1 2012-09-12 00:02:17 variousnefarious has quit (Read error: No route to host)
2 2012-09-12 00:02:24 variousnefarious has joined
3 2012-09-12 00:02:39 ZephyrVoid has joined
4 2012-09-12 00:03:12 jurov has quit (away!~jurov@rini17.broker.freenet6.net|Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
5 2012-09-12 00:03:27 jurovz has joined
6 2012-09-12 00:03:39 ZephyrVoid has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
7 2012-09-12 00:09:52 ShadesOfMarble has quit ()
8 2012-09-12 00:13:23 copumpkin is now known as imsaguy
9 2012-09-12 00:13:27 imsaguy is now known as copumpkin
10 2012-09-12 00:14:04 Clipse has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
11 2012-09-12 00:15:04 xisalty has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
12 2012-09-12 00:17:13 xisalty has joined
13 2012-09-12 00:25:28 Muis has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
14 2012-09-12 00:28:42 b00tkitz has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
15 2012-09-12 00:28:56 aq83 has joined
16 2012-09-12 00:31:07 benjamindees has joined
17 2012-09-12 00:31:53 <benjamindees> so, this is my running understanding of how locktime works... please correct me if it's wrong
18 2012-09-12 00:32:29 <benjamindees> I transmit a locked transaction, it is confirmed and added to the blockchain.
19 2012-09-12 00:32:48 <benjamindees> My balance doesn't change.
20 2012-09-12 00:33:28 <benjamindees> I create another transaction to spend the locked coins. It is not confirmed until after the lock expires?
21 2012-09-12 00:33:40 <gmaxwell> no.
22 2012-09-12 00:33:56 <gmaxwell> You create a locked transaction. It can't be confirmed until the lock expires.
23 2012-09-12 00:34:43 <benjamindees> well something ain't right then. how can I extract a raw transaction from the blockchain to verify it was locked?
24 2012-09-12 00:35:38 <gmaxwell> was locked in the past but the lock has since expired? run getrawtransaction on it and use some non-existing tool to parse it out of the hex.. or add some code to bitcoin's rawtransaction decode to print it (I don't think it does now)
25 2012-09-12 00:36:01 b00tkitz has joined
26 2012-09-12 00:36:11 <benjamindees> it does print it, and it's easy to verify from the hex since it's at the end
27 2012-09-12 00:36:39 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
28 2012-09-12 00:38:26 <benjamindees> http://blockchain.info/tx/13e100dd08b6da0a7426ea520b0bb3ae54cef79dd045e2e4f7116023df3a5c95
29 2012-09-12 00:38:46 <benjamindees> that's the txid. it shows as locked until block 198370.
30 2012-09-12 00:40:34 <gmaxwell> oh indeed, it does print it. cool.
31 2012-09-12 00:43:57 <benjamindees> and it was included in block 198359 :(
32 2012-09-12 00:45:13 ZephyrVoid has joined
33 2012-09-12 00:45:39 one_zero has joined
34 2012-09-12 00:48:08 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
35 2012-09-12 00:51:00 <gmaxwell> 0_o
36 2012-09-12 00:51:52 <gmaxwell> I ... really wish people would test these things in testnet first. crap.
37 2012-09-12 00:53:59 paraipan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
38 2012-09-12 00:54:08 <wizkid057> testnet? whats that? ;)
39 2012-09-12 00:54:18 <midnightmagic> holy crap there's a net where tests happen?!
40 2012-09-12 00:57:40 <Joric> blkindex wont open how to fix?
41 2012-09-12 00:58:06 PhantomSpark has quit (2!~kvirc@pool-71-251-16-25.nycmny.fios.verizon.net|Read error: Connection reset by peer)
42 2012-09-12 00:59:12 unknown45682 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
43 2012-09-12 01:00:18 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
44 2012-09-12 01:01:10 PhantomSpark has joined
45 2012-09-12 01:01:12 unknown45682 has joined
46 2012-09-12 01:01:35 unknown45682 has quit (Max SendQ exceeded)
47 2012-09-12 01:01:36 PhantomSpark has quit (2!~kvirc@pool-71-251-16-25.nycmny.fios.verizon.net|Read error: Connection reset by peer)
48 2012-09-12 01:02:08 skeledrew has joined
49 2012-09-12 01:02:10 PhantomSpark has joined
50 2012-09-12 01:02:25 midnightmagic has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
51 2012-09-12 01:02:51 unknown45682 has joined
52 2012-09-12 01:04:08 midnightmagic has joined
53 2012-09-12 01:06:11 JZavala has joined
54 2012-09-12 01:14:00 one_zero has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
55 2012-09-12 01:14:52 paraipan has joined
56 2012-09-12 01:16:00 EPiSKiNG- has joined
57 2012-09-12 01:16:49 <gmaxwell> So, did we previously know that nlocktime has always been broken?
58 2012-09-12 01:17:22 <gmaxwell> IsFinal can never be false.
59 2012-09-12 01:17:42 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
60 2012-09-12 01:19:05 <wizkid057> dont people have to test this stuff before it's merged?
61 2012-09-12 01:19:29 Marf has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
62 2012-09-12 01:19:36 <gmaxwell> wizkid057: day one bugs.
63 2012-09-12 01:19:49 copumpkin has joined
64 2012-09-12 01:20:14 <gmaxwell> and as I've mentioned before, the unit tests we have now are terrible in terms of confirmation bias... they mostly test things that pass.
65 2012-09-12 01:20:35 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: nlocktime has been disabled in the code since satoshi's time, yes
66 2012-09-12 01:20:54 <wizkid057> :(
67 2012-09-12 01:21:06 D34TH has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
68 2012-09-12 01:21:18 <jgarzik> requires a major effort to enable, at this point
69 2012-09-12 01:21:38 <jgarzik> I don't think anybody thought through all the issues, like DoS'ing
70 2012-09-12 01:22:36 <jgarzik> it leverages the mempool quite a bit more, and would force us to start thinking about mempool limits -- something we DO really need to do anyway. But it turns up the heat quite a bit.
71 2012-09-12 01:23:57 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: are you confusing nlocktime with replacement, because replacement has dos and mempool limit issues, nlocktime doesn't.
72 2012-09-12 01:24:04 <gmaxwell> And I knew replacement was disabled.
73 2012-09-12 01:27:54 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
74 2012-09-12 01:29:40 mal`` has left ()
75 2012-09-12 01:31:54 JZavala has joined
76 2012-09-12 01:32:51 Motest003 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
77 2012-09-12 01:33:22 Motest031 has joined
78 2012-09-12 01:33:37 one_zero has joined
79 2012-09-12 01:33:43 one_zero has quit (Excess Flood)
80 2012-09-12 01:34:40 one_zero has joined
81 2012-09-12 01:43:03 toffoo has joined
82 2012-09-12 01:47:51 Joric has quit ()
83 2012-09-12 02:04:07 agricocb has joined
84 2012-09-12 02:06:57 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
85 2012-09-12 02:07:10 firelegend has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
86 2012-09-12 02:12:05 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
87 2012-09-12 02:15:04 drazak_ has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
88 2012-09-12 02:17:33 osmosis has joined
89 2012-09-12 02:24:07 paraipan has quit (Quit: Saliendo)
90 2012-09-12 02:38:58 maqr has joined
91 2012-09-12 02:39:52 agricocb has joined
92 2012-09-12 02:40:04 fiesh has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
93 2012-09-12 02:41:19 stamit has left ()
94 2012-09-12 02:42:45 fiesh has joined
95 2012-09-12 02:43:07 Clipse has joined
96 2012-09-12 02:43:07 Clipse has quit (Changing host)
97 2012-09-12 02:43:07 Clipse has joined
98 2012-09-12 02:46:16 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
99 2012-09-12 02:46:28 unknown45682 has quit ()
100 2012-09-12 02:47:32 denisx has quit (Quit: denisx)
101 2012-09-12 02:50:15 drazak_ has joined
102 2012-09-12 02:57:40 CluckCreek has left ()
103 2012-09-12 03:03:24 setkeh has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
104 2012-09-12 03:07:19 agricocb has joined
105 2012-09-12 03:08:23 AlexWaters has joined
106 2012-09-12 03:09:55 [7] has quit (Disconnected by services)
107 2012-09-12 03:10:04 TheSeven has joined
108 2012-09-12 03:17:21 setkeh has joined
109 2012-09-12 03:17:40 EPiSKiNG- has quit ()
110 2012-09-12 03:17:52 slush has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
111 2012-09-12 03:24:25 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: huh, I stand corrected
112 2012-09-12 03:24:32 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: it looks like IsFinal is broken
113 2012-09-12 03:27:27 benjamindees has quit (Quit: Leaving)
114 2012-09-12 03:28:38 <gmaxwell> And there is now at least one transaction in the chain with an invalid IsFinal. I think it's more than a little horrifying that we're not hearing screams from alternatie implementations.
115 2012-09-12 03:34:33 spammytrap has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
116 2012-09-12 03:34:33 TwilightSparklee has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
117 2012-09-12 03:35:03 project10 has quit (Quit: ZNC - http://znc.in)
118 2012-09-12 03:36:39 project10 has joined
119 2012-09-12 03:41:24 <midnightmagic> gmaxwell: Perhaps they don't know about it, or they haven't realised the magnitude of the issue.
120 2012-09-12 03:44:32 tastynaysty has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
121 2012-09-12 03:51:09 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: I mean, either they impose the rule and they're stuck now, and I don't see any evidence of that.
122 2012-09-12 03:51:36 <gmaxwell> Or they don't. In which case... so much for alternative implementations. I think it would be really hard to copy that bug if you were reading the code at all.
123 2012-09-12 03:53:20 <Luke-Jr> lol
124 2012-09-12 03:58:47 <kjj_> oh dear god.
125 2012-09-12 03:59:58 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: alternative implementations tend to just cover the basics
126 2012-09-12 03:59:58 RainbowDashh has joined
127 2012-09-12 04:00:01 <kjj_> is that nested test construction in CTransaction::IsFinal common enough in C++ that people can actually read it without drawing a diagram?
128 2012-09-12 04:00:14 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: I don't know of a single alternative implementation with 100% coverage vis a vis the ref client
129 2012-09-12 04:01:21 denisx has joined
130 2012-09-12 04:02:29 <jgarzik> The network relies on the protection of the satoshi reference client a great deal
131 2012-09-12 04:03:35 <jgarzik> other implementations are "lazy" in various ways, and it doesn't usually matter, because omitting some checks is penalty-free is The Masses continue to do proper checking.
132 2012-09-12 04:05:07 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
133 2012-09-12 04:08:13 DaQatz has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
134 2012-09-12 04:09:18 project10_ has joined
135 2012-09-12 04:09:29 project10 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
136 2012-09-12 04:09:29 project10_ is now known as project10
137 2012-09-12 04:12:46 Lolcust has joined
138 2012-09-12 04:16:28 samw has joined
139 2012-09-12 04:18:43 enmaku has joined
140 2012-09-12 04:24:25 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: <NAME> said 2 hours, 58 minutes ago in <CHANNEL>: your quit message is really long)
141 2012-09-12 04:27:05 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: is Opus better than mp3, for the typical mp3 application (playing a stored collection of music)?
142 2012-09-12 04:27:14 <jgarzik> </ot>
143 2012-09-12 04:29:10 <kjj_> mp3 is smallish, decodes fast even on old CPUs, and sounds good if encoded properly. also, it is supported pretty much everywhere
144 2012-09-12 04:29:29 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: in case you didn't see it yet: http://opus-codec.org/comparison/
145 2012-09-12 04:29:48 <kjj_> dozens of competitors have popped up over the last 20 years, none have offered any really good reasons to switch
146 2012-09-12 04:30:06 <Luke-Jr> but who needs Opus when you can just hack into the LHC and compress your data with its mini black hole? </troll> ;)
147 2012-09-12 04:30:22 <Luke-Jr> kjj_: except that just about nothing uses MP3 anymore?
148 2012-09-12 04:30:47 <kjj_> you mean, not counting every device made in the last 15 years or the next 100? that nothing?
149 2012-09-12 04:30:56 <jgarzik> Luke-Jr: yah, that comparison does not really cover technical issues like software decode speed, hardware implementation difficulty, etc.
150 2012-09-12 04:31:20 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: the FAQ talks about it being easy to use in embedded RTOS at least *shrug*
151 2012-09-12 04:31:29 <Luke-Jr> kjj_: I mean actual data
152 2012-09-12 04:31:49 <kjj_> the patent issue is about the only really interesting argument against mp3, and for the most part, no one cares
153 2012-09-12 04:32:23 <kjj_> Luke-Jr: I'm no longer sure what you are talking about. what actual data do you mean?
154 2012-09-12 04:32:37 <Luke-Jr> kjj_: audio and video files.
155 2012-09-12 04:32:50 <Luke-Jr> I don't recall the last time I saw them using MP3
156 2012-09-12 04:33:05 <kjj_> who are them?
157 2012-09-12 04:33:39 <Luke-Jr> just various files online
158 2012-09-12 04:33:44 RainbowDashh has joined
159 2012-09-12 04:33:56 <Luke-Jr> then again, I don't go looking for music generally either
160 2012-09-12 04:33:57 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
161 2012-09-12 04:34:02 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: Yes, very much so. ... well, so long as your metric for better doesn't include compatiblity with a billion preexisting devices.
162 2012-09-12 04:34:07 <kjj_> if you are ripping yourself, mp3 is just fine, and odds are good that you already have the codec
163 2012-09-12 04:34:28 <Luke-Jr> kjj_: if you're ripping yourself, I don't know why you wouldn't use FLAC.
164 2012-09-12 04:34:40 <kjj_> if you aren't ripping yourself, unless you are coming from a lossless format, you lose when you re-code
165 2012-09-12 04:34:45 <jgarzik> being a nutter open source purist, my systems do not, in fact, automatically have mp3 support
166 2012-09-12 04:34:54 <jgarzik> even in the year 2012
167 2012-09-12 04:35:04 <kjj_> Luke-Jr: because I own probably about 20 devices that understand mp3, but don't understand FLAC
168 2012-09-12 04:35:47 <gmaxwell> kjj_: roughly half the bitrate of mp3, realistically, and having low enough latency to use for interactive use (voip, telepresence, real time remote music jamming), etc are not tiny selling points.
