1 2012-10-20 00:02:53 <midnightmagic> LOL you're accounting for february aren't you? with the average hours-in-a-month?
  2 2012-10-20 00:03:27 <gmaxwell> yea, I'm mostly accounting for leap-years there. Not fully though.
  3 2012-10-20 00:03:40 <midnightmagic> LOL that's hilariously accurate
  4 2012-10-20 00:04:03 <sipa> just use 365.2425 days per year
  5 2012-10-20 00:04:05 <Gladamas> BFL ASIC pics, ASICs to ship Nov/Dec: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=119351.0;topicseen
  6 2012-10-20 00:05:47 <gmaxwell> I wonder if those surprisingly non-descript packages are just dummies for oven testing and thermal measurements.
  7 2012-10-20 00:06:42 <midnightmagic> sipa: I wish my power company sent me bills that regularly! :-)
  8 2012-10-20 00:06:57 <sipa> MC1984: found a bug - bootstrap.dat was indeed not working in ultraprune (but it was caused by a bug by me)
  9 2012-10-20 00:08:40 RV__ has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 10 2012-10-20 00:11:16 <MC1984> oh i was right
 11 2012-10-20 00:11:42 <sipa> yup :)
 12 2012-10-20 00:11:55 <gmaxwell> MC1984 hurray for testing
 13 2012-10-20 00:11:58 <MC1984> omg i helped lol
 14 2012-10-20 00:12:04 <sipa> thx!
 15 2012-10-20 00:12:19 <midnightmagic> "price would have to be _negative_ to make it more attractive" <-- LOL
 16 2012-10-20 00:13:07 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 17 2012-10-20 00:13:24 <midnightmagic> This is why he's so anxious to get his devices done sooner..
 18 2012-10-20 00:13:36 <midnightmagic> He was saying something about "sparing no expense" a few weeks ago.
 19 2012-10-20 00:13:56 <sipa> he?
 20 2012-10-20 00:15:30 <gmaxwell> cablepair.
 21 2012-10-20 00:15:56 Detritus has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
 22 2012-10-20 00:16:09 <gmaxwell> If he beats BFL to shipping— regardless of my analysis— a lot of people will probably cancel bfl orders and switch to him. It's _very_ much in his interest to ship early.
 23 2012-10-20 00:16:21 <Diablo-D3> cancel bfl? lol
 24 2012-10-20 00:16:27 <Diablo-D3> I dont think you understand gmaxwell
 25 2012-10-20 00:16:30 <Diablo-D3> they're not preorders
 26 2012-10-20 00:16:30 <sipa> ah, must be a nickname :)
 27 2012-10-20 00:16:32 <Diablo-D3> they're investors
 28 2012-10-20 00:16:50 <Diablo-D3> all those people who keep calling themselves customers and bfl calls customers arent
 29 2012-10-20 00:16:52 <Diablo-D3> they're investors
 30 2012-10-20 00:16:57 <Diablo-D3> and they got burned the moment they handed the cash over
 31 2012-10-20 00:17:09 <gmaxwell> Diablo-D3: Inaba says otherwise. Which also seemed unbelevable to me. But they've accepted cancellations so far.
 32 2012-10-20 00:17:39 <gmaxwell> If BFL ships first then I expect that cablepair will have a hard time selling all his stock and will make a lot less money.
 33 2012-10-20 00:17:42 <jgarzik> which one is cablepair?  basic?  btcfpga?
 34 2012-10-20 00:17:50 <Luke-Jr> bASIC
 35 2012-10-20 00:18:13 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: thats how a scam works btw
 36 2012-10-20 00:18:20 <Diablo-D3> you refund a few, but then jew the rest
 37 2012-10-20 00:18:48 <sipa> is 'to jew' a verb?
 38 2012-10-20 00:18:54 <jgarzik> Looks like BTCFPGA to me: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=79637.0
 39 2012-10-20 00:18:56 <Diablo-D3> sipa: yes
 40 2012-10-20 00:19:01 <Diablo-D3> btw, yes, its btcfpga
 41 2012-10-20 00:19:04 <jgarzik> sipa: to anti-semites, I suppose
 42 2012-10-20 00:19:13 <Diablo-D3> basic I think is deepbit?
 43 2012-10-20 00:19:31 <Diablo-D3> jgarzik: heh, I went to school with a jewish kid, its 100% accurate from the stories hes said about his family
 44 2012-10-20 00:20:02 * jgarzik already paid for a BTCFPGA one
 45 2012-10-20 00:20:08 <firethief> Diablo here knows all about them jews.
 46 2012-10-20 00:20:19 <sturles> midnightmagic: gmaxwell forgot an important fact in his calculations.  The miners lose value over time.
 47 2012-10-20 00:20:25 <sipa> "In my country we have problem..."
 48 2012-10-20 00:20:27 <Diablo-D3> sturles: depends
 49 2012-10-20 00:20:39 <sturles> Moore's Law, etc.
 50 2012-10-20 00:20:44 <Diablo-D3> you cant predict future difficulty or future btc value
 51 2012-10-20 00:20:56 <Diablo-D3> operating costs and (some) purchase price is in dollars
 52 2012-10-20 00:21:03 <sturles> Indepndent of future difficulty or BTC value.
 53 2012-10-20 00:21:15 <Diablo-D3> sturles: I write off hardware purchases 100%.
 54 2012-10-20 00:21:19 <Diablo-D3> so maybe you do math differently
 55 2012-10-20 00:21:27 <Diablo-D3> its worth $0 the day I open the box
 56 2012-10-20 00:21:47 <jgarzik> disappointing, that bitmit is closing.  Apparently you can buy bitmit, on bitmit: https://www.bitmit.net/en/trade/i/8175-bitmit-net/description   Reason for closing: "Financial supervision requires special licences for businesses which holds customer funds"
 57 2012-10-20 00:22:07 <sturles> Diablo-D3: Read this and the post I quoted from for context: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=79637.msg1284615#msg1284615
 58 2012-10-20 00:22:07 da2ce7 has joined
 59 2012-10-20 00:22:16 <Luke-Jr> ;;bc,diff
 60 2012-10-20 00:22:17 <gribble> 3072321.7320208
 61 2012-10-20 00:22:44 <Diablo-D3> sturles: I dont see a problem with your math
 62 2012-10-20 00:22:46 <Diablo-D3> so whats the issue
 63 2012-10-20 00:23:29 <sturles> If small differences in power consumption matters over price per Ghash/s for ASIC miners.
 64 2012-10-20 00:23:34 <Diablo-D3> it does
 65 2012-10-20 00:23:37 <Diablo-D3> did someone say it didnt?
 66 2012-10-20 00:23:45 * Diablo-D3 has done this math like thousands of times
 67 2012-10-20 00:23:47 <sturles> Yes, my math. :-)
 68 2012-10-20 00:24:39 <Diablo-D3> hell, Ive even calculated that underclocking ram on 58xx from 1000/1200 to 3xx is usually enough to get you to break even a month or so earlier (depending on btc prices, electricity prices, etc)
 69 2012-10-20 00:24:56 <sturles> My math says that price per Ghash is much more important than power consumption as long as power consuption and price is at this level.
 70 2012-10-20 00:25:13 <Diablo-D3> sturles: atm? yes
 71 2012-10-20 00:25:19 <sturles> True for GPUs, yes.
 72 2012-10-20 00:25:21 <Diablo-D3> but divide profit by 100
 73 2012-10-20 00:25:27 <Diablo-D3> thats the asic difficulty wall
 74 2012-10-20 00:26:02 <Diablo-D3> if you've already purchased asics (key word here is already) and will have them mining dec/jan/feb
 75 2012-10-20 00:26:14 <Diablo-D3> price per ghash flat out controls profit
 76 2012-10-20 00:26:38 <Diablo-D3> once that wall kicks in, its power usage per ghash because you're looking at a 2 year climb to profit
 77 2012-10-20 00:27:07 <Diablo-D3> sturles: so I think we agree
 78 2012-10-20 00:27:31 prahanormal has joined
 79 2012-10-20 00:27:41 <sturles> For ASIC miners the power is only a very small part of the costs.  You have to mine for many years until the cost of power has surpassed your initial investment.'
 80 2012-10-20 00:28:14 <Diablo-D3> at current difficulty? yes
 81 2012-10-20 00:28:30 <Diablo-D3> at 100x difficulty? fffffffffffff--
 82 2012-10-20 00:28:32 <sturles> Independent of difficulty.
 83 2012-10-20 00:28:48 <Diablo-D3> its going to be 1000x in 2 years btw
 84 2012-10-20 00:29:01 <Diablo-D3> but the climb will be much slower once all the first asics get into action
 85 2012-10-20 00:29:18 <sturles> Difficulty and power consumption per Ghash has nothing to do with each other.
 86 2012-10-20 00:29:28 <Diablo-D3> sturles: it does.
 87 2012-10-20 00:29:39 <Diablo-D3> unless your electric company accepts bitcoins
 88 2012-10-20 00:29:40 <gmaxwell> sturles: ... you should go read the analysis I linked to.
 89 2012-10-20 00:30:00 <Diablo-D3> _now_, if btc prices skyrocket and climb with difficulty? no, they're not related
 90 2012-10-20 00:30:13 <Diablo-D3> but I dont think thats going to happen
 91 2012-10-20 00:30:24 <gmaxwell> We're also not talking about small difference in power consumption, we're talking about factors like 3-5x.
 92 2012-10-20 00:30:26 <sturles> gmaxwell: What link?
 93 2012-10-20 00:30:32 prahanormal has quit (Client Quit)
 94 2012-10-20 00:30:46 <Diablo-D3> if difficulty increases 100x, your profit per watt decreases 100x.
 95 2012-10-20 00:30:52 <Diablo-D3> you're spending 100x power to get the same dollars
 96 2012-10-20 00:30:57 <gmaxwell> 16:04 < gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: I feel kinda bad for making CP's product sound bad esp since the BFL's figures may all be lies, but you may enjoy the bomb I  tossed into that silly argument: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=79637.msg1284513#msg1284513
 97 2012-10-20 00:31:12 maaku_ has joined
 98 2012-10-20 00:31:26 <gmaxwell> sturles: I proposed a way of reasoning about the prices between mining options that fully factors out the bitcoin market side of the deal.
 99 2012-10-20 00:31:47 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: a functioning price per mhash metric?
100 2012-10-20 00:32:02 <sturles> Diablo-D3: Yeah, but I would have to mine with a BFL Single for 25 years until I have paid the same amount powering it as I did for the device itself.  This makes power consumption pretty much irrelevant compared to the cost of the device.
101 2012-10-20 00:32:10 maaku has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
102 2012-10-20 00:32:10 maaku_ is now known as maaku
103 2012-10-20 00:32:25 Detritus has joined
104 2012-10-20 00:32:28 <Diablo-D3> sturles: yes, but what if difficulty increases 100x? thats .25 years.
