1 2012-10-05 00:01:12 OneFixt_ is now known as OneFixt
   2 2012-10-05 00:02:23 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
   3 2012-10-05 00:05:38 lggr has joined
   4 2012-10-05 00:06:02 <sipa> xblitz: the code you pasted on the forum only works when the prevout you're looking up is in your own wallet as well (it was a change output, or a send-to-self)
   5 2012-10-05 00:06:36 <Eliel> do any other pools besides eligius and p2pool pay through generation?
   6 2012-10-05 00:07:24 <xblitz> sipa: are you sure..  it actualy works on my end
   7 2012-10-05 00:08:14 setkeh` has joined
   8 2012-10-05 00:08:28 <sipa> xblitz: yes, you're requesting the prevout from pwalletMain
   9 2012-10-05 00:08:56 <sipa> so it only works if the transaction is in your wallet
  10 2012-10-05 00:08:59 xisalty_ has joined
  11 2012-10-05 00:09:19 xisalty_ is now known as xisalty
  12 2012-10-05 00:09:33 one_zero has joined
  13 2012-10-05 00:09:51 <sipa> oh, it will always work for outgoing transactions, as you'll always have the transactions that credited your with their input
  14 2012-10-05 00:09:59 <sipa> but not necessarily for inputs
  15 2012-10-05 00:10:37 setkeh has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
  16 2012-10-05 00:10:42 Z0rZ0rZ0r has quit (Quit: Wheeeee)
  17 2012-10-05 00:10:47 <xblitz> sipa: ah yes okay.. in my case i am looking for transactions in my wallet.. but i guess you can use MerkleTx instead of CWalletTX and then use the GetTransaction from main.h
  18 2012-10-05 00:11:09 <sipa> no, you need CTransaction::ReadFromDisk
  19 2012-10-05 00:11:16 <xblitz> sipa: i will try to make a general one for the example so it can work for all transaction
  20 2012-10-05 00:11:43 <sipa> oh, GetTransaction probably also works
  21 2012-10-05 00:12:05 da2ce796 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
  22 2012-10-05 00:12:25 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
  23 2012-10-05 00:14:06 <xblitz> probably gets unconfirmed ones too
  24 2012-10-05 00:14:28 setkeh` is now known as setkeh
  25 2012-10-05 00:14:35 lggr has joined
  26 2012-10-05 00:19:07 JZavala has joined
  27 2012-10-05 00:19:13 <sipa> yes, but you'll never have a transaction in your wallet whose input is in the mempool but not in the wallet itself
  28 2012-10-05 00:19:20 <sipa> ... i think
  29 2012-10-05 00:19:41 <sipa> never mind; you're right
  30 2012-10-05 00:19:55 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
  31 2012-10-05 00:21:08 upb has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
  32 2012-10-05 00:21:18 Joric has quit ()
  33 2012-10-05 00:21:25 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
  34 2012-10-05 00:21:56 setkeh has quit (Quit: Love Linux ?? and Sharing Experience ?? Come Join us on Freenode at #linuxdistrocommunity)
  35 2012-10-05 00:22:06 setkeh has joined
  36 2012-10-05 00:23:33 lggr has joined
  37 2012-10-05 00:26:56 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
  38 2012-10-05 00:29:14 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
  39 2012-10-05 00:32:35 lggr has joined
  40 2012-10-05 00:33:37 upb has joined
  41 2012-10-05 00:33:38 upb has quit (Changing host)
  42 2012-10-05 00:33:38 upb has joined
  43 2012-10-05 00:37:32 gavinandresen has quit (Quit: gavinandresen)
  44 2012-10-05 00:39:51 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
  45 2012-10-05 00:42:19 lggr has joined
  46 2012-10-05 00:44:51 denisx has joined
  47 2012-10-05 00:45:15 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
  48 2012-10-05 00:49:08 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
  49 2012-10-05 00:51:08 rdponticelli has joined
  50 2012-10-05 00:52:20 lggr has joined
  51 2012-10-05 00:53:24 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
  52 2012-10-05 00:59:09 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
  53 2012-10-05 01:02:28 lggr has joined
  54 2012-10-05 01:03:25 <denisx> the logo for the apple binary is the logo for a universal binary which is for ppc/intel
  55 2012-10-05 01:03:31 <denisx> which is not the case
  56 2012-10-05 01:03:35 <denisx> I would use another one
  57 2012-10-05 01:07:17 sgornick has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
  58 2012-10-05 01:08:02 agricocb has joined
  59 2012-10-05 01:09:05 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
  60 2012-10-05 01:11:07 jurov has quit (away!~jurov@rini17.broker.freenet6.net|Quit: User accidentally the)
  61 2012-10-05 01:11:23 jurov has joined
  62 2012-10-05 01:12:13 toffoo has joined
  63 2012-10-05 01:12:33 lggr has joined
  64 2012-10-05 01:13:55 JZavala has joined
  65 2012-10-05 01:19:11 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
  66 2012-10-05 01:20:05 sgornick has joined
  67 2012-10-05 01:21:18 BTCTrader_ has joined
  68 2012-10-05 01:22:06 lggr has joined
  69 2012-10-05 01:25:26 BTCTrader has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
  70 2012-10-05 01:25:26 BTCTrader_ is now known as BTCTrader
  71 2012-10-05 01:25:31 ThomasV has joined
  72 2012-10-05 01:29:09 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
  73 2012-10-05 01:29:13 Arnavion has quit (Quit: Arnavion)
  74 2012-10-05 01:31:59 lggr has joined
  75 2012-10-05 01:32:19 Hasimir has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
  76 2012-10-05 01:32:24 KIDC has joined
  77 2012-10-05 01:32:30 Hasimir has joined
  78 2012-10-05 01:35:03 Arnavion has joined
  79 2012-10-05 01:37:58 KIDC has quit (Changing host)
  80 2012-10-05 01:37:58 KIDC has joined
  81 2012-10-05 01:38:23 Karmaon has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
  82 2012-10-05 01:38:46 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
  83 2012-10-05 01:38:51 D34TH has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
  84 2012-10-05 01:39:22 Gladamas has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
  85 2012-10-05 01:39:27 Karmaon_ has joined
  86 2012-10-05 01:41:47 lggr has joined
  87 2012-10-05 01:44:41 <Evilmax> it's falling?
  88 2012-10-05 01:46:25 AlexWaters1 has joined
  89 2012-10-05 01:48:41 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
  90 2012-10-05 01:48:50 AlexWaters has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
  91 2012-10-05 01:51:21 lggr has joined
  92 2012-10-05 01:58:06 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
  93 2012-10-05 02:01:20 xblitz has quit (Quit: Page closed)
  94 2012-10-05 02:01:31 lggr has joined
  95 2012-10-05 02:04:03 Impaler has joined
  96 2012-10-05 02:08:18 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
  97 2012-10-05 02:08:38 kreal has quit ()
  98 2012-10-05 02:11:52 lggr has joined
  99 2012-10-05 02:12:47 <jaxtr> sup broguana
 100 2012-10-05 02:16:01 maaku has joined
 101 2012-10-05 02:17:51 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 102 2012-10-05 02:20:51 lggr has joined
 103 2012-10-05 02:24:25 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 104 2012-10-05 02:26:40 xisalty has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 105 2012-10-05 02:27:27 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 106 2012-10-05 02:29:28 AlexWaters has joined
 107 2012-10-05 02:29:30 Maccer has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 108 2012-10-05 02:29:57 lggr has joined
 109 2012-10-05 02:31:06 Maccer has joined
 110 2012-10-05 02:31:54 AlexWaters1 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 111 2012-10-05 02:32:07 paraipan has quit (Quit: Saliendo)
 112 2012-10-05 02:36:35 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 113 2012-10-05 02:39:32 lggr has joined
 114 2012-10-05 02:40:15 xisalty has joined
 115 2012-10-05 02:45:10 fiesh has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 116 2012-10-05 02:46:05 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 117 2012-10-05 02:49:31 lggr has joined
 118 2012-10-05 02:50:24 fiesh has joined
 119 2012-10-05 02:53:16 <gmaxwell> http://swtch.com/r.tar.gz
 120 2012-10-05 02:53:39 BGL has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 121 2012-10-05 02:56:22 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 122 2012-10-05 02:59:35 lggr has joined
 123 2012-10-05 03:00:13 denisx has quit (Quit: denisx)
 124 2012-10-05 03:06:24 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 125 2012-10-05 03:09:13 lggr has joined
 126 2012-10-05 03:11:52 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 127 2012-10-05 03:13:03 ThomasV has joined
 128 2012-10-05 03:16:32 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 129 2012-10-05 03:18:27 Gladamas has joined
 130 2012-10-05 03:19:22 lggr has joined
 131 2012-10-05 03:19:44 ahbritto_ has joined
 132 2012-10-05 03:19:46 bcb has joined
 133 2012-10-05 03:20:23 <bcb> getting "code":-22,"message":"TX rejected"
 134 2012-10-05 03:20:48 <bcb> trying to send rawtranswaction after completing multisig escrow transaction
 135 2012-10-05 03:21:06 <bcb> sendrawtransaction
 136 2012-10-05 03:21:52 <gmaxwell> look in debug.log and see if you see why?
 137 2012-10-05 03:22:15 <gmaxwell> does it violate the fee rules? is it complete (fully signed) and locked?
 138 2012-10-05 03:23:35 <bcb> checking
 139 2012-10-05 03:25:45 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 140 2012-10-05 03:26:02 <bcb> not enough fees
 141 2012-10-05 03:26:31 <bcb> gmaswell: is that set at time of transaction or in the client
 142 2012-10-05 03:27:32 <gmaxwell> it's part of the transaction— fees are input coin you don't output.
 143 2012-10-05 03:27:54 <gmaxwell> any idea why it's insufficient fees? do you have an output less than 0.01?
 144 2012-10-05 03:28:06 <bcb> in .conf?
 145 2012-10-05 03:28:15 lggr has joined
 146 2012-10-05 03:28:41 <gmaxwell> The fees are part of the transaction. Fees exist when the input value is greater than the sum of the output values.
 147 2012-10-05 03:28:46 [7] has quit (Disconnected by services)
 148 2012-10-05 03:28:54 TheSeven has joined
 149 2012-10-05 03:28:57 <bcb> paytxfee=0.01
 150 2012-10-05 03:28:58 <gmaxwell> There is no setting when you're making transactions with the raw transaction API...
 151 2012-10-05 03:29:32 <gmaxwell> Since the transaction is exactly as you've specified it.
 152 2012-10-05 03:30:18 <bcb> output is 1
 153 2012-10-05 03:31:01 Raccoon` is now known as Raccoon
 154 2012-10-05 03:31:51 <gmaxwell> and the inputs are confirmed already?
 155 2012-10-05 03:32:41 <gmaxwell> How big is the transaction?
 156 2012-10-05 03:32:50 <gmaxwell> (how many characters is the raw hex?)
 157 2012-10-05 03:32:53 <bcb> gmaxwell: not sure this is only second attemp
 158 2012-10-05 03:32:56 <bcb> 1 btc
 159 2012-10-05 03:34:10 tucenaber has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 160 2012-10-05 03:35:03 <bcb> gmaswell:170
 161 2012-10-05 03:35:03 <gmaxwell> echo HEX | wc
 162 2012-10-05 03:35:26 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 163 2012-10-05 03:35:55 <bcb> 1 1 4
 164 2012-10-05 03:37:24 <gmaxwell> I didn't mean HEX litteraly but the hex txn.. but you say its 170? that sounds too small.
 165 2012-10-05 03:37:49 lggr has joined
 166 2012-10-05 03:37:56 <bcb> 385
 167 2012-10-05 03:38:06 <bcb> 170 is strlen
 168 2012-10-05 03:38:55 <gmaxwell> 170 byte hex is 85 bytes of data. Thats too small to be a complete transaction.
 169 2012-10-05 03:39:34 <gmaxwell> (or at lest I think the smallest you can get is 90some bytes)
 170 2012-10-05 03:41:03 <bcb> this signrawtransaction hex output is the same as the input
 171 2012-10-05 03:41:33 <gmaxwell> can you share the hex with me?
 172 2012-10-05 03:41:53 <bcb> 010000000139f78ddc55c5c65656d917a598dcbfaafc60b39cd9b0c9f4d847d34a3392ad530000000000ffffffff0100e1f505000000001976a914550501c59f51ab5110f4636354d0dc7ced590cbf88ac00000000
 173 2012-10-05 03:42:27 BGL has joined
 174 2012-10-05 03:42:43 <gmaxwell> it's not signed.
 175 2012-10-05 03:43:24 <lianj> right, https://pastee.org/jv7v
 176 2012-10-05 03:44:32 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 177 2012-10-05 03:45:50 tucenaber has joined
 178 2012-10-05 03:45:50 tucenaber has quit (Changing host)
 179 2012-10-05 03:45:50 tucenaber has joined
 180 2012-10-05 03:45:50 <lianj> also, "n":0 should be 1 if you want to redeem the 1btc output
 181 2012-10-05 03:47:50 lggr has joined
 182 2012-10-05 03:51:54 BGL has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 183 2012-10-05 03:52:40 AJNoz_ has quit (Quit: Page closed)
 184 2012-10-05 03:53:20 <bcb> lianj: nice (incoming transaction!)
 185 2012-10-05 03:54:08 <lianj> so it works now?
 186 2012-10-05 03:54:15 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 187 2012-10-05 03:55:12 <bcb> lianj: yes i recreated the rawtransaction changing vout:0 to vout:1
 188 2012-10-05 03:57:41 <bcb> so I guess I was trying to sign and empty transaction
 189 2012-10-05 03:57:47 <bcb> what exactly is vout
 190 2012-10-05 03:57:49 lggr has joined
 191 2012-10-05 03:58:11 <doublec> doing a "bitcoind stop" I got a DB exception in debug.log of "what():  DbEnv::remove: Device or resource busy"
 192 2012-10-05 03:58:27 <doublec> which seems a  bit odd
 193 2012-10-05 04:00:55 <bcb> doublec: did you change your .conf params while is was running?
 194 2012-10-05 04:01:46 <doublec> bcb: no, I'd started it 20 minutes ago and then stopped it
 195 2012-10-05 04:01:55 <doublec> I just noticed it's an old bitcoind though (6.3) so I'll update
 196 2012-10-05 04:04:22 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 197 2012-10-05 04:04:36 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 198 2012-10-05 04:06:46 BitcoinBaltar has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 199 2012-10-05 04:07:17 lggr has joined
 200 2012-10-05 04:08:07 BitcoinBaltar has joined
 201 2012-10-05 04:08:36 <bcb> lianj:how did you unpack that hex string
 202 2012-10-05 04:09:46 <lianj> first line in the paste
 203 2012-10-05 04:13:03 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 204 2012-10-05 04:16:10 lggr has joined
 205 2012-10-05 04:16:31 devrandom has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 206 2012-10-05 04:18:35 devrandom has joined
 207 2012-10-05 04:19:41 bcb has quit (Quit: Page closed)
 208 2012-10-05 04:21:30 freakazoid has joined
 209 2012-10-05 04:22:30 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 210 2012-10-05 04:24:46 BGL has joined
 211 2012-10-05 04:25:21 lggr has joined
 212 2012-10-05 04:25:54 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 213 2012-10-05 04:32:27 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 214 2012-10-05 04:34:25 ThomasV has joined
 215 2012-10-05 04:35:56 lggr has joined
 216 2012-10-05 04:41:57 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 217 2012-10-05 04:42:41 jgarzik has joined
 218 2012-10-05 04:43:09 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: cute tarball
 219 2012-10-05 04:43:50 <jgarzik> ByteCoin mentions some security fun, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=8392.msg1246511#msg1246511
 220 2012-10-05 04:44:46 lggr has joined
 221 2012-10-05 04:45:44 <gmaxwell> The malleability of transactions is well known and has been discussed many times. As far as I can tell there is absolutely nothing about the S flip vs any other kind of signature change.
 222 2012-10-05 04:51:35 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 223 2012-10-05 04:52:09 BGL has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 224 2012-10-05 04:54:02 lggr has joined
 225 2012-10-05 04:54:05 <kjj_> the OpenSSL library isn't transparent enough for us to tell the different signatures apart, right?
 226 2012-10-05 04:55:08 <kjj_> as in, if we have X and Y, we have no way to know if it was (r,s) or (r,-s%N) ?
 227 2012-10-05 04:56:05 <gmaxwell> sipa pointed out that you can check the even/oddness of s.
 228 2012-10-05 04:56:40 <kjj_> next question is...  do we care enough?
 229 2012-10-05 04:57:33 <gmaxwell> kjj_: it's just another kind of malleability, we're currently in the process of closing those down. (first by making them non-standard; this is being slowed a little by the fact that programs that produced weird forms had been somewhat widely deployed)
 230 2012-10-05 04:57:53 <kjj_> yeah, that's where I was going with it
 231 2012-10-05 04:58:20 <gmaxwell> Though I think we have the guilty parties identified and fixed now.
 232 2012-10-05 04:58:32 <kjj_> oh?
 233 2012-10-05 05:00:02 <gmaxwell> blockchain.info and armory were the largest ones it appeared.
 234 2012-10-05 05:00:18 <kjj_> what were they doing that was wrong?
 235 2012-10-05 05:00:49 <kjj_> just emitting signatures differently from the ones that openssl generates?
 236 2012-10-05 05:00:50 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 237 2012-10-05 05:02:39 <gmaxwell> too late to remember which was which. :P But yes, I think one of them just had a bunch of zeros stuffed on the end— an invalid encoding, but one openssl took.
 238 2012-10-05 05:02:52 lggr has joined
 239 2012-10-05 05:03:12 <kjj_> heh.  be generous in what you accept, and stingy with what you emit.
 240 2012-10-05 05:03:46 AlexWaters1 has joined
 241 2012-10-05 05:04:07 <gmaxwell> yea, this is now regarded as a bad idea in protocol design in many circles. Having resulted in a total @#$@#@ mess with the webbrowsers.
 242 2012-10-05 05:04:24 <kjj_> yeah, old habits die hard
 243 2012-10-05 05:04:28 <gmaxwell> And in cryptographic protocols these that kind of tolerance ends up turning into security holes and dos attacks.
 244 2012-10-05 05:05:44 <kjj_> what was the quote?  something about no standards prevent you from embedding a multi-gigabyte MPEG into most fields in X.509 certs...
 245 2012-10-05 05:05:54 AlexWaters has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 246 2012-10-05 05:07:50 arij has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 247 2012-10-05 05:09:35 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 248 2012-10-05 05:10:04 <kjj_> but, are we sure that we can identify and bless one specific signature out of the many possible?
 249 2012-10-05 05:10:39 OneFixt has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 250 2012-10-05 05:12:42 lggr has joined
 251 2012-10-05 05:14:55 BGL has joined
 252 2012-10-05 05:16:55 weex_ has joined
 253 2012-10-05 05:17:52 <jgarzik> no, it's just (a) age and/or (b) very busy
 254 2012-10-05 05:18:04 <jgarzik> we're all young and have plenty of time to waste on the intarweb
 255 2012-10-05 05:18:10 weex has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 256 2012-10-05 05:19:08 <jgarzik> er, oops.  wrong channel.
 257 2012-10-05 05:19:42 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 258 2012-10-05 05:21:25 lggr has joined
 259 2012-10-05 05:23:43 OneFixt has joined
 260 2012-10-05 05:27:29 zebedee_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 261 2012-10-05 05:28:30 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 262 2012-10-05 05:28:35 setkeh has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 263 2012-10-05 05:30:10 lggr has joined
 264 2012-10-05 05:36:17 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 265 2012-10-05 05:39:32 lggr has joined
 266 2012-10-05 05:42:13 root2 has joined
 267 2012-10-05 05:42:30 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 268 2012-10-05 05:44:08 sytse has joined
 269 2012-10-05 05:44:35 tucenaber has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 270 2012-10-05 05:45:25 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 271 2012-10-05 05:45:50 root2_ has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 272 2012-10-05 05:46:18 ovidiusoft has joined
 273 2012-10-05 05:46:19 tucenaber has joined
 274 2012-10-05 05:46:19 tucenaber has quit (Changing host)
 275 2012-10-05 05:46:19 tucenaber has joined
 276 2012-10-05 05:46:21 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 277 2012-10-05 05:49:10 lggr has joined
 278 2012-10-05 05:51:22 Phoebus has joined
 279 2012-10-05 05:52:32 boupitch has joined
 280 2012-10-05 05:52:33 KIDC has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 281 2012-10-05 05:55:37 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 282 2012-10-05 05:56:31 sytse has quit (Quit: Changing server)
 283 2012-10-05 05:56:54 sytse has joined
 284 2012-10-05 05:57:57 zebedee_ has joined
 285 2012-10-05 05:58:06 zebedee_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 286 2012-10-05 05:58:32 weex_ is now known as weex
 287 2012-10-05 05:58:34 zebedee_ has joined
 288 2012-10-05 05:58:37 weex has quit (Changing host)
 289 2012-10-05 05:58:37 weex has joined
 290 2012-10-05 05:58:39 zebedee_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 291 2012-10-05 05:58:50 lggr has joined
 292 2012-10-05 06:00:45 zebedee_ has joined
 293 2012-10-05 06:00:47 zebedee_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 294 2012-10-05 06:05:04 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 295 2012-10-05 06:08:19 lggr has joined
 296 2012-10-05 06:08:21 tonikt2 has joined
 297 2012-10-05 06:08:44 tonikt has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 298 2012-10-05 06:08:52 tonikt2 is now known as tonikt
 299 2012-10-05 06:08:55 Luke-Jr has quit (Excess Flood)
 300 2012-10-05 06:15:03 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 301 2012-10-05 06:16:40 noagendamarket has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 302 2012-10-05 06:18:07 lggr has joined
 303 2012-10-05 06:18:10 zebedee_ has joined
 304 2012-10-05 06:19:24 * jgarzik looks around for luke-jr.  gone?  excess flood?  good.
 305 2012-10-05 06:19:45 * jgarzik admits pondering pynode requiring python 3.3, well above its current 2.x
 306 2012-10-05 06:20:16 Gladamas_ has joined
 307 2012-10-05 06:20:18 <jgarzik> python 3.3 supports os.sendfile natively, which would enable my optimization
 308 2012-10-05 06:20:32 <jgarzik> for sending wire-format block messages straight from disk
 309 2012-10-05 06:21:30 Gladamas is now known as Guest62985
 310 2012-10-05 06:23:13 Guest62985 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 311 2012-10-05 06:24:57 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 312 2012-10-05 06:27:58 lggr has joined
 313 2012-10-05 06:34:35 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 314 2012-10-05 06:35:30 LolcustBackup has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 315 2012-10-05 06:37:38 lggr has joined
 316 2012-10-05 06:38:43 boupitch has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 317 2012-10-05 06:39:16 random_cat has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 318 2012-10-05 06:39:59 root2_ has joined
 319 2012-10-05 06:40:32 RazielZ has joined
 320 2012-10-05 06:42:11 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
 321 2012-10-05 06:43:35 root2 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 322 2012-10-05 06:44:08 <jgarzik> amiller: BTW if leveldb turns out to be highly efficient, we can reduce the size of the block cache in pynode, which currently takes up many hundreds of megabytes
 323 2012-10-05 06:44:18 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 324 2012-10-05 06:44:27 <jgarzik> just rely on OS pagecache
 325 2012-10-05 06:45:20 <jgarzik> amiller: it is also worth benchmarking storage of python objects directly, via cPickle
 326 2012-10-05 06:45:38 <jgarzik> rather than a custom serialization (network / wire format)
 327 2012-10-05 06:47:27 lggr has joined
 328 2012-10-05 06:54:22 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 329 2012-10-05 06:54:24 <jgarzik> quote,
 330 2012-10-05 06:54:26 <jgarzik> GLBSE is offline
 331 2012-10-05 06:54:26 <jgarzik> For those worried about their bitcoin, please calm yourselves there has been no hack and your coins are safe and all accounted for.