169 2012-09-12 04:36:07 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: if you consider that in theory, software patents are invalid, and in practice, nobody will bother you, and finally that MP3 decoders are open source, I'm not sure where the objection comes from âº
170 2012-09-12 04:36:26 <Luke-Jr> kjj_: I see. I don't use such devices.
171 2012-09-12 04:36:27 <kjj_> jgarzik: isn't LAME open source? mp3 is only an issue for "free software" people because they can't legally redistribute due to patent issues
172 2012-09-12 04:36:51 * Luke-Jr facepalms
173 2012-09-12 04:37:05 <gmaxwell> kjj_: and people do care about mp3 licensing, it's a couple bucks per decoder noq.. not joe blow on the internet.. but think about how much you've paid for mp3 over and over again in every device you've purchased made by large companies who can't count on it being bad PR to sue them.
174 2012-09-12 04:37:10 denisx_ has joined
175 2012-09-12 04:38:31 <gmaxwell> kjj_: FWIW, I got involved with RF codecs because I deployed lame at my job (and I wrote the initial lame VBR support), and I had a sales person come in and fud me about patents when I said I didn't need his product because I'd made something superior. And, at the tender age of 18 fully expected him to walk into my legal department and get me fired from my very conservative workplace.
176 2012-09-12 04:39:05 <kjj_> heh
177 2012-09-12 04:39:22 <gmaxwell> In hindsight, he would have had to awfully desperate to actually do that. But he sure scared me. Didn't work for him, I jumped in with the vorbis project and rapidly switched things over.
178 2012-09-12 04:39:25 denisx has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
179 2012-09-12 04:39:25 denisx_ is now known as denisx
180 2012-09-12 04:40:50 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
181 2012-09-12 04:40:58 <kjj_> meh. in 5 years, the patents on MP3 will all have expired
182 2012-09-12 04:42:38 <gmaxwell> kjj_: sure, and you'll have a twenty something year old format that kinda sucks. One requires vaguely twice the bitrate and has high latency that makes it unusable for realtime applications.
183 2012-09-12 04:43:09 drazak_ has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
184 2012-09-12 04:43:30 <kjj_> and I suspect that it will still be "good enough" in 2017, just like it is now
185 2012-09-12 04:43:58 <gmaxwell> kjj_: It is completely unusable for realtime usage. Talking through mp3 is like talking through a sat phone.
186 2012-09-12 04:44:03 <kjj_> for typical playback usages, it is really hard to justify re-ripping everything
187 2012-09-12 04:44:13 <gmaxwell> kjj_: sure, don't do that.
188 2012-09-12 04:44:37 <gmaxwell> If you rerip things it should be lossless. Diskspace is cheap. Then you can transcode to whatever mobile formats are convient for you at the time.
189 2012-09-12 04:44:37 <kjj_> gmaxwell: haha. I was just going to type the exact same thing about your realtime comment
190 2012-09-12 04:44:44 <da2ce7> 320 MP3 is "ok" providing you are encoding it with a good encoder (such as lame).
191 2012-09-12 04:45:22 <gmaxwell> But if you're streaming, or no a space constrained portable device the space matters. If it doesn't matter.. lossless is only twice again the size of a 320k mp3 for most content.
192 2012-09-12 04:45:52 <kjj_> da2ce7: and you need very good ears, or a fairly good imagination, to hear the difference between a good encoder and a merely decent one, or from 320k to 256k
193 2012-09-12 04:46:13 skeledrew has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
194 2012-09-12 04:46:54 skeledrew has joined
195 2012-09-12 04:47:08 <da2ce7> kjj_: 320 vs 256 on a good encoder I would agree with you (I cannot tell the difference with my studio-grade gear), however 320 bad encoder and 320 good encoder can be night and day.
196 2012-09-12 04:47:57 <gmaxwell> kjj_: well the spectrum isn't good vs decent, it's usually good vs bad. or good vs very bad. E.g. the iso mpeg reference source that almost everything is based on was horiffic. It managed to make the short block decision and put it in the wrong frame.
197 2012-09-12 04:48:21 <gmaxwell> You could absolutely abx bladeenc (just a speed optimized copy of the refrence encoder) at 320kbit/sec.
198 2012-09-12 04:48:30 B0g4r7 has joined
199 2012-09-12 04:48:44 samw has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
200 2012-09-12 04:48:59 dust-otc has joined
201 2012-09-12 04:50:15 <kjj_> I haven't been looking very hard, but it has been a LONG time since I came across a badly encoded mp3
202 2012-09-12 04:51:02 B0g4r7_ has joined
203 2012-09-12 04:53:11 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
204 2012-09-12 04:53:11 B0g4r7_ is now known as B0g4r7
205 2012-09-12 04:53:53 <osmosis> why did I get this sanity-test fail? http://jenkins.bluematt.me/pull-tester/224222746698db200d4c47e1611219f25fc5aa71/
206 2012-09-12 04:55:36 * jgarzik rips to FLAC, but sadly nobody supports that in any device I've ever owned
207 2012-09-12 04:55:59 <kjj_> jgarzik: rockbox
208 2012-09-12 04:56:45 <kjj_> not an option for your car, most likely. but I think there are decks that support FLAC now. and line-in is very common
209 2012-09-12 04:57:27 <Luke-Jr> pretty sure it works on Nokia N900 <.<
210 2012-09-12 04:58:29 <doublec> some of the korean digital media players support flac too
211 2012-09-12 04:59:08 <xisalty> android does too
212 2012-09-12 04:59:30 <kjj_> rockbox is pretty cool though. you can even get an old-school Winamp skin that makes your mp3 player look just like 1996
213 2012-09-12 04:59:32 Arnavion has quit (Quit: Arnavion)
214 2012-09-12 04:59:56 <kjj_> er, 1997 rather
215 2012-09-12 05:00:25 AlexWaters1 has joined
216 2012-09-12 05:01:19 AlexWaters has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
217 2012-09-12 05:01:54 ThomasV has joined
218 2012-09-12 05:02:23 <jgarzik> neat. it sounds like Samsung Galaxy S has FLAC support.
219 2012-09-12 05:02:47 * Luke-Jr wonders how much disk space modern smartphones have these days
220 2012-09-12 05:02:54 * Luke-Jr has 64 GB in his N900
221 2012-09-12 05:02:58 <jgarzik> 16GB here.
222 2012-09-12 05:03:04 <xisalty> 8GB-16GB is average
223 2012-09-12 05:03:04 <jgarzik> easily upgradable
224 2012-09-12 05:03:08 <xisalty> ^
225 2012-09-12 05:03:11 <doublec> if they don't allow SD cards it's usually 8-32GB
226 2012-09-12 05:03:20 <jgarzik> and if my phone supports it, then my car support it.
227 2012-09-12 05:03:26 <jgarzik> *supports
228 2012-09-12 05:03:32 <doublec> I have a 64GB card in my n900
229 2012-09-12 05:03:52 <xisalty> thats about how much spaec my laptop has
230 2012-09-12 05:04:14 <jgarzik> my first hard drive was 128MB :)
231 2012-09-12 05:04:26 <osmosis> if you got an android phone, you can play FLAC files just fine
232 2012-09-12 05:04:37 <gmaxwell> kjj_: rockbox has opus support (well, I think not yet in the latest shipping version)
233 2012-09-12 05:04:40 <gmaxwell> :P
234 2012-09-12 05:05:13 <jgarzik> osmosis: s//recent/
235 2012-09-12 05:05:20 <kjj_> heh, I don't actually use it any more. I'm rarely far enough away from a proper computer to need a MP3 player.
236 2012-09-12 05:05:38 <kjj_> I mostly got it to look into writing a bitcoin plugin for the UI to use as a hardware wallet
237 2012-09-12 05:05:59 <jgarzik> in 10 years, all computers will be the size of your phone. they will be the size necessary for the various input/output plugs, and no more.
238 2012-09-12 05:06:30 <xisalty> I wish
239 2012-09-12 05:06:36 * jgarzik chuffs at "proper computer"
240 2012-09-12 05:06:55 <kjj_> hmm. I'm thinking about video cards from 5, 10, 20 and 25 years ago, and I think the trend there is going in the other direction
241 2012-09-12 05:08:31 <kjj_> the old HGC cards were friggin huge, but thin. they got smallish for a while, but steady growth in all three dimensions since the late 90s
242 2012-09-12 05:09:06 <kjj_> well, VLB was an exception, but that was because of the connector.
243 2012-09-12 05:09:51 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: we can already put 5 year old technology in that size, but still we make/use desktop PCs ;)
244 2012-09-12 05:10:11 <jgarzik> desktop PC sales continue to fall through the floor, and nobody thinks that will recover
245 2012-09-12 05:10:12 <kjj_> even worse, the portable things we have now, phones, tablets, etc, are FAR from real computers. they have all of the right parts, but too often, they have a bunch of wrong parts too
246 2012-09-12 05:10:20 <Luke-Jr> no matter how advanced you get, the non-miniaturized computer will always outperform the smaller ones - and more importantly, be hand-customizable
247 2012-09-12 05:10:37 <jgarzik> desktops will disappear, and only "workstations" will remain, for the few programmers in the crowd.
248 2012-09-12 05:10:46 <xisalty> yup
249 2012-09-12 05:10:50 <Luke-Jr> kjj_: I run Gentoo and KDE on my N900.
250 2012-09-12 05:10:55 <xisalty> its all going the way of the mobile market now
251 2012-09-12 05:10:56 <kjj_> I absolutely despise android, for example
252 2012-09-12 05:12:03 <Luke-Jr> anyone know a reasonable GUI debugger that can intermix source and assembly?
253 2012-09-12 05:12:21 <Luke-Jr> I liked insight, but it seems they can't get it to work these days :/
254 2012-09-12 05:12:42 <kjj_> do you mean a debugger for a GUI, or a GUI-based debugger?
255 2012-09-12 05:12:48 <Luke-Jr> GUI-based debugger
256 2012-09-12 05:13:05 <Luke-Jr> heck, commandline would be fine too, but gdb doesn't make nice when the debugging symbols suck
257 2012-09-12 05:13:13 <kjj_> ok, phew. for a minute there, I was wondering what the hell you were working on
258 2012-09-12 05:14:28 <kjj_> what's wrong with your symbols? are you debugging a project with linked ASM and .c or .cpp objects? or just have a lot of inline assembly?
259 2012-09-12 05:15:33 <Luke-Jr> I don't know. I compiled with -O0 -ggdb, and still getting weird info
260 2012-09-12 05:15:47 <Luke-Jr> shouldn't be any assembly in my current build
261 2012-09-12 05:16:58 <kjj_> that's really odd then. usually don't run into that unless someone slips you a stripped library
262 2012-09-12 05:17:39 <Luke-Jr> ==5330== Invalid read of size 1
263 2012-09-12 05:17:40 <Luke-Jr> ==5330== at 0x4201FE7: strtok (strtok.S:196)
264 2012-09-12 05:17:42 <Luke-Jr> ==5330== by 0x804D6E7: load_config (miner.c:1297)
265 2012-09-12 05:17:45 <Luke-Jr> line 1297 doesn't call strtok
266 2012-09-12 05:18:19 <kjj_> what does line 1297 really do?
267 2012-09-12 05:18:27 <kjj_> or, is there a nearby strtok?
268 2012-09-12 05:18:58 <Luke-Jr> it calls a function that calls strtok (not at the end)
269 2012-09-12 05:19:28 <kjj_> the load_config function?
270 2012-09-12 05:19:35 <Luke-Jr> hmm, actually gdb itself is giving me a sane stack
271 2012-09-12 05:19:46 <Luke-Jr> load_config calls parse_config calls strtok in a loop
272 2012-09-12 05:19:50 bitcoinz has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
273 2012-09-12 05:20:14 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: try with -fno-builtin
274 2012-09-12 05:20:54 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: no change
275 2012-09-12 05:21:28 <gmaxwell> (the compiler has internal implementations of some simple ansic functions that get inlined implicitly, e.g. ABS, I think that even happens at -O0)
276 2012-09-12 05:21:31 <gmaxwell> darn
277 2012-09-12 05:21:52 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: so where do you endup if you run valgrind with --db-attach ?
278 2012-09-12 05:22:45 <kjj_> I guess I would try to hit a breakpoint before the load_config call and single step into it
279 2012-09-12 05:23:49 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: the correct line
280 2012-09-12 05:23:57 <kjj_> not exactly a subtle or skilled technique, but sometimes helps clear things up
281 2012-09-12 05:23:59 <Luke-Jr> I think I found the bug too :D
282 2012-09-12 05:24:55 <Luke-Jr> nested strtok â¹
283 2012-09-12 05:25:10 * Luke-Jr sighs at Windows portability of nestable strtok
284 2012-09-12 05:26:37 tonikt has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
285 2012-09-12 05:27:23 ovidiusoft has joined
286 2012-09-12 05:27:51 <kjj_> ugh. I'd love to see the code for that. what does it do, snoop on the stack to see which string it should be chopping?
287 2012-09-12 05:27:59 AlexWaters1 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
288 2012-09-12 05:29:29 RazielZ has joined
289 2012-09-12 05:31:33 <Luke-Jr> kjj_: I imagine it just uses a static variable.
290 2012-09-12 05:31:53 <Luke-Jr> POSIX has strtok_r to sanitize it, but Windows doesn't
291 2012-09-12 05:32:21 AlexWaters has joined
292 2012-09-12 05:32:32 <kjj_> yeah, the static variable part is easy. but how do you nest that safely without cheating to figure out which level you are being called from?
293 2012-09-12 05:34:13 <kjj_> or were you talking about strtok_r shen you said "nestable strtok" ?
294 2012-09-12 05:35:30 <kjj_> ahh, you were indeed. I missed the POSIX line. strtok_r should be easy enough to fake if you want to run it in Windows
295 2012-09-12 05:38:21 Cory has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
296 2012-09-12 05:38:55 <kjj_> so, has anyone been scanning the chain to see if there are more nLockTime violations?
