1 2012-04-13 00:03:46 barmstrong has joined
   2 2012-04-13 00:05:44 <t7> when you reset the testnet does the client have to be hardcoded with the genesis ?
   3 2012-04-13 00:07:41 Karmaon has quit (Quit: WeeChat 0.3.8-dev)
   4 2012-04-13 00:07:52 barmstrong has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
   5 2012-04-13 00:15:08 chrisb__ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
   6 2012-04-13 00:22:50 dvide has joined
   7 2012-04-13 00:23:34 Slix` has joined
   8 2012-04-13 00:24:21 Turingi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
   9 2012-04-13 00:30:26 Joric_ has joined
  10 2012-04-13 00:31:17 Joric has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
  11 2012-04-13 00:31:40 gruez has joined
  12 2012-04-13 00:32:09 <gruez> just wondering, how is Eligius "decentralized"?
  13 2012-04-13 00:35:56 graingert has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
  14 2012-04-13 00:40:28 midnightmagic has joined
  15 2012-04-13 00:40:29 sethman895 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
  16 2012-04-13 00:43:08 gruez has quit (Quit: Page closed)
  17 2012-04-13 00:43:52 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@pool-71-252-154-11.dllstx.fios.verizon.net|brwyatt
  18 2012-04-13 00:49:11 Snapman is now known as Snapman[afkers]
  19 2012-04-13 00:59:40 RainbowDashh has joined
  20 2012-04-13 01:01:15 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: gavinandresen opened issue 1086 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/1086>
  21 2012-04-13 01:02:51 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
  22 2012-04-13 01:04:26 eoss has joined
  23 2012-04-13 01:04:26 eoss has quit (Changing host)
  24 2012-04-13 01:04:26 eoss has joined
  25 2012-04-13 01:08:05 JRWR has joined
  26 2012-04-13 01:15:19 splatster has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
  27 2012-04-13 01:16:30 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: sipa opened pull request 1087 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1087>
  28 2012-04-13 01:20:03 rdponticelli has joined
  29 2012-04-13 01:23:11 Cablesaurus has quit (Quit: Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach him how to fish, and he will sit in a boat and drink beer all day)
  30 2012-04-13 01:24:52 t7 has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
  31 2012-04-13 01:25:07 fimpfimp has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
  32 2012-04-13 01:28:01  has quit (Clown|!~clown@static-87-79-93-140.netcologne.de|)
  33 2012-04-13 01:40:17 Joric has joined
  34 2012-04-13 01:40:17 Joric has quit (Changing host)
  35 2012-04-13 01:40:17 Joric has joined
  36 2012-04-13 01:41:27 dwon has quit (Quit: Leaving)
  37 2012-04-13 01:41:49 Joric_ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
  38 2012-04-13 01:43:13 dwon has joined
  39 2012-04-13 01:52:50 Snapman[afkers] is now known as Snapman
  40 2012-04-13 01:53:13 splatster has joined
  41 2012-04-13 01:57:58 caedes has quit (Quit: Saliendo)
  42 2012-04-13 02:18:24 word_ has joined
  43 2012-04-13 02:21:53 word has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
  44 2012-04-13 02:29:46 Slix` has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
  45 2012-04-13 02:30:05 Joric_ has joined
  46 2012-04-13 02:30:05 Joric_ has quit (Changing host)
  47 2012-04-13 02:30:05 Joric_ has joined
  48 2012-04-13 02:31:26 Joric has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
  49 2012-04-13 02:33:00 Slix` has joined
  50 2012-04-13 02:35:37 Joric_ has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
  51 2012-04-13 02:36:37 [7] has quit (Disconnected by services)
  52 2012-04-13 02:36:44 TheSeven has joined
  53 2012-04-13 02:37:59 sethman895 has joined
  54 2012-04-13 02:41:06 JRWR has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
  55 2012-04-13 02:42:15 eoss has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
  56 2012-04-13 02:45:07 paulo_ has joined
  57 2012-04-13 02:45:36 <paulo_> hello
  58 2012-04-13 02:46:53 <paulo_> the merkle root are hashes of what, exactly?
  59 2012-04-13 02:49:10 <[Tycho]> Transactions.
  60 2012-04-13 02:49:35 <paulo_> "Because transactions aren't hashed directly, hashing a block with 1 transaction takes exactly the same amount of effort as hashing a block with 10,000 transactions." - https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Block_hashing_algorithm
  61 2012-04-13 02:49:51 <[Tycho]> Yes, exactly.
  62 2012-04-13 02:50:26 <midnightmagic> imagine a bunch of individual hashes. now every two hashes, put them together into one hash, connected to the two. now keep doing that, joining each level of hashes until you are left with one. it is a hash or a tree of a bunch of hashes, and by itself it is included in the hash calculation of the block so the entire transaction hash set doesn't have to be to do a speedy verification of the block chain..
  63 2012-04-13 02:50:28 <[Tycho]> Transactions are hashed into the merkle tree just once, and then this hash is hashed to find blocks.
  64 2012-04-13 02:51:04 <paulo_> another question,
  65 2012-04-13 02:51:07 <midnightmagic> that is the "root" of the tree of hashes.
  66 2012-04-13 02:51:17 <midnightmagic> the tree of hashes is called a merkle tree
  67 2012-04-13 02:51:40 <paulo_> transactions are made as a newly found block spreads across the network. how do you compensate for that?
  68 2012-04-13 02:52:17 <gmaxwell> Can you clarify what you're actually asking?
  69 2012-04-13 02:52:45 <paulo_> it's a second question, i'm researching what a merkle tree is.
  70 2012-04-13 02:53:20 <paulo_> i mean, new transactions are made, which aren't included in the newly found block.
  71 2012-04-13 02:53:41 <[Tycho]> paulo_: they may be included in the next one.
  72 2012-04-13 02:53:50 <luke-jr> paulo_: you might find Eloipool's source code useful
  73 2012-04-13 02:53:53 <gmaxwell> Right, they'll be included in a subsequent one.
  74 2012-04-13 02:54:02 <luke-jr> gitorious.org/bitcoin/eloipool
  75 2012-04-13 02:54:37 <midnightmagic> assuming the miners mining the new blocks "like" the new transaction..
  76 2012-04-13 02:55:24 <sethman895> Has Anybody here tried electrum?
  77 2012-04-13 02:55:25 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
  78 2012-04-13 02:55:34 <paulo_> but how will the client know that the new transactions are not supposed to be include in the new block? (since the block arrives late to the client)
  79 2012-04-13 02:56:51 <paulo_> by included i mean included in the hash
  80 2012-04-13 02:56:55 <gmaxwell> By the client you mean "some random mining node"?
  81 2012-04-13 02:57:16 <paulo_> no, the every bitcoin node.
  82 2012-04-13 02:58:01 <gmaxwell> I think you need to walk through what you're thinking more specifically and clearly. I'm guessing you're suffering a misunderstanding, but what you're saying is so vague I can't figure out what it could be.
  83 2012-04-13 02:58:24 <[Tycho]> paulo_: each block contains all those transactions, so you always see what it inside and what isn't
  84 2012-04-13 02:58:30 <[Tycho]> *is
  85 2012-04-13 02:58:30 <gmaxwell> Give me a step by step example.
  86 2012-04-13 03:00:06 <Diablo-D3> welp I guess that was fun
  87 2012-04-13 03:00:20 <Diablo-D3> I finished my stm impl, dunno if it works
  88 2012-04-13 03:00:24 <Diablo-D3> probably never will
  89 2012-04-13 03:01:41 <paulo_> gmaxwell: i'll try step by step.
  90 2012-04-13 03:02:08 <midnightmagic> paulo_: when the block arrives from other miners, the client will know whether or not any transaction it curently knows about has been included in that block, since right now, the block includes every transaction: so the client can recalculate the hash tree of the transactions, and verify for itself that the block is valid.
  91 2012-04-13 03:02:54 <Diablo-D3> wonder why I bother sometimes
  92 2012-04-13 03:03:12 <midnightmagic> if the transaction you're talking about hasn't been included in the new block, the clients knows this and it stays in limbo for the time being.
  93 2012-04-13 03:03:23 <midnightmagic> Diablo-D3: stm?
  94 2012-04-13 03:03:30 <Diablo-D3> software transactional memory
  95 2012-04-13 03:06:02 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
  96 2012-04-13 03:07:33 <Diablo-D3> it was supposed to go in libmowgli2
  97 2012-04-13 03:07:33 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: RainbowDashh)
  98 2012-04-13 03:07:58 <Diablo-D3> so I could get rid of the overhead of locks in a lot of things
  99 2012-04-13 03:08:05 <paulo_> midnightmagic: stays in limbo?
 100 2012-04-13 03:09:05 <[Tycho]> paulo_: memorypool
 101 2012-04-13 03:09:10 enquirer has quit (Quit: back soon)
 102 2012-04-13 03:09:47 <[Tycho]> Still not sure what paulo_ is talking about.
 103 2012-04-13 03:09:52 <paulo_> midnightmagic: and how does the client "know" and not just discard the block as a fake block?
 104 2012-04-13 03:09:53 kingkatari has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 105 2012-04-13 03:10:33 <gmaxwell> paulo_: why would it do that?
 106 2012-04-13 03:10:34 * paulo_ maybe just misunderstood something.
 107 2012-04-13 03:10:43 <gmaxwell> see this is why I wanted you to walk through it.
 108 2012-04-13 03:10:59 <paulo_> wait, i'll paste bin it.
 109 2012-04-13 03:11:03 <gmaxwell> Blocks are validated against the chain they extend and the rules of the system.
 110 2012-04-13 03:12:01 <gmaxwell> Transactions which aren't yet in blocks yet have no relevance— rather if the blocks make those transactions invalid, they they are set aside. They don't influence the validation of new blocks.
 111 2012-04-13 03:13:48 <paulo_> I think I figured out where I misunderstood.
 112 2012-04-13 03:18:07 <paulo_> so you keep adding transactions to the tree until it matches the hash in the block?
 113 2012-04-13 03:18:54 <gmaxwell> No. Not at all.
 114 2012-04-13 03:19:09 <gmaxwell> The block comes with the set of transactions which are included in that block.
 115 2012-04-13 03:19:28 <gmaxwell> Given the set of transactions you can determinstically construct the tree and see that it matches.
 116 2012-04-13 03:19:59 <gmaxwell> And with the set of transactions you can also see that they themselves validate, and that they don't conflict with each other or any of the transactions in the prior blocks.
 117 2012-04-13 03:20:08 <paulo_> so when the blocks are spread across the network, the transactions themselves are included, and not just the hash?
 118 2012-04-13 03:20:24 <sethman895> This is the first time I've been on here and Bitcoin talk was going on.
 119 2012-04-13 03:22:08 <gmaxwell> sethman895: random sampling says this channel is mostly on-topic: http://pastebin.com/qQ9Bwc4R
 120 2012-04-13 03:22:34 <gmaxwell> paulo_: Yes.
 121 2012-04-13 03:22:56 <paulo_> I understand now. gtg & thanks.
 122 2012-04-13 03:24:57 guruvan has joined
 123 2012-04-13 03:27:55 paulo_ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 124 2012-04-13 03:28:53 RainbowDashh has joined
 125 2012-04-13 03:31:41 Joric has joined
 126 2012-04-13 03:36:30 Nicksasa has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 127 2012-04-13 03:37:53 gwillen is now known as gwollon
 128 2012-04-13 03:38:03 gwollon is now known as gwillen
 129 2012-04-13 04:04:40 sethman895 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 130 2012-04-13 04:08:13 <splatster> I'm still figuring stuff out as for my whole comp situation after what happened last night.
 131 2012-04-13 04:09:17 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 132 2012-04-13 04:10:10 agricocb has joined
 133 2012-04-13 04:14:27 paulo_ has joined
 134 2012-04-13 04:15:10 da2ce7 has joined
 135 2012-04-13 04:15:22 Graet is now known as Graet_on_holiday
 136 2012-04-13 04:23:45 Joric has quit ()
 137 2012-04-13 04:25:13 dwon has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 138 2012-04-13 04:28:56 d4de has joined
 139 2012-04-13 04:32:57 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
 140 2012-04-13 04:41:15 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: RainbowDashh)
 141 2012-04-13 04:43:58 pickett has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 142 2012-04-13 04:46:12 da2ce7 has joined
 143 2012-04-13 04:46:34 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 144 2012-04-13 04:46:58 pickett has joined
 145 2012-04-13 04:47:05 agricocb has joined
 146 2012-04-13 04:53:41 underscor has joined
 147 2012-04-13 04:53:51 splatster has quit (Quit: Dumping all physical memory...)
 148 2012-04-13 04:55:06 RainbowDashh has joined
 149 2012-04-13 05:00:37 MobiusL has joined
 150 2012-04-13 05:01:01 <paulo_> too bad I have an nvidia.
 151 2012-04-13 05:04:21 * BlueMatt likes nvidia, they just suck for mining...