 332 2012-10-05 06:54:26 <jgarzik> I apologize for the lack of notice and the downtime, but there isn't much choice. We will update our users on Saturday.
 333 2012-10-05 06:55:43 random_cat has joined
 334 2012-10-05 06:56:05 lggr has joined
 335 2012-10-05 06:58:34 Diablo-D3 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 336 2012-10-05 06:59:17 BlackPrapor has joined
 337 2012-10-05 06:59:56 BlackPrapor has quit (Client Quit)
 338 2012-10-05 07:02:18 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 339 2012-10-05 07:05:03 lggr has joined
 340 2012-10-05 07:11:22 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 341 2012-10-05 07:13:32 lggr has joined
 342 2012-10-05 07:14:40 Cory has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 343 2012-10-05 07:15:34 Cory has joined
 344 2012-10-05 07:19:55 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 345 2012-10-05 07:21:06 BlackPrapor has joined
 346 2012-10-05 07:22:59 lggr has joined
 347 2012-10-05 07:23:21 PK has joined
 348 2012-10-05 07:25:05 xisalty has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 349 2012-10-05 07:25:44 RV___ has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 350 2012-10-05 07:26:34 xisalty has joined
 351 2012-10-05 07:28:56 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 352 2012-10-05 07:31:38 lggr has joined
 353 2012-10-05 07:32:25 BlackPrapor has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.0.4 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
 354 2012-10-05 07:34:13 Motest031 has joined
 355 2012-10-05 07:34:46 AlexWaters has joined
 356 2012-10-05 07:34:52 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
 357 2012-10-05 07:34:55 Motest003 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 358 2012-10-05 07:37:42 Eslbaer has joined
 359 2012-10-05 07:37:48 AlexWaters1 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 360 2012-10-05 07:38:13 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 361 2012-10-05 07:39:26 boupitch has joined
 362 2012-10-05 07:40:58 lggr has joined
 363 2012-10-05 07:43:28 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 364 2012-10-05 07:47:42 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 365 2012-10-05 07:48:36 MC1984 has joined
 366 2012-10-05 07:50:57 lggr has joined
 367 2012-10-05 07:57:30 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 368 2012-10-05 07:59:35 lggr has joined
 369 2012-10-05 08:05:39 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 370 2012-10-05 08:08:56 lggr has joined
 371 2012-10-05 08:14:55 CodesInChaos has joined
 372 2012-10-05 08:15:24 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 373 2012-10-05 08:16:33 Impaler has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 374 2012-10-05 08:16:41 RV__ has joined
 375 2012-10-05 08:17:30 lggr has joined
 376 2012-10-05 08:17:56 jurov is now known as away!~jurov@rini17.broker.freenet6.net|jurov
 377 2012-10-05 08:18:51 BlackPrapor has joined
 378 2012-10-05 08:24:02 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 379 2012-10-05 08:27:14 lggr has joined
 380 2012-10-05 08:27:22 t7 has joined
 381 2012-10-05 08:29:19 mysil2 has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 382 2012-10-05 08:33:45 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 383 2012-10-05 08:36:58 lggr has joined
 384 2012-10-05 08:37:47 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 385 2012-10-05 08:38:25 copumpkin has joined
 386 2012-10-05 08:44:02 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 387 2012-10-05 08:47:02 lggr has joined
 388 2012-10-05 08:53:56 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 389 2012-10-05 08:54:11 <MC1984> wow i did not know that simply encrypting your wallet invalidates all your backups
 390 2012-10-05 08:54:22 <MC1984> what the fuck chaps
 391 2012-10-05 08:54:39 <MC1984> this shit is a minefield
 392 2012-10-05 08:54:59 <sipa> it doesn't invalidate your backups
 393 2012-10-05 08:55:24 <sipa> it simply makes sure that any new address never touched disk in unencrypted form afterwards
 394 2012-10-05 08:55:37 <sipa> so you need a new backup after encrypting, before you do new transactions
 395 2012-10-05 08:56:36 lggr has joined
 396 2012-10-05 08:57:00 <MC1984> so it invalidates you backups
 397 2012-10-05 08:57:25 <MC1984> if you dare use the wallet once after encrypting
 398 2012-10-05 09:00:36 tower has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 399 2012-10-05 09:01:50 <MC1984> i suppose this is why its still very much beta software, and the devs have never claimed otherwise
 400 2012-10-05 09:02:42 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 401 2012-10-05 09:06:05 tower has joined
 402 2012-10-05 09:06:15 otimm has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 403 2012-10-05 09:06:24 lggr has joined
 404 2012-10-05 09:09:27 otimm has joined
 405 2012-10-05 09:12:35 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 406 2012-10-05 09:15:21 bitcoinz has joined
 407 2012-10-05 09:15:46 lggr has joined
 408 2012-10-05 09:17:02 wizkid057 has joined
 409 2012-10-05 09:21:27 <sipa> ;;bc,diff
 410 2012-10-05 09:21:28 <gribble> 3054627.5269486
 411 2012-10-05 09:21:33 dvide has joined
 412 2012-10-05 09:22:16 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 413 2012-10-05 09:24:47 lggr has joined
 414 2012-10-05 09:26:51 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 415 2012-10-05 09:27:19 gjs278 has joined
 416 2012-10-05 09:27:29 copumpkin has joined
 417 2012-10-05 09:31:37 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 418 2012-10-05 09:32:37 <Eliel> MC1984: If the encryption dialog doesn't tell you about the need to make a new backup afterwards, that's a bug IMO. File a report.
 419 2012-10-05 09:34:08 CrazyMF has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 420 2012-10-05 09:34:33 lggr has joined
 421 2012-10-05 09:34:41 <MC1984> there are many things the client does that it should alert to the user in huge red flashing letters with glitter.gif from 1996 on the side
 422 2012-10-05 09:35:44 <MC1984> i dont think it warned me shit when i crypted my wallet the day wallet encryption was released
 423 2012-10-05 09:40:11 <sipa> Eliel: already reported as a bug (by me), and fixed in 0.7.1 (unsure if it's already merged)
 424 2012-10-05 09:40:35 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 425 2012-10-05 09:42:55 jdnavarro has joined
 426 2012-10-05 09:43:29 lggr has joined
 427 2012-10-05 09:49:35 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 428 2012-10-05 09:53:09 lggr has joined
 429 2012-10-05 09:55:41 <freewil> why is it that a new backup is needed after an encryption?
 430 2012-10-05 09:55:55 <freewil> are all the previously unused keys in the pool regenerated?
 431 2012-10-05 09:59:15 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 432 2012-10-05 09:59:34 <kinlo> good question, no idea
 433 2012-10-05 09:59:54 <kinlo> sipa: do you know this?
 434 2012-10-05 10:00:20 jurov is now known as jurov|away
 435 2012-10-05 10:02:00 lggr has joined
 436 2012-10-05 10:02:13 <freewil> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Wallet_encryption "When wallet passphrase enrcyption becomes enabled, any unused keys from the keypool are flushed (marked as used) and new keys protected with encyption are added. For this reason, make a new backup of your wallet so that you will be able to recover the keys from the new key pool should access to your backups be necessary."
 437 2012-10-05 10:03:08 <freewil> arent keys in the pool by definition unused?
 438 2012-10-05 10:04:05 denisx has joined
 439 2012-10-05 10:07:18 B0g4r7_ has joined
 440 2012-10-05 10:08:59 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 441 2012-10-05 10:09:11 <sipa> kinlo: ^
 442 2012-10-05 10:09:16 <kinlo> :)
 443 2012-10-05 10:09:18 <kinlo> thx
 444 2012-10-05 10:10:47 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 445 2012-10-05 10:10:47 B0g4r7_ is now known as B0g4r7
 446 2012-10-05 10:11:47 toffoo has quit ()
 447 2012-10-05 10:12:14 lggr has joined
 448 2012-10-05 10:18:15 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 449 2012-10-05 10:20:08 arsy has joined
 450 2012-10-05 10:21:55 lggr has joined
 451 2012-10-05 10:24:46 cande has joined
 452 2012-10-05 10:28:06 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 453 2012-10-05 10:30:53 lggr has joined
 454 2012-10-05 10:33:59 otimm has quit ()
 455 2012-10-05 10:37:55 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 456 2012-10-05 10:40:52 lggr has joined
 457 2012-10-05 10:42:29 otimm has joined
 458 2012-10-05 10:46:54 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 459 2012-10-05 10:48:51 BlackPrapor has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.0.4 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
 460 2012-10-05 10:49:26 TD has joined
 461 2012-10-05 10:49:48 lggr has joined
 462 2012-10-05 10:50:29 boupitch has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 463 2012-10-05 10:56:19 <Graet> I'm confused http://blockchain.info/block-index/311449/0000000000000412cb93f5cceceebdd6bec88d5db691a17a823287c47713d2cf   104BTC of txn fees with a 21.x btc fee for a 2BTC txn and 9.xxBTC fee for a 3.2xx btc txn
 464 2012-10-05 10:56:34 <Graet> oops21btc fee for a 21btc txn
 465 2012-10-05 10:57:03 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 466 2012-10-05 10:59:57 lggr has joined
 467 2012-10-05 11:06:24 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 262 seconds)
 468 2012-10-05 11:09:05 lggr has joined
 469 2012-10-05 11:10:11 <OneEyed> Graet: you mean http://blockchain.info/tx/f776cac4a61ed03a54fdf272d0e38f9a68824420aa5d2b8f1b7abf25543a0751 I guess. Indeed, looks funny.
 470 2012-10-05 11:12:30 <Graet> that is one of the 3 funny looking txns
 471 2012-10-05 11:13:50 darkee has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 472 2012-10-05 11:16:00 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 473 2012-10-05 11:18:02 eb3kk has quit (Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com)
 474 2012-10-05 11:19:16 lggr has joined
 475 2012-10-05 11:22:54 arsy has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 476 2012-10-05 11:23:29 darkee has joined
 477 2012-10-05 11:25:13 arsy has joined
 478 2012-10-05 11:25:36 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 479 2012-10-05 11:26:08 paraipan has joined
 480 2012-10-05 11:28:22 lggr has joined
 481 2012-10-05 11:29:39 Luke-Jr has joined
 482 2012-10-05 11:34:30 <Graet> actually looks like change has been made fee
 483 2012-10-05 11:34:45 <Graet> but it would be cool if some experts took interest :D
 484 2012-10-05 11:35:19 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 485 2012-10-05 11:37:53 xisalty has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 486 2012-10-05 11:38:02 arsy has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 487 2012-10-05 11:38:35 lggr has joined
 488 2012-10-05 11:40:02 cande has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 489 2012-10-05 11:42:29 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
 490 2012-10-05 11:44:48 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 491 2012-10-05 11:45:49 cande has joined
 492 2012-10-05 11:45:58 TD has joined
 493 2012-10-05 11:47:35 lggr has joined
 494 2012-10-05 11:47:59 Joric has joined
 495 2012-10-05 11:48:19 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
 496 2012-10-05 11:50:51 agricocb has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
 497 2012-10-05 11:53:02 <phantomcircuit> that's quite a lot of fees
 498 2012-10-05 11:53:02 <phantomcircuit> http://blockchain.info/block-index/311449/0000000000000412cb93f5cceceebdd6bec88d5db691a17a823287c47713d2cf
 499 2012-10-05 11:53:46 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 500 2012-10-05 11:56:42 <Joric> http://blockchain.info/tx/c16b8666e9f0ed85532a158bd9659b0cb62cdd462a920300285cf21b9898b8f2 64 btc fee
 501 2012-10-05 11:56:44 darsk1ez has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 502 2012-10-05 11:57:42 lggr has joined
 503 2012-10-05 11:57:50 <Joric> it's not brainwallet i swear (bci'd display relayed by 127.0.0.1)
 504 2012-10-05 11:58:59 <Joric> this is tx from kansas, who lives in kansas?
 505 2012-10-05 11:59:40 <Graet> Dorothy?
 506 2012-10-05 12:01:03 lolbirdofprey has joined
 507 2012-10-05 12:01:29 <phantomcircuit> Joric, im guessing those are just ips of nodes well connected to blockchain.info since they both show as being the first seen for a TON of transactions
 508 2012-10-05 12:02:26 <phantomcircuit> Joric, one is softlayer and the other is
 509 2012-10-05 12:02:26 <phantomcircuit> wtf
 510 2012-10-05 12:02:32 <phantomcircuit> Joe's Datacenter, LLC
 511 2012-10-05 12:02:33 <phantomcircuit> wat
 512 2012-10-05 12:03:04 <phantomcircuit> lol it's an actual datacenter
 513 2012-10-05 12:03:05 <phantomcircuit> that's hilarious
 514 2012-10-05 12:03:34 <Joric> this is clearly a mistaken transaction who will sanely send 64 btc fee
 515 2012-10-05 12:04:36 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 516 2012-10-05 12:05:13 <Graet> there are 3 strange ones in that block
 517 2012-10-05 12:05:14 <phantomcircuit> linkedin is more aggressive about getting you to pay than they used to be
 518 2012-10-05 12:05:21 <phantomcircuit> i guess they finally decided the information they have gotten from people is valuable enough
 519 2012-10-05 12:06:19 <phantomcircuit> lol this joes datacenter is apparently run by someone who used to be a weathermen
 520 2012-10-05 12:06:26 <phantomcircuit> that's an odd carear switch
 521 2012-10-05 12:07:49 lggr has joined
 522 2012-10-05 12:08:22 arsy has joined
 523 2012-10-05 12:09:53 copumpkin has joined
 524 2012-10-05 12:10:58 setkeh has joined
 525 2012-10-05 12:11:20 darsk1ez has joined
 526 2012-10-05 12:12:06 <Joric> can anyone tell is msvc 2008 express any better than 2005 express? heard ms drastically improved debugger and whatnot
 527 2012-10-05 12:13:55 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 528 2012-10-05 12:15:03 BlackPrapor has joined
 529 2012-10-05 12:16:41 arsy has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 530 2012-10-05 12:17:27 lggr has joined
 531 2012-10-05 12:18:06 boupitch has joined
 532 2012-10-05 12:18:07 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 533 2012-10-05 12:19:27 xisalty has joined
 534 2012-10-05 12:23:50 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 535 2012-10-05 12:24:19 drizztbsd has joined
 536 2012-10-05 12:26:31 lggr has joined
 537 2012-10-05 12:32:33 <JFK911> im using 2k8
 538 2012-10-05 12:32:49 <JFK911> ms improved a lot as the y2k decade progressed
 539 2012-10-05 12:33:20 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 540 2012-10-05 12:34:42 BTCTrader has quit (Quit: BTCTrader)
 541 2012-10-05 12:36:23 lggr has joined
 542 2012-10-05 12:41:34 Joric has quit ()
 543 2012-10-05 12:43:02 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 544 2012-10-05 12:43:08 arsy has joined
 545 2012-10-05 12:43:41 TD_ has joined
 546 2012-10-05 12:43:58 TD has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 547 2012-10-05 12:43:59 TD_ is now known as TD
 548 2012-10-05 12:46:31 lggr has joined
 549 2012-10-05 12:47:19 Arch_Coldfire has joined
 550 2012-10-05 12:49:32 da2ce796 has joined
 551 2012-10-05 12:52:37 arsy has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 552 2012-10-05 12:53:02 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 553 2012-10-05 12:53:27 agricocb has joined
 554 2012-10-05 12:53:52 yellowhat has quit (Quit: yellowhat)
 555 2012-10-05 12:54:18 yellowhat has joined
 556 2012-10-05 12:56:35 lggr has joined
 557 2012-10-05 13:00:40 ThomasV has joined
 558 2012-10-05 13:02:06 balrog has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 559 2012-10-05 13:03:08 drizztbsd has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 560 2012-10-05 13:03:36 gavinandresen has joined
 561 2012-10-05 13:03:40 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 562 2012-10-05 13:03:50 drizztbsd has joined
 563 2012-10-05 13:06:37 lggr has joined
 564 2012-10-05 13:12:04 Arch_Coldfire is now known as ravencop
 565 2012-10-05 13:12:50 ravencop is now known as marcupee
 566 2012-10-05 13:13:07 marcupee is now known as vroomsee
 567 2012-10-05 13:13:23 vroomsee is now known as robocop3
 568 2012-10-05 13:13:34 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 569 2012-10-05 13:13:48 robocop3 is now known as IRCDictator
 570 2012-10-05 13:16:11 IRCDictator is now known as setking
 571 2012-10-05 13:16:15 setking is now known as sethking
 572 2012-10-05 13:16:27 lggr has joined
 573 2012-10-05 13:16:55 sethking is now known as obamination
 574 2012-10-05 13:18:27 obamination is now known as foodstamps
 575 2012-10-05 13:18:31 arsy has joined
 576 2012-10-05 13:18:35 foodstamps is now known as foodstampsforame
 577 2012-10-05 13:18:38 one_zero has quit ()
 578 2012-10-05 13:18:44 foodstampsforame is now known as foodstampsforusa
 579 2012-10-05 13:21:12 graingert_ecs has joined
 580 2012-10-05 13:21:39 robocoin has joined
 581 2012-10-05 13:22:03 da2ce796 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 582 2012-10-05 13:23:21 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 583 2012-10-05 13:24:55 foodstampsforusa is now known as gunblow
 584 2012-10-05 13:26:30 lggr has joined
 585 2012-10-05 13:27:23 gunblow has quit (Quit: Arch Linux)
 586 2012-10-05 13:27:58 arsy has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 587 2012-10-05 13:30:14 arsy has joined
 588 2012-10-05 13:31:18 k3t3r has joined
 589 2012-10-05 13:32:04 balrog has joined
 590 2012-10-05 13:33:22 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 591 2012-10-05 13:36:46 lggr has joined
 592 2012-10-05 13:37:14 cande_ has joined
 593 2012-10-05 13:37:54 cande_ has quit (Client Quit)
 594 2012-10-05 13:38:03 braveppl has joined
 595 2012-10-05 13:39:29 braveppl has quit (Client Quit)
 596 2012-10-05 13:39:39 braveppl has joined
 597 2012-10-05 13:41:30 arij has joined
 598 2012-10-05 13:41:54 arij is now known as Guest86677
 599 2012-10-05 13:42:07 k3t3r has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.89 [Firefox 15.0.1/20120905151427])
 600 2012-10-05 13:42:52 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 601 2012-10-05 13:45:49 lggr has joined
 602 2012-10-05 13:46:22 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
 603 2012-10-05 13:47:48 JZavala has joined
 604 2012-10-05 13:51:31 cande_ has joined
 605 2012-10-05 13:51:53 cande_ has quit (Client Quit)
 606 2012-10-05 13:51:53 cande has quit (Quit: Lämnar)
 607 2012-10-05 13:52:02 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 608 2012-10-05 13:55:13 lggr has joined
 609 2012-10-05 13:55:25 crazyMotherFucke has joined
 610 2012-10-05 13:56:55 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 611 2012-10-05 13:58:47 freakazoid has joined
 612 2012-10-05 14:00:44 freakazoid has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 613 2012-10-05 14:01:38 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 614 2012-10-05 14:02:42 JZavala has joined
 615 2012-10-05 14:03:04 crazyMotherFucke is now known as CrazyMF
 616 2012-10-05 14:04:32 lggr has joined
 617 2012-10-05 14:07:34 Diablo-D3 has joined
 618 2012-10-05 14:11:22 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 619 2012-10-05 14:12:36 PK has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 620 2012-10-05 14:14:34 Wikicoin has joined
 621 2012-10-05 14:14:48 lggr has joined
 622 2012-10-05 14:15:01 antix_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 623 2012-10-05 14:15:53 MrMeowork has quit (Quit: MrMeowork)
 624 2012-10-05 14:17:21 <Diablo-D3> lets see
 625 2012-10-05 14:17:36 * Diablo-D3 moves .bitcoin to his zfs raid5 that can do 200mb/sec+ sequential reads
 626 2012-10-05 14:17:59 <pierre`> if you have memory, use /dev/shm
 627 2012-10-05 14:18:10 <Diablo-D3> pierre`: thats silly.
 628 2012-10-05 14:18:50 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 629 2012-10-05 14:18:55 <Graet> as silly as 104BTC in txn fees in one block?
 630 2012-10-05 14:20:11 <Eliel> could well be... that is, if you forget to set up a periodic call to backupwallet.
 631 2012-10-05 14:20:38 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 632 2012-10-05 14:21:38 pebbles has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 633 2012-10-05 14:21:53 asa1024 has quit (Quit: asa1024)
 634 2012-10-05 14:23:21 setkeh` has joined
 635 2012-10-05 14:23:42 setkeh has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 636 2012-10-05 14:24:08 setkeh` is now known as setkeh
 637 2012-10-05 14:24:18 lggr has joined
 638 2012-10-05 14:25:48 kreal has joined
 639 2012-10-05 14:26:10 MiningBuddy has joined
 640 2012-10-05 14:26:11 MiningBuddy has quit (Changing host)
 641 2012-10-05 14:26:11 MiningBuddy has joined
 642 2012-10-05 14:26:37 bitarrow has joined
 643 2012-10-05 14:27:17 braveppl has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 644 2012-10-05 14:27:28 Guest86677 has quit (Changing host)
 645 2012-10-05 14:27:28 Guest86677 has joined
 646 2012-10-05 14:27:33 Guest86677 is now known as arij
 647 2012-10-05 14:27:35 jdnavarro has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 648 2012-10-05 14:28:36 Ferroh has quit (Quit: *poof*)
 649 2012-10-05 14:30:39 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 650 2012-10-05 14:34:07 lggr has joined
 651 2012-10-05 14:35:19 darsk1ez has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 652 2012-10-05 14:37:17 BitcoinBaltar has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 653 2012-10-05 14:37:56 paraipan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 654 2012-10-05 14:37:56 Rayahe has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 655 2012-10-05 14:38:29 pooler has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 656 2012-10-05 14:38:33 MiningBuddy- has joined
 657 2012-10-05 14:39:34 BitcoinBaltar has joined
 658 2012-10-05 14:40:40 <Diablo-D3> pierre`, Eliel: no, the problem is the initial startup
 659 2012-10-05 14:40:48 MiningBuddy has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 660 2012-10-05 14:40:51 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 661 2012-10-05 14:41:45 <Diablo-D3> like, lets say I did linux md swraid between a ram block device and a loopback image on a disk
 662 2012-10-05 14:42:03 <Diablo-D3> and then fucked with the priorities to do reads on the ram disk
 663 2012-10-05 14:42:09 <Diablo-D3> I _still_ have to load it off the disk the first time
 664 2012-10-05 14:42:42 vigilyn has joined
 665 2012-10-05 14:42:48 MiningBuddy- is now known as MiningBuddy
 666 2012-10-05 14:42:49 MiningBuddy has quit (Changing host)
 667 2012-10-05 14:42:49 MiningBuddy has joined
 668 2012-10-05 14:43:39 [\\\] has joined
 669 2012-10-05 14:43:42 darsk1ez has joined
 670 2012-10-05 14:44:57 lggr has joined
 671 2012-10-05 14:46:15 * t7 thinks there could be a time limit on unspent bitcoins, might limit the size of the blockchain...
