1 2012-05-01 00:01:40 Nicksasa has joined
   2 2012-05-01 00:01:40 Nicksasa has quit (Changing host)
   3 2012-05-01 00:01:40 Nicksasa has joined
   4 2012-05-01 00:01:50 Nicksasa has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
   5 2012-05-01 00:04:02 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: Diapolo opened pull request 1173 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1173> || Diapolo opened pull request 1172 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1172>
   6 2012-05-01 00:08:26 <sipa> jgarzik: it's quite simple to set up, really
   7 2012-05-01 00:09:30 zzzzzzzzzzzzzz has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
   8 2012-05-01 00:09:43 <jgarzik> sipa: url?
   9 2012-05-01 00:10:02 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: out of random curiosity, are you in a Chapel Hill dorm or apartment?
  10 2012-05-01 00:10:20 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: dorm
  11 2012-05-01 00:13:20 Diapolo has joined
  12 2012-05-01 00:13:38 <Diapolo> hi there
  13 2012-05-01 00:13:53 <luke-jr> hey Diapolo
  14 2012-05-01 00:15:04 <Diapolo> The lesson in howto do pull-requests is hard, but I guess I got it ^^.
  15 2012-05-01 00:16:58 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
  16 2012-05-01 00:18:19 <jgarzik> Diapolo: heh
  17 2012-05-01 00:20:06 MC1984 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
  18 2012-05-01 00:20:24 MC1984 has joined
  19 2012-05-01 00:21:05 <Diapolo> jgarzik: Your comment was clear and easy to understand and I'll keep this practise.
  20 2012-05-01 00:25:46 barmstrong has joined
  21 2012-05-01 00:25:53 <sipa> jgarzik: http://github.com/sipa/bitcoin-seeder iirc
  22 2012-05-01 00:28:08 sirk390 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
  23 2012-05-01 00:28:53 eoss has joined
  24 2012-05-01 00:28:53 eoss has quit (Changing host)
  25 2012-05-01 00:28:53 eoss has joined
  26 2012-05-01 00:29:59 <jgarzik> Diapolo: the main thing is to split up logical changes into separate commits.  It is OK to then roll all those into a single git branch, e.g.:  1) create branch 'hacks', 2) commit each change to branch 'hacks', 3) click on 'hacks' branch in github, to create a pull request.  That pull req will automatically include all non-upstream changes in that branch, in that one pull request.
  27 2012-05-01 00:30:07 <jgarzik> (apologies if this is stating the obvious)
  28 2012-05-01 00:34:49 <Diapolo> No I'm fine as it makes my and your live easier as pull-requests will get merged faster and we can move on to other things :).
  29 2012-05-01 00:39:11 <luke-jr> Diapolo: it's important for fixing bugs later
  30 2012-05-01 00:41:15 <sipa> jgarzik: compile, run, look atthe command line options, run again :)
  31 2012-05-01 00:42:52 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
  32 2012-05-01 00:44:02 devrandom has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
  33 2012-05-01 00:49:10 <jgarzik> sipa: amused: -march=nocona
  34 2012-05-01 00:55:50 <sipa> right, old habit
  35 2012-05-01 00:56:13 osmosis has quit (Quit: Leaving)
  36 2012-05-01 01:03:54 * jgarzik starts ripping out the DNS server from sipa's code ;)
  37 2012-05-01 01:04:52 <sipa> why?
  38 2012-05-01 01:05:23 <jgarzik> sipa: because dnspark does a better job, and already has a better infrastructure than I ever will
  39 2012-05-01 01:06:13 <jgarzik> sipa: just need a robot that gets fresh addresses.  I might go back and hack in my 'getpeers' JSON-RPC call into bitcoind
  40 2012-05-01 01:06:30 <sipa> ic
  41 2012-05-01 01:08:48 dvide has quit ()
  42 2012-05-01 01:09:36 <sipa> feel free to submit a pull request if needed
  43 2012-05-01 01:10:21 darkee has joined
  44 2012-05-01 01:11:35 <luke-jr> jgarzik: sipa's makes nice statistics tho ;)
  45 2012-05-01 01:12:28 <sipa> jgarzik: advantage of an own dns servers is that you can give a different reply for each and every request
  46 2012-05-01 01:13:16 paul0 has quit (Quit: paul0)
  47 2012-05-01 01:17:21 Diapolo has quit (Quit: Page closed)
  48 2012-05-01 01:18:35 <sipa> jgarzik: my node serves around one request per 3-4 seconds
  49 2012-05-01 01:19:16 <[Tycho]> Was that "bitcoin-seed" useragent yours ?
  50 2012-05-01 01:19:33 <sipa> yes
  51 2012-05-01 01:20:43 <sipa> /bitcoin-seeder:0.01/
  52 2012-05-01 01:24:27 paulo_ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
  53 2012-05-01 01:27:51 <jgarzik> sipa: dnspark has a ton of servers, anycast'd across the world, over 5 redundant IP addresses.  I'm not going to beat that :)
  54 2012-05-01 01:28:01 <jgarzik> sipa: if someone ever decides to DDoS the bitcoin seeds, that will matter
  55 2012-05-01 01:28:07 <sipa> sure
  56 2012-05-01 01:28:43 <sipa> how quickly can you submit updates?
  57 2012-05-01 01:29:11 <jgarzik> sipa: that's the downside...  probably not too fast
  58 2012-05-01 01:29:36 <gmaxwell> In any case, it's good to have diversity. Only one honest DNSseed needs to be working for bitcoin to function.
  59 2012-05-01 01:30:42 Z0rZ0rZ0r1 has quit (Quit: Wheeeee)
  60 2012-05-01 01:31:20 <jgarzik> sipa: but it will be faster than my seed updates now, which is once every few months :)
  61 2012-05-01 01:51:05 <sipa> you can run my code without dns.server, and it dumps its statistics in a few files every 100s
  62 2012-05-01 01:53:20 vigilyn has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
  63 2012-05-01 01:56:32 Slix` has joined
  64 2012-05-01 01:58:06 <copumpkin> mndrix: thanks!
  65 2012-05-01 01:58:10 <copumpkin> :D
  66 2012-05-01 02:14:26 eoss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
  67 2012-05-01 02:22:15 paraipan has quit (Quit: Saliendo)
  68 2012-05-01 02:30:04 <jgarzik> sipa: do you think it's worth the effort to run your code, vs. a 'getpeers' JSON-RPC call that returns a randomized list of fresh addresses from the local node?
  69 2012-05-01 02:30:54 <jgarzik> I think your bitcoin-seeder probably produces a "better" list of peers?
  70 2012-05-01 02:31:03 <sipa> my code certainly keeps more statistics
  71 2012-05-01 02:31:59 <sipa> addrman has other priorities, like defense against sybil attacks and bounded memory
  72 2012-05-01 02:33:09 <sipa> also, dnsseed actually tries connecting to all nodes, in several threads
  73 2012-05-01 02:33:25 <BlueMatt> sipa: is it possible to add zone transfer support to eg give a certain subset of good nodes to peer dns resolvers?
  74 2012-05-01 02:33:28 <luke-jr> jgarzik: also, I think bitcoind uses more RAM
  75 2012-05-01 02:33:44 <sipa> while addrman only knows as much as bitcoind gathers, which means reconnecting almost never
  76 2012-05-01 02:35:25 TheSeven has quit (Disconnected by services)
  77 2012-05-01 02:35:34 [7] has joined
  78 2012-05-01 02:37:02 <sipa> my dnsseed instance that has been running for 6 days now, served 150k DNS requests, used about 5h of CPU time, knows about 500k addresses (of which only 28k are not banned), and uses 47MiB of memory
  79 2012-05-01 02:37:30 <gmaxwell> Is banned the word you wanted to use there? If so, why are they banned?
  80 2012-05-01 02:37:50 <sipa> too old, or too low reachability for too long a time
  81 2012-05-01 02:38:22 <sipa> for those, it just remembers "do no retry connecting to this address until time X", while for others actual statistics are being kept
  82 2012-05-01 02:39:10 <sipa> of those 28k, 1500 are "good enough" to be served as DNS results
  83 2012-05-01 02:40:16 one_zero has joined
  84 2012-05-01 02:46:34 <sipa> BlueMatt: i'd need to look into how zone transfer is implemented at the protocol level
  85 2012-05-01 02:47:59 <sipa> hmmm, wumpus's, gavin's and my 0.6.0rc2 builds are all completely different
  86 2012-05-01 02:48:27 <BlueMatt> sipa: afaik, its just a regular lookup, but I think they are required to use tcp connections
  87 2012-05-01 02:48:27 stejin has joined
  88 2012-05-01 02:48:39 stejin has left ()
  89 2012-05-01 02:48:43 <sipa> right, only UDP is implemented for now :)
  90 2012-05-01 02:48:46 <jgarzik> BlueMatt, sipa: BIND has an excellent dynamic propagation system.  see http://linux.yyz.us/dns/ddns-server.html and http://linux.yyz.us/nsupdate/ for an ancient write-up I did.  Securely signed DNS updates are fully propapgated, and the DNS servers reflect those updates in real time, without needing to use a full zone transfer.
  91 2012-05-01 02:49:18 <sipa> BlueMatt: not sure whether it's worth it, though
  92 2012-05-01 02:49:32 <jgarzik> BIND will not provide "give each query a random selection of addresses" behavior
  93 2012-05-01 02:49:41 <jgarzik> making bitcoin-seeder superior, there
  94 2012-05-01 02:49:47 setkeh has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
  95 2012-05-01 02:49:47 <BlueMatt> sipa: getting access to a huge array of ddns zone-transfering servers is really easy (and free!)
  96 2012-05-01 02:49:50 <BlueMatt> (was my thinking)
  97 2012-05-01 02:49:53 b4epoche_ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
  98 2012-05-01 02:50:15 <jgarzik> yep -- make the dns list easy to mirror, and more people will run seeds
  99 2012-05-01 02:50:21 <sipa> because what you want is another DNS server that serves random subsets from the same database of good nodes
 100 2012-05-01 02:50:36 <jgarzik> (yes, I know about http://sipa/seeds.txt or whatever it is)
 101 2012-05-01 02:50:40 <BlueMatt> sipa: yea, but if you, say, rotate every 2 minutes, its close enough
 102 2012-05-01 02:50:47 setkeh has joined
 103 2012-05-01 02:50:53 <sipa> which could of course use the DNS zone transfer system to communicate with the master
 104 2012-05-01 02:51:03 stejin has joined
 105 2012-05-01 02:51:12 <sipa> but there is no real reason why it needs to be DNS, as you need custom software anyway
 106 2012-05-01 02:51:16 <sipa> on both sides
 107 2012-05-01 02:51:22 b4epoche_ has joined
 108 2012-05-01 02:51:29 <BlueMatt> sipa: at that point you should just run another bitcoin-seeder on each node imo...
 109 2012-05-01 02:51:29 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: well, perhaps good enough compared to the background suckyness of things like recursive resolvers that cache forever and/or return only a single A record.
 110 2012-05-01 02:51:50 <jgarzik> sipa: with zone transfers, one can rope in the many free and for-pay services that offer secondary DNS
 111 2012-05-01 02:51:53 stejin has left ()
 112 2012-05-01 02:52:08 <jgarzik> sipa: we provide the zone, and they do the heavy lifting responding to end user queries
 113 2012-05-01 02:52:14 <BlueMatt> sipa: I was just thinking, there are a ton of free ddns server out there, plus I know I have access to one or two paid ones, that have good redundancy, etc...if I could get one or two such networks on a dnsseed, it would be pretty ddos-reliable
 114 2012-05-01 02:52:17 <BlueMatt> vs one server
 115 2012-05-01 02:52:31 <BlueMatt> what jgarzik said
 116 2012-05-01 02:53:06 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: last I heard on that issue, TD[gone] mentioned that google tracks such bad resolvers and puts pressure on such isps, so they are less common
 117 2012-05-01 02:53:08 <sipa> true, you won't get the same dynamics in the results, but you may get very reliable seeds for almost nothing
 118 2012-05-01 02:53:11 <jgarzik> apropos this stuff...  I am seriously considering incorporating a non-profit for the sole purpose of bitcoin network health
 119 2012-05-01 02:53:26 <jgarzik> run a well connected backone.  run zone xfer servers.  run dns seeds.  network metrics, ...
 120 2012-05-01 02:53:30 <gmaxwell> Yea, I do think it makes sense to have at least one large scale, if not very dynamic dns seed.
 121 2012-05-01 02:53:39 Bigpiggy01Mining has quit (Changing host)
 122 2012-05-01 02:53:39 Bigpiggy01Mining has joined
 123 2012-05-01 02:53:47 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: bitseed.xf2.org covers that :)
 124 2012-05-01 02:54:03 <BlueMatt> for the record, my current seed just rotates its list every 2 minutes and keeps a list of, I dont remember, like 25? nodes in a list at any time
 125 2012-05-01 02:54:27 <BlueMatt> a more redundant system could be set up to do something similar, though with a different list on different servers, making it even better
 126 2012-05-01 02:55:15 <BlueMatt> in the end, if you rotate often enough, its pretty close to the same result, even if some nodes get occasional spikes
 127 2012-05-01 02:57:01 <sipa> my DNS server uses TTL's of 60 seconds in its replies
 128 2012-05-01 02:57:12 <BlueMatt> same
 129 2012-05-01 02:57:45 <sipa> though obviously if two people simultaneously do a lookup, but are behind different resolvers, they'll get a different subset
 130 2012-05-01 02:58:11 * BlueMatt wishes more dns servers supported taking a huge list and returning a small set (only thing i could find when I looked a few years back was doing a custom db query from powerdns)
 131 2012-05-01 02:58:18 <gmaxwell> well, what the dnsseeds should do is generate a bunch of names.  This will help with the broken resolvers. E.g. Client picks at random one of [0-F].bitseed.xf2.org to query.
 132 2012-05-01 02:58:37 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: lots of people used powerdns for GSLB responses that basically look like this.
 133 2012-05-01 02:59:09 <BlueMatt> yea, but then you would actually have to run your own servers vs piggy backing on some free or cheap ddns service
 134 2012-05-01 02:59:33 <sipa> you can do zone transfer of every subdomain
 135 2012-05-01 02:59:49 <sipa> move the randomization from the server to the client
 136 2012-05-01 02:59:51 <BlueMatt> but, yea the subdomain idea is better
 137 2012-05-01 02:59:53 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: interesting idea
 138 2012-05-01 03:00:41 <gmaxwell> You don't want too much client randomization because you'll defeat caching.
 139 2012-05-01 03:00:43 <sipa> my DNS server already answers for arbitrary subdomains anyway
 140 2012-05-01 03:00:51 <jgarzik> I would recommend a higher TTL, as <= 60 occasionally has problems.  I think Google uses ~170?
 141 2012-05-01 03:01:23 <jgarzik> it's not like the same client will be making repeated requests, so it's mainly recursive caches that will pay attention anyway
 142 2012-05-01 03:02:01 <BlueMatt> we dont wanna be too big a dick to isps and their caching tough ;)
 143 2012-05-01 03:03:40 <luke-jr> jgarzik: way too many dynamic DNS sites  use 60 for it to have issues
 144 2012-05-01 03:04:05 <BlueMatt> most ddns sites Ive seen have min (and sometimes default) set to 60
 145 2012-05-01 03:05:39 ahihi2 has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 146 2012-05-01 03:07:59 <sipa> any idea how frequent such secondary servers try to update?
 147 2012-05-01 03:08:27 <BlueMatt> depends on the service, but you can send a notify to force them to refetch
 148 2012-05-01 03:08:43 <sipa> i'm not sure they'll like a update every minute :)
 149 2012-05-01 03:08:44 <BlueMatt> and you can set the default refetch in the SOA record
 150 2012-05-01 03:09:37 <BlueMatt> the ones Ive used always follow the soa (within reason), but will often ignore notifies
 151 2012-05-01 03:09:56 <BlueMatt> (the paid ones usually allow notifies)
 152 2012-05-01 03:11:43 <sipa> now, one DNS seed response has 28 results, have 256 subdomains and you've got a nice coverage of the entire "good set"
 153 2012-05-01 03:11:51 <jgarzik> sipa: many support push notification
 154 2012-05-01 03:12:01 <jgarzik> that's built into BIND (see above links)
 155 2012-05-01 03:12:19 * jgarzik updates bitseed.xf2.org
 156 2012-05-01 03:12:46 <jgarzik> sipa: thus, you choose the secondary server update frequency
 157 2012-05-01 03:12:46 <sipa> TTL of one hour :(
 158 2012-05-01 03:13:13 <jgarzik> sipa: the records are updated every few months, at present, as noted above :)  3600 is harmless due to that...
 159 2012-05-01 03:13:50 <sipa> combined with 256 subdomains (and clients choosing a random prefix), i think there is little reason to push more frequently than every 5 minutes
 160 2012-05-01 03:14:02 <jgarzik> bah.  gonna have to build an HTML form-reading robot, as dnspark's DDNS API only supports one A record per hostname
 161 2012-05-01 03:14:10 <jgarzik> sipa: agreed
 162 2012-05-01 03:15:11 <jgarzik> 16 subdomains is fine too IMO
 163 2012-05-01 03:15:24 <sipa> 42
 164 2012-05-01 03:15:53 <jgarzik> 16 == 0x0F
 165 2012-05-01 03:16:00 <sipa> eh no, 0x10 :)
 166 2012-05-01 03:16:16 <jgarzik> i.e. [0-F].bitseed.xf2.org as gmaxwell noted
 167 2012-05-01 03:16:25 <jgarzik> 16 total possibilities
 168 2012-05-01 03:16:58 devrandom has joined
 169 2012-05-01 03:19:00 devrandom has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 170 2012-05-01 03:19:20 <sipa> jgarzik: my aim is to make sure the entire good set is server somewhere at every point in time, to prevent focusing connection attemts to a small subsets
 171 2012-05-01 03:19:50 <sipa> currently, that is no issue (yet), there is only a connection attempt every few seconds
 172 2012-05-01 03:20:13 <sipa> s/server/served/
 173 2012-05-01 03:21:47 <sipa> 256 subdomains would be an AXFR of around 100KiB
 174 2012-05-01 03:22:37 <gmaxwell> Thats a bit much.
