1 2013-02-10 00:12:57 toffoo has joined
   2 2013-02-10 00:14:29 toffoo_ has joined
   3 2013-02-10 00:14:34 toffoo has quit (Client Quit)
   4 2013-02-10 00:14:35 toffoo_ is now known as toffoo
   5 2013-02-10 00:15:37 riddler_ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
   6 2013-02-10 00:18:18 bitcoinbulletin has quit (Quit: bitcoinbulletin)
   7 2013-02-10 00:23:17 freewil has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
   8 2013-02-10 00:25:15 KIDC has joined
   9 2013-02-10 00:25:15 andytoshi has quit (Quit: running low on RAM...)
  10 2013-02-10 00:26:59 benkay has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
  11 2013-02-10 00:27:21 wizkid057 has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
  12 2013-02-10 00:27:29 wizkidO57 has joined
  13 2013-02-10 00:27:58 <jgarzik> Luke-Jr: eloipool pukes big tracebacks, if bitcoind is restarted
  14 2013-02-10 00:27:59 bitcoinbulletin has joined
  15 2013-02-10 00:28:37 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: yes
  16 2013-02-10 00:28:48 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: if all of them are down
  17 2013-02-10 00:28:49 Arm0n has joined
  18 2013-02-10 00:29:16 wizkidO57 is now known as wizkid057
  19 2013-02-10 00:29:17 <jgarzik> tee hee hee
  20 2013-02-10 00:29:20 <jgarzik> 2013-02-10 00:11:06 ERROR: CTransaction::IsStandard : ignoring transaction with 1e-8 value output
  21 2013-02-10 00:29:37 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: you could run my block_dice branch ;)
  22 2013-02-10 00:31:09 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: it blacklists transactions with outputs to 1dice* while retaining them in the memory pool structures so it can block also ones using them as inputs
  23 2013-02-10 00:31:49 <Luke-Jr> actually, I suppose it doesn't need to retain them just for that, but it does <.<
  24 2013-02-10 00:31:52 riddler_ has joined
  25 2013-02-10 00:36:06 benkay has joined
  26 2013-02-10 00:36:26 riddler_ has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
  27 2013-02-10 00:36:46 denisx has joined
  28 2013-02-10 00:39:07 Guest22025 has joined
  29 2013-02-10 00:39:27 <Guest22025> how many of u are mining with asic?
  30 2013-02-10 00:39:41 <Guest22025> 1? 3, 5?
  31 2013-02-10 00:39:46 <Guest22025> just curious
  32 2013-02-10 00:40:18 <Guest22025> [besides jeff]
  33 2013-02-10 00:41:22 <denisx> Guest22025: 0, until you tell me otherwise
  34 2013-02-10 00:41:55 <Guest22025> jeff definitely has one
  35 2013-02-10 00:42:23 <denisx> Guest22025: you said 'beside'
  36 2013-02-10 00:42:31 <Guest22025> my bad...
  37 2013-02-10 00:42:42 <Guest22025> right u are
  38 2013-02-10 00:42:47 <sipa> how large is a 'normal' blkindex.dat on 0.7.x code these days?
  39 2013-02-10 00:43:13 <denisx> sipa: 1748369408
  40 2013-02-10 00:43:37 <sipa> ;;calc 1748369408/1.073741824
  41 2013-02-10 00:43:37 <gribble> 1628295898.44
  42 2013-02-10 00:43:51 <sipa> ;;calc 1748369408/1048576
  43 2013-02-10 00:43:51 <gribble> 1667.375
  44 2013-02-10 00:44:00 <Luke-Jr> sipa: Eligius's is 1.7 GB
  45 2013-02-10 00:44:32 <gmaxwell> I suspect we're moving off it just in time to advoid finding out if it has largefile support issues.
  46 2013-02-10 00:52:10 Guest22025 has quit (Quit: Page closed)
  47 2013-02-10 00:53:17 antimatter_ has joined
  48 2013-02-10 00:57:00 * JWU42 wonders how soon for 0.8 to be safe enough to use on his solo pool
  49 2013-02-10 00:58:00 <sipa> Luke-Jr: i thought you used a pruned one?
  50 2013-02-10 00:58:17 <gmaxwell> JWU42: a fair number of people have been mining on it for some time now. How closely do you pay attention to your daemon?
  51 2013-02-10 00:58:44 <Luke-Jr> sipa: I don't *think* we do on Eligius
  52 2013-02-10 00:58:46 <JWU42> gmaxwell: I could pay closer sttention I suppose
  53 2013-02-10 00:58:56 <Luke-Jr> JWU42: FWIW, Eloipool supports multiple bitcoinds
  54 2013-02-10 00:59:13 <Luke-Jr> JWU42: with block proposal support, it can only use templates that all of them consider valid
  55 2013-02-10 00:59:22 * JWU42 is using a fork of slush's stratum
  56 2013-02-10 00:59:25 <JWU42> pool
  57 2013-02-10 00:59:33 <JWU42> ;)
  58 2013-02-10 00:59:40 <gmaxwell> JWU42: I think it's fine so long as you pay attention. E.g. watch this channel and check the daemon for getting stranded ever day/couple of days. We don't know of any issues why you shouldn't, or otherwise we'd fix them.
  59 2013-02-10 01:00:15 <JWU42> gmaxwell: once I find my next block i may switch
  60 2013-02-10 01:00:19 <gmaxwell> I think it's _unlikely_ to have problems but I wouldn't want to hear you lost a week of mining becase you weren't watching it and it got stuck.
  61 2013-02-10 01:00:34 <JWU42> heh - yeah - I would check it more often than that
  62 2013-02-10 01:00:42 <JWU42> 3-4 times a day min.
  63 2013-02-10 01:00:44 <gmaxwell> Ideally you'd have monitoring.
  64 2013-02-10 01:00:56 * JWU42 is n00bish
  65 2013-02-10 01:01:06 <sipa> JWU42: you understand that switching now or switching later won't make any difference for your chances/expected time to see a block?
  66 2013-02-10 01:01:11 <JWU42> know just enough toi get myself into trouble
  67 2013-02-10 01:01:13 <gmaxwell> yea, if you're checking it that often it should be totally fine. keep a copy of an old 0.7 directory arond so you can switch back if anything goes wrong.
  68 2013-02-10 01:01:41 <JWU42> sipa: yes - understand that won't impact things (short of a fear the new bitcoind might crash)
  69 2013-02-10 01:02:18 <JWU42> thanks for the info huys - appreciate your work as always!
  70 2013-02-10 01:02:21 <gmaxwell> JWU42: you could also startup the new bitcoind in parallel (just on another port)
  71 2013-02-10 01:02:23 <sipa> JWU42: not that i want to push you to switch - far from it - but it sounded to me like you had the common misconception that there was progress during block mining
  72 2013-02-10 01:02:23 <JWU42> *guys
  73 2013-02-10 01:02:58 <JWU42> sipa: understood - and yes - I can see why you would say that based on my comment above
  74 2013-02-10 01:03:50 <JWU42> gmaxwell: I have found "issues" running two bitcoinds -- namely the bitcoind on a non standard port really struggles to get past 9-10 connections
  75 2013-02-10 01:04:00 <JWU42> yes - ports are forwarded...
  76 2013-02-10 01:04:25 <Luke-Jr> JWU42: 8 connections is plenty O.o
  77 2013-02-10 01:04:28 <JWU42> so I could run 0.7.2 on a non-standard and run 0.8 on 8333
  78 2013-02-10 01:04:52 <JWU42> Luke-Jr: so the bitcoind for eligius only has 8 connections
  79 2013-02-10 01:04:54 <JWU42> ?
  80 2013-02-10 01:05:15 <gmaxwell> JWU42: yes, nodes will not connect inbound to non-standard ports by defalt. But thats irrelevant so long as your two nodes are connected to each other.
  81 2013-02-10 01:05:17 <Luke-Jr> JWU42: 9 on 0.8, 4 on 0.6.0
  82 2013-02-10 01:05:26 <JWU42> well - perhaps - it is more the quality and not quanityt of the nodes you connect ?!?
  83 2013-02-10 01:05:29 <Luke-Jr> JWU42: 536 on our dedicated relay node :P
  84 2013-02-10 01:05:38 <Luke-Jr> JWU42: yes
  85 2013-02-10 01:05:50 <gmaxwell> It's also somewhat inadvisable to mine directly on a node with a large number of connections, because the node will block on realying blocks to its hundred peers and not issue out work.
  86 2013-02-10 01:06:34 <JWU42> gmaxwell: so run the non standard port bitcoind with connect=
  87 2013-02-10 01:06:50 <gmaxwell> In my setup I had one public node with lots of connections (the normal compliment) and multiple backend nodes with only 3-4 connections or so.
  88 2013-02-10 01:07:06 <Luke-Jr> JWU42: I'd do -connect=localhost -addnode=bigpools
  89 2013-02-10 01:07:06 <JWU42> gmaxwell: hrm
  90 2013-02-10 01:07:14 <Luke-Jr> that's what Eligius's main 0.6.0 does
  91 2013-02-10 01:07:20 <gmaxwell> JWU42: or at least an addnode to your standard port node, and perhaps some known good nodes like Jeff's public nodes and luke's public node.
  92 2013-02-10 01:07:57 <JWU42> yeah - I have been tweaking the nodes I used and perhaps have been wrong in using the higher traffic nodes per blockchain.info
  93 2013-02-10 01:08:18 <JWU42> you all know FAR more about this than I
  94 2013-02-10 01:08:44 <JWU42> again - appreciate the comments!
  95 2013-02-10 01:13:28 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
  96 2013-02-10 01:14:28 <JWU42> gmaxwell: quick googling didn't get me anywhere with finding Jeff and Luke's node IP
  97 2013-02-10 01:14:51 setkeh` has joined
  98 2013-02-10 01:15:51 <gmaxwell> Jeff's are 62.75.216.13  and 69.64.34.118   (pick whatever is lower latency)
  99 2013-02-10 01:18:56 <JWU42> crappy routing to both unfortunately
 100 2013-02-10 01:19:42 <JWU42> latter is best it seems
 101 2013-02-10 01:20:33 <jgarzik> 2013-02-09 19:38:24,240	merkleMaker	WARNING	Change from height 220419->220421; no longpoll merkleroots available!
 102 2013-02-10 01:20:36 <jgarzik> small reorg
 103 2013-02-10 01:20:36 <jgarzik> ?
 104 2013-02-10 01:23:57 agricocb has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 105 2013-02-10 01:25:02 rdymac has joined
 106 2013-02-10 01:25:12 rdymac has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 107 2013-02-10 01:28:59 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: it premakes merkleroots for the next block
 108 2013-02-10 01:36:56 toffoo has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 109 2013-02-10 01:37:56 a5m0 has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 110 2013-02-10 01:39:44 rdymac has joined
 111 2013-02-10 01:45:55 riddler_ has joined
 112 2013-02-10 01:52:29 ielo has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 113 2013-02-10 01:54:50 a5m0 has joined
 114 2013-02-10 01:54:50 a5m0 has quit (Changing host)
 115 2013-02-10 01:54:50 a5m0 has joined
 116 2013-02-10 02:00:59 rdymac has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 117 2013-02-10 02:04:50 jurov has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 118 2013-02-10 02:06:22 jurov has joined
 119 2013-02-10 02:13:19 gladoscc has joined
 120 2013-02-10 02:13:32 <gladoscc> How do I get the total balance of all accounts, and the actual balance on server?
 121 2013-02-10 02:13:51 <gladoscc> I'm trying to do a cold store system and I need to know how much BTC is on the wallet, and how much btc is in all accounts.
 122 2013-02-10 02:14:02 <jgarzik> gladoscc: 'getinfo' gives you the total balance of all coins.
