1 2012-10-02 00:00:45 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
   2 2012-10-02 00:01:48 Cory has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
   3 2012-10-02 00:02:00 Pasha has joined
   4 2012-10-02 00:02:20 pnicholson has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
   5 2012-10-02 00:02:21 pnicholson has joined
   6 2012-10-02 00:02:47 ForceMajeure_ is now known as ForceMajeure
   7 2012-10-02 00:04:31 lggr has joined
   8 2012-10-02 00:05:40 Pasha is now known as Cory
   9 2012-10-02 00:08:33 pnicholson has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
  10 2012-10-02 00:09:10 pnicholson has joined
  11 2012-10-02 00:09:40 eoss has joined
  12 2012-10-02 00:09:40 eoss has quit (Changing host)
  13 2012-10-02 00:09:40 eoss has joined
  14 2012-10-02 00:10:38 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
  15 2012-10-02 00:13:30 pnicholson has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
  16 2012-10-02 00:13:50 lggr has joined
  17 2012-10-02 00:14:02 pnicholson has joined
  18 2012-10-02 00:15:06 Evilmax has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
  19 2012-10-02 00:15:25 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@brwyatt.net|brwyatt
  20 2012-10-02 00:16:39 tonikt has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
  21 2012-10-02 00:17:18 tonikt has joined
  22 2012-10-02 00:18:39 aq83 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
  23 2012-10-02 00:19:08 aq83 has joined
  24 2012-10-02 00:19:08 tonikt has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
  25 2012-10-02 00:19:43 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
  26 2012-10-02 00:20:30 pnicholson has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
  27 2012-10-02 00:23:15 lggr has joined
  28 2012-10-02 00:25:34 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
  29 2012-10-02 00:25:38 JZavala has joined
  30 2012-10-02 00:26:03 RainbowDashh has joined
  31 2012-10-02 00:27:23 toffoo has quit ()
  32 2012-10-02 00:28:25 Evilmax has joined
  33 2012-10-02 00:29:43 OneFixt has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
  34 2012-10-02 00:29:48 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
  35 2012-10-02 00:29:56 OneFixt has joined
  36 2012-10-02 00:30:56 Edward_Black has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
  37 2012-10-02 00:31:12 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: SLEEP MODE. <nickname> tell RainbowDashh fix your quit message. And by "fix", I mean pick one that isn't incredibly annoying)
  38 2012-10-02 00:31:13 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
  39 2012-10-02 00:32:43 lggr has joined
  40 2012-10-02 00:37:43 one_zero has joined
  41 2012-10-02 00:39:18 RainbowDashh has joined
  42 2012-10-02 00:40:05 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
  43 2012-10-02 00:40:42 stamit has quit (Quit: stamit)
  44 2012-10-02 00:43:19 lggr has joined
  45 2012-10-02 00:44:30 dvide has joined
  46 2012-10-02 00:48:27 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
  47 2012-10-02 00:50:14 aq83 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
  48 2012-10-02 00:50:21 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
  49 2012-10-02 00:50:38 aq83 has joined
  50 2012-10-02 00:51:25 BTCTrader has quit (Quit: BTCTrader)
  51 2012-10-02 00:53:49 lggr has joined
  52 2012-10-02 00:56:12 <D34TH> bitcoind getinfo is taking a really long time to execute on my server
  53 2012-10-02 00:56:16 <D34TH> git head
  54 2012-10-02 00:56:22 <D34TH> 16gb ram quad core
  55 2012-10-02 00:57:20 <gmaxwell> D34TH: have you been trying to dos attack the bitcoin network by producing big chains of transactions spending unconfirmed change?
  56 2012-10-02 00:57:28 <D34TH> nope
  57 2012-10-02 00:57:38 <D34TH> just fresh compiled on a fresh server
  58 2012-10-02 00:57:57 <D34TH> and i havent spent a bitcoin in a long time
  59 2012-10-02 00:58:02 <D34TH> or earned one for that matter
  60 2012-10-02 00:59:23 <gmaxwell> oh, well are you just talking about during the initil startup?
  61 2012-10-02 00:59:57 <D34TH> yea
  62 2012-10-02 01:00:07 BTCTrader has joined
  63 2012-10-02 01:00:07 <D34TH> i also tried importing blocks and that seemed to break
  64 2012-10-02 01:00:07 BTCTrader has quit (Changing host)
  65 2012-10-02 01:00:07 BTCTrader has joined
  66 2012-10-02 01:00:46 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
  67 2012-10-02 01:02:48 <gmaxwell> block importing is in the foreground right now, it won't respond until its done.
  68 2012-10-02 01:03:51 <jgarzik> 'getinfo' occasionally takes a very long time -- 5-10 minutes or more -- for me on testnet3, for some reason
  69 2012-10-02 01:04:03 <jgarzik> never investigated, but have seen the behavior multiple times
  70 2012-10-02 01:04:10 lggr has joined
  71 2012-10-02 01:04:34 <D34TH> takes a few seconds sometimes
  72 2012-10-02 01:07:28 <jaxtr> coin it up bra
  73 2012-10-02 01:08:14 stamit has joined
  74 2012-10-02 01:11:21 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
  75 2012-10-02 01:14:27 lggr has joined
  76 2012-10-02 01:17:29 Impaler has joined
  77 2012-10-02 01:19:00 <jgarzik> ah hah!
  78 2012-10-02 01:19:06 <jgarzik> captured the behavior on testnet3, too:
  79 2012-10-02 01:19:17 <jgarzik> SetBestChain: new best=0000000001f30c173fd8  height=31789  work=1054057791842452  date=10/02/12 01:04:28
  80 2012-10-02 01:19:17 <jgarzik> ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED
  81 2012-10-02 01:19:17 <jgarzik> CreateNewBlock(): total size 1000
  82 2012-10-02 01:19:17 <jgarzik> Running BitcoinMiner with 1 transactions in block (188 bytes)
  83 2012-10-02 01:19:17 <jgarzik> getblocks -1 to 00000000000000000000 limit 500
  84 2012-10-02 01:19:19 <jgarzik> received getdata for: block 0000000001f30c173fd8
  85 2012-10-02 01:19:21 <jgarzik> getblocks -1 to 00000000000000000000 limit 500
  86 2012-10-02 01:19:25 <jgarzik> ...last line duplicated several times...
  87 2012-10-02 01:19:31 <jgarzik> http://pastebin.com/vnaxq3zf
  88 2012-10-02 01:20:19 <jgarzik> looking through debug.log, every single new testnet3 block is accompanied by several lines of: getblocks -1 to 00000000000000000000 limit 500
  89 2012-10-02 01:21:24 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
  90 2012-10-02 01:22:19 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
  91 2012-10-02 01:24:03 <jaxtr> aye
  92 2012-10-02 01:24:18 <jaxtr> jgarzik is cool
  93 2012-10-02 01:24:56 lggr has joined
  94 2012-10-02 01:27:28 pnicholson has joined
  95 2012-10-02 01:29:22 maaku has joined
  96 2012-10-02 01:31:18 Arch_Coldfire has joined
  97 2012-10-02 01:31:54 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
  98 2012-10-02 01:35:16 lggr has joined
  99 2012-10-02 01:41:28 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 100 2012-10-02 01:45:13 lggr has joined
 101 2012-10-02 01:47:23 nimdAHK has joined
 102 2012-10-02 01:51:51 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 103 2012-10-02 01:52:23 D34TH is now known as arij_watcher
 104 2012-10-02 01:52:31 arij_watcher is now known as d34th
 105 2012-10-02 01:53:11 stamit has quit (Quit: stamit)
 106 2012-10-02 01:53:25 Z0rZ0rZ0r has quit (Quit: Wheeeee)
 107 2012-10-02 01:53:33 [\\\] has joined
 108 2012-10-02 01:53:38 [\\\] has quit (Excess Flood)
 109 2012-10-02 01:55:24 [\\\] has joined
 110 2012-10-02 01:55:34 lggr has joined
 111 2012-10-02 01:57:29 Karmaon has joined
 112 2012-10-02 01:59:26 root2 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 113 2012-10-02 01:59:45 root2 has joined
 114 2012-10-02 02:00:23 BTCTrader has quit (Quit: BTCTrader)
 115 2012-10-02 02:02:09 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 116 2012-10-02 02:02:21 graingert has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 117 2012-10-02 02:05:54 lggr has joined
 118 2012-10-02 02:06:35 vampireb has joined
 119 2012-10-02 02:11:55 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 120 2012-10-02 02:12:04 PhantomSpark has joined
 121 2012-10-02 02:12:23 PhantomSpark has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 122 2012-10-02 02:12:50 PhantomSpark is now known as 2!~kvirc@pool-71-251-16-25.nycmny.fios.verizon.net|PhantomSpark
 123 2012-10-02 02:14:44 BTCTrader has joined
 124 2012-10-02 02:14:44 BTCTrader has quit (Changing host)
 125 2012-10-02 02:14:44 BTCTrader has joined
 126 2012-10-02 02:15:05 lggr has joined
 127 2012-10-02 02:22:07 d34th has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 128 2012-10-02 02:22:17 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 129 2012-10-02 02:25:35 lggr has joined
 130 2012-10-02 02:27:43 <jgarzik> evoorhees, on SD: "September was the second-strongest month ever in terms of bet volume, after last month's record-breaking performance.
 131 2012-10-02 02:27:43 <jgarzik> Moving into October, the new site is extremely close (day or two) to being live, and a special announcement still remains that is 1-2 weeks away."
 132 2012-10-02 02:29:06 <BlueMatt> yay stupidity!
 133 2012-10-02 02:30:03 toffoo has joined
 134 2012-10-02 02:30:22 tobtc has joined
 135 2012-10-02 02:30:56 tobtc has left ()
 136 2012-10-02 02:31:12 <nimdAHK> ?
 137 2012-10-02 02:31:27 <BlueMatt> guess there's no the average intelligence of a bitcoin user is higher than the average population...oh well, one can hope
 138 2012-10-02 02:32:24 <nimdAHK> Judging by the money invested in pirate...
 139 2012-10-02 02:32:24 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 140 2012-10-02 02:32:43 <BlueMatt> it really is astounding...people's ability to ignore reality when its staring them in the face...
 141 2012-10-02 02:33:01 <BlueMatt> whether its investing in obvious shit, or gambling against the odds
 142 2012-10-02 02:33:52 <nimdAHK> gambling against the odds makes sense, if you consider the entertainment value
 143 2012-10-02 02:34:20 <nimdAHK> If I'd spend $30 at a movie theater, I'd spend $30 at a casino
 144 2012-10-02 02:34:23 <BlueMatt> there are better...cheaper ways to be entertained
 145 2012-10-02 02:34:36 <nimdAHK> diversity is one of the secrets to happiness
 146 2012-10-02 02:34:48 <BlueMatt> true, but gambling all your money away isnt ;)
 147 2012-10-02 02:35:07 <nimdAHK> I have more than $30 :|
 148 2012-10-02 02:35:10 <nimdAHK> lol
 149 2012-10-02 02:35:35 <BlueMatt> there are those who bet once, but to get the kind of volume sd has, you have to have at least a few repeat "customers"
 150 2012-10-02 02:35:45 <nimdAHK> lol
 151 2012-10-02 02:35:50 <gmaxwell> 19:21 < nimdAHK> Judging by the money invested in pirate...
 152 2012-10-02 02:35:53 <nimdAHK> betting once is the second-best strategy
 153 2012-10-02 02:36:00 <gmaxwell> I think the claims of investment amount sthere are mostly fiction.
 154 2012-10-02 02:36:00 <nimdAHK> yes gmaxwell ?
 155 2012-10-02 02:36:04 lggr has joined
 156 2012-10-02 02:36:16 <nimdAHK> gmaxwell: well just sum up the values of PPT assets on GLBSE
 157 2012-10-02 02:36:19 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: lets call it "donated" to pirate
 158 2012-10-02 02:36:22 <gmaxwell> There is basically no evidence for the really big numbers people have trown around.
 159 2012-10-02 02:36:23 <nimdAHK> it was around 100K, gmaxwell
 160 2012-10-02 02:36:33 <nimdAHK> gmaxwell: the evidence is in GLBSE historic data
 161 2012-10-02 02:36:34 <gmaxwell> nimdAHK: the PPTs could invest in themselves and claim any size they wante.d
 162 2012-10-02 02:36:52 <gmaxwell> and it was strongly in their own interest to inflate their sizes.
 163 2012-10-02 02:37:00 <nimdAHK> still
 164 2012-10-02 02:37:03 <nimdAHK> someone had to invest
 165 2012-10-02 02:37:06 [\\\] is now known as imsaguy-gal
 166 2012-10-02 02:37:10 <nimdAHK> or he wouldn't have ran, lol
 167 2012-10-02 02:37:19 imsaguy-gal is now known as imsaguy-chick
 168 2012-10-02 02:37:28 imsaguy-chick is now known as [\\\]
 169 2012-10-02 02:37:34 <gmaxwell> sure. But it could be 'only' tens of thousands...
 170 2012-10-02 02:37:44 <nimdAHK> gmaxwell: I don't believe the 500K, ofc
 171 2012-10-02 02:38:03 * BlueMatt votes for 21 million btc
 172 2012-10-02 02:38:08 <nimdAHK> I held PPT bonds in-between dividends
 173 2012-10-02 02:38:19 <nimdAHK> to take advantage of the saw-tooth prices
 174 2012-10-02 02:38:23 <gmaxwell> zeekrewards apparently had pulled in over 600 million before the sec shut them down.
 175 2012-10-02 02:38:23 <nimdAHK> it was great
 176 2012-10-02 02:38:56 <gmaxwell> nimdAHK: you're calling people stupid for owning the toxic assets and yet you admit to having touched them yourself!
 177 2012-10-02 02:39:09 <nimdAHK> whoa man
 178 2012-10-02 02:39:11 <nimdAHK> I touched them
 179 2012-10-02 02:39:15 <nimdAHK> but with a much lower risk
 180 2012-10-02 02:39:17 <gmaxwell> don't you reconize that the "I'm to smart to be left holding the bag" thinking is what powered many of the victims?
 181 2012-10-02 02:39:30 <gmaxwell> s/to smart/too smart/
 182 2012-10-02 02:39:31 <nimdAHK> yes
 183 2012-10-02 02:39:42 <nimdAHK> but you saw how long it took for the assets to tank
 184 2012-10-02 02:39:45 <nimdAHK> I anticipated that
 185 2012-10-02 02:40:02 <nimdAHK> and I only held them in-between dividends
 186 2012-10-02 02:40:03 <gmaxwell> You can't prove to me that you escaped because of reason instead of chance.
 187 2012-10-02 02:40:06 <BlueMatt> claiming brilliance in hindsight is easy...
 188 2012-10-02 02:40:29 <nimdAHK> gmaxwell: I don't really think I need to
 189 2012-10-02 02:40:35 <gmaxwell> You might have— but _everyone_ who escaped can justify if the same way you did. And lots of people who didn't escape had considered exit plans.
