1 2012-11-12 00:00:26 PhantomSpark has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
2 2012-11-12 00:00:35 AlexWaters has joined
3 2012-11-12 00:05:20 PhantomSpark has joined
4 2012-11-12 00:08:39 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
5 2012-11-12 00:11:29 freakazoid has joined
6 2012-11-12 00:23:39 mykhal has joined
7 2012-11-12 00:26:54 Joric has quit ()
8 2012-11-12 00:27:45 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
9 2012-11-12 00:31:42 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: did the binary bloom serialization just change?
10 2012-11-12 00:38:04 <BlueMatt> yes
11 2012-11-12 00:38:25 <BlueMatt> only very slightly though
12 2012-11-12 00:38:29 <BlueMatt> the filter itself just got another int at the end
13 2012-11-12 00:40:14 <Luke-Jr> slush: ping
14 2012-11-12 00:40:48 <Luke-Jr> slush: IIRC I read somewhere that Stratum requires notifies every 30 seconds; is that correct? if not, is there any rule on how often, and is that documented anywhere?
15 2012-11-12 00:40:51 deadserious has joined
16 2012-11-12 00:41:14 deadserious is now known as Guest36409
17 2012-11-12 00:41:37 in has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
18 2012-11-12 00:44:59 xIsalty__ is now known as xIsalty
19 2012-11-12 00:45:06 xIsalty has quit (Changing host)
20 2012-11-12 00:45:06 xIsalty has joined
21 2012-11-12 00:45:19 RainbowDashh has joined
22 2012-11-12 00:46:44 <sipa> BlueMatt: what is the max bloom filter size now? 36k or 1M?
23 2012-11-12 00:47:05 <BlueMatt> that didnt change
24 2012-11-12 00:47:25 <sipa> that's no answer to my question :(
25 2012-11-12 00:47:27 <BlueMatt> static const unsigned int MAX_BLOOM_FILTER_SIZE = 36000; // bytes
26 2012-11-12 00:47:33 <BlueMatt> (I didnt remember)
27 2012-11-12 00:47:37 <sipa> ok
28 2012-11-12 00:48:07 <sipa> why does the pullreq mention 1M somewhere? was that just a proposal?
29 2012-11-12 00:53:25 AlexWaters1 has joined
30 2012-11-12 00:53:39 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
31 2012-11-12 00:55:05 <BlueMatt> thats filteradd ie max for any given element to be added to the filter over the network
32 2012-11-12 00:55:49 TD has joined
33 2012-11-12 00:55:54 TD has quit (Client Quit)
34 2012-11-12 00:56:24 AlexWaters has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
35 2012-11-12 00:58:05 <sipa> hmm
36 2012-11-12 00:58:42 <sipa> wait, how can the filter grow because of a filteradd?
37 2012-11-12 00:59:11 <BlueMatt> it cant, but now the elements themselves are limited
38 2012-11-12 00:59:31 <sipa> i'm not following
39 2012-11-12 01:00:08 <BlueMatt> you can call filteradd with an element (eg pubkey) which is then added to that connection's filter
40 2012-11-12 01:00:16 <BlueMatt> those elements are now limited in size to 1MB
41 2012-11-12 01:00:52 <sipa> ooh
42 2012-11-12 01:01:20 <sipa> isn't that already extremely much?
43 2012-11-12 01:01:42 <BlueMatt> meh, its hardly a dos even unlimited, so why limit it low
44 2012-11-12 01:02:57 Gladamas has joined
45 2012-11-12 01:03:28 <sipa> what is matched for? extracted addresses, txids... and?
46 2012-11-12 01:04:12 <BlueMatt> any script object
47 2012-11-12 01:04:22 taha has joined
48 2012-11-12 01:04:56 <sipa> oh yes, data pushes
49 2012-11-12 01:05:06 <sipa> aren't those limited?
50 2012-11-12 01:05:54 <BlueMatt> hmm...yea good point
51 2012-11-12 01:06:47 <sipa> 520 bytes, apparently
52 2012-11-12 01:10:13 <sipa> i don't like filteradd randomly assuming some parameters
53 2012-11-12 01:10:24 <BlueMatt> what else should it do?
54 2012-11-12 01:10:31 <sipa> fail
55 2012-11-12 01:10:41 <BlueMatt> meh...
56 2012-11-12 01:11:30 <sipa> either the spec should say what the parameters are, and reason why those are good defaults, or nothing atball
57 2012-11-12 01:12:00 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
58 2012-11-12 01:12:40 <sipa> because if not, application will make assumptions about what kind of filter they will get (if the default is one that is good for 1000 items, it will deteriorate quickly when 10000 are in the filter
59 2012-11-12 01:13:55 <sipa> but if it is not specified, no assumption at all can be made, and the server is not given any information, so cannot be assumed to make a meaningful guess
60 2012-11-12 01:15:48 <BlueMatt> frankly, Im not sure why filteradd was created in the first place...Id much rather it have not been there since the beginning
61 2012-11-12 01:16:00 <BlueMatt> (not having it there forces correct behavior...)
62 2012-11-12 01:16:56 <BlueMatt> (and no, Im not the one who created it)
63 2012-11-12 01:17:16 <sipa> if you dob't expect frequent matches, then filteradd probably has lower overhead than constantly sending a new filter
64 2012-11-12 01:17:56 sgornick has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
65 2012-11-12 01:18:45 <sipa> then again, just having constant client-supplied filters makes everything a lot more clean to reason about
66 2012-11-12 01:18:56 <Diablo-D3> so
67 2012-11-12 01:19:42 <Diablo-D3> are there any companies who are actually trying to take on paypal using bitcoin and actually succeeding?
68 2012-11-12 01:20:26 sgornick has joined
69 2012-11-12 01:22:14 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
70 2012-11-12 01:23:36 <BlueMatt> sipa: meh, filters are so small that the overhead to keep a local copy of your filter and add/resend as necessary is very low
71 2012-11-12 01:26:01 JStoker has quit (Excess Flood)
72 2012-11-12 01:31:54 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@brwyatt.net|brwyatt
73 2012-11-12 01:33:22 Gladamas has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
74 2012-11-12 01:34:52 <sipa> BlueMatt: there are even very efficient encodings to send incremental updates to a bloom filter
75 2012-11-12 01:35:28 <BlueMatt> yes...we could overoptimize like crazy, but...
76 2012-11-12 01:35:41 taha has quit (Quit: Leaving)
77 2012-11-12 01:36:21 RainbowDashh has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
78 2012-11-12 01:37:22 JDuke128 has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
79 2012-11-12 01:40:59 RainbowDashh has joined
80 2012-11-12 01:41:01 RainbowDashh has quit (Changing host)
81 2012-11-12 01:41:01 RainbowDashh has joined
82 2012-11-12 01:45:45 RainbowDashh has quit (Ping timeout: 268 seconds)
83 2012-11-12 01:48:28 RainbowDashh has joined
84 2012-11-12 01:51:18 deadserious has joined
85 2012-11-12 01:51:42 deadserious is now known as Guest22433
86 2012-11-12 01:53:02 JStoker has joined
87 2012-11-12 01:54:45 JDuke128 has joined
88 2012-11-12 01:54:47 Guest22433 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
89 2012-11-12 01:54:51 Guest36409 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
90 2012-11-12 02:00:03 xIsalty is now known as xisalty-otc
91 2012-11-12 02:28:25 stalled has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
92 2012-11-12 02:34:15 maaku has joined
93 2012-11-12 02:34:48 Sukharev has quit (Quit: EvoSurge - Free & Premium IRC Bouncers on Demand - http://evosurge.com/)
94 2012-11-12 02:41:17 aurigae1 has left ()
95 2012-11-12 02:44:08 stalled has joined
96 2012-11-12 02:49:55 MobiusL has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
97 2012-11-12 02:52:01 MobiusL has joined
98 2012-11-12 02:53:18 Sukharev has joined
99 2012-11-12 02:55:15 deadserious has joined
100 2012-11-12 02:55:40 deadserious is now known as Guest33670
101 2012-11-12 02:59:42 Guest33670 has quit (Read error: No route to host)
102 2012-11-12 03:02:41 one_zero has joined
103 2012-11-12 03:04:17 stamit has joined
104 2012-11-12 03:04:31 stamit has left ()
105 2012-11-12 03:07:31 enolan has quit (Quit: Leaving)
106 2012-11-12 03:07:47 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
107 2012-11-12 03:08:04 maaku has joined
108 2012-11-12 03:09:50 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
109 2012-11-12 03:10:48 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: SLEEP! [11:14:29] <+Tsunami1> http://i.imgur.com/t2rz5.png)
110 2012-11-12 03:16:40 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@brwyatt.net|brwyatt
111 2012-11-12 03:32:13 <Luke-Jr> this code is facepalm-worthy: http://pastebin.com/4kRNsLKt
112 2012-11-12 03:33:03 Garr255_ has joined
113 2012-11-12 03:33:04 Garr255_ has quit (Changing host)
114 2012-11-12 03:33:04 Garr255_ has joined
115 2012-11-12 03:33:04 <BlueMatt> where the hell did you see that?
116 2012-11-12 03:35:33 Garr255 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
117 2012-11-12 03:35:43 <Luke-Jr> BlueMatt: wizkid057's CPPSRB implementation for Eligius <.<
118 2012-11-12 03:35:57 <wizkid057> lol
119 2012-11-12 03:36:03 <wizkid057> leave me alone it was like, 4AM
120 2012-11-12 03:36:11 <Luke-Jr> XD
121 2012-11-12 03:36:14 * gmaxwell hands wizkid057 a jumbo brown paper bag.
122 2012-11-12 03:36:26 <wizkid057> and blockexplorer.com says reward halfs on block 209999
123 2012-11-12 03:36:32 <wizkid057> ;;web fetch http://blockexplorer.com/q/bcperblock/209999
124 2012-11-12 03:36:32 <gribble> 25.00000000
125 2012-11-12 03:37:23 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
126 2012-11-12 03:38:37 <wizkid057> wow, actually I commited that at 5:10AM
127 2012-11-12 03:38:38 <wizkid057> lol
128 2012-11-12 03:39:20 maaku has joined
129 2012-11-12 03:41:24 <wizkid057> so yeah, is blockexplorer.com wrong on this then?
130 2012-11-12 03:43:12 TwilightSparklee has joined
131 2012-11-12 03:45:34 <lianj> 5000000000 / (2 ** (209999 / 210000.0).floor)
132 2012-11-12 03:45:38 <lianj> yes
133 2012-11-12 03:45:53 fiesh has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
134 2012-11-12 03:46:08 <lianj> or it depends if block 0 is 0 or 1
135 2012-11-12 03:46:17 <wizkid057> block 0 is 0? heh
136 2012-11-12 03:48:48 fiesh has joined
137 2012-11-12 03:49:03 <Luke-Jr> genesis block is 0
138 2012-11-12 03:49:06 <Luke-Jr> confirmed in code
139 2012-11-12 03:49:28 <lianj> so bbe is off
140 2012-11-12 03:50:01 <wizkid057> Luke-Jr: http://pastebin.com/bG9mz0PK
141 2012-11-12 03:50:05 <wizkid057> HAPPY NOW?!
142 2012-11-12 03:50:07 <wizkid057> ;P
143 2012-11-12 03:50:27 * wizkid057 waits for a complaint about "unsigned long long"
144 2012-11-12 03:50:35 <lianj> https://pastee.org/55tch is from my specs, hope they are right then :)
145 2012-11-12 03:51:13 <Luke-Jr> wizkid057: #define block_reward(height) (5000000000>>(height/210000))
146 2012-11-12 03:51:14 * Luke-Jr hides
147 2012-11-12 03:51:19 <wizkid057> ...