 152 2012-04-13 05:04:21 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: cardpuncher opened pull request 1088 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1088>
 153 2012-04-13 05:04:21 paulo__c has joined
 154 2012-04-13 05:04:21 paulo_ has quit (Disconnected by services)
 155 2012-04-13 05:04:21 paulo__c is now known as paulo_
 156 2012-04-13 05:07:14 xenland has joined
 157 2012-04-13 05:07:58 <midnightmagic> "It’s sort of like BitCoin but with actual, government-backed value." ooookay
 158 2012-04-13 05:08:11 <Diablo-D3> except its not like bitcoin at all
 159 2012-04-13 05:08:18 <Diablo-D3> I mean, outside of that insanely stupid statement
 160 2012-04-13 05:09:18 <TuxBlackEdo> i think it is way more interesting for bitcoin to not have any backing at all and have value
 161 2012-04-13 05:09:40 <TuxBlackEdo> that makes it like 100x better then mintchip
 162 2012-04-13 05:09:52 <Diablo-D3> oh yeah?
 163 2012-04-13 05:09:59 * Diablo-D3 puts a silver coin on the tablet.
 164 2012-04-13 05:09:59 <TuxBlackEdo> mintchip is just another fiat currency (even though its digital)
 165 2012-04-13 05:10:01 <Diablo-D3> its backed.
 166 2012-04-13 05:10:07 <Diablo-D3> bam.
 167 2012-04-13 05:10:47 <TuxBlackEdo> Diablo-D3, I guess...
 168 2012-04-13 05:11:02 <guruvan> the mintchip comes in different flavors that are in different current  fiat currencies (EUR, GBP, USD ,etc)
 169 2012-04-13 05:11:52 <Diablo-D3> does it come in strawberry?
 170 2012-04-13 05:11:58 <TuxBlackEdo> but it's still fiat currency
 171 2012-04-13 05:12:06 <Diablo-D3> TuxBlackEdo: actually, its not even a currency
 172 2012-04-13 05:12:16 <Diablo-D3> its a digital certificate bearer bond... certificate.
 173 2012-04-13 05:12:29 <TuxBlackEdo> the reason i like bitcoin is because nobody can just make a million bitcoins in a day
 174 2012-04-13 05:12:34 paulo_ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 175 2012-04-13 05:12:42 * Diablo-D3 puts a million btc on the table, next to the silver coin
 176 2012-04-13 05:12:54 <TuxBlackEdo> Diablo-D3, I get it
 177 2012-04-13 05:12:58 * Diablo-D3 watches the table collapse :<
 178 2012-04-13 05:13:29 <TuxBlackEdo> Diablo-D3, here is a question to keep you busy: how much do 1 million bitcoins weigh?
 179 2012-04-13 05:14:00 <Diablo-D3> enough to crush a table, apparently.
 180 2012-04-13 05:14:07 <BlueMatt> a shitton, actually (when you calculate hard drive weight of people holding the chain...)
 181 2012-04-13 05:14:11 MobiusL has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
 182 2012-04-13 05:14:20 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
 183 2012-04-13 05:14:30 <TuxBlackEdo> BlueMatt, my laptop does get heavier the more i fill up my hard drive ;)
 184 2012-04-13 05:14:39 <BlueMatt> heh
 185 2012-04-13 05:14:55 <BlueMatt> it does if you have an ssd (a few electrons per 1-bit) ;)
 186 2012-04-13 05:15:06 abbe has quit (Quit: Aah IRC, where men are men, women are men, and 14 year old girls are FBI agents.)
 187 2012-04-13 05:15:34 <TuxBlackEdo> even mechanical hard drives apparently
 188 2012-04-13 05:15:40 <luke-jr> the problem is, to NORMAL PEOPLE, Mintchip *is* just like Bitcoin
 189 2012-04-13 05:15:56 <luke-jr> and they won't understand why it isn't.
 190 2012-04-13 05:16:02 <andytoshi> luke-jr: no, it has a completely different trust model
 191 2012-04-13 05:16:07 <andytoshi> that can be understood at a high level
 192 2012-04-13 05:16:08 <TuxBlackEdo> luke-jr, is it possible to use eligius to attack this alt chain? :)
 193 2012-04-13 05:16:15 <luke-jr> TuxBlackEdo: what chain?
 194 2012-04-13 05:16:19 <Diablo-D3> normal people are fucktards
 195 2012-04-13 05:16:20 <TuxBlackEdo> mintchip
 196 2012-04-13 05:16:24 <Diablo-D3> this is why I keep taking their money
 197 2012-04-13 05:16:27 <TuxBlackEdo> i wanted to make a joke luke-jr :(
 198 2012-04-13 05:16:46 egecko has quit (Quit: ~ Trillian Astra - www.trillian.im ~)
 199 2012-04-13 05:18:59 <TuxBlackEdo> BlueMatt, turns out a laptop weighs more if it is fully charged vs. it's ssd being full
 200 2012-04-13 05:19:09 <BlueMatt> TuxBlackEdo: makes sense
 201 2012-04-13 05:20:46 <xenland> Apparently electricity carries weight these days...
 202 2012-04-13 05:20:59 <Diablo-D3> hurray quantum chromodynamics.
 203 2012-04-13 05:21:11 <TuxBlackEdo> xenland, electrons do have weight
 204 2012-04-13 05:21:39 <xenland> Deffinatly not enough to be noticeable enough on a fully charged laptop
 205 2012-04-13 05:21:47 <xenland> maybe a super battery.... i might believe you
 206 2012-04-13 05:21:56 <Diablo-D3> something the size of the earth, really.
 207 2012-04-13 05:22:18 <BlueMatt> xenland: no one actually said it was noticeable
 208 2012-04-13 05:22:21 <TuxBlackEdo> even with a super battery the weight difference would be 1^-18 grams
 209 2012-04-13 05:22:39 <Diablo-D3> TuxBlackEdo: or a street value of 2 million
 210 2012-04-13 05:22:59 <xenland> Noticable/observable
 211 2012-04-13 05:23:00 <BlueMatt> thats some expensive coke
 212 2012-04-13 05:23:13 <BlueMatt> 2mill/1^-18 grams
 213 2012-04-13 05:23:16 <Diablo-D3> and when they get that 1^-19 grams into the evidence locker, that 1^-20 grams will put you away for years
 214 2012-04-13 05:23:27 <BlueMatt> heh
 215 2012-04-13 05:24:05 <TuxBlackEdo> i meane 1 e-19
 216 2012-04-13 05:24:12 <TuxBlackEdo> meant*
 217 2012-04-13 05:24:25 <BlueMatt> so did the rest of us, I think
 218 2012-04-13 05:24:50 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: RainbowDashh)
 219 2012-04-13 05:24:52 <TuxBlackEdo> or 1x10^-19
 220 2012-04-13 05:24:58 <Diablo-D3> I didnt, I thought that was the joke
 221 2012-04-13 05:25:03 <BlueMatt> oh...
 222 2012-04-13 05:25:09 <BlueMatt> well, that is also a valid joke...
 223 2012-04-13 05:25:26 * BlueMatt is tired, sorry...
 224 2012-04-13 05:25:34 egecko has joined
 225 2012-04-13 05:26:07 <TuxBlackEdo> does anyone here have bitcoin related dreams?
 226 2012-04-13 05:26:17 <Diablo-D3> no
 227 2012-04-13 05:26:25 <TuxBlackEdo> me neither...
 228 2012-04-13 05:26:27 * BlueMatt doesnt dream
 229 2012-04-13 05:26:28 <Diablo-D3> but I once had a dream I was having sex with a hot alien woman.
 230 2012-04-13 05:26:38 <TuxBlackEdo> Diablo-D3, pics or it didn't happen
 231 2012-04-13 05:26:42 <Diablo-D3> >dream
 232 2012-04-13 05:26:43 <Diablo-D3> >pics
 233 2012-04-13 05:26:45 <luke-jr> …
 234 2012-04-13 05:26:49 <xenland> hehe
 235 2012-04-13 05:26:51 <BlueMatt> Diablo-D3: meh, I actually experienced that...
 236 2012-04-13 05:26:56 <BlueMatt> (well, the drugs told me I did)
 237 2012-04-13 05:27:07 <xenland> Lucid dreams are very entertaining
 238 2012-04-13 05:27:19 blomqvist has joined
 239 2012-04-13 05:27:39 <luke-jr> oh, I thought BlueMatt meant the sex with a hot alien woman.
 240 2012-04-13 05:27:41 <Diablo-D3> what I dont get is, cat ears, right? how the fuck did the fleet admiral hat fit her head without ear holes
 241 2012-04-13 05:27:59 <Diablo-D3> (needless to mention, that was the ONLY thing she was wearing)
 242 2012-04-13 05:28:40 <TuxBlackEdo> i have nightmares about slender man :(
 243 2012-04-13 05:29:05 <Diablo-D3> well dont worry TuxBlackEdo, Im not slender.
 244 2012-04-13 05:29:13 ferroh_ has joined
 245 2012-04-13 05:29:17 * BlueMatt haunts TuxBlackEdo 
 246 2012-04-13 05:29:38 <ferroh_> Any idea what might be causing the chain to DL so slow for this guy? http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/s60sj/why_is_block_downloading_so_slow/
 247 2012-04-13 05:29:53 <ferroh_> He is using a USB key to store the blockchain, I suggested that he was heavily IO bound then.
 248 2012-04-13 05:30:05 <ferroh_> However, he reports downloading only 150 blocks in 3 hours.
 249 2012-04-13 05:30:07 <Diablo-D3> yup thats it
 250 2012-04-13 05:30:15 <Diablo-D3> thats the right answer
 251 2012-04-13 05:30:18 <ferroh_> over 6 hours actually
 252 2012-04-13 05:30:28 <ferroh_> 6 hours = 150 blocks?
 253 2012-04-13 05:30:34 <Diablo-D3> on a slow enough IO device? yes
 254 2012-04-13 05:30:52 <phantomcircuit> ferroh_, a usb flash drive is going to give you like
 255 2012-04-13 05:30:57 <phantomcircuit> maybe 2 write ops/second
 256 2012-04-13 05:31:09 <phantomcircuit> and once it's close to full you're talking seconds per write op
 257 2012-04-13 05:32:13 <ferroh_> Is there something I can suggest for this guy, as a way to easily store the wallet.dat only on the flash drive?
 258 2012-04-13 05:32:33 <ferroh_> I guess copy/paste it
 259 2012-04-13 05:33:03 <Diablo-D3> just make sure the client is off when he does it
 260 2012-04-13 05:33:21 [1]_Fireball has joined
 261 2012-04-13 05:33:56 <ferroh_> indeed, alrighty
 262 2012-04-13 05:34:04 <ferroh_> How about using a USB HDD?
 263 2012-04-13 05:34:12 <MC1984> wait can you really currupt a wallet by copying it
 264 2012-04-13 05:34:17 <ferroh_> Is the bottleneck the USB interface, or the drive itself do you suppose?
 265 2012-04-13 05:34:24 RainbowDashh has joined
 266 2012-04-13 05:35:27 splatster has joined
 267 2012-04-13 05:35:37 _Fireball has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 268 2012-04-13 05:35:38 [1]_Fireball is now known as _Fireball
 269 2012-04-13 05:38:25 <MC1984> guys
 270 2012-04-13 05:38:37 <MC1984> copying a live wallet corrupts it?
 271 2012-04-13 05:38:47 <BlueMatt> ofc
 272 2012-04-13 05:38:51 <MC1984> how, since copying is a read only
 273 2012-04-13 05:38:52 <Diablo-D3> yes
 274 2012-04-13 05:39:04 <Diablo-D3> MC1984: because you're looking at it non-transactionally
 275 2012-04-13 05:39:12 <BlueMatt> its a database, you dont copy a database while its open
 276 2012-04-13 05:39:21 <Diablo-D3> MC1984: writes to disk are not atomic
 277 2012-04-13 05:39:43 <splatster> Yes, quit your client before trying to backup/replace/copy/whatever your wallet.
 278 2012-04-13 05:39:57 <MC1984> so you can end up with a corrupted copy, but the original is fine?
 279 2012-04-13 05:40:02 <Diablo-D3> yes
 280 2012-04-13 05:40:05 <Diablo-D3> the original is fine
 281 2012-04-13 05:40:06 <splatster> yup
 282 2012-04-13 05:40:11 <MC1984> thats ok then
 283 2012-04-13 05:40:19 <Diablo-D3> thats not okay either
 284 2012-04-13 05:40:22 <Diablo-D3> you depend on the copy
 285 2012-04-13 05:40:32 <MC1984> well no its not ok
 286 2012-04-13 05:40:46 <MC1984> but its more ok than breaking your original too
 287 2012-04-13 05:40:58 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
 288 2012-04-13 05:41:07 <MC1984> so the wallet export thing will let you do it without corruption
 289 2012-04-13 05:41:43 <Diablo-D3> yeah
 290 2012-04-13 05:41:48 <Diablo-D3> it produces an atomic copy
 291 2012-04-13 05:42:42 <MC1984> duly noted
 292 2012-04-13 05:44:14 <MC1984> i was thinking given what happened to splatster
 293 2012-04-13 05:44:21 <MC1984> how about some anti keylogging stuff
 294 2012-04-13 05:44:59 <Diablo-D3> he was the one with the missing 100btc right?
 295 2012-04-13 05:45:02 <MC1984> like password input via on screen keyboard, which moves to a new screen X, Y position after every character
 296 2012-04-13 05:45:16 <MC1984> yes
 297 2012-04-13 05:45:21 <Diablo-D3> did anyone find out what happened?
