1 2013-01-03 00:03:40 <etotheipi_> sipa: gmaxwell: you were talking about undo data... would this be equivalent to "UTXO-tree diff data?"
2 2013-01-03 00:03:40 graingert has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
3 2013-01-03 00:04:40 <etotheipi_> so rather than representing it as "undo data", it would be "here's the full UTXOs that were removed since last block and the full UTXOs that were added"
4 2013-01-03 00:05:20 <etotheipi_> I guess it would be the same thing... I just think it should be "full-diff" data, useful for updating your tree between blocks, that happens to also work as "undo data"
5 2013-01-03 00:05:39 <sipa> well blocks are forward diffs
6 2013-01-03 00:05:56 <sipa> undo data is the part that is missing from blocks to have backward diffs
7 2013-01-03 00:06:57 <etotheipi_> well, I'm saying... just make it the data you need to go both forwards AND backwards, and it isn't really "undo data", it's "here's what you need to advance or rewind one block"
8 2013-01-03 00:07:38 <etotheipi_> perhaps it's more of a marketing distinction
9 2013-01-03 00:09:51 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@brwyatt.net|brwyatt
10 2013-01-03 00:10:43 <sipa> if you ahead behind, and i give you forward diff data, you can calculate the backward diff yourself
11 2013-01-03 00:10:50 <sipa> *are
12 2013-01-03 00:11:07 <sipa> if you are ahead, and i give you backward diff data, you can calculate the forward diff yourself
13 2013-01-03 00:11:33 <etotheipi_> my point is, why should those two be different?
14 2013-01-03 00:11:48 <etotheipi_> why not just have a single "packet" of data that has its hash included in coinbase script
15 2013-01-03 00:11:57 <sipa> what's the point?
16 2013-01-03 00:12:00 <etotheipi_> it serves all purposes
17 2013-01-03 00:12:19 <sipa> making it bidirectional makes it significantly larger, and you already have the forward diff anyway
18 2013-01-03 00:12:47 <etotheipi_> so there's no desire for nodes to be able to simply update their tree without downloading block data?
19 2013-01-03 00:13:29 <sipa> in general, i suppose you can distinguish 4 data classes: position data (txids, prevout txids + pos#), authentication data (txin scripts), forward diffs (txouts), backward diffs (txouts spent)
20 2013-01-03 00:13:43 <sipa> blocks contain all but the backward diffs
21 2013-01-03 00:13:45 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
22 2013-01-03 00:14:02 <sipa> undo files contain only the backward diffs (not the position data, which would make it standalone)
23 2013-01-03 00:14:32 <gavinandresen> sipa: your turbo-qt build is working perfectly
24 2013-01-03 00:14:37 <etotheipi_> for the same reason we're talking about blockchain compression on disk, this is blockchain compression on the network level (why send full blocks if a node only requests the minimal information?)
25 2013-01-03 00:15:04 <sipa> etotheipi_: yeah, the network side of things in a world where we have authenticated UTXO stuff... i haven't thought enough about that
26 2013-01-03 00:15:31 <sipa> right now, undo files for me is exactly what is needed to be able to do block disconnects when you already have the blocks themself
27 2013-01-03 00:15:46 <etotheipi_> I was pondering whether it would be possible to further extend the UTXO-trie technique for lite-nodes
28 2013-01-03 00:16:02 <etotheipi_> so they can not only get their balance, but update it with minimal download on each block
29 2013-01-03 00:16:21 <etotheipi_> if each block is 1 MB (or more, in the future), that's still a lot of data for a smartphone
30 2013-01-03 00:16:29 owowo has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
31 2013-01-03 00:16:47 <etotheipi_> and if that forward-diff data is structured in a tree, too, they might be able to request just address-specific forward-diff data from a peer
32 2013-01-03 00:16:49 <sipa> right, you want an efficiently-computable diff of a filtered view of the indexed UTXO set?
33 2013-01-03 00:17:03 <etotheipi_> with the same security
34 2013-01-03 00:17:22 <sipa> the security is independent, as they can check the resulting root merkle hash after updating
35 2013-01-03 00:17:30 owowo has joined
36 2013-01-03 00:17:50 owowo has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
37 2013-01-03 00:18:08 skeledrew has joined
38 2013-01-03 00:18:25 owowo has joined
39 2013-01-03 00:18:51 <sipa> gavinandresen: great
40 2013-01-03 00:18:53 <etotheipi_> it's not independent... the node needs to be able to know that it's little diff-branch is valid without downloading all transactions
41 2013-01-03 00:19:43 <sipa> etotheipi_: right, i'm just seeing it as a diff between two authenticated (=with merkle hashes) trees
42 2013-01-03 00:19:59 <sipa> etotheipi_: the diff would contain the merkle data for added tree nodes
43 2013-01-03 00:20:32 rdymac has joined
44 2013-01-03 00:20:37 graingert has joined
45 2013-01-03 00:20:37 graingert has quit (Changing host)
46 2013-01-03 00:20:37 graingert has joined
47 2013-01-03 00:28:48 <etotheipi_> sipa: how about this: the forward diff data and backward diff data is stored in two different "branches" ... it's trivial for miners to include both, and nodes only have to download the branch that they want
48 2013-01-03 00:29:02 <etotheipi_> (and the root hash of the other)
49 2013-01-03 00:29:36 rdymac has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
50 2013-01-03 00:29:55 rdymac has joined
51 2013-01-03 00:30:13 <sipa> etotheipi_: not sure, but i think you're confusing things
52 2013-01-03 00:31:12 <sipa> etotheipi_: if a light client wants to get a diff between two filtered UTXO trees (the one he has, and the one he wants), just send the diff (list of added/removed nodes in the tree)... if the tree is authenticated, the resulting oen will be as well
53 2013-01-03 00:31:38 <sipa> etotheipi_: doesn't even matter whether they are on the same chain or not
54 2013-01-03 00:31:53 <etotheipi_> sipa: but the goal is to not have to redownload all the authentication data for the new true
55 2013-01-03 00:32:08 <etotheipi_> if you're doing that, you don't need the diff data
56 2013-01-03 00:32:12 <etotheipi_> *new tree
57 2013-01-03 00:32:54 <sipa> well if some subtrees didn't change, you don't need to download anything for those subtrees... data nor merkle hashes
58 2013-01-03 00:34:32 pooler has joined
59 2013-01-03 00:34:52 <sipa> etotheipi_: i'm trying to see what you want to achieve
60 2013-01-03 00:35:05 tradefortress has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
61 2013-01-03 00:35:34 <etotheipi_> sipa: minimizing the amount of data that the litest of nodes needs to advance its state
62 2013-01-03 00:36:19 <sipa> so you want to have forward/backward diff data, that is by itself authenticated AND indexed?
63 2013-01-03 00:36:32 <sipa> so you can select subsets of it in an indexed way
64 2013-01-03 00:36:36 <sipa> that doesn't lose authentication
65 2013-01-03 00:36:55 <sipa> you're going to push one hell of a computation to miners!
66 2013-01-03 00:37:12 <sipa> and verified by every node
67 2013-01-03 00:37:33 mmoya_ has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
68 2013-01-03 00:37:55 <sipa> etotheipi_: i'm not sure i like the idea of indexing the same data in multiple ways
69 2013-01-03 00:38:08 <sipa> i think blocks should just commit to the state they cause
70 2013-01-03 00:38:37 <sipa> if someone wants diffs between (subsets of) state, compute the diff between the subtrees of state
71 2013-01-03 00:38:44 btcven has joined
72 2013-01-03 00:39:26 rdymac has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
73 2013-01-03 00:39:27 <sipa> committing to the undo data is not for lightweight client access, it's to prevent nodes from getting stuck (in a pre-indexed-UTXO-tree world)
74 2013-01-03 00:39:58 <sipa> but i'm a bit too tired now to think clearly about this, i think
75 2013-01-03 00:40:30 darsk1ez has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
76 2013-01-03 00:46:31 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: the stuck issue is this: Say you're all pruned up, and a reorg comes and you need to reverse to get back on the right track. You need to get the undo data again to roll back. It would be nice if you could get it and also not degrade the security model at all just because you were pruned.
77 2013-01-03 00:47:03 <sipa> yeah, so this is for "fully validating, archiveless nodes"
78 2013-01-03 00:49:04 darsk1ez has joined
79 2013-01-03 00:49:18 vampireb has joined
80 2013-01-03 00:50:32 graingert has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
81 2013-01-03 00:53:42 <etotheipi_> sipa: gmaxwell: I'm not discounting/doubting the usefulness of the "undo" data, I'm pointing out that it takes very little effort to simultaneously communicate forward diffs as well, which will open up avenues for much lighter devices
82 2013-01-03 00:54:20 swulf-- has joined
83 2013-01-03 00:55:33 <sipa> etotheipi_: no, you want it to be indexable, constructed into a tree, and merkleized
84 2013-01-03 00:56:52 swulf--1 has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
85 2013-01-03 00:56:55 <etotheipi_> well, I was pointing out that if it was that (which is trivial computationally), then it's also trivial to add an extra branch at the top level to include forward data that maybe no one downloads, but it cost you basically nothing to produce it
86 2013-01-03 00:57:21 btcven has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
87 2013-01-03 00:57:36 <sipa> *everyone* would download it
88 2013-01-03 00:57:47 <sipa> well, no, not download, but at least construct
89 2013-01-03 00:57:51 <etotheipi_> sipa: no, they can produce that themselves
90 2013-01-03 00:57:56 <sipa> agree
91 2013-01-03 00:58:01 <etotheipi_> only lite-nodes would download it
92 2013-01-03 00:58:08 BTCOxygen has quit (Changing host)
93 2013-01-03 00:58:08 BTCOxygen has joined
94 2013-01-03 00:58:12 <etotheipi_> and you're then sending them 2 kB instead of 1 MB
95 2013-01-03 00:58:24 <etotheipi_> well, maybe not that little, but yo uget the point
96 2013-01-03 00:58:54 <BTCOxygen> Luke-Jr: Hi
97 2013-01-03 00:58:58 <BTCOxygen> Luke-Jr: Are you here?
98 2013-01-03 00:59:18 <etotheipi_> it potentially reduces network bandwidth, and gives lite nodes a chance to keep up without downloading full blocks
99 2013-01-03 01:00:05 <etotheipi_> %s/bandwidth/traffic
100 2013-01-03 01:00:50 <BTCOxygen> etotheipi_: Yeah, when it comes to 3G,4G connection bandwidth matters
101 2013-01-03 01:00:51 <etotheipi_> or some gray-area-of-nodes to update their own full- or partial-trees with less data xfer
102 2013-01-03 01:01:08 <sipa> etotheipi_: yes, perhaps
103 2013-01-03 01:01:25 <sipa> etotheipi_: not sure whether it's a use case meaningful to optimize for
104 2013-01-03 01:01:41 <sipa> etotheipi_: in any case, not for any time soon... :)
105 2013-01-03 01:01:51 <BTCOxygen> Luke-Jr: Please send me a PM when you get here
106 2013-01-03 01:01:53 <etotheipi_> sipa: what's the real cost of it?
107 2013-01-03 01:02:08 <sipa> etotheipi_: requiring the world of full nodes to validate it
108 2013-01-03 01:02:30 <BTCOxygen> etotheipi_: 4G comes with 10GB of bandwidth per month
109 2013-01-03 01:02:32 <etotheipi_> that validation is negligible compared to everything else
110 2013-01-03 01:02:38 btcven has joined
111 2013-01-03 01:02:57 <BTCOxygen> currently downloading the whole blockchain will take 40% of the bandwidth
112 2013-01-03 01:02:59 <sipa> etotheipi_: perhaps
113 2013-01-03 01:03:23 <etotheipi_> the cost-to-benefit seems staggering, to me
114 2013-01-03 01:03:58 <etotheipi_> just keep it in mind...
115 2013-01-03 01:04:15 graingert has joined
116 2013-01-03 01:10:34 <Scrat> will ultraprune nodes keep growing at the same rate as it grows now? or will it only log transactions for addresses in the wallet
117 2013-01-03 01:10:52 <sipa> Scrat: forget that name, it is confusing
118 2013-01-03 01:11:09 <sipa> a full node serves the block chain, so it needs the block chain data
119 2013-01-03 01:11:50 <Scrat> my face http://thejesuscodpiece.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/azzht.jpg
120 2013-01-03 01:12:37 <sipa> what "ultraprune" does is change the database and validation engine to be a lot faster, and need less memory to be fast
121 2013-01-03 01:13:33 <sipa> it also permits a model where a node does not store the block chain itself anymore, but that's isn't implemented yet
122 2013-01-03 01:14:21 andytoshi has quit (Quit: "My filesystem is read-only...something awful has probably happened. Gonna reboot to fix it.")
123 2013-01-03 01:14:25 <Scrat> so in theory you would benefit from deleting the database and starting over every once in a while. assuming you dont want to waste gigs and the transactions per block keep growing
124 2013-01-03 01:14:55 <sipa> no, no
125 2013-01-03 01:15:01 <Scrat> ok I;m dumb
126 2013-01-03 01:15:23 <sipa> currently, the client stores the block chain + a database that stores where every transaction can be found in that block chain, and which outputs were already spent
127 2013-01-03 01:15:41 <sipa> that block chain is the blk000?.dat files; that database is blkindex.dat
128 2013-01-03 01:16:35 <sipa> in 0.8, we'll still have the blk000?.dat files (with a slightly different name, and in a subdir, but that isn't very important), and another type of database: one that only stores the unspent transaction outputs in the current state
129 2013-01-03 01:17:04 <sipa> that other database is currently around 150 MB is size
130 2013-01-03 01:17:16 <sipa> and it's all you need to validate transactions and blocks
131 2013-01-03 01:17:43 <sipa> but it still downloads full blocks
132 2013-01-03 01:17:49 <jine> sipa: Will that improve the verification-speed of blocks?
133 2013-01-03 01:17:56 <sipa> jine: very significantly
134 2013-01-03 01:18:00 MiningBuddy has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
135 2013-01-03 01:18:01 <jine> Cause afaik that's what takes most of the cpu/iops currently.
136 2013-01-03 01:18:11 MiningBuddy has joined
137 2013-01-03 01:18:11 MiningBuddy has quit (Changing host)
138 2013-01-03 01:18:11 MiningBuddy has joined
139 2013-01-03 01:18:35 <jine> Which seems to be the major limitation as of now. I'm on 250/100mbit with gbit against a few of my own nodes, on a fast SSD-disk - and it still takes ages to verify blocks :/
140 2013-01-03 01:19:01 <jine> sipa: Sounds good then :)
141 2013-01-03 01:19:22 <sipa> jine: i can reverify the entire chain (if i disable signature checking, which is 2 orders of magnitude slower than the rest, and the bottleneck after the last checkpoint) in 10 minutes or so on my laptop
142 2013-01-03 01:19:29 <Scrat> ok sipa. so how much does 0.8 fully synced up and started from clean slate weigh right now
143 2013-01-03 01:19:48 Impaler has joined
144 2013-01-03 01:20:13 <jine> sipa: Ah, i c.
145 2013-01-03 01:20:14 <sipa> Scrat: 5.2 GB
146 2013-01-03 01:20:51 andytoshi has joined
147 2013-01-03 01:21:18 <jine> Scrat: about 600mb less then.
148 2013-01-03 01:21:23 ByteUnit has joined
149 2013-01-03 01:21:59 <sipa> 5375800 KiB to be precise
150 2013-01-03 01:22:02 <Scrat> the mode where it just stores the balance would be awesome
151 2013-01-03 01:22:05 <Scrat> oh shit I said balance
152 2013-01-03 01:22:07 <jine> sipa: But that doesn't make sense, if we're going to replace blkindex with something that's ~150mb
153 2013-01-03 01:22:08 Skav has joined
154 2013-01-03 01:22:10 * Scrat wears chain mail
155 2013-01-03 01:22:15 <sipa> jine: nice catch
156 2013-01-03 01:22:17 <jine> As blkindex currently is about 1.5GB.
157 2013-01-03 01:22:24 <sipa> jine: there's also something called 'undo data'
158 2013-01-03 01:22:37 <sipa> jine: which is necessary to disconnect blocks
159 2013-01-03 01:22:45 <Scrat> "unspent coins" :p
160 2013-01-03 01:22:45 <jine> I seriously need to start reading the backlog in this channel + the mailing list :D
161 2013-01-03 01:22:55 <sipa> as the database only stores the current state, and not the history
162 2013-01-03 01:22:56 <jine> sipa: Ah, i c.
163 2013-01-03 01:23:39 <sipa> undo data is around 8 times smaller than the actual blocks
164 2013-01-03 01:23:51 <sipa> and is really only needed for reorganisation
165 2013-01-03 01:23:58 Skav is now known as MobPhone
166 2013-01-03 01:24:39 <sipa> Scrat: having nodes that don't store history isn't a technical problem (it's hardly more than just deleting the block files, in the current code), but there could be repercussions on the network
167 2013-01-03 01:25:00 <sipa> Scrat: as it means new nodes would need a way to find peers that do have history, which won't be just any peer
168 2013-01-03 01:25:11 <Scrat> yeah indeed
169 2013-01-03 01:25:54 <jine> Which in the end would more or less centralize the entire network.
170 2013-01-03 01:26:16 <jine> A few super-nodes with history, and the rest being dummy-clients just trusting them.
171 2013-01-03 01:26:25 <jine> Not so great imo. :)
172 2013-01-03 01:26:26 <sipa> ah, there you're wrong
173 2013-01-03 01:26:27 <etotheipi_> I'm not sure it's exactly like that
174 2013-01-03 01:26:38 <sipa> they don't need to trust the archive nodes at all
175 2013-01-03 01:26:51 <Scrat> jine: well, when the blockchain approaches the TB mark. what then?
176 2013-01-03 01:26:56 <jine> They don't?