148 2012-11-12 03:51:20 <wizkid057> lol
149 2012-11-12 03:51:21 <Luke-Jr> j/k I don't suggest that
150 2012-11-12 03:51:58 paraipan has quit (Quit: Saliendo)
151 2012-11-12 03:53:31 <cjd> I would hate typing 'unsigned long long' all the time
152 2012-11-12 03:53:37 <wizkid057> commit a9701b8c0eb763d390712e7476f62bba4cda3bfc --- Author: Jason Hughes <wizkid057@gmail.com> --- Date: Mon Nov 12 03:41:03 2012 +0000
153 2012-11-12 03:53:38 <wizkid057> changed the way block_reward function works because luke hurt my feelings and said it was ugly :(
154 2012-11-12 03:54:18 <cjd> uint64_t autotypes for me now
155 2012-11-12 03:54:31 JDuke128 has quit (Quit: ["Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com"])
156 2012-11-12 03:54:46 <wizkid057> i actually like using the built in types as a personal preference
157 2012-11-12 03:55:05 <cjd> yeah, it's valid
158 2012-11-12 03:55:13 <cjd> just be careful of 'long'
159 2012-11-12 03:55:36 <etotheipi_> what is the "proper" way to trigger uint*_t types in windows?
160 2012-11-12 03:55:57 <cjd> mingw32?
161 2012-11-12 03:56:23 <cjd> or use nacl which defines crypto_uint*.h and does it very thoroughly
162 2012-11-12 03:56:23 <etotheipi_> I end up just defining them myself in a windows-specific preprocessor, but I know it's hacky
163 2012-11-12 03:56:41 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: your macro is underparentheized. :P
164 2012-11-12 03:57:08 <cjd> *shrug* @ hacky, I do stuff like that constantly, either it's maintainable or it's not
165 2012-11-12 03:58:59 <cjd> https://github.com/cjdelisle/cnacl/blob/master/inttypes/signed.h <-- as usual, djb has the most solid way to define integers possible
166 2012-11-12 03:59:18 <cjd> make little test apps which bit shift until the 1 falls off the high side
167 2012-11-12 03:59:46 tonikt has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
168 2012-11-12 03:59:46 tonikt2 has joined
169 2012-11-12 03:59:54 <cjd> whether or not there is a system so insane that it's really needed is up for debate
170 2012-11-12 04:00:15 ForceMajeure has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
171 2012-11-12 04:01:27 ForceMajeure has joined
172 2012-11-12 04:02:09 <gmaxwell> cjd: yea, by writing code with undefined behavior⦠good job there.
173 2012-11-12 04:02:52 <gmaxwell> (overflowing a signed type is undefined and will, here and there, get you surprising optimizations)
174 2012-11-12 04:03:25 <cjd> indeed
175 2012-11-12 04:03:43 <cjd> not actually my code though, I'm just trying to save it from it's build system
176 2012-11-12 04:05:29 knotwork has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
177 2012-11-12 04:06:22 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: what? no it isn't :/
178 2012-11-12 04:06:27 knotwork has joined
179 2012-11-12 04:06:50 <cjd> hmm he's not shifting it off the edge, he's using addition
180 2012-11-12 04:07:01 <Luke-Jr> wizkid057: C99 stdlib doesn't count as built in?
181 2012-11-12 04:07:16 <Luke-Jr> etotheipi_: #include <stdint.h>
182 2012-11-12 04:07:26 PhantomSpark has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
183 2012-11-12 04:08:09 <cjd> hmm indeed still overflowing it
184 2012-11-12 04:08:10 <cjd> ohwell
185 2012-11-12 04:08:16 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: oh, I see why; I need to use (height) in case of internal maths
186 2012-11-12 04:08:32 <gmaxwell> cjd: Singed overflow is _generally_ undefined, not just via shifts... even in C89.
187 2012-11-12 04:08:43 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: yes.
188 2012-11-12 04:09:27 <cjd> I was thinking about that the other day, do I get a tiny performance improvement using for (int i = 0; i < .... vs. for (uint32_t i = 0;...
189 2012-11-12 04:09:28 <cjd> ?
190 2012-11-12 04:09:29 <gmaxwell> lest someone put 2016<<4 there.
191 2012-11-12 04:09:38 <gmaxwell> cjd: sometimes, yes.
192 2012-11-12 04:10:30 * cjd tends to be a cargo cult premature optimizer
193 2012-11-12 04:11:09 <gmaxwell> cjd: there are some cases where the compiler can figure out that the loop runs, say, exactly 4 times or infinity and if the counter is signed it assumes it won't overflow and can then unroll the loop.
194 2012-11-12 04:11:12 <Luke-Jr> cjd: if i were a compiler, I would interpret that macro as 'jmp <this instruction>' as long as bits was bigger than the size :D
195 2012-11-12 04:11:56 <cjd> hehe
196 2012-11-12 04:12:03 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: unsigned overflow is well-defined? O.o
197 2012-11-12 04:12:14 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: yes! unsigned is...
198 2012-11-12 04:12:27 <Luke-Jr> that's annoying. we just changed a bunch of for loops to use unsigned types :<
199 2012-11-12 04:12:27 <cjd> yeah, we'd be in some serious trouble otherwise
200 2012-11-12 04:13:02 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: well we did it in places where it caused mixed types otherwise.
201 2012-11-12 04:13:06 <cjd> stuff like the sha256 core is full of ints which roll over
202 2012-11-12 04:13:19 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: coulda cast to a signed type? :P
203 2012-11-12 04:14:00 Z0rZ0rZ0r1 has joined
204 2012-11-12 04:14:00 Z0rZ0rZ0r has quit (Disconnected by services)
205 2012-11-12 04:14:41 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: sure. ::shrugs:: I generally like to avoid the casts. I wouldn't generally worry about the optimization behavior of signed vs unsigned... far more concerning is people getting the promotion rules wrong when signed/unsigned are mixed. Casts don't make that go away: someone will forget one sooner or later.
206 2012-11-12 04:16:24 JDuke128 has joined
207 2012-11-12 04:17:30 freakazoid has joined
208 2012-11-12 04:17:32 <cjd> oh, I was wondering if you had an example of doing some arbitrary computation with templates which was actually useful? I've seen the factorial example on stackoverflow but it was not very impressive.
209 2012-11-12 04:20:37 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
210 2012-11-12 04:22:22 JZavala has joined
211 2012-11-12 04:29:50 TheSeven has quit (Disconnected by services)
212 2012-11-12 04:29:52 <Diablo-D3> so
213 2012-11-12 04:30:00 [7] has joined
214 2012-11-12 04:30:11 <Diablo-D3> I wonder if I could go buy an asic unit and get it hear early
215 2012-11-12 04:30:43 <Luke-Jr> if you weren't a troll, probably
216 2012-11-12 04:38:51 TwilightSparklee has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPhone - http://colloquy.mobi)
217 2012-11-12 04:39:05 D34TH has quit (Quit: Leaving)
218 2012-11-12 04:39:14 D34TH has joined
219 2012-11-12 04:40:18 TwilightSparklee has joined
220 2012-11-12 04:44:05 ThomasV has joined
221 2012-11-12 04:56:05 quijibo has joined
222 2012-11-12 04:57:30 eoss has joined
223 2012-11-12 04:57:30 eoss has quit (Changing host)
224 2012-11-12 04:57:30 eoss has joined
225 2012-11-12 04:58:12 Garr255_ is now known as Garr255
226 2012-11-12 04:58:54 lumberjak has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
227 2012-11-12 04:59:00 lumberjak has joined
228 2012-11-12 05:04:24 BlackPrapor has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.0.4 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
229 2012-11-12 05:07:55 darkee has joined
230 2012-11-12 05:11:08 darkee has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
231 2012-11-12 05:14:12 dvide has quit ()
232 2012-11-12 05:15:59 root2 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
233 2012-11-12 05:16:17 root2 has joined
234 2012-11-12 05:22:08 xisalty-otc has quit (Quit: Leaving)
235 2012-11-12 05:22:42 TwilightSparklee has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPhone - http://colloquy.mobi)
236 2012-11-12 05:34:29 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
237 2012-11-12 05:35:51 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
238 2012-11-12 05:36:03 rdponticelli_ has joined
239 2012-11-12 05:37:08 emryss has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
240 2012-11-12 05:41:06 emryss has joined
241 2012-11-12 05:46:38 knotwork has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
242 2012-11-12 05:47:42 knotwork has joined
243 2012-11-12 05:49:45 maaku has joined
244 2012-11-12 05:52:55 forrestv2 has joined
245 2012-11-12 05:55:56 forrestv2 has quit (Quit: ZNC - http://znc.sourceforge.net)
246 2012-11-12 05:58:31 D34TH has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
247 2012-11-12 05:58:41 rdponticelli_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
248 2012-11-12 06:02:32 rdponticelli has joined
249 2012-11-12 06:11:16 Silverion has joined
250 2012-11-12 06:11:35 eoss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
251 2012-11-12 06:12:00 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
252 2012-11-12 06:14:00 emryss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
253 2012-11-12 06:16:10 JDuke128 has quit (Quit: ["Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com"])
254 2012-11-12 06:21:07 thejedipimp has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
255 2012-11-12 06:22:00 thejedipimp has joined
256 2012-11-12 06:26:01 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
257 2012-11-12 06:26:46 deadserious has joined
258 2012-11-12 06:27:09 deadserious is now known as Guest53023
259 2012-11-12 06:27:16 TwilightSparklee has joined
260 2012-11-12 06:30:58 Guest53023 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
261 2012-11-12 06:37:05 Internet13 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
262 2012-11-12 06:42:46 Internet13 has joined
263 2012-11-12 06:43:28 TwilightSparklee has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPhone - http://colloquy.mobi)
264 2012-11-12 06:43:57 tonikt2 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
265 2012-11-12 06:48:34 RazielZ has joined
266 2012-11-12 06:53:11 sudog has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
267 2012-11-12 06:55:06 sudog has joined
268 2012-11-12 07:00:53 thejedipimp has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
269 2012-11-12 07:01:23 thejedipimp has joined
270 2012-11-12 07:05:36 thejedipimp has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
271 2012-11-12 07:07:10 toffoo has quit ()
272 2012-11-12 07:10:09 TwilightSparklee has joined
273 2012-11-12 07:12:38 ovidiusoft has joined
274 2012-11-12 07:14:24 ThomasV has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
275 2012-11-12 07:15:40 TwilightSparkl-1 has joined
276 2012-11-12 07:17:50 maaku has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
277 2012-11-12 07:18:20 maaku has joined
278 2012-11-12 07:19:24 CodesInChaos has joined
279 2012-11-12 07:19:48 TwilightSparklee has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
280 2012-11-12 07:23:06 maaku has quit (Client Quit)
281 2012-11-12 07:25:25 TwilightSparkl-1 has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPhone - http://colloquy.mobi)
282 2012-11-12 07:27:34 CodesInChaos has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
283 2012-11-12 07:29:55 abrkn has quit ()
284 2012-11-12 07:30:58 deadserious has joined
285 2012-11-12 07:31:21 deadserious is now known as Guest14149
286 2012-11-12 07:31:33 devrandom has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
287 2012-11-12 07:33:12 devrandom has joined
288 2012-11-12 07:33:44 RainbowDashh has joined
289 2012-11-12 07:35:13 Guest14149 has quit (Read error: No route to host)
290 2012-11-12 07:43:11 CodesInChaos has joined
291 2012-11-12 07:44:04 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: SLEEP! [11:14:29] <+Tsunami1> http://i.imgur.com/t2rz5.png)
292 2012-11-12 07:56:33 RainbowDashh has joined
293 2012-11-12 08:05:35 leotreasure has joined
294 2012-11-12 08:07:58 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
295 2012-11-12 08:15:45 CodesInChaos has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
296 2012-11-12 08:22:54 ibno has joined
297 2012-11-12 08:35:06 deadserious has joined
298 2012-11-12 08:35:30 deadserious is now known as Guest93342
299 2012-11-12 08:39:20 Guest93342 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
300 2012-11-12 08:49:38 ThomasV has joined
301 2012-11-12 08:55:56 RainbowDashh has quit (Quit: SLEEP! [11:14:29] <+Tsunami1> http://i.imgur.com/t2rz5.png)
302 2012-11-12 09:07:32 <sipa> BlueMatt: but even without explicit filteradd, there is still an implicit filteradd (txids of matched outputs)
303 2012-11-12 09:08:02 <sipa> BlueMatt: the client also has to be aware of those if it wants to maintain filter efficiency
304 2012-11-12 09:16:47 paraipan has joined
305 2012-11-12 09:23:13 robbak has joined
306 2012-11-12 09:24:13 t7 has joined
307 2012-11-12 09:25:10 xisalty has joined
308 2012-11-12 09:29:53 pooler has joined
309 2012-11-12 09:37:45 gjs278 has joined
310 2012-11-12 09:38:50 agath has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
311 2012-11-12 09:42:08 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
312 2012-11-12 09:42:43 copumpkin has joined
313 2012-11-12 10:01:03 BlackPrapor has joined
314 2012-11-12 10:03:23 random_cat has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
315 2012-11-12 10:05:18 random_cat has joined
316 2012-11-12 10:06:20 JDuke128 has joined
317 2012-11-12 10:07:10 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
318 2012-11-12 10:14:37 TD has joined
319 2012-11-12 10:25:50 x18882 has joined
320 2012-11-12 10:26:42 <x18882> hey guys, what's the most secure client usable today, after bitcoin-qt (which is too heavy on my machine)?