 190 2012-10-02 02:40:58 <nimdAHK> I considered it entertainment, too
 191 2012-10-02 02:41:06 <gmaxwell> (esp since pirate had told many people he'd give forwarning before shutting down)
 192 2012-10-02 02:41:14 <nimdAHK> it went on my entertainment budget
 193 2012-10-02 02:41:17 <gmaxwell> nimdAHK: and so did many other people who plunked funds in.
 194 2012-10-02 02:41:24 <nimdAHK> lol
 195 2012-10-02 02:41:28 <nimdAHK> then why are they whining?
 196 2012-10-02 02:41:38 <gmaxwell> and likewise— for many people all their bitcoins — even if there are tens of thousands— are just enterttainment budget.
 197 2012-10-02 02:41:46 <nimdAHK> the entertainment budget is meant to be thrown away
 198 2012-10-02 02:41:48 <gmaxwell> nimdAHK: because the whining is entertaining too!
 199 2012-10-02 02:41:52 <nimdAHK> rofl
 200 2012-10-02 02:41:55 <nimdAHK> you lost me there
 201 2012-10-02 02:42:09 <nimdAHK> I get a good kick out of a lot of things
 202 2012-10-02 02:42:13 <gmaxwell> also, fairly few releative to the likely totl participants are complaining I think.
 203 2012-10-02 02:42:18 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 204 2012-10-02 02:42:28 <gmaxwell> the peoples love the drama, it is their circus.
 205 2012-10-02 02:42:37 coblee has quit (Quit: coblee)
 206 2012-10-02 02:42:41 <nimdAHK> like I said in #bitcoin
 207 2012-10-02 02:42:52 <nimdAHK> there's a drama more than once a week in bitcoinland
 208 2012-10-02 02:42:59 <nimdAHK> that's more frequent than reality tv
 209 2012-10-02 02:43:00 <gmaxwell> woops. I thought this was #bitcoin
 210 2012-10-02 02:43:05 <gmaxwell> this is OT for here.
 211 2012-10-02 02:43:07 <jgarzik> heh
 212 2012-10-02 02:43:14 * nimdAHK shuffles over to #bitcoin
 213 2012-10-02 02:43:38 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: my bad, guess I started it in earnest...
 214 2012-10-02 02:43:46 * jgarzik does too
 215 2012-10-02 02:44:33 fiesh has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 216 2012-10-02 02:45:10 * BlueMatt waits for the google "Failure Trends in a Large SSD Drive Population" Paper to follow up the disk one...
 217 2012-10-02 02:45:26 fiesh has joined
 218 2012-10-02 02:45:33 lggr has joined
 219 2012-10-02 02:46:08 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: eventually Google will be nothing but fast or slow RAM
 220 2012-10-02 02:46:14 <BlueMatt> heh
 221 2012-10-02 02:49:09 eoss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 222 2012-10-02 02:51:58 isis has left ()
 223 2012-10-02 02:52:16 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 224 2012-10-02 02:56:01 lggr has joined
 225 2012-10-02 03:02:50 nimdAHK has quit (Quit: Page closed)
 226 2012-10-02 03:02:52 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 227 2012-10-02 03:03:46 AlexWaters has joined
 228 2012-10-02 03:06:15 lggr has joined
 229 2012-10-02 03:08:57 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: SLEEP MODE. puppy: it'd be wise to actual chat on here and not loiter.)
 230 2012-10-02 03:12:33 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 231 2012-10-02 03:16:11 lggr has joined
 232 2012-10-02 03:22:00 Davincij15 has joined
 233 2012-10-02 03:23:18 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 234 2012-10-02 03:25:30 lggr has joined
 235 2012-10-02 03:31:32 TheSeven has quit (Disconnected by services)
 236 2012-10-02 03:31:40 [7] has joined
 237 2012-10-02 03:32:31 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 238 2012-10-02 03:36:12 lggr has joined
 239 2012-10-02 03:43:10 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 240 2012-10-02 03:43:15 one_zero_ has joined
 241 2012-10-02 03:44:24 one_zero has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
 242 2012-10-02 03:45:38 lggr has joined
 243 2012-10-02 03:46:41 vampireb has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
 244 2012-10-02 03:47:06 xisalty_ has joined
 245 2012-10-02 03:47:17 xisalty has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 246 2012-10-02 03:47:30 xisalty_ is now known as xisalty
 247 2012-10-02 03:51:53 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 248 2012-10-02 03:55:08 gjs278 has joined
 249 2012-10-02 03:55:46 lggr has joined
 250 2012-10-02 03:56:09 freakazoid has joined
 251 2012-10-02 04:01:53 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 252 2012-10-02 04:05:36 lggr has joined
 253 2012-10-02 04:06:46 jrmithdobbs has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 254 2012-10-02 04:07:12 jrmithdobbs has joined
 255 2012-10-02 04:12:34 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 256 2012-10-02 04:15:58 lggr has joined
 257 2012-10-02 04:23:01 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 258 2012-10-02 04:25:48 RainbowDashh has joined
 259 2012-10-02 04:26:06 lggr has joined
 260 2012-10-02 04:27:15 jine has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 261 2012-10-02 04:28:09 jine has joined
 262 2012-10-02 04:32:51 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 263 2012-10-02 04:36:39 lggr has joined
 264 2012-10-02 04:41:06 pnicholson has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 265 2012-10-02 04:43:22 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 266 2012-10-02 04:46:03 lggr has joined
 267 2012-10-02 04:52:18 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 268 2012-10-02 04:54:14 devrandom has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 269 2012-10-02 04:55:13 lggr has joined
 270 2012-10-02 04:57:38 Davincij15 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 271 2012-10-02 04:59:36 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: SLEEP MODE. puppy: it'd be wise to actual chat on here and not loiter.)
 272 2012-10-02 05:01:57 RainbowDashh has joined
 273 2012-10-02 05:02:02 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 274 2012-10-02 05:05:23 lggr has joined
 275 2012-10-02 05:12:36 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 276 2012-10-02 05:15:37 lggr has joined
 277 2012-10-02 05:20:27 iddo has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 278 2012-10-02 05:21:40 bitcoinbulletin has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 279 2012-10-02 05:22:34 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 280 2012-10-02 05:23:55 arij has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 281 2012-10-02 05:25:51 lggr has joined
 282 2012-10-02 05:31:49 bitcoinbulletin has joined
 283 2012-10-02 05:32:40 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 284 2012-10-02 05:33:30 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 285 2012-10-02 05:33:39 ovidiusoft has joined
 286 2012-10-02 05:34:58 lggr has joined
 287 2012-10-02 05:40:16 ZephyrVoid has joined
 288 2012-10-02 05:41:29 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 289 2012-10-02 05:44:49 lggr has joined
 290 2012-10-02 05:46:01 Arch_Coldfire has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 291 2012-10-02 05:46:17 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
 292 2012-10-02 05:51:04 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 293 2012-10-02 05:54:58 lggr has joined
 294 2012-10-02 06:02:00 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 295 2012-10-02 06:02:06 haberdasher has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 296 2012-10-02 06:05:20 lggr has joined
 297 2012-10-02 06:07:53 Evilmax has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
 298 2012-10-02 06:12:41 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 299 2012-10-02 06:14:12 Edward_Black has joined
 300 2012-10-02 06:15:47 lggr has joined
 301 2012-10-02 06:18:27 Evilmax has joined
 302 2012-10-02 06:18:27 Evilmax has quit (Changing host)
 303 2012-10-02 06:18:27 Evilmax has joined
 304 2012-10-02 06:22:51 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 305 2012-10-02 06:25:50 denisx has joined
 306 2012-10-02 06:26:21 lggr has joined
 307 2012-10-02 06:27:59 Transfuta is now known as MurphyLawProof
 308 2012-10-02 06:31:43 BTCTrader_ has joined
 309 2012-10-02 06:31:43 BTCTrader_ has quit (Changing host)
 310 2012-10-02 06:31:43 BTCTrader_ has joined
 311 2012-10-02 06:32:36 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 312 2012-10-02 06:34:08 tcatm has joined
 313 2012-10-02 06:34:08 tcatm has quit (Changing host)
 314 2012-10-02 06:34:08 tcatm has joined
 315 2012-10-02 06:34:15 PiZZaMaN2K is now known as away!~PiZZaMaN2@host-72-2-137-170.csinet.net|PiZZaMaN2K
 316 2012-10-02 06:34:59 BTCTrader has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 317 2012-10-02 06:34:59 BTCTrader_ is now known as BTCTrader
 318 2012-10-02 06:35:39 lggr has joined
 319 2012-10-02 06:37:18 tonikt has joined
 320 2012-10-02 06:41:40 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 321 2012-10-02 06:44:57 lggr has joined
 322 2012-10-02 06:46:13 AlexWaters has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 323 2012-10-02 06:50:44 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 324 2012-10-02 06:53:10 AlexWaters has joined
 325 2012-10-02 06:54:20 lggr has joined
 326 2012-10-02 06:54:22 iddo has joined
 327 2012-10-02 07:00:22 da2ce7_d has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 328 2012-10-02 07:01:07 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 329 2012-10-02 07:04:38 lggr has joined
 330 2012-10-02 07:05:26 CodesInChaos has joined
 331 2012-10-02 07:11:37 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 332 2012-10-02 07:14:45 lggr has joined
 333 2012-10-02 07:15:18 osxorgate has joined
 334 2012-10-02 07:18:17 MurphyLawProof is now known as Transfuta
 335 2012-10-02 07:19:38 CodesInChaos has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 336 2012-10-02 07:20:46 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 337 2012-10-02 07:24:01 lggr has joined
 338 2012-10-02 07:25:43 AlexWaters has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
 339 2012-10-02 07:27:27 PhantomSpark has quit (3!~kvirc@pool-71-251-16-25.nycmny.fios.verizon.net|Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 340 2012-10-02 07:28:52 boupitch has joined
 341 2012-10-02 07:30:52 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 342 2012-10-02 07:32:04 fpgaminer has quit ()
 343 2012-10-02 07:33:54 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 344 2012-10-02 07:34:32 lggr has joined
 345 2012-10-02 07:35:00 B0g4r7_ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 346 2012-10-02 07:35:01 fpgaminer has joined
 347 2012-10-02 07:39:45 B0g4r7_ has joined
 348 2012-10-02 07:41:03 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 349 2012-10-02 07:44:46 lggr has joined
 350 2012-10-02 07:45:35 RazielZ has joined
 351 2012-10-02 07:48:01 MrMeowork has joined
 352 2012-10-02 07:51:37 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 353 2012-10-02 07:54:28 B0g4r7_ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 354 2012-10-02 07:55:12 lggr has joined
 355 2012-10-02 08:01:47 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 356 2012-10-02 08:04:26 lggr has joined
 357 2012-10-02 08:05:27 B0g4r7_ has joined
 358 2012-10-02 08:10:38 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 359 2012-10-02 08:13:41 lggr has joined
 360 2012-10-02 08:20:41 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 361 2012-10-02 08:21:06 Marf has joined
 362 2012-10-02 08:23:09 lggr has joined
 363 2012-10-02 08:25:29 devrandom has joined
 364 2012-10-02 08:26:51 boupitch has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 365 2012-10-02 08:28:39 gjs278 has joined
 366 2012-10-02 08:29:30 jdnavarro has joined
 367 2012-10-02 08:29:50 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 368 2012-10-02 08:32:52 root2_ has joined
 369 2012-10-02 08:33:29 lggr has joined
 370 2012-10-02 08:36:11 root2 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 371 2012-10-02 08:36:41 MrMeowork has quit (Quit: MrMeowork)
 372 2012-10-02 08:37:05 dusty_ has joined
 373 2012-10-02 08:38:07 <dusty_> hi all, I've another problem on a strange transaction... help from a script wizard would be great :)
 374 2012-10-02 08:38:15 <dusty_> it's EFDF1B981D7BBA9C941295C0DFC654C4B5E40D7B9744819DD4F78B8E149898E1 of testnet3
 375 2012-10-02 08:38:50 <dusty_> scriptsig is "2147483647 OP_NEGATE OP_DUP OP_ADD" : what value should this expressione give?
 376 2012-10-02 08:39:16 <dusty_> but apart from that, the scriptpubkey is "feffffff80 OP_EQUAL", and how it's supposed to work?
 377 2012-10-02 08:39:58 <dusty_> we can't compare 5 bytes with the result of the previous expression, whatever it was, because arithmetic in bitcoin script should be 4 bytes
 378 2012-10-02 08:40:19 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 379 2012-10-02 08:41:17 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
 380 2012-10-02 08:43:12 jurov is now known as away!~jurov@84.245.71.31|jurov
 381 2012-10-02 08:43:55 lggr has joined
 382 2012-10-02 08:44:46 jurov has quit (Quit: User accidentally the)
 383 2012-10-02 08:49:54 jurov has joined
 384 2012-10-02 08:50:30 t7 has joined
 385 2012-10-02 08:50:37 jurov is now known as away!~jurov@rini17.broker.freenet6.net|jurov
 386 2012-10-02 08:51:01 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 387 2012-10-02 08:53:51 alain__ has joined
 388 2012-10-02 08:54:07 alain__ has quit (Quit: leaving)
 389 2012-10-02 08:54:25 lggr has joined
 390 2012-10-02 08:57:51 MrMeowork has joined
 391 2012-10-02 09:01:10 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 392 2012-10-02 09:04:14 m00p has joined
 393 2012-10-02 09:04:44 lggr has joined
 394 2012-10-02 09:05:57 otimm has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 395 2012-10-02 09:09:18 otimm has joined
 396 2012-10-02 09:10:09 <dusty_> any takers? :-é
 397 2012-10-02 09:10:57 tower has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 398 2012-10-02 09:11:17 tower has joined
 399 2012-10-02 09:11:25 boupitch has joined
 400 2012-10-02 09:11:50 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 401 2012-10-02 09:15:07 lggr has joined
 402 2012-10-02 09:16:50 xisalty has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 403 2012-10-02 09:22:18 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 404 2012-10-02 09:24:22 lggr has joined
 405 2012-10-02 09:30:32 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 406 2012-10-02 09:33:26 MrMeowork has quit (Quit: MrMeowork)
 407 2012-10-02 09:33:46 lggr has joined
 408 2012-10-02 09:37:55 BlackPrapor has joined
 409 2012-10-02 09:40:31 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 410 2012-10-02 09:43:26 MrMeowork has joined
 411 2012-10-02 09:43:33 dwon has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 412 2012-10-02 09:44:23 lggr has joined
 413 2012-10-02 09:48:44 datagutt has joined
 414 2012-10-02 09:49:33 MrMeowork has quit (Quit: MrMeowork)
 415 2012-10-02 09:51:22 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 416 2012-10-02 09:55:06 lggr has joined
 417 2012-10-02 09:57:46 drizztbsd has joined
 418 2012-10-02 10:00:59 bitcoinz_ has joined
 419 2012-10-02 10:02:25 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 420 2012-10-02 10:03:38 bitcoinz has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 421 2012-10-02 10:03:40 bitcoinz_ is now known as bitcoinz
 422 2012-10-02 10:05:48 lggr has joined
 423 2012-10-02 10:09:30 MrTiggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 424 2012-10-02 10:12:10 MrTiggr has joined
 425 2012-10-02 10:12:12 MrTiggr has quit (Excess Flood)
 426 2012-10-02 10:13:09 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 427 2012-10-02 10:13:32 osxorgate has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 428 2012-10-02 10:14:02 osxorgate has joined
 429 2012-10-02 10:16:22 lggr has joined
 430 2012-10-02 10:21:31 MrMeowork has joined
 431 2012-10-02 10:22:33 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 432 2012-10-02 10:26:11 lggr has joined
 433 2012-10-02 10:32:39 Impaler has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 434 2012-10-02 10:33:13 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 435 2012-10-02 10:36:51 lggr has joined
 436 2012-10-02 10:38:19 CodesInChaos has joined
 437 2012-10-02 10:38:32 AnonX has joined
 438 2012-10-02 10:38:50 <AnonX> what happens to the coins if your transaction gets rejected?