 175 2012-05-01 03:23:30 <gmaxwell> Besides, its best if the names are non-overlapping in their results and you don't actually want to divide your dataset of good nodes 256 ways.
 176 2012-05-01 03:24:17 <gmaxwell> (best becase if the user really is behind some stupid resolver that only gives one result it would be unforuate to get the same one result multiple times)
 177 2012-05-01 03:25:30 <sipa> well, 1500 good nodes, 28 replies per A query -> 1500/28=53
 178 2012-05-01 03:26:28 <sipa> but of course the worst case we aim to (many connections attempts per second) deal with, most likely means that also the number of good nodes will be very different from now
 179 2012-05-01 03:35:37 devrandom has joined
 180 2012-05-01 03:38:58 <sipa> what about this: always have 256 subdomains, but implementations are free to make some or most to be CNAMEs of others
 181 2012-05-01 03:39:36 <jgarzik> 256 is too many
 182 2012-05-01 03:39:49 <sipa> that way it's scalable without meeding to roll out chamges to clients
 183 2012-05-01 03:40:01 <jgarzik> it's plenty scalable as is
 184 2012-05-01 03:40:09 <jgarzik> with 0-f
 185 2012-05-01 03:40:38 <sipa> 64k ought to be enough for everyone
 186 2012-05-01 03:43:21 <sipa> its quite cheap in terms of zone transfer size to add a few CNAMEd subdomains
 187 2012-05-01 03:44:17 <jgarzik> I don't want to piss off ISPs by having this huge DNS tree always in RAM, frequently queried
 188 2012-05-01 03:44:24 hahuang65 has quit (Quit: Textual IRC Client: http://www.textualapp.com/)
 189 2012-05-01 03:45:19 <sipa> it hardly costs any RAM to add a few CNAMEs
 190 2012-05-01 03:45:40 <sipa> though i see your point, and 256 may be too much
 191 2012-05-01 03:46:51 BitVector has joined
 192 2012-05-01 03:47:31 Joric has quit ()
 193 2012-05-01 03:49:56 jgarzik has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 194 2012-05-01 03:51:10 <BTC_Bear> ;;bc,nethash
 195 2012-05-01 03:51:11 <gribble> 12981.905162378183
 196 2012-05-01 03:54:03 Snapman is now known as Snapman[afkers]
 197 2012-05-01 03:59:46 Snapman[afkers] is now known as Snapman
 198 2012-05-01 04:08:06 BitVector has quit (Quit: .)
 199 2012-05-01 04:09:16 dwon has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 200 2012-05-01 04:13:09 Detritus has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
 201 2012-05-01 04:17:34 Detritus has joined
 202 2012-05-01 04:22:59 jgarzik has joined
 203 2012-05-01 04:23:25 jgarzik is now known as Guest14681
 204 2012-05-01 04:23:31 Guest14681 has quit (Changing host)
 205 2012-05-01 04:23:31 Guest14681 has joined
 206 2012-05-01 04:23:37 Guest14681 is now known as jgarzik_
 207 2012-05-01 04:23:44 <jgarzik_> bah, stupid X.org
 208 2012-05-01 04:23:55 * jgarzik_ returns from emergency reboots
 209 2012-05-01 04:26:42 <BlueMatt> yay Xorg, the source of all your linux problems since 2004
 210 2012-05-01 04:26:56 <BlueMatt> wait thats no where near right
 211 2012-05-01 04:26:59 <BlueMatt> since 1984
 212 2012-05-01 04:29:45 word has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 213 2012-05-01 04:31:43 noagendamarket has joined
 214 2012-05-01 04:33:04 capiscuas has joined
 215 2012-05-01 04:35:21 <seco> BlueMatt: http://wayland.freedesktop.org/architecture.html
 216 2012-05-01 04:35:30 <seco> but i have no clue how far they are
 217 2012-05-01 04:35:36 <BlueMatt> seco: not really /that/ far
 218 2012-05-01 04:35:44 <BlueMatt> maybe in a few years it will be usable
 219 2012-05-01 04:35:45 <BlueMatt> afaik
 220 2012-05-01 04:35:56 <seco> *hoping*
 221 2012-05-01 04:36:13 <BlueMatt> yea, I hope they get there
 222 2012-05-01 04:37:12 <gmaxwell> seco: HAHAH
 223 2012-05-01 04:37:28 capiscuas has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 224 2012-05-01 04:37:53 <seco> lemme in my dreams gmaxwell :p
 225 2012-05-01 04:37:55 <gmaxwell> Wayland: Brought to you by the same cultural background thats made it impossible to disable suspend on lid close in modern desktop enviroments.
 226 2012-05-01 04:38:32 word has joined
 227 2012-05-01 04:38:34 BTC_Bear is now known as BTC_Bear|hbrntng
 228 2012-05-01 04:40:11 <seco> hmm sorry you need to give me some hint
 229 2012-05-01 04:40:45 <seco> i were always able to get what i needed by gconf, yet :)
 230 2012-05-01 04:43:16 <BlueMatt> seco: yea, but you had to go into gconf to do it...
 231 2012-05-01 04:44:18 <BlueMatt> and yea...recent gnome3/ubuntu unity you-dont-ever-need-to-customize-this mentality is really quite terrible...
 232 2012-05-01 04:45:57 <seco> maybe thats the reason i still block gnome3: Need productivity
 233 2012-05-01 04:46:23 * BlueMatt (finally) moved off ubuntu because 11.04 was getting to old and he refused to "upgrade" to unity
 234 2012-05-01 04:47:27 Garr255Playbook has joined
 235 2012-05-01 04:47:33 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
 236 2012-05-01 04:48:54 da2ce7 has joined
 237 2012-05-01 04:49:00 <BlueMatt> and moving to a debian-testing-based distro has done wonders for my boot time...
 238 2012-05-01 04:59:26 Garr255Playbook has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 239 2012-05-01 05:05:10 <freewil> tus
 240 2012-05-01 05:05:32 <BlueMatt> tux
 241 2012-05-01 05:06:29 <freewil> ha.. that was the end of me trying to type git status
 242 2012-05-01 05:07:13 * BlueMatt ponders running s/tus/tux everywhere on a system, just to type tux more often...as is appropriate
 243 2012-05-01 05:07:31 <freewil> try mux too
 244 2012-05-01 05:07:46 <BlueMatt> meh, I prefer to pay homage to the penguin king
 245 2012-05-01 05:08:09 <BlueMatt> ...nvm
 246 2012-05-01 05:12:17 pickett has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 247 2012-05-01 05:12:25 <weex> if you wanted to make a blockchain where some % of mined coins were assigned to an organization, how might that be done? ( some context: http://forum.open-org.com/q92/#ans453 )
 248 2012-05-01 05:14:46 <freewil> whats a profitpoint
 249 2012-05-01 05:15:01 <weex> it's their version of a share
 250 2012-05-01 05:15:17 <weex> gives their users/members a piece of profits or revenues
 251 2012-05-01 05:15:47 <freewil> for a specifc business?
 252 2012-05-01 05:16:10 <weex> yes, the business is some sort of paid q&a site for legal questions
 253 2012-05-01 05:16:12 pickett has joined
 254 2012-05-01 05:16:30 <freewil> oh
 255 2012-05-01 05:17:51 <freewil> well i dont know much about the bitcoin scripting, but i guess you could make a fork of bitcoin where there was always a percentage of a tx going to a single address
 256 2012-05-01 05:18:13 <BlueMatt> see: solidcoin
 257 2012-05-01 05:18:18 <freewil> although i would think youd want it to be more than a single address to protect against that one address being attacked
 258 2012-05-01 05:18:20 <BlueMatt> (they do that...)
 259 2012-05-01 05:18:27 <freewil> really?
 260 2012-05-01 05:18:29 <weex> no kidding
 261 2012-05-01 05:18:33 <BlueMatt> yea...
 262 2012-05-01 05:18:46 <BlueMatt> dont read their code though
 263 2012-05-01 05:18:50 <BlueMatt> or you cant code on bitcoin anymore
 264 2012-05-01 05:18:59 <BlueMatt> (their very restrictive license is kinda...f'd up)
 265 2012-05-01 05:19:40 <weex> freewil: re the single address, yes i think that's too risky can a deterministic wallet be any better?
 266 2012-05-01 05:20:02 <weex> either way the org would have some secret to protect
 267 2012-05-01 05:20:11 <BlueMatt> use a p2sh address
 268 2012-05-01 05:21:59 <BlueMatt> (this kind of problem is one of their most important uses)
 269 2012-05-01 05:21:59 <weex> for the purpose of having m-of-n keys required to spend?
 270 2012-05-01 05:22:04 <BlueMatt> yea
 271 2012-05-01 05:23:56 da2ce7 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 272 2012-05-01 05:24:00 <weex> ok well that's significant, i think they're a ways off from doing anything like this but i wanted to check feasibility
 273 2012-05-01 05:24:39 <BlueMatt> its feasible, as long as you can protect a secret
 274 2012-05-01 05:24:47 <BlueMatt> or n secret
 275 2012-05-01 05:24:48 <BlueMatt> s
 276 2012-05-01 05:25:05 <weex> i can protect n but not sure about m :P
 277 2012-05-01 05:25:26 <BlueMatt> heh
 278 2012-05-01 05:25:28 da2ce7 has joined
 279 2012-05-01 05:25:53 <freewil> ok, so lets say you have an organization with 5 people (keys)
 280 2012-05-01 05:26:40 <freewil> so you can create an address where someone can send coins where it requires 3-of-the-5 keys to spend?
 281 2012-05-01 05:26:47 <BlueMatt> yep
 282 2012-05-01 05:27:20 <freewil> so how would you combine the keys together, bitcoind importprivkey?
 283 2012-05-01 05:27:42 <BlueMatt> the spending infrastructure is still kinda a wip...
 284 2012-05-01 05:27:55 <freewil> i see
 285 2012-05-01 05:27:57 <BlueMatt> though Ive been gone for a few months, so it probably works now
 286 2012-05-01 05:28:40 <freewil> there is the new rpc command addmultisigaddress
 287 2012-05-01 05:28:48 <weex> is a transaction broadcast that has less than n secrets for the others to sign?
 288 2012-05-01 05:28:50 <freewil> im not sure if it's available on livenet yet though
 289 2012-05-01 05:29:05 <BlueMatt> weex: not through the network, you have to broadcast it among peers manually
 290 2012-05-01 05:29:10 <BlueMatt> (that is the part thats still kinda wip)
 291 2012-05-01 05:29:21 <BlueMatt> freewil: oh, you can spend them/mine them/etc on livenet
 292 2012-05-01 05:29:24 <BlueMatt>  /mainnet
 293 2012-05-01 05:30:23 <freewil> hmm cool
 294 2012-05-01 05:31:23 jgarzik_ is now known as jgarzik
 295 2012-05-01 05:31:43 theorb has joined
 296 2012-05-01 05:31:57 <weex> now i had n and m screwed up so if n is "all the possible keys"...
 297 2012-05-01 05:32:12 <weex> could there be an operation to change that address using say n-1?
 298 2012-05-01 05:32:25 <BlueMatt> what do you mean change the address?
 299 2012-05-01 05:32:32 <BlueMatt> once the address is set, it requires m of n
 300 2012-05-01 05:32:32 <BlueMatt> period
 301 2012-05-01 05:32:43 <weex> that way if one of the keys were known to be compromised the whole set could be replaced
 302 2012-05-01 05:33:06 <weex> i know this is way off what the software does now
 303 2012-05-01 05:33:26 <BlueMatt> in the current method of p2sh, no
 304 2012-05-01 05:33:34 <BlueMatt> could it ever be done...not really
 305 2012-05-01 05:33:54 <BlueMatt> you can never depend on historical data to verify a tx's validity (except for the inputs of the given tx)
 306 2012-05-01 05:33:57 <BlueMatt> or should never
 307 2012-05-01 05:34:52 <weex> well like for this to work at all, the software would have an address hardcoded to start or be set to look for a specific address-setting transaction
 308 2012-05-01 05:35:18 <BlueMatt> you could, but then thin clients would never work
 309 2012-05-01 05:35:21 <BlueMatt> or be less secure
 310 2012-05-01 05:36:08 <weex> oh because any transaction could in theory be using inputs from the "company"
 311 2012-05-01 05:36:33 theorbtwo has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 312 2012-05-01 05:36:40 theorb is now known as theorbtwo
 313 2012-05-01 05:37:22 Slix` has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 314 2012-05-01 05:37:23 <weex> except you said except
 315 2012-05-01 05:37:49 <BlueMatt> I mean, you could do it that way
 316 2012-05-01 05:37:53 <BlueMatt> it would just get more ugly
 317 2012-05-01 05:37:59 <BlueMatt> and make tx verification take even longer
 318 2012-05-01 05:38:06 <BlueMatt> and you would have to add a new db for address updates
 319 2012-05-01 05:38:38 paulo_ has joined
 320 2012-05-01 06:03:56 devrandom has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 321 2012-05-01 06:04:37 devrandom has joined
 322 2012-05-01 06:12:04 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
 323 2012-05-01 06:25:03 splatster has quit (Quit: S²CM - An investment that actually won't put all your coins the shredder!)
 324 2012-05-01 06:26:41 Joric has joined
 325 2012-05-01 06:33:23 BTCTrader has quit (Quit: BTCTrader)
 326 2012-05-01 06:45:00 ThomasV has joined
 327 2012-05-01 07:03:51 b4epoche_ has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 328 2012-05-01 07:05:44 b4epoche_ has joined
 329 2012-05-01 07:09:40 molecular has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 330 2012-05-01 07:24:59 molecular has joined
 331 2012-05-01 07:27:21 RazielZ has joined
 332 2012-05-01 07:28:15 RazielZ has quit (Client Quit)
 333 2012-05-01 07:33:44 RazielZ has joined
 334 2012-05-01 07:37:06 paulo_ has quit ()
 335 2012-05-01 07:40:26 RainbowDashh has joined
 336 2012-05-01 07:41:12 Zarutian has joined
 337 2012-05-01 07:47:42 m00p has joined
 338 2012-05-01 08:07:34 Xunie has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 339 2012-05-01 08:13:43 dvide has joined
 340 2012-05-01 08:23:15 * dusty__ is still banging his head with a strange transaction
 341 2012-05-01 08:23:22 * dusty__ and needs help
 342 2012-05-01 08:23:59 Xunie has joined
 343 2012-05-01 08:24:03 <dusty__> I'm working on this transaction in testnet: http://blockexplorer.com/testnet/tx/a17b21f52859ed326d1395d8a56d5c7389f5fc83c17b9140a71d7cb86fdf0f5f#i584828
 344 2012-05-01 08:24:32 <dusty__> I've evaluated the script "by hand" and it should not validate
 345 2012-05-01 08:24:47 <dusty__> so why it's been accepted in block #30301 ?
 346 2012-05-01 08:25:03 datagutt has joined
 347 2012-05-01 08:25:18 datagutt has quit (Changing host)
 348 2012-05-01 08:25:18 datagutt has joined
 349 2012-05-01 08:25:20 <dusty__> it's a very strange script: 3 OP_ROLL OP_DUP 2 OP_GREATERTHANOREQUAL OP_VERIFY 3 OP_ROLL OP_SIZE OP_NOT OP_OVER OP_HASH160 80677c5392220db736455533477d0bc2fba65502 OP_EQUAL OP_BOOLOR OP_VERIFY 3 OP_ROLL OP_SIZE OP_NOT OP_OVER OP_HASH160 02d7aa2e76d9066fb2b3c41ff8839a5c81bdca19 OP_EQUAL OP_BOOLOR OP_VERIFY 3 OP_ROLL OP_SIZE OP_NOT OP_OVER OP_HASH160 10039ce4fdb5d4ee56148fe3935b9bfbbe4ecc89 OP_EQUAL OP_BOOLOR OP_VERIFY 3 OP_CHECKMULTISIG
 350 2012-05-01 08:25:37 <dusty__> but it gives false with this scriptSig: 0 3046022100d73f633f114e0e0b324d87d38d34f22966a03b072803afa99c9408201f6d6dc6022100900e85be52ad2278d24e7edbb7269367f5f2d6f1bd338d017ca460008776614401 3044022071fef8ac0aa6318817dbd242bf51fb5b75be312aa31ecb44a0afe7b49fcf840302204c223179a383bb6fcb80312ac66e473345065f7d9136f9662d867acf96c12a4201 2
 351 2012-05-01 08:25:37 <dusty__> 048c006ff0d2cfde86455086af5a25b88c2b81858aab67f6a3132c885a2cb9ec38e700576fd46c7d72d7d22555eee3a14e2876c643cd70b1b0a77fbf46e62331ac 04b68ef7d8f24d45e1771101e269c0aacf8d3ed7ebe12b65521712bba768ef53e1e84fff3afbee360acea0d1f461c013557f71d426ac17a293c5eebf06e468253e 0
 352 2012-05-01 08:25:58 <dusty__> so it should not be added in the block
 353 2012-05-01 08:26:15 <dusty__> anyone has some clue to give me?
 354 2012-05-01 08:28:04 ivan\ has quit (Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs))
 355 2012-05-01 08:29:31 ivan\ has joined
 356 2012-05-01 08:29:45 <genjix> dusty__: do you have the raw script dump?
 357 2012-05-01 08:29:58 <genjix> sorry raw tx dump
 358 2012-05-01 08:30:54 <dusty__> I can get the dump of the script, anyway the version I'm working on is equal to the one you see in blockexplorer
 359 2012-05-01 08:31:58 <dusty__> so I suppose I'm getting the data right
 360 2012-05-01 08:33:52 <Joric> dusty__, what are you using for building transactions
 361 2012-05-01 08:34:33 t7 has joined
 362 2012-05-01 08:34:58 <Joric> i'm trying to write tx editor here http://brainwallet.org/#transactions early alpha but working
 363 2012-05-01 08:36:17 gfinn has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 364 2012-05-01 08:36:17 devrandom has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 365 2012-05-01 08:36:43 devrandom has joined
 366 2012-05-01 08:37:31 <Joric> if you paste hex it'll convert it automatically
 367 2012-05-01 08:47:59 gfinn has joined
 368 2012-05-01 08:48:52 <dusty__> Joric: I don't have the raw bytes but we can get everything from the block explorer, what do you need exactly?
