 449 2012-02-11 05:29:51 sacredchao has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 450 2012-02-11 05:29:51 <etotheipi_> (I just concluded that wasn't the case from looking at the structure... but obviously I misinterpretted what I read)
 451 2012-02-11 05:30:19 sacredchao has joined
 452 2012-02-11 05:30:45 <CRichard> gmaxwell: did you catch my question above?
 453 2012-02-11 05:30:51 random_cat has joined
 454 2012-02-11 05:30:54 draco49 has joined
 455 2012-02-11 05:31:31 <gmaxwell> CRichard: I didn't but I see it now.
 456 2012-02-11 05:31:38 JRWR has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 457 2012-02-11 05:31:51 <gmaxwell> CRichard: the reference client is really not at all structured to be a thin client server today.
 458 2012-02-11 05:31:54 Cablesaurus has quit (Quit: Take my advice. I don't use it anyway)
 459 2012-02-11 05:32:18 <gmaxwell> CRichard: I don't have an opinions on protocols used to interconnect them once the work is done to restructure it to make that sort of usage reasonable.
 460 2012-02-11 05:32:27 <CRichard> k
 461 2012-02-11 05:33:14 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell, I'm not seeing it:  we are using a "regular" OP_CHECKMULTISIG TxOut script in the serialized script, and paying with an almost-regular OP_CHECKMULTISIG redemption script (a list of signatures)... I don't see why you can't replace those with the super-complicated pay-to-hash160 scripts
 462 2012-02-11 05:34:50 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell, like the scripts shown in this thread:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56095.msg670577#msg670577
 463 2012-02-11 05:35:13 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: because you must spend with exactly that script.
 464 2012-02-11 05:35:20 Cablesaurus has joined
 465 2012-02-11 05:35:20 Cablesaurus has quit (Changing host)
 466 2012-02-11 05:35:20 Cablesaurus has joined
 467 2012-02-11 05:35:23 <gmaxwell> And you can't validate a signature without the pubkey.
 468 2012-02-11 05:35:36 trigliu has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 469 2012-02-11 05:35:39 <etotheipi_> the public key and signature are supplied in the txin script
 470 2012-02-11 05:35:54 <gmaxwell> you could write some script that says pushpubkey dup hash160 pushhash equals .. checksig..  but that would be moronic.
 471 2012-02-11 05:36:18 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: P2SH is pay to hash of the script.
 472 2012-02-11 05:36:58 <etotheipi_> okay, there's clearly a misunderstanding here (most likely my own)... I will come up with a concrete example, and you can point out what I missed
 473 2012-02-11 05:37:09 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: sorry, I'm baffled too.
 474 2012-02-11 05:38:28 FROTUSCI has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 475 2012-02-11 05:39:01 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: yea. Not sure where the disconnect is.  P2SH says "pay only to an input script with hash X"  ... so to come up with X you must know the pubkey in advance because any txin has to provide the pubkey and p2sh specifies the hash of the txnin.  Am I still making no sense to you?
 476 2012-02-11 05:39:06 SuprTiggr has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 477 2012-02-11 05:40:46 SuprTiggr has joined
 478 2012-02-11 05:41:06 <etotheipi_> so your input script is [signatures] {2 pubkey0 pubkey1 pubkey2 3 OP_CHECKMULTISIG}  where everythign in {} is the serialized script
 479 2012-02-11 05:41:36 <etotheipi_> the stuff in {} would be hashed an included in the TxOut script, to be spent by the tx in script above
 480 2012-02-11 05:42:55 <etotheipi_> why couldn't you use:  [sig0] [pubkey0] [sig1] [pubkey1] {long script using only hash160 strings}
 481 2012-02-11 05:43:34 <gmaxwell> Okay, none of that is p2sh.
 482 2012-02-11 05:43:48 <gmaxwell> oh sorry, misread.
 483 2012-02-11 05:44:32 <etotheipi_> "long script using only hash160 strings" would be what you see in the non-OP_CHECKMULTISIG unit tests here:   https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56095.msg670577#msg670577
 484 2012-02-11 05:44:36 <gmaxwell> I follow you up to your questions.
 485 2012-02-11 05:44:49 <gmaxwell> "why couldn't you use:  [sig0]" use as what? desert topping? :)
 486 2012-02-11 05:45:26 <etotheipi_> oh, sorry... I messed up my syntax:   [sig0 pubkey0 sig1 pubkey1] {long script using only hash160 strings}
 487 2012-02-11 05:46:08 <etotheipi_> the long script I am referring to is a valid script that verifies the supplied public keys match the hash160 strings in the original script, before checking signatures
 488 2012-02-11 05:46:19 <etotheipi_> (most definitely not standard, and definitely not simple, but it works)
 489 2012-02-11 05:46:36 <gmaxwell> 21:28 < gmaxwell> you could write some script that says pushpubkey dup hash160 pushhash equals .. checksig..   but that would be moronic.
 490 2012-02-11 05:46:45 <gmaxwell> ^ am I misunderstanding that you're suggesting that?
 491 2012-02-11 05:47:10 <gmaxwell> e.g. the script provides the pubkeys, and checks the very keys its providing with hash160s.. thus saving you nothing.
 492 2012-02-11 05:47:19 <etotheipi_> well I wasn't clear exactly what you were saying there, since it doesn't look like the script I'm referring to, but probably
 493 2012-02-11 05:47:35 JRWR has joined
 494 2012-02-11 05:47:56 <etotheipi_> in what I'm proposing, there are no public keys in the script that is serialized
 495 2012-02-11 05:48:02 <gmaxwell> That can't work.
 496 2012-02-11 05:48:14 <etotheipi_> and I'm not necessarily proposing it, I'm trying to understand why it's not possible
 497 2012-02-11 05:48:31 <etotheipi_> okay, well clearly I missed something, I'll think about it and stop spending your time answering my stupid questions
 498 2012-02-11 05:49:11 <etotheipi_> based on your reaction, I feel like it must be a stupid question, but I just need more time to absorb BIP 0016
 499 2012-02-11 05:49:36 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: ah! how about this: the seralized script is exected with a clean enviroment
 500 2012-02-11 05:50:02 <gmaxwell> (are you expecting to feed extra data into it?)
 501 2012-02-11 05:50:29 <Diablo-D3> >0016
 502 2012-02-11 05:50:30 <Diablo-D3> >00
 503 2012-02-11 05:50:38 <Diablo-D3> >implication we're ever going to have that many
 504 2012-02-11 05:55:59 Rabbit67890 has quit (Quit: Rabbit67890)
 505 2012-02-11 05:56:08 Rabbit67890 has joined
 506 2012-02-11 06:00:37 Rabbit67890 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 507 2012-02-11 06:02:05 MrTiggr has joined
 508 2012-02-11 06:02:13 JRWR has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 509 2012-02-11 06:03:25 FROTUSCI has joined
 510 2012-02-11 06:03:28 trigliu has joined
 511 2012-02-11 06:12:33 sacarlson has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 512 2012-02-11 06:12:54 sacarlson has joined
 513 2012-02-11 06:14:11 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell, http://pastebin.com/yNK2ehqF
 514 2012-02-11 06:15:27 <etotheipi_> I feel like it's the same thing I said, just with more space and better formatting, to be abs clear... I still don't see how this wouldn't be valid if isStandard was not considered
 515 2012-02-11 06:16:21 <etotheipi_> it seems like the TxOut script preparer only needs each party's regular hash160...
 516 2012-02-11 06:17:29 <gmaxwell> it would fail to validate because there would be no public keys on the stack when the seralized script executes, so it would fail.
 517 2012-02-11 06:18:18 <etotheipi_> why would there be no public keys on the stack?  the sigs are there, right?
 518 2012-02-11 06:19:01 <gmaxwell> because they are not inside the seralized script.
 519 2012-02-11 06:19:25 <etotheipi_> neither are the signatures, but they somehow made it into the script execution for OP_CHECKMULTISIG to succeed
 520 2012-02-11 06:19:42 <trigliu> cool
 521 2012-02-11 06:19:57 <trigliu> OP_RAND is next
 522 2012-02-11 06:24:16 <luke-jr> lol
 523 2012-02-11 06:25:55 <trigliu> op_checkmultisig is awesome
 524 2012-02-11 06:26:01 <Diablo-D3> I fucking hate bitcoin's code
 525 2012-02-11 06:26:01 <trigliu> ive been waiting for something like that'
 526 2012-02-11 06:27:36 b4epoche_ has joined
 527 2012-02-11 06:28:23 b4epoche has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 528 2012-02-11 06:28:23 b4epoche_ is now known as b4epoche
 529 2012-02-11 06:29:15 <etotheipi_> the serialized script is included in the TxIn script as one, large PUSHDATA op, right? and recognized to be expanded for evaluation because of the special sequence of opcodes in the TxOut script?
 530 2012-02-11 06:30:15 <Diablo-D3> seriously, why in fucking hell is this code so goddamned ugly
 531 2012-02-11 06:30:20 <Diablo-D3> I cant even tell what the fuck its doing
 532 2012-02-11 06:30:27 <Diablo-D3> all I see is boost boost boost boost boost boost boost boost boost boost boost boost boost boost boost boost boost boost boost boost boost boost boost boost boost boost boost boost v
 533 2012-02-11 06:30:37 <Diablo-D3> some <>s that dont belong
 534 2012-02-11 06:30:42 <Diablo-D3> and lots of other insane shit
 535 2012-02-11 06:32:48 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell, as far as I can see, the only reason it is invalid is because of arbitrary restrictions put on BIP 0016, that could've been just as easily adapted to accommodate this use case if it wanted to (for instance, keeping everything on the stack before the serialized script)
 536 2012-02-11 06:33:04 <Diablo-D3> no wonder bitcoin adoption is a fucking failure
 537 2012-02-11 06:33:08 <Diablo-D3> who the fuck even wants to compile this shit
 538 2012-02-11 06:33:34 <etotheipi_> (I don't mean to suggest the restrictions in BIP 16 are arbitrary, but it seems they could just as easily have supported this structure (or similar) without compromising functionality/security)
 539 2012-02-11 06:33:53 skeledrew has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 540 2012-02-11 06:34:02 zeiris has joined
 541 2012-02-11 06:34:03 <etotheipi_> if it still seems like a stupid question, I'll back into my Armory-development-meditative state
 542 2012-02-11 06:42:53 skeledrew has joined
 543 2012-02-11 06:45:34 a_meteorite is now known as a_chicken
 544 2012-02-11 06:47:30 a_chicken is now known as meteoritemeteori
 545 2012-02-11 06:47:39 <olp> I compiled it many times, but ya I dont like all the high level c++ as well
 546 2012-02-11 06:50:09 meteoritemeteori is now known as meteormeteor
 547 2012-02-11 06:52:09 egecko has joined
 548 2012-02-11 06:55:40 djoot has quit (Quit: leaving)
 549 2012-02-11 07:00:07 dissipate has joined
 550 2012-02-11 07:01:19 att has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 551 2012-02-11 07:04:02 ThomasV has joined
 552 2012-02-11 07:17:14 meteormeteor is now known as a_meteorite
 553 2012-02-11 07:24:39 djoot has joined
 554 2012-02-11 07:24:48 djoot has quit (Changing host)
 555 2012-02-11 07:24:48 djoot has joined
 556 2012-02-11 07:32:38 barmstrong has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 557 2012-02-11 07:36:05 <trigliu> OP_RAND is a highly tamper-resistant lottery
 558 2012-02-11 07:36:31 <trigliu> unlike those phony powerball drawings where we're supposed to believe the numbers are fairly picked
 559 2012-02-11 07:37:37 <trigliu> lotteries suck in general tho im sure there are other applications.
