1 2012-08-10 00:01:37 MobiusLoop has joined
2 2012-08-10 00:02:56 e0s_ has joined
3 2012-08-10 00:03:58 Mobius_ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
4 2012-08-10 00:08:16 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
5 2012-08-10 00:08:35 [\\\] has joined
6 2012-08-10 00:09:38 noagendamarket has joined
7 2012-08-10 00:13:10 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
8 2012-08-10 00:17:06 [\\\] has joined
9 2012-08-10 00:17:19 Gladamas has joined
10 2012-08-10 00:17:24 igetgames has quit (Quit: Leaving)
11 2012-08-10 00:23:42 skeledrew has joined
12 2012-08-10 00:26:04 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
13 2012-08-10 00:27:18 one_zero has joined
14 2012-08-10 00:30:15 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
15 2012-08-10 00:36:23 BTCTrader has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
16 2012-08-10 00:36:25 <weex> did bitcoind used to report balances as integers? the wiki mentions genjix maintaining a patched version that reports balances as strings
17 2012-08-10 00:38:22 <Ferroh> reporting balances as strings is for people that want to use software packages that handle numbers as strings
18 2012-08-10 00:38:26 <Ferroh> like PHP's BCMath
19 2012-08-10 00:40:36 <D34TH> does anyone know that blockchain backup site, i wanna grab it
20 2012-08-10 00:41:48 <weex> well now bitcoind reports balances like this in getinfo: "balance" : 1.23456789
21 2012-08-10 00:41:49 rdponticelli has joined
22 2012-08-10 00:42:06 <weex> would you call that a string? certainly not an integer
23 2012-08-10 00:42:06 <phantomcircuit> Ferroh, or dont trust x86 floating point math units ;0
24 2012-08-10 00:42:19 <phantomcircuit> (i would be one)
25 2012-08-10 00:42:39 <Ferroh> weex, it never reported as strings
26 2012-08-10 00:42:47 <sipa> weex: it is a Number (as defined by JSON, which is not very well defined)
27 2012-08-10 00:42:50 <Ferroh> weex, genjix maintains a fork that reports as strings.
28 2012-08-10 00:43:00 <weex> oh so that's still true, good
29 2012-08-10 00:43:00 <Ferroh> (like you said)
30 2012-08-10 00:43:15 <sipa> almost every implementation uses IEEE 754 double floats
31 2012-08-10 00:43:19 <phantomcircuit> weex, it's like 4 loc
32 2012-08-10 00:43:21 <weex> so that's like "balance" : "1.23456789"
33 2012-08-10 00:43:25 <phantomcircuit> i wouldn't really call it a fork
34 2012-08-10 00:43:32 <Ferroh> ok
35 2012-08-10 00:43:35 <phantomcircuit> weex, no it returns everything in satoshi's
36 2012-08-10 00:43:38 <Ferroh> s/fork/patched version
37 2012-08-10 00:43:49 <weex> oh i'd call that integers then
38 2012-08-10 00:44:00 <sipa> integers?
39 2012-08-10 00:44:03 <phantomcircuit> weex, it's more like
40 2012-08-10 00:44:14 <phantomcircuit> "123456789"
41 2012-08-10 00:44:21 <Ferroh> it's not though
42 2012-08-10 00:44:25 <Ferroh> that is a string
43 2012-08-10 00:44:29 <Ferroh> it doesn't give strings
44 2012-08-10 00:44:37 <phantomcircuit> it does give strings
45 2012-08-10 00:44:39 <Ferroh> are we talking about genjix's patched version?
46 2012-08-10 00:44:43 <phantomcircuit> yes
47 2012-08-10 00:44:45 <Ferroh> oh.
48 2012-08-10 00:44:46 <phantomcircuit> it gives strings
49 2012-08-10 00:44:49 <Ferroh> yes, THAT gives strings
50 2012-08-10 00:44:59 <Ferroh> the client you get from bitcoin.org right now does not give strings
51 2012-08-10 00:45:01 <Ferroh> it gives a float
52 2012-08-10 00:45:06 <sipa> no, it gives a number
53 2012-08-10 00:45:15 <Ferroh> what?
54 2012-08-10 00:45:25 <weex> this PHP developer intro talks about genjix fork so i wanted to know that that was a current thing that's all
55 2012-08-10 00:45:27 <sipa> JSON does not define that that is a floating-point number
56 2012-08-10 00:45:39 <weex> i thought maybe before i got involved in any of this it used to be 123456789 by default
57 2012-08-10 00:45:42 <Ferroh> ok, fine. it gives a number with a decimal point in it
58 2012-08-10 00:45:57 <luke-jr> weex: it should be integer Numbers, but that would break compat
59 2012-08-10 00:47:10 <weex> ok, then that's fine, thanks luke-jr
60 2012-08-10 00:47:23 <sipa> well either integers or strings with the formatted number would be better than what we have now
61 2012-08-10 00:47:31 <weex> bbl
62 2012-08-10 00:48:24 <luke-jr> sipa: formatting doesn't belong in an API
63 2012-08-10 00:48:37 <sipa> not going to argue about it again :)
64 2012-08-10 00:48:49 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
65 2012-08-10 00:52:16 <Ferroh> I think it should write tonal pronunciations of the amount
66 2012-08-10 00:52:27 <Ferroh> with a decimal
67 2012-08-10 00:52:39 <Ferroh> like "42.123 Bong-bitcoin"
68 2012-08-10 00:52:57 <Ferroh> am i right sipa?
69 2012-08-10 00:53:17 <Ferroh> I'll see myself out.
70 2012-08-10 00:53:22 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
71 2012-08-10 00:54:42 <luke-jr> Ferroh: ⦠I will spend my time doing that for you if you pay me 42.123 bong-bitcoinsâ¦
72 2012-08-10 00:54:59 * sipa googles "bong tonal"
73 2012-08-10 00:55:36 <sipa> around 0.6 BTC? (decimal)
74 2012-08-10 00:55:38 <luke-jr> sipa: about 2837 BTC
75 2012-08-10 00:55:49 <sipa> oh, wait
76 2012-08-10 00:56:00 <sipa> right, not bong-satoshi
77 2012-08-10 00:56:05 <luke-jr> 42,1230.0000 TBC
78 2012-08-10 00:56:34 lumie has quit (Quit: Leaving)
79 2012-08-10 00:56:49 <luke-jr> heck, for that price we could probably convince Gavin to accept TBC support mainline <.<
80 2012-08-10 00:57:15 <sipa> haha
81 2012-08-10 01:02:23 ForceMajeure has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
82 2012-08-10 01:03:40 ForceMajeure has joined
83 2012-08-10 01:04:59 <sipa> ;;bc,blocks
84 2012-08-10 01:05:00 <gribble> 193141
85 2012-08-10 01:05:53 toffoo has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
86 2012-08-10 01:07:11 someone42 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
87 2012-08-10 01:07:53 toffoo has joined
88 2012-08-10 01:07:57 <sipa> gmaxwell: rebased ultraprune, and added a getcoinsetinfo RPC
89 2012-08-10 01:08:05 ForceMajeure_ has joined
90 2012-08-10 01:09:17 <jgarzik> sipa: sounds interesting
91 2012-08-10 01:09:33 ForceMajeure has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
92 2012-08-10 01:09:57 <sipa> 300 more blocks to catch up, then i'll tell you the output
93 2012-08-10 01:12:06 jgarzik has quit (Quit: Client exiting)
94 2012-08-10 01:14:23 <sipa> AAARGH
95 2012-08-10 01:14:27 <sipa> SetBestChain: new best=00000000000004470621 height=193005 work=420286468090488973348 date=08/09/12 06:30:02
96 2012-08-10 01:14:32 <sipa> *** Warning: Disk space is low!
97 2012-08-10 01:14:38 <sipa> Bitcoin exited
98 2012-08-10 01:14:50 Turingi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
99 2012-08-10 01:17:06 mpr has joined
100 2012-08-10 01:17:29 mpr is now known as Guest70311
101 2012-08-10 01:25:35 ForceMajeure_ is now known as ForceMajeure
102 2012-08-10 01:26:05 ForceMajeure is now known as Guest71871
103 2012-08-10 01:28:13 ForceMajeure_ has joined
104 2012-08-10 01:29:51 Guest71871 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
105 2012-08-10 01:30:10 da2ce731 has joined
106 2012-08-10 01:30:48 ForceMajeure_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
107 2012-08-10 01:31:24 ForceMajeure_ has joined
108 2012-08-10 01:35:13 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
109 2012-08-10 01:47:08 theymos has joined
110 2012-08-10 01:49:51 wereHamster has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
111 2012-08-10 01:51:55 <Diablo-D3> you laugh you lose hard mode: http://kotaku.com/5933454/blizzard-network-breached-change-your-passwords
112 2012-08-10 01:52:43 <sipa> { "transactions" : 962050, "txouts" : 1966607, "txouts_1satoshi" : 215666, "distinct_scripts" : 786077
113 2012-08-10 01:52:46 <sipa> }
114 2012-08-10 01:52:59 <sipa> gmaxwell, jgarzik ^
115 2012-08-10 01:53:46 <sipa> 10.97% of all txouts are 1 satoshi... :S
116 2012-08-10 01:53:54 <sipa> *unspent
117 2012-08-10 01:54:58 Jezzz has quit (Excess Flood)
118 2012-08-10 01:56:35 Guest89003 has joined
119 2012-08-10 02:05:22 Guest89003 is now known as Jezzz
120 2012-08-10 02:05:38 Jezzz has quit (Changing host)
121 2012-08-10 02:05:39 Jezzz has joined
122 2012-08-10 02:06:15 <forrestv> sipa, any idea why?
123 2012-08-10 02:06:29 <forrestv> satoshidice with 1 satoshi? q:
124 2012-08-10 02:07:18 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
125 2012-08-10 02:08:33 jgarzik has joined
126 2012-08-10 02:08:33 jgarzik has quit (Changing host)
127 2012-08-10 02:08:33 jgarzik has joined
128 2012-08-10 02:09:46 rdponticelli has joined
129 2012-08-10 02:10:55 tsche has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
130 2012-08-10 02:14:35 D34TH has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
131 2012-08-10 02:17:43 <Diablo-D3> hey gmaxwell
132 2012-08-10 02:17:44 <Diablo-D3> hey sipa
133 2012-08-10 02:17:51 <Diablo-D3> I have invented a new term
134 2012-08-10 02:17:53 <Diablo-D3> because of blizzard
135 2012-08-10 02:17:59 <Diablo-D3> "low sodium encryption"
136 2012-08-10 02:18:42 <abracadabra> sodium chloride?
137 2012-08-10 02:19:05 <Diablo-D3> salt.
138 2012-08-10 02:19:20 da2ce731 is now known as da2ce7
139 2012-08-10 02:19:27 <abracadabra> ;)
140 2012-08-10 02:21:17 <Ferroh> um..
141 2012-08-10 02:21:34 <Ferroh> in blockchain.info's wallet_api, you just send the username and password as GET vars? :/
142 2012-08-10 02:21:35 <Ferroh> http://blockchain.info/mywallet_api
143 2012-08-10 02:22:58 <Ferroh> I guess it's not necessarily insecure since it's via SSL
144 2012-08-10 02:23:07 <Ferroh> but it's a pretty lame design imo
145 2012-08-10 02:24:42 <Ferroh> I could see someone testing that by writing out a URL that includes their password
146 2012-08-10 02:24:54 <Ferroh> and now their password is cached in the browser history
147 2012-08-10 02:25:11 <Ferroh> also the server is going to log that request
148 2012-08-10 02:25:14 denisx has quit (Quit: denisx)
149 2012-08-10 02:25:16 <Ferroh> ...in plaintext
150 2012-08-10 02:25:31 <Diablo-D3> Ferroh: are you shitting me?
151 2012-08-10 02:26:08 <Ferroh> am I saying something wrong, or are you as surprised that he authenticates with GET vars?
152 2012-08-10 02:27:22 <Diablo-D3> yes
153 2012-08-10 02:28:08 <Ferroh> oh, which part did I get wrong?
154 2012-08-10 02:28:27 <Ferroh> the "not necessarily insecure" part? :)
155 2012-08-10 02:29:10 <luke-jr> "For the moment it requires sharing your wallet password and second password, this will requirement will be removed in future."
156 2012-08-10 02:29:32 <Ferroh> ergh, yeah there's also that
157 2012-08-10 02:29:44 <Diablo-D3> Ferroh: sorry, yes and yes in that order
158 2012-08-10 02:33:11 RainbowDashh has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
159 2012-08-10 02:34:05 [\\\] has joined
160 2012-08-10 02:35:16 RainbowDashh has joined
161 2012-08-10 02:36:43 agricocb has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
162 2012-08-10 02:38:20 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
163 2012-08-10 02:38:29 RainbowD_ has joined
164 2012-08-10 02:38:38 RainbowDashh has quit (Disconnected by services)
165 2012-08-10 02:38:39 RainbowD_ is now known as RainbowDashh
166 2012-08-10 02:44:48 PhantomSpark has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
167 2012-08-10 02:44:52 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
168 2012-08-10 02:53:03 eoss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
169 2012-08-10 02:53:03 e0s_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
170 2012-08-10 03:02:15 sgornick has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
171 2012-08-10 03:02:19 [\\\] has joined
172 2012-08-10 03:06:05 [\\\]_n has joined
173 2012-08-10 03:06:17 imsaguy is now known as Guest69464
174 2012-08-10 03:06:37 [\\\]_n is now known as imsaguy
175 2012-08-10 03:06:40 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
176 2012-08-10 03:07:19 Z0rZ0rZ0r_ has joined
177 2012-08-10 03:09:43 Z0rZ0rZ0r has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
178 2012-08-10 03:14:36 sgornick has joined
179 2012-08-10 03:16:53 ForceMajeure_ is now known as ForceMajeure
180 2012-08-10 03:20:04 localhost has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
181 2012-08-10 03:20:21 OneFixt has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
182 2012-08-10 03:20:34 OneFixt has joined
183 2012-08-10 03:22:52 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
184 2012-08-10 03:23:46 localhost has joined
185 2012-08-10 03:24:17 wizkid057 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
186 2012-08-10 03:25:50 wizkid057 has joined
187 2012-08-10 03:26:01 bitllc has joined
188 2012-08-10 03:28:08 Maged has joined
189 2012-08-10 03:33:00 RainbowDashh has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
190 2012-08-10 03:35:48 bitllc has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
191 2012-08-10 03:36:25 BTC_Bear has joined
192 2012-08-10 03:45:14 [7] has quit (Disconnected by services)
193 2012-08-10 03:45:20 TheSeven has joined
194 2012-08-10 04:00:55 fpgaminer has joined
195 2012-08-10 04:08:06 derpingtonIII has joined
196 2012-08-10 04:09:36 <derpingtonIII> Has anyone thought about integrating a bitcoin wallet with a browser, so that people can do one click payments?
