1 2012-06-08 00:00:04 <amtran> oh nevermind that was "rastaassassin" that started this discussion
  2 2012-06-08 00:00:25 <RastaAssasin> gmaxwell the previous comment about maybe being stuck forever if involved parties stop broadcasting, who specifically would have to stop broadcasting? I dont fully understand the broadcast system if it gets sent out through say 20 nodes as long as one of those nodes stays online the transaction will stand a chance of getting added ?
  3 2012-06-08 00:00:29 <BlueMatt> similar to any other p2p network, peers exchange addresses with each other, bootstrap by asking well-known servers for a list of peers
  4 2012-06-08 00:01:11 <xorgate> oh wait i forgot there's also the irc chan i think? but it could happen that your peers are all in on this 'not including sathoshidice' and then you're somewhat screwed
  5 2012-06-08 00:01:26 <xorgate> i mean the peers you decide to connect to
  6 2012-06-08 00:01:28 <gmaxwell> RastaAssasin: the sender/recipents of txns will keep reannouncing them while they aren't mined... unless they go away.
  7 2012-06-08 00:01:32 <BlueMatt> the irc chan is now disabled by default
  8 2012-06-08 00:01:36 <amtran> i dont think peers are still sent through irc
  9 2012-06-08 00:02:08 <gmaxwell> But e.g. if A sends to B and B uses that to send to C ... and the first txn doesn't get confirmed and a+b stop broadcasting it C's can't get confirmed.
 10 2012-06-08 00:02:48 <RastaAssasin> oh i c how that could be a problem now
 11 2012-06-08 00:02:54 * BlueMatt bb in a few hours
 12 2012-06-08 00:03:07 <sipa> irc is disabled by default since 0.6.0
 13 2012-06-08 00:04:31 <amtran> does artforz come here or gavin
 14 2012-06-08 00:04:49 <sipa> gavin comes here frequently
 15 2012-06-08 00:04:59 <sipa> haven't seen artforz in like a year
 16 2012-06-08 00:05:13 Turingi has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
 17 2012-06-08 00:05:34 <xorgate> i'm having some trouble understanding why people would care about satoshidice.. they want bitcoin to succeed so why try to drop (delay is more like it?) transactions, that would just make the system weaker
 18 2012-06-08 00:05:48 <amtran> i want to talk about GetNextWorkRequired with someone
 19 2012-06-08 00:06:16 <amtran> shit like satoshis dice makes bitcoin weaker
 20 2012-06-08 00:06:26 <sipa> maybe
 21 2012-06-08 00:06:27 <gmaxwell> xorgate: because the uncontrolled flood of transactions from that site are delaying transactions for other users who actually need confirmations to be secure against reversal.
 22 2012-06-08 00:06:27 <amtran> ^^ personal opinion
 23 2012-06-08 00:07:13 <xorgate> gmaxwell how does this delay come about? afaik it matters not how many tx in a block, right?
 24 2012-06-08 00:07:17 <gmaxwell> It alo increases the operating cost of bitcoin relative to its real economic activity and userbase size.
 25 2012-06-08 00:07:19 <Quaix> so can bitcoin handle all the traffic is it becomes 10x as popular? If just one site can have an adverse effect...
 26 2012-06-08 00:07:36 <sipa> Quaix: normal growth is not a problem
 27 2012-06-08 00:08:08 <gmaxwell> xorgate: What "matters not"?
 28 2012-06-08 00:08:33 <sipa> if bitcoin becomes more resource intensive because of increased usage, people will adapt
 29 2012-06-08 00:09:12 <sipa> but increased resources without increased usefulness of the economic platform it provides may be problematic
 30 2012-06-08 00:09:25 <sipa> i am unsure for now how to classify satoshidice
 31 2012-06-08 00:09:42 <xorgate> gmaxwell i mean, what's the difference between a block with 1 tx and one with 100? a miner can just include them without affecting the mining operation
 32 2012-06-08 00:09:56 <sipa> xorgate: blocks have a limited size
 33 2012-06-08 00:09:57 <gmaxwell> Increased usage brings its own benefits along with its costs. Increased load without those benefits just discourages more real use of the system. My own opinion of satoshidice is strongly negative imply because it is enormously inefficient compared to the next technical alternative.
 34 2012-06-08 00:10:33 <amtran> satoshis dice user : "so you mean i can buy weed on bitcoin without having to leave the house?"
 35 2012-06-08 00:10:39 <xorgate> sipa that... sounds like a flaw (?)
 36 2012-06-08 00:10:54 <gmaxwell> xorgate: it makes the block substantially larger, which means more storage and computational cost for all participating users. And as sipa says, blocks have a maximum size, otherwise some trouble maker could have just made bitcoin unusuable two years ago before it had much usage.
 37 2012-06-08 00:11:42 <xorgate> is the size of a block proportional to the amount of tx? meaning a block has a max amount of tx possible?
 38 2012-06-08 00:12:20 <Eliel> xorgate: it's a limit that will be increased in an update someday.
 39 2012-06-08 00:12:25 <Eliel> when necessary
 40 2012-06-08 00:12:37 <xorgate> sounds like it's necessary now :)
 41 2012-06-08 00:12:47 <gmaxwell> xorgate: no. It's absolutely not.
 42 2012-06-08 00:13:10 <xorgate> idunno i understand why one would feel negative, but on the other hand it's just another use of the system
 43 2012-06-08 00:13:45 <gmaxwell> Right now the blockchain can grow at a rate of 52gbytes/year. Do you really want a 54GByte blockchain a year from now while bitcoin has the same level of users that it has now?
 44 2012-06-08 00:14:24 <amtran> sounds like bitcoin is going to have to go DHT eventually
 45 2012-06-08 00:14:31 <gmaxwell> ...
 46 2012-06-08 00:14:37 JZavala has joined
 47 2012-06-08 00:14:39 <RastaAssasin> i understand the point that the dice increase the network load and storage but, on the other hand i think it also brings in new users and fresh money into the system which is needed for bitcoin to flourish so i would not bash it any at all more like support it
 48 2012-06-08 00:14:43 <luke-jr> LOLOL
 49 2012-06-08 00:14:54 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: we need a bot that silences on "DHT"
 50 2012-06-08 00:15:15 <gmaxwell> RastaAssasin: there are _lots_ of gambling sites.. All others work without producing new transactions for every trivial play.
 51 2012-06-08 00:15:48 <luke-jr> RastaAssasin: Dice is AFAIK illegal
 52 2012-06-08 00:16:04 <luke-jr> so, it brings the wrong kind of users/money
 53 2012-06-08 00:16:28 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: at least here it's a pretty excellent metric for people who are contributing buzzwords instead of insight.
 54 2012-06-08 00:17:09 <amtran> luke-jr: bitcoin 2.0 won't hash using a cryptographic function (like SHA256). put that in your pipe :) and it will use a DHT
 55 2012-06-08 00:18:00 <gmaxwell> amtran: DHT's don't don anything really useful in the context of what we do. Nor are any particularly attack resistant, even if they did.
 56 2012-06-08 00:18:00 <luke-jr> amtran: …
 57 2012-06-08 00:18:04 <wizkidO57> anyone had a chance to check into the issue i submitted about sendrawtx?
 58 2012-06-08 00:18:15 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't hashing inherently cryptographical?
 59 2012-06-08 00:18:16 caedes has joined
 60 2012-06-08 00:18:16 caedes has quit (Changing host)
 61 2012-06-08 00:18:16 caedes has joined
 62 2012-06-08 00:18:21 <amtran> you'll see!!!
 63 2012-06-08 00:18:37 <gmaxwell> amtran: and luke's comment was because I've long griped about clueless people claiming DHT's are the solution to every problem that sounds remotely like a distributed computing problem.
 64 2012-06-08 00:18:58 t7 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 65 2012-06-08 00:19:00 <gmaxwell> So it's sort of funny now whenever someone shows up and says "Use a DHT!!"
 66 2012-06-08 00:19:52 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
 67 2012-06-08 00:19:55 Jamesz has joined
 68 2012-06-08 00:20:00 <wizkidO57> wouldnt that be pretty insecure for something like this?
 69 2012-06-08 00:20:06 JZavala has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 70 2012-06-08 00:20:21 <Eliel> it very much would.
 71 2012-06-08 00:20:22 Jamesz has quit (Client Quit)
 72 2012-06-08 00:20:35 <phantomcircuit> wizkidO57, no but it would be slow as all hell
 73 2012-06-08 00:21:33 <amtran> well when you're talking about exponential growth of a distributed file system (the origin of bitcoin) it would seem DHT is a pretty good solution
 74 2012-06-08 00:22:10 <wizkidO57> phantomcircuit: already takes days to download the blockchain, so, why not make everything slow? :P
 75 2012-06-08 00:23:18 <Eliel> phantomcircuit: it'd make individual reads slow but you could do them all at once :P
 76 2012-06-08 00:23:47 <phantomcircuit> Eliel, actually because the blockchian is a linked list you cant
 77 2012-06-08 00:24:11 <xorgate> ok so, sounds like there's a proposal to increase max blocksize. But doing so does not fix any structural issues, just give some breathing room. Correct?