 439 2012-10-02 10:42:52 <_dr> how do you reject a transaction? did you modify the tx fee of your client?
 440 2012-10-02 10:43:29 <AnonX> multibit showed a 35btc balance when it only had 25btc
 441 2012-10-02 10:44:05 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 442 2012-10-02 10:47:32 ThomasV has joined
 443 2012-10-02 10:47:34 lggr has joined
 444 2012-10-02 10:54:05 <edcba> if your client 'accepted' the tx then there are spent that's all
 445 2012-10-02 10:54:21 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 446 2012-10-02 10:55:53 <AnonX> edcba: I sent the coins to my mtgox account and they never got there, so where are the coins?
 447 2012-10-02 10:56:56 bitcoinz has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 448 2012-10-02 10:57:46 bitcoinz has joined
 449 2012-10-02 10:57:56 <edcba> you will have to wait for ppl to include your tx in a block
 450 2012-10-02 10:58:06 <edcba> or include it yourself
 451 2012-10-02 10:58:15 lggr has joined
 452 2012-10-02 10:58:36 <edcba> is your client showing the transaction ?
 453 2012-10-02 11:01:07 <AnonX> edcba: nevermind, solved it
 454 2012-10-02 11:02:17 <epscy> AnonX: what happened?
 455 2012-10-02 11:03:10 <AnonX> <sturles> Yep, it is probably synchronized with the network, but it has lost track of your unspent outputs.
 456 2012-10-02 11:03:23 <AnonX> I just reset my transactions and got it syncrohnize again
 457 2012-10-02 11:05:10 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 458 2012-10-02 11:06:33 <edcba> there is a reset function for tx now ?
 459 2012-10-02 11:07:01 <AnonX> in multibit
 460 2012-10-02 11:07:42 root2_ is now known as root2
 461 2012-10-02 11:08:30 lggr has joined
 462 2012-10-02 11:08:39 PhantomSpark has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 463 2012-10-02 11:14:57 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 464 2012-10-02 11:15:15 BlackPrapor has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 465 2012-10-02 11:15:45 TD has joined
 466 2012-10-02 11:18:00 lggr has joined
 467 2012-10-02 11:23:03 one_zero_ has left ()
 468 2012-10-02 11:23:26 Diablo-D3 has joined
 469 2012-10-02 11:23:59 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 470 2012-10-02 11:27:29 lggr has joined
 471 2012-10-02 11:34:03 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 472 2012-10-02 11:35:58 BlackPrapor has joined
 473 2012-10-02 11:37:10 lggr has joined
 474 2012-10-02 11:38:16 PiZZaMaN2K has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 475 2012-10-02 11:38:52 BlackPrapor has quit (Client Quit)
 476 2012-10-02 11:43:50 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 477 2012-10-02 11:44:37 CvRoques has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 478 2012-10-02 11:47:28 lggr has joined
 479 2012-10-02 11:51:08 leotreasure has joined
 480 2012-10-02 11:53:21 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 481 2012-10-02 11:54:38 <BCBot>  Stats: http://bit.ly/bitcoin-irc-stats
 482 2012-10-02 11:55:25 <BCBot>  Stats: http://bit.ly/bitcoin-irc-stats
 483 2012-10-02 11:57:08 lggr has joined
 484 2012-10-02 11:59:06 CvRoques has joined
 485 2012-10-02 12:03:50 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 486 2012-10-02 12:07:43 lggr has joined
 487 2012-10-02 12:09:43 JZavala has joined
 488 2012-10-02 12:11:45 kreal has joined
 489 2012-10-02 12:14:52 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 490 2012-10-02 12:15:14 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 491 2012-10-02 12:15:17 CvRoques has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 492 2012-10-02 12:18:31 lggr has joined
 493 2012-10-02 12:18:43 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 494 2012-10-02 12:25:01 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 495 2012-10-02 12:28:30 lggr has joined
 496 2012-10-02 12:29:35 CvRoques has joined
 497 2012-10-02 12:35:01 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 498 2012-10-02 12:38:12 lggr has joined
 499 2012-10-02 12:42:13 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 500 2012-10-02 12:42:25 da2ce7 has joined
 501 2012-10-02 12:42:37 PiZZaMaN2K has joined
 502 2012-10-02 12:43:11 MrTiggr- has joined
 503 2012-10-02 12:44:24 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 504 2012-10-02 12:45:32 arij has joined
 505 2012-10-02 12:45:55 arij is now known as Guest81636
 506 2012-10-02 12:48:02 lggr has joined
 507 2012-10-02 12:48:09 <Luke-Jr> There are some pretty major non-fix changes in master, so 0.7.1 really needs a branch IMO.
 508 2012-10-02 12:51:05 <andyrossy> i branch
 509 2012-10-02 12:54:17 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 510 2012-10-02 12:56:13 MrTiggr- is now known as MrTiggr
 511 2012-10-02 12:57:42 lggr has joined
 512 2012-10-02 13:02:38 Guest81636 has quit (Changing host)
 513 2012-10-02 13:02:38 Guest81636 has joined
 514 2012-10-02 13:02:42 drizztbsd has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 515 2012-10-02 13:02:56 Guest81636 is now known as arij
 516 2012-10-02 13:03:27 drizztbsd has joined
 517 2012-10-02 13:03:37 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 518 2012-10-02 13:05:18 gavinandresen has joined
 519 2012-10-02 13:07:17 lggr has joined
 520 2012-10-02 13:13:20 CodesInChaos has quit (Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.)
 521 2012-10-02 13:13:45 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 522 2012-10-02 13:14:00 CodesInChaos has joined
 523 2012-10-02 13:14:59 da2ce773 has joined
 524 2012-10-02 13:16:57 lggr has joined
 525 2012-10-02 13:24:06 iddo has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 526 2012-10-02 13:24:11 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 527 2012-10-02 13:27:54 lggr has joined
 528 2012-10-02 13:30:15 tower has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 529 2012-10-02 13:30:26 AnonX has quit (Quit: Fuck you guys, I'm going home)
 530 2012-10-02 13:34:43 guruvan has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 531 2012-10-02 13:34:46 guruvan_ is now known as guruvan
 532 2012-10-02 13:34:52 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 533 2012-10-02 13:35:05 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
 534 2012-10-02 13:35:44 tower has joined
 535 2012-10-02 13:35:50 [\\\] has joined
 536 2012-10-02 13:36:48 guruvan- has joined
 537 2012-10-02 13:37:39 <gavinandresen> Who broke the commit-notify-bot ?
 538 2012-10-02 13:37:41 lggr has joined
 539 2012-10-02 13:37:42 guruvan has quit (Disconnected by services)
 540 2012-10-02 13:37:44 guruvan- is now known as guruvan
 541 2012-10-02 13:37:59 <kinlo> gavinandresen: cia.vc is gone beyond recovery
 542 2012-10-02 13:38:12 <gavinandresen> cia.vc ?
 543 2012-10-02 13:38:21 agricocb has joined
 544 2012-10-02 13:38:23 <gavinandresen> (I have no idea how it worked before....)
 545 2012-10-02 13:38:31 <kinlo> well
 546 2012-10-02 13:38:34 guruvan_ has joined
 547 2012-10-02 13:38:38 <kinlo> cia.vc is just a service one could use
 548 2012-10-02 13:38:49 <kinlo> and they didn't take backups from their servers
 549 2012-10-02 13:39:00 <gavinandresen> oh.  oops.
 550 2012-10-02 13:39:05 <kinlo> and according to what I read, they patched their live version without checking in their code
 551 2012-10-02 13:39:10 <gavinandresen> the phrase "we get what we pay for" comes to mind
 552 2012-10-02 13:39:11 <kinlo> so the user database is gone
 553 2012-10-02 13:39:27 <kinlo> and the code is not entirely recoverable either
 554 2012-10-02 13:39:43 <kinlo> but apparently they are working on a recovery
 555 2012-10-02 13:39:59 <kinlo> probably a new setup of the old code, minus some critical patches, and with a clean database
 556 2012-10-02 13:40:43 Arch_Coldfire has joined
 557 2012-10-02 13:41:01 <kinlo> there are alternatives, but Diablo-D3 says there is much hope on a good recovery
 558 2012-10-02 13:41:14 <kinlo> but one could look at kgb, fbi or irker
 559 2012-10-02 13:42:23 <kinlo> but to install any of them I guess repository access would be required
 560 2012-10-02 13:42:37 Marf has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 561 2012-10-02 13:43:01 jurov is now known as jurov|away
 562 2012-10-02 13:43:50 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 563 2012-10-02 13:47:24 lggr has joined
 564 2012-10-02 13:48:57 da2ce773 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 565 2012-10-02 13:49:36 MC1984 has joined
 566 2012-10-02 13:50:33 toffoo has quit ()
 567 2012-10-02 13:51:02 Arnavion has quit (Quit: Arnavion)
 568 2012-10-02 13:51:39 <Luke-Jr> gavinandresen: [12:37:05] <Luke-Jr> There are some pretty major non-fix changes in master, so 0.7.1 really needs a branch IMO.
 569 2012-10-02 13:52:16 <gavinandresen> like what?
 570 2012-10-02 13:53:09 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 571 2012-10-02 13:54:06 <dusty_> I'm sorry to re-request but I don't know where to ask for such a tecnical question... l, I've problem on a strange transaction : it's EFDF1B981D7BBA9C941295C0DFC654C4B5E40D7B9744819DD4F78B8E149898E1 of testnet3, scriptsig is "2147483647 OP_NEGATE OP_DUP OP_ADD" : what value should this expressione give?
 572 2012-10-02 13:54:20 <dusty_> but apart from that, the scriptpubkey is "feffffff80 OP_EQUAL", and how it's supposed to work? we can't compare 5 bytes with the result of the previous expression, whatever it was, because arithmetic in bitcoin script should be 4 bytes
 573 2012-10-02 13:55:22 Diapolo has joined
 574 2012-10-02 13:55:23 Diapolo has left ()
 575 2012-10-02 13:57:07 lggr has joined
 576 2012-10-02 13:57:24 <gavinandresen> dusty_: those odd scriptsigs all come from the unit tests in the source tree, src/test/data/script_valid.json
 577 2012-10-02 13:57:55 <gavinandresen> (well, gmaxwell or somebody might have added some, the ones I embedded in the testnet3 chain are all from script_valid.json)
 578 2012-10-02 13:58:38 <Luke-Jr> gavinandresen: bootstrap loading, stopdetach RPC, various GUI behaviour changes; I haven't been keeping entirely up to date, but those stand out at least
 579 2012-10-02 13:59:12 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: stopdetach is half a bugfix.
 580 2012-10-02 13:59:19 <Luke-Jr> otoh, if 0.7.1 is meant to be like 0.6.1 instead of just fixes, maybe those are fine
 581 2012-10-02 13:59:26 <gmaxwell> The whole fact that the user should ever need to worry about detach is a bug. :P
 582 2012-10-02 14:00:00 <gavinandresen> bootstrap loading is an invisible new experts-only feature, I'm fine with that getting into the 0.7.1 release
 583 2012-10-02 14:00:16 <gmaxwell> GUI changes are worth reviewing I expect.
 584 2012-10-02 14:00:53 MrMeowork has quit (Quit: MrMeowork)
 585 2012-10-02 14:00:55 copumpkin has joined
 586 2012-10-02 14:01:02 <dusty_> gavin: thanks, so I suppose the test is this: ["2147483647 NEGATE DUP ADD", "-4294967294 EQUAL"], but the scriptpubkey is different, has 5 bytes, not four: "feffffff80 OP_EQUAL"
 587 2012-10-02 14:01:35 <dusty_> so somewhere there is a bug, maybe when they were put in the block
 588 2012-10-02 14:01:52 <dusty_> that 0x80 byte should'nt be there
 589 2012-10-02 14:02:02 <gavinandresen> 0x80 is the negative
 590 2012-10-02 14:02:24 Arnavion has joined
 591 2012-10-02 14:02:26 <gavinandresen> if it wasn't there it would be +4 billion something, right?
 592 2012-10-02 14:02:39 <dusty_> isn't the first bit the negative?
 593 2012-10-02 14:03:00 <dusty_> so it's explained in the wiki, and in effect all the other tests works this way
 594 2012-10-02 14:03:33 <gavinandresen> let me use my ask-the-audience:  CScript encodes numbers big or little endian?