 298 2012-04-13 05:45:33 <splatster> Diablo-D3: I'm working on it.
 299 2012-04-13 05:45:35 <MC1984> probably got a keylogger on his mac, no other way
 300 2012-04-13 05:45:48 <Diablo-D3> yeah, but what would a keylogger do here
 301 2012-04-13 05:46:02 <Diablo-D3> it'd still have to grab his wallet.dat
 302 2012-04-13 05:46:07 <MC1984> log his wallet password
 303 2012-04-13 05:46:13 <splatster> Again, my main focus is to get my operations running again on this fresh comp and then when I have free time I will dissect my clone.
 304 2012-04-13 05:46:13 <MC1984> well thats not hard
 305 2012-04-13 05:46:17 <Diablo-D3> but what use is a wallet password without a wallet
 306 2012-04-13 05:46:42 <MC1984> Diablo-D3 if it can keylog you and send back to base, it can also grad a file and send it
 307 2012-04-13 05:46:52 <MC1984> one piece of malware can do both bro...
 308 2012-04-13 05:47:03 * Diablo-D3 shrugs
 309 2012-04-13 05:47:05 <Diablo-D3> this is why I use linux
 310 2012-04-13 05:47:25 mmoya has joined
 311 2012-04-13 05:47:31 <MC1984> ha, thats what mac users were saying up until last week you smug prick :P
 312 2012-04-13 05:47:55 <Diablo-D3> last week? why last week? osx has been known to be not secure for about 5 years
 313 2012-04-13 05:48:21 <MC1984> yeah but it didnt matter until the 600k botnet story
 314 2012-04-13 05:48:31 <Diablo-D3> and thats why osx cant be trusted
 315 2012-04-13 05:48:34 <Diablo-D3> "it didnt matter"
 316 2012-04-13 05:48:41 <MC1984> quite
 317 2012-04-13 05:48:44 <Diablo-D3> you fix security holes BEFORE they happen, not after
 318 2012-04-13 05:49:19 <splatster> Diablo-D3: It's my fault.  I kept funds on a hot wallet.  It was my mistake, so I took the hit.
 319 2012-04-13 05:49:49 <Diablo-D3> splatster: that shouldnt actually matter, really
 320 2012-04-13 05:50:10 <splatster> Diablo-D3: Well, it did.
 321 2012-04-13 05:50:31 <Diablo-D3> yes, if your machine isnt secure, it doesnt if the wallet is hot or luke warm or whatever
 322 2012-04-13 05:51:32 <MC1984> ok so anti keylogging ideas
 323 2012-04-13 05:51:37 Slix` has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 324 2012-04-13 05:51:43 <MC1984> the randomised on screen keyboard?
 325 2012-04-13 05:51:48 <Diablo-D3> no
 326 2012-04-13 05:51:55 <MC1984> why
 327 2012-04-13 05:52:01 <Diablo-D3> thats extremely hard to implement anyhow
 328 2012-04-13 05:52:27 <MC1984> i dont think so
 329 2012-04-13 05:52:29 <Diablo-D3> use overlaid graphics and require the user to drag them around to produce a certain color by filtering.
 330 2012-04-13 05:53:08 <MC1984> whut
 331 2012-04-13 05:53:16 <Diablo-D3> hard mode: you do the dragging on an iphone or android device using touch.js in a browser.
 332 2012-04-13 05:55:54 <splatster> luke-jr: What should I do about replacing my old GPG key with my new one?
 333 2012-04-13 05:56:21 <Diablo-D3> splatster: produce a shitlisting certificate for it
 334 2012-04-13 05:56:22 <splatster> (I have both, but I am unsure as to whether the old one was compromised as well)
 335 2012-04-13 05:56:31 <Diablo-D3> do not sign your new with your old
 336 2012-04-13 06:01:09 <mod6> Thats funny, he got exactly the opposite advice eariler.
 337 2012-04-13 06:01:18 <mod6> *earlier
 338 2012-04-13 06:01:33 <Diablo-D3> this is a faq in the gpg manual iirc
 339 2012-04-13 06:01:36 word_ is now known as word
 340 2012-04-13 06:02:17 <mod6> oh, maybe im remembering wrong, I thought it was, sign new with old to verify identity, then revoke old key.
 341 2012-04-13 06:02:25 <Diablo-D3> no.
 342 2012-04-13 06:02:30 <Diablo-D3> revoke, do NOT sign
 343 2012-04-13 06:02:39 <Diablo-D3> and then have everyone that knows you sign your new one
 344 2012-04-13 06:09:28 <mod6> ok, srry. looked but couldn't find, weak.
 345 2012-04-13 06:09:48 <mod6> scrollback only goes so far :/
 346 2012-04-13 06:10:06 <MC1984> hmm
 347 2012-04-13 06:10:37 <MC1984> https://github.com/coblee/litecoin/wiki/Mining-hardware-comparison according to this, ati gpu stil far outstrips a gpy for litecoin mining
 348 2012-04-13 06:10:50 <MC1984> i thought litecoin was supposed to be gpu hostile
 349 2012-04-13 06:11:02 <Diablo-D3> you mean cpu vs gpu?
 350 2012-04-13 06:11:04 Clipse has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 351 2012-04-13 06:11:06 <Diablo-D3> litecoin was designed retardedly.
 352 2012-04-13 06:11:08 <MC1984> yes
 353 2012-04-13 06:11:17 <MC1984> howso
 354 2012-04-13 06:11:23 <Diablo-D3> it isnt gpu hostile.
 355 2012-04-13 06:11:41 <MC1984> but its supposed to be?
 356 2012-04-13 06:11:48 <Diablo-D3> yes
 357 2012-04-13 06:11:56 <MC1984> how did they fuck up then
 358 2012-04-13 06:12:10 <Diablo-D3> their algo uses memory, it doesnt use ENOUGH memory
 359 2012-04-13 06:12:51 <MC1984> its just the memory requirement that was meant to keep in on cpu only?
 360 2012-04-13 06:13:09 <Diablo-D3> basically
 361 2012-04-13 06:13:14 <Diablo-D3> theres nothing suitably tricky going on
 362 2012-04-13 06:13:57 <MC1984> hmm thats not so good
 363 2012-04-13 06:14:48 <MC1984> is it even possible to make an algo that will only be good to mine on say, x86 cpus and nothing else for the foreseeable future
 364 2012-04-13 06:15:11 <Diablo-D3> no
 365 2012-04-13 06:15:35 <Diablo-D3> unless it uses an absolute fuckton of memory (which makes it unusable on smaller computers too), it can be gpu and fpga mined
 366 2012-04-13 06:15:41 <MC1984> goddamit thats a big problem
 367 2012-04-13 06:15:49 <Diablo-D3> well the stupidity is
 368 2012-04-13 06:15:54 <Diablo-D3> bitcoin ALREADY solved the problem
 369 2012-04-13 06:16:00 <Diablo-D3> just keep cranking difficulty up
 370 2012-04-13 06:16:21 <Diablo-D3> hardware efficiency always wins in the end no matter _what_ you do
 371 2012-04-13 06:16:30 <MC1984> no that is the problem
 372 2012-04-13 06:16:39 <MC1984> everyone has a cpu
 373 2012-04-13 06:16:49 <Diablo-D3> everyone has a massively inefficient cpu
 374 2012-04-13 06:17:01 <Diablo-D3> cpus are only useful for highly branchy unpredictable code
 375 2012-04-13 06:17:02 <MC1984> not too long until only a handful moneyed assholes have asic farms and thats where bitcoin is heading
 376 2012-04-13 06:17:14 <Diablo-D3> asics cant get that far ahead
 377 2012-04-13 06:17:16 <Diablo-D3> costs too much
 378 2012-04-13 06:17:30 <midnightmagic> make it memory-dependant and all that does is shift the resource target. it's pointless.
 379 2012-04-13 06:17:53 <MC1984> doesnt matter, only takes one or two and all gpu miners are pushed out, and thats that
 380 2012-04-13 06:18:10 <Diablo-D3> MC1984: not at all
 381 2012-04-13 06:18:14 <Diablo-D3> it costs too much money to get in
 382 2012-04-13 06:18:22 <midnightmagic> and meanwhile bitcoin doesn't have the "must be this rich" to attack threshold while the network compensates.
 383 2012-04-13 06:18:42 <MC1984> ??
 384 2012-04-13 06:19:47 <Diablo-D3> MC1984: by making the resource pure computation power, people cant play stupid fake efficiency games by throwing money at it
 385 2012-04-13 06:19:52 BlueMatt has quit (Quit: Quit!)
 386 2012-04-13 06:19:55 <midnightmagic> the network is becoming harder and harder to attack, asic+gpu+sasic+fpga+botnets. as long as the miners play by the rules overall, the activity of these out-of-range people just builds the network up.
 387 2012-04-13 06:20:18 BlueMatt has joined
 388 2012-04-13 06:20:23 <midnightmagic> we are protected by the people building asics..
 389 2012-04-13 06:20:33 <MC1984> until they take over
 390 2012-04-13 06:20:39 <Diablo-D3> and how do they take over?
 391 2012-04-13 06:20:42 <Diablo-D3> by making a 51% attack?
 392 2012-04-13 06:20:51 da2ce7 has joined
 393 2012-04-13 06:20:54 <MC1984> not even that
 394 2012-04-13 06:20:58 <Diablo-D3> when that happens all that millions of dollars of r&d is wasted
 395 2012-04-13 06:21:21 <MC1984> just by virtue of a random normal person asking can i mine? and the answer being an emphatic no
 396 2012-04-13 06:21:25 <midnightmagic> value is destroyed, trust is destroyed, bitcoin tanks, and the "experiment" is over.
 397 2012-04-13 06:21:37 <MC1984> its like everyone is forgetting the philosophy of bitcoin
 398 2012-04-13 06:21:39 <Diablo-D3> MC1984: except a random normal person can
 399 2012-04-13 06:21:46 <Diablo-D3> the answer is "yes, buy more efficient computing"
 400 2012-04-13 06:22:05 <midnightmagic> MC1984: what do you mean, specifically
 401 2012-04-13 06:22:08 <Diablo-D3> I mean, hell, give me a million dollars right now, I could 51% attack the network and it wouldn't do shit
 402 2012-04-13 06:22:15 <Diablo-D3> all it'd do is burn up a million dollars.
 403 2012-04-13 06:22:25 <MC1984> no the quastion is can i mine alongside these billion dollar mining corps
 404 2012-04-13 06:22:28 <MC1984> and the answer is lolno
 405 2012-04-13 06:22:34 <Diablo-D3> the answer is yes
 406 2012-04-13 06:22:35 <Diablo-D3> you just make less
 407 2012-04-13 06:22:43 <Diablo-D3> the larger something is the more efficient it is
 408 2012-04-13 06:22:51 <midnightmagic> ..  this future was already foreseen by the designers.
 409 2012-04-13 06:22:52 <Diablo-D3> mining companies just make it efficient
 410 2012-04-13 06:23:06 <Diablo-D3> MC1984: lets try this a different way
 411 2012-04-13 06:23:14 <Diablo-D3> do you know why a country should only have gold in it's vaults?
 412 2012-04-13 06:23:19 <Diablo-D3> instead of say, silver and gold
 413 2012-04-13 06:23:27 <midnightmagic> what you should be worried about is blockchain growing so huge normal people can't run a full node anymore.. :)
 414 2012-04-13 06:23:38 <midnightmagic> platinum.. palladium.
 415 2012-04-13 06:23:52 <Diablo-D3> the parity of silver and gold value would oscillate so quickly it would degrade the value of what is in the vault
 416 2012-04-13 06:23:58 <MC1984> again your disregarding the difference between 'official' pressure brought to bear on a handful of very large corps, and perhaps 100,000 individuals scattered all over the wrold
 417 2012-04-13 06:24:13 <Diablo-D3> MC1984: the 100k of us together would just be another mining company
 418 2012-04-13 06:24:17 <Diablo-D3> we all work towards the same goal
 419 2012-04-13 06:24:25 <Diablo-D3> whoever does it more efficiently should be paid more.
 420 2012-04-13 06:24:26 <MC1984> no
 421 2012-04-13 06:24:36 <MC1984> not the same entity
 422 2012-04-13 06:24:43 <MC1984> 100,000 different entities
 423 2012-04-13 06:24:50 <Diablo-D3> bitcoin is a distributed untrusted network
 424 2012-04-13 06:24:51 <MC1984> vs 1 entity with the same hashpower
 425 2012-04-13 06:25:04 <Diablo-D3> it doesnt matter who does it as long as it is done
 426 2012-04-13 06:25:06 <midnightmagic> "MC1984> its like everyone is forgetting the philosophy of bitcoin" <-- please identify specifically the philosophy you're referring to, and how we're forgetting it.
 427 2012-04-13 06:25:30 <Diablo-D3> MC1984: plus, do you realize the difference in efficiency?