 123 2013-02-10 02:14:20 <jgarzik> gladoscc: total of all accounts must be performed by summing all accounts
 124 2013-02-10 02:14:29 <gladoscc> jgarzik: hmm
 125 2013-02-10 02:15:52 <gladoscc> but since at the start, total balance should be balance of all accounts
 126 2013-02-10 02:16:05 <gladoscc> could I use an account to keep track of "coins not on server"?
 127 2013-02-10 02:16:57 antimatter_ has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 128 2013-02-10 02:17:14 <JWU42> gladoscc: you can do a watch only wallet on blockchain.info
 129 2013-02-10 02:17:30 <JWU42> just add the addresses
 130 2013-02-10 02:17:51 <gladoscc> nah, not using blockchain.info, down a lot
 131 2013-02-10 02:18:02 <gladoscc> I guess I'll just store it in the DB
 132 2013-02-10 02:18:28 <gmaxwell> JWU42: by doing that you expose yourself to the systemic risk of inaccuracy or compromise of the centralized service— so be mindful of that.
 133 2013-02-10 02:18:48 <JWU42> watch only address - how does that matter?
 134 2013-02-10 02:19:20 <gladoscc> gmaxwell: yeah, another reason why I don't like relying on blockchain.info
 135 2013-02-10 02:19:27 <JWU42> and yes - I probably need to rethink the % of my BTC with piuk
 136 2013-02-10 02:19:35 __niven has quit ()
 137 2013-02-10 02:20:16 <gmaxwell> JWU42: it depends on what you're going to be doing with them. If you're watching to tell if someone has paid you— for example, there is a vulnerability.
 138 2013-02-10 02:20:56 <JWU42> I thought he was just looking for a way to have a consolidated view of his BTC balance
 139 2013-02-10 02:21:42 <JWU42> otherwise would need to import all the private keys into one wallet?
 140 2013-02-10 02:21:42 <gmaxwell> Yes. And?
 141 2013-02-10 02:22:13 <JWU42> then it isn;t "cold storage"
 142 2013-02-10 02:22:17 <gladoscc> gmaxwell: is this a good way to do an automated cold store system?
 143 2013-02-10 02:22:39 <gladoscc> wait, I can't count hot wallet refills
 144 2013-02-10 02:22:41 <JWU42> as i understand it
 145 2013-02-10 02:23:02 <gmaxwell> gladoscc: I just have an online copy of an offline wallet, which is encrypted with a totally random key.
 146 2013-02-10 02:23:46 * JWU42 tries to wrap his head around that one
 147 2013-02-10 02:24:10 <gladoscc> gmaxwell: I'm doing the cold store for an online service
 148 2013-02-10 02:24:21 <gladoscc> Like, every 10 minutes it sends 90% of total balance to the cold store address.
 149 2013-02-10 02:25:04 * JWU42 shuts up and watches with interest
 150 2013-02-10 02:25:11 <Luke-Jr> gladoscc: fail
 151 2013-02-10 02:25:45 <gladoscc> Luke-Jr: what do you mean
 152 2013-02-10 02:25:49 <Luke-Jr> gladoscc: don't resend it, then there's a risk
 153 2013-02-10 02:25:51 <JWU42> helpful comment there Luke-Jr ;)
 154 2013-02-10 02:25:56 <Luke-Jr> gladoscc: just have customers send direct to the offline wallet
 155 2013-02-10 02:26:05 riddler_ has quit ()
 156 2013-02-10 02:26:08 * JWU42 nods
 157 2013-02-10 02:26:43 <JWU42> so we return to the "how to get the balance of th cold store"
 158 2013-02-10 02:26:52 <JWU42> ?
 159 2013-02-10 02:27:01 <gladoscc> yeah, but my service is like instawallet
 160 2013-02-10 02:27:02 <gmaxwell> gladoscc: Luke's commentary there is good though... the bounce through thing is not a grand idea.
 161 2013-02-10 02:27:10 <gladoscc> so a portion of the coins need to be on the server so people can spend it!
 162 2013-02-10 02:28:03 <gladoscc> can I do a bitcoind lookup of "transactions sent to X address"?
 163 2013-02-10 02:28:06 <Luke-Jr> hmm
 164 2013-02-10 02:28:13 <Luke-Jr> gladoscc: not currently
 165 2013-02-10 02:28:15 velige has joined
 166 2013-02-10 02:28:16 <gmaxwell> sure, so keep some coin on the server... and have deposits go offline. Then as coins are needed online move them there.
 167 2013-02-10 02:28:42 <benkay> Luke-Jr: how does blockchain.info track deposits to addresses?
 168 2013-02-10 02:28:47 <Luke-Jr> benkay: custom code
 169 2013-02-10 02:28:56 * benkay facepalms
 170 2013-02-10 02:29:07 <gladoscc> gmaxwell: then I still need to keep track of transactions to addresses
 171 2013-02-10 02:29:12 <gladoscc> so I can credit deposits.
 172 2013-02-10 02:29:33 <gmaxwell> Sure.
 173 2013-02-10 02:29:41 <gmaxwell> benkay: whats the facepalm for?
 174 2013-02-10 02:29:59 <benkay> i should have known that
 175 2013-02-10 02:30:03 <Luke-Jr> gladoscc: you can scan every block with -blocknotify
 176 2013-02-10 02:36:46 Solidarity is now known as RatchetLove
 177 2013-02-10 02:37:12 <Luke-Jr> gladoscc: or perhaps try out Armory
 178 2013-02-10 02:37:25 <Luke-Jr> gladoscc: I *think* it has working deterministic wallets and watch-only wallets
 179 2013-02-10 02:38:06 testnode9 has joined
 180 2013-02-10 02:39:29 setkeh` has quit (Quit: WeeChat 0.4.0)
 181 2013-02-10 02:40:20 setkeh has quit (Quit: setkeh.com)
 182 2013-02-10 02:40:55 setkeh has joined
 183 2013-02-10 02:46:32 LargoG has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 184 2013-02-10 02:51:46 freakazoid has joined
 185 2013-02-10 02:51:58 mykhal has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 186 2013-02-10 02:57:46 mykhal has joined
 187 2013-02-10 03:03:05 moore_ has joined
 188 2013-02-10 03:06:31 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 189 2013-02-10 03:17:36 <JWU42> for some reson I thought 0.8 used a smaller (total file size) blockchain
 190 2013-02-10 03:17:41 <JWU42> with a new DB of some sort
 191 2013-02-10 03:18:19 <kjj> the bulk of the old block files were blocks.  not much savings available
 192 2013-02-10 03:23:45 Jamesonwa has joined
 193 2013-02-10 03:27:04 <JWU42> yeah
 194 2013-02-10 03:27:11 <JWU42> I see the files are all smaller
 195 2013-02-10 03:27:20 <JWU42> but total is still ~ 6GB
 196 2013-02-10 03:28:17 a5m0_ has joined
 197 2013-02-10 03:29:00 <Luke-Jr> JWU42: reducing the blockchain size was not a goal for 0.8
 198 2013-02-10 03:29:26 <Luke-Jr> JWU42: ultraprune (which you're likely thinking of) is about the UTXO set, which improves *performance*
 199 2013-02-10 03:29:52 a5m0 has quit (Disconnected by services)
 200 2013-02-10 03:29:56 a5m0_ is now known as a5m0
 201 2013-02-10 03:30:01 <Luke-Jr> JWU42: the codebase *is* pretty close to one where you can outright delete blk0*.dat with some minimal hacking, though
 202 2013-02-10 03:30:02 a5m0 has quit (Changing host)
 203 2013-02-10 03:30:02 a5m0 has joined
 204 2013-02-10 03:33:37 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: yea, until there is a reorg and your node dies forever. or until you try to gettransaction on something, or a peer reuests a block from you.. :P
 205 2013-02-10 03:35:09 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: I did say minimal hacking
 206 2013-02-10 03:35:25 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: the undo files don't have enough to handle a reorg on their own?
 207 2013-02-10 03:36:11 <gmaxwell> Correct.
 208 2013-02-10 03:36:57 <Luke-Jr> well that sucks :p
 209 2013-02-10 03:37:15 * Luke-Jr wonders what the block files could have that is missing from undos
 210 2013-02-10 03:38:24 freakazoid has joined
 211 2013-02-10 03:45:27 xorgate has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 212 2013-02-10 03:45:30 Jamesonwa has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 213 2013-02-10 03:45:40 Goonie has quit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
 214 2013-02-10 03:45:49 <coingenuity> petertodd: Luke-Jr: nope, wasn't me, i actually know next to nothing about mixing
 215 2013-02-10 03:47:04 <Luke-Jr> oh, maybe it was copumpkin after all then :/
 216 2013-02-10 03:47:08 <Luke-Jr> co* someone XD
 217 2013-02-10 03:47:19 <coingenuity> heh
 218 2013-02-10 03:47:41 moore_ has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 219 2013-02-10 03:52:04 fiesh has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 220 2013-02-10 03:56:39 dvide has joined
 221 2013-02-10 03:56:54 fiesh has joined
 222 2013-02-10 03:57:31 denisx has quit (Quit: denisx)
 223 2013-02-10 03:58:53 citiz3n has joined
 224 2013-02-10 04:03:52 sgornick has quit (Quit: Ex-Chat)
 225 2013-02-10 04:06:28 eoss has joined
 226 2013-02-10 04:09:39 vampireb has joined
 227 2013-02-10 04:13:36 benkay has quit (Quit: benkay)
 228 2013-02-10 04:17:46 agricocb has joined
 229 2013-02-10 04:18:30 freakazoid has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 230 2013-02-10 04:24:43 dust-otc has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 231 2013-02-10 04:33:10 KIDC has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 232 2013-02-10 04:46:48 paybitcoin has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
 233 2013-02-10 04:47:23 paybitcoin has joined
 234 2013-02-10 04:48:24 copumpkin has joined
 235 2013-02-10 04:55:15 zooko has joined
 236 2013-02-10 04:58:08 benkay has joined
 237 2013-02-10 05:03:46 denisx has joined
 238 2013-02-10 05:05:23 D34TH has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 239 2013-02-10 05:09:12 benkay has quit (Quit: benkay)
 240 2013-02-10 05:16:22 rbecker is now known as RBecker
 241 2013-02-10 05:18:18 TheSeven has quit (Disconnected by services)
 242 2013-02-10 05:18:28 [7] has joined
 243 2013-02-10 05:27:41 <MC1984> wowser i wake up and bitcoin is using 550mb ram for its sync
 244 2013-02-10 05:27:49 <MC1984> is it supposed to do that
 245 2013-02-10 05:28:11 <MC1984> looks like it went dog slow all night because it went into swap :\
 246 2013-02-10 05:37:56 rlifchitz has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 247 2013-02-10 05:39:18 rlifchitz has joined
 248 2013-02-10 05:39:18 rlifchitz has quit (Changing host)
 249 2013-02-10 05:39:18 rlifchitz has joined
 250 2013-02-10 05:41:00 paraipan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 251 2013-02-10 05:45:47 e0s_ has joined
 252 2013-02-10 05:46:10 e0s_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 253 2013-02-10 05:46:21 <phantomcircuit> MC1984, during initial sync that sounds about right
 254 2013-02-10 05:48:06 <MC1984> i tought it wasnt supposed to do that unless you play ith the dbcache
 255 2013-02-10 05:48:56 BTCTrader has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 256 2013-02-10 05:50:17 denisx has quit (Quit: denisx)
 257 2013-02-10 06:06:40 vampireb has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
 258 2013-02-10 06:08:56 drizztbsd has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
 259 2013-02-10 06:18:42 <weex> MC1984: daily txns have grown recently too
 260 2013-02-10 06:24:05 e0s_ has joined
 261 2013-02-10 06:24:40 owowo has quit (Quit: sayonara)
 262 2013-02-10 06:31:13 MrTiggr has joined