 560 2012-02-11 07:38:29 dissipate has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 561 2012-02-11 07:43:06 barmstrong has joined
 562 2012-02-11 07:54:14 <cjd> pay to whoever can guess the lot bits of the hash of the next block
 563 2012-02-11 07:54:24 <cjd> *most low bits
 564 2012-02-11 07:54:54 int0x27h has quit (Changing host)
 565 2012-02-11 07:54:54 int0x27h has joined
 566 2012-02-11 07:59:48 zux00r has joined
 567 2012-02-11 08:00:01 RichardG has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 568 2012-02-11 08:00:02 Nick_ has joined
 569 2012-02-11 08:00:13 Nick_ is now known as Guest12328
 570 2012-02-11 08:00:26 glitch-mod has joined
 571 2012-02-11 08:01:10 fpgaminer has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 572 2012-02-11 08:01:19 RichardG has joined
 573 2012-02-11 08:01:26 RichardG has quit (Changing host)
 574 2012-02-11 08:01:26 RichardG has joined
 575 2012-02-11 08:01:28 [7] has quit (Disconnected by services)
 576 2012-02-11 08:01:38 TheSeven has joined
 577 2012-02-11 08:02:30 comboy_ has joined
 578 2012-02-11 08:02:37 phantomfake has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 579 2012-02-11 08:02:37 Bwild has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 580 2012-02-11 08:02:37 stalled has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 581 2012-02-11 08:02:37 zux0r has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 582 2012-02-11 08:03:07 <trigliu> cool cjd
 583 2012-02-11 08:03:07 comboy has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 584 2012-02-11 08:03:08 Nicksasa has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 585 2012-02-11 08:03:08 mtve has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 586 2012-02-11 08:03:08 BeTep has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 587 2012-02-11 08:03:23 b4epoche_ has joined
 588 2012-02-11 08:04:07 zeiris has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 589 2012-02-11 08:04:18 josephcp_ has joined
 590 2012-02-11 08:04:37 josephcp has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 591 2012-02-11 08:04:37 [eval] has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 592 2012-02-11 08:05:20 tooteach has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 593 2012-02-11 08:05:34 [eval] has joined
 594 2012-02-11 08:06:01 zeiris has joined
 595 2012-02-11 08:06:07 b4epoche has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 596 2012-02-11 08:06:08 b4epoche_ is now known as b4epoche
 597 2012-02-11 08:06:37 ahihi2 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 598 2012-02-11 08:06:45 Lolcust has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 599 2012-02-11 08:06:46 ahihi2 has joined
 600 2012-02-11 08:07:16 mcorlett has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 601 2012-02-11 08:07:47 Lolcust has joined
 602 2012-02-11 08:08:19 zux00r has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 603 2012-02-11 08:08:35 zux0r has joined
 604 2012-02-11 08:08:37 mcorlett has joined
 605 2012-02-11 08:10:06 stalled has joined
 606 2012-02-11 08:10:12 weather has joined
 607 2012-02-11 08:11:14 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 608 2012-02-11 08:13:21 cryptoxchange has joined
 609 2012-02-11 08:14:02 weather is now known as BeTep
 610 2012-02-11 08:14:31  has joined
 611 2012-02-11 08:14:36 splatster has quit (Quit: I'm the illest motherfucker alive!)
 612 2012-02-11 08:15:58 nexes has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 613 2012-02-11 08:16:25 nexes has joined
 614 2012-02-11 08:18:49 SuprTiggr has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 615 2012-02-11 08:22:10 Bwild has joined
 616 2012-02-11 08:23:36 SuprTiggr has joined
 617 2012-02-11 08:26:27 sneak_ has joined
 618 2012-02-11 08:27:38 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: rm44377 opened issue 820 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/820>
 619 2012-02-11 08:28:24 sneak has quit (Ping timeout: 308 seconds)
 620 2012-02-11 08:28:57 Lexa has quit (Ping timeout: 312 seconds)
 621 2012-02-11 08:34:28 molecular has joined
 622 2012-02-11 08:34:45 TD has joined
 623 2012-02-11 08:36:02 CRichard has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 624 2012-02-11 08:36:24 CRichard has joined
 625 2012-02-11 08:37:06 Karmaon has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 626 2012-02-11 08:42:35 danbri_ is now known as danbri
 627 2012-02-11 08:42:55 BeTep has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 628 2012-02-11 08:43:09 TheSeven has quit (Disconnected by services)
 629 2012-02-11 08:43:22 [7] has joined
 630 2012-02-11 08:44:28 stalled has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 631 2012-02-11 08:44:28 Lolcust has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 632 2012-02-11 08:44:59 mcorlett has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 633 2012-02-11 08:45:07 cryptoxchange has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 634 2012-02-11 08:45:22 CryptoX has joined
 635 2012-02-11 08:45:29 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
 636 2012-02-11 08:46:16 [eval]_ has joined
 637 2012-02-11 08:47:07 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 638 2012-02-11 08:47:09 jeremias_ has joined
 639 2012-02-11 08:47:45 luke-jr has quit (Excess Flood)
 640 2012-02-11 08:47:48 jeremias has quit (Write error: Broken pipe)
 641 2012-02-11 08:47:48 [eval] has quit (Write error: Broken pipe)
 642 2012-02-11 08:47:48 cyberdo has quit (Write error: Broken pipe)
 643 2012-02-11 08:47:48 spaola has quit (Write error: Broken pipe)
 644 2012-02-11 08:47:49 Lolcust has joined
 645 2012-02-11 08:47:49 Eliel has quit (Write error: Broken pipe)
 646 2012-02-11 08:47:53 copumpkin has joined
 647 2012-02-11 08:47:55 luke-jr has joined
 648 2012-02-11 08:48:05 vigilyn has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 649 2012-02-11 08:48:09 cyberdo has joined
 650 2012-02-11 08:48:19 CryptoX has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 651 2012-02-11 08:48:30 mcorlett has joined
 652 2012-02-11 08:48:32 spaola has joined
 653 2012-02-11 08:49:19 <sipa> not syure anyone thought of this already, but having the block height in the coinbase allows for much stricter bounds on the difficulty and time in orphan blocks
 654 2012-02-11 08:49:31 <sipa> gmaxwell: ^
 655 2012-02-11 08:49:48 cryptoxchange has joined
 656 2012-02-11 08:52:07 Eliel has joined
 657 2012-02-11 08:52:46 Karmaon has joined
 658 2012-02-11 08:52:57 iocor has joined
 659 2012-02-11 08:54:17 Lolcust has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 660 2012-02-11 08:54:17 jeremias_ has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 661 2012-02-11 08:54:21 jeremias has joined
 662 2012-02-11 08:54:48 mcorlett has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 663 2012-02-11 08:55:53 FROTUSCI has quit ()
 664 2012-02-11 08:56:48 Lolcust has joined
 665 2012-02-11 08:59:29 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 666 2012-02-11 09:00:02 marf_away has joined
 667 2012-02-11 09:00:35 gjs278 has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
 668 2012-02-11 09:03:04 random_cat has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 669 2012-02-11 09:03:05 MobiusL has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 670 2012-02-11 09:03:42 Karmaon has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 671 2012-02-11 09:03:43 da2ce7 has quit (2!~da2ce7@gateway/tor-sasl/da2ce7|Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 672 2012-02-11 09:04:14 wood has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 673 2012-02-11 09:06:48 random_cat has joined
 674 2012-02-11 09:07:12 Lolcust has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 675 2012-02-11 09:07:41 Karmaon has joined
 676 2012-02-11 09:07:48 Lolcust has joined
 677 2012-02-11 09:07:53 weather has joined
 678 2012-02-11 09:08:05 wood has joined
 679 2012-02-11 09:08:25 djoot has quit (Quit: leaving)
 680 2012-02-11 09:08:46 stalled has joined
 681 2012-02-11 09:09:09 Cablesaurus has quit (Quit: ASCII a stupid question, get a stupid ANSI!)
 682 2012-02-11 09:10:36 mcorlett has joined
 683 2012-02-11 09:11:43 weather is now known as BeTep
 684 2012-02-11 09:12:13 djoot has joined
 685 2012-02-11 09:12:27 djoot has quit (Changing host)
 686 2012-02-11 09:12:27 djoot has joined
 687 2012-02-11 09:13:54 molecular has joined
 688 2012-02-11 09:21:18 BurtyBB is now known as BurtyB
 689 2012-02-11 09:30:22 cande has joined
 690 2012-02-11 09:30:46 <cande> can i se which bitcoin address a tx is sent from?
 691 2012-02-11 09:38:00 <cande> this could be a good feater for the bitcoin gui, to show which address the tx was sent from
 692 2012-02-11 09:38:32 <bd__> cande: not really. bitcoin txns often have multiple inputs
 693 2012-02-11 09:38:43 <bd__> and/or those inputs can be internal wallet keys that are used only for splits
 694 2012-02-11 09:38:47 bd__ is now known as bd_
 695 2012-02-11 09:39:02 <bd_> so it wouldn't really be meaningful
 696 2012-02-11 09:39:20 iocor has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
 697 2012-02-11 09:39:53 smickles is now known as idle!~michael@cpe-071-070-169-083.nc.res.rr.com|smickles
 698 2012-02-11 09:41:14 <cande> so if i want to send the bitcoins back, look here: http://blockexplorer.com/tx/55275a829ad993acbabb2d865e82ac46bb28d9fc4029beb8372cfdf46f3aaf56#o1
 699 2012-02-11 09:41:36 <cande> would 1LHYE63... be the correct address?
 700 2012-02-11 09:42:41 <bd_> probably. although the recipient might find it coming back at an unexpected address
 701 2012-02-11 09:43:49 <cande> how do you mean?
 702 2012-02-11 09:44:12 Rabbit67890 has joined
 703 2012-02-11 09:45:03 <sipa> cande: do not assume that that address is owned by the sender
 704 2012-02-11 09:45:28 <sipa> if you want to do a refund, ask for an address
 705 2012-02-11 09:48:44 <cande> hm
 706 2012-02-11 09:49:09 <sipa> for example if they use an e-wallet service, sending something there may not credit your sender's account
 707 2012-02-11 09:49:53 smickles is now known as smickles|idle
 708 2012-02-11 09:50:02 MobiusL has joined
 709 2012-02-11 09:50:08 <cande> ah
 710 2012-02-11 09:50:13 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 711 2012-02-11 09:50:35 BlueMatt has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 712 2012-02-11 09:50:51 <cande> but if he sent it from bitcoin-qt?
 713 2012-02-11 09:50:55 <bd_> sipa: but the e-wallet service would get the money at least!
 714 2012-02-11 09:51:25 <cande> bd_, good for the e-wallet service :)
 715 2012-02-11 09:51:35 <sipa> cande: he may still have switched wallets, lost his computer, ...
 716 2012-02-11 09:52:35 <sipa> in general it is bad practice to send something to an address without the receiver's request to send it there
 717 2012-02-11 09:52:37 <cande> bd_, how about those internal wallet keys?
 718 2012-02-11 09:52:52 <bd_> dunno, I don't actually use bitcoin, I just hang out here ;)
 719 2012-02-11 09:52:59 <cande> hah :)
 720 2012-02-11 09:53:23 <sipa> those will work, cande, in bitcoin-qt, but it is bad practice
 721 2012-02-11 09:53:24 <bd_> If I were writing the client, it'd handle that. But I'm not.
 722 2012-02-11 09:55:24 <cande> sipa,  I understand, i just got one customer who wanted a refund of an order, and when i asked him about a bitcoin address, he promptly said, send it back to the same address.
 723 2012-02-11 09:55:47 <sipa> ok, in that case, no problem
 724 2012-02-11 09:56:21 <cande> so 1LHYE63... is a safe bet
 725 2012-02-11 09:56:40 <sipa> yes, both are fine
 726 2012-02-11 09:57:07 <cande> 19ZPqU.. also?
 727 2012-02-11 09:57:50 <sipa> yes
 728 2012-02-11 09:58:21 <cande> cool :)
 729 2012-02-11 09:58:24 <cande> thx alot
 730 2012-02-11 10:04:46 trigliu has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 731 2012-02-11 10:13:11 mtve has joined
 732 2012-02-11 10:13:40 <marf_away> maybe
 733 2012-02-11 10:14:03 <marf_away> the customer is using a e-qallet and doesnt know he cant get monney back that way?