321 2012-11-12 10:28:04 <x18882> sorry wrong channel, i meant to ask this in #bitcoin
322 2012-11-12 10:28:23 <x18882> although if someone wants to chime it, go ahead ;)
323 2012-11-12 10:35:02 <SomeoneWeird> define secure, x18882
324 2012-11-12 10:38:16 <xisalty> Idiot proof
325 2012-11-12 10:43:18 harkon has joined
326 2012-11-12 10:44:31 datagutt has joined
327 2012-11-12 10:47:10 JDuke128 has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
328 2012-11-12 10:47:12 guruvan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
329 2012-11-12 10:47:51 guruvan- has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
330 2012-11-12 10:48:03 <x18882> let's define a perfectly secure client as "never been stolen from" "has no known exploits", "uses high encryption standards", "is peer reviewed"
331 2012-11-12 10:49:06 guruvan- has joined
332 2012-11-12 10:49:13 guruvan has joined
333 2012-11-12 10:49:41 <x18882> I know these are quite strict requirements, and it's probably too early to get clients with that level of security, but after bitcoin-qt, what other client is closest to this definition?
334 2012-11-12 10:51:51 <sipa> multibit has a better security model imho, but has no wallet encryption
335 2012-11-12 10:52:26 <sipa> electrum has wallet encryption and deterministic wallets, but a less secure model (though it's improving)
336 2012-11-12 10:52:51 <cjd> Bitcoinj? java is memory safe and it's a pretty old client.. thoughts?
337 2012-11-12 10:53:14 <sipa> bitcoinj is not a client, it's a library
338 2012-11-12 10:53:19 <sipa> and multibit uses bitcoinj
339 2012-11-12 10:53:22 <cjd> ahh ok
340 2012-11-12 10:53:39 harkon_ has joined
341 2012-11-12 10:53:57 <TD> sipa: actually it does do wallet encryption now
342 2012-11-12 10:54:24 <TD> there's a pullreq open to add that to bitcoinj
343 2012-11-12 10:54:29 <TD> i just didn't have time to review it yet
344 2012-11-12 10:54:46 <TD> once it's merged, i guess it'd meet x18882s requirements
345 2012-11-12 10:56:17 <x18882> thanks
346 2012-11-12 10:57:30 <x18882> i might give multibit a try (although i'm reluctant to install a Java environment on my machine, seeing how many exploits are found each month)
347 2012-11-12 10:57:54 <sipa> TD: what do you think about a flag in the bloom filter to match only unspent outputs? not every client is necessarily interested in retrieving its entire history
348 2012-11-12 10:58:40 <x18882> also, what's less secure about the electrum model? i mean, what's the risk with its implementation?
349 2012-11-12 11:00:02 <sipa> x18882: it relies on a central server, which can have privacy issues, and there used to be no way of verifying whether what that server tells you is correct (it may make you believe you receive money while you didn't)
350 2012-11-12 11:01:01 <sipa> x18882: recently they added SPV verification to electrum though (which is the same type of verification multibit/bitcoinj use), but not every electrum server supports this yet, and i'm not sure how peer-reviewed it is
351 2012-11-12 11:03:01 <x18882> by central server you mean that if it goes down, every other server goes down too??
352 2012-11-12 11:05:09 <sipa> no, but the client needs a special server to operate, and only connects to this
353 2012-11-12 11:05:30 <sipa> an electrum client is not a node in the bitcoin network - the electrum server is the node
354 2012-11-12 11:06:33 <x18882> I see
355 2012-11-12 11:08:38 CodesInChaos has joined
356 2012-11-12 11:14:47 <TD> x18882: the exploits for java are relevant only if you have the java plugin enabled
357 2012-11-12 11:14:58 <TD> x18882: if you use modern browsers like chrome, you won't have that, so it's ok
358 2012-11-12 11:15:24 <TD> sipa: i guess so. we have to be wary of feature creep though
359 2012-11-12 11:17:46 x18882 has left ()
360 2012-11-12 11:18:08 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
361 2012-11-12 11:30:05 <slush> Luke-Jr: "Stratum requires notifies every 30 seconds" - - no, it doesn't require, it's just how me and Eleuthria implemented this.
362 2012-11-12 11:39:28 iddo has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
363 2012-11-12 11:40:58 iddo has joined
364 2012-11-12 11:43:22 JZavala has joined
365 2012-11-12 11:56:14 mykhal has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
366 2012-11-12 11:57:04 deadserious has joined
367 2012-11-12 11:57:22 mykhal has joined
368 2012-11-12 11:57:28 deadserious is now known as Guest99169
369 2012-11-12 12:01:23 Guest99169 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
370 2012-11-12 12:04:33 guruvan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
371 2012-11-12 12:06:52 guruvan- is now known as guruvan
372 2012-11-12 12:08:54 MC-Eeepc has joined
373 2012-11-12 12:10:39 TD has joined
374 2012-11-12 12:12:20 guruvan_ has joined
375 2012-11-12 12:12:28 MC1984 has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
376 2012-11-12 12:12:51 CodeInChaos has joined
377 2012-11-12 12:14:07 CodesInChaos has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
378 2012-11-12 12:25:04 x18882 has joined
379 2012-11-12 12:25:25 OneEyed has quit (Quit: WeeChat 0.3.9)
380 2012-11-12 12:25:45 daybyter has joined
381 2012-11-12 12:29:20 deadserious has joined
382 2012-11-12 12:29:44 deadserious is now known as Guest85146
383 2012-11-12 12:33:37 Guest85146 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
384 2012-11-12 12:36:46 PhantomSpark has joined
385 2012-11-12 12:37:31 x18882 has quit (Quit: Yo!)
386 2012-11-12 12:40:01 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
387 2012-11-12 12:41:09 agricocb has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
388 2012-11-12 12:46:19 cdecker has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
389 2012-11-12 12:58:19 cdecker has joined
390 2012-11-12 13:09:31 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
391 2012-11-12 13:11:55 asa1024 has quit (Quit: asa1024)
392 2012-11-12 13:13:06 abrkn has joined
393 2012-11-12 13:15:07 theorbtwo has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
394 2012-11-12 13:15:19 theorbtwo has joined
395 2012-11-12 13:15:30 graingert_ecs has joined
396 2012-11-12 13:18:14 <abrkn> can an address become invalid, or can i assume it's good if validateaddress ever returns true?
397 2012-11-12 13:18:35 <Diablo-D3> its even better
398 2012-11-12 13:18:44 <Diablo-D3> addresses can be valid even if no one holds the private key
399 2012-11-12 13:20:59 <abrkn> ok
400 2012-11-12 13:21:14 <abrkn> how many sends can i safely do in one transaction? (sendmany)¨
401 2012-11-12 13:21:22 <gmaxwell> abrkn: it only validates that the address has valid syntax. Its generally inadvisable to send coin to an address that hasn't just been given to you by the recipent for the purpose of recieving _this_ payment.
402 2012-11-12 13:21:35 drizztbsd has joined
403 2012-11-12 13:21:47 <abrkn> gmaxwell: ok
404 2012-11-12 13:21:58 Garr255 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
405 2012-11-12 13:22:43 <gmaxwell> abrkn: the number of outputs you can fit into a send many depends on the number and kinds of inputs you're redeeming. It'll fail and return an error if you call it with too many.
406 2012-11-12 13:23:42 eoss has joined
407 2012-11-12 13:23:43 eoss has quit (Changing host)
408 2012-11-12 13:23:43 eoss has joined
409 2012-11-12 13:23:50 <abrkn> interesting
410 2012-11-12 13:28:31 Garr255 has joined
411 2012-11-12 13:28:31 Garr255 has quit (Changing host)
412 2012-11-12 13:28:31 Garr255 has joined
413 2012-11-12 13:28:38 abrkn has quit ()
414 2012-11-12 13:29:03 abrkn has joined
415 2012-11-12 13:35:17 <someone42> does anyone here have any test vectors for the BIP 0032 child key derivation function?
416 2012-11-12 13:36:36 BlackPrapor has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.0.4 Insomnia http://www.kvirc.net/)
417 2012-11-12 13:37:41 <sipa> someone42: i do, but i haven't written them out in the BIP text
418 2012-11-12 13:40:06 <someone42> sipa: could you pastebin (or equivalent) them? I'd like to include them as unit tests
419 2012-11-12 13:42:29 <sipa> someone42: they're not very elaborate (just tests the derived public keys, and the corresponding public keys of the derived private keys), or nicely formatted, but this is from a unit test i wrote: https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/blob/edbdc5313c02dc82104cfb6017ce3427bf323071/src/test/detwallet_tests.cpp
420 2012-11-12 13:44:04 <sipa> someone42: what are you working on?
421 2012-11-12 13:45:15 <someone42> sipa: thanks, it was what i was looking for
422 2012-11-12 13:45:40 <someone42> i'm working on the firmware for a dedicated hardware Bitcoin wallet
423 2012-11-12 13:46:27 agricocb has joined
424 2012-11-12 13:46:27 Internet13 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
425 2012-11-12 13:46:46 <sipa> cool
426 2012-11-12 13:50:58 t7 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
427 2012-11-12 13:52:08 Internet13 has joined
428 2012-11-12 13:55:12 PiZZaMaN2K has joined
429 2012-11-12 14:00:39 Internet13 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
430 2012-11-12 14:01:43 gritball has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
431 2012-11-12 14:03:50 gritball has joined
432 2012-11-12 14:06:14 pusle has joined
433 2012-11-12 14:06:21 Internet13 has joined
434 2012-11-12 14:10:57 graingert_ecs has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
435 2012-11-12 14:25:16 eoss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
436 2012-11-12 14:26:12 pusle has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
437 2012-11-12 14:27:50 one_zero has quit ()
438 2012-11-12 14:37:15 darkee has quit (!~darkee@gateway/tor-sasl/darkee|Remote host closed the connection)
439 2012-11-12 14:38:17 darkee has joined
440 2012-11-12 14:50:41 JackOfAll has joined
441 2012-11-12 14:50:57 PhantomSpark has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
442 2012-11-12 14:55:33 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
443 2012-11-12 14:59:07 t7 has joined
444 2012-11-12 15:03:15 daybyter has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
445 2012-11-12 15:08:57 RazielZ has joined
446 2012-11-12 15:12:29 someone42 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
447 2012-11-12 15:13:01 someone42 has joined
448 2012-11-12 15:16:52 TD has joined
449 2012-11-12 15:18:46 copumpkin has joined
450 2012-11-12 15:23:43 PhantomSpark has joined
451 2012-11-12 15:23:48 PhantomSpark has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
452 2012-11-12 15:25:12 Zarutian has joined
453 2012-11-12 15:27:58 <abrkn> gahh: amounts are double-precision floating point numbers] code: -1 }
454 2012-11-12 15:28:17 <abrkn> sendmany { bob: 100 } <-- no bueno
455 2012-11-12 15:34:32 MiningBuddy has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
456 2012-11-12 15:39:56 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
457 2012-11-12 15:47:40 t7 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
458 2012-11-12 15:51:49 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
459 2012-11-12 15:52:38 copumpkin has joined
460 2012-11-12 15:57:07 <BlueMatt> sipa: yes but, again, filter adding is so cheap and they are small enough that I dont really see even a phone-based client having any load generated by just re-sending filter entirely when it needs updated (which is hopefully almost never anyway)
461 2012-11-12 16:01:37 <sipa> BlueMatt: no, but in terms of transparency towards the client, filteradd() is a lot nicer than the implicit adding of txids, and i'd rather not get rid of that last
462 2012-11-12 16:01:46 dvide has joined
463 2012-11-12 16:01:55 paraipan_ has joined
464 2012-11-12 16:02:45 <sipa> BlueMatt: just saying that if you have implicit adding, you may as well have filteradd
465 2012-11-12 16:03:05 theorb_ has joined
466 2012-11-12 16:03:14 <sipa> BlueMatt: not sure if we're arguing for the same thing or not :p
467 2012-11-12 16:03:15 theorbtwo has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
468 2012-11-12 16:04:24 paraipan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
469 2012-11-12 16:04:42 <jouke> I am using the standard 0.6.3 client from bitcoin.org. Do I need to detachdb in order to upgrade to 7.1?