105 2012-10-20 00:32:35 <gmaxwell> Diablo-D3: I turn the price into a monthly cost by comparing it with what the same amount would return on average invested in stock market indexes.
106 2012-10-20 00:32:51 <sturles> Diablo-D3: It is like comparing two expensive tablets for what they will cost on your power bill.
107 2012-10-20 00:32:58 <gmaxwell> So then power and initial price are both just monthly costs, and you can compare the monthly costs per hashrate.
108 2012-10-20 00:33:10 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: heh.
109 2012-10-20 00:33:24 <sturles> DerCoin: Difficulty has no effect on the price of electricity in my country.
110 2012-10-20 00:33:28 <sturles> Diablo-D3:
111 2012-10-20 00:33:35 <Diablo-D3> sturles: exactly.
112 2012-10-20 00:33:45 <Diablo-D3> sturles: so you're screwed.
113 2012-10-20 00:34:07 <sturles> Diablo-D3: Can you please explain why difficulty changes anything?
114 2012-10-20 00:34:11 <Diablo-D3> sturles: profit.
115 2012-10-20 00:34:21 <Diablo-D3> how much did that single cost you?
116 2012-10-20 00:34:23 <sturles> I haven't even mentiond profit.
117 2012-10-20 00:34:34 <Diablo-D3> oh wait, you're mining for fun?
118 2012-10-20 00:34:36 <Diablo-D3> screw that.
119 2012-10-20 00:34:37 <Diablo-D3> you're on your own
120 2012-10-20 00:34:40 <Detritus> Difficulty goes up, therefor the ammount of btc you generate for a given hash rate goes down
121 2012-10-20 00:34:47 <sturles> I mak absolutely no attempt of prdicting profit.
122 2012-10-20 00:34:56 <Diablo-D3> sturles: then why buy the hardware
123 2012-10-20 00:35:03 <Diablo-D3> its very important to see if you can even profit at all
124 2012-10-20 00:35:09 <Diablo-D3> asics are not profitable imo
125 2012-10-20 00:35:19 <sturles> Diablo-D3: I will try to explain this once more with a teaspoon.
126 2012-10-20 00:35:48 <sturles> Diablo-D3: If you pay 1000 for a miner and 50 to power it for a year.
127 2012-10-20 00:35:57 <sturles> Diablo-D3: Does power consumption matter?
128 2012-10-20 00:36:24 <Diablo-D3> sturles: yes because of factors that exist that you did not mention in your problem.
129 2012-10-20 00:36:28 <sipa> sturles: if your income makes it pay it off after 20 years only, yes
130 2012-10-20 00:36:29 <Diablo-D3> miner output is not linear.
131 2012-10-20 00:36:31 <sturles> It it is 25 or 100, and the expcted lifetime is 2 or 3 years, does it matter?
132 2012-10-20 00:36:42 <Diablo-D3> miner output is not linear.
133 2012-10-20 00:36:55 <sturles> ?
134 2012-10-20 00:37:01 <Diablo-D3> I do not pay for ghashes, I pay for future btc.
135 2012-10-20 00:37:17 <Diablo-D3> whatever gets me the most future btc for the least dollars it the winner.
136 2012-10-20 00:37:18 <sturles> Right.
137 2012-10-20 00:37:31 <Diablo-D3> the way you are describing the problem is wrong.
138 2012-10-20 00:37:36 <sturles> I can't predict future BTC, and make absolutely no attempt of doing it.
139 2012-10-20 00:37:41 <Diablo-D3> I can.
140 2012-10-20 00:37:51 <sturles> ASIC miners may be profitable, and may be not.
141 2012-10-20 00:37:51 <Diablo-D3> difficulty is going to skyrocket because of asic adoption
142 2012-10-20 00:38:18 <Diablo-D3> profitability, unless you're in on the full three months of dec/jan/feb, is going to be hard.
143 2012-10-20 00:38:36 <sturles> Profitablility changes nothing in this equation.
144 2012-10-20 00:38:44 <Diablo-D3> in yours? no
145 2012-10-20 00:38:46 <Diablo-D3> in mine? very yes.
146 2012-10-20 00:38:52 <sturles> Right.
147 2012-10-20 00:41:35 <vazakl> sup coin bros
148 2012-10-20 00:41:45 <sturles> I don't even try to predict future prices or difficulty or new ASICs coming on the market.  I am just trying to explain that when the power consumtion over a year for a current device costs 1/25th of what I pay to buy the device, it is totaly not important.  The price per Ghash/s is what's important.
149 2012-10-20 00:43:36 <gmaxwell> sturles: You can keep saying this, but go walk through the figures on the thread. It matters.
150 2012-10-20 00:43:46 <sturles> gmaxwell: If you invest in a stock market index, you don't lose the money.  You can sell your investment and get your money back.
151 2012-10-20 00:44:06 <sturles> You will not get your money back for an old miner.
152 2012-10-20 00:46:27 paraipan has quit (Quit: Saliendo)
153 2012-10-20 00:46:33 <sturles> gmaxwell: Your coice is between investing in a fund which normally will become worth more over time VS something which (hopefully) will make money but itself will become less worth over time.
154 2012-10-20 00:47:38 <sturles> gmaxwell: In your calculation you forgot to write off the value of the miner over time.
155 2012-10-20 00:47:56 <gmaxwell> I don't forget I intentionally do not do so— and I even explain why.
156 2012-10-20 00:48:04 <gmaxwell> Because the parameters for doing it are highly debatable.
157 2012-10-20 00:48:34 <sturles> Yes, but this will not make the parameters go away.
158 2012-10-20 00:48:51 <gmaxwell> You responded doing so— and I think you got it wrong, because you didn't give a longer life to the device with lower power.  ... but never the less you basically agreed with me: You show the devices _tie_ at 149 watts. No one expects the basic to be that low.
159 2012-10-20 00:49:10 <gmaxwell> my own expectation was more like 300 watts.
160 2012-10-20 00:49:37 <gmaxwell> The power _matters_. It's not the only factor, but it absolutely does matter.
161 2012-10-20 00:49:51 <sturles> Well, Tom says it will be "competetive".
162 2012-10-20 00:50:01 <gmaxwell> My own thinking is that it's better to support other vendors because we'll all win from competition.. but power still matters.
163 2012-10-20 00:50:45 <sturles> It doesn't matter much to m anyway.  My house needs heating all year, and electric power is the cheapest way to heat it.  A heat pump would be more efficient, but a heat pump doesn't make money.
164 2012-10-20 00:50:47 <gmaxwell> sturles: well, I've run numbers on 130nm designs, and I'd probably take a bet that he can't meet 54GH at 150w.  There are plenty of people in that thread arguing that power is totally irrelevant.
165 2012-10-20 00:51:04 <gmaxwell> sure, I note mining for heating in my post.
166 2012-10-20 00:51:05 <sturles> Arhg.  My e-key is broken.  Very unreliable.
167 2012-10-20 00:51:42 <gmaxwell> (I do that too— totally miner heated although I have a heatpump the miners are better. :P )
168 2012-10-20 00:52:01 <sturles> :-)
169 2012-10-20 00:52:12 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
170 2012-10-20 00:52:48 <sturles> What do you think about BFL's claims of 1 W / Ghash/s?
171 2012-10-20 00:53:29 <sturles> If you think 150 W is impossble?
172 2012-10-20 00:54:11 <gmaxwell> I think if BFL isn't lying completely they're on 45nm.
173 2012-10-20 00:54:52 <gmaxwell> And if they are then their claims are reasonable. But it also means that if it turns out they have a bad mask they'll probably vanish with everyone's money.
174 2012-10-20 00:55:18 <gmaxwell> (Inaba says they are not funded at all by preorders but I .. well. I wouldn't place a large bet against it, but nor do I believe it)
175 2012-10-20 01:01:37 bitcoinbulletin has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
176 2012-10-20 01:02:06 vampireb has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
177 2012-10-20 01:11:48 bitcoinbulletin has joined
178 2012-10-20 01:16:56 MC-Eeepc has joined
179 2012-10-20 01:18:25 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
180 2012-10-20 01:19:12 MC1984 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
181 2012-10-20 01:24:41 <MC-Eeepc> le reddit integrated bitcoin into their comment system?
182 2012-10-20 01:25:43 <gmaxwell> MC-Eeepc: no, some reddit user is running a bot.
183 2012-10-20 01:25:45 <jgarzik> it's a plugin bot
184 2012-10-20 01:26:16 <MC-Eeepc> reddit has plugins?
185 2012-10-20 01:28:45 xisalty has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
186 2012-10-20 01:30:02 <MC-Eeepc> oh everyone has to trust one guy
187 2012-10-20 01:56:23 agricocb has joined
188 2012-10-20 01:57:26 osmosis has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
189 2012-10-20 02:06:20 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
190 2012-10-20 02:15:00 <jgarzik> now this is _really_ strange
191 2012-10-20 02:15:20 <jgarzik> getpeerinfo reports all satoshi clients, all with "startingheight" >= 204066
192 2012-10-20 02:15:23 agricocb has joined
193 2012-10-20 02:15:33 <jgarzik> however...
194 2012-10-20 02:15:33 <jgarzik> 10/20/12 02:03:51 getblocks 198388 to 00000000000000000000 limit 500
195 2012-10-20 02:15:33 <jgarzik> 10/20/12 02:03:51   getblocks stopping at limit 198887 00000000000002772ce1
196 2012-10-20 02:15:33 <jgarzik> 10/20/12 02:03:52 getblocks 198888 to 00000000000000000000 limit 500
197 2012-10-20 02:15:33 <jgarzik> 10/20/12 02:03:52   getblocks stopping at limit 199387 000000000000056658c6
198 2012-10-20 02:15:34 <jgarzik> 10/20/12 02:03:52 getblocks 199388 to 00000000000000000000 limit 500
199 2012-10-20 02:15:36 <jgarzik> 10/20/12 02:03:52   getblocks stopping at limit 199887 000000000000005e7e63
200 2012-10-20 02:15:47 <jgarzik> a bunch of getblocks
201 2012-10-20 02:16:31 da2ce7 has joined
202 2012-10-20 02:16:37 <jgarzik> client(s) appear to be in a loop, repeatedly requesting 192388 through 203888
203 2012-10-20 02:16:49 <jgarzik> they are served those blocks, then the getblocks restarts
204 2012-10-20 02:20:30 xisalty has joined
205 2012-10-20 02:21:07 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
206 2012-10-20 02:21:43 copumpkin has joined
207 2012-10-20 02:29:02 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
208 2012-10-20 02:36:45 prahanormal has joined
209 2012-10-20 02:44:19 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
210 2012-10-20 02:44:59 prahanormal has quit ()
211 2012-10-20 02:45:30 prahanormal has joined
212 2012-10-20 02:45:30 prahanormal has quit (Client Quit)
213 2012-10-20 02:45:53 prahanormal has joined
214 2012-10-20 02:45:57 fiesh has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
215 2012-10-20 02:46:06 fiesh has joined
216 2012-10-20 02:47:05 Eslbaer has joined
217 2012-10-20 02:48:55 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
218 2012-10-20 02:49:33 copumpkin has joined
219 2012-10-20 02:49:44 TheEslbear has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
220 2012-10-20 02:52:58 Lolcust has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
221 2012-10-20 03:07:19 spreelanka has joined
222 2012-10-20 03:19:37 TheSeven has quit (Disconnected by services)
223 2012-10-20 03:19:47 [7] has joined
224 2012-10-20 03:30:15 meLon has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
225 2012-10-20 03:30:38 meLon has joined
226 2012-10-20 03:30:38 meLon has quit (Changing host)
227 2012-10-20 03:30:38 meLon has joined
228 2012-10-20 03:52:16 InabaEMC has joined
229 2012-10-20 03:55:20 BlackPrapor has joined
230 2012-10-20 03:55:32 BlackPrapor has quit (Client Quit)
231 2012-10-20 03:59:01 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@brwyatt.net|brwyatt
232 2012-10-20 04:01:17 noagendamarket has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
233 2012-10-20 04:11:15 noagendamarket has joined
234 2012-10-20 04:12:24 Joric has joined
235 2012-10-20 04:14:02 <Joric> http://eprint.iacr.org/2012/584.pdf 'We acquired the complete state of the Bitcoin transaction system (...) This required downloading 180,001
236 2012-10-20 04:14:02 <Joric> separate but linked HTML les
237 2012-10-20 04:14:04 <Joric> '
238 2012-10-20 04:14:19 <Joric> can't... find... words...