 672 2012-10-05 14:47:00 <kjj_> t7: there are a thousand threads about that on the forums
 673 2012-10-05 14:47:25 <t7> that was a completely origin thought, and a bloody good one too. I am very clever
 674 2012-10-05 14:47:50 asa1024 has joined
 675 2012-10-05 14:47:59 <t7> if only i could spell
 676 2012-10-05 14:48:09 <kjj_> Diablo-D3: disk caching should come close to that, but it doesn't actually seem to
 677 2012-10-05 14:48:15 <gmaxwell> I've previously suggested that such a limit might be implementable should there be a hardforking crypto upgrade at some point.
 678 2012-10-05 14:48:18 Rayahe has joined
 679 2012-10-05 14:48:37 paraipan has joined
 680 2012-10-05 14:49:09 <Wikicoin> That's pretty authoritarian.
 681 2012-10-05 14:49:12 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: doesn't make it a good idea? O.o
 682 2012-10-05 14:49:20 <gmaxwell> E.g. you're going to upgrade from ecdsa to something else at some point; you'll want to make unmigrated ecdsa coins become unspendable so they don't get cracked and crash the economy.  Might as well make the expiration permanent.
 683 2012-10-05 14:49:42 <gmaxwell> Wikicoin: the hell?
 684 2012-10-05 14:50:37 <Wikicoin> misread that
 685 2012-10-05 14:51:02 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: I think it's reasonable to assume that there will always need to be periodic crypto upgrade that make old crypto eventually unspendable (on a timeframe of decades) just to prevent total economic mayhem. Making that formal would be better than having it dealt with as an emergency case by case thing. But ::shrugs::
 686 2012-10-05 14:51:06 <kjj_> gmaxwell: unless there was a sudden break in ECDSA, cracking old coins would be just like mining, but with different rewards
 687 2012-10-05 14:51:14 <gmaxwell> kjj_: no sir.
 688 2012-10-05 14:51:15 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 689 2012-10-05 14:51:24 <gmaxwell> kjj_: the playout would be uncontrolled.
 690 2012-10-05 14:51:42 <kjj_> well, it would be whatever belonged to that key.
 691 2012-10-05 14:52:03 <gmaxwell> kjj_: Say bitcoin deflates to the point where 100 BTC buys you a nice planet. ... then the first crakers are hitting 9000 BTC at a time.
 692 2012-10-05 14:52:14 Guest4134 has joined
 693 2012-10-05 14:53:05 <Eliel> gmaxwell: if you do implement a time limit like that, it'd be nice to have the time period depend on the transaction fee :)
 694 2012-10-05 14:53:18 <kjj_> how would that be different from the rightful owner of that key starting to use them?
 695 2012-10-05 14:53:23 <gmaxwell> Generally the growing uncertanty of treasure chest coin being discovered (crypto cracking or not) is economically hazardous.
 696 2012-10-05 14:54:16 <gmaxwell> Eliel: meh, complexity is bad. Plus the scalability improvement needs the txouts to vanish.
 697 2012-10-05 14:54:19 <kjj_> heh.  a lot of us think that theft is just as hazardous.  and just because they become totally dead doesn't make it any less of a theft from the owner's eyes
 698 2012-10-05 14:54:27 <Eliel> kjj_: it wouldn't be different really.
 699 2012-10-05 14:54:48 <gmaxwell> kjj_: there is a difference between personal risk and the destruction of your society that can come from throughly upsetting the economy.
 700 2012-10-05 14:55:16 Hasimir has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 701 2012-10-05 14:55:23 lggr has joined
 702 2012-10-05 14:55:46 <Eliel> gmaxwell: how about a gradual decay of the old coins rather than a binary "now it exists, not it doesn't" kind of switch?
 703 2012-10-05 14:55:50 <kjj_> I think your keyboard fell asleep, when you typed "potential", it didn't register.  :)
 704 2012-10-05 14:56:21 graingert has joined
 705 2012-10-05 14:56:49 <gmaxwell> Eliel: amiller wanted that— basically paying for the txout storage. I think thats too economically tuning. Straight expiration follows naturally from a crypto upgrade.
 706 2012-10-05 14:57:35 arsy has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 707 2012-10-05 14:57:41 <gmaxwell> economically rational bitcoin do not want oodles of totally lost coins being reintroduced back into circulation as a result of expected crypto breaks.
 708 2012-10-05 14:58:01 <kjj_> I just think that if we have a hard fork to change encryption methods, if people want to permanently kill old coins, it'll cause a three way fork, with most of the planet on the non-killing branch
 709 2012-10-05 14:58:33 <Eliel> gmaxwell: for example, if txouts older than 10 years can be just dropped, it'd make sense to start decaying the amount at 5 years and reach zero at 10 years.
 710 2012-10-05 14:59:15 <Eliel> it's actually more user friendly that way as they don't lose it all if it slips their mind for a minute too long.
 711 2012-10-05 14:59:25 <amiller> i'm not in favor of 'tuning' anything at all, i don't have a way of bidding on storage fees but i still think it's the only thing that makes sense
 712 2012-10-05 14:59:25 <kjj_> gmaxwell: yeah, but most people are here because we respect property rights, even when painful to do so.
 713 2012-10-05 14:59:35 <gmaxwell> kjj_: then the people on the non-killing branches will die out when their economy is ruined by cracked coins and they all starve to death.
 714 2012-10-05 14:59:40 <Wikicoin> It would limit people using a single address as a inheritance trust fund
 715 2012-10-05 14:59:43 <amiller> also it means you would get the best deal by consolidating your coins, which is good for the network
 716 2012-10-05 14:59:59 <kjj_> gmaxwell: or the people on the killing branch will all die out when their coins are worthless because no one else takes them
 717 2012-10-05 15:00:15 <gmaxwell> kjj_: there isn't a property rights question— you just require that coins be moved within a decade or two.
 718 2012-10-05 15:00:28 <kjj_> gmaxwell: that IS a property right.
 719 2012-10-05 15:00:32 <gmaxwell> otherwise they're going to be stolen by the crypto crakers in any case.
 720 2012-10-05 15:01:02 graingert has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 721 2012-10-05 15:01:08 <kjj_> gmaxwell: the current rules rely ONLY on math.  if the sig is valid, the coins are valid.
 722 2012-10-05 15:01:34 <gmaxwell> kjj_: bullshit. As you point out the effective rules depend on the society of the users as well.
 723 2012-10-05 15:01:54 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 724 2012-10-05 15:01:55 <Eliel> kjj_: expiration would also rely on only math if you calculate it based on the block number difference between txout and txin.
 725 2012-10-05 15:02:19 <kjj_> Eliel: that's weak dude, and you know it
 726 2012-10-05 15:02:46 <kjj_> gmaxwell: so far, society has chosen that only the math is important
 727 2012-10-05 15:03:03 lggr has joined
 728 2012-10-05 15:03:03 <gmaxwell> kjj_: You're promoting a myopic autistic understanding of property rights. You're basically claiming that your right to behave in an economically irrational way— for nearly no personal benefit, and at great personal risk— throughly trumps everyone elses right to have a safe and functioning economy.
 729 2012-10-05 15:03:11 <Eliel> kjj_: no, your argument was weak, so I crushed it.
 730 2012-10-05 15:03:31 <gmaxwell> And indeed, this is all just math too as Eliel says.
 731 2012-10-05 15:03:55 <kjj_> Eliel: ha.  ECDSA has no concept of time.  your argument is that any rules that can be expressed as math are valid
 732 2012-10-05 15:04:19 <kjj_> that is essentially what got us into the fiat mess that we are struggling to get out of
 733 2012-10-05 15:04:20 <gmaxwell> kjj_: thats what you seemed to be saying!
 734 2012-10-05 15:04:24 <Eliel> 17:46 < kjj_> gmaxwell: the current rules rely ONLY on math.  if the sig is valid, the coins are valid.
 735 2012-10-05 15:04:36 <amiller> signatures often have a concept of time, in pki for example
 736 2012-10-05 15:05:14 <kjj_> amiller: no, they don't.  a cert may expire, but the signature is either from that key, or not from that key.  not sometimes
 737 2012-10-05 15:05:34 <Eliel> kjj_: property rights are a social agreement at their core.
 738 2012-10-05 15:05:35 <amiller> a signature from that key, after the cert has expired, is discarded as meaningless
 739 2012-10-05 15:05:48 <gmaxwell> kjj_: sorry, I can't see you— the smoke from your strawmen is producing quite a cloud.   Not accepting transactions with insecure signatures is simply not the same as "the fiat mess", it's not even compariable. You're appealing to emotion there, and it's hurting my respect for you.
 740 2012-10-05 15:05:52 <kjj_> amiller: we may put social meaning on when the sig was done, but the sig is still valid mathematically
 741 2012-10-05 15:06:01 <helo> only people with coin that they cannot unlock, that they hope to unlock in the future, would stick with the old crypto branch, right?
 742 2012-10-05 15:06:05 <Eliel> kjj_: they don't need to be taken to extremes.
 743 2012-10-05 15:06:24 <kjj_> gmaxwell: hang on, I'm trying to debate three of you all at once
 744 2012-10-05 15:06:26 <helo> everyone else's coin would potentially become more valuable by switching to the new crypto and ditching permanently all old coin
 745 2012-10-05 15:06:34 <kjj_> helo: that is theft
 746 2012-10-05 15:06:41 <gmaxwell> helo: and don't believe they could unlock it within the next, say, ten years, but believe they could unlock it past that.
 747 2012-10-05 15:07:46 <helo> kjj_: if someone has lost their ability to move their coin in a reasonable amount of time, presumably it is because of some poor decision making of their own
 748 2012-10-05 15:07:49 <kjj_> gmaxwell: if it becomes possible for someone else to find my key and forge my signature on a transaction, that is my problem if I don't remedy it.
 749 2012-10-05 15:07:57 <gmaxwell> kjj_: bitcoin is "theft". Why should all the coin be held by whatever people hold it, instead of all people equally.  Why is some kid in africa who wasn't even born when bitcoin was created less entitled to the world's wealth?  Come on, words like "theft" are so broad you can paint _anything_ with them.
 750 2012-10-05 15:08:20 <kjj_> helo: you don't know that they lost the ability to move their coins.  YOU made it impossible for them to do it with an arbitrary, but possibly well intentioned, rule.
 751 2012-10-05 15:08:34 <helo> it is easy enough to retain access to your wealth by making backups
 752 2012-10-05 15:08:43 <gmaxwell> kjj_: it's _everyones_ problem when it can potentially inject many times the whole economy of formerly lost (sometimes intentionally so) coins back into circulation.. far more a problem than the one it created for you.
 753 2012-10-05 15:08:57 <kjj_> gmaxwell: so, if we made a rule that transactions signed by a key, say, one of your keys, could violate the txout <= txin rule, you'd be ok with that?
 754 2012-10-05 15:09:39 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: oh, I thought you meant a general expiration rule; old crypto expiring does make sense
 755 2012-10-05 15:09:44 <gmaxwell> kjj_: all things are not equal. Shameful. Why are you not protesting every single commit to the codebase if you're going to think like that?
 756 2012-10-05 15:09:48 <kjj_> I know that isn't the same thing
 757 2012-10-05 15:10:04 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 758 2012-10-05 15:10:35 <kjj_> gmaxwell: if there is ever a commit that makes the validity of transaction redemption depend on anything other than the correctness of the signature, I WILL protest it, loudly
 759 2012-10-05 15:10:36 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: Wikicoin = Atlas (forum) = HowardStrong (guy trolling the wikipedia article)
 760 2012-10-05 15:10:41 Guest4134 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 761 2012-10-05 15:10:46 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: I dunno. The latter is the obvious and nearly mandatory thing to do. The former might make future instances of the latter less disruptive.
 762 2012-10-05 15:10:52 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: ah that explains some things
 763 2012-10-05 15:11:30 bitarrow has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 764 2012-10-05 15:11:41 Wikicoin has left ("Leaving")
 765 2012-10-05 15:11:43 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: he's here because my presense in #bitcoin-dev is his evidence for my being "conflict of interest" now…
 766 2012-10-05 15:12:00 stevep has joined
 767 2012-10-05 15:12:21 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: e.g. indeed I agree it's rude and unfortunate to have to add any kind of expiration to the system for the crypto-upgrade. It would have been better if there was always a ten year rule, and then the upgrade could have just trusted it to take care of it.
 768 2012-10-05 15:12:48 <stevep> What about paper wallets?
 769 2012-10-05 15:13:02 <helo> kjj_: so someone with a brainwallet slipped into a coma, only to wake to find that their coin was lost due to a broken-crypto hard fork.
 770 2012-10-05 15:13:05 <gmaxwell> stevep: print them again every ten years.
 771 2012-10-05 15:13:33 lggr has joined
 772 2012-10-05 15:13:34 <Luke-Jr> cute, apparently he changed his nick before he joined here, and changed it back after he left: [15:00:47] ⁂ Wikicoin is now known as ___Atlas___.
 773 2012-10-05 15:13:39 testnode9 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 774 2012-10-05 15:13:54 <stevep> How does fiat currency handle this situation when for example old notes are no longer accepted?
 775 2012-10-05 15:13:56 <kjj_> helo: good example.  if he loses the ability because someone cracked the crypto, that's unfortunate.  if he loses them because WE decide that his coins are invalid, that's shitty
 776 2012-10-05 15:14:03 testnode9 has joined
 777 2012-10-05 15:14:16 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: he quizzed me on the symbol the other day claiming to be a wikipedia administrator. And after I wouldn't agree with him he begain his latest railing against 'bitcoin developers' on the forums.
 778 2012-10-05 15:14:30 <helo> kjj_: but in the case where old coin wasn't invalidated, he will likely find that his coin was stolen (due to the broken crypto).
 779 2012-10-05 15:14:53 <kjj_> helo: again, unfortunate.  but not something that WE did to him
 780 2012-10-05 15:15:05 <helo> so either way, he loses. but if old coin is invalidated, the rest of the economy is protected.
 781 2012-10-05 15:15:11 <gmaxwell> helo: no, he'd never wake up. the economic term-oil due to the reintroduction of cracked coin would cause the hosipital to stop feeding him and he'd die. :P
 782 2012-10-05 15:15:16 <Luke-Jr> on another note, is there a SVG of just the BTC symbol somewhere?
 783 2012-10-05 15:15:22 <helo> hah no joke
 784 2012-10-05 15:15:28 <kjj_> gmaxwell: now who is making straw men?
 785 2012-10-05 15:15:35 <gmaxwell> kjj_: You want us to be murderers!
 786 2012-10-05 15:15:40 <kjj_> gmaxwell: you are the one predicting absolute and total chaos
 787 2012-10-05 15:15:48 arsy has joined
 788 2012-10-05 15:16:06 <gmaxwell> kjj_: inaction in the fact of forces that you know require action is every bit an action; morally and legally. There is no neutral path.
 789 2012-10-05 15:16:19 <gmaxwell> kjj_: Murderer.
 790 2012-10-05 15:16:34 <stevep> According to the bank of england old style notes cease to be legal tender  once they are withdrawn. http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/banknotes/Pages/about/faqs.aspx#12
 791 2012-10-05 15:17:03 <gmaxwell> kjj_: well what? I gave up on having a rational discussion because you kept refusing to have one with the non-stop stream of thought stopping emotional arguments. You murderer.
 792 2012-10-05 15:17:04 <kjj_> ha!  I'm sure that there are tons of dead folks around for that very reason.  I bet Lenin and Stalin felt that they too were forced to act when they killed millions and millions
 793 2012-10-05 15:17:45 <gmaxwell> kjj_: and the many thousands who could have trivially stopped them— a single bullet from a private guard who _knew_ it was wrong.. but it wasn't their place.
 794 2012-10-05 15:18:17 <kjj_> so, depriving people of their property is fine, as long as you do it on a big enough scale?
 795 2012-10-05 15:19:18 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 796 2012-10-05 15:19:29 <gmaxwell> kjj_: Why not? you're doing it right now. You're exploiting differential economic power to make use of high technology built from raw materials manufactured through exploitive labor in the third world.
 797 2012-10-05 15:19:46 <amiller> do we agree that bitcoin has two (possibly contentious) goals, 1) to defend the interests of stakeholders/investors, people who have BTC and 2) to adapt technology as necessary to ensure stability of the system?
 798 2012-10-05 15:19:47 <kjj_> gmaxwell: I call bullshit on that
 799 2012-10-05 15:20:01 <amiller> the only reason imo to do something like expiration is if it becomes apparent that bitcoin will be unstable otherwise
 800 2012-10-05 15:20:09 <gmaxwell> If you're going to invoke "theft" to justfiy your arguments you need to be prepared to deal with the idea that theft can be defined less than the myopic version which is most comfortable for you.
 801 2012-10-05 15:20:15 <kjj_> amiller: apparent to WHO?
 802 2012-10-05 15:20:20 <Eliel> kjj_: when the deprivation of property happens according to preset rules that were known to the owner before they acquired the property, yes, that's fine.
 803 2012-10-05 15:20:23 <amiller> apparent to everyone who participates?
 804 2012-10-05 15:20:27 <helo> amiller: they can be contentious, and they can be in accord
 805 2012-10-05 15:20:40 <kjj_> amiller: everyone?  or is some fraction ok?
 806 2012-10-05 15:20:48 <helo> isn't 2) a strict requirement for 1)?
 807 2012-10-05 15:21:47 <gmaxwell> kjj_: No bullshit. The world is an unfair place. And just from the evidence that you're talking to me, you are almost currently enjoying wealth which is entirely undeserved relative to your contribution to the human species as a whole. I certantly am.
 808 2012-10-05 15:21:50 <kjj_> Eliel: I disagree.  theft doesn't become right when you announce it in advance.  if your argument is correct, then you have no beef with congress for inflating your savings into dust
 809 2012-10-05 15:22:06 <Graet> so no-one knows why there would be 104BTc of txn fees in a block?
 810 2012-10-05 15:22:19 <Graet> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115583.0
 811 2012-10-05 15:22:22 <kjj_> gmaxwell: you are in debt?  that's unfortunate
 812 2012-10-05 15:22:24 <gmaxwell> Graet: someone got stupid with the raw transaction api.
 813 2012-10-05 15:22:30 <Graet> ahh cool
 814 2012-10-05 15:22:31 <helo> kjj_: i think the objective is to preserve wealth for as many people as possible... some tough decisions that don't include saving 100% are inevitable
 815 2012-10-05 15:22:40 <gmaxwell> kjj_: in debt? huh.
 816 2012-10-05 15:22:51 <Graet> thanks gmaxwell
 817 2012-10-05 15:23:00 darkskiez has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 818 2012-10-05 15:23:01 <gmaxwell> Graet: I'm guessing there.
 819 2012-10-05 15:23:01 lggr has joined
 820 2012-10-05 15:23:11 <gmaxwell> No. I've never been in debt. I own a bunch of other people's debt, in fact.
 821 2012-10-05 15:23:23 <Graet> hehe ok :) i thought it *might* be something like that - no-one screaming yet tho :P
 822 2012-10-05 15:23:35 <kjj_> gmaxwell: money is just a way to split a barter through time and space.  the only way to have enjoyed more wealth than you deserve is to have debt
 823 2012-10-05 15:23:59 <kjj_> if you don't have debt, then by definition, you have given to society at least as much as society has given to you
 824 2012-10-05 15:24:08 <gmaxwell> kjj_: er, no. Reciving stolen goods is another way.
 825 2012-10-05 15:24:25 <kjj_> heh, well, yeah, ok.  there are dishonest ways too
 826 2012-10-05 15:24:29 <kjj_> have you stolen stuff?
 827 2012-10-05 15:24:33 <amiller> lol
 828 2012-10-05 15:24:47 <gmaxwell> kjj_: No, but my society does— constantly in many different ways.
 829 2012-10-05 15:24:56 <gmaxwell> And I benefit greatly from that.
 830 2012-10-05 15:25:09 <kjj_> gmaxwell: meh.  I don't buy it when Chomsky says it either, and he is much more convincing than you are
 831 2012-10-05 15:25:29 <Eliel> kjj_: Yes, the congress is free to inflate the currencies they control. My own stupidity if I trusted them for good savings value.
 832 2012-10-05 15:25:33 <gmaxwell> kjj_: ::shrugs:: I don't feel (very) bad about it.
 833 2012-10-05 15:25:49 <gmaxwell> The current situation is unstable in any case.
 834 2012-10-05 15:26:50 <kjj_> gmaxwell: I hold the very unpopular opinion that the US is having economic woes because we made the decision to export our wealth around the world in order to try bootstrapping production and trade everywhere
 835 2012-10-05 15:27:00 <gmaxwell> economic woes?
 836 2012-10-05 15:27:04 <gmaxwell> oh god. what nonsense.
 837 2012-10-05 15:27:11 <gavinandresen> wow, didn't take long for somebody to shoot themselves in the foot with raw transactions....
 838 2012-10-05 15:27:13 <kjj_> heh, I told you it was unpopular
 839 2012-10-05 15:27:35 <Graet> that is it then Gabit ?
 840 2012-10-05 15:27:40 <Graet> oops gavinandresen
 841 2012-10-05 15:28:00 <gavinandresen> kjj_: I'm with gmaxwell, there is zero evidence more trade is ever bad.
 842 2012-10-05 15:28:05 <kjj_> gmaxwell: on the other hand, in 1945, there was exactly one intact industrial country on the planet.
 843 2012-10-05 15:28:17 <Graet> 2
 844 2012-10-05 15:28:17 <gmaxwell> kjj_: no, the nonsense is that there are economic woes. Go into the homes of people living in povery in the US— they are well fed (if not all that healthy so), they have TVs and video games, and access to more books than existed a hundred years ago. Most are not sick. We are impossibly wealthy.
 845 2012-10-05 15:28:38 <kjj_> gavinadresen: I'm not sure what you are referring to.  I don't think that more trade is bad either, and I can't think of anything that I might have possibly said to suggest otherwise
 846 2012-10-05 15:28:39 <gavinandresen> Graet: most likely. If you're not careful and remember to include a change output in your raw transactions you'll create transactions with huge fees
 847 2012-10-05 15:28:39 <helo> economic woes in 3...
 848 2012-10-05 15:28:47 <gmaxwell> Our poorest people have richer lives than the median in many parts of the world.
 849 2012-10-05 15:28:51 <helo> (years)
 850 2012-10-05 15:29:06 adamsjohn has joined
 851 2012-10-05 15:29:08 <Graet> ahh ok, it looked like one of the txn the change was fee, but one txn had fee and change
 852 2012-10-05 15:29:16 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 853 2012-10-05 15:29:32 <gmaxwell> Graet: congrats on your windfall, I guess
 854 2012-10-05 15:29:52 <kjj_> gmaxwell: grab a newspaper, see the stories on inflation, unemployment, etc, etc.  those economic woes
 855 2012-10-05 15:29:53 <Graet> heh, thanks gmaxwell - the miners got the windfall though :D
 856 2012-10-05 15:30:06 <helo> if someone can prove they were the ones that generated that transaction, will you refund them?
 857 2012-10-05 15:30:19 <helo> oh, i though Graet mined it
 858 2012-10-05 15:30:46 darkskiez has joined
 859 2012-10-05 15:30:46 <gmaxwell> kjj_: if you allow things to be measured relatively, especially with a short term reference, then every downward change is a "woe". The word loses its meaning.