 78 2012-06-08 00:24:38 <amtran> no because the issue is the clients forwarding cleartext transactions not hashing
 79 2012-06-08 00:24:51 <Eliel> phantomcircuit: that depends a lot on what data the nodes keep locally.
 80 2012-06-08 00:24:52 <wizkidO57> phantomcircuit: well, theres the problem. Obviously the solution is to make the blockchain not be a linked list, then use a distributed hash table...
 81 2012-06-08 00:25:37 <phantomcircuit> wizkidO57, it's core to the algorithm that makes bitcoin secure...
 82 2012-06-08 00:25:56 <wizkidO57> :)
 83 2012-06-08 00:26:08 <hnz> and use one of these modern nosql-databases like couchdb instead of bdb?
 84 2012-06-08 00:26:16 <wizkidO57> i was being facetious
 85 2012-06-08 00:26:27 <wizkidO57> hehe
 86 2012-06-08 00:26:28 <hnz> rot13 may also be faster than sha256.
 87 2012-06-08 00:26:44 <wizkidO57> oh sweet, rot13
 88 2012-06-08 00:26:46 <wizkidO57> +1
 89 2012-06-08 00:27:09 <hnz> wizkidO57: rot14? ;)
 90 2012-06-08 00:27:32 <Eliel> it's a good thing the speed of the hashing algorithm is almost meaningless then :)
 91 2012-06-08 00:27:35 <amtran> after a certain number of confirmations does it really matter what hashing function you use...
 92 2012-06-08 00:28:12 <wizkidO57> hnz: :D
 93 2012-06-08 00:28:14 <Eliel> no, the hash algo is not important, other than that you can't easily reverse it.
 94 2012-06-08 00:28:27 <amtran> i guess bitcoin isn't so much of an innovation in cryptography as people make it out to be ...
 95 2012-06-08 00:28:53 <hnz> amtran: the innovation is that someone put all the pieces together to create what is now bitcoin
 96 2012-06-08 00:29:15 <amtran> yeah but your joke about rot13 isn't a joke at all. why not use rot13
 97 2012-06-08 00:29:34 <Eliel> amtran: rot13 is reversible
 98 2012-06-08 00:29:36 <wizkidO57> its not really a hash...
 99 2012-06-08 00:29:41 <Eliel> and not a hash either :P
100 2012-06-08 00:29:45 <amtran> cryptograhpicly secure hashing function is irrelevant to the function of bitcoin
101 2012-06-08 00:30:10 <wizkidO57> amtran: make an alt chain that uses rot13 :P
102 2012-06-08 00:30:13 <Eliel> amtran: no it's not. it's very much required feature of the hashing function
103 2012-06-08 00:30:40 <Eliel> bitcoin can't work with a hashing function that can be reversed easily.
104 2012-06-08 00:30:58 <wizkidO57> oh wow, just realized i'm on the wrong nick
105 2012-06-08 00:31:02 wizkidO57 is now known as wizkid057
106 2012-06-08 00:31:22 <amtran> reversing the function must be computationally difficult but there is no requirement that it be cryptographically secure
107 2012-06-08 00:31:36 <hnz> amtran: for the integrity of the blockchain you need some way to prove, that the old parts are part of the chain. this is done using crypthographically secure hashes
108 2012-06-08 00:32:05 <amtran> isnt that what the dsa is for
109 2012-06-08 00:32:29 <Eliel> amtran: with dsa, you need centralized trust.
110 2012-06-08 00:32:35 <wizkid057> the blocks themselves are secured only by SHA256 and a target
111 2012-06-08 00:34:06 <Eliel> amtran: with cryptographic hash functions and mining, you can trust that it's damn expensive to falsify history.
112 2012-06-08 00:34:10 <gmaxwell> amtran> well when you're talking about exponential growth < bitcoin's growth is strictly linear.
113 2012-06-08 00:34:40 hnz_ has joined
114 2012-06-08 00:34:40 * wizkid057 regenerated the entire blockchain
115 2012-06-08 00:34:56 <hnz_> amtran: you call hash functions with the property that it is quite easy to hash but very hard to reverse it (and to find another value which hashes to the same hash) cryptographic hash function. it is just the name for this property.
116 2012-06-08 00:34:57 <wizkid057> using my $100,000,000 cluster
117 2012-06-08 00:35:01 <wizkid057> lol
118 2012-06-08 00:36:07 hnz has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
119 2012-06-08 00:36:13 <amtran> once the transaction is confirmed on the block chain the hashing algorithm doesnt matter
120 2012-06-08 00:36:32 <hnz_> amtran: you could use dsa, but it is more complicated. you need a key for that. if you only need hashing you don't use a signature algorithm because a hashing algorithm is easier and faster.
121 2012-06-08 00:37:16 Maccer has quit (Excess Flood)
122 2012-06-08 00:37:36 tower has quit (Disconnected by services)
123 2012-06-08 00:37:47 tower has joined
124 2012-06-08 00:38:18 hnz has joined
125 2012-06-08 00:38:21 <hnz> amtran: if i start at the beginning i trust the genesis block because it is in the client. to trust block 2 i first need to know that it depends on block 1. so it needs at least a hash of block 1
126 2012-06-08 00:38:28 <hnz> the network here sucks :/
127 2012-06-08 00:39:32 <amtran> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_hash_functions#Non-cryptographic_hash_functions
128 2012-06-08 00:40:38 <amtran> http://google-opensource.blogspot.com/2011/04/introducing-cityhash.html
129 2012-06-08 00:41:09 hnz_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
130 2012-06-08 00:42:46 hnz_ has joined
131 2012-06-08 00:42:51 hnz has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
132 2012-06-08 00:44:31 <Eliel> amtran: I don't think you're quite understanding what the cryptographic hash function feature is needed for. If we don't have that, It'll be way too easy to find hash collisions and that will basically make the whole system untrustworthy for anything.
133 2012-06-08 00:44:42 Matt_von_Mises has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
134 2012-06-08 00:45:03 <amtran> if its stored in a dht how will there be collisions
135 2012-06-08 00:45:20 <amtran> the hash function is only a proof of work
136 2012-06-08 00:46:23 <Eliel> dht is completely irrelevant here. What is relevant is that if the hash is not cryptographically secure, anyone can create a block that has the same hash as earlier block but with different transaction data.
137 2012-06-08 00:46:42 <amtran> and those blocks will be rejected
138 2012-06-08 00:47:07 <Eliel> by the existing network, sure. But how will new nodes decide?
139 2012-06-08 00:47:33 <Eliel> also, how will you tell the two versions apart? they have the same hash
140 2012-06-08 00:47:59 <Eliel> in a DHT, you have to ask by hash
141 2012-06-08 00:48:13 <amtran> but thats different than the proof of work
142 2012-06-08 00:48:29 <amtran> the proof of work only has to survive through a few confirmations
143 2012-06-08 00:48:46 <Eliel> it ceases to be a proof of work if you can forge it.
144 2012-06-08 00:48:46 <amtran> and then its pretty irrelevant (not in bitcoin as it is today)
145 2012-06-08 00:48:47 <graingert> would there be any use in the block chain for "transactions seen"
146 2012-06-08 00:49:04 <graingert> eg tx that have not been checked
147 2012-06-08 00:49:06 <graingert> just seen
148 2012-06-08 00:49:11 <amtran> but bitcoin 2.0 this will be true
149 2012-06-08 00:50:03 <Eliel> amtran, anyway, I need some sleep. I don't know if you're trolling or if you really are too thickheaded to get it.