 369 2012-05-01 08:49:12 <dusty__> genjix: maybe it's possible to use libbitcoin to get the raw data?
 370 2012-05-01 08:49:51 <Joric> dusty__, you may paste json as well )
 371 2012-05-01 08:49:56 <dusty__> the lib I'm working with parses the bytes while reading them from the net
 372 2012-05-01 08:50:10 <dusty__> full json is here: http://blockexplorer.com/testnet/rawtx/a17b21f52859ed326d1395d8a56d5c7389f5fc83c17b9140a71d7cb86fdf0f5f
 373 2012-05-01 08:50:43 <Joric> whoa that's a one strange transaction
 374 2012-05-01 08:50:51 <dusty__> Joric: yes
 375 2012-05-01 08:51:18 <dusty__> Joric: the problem is that it should evaluate to false, at least what I'm getting
 376 2012-05-01 08:52:01 <genjix> dusty__: yeah i'll get it later. it's an interesting tx i want to examine
 377 2012-05-01 08:52:48 <dusty__> I can setup a document with all the evaluation and the stack data, step by step, if you want
 378 2012-05-01 08:53:09 <genjix> nah it's easier if i just get the raw dump
 379 2012-05-01 08:53:18 <dusty__> it's not so complex to do the evaluation by hand
 380 2012-05-01 08:54:24 <dusty__> genjix: I've took a look at libbiitcoin and it seems to me that it does not implements all the opcodes, so you can't evaluate it, yet
 381 2012-05-01 08:54:46 <genjix> yep it doesn't have the obscure opcodes like OP_ROLL
 382 2012-05-01 08:55:04 chrisb__ has joined
 383 2012-05-01 08:55:24 fred-fri has joined
 384 2012-05-01 08:57:08 <dusty__> this is the stack before OP_ROLL: http://pastebin.com/JuzSuTJD
 385 2012-05-01 09:00:38 devrandom has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 386 2012-05-01 09:00:50 <dusty__> and this is the stack before executing OP_GREATERTHANOREQUAL : http://pastebin.com/vCe7EA3r
 387 2012-05-01 09:01:09 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 388 2012-05-01 09:01:30 devrandom has joined
 389 2012-05-01 09:01:40 copumpkin has joined
 390 2012-05-01 09:02:26 <dusty__> up to the second OP_VERIFY everything should be ok because everything seems fine: the result of HASH160 compares correctly with the values provided by the script
 391 2012-05-01 09:04:38 <genjix> dusty__: why are you evaluating this output?
 392 2012-05-01 09:05:09 <genjix> just fyi, are you using the input of the next tx, right?
 393 2012-05-01 09:05:44 <genjix> so output 1 of a17b21f52859ed326d1395d8a56d5c7389f5fc83c17b9140a71d7cb86fdf0f5f
 394 2012-05-01 09:05:47 <dusty__> this is the stack before executing second OP_EQUAL: http://pastebin.com/irzhrkdN
 395 2012-05-01 09:05:59 <genjix> dusty__: this output is unspent
 396 2012-05-01 09:06:19 <dusty__> genjix: I'm validating block #30301 that has tx a17b21f52859ed326d1395d8a56d5c7389f5fc83c17b9140a71d7cb86fdf0f5f
 397 2012-05-01 09:06:36 <dusty__> that uses this previous ouput: http://blockexplorer.com/testnet/tx/87abda4755e492de6149affbfc67d42a367f76c166c6bc31c8dfb916f74f66bb#o1
 398 2012-05-01 09:06:40 <genjix> ok good
 399 2012-05-01 09:06:46 <dusty__> the scriptpubkey is the same
 400 2012-05-01 09:06:47 <genjix> just checking :)
 401 2012-05-01 09:07:22 <dusty__> i've checked myself a hundred times because I'm banging my head on that since yesterday :)
 402 2012-05-01 09:08:16 <dusty__> so up to the second OP_VERIFY everything seems fine
 403 2012-05-01 09:08:21 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 404 2012-05-01 09:10:37 <genjix> i'm checking
 405 2012-05-01 09:11:01 <dusty__> thank you :)
 406 2012-05-01 09:11:38 sirk390 has joined
 407 2012-05-01 09:12:33 <genjix> well to be fair i'm interested in this unusual tx :)
 408 2012-05-01 09:14:37 <dusty__> genjix: that what I was counting on :-D
 409 2012-05-01 09:15:40 gjs278 has joined
 410 2012-05-01 09:18:15 <genjix> 15k blocks
 411 2012-05-01 09:19:01 <dusty__> that's fast... validated?
 412 2012-05-01 09:19:26 <genjix> testnet blocks
 413 2012-05-01 09:22:16 <dusty__> I suppose you was telling me how many testnet blocks have you already downloaded
 414 2012-05-01 09:23:12 <dusty__> if you did 15k in such a short amount of time I suppose they were downloaded without validating them
 415 2012-05-01 09:24:20 <genjix> 0100000001845ad165bdc0f9b5829cf5a594c4148dfd89e24756303f3a8dabeb597afa589b010000008b483045022063c233df8efa3d1885e069e375a8eabf16b23475ef21bdc9628a513ee4caceb702210090a102c7b602043e72b34a154d495ac19b3b9e42acb962c399451f2baead8f4c014104b38f79037ad25b84a564eaf53ede93dec70b35216e6682aa71a47cefa2996ec49acfbb0a8730577c62ef9a7cc20c740aaaaee75419bef9640a4216c2b49c42d3ffffffff02000c022900000000434104c08c0a71ccbe838403e3870aa1ab871b0ab3a6014b0ba41f6df2b9aefea73134
 416 2012-05-01 09:24:27 <genjix> that's the first one
 417 2012-05-01 09:24:38 <genjix> mr 87a
 418 2012-05-01 09:25:49 <dusty__> ok, in block #30297
 419 2012-05-01 09:26:16 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 420 2012-05-01 09:26:46 <dusty__> can you please tell me how can libbitcoin be used to get this data? it can be very useful
 421 2012-05-01 09:28:05 gjs278 has joined
 422 2012-05-01 09:30:40 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: RainbowDashh)
 423 2012-05-01 09:30:59 <genjix> dusty__: you mean parse?
 424 2012-05-01 09:31:22 <dusty__> no, I mean to get the raw data
 425 2012-05-01 09:31:58 <dusty__> so to save it to a file for example, for later doing batch tests without the need to connect to other hosts
 426 2012-05-01 09:32:10 <genjix> like this:
 427 2012-05-01 09:33:53 <genjix> blockchain_ptr chain = ...; chain->fetch_transaction(hash_from_pretty("..."), handle_tx); ...   void handle_tx(const std::error_code& ec, const message::transaction& tx) { if (ec) return; satoshi_exporter ex; std::cout << pretty_hex(ex.save(tx)) << std::endl; }
 428 2012-05-01 09:34:24 <dusty__> ah ok, I thougt it was possible to do it via commandline
 429 2012-05-01 09:34:32 <genjix> you can use python
 430 2012-05-01 09:34:53 <genjix> (essentially same)
 431 2012-05-01 09:35:11 <dusty__> ok, thanks
 432 2012-05-01 09:37:57 tower has quit (Disconnected by services)
 433 2012-05-01 09:38:10 tower has joined
 434 2012-05-01 09:39:11 <genjix> 0100000001bb664ff716b9dfc831bcc666c1767f362ad467fcfbaf4961de92e45547daab8701000000fd190100493046022100d73f633f114e0e0b324d87d38d34f22966a03b072803afa99c9408201f6d6dc6022100900e85be52ad2278d24e7edbb7269367f5f2d6f1bd338d017ca460008776614401473044022071fef8ac0aa6318817dbd242bf51fb5b75be312aa31ecb44a0afe7b49fcf840302204c223179a383bb6fcb80312ac66e473345065f7d9136f9662d867acf96c12a42015241048c006ff0d2cfde86455086af5a25b88c2b81858aab67f6a3132c885a2cb9ec38e70057
 435 2012-05-01 09:39:18 <genjix> second
 436 2012-05-01 09:41:07 fred-fri has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 437 2012-05-01 09:41:21 fred-fri has joined
 438 2012-05-01 09:41:34 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 439 2012-05-01 09:47:20 Xunie has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 440 2012-05-01 09:49:20 gjs278 has joined
 441 2012-05-01 09:49:26 toffoo has quit ()
 442 2012-05-01 09:50:08 RainbowDashh has joined
 443 2012-05-01 09:52:05 gfinn has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 444 2012-05-01 09:57:33 <dusty__> genjix: are you implementing the missing opcodes to check it out? :)
 445 2012-05-01 09:58:11 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 446 2012-05-01 09:59:01 <genjix> dusty__: yep
 447 2012-05-01 09:59:09 gjs278 has joined
 448 2012-05-01 10:00:38 <Diablo-D3> remember to vote: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=78052.0
 449 2012-05-01 10:03:56 gfinn has joined
 450 2012-05-01 10:09:06 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 451 2012-05-01 10:10:52 gjs278 has joined
 452 2012-05-01 10:12:37 chrisb__ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 453 2012-05-01 10:13:27 darkee has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 454 2012-05-01 10:15:48 darkee has joined
 455 2012-05-01 10:16:15 mmoya has joined
 456 2012-05-01 10:21:55 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: RainbowDashh)
 457 2012-05-01 10:23:28 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 458 2012-05-01 10:24:00 copumpkin has joined
 459 2012-05-01 10:34:05 sytse has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 460 2012-05-01 10:35:45 sytse has joined
 461 2012-05-01 10:37:50 Joric has quit ()
 462 2012-05-01 10:38:23 paraipan has joined
 463 2012-05-01 10:55:36 kish_ is now known as kish
 464 2012-05-01 10:57:39 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 465 2012-05-01 11:04:11 ahihi2 has joined
 466 2012-05-01 11:17:55 b4epoche_ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 467 2012-05-01 11:19:39 b4epoche_ has joined
 468 2012-05-01 11:19:54 TD has joined
 469 2012-05-01 11:21:28 [7] has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
 470 2012-05-01 11:33:41 [7] has joined
 471 2012-05-01 11:40:48 [7] has quit (Disconnected by services)
 472 2012-05-01 11:40:54 TheSeven has joined
 473 2012-05-01 11:43:57 m00p has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 474 2012-05-01 11:48:04 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 475 2012-05-01 11:55:44 Z0rZ0rZ0r has joined
 476 2012-05-01 12:09:17 Z0rZ0rZ0r has quit (Quit: Wheeeee)
 477 2012-05-01 12:09:46 <dusty__> genjix: any news?
 478 2012-05-01 12:12:39 t7_ has joined
 479 2012-05-01 12:13:52 t7 has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 480 2012-05-01 12:13:59 <genjix> dusty__: oh i got distracted. back to it.
 481 2012-05-01 12:14:03 t7_ is now known as t7
 482 2012-05-01 12:17:33 chrisb__ has joined
 483 2012-05-01 12:20:18 Nicksasa has joined
 484 2012-05-01 12:20:18 Nicksasa has quit (Changing host)
 485 2012-05-01 12:20:18 Nicksasa has joined
 486 2012-05-01 12:24:22 TheSeven has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 487 2012-05-01 12:24:28 <genjix> dusty__: k so it failed for me but maybe i got an opcode wrong
 488 2012-05-01 12:25:52 TheSeven has joined
 489 2012-05-01 12:25:57 <fred-fri> hey guys, im starting an open source messaging service similar to bitcoin, would be very glad for any feedback, input or help http://sourceforge.net/p/bitmessage/wiki/Home/
 490 2012-05-01 12:28:49 <fred-fri> goin afk for a while, brb
 491 2012-05-01 12:38:30 ThomasV has joined
 492 2012-05-01 12:54:20 b4epoche has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
 493 2012-05-01 12:54:20 b4epoche_ is now known as b4epoche
 494 2012-05-01 12:55:24 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
 495 2012-05-01 12:55:34 devrandom has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 496 2012-05-01 12:56:21 devrandom has joined
 497 2012-05-01 12:56:41 Turingi has joined
 498 2012-05-01 12:56:41 Turingi has quit (Changing host)
 499 2012-05-01 12:56:41 Turingi has joined
 500 2012-05-01 13:05:44 Z0rZ0rZ0r has joined
 501 2012-05-01 13:11:33 paraipan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 502 2012-05-01 13:12:36 paraipan has joined
 503 2012-05-01 13:12:58 mtve has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 504 2012-05-01 13:13:16 splatster has joined
 505 2012-05-01 13:13:26 BTC_Bear is now known as hbrntng!~BTC_Bear@unaffiliated/btc-bear/x-5233302|BTC_Bear
 506 2012-05-01 13:14:41 ahihi2 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 507 2012-05-01 13:18:51 fred-fri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 508 2012-05-01 13:20:46 <dusty__> genjix: if I can help debug the opcodes pls ask
 509 2012-05-01 13:20:47 <t7> Fred-fri how does it resist spam?
 510 2012-05-01 13:20:59 ahihi2 has joined
 511 2012-05-01 13:21:01 <t7> it uses a difficulty like bitcoin?
 512 2012-05-01 13:21:14 <dusty__> have you checked out my "by hand" evaluation?
 513 2012-05-01 13:22:33 <dusty__> Here is the crucial part: http://pastebin.com/vCe7EA3r
 514 2012-05-01 13:23:07 <dusty__> if we catch a bug in the official client it will be fun ;)
 515 2012-05-01 13:24:05 guruvan has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 516 2012-05-01 13:24:06 pickett has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 517 2012-05-01 13:25:16 pickett has joined
 518 2012-05-01 13:27:00 devrandom has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 519 2012-05-01 13:27:56 devrandom has joined
 520 2012-05-01 13:29:18 guruvan has joined
 521 2012-05-01 13:30:46 setkeh` has joined
 522 2012-05-01 13:32:30 setkeh has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 523 2012-05-01 13:34:58 setkeh` is now known as setkeh
 524 2012-05-01 13:35:27 <genjix> dusty__: http://pastebin.com/jTgmfz3H
 525 2012-05-01 13:39:31 copumpkin has joined
 526 2012-05-01 13:41:14 mmoya has joined
 527 2012-05-01 13:43:26 BTC_Bear is now known as BTC_Bear|hbrntng
 528 2012-05-01 13:58:01 <dusty__> genjix: with [] you mean zero?
 529 2012-05-01 13:59:21 <dusty__> ok so I've a bug in the op_roll handling
 530 2012-05-01 14:03:49 Ouzo69_ has joined
 531 2012-05-01 14:04:17 Nicksasa has quit (Read error: No route to host)
 532 2012-05-01 14:04:40 <genjix> dusty__: yep OP_FALSE/OP_0 pushes a nothing onto the stack
 533 2012-05-01 14:04:54 <sipa> dusty__: gavin recently asked for script test cases somewhere
 534 2012-05-01 14:06:02 <sipa> dusty__: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=77422.msg860686#msg860686
 535 2012-05-01 14:08:32 Ouzo69_ has quit (Client Quit)
 536 2012-05-01 14:12:04 <dusty__> sipa: thanks for the tip
 537 2012-05-01 14:13:24 Glasswalker has joined
 538 2012-05-01 14:30:35 <dusty__> genjix: so op_size of 0 is 0
 539 2012-05-01 14:31:23 <dusty__> but 0 is not the empty string, why not discriminate between them?
 540 2012-05-01 14:32:03 <dusty__> or maybe the size of a constant is always zero...?
 541 2012-05-01 14:32:14 <genjix> dusty__: OP_0 is [] not [0]
 542 2012-05-01 14:32:23 <genjix> (if that makes sense)
 543 2012-05-01 14:33:19 <dusty__> well that's a problem, for me
 544 2012-05-01 14:33:25 <dusty__> i translated OP_0 with 0
 545 2012-05-01 14:34:01 <dusty__> I suppose I'll have some refactoring to do
 546 2012-05-01 14:34:05 <dusty__> thanks
 547 2012-05-01 14:34:43 Diapolo has joined
 548 2012-05-01 14:35:03 <genjix> nw
 549 2012-05-01 14:35:04 <Diapolo> hello
 550 2012-05-01 14:38:53 vigilyn has joined
 551 2012-05-01 14:39:42 <dusty__> genjix: but I see another problem
 552 2012-05-01 14:39:53 <dusty__> you made OP_NOT [] = []
 553 2012-05-01 14:40:11 <dusty__> but the specs indicated that the result should be 0
 554 2012-05-01 14:40:23 <dusty__> from the wiki "If the input is 0 or 1, it is flipped. Otherwise the output will be 0."
 555 2012-05-01 14:41:26 one_zero has quit ()
 556 2012-05-01 14:41:46 <dusty__> genjix: sorry, I misread, you put 1, not []
 557 2012-05-01 14:41:51 <dusty__> so I'm a bit puzzled
 558 2012-05-01 14:42:02 <genjix> wiki is wrong
 559 2012-05-01 14:42:18 <genjix> OP_NOT tests whether it equals big_number(0)
 560 2012-05-01 14:42:22 <genjix> CBigNum(0)
 561 2012-05-01 14:43:26 <genjix> ah worded that way it isn't wrong
 562 2012-05-01 14:43:33 <genjix> just a little convoluted :)
 563 2012-05-01 14:45:12 <sipa> genjix: sure that 0 OP_NOT is equal to 0 ?
 564 2012-05-01 14:47:02 <dusty__> sipa: I've your same doubt
 565 2012-05-01 14:47:28 <sipa> genjix: bitcoind's code casts the lasts number on the stack to a bignum, and compares that to 0
 566 2012-05-01 14:47:59 <sipa> afaik [] would be cast to CBigNum(0), which will compare equal to 0
 567 2012-05-01 14:48:36 <genjix> you mean OP_0 or [0]?