 428 2012-04-13 06:25:36 <Diablo-D3> lets say 100k people make 100k bitcoins in x time
 429 2012-04-13 06:25:54 <MC1984> the prevention of consolidation of financial power that gave us entral banking and quantitativ easing and shit
 430 2012-04-13 06:26:02 <Diablo-D3> 1 really large company with 100k people worth of hashing power would get about 115k bitcoins at the very max in that x time
 431 2012-04-13 06:26:20 <Diablo-D3> asic doesnt magically grant you some huge bonus here
 432 2012-04-13 06:26:26 <midnightmagic> and what makes you think that is 1) the philosophy of bitcoin, and 2) not being satisfied.
 433 2012-04-13 06:26:37 <MC1984> Diablo-D3 you are looking at it from a technical perspective only
 434 2012-04-13 06:26:47 <Diablo-D3> Im looking at it from a _logical_ perspective
 435 2012-04-13 06:26:56 <Diablo-D3> you're speaking all wishy washy bullshit
 436 2012-04-13 06:27:05 <MC1984> i the goal is efficiency, lets get rid of the blockchain and throw up a txn clearing server on S3
 437 2012-04-13 06:27:31 <midnightmagic> MC1984: OpenTransactions already does that.
 438 2012-04-13 06:27:34 da2ce7 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 439 2012-04-13 06:27:49 <Diablo-D3> MC1984: but that does not provide one of the base goals
 440 2012-04-13 06:27:58 <Diablo-D3> a distributed untrusted cryptographically secured system
 441 2012-04-13 06:27:58 <midnightmagic> MC1984: And Ben Laurie agrees with you, btw, and says we should replace the hashing with a magic crypto voting protocol.
 442 2012-04-13 06:28:12 <MC1984> but its becoming not distributed, why cant you see that
 443 2012-04-13 06:28:14 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic: that'd be wrong anyhow
 444 2012-04-13 06:28:24 <MC1984> youre sleepwalking into central banking again and you seem happy
 445 2012-04-13 06:28:24 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic: we ALREADY quorum based on specific rules
 446 2012-04-13 06:28:37 <Diablo-D3> MC1984: yes, this IS central banking
 447 2012-04-13 06:28:43 <Diablo-D3> and the bank is owned by the public in full.
 448 2012-04-13 06:29:02 <midnightmagic> Diablo-D3: Laurie thinks it should be a voting protocol rather than brute-forcing, for electricity purposes.
 449 2012-04-13 06:29:08 <MC1984> no the bank will be owned by a handful of corps soon enough
 450 2012-04-13 06:29:13 minimoose has joined
 451 2012-04-13 06:29:18 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic: doesnt work, whoever is louder wins
 452 2012-04-13 06:29:26 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic: hashing just makes them show up or shut up
 453 2012-04-13 06:29:40 <Diablo-D3> MC1984: except everyone who produces a hash has control of the final outcome
 454 2012-04-13 06:29:43 sirk390 has joined
 455 2012-04-13 06:29:50 <Diablo-D3> no matter if they produce 50 mhash or 50 thash
 456 2012-04-13 06:30:26 <MC1984> not if they hardly find blocks
 457 2012-04-13 06:30:34 <MC1984> or if the corps collude
 458 2012-04-13 06:30:56 <midnightmagic> Diablo-D3: it seems to me the one who can simulate the most identities wins, so it was just a shift in resource utilization. He never answered my questions about it though. Zooko got some comments out of him but it wasn't about solving the practicalities, it was more about some weird esoteric stuff I didn't really grok.
 459 2012-04-13 06:31:04 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic: thats what I just said.
 460 2012-04-13 06:31:14 <Diablo-D3> [02:27:59] <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic: doesnt work, whoever is louder wins
 461 2012-04-13 06:31:14 <Diablo-D3> [02:28:07] <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic: hashing just makes them show up or shut up
 462 2012-04-13 06:31:39 <midnightmagic> Diablo-D3: I know, I'm agreeing. Also, I started writing that before your lines showed up.
 463 2012-04-13 06:32:01 da2ce7 has joined
 464 2012-04-13 06:32:36 <Diablo-D3> heh
 465 2012-04-13 06:32:45 <MC1984> so litecoin is shit and bitcoin seems happy for the entire system to be run on a few interlinked datacenteres facebook style
 466 2012-04-13 06:32:48 <MC1984> this is great
 467 2012-04-13 06:33:26 <midnightmagic> MC1984: long-term, yes. Giant Bitcoin datacentres making money from transaction fees..
 468 2012-04-13 06:34:02 <MC1984> right and everyone is happy with that
 469 2012-04-13 06:34:18 <Diablo-D3> yes, because the moment they cause shit everyone else can just refuse their blocks
 470 2012-04-13 06:34:25 <midnightmagic> It was pretty clear from the start..  I'm pretty sure Satoshi said something about that in one of his posts..
 471 2012-04-13 06:34:35 <Diablo-D3> tbe problem is, btw
 472 2012-04-13 06:34:46 <Diablo-D3> the global banking system MUST come along
 473 2012-04-13 06:34:52 <Diablo-D3> otherwise they become redundant
 474 2012-04-13 06:34:58 <midnightmagic> speaking of, I've always wondered whether Satoshi's posting history has ever been surreptitiously altered..
 475 2012-04-13 06:36:05 <MC1984> at least greg spoke favourably of integrating p2pool gpu mining back in the client i suppose
 476 2012-04-13 06:36:27 <midnightmagic> gavin said he would be in favour of a C++ version of p2pool being integrated into mainline.
 477 2012-04-13 06:36:38 <Diablo-D3> that'd be interesting
 478 2012-04-13 06:37:42 <midnightmagic> ..  but not gpu mining itself I don't think, since p2pool isn't a miner.
 479 2012-04-13 06:43:07 <MC1984> i suppose the asic miners are taking ultra giga risk though
 480 2012-04-13 06:43:15 <Diablo-D3> yes
 481 2012-04-13 06:43:18 <MC1984> cos if bitcoin fails youre gonna have to hire a skip
 482 2012-04-13 06:43:20 <Diablo-D3> and such risk requires reward
 483 2012-04-13 06:43:20 <midnightmagic> enormous risk.
 484 2012-04-13 06:43:56 jgarzik has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 485 2012-04-13 06:44:14 <midnightmagic> so, a single entity building modern-process asic without any competition would be a failure of the marketplace..
 486 2012-04-13 06:44:39 <MC1984> yes?
 487 2012-04-13 06:46:03 Detritus has joined
 488 2012-04-13 06:46:24 <midnightmagic> but not necessarily a failure contrary to bitcoin's blockchain. for it to become unprofitable to fpga would require razor-thin margins and either a monumental difficulty increase, or a monumental drop in price.
 489 2012-04-13 06:50:17 paulo_ has joined
 490 2012-04-13 06:50:25 <midnightmagic> gpu mining is going away, barring some weird shift in computing devices from chip manufacturers
 491 2012-04-13 06:51:15 <paulo_> how many nodes does the client connect to?
 492 2012-04-13 06:51:54 <midnightmagic> paulo_: maintains 8 outgoing by default i think. you can tell it to connect to more.  and if you open up incoming connections, the number goes up.
 493 2012-04-13 06:53:42 <midnightmagic> paulo_: so..  whatchya doin'? anything interesting?
 494 2012-04-13 06:54:36 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: laanwj opened pull request 1089 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1089>
 495 2012-04-13 06:56:24 jgarzik has joined
 496 2012-04-13 06:56:49 jgarzik is now known as Guest12806
 497 2012-04-13 06:56:51 <paulo_> is that enought to maintain the p2p network?
 498 2012-04-13 06:57:13 <paulo_> just trying to understand p2p networks. (specifically bitcoin)
 499 2012-04-13 07:01:11 <MC1984> things would be pretty shit if there were no listening nodes
 500 2012-04-13 07:04:28 <wumpus> p2p, by definition, is not possible without listening nodes
 501 2012-04-13 07:05:21 <MC1984> the times that skype went down was becasue of a retarded bug where thier supernodes shut themselves down
 502 2012-04-13 07:06:07 <MC1984> i read you need 10:1 ratio of supernodes for stability
 503 2012-04-13 07:20:56 Mad7Scientist has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 504 2012-04-13 07:21:16 paulo_ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 505 2012-04-13 07:32:12 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
 506 2012-04-13 07:34:27 splatster has quit (Quit: I'm mad.)
 507 2012-04-13 07:36:00 Fnar has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
 508 2012-04-13 07:39:01 Fnar has joined
 509 2012-04-13 07:40:21 erle- has joined
 510 2012-04-13 07:51:25 MobiusL has joined
 511 2012-04-13 07:55:13 OpenOcean has joined
 512 2012-04-13 07:57:13 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 513 2012-04-13 07:57:32 captain^k has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 514 2012-04-13 07:58:19 gjs278 has joined
 515 2012-04-13 08:03:01 RazielZ has joined
 516 2012-04-13 08:07:48 t7 has joined
 517 2012-04-13 08:13:49 MobiusL has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 518 2012-04-13 08:18:59 <xenland> midnightmagic: How do you increase connections? I always get a fixed rate of 8
 519 2012-04-13 08:24:11 knotwork_ is now known as knotwork
 520 2012-04-13 08:27:17 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: RainbowDashh)
 521 2012-04-13 08:30:04 Fnar has quit (Changing host)
 522 2012-04-13 08:30:04 Fnar has joined
 523 2012-04-13 08:36:23 <MC1984> dont worry about it
 524 2012-04-13 08:39:16 andytoshi has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 525 2012-04-13 08:39:37 ferroh_ is now known as ferroh
 526 2012-04-13 08:45:32 twobitcoins has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 527 2012-04-13 08:45:56 twobitcoins has joined
 528 2012-04-13 08:53:41 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 529 2012-04-13 08:54:20 gjs278 has joined
 530 2012-04-13 08:54:35 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 531 2012-04-13 08:55:10 <t7> 8 means firewall
 532 2012-04-13 08:56:04 <Diablo-D3> [04:17:40] <xenland> midnightmagic: How do you increase connections? I always get a fixed rate of 8
 533 2012-04-13 08:56:05 <Diablo-D3> tor?
 534 2012-04-13 09:00:35 <t7> Does anyone know of a minimal implementation of a crypto currency ?
 535 2012-04-13 09:00:40 <t7> im thinking of writing one
 536 2012-04-13 09:00:46 MobiusL has joined
 537 2012-04-13 09:00:55 <t7> not bitcoin compatible
 538 2012-04-13 09:03:07 <Diablo-D3> minimal?
 539 2012-04-13 09:03:22 <Diablo-D3> minimal would just be a central authority that doesnt hand anything out at all
 540 2012-04-13 09:03:43 gjs278 has joined
 541 2012-04-13 09:03:58 <Diablo-D3> next step up from that would be something thats essentially an ssl cert signing authority, except instead of ssl certs, it'd be bearer bonds
 542 2012-04-13 09:04:36 <t7> no i mean distributed
 543 2012-04-13 09:04:39 <t7> with a block chain
 544 2012-04-13 09:05:01 <Diablo-D3> hrm
 545 2012-04-13 09:05:05 <Diablo-D3> bitcoin is as minimal as it gets
 546 2012-04-13 09:05:14 <t7> i disagree
 547 2012-04-13 09:05:31 <t7> il show you! il show you all!
 548 2012-04-13 09:05:35 <Diablo-D3> you can make different choices, but you'll largely be implementing many of the same things
 549 2012-04-13 09:05:40 <t7> yeah i will
 550 2012-04-13 09:05:47 <t7> but it will be saner
 551 2012-04-13 09:05:57 <t7> no silly custom floating point types
 552 2012-04-13 09:06:22 <Diablo-D3> its not a custom floating point type
 553 2012-04-13 09:06:36 <Diablo-D3> I think you seem to be confused with what fixed point is
 554 2012-04-13 09:06:57 <t7> im not talking about satoshi
 555 2012-04-13 09:07:24 <t7> 'bits' in a transaction is expressed all strange
 556 2012-04-13 09:07:35 <t7> and loads of other things i dont like
 557 2012-04-13 09:07:47 <Diablo-D3> I think you need to learn how to program first.
 558 2012-04-13 09:08:32 <t7> and maybe i wont bother with scripts
 559 2012-04-13 09:08:37 <t7> no one seems to use them
 560 2012-04-13 09:08:39 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 561 2012-04-13 09:09:13 copumpkin has joined
 562 2012-04-13 09:09:26 <Diablo-D3> yeah, but thats all chairs on the deck of the titanic kind of shit
 563 2012-04-13 09:12:46 blomqvist has quit (Quit: Aah IRC, where men are men, women are men, and 14 year old girls are FBI agents.)
