1 2013-03-07 00:00:22 <petertodd> gmaxwell: OK, to answere your question, transactions paying 0.0019BTC/KB are the least fee tx's being included in blocks
   2 2013-03-07 00:00:26 <muhoo> jgarzik: nice, thanks. and the logjam breaks, for the moment
   3 2013-03-07 00:00:31 <petertodd> So basically, some standard 0.005BTC tx's get left out.
   4 2013-03-07 00:01:14 <petertodd> gmaxwell: I wrote a script that gets the whole mempool, calculates fees for each mempool tx, and sorts that by fees per KB, and then tries to fill a block from highest fees per KB down.
   5 2013-03-07 00:01:24 <OneMiner> http://blockchain.info/block-index/354938/000000000000021853a045c480f8ca0ae78d91fc76f09fd0e61cb002f630b672     94BTC fee
   6 2013-03-07 00:01:39 <muhoo> TD: bitcoinj sends compressed keys, correct?
   7 2013-03-07 00:01:48 <TD> the latest version generates compressed keys by default yes
   8 2013-03-07 00:01:49 <OneMiner> Damn block wasn't even half a meg.
   9 2013-03-07 00:01:57 <TD> older keys are obviously not compressed
  10 2013-03-07 00:02:03 <wizkid057> OneMiner: http://eligius.st/~wizkid057/newstats/blocks.php ... *cough*
  11 2013-03-07 00:02:17 <petertodd> gmaxwell: Another way to put it, is that total fees fitting into 250KB are 0.7BTC right now, and the rest, 0.868BTC of fees, would take 2MB
  12 2013-03-07 00:02:29 ByteUnit has joined
  13 2013-03-07 00:02:48 <OneMiner> wizkid057 Damn son! Hell of a windfall.
  14 2013-03-07 00:03:01 <OneMiner> Coingrats.
  15 2013-03-07 00:03:48 <wizkid057> yeah, wish I could keep um :P
  16 2013-03-07 00:04:32 <TD> the number of times pools are getting 2 blocks in a row is a bit annoying
  17 2013-03-07 00:04:39 <OneMiner> Could put up a banner or something saying that the pool distributes 94BTC fees between the miners periodically. It's kinda true....
  18 2013-03-07 00:04:42 <TD> also why is deepbit making 50kb blocks?
  19 2013-03-07 00:05:17 <OneMiner> Anyways, hot damn! That's almost like 5 blocks in a row!
  20 2013-03-07 00:05:25 <gmaxwell> I believe they did that in response to high ophaning a while back.
  21 2013-03-07 00:05:41 <TD> it doesn't seem to be consistent though
  22 2013-03-07 00:05:55 <TD> unless they have some kind of auto "half of blocks have a limit" or something
  23 2013-03-07 00:06:03 <gmaxwell> TD: at least in the past it was clear they ran multiple daemons with different policy.
  24 2013-03-07 00:06:07 <TD> ah
  25 2013-03-07 00:06:28 <gmaxwell> amusingly they triggered a 'bug' (?) in bfgminer's pool misconduct detection by mining forks against their own blocks sometimes. lol
  26 2013-03-07 00:07:03 <gmaxwell> e.g. solved a block, gave work to miners.. then gave new work for the block before.
  27 2013-03-07 00:07:49 ByteUnit has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
  28 2013-03-07 00:07:54 <TD> fail. seems tycho isn't really maintaining it anymore
  29 2013-03-07 00:08:01 <TD> some users are complaining that it hasn't kept up
  30 2013-03-07 00:08:12 <gmaxwell> s/anymore// hasn't really maintained it in a long time.
  31 2013-03-07 00:08:34 <TD> there was a good pie chart of pool hash rates somewhere
  32 2013-03-07 00:08:37 <TD> but i can't find it anymore
  33 2013-03-07 00:08:48 chmod755 has quit (Quit: chmod755)
  34 2013-03-07 00:08:49 Graet has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
  35 2013-03-07 00:08:50 <gmaxwell> We were never able to get him to switch to sendmany.
  36 2013-03-07 00:09:30 <gmaxwell> or discourage bitdust payouts...
  37 2013-03-07 00:10:48 <gavinandresen> I think Tycho got stuck in  "I've got too many custom patches to upgrade"
  38 2013-03-07 00:12:11 <gmaxwell> I suspect that Tycho outsourced a lot of the technical stuff and so doing anything cost money and thus wasn't interesting.
  39 2013-03-07 00:12:42 <slush> gavinandresen: I was in similar situation few months ago. Even single change was a pain
  40 2013-03-07 00:12:56 <TD> gavinandresen: what's the status of the parent-pays-for-child patch?
  41 2013-03-07 00:13:06 <gavinandresen> TD: I don't trust Luke's code
  42 2013-03-07 00:13:13 <TD> ok
  43 2013-03-07 00:13:37 * TD -> sleep
  44 2013-03-07 00:14:21 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
  45 2013-03-07 00:14:48 <Luke-Jr> ironically, it's not even possible to use ASICs on Deepbit
  46 2013-03-07 00:16:07 Zarutian has joined
  47 2013-03-07 00:16:41 <K1773R> Luke-Jr, perfect!
  48 2013-03-07 00:17:12 <Luke-Jr> gavinandresen: while your request for tests is perfectly reasonable, and I don't especially like the code myself, do note it does have an advantage of months (years in the oldest form) of real-world testing ;)
  49 2013-03-07 00:17:35 <petertodd> gmaxwell: As for fees left on the table by not mining 1MB blocks, I'm seeing numbers around 1BTC approx, and such blocks would be 100% fee paying.
  50 2013-03-07 00:19:55 <petertodd> gmaxwell: Finally, looks like of the tx's that fit in 250KB block, a great deal of them are satoshidice given their 0.001BTC by default fees...
  51 2013-03-07 00:22:41 gritcoin has joined
  52 2013-03-07 00:26:06 brocktice has joined
  53 2013-03-07 00:27:00 one_zero has joined
  54 2013-03-07 00:33:17 tg has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
  55 2013-03-07 00:35:12 tg has joined
  56 2013-03-07 00:35:12 <gmaxwell> petertodd: feel like braking that out with dice vs non-dice? you can sniff the address prefix but don't forget to check the inputs or you'll miss half of them.
  57 2013-03-07 00:36:23 <petertodd> gmaxwell: Yeah, I'll give that a go later, I gotta get some other work tonight though.
  58 2013-03-07 00:37:43 <petertodd> gmaxwell: emailed you the script
  59 2013-03-07 00:40:50 <discrete> ;;ticker
  60 2013-03-07 00:40:56 <gribble> BTCUSD ticker | Best bid: 37.00190, Best ask: 37.09637, Bid-ask spread: 0.09447, Last trade: 36.32000, 24 hour volume: 144847.17896994, 24 hour low: 36.32000, 24 hour high: 49.09900, 24 hour vwap: 44.37552
  61 2013-03-07 00:45:43 <muhoo> it just occurred to me that the massive 94btc fee paid into elgius might be someone deliberately donating a huge fee to someone not mining SD
  62 2013-03-07 00:46:07 <gmaxwell> muhoo: miners prioritize highest fees per kb first. Everyone should have been trying to mine that.
  63 2013-03-07 00:46:11 <gmaxwell> If not, then there is a bug.
  64 2013-03-07 00:47:00 <muhoo> there's no way to direct a tx at a particular pool?
  65 2013-03-07 00:47:31 <gmaxwell> you could give it to them directly and trust them to be greedy enough to not relay it... but no one is that greedy right now.
  66 2013-03-07 00:47:56 <gmaxwell> eligius has a donation address they could have used.
  67 2013-03-07 00:48:33 <jgarzik> heh, wow
  68 2013-03-07 00:48:35 <jgarzik> http://blockexplorer.com/tx/13dffdaef097881acfe9bdb5e6338192242d80161ffec264ee61cf23bc9a1164
  69 2013-03-07 00:48:41 JDuke128 has joined
  70 2013-03-07 00:48:43 tristan__ has joined
  71 2013-03-07 00:48:59 <jgarzik> I wonder if that fee is the result of block space being bid up
  72 2013-03-07 00:49:09 <jgarzik> and the client thought it needed such a fee
  73 2013-03-07 00:49:14 tristan__ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
  74 2013-03-07 00:49:28 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: some crazy client software.
  75 2013-03-07 00:49:45 <gmaxwell> there is no way you could get that in bitcoin-qt even with manual adjustments. IIRC.
  76 2013-03-07 00:49:56 <jgarzik> or, a manual transaction build gone wrong
  77 2013-03-07 00:50:13 <gmaxwell> Yes, that you can do— obviously.
  78 2013-03-07 00:51:36 Mandrius has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
  79 2013-03-07 00:51:40 <doublec> I need to learn to add fees to transactions. I'm waiting on 4-5 hours for one at the moment.
  80 2013-03-07 00:52:21 Graet has joined
  81 2013-03-07 00:52:30 <doublec> actually I need to learn to post here about it. As soon as I wrote that it got in the last block.
  82 2013-03-07 00:52:40 Graet is now known as Guest67709
  83 2013-03-07 00:52:53 <gmaxwell> need captchas for priority. :P
  84 2013-03-07 00:53:27 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: I was thinking maybe they got the wrong out index on one of their inputs, but nope, that doesn't explain 94btc in fees.
  85 2013-03-07 00:54:04 Guest67709 is now known as Graet
  86 2013-03-07 00:54:16 Graet has quit (Changing host)
  87 2013-03-07 00:54:16 Graet has joined
  88 2013-03-07 01:01:12 <HM> gmaxwell: clearly petertodd burning his coins to create bonds :P
  89 2013-03-07 01:01:22 vampireb has joined
  90 2013-03-07 01:05:15 pROFMac has joined
  91 2013-03-07 01:05:44 Scrat is now known as ITRADEORFAMILYDI
  92 2013-03-07 01:05:57 ITRADEORFAMILYDI is now known as Scrat
  93 2013-03-07 01:07:51 GMP has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
  94 2013-03-07 01:11:21 coolsa has joined
  95 2013-03-07 01:11:56 OMGMTGOX has joined
  96 2013-03-07 01:13:52 <PRab> Anyone know if blockexplorer.com has an API to their /block pages?
  97 2013-03-07 01:14:40 <PRab> I'm looking for the same data, but in an easier to parse format (JSON, XML, CSV, etc.)
  98 2013-03-07 01:15:06 mogri has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
  99 2013-03-07 01:15:08 <OMGMTGOX> bitcoind is hogging 100% cpu
 100 2013-03-07 01:15:33 nimdAHK has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 101 2013-03-07 01:16:02 <gmaxwell> OMGMTGOX: doing a new install?
 102 2013-03-07 01:16:26 <OMGMTGOX> gmaxwell: I already remade it from source, I'm on ubuntu 12.04
 103 2013-03-07 01:17:08 <OMGMTGOX> ./bitcoind -getinfo doesn't return anything either
 104 2013-03-07 01:17:56 <gmaxwell> OMGMTGOX: the command is ./bitcoind getinfo
 105 2013-03-07 01:17:57 <sipa> OMGMTGOX: you didn't answer gmaxwell's question
 106 2013-03-07 01:18:26 <gmaxwell> and indeed, you didn't— it's normal and expected for it to use all the available cpu while doing its syncup (esp at the end when the sync process is cpu bound)
 107 2013-03-07 01:19:07 <OMGMTGOX> sorry, yes it's a new install of bitcoind however at first it was working, downloading blocks, etc
 108 2013-03-07 01:19:25 <sipa> perfectly expected in that case
 109 2013-03-07 01:19:25 <OMGMTGOX> it had about 20k to go last night. today, communicating via JSON-RPC gives me an exception
 110 2013-03-07 01:19:36 <sipa> oh, which one?
 111 2013-03-07 01:21:53 <OMGMTGOX> sipa: php doesn't tell me anything, I'm going to see what I get
 112 2013-03-07 01:22:39 <OMGMTGOX> ~/bitcoin/src$ ./bitcoind getinfo error: couldn't connect to server
 113 2013-03-07 01:23:00 <gmaxwell> OMGMTGOX: tail ~/.bitcoin/debug.log
 114 2013-03-07 01:23:17 <doublec> isn't that error normal when it's downloading the blockchain?
 115 2013-03-07 01:23:23 <sipa> no
 116 2013-03-07 01:23:29 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 117 2013-03-07 01:23:35 <sipa> it would refuse to do some things, like getwork
 118 2013-03-07 01:23:40 <OMGMTGOX> wallet.dat closed DBFlush(false) ended              33ms StopNode() ThreadOpenConnections exited Flushed 7171 addresses to peers.dat  51ms Committing 36519 changed transactions to coin database... Flush(true) DBFlush(true) ended               0ms Bitcoin exited
 119 2013-03-07 01:23:48 <sipa> seems like it exited
 120 2013-03-07 01:23:51 <sipa> cleanlt
 121 2013-03-07 01:23:52 <OMGMTGOX> I'll look more at it
 122 2013-03-07 01:23:55 <sipa> *cleanly
 123 2013-03-07 01:24:30 <sipa> sure it's still hogging your CPU...?
 124 2013-03-07 01:25:17 <OMGMTGOX> nope, it's shut down now
 125 2013-03-07 01:25:41 <OMGMTGOX> I'm going to start clean from a new wallet.dat and see how it goes.
 126 2013-03-07 01:26:10 <sipa> just so you understand: from what i can tell, there was nothing wrong
 127 2013-03-07 01:27:12 <OMGMTGOX> ahh
 128 2013-03-07 01:27:19 <OMGMTGOX> looked at debug.log earlier, low disk space
 129 2013-03-07 01:27:37 <sipa> ok, that is a problem of course
 130 2013-03-07 01:27:39 <OMGMTGOX> that must be why json-rpc stopped working after it dl'd more blocks.
 131 2013-03-07 01:27:50 <sipa> and it shuts down automatically when that is the case
 132 2013-03-07 01:30:52 Hashdog has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 133 2013-03-07 01:31:03 sgornick has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 134 2013-03-07 01:36:33 ielo has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
 135 2013-03-07 01:37:08 GMP has joined
 136 2013-03-07 01:37:40 Guest53438 is now known as valparaiso
 137 2013-03-07 01:38:09 valparaiso is now known as Guest58179
 138 2013-03-07 01:42:55 bock has quit (Quit: Verlassend)
 139 2013-03-07 01:45:49 <Luke-Jr> https://twitter.com/gavinandresen/status/309345069461303296 <-- is this why the price drop? -.-
 140 2013-03-07 01:45:58 OMGMTGOX has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 141 2013-03-07 01:46:19 <lianj> yea guessed so too
 142 2013-03-07 01:47:16 <lianj> congrats on your big fee block though
 143 2013-03-07 01:47:17 <Luke-Jr> gavin should give us some warning next time :p
 144 2013-03-07 01:48:33 <warren> Wall street traders watch a IRC channel for price signals.
 145 2013-03-07 01:50:27 <HM> lol @ gavin
 146 2013-03-07 01:50:35 <HM> such an optimist :)
 147 2013-03-07 01:51:36 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: you weren't BCCed on that email?
 148 2013-03-07 01:53:07 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: O.o?
 149 2013-03-07 01:55:11 teppy has joined
 150 2013-03-07 01:59:42 freakazoid has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 151 2013-03-07 02:00:30 [\\\] has joined
 152 2013-03-07 02:00:41 freakazoid has joined
 153 2013-03-07 02:07:37 <saivann> Can some one explain me how you get github to build bitcoin.org using your custom plugins (contributors.rb and less.rb)?
 154 2013-03-07 02:07:55 <saivann> Github pages run jekyll in safe mode.. And each time I tried, the plugins were ignored.
 155 2013-03-07 02:08:13 <gmaxwell> saivann: jekyll is run externally, not on github.
 156 2013-03-07 02:08:22 <gmaxwell> There are two repositories, a real one and the displayed one.
 157 2013-03-07 02:08:40 <gmaxwell> A script on a remote server picks up commits from one runs the parser and updates the other.
 158 2013-03-07 02:09:01 <saivann> All of this is done automatically?
 159 2013-03-07 02:09:10 <gmaxwell> Yes.
 160 2013-03-07 02:09:15 <saivann> Perfect, thanks
 161 2013-03-07 02:09:51 <gavinandresen> saivann: it seemed to be broken a week or so ago, but I think tcatm or BlueMatt fixed it
 162 2013-03-07 02:11:51 <saivann> I've succesfully replaced everything Apache/PHP related and added javascript redirections instead. So it should now be OK for github pages
 163 2013-03-07 02:12:04 <saivann> There is three orphan pages I didn't include :
 164 2013-03-07 02:12:04 <saivann> http://bitcoin.org/critfix.html
 165 2013-03-07 02:12:05 <saivann> http://bitcoin.org/feb20.html
 166 2013-03-07 02:12:05 <saivann> http://bitcoin.org/dos.html
 167 2013-03-07 02:12:20 <saivann> Are you OK to trash them, or are they still necessary?
 168 2013-03-07 02:12:40 <gmaxwell> these are messages that were linked from alerts.
 169 2013-03-07 02:12:42 <phantomcircuit> there are links to them from all over the web
 170 2013-03-07 02:14:14 <BCB> ;;rated appendage
 171 2013-03-07 02:14:14 <gribble> You rated user appendage on Wed Mar  6 18:05:56 2013, giving him a rating of 1, and supplied these additional notes: small Dwolla to Paypal trade.
 172 2013-03-07 02:14:31 <BCB> ;;rate appendage 1 Small Dwolla to Bitcoin Trade. Smooth.
 173 2013-03-07 02:14:32 <gribble> Rating entry successful. Your rating for user appendage has changed from 1 to 1.
 174 2013-03-07 02:14:55 <gmaxwell> bcb: wrong channel.
 175 2013-03-07 02:15:32 freakazoid has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 176 2013-03-07 02:17:19 <saivann> Good
 177 2013-03-07 02:17:23 road33 has joined
 178 2013-03-07 02:17:35 <saivann> Concerning the press mailing list, do you still want to keep it? Or rather point to https://bitcoinfoundation.org/contact
 179 2013-03-07 02:20:18 <jgarzik> BCB: wrong channel, and, please "/msg gribble ..." instead
 180 2013-03-07 02:20:42 ByteUnit has joined
 181 2013-03-07 02:20:56 <BCB> sorry
 182 2013-03-07 02:21:52 brent5001 has joined
 183 2013-03-07 02:22:36 <brent5001> does anyone know if the API calls have change from version 0.5.1 to 0.8?
 184 2013-03-07 02:22:50 D34TH_ has joined
 185 2013-03-07 02:22:54 <Luke-Jr> brent5001: not majorly
 186 2013-03-07 02:23:01 <brent5001> and/or are the old calls backwards compatible?
 187 2013-03-07 02:23:12 <Luke-Jr> brent5001: I think the only change was accounting generation into accounts
 188 2013-03-07 02:23:20 D34TH has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 189 2013-03-07 02:23:46 tyn has joined
 190 2013-03-07 02:24:24 <brent5001> where is the api documentation for the different versions?
 191 2013-03-07 02:24:38 <jgarzik> brent5001: mainly the wiki, sadly
 192 2013-03-07 02:24:44 <Luke-Jr> sadly? O.o
 193 2013-03-07 02:24:46 <jgarzik> brent5001: plus release announcements
 194 2013-03-07 02:25:02 <jgarzik> Luke-Jr: in an ideal world there would be signed, sealed, delivered API docs for each version
 195 2013-03-07 02:25:27 <jgarzik> Luke-Jr: many softwares do that (usually the ones with semi-generated docs, not surprisingly)
 196 2013-03-07 02:25:54 <jgarzik> ideal world, click on http://bitcoin.org/bitcoind/api/0.7.2/ etc.
 197 2013-03-07 02:26:01 <jrmithdobbs> jgarzik: i've not seen that for anything without auto-generation in like a decade, noone cares about documentation for customers/users any more
 198 2013-03-07 02:26:07 <jrmithdobbs> :(
 199 2013-03-07 02:26:33 <jrmithdobbs> (so maybe bitcoin needs an automated way of generating it! ;p)
 200 2013-03-07 02:26:39 <jgarzik> Easy examples: libevent, mysql, python, ...
 201 2013-03-07 02:26:46 <jgarzik> all publish multiple versions of docs
 202 2013-03-07 02:26:56 <jgarzik> and archive old, in browseable fashion
 203 2013-03-07 02:27:09 <jrmithdobbs> ya, they're mostly generated off the code (all of python is)
 204 2013-03-07 02:28:13 <brent5001> do you know if upgrading from 0.5.1(non deterministic wallet) to 0.8 will cause excessive downtime?
 205 2013-03-07 02:29:20 <Luke-Jr> brent5001: likely a few hours
 206 2013-03-07 02:29:32 <Luke-Jr> also note 0.8 also has no deterministic wallet
 207 2013-03-07 02:32:03 Dagger2 has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 208 2013-03-07 02:33:53 D34TH__ has joined
 209 2013-03-07 02:33:56 D34TH_ has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 210 2013-03-07 02:34:10 Diablo-D3 has joined
 211 2013-03-07 02:35:45 <BTC_Bear> Not sure why people 'want' deterministic wallets but meh...
 212 2013-03-07 02:36:07 <gmaxwell> BTC_Bear: because maintaining backups takes work.
 213 2013-03-07 02:36:10 <Luke-Jr> BTC_Bear: it makes wallets managable
 214 2013-03-07 02:36:25 gritcoin has quit (Quit: gritcoin)
 215 2013-03-07 02:36:39 tyn has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
 216 2013-03-07 02:38:26 <brent5001> anyone know if 0.8 is compatible with debian 5?
 217 2013-03-07 02:38:40 <jgarzik> brent5001: should be...