 263 2013-02-10 06:32:43 andytoshi has joined
 264 2013-02-10 06:32:51 eoss has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 265 2013-02-10 06:32:52 e0s_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 266 2013-02-10 06:37:30 gladoscc has quit (Quit: Page closed)
 267 2013-02-10 06:45:21 Guest6613 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 268 2013-02-10 06:47:47 zooko has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 269 2013-02-10 06:51:19 root2 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 270 2013-02-10 06:51:38 root2 has joined
 271 2013-02-10 06:56:56 Jamesonwa has joined
 272 2013-02-10 06:58:22 dbe has joined
 273 2013-02-10 06:58:46 dbe is now known as Guest66054
 274 2013-02-10 06:59:08 Guest66054 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 275 2013-02-10 07:03:06 <muhoo> yesss... the dice effect
 276 2013-02-10 07:03:32 ciphermonk has joined
 277 2013-02-10 07:08:16 MrTiggr has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 278 2013-02-10 07:10:20 BTCTrader has joined
 279 2013-02-10 07:32:56 cnidaria_ has joined
 280 2013-02-10 07:33:32 icebattl1 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 281 2013-02-10 07:33:36 cnidaria_ has quit (Client Quit)
 282 2013-02-10 07:33:47 icebattle has joined
 283 2013-02-10 07:40:36 Arm0n has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 284 2013-02-10 07:41:49 dbe has joined
 285 2013-02-10 07:42:13 dbe is now known as Guest45150
 286 2013-02-10 07:46:00 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
 287 2013-02-10 07:59:10 Jamesonwa has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 288 2013-02-10 08:23:07 Goonie has joined
 289 2013-02-10 08:32:32 stalled has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 290 2013-02-10 08:36:08 andytoshi has quit (Quit: all the clowns are fallen)
 291 2013-02-10 08:40:09 CodesInChaos has joined
 292 2013-02-10 08:49:16 TD has joined
 293 2013-02-10 08:49:20 TD has quit (Client Quit)
 294 2013-02-10 08:55:48 Guest45150 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 295 2013-02-10 09:00:05 ovidiusoft has joined
 296 2013-02-10 09:16:44 RBecker is now known as rbecker
 297 2013-02-10 09:26:46 mappum has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 298 2013-02-10 09:34:40 voodster has joined
 299 2013-02-10 09:36:17 Arnavion has quit (Disconnected by services)
 300 2013-02-10 09:36:26 Arnavion has joined
 301 2013-02-10 09:36:56 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 302 2013-02-10 09:37:29 JZavala has joined
 303 2013-02-10 09:37:47 ken` has joined
 304 2013-02-10 09:44:14 dserrano5 has left ()
 305 2013-02-10 09:45:26 Scrat has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 306 2013-02-10 09:46:01 Scrat has joined
 307 2013-02-10 09:53:33 dbe has joined
 308 2013-02-10 09:53:56 dbe is now known as Guest25569
 309 2013-02-10 09:54:59 Insu has joined
 310 2013-02-10 10:03:47 gjs278 has joined
 311 2013-02-10 10:04:08 HM has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 312 2013-02-10 10:05:23 HM has joined
 313 2013-02-10 10:08:43 one_zero has quit ()
 314 2013-02-10 10:10:44 BTCOxygen has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 315 2013-02-10 10:11:38 BTCOxygen has joined
 316 2013-02-10 10:12:48 Raccoon has joined
 317 2013-02-10 10:14:06 <Raccoon> Seriously, the progress bar UI hasn't been updated yet to approximate progress by transaction count or block size?
 318 2013-02-10 10:14:29 dvide has quit ()
 319 2013-02-10 10:14:36 <Raccoon> I really thought that would have been tackled a year ago
 320 2013-02-10 10:15:18 <Raccoon> 100% of new users think that the bitcoin client has "locked up" once it reaches 80%
 321 2013-02-10 10:16:21 <Raccoon> gavinandresen: what gives?
 322 2013-02-10 10:17:54 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 323 2013-02-10 10:19:22 <midnightmagic> :-P
 324 2013-02-10 10:19:32 <midnightmagic> i imagine patches are welcome
 325 2013-02-10 10:22:27 B0g4r7 has joined
 326 2013-02-10 10:24:18 <jgarzik> Raccoon: "100% of new users"... seems like a dubious claim ;p
 327 2013-02-10 10:24:40 <Raccoon> can't be helped.  it is what it is. :)
 328 2013-02-10 10:25:31 MrTiggr has joined
 329 2013-02-10 10:25:45 <Scrat> wouldnt that require a way to get the blockchain size from the network?
 330 2013-02-10 10:26:11 <Raccoon> isn't it?
 331 2013-02-10 10:27:16 <Raccoon> it also seems reasonable that the client should attempt a full download up front so it can grind away while disconnected from the internet.
 332 2013-02-10 10:29:24 BurtyBB has joined
 333 2013-02-10 10:29:28 <Raccoon> Also seems reasonable that, since any bitcoin client itself relies a bit on trust (eg, trust that the epoc date is correct, and other such measurments) that the client should also have written into code the SHA512 hashes of each month of block data, so all this grinding can go away.
 334 2013-02-10 10:30:18 <Raccoon> just a quick hash of the chain would be all that's necessary for a new client install.
 335 2013-02-10 10:30:38 <Scrat> there are checkpoints
 336 2013-02-10 10:30:52 <Raccoon> there are no checkpoints
 337 2013-02-10 10:30:54 BurtyB has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 338 2013-02-10 10:31:11 <Raccoon> at least none that eliminate grinding
 339 2013-02-10 10:33:32 <Scrat> what do you mean by grinding
 340 2013-02-10 10:34:11 <Raccoon> where the client inspects each and every transaction since day 1 by hashing and testing each block or match
 341 2013-02-10 10:34:13 <Raccoon> *for
 342 2013-02-10 10:34:47 <Scrat> so you're arguing for lite nodes
 343 2013-02-10 10:34:57 <Raccoon> yes and no.
 344 2013-02-10 10:35:15 <Raccoon> the idea behind lite nodes is more of a remote cloud-based solution.
 345 2013-02-10 10:35:35 ielo has joined
 346 2013-02-10 10:35:38 <Raccoon> where the client doesn't retain the blockchain itself
 347 2013-02-10 10:35:53 <Raccoon> i'm not suggesting that at all
 348 2013-02-10 10:37:17 WolfAlex has joined
 349 2013-02-10 10:37:35 <Raccoon> i'm suggesting that the bitcoin code can have an array of checkpoints, which can be verified against a hundred trusted websites, and all the client has to do is quick hash a huge glob of blocks as one bundle.  Super Blocks
 350 2013-02-10 10:38:02 WolfAlex_ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 351 2013-02-10 10:38:41 <jgarzik> Raccoon: Oh, you weren't joking?  "100% of new users think that the bitcoin client has "locked up" once it reaches 80%" is a false claim, based on positive reports in the 0.8 rc1 testing threads.
 352 2013-02-10 10:39:20 <jgarzik> Plus it seems self-evident that you are unlikely to be receiving reports from all new bitcoin users.
 353 2013-02-10 10:40:11 <Raccoon> jgarzik: people who participate in testing threads are unlikely to be "new users".
 354 2013-02-10 10:40:41 <Raccoon> "Bitcoin -- This is not your grandma's coin"
 355 2013-02-10 10:41:57 <Raccoon> But yeah, my neighbors asked me why it locked up.  The expected by the rate of progress that they could turn off their computer before going to bed.
 356 2013-02-10 10:42:08 <Raccoon> *They expected
 357 2013-02-10 10:44:58 <Raccoon> I suggest every 4383 blocks be bundled as a "super block", SHA512 hashed, hash gets hard-coded into the client, and the hash list shared on sites like bitcoin.org, mtgox and blockexplorer
 358 2013-02-10 10:45:57 <Raccoon> 4383 is the average number of blocks per month, considering 365.25 days a year, or 30.4375 days in a month.
 359 2013-02-10 10:46:45 <Scrat> Raccoon: I dont see how that would make verification faster
 360 2013-02-10 10:46:50 <Raccoon> Which works out with how the client calculates bounty every 4 years
 361 2013-02-10 10:47:08 <Raccoon> Scrat: right now verification is slow because of harddrive seek times.
 362 2013-02-10 10:47:46 xorgate has joined
 363 2013-02-10 10:47:49 <Raccoon> Scrat: The harddrive constantly reads small chunks at a time and verifies each little chunk.
 364 2013-02-10 10:48:03 RazielZ has joined
 365 2013-02-10 10:48:35 <Raccoon> Scrat: What it should be doing is loading a hundred megs into ram, then do a single SHA512 hash over the whole glob of data
 366 2013-02-10 10:49:21 <Raccoon> (not literally 100 megs at once, but you get the idea)
 367 2013-02-10 11:09:54 ciphermonk has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 368 2013-02-10 11:10:06 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 369 2013-02-10 11:11:42 Guest25569 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 370 2013-02-10 11:28:17 gjs278 has joined
 371 2013-02-10 11:31:22 rdymac has joined
 372 2013-02-10 11:31:37 valparaiso_ has joined
 373 2013-02-10 11:31:59 valparaiso_ is now known as Guest44879
 374 2013-02-10 11:34:02 valparaiso has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 375 2013-02-10 11:36:10 gjs278 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 376 2013-02-10 11:36:37 <Eliel> Raccoon: I don't understand your complaint. 0.8 rc1 definitely shows the number of blocks left rather than a percentage.
 377 2013-02-10 11:37:53 <Eliel> although, granted, it'd make it much easier to estimate how much time it'll take if it showed the total transaction count instead.
 378 2013-02-10 11:38:16 BurtyBB has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 379 2013-02-10 11:52:19 RazielXYZ has joined
 380 2013-02-10 11:52:56 MC1984 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 381 2013-02-10 11:53:06 gjs278 has joined
 382 2013-02-10 11:53:38 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 383 2013-02-10 11:56:37 RazielZ has joined
 384 2013-02-10 11:57:08 zooko has joined
 385 2013-02-10 11:58:28 MC1984 has joined
 386 2013-02-10 11:59:35 RazielXYZ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 387 2013-02-10 12:00:36 RazielXYZ has joined
 388 2013-02-10 12:01:07 <Raccoon> Eliel: That's what I'm saying.  It -only- shows number of blocks left.  It has done this since at least 0.3
 389 2013-02-10 12:01:30 RazielZ has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 390 2013-02-10 12:01:34 <Raccoon> What it doesn't show is number of transactions, bytes, or appearance of time left.
 391 2013-02-10 12:02:28 <Eliel> but accomplishing what you're asking would require at least a big reorganization of the code, possibly even a rewrite.
 392 2013-02-10 12:04:01 <Eliel> the code that needs this overhaul to implement what you want is the most critical part of Bitcoin. Thus extreme care is needed when modifying it.
 393 2013-02-10 12:05:50 RazielZ has joined
 394 2013-02-10 12:06:12 <Raccoon> You're suggesting a protocol rewrite?