150 2012-06-08 00:50:13 <Eliel> so, I give up
151 2012-06-08 00:50:28 <amtran> ok me too :)
152 2012-06-08 00:58:52 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
153 2012-06-08 00:59:37 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@pool-96-226-236-130.dllstx.fios.verizon.net|brwyatt
154 2012-06-08 01:00:07 hnz_ has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
155 2012-06-08 01:02:36 occulta has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
156 2012-06-08 01:04:37 hnz has joined
157 2012-06-08 01:10:22 hnz has quit ()
158 2012-06-08 01:12:33 Maccer has joined
159 2012-06-08 01:14:54 wasabi2 has joined
160 2012-06-08 01:15:50 wasabi1 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
161 2012-06-08 01:16:23 phantomcircuit has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
162 2012-06-08 01:18:04 phantomcircuit has joined
163 2012-06-08 01:22:07 luke-jr has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
164 2012-06-08 01:22:08 sirk390 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
165 2012-06-08 01:26:14 Slix` has joined
166 2012-06-08 01:29:17 wizkid057 has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
167 2012-06-08 01:30:23 wizkid057 has joined
168 2012-06-08 01:31:59 copumpkin has joined
169 2012-06-08 01:32:06 copumpkin has quit (Changing host)
170 2012-06-08 01:32:06 copumpkin has joined
171 2012-06-08 01:32:07 agricocb has joined
172 2012-06-08 01:37:36 osmosis has quit (Quit: Leaving)
173 2012-06-08 01:58:59 luke-jr has joined
174 2012-06-08 02:03:48 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
175 2012-06-08 02:04:47 Karmaon has quit (Quit: WeeChat 0.3.8-rc2)
176 2012-06-08 02:05:58 freewil has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
177 2012-06-08 02:09:30 Karmaon has joined
178 2012-06-08 02:11:48 rdponticelli has joined
179 2012-06-08 02:14:12 freewil has joined
180 2012-06-08 02:18:57 JZavala has joined
181 2012-06-08 02:23:48 Slix` has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
182 2012-06-08 02:28:22 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
183 2012-06-08 02:38:57 Z0rZ0rZ0r has joined
184 2012-06-08 02:43:36 minimoose has joined
185 2012-06-08 02:45:26 osmosis has joined
186 2012-06-08 02:47:50 abracadab is now known as abracadabra
187 2012-06-08 02:48:18 MobiusL has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
188 2012-06-08 02:51:56 Tuxavant has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
189 2012-06-08 02:52:14 TheSeven has quit (Disconnected by services)
190 2012-06-08 02:52:15 [7] has joined
191 2012-06-08 02:52:15 Tuxavant has joined
192 2012-06-08 02:57:34 MobiusL has joined
193 2012-06-08 03:07:34 Z0rZ0rZ0r has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
194 2012-06-08 03:08:00 Z0rZ0rZ0r has joined
195 2012-06-08 03:14:02 MobiusL has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
196 2012-06-08 03:14:37 dvide_ has quit ()
197 2012-06-08 03:19:31 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
198 2012-06-08 03:20:17 eoss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
199 2012-06-08 03:23:51 MobiusL has joined
200 2012-06-08 03:37:52 wizkid057 has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
201 2012-06-08 03:38:07 luke-jr has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
202 2012-06-08 03:38:17 wizkid057 has joined
203 2012-06-08 03:56:30 <amtran> I don't think that broken cryptography could ever be the end of BitCoin if it becomes popular. Since the block chain can be forked without losing too much data, modifications to all aspects of BitCoin are possible. If SHA-256 was broken, a new version of BitCoin would be released that would switch to a stronger hash function for addresses. I don't think that broken cryptography could ever be the end of BitCoin if it becomes p
204 2012-06-08 03:56:30 <amtran> opular. Since the block chain can be forked without losing too much data, modifications to all aspects of BitCoin are possible. If SHA-256 was broken, a new version of BitCoin would be released that would switch to a stronger hash function for addresses. Changing the hash function used for blocks might not be necessary if the weakness still required some non-trivial amount of computation. The new version would ignore SHA-25
205 2012-06-08 03:56:31 <amtran> 6 blocks after a certain point in time, but most old transactions would survive.Changing the hash function used for blocks might not be necessary if the weakness still required some non-trivial amount of computation. The new version would ignore SHA-256 blocks after a certain point in time, but most old transactions would survive.
206 2012-06-08 03:56:40 <amtran> -theymos
207 2012-06-08 04:04:08 <amtran> So lets say I can create SHA-256 collisions fairly easily, and I want to replace an old transaction somewhere in the block chain.
208 2012-06-08 04:04:19 <amtran> I create an alternate version of the transaction with the same hash... and then?  Whenever clients happen to connect to my node to get old transactions I feed them the bogus version?
209 2012-06-08 04:04:29 <amtran> How do I get a majority of the network to accept the bogus version as valid, when the majority of the network probably already has already downloaded the old, valid version?
210 2012-06-08 04:04:34 <amtran> -gavin
211 2012-06-08 04:16:17 wasabi1 has joined
212 2012-06-08 04:17:52 wasabi2 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
213 2012-06-08 04:18:39 sytse has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
214 2012-06-08 04:24:49 sytse has joined
215 2012-06-08 04:27:19 <amtran> ...disk blocks are stored in a B+tree indexed by file position,
216 2012-06-08 04:27:19 <amtran> mainly to provide quick response time for seeks to random file positions...
217 2012-06-08 04:35:55 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
218 2012-06-08 04:36:27 luke-jr has joined
219 2012-06-08 04:37:19 Karmaon has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
220 2012-06-08 04:37:38 Karmaon has joined
221 2012-06-08 05:09:11 ovidiusoft has joined
222 2012-06-08 05:45:28 ThomasV has joined
223 2012-06-08 05:50:30 RazielZ has joined
224 2012-06-08 06:01:11 D34TH has quit (Quit: Leaving)
225 2012-06-08 06:03:50 jgarzik has joined
226 2012-06-08 06:03:59 jgarzik has quit (Changing host)
227 2012-06-08 06:03:59 jgarzik has joined
228 2012-06-08 06:16:10 osmosis has quit (Quit: Leaving)
229 2012-06-08 06:17:53 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
230 2012-06-08 06:21:06 paraipan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
231 2012-06-08 06:35:15 paraipan has joined
232 2012-06-08 06:45:08 mmoya has joined
233 2012-06-08 06:55:59 toffoo has quit ()
234 2012-06-08 07:10:48 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
235 2012-06-08 07:19:23 SomeoneWeird has quit (Excess Flood)
236 2012-06-08 07:20:06 Guest63243 has joined
237 2012-06-08 07:20:18 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
238 2012-06-08 07:20:54 Prattler has joined
239 2012-06-08 07:21:07 molecular has joined
240 2012-06-08 07:26:23 Guest63243 has quit (Changing host)
241 2012-06-08 07:26:23 Guest63243 has joined
242 2012-06-08 07:26:47 Guest63243 is now known as SomeoneWeird
243 2012-06-08 07:32:06 TD has joined
244 2012-06-08 07:37:53 Diapolo has joined
245 2012-06-08 07:40:50 gribble has quit (Disconnected by services)
246 2012-06-08 07:42:44 gribble has joined
247 2012-06-08 07:43:25 gribble has quit (Excess Flood)
248 2012-06-08 07:43:51 gribble has joined
249 2012-06-08 07:44:34 gribble has quit (Excess Flood)
250 2012-06-08 07:45:13 gribble has joined
251 2012-06-08 07:45:54 gribble has quit (Excess Flood)
252 2012-06-08 07:45:59 graingert has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
253 2012-06-08 07:46:18 gribble has joined
254 2012-06-08 07:47:01 gribble has quit (Excess Flood)
255 2012-06-08 07:47:39 gribble has joined
256 2012-06-08 07:49:17 RainbowDashh has joined
257 2012-06-08 08:21:55 ThomasV has joined
258 2012-06-08 08:22:07 ThomasV has quit (Changing host)
259 2012-06-08 08:22:07 ThomasV has joined
260 2012-06-08 08:22:46 wizkidO57 has joined
261 2012-06-08 08:26:21 wizkid057 has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
262 2012-06-08 08:35:10 _Fireball has joined
263 2012-06-08 09:06:39 saieko has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
264 2012-06-08 09:08:48 paraipan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
265 2012-06-08 09:11:10 Diapolo has left ()
266 2012-06-08 09:12:33 socket has joined
267 2012-06-08 09:12:58 socket has quit (Quit: http://www.iBash.org - Create a Quotes database for your channel)
268 2012-06-08 09:14:49 james123 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
269 2012-06-08 09:16:43 superjames has joined
270 2012-06-08 09:17:41 paraipan has joined
271 2012-06-08 09:21:52 wumpus has quit (No Ping reply in 180 seconds.)