 595 2012-10-02 14:03:36 <dusty_> for example ["-2147483647 -100 100", "WITHIN NOT"], has the negative constant in 4 bytes with the most significant bit set
 596 2012-10-02 14:04:20 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 597 2012-10-02 14:05:52 <gavinandresen> dusty_: okey doke.  I vaguely remember being surprised at the encoding of numbers near the top or bottom of the 32-bit range, which is why those tests are in script_valid.json
 598 2012-10-02 14:07:11 <gavinandresen> dusty_: ... but I don't remember the details.  In any case, the data in the testnet3 chain is valid by definition, although it is certainly possible some other scriptsig could also satisfy the scriptPubKey
 599 2012-10-02 14:07:34 <gavinandresen> dusty_: if you want to test, it is trivial to add test cases to src/test/data/script_valid.json or script_invalid.json
 600 2012-10-02 14:07:45 <gavinandresen> ... then just 'make test'  in src/
 601 2012-10-02 14:08:00 lggr has joined
 602 2012-10-02 14:08:08 t7 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 603 2012-10-02 14:08:42 t7 has joined
 604 2012-10-02 14:09:35 <dusty_> gavin: thanks, I'll take a look, the problem is that I'm working on a implementation from scratch and I used 32bits for values as stated in the wiki, while in this case we have at least 33 bits :P
 605 2012-10-02 14:10:22 <gavinandresen> dusty_: oh, I see.  The arithmetic operations can PRODUCE values more than 4 bytes big, they just can't CONSUME values more than 4-bytes big
 606 2012-10-02 14:10:44 t7_ has joined
 607 2012-10-02 14:10:52 <gavinandresen> And OP_EQUAL is not arithmetic, it can compare arrays of arbitrary length
 608 2012-10-02 14:11:03 <dusty_> gavin: Understood, thanks
 609 2012-10-02 14:13:20 t7 has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 610 2012-10-02 14:13:35 t7_ is now known as t7
 611 2012-10-02 14:13:53 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 612 2012-10-02 14:17:39 lggr has joined
 613 2012-10-02 14:24:09 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 614 2012-10-02 14:27:36 lggr has joined
 615 2012-10-02 14:30:55 MrMeowork has joined
 616 2012-10-02 14:31:10 Marf has joined
 617 2012-10-02 14:32:31 robocoin has joined
 618 2012-10-02 14:34:03 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 619 2012-10-02 14:34:44 drizztbsd has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 620 2012-10-02 14:36:24 MrMeowork has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 621 2012-10-02 14:37:11 MrMeowork has joined
 622 2012-10-02 14:37:19 lggr has joined
 623 2012-10-02 14:40:49 skeledrew1 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 624 2012-10-02 14:44:19 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 625 2012-10-02 14:45:07 PiZZaMaN2K is now known as PiZZaMaN2K|away
 626 2012-10-02 14:46:56 skeledrew has joined
 627 2012-10-02 14:47:17 root2_ has joined
 628 2012-10-02 14:48:04 lggr has joined
 629 2012-10-02 14:48:43 CodesInChaos has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
 630 2012-10-02 14:50:43 root2 has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 631 2012-10-02 14:54:35 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 632 2012-10-02 14:57:52 lggr has joined
 633 2012-10-02 15:04:50 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 634 2012-10-02 15:07:47 lggr has joined
 635 2012-10-02 15:10:45 Joric has joined
 636 2012-10-02 15:11:41 freakazoid has joined
 637 2012-10-02 15:13:47 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 638 2012-10-02 15:16:08 OneFixt has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 639 2012-10-02 15:16:22 OneFixt has joined
 640 2012-10-02 15:17:32 lggr has joined
 641 2012-10-02 15:23:11 balrog has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 642 2012-10-02 15:24:02 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 643 2012-10-02 15:25:07 skeledrew1 has joined
 644 2012-10-02 15:25:17 skeledrew has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 645 2012-10-02 15:25:50 MrMeowork has quit (Quit: MrMeowork)
 646 2012-10-02 15:27:36 lggr has joined
 647 2012-10-02 15:28:26 Joric has quit ()
 648 2012-10-02 15:28:47 maaku has joined
 649 2012-10-02 15:29:13 sgstair has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 650 2012-10-02 15:29:18 darkee has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 651 2012-10-02 15:29:34 sgstair has joined
 652 2012-10-02 15:31:11 balrog has joined
 653 2012-10-02 15:34:27 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 654 2012-10-02 15:34:55 darkee has joined
 655 2012-10-02 15:35:25 root2_ has quit (Read error: No route to host)
 656 2012-10-02 15:35:46 root2_ has joined
 657 2012-10-02 15:37:27 lggr has joined
 658 2012-10-02 15:37:57 balrog has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 659 2012-10-02 15:39:27 root2_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 660 2012-10-02 15:39:45 root2_ has joined
 661 2012-10-02 15:41:56 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: SLEEP MODE. puppy: it'd be wise to actual chat on here and not loiter.)
 662 2012-10-02 15:43:07 balrog has joined
 663 2012-10-02 15:43:50 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 664 2012-10-02 15:47:37 lggr has joined
 665 2012-10-02 15:50:44 dvide has quit ()
 666 2012-10-02 15:50:58 leotreasure has quit (Quit: leotreasure)
 667 2012-10-02 15:52:19 balrog has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 668 2012-10-02 15:52:33 PhantomSpark has joined
 669 2012-10-02 15:54:17 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 670 2012-10-02 15:56:09 <TD> something that occurs to me, is that wallet software should stop showing the balance on-screen at all times
 671 2012-10-02 15:56:32 <TD> i'm keeping a bit too much coinage in my hot wallets at the moment and twice now people have looked at my screen whilst i'm paying them and said "wow you have a lot of coins"
 672 2012-10-02 15:56:34 <TD> privacy fail
 673 2012-10-02 15:57:13 lggr has joined
 674 2012-10-02 15:58:26 balrog has joined
 675 2012-10-02 15:58:50 theorbtwo has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 676 2012-10-02 16:01:44 theorbtwo has joined
 677 2012-10-02 16:02:06 <sipa> TD: just reply "oh, that's just testnet"
 678 2012-10-02 16:02:15 <TD> hah
 679 2012-10-02 16:02:26 <TD> sipa: do you have the slides for your talk anywhere?
 680 2012-10-02 16:02:30 osxorgate has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 681 2012-10-02 16:03:13 <TD> i want to write down some thoughts on payment protocols
 682 2012-10-02 16:03:19 <TD> but don't want to duplicate anything you already did
 683 2012-10-02 16:03:37 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 684 2012-10-02 16:04:07 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 685 2012-10-02 16:04:27 <sipa> TD: second, need to find the url
 686 2012-10-02 16:04:31 <TD> ok
 687 2012-10-02 16:05:43 <sipa> http://prezi.com/iehicj84gxgo/bitcoins-challenges-for-the-near-future/
 688 2012-10-02 16:05:48 t7 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 689 2012-10-02 16:06:39 lggr has joined
 690 2012-10-02 16:06:58 <sipa> there's not too much on the slides though
 691 2012-10-02 16:08:26 drizztbsd has joined
 692 2012-10-02 16:08:38 drizztbsd has quit (Client Quit)
 693 2012-10-02 16:09:07 <TD> yeah
 694 2012-10-02 16:09:08 <TD> thanks
 695 2012-10-02 16:10:33 boupitch has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 696 2012-10-02 16:10:37 <sipa> TD: i talked about payment protocols a bit with stefan and michael gronager at the conference, and i'm sure gmaxwell and gavin and other people here are interested in it as well
 697 2012-10-02 16:10:50 <TD> yeah
 698 2012-10-02 16:10:51 <sipa> so maybe we should start some discussion
 699 2012-10-02 16:10:53 <TD> i'm drafting a mail
 700 2012-10-02 16:10:54 <TD> to the list
 701 2012-10-02 16:12:41 <sipa> here's my original gist proposal: https://gist.github.com/1237788
 702 2012-10-02 16:12:52 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 703 2012-10-02 16:12:56 <sipa> it's somewhat outdated, and probably tries to do too much
 704 2012-10-02 16:13:15 <sipa> i'd first like to standardize a payment-request and payment-submission format
 705 2012-10-02 16:13:30 <sipa> the transport layer can be done later
 706 2012-10-02 16:15:25 <TD> yes
 707 2012-10-02 16:15:31 <TD> transport layers :)
 708 2012-10-02 16:15:54 <sipa> indeed, several
 709 2012-10-02 16:16:07 lggr has joined
 710 2012-10-02 16:16:12 <sipa> https, manual/IM/email, NFC, ...
 711 2012-10-02 16:17:07 <helo> will the payment requests support signing?
 712 2012-10-02 16:19:57 jurov is now known as away!~jurov@rini17.broker.freenet6.net|jurov
 713 2012-10-02 16:20:18 ahihi2 has quit ()
 714 2012-10-02 16:20:44 <helo> indeed it does...
 715 2012-10-02 16:21:01 slush has joined
 716 2012-10-02 16:21:09 paraipan has quit (Quit: Saliendo)
 717 2012-10-02 16:21:35 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: 0.7.1 does not need a separate branch, IMO
 718 2012-10-02 16:21:49 <sipa> let's look at the changelist from 0.7 to 0.7.1
 719 2012-10-02 16:22:17 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 720 2012-10-02 16:24:03 OneFixt_ has joined
 721 2012-10-02 16:25:29 lggr has joined
 722 2012-10-02 16:27:35 OneFixt has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 723 2012-10-02 16:30:21 <sipa> s/0.7.1/HEAD/
 724 2012-10-02 16:31:59 <Luke-Jr> git log --no-merges v0.7.1..master
 725 2012-10-02 16:32:34 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 726 2012-10-02 16:33:10 <gavinandresen> I'd like to get a fix for the DB_RUNRECOVERY into 0.7.1
 727 2012-10-02 16:34:05 Eslbaer has joined
 728 2012-10-02 16:35:32 lggr has joined
 729 2012-10-02 16:35:34 <sipa> there were some non-trivial non-bugfix things since 0.7, but not too many\
 730 2012-10-02 16:39:28 balrog has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 731 2012-10-02 16:39:52 <denisx> btw, when will hash1 and midstate finally be removed?
 732 2012-10-02 16:39:52 paraipan has joined
 733 2012-10-02 16:40:36 <Luke-Jr> denisx: no sooner than someone bothering to write the code to remove the calculations :p
 734 2012-10-02 16:41:29 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 735 2012-10-02 16:42:05 <wumpus> jgarzik: are you serious about the stratum protocol in bitcoind?
 736 2012-10-02 16:42:20 <gavinandresen> no, he's not
 737 2012-10-02 16:42:27 <sipa> i thought stratum was just a concatenation of serializeed JSON directly over HTTP
 738 2012-10-02 16:42:34 <jgarzik> yes
 739 2012-10-02 16:42:40 <gavinandresen> get out
 740 2012-10-02 16:42:49 <wumpus> it uses protocol buffers right?
 741 2012-10-02 16:42:52 <jgarzik> conditional logic in that thread, not simple answer
 742 2012-10-02 16:42:53 <jgarzik> no
 743 2012-10-02 16:42:53 <sipa> not afaik
 744 2012-10-02 16:43:10 <jgarzik> stratum protocol == JSON-RPC line + "\n"
 745 2012-10-02 16:43:13 <gavinandresen> oh, if it just a JSON/HTTP variant then that's fine
 746 2012-10-02 16:43:15 <wumpus> ok, then it's not as bad as I thought
 747 2012-10-02 16:43:19 <jgarzik> but my logic in that thread was CONDITIONAL
 748 2012-10-02 16:43:21 <sipa> they implement mining-over-stratum and electrum-over-stratum, but those are separate protocols imho
 749 2012-10-02 16:43:28 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
 750 2012-10-02 16:43:32 <sipa> those two are unrelated, afaik too
 751 2012-10-02 16:43:33 <jgarzik> I said:  stratum > Yet Another Custom Protocol
 752 2012-10-02 16:43:38 <jgarzik> I did not say "let's use stratum"
 753 2012-10-02 16:43:54 <Luke-Jr> I'm not sure there's any easy solution to that one, unfortunately
 754 2012-10-02 16:44:02 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: stratum is not HTTP; it is a JSON-RPC stream
 755 2012-10-02 16:44:25 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: connect, and receive "JSON-RPC\n" asynchronously, or send "JSON-RPC\n" asynchronously
 756 2012-10-02 16:44:32 <jgarzik> it is an improvement over HTTP
 757 2012-10-02 16:44:40 <jgarzik> but it is Yet Another Custom Protocol
 758 2012-10-02 16:44:41 <gavinandresen> I see, direct connection over a socket?
 759 2012-10-02 16:44:46 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: correct
 760 2012-10-02 16:44:46 <wumpus> well my solution is easy and keeps HTTP semantics
 761 2012-10-02 16:44:53 lggr has joined
 762 2012-10-02 16:45:00 <sipa> well, stratum probably also requires some pubsub mechanism
 763 2012-10-02 16:45:06 <sipa> s/requires/defines/
 764 2012-10-02 16:45:29 <sipa> which may not be useles for block/tx update events, either
 765 2012-10-02 16:45:39 <jgarzik> sipa: dunno about pubsub, but certainly there is some per-connection server-side state
 766 2012-10-02 16:45:41 <sipa> that said... KISS
 767 2012-10-02 16:46:12 Joric has joined
 768 2012-10-02 16:46:23 <gavinandresen> Yes, KISS. And we should be sure to keep track of what problem we're trying to solve
 769 2012-10-02 16:46:39 <sipa> brb
 770 2012-10-02 16:46:51 <jgarzik> If the problem space is "server [listening socket] may asynchronously send data to client [connecting socket]", then you have HTTP long-polling or $New_Protocol
 771 2012-10-02 16:47:10 <jgarzik> HTTP long-polling is an ugly (but effective!) hack
 772 2012-10-02 16:47:12 <Luke-Jr> or websocket?
 773 2012-10-02 16:47:21 balrog has joined
 774 2012-10-02 16:47:25 <jgarzik> websocket is a brand new protocol, from bitcoind's perspective
 775 2012-10-02 16:47:33 <jgarzik> stratum is nicer than websocket
 776 2012-10-02 16:47:34 <jgarzik> by far
 777 2012-10-02 16:47:38 <Luke-Jr> i c, wasn't sure how complex websocket was over simple HTTP
 778 2012-10-02 16:47:46 <jgarzik> websocket is stupid, overly complex shite
 779 2012-10-02 16:47:56 <jgarzik> but standardized shite, it must be admitted
 780 2012-10-02 16:48:15 <jgarzik> nevertheless, stratum is easier to debug and use than websocket
 781 2012-10-02 16:48:38 <Luke-Jr> I suppose LP could work iff clients can maintain 2 connections, the latter of which is a "double LP", but that's getting into $New_Protocol ugliness too
 782 2012-10-02 16:48:54 <Luke-Jr> and even worse hack than LP itself
 783 2012-10-02 16:49:04 <jgarzik> you cannot get much more simple than a line-by-line text protocol, which is stratum
 784 2012-10-02 16:51:27 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 785 2012-10-02 16:51:43 balrog has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 786 2012-10-02 16:51:45 <gavinandresen> simpler: create two boost::interprocess::message_queues, one for new head-of-blockchain events, one for tranaction-into-the-memory-pool events.  Event messages are just block/tx hashes.
 787 2012-10-02 16:51:59 <gavinandresen> ... and dont' support it on Windows, because Windows sucks.
 788 2012-10-02 16:52:38 <Luke-Jr> gavinandresen: I think a goal is to allow access from other hosts
 789 2012-10-02 16:52:45 <Luke-Jr> that was one of the problems people had with -blocknotify
 790 2012-10-02 16:52:55 <gavinandresen> then install a listener that listens to the queue and does whatever you like.
 791 2012-10-02 16:53:00 <TD> windows supports IPC message queues
 792 2012-10-02 16:53:02 <gavinandresen> LESS CODE IN CORE
 793 2012-10-02 16:53:06 <TD> if boost doesn't then boost sucks
 794 2012-10-02 16:53:21 <gavinandresen> TD: we've had trouble using them for URI support
 795 2012-10-02 16:53:24 <Luke-Jr> heh
 796 2012-10-02 16:53:42 <jgarzik> Separate but related:  I think bitcoind will eventually support GBT-over-stratum
 797 2012-10-02 16:53:48 <Luke-Jr> could just tell people who want this to connect on the p2p port and look for invs ;)
 798 2012-10-02 16:53:54 * TD suspects boost sucks then :)
 799 2012-10-02 16:53:57 <gavinandresen> GBT is an acronym I don't recognize.