 395 2013-02-10 12:08:22 RazielXYZ has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 396 2013-02-10 12:22:14 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 397 2013-02-10 12:22:18 dbe has joined
 398 2013-02-10 12:22:43 dbe is now known as Guest43881
 399 2013-02-10 12:24:35 <wumpus> running a full node is just not for everyone
 400 2013-02-10 12:25:49 <wumpus> the problem for most users with running a full node is not at all that it's unclear how long they have to wait, but that they have to wait before the chain is downloaded before they can play at all
 401 2013-02-10 12:26:58 Guest43881 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 402 2013-02-10 12:32:39 <MC1984> just make a transparent SPV>full transition
 403 2013-02-10 12:32:46 <MC1984> no more waiting like a chump
 404 2013-02-10 12:32:55 <wumpus> discussing whether the progress bar should show transactions, bytes, or time left is just besides the point, it's bikeshedding, people that decide to run a full node should be aware it takes a while to jumpstart
 405 2013-02-10 12:33:36 <wumpus> yes, either that or just run a SPV client
 406 2013-02-10 12:33:52 <MC1984> no
 407 2013-02-10 12:33:55 CodeShark has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 408 2013-02-10 12:34:18 <MC1984> lul as many people as possible, who dont know or care anyway, into running a full node
 409 2013-02-10 12:35:08 <MC1984> and that bar would be nice if its progress was linear somehow, whatever it measures
 410 2013-02-10 12:35:54 <MC1984> or maybe just get rid of it once the SPV mode is in
 411 2013-02-10 12:36:08 <wumpus> my vote would be to get rid of it or put it in the debug screen
 412 2013-02-10 12:36:13 zooko has left ("#tahoe-lafs")
 413 2013-02-10 12:37:10 <wumpus> at least once it can do something without having all the blocks
 414 2013-02-10 12:38:15 <Eliel> Raccoon: no, not protocol rewrite. Just a rewrite of the code that implements the current protocol.
 415 2013-02-10 12:38:31 <Eliel> Raccoon: at the moment it just has no way to know how many transactions there are in total.
 416 2013-02-10 12:38:37 <wumpus> then again, I'm starting to think that a full node is just too much for most people that simply want a payment solution, we should stop recommending it by default
 417 2013-02-10 12:38:51 <Eliel> wumpus: I agree with that.
 418 2013-02-10 12:39:07 <Eliel> it gives many people a bad impression when they end up trying that first.
 419 2013-02-10 12:39:22 <Eliel> and have to wait ages for their first coins to show up ready to use.
 420 2013-02-10 12:39:37 <MC1984> fuck it, lets just stick the full nodes on ec2 and call it a day
 421 2013-02-10 12:39:57 <wumpus> yeah... a full node is great for getting people to support the network, but it can't be expected of everyone.. most people won't leave it running all day anyway
 422 2013-02-10 12:40:13 <wumpus> a full node that runs 30 minutes a day is useless to the network
 423 2013-02-10 12:40:35 <Eliel> perhaps even worse than useless :/
 424 2013-02-10 12:40:39 frosks has joined
 425 2013-02-10 12:40:56 <MC1984> i dont see why that is
 426 2013-02-10 12:41:19 stalled has joined
 427 2013-02-10 12:41:58 <ne0futur> would be great if the bitcoin protocol could give some kind of small reward for full nodes
 428 2013-02-10 12:42:01 Hashdog has joined
 429 2013-02-10 12:42:03 <wumpus> because bootstrapping nodes perform best if they have a stable peer
 430 2013-02-10 12:42:30 <ne0futur> not generating, but always here
 431 2013-02-10 12:43:29 <MC1984> verification fee?
 432 2013-02-10 12:43:52 darkskiez has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 433 2013-02-10 12:43:59 <MC1984> wumpus yes well i think wed expect work on the P2P to mitigate that
 434 2013-02-10 12:44:06 <Eliel> that's hard to implement in a way that doesn't bloat the blockchain quite a bit.
 435 2013-02-10 12:44:59 <MC1984> maybe a small fee every 10,000 verified txn or something
 436 2013-02-10 12:45:11 <MC1984> souns impossible though
 437 2013-02-10 12:45:26 <Eliel> yes, it's difficult to verify you've verified them.
 438 2013-02-10 12:45:27 <ne0futur> I d setup many more full nodes
 439 2013-02-10 12:45:28 <MC1984> also no way to verify long term storage
 440 2013-02-10 12:45:38 darkskiez has joined
 441 2013-02-10 12:45:55 <ne0futur> running 2 for now just for the glory, but I d have 10-20 with an incentive
 442 2013-02-10 12:45:56 LargoG has joined
 443 2013-02-10 12:45:58 <Eliel> plus, who'd pay for it.
 444 2013-02-10 12:45:59 <wumpus> is there a problem at all with # of full nodes? someone could set up something like torservers for bitcoin
 445 2013-02-10 12:47:15 <Eliel> if there was a way for people sending a transaction to include a fee that gets given to a random full node that the tx passed through, it might work.
 446 2013-02-10 12:47:22 <wumpus> I think there's enough enthousiasts that want to run a full node just for the heck of it
 447 2013-02-10 12:47:34 <Eliel> but... I can't think of a way to do that sensibly.
 448 2013-02-10 12:47:35 <MC1984> running mor than one is pointless i think
 449 2013-02-10 12:48:01 <MC1984> the point of independent veriying nodes is the person who controls it is prob honest
 450 2013-02-10 12:48:12 <MC1984> thus adding more "honesty" to the network
 451 2013-02-10 12:48:25 <MC1984> more nodes from the same person does not add more honesty
 452 2013-02-10 12:48:27 <MC1984> right?
 453 2013-02-10 12:48:35 <wumpus> it should always be encouraged for people to run a full node, but they should know what they're doing, not expecting just to try out bitcoin for a bit quickly
 454 2013-02-10 12:48:59 <Eliel> MC1984: if the person's nodes are honest, it will increase the density of honest nodes in the network, no?
 455 2013-02-10 12:50:18 <MC1984> it only works that way for miners?
 456 2013-02-10 12:50:55 <MC1984> everyone should run a full v node
 457 2013-02-10 12:51:18 <MC1984> i just dont see it being a problem for most people going forward, especially if the block cap stays put
 458 2013-02-10 12:51:33 <MC1984> if the cap stays put illbe running one on my phone in 5 years
 459 2013-02-10 12:52:02 frosks has quit ()
 460 2013-02-10 12:52:15 axhlf has joined
 461 2013-02-10 12:53:50 voodster has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 462 2013-02-10 12:56:22 Skav has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 463 2013-02-10 12:58:04 Skav has joined
 464 2013-02-10 12:59:41 D34TH has joined
 465 2013-02-10 13:05:33 voodster has joined
 466 2013-02-10 13:13:21 tsche has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 467 2013-02-10 13:16:20 daybyter has joined
 468 2013-02-10 13:19:52 xorgate has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 469 2013-02-10 13:20:09 <Raccoon> Also, what happens now that we're reaching critical mass as far as number of transactions per block
 470 2013-02-10 13:20:39 xorgate has joined
 471 2013-02-10 13:20:43 <Raccoon> how will the network ever grow to even cover a small % of coffee sold in the US, let alone replace Visa
 472 2013-02-10 13:21:12 <Raccoon> When the number of coffees sold in the US is enough to max out the bandwidth of a small city
 473 2013-02-10 13:21:34 <Raccoon> and fill up a 2TB harddrive in an hour
 474 2013-02-10 13:21:48 Detritus has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
 475 2013-02-10 13:22:20 <sipa> why would you want it to replace Visa?
 476 2013-02-10 13:23:12 <Raccoon> If it's theoretically impossible to replace Visa, then it's actually impractical to suppliment Visa
 477 2013-02-10 13:23:45 <Raccoon> The amount we use Visa today in 2013 is only 1% of Visa's usage in 2023
 478 2013-02-10 13:23:46 <sipa> well you assume that all transactions in the bitcoin economy need to go through the block chain
 479 2013-02-10 13:24:04 Scrat_p has joined
 480 2013-02-10 13:24:18 <Raccoon> Can Bitcon keep up with that 100 fold decadial pace?
 481 2013-02-10 13:24:38 Scrat has quit (Disconnected by services)
 482 2013-02-10 13:24:41 Scrat_p is now known as Scrat
 483 2013-02-10 13:24:55 <Raccoon> sipa: It does if people are going to "use bitcoin", an not that bitcoin turns into another fiat system.
 484 2013-02-10 13:25:28 <Raccoon> If you buy coffee with bitcoin, you're buying it with bitcoin... unless you're buying it with Gox Bux or Second Life dollars
 485 2013-02-10 13:25:33 <Raccoon> that you bought with bitcoins
 486 2013-02-10 13:25:47 <sipa> depends on your meaning of fiat (if you mean "government-declared value", no; if you mean "money without intrinstic value", yes)
 487 2013-02-10 13:25:48 <Raccoon> Then it turns out that THOSE networks are more useful than Bitcoin itself
 488 2013-02-10 13:26:40 <sipa> and it's inevitable to have some degree of _voluntary_ centralization
 489 2013-02-10 13:27:06 <Raccoon> I mean, sure, I can buy a starbucks coffee with a sarbucks gift card I bought from an amazon gift card that I received from selling bitcoins.
 490 2013-02-10 13:27:14 <Raccoon> but that's 7 degrees of separation
 491 2013-02-10 13:27:20 <sipa> no need why it can't be bitcoins all the way
 492 2013-02-10 13:27:24 <sipa> for example mtgox vouchers
 493 2013-02-10 13:27:27 <Raccoon> that's not scanning a bitcoin qr-code at starbucks
 494 2013-02-10 13:27:43 <sipa> i sure as hell hope no one ever needs to scan a QR code to pay with bitcoins
 495 2013-02-10 13:27:47 <sipa> or see a bitcoin address
 496 2013-02-10 13:27:52 <Raccoon> mtgox vouchers are NOT bitcoins by any stretch of the word
 497 2013-02-10 13:27:57 <sipa> they aren't
 498 2013-02-10 13:28:22 <axhlf> Raccoon: rather that they have NFC and just place the device on the counter and tap "accept"
 499 2013-02-10 13:28:30 <Raccoon> sipa: what's wrong with scanning qrcodes?
 500 2013-02-10 13:28:57 <sipa> inconvenient
 501 2013-02-10 13:29:00 <Raccoon> axhlf: that'd be nice, except only 3 devices on the market have NFC capability, and nobody can agree on an NFC standard.
 502 2013-02-10 13:29:12 <sipa> sure, compared to manally typing a bitcoin address, it's heaven
 503 2013-02-10 13:29:19 Detritus has joined
 504 2013-02-10 13:29:20 <JWU42> so - with 0.8 - if you DO NOT start with a clean data dir the .dat files remain at 2GB?
 505 2013-02-10 13:29:31 <Raccoon> it's less convenient to tap your finger on an icon than it is to tap your phone against the counter?
 506 2013-02-10 13:29:39 <sipa> JWU42: they are hardlinked to their new locations
 507 2013-02-10 13:29:47 <axhlf> Raccoon: well but there will be some time before starbucks accept btc ;)
 508 2013-02-10 13:30:04 <JWU42> sipa: so if I wanted the smaller .dat files start with clean datadir...
 509 2013-02-10 13:30:12 <JWU42> K
 510 2013-02-10 13:30:12 <Raccoon> axhlf: starbux at least has access to printer paper
 511 2013-02-10 13:30:13 <JWU42> thks
 512 2013-02-10 13:30:18 sacredch1o has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 513 2013-02-10 13:30:24 <Raccoon> axhlf: 10 cents vs 1000 dollars
 514 2013-02-10 13:30:51 <Raccoon> which is how much it would cost to set up NFC at each location
 515 2013-02-10 13:30:52 <axhlf> Raccoon: who prints qr's?!
 516 2013-02-10 13:31:01 <Raccoon> axhlf: you and I
 517 2013-02-10 13:31:04 <Raccoon> anyone
 518 2013-02-10 13:31:23 <Raccoon> starbucks would print them and place by the counter.