470 2012-11-12 16:05:08 <sipa> probably, yes
471 2012-11-12 16:05:21 <sipa> -detachdb on 0.6.3
472 2012-11-12 16:05:30 <abrkn> what's a reasonable way to track transactions in my own database using the rpc? i noticed the order of listtransactions isnt guaranteed, to using "listtransactions 100 numberseenbefore" to discover new ones is not stable
473 2012-11-12 16:05:43 <abrkn> so using*
474 2012-11-12 16:06:22 <BlueMatt> sipa: meh, I dont really mind filteradd remaining, but I feel like thinking about it much isnt worth it because its use should be highly discouraged anyway...
475 2012-11-12 16:06:55 <BlueMatt> sipa: Im not really against failing if you give filteradd without a filter...
476 2012-11-12 16:07:09 <sipa> BlueMatt: i think filteradd working without having provided a filter is much worse than just filteradd
477 2012-11-12 16:07:19 <sipa> filteradd is useful if you only need incremental changes
478 2012-11-12 16:07:48 <sipa> BlueMatt: also,.what do you think about a flag to limit a filter to matching only unspent outputs?
479 2012-11-12 16:07:48 <BlueMatt> well...again Im not a fan of using filteradd for incremental changes...its kinda incorrect behavior
480 2012-11-12 16:07:57 <sipa> why?
481 2012-11-12 16:08:09 <sipa> you have a deterministic wallet, precalculate hundred keys
482 2012-11-12 16:08:11 <BlueMatt> it breaks any anonymity you get from filters
483 2012-11-12 16:08:17 <sipa> right
484 2012-11-12 16:08:26 <BlueMatt> (which incremental adding, btw, does not)
485 2012-11-12 16:08:30 <sipa> that's a good point, but probably not everyone cares about that
486 2012-11-12 16:10:32 <gmaxwell> sipa: a flag matching just unspent makes a lot of sense, but I worry that its burdensom since you need to both consult the txout set and the blocks.
487 2012-11-12 16:10:59 <sipa> the txout set should be very accessible already
488 2012-11-12 16:11:44 freakazoid has joined
489 2012-11-12 16:12:00 <sipa> plus you can probably do things (in a later optimization) like making a read-only snapshot of the txout database, iterate through it, build a list of heights that have interesting transactions, and then only query those blocks from disk
490 2012-11-12 16:12:33 <sipa> (as serving empty block headers does not need access to on-disk blocks)
491 2012-11-12 16:12:44 <jouke> When I run with -detachdb, am I able to stop it trough rpc?
492 2012-11-12 16:12:56 <sipa> jouke: doesn't matter; just shutdown cleanly
493 2012-11-12 16:13:28 <jouke> I don't really know what that means.
494 2012-11-12 16:13:36 <sipa> jouke: i.e. don't crash
495 2012-11-12 16:13:40 <jouke> Can I ctrl+c it?
496 2012-11-12 16:13:42 <sipa> yes
497 2012-11-12 16:13:56 <sipa> don't pull the power cable, don't kill -KILL, ...
498 2012-11-12 16:14:09 <jouke> because atm I can't connect to it trough rpc
499 2012-11-12 16:14:16 <sipa> why not?
500 2012-11-12 16:14:26 <jouke> I don't know
501 2012-11-12 16:14:35 <jouke> Ah, now I can
502 2012-11-12 16:14:44 <sipa> if it hasn't started up yet, wait
503 2012-11-12 16:14:44 <jouke> I guess it was still starting up
504 2012-11-12 16:14:46 <sipa> ok
505 2012-11-12 16:15:44 <edcba> maybe we should remain bitcoins as karma
506 2012-11-12 16:15:49 <edcba> rename
507 2012-11-12 16:16:40 <sipa> gmaxwell: then again, maybe serving just unspent outputs risks making people not keep a local wallet at all (what if i have a local wallet with formerly unspent outputs, i sync, and don't get to see the transactions that spend them?)
508 2012-11-12 16:17:32 <BlueMatt> sipa: yea, many people wont care, but implementations dont know whether the user cares or not, so implementations should always be careful to maintain privacy; re: unspent outputs, do you mean you match everything as we currently do but only match if its unspent...Im not a huge fan there, it could cause more cost for serving nodes if you dont keep a db of that (which ultraprune does not?)
509 2012-11-12 16:18:18 <sipa> BlueMatt: the one thing ultraprune keeps first and foremost is a set of unspent transaction outputs...
510 2012-11-12 16:19:02 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: it means you could satisify those queries off pruned nodes... pretty nice optimization there.
511 2012-11-12 16:19:26 <sipa> gmaxwell: still needs the actual block data
512 2012-11-12 16:19:32 <sipa> for the transactions being served
513 2012-11-12 16:19:40 <BlueMatt> sipa: ahh, thought about that wrong sorry...
514 2012-11-12 16:20:06 <sipa> gmaxwell: as ultraprune data does not have full transactions or merkle paths
515 2012-11-12 16:20:20 <sipa> but you could use the ultraprune data as index for finding the rest
516 2012-11-12 16:22:10 <sipa> by the way... is there a service bit for serving merkle blocks?
517 2012-11-12 16:22:25 <sipa> or has that been considered? (i vaguely remeber something like that)
518 2012-11-12 16:23:02 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: meh, you shouldnt be doing initial sync off a pruned noide
519 2012-11-12 16:23:09 <BlueMatt> node*
520 2012-11-12 16:23:19 <sipa> what do you mean by pruned node in the first place?
521 2012-11-12 16:23:28 <sipa> one which doesn't have all blocks?
522 2012-11-12 16:23:35 <gmaxwell> One that can't serve historic transactions.
523 2012-11-12 16:23:36 <sipa> if it has the blocks you need, there is no problem
524 2012-11-12 16:23:58 <sipa> if it doesn't want to serve blocks at all, there is no way to sync from it
525 2012-11-12 16:24:54 <sipa> but if someone is only interested in knowing unspent transaction outputs, i could iterate my ultraprune db instead of iterating all blocks
526 2012-11-12 16:25:03 <sipa> if anything, that's a massive optimization for the server
527 2012-11-12 16:25:23 <sipa> (assuming the number of blocks with relevant unspent transactions is small)
528 2012-11-12 16:28:29 RainbowDashh has joined
529 2012-11-12 16:28:47 RainbowDashh has quit (Client Quit)
530 2012-11-12 16:29:00 <sipa> two reasons against this idea: it means serving blocks to other nodes means having an UTXO database , so you can't perfectly separate the archive function and the validation function anymore
531 2012-11-12 16:29:10 MiningBuddy has joined
532 2012-11-12 16:29:10 MiningBuddy has quit (Changing host)
533 2012-11-12 16:29:10 MiningBuddy has joined
534 2012-11-12 16:29:27 <sipa> and another: it is not very useful for syncing existing wallets, as those want to know about their old txouts being spent
535 2012-11-12 16:29:51 JudgeTheDude has joined
536 2012-11-12 16:29:54 JudgeTheDude has quit (Client Quit)
537 2012-11-12 16:32:47 toffoo has joined
538 2012-11-12 16:33:00 <sipa> afk
539 2012-11-12 16:37:34 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
540 2012-11-12 16:42:24 deadserious has joined
541 2012-11-12 16:42:48 deadserious is now known as Guest85231
542 2012-11-12 16:43:51 Guest85231 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
543 2012-11-12 16:51:54 stalled has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
544 2012-11-12 16:58:43 stalled has joined
545 2012-11-12 16:59:11 agricocb has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
546 2012-11-12 16:59:46 daybyter has joined
547 2012-11-12 17:05:23 maaku has joined
548 2012-11-12 17:06:35 da2ce7 has joined
549 2012-11-12 17:08:38 da2ce7_d has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
550 2012-11-12 17:12:50 MattBlue has joined
551 2012-11-12 17:14:05 <helo> BAM
552 2012-11-12 17:16:25 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Leaving)
553 2012-11-12 17:17:05 MATTMATT has joined
554 2012-11-12 17:17:09 <MATTMATT> I WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS DEVELOPMENT
555 2012-11-12 17:17:20 <BlueMatt> FUCK YOU
556 2012-11-12 17:17:47 <daybyter> ???
557 2012-11-12 17:19:01 <BlueMatt> (hes sitting next to me and just wanted to be a dick)
558 2012-11-12 17:19:41 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
559 2012-11-12 17:21:00 <abrkn> what does an accoun tor a label signify in bitcoind? a collection of addresses?
560 2012-11-12 17:32:56 devrando1 has joined
561 2012-11-12 17:35:24 devrandom has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
562 2012-11-12 17:37:48 <kinlo> abrkn: basicly that yes...
563 2012-11-12 17:41:06 taha has joined
564 2012-11-12 17:43:27 ThomasV has joined
565 2012-11-12 17:45:17 <abrkn> kinlo: im trying to keep track of the balance of users of my service and im struggling to come up with a way to track it
566 2012-11-12 17:45:50 <abrkn> use getaccountaddress and track getreceivedbyaddress for deposits (+listen using blockchain.info websockets)
567 2012-11-12 17:46:28 <abrkn> and for withdraw ensure that getaccountbalance has enough money (in some kind of mutex)
568 2012-11-12 17:46:35 <abrkn> *head spins*
569 2012-11-12 17:47:04 <abrkn> or just drop getaccountbalance and use my own apps balance tracking
570 2012-11-12 17:50:35 CodeInChaos has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
571 2012-11-12 17:52:29 molecular has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
572 2012-11-12 17:52:36 molecular has joined
573 2012-11-12 18:06:36 PhantomSpark has quit (2!~kvirc@pool-71-190-231-20.nycmny.fios.verizon.net|Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
574 2012-11-12 18:07:31 <kinlo> abrkn: I use my own tracking...
575 2012-11-12 18:07:48 <kinlo> abrkn: you need hot and cold wallets, so your bitcoind is out of sync anyway
576 2012-11-12 18:07:49 BurtyBB has joined
577 2012-11-12 18:07:55 <abrkn> kinlo: how custom is it? do you analyze every block?
578 2012-11-12 18:08:17 <kinlo> as I am a pool, I track completly differently
579 2012-11-12 18:08:30 <kinlo> but remember, you will use hot and cold wallets...