 800 2012-10-02 16:54:03 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: getblocktemplate RPC
 801 2012-10-02 16:54:13 lggr has joined
 802 2012-10-02 16:54:27 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: probably some synthesis of GBT and stratum is inevitable, though I'm not sure it's a priority right now
 803 2012-10-02 16:54:27 <gavinandresen> I was thinking gay/bisexual/transgender....
 804 2012-10-02 16:54:29 * jgarzik has been infected with the Luke-Jr acronym virus, it seems
 805 2012-10-02 16:54:39 <jgarzik> lol
 806 2012-10-02 16:54:51 <jgarzik> Luke-Jr: it was not claimed a priority
 807 2012-10-02 16:54:57 boupitch has joined
 808 2012-10-02 16:55:00 <jgarzik> Luke-Jr: but if there is alignment with separate issues, it is relevant
 809 2012-10-02 16:55:13 denisx has quit (Quit: denisx)
 810 2012-10-02 16:55:15 <Luke-Jr> sure
 811 2012-10-02 16:56:32 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: I don't disagree with stratum being probably one of the most practical options
 812 2012-10-02 16:57:11 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: I understand the "don't do it in core" argument, but realistically we have not seen much -blocknotify takeup vis a vis external processes
 813 2012-10-02 16:57:17 OneFixt has joined
 814 2012-10-02 16:57:18 <jgarzik> at least not that I've seen
 815 2012-10-02 16:57:20 Karmaon_ has joined
 816 2012-10-02 16:57:20 Karmaon_ has quit (Changing host)
 817 2012-10-02 16:57:20 Karmaon_ has joined
 818 2012-10-02 16:57:44 <jgarzik> from the user perspective, -blocknotify creates another "moving part" that might break
 819 2012-10-02 16:57:57 <gavinandresen> somebody should write up an example that implements "send email when any transaction to my wallet gets 6 confirmations"
 820 2012-10-02 16:58:20 <wumpus> over a interprocess::message_queue you still need a protocol
 821 2012-10-02 16:58:28 <jgarzik> indeed
 822 2012-10-02 16:58:30 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: afaik -blocknotify has put blkmond out of business
 823 2012-10-02 16:58:39 ThomasV_ has joined
 824 2012-10-02 16:58:48 <wumpus> though you could of course stream json over that...
 825 2012-10-02 16:58:55 <gavinandresen> jgarzik: sure, but I'm a much bigger fan of the unix-philosophy of small, solid, inter-operating tools.
 826 2012-10-02 16:58:56 <wumpus> then again, if you do that, why not simply a socket
 827 2012-10-02 16:59:08 <jgarzik> wumpus: precisely
 828 2012-10-02 16:59:12 <jgarzik> Luke-Jr: afaik progress and pushpool obsolescence pushed blkmond out of business ;-)
 829 2012-10-02 16:59:22 <wumpus> a socket IS a simple interprocess message queue, integrated into the OS
 830 2012-10-02 16:59:31 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: yes, but the new poolservers still use SIGUSR1 :p
 831 2012-10-02 16:59:44 <wumpus> boost:interprocess is really ugly, uses shared memory mappings etc...
 832 2012-10-02 16:59:48 <jgarzik> indeed
 833 2012-10-02 16:59:50 quijibo has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 834 2012-10-02 16:59:52 bitcoinbulletin has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 835 2012-10-02 16:59:57 robocoin has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 836 2012-10-02 17:00:10 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 837 2012-10-02 17:00:10 freewil has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 838 2012-10-02 17:00:10 Karmaon has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 839 2012-10-02 17:00:12 freewil has joined
 840 2012-10-02 17:00:12 ThomasV_ has quit (Client Quit)
 841 2012-10-02 17:00:12 <jgarzik> we already know how to do handle "socket IPC"
 842 2012-10-02 17:00:12 OneFixt_ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 843 2012-10-02 17:00:13 <wumpus> well mr. unix would also propose using sockets and pipes :P
 844 2012-10-02 17:00:14 <jgarzik> and that IPC works remotely, as well as locally
 845 2012-10-02 17:00:18 <jgarzik> and cross-platform too :)
 846 2012-10-02 17:00:26 ThomasV has joined
 847 2012-10-02 17:00:27 <gavinandresen> sockets or named pipes would be fine
 848 2012-10-02 17:00:47 quijibo has joined
 849 2012-10-02 17:00:52 robocoin has joined
 850 2012-10-02 17:01:11 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 851 2012-10-02 17:01:29 stamit has joined
 852 2012-10-02 17:01:56 bitcoinbulletin has joined
 853 2012-10-02 17:01:57 <gavinandresen> the can of worms opens up when you get off the local machine, in my opinion.  If you listen on a socket then suddenly you need authentication.
 854 2012-10-02 17:02:11 <wumpus> we already have authentication in the JSONRPC web server
 855 2012-10-02 17:02:12 <gavinandresen> If you connect out, suddenly you're vulnerable to MITM attacks
 856 2012-10-02 17:02:23 <wumpus> that's why I proposed to simply extend that
 857 2012-10-02 17:02:38 <wumpus> connecting out is a bad idea, yes
 858 2012-10-02 17:02:46 <wumpus> there's so many ways to do that
 859 2012-10-02 17:03:31 <gavinandresen> wumpus: I like the connection-means-subscription model via existing JSON-HTTP-RPC
 860 2012-10-02 17:03:55 <wumpus> and it'd also add more administration... and what if you want multiple listeners? 
 861 2012-10-02 17:04:12 lggr has joined
 862 2012-10-02 17:04:17 <wumpus> yes, with that model an arbitrary number of people can simply connect and listen
 863 2012-10-02 17:05:08 <gavinandresen> wumpus: I don't like the complexity of our existing RPC code, I think we've had a lot of feature creep.  But c'est la vie
 864 2012-10-02 17:06:43 <wumpus> I don't like it either, but we need some kind of RPC, otherwise bitcoind would get a bit lonely.. I mean, if we'd move JSONRPC to an external processs we'd still need a protocol/RPC mechanism to let it talk to the core...
 865 2012-10-02 17:08:08 <gmaxwell> splitting the blockchain and wallet would clean up some of the RPC bloat. (as a lot of the rpc bloat is wallet related)
 866 2012-10-02 17:08:39 <wumpus> yes
 867 2012-10-02 17:09:43 <TD> another way to solve it would be to reimplement some RPC protocol on top of a separate app, eg, based on bitcoinj
 868 2012-10-02 17:09:48 <TD> that talks p2p to a local node
 869 2012-10-02 17:10:19 <TD> then people who don't necessarily know C++ can add new RPC protocols as they see fit, maybe with some plugins or whatever.
 870 2012-10-02 17:10:21 <wumpus> though the wallet would have to talk with the block chain, so you'd need *some* RPC bloat
 871 2012-10-02 17:10:42 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 872 2012-10-02 17:11:00 toffoo has joined
 873 2012-10-02 17:11:28 <Joric> there was a question about using the same key in two different wallet.dat's will it work correctly? will it pick transactions from the blockchain?
 874 2012-10-02 17:11:29 <wumpus> so you would have a daemon that only does P2P, but offers no outside access?
 875 2012-10-02 17:11:42 toffoo has quit (Client Quit)
 876 2012-10-02 17:11:49 <wumpus> interesting, but I wonder why people would run that in the first place
 877 2012-10-02 17:12:01 <gavinandresen> wumpus: I'm not thinking of the number of RPC methods, I'm thinking of IPv4/IPv6/SSL/non-ssl/authentication/IP restrictions/DoS prevention ....
 878 2012-10-02 17:12:04 toffoo has joined
 879 2012-10-02 17:12:13 <wumpus> oh right
 880 2012-10-02 17:12:18 toffoo has quit (Client Quit)
 881 2012-10-02 17:12:24 <wumpus> would be fine with me to make jsonrpc localhost-only
 882 2012-10-02 17:12:47 <wumpus> want it external, fine, run a proxy
 883 2012-10-02 17:13:03 <gavinandresen> yes, that's what I think we should've done.  ah well.
 884 2012-10-02 17:13:25 <wumpus> DoS protection in the RPC server? you can't be serious.. :/
 885 2012-10-02 17:13:36 Z0rZ0rZ0r has joined
 886 2012-10-02 17:13:57 lggr has joined
 887 2012-10-02 17:13:58 <gavinandresen> sure.  There's a check for trying to DoS using failed basic authentication, to prevent brute-forcing the password
 888 2012-10-02 17:14:03 <wumpus> Joric: just don't 
 889 2012-10-02 17:14:34 <phantomcircuit> gavinandresen, something tells me that generally speaking if the rpc interface is available there are other issues at play
 890 2012-10-02 17:14:57 <jgarzik> boy this convo is wandering far afield ;p
 891 2012-10-02 17:14:57 CodesInChaos has joined
 892 2012-10-02 17:14:58 <Joric> wumpus, why?
 893 2012-10-02 17:15:12 <wumpus> Joric: because you'll get into a world of pain
 894 2012-10-02 17:15:19 drizztbsd has joined
 895 2012-10-02 17:15:22 <jgarzik> maybe some Tex-Mex will make things clear *poof*
 896 2012-10-02 17:15:29 <gavinandresen> Joric: because we don't test that case and when it doesn't work we won't fix it
 897 2012-10-02 17:16:51 <gmaxwell> Joric: it does, but there are nice race conditions to stomp yourself when writing transactions.
 898 2012-10-02 17:17:44 da2ce7_d has joined
 899 2012-10-02 17:19:50 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 900 2012-10-02 17:19:50 <Joric> i just was going to give a copy of the wallet.dat to my wife
 901 2012-10-02 17:19:58 toffoo has joined
 902 2012-10-02 17:20:16 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 903 2012-10-02 17:20:42 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
 904 2012-10-02 17:21:01 <gmaxwell> Joric: and in that case you'll get the two wallets diverging.. eventually some random fraction of your funds will be in each and unspendable in the other.
 905 2012-10-02 17:21:37 <OneEyed> I'm surprised nobody sees key derivation as a top priority for bitcoind
 906 2012-10-02 17:22:07 <gmaxwell> OneEyed: oh sure, it's just under the 40 other top priorities.
 907 2012-10-02 17:22:10 <OneEyed> (I know I would probably work on this if I used bitcoind to generate my keys)
 908 2012-10-02 17:22:26 <gmaxwell> Though, I'm not sure what exactly you're thinking there.
 909 2012-10-02 17:22:50 <OneEyed> gmaxwell: keys derived from a single key, as in Armory or in Electrum
 910 2012-10-02 17:23:11 <gmaxwell> (and that doesn't really have a baring on Joric's question: multistarting a wallet is still not going to work right no matter how the keys are generated)
 911 2012-10-02 17:23:51 lggr has joined
 912 2012-10-02 17:24:16 <OneEyed> gmaxwell: what do you mean? Armory instances at different places and using the same wallet are kept in sync, because any of the instances know the keys that will be generated, so anything received in the wallet is spendable from anywhere
 913 2012-10-02 17:25:35 <gmaxwell> OneEyed: And when you manage to send from two places concurrently and double spend an input, causing a bunch of inputs in your wallet to become at least temporarily unspendable?
 914 2012-10-02 17:25:55 <OneEyed> Oh sure, I hadn't understood you talked about that
 915 2012-10-02 17:27:21 <gmaxwell> If you only concern was the keys staying in sync you could just set the keypool to 50,000 keys and call it done.
 916 2012-10-02 17:27:37 <OneEyed> gmaxwell: are change addresses included in the keypool now?
 917 2012-10-02 17:27:46 <OneEyed> (I remember reading something about that some time ago, that may be moot)
 918 2012-10-02 17:28:18 denisx has joined
 919 2012-10-02 17:28:39 <gmaxwell> OneEyed: they've _always_ been in the keypool. Thats the point. 0_o
 920 2012-10-02 17:29:50 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 921 2012-10-02 17:33:51 lggr has joined
 922 2012-10-02 17:39:49 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 923 2012-10-02 17:42:10 Marf has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 924 2012-10-02 17:43:07 <Luke-Jr> Anyone have spare testnet3 coins? myWxSedFAaiVntDfSYskCtMnimANxPSAWU
 925 2012-10-02 17:43:42 lggr has joined
 926 2012-10-02 17:44:29 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: you burned through the ones I gave you fast. :P
 927 2012-10-02 17:44:52 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: were those tn3? >_<
 928 2012-10-02 17:44:58 * Luke-Jr ponders what directory they might be in
 929 2012-10-02 17:44:58 <gmaxwell> yea.
 930 2012-10-02 17:45:01 <gmaxwell> hah.
 931 2012-10-02 17:45:24 <Luke-Jr> ok, nobody send to that address
 932 2012-10-02 17:45:28 <Luke-Jr> about to overwrite it with others
 933 2012-10-02 17:45:30 <Luke-Jr> <.<
 934 2012-10-02 17:45:47 <lianj> http://blockexplorer.com/testnet/address/myWxSedFAaiVntDfSYskCtMnimANxPSAWU
 935 2012-10-02 17:45:57 <gmaxwell> fwiw for testnet key management .. er.. I've been using that utility that scans the disk for keys to merge wallets.
 936 2012-10-02 17:45:58 <sipa> Joric: you can, but be ware
 937 2012-10-02 17:46:23 <sipa> Joric: yes the transactions will get picked up by the other node, but the keys will diverge
 938 2012-10-02 17:46:37 <sipa> Joric: if you sync the wallets every (keypool)-transactions, it should be fine
 939 2012-10-02 17:47:01 <sipa> Joric: but there are other caveats, like trying to send coins while your node hasn't seen they' re already spent by the other one
 940 2012-10-02 17:47:26 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: found it :D
 941 2012-10-02 17:50:13 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 942 2012-10-02 17:50:30 freakazoid has joined
 943 2012-10-02 17:51:28 denisx has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 944 2012-10-02 17:51:40 denisx has joined
 945 2012-10-02 17:53:35 lggr has joined
 946 2012-10-02 17:59:17 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 947 2012-10-02 18:03:21 lggr has joined
 948 2012-10-02 18:05:37 MiningBuddy has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 949 2012-10-02 18:05:45 <gmaxwell> " roughly 3-5% of our initial members double-spent. "  0_o  huh?
 950 2012-10-02 18:05:46 <gavinandresen> Luke-Jr: http://testnet.freebitcoins.appspot.com/  is up
 951 2012-10-02 18:06:21 <lianj> gavinandresen: thats were he got the 50 from
 952 2012-10-02 18:06:49 <gavinandresen> lianj: testnet faucet doesn't limit to one-per-customer
 953 2012-10-02 18:07:47 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: is that a quote from Peter ?
 954 2012-10-02 18:08:00 <gmaxwell> yes.
 955 2012-10-02 18:08:19 <gavinandresen> oh, he means 'double-paid' not double-spent
 956 2012-10-02 18:08:23 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 957 2012-10-02 18:08:29 <gmaxwell> I did figure that out; although it's still confusing!