 564 2012-04-13 09:13:01 <wumpus> custom scripts are the future, you're right they are not used *yet*
 565 2012-04-13 09:15:07 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 566 2012-04-13 09:15:24 <wumpus> if you don't understand the subtleties involved, it's easy to say something is too complex
 567 2012-04-13 09:16:26 <wumpus> everything is a work in progress, submit a BIP if you think something in the protocol can be handled better
 568 2012-04-13 09:16:32 <Diablo-D3> yeah, until you write massively complex shit, who cares
 569 2012-04-13 09:17:00 gjs278 has joined
 570 2012-04-13 09:17:39 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 571 2012-04-13 09:18:20 gjs278 has joined
 572 2012-04-13 09:18:41 <MC1984> t7 maybe you could hack around with libbitcoin
 573 2012-04-13 09:18:57 <t7> nah im gonna write from scratch
 574 2012-04-13 09:19:46 <wumpus> and if you don't like the *implementation* you should look at the alternative clients
 575 2012-04-13 09:19:53 abbe has joined
 576 2012-04-13 09:20:16 <t7> its just for fun and learning
 577 2012-04-13 09:20:19 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 578 2012-04-13 09:27:18 gjs278 has joined
 579 2012-04-13 09:27:21 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 580 2012-04-13 09:28:11 gjs278 has joined
 581 2012-04-13 09:29:51 MobiusL has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 582 2012-04-13 09:31:20 toffoo has quit ()
 583 2012-04-13 09:34:51 MobiusL has joined
 584 2012-04-13 09:36:01 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 585 2012-04-13 09:36:25 gjs278 has joined
 586 2012-04-13 09:36:31 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 587 2012-04-13 09:37:38 guruvan has quit (Quit: I probably voided the warranty on this thing.....)
 588 2012-04-13 09:37:55 gjs278 has joined
 589 2012-04-13 09:37:56 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 590 2012-04-13 09:41:50 Turingi has joined
 591 2012-04-13 09:43:09 gjs278 has joined
 592 2012-04-13 09:45:58 fimpfimp has joined
 593 2012-04-13 09:49:36 tcatm_ has joined
 594 2012-04-13 09:49:52 T_X has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 595 2012-04-13 09:50:27 tcatm has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 596 2012-04-13 09:50:27 npouillard has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 597 2012-04-13 09:51:12 T_X has joined
 598 2012-04-13 09:52:01 npouillard has joined
 599 2012-04-13 09:58:32 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 600 2012-04-13 09:59:56 gjs278 has joined
 601 2012-04-13 10:00:22 MobiusL has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 602 2012-04-13 10:03:58 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 603 2012-04-13 10:06:32 MobiusL has joined
 604 2012-04-13 10:08:13 Snapman is now known as Snapman[afkers]
 605 2012-04-13 10:12:29 gjs278 has joined
 606 2012-04-13 10:14:53 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 607 2012-04-13 10:15:17 gjs278 has joined
 608 2012-04-13 10:16:07 pierre` has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 609 2012-04-13 10:19:37 fimpfimp has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
 610 2012-04-13 10:20:16 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 611 2012-04-13 10:20:49 Someguy123 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 612 2012-04-13 10:20:53 gjs278 has joined
 613 2012-04-13 10:21:41 Someguy123 has joined
 614 2012-04-13 10:25:00 Someguy123[afk] has joined
 615 2012-04-13 10:30:54 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 616 2012-04-13 10:31:23 paraipan_ has quit (Quit: Saliendo)
 617 2012-04-13 10:37:08 <Diablo-D3> today is friday the 13th, I feel sorry for anyone that believes in this
 618 2012-04-13 10:38:21 MobiusL has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 619 2012-04-13 10:40:01 Z0rZ0rZ0r has joined
 620 2012-04-13 10:49:07 rdponticelli has joined
 621 2012-04-13 10:54:58 <MC1984> beleives in what
 622 2012-04-13 10:55:21 <Diablo-D3> thats the right mindset
 623 2012-04-13 10:55:24 <Diablo-D3> good job
 624 2012-04-13 10:55:45 Radium has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 625 2012-04-13 10:55:48 <MC1984> isnt it only supposed to be creepy because of the film
 626 2012-04-13 10:56:13 <Diablo-D3> no
 627 2012-04-13 10:56:25 <Diablo-D3> its a hundreds of years old superstition
 628 2012-04-13 10:57:47 <MC1984> yeah and people are scared of the mayan calendar shit too
 629 2012-04-13 10:58:01 <Blitzboom> i am not, i look forward to it
 630 2012-04-13 10:58:22 <Diablo-D3> I try not to look forward to it
 631 2012-04-13 10:58:24 <Diablo-D3> I mean, lets face it
 632 2012-04-13 10:58:25 <MC1984> it was like 10 months ago cos the mayans didnt know about leap years
 633 2012-04-13 10:58:27 <MC1984> or somthing
 634 2012-04-13 10:58:27 <Diablo-D3> anything I want never happens
 635 2012-04-13 10:59:08 <MC1984> and the y2k error thing
 636 2012-04-13 10:59:12 <MC1984> the hype of that was immense
 637 2012-04-13 10:59:31 <MC1984> i remember going to pc world and seeing Y2K PROTECTION KITS
 638 2012-04-13 10:59:38 <MC1984> back when you could buy boxed software
 639 2012-04-13 11:00:18 <MC1984> lots of people made bank off that scare lol
 640 2012-04-13 11:00:38 <MC1984> from joe dumbass up to government level
 641 2012-04-13 11:01:20 guruvan has joined
 642 2012-04-13 11:04:45 TD has joined
 643 2012-04-13 11:06:45 RazielZ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 644 2012-04-13 11:22:55 m00p has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 645 2012-04-13 11:27:44 <wumpus> hehe
 646 2012-04-13 11:28:18 <wumpus> you can sell those kits again in 2036 when the 32-bit epoch runs out
 647 2012-04-13 11:32:58 Turingi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 648 2012-04-13 11:33:36 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
 649 2012-04-13 11:34:39 TD has joined
 650 2012-04-13 11:35:53 <luke-jr> wumpus: not sure the idiots can comprehend why 2036 is a problem
 651 2012-04-13 11:36:22 agricocb has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 652 2012-04-13 11:37:37 <kinlo> luke-jr: I wonder if it will be that big of a problem, that's still more then 20 years to allow everybody to upgrade to 64 bit
 653 2012-04-13 11:38:07 <luke-jr> kinlo: yeah well, people had a long time before y2k too
 654 2012-04-13 11:38:27 <luke-jr> apparently a lot of idiots like to use unmaintained code for important stuff
 655 2012-04-13 11:38:45 <wumpus> easy to drum them up though
 656 2012-04-13 11:38:52 <kinlo> luke-jr: true, but everyday I hope there are less retards on this world, and everytime somebody like you has to shake be down to reality :)
 657 2012-04-13 11:38:54 <luke-jr> the world needs to wake up and realize software isn't write-once
 658 2012-04-13 11:39:04 <kinlo> s/be/me/
 659 2012-04-13 11:39:09 <wumpus> it's easy to get people scared about everything they don't understand
 660 2012-04-13 11:39:18 <luke-jr> kinlo: until one of these "crisises" results in major damage, I don't think it'll happen
 661 2012-04-13 11:39:43 <kinlo> :)
 662 2012-04-13 11:39:49 <luke-jr> if y2k had some real harmful effect, we could say "SEE! you need to maintain computer software just like you do cars"
 663 2012-04-13 11:40:04 <luke-jr> but as-is, people were left thinking it was completely fictional
 664 2012-04-13 11:41:33 <wumpus> well there were quite some letterheads etc that were suddenly 1900 instead of 2000... but yeah nothing really bad, people were fed stories about nuclear bombs launching etc :')
 665 2012-04-13 11:51:38 Snapman[afkers] is now known as Snapman
 666 2012-04-13 11:56:28 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
 667 2012-04-13 12:02:24 guruvan has quit (Quit: I probably voided the warranty on this thing.....)
 668 2012-04-13 12:03:44 guruvan has joined
 669 2012-04-13 12:05:34 <MC1984> <luke-jr> the world needs to wake up and realize software isn't write-once
 670 2012-04-13 12:05:37 <MC1984> what about java?
 671 2012-04-13 12:05:49 <luke-jr> Java? What's that?
 672 2012-04-13 12:08:58 p0s has joined
 673 2012-04-13 12:19:38 <vragnaroda> Was that supposed to be an implication that Java isn't usually written once or that real software is written in Java?
 674 2012-04-13 12:19:42 <vragnaroda> Either way, rofl.
 675 2012-04-13 12:20:45 datagutt has joined
 676 2012-04-13 12:23:18 Graet_on_holiday has quit (Excess Flood)
 677 2012-04-13 12:25:11 Guest44833 has joined
 678 2012-04-13 12:30:11 sirk390 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
 679 2012-04-13 12:32:24 toffoo has joined
 680 2012-04-13 12:33:27 merde has quit ()
 681 2012-04-13 12:34:58 sirk390 has joined
 682 2012-04-13 12:36:01 Z0rZ0rZ0r has quit (Quit: Wheeeee)
 683 2012-04-13 12:39:05 Guest44833 is now known as graet
 684 2012-04-13 12:39:26 graet is now known as Graet
 685 2012-04-13 12:39:43 Graet has quit (Changing host)
 686 2012-04-13 12:39:43 Graet has joined
 687 2012-04-13 12:42:25 minimoose has joined
 688 2012-04-13 12:44:35 Joric has joined
 689 2012-04-13 12:45:15 Nicksasa has joined
 690 2012-04-13 12:45:15 Nicksasa has quit (Changing host)
 691 2012-04-13 12:45:15 Nicksasa has joined
 692 2012-04-13 12:50:39 Clipse has joined
 693 2012-04-13 12:52:54 torsthaldo has joined
 694 2012-04-13 12:56:49 gavinandresen has joined
 695 2012-04-13 13:00:55 slothbag has joined
 696 2012-04-13 13:03:17 MobiusL has joined
 697 2012-04-13 13:06:26 <JFK911> haha y2k
 698 2012-04-13 13:06:45 <JFK911> in the early 1990's, other undergrads were laughing at me for studying cobol.
 699 2012-04-13 13:08:10 darkskiez has joined
 700 2012-04-13 13:08:31 MobiusL has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 701 2012-04-13 13:16:12 <t7> watch out bitcoin!
 702 2012-04-13 13:16:14 <t7> https://github.com/tm1rbrt/Lambdacoin
 703 2012-04-13 13:26:22 p0s has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 704 2012-04-13 13:27:56 Z0rZ0rZ0r has joined
 705 2012-04-13 13:32:37 <t7> whats the formula for number of bitcoin-reward per block
 706 2012-04-13 13:40:43 <helo> t7: the reward halves every 210000 blocks, starting at 50 at block 0
 707 2012-04-13 13:40:53 <helo> or 1... :/
 708 2012-04-13 13:41:20 <t7> ah cool
 709 2012-04-13 13:42:09 <t7> i guess its important that a currency be in base 10
 710 2012-04-13 13:43:27 <helo> according to block explorer the first block with a reward of 25 will be 209999: https://blockexplorer.com/q/bcperblock/209999
 711 2012-04-13 13:43:59 <t7> ;;bc;count
 712 2012-04-13 13:43:59 <gribble> Error: "bc;count" is not a valid command.
 713 2012-04-13 13:44:03 <t7> ;;bc;blocks
 714 2012-04-13 13:44:03 <gribble> Error: "bc;blocks" is not a valid command.
 715 2012-04-13 13:44:08 <t7> ;;blocks
 716 2012-04-13 13:44:08 <gribble> Error: "blocks" is not a valid command.
 717 2012-04-13 13:44:09 <helo> ;;bc,blocks
 718 2012-04-13 13:44:10 <gribble> 175507
 719 2012-04-13 13:44:26 <t7> not long now :O
 720 2012-04-13 13:45:14 <helo> yeah... those expensive fpga miners are becoming more risky and attractive at the same time :)
 721 2012-04-13 13:46:16 <Graet> ;;bc,halfreward
 722 2012-04-13 13:46:16 <gribble> Estimated time of bitcoin block reward halving: Sat Dec  8 18:34:00 2012 | Time remaining: 34 weeks, 1 day, 12 hours, 50 minutes, and 0 seconds
 723 2012-04-13 13:47:36 <wumpus> <t7> i guess its important that a currency be in base 10 <- shhh, luke-jr may be listening
 724 2012-04-13 13:47:48 <luke-jr> t7: fail
 725 2012-04-13 13:48:25 <t7> ?
 726 2012-04-13 13:49:33 <luke-jr> t7: use fractions.
 727 2012-04-13 13:50:37 <t7> whats wrong with satoshis ?
 728 2012-04-13 13:50:45 <luke-jr> they're limited.
 729 2012-04-13 13:51:05 <luke-jr> and you can't do 1/3 ;)
 730 2012-04-13 13:52:49 guruvan is now known as guruvan|AFK
 731 2012-04-13 14:02:23 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
 732 2012-04-13 14:03:29 Graet has quit (Excess Flood)
 733 2012-04-13 14:03:40 Graet has joined
 734 2012-04-13 14:04:00 Graet is now known as Guest42789
 735 2012-04-13 14:11:47 <MC1984> oh boy here we go
 736 2012-04-13 14:12:52 Guest12806 has quit (Changing host)
 737 2012-04-13 14:12:52 Guest12806 has joined
 738 2012-04-13 14:12:55 Guest12806 is now known as jgarzik
 739 2012-04-13 14:15:17 paulo_ has joined
 740 2012-04-13 14:16:08 graingert has joined
 741 2012-04-13 14:26:19 <helo> so if you sent a tx from inputs valued at 1/2, 1/3, and 1/5, how would you represent the resulting amount in the output?
 742 2012-04-13 14:26:39 copumpkin has joined
 743 2012-04-13 14:26:47 kingkataricell has joined
 744 2012-04-13 14:26:52 <gmaxwell> helo: bitcoin values are all integers.