 568 2012-05-01 14:49:10 <sipa> all of them
 569 2012-05-01 14:50:06 <genjix> it might do. i'd have to check.
 570 2012-05-01 14:50:06 <sipa> OP_0 ([]) and [0x00] would both be cast to CBigNum(0)
 571 2012-05-01 14:50:17 <genjix> ah right.
 572 2012-05-01 14:50:34 <genjix> yeah what i meant for dusty__ is how is looks on the stack
 573 2012-05-01 14:50:42 <luke-jr> I don't get why 1173 has ACKs
 574 2012-05-01 14:50:54 <genjix> (he was asking about the []s in my paste)
 575 2012-05-01 14:51:00 <genjix> http://pastebin.com/jTgmfz3H
 576 2012-05-01 14:53:50 <luke-jr> dooglus: poke?
 577 2012-05-01 14:55:49 BTC_Bear is now known as hbrntng!~BTC_Bear@unaffiliated/btc-bear/x-5233302|BTC_Bear
 578 2012-05-01 14:56:27 gavinandresen has joined
 579 2012-05-01 14:58:19 Diapolo has quit (Quit: Page closed)
 580 2012-05-01 14:58:54 Diapolo has joined
 581 2012-05-01 15:09:56 devrandom has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 582 2012-05-01 15:10:40 devrandom has joined
 583 2012-05-01 15:11:24 <dusty__> ok I finally got to the checkmultisig
 584 2012-05-01 15:11:32 <dusty__> and not it's it that's failing
 585 2012-05-01 15:11:49 <dusty__> because one of the three public keys is empty...
 586 2012-05-01 15:12:11 <dusty__> that script is very rich in corner cases :)
 587 2012-05-01 15:14:45 pusle has joined
 588 2012-05-01 15:18:44 <genjix> dusty__: thanks for that. tell me if you see any more of those http://gitorious.org/libbitcoin/libbitcoin/commit/6ee6236fc7a0706079e8992eaa4ece82227f8fd7/diffs/6319e2f5062f024858153446a6854e3609107ed0
 589 2012-05-01 15:20:26 <dusty__> genjix: thank to you for your support :)
 590 2012-05-01 15:20:57 <dusty__> will you be online for some time? I've some conceirn regarding the checkmultisig implementation... :-/
 591 2012-05-01 15:21:05 <genjix> sure
 592 2012-05-01 15:22:20 RainbowDashh has joined
 593 2012-05-01 15:22:26 <[Tycho]> dusty__: are you sure it's a script ?
 594 2012-05-01 15:22:56 RainbowDashh has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 595 2012-05-01 15:23:08 sirk390 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 596 2012-05-01 15:23:18 ahihi2 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 597 2012-05-01 15:23:40 <dusty__> [Tycho]: yes, of course, here is the link: http://blockexplorer.com/testnet/tx/a17b21f52859ed326d1395d8a56d5c7389f5fc83c17b9140a71d7cb86fdf0f5f#i584828
 598 2012-05-01 15:23:42 <Diapolo> wumpus: are you on?
 599 2012-05-01 15:24:09 devrandom has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 600 2012-05-01 15:25:25 <[Tycho]> Oh, now I see a similar one, redeemed.
 601 2012-05-01 15:26:03 <dusty__> yes, the script is the same
 602 2012-05-01 15:29:44 thescent has joined
 603 2012-05-01 15:30:01 BTCTrader has joined
 604 2012-05-01 15:30:01 BTCTrader has quit (Changing host)
 605 2012-05-01 15:30:01 BTCTrader has joined
 606 2012-05-01 15:30:28 Diablo-D3 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 607 2012-05-01 15:32:43 b4epoche has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 608 2012-05-01 15:33:35 ahihi2 has joined
 609 2012-05-01 15:35:05 b4epoche has joined
 610 2012-05-01 15:35:12 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Quitte)
 611 2012-05-01 15:35:19 BTC_Bear is now known as BTC_Bear|hbrntng
 612 2012-05-01 15:36:52 sje has joined
 613 2012-05-01 15:38:12 sje has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 614 2012-05-01 15:40:19 sje has joined
 615 2012-05-01 15:40:19 sje has quit (Changing host)
 616 2012-05-01 15:40:19 sje has joined
 617 2012-05-01 15:41:02 sje has quit (Client Quit)
 618 2012-05-01 15:41:18 <dusty__> genjix: how do you handle the verification with an empty public key?
 619 2012-05-01 15:43:30 <genjix> check signature will fail i guess
 620 2012-05-01 15:46:34 <genjix> yeah will fail
 621 2012-05-01 15:47:04 <dusty__> genjix: but the script before is valid, so how can that be?
 622 2012-05-01 15:47:40 <dusty__> the first public key to test of the three provided is empty
 623 2012-05-01 15:48:13 <gavinandresen> only 2 of the 3 need to succeed
 624 2012-05-01 15:48:44 <gavinandresen> (if I'm remembering that CHECKMULTISIG correctly)
 625 2012-05-01 15:49:16 <dusty__> gavinandresen: thanks, I'll study better the specs then
 626 2012-05-01 15:49:48 <gavinandresen> did somebody write CHECKMULTISIG specs?  The only real spec is the code last I checked....
 627 2012-05-01 15:50:23 <gavinandresen> I did write unit tests for CHECKMULTISIG that might help (I tried to exercise the edge cases)
 628 2012-05-01 15:51:07 <gavinandresen> sipa: do you have time to do a gitian rc2 build?
 629 2012-05-01 15:51:17 <sipa> gavinandresen: yes, I did one
 630 2012-05-01 15:51:19 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: sipa opened pull request 1174 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1174>
 631 2012-05-01 15:51:27 <genjix> checkmultisig is not that odd though: start with pubkeys and signatures. keep advancing (never go back) running check signature as you go along
 632 2012-05-01 15:51:29 <sipa> but the build doesn't match your or wumpus's at all
 633 2012-05-01 15:51:32 <genjix> fail if not enough pass
 634 2012-05-01 15:51:57 <gavinandresen> sipa: checksums on wumpus' source files are completely different from mine
 635 2012-05-01 15:52:18 t7 has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.88.2 [Firefox 13.0/20120425123149])
 636 2012-05-01 15:53:35 <gavinandresen> sipa: any idea what isn't matching ?  Do the linux builds match?
 637 2012-05-01 15:53:40 <sipa> gavinandresen: no
 638 2012-05-01 15:53:49 <sipa> gavinandresen: which version id do your builds report?
 639 2012-05-01 15:54:23 <gavinandresen> one sec, I'll unpack and run...
 640 2012-05-01 15:54:27 <sipa> Bitcoin version v0.6.1rc2-beta (2012-04-30 11:08:07 -0400)
 641 2012-05-01 15:54:31 <sipa> is what i get
 642 2012-05-01 15:54:59 <sipa> (that timestamp is the last commit date, which should be equal for other builds)
 643 2012-05-01 15:56:26 <wumpus> what source files are different? I diffed your gitian output with mine and only found differences in the binary files
 644 2012-05-01 15:56:55 <gavinandresen> sipa: how do I get the timestamp?  I just get Bitcoin version v0.6.1rc2-beta
 645 2012-05-01 15:57:09 <sipa> gavinandresen: it's written in debug.log
 646 2012-05-01 15:57:49 agricocb has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
 647 2012-05-01 15:58:27 <sipa> i pushed my sigs
 648 2012-05-01 15:58:49 barmstrong has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 649 2012-05-01 15:59:16 <sipa> only the binaries and some unrelated .deb package checksums differ
 650 2012-05-01 15:59:24 <gavinandresen> my version matches: Bitcoin version v0.6.1rc2-beta (2012-04-30 11:08:07 -0400)
 651 2012-05-01 16:00:50 <Diapolo> wumpus: Could you take a look at small translator changes before I open a pull-req if they make sense to you?
 652 2012-05-01 16:00:58 <wumpus> Bitcoin version 0.6.0.5-beta    uhmm
 653 2012-05-01 16:01:24 <wumpus> yes Diapolo
 654 2012-05-01 16:01:52 <sipa> gavinandresen: are your builds online somewhere?
 655 2012-05-01 16:02:20 <gavinandresen> sipa: no, I haven't uploaded them yet
 656 2012-05-01 16:02:38 <sipa> i'm uploading mine
 657 2012-05-01 16:03:18 <Diapolo> wumpus: https://github.com/Diapolo/bitcoin/commit/aab1f950aaa0f2123bdf2d18cd548709928f2ede I tried to fix the missing untranslated default buttons and either this helps or it has to do with the used Qt Version the default client is compiled with.
 658 2012-05-01 16:03:59 <wumpus> how can I have built v0.6.0.5 instead of v.0.6.1rc2?!?
 659 2012-05-01 16:04:24 <wumpus> COMMIT=v0.6.1rc2  bin/gbuild --commit bitcoin=${COMMIT} ../bitcoin/contrib/gitian-descriptors/gitian-win32.yml
 660 2012-05-01 16:04:53 <wumpus> oh never mind
 661 2012-05-01 16:05:07 <sipa> gavinandresen: http://bitcoin.sipa.be/builds/0.6.1rc2/
 662 2012-05-01 16:05:11 <Diapolo> sipa: Is it correct that RC1 had the dirty flag in it? Bitcoin version v0.6.1rc1-2-g0acbe31-dirty-beta (2012-04-27 12:45:49 -0400)
 663 2012-05-01 16:05:13 <wumpus> only updated the version for the windows builder
 664 2012-05-01 16:05:41 <sipa> Diapolo: accidentally, yes
 665 2012-05-01 16:06:06 <Diapolo> sipa: ok, so nothing big then
 666 2012-05-01 16:06:22 <gavinandresen> sipa: whoops, hang on, version does NOT match yours for 64-bit linux build
 667 2012-05-01 16:06:32 <sipa> no, not a single binary matches
 668 2012-05-01 16:06:40 <sipa> not linux ones and not windows ones
 669 2012-05-01 16:06:48 <gavinandresen> sipa:  Bitcoin version v0.6.1rc2-dirty-beta (2012-04-30 11:08:07 -0400)
 670 2012-05-01 16:07:02 <sipa> oww
 671 2012-05-01 16:07:18 <sipa> are you using the most recent gitian builder?
 672 2012-05-01 16:07:22 <wumpus> no
 673 2012-05-01 16:07:34 <gavinandresen> sipa: I'll double-check, but I think so
 674 2012-05-01 16:07:44 <wumpus> you mean gitian version? or yml version?
 675 2012-05-01 16:07:50 <sipa> gitian
 676 2012-05-01 16:07:57 <sipa> because i'm not, and i believe something important changed
 677 2012-05-01 16:08:01 <wumpus> my version is very ancient
 678 2012-05-01 16:08:12 <gavinandresen> my gitian-builder is commit 953edf57df5f89eb4cd0e73f07e61037058bcbf4
 679 2012-05-01 16:08:21 <gavinandresen> (April 22)
 680 2012-05-01 16:08:29 <gavinandresen> ... and is up-to-date
 681 2012-05-01 16:08:55 <sipa> gavinandresen: i'll update as well, and see whether i get a dirty build
 682 2012-05-01 16:08:56 <wumpus> retrying with up-to-date one
 683 2012-05-01 16:09:03 devrandom has joined
 684 2012-05-01 16:09:12 <sipa> ah, when we speak of the devil
 685 2012-05-01 16:11:13 <wumpus> Diapolo: I'm not entirely sure what your commit does... does it solve the problem?
 686 2012-05-01 16:13:58 <Diapolo> wumups: main difference is qtTranslatorBase.load(QLibraryInfo::location(QLibraryInfo::TranslationsPath) + "/qt_" + lang) -> qtTranslatorBase.load("qt_" + lang, QLibraryInfo::location(QLibraryInfo::TranslationsPath)); other stuff is not related ... but perhaps there is sth. wrong with the path on Win, so can't harm and removes the isEmpty() check as we have a bool returned for .load().
 687 2012-05-01 16:14:48 <luke-jr> devrandom: btw, -i doesn't work
 688 2012-05-01 16:15:43 <wumpus> Diapolo: yes, it makes sense to do it this way, but I don't think there should be a functional difference
 689 2012-05-01 16:16:03 sje has joined
 690 2012-05-01 16:16:04 sje has quit (Changing host)
 691 2012-05-01 16:16:04 sje has joined
 692 2012-05-01 16:16:08 sje has quit (Client Quit)
 693 2012-05-01 16:16:29 <wumpus> Diapolo: I wonder what the value of QLibraryInfo::location(QLibraryInfo::TranslationsPath) is in the statically compiled qt
 694 2012-05-01 16:16:48 <Diapolo> wumpus: my local build now has correct translations for default buttons ... but the cause could be another :-/ Are you fine with the commit itself so I can open a pull?
 695 2012-05-01 16:17:16 <wumpus> ie, whether qt is smart enough to embed the translations as well in a resource, or that it thinks the files are somewhere else in the file system
 696 2012-05-01 16:17:33 <wumpus> yes I'm fine with it
 697 2012-05-01 16:18:02 <Diapolo> wumpus: D:\QtSDK\Desktop\Qt\4.8.1\mingw\translations is the path on Win for QLibraryInfo::TranslationsPath on my machine
 698 2012-05-01 16:18:03 <wumpus> Diapolo: so it was wrong in your local build, and after this change it is fixed?
 699 2012-05-01 16:18:37 <Diapolo> It could aswell been a problem with my Qt installation as I had 4.8.0 and 4.8.1 in parallel.
 700 2012-05-01 16:18:39 <wumpus> or was it already good in your local build just not the prepackaged one?
 701 2012-05-01 16:19:28 <wumpus> play
 702 2012-05-01 16:19:31 <wumpus> okay*
 703 2012-05-01 16:19:38 <gavinandresen> sipa devrandom :  I think gitian-builder commit 28bb4211 broke the version determination logic
 704 2012-05-01 16:20:47 <gavinandresen> ... wait... maybe....
 705 2012-05-01 16:21:05 <gavinandresen> (I don't completely understand how the git clone / git checkout is done)
 706 2012-05-01 16:21:18 <Diapolo> wumpus: RC1 is faulty and my local build had no correct translations, too until yesterday, where I switched to only Qt 4.8.1 and played around with the code ... perhaps some env vars were set wrong and are now correct.
 707 2012-05-01 16:22:01 <sipa> gavinandresen: in earlier version of gitian, the VM did the git clone; now it's done on the host system
 708 2012-05-01 16:22:22 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: Diapolo opened pull request 1175 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1175>
 709 2012-05-01 16:22:25 <Diapolo> wumpus: only speaking of default button texts and not of any bitcoin translations
 710 2012-05-01 16:22:58 <lianj> gribble: are old news common?
 711 2012-05-01 16:25:02 paraipan has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 712 2012-05-01 16:25:19 <Diapolo> wumpus: Official build is based on Qt 4.7.2 ... it could aswell be a simple Qt bug?
 713 2012-05-01 16:25:38 <wumpus> yes, it could be... but I somehow doubt it
 714 2012-05-01 16:25:58 <Diapolo> wumpus: related to Win, as it works for you ... OS was Ubuntu?
 715 2012-05-01 16:26:16 <wumpus> it works for me, but I don't use the static builds
 716 2012-05-01 16:26:34 <wumpus> and I've got the qt translation files on a predictable place on my system
 717 2012-05-01 16:27:14 <wumpus> I really suspect it's a problem with the static build of qt on windows
 718 2012-05-01 16:27:57 <luke-jr> sigh @ #1173
 719 2012-05-01 16:28:30 <luke-jr> it seems like whenever I point out why a pullreq is wrong, someone feels the need to merge it
 720 2012-05-01 16:28:32 <luke-jr> whatever
 721 2012-05-01 16:28:53 <Diapolo> Wumpus: I'm not sure how I could help with tracking this down further, as I can't do any static builds on my machine.
 722 2012-05-01 16:29:02 <wumpus> luke-jr: yes, I think we misunderstood the comment
 723 2012-05-01 16:29:34 <wumpus> it's doing SetStartOnSystemStartup *if* StartOnSystemStartup is already set
 724 2012-05-01 16:29:37 theorb has joined
 725 2012-05-01 16:29:47 <Diapolo> luke-jr: Sorry no, it was not about removing wx autostart links ... it's the same Bitcoin.lnk file perhaps with a different path!
 726 2012-05-01 16:30:13 <sipa> it removes Bitcoin.lnk, which is the startup link for both old and new versions, afaik?
 727 2012-05-01 16:30:28 <luke-jr> wasn't it changed to Bitcoin-Qt.lnk?
 728 2012-05-01 16:30:37 <luke-jr> if not, then what's there to remove?
 729 2012-05-01 16:31:02 <sipa> if you want to turn off autostart, you need to remove the shortcut
 730 2012-05-01 16:31:03 theorbtwo has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 731 2012-05-01 16:31:05 <wumpus> no, it wasn't changed
 732 2012-05-01 16:31:14 <sipa> wait, no
 733 2012-05-01 16:31:15 theorb is now known as theorbtwo
 734 2012-05-01 16:31:16 <wumpus> the lnk file is still the same... HOWEVER what it links to changed
 735 2012-05-01 16:31:23 <wumpus> lnk file name*
 736 2012-05-01 16:31:34 <sipa> right, of course
 737 2012-05-01 16:31:45 <luke-jr> sipa: that code only runs if autostart is enabled
 738 2012-05-01 16:31:48 <Diapolo> as I see it, the link is always regenerated if Autostart is turned on
 739 2012-05-01 16:32:01 <sipa> Diapolo: indeed
 740 2012-05-01 16:32:18 <Diapolo> so no need for the comment to contain any wx reference
 741 2012-05-01 16:32:19 <wumpus> so the comment was correct, by regenerating the link it fixed stale links to bitcoin-wx
 742 2012-05-01 16:32:21 <luke-jr> Diapolo: which only makes a difference, if the old one was wxBitcoin
 743 2012-05-01 16:32:54 <wumpus> right
 744 2012-05-01 16:33:04 <sipa> a better comment would be "Regenerate startup link, to fix links to old versions"
 745 2012-05-01 16:33:11 <Diapolo> but it does it everytime ^^
 746 2012-05-01 16:33:32 <wumpus> yes it does, but the reason it does it is to fix old versions
 747 2012-05-01 16:33:33 <wumpus> right sipa
 748 2012-05-01 16:33:40 <Diapolo> sipa: ACK
 749 2012-05-01 16:33:51 <wumpus> without the comment someone might think 'hey, this is a no-op, let's remove it'
 750 2012-05-01 16:33:55 agricocb has joined
 751 2012-05-01 16:33:55 <luke-jr> sipa: "Furthermore, make sure the port bitcoind listens on is not reachable from the outside world," <-- why not bind only localhost in that case; also, what if you *want* a dual-stack (IPv4 + Tor) node? :p
 752 2012-05-01 16:34:41 <Diapolo> wumpus: you suggested to move that function calls, why not do this and update the comment?