 958 2012-10-02 18:09:37 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 959 2012-10-02 18:12:56 <midnightmagic> Luke-Jr: Do you still need tn3 coins?
 960 2012-10-02 18:13:06 balrog has joined
 961 2012-10-02 18:13:08 <Luke-Jr> midnightmagic: no, I found the ones gmaxwell sent me
 962 2012-10-02 18:13:13 <Luke-Jr> gavinandresen: midnightmagic: thanks tho
 963 2012-10-02 18:13:16 <midnightmagic> ok
 964 2012-10-02 18:13:27 lggr has joined
 965 2012-10-02 18:15:03 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: just what I was thinking
 966 2012-10-02 18:17:35 chmod755 has joined
 967 2012-10-02 18:19:31 balrog has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 968 2012-10-02 18:20:11 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: See this, from last night?  http://pastebin.com/vnaxq3zf
 969 2012-10-02 18:20:24 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: that happens after almost every testnet3 block, on us4.exmulti.net
 970 2012-10-02 18:20:46 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 971 2012-10-02 18:20:48 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: getpeerinfo shows nearly 100% satoshi clients
 972 2012-10-02 18:21:07 denisx_ has joined
 973 2012-10-02 18:21:31 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 974 2012-10-02 18:23:29 lggr has joined
 975 2012-10-02 18:23:51 jdnavarro has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 976 2012-10-02 18:23:56 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: heres your source: "                pfrom->PushGetBlocks(mapBlockIndex[inv.hash], uint256(0));"
 977 2012-10-02 18:23:58 denisx has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 978 2012-10-02 18:23:59 denisx_ is now known as denisx
 979 2012-10-02 18:24:19 <BlueMatt> or...seems to be its the only call to PushGetBlocks thats !pindexBest
 980 2012-10-02 18:24:56 balrog has joined
 981 2012-10-02 18:25:14 <BlueMatt> (its called if you are the second node to send the block, and send it after the node already has the block)
 982 2012-10-02 18:25:36 <BlueMatt> (or, more realistically, it processes the message after it processes the block)
 983 2012-10-02 18:26:20 <jgarzik> hmmm
 984 2012-10-02 18:26:36 <jgarzik> that means fAlreadyHave is true
 985 2012-10-02 18:27:00 <BlueMatt> ehh...maybe its the other way around then
 986 2012-10-02 18:27:19 <jgarzik> but these guys are continuously sending getblocks(-1,0) with each new network block
 987 2012-10-02 18:27:36 <BlueMatt> wait, no thats right
 988 2012-10-02 18:27:43 <BlueMatt> yea, you are the second node to send the inv to them
 989 2012-10-02 18:27:45 <jgarzik> seen on mainnet regularly, but more visible on testnet3.  Was hoping testnet3 behavior would lead to debugging
 990 2012-10-02 18:28:24 <jgarzik> I don't think that comment is accurate
 991 2012-10-02 18:28:32 <jgarzik> I don't think the nodes are on a long side chain
 992 2012-10-02 18:28:46 <BlueMatt> the comment is one of the cases where that code is called
 993 2012-10-02 18:28:46 tower has quit (Disconnected by services)
 994 2012-10-02 18:29:01 <BlueMatt> but its also possible because we get dup invs all the time
 995 2012-10-02 18:29:01 tower has joined
 996 2012-10-02 18:29:18 <BlueMatt> (have to process the block before sending out the announce, so if we get send another inv during that period...dup)
 997 2012-10-02 18:29:29 * jgarzik wonders if this is a side effect of sending hashBestChain, as the method of triggering getblocks continuation (for IBD)
 998 2012-10-02 18:29:50 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 999 2012-10-02 18:30:56 <BlueMatt> indirectly, sure
1000 2012-10-02 18:31:14 <BlueMatt> its a side-effect of some nodes getting on long side-chains and sipa having to write a fix for that ;)
1001 2012-10-02 18:32:01 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: I really don't think that is what's happening
1002 2012-10-02 18:32:02 <BlueMatt> (long, here, being not-that-long since we were limiting getblocks to SendBufferSize...)
1003 2012-10-02 18:32:10 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: otherwise the locator would not be -1
1004 2012-10-02 18:32:29 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: thats the point, that code is called in other cases, not just the stuff that it says in the comment
1005 2012-10-02 18:32:37 Mad7Scientist is now known as picotube
1006 2012-10-02 18:32:39 <BlueMatt> (though it does fix the issue described in the comment)
1007 2012-10-02 18:32:42 chmod755 is now known as yoctotube
1008 2012-10-02 18:33:16 <gmaxwell> yea, I initially thought this was the keep-feeding prod but I couldn't see how that got a -1 locator.
1009 2012-10-02 18:33:29 lggr has joined
1010 2012-10-02 18:33:42 <gmaxwell> though I admit I haven't had much time to look at it. :(
1011 2012-10-02 18:34:35 <BlueMatt> hmm...well it should have to be that...its the only one that isnt pindexBest (and all of those are response to an inv where they should reasonably have pindexBest)
1012 2012-10-02 18:34:47 <BlueMatt> but...yea seems odd that that is -1 anyway
1013 2012-10-02 18:35:10 <BlueMatt> anywhoo...needs -debug testing with a few nodes...
1014 2012-10-02 18:37:10 <jgarzik> maybe a special debug patch that logs peer node version
1015 2012-10-02 18:37:15 <jgarzik> any info debug info that might be helpful?
1016 2012-10-02 18:37:25 <jgarzik> IP address, to see if it's the same nodes
1017 2012-10-02 18:37:46 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: it doesnt seem to be "weird" (as in non-std node) behavior, Id think you'd see it in a large enough testnet-in-a-box network
1018 2012-10-02 18:38:04 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: how?
1019 2012-10-02 18:38:33 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: I can see the behavior is sane, iff locator != -1
1020 2012-10-02 18:39:01 <jgarzik> but every single new network block sees multiple clients getblocks(-1,0)
1021 2012-10-02 18:39:01 <gmaxwell> I think if you're seeing it on tn3 then it must be 0.7 doing it, no?
1022 2012-10-02 18:39:10 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: presumably
1023 2012-10-02 18:39:14 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: whether its sane or not, i'd guess its too prevalent to be happening from just crap nodes, seems like it should appear with std nodes
1024 2012-10-02 18:39:39 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1025 2012-10-02 18:39:41 yoctotube is now known as chmod755
1026 2012-10-02 18:39:41 <jgarzik> as gmaxwell points out, testnet3 is an elite subset ;p
1027 2012-10-02 18:39:48 <jgarzik> since we just changed the pchMessageStart
1028 2012-10-02 18:40:01 <jgarzik> most likely standard nodes
1029 2012-10-02 18:40:43 lggr has joined
1030 2012-10-02 18:40:51 D34TH has joined
1031 2012-10-02 18:40:55 picotube is now known as Mad7Scientist
1032 2012-10-02 18:44:21 <BlueMatt> hmm...yea makes no sense, but its been happening forever...I thought it was a flag because Id seen it so long ago
1033 2012-10-02 18:45:42 molecular has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1034 2012-10-02 18:46:24 molecular has joined
1035 2012-10-02 18:46:44 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1036 2012-10-02 18:49:06 denisx has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1037 2012-10-02 18:49:18 denisx has joined
1038 2012-10-02 18:50:35 lggr has joined
1039 2012-10-02 18:55:52 <sipa> jgarzik: wasn't that a known BitcoinJ problem?
1040 2012-10-02 18:56:06 <sipa> with the getblocks(-1,0), or was that something else?
1041 2012-10-02 18:56:13 <sipa> TD[gone]: ?
1042 2012-10-02 18:56:39 denisx has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1043 2012-10-02 18:56:50 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1044 2012-10-02 18:57:03 denisx has joined
1045 2012-10-02 19:00:01 chmod755 has quit (Quit: chmod755)
1046 2012-10-02 19:00:34 lggr has joined
1047 2012-10-02 19:04:02 denisx has quit (Quit: denisx)
1048 2012-10-02 19:05:04 <jgarzik> sipa: getpeerinfo reports satoshi clients
1049 2012-10-02 19:05:17 <jgarzik> sipa: this is testnet3, so pretty much everybody is satoshi 0.7
1050 2012-10-02 19:05:39 <sipa> ok, right
1051 2012-10-02 19:05:42 <sipa> that is strange
1052 2012-10-02 19:06:56 <jgarzik> sipa, BlueMatt, gmaxwell: http://pastebin.com/LEc6QuJV (getpeerinfo | grep -i subver)
1053 2012-10-02 19:07:16 <jgarzik> looks like there is 1 bitcoinj, surprisingly
1054 2012-10-02 19:07:31 <gmaxwell> oh ho!
1055 2012-10-02 19:07:31 <jgarzik> going to instrument to print out IP addr and subver
1056 2012-10-02 19:08:05 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1057 2012-10-02 19:10:15 gavinandresen has quit (Quit: gavinandresen)
1058 2012-10-02 19:10:46 lggr has joined
1059 2012-10-02 19:11:28 <jgarzik> I seriously doubt one BitcoinJ would send 4+ getblocks(-1,0) though
1060 2012-10-02 19:11:48 D34TH_ has joined
1061 2012-10-02 19:13:57 Eslbaer has quit (Quit: Verlassend)
1062 2012-10-02 19:14:53 drizztbsd has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
1063 2012-10-02 19:15:30 D34TH has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1064 2012-10-02 19:16:37 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1065 2012-10-02 19:16:47 D34TH__ has joined
1066 2012-10-02 19:18:32 D34TH__ is now known as D34TH
1067 2012-10-02 19:18:40 D34TH has quit (Changing host)
1068 2012-10-02 19:18:40 D34TH has joined
1069 2012-10-02 19:20:42 D34TH_ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1070 2012-10-02 19:20:43 lggr has joined
1071 2012-10-02 19:22:00 bitcoinz has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1072 2012-10-02 19:24:10 bitcoinz has joined
1073 2012-10-02 19:25:23 balrog has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1074 2012-10-02 19:26:23 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1075 2012-10-02 19:27:12 BitcoinBaltar has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1076 2012-10-02 19:27:51 pusle has joined
1077 2012-10-02 19:30:39 lggr has joined
1078 2012-10-02 19:31:10 BitcoinBaltar has joined
1079 2012-10-02 19:31:27 <jgarzik> OK, testnet3 public node and local, behind-firewall node instrumented
1080 2012-10-02 19:31:37 <jgarzik> let's see who those getblocks weirdos are, now
1081 2012-10-02 19:31:57 <jgarzik> SetBestChain: new best=000000000422c384f6ba  height=32195  work=1148841233482094  date=10/02/12 19:19:59
1082 2012-10-02 19:31:57 <jgarzik> ProcessBlock: ACCEPTED
1083 2012-10-02 19:31:57 <jgarzik> 81.161.177.190:18333 /Satoshi:0.7.0.3/ getblocks -1 to 00000000000000000000 limit 500
1084 2012-10-02 19:31:57 <jgarzik> 88.198.7.53:18333 /Satoshi:0.7.0.3/ getblocks -1 to 00000000000000000000 limit 500
1085 2012-10-02 19:31:57 <jgarzik> 173.170.188.216:45040 /Satoshi:0.7.0.99/next-test:20120920/ getblocks -1 to 00000000000000000000 limit 500
1086 2012-10-02 19:32:08 <jgarzik> all satoshi clients, as expected
1087 2012-10-02 19:33:05 <jgarzik> that's testnet3 btw
1088 2012-10-02 19:33:31 <jgarzik> 54.243.211.176:55101 /Satoshi:0.7.0.3/ getblocks -1 to 00000000000000000000 limit 500
1089 2012-10-02 19:33:31 balrog has joined
1090 2012-10-02 19:36:46 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1091 2012-10-02 19:37:15 ThomasV has joined
1092 2012-10-02 19:40:11 m00p has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1093 2012-10-02 19:40:31 <jgarzik> 173.170.188.216:45040 /Satoshi:0.7.0.99/next-test:20120920/ getblocks -1 to 00000000000000000000 limit 500
1094 2012-10-02 19:40:31 <jgarzik> 89.40.16.241:58926 /Satoshi:0.7.0.3/ getblocks -1 to 00000000000000000000 limit 500
1095 2012-10-02 19:40:31 <jgarzik> 81.161.177.190:18333 /Satoshi:0.7.0.3/ getblocks -1 to 00000000000000000000 limit 500
1096 2012-10-02 19:40:31 <jgarzik> 98.109.229.215:58706 /Satoshi:0.7.0.3/ getblocks -1 to 00000000000000000000 limit 500
1097 2012-10-02 19:40:31 <jgarzik> 115.187.242.125:62243 /Satoshi:0.7.0.3/ getblocks -1 to 00000000000000000000 limit 500
1098 2012-10-02 19:40:40 lggr has joined
1099 2012-10-02 19:40:55 <jgarzik> at least one repeater
1100 2012-10-02 19:41:15 <jgarzik> make that two
1101 2012-10-02 19:41:37 <jgarzik> and again,
1102 2012-10-02 19:41:39 <jgarzik> 89.40.16.241:58926 /Satoshi:0.7.0.3/ getblocks -1 to 00000000000000000000 limit 500
1103 2012-10-02 19:41:59 <jgarzik> so
1104 2012-10-02 19:42:30 <jgarzik> Clear proof that nodes are getting stuck, even with new blocks appearing on network
1105 2012-10-02 19:47:41 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1106 2012-10-02 19:50:39 lggr has joined
1107 2012-10-02 19:56:32 <D34TH> so it seems that the server i started downloading blocks on last night wants to commit suicide, cpu load = 0.7 ram = 565/15953MB load avg=5.63
1108 2012-10-02 19:56:41 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1109 2012-10-02 20:00:36 lggr has joined
1110 2012-10-02 20:01:30 <jgarzik> D34TH: it is primarily in disk wait, then?