 519 2013-02-10 13:31:31 <Raccoon> nice glossy laminate
 520 2013-02-10 13:34:37 <Scrat> in the future bitcoin could just be the backbone on which centralized payment services are constructed
 521 2013-02-10 13:35:01 <Raccoon> Scrat: that's how banks started and gold disappeared
 522 2013-02-10 13:35:16 <Raccoon> banks started trading direct notes with each other
 523 2013-02-10 13:35:33 <Raccoon> turns out gold was to inconvenient
 524 2013-02-10 13:35:47 <sipa> and bitcoins are also inconvenient
 525 2013-02-10 13:35:50 <Scrat> it's still too cumbersome and heavily regulated
 526 2013-02-10 13:35:52 <Raccoon> my point.
 527 2013-02-10 13:35:57 <Raccoon> it'd be first to go
 528 2013-02-10 13:36:03 <sipa> though vastly more convenient than gold
 529 2013-02-10 13:36:39 <Raccoon> sipa: more convenient for the middle-man to cut out the not-middle-man
 530 2013-02-10 13:37:07 <sipa> i think the advantage that bitcoin has, is that becoming your own bank is more or less trivial
 531 2013-02-10 13:37:09 <Eliel> interesting. I'm trying out 0.8 rc1 on windows XP and the syncing process seems to slow down gradually while the program is running.
 532 2013-02-10 13:37:10 <Raccoon> suddenly you'll have some other entity with everyone in his walled garden
 533 2013-02-10 13:37:13 <Raccoon> almost like mtgox
 534 2013-02-10 13:37:22 <sipa> Eliel: very expected - later blocks are larger
 535 2013-02-10 13:37:38 <Eliel> well, is it also expectec that if I restart it, it speeds up significantly?
 536 2013-02-10 13:37:43 <sipa> Eliel: no
 537 2013-02-10 13:38:03 <Eliel> it's addnoded with another ip on the local network.
 538 2013-02-10 13:38:06 <Raccoon> Eliel: If it took a couple hours to get to 80%, it'll take about another day or 2 to reach 100%
 539 2013-02-10 13:38:12 <Scrat> Raccoon: people like walled gardens
 540 2013-02-10 13:38:19 <sipa> Raccoon: i hope that the fact that becoming a bank-like entity for bitcoin is so easy that there will be enough competition
 541 2013-02-10 13:38:31 <Eliel> Raccoon: I thought that too, but it's going much faster now that I'm periodically restarting it.
 542 2013-02-10 13:38:48 <sipa> Eliel: you're just syncing from the network?
 543 2013-02-10 13:39:05 <JWU42> I did an install from a local client - took about an hour
 544 2013-02-10 13:39:05 <Eliel> it's going ~10 blocks per display update right now.
 545 2013-02-10 13:39:06 <Raccoon> Eliel restarting bitcoin only means you have to re-read gigs of data from the HDD
 546 2013-02-10 13:39:17 <sipa> not at all
 547 2013-02-10 13:39:22 <JWU42> now reindex on a win7 box - taking about the same time
 548 2013-02-10 13:39:36 <JWU42> maybe just under an hour
 549 2013-02-10 13:39:49 Detritus has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 550 2013-02-10 13:40:07 <sipa> 0.8 reads much less data from disk at statup
 551 2013-02-10 13:40:21 <Raccoon> I calculated 2 hours 36 minutes to go when it was at 120 days remaining
 552 2013-02-10 13:40:31 <Eliel> I'm running "version" : 70100 on another system on the LAN. the 0.8 rc1 node is connected to that one.
 553 2013-02-10 13:40:32 <JWU42> yeah - the last 20-30% of the chain gets CPU and mem intensive
 554 2013-02-10 13:40:59 <sipa> signature checking is only enabled after the last checkpoint
 555 2013-02-10 13:41:24 <sipa> ;;calc 216116-[bc,blocks]
 556 2013-02-10 13:41:25 <Eliel> anyway, it was doing under 1 block a second before I restarted it
 557 2013-02-10 13:41:28 <gribble> -2982
 558 2013-02-10 13:41:33 <JWU42> so the sig checking is what increases the mem and CPU usage?
 559 2013-02-10 13:41:35 <Eliel> speeded up to about 10 blocks a second after restart
 560 2013-02-10 13:41:40 <sipa> JWU42: only CPU
 561 2013-02-10 13:42:03 <sipa> Eliel: try -connect=<ip>'ing to your other node
 562 2013-02-10 13:42:12 <moarrr> ;;ticker
 563 2013-02-10 13:42:13 <gribble> BTCUSD ticker | Best bid: 23.43508, Best ask: 23.44399, Bid-ask spread: 0.00891, Last trade: 23.44399, 24 hour volume: 52617.29114700, 24 hour low: 22.67000, 24 hour high: 23.98961, 24 hour vwap: 23.38145
 564 2013-02-10 13:42:18 <Eliel> addnode is different?
 565 2013-02-10 13:42:20 <JWU42> checkpoint = last block ?
 566 2013-02-10 13:42:21 <sipa> initial download is gets less confused when just connected to a single peer
 567 2013-02-10 13:42:31 <sipa> JWU42: last checkpoint in 0.8.0rc1 is 216116
 568 2013-02-10 13:42:40 <JWU42> K
 569 2013-02-10 13:42:41 <Eliel> ah, true it is
 570 2013-02-10 13:42:47 <Eliel> I'll try that.
 571 2013-02-10 13:42:52 <JWU42> so that is fixed and noting I can do about it ;)
 572 2013-02-10 13:42:56 <sipa> Eliel: yes, -connect means 'only connect to', -addnode is sort of a 'try to stay connected to at least X'
 573 2013-02-10 13:42:57 <JWU42> nothing*
 574 2013-02-10 13:43:06 <sipa> JWU42: you can disable it, if you want to compare :)
 575 2013-02-10 13:43:08 <sipa> -nocheckpoints
 576 2013-02-10 13:43:12 <JWU42> 52 minutes
 577 2013-02-10 13:43:28 <JWU42> win7 rig - using -dbcache=1000 -par=8
 578 2013-02-10 13:43:51 <sipa> JWU42: reindex or sync from network?
 579 2013-02-10 13:43:52 <JWU42> i7 920 on 1TB Sata drive
 580 2013-02-10 13:43:55 <JWU42> reindex
 581 2013-02-10 13:44:06 <JWU42> just fwiw
 582 2013-02-10 13:44:23 <sipa> we should try to get 64-bit windows binaries at some point
 583 2013-02-10 13:44:37 <sipa> as the ECDSA crypto code is about 2x faster on 64 bit
 584 2013-02-10 13:44:48 <JWU42> the local network sync on a slower rig took just over 1 hour last night
 585 2013-02-10 13:45:11 <JWU42> dual core AMD system
 586 2013-02-10 13:45:33 * JWU42 ponders what to test next ;)
 587 2013-02-10 13:47:24 <JWU42> sipa: can you pass a port with -connect?
 588 2013-02-10 13:47:33 <sipa> yes
 589 2013-02-10 13:47:44 <sipa> -connect=ip:port
 590 2013-02-10 13:47:53 <sipa> or -connect=[ip]:port for ipv6
 591 2013-02-10 13:47:56 <JWU42> K - that explains why 0
 592 2013-02-10 13:48:09 <JWU42> I had it pointed to a rig using non std port
 593 2013-02-10 13:48:34 rdymac has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
 594 2013-02-10 13:49:06 sacredch1o has joined
 595 2013-02-10 13:50:45 MC1984 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 596 2013-02-10 13:51:05 <JWU42> hmm - still no connections
 597 2013-02-10 13:51:24 <sipa> what is your exact command line?
 598 2013-02-10 13:51:39 rdymac has joined
 599 2013-02-10 13:52:19 <JWU42> sipa: I have connect=lan_IP:nonstdport
 600 2013-02-10 13:52:24 <JWU42> in the .conf
 601 2013-02-10 13:52:45 <JWU42> will try other lanip on std port now and see if that works
 602 2013-02-10 13:52:58 <sipa> debug.log may give a clue
 603 2013-02-10 13:53:13 <JWU42> yeah - good idea
 604 2013-02-10 13:53:54 <JWU42> connect timeout
 605 2013-02-10 13:55:00 Detritus has joined
 606 2013-02-10 13:56:29 <JWU42> connects fine to other lanip (it uses standard port)
 607 2013-02-10 13:58:06 <JWU42> hmm - both bitcoind running on non-std port aren't "listening"
 608 2013-02-10 13:58:24 <sipa> what command lines were they started with?
 609 2013-02-10 13:58:31 <sipa> or config options
 610 2013-02-10 13:58:40 <JWU42> sipa: again - using port= in the conf
 611 2013-02-10 13:59:39 <JWU42> http://pastebin.com/yvW1qRy5
 612 2013-02-10 14:00:14 <sipa> JWU42: if you use -connect, listening is disabled
 613 2013-02-10 14:00:15 <JWU42> the .conf for a 0.8 install
 614 2013-02-10 14:00:26 <JWU42> and there we have it
 615 2013-02-10 14:00:28 <JWU42> heh
 616 2013-02-10 14:00:53 <sipa>   -listen                Accept connections from outside (default: 1 if no -proxy or -connect)
 617 2013-02-10 14:01:14 <JWU42> RTFM
 618 2013-02-10 14:01:55 <JWU42> ok - back to the drawing board...
 619 2013-02-10 14:01:57 <JWU42> thks sipa
 620 2013-02-10 14:02:18 <sipa> also, -addnode is ignored when using -connect (i think)
 621 2013-02-10 14:02:28 <JWU42> seems to work
 622 2013-02-10 14:02:34 <sipa> ok
 623 2013-02-10 14:02:44 <sipa> typically, you'd use specify -connect twice
 624 2013-02-10 14:02:51 <JWU42> Luke-Jr: mentioned this yesterday
 625 2013-02-10 14:03:13 <JWU42> [18:49] <Luke-Jr> JWU42: I'd do -connect=localhost -addnode=bigpools
 626 2013-02-10 14:03:44 <sipa> ha
 627 2013-02-10 14:03:49 <JWU42> seeing he mentioned both in context of a bitcoind on a non std port - they seem to work together
 628 2013-02-10 14:06:38 rdymac has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 629 2013-02-10 14:06:57 rdymac has joined
 630 2013-02-10 14:07:06 Detritus has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 631 2013-02-10 14:12:28 ciphermonk has joined
 632 2013-02-10 14:13:25 <sipa> ;;bc,blocks
 633 2013-02-10 14:13:25 <gribble> 219270
 634 2013-02-10 14:15:46 <sipa> just reindexed (until block 218478) with 0.8.0rc1 in 23m44s
 635 2013-02-10 14:16:39 rdymac has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
 636 2013-02-10 14:16:53 r3dv1p3r has joined
 637 2013-02-10 14:17:17 r3dv1p3r has left ("Leaving")
 638 2013-02-10 14:17:44 <JWU42> =)
 639 2013-02-10 14:22:18 <Eliel> hmm, this is a bit confusing from user interface point of view. The sync progress bar disappeared but it's still a month behind and syncing.
 640 2013-02-10 14:23:19 <sipa> ;;later tell wumpus i wonder: can't we use the other criterion (last block max 90 minutes old, afaik) for deciding whether to show the sync progress bar too?
 641 2013-02-10 14:23:19 <gribble> The operation succeeded.
 642 2013-02-10 14:24:46 asa1024 has quit (Quit: asa1024)
 643 2013-02-10 14:35:38 <JWU42> not faster with -nocheckpoints
 644 2013-02-10 14:36:01 <JWU42> as the estimate stops at ~110K
 645 2013-02-10 14:36:13 <JWU42> versus 216116
 646 2013-02-10 14:39:58 rng29a has joined
 647 2013-02-10 14:39:58 rng29a has quit (Changing host)
 648 2013-02-10 14:39:58 rng29a has joined
 649 2013-02-10 14:45:31 Z0rZ0rZ0r has joined
 650 2013-02-10 14:56:04 <wumpus> sipa: I think the only criterion to determine whether to show the progress bar right now, is that the current block is smaller than the estimate of number of blocks of peers... if it doesn't show the progress bar it doesn't know the progress
 651 2013-02-10 14:58:29 <wumpus> yes, just verified that
 652 2013-02-10 15:00:12 <wumpus> there's no other way
 653 2013-02-10 15:00:22 <wumpus> i guess that's another reason to just delete the progress bar
 654 2013-02-10 15:03:39 <Eliel> wouldn't it be better to just fix it so it gets an estimate somehow?