 218 2013-03-07 02:39:42 LainZ has joined
 219 2013-03-07 02:41:15 coolsa has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 220 2013-03-07 02:43:25 <road33> are there good standard trading bots? I need something simple
 221 2013-03-07 02:43:40 Dagger2 has joined
 222 2013-03-07 02:44:06 pizzaman1337 has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 223 2013-03-07 02:44:25 pizzaman1337 has joined
 224 2013-03-07 02:45:28 <jgarzik> road33: try #bitcoin-otc
 225 2013-03-07 02:46:31 <road33> thanks
 226 2013-03-07 02:48:19 Zarutian has quit (Quit: Zarutian)
 227 2013-03-07 02:48:27 JDuke128 has quit (Quit: [BB])
 228 2013-03-07 02:48:36 tyn has joined
 229 2013-03-07 02:50:18 brent5001 has quit (Quit: Page closed)
 230 2013-03-07 02:55:16 D34TH__ is now known as D34TH
 231 2013-03-07 02:55:23 D34TH has quit (Changing host)
 232 2013-03-07 02:55:23 D34TH has joined
 233 2013-03-07 03:06:59 tyn has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
 234 2013-03-07 03:07:29 hsmiths_ has joined
 235 2013-03-07 03:07:46 D34TH has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 236 2013-03-07 03:08:05 hsmiths has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 237 2013-03-07 03:08:12 hsmiths_ is now known as hsmiths
 238 2013-03-07 03:08:58 Goonie has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 239 2013-03-07 03:09:50 hsmiths has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 240 2013-03-07 03:09:58 teppy has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
 241 2013-03-07 03:13:01 mogri has joined
 242 2013-03-07 03:14:43 JZavala has joined
 243 2013-03-07 03:16:09 coolsa has joined
 244 2013-03-07 03:17:19 bitit has joined
 245 2013-03-07 03:17:31 b4tt3r136 has joined
 246 2013-03-07 03:18:16 hsmiths has joined
 247 2013-03-07 03:19:57 <freewil> 0.8.x starts up so much quicker
 248 2013-03-07 03:20:07 <freewil> used to have to wait like 2mins+ before the rpc became responsive
 249 2013-03-07 03:20:26 dust-otc has joined
 250 2013-03-07 03:20:29 rbecker is now known as RBecker
 251 2013-03-07 03:20:58 gavinandresen has quit (Quit: gavinandresen)
 252 2013-03-07 03:27:26 zivester has joined
 253 2013-03-07 03:31:15 jaekwon has joined
 254 2013-03-07 03:34:00 fiesh has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 255 2013-03-07 03:36:31 fiesh has joined
 256 2013-03-07 03:41:36 andytoshi has joined
 257 2013-03-07 03:41:43 RBecker is now known as rbecker
 258 2013-03-07 03:44:57 gritcoin has joined
 259 2013-03-07 03:45:05 coolsa has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 260 2013-03-07 03:47:14 vigilyn3 has joined
 261 2013-03-07 03:47:17 JZavala has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
 262 2013-03-07 03:47:30 vigilyn2 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 263 2013-03-07 03:49:07 paraipan has quit (Quit: Saliendo)
 264 2013-03-07 04:03:43 hydrogenesis has joined
 265 2013-03-07 04:04:07 hydrogenesis is now known as Guest25378
 266 2013-03-07 04:05:52 Guest25378 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 267 2013-03-07 04:06:12 owowo has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 268 2013-03-07 04:07:13 sneak has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
 269 2013-03-07 04:07:24 aphedox has joined
 270 2013-03-07 04:07:54 GMP has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 271 2013-03-07 04:08:26 jeremias has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 272 2013-03-07 04:09:13 beethoven8201 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 273 2013-03-07 04:12:14 voodoo has joined
 274 2013-03-07 04:18:10 <jaekwon> does bitcoin have a scalability problem?
 275 2013-03-07 04:20:36 GMP has joined
 276 2013-03-07 04:20:42 <hsmiths> bitcoin is holding up just fine.  it is all the exchanges that are not scaling to match the volume.
 277 2013-03-07 04:21:18 owowo has joined
 278 2013-03-07 04:23:12 jaakkos has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 279 2013-03-07 04:23:18 <Luke-Jr> jaekwon: eventually, yes
 280 2013-03-07 04:23:25 gritcoin has quit (Quit: gritcoin)
 281 2013-03-07 04:23:39 jaakkos has joined
 282 2013-03-07 04:23:40 sneak has joined
 283 2013-03-07 04:23:40 sneak has quit (Changing host)
 284 2013-03-07 04:23:40 sneak has joined
 285 2013-03-07 04:24:11 jeremias has joined
 286 2013-03-07 04:24:58 <jaekwon> thanks hsmiths. also, why are there hours+ gaps in blockchain generation? i've seen two in two days now.
 287 2013-03-07 04:28:39 hydrogenesis has joined
 288 2013-03-07 04:28:42 comboy has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 289 2013-03-07 04:29:02 hydrogenesis is now known as Guest28262
 290 2013-03-07 04:29:22 Guest28262 has quit (Client Quit)
 291 2013-03-07 04:29:34 <hsmiths> block generation is a random process.  difficulty is set to make generation average out to 10 minutes each, but there will be variation -- some blocks are generated within seconds of the previous block, while others take many times the average.  it is a normal distribution, and there will be points in the tails from time to time.  also there is a pretty large change going on in the mining community with the roll
 292 2013-03-07 04:29:34 <hsmiths>  out of ASIC chips, so the current difficulty is probably not exactly righ to give the 10 minute block time.
 293 2013-03-07 04:34:06 tyn has joined
 294 2013-03-07 04:34:50 BTCTrader2 has quit (Quit: BTCTrader2)
 295 2013-03-07 04:39:24 puhc has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 296 2013-03-07 04:39:36 comboy has joined
 297 2013-03-07 04:43:36 ByteUnit has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.90 [Firefox 19.0/20130215130331])
 298 2013-03-07 04:43:50 comboy has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 299 2013-03-07 04:45:03 [7] has quit (Disconnected by services)
 300 2013-03-07 04:45:12 TheSeven has joined
 301 2013-03-07 04:45:48 vampireb has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
 302 2013-03-07 04:47:30 BTCTrader2 has joined
 303 2013-03-07 04:50:10 b4tt3r136 is now known as pre2
 304 2013-03-07 04:50:16 pre2 has left ()
 305 2013-03-07 04:50:41 Diablo-D3 has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
 306 2013-03-07 04:52:37 miscreanity has joined
 307 2013-03-07 04:54:48 dkog has joined
 308 2013-03-07 04:55:29 owowo has quit (Quit: sayonara)
 309 2013-03-07 04:55:31 <dkog> Hi there.  In theory is it possible to lose coins in a forever unconfirmed transaction?  I sent over an hour ago, txn shows up in blockchain.info, but still has 0 confirmations... Am getting a bit concerned.
 310 2013-03-07 04:56:54 <andytoshi> dkog: no, not possible, but bitcoind doesn't support you removing it from your local database
 311 2013-03-07 04:57:07 <andytoshi> so you'll need some trickery to convince your client the money has not been spent
 312 2013-03-07 04:57:15 <andytoshi> ...however, 1 hour is not cause for concern, only annoyance
 313 2013-03-07 04:57:44 <weex> i learned last night that blockchain.info wallet can import an entire pywallet dump
 314 2013-03-07 04:57:56 <dkog> andytoshi: OK that's good to know.  I'm using standard bitcoin-qt.  I had default 0 txn fee set, and didn't realize.  Just bumped it up, but these coins be stuck :)  At what point should I be more concerned?
 315 2013-03-07 04:58:28 <andytoshi> 4-5 hours -- there are plenty of miners out there still who don't require fees
 316 2013-03-07 04:58:47 freakazoid has joined
 317 2013-03-07 04:59:22 BTC_Bear is now known as BTC_Bear|hbrntng
 318 2013-03-07 05:00:14 <dkog> OK thank you.  I bumped up my fee for the future anyway.  Maybe the client should explain clearly about that it's defaulting to 0 fees and what the issues can be with that.
 319 2013-03-07 05:01:23 tyn has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
 320 2013-03-07 05:01:34 <andytoshi> yeah, times are a-changing and i think bitcoin-qt needs some better facilities for this
 321 2013-03-07 05:01:58 <andytoshi> it would also be nice if there was a "cancel transaction" feature that many miners would respect, after an hour or so
 322 2013-03-07 05:02:08 <andytoshi> but it's not really clear what exactly to do
 323 2013-03-07 05:03:34 BenderCoin has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 324 2013-03-07 05:04:42 <mogri> i wonder how abuse is for bitcoin-accepting it providers
 325 2013-03-07 05:05:14 <gmaxwell> ::sigh::
 326 2013-03-07 05:05:51 <gmaxwell> I'd say we should just ship it out with a non-zero default fee... but if we set it to 0.0001 that won't be enough to get in front of the flood of 0.001 fee txn.
 327 2013-03-07 05:06:32 <gmaxwell> And if we set it to 0.001 then on a 100KB transaction it'll have 0.1 BTC fees, which is a bit extreme, esp since the 100KB ones are inevitably some fool sending 0.01 BTC with dust. :P
 328 2013-03-07 05:07:19 <gmaxwell> it's really annoying that the bitcoinj txn just have a @#$@# constant fee instead of a size proportional one.
 329 2013-03-07 05:07:47 freakazoid has quit (Quit: Leaving)
 330 2013-03-07 05:07:52 <gmaxwell> as to keep up we'd need to put a constant fee in bitcoin-qt that makes no sense because miners prioritize on fee/kb.
 331 2013-03-07 05:08:27 <mogri> andytoshi, i am not sure how 'cnacel transaction' could work, transactions are provably one-way due to the usage of merkel trees
 332 2013-03-07 05:08:43 <dkog> Well I was suggesting to at least let the user make a choice.  Currently you have to dig into preferences to even see or know anything about the fee.  When you send your first txn and fee is still 0, it should just explain and give you a chance to set it yourself.
 333 2013-03-07 05:09:03 <dkog> So you don't have to figure out the perfect fee, just help let people know about the option.
 334 2013-03-07 05:09:12 <etotheipi_> why is it so hard to compute a *reasonable* fee
 335 2013-03-07 05:09:13 <mogri> andytoshi, the only thing i can think of is maybe allowing a transaction to be aborted *before* the next block is mined, but past that, you can't go backwards
 336 2013-03-07 05:09:23 <etotheipi_> my code for doing it in Armory is like 20 lines
 337 2013-03-07 05:10:10 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: what do you mean by reasonable?
 338 2013-03-07 05:10:54 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: basically applying allowFree logic, and doing 0.0005 BTC/kB above certain sizes
 339 2013-03-07 05:11:20 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: sure sure thats easy.
 340 2013-03-07 05:11:41 <weex> it's really a market so if you want something robust it needs market info
 341 2013-03-07 05:11:45 <andytoshi> mogri: you'd only be able to cancel unconfirmed transactions, of course
 342 2013-03-07 05:11:58 <etotheipi_> gmaxwell: that's my point, why should bitcoinj use a an absolute fixed fee when that logic is so simple?
 343 2013-03-07 05:12:02 <andytoshi> this feature would be very confusing and should be hidden unless you do a magic dance upon a "stuck" transaction
 344 2013-03-07 05:12:19 <gmaxwell> etotheipi_: I dunno. :(
 345 2013-03-07 05:13:09 puhc has joined
 346 2013-03-07 05:13:38 BTCTrader2 has quit (Quit: BTCTrader2)
 347 2013-03-07 05:17:13 BenderCoin has joined
 348 2013-03-07 05:20:08 <mogri> this seems like it would break satoshidice
 349 2013-03-07 05:20:20 <mogri> otoh who cares about that :P
 350 2013-03-07 05:21:22 <freewil> if anyone could update this for 0.8.0, it would be appreciated
 351 2013-03-07 05:21:25 <freewil> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Data_directory
 352 2013-03-07 05:21:28 grau has joined
 353 2013-03-07 05:24:16 comboy has joined
 354 2013-03-07 05:39:43 gritcoin has joined
 355 2013-03-07 05:43:28 hydrogenesis has joined
 356 2013-03-07 05:53:59 gritcoin has quit (Quit: gritcoin)
 357 2013-03-07 05:54:11 FredEE_ has joined
 358 2013-03-07 05:54:21 hydrogenesis has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPhone - http://colloquy.mobi)
 359 2013-03-07 05:55:37 BTC_Bear is now known as hbrntng!~BTC_Bear@unaffiliated/btc-bear/x-5233302|BTC_Bear
 360 2013-03-07 05:57:29 FredEE has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
 361 2013-03-07 05:57:30 FredEE_ is now known as FredEE
 362 2013-03-07 05:58:41 hydrogenesis has joined
 363 2013-03-07 06:02:10 grau has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 364 2013-03-07 06:05:58 <muhoo> hmm just thinking, if tx fees are a "market" they fail pretty badly at being a market. how can you find out what the actual price is? how can you buy something if you don't know FOR SURE how much it'll cost before you buy?
 365 2013-03-07 06:06:51 nus-- has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 366 2013-03-07 06:07:03 <muhoo> and, how can you buy something, if all you can do is try to buy, and have to keep re-trying it if it fails to make a sale, and there's no automated way to re-try buying it at a different price until you can buy one.
 367 2013-03-07 06:07:55 <muhoo> it's more like a blind auction, really, than a market
 368 2013-03-07 06:08:12 <muhoo>  </rant>
 369 2013-03-07 06:12:02 <freewil> i think the fees "market" is understood to be underdeveloped at this point
 370 2013-03-07 06:12:04 <petertodd> muhoo: Do you know what gas will cost next weekend?
 371 2013-03-07 06:12:29 <muhoo> i know what it will cost NOW
 372 2013-03-07 06:12:38 <muhoo> and if i pull up to the pump, i know before i buy
 373 2013-03-07 06:12:52 <muhoo> if i send a tx now, i have no real idea what is the "right" fee to get into a block
 374 2013-03-07 06:13:23 <petertodd> Sure, but you can get a very good estimate by looking at past blocks; unless you want exactly at the minimum margin you can have very good certainty.
 375 2013-03-07 06:13:23 <freewil> there arent any good tools i know of
 376 2013-03-07 06:13:28 <muhoo> also, the price is posted on the pump.
 377 2013-03-07 06:13:34 <petertodd> Besides, blocks themselves happen randomly.
 378 2013-03-07 06:13:45 <petertodd> Who knows how long it'll take?
 379 2013-03-07 06:13:59 <freewil> but you in theory should be able to figure out the right fee by analyzing the current pool of txs that havent made it into a block
 380 2013-03-07 06:14:14 <petertodd> Sure, I wrote a tool that basically does that in just a few minutes today.
 381 2013-03-07 06:14:21 <petertodd> (er, ok, 30 minutes)
 382 2013-03-07 06:14:28 <muhoo> that'd be an improvement, towards being more like a market
 383 2013-03-07 06:14:37 <muhoo> where you can at least check the bid/ask
 384 2013-03-07 06:15:07 <muhoo> then if that could be worked into the client code, it could pick the fee based on that.
 385 2013-03-07 06:15:30 <petertodd> Well, if miners behave rationally, it's really easy: sort all the transactions by fee per kb, and figure out what fee per kb is at the cut-off, and whatever margin you want.
 386 2013-03-07 06:15:52 grau_ has joined
 387 2013-03-07 06:16:10 <muhoo> i think i'm safe in saying that humans are not rational :-) . but i get your point, it would be a useful way to approach it.
 388 2013-03-07 06:16:28 <petertodd> Yup, I ran it a bunch of times and the threshold was pretty consistant.
 389 2013-03-07 06:16:52 <petertodd> You know how to write python code to interface with the Bitcoin RPC?
 390 2013-03-07 06:17:01 <muhoo> json-rpc? sure.
 391 2013-03-07 06:17:13 <petertodd> Cool, now go write your own. :P
 392 2013-03-07 06:17:16 <muhoo> python has to be the easiest jsonrpc (or xmlrpc) interface around.
 393 2013-03-07 06:17:44 <petertodd> FWIW my one takes maybe a minute or two to analyze the whole mempool, but if you do some caching I'm sure you can do better.
 394 2013-03-07 06:18:01 BTCTrader2 has joined
 395 2013-03-07 06:18:01 <petertodd> Bitcoin can add a "add/remove mempool tx" callback or something.
 396 2013-03-07 06:18:03 <muhoo> heh, no open source for you!
 397 2013-03-07 06:18:25 <petertodd> Heh, you can have a copy of mine if you really want.
 398 2013-03-07 06:18:45 <muhoo> sure, just gist it somewhere
 399 2013-03-07 06:19:07 BTCTrader2 has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 400 2013-03-07 06:19:30 <muhoo> i'd probably write something in clojure and integrate it with my app, but it'd be better to have it in java and integrated into bitcoinj for everyone, or in C++ and in bitcoind, etc.
 401 2013-03-07 06:20:01 <muhoo> oh, wait. with an spv client, not so easy.
 402 2013-03-07 06:20:41 <muhoo> i'll look at what bitcoinj has by way of mempool, if any.
 403 2013-03-07 06:22:50 <petertodd> https://gist.github.com/petertodd/5105934
 404 2013-03-07 06:23:20 <petertodd> You'll have to change it slightly for jgarzik's bitcoin rpc; I have it written to import my opentimestamps crap.
 405 2013-03-07 06:23:37 <petertodd> And hexlify and unhexlify are python3 versions that accecpt strings.
 406 2013-03-07 06:23:41 <petertodd> Minor things really.
 407 2013-03-07 06:23:53 <jgarzik> petertodd: patches to python-bitcoinrpc welcome
 408 2013-03-07 06:23:57 <petertodd> (actually, the code doesn't even use (un)hexlify so...)
 409 2013-03-07 06:23:59 dvide has quit ()
 410 2013-03-07 06:24:02 <jgarzik> petertodd: in particular, if you know Proper Python Packaging
 411 2013-03-07 06:24:15 <jgarzik> setup.py distutils etc.
 412 2013-03-07 06:24:16 <petertodd> jgarzik: Oh, I haven't actually changed your code, I was just being super lazy.
 413 2013-03-07 06:24:27 <petertodd> jgarzik: But yes, that is on my todo list... ever growing todo list...
 414 2013-03-07 06:24:28 <mogri> jgarzik, repository location ?
 415 2013-03-07 06:24:34 <mogri> i'll package it for you
 416 2013-03-07 06:24:58 <jgarzik> mogri: https://github.com/jgarzik/python-bitcoinrpc
 417 2013-03-07 06:25:15 <jgarzik> mogri: and https://github.com/jgarzik/pynode/ too, if you are motivated
 418 2013-03-07 06:25:23 <jgarzik> pynode's bitcoin/ sub-dir is really a library
 419 2013-03-07 06:25:24 <petertodd> mogri: Cool! If you do that for ubuntu/debian I'll tip a bitcoin. (at reasonably close to current prices :P)
 420 2013-03-07 06:25:53 <mogri> ok, give me a moment.
 421 2013-03-07 06:26:07 <petertodd> mogri: Yeah, I really wanna see pynode's bitcoin separated out as it's own library.
 422 2013-03-07 06:26:09 <gmaxwell> muhoo: thats how a real market works too. you put out your offer (a txn) and then people take the offers most attractive first. :P
 423 2013-03-07 06:26:22 <muhoo> information though.
 424 2013-03-07 06:26:31 <muhoo> that's why i said, like a blind, silent auction.
 425 2013-03-07 06:27:07 <muhoo> if there were a way to retransmit the tx'es with increasing fees until one is accepted, then, yeah, i'd buy "market".
 426 2013-03-07 06:27:14 <petertodd> muhoo: Commodities mostly get sold that way anyway - intermediaries repackage it up and take the price risk.
 427 2013-03-07 06:27:31 FredEE has quit (Quit: FredEE)
 428 2013-03-07 06:29:52 <petertodd> mogri: Oh, just to be clear, that's a 1BTC for both python-bitcoinrpc and pynode
 429 2013-03-07 06:30:23 Shealan has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
 430 2013-03-07 06:30:24 <petertodd> mogri: Well, lets say 0.5BTC for the former, 1BTC for the latter with the separated out library.
 431 2013-03-07 06:30:50 AtashiCon has quit (Quit: AtashiCon)
 432 2013-03-07 06:34:56 AtashiCon has joined
 433 2013-03-07 06:39:13 <mogri> jgarzik, https://github.com/jgarzik/python-bitcoinrpc/pull/7
 434 2013-03-07 06:41:10 gritcoin has joined
 435 2013-03-07 06:42:03 BCBot has joined
 436 2013-03-07 06:42:09 <jgarzik> mogri: merged
 437 2013-03-07 06:42:34 grau_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 438 2013-03-07 06:42:40 BCBot` has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 439 2013-03-07 06:42:41 <mogri> do you want to split out the bitcoin library in pynode to it's own repository?
 440 2013-03-07 06:42:46 <Luke-Jr> …
 441 2013-03-07 06:42:53 * Luke-Jr NACKs mogri?
 442 2013-03-07 06:42:56 <mogri> (could use git submodule to bring it in that way)
 443 2013-03-07 06:43:31 <petertodd> mogri: Personally, I would prefer that.
 444 2013-03-07 06:43:36 <mogri> or do you just want setup.py support for it
 445 2013-03-07 06:43:51 defunctzombie is now known as defunctzombie_zz
 446 2013-03-07 06:44:02 grau_ has joined
 447 2013-03-07 06:44:08 <mogri> for distribution packagers, it doesn't matter, as they can split it on the distro side obviously
 448 2013-03-07 06:44:18 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: could you revert that please? :/
 449 2013-03-07 06:44:22 <petertodd> mogri: I think at this stage, it's in flux enough that using submodules or merged trees makes more sense for projects - pynode doesn't have versions.
 450 2013-03-07 06:44:33 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: What's the NACK due to?
 451 2013-03-07 06:44:41 AtashiCon has quit (Quit: AtashiCon)
 452 2013-03-07 06:44:58 <Luke-Jr> the entire point of the jsonrpc/ directory is to be a drop-in *replacement* for python-jsonrpc
 453 2013-03-07 06:45:08 <Luke-Jr> without any software changes
 454 2013-03-07 06:45:14 <mogri> that is a nono in python
 455 2013-03-07 06:45:29 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: Yeah, I've seen that cause problems a few times already.
 456 2013-03-07 06:45:38 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: It's not drop-in if it uses Decimal()...
 457 2013-03-07 06:45:44 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: why not?
 458 2013-03-07 06:45:45 AtashiCon has joined
 459 2013-03-07 06:45:54 <mogri> there was a shitstorm about that with simplejson for example
 460 2013-03-07 06:46:07 <Luke-Jr> mogri: quite frankly I don't care about stupid "Python rules"
 461 2013-03-07 06:46:17 <Luke-Jr> if you don't want a drop-in replacement, don't use the jsonrpc/ directory
 462 2013-03-07 06:46:20 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: Different behavior; Gavin's coin control script doesn't work without Decimal() for instance.
 463 2013-03-07 06:46:23 <Luke-Jr> the ONLY thing it does is provide compatibility
 464 2013-03-07 06:46:32 <gmaxwell> whoa whoa, luke not arguing for pedantic correctness for once?
 465 2013-03-07 06:46:46 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: Python's pedantics are all wrong
 466 2013-03-07 06:47:17 <jgarzik> well
 467 2013-03-07 06:47:33 <jgarzik> it is fair to say it breaks existing apps, that currently use python-bitcoinrpc
 468 2013-03-07 06:47:46 <jgarzik> and have "from jsonrpc import"
 469 2013-03-07 06:48:08 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: the files in jsonrpc/ *only* create a compatibility interface - they do nothing else at all..
 470 2013-03-07 06:48:18 <petertodd> jgarzik: Packaging becomes harder if we call it jsonrpc...