 734 2012-02-11 10:14:37 iocor has joined
 735 2012-02-11 10:14:40 iocor has quit (Changing host)
 736 2012-02-11 10:14:40 iocor has joined
 737 2012-02-11 10:19:21 gjs278 has joined
 738 2012-02-11 10:24:53 cande has quit (Quit: Lämnar)
 739 2012-02-11 10:26:56 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: laanwj opened issue 821 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/821>
 740 2012-02-11 10:30:07 ThomasV has joined
 741 2012-02-11 10:31:23 RazielZ has joined
 742 2012-02-11 10:39:50 Zarutian has joined
 743 2012-02-11 10:41:09 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 744 2012-02-11 10:45:08 Cablesaurus has joined
 745 2012-02-11 10:45:08 Cablesaurus has quit (Changing host)
 746 2012-02-11 10:45:08 Cablesaurus has joined
 747 2012-02-11 10:48:39 a_meteor has joined
 748 2012-02-11 10:51:01 a_meteorite has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 749 2012-02-11 10:51:02 a_meteor is now known as a_meteorite
 750 2012-02-11 10:55:15 molecular has joined
 751 2012-02-11 10:56:36 Rabbit67890 has quit (Quit: Rabbit67890)
 752 2012-02-11 11:09:55 Idiot___ has joined
 753 2012-02-11 11:10:59 aSH-[i] has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 754 2012-02-11 11:11:26 booo has joined
 755 2012-02-11 11:13:07 sacarlson has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
 756 2012-02-11 11:13:25 sacarlson has joined
 757 2012-02-11 11:25:20 BGL has joined
 758 2012-02-11 11:25:46 NxTitle has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 759 2012-02-11 11:30:45 CRichard has quit ()
 760 2012-02-11 11:35:31 newfrozzen has joined
 761 2012-02-11 11:35:41 dr_win has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 762 2012-02-11 11:38:10 <newfrozzen> Hi =)
 763 2012-02-11 11:38:36 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: xanatos opened issue 822 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/822>
 764 2012-02-11 11:43:30 Guest12328 is now known as Nicksasa
 765 2012-02-11 11:43:40 erle- has joined
 766 2012-02-11 11:44:10 sacarlson has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
 767 2012-02-11 11:46:56 sacarlson has joined
 768 2012-02-11 11:46:56 datagutt has joined
 769 2012-02-11 11:48:47 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: sipa opened pull request 823 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/823>
 770 2012-02-11 11:54:18 sacarlson has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
 771 2012-02-11 11:55:11 sacarlson has joined
 772 2012-02-11 11:56:05 zux00r has joined
 773 2012-02-11 11:59:08 zux0r has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 774 2012-02-11 11:59:44 sacarlson has quit (Client Quit)
 775 2012-02-11 12:02:14 cryptoxchange has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 776 2012-02-11 12:03:59 sacarlson has joined
 777 2012-02-11 12:04:04 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 778 2012-02-11 12:04:30 copumpkin has joined
 779 2012-02-11 12:04:40 copumpkin has quit (Changing host)
 780 2012-02-11 12:04:40 copumpkin has joined
 781 2012-02-11 12:06:58 iocor has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
 782 2012-02-11 12:07:42 bodom has joined
 783 2012-02-11 12:11:46 iocor has joined
 784 2012-02-11 12:13:37 sacarlson has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
 785 2012-02-11 12:14:49 iocor has quit (Client Quit)
 786 2012-02-11 12:15:09 b4epoche_ has joined
 787 2012-02-11 12:15:35 sacarlson has joined
 788 2012-02-11 12:15:50 b4epoche has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 789 2012-02-11 12:15:50 b4epoche_ is now known as b4epoche
 790 2012-02-11 12:17:21 sacarlson has quit (Client Quit)
 791 2012-02-11 12:17:32 sacarlson has joined
 792 2012-02-11 12:19:52 iocor has joined
 793 2012-02-11 12:33:08 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 794 2012-02-11 12:36:14 iocor has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
 795 2012-02-11 12:44:32 ovidiusoft has joined
 796 2012-02-11 12:46:48 iocor has joined
 797 2012-02-11 12:50:00 sacarlson has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
 798 2012-02-11 12:59:11 bodom has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 799 2012-02-11 13:01:44 bodom has joined
 800 2012-02-11 13:16:50 guy_ has joined
 801 2012-02-11 13:21:30 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 802 2012-02-11 13:21:59 copumpkin has joined
 803 2012-02-11 13:26:52 Idiot___ is now known as ID-10T
 804 2012-02-11 13:27:18 ID-10T is now known as Idiot___
 805 2012-02-11 13:29:34 ThomasV has joined
 806 2012-02-11 13:29:40 ThomasV has quit (Changing host)
 807 2012-02-11 13:29:40 ThomasV has joined
 808 2012-02-11 13:31:50 PK has joined
 809 2012-02-11 13:49:09 pasky_ is now known as pasky
 810 2012-02-11 13:54:29 bodom_ has joined
 811 2012-02-11 13:55:19 CRichard has joined
 812 2012-02-11 13:55:26 bodom has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
 813 2012-02-11 13:57:25 darkskiez is now known as darkskiez2
 814 2012-02-11 13:57:29 darkskiez2 is now known as darkskiez
 815 2012-02-11 13:59:45 <newfrozzen> #bitcoin-mining
 816 2012-02-11 13:59:50 newfrozzen has quit (Quit: Page closed)
 817 2012-02-11 14:00:42 cosurgi has joined
 818 2012-02-11 14:01:38 dvide has joined
 819 2012-02-11 14:04:47 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: xanatos opened issue 824 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/824>
 820 2012-02-11 14:14:48 Turingi has joined
 821 2012-02-11 14:14:48 Turingi has quit (Changing host)
 822 2012-02-11 14:14:48 Turingi has joined
 823 2012-02-11 14:18:57 sje has joined
 824 2012-02-11 14:31:39 booo has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 825 2012-02-11 14:35:39 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: sipa opened pull request 825 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/825>
 826 2012-02-11 14:39:31 iocor has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
 827 2012-02-11 14:45:46 yorick_ is now known as yorick
 828 2012-02-11 14:45:55 glitch-mod has quit (2!~xd@71.190.229.236|Quit: KVIrc 4.0.4 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
 829 2012-02-11 14:47:22 MrTiggr has quit (Changing host)
 830 2012-02-11 14:47:22 MrTiggr has joined
 831 2012-02-11 14:51:01 vigilyn has joined
 832 2012-02-11 15:02:46 Graet has joined
 833 2012-02-11 15:08:00 iyov7 is now known as elektriks
 834 2012-02-11 15:12:03 darkskiez has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 835 2012-02-11 15:13:17 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Quitte)
 836 2012-02-11 15:18:10 iocor has joined
 837 2012-02-11 15:18:16 chmod755 has joined
 838 2012-02-11 15:24:49 <sipa> ;;later tell BlueMatt it seems the old 'key' records are not removed when encrypting a wallet in git head; where was this supposed to happen?
 839 2012-02-11 15:24:49 <gribble> The operation succeeded.
 840 2012-02-11 15:25:20 <jamescarr> sipa, git head or git master?
 841 2012-02-11 15:25:41 <jamescarr> of course, I guess you could say head of master
 842 2012-02-11 15:25:58 <UukGoblin> where can I read up about how merged mining works in detail? I mean, if I wanted to start a new chain that I'd like to have linked to bitcoin - what should getauxblock return, what are the details...?
 843 2012-02-11 15:26:48 <UukGoblin> oh found a wiki page
 844 2012-02-11 15:26:59 <sipa> jamescarr: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.git branch master's HEAD
 845 2012-02-11 15:27:04 SomeoneWeird is now known as SomeoneWeirdzzzz
 846 2012-02-11 15:34:44 Ken` has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 847 2012-02-11 15:35:27 Diablo-D3 has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 848 2012-02-11 15:36:38 elektriks has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 849 2012-02-11 15:39:41 bodom_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 850 2012-02-11 15:40:40 BLZNGPNGN has joined
 851 2012-02-11 15:41:48 <UukGoblin> is there a list of chain IDs somewhere?
 852 2012-02-11 15:42:18 BLZNGPNGN has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 853 2012-02-11 15:42:48 plutonic_ has joined
 854 2012-02-11 15:44:12 plutonic has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
 855 2012-02-11 15:44:12 plutonic_ is now known as plutonic
 856 2012-02-11 15:46:47 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: laanwj opened pull request 826 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/826>
 857 2012-02-11 15:47:00 JRWR has joined
 858 2012-02-11 15:47:53 Ken` has joined
 859 2012-02-11 15:48:37 Clipse has joined
 860 2012-02-11 15:50:44 elektriks has joined
 861 2012-02-11 15:51:27 briggle has joined
 862 2012-02-11 15:51:44 briggle has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 863 2012-02-11 15:51:50 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: sipa opened pull request 827 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/827>
 864 2012-02-11 15:52:46 briggle has joined
 865 2012-02-11 15:53:21 JRWR has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 866 2012-02-11 15:53:58 briggle has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 867 2012-02-11 15:54:25 JRWR has joined
 868 2012-02-11 15:55:02 briggle has joined
 869 2012-02-11 15:55:14 briggle has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 870 2012-02-11 15:56:45 briggle has joined
 871 2012-02-11 15:58:14 <lianj> .
 872 2012-02-11 16:01:13 iocor has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
 873 2012-02-11 16:01:22 lianj has quit (Changing host)
 874 2012-02-11 16:01:22 lianj has joined
 875 2012-02-11 16:08:08 ThomasV has joined
 876 2012-02-11 16:12:05 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: sipa opened pull request 828 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/828>
 877 2012-02-11 16:14:50 cuqa has quit (Changing host)
 878 2012-02-11 16:14:50 cuqa has joined
 879 2012-02-11 16:19:47 <sipa> ;;later tell BlueMatt nevermind, fixed in pullreq 827; want to have a look at pullreq 828?
 880 2012-02-11 16:19:47 <gribble> The operation succeeded.
 881 2012-02-11 16:20:50 * sipa is on a pullreq spree
 882 2012-02-11 16:21:07 Ken` has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 883 2012-02-11 16:21:22 <lianj> headmerge!
 884 2012-02-11 16:22:02 Ken` has joined
 885 2012-02-11 16:26:19 b4epoche_ has joined
 886 2012-02-11 16:27:42 b4epoche has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
 887 2012-02-11 16:27:42 b4epoche_ is now known as b4epoche
 888 2012-02-11 16:28:59 paraipan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 889 2012-02-11 16:32:48 paraipan has joined
 890 2012-02-11 16:32:59 userggf has joined
 891 2012-02-11 16:33:17 jamescarr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 892 2012-02-11 16:42:16 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 893 2012-02-11 16:54:19 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 894 2012-02-11 16:55:14 cande has joined
 895 2012-02-11 16:56:04 molecular has joined
 896 2012-02-11 16:57:12 skeledrew has quit (Quit: Instantbird 1.2a1pre)
 897 2012-02-11 16:58:28 twmz_ has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
 898 2012-02-11 16:59:47 dissipate has joined
 899 2012-02-11 16:59:52 luke-jr has quit (Excess Flood)
 900 2012-02-11 17:00:13 luke-jr has joined
 901 2012-02-11 17:00:23 skeledrew has joined
 902 2012-02-11 17:01:10 JRWR has quit (Quit: BTC Welcome: 19QtYzmENUmqRhvjEvHsz785rqZ5RRcZG4)
 903 2012-02-11 17:03:00 ThomasV has joined
 904 2012-02-11 17:09:40 dissipate has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 905 2012-02-11 17:13:11 random_cat has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 906 2012-02-11 17:14:18 BurtyB has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 907 2012-02-11 17:14:29 random_cat has joined
 908 2012-02-11 17:20:59 bodom has joined
 909 2012-02-11 17:31:23 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 910 2012-02-11 17:32:11 <sipa> i'm surprised that ThreadCleanWalletPassphrase even worked at all... it calculated its number of seconds left to sleep as (GetTime() - nWalletUnlockTime) ...
 911 2012-02-11 17:32:27 ThomasV has joined
 912 2012-02-11 17:33:00 MrTiggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 913 2012-02-11 17:33:37 <sipa> while it should have been 1000*(nWalletUnlockTime - GetTime())
 914 2012-02-11 17:34:25 <sipa> *milliseconds
 915 2012-02-11 17:35:47 elektriks has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 916 2012-02-11 17:37:17 smickles is now known as idle!~michael@cpe-071-070-169-083.nc.res.rr.com|smickles
 917 2012-02-11 17:40:16 <userggf> hi, i was looking escrow transactions on blockchain.info
 918 2012-02-11 17:40:43 <userggf> i ask; is it possible instead of 2 of 3
 919 2012-02-11 17:41:02 <userggf> is possible something with percentage
 920 2012-02-11 17:41:59 BurtyB has joined
 921 2012-02-11 17:42:03 danbri has joined
 922 2012-02-11 17:42:07 <userggf> like 60% of all on a pre definied keys
 923 2012-02-11 17:44:10 Ken` has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 924 2012-02-11 17:44:40 Ken` has joined
 925 2012-02-11 17:44:41 <sipa> you could probably do something with up to 20 keys, and have some weight assigned to each
 926 2012-02-11 17:44:44 <Idiot___> userggf: i beleive their working on all even numbered keys or all pretty looking ones :P
 927 2012-02-11 17:44:49 <sipa> and a minimum required weight
 928 2012-02-11 17:45:09 <sipa> but those would be non-standard scripts
 929 2012-02-11 17:47:18 denisx has joined
 930 2012-02-11 17:48:19 <userggf> no one is working on escrow transactions on satoshi client?
 931 2012-02-11 17:48:56 <sipa> sure - 0.6 will be the first client with preliminary support for them
 932 2012-02-11 17:49:23 <userggf> on gui?
 933 2012-02-11 17:49:40 <userggf> any screenshot?