197 2012-08-10 04:10:40 theymos has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
198 2012-08-10 04:11:27 <weex> derpingtonIII: i believe there's a firefox addon out there but it's not really an idea i like much
199 2012-08-10 04:11:40 <weex> using a mobile wallet is kind of nice though...just don't keep too much funds there
200 2012-08-10 04:15:04 <luke-jr> derpingtonIII: it's already done, more or less
201 2012-08-10 04:15:27 Karmaon6 is now known as Karmaon
202 2012-08-10 04:15:28 Karmaon has quit (Changing host)
203 2012-08-10 04:15:28 Karmaon has joined
204 2012-08-10 04:15:32 <derpingtonIII> lukejr where would I find it?
205 2012-08-10 04:15:36 <luke-jr> derpingtonIII: just Bitcoin-Qt's implementation is buggy, so it was disabled in 0.6
206 2012-08-10 04:15:44 <luke-jr> derpingtonIII: it'll probably be fixed for 0.7
207 2012-08-10 04:16:12 <derpingtonIII> ah.
208 2012-08-10 04:21:32 fpgaminer has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
209 2012-08-10 04:27:17 iisword has joined
210 2012-08-10 04:37:24 Gladamas_ has joined
211 2012-08-10 04:37:38 Diablo-D3 has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
212 2012-08-10 04:37:50 RainbowDashh has joined
213 2012-08-10 04:39:51 Gladamas has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
214 2012-08-10 05:02:07 phantomcircuit_ has joined
215 2012-08-10 05:10:32 wereHamster has joined
216 2012-08-10 05:16:05 <gmaxwell> 19:01 < forrestv> satoshidice with 1 satoshi? q:
217 2012-08-10 05:16:18 <gmaxwell> ^ yes, every losing transaction results in a 1 satoshi output.
218 2012-08-10 05:16:51 <gmaxwell> Which, of course, doesn't get spent.
219 2012-08-10 05:16:57 <forrestv> ah :/
220 2012-08-10 05:17:07 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: why not?
221 2012-08-10 05:17:18 BTCTrader has joined
222 2012-08-10 05:17:18 BTCTrader has quit (Changing host)
223 2012-08-10 05:17:18 BTCTrader has joined
224 2012-08-10 05:17:31 <luke-jr> I've spent 1-satoshi outputs before!
225 2012-08-10 05:17:54 <Gladamas_> the 1-satoshi tx is just to verify that it was a loss, without visiting the site
226 2012-08-10 05:17:58 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: because the solver will pretty much never pick a very tiny input unless it happens to exactly fit what you need.. and who makes payments of x.xxxxxxx[^0] btc?
227 2012-08-10 05:18:35 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: it does it for me <.<
228 2012-08-10 05:18:43 <forrestv> has any thought been given to changing the solver to prefer to consolidate inputs?
229 2012-08-10 05:19:05 <luke-jr> forrestv: perhaps the miner rules should do that too
230 2012-08-10 05:19:39 someone42 has joined
231 2012-08-10 05:19:54 <gmaxwell> forrestv: Well, a while back I did some code that post processed the decision so add extra inputs in when there was room (before going to the next fee level)... but it created a lot of address linkagesâ bad for privacy.
232 2012-08-10 05:20:15 <forrestv> luke-jr, what do you mean by that? give consolidating transactions higher priority..?
233 2012-08-10 05:20:17 <gmaxwell> (in theory it would be good for privacy by better disguising the change output, but it practice it didn't seem like it was)
234 2012-08-10 05:20:42 <luke-jr> forrestv: possibly; but it might encourage splitting up if not thought out well
235 2012-08-10 05:21:44 <forrestv> hm.. ideally we'd have some sort of scripting language that miners publish in blocks that describes their fee policy (to handle complex things like this)
236 2012-08-10 05:22:12 <forrestv> and clients could examine those and give the human estimates of the expected time-to-confirm for different fee choices :)
237 2012-08-10 05:22:42 <forrestv> otherwise, choices like that don't really affect anything
238 2012-08-10 05:27:10 <luke-jr> forrestv: well, gmaxwell had a genius idea for autodetecting it
239 2012-08-10 05:27:28 <luke-jr> watch the transactions that don't get into blocks, and see what the insufficient fees are like
240 2012-08-10 05:29:37 <forrestv> i guess that works, but you have to guess why they're being rejected. if miners only take size into account, that's simple, but otherwise...
241 2012-08-10 05:32:06 <gmaxwell> forrestv: Right, it's a slick method but it only really solves for one unknown. (The lambda for fee vs badness, but not the weights for badness)
242 2012-08-10 05:32:52 Gladamas_ is now known as Gladamas
243 2012-08-10 05:33:43 <gmaxwell> forrestv: I'd before been suggesting that priority go from sum(age*value)/size to sum(age*value)/(2*size-input_size) (or similar, with whatever scaling gets it to largely agree with the current typical usage.
244 2012-08-10 05:34:05 <gmaxwell> But it introduces more magic behavior and needs some clamps in order to not get weird results.
245 2012-08-10 05:34:21 RainbowDashh has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
246 2012-08-10 05:41:38 <iisword> what about making a custom client that redirecting the transaction at a specialized mining pool that focused on consolidating transactions to help the network and require the owners of those transactions to mine some or pay a transaction fee. If the pool didn't have enough transactions, it would look at lower priority first and would use the 50 BTC from solving to increase hashing and/or pay miners.
247 2012-08-10 05:42:51 phantomcircuit_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
248 2012-08-10 05:45:29 Applejackk has joined
249 2012-08-10 05:46:14 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
250 2012-08-10 06:06:43 agricocb has joined
251 2012-08-10 06:15:28 <gmaxwell> iisword: I'm not sure what problem you're trying to address there.
252 2012-08-10 06:15:37 OneFixt_ has joined
253 2012-08-10 06:16:19 RainbowDashh has joined
254 2012-08-10 06:16:23 <gmaxwell> My bigger concern is that users will bankrupt themselves gambling and have wallets with thousnds of 1e-8 outputs but no value, then just delete them... and we'll never be able to clear out those txouts. Not the end of the world, but it would be unfortunate.
255 2012-08-10 06:16:33 OneFixt_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
256 2012-08-10 06:17:12 dvide has quit ()
257 2012-08-10 06:18:20 MobiusLoop is now known as MobiusL
258 2012-08-10 06:19:06 <amiller> if there's not a way to reclaim old unspent txouts then there's clearly a divergent behavior rather than a stabilizing one
259 2012-08-10 06:19:09 <amiller> zooko basically convinced me of that
260 2012-08-10 06:19:19 OneFixt has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
261 2012-08-10 06:19:34 <midnightmagic> gmaxwell: it would be nice to help deepbit and p2pool users to spend their bits-at-a-time earnings without paying ridiculoud fees.
262 2012-08-10 06:19:36 <amiller> that's another one of those basic ideas that gets repeated in various ways over and over isn't it
263 2012-08-10 06:20:17 <midnightmagic> zooko doesn't think reallocating old unspent tx is a solution anymore, last I spoke with him.
264 2012-08-10 06:20:37 <amiller> hmm, surprising to me.
265 2012-08-10 06:21:08 <gmaxwell> amiller: most of the people who complain about that do so for the wrong reasons. Besidesâ they _will_ go unspendable at some point, after the system upgrades cryptosystems.
266 2012-08-10 06:21:49 <midnightmagic> the issue is probably a human one: we all signed on with the rules as they are; some of us have built systems which can't actually reveal wallet keys for years, or decades. if the system changes so that money goes away without being spent, part of the expected value also disappears to long-term storage'rs.
267 2012-08-10 06:22:03 <amiller> i believe that, but that's even better reason to give the problem a name and aggregate all the details about it
268 2012-08-10 06:22:54 <midnightmagic> broken cryptosystems being a necessary exception of course.
269 2012-08-10 06:22:58 <amiller> upgrading cryptosystems isn't part of the protocol so my point about divergence stands
270 2012-08-10 06:23:00 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: right, I think we can only solve that through a cryptosystem upgrade, as ~everyone will agree that zombie coins returning to ecdsa crackers will be worse than losing some coins that can't be spent in the following decade or whatever.
271 2012-08-10 06:24:08 <midnightmagic> sorry, you're postulating an ecdsa crack of some sort as a prerequisite to a cryptosystem upgrade, correct?
272 2012-08-10 06:24:35 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: or at least the appearence of one on the horizon.
273 2012-08-10 06:25:39 <gmaxwell> amiller: In any case, you realize that miners could actually prune their unspent txout trees too so long as they were always guerenteed to be able to fetch copies of them from nodes spending them or giving them blocks spending them.
274 2012-08-10 06:25:49 <gmaxwell> (This works in the current protocol, it's just not the current norm)
275 2012-08-10 06:26:15 <gmaxwell> So at least all txouts could, in theory, be compressed to the space they take up in the tree.
276 2012-08-10 06:27:12 <amiller> yeah those are my assumptions already; still it's space in the tree, that's the resource we're basically competing over
277 2012-08-10 06:27:19 <amiller> anyway i don't meant to actually discuss it now
278 2012-08-10 06:27:40 <amiller> "iisword: I'm not sure what problem you're trying to address there." <--- my point was that you know what problem it's addressing because it's recognizable and it's been discussed before
279 2012-08-10 06:28:03 <gmaxwell> amiller: no, you totally misunderstood that.
280 2012-08-10 06:28:12 OneFixt has joined
281 2012-08-10 06:28:16 <amiller> consolidating transac...... yeah nvm i think i did
282 2012-08-10 06:28:19 <gmaxwell> I was just talking about wanting to avoid txout bloat above. I'm fine with that.
283 2012-08-10 06:28:45 <gmaxwell> But I don't reconize any of the things iisword listed off helping to achieve that.
284 2012-08-10 06:29:11 <gmaxwell> (AFAIK there isn't any mining pool component to the issue there)
285 2012-08-10 06:29:29 <midnightmagic> amiller: by divergent, you are saying that value diverges due to old unspent txn (potentially coming back and wreaking havoc on stability) or you're saying what the 28c3 presentations said: eventually all useful amounts of bitcoins will be lost or destroyed?
286 2012-08-10 06:30:03 <gmaxwell> The latter bit is what I was referring to when I said "most of the people who complain about that do so for the wrong reasons"
287 2012-08-10 06:30:52 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: I think amiller was just saying it makes bitcoin non-scalable. The size diverges (becomes progressively larger) over time, independant of current usage.
288 2012-08-10 06:31:07 <amiller> yeah that one
289 2012-08-10 06:31:33 <amiller> at least with regard to the active state
290 2012-08-10 06:31:47 <gmaxwell> I did figuring out this before and basically decided it was irrelevant. The growth under reasonable assumptions is so slow.
291 2012-08-10 06:32:55 <gmaxwell> So long as you postulate any contined decrease in storage costs it should be no worst than constant in terms of cost, even if it's perpetually growing in terms of size.
292 2012-08-10 06:33:10 <midnightmagic> I'm confident waiting 10 minutes to get a single confirmation will irritate people enough that another instant mechanism of transacting will rise and replace bitcoin for smaller txn values.
293 2012-08-10 06:33:12 <gmaxwell> But I do generally agree that making it better is better.
294 2012-08-10 06:33:41 <amiller> i'm of the opinion that any strategy effectively involves paying rent on the storage consumed by utxo in the database
295 2012-08-10 06:33:57 <amiller> it doesn't have to be much, and it certainly doesn't have to be proportional to the amount of btc, just the amount of resource taken up in the tree
296 2012-08-10 06:34:10 <midnightmagic> utxo heh heh
297 2012-08-10 06:34:43 <midnightmagic> Feel like I'm reading Lewis Carroll..
298 2012-08-10 06:35:31 <gmaxwell> s/10 minutes/30 minutes every 4 hours, 60 minutes every few days/
299 2012-08-10 06:35:38 <amiller> in that view, it's really (bit*bit)coin
300 2012-08-10 06:35:53 <amiller> bit is a pun, since bit can mean a bit of storage in the active-state, but it can also mean a bit of difficulty, which is how time is measured
301 2012-08-10 06:35:53 <midnightmagic> Are you the one that "discovered" that pun the other day?
302 2012-08-10 06:36:02 <amiller> yeah i think so
303 2012-08-10 06:36:14 iisword has quit (Quit: iisword)
304 2012-08-10 06:36:59 <gmaxwell> amiller: you could simply cap the horizon, then the fees related to respending txn are how you pay rent.
305 2012-08-10 06:37:01 <BTC_Bear> Butt in: Attrition if it follows physical rates would about 1%-10% (depending), without the ability to 'print' more money, it will collapse. We can't print more. So, you change currencies with a paralleling chain over a period of years. After the transfer the first chain is dropped. Not sure, but the client would need to handle two 'authorized' chains. Then drop one after say 5 years. Rinse and Repeat as needed. Just a lay opinion.
306 2012-08-10 06:37:20 <gmaxwell> BTC_Bear: Welcome to failing, you're in good company.
307 2012-08-10 06:37:25 <midnightmagic> BTC_Bear: Or you just increase divisional precision.
308 2012-08-10 06:37:29 <gmaxwell> ^ That.
309 2012-08-10 06:37:47 <amiller> gmaxwell, the point is the rent on a txo is a different quantity than the fee in a txn
310 2012-08-10 06:38:00 <amiller> because a transaction occurs once and is complete, but a utxo stays until another transaction occurs
311 2012-08-10 06:38:07 <BTC_Bear> Sorry, I disagree with increasing divisional precision. For reasons, I stated in the forum.
312 2012-08-10 06:38:15 <midnightmagic> BTC_Bear: Link?