239 2012-10-20 04:14:53 <Joric> did they scrape blockexplorer to death
240 2012-10-20 04:16:41 DerCoin has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
241 2012-10-20 04:17:20 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
242 2012-10-20 04:21:15 JZavala has joined
243 2012-10-20 04:30:49 antix_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
244 2012-10-20 04:31:00 prahanormal has quit ()
245 2012-10-20 04:36:52 <weex> yes
246 2012-10-20 04:37:00 da2ce7 has joined
247 2012-10-20 04:40:58 ForceMajeure has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
248 2012-10-20 04:42:43 <jgarzik> Joric: sad, eh?
249 2012-10-20 04:47:52 Hasimir_ has joined
250 2012-10-20 04:49:47 freakazoid has joined
251 2012-10-20 04:50:29 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
252 2012-10-20 04:50:34 Hasimir has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
253 2012-10-20 04:52:25 da2ce7 has joined
254 2012-10-20 04:55:47 maaku has joined
255 2012-10-20 05:01:32 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
256 2012-10-20 05:02:54 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: SLEEP MODE. puppy: it'd be wise to actual chat on here and not loiter.)
257 2012-10-20 05:10:23 <Joric> they are analysts, not technichians
258 2012-10-20 05:12:37 <Joric> how do they call it... IR, information retrieval specialists :D
259 2012-10-20 05:13:16 RainbowDashh has joined
260 2012-10-20 05:13:21 xorgate has joined
261 2012-10-20 05:22:22 Hasimir_ is now known as Hasimir
262 2012-10-20 05:24:22 Joric has quit ()
263 2012-10-20 05:32:13 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
264 2012-10-20 05:38:22 root2_ has joined
265 2012-10-20 05:42:08 root2 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
266 2012-10-20 05:50:15 ThomasV_ has joined
267 2012-10-20 06:02:40 da2ce7_d has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.2.0 Equilibrium http://www.kvirc.net/)
268 2012-10-20 06:03:16 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
269 2012-10-20 06:15:20 Varan has joined
270 2012-10-20 06:16:16 dvide has joined
271 2012-10-20 06:19:41 Joric has joined
272 2012-10-20 06:22:54 da2ce7 has joined
273 2012-10-20 06:23:50 Varan has quit (Quit: Leaving)
274 2012-10-20 06:24:04 dlb76 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
275 2012-10-20 06:25:48 Joric has quit ()
276 2012-10-20 06:25:51 freewil has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
277 2012-10-20 06:26:44 freewil has joined
278 2012-10-20 06:27:23 BlackPrapor has joined
279 2012-10-20 06:30:31 pnicholson has quit (Quit: pnicholson)
280 2012-10-20 06:33:00 D34TH has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
281 2012-10-20 06:41:35 InabaEMC has quit ()
282 2012-10-20 06:42:20 optimator has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
283 2012-10-20 06:43:01 optimator has joined
284 2012-10-20 06:43:01 optimator has quit (Changing host)
285 2012-10-20 06:43:01 optimator has joined
286 2012-10-20 06:44:23 dust-otc has joined
287 2012-10-20 06:45:10 ovidiusoft has joined
288 2012-10-20 06:47:58 ThomasV_ has quit (Quit: Quitte)
289 2012-10-20 06:48:17 ThomasV has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
290 2012-10-20 06:48:47 ThomasV has joined
291 2012-10-20 06:49:38 <wumpus> so that's why block explorer was down all the time :')
292 2012-10-20 06:54:01 <wumpus> well, "not being technicians" is not an excuse, they could have just asked here, or on the forums...
293 2012-10-20 06:56:45 <MagicalTux> lol
294 2012-10-20 06:56:56 <MagicalTux> they actually parsed the blockexplorer pages ?
295 2012-10-20 06:57:44 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
296 2012-10-20 07:00:34 <wumpus> yes :D
297 2012-10-20 07:02:51 Joric has joined
298 2012-10-20 07:07:25 one_zero has joined
299 2012-10-20 07:20:29 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
300 2012-10-20 07:28:15 spreelanka has quit (Quit: spreelanka)
301 2012-10-20 07:33:08 arij has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
302 2012-10-20 07:36:00 one_zero has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
303 2012-10-20 07:46:13 BGL has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
304 2012-10-20 07:56:23 one_zero has joined
305 2012-10-20 07:59:04 mmoya has joined
306 2012-10-20 08:06:30 BGL has joined
307 2012-10-20 08:06:42 Gladamas has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
308 2012-10-20 08:06:54 ThomasV has joined
309 2012-10-20 08:08:00 Joric has quit ()
310 2012-10-20 08:09:39 toffoo has quit ()
311 2012-10-20 08:10:24 Gladamas has joined
312 2012-10-20 08:19:24 one_zero_ has joined
313 2012-10-20 08:21:47 DutchBrat has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
314 2012-10-20 08:22:12 one_zero has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
315 2012-10-20 08:23:02 DutchBrat has joined
316 2012-10-20 08:35:59 one_zero_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
317 2012-10-20 08:42:05 asuk has joined
318 2012-10-20 08:49:41 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
319 2012-10-20 08:56:05 asuk has joined
320 2012-10-20 08:57:42 asuk has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
321 2012-10-20 09:00:15 RazielZ has joined
322 2012-10-20 09:01:05 asuk has joined
323 2012-10-20 09:08:03 otimm has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
324 2012-10-20 09:09:52 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
325 2012-10-20 09:11:11 otimm has joined
326 2012-10-20 09:12:53 testnode9 has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
327 2012-10-20 09:15:12 testnode9 has joined
328 2012-10-20 09:24:40 Joric has joined
329 2012-10-20 09:24:58 one_zero has joined
330 2012-10-20 09:26:00 topace has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
331 2012-10-20 09:28:30 topace has joined
332 2012-10-20 09:49:38 Joric has quit ()
333 2012-10-20 09:54:28 datagutt has joined
334 2012-10-20 09:54:51 asuk has joined
335 2012-10-20 10:01:32 harkon has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
336 2012-10-20 10:04:22 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
337 2012-10-20 10:05:00 copumpkin has joined
338 2012-10-20 10:05:26 BlackPrapor has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
339 2012-10-20 10:05:31 asuk has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
340 2012-10-20 10:05:49 asuk has joined
341 2012-10-20 10:40:28 abrkn has joined
342 2012-10-20 10:44:31 RV__ has joined
343 2012-10-20 11:07:51 [7] has quit (Disconnected by services)
344 2012-10-20 11:07:57 TheSeven has joined
345 2012-10-20 11:08:20 paraipan has joined
346 2012-10-20 11:08:24 abrkn has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
347 2012-10-20 11:23:34 BlackPrapor has joined
348 2012-10-20 11:27:25 asuk has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
349 2012-10-20 11:27:40 asuk has joined
350 2012-10-20 11:44:42 CodesInChaos has joined
351 2012-10-20 11:45:01 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
352 2012-10-20 11:55:57 Joric has joined
353 2012-10-20 12:00:08 root2_ is now known as root2
354 2012-10-20 12:01:57 harkon has joined
355 2012-10-20 12:12:02 asuk has joined
356 2012-10-20 12:21:07 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
357 2012-10-20 12:21:32 int0x27h has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
358 2012-10-20 12:22:03 TheSeven has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
359 2012-10-20 12:22:14 harakiri has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
360 2012-10-20 12:22:43 TheSeven has joined
361 2012-10-20 12:23:55 harakiri has joined
362 2012-10-20 12:24:26 int0x27h has joined
363 2012-10-20 12:29:49 cheebydi has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
364 2012-10-20 12:30:18 cheebydi has joined
365 2012-10-20 12:30:24 hnz_ has joined
366 2012-10-20 12:30:25 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
367 2012-10-20 12:31:32 hnz has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
368 2012-10-20 12:33:23 slush1 has joined
369 2012-10-20 12:44:00 Joric has quit ()
370 2012-10-20 13:01:47 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
371 2012-10-20 13:02:26 copumpkin has joined
372 2012-10-20 13:05:48 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: SLEEP MODE. puppy: it'd be wise to actual chat on here and not loiter.)
373 2012-10-20 13:09:43 Zarutian has joined
374 2012-10-20 13:11:37 Eslbaer has quit (Quit: Verlassend)
375 2012-10-20 13:11:42 aq83 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
376 2012-10-20 13:15:36 asuk has joined
377 2012-10-20 13:20:05 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
378 2012-10-20 13:22:45 one_zero has quit ()
379 2012-10-20 13:25:11 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Quitte)
380 2012-10-20 13:25:28 RV__ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
381 2012-10-20 13:30:15 galambo_ has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
382 2012-10-20 13:35:47 Eslbaer has joined
383 2012-10-20 13:43:04 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
384 2012-10-20 13:50:38 rdponticelli has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
385 2012-10-20 13:54:27 rdponticelli has joined
386 2012-10-20 14:01:53 testnode9 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
387 2012-10-20 14:03:43 Zarutian has joined
388 2012-10-20 14:13:22 root2 has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
389 2012-10-20 14:15:51 spreelanka has joined
390 2012-10-20 14:16:00 asuk has joined
391 2012-10-20 14:19:23 testnode9 has joined
392 2012-10-20 14:20:33 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
393 2012-10-20 14:25:37 ThomasV has joined
394 2012-10-20 14:27:54 graingert_ecs has joined
395 2012-10-20 14:30:03 PhantomSpark has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
396 2012-10-20 14:38:31 cande has joined
397 2012-10-20 14:39:50 t7 has joined
398 2012-10-20 14:46:30 gavinandresen has joined
399 2012-10-20 14:49:53 <Luke-Jr> gavinandresen: found a way to (tediously) get transifex contributors; what date range do you want?