580 2012-11-12 18:08:40 ovidiusoft has quit (Quit: leaving)
581 2012-11-12 18:08:41 <kinlo> so your coins won't even be on the server
582 2012-11-12 18:08:43 <kinlo> anyway afk
583 2012-11-12 18:10:59 BurtyB has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
584 2012-11-12 18:17:41 sebicas has joined
585 2012-11-12 18:17:53 BurtyBB is now known as BurtyB
586 2012-11-12 18:20:41 ovidiusoft has joined
587 2012-11-12 18:26:45 JackOfAll has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
588 2012-11-12 18:36:54 darkee has quit (!~darkee@gateway/tor-sasl/darkee|Remote host closed the connection)
589 2012-11-12 18:37:47 sebicas_ has joined
590 2012-11-12 18:37:55 darkee has joined
591 2012-11-12 18:39:25 forrestv2 has joined
592 2012-11-12 18:39:50 sebicas has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
593 2012-11-12 18:39:50 sebicas_ is now known as sebicas
594 2012-11-12 18:42:18 freakazoid has joined
595 2012-11-12 18:44:02 deadserious has joined
596 2012-11-12 18:44:26 deadserious is now known as Guest36308
597 2012-11-12 18:47:06 forrestv2 has quit (Quit: ZNC - http://znc.sourceforge.net)
598 2012-11-12 18:47:32 maaku has joined
599 2012-11-12 18:50:03 forrestv_ has joined
600 2012-11-12 18:50:21 forrestv_ is now known as forrestv
601 2012-11-12 18:50:28 forrestv has quit (Changing host)
602 2012-11-12 18:50:28 forrestv has joined
603 2012-11-12 18:52:47 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
604 2012-11-12 18:54:07 taha has quit (Quit: Leaving)
605 2012-11-12 18:58:41 maqr has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
606 2012-11-12 19:00:14 Guest36308 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
607 2012-11-12 19:00:20 <doublec> abrkn: I track account balances and similar within the app rather than using the bitcoind accounts functionality
608 2012-11-12 19:00:35 <doublec> abrkn: like kinlo mentioned it makes dealing with multiple wallets a bit easier
609 2012-11-12 19:00:53 <doublec> abrkn: if you ever need to move to a new wallet it's a pain with accounts
610 2012-11-12 19:04:01 agricocb has joined
611 2012-11-12 19:05:30 TD has joined
612 2012-11-12 19:08:52 enmaku has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
613 2012-11-12 19:10:16 enmaku has joined
614 2012-11-12 19:10:56 abrkn has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
615 2012-11-12 19:13:30 maqr has joined
616 2012-11-12 19:20:44 PiZZaMaN2K is now known as PiZZaMaN2K|away
617 2012-11-12 19:33:41 drizztbsd has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
618 2012-11-12 19:36:02 CodesInChaos has joined
619 2012-11-12 19:41:47 bitfoo has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
620 2012-11-12 19:43:16 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
621 2012-11-12 19:44:49 agath has joined
622 2012-11-12 19:48:05 rdponticelli has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
623 2012-11-12 19:51:33 DrHaribo has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
624 2012-11-12 19:51:39 DrHaribo has joined
625 2012-11-12 19:56:55 rdponticelli has joined
626 2012-11-12 19:59:43 BGL has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
627 2012-11-12 20:06:55 D34TH has joined
628 2012-11-12 20:06:56 D34TH has quit (Changing host)
629 2012-11-12 20:06:56 D34TH has joined
630 2012-11-12 20:18:50 davout has joined
631 2012-11-12 20:18:51 davout has quit (Changing host)
632 2012-11-12 20:18:51 davout has joined
633 2012-11-12 20:21:57 daybyter has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
634 2012-11-12 20:25:04 devrando1 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
635 2012-11-12 20:25:56 devrandom has joined
636 2012-11-12 20:30:22 datagutt has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
637 2012-11-12 20:31:09 datagutt has joined
638 2012-11-12 20:31:26 BGL has joined
639 2012-11-12 20:40:15 asa1024 has joined
640 2012-11-12 20:42:06 gfinn has joined
641 2012-11-12 20:42:48 Bwild has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
642 2012-11-12 20:43:35 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
643 2012-11-12 20:45:18 agricocb has joined
644 2012-11-12 20:50:48 JDuke128 has joined
645 2012-11-12 20:56:19 Bwild has joined
646 2012-11-12 20:59:51 TD has joined
647 2012-11-12 21:03:34 TD has quit (Client Quit)
648 2012-11-12 21:04:03 bitfoo has joined
649 2012-11-12 21:04:49 ThomasV has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
650 2012-11-12 21:07:48 <MC-Eeepc> wow there are over 10,000 pending txns
651 2012-11-12 21:07:57 <MC-Eeepc> anyone notice that keeps getting wrose
652 2012-11-12 21:08:18 <MC-Eeepc> make that 15,000
653 2012-11-12 21:08:49 <MC-Eeepc> do people need to start paying fees or what
654 2012-11-12 21:09:24 <jeremias> yep
655 2012-11-12 21:09:30 <jeremias> how is that a problem?
656 2012-11-12 21:10:09 <jeremias> or do you consider that a problem?
657 2012-11-12 21:12:20 <MC-Eeepc> its a problem if it keeps increasing rite
658 2012-11-12 21:12:29 <MC-Eeepc> used to be under 1000
659 2012-11-12 21:14:02 JDuke128 has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
660 2012-11-12 21:14:03 bitfoo has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
661 2012-11-12 21:14:58 <jeremias> well, the fees are not near any meaningful factor to me
662 2012-11-12 21:15:12 <jeremias> if they keep to be under few cents, that is fine to me
663 2012-11-12 21:15:30 <jeremias> and then you can start to optimize
664 2012-11-12 21:16:03 bitfoo has joined
665 2012-11-12 21:16:47 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
666 2012-11-12 21:19:22 <MC-Eeepc> 15,000 pending txn and the last block only cleared 369 of them
667 2012-11-12 21:19:49 bitfoo has quit (Excess Flood)
668 2012-11-12 21:21:34 bitfoo has joined
669 2012-11-12 21:22:26 <Luke-Jr> MC-Eeepc: most of them are spam
670 2012-11-12 21:22:55 <MC-Eeepc> define spam
671 2012-11-12 21:24:29 <Cusipzzz> satoshi dice double spends and no fee freeloaders
672 2012-11-12 21:24:57 <sipa> why would you try doublespending SD? :o
673 2012-11-12 21:25:06 <MC-Eeepc> you cant double spend SD
674 2012-11-12 21:25:22 <sipa> my point exactly
675 2012-11-12 21:25:33 <Cusipzzz> no, their payments are respending the same input, so they have to wait
676 2012-11-12 21:25:41 <Cusipzzz> hence a lot of pending txns
677 2012-11-12 21:25:54 <sipa> ?
678 2012-11-12 21:26:07 <yellowhat> is grau the author of bitsofproof here somewhere?
679 2012-11-12 21:26:09 <Cusipzzz> they have to wait for the wager txn to confirm
680 2012-11-12 21:26:15 <sipa> Cusipzzz: no
681 2012-11-12 21:26:36 <sipa> they can be included in the same block
682 2012-11-12 21:26:39 <Cusipzzz> sipa: oh? never seen an sd payment confirm without the wager payment
683 2012-11-12 21:26:40 <MC-Eeepc> !seen genjix
684 2012-11-12 21:26:41 <gribble> genjix was last seen in #bitcoin-dev 11 weeks, 0 days, 18 hours, 44 minutes, and 7 seconds ago: <genjix> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zh8W4ZglOlw
685 2012-11-12 21:26:54 <Cusipzzz> right, same block, but still a lot of pending txns
686 2012-11-12 21:27:28 <sipa> their payout mechanism just results in a massive amount of transactions
687 2012-11-12 21:27:38 <MC-Eeepc> so its just the priority system doing its job?
688 2012-11-12 21:27:40 <Luke-Jr> MC-Eeepc: you sure can
689 2012-11-12 21:27:54 <Luke-Jr> sipa: doublespending SD is quite profitable :P
690 2012-11-12 21:28:05 <sipa> ?
691 2012-11-12 21:28:21 <Luke-Jr> sipa: if you lose, you get the doublespend mined; if you win, you don't
692 2012-11-12 21:28:31 <sipa> ha, of course
693 2012-11-12 21:28:33 <Cusipzzz> bet max, isolate them, if wager=loss doublespend to rest of network
694 2012-11-12 21:28:45 <Cusipzzz> or just the large pools :)
695 2012-11-12 21:29:24 da2ce7 has quit (Quit: KVIrc 4.2.0 Equilibrium http://www.kvirc.net/)
696 2012-11-12 21:29:31 <Luke-Jr> moreover, this helps defeat the DDoS
697 2012-11-12 21:29:42 <Luke-Jr> since SD uses the outputs from losses to cover the wins
698 2012-11-12 21:29:58 <Luke-Jr> someone should streamline it :D
699 2012-11-12 21:30:13 <Cusipzzz> easier would be for miners to reject SD txns, unless the fee is .01+
700 2012-11-12 21:31:02 <Luke-Jr> Cusipzzz: a number of miners reject SD txns period.
701 2012-11-12 21:31:16 <Cusipzzz> Luke-Jr: good
702 2012-11-12 21:32:09 <Luke-Jr> I wouldn't mind accepting them with 1+ BTC fees, but no point writing code nobody will ever use
703 2012-11-12 21:33:00 freakazoid has joined
704 2012-11-12 21:33:40 <Cusipzzz> get a few big pools on board and it will force them to use accounts rather than this spam
705 2012-11-12 21:35:19 <Luke-Jr> hah
706 2012-11-12 21:35:36 <Luke-Jr> we can't even get most of the bigger pools to care about decentralized mining
707 2012-11-12 21:37:08 <Cusipzzz> well, we wouldn't want big pools agreeing on anything usually, but this one would be ok
708 2012-11-12 21:38:14 PhantomSpark has joined
709 2012-11-12 21:44:01 <wizkid057> still worrying about satoshidice? heh
710 2012-11-12 21:45:12 JDuke128 has joined
711 2012-11-12 21:45:35 BurtyB has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
712 2012-11-12 21:46:12 <wizkid057> i dont like the concept at all, and it seems to abuse the network, but.... at the same time it doesnt make bitcoin look very useful. If one entitiy with a relatively decent amount of transaction volume can cause disruption to the network... then theres an issue with scalability. Bitcoin is going to need to be able to handle many thousands of times more tranactions per time period than
713 2012-11-12 21:46:14 <wizkid057> it does now, even with SD, if it is to be useful in the longterm, and right now it isnt.
714 2012-11-12 21:46:19 BurtyB has joined
715 2012-11-12 21:47:12 <wizkid057> there are many road blocks to mass adoption
716 2012-11-12 21:47:47 <wizkid057> this is one, the fact that its taking a beast of a server of mine > 2 days to download/process the blockchain is another, etc
717 2012-11-12 21:48:41 <yellowhat> it would be interesting to hear the opinion of you guys on this project idea:
718 2012-11-12 21:48:42 <yellowhat> https://github.com/bitcoinaustria/bitnotar
719 2012-11-12 21:49:14 <yellowhat> we implemented a bitcoin-based document timestamp service in a few hours at a local hackathon.
720 2012-11-12 21:49:21 <Luke-Jr> wizkid057: you're not running git master on that server tho
721 2012-11-12 21:49:40 <yellowhat> do you see any possible obvious flaws in the idea or is it viable?
722 2012-11-12 21:50:02 <wizkid057> Luke-Jr: there some improvement between the tarbar on bitcoin.org and git master?
723 2012-11-12 21:50:03 <yellowhat> the presentation we did at the end is here: https://docs.google.com/presentation/pub?id=1qS8zFR5TLxRtVAV6qzBOTHMy4_wlWh69t_FQMTmpg48&start=false&loop=false&delayms=3000
724 2012-11-12 21:50:27 <Luke-Jr> wizkid057: significant
725 2012-11-12 21:50:46 <wizkid057> hmm
726 2012-11-12 21:50:53 <Luke-Jr> wizkid057: bdb is almost gone now (just wallet)
727 2012-11-12 21:50:57 <jrmithdobbs> wizkid057: a beast? really? until i updated past .7 my p4 (prescott) with slow as fuck disks in software raid running in 32bit mode did a IBD in <24 hours ...