313 2012-08-10 06:38:16 <gmaxwell> BTC_Bear: sorry for you.
314 2012-08-10 06:38:33 <gmaxwell> There is already a ludicrous amount of divisional precision.
315 2012-08-10 06:38:39 <midnightmagic> BTC_Bear: Did you know there are only twice as many people as bears in Yukon?
316 2012-08-10 06:38:48 <BTC_Bear> midnightmagic: basically, It was tantamount to stock splitting.
317 2012-08-10 06:38:48 <amiller> so you'd plunk down a stack of satoshis on a utxo cell, if it takes 10 bytes and you pay for 100*(bytes*block), then after 10 blocks it gets reclaimed
318 2012-08-10 06:38:54 <luke-jr> lol
319 2012-08-10 06:39:04 noagendamarket has quit (Quit: Leaving)
320 2012-08-10 06:39:04 <gmaxwell> amiller: Whatever ratio you want, there is some time horizon that gives the same average cost.
321 2012-08-10 06:39:07 <amiller> do you see the quantity i'm referring to by bytes*block or bit*bit, it's like kilowatt hour
322 2012-08-10 06:39:23 <amiller> gmaxwell, assuming all utxos are identical size
323 2012-08-10 06:39:25 <gmaxwell> BTC_Bear: it's not.
324 2012-08-10 06:39:44 <midnightmagic> BTC_Bear: Moving the decimal place IMO is stock splitting. Being able to chop a penny up into pieces is just increasing fungibility: Gold for example can be physically (in our macro-perspective) divided essentially into useless specks we can't humanly see..
325 2012-08-10 06:39:47 <amiller> also you would get the balance if you remove the transaction yourself
326 2012-08-10 06:39:50 <gmaxwell> BTC_Bear: you get something like that if you "move the dot" or idiotic things like that... but thats idiotic.
327 2012-08-10 06:40:07 <BTC_Bear> gmaxwell: Whether it is or isn't, the market will decide. We will find out however. As it will need to be done otherwise.
328 2012-08-10 06:40:24 <gmaxwell> We already have support in the software to change the units you're using.
329 2012-08-10 06:40:25 <midnightmagic> BTC_Bear: It's all just psychological anyway. Where would dollar parity have come from but the decimal place?
330 2012-08-10 06:40:43 <amiller> it's 21 million 'cuz of black jack.
331 2012-08-10 06:40:50 <amiller> *snake eyes*
332 2012-08-10 06:40:58 <BTC_Bear> midnightmagic: but what happens when stocks split? All things being equal say nothing should happen, but stuff does happen.
333 2012-08-10 06:41:11 <midnightmagic> amiller: :-) 20999999.97690000 you mean!
334 2012-08-10 06:41:13 <gmaxwell> BTC_Bear: but there is no denominated change.
335 2012-08-10 06:41:25 <gmaxwell> BTC_Bear: I believe you're confused.
336 2012-08-10 06:41:41 <gmaxwell> Changing the allowed subdivision is utterly invisible to the users.
337 2012-08-10 06:41:46 <BTC_Bear> Probably, it happens frequently.
338 2012-08-10 06:42:07 <midnightmagic> BTC_Bear: Yes, stuff definitely happens. Weird stuff that only makes sense if you take into account humans' terrible counting abilities. :)
339 2012-08-10 06:42:09 <gmaxwell> AFAICT, we saw no change when the client started allowing people to enter values with more precision than 0.01.
340 2012-08-10 06:43:17 <midnightmagic> But if a human sees: 10.01 or sees: 10.01000001, a human is going to pretend that Satoshi doesn't exist. They're only seeing the decimal point.
341 2012-08-10 06:43:56 <gmaxwell> s/enter/enter and display/
342 2012-08-10 06:44:03 <midnightmagic> BTC_Bear: Was it recently that you made that post?
343 2012-08-10 06:44:32 <BTC_Bear> no, a few months back. The post about attrition was a year ago.
344 2012-08-10 06:45:11 <midnightmagic> doh. You say "for reasons I stated in my post" and I have trouble not looking for it.
345 2012-08-10 06:45:24 <BTC_Bear> gmaxwell: I will have to ponder that. IF people don't know, what they don't know won't hurt them.
346 2012-08-10 06:46:00 <BTC_Bear> We are talking financial markets, perception is everything, math is second place.
347 2012-08-10 06:48:15 <midnightmagic> Nobody puts Math in the corner..
348 2012-08-10 06:48:17 <amiller> woe unto those who would join the wrong blockchain because of perceptions rather than math
349 2012-08-10 06:48:32 <amiller> fools and their money are soon parted; they'll be happier there anyway
350 2012-08-10 06:49:24 <midnightmagic> I once came upon a fork in the road. No, really, I still have it, it's great for salad.
351 2012-08-10 06:49:42 <BTC_Bear> lol
352 2012-08-10 06:50:07 <midnightmagic> you lol but I'm making a pun out of reality.
353 2012-08-10 06:50:14 <amiller> superman2coin: skims off the .000001 (you mean the take a satoshi leave a satoshi jar?)
354 2012-08-10 06:50:48 <amiller> I'd prefer just to refer to the money supply as 1. Everything is just a portion of the total. Any other interpretation is equivalent to that anyway
355 2012-08-10 06:51:01 ovidiusoft has joined
356 2012-08-10 06:52:05 mmoya has joined
357 2012-08-10 06:52:14 <amiller> or at least maybe that's an easy way to argue why that the decimal place / divisibility doesn't matter
358 2012-08-10 06:54:00 sirk390 has joined
359 2012-08-10 06:54:28 <BTC_Bear> Ok, lets assume divisibility is the answer. Then the fees will charged will have to be proportional to the divisibility. Otherwise the cost of using those smaller denominations will increase. Hence, inflation.
360 2012-08-10 06:54:38 <BTC_Bear> s/will/being/
361 2012-08-10 06:55:37 <amiller> that's a storage/scaling issue now though rather than a money supply issue
362 2012-08-10 06:55:48 <amiller> the same thing happens if people just want to use it more
363 2012-08-10 06:56:46 Marf has joined
364 2012-08-10 06:59:35 <amiller> in the worse case it would be _possible_ for users to put one satoshi in every utxo, that gets twice as bad if you split
365 2012-08-10 06:59:42 CodesInChaos has joined
366 2012-08-10 06:59:58 <amiller> if there's a good solution to the first case (i hope there is), then divisibility not be an issue
367 2012-08-10 07:01:04 <BTC_Bear> Not that I will be around to see it, but I kind of hope division is what is used. I will pass down stored BTC to the great grandkids and tell them "wait for the right moment" after people think the money is gone and not saved take over the world. :))
368 2012-08-10 07:02:50 <BTC_Bear> Which will cause the Great Depression in the year of our Lord 2240.
369 2012-08-10 07:03:42 <luke-jr> use great grandkids to troll everyone else? <.<
370 2012-08-10 07:04:01 MadSweeney has joined
371 2012-08-10 07:05:18 <BTC_Bear> I try not to troll, it happens but I try not to do it. Even you, I respect your beliefs. Might not agree with them all but I respect them.
372 2012-08-10 07:09:09 [Tycho] has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
373 2012-08-10 07:10:36 osmosis has quit (Quit: Leaving)
374 2012-08-10 07:16:39 <amiller> i don't know that much about the gossip network works
375 2012-08-10 07:16:45 <amiller> does it behave basically like a distributed hash table?
376 2012-08-10 07:16:58 <amiller> does it coopt anything from the bittorrent dht or something like kademlia
377 2012-08-10 07:19:54 slush has joined
378 2012-08-10 07:24:17 <BTC_Bear> I believe they work like the old school trick of saying something to the first kid and getting something different out of the last kid.
379 2012-08-10 07:26:34 <BTC_Bear> ie. instead of reciting the whole chapter on GW crossing the Potomic, the last kid just says: GW crossed the Potomic and saves a lot of time reading
380 2012-08-10 07:31:16 sirk390 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
381 2012-08-10 07:32:09 <BTC_Bear> amiller: thanx, hanging around here helps sometimes. :) Address Please, a donation for inspiration.
382 2012-08-10 07:52:46 poop_ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
383 2012-08-10 07:53:11 sneak has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
384 2012-08-10 07:53:27 Prattler has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
385 2012-08-10 07:53:29 poop has joined
386 2012-08-10 07:54:49 sneak has joined
387 2012-08-10 07:54:50 sneak has quit (Changing host)
388 2012-08-10 07:54:50 sneak has joined
389 2012-08-10 07:55:03 pickett has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
390 2012-08-10 07:59:24 <BTC_Bear> And the solution is: The Tomyknockers Protocol, that is it so far, got to admit, its apropos.
391 2012-08-10 07:59:39 pickett has joined
392 2012-08-10 08:03:31 RazielZ has joined
393 2012-08-10 08:04:39 denisx has joined
394 2012-08-10 08:07:42 jouke has quit (Changing host)
395 2012-08-10 08:07:42 jouke has joined
396 2012-08-10 08:14:23 t7 has joined
397 2012-08-10 08:20:35 RainbowDashh has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
398 2012-08-10 08:38:54 pierre`_ has joined
399 2012-08-10 08:40:00 Clipse has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
400 2012-08-10 08:40:22 Gladamas has quit (Quit: Got to go, or internet/client/computer crash)
401 2012-08-10 08:40:47 pierre` has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
402 2012-08-10 08:40:47 Tycale has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
403 2012-08-10 08:42:27 Tycale has joined
404 2012-08-10 08:47:43 Fanquake has joined
405 2012-08-10 08:48:12 Fanquake has quit (Client Quit)
406 2012-08-10 08:48:23 Fanquake has joined
407 2012-08-10 08:51:31 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
408 2012-08-10 08:51:46 molecular has joined
409 2012-08-10 08:54:29 fpgaminer has joined
410 2012-08-10 08:54:54 RainbowDashh has joined
411 2012-08-10 08:59:19 [Tycho] has joined
412 2012-08-10 09:02:11 [Tycho] has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
413 2012-08-10 09:03:09 <Eliel> midnightmagic: a ripple-style network for accepting transactions immediately could work (http://www.ripplepay.com/)
414 2012-08-10 09:03:37 <Eliel> midnightmagic: for allowing 0-conf acceptance, that is.
415 2012-08-10 09:04:38 Turingi has joined
416 2012-08-10 09:04:52 <Eliel> if you limit the system so it'll just be used for fast transaction confirmation, there's is much less trust required for the people using it.
417 2012-08-10 09:08:26 sneak has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
418 2012-08-10 09:08:34 sneak has joined
419 2012-08-10 09:08:34 sneak has quit (Changing host)
420 2012-08-10 09:08:34 sneak has joined
421 2012-08-10 09:09:52 <sipa> there is no problem with 0-conf transactions if you trust the sender
422 2012-08-10 09:12:12 <jeremias> and you have to trust only for 10-20 minutes
423 2012-08-10 09:18:00 <Eliel> jeremias, sipa: sure, I don't see a huge need for that, but it is there.
424 2012-08-10 09:19:04 <Eliel> a ripple-style network just for catching cheaters (the very few who would and can) would work pretty well.
425 2012-08-10 09:19:31 <Eliel> it would also provide a fallback in case the main bitcoin-system has bigger troubles someday.
426 2012-08-10 09:19:36 Fanquake has quit (Quit: Fanquake)
427 2012-08-10 09:20:44 coingenuity is now known as NicotineGuy
428 2012-08-10 09:20:45 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
429 2012-08-10 09:21:50 NicotineGuy is now known as coingenuity
430 2012-08-10 09:27:20 toffoo has quit ()
431 2012-08-10 09:31:10 Applejackk has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
432 2012-08-10 09:38:08 da2ce7 has joined
433 2012-08-10 09:42:10 denisx has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
434 2012-08-10 09:42:33 denisx has joined
435 2012-08-10 09:50:18 Clipse has joined
436 2012-08-10 09:59:16 pickett has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
437 2012-08-10 09:59:25 datagutt has joined
438 2012-08-10 10:00:42 Goilio has joined
439 2012-08-10 10:03:09 pickett has joined
440 2012-08-10 10:03:11 BTC_Bear is now known as BTC_Bear|hbrntng
441 2012-08-10 10:09:19 torsthaldo has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
442 2012-08-10 10:10:23 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
443 2012-08-10 10:19:09 BTC_Bear is now known as hbrntng!~BTC_Bear@unaffiliated/btc-bear/x-5233302|BTC_Bear
444 2012-08-10 10:22:33 LuaKT has joined
445 2012-08-10 10:22:33 LuaKT has quit (Changing host)
446 2012-08-10 10:22:33 LuaKT has joined
447 2012-08-10 10:33:00 Raziel_ has joined
448 2012-08-10 10:34:12 Raziel_ has quit (Client Quit)
449 2012-08-10 10:34:39 Raziel_ has joined
450 2012-08-10 10:35:47 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
451 2012-08-10 10:39:32 rdponticelli has joined
452 2012-08-10 11:00:09 BTC_Bear is now known as BTC_Bear|hbrntng
453 2012-08-10 11:05:25 BTC_Bear is now known as hbrntng!~BTC_Bear@unaffiliated/btc-bear/x-5233302|BTC_Bear
454 2012-08-10 11:13:29 tsche has joined
455 2012-08-10 11:18:34 Turingi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
456 2012-08-10 11:23:04 nickrb has joined
457 2012-08-10 11:24:51 nickrb- has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
458 2012-08-10 11:28:11 LuaKT has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
459 2012-08-10 11:28:36 LuaKT has joined
460 2012-08-10 11:28:38 nickrb- has joined
461 2012-08-10 11:31:52 nickrb has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
462 2012-08-10 11:34:25 wereHamster has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
463 2012-08-10 11:36:11 LuaKT has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
464 2012-08-10 11:36:20 LuaKT has joined
465 2012-08-10 11:36:21 LuaKT has quit (Changing host)
466 2012-08-10 11:36:21 LuaKT has joined
467 2012-08-10 11:38:16 Silverion has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
468 2012-08-10 11:38:50 wereHamster has joined
469 2012-08-10 11:51:20 bitllc has joined
470 2012-08-10 11:53:57 <t7> how do i read a scriptSig ?
471 2012-08-10 11:54:34 <t7> read (256 * 2 / 8) bytes as a sig then the est as pub key?