 655 2013-02-10 15:03:53 <wumpus> feel free to do so
 656 2013-02-10 15:04:01 <wumpus> I wouldn't know how
 657 2013-02-10 15:04:46 <Eliel> do you know what is the cause for not having an estimate?
 658 2013-02-10 15:05:06 <wumpus> the android applet also simply displays the current date/time of last block, no progress bar
 659 2013-02-10 15:05:42 <wumpus> I suppose you could even base a progress bar on time instead of block #
 660 2013-02-10 15:05:49 <Eliel> ... actually that sounds like it might work.
 661 2013-02-10 15:05:53 tonikt has joined
 662 2013-02-10 15:06:26 <Eliel> X days behind is actually more informative than the block number.
 663 2013-02-10 15:06:29 <wumpus> would be an interesting experiment
 664 2013-02-10 15:06:48 <wumpus> "where in time are we from the genesis block to now"
 665 2013-02-10 15:08:35 <Eliel> the progress bar is probably unnecessary if you keep an updating view of how many days worth of blocks there is left to process.
 666 2013-02-10 15:08:51 <wumpus> the advantage being that it doesn't need any estimate of the current block number
 667 2013-02-10 15:09:30 <wumpus> yeah
 668 2013-02-10 15:09:55 <Eliel> just, what will that do if the computer's time is wrong?
 669 2013-02-10 15:10:14 <JWU42> heh - good point
 670 2013-02-10 15:10:23 rdymac has joined
 671 2013-02-10 15:10:38 <Eliel> then again, if the computer's time being wrong already screws things up, perhaps that doesn't matter.
 672 2013-02-10 15:10:50 ken` has quit (Quit: leaving)
 673 2013-02-10 15:10:51 <wumpus> well if the time is wrong by too much compared to the network, it will warn you already
 674 2013-02-10 15:11:04 LargoG has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 675 2013-02-10 15:11:12 <wumpus> if it's just a bit wrong it doesn't matter
 676 2013-02-10 15:11:49 <wumpus> at most it will show a wrong value
 677 2013-02-10 15:12:33 <Eliel> of course, there's always the option to ignore the computer's time and show the days left based on network time.
 678 2013-02-10 15:13:01 <wumpus> it doesn't really matter for a visual indication, which is always an estimate, I really don't want to bikeshed too much about that
 679 2013-02-10 15:17:13 LargoG has joined
 680 2013-02-10 15:42:28 rbecker is now known as RBecker
 681 2013-02-10 15:44:06 eckey has joined
 682 2013-02-10 15:47:43 <eckey> is anyone here running Bitcoin-Qt on a MacBook Pro?
 683 2013-02-10 15:49:32 rdymac has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
 684 2013-02-10 15:56:08 meLon has quit (Quit: leaving)
 685 2013-02-10 15:57:21 meLon has joined
 686 2013-02-10 15:58:04 eckey has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 687 2013-02-10 16:03:43 LargoG has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 688 2013-02-10 16:08:38 Graet_ has quit (Quit: ZNC - http://znc.sourceforge.net)
 689 2013-02-10 16:08:55 ciphermonk has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 690 2013-02-10 16:10:41 <wumpus> looks like my idea is working pretty well
 691 2013-02-10 16:10:53 MrTiggr has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 692 2013-02-10 16:21:27 <Eliel> wumpus: great! :)
 693 2013-02-10 16:22:24 <Eliel> that increases the user friendlyness quite significantly. what kind of a message are you using for it?
 694 2013-02-10 16:23:12 <sipa> wumpus: i'm fine with just "X time behind"
 695 2013-02-10 16:23:20 <wumpus> I compute the progress bar based on time, and in the label I show the "X days ago"
 696 2013-02-10 16:23:40 <wumpus> ago could be replaced by behind, indeed
 697 2013-02-10 16:23:48 Lolcust has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 698 2013-02-10 16:23:48 <Eliel> yes
 699 2013-02-10 16:24:13 <sipa> ah, you're changing it to just use the time of the last block in the interval [genesis,now()] ?
 700 2013-02-10 16:24:25 <wumpus> yes
 701 2013-02-10 16:24:51 <wumpus> the advantage being that no estimate of the current block is needed anymore
 702 2013-02-10 16:25:12 <wumpus> which is always wrong (and behind) anyway
 703 2013-02-10 16:25:21 <Eliel> that's not the only advantage. It also makes much more sense to the average user
 704 2013-02-10 16:25:33 <sipa> agree
 705 2013-02-10 16:26:42 <Eliel> it might make sense to have it show hours too. more user friendly that they can see it advancing reasonably constantly.
 706 2013-02-10 16:27:09 <wumpus> it currently shows hours when less than a day behind
 707 2013-02-10 16:27:25 <Eliel> that's a nice touch too.
 708 2013-02-10 16:27:33 <sipa> and what is the criterion for progressbar or not?
 709 2013-02-10 16:27:49 <wumpus> there's something to be said for always showing hours, though, for the reason you say (seeing activity)
 710 2013-02-10 16:28:07 <wumpus> sipa: 90 minutes behind, same as other places
 711 2013-02-10 16:28:13 <sipa> ok
 712 2013-02-10 16:29:02 <sipa> but in 0.8.0rc1, it uses a different criterion, no?
 713 2013-02-10 16:29:21 <wumpus> yes
 714 2013-02-10 16:29:33 <wumpus> <wumpus> sipa: I think the only criterion to determine whether to show the progress bar right now, is that the current block is smaller than the estimate of number of blocks of peers... if it doesn't show the progress bar it doesn't know the progress
 715 2013-02-10 16:29:33 <wumpus> <wumpus> yes, just verified that
 716 2013-02-10 16:30:20 <sipa> ok
 717 2013-02-10 16:30:36 <sipa> i think changing that + using the time interval method would be an improvement then, indeed
 718 2013-02-10 16:32:15 da2ce7_d has joined
 719 2013-02-10 16:32:36 Lolcust has joined
 720 2013-02-10 16:34:36 da2ce7 has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 721 2013-02-10 16:36:51 <Eliel> it would also be nice if the progress bar tooltip would explain more verbosely that the wallet can only see transactions up until X days ago.
 722 2013-02-10 16:37:27 <wumpus> hmm
 723 2013-02-10 16:38:57 <Jouke> Yes it would. Our business receives so many questions about when we will send the bought bitcoins, when in reallity the transactions already has loads of confirmations.
 724 2013-02-10 16:39:14 <Jouke> *the bitcoins they bought
 725 2013-02-10 16:39:54 Diapolo has joined
 726 2013-02-10 16:39:55 <Jouke> We always send them to blockchain.info, but that is not really what we want to do.
 727 2013-02-10 16:40:24 <wumpus> indeed, a progress bar that says 'XXX days and YYY hours behind' is already clearer in that regard
 728 2013-02-10 16:41:24 <wumpus> if the transaction is from today and the client is 6 days behind, it's clear that you cannot see them yet
 729 2013-02-10 16:41:40 <sipa> more than a month ago, i'd say an absolute date is more useful
 730 2013-02-10 16:42:14 <sipa> things like "431 days behind" say less than "synchronized until 21 nov 2011"
 731 2013-02-10 16:42:23 <sipa> but that's a nit
 732 2013-02-10 16:42:26 <wumpus> hmm 
 733 2013-02-10 16:42:28 <Diapolo> once more the progressbar ;)?
 734 2013-02-10 16:42:40 <wumpus> I like 'xxx days behind' better than an absolute date, but I suppose that's personal taste
 735 2013-02-10 16:43:08 <sipa> the android app uses weeks/days
 736 2013-02-10 16:43:15 <wumpus> yeah Diapolo
 737 2013-02-10 16:43:30 <wumpus> same shit different day :)
 738 2013-02-10 16:43:32 <sipa> but when it's more than a few weeks, i find it hard to interpret
 739 2013-02-10 16:43:58 <sipa> anyway, not a large enough nit to keep picking :)
 740 2013-02-10 16:44:24 <wumpus> it's hard to interpret, but so is a full date (to me), especially if it continuously updates
 741 2013-02-10 16:44:55 <sipa> i guess so
 742 2013-02-10 16:45:02 <wumpus> and counting down is fun!
 743 2013-02-10 16:45:07 <Eliel> Jouke: Yes, it's the same for us.
 744 2013-02-10 16:45:28 <Diapolo> wumpus: I don't want to argue over that again, so I'm just listening ^^ btw. I have some changes ready, that show the progressbar label, when we normally would hide everything there, to see what the client is doing (e.g. while reindexing)... guess I create a pull after that refactorings and 0.8
 745 2013-02-10 16:46:41 <sipa> wumpus: hmm, not-so-very-random variations in the block timestamp can be up to 2 hours
 746 2013-02-10 16:46:57 <sipa> so it may mean that the progressbar (or its label) jump back slightly
 747 2013-02-10 16:47:20 <wumpus> yep I suppose that's possible
 748 2013-02-10 16:47:40 <sipa> one way to fix that is using an average or median of a range of blocks
 749 2013-02-10 16:47:45 <sipa> but i guess that's overkill
 750 2013-02-10 16:47:56 <wumpus> Diapolo: okay, that's nice
 751 2013-02-10 16:48:02 <wumpus> oh no, not another median filter :-)
 752 2013-02-10 16:48:13 <sipa> it could be the same one :p
 753 2013-02-10 16:48:58 <wumpus> we could also remember the last one and require it to never go down, then again, two hours of jitter doesn't really show on a time range from genesis block..now
 754 2013-02-10 16:49:15 <Eliel> well, if you show the hours, it makes sense
 755 2013-02-10 16:50:02 <Eliel> if (block_time > last_shown_time) show(block_time); :P
 756 2013-02-10 16:50:23 <wumpus> I don't want to make it too complex, usually it's best to just show things as they are
 757 2013-02-10 16:50:27 <sipa> that's a 0.005% variaton only
 758 2013-02-10 16:51:06 <Diapolo> ^^
 759 2013-02-10 16:51:07 <sipa> so unless someone has a 20000-pixel wide screen, he won't see anything indeed
 760 2013-02-10 16:51:11 <wumpus> hehehe
 761 2013-02-10 16:51:33 <Eliel> yes, for the progress bar it won't matter.