 471 2013-03-07 06:48:22 <jgarzik> but I had hoped there was a stupid python namespace aliasing trick
 472 2013-03-07 06:48:33 <petertodd> jgarzik: ...and there isn't
 473 2013-03-07 06:48:34 <mogri> there is :)
 474 2013-03-07 06:48:38 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: it's called bitcoinrpc though ;)
 475 2013-03-07 06:48:41 <mogri> flask has one
 476 2013-03-07 06:48:47 <mogri> i can write a stub
 477 2013-03-07 06:48:55 <jgarzik> petertodd: <shrug> bitcoin.git/contrib/spendfrom/* shipped looking for 'jsonrpc'
 478 2013-03-07 06:49:13 <petertodd> jgarzik: Yes, and it doesn't work on my system because it does that...
 479 2013-03-07 06:49:16 <Luke-Jr> hmm, everything is in the directory? /me reviews
 480 2013-03-07 06:49:20 <petertodd> jgarzik: It expects Decimals
 481 2013-03-07 06:49:23 FredEE has joined
 482 2013-03-07 06:49:59 <jgarzik> petertodd: you have the regular, crappy jsonrpc module on your system, you are saying?
 483 2013-03-07 06:50:05 geb has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 484 2013-03-07 06:50:18 <petertodd> jgarzik: Yes, which gives floats, which is compatible with *other* software.
 485 2013-03-07 06:52:37 <Luke-Jr> afaik you can use floats and Decimal interchangable in Python, for many/most use cases
 486 2013-03-07 06:53:17 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: Emphasis most...
 487 2013-03-07 06:53:30 <mogri> i'll have another pull adding a stub in a second.
 488 2013-03-07 06:53:37 <jgarzik> I propose a cage-match between all present
 489 2013-03-07 06:53:51 <jgarzik> because I'm not very pythonic.
 490 2013-03-07 06:53:53 <Luke-Jr> mogri: it *was* a stub
 491 2013-03-07 06:54:04 <petertodd> jgarzik: Finally some sanity in the room...
 492 2013-03-07 06:54:05 geb has joined
 493 2013-03-07 06:54:05 geb has quit (Excess Flood)
 494 2013-03-07 06:54:10 <Luke-Jr> authproxy.py is the only *real* bitcoinrpc file, and doesn't exist in jsonrpc
 495 2013-03-07 06:54:16 <Luke-Jr> the other .py files were stubs for compatibility
 496 2013-03-07 06:54:25 geb has joined
 497 2013-03-07 06:56:13 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: Alright, compromise: make bitcoinrpc bitcoinrpc specific and do smart things like convert hex/bytes etc.
 498 2013-03-07 06:56:27 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: (or maybe by that I mean, bikeshed further)
 499 2013-03-07 06:56:38 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: …
 500 2013-03-07 06:57:22 <Luke-Jr> the only things bitcoinrpc does differently are use Decimal by default and use the native json module for JSON parsing.. nothing fancy/incompatible
 501 2013-03-07 06:57:47 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: grr, using Decimal is very incompatible...
 502 2013-03-07 06:57:55 <Luke-Jr> not for most applications
 503 2013-03-07 06:58:02 <petertodd> *most* is not good enough
 504 2013-03-07 06:58:06 <Luke-Jr> what can floats do that decimal cannot?
 505 2013-03-07 06:58:11 <petertodd> Packaging it named jsonrpc will break stuff, end of story.
 506 2013-03-07 06:58:15 <Luke-Jr> yes it is..
 507 2013-03-07 06:58:28 <Luke-Jr> so package it named bitcoinrpc; package != module
 508 2013-03-07 06:58:33 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: For one thing, floats aren't IsInstance(float)...
 509 2013-03-07 06:58:36 <doublec> I got a std::bad_alloc thrown running 0.8 while downloading the blockchain
 510 2013-03-07 06:58:46 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: Like it or not, there is code that does that...
 511 2013-03-07 06:58:58 <doublec> oh probably ran out of ram
 512 2013-03-07 06:59:27 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: then that software can depend on the jsonrpc package instead of the bitcoinrpc-jsonrpc-compat package
 513 2013-03-07 07:00:02 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: Right, and that's not the way python namespaces work. When I type "import jsonrpc" in python, I expect the system jsonrpc without any fuss.
 514 2013-03-07 07:00:10 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: Work with python
 515 2013-03-07 07:00:34 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: system jsonrpc could be either; if you need a specific one, depend on it in your package
 516 2013-03-07 07:01:07 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: As I say, that's not the sane way to do things. If I run a script I grabbed from someone, I expect system jsonrpc to be standard jsonrpc, end of story.
 517 2013-03-07 07:01:12 <Luke-Jr> yes it is
 518 2013-03-07 07:01:14 ahbritto has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
 519 2013-03-07 07:01:45 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: So if you now make me add a bunch of Python path crap, just so I can use your Bitcoin but nearly, but not quite compatible jsonrpc, that's a fail.
 520 2013-03-07 07:01:58 ahbritto has joined
 521 2013-03-07 07:01:59 <jgarzik> pkg A provides "foo" and pkg B provides "foo" is a common concept in RPM land
 522 2013-03-07 07:02:06 <jgarzik> where A conflicts with B
 523 2013-03-07 07:02:14 <jgarzik> probably not helpful if you need both
 524 2013-03-07 07:02:22 <petertodd> jgarzik: So what? That's not how Python is done.
 525 2013-03-07 07:02:22 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: also in Debian and Gentoo
 526 2013-03-07 07:02:50 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: Python is just a programming language. It doesn't get to redefine what is reasonable and sane.
 527 2013-03-07 07:03:11 <jgarzik> The main questions are, what do bitcoin users need now and in the future?  Is there a huge value in appearing as 'jsonrpc'?
 528 2013-03-07 07:03:12 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: python-bitcoinrpc is just some library, it doesn't get to redefine what the whole Python ecosystem does.
 529 2013-03-07 07:03:27 <petertodd> jgarzik: Fuck no...
 530 2013-03-07 07:03:27 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: yes
 531 2013-03-07 07:03:35 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: I don't recognize a "Python ecosystem"
 532 2013-03-07 07:03:41 <jgarzik> packaging as 'bitcoinrpc' may get us in distros, and thus be the most widely accepted version
 533 2013-03-07 07:03:45 <petertodd> jgarzik: Note how I import python-bitcoinrpc in my script
 534 2013-03-07 07:03:49 <mogri> hmm...
 535 2013-03-07 07:03:53 <petertodd> jgarzik: Yes!
 536 2013-03-07 07:03:56 <mogri> this jsonrpc stub isn't gonna work
 537 2013-03-07 07:04:07 <mogri> cause it doesn't seem to work with 'from jsonrpc import ...'
 538 2013-03-07 07:04:18 <petertodd> jmogri: ...and I'm paying a bounty for a distro-possible thing. :P
 539 2013-03-07 07:04:26 <Luke-Jr> mogri: you're reinventing the wheel. everything except authproxy.py was ALREADY a stub
 540 2013-03-07 07:04:40 <jgarzik> that is a fair point, though
 541 2013-03-07 07:04:51 <Luke-Jr> there are 3 use cases:
 542 2013-03-07 07:04:59 <Luke-Jr> 1. application doesn't care
 543 2013-03-07 07:05:02 <petertodd> jgarzik: Then don't use bitcoinrpc at all and make some really minor thing, or whatever.
 544 2013-03-07 07:05:06 <Luke-Jr> 2. application only works with original jsonrpc
 545 2013-03-07 07:05:13 <Luke-Jr> 3. application only works with bitcoinrpc
 546 2013-03-07 07:05:14 <petertodd> jgarzik: IMO stubs are fine if they add a bit of value.
 547 2013-03-07 07:05:42 <petertodd> jgarzik: Again, I'd kinda like to see a bitcoinrpc that was a bit more sophisticated and did some useful conversions, but that leads down bikeshedding...
 548 2013-03-07 07:05:43 <jgarzik> the fair point being the stubs are largely useless as named 'bitcoinrpc'
 549 2013-03-07 07:05:43 <freewil> what datafiles in 0.8.x should be distributed with a testnet box... here is from 0.7.2... https://github.com/freewil/bitcoin-testnet-box/tree/master/1/testnet3
 550 2013-03-07 07:05:51 <jgarzik> possible solution being deletion ;p
 551 2013-03-07 07:06:38 BTC_Bear is now known as BTC_Bear|hbrntng
 552 2013-03-07 07:06:53 RazielZ has joined
 553 2013-03-07 07:07:10 <mogri> Luke-Jr, then the changes should be reverted, and authproxy.py should be separated from jsonrpc module
 554 2013-03-07 07:07:40 <Luke-Jr> mogri: I'm okay with that, but I don't see the point in moving anything
 555 2013-03-07 07:07:43 <Luke-Jr> authproxy.py has no conflicts
 556 2013-03-07 07:08:50 <mogri> Luke-Jr, what i am saying is that authproxy.py should not be in jsonrpc module, it should be separate, e.g. bitcoinrpc.authproxy
 557 2013-03-07 07:09:10 <Luke-Jr> mogri: right, I'm saying: why bother?
 558 2013-03-07 07:09:45 <mogri> because stomping ontop of jsonrpc namespace makes python-bitcoinrpc unpackageable (doubly so in terms of inclusion in distributions)
 559 2013-03-07 07:10:02 <Luke-Jr> original jsonrpc doesn't have an authproxy
 560 2013-03-07 07:10:10 <mogri> that's not the point
 561 2013-03-07 07:10:11 RazielZ has quit (Client Quit)
 562 2013-03-07 07:10:18 <mogri> the point is, it may in the future
 563 2013-03-07 07:10:52 <mogri> you're shoving it in a namespace that is not yours
 564 2013-03-07 07:11:07 <mogri> thusly, you're at the mercy of upstream jsonrpc author
 565 2013-03-07 07:11:48 <Luke-Jr> meh, my code all uses the stubs, so I don't care to argue it beyond that
 566 2013-03-07 07:12:55 <freewil> can anyone tell me what datadir/blocks/rev*.dat is for?
 567 2013-03-07 07:13:26 <freewil> im guessing it might have something to do with a new best chain
 568 2013-03-07 07:13:35 <mogri> if the goal is to get bitcoinrpc module packaged into distributions, at least authproxy.py should be divorced.  a stub can be added to provide backwards compatibility for those using the bundled stubs module (this wouldn't be installed by setup.py obviously :))
 569 2013-03-07 07:14:40 <mogri> would you be ok with that refactoring?
 570 2013-03-07 07:14:45 <Luke-Jr> mogri: fine
 571 2013-03-07 07:15:13 <Luke-Jr> please be sure not to break Python 3 compat either..
 572 2013-03-07 07:15:20 <mogri> alright, i will do it.  give me a moment.
 573 2013-03-07 07:15:32 <mogri> yes, of course.
 574 2013-03-07 07:15:39 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: re: Python 3, finally something luke and I can agree on. :P
 575 2013-03-07 07:15:50 <gmaxwell> freewil: its the data requred in addition to the blocks needed to roll back applying a block to the coins database.
 576 2013-03-07 07:15:56 <gmaxwell> freewil: 'undo files'
 577 2013-03-07 07:16:22 <freewil> gmaxwell, ok im trying to figure out how to update the testnet box
 578 2013-03-07 07:16:29 <freewil> looks like i need to add blocks/blk*.dat
 579 2013-03-07 07:16:36 <freewil> anything else?
 580 2013-03-07 07:16:38 <freewil> chainstate/?
 581 2013-03-07 07:16:53 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: I only work with Python 3 anymore :P
 582 2013-03-07 07:16:56 RazielZ has joined
 583 2013-03-07 07:17:01 <Luke-Jr> (as far as Python goes)
 584 2013-03-07 07:17:07 <gmaxwell> freewil: everything.
 585 2013-03-07 07:17:18 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: OpenTimestamps is all Py3... I just want to see a Py3 protobuf
 586 2013-03-07 07:17:32 <freewil> gmaxwell, well i dont want junk like peers.dat, here it is from 0.7.2... https://github.com/freewil/bitcoin-testnet-box/tree/master/1/testnet3
 587 2013-03-07 07:17:56 tyn has joined
 588 2013-03-07 07:18:36 * Luke-Jr hides in shame of not following along well enough to have the foggiest idea what OT actually is :P
 589 2013-03-07 07:19:01 * petertodd hides in shame because no-one knows what his pet project is.
 590 2013-03-07 07:19:16 geb has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 591 2013-03-07 07:20:38 <warren> petertodd: ooh, sounds interesting, is code up?
 592 2013-03-07 07:20:47 <warren> petertodd: I've been meaning on working on timestamping this summer
 593 2013-03-07 07:21:06 <petertodd> https://github.com/opentimestamps/opentimestamps-client
 594 2013-03-07 07:21:12 <petertodd> My server should be working too
 595 2013-03-07 07:21:40 <petertodd> (someone donated 5BTC for me to turn it back on - they said they were using unspendable TX outs for timestamping...)
 596 2013-03-07 07:21:45 <warren> Does this work anything like chronobit?
 597 2013-03-07 07:21:54 <warren> oh
 598 2013-03-07 07:22:06 geb has joined
 599 2013-03-07 07:22:06 geb has quit (Excess Flood)
 600 2013-03-07 07:22:32 <petertodd> 7ec2ef87856a2fb1fe0ff075f678d7fcbfa2d182adc888a41e1f65ca48fbedba <- example transaction
 601 2013-03-07 07:22:33 <warren> petertodd: I was thinking about blockchain inclusion solutions for timestamping, but gmaxwell whacked me hard
 602 2013-03-07 07:22:47 <petertodd> It's a super general "proof by hash chain" thing
 603 2013-03-07 07:23:00 <petertodd> gmaxwell didn't whack me hard enough apparently
 604 2013-03-07 07:23:06 geb has joined
 605 2013-03-07 07:23:06 geb has quit (Excess Flood)
 606 2013-03-07 07:23:17 <petertodd> Being server based it's an O(small ish hopefully) solution
 607 2013-03-07 07:23:35 <petertodd> It can do coinbase timestamping without changing the client code
 608 2013-03-07 07:23:44 <petertodd> (well, almost, I need to write SHA256 midstate support)
 609 2013-03-07 07:24:00 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: merge-mine compatible?
 610 2013-03-07 07:24:06 geb has joined
 611 2013-03-07 07:24:06 geb has quit (Excess Flood)
 612 2013-03-07 07:24:27 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: Yup, from the client's point of view, proofs are just a set of instructions that somehow turn some data into a digest that it knows how to verify.
 613 2013-03-07 07:24:35 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: Fundementally it's not even Bitcoin specific.
 614 2013-03-07 07:24:36 <mogri> secondary pull-request submitted
 615 2013-03-07 07:24:46 geb has joined
 616 2013-03-07 07:25:05 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: https://github.com/opentimestamps/opentimestamps-client/blob/master/doc/opentimestamps-client-v0.1.ots is an example timestamp
 617 2013-03-07 07:25:11 <mogri> it puts jsonrpc stubs back where they are and adds another for jsonrpc.authproxy (so importing that still works if you're using the old way of just ganking the code)
 618 2013-03-07 07:26:20 <warren> petertodd: does this solution require a miner to merge your input?
 619 2013-03-07 07:26:36 <warren> (like chronobit)
 620 2013-03-07 07:26:43 <petertodd> warren: Require, no, but if you want to use it that way you can.
 621 2013-03-07 07:26:43 <warren> or are timestamps in unspendable tx's
 622 2013-03-07 07:26:58 <petertodd> warren: Well, what I've implemented right now is they're done with bare multisig tx's
 623 2013-03-07 07:27:04 <petertodd> warren: Did you see my example tx?
 624 2013-03-07 07:27:28 Arnavion has quit (Disconnected by services)
 625 2013-03-07 07:27:36 Arnavion3 has joined
 626 2013-03-07 07:27:38 <warren> http://blockchain.info/tx-index/58864627/7ec2ef87856a2fb1fe0ff075f678d7fcbfa2d182adc888a41e1f65ca48fbedba  blockchain considers this an escrow ...
 627 2013-03-07 07:27:41 Arnavion3 is now known as Arnavion
 628 2013-03-07 07:28:12 <Luke-Jr> warren: trying to learn bitcoin from blockchain.info is a bad idea
 629 2013-03-07 07:28:26 <petertodd> Yup, 1 of 2 multisig, the first key is real, the second is the digest that's the head of the merkle tree of digests being timestamped.
 630 2013-03-07 07:28:35 <mogri> Luke-Jr, is the pull-request i just submitted ok with you?
 631 2013-03-07 07:28:53 <Luke-Jr> mogri: looks okay, but I'm not really setup to test it until it's merged
 632 2013-03-07 07:28:55 <jgarzik> petertodd: interesting (re second)
 633 2013-03-07 07:29:48 <Luke-Jr> mogri: then I have to update the package ;)
 634 2013-03-07 07:29:50 <petertodd> jgarzik: Yeah, because it's prepending with a zero byte, it's totally invalid, but Bitcoin currently accepts it. I also wrote code that forces it to be a valid pubkey, but for now ensuring it's invalid is safer I think.
 635 2013-03-07 07:30:06 <warren> Luke-Jr: yeah, I need to learn how to read it from RPC
 636 2013-03-07 07:30:50 <warren> petertodd: looked at chronobit?
 637 2013-03-07 07:30:50 <jgarzik> petertodd: er, eh?  multisig requires a prepend due to bug I thought
 638 2013-03-07 07:31:19 <jgarzik>     CScript result;
 639 2013-03-07 07:31:20 <jgarzik>     result << OP_0; // CHECKMULTISIG bug workaround
 640 2013-03-07 07:31:20 <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: to spend
 641 2013-03-07 07:31:32 <petertodd> jgarzik: No, I mean the pubkey itself. IE, I have a 32 byte digest, and I pre-pend it with 0x00 to ensure OpenSSL considers it invalid under any circumstance.
 642 2013-03-07 07:31:49 <jgarzik> ah, understood
 643 2013-03-07 07:31:50 <petertodd> warren: YES I HAVE FUCKING LOOKED AT CHRONOBIT
 644 2013-03-07 07:31:58 <petertodd> warren: Sorry, the millionth time I've been asked this. :P
 645 2013-03-07 07:32:03 <warren> ah, sorry.
 646 2013-03-07 07:32:16 <Luke-Jr> LOL
 647 2013-03-07 07:32:32 <petertodd> I need to start claiming I actually wrote chronobit...
 648 2013-03-07 07:32:37 <warren> petertodd: I've been thinking about making a server frontend for the public to timestamp anything, and I push it through p2pool for them.
 649 2013-03-07 07:33:02 <petertodd> warren: Get forrestv to make the p2pool blockchain non-linear so the proofs are small and you can do that with OpenTimestamps
 650 2013-03-07 07:33:02 <warren> Doesn't spam the blockchain at all.
 651 2013-03-07 07:33:16 <Luke-Jr> warren: would be nice if someone made a pool-independent version
 652 2013-03-07 07:34:02 <petertodd> warren: Do that and I'll totally merge your changes.
 653 2013-03-07 07:34:03 Ukto has left ()
 654 2013-03-07 07:34:03 <warren> Luke-Jr: technically the input can be included in any pool, but I'd need to convince pool operators to use it, and I've been told "good luck" in convincing pool operators.
 655 2013-03-07 07:34:13 <Luke-Jr> warren: O.o
 656 2013-03-07 07:34:14 <petertodd> warren: Dunno if you looked, but there is also an opentimestamps-server package...
 657 2013-03-07 07:34:34 <Luke-Jr> warren: you can basically consider it a given I can get Eligius to do anything useful :p
 658 2013-03-07 07:34:43 ByteUnit has joined
 659 2013-03-07 07:35:42 <mogri> jgarzik, anyway i sent you mroe patches which probably will make Luke-Jr happy ;p
 660 2013-03-07 07:35:46 <petertodd> warren: Luke offered ages ago to do coinbase timestamping, but I realized the idea would never catch on if it took a day to get a timestamp
 661 2013-03-07 07:35:53 <warren> petertodd: I'll look into this in the next few months
 662 2013-03-07 07:36:04 <warren> petertodd: yeah, that's my concern as well
 663 2013-03-07 07:36:09 <jgarzik> mogri: just merged, maybe luke-jr is happy
 664 2013-03-07 07:36:23 <Luke-Jr> why not? timestamping taking a day, I don't see a huge barrier to adoption…
 665 2013-03-07 07:36:30 <jgarzik> but is petertodd sad?  and has he looked into chronobit?  the world wants to know.
 666 2013-03-07 07:36:50 <petertodd> warren: Hence my approach of "make it stupidly general" so timestamping servers can work together to get timestamps into the blockchain the fastest and cheapest way possible.
 667 2013-03-07 07:37:26 <warren> Luke-Jr: from a usability POV, people want to timestamp NOW and not think about it.  chronobit requires you to wait for the fragment to complete, which can take hours, before you save it as a proof.
 668 2013-03-07 07:37:40 <warren> petertodd: ahh
 669 2013-03-07 07:37:42 <petertodd> Yes! It's already awful UI that you even have to do anything twice.
 670 2013-03-07 07:37:51 FredEE has quit (Quit: FredEE)
 671 2013-03-07 07:38:12 <warren> petertodd: I was considering an intermediate token that they save instantly, that can be redeemed later for the permanent fragment.
 672 2013-03-07 07:38:17 <petertodd> Fuck, I'm considering running server's that'll do a top-level archived calendar thing that happens every 1 second or something and publish the whole archive, + bitcoin timestamps, publicly.
 673 2013-03-07 07:38:47 <Luke-Jr> bleh, bitcoinrpc still making trouble
 674 2013-03-07 07:38:56 <petertodd> Basically collect every timestamp that happens in a one second interval, turn it into a digest, and archive those digests.
 675 2013-03-07 07:38:56 <Luke-Jr> ImportError: No module named bitcoinrpc.authproxy
 676 2013-03-07 07:39:09 <jgarzik> mogri: ^
 677 2013-03-07 07:39:20 <petertodd> 32bytes/second * 1year = 1GB
 678 2013-03-07 07:39:21 <Luke-Jr> need to add a new symlink <.<
 679 2013-03-07 07:39:31 Mandrius has joined
 680 2013-03-07 07:39:34 <mogri> hmm ?
 681 2013-03-07 07:39:40 geb has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 682 2013-03-07 07:39:48 <warren> petertodd: I thought about that too, ideally we want a solution that requires the timestamp service operators to not store anything, it's up to the user to store their own proof.
 683 2013-03-07 07:39:51 <mogri> what are you doing exactly
 684 2013-03-07 07:39:56 <warren> petertodd: but the wait time really sucks
 685 2013-03-07 07:40:05 <Luke-Jr> mogri: current installs of Eloipool often do: git clone python-bitcoinrpc; ln -s python-bitcoinrpc/jsonrpc .
 686 2013-03-07 07:40:10 <petertodd> warren: Yeah, compromise between usability and centralization.
 687 2013-03-07 07:40:26 <petertodd> warren: But timestamping doesn't have the nasty incentives money does, so a bit of centralization is probably acceptable.