272 2012-06-08 09:22:13 wump has joined
273 2012-06-08 09:23:45 doublec_ has joined
274 2012-06-08 09:23:52 ByronJoh1son has joined
275 2012-06-08 09:24:09 lianj_ has joined
276 2012-06-08 09:24:53 wumpus has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
277 2012-06-08 09:24:53 doublec has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
278 2012-06-08 09:24:53 lianj has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
279 2012-06-08 09:24:53 ByronJohnson has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
280 2012-06-08 09:26:56 nanotube has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
281 2012-06-08 09:28:41 Dyaheon has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
282 2012-06-08 09:28:41 splatster has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
283 2012-06-08 09:29:51 Jezzz has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
284 2012-06-08 09:29:51 tcatm has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
285 2012-06-08 09:30:49 chmod755 has joined
286 2012-06-08 09:32:04 tcatm has joined
287 2012-06-08 09:32:07 tcatm has quit (Changing host)
288 2012-06-08 09:32:07 tcatm has joined
289 2012-06-08 09:32:11 TD[gone] has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
290 2012-06-08 09:32:11 longpig has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
291 2012-06-08 09:32:28 nanotube has joined
292 2012-06-08 09:32:46 coderrr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
293 2012-06-08 09:33:42 <chmod755> hi nanotube
294 2012-06-08 09:33:56 dstien has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
295 2012-06-08 09:34:07 Guest83582 has joined
296 2012-06-08 09:34:25 dstien has joined
297 2012-06-08 09:36:50 Dyaheon has joined
298 2012-06-08 09:37:05 TD[gone] has joined
299 2012-06-08 09:40:08 splatster has joined
300 2012-06-08 09:40:20 splatster is now known as Guest37395
301 2012-06-08 09:42:30 chmod755 has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
302 2012-06-08 10:04:46 p0s has joined
303 2012-06-08 10:06:19 dvide has joined
304 2012-06-08 10:14:20 Diablo-D3 has joined
305 2012-06-08 10:18:33 sirk390 has joined
306 2012-06-08 10:18:53 wasabi2 has joined
307 2012-06-08 10:19:49 wasabi1 has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
308 2012-06-08 10:19:53 rdponticelli has joined
309 2012-06-08 10:39:06 saieko has joined
310 2012-06-08 10:46:53 tower has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
311 2012-06-08 10:47:51 setkeh has quit (Quit: Time For a World Without Govorment Internet Interfearence)
312 2012-06-08 10:49:24 setkeh has joined
313 2012-06-08 10:54:00 tower has joined
314 2012-06-08 10:55:59 erle- has joined
315 2012-06-08 10:55:59 erle- has quit (Client Quit)
316 2012-06-08 10:56:23 erle- has joined
317 2012-06-08 10:57:58 t7 has joined
318 2012-06-08 11:13:24 _Fireball has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
319 2012-06-08 11:14:17 _Fireball has joined
320 2012-06-08 11:25:59 O2made has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
321 2012-06-08 11:33:37 _Fireball has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
322 2012-06-08 11:39:09 sirk390 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
323 2012-06-08 11:40:18 sirk390 has joined
324 2012-06-08 11:53:01 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
325 2012-06-08 11:58:25 sirk390 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
326 2012-06-08 11:58:47 sirk390 has joined
327 2012-06-08 12:04:25 RastaAssasin_ has joined
328 2012-06-08 12:06:48 RastaAssasin has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
329 2012-06-08 12:07:38 Guest83582 is now known as Jezzz
330 2012-06-08 12:07:44 Jezzz has quit (Changing host)
331 2012-06-08 12:07:45 Jezzz has joined
332 2012-06-08 12:09:20 Xunie has joined
333 2012-06-08 12:09:53 att has joined
334 2012-06-08 12:09:59 tower has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
335 2012-06-08 12:11:46 tower has joined
336 2012-06-08 12:12:57 agricocb has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
337 2012-06-08 12:13:25 sirk390 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
338 2012-06-08 12:13:43 sirk390 has joined
339 2012-06-08 12:17:30 setkeh has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
340 2012-06-08 12:18:35 word_ has joined
341 2012-06-08 12:18:50 word_ has quit (Changing host)
342 2012-06-08 12:18:50 word_ has joined
343 2012-06-08 12:18:55 word has quit (Disconnected by services)
344 2012-06-08 12:19:01 word_ is now known as word
345 2012-06-08 12:20:58 makomk has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
346 2012-06-08 12:21:49 minimoose has joined
347 2012-06-08 12:22:05 setkeh has joined
348 2012-06-08 12:23:36 Joric has joined
349 2012-06-08 12:23:36 Joric has quit (Changing host)
350 2012-06-08 12:23:36 Joric has joined
351 2012-06-08 12:27:24 MobiusL has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
352 2012-06-08 12:30:38 MobiusL has joined
353 2012-06-08 12:31:51 p0s has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
354 2012-06-08 12:38:41 makomk has joined
355 2012-06-08 12:42:10 datagutt has joined
356 2012-06-08 12:42:26 datagutt has quit (Changing host)
357 2012-06-08 12:42:26 datagutt has joined
358 2012-06-08 12:42:46 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
359 2012-06-08 12:53:18 Diapolo has joined
360 2012-06-08 12:53:54 agricocb has joined
361 2012-06-08 12:58:51 erle- has quit (Quit: erle-)
362 2012-06-08 12:59:59 ThomasV_ has joined
363 2012-06-08 13:06:50 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
364 2012-06-08 13:10:50 <Diapolo> Comments? http://i48.tinypic.com/2iw3yfb.jpg
365 2012-06-08 13:11:31 <sipa> Diapolo: looks good; something like that will be needed
366 2012-06-08 13:12:15 <Diapolo> The code and UI is there I just need to create a pull.
367 2012-06-08 13:12:35 <Diapolo> It's tabbed as you see and much easier to expand, because it has an UI-file.
368 2012-06-08 13:13:40 <Diapolo> sipa: If I push it to my remote repo can you try if it compiles and take a quick look at the code, before I open a pull?
369 2012-06-08 13:14:03 diki has joined
370 2012-06-08 13:14:27 <diki> Any new stuff going on?
371 2012-06-08 13:15:00 <diki> New stolen coins or stuff like that?
372 2012-06-08 13:16:48 <sipa> Diapolo: to be honest, i'd wait a little bit
373 2012-06-08 13:17:12 <sipa> Diapolo: i hope to get the onion routing stuff merged as well
374 2012-06-08 13:18:21 <Diapolo> sipa: as I said it will be real easy to extend the available options and if you tell me what you need I have no problem in assisting you
375 2012-06-08 13:18:28 <sipa> Diapolo: when that is done, i think we need something in the gui like "[X] proxy server: [...]" "IPv6 proxy: [X] Same [ ] None [ ] Other server: [...]" "Tor proxy: [X] Same [ ] Other server [...]"
376 2012-06-08 13:20:21 <sipa> but sure, i'll have a look if you want
377 2012-06-08 13:26:42 <Diapolo> sipa: take a look here, perhaps you can try to build it, so that I can fix possible compilation errors before opening a pull
378 2012-06-08 13:27:33 <Diapolo> sipa: I extended the optionsmodel with the SOCKS version I guess that's the main part where you can look for glitches
379 2012-06-08 13:27:37 <Diapolo> https://github.com/Diapolo/bitcoin/tree/tabbed_optionsdialog
380 2012-06-08 13:42:37 winterblack has joined
381 2012-06-08 13:42:51 twmz_ has joined
382 2012-06-08 13:43:10 twobitcoins__ has joined
383 2012-06-08 13:44:42 Internet13 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
384 2012-06-08 13:44:43 twmz has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
385 2012-06-08 13:44:43 Turingi has joined
386 2012-06-08 13:44:43 Turingi has quit (Changing host)
387 2012-06-08 13:44:43 Turingi has joined
388 2012-06-08 13:46:30 winterblack_ has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
389 2012-06-08 13:46:30 twobitcoins_ has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
390 2012-06-08 13:48:00 Internet13 has joined
391 2012-06-08 13:50:00 <Diapolo> re
392 2012-06-08 13:55:37 Maccer has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
393 2012-06-08 13:55:37 Ahimoth has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
394 2012-06-08 13:55:37 BeTep has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
395 2012-06-08 13:55:38 Bwild has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
396 2012-06-08 13:55:38 nameless has quit (!~root@weowntheinter.net|Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
397 2012-06-08 13:55:38 tucenaber has quit (Quit: Bye)
398 2012-06-08 13:55:44 Ahimoth_ has joined
399 2012-06-08 13:55:48 Ahimoth_ is now known as Ahimoth
400 2012-06-08 13:56:16 bulletbill has joined
401 2012-06-08 13:56:19 TuxBlackEdo has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
402 2012-06-08 13:56:37 wereHamster has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
403 2012-06-08 13:56:50 UukGoblin has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
404 2012-06-08 13:56:59 parus has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
405 2012-06-08 13:57:00 wereHamster has joined
406 2012-06-08 13:57:07 parus has joined
407 2012-06-08 13:57:11 RainbowDashh has joined
408 2012-06-08 13:57:17 UukGoblin has joined
409 2012-06-08 13:57:20 Diablo-D3 has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
410 2012-06-08 13:58:55 <bulletbill> hello,  if i want to build a 'production-ready' bitcoin client, should i go off the 0.6.2 branch or the 0.6.2 tag in master? what is the procedure for maintaining the current stable version? is the latest stable version going to be branched now? (has it always been..i don't think so)
411 2012-06-08 13:59:21 <sipa> 0.6.2 is 0.6.2
412 2012-06-08 13:59:38 TuxBlackEdo has joined
413 2012-06-08 14:00:19 <bulletbill> sipa: however, 0.6.2 branch has further commits...i guess i worded it badly: to follow the latest 'stable' version, should i track the branch?