 762 2013-02-10 16:52:26 bitafterbit has joined
 763 2013-02-10 16:53:21 rng29a has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 764 2013-02-10 16:57:16 pooler has joined
 765 2013-02-10 16:57:16 pooler has quit (Changing host)
 766 2013-02-10 16:57:16 pooler has joined
 767 2013-02-10 17:01:22 Diapolo has left ()
 768 2013-02-10 17:04:49 freakazoid has joined
 769 2013-02-10 17:06:43 Muis_ has joined
 770 2013-02-10 17:07:27 Muis has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 771 2013-02-10 17:08:45 <sipa> wumpus: i wonder if it makes sense to try to compensate for the speed difference between before/after last checkpoint
 772 2013-02-10 17:09:58 <sipa> just a fixed heuristic speed factor, using a function like f(time) = (time < last_checkpoint_time) ? time : last_checkpoint_time + FACTOR*(time - last_checkpoint_time)
 773 2013-02-10 17:10:42 MC1984 has joined
 774 2013-02-10 17:11:07 <Scrat> convert the progress bar from logarithmic to linear
 775 2013-02-10 17:11:10 <Scrat> </troll>
 776 2013-02-10 17:11:40 <Scrat> well, exponential
 777 2013-02-10 17:11:50 <Scrat> or whatever it's approximation is
 778 2013-02-10 17:12:07 <sipa> the best estimate would be using the number of transactions
 779 2013-02-10 17:12:15 <sipa> unfortunately, that is not known in advance
 780 2013-02-10 17:12:44 <Scrat> blockchain size would be also easy
 781 2013-02-10 17:12:48 <Scrat> to compute
 782 2013-02-10 17:12:55 <sipa> also not known in advance
 783 2013-02-10 17:13:02 <Scrat> yes
 784 2013-02-10 17:15:19 <sipa> on my system, blocks after the checkpoint are about 9 times slower than those before
 785 2013-02-10 17:15:55 <Scrat> would require protocol change. is that part modular? the part where it gets the max block height from peers
 786 2013-02-10 17:16:46 <sipa> protocol changes are easy
 787 2013-02-10 17:16:54 owowo has joined
 788 2013-02-10 17:17:00 <sipa> but there is no way to convey that information in an authenticated way
 789 2013-02-10 17:17:09 Muis has joined
 790 2013-02-10 17:17:33 <sipa> sure, peers that lie don't matter much as long as you only use the information for GUI purposes
 791 2013-02-10 17:18:01 <wumpus> sipa: indeed, it could use a scaling factor for the part before first checkpoint
 792 2013-02-10 17:18:05 <Scrat> is that startingheight in getpeerinfo?
 793 2013-02-10 17:18:30 Muis_ has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 794 2013-02-10 17:18:40 <wumpus> would make sense, would need to do some timing experiments to see what's an appropriate factor 
 795 2013-02-10 17:18:40 <sipa> Scrat: yes
 796 2013-02-10 17:19:47 <sipa> problem is that that factor is very system dependent
 797 2013-02-10 17:19:56 <sipa> especially with parallel signature checking
 798 2013-02-10 17:20:30 <sipa> and there's a significant difference between 32 and 64 bit too
 799 2013-02-10 17:21:44 <wumpus> as long as the second part *appears* to go faster or just as fast as the first part it's good
 800 2013-02-10 17:21:51 <wumpus> just not slower
 801 2013-02-10 17:22:12 <sipa> on some systems, the factor may well be 50 or so
 802 2013-02-10 17:22:33 <sipa> single-core, SSD, lots of RAM
 803 2013-02-10 17:22:34 <wumpus> sure, though most people will be running it on crappy machines
 804 2013-02-10 17:23:21 Muis has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 805 2013-02-10 17:23:39 Muis_ has joined
 806 2013-02-10 17:24:43 <sipa> more cores makes the factor closer to 1
 807 2013-02-10 17:25:04 <sipa> faster disk makes the factor further from 1
 808 2013-02-10 17:25:33 <Eliel> couldn't you just precalculate a function based on the actual transaction counts in the block?
 809 2013-02-10 17:25:42 <Eliel> and just use that
 810 2013-02-10 17:25:51 <wumpus> too much bother, I'll just keep the progress bar "honest"
 811 2013-02-10 17:26:39 <Eliel> I mean, you could hardcode the transaction count on each checkpoint and use those to scale it.
 812 2013-02-10 17:26:51 Muis_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 813 2013-02-10 17:27:15 <sipa> true
 814 2013-02-10 17:27:19 Muis_ has joined
 815 2013-02-10 17:27:41 <wumpus> but how would that help you scale compared to blocks that are not in a checkpoint yet?
 816 2013-02-10 17:29:21 <sipa> you could use a heuristic num_transactions_per_day factor, and use transactions_at_last_checkpoint + (now() - time_last_checkpoint)*num_transactions_per_day*slowdown_after_checkpoint_factor
 817 2013-02-10 17:29:40 <sipa> and compare that to the total number of transactions in the currently-connected chain
 818 2013-02-10 17:30:17 <sipa> (which is tracked)
 819 2013-02-10 17:30:18 <wumpus> hmm
 820 2013-02-10 17:30:40 freakazoid has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 821 2013-02-10 17:30:43 <sipa> pindexBestBlock->nChainTx
 822 2013-02-10 17:30:43 <wumpus> I like the simple time based progress bar
 823 2013-02-10 17:31:07 <sipa> that's certainly the easiest solution
 824 2013-02-10 17:31:22 <wumpus> it's also the least bug prone, you know what you get
 825 2013-02-10 17:31:52 <sipa> although i think that something that compensates for sigchecking and/or transaction counts has all of the advantages that a time-based progressbar has
 826 2013-02-10 17:32:01 <sipa> except simplicity
 827 2013-02-10 17:32:05 Muis_ has quit (Client Quit)
 828 2013-02-10 17:32:05 <wumpus> and is not based on any uncertain number received from other nodes
 829 2013-02-10 17:33:40 <sipa> CCheckpoints or whatever could expose a GuessTotalTransactions(time_t) function
 830 2013-02-10 17:33:54 <sipa> but i suppose just using time now would already be a nice improvement
 831 2013-02-10 17:34:18 <Scrat> lockunspent with the same arguments unlocks it, correct?
 832 2013-02-10 17:34:25 <wumpus> yeah...
 833 2013-02-10 17:35:43 <sipa> Scrat: first argument to lockunspent is a bool
 834 2013-02-10 17:35:54 <sipa> false for locking, true for unlocking
 835 2013-02-10 17:36:05 freakazoid has joined
 836 2013-02-10 17:36:06 <Scrat> oh, fUnlock is an argument
 837 2013-02-10 17:36:09 <Scrat> im derping
 838 2013-02-10 17:38:40 BurtyB has joined
 839 2013-02-10 17:48:32 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@brwyatt.net|brwyatt
 840 2013-02-10 18:05:03 Lolcust has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 841 2013-02-10 18:10:32 MobGod has quit ()
 842 2013-02-10 18:10:44 Skav is now known as MobGod
 843 2013-02-10 18:10:51 MobGod has quit (Changing host)
 844 2013-02-10 18:10:51 MobGod has joined
 845 2013-02-10 18:10:51 MobGod has quit (Changing host)
 846 2013-02-10 18:10:51 MobGod has joined
 847 2013-02-10 18:15:57 B0g4r7__ has joined
 848 2013-02-10 18:16:07 reizuki__ has joined
 849 2013-02-10 18:16:07 reizuki__ has quit (Changing host)
 850 2013-02-10 18:16:07 reizuki__ has joined
 851 2013-02-10 18:16:09 B0g4r7 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 852 2013-02-10 18:16:09 B0g4r7__ is now known as B0g4r7
 853 2013-02-10 18:16:32 <sipa> wumpus: do you intend to make those progressbar changes before 0.8?
 854 2013-02-10 18:18:21 <wumpus> I'm now testing them
 855 2013-02-10 18:18:37 <wumpus> so I suppose it's possible
 856 2013-02-10 18:18:56 <sipa> can you push it to github?
 857 2013-02-10 18:19:00 <wumpus> yeah
 858 2013-02-10 18:19:12 Lolcust has joined
 859 2013-02-10 18:20:27 BNCatDIGISHELL has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 860 2013-02-10 18:23:35 <MobGod> can someone tell me where the wallet.dat file is on a mac
 861 2013-02-10 18:23:56 <wumpus> sipa: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2294
 862 2013-02-10 18:24:04 <sipa> MobGod: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Data_directory
 863 2013-02-10 18:24:16 <MobGod> looking at the docs it's not there
 864 2013-02-10 18:25:24 RBecker is now known as rbecker
 865 2013-02-10 18:26:23 <MobGod> sipa files are not there
 866 2013-02-10 18:26:32 <MobGod> thats why i'm asking
 867 2013-02-10 18:26:43 <sipa> MobGod: in that case, i can't help you - i know nothing about apple stuff
 868 2013-02-10 18:27:19 <wumpus> why not just search for wallet.dat?
 869 2013-02-10 18:30:28 <MobGod> wumpus telling me my info should be here but it's not
 870 2013-02-10 18:30:30 <MobGod> ~/Library/Application Support/Bitcoin/
 871 2013-02-10 18:31:37 rdponticelli has quit (Quit: No Ping reply in 180 seconds.)
 872 2013-02-10 18:32:56 BNCatDIGISHELL has joined
 873 2013-02-10 18:33:40 <MobGod> sipa any idea how i can find this info
 874 2013-02-10 18:33:45 MC1984 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 875 2013-02-10 18:33:53 <wumpus> yes but I mean why not run a 'find' command
 876 2013-02-10 18:33:58 MC1984 has joined
 877 2013-02-10 18:34:06 <wumpus> or whatever is the osx variant
 878 2013-02-10 18:34:07 MC1984 has quit (Client Quit)
 879 2013-02-10 18:34:25 rdponticelli has joined
 880 2013-02-10 18:35:20 <MobGod> wumpus i've done that also lol
 881 2013-02-10 18:36:36 <wumpus> well if that finds nothing I suppose it simply doesn't exist
 882 2013-02-10 18:37:47 <BCB> ;;ticker --last
 883 2013-02-10 18:37:50 <gribble> 23.61100
 884 2013-02-10 18:38:24 denisx has joined
 885 2013-02-10 18:38:42 <sipa> MobGod: what program are you using?
 886 2013-02-10 18:38:49 <sipa> what bitcoin client, i mean
 887 2013-02-10 18:40:28 grau has joined
 888 2013-02-10 18:42:03 <MobGod> qt\
 889 2013-02-10 18:42:10 <MobGod> qt*
 890 2013-02-10 18:46:49 <MobGod> sipa latest release is 0.7.2 right
 891 2013-02-10 18:47:28 <sipa> yes
 892 2013-02-10 18:50:38 <MobGod> just not understanding why i can't find the files
 893 2013-02-10 18:50:38 PsyKick has joined
 894 2013-02-10 18:50:53 Jamesonwa has joined
 895 2013-02-10 18:51:17 <MobGod> i'm in Application/Support but i don't see bit coin-qt or anything that has bitcoin
 896 2013-02-10 18:52:21 dbe has joined
 897 2013-02-10 18:52:44 dbe is now known as Guest65762
 898 2013-02-10 18:56:20 rbecker is now known as RBecker
 899 2013-02-10 18:57:33 <MobGod> this is crazy
 900 2013-02-10 18:59:41 <sipa> MobGod: sorry, you'll have to ask an OSX user
 901 2013-02-10 18:59:55 <sipa> wumpus: i implemented a transaction-count-based progress calculator
 902 2013-02-10 19:00:06 <sipa> wumpus: it seems to be extremely slow initially...
 903 2013-02-10 19:00:20 <Jouke> :o
 904 2013-02-10 19:00:40 <sipa> because early blocks have almost no transactions, that's expected
 905 2013-02-10 19:00:40 <MobGod> sipa ok
 906 2013-02-10 19:00:53 axhlf has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 907 2013-02-10 19:02:59 <PsyKick> Library/Application, I think, is the correct folder you're looking for
 908 2013-02-10 19:03:13 <wumpus> sipa: indeed
 909 2013-02-10 19:05:09 <sipa> wumpus: see my 'progressbar' branch
 910 2013-02-10 19:05:29 axhlf has joined
 911 2013-02-10 19:06:06 <sipa> hmmm, there must be a bug
 912 2013-02-10 19:07:37 denisx has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 913 2013-02-10 19:07:44 gavinandresen has quit (Quit: gavinandresen)
 914 2013-02-10 19:07:48 denisx has joined
 915 2013-02-10 19:08:22 Guest44879 has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 916 2013-02-10 19:10:53 paraipan has joined
 917 2013-02-10 19:12:18 Guest65762 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 918 2013-02-10 19:14:37 asa1024 has joined
 919 2013-02-10 19:15:03 Jamesonwa has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 920 2013-02-10 19:18:16 tonikt has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 921 2013-02-10 19:23:14 <denisx> MobGod: what you are looking for?