 934 2012-02-11 17:49:52 <sipa> no, no gui
 935 2012-02-11 17:50:26 elektriks has joined
 936 2012-02-11 17:50:31 aga has joined
 937 2012-02-11 17:50:33 <sipa> only making a few types standard (so they get relayed by the network), and an RPC call to create addresses corresponding to multisigs
 938 2012-02-11 17:50:35 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 939 2012-02-11 17:50:54 aga is now known as agath
 940 2012-02-11 17:51:18 <userggf> ok
 941 2012-02-11 17:52:26 agricocb has joined
 942 2012-02-11 17:54:31 erle- has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 943 2012-02-11 17:54:51 blackadder22 has joined
 944 2012-02-11 18:02:14 <luke-jr> userggf: be sure to get a BIP 17 enabled miner if you solo/p2pool mine
 945 2012-02-11 18:02:18 <luke-jr> to help enable it
 946 2012-02-11 18:02:21 BlueMatt has joined
 947 2012-02-11 18:03:28 <PK> when I request work from the bitcoin client and solve it. Which address will get the block? Is there any way to control that?
 948 2012-02-11 18:03:50 <luke-jr> PK: I have a pullreq that lets you control it, but mainline hasn't merged it yet
 949 2012-02-11 18:04:04 <luke-jr> PK: they claim not enough people need to control it
 950 2012-02-11 18:04:26 <luke-jr> if you want to voice your support, you can comment on https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/719
 951 2012-02-11 18:04:28 <PK> luke-jr: I'm fine with any address getting the block, really. I just like to know which one it is :)
 952 2012-02-11 18:04:35 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 953 2012-02-11 18:04:49 <luke-jr> I don't know any easy way to find that out
 954 2012-02-11 18:05:40 <sipa> the next unused pool address
 955 2012-02-11 18:05:49 <sipa> but there is no way to request that in advance
 956 2012-02-11 18:07:34 <PK> ok, so it makes a new address for a new block (at least new to me, the user since I don't see it in advance).
 957 2012-02-11 18:07:50 <sipa> indeed
 958 2012-02-11 18:07:58 zux00r is now known as zux0r
 959 2012-02-11 18:08:11 <Graet> crazy that eh, i can set an address in one bitcoind to generate to another, but not know the adress on the same bitcoind :)
 960 2012-02-11 18:09:29 <sipa> ?
 961 2012-02-11 18:09:40 <PK> I'd really like an easy way to get th private key out too. Maybe a QR picture so I can use my wallet on the bitcoin client and on the mobilephone. Any plans in that direction already?
 962 2012-02-11 18:10:21 <Graet> sipa, the pool is setup with mining nodes and a wallet to generate blocks to, the mining nodes dont ever see any coins
 963 2012-02-11 18:11:02 <PK> luke-jr: I could ask for a getwork request. That should show me the address, right?
 964 2012-02-11 18:11:31 <luke-jr> PK: no
 965 2012-02-11 18:11:55 <luke-jr> Graet: you can't set where you generate in bitcoind without coinbaser ;)
 966 2012-02-11 18:12:43 <Graet> yes, still surprising with all these very clever that we cant tell if we generate to same bitcoind...
 967 2012-02-11 18:12:55 <Graet> what the addy will be :)
 968 2012-02-11 18:15:40 CRichard has quit ()
 969 2012-02-11 18:16:18 <sipa> PK: 0.6.0 will have dumpprivkey RPC call
 970 2012-02-11 18:17:00 <PK> nice, but feels dangerous to allow that from remote :O
 971 2012-02-11 18:17:16 <PK> imho better have a privatekey import call. Much safer
 972 2012-02-11 18:17:27 <sipa> eh
 973 2012-02-11 18:17:31 <sipa> you can't compare those
 974 2012-02-11 18:17:37 <sipa> you need both an import and an export call
 975 2012-02-11 18:17:46 <sipa> one is useless without the other
 976 2012-02-11 18:18:09 <sipa> also, if you consider dumpprivkey unsafe, sendto is also unsafe...
 977 2012-02-11 18:18:10 <PK> not really. Only if you generate the other key with a bitcoind.
 978 2012-02-11 18:18:19 <PK> true
 979 2012-02-11 18:24:43 luke-jr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 980 2012-02-11 18:25:22 <userggf> the last post here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=40264.400
 981 2012-02-11 18:25:33 <userggf> is already possible?
 982 2012-02-11 18:26:26 <sipa> 100 keys is a lot... that means a transaction of at least 2-3 KiB
 983 2012-02-11 18:26:48 <sipa> the network supports it, but you'd need to find a miner that will accept such a non-standard transaction
 984 2012-02-11 18:27:09 <userggf> is this a problem?
 985 2012-02-11 18:28:48 <sipa> probably yes -- the network will not relay such a transaction for you, and you will certainly need a fee
 986 2012-02-11 18:29:03 <BlueMatt> likely a pretty big fee too
 987 2012-02-11 18:29:24 <userggf> hum, this is bad
 988 2012-02-11 18:29:41 <BlueMatt> why would you want to do such a huge tx anyway?
 989 2012-02-11 18:30:15 <userggf> i imagine the situation of:
 990 2012-02-11 18:30:53 <userggf> my english is bad, but i'll try to explaing
 991 2012-02-11 18:31:26 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 992 2012-02-11 18:31:33 <userggf> you know closed places where you livesnd pay a month fee
 993 2012-02-11 18:31:42 <userggf> live and
 994 2012-02-11 18:31:54 copumpkin has joined
 995 2012-02-11 18:32:08 <userggf> or that you don't live but have house on it
 996 2012-02-11 18:33:31 <userggf> many people pay and don't know where the money goes
 997 2012-02-11 18:33:58 <BlueMatt> sipa: so "while (GetTime() < nWalletUnlockTime) Sleep(GetTime() - nWalletUnlockTime);"  has a race condition?
 998 2012-02-11 18:34:02 <userggf> so who admin the close place condominium
 999 2012-02-11 18:34:20 <sipa> BlueMatt: you were checking nWalletUnlockTime outside of the CS
1000 2012-02-11 18:34:43 <userggf> should before by things or service, will need an aval first
1001 2012-02-11 18:34:58 <userggf> from who own houses on it
1002 2012-02-11 18:35:39 <userggf> before buy
1003 2012-02-11 18:37:05 <userggf> understand?
1004 2012-02-11 18:37:25 <sipa> yes
1005 2012-02-11 18:37:49 <userggf> make sense?
1006 2012-02-11 18:37:50 <sipa> that's a potential application for multisigs, but one that becomes hard for many keys
1007 2012-02-11 18:37:59 wind_chime has joined
1008 2012-02-11 18:38:20 <userggf> ok
1009 2012-02-11 18:38:30 smickles is now known as smickles|idle
1010 2012-02-11 18:38:40 smickles is now known as idle!~michael@cpe-071-070-169-083.nc.res.rr.com|smickles
1011 2012-02-11 18:38:42 <sipa> over time, such transactions will probably become possible, if there is demand for it
1012 2012-02-11 18:39:28 <userggf> good to know
1013 2012-02-11 18:39:33 wind_chime has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
1014 2012-02-11 18:40:07 <userggf> my freak was a answer like techinical impossible
1015 2012-02-11 18:40:57 <sipa> BlueMatt: the trick to doing such things is always do all calculation that is based on the shared variable inside a CS, but release the mutex right before sleeping
1016 2012-02-11 18:41:36 <sipa> otherwise the check may use one value, but the delay for sleeping use another
1017 2012-02-11 18:41:56 <BlueMatt> that wouldnt cause a problem though
1018 2012-02-11 18:42:27 <BlueMatt> even if you are setting nWalletUnlockTime at the worst possible clock, I still see little way for that to cause problems
1019 2012-02-11 18:42:59 <BlueMatt> s/little/no/
1020 2012-02-11 18:43:54 <BlueMatt> maybe on a 32-bit computer, if you set the upper 32-bits of nWalletUnlockTime before the sleep, and the lower after the sleep has been calculated, the sleep could go on for too long
1021 2012-02-11 18:44:40 <sipa> your initial check is outside a CS; the thread could think it is non-zero, but immediately afterwards it is set to zero by another thread
1022 2012-02-11 18:45:01 <sipa> that would mean it only increments nWalletUnlockTime, and exists
1023 2012-02-11 18:45:11 <sipa> *exits
1024 2012-02-11 18:45:19 <sipa> and the wallet would never get locked again
1025 2012-02-11 18:45:28 <sipa> i'm sure there are tons of such combinations possible
1026 2012-02-11 18:47:22 <BlueMatt> if its non-0 on the check and 0 on the sleep, the sleep will get called with a negative number, so it should just not do anything, and this thread will exit, no problem
1027 2012-02-11 18:47:50 <sipa> i'm not talking about the sleep
1028 2012-02-11 18:48:30 <sipa> i'm talking about the initial if (nWalletUnlockTime == 0) test on line 1542
1029 2012-02-11 18:48:37 <sipa> which happens outside a CS
1030 2012-02-11 18:48:55 luke-jr has joined
1031 2012-02-11 18:49:03 <sipa> which means another thread could simultaneously be setting it to zero
1032 2012-02-11 18:50:07 <BlueMatt> I dont think that can happen, as the wallet would have to have been unlocked, then set to zero while still being unlocked, then locked.  and ThreadCleanWalletPassphrase wont be started if the wallet is already unlocked
1033 2012-02-11 18:50:09 <sipa> so you end up in the else branch, thinking that an another thread will do the actual wait-until-time-passed, but that other thread is exiting
1034 2012-02-11 18:50:25 <sipa> see walletlock()
1035 2012-02-11 18:50:33 <sipa> that sets nWalletUnlockTime to 0
1036 2012-02-11 18:50:46 <BlueMatt> oh, that sets it after lock...
1037 2012-02-11 18:51:02 <BlueMatt> meh, ok
1038 2012-02-11 18:51:25 <sipa> there may or may not be other potential issues, but the code now is absolutely thread-safe :)
1039 2012-02-11 18:52:04 <BlueMatt> fair enough, though maybe replace the cs....Enter(...__FILE__, __LINE__) with a define somewhere?
1040 2012-02-11 18:52:17 <BlueMatt> make it look a bit cleaner?
1041 2012-02-11 18:52:22 <BlueMatt> ;)
1042 2012-02-11 18:52:23 <sipa> maybe, it's also used in net.h in BeginMessage() afaik
1043 2012-02-11 18:57:11 smickles is now known as smickles|idle
1044 2012-02-11 18:59:04 <luke-jr> http://paste.pocoo.org/show/549398/
1045 2012-02-11 19:01:02 paraipan has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1046 2012-02-11 19:01:51 paraipan has joined
1047 2012-02-11 19:01:51 paraipan has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1048 2012-02-11 19:12:18 smickles is now known as idle!~michael@cpe-071-070-169-083.nc.res.rr.com|smickles
1049 2012-02-11 19:13:35 <userggf> sipa, see the piuk answer: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=40264.msg743209;topicseen#msg743209
1050 2012-02-11 19:14:46 <sipa> userggf: he is right - it is not practically feasible right now, but the internal protocol allows it
1051 2012-02-11 19:14:47 paraipan has joined
1052 2012-02-11 19:15:05 <userggf> right
1053 2012-02-11 19:15:47 <sipa> BlueMatt: better now?
1054 2012-02-11 19:15:57 bodom has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1055 2012-02-11 19:19:01 <BlueMatt> sipa: looks nice, whats the reason for the do {} while(0);?
1056 2012-02-11 19:20:07 <sipa> BlueMatt: that's the only way to write a macro that always behaves like a function call, even in combination with nested if-then-elses
1057 2012-02-11 19:20:29 <BlueMatt> hmm, odd anyway, looks good
1058 2012-02-11 19:20:54 <sipa> it's something you often see inside system headers
1059 2012-02-11 19:21:23 <BlueMatt> hmm, fun
1060 2012-02-11 19:22:42 <cjd> should be a -Wunbracketed-ifs
1061 2012-02-11 19:25:16 <denisx> can someone pls add netinet.h and sys/socket.h to protocol.cpp
1062 2012-02-11 19:25:21 booo has joined
1063 2012-02-11 19:25:22 <denisx> this is needed on freebsd to build
1064 2012-02-11 19:26:03 <sipa> denisx: can you submit a pull request?
1065 2012-02-11 19:26:09 <luke-jr> sipa: is there a reason to use a macro instead of an inline?
1066 2012-02-11 19:26:36 <sipa> luke-jr: for ENTER_CRITICAL_SECTION? yes, to make __FILE__ and __LINE__ work
1067 2012-02-11 19:26:42 <luke-jr> i c
1068 2012-02-11 19:27:37 Idiot___ has quit ()
1069 2012-02-11 19:27:46 josephcp_ has quit (Quit: Reconnecting)
1070 2012-02-11 19:27:59 josephcp has joined
1071 2012-02-11 19:28:01 paul0 has joined
1072 2012-02-11 19:28:18 Stupid____ has joined
1073 2012-02-11 19:34:21 BlueMatt_ has joined
1074 2012-02-11 19:38:03 BlueMatt has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1075 2012-02-11 19:38:35 BlueMatt_ is now known as BlueMatt
1076 2012-02-11 19:41:50 chmod755 has left ("Leaving.")