 745 2012-04-13 14:27:13 <gmaxwell> helo: we display them as 'bitcoins' by first dividing by 1e8.
 746 2012-04-13 14:27:35 <helo> sorry, that was to luke-jr's "use fractions"...
 747 2012-04-13 14:27:48 <gmaxwell> oh sorry, was just tuning in.
 748 2012-04-13 14:27:53 <luke-jr> helo: 1/50th
 749 2012-04-13 14:28:14 <paulo_> are tx fees dependent on the block accepting them?
 750 2012-04-13 14:28:20 <gmaxwell> helo: yea, I pointed out to in previously that if you supported mixed radix numbers then people could create coins who's values took gigabytes to represent due to having many prime factors.
 751 2012-04-13 14:28:49 <gavinandresen> I want pi.  I like pi.
 752 2012-04-13 14:28:51 <kingkataricell> Hey like sorry it is a no go I don't have the cash this month
 753 2012-04-13 14:29:08 <gmaxwell> paulo_: You're pretty good at coming up with questions I can't decode! :)
 754 2012-04-13 14:29:09 <helo> kingkataricell: no problem, we'll still be here next month
 755 2012-04-13 14:29:53 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: hence the size limtis
 756 2012-04-13 14:30:00 <kingkataricell> I mental to say luke not like
 757 2012-04-13 14:30:24 <gmaxwell> paulo_: you can specify whatever fee you like— nodes are free to choose to (not) relay or (not) mine them as they wish, based on the fees, the phase of the moon, or whatever they like.
 758 2012-04-13 14:31:21 <luke-jr> transaction fee = bribe to miner :p
 759 2012-04-13 14:31:34 <kingkataricell> This damn irc phone chat is changing what I type
 760 2012-04-13 14:33:07 <kingkataricell> You get that msg luke?
 761 2012-04-13 14:33:37 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: I'm working on a testnet reset...
 762 2012-04-13 14:34:54 <helo> how do you enforce a reset on testnet?
 763 2012-04-13 14:35:03 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: I'm thinking:  new genesis block (of course), new bytestream marker, new IRC rendezvous channel and default difficulty same as main net.
 764 2012-04-13 14:35:32 <gavinandresen> helo: you don't enforce it, people can continue to use the old testnet if they like...
 765 2012-04-13 14:36:41 <helo> ahh right... will new clients find the old testnet invalid by default somehow?
 766 2012-04-13 14:37:38 <gavinandresen> the new bytestream marker means even if old&new connect they'll never manage to communicate
 767 2012-04-13 14:40:10 <luke-jr> kingkataricell: yes
 768 2012-04-13 14:40:12 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: that sounds good, although it may mess with some tools that speak to the testnet network port. (e.g. like p2pool)
 769 2012-04-13 14:42:20 <kingkataricell> Luke-jr: Ok I will see if I can't come up with the cash another way
 770 2012-04-13 14:44:47 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: good point; I can't decide which will be less painful, though, requiring that tools upgrade or dealing with old clients trying to send you the old testnet blockchain
 771 2012-04-13 14:45:25 <gmaxwell> I think old clients sending you old blockchains is probably pretty bad. Otoh, probably gives us block-flooding attack testing.
 772 2012-04-13 14:47:39 <gavinandresen> yeah... maybe an early checkpoint instead of a new pchMessageStart....
 773 2012-04-13 14:49:39 slothbag has quit (Quit: I quit!)
 774 2012-04-13 14:53:33 antix has joined
 775 2012-04-13 14:56:56 paulo_ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 776 2012-04-13 14:56:56 spq has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 777 2012-04-13 14:59:35 paulo_ has joined
 778 2012-04-13 15:03:34 kingkataricell has quit (Quit: Bye)
 779 2012-04-13 15:03:54 kingkataricell has joined
 780 2012-04-13 15:04:29 kingkataricell has quit (Client Quit)
 781 2012-04-13 15:04:44 kingkataricell has joined
 782 2012-04-13 15:05:09 Diablo-D3 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
 783 2012-04-13 15:07:13 kingkataricell has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 784 2012-04-13 15:12:25 reo33rer has joined
 785 2012-04-13 15:17:24 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: laanwj opened pull request 1090 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1090>
 786 2012-04-13 15:24:49 <t7> sipa: you know how to implement ECDSA ?
 787 2012-04-13 15:25:38 <t7> or anyone else who knows haskell :3 ?
 788 2012-04-13 15:28:34 <luke-jr> t7: maybe check Purecoin?
 789 2012-04-13 15:28:43 <t7> yeah good idea
 790 2012-04-13 15:30:04 danbri_ has joined
 791 2012-04-13 15:30:21 toffoo has quit ()
 792 2012-04-13 15:33:10 danbri has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 793 2012-04-13 15:34:57 <t7> i feel like i need to bleach my eyes now
 794 2012-04-13 15:42:31 ahihi2 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 795 2012-04-13 15:44:27 RazielZ has joined
 796 2012-04-13 15:54:09 t7 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 797 2012-04-13 16:01:00 Clipse has quit (Quit: Clipse)
 798 2012-04-13 16:04:01 pierre` has joined
 799 2012-04-13 16:05:08 paulo_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 800 2012-04-13 16:30:31 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: Diapolo opened pull request 1091 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1091>
 801 2012-04-13 16:33:56 torsthaldo has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 802 2012-04-13 16:44:35 * jgarzik wonders what are the current proposals for replacing bitcoin's current fee schedule/system
 803 2012-04-13 16:45:24 <jgarzik> ISTR at least one or two proposals floating around that gavinandresen and BlueMatt may have mumbled positive noises about
 804 2012-04-13 16:46:02 * jgarzik readily admits having no good ideas on fees, himself... :)
 805 2012-04-13 16:47:42 <[Tycho]> Do we need a new fee system ?
 806 2012-04-13 16:48:05 <[Tycho]> Or you are talking about optimal fee guessing for clients ?
 807 2012-04-13 16:49:13 <luke-jr> ISTR?
 808 2012-04-13 16:49:24 <sipa> i want to have one or a few switches in the client, for miners to choose for themselves
 809 2012-04-13 16:49:45 <sipa> i once started writing aproposal, but i'm afraid i lost it
 810 2012-04-13 16:49:52 <luke-jr> sipa: I have a pullreq for that.
 811 2012-04-13 16:49:55 <Joric> jgarzik, just tie fees to the cost of electricity )
 812 2012-04-13 16:50:04 <luke-jr> the hard part is conveying it to people sending txns
 813 2012-04-13 16:50:05 <sipa> luke-jr: a bit more complex than that
 814 2012-04-13 16:50:49 <[Tycho]> sipa: nice idea.
 815 2012-04-13 16:51:00 <Joric> i believe the only scale factor for fees is the BTC/USD exchange rate
 816 2012-04-13 16:51:12 <sipa> basically a new scoring system for priorities, based on some parameters, and priorities that increase based on the time spent waiting, and then the miner choosing a cutoff point, and including all priorities above the cutoff
 817 2012-04-13 16:51:39 capiscuas has joined
 818 2012-04-13 16:52:24 <sipa> if such a system is implemented (and used by every miner, although every miner is allowed to choose his own parameters), it should be possible for clients to observe waiting time and suggest a fee based on that
 819 2012-04-13 16:52:37 <sipa> but that's a strong assumption
 820 2012-04-13 17:01:53 bobke has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 821 2012-04-13 17:01:57 <Joric> sha256("") > hex > electrum : woman everyone rape listen strife flash breath tune held dragon especially least love nerd weave bag weary wound excuse sane pound acid shame awe
 822 2012-04-13 17:02:06 <Joric> rfc1751 replacement could be better
 823 2012-04-13 17:02:07 <gjs278> wat
 824 2012-04-13 17:02:32 <Joric> gjs278, http://brainwallet.org/#converter
 825 2012-04-13 17:02:57 <Joric> could actually use rhymimg
 826 2012-04-13 17:03:31 <sipa> let's create a haiku-based convertor
 827 2012-04-13 17:03:37 <sipa> or a lymmeric one
 828 2012-04-13 17:03:42 <Joric> *rhyming words
 829 2012-04-13 17:04:03 <sipa> just have a list of verbs, nounds, adjectives, place names, ...
 830 2012-04-13 17:06:20 occulta has joined
 831 2012-04-13 17:11:18 Samuel has joined
 832 2012-04-13 17:11:28 <Samuel> Hello
 833 2012-04-13 17:12:20 capiscuas has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 834 2012-04-13 17:13:21 paulo_ has joined
 835 2012-04-13 17:17:25 dvide has quit ()
 836 2012-04-13 17:18:10 bobke has joined
 837 2012-04-13 17:23:36 Vitas has joined
 838 2012-04-13 17:23:44 Samuel has quit (Quit: Page closed)
 839 2012-04-13 17:38:03 Hasbro has joined
 840 2012-04-13 17:38:03 Hasbro has quit (Changing host)
 841 2012-04-13 17:38:03 Hasbro has joined
 842 2012-04-13 17:41:34 <jgarzik> [Tycho]: more generally, letting "the market" decide about fees by itself, rather than hand-coding anti-spam and block-size rules as we do now
 843 2012-04-13 17:43:03 <jgarzik> [Tycho]: i.e. people seem to agree the current fee system is a mess, but noone has developed an obviously better solution
 844 2012-04-13 17:43:07 <jgarzik> kinda like democracy
 845 2012-04-13 17:43:35 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: market decides anti-spam has more or less not worked on altchains. E.g. namecoin and litecoin gained hundreds of megabytes of spam (and the former seems to only have stopped because the spammers stopped, not because of any reaction— litecoin reacted by basically adopting the bitcoin policy scaled to the value of their coin)
 846 2012-04-13 17:51:27 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: Until the block reward drops, fees and transaction volume (anti-spam) are really noise that few miners really care about
 847 2012-04-13 17:53:00 Turingi has joined
 848 2012-04-13 17:53:06 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: forget the reward — until the real traffic grows to the point where there is actual block space pressure it would be hard to get the market to do anything about spam, because it's just a slow silent tax which nails new and furuture users and quitely discourages decentralization.
 849 2012-04-13 17:54:23 <jgarzik> true
 850 2012-04-13 17:55:07 <gmaxwell> In any case, making it more possible to reliably replace stuck transactions would be a good initial step.
 851 2012-04-13 17:56:22 <jgarzik> IMO I think the current bitcoin's endgame is as a not-high-volume settlement network.  Scaling up, I don't think it will be realistic for even lightweight clients to deal with the main P2P network
 852 2012-04-13 17:57:15 <jgarzik> -hopefully- an open access, instant tx layer will emerge by the time that becomes a worry, years in the future
 853 2012-04-13 17:58:45 <jgarzik> i.e. maybe the best plan is to develop a useful client protocol for submitting raw TX's, and then watching the network for various addresses / pubkeys / hashes, and a means to find various endpoints willing to talk that protocol, rather than worry about connecting mobile phones to the current P2P network
 854 2012-04-13 18:00:15 <jgarzik> even a header-only block chain is rather pointless for a mobile phone
 855 2012-04-13 18:00:22 <gmaxwell> ::nods:: I think high volume basically would preclude the decentralization (e.g. making it so that no one but a few central banks ran full nodes) that currently makes bitcoin a novel system.
 856 2012-04-13 18:00:33 <jgarzik> yep
 857 2012-04-13 18:02:43 <gavinandresen> jgarzik: RE: clients knowing the "right" fees:  I still think clients could do a good-enough job suggesting appropriate fees by observing network behavior
 858 2012-04-13 18:03:30 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: so, a problem with at least some of those schemes is the existance of things like Luke's pools' mtgox agreement where they provide free processing for txn selected by mtgox.
 859 2012-04-13 18:03:51 <gavinandresen> are those txn ever broadcast to the network?
 860 2012-04-13 18:04:15 <gmaxwell> I believe so— I think they send the authorize-this message for txn paying _to_ them as well as txn from them.
 861 2012-04-13 18:05:03 pusle has joined
 862 2012-04-13 18:05:25 <luke-jr> [12:51:05] <sipa> if such a system is implemented (and used by every miner, although every miner is allowed to choose his own parameters), it should be possible for clients to observe waiting time and suggest a fee based on that
 863 2012-04-13 18:05:31 <luke-jr> sipa: observation is impossible
 864 2012-04-13 18:06:29 <gavinandresen> so luke-jr, how do you think clients should suggest fees?
 865 2012-04-13 18:07:05 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: I don't know a perfect solution, but standardizing a protocol for miners to express their fee policy seems the best I can think of.
 866 2012-04-13 18:07:52 <gavinandresen> and then count on them being mostly honest...  mmmm.
 867 2012-04-13 18:07:56 <gmaxwell> Miners could sign a fee policy message, tied to solved blocks, and that could be flooded.
 868 2012-04-13 18:08:08 <jgarzik> Thinking aloud...  to provide democratic access to a scaled-up, high-volume bitcoin network, consider a second P2P network.  It provides TX submission (client->block chain) services, and block chain query services (find payments to [these] addresses, check for my TX confirm level).  Leaf nodes (mobile phones) connect to one or more nodes, and discover API endpoints.  Each API endpoint, a service provider, advertises API
 869 2012-04-13 18:08:08 <jgarzik>  services and associated fees.  Leaf nodes choose one or more API endpoints, and submit bitcoin TX's or query the block chain for new data.