728 2012-11-12 21:51:12 <jrmithdobbs> something's wrong with your box
729 2012-11-12 21:51:23 <sipa> not necessarily
730 2012-11-12 21:51:25 <Luke-Jr> jrmithdobbs: well, the IBD code sucks too
731 2012-11-12 21:51:30 <sipa> indeed
732 2012-11-12 21:51:35 <wizkid057> jrmithdobbs: its an Amazon EC2 high CPU instance
733 2012-11-12 21:51:42 <sipa> oh that explains
734 2012-11-12 21:51:44 <Luke-Jr> could just as well be bad luck on peer selection and network activity
735 2012-11-12 21:51:45 <sipa> very slow I/O
736 2012-11-12 21:51:49 <wizkid057> nope, blockchain is in RAM
737 2012-11-12 21:51:50 <jrmithdobbs> so ya, something's wrong with your box
738 2012-11-12 21:51:51 <wizkid057> and index
739 2012-11-12 21:51:53 <jrmithdobbs> (you have shit i/o)
740 2012-11-12 21:51:55 <wizkid057> on tmpfs
741 2012-11-12 21:51:58 <sipa> oh
742 2012-11-12 21:52:03 <sipa> ok, bad IBD then
743 2012-11-12 21:52:25 <jrmithdobbs> ya, only explanation for that is bad dice rolls when choosing the peer you're downloading from
744 2012-11-12 21:52:33 <wizkid057> well
745 2012-11-12 21:52:41 <wizkid057> i hacked source to allow more outbounds
746 2012-11-12 21:52:48 <wizkid057> but it was slow before that also
747 2012-11-12 21:52:49 <wizkid057> lol
748 2012-11-12 21:52:50 <Luke-Jr> wizkid057: bad idea âº
749 2012-11-12 21:52:51 <sipa> doesn't help a thing
750 2012-11-12 21:52:52 <jrmithdobbs> wont matter
751 2012-11-12 21:52:58 <sipa> at least from disk, it takes 2.5 hours on my VPS to reindex the entire chain
752 2012-11-12 21:53:00 <wizkid057> i know
753 2012-11-12 21:53:04 <Luke-Jr> wizkid057: more connections = less time spent on IBS
754 2012-11-12 21:53:06 <Luke-Jr> IBD*
755 2012-11-12 21:53:16 <sipa> most of which is signature verification after 192k
756 2012-11-12 21:53:22 <jrmithdobbs> and only one peer is used for the IBD at a time any ways
757 2012-11-12 21:53:29 * wizkid057 shrugs
758 2012-11-12 21:53:35 <wizkid057> i'll try a roll up of git master
759 2012-11-12 21:53:38 <wizkid057> and see how it goes
760 2012-11-12 21:53:49 <Luke-Jr> wizkid057: just note git master isn't presumed stable for mining yet
761 2012-11-12 21:53:57 <jrmithdobbs> wizkid057: -nolisten -addpeer=<known good node> is best way to work around that
762 2012-11-12 21:54:05 <wizkid057> be fine for a random well-connected node, though
763 2012-11-12 21:54:09 <Luke-Jr> jrmithdobbs: or just -connect
764 2012-11-12 21:54:15 <jrmithdobbs> ya
765 2012-11-12 21:54:24 <wizkid057> doesnt -loadblocks work?
766 2012-11-12 21:54:29 <Luke-Jr> ⦠or that
767 2012-11-12 21:54:54 <wizkid057> i'll mess with it later
768 2012-11-12 21:55:23 <sipa> with current git head you can even just copy your old blk000{1,2}.dat to blocks/blk0000{0,1}.dat, and start with -reindex
769 2012-11-12 21:55:31 JDuke128 has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
770 2012-11-12 21:55:31 <sipa> to import them "in place"
771 2012-11-12 21:55:38 <wizkid057> ah
772 2012-11-12 21:56:16 theorb_ is now known as theorbtwo
773 2012-11-12 21:56:23 <wizkid057> if I know my blk*.dat files are legit, any way I can tell bitcoin to not bother verifying anything about them?
774 2012-11-12 21:56:33 <wizkid057> i notice -loadblocks still does full verification
775 2012-11-12 21:56:34 <Luke-Jr> wizkid057: it still has to make the index
776 2012-11-12 21:56:48 <sipa> verification is not the problem, maintaining the indx is
777 2012-11-12 21:56:54 <Luke-Jr> wizkid057: when master is done, it uses like 80 MB db only
778 2012-11-12 21:57:05 <sipa> 120 MB these days
779 2012-11-12 21:57:08 <Luke-Jr> meh
780 2012-11-12 21:57:21 <sipa> well, after 193k, the significant part becomes signature verification
781 2012-11-12 21:57:39 * sipa thinks 210k will make a new checkpoint for 0.8
782 2012-11-12 21:58:03 <wizkid057> thats what i'm saying
783 2012-11-12 21:58:09 <wizkid057> useless dice txn verifications
784 2012-11-12 21:58:52 <sipa> there should be a way to prevent redoing all verification when importing an old chain yes
785 2012-11-12 21:58:53 ibno has quit (Quit: Lämnar)
786 2012-11-12 21:59:02 <wizkid057> SD should make an alt chain, and run an exchange
787 2012-11-12 21:59:03 <wizkid057> lol
788 2012-11-12 21:59:11 <jrmithdobbs> SD should just die
789 2012-11-12 21:59:18 <wizkid057> that'd be too easy
790 2012-11-12 21:59:27 <sipa> but the re-verification has some nice benefits (given the number of stuck nodes, i assume there are many corrupted chains already)
791 2012-11-12 21:59:30 <wizkid057> but like I said, if SD causes this much hassle, then bitcoin has issues
792 2012-11-12 21:59:55 <gmaxwell> wizkid057: whats the hassle?
793 2012-11-12 22:00:40 <wizkid057> blocks made post-SD take ages to verify, blocks bloated with useless transactions, legit transactions taking way longer than the system intends to confirm, etc
794 2012-11-12 22:01:17 <wizkid057> SD bloated block orphan risk for miners
795 2012-11-12 22:01:28 <wizkid057> i'm sure i'm missing some hassles here
796 2012-11-12 22:01:29 <sipa> define 'ages'
797 2012-11-12 22:01:35 <Luke-Jr> wizkid057: to be fair, SD load is far more than any existing payment network handles
798 2012-11-12 22:01:42 <Luke-Jr> proportionally speaking
799 2012-11-12 22:01:50 <wizkid057> ?
800 2012-11-12 22:02:02 <sipa> on my laptop, with git head code, on a single core, i can do 2-3 blocks/s
801 2012-11-12 22:02:08 <wizkid057> proportionally? my local walmart does more txns per day than SD
802 2012-11-12 22:02:10 <wizkid057> lol
803 2012-11-12 22:02:42 <sipa> after 193k, that is
804 2012-11-12 22:02:44 <Luke-Jr> wizkid057: for far more people
805 2012-11-12 22:03:10 <Luke-Jr> wizkid057: imagine if everyone who went into your walmart did like 20 tiny transactions
806 2012-11-12 22:03:13 <Luke-Jr> on average
807 2012-11-12 22:03:32 <Luke-Jr> every day.
808 2012-11-12 22:03:40 <wizkid057> thats an interesting way to put it
809 2012-11-12 22:03:51 <Luke-Jr> I bet every WalMart doing that would kill VISA even
810 2012-11-12 22:03:52 <wizkid057> but, physical retail is different than electronic
811 2012-11-12 22:04:07 <wizkid057> lol, you'd be surprised how robust VISA is
812 2012-11-12 22:04:34 * midnightmagic imagines a small meta-script to filter irritating txn and lols and remembers he isn't that interested..
813 2012-11-12 22:04:39 <wizkid057> people have tried "DDoS'ing" VISA with transactions... all it did was delay authorizations coming in by a couple of seconds
814 2012-11-12 22:04:52 <Cusipzzz> VISA would shut down any merchant that did what SD does.. or kill them with fees
815 2012-11-12 22:04:59 <Luke-Jr> probably
816 2012-11-12 22:05:14 <wizkid057> Cusipzzz: true, but, there are micro transaction contracts
817 2012-11-12 22:05:22 <midnightmagic> wizkid057: Who DDoS'd visa with txn?
818 2012-11-12 22:05:27 <gmaxwell> I've caused my brokerage to call me and ask me to make fewer ACHs.
819 2012-11-12 22:05:27 <jrmithdobbs> wizkid057: ya the fact that bitcoin hasn't completely imploded due to satoshi's dice shit design is actually a testament to how well it does work
820 2012-11-12 22:05:46 <jrmithdobbs> err satoshi dice's shit design
821 2012-11-12 22:06:00 <wizkid057> dont get me wrong, bitcoin is doing OK with it
822 2012-11-12 22:06:09 <wizkid057> but what if 5 more SD-like entities pop up?
823 2012-11-12 22:06:34 <jrmithdobbs> wizkid057: the SD guy has been asked to change how things work to play nicer and get the same results he does now, he's just a dick and is like "nope deal with it"
824 2012-11-12 22:06:37 <jrmithdobbs> (if you weren't aware)
825 2012-11-12 22:06:37 <gmaxwell> wizkid057: what if?
826 2012-11-12 22:06:54 <wizkid057> gmaxwell: more like when
827 2012-11-12 22:06:59 <gmaxwell> wizkid057: it can't make bitcoin any slower.
828 2012-11-12 22:07:00 <midnightmagic> wizkid057: it won't matter; the capacity for it is X, the suppliers don't matter.
829 2012-11-12 22:07:16 <midnightmagic> wizkid057: And in fact, others have already tried it and as far as I know that was the last we all heard of them.
830 2012-11-12 22:07:17 <wizkid057> not actual gambling things like SD
831 2012-11-12 22:07:19 <gmaxwell> wizkid057: it's already happened there are many unsccessful clones.
832 2012-11-12 22:07:24 <wizkid057> i mean entities with the volume of SD
833 2012-11-12 22:07:31 <wizkid057> not clones
834 2012-11-12 22:07:40 <jrmithdobbs> wizkid057: well, like luke mentioned, SD does more txns/day than visa net right now
835 2012-11-12 22:07:43 <jrmithdobbs> so that's pretty unlilkely
836 2012-11-12 22:07:54 <sipa> heh?
837 2012-11-12 22:07:57 <wizkid057> SD does not do more txns per day than visa....
838 2012-11-12 22:08:05 <wizkid057> lets clear that up now
839 2012-11-12 22:08:05 <wizkid057> lol
840 2012-11-12 22:08:23 <midnightmagic> wizkid057: The reward would need to be gambling-like and potentially large, or else people wouldn't DoS themselves.
841 2012-11-12 22:08:57 <wizkid057> midnightmagic: what if a company like Amazon.com decided they wanted to accept bitcoins?
842 2012-11-12 22:09:03 <jrmithdobbs> wizkid057: but they do due to their bad code?
843 2012-11-12 22:09:12 <jrmithdobbs> wizkid057: it'd handle it fine.
844 2012-11-12 22:09:30 <wizkid057> you're very optimistic ;)
845 2012-11-12 22:09:34 <midnightmagic> wizkid057: That would be fine, the amounts flowing would be large and not dust-like.
846 2012-11-12 22:09:46 <midnightmagic> wizkid057: The mines would be falling all over themselves to collect the fees.
847 2012-11-12 22:09:47 <wizkid057> i dont think the amounts matter
848 2012-11-12 22:10:11 <midnightmagic> The amounts do matter. If SD was purely largescale nobody would be bitching about it.
849 2012-11-12 22:10:15 <jrmithdobbs> wizkid057: SD really does more txns/day (not user-facing txns necessarily, but on the blockchain) than visa net, that's not an exageration :(
850 2012-11-12 22:10:17 <wizkid057> a txn that moves 1 satoshi can take up as much blockchain space as a txn that moves 100000 BTC
851 2012-11-12 22:10:38 <wizkid057> jrmithdobbs: how many txns per day do you think visa does?