177 2013-01-03 01:27:05 <jine> Scrat: By then, lets hope we have cheaper storage? ;)
178 2013-01-03 01:27:07 <sipa> we're still talking about fully validating nodes
179 2013-01-03 01:27:17 <jine> sipa: Ah, my bad then, sorry.
180 2013-01-03 01:27:18 <sipa> they just don't remember history
181 2013-01-03 01:27:43 <sipa> there are other models of course
182 2013-01-03 01:27:44 <Scrat> it will be cheaper for sure. just not following "moore's law"
183 2013-01-03 01:28:06 <sipa> you have SPV nodes, even right now, which don't validate the block data, only block headers
184 2013-01-03 01:28:08 <Scrat> but it will be bigger than anything else you can install on your computer
185 2013-01-03 01:28:15 <etotheipi_> if Bitcoin is still around in 50 years, then nearly every node will be one of these "pruned" nodes
186 2013-01-03 01:28:24 <etotheipi_> they can still do complete validation
187 2013-01-03 01:28:31 <etotheipi_> gracefully forgetting the past as they go
188 2013-01-03 01:28:49 <etotheipi_> and there will be a few nodes that still archive it for various reasons
189 2013-01-03 01:28:57 <etotheipi_> (historians, probably)
190 2013-01-03 01:29:13 <Scrat> well yeah sipa I thought that ultraprune only referred to that (the node that doesn't store history). thanks for the explanation
191 2013-01-03 01:30:07 <Scrat> I mistakenly thought*
192 2013-01-03 01:31:07 <sipa> yeah, that's why i stopped using that name :)
193 2013-01-03 01:34:23 vampireb has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
194 2013-01-03 01:35:13 aethero has joined
195 2013-01-03 01:35:19 <aethero> Anyone looking for some bounties?
196 2013-01-03 01:36:47 <aethero> https://www.ziggap.com <--- Hack it. Get coins. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=134386
197 2013-01-03 01:37:07 <dparrish> please do
198 2013-01-03 01:37:08 <jine> aethero: Seems illegal.
199 2013-01-03 01:37:22 <dparrish> nah it's legit ;)
200 2013-01-03 01:37:25 <dparrish> even the frontpage says so
201 2013-01-03 01:37:28 <dparrish> cause i added that text to it
202 2013-01-03 01:37:41 <jine> SÃ¥ wait, 10 BTC for each "string"?
203 2013-01-03 01:37:46 <jine> so*
204 2013-01-03 01:37:48 <jine> Whatever that is.
205 2013-01-03 01:37:56 * jine gets to work.
206 2013-01-03 01:38:07 <dparrish> yeah they're hidden in places like root's homedir on the servers and in the database
207 2013-01-03 01:38:17 <aethero> No hints parrish :)
208 2013-01-03 01:38:20 <dparrish> there was one that was just text on the ToS page, but that got found quickly
209 2013-01-03 01:38:33 <dparrish> no hints? boo!
210 2013-01-03 01:38:39 MobPhone has quit (Quit: -a-)
211 2013-01-03 01:38:53 <dparrish> ok they're in totally different places to what i just said :p
212 2013-01-03 01:40:50 <jine> I haven't found anything except poor settings so far. :D
213 2013-01-03 01:41:08 <dparrish> poor settings?
214 2013-01-03 01:41:10 <dparrish> tell me omre
215 2013-01-03 01:41:11 <dparrish> more
216 2013-01-03 01:42:32 <lianj> whats the point about auditing if you know the wholes?
217 2013-01-03 01:42:44 <jine> For one, invest a few hours in setting up IDS, blocking external SSH, disabling nginx-version, adding HSTS-header and setup a firewall to block obvious portscans.
218 2013-01-03 01:43:12 <jine> That will fight off a lot of the skiddes.
219 2013-01-03 01:43:48 <jine> Disabling external SSH and similar is a good way to (start) protecting against 0-day sploits.
220 2013-01-03 01:44:27 <dparrish> yeah i will, but right now I *want* people to find vulnerabilities
221 2013-01-03 01:44:39 <dparrish> HSTS header is good one though, i'll do that
222 2013-01-03 01:44:45 <dparrish> and ngnix-version
223 2013-01-03 01:45:00 <jine> Well, if you want to *help* me find vulns, please PM me your root-pwd? ;P
224 2013-01-03 01:45:04 <dparrish> but at the moment, ssh is staying open cause if someone finds a vulnerability there, I want to know about it :)
225 2013-01-03 01:45:08 <dparrish> root pw? i've got no idea
226 2013-01-03 01:45:10 <dparrish> i don't use passwords
227 2013-01-03 01:45:23 <dparrish> key auth only
228 2013-01-03 01:45:35 <jine> Then turn off pwd-auth in sshd.
229 2013-01-03 01:45:36 <jine> :)
230 2013-01-03 01:45:46 <jine> sshd_config to be more precise.
231 2013-01-03 01:45:50 <dparrish> yeah ok :)
232 2013-01-03 01:46:05 <jine> I haven't found anything but poor configuration and settings so far, as i said :P
233 2013-01-03 01:46:18 <jine> I usualy get paid to search, not paid to find :(
234 2013-01-03 01:46:30 <dparrish> heh
235 2013-01-03 01:46:53 <lianj> m(
236 2013-01-03 01:47:08 <dparrish> I *think* we're going to get an external audit done of the code after this bounty phase
237 2013-01-03 01:47:16 <aethero> Yup.
238 2013-01-03 01:47:18 <aethero> We are.
239 2013-01-03 01:47:40 <dparrish> i gtg, back in a few hours
240 2013-01-03 01:48:25 <jine> dparrish: You should.
241 2013-01-03 01:52:06 <jine> Turn on 2-fact auth on your google account to :)
242 2013-01-03 01:54:23 <etotheipi_> sipa: I have no idea if this is persuasive to you, but it most certainly matters for my address-indexed UTXO trees
243 2013-01-03 01:54:23 btcven has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
244 2013-01-03 01:54:24 <jine> Both the @ziggap.com account and the @gmail.com account used as an alt-address.
245 2013-01-03 01:55:01 <etotheipi_> sipa: I just realized that even if I wanted to redownload all the new authentication data for my wallet and redownload all the UTXOs (which is a small download, btw), that's a privacy issue
246 2013-01-03 01:55:50 <etotheipi_> however, if I only do it once, and then simply transition my states from new block data, then I only reveal my addresses the first time I download (which may have been a while ago)
247 2013-01-03 01:56:12 <sipa> etotheipi_: but you were just talking about address-indexed diffs!
248 2013-01-03 01:56:25 <sipa> so you'd have to ask for diffs for particular addresses
249 2013-01-03 01:56:40 <etotheipi_> sipa: yes, I was just talking about that
250 2013-01-03 01:56:48 <etotheipi_> and I'm taking a step back/compromise
251 2013-01-03 01:57:05 <sipa> i should learn to read
252 2013-01-03 01:57:17 <etotheipi_> if instead you just have a two node merkle tree: hash(forwarddata)||hash(backwarddata)
253 2013-01-03 01:57:33 <etotheipi_> then you don't need to do any merkle stuff for that
254 2013-01-03 01:57:35 <etotheipi_> it remains simple
255 2013-01-03 01:57:43 <etotheipi_> but you do enable bulk downloads of just the forward diff data
256 2013-01-03 01:57:57 <etotheipi_> so that lite nodes can update themselves with a fraction of the download, if they don't want to compromise privacy
257 2013-01-03 01:58:10 <sipa> i'm not following
258 2013-01-03 01:58:24 <etotheipi_> my point is that I'm using a lite node because I don't want to download a lot of data
259 2013-01-03 01:58:36 <etotheipi_> downloading 1 MB every 10 min is a lot of data
260 2013-01-03 01:58:45 btcven has joined
261 2013-01-03 01:58:51 <sipa> how can a lite node not compromise privacy if it needs to query an address-indexed datastructure remotely?
262 2013-01-03 01:59:09 <etotheipi_> sipa: it only needs to access that address-indexed structure once, a long time ago
263 2013-01-03 01:59:24 <sipa> ok, so you're talking about non-indexed forward diff data
264 2013-01-03 01:59:33 <etotheipi_> it can then "follow the blockchain" afterwards for a fraction of the full block data
265 2013-01-03 01:59:40 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
266 2013-01-03 01:59:42 <etotheipi_> yes
267 2013-01-03 01:59:57 da2ce7_d is now known as da2ce7
268 2013-01-03 01:59:58 <etotheipi_> I can synchronize once every night at home
269 2013-01-03 02:00:10 <sipa> "a fraction" here means something like 1/6
270 2013-01-03 02:00:12 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
271 2013-01-03 02:00:15 <etotheipi_> is it?
272 2013-01-03 02:00:30 da2ce7 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
273 2013-01-03 02:00:31 <etotheipi_> for some reason I thought it would be more...
274 2013-01-03 02:00:34 <sipa> it means the entire block without txin scripts
275 2013-01-03 02:00:47 <sipa> you need prevouts, txouts, txids
276 2013-01-03 02:01:10 <etotheipi_> err... less
277 2013-01-03 02:01:21 <sipa> how so?
278 2013-01-03 02:01:27 <sipa> ah :D
279 2013-01-03 02:01:32 <etotheipi_> heh
280 2013-01-03 02:01:47 <sipa> i thought you were claiming you needed less
281 2013-01-03 02:01:55 da2ce7 has joined
282 2013-01-03 02:02:23 * sipa .sleep();
283 2013-01-03 02:02:42 <etotheipi_> sipa: well still think about it
284 2013-01-03 02:02:47 <etotheipi_> I think it 's worth it
285 2013-01-03 02:02:50 <etotheipi_> definitely worth considering
286 2013-01-03 02:03:32 <sipa> etotheipi_: i agree it may be worth considering, but certainly not for this use case
287 2013-01-03 02:04:21 <etotheipi_> sipa: but if you're going to go through the effort of adding blockchain validation rules (like requiring correct undo data digest in coinbase), then you might as well cover current and future usecases
288 2013-01-03 02:04:26 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
289 2013-01-03 02:04:46 gjs278 has joined
290 2013-01-03 02:04:50 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: thats not actually what he's talking about right now.
291 2013-01-03 02:05:05 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: I thought that was the ultimate goal of it
292 2013-01-03 02:05:23 <gmaxwell> AFAIK sipa's current concern is the on disk format for the undo data, as he didn't want a format which precluded network transmission of it.
293 2013-01-03 02:05:26 <etotheipi_> sipa: go to sleep, I'll bug gmaxwell about it
294 2013-01-03 02:05:28 <etotheipi_> :)
295 2013-01-03 02:06:56 <sipa> etotheipi_: you're proposing several things (forward and backward data, indexed in a tree or not, merkleized or not), and several use cases that use several combinations
296 2013-01-03 02:07:23 caedes has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
297 2013-01-03 02:07:52 <sipa> etotheipi_: if you're going to push for all combinations that may be useful at some point, it's going to cost more than just trying to cover the cases where it actually may give a significant advantage (sorry, a constant factor compressed on-the-wire is hardly worth it, imho)
298 2013-01-03 02:08:52 <etotheipi_> sipa: it's not all combinations... it's accommodating a use case that's clearly, feasibly useful
299 2013-01-03 02:09:09 <sipa> etotheipi_: if you only have a merkleized indexed forward diff (which is already duplication), and go for the use case you present here, they'll need to download the prevouts/txouts/txids data + address index + tree overhead + merkle data; i'm not even sure that will be smaller than the original block in the first place
300 2013-01-03 02:09:32 <sipa> so you do need a different version of the system for the use case you described now, w.r.t the one you described earlier
301 2013-01-03 02:09:45 <gmaxwell> I think the thinking that got us to this discussion: We need validation of the utxo database to prevent silent failure. One way to do that would be to undo and redo the last N blocks at start, if the db is broken we'll likely discover that for enough N. But for that we need to know if the undo data is reliable, it ought to have a checksum/hash. If it has one it would be good if that hash could be shared over the network and potentially commit
302 2013-01-03 02:10:01 <gmaxwell> Out of that very narrow use case, you're talking about boiling the oceans by comparison. :)
303 2013-01-03 02:10:56 <etotheipi_> sipa: I see your point about a constant factor of 1/6... but is that not useful nonetheless?
304 2013-01-03 02:11:01 <etotheipi_> the cost seems absolutely trivial
305 2013-01-03 02:11:15 <gmaxwell> on a related subject, my confidence in the viability of committed utxo sets is also starting to falter generally. :( My thinking previously was that they could be made close enough to free (other than software complexity) that they've be viable as enforced network rules and thus trustworthy.
306 2013-01-03 02:11:30 grau has joined
307 2013-01-03 02:11:33 EPiSKiNG- has joined
308 2013-01-03 02:11:55 EPiSKiNG- has quit (Client Quit)
309 2013-01-03 02:12:03 <etotheipi_> I'm not connecting to your previous comment... downloading an address-indexed DB is not part of this discussion -- whether you're operating with a full chain, lite chain, gray-node partial chain.... it's still 83% compression of data to transfer
310 2013-01-03 02:12:13 EPiSKiNG- has joined
311 2013-01-03 02:12:31 <etotheipi_> I mean, it's not specific to address-indexed DB... it could be any lite/pruned node
312 2013-01-03 02:12:54 <gmaxwell> But on further reflection I realized that the UTXO set canâ in theoryâ by partitioned fixed size hash tables that have almost no overhead and O(1) lookup near O(1) updates. No merkelized structure can be anywhere near as cheap.
313 2013-01-03 02:13:46 <sipa> etotheipi_: someone who maintains a fully validating node, needs the full blocks anyway
314 2013-01-03 02:13:51 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: I don't follow
315 2013-01-03 02:13:52 TwilightSparklee has joined
316 2013-01-03 02:13:52 <gmaxwell> especially if you wanted things like address ordered structure _and_ txid ordered structure. I don't know that making full nodes much much more expensive to run fundimentally can be justified by making semifull nodes possible. :(
317 2013-01-03 02:15:17 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: I agree it won't be free for the full-node to operate it
318 2013-01-03 02:15:28 <etotheipi_> but I think the benefit is epic, and shared by all nodes
319 2013-01-03 02:16:14 <sipa> etotheipi_: talking about an at-most-constant-factor benefit for some hypothetical mode of operation in some future, with unclear ideas about the priorities and problems at that point... no
320 2013-01-03 02:16:20 <etotheipi_> new users no longer have to compromise between security and convenience... you can now import a new wallet with 100 address for 250kB download
321 2013-01-03 02:16:40 <etotheipi_> sipa: I don't see why it's hypothetical
322 2013-01-03 02:16:45 <sipa> etotheipi_: inho, a new user shouldn't need to import a wallet in the first placwe
323 2013-01-03 02:16:47 <gmaxwell> Even a constant factor inefficiency isn't bad, but this isn't a constant factor cost. It turns things from O(1) ish time complexity into O(ln txouts)*(constant factor) time complexity.
324 2013-01-03 02:16:57 <sipa> he creates a new wallet, and perhaps sends some coins to it
325 2013-01-03 02:17:26 <sipa> etotheipi_: that's what i mean by hypothetical
326 2013-01-03 02:17:32 <etotheipi_> sipa: you no longer has to search the blockchain for your transactions
327 2013-01-03 02:17:46 <etotheipi_> you don't have to worry about missing things between booting (unless you consider my privacy issue and download diff data instead)
328 2013-01-03 02:18:03 <sipa> etotheipi_: yes, that's a measly benefit if nobody needs to search the blockchain in the first place
329 2013-01-03 02:18:10 <sipa> not saying it's one way or another
330 2013-01-03 02:18:13 <sipa> i don't know the future
331 2013-01-03 02:18:24 <sipa> i'm just saying that we don't know how things will be used in the future
332 2013-01-03 02:19:10 <gmaxwell> sipa: you should sleep.
333 2013-01-03 02:19:17 <sipa> yeah :p
334 2013-01-03 02:19:19 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: technically, if you're using a trie-based structure, it's O(1)
335 2013-01-03 02:19:31 <grau> may i jump in guys ?
336 2013-01-03 02:19:33 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: storage, not access latency.
337 2013-01-03 02:19:37 <etotheipi_> oh
338 2013-01-03 02:20:00 <etotheipi_> so it's O(NlogN) instead of O(N)
339 2013-01-03 02:20:54 skeledrew has joined
340 2013-01-03 02:21:04 <gmaxwell> For N operations, yea. well N log M (M being the txo set size) vs O(N) (plus constant factors)
341 2013-01-03 02:21:22 <etotheipi_> what's up, grau?
342 2013-01-03 02:21:48 <grau> i should also better sleep, but wake up with the question you might be able to answer
343 2013-01-03 02:21:55 <grau> should i continue?
344 2013-01-03 02:22:03 <gmaxwell> We'll be here later too.
345 2013-01-03 02:22:05 <grau> with what I did
346 2013-01-03 02:22:42 <grau> i spent most of my free time a bit of my health and a lot of my family on this for months
347 2013-01-03 02:22:56 <grau> i received lots of headwind and learned a lot
348 2013-01-03 02:23:10 <grau> now i am asking if is should continue...
349 2013-01-03 02:23:45 <gmaxwell> grau: people seem interested in your workâ that said, holy crap, don't let working on anything bitcoin adversely impact your health!
350 2013-01-03 02:23:55 <etotheipi_> grau, I can sympathize a bit
351 2013-01-03 02:24:06 <etotheipi_> but it's mostly just "family", not so much health
352 2013-01-03 02:24:09 btcven has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
353 2013-01-03 02:24:43 <etotheipi_> I don't know exactly what you're discomforts are, but if it's rewarding for you, do it
354 2013-01-03 02:24:59 <etotheipi_> my own advice on it is this: I have spent tons of time on Armory
355 2013-01-03 02:25:14 <etotheipi_> and I'm constantly anxious to fix every bug and implement every feature directly in front of me
356 2013-01-03 02:25:24 <etotheipi_> and I neglect my (now-)fiance
357 2013-01-03 02:25:38 <etotheipi_> and don't visit my parents as much as I should
358 2013-01-03 02:25:59 <grau> thanks a lot
359 2013-01-03 02:26:02 <etotheipi_> two things changed that (1) Talking to them about it -- they know I'm an OCD kinda person and I'm doing something I like, we compromise
360 2013-01-03 02:26:31 <grau> bye
361 2013-01-03 02:26:33 <etotheipi_> (2) I realized that these things actually aren't critical... that feature I could change in 1 hour... it can wait a day or two and really no one will be affected
362 2013-01-03 02:26:45 grau has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
363 2013-01-03 02:26:57 <etotheipi_> ...okay
364 2013-01-03 02:27:56 <etotheipi_> did I say something wrong?