472 2012-08-10 11:54:41 drizzt_ has joined
473 2012-08-10 11:57:53 drizzt_ is now known as drizztbsd
474 2012-08-10 11:58:40 wereHamster has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
475 2012-08-10 11:59:51 slush1 has joined
476 2012-08-10 12:00:21 wereHamster has joined
477 2012-08-10 12:00:43 <t7> hmm r and s can be (32 - 34) bytes each
478 2012-08-10 12:00:53 <t7> but i thought they had to be modulo n
479 2012-08-10 12:01:00 <t7> and n is less than 256bits
480 2012-08-10 12:02:11 <t7> should have used SOAP guys lelel
481 2012-08-10 12:07:57 <sipa> signature are DER encoded
482 2012-08-10 12:08:07 RV__ has joined
483 2012-08-10 12:08:08 <sipa> which makes them up to 72 bytes long
484 2012-08-10 12:08:17 <sipa> even though they only contain 64 bytes meaningful data
485 2012-08-10 12:08:52 danbri has joined
486 2012-08-10 12:08:52 <t7> oh boy here we go
487 2012-08-10 12:09:00 <t7> time to write a DER parser
488 2012-08-10 12:13:24 Raziel_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
489 2012-08-10 12:19:20 RV__ has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
490 2012-08-10 12:19:25 BTC_Bear is now known as BTC_Bear|hbrntng
491 2012-08-10 12:22:03 RazielZ has joined
492 2012-08-10 12:24:22 paraipan has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
493 2012-08-10 12:25:05 paraipan has joined
494 2012-08-10 12:38:30 _dr has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
495 2012-08-10 12:49:03 _dr has joined
496 2012-08-10 12:51:19 minimoose has joined
497 2012-08-10 12:58:22 nonick has joined
498 2012-08-10 12:59:38 <Ferroh> wait
499 2012-08-10 12:59:46 <Ferroh> Bitcoin identifies blocks by hashes?
500 2012-08-10 12:59:49 <sipa> yes
501 2012-08-10 12:59:55 <Ferroh> isnt there a possibility of collisions?
502 2012-08-10 13:00:19 <sipa> after around 2^128 hashes that possibility becomes viable
503 2012-08-10 13:00:26 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: wait...you're kidding me...satoshidice gives 1satoshi outputs on losses???
504 2012-08-10 13:00:29 <BlueMatt> wow...just wow
505 2012-08-10 13:00:35 <sipa> we haven't reached 2^70 hashes yet
506 2012-08-10 13:00:43 <BlueMatt> and I thought the high volume was stupid
507 2012-08-10 13:01:01 <sipa> i don't understand why?
508 2012-08-10 13:01:03 nonick is now known as darkee
509 2012-08-10 13:01:53 RV__ has joined
510 2012-08-10 13:02:02 darkee has quit (!~darkee@gateway/tor-sasl/darkee|Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
511 2012-08-10 13:03:02 <BlueMatt> I dont think I could come up with a service that was worse for bitcoin than satoshidice if I tried
512 2012-08-10 13:03:47 <Ferroh> I dont think it's all that bad. It is forcing us to face the blockchain size issue a little earlier.
513 2012-08-10 13:03:54 <Ferroh> I dont know if it's ideal, but there is some merit in that.
514 2012-08-10 13:04:15 <sipa> that is an interesting effect yes
515 2012-08-10 13:04:19 <BlueMatt> how is forcing us to face a bloated chain earlier good?
516 2012-08-10 13:04:24 <sipa> but that would have happened anyway
517 2012-08-10 13:04:38 <BlueMatt> it would have, but it would have happened from actually useful use of the system
518 2012-08-10 13:04:46 <BlueMatt> and growth of the system
519 2012-08-10 13:04:49 <Ferroh> BlueMatt, I think that dealing with the weaker points of bitcoin sooner is obviously a good thing?
520 2012-08-10 13:04:51 <sipa> now they are forcing anyone who wants to use bitcoin voluntarily to put more resources into it, without actual growth
521 2012-08-10 13:05:14 <Ferroh> Preparing for growth is important. Otherwise failures later drive people away.
522 2012-08-10 13:05:17 <BlueMatt> Ferroh: I have yet to see a weaker point of bitcoin showing up as a result of satoshidice
523 2012-08-10 13:05:26 <Ferroh> Better to be ready for growth, and accomodate the growth easily.
524 2012-08-10 13:05:32 <sipa> and yes, SD itself is growth, but there are hundreds of way to provide the same service without bloating the chain to this extent
525 2012-08-10 13:05:39 <BlueMatt> maybe you could argue block propagation times, but that was going to be solved by other projects in the pipeline anyway
526 2012-08-10 13:06:23 <Ferroh> BlueMatt, well, the lack of an implemented blockchain size/storage solution is a weaker point. Consider what happens if we gain 10 million users. Growth of technologies like this can be very rapid when they finally catch on.
527 2012-08-10 13:06:42 <BlueMatt> what?
528 2012-08-10 13:07:01 <sipa> Ferroh: but increasing resource is not a problem if there is actual growth involved, because that also provides the extra incentive to keep everyone interested
529 2012-08-10 13:07:03 <BlueMatt> if you cant handle a few gb on your drive, you switch to an spv client...that was always an option
530 2012-08-10 13:07:08 <jeremias> scaling problems take care of themselves, if bitcoin doesn't scale, people won't use it...
531 2012-08-10 13:07:22 <Ferroh> I am saying that if bitcoin usage explodes (as is often the case with new techs), if we dont have a solution in place to deal with that growth, bitcoin would get hurt.
532 2012-08-10 13:07:38 <BlueMatt> we do
533 2012-08-10 13:07:40 <sipa> but that is exactly what is happenning
534 2012-08-10 13:07:41 <BlueMatt> and did before sd
535 2012-08-10 13:07:41 <Ferroh> sipa: And satoshidice is providing that resource usage. Are you trying to support my point, or argue against me? :)
536 2012-08-10 13:07:52 <sipa> i am arguing against you
537 2012-08-10 13:08:07 <Ferroh> It doesn't seem like it.
538 2012-08-10 13:08:24 <sipa> SD is making the resource usage explode, but it is not adding the incentive for people to keep running full nodes
539 2012-08-10 13:08:32 <jeremias> the point with satoshidice is that you can't avoid these type of services
540 2012-08-10 13:08:35 <Ferroh> Why is growth also necessary alongside the resource usage increase?
541 2012-08-10 13:08:53 <BlueMatt> jeremias: yes, you cant when the network grows with actual usage...which satoshidice isnt providing
542 2012-08-10 13:09:06 <Ferroh> If the usage increase is solvable, and people want it solved, then it can be a good thing to get it solved sooner.
543 2012-08-10 13:09:19 <sipa> Ferroh: because who will run full nodes will shift over time
544 2012-08-10 13:09:22 <Ferroh> BlueMatt, SPV nodes etc are a solution, but better ideas have been proposed.
545 2012-08-10 13:09:26 <BlueMatt> Ferroh: because it provides incentive for people to get over the now large cost of running a full node because there is usage that you want to be a part of or are already a part of
546 2012-08-10 13:09:27 <sipa> Ferroh: it is unviable that everyone keeps doing that
547 2012-08-10 13:09:35 <sipa> Ferroh: but such shift is slow
548 2012-08-10 13:09:51 <sipa> and it will happen if there are enough incentives for people to have full nodes around
549 2012-08-10 13:09:55 <Ferroh> sipa: I agree. My argument is essentially that satoshidice is speeding that shift up somewhat.
550 2012-08-10 13:10:09 <Ferroh> Which isnt necessarily bad.
551 2012-08-10 13:10:14 <sipa> yes, and my argument is that that sudden increase is bad
552 2012-08-10 13:10:21 <sipa> not the increase itself
553 2012-08-10 13:10:25 <Ferroh> That is also my argument...
554 2012-08-10 13:10:31 <Ferroh> the satoshidice increase is very small compared to gaining 10 million users.
555 2012-08-10 13:10:38 <Ferroh> very, very small, by comparison.
556 2012-08-10 13:10:44 <sipa> but it is not gaining us 10 million users
557 2012-08-10 13:11:03 <Ferroh> sigh, obviously. I'm starting to feel like you're not reading what I'm writing ;)
558 2012-08-10 13:11:06 <sipa> if it would get us 10 million users, there would be enough incentives to keep the network running
559 2012-08-10 13:11:18 <Ferroh> Nowhere did anyone say that satoshidice is gaining us any users.
560 2012-08-10 13:11:29 <sipa> and THAT is the problem :)
561 2012-08-10 13:11:32 <Ferroh> I am saying that satoshidice is preparing us for a fast increase of resource usage.
562 2012-08-10 13:11:38 <sipa> you say that we have to face resource growth, and that is correct
563 2012-08-10 13:11:54 <BlueMatt> actually, 10 million users creating 1 tx/week on average is roughly equal to the satoshidice load, so 10mill users is comparable, I would argue
564 2012-08-10 13:11:59 <Ferroh> That IS the problem, yes. But I am not talking about the problem it creates, I am talking about the positive benefit. No one is disputing that wasting blockchain usage is bad.
565 2012-08-10 13:12:12 <sipa> but eventually the only way we can deal with increasing resources is by shifting how bitcoin is used
566 2012-08-10 13:12:30 <Ferroh> BlueMatt, people spend a lot more than 1 tx/week with a debit/VISA card on average.
567 2012-08-10 13:12:40 <Ferroh> BlueMatt, but I see your point, assuming your arithmetic is correct.
568 2012-08-10 13:12:43 <sipa> and VISA is a payment network, not a currency
569 2012-08-10 13:12:45 <BlueMatt> Ferroh: and you think bitcoin will become that?
570 2012-08-10 13:13:31 <Ferroh> BlueMatt, I don't know. Bitcoin users might wind up sending far more than what they do with VISA cards, depending on how many services we see that depend on the blockchain (such as satoshidice).
571 2012-08-10 13:13:57 <Ferroh> sipa: That is true.
572 2012-08-10 13:14:01 <BlueMatt> anyway, even disregarding the load issues, the 1 satoshi outputs per loss is absolutely rediculous
573 2012-08-10 13:14:12 <Ferroh> do they serve no function?
574 2012-08-10 13:14:14 <sipa> Ferroh: my point is that a slower increase to the current transaction frequency, backed by actual growth of the bitcoin economy would be better than SD suddenly forcing us to make sure people don't leave the network because it is too hard all of a sudden
575 2012-08-10 13:15:27 <BlueMatt> Ferroh: afaik they probably serve to be a notification of loss, but, as gmaxwell points out, people are likely to never spend them, which causes absolutely pointless load on the network and even on pruned nodes
576 2012-08-10 13:15:47 <sipa> w00t! ultraprune will now automatically reorg to the best block in blockchain database present at startup
577 2012-08-10 13:16:13 <BlueMatt> how would it ever get to the non-best block that is in the db?
578 2012-08-10 13:16:34 <sipa> BlueMatt: i mean: you can just *replace* your blockdb by another one, and it won't hurt
579 2012-08-10 13:16:43 <sipa> as the coindb and the blockdb are entirely independent
580 2012-08-10 13:16:54 <BlueMatt> nice
581 2012-08-10 13:17:10 <sipa> as long as the current blockchaintip of the coindb is at least known in the blockdb
582 2012-08-10 13:17:32 <sipa> so you could ship with a pre-indexed blockdb, and at first startup, the coindb would be built
583 2012-08-10 13:19:39 <sipa> and that's actually something that could be done without ultraprune, too
584 2012-08-10 13:20:08 <Ferroh> Maybe Satoshidice should just use litecoin for proof of fairness, and then offload chain bloat onto that alt chain. It would make that chain more useful and save bitcoin users from this extra 300mb/month of chain bloat (or however much it is)
585 2012-08-10 13:20:30 <Ferroh> i.e.: Still accept and pay bitcoins, just put the proof on the litecoin chain.
586 2012-08-10 13:21:20 <sipa> i'm sure litecoin would like it even less :)
587 2012-08-10 13:21:58 <Ferroh> are we not okay with that?
588 2012-08-10 13:22:19 <Ferroh> if not, then an altchain specifically for proving gambling could be made
589 2012-08-10 13:22:41 <gmaxwell> Ferroh: the blockchain plays no role in their proof of fairness.
590 2012-08-10 13:22:47 <Ferroh> gmaxwell, oh?
591 2012-08-10 13:23:12 <Ferroh> do they not put extra transactions on the chain in order to show fair dice rolls?
592 2012-08-10 13:23:24 <gmaxwell> Ferroh: their proof of fairness is a hmac. They do use the txnid as the input, but it could just as easily be a use provided value.
593 2012-08-10 13:23:24 <sipa> they just reveal their secret seed after some time
594 2012-08-10 13:23:37 <gmaxwell> right the secrets are revealed via their website.
595 2012-08-10 13:24:00 <Ferroh> oh, so what you mean is that they dont NEED to use the blockchain for this, although they are.
596 2012-08-10 13:24:10 <Ferroh> that is pretty stupid then
597 2012-08-10 13:24:24 <Ferroh> I am mildly annoyed now, I hope you're happy.
598 2012-08-10 13:27:07 <Ferroh> so I just thought of voluntary botnets
599 2012-08-10 13:27:08 <gmaxwell> Ferroh: and I don't know if you really groked sipa's point beforeâ if the growth came organically, e.g. by getting another 10 million users, it would have come with the backing of adding more developers (or funding for existing ones); more full node operators, etc... When the growth comes due to a single nich very high volume service there is no compensating increase in resources.
600 2012-08-10 13:27:10 Goilio has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
601 2012-08-10 13:27:12 <Ferroh> and discovered that they already exist
602 2012-08-10 13:27:31 <Ferroh> gmaxwell, that's a good point.
603 2012-08-10 13:27:37 <Ferroh> sipa, why didnt you just say that?
604 2012-08-10 13:27:43 <sipa> gmaxwell is better at explaining :p
605 2012-08-10 13:29:05 <Ferroh> gmaxwell, my thought was more that I am concerned about the day when someone releases a killer bitcoin app and we suddenly gain 10 million users in a month. There would be extra developers, but not in time.