297 2012-09-12 05:45:16 PiZZaMaN2K has joined
298 2012-09-12 05:46:08 danbri has joined
299 2012-09-12 05:46:13 tastynaysty has joined
300 2012-09-12 05:48:43 yellowhat-mobile has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
301 2012-09-12 05:55:01 ForceMajeure_ has joined
302 2012-09-12 05:58:08 ForceMajeure has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
303 2012-09-12 05:58:38 arij has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
304 2012-09-12 06:00:29 AlexWaters has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
305 2012-09-12 06:03:20 AlexWaters has joined
306 2012-09-12 06:04:17 stamit has joined
307 2012-09-12 06:05:41 stamit has quit (Client Quit)
308 2012-09-12 06:06:50 yellowhat-mobile has joined
309 2012-09-12 06:13:13 yellowhat-mobile has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
310 2012-09-12 06:13:25 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
311 2012-09-12 06:14:24 Diablo-D3 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
312 2012-09-12 06:16:07 leotreasure has joined
313 2012-09-12 06:22:26 ForceMajeure_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
314 2012-09-12 06:22:58 [Echelon] has quit (Quit: ircN 8.00 for mIRC (20100904) - www.ircN.org)
315 2012-09-12 06:26:02 Erdon has joined
316 2012-09-12 06:32:50 Clipse has quit (Quit: Clipse)
317 2012-09-12 06:34:13 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
318 2012-09-12 06:34:14 leotreasure has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
319 2012-09-12 06:41:02 leotreasure has joined
320 2012-09-12 06:51:43 ForceMajeure has joined
321 2012-09-12 06:53:48 dvide has quit ()
322 2012-09-12 06:53:48 tucenaber has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
323 2012-09-12 06:58:40 RainbowDashh has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
324 2012-09-12 07:01:15 RainbowDashh has joined
325 2012-09-12 07:02:16 CodesInChaos has joined
326 2012-09-12 07:05:04 fpgaminer has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
327 2012-09-12 07:05:09 fpgaminer has joined
328 2012-09-12 07:10:00 tucenaber has joined
329 2012-09-12 07:10:00 tucenaber has quit (Changing host)
330 2012-09-12 07:10:00 tucenaber has joined
331 2012-09-12 07:17:01 RainbowD_ has joined
332 2012-09-12 07:19:44 RainbowDashh has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
333 2012-09-12 07:19:44 RainbowD_ is now known as RainbowDashh
334 2012-09-12 07:20:06 leotreasure has quit (Quit: leotreasure)
335 2012-09-12 07:20:46 tonikt has joined
336 2012-09-12 07:22:04 Joric has joined
337 2012-09-12 07:23:15 eian has quit ()
338 2012-09-12 07:24:00 danbri has joined
339 2012-09-12 07:40:28 PK has joined
340 2012-09-12 07:41:21 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
341 2012-09-12 07:49:53 osmosis has quit (Quit: Leaving)
342 2012-09-12 07:56:47 Raccoon` has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
343 2012-09-12 07:58:29 PK has quit (Quit: breakfast, then checking if the larc is still abandoned.)
344 2012-09-12 07:59:59 Raccoon` has joined
345 2012-09-12 08:02:30 stamit has joined
346 2012-09-12 08:09:21 stamit has left ()
347 2012-09-12 08:10:12 unknown45682 has joined
348 2012-09-12 08:11:31 stamit has joined
349 2012-09-12 08:12:57 stamit has quit (Client Quit)
350 2012-09-12 08:14:28 stamit has joined
351 2012-09-12 08:23:35 danbri has joined
352 2012-09-12 08:24:36 CodeInChaos has joined
353 2012-09-12 08:25:21 [\\\] has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
354 2012-09-12 08:26:48 ThomasV has joined
355 2012-09-12 08:28:05 CodesInChaos has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
356 2012-09-12 08:34:07 fpgaminer has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
357 2012-09-12 08:35:04 fpgaminer has joined
358 2012-09-12 08:38:28 jurovz has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
359 2012-09-12 08:41:16 olp has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
360 2012-09-12 08:41:51 fpgaminer has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
361 2012-09-12 08:41:58 Joric_ has joined
362 2012-09-12 08:41:58 Joric_ has quit (Changing host)
363 2012-09-12 08:41:58 Joric_ has joined
364 2012-09-12 08:42:26 fpgaminer has joined
365 2012-09-12 08:42:46 Joric_ has quit (Client Quit)
366 2012-09-12 08:43:42 Joric has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
367 2012-09-12 08:46:07 tonikt is now known as tonikt2
368 2012-09-12 08:46:47 tonikt2 is now known as tonikt3
369 2012-09-12 08:46:57 tonikt3 is now known as tonikt
370 2012-09-12 08:48:00 jdnavarro has joined
371 2012-09-12 08:49:29 Joric has joined
372 2012-09-12 08:53:47 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
373 2012-09-12 08:57:05 gjs278 has joined
374 2012-09-12 08:57:33 fpgaminer has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
375 2012-09-12 08:57:47 fpgaminer has joined
376 2012-09-12 08:57:54 Obsi has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
377 2012-09-12 08:58:21 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
378 2012-09-12 08:59:41 m00p has joined
379 2012-09-12 09:00:39 jurov has joined
380 2012-09-12 09:03:11 fpgaminer has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
381 2012-09-12 09:03:58 Clipse has joined
382 2012-09-12 09:03:58 Clipse has quit (Changing host)
383 2012-09-12 09:03:59 Clipse has joined
384 2012-09-12 09:04:17 fpgaminer has joined
385 2012-09-12 09:10:50 Marf has joined
386 2012-09-12 09:19:39 da2ce7 has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.2.0 Equilibrium http://www.kvirc.net/)
387 2012-09-12 09:20:23 PiZZaMaN2K is now known as PiZZaMaN2K|away
388 2012-09-12 09:22:28 da2ce7 has joined
389 2012-09-12 09:26:01 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: QUITQUITQUITQUITQUITQUITQUITQUITQUITQUIT)
390 2012-09-12 09:26:52 RainbowDashh has joined
391 2012-09-12 09:33:06 stamit has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
392 2012-09-12 09:34:57 <jdnavarro> in the protocol specification for a tx message, when there is no output how is it represented over the wire? is it filled with 0s or just skipped?
393 2012-09-12 09:35:01 <jdnavarro> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_Specification#tx
394 2012-09-12 09:41:48 dust-otc has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
395 2012-09-12 09:42:56 Muis has joined
396 2012-09-12 09:44:03 da2ce705 has joined
397 2012-09-12 09:44:48 stamit has joined
398 2012-09-12 09:45:25 <jdnavarro> just found out by looking at bitcoinjs source code that just the number of output transactions (0) is serialized in this case
399 2012-09-12 09:52:15 Joric has quit ()
400 2012-09-12 10:01:04 da2ce705 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
401 2012-09-12 10:01:04 toffoo has quit ()
402 2012-09-12 10:07:17 gjs278 has joined
403 2012-09-12 10:10:13 <wumpus> ok, please update that in the wiki
404 2012-09-12 10:10:21 paraipan has joined
405 2012-09-12 10:13:55 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
406 2012-09-12 10:13:55 stamit has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
407 2012-09-12 10:14:06 olp has joined
408 2012-09-12 10:14:26 olp has quit (Client Quit)
409 2012-09-12 10:15:16 stamit has joined
410 2012-09-12 10:26:13 ThomasV has joined
411 2012-09-12 10:32:32 PK has joined
412 2012-09-12 10:39:37 TD has joined
413 2012-09-12 10:39:40 PK has quit (Quit: Leaving)
414 2012-09-12 10:41:28 PK has joined
415 2012-09-12 10:43:45 drizztbsd has joined
416 2012-09-12 10:52:15 stamit has quit (Quit: stamit)
417 2012-09-12 10:53:43 seco has joined
418 2012-09-12 10:55:56 <seco> hey guys, ive looked a bit into the current rc2 of bitcoin-qt, and im impressed about the speeds as well about the changes in the UI :)
419 2012-09-12 10:56:34 <seco> but you know..there is no UI someone cannot find a thing which disturbs one hehe
420 2012-09-12 10:56:43 aq83 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
421 2012-09-12 10:56:44 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
422 2012-09-12 10:57:23 jurov is now known as jurov|away
423 2012-09-12 10:57:57 aq83 has joined
424 2012-09-12 10:59:10 Clipse has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
425 2012-09-12 11:05:05 tastynaysty has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
426 2012-09-12 11:05:12 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: <NAME> said 2 hours, 58 minutes ago in <CHANNEL>: your quit message is really long)
427 2012-09-12 11:17:03 stamit has joined
428 2012-09-12 11:17:29 stamit has quit (Client Quit)
429 2012-09-12 11:18:28 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
430 2012-09-12 11:20:14 Clipse has joined
431 2012-09-12 11:20:15 Clipse has quit (Changing host)
432 2012-09-12 11:20:15 Clipse has joined
433 2012-09-12 11:25:04 leotreasure has joined
434 2012-09-12 11:25:32 Varan has joined
435 2012-09-12 11:28:37 agricocb has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
436 2012-09-12 11:29:24 danbri has joined
437 2012-09-12 11:34:25 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
438 2012-09-12 11:44:46 <theorbtwo> Anybody here at the post-bitcoin-conference hackathon in the london hackspace?
439 2012-09-12 11:46:18 <theorbtwo> OK, guess not.
440 2012-09-12 11:50:18 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
441 2012-09-12 11:51:41 Varan has quit (Quit: Leaving)
442 2012-09-12 11:55:18 danbri has joined
443 2012-09-12 11:55:28 galambo_ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
444 2012-09-12 11:57:06 <jeremias> lc
445 2012-09-12 11:57:36 <jeremias> theorbtwo: I plan to go there tomorrow
446 2012-09-12 12:00:09 <theorbtwo> jeremias: Cool, but maybe actually ask for permission first, or have it somewhere else?
447 2012-09-12 12:00:34 PK has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
448 2012-09-12 12:01:02 <theorbtwo> (Popping in #london-hack-space might be a good idea.)
449 2012-09-12 12:01:18 slush has joined
450 2012-09-12 12:04:42 firelegend has joined
451 2012-09-12 12:06:21 <firelegend> Was the p2sh thing accepted?
452 2012-09-12 12:06:39 <jeremias> theorbtwo: I don't know anything about that...
453 2012-09-12 12:07:07 <jeremias> theorbtwo: it seems pretty badly organized, it was supposed to be at another location, and the location changed like today
454 2012-09-12 12:07:35 <jeremias> I was organizing the previous berlin hackathon, but in this I haven't been involved
455 2012-09-12 12:07:59 <theorbtwo> jeremias: *nod*
456 2012-09-12 12:08:22 <Luke-Jr> firelegend: that was always a given, BIP 16 went active in April
457 2012-09-12 12:08:42 <theorbtwo> Anyway, it looks like there's now actual talking between the groups, so it's working, somewhat.
458 2012-09-12 12:09:21 [\\\] has joined
459 2012-09-12 12:09:27 [\\\] has quit (Excess Flood)
460 2012-09-12 12:11:13 [\\\] has joined
461 2012-09-12 12:12:49 stamit has joined
462 2012-09-12 12:13:19 Ferroh has joined
463 2012-09-12 12:16:15 PiZZaMaN2K is now known as away!~PiZZaMaN2@host-72-2-137-170.csinet.net|PiZZaMaN2K
464 2012-09-12 12:16:37 rdponticelli has joined
465 2012-09-12 12:20:39 Cory has joined
466 2012-09-12 12:20:48 Erdon has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
467 2012-09-12 12:22:43 <Luke-Jr> hmm, cute. Deepbit's blocked me
468 2012-09-12 12:24:05 t7 has joined
469 2012-09-12 12:31:51 datagutt has joined
470 2012-09-12 12:32:13 datagutt has quit (Changing host)
471 2012-09-12 12:32:13 datagutt has joined
472 2012-09-12 12:32:25 sytse has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
473 2012-09-12 12:33:45 datagutt has quit (Client Quit)
474 2012-09-12 12:34:05 datagutt has joined
475 2012-09-12 12:37:17 <sipa> jgarzik, gmaxwell: afaik nLockTime works, but you need an nSequence in one of the inputs that is not yet INT_MAX
476 2012-09-12 12:40:40 Clipse has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
477 2012-09-12 12:42:08 vampireb_ has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
478 2012-09-12 12:42:51 agricocb has joined
479 2012-09-12 12:43:11 Gladamas has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
480 2012-09-12 12:45:05 Gladamas has joined
481 2012-09-12 12:45:26 <sipa> jgarzik: afaik it's transaction replacement that is disabled, not transaction locking
482 2012-09-12 12:45:42 <sipa> jgarzik: and that doesn't even need a softfork to re-enable
483 2012-09-12 12:46:24 eian has joined
484 2012-09-12 12:46:41 Gladamas_ has joined
485 2012-09-12 12:47:59 CodeInChaos has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
486 2012-09-12 12:48:01 <gmaxwell> sipa: why would nSequence in one of the inputs not being INT_MAX be intended to be required?
487 2012-09-12 12:48:16 CodesInChaos has joined
488 2012-09-12 12:49:01 <sipa> gmaxwell: if all inputs have nSequence==MAX, the transaction can't be replaced, and as such, it's inevitably final
489 2012-09-12 12:49:22 Gladamas has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
490 2012-09-12 12:49:25 jdnavarro has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
491 2012-09-12 12:50:31 <sipa> we could *right now* just switch to nSequence==0 in all txins, and nothing would change, except nLockTime would behave are intended
492 2012-09-12 12:51:33 jdnavarro has joined
493 2012-09-12 12:52:39 ehash has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
494 2012-09-12 12:52:40 BitcoinBaltar has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
495 2012-09-12 12:52:48 pierre`_ has joined
496 2012-09-12 12:52:54 <kjj_> are you sure about that? is IsFinal supposed to return true if the transaction is final like you'd expect from the name?
497 2012-09-12 12:53:06 pierre` has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
498 2012-09-12 12:53:06 slush has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
499 2012-09-12 12:53:07 Maccer has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
500 2012-09-12 12:53:07 CodesInChaos has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
501 2012-09-12 12:53:07 ehash has joined
502 2012-09-12 12:53:09 pierre`_ is now known as pierre`
503 2012-09-12 12:53:24 BCBot has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
504 2012-09-12 12:53:32 CodesInChaos has joined
505 2012-09-12 12:53:41 BCBot has joined
506 2012-09-12 12:53:45 BitcoinBaltar has joined
507 2012-09-12 12:53:47 slush has joined
508 2012-09-12 12:53:53 <gmaxwell> sipa: Indeed, I follow now. I hadn't realized that.