 753 2012-05-01 16:35:17 <sipa> luke-jr: 1) that is one way for achieving being unreachability from the outside world 2) you can, but you'll lose privacy, as it will give out your IPv4 address to incoming Tor connections
 754 2012-05-01 16:35:28 <sipa> -being
 755 2012-05-01 16:36:45 <luke-jr> sipa: 1) right now, it's not possible afaik?
 756 2012-05-01 16:36:57 genjix has quit (Quit: leaving)
 757 2012-05-01 16:37:32 <wumpus> Diapolo: right
 758 2012-05-01 16:37:32 <sipa> luke-jr: i don't think so, no
 759 2012-05-01 16:38:02 <luke-jr> sipa: seems to me, that being able to do so would make sense for that pullreq
 760 2012-05-01 16:38:35 <wumpus> Diapolo: I'm moving them to guiutil instead of util
 761 2012-05-01 16:38:39 paraipan has joined
 762 2012-05-01 16:39:05 <sipa> luke-jr: there's another problem with dual-stack too: someone can send you a newly crafted transaction via tor, and watch the IPv4 network (like blockchain.info) for where it appears
 763 2012-05-01 16:39:26 <luke-jr> sipa: someone running a hidden service might not care ;p
 764 2012-05-01 16:39:28 <Diapolo> wumpus: sounds good as they are GUI related
 765 2012-05-01 16:39:29 <sipa> to prevent that, you'd need a delay or even blocking of transactions passing from one network to the other
 766 2012-05-01 16:39:37 <luke-jr> sipa: ie, to help out tor peers rather than be secret themselves
 767 2012-05-01 16:39:50 <sipa> luke-jr: sure, it's not necessarily a concern
 768 2012-05-01 16:40:14 <sipa> luke-jr: and i agree that the ability to limit listening would be useful
 769 2012-05-01 16:40:41 <wumpus> it's already possible to limit listening isn't it?
 770 2012-05-01 16:40:56 <wumpus> ah right, only for the rpc port
 771 2012-05-01 16:41:03 <Diapolo> Can anyone tell me if this line is correct, it seems like double use of src + json has no include sub-dir. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/bitcoin-qt.pro#L96
 772 2012-05-01 16:41:26 <sipa> wumpus: indeed
 773 2012-05-01 16:42:33 <wumpus> Diapolo: yes it should probably have been src/json
 774 2012-05-01 16:43:14 <Diapolo> wumpus: I use src src/json src/qt and it still works, but I was unsure.
 775 2012-05-01 16:46:46 <sipa> gavinandresen: i also get dirty builds now
 776 2012-05-01 16:46:49 <sipa> devrandom: ping
 777 2012-05-01 16:47:56 <wumpus> Diapolo: can you check whether this still compiles on windows? https://github.com/laanwj/bitcoin/tree/2012_05_move_startonsystemstartup   (yes, the comment is changed too)
 778 2012-05-01 16:48:44 ferroh_ has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 779 2012-05-01 16:49:08 ferroh_ has joined
 780 2012-05-01 16:51:10 <sipa> ;;later tell devrandom any idea why the latest version of gitian produces builds for which git-describe calls the source directory "dirty"? i don't see any files being modified by the script
 781 2012-05-01 16:51:10 <gribble> The operation succeeded.
 782 2012-05-01 16:51:42 <luke-jr> FWIW, I get 7250e2 named rc1, when I gitian-build rc2
 783 2012-05-01 16:51:56 <luke-jr> sipa: that git bug?
 784 2012-05-01 16:52:05 <sipa> luke-jr: i worked around that
 785 2012-05-01 16:52:14 <luke-jr> sipa: possibly your yml is pre-workaround?
 786 2012-05-01 16:52:23 <Diapolo> wumpus: Will try this later, as I have to get into RL now ;).
 787 2012-05-01 16:52:28 <sipa> luke-jr: no, because the workaround is in genbuild.sh
 788 2012-05-01 16:52:36 <wumpus> Diapolo: ok
 789 2012-05-01 16:52:45 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: Diapolo opened pull request 1176 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1176>
 790 2012-05-01 16:52:58 <sipa> but maybe the source files have a timestamp in the future, according to the VM
 791 2012-05-01 16:53:10 <luke-jr> sipa: they always do afaik
 792 2012-05-01 16:53:18 <luke-jr> build.log is full of such warnings
 793 2012-05-01 16:53:20 <sipa> luke-jr: not if they're fetched by the VM itself
 794 2012-05-01 16:53:27 <sipa> luke-jr: that's FAKETIME
 795 2012-05-01 16:53:55 <sipa> (i think)
 796 2012-05-01 16:54:15 <luke-jr> I wasn't aware you were excluding FAKETIME
 797 2012-05-01 16:55:11 <sipa> no i'm not sure, really
 798 2012-05-01 16:57:57 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: laanwj opened pull request 1177 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1177>
 799 2012-05-01 16:58:11 <gavinandresen> sipa: I'm rebuilding rc2 with the Feb 21 version of gitian-builder...
 800 2012-05-01 16:58:29 <sipa> gavinandresen: build matches now
 801 2012-05-01 16:58:53 <gavinandresen> you mean build matches but both say 'dirty' ?
 802 2012-05-01 16:58:59 <sipa> yes
 803 2012-05-01 16:59:08 <sipa> all binaries are equal
 804 2012-05-01 16:59:30 <wumpus> 77b4bc51e558989f9e961fa4e0c826a229b80a246d35ce26af15a82b838b1b6a  bin/32/bitcoin-qt
 805 2012-05-01 16:59:30 <wumpus> 41cffe16ed76438867269f3de50993746ae37d5814a21fe286783a4df7028cc7  bin/32/bitcoind
 806 2012-05-01 16:59:34 <wumpus> that's what I get now
 807 2012-05-01 17:00:07 <gavinandresen> So:  do we want a rc2 that reports itself as dirty and uses latest gitian-builder, or one that is clean and uses the old gitian-builder
 808 2012-05-01 17:01:11 <sipa> let me try finding out why it's being reported as dirty first
 809 2012-05-01 17:01:26 <gavinandresen> cool, thanks
 810 2012-05-01 17:01:30 * luke-jr thinks gitian will be fixed at some point, so doing releases with a buggy gitian-builder is not ideal
 811 2012-05-01 17:02:24 <luke-jr> so for the Windows build, is rc2 tag supposed to use rc1 filename? or did I mess up somewhere?
 812 2012-05-01 17:02:40 <gavinandresen> No, I think I messed up
 813 2012-05-01 17:02:51 <wumpus> ... I still get different files
 814 2012-05-01 17:03:00 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: laanwj opened pull request 1178 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1178>
 815 2012-05-01 17:03:21 <wumpus> no, not true.. different from sipa but same as gavinandresen
 816 2012-05-01 17:03:27 <wumpus> phew
 817 2012-05-01 17:03:41 <gavinandresen> luke-jr: somehow I didn't change the filename in share/setup.nsi ....
 818 2012-05-01 17:04:07 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: I think this is the first release window where the setup.nsi filename includes "rcX" at all
 819 2012-05-01 17:04:13 <luke-jr> in the past, I recall renaming it
 820 2012-05-01 17:04:18 <gavinandresen> yup
 821 2012-05-01 17:04:25 * luke-jr wonders if we can pull sipa's version into the filename somehow
 822 2012-05-01 17:08:29 Hasbro has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 823 2012-05-01 17:12:55 banshee12 has joined
 824 2012-05-01 17:18:16 BTCTrader has quit (Quit: BTCTrader)
 825 2012-05-01 17:18:52 devrandom has quit (Quit: leaving)
 826 2012-05-01 17:19:04 devrandom has joined
 827 2012-05-01 17:19:24 pickett has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 828 2012-05-01 17:21:02 <devrandom> sipa: interesting, looking...
 829 2012-05-01 17:22:52 <Diapolo> wumpus: I tried it, but get quite a few compilation errors and added comments to your request ... I'm off for now ^^.
 830 2012-05-01 17:23:02 <wumpus> Diapolo: thanks
 831 2012-05-01 17:23:34 Diapolo has quit (Quit: Page closed)
 832 2012-05-01 17:25:08 <devrandom> sipa: are you using lxc or kvm?
 833 2012-05-01 17:25:13 <sipa> devrandom: kvm
 834 2012-05-01 17:25:25 <sipa> (at least, i didn't change anything related to that)
 835 2012-05-01 17:27:05 <devrandom> sipa: you are building rc2?
 836 2012-05-01 17:28:03 <devrandom> (sorry, lost my scrollback)
 837 2012-05-01 17:28:11 <sipa> devrandom: yes
 838 2012-05-01 17:28:49 sirk390 has joined
 839 2012-05-01 17:31:07 <devrandom> $ git describe
 840 2012-05-01 17:31:07 <devrandom> v0.6.1rc2
 841 2012-05-01 17:31:16 <devrandom> this is on the target
 842 2012-05-01 17:31:26 <devrandom> I'll let the build finish and check again
 843 2012-05-01 17:32:14 <devrandom> sipa: I don't see any use of git-describe in .yml file
 844 2012-05-01 17:32:27 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
 845 2012-05-01 17:32:29 <sipa> devrandom: it's in share/genbuild.sh, called from the makefile
 846 2012-05-01 17:33:23 <devrandom> ah, --dirty, let me check again
 847 2012-05-01 17:36:03 darkee has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 848 2012-05-01 17:36:56 <sipa> devrandom: hmm, you create a bitcoin directory inside inputs, cloned from the URL, and update that?
 849 2012-05-01 17:37:03 <sipa> but reuse the directory?
 850 2012-05-01 17:37:05 <devrandom> sipa: ah, README is a symlink, scp copies it as regular
 851 2012-05-01 17:37:25 <sipa> ah, that explains
 852 2012-05-01 17:37:51 <devrandom> ok, git-reset --hard fixes it
 853 2012-05-01 17:39:57 * luke-jr recommends rsync over scp
 854 2012-05-01 17:40:29 <luke-jr> (even for LXC/local)
 855 2012-05-01 17:40:51 <devrandom> luke-jr: good idea
 856 2012-05-01 17:43:12 <devrandom> it's a bit complicated, since I don't use networking at all with lxc - I directly execute commands in the container
 857 2012-05-01 17:43:25 <devrandom> the git-reset is good enough for now...
 858 2012-05-01 17:43:30 <sipa> devrandom: how about this: create a bundle with the requested head, copy that to the VM, and unpack it there
 859 2012-05-01 17:45:24 <devrandom> sipa: I'll look into that today or tomorrow - I have to go.  but I pushed the git-reset fix to the gitian repo
 860 2012-05-01 17:45:32 <sipa> ok, good
 861 2012-05-01 17:45:35 <sipa> thanks!
 862 2012-05-01 17:47:27 <sipa> gavinandresen, wumpus: can you retry building with the latest gitian? the dirty issue should be fixed
 863 2012-05-01 17:47:48 <gavinandresen> sipa: ACK
 864 2012-05-01 17:48:10 <sipa> i'll do the same
 865 2012-05-01 17:51:42 darkee has joined
 866 2012-05-01 17:54:23 toffoo has joined
 867 2012-05-01 17:57:03 MobiusL has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 868 2012-05-01 17:57:46 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
 869 2012-05-01 17:58:12 RazielZ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 870 2012-05-01 17:58:31 RazielZ has joined
 871 2012-05-01 18:09:47 copumpkin has joined
 872 2012-05-01 18:11:13 copumpkin has quit (Client Quit)
 873 2012-05-01 18:16:40 pusle has quit ()
 874 2012-05-01 18:18:39 localhost has joined
 875 2012-05-01 18:19:49 copumpkin has joined
 876 2012-05-01 18:21:10 <gavinandresen> sipa: linux build done, I pushed 0.6.1rc2/gavinandresen/bitcoin-build.assert
 877 2012-05-01 18:33:19 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: started working on prelim release notes?  if not, I could do a quick version, then bounce it to you for completion
 878 2012-05-01 18:35:50 Transformer has joined
 879 2012-05-01 18:37:17 Transformer has left ()
 880 2012-05-01 18:37:26 <gavinandresen> jgarzik: http://sourceforge.net/projects/bitcoin/files/Bitcoin/bitcoin-0.6.1/test/README.txt/download
 881 2012-05-01 18:37:42 <gavinandresen> jgarzik: please feel free to expand
 882 2012-05-01 18:42:28 <sipa> gavinandresen: windows builds differ, linux ones don't
 883 2012-05-01 18:43:16 <gavinandresen> sipa: I haven't pushed windows gitian sigs yet
 884 2012-05-01 18:43:21 <sipa> that explains
 885 2012-05-01 18:44:02 <gavinandresen> .... just pushed
 886 2012-05-01 18:44:29 <sipa> match!
 887 2012-05-01 18:44:36 <gavinandresen> yay!
 888 2012-05-01 18:44:57 <[Tycho]> Is there a roadmap for future releases ?
 889 2012-05-01 18:45:10 <gavinandresen> nope
 890 2012-05-01 18:45:20 <[Tycho]> Why not :(
 891 2012-05-01 18:45:31 <[Tycho]> Roadmaps are cool.
 892 2012-05-01 18:45:39 <sipa> And disappointing.
 893 2012-05-01 18:45:42 <gavinandresen> http://buytaert.net/roadmap
 894 2012-05-01 18:46:21 <[Tycho]> At least to sort out importance of next features.
 895 2012-05-01 18:47:05 <gmaxwell> (1) Create crypto currency ✔ (2) Get people using it ✔  (3) World domination ✘
 896 2012-05-01 18:47:14 <gavinandresen> lol
 897 2012-05-01 18:47:15 <sipa> (4) Profit!
 898 2012-05-01 18:49:41 erle- has joined
 899 2012-05-01 18:53:55 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: there ya go: http://gtf.org/garzik/bitcoin/patch.061.readme
 900 2012-05-01 18:54:04 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: wumpus should look at the Qt bits
 901 2012-05-01 18:55:19 <wumpus> the progressbar improvement is most important and visible, I think
 902 2012-05-01 18:55:44 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 903 2012-05-01 18:55:53 <wumpus> (showing how many blocks are left to download instead of a percentage)
 904 2012-05-01 18:56:17 <gavinandresen> rc2 binaries uploading... README patched....
 905 2012-05-01 18:56:25 Turingi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 906 2012-05-01 18:56:26 wannabeminer has joined
 907 2012-05-01 19:00:20 graingert has joined
 908 2012-05-01 19:00:28 <BlueMatt> whats new in 0.6.1?
 909 2012-05-01 19:01:59 osmosis has joined
 910 2012-05-01 19:02:27 localhost has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 911 2012-05-01 19:03:38 <gavinandresen> "This is a bug-fix and code-cleanup release, with no major new features."
 912 2012-05-01 19:04:01 <gavinandresen> Ready for sanity testing at: https://sourceforge.net/projects/bitcoin/files/Bitcoin/bitcoin-0.6.1/test/
 913 2012-05-01 19:04:03 <BlueMatt> ah
 914 2012-05-01 19:04:12 * BlueMatt should really read those READMEs...
 915 2012-05-01 19:05:00 sunbird has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 916 2012-05-01 19:05:37 Stellar has joined
 917 2012-05-01 19:11:27 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: where ya been? :p
 918 2012-05-01 19:13:00 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: working, mostly...
 919 2012-05-01 19:13:18 <BlueMatt> but as of today Im done with finals, so...free for a few months :)
 920 2012-05-01 19:13:30 * sipa expects an updated cblockstore soon!
 921 2012-05-01 19:13:34 <sipa> ;)
 922 2012-05-01 19:13:43 * BlueMatt ponders rewriting it (for the second time...)
 923 2012-05-01 19:14:09 * BlueMatt goes to see what conflicts with the old version on master
 924 2012-05-01 19:14:26 <sipa> I don't think you'll need to change that much; only jgarzik's cmempool probably conflicts significantly
 925 2012-05-01 19:14:52 <BlueMatt> oh, ok good...I saw cmempool and thought it may be terrible, but I looked at it yesterday and it shouldnt be too much work afaict
 926 2012-05-01 19:15:02 <BlueMatt> (terrible to port)
 927 2012-05-01 19:19:21 Nicksasa has joined
 928 2012-05-01 19:19:21 Nicksasa has quit (Changing host)
 929 2012-05-01 19:19:21 Nicksasa has joined
 930 2012-05-01 19:19:38 twmz__ is now known as twmz_
 931 2012-05-01 19:23:55 Stellar has joined
 932 2012-05-01 19:23:58 Stellar has quit (2!~Stellar@110.137.124.122|Client Quit)
 933 2012-05-01 19:27:10 Stellar has joined
 934 2012-05-01 19:27:10 Stellar has quit (2!~Stellar@110.137.124.122|Client Quit)
 935 2012-05-01 19:27:16 Stellar has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 936 2012-05-01 19:32:27 cande has joined
 937 2012-05-01 19:33:21 thescent has quit (Disconnected by services)
 938 2012-05-01 19:35:32 cande has quit (Client Quit)
 939 2012-05-01 19:35:44 ThomasV has joined
 940 2012-05-01 19:37:19 datagutt has quit (Quit: kthxbai)
 941 2012-05-01 19:38:08 topace has quit (Changing host)
 942 2012-05-01 19:38:08 topace has joined
 943 2012-05-01 19:41:35 graingert has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 944 2012-05-01 19:44:10 graingert has joined
 945 2012-05-01 19:45:51 random_cat has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 946 2012-05-01 19:48:09 b4epoche has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 947 2012-05-01 19:49:35 random_cat has joined
 948 2012-05-01 19:49:56 b4epoche has joined
 949 2012-05-01 19:53:08 jrmithdobbs has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 950 2012-05-01 19:58:06 sunbird has joined
 951 2012-05-01 19:59:44 graingert has left ()
 952 2012-05-01 20:02:35 jrmithdobbs has joined
 953 2012-05-01 20:03:11 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 954 2012-05-01 20:04:21 MobiusL has joined
 955 2012-05-01 20:07:55 sirk3901 has joined
 956 2012-05-01 20:08:04 sirk3901 has left ()
 957 2012-05-01 20:08:11 sirk390 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 958 2012-05-01 20:10:08 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
 959 2012-05-01 20:18:10 Diapolo has joined
 960 2012-05-01 20:18:47 <Diapolo> wumpus: still here?