365 2013-01-03 02:28:07 <sipa> i think he just went to sleep :)
366 2013-01-03 02:28:22 <etotheipi_> or am I just a terrible at supporting stressed out people?
367 2013-01-03 02:28:33 <etotheipi_> sipa: what are you doing still here?
368 2013-01-03 02:28:43 <sipa> a good question
369 2013-01-03 02:28:46 <etotheipi_> :)
370 2013-01-03 02:29:16 <etotheipi_> meh, I guess I'm looking at Bitcoin with from the eyes of usability, and wondering how these "hypothetical" features *won't* be used
371 2013-01-03 02:29:20 <etotheipi_> this seems like the future to me
372 2013-01-03 02:30:08 <etotheipi_> and by future, I mean, Bitcoin's long-term future could depend on making almost-full-security lite nodes, and minimizing the data to sync
373 2013-01-03 02:31:41 ByteUnit has quit (Quit: Tik Tak, a clockwork orange?, what the fuck)
374 2013-01-03 02:32:48 <etotheipi_> there certainly won't be much bitcoin future (at least in the direct consumer market) with Bitcoin-Qt as-is
375 2013-01-03 02:33:24 <sipa> there's little doubt about that :)
376 2013-01-03 02:33:59 <etotheipi_> maybe reduced-security lite nodes are sufficient for the world to embrace it
377 2013-01-03 02:34:11 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
378 2013-01-03 02:34:44 <sipa> people are fleeing to blockchain.info and electrum already... i wish they'd flee to SPV nodes instead
379 2013-01-03 02:35:24 <gmaxwell> electrum is at least closer to spv now.
380 2013-01-03 02:35:29 <sipa> true
381 2013-01-03 02:35:45 yellowhat has quit (Quit: yellowhat)
382 2013-01-03 02:36:11 <etotheipi_> if we had started with this authenticated, address-indexed UTXO, I don't think we'd be having this discussion
383 2013-01-03 02:36:16 <gmaxwell> it needs more review and more strenghtening still, I'm sure... but at least thats better. My concern is is that I think webwallets are outpacing electrum substantially still.
384 2013-01-03 02:36:25 <etotheipi_> armory, eletrum and others would be using this
385 2013-01-03 02:36:31 <etotheipi_> and wouldn't have to centralize
386 2013-01-03 02:36:33 <gmaxwell> I'm absolutely sure that you're ont right there.
387 2013-01-03 02:36:45 <gmaxwell> 'cause otherwise it would just electrum vs spv.
388 2013-01-03 02:37:19 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: what do you mean?
389 2013-01-03 02:37:29 <gmaxwell> And it's not... blockchain.info got like 40k additional wallet accounts last month or something crazy like that.
390 2013-01-03 02:38:08 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: electrum already has all the usability advantages you're hoping for there (at lower bandwidth costs too), and its not the most popular option by far.
391 2013-01-03 02:38:11 <jine> dparrish: Talk wth aethero later, and ask me if you have any questions about what i found. :) (No, no security issues, just inconsistencies)
392 2013-01-03 02:39:45 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: I don't thing that's a meaningful metric
393 2013-01-03 02:39:48 <jine> I just found that I'm missing a feature in firebug. I want to export something from the network-tab with http-requests. Is that really impossible? :(
394 2013-01-03 02:39:56 <jine> I hate when this happens :P
395 2013-01-03 02:40:24 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: it's the "would we be having this discussion" metric, I think.
396 2013-01-03 02:40:35 MobTablet has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
397 2013-01-03 02:40:36 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: the point is that there would be "no need" for electrum
398 2013-01-03 02:40:45 <etotheipi_> not to say we don't need alt clients
399 2013-01-03 02:41:08 <etotheipi_> but the benefits that it touts would be available without having to centralize anything
400 2013-01-03 02:41:16 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: I know, but that wouldn't address sipa's point. Electrum is less of a concern than sipa was crediting it for being in any case.
401 2013-01-03 02:42:02 TwilightSparklee has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPhone - http://colloquy.mobi)
402 2013-01-03 02:42:20 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: yes, and it doesn't matter, because people are choosing a fully centeralized solution over electrum which is almost decenteralized (it just trusts the servers to not DOS attack it by hiding transactions, and not to network isolate it from hearing the longest chain headers)
403 2013-01-03 02:42:50 MobEvo has joined
404 2013-01-03 02:43:09 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: to make sure we're talking about the same thing... I thought electrum came with pre-hardcoded servers that were to be trusted
405 2013-01-03 02:43:33 unknown45682 has joined
406 2013-01-03 02:43:55 skeledrew has joined
407 2013-01-03 02:44:01 TwilightSparklee has joined
408 2013-01-03 02:44:14 rozani has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
409 2013-01-03 02:44:23 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: I raised hell, electrum was improved. Electrum is now a SPV client which has a list of servers that it uses because they can do fast by-address queries for it. (they also give it the headers)
410 2013-01-03 02:44:32 graingert has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
411 2013-01-03 02:44:42 <gmaxwell> (previously they were fully trusted for everything except the private keys, and the communication was all cleartext too)
412 2013-01-03 02:45:22 <etotheipi_> okay... I still wouldn't call that decentralized
413 2013-01-03 02:45:50 <gmaxwell> I think the https is still unauthenticated, and it doesn't consult multiple sources to make sure its on the longest chain, etc.. still room to improve. And the index is subject to dos attack through false negative responses.
414 2013-01-03 02:46:05 Cory has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
415 2013-01-03 02:46:33 <gmaxwell> But it won't take much to improve it greatly (E.g. consult multiple sources, blacklist ones that hid data). Not as good as what you want.. but not so bad.
416 2013-01-03 02:46:58 <gmaxwell> Meanwhile people choose webwallets over it on a massive scale.
417 2013-01-03 02:47:53 <gmaxwell> Users do not care about security because their metric for security is something like "have I heard of anyone getting ripped off this way yet". It's just no something most people use in picking an option.
418 2013-01-03 02:48:36 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: some people
419 2013-01-03 02:48:57 Cory has joined
420 2013-01-03 02:49:35 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: I'm thinking... and it's an interesting philosophical discussion
421 2013-01-03 02:49:41 <gmaxwell> evidence suggests mostâ besides security is a lemon market. It's really costly to figure out this stuff when it's not totally secret (as it often is on centeralized things)
422 2013-01-03 02:49:45 <etotheipi_> I'll have to ponder this...
423 2013-01-03 02:50:25 <etotheipi_> I do agree that there is a large market for webwallets
424 2013-01-03 02:50:38 <etotheipi_> but to me, it feels like "linux"
425 2013-01-03 02:50:42 <gmaxwell> plus as you may have noticed, it's a lot easier to monetize a centeralized service than it is for distributed softwareâ better funding means more polish which is often a proxy for security.
426 2013-01-03 02:50:44 <etotheipi_> sure, you don't have Linux on the desktop
427 2013-01-03 02:50:53 <etotheipi_> but the world relies on it
428 2013-01-03 02:51:15 <etotheipi_> it still benefits us to improve the baseline kernel, even if yo udon't have a linux machine sitting at home
429 2013-01-03 02:51:32 <gmaxwell> Part of what inspired me to go beat on poor thomasv was that he made a merchant/daemon version of electrum and people started rapidly picking it up.
430 2013-01-03 02:52:14 <gmaxwell> Someone was telling at someone else in #bitcoin earlier that if you want to accept bitcoin on your website you're a fool not to use an API (meaning one of the centeralized services).
431 2013-01-03 02:52:26 <Scrat> :)
432 2013-01-03 02:52:30 <gmaxwell> But sure, I agree, good infrastructure is good even if regular users don't use it... but does bitcoin use its point?
433 2013-01-03 02:52:39 <gmaxwell> Yea, it was Scrat doing that! :P
434 2013-01-03 02:52:46 <gmaxwell> s/use/lose/
435 2013-01-03 02:53:11 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: part of Bitcoin is "choice"
436 2013-01-03 02:53:20 <gmaxwell> 'cause it's going to be a bloodbath when some overzealous regulator shuts down blockchain.info because they don't like its integrated laundering service or whatever.
437 2013-01-03 02:53:33 <etotheipi_> it doesn't preclude people using third-parties, it is about the fact that people have another option than using third parties
438 2013-01-03 02:53:38 <lianj> gmaxwell: if you dont want to care or handle and secure a bitcoin process just to accept bitcoins, youre a fool not to use an api
439 2013-01-03 02:53:38 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: note I don't suggest forbidding things (Even if it were possible)....
440 2013-01-03 02:54:06 <etotheipi_> and using a single data point in time "right now people are flocking to webwallets" is not sufficient for claiming that the world will only use them forever
441 2013-01-03 02:54:07 <gmaxwell> lianj: our community is 'fools' that we haven't made a foolproof decenteralized solution easy.
442 2013-01-03 02:54:44 <etotheipi_> it certainly wouldn't hurt to have a client option that has virtually no download requirement and gives them everything they need
443 2013-01-03 02:54:52 <gmaxwell> lianj: everyone using a small set of API's is an impending receipy for disaster. I'm not aware of a _single_ bitcoin bank like service which is independantly audited and insured for their business, not to mention the large regulatory oversight risk.
444 2013-01-03 02:55:30 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: well thats why electrum's option was interesting, and why it worred me that it was needlessly insecure. Fortunately thats been improved.
445 2013-01-03 02:55:36 <Scrat> but this is easy to solve (relatively). just a few callbacks on bitcoind. this isn't a protocol rework that does your head in
446 2013-01-03 02:55:39 <lianj> if person x runs his webshop, god forbid even in php, and WE want him to also accept bitcoin, he will prolly not setup anything even if it if so easy
447 2013-01-03 02:56:02 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: they won't use them forever, they'll use them until the next massive adverse event... and the question is after that how many of them will use bitcoin at all? :P
448 2013-01-03 02:56:07 <Scrat> php sucks so much dick for async stuff it ain't even funny
449 2013-01-03 02:56:45 <lianj> gmaxwell: would a insurance make you feel better? for a third party wallet service?
450 2013-01-03 02:56:57 <gmaxwell> lianj: having easy to deploy infrastructure (and well communicated standards and best practices) also means that there can be more diversity in centeralized api options, which also would reduce the systemic risk.
451 2013-01-03 02:57:31 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: I just feel it's being treated as a black-and-white problem... because grandma won't download an app to her phone means it's not worth optimizing that case... and this isn't optimizing a case, this is optimizing the baseline interaction with the network
452 2013-01-03 02:57:33 <gmaxwell> lianj: I think independant auditing is more important than insurance, but insurance can be helpful too... but it's something the I think we're too immature to really have now.
453 2013-01-03 02:57:33 <lianj> true
454 2013-01-03 02:58:12 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: part of what sipa was pointing out though was that your optimization was not free at all. It would create a lot of computational and storage redundancy for full nodes.
455 2013-01-03 02:58:30 <gmaxwell> So if the case it helps is rare and not helped much, and the cost it imposes is common it may be a net loss.
456 2013-01-03 02:59:03 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: we both understand cost-to-benefit... we just disagree about the costs and benefits and the source of that disagreement
457 2013-01-03 02:59:11 <gmaxwell> Esp since you can still build non-committed electrum like servers to answer queries... so the benefit you need to compare to is the benefit over that.
458 2013-01-03 02:59:41 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: thanks... this is all great food for thought
459 2013-01-03 02:59:45 <gmaxwell> (and the non-committed case at least has the benefit that no one is forced into running one just to make queries cheap for people who choose not to)
460 2013-01-03 02:59:48 <gmaxwell> yea, mee too.
461 2013-01-03 02:59:57 graingert has joined
462 2013-01-03 03:00:02 <etotheipi_> I will get back to Armory development
463 2013-01-03 03:00:14 <etotheipi_> and I'm sure I'll have revelations about this as I'm falling asleep 3 nights from now
464 2013-01-03 03:00:20 <gmaxwell> :P
465 2013-01-03 03:00:21 <Scrat> whats the gist?
466 2013-01-03 03:00:24 <Scrat> are light clients evil?
467 2013-01-03 03:01:05 <etotheipi_> Scrat: it's just a debate about cost of improving lite clients vs the benefit (which gmaxwell says is not much, because people just use third-parties, anyway)
468 2013-01-03 03:01:22 <etotheipi_> (it's not quite that simple, but it's the gist)
469 2013-01-03 03:02:39 Cory has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
470 2013-01-03 03:02:56 <gmaxwell> well, over which of an infinite number of ways of improving lite clients best justfiy their costs.
471 2013-01-03 03:03:14 <gmaxwell> E.g. the electrum way improves lite clients but it does so with less security than a committed address index on every full node does.
472 2013-01-03 03:03:20 rozani has joined
473 2013-01-03 03:03:24 Detritus has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
474 2013-01-03 03:03:38 Cory has joined
475 2013-01-03 03:03:44 <gmaxwell> But OTOH, the latter imposes costs on every full node (debatable how much) while the former is purely opt in.
476 2013-01-03 03:04:06 Detritus has joined
477 2013-01-03 03:05:19 Cory has quit (Excess Flood)
478 2013-01-03 03:08:05 Cory has joined
479 2013-01-03 03:08:15 owowo has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
480 2013-01-03 03:09:39 Guest41230 is now known as ageis
481 2013-01-03 03:09:46 Cory has quit (Excess Flood)
482 2013-01-03 03:10:08 ageis is now known as Guest64682
483 2013-01-03 03:11:45 Cory has joined
484 2013-01-03 03:13:08 freakazoid has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
485 2013-01-03 03:16:19 jine has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
486 2013-01-03 03:16:49 Pasha has joined
487 2013-01-03 03:17:11 Cory has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
488 2013-01-03 03:21:49 Pasha is now known as Cory
489 2013-01-03 03:23:56 jine has joined
490 2013-01-03 03:28:05 paraipan has quit (Quit: Saliendo)
491 2013-01-03 03:28:35 EasyAt has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
492 2013-01-03 03:30:21 Dr-X2 has joined
493 2013-01-03 03:32:45 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
494 2013-01-03 03:33:33 Dr-X2 is now known as Dr-X
495 2013-01-03 03:34:33 maaku has joined
496 2013-01-03 03:35:10 skeledrew has joined
497 2013-01-03 03:37:14 pigeons has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
498 2013-01-03 03:37:52 pigeons has joined
499 2013-01-03 03:38:03 TwilightSparklee has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPhone - http://colloquy.mobi)
500 2013-01-03 03:38:15 pigeons is now known as Guest84186
501 2013-01-03 03:39:50 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
502 2013-01-03 03:48:06 dub has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
503 2013-01-03 03:49:07 peper has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
504 2013-01-03 03:50:36 peper has joined
505 2013-01-03 03:50:57 fiesh has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
506 2013-01-03 03:51:31 skeledrew has joined
507 2013-01-03 03:51:35 Graet has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
508 2013-01-03 03:54:04 Graet has joined
509 2013-01-03 03:54:04 Graet is now known as Guest39999
510 2013-01-03 03:54:15 dub has joined
511 2013-01-03 03:54:41 fiesh has joined
512 2013-01-03 03:55:30 Guest39999 is now known as Graet
513 2013-01-03 03:55:42 Graet has quit (Changing host)
514 2013-01-03 03:55:42 Graet has joined
515 2013-01-03 04:04:09 Jamesz has joined
516 2013-01-03 04:04:21 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
517 2013-01-03 04:04:54 Apexseals has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
518 2013-01-03 04:05:18 skeledrew has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
519 2013-01-03 04:05:32 Apexseals has joined
520 2013-01-03 04:05:37 skeledrew has joined
521 2013-01-03 04:13:19 BTCOxygen is now known as a1111-afk
522 2013-01-03 04:14:33 rdponticelli has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
523 2013-01-03 04:15:59 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
524 2013-01-03 04:16:34 copumpkin has joined
525 2013-01-03 04:21:51 <paybitcoin> hello
526 2013-01-03 04:21:57 <paybitcoin> does anyone have any testnet coins?
527 2013-01-03 04:22:13 <paybitcoin> that they could send me, maybe?
528 2013-01-03 04:22:38 graingert has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
529 2013-01-03 04:25:07 <etotheipi_> paybitcoin: sure
530 2013-01-03 04:25:11 <etotheipi_> send me a testnet addr
531 2013-01-03 04:25:14 <paybitcoin> oooh yay
532 2013-01-03 04:25:24 <paybitcoin> mwPdgnjfq1WGPmTJwSSEcyukp5ZJ2oucFX
533 2013-01-03 04:25:41 <paybitcoin> just about to try to figure out how to turn on CPU mining :/
534 2013-01-03 04:25:42 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
535 2013-01-03 04:26:02 <etotheipi_> been there, done that :)
536 2013-01-03 04:31:58 <paybitcoin> just got it, thanks!!!