414 2012-06-08 14:00:24 tucenaber has joined
415 2012-06-08 14:00:57 bd_ has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
416 2012-06-08 14:01:45 weather has joined
417 2012-06-08 14:03:08 MiningBuddy- is now known as MiningBuddy
418 2012-06-08 14:03:31 <Diapolo> sipa: I'm out for now, if you have got the time and have things, comment directly in my branch, ok :)? Thanks!
419 2012-06-08 14:03:46 Diablo-D3 has joined
420 2012-06-08 14:04:21 att has quit (Quit: Leaving)
421 2012-06-08 14:04:30 nameless has joined
422 2012-06-08 14:04:53 Diapolo has left ()
423 2012-06-08 14:04:56 bd_ has joined
424 2012-06-08 14:05:34 weather is now known as BeTep
425 2012-06-08 14:06:41 bulletbill has left ()
426 2012-06-08 14:20:40 ThomasV_ has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
427 2012-06-08 14:20:43 wasabi1 has joined
428 2012-06-08 14:21:55 wasabi2 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
429 2012-06-08 14:22:49 egecko has quit (Quit: ~ Trillian Astra - www.trillian.im ~)
430 2012-06-08 14:25:00 shurnormal has joined
431 2012-06-08 14:37:38 ThomasV_ has joined
432 2012-06-08 14:40:34 Maccer has joined
433 2012-06-08 14:42:23 shurnormal has quit (Disconnected by services)
434 2012-06-08 14:42:36 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
435 2012-06-08 14:50:52 RainbowDashh has joined
436 2012-06-08 14:53:41 lianj_ has quit (Changing host)
437 2012-06-08 14:53:41 lianj_ has joined
438 2012-06-08 14:53:55 lianj_ is now known as lianj
439 2012-06-08 14:54:54 Guest37395 is now known as splatster
440 2012-06-08 14:54:54 splatster has quit (Changing host)
441 2012-06-08 14:54:54 splatster has joined
442 2012-06-08 15:00:24 <Ukto> luke-jr is it possible for an LP response from a pool to respond, but without data, so the miner would immediately process a normal getwork ?
443 2012-06-08 15:01:01 <luke-jr> possible, but bad idea
444 2012-06-08 15:01:19 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
445 2012-06-08 15:01:57 <Ukto> LP (at lease gminers implementation) breaks things a bit if a miner has diff threads passing through the same proxy but getting work from diff pools
446 2012-06-08 15:02:31 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
447 2012-06-08 15:05:20 RainbowDashh has joined
448 2012-06-08 15:05:55 Zarutian has joined
449 2012-06-08 15:08:43 <epscy> i was thinking about the variance problem
450 2012-06-08 15:09:32 <epscy> as well as accepting a hash equal to the difficulty
451 2012-06-08 15:10:12 <epscy> could it not also accept two hashes each equal to half the difficult
452 2012-06-08 15:10:18 <epscy> y
453 2012-06-08 15:13:46 <sipa> what problem would that solve?
454 2012-06-08 15:17:51 rdponticelli has joined
455 2012-06-08 15:17:57 <helo> 'variance problem' is that some blocks can take a lot longer than others?
456 2012-06-08 15:17:58 t7 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
457 2012-06-08 15:20:02 t7 has joined
458 2012-06-08 15:20:11 <epscy> yeah
459 2012-06-08 15:21:06 <epscy> basically if we let it accept two hashes that take an average of 5 minutes each to calc as well as one that takes an average of 10 mins
460 2012-06-08 15:21:35 <epscy> that should give us more chances of solving a block every 10 mins
461 2012-06-08 15:21:41 <epscy> i think
462 2012-06-08 15:22:40 <epscy> and of course we could take it further, 4 hashes each taking 2 minutes and 30 seconds on average to caulculate, and so on
463 2012-06-08 15:23:03 <epscy> is it a dumb idea?
464 2012-06-08 15:24:31 <sipa> you'd just move the problem, i think
465 2012-06-08 15:24:43 <epscy> how?
466 2012-06-08 15:24:57 <sipa> pools will want to let miners announce their half-blocks
467 2012-06-08 15:27:06 dvide_ has joined
468 2012-06-08 15:27:22 dvide has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
469 2012-06-08 15:30:22 <epscy> why?
470 2012-06-08 15:30:33 <epscy> i don't see what the difference would be
471 2012-06-08 15:30:57 <epscy> the protocol would say that you need 0..n hashes that add up to the current difficulty
472 2012-06-08 15:31:05 <epscy> sorry 1..n
473 2012-06-08 15:31:43 <epscy> the pools and lone miners would hold on to hashes that are greater than half the difficulty
474 2012-06-08 15:32:11 <epscy> but why would they announce them?
475 2012-06-08 15:32:24 <epscy> until they actually have enough hashes?
476 2012-06-08 15:34:52 <sipa> waiting for one miner to find two good hashes takes longer than waiting for one miner to find one hash, broadcasting it, and waiting for another miner to find the second
477 2012-06-08 15:35:58 <epscy> sipa: why?
478 2012-06-08 15:36:09 <epscy> you are talking about a pool?
479 2012-06-08 15:36:14 <sipa> yes
480 2012-06-08 15:36:33 <epscy> don't miners have to send all their hashes to the pool anyway?
481 2012-06-08 15:36:38 <sipa> well, or a solo miner with many mining nodes
482 2012-06-08 15:37:03 <epscy> the only downsides i can see, is that the block would larger
483 2012-06-08 15:37:16 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
484 2012-06-08 15:37:22 <sipa> i don't even see what problem it solves
485 2012-06-08 15:37:24 <helo> right now the average is every 10 minutes... if you start accepting more ways to solve a block, the average will be less than every 10 minutes
486 2012-06-08 15:37:36 avengre has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
487 2012-06-08 15:37:38 <helo> i think we want the average to stay every 10
488 2012-06-08 15:37:44 <epscy> and the bitcoin node (either in a pool or solo) would need to remember some hashes
489 2012-06-08 15:37:46 <sipa> yes, there is variance, and yes your idea would decrease variance
490 2012-06-08 15:38:15 <sipa> but there are ways to do this that do not make the core bitcoin system more complicated
491 2012-06-08 15:38:24 <epscy> helo: huh, two 5 minute hashes should take 10 minutes on average as well
492 2012-06-08 15:38:34 <epscy> sipa: fair enough
493 2012-06-08 15:38:42 <helo> oh, you mean isntead of accepting 10 minute hash, accept 2 5-minute hashes
494 2012-06-08 15:38:45 <epscy> this doesn't actually seem that complicated to me though
495 2012-06-08 15:38:49 <helo> not in addition to
496 2012-06-08 15:38:55 <sipa> well, it would require a hard fork
497 2012-06-08 15:39:04 <epscy> sipa: oh yes obviously
498 2012-06-08 15:39:09 <sipa> which may one day indeed be necessary
499 2012-06-08 15:39:25 <epscy> i was just asking to see if anyone could see a technical flaw in the idea
500 2012-06-08 15:39:31 <sipa> but it would also require an extraordinary degree of consensus on any changes included
501 2012-06-08 15:39:51 <helo> how do the two submitters of the hashes agree on the transactions that are included in the block?
502 2012-06-08 15:39:53 <epscy> sipa: i am not suggesting we put this into the bitcoin client today
503 2012-06-08 15:39:58 <sipa> sure
504 2012-06-08 15:40:07 <sipa> it's interesting to think about
505 2012-06-08 15:40:11 <epscy> helo: two submitters?
506 2012-06-08 15:40:17 <epscy> the pool gives the work
507 2012-06-08 15:40:26 <epscy> they should be hashing the same thing
508 2012-06-08 15:40:32 <helo> oh, missed that part too... so you accept two 5-min hashes from the same person
509 2012-06-08 15:40:39 <epscy> yeah
510 2012-06-08 15:41:08 <sipa> it would increase transaction confirmation time by a few minutes on average
511 2012-06-08 15:41:27 <epscy> why?
512 2012-06-08 15:41:30 <sipa> as miners cannot simply switch to new work without discarding earlier found hashes
513 2012-06-08 15:42:01 <epscy> i don't see why that is so, when new work is issued you discard hashes for the old work
514 2012-06-08 15:42:15 <sipa> that would be stupid!
515 2012-06-08 15:42:15 <epscy> i think that's how it works now
516 2012-06-08 15:42:22 <epscy> why?