606 2012-08-10 13:29:06 <gmaxwell> niche*
607 2012-08-10 13:29:37 <Ferroh> Of course, we may not care very much if we lose a few people, after we've gained 10 million
608 2012-08-10 13:29:40 <gmaxwell> Ferroh: The growth in chain volume always takes timeâ if nothing else then just because the system rate limits it.
609 2012-08-10 13:30:42 <gmaxwell> And right exactly, thats the other half I didn't mention. A real growth in users is its own economic reward generally. "A good problem to have". A high volume service which added something truly new to the ecosystem might also be, but there has been gambling sites all along.
610 2012-08-10 13:30:54 <gmaxwell> (even ones with cryptographic proof)
611 2012-08-10 13:32:01 <Ferroh> So, convince me not to modify LOIC to assign bitcoins to participants in a network and then sell botnet power from volunteers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_Orbit_Ion_Cannon
612 2012-08-10 13:32:12 <Ferroh> I am actually not going to do that and dont need convincing,
613 2012-08-10 13:32:19 <Ferroh> but I'm surprised no one has at least proposed this.
614 2012-08-10 13:33:11 <Ferroh> s/volunteers/people selling their botting power/
615 2012-08-10 13:33:16 <doublec> iirc solidcoin considered something similar
616 2012-08-10 13:33:21 <gmaxwell> Ferroh: Solidcoin had planned to integrate something like that, and their users convinced them that it was a horrible ideaâ so, if you were looking for a yardstick of good judgement, there you go: Even the SCers thought that was crazy.
617 2012-08-10 13:33:32 <Ferroh> lol
618 2012-08-10 13:33:34 <Ferroh> interesting
619 2012-08-10 13:34:40 <gmaxwell> Generally though, There are all kinds of fringe uses of cryptocurrency which are morally ambigious (at best!), it serves us no good if the usage in those places outpaces boring usage.
620 2012-08-10 13:36:35 one_zero has quit ()
621 2012-08-10 13:36:40 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
622 2012-08-10 13:37:07 danbri has joined
623 2012-08-10 13:38:33 <gmaxwell> Ferroh: what surprises me is that no one has made multipurpose miners. E.g. miners software that, if you tell them you're going to pay them more bitcoin than mining, run some different gpu kernel for some different computational work.
624 2012-08-10 13:38:58 <gmaxwell> I kept thinking that as difficulty grew it would get easier and easier to make that viable, but no one has done it.
625 2012-08-10 13:40:36 <Ferroh> It seems hard. You need to be able to allow a user to write a script that is sandboxed, and split among arbitrarily many users, and would only work for problems that require very low bandwidth (between each script instance anyway)
626 2012-08-10 13:40:51 <Ferroh> and the project could do well, or totally fail
627 2012-08-10 13:41:15 <gmaxwell> Ferroh: you dont have to take random code though, you could just pack prefabbed computational kernels.
628 2012-08-10 13:41:21 danbri has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
629 2012-08-10 13:41:32 <gmaxwell> E.g. for vanity address searches, or WPA cracking.
630 2012-08-10 13:41:33 <Ferroh> that's an interesting idea
631 2012-08-10 13:41:33 Turingi has joined
632 2012-08-10 13:41:46 <Ferroh> gmaxwell, vanity address searches can be done in a pool now.
633 2012-08-10 13:41:59 <gmaxwell> Ferroh: sure, but why isn't that miner-integrated?
634 2012-08-10 13:42:01 <Ferroh> i have no idea why no one has done THAT, because I think even the pool software is mostly written for you
635 2012-08-10 13:42:16 <Ferroh> good point
636 2012-08-10 13:43:26 <gmaxwell> someone creating infrastructure for this could make a lot of coin, esp with the halving and the (expected) introduction of mining asics making the gpus much less useful for mining, though I'm sad we're missing the window:
637 2012-08-10 13:43:56 <gmaxwell> mining could have made a lot of computing on demand viable by providing good background work to pay for the infrastructure while there wasn't enough demand for other applications.
638 2012-08-10 13:44:22 <Ferroh> if you had told me this 6 months ago, I might have done something about it
639 2012-08-10 13:44:36 * BlueMatt ponders joining a vanitygen mining pool and logging privkeys to steal coins
640 2012-08-10 13:44:39 <Ferroh> though I'm not sure whether it's within my realm of expertise or not
641 2012-08-10 13:44:52 <Ferroh> BlueMatt, you cant steal the private keys.
642 2012-08-10 13:44:54 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: It can use a scheme like type-2 determinstic wallets so that it _can't_
643 2012-08-10 13:45:03 <BlueMatt> oh, it does? nice
644 2012-08-10 13:45:14 <gmaxwell> I don't know what people wrote, but that what was suggested!
645 2012-08-10 13:46:27 <Ferroh> It is written.
646 2012-08-10 13:46:27 <Ferroh> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=25804.0
647 2012-08-10 13:47:18 <gmaxwell> Ferroh: did they ever make it support creating compressed public keys?
648 2012-08-10 13:47:18 <Ferroh> vanity pool:
649 2012-08-10 13:47:19 <Ferroh> https://vanitypooltest.appspot.com/
650 2012-08-10 13:47:45 <Ferroh> gmaxwell, I dont think so.
651 2012-08-10 13:47:57 <gmaxwell> bummer.
652 2012-08-10 13:48:11 danbri has joined
653 2012-08-10 13:51:35 RainbowDashh is now known as DashhSleeps
654 2012-08-10 13:52:32 <BlueMatt> heh...wtf? who the hell is buying mannu?
655 2012-08-10 13:53:31 <Ferroh> wow, the guy that wrote vanity pool wrote it in Google Go
656 2012-08-10 13:54:11 quijibo has joined
657 2012-08-10 13:54:12 <Ferroh> and apparently a bunch of other bitcoin stuff in Go as well
658 2012-08-10 13:54:35 <t7> ok parsed the DER
659 2012-08-10 13:54:44 <t7> now what am i verifying with this public key
660 2012-08-10 13:55:14 <Ferroh> heh Go is a language that actually uses the assignment operator theoretical CS people seem to want so much ":="
661 2012-08-10 13:55:15 unknown45682 has quit ()
662 2012-08-10 13:55:31 <t7> Ferroh: only for first assignment
663 2012-08-10 13:55:45 <t7> x := is like var x =
664 2012-08-10 13:56:01 <Ferroh> oh, so it is declaration and assignment
665 2012-08-10 13:56:07 <Ferroh> ..I find that annoying?
666 2012-08-10 13:56:08 <t7> yeah
667 2012-08-10 13:56:11 <Ferroh> what is the benefit of that
668 2012-08-10 13:56:14 <t7> Go is rubbish
669 2012-08-10 13:56:16 <Ferroh> BASH does that
670 2012-08-10 13:56:20 <t7> it doesnt even have generics
671 2012-08-10 13:56:22 <t7> in 2012
672 2012-08-10 13:56:56 <Ferroh> http://golang.org/doc/go_faq.html#generics
673 2012-08-10 13:57:08 <Ferroh> answer:
674 2012-08-10 13:57:09 <Ferroh> "We don't feel an urgency for them"
675 2012-08-10 13:57:31 <t7> enjoy writing containers for every type
676 2012-08-10 13:58:03 <gmaxwell> Rust seems a lot more interesting generally, though, sadly... it doesn't seem that they increased the power of the type system enough to really go much beyond C level program correctness.
677 2012-08-10 13:58:04 <Ferroh> no exceptions or assertions too
678 2012-08-10 13:58:55 <gmaxwell> Meh, exceptions are somewhat unwelcome in system level programming.
679 2012-08-10 13:59:32 <BlueMatt> I have to say the lack of exceptions is really nice imho
680 2012-08-10 14:00:36 <t7> guys, what is this sigScript signing?
681 2012-08-10 14:00:38 <Ferroh> ..but i like exceptions
682 2012-08-10 14:01:37 pierre`_ has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
683 2012-08-10 14:01:40 <sipa> t7: a rather conplex byte array derived from the transactions, with some parts of it erased
684 2012-08-10 14:01:43 eian has joined
685 2012-08-10 14:01:50 <copumpkin> gmaxwell: don't they have some sort of type-state thing that lets them track states in types?
686 2012-08-10 14:01:55 <copumpkin> I haven't looked at it
687 2012-08-10 14:02:03 <copumpkin> but I remember someone mentioning that at some point
688 2012-08-10 14:02:06 <t7> sipa are there any docs i can read on this?
689 2012-08-10 14:03:08 <eian> I've collected 2 weeks of bitcoin p2p traffic by connecting to between 2k and 3k peers - it is about 110 GB of data. I'm trying to see which nodes are *not* relaying messages and the query takes 3 days in mysql.
690 2012-08-10 14:03:52 <eian> I don't want to wait that long :(
691 2012-08-10 14:04:14 <freewil> do you have any indices
692 2012-08-10 14:04:31 <eian> yeah, I've slapped them on using mysql's explain statement
693 2012-08-10 14:04:52 <eian> I've looked at the slow query log and there aren't any
694 2012-08-10 14:05:09 <freewil> are you using some inefficient subqueries
695 2012-08-10 14:05:27 <eian> hm
696 2012-08-10 14:05:41 <eian> good point
697 2012-08-10 14:05:44 <t7> i feel like this could be so much easier....
698 2012-08-10 14:05:50 <freewil> feel free to paste it
699 2012-08-10 14:06:03 <freewil> if its long use pastebin or something though
700 2012-08-10 14:06:28 <eian> freewil, let me process what you've said - I suppose joins are faster than subqueries right?
701 2012-08-10 14:06:34 <freewil> usually yes
702 2012-08-10 14:06:52 <eian> eian, I'll need to look at what I've written - it was months ago :(
703 2012-08-10 14:07:08 <eian> freewil, thanks for the idea
704 2012-08-10 14:07:19 <eian> nice, I typed to myself...boy I'm tired
705 2012-08-10 14:07:19 <freewil> glad i could be helpful
706 2012-08-10 14:07:23 <freewil> lol
707 2012-08-10 14:07:49 <eian> I have all this data and so many ideas
708 2012-08-10 14:07:54 <eian> and it takes f'ing forever
709 2012-08-10 14:08:00 <eian> it's driving me crazy
710 2012-08-10 14:08:12 <doublec> copumpkin: typestate looks like it'll be removed
711 2012-08-10 14:08:18 <copumpkin> oh? :(
712 2012-08-10 14:08:59 <doublec> copumpkin: https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/rust-dev/2012-July/002094.html
713 2012-08-10 14:09:14 <doublec> copumpkin: there was lots of discussion on irc and other places too
714 2012-08-10 14:09:19 Diablo-D3 has joined
715 2012-08-10 14:10:00 <doublec> copumpkin: which is a shame because it was what had me interested in rust originally
716 2012-08-10 14:10:53 <sipa> t7: the source code, i'm afraid
717 2012-08-10 14:10:56 <copumpkin> boo
718 2012-08-10 14:11:06 <sipa> or one of the several re-implementations
719 2012-08-10 14:11:42 <doublec> copumpkin: also https://github.com/mozilla/rust/issues/1105
720 2012-08-10 14:13:34 <doublec> copumpkin: that issues seems to imply that user's of api's find it annoying to have to assert the preconditions before use all the time
721 2012-08-10 14:15:04 <copumpkin> yeah
722 2012-08-10 14:16:07 <doublec> that's part of the point though of course. if the API says x must be less than 5 then the user has to assert that somehow
723 2012-08-10 14:16:20 <doublec> but the user's seem to prefer runtime checks/throw exception type behaviour
724 2012-08-10 14:16:48 <copumpkin> yeah
725 2012-08-10 14:17:06 <copumpkin> I guess that in some ways it ends up feeling like java's exception tagging
726 2012-08-10 14:17:14 <doublec> yes
727 2012-08-10 14:20:01 Detritus has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
728 2012-08-10 14:23:41 imsaguy has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
729 2012-08-10 14:23:46 <gmaxwell> bleh runtime.
730 2012-08-10 14:24:18 <gmaxwell> The good thing about specifying the constraints in the api is that they can percolate out and make static analysis actually work.
731 2012-08-10 14:24:19 <sipa> real programmers compute the output of their programs at compile time
732 2012-08-10 14:25:14 <copumpkin> I liked that language recently that claimed to have a dynamic dependent type system
733 2012-08-10 14:25:31 <copumpkin> i.e., you can put values into your "types", at runtime, and have them checked at runtime
734 2012-08-10 14:26:12 <doublec> gmaxwell: right, I agree
735 2012-08-10 14:26:48 <Ferroh> copumpkin, I dont understand, so their type is defined on first assignment? or what? when is their type allowed to change
736 2012-08-10 14:27:07 <copumpkin> oh, dynamic types in the sense of not having a typechecking phase at compile time
737 2012-08-10 14:27:15 <copumpkin> in the ruby/python/etc. sense
738 2012-08-10 14:27:49 <gmaxwell> "* Avoid wasting time fixing bugs before customers see them!"
739 2012-08-10 14:27:58 <doublec> Dylan has a limited integer type where the integer is bound by a min/max value. But that's checked at runtime by implementations :)
740 2012-08-10 14:28:10 <copumpkin> lol
741 2012-08-10 14:29:20 derpingtonIII has left ()
742 2012-08-10 14:34:05 <sipa> luke-jr: what was your test for SD transactions again?
743 2012-08-10 14:34:27 <t7> copumpkin: which language was that?
744 2012-08-10 14:34:35 <copumpkin> can't remember now
745 2012-08-10 14:34:42 <copumpkin> some new one that a colleague sent me to laugh at
746 2012-08-10 14:34:54 <luke-jr> sipa: http://gitorious.org/~Luke-Jr/bitcoin/luke-jr-bitcoin/commit/8b0e2b258d017dc169ca26b1fc2b7ef7c7aec51f
747 2012-08-10 14:34:59 nsh has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
748 2012-08-10 14:35:34 nsh has joined
749 2012-08-10 14:36:19 balrog has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
750 2012-08-10 14:36:28 nsh has quit (Changing host)
751 2012-08-10 14:36:28 nsh has joined
752 2012-08-10 14:42:47 balrog has joined
753 2012-08-10 14:49:45 <eian> gmaxwell, what static analysis tools are you guys looking at/using?