 688 2013-03-07 07:40:28 <mogri> oh, well
 689 2013-03-07 07:40:34 <mogri> i can't work magic for that :(
 690 2013-03-07 07:40:42 <Luke-Jr> >_<
 691 2013-03-07 07:41:27 <warren> petertodd: what % of pool mining power can we convince to participate?
 692 2013-03-07 07:41:35 <warren> petertodd: the turnaround time matters a lot to our design
 693 2013-03-07 07:42:01 <warren> petertodd: there's stupidly simple ways of getting the input to miners, it doens't have to be secure at all
 694 2013-03-07 07:42:03 <warren> petertodd: like DNS
 695 2013-03-07 07:42:23 <warren> petertodd: would benefit from caching
 696 2013-03-07 07:42:48 <petertodd> warren: Yup, merkle timestamping is stupidly scalable - that's why I wrote it in Python.
 697 2013-03-07 07:43:23 <petertodd> warren: re: turnaround time, the ugly bit is a trust-free way of having P2P merkle chain building, but the second you add any trsut to the system it becomes really easy.
 698 2013-03-07 07:43:48 <warren> If we make it simple and robust, I'd even suggest it for inclusion in the standard bitcoind.  Non-blocking DNS lookup, OK if it fails.
 699 2013-03-07 07:43:55 brwyatt is now known as brwyatt|Away
 700 2013-03-07 07:44:37 <Luke-Jr> warren: er, how would that even work?
 701 2013-03-07 07:45:05 <Luke-Jr> I mean, it doesn't make sense involving bitcoind
 702 2013-03-07 07:45:09 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: DNS with really short expiry time may actually work.
 703 2013-03-07 07:45:16 <petertodd> and yeah, it's not a bitcoind thing
 704 2013-03-07 07:45:22 <warren> I haven't figured that out yet, and it's possible I misunderstood chronobit.  I'll study this in May.
 705 2013-03-07 07:45:27 <warren> oh right
 706 2013-03-07 07:45:29 <warren> sorry
 707 2013-03-07 07:45:43 <mogri> Luke-Jr, i will think on a solution.  perhaps 'jsonrpc.bitcoinrpc.*' could be workable as a namespace.
 708 2013-03-07 07:45:55 <warren> petertodd: my point is it wouldn't hurt to make it easy for all miners to do it
 709 2013-03-07 07:45:56 * mogri zzz
 710 2013-03-07 07:46:07 <petertodd> warren: Absolutely
 711 2013-03-07 07:46:36 <petertodd> warren: Needs to be something they can setup trivially, and that a timestamp server can figure out what digests actually got into blocks basically.
 712 2013-03-07 07:46:43 <warren> petertodd: you're thinking a p2p chain for the digests?
 713 2013-03-07 07:46:47 <petertodd> Just keep a temp database of digests sent to the pool ops and you'll be good.
 714 2013-03-07 07:46:48 <mogri> i don't really like that though, i think it would be better just to bite the bullet and install a secondary symlink
 715 2013-03-07 07:47:04 reizuki__ has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
 716 2013-03-07 07:47:08 <petertodd> warren: Nah, I figure that's heavier weight than you actually need - get a simple centralized system working first.
 717 2013-03-07 07:47:11 <mogri> (or just fix the code to not use the jsonrpc stubs, that works too.)
 718 2013-03-07 07:47:27 <petertodd> warren: As I say, there isn't much incentive to attack timestamping like there is money.
 719 2013-03-07 07:47:27 <mogri> plus, it's needed if they want to get it packaged in a distro anyway
 720 2013-03-07 07:47:31 <Luke-Jr> mogri: I don't really like breaking compatibility with existing deployments :p
 721 2013-03-07 07:47:56 <mogri> needing a symlink is a minor break
 722 2013-03-07 07:47:57 <warren> petertodd: I think this as a service can't pay for itself, it seems like an ideal "public service" from the Foundation.
 723 2013-03-07 07:48:03 <mogri> it still allows having broken code :P
 724 2013-03-07 07:48:10 <Luke-Jr> mogri: as jgarzik pointed out, distros already handle shared APIs just fine
 725 2013-03-07 07:48:25 <petertodd> warren: Oh for sure
 726 2013-03-07 07:48:33 <mogri> APIs yes
 727 2013-03-07 07:48:38 <warren> petertodd: some industries will have use for timestamping of hundreds or thousands of things an hour, eventually we'll want a daemon anyone can run.
 728 2013-03-07 07:48:40 <mogri> but, this is not shared API
 729 2013-03-07 07:48:45 <Luke-Jr> yes it is
 730 2013-03-07 07:48:50 <mogri> this is like
 731 2013-03-07 07:48:54 <mogri> two packages installing /bin/ls
 732 2013-03-07 07:48:57 <mogri> :p
 733 2013-03-07 07:49:06 <Luke-Jr> that's a shared API
 734 2013-03-07 07:49:07 ThomasV has joined
 735 2013-03-07 07:49:15 <petertodd> warren: And the thing is, that's actually already true, timestamping services make boatloads of money, but what you have to understand, is they aren't selling technology, they're selling lawyers.
 736 2013-03-07 07:49:15 <mogri> night
 737 2013-03-07 07:49:21 ThomasV has quit (Client Quit)
 738 2013-03-07 07:49:26 <petertodd> mogri: pete@petertodd.org <- email me your btc addr
 739 2013-03-07 07:49:32 <mogri> jsonrpc.bitcoinrpc is a possible solution
 740 2013-03-07 07:49:40 <mogri> that gives us isolating our stuff
 741 2013-03-07 07:49:43 <mogri> from jsonrpc.*
 742 2013-03-07 07:49:48 <mogri> which we want that
 743 2013-03-07 07:50:03 <warren> petertodd: the part that makes money is integration in tools and services used by particular industries
 744 2013-03-07 07:50:57 <petertodd> warren: Well, long story short, UI design is the hard part. I quite seriously was looking into doing OpenTimestamps as a masters thesis project at an art and design school.
 745 2013-03-07 07:51:09 <warren> petertodd: so ... end-users get an instant token that they can later compare to the centrally stored permanent digests?
 746 2013-03-07 07:51:30 <petertodd> warren: Not a token, a merkle path to the centrally stored digests.
 747 2013-03-07 07:51:47 <warren> well, something they save locally
 748 2013-03-07 07:51:51 <warren> instantly
 749 2013-03-07 07:51:54 <petertodd> yeah
 750 2013-03-07 07:51:55 <warren> doesn't matter what i tis
 751 2013-03-07 07:52:23 <warren> how quickly will the digests grow?
 752 2013-03-07 07:52:41 <petertodd> You mean the proofs?
 753 2013-03-07 07:52:50 <warren> yes
 754 2013-03-07 07:53:07 <petertodd> Work it out - educational.
 755 2013-03-07 07:53:35 <warren> so you really want to solve the turnaround problem with this...
 756 2013-03-07 07:53:39 <warren> I had given up on that.
 757 2013-03-07 07:53:47 <mogri> petertodd, 1B9J3NsRmajwXcLLXWJA9tH4suqhkJLHo4
 758 2013-03-07 07:53:58 <petertodd> mogri: email me so I don't forget...
 759 2013-03-07 07:54:03 <mogri> oh, ok.
 760 2013-03-07 07:54:12 <petertodd> mogri: I wanan try it first
 761 2013-03-07 07:54:50 muhoo has quit (Quit: leaving)
 762 2013-03-07 07:55:00 <warren> petertodd: I was planning on saving only enough data to allow someone to later use their instant-saved token to retrieve their own fragment.  I wouldn't store their proofs.
 763 2013-03-07 07:55:02 <mogri> petertodd, yeah, sure :)
 764 2013-03-07 07:55:13 <mogri> petertodd, i need to do pynode too still
 765 2013-03-07 07:55:22 <petertodd> mogri: yeah
 766 2013-03-07 07:55:23 <mogri> petertodd, and add debian/rules files to them
 767 2013-03-07 07:55:31 <petertodd> mogri: yup, rules too
 768 2013-03-07 07:55:34 <mogri> i'll work at it tomorrow
 769 2013-03-07 07:55:40 <petertodd> mogri: thanks a lot!
 770 2013-03-07 07:56:13 <petertodd> warren: Your homework: figure out why that won't work. (or will)
 771 2013-03-07 07:57:03 <warren> I'll be back on this topic.
 772 2013-03-07 07:57:36 <mogri> either way, clean integration of bitcoin and python is a direct goal of mine (and where i work)
 773 2013-03-07 07:58:05 <mogri> so any way to enhance that is interesting to me :)
 774 2013-03-07 07:58:10 <mogri> night for real now :)
 775 2013-03-07 07:58:14 <petertodd> warren: Here, you see the example OpenTimestamps proof I posted, and have in the repo? Verify it by hand and get back to me.
 776 2013-03-07 08:01:55 random_cat has joined
 777 2013-03-07 08:03:26 ByteUnit has quit (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.90 [Firefox 19.0/20130215130331])
 778 2013-03-07 08:04:15 tyn has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
 779 2013-03-07 08:13:32 mappum has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
 780 2013-03-07 08:17:25 ovidiusoft has joined
 781 2013-03-07 08:17:41 geb has joined
 782 2013-03-07 08:17:41 geb has quit (Excess Flood)
 783 2013-03-07 08:20:21 geb has joined
 784 2013-03-07 08:20:21 geb has quit (Excess Flood)
 785 2013-03-07 08:20:42 geb has joined
 786 2013-03-07 08:20:42 geb has quit (Excess Flood)
 787 2013-03-07 08:21:21 geb has joined
 788 2013-03-07 08:21:21 geb has quit (Excess Flood)
 789 2013-03-07 08:21:42 geb has joined
 790 2013-03-07 08:24:50 gritcoin has quit (Quit: gritcoin)
 791 2013-03-07 08:26:28 axhlf has joined
 792 2013-03-07 08:27:54 ivan\ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 793 2013-03-07 08:29:20 nus has joined
 794 2013-03-07 08:29:39 ivan\ has joined
 795 2013-03-07 08:29:56 saivann has quit ()
 796 2013-03-07 08:30:16 eipeace__ has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
 797 2013-03-07 08:39:25 <jgarzik> petertodd: the use of invalid pubkeys was one reason why I suggested OP_DROP
 798 2013-03-07 08:42:09 _dr has joined
 799 2013-03-07 08:43:12 Goonie has joined
 800 2013-03-07 08:45:23 gritcoin has joined
 801 2013-03-07 08:46:28 <petertodd> jgarzik: I know, I suggested the idea in that conversation actually...
 802 2013-03-07 08:46:50 <jgarzik> it's been known for ages
 803 2013-03-07 08:46:52 <petertodd> jgarzik: You can force them to be valid, but at least for hashes it's still pretty trivial to force them to be valid keys.
 804 2013-03-07 08:47:04 <jgarzik> it is a Hope Somebody Doesn't Do This On A Large Scale thing
 805 2013-03-07 08:47:21 <jgarzik> ;p
 806 2013-03-07 08:47:29 <petertodd> Well, I alway see tx fees as the solution to the pollution problem.
 807 2013-03-07 08:47:51 <petertodd> You fundementally can't stop people from putting data in the chain in some fashion, only make it expensive and inconvenient.
 808 2013-03-07 08:53:07 ahbritto__ has joined
 809 2013-03-07 08:53:25 <jgarzik> petertodd: yep
 810 2013-03-07 08:53:33 <jgarzik> *zonk*
 811 2013-03-07 08:54:14 toffoo has quit ()
 812 2013-03-07 08:54:41 ahbritto has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 813 2013-03-07 08:55:04 ahbritto has joined
 814 2013-03-07 09:05:25 meLon has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
 815 2013-03-07 09:05:32 jgarzik has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 816 2013-03-07 09:06:20 jgarzik has joined
 817 2013-03-07 09:06:45 jgarzik is now known as Guest34164
 818 2013-03-07 09:08:44 Aaron_TangCryp is now known as Aaron_Away
 819 2013-03-07 09:10:09 darkee has quit (!~darkee@gateway/tor-sasl/darkee|Remote host closed the connection)
 820 2013-03-07 09:10:33 MobPhone has joined
 821 2013-03-07 09:10:56 darkee has joined
 822 2013-03-07 09:12:00 X-Scale has joined
 823 2013-03-07 09:12:20 meLon has joined
 824 2013-03-07 09:13:59 LainZ has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
 825 2013-03-07 09:20:57 Bwild has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 826 2013-03-07 09:22:34 MobPhone has quit (Quit: -a-)
 827 2013-03-07 09:26:11 iddo has quit (Changing host)
 828 2013-03-07 09:26:11 iddo has joined
 829 2013-03-07 09:28:25 Bwild has joined
 830 2013-03-07 09:28:29 xenesis has quit (Quit: xenesis)
 831 2013-03-07 09:29:33 xenesis has joined
 832 2013-03-07 09:30:03 jaromil has joined
 833 2013-03-07 09:31:23 <jaromil> g'moin. my connection went down yesterday a short while after posing my question, will appreciate if someone can past me any other reply in private, thanks
 834 2013-03-07 09:31:42 <jaromil> are there irc channel archives?
 835 2013-03-07 09:33:14 ielo has joined
 836 2013-03-07 09:37:14 BTC_Bear has quit (hbrntng!~BTC_Bear@unaffiliated/btc-bear/x-5233302|Quit: Leaving...)
 837 2013-03-07 09:39:49 xjrn has joined
 838 2013-03-07 09:42:46 sgornick has joined
 839 2013-03-07 09:49:53 xenesis has quit (Quit: xenesis)
 840 2013-03-07 09:50:45 <Graet> Channel logs: bit.ly/iPFi3X from topic jaromil
 841 2013-03-07 09:50:56 xenesis has joined
 842 2013-03-07 09:51:44 gdoteoff has joined
 843 2013-03-07 09:52:39 ielo has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 844 2013-03-07 09:52:50 <grazs> do you know where I can get historical data for a btcexchange like mtgox? I figured I'd ask here, it's for training a trading bot.
 845 2013-03-07 09:54:21 egecko has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
 846 2013-03-07 09:55:48 egecko has joined
 847 2013-03-07 09:56:50 <freewil> am i reading this right... the 'help' rpc command requires an unlocked wallet? https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/bitcoinrpc.cpp#L199
 848 2013-03-07 09:58:10 <Luke-Jr> freewil: no
 849 2013-03-07 09:58:25 <Luke-Jr> freewil: unlocked refers to whether it's threadsafe or not
 850 2013-03-07 09:58:29 <freewil> oh
 851 2013-03-07 09:58:34 <Luke-Jr> or whether it needs to lock the mutexes
 852 2013-03-07 09:58:50 <freewil> ok thanks
 853 2013-03-07 09:59:23 <freewil> btw theres a typo there on line 197  - i think it should be 'safecmd'
 854 2013-03-07 09:59:48 gritcoin has quit (Quit: gritcoin)
 855 2013-03-07 10:00:46 CaptainBlaze has joined
 856 2013-03-07 10:01:35 <grazs> I found the historic converstion prices at http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/4799/need-authoritative-source-for-historic-bitcoin-conversion-prices-from-all-exchan
 857 2013-03-07 10:01:51 <freewil> im going to submit a PR for that
 858 2013-03-07 10:05:19 BTCOxygen is now known as Guest289374
 859 2013-03-07 10:05:54 rdymac has joined
 860 2013-03-07 10:07:18 Guest289374 is now known as BTCOxygen
 861 2013-03-07 10:14:27 axhlf has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 862 2013-03-07 10:17:39 ahbritto_ has joined
 863 2013-03-07 10:18:51 ahbritto has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 864 2013-03-07 10:19:11 ahbritto__ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
 865 2013-03-07 10:19:23 ahbritto has joined
 866 2013-03-07 10:46:45 hydrogenesis has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 867 2013-03-07 10:48:13 Internet13 has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
 868 2013-03-07 10:51:27 Internet13 has joined
 869 2013-03-07 10:56:50 axhlf has joined
 870 2013-03-07 10:59:25 one_zero has quit ()
 871 2013-03-07 11:00:08 paraipan has joined
 872 2013-03-07 11:02:57 ciphermonk has joined
 873 2013-03-07 11:03:54 ItsDom has joined
 874 2013-03-07 11:04:13 <ItsDom> approximately how many entries to a typical satoshi clients list of known nodes have in it? (So known nodes not necessarily connected)
 875 2013-03-07 11:04:50 pierre` has joined
 876 2013-03-07 11:05:26 <ciphermonk> They there. Is there a relationship between transaction outputs in your wallet and accounts? I can't seem to find a mapping between outputs => addresses => accounts when I start moving coins around using RPC "move" command
 877 2013-03-07 11:05:32 grau_ has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
 878 2013-03-07 11:07:03 <Luke-Jr> ciphermonk: no
 879 2013-03-07 11:07:09 <Luke-Jr> ciphermonk: accounts are just numbers
 880 2013-03-07 11:08:34 <ciphermonk> oh ok, so outputs to not "belong" to accounts. I see :) thanks
 881 2013-03-07 11:09:41 <ciphermonk> I was trying to get account outputs using "getaddressesbyaccount" and feeding the account list to "listunspent"
 882 2013-03-07 11:10:30 <Luke-Jr> right
 883 2013-03-07 11:10:47 <Luke-Jr> addresses are associated with accounts only so it knows which one to increment when receiving
 884 2013-03-07 11:11:10 <ciphermonk> oh fair enough, ok
 885 2013-03-07 11:12:58 <sipa> ItsDom: up to 16000 or so
 886 2013-03-07 11:14:16 <ItsDom> sipa: cheers. is there actually a limit imposed? or do they just try and store everyone they learn about?
 887 2013-03-07 11:18:44 <sipa> ItsDom: there are almost half a million ip addresses circulating
 888 2013-03-07 11:18:51 <sipa> ItsDom: so yes, there is a limit
 889 2013-03-07 11:21:20 <ItsDom> So what is the point of storing 16k? Do they all get used when sending a transaction, or does it just send to connected peers (of which, I've heard, there are normally about 5 - 15)
 890 2013-03-07 11:21:45 <ItsDom> sipa: thanks for the help btw, muchly appreciated:)
 891 2013-03-07 11:22:53 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: your email presumes censorship is a bad thing
 892 2013-03-07 11:23:20 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: I'm happy with people chosing what transactions they want to mine, I'm not happy with a wholesale ban.
 893 2013-03-07 11:23:33 <petertodd> I know you're thinking of satoshidice, but such censorship could go way farther than that.
 894 2013-03-07 11:24:23 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: wholesale ban would require miners to be of one mind, so I think in such a case censorship is most likely correct?
 895 2013-03-07 11:24:41 <sipa> ItsDom: tead the commemts in addrman.cpp or addrman.h
 896 2013-03-07 11:25:16 <petertodd> Remember, that's in reference to large blocks, where you could easily wind up with just a dozen mining pools, and barriers to entry high enough that adding an additional mining pool will cost you thousands, and isn't possible anonymously anyway,
 897 2013-03-07 11:25:27 <sipa> ItsDom: andnof coursenyounjust send to connected peers- hard to send to non-connected ones :)
 898 2013-03-07 11:25:27 <ItsDom> sipa: will do, cheers.
 899 2013-03-07 11:25:39 <sipa> ItsDom: theybforward it to tjeir peers and so on
 900 2013-03-07 11:26:09 <ItsDom> sipa: lol, i was more suggesting when a transaction is sent, does it open more connections to known peers to broadcast better. But I'll take a browse at the comments:)
 901 2013-03-07 11:26:27 <sipa> no, never more than 8 outgoing connections
 902 2013-03-07 11:26:40 <sipa> connectable peers are a scarce resource
 903 2013-03-07 11:26:56 <sipa> there is no need to try to connect to as many as possible
 904 2013-03-07 11:27:30 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: well, hopefully those are GBT-enabled mining pools that allow miners to select transactions ;)
 905 2013-03-07 11:27:59 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: Doesn't matter. You can't force the pool to accept your shares if you do that, thus you're mining solo.
 906 2013-03-07 11:28:33 <ItsDom> sipa: okay, thanks:)
 907 2013-03-07 11:29:00 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: Besides, if such centralization happens, what makes you think pools are going to continue using GBT anyway?
 908 2013-03-07 11:29:18 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: true :/
 909 2013-03-07 11:29:42 <Luke-Jr> we already see the big pools refusing to use GBT even without a monopoly
 910 2013-03-07 11:30:04 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: It's the same thing with UTXO proofs, unless a solid, can't change it, hard fork enforcing UTXO proofs is achieved, centralized pools can always choose to turn off the soft-fork to UTXO proofs.
 911 2013-03-07 11:30:11 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: Yup, why should they care?
 912 2013-03-07 11:30:45 <petertodd> Frankly, pools are centralized right now, but because any censorship creates an opportunity for others, it's mainly a confirmation reversal risk.
 913 2013-03-07 11:30:46 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: I guess the biggest flaw right now is that miners have too little incentive to care
 914 2013-03-07 11:31:10 <petertodd> Unfortunately true - the "hashers" model of mining is a problem, but I can't see a way to fix that.
 915 2013-03-07 11:31:19 <petertodd> Or I should say, "dumb hashers"
 916 2013-03-07 11:32:11 <Luke-Jr> attempting to fix that is why I intentionally omitted a way for GBT miners to be blinded
 917 2013-03-07 11:32:15 buddyrandom has joined
 918 2013-03-07 11:32:25 ielo has joined
 919 2013-03-07 11:32:29 <petertodd> Oh, and I should have said in my email too: centralization of pools also can kill merge-mining, again out of censorship of competitors.
 920 2013-03-07 11:32:43 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: Good move
 921 2013-03-07 11:32:53 <sipa> petertodd: switch to a PoW function that requires fast access to the UTXO set
 922 2013-03-07 11:33:15 <petertodd> sipa: Well, I mean a way we can fix that in Bitcoin...
 923 2013-03-07 11:35:09 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: we *could* do that for Bitcoin, but it'd need a hardfork
 924 2013-03-07 11:35:32 <petertodd> Yeah, with BFL shipping something like $30 million worth of SHA256 hardware, good luck...
 925 2013-03-07 11:35:34 <Luke-Jr> basically just require the UTXO POW per header
 926 2013-03-07 11:35:41 <Luke-Jr> that'd be compatible with the ASICs
 927 2013-03-07 11:35:42 Mandrius has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
 928 2013-03-07 11:35:58 <Luke-Jr> so you make extranonce rolling require access to UTXO
 929 2013-03-07 11:36:28 <petertodd> Doesn't matter how you want to do it, there's an enormous amount of economic force behind the current PoW function.
 930 2013-03-07 11:36:37 <sipa> changing the PoW function in practice requires starting an altcoin i think
 931 2013-03-07 11:36:50 <petertodd> As always, anything *can* be changed, but look luck convincing the economic super majority.