 860 2012-10-05 15:30:51 <helo> wow english
 861 2012-10-05 15:30:53 <Graet> bit hard to refund what has been paid out to miners :)
 862 2012-10-05 15:31:00 <gmaxwell> Graet: well congrats to your miners!
 863 2012-10-05 15:31:07 <Graet> cheers gmaxwell :D
 864 2012-10-05 15:31:40 <Graet> they do sem pleased. i was stunned - and checked about 5 places before i believed it wa real :P
 865 2012-10-05 15:31:41 Hasimir has joined
 866 2012-10-05 15:31:43 <gmaxwell> weird. they all have two outputs.
 867 2012-10-05 15:31:52 <gavinandresen> Should be a good incentive for pool ops to upgrade to the 0.7 "sort transactions by fee when deciding which to include" ....
 868 2012-10-05 15:32:07 <gmaxwell> maybe this wasn't a raw transactions mistake.
 869 2012-10-05 15:32:14 lggr has joined
 870 2012-10-05 15:32:15 <gmaxwell> perhaps they set their fee per KB very high?
 871 2012-10-05 15:32:42 <gavinandresen> I believe there's a check/warning for that
 872 2012-10-05 15:32:50 <gmaxwell> Indeed.
 873 2012-10-05 15:32:55 <gmaxwell> Graet: there have been some enormous fees in the past.
 874 2012-10-05 15:33:00 <gavinandresen> not that people pay attention to warnings....
 875 2012-10-05 15:33:06 <stevep> I'd hope the standard client would have that kind of sanity check
 876 2012-10-05 15:33:06 <helo> they thought that was the fees they receive ;)
 877 2012-10-05 15:33:09 <kjj_> also, I don't think the fee per KB kicks in if it still qualifies as free, and these don't look complicated enough to be not-free
 878 2012-10-05 15:33:12 <gmaxwell> There was a block with something like 200 BTC, for examples.
 879 2012-10-05 15:33:25 <Graet> i havent seen so many, but 64btc 21.xx and 9.xx BTc in one block
 880 2012-10-05 15:34:00 RV___ has joined
 881 2012-10-05 15:34:00 <gavinandresen> well, I hope whoever it was steps forward and lets us know what happened.
 882 2012-10-05 15:34:00 <Graet> oh ok, well i was hoping for the record, but well beaten already :P
 883 2012-10-05 15:34:00 <kjj_> the one with the 21.5s looks like he was trying to do a three way split and forgot to add the third address
 884 2012-10-05 15:34:04 MiningBuddy has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 885 2012-10-05 15:34:14 MiningBuddy has joined
 886 2012-10-05 15:34:20 <gmaxwell> kjj_: right, at least one of these should have been fee.
 887 2012-10-05 15:34:21 <gmaxwell> er free
 888 2012-10-05 15:34:42 <gmaxwell> e.g. spending a single 289 btc input with 500 confirmations.
 889 2012-10-05 15:34:51 <gmaxwell> oh no, sub cent output.
 890 2012-10-05 15:35:57 <Eliel> is there a good place in the rawtx process to add a warning if the transaction smells funny?
 891 2012-10-05 15:35:57 <gmaxwell> http://blockchain.info/tx/c16b8666e9f0ed85532a158bd9659b0cb62cdd462a920300285cf21b9898b8f2 < not free.
 892 2012-10-05 15:35:57 <gmaxwell> Eliel: well, it would help if decoderawtransaction showed the fees... but that requires looking up the inputs.
 893 2012-10-05 15:35:57 MiningBuddy- has joined
 894 2012-10-05 15:36:15 <gmaxwell> I helped someone make a several thousand BTC transaction using the raw transactions API.  I manually summed the input six times and was still a bit nervous that I calculated it all right. (it went fine)
 895 2012-10-05 15:36:15 <phantomcircuit> so
 896 2012-10-05 15:36:25 <phantomcircuit> any guesses what happened there?
 897 2012-10-05 15:36:42 RV__ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 898 2012-10-05 15:37:16 <phantomcircuit> i expect it to be something mundane
 899 2012-10-05 15:37:16 MiningBuddy- has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 900 2012-10-05 15:37:18 <stevep> gmaxwell: Just shows how much trust we all place in the client :)
 901 2012-10-05 15:37:25 MiningBuddy- has joined
 902 2012-10-05 15:37:38 <gmaxwell> stevep: even crappy software is at lest pretty consistent! :P not so for humans.
 903 2012-10-05 15:37:55 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, isn't that the truth
 904 2012-10-05 15:38:01 <gmaxwell> Though I'm a bit alarmed by people creating 100kBTC TXouts... they're begging for a cosmic ray to make them broke.
 905 2012-10-05 15:38:01 <Graet> ++
 906 2012-10-05 15:38:10 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 907 2012-10-05 15:38:10 <Eliel> gmaxwell: is there a good reason not to look up the input amounts by default to show the warning?
 908 2012-10-05 15:38:23 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, lawl
 909 2012-10-05 15:38:24 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: an on-by-default fee sanity check in sendrawtransaction is probably the right thing to do.
 910 2012-10-05 15:39:07 <phantomcircuit> hmm
 911 2012-10-05 15:39:07 <phantomcircuit> wonder if it's an electrum bug
 912 2012-10-05 15:39:07 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: ... although there are enough other ways to hang yourself using raw transactions maybe that would just be a false sense of security
 913 2012-10-05 15:39:07 MiningBuddy- has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 914 2012-10-05 15:39:07 <helo> or a "summarize wtf will happen with this raw transaction"
 915 2012-10-05 15:39:11 MiningBuddy has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 916 2012-10-05 15:39:11 MiningBuddy- has joined
 917 2012-10-05 15:39:42 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 918 2012-10-05 15:39:45 MiningBuddy- has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 919 2012-10-05 15:39:49 MiningBuddy has joined
 920 2012-10-05 15:40:17 <stevep> gavinandresen: I agree with helo somekind of summary to make it easier to write sanity checks seems like it would be helpful
 921 2012-10-05 15:40:28 <kjj_> people using raw transactions have the option to run it through decoderawtransactions already
 922 2012-10-05 15:40:59 <helo> the decode doesn't make it plain-as-day exactly what will happen though, does it?
 923 2012-10-05 15:41:18 <kjj_> helo: pretty sure it does.  sec
 924 2012-10-05 15:41:44 <gmaxwell> helo: the decode doesn't show the fees.
 925 2012-10-05 15:42:00 <gmaxwell> it shows which txouts you're spending, and your new outputs.
 926 2012-10-05 15:42:22 <gmaxwell> But if you don't know the values of those tx outs and do the summing, ... you don't know the fee.
 927 2012-10-05 15:42:40 lggr has joined
 928 2012-10-05 15:43:13 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: there are other ways; indeed. But the fee one is a risk even if your outputs are totally boring and regular.
 929 2012-10-05 15:43:32 <gmaxwell> a basic 'spend these particular input to this regular address output' transaction basically only has the fee risk.
 930 2012-10-05 15:43:40 <kinlo> does anyone know the exact formula to calculate the supermajority on version 2 blocks?
 931 2012-10-05 15:43:43 <gmaxwell> (well, you could get the address wrong; but thats the same for non-raw)
 932 2012-10-05 15:43:53 Z0rZ0rZ0r has joined
 933 2012-10-05 15:43:59 <kinlo> ie: how many blocks need to be version 2 before the network starts rejecting version 1?
 934 2012-10-05 15:44:08 pooler has joined
 935 2012-10-05 15:44:08 <stevep> gmaxwell: and I guess the fee risk will be the one most often exercised
 936 2012-10-05 15:44:09 <helo> implicit fee trapdoor :/
 937 2012-10-05 15:44:32 <kjj_> kinlo: 95%  (950 of the last 1000)
 938 2012-10-05 15:44:33 <gmaxwell> helo: yea, well, it's how the protocol worls.
 939 2012-10-05 15:44:37 <gmaxwell> er works.
 940 2012-10-05 15:44:43 <kinlo> kjj_: so the last 1000... interesting
 941 2012-10-05 15:44:47 <gmaxwell> (actually a pretty elegant thing, IMO)
 942 2012-10-05 15:45:13 <Diablo-D3> [10:37:01] <kjj_> Diablo-D3: disk caching should come close to that, but it doesn't actually seem to
 943 2012-10-05 15:45:19 <Diablo-D3> it does if you have enough memory
 944 2012-10-05 15:45:36 <helo> yeah, it is elegant... just spooky
 945 2012-10-05 15:45:37 <Diablo-D3> I have 8gb of memory, I can reboot, start bitcoin, take forever, close bitcoin, and then start it again and its instant
 946 2012-10-05 15:45:49 <helo> but the software can make it not spooky easily enough
 947 2012-10-05 15:46:04 <kinlo> I've added block version numbers to blockorigin if someone is interested in tracking this information
 948 2012-10-05 15:46:04 darkskiez has quit (Excess Flood)
 949 2012-10-05 15:46:05 <gavinandresen> stevep: decoderawtransaction before sendrawtransaction gives you a summary... not of fees, though.
 950 2012-10-05 15:46:17 <helo> when is the first foundation vote?
 951 2012-10-05 15:46:23 <kinlo> I guess adding a percentage would make sense too
 952 2012-10-05 15:47:17 <kjj_> Diablo-D3: IDB seems to be different.
 953 2012-10-05 15:47:29 <gavinandresen> helo: vote for board members?  Not for at least a year.  There might be other things put to member votes before then, though.
 954 2012-10-05 15:47:31 <stevep> gavinandresen: I think the fees is the major issue. I guess we should let one of the rawtransaction users who lost a lot submit the feature request. That way it will carry the required weight to consider making a new api ;)
 955 2012-10-05 15:47:44 darkskiez has joined
 956 2012-10-05 15:47:59 <gmaxwell> stevep: we've not had any reports of that yet.
 957 2012-10-05 15:48:13 <kjj_> Diablo-D3: as in, a box with 8 gigs of RAM and a disk takes MANY hours longer to do IBD than a box with just a ramdisk.  much more time and disk thrashing than you'd expect from merely writing 4 GB
 958 2012-10-05 15:48:13 <helo> "summarizerawtransaction" -> "Starting wallet balance: ... Payments: ... Fees: ... Ending wallet balance: ..."
 959 2012-10-05 15:48:35 <gmaxwell> Though I don't think it needs a new api.. it should just be a decoderawtransaction field.. but since it requires looking up the inputs it will make decoderawtransaction slower. :(
 960 2012-10-05 15:48:40 <Diablo-D3> kjj_: you mean let bitcoin load cold vs preload then bitcoin load cold? yeah, its fucktarded
 961 2012-10-05 15:48:56 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 962 2012-10-05 15:49:04 <gmaxwell> helo: ugh. that makes no sense. What happens when your raw transaction is spending funds you have in a different wallet?
 963 2012-10-05 15:49:06 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: could be a 'verbose' or 'slow' or 'lookupinputs' flag to decoderawtransaction
 964 2012-10-05 15:49:45 <Diablo-D3> bitcoin would actually be better off if it tried to cache preload the db by dumb reading it
 965 2012-10-05 15:49:46 <gmaxwell> (half of my raw transactions have been to spend inputs in nearline wallets)
 966 2012-10-05 15:49:49 <kjj_> Diablo-D3: from the sounds my drive was making, it was spending a lot of time re-reading old blocks to verify new transactions
 967 2012-10-05 15:50:04 <helo> gmaxwell: yeah, that is a pretty common use case... likely the most common :/
 968 2012-10-05 15:50:06 <gavinandresen> And for sendrawtransaction to succeed it has to know the inputs, so it could enforce a "fail if fees are > X BTC" default rule.
 969 2012-10-05 15:50:08 <Diablo-D3> kjj_: yeah which doesnt make sense
 970 2012-10-05 15:50:23 <kjj_> Diablo-D3: but I don't have any way to be sure, that was just my impression from the amount of seeking I heard
 971 2012-10-05 15:50:26 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: node won't accept the txn if it doesn't know the inputs in any case.
 972 2012-10-05 15:50:33 <Diablo-D3> kjj_: writing blocks kills my box
 973 2012-10-05 15:50:34 <lianj> gmaxwell: or sendrawtransaction --dry-run
 974 2012-10-05 15:50:36 <gmaxwell> just because it passes the txn through the regular transaction acceptance code.
 975 2012-10-05 15:50:41 usagi has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 976 2012-10-05 15:50:44 <lianj> with a summary printed on dry-run
 977 2012-10-05 15:50:47 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: right.  decoderawtransaction does need to be able to decode without inputs, though.
 978 2012-10-05 15:51:07 <kjj_> Diablo-D3: I wonder if the BDB layer is somehow invalidating part of the disk cache when it syncs the writes.
 979 2012-10-05 15:51:26 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: agreed, a flag would work there I guess. Though perhaps the default should be to show the fee and there should be a flag to get the current behavior?
 980 2012-10-05 15:51:49 <kjj_> Diablo-D3: or maybe I'm just wrong, and the shoe shining I heard was from it doing interleaved writes into two files (blocks and index)
 981 2012-10-05 15:51:52 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: probably-- decode is really for debugging most of the time
 982 2012-10-05 15:51:56 <gmaxwell> Diablo-D3: test ultraprune+leveldb
 983 2012-10-05 15:51:58 <gavinandresen> ... where speed doesn't matter
 984 2012-10-05 15:52:09 lggr has joined
 985 2012-10-05 15:52:48 <Eliel> perhaps require a parameter to sendrawtransaction that should be set to the expected fee size. If it's off, return an error.
 986 2012-10-05 15:52:52 <helo> gavinandresen: i meant the first member vote... or if it has passed the next
 987 2012-10-05 15:53:02 boupitch has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 988 2012-10-05 15:53:35 <gmaxwell> Eliel: bleh. No. I sometimes use sendrawtransaction to reannounce other people's transactions for them.
 989 2012-10-05 15:53:38 ThomasV has joined
 990 2012-10-05 15:53:56 <gavinandresen> helo: member vote for what?  as I said, the only definite thing members will vote on is board member elections, but there may be other things the board decides to put to member vote
 991 2012-10-05 15:54:13 <stevep> gavinanresen: Is checking a transaction really that slow? If I were generating raw transaction I'd accept a performance hit for the benefit of sanity checks
 992 2012-10-05 15:54:30 <Diablo-D3> [11:39:59] <kjj_> Diablo-D3: I wonder if the BDB layer is somehow invalidating part of the disk cache when it syncs the writes.
 993 2012-10-05 15:54:45 <Diablo-D3> kjj_: technically it should because of the extra paranoid write checking
 994 2012-10-05 15:54:46 <gavinandresen> stevep: what do you mean?  sendrawtransaction checks the transaction before broadcasting it....
 995 2012-10-05 15:55:03 <Diablo-D3> kjj_: but it should also be maintaining its own goddamned lru just-written read cache
 996 2012-10-05 15:55:12 <helo> oh, i misunderstood "vote for board members" to mean "the first time board members will be voting"
 997 2012-10-05 15:55:15 <Diablo-D3> or just something thats just not so goddamned blaaaaaargh
 998 2012-10-05 15:55:30 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: Ill test it when it ships in a stable releease
 999 2012-10-05 15:55:55 <stevep> gavinandresen: I mean ina  "summarizetransaction" style api I'd accept the cost of checking the transaction and calculating the fee for the benfit of the sanity check I can put into my code
1000 2012-10-05 15:56:23 <gavinandresen> stevep: sure, that is what we're saying decoderawtransaction might/should do
1001 2012-10-05 15:56:46 <gavinandresen> ... if it actually knows enough about previous inputs to calculate fee/etc.
1002 2012-10-05 15:56:59 <stevep> gavinandresen: I'm trying to say I'd gladly accept the performance hit
1003 2012-10-05 15:57:20 <Eliel> how about having decoderawtx to fetch the inputs by default and make it possible to skip that by extra parameter?
1004 2012-10-05 15:57:41 <gavinandresen> it's not  a question of performance if you're creating a chain of transactions to broadcast later-- bitcoind may simply not be able to calculate the fee for transactions it doesn't yet know about
1005 2012-10-05 15:58:01 <gmaxwell> stevep: there are cases where it _can't_ be done, because the node doesn't know the inputs; and applications (e.g. block explorer sorts of things) where the performance hit is significant. So we do need to support the unknown inputs case too.
1006 2012-10-05 15:58:24 <stevep> I see I didn't consider a chain of unbroadcast transactions.
1007 2012-10-05 15:58:45 <gmaxwell> e.g. if you're precalculating a refund transaction; or building a transaction on an offline node.
1008 2012-10-05 15:59:04 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1009 2012-10-05 16:00:01 <stevep> gmaxwell: it seems there are more use cases than I was aware but I'd guess the most frequent case is calculatable it just a question of return on investment for the effort to implement it.
1010 2012-10-05 16:00:17 <Eliel> you could also add support to decoderawtx to receive the input txouts with the request.
1011 2012-10-05 16:01:08 <gmaxwell> Eliel: the way the json stuff works from the cli optional parameters make life suck. So.. bleh on adding more parameters.
1012 2012-10-05 16:01:17 <gavinandresen> yeah... yuck.
1013 2012-10-05 16:01:39 <gmaxwell> Besides, the refund txn case requires the person signing the refund actually not have the input.
1014 2012-10-05 16:01:41 lggr has joined
1015 2012-10-05 16:01:57 <gmaxwell> (because you make your counterparty sign the refund before you let him see the payment into the escrow)
1016 2012-10-05 16:02:22 <TheSeven> BlueMatt: now that quantal is around the corner, when can we expect a bitcoin PPA update?
1017 2012-10-05 16:03:34 <gmaxwell> e.g. you make a txn paying 100 BTC into escrow A, but don't announce it yet, then tell your party the txid and have them make a unlocked transaction refunding from that escrow in 6 months. They sign and give it to you. You sign and put the refund aside.. then you announce the payment into the escrow.
1018 2012-10-05 16:04:00 <gmaxwell> if you gave them the input they could just announce it, locking you into the escrow without ever signing the refund.
1019 2012-10-05 16:05:09 BTCTrader has joined
1020 2012-10-05 16:05:47 Jubjub has joined
1021 2012-10-05 16:06:05 <lianj> gmaxwell: you need to give them your output script too, not only the txid
1022 2012-10-05 16:06:14 <MC1984> is there more than one company doing ASICS now?
1023 2012-10-05 16:06:26 t7 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1024 2012-10-05 16:06:34 <stevep> MC1984: Advertising or Shipping?
1025 2012-10-05 16:06:44 <gmaxwell> lianj: well, not necessarily. You can write the transaction for them, they just need to look at it and then sign it.
1026 2012-10-05 16:06:50 <Eliel> MC1984: we've got many companies advertising ASICs :)
1027 2012-10-05 16:07:18 <lianj> gmaxwell: right, but only the txid is not enough for them to redeem/sign it
1028 2012-10-05 16:07:27 tower has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1029 2012-10-05 16:07:39 <MC1984> deepbit are getting into the asic game wtf
1030 2012-10-05 16:07:40 <TheSeven> BlueMatt: the packages from the precise packages depend on a couple of libs that seem to be gone in quantal
1031 2012-10-05 16:08:37 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1032 2012-10-05 16:08:43 <gmaxwell> I note that ngzhang's preorder still has some slots left after they punted the non-payers.
1033 2012-10-05 16:10:17 ovidiusoft has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1034 2012-10-05 16:10:43 tower has joined
1035 2012-10-05 16:10:52 <gmaxwell> lianj: the unsigned txn is technially enough; though I don't believe we're currently smart enough to find the relevant key from the scriptsig... though we could.
1036 2012-10-05 16:11:50 lggr has joined
1037 2012-10-05 16:11:57 denisx has quit (Quit: denisx)
1038 2012-10-05 16:16:47 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1039 2012-10-05 16:18:46 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1040 2012-10-05 16:21:36 Tykling has quit (Excess Flood)
1041 2012-10-05 16:21:44 lggr has joined
1042 2012-10-05 16:23:13 Tykling has joined
1043 2012-10-05 16:23:36 Tykling has quit (Excess Flood)
1044 2012-10-05 16:24:01 maaku has joined
1045 2012-10-05 16:27:13 Tykling has joined
1046 2012-10-05 16:28:04 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1047 2012-10-05 16:28:26 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: woo!
1048 2012-10-05 16:28:30 * jgarzik goes to buy one
1049 2012-10-05 16:29:33 pusle has joined
1050 2012-10-05 16:29:54 <jgarzik> Trying to buy one of each.  At least one will not be a scam ;p
1051 2012-10-05 16:30:06 <kjj_> heh
1052 2012-10-05 16:30:16 <gmaxwell> For those who don't know what we're talking about: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=110090.0
1053 2012-10-05 16:30:51 lggr has joined
1054 2012-10-05 16:31:43 <jgarzik> Here's another one, that claimed tapeout on Sept 22: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=91173.0
1055 2012-10-05 16:32:08 * jgarzik has no money in asicminer or revolver (the icbit one)... yet
1056 2012-10-05 16:32:30 <gavinandresen> I love competition.
1057 2012-10-05 16:32:46 tonikt2 has joined
1058 2012-10-05 16:32:51 <kreal> same
1059 2012-10-05 16:33:13 <kjj_> I'd probably pick up an avalon, but I hear Wayne's World every time I read ngzhang
1060 2012-10-05 16:33:22 <gavinandresen> somebody PM'ed me concerned that the ASIC companies would be mining on the main network during burn-in, earning BTC....
1061 2012-10-05 16:33:40 <kreal> gavinandresen, I bet they will.
1062 2012-10-05 16:33:45 <kreal> gavinandresen, would only make sense.
1063 2012-10-05 16:33:52 <kjj_> they'd be pretty dumb not to
1064 2012-10-05 16:33:55 <gavinandresen> I said "Great!  That means they'll be able to sell to miners for less..."
1065 2012-10-05 16:34:01 <kreal> :D
1066 2012-10-05 16:34:10 <kreal> dream on haah
1067 2012-10-05 16:34:27 <gavinandresen> no, that's what will happen, because they're competing on price against each other....
1068 2012-10-05 16:35:01 <kreal> well I will cross my fingers
1069 2012-10-05 16:35:11 <kreal> I like the upgrade to 60GH/s though
1070 2012-10-05 16:36:30 Hasimir has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1071 2012-10-05 16:37:30 <Graet> lol yeah great, the asic companies test on mainnet, make bitcoins and lift difficulty before shipping to thier customers.. most have said they will not test on m,ainnet. time will tell i guess
1072 2012-10-05 16:37:39 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1073 2012-10-05 16:37:42 Hasimir has joined
1074 2012-10-05 16:39:11 jurov is now known as away!~jurov@rini17.broker.freenet6.net|jurov
1075 2012-10-05 16:39:39 JZavala has joined
1076 2012-10-05 16:40:01 <kjj_> Graet: yeah, I saw some of them say that they wouldn't test on main.  Seemed very silly, but people were clamoring for it in the threads.
1077 2012-10-05 16:40:11 lggr has joined
1078 2012-10-05 16:40:45 <gmaxwell> kjj_: hm? I don't think it's silly. It goofs up the economic planning their customers made if they crank the difficulty 'testing'.
1079 2012-10-05 16:40:57 <gmaxwell> And its trivial to test on testnet or testnet in a box.