 961 2012-05-01 20:23:26 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: sanity tests OK here
 962 2012-05-01 20:23:33 * jgarzik votes for announce
 963 2012-05-01 20:24:07 <gavinandresen> jgarzik: ACK
 964 2012-05-01 20:25:40 <sipa> if you have half an hour i can test whether the 0.6.1rc2 code accepts the current blockchain
 965 2012-05-01 20:25:56 <sipa> (i should have notice before if it doesn't, though)
 966 2012-05-01 20:28:07 <gavinandresen> ... forgot to upload SHA256sums.asc... fixed.  By the way, I'm generating that with:  gpg --clearsign --digest-algo SHA256 SHA256SUMS
 967 2012-05-01 20:28:39 <gavinandresen> I thought it was confusing before that PGP was putting Hash: SHA1 in it when all of the checksums inside the file are SHA256
 968 2012-05-01 20:30:24 <luke-jr> man gpg sez to use personal-digest-preferences instead <.,
 969 2012-05-01 20:30:25 <luke-jr> <.<*
 970 2012-05-01 20:30:33 jgarzik has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
 971 2012-05-01 20:32:02 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: Diapolo opened pull request 1179 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1179>
 972 2012-05-01 20:32:13 agricocb has joined
 973 2012-05-01 20:35:02 <sipa> anyone feel like testing my tor hidden service branch?
 974 2012-05-01 20:35:34 <luke-jr> sipa: how important are the last 2-3 commits?
 975 2012-05-01 20:36:10 <sipa> third last one is an improvement; the last two ones aren't (just documentation and debug output)
 976 2012-05-01 20:36:48 <luke-jr> sipa: so not important enough to re-merge into next-test?
 977 2012-05-01 20:36:59 <gavinandresen> sipa: I'll give it a whirl
 978 2012-05-01 20:37:01 <luke-jr> (currently building for Windows)
 979 2012-05-01 20:37:19 <sipa> luke-jr: oh; i made changes in earlier commits as well
 980 2012-05-01 20:38:38 hashalfa_ has joined
 981 2012-05-01 20:38:52 <sipa> gavinandresen: gmaxwell already tried an earlier version and was able to download the entire blockchain from me in 3 hours
 982 2012-05-01 20:38:57 <hashalfa_> does anyone know how i can convert a base58 key to hex or another format?
 983 2012-05-01 20:39:02 <luke-jr> sipa: 7b20b8f is what is in right now.
 984 2012-05-01 20:40:55 <luke-jr> looks like I need to fix coincontrol more anyway. I wonder why these errors don't show up on Linux builds
 985 2012-05-01 20:40:55 <sipa> luke-jr: in that case, update if possible
 986 2012-05-01 20:42:31 <luke-jr> k
 987 2012-05-01 20:45:50 paulo_ has joined
 988 2012-05-01 20:45:58 chrisb__ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 989 2012-05-01 20:46:20 <sipa> ;;bc,blocks
 990 2012-05-01 20:46:20 <gribble> 178157
 991 2012-05-01 20:46:29 <JFK911> !ticker
 992 2012-05-01 20:46:30 <gribble> Best bid: 4.96965, Best ask: 4.96982, Bid-ask spread: 0.000170000000001, Last trade: 4.9797, 24 hour volume: 37015, 24 hour low: 4.91001, 24 hour high: 4.99
 993 2012-05-01 20:46:35 <JFK911> ;;bc,stats
 994 2012-05-01 20:46:37 <gribble> Current Blocks: 178157 | Current Difficulty: 1508589.6720603 | Next Difficulty At Block: 179423 | Next Difficulty In: 1266 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 0 days, 15 hours, 55 minutes, and 18 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1731376.16399571 | Estimated Percent Change: 14.767865382
 995 2012-05-01 20:49:51 Turingi has joined
 996 2012-05-01 20:50:01 Turingi has quit (Changing host)
 997 2012-05-01 20:50:01 Turingi has joined
 998 2012-05-01 20:50:01 <gavinandresen> Half-baked thoughts on neutralizing a shut-down-the-network-51%-attack:  http://gavintech.blogspot.com/2012/05/neutralizing-51-attack.html
 999 2012-05-01 20:51:52 hashalfa_ has left ()
1000 2012-05-01 20:52:56 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: the addition of the priorty bit to that moves my position from complete dismissal to _hmmm... maybe_
1001 2012-05-01 20:54:09 <gmaxwell> One challenge with that is that it might prevent the complete DOS it wouldn't prevent large reorgs which might be much worse than the DOS
1002 2012-05-01 20:54:25 <ThomasV> 51% is not how big banks will try to attack bitcoin. shutting down exchanges comes first
1003 2012-05-01 20:54:32 <gavinandresen> ThomasV: agreed
1004 2012-05-01 20:54:59 <sipa> That doesn't mean we shouldn't aim for the best defense against DOS or 51% attacks.
1005 2012-05-01 20:55:20 <gmaxwell> For example I produce a fork which is 40% sum difficulty long... during a time when real chain activity is low,, and then I drop a bunch of high priority coin into my fork and cause a 200 block reorg onto it.. enabling a bunch of double spending.
1006 2012-05-01 20:55:22 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: I think a more-trusted set of nodes and user-defined checkpoints would be the answer to avoiding more-than-6-block-reorgs
1007 2012-05-01 20:56:28 <gavinandresen> If the big exchanges, merchants, and miners all agree on the sixth-deepest block then it is in all their best interests to lock it in
1008 2012-05-01 20:56:52 <gmaxwell> I don't agree with you on that point. Trying to use checkpoints to stop reorgs makes things much worse.  Persistent (unrecoverable) splitting is probably the worse possible outcome— worse than one shot fradulent multi-spending... and it's completely precluded by the current design.
1009 2012-05-01 20:57:01 <gavinandresen> (assuming they haven't detected a split with a big drop in hash rate yada yada yada)
1010 2012-05-01 20:57:32 t7 has joined
1011 2012-05-01 20:57:45 <gavinandresen> A split less than 100 blocks deep is not a problem for anybody unless there are double-spends on the two forks.
1012 2012-05-01 20:58:29 <gmaxwell> In order to make such a mechnism safe from preventing non-trivial persistent splits you need an agreement mechinism on the checkpoints. Our options are either to (quasi)centeralize it which removes the attractiveness of bitcoin, or to use distributed consensus for it and in that case the distributed consensus has the same attack vulnerabilities.
1013 2012-05-01 21:00:36 <gavinandresen> I'd be willing to run code that says "If I am suddenly presented with a longer chain with either a bunch of double-spends or no/few transactions then ignore it because it is probably Bad Guys"
1014 2012-05-01 21:01:38 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: then the bad guys just need to deliver their double-spend chain first?
1015 2012-05-01 21:02:19 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: when are you looking at 0.6.1 release?
1016 2012-05-01 21:02:29 <gavinandresen> uhhh.... how would that work?  the double-spend chain is longer, it does no good to send me a shorter chain second....
1017 2012-05-01 21:03:07 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: "if I am suddenly presented with a longer chain" implies "only if I have a shorter chain first"
1018 2012-05-01 21:03:17 <luke-jr> otherwise, it's the shorter chain that has "double spends"
1019 2012-05-01 21:03:28 <gmaxwell> ^ that.
1020 2012-05-01 21:04:32 <gmaxwell> It might be helpful to consider the case where a new node starts up during this event.  The transaction priority sum thing might be a workable tie breaker, I'll have to consider that more but anything involving 'first' or 'double spends' fails to luke's comment.
1021 2012-05-01 21:04:35 <gavinandresen> I'm confused.  So my node has been well-connected to the network for a day, has seen a steady block-every-10-minutes (within reasonable statistical bounds).
1022 2012-05-01 21:04:40 shurnormal has quit (Quit: http://driedleaves.no-ip.org)
1023 2012-05-01 21:05:02 <gavinandresen> And, lets say, has best blocks that pretty much match Mt Gox and DeepBit and some other mostly-trusted place.
1024 2012-05-01 21:05:19 <gavinandresen> Now I see a longer chain that rewrites the last 100 blocks.....
1025 2012-05-01 21:05:30 <gavinandresen> That is mighty suspicious.
1026 2012-05-01 21:05:52 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: now consider if you haven't been connected all day.
1027 2012-05-01 21:06:01 <gavinandresen> Then I accept any damn chain.
1028 2012-05-01 21:06:11 <luke-jr> and you stick with the chain everyone else rejects
1029 2012-05-01 21:06:58 <sipa> So such an extra critirion for switching should only be active when your node considers itself in a stable situation?
1030 2012-05-01 21:07:07 <gavinandresen> sipa: yup
1031 2012-05-01 21:07:12 <sipa> *criterion
1032 2012-05-01 21:07:44 <gavinandresen> luke-jr: if I disagree with Mt Gox about what the best chain is, then something is very wrong with either me or Mt Gox
1033 2012-05-01 21:08:28 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: I think giving MtGox a trusted authority, is liable to incite a fork.
1034 2012-05-01 21:08:51 <gavinandresen> Fine, choose your own favorite 20 semi-trusted nodes....
1035 2012-05-01 21:08:56 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1036 2012-05-01 21:09:01 Slix` has joined
1037 2012-05-01 21:09:26 <gavinandresen> I think more "belt and suspenders" with respect to "am I on the majority chain" would be a good thing, in general.  Sybil attacks still worry me.
1038 2012-05-01 21:10:06 ThomasV has joined
1039 2012-05-01 21:10:57 <gmaxwell> I think you'll be hard pressed to find anything that doesn't obviously add new vulnerabilities.  Six one way, half a dozen the other.  persistent fragmentation is something we're totally immune to now (save bugs).
1040 2012-05-01 21:11:51 <luke-jr> tbh, 51% attacks don't scare me nearly as much as scaling.
1041 2012-05-01 21:12:05 <gavinandresen> luke-jr: I agree
1042 2012-05-01 21:12:11 BTC_Bear is now known as hbrntng!~BTC_Bear@unaffiliated/btc-bear/x-5233302|BTC_Bear
1043 2012-05-01 21:12:38 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1044 2012-05-01 21:13:19 <gavinandresen> sipa: torhs branch gives me warnings:  net.cpp:1712: warning: missing initializer for member ‘sockaddr_in::sin_len’
1045 2012-05-01 21:13:22 <gmaxwell> It's interesting to note that solid coin has apparently abandoned their quasi proof of stake stuff in their latest respin.
1046 2012-05-01 21:13:40 <BlueMatt> did solidcoin reset their chain again?
1047 2012-05-01 21:13:54 <gavinandresen> they're not solidcoin any more, they're microcrash
1048 2012-05-01 21:13:59 <etotheipi_> I'm much more concerned about scaling as well... I think it's a topic we're going to have to address
1049 2012-05-01 21:13:59 <gavinandresen> i mean cash
1050 2012-05-01 21:14:12 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: Freudian slip?
1051 2012-05-01 21:14:20 <gavinandresen> no, I did that on purpose
1052 2012-05-01 21:14:24 <gavinandresen> :)
1053 2012-05-01 21:14:30 <BlueMatt> well...you could have atleast denied it...
1054 2012-05-01 21:14:31 <etotheipi_> with scaling comes extra security against 51%... but we're not going to scale unless there is more confidence that the system can handle it
1055 2012-05-01 21:15:43 <sipa> gavinandresen: it seems you're building without -DUSE_IPV6
1056 2012-05-01 21:15:53 <gavinandresen> I don't think I agree with that; I think usability, security, and legal/regulatory uncertainty are the big problems right now, not fear of scaling
1057 2012-05-01 21:16:06 <sipa> gavinandresen: which should not be a problem, though
1058 2012-05-01 21:16:11 <gavinandresen> sipa: oh, I need -DUSE_IPV6 for tor?
1059 2012-05-01 21:16:15 <BlueMatt> legal/regulatory would be the biggest thing I see
1060 2012-05-01 21:16:20 <sipa> gavinandresen: no
1061 2012-05-01 21:16:26 <gavinandresen> sipa: ok, cool.
1062 2012-05-01 21:16:33 <BlueMatt> the rest is coming quick, legal still isnt really in progress...
1063 2012-05-01 21:17:20 <gmaxwell> I'm not too concered about scaling. Scaling is just technical stuff— if scaling becomes a problem there will also be enough interest to get the software improved.
1064 2012-05-01 21:17:28 <BlueMatt> agreed
1065 2012-05-01 21:17:38 <BlueMatt> we already have soooo much room to improve scaling right now that isnt used
1066 2012-05-01 21:17:40 <BlueMatt> thin clients, etc
1067 2012-05-01 21:18:02 <BlueMatt> and even better webclients
1068 2012-05-01 21:18:26 <gmaxwell> I'm more concerned with the loss of decentralization that rapid scaling would imply— and moreover, the either adverse regulatory effects or non-regulatory effects of that kind of decentralization loss.
1069 2012-05-01 21:19:08 <gmaxwell> E.g. if everyon ends up using mybitcoin2 because running a node is too burdensome then people may be unhappy when they get robbed because mybitcoin2 was inadequately regulated, or be unhappy when mybitcoin2 is excessively regulated.
1070 2012-05-01 21:19:14 <BlueMatt> true, but I believe it will be done right very soon
1071 2012-05-01 21:19:27 <BlueMatt> mybitcoin as a wallet, with a secondary auth on phone, etc with multisig
1072 2012-05-01 21:19:46 <BlueMatt> or, I hope it will be
1073 2012-05-01 21:19:56 <etotheipi_> getting the network to scale better is necessary but not sufficient to succeed
1074 2012-05-01 21:20:08 <BlueMatt> I mean...blockchain.info already handles multisig
1075 2012-05-01 21:20:09 <etotheipi_> obviously there's other factors too
1076 2012-05-01 21:20:11 <BlueMatt> so its coming "quick"
1077 2012-05-01 21:20:21 <gmaxwell> so I do hope we get things like more things like good electrum style thin clients before scaling makes strongly centeralized clients win out.
1078 2012-05-01 21:20:50 <BlueMatt> agreed
1079 2012-05-01 21:20:53 <BlueMatt> and I really think we will
1080 2012-05-01 21:21:04 TD has joined
1081 2012-05-01 21:21:09 <etotheipi_> well I hope to make Armory "Standard Usermode" be a lite-client mode
1082 2012-05-01 21:21:10 <BlueMatt> hey TD
1083 2012-05-01 21:21:19 <TD> hey
1084 2012-05-01 21:21:25 <BlueMatt> etotheipi_: makes sense
1085 2012-05-01 21:21:30 <BlueMatt> I think most clients will go that way
1086 2012-05-01 21:21:48 <etotheipi_> the plan is for Armory installation to default to "Standard" which is lite... and Advanced/Dev be full blockchain.. but also eventually deal with blockchain pruning
1087 2012-05-01 21:22:11 <BlueMatt> I would bet most clients will go that way with age
1088 2012-05-01 21:22:29 <BlueMatt> if not default, at least make it an option and set no default (query user on first run)
1089 2012-05-01 21:23:05 <etotheipi_> but I would really like to see some kind of protocol upgrade that allows clients to verify pruned-blockchain images
1090 2012-05-01 21:23:30 <etotheipi_> and if I ever finish the 3000 things I have currently on my plate, I'm happy to pioneer that, even if it's an overlay network among Armory nodes
1091 2012-05-01 21:23:53 <sipa> etotheipi_: hash-of-opentxouts-set?
1092 2012-05-01 21:23:59 <etotheipi_> sipa: something along those lines
1093 2012-05-01 21:24:19 <BlueMatt> would be cool to add, but not so sure about doing it on the p2p network interface
1094 2012-05-01 21:24:37 <etotheipi_> I haven't thought it all through... or rather there's *lots* of ways to do it with various advantages... I haven't really thought it through yet and evaluated different options
1095 2012-05-01 21:24:38 <BlueMatt> maybe large sites publishing it, in signed form
1096 2012-05-01 21:25:03 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: here is something more to think about. Take your sum priority scheme. Now have every transaction also include a block hash. That TXN's priority is only counted against chains which contain that hash.
1097 2012-05-01 21:25:05 <etotheipi_> it could be useful to use something like merkle trees, and organized unspent outputs by address... thus allowing nodes to easily get the balance of a given address
1098 2012-05-01 21:25:55 <sipa> gmaxwell: that's going in the direction of a proof-of-stake
1099 2012-05-01 21:26:22 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: when creating a txn you pick a block from 2-6 blocks ago to use as the hash. This way someone trying to create a reorg does not enjoy any priority benefit without having the ability to create coin days destroyed.
1100 2012-05-01 21:26:30 <gmaxwell> sipa: Indeed.
1101 2012-05-01 21:27:39 <gavinandresen> yup, this is all proof-of-stake-like.  But I only want to only apply in the case where there are large chain re-orgs.