517 2012-06-08 15:42:42 <sipa> miners will not start working on new work when there is a hash for old work found already
518 2012-06-08 15:42:52 <epscy> errm, why not?
519 2012-06-08 15:42:52 <sipa> on a new block, sure
520 2012-06-08 15:43:03 <epscy> the old hash becomes useless...
521 2012-06-08 15:43:14 <sipa> no it does not
522 2012-06-08 15:43:32 <sipa> i'm just talking about new transactions added to the mempool
523 2012-06-08 15:43:37 <epscy> hmmm i thought new work was issued for new blocks only
524 2012-06-08 15:43:53 <sipa> no new work is generated anytime a miner asks for it
525 2012-06-08 15:44:15 <sipa> anyone with 4GH/s needs one getwork per second
526 2012-06-08 15:44:17 <epscy> sipa: right but when do transactions get added to the potential block?
527 2012-06-08 15:44:31 <sipa> when new work is requested by a miner
528 2012-06-08 15:44:39 <epscy> aah
529 2012-06-08 15:45:02 <epscy> i thought the miners froze the potential block when a new round starts
530 2012-06-08 15:45:11 <sipa> not at all
531 2012-06-08 15:45:20 <epscy> of course miners can pick and choose which transactions they include
532 2012-06-08 15:45:30 <epscy> so this could still work
533 2012-06-08 15:45:37 <epscy> but yeah
534 2012-06-08 15:45:46 <epscy> it would increase confirmation time
535 2012-06-08 15:45:56 <epscy> hmmm
536 2012-06-08 15:45:57 <epscy> thanks
537 2012-06-08 15:46:20 <sipa> also, it incentivizes larger pools
538 2012-06-08 15:46:37 <sipa> i think
539 2012-06-08 15:50:03 <epscy> well i think it should be neutral in the regard
540 2012-06-08 15:50:24 ThomasV_ has quit (Quit: Quitte)
541 2012-06-08 15:50:29 <epscy> or at least it shouldn't give pools more of an advantage than they do at the moment
542 2012-06-08 15:51:06 t7 has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.88.2 [Firefox 14.0/20120605113340])
543 2012-06-08 15:54:39 <luke-jr> epscy: did you see my anti-blockwithholding algo?
544 2012-06-08 15:54:58 <epscy> luke-jr: nope
545 2012-06-08 15:55:37 ovidiusoft has quit (Read error: No route to host)
546 2012-06-08 15:55:41 ovidiuso1t has joined
547 2012-06-08 15:55:49 <luke-jr> it's aimed at a different problem, but maybe would have your idea as a side effect?
548 2012-06-08 15:56:01 <epscy> what is it all about?
549 2012-06-08 15:56:05 <luke-jr> http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=29353920
550 2012-06-08 15:56:51 <jgarzik> so
551 2012-06-08 15:56:55 <jgarzik> what have I missed?
552 2012-06-08 15:57:10 <jgarzik> we chose to hardfork and added a ton of new, incompatible features yes?
553 2012-06-08 15:57:13 <luke-jr> jgarzik: not much, I think
554 2012-06-08 15:57:17 <epscy> jgarzik: me and luke-jr are going to create a new alt coin
555 2012-06-08 15:57:20 <luke-jr> hah
556 2012-06-08 15:57:28 <sipa> jgarzik: satoshi returned, sold 1M btc on mtgox
557 2012-06-08 15:57:29 <jgarzik> tonalcoin
558 2012-06-08 15:58:09 <sipa> oh, and we dropped IPv4 support
559 2012-06-08 15:58:13 <luke-jr> ^ win
560 2012-06-08 15:58:28 <luke-jr> can we drop Windows support now?
561 2012-06-08 15:58:59 <jgarzik> let's drop windows and linux support
562 2012-06-08 15:59:05 <jgarzik> OSX is the only relevant OS these days
563 2012-06-08 15:59:15 <sipa> and OS/2!
564 2012-06-08 15:59:15 <luke-jr> …
565 2012-06-08 15:59:18 <epscy> i'm too poor to afford a mac
566 2012-06-08 15:59:25 <amtran> lets go full pen/paper
567 2012-06-08 15:59:27 * jgarzik was a huge OS/2 fan back in the day ;)
568 2012-06-08 15:59:39 <jgarzik> go go HPFS
569 2012-06-08 15:59:41 * sipa was too young
570 2012-06-08 15:59:45 <amtran> how fast can you do sha256 with an abacus
571 2012-06-08 15:59:48 <epscy> this is bitcoins future, a niche for rich people with more money than sense
572 2012-06-08 16:00:17 <jgarzik> more seriously, sounds like 'sendrawtx' has a bug...  it adds the new tx to relay inventory, but does not force immediate broadcast.  sounds like it should force immediate broadcast too.
573 2012-06-08 16:00:31 <luke-jr> wizkidO57: ^
574 2012-06-08 16:00:44 Diapolo has joined
575 2012-06-08 16:01:10 <sipa> jgarzik: indeed
576 2012-06-08 16:01:18 <amtran> GetNextWorkRequired has a bug too. it really sucks.
577 2012-06-08 16:01:47 <sipa> furthermore, gavin (who is in vienna right now) is working on a more lowlevel rpc interface for transactions
578 2012-06-08 16:01:56 [Tycho] has joined
579 2012-06-08 16:01:59 <sipa> maybe sendrawtx should be adapted a bit
580 2012-06-08 16:02:28 <sipa> amtran: no it has no bug; it has odd semantics, but that is something we can't just change
581 2012-06-08 16:02:31 <[Tycho]> sendrawtx... Cool :)
582 2012-06-08 16:02:55 wasabi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
583 2012-06-08 16:03:03 <luke-jr> jgarzik: did you miss the new x32 ABI?
584 2012-06-08 16:03:15 <sipa> ?
585 2012-06-08 16:03:16 <amtran> no really why is the difficulty retargeted once every 2016 blocks
586 2012-06-08 16:03:22 <amtran> why not retarget continuously
587 2012-06-08 16:03:28 <sipa> amtran: because that is what satoshi chose
588 2012-06-08 16:03:40 <sipa> it was easy to implement i guess
589 2012-06-08 16:03:52 wasabi has joined
590 2012-06-08 16:03:52 <sipa> i wouldn't do it that way if i redesigned it
591 2012-06-08 16:03:56 <[Tycho]> amtran: otherwise it will be heavily affected by randomness
592 2012-06-08 16:04:12 <amtran> its heavily affected by randomness as it is
593 2012-06-08 16:04:21 <[Tycho]> Or you were talking about moving window ?
594 2012-06-08 16:04:23 <amtran> from what i can see it only uses 2 values
595 2012-06-08 16:04:29 <sipa> nah, you have to be careful, but there are certainly much better retargeting algorithms than the one implwmented
596 2012-06-08 16:04:30 <luke-jr> …
597 2012-06-08 16:04:41 <amtran> time value of current block and the time value of the block 2016 blocks ago
598 2012-06-08 16:05:15 <sipa> well, the actual new difficulty is just based on the average hash rate the past 2016 blocks
599 2012-06-08 16:05:32 <amtran> yes but this is a stupid way to calculate a rate
600 2012-06-08 16:05:32 <luke-jr> oh right
601 2012-06-08 16:05:43 <sipa> unless it is more than 4x or less than 1/4x the previous difficulty
602 2012-06-08 16:05:50 <luke-jr> amtran is the guy who was suggesting we use non-cryptographic hashes for block hashing algorithm, and use DHT
603 2012-06-08 16:06:12 <sipa> yes it is far from perfect as a retargeting
604 2012-06-08 16:06:22 <sipa> but it is stable and simple to implement
605 2012-06-08 16:06:28 <amtran> a better way to calculate a rate is a type 3 or 4 FIR filter
606 2012-06-08 16:06:34 <sipa> and we cannot change it
607 2012-06-08 16:07:25 <amtran> the problem with bitcoin and control theory is that the values of time between block completion are not discrete
608 2012-06-08 16:07:49 <sipa> who are you trying to convince?
609 2012-06-08 16:07:58 <amtran> nobody
610 2012-06-08 16:08:15 <sipa> yes, i agree with you
611 2012-06-08 16:08:22 <luke-jr> sipa: you know, the trolls who would complain at a hardfork (the ones without good reasoning), would probably get behind it if it was me forking the project to continue the current blockchain as-is ;)
612 2012-06-08 16:08:38 <amtran> i just recently started taking a hard look at bitcoin and reading old posts on the forum
613 2012-06-08 16:09:20 <amtran> im just trying to understand the software and strip it down to the bare essentials sorry ill shut up
614 2012-06-08 16:09:56 <amtran> like a lot of people seem to worry about sha-256 being broken but i dont think thats a big deal
615 2012-06-08 16:10:10 <jgarzik> sipa: oh?  what are the goals for the lowlevel rpc tx interface?