1080 2012-10-05 16:41:15 <Graet> well none said in thier release they would mine on mainet keep the coins and raise diff before shipping, so it was a valid question, if they said they were and that they were factoring earning into cost a lot of ppl would have accepted it better :)
1081 2012-10-05 16:41:35 <kreal> know what would be fun?, make them mine litecoin or what the others are called and fuck the diff up there :)
1082 2012-10-05 16:41:37 <kjj_> gmaxwell: the difficulty will crank up.  if people aren't planning for 30x difficulty on more-or-less day 1, they deserve the failure they are getting
1083 2012-10-05 16:41:53 <gmaxwell> kjj_: but they plan on being in on that windfall.
1084 2012-10-05 16:41:53 <Graet> kreal, asic wont do scrypt
1085 2012-10-05 16:42:00 <Graet> well these omnes wont
1086 2012-10-05 16:42:13 <kjj_> gmaxwell: yeah, I know they are planning on that, but they are wrong
1087 2012-10-05 16:42:23 <kreal> cannot remember what the fork of bitcoin blockchain was called.
1088 2012-10-05 16:43:23 <gmaxwell> kreal: the? there are like 100 of them.
1089 2012-10-05 16:43:55 <kreal> ok :) well choose one the ascis can computate and read my above statement.
1090 2012-10-05 16:44:10 <kreal> could be fun
1091 2012-10-05 16:44:52 <kjj_> kreal: none of the alt chains are worth poking
1092 2012-10-05 16:45:24 <kreal> no but for burn-in
1093 2012-10-05 16:45:30 <kreal> nevermind.
1094 2012-10-05 16:45:57 <kreal> I'm tired today.
1095 2012-10-05 16:46:02 <helo> hah, asic burn-in on namecoin
1096 2012-10-05 16:46:30 <gmaxwell> kreal: testnet has the advantage of having the anti islanding logic.
1097 2012-10-05 16:46:38 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1098 2012-10-05 16:46:54 <kreal> no idea what that is sorry.
1099 2012-10-05 16:47:27 <gmaxwell> kreal: testnet will accept a difficulty 1 block 20 minutes after the last block.
1100 2012-10-05 16:47:28 <kreal> similar to http://udini.proquest.com/view/anti-islanding-methods-for-inverter-goid:845659817/ ?
1101 2012-10-05 16:47:36 <helo> heh
1102 2012-10-05 16:48:49 coblee_ has joined
1103 2012-10-05 16:48:55 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1104 2012-10-05 16:49:30 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
1105 2012-10-05 16:49:44 lggr has joined
1106 2012-10-05 16:50:18 JZavala has joined
1107 2012-10-05 16:50:26 <Diablo-D3> man
1108 2012-10-05 16:50:32 <Diablo-D3> theres something really wrong with bitcoin
1109 2012-10-05 16:50:49 <kreal> indeed
1110 2012-10-05 16:50:53 <kreal> and you know what it is.
1111 2012-10-05 16:51:00 <Diablo-D3> I wonder how you can flood the linux network stack so badly that you cant even make LAN connections
1112 2012-10-05 16:51:01 <kreal> not every store here in denmark are accepting them yet.
1113 2012-10-05 16:51:59 boupitch has joined
1114 2012-10-05 16:52:04 coblee has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1115 2012-10-05 16:52:04 coblee_ is now known as coblee
1116 2012-10-05 16:54:19 <Diablo-D3> what the fuck is going on
1117 2012-10-05 16:54:22 <Diablo-D3> I shut bitcoin off
1118 2012-10-05 16:54:27 <Diablo-D3> I still cant make connections
1119 2012-10-05 16:54:42 <kjj_> maybe it isn't bitcoin doing it?
1120 2012-10-05 16:54:59 <Diablo-D3> kjj_: only thing running with network
1121 2012-10-05 16:55:07 <Diablo-D3> other boxes on the network arent connected
1122 2012-10-05 16:55:14 tonikt3 has joined
1123 2012-10-05 16:56:38 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1124 2012-10-05 16:57:28 <kreal> install wireshark or similar and see whats happening? You know it could be solar flares...
1125 2012-10-05 16:58:10 maaku has joined
1126 2012-10-05 16:58:21 slush has joined
1127 2012-10-05 16:58:40 arsy has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1128 2012-10-05 16:59:08 tonikt2 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1129 2012-10-05 16:59:51 lggr has joined
1130 2012-10-05 17:00:57 <Diablo-D3> kreal: heh.
1131 2012-10-05 17:01:10 tonikt3 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1132 2012-10-05 17:01:33 tonikt3 has joined
1133 2012-10-05 17:02:26 maaku has quit (Client Quit)
1134 2012-10-05 17:03:33 <gavinandresen> Anybody feel like joining my in procrastinating by thinking about brain wallets ?   https://gist.github.com/3840286
1135 2012-10-05 17:05:47 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1136 2012-10-05 17:06:52 * helo o/
1137 2012-10-05 17:07:15 PeanutPower has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1138 2012-10-05 17:07:25 PeanutPower has joined
1139 2012-10-05 17:08:12 <kjj_> gavinandresen: you have to make step 2 costly
1140 2012-10-05 17:08:39 <gavinandresen> kjj_: did you read to the end?
1141 2012-10-05 17:08:56 <kjj_> not yet, still going through it.
1142 2012-10-05 17:09:11 <kjj_> now that you say that, I'm sorta wondering if the part I'm reading is about step 1, with the part about step 2 coming later...
1143 2012-10-05 17:09:12 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: _meh_
1144 2012-10-05 17:09:14 lggr has joined
1145 2012-10-05 17:09:39 <Diablo-D3> kreal: wait, did you imply I dont have wireshark installed?
1146 2012-10-05 17:09:54 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: just as people underestimate the entropy of their passwords greatly, they also overestimate their ability to remember things.
1147 2012-10-05 17:10:41 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: true. If I used a brainwallet I'd write it down and put it in my safe deposit box.
1148 2012-10-05 17:10:42 <kreal> Diablo-D3, nope I would just be currious myself if that where to happend to me.
1149 2012-10-05 17:11:14 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: ... and the real danger is I type it in on a compromised system....
1150 2012-10-05 17:11:14 <kjj_> gavinandresen: how do you force the attacker to guess your sentinel first?
1151 2012-10-05 17:11:16 graingert_ecs has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1152 2012-10-05 17:11:36 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: it's better to just do what electrum is setup to do for that. It encodes a 128 bit value in 12 words. If you want to remember it you can, if you want to write it down, you can.. And because we know it was generated through a cryptographically strong random procedure we escape all doubt about its entropy.
1153 2012-10-05 17:11:49 <gavinandresen> kjj_: you don't.  But if you put enough coin in the sentinels then everybody has an incentive to try to crack them....
1154 2012-10-05 17:12:00 <kjj_> even worse.  if the attacker knows you, what stops him from using the sentinels as an oracle?
1155 2012-10-05 17:12:12 <gavinandresen> kjj_: ?
1156 2012-10-05 17:12:21 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: crack each sentinel, now you have the whole.
1157 2012-10-05 17:12:30 <gmaxwell> Thats the lanman password problem.
1158 2012-10-05 17:12:36 <kjj_> if he DOESN'T take the sentinel coins, you are giving him an easier problem to solve
1159 2012-10-05 17:12:50 <gmaxwell> (lanman confusingly splits passwords over 8ch in half and you can crack each half alone)
1160 2012-10-05 17:13:00 Z0rZ0rZ0r has quit (Quit: Wheeeee)
1161 2012-10-05 17:13:39 <gmaxwell> As far as names go— he doesn't need to try the 10 million most common names, he'll start with the 10,000 most common posters on bitcoin forums.
1162 2012-10-05 17:13:52 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: good point. I assume the attacker doesn't know which 3 transactions (sentinel1/2/secure) are together
1163 2012-10-05 17:13:53 <gmaxwell> It's just really hard to reason about the attacker's statistical power.
1164 2012-10-05 17:14:08 freakazoid has joined
1165 2012-10-05 17:14:10 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: mmm.   What's your middle name?
1166 2012-10-05 17:14:35 da2ce7 has joined
1167 2012-10-05 17:14:52 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: it's easily found at least. A script could be taking forum poster names and expanding them via google searches. (good for resolving pseudonyms too)
1168 2012-10-05 17:14:53 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1169 2012-10-05 17:14:58 Detritus has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1170 2012-10-05 17:15:35 <gmaxwell> plus it's in mtgox and bitcoinfoundation databases (I think).
1171 2012-10-05 17:15:38 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: True.  Previous versions of that gist I thought about combining other personal information, but attackers could pretty easily create huge databases that linked SS# / phone # / etc
1172 2012-10-05 17:16:24 <gavinandresen> In any case, even if it is 10,000 names to be tried that's still a long time to crack.
1173 2012-10-05 17:16:28 <gmaxwell> ::shrugs::  Right, it's just hard to reason about what they'll do and what statistical power they have. Especially since their effort is conserved. One unit of computation cracks all past and future usage.
1174 2012-10-05 17:16:46 da2ce7_d has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1175 2012-10-05 17:16:54 <gavinandresen> The piece I think is nifty is "put enough bitcoins in your sentinels and the incentive is for crackers to take them instead of trying to brute-force your full wallet"
1176 2012-10-05 17:17:36 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: at what speed?  A lot of people point at that 'correct horse stapler battery'  = zillion years xkcd thing. But thats assuming 1000/attempts a second. A GPU can do some insane billion attempts per second with MD5. At that speed xkcd's zillion years becomes just a few hours.
1177 2012-10-05 17:17:38 <gavinandresen> ... and if everybody uses a similar scheme then, essentially, we're all constantly trying to guess and check each other's passphrases.
1178 2012-10-05 17:18:36 Detritus has joined
1179 2012-10-05 17:18:40 lggr has joined
1180 2012-10-05 17:18:42 <gavinandresen> Right. So say it costs X to break one passphrase.  Two independently chosen (maybe a bad assumption right there) would be X^2
1181 2012-10-05 17:18:49 <kjj_> gavinandresen: I still think that by using portions of your security, you are giving the attacker hints.  you are replacing x effort with 2*sqrt(x)*y effort, where y is probably pretty small compared to sqrt(x)
1182 2012-10-05 17:18:52 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: seems wasteful— we really don't want 'honest' people doing that, and sometimes they'll hit the jackpot even under that scheme. This seems like a really poor way around just using 12 machine specified words.
1183 2012-10-05 17:18:59 <gavinandresen> ... add a constant factor by salting with some easily found personal information....
1184 2012-10-05 17:19:30 <gmaxwell> plus people spaz about the personal information when you tell them to type it in...
1185 2012-10-05 17:19:42 <gavinandresen> Asking people to memorize and write down two sentences they choose themselves is much friendlier than 12 random words.
1186 2012-10-05 17:20:05 freewil has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1187 2012-10-05 17:20:11 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: only by the margin that they reduce the entropy.
1188 2012-10-05 17:20:55 <gmaxwell> You might as well use six random words. and put the sentinel on five of them.
1189 2012-10-05 17:21:18 <gmaxwell> And, any kind of brain wallet gives you a key management headache— you can't rotate the keys easily, so if someone might have seen part of your key you have disincentives to change it and he can start attacking right away if he really did see it.
1190 2012-10-05 17:22:00 <kjj_> gmaxwell: putting the sentinel on 5-of-6 is really bad.  it tells the attacker that they are VERY close
1191 2012-10-05 17:22:04 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: I knew you'd hate it.   I think brainwallets of some kind or another are bound to happen....
1192 2012-10-05 17:22:37 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: Yes, we've talked about it before.
1193 2012-10-05 17:22:58 <gavinandresen> Getting back to the sentinels and incentives:  If I put square-root-of-main-wallet-balance+1 bitcoins in the 2 sentinel wallets, then the attacker is better off trying to steal the sentinels.
1194 2012-10-05 17:23:24 <gavinandresen> ... and actually I can put much less than that, because attackers will be trying to compromise EVERYBODY's sentinels at once.
1195 2012-10-05 17:23:32 toffoo has joined
1196 2012-10-05 17:24:01 <gmaxwell> They are irresponsible to promote under several different threat models: Attacker non-linear advantage (crack everyone at once); Underestimation of entropy; poor key management; overestimation of human memory.
1197 2012-10-05 17:24:22 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1198 2012-10-05 17:24:31 <gavinandresen> okey dokey.  I think people will use them anyway.
1199 2012-10-05 17:24:40 <kjj_> yeah, that's the sad thing, they will
1200 2012-10-05 17:25:20 <gmaxwell> And when you add sentinels you gain txout bloat and theoretical security that no one will actully leverage in practice. E.g. "people use this, so it must be safe" ignoring that they actually have to watch the sentinals and react to them. But they won't.
1201 2012-10-05 17:25:27 <gavinandresen> DO NOT USE BRAIN WALLETS.  But if you do.....
1202 2012-10-05 17:25:29 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: They do already and they get robbed, in fact.
1203 2012-10-05 17:25:33 <kjj_> how much responsibility do you take on?  is it enough to say "This is a terrible bad idea, you will lose all of your money and your hair will fall out.  Type your seed phrase:" ?
1204 2012-10-05 17:25:39 datagutt has joined
1205 2012-10-05 17:25:41 <gmaxwell> The advice to use the machine generated keys appears to be very successful in practice.
1206 2012-10-05 17:25:51 <helo> But if you do, you will get robbed and we will laugh at you.
1207 2012-10-05 17:25:57 datagutt is now known as Guest9818
1208 2012-10-05 17:26:12 <gmaxwell> And sipa, etotheipi, and I came up with a scheme that makes it much more attractive to use machine generated ones.
1209 2012-10-05 17:26:27 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: where's that written up
1210 2012-10-05 17:27:10 <gmaxwell> helo: thats actually one of the things that makes 'brainwallets' worse... the fact that the victims blame themselves make people underestimate the badness of the system. "It's his/(my) fault. He/I chose a stupid password."
1211 2012-10-05 17:27:24 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: sipa has a gist, looking.
1212 2012-10-05 17:27:47 Guest9818 has quit (Client Quit)
1213 2012-10-05 17:28:08 lggr has joined
1214 2012-10-05 17:28:09 datagutt_ has joined
1215 2012-10-05 17:28:33 vigilyn has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1216 2012-10-05 17:28:59 <gmaxwell> The general idea is that the keys are required to have some criteria e.g. H(H(key)) begins with zeros... with the number of acceptable keys increasing the more computation you do.
1217 2012-10-05 17:29:36 maaku has joined
1218 2012-10-05 17:30:48 <gavinandresen> ... where key is what?
1219 2012-10-05 17:31:11 <gavinandresen> I'd propose key is:   Name:passphrase1:passphrase2  ....
1220 2012-10-05 17:31:25 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1221 2012-10-05 17:31:29 <gavinandresen> ... and you still do the sentinel thing with the passphrases so you know if you chose badly.
1222 2012-10-05 17:32:06 <gavinandresen> ... and put enough bitcoins in the sentinels so it is in the attacker's financial interest to just take those instead of cracking your main wallet
1223 2012-10-05 17:32:08 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: the other complication is that any user provided key scheme is enormously improved by making the derivation computationally expensive... But also "what people will do" is use JS which is 1000-2000x slower than basic C code, so you can't get much advantage on the attacker with that.
1224 2012-10-05 17:32:42 <gavinandresen> that's why I like the passphrase1:passphrase2 scheme:  you get O(N^2)
1225 2012-10-05 17:32:49 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: it's not like you're going to spend those sentinels— would defeat the purpose. So he can wait.
1226 2012-10-05 17:33:12 <gavinandresen> but he's competing against everybody else in the world who might like to spend the sentinels
1227 2012-10-05 17:33:24 <gmaxwell> once he has cracked a bunch of sentinels he just does the N^2*names pairing, which is very fast.
1228 2012-10-05 17:33:37 <gavinandresen> or ordinary people who, if they happen to choose the same passphrase as me, will take the coins "lying on the street"
1229 2012-10-05 17:33:47 occulta has joined
1230 2012-10-05 17:33:58 <gmaxwell> and again, this only has value if you'll notice the spends and abandon your keys.. otherwise it gives attacker a substantial speedup
1231 2012-10-05 17:34:35 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: even the race bit can be addresses by postponing and then trying to win in the network when you see one spend announced.
1232 2012-10-05 17:34:36 <gavinandresen> There are already services that will send you email if an address is spent....
1233 2012-10-05 17:34:43 <kjj_> I'm not sure that it is possible to come up with a correct value to store in the sentinel.  if the attacker finds one, he is reasonably safe to assume that it will take the next guy about as long to find it too
1234 2012-10-05 17:34:52 Hasimir has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1235 2012-10-05 17:35:01 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1236 2012-10-05 17:35:19 Hasimir has joined
1237 2012-10-05 17:35:28 <kjj_> the amount needs to be high enough that he isn't willing to take the risk, but not so high that it is prohibative for the user
1238 2012-10-05 17:35:35 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: ... and you're expecting people to sign up for all this? please. This is pretext so that when people get robbed you can sleep at night because they didn't follow the complicated scheme.  The alternative, remember, is just remembering 12 machine generated words.
1239 2012-10-05 17:35:53 <gmaxwell> And god knows bitcoin doesn't need the reputation of having any part of the pratical security depending on people cracking things.
1240 2012-10-05 17:35:54 datagutt_ is now known as nowai
1241 2012-10-05 17:36:01 nowai is now known as datagutt_
1242 2012-10-05 17:36:28 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=102349.0
1243 2012-10-05 17:37:19 <kjj_> ooh.  and the attacker can prepare the transaction to spend the found sentinel, but not broadcast it until he sees another on the network.  that halves the value of the found money, and gives him roughly double the time to attack the real wallet
1244 2012-10-05 17:38:05 lggr has joined
1245 2012-10-05 17:38:28 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: has anyone done any testing, to see how long that algorithm takes on a modern computer, in JS or C++?
1246 2012-10-05 17:38:46 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: sipa has implementations in both for benchmarking.
1247 2012-10-05 17:39:44 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: re: 12 machine generated words:  yeah, I'm not going to memorize 12 machine generated random words.
1248 2012-10-05 17:39:51 <gmaxwell> I'm unhappy with the minimum level of strenghtening it uses— it's not enough to slow insecure keys down against 'gpu grade' attackers, but any more is too slow to be usable in JS. :(
1249 2012-10-05 17:40:30 <gavinandresen> re: security depending on cracking things:  think of it as intrusion detection
1250 2012-10-05 17:41:08 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: Many electrum users have, it's not hard... Perhaps you wont; but you're also not going to go sign up for a notice system on sentinal transactions or even create them in the first place, or respond when it does do something. Email==spam for a lot of people now.
1251 2012-10-05 17:41:17 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: yes, I use wallets on hosts as attack tripwires.
1252 2012-10-05 17:41:31 <gmaxwell> All my firewalls have wallets with a bitcoin in them. I've talked about this here before.
1253 2012-10-05 17:41:35 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: I assume a client that does the brainwallet thing will take care of all of that for the user.
1254 2012-10-05 17:42:18 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: ... and as I said in the gist, I'm glossing over a gazillion details.
1255 2012-10-05 17:43:05 <gavinandresen> (maybe it is a SMS when one of your passphrases gets tripped, and if you're serious about your funds being secure you'd combine your brainwallet with multisig/multidevice transaction authorization....)
1256 2012-10-05 17:43:16 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: I'm not sure tht it can... first when you create a wallet you don't have funds in it.. getting past that, people are going to spaz out when some of their funds are diverted to more easily stolen addresses and then you have to explain it.  And when the user gets one stolen the software can't respond without their help, and it has to be online for it to happen.
1257 2012-10-05 17:43:50 <gmaxwell> so does that create some centeralized attack target which knows the sentinel pairing?
1258 2012-10-05 17:43:56 Mobius_ has joined
1259 2012-10-05 17:44:42 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1260 2012-10-05 17:44:47 <gavinandresen> all great concerns.
1261 2012-10-05 17:44:49 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: and, of course this whole sidebar ignores that users memory is _not_ reliable. And unlike _every_ other kind of password security they encounter forgetting is utterly unrecoverable.
1262 2012-10-05 17:45:11 <gmaxwell> whereas writing things down solves that neatly, and 12 words are no biggie to write down.
1263 2012-10-05 17:45:26 <gavinandresen> Meh.  Memory is fuzzy, brute-forcing a sentinel on the user's behalf might be a service
1264 2012-10-05 17:45:47 MobiusL has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1265 2012-10-05 17:45:49 <gavinandresen> (I've actually thought about creating a brute-force-my-wallet-dat service....)
1266 2012-10-05 17:46:07 <gmaxwell> yea, great so you'll legitimize cracking infrastructure so it can happen on an industrial scale with 14nm cracking asic farms.
1267 2012-10-05 17:46:18 <gmaxwell> just.. yuck.
1268 2012-10-05 17:46:35 <gmaxwell> I don't think the activation energy to get people to write down actully random values instead is all that great.
1269 2012-10-05 17:46:52 <gavinandresen> ummm, industrial scale password/passphrase cracking is happening anyway.
1270 2012-10-05 17:47:07 <gmaxwell> And it certantly requires less development and risky points (e.g. centeralized data collectors) than what you're suggesting.
1271 2012-10-05 17:47:10 <Diablo-D3> back
1272 2012-10-05 17:47:12 <gavinandresen> e.g. LastPass subscribing to that password-hash-gathering service.....
1273 2012-10-05 17:47:13 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: It's not VC funded.
1274 2012-10-05 17:47:26 lggr has joined
1275 2012-10-05 17:47:28 <Diablo-D3> kreal: Im seriously not seeing anything out of the way
1276 2012-10-05 17:47:50 datagut__ has joined
1277 2012-10-05 17:47:53 <kreal> strange
1278 2012-10-05 17:48:06 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: you sure pwnedlist.com isn't VC funded?
1279 2012-10-05 17:48:07 <kreal> which linux dis?
1280 2012-10-05 17:48:12 <Diablo-D3> debian
1281 2012-10-05 17:48:27 toffoo has quit ()
1282 2012-10-05 17:48:32 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: if I was a VC I'd fund them....
1283 2012-10-05 17:48:56 datagut__ has quit (Client Quit)
1284 2012-10-05 17:49:07 datagutt_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1285 2012-10-05 17:49:18 datagutt_ has joined
1286 2012-10-05 17:50:11 <gmaxwell> In any case, the academic thinking on password security is that the same markov property that makes password material easily predicted is what makes them easily remembered; you don't get one without the other. The sentinel idea is _cute_ but it lowers the workfactor for attackers a lot, and it providing a benefit
1287 2012-10-05 17:50:47 <gmaxwell> requires that the attackers feel enough compeition to race to grab the values... and that the users take action before the attacker gets both and permutes.
1288 2012-10-05 17:51:37 <Diablo-D3> kreal: debian
1289 2012-10-05 17:52:46 <gavinandresen> sure...  boiling the idea down, if it is a million times easier to crack the sentinel then a rational attacker will "take the money and run" if they think you have less than 1 million times the fund in the ultra-secure wallet.
1290 2012-10-05 17:53:18 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1291 2012-10-05 17:53:49 <gavinandresen> ... assuming that there are multiple attackers all trying to steal the sentinels.
1292 2012-10-05 17:54:06 <Diablo-D3> kreal: according to wireshark statistics, 85% of packets and bytes are tcp, 43%/56% packets/bytes are my ssh session to my laptop.
1293 2012-10-05 17:54:14 <gavinandresen> I'm probably making the whole thing more complicated with multiple passphrases.