 870 2012-04-13 18:08:14 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: I'm not sure what exactly miners have to gain by lying.
 871 2012-04-13 18:08:23 <jgarzik> but anyway, that is years down the road
 872 2012-04-13 18:08:54 <gavinandresen> luke-jr: there's a built-in incentive for miners to say their fee policy is to charge higher fees than they are actually charging
 873 2012-04-13 18:09:05 <jgarzik> I just don't see the current design ever being friendly to mobile phone style use
 874 2012-04-13 18:09:08 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: claim they charge high fees to that people are willing to pay .. pay.. but still process cheap txn .. so that unwilling traffic still gets timely processing.
 875 2012-04-13 18:09:40 <gmaxwell> Basically: discriminatory pricing always makes you more money than flat pricing.
 876 2012-04-13 18:09:42 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: that's already a problem with the current setup, though.
 877 2012-04-13 18:10:27 spq has joined
 878 2012-04-13 18:10:40 toffoo has joined
 879 2012-04-13 18:10:45 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: RE suggesting fees...   yes.  if you have full block chain, you could easily discover the average fee for last N blocks
 880 2012-04-13 18:10:59 <gavinandresen> That's why I like the give&take market of clients developers constantly trying to give their users the cheapest transactions, miners trying to get the most fees...
 881 2012-04-13 18:11:00 <jgarzik> heck, P2P nodes could even return 'average fee' at login
 882 2012-04-13 18:11:06 <jgarzik> in version msg
 883 2012-04-13 18:11:31 <gavinandresen> jgarzik: I'm thinking more of looking at the transactions that make it into the memory pool, and measuring how long it takes them to get into a block.
 884 2012-04-13 18:11:45 <gavinandresen> ... then inferring fee policy from their size/priority/etc
 885 2012-04-13 18:12:38 <gavinandresen> Some decentralized centralization might make sense, though... some way to tell your client "Listen to Gavin's Faucet node, it knows a lot about fee policies"
 886 2012-04-13 18:13:25 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: makes sense, though it would be tough for that to ramp down in a distributed manner when prices fall.  TXs might simply not get relayed, as opposed to simply a longer delay, right?
 887 2012-04-13 18:14:28 barmstrong has joined
 888 2012-04-13 18:14:33 <gavinandresen> I agree that transactions aught to have an expiration time
 889 2012-04-13 18:14:57 <luke-jr> jgarzik: but just because Joe paid no fee, doesn't mean you could have paid no fee
 890 2012-04-13 18:15:04 <gavinandresen> I think that's orthogonal to setting fee policy (I agree that bundling chained transactions to pay fees after-the-fact is another good, orthogonal idea)
 891 2012-04-13 18:15:12 guruvan is now known as AFK!~guruvan@gateway/tor-sasl/guruvan|guruvan
 892 2012-04-13 18:15:36 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: agree
 893 2012-04-13 18:15:56 <jgarzik> one small step forward
 894 2012-04-13 18:16:46 graingert has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 895 2012-04-13 18:16:46 <gavinandresen> Thinking out loud... what if a tx message included a "kick from memory pool after time X" ?  Not a permanent part of the transaction, just used to tell relayers/miners "I expect this to get into a block by time X, if it doesn't, forget about it."
 896 2012-04-13 18:17:18 reo33rer has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 897 2012-04-13 18:17:21 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: so I sent that to 10 seconds, and then have an easier time doublespending the rx side.
 898 2012-04-13 18:17:41 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: unfortunately, you broke the only way we had to tie extra relay-only data onto transactions… :p
 899 2012-04-13 18:18:09 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: nobody has to obey the expiracy. clients might include a 1 day minimum
 900 2012-04-13 18:18:41 <luke-jr> (otherwise, set it to the past, and only send it to your victim…)
 901 2012-04-13 18:18:54 <gmaxwell> right right. Just pointing out things that have to be thought about.
 902 2012-04-13 18:20:05 <gavinandresen> clients aught to be able to figure out that transactions with mine-by times in the near future or past aught to be treated with extra suspicion
 903 2012-04-13 18:20:09 Hasbro has quit ()
 904 2012-04-13 18:21:10 <gmaxwell> In theory, but I think asking users or application developers to actually competently handle the partial reversability of transactions ... is not going to happen.
 905 2012-04-13 18:21:45 PsychoticBoy has joined
 906 2012-04-13 18:21:46 graingert has joined
 907 2012-04-13 18:21:48 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: I trust TD to do a great job of that, and I think we can do a good job
 908 2012-04-13 18:22:24 <gmaxwell> Right, I didn't mean bitcoin clients themselves.. I mean higher level stuff. I think the bitcoin software has to report a binary "safe" vs "not safe".
 909 2012-04-13 18:22:31 <jgarzik> That's partly why I wanted the rule to be entirely an implementation choice, without client input.  bitcoind receives a TX, and chooses number of blocks after which it expires, if it hasn't yet made it into a block.  Client, on the other hand, has the choice to retransmit (or not) every couple of hours.
 910 2012-04-13 18:22:37 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: and, again, some decentralized centralization might be a good idea:  I imagine services like "how likely is it that this txid is a double-spend?"
 911 2012-04-13 18:23:04 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: absolutely, I think thats a grand idea and there should eventually be support for that in the refernce client.
 912 2012-04-13 18:23:10 <jgarzik> ArtForz suggested a 24 hour expiration from memory pool.  Helps cap mempool size, and clients are expected to retransmit regularly.
 913 2012-04-13 18:23:25 <gavinandresen> I'd vote for that.
 914 2012-04-13 18:23:34 <jgarzik> Clients stop retransmitting, signalling expiration is desired.
 915 2012-04-13 18:24:04 <gmaxwell> I support that too.
 916 2012-04-13 18:24:08 graingert has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 917 2012-04-13 18:25:36 <gmaxwell> though ... if someone is still retransmiting it should never fall out.. a simple 24 hour expire doesn't get us that.
 918 2012-04-13 18:25:45 <gmaxwell> (because it will have to expire before the rebroadcast works)
 919 2012-04-13 18:26:10 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 920 2012-04-13 18:26:35 * luke-jr notes clients already stop relaying transactions after some period of time
 921 2012-04-13 18:26:37 <gmaxwell> so it needs to be something like n hours after it broadcastable again, and then at >n the nodes forget it.
 922 2012-04-13 18:27:15 reo33rer has joined
 923 2012-04-13 18:27:34 <jgarzik> correct, the client must stop retransmitting before expire even begins to stop
 924 2012-04-13 18:27:37 <jgarzik> *to work
 925 2012-04-13 18:28:23 <gmaxwell> Three steps: retransmitting must stop long before the expire, then it should be possible to refresh the expiration, then it should expire.
 926 2012-04-13 18:28:41 danbri_ is now known as danbri
 927 2012-04-13 18:30:18 <gavinandresen> hmm?  just a simple drop-from-memory-pool-after-24-hours should be good enough, right?  If you're rebroadcasting, then it either gets ignored (if it is the node's memory pool) or relayed.  Stop rebroadcasting and 24 hours later the transaction should be clear from all nodes that have upgraded to the new policy
 928 2012-04-13 18:30:32 <jgarzik> How to implement the middle step?  Retransmitting (or not) is a binary choice, and the TX will be refreshed immediately when/if that switch is flipped back on
 929 2012-04-13 18:30:40 <jgarzik> so I don't understand/see the need for the middle step
 930 2012-04-13 18:30:44 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: agree
 931 2012-04-13 18:31:28 <gmaxwell> Because say I _don't_ want it to expire.
 932 2012-04-13 18:31:36 graingert has joined
 933 2012-04-13 18:31:38 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: then retransmit :)
 934 2012-04-13 18:31:40 <gmaxwell> I keep retransmitting, but my retransmits get dropped because nodes already know about it.
 935 2012-04-13 18:31:55 <gmaxwell> And thus the retranmissions don't make it out to nodes that do forget about it.
 936 2012-04-13 18:32:05 <jgarzik> s/ gavinandresen / gmaxwell /
 937 2012-04-13 18:32:19 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: you know when you started, so you can predict the expire time
 938 2012-04-13 18:32:32 <luke-jr> after 12 hours, tolerate relaying them again; after 24 hours, drop them
 939 2012-04-13 18:32:43 <luke-jr> (the retransmit should refresh the expiracy)
 940 2012-04-13 18:33:00 <gmaxwell> e.g. The network is only: Me <-> Jeff <-> Gavin.     Jeff forgets about it first, I retransmit it to him, now he knows it. Gavin then forgets.. but my further retransmissions don't make it to gavin, and gavin is still connected to jeff.. so he never learns of it again.
 941 2012-04-13 18:33:50 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: yes, after N, where N<expire then tolerate retransmit is okay.
 942 2012-04-13 18:33:55 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: the most common case is a node will retransmit to 8 other nodes until it reaches a block
 943 2012-04-13 18:34:00 reo33rer has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 944 2012-04-13 18:34:19 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: because we -already- face expiration issues anyway, due to node restarts etc.
 945 2012-04-13 18:34:22 toffoo has quit ()
 946 2012-04-13 18:34:31 <jgarzik> this change just makes expiration more predictable
 947 2012-04-13 18:36:47 Hasbro has joined
 948 2012-04-13 18:38:47 * jgarzik wonders what the average uptime is
 949 2012-04-13 18:38:57 <jgarzik> we might be below 24 hours already, on average
 950 2012-04-13 18:39:14 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 951 2012-04-13 18:39:31 <helo> for the GUI client... should sent transactions be interpreted and shown as "unconfirmed" unless they are in the currently accepted chain? with perhaps the possibility of retransmitting with a higher fee if they aren't included after __ blocks?
 952 2012-04-13 18:46:34 Hasbro has quit (Changing host)
 953 2012-04-13 18:46:34 Hasbro has joined
 954 2012-04-13 18:48:02 Zarutian has joined
 955 2012-04-13 18:51:26 <[Tycho]> helo: aren't they already shown as "0 confirmations" ?
 956 2012-04-13 18:54:09 <helo> yes, although most users are probably not be aware that they are in limbo
 957 2012-04-13 18:54:27 <TuxBlackEdo> i am fully aware that i am in limbo
 958 2012-04-13 19:00:27 FACEFOX has joined
 959 2012-04-13 19:00:27 FACEFOX has quit (Excess Flood)
 960 2012-04-13 19:00:52 FACEFOX has joined
 961 2012-04-13 19:00:52 FACEFOX has quit (Excess Flood)
 962 2012-04-13 19:05:25 <jgarzik> CTransaction::AcceptToMemoryPool() is such an odd configuration.  Seems inside-out, to me, as mapTransactions is global.
 963 2012-04-13 19:05:43 * jgarzik 's brain expects to see MemoryPool::Accept(CTransaction)
 964 2012-04-13 19:06:11 paraipan has joined
 965 2012-04-13 19:06:32 machine2 has joined
 966 2012-04-13 19:07:53 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: Ive always felt that way
 967 2012-04-13 19:08:00 <BlueMatt> and it looks even worse in CBlockStore
 968 2012-04-13 19:08:27 mmoya has joined
 969 2012-04-13 19:12:20 <paulo_> is bitcoin-0.6.0-win32.zip the source code?
 970 2012-04-13 19:12:37 <ELT> github has it in all its glory and tangles
 971 2012-04-13 19:13:59 Clipse has joined
 972 2012-04-13 19:16:30 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: laanwj opened pull request 1092 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1092>
 973 2012-04-13 19:16:42 sirk390 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 974 2012-04-13 19:16:56 FACEFOX has joined
 975 2012-04-13 19:17:47 RazielZ has quit ()
 976 2012-04-13 19:20:51 paulo_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 977 2012-04-13 19:26:31 <sipa> luke-jr: it's not theoretically impossible, but probably very hard to do in practice
 978 2012-04-13 19:27:32 paulo_ has joined
 979 2012-04-13 19:32:56 d4de has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 980 2012-04-13 19:33:13 d4de has joined
 981 2012-04-13 19:33:14 d4de has quit (Changing host)
 982 2012-04-13 19:33:14 d4de has joined
 983 2012-04-13 19:38:54 rdponticelli has joined
 984 2012-04-13 19:46:35 reo33rer has joined
 985 2012-04-13 19:47:12 molecular has joined
 986 2012-04-13 19:47:33 reo33rer has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 987 2012-04-13 19:47:46 reo33rer has joined
 988 2012-04-13 19:48:13 ThePanCakeKid95 has joined
 989 2012-04-13 19:48:36 Someguy123 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 990 2012-04-13 19:49:24 <graingert> for some reason the progress bar is permenantly stuck at 99%
 991 2012-04-13 19:49:28 <ThePanCakeKid95> Hello is anyone there
 992 2012-04-13 19:49:31 <graingert> in version 0.6
 993 2012-04-13 19:49:37 <graingert> 0.5 was fine
 994 2012-04-13 19:49:57 <luke-jr> graingert: confirm with 0.5.4 ?