509 2012-09-12 12:53:56 theorbtwo is now known as jhchrist
510 2012-09-12 12:54:04 malaimo has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
511 2012-09-12 12:54:25 ZephyrVoid has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
512 2012-09-12 12:54:25 knotwork has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
513 2012-09-12 12:54:26 poop_ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
514 2012-09-12 12:54:44 jhchrist is now known as theorbtwo
515 2012-09-12 12:54:53 <sipa> kjj_: yes
516 2012-09-12 12:55:08 CodeInChaos has joined
517 2012-09-12 12:55:33 xorgate has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
518 2012-09-12 12:55:44 xorgate has joined
519 2012-09-12 12:55:54 devrandom has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
520 2012-09-12 12:56:23 malaimo has joined
521 2012-09-12 12:56:24 poop_ has joined
522 2012-09-12 12:57:02 darkee has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
523 2012-09-12 12:57:02 b00tkitz has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
524 2012-09-12 12:57:13 devrandom has joined
525 2012-09-12 12:57:22 ZephyrVoid has joined
526 2012-09-12 12:57:38 b00tkitz has joined
527 2012-09-12 12:57:50 darkee has joined
528 2012-09-12 12:58:34 knotwork has joined
529 2012-09-12 12:58:53 PK has joined
530 2012-09-12 13:00:48 <gmaxwell> It would hae been more intutive, and useful, if a nSequence==max transaction was still time locked, but was invalid until after the time.. so that it couldn't be put into the memory pool or relayed
531 2012-09-12 13:01:10 <gmaxwell> This way you could still do 'offline' replacement, by creating a locked transaction.
532 2012-09-12 13:01:23 laundry has joined
533 2012-09-12 13:01:59 <sipa> indeed; i think satoshi considered transaction replacement to be the only usecase for transaction locking
534 2012-09-12 13:02:32 CodesInChaos has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
535 2012-09-12 13:02:32 xorgate has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
536 2012-09-12 13:05:10 <gmaxwell> I think a lot of the examples for nlocktime that people have given that don't require in network replacement, are gummed up by this. E.g. prefabbing a refund transaction for an escrow to reduce risk... since the locked refund if accepted by the network would inhibit the real spend. ::sigh::
537 2012-09-12 13:06:47 <sipa> well there's no problem in using nSequence=0 in those cases
538 2012-09-12 13:08:03 <eian> good morning
539 2012-09-12 13:08:38 <eian> Where is the latest release candidate available? Is it just the github master branch?
540 2012-09-12 13:08:45 gfinn has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
541 2012-09-12 13:08:45 MobiusL has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
542 2012-09-12 13:08:45 b00tkitz has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
543 2012-09-12 13:09:07 <sipa> eian: there are a few changes in git master w.r.t. rc2
544 2012-09-12 13:09:38 <eian> is rc2 on your subversion repo?
545 2012-09-12 13:09:51 <sipa> nobody uses svn anymore
546 2012-09-12 13:09:55 <eian> oh :)
547 2012-09-12 13:10:16 <gmaxwell> sipa: sure, but since you can't replace the transaction in the network, someone can just instantly announce the refund, and then it becomes hard to spend the intended real spend.
548 2012-09-12 13:10:42 <sipa> gmaxwell: hmm?
549 2012-09-12 13:11:26 <sipa> non-final transactions are accepted into the memory-pool
550 2012-09-12 13:11:37 <sipa> (mental note: DoS risk)
551 2012-09-12 13:12:59 <gmaxwell> right. Thats my point. I write an escrow transaction with you. Before I give it to you/network I make you write a refund 180 days from now that sends the funds back to me if the escrow isn't resolved. Once you do I announce the payment into the escrow.
552 2012-09-12 13:13:05 one_zero has quit ()
553 2012-09-12 13:13:09 <sipa> gmaxwell: got it
554 2012-09-12 13:14:19 b00tkitz has joined
555 2012-09-12 13:14:46 <kjj_> phew. we need to get Theymos to add sequence to his dump
556 2012-09-12 13:20:46 <sipa> what dump?
557 2012-09-12 13:20:55 gfinn has joined
558 2012-09-12 13:21:35 michaelmclees has joined
559 2012-09-12 13:21:50 <michaelmclees> I have a quick question
560 2012-09-12 13:22:07 <michaelmclees> i restored a wallet but the coins are no longer showing in the client
561 2012-09-12 13:22:16 <michaelmclees> the transactions are not there either
562 2012-09-12 13:22:56 <michaelmclees> is there a rescan tool or something that will pop them up
563 2012-09-12 13:23:02 <michaelmclees> here is the address 1BkLsW9eY82rZCe9DdVYnKKeL18n98Z7kF
564 2012-09-12 13:23:14 <sipa> how old was the backup?
565 2012-09-12 13:23:26 <michaelmclees> a couple weeks
566 2012-09-12 13:23:44 <sipa> are the transactions missing, or marked unconfirmed?
567 2012-09-12 13:23:53 <michaelmclees> transactions not there at all
568 2012-09-12 13:23:58 <PK> michaelmclees, did you do that rescan thing you mentioned?
569 2012-09-12 13:24:06 <sipa> no need
570 2012-09-12 13:24:08 <michaelmclees> there should be 2 as stated in the block explorer
571 2012-09-12 13:24:13 <PK> it's bitcoind -rescan
572 2012-09-12 13:24:18 <sipa> michaelmclees: did you catch up with the blockchain entirely?
573 2012-09-12 13:24:23 <michaelmclees> yeah
574 2012-09-12 13:24:41 <sipa> ok, try running with -rescan, but i doubt it will help
575 2012-09-12 13:24:52 <sipa> (unless you're running a very old bitcoin)
576 2012-09-12 13:24:59 <michaelmclees> i have the latest
577 2012-09-12 13:25:37 <PK> michaelmclees, did you restore after catching up to the block chain? In that case the rescan works. We had the same issue in #bitcoin a few days ago and the rescan fixed it.
578 2012-09-12 13:26:17 <michaelmclees> well, yeah... but won't that always be the case?
579 2012-09-12 13:26:20 b00tkitz has quit (Quit: leaving)
580 2012-09-12 13:26:29 <michaelmclees> any time you restore, the block chain is longer than when you backed up
581 2012-09-12 13:26:42 chmod755 has joined
582 2012-09-12 13:26:45 <sipa> in almost all cases, bitcoin will automatically rescan the part of the blockchain that the wallet didn't know about
583 2012-09-12 13:27:00 <sipa> since 0.3.21 or so
584 2012-09-12 13:27:05 <chmod755> "This transaction is over the size limit. You can still send it for a fee of 0.99 BTC, which goes to the nodes that process your transaction and helps to support the network. Do you want to pay the fee?" << WTF?????? NO
585 2012-09-12 13:27:27 <sipa> chmod755: that must be one hell of a transaction
586 2012-09-12 13:27:31 <eian> haha
587 2012-09-12 13:27:32 <sipa> many very small inputs?
588 2012-09-12 13:27:45 Joric has joined
589 2012-09-12 13:28:13 <chmod755> mm
590 2012-09-12 13:28:21 <chmod755> omg
591 2012-09-12 13:29:25 <michaelmclees> do i run rescan while the client is closed
592 2012-09-12 13:29:34 <michaelmclees> and then open the client after i do the command?
593 2012-09-12 13:30:11 <sipa> it's a command-line option to the client
594 2012-09-12 13:30:20 <sipa> and when passed, it will do a full rescan at startup
595 2012-09-12 13:30:22 <chmod755> why does it say "Error: Transaction creation failed"
596 2012-09-12 13:30:52 <michaelmclees> when i have the client running, i can't do the command
597 2012-09-12 13:30:54 <sipa> chmod755: because it couldn't create a valid transaction that satisfies the requirement
598 2012-09-12 13:31:02 <michaelmclees> when i have the command running, i can't open the client
599 2012-09-12 13:31:17 <michaelmclees> so now that i am doing the rescan, do i close the daemon and then open?
600 2012-09-12 13:31:25 <sipa> michaelmclees: there is no "command", it's a flag to the client
601 2012-09-12 13:31:35 <sipa> michaelmclees: so exit the client, and start it again with that flag
602 2012-09-12 13:32:41 <michaelmclees> but what I'm saying is, im rescanning now... or ive opened the command prompt, found the directory and typed "bitcoind -rescan"
603 2012-09-12 13:32:56 <michaelmclees> right now the cursor is just blinking
604 2012-09-12 13:32:59 Motest003 has joined
605 2012-09-12 13:33:11 <michaelmclees> if i attempted to open the qt client, it says bitcoin is already running
606 2012-09-12 13:33:14 <Joric> is pruning firstbits compatible?
607 2012-09-12 13:33:43 <sipa> michaelmclees: ooh, now i see; you could just have done "bitcoin-qt -rescan" as well
608 2012-09-12 13:33:54 <sipa> Joric: no, one of its many weaknesses
609 2012-09-12 13:33:55 <Joric> if not maybe it's worth to make it compatible for that matter
610 2012-09-12 13:34:04 <michaelmclees> oh... well let me try that then
611 2012-09-12 13:34:31 Motest031 has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
612 2012-09-12 13:35:54 <michaelmclees> is rescanning going to have me download the whole chain again?
613 2012-09-12 13:35:58 Diablo-D3 has joined
614 2012-09-12 13:36:03 <sipa> no
615 2012-09-12 13:36:11 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
616 2012-09-12 13:36:14 <gmaxwell> Joric: you should have said is firstbits pruning compatible. And I don't see any way to make it so, which is just one of many reasons firstbits should not be used.
617 2012-09-12 13:37:03 <sipa> firstbits relies on the exact history of the chain, and not just its final state
618 2012-09-12 13:37:22 <sipa> so you can't calculate firstbits (or the firstbits database) without processing the history
619 2012-09-12 13:37:51 <chmod755> sipa: tried changing the transaction but it still doesnt work :/
620 2012-09-12 13:38:36 <sipa> chmod755: a small calculation shows me you're trying to create a transaction with >8000 inputs?
621 2012-09-12 13:38:45 <chmod755> no
622 2012-09-12 13:38:49 <chmod755> not really
623 2012-09-12 13:38:51 <gmaxwell> (others off the top of my head being the spam potential, the limited supply from pow searching, the severe hazard of typosquatting (esp since txn can't be reversed), the inability to securely transfer a firstbits address to another party, the unfriendlyness of the base58 charset for names)
624 2012-09-12 13:39:14 <sipa> gmaxwell: and the general encouragement of address reuse?
625 2012-09-12 13:39:23 <chmod755> ROFL "This transaction is over the size limit. You can still send it for a fee of 2.00 BTC, which goes to the nodes that process your transaction and helps to support the network. Do you want to pay the fee?"
626 2012-09-12 13:39:33 jurov is now known as away!gwyvafco@84.245.71.31|jurov
627 2012-09-12 13:39:45 <michaelmclees> haha
628 2012-09-12 13:39:55 <sipa> chmod755: HOW small are your inputs?
629 2012-09-12 13:39:59 <michaelmclees> were you running a bot to bet on satoshi dice at .001btc or something?
630 2012-09-12 13:40:14 <chmod755> some are tiny, some are big
631 2012-09-12 13:40:24 <michaelmclees> bingo, the rescan worked
632 2012-09-12 13:40:25 <chmod755> michaelmclees: no
633 2012-09-12 13:40:34 <michaelmclees> thank you guys!
634 2012-09-12 13:41:06 <sipa> michaelmclees: when you made the backup, which client version were you running?
635 2012-09-12 13:41:32 <michaelmclees> hmm.... not sure, it was probably 2 versions before i think
636 2012-09-12 13:41:32 <helo> it would be nice if the size limit dialog allowed you to get more details
637 2012-09-12 13:41:46 <sipa> michaelmclees: 0.6.1 then?
638 2012-09-12 13:41:52 <michaelmclees> i think so
639 2012-09-12 13:41:57 <sipa> very strange
640 2012-09-12 13:42:00 <michaelmclees> but i can't say for certain
641 2012-09-12 13:42:09 <chmod755> sipa: looks like the client changes the suggestion based on my fee setting
642 2012-09-12 13:42:20 <chmod755> "This transaction is over the size limit. You can still send it for a fee of 0.099 BTC, which goes to the nodes that process your transaction and helps to support the network. Do you want to pay the fee?"
643 2012-09-12 13:42:20 <sipa> chmod755: oh, what is your fee setting?
644 2012-09-12 13:42:34 <chmod755> it was 0.02 BTC before now it's 0.001 BTC
645 2012-09-12 13:42:35 <chmod755> :d
646 2012-09-12 13:42:38 <michaelmclees> and now that you guys know my IP, guess its time to encrypt the wallet
647 2012-09-12 13:42:45 <sipa> chmod755: you know that's a fee per kilobyte, right?
648 2012-09-12 13:42:55 <chmod755> lol
649 2012-09-12 13:42:57 <chmod755> ok
650 2012-09-12 13:43:07 <chmod755> so it's a 50kb transaction?
651 2012-09-12 13:43:10 Arnavion has joined
652 2012-09-12 13:43:10 <sipa> must be
653 2012-09-12 13:43:13 <chmod755> err 100 kb
654 2012-09-12 13:44:08 PK has quit (Quit: Leaving)
655 2012-09-12 13:44:33 <michaelmclees> once again, thank you guys!