1077 2012-02-11 19:45:25 minimoose has joined
1078 2012-02-11 19:46:22 Lolcust has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1079 2012-02-11 19:47:25 Lolcust has joined
1080 2012-02-11 19:47:50 <gmaxwell> sipa: I couldn't figure out if using height was more cool because of orphan filtering, or if using the hash of the inputs to the inputs of the transactions in the prev block (to prevent people from mining who didn't really validate the prior block) was.
1081 2012-02-11 19:48:29 BLZNGPNGN has quit (2!~kvirc@S0106602ad0726c1f.vf.shawcable.net|Quit: ~qq)
1082 2012-02-11 19:48:46 BLZNGPNGN has joined
1083 2012-02-11 20:01:03 ThomasV has joined
1084 2012-02-11 20:01:34 pusle has joined
1085 2012-02-11 20:02:25 pingdrive has joined
1086 2012-02-11 20:08:51 zeiris has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1087 2012-02-11 20:09:06 Lolcust has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1088 2012-02-11 20:09:25 Lolcust has joined
1089 2012-02-11 20:18:02  has quit (Clown|!Clown@static-87-79-93-140.netcologne.de|Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1090 2012-02-11 20:19:34 darkskiez has joined
1091 2012-02-11 20:20:44 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1092 2012-02-11 20:21:14 savage_ has joined
1093 2012-02-11 20:21:44 Cablesaurus has quit (Quit: Some folks are wise, and some otherwise.)
1094 2012-02-11 20:36:41 darkskiez has quit (Quit: Client exiting)
1095 2012-02-11 20:38:50 b4epoche_ has joined
1096 2012-02-11 20:39:58 darkskiez has joined
1097 2012-02-11 20:40:03 b4epoche has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1098 2012-02-11 20:40:03 b4epoche_ is now known as b4epoche
1099 2012-02-11 20:46:55 Cablesaurus has joined
1100 2012-02-11 20:46:55 Cablesaurus has quit (Changing host)
1101 2012-02-11 20:46:55 Cablesaurus has joined
1102 2012-02-11 20:48:15 Keefe_ is now known as Keefe
1103 2012-02-11 20:48:45 Keefe is now known as Guest17867
1104 2012-02-11 20:59:11 khalahan has quit (Quit: Bye)
1105 2012-02-11 21:02:06 iocor has joined
1106 2012-02-11 21:04:04 copumpkin is now known as ABS
1107 2012-02-11 21:04:11 khalahan has joined
1108 2012-02-11 21:04:12 ABS is now known as copumpkin
1109 2012-02-11 21:11:11 khalahan has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1110 2012-02-11 21:16:25 cryptoxchange has joined
1111 2012-02-11 21:16:25 cryptoxchange has quit (Changing host)
1112 2012-02-11 21:16:25 cryptoxchange has joined
1113 2012-02-11 21:29:03 jondoe has joined
1114 2012-02-11 21:34:50 TD has joined
1115 2012-02-11 21:37:12 forever-d has joined
1116 2012-02-11 21:38:00 pusle has quit ()
1117 2012-02-11 21:42:11 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1118 2012-02-11 21:47:09 Hunterbunter has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1119 2012-02-11 21:48:57 Joric has joined
1120 2012-02-11 21:48:57 Joric has quit (Changing host)
1121 2012-02-11 21:48:57 Joric has joined
1122 2012-02-11 21:51:03 <Stupid____> phantomcircuit you banned me from #bitcoin ?
1123 2012-02-11 21:51:20 <phantomcircuit> yes your appeal can be filed in /dev/null
1124 2012-02-11 21:51:24 <phantomcircuit> very good compression
1125 2012-02-11 21:51:30 <Stupid____> thats not fair
1126 2012-02-11 21:51:32 <Stupid____> i wasnt the only one
1127 2012-02-11 21:51:35 <Stupid____> i didnt even start it
1128 2012-02-11 21:52:55 <Stupid____> please unban me
1129 2012-02-11 21:54:17 <Stupid____> phantomcircuit>
1130 2012-02-11 21:54:18 <Stupid____> ?
1131 2012-02-11 21:54:35 <phantomcircuit> no you've been warned by multiple ops over multiple days to stop
1132 2012-02-11 21:54:47 <Stupid____> ill stop i swear
1133 2012-02-11 21:54:57 <Stupid____> your the only one who warned me
1134 2012-02-11 21:55:00 <luke-jr> lol
1135 2012-02-11 21:55:08 <luke-jr> Stupid____: get a life
1136 2012-02-11 21:55:24 <Stupid____> :(
1137 2012-02-11 21:55:37 <Stupid____> thats it, im selling all my bitcoins
1138 2012-02-11 21:55:47 <luke-jr> all 2?
1139 2012-02-11 21:55:51 <phantomcircuit> i saw gmaxwell kick you several times yesterday
1140 2012-02-11 21:56:05 <Stupid____> he was just playing phantomcircuit
1141 2012-02-11 21:56:10 <Stupid____> its a little thing we have going ;)
1142 2012-02-11 21:56:39 <BlueMatt> if you feel like appealing a ban, please do it in pm
1143 2012-02-11 21:57:12 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: phantomcircuit already said /dev/null
1144 2012-02-11 21:57:23 <BlueMatt> oh, sorry appeal there then
1145 2012-02-11 21:57:28 <Stupid____> its not responding
1146 2012-02-11 21:58:30 <phantomcircuit>  /ignore Stupid_*!*@* ALL
1147 2012-02-11 21:58:41 <Stupid____> phantom your being unreasonable
1148 2012-02-11 21:59:00 <Stupid____> whos in charge of the irc channels?
1149 2012-02-11 21:59:30 <BlueMatt> phantomcircuit
1150 2012-02-11 21:59:36 <Stupid____> thats BS
1151 2012-02-11 21:59:45 <BlueMatt> shame
1152 2012-02-11 21:59:55 <Stupid____> oh well, i guess i can keep you guys company
1153 2012-02-11 22:00:29 <savage_> if you are careful...
1154 2012-02-11 22:00:31 * savage_ waves with jurisprudence
1155 2012-02-11 22:00:37 <phantomcircuit> i have no interest in arguing about something im not going to change
1156 2012-02-11 22:00:48 <phantomcircuit> he's been warned ALOT to stop and refuses
1157 2012-02-11 22:00:50 <Stupid____> phantomcircuit, you banned me without any warning whatsoever
1158 2012-02-11 22:00:52 <Stupid____> im just asking for a second chance
1159 2012-02-11 22:01:10 <Stupid____> you banned me and not any one else too
1160 2012-02-11 22:01:12 <phantomcircuit> if he can find at least one other person to make a case i'll listen
1161 2012-02-11 22:01:25 <Stupid____> gmaxwell, can you help me out please?!
1162 2012-02-11 22:04:46 <Stupid____> u kno what... im gonna mess up the blockchain
1163 2012-02-11 22:04:48 <Stupid____> first chance i get :)
1164 2012-02-11 22:05:51 <sipa> what has he done, except being stupid?
1165 2012-02-11 22:05:56 <pingdrive> master troll my ass
1166 2012-02-11 22:05:58 <Stupid____> sipa, i did nothing
1167 2012-02-11 22:06:09 <Stupid____> other people were trolling
1168 2012-02-11 22:06:11 <Stupid____> i made a few jokes
1169 2012-02-11 22:06:15 <Stupid____> and i was banned
1170 2012-02-11 22:06:33 <gmaxwell> #bitcoin has been idiotic all day, I haven't been looking at it.
1171 2012-02-11 22:06:45 <Stupid____> hey gmaxwell your here : )
1172 2012-02-11 22:06:48 <gmaxwell> "Stupid____> u kno what... im gonna mess up the blockchain" < not making a good case for you.
1173 2012-02-11 22:06:51 <sipa> is it sometimes non-idiotic there?
1174 2012-02-11 22:06:59 <gmaxwell> sipa: there are degrees.
1175 2012-02-11 22:07:03 <Stupid____> ok i take that back, i was angry
1176 2012-02-11 22:07:10 <Stupid____> did you get my pm gmaxwell?
1177 2012-02-11 22:07:23 <Joric> phantomcircuit what have you done
1178 2012-02-11 22:07:38 <BlueMatt> can you guys move to #bitcoin-meta or smth? I hate having any disk io (even irc log writing) while benchmarking cblockstore on disk
1179 2012-02-11 22:07:52 <sipa> haha
1180 2012-02-11 22:07:58 * Stupid____ sighs
1181 2012-02-11 22:08:34 <pingdrive> the channel that noone ever visits
1182 2012-02-11 22:08:52 <pingdrive> i guess you are fucked Stupid____
1183 2012-02-11 22:09:07 * Stupid____ sighs more... at pingdrive
1184 2012-02-11 22:09:36 <pingdrive> what dude i did what i could, i have no clout myself
1185 2012-02-11 22:09:41 <pingdrive> i said you were legit
1186 2012-02-11 22:10:25 <Stupid____> i am
1187 2012-02-11 22:10:30 <pingdrive> phantomcircuit run the show so its up to him
1188 2012-02-11 22:10:38 <Stupid____> thats not fair
1189 2012-02-11 22:11:00 <Stupid____> gmaxwell u get my pm?
1190 2012-02-11 22:11:05 <phantomcircuit> Stupid____, you'll be unbanned like tomorrow ish
1191 2012-02-11 22:11:10 <pingdrive> he told you find more supporters, do it, he is giving you a chance
1192 2012-02-11 22:11:33 <userggf> from all pools, what is the % being mined by p2p pool?
1193 2012-02-11 22:11:36 <Stupid____> phantomcircuit: could you unban me a little sooner-ish?
1194 2012-02-11 22:11:49 <sipa> ;;bc,p2pool
1195 2012-02-11 22:11:50 <gribble> 220629019.584
1196 2012-02-11 22:12:04 <Stupid____> phantomcircuit: if i promise to behave
1197 2012-02-11 22:12:19 <PK> Stupid____: it's all about timezones. in the UK it's only 2 hours until tomorrow.
1198 2012-02-11 22:12:20 ovidiusoft has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
1199 2012-02-11 22:12:26 <pingdrive> will you join his troll army?
1200 2012-02-11 22:12:28 <gmaxwell> userggf: not much, p2pool only recently started growing a lot.
1201 2012-02-11 22:12:38 <sipa> ;;calc 100*[bc,p2pool]/([bc,nethash]*1000000)
1202 2012-02-11 22:12:41 <gribble> 2.26636331025
1203 2012-02-11 22:12:47 <sipa> 2.266% :)
1204 2012-02-11 22:12:48 <Stupid____> i guess PK,
1205 2012-02-11 22:12:51 <BlueMatt> Stupid____: seriously, shut up no one cares, deal with this in pm or something less intrusive
1206 2012-02-11 22:12:59 <Stupid____> ok
1207 2012-02-11 22:13:07 <Stupid____> :(
1208 2012-02-11 22:13:11 <userggf> 2,26%?
1209 2012-02-11 22:13:22 <BlueMatt> shame, p2pool needs to grow
1210 2012-02-11 22:13:30 <sipa> it's growing nicely
1211 2012-02-11 22:13:36 <gmaxwell> It's been growing very quicky.
1212 2012-02-11 22:13:41 * BlueMatt would like to see it at 50 tomorrow
1213 2012-02-11 22:14:00 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: http://u.forre.st/p2pool/320.png
1214 2012-02-11 22:14:09 <Stupid____> sipa: whats that complicated formula for?
1215 2012-02-11 22:14:18 <userggf> why p2pool doesn't appear here http://blockchain.info/pools
1216 2012-02-11 22:14:27 <pingdrive> so what is the whole deal in the animosity between p2pool and deepbit?
1217 2012-02-11 22:14:35 <forrestv> userggf, i see it on the left
1218 2012-02-11 22:14:47 <gmaxwell> userggf: the figures on blockchain.info are largely junk, fwiw.
1219 2012-02-11 22:14:49 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: nice, but again my expectation is that it gets to 50% tomorrow, so thats still a bit slow...
1220 2012-02-11 22:14:59 <gmaxwell> pingdrive: huh?
1221 2012-02-11 22:15:02 * Stupid____ is confused
1222 2012-02-11 22:15:07 <Stupid____> what gets to 50%?
1223 2012-02-11 22:15:24 <gmaxwell> Stupid____: go read the conversation that you've been interupting.
1224 2012-02-11 22:15:36 <pingdrive> gmaxwell, i got an impression from the forums that p2pool is against deepbit
1225 2012-02-11 22:16:02 <Stupid____> oic
1226 2012-02-11 22:16:06 <BlueMatt> the whole point of p2pool is to move bitcoin mining off such high pool-dependency
1227 2012-02-11 22:16:17 <BlueMatt> which kinda kills deepbit's business model...