852 2012-11-12 22:10:57 <midnightmagic> yes, but the fees would be greater, txn velocity would be greater, as a whole bitcoin would win.
853 2012-11-12 22:11:00 <gmaxwell> visa does zero bitcoin transactions per day. :P
854 2012-11-12 22:11:19 <gmaxwell> but wtf did you get this idea of visa a point of reference. Thats bonkers.
855 2012-11-12 22:11:19 <wizkid057> bitcoin's best day was somewhere near 60k transactions I think
856 2012-11-12 22:11:20 <jrmithdobbs> VisaNet authorizes, clears and settles an average of 130 million transactions per day in 200 countries and territories.
857 2012-11-12 22:11:27 <gmaxwell> wizkid057: what exactly are you going on about in any case?
858 2012-11-12 22:11:43 <wizkid057> gmaxwell: they're trying to tell me bitcoin can handle Visa's volume... lol
859 2012-11-12 22:12:01 <midnightmagic> wizkid057: Amazon also represents actual economic activity of physical-space goods, which would drive demand higher for bitcoin. i'm pretty sure people don't buy bitcoin just to gamble with sd.
860 2012-11-12 22:12:17 <gmaxwell> wizkid057: Why are you concerned that bitcoin is currently only 1000x realtime at its maximum volume?
861 2012-11-12 22:12:19 <midnightmagic> wizkid057: That's Luke-Jr saying that BTW.
862 2012-11-12 22:13:01 <wizkid057> midnightmagic: i wasn't refering to the added benefits of amazon being on board, i was refering to the network in general not being crippled under the volume
863 2012-11-12 22:13:31 <gmaxwell> wizkid057: Are you ignoring me because I'm trying to make you clarify what you mean with bullshit fud like "crippled under the volume"?
864 2012-11-12 22:13:32 <wizkid057> gmaxwell: i dont understand that statement...
865 2012-11-12 22:13:52 <midnightmagic> wizkid057: Well, you can speak in a hypothetical, but you'll have to describe an actual problematic hypothetical or else it's just imaginary right?
866 2012-11-12 22:13:54 <wizkid057> crippled under the volume? how is that not clear... heh
867 2012-11-12 22:14:00 <gmaxwell> wizkid057: the current software can validate the chain at something like 1000x realtime.
868 2012-11-12 22:14:32 <gmaxwell> wizkid057: stop trolling and go test current code. :P
869 2012-11-12 22:14:40 <wizkid057> everyone isnt running current code
870 2012-11-12 22:15:00 <wizkid057> hell, even the bitcoin website doesnt provide this current code :P
871 2012-11-12 22:15:03 <midnightmagic> people who buckle becaue theyre runing old code will upgrade.
872 2012-11-12 22:15:04 <gmaxwell> Yes sure. But only you going and testing the current stuff can solve that. :P
873 2012-11-12 22:16:30 <wizkid057> well, in any case
874 2012-11-12 22:16:51 <wizkid057> whats the theoretical maximum txns per day bitcoin can currently handle?
875 2012-11-12 22:16:52 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: is the bloomfilter stuff going to make .8 or is that decided yet?
876 2012-11-12 22:17:02 <sipa> jrmithdobbs: i hope it will
877 2012-11-12 22:17:06 <Cusipzzz> sd is a plague because the spam is not needed. the network handles it fine.
878 2012-11-12 22:17:07 <sipa> (and i'm not alone)
879 2012-11-12 22:17:09 <wizkid057> assuming all perfect tiny transactions
880 2012-11-12 22:17:19 <jrmithdobbs> sipa: i do too, just wondering how practical that hope is :P
881 2012-11-12 22:17:23 <gmaxwell> wizkid057: on the order of a half million or so. (somewhat more if you really talk about the smallest possible)
882 2012-11-12 22:17:42 <wizkid057> ok, so a long ways off from Visa :)
883 2012-11-12 22:17:53 <Cusipzzz> Visa pays better :p
884 2012-11-12 22:17:58 <wizkid057> that too
885 2012-11-12 22:17:59 <wizkid057> :P
886 2012-11-12 22:18:07 <gmaxwell> wizkid057: bitcoin is almost but not quite entirely unlike visa.
887 2012-11-12 22:18:19 <gmaxwell> (they are similar in that they transfer value between parties!)
888 2012-11-12 22:18:26 <jrmithdobbs> wizkid057: also it's semi-arbitrary since that's based on the current blocksize limit that can be changed
889 2012-11-12 22:18:31 <sipa> bitcoin is a currency; it is not a payment system
890 2012-11-12 22:18:37 <gmaxwell> jrmithdobbs: s/can/can't/
891 2012-11-12 22:18:37 <wizkid057> its both
892 2012-11-12 22:18:45 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: why can't it?
893 2012-11-12 22:18:54 <wizkid057> what good is a currency without a payment system of some kind? hehe
894 2012-11-12 22:18:58 <gmaxwell> jrmithdobbs: unless you want to say 21 million sum total btc can be changedâ it's exactly the same technical effort to change either.
895 2012-11-12 22:19:13 <sipa> wizkid057: it provides payments of the style of giving someone cash, in the digital world
896 2012-11-12 22:19:15 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: the 1M blocksize limit?
897 2012-11-12 22:19:30 <gmaxwell> wizkid057: it's a currency with a limited payment system, enough to make it usable. It's not a retail payment network and fundimentally can't be a good one.
898 2012-11-12 22:19:32 <wizkid057> sipa: physical cash is a payment system
899 2012-11-12 22:19:35 unknown45682 has joined
900 2012-11-12 22:19:36 <sipa> agree, it is
901 2012-11-12 22:19:47 <sipa> but it's a very rudimentary one
902 2012-11-12 22:20:14 <wizkid057> gmaxwell: if it cant be a good one, how am I ever going to buy stuff at walmart with bitcoins?!
903 2012-11-12 22:20:19 * wizkid057 cries
904 2012-11-12 22:20:21 <gmaxwell> wizkid057: using VISA!
905 2012-11-12 22:20:24 <jrmithdobbs> you probably wont
906 2012-11-12 22:20:29 <wizkid057> lol
907 2012-11-12 22:20:47 <jrmithdobbs> wizkid057: the 10 min inclusion time makes POS use pretty unlikely at any scale, ever
908 2012-11-12 22:20:54 <sipa> why would you want that? use bitcoin where it shines: international/digital transactions
909 2012-11-12 22:20:56 <wizkid057> that'd be interesting, if Visa starting allowing BTC currency exchanges
910 2012-11-12 22:21:06 <gmaxwell> Currency and payment network are not one in the same. We want very different things from a payment system, than we do from a currency.
911 2012-11-12 22:21:24 <sipa> jrmithdobbs: disagree completely
912 2012-11-12 22:21:32 <gmaxwell> wizkid057: even withtout the currency exchangeâ visa works in multiple currencies you know. there is no technical reason why bitcoin couldn't just be one of them.
913 2012-11-12 22:21:48 <wizkid057> jrmithdobbs: sipa: i happen to agree, heh
914 2012-11-12 22:21:53 <jrmithdobbs> sipa: ?
915 2012-11-12 22:22:00 <gmaxwell> (and if visa is too corporate for you, invoke ripple or open transactions or whatever)
916 2012-11-12 22:22:11 unknown45682 has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
917 2012-11-12 22:22:18 <wizkid057> gmaxwell: thats what I mean (about the multiple currencies)
918 2012-11-12 22:22:37 <sipa> jrmithdobbs: a merchant doesn't wait for confirmations (weeks? months?) for accepting your credit card payment
919 2012-11-12 22:22:50 <midnightmagic> huh. i didn't realise that amd cards don't come with error-correcting memory as an option. is this so?
920 2012-11-12 22:23:03 <sipa> and neither should you in bitcoin (as long as you are aware of the risks, and probably insured against them)
921 2012-11-12 22:23:18 <wizkid057> bitcoin reminds me of the ubiquitous "credit" in a lot of future-based scifi movies and books and such
922 2012-11-12 22:23:27 <jrmithdobbs> sipa: well ya, there's an intermediary that pre-auths (in most cases if the power's on anyways) and takes the majority of the risk
923 2012-11-12 22:23:43 <sipa> exactly
924 2012-11-12 22:23:55 <sipa> bitcoin is for clearing transactions where trust doesn't exist
925 2012-11-12 22:24:07 <jrmithdobbs> sipa: i meant it wont be used *directly* at POS most likely
926 2012-11-12 22:24:09 <gmaxwell> sipa: there is, of course, different degrees of confidence. Credit cards are reversable for months, but still less reversable than bitcoins are in the first 30 seconds. Most merchants (but not all) do wait for an ACK from the credit processor.
927 2012-11-12 22:24:21 <sipa> sure
928 2012-11-12 22:24:27 <sipa> it's not entirely comparable
929 2012-11-12 22:24:35 rdponticelli_ has joined
930 2012-11-12 22:24:35 <gmaxwell> I dunno the answers for that, we'll just see what people do.
931 2012-11-12 22:24:56 <Cusipzzz> people will eventually take 0conf txns for < 50$ or so, if there is demand
932 2012-11-12 22:25:01 <gmaxwell> I expect that for small value in person stuff they would just photocopy your ID and move on with life.
933 2012-11-12 22:25:19 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
934 2012-11-12 22:26:01 * wizkid057 double spends his latte purchase
935 2012-11-12 22:26:31 <Cusipzzz> wizkid057: they will make enough money on the rest not to worry
936 2012-11-12 22:26:39 <wizkid057> pfft
937 2012-11-12 22:26:49 <Luke-Jr> wizkid057: no, I'm trying to say that we have no metric to compare VISA and Bitcoin :p
938 2012-11-12 22:26:54 <wizkid057> i wonder how many visa chargebacks starbucks gets...
939 2012-11-12 22:27:07 <Cusipzzz> or use a bit-pay or equivalent to detect doublespends and will take the risk
940 2012-11-12 22:27:19 <Luke-Jr> because by the time Bitcoin has the same number of legit transactions as VISA, a lot will have changed in terms of adoption
941 2012-11-12 22:27:38 <helo> bitcoin being feasible for small valued purchases is a temporary thing
942 2012-11-12 22:27:47 <sipa> if that ever happens, i doubt you and i will be running a full node
943 2012-11-12 22:28:01 <wizkid057> should definitely hard fork and change the block header size, btw
944 2012-11-12 22:28:10 <Luke-Jr> â¦
945 2012-11-12 22:28:18 <wizkid057> yay for ASICs :P
946 2012-11-12 22:28:21 <sipa> the block *header* size?
947 2012-11-12 22:28:24 <sipa> wtf?
948 2012-11-12 22:28:36 <helo> block space competition will raise fees, raising the minimum amount bitcoin is useful for
949 2012-11-12 22:29:07 <wizkid057> well, it'd be fun to effectively kill ASIC mining
950 2012-11-12 22:29:38 <Cusipzzz> helo: good. micro transactions spammed are not viable. but a service provider can aggregate them, like via an account at SD, and use the chain only when needed
951 2012-11-12 22:29:39 <helo> i think it's safe to assume all bitcoin users will wait the full 6 confirms, and target that use case
952 2012-11-12 22:29:50 <wizkid057> if it even exists that is
953 2012-11-12 22:29:55 <sipa> wizkid057: i'll make sure i'm on some exotic island with a fake identity before I propose that
954 2012-11-12 22:30:06 <wizkid057> lol
955 2012-11-12 22:30:08 <sipa> wizkid057: don't want the ASIC industry's secret agents behind me
956 2012-11-12 22:30:44 <wizkid057> would be interesting if some bug was found which required a fix like that
957 2012-11-12 22:30:45 <helo> Cusipzzz: it'd be great to get paid in bitcoin, and cash out to local currency for short-term purchases
958 2012-11-12 22:30:57 <Luke-Jr> wizkid057: it'd kill Bitcoi
959 2012-11-12 22:30:57 <wizkid057> i'd laugh ;P
960 2012-11-12 22:30:58 <Cusipzzz> 6 confirms is flat earth voodoo...tired of hearing that. it should always be discussed as a scale
961 2012-11-12 22:30:59 <sipa> ;;bc,blocks
962 2012-11-12 22:30:59 <Luke-Jr> n
963 2012-11-12 22:30:59 <gribble> 207673
964 2012-11-12 22:31:15 <Cusipzzz> ;;halfreward
965 2012-11-12 22:31:17 <gribble> Estimated time of bitcoin block reward halving: Thu Nov 29 02:09:04 2012 UTC | Time remaining: 2 weeks, 2 days, 3 hours, 50 minutes, and 0 seconds.