 995 2012-04-13 19:50:05 Someguy123[afk] is now known as Someguy123
 996 2012-04-13 19:50:13 Someguy123 has quit (Changing host)
 997 2012-04-13 19:50:14 Someguy123 has joined
 998 2012-04-13 19:50:26 <graingert> luke-jr: sorry I misspoke - it's not permenant
 999 2012-04-13 19:50:27 <luke-jr> graingert: in normal use, it *should* be 99% almost all the time; some older versions had a bug that made it different
1000 2012-04-13 19:50:35 <graingert> it's either 99% or 100%
1001 2012-04-13 19:50:40 <ThePanCakeKid95> I have a stupid question :P when i go to the wiki the address is "bitcoin.it" what is this ".it"
1002 2012-04-13 19:50:49 <graingert> I preferred it based on last open
1003 2012-04-13 19:50:55 <graingert> ThePanCakeKid95: italy
1004 2012-04-13 19:51:14 <ThePanCakeKid95> all ok thanks :)
1005 2012-04-13 19:51:26 ThePanCakeKid95 has left ()
1006 2012-04-13 19:51:31 <graingert> luke-jr: what is the percentage based on now?
1007 2012-04-13 19:51:36 <luke-jr> graingert: the blockchain
1008 2012-04-13 19:51:56 <graingert> well it's useless as a percentage most of the time
1009 2012-04-13 19:52:05 <graingert> percentage catch up is much more useful
1010 2012-04-13 19:53:07 [Tycho] has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1011 2012-04-13 19:53:37 <luke-jr> well nobody liked that
1012 2012-04-13 19:54:17 <graingert> luke-jr: really?
1013 2012-04-13 19:54:26 <graingert> but it's uninformative most of the time now
1014 2012-04-13 19:54:36 <MC1984> lol
1015 2012-04-13 19:54:41 barmstrong has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1016 2012-04-13 19:54:44 <MC1984> quick change it back
1017 2012-04-13 19:54:54 <graingert> who didn't like it?
1018 2012-04-13 19:55:01 <MC1984> everyone
1019 2012-04-13 19:55:06 <graingert> wat
1020 2012-04-13 19:55:10 <graingert> I loved it
1021 2012-04-13 19:55:16 <MC1984> yes its unimformative both ways
1022 2012-04-13 19:55:26 <MC1984> simple block count is better
1023 2012-04-13 19:55:31 <graingert> no percentage catch-up is much more useful
1024 2012-04-13 19:55:37 <MC1984> no its not
1025 2012-04-13 19:55:45 <MC1984> confused the hell out of everyone
1026 2012-04-13 19:55:54 <graingert> it's a progress bar that moves faster too - making the experience of catch-up seem faster
1027 2012-04-13 19:56:08 <graingert> can someone point me at the issue?
1028 2012-04-13 19:56:11 <graingert> on github
1029 2012-04-13 19:56:28 <MC1984> people complained that it went back to 0% every time they start bitcoin
1030 2012-04-13 19:56:56 <graingert> in that case percentage catch up should reset once caught up
1031 2012-04-13 19:57:01 <MC1984> just give me a goddamn blockcount that i dont have to hover for
1032 2012-04-13 19:57:04 <graingert> not remain at 99% ad infinitum
1033 2012-04-13 19:57:35 <MC1984> thats not a bug, its 99%
1034 2012-04-13 19:57:36 <MC1984> deal with it
1035 2012-04-13 19:57:53 [Tycho] has joined
1036 2012-04-13 19:58:24 <MC1984> its an occupy conspiracy lol
1037 2012-04-13 20:01:43 <Joric> are 'github pages' support ssl is it planned or something?
1038 2012-04-13 20:02:26 <graingert> Joric: wat
1039 2012-04-13 20:03:53 <Joric> http://pages.github.com
1040 2012-04-13 20:08:49  has joined
1041 2012-04-13 20:17:58 graingert has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
1042 2012-04-13 20:30:48 pusle has quit ()
1043 2012-04-13 20:33:16 Vitas has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.0.4 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
1044 2012-04-13 20:34:56 paulo_ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1045 2012-04-13 20:50:56 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@pool-71-252-154-11.dllstx.fios.verizon.net|brwyatt
1046 2012-04-13 20:51:20 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
1047 2012-04-13 20:56:04 paraipan_ has joined
1048 2012-04-13 20:56:24 FACEFOX has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1049 2012-04-13 20:57:02 paraipan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1050 2012-04-13 20:57:07 FACEFOX has joined
1051 2012-04-13 20:57:09 FACEFOX has quit (Max SendQ exceeded)
1052 2012-04-13 20:57:16 paraipan_ has quit (Client Quit)
1053 2012-04-13 20:59:15 FACEFOX has joined
1054 2012-04-13 20:59:17 FACEFOX has quit (Max SendQ exceeded)
1055 2012-04-13 21:01:05 FACEFOX has joined
1056 2012-04-13 21:01:07 FACEFOX has quit (Max SendQ exceeded)
1057 2012-04-13 21:01:41 FACEFOX has joined
1058 2012-04-13 21:01:43 FACEFOX has quit (Max SendQ exceeded)
1059 2012-04-13 21:04:21 FACEFOX has joined
1060 2012-04-13 21:04:23 FACEFOX has quit (Max SendQ exceeded)
1061 2012-04-13 21:04:58 FACEFOX has joined
1062 2012-04-13 21:05:01 FACEFOX has quit (Max SendQ exceeded)
1063 2012-04-13 21:06:28 occulta has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.1.1 Equilibrium http://www.kvirc.net/)
1064 2012-04-13 21:08:07 FACEFOX has joined
1065 2012-04-13 21:08:10 FACEFOX has quit (Max SendQ exceeded)
1066 2012-04-13 21:10:02 FACEFOX has joined
1067 2012-04-13 21:11:35 Vitas has joined
1068 2012-04-13 21:13:17 guruvan has quit (Quit: I probably voided the warranty on this thing.....)
1069 2012-04-13 21:14:14 guruvan has joined
1070 2012-04-13 21:24:33 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1071 2012-04-13 21:27:24 Cablesaurus has joined
1072 2012-04-13 21:27:25 Cablesaurus has quit (Changing host)
1073 2012-04-13 21:27:25 Cablesaurus has joined
1074 2012-04-13 21:28:46 erle- has quit (Quit: erle-)
1075 2012-04-13 21:30:12 OpenOcean is now known as Mad7Scientist
1076 2012-04-13 21:33:26 topace has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1077 2012-04-13 21:35:26 topace has joined
1078 2012-04-13 21:37:11 elkingrey has joined
1079 2012-04-13 21:37:11 MC1984 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1080 2012-04-13 21:39:45 torsthaldo has joined
1081 2012-04-13 21:47:12 Cablesaurus has quit (Quit: For Sale: Parachute. Only used once, never opened, small stain.)
1082 2012-04-13 21:47:49 datagutt has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
1083 2012-04-13 21:48:23 elkingrey has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1084 2012-04-13 21:53:04 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: jgarzik opened pull request 1093 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1093>
1085 2012-04-13 21:54:08 eoss has joined
1086 2012-04-13 21:54:20 eoss has quit (Changing host)
1087 2012-04-13 21:54:20 eoss has joined
1088 2012-04-13 21:59:00 PsychoticBoy has quit (Quit: Page closed)
1089 2012-04-13 22:23:01 Z0rZ0rZ0r1 has joined
1090 2012-04-13 22:23:01 Z0rZ0rZ0r has quit (Disconnected by services)
1091 2012-04-13 22:23:13 minimoose has joined
1092 2012-04-13 22:23:13 Z0rZ0rZ0r1 has quit (Client Quit)
1093 2012-04-13 22:23:33 Z0rZ0rZ0r has joined
1094 2012-04-13 22:24:01 alephozee has quit ()
1095 2012-04-13 22:25:00 localhost has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1096 2012-04-13 22:26:22 reo33rer has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1097 2012-04-13 22:28:41 localhost has joined
1098 2012-04-13 22:28:57 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: jgarzik opened pull request 1094 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1094>
1099 2012-04-13 22:39:46 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: jgarzik opened pull request 1095 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1095>
1100 2012-04-13 22:44:18 tower has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1101 2012-04-13 22:45:13 Clipse has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1102 2012-04-13 22:46:16 MC1984 has joined
1103 2012-04-13 22:46:58 <[Tycho]> ::bc,calc
1104 2012-04-13 22:47:01 <[Tycho]> ::bc.calc
1105 2012-04-13 22:47:07 <[Tycho]> ;;bc.gen
1106 2012-04-13 22:47:08 <gribble> Error: "bc.gen" is not a valid command.
1107 2012-04-13 22:47:12 <[Tycho]> ;;bc.gen
1108 2012-04-13 22:47:12 <gribble> Error: "bc.gen" is not a valid command.
1109 2012-04-13 22:47:14 <[Tycho]> ;;bc,gen
1110 2012-04-13 22:47:14 <gribble> (bc,gen <an alias, 1 argument>) -- Alias for "echo The expected generation output, at $1 Khps, given current difficulty of [bc,diff], is [math calc 50*24*60*60 / (1/((2**224-1)/[bc,diff]*$1*1000/2**256))] BTC per day and [math calc 50*60*60 / (1/((2**224-1)/[bc,diff]*$1*1000/2**256))] BTC per hour.".
1111 2012-04-13 22:47:22 <[Tycho]> ;;bc,gen 5000000
1112 2012-04-13 22:47:22 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 5000000 Khps, given current difficulty of 1577913.4856767 , is 3.18721016619 BTC per day and 0.132800423591 BTC per hour.
1113 2012-04-13 22:48:55 tower has joined
1114 2012-04-13 22:50:46 <[Tycho]> Who is the author of MPBM ?
1115 2012-04-13 22:50:54 <sipa> mpbm?
1116 2012-04-13 22:50:59 <[Tycho]> Yes.
1117 2012-04-13 22:51:11 <sipa> What is MPBM?
1118 2012-04-13 22:51:20 <[Tycho]> Modular Python Bitcoin Miner
1119 2012-04-13 22:51:25 <sipa> ah
1120 2012-04-13 22:51:28 <sipa> no idea
1121 2012-04-13 22:53:26 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
1122 2012-04-13 22:56:57 Turingi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1123 2012-04-13 23:02:06 FACEFOX has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
1124 2012-04-13 23:03:05 PiZZaMaN2 has joined
1125 2012-04-13 23:03:26 Blitzboom_ has joined
1126 2012-04-13 23:03:59 tower has quit (Disconnected by services)
1127 2012-04-13 23:04:08 PiZZaMaN2K has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1128 2012-04-13 23:04:12 tower has joined
1129 2012-04-13 23:04:48 FACEFOX has joined
1130 2012-04-13 23:05:13 Karmaon has joined
1131 2012-04-13 23:06:04 Tycale_ has joined
1132 2012-04-13 23:06:04 Eliel_ has joined
1133 2012-04-13 23:06:57 delt0r__ has joined
1134 2012-04-13 23:08:00 toffoo has joined
1135 2012-04-13 23:08:00 rlifchitz_ has joined
1136 2012-04-13 23:08:29 rcorreia_ has joined
1137 2012-04-13 23:09:35 ivan\_ has joined
1138 2012-04-13 23:12:18 pierre`_ has joined
1139 2012-04-13 23:12:37 xenland_ has joined
1140 2012-04-13 23:13:25 chrisb__ has joined
1141 2012-04-13 23:15:53 Z0rZ0rZ0r has quit (Disconnected by services)
1142 2012-04-13 23:15:54 Z0rZ0rZ0r1 has joined
1143 2012-04-13 23:16:46 Diablo-D3 has joined
1144 2012-04-13 23:18:10 ivan\_ is now known as ivan\
1145 2012-04-13 23:20:06 sturles has joined
1146 2012-04-13 23:20:12 copumpkin has joined
1147 2012-04-13 23:20:58 machine2 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1148 2012-04-13 23:21:04 Joric_ has joined
1149 2012-04-13 23:21:05 Joric_ has quit (Changing host)
1150 2012-04-13 23:21:05 Joric_ has joined
1151 2012-04-13 23:21:23 FACEFOX has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1152 2012-04-13 23:21:48 machine2 has joined
1153 2012-04-13 23:22:27 Joric has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1154 2012-04-13 23:26:03 FACEFOX has joined
1155 2012-04-13 23:26:06 z310 has joined
1156 2012-04-13 23:26:06 bd_ has joined
1157 2012-04-13 23:26:53 eoss has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1158 2012-04-13 23:27:50 ahbritto_ has joined
1159 2012-04-13 23:28:45 rdponticelli has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1160 2012-04-13 23:29:20 d4de has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1161 2012-04-13 23:29:56 forrest is now known as forrestv
1162 2012-04-13 23:30:16 Joric_ has quit ()
1163 2012-04-13 23:30:56 forrestv is now known as forrest
1164 2012-04-13 23:31:24 forrest is now known as forrestv
1165 2012-04-13 23:32:48 Z0rZ0rZ0r1 has quit (Quit: Wheeeee)
1166 2012-04-13 23:33:15 d4de has joined
1167 2012-04-13 23:36:34 d4de has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1168 2012-04-13 23:47:47 chrisb__ has quit (Quit: Leaving)