 932 2013-03-07 11:36:50 <sipa> there is no way to push such a thing in the bitcoin economy
 933 2013-03-07 11:37:02 <Luke-Jr> sipa: bundle it with some other hardfork features
 934 2013-03-07 11:37:11 ielo has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
 935 2013-03-07 11:37:19 <sipa> sure, and even other things
 936 2013-03-07 11:37:23 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: and make acceptance of the hard fork even less likely?
 937 2013-03-07 11:37:24 rbecker is now known as RBecker
 938 2013-03-07 11:37:25 <sturles> Bah!  Sometimes I'm very annoyed about how bitcoind chooses inputs.  I just sent a 3 BTC tx.  It selected a rather young 3 BTC input (out of many older possibilities at 5 or more).  Due to the low number of confirmations, it needed a fee, so it added another small input.  Now needing two inputs and making two outputs.  If it had selected another possible input (one at 5 BTC, one with 7 BTC), it would have been a smaller transaction requiring no
 939 2013-03-07 11:37:31 <Luke-Jr> give non-miner features 2 years before they take effect
 940 2013-03-07 11:37:42 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: more likely, because more people will want at least one of the changes
 941 2013-03-07 11:37:57 <Luke-Jr> sturles: patches welcome
 942 2013-03-07 11:38:02 <sipa> some things are not doable in a hardfork even in practice, like stuff that prevents old-system ourputs to be spent
 943 2013-03-07 11:38:05 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: Or... 500 page forum threads will pop up until nothign happens.
 944 2013-03-07 11:38:29 <petertodd> sipa: Yes, UTXO bloat is I think one of the biggest hidden technical dangers of large blocks.
 945 2013-03-07 11:38:45 <sturles> Luke-Jr: I know, but I haven't been able to understand the current selection code fully.
 946 2013-03-07 11:38:51 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: it can be done in a way that automatically upgrades only after N% of the network has upgraded
 947 2013-03-07 11:38:58 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: signalled by transaction versions, for example
 948 2013-03-07 11:38:59 <petertodd> sipa: Just buy up some mining power, and produce 1GiB blocks until your competitors run out of money to buy SSD's.
 949 2013-03-07 11:39:30 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: Look, I know it can be done technically, socially, good luck. Any hardfork for bitcoin is going to be tough.
 950 2013-03-07 11:39:42 <sturles> Luke-Jr: I would also like bitcoind to consolidate my coins.  E.g. when this tx required a fee anyway, it should have added more small inputs to avoid making the dust it added even smaller.
 951 2013-03-07 11:39:44 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: However harmless it is.
 952 2013-03-07 11:39:54 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: there's enough software centralization right now it wouldn't be difficult really
 953 2013-03-07 11:40:11 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: you realize we did one about a year ago?
 954 2013-03-07 11:40:34 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: There's plenty of people who can create forks of the software.
 955 2013-03-07 11:40:56 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: and a ton more people who will just do whatever Gavin tells them
 956 2013-03-07 11:41:01 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: Who cares what we did a year ago? It wasn't anywhere near as political as a PoW change would be.
 957 2013-03-07 11:41:13 <Luke-Jr> a PoW change wouldn't be political AFAIK
 958 2013-03-07 11:41:14 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: Besides, P2SH wasn't a hard fork.
 959 2013-03-07 11:41:23 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: I wasn't talking about P2SH
 960 2013-03-07 11:41:30 <Luke-Jr> I was talking about the checksummed version message
 961 2013-03-07 11:41:34 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: So being ordered to buy new hardware to keep up by the powers that be won't be political?
 962 2013-03-07 11:41:48 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: what I proposed is compatible with all existing hardware
 963 2013-03-07 11:41:50 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: Ok, so that's even more my point: it was such a minor hard fork, I had forgotten about it.
 964 2013-03-07 11:42:25 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: It's only compatible with existing hardware if miners don't have to change any of their hardware to remain competitive. UTXO PoW does not meet that criteria.
 965 2013-03-07 11:42:44 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: You'd have a crazy dash to buy the most IOPs/$
 966 2013-03-07 11:43:05 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: Just like the crazy dash to buy ASICs
 967 2013-03-07 11:43:15 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: I'm assuming UTXO is stored in memory.
 968 2013-03-07 11:43:50 Mandrius has joined
 969 2013-03-07 11:43:55 <petertodd> Who cares? Then people start building crazy systems with tonnes of ram so multiple copies of the UTXO are stored in memory.
 970 2013-03-07 11:44:14 Mandrius is now known as Guest42284
 971 2013-03-07 11:44:18 rdymac has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
 972 2013-03-07 11:44:28 <petertodd> The only way you can hope to achieve any of this, is if the maximum *hardness* of this PoW is strictly limited, and preferably doesn't grow, and even that's going to be tricky.
 973 2013-03-07 11:44:49 <petertodd> Like, if you need a UTXO PoW meeting foo IOP/s per block, but no more.
 974 2013-03-07 11:45:04 <petertodd> But then it's really just a proof you had access to the UTXO set, not a PoW per-se.
 975 2013-03-07 11:45:22 Guest42284 is now known as Mandrius
 976 2013-03-07 11:45:30 rdymac has joined
 977 2013-03-07 11:45:47 <Luke-Jr> well, proof of UTXO access is what's important
 978 2013-03-07 11:45:55 sgornick has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
 979 2013-03-07 11:46:20 <petertodd> Luke-Jr: Yes, but we've talked about that one before, and pure proving access isn't anywhere near as controversial.
 980 2013-03-07 11:46:33 <Luke-Jr> using the UTXO to create block headers + ASICs forcing rapid creation of block headers = win
 981 2013-03-07 11:46:37 <petertodd> But it doesn't provide the real "make miners care" incentive you want.
 982 2013-03-07 11:46:45 <Luke-Jr> I suppose
 983 2013-03-07 11:47:00 <petertodd> Forcing the hashing power to care is political, that's the issue.
 984 2013-03-07 11:47:32 <petertodd> All the safe version does is keep "mystry miners" away, and juicy high-tx fees give correct behavior there anyway,.
 985 2013-03-07 11:47:53 daybyter has joined
 986 2013-03-07 11:49:08 sgornick has joined
 987 2013-03-07 11:49:35 <Luke-Jr> petertodd: what if we delay spendability of generation longer?
 988 2013-03-07 11:49:50 <Luke-Jr> eg, cannot spend for 5000 blocks
 989 2013-03-07 11:49:58 <Luke-Jr> that means miners need to hold onto them for a month
 990 2013-03-07 11:50:11 <petertodd> Promotes weird financial structures to get around that.
 991 2013-03-07 11:50:18 <Luke-Jr> and therefore have an interest in the value remaining the same or improving in that time
 992 2013-03-07 11:50:31 <petertodd> Besides, a month is tiny.
 993 2013-03-07 11:50:45 <Luke-Jr> any longer could create barrier-to-entry problems
 994 2013-03-07 11:51:17 <petertodd> Yeah, it's a cute idea, but again, making it effective is political.
 995 2013-03-07 11:51:29 darkee has quit (!~darkee@gateway/tor-sasl/darkee|Remote host closed the connection)
 996 2013-03-07 11:51:38 <petertodd> I don't want us to waste on hard-fork capital on things like that, when we might really need them for a serious security break.
 997 2013-03-07 11:52:05 darkee has joined
 998 2013-03-07 11:52:22 <petertodd> Stuff like a SHA256 partial break, and we know hashing power needs to be upgraded to SHA3 or whatever, hopefully in the next few years.
 999 2013-03-07 11:52:40 <Luke-Jr> that would be a harder fork
1000 2013-03-07 11:52:52 <petertodd> Politically I think it'd be easier.
1001 2013-03-07 11:53:20 <petertodd> It's not changing the economic condition of hashers, just telling them "as you upgrade your equipment, it needs to be this"
1002 2013-03-07 11:53:34 <petertodd> In practice it's changing the economics, but at least for (hopefully) clear reasons.
1003 2013-03-07 11:53:59 <petertodd> Not to say a UTXO thing couldn't be done, but the reasons to do it aren't due to an existential threat like a broken hash fucntion.
1004 2013-03-07 11:54:07 <Luke-Jr> why would they be upgrading their equipment?
1005 2013-03-07 11:54:29 <petertodd> Because the PoW would be changing to progressivly deprioritize SHA256 vs SHA3
1006 2013-03-07 11:54:33 <petertodd> (or whatever)
1007 2013-03-07 11:54:50 tonikt has joined
1008 2013-03-07 11:54:57 <petertodd> (I assume a straight cut-off wouldn't fly due to accusations of unfairness)
1009 2013-03-07 11:55:55 <petertodd> anyway, I gotta go
1010 2013-03-07 11:55:56 <petertodd> later
1011 2013-03-07 11:55:59 <Luke-Jr> ttyl
1012 2013-03-07 12:00:55 <sturles> Luke-Jr: Would roughly approxmating a minimum nConfTheirs needed for a free transaction of nTargetValue in SelectCoinsMinConf work?  Look for an old output large enough fist, and if not found try younger outputs.
1013 2013-03-07 12:00:58 RBecker is now known as rbecker
1014 2013-03-07 12:10:43 Mandrius has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1015 2013-03-07 12:15:42 ciphermonk has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1016 2013-03-07 12:17:29 idstam has quit ()
1017 2013-03-07 12:17:46 Mandrius has joined
1018 2013-03-07 12:21:22 BCBot` has joined
1019 2013-03-07 12:21:46 BCBot has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1020 2013-03-07 12:25:15 TD has joined
1021 2013-03-07 12:31:23 sgornick has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1022 2013-03-07 12:31:23 ItsDom has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1023 2013-03-07 12:34:45 peres has joined
1024 2013-03-07 12:39:18 Zarutian has joined
1025 2013-03-07 12:39:21 Zarutian has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1026 2013-03-07 12:44:59 sgornick has joined
1027 2013-03-07 12:46:52 X-Scale` has joined
1028 2013-03-07 12:47:18 X-Scale has quit (Disconnected by services)
1029 2013-03-07 12:47:21 X-Scale` is now known as X-Scale
1030 2013-03-07 12:55:42 X-Scale has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1031 2013-03-07 13:11:14 Guest34164 has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
1032 2013-03-07 13:11:46 Guest34164 has joined
1033 2013-03-07 13:14:32 datagutt has joined
1034 2013-03-07 13:16:45 Nesetalis has joined
1035 2013-03-07 13:26:16 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1036 2013-03-07 13:32:29 axhlf has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1037 2013-03-07 13:32:30 rdymac has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
1038 2013-03-07 13:34:13 davout has joined
1039 2013-03-07 13:34:13 davout has quit (Changing host)
1040 2013-03-07 13:34:13 davout has joined
1041 2013-03-07 13:37:39 t7 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1042 2013-03-07 13:38:03 t7 has joined
1043 2013-03-07 13:41:12 daybyter has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
1044 2013-03-07 13:45:07 road33 has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1045 2013-03-07 13:52:33 Diablo-D3 has joined
1046 2013-03-07 13:52:36 drizztbsd has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1047 2013-03-07 13:59:59 jandd has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1048 2013-03-07 14:02:43 jandd has joined
1049 2013-03-07 14:06:12 bitit has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1050 2013-03-07 14:06:36 bitit has joined
1051 2013-03-07 14:06:56 road33_ has joined
1052 2013-03-07 14:07:18 <jaromil> gmaxwell: thanks for your remark, I will watch out before calling it "signing" again. I did read the pdf and did meant relaying. I should really take care of these details in my writings and speeches, I will.
1053 2013-03-07 14:07:40 <HM> "// returns false if point is compressed and not valid (doesn't check if uncompressed)"
1054 2013-03-07 14:07:43 <HM> .... badness
1055 2013-03-07 14:12:55 agricocb has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1056 2013-03-07 14:13:16 <HM> necessary for performance i guess
1057 2013-03-07 14:13:56 <jaromil> jgarzik: re "so you want to wait for a certain # of confirmations?" sorry my connection went down yesterday. answer is yes, but I don't need to have explained how to do that in detail :^) I just need your advice on what is the best way to register a callback in brd and find out when a transaction gets relayed.
1058 2013-03-07 14:13:57 road33_ has quit (Quit: Lost terminal)
1059 2013-03-07 14:16:40 darkee has quit (!~darkee@gateway/tor-sasl/darkee|Remote host closed the connection)
1060 2013-03-07 14:17:44 darkee has joined
1061 2013-03-07 14:23:48 CaptainBlaze has quit (Quit: CaptainBlaze)
1062 2013-03-07 14:25:16 impulse has quit (Quit: leaving)
1063 2013-03-07 14:31:41 <Diablo-D3> hey guys
1064 2013-03-07 14:31:46 <Diablo-D3> is <> used anywhere in C?
1065 2013-03-07 14:31:46 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1066 2013-03-07 14:31:59 <Diablo-D3> I mean as in an encapsulating pair, like () [] and {}
1067 2013-03-07 14:32:06 <sipa> no
1068 2013-03-07 14:32:08 <mogri> no
1069 2013-03-07 14:32:13 <Diablo-D3> _huh_
1070 2013-03-07 14:32:15 <MagicalTux> only for #include
1071 2013-03-07 14:32:21 * Diablo-D3 stares angrily at objc
1072 2013-03-07 14:32:22 <mogri> that's not C
1073 2013-03-07 14:32:23 copumpkin has joined
1074 2013-03-07 14:32:23 <MagicalTux> but that's not what you're looking for
1075 2013-03-07 14:32:26 <mogri> it's C preprocessor
1076 2013-03-07 14:33:09 <mogri> Diablo-D3, i accept bitcoins now it is great
1077 2013-03-07 14:33:22 <Diablo-D3> mogri: Ive only been asking you to do that for several years now
1078 2013-03-07 14:33:27 <Diablo-D3> great you finally did what I asked
1079 2013-03-07 14:33:48 <mogri> well, at sip it was bureaucracy (i.e. mike didn't want to do it)
1080 2013-03-07 14:33:56 ciphermonk has joined
1081 2013-03-07 14:34:08 <Diablo-D3> yeah, and now mike can go fuck himself and we can roll in $40 bitcoins
1082 2013-03-07 14:35:26 <Diablo-D3> sips, gmaxwell: btw, you might wanna look into using uncrustify to format bitcoin's src
1083 2013-03-07 14:35:29 <Diablo-D3> sipa
1084 2013-03-07 14:35:36 <Diablo-D3> osx just autocorrected someone's nick.
1085 2013-03-07 14:35:47 * Diablo-D3 just turns it off
1086 2013-03-07 14:36:02 <Diablo-D3> up yours apple
1087 2013-03-07 14:38:36 <MC1984_> so angry diablo
1088 2013-03-07 14:41:40 ThomasV has joined
1089 2013-03-07 14:43:18 agricocb has joined
1090 2013-03-07 14:46:31 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1091 2013-03-07 14:47:11 copumpkin has joined
1092 2013-03-07 14:48:59 epscy is now known as TallTimsSon
1093 2013-03-07 14:49:27 TallTimsSon is now known as epscy
1094 2013-03-07 14:51:03 ciphermonk has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1095 2013-03-07 14:51:29 Shealan has joined
1096 2013-03-07 14:54:18 rdymac has joined
1097 2013-03-07 14:54:38 CodeShark has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1098 2013-03-07 14:58:05 sgornick has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1099 2013-03-07 15:09:04 defunctzombie_zz is now known as defunctzombie
1100 2013-03-07 15:27:13 tyn has joined
1101 2013-03-07 15:29:46 grau has joined
1102 2013-03-07 15:30:08 grau has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1103 2013-03-07 15:30:39 grau has joined
1104 2013-03-07 15:32:37 ovidiusoft has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1105 2013-03-07 15:34:39 ovidiusoft has joined
1106 2013-03-07 15:35:48 <mogri> .check buyvm.com
1107 2013-03-07 15:36:08 <mogri> oh right
1108 2013-03-07 15:36:09 <mogri> it's .net
1109 2013-03-07 15:36:13 Guest34164 has quit (Read error: Connection timed out)
1110 2013-03-07 15:36:20 <mogri> .check my.frantech.ca
1111 2013-03-07 15:37:00 Guest34164 has joined
1112 2013-03-07 15:38:40 <mogri> .geo 198.27.77.7
1113 2013-03-07 15:38:44 <mogri> oops
1114 2013-03-07 15:41:35 hydrogenesis has joined
1115 2013-03-07 15:43:24 <grau> !ticker
1116 2013-03-07 15:43:25 <gribble> BTCUSD ticker | Best bid: 45.18900, Best ask: 45.19000, Bid-ask spread: 0.00100, Last trade: 45.19000, 24 hour volume: 176261.63876036, 24 hour low: 33.30000, 24 hour high: 49.09900, 24 hour vwap: 42.04372
1117 2013-03-07 15:43:37 <grau> ;;goxlag
1118 2013-03-07 15:43:38 <gribble> 10.7028 seconds
1119 2013-03-07 15:43:51 davout has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1120 2013-03-07 15:44:13 <grau> !ticker
1121 2013-03-07 15:44:14 <gribble> BTCUSD ticker | Best bid: 45.07000, Best ask: 45.18900, Bid-ask spread: 0.11900, Last trade: 45.07000, 24 hour volume: 176042.29777262, 24 hour low: 33.30000, 24 hour high: 49.09900, 24 hour vwap: 42.03492
1122 2013-03-07 15:44:17 <helo> are blocks larger than 250kb orphaned too much to be worth it?
1123 2013-03-07 15:44:22 justmoon has joined
1124 2013-03-07 15:44:52 <helo> i was pretty sure blocks were sticking around 250kb because of the soft limit, but someone claimed otherwise
1125 2013-03-07 15:45:18 <grau> I guess you mean transactions not blocks
1126 2013-03-07 15:48:13 <helo> no, block size is hovering around 250kb. it's either because miners are lazy and haven't increased the soft limit, or because they think they'll make less if they increase it
1127 2013-03-07 15:49:10 <grau> if I were to guess the second.
1128 2013-03-07 15:49:59 <grau> their interest is to have competition in fees
1129 2013-03-07 15:50:09 <grau> no limit no competition
1130 2013-03-07 15:53:02 <helo> could users retaliate by refusing to relay blocks smaller than 250kb when poolsz is big?
1131 2013-03-07 15:55:16 ovidiusoft has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1132 2013-03-07 15:57:02 ovidiusoft has joined
1133 2013-03-07 15:59:44 <grau> helo: I guess big mining pools have direct links to each other so they do not depend on propagation by the user
1134 2013-03-07 16:00:14 asa1024 has quit (Quit: asa1024)
1135 2013-03-07 16:00:14 topace has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1136 2013-03-07 16:00:57 <grau> they however have the incentive of keeping the network useful for user otherwise what they mine is worthless
1137 2013-03-07 16:01:15 hydrogenesis has quit (Quit: Colloquy for iPad - http://colloquy.mobi)
1138 2013-03-07 16:01:26 mappum has joined
1139 2013-03-07 16:05:18 <helo> is it straightforward that 250kb is the optimal supply to maximize mining profit?
1140 2013-03-07 16:06:19 asa1024 has joined
1141 2013-03-07 16:06:33 da2ce7 has joined
1142 2013-03-07 16:06:34 tyn has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1143 2013-03-07 16:08:24 <BlueMatt> helo: no, in fact there is no evidence that any value is optimal to maximize profit
1144 2013-03-07 16:08:33 <BlueMatt> (and higher is probably significantly better for many miners)
1145 2013-03-07 16:08:38 da2ce7_d has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1146 2013-03-07 16:11:04 d4de has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1147 2013-03-07 16:12:57 <petertodd> helo: Optimal is if you can reliably get your blocks to 51% of the hashing power: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=144895.0
1148 2013-03-07 16:13:21 <petertodd> helo: In reality, that's hard to measure, so pool ops chasing fees with up block sizes until orphans scare them.
1149 2013-03-07 16:13:37 <BlueMatt> petertodd: well, get it there before there has its own block
1150 2013-03-07 16:14:08 topace has joined
1151 2013-03-07 16:14:28 topace has quit (Changing host)
1152 2013-03-07 16:14:28 topace has joined
1153 2013-03-07 16:14:46 <petertodd> Yes, and if 51% of the overall hashing power sees your block, you'll get ahead. The subtley is you have to do that reliably, but with lag based on bandwidth, that's doable, just not to exactly 51%
1154 2013-03-07 16:15:28 <BlueMatt> yea, no 1MB with 10 minute intervals for blocks means orphans due to block size really shouldnt ever be an issue in my guesstimates
1155 2013-03-07 16:15:43 <BlueMatt> still, I wouldnt mine behind tor
1156 2013-03-07 16:16:55 daybyter has joined
1157 2013-03-07 16:17:13 <OneMiner> Buying XRP. Selling signed sports jerseys. WTT for computer parts.
1158 2013-03-07 16:17:23 <OneMiner> Shizzz sry, wrong chan.
1159 2013-03-07 16:18:06 <petertodd> With 1MB blocks mining behind tor is doable, just a bit less profitable, but not seriously so. The point is, with 100MB blocks, that just won't be true.
1160 2013-03-07 16:18:36 <BlueMatt> yes, absolutely, that is what I was referring to
1161 2013-03-07 16:18:38 BenderCoin has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1162 2013-03-07 16:19:01 EasyAt has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1163 2013-03-07 16:19:28 <BlueMatt> mining behind tor will always be profitable if you discount electricity, but if you count electricity and assume mining is only profitable on infinitely small margins, then mining is never profitable unless propagation to 51% is instant
1164 2013-03-07 16:19:59 <BlueMatt> actually more than 51% in the extreme case
1165 2013-03-07 16:20:08 <petertodd> Huh?
1166 2013-03-07 16:20:39 <petertodd> You mean, how you can always mine empty blocks?
1167 2013-03-07 16:21:49 <BlueMatt> well assuming the margins are infinitely small, you have to ensure 100% of your blocks are accepted or you end up losing
1168 2013-03-07 16:22:04 <BlueMatt> which is ofc impossible, but...anyway you see my point
1169 2013-03-07 16:23:48 davout has joined
1170 2013-03-07 16:23:48 davout has quit (Changing host)
1171 2013-03-07 16:23:48 davout has joined
1172 2013-03-07 16:23:58 davout has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1173 2013-03-07 16:24:29 <petertodd> Ah, yeah, you're technically correct, the best kind of correct. :P
1174 2013-03-07 16:25:20 <BlueMatt> heh
1175 2013-03-07 16:25:49 <petertodd> I think in my bitcoin-dev email this morning I remembered to mention how in theory miners behind tor could mine censored tx's with really high fees...
1176 2013-03-07 16:26:18 FredEE has joined
1177 2013-03-07 16:26:37 <petertodd> Lots of risk though due to other miners griefing them by mining the ones the tor nodes think aren't going to get mined anyway, thus invalidating their blocks.