400 2012-10-20 14:50:04 abrkn has joined
401 2012-10-20 14:50:39 <gavinandresen> Luke-Jr: meh.  if it is tedious, not worth it to do every release....
402 2012-10-20 14:51:10 <Luke-Jr> gavinandresen: basically the equivalent of "git log" is available via HTML with like 20 entries per page
403 2012-10-20 14:52:25 <sipa> you have a script to scrape that?
404 2012-10-20 14:52:27 <gavinandresen> I wonder if any other projects thank their translators.  I really DO appreciate their effort, it'd be nice to thank them.
405 2012-10-20 14:52:40 <Luke-Jr> sipa: I don't, but I doubt it'd be hard to make
406 2012-10-20 14:53:42 <Luke-Jr> especially if we just want usernames
407 2012-10-20 14:55:04 <sipa> how large is blk0001.dat, blk0002.dat, blkindex.dat together these days?
408 2012-10-20 14:55:57 <Luke-Jr> 4-5 GB I think
409 2012-10-20 14:56:33 <sipa> du -h --total on ultraprune's equivalent files: 4071804 KiB
410 2012-10-20 14:56:47 <Luke-Jr> :/
411 2012-10-20 14:57:08 <abrkn> heya, i was thinking of making a card game played with a "real" (pseudo random) deck of cards. the player receives a hash of the deck before the game starts to prove that the game is not "rigged" for him to lose. has this been done? are there any holes in my logic?
412 2012-10-20 14:57:16 <sipa> without any pruning, obviously
413 2012-10-20 15:03:24 <sipa> anyone know the numbers for the current databases?
414 2012-10-20 15:03:39 <Luke-Jr> ?
415 2012-10-20 15:03:58 <sipa> du -h --total ~/.bitcoin/{blk*.dat}
416 2012-10-20 15:05:18 <Luke-Jr> [14:44:21] <Luke-Jr> 4-5 GB I think
417 2012-10-20 15:05:45 <sipa> i'm asking for somewhat higher precision :)
418 2012-10-20 15:06:02 <Luke-Jr> it's not that precise :p
419 2012-10-20 15:06:23 <Luke-Jr> depends on how many orphans etc someone's seen
420 2012-10-20 15:06:29 <Luke-Jr> how recently they did IBD
421 2012-10-20 15:06:40 <sipa> sure, that may make a few % difference
422 2012-10-20 15:06:55 <Luke-Jr> mine is 4.0 GB
423 2012-10-20 15:07:04 <Luke-Jr> with pruned blk0001 index
424 2012-10-20 15:07:50 <sipa> by pruned you mean removed spent entries from blkindex.dat, or no stale blocks in blk000*.dat ?
425 2012-10-20 15:08:00 <Luke-Jr> both
426 2012-10-20 15:08:15 <Luke-Jr> but only up to the end of blk0001
427 2012-10-20 15:08:28 <sipa> ok
428 2012-10-20 15:08:38 <Luke-Jr> also,  note that du uses sane 1024-units, not SI
429 2012-10-20 15:08:53 <sipa> that's why I said KiB :)
430 2012-10-20 15:09:26 MobiusL has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
431 2012-10-20 15:09:53 <Luke-Jr> just clarifying my GB so it doesn't confuse you ;)
432 2012-10-20 15:12:42 <sipa> ok
433 2012-10-20 15:14:27 <Luke-Jr> gavinandresen: do you want a date range or "all time"?
434 2012-10-20 15:14:48 <gavinandresen> date range, last release to current release
435 2012-10-20 15:16:19 asuk has joined
436 2012-10-20 15:16:27 <Luke-Jr> so from 0.7.0 to 0.7.1, or 0.6.3 to 0.7.1 ? I don't think much changed between the 0.7.x
437 2012-10-20 15:18:56 <gavinandresen> I dunno, what do you think? Maybe somebody should post a "Thank you Translators" that does all-time, and we'll do a thank-you incremental for future releases.
438 2012-10-20 15:19:31 <Luke-Jr> shrug
439 2012-10-20 15:20:00 <gavinandresen> exactly, if it is a pain in the ass it's not worth spending time on it.
440 2012-10-20 15:21:06 <Luke-Jr> { for i in {1..21}; do curl -s -i -b 'sessionid=bd4010e6a781c81af98283c49f32a165' 'https://www.transifex.com/projects/p/bitcoin/timeline/?page=$i'; done; } | perl -nle 'm[/accounts/profile/([^/]+)] && print $1'|sort|uniq -c|sort -n
441 2012-10-20 15:21:08 <Luke-Jr> :p
442 2012-10-20 15:21:15 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
443 2012-10-20 15:21:20 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
444 2012-10-20 15:22:03 <Luke-Jr> hmm, odd
445 2012-10-20 15:22:13 <Luke-Jr> I probably should void that sessionid :x
446 2012-10-20 15:23:09 <Luke-Jr> seems to be missing some users somehow; I gotta run tho, will look at it a bit more when I get back
447 2012-10-20 15:25:05 pecket has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
448 2012-10-20 15:25:17 <Luke-Jr> actually, it was $i being inside single quotes
449 2012-10-20 15:25:57 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
450 2012-10-20 15:26:19 <abrkn> how can i get a receiving address that starts with "abrkn"? i noticed "1ninja" has an address starting with "1ninja"
451 2012-10-20 15:26:35 <sipa> abrkn: search for vanity addresses
452 2012-10-20 15:27:33 <abrkn> that's cool as shit.
453 2012-10-20 15:28:12 <sipa> yes and no; i admin i have some of those myself, but as addresses aren't really intended to be reused multiple times, they should be generated on the spot
454 2012-10-20 15:28:33 <sipa> but for donation addresses and such, there's no nicer solution currently, imho
455 2012-10-20 15:28:44 <sipa> s/admin/admit/
456 2012-10-20 15:29:53 <abrkn> is "brain wallet" on bitadress.org any good? like, if that site goes down can i still use my money?
457 2012-10-20 15:29:57 <Luke-Jr> 85 mauron, 57 Diapolo, 50 lukedashjr, 49 birgerhedman, 38 penknife, 34 Dr_Nix, 32 tcatm, 30 iongchun, 27 Janjko, 16 eurekafag, 15 Amink, 10 yomismo, 10 xHire, 10 transifexuser, 10 finway_china, 9 DrHaribo, 7 pishtov, 7 kevinxw, 6 menirosenfeld, 6 jondoh, 6 bitgarden, 5 doobrik, 5 Zyzzy, 5 HostFat, 4 stikonas, 4 kr105, 4 jui, 4 ariesgo, 4 Legogris, 4 Iltane, 4 Eisenaxt, 3 slobodanmiskovic, 3 jaau, 3 Eliel, 3 Deafboy, 2 sulaymanf, 2
458 2012-10-20 15:29:58 <Luke-Jr> runeks, 2 palsecam, 2 opresco, 2 olea, 2 mrmx, 2 mila, 2 matshenricson, 2 hendi, 2 david113, 2 bitcoinhu, 2 akira0, 2 Jrnr601, 2 Fernando, 2 Alissa, 1 vitor.de.mello.freitas, 1 tester, 1 tengo, 1 stergium, 1 reezer, 1 ownermadepa, 1 mysteq, 1 mikolaj, 1 linjaaho, 1 jeremiaskangas, 1 iavael, 1 h2010n, 1 eugemjj, 1 emuLOAD, 1 cj, 1 cesarfdez123, 1 cande, 1 bttfmcf, 1 bottleb, 1 beoswind, 1 Thiriel, 1 Stemby, 1 Serenata, 1
459 2012-10-20 15:30:00 <Luke-Jr> NedjeljniKomentar, 1 Funkin, 1 DH_, 1 BAWLAW
460 2012-10-20 15:30:07 <Luke-Jr> sorry for spam, ttyl
461 2012-10-20 15:30:17 <sipa> abrkn: yes, but you shouldn't ever use a website for generating addresses
462 2012-10-20 15:30:28 <abrkn> it claims to be client sife
463 2012-10-20 15:30:30 <abrkn> side*
464 2012-10-20 15:30:38 <sipa> doesn't matter - they can change it on the fly
465 2012-10-20 15:30:40 <Luke-Jr> for 0.7.0-0.7.1: 7 birgerhedman, 5 mauron, 5 Diapolo, 3 penknife, 2 xHire, 2 iongchun, 2 Dr_Nix, 1 pishtov, 1 menirosenfeld, 1 eurekafag, 1 emuLOAD
466 2012-10-20 15:30:49 <sipa> you can save the site locally though, and use that
467 2012-10-20 15:30:52 <sipa> if you trust the code
468 2012-10-20 15:31:26 <Luke-Jr> for 0.6.3-0.7.1: 50 lukedashjr, 32 mauron, 22 birgerhedman, 20 Diapolo, 11 iongchun, 9 Dr_Nix, 9 Amink, 7 penknife, 6 finway_china, 5 xHire, 5 eurekafag, 4 stikonas, 4 jui, 4 ariesgo, 3 menirosenfeld, 3 Eliel, 2 pishtov, 2 palsecam, 2 DrHaribo, 1 tengo, 1 tcatm, 1 olea, 1 mysteq, 1 mikolaj, 1 linjaaho, 1 h2010n, 1 emuLOAD, 1 beoswind, 1 Serenata
469 2012-10-20 15:31:36 <sipa> Luke-Jr: put that in a gist or a pastebin or so
470 2012-10-20 15:32:27 cande has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
471 2012-10-20 15:33:25 cande has joined
472 2012-10-20 15:33:28 pecket has joined
473 2012-10-20 15:35:58 MobiusL has joined
474 2012-10-20 15:36:14 D34TH has joined
475 2012-10-20 15:37:48 cande has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
476 2012-10-20 15:39:42 galambo has joined
477 2012-10-20 15:39:59 DerCoin has joined
478 2012-10-20 15:40:08 sirk390 has joined
479 2012-10-20 15:40:15 sirk390 has left ()
480 2012-10-20 15:40:35 aq83 has joined
481 2012-10-20 15:48:34 BlackPrapor has joined
482 2012-10-20 15:48:40 <abrkn> heya, i was thinking of making a card game played with a "real" (pseudo random) deck of cards. the player receives a hash of the deck before the game starts to prove that the game is not "rigged" for him to lose. has this been done? are there any holes in my logic?
483 2012-10-20 15:48:41 BlackPrapor has quit (2!~BlackPrap@h31-8-44-113.dyn.bashtel.ru|Client Quit)
484 2012-10-20 15:50:24 cande has joined
485 2012-10-20 15:52:09 <vazakl> your logic is correct
486 2012-10-20 15:53:08 <abrkn> so for roulette, i could make up a game id before every spin, generate result on server, send client crypted gameid+result before he bets?