537 2013-01-03 04:37:14 <jgarzik> 0.8-~3-weeks: 15695 jgarzik 39 19 1847m 823m 22m S 103.0 10.6 37255:27 bitcoind
538 2013-01-03 04:37:20 <jgarzik> 0.7.1-something: 1069 jgarzik 39 19 1523m 582m 2672 S 13.7 10.2 5517:50 bitcoind
539 2013-01-03 04:37:55 <jgarzik> 0.8.~3-weeks: 4437 jgarzik 39 19 3245m 1.7g 15m S 98.8 43.7 37538:18 bitcoind
540 2013-01-03 04:38:10 <jgarzik> latter surprisingly large
541 2013-01-03 04:38:45 <jgarzik> both 0.8* have ~100 connections
542 2013-01-03 04:44:44 Guest84186 is now known as pigeons
543 2013-01-03 04:57:57 MobPhone has joined
544 2013-01-03 04:57:57 aethero] has joined
545 2013-01-03 04:57:58 aethero has quit (Disconnected by services)
546 2013-01-03 04:58:00 aethero] is now known as aethero
547 2013-01-03 04:58:45 TheSeven has quit (Disconnected by services)
548 2013-01-03 04:58:55 [7] has joined
549 2013-01-03 04:59:05 copumpkin has quit (Quit: Computer has gone to sleep.)
550 2013-01-03 05:02:13 paybitcoin has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
551 2013-01-03 05:13:36 <MobPhone> gmaxwell did you get the file
552 2013-01-03 05:13:47 <MobPhone> my chain is still going lol
553 2013-01-03 05:28:48 paybitcoin has joined
554 2013-01-03 05:49:22 Guest64682 is now known as ageis
555 2013-01-03 05:49:45 freakazoid has joined
556 2013-01-03 06:04:41 D34TH has quit (Quit: Leaving)
557 2013-01-03 06:22:59 <jine> paybitcoin: Need more testnet coins, just tell me. :)
558 2013-01-03 06:27:41 digit_ has joined
559 2013-01-03 06:32:44 d1g1t has joined
560 2013-01-03 06:33:11 digit_ has quit (Quit: Leaving)
561 2013-01-03 06:33:14 d1g1t has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
562 2013-01-03 06:38:19 grau has joined
563 2013-01-03 06:45:01 libcoin has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
564 2013-01-03 07:05:18 MobPhone has quit (Quit: -a-)
565 2013-01-03 07:08:47 grau has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
566 2013-01-03 07:10:11 cioqvvnr has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
567 2013-01-03 07:16:51 yellowhat has joined
568 2013-01-03 07:17:57 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
569 2013-01-03 07:19:06 cioqvvnr has joined
570 2013-01-03 07:23:06 cioqvvnr_ has joined
571 2013-01-03 07:23:30 skeledrew has joined
572 2013-01-03 07:23:43 cioqvvnr has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
573 2013-01-03 07:27:06 cioqvvnr has joined
574 2013-01-03 07:27:56 cioqvvnr_ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
575 2013-01-03 07:28:09 gladoscc has joined
576 2013-01-03 07:28:36 <gladoscc> OK, I get the No information available about transaction error... when I call listtransactions(50).
577 2013-01-03 07:31:11 cioqvvnr has quit (Client Quit)
578 2013-01-03 07:32:14 <gladoscc> More concerning is that I deleted wallet.dat to start afresh and it did not automatically generate a new wallet.dat ???
579 2013-01-03 07:33:21 <stealth222> what version are you using?
580 2013-01-03 07:35:56 <gladoscc> 0.7.2
581 2013-01-03 07:36:01 <gladoscc> not 0.8
582 2013-01-03 07:36:12 <stealth222> what does the debug.log say?
583 2013-01-03 07:37:00 <gladoscc> noting useful, a truckload of ACCEPTED
584 2013-01-03 07:37:05 <stealth222> before that
585 2013-01-03 07:37:09 <stealth222> when you first start it up
586 2013-01-03 07:37:43 <stealth222> it shouldn't even get to the network if it can't find or recover a wallet.dat
587 2013-01-03 07:37:57 <gladoscc> oh, I just realized I was checking in root's home folder
588 2013-01-03 07:38:00 <gladoscc> I still have a wallet.dat
589 2013-01-03 07:38:13 <gladoscc> but the problem is listtransactions returns an error..
590 2013-01-03 07:38:19 <stealth222> what's the error?
591 2013-01-03 07:38:28 <gladoscc> No information available about transaction
592 2013-01-03 07:38:43 <stealth222> what was the exact command you entered?
593 2013-01-03 07:39:05 ovidiusoft has joined
594 2013-01-03 07:40:32 <gladoscc> listtransactions "myaccount" "50"
595 2013-01-03 07:45:12 <stealth222> are you sure you're using listtransactions and not listrawtransaction?
596 2013-01-03 07:46:26 <gladoscc> yes
597 2013-01-03 07:47:06 <stealth222> listtransactions doesn't return that error. listrawtransaction does
598 2013-01-03 07:47:45 <gladoscc> but I *am* calling listtransactions
599 2013-01-03 07:48:03 <stealth222> what happens if you call listtransactions with a txid as a parameter?
600 2013-01-03 07:48:17 <gladoscc> Wait
601 2013-01-03 07:48:21 <gladoscc> Does getrawtransaction return this error?
602 2013-01-03 07:48:24 <stealth222> yes
603 2013-01-03 07:49:03 <gladoscc> Ok, then it is getrawtransaction then. I'm calling those via PHP so I guessed it was listtransactions based on when the Fatal error occurred, and uncommenting that stopp dthe error.
604 2013-01-03 07:49:15 <gladoscc> so, I'm calling getrawtransaction on a txid returned by listtransactions.
605 2013-01-03 07:49:47 <gladoscc> the txid exists.
606 2013-01-03 07:50:34 <stealth222> put some tracers in the code and display the txid on which it is giving you the error
607 2013-01-03 07:51:50 <gladoscc> I don't think the actual transaction is the problem, I can query it fine on blockchain.info
608 2013-01-03 07:52:00 <gladoscc> corrupted blockchain?
609 2013-01-03 07:52:33 <gladoscc> I have already deleted the blockchain so it redownloads, but I somehow have the balance BEFORE the blockchain is fully downloaded
610 2013-01-03 07:55:36 <gladoscc> deleted wallet.dat properly, seems to work now
611 2013-01-03 07:55:56 crazy4btc has quit (Quit: Leaving)
612 2013-01-03 08:01:54 gladoscc has quit (Quit: Page closed)
613 2013-01-03 08:14:18 nathaniel has joined
614 2013-01-03 08:15:11 muhoo has joined
615 2013-01-03 08:19:37 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
616 2013-01-03 08:22:55 d4de has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
617 2013-01-03 08:31:24 Insu has joined
618 2013-01-03 08:34:01 CodesInChaos has joined
619 2013-01-03 08:34:09 Impaler_ has joined
620 2013-01-03 08:36:36 Impaler has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
621 2013-01-03 08:38:55 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
622 2013-01-03 08:48:02 mmoya_ has joined
623 2013-01-03 08:56:56 libcoin has joined
624 2013-01-03 09:02:20 nathaniel has quit (Quit: bye)
625 2013-01-03 09:16:14 t7 has joined
626 2013-01-03 09:28:49 midnightmagic has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
627 2013-01-03 09:38:45 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
628 2013-01-03 09:43:06 skeledrew has joined
629 2013-01-03 09:46:07 midnightmagic has joined
630 2013-01-03 09:46:07 midnightmagic has quit (Changing host)
631 2013-01-03 09:46:07 midnightmagic has joined
632 2013-01-03 09:55:31 sneak has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
633 2013-01-03 09:57:46 sneak has joined
634 2013-01-03 09:57:46 sneak has quit (Changing host)
635 2013-01-03 09:57:46 sneak has joined
636 2013-01-03 10:00:06 one_zero has quit ()
637 2013-01-03 10:03:30 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
638 2013-01-03 10:05:10 drivelights has joined
639 2013-01-03 10:08:10 RazielZ has joined
640 2013-01-03 10:08:38 ThomasV has joined
641 2013-01-03 10:12:17 skeledrew has joined
642 2013-01-03 10:15:17 vigilyn2 has joined
643 2013-01-03 10:15:20 ThomasV has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
644 2013-01-03 10:17:03 wereHamster has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
645 2013-01-03 10:17:41 wereHamster has joined
646 2013-01-03 10:17:47 parus has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
647 2013-01-03 10:17:54 parus has joined
648 2013-01-03 10:18:35 dvide has joined
649 2013-01-03 10:18:43 vigilyn has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
650 2013-01-03 10:19:17 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
651 2013-01-03 10:24:09 MC-Eeepc has joined
652 2013-01-03 10:27:17 MC1984 has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
653 2013-01-03 10:27:37 skeledrew has joined
654 2013-01-03 10:34:16 ThomasV has joined
655 2013-01-03 10:36:23 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
656 2013-01-03 10:47:12 skeledrew has joined
657 2013-01-03 10:54:27 GNULinuxGuy has joined
658 2013-01-03 10:59:04 Impaler_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
659 2013-01-03 11:00:14 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
660 2013-01-03 11:05:21 skeledrew has joined
661 2013-01-03 11:22:20 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
662 2013-01-03 11:26:00 skeledrew has joined
663 2013-01-03 11:26:14 drizztbsd has joined
664 2013-01-03 11:32:41 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
665 2013-01-03 11:37:52 skeledrew has joined
666 2013-01-03 11:51:36 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
667 2013-01-03 11:52:26 skeledrew has joined
668 2013-01-03 11:53:25 ircuser-6 has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
669 2013-01-03 11:53:34 rozani has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
670 2013-01-03 11:54:23 talso has joined
671 2013-01-03 11:57:04 rdymac has joined
672 2013-01-03 12:07:10 daybyter has joined
673 2013-01-03 12:12:58 GMP has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
674 2013-01-03 12:13:34 vigilyn2 is now known as vigilyn
675 2013-01-03 12:13:38 vigilyn has quit (Changing host)
676 2013-01-03 12:13:38 vigilyn has joined
677 2013-01-03 12:30:20 rozani has joined
678 2013-01-03 12:36:55 tg has quit (Quit: Changing server)
679 2013-01-03 12:37:36 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
680 2013-01-03 12:37:44 tg has joined
681 2013-01-03 12:43:16 skeledrew has joined
682 2013-01-03 12:49:50 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
683 2013-01-03 12:50:34 skeledrew has joined
684 2013-01-03 12:51:58 Jamesz has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
685 2013-01-03 12:55:39 ircuser-6 has joined
686 2013-01-03 12:56:05 rdponticelli has joined
687 2013-01-03 12:56:57 datagutt has joined
688 2013-01-03 13:03:31 sacredchao has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
689 2013-01-03 13:04:32 sacredchao has joined
690 2013-01-03 13:04:58 daybyter has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
691 2013-01-03 13:11:58 agricocb has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
692 2013-01-03 13:18:45 novusordo has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
693 2013-01-03 13:19:19 novusordo has joined
694 2013-01-03 13:19:43 novusordo is now known as Guest4512
695 2013-01-03 13:22:27 Insu has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
696 2013-01-03 13:25:40 rdymac has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
697 2013-01-03 13:29:50 rozani has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
698 2013-01-03 13:47:10 agricocb has joined
699 2013-01-03 13:51:14 paraipan has joined
700 2013-01-03 13:51:36 wereHamster has quit (Changing host)
701 2013-01-03 13:51:36 wereHamster has joined
702 2013-01-03 13:57:15 alberto has joined
703 2013-01-03 13:58:03 Eslbaer has joined
704 2013-01-03 13:58:40 libcoin has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
705 2013-01-03 13:58:45 libcoin1 has joined
706 2013-01-03 14:00:08 Insu has joined
707 2013-01-03 14:07:59 TD has joined
708 2013-01-03 14:16:53 libcoin1 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
709 2013-01-03 14:17:01 skeledrew has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
710 2013-01-03 14:17:17 TwilightSparklee has joined
711 2013-01-03 14:17:38 skeledrew has joined
712 2013-01-03 14:21:42 rozani1 has joined
713 2013-01-03 14:28:53 leotreasure has left ()
714 2013-01-03 14:34:20 Aurigae has joined
715 2013-01-03 14:42:22 altamic has joined
716 2013-01-03 14:42:31 altamic has quit (Client Quit)
717 2013-01-03 14:43:43 TwilightSparklee has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPhone - http://colloquy.mobi)
718 2013-01-03 14:46:24 alberto has quit (Quit: Page closed)
719 2013-01-03 14:47:15 blinky has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
720 2013-01-03 14:57:38 garij_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
721 2013-01-03 14:58:15 D34TH has joined
722 2013-01-03 14:58:15 D34TH has quit (Changing host)
723 2013-01-03 14:58:15 D34TH has joined
724 2013-01-03 14:58:51 btcven has joined
725 2013-01-03 15:03:37 meLon has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
726 2013-01-03 15:12:36 rozani1 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
727 2013-01-03 15:18:46 rozani has joined
728 2013-01-03 15:32:46 tonikt has joined
729 2013-01-03 15:37:31 StarenseN has joined
730 2013-01-03 15:44:00 freakazoid has joined
731 2013-01-03 15:45:24 EPiSKiNG- has quit ()
732 2013-01-03 15:51:06 copumpkin has joined
733 2013-01-03 15:54:06 btcven is now known as rdymac
734 2013-01-03 16:05:34 rdymac has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
735 2013-01-03 16:07:36 rdymac has joined
736 2013-01-03 16:13:23 drdoolittle has joined
737 2013-01-03 16:16:14 zooko has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
738 2013-01-03 16:20:24 zooko has joined
739 2013-01-03 16:28:02 cioqvvnr has joined
740 2013-01-03 16:28:39 zooko has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
741 2013-01-03 16:28:48 cioqvvnr has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
742 2013-01-03 16:28:57 cioqvvnr has joined
743 2013-01-03 16:30:13 cioqvvnr has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
744 2013-01-03 16:31:17 kuzetsa has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
745 2013-01-03 16:31:57 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
746 2013-01-03 16:32:08 kuzetsa has joined
747 2013-01-03 16:32:29 testnode9 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
748 2013-01-03 16:32:46 ivan` has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
749 2013-01-03 16:34:18 poop_ has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
750 2013-01-03 16:34:27 rdymac has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
751 2013-01-03 16:34:52 poop_ has joined
752 2013-01-03 16:34:59 zooko has joined
753 2013-01-03 16:35:17 ivan` has joined
754 2013-01-03 16:36:39 zooko has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
755 2013-01-03 16:37:18 zooko has joined
756 2013-01-03 16:39:07 rdymac has joined
757 2013-01-03 16:41:44 maaku has joined
758 2013-01-03 16:43:06 da2ce7_d has joined
759 2013-01-03 16:43:10 christian has joined
760 2013-01-03 16:43:35 christian is now known as Guest17551
761 2013-01-03 16:44:18 christian_ has joined
762 2013-01-03 16:44:38 christian_ has quit (Client Quit)
763 2013-01-03 16:44:56 cande has joined
764 2013-01-03 16:45:03 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
765 2013-01-03 16:50:31 a1111-afk has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
766 2013-01-03 16:55:31 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
767 2013-01-03 16:57:39 AlexWaters1 has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
768 2013-01-03 17:01:32 Guest17551 has quit (Quit: Lämnar)
769 2013-01-03 17:07:31 <gavinandresen> Dev team: I'm trying again to get more QA testing happening, feedback appreciated: http://tinyurl.com/a5nukqy
770 2013-01-03 17:09:22 rdymac has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
771 2013-01-03 17:10:40 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
772 2013-01-03 17:11:45 t7 has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.89-rdmsoft [XULRunner 1.9.0.17/2009122204])
773 2013-01-03 17:16:57 casasciu_ has joined
774 2013-01-03 17:27:40 <jgarzik> http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/01/coder-charged-for-gambling-software/
775 2013-01-03 17:33:58 <Luke-Jr> wow
776 2013-01-03 17:36:17 <gmaxwell> lemme guess: new york, right
777 2013-01-03 17:36:18 <gmaxwell> ?
778 2013-01-03 17:36:54 <kinlo> americans are so stupid, that's the first reaction that I get from reading such articles
779 2013-01-03 17:36:55 <Luke-Jr> right ;)
780 2013-01-03 17:38:45 TD has joined
781 2013-01-03 17:39:19 <Luke-Jr> "Stuart has tried to obtain a copy of the affidavit used to get the search warrant, but it's currently sealed." <-- wtf?
782 2013-01-03 17:39:20 <helo> oklahoma has similar laws
783 2013-01-03 17:39:38 <helo> but there aren't many programmers there
784 2013-01-03 17:39:44 <gavinandresen> wow, I think I'll have to put a google alert on"Robert Stuart" and keep track of what happens....
785 2013-01-03 17:40:17 <TD> who is this?
786 2013-01-03 17:40:40 <TD> http://www.dayonepatch.com/index.php?/topic/73898-write-gambling-software-go-to-prison/
787 2013-01-03 17:40:41 <TD> ?
788 2013-01-03 17:40:53 <Luke-Jr> [17:10:57] <jgarzik> http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/01/coder-charged-for-gambling-software/
789 2013-01-03 17:41:20 <Luke-Jr> kinlo: there are stupider things going on elsewhere in the world too <.<
790 2013-01-03 17:41:49 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: go look at the ACLU appelbaum filings (the few that aren't themselves sealed)â NY district courts have a problem with overly sealing stuff and even failing to docket the sealed documents. I expect they're eventually going to get beaten down by the US supreme court, but it'll probably be years before that happens.
791 2013-01-03 17:41:49 <kinlo> true, it's not to particularly pinpoint the americans :)
792 2013-01-03 17:41:59 <kinlo> but still, I get that feeling :p
793 2013-01-03 17:42:26 <TD> "He says the New York district attorneyâs office tried to strong-arm him into a plea agreement that would have had him hacking into the systems of his software clients in order to obtain the usernames and passwords of gamblers "
794 2013-01-03 17:42:42 <TD> wtf
795 2013-01-03 17:42:50 <TD> the US is going downhill
796 2013-01-03 17:42:59 <Luke-Jr> TD: you just realized this? :P
797 2013-01-03 17:43:07 <TD> not at all. just bears repeating.
798 2013-01-03 17:43:09 <TD> each step along the way
799 2013-01-03 17:43:35 <gmaxwell> kinlo: I don't agree. For all the dumb things we have in america, we also get a lot of things deeply right. For example we actually regard freedom of speech as an actual right. This is distinct from many developed nations (e.g. the UK) and has profound policy and practice impacts.