1178 2013-03-07 16:26:43 * BlueMatt doesnt really have time to keep up with even the ml anymore :(
1179 2013-03-07 16:27:15 tyn has joined
1180 2013-03-07 16:28:31 <petertodd> Eek, you must be a father or something. :P
1181 2013-03-07 16:28:48 <BlueMatt> heh, no Im still a student
1182 2013-03-07 16:28:58 <BlueMatt> and yet I still cant find time to do all I want to....
1183 2013-03-07 16:29:07 <BlueMatt> TD: off-by-one in my block size code...thats not good :(
1184 2013-03-07 16:29:31 <BlueMatt> or maybe the sig is too big...
1185 2013-03-07 16:29:49 <petertodd> BlueMatt: Ha, close enough. I sleep so much better now that I'm not taking math classes...
1186 2013-03-07 16:31:03 <BlueMatt> ehh, most of my time is in various personal projects, clubs, etc...even my credit hour overload doesnt keep my all that busy (though they are mostly cs courses, so...meh)
1187 2013-03-07 16:31:37 <petertodd> BlueMatt: Hey, so long as it's not just work.
1188 2013-03-07 16:31:43 <BlueMatt> yep
1189 2013-03-07 16:32:16 idstam has joined
1190 2013-03-07 16:39:05 pre2 has joined
1191 2013-03-07 16:39:18 bitafterbit has joined
1192 2013-03-07 16:39:20 pre2 is now known as away!~b4tt3r135@46.165.221.13|pre2
1193 2013-03-07 16:39:50 pre2 is now known as Guest59052
1194 2013-03-07 16:40:10 Guest59052 is now known as JUSTcallmePRE
1195 2013-03-07 16:45:21 Hashdog has joined
1196 2013-03-07 16:47:44 tyn has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1197 2013-03-07 16:49:13 Guest34164 has quit (Changing host)
1198 2013-03-07 16:49:13 Guest34164 has joined
1199 2013-03-07 16:49:15 Guest34164 is now known as jgarzik
1200 2013-03-07 16:50:06 Hashdog has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1201 2013-03-07 16:50:24 defunctzombie is now known as defunctzombie_zz
1202 2013-03-07 16:50:29 FredEE has quit (Quit: FredEE)
1203 2013-03-07 16:51:35 rdymac has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
1204 2013-03-07 16:55:10 denisx has joined
1205 2013-03-07 16:57:52 bernard75 has joined
1206 2013-03-07 16:59:07 bernard75 has left ()
1207 2013-03-07 17:01:21 ovidiusoft has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1208 2013-03-07 17:02:21 X-Scale has joined
1209 2013-03-07 17:02:39 ByteUnit has joined
1210 2013-03-07 17:03:58 monkeynipples has quit (Quit: flaccid monkeynipples)
1211 2013-03-07 17:04:23 monkeynipples has joined
1212 2013-03-07 17:04:44 tyn has joined
1213 2013-03-07 17:05:17 gdoteofff has joined
1214 2013-03-07 17:05:45 eckey has joined
1215 2013-03-07 17:07:46 gdoteoff has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1216 2013-03-07 17:08:26 Hashdog has joined
1217 2013-03-07 17:14:00 ForceMajeure has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1218 2013-03-07 17:14:27 grau has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1219 2013-03-07 17:14:48 <midnightmagic> BlueMatt: If your CS courses are "meh" you should be applying for course waivers and skipping up the prereq chain.
1220 2013-03-07 17:15:17 <midnightmagic> BlueMatt: Why waste your time there, I say, doing shit you already know. Skip up, and load up on upper level credit.
1221 2013-03-07 17:15:45 <midnightmagic> it's more interesting anyway
1222 2013-03-07 17:16:00 bitit has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1223 2013-03-07 17:16:05 <BlueMatt> midnightmagic: the meh was more because its not much work, easy courses != not learning anything
1224 2013-03-07 17:16:10 <BlueMatt> (and I have skipped up a lot...)
1225 2013-03-07 17:17:18 <midnightmagic> Does your institute do the really annoying thing and require attendance? double up on the courses then and finish sooner.
1226 2013-03-07 17:20:50 grau has joined
1227 2013-03-07 17:23:17 grau has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1228 2013-03-07 17:23:52 grau has joined
1229 2013-03-07 17:24:24 <BlueMatt> na, I could (I already overload)...but why give up free time to get out early?
1230 2013-03-07 17:24:29 <BlueMatt> work is...well work
1231 2013-03-07 17:25:09 <splnkr> then again, the less you have to go away from the computer, the more you should make a point of it
1232 2013-03-07 17:25:19 <splnkr> every 20 mins, focus the eyes on an object 20 feet (6 meters) away for 20 seconds.
1233 2013-03-07 17:26:12 <BlueMatt> huh? we are talking about college, not just working on computers all day
1234 2013-03-07 17:26:46 <Luke-Jr> BlueMatt: work is far more useful than uni :P
1235 2013-03-07 17:27:04 <splnkr> CS courses are both, no?
1236 2013-03-07 17:27:11 <Happzz> i've a technical question. SD, right? so you send them X, and they almost instantly send you back Y, like, much before your tx was confirmed even once. how do they know it's not a fake tx or so?
1237 2013-03-07 17:27:26 <Happzz> i assume they check it somehow, or else people would scam the shit out of them already
1238 2013-03-07 17:27:53 <Luke-Jr> Happzz: they don't
1239 2013-03-07 17:28:01 <Luke-Jr> Happzz: people *do* scam them already
1240 2013-03-07 17:28:20 <BlueMatt> Luke-Jr: provides money, but...as long as you dont need it
1241 2013-03-07 17:28:26 grau has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1242 2013-03-07 17:28:42 <Luke-Jr> BlueMatt: I wasn't talking about money :P
1243 2013-03-07 17:28:54 <BlueMatt> well, ok, but thats what internships are for
1244 2013-03-07 17:29:03 <sipa> Happzz: they use the tx you send them as input for the transaction returning to you
1245 2013-03-07 17:29:18 <sipa> Happzz: so if you send them something invalid for any reason, the returning tx will be invalid too
1246 2013-03-07 17:29:22 <BlueMatt> Luke-Jr: also working on floss
1247 2013-03-07 17:29:54 JUSTcallmePRE has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1248 2013-03-07 17:30:08 <TD> heya
1249 2013-03-07 17:30:12 <TD> BlueMatt: did you see the bug i CCd you on?
1250 2013-03-07 17:31:24 mungojelly has joined
1251 2013-03-07 17:35:24 <andytoshi> BlueMatt: what year are you in?
1252 2013-03-07 17:37:11 kipp_ has joined
1253 2013-03-07 17:38:46 hattorihanzo2 has joined
1254 2013-03-07 17:39:02 [\\\] has joined
1255 2013-03-07 17:39:10 mrcheesenips_ has joined
1256 2013-03-07 17:39:22 Mrcheesenips has quit (Disconnected by services)
1257 2013-03-07 17:39:30 mrcheesenips_ is now known as Mrcheesenips
1258 2013-03-07 17:39:38 Mrcheesenips has quit (Changing host)
1259 2013-03-07 17:39:38 Mrcheesenips has joined
1260 2013-03-07 17:40:25 BenderCoin has joined
1261 2013-03-07 17:40:45 jaromil_ has joined
1262 2013-03-07 17:40:59 DrHaribo_ has joined
1263 2013-03-07 17:41:17 helo_ has joined
1264 2013-03-07 17:41:44 helo has quit (Disconnected by services)
1265 2013-03-07 17:41:49 helo_ is now known as helo
1266 2013-03-07 17:43:57 ashams has joined
1267 2013-03-07 17:43:57 ashams has quit (Changing host)
1268 2013-03-07 17:43:57 ashams has joined
1269 2013-03-07 17:44:28 graingert has joined
1270 2013-03-07 17:44:31 toobreev has joined
1271 2013-03-07 17:44:52 graingert is now known as Guest51714
1272 2013-03-07 17:45:08 xjrn has quit (Ping timeout: 255 seconds)
1273 2013-03-07 17:45:49 defunctzombie_zz is now known as defunctzombie
1274 2013-03-07 17:47:48 asdasada has joined
1275 2013-03-07 17:47:48 Apexseals has joined
1276 2013-03-07 17:47:48 Bwild has joined
1277 2013-03-07 17:48:50 Guest51714 has quit (Client Quit)
1278 2013-03-07 17:49:57 techlife has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1279 2013-03-07 17:49:57 <gmaxwell> Density of dice related txn in each block: (dice related means that an input had an output that paid to dice, or it has an output that pays to dice)
1280 2013-03-07 17:50:01 <gmaxwell> 224715 0.81457
1281 2013-03-07 17:50:03 <gmaxwell> 224714 0.875507
1282 2013-03-07 17:50:06 <gmaxwell> 224713 0.328125
1283 2013-03-07 17:50:08 <gmaxwell> 224712 0.797654
1284 2013-03-07 17:50:11 graingert_ has joined
1285 2013-03-07 17:50:11 <gmaxwell> 224711 0.0623819
1286 2013-03-07 17:50:13 <gmaxwell> 224710 0.686567
1287 2013-03-07 17:50:15 <gmaxwell> It's interesting to note that 224711 was also 400k— it was produced by someone blocking dice.
1288 2013-03-07 17:50:18 <gmaxwell> 224709 0.581081
1289 2013-03-07 17:50:20 <gmaxwell> 224708 0.769886
1290 2013-03-07 17:50:23 <gmaxwell> 224707 0.749386
1291 2013-03-07 17:50:39 Diapolo has joined
1292 2013-03-07 17:51:56 <andytoshi> very good numbers to know
1293 2013-03-07 17:52:02 <andytoshi> i thought more people were dice-blocking :(
1294 2013-03-07 17:52:14 <Happzz> dice blocking?
1295 2013-03-07 17:53:02 <andytoshi> Happzz: refusing to mine transactions that come from satoshi dice
1296 2013-03-07 17:53:03 <helo> Happzz: refusing to mine transactions to/from satoshidice
1297 2013-03-07 17:53:07 <andytoshi> lolo
1298 2013-03-07 17:53:14 <helo> hh
1299 2013-03-07 17:53:21 <gmaxwell> andytoshi: 224713 was dice blocking too, but dice blockers still mine dice returns... because they block only based on outputs.
1300 2013-03-07 17:53:37 gdoteoff has joined
1301 2013-03-07 17:53:58 techlife has joined
1302 2013-03-07 17:54:01 <andytoshi> gmaxwell: OK, 2 of eight is not too bad
1303 2013-03-07 17:54:02 <gmaxwell> well, some dice blockers— 224711 was more effective.
1304 2013-03-07 17:55:11 rdymac has joined
1305 2013-03-07 17:55:42 <Happzz> someone will mine tx to/from sd i guess.
1306 2013-03-07 17:55:43 <TD> gmaxwell: shouldn't it be zero, if dice was blocked?
1307 2013-03-07 17:55:52 <TD> ah
1308 2013-03-07 17:55:54 <Happzz> you can't really "block" that kinda stuff with the btc infrastructure
1309 2013-03-07 17:55:55 <TD> just caught up
1310 2013-03-07 17:56:16 <Happzz> i still don't understand what's the big deal with SD and why everyone hates them
1311 2013-03-07 17:56:23 pigeons has quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
1312 2013-03-07 17:56:47 <andytoshi> Happzz: because they are spamming the chain, look at that garbage, over half the transactions come from one entity
1313 2013-03-07 17:56:47 gdoteofff has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1314 2013-03-07 17:56:50 pigeons has joined
1315 2013-03-07 17:56:55 <andytoshi> why can't they just use multiple outputs?
1316 2013-03-07 17:57:09 gdoteofff has joined
1317 2013-03-07 17:57:13 pigeons is now known as Guest86077
1318 2013-03-07 17:57:33 <Happzz> andytoshi they pay the fees, sounds harsh to not accept their txs
1319 2013-03-07 17:57:41 <gmaxwell> TD: my 'related' definition is also a little more expansive than any reasonable blocking would be.. in that if you spend an unrelated output from a txn that also payed dice, I count that spend as dice related.
1320 2013-03-07 17:58:03 <andytoshi> Happzz: they don't pay me any fees, or any other node, to store their crap
1321 2013-03-07 17:58:12 <TD> ok
1322 2013-03-07 17:58:23 <Happzz> andytoshi nobody pays you to store his shit though.
1323 2013-03-07 17:58:33 <Happzz> the more users we have the more crap we're going to store
1324 2013-03-07 17:58:42 <Happzz> that's how btc was designed :o
1325 2013-03-07 17:58:45 <gmaxwell> Happzz: andy is paid by the usefulness of bitcoin. Not all use is equal.
1326 2013-03-07 17:58:54 gdoteoff has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1327 2013-03-07 17:59:06 <andytoshi> Happzz: gmaxwell beat me to it -- "more users" would be wonderful, and quite rewarding
1328 2013-03-07 17:59:07 btcven has joined
1329 2013-03-07 17:59:22 <Happzz> how is that going to be rewarding?
1330 2013-03-07 17:59:26 gdoteoff has joined
1331 2013-03-07 17:59:34 <Luke-Jr> Happzz: SD doesn't pay fees, it makes the gamblers do it
1332 2013-03-07 17:59:42 rdymac has quit (Read error: No route to host)
1333 2013-03-07 17:59:48 <gmaxwell> Happzz: these dice transactions are not actual economic activity,— at least not most of them.  They're a few (or one?) bot constantly 'playing' over and over again. They could just as well send their whole balance to SD in a single transaction. But instead they send hundreds of megabytes of junk.
1334 2013-03-07 17:59:57 <Luke-Jr> Happzz: also, the fees exists to deter people from flooding - they DON'T cover the cost of the transaction at all
1335 2013-03-07 18:00:10 <andytoshi> Happzz: because it would mean a movement toward a freer, more efficient financial system
1336 2013-03-07 18:00:22 <andytoshi> with very cool infrastructure and a lot of potential
1337 2013-03-07 18:00:30 <Happzz> andytoshi it's an open system. if SD dies and disappears, somebody else will rise.
1338 2013-03-07 18:00:49 <gmaxwell> Happzz: unlikely.
1339 2013-03-07 18:00:57 <Happzz> how so
1340 2013-03-07 18:01:06 <Happzz> they make money. why wouldn't others take their place?
1341 2013-03-07 18:01:18 graingert_ is now known as graingert
1342 2013-03-07 18:01:24 gdoteofff has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1343 2013-03-07 18:01:25 <andytoshi> well, SD is economically irrational, despised by other actors and actually illegal where they are based
1344 2013-03-07 18:01:32 <andytoshi> i should say, their users are irrational
1345 2013-03-07 18:01:49 <Happzz> how is that
1346 2013-03-07 18:01:53 <gmaxwell> Because there are plenty of other gambling sites, some with the same interface, and they don't get much traffic at all. As mentioned this flood appears to be just one or a few people.
1347 2013-03-07 18:02:12 <andytoshi> also, they would make more money (and be scammed less!) by using bitcoin efficiently
1348 2013-03-07 18:02:25 <Happzz> scammed less?
1349 2013-03-07 18:02:31 <Happzz> so my theory earlier was right?
1350 2013-03-07 18:02:43 BTCTrader2 has joined
1351 2013-03-07 18:02:44 peres has quit (Quit: Page closed)
1352 2013-03-07 18:02:53 <Happzz> you broadcast an invalid tx, and they send you legit btcs because they didn't wait for a confirmation?
1353 2013-03-07 18:03:09 <gmaxwell> Happzz: no, not quite.
1354 2013-03-07 18:03:10 <sipa> Happzz: so if you send them something invalid for any reason, the returning tx will be invalid too
1355 2013-03-07 18:03:20 <Happzz> gmaxwell what then?
1356 2013-03-07 18:03:24 <sipa> Happzz: the return transactions use the bet as input
1357 2013-03-07 18:03:33 <sipa> so if the bet is invalid, so will the reward
1358 2013-03-07 18:03:44 <Happzz> sipa what about double spending
1359 2013-03-07 18:03:46 gdoteoff has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1360 2013-03-07 18:04:04 <sipa> Happzz: you can try to selective doublespend when you lose, yes
1361 2013-03-07 18:04:10 <sipa> Happzz: and that works, and people do it
1362 2013-03-07 18:04:10 <andytoshi> Happzz: you can double-spend them, especially in the presence of dice-blocking miners
1363 2013-03-07 18:04:32 <gmaxwell> At the same time, they only zero-confirm pay low value transactions.
1364 2013-03-07 18:04:42 <BlueMatt> TD: yes :(
1365 2013-03-07 18:04:46 <Happzz> teach me how, and i'll scam them to death.
1366 2013-03-07 18:04:52 <gmaxwell> Happzz: you can't.
1367 2013-03-07 18:04:56 <Happzz> why can't i?
1368 2013-03-07 18:05:03 <BlueMatt> andytoshi: sophomore...though most of my cs classes are primarily juniors/seniors
1369 2013-03-07 18:05:11 <gmaxwell> as they only selectively zero-confirm pay low value transactions.
1370 2013-03-07 18:05:25 <Happzz> what does that mean?
1371 2013-03-07 18:05:32 <BlueMatt> TD: isnt this the second irreproduceable bug in those test-cases?
1372 2013-03-07 18:05:33 <gmaxwell> AND because doublespending selectively on loss is not something you can reliably do.
1373 2013-03-07 18:05:38 <andytoshi> BlueMatt: sophomore == 2nd year? (sorry, we don't have these words in canada)
1374 2013-03-07 18:05:47 <Happzz> gmaxwell statistics win eventually
1375 2013-03-07 18:05:48 <TD> BlueMatt: could be. it sounded like you expected it?
1376 2013-03-07 18:05:51 <BlueMatt> andytoshi: yes
1377 2013-03-07 18:05:54 <gmaxwell> Happzz: transaction 101 is really OT for bitcoin-dev.
1378 2013-03-07 18:06:10 <Happzz> right. sorry
1379 2013-03-07 18:06:25 graingert has quit (Quit: Ex AndChat)
1380 2013-03-07 18:06:28 <BlueMatt> TD: no, I knew it was nondeterministic but I thought I got my math right and it wouldnt fail (and afaik its equally likely across the like 3 possibilities so I didnt think it was possible)
1381 2013-03-07 18:06:44 graingert has joined
1382 2013-03-07 18:06:47 <Happzz> i must mention the SD concept is cool.
1383 2013-03-07 18:07:07 <sipa> it's an interesting use of the blockchain
1384 2013-03-07 18:07:13 <sipa> i agree
1385 2013-03-07 18:07:15 <gmaxwell> Happzz: what concept?
1386 2013-03-07 18:07:17 <TD> BlueMatt: is the issue in the test or the code?
1387 2013-03-07 18:07:21 <helo> they could implement the same thing with their own app that handles messaging outside of the bitcoin network
1388 2013-03-07 18:07:22 <sipa> but that doesn't make it acceptable
1389 2013-03-07 18:07:37 <Happzz> the concept in which you send X, they run a number, and send you back your win.
1390 2013-03-07 18:07:51 <BlueMatt> TD: in this case I have nfc, the nondeterminism is the signature length on the first tx, but I thought that was handled
1391 2013-03-07 18:08:09 detro has joined
1392 2013-03-07 18:08:36 <gmaxwell> Happzz: uh. thats how all gambling sites work, at 100,000 feet.
1393 2013-03-07 18:09:20 FredEE has joined
1394 2013-03-07 18:10:05 <gmaxwell> but if you want to waste money there are more efficient ways— e.g. https://ragecoin.appspot.com/
1395 2013-03-07 18:10:25 <Luke-Jr> (or you can just send it all to me)
1396 2013-03-07 18:10:37 <Happzz> ^^
1397 2013-03-07 18:10:59 <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: but that wouldn't be a waste.
1398 2013-03-07 18:11:19 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: shh, it looks the same from his perspective
1399 2013-03-07 18:12:15 <Happzz> gmaxwell how is that efficient?
1400 2013-03-07 18:12:32 gritcoin has joined
1401 2013-03-07 18:13:09 <gmaxwell> Happzz: no transaction fees, instant confirmation, zero globally visible bitcoin transactions per play
1402 2013-03-07 18:14:24 <Happzz> gmaxwell the statistics there suck really. you've 16% to double your money
1403 2013-03-07 18:14:53 sgornick has joined
1404 2013-03-07 18:15:10 <Happzz> maybe even 14%, i can't tell how many different variations are there for the left one
1405 2013-03-07 18:15:31 <sipa> Happzz: gmaxwell said it was a more efficient way to waste your money :p
1406 2013-03-07 18:15:47 <Happzz> sipa ^^
1407 2013-03-07 18:15:49 <sipa> not more productive
1408 2013-03-07 18:15:51 <Happzz> it's inefficient.
1409 2013-03-07 18:15:58 <Happzz> maybe chain-efficient :p
1410 2013-03-07 18:16:13 <sipa> no no, it requires far less effort from _everyone_ for you to lose your money
1411 2013-03-07 18:16:19 <Happzz> r:p
1412 2013-03-07 18:16:20 <sipa> for them, for you, for miners, ...
1413 2013-03-07 18:16:27 <Happzz> i've like 15 mins break in this boooooring class
1414 2013-03-07 18:16:27 <Happzz> so brb
1415 2013-03-07 18:16:49 toffoo has joined
1416 2013-03-07 18:16:55 <gmaxwell> Happzz: uh. you fail at math, it actually has a _lower_ house rake than SD.
1417 2013-03-07 18:17:13 <Luke-Jr> lol
1418 2013-03-07 18:17:50 <Diablo-D3> lol
1419 2013-03-07 18:18:52 <gmaxwell> (er, well if I correctly remember what SD's rake is)
1420 2013-03-07 18:20:09 btcven is now known as rdymac
1421 2013-03-07 18:20:12 <gmaxwell> in any case ragecoin has an EV of 0.965, and thats the full ev since there are no fees.
1422 2013-03-07 18:20:22 <Diablo-D3> ragecoin? seriously?
1423 2013-03-07 18:20:27 <gmaxwell> Of course, these things are all moronic to play.
1424 2013-03-07 18:20:33 * Diablo-D3 starts worldpeacecoin
1425 2013-03-07 18:20:42 <Diablo-D3> instead of coins, you get karma
1426 2013-03-07 18:21:31 <helo> karmakoin?