616 2012-06-08 16:10:12 <amtran> trying to figure out what actually matters
617 2012-06-08 16:10:25 <jgarzik> sipa: I'm happy to change sendrawtx as needed.  I see gavin already changed the return value
618 2012-06-08 16:10:49 <jgarzik> I am also curious about opinions on filter{clear,add} RPCs
619 2012-06-08 16:10:55 <jgarzik> or a better method of filtering
620 2012-06-08 16:11:15 <jgarzik> sendraw + filter seem to fit the needs of a large enterprise site that manages its own keys
621 2012-06-08 16:11:19 darkee has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
622 2012-06-08 16:11:26 <luke-jr> jgarzik: how about longpolling filters?
623 2012-06-08 16:11:50 <luke-jr> (so it can be network-friendly)
624 2012-06-08 16:12:27 <amtran>  i cnat find any open resources on the web to display what im talking about
625 2012-06-08 16:12:34 <amtran> you'd need to find a signals and system text
626 2012-06-08 16:12:40 <amtran> heres a paper,,, http://eeweb.poly.edu/iselesni/lowdiff/lowdiff.pdf
627 2012-06-08 16:12:41 <gribble> Error: "," is not a valid command.
628 2012-06-08 16:12:50 <amtran> but its too complicated
629 2012-06-08 16:14:36 <sipa> jgarzik: https://gist.github.com/2839617
630 2012-06-08 16:15:44 <amtran> i think you could achieve better results in 1/10 of the blocks delay if you put an actual filter
631 2012-06-08 16:16:17 <epscy> amtran: a moving window would decrease variance?
632 2012-06-08 16:16:26 <amtran> no moving window
633 2012-06-08 16:16:35 ByronJoh1son is now known as ByronJohnson
634 2012-06-08 16:16:55 <sipa> amtran: i think one easy improvement would be doing looing at the past 2016-blocks-window at every block, and multiply difficulty by the 2016th root of the time factor
635 2012-06-08 16:17:02 <amtran> look up an fir filter
636 2012-06-08 16:17:56 <epscy> i like the idea of a moving window
637 2012-06-08 16:17:56 <sipa> well if you have 2016-inputs FIR with contant weights, you have in practice a moving window
638 2012-06-08 16:18:40 RainbowDashh has joined
639 2012-06-08 16:18:49 <amtran> i dont know what you mean when you say moving window
640 2012-06-08 16:19:08 <amtran> the number of taps to the filter would not change
641 2012-06-08 16:19:14 <amtran> the coefficients would nto change
642 2012-06-08 16:19:33 <amtran> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finite_difference
643 2012-06-08 16:19:45 <amtran> See section "higher order differences"
644 2012-06-08 16:20:01 <amtran> but imagine this for order=128
645 2012-06-08 16:20:06 RainbowDashh has quit (Client Quit)
646 2012-06-08 16:20:06 <amtran> or some similar high value
647 2012-06-08 16:20:29 <jgarzik> sipa: looks good
648 2012-06-08 16:21:13 <amtran> wait i said that wrong
649 2012-06-08 16:22:14 <amtran> wrong wikipedia page in my notes
650 2012-06-08 16:22:17 <amtran> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finite_difference_coefficients
651 2012-06-08 16:22:27 Diapolo has left ()
652 2012-06-08 16:23:51 darkee has joined
653 2012-06-08 16:25:19 RainbowDashh has joined
654 2012-06-08 16:32:46 abragin has joined
655 2012-06-08 16:39:23 SteveBell has joined
656 2012-06-08 16:39:43 <SteveBell> hi all. should URI links be working on mac platform?
657 2012-06-08 16:39:55 <SteveBell> I see some closed but also several open tickets in that regard. not sure how platforms matter in that regard
658 2012-06-08 16:40:10 <sipa> i don't think they are currently functional
659 2012-06-08 16:41:21 silp has joined
660 2012-06-08 16:41:24 <SteveBell> hey sipa. ok, that'd be my experience. I think this is very important. it would easen up the process for new users a lot
661 2012-06-08 16:41:33 <SteveBell> and streamline bitcoin payment.
662 2012-06-08 16:43:10 <SteveBell> do you have URI on your radar or is it way down the priority list?
663 2012-06-08 16:43:53 <sipa> i hope it'll be fixed before 0.7
664 2012-06-08 16:47:05 <SteveBell> that's good news. thx for your work and hope to see this live soon. let it bring further adoption of bitcoin
665 2012-06-08 16:47:11 <SteveBell> enjoy your day :)
666 2012-06-08 16:47:14 <SteveBell> ^/
667 2012-06-08 16:47:24 SteveBell has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
668 2012-06-08 16:48:22 wizkidO57 has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
669 2012-06-08 16:48:40 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
670 2012-06-08 16:49:15 wizkid057 has joined
671 2012-06-08 16:50:40 <luke-jr> sipa: lol at your non-answer :P
672 2012-06-08 16:50:56 <luke-jr> (btw, Mac support isn't broken, it just isn't implemented at all ;)
673 2012-06-08 16:51:41 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: luke-jr opened pull request 1431 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1431>
674 2012-06-08 16:59:08 micah has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
675 2012-06-08 17:04:40 rdponticelli_ has joined
676 2012-06-08 17:05:04 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
677 2012-06-08 17:05:10 da2ce775 has joined
678 2012-06-08 17:05:18 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
679 2012-06-08 17:09:20 MobiusL has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
680 2012-06-08 17:09:44 Prattler has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
681 2012-06-08 17:11:11 micah has joined
682 2012-06-08 17:11:11 micah has quit (Changing host)
683 2012-06-08 17:11:11 micah has joined
684 2012-06-08 17:18:40 rdponticelli_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
685 2012-06-08 17:19:38 D34TH has joined
686 2012-06-08 17:32:52 D34TH has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
687 2012-06-08 17:34:08 Clipse has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
688 2012-06-08 17:34:10 D34TH has joined
689 2012-06-08 17:36:52 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
690 2012-06-08 17:46:24 D34TH has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
691 2012-06-08 17:51:51 D34TH has joined
692 2012-06-08 17:52:07 D34TH has quit (Changing host)
693 2012-06-08 17:52:07 D34TH has joined
694 2012-06-08 17:52:10 nanotube has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
695 2012-06-08 17:54:15 gribble has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
696 2012-06-08 17:54:30 t7 has joined
697 2012-06-08 17:56:17 micah has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
698 2012-06-08 17:57:49 terry_ has joined
699 2012-06-08 18:00:28 terry_ is now known as terrytibbs
700 2012-06-08 18:00:40 terrytibbs is now known as terry
701 2012-06-08 18:04:35 micah has joined
702 2012-06-08 18:04:35 micah has quit (Changing host)
703 2012-06-08 18:04:35 micah has joined
704 2012-06-08 18:05:08 RastaAssasin_ has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
705 2012-06-08 18:06:00 da2ce7 has joined
706 2012-06-08 18:06:53 da2ce775 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
707 2012-06-08 18:07:47 RazielZ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
708 2012-06-08 18:08:16 MobiusL has joined
709 2012-06-08 18:09:00 ThomasV_ has joined
710 2012-06-08 18:09:57 nanotube has joined
711 2012-06-08 18:10:13 gribble has joined
712 2012-06-08 18:10:57 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: Dr-Nix opened issue 1432 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/1432>
713 2012-06-08 18:12:45 hnz has joined
714 2012-06-08 18:15:46 coblee has quit (Quit: coblee)
715 2012-06-08 18:16:50 p0s has joined
716 2012-06-08 18:16:57 coblee has joined
717 2012-06-08 18:16:59 p0s has quit (Changing host)
718 2012-06-08 18:16:59 p0s has joined
719 2012-06-08 18:19:19 RazielZ has joined
720 2012-06-08 18:23:46 talpan has joined
721 2012-06-08 18:25:10 rdponticelli has joined
722 2012-06-08 18:32:10 eryngi has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
723 2012-06-08 18:34:39 zooko has joined
724 2012-06-08 18:38:28 <[Tycho]> Can anyone remember when default fee was changed to 0.0005 ?
725 2012-06-08 18:39:13 rxw has joined
726 2012-06-08 18:39:29 rxw has quit (2!~rxw@cpe-67-247-89-159.rochester.res.rr.com|Client Quit)
727 2012-06-08 18:39:41 rxw has joined
728 2012-06-08 18:39:43 saieko has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
729 2012-06-08 18:41:55 TuxBlackEdo has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
730 2012-06-08 18:44:35 TuxBlackEdo has joined
731 2012-06-08 18:44:49 <freewil> [Tycho], 0.3.23 i think
732 2012-06-08 18:44:56 <freewil> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_Fee
733 2012-06-08 18:45:00 saieko has joined
734 2012-06-08 18:47:49 saieko has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
735 2012-06-08 18:50:04 <[Tycho]> Thanks.