1294 2012-10-05 17:54:38 <Diablo-D3> kreal: theres nothing else popping up
1295 2012-10-05 17:55:26 <kjj_> gavinandresen: but multiple passphrases is probably crucial.  with just one, getting the master wallet is easy, once the sentinel has been found
1296 2012-10-05 17:55:57 <kreal> Diablo-D3 solar flares then only suggestion is to purge wallet.dat with a new.
1297 2012-10-05 17:56:06 <Diablo-D3> kreal: bitcoin isnt even running =P
1298 2012-10-05 17:56:08 <kjj_> gavinandresen: with two partials, the effort is slightly more than the effort of the weakest passphrase, which is hopefully enough time to mitigate
1299 2012-10-05 17:56:35 <maaku> kreal: atmospheric nuke detonation might do the trick too ;)
1300 2012-10-05 17:56:38 <kreal> have you considered the hardware?
1301 2012-10-05 17:56:43 <kreal> broken netcard?
1302 2012-10-05 17:56:46 <Diablo-D3> kreal: its not the hardware
1303 2012-10-05 17:56:57 lggr has joined
1304 2012-10-05 17:57:03 <kjj_> hmm, I don't think that is clear.  I'm not sure that sentinels are a good idea, but if someone decides that they are and uses them, they must use at least 2 in order for whatever protection they provide to be effective
1305 2012-10-05 17:57:43 <kreal> maaku, or an alien emp weapon
1306 2012-10-05 17:57:48 <gavinandresen> kjj_: that's right, I think.  Assuming that they're independent, and not revealed as linked, which might be bad assumptions.
1307 2012-10-05 17:58:26 <kreal> targeting only Diablo-D3 :)
1308 2012-10-05 17:58:36 <kreal> because hey? he is the devil.
1309 2012-10-05 17:58:49 <gavinandresen> (If I choose a cutsey girly passphrase1, then I'm probably more likely to choose a cutsey girly passphrase2....)
1310 2012-10-05 17:58:54 <Diablo-D3> how do I just list all open sockets?
1311 2012-10-05 17:59:19 <kjj_> gavinandresen: right, anything two things that come from the same person are going to be linked to some degree
1312 2012-10-05 17:59:52 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: I updated the gist to start with: DO NOT USE A BRAINWALLET! YOU ARE LIKELY TO LOSE YOUR COINS!
1313 2012-10-05 17:59:52 <gavinandresen> These are half-baked thoughts.
1314 2012-10-05 18:00:05 <kjj_> quotes from books in the same genre, song lyrics, whatever, there will be links
1315 2012-10-05 18:00:44 <kjj_> I would love to see brain wallets be made as safe as practical, but there are big issues with them.
1316 2012-10-05 18:01:02 <kreal> "DO NOT USE A BRAINWALLET! YOU ARE LIKELY TO LOSE YOUR COINS!, INSTEAD USE WALLETBIT YOU ARE MORE THEN LIKELY TO GAIN COINS?"  sorry couldnt help myself.
1317 2012-10-05 18:01:26 <kjj_> for example, they stop being brain wallets and turn into mere keys the first time you use them, unless you are really really sure about the device you are typing on
1318 2012-10-05 18:02:36 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1319 2012-10-05 18:02:45 <Diablo-D3> _what the fuck firefox_
1320 2012-10-05 18:02:55 <kjj_> if you have to create a new address under duress (someone hit a sentinel, save your stuff ASAP!) the new passphrases chosen are VERY likely to be related to the ones just broken, which means they are somewhat less secure on the second pass
1321 2012-10-05 18:03:01 <Diablo-D3> infinity.local:xxxxx->observatory5.eff.org:https (ESTABLISHED)
1322 2012-10-05 18:03:09 <Diablo-D3> HUNDREDS of those
1323 2012-10-05 18:03:33 k3t3r has joined
1324 2012-10-05 18:03:49 <gavinandresen> brainwallet software running on your system should take a couple of minutes and try to brute-force variations of your new passphrase.
1325 2012-10-05 18:03:50 <kjj_> Diablo-D3: that is the SSL observatory
1326 2012-10-05 18:04:24 <Diablo-D3> yes, Im aware of what it is
1327 2012-10-05 18:04:33 <Diablo-D3> I have https everywhere installed expressly for that feature
1328 2012-10-05 18:04:39 <Diablo-D3> why the fuck is firefox spamming connections to it
1329 2012-10-05 18:04:52 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: ignoring all my complaints, some basic challenges you'd have— if software asks people to provide personal info for salting it will be really hard to keep people from assuming its collecting personal information.
1330 2012-10-05 18:04:59 lolbirdofprey has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1331 2012-10-05 18:05:39 ovidiusoft has joined
1332 2012-10-05 18:05:41 <kjj_> gmaxwell: people trust the software with money, and the source is available.  It shouldn't be too hard to convince them
1333 2012-10-05 18:05:44 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: use their email or mobile phone number as salt, "so we can tell you if you're about to be compromised"
1334 2012-10-05 18:06:17 lggr has joined
1335 2012-10-05 18:06:18 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: thats better but people who want privacy will then just leave . as their salt and thus not get salting or notices. :(
1336 2012-10-05 18:06:20 Mobius_ is now known as MobiusL
1337 2012-10-05 18:06:39 <gavinandresen> good, I don't like them anyway.
1338 2012-10-05 18:06:41 <gavinandresen> (kidding!)
1339 2012-10-05 18:06:48 <kjj_> you can put a note nearby that says that lying is OK, they just need to remember their lie
1340 2012-10-05 18:06:59 <Diablo-D3> infinity.local:56907->static.162.62.9.176.clients.your-server.de:http (ESTABLISHED)
1341 2012-10-05 18:07:02 <Diablo-D3> a shitload of those too
1342 2012-10-05 18:07:10 <Diablo-D3> what the fuck is going on
1343 2012-10-05 18:07:27 <kjj_> you getting pwn3d, Diablo?  your coins still in your wallet?
1344 2012-10-05 18:07:34 <Diablo-D3> kjj_: no
1345 2012-10-05 18:07:38 <Diablo-D3> firefox is just going fucktarded quickly
1346 2012-10-05 18:08:18 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: I'm going to let all these ideas percolate for a few weeks.  Or months.  It's not like brainwallets are high on the priority list....
1347 2012-10-05 18:08:21 <gmaxwell> kjj_: it's just more to understand and get wrong.
1348 2012-10-05 18:08:36 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: things like mechnisms for recovery/ backup are more important.
1349 2012-10-05 18:08:47 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: absolutely.
1350 2012-10-05 18:08:54 <Diablo-D3> does static.162.62.9.176.clients.your-server.de respond to anyone?
1351 2012-10-05 18:09:19 <Graet> yes
1352 2012-10-05 18:09:21 <gavinandresen> I do worry that we'll see more really poorly thought-out brainwallet solutions, though
1353 2012-10-05 18:09:26 <Diablo-D3> do you see anything?
1354 2012-10-05 18:10:06 <Graet> yep fe[n]ix's blog
1355 2012-10-05 18:10:25 <Diablo-D3> ahh
1356 2012-10-05 18:10:25 <Diablo-D3> wtf
1357 2012-10-05 18:10:54 <Diablo-D3> that was linked to by hn like 2-3 days ago
1358 2012-10-05 18:11:04 <Diablo-D3> why does firefox still have sockets open to it
1359 2012-10-05 18:11:53 da2ce7_d has joined
1360 2012-10-05 18:12:13 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1361 2012-10-05 18:12:24 graham1 has joined
1362 2012-10-05 18:12:53 <graham1> hey. i dont understand anything about bitcoin code tbh, but was just wondering a quick thing. is it possible to use the existing bitcoin system as a software key authentication system?
1363 2012-10-05 18:13:16 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1364 2012-10-05 18:13:31 <graham1> something which cant be bypassed through cracking. like how server side authentication works
1365 2012-10-05 18:13:40 * Diablo-D3 just restarts firefox because its gone insane
1366 2012-10-05 18:13:41 <kjj_> graham1: probably not
1367 2012-10-05 18:13:55 <stevep> graham1: cant be bypassed through cracking == no
1368 2012-10-05 18:15:27 ovidiusoft has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1369 2012-10-05 18:15:37 lggr has joined
1370 2012-10-05 18:17:03 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: I don't know if it's escapable; e.g. a well thought out one would require 500ms+ of fast cpu strengthening. But a JS implementation of that would take 8 minutes; so the 'dumb' implementations just won't implement it.
1371 2012-10-05 18:17:58 <gmaxwell> So at some point I think you just have to say some implementations are dumb and bad and shouldn't be used.
1372 2012-10-05 18:18:15 darsk1ez has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1373 2012-10-05 18:18:25 Hasimir has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1374 2012-10-05 18:18:56 darkskiez has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1375 2012-10-05 18:19:39 <graham1> i need to make some software which i dont want pirated. there needs to be an authentication system so that nobody without a username/password can use the software. i was thinking of somehow storing the username/passwords on a botnet? what is missing from bitcoin which would allow me to use the infrastructure for authentication? might be a laughably bad question. i dont know /anything/
1376 2012-10-05 18:19:39 <graham1> about how the technology works. i just thought since the bitcoin client connects and verifies a blockchain there is some sort of authnetication there? anyway..if bitcoin isn't useful to what i need...how else would i do it?
1377 2012-10-05 18:20:34 <graham1> help appreciated, thanks
1378 2012-10-05 18:21:45 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1379 2012-10-05 18:24:50 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: it seems likely to me that in the future _most_ bitcoin software written will be scams or snake-oil; because honestly and thoughtfullness are more costly than their absence. The community in general needs to figure out how to sort that stuff out and efficiently communicate people about the things they should and shouldn't use.
1380 2012-10-05 18:25:05 lggr has joined
1381 2012-10-05 18:25:30 Hasimir has joined
1382 2012-10-05 18:25:49 <stevep> gmaxwell: this is where I see the need for certification and publishing of best practices.
1383 2012-10-05 18:27:22 <gmaxwell> stevep: its hard to balane that against the diversity and vibrancy we need. Ignoring that I know what we have I don't think I'd be comfortable giving any implementation (including the reference) a clean bill of health today.
1384 2012-10-05 18:27:56 <gmaxwell> Maybe bitcoinj. I haven't looked at it in a while though. But it's not a full node either, so thats not enough.
1385 2012-10-05 18:28:46 <gmaxwell> so it all has to be relative.
1386 2012-10-05 18:29:36 <stevep> gmaxwell: What is a clean bill of health. We need to define what healthy is first.
1387 2012-10-05 18:30:41 <midnightmagic> ...
1388 2012-10-05 18:31:16 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1389 2012-10-05 18:31:51 <gmaxwell> stevep: What I'm saying is that I'm reasonably confident if I erased my knoweldge of how the software is now and wrote a list of what is healthy, the resulting spec would not be passed by anything.
1390 2012-10-05 18:31:52 darsk1ez has joined
1391 2012-10-05 18:31:56 darkskiez has joined
1392 2012-10-05 18:32:32 <stevep> gmaxwell: I'd love to see the list :)
1393 2012-10-05 18:32:49 <gmaxwell> E.g. in the reference client a single unfortunate bitflip could make you lose all your coin. I think that should disqualify any wallet from handling significant sums of money.. at least not without an external redundancy layer to double check all transactions; which we don't have the hooks to support.
1394 2012-10-05 18:34:18 <stevep> gmaxwell: I guess we need something like triple reduncancy similar to flight systems
1395 2012-10-05 18:34:19 <gmaxwell> the standards for bitcoin need to be somewhat higher than most finance software because all it does is irreversable. :(  So the criteria for software quality should start with things like DO-178B.
1396 2012-10-05 18:34:25 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1397 2012-10-05 18:34:25 <gmaxwell> Jinx.
1398 2012-10-05 18:34:31 lggr has joined
1399 2012-10-05 18:34:32 <gmaxwell> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DO-178B)
1400 2012-10-05 18:34:57 [\\\] has joined
1401 2012-10-05 18:35:06 <stevep> gmaxwell: even then its running on an operating system that allows a debugger to attach and flip bits at will.
1402 2012-10-05 18:35:29 <gmaxwell> And I'm somewhat doubtful that you can really meet DO-178B level A with a program written in C++.
1403 2012-10-05 18:35:47 <gmaxwell> (though you could have a transaction core that meets it even if the whole thing doesn't)
1404 2012-10-05 18:35:57 <kjj_> hmm.  it would be nice if github could tag lines or functions with DAL markers
1405 2012-10-05 18:36:10 <gmaxwell> stevep: well, even an airplane can be shot down.. thats okay. "don't do that". It should still be secure against "normal" attackers and random events.
1406 2012-10-05 18:36:29 drizztbsd has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1407 2012-10-05 18:36:48 Ferroh has joined
1408 2012-10-05 18:37:20 <gmaxwell> (I say 'doubtful' instead of "I'm sure you can't" because apparently F-35 sofware is written in C++)
1409 2012-10-05 18:37:56 <stevep> gmaxwell: AFAIK you just have to fill in a form saying ada is too slow to use :)
1410 2012-10-05 18:39:05 <gmaxwell> Well _C_, doesn't surprise me, I know how to do modified-decision-criteria testing for that... even without instrumentation so long as the compiler isn't optimizing.
1411 2012-10-05 18:39:10 <stevep> gmaxwell: bitflips are not just an issue at runtime. The filesystem is also vulnerable. Do we need redundandcy in the waller.dat too
1412 2012-10-05 18:39:15 <gmaxwell> But I dunno how one handles that with C++.
1413 2012-10-05 18:39:28 <gmaxwell> stevep: backups achieve that redundancy and are needed for other reasons.
1414 2012-10-05 18:39:49 <gmaxwell> Though we've discussed having redundancy in the file / by having backup files too.
1415 2012-10-05 18:40:24 <stevep> gmaxwell: backups gets us back into education and best practices again. I can't even get my family to backup their priceless photos let alone their cash.
1416 2012-10-05 18:40:27 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1417 2012-10-05 18:40:33 <gmaxwell> the bitflip I was thinking about is a flip during transaction drafting can make you send change to an unspendable address.
1418 2012-10-05 18:41:16 <stevep> gmaxwell: whats the probability of that compared to a sha256 collision
1419 2012-10-05 18:41:48 <gmaxwell> stevep: once a one-time backup is sufficient; that will be easier.  It's not avoidable, though we can offer escrow mechenisms that make backup easy. Education is important. But when I say I couldn't approve any client with absolute quality criteria it's because no how good a user you are— the unmodified software is "unsafe (if only slightly) at any speed"
1420 2012-10-05 18:42:16 <gmaxwell> stevep: pretty good. I observe bout three bitflips a week on my ECC protected systems with 64gb ram.
1421 2012-10-05 18:42:41 <gmaxwell> I've never observed  sha256 collision. :P
1422 2012-10-05 18:42:44 <kjj_> where do you live?  Denver?
1423 2012-10-05 18:43:04 <stevep> gmaxwell: I have to admit I've lost 3 systems to bad ram too... scary as hell to think a sigsegv could just as easily be "all your coin belong to us"
1424 2012-10-05 18:43:13 <gmaxwell> kjj_: nah, it's not atypical, enable scrubbing and kernel logging.
1425 2012-10-05 18:43:48 <gmaxwell> stevep: right. and it's avoidable. Every operation should be doublechecked. Doesn't eliminate the possibility. but _vastly_ reduces it.
1426 2012-10-05 18:44:12 lggr has joined
1427 2012-10-05 18:44:36 <gmaxwell> Proper hooks that make it possible for high value systems to do voting for things like exchanges and banks; would go a step further but perhaps too specalized for general purpose implementations.
1428 2012-10-05 18:45:22 <gmaxwell> Bitflips during signing can also leak your private key.. though we check the signature; which catches most of them (except those resulting in poor R selection)
1429 2012-10-05 18:47:02 agricocb has joined
1430 2012-10-05 18:47:02 <stevep> gmaxwell: I'm don't understand the private key leak. Do you mean by changing a pointer or something deeper.
1431 2012-10-05 18:47:28 ovidiusoft has joined
1432 2012-10-05 18:47:40 <gmaxwell> stevep: no, something deeper. Though changing a pointer or a bit of code could do that too.
1433 2012-10-05 18:48:30 <gmaxwell> There are a bunch of points in the ecc math where a single bit difference basically corrupts the signature in a way that discloses part or all of the private key. This has been used to seal keys out of smart cards by irradiating or power spiking them.
1434 2012-10-05 18:48:49 slush has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1435 2012-10-05 18:49:30 <stevep> gmaxwell: I think I've read about something like that that where they hold a heat lamp on a stripped smart card.
1436 2012-10-05 18:50:08 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1437 2012-10-05 18:50:15 <gmaxwell> generally a design that double computed all criticial operations and shuts down if they get different results would close off that stuff.
1438 2012-10-05 18:50:22 <stevep> gmaxwell: All i can think for that situation is to run the math multiple times preferably in different parts of the heap so we don't keep using the same bad bit of ram.
1439 2012-10-05 18:50:55 slush has joined
1440 2012-10-05 18:51:16 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1441 2012-10-05 18:51:29 molecular has joined
1442 2012-10-05 18:51:32 <stevep> gmaxwell: Even then you're at the "mercy" of bitflips in the executable code.
1443 2012-10-05 18:51:46 <gmaxwell> stevep: Right. In professional software used by banks and exchanges they should do voting. E.g. multiple backend systems and a harness that makes them get consistent results. Which would require derandomizing some things that are random now.  But typical usage should just double check.
1444 2012-10-05 18:51:59 <stevep> gmaxwell: Would you advocate creating a standard API for bitcoin protocol handling and have the reference client call into its own reference implementation and multiple other independent implementations?
1445 2012-10-05 18:52:37 <gmaxwell> I think that is a good long term view for professional usage. Not just for random errors but also for avoiding software bugs.
1446 2012-10-05 18:52:49 <gmaxwell> e.g. miners want to make blocks that all nodes will accept.
1447 2012-10-05 18:53:29 <stevep> gmaxwell: I think there is a monoculture in mining software at the moment. Are there any other mining capabale implementations?
1448 2012-10-05 18:53:45 lggr has joined
1449 2012-10-05 18:54:23 <gavinandresen> some mining pools use patched, old versions of the reference implementation. I don't think anybody uses something completely re-implemented.
1450 2012-10-05 18:54:47 <gmaxwell> apparently bitcoin-js is, though I'm skeptical how complete its rules implementation is. Bluematt has been adding full validation to bitcoinj which could get it there.
1451 2012-10-05 18:55:44 <gmaxwell> I think diversity of solid software > single implementation monoculture > diversity of broken software ... so making sure you have the first instead of the last is important.
1452 2012-10-05 18:55:49 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: re: bit flips:  in your copious spare time, finding spots where a bit-flip would cause lost coins and filing github issues about that would be nifty.
1453 2012-10-05 18:56:08 <stevep> gmaxwell: Of course the benefit of a mining monoculture is no blockchain forks. as we all agree to be "wrong" together.
1454 2012-10-05 18:56:26 <gavinandresen> I don't think it would be hard to implement double-checks for critical operations like creating keypairs or txouts
1455 2012-10-05 18:56:39 <gmaxwell> stevep: right, in bitcoin for the _economy_ consistency is more important than correctness.
1456 2012-10-05 18:58:01 <gavinandresen> monoculture has bad tail-risk, though, when there's a major bug found...
1457 2012-10-05 18:59:14 <stevep> gavinandresen: exactly. Maybe 2 independent "protocol backends" implemented by 2 independent teams but both part of the reference client.
1458 2012-10-05 18:59:19 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: yea, output address handing and change address are the ones I've spotted so far. (the later is more risky, at least the former only loses what you send)
1459 2012-10-05 19:00:03 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1460 2012-10-05 19:01:25 Nesetalis has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1461 2012-10-05 19:01:48 <maaku> stevep: well, that's what pynode is for ;)
1462 2012-10-05 19:03:15 lggr has joined
1463 2012-10-05 19:04:26 <stevep> maaku: Are there plans to embed pynode into the reference client?
1464 2012-10-05 19:04:32 <maaku> no
1465 2012-10-05 19:05:13 <maaku> but it provides (soon) a complete, independent, full node implementation
1466 2012-10-05 19:06:20 ThomasV_ has joined
1467 2012-10-05 19:06:46 <stevep> I guess the good thing about new implementations is that they have a huge unit test suite encapsulated in the current blockchain
1468 2012-10-05 19:07:06 <jgarzik> stevep: no point
1469 2012-10-05 19:07:38 <kjj_> correctly handling the chain is only part of it.  the other part is properly rejecting the bogons that aren't in the chain (because they are bogus)
1470 2012-10-05 19:07:41 <jgarzik> stevep: reference client already does everything that pynode does, and more.
1471 2012-10-05 19:07:55 <jgarzik> stevep: pynode has zero wallet support, as that's not really it's purpose
1472 2012-10-05 19:08:04 <jgarzik> (which is more about monitoring, status, aux purposes, routing, ...)
1473 2012-10-05 19:08:08 pusle has quit ()
1474 2012-10-05 19:08:14 <stevep> jgarzik: We've been discussing the importance of having a second implementation to catch more "bogons"
1475 2012-10-05 19:08:44 <stevep> Is there a collection of "bad blocks" that can be used for testing other implementations.
1476 2012-10-05 19:09:08 <kjj_> well, the system stores a few types of bad blocks in /dev/random...
1477 2012-10-05 19:09:13 <jgarzik> stevep: not really
1478 2012-10-05 19:09:22 <jgarzik> stevep: there is a collection of bad scripts and similar details
1479 2012-10-05 19:09:24 <stevep> kj_: I said bad blocks not bad bytes
1480 2012-10-05 19:09:26 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1481 2012-10-05 19:09:36 <kjj_> the bytes aren't bad, just misunderstood
1482 2012-10-05 19:09:41 <jgarzik> stevep: some blk0001.dat files like http://gtf.org/garzik/bitcoin/blk0001.dat.bz2 include invalid blocks by accident
1483 2012-10-05 19:09:48 <jgarzik> and are kept around for testing purposes
1484 2012-10-05 19:10:00 <maaku> stevep: there isn't a suite of bad blocks/bad transactions to test against
1485 2012-10-05 19:10:02 <jgarzik> kjj_: heh
1486 2012-10-05 19:10:07 <maaku> stevep: but that could be useful if you feel like making one
1487 2012-10-05 19:10:19 <jgarzik> testnet chain includes MANY tests
1488 2012-10-05 19:10:22 <kjj_> hmm.  I wonder if we could script creation of almost, but not quit, valid blocks
1489 2012-10-05 19:10:22 <stevep> jgarzik: I noticed some of the "odd" blocks implementing my own blockchain parser.
1490 2012-10-05 19:10:24 <jgarzik> the best tests are data-driven
1491 2012-10-05 19:10:29 <jgarzik> and thus implementation independent
1492 2012-10-05 19:10:41 <jgarzik> gavin really hit a home run by putting tests in the testnet3 chain
1493 2012-10-05 19:10:50 Nesetalis has joined
1494 2012-10-05 19:10:52 <kjj_> every time we identify a new corner case, add that to the script
1495 2012-10-05 19:12:09 <kjj_> heh.  here's a good hack for pynode...  make a node that doesn't ever connect out, but when someone connects up, start pushing out test cases over the network
1496 2012-10-05 19:12:23 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1497 2012-10-05 19:12:50 lggr has joined
1498 2012-10-05 19:15:03 <stevep> How do you guys develop bitcoin. I'm scared to death of running an edited version on my system in case my modifications spend all my coins ;)
1499 2012-10-05 19:15:40 <kjj_> second box, second datadir, VM, testnet, etc.  lots of ways to run test versions without risking your real money
1500 2012-10-05 19:16:31 <stevep> I think VM would be my preferred choice.