1427 2013-03-07 18:21:44 <Diablo-D3> no, just karma
1428 2013-03-07 18:21:48 <Diablo-D3> hey
1429 2013-03-07 18:21:51 <Diablo-D3> I could just CALL it karma
1430 2013-03-07 18:21:58 <Diablo-D3> karmad karma-qt, etc
1431 2013-03-07 18:22:02 rdymac has quit (Quit: Saliendo)
1432 2013-03-07 18:22:04 <Diablo-D3> and fix all the problems with bitcoin
1433 2013-03-07 18:22:15 <Diablo-D3> like the fact its written in c++\
1434 2013-03-07 18:22:43 <helo> it's probably best to get rid of the block chain too
1435 2013-03-07 18:23:03 <Diablo-D3> no, keep the block chain but allow localized chain splits
1436 2013-03-07 18:24:01 <Diablo-D3> produce 10 sub blocks every 10 minutes that contain tx and confirm previous subblocks
1437 2013-03-07 18:24:14 <_dr> karmekoin, the people on reddit would love it
1438 2013-03-07 18:24:18 Diapolo has left ()
1439 2013-03-07 18:24:23 <_dr> *karma
1440 2013-03-07 18:24:25 <Diablo-D3> 1 master block that only refers to subblocks every 10 minutes as usual
1441 2013-03-07 18:24:29 grau has joined
1442 2013-03-07 18:24:32 TD has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1443 2013-03-07 18:24:33 <Diablo-D3> you cant spend coins inside of a block boundary
1444 2013-03-07 18:25:35 <Diablo-D3> so you could theoretically confirm a transaction in only 10 minutes if you fit 6 subblocks in between blocks
1445 2013-03-07 18:25:56 <gmaxwell> uh.
1446 2013-03-07 18:26:09 <gmaxwell> you know there is nothing magical about the number 6 right?
1447 2013-03-07 18:26:18 grau has quit (Read error: Operation timed out)
1448 2013-03-07 18:26:22 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: I know, but it fits since we have 60 minutes in an hour
1449 2013-03-07 18:26:37 SchmalzTech has joined
1450 2013-03-07 18:26:44 <gmaxwell> producing a billion blocks a second doesn't allow you to be confident that a transaction is irreversable after 6 billioniths of a second.
1451 2013-03-07 18:26:59 <sipa> gmaxwell: but but... it's the first non-prime-power natural number!
1452 2013-03-07 18:27:21 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: I never said it did
1453 2013-03-07 18:27:33 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: but subblocks would have two parents
1454 2013-03-07 18:27:36 MC1984 has joined
1455 2013-03-07 18:27:38 <Diablo-D3> block and subblock
1456 2013-03-07 18:27:57 <sipa> gmaxwell: well given a constant percentage of hashrate in the hands of an attacker, it does
1457 2013-03-07 18:28:08 <Diablo-D3> subblocks would not REQUIRE the correct subblock parent (it could just say 0)
1458 2013-03-07 18:28:18 <sipa> gmaxwell: of course, he needs to maintain his attack for a smaller time
1459 2013-03-07 18:28:28 <Diablo-D3> sipa: yeah but you run into internet latency at that scale
1460 2013-03-07 18:28:29 MC1984_ has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1461 2013-03-07 18:29:01 <Scrat> Oh b.i... a website that has transacted $1 billion yet it is still run by 1 guy
1462 2013-03-07 18:29:25 defunctzombie is now known as defunctzombie_zz
1463 2013-03-07 18:30:39 <Scrat> ran*
1464 2013-03-07 18:31:08 rdymac has joined
1465 2013-03-07 18:31:41 <Diablo-D3> man
1466 2013-03-07 18:31:51 <Diablo-D3> I should actually look into a generic proof of work library that does what I described
1467 2013-03-07 18:32:00 <Diablo-D3> it'd be interesting for parallel data storage
1468 2013-03-07 18:32:04 <gmaxwell> sipa: e.g. doesn't because the speed of light / speed of processing blocks isn't infinite.
1469 2013-03-07 18:33:54 meLon has quit (Quit: leaving)
1470 2013-03-07 18:34:21 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: so what would happen if I produce a better altcoin than bitcoin?
1471 2013-03-07 18:34:42 <sipa> define 'better'
1472 2013-03-07 18:34:52 <Diablo-D3> sipa: more people use it
1473 2013-03-07 18:35:19 <sipa> so for example paypal?
1474 2013-03-07 18:35:45 <Diablo-D3> sure, if paypal launches a secure decentralized currency that aims to destroy the banking industry
1475 2013-03-07 18:36:15 free__ has joined
1476 2013-03-07 18:36:24 <sipa> ah, it needs to be decentralized and have political motives; ok
1477 2013-03-07 18:36:34 <Diablo-D3> yup, otherwise what fun is it? =P
1478 2013-03-07 18:36:43 bock has joined
1479 2013-03-07 18:37:24 <Happzz> back
1480 2013-03-07 18:37:26 <Diablo-D3> Ill have to change how mining works
1481 2013-03-07 18:37:27 <Diablo-D3> like
1482 2013-03-07 18:37:36 daybyter has quit (Quit: Konversation terminated!)
1483 2013-03-07 18:37:38 Tatsuya has joined
1484 2013-03-07 18:37:42 <Happzz> gmaxwell how does it have a lower house rake than SD?
1485 2013-03-07 18:37:48 <Diablo-D3> some giant 1024 bit number or something
1486 2013-03-07 18:37:57 <Happzz> SD gives your 48% chance to double your bet.
1487 2013-03-07 18:37:59 <Diablo-D3> actually wait
1488 2013-03-07 18:38:04 <Diablo-D3> sipa: what does scrypt go up to?
1489 2013-03-07 18:38:21 <sipa> no idea; high enough
1490 2013-03-07 18:38:29 <sipa> what advantage would scrypt have?
1491 2013-03-07 18:38:44 <Diablo-D3> it uses memory, thus can make it gpu, fpga, and asic hard
1492 2013-03-07 18:38:53 <sipa> why do you want that?
1493 2013-03-07 18:39:11 <sipa> it's just making things easier for a botnet
1494 2013-03-07 18:39:15 <Diablo-D3> because it would push the technology industry ahead that eventually gpus, fpgas, and asics really could do them
1495 2013-03-07 18:39:41 <sipa> i doubt that :)
1496 2013-03-07 18:40:02 <sipa> at some point, for whatever the PoW function is, it will become economically viable to develop an ASIC for it
1497 2013-03-07 18:40:21 <Diablo-D3> yeah
1498 2013-03-07 18:40:27 <Diablo-D3> but difficulty could be memory usage too
1499 2013-03-07 18:40:34 <MC1984> https://gist.github.com/re4k/3878505
1500 2013-03-07 18:40:37 <gmaxwell> Happzz: you have to sum up all the returns and their probablities to get the expected return.
1501 2013-03-07 18:40:38 <Tatsuya> So, as someone who doesn't have their head buried in how the bitcoin protocol works, but has a general idea of how to use it and develop apps with it, and has been mildly playing with it since 2010 - it actually wasn't clear to me until today about what exactly makes SD a debateably irresponsible use of the network.
1502 2013-03-07 18:40:38 <MC1984> oops a daisy
1503 2013-03-07 18:40:54 <Diablo-D3> Tatsuya: it bloats chains.
1504 2013-03-07 18:40:57 <Tatsuya> I get that now
1505 2013-03-07 18:41:03 <Tatsuya> where I'm going with this, though
1506 2013-03-07 18:41:18 <Diablo-D3> sipa: so people make asics, and then the asics go obsolete after awhile
1507 2013-03-07 18:41:28 <Diablo-D3> sipa: because the diff memory usage went up
1508 2013-03-07 18:42:18 <Diablo-D3> sipa: I mean, litecoin actually had the right idea using it
1509 2013-03-07 18:42:22 <Diablo-D3> they just implemented it lolwrong
1510 2013-03-07 18:42:35 <gmaxwell> Happzz: if SD is 48% for 2x you have 2*.48 = .96 ev (ignoring fees, which the player pays). If thats correct than SD actually has a slightly higher EV than ragecoin. Ragecoin's ev is 0.965.
1511 2013-03-07 18:42:42 <Tatsuya> is that is there anywhere on the wiki / should there be something on the wiki about some sort of "responsible use of the network" - that might contain things like: gambling sites should make sure their users have accounts that are cashed out of / rather than doing this sort of immediate turnaround processing that SD does
1512 2013-03-07 18:42:48 <graingert> Diablo-D3: how wrong?
1513 2013-03-07 18:42:57 <graingert> What did they stupid?
1514 2013-03-07 18:42:58 graingert has quit (Quit: Ex AndChat)
1515 2013-03-07 18:43:08 <Diablo-D3> graingert: it uses a very small memory size
1516 2013-03-07 18:43:11 <Diablo-D3> ....
1517 2013-03-07 18:43:16 <Diablo-D3> WHY ASK ME QUESTION THEN QUIT
1518 2013-03-07 18:43:17 graingert has joined
1519 2013-03-07 18:43:19 <Tatsuya> Just some sort of responsible use policy, for people to be aware of who aren't super well versed with the protocol
1520 2013-03-07 18:43:24 <Diablo-D3> graingert: WAAAAAAAAAARGH
1521 2013-03-07 18:43:33 <graingert> Uh
1522 2013-03-07 18:43:37 <Diablo-D3> [01:43:03] <Diablo-D3> graingert: it uses a very small memory size\
1523 2013-03-07 18:43:43 <graingert> Lol
1524 2013-03-07 18:43:47 <graingert> Morris
1525 2013-03-07 18:43:54 <graingert> Morons*
1526 2013-03-07 18:44:05 <Tatsuya> So that people who generally have good intentions don't accidentally develop something popular that places a potentially unnecessary burden on the network
1527 2013-03-07 18:44:24 <gmaxwell> Tatsuya: you don't even have to have persistant accounts. Luke suggested a design with something that couple be called ephemeral accounts. E.g. you goto the site it says "to play, type in your refund address" you do, it then gives you an address to send coin to. You do.. then you play as much as you like.. if you stop playing eventually it will auto-refund your balance.
1528 2013-03-07 18:44:56 <Diablo-D3> graingert: yeah, I mean, its great what they're doing and all
1529 2013-03-07 18:45:01 <Diablo-D3> graingert: but wtf =/
1530 2013-03-07 18:45:02 <gmaxwell> (or you can hit a cashout button) In either case it does a nice friendly batch payment... can avoid paying out dust amounts, etc.
1531 2013-03-07 18:45:15 <Happzz> gmaxwell how is ragecoin 0.965?  it has at least 6 possibilities for the first icon; thus, 17% to double your money..
1532 2013-03-07 18:45:24 dust-otc has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1533 2013-03-07 18:45:28 <Tatsuya> gmaxwell sure sure - I'm trying to make the point though - maybe responsible use of the network ought to be more explicitly laid out
1534 2013-03-07 18:45:28 <graingert> Tatsuya: no you have to make the clients prevent spam
1535 2013-03-07 18:45:30 dvide has joined
1536 2013-03-07 18:46:14 <sivu> hm. libbitcoin repository layout is totally not what swig bindings expect
1537 2013-03-07 18:47:27 <Tatsuya> graingert - sure sure. Again, just trying to say that a very general "responsible use" note should maybe be put somewhere easily visible to potential developers
1538 2013-03-07 18:47:42 denisx has quit (Quit: denisx)
1539 2013-03-07 18:49:59 ovidiusoft has joined
1540 2013-03-07 18:51:55 X-Scale has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1541 2013-03-07 18:52:03 tonikt has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1542 2013-03-07 18:52:26 <gmaxwell> Happzz: yes, you need to look at all the possible outcomes, not just the possiblity to double your money.
1543 2013-03-07 18:53:25 <gmaxwell> (and besides, the site gives you the return)
1544 2013-03-07 18:54:25 <gmaxwell> seriously, this is offensively offtopic now. I'm not going to respond on it any further.
1545 2013-03-07 18:54:45 <Happzz> lol okay
1546 2013-03-07 18:54:48 free__ has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1547 2013-03-07 18:54:48 graingert has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1548 2013-03-07 18:56:12 gritcoin has quit (Quit: gritcoin)
1549 2013-03-07 19:02:02 justmoon has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1550 2013-03-07 19:15:45 gdoteoff has joined
1551 2013-03-07 19:16:23 agricocb has quit (Ping timeout: 248 seconds)
1552 2013-03-07 19:18:09 JDuke128 has joined
1553 2013-03-07 19:19:25 <jgarzik> hrm de hrm
1554 2013-03-07 19:19:28 grau has joined
1555 2013-03-07 19:19:42 <jgarzik> clients really need partial transaction support
1556 2013-03-07 19:20:02 <sipa> partial transaction?
1557 2013-03-07 19:20:41 <jgarzik> manually passing around transaction bits for signing is cumbersome, because there is an easy danger that you could accidentally spend the coins in a not-yet-fully-signed-and-published-and-confirmed transaction.
1558 2013-03-07 19:21:21 <jgarzik> example, crowdfunding:  you might contribute 100 BTC to a crowdfunding transaction, but bitcoind does not know they are spent for 30 days or more
1559 2013-03-07 19:21:40 <jgarzik> and might accidentally spend those outputs in unrelated transactions in the meantime
1560 2013-03-07 19:22:13 <jgarzik> at a minimum, need a stateful 'lockunspent'
1561 2013-03-07 19:23:38 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: so I was thinking about this a bit while playing with the coin control interface...
1562 2013-03-07 19:23:38 <jgarzik> Consider how a user will go through the crowdfunding steps described in https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Contracts#Example_3:_Assurance_contracts
1563 2013-03-07 19:23:44 grau has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1564 2013-03-07 19:23:46 <jgarzik> they create, in essence, a partial transaction
1565 2013-03-07 19:23:51 <jgarzik> or "incomplete transaction" if you prefer
1566 2013-03-07 19:24:16 <gmaxwell> Our coin selection can be changed to remove the signing from the innerloop using conservative worst case numbers for signature sizes... then what it produces is an unsigned raw transaction.
1567 2013-03-07 19:24:47 <gmaxwell> This would let the GUI actually be able to show a raw transaction (while set to advanced)... and you could then click sign then click send.
1568 2013-03-07 19:25:22 <jgarzik> I was thinking about a PyQt coin control "transaction builder", that helps you build a transaction by hand
1569 2013-03-07 19:25:29 <jgarzik> but the raw API only gets you so far
1570 2013-03-07 19:25:45 <jgarzik> you have full coin control, but that also requires 100% commitment on the user's part
1571 2013-03-07 19:25:49 <gmaxwell> so e.g. type stuff into the gui and as you type a raw transaction appears in a box .. and then when you're happy you click sign then send.  Or you can copy it out and have some paste that in and add more inputs/outputs to it.. etc.
1572 2013-03-07 19:25:58 * Diablo-D3 shouldnt be working on what hes working on =/
1573 2013-03-07 19:26:12 <jgarzik> one slipup using 'sendtoaddress' or 'sendfrom' will trigger internal coin selection, possibly spending the wrong coins by accident
1574 2013-03-07 19:26:35 <jgarzik> coin control -- and experimenting with exotic transactions -- is all-or-none commitment on the user's part
1575 2013-03-07 19:26:47 <jgarzik> (sans stateful coin locking)
1576 2013-03-07 19:26:55 <Diablo-D3> jgarzik: oh, so sorta like signing onto an existing tx?
1577 2013-03-07 19:27:14 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: yep, that's what I was thinking for my little GUI tool
1578 2013-03-07 19:28:52 defunctzombie_zz is now known as defunctzombie
1579 2013-03-07 19:31:37 torsthaldo has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1580 2013-03-07 19:32:08 datagutt has quit (Quit: kthxbai)
1581 2013-03-07 19:33:17 gdoteoff has quit (Quit: Bye)
1582 2013-03-07 19:33:38 gdoteoff has joined
1583 2013-03-07 19:36:56 Hasimir- has joined
1584 2013-03-07 19:39:34 Hasimir has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1585 2013-03-07 19:43:40 coolsa has joined
1586 2013-03-07 19:46:59 <nym> can anyone recommend oss that collects exchange prices?
1587 2013-03-07 19:47:08 Tatsuya has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1588 2013-03-07 19:47:25 <nym> i know tradehill has their code for mtgox+bitfloor via websocket
1589 2013-03-07 19:48:06 Tatsuya has joined
1590 2013-03-07 19:48:31 MobPhone has joined
1591 2013-03-07 19:49:54 Graet is now known as Guest57500
1592 2013-03-07 19:51:50 Guest57500 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1593 2013-03-07 19:52:23 clav8 has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1594 2013-03-07 19:53:07 andytoshi has quit (Quit: WeeChat 0.4.0)
1595 2013-03-07 19:56:24 pROFMac has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1596 2013-03-07 19:58:37 axhlf has joined
1597 2013-03-07 19:59:55 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: any preferred format for saving and restoring incomplete transactions?
1598 2013-03-07 20:00:00 <jgarzik> JSON a la bitcoind RPC?
1599 2013-03-07 20:00:13 <jgarzik> importing and exporting, I should say
1600 2013-03-07 20:01:06 holorga has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1601 2013-03-07 20:01:18 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: hex encoding of the transaction data, a la de rpc.
1602 2013-03-07 20:02:06 gdoteoff has quit (Quit: Bye)
1603 2013-03-07 20:02:30 gdoteoff has joined
1604 2013-03-07 20:03:08 tyn has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1605 2013-03-07 20:04:42 holorga has joined
1606 2013-03-07 20:05:51 ProfMac has joined
1607 2013-03-07 20:06:33 <gmaxwell> 224717 is 93.5% 0_o
1608 2013-03-07 20:08:05 <warren> gmaxwell: a chart would be awesome
1609 2013-03-07 20:08:40 <jgarzik> hmmmm
1610 2013-03-07 20:09:05 TD has joined
1611 2013-03-07 20:09:06 <jgarzik> I wonder if signrawtransaction, with no arguments, could be a useful way to check if a transaction is completely signed
1612 2013-03-07 20:09:36 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: the complete flag is not always accurate.
1613 2013-03-07 20:09:47 <petertodd> gmaxwell: You got that script up anyhere?
1614 2013-03-07 20:09:49 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: 93.5% what?
1615 2013-03-07 20:09:58 <warren> SD
1616 2013-03-07 20:10:04 <petertodd> jgarzik: Puppies
1617 2013-03-07 20:10:09 <gmaxwell> Dead puppies.
1618 2013-03-07 20:10:18 <warren> That's our new codeword.
1619 2013-03-07 20:10:21 <petertodd> gmaxwell: ...they're still fluffy.
1620 2013-03-07 20:10:28 <gmaxwell> DP from now on.
1621 2013-03-07 20:10:31 <warren> DP
1622 2013-03-07 20:10:35 <jgarzik> yuck
1623 2013-03-07 20:10:55 <gmaxwell> petertodd: just awful shell hackery.
1624 2013-03-07 20:11:33 <gmaxwell> petertodd: http://pastebin.com/3dsWAeyB
1625 2013-03-07 20:11:41 <petertodd> We can call it the P vs DP problem.
1626 2013-03-07 20:12:38 <petertodd> gmaxwell: I'm kinda afraid to run that.
1627 2013-03-07 20:12:45 * warren runs it.
1628 2013-03-07 20:12:53 owowo has joined
1629 2013-03-07 20:13:26 <gmaxwell> it's really slow and horrible. But worse is better.
1630 2013-03-07 20:13:38 <petertodd> gmaxwell: Nice machine name.
1631 2013-03-07 20:13:40 <jgarzik> sipa: if one creates and stores a CWalletTx of an incomplete transaction, will that fool the system into thinking those coins are unavailable for further spending?
1632 2013-03-07 20:13:50 <petertodd> Yeah, my Python one wasn't fast either.
1633 2013-03-07 20:14:25 <jgarzik> it looks like CWalletTx might have some support for incomplete TXs
1634 2013-03-07 20:14:45 X-Scale has joined
1635 2013-03-07 20:14:53 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: an interesting way of doing locking... just creating incomple txn that consume the inputs.
1636 2013-03-07 20:15:05 <gmaxwell> bet you can expose all kinds of awesome bugs that way.
1637 2013-03-07 20:15:41 <jgarzik> vOrderForm seems to indicate satoshi might have wanted incomplete tx support in there?
1638 2013-03-07 20:16:54 ashod has joined
1639 2013-03-07 20:17:19 <ashod> anyone from australia here ?
1640 2013-03-07 20:18:22 nowan has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1641 2013-03-07 20:18:40 grau has joined
1642 2013-03-07 20:19:10 <HM> gah
1643 2013-03-07 20:19:27 nowan has joined
1644 2013-03-07 20:19:36 <HM> Bad apis and weakly typed languages are a bad combination
1645 2013-03-07 20:19:51 ashod has quit (Client Quit)
1646 2013-03-07 20:20:04 rdymac has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
1647 2013-03-07 20:20:10 ThomasV has quit (Quit: Quitte)
1648 2013-03-07 20:21:02 <TD> jgarzik: hmm?
1649 2013-03-07 20:21:12 <TD> jgarzik: vOrderForm is a leftover from the ebay system he was doing, i think
1650 2013-03-07 20:21:15 <TD> jgarzik: or something like that
1651 2013-03-07 20:21:40 <warren> ebay system
1652 2013-03-07 20:22:03 <petertodd> c
1653 2013-03-07 20:22:07 <petertodd> Crazy, deleted in 2b63e68bbfebc370aa6f2d542419a6e5680f33c5
1654 2013-03-07 20:22:20 <petertodd> Oh wait, no 5253d1ab77fab1995ede03fb934edd67f1359ba8
1655 2013-03-07 20:23:02 grau has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1656 2013-03-07 20:24:10 n000by has joined
1657 2013-03-07 20:24:18 asdasada has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1658 2013-03-07 20:28:16 rbecker is now known as RBecker
1659 2013-03-07 20:29:50 tyn has joined
1660 2013-03-07 20:30:55 gdoteoff has quit (Quit: Bye)
1661 2013-03-07 20:31:14 gdoteoff has joined
1662 2013-03-07 20:32:54 <jgarzik> huh
1663 2013-03-07 20:32:58 <jgarzik> that's a bit of history I never knew
1664 2013-03-07 20:35:54 gritcoin has joined
1665 2013-03-07 20:39:34 Graet has joined
1666 2013-03-07 20:39:34 defunctzombie is now known as defunctzombie_zz
1667 2013-03-07 20:44:03 <petertodd> I like how one day there will be a copy of the early Bitcoin source code in the national archives or something, with that half-finished experiment...
1668 2013-03-07 20:44:43 <petertodd> ...and some copies at the NSA, with a report written up on it. :P
1669 2013-03-07 20:45:59 * gmaxwell writes up the FOIA request
1670 2013-03-07 20:46:29 asdasada has joined
1671 2013-03-07 20:46:41 <warren> petertodd: to get in the national archives, doesn't the owner have to submit it?
1672 2013-03-07 20:48:38 <warren> gmaxwell: regarding the issue of dead puppies.  This has been a problem for a while now, and it's clear that "blocking" it by name isn't going to work.  Are the other proposals to deal with it listed anywhere?
1673 2013-03-07 20:49:23 <gmaxwell> warren: I don't know that we really understand the behavior well enough.
1674 2013-03-07 20:50:16 sniperx has joined
1675 2013-03-07 20:50:24 Nesetalis has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1676 2013-03-07 20:50:31 <gmaxwell> In any case, there is nothing to do system wise. Fee competition should drive out uses like this. It's just painful. Client software needs to get smarter about handling fees and more helpful when they turn out to be wrong.