656 2012-09-12 13:44:35 <michaelmclees> out
657 2012-09-12 13:44:39 michaelmclees has left ()
658 2012-09-12 13:45:53 <Joric> is bitcoin network somehow protected from the clasterisation what if say us and china will start mining independently and split the blockchain
659 2012-09-12 13:45:55 gavinandresen has joined
660 2012-09-12 13:46:14 Ravi has joined
661 2012-09-12 13:46:17 <sipa> if they have >50% combined, no
662 2012-09-12 13:49:33 Arnavion has quit (Disconnected by services)
663 2012-09-12 13:50:22 <Joric> how about surprise orphaning a few hundred blocks )
664 2012-09-12 13:50:31 Arnavion3 has joined
665 2012-09-12 13:50:31 Arnavion3 is now known as Arnavion
666 2012-09-12 13:52:01 <epscy> Joric: i think that would require a serious network split
667 2012-09-12 13:52:18 <epscy> which would be unlikely to go unnoticed by most people
668 2012-09-12 13:52:32 <kjj_> no, they'd just have to follow different rules in their part
669 2012-09-12 13:52:39 <kjj_> which would cause a network split
670 2012-09-12 13:52:44 Maccer has joined
671 2012-09-12 13:54:12 <epscy> right
672 2012-09-12 13:55:08 <epscy> but network segmentation seems more likely than 50% of the network agreeing to use different rules
673 2012-09-12 13:55:09 Arnavion has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
674 2012-09-12 13:55:38 <epscy> the latter is probably less likely to get noticed straight away though, i agree
675 2012-09-12 13:56:25 <kjj_> and if they did fork the chain, we'd all have double our money
676 2012-09-12 13:56:41 Arnavion has joined
677 2012-09-12 13:57:23 copumpkin has joined
678 2012-09-12 13:58:21 <Joric> what if some guy manages to spend a few dollars to build a network-sized cluster (it's just ~15 BFL minirigs currenly, $450 worth) and start mining without communicating with the main network
679 2012-09-12 13:59:07 <Joric> 30k asic miners 1 th each x 15 = 450k$
680 2012-09-12 13:59:52 firelegend has quit ()
681 2012-09-12 14:00:47 <kjj_> if he has a magic wand that can summon 15 minirigs, why can't he just use it to get what he really wants?
682 2012-09-12 14:03:41 tastynaysty has joined
683 2012-09-12 14:06:18 Clipse has joined
684 2012-09-12 14:06:18 Clipse has quit (Changing host)
685 2012-09-12 14:06:18 Clipse has joined
686 2012-09-12 14:09:23 Diapolo has joined
687 2012-09-12 14:11:52 <epscy> in that scenaerio they wouldn't be able to rewrite the whole blockchain i don't think
688 2012-09-12 14:14:12 nathan7 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
689 2012-09-12 14:16:27 sytse has joined
690 2012-09-12 14:20:54 <gmaxwell> 06:36 < sipa> chmod755: oh, what is your fee setting?
691 2012-09-12 14:21:08 nathan7 has joined
692 2012-09-12 14:21:28 <gmaxwell> I was going to say before, but got pulled off.. the largest transaction it will author without bailing out is 100k. So with the default minfee you can't end up being asked for more than 0.05 BTC.
693 2012-09-12 14:21:53 <gmaxwell> so anyone seeing a number like 0.99 has cranked their fee up.
694 2012-09-12 14:22:15 <sipa> ah, good to know
695 2012-09-12 14:23:00 <gavinandresen> Looking for ACKs on https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1821 : I'd like to pull it then tag and build a rc3
696 2012-09-12 14:24:46 <gmaxwell> Will look.
697 2012-09-12 14:25:44 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1814 < going to pull this? I ask because its a somewhat nasty IBD dos attack fix. Perhaps we've become a little too paranoid with the DOS fixes, because it doesnt seem that anyone currently cares to dos attack.
698 2012-09-12 14:26:45 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: yes, I will pull that-- I think being paranoid about DoS fixes is a good thing.
699 2012-09-12 14:27:10 <sipa> gmaxwell: if anything, it's a good sign that for now we care more about DoS attacks than attackers do :)
700 2012-09-12 14:27:56 <gavinandresen> being proactive about DoS attacks is something I think we've done pretty well. "No news is good news" and all that....
701 2012-09-12 14:28:06 tower has quit (Disconnected by services)
702 2012-09-12 14:28:16 tower has joined
703 2012-09-12 14:28:58 <sipa> gavinandresen: hmm, i wonder if there isn't a less intrusive fix for the RPC IPv6 thing
704 2012-09-12 14:29:02 <sipa> let me have a look
705 2012-09-12 14:29:26 <gavinandresen> there probably is... I don't know enough about IPv6 to reproduce the problem, so took the sledgehammer approach
706 2012-09-12 14:31:27 <sipa> there is already a backup section to deal with the ipv-failed case
707 2012-09-12 14:31:33 <sipa> but it's inside the same excpetion block
708 2012-09-12 14:32:56 <sipa> gmaxwell: by the way, managed to get a 2.5x speedup in wall-clock IBD time after the last checkpoint by using 4 sig verification checks
709 2012-09-12 14:33:17 <sipa> seems i should be able to do better on a 4-core i7...
710 2012-09-12 14:33:42 <sipa> *4 sig verification threads
711 2012-09-12 14:33:48 <wumpus> I also don't think rpc-over-ipv6 is a particularly urgent case
712 2012-09-12 14:34:41 <wumpus> and people that use that can build their own bitcoind
713 2012-09-12 14:34:50 arij has joined
714 2012-09-12 14:35:05 <gmaxwell> wumpus: no, it's not urgent though it means that bitcoin still can't run ipv6 only, which isn't of great pratical importatnce but it's a certificational goodness.
715 2012-09-12 14:35:51 <gavinandresen> wumpus: I agree... I've been thinking lately that "we" made a mistake implementing things like -rpcallowip and -rpcssl in bitcoind. I think it would have been better to listen on only a local socket, and shipped a little RPC python proxy if you wanted to do anything more complicated.
716 2012-09-12 14:37:31 arij has quit (Changing host)
717 2012-09-12 14:37:31 arij has joined
718 2012-09-12 14:37:40 <wumpus> it's a form of feature creep
719 2012-09-12 14:37:47 <gavinandresen> yup
720 2012-09-12 14:37:56 arij has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
721 2012-09-12 14:38:28 arij has joined
722 2012-09-12 14:38:51 arij has quit (Changing host)
723 2012-09-12 14:38:51 arij has joined
724 2012-09-12 14:39:07 <gmaxwell> Well doing that wouldn't cure the need to listen on an IPv6 socket, as a v6 only host doesn't have any v4 sockets at all.
725 2012-09-12 14:39:18 <gmaxwell> Though I agree wrt SSL. That ssl code scares me.
726 2012-09-12 14:39:30 <sipa> i duplicated the try-catch block
727 2012-09-12 14:39:34 <gavinandresen> sure, but I'd be more confident that the new Ipv6 code didn't break those other features accidently
728 2012-09-12 14:39:34 <sipa> testing
729 2012-09-12 14:39:44 <gmaxwell> Big attack surface, and almost by definition the people using it will expose it to the internet.
730 2012-09-12 14:40:45 <gavinandresen> sipa: you can replicate the bug with the old code?
731 2012-09-12 14:41:04 <sipa> unfortunately, no
732 2012-09-12 14:41:07 m00p has quit (Quit: Leaving)
733 2012-09-12 14:41:30 <gavinandresen> mmm... then I think the right thing to do is ship 0.7 with the sledgehammer fix
734 2012-09-12 14:41:44 <gavinandresen> (and get full ipv6 support next release)
735 2012-09-12 14:41:52 <sipa> second
736 2012-09-12 14:44:21 <sipa> gavinandresen: if i get a fix that zvs on the forums confirms to make it work for his situation, would that be fine?
737 2012-09-12 14:44:29 <gavinandresen> sipa: yes
738 2012-09-12 14:46:12 jurov is now known as jurov|away
739 2012-09-12 14:51:24 Zarutian has joined
740 2012-09-12 15:02:14 Diapolo has left ()
741 2012-09-12 15:07:12 <wumpus> nah, exposing it on the internet *without* SSL is even scarier. If you're going to remove SSL support, also remove other-than-localhost binding..
742 2012-09-12 15:12:32 <gmaxwell> wumpus: other than localhost binding does _not_ mean exposing to the internet.
743 2012-09-12 15:13:20 <gmaxwell> A fair number of people use bitcoind on private networks between web front ends and poolservers.
744 2012-09-12 15:14:00 <gmaxwell> and I wasn't suggesting removing it, my answer to the fact that I'm uncomfortable with it's security is to remind people that the rpc should never be internet exposed. :)
745 2012-09-12 15:18:09 Gladamas_ is now known as Gladamas
746 2012-09-12 15:19:38 <wumpus> I agree that other-than-localhost binding *can* be used responsibly
747 2012-09-12 15:20:33 * gavinandresen goes to write a third reminder email to somebody who owes me some bitcoins....
748 2012-09-12 15:21:08 <gavinandresen> Maybe a "send email once a week until you see payment to this bitcoin address" feature for the client would be good....
749 2012-09-12 15:21:08 * gmaxwell starts rumors that gavin lost all his coin to pirate40
750 2012-09-12 15:21:19 <gavinandresen> lol
751 2012-09-12 15:21:34 <wumpus> and you cannot prevent people from doing irresponsible things...
752 2012-09-12 15:21:36 <wumpus> hehe
753 2012-09-12 15:21:39 <ersi> sure you can
754 2012-09-12 15:21:43 <ersi> lock 'em up
755 2012-09-12 15:21:55 <gmaxwell> "Every program attempts to expand until it can read mail. Those programs which cannot so expand are replaced by ones which can." Then we'll know that bitcoin is done.
756 2012-09-12 15:22:40 <sipa> gmaxwell: i wouldn't mind a payment protocol implemented over SMTP :p
757 2012-09-12 15:22:49 <wumpus> it doesn't belong in the client, let's package a python script to do that :p
758 2012-09-12 15:23:25 <sipa> wumpus: duh :)
759 2012-09-12 15:24:53 <gmaxwell> you mean we shouldn't add an OP_CHECKEMAIL???
760 2012-09-12 15:25:51 <wumpus> I think we should, and then embed the email into the block chain
761 2012-09-12 15:25:55 <Joric> OP_LOL will look fabulous
762 2012-09-12 15:26:37 <wumpus> also we should support smoke signals and pigeons in case email is not available
763 2012-09-12 15:27:27 <gmaxwell> "Pigeons in the blockchain" sounds like a million dollar maker IOS app.
764 2012-09-12 15:28:48 <Jouke> Yes please
765 2012-09-12 15:28:50 <Joric> i'm writting ios apps, just in case
766 2012-09-12 15:28:57 spaola has joined
767 2012-09-12 15:30:35 <wumpus> yes such a game would certaily help make bitcoin appeal to the masses
768 2012-09-12 15:30:53 danbri_ has joined
769 2012-09-12 15:31:14 <Joric> who's sending out bitcoin announcements? newer clients to older ones?
770 2012-09-12 15:32:06 <Joric> i mean, warnings, like - your client is too old!
771 2012-09-12 15:32:28 <gmaxwell> No one is.
772 2012-09-12 15:32:34 <gmaxwell> Your client generates that on its own.
773 2012-09-12 15:32:41 <Joric> ah
774 2012-09-12 15:32:48 danbri_ has quit (Excess Flood)
775 2012-09-12 15:33:00 <gmaxwell> and if you see it, it's not currently because your client is too old, its because your blockchain is stuck for some reason.
776 2012-09-12 15:33:16 danbri_ has joined
777 2012-09-12 15:33:43 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: the pre-0.6.3 alerts are still active, if I recall
778 2012-09-12 15:33:45 <Joric> 0.6.2 shows that i have to upgrade to 0.6.3 if i remember right
779 2012-09-12 15:33:54 <Joric> yeah, thats it, alerts
780 2012-09-12 15:34:00 danbri has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
781 2012-09-12 15:34:53 <Joric> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Alerts
782 2012-09-12 15:34:58 <Joric> found it
783 2012-09-12 15:35:27 <gmaxwell> Joric: okay, _that_ warning is an alert. All nodes that have it will hand it to you at startup. Gavin can generate them, though a special signing key thats set in the software. I thought you were talking about the generic "you or your peers should upgrade".
784 2012-09-12 15:35:59 danbri_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
785 2012-09-12 15:36:22 <Joric> damn i thought everyone could send those :(
786 2012-09-12 15:36:37 <gmaxwell> No.
787 2012-09-12 15:36:57 <gmaxwell> hm. I know know how to encourage people to run testnet.. periodically send testnet alerts containing bitcoin private keys that have funds assigned to them.
788 2012-09-12 15:37:33 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: good idea!
789 2012-09-12 15:37:45 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: you could make it a game, make the alerts clues....
790 2012-09-12 15:37:50 RainbowDashh has joined
791 2012-09-12 15:38:19 <gavinandresen> we could call it "pigeons in the blockchain"
792 2012-09-12 15:38:21 <Joric> you could nag pirate with those
793 2012-09-12 15:40:50 danbri has joined
794 2012-09-12 15:46:25 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: <NAME> said 2 hours, 58 minutes ago in #random_channel_name: your quit message is really long)
795 2012-09-12 15:47:11 <edcba> just buy testnet coins with bitcoins ?
796 2012-09-12 15:48:42 <Joric> edcba, faucet's currently giving away testnet coins in 500 coin packs
797 2012-09-12 15:52:11 <edcba> only coinbase recent enough then
798 2012-09-12 15:53:40 <edcba> choose your incentive, pay bitcoins
799 2012-09-12 15:55:28 <gmaxwell> edcba: buying testnet coins creates the wrong incentives. It's good the that coins are ~worthless because that encourages testing.
800 2012-09-12 15:55:46 <gmaxwell> If people are worried about destroying precious coins they won't do the kinds of crazy tests they already won't do on mainnet.
801 2012-09-12 15:57:56 Varan has joined
802 2012-09-12 15:59:57 danbri has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
803 2012-09-12 16:00:40 JZavala has joined
804 2012-09-12 16:01:44 spaola has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
805 2012-09-12 16:02:03 darkee has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
806 2012-09-12 16:03:55 t7 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
807 2012-09-12 16:05:14 tower has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
808 2012-09-12 16:05:55 spaola has joined
809 2012-09-12 16:07:09 leotreasure has quit (Quit: leotreasure)
810 2012-09-12 16:08:22 tower has joined
811 2012-09-12 16:09:40 <eian> gmaxwell, the multiparty signatures you were describing to me yesterday (that would frustrate my address clustering) - that would just introduce plausible deniability would it not?