1102 2012-05-01 21:28:02 <gavinandresen> (didn't that typing out come right)
1103 2012-05-01 21:28:02 MobiusL has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1104 2012-05-01 21:28:03 guruvan has quit (Write error: Connection reset by peer)
1105 2012-05-01 21:28:03 darkee has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1106 2012-05-01 21:28:03 devrandom has quit (Write error: Connection reset by peer)
1107 2012-05-01 21:28:03 random_cat has quit (Write error: Broken pipe)
1108 2012-05-01 21:28:03 paraipan has quit (Write error: Broken pipe)
1109 2012-05-01 21:28:03 gfinn has quit (Write error: Broken pipe)
1110 2012-05-01 21:28:04 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: one interesting thing to do would be to make the length calculation scaled so that the proof-of-stake-ish cost only matters if the difficulty is low.
1111 2012-05-01 21:28:23 jgarzik has joined
1112 2012-05-01 21:28:43 <gmaxwell> That means it doesn't help against 50% attacks now, but does in a hypothetical future where low subsidy means low difficulty which means insecurity.
1113 2012-05-01 21:28:43 jgarzik has quit (Changing host)
1114 2012-05-01 21:28:43 jgarzik has joined
1115 2012-05-01 21:29:00 <gmaxwell> E.g. changing the failure mode of bitcoin from "becomes insecure" to "becomes proof of stake"
1116 2012-05-01 21:29:33 <gmaxwell> and that kind of change might actually be community viable because the threshold could be so low that everyone would agree that bitcoin would be insecure if it dropped to that.
1117 2012-05-01 21:29:41 paraipan has joined
1118 2012-05-01 21:31:29 <gavinandresen> I'm generally not a fan of writing code for "what if this thing that we're not sure is going to happen in the future happens...."
1119 2012-05-01 21:32:30 guruvan has joined
1120 2012-05-01 21:32:32 Diapolo has quit (Quit: Page closed)
1121 2012-05-01 21:32:53 <gavinandresen> sipa:  how can I tell if Tor is listening on port 9050?  I'm getting connect() failed running -proxy=127.0.0.1:9050
1122 2012-05-01 21:33:04 <BlueMatt> netstat -lnp
1123 2012-05-01 21:33:07 <gmaxwell> telnet localhost 9050
1124 2012-05-01 21:33:12 <BlueMatt> does osx have netstat?
1125 2012-05-01 21:33:18 Diablo-D3 has joined
1126 2012-05-01 21:33:44 Glasswalker has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1127 2012-05-01 21:33:47 <gmaxwell> sipa: how do we manage to avoid two onion nodes connecting to each other?
1128 2012-05-01 21:33:50 <gavinandresen> telnet fails.  osx does have netstat, but it has different args....
1129 2012-05-01 21:34:06 <sipa> gmaxwell: ?
1130 2012-05-01 21:34:24 <Diablo-D3> with magic.
1131 2012-05-01 21:35:06 <sipa> gmaxwell: ah; get it
1132 2012-05-01 21:35:29 darkee has joined
1133 2012-05-01 21:36:44 <sipa> gmaxwell: we don't; there is a possibility though; on incoming connections check whether addrFrom equals an address we're already connected to, and if so, disconnect
1134 2012-05-01 21:37:07 <gavinandresen> Aha!  "In Vidalia, go to Settings->Advanced and uncheck the box that says 'Configure ControlPort automatically'. Click OK and restart TBB. Your Socks port will then be on 9050."
1135 2012-05-01 21:37:39 <sipa> gavinandresen: there's a doc/Tor.txt now, by the way
1136 2012-05-01 21:38:00 SphericalCow has joined
1137 2012-05-01 21:38:09 <gavinandresen> sipa: thanks-- I was following that....
1138 2012-05-01 21:38:10 SphericalCow has quit (Changing host)
1139 2012-05-01 21:38:10 SphericalCow has joined
1140 2012-05-01 21:38:13 <sipa> hmm, i can't push to github?
1141 2012-05-01 21:38:35 guruvan has quit (Quit: I probably voided the warranty on this thing.....)
1142 2012-05-01 21:39:35 gfinn has joined
1143 2012-05-01 21:40:07 <sipa> ok, had to kill a lingering ssh connection
1144 2012-05-01 21:41:21 guruvan has joined
1145 2012-05-01 21:42:03 <gmaxwell> sipa: so than I can us that to slay people you're connected to.
1146 2012-05-01 21:42:11 BTC_Bear is now known as BTC_Bear|hbrntng
1147 2012-05-01 21:42:14 <sipa> gmaxwell: yup
1148 2012-05-01 21:42:22 <gmaxwell> hm. I guess first wins.. so not quite 'slay' but yea..
1149 2012-05-01 21:43:09 erle- has quit (Quit: erle-)
1150 2012-05-01 21:43:09 <gmaxwell> we could use the same method used to prevent you from talking to yourself.
1151 2012-05-01 21:43:47 <gmaxwell> At least with some modification.
1152 2012-05-01 21:45:04 <gmaxwell> meh. almost not worth preventing.
1153 2012-05-01 21:46:44 devrandom has joined
1154 2012-05-01 21:46:45 random_cat has joined
1155 2012-05-01 21:50:12 wannabeminer has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1156 2012-05-01 21:52:46 <sipa> gavinandresen: anyway, got torhs running?
1157 2012-05-01 21:52:56 <sipa> (i fixed the warning you got)
1158 2012-05-01 21:53:13 <gavinandresen> yes, had to un-check the "Configure ControlPort automatically" then restart
1159 2012-05-01 21:53:33 <gavinandresen> oops, wait, no, just core dumped on me
1160 2012-05-01 21:53:42 <sipa> :S
1161 2012-05-01 21:56:14 <etotheipi_> sipa, what's the timeline like on the HD wallets?  I just realized I'm anxious to push out a new, compatible wallet format for Armory, but the spec is not finalized
1162 2012-05-01 21:57:12 <BlueMatt> are you actually going to call them hd wallets?
1163 2012-05-01 21:57:20 * sipa would like to :p
1164 2012-05-01 21:57:24 <helo> lol
1165 2012-05-01 21:57:31 <[Tycho]> HD wallets ? What's this ?
1166 2012-05-01 21:57:45 <sipa> [Tycho]: they're higher resolution!
1167 2012-05-01 21:57:57 <sipa> no, HD Wallet = hierarchical deterministic wallet
1168 2012-05-01 21:58:17 <luke-jr> sipa: do it! :D
1169 2012-05-01 21:58:34 <BlueMatt> I know sipa's the version king and all, but do we have to follow the marketing of nearly every other product on the globe?
1170 2012-05-01 21:58:45 <etotheipi_> I kinda like dwallets
1171 2012-05-01 21:58:45 <gavinandresen> Yes, yes we do.
1172 2012-05-01 21:59:10 <sipa> etotheipi_: when the implementation is finished, i guess
1173 2012-05-01 21:59:13 <gavinandresen> NewWayWallets.  Rhymes with BlueRay
1174 2012-05-01 21:59:19 pumpkin has joined
1175 2012-05-01 21:59:26 <sipa> etotheipi_: i intend to work on it further soon, though
1176 2012-05-01 21:59:29 <etotheipi_> sipa: well I'd like to push that along then...
1177 2012-05-01 21:59:41 <etotheipi_> should I attack the mailing list with it?
1178 2012-05-01 21:59:51 ThomasV has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1179 2012-05-01 22:00:04 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1180 2012-05-01 22:00:05 pumpkin is now known as copumpkin
1181 2012-05-01 22:00:25 <sipa> etotheipi_: i'll only consider my draft BIP-ready when it's implemented (so I know everything in it is possible in the way it is intended)
1182 2012-05-01 22:01:00 <etotheipi_> well I implemented it... doesn't that count? :)
1183 2012-05-01 22:01:31 <sipa> haha
1184 2012-05-01 22:01:36 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
1185 2012-05-01 22:01:50 <sipa> i'm very glad that there will be two implementations :)
1186 2012-05-01 22:02:21 <etotheipi_> my only gripe so far has been the fingerprint... it's kind of annoying that it's not unique
1187 2012-05-01 22:02:33 <etotheipi_> so I decided to store the full parent address anyway
1188 2012-05-01 22:02:50 <sipa> oh sure, i will do so too
1189 2012-05-01 22:02:51 <etotheipi_> because it was much easier than putting in logic to handle potential duplicate fingerprints
1190 2012-05-01 22:03:22 <sipa> but the serialized format certainly does not contain all metadata a wallet will store about a node
1191 2012-05-01 22:03:55 <sipa> s/node/chain/
1192 2012-05-01 22:04:10 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: jgarzik opened pull request 1180 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1180>
1193 2012-05-01 22:04:59 <etotheipi_> sipa, but I'm finding the fingerprint to be useless for the reason that I'm storing the whole address anyway
1194 2012-05-01 22:05:25 <etotheipi_> I don't think the extra complexity to save 16 bytes in the serialization is worth it
1195 2012-05-01 22:05:45 <sipa> 28 bytes, you mean
1196 2012-05-01 22:06:13 Z0rZ0rZ0r1 has joined
1197 2012-05-01 22:06:14 Z0rZ0rZ0r has quit (Disconnected by services)
1198 2012-05-01 22:06:22 <etotheipi_> I'm storing the parent node's Hash160 instead of its fingerprint
1199 2012-05-01 22:06:24 Diablo-D3 has quit (Quit: do coders dream of sheep()?)
1200 2012-05-01 22:06:25 <etotheipi_> (well, actually both)
1201 2012-05-01 22:06:44 <sipa> but if you import a chain, and want to link it to its parent, will you just try all other nodes you already have at the correct height?
1202 2012-05-01 22:06:57 <sipa> that could be quite expensive
1203 2012-05-01 22:07:21 <gavinandresen> sipa: running bitcoind in gdb, of course I'm not getting a crash.  The core dump doesn't seem very helpful either: https://gist.github.com/2571807
1204 2012-05-01 22:07:23 <etotheipi_> I don't follow
1205 2012-05-01 22:07:24 <sipa> probably insignificant to rescanning the whole chain, though
1206 2012-05-01 22:07:39 danbri has joined
1207 2012-05-01 22:07:44 <etotheipi_> in my wallets, I look up all addresses by hash160
1208 2012-05-01 22:07:47 <etotheipi_> it's a map
1209 2012-05-01 22:07:51 TheSeven has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1210 2012-05-01 22:08:03 <sipa> etotheipi_: i'm not talking about what you do internally
1211 2012-05-01 22:08:13 <etotheipi_> I'd have to change it to a multimap for non-unique keys
1212 2012-05-01 22:08:16 <sipa> we're talking about the serialized form, right?
1213 2012-05-01 22:08:41 <sipa> the base58 thing
1214 2012-05-01 22:08:44 <etotheipi_> sipa: everything
1215 2012-05-01 22:09:01 <etotheipi_> I'm trying to figure out at what step the fingerprint helps you
1216 2012-05-01 22:09:04 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1217 2012-05-01 22:09:08 <etotheipi_> that the hash160 doesn't
1218 2012-05-01 22:10:08 <sipa> etotheipi_: you already have a wallet; i give you a chain serialized in base58; you want to connect it to other chains you have in your wallet (because it could be an extra account of an existing root, and you don't want to regenerate that when creating a new account, for example)
1219 2012-05-01 22:10:26 <sipa> so you need to know what its parent chain is
1220 2012-05-01 22:10:47 <sipa> without the fingerprint, the only possible way for doing that is trying all chains you have
1221 2012-05-01 22:11:09 <etotheipi_> I don't understand how the fingerprint helps... I still have to go through and calculate fingerprints for all the other chain nodes
1222 2012-05-01 22:11:23 <etotheipi_> ...or use hash160s and go through and calculate all the hash160s of the other chain nodes
1223 2012-05-01 22:12:00 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1224 2012-05-01 22:12:18 <sipa> well you can have an extra index from fingerprints to nodes, or if not you can at least skip recalculating
1225 2012-05-01 22:12:57 jgarzik has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1226 2012-05-01 22:13:12 <sipa> it's probably only a very small gain in practice, but it somehow feels wrong to do that calculation over and over again, when a chain could just already say what its parent is
1227 2012-05-01 22:13:47 <etotheipi_> sipa: I don't understand what recalculation has to be done over and over:  all I'm talking about is identifying nodes by their hash160 instead of their 4-byte-non-unique fingerprint
1228 2012-05-01 22:14:53 <etotheipi_> there must be something I'm missing...
1229 2012-05-01 22:15:23 <sipa> etotheipi_: given: new chain X, child id N; foreach (chain Y in wallet) { if (CKD(Y,N) == X) done }
1230 2012-05-01 22:15:46 <sipa> etotheipi_: given: new chain X, fingerprint F, child id N; foreach (chain Y in wallet) { if (Y.fpr == F && CKD(Y,N) == X) done }
1231 2012-05-01 22:17:37 <etotheipi_> sipa:  given: new chain X, parentHash160=H, child id N;  foreach (chain Y in wallet) {if (Y.hash160==H && CKD(Y,N)==X) done }
1232 2012-05-01 22:18:03 <etotheipi_> except you don't even need the second part of the conditional, because the first one is necessary and sufficient
1233 2012-05-01 22:18:09 <etotheipi_> instead of just necessary
1234 2012-05-01 22:18:12 <sipa> etotheipi_: yes, if you put the entire parentHash160 in there
1235 2012-05-01 22:18:32 <sipa> now i see where you get 16 bytes extra from
1236 2012-05-01 22:18:34 <etotheipi_> and in most implementations, you don't even need a foreach loop
1237 2012-05-01 22:18:43 <sipa> you want to use the hash160 as fingerprint
1238 2012-05-01 22:18:47 <etotheipi_> :)
1239 2012-05-01 22:19:03 <sipa> i like
1240 2012-05-01 22:20:16 <sipa> etotheipi_: i thought you tried to say that there was no advantage in having a fingerprint at all
1241 2012-05-01 22:20:52 <etotheipi_> pseudo-code: 1,   regular human communication: 0
1242 2012-05-01 22:22:04 <sipa> so, it will be 91 bytes for a typical serialized chain
1243 2012-05-01 22:22:32 <etotheipi_> sounds right
1244 2012-05-01 22:22:34 <sipa> or 130 bytes in base58
1245 2012-05-01 22:22:54 <sipa> gavinandresen: is it reproducible?
1246 2012-05-01 22:22:59 <sipa> (outside of gdb)
1247 2012-05-01 22:24:15 <sipa> etotheipi_: ok, fine; i'm going to change the fingerprint into Hash160(K_par)
1248 2012-05-01 22:25:56 TD has joined
1249 2012-05-01 22:25:56 TD has quit (Client Quit)
1250 2012-05-01 22:26:58 b4epoche_ has joined
1251 2012-05-01 22:29:32 <etotheipi_> sipa: does the extra 16 bytes make you uncomfortable?
1252 2012-05-01 22:30:20 <sipa> they're already way too big to be nice to humans, and humans shouldn't be transferring such datastructures at all
1253 2012-05-01 22:31:17 jgarzik has joined
1254 2012-05-01 22:31:30 <etotheipi_> I guess I hadn't considered Base58 transfer length
1255 2012-05-01 22:31:36 jgarzik has quit (Changing host)
1256 2012-05-01 22:31:36 jgarzik has joined
1257 2012-05-01 22:31:42 <etotheipi_> I didn't see that as  a use-case, but I don't see why not
1258 2012-05-01 22:32:20 <etotheipi_> it could enable users to create different chains for each contact and use those like persistent addressess
1259 2012-05-01 22:32:49 <sipa> yes, a M/n/0 chain can be used as a "super address"
1260 2012-05-01 22:33:00 <etotheipi_> but admittedly, size-of-base58 string was not on my list of optimizations for the protocol
1261 2012-05-01 22:33:46 <sipa> meh, i suppose people will save those in text files rather than copy-paste them
1262 2012-05-01 22:33:54 <sipa> but at least copy-pasting is still possible
1263 2012-05-01 22:34:04 <etotheipi_> people copy-paste URLs longer than that all the time
1264 2012-05-01 22:34:08 <sipa> indeed
1265 2012-05-01 22:34:13 <etotheipi_> plus... they can be put into URLs...
1266 2012-05-01 22:34:31 <sipa> indeed
1267 2012-05-01 22:34:37 <sipa> anyway; draft updated :)
1268 2012-05-01 22:34:56 <etotheipi_> ehh, I didn't consider the search space for reconstructing your wallet from M
1269 2012-05-01 22:35:13 <etotheipi_> that search space gets out of hand quickly the more depth you have
1270 2012-05-01 22:35:37 <sipa> is that a problem?
1271 2012-05-01 22:35:39 <etotheipi_> I've been operating under single-chain-ever mode... and you only have one dimension to search on a wallet restore
1272 2012-05-01 22:35:59 <etotheipi_> ehh... i don't think so, but I just hadn't really thought of it until now
1273 2012-05-01 22:36:16 <sipa> use a look-ahead of 20 keys for external chains, 2 for internal chains, and 4 for unused accounts
1274 2012-05-01 22:36:54 <sipa> so if you already have N accounts, that means (4+N)*22 lookahead keys
1275 2012-05-01 22:37:04 darkee has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1276 2012-05-01 22:37:15 <sipa> (those are the numbers i had in mind)
1277 2012-05-01 22:37:26 <sipa> obviously tweakable
1278 2012-05-01 22:37:33 <etotheipi_> I don't see a reason not to do bigger than that... but you're right, it's not bad
1279 2012-05-01 22:37:55 <etotheipi_> at least in my implementation, it's just as fast to search for 1,000 addresses as it is 10 (just about)
1280 2012-05-01 22:38:10 <etotheipi_> oh... except I have to compute those 1000
1281 2012-05-01 22:38:11 <sipa> the nice thing is that internal chains are only used by yourself, so unless you have very weird setup, i don't see how there could be gaps in that
1282 2012-05-01 22:40:05 <etotheipi_> well it definitely benefits from having a controlled access pattern
1283 2012-05-01 22:40:12 MobiusL has joined
1284 2012-05-01 22:40:13 <etotheipi_> to avoid spreading that space out too much
1285 2012-05-01 22:40:23 <etotheipi_> okay, I like it
1286 2012-05-01 22:40:31 <etotheipi_> and I don't think it's a problem at all
1287 2012-05-01 22:40:53 <sipa> i doubt any system has a problem with a few thousand keys
1288 2012-05-01 22:41:02 <etotheipi_> I just hadn't walked through the thought-experiment yet...  plus wallet restores are so infrequent
1289 2012-05-01 22:41:09 <etotheipi_> even if it takes 5 minutes... it's still worth it
1290 2012-05-01 22:41:26 <etotheipi_> well, it's still usable
1291 2012-05-01 22:41:53 <sipa> well, i intend to just make the entire set (all your keys + all lookaheads), wallet keys, and watch for payments from/to those
1292 2012-05-01 22:43:13 <etotheipi_> yup
1293 2012-05-01 22:43:24 slush has joined
1294 2012-05-01 22:44:11 <etotheipi_> so this is to my deterministic wallets that my determinstic wallets were to the original Satoshi wallets...