1501 2012-10-05 19:16:37 <jgarzik> stevep: build from git, using gitian, and verify that the resulting hash matches those from other builders, building independently of each other
1502 2012-10-05 19:16:44 <jgarzik> gitian uses a virtual machine
1503 2012-10-05 19:17:31 <stevep> Thanks :) Never heard of gitian before.
1504 2012-10-05 19:18:39 eriklonroth has joined
1505 2012-10-05 19:18:58 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1506 2012-10-05 19:19:41 <helo> are there tests which could be data-driven, but not from a chain? eg network data sequences
1507 2012-10-05 19:19:58 D34TH has joined
1508 2012-10-05 19:19:59 <eriklonroth> Heya, quick question. Having extremely slow performance of ./bitcoind <command> on my virtual xen-node. Common issue?
1509 2012-10-05 19:20:55 stevep has quit (Quit: Gotta go play with gitian and the bitcoin-qt build)
1510 2012-10-05 19:22:05 <eriklonroth> I have a somewhat high bi I/O (from vmstat) and read from debug.log "ERROR: FetchInputs()
1511 2012-10-05 19:22:11 <midnightmagic> aaand he's gone..
1512 2012-10-05 19:22:25 lggr has joined
1513 2012-10-05 19:23:52 occulta has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.1.3 Equilibrium http://www.kvirc.net/)
1514 2012-10-05 19:25:04 asa1024 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1515 2012-10-05 19:25:52 asa1024 has joined
1516 2012-10-05 19:28:31 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
1517 2012-10-05 19:29:00 maaku has joined
1518 2012-10-05 19:29:03 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1519 2012-10-05 19:31:53 lggr has joined
1520 2012-10-05 19:34:24 Motest003 has joined
1521 2012-10-05 19:35:59 Motest031 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1522 2012-10-05 19:37:49 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1523 2012-10-05 19:41:06 vigilyn has joined
1524 2012-10-05 19:41:22 lggr has joined
1525 2012-10-05 19:46:53 <jgarzik> "Right now you can use part of the version field as nonce and nothing bad will happen AFAIK."
1526 2012-10-05 19:46:55 <jgarzik> SIGH
1527 2012-10-05 19:47:31 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1528 2012-10-05 19:47:35 <kjj_> he's right you know.  I started putting garbage in my version field, let it run for a few hours.  no fire, no smoke, nothing.
1529 2012-10-05 19:47:35 <Diablo-D3> jgarzik: ffffff
1530 2012-10-05 19:47:49 <Diablo-D3> kjj_: THATS NOT WHY SPECS EXIST GODDAMNIT
1531 2012-10-05 19:47:57 <kjj_> haha
1532 2012-10-05 19:49:27 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: where is this?
1533 2012-10-05 19:49:37 <gmaxwell> wait!
1534 2012-10-05 19:49:40 <gmaxwell> I don't want to know.
1535 2012-10-05 19:49:41 <gmaxwell> never mind.
1536 2012-10-05 19:49:46 <gmaxwell> commencing mind wipe now
1537 2012-10-05 19:49:49 gmaxwell has left ()
1538 2012-10-05 19:49:49 gmaxwell has joined
1539 2012-10-05 19:49:56 BitcoinBaltar has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1540 2012-10-05 19:51:37 <kjj_> the real problem is that he did some thread necromancy without knowing that the solution had already been found (aka, stratum mining protocol)
1541 2012-10-05 19:52:03 BitcoinBaltar has joined
1542 2012-10-05 19:52:24 lggr has joined
1543 2012-10-05 19:52:38 <jgarzik> "Re: Handle much larger MH/s rigs : simply increase the nonce size" https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=89278.msg1247791#msg1247791
1544 2012-10-05 19:52:52 <jgarzik> Sergio Demian Lerner
1545 2012-10-05 19:52:52 <Diablo-D3> jgarzik: fuck no
1546 2012-10-05 19:53:00 <Diablo-D3> I will not fucking support that, neither will ck
1547 2012-10-05 19:53:07 <Diablo-D3> thats 90% of miners right there.
1548 2012-10-05 19:53:08 <jgarzik> good
1549 2012-10-05 19:53:17 <gmaxwell> god I didn't want to knoooowww!
1550 2012-10-05 19:53:31 <gmaxwell> have to wipe my mind1
1551 2012-10-05 19:53:32 <gmaxwell> !
1552 2012-10-05 19:53:34 gmaxwell has left ()
1553 2012-10-05 19:53:34 gmaxwell has joined
1554 2012-10-05 19:57:49 slush1 has joined
1555 2012-10-05 19:58:09 slush has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1556 2012-10-05 19:58:45 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
1557 2012-10-05 19:59:07 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1558 2012-10-05 20:00:47 Zarutian has joined
1559 2012-10-05 20:01:29 slush has joined
1560 2012-10-05 20:01:56 lggr has joined
1561 2012-10-05 20:02:37 slush1 has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1562 2012-10-05 20:03:17 toffoo has joined
1563 2012-10-05 20:05:48 slush has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1564 2012-10-05 20:07:45 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1565 2012-10-05 20:09:15 gavinandresen has quit (Quit: gavinandresen)
1566 2012-10-05 20:09:53 [\\\] has joined
1567 2012-10-05 20:09:54 [\\\] has quit (Excess Flood)
1568 2012-10-05 20:11:21 [\\\] has joined
1569 2012-10-05 20:11:36 lggr has joined
1570 2012-10-05 20:15:55 Joric has joined
1571 2012-10-05 20:17:50 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1572 2012-10-05 20:21:07 lggr has joined
1573 2012-10-05 20:22:59 copumpkin has joined
1574 2012-10-05 20:24:47 enmaku has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1575 2012-10-05 20:25:36 slush has joined
1576 2012-10-05 20:26:35 enmaku has joined
1577 2012-10-05 20:27:02 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1578 2012-10-05 20:30:48 lggr has joined
1579 2012-10-05 20:31:12 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
1580 2012-10-05 20:31:22 helo is now known as helo_1
1581 2012-10-05 20:31:33 helo_1 is now known as helo
1582 2012-10-05 20:34:17 <slush> wtf, using block version as extraextranonce?
1583 2012-10-05 20:34:38 <Diablo-D3> slush: yeah no shit
1584 2012-10-05 20:34:38 <slush> I didn't read that forum tread before, but thinking of some people really scare me
1585 2012-10-05 20:34:42 <Diablo-D3> thats fucking nuts
1586 2012-10-05 20:34:49 <gmaxwell> <3 slush
1587 2012-10-05 20:35:09 <gmaxwell> It's this !@#!@!@# lazyness that seeps all over this community.
1588 2012-10-05 20:35:38 <gmaxwell> and this ability makes rightness politics. "I can shit all over this; therefor it is my moral right to do so, especially if it makes things easier for me"
1589 2012-10-05 20:36:01 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: thats how DMC died
1590 2012-10-05 20:36:25 <Diablo-D3> <nefario> I can shit all over DMC, therefor it is my moral rgiht to do so, especially since I can just claim the SEC shut GLBSE down
1591 2012-10-05 20:36:29 <slush> my 3 years old Atom netbook can generate 500 blockheaders per second in python. It is enough for few THash/s per second + it can use ntime rolling
1592 2012-10-05 20:36:41 <Diablo-D3> yeah, we have ntime rolling
1593 2012-10-05 20:36:44 <Diablo-D3> thats MORE than enough
1594 2012-10-05 20:36:49 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1595 2012-10-05 20:37:12 <gmaxwell> yep. And dich the python and get an easy order of magnitude or two improvement. Plus when you've got tens of thousands of dollars of asics you can probably afford something faster than an atom or rasberry-die.
1596 2012-10-05 20:37:31 <slush> exactly
1597 2012-10-05 20:37:46 <Diablo-D3> yeah, on a Pi we could do a few hundred TH
1598 2012-10-05 20:38:01 <Diablo-D3> if you have a few hundred TH, even in asics, you have money to spend on a better host server
1599 2012-10-05 20:38:36 <gmaxwell> dunno about the the rasberry-die! is awfully slow. But your $50k asic farm can affort a $500 ivybridge system or two.
1600 2012-10-05 20:38:49 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: what, in C?
1601 2012-10-05 20:38:51 <Diablo-D3> its fast enough
1602 2012-10-05 20:38:59 <Diablo-D3> in python, fuck no
1603 2012-10-05 20:39:04 <gmaxwell> maybe but that wasn't my point. :P
1604 2012-10-05 20:39:19 <Diablo-D3> python fucking sucks on arm, no matter how fast your arm is
1605 2012-10-05 20:40:23 <jgarzik> python is slow on any platform :)
1606 2012-10-05 20:40:56 <slush> :)
1607 2012-10-05 20:41:07 <gmaxwell> In any case. Yes. Non-issue.
1608 2012-10-05 20:41:22 lggr has joined
1609 2012-10-05 20:41:27 <Diablo-D3> jgarzik: its extra nasty on arm
1610 2012-10-05 20:41:35 k3t3r has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1611 2012-10-05 20:42:09 k3t3r has joined
1612 2012-10-05 20:43:10 k3t3r_ has joined
1613 2012-10-05 20:46:44 k3t3r has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1614 2012-10-05 20:46:45 k3t3r_ is now known as k3t3r
1615 2012-10-05 20:47:13 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1616 2012-10-05 20:50:35 lggr has joined
1617 2012-10-05 20:57:39 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1618 2012-10-05 20:59:36 denisx has joined
1619 2012-10-05 21:00:46 lggr has joined
1620 2012-10-05 21:01:13 noagendamarket has joined
1621 2012-10-05 21:01:51 <MC1984> I've never tried those new clients, always used 0.3.24, is there a best version when it comes to download blockchain speed and with less transaction fee?
1622 2012-10-05 21:02:17 <MC1984> guess where this was written
1623 2012-10-05 21:04:10 copumpkin has joined
1624 2012-10-05 21:06:27 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1625 2012-10-05 21:06:39 tonikt3 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1626 2012-10-05 21:07:58 <kjj_> someone's parents' basement?
1627 2012-10-05 21:10:09 lggr has joined
1628 2012-10-05 21:10:15 <Joric> i doubt 0.3.24 is the fastest %) maybe in 2011
1629 2012-10-05 21:11:04 da2ce796 has joined
1630 2012-10-05 21:11:46 <Joric> i'm not very sure though, most software gets slower over time
1631 2012-10-05 21:12:56 MaxSan has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1632 2012-10-05 21:13:53 MaxSan has joined
1633 2012-10-05 21:14:39 ThomasV_ has quit (Quit: Quitte)
1634 2012-10-05 21:16:29 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1635 2012-10-05 21:16:58 <gmaxwell> Joric: it's much faster now.
1636 2012-10-05 21:17:29 kreal has quit ()
1637 2012-10-05 21:17:41 gribble has quit (Excess Flood)
1638 2012-10-05 21:18:23 k3t3r has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1639 2012-10-05 21:18:41 <MC1984> deliberately running .3 is suicidal at this point i assume
1640 2012-10-05 21:19:00 k3t3r has joined
1641 2012-10-05 21:19:39 k3t3r has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1642 2012-10-05 21:19:43 <gmaxwell> many 0.3.24 nodes that were left running are simply stuck now.
1643 2012-10-05 21:20:00 <gmaxwell> or were at least.
1644 2012-10-05 21:20:01 k3t3r has joined
1645 2012-10-05 21:20:39 lggr has joined
1646 2012-10-05 21:21:10 <MC1984> do these people just put miners in a closet and forget about them for multiple years or what
1647 2012-10-05 21:22:29 <gmaxwell> okay, only 35.9% of the current listening 0.3.24 nodes are stuck.
1648 2012-10-05 21:23:18 <Luke-Jr> O.o
1649 2012-10-05 21:23:25 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: cause of stuck-ness?
1650 2012-10-05 21:23:31 KIDC has joined
1651 2012-10-05 21:23:31 KIDC has quit (Changing host)
1652 2012-10-05 21:23:31 KIDC has joined
1653 2012-10-05 21:23:32 <jgarzik> the block download avoidance code?
1654 2012-10-05 21:23:50 <jgarzik> static const int NOBLKS_VERSION_START = 32000;
1655 2012-10-05 21:23:50 <jgarzik> static const int NOBLKS_VERSION_END = 32400;
1656 2012-10-05 21:24:08 <Luke-Jr> MC1984: 0.7.1 is probably the best version to use now; if you really want to override the fee rules (BAD IDEA), you can use a hidden option in next-test
1657 2012-10-05 21:24:28 datagutt_ is now known as datagutt
1658 2012-10-05 21:25:01 <MC1984> i have no intention of using anything other than the latest
1659 2012-10-05 21:25:02 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: I expected most to be stuck due to the bdb maximum transaction size preventing a reorg during the p2sh move.. but it looks like only a few percent are stuck due to that.
1660 2012-10-05 21:25:14 gribble has joined
1661 2012-10-05 21:25:42 k3t3r has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1662 2012-10-05 21:25:50 <gmaxwell> The rest I expect are stuck because they don't do the keep pulling thing once they get too far behind and they dont get 500 blocks due to the send buffer limits.
1663 2012-10-05 21:26:08 k3t3r has joined
1664 2012-10-05 21:26:10 <gmaxwell> There could be other stuff I'm not thinking of— we've fixed a lot of things.
1665 2012-10-05 21:26:22 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: one would think the latter would cause a dramatically slowing of download, but not stuck
1666 2012-10-05 21:26:28 jurov has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1667 2012-10-05 21:26:29 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1668 2012-10-05 21:26:36 slush has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1669 2012-10-05 21:26:46 <jgarzik> the try-getblocks-upon-new-network-block thing has existed for a long time, I thought?
1670 2012-10-05 21:26:59 slush has joined
1671 2012-10-05 21:27:14 jurov has joined
1672 2012-10-05 21:27:31 <Luke-Jr> MC1984: ah, I missed that you were quoting someone above
1673 2012-10-05 21:27:51 <MC1984> some retard on the forum
1674 2012-10-05 21:28:30 <MC1984> is the amount of nodes on an old version still a problem
1675 2012-10-05 21:29:13 <Luke-Jr> MC1984: http://luke.dashjr.org/programs/bitcoin/files/charts/security.html
1676 2012-10-05 21:29:40 <Luke-Jr> for branch versions: http://luke.dashjr.org/programs/bitcoin/files/charts/branches.html
1677 2012-10-05 21:30:01 lggr has joined
1678 2012-10-05 21:30:22 <jgarzik> MC1984: old nodes should be fine, modulo the odd bug, as long as the majority are validating P2SH
1679 2012-10-05 21:30:39 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: don't forget security vulns
1680 2012-10-05 21:30:59 <MC1984> 70% vulnerable to what
1681 2012-10-05 21:31:09 <Luke-Jr> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/CVEs
1682 2012-10-05 21:32:33 <jgarzik> Sure, they should upgrade.  But the existence of CVEs does not imply those nodes are suddenly dead in the water and useless.
1683 2012-10-05 21:32:45 TD has joined
1684 2012-10-05 21:33:27 xisalty has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1685 2012-10-05 21:35:36 boupitch has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1686 2012-10-05 21:36:23 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1687 2012-10-05 21:39:31 lggr has joined
1688 2012-10-05 21:40:38 MaxSan has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1689 2012-10-05 21:41:04 <MC1984> hey is gavin gonna go fulltime dev on bitcoin with this foundation thing
1690 2012-10-05 21:41:06 <midnightmagic> Luke-Jr: Ooo is there a new next-test?
1691 2012-10-05 21:41:09 <MC1984> is anyone else
1692 2012-10-05 21:41:33 <midnightmagic> MC1984: I think paying Gavin was the idea, but who knows where money is intended to go.
1693 2012-10-05 21:43:33 <midnightmagic> MC1984: Unless you're part of the organization! Go join! It's pretty cheap to be an individual member.
1694 2012-10-05 21:44:39 <MC1984> ill see what they intend to do first
1695 2012-10-05 21:45:24 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: no it causes stuck IIRC
1696 2012-10-05 21:46:07 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: what happens is that it requests blocks. and then stops.. and never gets enough to actually _connect_ them, when it gets another block announcement it doesn't keep trying.
1697 2012-10-05 21:46:20 <MC1984> i would like to see them produce or comission a standard set of custoemr facing bitcoin branding logos and graphics etc
1698 2012-10-05 21:46:20 <gmaxwell> (because it already has the next block)
1699 2012-10-05 21:46:39 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1700 2012-10-05 21:46:47 <MC1984> better than the old logo someone knocked up 4 years ago
1701 2012-10-05 21:46:57 <gmaxwell> er, to restate: so it tries getblocks but doesn't get enough to connect .. and it doesn't keep trying because it already has wha it gets.
1702 2012-10-05 21:47:09 <gmaxwell> nodes really do get stuck with this, though they have to end up somewhat behind.
1703 2012-10-05 21:47:53 <gmaxwell> iirc 0.3.24 will still display never confirmable self-doublespends too.
1704 2012-10-05 21:49:11 xisalty has joined
1705 2012-10-05 21:49:29 lggr has joined
1706 2012-10-05 21:50:57 <gmaxwell> though right, the 'vulns' we've had wouldn't have been announced as vulnerabilities in other kinds of software; 0.3.24 isn't exposed to any remote code execution bugs... other than tricking people with short forks and DOS I don't think 0.3.24 is that risky. Of course, it's likely to fail all on its own (as evidence by the fact that 1/3rd listeners appear to be broken)
1707 2012-10-05 21:51:23 Gabit has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1708 2012-10-05 21:54:36 slush has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1709 2012-10-05 21:55:29 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1710 2012-10-05 21:55:44 Rayahe has quit (Quit: Rayahe)
1711 2012-10-05 21:57:15 Gladamas_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1712 2012-10-05 21:58:05 Gabit has joined
1713 2012-10-05 21:58:50 lggr has joined
1714 2012-10-05 22:00:58 <BlueMatt> TheSeven: uhh...yea, I should probably do that...Ill look into it (sometime)
1715 2012-10-05 22:03:27 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: re: bitcoinjs: I know it supports getwork and the full script impl, so...Id say its probably pretty much there...
1716 2012-10-05 22:04:13 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: yea, I don't believe it though— as far as I can tell it resulted in no bug reports about the reference implementations script handling. So it's probably not consisten with the reference implementation.
1717 2012-10-05 22:04:22 <gmaxwell> consistent*
1718 2012-10-05 22:04:46 <BlueMatt> IIRC it runs the reference data-driven tests, so it cant be /that/ far off
1719 2012-10-05 22:05:15 <gmaxwell> HAHAHAHAHAHA
1720 2012-10-05 22:05:18 <BlueMatt> and it bitcoinj reimpl only resulted in like 1-2 reference bug reports...
1721 2012-10-05 22:05:19 ovidiusoft has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1722 2012-10-05 22:05:24 <gmaxwell> We basically test _none_ of the failure modes.
1723 2012-10-05 22:05:38 <BlueMatt> ehh...we test some stuff ok
1724 2012-10-05 22:05:46 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1725 2012-10-05 22:05:53 <BlueMatt> its far from ideal, but its not /that/ bad
1726 2012-10-05 22:05:56 <gmaxwell> I'm not saying it's bad or anything— quite the opposite, it may well be less buggy than reference.
1727 2012-10-05 22:06:41 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: Yes, it really is that bad.
1728 2012-10-05 22:06:43 <gmaxwell> https://people.xiph.org/~greg/bitcoin_coverage/coverage2/home/gmaxwell/src/bcm/bax/src/script.cpp.gcov.html
1729 2012-10-05 22:06:52 <gmaxwell> every orange box is an untested case.
1730 2012-10-05 22:07:06 <gmaxwell> Some are untestable, yes, but not most of them.
1731 2012-10-05 22:07:22 <gmaxwell> and a good chunk of this coverage is only from more recently created tests.
1732 2012-10-05 22:07:24 jurov is now known as jurov|away
1733 2012-10-05 22:07:36 B0g4r7__ has joined
1734 2012-10-05 22:07:46 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
1735 2012-10-05 22:08:05 <BlueMatt> I see only like 10 lines in the actual script execution that isnt covered
1736 2012-10-05 22:08:14 <BlueMatt> 8
1737 2012-10-05 22:08:24 <BlueMatt> (not incl impossible stuff + disabled opcodes)
1738 2012-10-05 22:08:36 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: no way, the failure cases — look at all the return false's not tested.
1739 2012-10-05 22:08:48 lggr has joined
1740 2012-10-05 22:08:55 Diapolo has joined
1741 2012-10-05 22:09:08 <gmaxwell> okay, perhaps its 10 in total, they're still not tested.
1742 2012-10-05 22:09:12 <BlueMatt> in which function?
1743 2012-10-05 22:09:24 <gmaxwell> in evalscript
1744 2012-10-05 22:09:25 <BlueMatt> yea, I didnt say it was perfect, but its not that bad
1745 2012-10-05 22:10:35 <gmaxwell> who knows? those cases aren't tested at all. they could be wildly different or not even implemented and we'd have no way of knowing.  Even if they were hit they could still be wrong, but as of now they're untested.
1746 2012-10-05 22:10:53 <gmaxwell> This is all way better than a year ago when we basically had nothing but the chain. I'm not faulting anyone.
1747 2012-10-05 22:10:59 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1748 2012-10-05 22:11:00 B0g4r7__ is now known as B0g4r7
1749 2012-10-05 22:11:46 <gmaxwell> But a new implementation that didn't report bugs in the reference should be assumed to be inconsistent: we don't have tests that even run all the cases, and we know the reference as all kinds of weird bugs that a reimplementor _should_ have discovered.
1750 2012-10-05 22:12:09 <gmaxwell> (As both roconnor and you have)
1751 2012-10-05 22:12:15 <BlueMatt> so then the bitcoinj stuff should be assumed to be inconsistent?
1752 2012-10-05 22:12:37 <BlueMatt> iirc I saw only one script bug, and a very well-hidden one at that
1753 2012-10-05 22:13:16 <gmaxwell> I though you reported reference bugs?  But yet, perhaps even regardless of that it should be. This is very detailed stuff and the behavior must be exact, and some of the behavior is hidden inside the bignum/crypto libraries.
1754 2012-10-05 22:13:40 <BlueMatt> I saw one or two non-script-related bugs
1755 2012-10-05 22:15:07 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1756 2012-10-05 22:16:06 <gmaxwell> ::nods:: outside of script, the best chain/reorg logic has to be exact too. Though thats a bit easier to at least get right or fail completely.
1757 2012-10-05 22:16:09 <BlueMatt> anyway...I would say that bitcoinjs isnt necessarily as well-tested, as its not as popularly used as others, but I wouldnt discount it simply because its impl didnt find any gaping holes in the reference impl
1758 2012-10-05 22:16:39 <gmaxwell> well, I didn't mean to discount it more than anything else.
1759 2012-10-05 22:16:41 <BlueMatt> I know bitcoinjs was missing some network command that made it impossible to test with my bitcoind comp tool, but I know justmoon was working on it
1760 2012-10-05 22:17:15 <gmaxwell> The reference implementation is crap too, but it gets a 'free' pass because its the widely deployed one, so even if its wrong its almost automatically consistent with itself.
1761 2012-10-05 22:17:16 <lianj> what bitcoind comp tool?