754 2012-08-10 14:50:32 <copumpkin> the main one I use is called a "type system"
755 2012-08-10 14:52:08 spitteler has joined
756 2012-08-10 14:52:25 denisx has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
757 2012-08-10 14:52:30 DashhSleeps has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
758 2012-08-10 14:52:32 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
759 2012-08-10 14:54:04 <doublec> I have heard goog things about sixgill: http://sixgill.org/
760 2012-08-10 14:54:41 <gmaxwell> eian: I use all available tools.
761 2012-08-10 14:55:11 <eian> gmaxwell, I've been interested in Fortify
762 2012-08-10 14:55:18 <eian> gmaxwell, never looked at pricing though
763 2012-08-10 14:57:31 <gmaxwell> Speaking of software validationâ has anyone found any useful mutation testing tools for C?
764 2012-08-10 14:57:45 <t7> random mutation?
765 2012-08-10 14:57:55 <t7> or is mutation random by definition... ?
766 2012-08-10 14:58:22 <gmaxwell> The idea of mutation testing is that you fuzz the source codeâ doesn't have to be 'random'â and if your tests don't fail, then thats interesting.
767 2012-08-10 14:58:43 <t7> fuzz the AST?
768 2012-08-10 14:58:55 <gmaxwell> Actually fuzzing the source text would be stupid. :)
769 2012-08-10 14:59:11 <t7> ah so the tests should fail
770 2012-08-10 14:59:15 <t7> i get it now :)
771 2012-08-10 14:59:19 <gmaxwell> The tool I wrote for it goes around adding random negations to branches, though thats somewhat limited.
772 2012-08-10 14:59:25 <ersi> well, it'll be easy to find faults if you'd fuzz/randomize the source
773 2012-08-10 14:59:25 <ersi> haha
774 2012-08-10 14:59:53 <t7> port to Coq, then you can do exhaustive testing
775 2012-08-10 14:59:57 <t7> or agda
776 2012-08-10 15:00:03 <gmaxwell> ersi: the idea is that it answers the question "Could my tests catch the case when the software was broken in X way" .. and if not, then how do you know it isn't already wrong?
777 2012-08-10 15:00:17 <gmaxwell> t7: sure, I use exhaustive testing in C too, but it's not always possible. :)
778 2012-08-10 15:00:44 <t7> in coq you can use induction rather than enumerating through every possible value
779 2012-08-10 15:00:59 <gmaxwell> Sure, you can do this on C code with framac too.
780 2012-08-10 15:01:08 * t7 googles
781 2012-08-10 15:01:26 <gmaxwell> (and yes, coq is more powerful, but ... well, some people like the coq, some don't)
782 2012-08-10 15:02:02 <gmaxwell> (more importantly, reasonable production code is C these days, and I don't have the time to write and validate two implementations of things...)
783 2012-08-10 15:02:06 <t7> for something as important as bitcoin it makes sense to have it formally verified
784 2012-08-10 15:02:26 <gmaxwell> Absolutely, and there are people working on verified bitcoin implementations, slowly.
785 2012-08-10 15:02:41 <ersi> gmaxwell: Yeah, of course. I was just amused by randomizing the source :)
786 2012-08-10 15:02:49 <gmaxwell> But if the formally verified one isn't praticale, then you still have the issue that the implementation people actually use needs to be tested.
787 2012-08-10 15:03:03 <gmaxwell> ersi: it's surprising how much damange you can do and still have things compile and run! :)
788 2012-08-10 15:03:11 denisx has joined
789 2012-08-10 15:03:20 <ersi> gmaxwell: haha
790 2012-08-10 15:03:41 <t7> i do think you guys should start on a new client rather than keep working on the current code base
791 2012-08-10 15:03:51 <t7> even in C++
792 2012-08-10 15:04:14 balrog has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
793 2012-08-10 15:04:38 <gmaxwell> "we're going to rewrite everything and do it right" is like ... "Case studies in beginner mistakes in large scale software engineering; 101."
794 2012-08-10 15:05:23 <t7> i disagree
795 2012-08-10 15:05:42 <luke-jr> t7: Amir has already started on that.
796 2012-08-10 15:05:50 <Ferroh> A txid is identified by a ~64 char hash right?
797 2012-08-10 15:05:51 <luke-jr> but all the eggs aren't in one basket
798 2012-08-10 15:06:04 <doublec> a few people are working on alternate clients
799 2012-08-10 15:06:18 * luke-jr mentioned Amir's since it's C++ :p
800 2012-08-10 15:06:36 BTC_Bear has quit (hbrntng!~BTC_Bear@unaffiliated/btc-bear/x-5233302|Quit: Leaving...)
801 2012-08-10 15:06:58 <Ferroh> pynode appears to be moving toward being a full python node one day
802 2012-08-10 15:07:26 <luke-jr> pynode isn't a rewrite though
803 2012-08-10 15:07:38 <luke-jr> it's a direct port of the Satoshi code AFAIK
804 2012-08-10 15:07:50 <t7> i checked pynode's verify transaction function
805 2012-08-10 15:07:56 <t7> it was 'pass' :(
806 2012-08-10 15:08:12 <Ferroh> er, he implemented that recently, no?
807 2012-08-10 15:08:22 <Ferroh> pynode is a work in progress of course
808 2012-08-10 15:08:28 <Ferroh> it only supports 1 connection at the moment
809 2012-08-10 15:08:30 p0s has joined
810 2012-08-10 15:08:42 <Ferroh> Are collisions a concern for txid hashes? There are lots of transactions and 64 chars doesnt seem like a very big hash.
811 2012-08-10 15:09:09 <t7> its 32 bytes
812 2012-08-10 15:09:14 <t7> 256 bit
813 2012-08-10 15:09:31 <luke-jr> Ferroh: colliding an address is easier than colliding a txid
814 2012-08-10 15:09:40 balrog has joined
815 2012-08-10 15:09:43 <Ferroh> oh, yes I guess that is a lot of bits
816 2012-08-10 15:09:58 <Ferroh> ok, move along, there's nothing to see here folks
817 2012-08-10 15:13:34 <t7> If i hid a penny under the earths surface (including the sea) somewhere and you could only check a centimeter (squared) at a time. You would have to check less times than a 46bit encryption scheme.
818 2012-08-10 15:13:48 <t7> and that doubles for every bit
819 2012-08-10 15:13:55 <t7> so 256 is quite a lot
820 2012-08-10 15:14:55 <Ferroh> that is pretty esoteric
821 2012-08-10 15:15:26 <Ferroh> you could just say num_hashes_year/2^256 = E(num_years_to_collide)
822 2012-08-10 15:15:41 <t7> how many olympic swimming pools in a football stadium ?
823 2012-08-10 15:15:46 <Ferroh> lol
824 2012-08-10 15:17:21 <abracadabra> 42
825 2012-08-10 15:17:42 <forrestv> a more helpful relation: assuming the cost of a RIPEMD160 hash is equal to a SHA256 hash's, the work done to find an address collision could otherwise mine 8.3 * 10^33 BTC (if the difficulty and block reward stay constant for eons..)
826 2012-08-10 15:18:32 <t7> forrestv: can you factor in the changing reward and network-hashrate into your equation please
827 2012-08-10 15:19:00 <t7> dont forget, predicting what will happen to hash rate as the reward drops
828 2012-08-10 15:20:15 <forrestv> you'd just mine out all the rest of the BTC, assuming you could do it quickly
829 2012-08-10 15:21:03 <t7> and whats the wight of the equivalent value of gold... in hogs heads...
830 2012-08-10 15:21:20 <forrestv> :P
831 2012-08-10 15:21:37 MC-Eeepc has joined
832 2012-08-10 15:22:07 <t7> oh apparently a hogshead is a measure of volume
833 2012-08-10 15:22:13 <t7> ok im shutting up now
834 2012-08-10 15:23:05 d4de has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
835 2012-08-10 15:23:45 <jgarzik> <t7> i checked pynode's verify transaction function <<-- apparently you did not look in the right place. hashes are verified, and there's a whole script engine in bitcoin/script*.py
836 2012-08-10 15:24:07 <jgarzik> spent-ness is verified in block functions, etc.
837 2012-08-10 15:24:36 <t7> ah i was looking at pycoin
838 2012-08-10 15:24:41 <t7> whoops
839 2012-08-10 15:24:41 <jgarzik> <luke-jr> [pynode is] a direct port of the Satoshi code AFAIK << -- the script engine is, yes. other code is not.
840 2012-08-10 15:25:22 Diablo-D3 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
841 2012-08-10 15:25:41 <jgarzik> and even pynode's script engine is pythonic -- it converts to/from python longs, rather than implementing a separate CBigNum class
842 2012-08-10 15:25:52 nickrb has joined
843 2012-08-10 15:26:15 rdponticelli has joined
844 2012-08-10 15:26:21 Diablo-D3 has joined
845 2012-08-10 15:27:11 <t7> where is your DER code jgarzik ?
846 2012-08-10 15:27:18 <jgarzik> t7: openssl
847 2012-08-10 15:27:25 <t7> oh thats cheating
848 2012-08-10 15:27:32 bitllc has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
849 2012-08-10 15:28:27 nickrb- has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
850 2012-08-10 15:28:34 <luke-jr> t7: you're likely to have a broken client if you use anything but OpenSSL ;)
851 2012-08-10 15:28:54 <BlueMatt> not really
852 2012-08-10 15:28:56 <t7> the same openssl that the fbi had back doors in?
853 2012-08-10 15:29:05 <BlueMatt> yea...no
854 2012-08-10 15:29:15 <t7> but i agree this should be left to researchers
855 2012-08-10 15:29:22 <t7> i only did it for fun
856 2012-08-10 15:29:32 [\\\] has joined
857 2012-08-10 15:29:34 <jgarzik> in fact, using python's long and list made the script engine quite easy to implement. python has the handy "stack[-1]" notation for accessing the end of the array.
858 2012-08-10 15:30:15 <jgarzik> https://github.com/jgarzik/pynode/blob/master/bitcoin/scripteval.py
859 2012-08-10 15:30:29 <BlueMatt> tbh, implementing the script engine in full isnt as as bad as one might guess
860 2012-08-10 15:31:18 <jgarzik> pynode also fully implements all P2P commands, and a few RPC commands.
861 2012-08-10 15:31:27 <BlueMatt> nice
862 2012-08-10 15:31:43 <jgarzik> remaining todo for full node status: chain reorg, hook up existing, working script engine to network node's block verification
863 2012-08-10 15:32:24 <t7> wow python loads dynamic link libraries so nicely
864 2012-08-10 15:32:38 * jgarzik was going to do 'getwork' and 'getblocktemplate' RPCs the other day, but FormatHashBuffers() is just so nasty
865 2012-08-10 15:32:49 <jgarzik> getwork+cpuminer requires sha256 midstate :(
866 2012-08-10 15:33:08 * jgarzik kicks himself for that one
867 2012-08-10 15:33:33 <jgarzik> cpuminer should have only used first 80 bytes of 'data' in JSON, plus 'target', and ignored the other stuff
868 2012-08-10 15:35:03 <jgarzik> chain reorg is the big obstacle to people using pynode on a regular basis. without that, you'll get stuck on an orphan chain every time the chain forks (every few days). Gotta restore from backup or perform IBD all over again, once stuck.
869 2012-08-10 15:35:14 Mobius_ has joined
870 2012-08-10 15:35:44 <jgarzik> though I do plan to make sure pynode works in a reduced, no-db mode for lightweight situations like network monitoring.
871 2012-08-10 15:36:05 Diablo-D3 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
872 2012-08-10 15:36:21 <jgarzik> we also talked about a RAM-only mode on here, where pynode could remotely fetch blocks needed for verification
873 2012-08-10 15:37:32 MadSweeney has quit (Quit: MadSweeney)
874 2012-08-10 15:38:02 MobiusL has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
875 2012-08-10 15:38:05 Diablo-D3 has joined
876 2012-08-10 15:39:47 t7 has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.88-rdmsoft [XULRunner 1.9.0.17/2009122204])
877 2012-08-10 15:42:10 <eian> can someone link me to the pynode project?
878 2012-08-10 15:42:34 <eian> Oh, is this it: https://github.com/jgarzik/pynode ?
879 2012-08-10 15:43:36 Motest003 has joined
880 2012-08-10 15:43:44 <Ferroh> that's it.
881 2012-08-10 15:44:03 Motest003 has quit (Client Quit)
882 2012-08-10 15:44:24 <gmaxwell> doublec: I had to fix a bunch of bugs to get sixgill to compile, and having done thatâ it doesn't seem to have any usage instructions. Do you think this software has been used by anyone but its author?
883 2012-08-10 15:44:53 <gmaxwell> doublec: I actually kinda figured out how to get it working, though only on single source files.
884 2012-08-10 15:55:04 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
885 2012-08-10 15:56:06 [\\\] has joined
886 2012-08-10 15:59:07 <jgarzik> eian: that's it
887 2012-08-10 16:01:00 <jgarzik> hmmmmm :)
888 2012-08-10 16:01:46 <jgarzik> http://blog.archive.org/2012/08/07/over-1000000-torrents-of-downloadable-books-music-and-movies/
889 2012-08-10 16:01:54 <jgarzik> we should get the Internet Archive to seed the blockchain torrent
890 2012-08-10 16:02:02 <jgarzik> I think it's a valuable piece of history
891 2012-08-10 16:02:06 <doublec> gmaxwell: isn't it a gcc plugin?
892 2012-08-10 16:02:29 <doublec> gmaxwell: it compiled out of the box for me
893 2012-08-10 16:02:48 <doublec> gmaxwell: but I don't have the relevant version of gcc to run it
894 2012-08-10 16:03:24 <Ferroh> jgarzik, it's all fun and games until the internet archive gets hacked and everyone is downloading a modified chain?
895 2012-08-10 16:03:34 <luke-jr> Ferroh: you can't hack a torrent :p
896 2012-08-10 16:03:58 <Ferroh> good point!
897 2012-08-10 16:04:38 <jgarzik> Ferroh: in addition to the torrent's hash protection, the blockchain data itself is self-verifying
898 2012-08-10 16:04:56 <jgarzik> IMO the dev team should produce a new torrent each time a checkpoint is added to the Satoshi client
899 2012-08-10 16:05:20 <luke-jr> jgarzik: every blk file isn't enough? :P
900 2012-08-10 16:05:41 <jgarzik> luke-jr: eh?