487 2012-10-20 15:53:21 <vazakl> you could
488 2012-10-20 15:53:33 <abrkn> interesting. i assume this method is in use already?
489 2012-10-20 15:54:00 <fiesh> it is
490 2012-10-20 15:54:06 <abrkn> any examples?
491 2012-10-20 15:54:12 <vazakl> im not up to date on all the bitcoin sites. but what youre saying makes perfect sense
492 2012-10-20 15:54:15 <fiesh> check the bitcoin wiki, section gambling
493 2012-10-20 15:54:23 OlaHughson has joined
494 2012-10-20 15:54:30 <abrkn> ok. i really want to make a card game you can beat if you play it perfectly
495 2012-10-20 15:55:03 <abrkn> just need to find a way not to get overrun by bots that isnt as boring as text captcha
496 2012-10-20 15:57:49 <abrkn> what's the most interesting way to prove that someone is a human?
497 2012-10-20 16:03:03 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@brwyatt.net|brwyatt
498 2012-10-20 16:04:15 Rv has joined
499 2012-10-20 16:04:24 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
500 2012-10-20 16:04:39 Rv is now known as Guest70510
501 2012-10-20 16:04:54 Arnavion has quit (Quit: Arnavion)
502 2012-10-20 16:05:35 maaku has joined
503 2012-10-20 16:05:52 <SomeoneWeird> abrkn, get them to take a picture of themselves with a shoe on their head with a game id written on their face while holding a dog
504 2012-10-20 16:06:43 <abrkn> SomeoneWeird: genius, is that technology patented?
505 2012-10-20 16:07:11 <SomeoneWeird> abrkn, get them to take a picture of themselves with a shoe on their head with a game id written on their face while holding a dog™
506 2012-10-20 16:07:14 <SomeoneWeird> it is now
507 2012-10-20 16:07:23 <abrkn> touche
508 2012-10-20 16:07:23 maaku has quit (Client Quit)
509 2012-10-20 16:07:41 arij has joined
510 2012-10-20 16:08:04 arij is now known as Guest59392
511 2012-10-20 16:09:34 maaku has joined
512 2012-10-20 16:12:46 Arnavion has joined
513 2012-10-20 16:14:07 testnode9 has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
514 2012-10-20 16:16:44 asuk has joined
515 2012-10-20 16:19:34 rdponticelli has joined
516 2012-10-20 16:21:15 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
517 2012-10-20 16:23:09 mologie has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
518 2012-10-20 16:23:32 mologie_ has joined
519 2012-10-20 16:23:34 mologie_ is now known as mologie
520 2012-10-20 16:31:14 dlb76 has joined
521 2012-10-20 16:43:52 Zarutian has joined
522 2012-10-20 16:49:46 <gmaxwell> sipa: just didn't want us to forget it.
523 2012-10-20 16:55:03 <sipa> sure
524 2012-10-20 17:01:53 asuk has joined
525 2012-10-20 17:03:35 graingert_ecs has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
526 2012-10-20 17:09:43 otimm has quit ()
527 2012-10-20 17:10:36 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
528 2012-10-20 17:14:14 asuk has joined
529 2012-10-20 17:22:28 Arnavion has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
530 2012-10-20 17:23:11 <jgarzik> <sipa> By the way: this pull request is rebased on top of 'threadimport' and 'canonical'.  <<-- would be nice to reference the pull req #'s
531 2012-10-20 17:23:17 <jgarzik> in github
532 2012-10-20 17:24:24 comboy has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
533 2012-10-20 17:24:32 comboy has joined
534 2012-10-20 17:25:38 Arnavion has joined
535 2012-10-20 17:26:42 <sipa> jgarzik: done
536 2012-10-20 17:27:44 <jgarzik> Meni's letter to Ron/Shamir got a response: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=118797.msg1286015#msg1286015
537 2012-10-20 17:30:13 abrkn has quit ()
538 2012-10-20 17:30:50 jercos has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
539 2012-10-20 17:32:14 jercos has joined
540 2012-10-20 17:32:27 da2ce7_d has joined
541 2012-10-20 17:34:38 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
542 2012-10-20 17:34:46 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
543 2012-10-20 17:37:11 eoss has joined
544 2012-10-20 17:38:35 tonikt has joined
545 2012-10-20 17:43:14 dust-otc has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
546 2012-10-20 17:43:40 dvide has quit ()
547 2012-10-20 17:43:47 asuk has joined
548 2012-10-20 17:48:44 <Titanium2> abrkn have them do somethign only a humnan can do, like somethign in the real world that generates a news article
549 2012-10-20 17:48:57 <Titanium2> obits are hard to fake
550 2012-10-20 17:57:28 <_dr> wow, these guys sure are annoying
551 2012-10-20 17:59:19 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
552 2012-10-20 17:59:31 parus has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
553 2012-10-20 18:00:20 agricocb has joined
554 2012-10-20 18:00:59 parus has joined
555 2012-10-20 18:01:34 BNCatDIGISHELL has quit (Quit: changing servers)
556 2012-10-20 18:01:52 BNCatDIGISHELL has joined
557 2012-10-20 18:02:48 <_dr> first they claim that if someone has money in their wallet they are hoarding it; and when someone comes along and tells them that's BS they accuse the community of wanting to manipulate the methodology to fit their own 'political' (whatever that means) agenda
558 2012-10-20 18:03:31 <_dr> yeah right, and after they insult the community they ask for help! science, bitches!
559 2012-10-20 18:03:44 Gladamas_ has joined
560 2012-10-20 18:06:04 BNCatDIGISHELL has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
561 2012-10-20 18:07:38 Gladamas has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
562 2012-10-20 18:08:42 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
563 2012-10-20 18:11:17 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
564 2012-10-20 18:11:57 BNCatDIGISHELL has joined
565 2012-10-20 18:13:30 sirk390 has joined
566 2012-10-20 18:18:16 senseless has joined
567 2012-10-20 18:19:22 <senseless> is there anyway to rebroadcast a transaction?
568 2012-10-20 18:20:00 <sipa> it happens automatically from time to time
569 2012-10-20 18:20:10 <sipa> at least once every half an hour
570 2012-10-20 18:22:53 <senseless> alright, thanks
571 2012-10-20 18:28:14 Guest59392 is now known as arij
572 2012-10-20 18:28:29 arij has quit (Changing host)
573 2012-10-20 18:28:29 arij has joined
574 2012-10-20 18:29:17 CMmike has joined
575 2012-10-20 18:36:25 <sipa> hmm, 33 incoming onion connections to bitcoin.sipa.be, and 4 IPv6 connections ...
576 2012-10-20 18:36:59 <sipa> while my crawler only knows of 14 onion nodes that accept connections
577 2012-10-20 18:37:06 * sipa thinks more onion nodes are needed
578 2012-10-20 18:38:37 <gmaxwell> sipa: It takes work to make them go. We can ask people to run more... but unless tor adds the ability to ask for an onion inbound over the proxy port, it'll remain hard to get people to do.
579 2012-10-20 18:38:45 <sipa> true
580 2012-10-20 18:40:50 ThomasV has joined
581 2012-10-20 18:41:49 ForceMajeure has joined
582 2012-10-20 18:43:37 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: ACK troll for https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1880 (Move external block import to separate thread)
583 2012-10-20 18:48:00 Arnavion has quit (Quit: Arnavion)
584 2012-10-20 18:48:14 Arnavion has joined
585 2012-10-20 18:48:53 sirk390 has left ()
586 2012-10-20 18:54:38 denisx has joined
587 2012-10-20 18:55:19 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: your last post almost implies p2pool is the only decentralized pool -.-
588 2012-10-20 18:58:19 <sipa> it's the only pool i know that decentralizes payouts
589 2012-10-20 18:59:49 guruvan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
590 2012-10-20 18:59:57 guruvan_ is now known as guruvan
591 2012-10-20 19:00:33 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
592 2012-10-20 19:00:44 molecular has joined
593 2012-10-20 19:01:39 <gmaxwell> decentralizes payouts, for better or worse!
594 2012-10-20 19:02:01 <Luke-Jr> not really; payouts are decided by forrestv's rules, for better or worse
595 2012-10-20 19:02:15 <Luke-Jr> decentralizes the checking of every share, sure, but that's also irrelevant to Bitcoin
596 2012-10-20 19:02:56 <sipa> well if you consider the author of software a point of centralization, surely Bitcoin is completely centralized as well
597 2012-10-20 19:03:27 <Luke-Jr> sipa: for Bitcoin, it's an acknowledged problem the community is working to overcome :p
598 2012-10-20 19:03:53 <sipa> of course, but the same is true for any other software
599 2012-10-20 19:04:25 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: you can't change the rules of bitcoin by making more versions.
600 2012-10-20 19:04:54 <gmaxwell> also, unlike bitcoin it's perfectly reasonable to just start your own p2pool.. and there are people using it 'privately' on forks.
601 2012-10-20 19:05:02 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: that's not p2pool then
602 2012-10-20 19:05:09 asuk has joined
603 2012-10-20 19:05:16 <gmaxwell> It's the p2pool software.
604 2012-10-20 19:05:26 <sipa> i'm not saying that centralizing payouts cannot have advantages, but using software that does payout calculation according to verifiable and verified-by-every-node software is certainly more decentralized than what any central server can achieve
605 2012-10-20 19:05:31 <Luke-Jr> anyhow, there is no reason to prefer p2pool over other decentralized pools
606 2012-10-20 19:06:11 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: Some people don't trust pool operators not to rob them.
607 2012-10-20 19:06:31 <gmaxwell> And there are perfectly reasonable reasons to do that.
608 2012-10-20 19:06:36 <sipa> i really don't consider a GBT pool to be decentralized (even though it's certainly superior to a pool that does not allow block inspection or modification)
609 2012-10-20 19:06:39 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: Eligius has required zero trust in that regard since it launched
610 2012-10-20 19:06:56 PhantomSpark has joined
611 2012-10-20 19:07:17 <Luke-Jr> sipa: as far as Bitcoin is concerned, it is identical to p2pool
612 2012-10-20 19:07:19 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: er. Thats not true. You were originally proportional and could have been stuffing shares.
613 2012-10-20 19:07:37 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: no, because the share database including hashes of every share has been public
614 2012-10-20 19:07:38 <sipa> Luke-Jr: i'm not Bitcoin
615 2012-10-20 19:07:47 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: And later with SMPPS you're still a kind of proportional payout when you go negative.
616 2012-10-20 19:08:28 <sipa> Luke-Jr: i fully support the idea of GBT pools, but claiming it is as decentralized as P2Pool really makes no sense to me - one connects to a central server, no?
617 2012-10-20 19:08:58 <Eliel> Luke-Jr: your pool is pretty well auditable but it does require trust unless you're willing to spend hours auditing it.