800 2013-01-03 17:43:47 <andytoshi> TD: watch what happens when the US federal government's currency has real competition
801 2013-01-03 17:43:52 <andytoshi> i bet they get their act together real quick
802 2013-01-03 17:44:00 <andytoshi> (though new york is maybe a lost cause)
803 2013-01-03 17:44:11 <TD> hardly
804 2013-01-03 17:44:19 <andytoshi> there's no bitcoinistan to invade
805 2013-01-03 17:44:23 <TD> the USG wipes its ass with the constitution. what was ITAR and EAR about if not direct censorship of cryptographers
806 2013-01-03 17:44:38 <TD> when the courts struck down ITAR as unconstitutional, it was simply re-passed again under a new name
807 2013-01-03 17:44:43 <MC-Eeepc> greg is right
808 2013-01-03 17:44:46 <gmaxwell> TD: ITAR was quite comfortably dismantled by the courts for that reason.
809 2013-01-03 17:44:54 <rozani> greg is a freak
810 2013-01-03 17:45:15 <kinlo> gmaxwell: I'm not going to discuss things in depth here, but I feel there are plenty of examples where your freedom of speech really is not honored
811 2013-01-03 17:45:21 <TD> i don't think a process whereby the legislature routinely passes blatantly un-constitutional laws and then dares people to take them on is "deeply right". they know full well only 1% of supreme court cases get actually heard
812 2013-01-03 17:45:22 <MC-Eeepc> here the local university to me just formally issued a warning over posting drunken shenanigans on facebook, lest it affect your career or even get you arrested
813 2013-01-03 17:45:26 <gmaxwell> TD: and meanwhile but AU and NZ copied the ITAR restrictions word for word without copying the caselaw, and don't have the underling basis in right to overturn them on their own.
814 2013-01-03 17:45:33 <andytoshi> MC-Eeepc: greg is very right ... you should see the anti-speech travesties we have in canada
815 2013-01-03 17:45:53 <andytoshi> we have actual federal bodies called "human rights tribunals", which run their own kangaroo courts
816 2013-01-03 17:46:04 <andytoshi> to prosecute people who say bad things about islam
817 2013-01-03 17:46:23 <andytoshi> they have their own laws, appoint their own people, attack whoever they want
818 2013-01-03 17:46:34 <TD> sounds a lot like financial regulators :)
819 2013-01-03 17:46:35 robocoin has joined
820 2013-01-03 17:46:37 cande has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
821 2013-01-03 17:46:43 <gmaxwell> TD: a lot of things (including ITAR) get fixed by district courts. And the supreme court not taking a case just as well upholds a lower court ruling. Everything above a trial court makes binding precedent. (thoug the scope of the binding increases as you go up)
822 2013-01-03 17:46:55 abracadabra has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
823 2013-01-03 17:47:01 <andytoshi> TD: yes, my point :) the problems in the US seem to me to be caused (nearly) exclusively by cheap money
824 2013-01-03 17:47:03 <TD> well, i hope this case gets struck down by the courts
825 2013-01-03 17:47:15 <rozani> go hit up craigslist, greg, and you might find someone who will at least pretend to be human for you
826 2013-01-03 17:47:32 meLon has joined
827 2013-01-03 17:47:32 meLon has quit (Changing host)
828 2013-01-03 17:47:32 meLon has joined
829 2013-01-03 17:47:40 <gmaxwell> I'm certantly not arguing that it's all well and good, it's just important to also reconize that there are balances and many places are worse.
830 2013-01-03 17:47:44 <TD> sure
831 2013-01-03 17:47:48 <gavinandresen> TD: unfortunately, if it looks like he'll win they will most likely drop the case so there is no firm precedent
832 2013-01-03 17:48:11 <MC-Eeepc> charged with promoting gambling in New York because authorities say his software was used by others for illegal betting in that state.
833 2013-01-03 17:48:12 <TD> ah yes. that seems to be distressingly routine. i was pointed to the case "saleh vs the us treasury" the other day. it ended the same way.
834 2013-01-03 17:48:18 <MC-Eeepc> oh boy oh boy
835 2013-01-03 17:48:22 <MC-Eeepc> thats very interesting
836 2013-01-03 17:48:25 <gavinandresen> ... just the chilling effect of maybe the next guy having to hire lawyers and spend lots of money to defend himself
837 2013-01-03 17:48:25 <MC-Eeepc> very interesting indeed
838 2013-01-03 17:48:58 <TD> sometimes i wonder if the AML laws are building what is functionally equivalent to censorship of speech, just operating on a different level. if you look at how the AML infrastructure works it can be compared quite closely to the chinese firewalls. there are keyword stoplists applied to wire transfers, etc.
839 2013-01-03 17:49:12 <gmaxwell> MC-Eeepc: his life is made less fun there by the fact that his income there was fairly remarkable for just a software developer. No doubt the prosecutors believe him to be a business partner who was 'only a developer' only on paper.
840 2013-01-03 17:49:25 <TD> a bit like that scene from the matrix, "what use is free speech, if you cannot â¦.. organize"
841 2013-01-03 17:49:47 <MC-Eeepc> TD thats why were here bro lol
842 2013-01-03 17:50:05 <gmaxwell> TD: yes. money really is speech too. I'm made sad about people bitching about citizen's united, not because it wasn't a crappy case but because they're making crappy arguments against it.
843 2013-01-03 17:50:26 <MC-Eeepc> also pertintent since money has been ruled to indeed be speech in the US
844 2013-01-03 17:50:27 <andytoshi> TD: we've won the encryption fight, thanks to the clinton adminstration. what we need to do now is popularize it
845 2013-01-03 17:50:44 agricocb has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
846 2013-01-03 17:50:45 <TD> yeah. i've debated citizens united with a guy i work with a few times. same thing. the outcome seems so suboptimal but the arguments against it are poor, so the solution must lie elsewhere (delegated voting, or whatever)
847 2013-01-03 17:51:21 <MC-Eeepc> what are the bad arguments?
848 2013-01-03 17:51:26 <gmaxwell> TD: I try to get people to read the ruling and the dissent, its quite thouhtful.
849 2013-01-03 17:51:27 <gavinandresen> I wonder if the left would like citizens united more if it was a group spending money on a Bush-bashing movie (instead of a Clinton-bashing movie)
850 2013-01-03 17:51:30 <TD> the NY DA really sounds out of control in this article. quite amazing.
851 2013-01-03 17:52:12 <gmaxwell> TD: yes, NY DA being out of control (and especially agressive wrt gambling) is well know, this is what made me surprised about the location of some bitcoin site ownersâ¦
852 2013-01-03 17:52:33 <gmaxwell> (specific bitcoin site owners, I'm not saying bitcoin in general of course)
853 2013-01-03 17:52:40 <gavinandresen> NY is the financial capital of the US.... for better or worse.
854 2013-01-03 17:52:42 <TD> indeed
855 2013-01-03 17:52:45 <TD> i was thinking the same thing
856 2013-01-03 17:52:56 <TD> fireduck is in the UK, i think, but not the owners
857 2013-01-03 17:52:58 rdponticelli has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
858 2013-01-03 17:53:15 <gmaxwell> (NY has a very long and complicated history with gambling)
859 2013-01-03 17:53:59 <gmaxwell> MC-Eeepc: the bad arguments are the strawmen ones where people make fun of the imposition that money is speech and that corporations are people as though they are insane and obviously false positions.
860 2013-01-03 17:54:32 <TD> MC-Eeepc: the basic issue is the one we just stated â¦â¦ if you can "speak" but the finance you need to actually make that speech heard is illegal, then do you really have freedom of speech?
861 2013-01-03 17:54:41 <TD> MC-Eeepc: if a tree falls in the forest and nobody hears it, etc
862 2013-01-03 17:54:57 <gavinandresen> I think we'll see a shift in attitude in the US towards gambling over the next 10-20 years. Mostly because I know lots of old people who love to go to casinos, and as they get older I bet they'll want casinos closer to home.
863 2013-01-03 17:55:02 <gavinandresen> ... or in their homes....
864 2013-01-03 17:55:07 <gmaxwell> MC-Eeepc: but they aren't false positionsâ there is a need for balancing, but if you take the position that money is never speech and corporations never have the rights of people, then you deny people the ability to organize and effectively communicate. "You have free speech, but we're going to make sure you're alone and broke so your speech is powerless"
865 2013-01-03 17:55:41 <MC-Eeepc> yeah ok
866 2013-01-03 17:55:45 <TD> MC-Eeepc: so the bad argument was something like, "lots of money in politics is distorting our democracy" (this may or may not be the case, but let's assume it's true) â¦. "therefore we must regulate the use of money for political speech"
867 2013-01-03 17:55:57 <TD> MC-Eeepc: there's a genuine problem there, but the solution being proposed is not the correct one.
868 2013-01-03 17:56:04 <MC-Eeepc> but the reality is that the legislature is shot through with corporate money and works about as ell as youd expect
869 2013-01-03 17:56:21 rdponticelli has joined
870 2013-01-03 17:56:24 <TD> in that sense, I guess I agree with gmaxwell that the USA came to the right conclusions in that case. the judicial system is one area where (outside of patent litigation), I still have some confidence
871 2013-01-03 17:56:28 <gavinandresen> TD: <gavin puts on an occupy tinfoil hat> Exactly! the solution is to get rid of money!
872 2013-01-03 17:56:31 <TD> haha
873 2013-01-03 17:56:36 <TD> like in star trek
874 2013-01-03 17:56:42 <MC-Eeepc> if money is speech and the answer to speech is more speech from elsewhere......
875 2013-01-03 17:56:44 <gmaxwell> But at the same time you shouldn't let the richest players saturate the media using all their money so that only they have a voice... so it makes sense to have some kind of balancing act. So that much is good, but you can't define a good balance if you're busy calling people evil for saying that free speech need free(dom) for money too.
876 2013-01-03 17:56:46 <TD> "how was the Enterprise funded? oh, we don't have money here in the future. we just decided to do it"
877 2013-01-03 17:57:18 <gmaxwell> TD: well, not totally crazy. Lots of software systems that have no marginal cost get created by people or companies "deciding to do it".
878 2013-01-03 17:57:19 <TD> MC-Eeepc: the issue then may be that the legislative branch needs serious reform. google [liquid democracy] for some ideas.
879 2013-01-03 17:57:20 <MC-Eeepc> gmaxwell the internet is that balance
880 2013-01-03 17:57:30 <MC-Eeepc> or it would be if they would just leave it the fuck alone
881 2013-01-03 17:57:47 <TD> an open source warp drive? i could get behind that :)
882 2013-01-03 17:58:05 <TD> still, judicial power seems to have its limits. witness the judges statement in the recent drone secrecy case
883 2013-01-03 17:58:11 <gmaxwell> MC-Eeepc: it's part of it, but a lot of the internet is for profit too. Should I be able to pay all the major sites to suppress your views that disagree with mine?
884 2013-01-03 17:58:16 <gavinandresen> the internet didn't take off until farsighted people who thought they could get filthy rich jumped in and started building companies
885 2013-01-03 17:58:23 <gavinandresen> turns out they were right, and they are filthy rich....
886 2013-01-03 17:58:36 agricocb has joined
887 2013-01-03 17:59:11 <MC-Eeepc> i stil think you guys should get up on a constitutional amendment about campaign funding
888 2013-01-03 17:59:55 <gmaxwell> MC-Eeepc: it'll happen eventually, and then in 30 years get undone.. then in 30 more years get fixed again.. etc.
889 2013-01-03 18:00:08 <MC-Eeepc> i mean, after i saw chris dodd get on the telly and openly threaten obama about his "donations" after the sopa thing
890 2013-01-03 18:00:26 <andytoshi> MC-Eeepc: if there were any serious candidates, maybe you'd be right
891 2013-01-03 18:00:33 MobPhone has joined
892 2013-01-03 18:00:40 <TD> MC-Eeepc: the reason people spend money on campaigns isn't because congress can literally be bought. it's because the choices offered to voters are so often minimally distinguishable that it all boils down to a knifeedge decision driven as much by personalities as anything else.
893 2013-01-03 18:00:43 <andytoshi> in 2012 there were some serious media problems, that -weren't- caused by campaign funding
894 2013-01-03 18:00:45 OneEyed has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
895 2013-01-03 18:00:52 <MC-Eeepc> what the hell have you got to do to get an amendment done anyway
896 2013-01-03 18:00:55 <TD> MC-Eeepc: the real solution to solving campaign funding may be to change how voting is done, so representatives are less important.
897 2013-01-03 18:00:57 <MC-Eeepc> seems herculean
898 2013-01-03 18:01:00 <TD> but i don't anticipate that happening anytime soon
899 2013-01-03 18:01:08 <TD> MC-Eeepc: 75%, i thought?
900 2013-01-03 18:01:31 <TD> by the way, in switzerland there is a ton of political advertising
901 2013-01-03 18:01:37 <gmaxwell> Well, some places use alternative voting systems which disenfranchize minority candidates less.
902 2013-01-03 18:01:47 <gmaxwell> (e.g. the aussies with the ranked ballots)
903 2013-01-03 18:01:50 <TD> literally all the time. but you don't see people here complaining about it because the political advertising and campaign money is being spent to argue issues, not people
904 2013-01-03 18:02:13 <MC-Eeepc> swizerland is the pimp daddy of the world
905 2013-01-03 18:02:16 OneEyed has joined
906 2013-01-03 18:02:34 <gmaxwell> TD: one of the things critical to citizens united is that you can't really seperate funding for issues vs people.
907 2013-01-03 18:02:45 <TD> they do here because there are so many referendums
908 2013-01-03 18:02:56 <MC-Eeepc> that article is crazy
909 2013-01-03 18:03:05 <MC-Eeepc> what is it with your public prosecutors
910 2013-01-03 18:03:10 <TD> i can name several referendums that happened in the past 6 years but couldn't name my local politicians for the life of me
911 2013-01-03 18:03:14 <MC-Eeepc> carrer building or what
912 2013-01-03 18:03:14 <gmaxwell> TD: ah, switzerland is big on referendums?
913 2013-01-03 18:03:15 <TD> (not that i can vote anyway :))
914 2013-01-03 18:03:17 <TD> very
915 2013-01-03 18:03:19 <TD> it's famous for it
916 2013-01-03 18:03:40 <gmaxwell> Some US states use them, but at most I think they're only about equal in attention to the politicians.
917 2013-01-03 18:03:53 <MC-Eeepc> i think a petition of 100,000 guarantees a referendum on anything
918 2013-01-03 18:03:55 <TD> switzerland is structured a little bit like the USA is (theoretically). there's a somewhat weak federal government and most power lies with the cantons, which are like mini states
919 2013-01-03 18:04:01 <TD> except more the size of counties than states
920 2013-01-03 18:04:25 <MC-Eeepc> they have the canton system
921 2013-01-03 18:04:33 <MC-Eeepc> its like 13 federated states
922 2013-01-03 18:04:54 <MC-Eeepc> a lot of them even geopraphically seperated by mountain ranges etc
923 2013-01-03 18:04:58 <MC-Eeepc> some say that why its so stable
924 2013-01-03 18:04:59 <TD> switzerland is a really inspiring country in many ways. i wish i could take part more.
925 2013-01-03 18:05:04 <MC-Eeepc> compartmentalised
926 2013-01-03 18:05:47 <gmaxwell> (as an american I'm pretty ignorant about a lot of things outside of the US, I've been to switzerland but didn't know anything about its system of government)
927 2013-01-03 18:05:54 <TD> gavinandresen: i wouldn't rely on older people for gambling law reform, given that the big problems seem to be around internet gambling
928 2013-01-03 18:06:08 <MC-Eeepc> ha loud american tourist :)
929 2013-01-03 18:06:17 <TD> gmaxwell: switzerland comes up a lot in US gun control debates because it marries very high levels of gun ownership with very low levels of homicide and mass shootings
930 2013-01-03 18:06:19 <gmaxwell> MC-Eeepc: I pretend to be canadian when travling abroad!
931 2013-01-03 18:06:22 <TD> amongst other things
932 2013-01-03 18:06:26 t7 has joined
933 2013-01-03 18:06:28 <MC-Eeepc> heh
934 2013-01-03 18:06:35 <TD> hah. i've done that too. in slovakia. it turned out they didn't like the brits much.
935 2013-01-03 18:06:54 <TD> my canadian accent sucks, but they couldn't really tell the difference :)
936 2013-01-03 18:07:03 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, coward
937 2013-01-03 18:07:13 <MC-Eeepc> yeah its the law for each houshold to have a service rifle isnt it?
938 2013-01-03 18:07:33 <TD> something like that
939 2013-01-03 18:07:50 <MC-Eeepc> such a beautiful, free country
940 2013-01-03 18:08:01 <MC-Eeepc> also tax haven of the world
941 2013-01-03 18:08:09 <TD> however there are restrictions on ammo
942 2013-01-03 18:08:19 <TD> it's not quite as simple as "everyone can have whatever guns they want" either, far from it
943 2013-01-03 18:08:42 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
944 2013-01-03 18:08:47 <TD> the wikipedia article on it is useful. the laws changed recently as part of entering the schengen zone
945 2013-01-03 18:08:52 <MC-Eeepc> no one service rifle per household, gun safe all that etc
946 2013-01-03 18:09:17 copumpkin has joined
947 2013-01-03 18:10:14 <TD> one of the referendums i remember was about tightening gun controls (rejected). the adverts had a scary cartoon of a moustachioed gun-toting "badass guy" holding a gun with the line, "Weapon monopoly for criminals? Say NO" which is pretty typical for political advertising here
948 2013-01-03 18:10:22 <TD> there are adverts for individual candidates too of course.