901 2012-08-10 16:05:58 <luke-jr> eg, next being when blk0002 is filled
902 2012-08-10 16:06:13 DiabloD3 has joined
903 2012-08-10 16:06:20 DiabloD3 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
904 2012-08-10 16:06:23 <doublec> gmaxwell: the author works for mozilla so perhaps the fact that mozilla people recommended it to me was biased :-)
905 2012-08-10 16:07:22 Diablo-D3 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
906 2012-08-10 16:07:28 <jgarzik> luke-jr: I think you want to produce torrents more often than once-every-blkNNNN.dat creation
907 2012-08-10 16:07:35 <jgarzik> once every 6 months, I'd say
908 2012-08-10 16:07:47 <jgarzik> ...about the same frequency as you want to checkpoint the chain, in fact
909 2012-08-10 16:09:59 DiabloD3 has joined
910 2012-08-10 16:11:11 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
911 2012-08-10 16:12:22 nsh- has joined
912 2012-08-10 16:12:47 nsh has quit (Disconnected by services)
913 2012-08-10 16:13:25 nsh- is now known as nsh
914 2012-08-10 16:13:31 nsh has quit (Changing host)
915 2012-08-10 16:13:31 nsh has joined
916 2012-08-10 16:16:35 DiabloD3 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
917 2012-08-10 16:16:37 Mobius_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
918 2012-08-10 16:16:38 nsh- has joined
919 2012-08-10 16:17:04 DiabloD3 has joined
920 2012-08-10 16:17:07 nsh has quit (Disconnected by services)
921 2012-08-10 16:17:22 nsh- is now known as nsh
922 2012-08-10 16:17:23 nsh has quit (Changing host)
923 2012-08-10 16:17:24 nsh has joined
924 2012-08-10 16:17:44 Mobius_ has joined
925 2012-08-10 16:21:55 torsthaldo has joined
926 2012-08-10 16:26:50 DiabloD3 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
927 2012-08-10 16:30:28 DiabloD3 has joined
928 2012-08-10 16:31:10 dvide has joined
929 2012-08-10 16:38:49 osmosis has joined
930 2012-08-10 16:39:21 p0s has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
931 2012-08-10 16:39:55 chylee has joined
932 2012-08-10 16:40:36 <Ferroh> jgarzik, I dont get it then, what is the benefit of the internet archive hosting the block chain torrent?
933 2012-08-10 16:40:39 <Ferroh> just for novelty purposes?
934 2012-08-10 16:41:16 <sipa> they do have some bandwidth ;)
935 2012-08-10 16:43:36 <Ferroh> but we arent short on bandwidth, right?
936 2012-08-10 16:43:44 <Ferroh> since uh, we have like tens of thousands of bitcoin nodes
937 2012-08-10 16:44:37 <gmaxwell> doublec: I think the authors of sixgill and rust should be put into a pit to fight to the death or something.
938 2012-08-10 16:44:40 <Ferroh> also he is talking about just storing the torrent
939 2012-08-10 16:44:46 <Ferroh> that is like a few kilobytes...
940 2012-08-10 16:45:30 <Ferroh> (by "the torrent" i assume we mean the .torrent file)
941 2012-08-10 16:45:42 <eian> Ferroh, there are only about 3k connectable nodes
942 2012-08-10 16:45:49 <gmaxwell> 'only'
943 2012-08-10 16:45:54 <eian> :P
944 2012-08-10 16:46:09 <sipa> gmaxwell: until they can prove statically which of them will survive?
945 2012-08-10 16:46:31 p0s has joined
946 2012-08-10 16:47:09 <jgarzik> Ferroh: some devs think that will shrink down to just a few "archive nodes"
947 2012-08-10 16:47:24 <jgarzik> with few nodes storing the entire chain
948 2012-08-10 16:47:50 <Ferroh> jgarzik, if that is really a problem, then the client can just store a magnet link, and embed a small bitcoin client, and let users seed the blockchain then
949 2012-08-10 16:48:01 <Ferroh> its hard to imagine this being necessary ever though
950 2012-08-10 16:48:03 <ersi> Ferroh: You don't get it.. What's the loss of them storing a torrent of a part of the blockchain?
951 2012-08-10 16:48:21 <ersi> None :)
952 2012-08-10 16:48:55 <Ferroh> Well, it's definitely not none, obviously. I get that the loss to them is very small. I'm wondering if there's any gain for us :)
953 2012-08-10 16:48:56 rdponticelli has joined
954 2012-08-10 16:49:12 iocor has joined
955 2012-08-10 16:49:21 <iocor> can anyone else on the testnet tell me what their current block is?
956 2012-08-10 16:49:24 <iocor> I'm getting 74297
957 2012-08-10 16:49:27 <iocor> but block explorer disagrees
958 2012-08-10 16:49:29 <sipa> iocor: testnet2 or testnet3 ?
959 2012-08-10 16:49:32 <jgarzik> the initial block download is better done via torrent than P2P IMNSHO. a ton of static data, served over and over.
960 2012-08-10 16:49:39 <iocor> sipa: I ran ./bitcoind -testnet
961 2012-08-10 16:49:44 <jgarzik> make the bitcoin client refuse to start, if blocks < 190000
962 2012-08-10 16:49:48 <iocor> downloaded bitcoind today
963 2012-08-10 16:50:16 <ersi> Ferroh: Well, the availability of the oldest/filled up chunks would be good and possibly even faster to download
964 2012-08-10 16:50:44 <sipa> iocor: which version?
965 2012-08-10 16:51:07 <iocor> 0.6.3
966 2012-08-10 16:52:05 denisx has quit (Quit: denisx)
967 2012-08-10 16:52:07 <sipa> iocor: right, testnet is being reset for v0.7.0 (and is already in git HEAD)
968 2012-08-10 16:52:15 <iocor> ok
969 2012-08-10 16:52:21 <sipa> 0.6.3 still uses the "old" testnet2, which has several issues
970 2012-08-10 16:52:32 <iocor> oh really, what are the issues with the testnet2?
971 2012-08-10 16:52:50 d4de has joined
972 2012-08-10 16:52:51 d4de has quit (Changing host)
973 2012-08-10 16:52:51 d4de has joined
974 2012-08-10 16:52:55 <jgarzik> For example... At startup, GUI checks for bootstrap.dat. If it exists, import it. If block height < 190000, show dialog box "download bootstrap.dat from $magnetlink", then exit program.
975 2012-08-10 16:53:13 <iocor> does it effect me generating a block and emitting some transactions to test some stuff?
976 2012-08-10 16:53:14 <jgarzik> bitcoind is similar, with messages to debug.log
977 2012-08-10 16:53:29 <jgarzik> the community will come up with a good archival solution
978 2012-08-10 16:53:36 <sipa> iocor: many clients with different combinations of rules, leading to many forks that compete
979 2012-08-10 16:53:48 <iocor> k
980 2012-08-10 16:53:54 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: can we wait to get overcomplicated until we need it, and fix the underlying causes first?
981 2012-08-10 16:53:56 <Ferroh> okay, currently downloading the chain "faster" makes no difference to 99.99% of users since they are not bottlenecked by download speed
982 2012-08-10 16:54:07 <sipa> Ferroh: they soon will be :)
983 2012-08-10 16:54:09 <Ferroh> if someday that is a problem, then the solution is not to show the user some cryptic prompt
984 2012-08-10 16:54:24 <jgarzik> public nodes should not be burdened with serving the ancient blocks
985 2012-08-10 16:54:25 <Ferroh> it is to copy/paste bittorrent into a client
986 2012-08-10 16:54:35 <Ferroh> and let the client automatically use bittorrent to get the first part of the chain
987 2012-08-10 16:54:39 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: agreed, so lets make it non-burdensome
988 2012-08-10 16:54:41 <jgarzik> public nodes should focus on verifying current blocks/txs, and spreading peer addresses
989 2012-08-10 16:54:49 <sipa> jgarzik: ACK
990 2012-08-10 16:54:51 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: just proposed an easy, external way
991 2012-08-10 16:55:06 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: very little code changes to bitcoin at all
992 2012-08-10 16:55:25 <sipa> there are two issues; 1) block propagation is currently flawed 2) block propagation is used for historic data, exposing the flaw
993 2012-08-10 16:55:30 <sipa> both problems have solutions
994 2012-08-10 16:55:39 <BlueMatt> I guess its just me here, but I just see that like adding a DHT to distribute peer addresses, and then we can add another dht to distribute dht addresses, and then...
995 2012-08-10 16:56:10 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: no, it's using an existing, production solution for serving large datasets to many peers
996 2012-08-10 16:56:17 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: and we have a large, static dataset to serve
997 2012-08-10 16:56:24 <sipa> and both of you are right
998 2012-08-10 16:56:25 <iocor> I agree with the principle that nodes should only care about newer transactions but "download bootstrap.dat from $magnetlink" that dialogue is probably a little too cryptic. Perhaps "Download historic bitcoin data to get started. The bitcoin data can be found here: $magnetlink"
999 2012-08-10 16:56:49 <jgarzik> bitcoin should not waste code focusing on serving large static datasets
1000 2012-08-10 16:56:54 <sipa> we have easy fixes for improving the P2P block download (which is used anyway, even if we move serving historic data to some external process)
1001 2012-08-10 16:56:58 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: absolutely, but I dont see a point in using bittorrent if we dont need it, it just seems like a waste
1002 2012-08-10 16:56:58 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1003 2012-08-10 16:57:10 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: we are already (probably) starting to move towards archival nodes anyway
1004 2012-08-10 16:57:27 <sipa> i'm not sure BitTorrent is the best solution, by the way
1005 2012-08-10 16:57:32 <sipa> but i don't really care
1006 2012-08-10 16:57:38 <sipa> any way for retrieving the data is fine
1007 2012-08-10 16:57:43 <jgarzik> where is bittorrent mentioned... in the bitcoin code? if you code "if block < 190k, exit" the community will find a solution
1008 2012-08-10 16:57:48 <jgarzik> be it http or whatever
1009 2012-08-10 16:57:58 <sipa> exactly
1010 2012-08-10 16:58:08 <BlueMatt> that sounds like a horrible user experience
1011 2012-08-10 16:58:19 <BlueMatt> and for what?
1012 2012-08-10 16:58:30 <sipa> the only reason to serve historic data, is to bootstrap other nodes
1013 2012-08-10 16:58:44 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: to avoid burdened shared bitcoin resources with suboptimal historical data serving responsibilities
1014 2012-08-10 16:59:30 <sipa> anyway, i don't mind keeping it in the P2P protocol for now, but then I'd argue for an optional service bit which signifies "serves historic data"
1015 2012-08-10 16:59:31 <BlueMatt> what is the fundamental difference between using archival nodes and bittorrent or http or whatever?
1016 2012-08-10 16:59:37 <sipa> none
1017 2012-08-10 16:59:40 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: you can always ship a "bitcoin-firsttime.zip" that includes bootstrap.dat with bitcoin.exe
1018 2012-08-10 16:59:42 <Ferroh> well, there is some actually
1019 2012-08-10 16:59:48 Zarutian has joined
1020 2012-08-10 16:59:49 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: we can do that either way
1021 2012-08-10 16:59:56 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: where is the code? bitcoin or !bitcoin
1022 2012-08-10 17:00:08 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: archival nodes sounds like lots of added code to bitcoind
1023 2012-08-10 17:00:14 <BlueMatt> huh?
1024 2012-08-10 17:00:18 <Ferroh> many people already use bittorrent to seed files. Many of the people that use bitcoin and bitorrent do NOT run bitcoind though.
1025 2012-08-10 17:00:18 <BlueMatt> its no extra code
1026 2012-08-10 17:00:36 <sipa> archival nodes is what every satoshi node is already
1027 2012-08-10 17:00:37 <BlueMatt> current nodes are archival nodes, new nodes switch to a new nServices field
1028 2012-08-10 17:00:39 <Ferroh> So using BitTorrent would allow more people to seed the blockchain, even if they themselves dont use it in a bitcoin client.
1029 2012-08-10 17:00:48 <sipa> anyway, imho BlueMatt has a point that we still need to improve some very naive block propagation code
1030 2012-08-10 17:01:16 <sipa> that is independent from gradually shifting towards other protocols (be it http, archive nodes, bittorrent) for serving historic data
1031 2012-08-10 17:01:37 ninix has joined
1032 2012-08-10 17:01:54 <BlueMatt> agreed
1033 2012-08-10 17:01:57 <sipa> w00t
1034 2012-08-10 17:02:17 <sipa> re-import of already-downloaded testnet blockchain: 3 seconds
1035 2012-08-10 17:06:14 <gmaxwell> wowza.
1036 2012-08-10 17:06:38 <gmaxwell> heck, there are single transactions in testnet that takes longer than that w/ git master.
1037 2012-08-10 17:07:26 <sipa> oh, without sig checks
1038 2012-08-10 17:08:37 MC-Eeepc has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1039 2012-08-10 17:09:27 OneFixt has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1040 2012-08-10 17:09:41 <gmaxwell> pft. Cheater.
1041 2012-08-10 17:10:06 toffoo has joined
1042 2012-08-10 17:12:25 OneFixt has joined
1043 2012-08-10 17:12:58 <jgarzik> yeah really
1044 2012-08-10 17:14:31 denisx has joined
1045 2012-08-10 17:14:46 <jgarzik> [jgarzik@bd pynode]$ time ./dbck.py
1046 2012-08-10 17:14:46 <jgarzik> real 0m4.149s
1047 2012-08-10 17:14:53 <jgarzik> pynode in 4.14 seconds
1048 2012-08-10 17:15:25 <jgarzik> ignoring sig verf makes things fast :)
1049 2012-08-10 17:16:18 nickrb- has joined
1050 2012-08-10 17:17:13 <jgarzik> sudo stap /usr/share/doc/python-libs-2.7.3/pyfuntop.stp
1051 2012-08-10 17:17:29 <jgarzik> then run a python script, on Fedora. a top(1) for python
1052 2012-08-10 17:19:55 nickrb has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1053 2012-08-10 17:21:11 tsche has quit ()
1054 2012-08-10 17:22:19 unknown45682 has joined
1055 2012-08-10 17:23:49 <BlueMatt> what about mainnet?