1111 2012-10-02 20:01:52 <D34TH> i dont even know
1112 2012-10-02 20:02:56 <D34TH> give me a second
1113 2012-10-02 20:03:00 <sipa> 1
1114 2012-10-02 20:03:48 <D34TH> seems like it
1115 2012-10-02 20:04:13 <D34TH> 21.6 w/s
1116 2012-10-02 20:05:22 boupitch has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1117 2012-10-02 20:06:36 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1118 2012-10-02 20:06:43 darkee has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1119 2012-10-02 20:07:08 zzzzzZZZZzzz has joined
1120 2012-10-02 20:10:31 lggr has joined
1121 2012-10-02 20:10:35 jdnavarro has joined
1122 2012-10-02 20:10:46 zzzzzZZZZzzz has quit (Excess Flood)
1123 2012-10-02 20:12:12 <jgarzik> 178.63.48.141:61626 /Satoshi:0.7.0.3/ getblocks -1 to 00000000000000000000 limit 500
1124 2012-10-02 20:12:12 <jgarzik> 96.21.113.151:33994 /Satoshi:0.7.0.99/ getblocks -1 to 00000000000000000000 limit 500
1125 2012-10-02 20:12:12 <jgarzik> 81.161.177.190:18333 /Satoshi:0.7.0.3/ getblocks -1 to 00000000000000000000 limit 500
1126 2012-10-02 20:12:12 <jgarzik> 89.40.16.241:58926 /Satoshi:0.7.0.3/ getblocks -1 to 00000000000000000000 limit 500
1127 2012-10-02 20:12:12 <jgarzik> 98.109.229.215:58706 /Satoshi:0.7.0.3/ getblocks -1 to 00000000000000000000 limit 500
1128 2012-10-02 20:12:12 <jgarzik> 173.170.188.216:45040 /Satoshi:0.7.0.99/next-test:20120920/ getblocks -1 to 00000000000000000000 limit 500
1129 2012-10-02 20:12:27 <jgarzik> quite odd.  IP addresses appear repeatedly, making this request
1130 2012-10-02 20:12:39 <jgarzik> ...but it is not guaranteed that they request after -every- block
1131 2012-10-02 20:12:53 <jgarzik> perhaps they are hitting !fAlreadyHave in those cases
1132 2012-10-02 20:12:55 <sipa> jgarzik: did you check what their initial height was when connecting?
1133 2012-10-02 20:13:07 darkee has joined
1134 2012-10-02 20:13:14 <jgarzik> sipa: no
1135 2012-10-02 20:13:22 * jgarzik adds that to the logging
1136 2012-10-02 20:14:21 pusle has quit ()
1137 2012-10-02 20:16:25 <sipa> quite sure it's my unstuck logic that is causing this
1138 2012-10-02 20:17:38 <sipa> yup, it is
1139 2012-10-02 20:17:45 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1140 2012-10-02 20:17:58 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1141 2012-10-02 20:18:29 <jgarzik>                 pfrom->PushGetBlocks(mapBlockIndex[inv.hash], uint256(0));
1142 2012-10-02 20:18:44 <jgarzik> are we certain that mapBlockIndex[inv.hash] actually has a useful value?
1143 2012-10-02 20:18:52 <jgarzik> we might have seen it... but not yet in block index, right?
1144 2012-10-02 20:18:53 <sipa> yes
1145 2012-10-02 20:19:15 <sipa> because it's not !fAlreadyHave, and not an orphan
1146 2012-10-02 20:19:17 balrog has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1147 2012-10-02 20:19:21 agricocb has joined
1148 2012-10-02 20:20:16 <sipa> in the (nInv == nLastBlock) check, can you add && (inv.hash != pindexBest->GetHash())
1149 2012-10-02 20:20:23 <jgarzik> sipa: AlreadyHave() returns 'true' by default though... ;p
1150 2012-10-02 20:20:27 lggr has joined
1151 2012-10-02 20:20:38 <sipa> not for blocks
1152 2012-10-02 20:21:19 <jgarzik> sipa: sadly changing my node's PushGetBlocks processing won't do much
1153 2012-10-02 20:21:33 <sipa> oh damnit
1154 2012-10-02 20:21:37 <sipa> of course, it's the other side
1155 2012-10-02 20:21:38 <jgarzik> I don't have a local reproducer, just observing the other side
1156 2012-10-02 20:22:40 <sipa> can i -connect to you, with a patched node, to see if it happens?
1157 2012-10-02 20:23:40 mykhal has joined
1158 2012-10-02 20:25:35 balrog has joined
1159 2012-10-02 20:26:38 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1160 2012-10-02 20:30:38 lggr has joined
1161 2012-10-02 20:31:09 <jgarzik> sipa: sure
1162 2012-10-02 20:31:14 <jgarzik> sipa: us4.exmulti.net:18333
1163 2012-10-02 20:31:29 <jgarzik> sipa: just restarted with log-nStartingHeight update
1164 2012-10-02 20:32:24 Evilmax has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1165 2012-10-02 20:34:18 balrog has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1166 2012-10-02 20:36:28 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1167 2012-10-02 20:37:05 <jgarzik> my my
1168 2012-10-02 20:37:07 <jgarzik> ERROR: CTxMemPool::accept() : not enough fees 24e2737de230ade56cab84d3fa453563a14e3e57e4bc0bafb5ae97c2b3d9b7d0, -99950000 < 0
1169 2012-10-02 20:37:15 <jgarzik> that's an interesting testnet transaction
1170 2012-10-02 20:37:54 <sipa> jgarzik: sec, rebasing ultraprune
1171 2012-10-02 20:38:30 <jgarzik> sipa: Here's output with starting height: http://pastebin.com/Dfh4Xn2m
1172 2012-10-02 20:38:47 <jgarzik> (third data item is nStartingHeight)
1173 2012-10-02 20:39:29 <jgarzik> more output, block #32231: http://pastebin.com/mj5YMq2Q
1174 2012-10-02 20:39:36 balrog has joined
1175 2012-10-02 20:40:36 lggr has joined
1176 2012-10-02 20:45:01 darkskiez has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1177 2012-10-02 20:46:26 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1178 2012-10-02 20:49:47 <jgarzik> more output, block #32233-32235: http://pastebin.com/50ahaUxp
1179 2012-10-02 20:50:07 lggr has joined
1180 2012-10-02 20:50:26 <sipa> jgarzik: i know an easy fix (only triggering the unstuck logic when there's more than 1 block in the inv), but there's a deeper issue
1181 2012-10-02 20:52:49 iddo has joined
1182 2012-10-02 20:53:09 <sipa> jgarzik: got it
1183 2012-10-02 20:53:32 <sipa> imagine a getblocks that sends the current best tip as locator
1184 2012-10-02 20:53:58 <sipa> the receiver gets a pindex out of that which refers ideally to his own tip
1185 2012-10-02 20:54:21 <sipa> there's pindex = pindex->pnext in the "getblocks" handler
1186 2012-10-02 20:54:21 <jgarzik> more output, block #32236: http://pastebin.com/mRwvtG4x
1187 2012-10-02 20:54:36 <sipa> as you want to start sending at the block after the last own the other side has
1188 2012-10-02 20:54:49 <sipa> but as you already were at the tip, pindex is now NULL
1189 2012-10-02 20:55:06 <sipa> and what you actually do is start sending the entire index from scratch
1190 2012-10-02 20:55:50 <jgarzik> indeed, I see it
1191 2012-10-02 20:56:07 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1192 2012-10-02 20:56:14 <jgarzik> BTW, unrelated note:  that last pastebin has an interesting strSubVer
1193 2012-10-02 20:56:15 <sipa> so imho, a getblocks should be silently ignored in that case
1194 2012-10-02 20:56:28 <sipa> as it requests something for which only the empty set is the correct answer
1195 2012-10-02 20:57:12 <jgarzik> 93.56.34.243:52480 JavaCoin/1.0-DEV 518 getblocks 2019 to 00000000000000000000 limit 500
1196 2012-10-02 20:57:14 <jgarzik> JavaCoin!
1197 2012-10-02 20:57:35 <jgarzik> sipa: if they are already at the tip, wonder why it sends the request at all?
1198 2012-10-02 20:57:51 <sipa> because they don't know they're at the tip
1199 2012-10-02 20:58:05 jdnavarro has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1200 2012-10-02 20:59:41 datagutt has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
1201 2012-10-02 20:59:51 lggr has joined
1202 2012-10-02 21:00:11 <sipa> jgarzik: actually, we already ignore it
1203 2012-10-02 21:00:34 <sipa> the loop afterwards in the getblocks handler runs only as long as pindex is not NULL
1204 2012-10-02 21:00:43 <sipa> so the only problem is the output really
1205 2012-10-02 21:01:04 <sipa> (and the fact that it shouldn't be triggered at all in normal circumstances)
1206 2012-10-02 21:01:50 <sipa> i wonder whether we can avoid it during IBD as well
1207 2012-10-02 21:05:15 xisalty has joined
1208 2012-10-02 21:05:42 darkskiez has joined
1209 2012-10-02 21:05:44 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1210 2012-10-02 21:07:26 setkeh has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1211 2012-10-02 21:07:39 <sipa> SHA-3 == Keccak
1212 2012-10-02 21:08:09 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Quitte)
1213 2012-10-02 21:09:07 lggr has joined
1214 2012-10-02 21:15:20 <jgarzik> sipa: link?
1215 2012-10-02 21:15:22 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1216 2012-10-02 21:15:30 <sipa> http://www.nist.gov/itl/csd/sha-100212.cfm
1217 2012-10-02 21:15:42 <jgarzik> owel, that shoots down all my Linux kernel work on skein ;-)
1218 2012-10-02 21:16:33 <sipa> the second author of RIjndael (AES) is also the second author of Keccak...
1219 2012-10-02 21:16:42 <sipa> <conspiracy_theories>
1220 2012-10-02 21:18:22 lggr has joined
1221 2012-10-02 21:20:20 root2_ is now known as root2
1222 2012-10-02 21:21:58 maaku has joined
1223 2012-10-02 21:23:43 darsk1ez has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1224 2012-10-02 21:24:28 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1225 2012-10-02 21:26:58 <gmaxwell> Boom.
1226 2012-10-02 21:26:59 <gmaxwell> I called it
1227 2012-10-02 21:27:03 * gmaxwell goes to collect bets.
1228 2012-10-02 21:27:30 <gmaxwell> Skein was the only finalist without an internal state 2x the output in the recommended config.
1229 2012-10-02 21:27:49 lggr has joined
1230 2012-10-02 21:29:10 darsk1ez has joined
1231 2012-10-02 21:29:48 <sipa> skein was also significantly faster than keccak
1232 2012-10-02 21:31:23 Marf has joined
1233 2012-10-02 21:32:06 <maaku> damn. i was hoping for skein because that would have been de facto standardization of Threefish as a block cipher
1234 2012-10-02 21:32:27 [\\\] has joined
1235 2012-10-02 21:33:31 <helo> sounds like they made a great choice!
1236 2012-10-02 21:33:48 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1237 2012-10-02 21:34:27 <sipa> it looks like an unusual construction, though
1238 2012-10-02 21:34:54 <gmaxwell> Increases diversity.
1239 2012-10-02 21:35:05 balrog has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1240 2012-10-02 21:35:08 <maaku> sipa: from the wording of the press release, that appears to be a primary consideration
1241 2012-10-02 21:35:20 <sipa> i'm somewhat glad that they dare choose something "new"
1242 2012-10-02 21:35:55 <gmaxwell> there were several others submissions with similar structure.
1243 2012-10-02 21:36:17 <gmaxwell> 'sponge+permutation' is sort of popular for research.
1244 2012-10-02 21:36:26 * jgarzik picked Skein because of the block cipher, and because I like Bruce ;p
1245 2012-10-02 21:36:36 <maaku> sipa: well they picked something unusual with AES as well
1246 2012-10-02 21:36:56 <sipa> maaku: and in both cases the "unusual" part was in fact designed by Joan Daemen, from what I hear
1247 2012-10-02 21:37:04 lggr has joined
1248 2012-10-02 21:38:20 <sipa> a friend of mine actualy made a submission (LANE), but he didn't make it to the second round
1249 2012-10-02 21:38:55 asa1024 has quit (Quit: asa1024)
1250 2012-10-02 21:40:17 D34TH has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1251 2012-10-02 21:40:17 <amiller> was "unusual" an explicit goal from the outset?
1252 2012-10-02 21:40:30 <jgarzik> http://keccak.noekeon.org/
1253 2012-10-02 21:40:34 D34TH has joined
1254 2012-10-02 21:40:41 <jgarzik> "Keccak makes use of the sponge construction and is hence a sponge function family."
1255 2012-10-02 21:41:19 <maaku> amiller: not as such; there are pros and cons that come with it
1256 2012-10-02 21:41:22 balrog has joined
1257 2012-10-02 21:43:05 <maaku> if you're talking about the NIST's goals at least; i don't know if Keccak's authors were purposefully trying to be original
1258 2012-10-02 21:43:23 <jgarzik> absent other constraints, diversity is good
1259 2012-10-02 21:43:43 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1260 2012-10-02 21:44:13 <jgarzik> same reason I like bitcoin...  bitcoin provides a heterogenous environment, when it lives alongside fiat currencies.  Good for checks-and-balances.
1261 2012-10-02 21:45:16 <sipa> according to sebastiaan, keccak was actually designed to be original
1262 2012-10-02 21:45:18 <maaku> jgarzik: but an unusual design means there has been less research in that area, meaning there is a higher probability of undiscovered attack vectors
1263 2012-10-02 21:46:07 <maaku> but in this case that's probably not an issue since SHA-2 is still a suitable alternative
1264 2012-10-02 21:46:12 <jgarzik> maaku: quite true as well
1265 2012-10-02 21:46:21 lggr has joined
1266 2012-10-02 21:47:25 <sipa> best attacks on SHA-2 work on 1/2nd to 2/3rd of the number of rounds only
1267 2012-10-02 21:47:42 <sipa> so i can see there was reason to be suspicious about its safety in the very long run
1268 2012-10-02 21:47:44 <maaku> then again the NSA gets input into the final selection, so maybe one can read into this that they know quite a bit about the sponge function family ;)
1269 2012-10-02 21:48:00 MiningBuddy has joined
1270 2012-10-02 21:52:12 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1271 2012-10-02 21:52:44 MC1984 has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1272 2012-10-02 21:52:44 <jgarzik> oh god
1273 2012-10-02 21:52:50 <jgarzik> Keccak is indeed _so_ horrible
1274 2012-10-02 21:53:20 <sipa> how so?
1275 2012-10-02 21:53:21 <Luke-Jr> ?
1276 2012-10-02 21:53:28 <sipa> it looks quite elegant, imho
1277 2012-10-02 21:53:40 <Luke-Jr> someone remember to announce a switch of POW to SHA-3 on April 1
1278 2012-10-02 21:53:53 <sipa> Luke-Jr: ACK :p
1279 2012-10-02 21:53:53 <maaku> lol
1280 2012-10-02 21:54:00 <jgarzik> http://keccak.noekeon.org/KeccakReferenceAndOptimized-3.2.zip
1281 2012-10-02 21:54:14 <jgarzik> a dozen unreadable implementations, #ifdef'd to hell and back
1282 2012-10-02 21:54:35 <jgarzik> Luke-Jr: hehehe
1283 2012-10-02 21:54:53 <jgarzik> I meant the Keccak source code is horrible
1284 2012-10-02 21:54:55 <jgarzik> not design
1285 2012-10-02 21:55:27 lggr has joined
1286 2012-10-02 21:56:14 <sipa> Luke-Jr: "Because the SHA256 PoW function used in Bitcoin was superceded by Keccak (SHA-3), Bitcoin 0.9 will retroactively switch to Keccak for POW. Large reorganisation is expected."
1287 2012-10-02 21:56:36 <Luke-Jr> sipa: that's too obvious?