1295 2012-05-01 22:44:33 imsaguy3 has joined
1296 2012-05-01 22:44:33 <etotheipi_> this lets you make unlimited *wallets* and unlimited addresses in those wallets, with a single seed
1297 2012-05-01 22:44:41 <sipa> yup
1298 2012-05-01 22:45:20 <sipa> the only data not reconstructible from the blockchain is account and address names
1299 2012-05-01 22:45:24 <sipa> "labels"
1300 2012-05-01 22:45:46 <etotheipi_> does it make sense for all external chains to use the same internal chain?
1301 2012-05-01 22:45:59 <sipa> actually, yes
1302 2012-05-01 22:46:25 <sipa> the internal chain could be common for one setup
1303 2012-05-01 22:46:43 <etotheipi_> actually... I take that back
1304 2012-05-01 22:46:52 <etotheipi_> that really blurs the lines between what a "wallet" is
1305 2012-05-01 22:47:08 imsaguy has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1306 2012-05-01 22:47:09 slush1 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1307 2012-05-01 22:47:19 <etotheipi_> if a user is creating multiple chains for the purposes of segregating funds... having all change go to a single change completely muddles the wallet balances
1308 2012-05-01 22:47:25 <etotheipi_> or at least adds a ton of complexity to tracking it
1309 2012-05-01 22:47:37 imsaguy3 is now known as imsaguy
1310 2012-05-01 22:47:49 <sipa> the change-destination policy is still something to think about
1311 2012-05-01 22:48:15 <etotheipi_> also, the policy of *spending* change
1312 2012-05-01 22:48:21 <sipa> yup
1313 2012-05-01 22:48:25 <etotheipi_> you could end up linking all your chains together with a single tx
1314 2012-05-01 22:48:47 <sipa> 1) try to minimize (perhaps using a hard limit) the number of accounts you draw funds from
1315 2012-05-01 22:49:27 makomk_ has joined
1316 2012-05-01 22:49:49 Glasswalker has joined
1317 2012-05-01 22:50:29 <etotheipi_> I think I'll stick to keeping wallets "feel" completely detached from one another... so that you can still only draw from one chain (or rather, int/ext chain pair) at a time
1318 2012-05-01 22:50:49 <sipa> although; an outside observer cannot automatically link addresses within the same chain
1319 2012-05-01 22:51:17 <etotheipi_> I might try to introduce a way of subwallets: so that you could treat multiple chains as part of the same wallet (and balance would be aggregated), but I think that level is complexity is too much for now
1320 2012-05-01 22:51:19 <sipa> so using funds from 3 keys from a single chain may be worse for your privacy than taking funds from 2 keys, each in a different chain
1321 2012-05-01 22:51:35 <etotheipi_> ooh wow, you're right
1322 2012-05-01 22:51:47 <etotheipi_> if someone compomises a leaf node, it doesn't compromise the other nodes
1323 2012-05-01 22:52:06 <etotheipi_> though, the opportunity vector there is rare:  usually an attacker gets all or none
1324 2012-05-01 22:52:22 <sipa> but someone who has a public chain already can
1325 2012-05-01 22:52:30 <sipa> but those are typically people you trust more already
1326 2012-05-01 22:52:36 da2ce7 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1327 2012-05-01 22:52:55 <sipa> and if the wallet gets compromised, i think you should assume the master key gets out
1328 2012-05-01 22:53:03 <etotheipi_> well, I was actually thinking about the question I've gotten a couple times:  "If someone gets one of my private keys, will they automatically get all the others?"
1329 2012-05-01 22:53:26 <sipa> in this specification certainly not
1330 2012-05-01 22:53:27 <etotheipi_> in my previous wallet, the answer is that if they get PrivKey[k], they get PrivKey[i>k] too
1331 2012-05-01 22:53:55 <sipa> assuming no cryptographic vulnerabilities, of course
1332 2012-05-01 22:54:13 rcorreia_ has joined
1333 2012-05-01 22:54:19 <etotheipi_> well if we HMAC things enough times...
1334 2012-05-01 22:54:56 <sipa> ?
1335 2012-05-01 22:54:58 amiller_ has joined
1336 2012-05-01 22:55:30 <sipa> gavinandresen: valgrind, maybe?
1337 2012-05-01 22:57:00 gmaxwell_ has joined
1338 2012-05-01 22:58:50 <etotheipi_> wtf just happened there?
1339 2012-05-01 22:58:58 <sipa> a netsplit
1340 2012-05-01 22:59:04 SomeoneWeird_ has joined
1341 2012-05-01 22:59:04 <etotheipi_> I have no idea what that means
1342 2012-05-01 22:59:28 <sipa> etotheipi_: connection or synchronisation between two IRC servers on the same network broke
1343 2012-05-01 22:59:38 <etotheipi_> oh
1344 2012-05-01 22:59:39 stalled_ has joined
1345 2012-05-01 23:00:19 <sipa> (IRC networks are composed of a tree of servers)
1346 2012-05-01 23:02:07 ivan`_ has joined
1347 2012-05-01 23:02:25 gmaxwell_ is now known as gmaxwell
1348 2012-05-01 23:02:30 Guest54441 has joined
1349 2012-05-01 23:02:30 pierre`_ has joined
1350 2012-05-01 23:02:30 copumpkin has joined
1351 2012-05-01 23:02:30 Guest35386 has joined
1352 2012-05-01 23:02:58 ivan`_ has quit (Changing host)
1353 2012-05-01 23:02:59 ivan`_ has joined
1354 2012-05-01 23:03:00 BlueMattBot has joined
1355 2012-05-01 23:03:00 gmaxwell has quit (Changing host)
1356 2012-05-01 23:03:01 imsaguy has quit (Changing host)
1357 2012-05-01 23:03:01 imsaguy has joined
1358 2012-05-01 23:03:23 slush is now known as Guest33092
1359 2012-05-01 23:03:44 ahihi2 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1360 2012-05-01 23:04:23 ivan`_ is now known as ivan`
1361 2012-05-01 23:04:57 Someguy123 has quit (Changing host)
1362 2012-05-01 23:04:57 Someguy123 has joined
1363 2012-05-01 23:05:13 Bwild has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
1364 2012-05-01 23:05:22 egecko has joined
1365 2012-05-01 23:05:30 Karmaon has joined
1366 2012-05-01 23:08:37 gruez has joined
1367 2012-05-01 23:08:40 Internet13 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1368 2012-05-01 23:08:55 <etotheipi_> so sipa, back to my very original question... it sounds like maybe I should hold off on the new wallet release?  I'm a little conflicted because I want to get beta out... but I expect a flurry of new users, and I'd rather get them on the new wallets
1369 2012-05-01 23:09:09 <gruez> luke-jr: where can i get the source for 0.4.*
1370 2012-05-01 23:09:22 <gavinandresen> sipa: not reproducible yet, I'll try valgrind...
1371 2012-05-01 23:09:25 <gruez> etotheipi_: you mean the compressed keys?
1372 2012-05-01 23:09:26 Guest54441 has quit (Changing host)
1373 2012-05-01 23:09:26 Guest54441 has joined
1374 2012-05-01 23:09:32 Guest54441 is now known as jgarzik_
1375 2012-05-01 23:09:49 <etotheipi_> gruez... lots of new stuff:  mainly the determinism algorithm
1376 2012-05-01 23:10:10 <gruez> huh, i didn't hear about that
1377 2012-05-01 23:10:23 <etotheipi_> Satoshi client will, in the near future, start upgrading to a deterministic wallet
1378 2012-05-01 23:10:30 <etotheipi_> though I don't know how near
1379 2012-05-01 23:10:30 <gruez> noooooo
1380 2012-05-01 23:10:40 <etotheipi_> and I want my new wallets to be compatible
1381 2012-05-01 23:10:57 phantomcircuit_ has joined
1382 2012-05-01 23:11:26 <etotheipi_> though the new wallets will also be faster, support compressed public keys, and designed to handle P2SH and address comments and backups of such data , better
1383 2012-05-01 23:11:26 <sipa> etotheipi_: i'll try to have it implemented in a few days
1384 2012-05-01 23:11:35 Karmaon has quit (Quit: WeeChat 0.3.8-dev)
1385 2012-05-01 23:11:42 <gruez> so my wallet is corrupt on 0.4.4, and it works fine on 0.6.0 and 0.4.3
1386 2012-05-01 23:11:51 <gruez> is it because it contains compressed keys?
1387 2012-05-01 23:12:03 <gruez> i cant come up with an explaination
1388 2012-05-01 23:12:06 Karmaon has joined
1389 2012-05-01 23:12:11 <sipa> gruez: do a getinfo on 0.6.0
1390 2012-05-01 23:12:20 Karmaon has quit (Client Quit)
1391 2012-05-01 23:12:21 <etotheipi_> gruez, what's your issue with deterministic wallets?
1392 2012-05-01 23:12:21 Nesetalis has quit (Quit: <+shponka> how does one scissor with four people <+shponka> hypercube tribadism)
1393 2012-05-01 23:12:21 <sipa> which walletversion does it report?
1394 2012-05-01 23:13:39 Internet13 has joined
1395 2012-05-01 23:13:55 <gruez> "version" : 60006, "protocolversion" : 60000, "walletversion" : 10500, "balance" : xxx, "blocks" : 178174, "connections" : 1, "proxy" : "", "difficulty" : 1508589.67206029, "testnet" : false, "keypoololdest" : xxx, "keypoolsize" : 101, "paytxfee" : 0.00000000, "errors" : ""
1396 2012-05-01 23:14:37 ahihi2 has joined
1397 2012-05-01 23:15:20 <gruez> and with 0.4.3
1398 2012-05-01 23:15:36 <sipa> gruez: hmm
1399 2012-05-01 23:15:43 <gruez> "version" : 40300, "balance" : xxx, "blocks" : 178174, "connections" : 13, "proxy" : "", "generate" : false, "genproclimit" : -1, "difficulty" : 1508589.67206029, "hashespersec" : 0, "testnet" : false, "keypoololdest" : xxx, "keypoolsize" : 101, "paytxfee" : 0.00000000, "errors" : ""
1400 2012-05-01 23:15:44 <sipa> that should work
1401 2012-05-01 23:17:00 Diablo-D3 has joined
1402 2012-05-01 23:17:04 <gruez> i was thinking if i could find the diffs between 0.4.3 and 0.4.4
1403 2012-05-01 23:17:12 dvide has quit ()
1404 2012-05-01 23:17:18 <gruez> i can see what caused the problem
1405 2012-05-01 23:17:56 MobiusL has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
1406 2012-05-01 23:18:38 barmstrong has joined
1407 2012-05-01 23:19:31 Karmaon has joined
1408 2012-05-01 23:19:58 egecko has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1409 2012-05-01 23:21:47 egecko_ has joined
1410 2012-05-01 23:24:11 Diablo-D3 has quit (Quit: do coders dream of sheep()?)
1411 2012-05-01 23:24:14 mologie has joined
1412 2012-05-01 23:25:10 MobiusL has joined
1413 2012-05-01 23:25:31 barmstro_ has joined
1414 2012-05-01 23:26:39 JFK911_ has joined
1415 2012-05-01 23:27:25 drazak_ has joined
1416 2012-05-01 23:28:06 cosurg1 has joined
1417 2012-05-01 23:28:15 <sipa> what version did you create the wallet with?
1418 2012-05-01 23:28:44 wtfman[away]_ has joined
1419 2012-05-01 23:29:06 nathan7_ has joined
1420 2012-05-01 23:29:16 kinlo_ has joined
1421 2012-05-01 23:29:51 ahihi2 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1422 2012-05-01 23:31:29 Diablo-D3 has joined
1423 2012-05-01 23:34:35 kinlo_ is now known as kinlo
1424 2012-05-01 23:34:43 wtfman[away]_ is now known as wtfman[away]
1425 2012-05-01 23:35:30 gruez has quit (Quit: Page closed)
1426 2012-05-01 23:36:05 wasabi has joined
1427 2012-05-01 23:36:40 Pasha has joined
1428 2012-05-01 23:36:53 t7 has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.88.2 [Firefox 12.0/20120420145725])
1429 2012-05-01 23:37:35 Turingi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1430 2012-05-01 23:38:57 <luke-jr> sipa: fwiw, 0.4.4 is probably where the "check validity of keys" got merged
1431 2012-05-01 23:39:45 phungus_ has joined
1432 2012-05-01 23:40:10 Insti_ has joined
1433 2012-05-01 23:40:59 barmstro_ has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1434 2012-05-01 23:40:59 amiller has joined
1435 2012-05-01 23:41:16 eoss has joined
1436 2012-05-01 23:41:17 eoss has quit (Changing host)
1437 2012-05-01 23:41:17 eoss has joined
1438 2012-05-01 23:41:34 JFK911_ is now known as JFK911
1439 2012-05-01 23:43:15 random_cat has joined
1440 2012-05-01 23:44:22 Cory has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1441 2012-05-01 23:44:22 phungus has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1442 2012-05-01 23:44:22 Insty has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1443 2012-05-01 23:44:22 amiller_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1444 2012-05-01 23:44:45 HobGoblin has joined
1445 2012-05-01 23:44:52 OneMiner has quit (Quit: For Sale: Parachute. Only used once, never opened, small stain.)
1446 2012-05-01 23:44:53 _W_ has joined
1447 2012-05-01 23:44:53 kjj_ has joined
1448 2012-05-01 23:45:00 BlueMatt_ has joined
1449 2012-05-01 23:45:11 HobGoblin is now known as Guest55285
1450 2012-05-01 23:45:26 DaQatz has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1451 2012-05-01 23:46:51 kinlo_ has joined
1452 2012-05-01 23:46:54 pigeons_ has joined
1453 2012-05-01 23:47:19 aga has joined
1454 2012-05-01 23:47:45 BlueMatt has quit (Disconnected by services)
1455 2012-05-01 23:47:58 Tycale has joined
1456 2012-05-01 23:48:15 ByronJoh1son has joined
1457 2012-05-01 23:48:26 bobke_ has joined
1458 2012-05-01 23:48:48 sytse_ has joined
1459 2012-05-01 23:49:02 Dagger3 has joined
1460 2012-05-01 23:49:12 PiZZaMaN2 has joined
1461 2012-05-01 23:49:41 MtRedMin1ng has joined
1462 2012-05-01 23:49:41 stalled has joined
1463 2012-05-01 23:50:20 tg has quit (Disconnected by services)
1464 2012-05-01 23:50:21 tg` has joined
1465 2012-05-01 23:51:25 tg` is now known as tg
1466 2012-05-01 23:51:42 james123 has joined
1467 2012-05-01 23:52:33 ivan\_ has joined
1468 2012-05-01 23:52:45 spaola_out has joined
1469 2012-05-01 23:52:47 ivan\ has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1470 2012-05-01 23:52:47 bitcoinbulletin has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1471 2012-05-01 23:52:47 Dagger2 has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1472 2012-05-01 23:52:48 Tycale_ has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1473 2012-05-01 23:52:48 dub has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1474 2012-05-01 23:52:48 T_X has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1475 2012-05-01 23:52:48 pigeons has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1476 2012-05-01 23:52:48 stalled_ has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1477 2012-05-01 23:52:48 SphericalCow has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1478 2012-05-01 23:52:48 jrmithdobbs has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1479 2012-05-01 23:52:49 sytse has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1480 2012-05-01 23:52:49 bobke has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1481 2012-05-01 23:52:49 agath has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1482 2012-05-01 23:52:49 rlifchitz has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1483 2012-05-01 23:52:49 superjames has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1484 2012-05-01 23:52:49 Lexa has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1485 2012-05-01 23:52:49 ByronJohnson has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1486 2012-05-01 23:52:50 UukGoblin has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1487 2012-05-01 23:52:50 spaola has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1488 2012-05-01 23:52:50 fahadsadah has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1489 2012-05-01 23:52:50 PiZZaMaN2K has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1490 2012-05-01 23:52:50 MtRedMining has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1491 2012-05-01 23:52:50 inlikeflynn has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1492 2012-05-01 23:52:50 marienz has quit (Ping timeout: 604 seconds)
1493 2012-05-01 23:52:51 kinlo_ is now known as kinlo
1494 2012-05-01 23:52:51 Dagger3 is now known as Dagger2
1495 2012-05-01 23:53:05 jrmithdobbs has joined
1496 2012-05-01 23:53:29 rlifchitz has joined
1497 2012-05-01 23:53:41 ivan\_ is now known as ivan\
1498 2012-05-01 23:53:46 inlikeflynn has joined
1499 2012-05-01 23:54:57 dub has joined
1500 2012-05-01 23:55:46 dub has quit (Changing host)
1501 2012-05-01 23:55:46 dub has joined
1502 2012-05-01 23:57:31 spaola_out is now known as spaola
1503 2012-05-01 23:58:03 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@pool-96-226-232-89.dllstx.fios.verizon.net|brwyatt
1504 2012-05-01 23:58:44 aga is now known as agath
1505 2012-05-01 23:58:52 T_X has joined
1506 2012-05-01 23:58:52 T_X has quit (Changing host)
1507 2012-05-01 23:58:52 T_X has joined