736 2012-06-08 18:55:23 spq has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
737 2012-06-08 18:56:24 Ferroh has quit (Quit: Leaving)
738 2012-06-08 19:06:19 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
739 2012-06-08 19:06:48 RazielZ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
740 2012-06-08 19:15:11 Clipse has joined
741 2012-06-08 19:16:54 Shaded has joined
742 2012-06-08 19:17:26 talpan has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
743 2012-06-08 19:24:23 rxw has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
744 2012-06-08 19:25:25 graingert has joined
745 2012-06-08 19:29:32 coderrr has joined
746 2012-06-08 19:32:59 Ferroh has joined
747 2012-06-08 19:34:23 p0s has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
748 2012-06-08 19:42:39 copumpkin has joined
749 2012-06-08 19:51:47 zooko has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
750 2012-06-08 19:52:03 zooko has joined
751 2012-06-08 19:59:27 zooko has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
752 2012-06-08 20:01:00 rdponticelli has joined
753 2012-06-08 20:08:03 egecko has joined
754 2012-06-08 20:09:20 spq has joined
755 2012-06-08 20:17:47 Joric has quit ()
756 2012-06-08 20:18:15 zooko has joined
757 2012-06-08 20:20:43 abragin has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
758 2012-06-08 20:21:57 abragin has joined
759 2012-06-08 20:22:08 abragin has quit (Changing host)
760 2012-06-08 20:22:08 abragin has joined
761 2012-06-08 20:25:55 t7 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
762 2012-06-08 20:26:30 wizkid057 has quit ()
763 2012-06-08 20:29:26 wizkid057 has joined
764 2012-06-08 20:35:08 toffoo has joined
765 2012-06-08 20:42:51 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
766 2012-06-08 20:43:21 rxw has joined
767 2012-06-08 20:49:05 graingert has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
768 2012-06-08 20:50:48 Motest003 has joined
769 2012-06-08 20:51:32 Z0rZ0rZ0r has quit (Disconnected by services)
770 2012-06-08 20:51:33 Z0rZ0rZ0r1 has joined
771 2012-06-08 20:54:00 graingert has joined
772 2012-06-08 20:59:55 MobiusL has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
773 2012-06-08 21:01:18 MobiusL has joined
774 2012-06-08 21:02:52 Clipse has quit (Quit: Clipse)
775 2012-06-08 21:05:58 <sipa> hmm, i just rebased ipparse against upstream/master
776 2012-06-08 21:06:08 <sipa> but github says it cannot be merged automatically
777 2012-06-08 21:08:52 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
778 2012-06-08 21:10:32 silpee has joined
779 2012-06-08 21:14:23 silp has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
780 2012-06-08 21:22:03 Shaded has quit (Quit: Shaded)
781 2012-06-08 21:24:13 titeuf_87 has joined
782 2012-06-08 21:25:01 p0s has joined
783 2012-06-08 21:26:20 ovidiuso1t has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
784 2012-06-08 21:27:06 Clipse has joined
785 2012-06-08 21:28:31 coinbuck has joined
786 2012-06-08 21:33:00 O2made has joined
787 2012-06-08 21:35:39 D34TH has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
788 2012-06-08 21:39:03 t7 has joined
789 2012-06-08 21:43:39 <BlueMatt> sipa: no, I dont think uri for osx is on the roadmap for anyone, windows is another story, and I hope win32 is fixed for 0.7
790 2012-06-08 21:45:04 <BlueMatt> speaking of which...I should go do that
791 2012-06-08 21:46:09 <diki> 0.7 eh?
792 2012-06-08 21:46:44 * luke-jr hides
793 2012-06-08 21:47:27 <Diablo-D3> lol
794 2012-06-08 21:47:38 p0s has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
795 2012-06-08 21:47:43 datagutt has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
796 2012-06-08 21:50:24 RainbowDashh has joined
797 2012-06-08 21:51:34 Shaded has joined
798 2012-06-08 21:54:14 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
799 2012-06-08 21:55:12 mmoya has joined
800 2012-06-08 21:56:54 rxw has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
801 2012-06-08 22:01:56 rdponticelli has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
802 2012-06-08 22:02:12 avengre has joined
803 2012-06-08 22:02:32 zooko has left ("ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs)")
804 2012-06-08 22:05:19 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: is your prune branch sane enough to put in next-test?
805 2012-06-08 22:05:43 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: afaik, sure
806 2012-06-08 22:05:56 <luke-jr> then again, it permanently affects the user's data… ?
807 2012-06-08 22:06:13 <BlueMatt> blkindex.dat, yea...but it only prunes up to checkpoints
808 2012-06-08 22:08:23 <luke-jr> so can't hurt anything?
809 2012-06-08 22:08:34 <BlueMatt> in theory, yea
810 2012-06-08 22:08:43 <sipa> it should be safe enough to put in an experimental branch
811 2012-06-08 22:08:44 <BlueMatt> if I wrote it wrong, sure
812 2012-06-08 22:08:46 Diapolo has joined
813 2012-06-08 22:18:49 abragin has left ()
814 2012-06-08 22:21:29 ThomasV_ has quit (Quit: Quitte)
815 2012-06-08 22:24:24 wasabi2 has joined
816 2012-06-08 22:26:41 wasabi1 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
817 2012-06-08 22:29:42 OneFixt_ has joined
818 2012-06-08 22:29:47 Neskia has joined
819 2012-06-08 22:29:50 enquirer_ has joined
820 2012-06-08 22:30:45 BurtyBB has joined
821 2012-06-08 22:31:36 Quaixor has joined
822 2012-06-08 22:34:01 skeledrew1 has joined
823 2012-06-08 22:34:49 doublec has joined
824 2012-06-08 22:35:55 titeuf_87 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
825 2012-06-08 22:36:29 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
826 2012-06-08 22:37:51 abracadab has joined
827 2012-06-08 22:37:51 abracadab has quit (Changing host)
828 2012-06-08 22:37:51 abracadab has joined
829 2012-06-08 22:38:10 SomeoneWeird_ has joined
830 2012-06-08 22:38:10 doublec has quit (Changing host)
831 2012-06-08 22:38:10 doublec has joined
832 2012-06-08 22:38:35 midnightmagic_ has joined
833 2012-06-08 22:39:06 epscy has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
834 2012-06-08 22:39:58 enquirer_ is now known as enquirer
835 2012-06-08 22:40:02 epscy has joined
836 2012-06-08 22:40:57 rdponticelli has joined
837 2012-06-08 22:41:26 imsaguy has joined
838 2012-06-08 22:42:54 Facefox has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
839 2012-06-08 22:43:43 Shaded has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
840 2012-06-08 22:44:32 Shaded has joined
841 2012-06-08 22:45:36 Fnar has joined
842 2012-06-08 22:47:31 etotheipi_ has joined
843 2012-06-08 22:47:31 _W_ has joined
844 2012-06-08 22:48:27 Aexoden_II has joined
845 2012-06-08 22:48:40 Apexseals has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
846 2012-06-08 22:49:08 Facefox has joined
847 2012-06-08 22:49:45 Apexseals has joined
848 2012-06-08 22:53:11 mndrix has joined
849 2012-06-08 22:53:11 mndrix has quit (Changing host)
850 2012-06-08 22:53:11 mndrix has joined
851 2012-06-08 22:53:41 mndrix has joined
852 2012-06-08 22:53:45 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
853 2012-06-08 22:55:37 imsaguy2 has joined
854 2012-06-08 22:56:15 OneFixt_ is now known as OneFixt
855 2012-06-08 22:57:37 apex-alt has joined
856 2012-06-08 22:58:53 Apexseals has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
857 2012-06-08 22:59:52 copumpkin has joined
858 2012-06-08 23:02:49 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@pool-96-226-236-130.dllstx.fios.verizon.net|brwyatt
859 2012-06-08 23:12:34 imsaguy2 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
860 2012-06-08 23:19:23 D34TH has joined
861 2012-06-08 23:21:04 Diapolo has left ()
862 2012-06-08 23:23:34 eoss has joined
863 2012-06-08 23:28:53 Quaixor has quit ()
864 2012-06-08 23:29:18 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
865 2012-06-08 23:36:32 imsaguy2 has joined
866 2012-06-08 23:41:47 eoss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
867 2012-06-08 23:56:43 D34TH has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
868 2012-06-08 23:56:54 Shaded has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
869 2012-06-08 23:57:54 mcorlett has joined
870 2012-06-08 23:59:31 coinbuck has quit (Quit: coinbuck)