812 2012-09-12 16:09:56 <eian> wait
813 2012-09-12 16:10:00 <eian> multi-input
814 2012-09-12 16:10:08 <eian> however you described it...
815 2012-09-12 16:10:24 <eian> the mixing
816 2012-09-12 16:10:29 <eian> bah...words escape me
817 2012-09-12 16:10:46 ThomasV_ has joined
818 2012-09-12 16:11:13 chmod755 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
819 2012-09-12 16:11:27 <Varan> eian, why are you trying to cluster addresses ... just out of curiosity
820 2012-09-12 16:11:32 <gmaxwell> eian: You have N people who togeater make one transaction with N output. You can't tell which of the outputs belonged to which of the people, and also the join transaction will confuse automated clustering that assumes that a common txn automatically means one person.
821 2012-09-12 16:11:52 <gmaxwell> s/join/joint/
822 2012-09-12 16:12:17 <gmaxwell> (web wallet private key imports might also hae the confusing property too)
823 2012-09-12 16:12:54 <eian> gmaxwell, if a single participant in a transaction is somehow deanonymized, wouldn't this implicate multiple people (i.e., you'll be sharing your cell with someone else)
824 2012-09-12 16:13:19 <eian> Varan, because it's cool!
825 2012-09-12 16:13:36 <Varan> Oke ... but i mean .. for visualization or something?
826 2012-09-12 16:13:39 <eian> gmaxwell, this might be more a legal question...
827 2012-09-12 16:14:07 <sipa> eian: it implies they create a transaction together, but i think there may be cases where they don't necessarily trust eachother
828 2012-09-12 16:14:09 <eian> Varan, I suspect it would be too much information to visualization.
829 2012-09-12 16:14:19 <eian> Varan, but i'd like to see if I can find relationships
830 2012-09-12 16:14:37 <Varan> Btw ... do these kind of multiparty transactions happen often now? .... I dont know of many clients/websites that create these kinds of transactions
831 2012-09-12 16:14:40 <gmaxwell> They don't even necessarily know each other, e.g. if some automated transaction privacy tool joined them togeather.
832 2012-09-12 16:15:02 dust-otc has joined
833 2012-09-12 16:15:10 <eian> gmaxwell, I've heard of computers being confisciated by law enforcement for simply acting as a TOR exit node
834 2012-09-12 16:15:16 <gmaxwell> Varan: They aren't often yet, but they are much easier to create now with 0.7. The webwallet imports probably happen sometimes now.
835 2012-09-12 16:15:28 <eian> gmaxwell, does this sit within the same realm legally?
836 2012-09-12 16:15:40 <gmaxwell> eian: That doesn't happen in the US.
837 2012-09-12 16:15:50 darkee has joined
838 2012-09-12 16:15:58 <Varan> But if you import a key ... you do own it so ... that no issue right
839 2012-09-12 16:16:03 <gmaxwell> There was some weird histeria in germany for a while wrt that. But no one got in actual trouble just harassed due to ignorance.
840 2012-09-12 16:16:11 <Varan> thats*
841 2012-09-12 16:16:13 <gmaxwell> Ignorance wouldn't be likely in this sort of case.
842 2012-09-12 16:16:44 <gmaxwell> Varan: well not quite. E.g. some analysis is assuming that a txn with common inputs means they had a common owner, but what happens when the key changes hands? It still frustrates the analysis.
843 2012-09-12 16:17:07 <eian> gmaxwell, do you know any bitcoin lawyers? haha. What type of lawyer should I even speak to?
844 2012-09-12 16:17:23 <Varan> Yes ... true
845 2012-09-12 16:17:52 <gmaxwell> eian: You need a more concret question before you can ask a layer. But this should be answerable on principles, not anything specific to bitcoin.
846 2012-09-12 16:17:55 agricocb has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
847 2012-09-12 16:18:19 <Varan> eian, how are you parsing the transactions? ... what language?
848 2012-09-12 16:18:28 <eian> gmaxwell, would being one of the N people implicate me legally if another individual did something stupid?
849 2012-09-12 16:18:33 <eian> Varan, C++
850 2012-09-12 16:19:18 <eian> Varan, I'm doing this as part of my masters thesis
851 2012-09-12 16:19:29 <eian> gmaxwell crushed my hopes and dreams yesterday lol
852 2012-09-12 16:19:39 <Varan> Lol
853 2012-09-12 16:19:42 <Varan> how so?
854 2012-09-12 16:19:42 <gmaxwell> eian: legally how? A criminal act? No mens rea, on basic principles you can't be implicated of a crime you couldn't have known about, couldn't profit from, etc.
855 2012-09-12 16:19:45 <eian> but alas, I have a deeper understanding and appreciation for the system
856 2012-09-12 16:20:09 <Varan> Are you using https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=88584.0 ?
857 2012-09-12 16:20:33 vigilyn has joined
858 2012-09-12 16:20:37 <eian> Varan, I've written all custom code
859 2012-09-12 16:20:41 <Varan> hmm oke
860 2012-09-12 16:20:42 <eian> Varan, why do you ask?
861 2012-09-12 16:21:07 <eian> gmaxwell, I see
862 2012-09-12 16:21:46 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
863 2012-09-12 16:22:04 <gmaxwell> It also matters how you did the arrangement, if someone says "hey help me launder some coin" you might be implicated as being knowingly (any reasonable person would have know it was no good) involved in their crimes... if its just "hey, I'm tired of blockchain.info connecting up all my addresses and making my transactions and bitcoin net worth non-private, lets us this anonymity tool" thats a perfectly legimate thing to do.
864 2012-09-12 16:22:48 <Varan> I'm trying to get all the transactions in memory in my Java program to do some clustering stuff and maybe output something so it can be visualized in Gephi. But it's alot of data. I'm using that c++ block parser to output a file with all the transactions and then trying to read it in Java ... my C++ is not so good.
865 2012-09-12 16:23:08 <eian> Varan, what are you doing this for :)
866 2012-09-12 16:23:09 <eian> ?
867 2012-09-12 16:23:29 <eian> gmaxwell, are you certain of this legally? I guess I'm just naive to the law then :P
868 2012-09-12 16:23:40 <Varan> eian, just for fun :P
869 2012-09-12 16:24:14 <eian> Varan, I ran out of memory a long it ago
870 2012-09-12 16:24:23 <Varan> Haha
871 2012-09-12 16:24:26 <eian> Varan, I have 60+ gigs of normalized transaction data
872 2012-09-12 16:24:32 <Varan> The block parser tool is very cool...
873 2012-09-12 16:24:48 <Varan> it can do alot of stuff with only about 3 gig
874 2012-09-12 16:25:06 <eian> Varan, I looked at using gephi but I don't think it can handle this much data without narrowing the time window
875 2012-09-12 16:25:08 spaola has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
876 2012-09-12 16:25:10 <Varan> what do you mean by normalized transaction data
877 2012-09-12 16:25:14 <eian> I can't even graph a weeks worth of data
878 2012-09-12 16:25:24 <eian> Varan, normalized in the database sense
879 2012-09-12 16:25:29 <Varan> eian, yeah maybe your right ... but i like to try
880 2012-09-12 16:25:31 <Varan> ah oke
881 2012-09-12 16:26:01 <eian> Varan, how many transactions are you looking at?
882 2012-09-12 16:26:27 <Varan> At the moment I am trying to load all transactions into memory
883 2012-09-12 16:26:35 <eian> in the block chain?
884 2012-09-12 16:26:40 <Varan> yeah
885 2012-09-12 16:26:45 <eian> ah, sorry....that will wokr
886 2012-09-12 16:26:46 <eian> work*
887 2012-09-12 16:26:51 <eian> that will most certainly fit in memory
888 2012-09-12 16:26:52 spaola has joined
889 2012-09-12 16:27:04 <gmaxwell> eian: Somewhat, or at least I've talked about these issues with actual attornies; (My SO is an attorney, and we have lots of electronic freedom interested attornies in our social circle). But any attorney would also tell you that things depend on the facts.
890 2012-09-12 16:27:10 <Varan> what other transactions are you talking about then?
891 2012-09-12 16:27:21 <eian> gmaxwell, that's awesome :)
892 2012-09-12 16:27:31 <eian> gmaxwell, what does your SO think about bitcoin
893 2012-09-12 16:27:35 <eian> legally I mean
894 2012-09-12 16:27:41 <eian> I know the EFF stopped taking donations
895 2012-09-12 16:28:07 <eian> Varan, I'm collecting information about the real-time network
896 2012-09-12 16:28:20 <Varan> like...?
897 2012-09-12 16:28:23 <Varan> timestamps?
898 2012-09-12 16:28:25 <eian> everything
899 2012-09-12 16:28:25 <Varan> ip addrs?
900 2012-09-12 16:28:28 <eian> literally everything
901 2012-09-12 16:28:34 <Varan> oke
902 2012-09-12 16:28:36 <eian> I store it all as binary dumps
903 2012-09-12 16:28:39 andrew_wmf has joined
904 2012-09-12 16:28:41 <eian> and process it later
905 2012-09-12 16:28:42 <Varan> haha
906 2012-09-12 16:29:01 andrew_wmf has quit (Client Quit)
907 2012-09-12 16:29:07 <eian> I need more computing power to process this crap
908 2012-09-12 16:29:11 <gmaxwell> eian: she doesn't know anything about finance regulations. But people who do think it's generally uninteresting legally currently.
909 2012-09-12 16:29:12 <Varan> to try to identify addresses?
910 2012-09-12 16:29:24 <eian> Varan, yeah
911 2012-09-12 16:29:52 <eian> Varan, and any other patterns (because deanonymizatoin remains hard unless your client app screws something up apparently)
912 2012-09-12 16:29:56 <gmaxwell> certian activities that handle both usd and bitcoins seem like regulatory messes.
913 2012-09-12 16:30:04 <eian> gmaxwell, I see
914 2012-09-12 16:30:23 <Varan> have you tried to crawl the bitcoin forum and parse the addresses people have in their signatures?
915 2012-09-12 16:30:27 <eian> Varan, what problems are you running into loading into gephi?
916 2012-09-12 16:30:43 <eian> Varan, the block chain data should fit in memory for sure
917 2012-09-12 16:30:49 <eian> probably well under 3 gb as well
918 2012-09-12 16:31:01 <eian> especially if you normalize the data set
919 2012-09-12 16:31:24 <eian> Varan, I guess I could parse that info too
920 2012-09-12 16:31:35 jdnavarro has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
921 2012-09-12 16:31:54 <Varan> eian, I'm not that far yet .... for my first attempt I was just trying to load the transactions (input addrs + amount + tx hash + output addrs + amount) into memory ... in Java ... but I think i'm being inefficient
922 2012-09-12 16:32:21 <eian> so, don't repeat tx hashes - it is like 32 bytes
923 2012-09-12 16:32:28 <eian> read into database normalization concepts
924 2012-09-12 16:32:33 <eian> let me see if I can find an example
925 2012-09-12 16:32:41 <Varan> Yeah I was lazy ... just trying to hack something together
926 2012-09-12 16:33:44 <Varan> I have the C++ block parser dump all transactions in ascii (already bad!) and then read that form disk into a java program ... but it just hangs because it has to do so much GC ... :P
927 2012-09-12 16:33:45 <Joric> znort wrote an uncompilable thing =) c0x + 64bit only + boost i can't build it on win32 yet
928 2012-09-12 16:34:04 <Varan> uncompilable?
929 2012-09-12 16:34:11 <Varan> compiled just fine on linux :P
930 2012-09-12 16:34:23 <Varan> who uses 32 bit anyway :P
931 2012-09-12 16:34:28 <eian> Varan, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZs-Qdf-Sxg
932 2012-09-12 16:35:02 <eian> It sounds like you are duplicating btc addresses
933 2012-09-12 16:35:26 <Varan> eian, I know about that kind of stuff (from school ... about 4 years ago :P) ... but I was just being lazy ...
934 2012-09-12 16:35:32 <eian> ah, I see
935 2012-09-12 16:35:47 <Varan> But do you use an actual database?
936 2012-09-12 16:35:54 <Varan> like mysql
937 2012-09-12 16:36:00 <eian> I am using mysql
938 2012-09-12 16:36:01 <Varan> of just binary dumps or something
939 2012-09-12 16:36:03 <Varan> oke
940 2012-09-12 16:36:09 <Varan> doesn't that create overhead?
941 2012-09-12 16:36:12 <eian> I take binary > csv > mysql
942 2012-09-12 16:37:04 <eian> It is basically an 'ETL' if you are familiar with data warehouse terminology
943 2012-09-12 16:37:08 <Varan> What is the subject of you master thesis?
944 2012-09-12 16:37:12 <eian> extract,transform, load
945 2012-09-12 16:37:20 <Varan> Oke
946 2012-09-12 16:37:24 <eian> Varan, at this point...collecting data? lol
947 2012-09-12 16:37:34 <eian> Varan, I was hoping to have better results with clustering
948 2012-09-12 16:37:37 <Varan> No I dont know so much about data warehouse stuff
949 2012-09-12 16:37:50 <Varan> yeah but i mean what is the goal?
950 2012-09-12 16:38:04 <eian> the goal was to see how far I could deanonymize individuals
951 2012-09-12 16:38:11 <Varan> Ah oke
952 2012-09-12 16:38:13 <Varan> Hmm :P
953 2012-09-12 16:38:17 <eian> it seems I can only do so if their clients have configuration mistakes
954 2012-09-12 16:38:30 <eian> I have seen patterns of misuse as well
955 2012-09-12 16:38:36 <eian> but it is isloated
956 2012-09-12 16:38:39 <eian> isolated**
957 2012-09-12 16:38:52 <Varan> But for the standard client you can see the ip form where the tx originated right?
958 2012-09-12 16:39:11 <Varan> if they dont use tor or something like that
959 2012-09-12 16:39:27 <eian> Varan, yes - but I have no idea if that was the actual originator of the tx, or something that was simply relaying the message
960 2012-09-12 16:39:42 <eian> Varan, so I take a guess and assume that the first time I hear about a tx, it is the originator
961 2012-09-12 16:40:24 <eian> I've only seen about 200 or so ips that use TOR, out of 130,000
962 2012-09-12 16:41:09 <Varan> blockchain.info does something similar
963 2012-09-12 16:41:33 <Varan> but I think they connect to many nodes to get the tx as fast as possible
964 2012-09-12 16:41:56 <eian> I'm connected to more than they are :)
965 2012-09-12 16:42:22 <helo> how do you know if an IP you see is using TOR?