618 2012-10-20 19:09:05 <Eliel> p2pool automatically audits itself.
619 2012-10-20 19:09:09 <sipa> i know the advantages, and I like them, but i think you'll get little respect by claiming it is not centralized
620 2012-10-20 19:09:21 <Luke-Jr> Eliel: p2pool doesn't audit itself, you have to spend even more hours reading its unreadable code :p
621 2012-10-20 19:09:32 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
622 2012-10-20 19:09:42 <sipa> Luke-Jr: compared to looking at every GBT response your server gives?
623 2012-10-20 19:09:42 <Luke-Jr> sipa: miners control and make their own blocks; as far as Bitcoin goes, that's as decentralized as it gets
624 2012-10-20 19:09:55 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
625 2012-10-20 19:10:04 <sipa> Luke-Jr: and as I said, I am not Bitcoin - I'm a human that considers a central server to be something centralized
626 2012-10-20 19:10:11 <Eliel> Luke-Jr: that is much more doable than writing your own software to audit eligius data.
627 2012-10-20 19:10:38 <sipa> and I think very few people will disagree with me there
628 2012-10-20 19:11:11 <Luke-Jr> *shrug* the only practical difference is that forrestv saves on server costs
629 2012-10-20 19:11:25 <Luke-Jr> at the expense of many other more important factors
630 2012-10-20 19:12:34 maaku has joined
631 2012-10-20 19:12:42 <sipa> I think a GBT pool should be called "solo mining with coordinated payout" or something
632 2012-10-20 19:15:18 <Luke-Jr> or just "decentralized pool" for short
633 2012-10-20 19:15:47 <Luke-Jr> p2pool can continue to use "p2p" for its tradeoffs as it has been
634 2012-10-20 19:15:59 <sipa> Do you really think you' re going to convince *anyone* that a service with a central server is decentralized?
635 2012-10-20 19:16:09 <sipa> even though I know what you mean, it is confusing
636 2012-10-20 19:17:13 <Eliel> the problem is trying to assign a binary statement about decentralizedness when one bit is not enough.
637 2012-10-20 19:17:21 <sipa> exactly
638 2012-10-20 19:17:26 <Luke-Jr> sipa: it's not exactly been disputed in general
639 2012-10-20 19:18:47 <Eliel> and you two are arguing about whether the generalized one bit statement should be formed by anding the bits or orring them :)
640 2012-10-20 19:26:08 <gmaxwell> There are multiple reasons to want decenteralized mining.
641 2012-10-20 19:27:00 <gmaxwell> Protection of bitcoin, attack resistance (downtime), invulnerablity to theft are some of the most obvious ones. Different solutions have different degrees of these things.
642 2012-10-20 19:27:41 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: p2p is *less* resistant to attacks
643 2012-10-20 19:28:25 <sipa> One reason to prefer a centralized (but inspectable) payout system, is performance - I'm not sure to what extent p2pool can reasonably scale
644 2012-10-20 19:28:26 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: p2p has less *motivation* to attack.
645 2012-10-20 19:28:57 <Luke-Jr> sipa: p2pool should be fine for constant performance I expect, but variance will skyrocket
646 2012-10-20 19:29:02 CMmike_ has joined
647 2012-10-20 19:29:06 <gmaxwell> sipa: it just runs out of varience reduction at some point. The PPLNS window is such that small miners will just not get shares in every block.
648 2012-10-20 19:29:12 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: only because p2pool has good PR ;)
649 2012-10-20 19:29:42 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: not so. You got people trying to attack you because they thought they could extort you.
650 2012-10-20 19:30:02 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: they could extort p2p miners easier IMO
651 2012-10-20 19:30:15 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: And p2p can have very strong attack resistance. A good chunk of p2pool's hash rate is connected via non-public IPs on a darknet I run.
652 2012-10-20 19:30:37 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: p2pool wouldn't work if everyone did that
653 2012-10-20 19:30:44 <gmaxwell> Sure it would.
654 2012-10-20 19:30:45 t7 has quit (Quit: WeeChat 0.3.9)
655 2012-10-20 19:31:05 harkon_ has joined
656 2012-10-20 19:31:06 <gmaxwell> there can be any number of darknets. We still mine the same pool, but you can't sever our connectivity.
657 2012-10-20 19:31:44 <gmaxwell> you'd have to saturate the connection of every node in a darknet to partition it from p2pool.. And we'd still be mining our own darkpool that you couldn't attack.
658 2012-10-20 19:31:59 harkon has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
659 2012-10-20 19:32:08 CMmike has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
660 2012-10-20 19:33:11 <gmaxwell> and I'm sure the software itself has all kinds of dos weaknesses that your pool lacks, since it simply hasn't been attacked.
661 2012-10-20 19:33:42 <gmaxwell> There is just less motivation. All the big centeralized pools get dos attacked, and p2pool doesn't. The payoff isn't there, and the effort required for a minimum attack is somewhat greater.
662 2012-10-20 19:34:06 <Luke-Jr> I doubt that.
663 2012-10-20 19:34:28 <Luke-Jr> all the p2pool nodes combined can be overwhelmed easier than a single dedicated server with DDoS protection
664 2012-10-20 19:34:44 <gmaxwell> You can't even _find_ all the p2pool nodes.
665 2012-10-20 19:35:52 hnz_ is now known as hnz
666 2012-10-20 19:48:52 bcb has joined
667 2012-10-20 19:49:12 <bcb> how do you remove the bitcoin wallet passphrase?
668 2012-10-20 19:49:25 <sipa> that wasn't ever implemented
669 2012-10-20 19:50:05 <sipa> it wouldn't be hard, but nobody found it worthwhile to do i suppose
670 2012-10-20 19:51:08 <gmaxwell> It's just another risky edge case that would be undertested.
671 2012-10-20 19:51:28 eoss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
672 2012-10-20 19:52:06 <sipa> I think in general it's better to have encrypted wallets anyway - the only reason not to require that initially is that people are likely to forget the password when they're experimenting and don't have many coins yet
673 2012-10-20 19:52:49 <gmaxwell> You can also always make the password something trivial.
674 2012-10-20 19:53:02 <gmaxwell> Like the empty string.
675 2012-10-20 19:53:37 <sipa> I'm not sure the GUI accepts an empty string.
676 2012-10-20 19:54:03 <gmaxwell> hm. I thought I'd seen someone say thats what they'd done.
677 2012-10-20 19:54:17 <gmaxwell> might not have been the gui.
678 2012-10-20 19:58:08 <MC-Eeepc> p2p isnt really all that, claims operator of a competing centralised pool
679 2012-10-20 19:59:05 <gmaxwell> MC-Eeepc: I'm sure luke's views are earnest. It's not like his pool is a big money maker in any case.
680 2012-10-20 19:59:35 <gmaxwell> E.g. rather than his pool justifying his views, his views justify the pool.
681 2012-10-20 20:00:36 <MC-Eeepc> he seems to trot out the same distortions every time someone mentions p2pool
682 2012-10-20 20:00:50 <Luke-Jr> MC-Eeepc: Eligius is a decentralized pool.
683 2012-10-20 20:01:04 <MC-Eeepc> strange definitions no one here seems to agree with
684 2012-10-20 20:01:31 <MC-Eeepc> its partially decentralised at best from what i understand
685 2012-10-20 20:01:34 PhantomSpark has quit (2!~kvirc@pool-71-251-16-25.nycmny.fios.verizon.net|Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
686 2012-10-20 20:01:50 <MC-Eeepc> and you could say it is not autonomously decentralised, which p2pool is
687 2012-10-20 20:02:05 <MC-Eeepc> big distinction i think
688 2012-10-20 20:02:38 <Luke-Jr> MC-Eeepc: p2pool gives up a lot of major benefits of pools in exchange for what are mostly vulnerabilities
689 2012-10-20 20:03:15 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: what percentage of your hashrate is on getwork?  What percentage of !getwork miners have _ever_ selected their own transactions?
690 2012-10-20 20:03:26 <gmaxwell> For p2pool these figures are 100% and 100%.
691 2012-10-20 20:03:36 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: I don't even have a way to measure that.
692 2012-10-20 20:04:05 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: if Stratum hadn't come around, it could have been 100% when ASICs went live :/
693 2012-10-20 20:04:08 <gmaxwell> Even if you ignore the centeralization of the payout, in practice you're not very decenteralized— though I know you're working on it with things like GBT support in bfgminer.
694 2012-10-20 20:04:21 <gmaxwell> Yea. ::sigh::
695 2012-10-20 20:04:23 <Luke-Jr> (100% of all mining, I mean)
696 2012-10-20 20:04:37 <gmaxwell> Well, it still wouldn't result in people actually doing anything with the decenteralization.
697 2012-10-20 20:04:45 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: neither does p2pool
698 2012-10-20 20:04:49 <gmaxwell> Vs p2pool which won't mine if bitcoin disagrees.
699 2012-10-20 20:04:51 <Luke-Jr> but it does enable automated checks
700 2012-10-20 20:05:10 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: well, bfgminer could easily be made to solo mine in such a scenario
701 2012-10-20 20:05:15 <rdponticelli> They are just different things and both aproach are needed to build a richer ecosystem
702 2012-10-20 20:05:20 <gmaxwell> And where all the nodes are picking their own transactions, though only a few miners diverge from the bitcoind defaults.
703 2012-10-20 20:05:26 asuk has joined
704 2012-10-20 20:05:39 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: I intentionally made libblkmaker's API such that it can combine GBT templates from multiple sources
705 2012-10-20 20:05:54 <sipa> Luke-Jr: every time someone challenges that eligius is decentralizes, your answer seems to be "it's not centralized because it has all advantages decentralization has" - that's like saying that airplanes are actually boats, as they have all advantages of boats compared to cars
706 2012-10-20 20:06:01 <gmaxwell> Yea, I agree with rdponticelli. I'm happy both exist. Keep in mind your work for GBT probably never would have happened without p2pool prodding you along.
707 2012-10-20 20:06:35 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: I don't believe "what if" is possible to talk about :p
708 2012-10-20 20:06:49 <darkip> Does anyone know what size window blockchain.info uses for their hash rate calculation?
709 2012-10-20 20:06:57 JZavala has joined
710 2012-10-20 20:07:17 galambo_ has joined
711 2012-10-20 20:08:03 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: and regardless of what you're doing, none of the other formerally fully centeralized pools seem to have much interest in going your route. Since you've never had more than 1/6th the hashrate or so, clearly "eligius is (somewhat) decenteralized" doesn't solve the problem of pool centeralization.
712 2012-10-20 20:08:22 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: EclipseMC is GBT-enabled
713 2012-10-20 20:08:33 <gmaxwell> Oh, I wasn't aware of that. Cool.
714 2012-10-20 20:08:46 <gmaxwell> P2pool has done quite well, especially considering its vastly increased startup costs.