949 2013-01-03 18:10:31 <TD> but the issue ads are way more memorable
950 2013-01-03 18:10:42 testnode9 has joined
951 2013-01-03 18:11:56 <aethero> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=134386.0
952 2013-01-03 18:12:07 <aethero> Hack it. Get coins. ZIGGAP.com is mine by the way.
953 2013-01-03 18:12:09 drizztbsd has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
954 2013-01-03 18:13:15 <phantomcircuit> aethero, 80.5 BTC isn't enough to seriously interest... anybody
955 2013-01-03 18:13:30 <aethero> You dont think so?
956 2013-01-03 18:13:37 maaku has joined
957 2013-01-03 18:13:37 <gmaxwell> aethero: I didn't even bother to load the webpage.
958 2013-01-03 18:13:52 MobPhone has quit (Quit: -a-)
959 2013-01-03 18:13:57 <aethero> $1000 bucks?
960 2013-01-03 18:14:10 <gmaxwell> It will probably interest some people however, so I don't fully agree with phantomcircuit.
961 2013-01-03 18:14:14 <MC-Eeepc> nice to see political ads are peurile the world over
962 2013-01-03 18:14:53 <MC-Eeepc> we recently had a referendum on AV system, and the conservatives did ads that said "she needs a new hosptial not AV" with a surgeon holding a newborn baby
963 2013-01-03 18:14:55 Diapolo has joined
964 2013-01-03 18:15:02 <MC-Eeepc> AKA vote no to AV or the baby gets it!
965 2013-01-03 18:16:03 <MC-Eeepc> phantomcircuit doesnt get out of bed for less than 10 gees these days ;)
966 2013-01-03 18:17:56 maaku has quit (Client Quit)
967 2013-01-03 18:19:06 maaku has joined
968 2013-01-03 18:20:01 daybyter has joined
969 2013-01-03 18:24:19 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Leaving)
970 2013-01-03 18:24:41 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
971 2013-01-03 18:25:28 agricocb has joined
972 2013-01-03 18:27:47 <TD> MC-Eeepc: that was the UK, right
973 2013-01-03 18:27:56 <TD> MC-Eeepc: i think a lot of people took the piss out of that ad
974 2013-01-03 18:28:19 <MC-Eeepc> http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/steven-baxter/2011/02/voting-system-baby-gets
975 2013-01-03 18:28:26 <MC-Eeepc> yep good old tories
976 2013-01-03 18:29:09 <MC-Eeepc> currently rather successfully shifting the blame for the shitty economy onto the disabled and other undesirables
977 2013-01-03 18:29:16 <phantomcircuit> MC-Eeepc, $1000 isn't a large enough prize for maybe finding something
978 2013-01-03 18:29:46 <phantomcircuit> i would calculate the expected hourly wage for that to be like maybe $5/hr
979 2013-01-03 18:30:08 agricocb has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
980 2013-01-03 18:33:16 <gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: I think its better than not doing something like that though.
981 2013-01-03 18:33:46 <phantomcircuit> sure
982 2013-01-03 18:33:51 <phantomcircuit> better than nothing i suppose
983 2013-01-03 18:37:12 EasyAt has joined
984 2013-01-03 18:37:13 EasyAt has quit (Changing host)
985 2013-01-03 18:37:13 EasyAt has joined
986 2013-01-03 18:39:44 <drdoolittle> I have a paypal tool which can be fully customized with good programming...pm if interested..
987 2013-01-03 18:39:55 <drdoolittle> ;;voiceme
988 2013-01-03 18:42:15 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
989 2013-01-03 18:43:37 <Luke-Jr> â¦
990 2013-01-03 18:43:38 skeledrew has joined
991 2013-01-03 18:44:14 grau has joined
992 2013-01-03 18:46:14 <TD> gavinandresen: i was thinking we should make outputs of zero value with [OP_FALSE] standard, and teach the client to automatically remove them from the utxo set.
993 2013-01-03 18:46:23 <TD> gavinandresen: in case one day we want to fund mining through assurance contracts
994 2013-01-03 18:46:29 <TD> it seems like a relatively simple and uncontroversial change
995 2013-01-03 18:48:45 <TD> also (more controversially) [<data> OP_FALSE]
996 2013-01-03 18:48:53 <TD> so it goes into the block chain but not the utxo set
997 2013-01-03 18:49:05 <gmaxwell> I don't see why they'd need to be made standard.
998 2013-01-03 18:49:23 <gavinandresen> getting them relayed/mined would be the point
999 2013-01-03 18:49:34 agricocb has joined
1000 2013-01-03 18:49:38 <TD> because you want them to be available to all miners
1001 2013-01-03 18:49:53 <gmaxwell> There is no application for them today, however.
1002 2013-01-03 18:50:10 <gavinandresen> If we build it, the applications will come....
1003 2013-01-03 18:50:18 <gmaxwell> Exactly. As it stands making them available would just enable using the p2p network for IM.
1004 2013-01-03 18:50:21 <gmaxwell> :P
1005 2013-01-03 18:50:32 <TD> well, focus just on the [OP_FALSE] case then
1006 2013-01-03 18:50:38 denisx has joined
1007 2013-01-03 18:50:40 <TD> that doesn't seem to have any cost or possible side effects
1008 2013-01-03 18:50:55 <gmaxwell> Why OP_FALSE and not OP_RETURN?
1009 2013-01-03 18:51:03 <jgarzik> I hate OP_IF </offtopic>
1010 2013-01-03 18:51:04 <TD> OP_RETURN works, yes
1011 2013-01-03 18:51:13 <gavinandresen> bleuch, OP_RETURN is disabled
1012 2013-01-03 18:51:30 <gavinandresen> I think OP_FALSE is much clearer semantics: "this is never true"
1013 2013-01-03 18:51:31 <TD> but i think if the outputs are immediately considered as spent, then their cost is much lower. so it gives people a way to embed hashes more cheaply than abusing other types of output
1014 2013-01-03 18:52:00 <gmaxwell> But sure, I generally agree with the UTXO pruning of unspendable outputs... though I think care should be taken to figure out how this would interact with normative UTXO talk.
1015 2013-01-03 18:52:07 <gavinandresen> I agree with TD.
1016 2013-01-03 18:52:22 agricocb has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1017 2013-01-03 18:53:07 <gmaxwell> If you want to talk controversial, I think I also think we should autoprune zero value outputs.
1018 2013-01-03 18:53:12 <gavinandresen> I think making <data> OP_FALSE standard if <data> is 32 bytes or less is the right thing to do.
1019 2013-01-03 18:53:29 <gmaxwell> TD: enbedded data can be handled much more cheaply on the input side though.
1020 2013-01-03 18:54:01 <gmaxwell> But both cases have the unfortunate problem of still needing the data to verify the block in the first place. (though at least size limits can mean it was pre-hash compressed if large)
1021 2013-01-03 18:54:36 <TD> input data is only cheaper because it doesn't sit in the UTXO set. if an output never enters that set, they are equivalent
1022 2013-01-03 18:54:49 <TD> gmaxwell: that's a forking change though because they are spendable today.
1023 2013-01-03 18:54:59 <TD> and they may have uses, also. but we went round that before.
1024 2013-01-03 18:55:03 agricocb has joined
1025 2013-01-03 18:55:05 <Luke-Jr> if the outputs are automatically spent, it's a softfork
1026 2013-01-03 18:55:42 <gavinandresen> sure, but soft forks are a lot harder to roll out than changes to IsStandard
1027 2013-01-03 18:56:07 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: But IsStandard changes do not need deployment in advance of usage, whereas softforks do.
1028 2013-01-03 18:56:19 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: I thought that is what I just said :)
1029 2013-01-03 18:56:28 <gmaxwell> Ah. :P
1030 2013-01-03 18:56:57 <gmaxwell> I can have a pool accepting OP_FALSEs in 10 minutes, and people using them in 15... "addnode this IP."
1031 2013-01-03 18:57:28 <TD> the point is not to whitelist certain pools. it's to incentivize all miners. and the most effective way to do that is to allow relaying. that means upgrading all nodes, which takes time
1032 2013-01-03 18:57:39 <TD> and will take longer and longer times as the project goes on
1033 2013-01-03 18:57:44 <gmaxwell> forrestv: since you're the resident crap output maker, :P do you have an opinions on what form an unspendable data packing output should take?
1034 2013-01-03 18:58:47 <gmaxwell> TD: It's only a matter of time before we get some massive parasitic bitcoin p2p network child porn trading tool or whatever, I'd rather break fewer things by not enabling a lot of new message types without knowing how we'd flood control them in advance.
1035 2013-01-03 18:59:17 daybyter has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
1036 2013-01-03 18:59:25 <gmaxwell> (break fewer things when we're forced to turn off relaying of message types where we can't control the flood)
1037 2013-01-03 19:01:34 <gavinandresen> transaction fees are our flood control mechanism. If they're broken, then that is what we should fix.
1038 2013-01-03 19:01:34 ThomasV has joined
1039 2013-01-03 19:01:49 <TD> storing files in the block chain will never make economic sense. so the only possibility is trolling. nodes run in jurisdictions where the police are easily trolled can enable pruning and the "bad data" just gets automatically deleted
1040 2013-01-03 19:01:49 <jgarzik> ...thus my proposed in pullreq + forum ;)
1041 2013-01-03 19:01:56 <jgarzik> *proposal
1042 2013-01-03 19:01:59 <jgarzik> increasing dust fees
1043 2013-01-03 19:02:18 <jgarzik> TD: not true
1044 2013-01-03 19:02:28 <gmaxwell> TD: who said anything about the blockchain? Thats incidental. Right now someone could abuse the relay network for anonymous messaging.
1045 2013-01-03 19:02:33 <jgarzik> TD: other possibilities exist, namely, it is technically possible and already exists
1046 2013-01-03 19:02:43 <TD> anonymous messaging is pretty much the point of the p2p network :)
1047 2013-01-03 19:02:49 <jgarzik> TD: bootstrapping cost is low, if you have an existing network
1048 2013-01-03 19:02:56 <jgarzik> which we do
1049 2013-01-03 19:03:05 <gmaxwell> No, the point of the p2p network is enabling the bitcoin currency to work.
1050 2013-01-03 19:03:42 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1051 2013-01-03 19:03:48 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, to be fair robust messaging is a prerequisite to that
1052 2013-01-03 19:04:03 <phantomcircuit> although i would hardly call the current network anonymous
1053 2013-01-03 19:04:11 <gmaxwell> someone using it as an IM or file trading network is at odds with that purpose, and if someone starts doing it at large scale we're going to have to filter out more of the relaying.
1054 2013-01-03 19:04:43 <phantomcircuit> that would be a comically inefficient thing to do even today
1055 2013-01-03 19:05:05 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: I actually disagree-- I think leveraging the bitcoin p2p network as a messaging network could make it explode even faster.
1056 2013-01-03 19:05:10 <gmaxwell> Inefficient for the bitcoin users who eat the externalized costs, not so much for the guy sending the messsages.
1057 2013-01-03 19:05:14 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: that doesn't mean that the messages get stored in the blockchain....
1058 2013-01-03 19:05:16 RainbowDashh has joined
1059 2013-01-03 19:05:46 <jgarzik> still burdens the network, making bitcoin-the-currency more difficult to use
1060 2013-01-03 19:06:02 skeledrew has joined
1061 2013-01-03 19:06:06 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: if the messaging and the other stuff is seperable at least it can avoid burdening bitcoin the currency. But using transactions for that doesn't achieve that.
1062 2013-01-03 19:06:15 <gavinandresen> well, maybe we can design it so it is opt-in, or opt-in-if-you-have-the-bandwidth
1063 2013-01-03 19:06:16 RainbowDashh has quit (Write error: Broken pipe)
1064 2013-01-03 19:06:54 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: I do agree there. But ... this is such an enormous project. If you note: nothing like that exists at all, except .. Uh jgarzik whats that thing called?. And not for lack of demand.
1065 2013-01-03 19:07:19 <gmaxwell> (that python/qt bitcoin inspired flooding based anonymous IM system)
1066 2013-01-03 19:07:31 <TD> bitmessage
1067 2013-01-03 19:07:34 <gmaxwell> Thanks.
1068 2013-01-03 19:07:48 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: I plan on getting back to https://gist.github.com/4073937 someday (but payment protocol first)
1069 2013-01-03 19:07:48 <TD> i really doubt anyone is going to build an IM network where al you can do is floodfill 32 byte messages
1070 2013-01-03 19:08:11 <gmaxwell> TD: you just send lots and lots of them, each 'spending' the unconfirmed output of the last.
1071 2013-01-03 19:08:52 <TD> i didn't say it's impossible, just unlikely
1072 2013-01-03 19:09:47 <gmaxwell> I think it's P=1, in fact. As I've run into people on IRC trying to do it and bouncing off the reference client's refusal to make zero value outputs with sendmany.
1073 2013-01-03 19:10:27 <gmaxwell> Fortunately, I guess, so far the people trying were not sufficiently competent and motivated to actually compile their own copy of the software.
1074 2013-01-03 19:10:59 <jgarzik> TD: SatoshiDICE already uses bitcoin blockchain for IM :(
1075 2013-01-03 19:11:13 <TD> anyway, fine, let's restrict my proposal to just [OP_FALSE]
1076 2013-01-03 19:11:21 <jgarzik> TD: and their behavior for losing bets is definitely a flood-fill
1077 2013-01-03 19:11:54 <gavinandresen> TD: any reason to say OP_FALSE ...and... zero-valued output? If people want to burn bitcoins....
1078 2013-01-03 19:11:55 <gmaxwell> And pays for the privileged! ... and yes, I agree with gavin that actually having some kind of IM might be productive simply because it would keep some of that out of the blockchain.
1079 2013-01-03 19:12:14 <TD> gavinandresen: i don't think we want to encourage coin-burning?
1080 2013-01-03 19:12:38 <gmaxwell> The non-standard rules have sometimes saved people from very expensive mistakes.
1081 2013-01-03 19:12:39 <gavinandresen> TD: we shouldn't encourage it, but should we make the code a little more complex to try to discourage it?
1082 2013-01-03 19:13:01 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: good point on expensive mistakes....
1083 2013-01-03 19:13:34 <gavinandresen> I suppose an extra check in the IsStandard() code is trivial enough to be worth it
1084 2013-01-03 19:14:24 <gmaxwell> (when it works it doesn't leave evidence but we have an example where it failed: the big MTGOX coin burning that only worked because of their programatic interface to trigger eligius to mine any txid they wanted.)
1085 2013-01-03 19:15:19 <jgarzik> at the same time: (1) increase fees on dust, (2) provide non-blockchain anonymous IM
1086 2013-01-03 19:15:29 <jgarzik> carrot + stick
1087 2013-01-03 19:15:55 * jgarzik was surprised at the lack of negative reaction on the forum and mailing list, to the fee increase proposal
1088 2013-01-03 19:16:04 <gavinandresen> jgarzik: you didn'
1089 2013-01-03 19:16:13 <gavinandresen> jgarzik: you didn't ask the SD folks directly, did you?
1090 2013-01-03 19:16:17 <gmaxwell> maybe we should put out a call for people to work on non-blockchain anonymous IM. We may gain some more developers who are interested specifically in that and who have expirence in relevant techniques.
1091 2013-01-03 19:16:18 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: no
1092 2013-01-03 19:16:54 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: tying the messages to transactions, so fees control spam problems, is really important IMHO
1093 2013-01-03 19:17:18 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: evorhees posted on reddit, quote, "it's not like "dust" or spam transactions are even occurring at all."
1094 2013-01-03 19:17:27 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: if SD cannot even admit they are creating dust, what is the point?
1095 2013-01-03 19:17:35 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: mining POW can also be employed... and would help bootstrap people who don't yet have bitcoin into that ecosystem.
1096 2013-01-03 19:18:10 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: but mining POW and fees are equivalent on a meta-level. And it seems to me using fees is simpler.
1097 2013-01-03 19:18:30 <gavinandresen> (and has the advantage of helping secure the network)
1098 2013-01-03 19:18:55 <kjj> new message type, client only relays signed messages when the signing address has paid fees in the last N blocks?
1099 2013-01-03 19:19:08 <gavinandresen> anyway, the messaging+transactions conversation isn't something I think we should think hard about right now
1100 2013-01-03 19:19:12 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: Both do. There is a small degree of non-equivilance in that to increase IM volume if fees are your only issue you must increase transaction volumeâ potentially transactions purely for the purpose of paying for IMs.
1101 2013-01-03 19:19:33 <gavinandresen> I would like to think hard about getting a 0.8 release out sometime this year....
1102 2013-01-03 19:20:16 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: I saw your testing message post. Thats critical. Sipa just mostly completed one of my 0.8 must-happen items (the self checking).
1103 2013-01-03 19:20:43 <gavinandresen> Item next at the top of my TODO list: get code signing certificates for the OSX and Windows binaries. I'm working on that now.
1104 2013-01-03 19:20:59 <gmaxwell> We probably need to talk some about 0.8 scoping. There are a number of inflight changes that I'm suspecting should be skipped for 0.8 but I don't want to discourage new contributors with long merge windows.
1105 2013-01-03 19:21:07 <gavinandresen> Quick sanity check: nobody has objections to the certificates being officially owned by Bitcoin Foundation, Inc. ?
1106 2013-01-03 19:21:20 <gmaxwell> sounds fine to me.
1107 2013-01-03 19:21:22 <TD> it's an Inc?
1108 2013-01-03 19:21:29 <gmaxwell> Better check with atlas (lol).
1109 2013-01-03 19:21:43 <gavinandresen> yes, Foundation's official name is an Inc.
1110 2013-01-03 19:21:56 <kjj> yeah, the troll brigade will whine. but who else is in a position to do it?
1111 2013-01-03 19:22:05 <TD> i thought that was reserved for companies, rather than registered charities.
1112 2013-01-03 19:22:24 <gavinandresen> Alternative is a certificate that belongs to Gavin Andresen (or Jeff Garzik or ... somebody...)