1228 2012-02-11 22:16:21 * Stupid____ starts mining on deepbit just to annoy you all
1229 2012-02-11 22:16:49 <Stupid____> not really BlueMatt
1230 2012-02-11 22:17:08 Stupid____ has joined
1231 2012-02-11 22:17:15 <userggf> now i see p2pool on the graphic
1232 2012-02-11 22:17:20 <marf_away> hello! how can i manipulate the data in my coinbase?
1233 2012-02-11 22:17:30 <gmaxwell> pingdrive: I have no clue what you're talking about. But, of course, p2pool users advocate p2pool over centeralized pools.
1234 2012-02-11 22:17:37 <marf_away> so i can write stuff inside like satoshi did
1235 2012-02-11 22:17:47 <pingdrive> i gotta find it
1236 2012-02-11 22:17:58 <pingdrive> there were som anti deepbit ads running
1237 2012-02-11 22:18:22 <Stupid____> hey... i was just thinking
1238 2012-02-11 22:18:25 <gmaxwell> marf_away: make a one line patch to current bitcoind. Look for COINBASE_FLAGS in the source.
1239 2012-02-11 22:18:28 <pingdrive> i am prolly misinterpreting something
1240 2012-02-11 22:18:30 <Stupid____> has anyone thought of writing a decentralised email server?
1241 2012-02-11 22:18:40 <BlueMatt> ...
1242 2012-02-11 22:18:48 <pingdrive> yeh i2p
1243 2012-02-11 22:18:59 <gmaxwell> pingdrive: there is one or two people on the forum with some deepbit = evil signature, but I don't see how that has anything to do with p2pool.
1244 2012-02-11 22:19:15 <pingdrive> oh yeh that
1245 2012-02-11 22:19:17 <Stupid____> i2p has email?
1246 2012-02-11 22:19:34 <pingdrive> Stupid____, yes i never used it tho
1247 2012-02-11 22:20:33 <pingdrive> i think the same person who is advocating p2pool is saying deepbit is evil
1248 2012-02-11 22:20:52 <pingdrive> i thought the was some conflict, i guess there isnt
1249 2012-02-11 22:20:53 <pingdrive> nvm
1250 2012-02-11 22:20:58 <Stupid____> i donno whats wrong with deepbit, i advocate it to everyone
1251 2012-02-11 22:21:09 <luke-jr> Stupid____: advocate Eligius instead
1252 2012-02-11 22:21:19 <Stupid____> i might if i get unbanned luke-jr
1253 2012-02-11 22:21:23 <pingdrive> deepbit = evil is a pretty strong slogan
1254 2012-02-11 22:21:25 <PK> Stupid____: I was thinking about writing a decentralised forum. Each post signed and unalterable, undeleable. True freedom of speech.
1255 2012-02-11 22:21:45 <luke-jr> pingdrive: a number of months ago, deepbit had a 50% hold on Bitcoin, which they could have abused
1256 2012-02-11 22:21:53 <luke-jr> pingdrive: they stopped advertising on Google, and are only like 1/3 now
1257 2012-02-11 22:21:54 <Stupid____> hasnt that been done before PK?
1258 2012-02-11 22:21:54 <PK> and advocate btcserv, they can need all the support they can get after getting hacked.
1259 2012-02-11 22:21:57 <marf_away> thx gmaxwell
1260 2012-02-11 22:22:03 <BlueMatt> pingdrive: deepbit may not be, but to many the idea of bitcoin being centralized is to many people
1261 2012-02-11 22:22:14 <BlueMatt> and the heavy centralization of mining is, to many people, evil
1262 2012-02-11 22:22:49 <PK> Stupid____: not afaik. But please provide me a URL to such a project. It would be typical for me if my great ideas got implemented already. :) I'm jinxed like that.
1263 2012-02-11 22:22:51 <pingdrive> okay, assumingly that all the miners have unified agenda
1264 2012-02-11 22:22:58 cande has quit (Quit: Lämnar)
1265 2012-02-11 22:22:58 <pingdrive> miners of Deepbit
1266 2012-02-11 22:23:08 <Stupid____> i thought there were a few on tor
1267 2012-02-11 22:23:13 <gmaxwell> deepbit producing 27% of the recent transactions and the smartass "trying to promote lite clients" justification for contiuing to do that and not use sendmany is a little evil.
1268 2012-02-11 22:23:15 <Stupid____> but my knowledge on that is a bit flaky
1269 2012-02-11 22:23:26 <PK> Stupid____: decentralized forums on tor?
1270 2012-02-11 22:23:34 paraipan_ has joined
1271 2012-02-11 22:23:37 <Stupid____> one of the darknets
1272 2012-02-11 22:23:44 <Stupid____> might not be tor
1273 2012-02-11 22:23:58 paraipan_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1274 2012-02-11 22:24:36 paraipan_ has joined
1275 2012-02-11 22:24:42 <pingdrive> kay got it, somebody is promoting p2pool by saying deepbit is evil
1276 2012-02-11 22:25:32 <gmaxwell> pingdrive: can you point me to who is doing that, and I'll tell them to generalize their complaint a bit.
1277 2012-02-11 22:25:48 <Stupid____> i think they are more concerned at deepbit getting 51% of the hashing power
1278 2012-02-11 22:25:59 <Stupid____> since p2pool cant exploit that, its thought to be better
1279 2012-02-11 22:26:10 <Stupid____> personaly, i hope deepbit gets as much hashing power as they can
1280 2012-02-11 22:26:30 paraipan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1281 2012-02-11 22:26:31 <cjd> in p2pools defense, they are unique in that no one entity has ultimate power over what the blocks will look like
1282 2012-02-11 22:26:38 <gmaxwell> deepbit has _has_ a majority of hash power, and [tycho] didn't give a shit until people DDOSed him off the air. :-/
1283 2012-02-11 22:27:14 smickles is now known as smickles|idle
1284 2012-02-11 22:27:15 <gmaxwell> cjd: whats to defend— p2pool can't control if someone who promotes it uses a weaksauce argument, though I did just offer to tell them to tone it down.
1285 2012-02-11 22:27:27 <pingdrive> gmaxwell, umm i need to look, i am just going of that signature, its owner is the one who is driving the agenda
1286 2012-02-11 22:27:28 <gmaxwell> damnit. _has had_
1287 2012-02-11 22:27:41 <gmaxwell> pingdrive: there is no p2pool "owner"
1288 2012-02-11 22:27:48 <cjd> /nod
1289 2012-02-11 22:27:50 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
1290 2012-02-11 22:27:51 <pingdrive> gmaxwell, jsut wanted to see what is the current state of affair and not really do the work
1291 2012-02-11 22:28:05 <sipa> Stupid____: what kind of reasoning is that? because p2pool cannot exploit a supermajority, you prefer that one who does gets as much hashrate as possible?
1292 2012-02-11 22:28:13 <pingdrive> gmaxwell, okay i guess i dont undestand how it works
1293 2012-02-11 22:28:28 <forrestv> pingdrive, i'm the closest thing to the owner, and i've never said that :P
1294 2012-02-11 22:28:40 <gmaxwell> pingdrive: forest's (the orignal and primary developer of p2pool) signature just has a donation address.
1295 2012-02-11 22:28:47 <PK> there may not be an owner of p2pool, but certainly some main/core developers that could be seen as owners.
1296 2012-02-11 22:29:20 <pingdrive> ^ PK
1297 2012-02-11 22:29:24 <gmaxwell> PK: forrestv is pretty much the only substantial developer. And he's said no such thing.
1298 2012-02-11 22:29:36 <pingdrive> if p2pool is so great how come all the miners arent mining on it
1299 2012-02-11 22:29:39 <PK> he is? didn't know that
1300 2012-02-11 22:29:49 * Stupid____ swears at forrestv
1301 2012-02-11 22:29:55 <pingdrive> it is easy i just got to look up who has the signature
1302 2012-02-11 22:30:04 <forrestv> pingdrive, because people make stupid arguments against it like "why isn't everyone using it?"
1303 2012-02-11 22:30:08 <gmaxwell> pingdrive: because its relatively new. It only reached 'full' maturity (mining transactions and such) a couple months ago.
1304 2012-02-11 22:30:09 <PK> pingdrive: afaik, I was told that p2pool has a fee that goes directly to the main developer. Sort of a donation. Which would be you then?
1305 2012-02-11 22:30:13 <gmaxwell> and that.
1306 2012-02-11 22:30:25 <gmaxwell> PK: It has a fee like cgminer has a fee.
1307 2012-02-11 22:30:36 <PK> an optional one you can turn off?
1308 2012-02-11 22:30:39 * cjd grumbles some people will never get that it's impossible for p2pool to 51% attack the chain
1309 2012-02-11 22:30:40 <gmaxwell> (you can optionally donate)
1310 2012-02-11 22:30:40 <pingdrive> PK, i dont own anything
1311 2012-02-11 22:30:40 <forrestv> yes
1312 2012-02-11 22:30:42 <gmaxwell> pingdrive: yes.
1313 2012-02-11 22:30:54 <gmaxwell> er PK
1314 2012-02-11 22:31:27 <PK> well, that little detail was left out last time someone in this channel told me about p2pool ^^
1315 2012-02-11 22:31:29 <BlueMatt> forrestv: does it handle fee distribution fairly, or are they donated?
1316 2012-02-11 22:31:36 <gmaxwell> 14:20 < pingdrive> gmaxwell, jsut wanted to see what is the current state of affair and not really do the work
1317 2012-02-11 22:31:44 <gmaxwell> ^ you just wanted to spread FUD and not back it up? :-/
1318 2012-02-11 22:31:48 <BlueMatt> PK: I believe it used to be non-optional
1319 2012-02-11 22:31:55 <pingdrive> forrestv, how what you said makes sense?
1320 2012-02-11 22:31:56 smickles is now known as idle!~michael@cpe-071-070-169-083.nc.res.rr.com|smickles
1321 2012-02-11 22:32:04 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: distributed just like the subsidy.
1322 2012-02-11 22:32:10 <BlueMatt> nice
1323 2012-02-11 22:32:28 <pingdrive> well, considering my current bandwidth, running a browser is not one of my options ATM
1324 2012-02-11 22:32:54 <Stupid____> pingdrive: you cant even run a browser? what kinda connection do you have?
1325 2012-02-11 22:32:57 <pingdrive> so it does seem like i am spreading FUD (whatsever that means)
1326 2012-02-11 22:33:00 <forrestv> pingdrive, half joking, but people ask that question a lot ("why isn't everyone using it?"), so it becomes a bit of a self-fulfilling question
1327 2012-02-11 22:33:22 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: I saw a 22 btc fee in my memory pool the other day, I was sad p2pool didn't get the next block. :)
1328 2012-02-11 22:33:48 <BlueMatt> 22 btc fee being freely distributed? wow...
1329 2012-02-11 22:33:57 Joric has quit ()
1330 2012-02-11 22:34:00 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: do you p2pool mine?
1331 2012-02-11 22:34:03 <gmaxwell> There is even a user on the form who's posts have almost 100% been spreading fud about p2pool. Pretty interesting.
1332 2012-02-11 22:34:08 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: yes.
1333 2012-02-11 22:34:14 <BlueMatt> nice
1334 2012-02-11 22:34:26 <Stupid____> really gmaxwell?
1335 2012-02-11 22:34:31 <Stupid____> im gonna have to study up on his posts
1336 2012-02-11 22:34:51 <pingdrive> Stupid____, lol
1337 2012-02-11 22:34:52 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: I like to brag that I was the start of the big p2pool hashrate upswing. :)
1338 2012-02-11 22:34:57 <pingdrive> Stupid____, you're a fucking troll
1339 2012-02-11 22:35:08 <Stupid____> im not a troll
1340 2012-02-11 22:35:10 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: heh, well congrats
1341 2012-02-11 22:35:15 <BlueMatt> Stupid____: yes you are
1342 2012-02-11 22:35:24 <Stupid____> why am i a troll?
1343 2012-02-11 22:35:33 <cjd> 22btc fee sounds like a mistake, or someone's using it for some "proof of loss" scheme
1344 2012-02-11 22:35:42 <gmaxwell> cjd: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=61984.0
1345 2012-02-11 22:35:48 <pingdrive> Stupid____, how is you studying some stupid ass posts relevant?
1346 2012-02-11 22:36:04 <Stupid____> well, to try and stop people using p2p
1347 2012-02-11 22:36:07 <Stupid____> p2pool
1348 2012-02-11 22:36:08 <Stupid____> rather
1349 2012-02-11 22:36:18 <pingdrive> and why would you wnat to do that?
1350 2012-02-11 22:36:24 <PK> Stupid____: why would you want to stop people from using p2pool?