1762 2012-10-05 22:17:41 <BlueMatt> lianj: see: http://jenkins.bluematt.me/pull-tester/files/
1763 2012-10-05 22:17:53 lggr has joined
1764 2012-10-05 22:18:03 <gmaxwell> s/is crap/has been crap/ (it may be better now. :P )
1765 2012-10-05 22:18:11 <BlueMatt> just feeds a node a list of blocks and checks that its reorg/test code is somewhat sane
1766 2012-10-05 22:18:16 datagutt has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
1767 2012-10-05 22:18:34 <lianj> BlueMatt: tanks
1768 2012-10-05 22:18:36 <lianj> *h
1769 2012-10-05 22:18:42 <lianj> tanks also
1770 2012-10-05 22:18:45 <gmaxwell> It a really good test. And its the sort of thing that must exist— coupled with careful review.. to really say an implementation is solid.
1771 2012-10-05 22:18:46 <sipa> gmaxwell: i don't think the *best* chain logic has to be identical
1772 2012-10-05 22:18:59 <BlueMatt> I would avoid calling the reference impl better now...I dont know that anything significant has changed there, and I do know there are still some structures that arent even locked properly...
1773 2012-10-05 22:19:07 <sipa> gmaxwell: validity of indivifual chains must, though
1774 2012-10-05 22:19:25 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: well e.g. we've fixed a number of killer things.
1775 2012-10-05 22:19:32 <BlueMatt> well, thats true
1776 2012-10-05 22:19:46 <gmaxwell> sipa: if you're going to have nodes mining its really important that they're selecting the same best chain or you get constant fork formation.
1777 2012-10-05 22:20:11 <sipa> right, true
1778 2012-10-05 22:20:19 <lianj> if an implementaion stays in sync ith mainnet/testnet3 shouldnt it be good enough=
1779 2012-10-05 22:20:27 <gmaxwell> lianj: no. :(
1780 2012-10-05 22:20:48 <sipa> it may only differ in an obscure state that never occurred
1781 2012-10-05 22:20:55 <lianj> (and passed bitcoind test cases) then maybe?
1782 2012-10-05 22:21:13 <gmaxwell> But people thinking that is partially my point... if it's different in some obsecure untested way... and gets widely deployed someone can fork the network by triggering that case.
1783 2012-10-05 22:21:16 <BlueMatt> lianj: and has extensive real-world testing and analysis, then maybe
1784 2012-10-05 22:21:33 <gmaxwell> lianj: if our testcases were complete. They are not. And even that isn't quite enough.
1785 2012-10-05 22:21:51 <lianj> true, but its a good start
1786 2012-10-05 22:22:03 <gmaxwell> oh sure, just following the main chain is a good start.
1787 2012-10-05 22:22:17 <gmaxwell> But something that only has that level of testing is a hazard to the network if widely deployed.
1788 2012-10-05 22:22:36 * BlueMatt is still of the opinion that it is far too easy to royally fuck-up the reference impl by changing code in completely different places to call it "better now" even if we have fixed a ton of crap
1789 2012-10-05 22:22:41 <lianj> ruby commuinity made something nice called rubyspec, and every implementation tries to get these specs/test passing
1790 2012-10-05 22:23:04 <BlueMatt> (in ways that even mergers wont see)
1791 2012-10-05 22:23:07 <sipa> i've been p2pool mining on ultraprune for a week now, by the way
1792 2012-10-05 22:23:18 <sipa> and actually found a block even
1793 2012-10-05 22:23:31 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: or worse, via some external library like openssl or bdb changing in some subtle way.  "Der parser now more tolerate of some bad encodings!"
1794 2012-10-05 22:23:38 <gmaxwell> sipa: wow, congrats.
1795 2012-10-05 22:23:58 agricocb has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1796 2012-10-05 22:24:00 <gmaxwell> I have a heavily loaded ultraprune node that I'm paying attention to..
1797 2012-10-05 22:24:12 <sipa> with +- 1GH/s
1798 2012-10-05 22:24:32 <BlueMatt> ultraprune: nice, but its a real test only if there is significant incentive for people to try to break it on purpose
1799 2012-10-05 22:24:34 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1800 2012-10-05 22:24:40 <gmaxwell> the block gods have smiled on ultraprune. Ship it!
1801 2012-10-05 22:25:03 drizztbsd has joined
1802 2012-10-05 22:25:38 <gmaxwell> ;;bc,blocks
1803 2012-10-05 22:25:39 <gribble> 201978
1804 2012-10-05 22:25:42 <sipa> well even that is far from enough to be sure
1805 2012-10-05 22:25:45 <sipa> but nio scrioot or tx validity ckode chsanged
1806 2012-10-05 22:25:54 slush has joined
1807 2012-10-05 22:25:56 <Diapolo> What about shipping such features in the client but make them uasable at first in testnet only?
1808 2012-10-05 22:26:04 <sipa> just block connection logic
1809 2012-10-05 22:26:07 <BlueMatt> am I the only one who saw lots of crap in that last message?
1810 2012-10-05 22:26:10 <BlueMatt> <sipa> but nio scrioot or tx validity ckode chsanged
1811 2012-10-05 22:26:23 <Diapolo> me too
1812 2012-10-05 22:26:26 <gmaxwell> Diapolo: ultraprune is too invasive a change for that.. testnet only works for some things.
1813 2012-10-05 22:26:30 <BlueMatt> Diapolo: thats probably likely to break even more things...
1814 2012-10-05 22:26:35 <sipa> Diapolo: not sure if you've seen the amount of refactoring in ultraprune?
1815 2012-10-05 22:26:38 <gmaxwell> My error correction parsed all that.
1816 2012-10-05 22:26:55 <sipa> BlueMatt: sorry, im on a train
1817 2012-10-05 22:27:09 <Diapolo> ^^ hey don't spam me, yeah I looked at the code and there are huge changes and many commits in the pull indeed
1818 2012-10-05 22:27:10 <BlueMatt> sipa: thats f'ing with your packets?
1819 2012-10-05 22:27:31 <sipa> BlueMatt: with ssh that should be imoossible
1820 2012-10-05 22:27:33 <gmaxwell> My thinking was that we might recommend that 0.8.0 be used only for 'clients'.. miners and merchants should stay on 0.7.x until 0.8.1. That would get at least some more real world exposure.
1821 2012-10-05 22:27:47 lggr has joined
1822 2012-10-05 22:27:50 <gmaxwell> sipa: when that happens you just get a ssh hash error and get disconnected. :P
1823 2012-10-05 22:27:55 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: s/packets/fingers/
1824 2012-10-05 22:27:57 <BlueMatt> sipa: I would think so...hence my wondering why I see non-printable chars in your message...
1825 2012-10-05 22:28:07 <gmaxwell> oh I don't see non-printable characters in that message.
1826 2012-10-05 22:28:10 <gmaxwell> or the copy.
1827 2012-10-05 22:28:14 <sipa> hmmm :)
1828 2012-10-05 22:28:15 <BlueMatt> oh...
1829 2012-10-05 22:28:32 <gmaxwell> I see "but nio scioot or tx validity ckode chsanged"
1830 2012-10-05 22:28:39 <Diapolo> gmaxwell: Are you sure that would work? To recommend doesn't mean people use 0.8, for what you didn't intend it.
1831 2012-10-05 22:28:43 <BlueMatt> probably have my locale all f'd up and not printing non-ascii chars then...
1832 2012-10-05 22:28:55 <gmaxwell> Diapolo: I think most would listen, which is mostly what matters.
1833 2012-10-05 22:29:01 <gmaxwell> Diapolo: the real risk is miners.
1834 2012-10-05 22:29:14 <gmaxwell> If there is a fork risk bug in 0.8 you don't want miners on the fork.
1835 2012-10-05 22:29:24 <gmaxwell> or at least not more than a few.
1836 2012-10-05 22:29:34 k3t3r has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1837 2012-10-05 22:29:53 <Diapolo> to be able to fix the mess and catch em with 0.8.1 you mean?
1838 2012-10-05 22:29:54 k3t3r has joined
1839 2012-10-05 22:29:58 <gmaxwell> absent miners a fork bug is just a DOS. If there is hashpower on the fork people can potentially double spend.
1840 2012-10-05 22:30:36 <stamit> why aren't you put in a chat room with only one person (you), gmaxwell?
1841 2012-10-05 22:30:42 <stamit> you talk too much
1842 2012-10-05 22:30:54 <gmaxwell> e.g. if a 0.8 bug makes 0.8 nodes reject the majority chain they'll be stuck.. unless there are enough miners on 0.8 that there are six+ blocks before people notice.
1843 2012-10-05 22:31:07 <Diapolo> stamit: you should be happy that I'm not doing this :-P
1844 2012-10-05 22:31:08 <gmaxwell> If that happens then people can use that to rip off merchants who are also running 0.8.
1845 2012-10-05 22:33:41 <MC1984> why is thi stamit guy so asspained with greg
1846 2012-10-05 22:34:08 Gabit has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1847 2012-10-05 22:34:23 <BlueMatt> iirc gmaxwell pissed him off at some point in the past (banned him or smth?)
1848 2012-10-05 22:34:23 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1849 2012-10-05 22:34:52 <MC1984> wow get over it
1850 2012-10-05 22:35:16 <gmaxwell> MC1984: I banned him once previously in OTC when he was offering earnestly to pay people to hurt paypal employees (this after a long list of fucked up things he was doing; like creeping on everyone he thought was a woman and propositing them for sex); now I'm his favorite pasttime or something.
1851 2012-10-05 22:35:23 <Diapolo> the 0.1 release was for Windows only at first? LOL that's hard ^^, makes me smile
1852 2012-10-05 22:35:43 <sipa> Diapolo: satoshi was a windows guy
1853 2012-10-05 22:35:54 <MC1984> fuckin wingnuts
1854 2012-10-05 22:36:01 <Diapolo> Makes me miss him, didn't know that :).
1855 2012-10-05 22:36:04 <gmaxwell> Diapolo: the early builds ran just fine in wine.
1856 2012-10-05 22:36:14 <BlueMatt> current builds run just fine in wine
1857 2012-10-05 22:37:07 <Diapolo> that's fine ^^
1858 2012-10-05 22:37:38 lggr has joined
1859 2012-10-05 22:39:02 k3t3r has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1860 2012-10-05 22:39:49 k3t3r has joined
1861 2012-10-05 22:40:02 k3t3r has quit (Client Quit)
1862 2012-10-05 22:40:20 <gmaxwell> Perhaps this deserves a chapter on bitcoin and (pseudo)nonymous money: https://cryptoparty.org/wiki/CryptoPartyHandbook
1863 2012-10-05 22:40:27 Gabit has joined
1864 2012-10-05 22:41:29 <Diapolo> Btw. did any of you invest in http://mybitcointrade.com? Seems like some scammer was able to trick many users into giving the site round about 6000 BTC and now it's offline after owner change ... and I was dumb enough to do the same and lost my ~80 Coins -_-.
1865 2012-10-05 22:41:58 <gmaxwell> Diapolo: what did it claim to be?
1866 2012-10-05 22:42:40 <Diapolo> a savings book with ~10% per month
1867 2012-10-05 22:42:43 <lianj> hehe 'owner change'
1868 2012-10-05 22:43:04 <Diapolo> which worked quite some time ... so we were fed to believe it's okay ...
1869 2012-10-05 22:43:15 <gmaxwell> I have yet to be scammed. Though I suppose I have some exposure now, preordered some avalon. I guess I had a little exposure before with betsofbitcoin sha3 bets.
1870 2012-10-05 22:43:22 <gmaxwell> Diapolo: ...
1871 2012-10-05 22:43:24 * gmaxwell cries
1872 2012-10-05 22:43:40 <Diapolo> fell free to slap me ...
1873 2012-10-05 22:44:14 <gmaxwell> Diapolo: well, **hug** you fool. :P If its any consolation, lots of people fall for things like that.
1874 2012-10-05 22:44:14 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1875 2012-10-05 22:44:26 <Diapolo> things I would never do with my real money I did there
1876 2012-10-05 22:44:48 cande has joined
1877 2012-10-05 22:44:54 <gmaxwell> People even fall for things like that with their life savings, so I suppose you are better off in that regard.
1878 2012-10-05 22:44:59 <Joric> tortoise svn adds context menu to the recycle bin, lol, seriously? why??
1879 2012-10-05 22:45:34 <gmaxwell> next time you see some great offering; tell me about if— and I promise I will be dutifully cynical on your behalf.
1880 2012-10-05 22:45:54 <gmaxwell> Joric: what, you've never wanted to revision control your trash??
1881 2012-10-05 22:46:18 <Diapolo> I would count it as ... experience. But I want to slap that guy, as most of the discussion is in german and there are some names and copies of ID cards and so on flying around in the thread we have perhaps a little chance to at least kick his ass :-D.
1882 2012-10-05 22:46:47 <pjorrit> first bitcoin death.. i can see the headlines
1883 2012-10-05 22:46:48 lggr has joined
1884 2012-10-05 22:46:50 <gmaxwell> Diapolo: well, if you have an oppturnity to persue it somehow you should— though don't beat anyone up: don't want you getting in trouble! :P
1885 2012-10-05 22:46:55 <pjorrit> or has that one come and gone yet?
1886 2012-10-05 22:47:28 <Diapolo> gmaxwell: I should try Satoshi Dice to bring it back ... no joke! I've learned my lesson.
1887 2012-10-05 22:48:20 <stamit> they were to pay themselves. i wasn't offering to pay anyone. if they are thieves, that means they can make money (by stealing it)
1888 2012-10-05 22:48:26 <Diapolo> no no I'm harmless in physical terms
1889 2012-10-05 22:48:26 <gmaxwell> pjorrit: the producer of the TV sitcom that ran a bitcoin episode committed suicide right after the price dropped after the show aired.... some have speculated....
1890 2012-10-05 22:48:51 <pjorrit> oh wow, that's pretty special
1891 2012-10-05 22:49:11 <stamit> and she used to like me
1892 2012-10-05 22:49:14 <Joric> mybitcointrade.com is not just some random site it's that funny guy from italy, he also made bitscalper.com
1893 2012-10-05 22:49:21 <Joric> google 'My name is Alberto Armandi, i was born in Italy.'
1894 2012-10-05 22:49:35 <gmaxwell> Joric: oh god.. that person?
1895 2012-10-05 22:50:01 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@brwyatt.net|brwyatt
1896 2012-10-05 22:50:08 <Diapolo> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=115572.0
1897 2012-10-05 22:50:15 <Joric> yeah he also stole about 4k with bitscalper, so i guess it's about 10k overall =)
1898 2012-10-05 22:50:28 <gmaxwell> Diapolo: well you shouldn't give up if you see a way to get your funds back... One of the things these theieves count on is apathy from their victims
1899 2012-10-05 22:50:41 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1900 2012-10-05 22:50:47 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: Im apathetic on this.
1901 2012-10-05 22:50:58 <Diablo-D3> I think I have a right to be at this point
1902 2012-10-05 22:51:12 <Diapolo> Joric: any thread about that? perhaps your info is helpful
1903 2012-10-05 22:51:16 <gmaxwell> if you're really local to the person and establish that, then I assume there is some equivalent of small claims court in germany and perhaps you could just win by default.
1904 2012-10-05 22:51:28 <Diablo-D3> its only a matter of time before nefario goes to jail I think
1905 2012-10-05 22:51:44 <Joric> he's a terrible php coder btw http://i.imgur.com/gKQpM.png
1906 2012-10-05 22:51:50 <sipa> what'd nefario do?
1907 2012-10-05 22:51:56 <gmaxwell> (a scammer is unlikely to show in court, and 80 BTC is little enough that you could potentially hope to get it back from payroll siphoning)
1908 2012-10-05 22:52:19 <gmaxwell> sipa: GLBSE has vanished with a vague message.
1909 2012-10-05 22:52:22 <TheSeven> BlueMatt: quantal release is in 12 days, just fyi :)
1910 2012-10-05 22:52:26 <Diablo-D3> sipa: participate in scams listed in glbse and then took down glbse when caught
1911 2012-10-05 22:52:41 <Joric> Diapolo, idk start from googling 'My name is Alberto Armandi, i was born in Italy.'
1912 2012-10-05 22:52:54 <Diapolo> okay thanks
1913 2012-10-05 22:52:57 <gmaxwell> he also pissed off Diablo-D3 by behaving weirdly wrt him.
1914 2012-10-05 22:52:59 <sipa> eww
1915 2012-10-05 22:53:06 <stamit> gmaxwell, you have a very long list of things about you
1916 2012-10-05 22:53:16 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: that just sounds wrong
1917 2012-10-05 22:53:30 <stamit> it's so long i can't even measure it
1918 2012-10-05 22:53:37 <gmaxwell> Diablo-D3: well summarizing what happened would take more room than fits in one irc message. :P
1919 2012-10-05 22:53:38 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1920 2012-10-05 22:53:40 <Joric> oh sorry i must be confused bitdaytrade.com with mybitcointrade.com
1921 2012-10-05 22:53:45 <gmaxwell> "Thats what she said"
1922 2012-10-05 22:53:57 <Diablo-D3> he locked DMC's account accusing me of stealing from DMC when I started publicly asking him about what hes going to do about the scams on GLBSE
1923 2012-10-05 22:53:58 <Joric> they all look pretty similar
1924 2012-10-05 22:54:11 <gmaxwell> "Thats also what she said :("
1925 2012-10-05 22:54:26 <Diapolo> no problem seems the scammer who got my coins is a native german, if not a russian (Victor) who we were told bought the site ...
1926 2012-10-05 22:55:17 <Diapolo> since it was sold all you see is the please standby message on the page: http://mybitcointrade.com
1927 2012-10-05 22:55:19 <Joric> avoid services starting with 'my', as in mybitcoin, mywallet, etc. )
1928 2012-10-05 22:55:36 <Diapolo> Can we get that as warning string in the client :-D?
1929 2012-10-05 22:56:30 lggr has joined
1930 2012-10-05 22:56:51 <stamit> hey, gmaxwell, wanna do some "payroll siphoning" and send me my $126?
1931 2012-10-05 22:57:10 <stamit> wtf is "payroll siphoning"?
1932 2012-10-05 22:58:26 <stamit> you seem to know a lot
1933 2012-10-05 22:59:05 BlackPrapor has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.0.4 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
1934 2012-10-05 23:00:01 slush has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1935 2012-10-05 23:00:47 <sipa> stamit: did he steal $126 from you?
1936 2012-10-05 23:00:56 robocoin has quit (Quit: ｡◕‿◕｡) ლ(｀ー´ლ)
1937 2012-10-05 23:01:06 <stamit> no, but he's just interfering with my attempts to get it back
1938 2012-10-05 23:02:01 <stamit> just googled "payroll siphoning" and didn't find anything. he must be advanced...
1939 2012-10-05 23:02:06 <gmaxwell> "Spawn" scammed two dozen people in -otc via paypal (paying with stolen accounts it seems). Paypal reversed transactions on them.  Only one of the victims responded by offering to pay people to attack paypal employees.
1940 2012-10-05 23:02:29 slush has joined
1941 2012-10-05 23:02:54 <Joric> attack, as on the streets?
1942 2012-10-05 23:03:03 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1943 2012-10-05 23:03:04 <gmaxwell> stamit: it's called different things in different places, here is called an 'earnings hold order'; I thought calling it payroll siphoning was more clear as to what I was talking about.
1944 2012-10-05 23:03:09 <gmaxwell> Joric: indeed.
1945 2012-10-05 23:03:30 <stamit> whatever works
1946 2012-10-05 23:03:44 <stamit> maybe something on the streets would be too risky though
1947 2012-10-05 23:03:51 <stamit> and too ugly
1948 2012-10-05 23:04:02 <stamit> an insider would be better
1949 2012-10-05 23:04:07 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1950 2012-10-05 23:04:16 <gmaxwell> This is obviously not in accordance with -otc rules, and not generally something we want going on in the bitcoin community.
1951 2012-10-05 23:04:55 <sipa> stamit: you want to hurt paypal?
1952 2012-10-05 23:04:57 <gmaxwell> for comparison, people offering to sell forged coupons and video game codes also get punted at least if they won't cut it out.
1953 2012-10-05 23:05:05 <stamit> i can't go to the philippines, it's just that luxemburg is closer
1954 2012-10-05 23:06:14 freakazoid has joined
1955 2012-10-05 23:06:34 lggr has joined
1956 2012-10-05 23:07:00 <stamit> if you are a thief, make sure you don't get hired by paypal first.
1957 2012-10-05 23:07:15 <stamit> you are supposed to steal them, remember?
1958 2012-10-05 23:07:27 <stamit> *from them
1959 2012-10-05 23:07:34 harkon__ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1960 2012-10-05 23:07:48 harkon__ has joined
1961 2012-10-05 23:09:19 <sipa> wth are you talking about?
1962 2012-10-05 23:10:28 <Diapolo> this get's weird, I'm off  ;)
1963 2012-10-05 23:10:31 Diapolo has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1964 2012-10-05 23:11:02 CoinHoarder has joined
1965 2012-10-05 23:12:36 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1966 2012-10-05 23:14:51 CodesInChaos has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1967 2012-10-05 23:15:40 lggr has joined
1968 2012-10-05 23:17:36 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
1969 2012-10-05 23:18:21 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
1970 2012-10-05 23:22:26 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1971 2012-10-05 23:25:42 lggr has joined
1972 2012-10-05 23:27:36 MC1984 has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1973 2012-10-05 23:27:42 xisalty has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1974 2012-10-05 23:27:59 xisalty has joined
1975 2012-10-05 23:31:55 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1976 2012-10-05 23:34:34 lggr has joined
1977 2012-10-05 23:37:53 <Luke-Jr> midnightmagic: about 20 days ago
1978 2012-10-05 23:41:09 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1979 2012-10-05 23:44:32 torsthaldo has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1980 2012-10-05 23:44:36 lggr has joined
1981 2012-10-05 23:47:40 PiZZaMaN2K is now known as away!~PiZZaMaN2@host-72-2-137-170.csinet.net|PiZZaMaN2K
1982 2012-10-05 23:48:30 xisalty has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1983 2012-10-05 23:49:30 <BlueMattBot> Project Bitcoin build #96: FAILURE in 5 hr 12 min: http://jenkins.bluematt.me/job/Bitcoin/96/
1984 2012-10-05 23:51:26 lggr has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1985 2012-10-05 23:52:47 pingdrive has joined
1986 2012-10-05 23:53:01 <CrazyMF> yeah hey. A question. does bitcoind need root uid for binding to a real network iface and not 0.0.0.0 ?
1987 2012-10-05 23:53:14 <sipa> jgarzik: no
1988 2012-10-05 23:53:16 <sipa> eh
1989 2012-10-05 23:53:17 <sipa> CrazyMF: no
1990 2012-10-05 23:53:25 <sipa> only for binding to a port <1024
1991 2012-10-05 23:53:35 lggr has joined
1992 2012-10-05 23:53:57 <CrazyMF> bitcoind -bind 127.0.0.1:9999    gives me "error: couldn't connect to server"
1993 2012-10-05 23:54:03 <CrazyMF> without -bind it works fine
1994 2012-10-05 23:54:38 torsthaldo has joined
1995 2012-10-05 23:55:18 <sipa> it's -bind=127.0.0.1:9999
1996 2012-10-05 23:55:39 <CrazyMF> daaaaayyum
1997 2012-10-05 23:55:43 <sipa> what you now tried to do was send the command "127.0.0.1:9999" to another bitcoind
1998 2012-10-05 23:56:10 <CrazyMF> i see
1999 2012-10-05 23:56:12 <CrazyMF> thanks