715 2012-10-20 20:09:00 PhantomSpark has joined
716 2012-10-20 20:09:46 asuk has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
717 2012-10-20 20:09:54 galambo has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
718 2012-10-20 20:10:35 <MC-Eeepc> gmaxwell startup costs?
719 2012-10-20 20:10:48 <sipa> I think there are two types of miners (yeah, generalizations, I know): those who care about Bitcoin itself, and those who mainly care about their income; the former (given that they know about it, and don't mind the effort) are likely to choose a solution that decentralizes everything (even making them blind for the disadvantages, perhaps), the latter will just pick a centralized pool and some others as backups
720 2012-10-20 20:11:41 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
721 2012-10-20 20:12:16 <MC-Eeepc> the latter put a couple of radeons and bitcoin 0.3 in a cupboard 18 months ago and forgot all about it while it prints money for them
722 2012-10-20 20:12:29 <MC-Eeepc> far too many of those it seems
723 2012-10-20 20:12:44 maaku has joined
724 2012-10-20 20:14:47 <Luke-Jr> sipa: I think there are some miners who would care about Bitcoin if it was convenient and didn't disadvantage them
725 2012-10-20 20:15:39 <sipa> sure, i've overgeneralized
726 2012-10-20 20:16:36 bcb has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
727 2012-10-20 20:17:02 asuk has joined
728 2012-10-20 20:19:29 pusle has joined
729 2012-10-20 20:22:23 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: fwiw, looks like at least 6 blocks (globally) found with BFGMiner 2.8.1+ over GBT :p
730 2012-10-20 20:22:45 <gmaxwell> Pretty snazzy!
731 2012-10-20 20:23:10 <MC-Eeepc> thats why p2pool should be made brain dead easy to get up and running
732 2012-10-20 20:23:26 <gmaxwell> MC-Eeepc: you need a bitcoin full node.
733 2012-10-20 20:23:36 <MC-Eeepc> at least as easy and typing in a central pool address
734 2012-10-20 20:23:51 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
735 2012-10-20 20:24:05 <MC-Eeepc> gmaxwell yeah that is a pain
736 2012-10-20 20:24:29 <darkip> What is the recommended number of previous blocks to consider when calculating network hash rate?
737 2012-10-20 20:24:45 <MC-Eeepc> perhaps as part of the SPV > full process, it could mine to a p2pool node and switch to normal p2pool if/when it becomes a full node
738 2012-10-20 20:25:56 <Luke-Jr> lol
739 2012-10-20 20:26:09 <Luke-Jr> using a "p2pool node" is LESS decentralized than GBT pools
740 2012-10-20 20:26:40 <sipa> Luke-Jr: that is the one claim you keep making that I do not understand at all
741 2012-10-20 20:27:08 <Luke-Jr> sipa: what's not to understand there?
742 2012-10-20 20:27:34 <Luke-Jr> sipa: all those miners are doing is solving getworks for some 3rd party, like any other centralized pool
743 2012-10-20 20:28:21 <Eliel> Luke-Jr: who's this 3rd party?
744 2012-10-20 20:28:30 <Luke-Jr> Eliel: the person running the p2pool node
745 2012-10-20 20:29:32 JZavala has joined
746 2012-10-20 20:30:03 <gmaxwell> sipa: by p2pool node he means getwork mining against someone elses.
747 2012-10-20 20:30:48 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: no reason p2pool nodes couldn't offer GBT to connected hosts, same as you do... There has just been no demand.
748 2012-10-20 20:31:02 <gmaxwell> but thats like— worst of all worlds.
749 2012-10-20 20:31:31 <sipa> Luke-Jr: oh - i thought you were talking about people running their own p2pool client
750 2012-10-20 20:31:41 <Luke-Jr> sipa: I was responding to MC-Eeepc's comment
751 2012-10-20 20:31:50 <Luke-Jr> where he is contrasting the two
752 2012-10-20 20:31:51 <sipa> ok - nevermind in that case
753 2012-10-20 20:33:21 <MC-Eeepc> and SPV sucks compared to a real client, but tis just a temporary measure
754 2012-10-20 20:33:29 RainbowDashh has joined
755 2012-10-20 20:34:41 <Luke-Jr> MC-Eeepc: but insofar as Bitcoin being secured goes, GBT is equal to p2pool, plus uses a standardized protocol that isn't pool-specific
756 2012-10-20 20:36:26 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: it's not equal in practice, it's only equal if people start doing things with GBT that they currently don't.
757 2012-10-20 20:36:39 <MC-Eeepc> "GBT is equal to p2pool" - luke jr, 2012
758 2012-10-20 20:37:13 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: they don't do those things with p2pool either
759 2012-10-20 20:37:43 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: e.g. lets have a bet, move all your GBT users onto a fork 10 blocks back. I'll bet you they all happily mine it.
760 2012-10-20 20:37:58 <gmaxwell> p2pool can't have that done to them.
761 2012-10-20 20:38:01 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: I'll bet they won't.
762 2012-10-20 20:38:07 <gmaxwell> Why won't they?
763 2012-10-20 20:38:19 <gmaxwell> I expect they don't even have a bitcoin to compare with.
764 2012-10-20 20:38:32 Gladamas_ is now known as Gladamas
765 2012-10-20 20:38:40 <Luke-Jr> BFGMiner will consider the pool broken and disable it
766 2012-10-20 20:38:48 <sipa> how will it now?
767 2012-10-20 20:38:50 <sipa> *know
768 2012-10-20 20:38:53 <Luke-Jr> it keeps a log of past blocks
769 2012-10-20 20:39:03 <Luke-Jr> and ideally can get info from other pools
770 2012-10-20 20:39:10 <gmaxwell> Well you could do that for getwork too (which was the context under which I'd suggested that behavior!) :P
771 2012-10-20 20:39:18 <gmaxwell> Hm. I didn't realize you were actually enforcing it.
772 2012-10-20 20:39:27 <gmaxwell> I though it was still just a warning.
773 2012-10-20 20:39:51 <gmaxwell> How are you dealing with psycho stuff from weird load balancing?
774 2012-10-20 20:39:58 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: not well :<
775 2012-10-20 20:40:35 <Luke-Jr> I need to rewrite the work fetching someday to handle these corner cases better
776 2012-10-20 20:40:49 <Luke-Jr> I think it ends up flooding the pool while it does that right now
777 2012-10-20 20:42:26 <gmaxwell> Okay, so fine, move them on to a fork that started ten blocks back, but skipping the first block of it. (which could have just been mined with private hash power, or random non-bfgminers)
778 2012-10-20 20:42:46 RainbowDashh is now known as Rabbit67890
779 2012-10-20 20:42:49 <gmaxwell> again, p2pool nodes have no compariable vulnerability. You'd have to isolate each miner's bitcoin node.
780 2012-10-20 20:46:58 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
781 2012-10-20 20:56:08 firethief has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
782 2012-10-20 20:58:57 <sipa> Luke-Jr: how well are ztex fpga's supported by bfgminer now?
783 2012-10-20 21:00:11 <Luke-Jr> sipa: works for me, if you overlook the false hw errors
784 2012-10-20 21:00:33 <sipa> i'll give it a try then
785 2012-10-20 21:01:07 theorbtwo has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
786 2012-10-20 21:02:00 <jgarzik> sipa: all ultraprune reqs are merged now?
787 2012-10-20 21:02:12 <Diablo-D3> fuck.
788 2012-10-20 21:02:14 <Diablo-D3> okay so
789 2012-10-20 21:02:18 <Diablo-D3> Im going to make my own language
790 2012-10-20 21:02:25 <Diablo-D3> and the only feature I can think of that would be nifty is
791 2012-10-20 21:02:38 <Diablo-D3> @json " ";
792 2012-10-20 21:03:51 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
793 2012-10-20 21:05:07 <Diablo-D3> actually, that probably should be @json { }
794 2012-10-20 21:05:47 <Diablo-D3> and it gets compiled to a JSONTree, built inside the compiler adn static
795 2012-10-20 21:09:34 maaku has joined
796 2012-10-20 21:12:04 theorbtwo has joined
797 2012-10-20 21:18:34 <sipa> jgarzik: yes
798 2012-10-20 21:18:39 ovidiusoft has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
799 2012-10-20 21:19:17 asuk has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
800 2012-10-20 21:19:30 asuk has joined
801 2012-10-20 21:22:08 pusle has quit ()
802 2012-10-20 21:24:58 <sipa> gmaxwell: ACK on ultraprune?
803 2012-10-20 21:29:54 <sipa> Diablo-D3: i think you want metaprogramming
804 2012-10-20 21:30:55 Rabbit67890 is now known as RainbowDashh
805 2012-10-20 21:31:05 <Diablo-D3> sipa: probably
806 2012-10-20 21:31:12 <Diablo-D3> I just want the fucking compiler to do my bidding
807 2012-10-20 21:31:35 <Diablo-D3> seriously, my compiler (if you can call it that, it'll probably just end up being a perl script with a ton of regex that turn it into C)...
808 2012-10-20 21:31:39 <Diablo-D3> will have plugins.
809 2012-10-20 21:36:18 <Diablo-D3> dont like how the language works?
810 2012-10-20 21:36:20 <Diablo-D3> redfine it, asshole
811 2012-10-20 21:37:47 <midnightmagic> I've always wanted a compile to swear at me and call me stupid.
812 2012-10-20 21:45:30 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic: hah
813 2012-10-20 21:45:41 <Diablo-D3> I should call the language Seaking
814 2012-10-20 21:47:12 <midnightmagic> or you could call it.. like.. PoppaVic or greycat or something..
815 2012-10-20 21:47:57 sirk390 has joined
816 2012-10-20 21:48:05 <Diablo-D3> tf?
817 2012-10-20 21:52:48 gfinn has joined
818 2012-10-20 21:53:48 <gmaxwell> sipa: acked
819 2012-10-20 21:58:38 Guest70510 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
820 2012-10-20 22:09:51 mmoya has joined
821 2012-10-20 22:10:18 Rv has joined
822 2012-10-20 22:10:43 Rv is now known as Guest34894
823 2012-10-20 22:23:46 eoss has joined
824 2012-10-20 22:24:01 <gmaxwell> sipa: Can you send out a quick note to bitcoin-dev and say that ultraprune has been merged and many pull requests need to be rebased?
825 2012-10-20 22:24:12 <sipa> yes, was about to
826 2012-10-20 22:24:18 <gmaxwell> sipa: and congrats, good work. Now the testing fun begins. :P
827 2012-10-20 22:24:30 <Luke-Jr> XD
828 2012-10-20 22:31:12 * gmaxwell starts updating public nodes
829 2012-10-20 22:36:41 <gmaxwell> Hm. I bet that bitcoin's search for sha2 partial preimages has now recieved more computational effort than any other single 'problem'. We're almost to 69 bits of work now.
830 2012-10-20 22:37:59 <rdponticelli> I've been trying ultraprune as another username. Can I copy blocks directory to my main user and it will take it out of the box?