1351 2012-02-11 22:36:29 <PK> or what pingdrive said
1352 2012-02-11 22:36:54 <Stupid____> because eventually one of the larger pools will win out and their greed will allow them use 51% attacks to mess up the blockchain
1353 2012-02-11 22:37:07 <PK> and that's why makes you a troll I guess.
1354 2012-02-11 22:37:12 <pingdrive> gmaxwell is making an observatiopn he is not instructing you do shit
1355 2012-02-11 22:37:27 <pingdrive> if you are ready for action join the marines
1356 2012-02-11 22:38:15 <pingdrive> from what i am hearing p2pool does not threaten anyone with 51% stake in bitcoin
1357 2012-02-11 22:38:36 <cjd> that is weird
1358 2012-02-11 22:38:37 <Stupid____> pk, im no troll, i have my reasons
1359 2012-02-11 22:38:46 <BlueMatt> the ability of miners using p2pool to 51%-attack is equivalent to each individual miner's ability to do so
1360 2012-02-11 22:39:25 <cjd> what's probably the most weird about that transaction is just how "normal" it is, asside from the massive fee
1361 2012-02-11 22:39:28 <gmaxwell> Stupid____: As far as I can tell, you're taking a contrived position purely for the purpose of getting people to argue with you.
1362 2012-02-11 22:39:41 <BlueMatt> aka a troll
1363 2012-02-11 22:39:58 <etotheipi_> so then... if 100% of computing power was using P2Pool, we'd be back at regular Bitcoin network, but with all rewards distributed proportionally instead of like a lottery
1364 2012-02-11 22:40:11 <BlueMatt> etotheipi_: pretty much
1365 2012-02-11 22:40:21 <etotheipi_> what's the downside?
1366 2012-02-11 22:40:25 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: well, p2pool shares are a lottery too, but a much more frequent one with more stable pay.
1367 2012-02-11 22:40:26 <Stupid____> etotheipi_: what about the exchanges? their another point of centralisation?
1368 2012-02-11 22:40:36 <pingdrive> forrestv gets the fee
1369 2012-02-11 22:40:38 <pingdrive> thats the dowside
1370 2012-02-11 22:40:45 <BlueMatt> pingdrive: not true
1371 2012-02-11 22:41:00 <forrestv> pingdrive, it's an optional donation as of months ago
1372 2012-02-11 22:41:21 <BlueMatt> etotheipi_: p2pool may not be be able to scale to quite the size of bitcoin's total mining power, but if that were fixed up a bit with some rule changes, there isnt much of one from a whoelistic pov
1373 2012-02-11 22:41:25 <pingdrive> so no fees?
1374 2012-02-11 22:41:32 <BlueMatt> s/whoelistic/wholeisit/
1375 2012-02-11 22:41:34 <BlueMatt> s/whoelistic/wholeisitc/
1376 2012-02-11 22:41:38 <BlueMatt> whatever
1377 2012-02-11 22:41:40 <etotheipi_> lol
1378 2012-02-11 22:41:40 <gmaxwell> pingdrive: this was answered to you several minutes ago.
1379 2012-02-11 22:41:50 <BlueMatt> pingdrive: no, fees are distributed like the regular 50BTC
1380 2012-02-11 22:42:09 <Stupid____> gmaxwell: btw just because i like to debate (or argue) with people doesnt mean i should get banned
1381 2012-02-11 22:42:15 <pingdrive> can i mine behind tor?
1382 2012-02-11 22:42:19 <Stupid____> not does it mean im a troll
1383 2012-02-11 22:42:24 <Stupid____> not=nor
1384 2012-02-11 22:42:39 <gmaxwell> pingdrive: yes, though you may expirence higher stale rates due to tor latency.
1385 2012-02-11 22:42:53 <marf_away> i imagine verry high stale rates
1386 2012-02-11 22:43:00 <pingdrive> pingdrive, i am doing fin enow, 1% stale
1387 2012-02-11 22:43:00 datagutt has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
1388 2012-02-11 22:43:05 <gmaxwell> marf_away: tor latency can be pretty good, it differs.
1389 2012-02-11 22:43:17 <marf_away> nice to know
1390 2012-02-11 22:43:19 <marf_away> :)
1391 2012-02-11 22:43:24 jondoe has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1392 2012-02-11 22:43:41 <gmaxwell> marf_away: if you wanted you could constrain your circuit path to lower latency nodes.. compromising your anonymity some but improving latency.
1393 2012-02-11 22:44:20 <pingdrive> 1.58311346 to be exact, 90 rejected shares out of 5685
1394 2012-02-11 22:44:23 plutonic has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1395 2012-02-11 22:44:29 <marf_away> kk
1396 2012-02-11 22:44:32 <pingdrive> i think its a pretty damn good compromise
1397 2012-02-11 22:44:40 plutonic has joined
1398 2012-02-11 22:45:08 <Stupid____> how does p2pool work exactly? i heard it has its own blockchain?
1399 2012-02-11 22:45:18 <Stupid____> are there any weaknesses in it?
1400 2012-02-11 22:45:23 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: ok, so Im about as confused as can be with this whole cblockstore performance thing.  Im doing some tests of downloading ~600 blocks at a time and it appears to have a "small but measurable increase in performance"
1401 2012-02-11 22:45:35 <BlueMatt> whereas all the very long tests appear to have the opposite
1402 2012-02-11 22:45:38 <gmaxwell> Stupid____: it works like bitcoin works. tada.
1403 2012-02-11 22:45:54 <Stupid____> is it like a version of bitcoin with the block generation speeded up?
1404 2012-02-11 22:46:02 <gmaxwell> Stupid____: no, it's not a currency.
1405 2012-02-11 22:46:17 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: (Ive only ever done long tests on tmpfs->tmpfs, which may be a factor...)
1406 2012-02-11 22:46:56 <gmaxwell> Stupid____: it's pretty straight forward. You attempt to mine bitcoin, if your attempts have hash values low enough they are shares. There is a chain of shares. P2pool nodes perform their payout according to the last N shares in the p2pool share chain.
1407 2012-02-11 22:47:11 <cjd> if the vast majority of hashing happened in p2pools, it would be nice since you could get weak/early confirmation on transactions just by listening for them in the pool.
1408 2012-02-11 22:47:19 <gmaxwell> (N is 24 hours worth of 3*PPLNS, whichever is shorter)
1409 2012-02-11 22:47:20 <Stupid____> what are shares?
1410 2012-02-11 22:47:33 <gmaxwell> Stupid____: attempted bitcoin solutions.
1411 2012-02-11 22:47:37 <Stupid____> oh
1412 2012-02-11 22:47:45 <sipa> Stupid____: http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/1505/what-is-a-share-can-i-find-it-while-mining-solo-or-only-when-pool-mining
1413 2012-02-11 22:48:16 <Stupid____> oh
1414 2012-02-11 22:48:53 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: you said you did a bit of cblockstore benchmarking, did you actually look at the time differences or just try to look for potential poor-performance-causing-code
1415 2012-02-11 22:49:12 <gmaxwell> The latter.
1416 2012-02-11 22:49:28 <gmaxwell> FWIW, litecoin p2pool is about 6% of the litecoin hashrate
1417 2012-02-11 22:49:52 <gmaxwell> oh actually 8% now.
1418 2012-02-11 22:50:13 <BlueMatt> arg...
1419 2012-02-11 22:51:01 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: have you tried measuring while on a spinning disk rather than tmpfs?
1420 2012-02-11 22:51:08 <BlueMatt> thats what Im doing now
1421 2012-02-11 22:51:27 <BlueMatt> but I really dont feel like doing enough tests on 5-hour-long benchmarks to get good readings...
1422 2012-02-11 22:51:52 <Stupid____> in p2pool who pays you for your hashing?
1423 2012-02-11 22:51:54 <BlueMatt> and short block downloads either are hiding the performance impact in disk variations or it just doesnt exist
1424 2012-02-11 22:52:00 <sipa> Stupid____: bitcoin
1425 2012-02-11 22:52:05 jondoe has joined
1426 2012-02-11 22:52:16 <Stupid____> but i thought payments only come in 50btc per block goes
1427 2012-02-11 22:52:16 <sipa> same as with other miners
1428 2012-02-11 22:52:26 <etotheipi_> so, about P2Pool... wouldn't there be a "problem" with advancements like BIP 0016, where it seems we're actually dependent on high-level of coordination with 50%+ of the hashpower
1429 2012-02-11 22:52:46 <etotheipi_> for instance, how would we roll out something like BIP 0016 if everyone was on P2Pool?
1430 2012-02-11 22:52:55 <sipa> Stupid____: yes, and with p2pool you agree to create blocks which are distributed over other people, proporational to their hashing rate
1431 2012-02-11 22:53:01 <sipa> Stupid____: and they do the same for you
1432 2012-02-11 22:53:02 Diablo-D3 has joined
1433 2012-02-11 22:53:05 <BlueMatt> you would have to wait for 50% of p2pool users to upgrade
1434 2012-02-11 22:53:10 <BlueMatt> (if p2pool had 100% hash power)
1435 2012-02-11 22:53:40 <Diablo-D3> what broke now
1436 2012-02-11 22:53:41 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: by putting it in new software and making the actual activation triggered by the coinbases automatically. P2pool could also intentionally stop rewarding shares to nodes that aren't upgraded.
1437 2012-02-11 22:54:00 <Stupid____> im not gonna upgrade :)
1438 2012-02-11 22:54:02 PK has quit ()
1439 2012-02-11 22:54:19 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell, your last sentence suggests that one person, or a small group can "intentionally" decide something
1440 2012-02-11 22:54:23 <etotheipi_> who is that person/group?
1441 2012-02-11 22:54:25 <sipa> Stupid____: any reason why you wouldn't update?
1442 2012-02-11 22:54:30 <pingdrive> yeh fuck that
1443 2012-02-11 22:54:41 <pingdrive> sipa, just to prove a point
1444 2012-02-11 22:54:43 <Stupid____> because i got banned from the bitcoin channel
1445 2012-02-11 22:54:51 <Stupid____> im gonna run hundreds of non-upgraded nodes for fun
1446 2012-02-11 22:54:56 <pingdrive> sipa, that not all people are cool with upgrading
1447 2012-02-11 22:54:58 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: ::sigh:: no, I mean the p2pool miners who are paying attention can put pressure on the ones who aren't.
1448 2012-02-11 22:55:13 <Diablo-D3> yeah, but the ones that arnet will still see a lack of money
1449 2012-02-11 22:55:17 <gmaxwell> Can we please ban Stupid____ from here?
1450 2012-02-11 22:55:22 <gmaxwell> He's being annoying.
1451 2012-02-11 22:55:22 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: go for it
1452 2012-02-11 22:55:25 <Diablo-D3> jgarzik: do it
1453 2012-02-11 22:55:33 <Stupid____> im joking
1454 2012-02-11 22:55:47 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: No one has saw fit to add me to the access list here.
1455 2012-02-11 22:55:48 <Diablo-D3> ooh hes an op doo
1456 2012-02-11 22:55:57 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: oh, well nanotube should do that
1457 2012-02-11 22:56:15 <Diablo-D3> *too
1458 2012-02-11 22:56:21 <BlueMatt> heh, I forgot to deop after I kicked Stupid the first time
1459 2012-02-11 22:56:30 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
1460 2012-02-11 22:56:37 <Diablo-D3> anyhow
1461 2012-02-11 22:56:37 * sipa kinda thinks that devs may deserve an op in the -dev channel
1462 2012-02-11 22:56:49 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: whats the issue?
1463 2012-02-11 22:56:57 <BlueMatt> sipa: that sounds about right...
1464 2012-02-11 22:58:24 <gmaxwell> I mostly don't care. If someone wants me opped in here go ask nanotube.
1465 2012-02-11 22:59:43 <BlueMatt> nanotube: op nanotube
1466 2012-02-11 22:59:48 <BlueMatt> nanotube: op gmaxwell
1467 2012-02-11 23:00:09 h4ckm3 has quit (Quit: changing servers)
1468 2012-02-11 23:00:12 phantomfakeBNC has quit (Quit: changing servers)
1469 2012-02-11 23:01:26 smoothie has quit (Quit: changing servers)
1470 2012-02-11 23:01:33 h4ckm3 has joined
1471 2012-02-11 23:03:00 phantomfakeBNC has joined
1472 2012-02-11 23:03:01 smoothie has joined
1473 2012-02-11 23:03:47 phantomfakeBNC has quit (Max SendQ exceeded)
1474 2012-02-11 23:06:57 forever-d has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1475 2012-02-11 23:07:42 JRWR has joined
1476 2012-02-11 23:08:48 paul0 has quit (Quit: paul0)
1477 2012-02-11 23:11:56 JRWR has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1478 2012-02-11 23:12:58 <BlueMatt> whats the easiest way to write a xchat script to just respond to everything Stupid____ pms me with "ok, have fun" ?