1113 2013-01-03 19:22:28 <kjj> Inc. is for any incorporated (chartered and registered) entity
1114 2013-01-03 19:22:33 <TD> ok
1115 2013-01-03 19:22:37 <TD> sounds good to me
1116 2013-01-03 19:22:54 <TD> so you got the DUNS number?
1117 2013-01-03 19:22:57 <gavinandresen> yes, you are an Inc. and then you register for non-profit status (Foundation will be a 501(c)6 )
1118 2013-01-03 19:23:09 <gavinandresen> and yes, DUNS number arrived yesterday
1119 2013-01-03 19:23:26 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: ACK on B.F. holding certs
1120 2013-01-03 19:23:29 <jgarzik> hah
1121 2013-01-03 19:23:30 <gmaxwell> In particular, there are major wallet code changes and the bloom filtering pulls. I'm concerned that they're a distraction for 0.8, at the same time 0.8 needs mostly time and testing, and rewarding people who submit code with a short pipeline should also be a priority.
1122 2013-01-03 19:23:38 * jgarzik just got his DUNS number for Dunvegan Space Systems
1123 2013-01-03 19:24:44 <TD> i'd like to see bloom filtering in 0.8 - it's low risk and we can do some more testing on it real soon. but in the worst case, if it ships in a broken state then sans exploits, it's as if it hadn't shipped at all
1124 2013-01-03 19:24:55 <TD> as all it does is add new commands to the protocol
1125 2013-01-03 19:24:58 nanotube has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1126 2013-01-03 19:24:58 gribble has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1127 2013-01-03 19:24:58 <D34TH> jgarzik, bitcoins in space?
1128 2013-01-03 19:25:06 ageis is now known as gribble
1129 2013-01-03 19:25:10 gribble is now known as ageis
1130 2013-01-03 19:26:07 <gavinandresen> Anybody have bandwidth to write a fuzz-tester for the bloom filtering code?
1131 2013-01-03 19:26:11 <MC-Eeepc> whats a bloom filter
1132 2013-01-03 19:26:13 Gladamas_ has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
1133 2013-01-03 19:26:26 <gavinandresen> judy bloom, famous teenager author....
1134 2013-01-03 19:26:30 <gmaxwell> TD: yea, 'sans exploits' being key.
1135 2013-01-03 19:26:39 <gavinandresen> ... also invented bloom filters. (little known fact)
1136 2013-01-03 19:26:43 <gavinandresen> (that isn't actually true)
1137 2013-01-03 19:26:49 <TD> it uses the same deserialization logic as all the other commands
1138 2013-01-03 19:27:19 <gmaxwell> TD: I'm not arguing that its atypically risky.
1139 2013-01-03 19:27:25 <gavinandresen> I'd like to see a fuzzer throw all sorts of almost-correct filters at it for 24 hours or so and see the code not crash.
1140 2013-01-03 19:27:46 <D34TH> gavinandresen, how much bandwidth we talking
1141 2013-01-03 19:27:50 <TD> a filter is just a few fields, one of which is a bitfield
1142 2013-01-03 19:27:52 <D34TH> i have quite a bit
1143 2013-01-03 19:27:53 <TD> there isn't much to fuzz
1144 2013-01-03 19:28:09 <gavinandresen> D34TH: I mean programming-time bandwidth, not network bandwidth
1145 2013-01-03 19:28:18 <D34TH> sadface
1146 2013-01-03 19:28:24 <gmaxwell> I think a fuzzer is a requirement, regardless. In general we should probably adopt a postion that full coverage and fuzzing is required for any new network exposed feature.
1147 2013-01-03 19:28:42 <gavinandresen> I think I still have the fuzzing branch I used to test the BIP16 code....
1148 2013-01-03 19:28:48 <kjj> isn't every possible bitfield a valid request though?
1149 2013-01-03 19:28:48 nanotube has joined
1150 2013-01-03 19:29:33 <gmaxwell> kjj: obviously we don't expect it to fail, it would be very surprising that it exists. You perform fuzz testing in order to catch the unexpected.
1151 2013-01-03 19:31:41 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: RE: wallet changes: I think the policy should be "we're testing constrained; get a good test plan written, then round up testers and get it tested and it'll get pulled."
1152 2013-01-03 19:32:30 <kjj> sounds very reasonable
1153 2013-01-03 19:33:19 <gavinandresen> and if a little bit of funding would help motivate people to help write a test plan or test, we should think about using some of our Foundation grant to chip in for that.
1154 2013-01-03 19:33:21 <gmaxwell> Okay, thats consistent with what I'd already suggested to stealth222 (next work on adding tests).
1155 2013-01-03 19:34:27 <gmaxwell> I've been somewhat surprised at how little interest people seem to have in simply trying out new things (testing is more than just trying outâ but if you're not willing to even try, you're not going to test either). I don't actually understand whats creating this situation.
1156 2013-01-03 19:35:17 <kjj> I wouldn't read anything into low attendance/participation for at least another month
1157 2013-01-03 19:35:24 <gmaxwell> (I mean, this is not consistent with the expirence I'm having in some non-bitcoin projects. Relative to the number of users I see more people interested in trying out prerelease stuff, e.g. for a lossy audio compressor)
1158 2013-01-03 19:35:33 <jgarzik> on 0.8
1159 2013-01-03 19:35:44 <jgarzik> I think getting the current code out to users is highest priority
1160 2013-01-03 19:35:51 <jgarzik> higher priority than bloom filtering or wallet updates
1161 2013-01-03 19:36:03 <jgarzik> 0.7 is really creaking
1162 2013-01-03 19:36:12 <jgarzik> pushing users away from satoshicode
1163 2013-01-03 19:36:48 <gmaxwell> We also have reported database corruption from windows users on 0.8 that we don't know the cause of. But we also have reported database corruption with 0.7 that we don't know the cause of. :-/
1164 2013-01-03 19:36:51 <jgarzik> I'm concerned that 0.8 takes forever as it becomes an "everything I want it to be" release
1165 2013-01-03 19:36:54 Lexa has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1166 2013-01-03 19:37:21 <jgarzik> if bloom filter is ready, let's pull it today
1167 2013-01-03 19:37:29 <jgarzik> but let's not block 0.8 for bloom filtering
1168 2013-01-03 19:37:36 <gavinandresen> I agree with jgarzik
1169 2013-01-03 19:37:37 <TD> matt has done a lot of testing and written quite thorough unit tests
1170 2013-01-03 19:37:42 <TD> i'm going to do some testing also soon
1171 2013-01-03 19:38:03 <gavinandresen> we should be tieing up loose ends to get to a rc1 asap
1172 2013-01-03 19:38:12 gribble has joined
1173 2013-01-03 19:38:21 <TD> well, could we at least do a fast 0.9? bloom filtering is getting really important for spv clients
1174 2013-01-03 19:38:35 <jgarzik> TD: have it ready soon, and it will get pulled soon ;p
1175 2013-01-03 19:38:42 <TD> i was hoping we could say "upgrade to 0.8, it's important for network performance"
1176 2013-01-03 19:38:51 <gavinandresen> I think we can have bloom filtering in 0.8rc1....
1177 2013-01-03 19:38:55 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1178 2013-01-03 19:38:56 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: we should pull sipa's checking pull sooner rather than later, as it'll help increase confidence that 0.8 is correct.
1179 2013-01-03 19:39:00 <TD> AFAIK it is ready, as in the code works on both sides. i'll do some local testing soon
1180 2013-01-03 19:39:33 <gmaxwell> I think we can have bloomfiltering too. It may need some additional tests, but I actually haven't looked at what it has right now. Matt has done a lot of excellent testing automation work.
1181 2013-01-03 19:39:52 Lexa has joined
1182 2013-01-03 19:40:23 <gavinandresen> speaking of matt's excellent testing automation work... I think he should get some of the 70 BTC that was donated to the Bitcoin Testing Project. Anybody object if I send him 20 ?
1183 2013-01-03 19:40:24 <gmaxwell> The other gate on bloomfilter is really another implementation. :( But if no one is volunteering then perhaps we should look the other way and if it turns out to be flawed we can replace it.
1184 2013-01-03 19:40:31 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: ACK
1185 2013-01-03 19:40:33 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: I strongly support that.
1186 2013-01-03 19:41:04 <jgarzik> The important thing to get right with bloom filtering is the on-wire format. Implementation bugs can be dealt with during -rc etc.
1187 2013-01-03 19:41:06 <Diapolo> for that pull tester alone he should get it ^^
1188 2013-01-03 19:41:11 <gavinandresen> cool, I'll send them before he has a chance to say he doesn't want them
1189 2013-01-03 19:41:17 <jgarzik> hehe
1190 2013-01-03 19:41:19 <gmaxwell> (I dunno if paying people for testing will help, but I can tell you paying some people and not others for testing will hurt! :P)
1191 2013-01-03 19:41:28 <gmaxwell> (even if they insist they don't want them)
1192 2013-01-03 19:41:29 <TD> gmaxwell: it's implemented in bitcoinj
1193 2013-01-03 19:41:42 <jgarzik> TD: and picocoin/libccoin
1194 2013-01-03 19:41:59 <gmaxwell> TD: yes, but I consider bitcoin + bitcoinj 1.5 implementations.
1195 2013-01-03 19:42:03 <gmaxwell> but I didn't know about picocoin.
1196 2013-01-03 19:42:06 <gmaxwell> Concern removed.
1197 2013-01-03 19:42:17 <TD> jgarzik: cool. i thought picocoin didn't have a wallet yet
1198 2013-01-03 19:42:55 skeledrew has joined
1199 2013-01-03 19:43:02 <jgarzik> TD, gmaxwell: it's mostly on the libccoin side, as it is intended to be used internally as well as externally: picocoin has fork-based process separation between wallet and network, and I plan to pass a bloom filter between the two
1200 2013-01-03 19:43:22 <jgarzik> note future tense "plan to". the bloom filter is implemented w/ tests on libccoinc
1201 2013-01-03 19:43:26 <jgarzik> picocoin, not so much
1202 2013-01-03 19:44:21 <jgarzik> TD: picocoin has always had a wallet, from day one. not a very useful one... but picocoin is a SPV wallet client.
1203 2013-01-03 19:44:28 <TD> ok
1204 2013-01-03 19:45:10 <jgarzik> the underlying bitcoin lib, libccoin, is much more expansive. It supports picocoin as well as other apps (including the nascent block relay daemon "brd")
1205 2013-01-03 19:45:29 <jgarzik> libccoin passes all the JSON tests shipped w/ bitcoin/bitcoin.git
1206 2013-01-03 19:46:03 <jgarzik> picocoin is half-built, very much still under construction. it can receive payments to a wallet, but not send (or even enumerate very well)
1207 2013-01-03 19:47:00 <jgarzik> still, for bitcoind, bloom filtering not should be a blocker for 0.8. it is on the "nice to have, if ready" list. and it sounds like it is ready.
1208 2013-01-03 19:49:39 <kjj> is the reported database corruption in 0.8 better, worse, or the same as in the old BDB versions?
1209 2013-01-03 19:50:00 <kjj> as in, wallet corruption, or not?
1210 2013-01-03 19:51:48 <Diapolo> worse than BDB seems impossible? ^^
1211 2013-01-03 19:52:11 <gmaxwell> kjj: no, never wallet.
1212 2013-01-03 19:52:32 <gmaxwell> As far as we know the BDB corruption issues seems to be related to unclean shutdowns, and doesn't seem to create (much) forking risk.
1213 2013-01-03 19:52:49 <gmaxwell> With 0.8 we have less information.
1214 2013-01-03 19:53:09 <kjj> is a 0.8 DB corruption more or less annoying to recover from than in BDB? As in, is the usual remedy to delete the index and start over?
1215 2013-01-03 19:53:50 <gmaxwell> the annoyance of the corruption isn't a consideration for me (though it's less), the concern is that it might come along with forking risk.
1216 2013-01-03 19:54:15 <grau> Hi, Would you please clarify does 0.8 moves away from BDB or stores an index of BDB in LevelDB?
1217 2013-01-03 19:54:31 <gmaxwell> an index of bdb??
1218 2013-01-03 19:54:33 <kjj> as in, some nodes might get funny ideas about the top of the chain and think that the rest of the network is building on bogus hashes?
1219 2013-01-03 19:54:40 <gmaxwell> In 0.8 BDB is only used for the wallet.
1220 2013-01-03 19:55:03 <grau> exuse i never tried to parse the binary store
1221 2013-01-03 19:55:15 <grau> its just a dump?
1222 2013-01-03 19:55:22 <gmaxwell> kjj: that would be the less bad case. Worse is corruption that would permit building a bogus block.
1223 2013-01-03 19:56:13 <gmaxwell> grau: the blocks themselves have never been stored with bdb. They're just seralized to disk just like they are on the wire, one after another.
1224 2013-01-03 19:56:28 <kjj> gmaxwell: would the bogus chain be accepted by nodes other than the one with the funny corruption?
1225 2013-01-03 19:56:52 <grau> ok, so it is a wire dump. Thanks I thought that weould also be indexed store
1226 2013-01-03 19:56:56 <gmaxwell> kjj: if the cause is systemic e.g. a flaw in the software then potentially yes.
1227 2013-01-03 19:57:04 <kjj> ahh
1228 2013-01-03 19:57:26 <kjj> hmm.
1229 2013-01-03 19:57:35 <gmaxwell> grau: BDB is used in <0.8 to index that data. 0.8 largely does not index that data (it indexes only the block locations).
1230 2013-01-03 19:59:17 <gmaxwell> kjj: we've had and fixed bugs in git that could result in accepting an invalid chain, so it's not purely hypothetical. Though it would seem to me that the evidence we have now merely suggests some leveldb durability or atomiticiy problems on windows, though its a bit dangerous to assume.
1231 2013-01-03 19:59:32 <grau> ok, thats different. I use leveldb both to store and index, btw using diffrent access paths e.g. by address and by hash
1232 2013-01-03 19:59:41 <grau> you might want to take a look
1233 2013-01-03 19:59:43 <gmaxwell> We do not index transactions anymore in 0.8.
1234 2013-01-03 19:59:59 <aethero> gmaxwell are you alive?
1235 2013-01-03 20:00:06 <aethero> obviously :)
1236 2013-01-03 20:00:09 <aethero> May I PM?
1237 2013-01-03 20:00:12 <gmaxwell> And for storing its quite hard to be more efficient than what we do, especially since we no longer access block data except to initilize peers.
1238 2013-01-03 20:00:21 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1239 2013-01-03 20:00:22 Dyaheon has quit ()
1240 2013-01-03 20:00:49 <kjj> well, my thought was that if 0.8 is being held up by serious issues, we should merge some smaller stuff in as the next 0.7.x release while we continue work (testing) on the leveldb
1241 2013-01-03 20:00:56 copumpkin has joined
1242 2013-01-03 20:01:08 <kjj> but the situation sorta splits my decision criteria down the middle.
1243 2013-01-03 20:01:21 <gmaxwell> aethero: it's a free country. But in the past I've had a habbit of ignoring PM's from people who make a point of bragging in public that they want to have a private conversation with me.
1244 2013-01-03 20:01:45 <aethero> That wasn't bragging. It's considered polite to ask..
1245 2013-01-03 20:01:45 <gmaxwell> kjj: the things in 0.8 are the most important things happening for the software by far. If we can't get them out in a timely fashion the rest is pointless.
1246 2013-01-03 20:01:52 <grau> its efficient for store, but is it efficient to look up utxo?
1247 2013-01-03 20:02:11 <gmaxwell> grau: we don't use the blockchain data to look up transactions.
1248 2013-01-03 20:02:30 <kjj> gmaxwell: I'm inclined to agree, but if it needs more testing, it needs more testing, and another 0.7.x release won't necessarily have a huge impact on that
1249 2013-01-03 20:02:44 <grau> gmaxwell : you assume utxo in memory?
1250 2013-01-03 20:03:57 Dyaheon has joined
1251 2013-01-03 20:04:36 <gmaxwell> grau: no, it's seperate from the blockchain, in a special highly compacted form that includes only the data needed for validation.
1252 2013-01-03 20:05:34 <grau> gmaxwell : can it be more compact than the output part of transactions?
1253 2013-01-03 20:05:39 <gmaxwell> Yes.
1254 2013-01-03 20:06:17 <kjj> gmaxell: can you think of anything we could do to provide ourselves with reasonable assurance that the new code won't allow bogus blocks to fall in?
1255 2013-01-03 20:07:06 <grau> i will look into thanks, hate reading c++ if than rather c.
1256 2013-01-03 20:07:44 <kjj> the most obvious way is also the high risk way: release, see what happens. perhaps retagging it from pre-0.8 to 0.8rc1 will get it into enough hands to build confidence, while still limiting the potential damage
1257 2013-01-03 20:08:41 toffoo has joined
1258 2013-01-03 20:09:16 <gmaxwell> kjj: releases don't actually increase confidence enormously for that partiuclar concern, because the type of bogosity could be so obscure that it wouldn't happen naturally.
1259 2013-01-03 20:10:06 <helo> should the 0.8 previews be set to testnet only?
1260 2013-01-03 20:10:11 <gmaxwell> The best work is the work that bluematt has already done, which in fact caught one of those issues, â the blocktester. Improving it further would be helpful. Though it's only likely to catch blockchain state determinstic failures.
1261 2013-01-03 20:10:19 <gmaxwell> helo: no one will test them.
1262 2013-01-03 20:10:23 <gmaxwell> (if thats done)
1263 2013-01-03 20:20:18 freakazoid has joined
1264 2013-01-03 20:21:52 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1265 2013-01-03 20:22:22 InsuDra has joined
1266 2013-01-03 20:22:46 <kjj> gmaxwell: ok, does improving on that work require time, or effort, or both?
1267 2013-01-03 20:23:17 <grau> gmaxwell: where can I find that blockester please?