966 2012-09-12 16:42:37 <eian> http://torstatus.blutmagie.de/
967 2012-09-12 16:42:47 <eian> I just grab the list of all nodes
968 2012-09-12 16:42:58 <eian> It's not precise, but it is good enough
969 2012-09-12 16:54:03 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
970 2012-09-12 16:54:32 <Varan> I have been thinking of another way to cluster addresses. But it's much less precise. There are alot of tx chains where the addresses are only used once and a small amount is split off. The bitcoins in these addresses originate all from the same address. like: http://blockchain.info/address/12aqJLSsHwRdJNfogE8MDvGGtHkp8xuqhY
971 2012-09-12 16:55:20 <Varan> Maybe the addresses in such a chain could then be merged with the originating address ... there is ofcourse no guarantee that this is the same owner but for the visualization this does not matter much
972 2012-09-12 16:55:24 <Varan> I think
973 2012-09-12 16:57:40 PiZZaMaN2K is now known as PiZZaMaN2K|away
974 2012-09-12 16:58:57 <eian> Varan, yeah that is possible
975 2012-09-12 17:00:57 <Varan> But I wonder how many cluster you would get if you do that
976 2012-09-12 17:01:25 <Varan> vs if you use just tx input clustering and just addresses
977 2012-09-12 17:01:30 <Varan> clusters*
978 2012-09-12 17:01:58 <eian> People are encouraged to only use a key once
979 2012-09-12 17:02:17 osmosis has joined
980 2012-09-12 17:02:18 <eian> In the worst possible case, you will have as many clusters as transactions
981 2012-09-12 17:02:38 <eian> use an *address once
982 2012-09-12 17:03:50 <eian> clusters on input addresses are flawed, as gmaxwell pointed out to me yesterday
983 2012-09-12 17:04:00 <eian> but I was doing that
984 2012-09-12 17:04:03 <Varan> Yeah in theory
985 2012-09-12 17:04:09 <eian> we had ~1.5 million clusters
986 2012-09-12 17:04:36 graingert has joined
987 2012-09-12 17:04:38 <eian> out of ~3 million total addresses
988 2012-09-12 17:04:50 <eian> don't remember the exact numbers
989 2012-09-12 17:04:53 <eian> but roughly half
990 2012-09-12 17:04:56 <Varan> But I think in practice it should work because not many people make those kinds of transactions
991 2012-09-12 17:04:57 <Varan> oke
992 2012-09-12 17:07:30 maqr has quit (Quit: brb)
993 2012-09-12 17:10:29 danbri has joined
994 2012-09-12 17:17:19 <devrandom> sipa: pushed fix to LXC arch issue
995 2012-09-12 17:19:46 dust-otc has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
996 2012-09-12 17:20:15 unknown45682 has quit ()
997 2012-09-12 17:21:47 MBS has quit (Quit: Lolbye)
998 2012-09-12 17:26:41 maqr has joined
999 2012-09-12 17:31:17 MobiusL has joined
1000 2012-09-12 17:35:08 mtve has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1001 2012-09-12 17:35:55 jurov is now known as away!gwyvafco@84.245.71.31|jurov
1002 2012-09-12 17:38:32 Obsi has joined
1003 2012-09-12 17:51:02 da2ce7_d has joined
1004 2012-09-12 17:51:37 ehash has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1005 2012-09-12 17:53:25 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1006 2012-09-12 17:53:27 ehash has joined
1007 2012-09-12 17:59:34 agricocb has joined
1008 2012-09-12 18:05:49 Guest50156 has joined
1009 2012-09-12 18:07:37 Guest50156 is now known as MBs
1010 2012-09-12 18:07:38 MBs is now known as MBS
1011 2012-09-12 18:07:44 MBS has quit (Changing host)
1012 2012-09-12 18:07:44 MBS has joined
1013 2012-09-12 18:09:36 denisx has quit (Quit: denisx)
1014 2012-09-12 18:14:03 danbri has left ()
1015 2012-09-12 18:14:48 <gavinandresen> Pushed: * [new tag] v0.7.0rc3 -> v0.7.0rc3
1016 2012-09-12 18:21:14 vampireb has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
1017 2012-09-12 18:22:57 Clipse has quit (Quit: Clipse)
1018 2012-09-12 18:23:46 dvide has joined
1019 2012-09-12 18:25:12 unknown45682 has joined
1020 2012-09-12 18:25:57 pirateat160 has joined
1021 2012-09-12 18:26:45 <Luke-Jr> gavinandresen: did you merge the refactor_times fix? I really hate to find out the extent of problems it can causeâ¦
1022 2012-09-12 18:26:53 <Luke-Jr> bbiab
1023 2012-09-12 18:31:48 D34TH has joined
1024 2012-09-12 18:31:49 D34TH has quit (Changing host)
1025 2012-09-12 18:31:49 D34TH has joined
1026 2012-09-12 18:33:00 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1027 2012-09-12 18:33:19 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1028 2012-09-12 18:34:01 molecular has joined
1029 2012-09-12 18:37:39 <gavinandresen> Luke-Jr: no, I didn't merge refactor_times, that's not a showstopper bug.
1030 2012-09-12 18:42:42 DaQatz has joined
1031 2012-09-12 18:43:15 xisalty has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1032 2012-09-12 18:43:16 ThomasV_ has quit (Quit: Quitte)
1033 2012-09-12 18:43:41 xisalty has joined
1034 2012-09-12 18:43:47 ThomasV has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1035 2012-09-12 18:45:22 ThomasV has joined
1036 2012-09-12 18:49:39 vampireb has joined
1037 2012-09-12 18:52:41 pusle has joined
1038 2012-09-12 18:54:26 <Luke-Jr> gavinandresen: I would've expected it to be - if it does mess anything up, it won't be easy to fix the wallets after the factâ¦
1039 2012-09-12 18:54:37 <BlueMatt> osmosis: looks like you updated the pull before at the wrong time, just wait, it should figure it out (unless that commit is actually the head on your pull, in which case, rebase or reword to make a new head commit sha)
1040 2012-09-12 18:58:07 <osmosis> BlueMatt, the pull has already been accepted so i suppose ill just leave it.
1041 2012-09-12 18:59:15 <BlueMatt> ack
1042 2012-09-12 19:04:44 denisx has joined
1043 2012-09-12 19:14:04 graingert has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1044 2012-09-12 19:19:13 datagutt has quit (Quit: kthxbai)
1045 2012-09-12 19:28:10 <gavinandresen> BlueMatt wumpus sipa : I pushed my gitian.sigs for rc3, can y'all start builds?
1046 2012-09-12 19:30:04 pirateat160 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1047 2012-09-12 19:30:54 toffoo has joined
1048 2012-09-12 19:38:47 <devrandom> gavinandresen: BTW, my latest gitian commit solves the 32 bit on 64 host for LXC
1049 2012-09-12 19:39:07 <gavinandresen> devrandom: I saw that, thanks! (works great for me)
1050 2012-09-12 19:45:00 darkee has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1051 2012-09-12 19:48:32 Joric has quit ()
1052 2012-09-12 19:49:31 freakazoid has joined
1053 2012-09-12 19:52:15 <osmosis> what format does the parse_Transaction function expect the data in the BCDataStream() class to be in?
1054 2012-09-12 19:55:38 sebicas has joined
1055 2012-09-12 19:55:54 peper has joined
1056 2012-09-12 19:57:11 darkee has joined
1057 2012-09-12 19:58:46 <sebicas> Hi! If there any limit of transactions the main client can handle? Will it support a high number of transactions ( over 100K / Month ) ?
1058 2012-09-12 19:59:53 <gmaxwell> sebicas: transaction handling how? on the network or locally?
1059 2012-09-12 20:00:03 <sebicas> Network
1060 2012-09-12 20:00:19 <gmaxwell> thats only 23 transaction a block on average, we probably have more than that now.
1061 2012-09-12 20:00:40 <sebicas> I mean own transactions
1062 2012-09-12 20:01:23 <sebicas> For example, I understand SatoshiDice uses Bitcoinj
1063 2012-09-12 20:02:13 <gmaxwell> If the transactions leave a lot of unconfirmed outputs, then it might get a bit slow... but if you're thinking of doing SatoshiDice you ought not. It's not fee efficient, and it's hostile to other users of the network, causing slower confirmations for services which actually care about confirmations.
1064 2012-09-12 20:02:57 <sebicas> No, is not for that.. I understand the harn of SatoshiDice...
1065 2012-09-12 20:03:08 <sebicas> harm
1066 2012-09-12 20:03:48 <jgarzik> with 1MB blocks, IIRC, we max out at ~7/sec
1067 2012-09-12 20:03:49 agricocb has joined
1068 2012-09-12 20:03:54 <gmaxwell> Fine enough, just had to say it.
1069 2012-09-12 20:03:57 <jgarzik> assuming an avg tx size
1070 2012-09-12 20:04:02 dk5 has joined
1071 2012-09-12 20:04:14 <gmaxwell> sebicas: in any case I'd expect it to work fine with that load, if you like, go create that load on testnet and try it out.
1072 2012-09-12 20:04:29 <gmaxwell> If you have performance problems over time they may be helped by periodically cycling out wallets.
1073 2012-09-12 20:04:53 <sebicas> ok, great⦠thank you guys..
1074 2012-09-12 20:04:58 <jgarzik> or just store your private keys external to bitcoind, and interact via raw rpc api
1075 2012-09-12 20:05:41 <gmaxwell> the only thing that I'm aware of that gets intolerably slow fast is when you have spend with a lot of unconfirmed inputs in your wallet.
1076 2012-09-12 20:05:42 <sebicas> So, private keys are the ones that may cause slow down of the client?
1077 2012-09-12 20:05:57 <sebicas> If the client only holds one address ( one private key )
1078 2012-09-12 20:06:04 <gmaxwell> sebicas: jgarzik was suggesting that so you could avoid using the internal wallet and local transaction tracking entirely.
1079 2012-09-12 20:06:15 <gmaxwell> private keys themselves don't create any slowdown.
1080 2012-09-12 20:06:25 <sebicas> Ahh ok.
1081 2012-09-12 20:06:25 <gmaxwell> And you very much should be using each address only once if you can.
1082 2012-09-12 20:07:40 <jgarzik> a system that stores keys external to bitcoind might, for example, take advantage of the knowledge that you will never use addresses X, Y, or Z again. Therefore, store those keys in a "cold storage" locker, and never referenced by active online apps
1083 2012-09-12 20:13:33 <MC1984> gmaxwell you did any work on opus?
1084 2012-09-12 20:14:16 D34TH has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1085 2012-09-12 20:14:58 <gmaxwell> MC1984: yea, I wrote somehting like 10% of it, and did most of the software QA, and much of the R&D tooling.
1086 2012-09-12 20:15:21 <MC1984> cool, just read your name on the wiki page
1087 2012-09-12 20:16:18 <MC1984> lolling reading the list of companies with proprietary codecs that are asspained about opus
1088 2012-09-12 20:18:44 <MC1984> does that mean that vorbis is dead now or what
1089 2012-09-12 20:19:12 jurov is now known as jurov|away
1090 2012-09-12 20:24:17 MobiusL has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1091 2012-09-12 20:25:35 MobiusL has joined
1092 2012-09-12 20:26:04 <sebicas> Guys, will it be better for the network 1) One transaction with 20 outs 2) 20 TXs with 1 output 3) Divide it in 5 outputs transactions ?
1093 2012-09-12 20:27:56 gavinandresen has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1094 2012-09-12 20:31:43 <gmaxwell> sebicas: fewer outputs are better, especitally in the long term.
1095 2012-09-12 20:32:09 <sebicas> ok, thx!
1096 2012-09-12 20:32:23 <kjj_> wait, it is the same number of outputs in either case
1097 2012-09-12 20:32:29 <kjj_> the question is how they are distributed
1098 2012-09-12 20:32:33 <sebicas> Yes
1099 2012-09-12 20:32:49 <gmaxwell> oh well fewer transactions are better if the total outputs are the same.
1100 2012-09-12 20:33:15 <kjj_> gmaxwell: will pruning change that? or is pruning going to hit txouts?
1101 2012-09-12 20:33:17 <gmaxwell> (fewer total bytes are better, given equal total outputs, and fewer transactions will results in fewer bytes)
1102 2012-09-12 20:33:47 <sebicas> Then making one transaction with 20 outputs⦠if better than 20 transactions with 1 outputs, correct?
1103 2012-09-12 20:34:08 <gmaxwell> kjj_: pruning, the way we'll implement it is per output. Ideally you want to reduce the total outputs. But given the same number pruning doesn't care. Pre-pruning, less data is better.
1104 2012-09-12 20:34:12 <gmaxwell> sebicas: correct.
1105 2012-09-12 20:34:18 <sebicas> ok, thank!
1106 2012-09-12 20:34:34 <kjj_> ok. I wasn't sure if it was possible to prune transactions once all of the outputs were gone or not
1107 2012-09-12 20:34:36 gavinandresen has joined
1108 2012-09-12 20:34:36 gavinandresen has quit (Changing host)
1109 2012-09-12 20:34:36 gavinandresen has joined
1110 2012-09-12 20:35:12 <gmaxwell> kjj_: yea ultraprune can work one output at a time. Earlier pruning ideas people had would have had to prune the whole txn.
1111 2012-09-12 20:35:47 <gmaxwell> ultraprune only stores the txid:txout (plus a few other bits of data) in the coins database. (all the rest is there, but only used for reorgs / archival / bootstrapping etc)
1112 2012-09-12 20:41:49 <BlueMattBot> Yippie, build fixed!