1479 2012-02-11 23:13:31 userggf has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1480 2012-02-11 23:14:03 usergv has joined
1481 2012-02-11 23:15:55 <cjd> hahaha
1482 2012-02-11 23:16:38 <cjd> BlueMatt: I used to have eliza.pl for irssi, letting people talk to that was pretty funny
1483 2012-02-11 23:17:04 <BlueMatt> I found a decent-looking one
1484 2012-02-11 23:18:08 <cjd> I was in a channel where horney middle eastern men would just randomly pm looking to cyber and my nick doesn't make gender obvious
1485 2012-02-11 23:18:24 <cjd> fed them to the chatbot
1486 2012-02-11 23:18:29 <BlueMatt> why the hell were you in such a chan?
1487 2012-02-11 23:18:45 <cjd> invited by the owner of it
1488 2012-02-11 23:18:49 <gmaxwell> thats almost every chan if your name is percieved to be female.
1489 2012-02-11 23:19:05 <cjd> I ended up leaving after a while, too much drama
1490 2012-02-11 23:19:12 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: ok, thats a good point
1491 2012-02-11 23:20:26 <BlueMatt> whats the status of a potential 0.5.3, and generally dealing with the version checksum issue?
1492 2012-02-11 23:21:23 <gmaxwell> I just merged pull 817.
1493 2012-02-11 23:21:33 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: ping
1494 2012-02-11 23:22:14 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: feel like merging https://github.com/TheBlueMatt/bitcoin/commit/a9108382e2dd1540913f15bd2f4ebe3a8977f46a into 0.5.X?
1495 2012-02-11 23:22:35 <gmaxwell> perhaps merge it into stable and cut a 0.5.3 RC with it? try to get some people to run it?
1496 2012-02-11 23:22:36 paraipan_ has quit (Quit: Saliendo)
1497 2012-02-11 23:23:02 <BlueMatt> sounds good to me
1498 2012-02-11 23:23:47 <BlueMatt> I dont think 0.5.3 is really completely necessary (it would be kinda a pita) if we make a page on bitcoin.org informing people that if they have problems use the alternate build available somewhere
1499 2012-02-11 23:23:52 <gmaxwell> Realistically we're not going to get much organic uptake in 9 days, people will install it if their old version stops working.. so the goal should just to be to have it released before the 19th or so. (though sooner is better)
1500 2012-02-11 23:23:54 <BlueMatt> and do an alert
1501 2012-02-11 23:24:09 <BlueMatt> 19th? you mean 15th?
1502 2012-02-11 23:24:22 <gmaxwell> The switch is actually on the 20th, no?
1503 2012-02-11 23:24:29 <BlueMatt> oh, I thought it was the 15th
1504 2012-02-11 23:24:41 <gmaxwell> sorry if I caused that, I was thinking it for a bit. lemme check.
1505 2012-02-11 23:25:19 <gmaxwell> 1329696000 .. Mon, 20 Feb 2012 00:00:00 GMT
1506 2012-02-11 23:26:04 <gmaxwell> yea, so— I think we should do an alert 24 hours ahead. With a maximally non-frightening message that tells people they can get updates at bitcoin.org
1507 2012-02-11 23:26:30 <gmaxwell> and we run a simple page about the upgrade there with information on it.
1508 2012-02-11 23:26:31 <BlueMatt> sounds good to me
1509 2012-02-11 23:26:37 <BlueMatt> though I prefer a bitcoin.org/feb20.html
1510 2012-02-11 23:26:45 <denisx> what will happen to pools with old bitcoind software?
1511 2012-02-11 23:26:49 <BlueMatt> nothing
1512 2012-02-11 23:26:59 thefinn93 has joined
1513 2012-02-11 23:27:03 <BlueMatt> nothing will happen to (what we think to be) ~99% of users
1514 2012-02-11 23:27:08 <BlueMatt> s/we/I/
1515 2012-02-11 23:27:12 <sipa> every version of bitcoind since 0.2.9 will keep working
1516 2012-02-11 23:27:36 <sipa> except those behind some funky routers
1517 2012-02-11 23:27:52 <gmaxwell> *except there may be some users behind freaky nats what will have issues. We believe that the change that will go in 0.5.3 will reduce that problem.
1518 2012-02-11 23:28:37 thefinn93 has left ("Leaving")
1519 2012-02-11 23:28:48 <marf_away> 5.3?
1520 2012-02-11 23:28:55 <marf_away> INST THERE A 6.0 RC??
1521 2012-02-11 23:28:58 <marf_away> UPS
1522 2012-02-11 23:29:22 <gmaxwell> we should probably cut a 0.6.0 RC with the recent fixes too.
1523 2012-02-11 23:29:55 <gmaxwell> marf_away: we wouldn't want to promot moving to 0.6 (even if we got it out in time) as a solution to nat issues.
1524 2012-02-11 23:29:59 <cjd> is there a way to check nodes for this?
1525 2012-02-11 23:30:16 <BlueMatt> cjd: you need to check nats, not nodes
1526 2012-02-11 23:30:25 <BlueMatt> I believe if you dont have problems on p2pool you are fine
1527 2012-02-11 23:30:34 <gmaxwell> cjd: not really. I mean, I could give you a program to run that would tell you.. but thats the best I could do.
1528 2012-02-11 23:30:47 <cjd> like send nodes an inf message with a forged hash that contains their ip addr and then listen for the getdata they send back?
1529 2012-02-11 23:30:55 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: am I correct that all p2pool users would have already seen the problem?
1530 2012-02-11 23:31:09 disq has joined
1531 2012-02-11 23:31:16 localhost has joined
1532 2012-02-11 23:31:19 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: yes. p2pool users behind these nats are broken.
1533 2012-02-11 23:31:21 disq has left ()
1534 2012-02-11 23:31:36 <BlueMatt> cjd: go try p2pool if you want to know in advance if you will have problems then
1535 2012-02-11 23:31:51 <gmaxwell> cjd: it's pretty likely that the trouble making routers only look at the first couple bytes of the stream.
1536 2012-02-11 23:31:53 localhost has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1537 2012-02-11 23:32:04 elektriks has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1538 2012-02-11 23:32:11 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1539 2012-02-11 23:32:14 <cjd> oh I know my stuff is good, I was thinking more like doing analytics on the network, identify the isps which use the bad equipment, get hard numbers etc.
1540 2012-02-11 23:32:35 <cjd> hmm good point gmax
1541 2012-02-11 23:33:07 <gmaxwell> cjd: yea, I can't come up with a way. As I said on github, it could be anywhere between 1:10 to 1:100000 or even none, because perhaps the stupid nats don't do it to the port bitcoin is on (but do hit p2pools port)
1542 2012-02-11 23:33:09 <BlueMatt> probably not isp-level routers
1543 2012-02-11 23:33:17 <BlueMatt> probably home-level routers
1544 2012-02-11 23:33:28 <sipa> isp-level routers do not NAT
1545 2012-02-11 23:33:36 <BlueMatt> that too
1546 2012-02-11 23:33:48 <BlueMatt> well, dont usually nat
1547 2012-02-11 23:33:49 <gmaxwell> sipa: :( wish that were true, but at least today it's not that common most places people run bitcoin.
1548 2012-02-11 23:33:52 <cjd> when I say "isps" I mean "isps which issue this equipment"
1549 2012-02-11 23:33:56 <Diablo-D3> no
1550 2012-02-11 23:33:58 <Diablo-D3> there ARE isps that nat
1551 2012-02-11 23:34:04 <Diablo-D3> just in strange little foreign countries
1552 2012-02-11 23:34:13 <cjd> because everyone uses the nat box that their isp sends them
1553 2012-02-11 23:34:14 <gmaxwell> Diablo-D3: and mobile providers.
1554 2012-02-11 23:34:23 <Diablo-D3> bitcoin fucked uo because it has a port
1555 2012-02-11 23:34:40 <sipa> well the university dorm network was behind a nat, but that is no real ISP :)
1556 2012-02-11 23:34:46 <BlueMatt> anyway, it would be really nice to get a list of routers from people who run into a problem on the 20th
1557 2012-02-11 23:35:04 <gmaxwell> Yea, I don't think we're going to know about it before the 20th. Alas.
1558 2012-02-11 23:35:12 <Diablo-D3> whats on the 20th?
1559 2012-02-11 23:35:13 <gmaxwell> flag days suck.
1560 2012-02-11 23:35:27 <BlueMatt> maybe a little "Please email routerlist@bitcoin.org with the model of your router if you appear to be effected"
1561 2012-02-11 23:35:38 <cjd> heh
1562 2012-02-11 23:35:51 <BlueMatt> and then we can post a list of (potentially) broken routers to bitcoin.org/feb20th
1563 2012-02-11 23:36:00 <forrestv> the only ip address i have with this behavior was from california, probably with at&t dsl (from whois)
1564 2012-02-11 23:36:14 <sipa> what port runs p2pool?
1565 2012-02-11 23:36:18 <forrestv> 9333
1566 2012-02-11 23:36:18 <sipa> 9333, right?
1567 2012-02-11 23:36:22 <gmaxwell> well, if you're broken you'll know it— you won't need our list.
1568 2012-02-11 23:36:36 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: yea, but it would be nice for statistical purposes to get the list
1569 2012-02-11 23:36:54 <BlueMatt> and document it for others
1570 2012-02-11 23:38:49 <gmaxwell> because of clock skew people may have a hard time connecting right around the switch time.
1571 2012-02-11 23:39:49 <cjd> it's a bit mindboggling that someone would do that
1572 2012-02-11 23:40:03 <cjd> you don't make a mistake and use memmem instead of memcmp
1573 2012-02-11 23:40:09 <cjd> it takes a concerted effort
1574 2012-02-11 23:40:57 <BlueMatt> agreed, but home routers do stupid things way, way too often
1575 2012-02-11 23:41:13 <sipa> http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/Routers+SIP+ALG
1576 2012-02-11 23:41:19 <sipa> ALG is what we are looking for
1577 2012-02-11 23:41:33 <sipa> though it is supposed to be application-specific
1578 2012-02-11 23:41:47 <sipa> i haven't found any information about routers that do this for data they don't recognize
1579 2012-02-11 23:43:02 <cjd> IMO this is a good argument for migrating to curvecp, DPI / packet forgery is nolonger a theoretical attack.
1580 2012-02-11 23:43:37 mizerydearia has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1581 2012-02-11 23:45:09 Cablesaurus has quit (Quit: REALITY.SYS Corrupted: Re-boot universe? (Y/N/Q))
1582 2012-02-11 23:45:49 <gmaxwell> cjd: tcpcrypt ftw.
1583 2012-02-11 23:45:55 mizerydearia has joined
1584 2012-02-11 23:46:24 elektriks has joined
1585 2012-02-11 23:46:45 <cjd> well... curvecp has the advantage that it's all udp so you get some neat nat punching advantages
1586 2012-02-11 23:48:06 <gmaxwell> cjd: tcpcrypy works okay through most nat. (It's a TCP header extension) (so long as the nat isn't randomly corrupting the traffic of course)
1587 2012-02-11 23:48:13 <gmaxwell> er tcpcrypt*
1588 2012-02-11 23:48:51 <cjd> curvecp has the disadvantage that djb didn't think it prudent to put a GNU-stack note in his asm files and it isn't -fPIC by default so if you want NXstack and ASLR, you need to patch and prey
1589 2012-02-11 23:50:45 <cjd> but my understanding of udp is you can send one udp packet to someone and most nats will send any udp traffic with your port back to you
1590 2012-02-11 23:50:57 <cjd> so it's really nice from a hole punching standpoint
1591 2012-02-11 23:51:28 smickles is now known as smickles|idle
1592 2012-02-11 23:52:08 <gmaxwell> cjd: some but not all. And they'll change the port number, sometimes but not always.
1593 2012-02-11 23:53:40 <cjd> hmm, need to detect what your external port is, but if you can do that, you get a lot of nats just plain leaving you alone
1594 2012-02-11 23:54:40 guy_ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1595 2012-02-11 23:54:47 <gmaxwell> cjd: right but you can't simply connect two natted hosts in that case— and there is no promise that if you send packets to a second host that it'll usethe same port. :( it's really a mess.
1596 2012-02-11 23:55:25 <Diablo-D3> but isnt that what stun and ice are for?
1597 2012-02-11 23:55:26 <cjd> yeah but as long as someone isn't natted, they can introduce everyone else
1598 2012-02-11 23:55:35 <Diablo-D3> stun, turn, and ice
1599 2012-02-11 23:55:51 <cjd> it works pretty well for the bittorrent people, since upnp works "sometimes"
1600 2012-02-11 23:58:25 Cablesaurus has joined
1601 2012-02-11 23:58:25 Cablesaurus has quit (Changing host)
1602 2012-02-11 23:58:25 Cablesaurus has joined