966 2012-11-12 22:31:37 <wizkid057> Luke-Jr: why?
967 2012-11-12 22:31:44 TD has joined
968 2012-11-12 22:31:58 <wizkid057> because people don't know the risks in spending ooodles of money on specicialized hardware? heh
969 2012-11-12 22:32:14 <helo> 6 confirms is kind of an arbitrary level of confidence, but somewhat on the same level as 256-bit keys... it's effective
970 2012-11-12 22:32:38 <helo> wizkid057: botnet mining could >50% without asic/gpu mining
971 2012-11-12 22:32:41 Silverion has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
972 2012-11-12 22:32:45 <helo> particularly after asic has been ramped up
973 2012-11-12 22:32:47 <Cusipzzz> arbitrary indeed.
974 2012-11-12 22:33:02 <Luke-Jr> wizkid057: becasue Bitcoin depends on ASICs to secure it at this point
975 2012-11-12 22:33:43 Detritus has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
976 2012-11-12 22:34:10 <wizkid057> Luke-Jr: there are zero ASICs online
977 2012-11-12 22:34:14 <wizkid057> you're saying bitcoin is insecure?
978 2012-11-12 22:34:31 <Luke-Jr> wizkid057: there are 50 BTC subsidies
979 2012-11-12 22:34:41 <wizkid057> apples/oranges
980 2012-11-12 22:34:59 <sipa> both fruits!
981 2012-11-12 22:35:00 <Luke-Jr> wizkid057: we'll see in 2 weeks
982 2012-11-12 22:35:19 <wizkid057> there wont be an ASIC in a consumer hand in 2 weeks
983 2012-11-12 22:35:22 <wizkid057> so, i guess we will
984 2012-11-12 22:35:23 <wizkid057> hehe
985 2012-11-12 22:35:25 <Luke-Jr> I'm betting the GPUs going offline are going to bring Bitcoin to a near halt until ASICs arrive
986 2012-11-12 22:35:39 <Cusipzzz> cool, will bring back my CPU miners
987 2012-11-12 22:35:44 <Luke-Jr> â¦
988 2012-11-12 22:36:04 <wizkid057> if the amount of people mindlessly mining Eligius when it's down is any indication on how much people pay attention/care
989 2012-11-12 22:36:11 <wizkid057> i doubt we'll see a huge effect in 2 weeks
990 2012-11-12 22:36:23 <Luke-Jr> wizkid057: you're assuming they don't have automatic failover in place
991 2012-11-12 22:36:50 <sipa> very interesting that perhaps the introduction of asics and the subsidy halving coincide
992 2012-11-12 22:36:52 <wizkid057> i am, because a lot of the mining software (user agent) doesnt support it
993 2012-11-12 22:36:55 <sturles> How much is GPU and how much is FPGA nowadays?
994 2012-11-12 22:36:58 <Cusipzzz> people will not suddenly turn off gpu miners at block 210k, doesn't work that way. sure it may be slower til the next change, but meh
995 2012-11-12 22:37:23 <sipa> sturles: no idea
996 2012-11-12 22:37:28 <sipa> does anyone have a guess about that?
997 2012-11-12 22:37:43 <wizkid057> i predict, assuming no ASICs, that the difficulty will gradually drop
998 2012-11-12 22:37:56 <wizkid057> maybe 12 minute blocks instead of 10 for a while
999 2012-11-12 22:38:00 <Cusipzzz> very little fpga, mostly gpu currently
1000 2012-11-12 22:38:28 <wizkid057> like, i have no financial reason to turn off my GPUs
1001 2012-11-12 22:38:31 ovidiusoft has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1002 2012-11-12 22:38:39 <wizkid057> and i'm sure many others are in similar boats
1003 2012-11-12 22:38:48 <sturles> I am not going to swith my GPUs off. I may be mining at a loss measured in kWh/BTC, but I need the heat. It is still making more than a dumb resistor.
1004 2012-11-12 22:38:51 <sipa> i have no financial reason to turn off my FPGAs :p
1005 2012-11-12 22:38:58 paraipan_ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1006 2012-11-12 22:39:13 <sipa> sturles: would you heat using electricity otherwise?
1007 2012-11-12 22:39:18 <sturles> Yes.
1008 2012-11-12 22:39:24 unknown45682 has quit (2!~unknown45@pool-98-109-228-79.nwrknj.east.verizon.net|)
1009 2012-11-12 22:39:24 <sturles> Electricity is cheap.
1010 2012-11-12 22:39:29 <sturles> Hydro power.
1011 2012-11-12 22:39:33 <sipa> ha
1012 2012-11-12 22:39:38 <Cusipzzz> lucky
1013 2012-11-12 22:39:59 <sipa> well, where i'm from, electricity costs around $0.3/kWh (coverted)
1014 2012-11-12 22:40:06 <wizkid057> ouch
1015 2012-11-12 22:40:07 maqr has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1016 2012-11-12 22:40:17 <wizkid057> its about $0.16-18 here
1017 2012-11-12 22:40:19 <sipa> ok, rather 0.25
1018 2012-11-12 22:40:28 <wizkid057> but, free for me :D
1019 2012-11-12 22:40:58 <wizkid057> i'm surprised they didnt try to modify that portion of my lease when i renewed
1020 2012-11-12 22:41:34 paraipan has joined
1021 2012-11-12 22:41:55 <gmaxwell> <tinfoilhat>because the've been mining on the asic's for months and are only giving them to people at the halving</tinfoilhat>
1022 2012-11-12 22:42:05 <wizkid057> i need to find an efficient way to bottle up my kWh's and feed them into the grid at my parent's house or something
1023 2012-11-12 22:42:09 <wizkid057> make a few bucks
1024 2012-11-12 22:42:11 <wizkid057> :P
1025 2012-11-12 22:42:30 BlackPrapor has joined
1026 2012-11-12 22:42:38 <sturles> wizkid057: Buy a giant UPS! :-)
1027 2012-11-12 22:42:38 <sipa> gmaxwell: haha, nice one!
1028 2012-11-12 22:43:05 <Cusipzzz> gmaxwell: you give them too much credit...why give them to people..keep mining, move to costa rica, profit.
1029 2012-11-12 22:43:07 <wizkid057> sturles: probably not cost effective... lol
1030 2012-11-12 22:43:12 <sturles> wizkid057: Or a Tesla, and go visit them often. :-)
1031 2012-11-12 22:43:32 <wizkid057> sturles: i have a Volt already, lol
1032 2012-11-12 22:43:39 <sipa> 1 volt?
1033 2012-11-12 22:43:40 <sturles> :-D
1034 2012-11-12 22:43:49 <gmaxwell> Cusipzzz: cause it would undermine bitcoin's value if they got caught, the halving is a natural breakpoint.
1035 2012-11-12 22:43:50 <wizkid057> yup, 1 Chevy Volt
1036 2012-11-12 22:43:50 <wizkid057> :P
1037 2012-11-12 22:44:32 emryss has joined
1038 2012-11-12 22:45:15 <wizkid057> just so you all know, if I ever win the lottery (like, Mega Millions or something), I plan on 51% attacking bitcoin, then hiring all the devs to make something better.
1039 2012-11-12 22:45:16 <Cusipzzz> gmaxwell: if bfl going under hurts bitcoin value, bitcoin should already be at 0 from the other scams
1040 2012-11-12 22:46:27 <sipa> wizkid057: interesting, but why do you assume that if you make something even objectively significantly better in the technical sense, people would trust it, after trust in bitcoin was lost?
1041 2012-11-12 22:47:31 <wizkid057> sipa: who knows
1042 2012-11-12 22:47:33 <Cusipzzz> he could escrow $100 mil, and be the 'buyer of last resort' at $5 ea for 20mil coins, would give people confidence that they won't go to 0.
1043 2012-11-12 22:47:45 <wizkid057> we never will, because i'll never win the lottery
1044 2012-11-12 22:47:49 <wizkid057> so, no worries
1045 2012-11-12 22:47:50 <wizkid057> lol
1046 2012-11-12 22:47:51 sebicas has quit (Quit: sebicas)
1047 2012-11-12 22:48:56 <wizkid057> but yeah, i'd spend the $10M+ needed to make and mass produce a *real* mining ASIC, get at least 2x the network's hashrate worth, and go to town
1048 2012-11-12 22:49:22 <wizkid057> would be fun
1049 2012-11-12 22:49:22 <wizkid057> :)
1050 2012-11-12 22:50:11 <wizkid057> either that or I would do a hostile take over of satoshidice
1051 2012-11-12 22:50:22 <sipa> as in: using armed forces?
1052 2012-11-12 22:50:27 <wizkid057> nah
1053 2012-11-12 22:50:35 <wizkid057> orphan any block that contains a SD txn
1054 2012-11-12 22:50:37 <wizkid057> lol
1055 2012-11-12 22:50:49 <Luke-Jr> lol
1056 2012-11-12 22:53:10 maqr has joined
1057 2012-11-12 22:54:47 AlexWaters1 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1058 2012-11-12 22:55:11 AlexWaters has joined
1059 2012-11-12 22:56:55 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1060 2012-11-12 23:01:47 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
1061 2012-11-12 23:02:19 davout has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1062 2012-11-12 23:06:39 agricocb has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1063 2012-11-12 23:06:57 davout has joined
1064 2012-11-12 23:08:19 bitfoo has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1065 2012-11-12 23:11:13 <helo> how many current ~average transactions would fit in a block? 3000?
1066 2012-11-12 23:11:28 <helo> roughly, of course...
1067 2012-11-12 23:12:29 freakazoid has joined
1068 2012-11-12 23:13:25 guruvan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1069 2012-11-12 23:14:06 Garr255 has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1070 2012-11-12 23:14:07 guruvan_ is now known as guruvan
1071 2012-11-12 23:15:43 Garr255 has joined
1072 2012-11-12 23:15:43 Garr255 has quit (Changing host)
1073 2012-11-12 23:15:43 Garr255 has joined
1074 2012-11-12 23:20:16 D34TH has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1075 2012-11-12 23:20:52 guruvan- has joined
1076 2012-11-12 23:28:50 tucenaber has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1077 2012-11-12 23:41:47 agricocb has joined
1078 2012-11-12 23:41:49 c_k has joined
1079 2012-11-12 23:41:49 `2Fast2BCn has joined
1080 2012-11-12 23:41:50 agricocb has quit (Changing host)
1081 2012-11-12 23:41:50 agricocb has joined
1082 2012-11-12 23:42:12 tucenaber has joined
1083 2012-11-12 23:42:12 tucenaber has quit (Changing host)
1084 2012-11-12 23:42:13 tucenaber has joined
1085 2012-11-12 23:47:27 devrando1 has joined
1086 2012-11-12 23:48:19 devrandom has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1087 2012-11-12 23:48:26 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
1088 2012-11-12 23:50:12 * Luke-Jr hugs jgarzik for renaming methods when their behaviour changes (2306dc4)
1089 2012-11-12 23:52:59 robbak has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1090 2012-11-12 23:53:22 robbak has joined
1091 2012-11-12 23:53:41 copumpkin has joined
1092 2012-11-12 23:59:57 JZavala has joined