1268 2013-01-03 20:24:26 Z0rZ0rZ0r has joined
1269 2013-01-03 20:25:07 Insu has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1270 2013-01-03 20:25:27 libcoin has joined
1271 2013-01-03 20:25:37 <jgarzik> grau: raw block data ("block" messages) are stored in on-wire format in sequential access data files
1272 2013-01-03 20:25:59 <jgarzik> grau: BDB (< 0.8) or leveldb (>= 0.8) stored indices into this data
1273 2013-01-03 20:26:15 <jgarzik> grau: 0.8 also optimizes storage of the UTXO set
1274 2013-01-03 20:27:20 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: well 0.8 indexes a _lot_ less of that data. It really only indexes the block IDs. Then it seperately keeps the utxo data.
1275 2013-01-03 20:28:02 <grau> jgarzik : thanks. gmaxwell explained. I have to test the branching of the chain. gmaxwell recommends blocktester of bluematt, would you please point me to it?
1276 2013-01-03 20:29:07 <gmaxwell> grau: The tool is here https://github.com/TheBlueMatt/test-scripts but I don't know if thats the best location for it.
1277 2013-01-03 20:29:15 <gmaxwell> So I was looking in my logs to see if there was a better url.
1278 2013-01-03 20:29:20 <grau> i store by hash in leveldb and also store hash by address since want to support query by that. this is certainly slowe but i think a string use case
1279 2013-01-03 20:29:56 <jgarzik> grau: ping bluematt... don't know offhand
1280 2013-01-03 20:30:15 <jgarzik> grau: yes, optional indices can add useful queries
1281 2013-01-03 20:30:25 skeledrew has joined
1282 2013-01-03 20:30:35 <jgarzik> grau: sipa has mentioned an optional bitcoind index, storing all (Hash) -> (transaction)
1283 2013-01-03 20:30:45 <jgarzik> well really (hash)->(transaction offset)
1284 2013-01-03 20:31:02 <jgarzik> that would permit queries on spent transactions, which many have requested
1285 2013-01-03 20:31:23 <grau> jgarzik: I store hash->block, hash->tx and out address->tx
1286 2013-01-03 20:32:01 <grau> where address is both sent and received
1287 2013-01-03 20:33:16 <grau> i mean address->tx hash
1288 2013-01-03 20:33:46 <jgarzik> grau: BTW it is nice that you are on IRC
1289 2013-01-03 20:34:10 owowo has joined
1290 2013-01-03 20:34:13 <jgarzik> grau: several protocol changes have been first discussed here. it is good to have alt-implementation developers listening.
1291 2013-01-03 20:34:33 <grau> thanks, will listen :)
1292 2013-01-03 20:34:51 Hashdog has joined
1293 2013-01-03 20:35:58 <grau> bloom filter is not my interest the moment. but BIP32 is what I think needed by my "customer"
1294 2013-01-03 20:37:19 <gmaxwell> If you will not implement bloom filters but you are implementing a full node, then that would be an argument against us adopting it. It would be helpful to know if you're opposed to it and why, or if it just isn't your current priority.
1295 2013-01-03 20:37:33 Hashdog has left ()
1296 2013-01-03 20:38:13 <grau> do not read much about it. I just mean I do not see it important at the moment
1297 2013-01-03 20:38:27 <gmaxwell> OK.
1298 2013-01-03 20:39:08 datagutt has quit (Quit: kthxbai)
1299 2013-01-03 20:40:12 <jgarzik> The general idea of bloom filters is making it easier to support thin clients (SPV clients). Full nodes will transmit fewer bytes to clients, using less bandwidth, if a client installs a bloom filter.
1300 2013-01-03 20:40:36 <jgarzik> And for thin clients on mobile phones, that means less bandwidth used on a potentially poor mobile connection :)
1301 2013-01-03 20:41:35 tonikt has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1302 2013-01-03 20:41:37 <grau> Yes, I got the concept and like it.
1303 2013-01-03 20:44:35 <jgarzik> Fraudulent certs in the wild again, LWN reports: http://lwn.net/Articles/531346/rss
1304 2013-01-03 20:44:57 libcoin1 has joined
1305 2013-01-03 20:44:58 libcoin has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1306 2013-01-03 20:45:28 <grau> Serving lots of SPVs is a particular role of a full node. I focus on uses of a full node that connect bitcoin with other systems.
1307 2013-01-03 20:51:12 <gmaxwell> I wonder if we could also use bloom filters in the reference client for bandwidth limiting. E.g. if you have limited your bandwidth, send peers orthorgonal random bloom filters to reduce the number of INVs they send you. (but still send normal GETBLOCKs rather than MSG_FILTERED_BLOCK).
1308 2013-01-03 20:54:10 drdoolittle has quit ()
1309 2013-01-03 20:56:00 <grau> gmaxwell: sounds risky if filter are orthogonal, you might miss a lot if one client is a zombie. Or you also ramdomly disconnect to reset filter.
1310 2013-01-03 20:56:33 <ThomasV> gmaxwell: doesn't that increase the processing work for the peers who need to filter?
1311 2013-01-03 20:56:40 <gmaxwell> grau: missing transaction messages isn't terribly risky though, as you'll find them when the transactions end up in a block... at least so long as only ratelimited nodes do it.
1312 2013-01-03 20:57:14 <gmaxwell> ThomasV: the filter is really cheap, probably (hopefully?) cheaper than the sha256 operations required to send the inv messages that will get skipped.
1313 2013-01-03 20:57:25 <grau> gmaxwell: ok until all transactions get a block
1314 2013-01-03 21:00:09 <ThomasV> gmaxwell: ok, but a given node will receive different filters from its various peers. I guess that scales at least linearly
1315 2013-01-03 21:01:10 <jgarzik> Can't do it for all peers, either. SPV clients will just ignore filter* messages.
1316 2013-01-03 21:01:33 <gmaxwell> spv clients don't relay third party transactions.
1317 2013-01-03 21:01:48 <gmaxwell> (and if they do, they're DOS multipliers)
1318 2013-01-03 21:02:28 <grau> Do SPV clients identify themselves as such in version message ?
1319 2013-01-03 21:02:45 <jgarzik> !NODE_NETWORK
1320 2013-01-03 21:02:45 <gribble> Error: "NODE_NETWORK" is not a valid command.
1321 2013-01-03 21:02:48 <jgarzik> !NODE_NETWORK
1322 2013-01-03 21:04:10 <MC-Eeepc> spv dont contribute back to the network in any way then?
1323 2013-01-03 21:04:58 <gmaxwell> wrt the broken node risk if they're orthorgonal, you could also make them only partially orthorgonal, e.g. every bit is sent to two peers, but not all peers...
1324 2013-01-03 21:05:08 <gmaxwell> MC-Eeepc: they contribute to the network by being users of it.
1325 2013-01-03 21:05:27 <gmaxwell> Ideally supporting a connection, esp a filtered one should be so cheap and scalable that its a non-issue.
1326 2013-01-03 21:05:36 <gmaxwell> Though our current network code doesn't make that the case.
1327 2013-01-03 21:07:03 <grau> you basically assume a random partitioning of the network. I wonder if some protocol could even gove hint to real partitioning, so one can recognize those nodes that add more to reach
1328 2013-01-03 21:07:56 <gmaxwell> grau: yes/no, I'd only propose this for network leaf nodes which are resource constrained.. where their alternative would be to run a SPV node that doesn't validate or relay.
1329 2013-01-03 21:08:52 StarenseN has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1330 2013-01-03 21:09:19 StarenseN has joined
1331 2013-01-03 21:09:51 <kjj> a SPV leaf node isn't likely to be asking for a full inventory anyway, will it?
1332 2013-01-03 21:10:57 <kjj> so the nodes that are asking for inventory will be regular multi-connected nodes, so it shouldn't matter if any of those peers provides less than a full set, provided that it gets a full set from everywhere
1333 2013-01-03 21:12:27 <kjj> so a node should be fine if it protects itself by advertising a masked filter, provided it does so somewhat randomly to reduce the chances of a peer getting a degenerate mask set
1334 2013-01-03 21:13:13 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1335 2013-01-03 21:16:03 skeledrew has joined
1336 2013-01-03 21:17:37 ovidiusoft has quit (Quit: leaving)
1337 2013-01-03 21:18:57 ovidiusoft has joined
1338 2013-01-03 21:20:41 <gmaxwell> I don't really know if its worth thinking about, INVs are very low volume.
1339 2013-01-03 21:25:29 xenland has joined
1340 2013-01-03 21:26:18 <xenland> Is there a default encoding enforced on the Sign message dialogue in the GUI? or does it default to Qt?
1341 2013-01-03 21:26:19 <jgarzik> pretty much
1342 2013-01-03 21:26:36 <xenland> (UTF-8)
1343 2013-01-03 21:26:44 <xenland> ^for example.
1344 2013-01-03 21:32:16 att__ has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1345 2013-01-03 21:32:34 Insu_Dra has joined
1346 2013-01-03 21:33:52 att__ has joined
1347 2013-01-03 21:35:45 InsuDra has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
1348 2013-01-03 21:37:18 <Diapolo> Qt should be UTF-8 afaik
1349 2013-01-03 21:40:46 grau has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1350 2013-01-03 21:41:07 <Diapolo> gmaxwell: CheckDiskSpace() is called right before pre-allocating new space for undo or block files ... is that really different as before it checked before appending to the block files (for every block AFAIK)?
1351 2013-01-03 21:42:02 <gmaxwell> Diapolo: yes, it really is.
1352 2013-01-03 21:42:27 <gmaxwell> Diapolo: what it does now basically doesn't get run during runtime. The database takes space too, not just the blockfiles.
1353 2013-01-03 21:42:58 <Diapolo> gmaxwell: indeed it is, but to be honest that check before was only saving us by chance then
1354 2013-01-03 21:44:15 <gmaxwell> Diapolo: it got called every block before, so it's a lot closer. Don't feel bad: all code that isn't tested is broken and we have no tests for it.
1355 2013-01-03 21:44:26 <TD> gavinandresen: btw, could you hold off merging matts work until he gives the OK
1356 2013-01-03 21:44:35 <gavinandresen> TD: sure
1357 2013-01-03 21:44:48 <TD> i'm testing it now and found some issues :( hopefully they can be fixed quickly
1358 2013-01-03 21:45:44 <xenland> Diapolo: thanks mate.
1359 2013-01-03 21:46:26 <Diapolo> gmaxwell: I don't feel bad, just wanted to understand and clarify ;)
1360 2013-01-03 21:47:06 BTCOxygen has joined
1361 2013-01-03 21:49:58 <Diapolo> gmaxwell: perhaps the buffer to ensure we don't run out of disk space should be just raised, so the first check on startup is sufficient until undo or block files get touched the next time or do we have a background thread, which could do that check periodically?
1362 2013-01-03 21:53:24 <kjj> how deep do you feel like we need to go into this? my choices would be 1) a note in the docs that it will die silently and horribly if you run out of disk space, 2) die loudly if less than 5 GB free is ever detected, 3) careful thoughtful checking of free space
1363 2013-01-03 21:53:46 xenland has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1364 2013-01-03 21:54:38 <MC-Eeepc> do bloom filters operate in sort of the same way as dht works
1365 2013-01-03 21:54:43 <helo> no
1366 2013-01-03 21:54:44 paraipan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1367 2013-01-03 21:55:04 <helo> read the wikipedia entry, it's simple enough
1368 2013-01-03 21:55:37 <jgarzik> MC-Eeepc: a bloom filter is an abstract data type, like a b-tree or hash table
1369 2013-01-03 21:55:50 libcoin has joined
1370 2013-01-03 21:55:50 libcoin1 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1371 2013-01-03 21:56:25 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1372 2013-01-03 21:57:28 <helo> seems like it would be pretty hard to know if unused disk space falls below some amount
1373 2013-01-03 21:57:48 <Diapolo> kjj: we should take care of disk space and I guess it can be done just by requiring a large enough amount of free space during startup
1374 2013-01-03 22:00:50 <jgarzik> really it's low disk space that should be detected, prior to wallet and block writes
1375 2013-01-03 22:01:05 skeledrew has joined
1376 2013-01-03 22:01:11 <jgarzik> < 10 MB is danger zone, as BDB and level might write ~1MB or so "unexpectedly"
1377 2013-01-03 22:01:37 <Diapolo> jgarzik: we check for 50MB + X for each check, which occurs on startup and during every extension of undo and block files
1378 2013-01-03 22:02:24 <MC-Eeepc> oh its only for spv nodes
1379 2013-01-03 22:02:36 <MC-Eeepc> seems sensible then
1380 2013-01-03 22:06:40 <MC-Eeepc> let it be known that i support the gist of bip 37, if not the details
1381 2013-01-03 22:06:56 <MC-Eeepc> (because im too dumb to understand them)
1382 2013-01-03 22:07:34 Guest68810 has joined
1383 2013-01-03 22:07:48 paraipan has joined
1384 2013-01-03 22:08:23 zooko has quit (Quit: ERC Version 5.3 (IRC client for Emacs))
1385 2013-01-03 22:09:35 <MC-Eeepc> why do the bips start at 10 anyway
1386 2013-01-03 22:12:22 <kjj> 2 through 9 were rubbish
1387 2013-01-03 22:12:52 <jgarzik> random genjix allocations, unfinished projects that never made it to BIP stage
1388 2013-01-03 22:13:19 <Luke-Jr> AFAIK 2-9 were reserved for revisions of 1
1389 2013-01-03 22:13:36 <Luke-Jr> don't know if that was explicitly said or an assumption of mine tho
1390 2013-01-03 22:14:31 root2_ has joined
1391 2013-01-03 22:16:45 root2 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1392 2013-01-03 22:21:22 <MC-Eeepc> ultraprune never actully got made a bip??
1393 2013-01-03 22:21:39 <Luke-Jr> MC-Eeepc: ultraprune doesn't change anything standardized
1394 2013-01-03 22:21:59 <MC-Eeepc> oh
1395 2013-01-03 22:23:43 Z0rZ0rZ0r has quit (Quit: Wheeeee)
1396 2013-01-03 22:24:14 <MC-Eeepc> 36 seems excitinmg
1397 2013-01-03 22:24:34 <MC-Eeepc> like an api for the p2p network itself?
1398 2013-01-03 22:28:36 robocoin has quit (Quit: ´ã¼ï½)
1399 2013-01-03 22:34:03 unknown45682 has quit ()
1400 2013-01-03 22:35:41 flatfly has joined
1401 2013-01-03 22:39:04 Diapolo has left ()
1402 2013-01-03 22:41:20 StarenseN has quit ()
1403 2013-01-03 22:42:58 <gmaxwell> Diapolo: db cache can be set to gigabytes.
1404 2013-01-03 22:43:24 <gmaxwell> darn, just missed him.
1405 2013-01-03 22:43:48 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: right now we have a 50 MB check IIRC.
1406 2013-01-03 22:43:50 one_zero has joined
1407 2013-01-03 22:44:04 <gmaxwell> So for the wallet just putting in some more space checks is sufficient.
1408 2013-01-03 22:44:43 <jgarzik> I wonder if leveldb does any mmap-based reading or writing. that can be crash prone if not done very carefully.
1409 2013-01-03 22:45:41 <gmaxwell> I assume what we're going to have to do is keep track of how much unflushed data we might have and add that to the check. ... either that or add dbcache of safty to the check which is fairly obnoxious.
1410 2013-01-03 22:49:27 ovidiusoft has quit (Quit: leaving)
1411 2013-01-03 22:49:49 <jgarzik> current code flushes almost immediately, and does leveldb batch writes
1412 2013-01-03 22:50:37 maaku has quit (Quit: maaku)
1413 2013-01-03 22:54:35 InsuDra has joined
1414 2013-01-03 22:58:00 Insu_Dra has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1415 2013-01-03 23:09:06 MobGod has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1416 2013-01-03 23:10:42 MobEvo has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1417 2013-01-03 23:10:55 mmoya_ has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1418 2013-01-03 23:12:44 EasyAt has quit (Quit: leaving)
1419 2013-01-03 23:13:10 EasyAt has joined
1420 2013-01-03 23:13:48 EasyAt has quit (Client Quit)
1421 2013-01-03 23:16:16 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1422 2013-01-03 23:16:27 skeledrew has joined
1423 2013-01-03 23:19:22 InsuDra has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1424 2013-01-03 23:19:48 Impaler has joined
1425 2013-01-03 23:20:03 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
1426 2013-01-03 23:22:18 gladoscc has joined
1427 2013-01-03 23:23:06 <gladoscc> How can I get a list of transactions of a specified, external address?
1428 2013-01-03 23:24:02 CodeInChaos has joined
1429 2013-01-03 23:25:01 flatfly has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1430 2013-01-03 23:25:10 TD has joined
1431 2013-01-03 23:25:16 TD has quit (Client Quit)
1432 2013-01-03 23:27:24 CodesInChaos has quit (Ping timeout: 265 seconds)
1433 2013-01-03 23:29:27 EasyAt has joined
1434 2013-01-03 23:29:51 EasyAt is now known as Guest21311
1435 2013-01-03 23:31:56 gladoscc has quit (Changing host)
1436 2013-01-03 23:31:56 gladoscc has joined
1437 2013-01-03 23:34:00 agricocb has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1438 2013-01-03 23:34:02 t7 has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
1439 2013-01-03 23:35:26 <gladoscc> umm anyone?
1440 2013-01-03 23:37:18 CodeInChaos has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1441 2013-01-03 23:37:31 CodesInChaos has joined
1442 2013-01-03 23:38:47 Guest21311 is now known as EasyAt|
1443 2013-01-03 23:42:19 Tace has joined
1444 2013-01-03 23:42:45 Tace has left ("http://quassel-irc.org - Chat comfortably. Anywhere.")
1445 2013-01-03 23:45:16 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Quitte)
1446 2013-01-03 23:49:08 paraipan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1447 2013-01-03 23:55:42 JWU42_ has joined
1448 2013-01-03 23:58:14 JWU42 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1449 2013-01-03 23:58:14 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
1450 2013-01-03 23:58:40 agricocb has joined
1451 2013-01-03 23:59:05 JWU42_ has quit (Client Quit)