831 2012-10-20 22:38:41 <gmaxwell> No. it's need to resync either from the network, a bootstrap, or via loadblock. Fortunately it resyncs fast.
832 2012-10-20 22:38:54 <rdponticelli> Ok
833 2012-10-20 22:39:03 <sipa> rdponticelli: no, but you can use -loadblock=<path>, where path is the old blk0001.dat file
834 2012-10-20 22:39:15 <sipa> and specify it twice, if you also want to import blk0002.dat
835 2012-10-20 22:39:36 <rdponticelli> Thx, will do it
836 2012-10-20 22:40:14 sirk390 has left ()
837 2012-10-20 22:44:00 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Quitte)
838 2012-10-20 22:52:05 <sipa> gmaxwell: given that each bitcoin hash attempt is around 122 SHA256 rounds, I'd say we're at 69.6 bits
839 2012-10-20 22:52:15 <Luke-Jr> sipa: I suggest a followup email (or maybe adding a doc/* file) detailing how upgrade/downgrade is handled?
840 2012-10-20 22:52:35 <sipa> Luke-Jr: not yet implemented :)
841 2012-10-20 22:52:41 sirk390 has joined
842 2012-10-20 22:52:46 BlackPrapor has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.0.4 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
843 2012-10-20 22:52:49 <Luke-Jr> :<
844 2012-10-20 22:53:15 <sipa> (there is no overlap between the data files, so at worst your node ends up in what seems to be an empty datadir, except for peers.dat and wallet.dat)
845 2012-10-20 22:54:30 CodesInChaos has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
846 2012-10-20 22:54:34 <Luke-Jr> I presume wallet.dat works as-is both directions for now?
847 2012-10-20 22:54:47 <sipa> yes
848 2012-10-20 22:54:49 <sipa> no change
849 2012-10-20 22:54:56 <sipa> same for peers.dat
850 2012-10-20 22:55:20 <sipa> Luke-Jr: but my intention is to have some mechanism move (and maybe split) the block files, delete blkindex.dat, and then run an automated -reindex
851 2012-10-20 22:58:02 <Luke-Jr> sipa: would be nice if it didn't need to break older versions; there's almost certainly going to be a reason some people want to go back
852 2012-10-20 23:02:01 <sipa> the choice is either removing the blocks from the pre-ultraprune view, or keeping 3+ GB of data duplicated
853 2012-10-20 23:02:31 <sipa> the GUI could ask whether you want to move or copy, i suppose
854 2012-10-20 23:03:48 sirk390 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
855 2012-10-20 23:04:17 <Luke-Jr> Maybe a menu item for "Remove old data" that is hidden if it's missing already? (and a firstrun popup to let users know it exists)
856 2012-10-20 23:04:36 <sipa> perhaps - I'll let the GUI people worry about that
857 2012-10-20 23:12:34 johnathan has joined
858 2012-10-20 23:13:22 johnathan has left ()
859 2012-10-20 23:14:54 mmoya has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
860 2012-10-20 23:22:48 echelon has joined
861 2012-10-20 23:24:00 <echelon> hi, how do i prevent the client from trying to get the external ip?
862 2012-10-20 23:24:10 <sipa> by specifying it explicitly
863 2012-10-20 23:24:19 <echelon> ah
864 2012-10-20 23:24:36 eoss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
865 2012-10-20 23:24:51 <sipa> or -nodiscover
866 2012-10-20 23:25:07 <echelon> cool thanks :)
867 2012-10-20 23:25:08 datagutt has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
868 2012-10-20 23:25:37 <echelon> i'm in the middle of repairing my index, how long should it take? :/
869 2012-10-20 23:25:58 <echelon> it's making everything sluggish
870 2012-10-20 23:29:12 <jgarzik> sipa: yay :)  congrats, it's finally merged
871 2012-10-20 23:29:21 <jgarzik> sipa: well done
872 2012-10-20 23:29:38 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
873 2012-10-20 23:33:02 <jgarzik> sipa: oh yeah
874 2012-10-20 23:33:09 <jgarzik> sipa:  if not already done...  bump the client version
875 2012-10-20 23:33:21 <jgarzik> sipa: that will help determine behavior differences
876 2012-10-20 23:33:29 <sipa> good idea
877 2012-10-20 23:33:41 vampireb has joined
878 2012-10-20 23:34:35 <gmaxwell> hey, now that the wallet is the only thing in the bdb enviroment.. we could realistically have a -walletfile that even let you use another path.
879 2012-10-20 23:35:10 <jgarzik> yep
880 2012-10-20 23:35:40 * jgarzik ponders blockindex as a flat file
881 2012-10-20 23:36:09 <sipa> jgarzik: i considered that too before changing the block index entries
882 2012-10-20 23:36:24 <jgarzik> sipa: how often are blockindex entries updated?
883 2012-10-20 23:36:45 <jgarzik> looking at CBlockIndex right now... not seeing much that is highly variable
884 2012-10-20 23:36:47 <sipa> right now: when adding them, and when connecting them
885 2012-10-20 23:37:01 <sipa> nStatus is variable, and nFile/nBlockPos/nUndoPos
886 2012-10-20 23:37:30 <sipa> but there's also CBlockFileInfo in the block index now
887 2012-10-20 23:38:06 <jgarzik> sipa: I don't see it in CBlockIndex?
888 2012-10-20 23:38:11 <sipa> it's not
889 2012-10-20 23:38:45 <sipa> it's a per-blockfile entry
890 2012-10-20 23:39:38 <sipa> when doing headers-first mode, with blocks signatures checked in the background, the number of times data is written will increase
891 2012-10-20 23:39:55 <jgarzik> ah, I see.  multiple, distinct datasets merged into a single leveldb database
892 2012-10-20 23:40:00 <jgarzik> similar to blkindex.dat
893 2012-10-20 23:40:10 <sipa> all metadata associated with the block tree
894 2012-10-20 23:41:12 <sipa> this means for example that space occupied by a partially-written block will be reused afterwards, as the fact that that byte range was used will not have been written to the index
895 2012-10-20 23:43:04 RazielZ has joined
896 2012-10-20 23:44:35 MC-Eeepc has quit (Quit: Leaving)
897 2012-10-20 23:47:09 Guest34894 has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
898 2012-10-20 23:50:54 <jgarzik> c_k: As just noted in https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=108854.msg1286724#msg1286724  I am open to GBT improvements
899 2012-10-20 23:52:04 <sipa> gmaxwell: there's still a (less serious) issue if someone has a wallet file on a USB stick, has an unclean shutdown, moves the stick elsewhere, and tries to open it
900 2012-10-20 23:52:05 <jgarzik> sipa: docs on upgrade
901 2012-10-20 23:52:22 <gmaxwell> sipa: it should move the whole database enviroment.
902 2012-10-20 23:52:40 <sipa> gmaxwell: oh, duh!
903 2012-10-20 23:52:41 <jgarzik> sipa: Your post does not appear to include any instructions or advice or description of what happens during upgrade
904 2012-10-20 23:53:02 <gmaxwell> sipa: thats what I meant by 'now that the wallet is the only thing in the bdb enviroment'
905 2012-10-20 23:53:05 <jgarzik> sipa: like "if you run it on an existing install, it will re-download the blockchain"
906 2012-10-20 23:53:19 <sipa> right; i'll mention that
907 2012-10-20 23:53:52 <jgarzik> Building LevelDB ...
908 2012-10-20 23:53:52 <jgarzik> make[1]: warning: jobserver unavailable: using -j1.  Add `+' to parent make rule.
909 2012-10-20 23:53:54 <jgarzik> lame!
910 2012-10-20 23:53:55 <jgarzik> ;p
911 2012-10-20 23:54:24 <sipa> true, but compatibility >> complexity (and it's already a huge hack)
912 2012-10-20 23:54:32 <sipa> and you only need to do it once anyway
913 2012-10-20 23:55:08 <gmaxwell> sipa: did you ever sort out the memory corruption with parallel signature validation?
914 2012-10-20 23:55:13 <sipa> no
915 2012-10-20 23:55:13 echelon has left ()
916 2012-10-20 23:55:25 echelon has joined
917 2012-10-20 23:55:47 <jgarzik> hum
918 2012-10-20 23:55:49 <gmaxwell> okay, when the dust settles point me at the patches and I'll see if I can find it. I think thats now the limiting factor on blocksync from local peers.
919 2012-10-20 23:56:00 <jgarzik> I wonder if I hit a bad peer... things are going more slowly than with BDB
920 2012-10-20 23:56:02 <jgarzik> 31870 jgarzik   39  19  857m  43m 4752 S  7.6  1.1   0:08.57 bitcoind
921 2012-10-20 23:56:06 <jgarzik> not doing much there
922 2012-10-20 23:56:19 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: yea, I -connect mine when syncing otherwise it's slow. :(
923 2012-10-20 23:56:30 * jgarzik -addnode's
924 2012-10-20 23:56:38 <BlueMatt> sipa: for comparison's sake, Im assuming your dnsseed never throws out ips so X/N available means its heard of a total of N ips? Also, how much checking does it do per peer and what kind of timeout does it have?
925 2012-10-20 23:56:51 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: addnode isn't enough, you'll switch to some moron peer at a random point.
926 2012-10-20 23:57:24 <sipa> BlueMatt: it does throw out IPs, but only very rarely (like no response seen in a month, i should check the actual criteria)
927 2012-10-20 23:57:42 <sipa> BlueMatt: X/N indeed means a total of N IPs seen
928 2012-10-20 23:58:01 <BlueMatt> fair enough; what about block download checking/etc?
929 2012-10-20 23:58:02 <sipa> how much checking: correct version/verack cycle, and answer to addr
930 2012-10-20 23:58:09 <BlueMatt> ok
931 2012-10-20 23:58:12 <BlueMatt> timeout?
932 2012-10-20 23:58:16 <sipa> 10s or so
933 2012-10-20 23:58:16 <jgarzik> OK
934 2012-10-20 23:58:21 <jgarzik> -loadblock gets me full speed
935 2012-10-20 23:58:24 <sipa> i planned to add some checking that asked for a random recent block, or something
936 2012-10-20 23:58:25 <BlueMatt> sipa: thanks
937 2012-10-20 23:58:30 <sipa> but not yet done
938 2012-10-20 23:58:37 <echelon> jgarzik: full speed?
939 2012-10-20 23:58:46 <jgarzik> echelon: yes
940 2012-10-20 23:59:15 <echelon> how do you mean
941 2012-10-20 23:59:18 <sipa> jgarzik: -loadblock's (wall clock) speed has gone down significantly since it happens in parallel with normal operation
942 2012-10-20 23:59:32 <jgarzik> echelon: we are all playing with the just-merged database backend rewrite
943 2012-10-20 23:59:32 <sipa> solution: reducing cs_main
944 2012-10-20 23:59:49 <jgarzik> sipa: agreed... long been on the todo list
945 2012-10-20 23:59:55 <echelon> oh, me too i guess