 922 2013-02-10 19:24:54 axhlf has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 923 2013-02-10 19:25:04 <denisx> MobGod: my data is in ~/Library/Application\ Support/Bitcoin/
 924 2013-02-10 19:25:58 <MobGod> your on OSX?
 925 2013-02-10 19:26:10 <denisx> yes
 926 2013-02-10 19:28:41 <JWU42> 0.8 with 8 connections about 10-15 seconds faster relaying new block than 0.7.2 with 70 connections
 927 2013-02-10 19:28:51 <JWU42> this over the last 10-15 blocks
 928 2013-02-10 19:29:19 <JWU42> 0.8 better or too many connections on 0.7.2 ;)
 929 2013-02-10 19:29:31 <sipa> how do you measure relay speed?
 930 2013-02-10 19:29:38 <JWU42> faster HW on the 0.7.2 rig
 931 2013-02-10 19:29:56 <JWU42> sipa: tailing debug.log on both
 932 2013-02-10 19:30:22 <JWU42> and the 0.7.2 rig is running stratum pool and watching that console as well
 933 2013-02-10 19:30:58 <JWU42> I saw the inverse happen previously - the faster rig with just 8 connections reporting new blocks sooner
 934 2013-02-10 19:31:15 <JWU42> the older rig with 70+ being slower
 935 2013-02-10 19:31:17 ashams has joined
 936 2013-02-10 19:31:17 ashams has quit (Changing host)
 937 2013-02-10 19:31:17 ashams has joined
 938 2013-02-10 19:31:22 <sipa> 0.8 should definitely be faster in relaying
 939 2013-02-10 19:31:28 <JWU42> which has me questioning the optimal number of peers
 940 2013-02-10 19:31:47 <JWU42> perhaps relaying is the wrong word choice
 941 2013-02-10 19:31:54 <JWU42> on my part
 942 2013-02-10 19:31:59 <sipa> but you have no guarantee that both receive the same block at the same time, right?
 943 2013-02-10 19:32:07 <JWU42> I see the change in block height first on the 0.8 rig
 944 2013-02-10 19:32:27 <JWU42> sipa: correct
 945 2013-02-10 19:33:16 <JWU42> I am too ignorant to figure how to test for that (0.7.2 vs. 0.8)
 946 2013-02-10 19:33:42 <JWU42> =)
 947 2013-02-10 19:37:37 dbe has joined
 948 2013-02-10 19:38:01 dbe is now known as Guest30582
 949 2013-02-10 19:39:28 Hashdog has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 950 2013-02-10 19:40:01 Hashdog has joined
 951 2013-02-10 19:40:16 Hashdog has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 952 2013-02-10 19:45:23 Hashdog has joined
 953 2013-02-10 19:47:30 Guest50728 has joined
 954 2013-02-10 19:48:30 axhlf has joined
 955 2013-02-10 19:49:43 Jamesonwa has joined
 956 2013-02-10 19:52:08 Jamesonwa has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 957 2013-02-10 19:52:21 <muhoo> yikes, btc has doubled since i first got some4 months ago. too bad i spent them almost immediately.
 958 2013-02-10 19:58:28 word has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 959 2013-02-10 19:58:29 rdponticelli has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 960 2013-02-10 19:58:59 word has joined
 961 2013-02-10 19:59:07 axhlf has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 962 2013-02-10 19:59:56 rdponticelli has joined
 963 2013-02-10 20:01:33 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 964 2013-02-10 20:02:01 Guest50728 has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 965 2013-02-10 20:03:10 RBecker has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 966 2013-02-10 20:05:20 khalahan has quit (Quit: Bye)
 967 2013-02-10 20:05:56 axhlf has joined
 968 2013-02-10 20:05:56 mappum has joined
 969 2013-02-10 20:06:46 RBecker has joined
 970 2013-02-10 20:07:10 PsyKick has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 971 2013-02-10 20:07:41 khalahan has joined
 972 2013-02-10 20:10:13 <muhoo> hmm, is transaction  5d4dca620db4dac6ef666381bb95e9d49a920bc1a05bfdb41022018c9579a263: on the testnet all screwed u?
 973 2013-02-10 20:10:27 <muhoo> from [exception: Script not of right size, expecting 2 but got 1]
 974 2013-02-10 20:12:48 <sipa> which script?
 975 2013-02-10 20:13:27 <muhoo> didn't say
 976 2013-02-10 20:14:04 <sipa> i mean: which input or output #?
 977 2013-02-10 20:15:58 <muhoo> can't say. looks like there is only 1
 978 2013-02-10 20:16:57 Jamesonwa has joined
 979 2013-02-10 20:16:59 Jamesonwa has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 980 2013-02-10 20:17:00 <sipa> it has 28 inputs and 1 output
 981 2013-02-10 20:17:12 Jamesonwa has joined
 982 2013-02-10 20:17:26 <muhoo> hmm, yes it does. and each of those inputs throws the same error
 983 2013-02-10 20:18:22 <muhoo> https://www.refheap.com/paste/11151 is what it looks like to me
 984 2013-02-10 20:18:44 <muhoo> the output, 1000.00 BTC looks fine.
 985 2013-02-10 20:19:24 <muhoo> what's different about that transaction?
 986 2013-02-10 20:19:49 <sipa> what software is that?
 987 2013-02-10 20:20:02 voodster has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
 988 2013-02-10 20:20:13 <muhoo> bitcoinj
 989 2013-02-10 20:21:10 <muhoo> where are you looking to see the inputs and outputs of that transaction? is there a blockexplorer for the testnet?
 990 2013-02-10 20:21:19 <sipa> yes
 991 2013-02-10 20:21:23 <sipa> blockexplorer.com/testnet
 992 2013-02-10 20:21:40 <sipa> and it seems bitcoinj doesn't support send-to-pubkeys
 993 2013-02-10 20:21:51 <muhoo> i guess not. hmm.
 994 2013-02-10 20:21:53 <sipa> so it doesn't understand those inputs
 995 2013-02-10 20:23:18 <muhoo> thanks
 996 2013-02-10 20:23:45 ashams has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 997 2013-02-10 20:24:25 Jamesonwa has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 998 2013-02-10 20:25:10 RBecker is now known as rbecker
 999 2013-02-10 20:31:36 Jamesonwa has joined
1000 2013-02-10 20:31:39 Jamesonwa has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1001 2013-02-10 20:31:51 Jamesonwa has joined
1002 2013-02-10 20:33:20 paraipan has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1003 2013-02-10 20:34:05 paraipan has joined
1004 2013-02-10 20:34:11 <Jamesonwa> ;;rate michail1 6 Sold atleast $5,000 worth of bitcoins in 30 days.  Safe dealings, cash in hand, local.
1005 2013-02-10 20:34:27 <gribble> Rating entry successful. Your rating for user michail1 has changed from 4 to 6.
1006 2013-02-10 20:34:48 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1007 2013-02-10 20:39:04 denisx_ has joined
1008 2013-02-10 20:39:33 RazielZ has joined
1009 2013-02-10 20:39:52 citiz3n has quit ()
1010 2013-02-10 20:40:43 ashams has joined
1011 2013-02-10 20:41:24 citiz3n has joined
1012 2013-02-10 20:42:42 datagutt has quit (Quit: kthxbai)
1013 2013-02-10 20:43:12 denisx has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1014 2013-02-10 20:43:12 denisx_ is now known as denisx
1015 2013-02-10 20:43:12 ashams has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1016 2013-02-10 20:45:51 khalahan has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1017 2013-02-10 20:48:02 daybyter has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
1018 2013-02-10 21:00:58 CodesInChaos_ has joined
1019 2013-02-10 21:01:07 CodesInChaos has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1020 2013-02-10 21:01:50 khalahan has joined
1021 2013-02-10 21:09:37 Jamesonwa has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1022 2013-02-10 21:16:30 PsyKick has joined
1023 2013-02-10 21:19:06 Guest44901 has joined
1024 2013-02-10 21:30:23 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
1025 2013-02-10 21:30:33 GMP has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1026 2013-02-10 21:31:15 Zarutian has joined
1027 2013-02-10 21:31:39 CodeShark has joined
1028 2013-02-10 21:33:51 khalahan has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1029 2013-02-10 21:40:12 khalahan has joined
1030 2013-02-10 22:02:31 CodesInChaos_ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1031 2013-02-10 22:21:11 denisx has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1032 2013-02-10 22:21:22 denisx has joined
1033 2013-02-10 22:26:27 WolfAlex_ has joined
1034 2013-02-10 22:27:11 WolfAlex has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1035 2013-02-10 22:32:58 ovidiusoft has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1036 2013-02-10 22:34:56 Bwild_ has joined
1037 2013-02-10 22:35:52 Bwild_ has quit (Client Quit)
1038 2013-02-10 22:47:38 Guest44901 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1039 2013-02-10 22:49:46 Guest44901 has joined
1040 2013-02-10 23:00:47 ielo has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1041 2013-02-10 23:02:32 Hashdog has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1042 2013-02-10 23:05:01 grau has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1043 2013-02-10 23:08:49 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1044 2013-02-10 23:10:31 B0g4r7 has joined
1045 2013-02-10 23:12:17 sgstair has quit (Quit: .•«UPP»•.)
1046 2013-02-10 23:12:41 <Eliel> this looks rather strange https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=142395
1047 2013-02-10 23:13:35 sgornick has joined
1048 2013-02-10 23:14:00 Arm0n has joined
1049 2013-02-10 23:14:14 sgstair has joined
1050 2013-02-10 23:16:56 paraipan has quit (Quit: Saliendo)
1051 2013-02-10 23:17:01 Hashdog has joined
1052 2013-02-10 23:18:41 tsche has joined
1053 2013-02-10 23:19:52 Guest44901 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1054 2013-02-10 23:21:21 MrTiggr has joined
1055 2013-02-10 23:23:11 Z0rZ0rZ0r has quit (Quit: Wheeeee)
1056 2013-02-10 23:25:59 Guest44901 has joined
1057 2013-02-10 23:26:45 Guest44901 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1058 2013-02-10 23:27:02 moarrr_ has joined
1059 2013-02-10 23:27:11 paraipan has joined
1060 2013-02-10 23:28:41 moarrr has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1061 2013-02-10 23:29:22 skeledrew has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1062 2013-02-10 23:32:58 one_zero has joined
1063 2013-02-10 23:34:13 unknown45682 has joined
1064 2013-02-10 23:34:39 Guest44901 has joined
1065 2013-02-10 23:35:23 darkskiez_ has joined
1066 2013-02-10 23:36:07 paraipan has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1067 2013-02-10 23:37:38 darkskiez_ has quit (Client Quit)
1068 2013-02-10 23:40:08 Hasimir- has joined
1069 2013-02-10 23:42:28 Hasimir has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1070 2013-02-10 23:42:29 Guest44901 has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
1071 2013-02-10 23:42:37 B0g4r7 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1072 2013-02-10 23:46:57 KIDC has joined
1073 2013-02-10 23:46:57 KIDC has quit (Changing host)
1074 2013-02-10 23:46:57 KIDC has joined
1075 2013-02-10 23:47:36 B0g4r7 has joined
1076 2013-02-10 23:52:53 Arm0n has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1077 2013-02-10 23:53:17 LargoG has joined
1078 2013-02-10 23:54:26 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@brwyatt.net|brwyatt
1079 2013-02-10 23:55:41 zooko has joined
1080 2013-02-10 23:56:37 axhlf has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1081 2013-02-10 23:56:54 bitafterbit has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1082 2013-02-10 23:57:06 axhlf has joined