1288 2012-10-02 21:56:45 <sipa> hmm, true
1289 2012-10-02 21:57:14 <sipa> jgarzik: oh, didn't check the source code
1290 2012-10-02 21:58:56 <jgarzik> ROFL, from the Keccak page: "Markku-Juhani O. Saarinen posted an implementation of Keccak in C aimed at readability and clarity, as an alternative to our specifications summary."  http://www.mjos.fi/dist/readable_keccak.tgz
1291 2012-10-02 21:59:32 <sipa> Keccak seems systematically faster than SHA-256, but slower than SHA-512...
1292 2012-10-02 21:59:48 <sipa> on 64-bit hardware, that is
1293 2012-10-02 22:01:34 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1294 2012-10-02 22:02:00 <jgarzik> sipa: strange that nStartingHeight is so uniform: http://pastebin.com/5yBWFL7W
1295 2012-10-02 22:02:38 <sipa> jgarzik: it only happens with up-to-date nodes
1296 2012-10-02 22:02:59 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
1297 2012-10-02 22:03:15 tcatm has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1298 2012-10-02 22:03:23 tcatm has joined
1299 2012-10-02 22:03:24 tcatm has quit (Changing host)
1300 2012-10-02 22:03:24 tcatm has joined
1301 2012-10-02 22:03:33 TD has joined
1302 2012-10-02 22:04:35 lggr has joined
1303 2012-10-02 22:07:11 Luke-Jr has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1304 2012-10-02 22:10:19 D34TH has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1305 2012-10-02 22:10:21 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1306 2012-10-02 22:10:26 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1307 2012-10-02 22:10:36 D34TH has joined
1308 2012-10-02 22:11:53 jurov is now known as jurov|away
1309 2012-10-02 22:12:09 slush has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1310 2012-10-02 22:13:50 lggr has joined
1311 2012-10-02 22:14:17 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1312 2012-10-02 22:14:23 Luke-Jr has joined
1313 2012-10-02 22:14:30 D34TH has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1314 2012-10-02 22:14:46 D34TH has joined
1315 2012-10-02 22:17:16 <jgarzik> flood of these on testnet3:
1316 2012-10-02 22:17:18 <jgarzik>   nActualTimespan = 326059  before bounds
1317 2012-10-02 22:17:18 <jgarzik> GetNextWorkRequired RETARGET
1318 2012-10-02 22:17:18 <jgarzik> nTargetTimespan = 1209600    nActualTimespan = 326059
1319 2012-10-02 22:17:18 <jgarzik> Before: 1c04b5af  0000000004b5af00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
1320 2012-10-02 22:17:18 <jgarzik> After:  1c014500  00000000014500d8027027027027027027027027027027027027027027027027
1321 2012-10-02 22:17:30 <jgarzik> same before/after in each message
1322 2012-10-02 22:18:25 D34TH_ has joined
1323 2012-10-02 22:19:26 <jgarzik> wonder if it's related to the internal miner
1324 2012-10-02 22:19:53 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1325 2012-10-02 22:20:06 D34TH has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1326 2012-10-02 22:20:39 <maaku> u
1327 2012-10-02 22:20:53 <jgarzik> yep
1328 2012-10-02 22:21:02 <jgarzik> turn on internal miner... flood of the above
1329 2012-10-02 22:21:06 <jgarzik> turn off, no messages
1330 2012-10-02 22:23:00 lggr has joined
1331 2012-10-02 22:27:23 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1332 2012-10-02 22:29:38 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1333 2012-10-02 22:30:19 D34TH_ is now known as D34TH
1334 2012-10-02 22:30:31 D34TH has quit (Changing host)
1335 2012-10-02 22:30:31 D34TH has joined
1336 2012-10-02 22:33:11 lggr has joined
1337 2012-10-02 22:34:57 setkeh has joined
1338 2012-10-02 22:35:36 Joric has quit ()
1339 2012-10-02 22:39:58 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1340 2012-10-02 22:43:33 lggr has joined
1341 2012-10-02 22:50:34 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1342 2012-10-02 22:51:36 da2ce773 has joined
1343 2012-10-02 22:53:08 rdponticelli has joined
1344 2012-10-02 22:53:43 lggr has joined
1345 2012-10-02 22:56:32 da2ce773 is now known as da2ce7
1346 2012-10-02 22:59:56 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1347 2012-10-02 23:02:44 lggr has joined
1348 2012-10-02 23:04:29 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1349 2012-10-02 23:05:10 harkon has joined
1350 2012-10-02 23:06:55 <Diablo-D3> http://csrc.nist.gov/groups/ST/hash/sha-3/winner_sha-3.html
1351 2012-10-02 23:07:02 <sipa> old news
1352 2012-10-02 23:07:13 <sipa> we're already defining SHA-3.14159 here
1353 2012-10-02 23:07:18 CodesInChaos has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1354 2012-10-02 23:07:56 <jgarzik> Diablo-D3: we're prepping the April 1 announcement for bitcoin's switch to SHA-3
1355 2012-10-02 23:08:07 <Diablo-D3> jgarzik: :D
1356 2012-10-02 23:08:26 <D34TH> jgarzik, thats going to break the miners right?
1357 2012-10-02 23:08:44 agricocb has joined
1358 2012-10-02 23:08:50 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1359 2012-10-02 23:09:00 <Diablo-D3> D34TH: all of them
1360 2012-10-02 23:09:02 <Diablo-D3> doubly so for asic
1361 2012-10-02 23:09:06 <gmaxwell> sipa: I started on a joke SHA-3 submission but didn't bother finishing it and completing it.. that was called SHA-π  and it was a hash function based on using  indexing into the hex expansion of PI as the inner strong one way function.
1362 2012-10-02 23:09:10 <jgarzik> D34TH: yep
1363 2012-10-02 23:09:20 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: wat
1364 2012-10-02 23:09:30 <gmaxwell> I was trying to work it out so that there was a security proof related to the irrational of pi tht proved it secure... but I got stuck. :(
1365 2012-10-02 23:09:42 <Diablo-D3> that'd be fucking hilarious
1366 2012-10-02 23:09:56 <gmaxwell> (it was totally impratical as the cost of computing the hex expansion at offset x is linear in x.
1367 2012-10-02 23:09:59 <gmaxwell> )
1368 2012-10-02 23:10:46 <D34TH> jgarzik, Diablo-D3 : https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=vVof0qj7SOw#t=6s
1369 2012-10-02 23:11:07 <D34TH> thats what I imagine the community will be like
1370 2012-10-02 23:11:45 lggr has joined
1371 2012-10-02 23:11:46 Arch_Col1 has joined
1372 2012-10-02 23:11:48 <sipa> gmaxwell: i actually once started designing an actual hash function, and i think it's decent myself; however, as i'm not a cryptoanalist, and never peer reviewed, i'd be stupid to think it's hard to attack :)
1373 2012-10-02 23:11:50 Arch_Col1 has quit (Client Quit)
1374 2012-10-02 23:12:28 <Diablo-D3> so what I should do now
1375 2012-10-02 23:12:32 <Diablo-D3> is build a better crypto hash
1376 2012-10-02 23:12:34 <Diablo-D3> FOR THE LULZ
1377 2012-10-02 23:14:59 <Luke-Jr> something tells me D34TH doesn't understand the significance of April 1st
1378 2012-10-02 23:15:21 <D34TH> i think it would be funny to do on april first though
1379 2012-10-02 23:15:29 <D34TH> as it would seem like a joke
1380 2012-10-02 23:15:32 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: actually, why don't hashes use fucking gigantic internal states?
1381 2012-10-02 23:15:33 <D34TH> then the realization hits
1382 2012-10-02 23:15:38 darkee has quit (Quit: Verlassend)
1383 2012-10-02 23:15:39 <D34TH> then the depression
1384 2012-10-02 23:15:43 <Luke-Jr> Diablo-D3: scrypt is supposed to
1385 2012-10-02 23:15:46 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
1386 2012-10-02 23:15:58 <gmaxwell> Diablo-D3: because memory is costly.
1387 2012-10-02 23:16:18 <gmaxwell> And SHA-3 _does_ use a fairly large internal state.
1388 2012-10-02 23:16:19 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: exactly.
1389 2012-10-02 23:16:27 <Diablo-D3> sha3 isnt as big as um
1390 2012-10-02 23:16:29 <sipa> Diablo-D3: hash functions are not actually designed to be slow or hard; key derivation is
1391 2012-10-02 23:16:30 <gmaxwell> Diablo-D3: hashes aren't intended to be expensive.
1392 2012-10-02 23:16:34 <Diablo-D3> shit, that one the alt coin uses that just goes apeshit
1393 2012-10-02 23:16:44 <Luke-Jr> http://blog.ip.fi/2012/04/we-dont-understand-hashes.html
1394 2012-10-02 23:16:55 <sipa> 200 bytes of internal state is a lot
1395 2012-10-02 23:16:57 <gmaxwell> Hash != KDF != Hashcash.
1396 2012-10-02 23:17:00 <Diablo-D3> sipa: yeah, but keccack is unsafe for pbdkf2
1397 2012-10-02 23:17:06 <sipa> Diablo-D3: how so?
1398 2012-10-02 23:17:14 <Diablo-D3> Im not sure, but apparently thats a thing.
1399 2012-10-02 23:17:21 <sipa> it's certainly no less safe than SHA256
1400 2012-10-02 23:17:24 <sipa> (afaik(
1401 2012-10-02 23:17:27 <gmaxwell> Diablo-D3: well, not more than sha-2. You're wanting memory hard like scrypt.
1402 2012-10-02 23:17:39 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: yeah, scrypt was what I was trying to think of
1403 2012-10-02 23:17:57 <Eliel> D34TH: I don't think it would be possible to force a mining algorithm upgrade on people without a good reason to do so.
1404 2012-10-02 23:18:16 <D34TH> true
1405 2012-10-02 23:18:29 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1406 2012-10-02 23:18:38 <Diablo-D3> jesus, Im looking at the keccak algo
1407 2012-10-02 23:18:39 <sipa> the _only_ reason i would consider suggesting changing the PoW function, is when a serious vulnerability is found in SHA256
1408 2012-10-02 23:18:40 <Diablo-D3> thats pretty nifty
1409 2012-10-02 23:18:42 <gmaxwell> Eliel: s/without a good reason/unless bitcoin is dead unless its done/
1410 2012-10-02 23:19:05 <Eliel> gmaxwell: yes, that's pretty much the only plausible reason to do so.
1411 2012-10-02 23:19:06 <gmaxwell> sipa: most vulnerabilities wouldn't matter for _pow_ in any case. E.g. I don't know of any reason MD5 wouldn't be fine.
1412 2012-10-02 23:19:17 <gmaxwell> for the hash trees and signatures; thats another matter.
1413 2012-10-02 23:19:24 <sipa> gmaxwell: yes, it has to be a preimage attack
1414 2012-10-02 23:19:33 <sipa> collision attacks are not significant for PoW
1415 2012-10-02 23:19:45 <gmaxwell> With lower complexity than the difficulty!
1416 2012-10-02 23:19:51 DutchBrat has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1417 2012-10-02 23:19:57 <Diablo-D3> why should hashes be fast, though?
1418 2012-10-02 23:20:01 <Diablo-D3> what do we gain with that?
1419 2012-10-02 23:20:05 <sipa> time
1420 2012-10-02 23:20:07 <upb> lol
1421 2012-10-02 23:20:21 <Diablo-D3> network and disk io is typically far slower than cpus
1422 2012-10-02 23:20:29 <gmaxwell> Diablo-D3: because you can always make something slow by doing more of it. Not so much for fast. And it's important that the hashes are fast or block validation would be slow.
1423 2012-10-02 23:20:46 <sipa> Diablo-D3: making a good hash function isn't hard (if you know how)
1424 2012-10-02 23:20:49 <gmaxwell> e.g. consider the hash trees... N transactions means 2* the number of hash operations.
1425 2012-10-02 23:20:53 <sipa> Diablo-D3: making a good fast hash function is
1426 2012-10-02 23:21:05 DutchBrat has joined
1427 2012-10-02 23:21:47 lggr has joined
1428 2012-10-02 23:22:37 <sipa> Diablo-D3: you're certainly right that in many application the hash speed is largely irrelevant
1429 2012-10-02 23:24:28 <sipa> but in some cases it certainly is relevant (also its complexity to implement in a performant way in hardware matters), so if you can come up with two hash function of equal cryptographic strength, and A took a month to find but is slow, and B took 5 years to find but is 20% faster... after you spent (as a society) the research to find B, why wouldn't you use it?
1430 2012-10-02 23:27:04 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1431 2012-10-02 23:27:30 <Diablo-D3> so what we need is an algo that is fast and secure?
1432 2012-10-02 23:28:42 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1433 2012-10-02 23:29:09 <gmaxwell> secure isn't a single dimension either.
1434 2012-10-02 23:30:08 rejoin_ has joined
1435 2012-10-02 23:30:13 B0g4r7 has joined
1436 2012-10-02 23:30:20 <rejoin_> Hello all :)
1437 2012-10-02 23:31:10 <rejoin_> Is it a good idea to run mining software on my workstation?
1438 2012-10-02 23:31:22 Marf has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1439 2012-10-02 23:32:02 lggr has joined
1440 2012-10-02 23:32:45 <sipa> depends what hardware you'd mine with
1441 2012-10-02 23:32:56 <rejoin_> ...laptop
1442 2012-10-02 23:33:03 <gmaxwell> rejoin_: if you're interested in mining, sure. Depending on your workstation it might not make more in coins than the power to run it costs you though.
1443 2012-10-02 23:33:12 <gmaxwell> and on a laptop I'd generally recommend against it...
1444 2012-10-02 23:33:27 <sipa> rejoin_: unless you have an FPGA or a high-end ATI graphics hard, don't
1445 2012-10-02 23:33:35 <gmaxwell> just because many laptops don't actually like being run at full load 24/7 and it may cause earlier hardware failure.
1446 2012-10-02 23:33:46 <rejoin_> Makes sense :)
1447 2012-10-02 23:34:28 <rejoin_> When I first found out about bitcoin, my machine was too slow... 2 years later with a new machine, still.
1448 2012-10-02 23:37:12 Gladamas has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1449 2012-10-02 23:37:21 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@brwyatt.net|brwyatt
1450 2012-10-02 23:38:00 Karmaon_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1451 2012-10-02 23:38:09 Karmaon has joined
1452 2012-10-02 23:38:09 Karmaon has quit (Changing host)
1453 2012-10-02 23:38:09 Karmaon has joined
1454 2012-10-02 23:38:20 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1455 2012-10-02 23:41:02 lggr has joined
1456 2012-10-02 23:42:25 rejoin_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1457 2012-10-02 23:44:25 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1458 2012-10-02 23:47:11 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1459 2012-10-02 23:50:39 lggr has joined
1460 2012-10-02 23:54:59 robocoin has quit (Quit: 3>_<3)
1461 2012-10-02 23:56:52 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1462 2012-10-02 23:58:57 darkee has joined
1463 2012-10-02 23:59:29 [\\\] has joined
1464 2012-10-02 23:59:34 lggr has joined