1113 2012-09-12 20:41:49 <BlueMattBot> Project Bitcoin build #59: FIXED in 6 hr 9 min: http://jenkins.bluematt.me/job/Bitcoin/59/
1114 2012-09-12 20:43:34 JFK911 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1115 2012-09-12 20:44:04 CluckCreek has joined
1116 2012-09-12 20:44:15 JFK911 has joined
1117 2012-09-12 20:44:23 slush has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1118 2012-09-12 20:47:11 hnz has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1119 2012-09-12 20:47:53 <CluckCreek> I'm getting http 500s when using addmultisigaddress on 0.7rc2.
1120 2012-09-12 20:48:16 Varan has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1121 2012-09-12 20:49:05 <CluckCreek> Does the wallet need to have the private keys for all the addresses? I don't want to unilaterally send money sent to the multisig address, I just want to generate the address.
1122 2012-09-12 20:50:42 <Eliel> CluckCreek: the error 500's are probably due to non-json formatted liste in the command
1123 2012-09-12 20:54:51 <CluckCreek> Well, I don't have the problem when all the addresses are from the same wallet. And it's the same code generating the list in both cases.
1124 2012-09-12 20:56:05 <gmaxwell> no, you shouldn't need to have the keys in the same wallet.
1125 2012-09-12 20:56:16 <gmaxwell> You will need to provide pubkeys rather than addresses.
1126 2012-09-12 20:56:52 hnz has joined
1127 2012-09-12 20:58:47 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1128 2012-09-12 20:59:38 <CluckCreek> How do I get the pubkey?
1129 2012-09-12 21:00:35 bonks has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
1130 2012-09-12 21:00:44 Obsi has quit (Quit: *PooF*)
1131 2012-09-12 21:01:22 Obsi has joined
1132 2012-09-12 21:01:51 bonks has joined
1133 2012-09-12 21:02:06 <gavinandresen> CluckCreek: validateaddress will tell you the pubkey (on a wallet that has the public/private keypair)
1134 2012-09-12 21:02:24 <CluckCreek> cool, thanks
1135 2012-09-12 21:02:53 gavinandresen has quit (Quit: gavinandresen)
1136 2012-09-12 21:09:28 pusle has quit ()
1137 2012-09-12 21:10:38 bonks has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1138 2012-09-12 21:13:48 bonks has joined
1139 2012-09-12 21:18:25 D34TH has joined
1140 2012-09-12 21:18:26 D34TH has quit (Changing host)
1141 2012-09-12 21:18:26 D34TH has joined
1142 2012-09-12 21:27:13 Joric has joined
1143 2012-09-12 21:29:12 <gmaxwell> Weee: https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/10825183/patch/1/2 chrome mysteriously disabling compression in openssl.
1144 2012-09-12 21:29:37 gjs278 has joined
1145 2012-09-12 21:30:36 <edcba> doesn't endanger bitcoin
1146 2012-09-12 21:31:02 <edcba> there is no compression in bitcoin :)
1147 2012-09-12 21:31:21 devrandom has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1148 2012-09-12 21:31:37 slush has joined
1149 2012-09-12 21:31:56 <doublec> a little bit of discussion about it in this firefox bug too https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=580679
1150 2012-09-12 21:32:02 <doublec> comment 32
1151 2012-09-12 21:32:17 maqr has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1152 2012-09-12 21:33:12 devrandom has joined
1153 2012-09-12 21:33:14 <gmaxwell> edcba: earlier today I mentioned that the RPCSSL gives me hives a bit.
1154 2012-09-12 21:34:03 <gmaxwell> I boggle at the rate of remote exploits in zlib.
1155 2012-09-12 21:34:25 <edcba> just the word rpc afraids me
1156 2012-09-12 21:35:22 <edcba> it's not a zlib problem it seems
1157 2012-09-12 21:35:30 <edcba> more a general compresion problem
1158 2012-09-12 21:36:21 <edcba> according to some stackoverflow post :)
1159 2012-09-12 21:36:47 <gmaxwell> http://lists.randombit.net/pipermail/cryptography/2012-September/003191.html
1160 2012-09-12 21:37:07 <gmaxwell> If only I was keeping up with my email I would have already seen that.
1161 2012-09-12 21:37:17 <edcba> indeed this one
1162 2012-09-12 21:38:11 <gmaxwell> we actually had a problem with the wikimedia board elections and gpg. The system encrypted the votes using gpg.. and you could uniquely identify some of the ballots based on their size.
1163 2012-09-12 21:38:41 <edcba> lol
1164 2012-09-12 21:39:16 <gmaxwell> solution was to just disable compression.
1165 2012-09-12 21:45:56 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
1166 2012-09-12 21:47:34 _sudog has joined
1167 2012-09-12 21:47:47 sudog has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1168 2012-09-12 21:48:10 maqr has joined
1169 2012-09-12 21:53:47 ovidiusoft has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1170 2012-09-12 21:54:30 <jgarzik> a lot of things may be fingerprinted without examining their contents
1171 2012-09-12 21:54:40 <eian> with bitcoin?
1172 2012-09-12 21:55:05 <eian> or just in general?
1173 2012-09-12 21:55:21 <jgarzik> sure. you can easily recognize who is using bitcoin protocol over Tor, if a suspect is wiretapped.
1174 2012-09-12 21:55:53 <jgarzik> with timings and luck, you might be able to identify whether or not a suspect sends a new transaction out to the world
1175 2012-09-12 21:57:11 <gmaxwell> I looked into doing this and it was complicated by the fact that the cells are a rather large constant size... and the further propagation is slow.
1176 2012-09-12 21:57:11 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1177 2012-09-12 21:57:21 <gmaxwell> with enough txn you could, of course.
1178 2012-09-12 21:57:35 <gmaxwell> (identifiying when a transaction is sent)
1179 2012-09-12 21:58:16 <eian> :)
1180 2012-09-12 21:59:02 <gmaxwell> Ultimately to avoid traffic analysis you must use hard constant bitrate streams...
1181 2012-09-12 21:59:24 <gmaxwell> bitcoin has a low enough data rate that you could reasonably do that.
1182 2012-09-12 22:00:06 <helo> is it a complete waste of time for tor clients to send out data that would look similar to a new transaction being sent?
1183 2012-09-12 22:00:56 <gmaxwell> because of the tor cell size rounding the bitcoin ping messages are probably sufficient for that.
1184 2012-09-12 22:06:10 <jgarzik> RE hard constant bitrate -- yep, that's how to fix it
1185 2012-09-12 22:06:20 <jgarzik> sucks for network usage though
1186 2012-09-12 22:06:43 Joric has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1187 2012-09-12 22:06:52 Joric has joined
1188 2012-09-12 22:06:55 Joric has quit (Changing host)
1189 2012-09-12 22:06:55 Joric has joined
1190 2012-09-12 22:07:20 <eian> setting up such a hard constant bitrate would just be a "leaky bucket" buffer right?
1191 2012-09-12 22:07:55 copumpkin has joined
1192 2012-09-12 22:08:23 <jgarzik> not familiar with a leaky bucket buffer
1193 2012-09-12 22:08:29 <jgarzik> I consider it "padded with random data"
1194 2012-09-12 22:08:49 <jgarzik> and carefully timed so that packets are sent at a clock-regular rate
1195 2012-09-12 22:08:57 <eian> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/dd206751(v=vs.85).aspx
1196 2012-09-12 22:12:16 <gmaxwell> eian: yes, its not important that the instant rate is constant, so long as its unrelated to anything private.
1197 2012-09-12 22:12:30 <eian> right
1198 2012-09-12 22:12:44 <gmaxwell> eian: e.g. if your rate is 2kbit/sec.. and you get knocked offline for 60 seconds you could reasonably have 120kbit to burst out on reconnect.
1199 2012-09-12 22:13:10 <gmaxwell> a smart implementation would not buffer the data but only the obligation of data, and only use padding when there really was nothing to send.
1200 2012-09-12 22:13:44 <eian> makes sense
1201 2012-09-12 22:13:44 agricocb has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1202 2012-09-12 22:13:46 Joric has quit ()
1203 2012-09-12 22:15:22 <gmaxwell> there are still attacks against anything with sustained traffic.. e.g. disrupt connectivity for groups of nodes long enough to observe their absense. bisection search for the target.
1204 2012-09-12 22:15:48 <gmaxwell> useless against signal transactions probably feasable for a state level actor against something like an underground market.
1205 2012-09-12 22:15:49 <Diablo-D3> heh
1206 2012-09-12 22:16:00 <gmaxwell> s/signal/single/
1207 2012-09-12 22:16:07 PhantomSpark has joined
1208 2012-09-12 22:16:56 <jgarzik> yep
1209 2012-09-12 22:17:10 <gmaxwell> a non-realtime mixnet would be much stronger against that sort of thing though, if you could except very high txn delivery times.
1210 2012-09-12 22:17:36 <gmaxwell> wow I can't english today.
1211 2012-09-12 22:17:39 <gmaxwell> accept.
1212 2012-09-12 22:17:42 <jgarzik> heh, indeed -- most mixnets are a joke because they are real-time
1213 2012-09-12 22:17:48 <Diablo-D3> man
1214 2012-09-12 22:17:50 <Diablo-D3> we need like
1215 2012-09-12 22:17:52 <Diablo-D3> a martian mixnet
1216 2012-09-12 22:17:56 <Diablo-D3> send it to mars
1217 2012-09-12 22:17:59 <Diablo-D3> wait for it to come back
1218 2012-09-12 22:18:01 <gmaxwell> yup. and non-realtime ones basicaly don't exist. kinda weird.. not hard to code.
1219 2012-09-12 22:18:25 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: hard to trust
1220 2012-09-12 22:18:27 <gmaxwell> I kinda expect the raw txn api to inspire some of this.. it's easy to do external txn forwarding now.
1221 2012-09-12 22:18:43 <Diablo-D3> jgarzik: why?
1222 2012-09-12 22:18:45 <Diablo-D3> if it drops tx
1223 2012-09-12 22:18:48 <Diablo-D3> then you repeat them
1224 2012-09-12 22:18:53 PhantomSpark has quit (2!~kvirc@pool-71-251-16-25.nycmny.fios.verizon.net|Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1225 2012-09-12 22:19:07 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: so you run it over a widely used realtime mixnet like tor... should be no less secure than the realtime one you're riding on.
1226 2012-09-12 22:19:14 <jgarzik> people fundamentally don't like their money simply disappearing within $UnknownEntity for long spans of time
1227 2012-09-12 22:19:31 <jgarzik> trusting the mixer is a sufficient stretch, even for real time
1228 2012-09-12 22:19:59 <jgarzik> I'm not pretending this is logical behavior... but it's human behavior ;p
1229 2012-09-12 22:19:59 <gmaxwell> ah, well I didn't mean coinmixing, just txn forwarding. it's possible to do zero trust coinmixing though.
1230 2012-09-12 22:20:17 <ThomasV> a longer time increases the amount of coins, and thus the incentive for the mixnet operator to run away with the coins
1231 2012-09-12 22:20:25 <jgarzik> yep
1232 2012-09-12 22:20:43 <gmaxwell> (you just have all participants jointly author a transaction.. collaborating over a non-realtime mixnet, I'd guess ;) )
1233 2012-09-12 22:22:02 <eian> non sequitur: Someone is sending the same tx once per hour over the course of 5 weeks. I've recorded it no less than 921 times and there is no record of it on blockchain info.
1234 2012-09-12 22:22:45 <gmaxwell> eian: probably an invalid transaction. can you give us the hex dump of it?
1235 2012-09-12 22:22:59 <eian> not easily, one sec
1236 2012-09-12 22:23:21 <gmaxwell> eian: bitcoin can now do nice user friendly decodes of transactions from hex.
1237 2012-09-12 22:23:27 <gmaxwell> 'decoderawtransaction' rpc.
1238 2012-09-12 22:23:38 <eian> hah :P
1239 2012-09-12 22:25:20 Mad7Scientist is now known as danieldanieldani
1240 2012-09-12 22:27:24 danieldanieldani is now known as MAD7SCIENTIST
1241 2012-09-12 22:30:44 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1242 2012-09-12 22:33:32 denisx_ has joined
1243 2012-09-12 22:33:32 denisx has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1244 2012-09-12 22:33:32 denisx_ is now known as denisx
1245 2012-09-12 22:35:22 <midnightmagic> gmaxwell: does it do a full script decode?
1246 2012-09-12 22:36:00 denisx_ has joined
1247 2012-09-12 22:36:01 denisx has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1248 2012-09-12 22:36:01 denisx_ is now known as denisx
1249 2012-09-12 22:36:55 denisx has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1250 2012-09-12 22:37:02 denisx has joined
1251 2012-09-12 22:38:06 agricocb has joined
1252 2012-09-12 22:38:50 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
1253 2012-09-12 22:46:26 ThomasV has joined
1254 2012-09-12 22:48:26 Marf has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1255 2012-09-12 22:51:06 B0g4r7 has joined
1256 2012-09-12 22:54:44 Diablo-D3 has quit (Quit: do coders dream of sheep()?)
1257 2012-09-12 22:56:31 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
1258 2012-09-12 22:57:16 Joric has joined
1259 2012-09-12 23:04:03 Raccoon` is now known as Raccoon
1260 2012-09-12 23:05:13 ThomasV has joined
1261 2012-09-12 23:05:27 CodeInChaos has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1262 2012-09-12 23:05:55 JFK911 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1263 2012-09-12 23:05:56 JFK911 has joined
1264 2012-09-12 23:07:26 Diablo-D3 has joined
1265 2012-09-12 23:07:53 aq83 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1266 2012-09-12 23:08:38 aq83 has joined
1267 2012-09-12 23:09:31 gavinandresen has joined
1268 2012-09-12 23:10:56 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@brwyatt.net|brwyatt
1269 2012-09-12 23:18:44 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1270 2012-09-12 23:19:33 slush has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1271 2012-09-12 23:23:23 ThomasV has joined
1272 2012-09-12 23:29:59 Marf has joined
1273 2012-09-12 23:35:49 MobiusL has quit (Excess Flood)
1274 2012-09-12 23:37:25 MobiusL has joined
1275 2012-09-12 23:38:26 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1276 2012-09-12 23:39:23 Joric has quit ()
1277 2012-09-12 23:52:47 TheSeven has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1278 2012-09-12 23:54:48 TheSeven has joined
1279 2012-09-12 23:58:03 meLon has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)