1056 2012-08-10 17:27:47 nickrb has joined
1057 2012-08-10 17:31:19 nickrb- has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1058 2012-08-10 17:38:37 nickrb- has joined
1059 2012-08-10 17:41:32 <jgarzik> hrm, this appears to be no longer maintained: http://gitorious.org/python-bitcoin/
1060 2012-08-10 17:41:49 * jgarzik wonders if he can steal the name "python-bitcoin" for pynode's pynode-independent lib
1061 2012-08-10 17:42:21 nickrb has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1062 2012-08-10 17:43:49 datagutt is now known as leKanger
1063 2012-08-10 17:43:57 leKanger is now known as datagutt
1064 2012-08-10 17:44:17 datagutt is now known as leKanger
1065 2012-08-10 17:44:27 leKanger is now known as datagutt
1066 2012-08-10 17:44:55 datagutt is now known as leKangeur
1067 2012-08-10 17:45:01 leKangeur is now known as datagutt
1068 2012-08-10 17:46:26 bitllc has joined
1069 2012-08-10 17:46:32 bitllc has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1070 2012-08-10 17:47:56 nickrb has joined
1071 2012-08-10 17:49:18 bitllc has joined
1072 2012-08-10 17:49:21 toffoo has quit ()
1073 2012-08-10 17:49:42 <Ferroh> looking at python-bitcoin,
1074 2012-08-10 17:49:46 AlexWaters has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1075 2012-08-10 17:49:48 da2ce7 has joined
1076 2012-08-10 17:49:50 <Ferroh> it seems like that code was barely maintained to begin with
1077 2012-08-10 17:49:59 nickrb- has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1078 2012-08-10 17:50:10 bitllc has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1079 2012-08-10 17:50:44 devrandom has quit (Quit: leaving)
1080 2012-08-10 17:51:06 <Ferroh> so i vote that you can take that name if you want jgarzik
1081 2012-08-10 17:51:29 devrandom has joined
1082 2012-08-10 17:52:02 <Ferroh> pybitcoin and py-bitcoin also seem fine to me
1083 2012-08-10 17:52:20 da2ce7_d has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
1084 2012-08-10 17:52:52 <Ferroh> pyProjectName is a pretty common naming scheme for python stuff
1085 2012-08-10 17:53:09 <Ferroh> e.g. pySQLite, pyGtk, pyQT, pyOpenGL, etc.
1086 2012-08-10 17:53:18 <copumpkin> pygsty
1087 2012-08-10 17:55:42 meLon has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1088 2012-08-10 18:01:15 <jgarzik> pybitcoin seems taken by another incomplete project, https://github.com/lachesis/pybitcoin
1089 2012-08-10 18:01:56 <copumpkin> I wouldn't consider that a name conflict though
1090 2012-08-10 18:02:00 <jgarzik> (technical note - pynode's bitcoin lib can be considered complete, even if pynode's internal chain database is not)
1091 2012-08-10 18:02:16 <copumpkin> an abandoned/bitrotted project shouldn't really get to claim a name
1092 2012-08-10 18:02:53 * luke-jr is a fan of giving things real names..
1093 2012-08-10 18:02:59 <jgarzik> and then there's the potentially lame and untrustworthy "pyBitcoin Backup Portable 0.1 Alpha" http://www.softpedia.com/get/PORTABLE-SOFTWARE/System/Backup-and-Recovery/pyBitcoin-Backup-Portable.shtml
1094 2012-08-10 18:03:06 <copumpkin> I like real names too
1095 2012-08-10 18:03:26 <jgarzik> luke-jr's names are all hard to remember and type
1096 2012-08-10 18:03:36 <luke-jr> they are? O.o
1097 2012-08-10 18:04:07 <Ferroh> I heard luke-jr's names all contain Tonal numbering
1098 2012-08-10 18:04:18 <luke-jr> Ferroh: just Eligius pool names
1099 2012-08-10 18:05:28 drizztbsd has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1100 2012-08-10 18:05:52 DiabloD3 is now known as Diablo-D3
1101 2012-08-10 18:07:53 ByteUnits has joined
1102 2012-08-10 18:19:47 andrew_wmf has joined
1103 2012-08-10 18:20:53 emzic has joined
1104 2012-08-10 18:30:59 p0s has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1105 2012-08-10 18:33:34 bitllc has joined
1106 2012-08-10 18:33:48 bitllc has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1107 2012-08-10 18:44:26 phantomcircuit_ has joined
1108 2012-08-10 18:45:08 phantomcircuit has quit (Disconnected by services)
1109 2012-08-10 18:45:16 phantomcircuit_ is now known as phantomcircuit
1110 2012-08-10 18:45:27 hnz_ has joined
1111 2012-08-10 18:45:37 phantomcircuit_ has joined
1112 2012-08-10 18:49:52 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1113 2012-08-10 18:58:51 D34TH has joined
1114 2012-08-10 19:07:19 danbri has joined
1115 2012-08-10 19:12:15 rdponticelli has joined
1116 2012-08-10 19:14:15 <sipa> BlueMatt: mainnet without sig check in 6-7 mimutes something
1117 2012-08-10 19:14:30 <BlueMatt> Imported 188528 blocks.
1118 2012-08-10 19:14:30 <BlueMatt> real 1m15.470s
1119 2012-08-10 19:14:37 <BlueMatt> (without scripting)
1120 2012-08-10 19:14:51 <sipa> but i think i can speed that up a bit still
1121 2012-08-10 19:16:02 <BlueMatt> hmm...except the tmpfs-backed version takes a lot longer
1122 2012-08-10 19:17:46 <sipa> longer?
1123 2012-08-10 19:18:05 <BlueMatt> the 1m15s was a HashMap-based impl
1124 2012-08-10 19:18:24 <sipa> in bitcoinj?
1125 2012-08-10 19:18:26 <BlueMatt> yea
1126 2012-08-10 19:19:06 <sipa> i think if i disable creation of undo files, importing becomes a lot faster too
1127 2012-08-10 19:19:30 <sipa> and actually, before the last checkpoint that's pefectly fine
1128 2012-08-10 19:19:35 <BlueMatt> that was keeping 100 undoable blocks around
1129 2012-08-10 19:19:52 <sipa> in ram?
1130 2012-08-10 19:19:55 <BlueMatt> yea
1131 2012-08-10 19:20:16 <sipa> yes, ultraprune writes those directly to disk
1132 2012-08-10 19:20:25 <BlueMatt> ahh
1133 2012-08-10 19:20:48 <sipa> in almost every case, you don't need them anyway
1134 2012-08-10 19:21:37 <BlueMatt> damn, it should not be this hard to find a decent well-performing java db...
1135 2012-08-10 19:22:06 <sipa> also, separate file for each block slows things down
1136 2012-08-10 19:22:14 <BlueMatt> yea, that can hurt
1137 2012-08-10 19:24:21 <sipa> even in tmpfs
1138 2012-08-10 19:24:37 <BlueMatt> tmpfs really isnt particularly fast compared to anything in-memory
1139 2012-08-10 19:24:47 <BlueMatt> well, in-program's memory
1140 2012-08-10 19:26:05 <sipa> and tmpfs is actually slow compared to ext4-with-blocks-already-in-cache
1141 2012-08-10 19:26:08 Gladamas has joined
1142 2012-08-10 19:26:30 <BlueMatt> yep
1143 2012-08-10 19:27:54 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1144 2012-08-10 19:34:39 nsh has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1145 2012-08-10 19:38:51 <jgarzik> yeah, pynode keeps last 500 blocks in cache, parsed into data structures
1146 2012-08-10 19:42:30 Gladamas has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1147 2012-08-10 19:48:19 nsh has joined
1148 2012-08-10 19:49:41 Mad7Scientist has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1149 2012-08-10 19:51:57 <sipa> gmaxwell: just thought of a trivial consistency check for ultraprune: try a memory-only reorg a few hundred blocks back
1150 2012-08-10 19:55:49 andrew_wmf has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1151 2012-08-10 20:02:22 d4ve has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1152 2012-08-10 20:05:30 d4ve has joined
1153 2012-08-10 20:08:25 PhantomSpark has joined
1154 2012-08-10 20:10:45 jurov is now known as away!xzbnxup@84.245.71.31|jurov
1155 2012-08-10 20:19:27 nsh has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1156 2012-08-10 20:30:25 <denisx> someone with a ztex board here?
1157 2012-08-10 20:30:46 <sipa> yes
1158 2012-08-10 20:30:46 <eian> tn!3502012
1159 2012-08-10 20:32:10 <denisx> sipa: was that yes for me?
1160 2012-08-10 20:32:15 <sipa> denisx: yes
1161 2012-08-10 20:32:19 <denisx> sipa: cool
1162 2012-08-10 20:32:29 <denisx> sipa: which one do you have?
1163 2012-08-10 20:32:31 <denisx> x or y?
1164 2012-08-10 20:32:34 <sipa> both
1165 2012-08-10 20:32:56 <denisx> sipa: I thought the leds are blinking for every found share
1166 2012-08-10 20:33:00 <denisx> but nothing blinks for me
1167 2012-08-10 20:33:45 <sipa> are you using the 120703 with dummy firmware?
1168 2012-08-10 20:34:10 <denisx> sipa: just unpacket it and started it
1169 2012-08-10 20:34:19 <denisx> don't know much about dummy firmware
1170 2012-08-10 20:34:58 <sipa> the earlier versions required you to flash the appropriate firmware for your module before mining
1171 2012-08-10 20:35:44 <sipa> now you're supposed to flash some dummy firmware which allows the program to just detect the hardware, and load the correct code at runtime
1172 2012-08-10 20:35:55 <sipa> don't know the exact command-line arguments anymor
1173 2012-08-10 20:35:56 <denisx> sipa: ok, cool
1174 2012-08-10 20:36:51 meLon has joined
1175 2012-08-10 20:40:11 nsh has joined
1176 2012-08-10 20:41:13 slush1 has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1177 2012-08-10 20:44:10 <denisx> sipa: ztex_ufm1_15y.ucf this is the dummy firmware?
1178 2012-08-10 20:44:23 <sipa> i think so
1179 2012-08-10 20:44:35 <sipa> oh, that's for the y board, no?
1180 2012-08-10 20:44:59 topace has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1181 2012-08-10 20:45:08 <denisx> sipa: yes, I have the 1.115y
1182 2012-08-10 20:45:17 <denisx> 1.15y
1183 2012-08-10 20:45:38 <sipa> ah, not sure if that's even supposed to flash
1184 2012-08-10 20:46:16 topace has joined
1185 2012-08-10 20:49:27 phantomcircuit has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1186 2012-08-10 20:52:06 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1187 2012-08-10 20:53:07 MC-Eeepc has joined
1188 2012-08-10 21:02:28 sirk390 has joined
1189 2012-08-10 21:05:47 sirk390 has left ()
1190 2012-08-10 21:07:16 Diablo-D3 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1191 2012-08-10 21:07:55 Diablo-D3 has joined
1192 2012-08-10 21:17:59 minimoose has quit (Quit: minimoose)
1193 2012-08-10 21:25:08 darkee has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1194 2012-08-10 21:25:44 darkee has joined
1195 2012-08-10 21:27:03 toffoo has joined
1196 2012-08-10 21:28:10 danbri has joined
1197 2012-08-10 21:30:03 andrew_wmf_ has joined
1198 2012-08-10 21:35:07 JStoker has quit (Excess Flood)
1199 2012-08-10 21:40:41 jurov is now known as jurov|away
1200 2012-08-10 21:47:09 ninix has quit (Quit: Page closed)
1201 2012-08-10 21:49:50 JStoker has joined
1202 2012-08-10 21:50:52 nickrb- has joined
1203 2012-08-10 21:53:26 nickrb has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1204 2012-08-10 21:54:20 D34TH_ has joined
1205 2012-08-10 21:54:37 Stove has joined
1206 2012-08-10 21:56:23 Stove has left ()
1207 2012-08-10 21:58:18 D34TH has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1208 2012-08-10 22:00:17 eoss has joined
1209 2012-08-10 22:00:17 eoss has quit (Changing host)
1210 2012-08-10 22:00:17 eoss has joined
1211 2012-08-10 22:01:50 [\\\] has joined
1212 2012-08-10 22:03:25 LuaKT has quit ()
1213 2012-08-10 22:06:27 ehash has joined
1214 2012-08-10 22:15:41 ovidiusoft has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1215 2012-08-10 22:18:39 DashhSleeps has joined
1216 2012-08-10 22:18:57 DashhSleeps is now known as RainbowDashh
1217 2012-08-10 22:21:24 Turingi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1218 2012-08-10 22:30:16 CodesInChaos has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1219 2012-08-10 22:36:14 unknown45682 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1220 2012-08-10 22:50:06 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
1221 2012-08-10 22:50:47 sirk390 has joined
1222 2012-08-10 22:50:48 sirk390 has quit (Client Quit)
1223 2012-08-10 22:56:47 ehash_ has joined
1224 2012-08-10 23:00:42 ehash has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1225 2012-08-10 23:01:05 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@brwyatt.net|brwyatt
1226 2012-08-10 23:08:20 RainbowDashh has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1227 2012-08-10 23:11:00 RainbowDashh has joined
1228 2012-08-10 23:13:57 slush1 has joined
1229 2012-08-10 23:15:01 RazielZ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1230 2012-08-10 23:25:43 Detritus has joined
1231 2012-08-10 23:27:15 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1232 2012-08-10 23:33:42 Marf has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1233 2012-08-10 23:34:35 Fanquake has joined
1234 2012-08-10 23:35:48 spitteler has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1235 2012-08-10 23:36:32 Gladamas has joined
1236 2012-08-10 23:37:24 Fanquake has left ()
1237 2012-08-10 23:40:48 eian has quit ()
1238 2012-08-10 23:46:29 bitcoinfans has joined
1239 2012-08-10 23:46:49 <bitcoinfans> I am the horseman!
1240 2012-08-10 23:49:29 datagutt has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
1241 2012-08-10 23:50:06 d4de has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1242 2012-08-10 23:55:30 Clipse has quit (Quit: Clipse)
1243 2012-08-10 23:58:47 <luke-jr> bitcoinfans: I am the Musketeer. I win.
1244 2012-08-10 23:59:50 Clipse has joined