1677 2013-03-07 20:50:44 DrHaribo_ is now known as DrHaribo
1678 2013-03-07 20:51:21 <warren> I want to believe you, I just don't see how "Fee competition should drive out uses like this." will happen.
1679 2013-03-07 20:51:49 <warren> SD can impose escalating fees to their psychologically addicted users
1680 2013-03-07 20:51:53 <warren> I mean DP
1681 2013-03-07 20:52:02 <sipa> dp?
1682 2013-03-07 20:52:28 <warren> <gmaxwell> Dead puppies.
1683 2013-03-07 20:52:28 <warren> <warren> That's our new codeword.
1684 2013-03-07 20:52:28 <warren> <petertodd> gmaxwell: ...they're still fluffy.
1685 2013-03-07 20:52:28 <warren> <gmaxwell> DP from now on.
1686 2013-03-07 20:52:36 <sipa> ok!
1687 2013-03-07 20:55:35 <sniperx> i want to understand the core algorithm of bitcoins, any help? any resources?
1688 2013-03-07 20:56:52 agricocb has joined
1689 2013-03-07 20:56:57 sniperx_ has joined
1690 2013-03-07 20:57:13 sniperx has quit (Quit: Page closed)
1691 2013-03-07 20:57:14 sniperx_ is now known as sniperx
1692 2013-03-07 20:57:18 <petertodd> warren: One ugly part of the dead puppy problem, is that normally the expected return on a dead puppy with non-Bitcoin services is in the range of %50-%75, yet people still buy them, which gives you an idea about how high the fees could get for people buying dead puppies.
1693 2013-03-07 20:57:46 sniperx has quit (Client Quit)
1694 2013-03-07 20:57:54 <warren> Man it's hard to discuss this without laughing now.
1695 2013-03-07 20:58:08 sniperx has joined
1696 2013-03-07 20:58:17 sniperx has quit (Client Quit)
1697 2013-03-07 20:58:40 sniperx_ has joined
1698 2013-03-07 20:58:42 <petertodd> warren: What?
1699 2013-03-07 20:59:05 <warren> petertodd: Yes, if there is significant room to escalate dead puppy fees, I don't see how fee competition will self-correct this issue.
1700 2013-03-07 20:59:44 gdoteoff has quit (Quit: Bye)
1701 2013-03-07 20:59:45 <petertodd> warren: Yeah, the buyers already don't notice the 0.005 fees taken out of a purchase.
1702 2013-03-07 21:00:04 gdoteoff has joined
1703 2013-03-07 21:00:15 <petertodd> warren: Having said that, as a puppy hasher, I could stand to make lot more money if that happened, and anyway, the network would be more secure.
1704 2013-03-07 21:00:38 dvide has quit ()
1705 2013-03-07 21:01:05 rdymac has joined
1706 2013-03-07 21:01:40 <gmaxwell> petertodd: it's not clear what the fair market return is for purified dead puppies. Normal comercially available dead puppies come with a lot of extra perks that help justify their lower returns.
1707 2013-03-07 21:01:51 <gmaxwell> For example, free booze and blinking lights.
1708 2013-03-07 21:02:35 JDuke128 has quit (Quit: [BB])
1709 2013-03-07 21:03:05 <petertodd> gmaxwell: True, but then look at the example of scratch-off puppies, or at it's simpliest, the paper puppy vouchers, again with similar expected returns.
1710 2013-03-07 21:03:29 <warren> petertodd: it sounds from a puppy hasher perspective, no hard-line rule change meant to stop dead puppy behavior would be accepted.  Until we think of something that would be acceptable to the puppy hashers, should we instead pick some low hanging fruit to mitigate the issue?  For example, make default a higher fee weight on non-compressed keys than currently is the case.  Would there be any drawback to this?
1711 2013-03-07 21:03:45 <petertodd> gmaxwell: Granted, I will admit, the latter has a social ritual involved, what with the puppy spinning thing to select the winning dead puppies, and often the hosts of that ritual have big boobs.
1712 2013-03-07 21:04:19 clr_ has joined
1713 2013-03-07 21:04:25 <petertodd> warren: But we do! Non-compressed dead puppies can only fit into the chain using more bits, so automatically fees are higher.
1714 2013-03-07 21:04:32 <gmaxwell> Or more generally, the pure dead puppy expirence can be replicated exactly (or better, if you can define better) by another party with lower operating costs.  So I would not expect inefficient dead puppy production to be the stable state no matter which form of dead puppies the market prefers.
1715 2013-03-07 21:04:55 <gmaxwell> Unless you want to argue that people actually have a preference for the inefficiency. If thats the case we are indeed doomed.
1716 2013-03-07 21:05:21 <warren> petertodd: I mean, even more than now.  Actively discourage it by doubling fees, so compressed keys pay less for the same priority.
1717 2013-03-07 21:05:43 rdymac has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1718 2013-03-07 21:05:46 asdasada has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1719 2013-03-07 21:06:01 <warren> There is no good reason for anyone to continue to use non-compressed keys.  The rules can discourage it.
1720 2013-03-07 21:06:11 asdasada has joined
1721 2013-03-07 21:06:14 <petertodd> warren: Yeah, but ultimately there is a fixed amount of bits every 10 minutes, and the puppy bits limit is low enough that fairly inexpensive storage devices will be able to store all puppy bits for the far forseeable future.
1722 2013-03-07 21:06:22 <gmaxwell> warren: unfortunately we can't discourage paying to a non-compressed key, only redeeming it.
1723 2013-03-07 21:06:23 MiningBuddy has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1724 2013-03-07 21:06:33 <gmaxwell> It's too late to publish at redemption time.
1725 2013-03-07 21:06:50 <petertodd> warren: I'm inclined to just let the free market act out, within the limit of total allowed global puppy bit space.
1726 2013-03-07 21:07:17 <warren> we've overloaded the meaning of puppy at least four times here
1727 2013-03-07 21:07:20 <petertodd> So long as we don't allow more than 8 million dead puppy bits every 10 minutes at least, though Gavin and Mike do want to increase the allowable amount of dead puppy bits.
1728 2013-03-07 21:07:35 <gmaxwell> I suppose that you could punish payments to non-compressed keys if they've been spent from before by remembering that.. but I'd rather just publish key reuse generally.
1729 2013-03-07 21:07:56 Hasimir_ has joined
1730 2013-03-07 21:08:04 <HM> warren: i think at least one of the main devs has a dog called Merkle
1731 2013-03-07 21:08:07 Hasimir_ is now known as Guest39295
1732 2013-03-07 21:08:23 <HM> It's the only explanation
1733 2013-03-07 21:08:39 Hasimir- has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1734 2013-03-07 21:08:49 <petertodd> gmaxwell: Punishing reuse though worries me a bit, because blinded puppy token trading services often need to reuse the dead puppies the blinded ones represent.
1735 2013-03-07 21:09:08 <petertodd> gmaxwell: Easier if you only need to re-use a few types of dead ones, keeps the proof size down.
1736 2013-03-07 21:09:31 <gmaxwell> petertodd: the punish would just take the form of a limit of N reuses per block. (N probably 1 or 2).
1737 2013-03-07 21:09:33 <petertodd> gmaxwell: Especially with merkle sum trees for total unspent puppies per type.
1738 2013-03-07 21:09:33 <warren> I understand that reusing keys makes you vulnerable to future hash attacks, but I like how easy it is to audit for accounting reasons.
1739 2013-03-07 21:09:49 <petertodd> gmaxwell: Fair enough, I guess most trading services can get away with that.
1740 2013-03-07 21:10:09 Tatsuya has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1741 2013-03-07 21:10:16 <gmaxwell> warren: you use type-2 determinstic wallets if you want that.
1742 2013-03-07 21:10:34 <warren> uh, is that any more secure than key reuse?
1743 2013-03-07 21:10:40 <gmaxwell> warren: yes.
1744 2013-03-07 21:10:43 <warren> oh
1745 2013-03-07 21:10:47 <warren> ok
1746 2013-03-07 21:10:47 <gmaxwell> And more private.
1747 2013-03-07 21:10:58 <gmaxwell> (because only people with the chaining key can derrive the list of keys)
1748 2013-03-07 21:11:42 <gmaxwell> and not incompatible with post-quantum signing techniques, which we shouldn't let our ecosystem become gratitiously incompatible with, should we need to employ them.
1749 2013-03-07 21:13:08 clarkm has joined
1750 2013-03-07 21:13:29 <warren> saw the discussion earlier today, I didn't realize it would be possible to replace the hash algorithm of the blockchain, that's cool.
1751 2013-03-07 21:13:33 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, i just have a wallet with 100k keys in the keypool
1752 2013-03-07 21:13:34 <phantomcircuit> :/
1753 2013-03-07 21:15:42 clr_ is now known as c00w
1754 2013-03-07 21:15:49 <sipa> warren: the PoW function can't be changed without a hard fork
1755 2013-03-07 21:15:49 <gmaxwell> warren: we can do soft-forking replacements for all the crypto except the POW and transaction hashes.  POW or transaction hashes would be a hard forking change but could be triggered by a chain flagday.
1756 2013-03-07 21:15:56 copumpkin has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1757 2013-03-07 21:16:40 copumpkin has joined
1758 2013-03-07 21:16:42 <helo> i'm not sure why, but i like to imagine some digital service that publishes a newspaper ad with a single qr-code payment address that everyone pays to
1759 2013-03-07 21:17:09 <helo> that uses signmessage challenge to authenticate anyone who has paid
1760 2013-03-07 21:17:33 <phantomcircuit> helo, that's completely incompatible with pooled wallet setups
1761 2013-03-07 21:17:40 Diablo-D3 has quit (Quit: This computer has gone to sleep)
1762 2013-03-07 21:17:46 clav8 has joined
1763 2013-03-07 21:17:54 defunctzombie_zz is now known as defunctzombie
1764 2013-03-07 21:17:56 <phantomcircuit> which i assume is what the vast majority of people will be using
1765 2013-03-07 21:18:07 <gmaxwell> helo: it's also pretty hostile to privacy.  You can do bytecoin payments for that instead though, if you like.
1766 2013-03-07 21:18:18 <sipa> bytecoin?
1767 2013-03-07 21:18:20 <phantomcircuit> bytecoin?
1768 2013-03-07 21:18:26 <phantomcircuit> lol
1769 2013-03-07 21:18:27 <jgarzik> bytecoin?
1770 2013-03-07 21:18:31 <phantomcircuit> sipa, YOU BEAT ME
1771 2013-03-07 21:18:44 MobPhone has quit (Quit: -a-)
1772 2013-03-07 21:18:47 <sipa> Your powers of observation continue to serve you well
1773 2013-03-07 21:18:57 <phantomcircuit> i had to put down my oatmeal :(
1774 2013-03-07 21:19:05 <phantomcircuit> next time i shall be victorious
1775 2013-03-07 21:19:07 <petertodd> BYTECOIN: 8 times better
1776 2013-03-07 21:19:12 <gmaxwell> Bytecoin once proposed that you derrive a payment address for something by having the sender give you a pubkey, and then you H('your name') and derrive a new key through point multiplication. And then you tell the reciever you paid them.
1777 2013-03-07 21:19:27 <phantomcircuit> petertodd, there is now a small amount of oatmeal on my desk
1778 2013-03-07 21:19:33 <phantomcircuit> brb paper towel
1779 2013-03-07 21:19:40 <petertodd> phantomcircuit: VICTORY
1780 2013-03-07 21:19:42 <gmaxwell> (maybe someone remembers which post that was?)
1781 2013-03-07 21:19:46 <helo> heh
1782 2013-03-07 21:19:51 <HM> petertodd: wouldn't it actually be 128 times better?
1783 2013-03-07 21:20:03 <sipa> oh, like a hobbyte consists of 7 hobbits and a parody bit?
1784 2013-03-07 21:20:09 <gmaxwell> helo: one neat thing about that payment mechenism is that once they collect the coins they can't deny knowing you paid them
1785 2013-03-07 21:20:10 i2pRelay has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1786 2013-03-07 21:20:12 Nesetalis has joined
1787 2013-03-07 21:20:18 <petertodd> sipa: that was terrible... but funny
1788 2013-03-07 21:20:42 <TD> sipa: haha
1789 2013-03-07 21:20:45 <TD> brilliant
1790 2013-03-07 21:21:23 <warren> Puppies spend bitecoins.
1791 2013-03-07 21:21:50 <petertodd> warren: What do the dead puppies spend?
1792 2013-03-07 21:23:30 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
1793 2013-03-07 21:25:23 <gmaxwell> petertodd: they mostly produce bitrot instead of spending bitcoins.
1794 2013-03-07 21:25:27 <helo> sterilecoins?
1795 2013-03-07 21:25:42 Mandrius has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1796 2013-03-07 21:26:42 <jgarzik> petertodd: Any objections to renaming pynode to python-bitcoinlib, and making bitcoin/ a proper package?
1797 2013-03-07 21:26:53 <petertodd> gmaxwell: Ah, saving for retirement.
1798 2013-03-07 21:27:03 <petertodd> jgarzik: Sounds great!
1799 2013-03-07 21:27:17 <jgarzik> petertodd: I want to make a push to make it a semi-official, or at least popular, python bitcoin lib
1800 2013-03-07 21:27:25 <jgarzik> petertodd: import bitcoind tests, etc.
1801 2013-03-07 21:27:37 * jgarzik looks around for mogri too ;p
1802 2013-03-07 21:27:39 i2pRelay has joined
1803 2013-03-07 21:28:33 gdoteoff has quit (Quit: Bye)
1804 2013-03-07 21:28:55 gdoteoff has joined
1805 2013-03-07 21:29:02 m00p has joined
1806 2013-03-07 21:29:09 <petertodd> jgarzik: I'm totally for that.
1807 2013-03-07 21:29:25 gritcoin has quit (Quit: gritcoin)
1808 2013-03-07 21:29:25 <petertodd> jgarzik: Lemme clean up my half-finished script unit tests and push them.
1809 2013-03-07 21:33:34 <warren> sipa: i'm stealing  your quote
1810 2013-03-07 21:34:27 <jgarzik> petertodd: ok, will hold off on fork, until we have those
1811 2013-03-07 21:35:09 <jgarzik> petertodd: I'm thinking:  clone pynode -> python-bitcoinlib, remove pynode from python-bitcoinlib.git, remove bitcoin/ from pynode.git
1812 2013-03-07 21:36:12 <sipa> warren: i didn't invent it :)
1813 2013-03-07 21:36:32 <petertodd> jgarzik: Cool. I need to add some script parsing stuff, basically to replicate ParseScript() in tests/script_tests.cpp
1814 2013-03-07 21:37:04 <petertodd> jgarzik: I mean, there's a tonne of stuff that could be done to make things more pythonic, but might as well get the unittests running now and keep it simple.
1815 2013-03-07 21:38:36 <jgarzik> petertodd: +1
1816 2013-03-07 21:38:44 <jgarzik> petertodd: self-validation > pretty and pythonic
1817 2013-03-07 21:39:16 <jgarzik> petertodd: PS a few coding style decisions are intentional, after careful study of python style guide
1818 2013-03-07 21:39:25 ashams has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1819 2013-03-07 21:39:30 <petertodd> jgarzik: ...like tabs?
1820 2013-03-07 21:40:05 <petertodd> jgarzik: Anyway, you're scripting logic has some really serious bugs in it, the type caught by just compiling with Cython.
1821 2013-03-07 21:41:11 detro has quit (Quit: Leaving)
1822 2013-03-07 21:41:34 Vinnie_win has joined
1823 2013-03-07 21:41:46 <jgarzik> petertodd: I don't doubt it.  It was written all in one go, then the testing began
1824 2013-03-07 21:41:50 <Vinnie_win> Where can I read the bitcoin-dev mailing in threaded format?
1825 2013-03-07 21:51:07 Guest11382 has joined
1826 2013-03-07 21:51:34 <petertodd> jgarzik: Yeah, I noticed it followed the way bitcoin itself works very closely; probably a good idea at least at first.
1827 2013-03-07 21:52:11 <petertodd> jgarzik: I think the ref-implementation variable styles are fine for that consistency.
1828 2013-03-07 21:52:13 BenderCoin__ has joined
1829 2013-03-07 21:52:44 coolfengyu has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)
1830 2013-03-07 21:53:21 <sipa> Vinnie_win: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.comp.bitcoin.devel
1831 2013-03-07 21:56:00 BenderCoin has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1832 2013-03-07 21:57:22 gdoteoff has quit (Quit: Bye)
1833 2013-03-07 21:57:45 gdoteoff has joined
1834 2013-03-07 21:58:53 RBecker is now known as rbecker
1835 2013-03-07 22:00:08 SchmalzTech has quit ()
1836 2013-03-07 22:01:50 sniperx_ has quit (Quit: sniperx_)
1837 2013-03-07 22:04:46 clav8 has quit (Ping timeout: 240 seconds)
1838 2013-03-07 22:05:25 free__ has joined
1839 2013-03-07 22:07:03 grau has joined
1840 2013-03-07 22:07:51 Guest11382 has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1841 2013-03-07 22:09:09 [\\\] has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1842 2013-03-07 22:09:59 agricocb has quit (Quit: Leaving.)
1843 2013-03-07 22:14:08 RazielZ has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1844 2013-03-07 22:16:33 Guest11382 has joined
1845 2013-03-07 22:16:59 <nym> can anyone suggest an exchange aggregator library?
1846 2013-03-07 22:17:16 gritcoin has joined
1847 2013-03-07 22:17:19 Guest39295 has quit (Read error: Connection reset by peer)
1848 2013-03-07 22:17:56 Guest39295 has joined
1849 2013-03-07 22:21:29 xenesis has quit (Quit: xenesis)
1850 2013-03-07 22:22:12 grau has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1851 2013-03-07 22:22:21 BenderCoin__ has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1852 2013-03-07 22:22:34 xenesis has joined
1853 2013-03-07 22:23:25 free__ is now known as WeLoveCP
1854 2013-03-07 22:24:45 eckey has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1855 2013-03-07 22:24:56 BenderCoin has joined
1856 2013-03-07 22:26:11 gdoteoff has quit (Quit: Bye)
1857 2013-03-07 22:26:35 gdoteoff has joined
1858 2013-03-07 22:29:36 gritcoin has quit (Quit: gritcoin)
1859 2013-03-07 22:29:55 xenesis has quit (Quit: xenesis)
1860 2013-03-07 22:33:06 tyn has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1861 2013-03-07 22:39:32 eckey has joined
1862 2013-03-07 22:40:56 ovidiusoft has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1863 2013-03-07 22:42:54 D34TH has joined
1864 2013-03-07 22:42:54 D34TH has quit (Changing host)
1865 2013-03-07 22:42:54 D34TH has joined
1866 2013-03-07 22:42:56 kritCoin has joined
1867 2013-03-07 22:43:16 bitafterbit has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1868 2013-03-07 22:44:58 tyn has joined
1869 2013-03-07 22:45:11 grau has joined
1870 2013-03-07 22:49:48 grau has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1871 2013-03-07 22:50:00 tyn has quit (Ping timeout: 250 seconds)
1872 2013-03-07 22:50:06 PhantomSpark has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1873 2013-03-07 22:50:16 <gmaxwell> 224736 498888 0.949111
1874 2013-03-07 22:50:38 <gmaxwell> 500kb of concentrated dead puppies there.
1875 2013-03-07 22:51:02 <Happzz> :o
1876 2013-03-07 22:52:18 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: so .. exactly what good did your post encouraging people to raise their block size accomplish? It seems to have only allowed an increase of dead puppies being placed in permanent storage.  :-/
1877 2013-03-07 22:53:47 <petertodd> My node's starting to smell.
1878 2013-03-07 22:54:11 <Happzz> gmaxwell the dice-blocking thing you mentioned earlier? so i can't see how that's going to catch. they will just use random addresses..
1879 2013-03-07 22:54:14 <petertodd> So, how have people kept on using 500kb as their limit anyway? I mean, there's nothing special about 500kb of right?
1880 2013-03-07 22:54:59 gdoteoff has quit (Quit: Bye)
1881 2013-03-07 22:55:11 <Happzz> sure there is. it's 524,288 bytes.
1882 2013-03-07 22:55:13 <petertodd> Happzz: Once you implement random addresses, it becomes easy to just implement a proper payment system.
1883 2013-03-07 22:55:19 <Happzz> which is 1000 0000 0000 0000 0000 bytes in binary
1884 2013-03-07 22:55:20 <Happzz> makes sense.
1885 2013-03-07 22:55:23 gdoteoff has joined
1886 2013-03-07 22:55:29 <Happzz> petertodd what?
1887 2013-03-07 22:55:31 <sipa> Happzz: it's actually 500000 bytes :p
1888 2013-03-07 22:55:44 <Happzz> sipa a kilobyte is 1024 bytes.
1889 2013-03-07 22:55:51 <petertodd> sipa: Yeah, notice how was incorrectly saying 1MiB a bunch of times before...
1890 2013-03-07 22:55:51 <Happzz> computer-terminology
1891 2013-03-07 22:56:04 <petertodd> Happzz: The block limit really is 1,000,000 bytes.
1892 2013-03-07 22:56:07 <sipa> Happzz: i respectfully disagree :)
1893 2013-03-07 22:56:22 c00w has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1894 2013-03-07 22:56:38 <Happzz> google 1 kilobyte in bytes ?
1895 2013-03-07 22:56:53 <petertodd> Google is wrong.
1896 2013-03-07 22:57:00 <Happzz> semantics of kb vs KB?
1897 2013-03-07 22:57:02 <sipa> but that is beside the point - it is 500000 bytes, whether you want to call that 500kB or 488KiB or anythng
1898 2013-03-07 22:57:07 <petertodd> Well, half wrong: 1 kibibyte in bytes
1899 2013-03-07 22:57:31 <petertodd> Anyway, re the 500KB limit, so is that just what people have picked to be safe?
1900 2013-03-07 22:57:34 Diablo-D3 has joined
1901 2013-03-07 22:57:38 <sipa> imho, there is no reason to give 'kilo' two different meanings, and as an SI prefix is means 1000
1902 2013-03-07 23:00:32 <HM> everything except RAM should be in powers of 10
1903 2013-03-07 23:00:44 <sipa> agree
1904 2013-03-07 23:00:51 <HM> possibly SSDs?
1905 2013-03-07 23:00:59 <petertodd> ...and merkle trees
1906 2013-03-07 23:01:06 <sipa> well, and perhaps other storage forms that use powers of two typically
1907 2013-03-07 23:01:17 <HM> yeah, things that lend themselves to powers of 2s like binary tree
1908 2013-03-07 23:01:36 X-Scale` has joined
1909 2013-03-07 23:01:45 <petertodd> Harddrives and SSD's don't because they reserve so much space space, although with SSD's the underlying chips are often powers of two.
1910 2013-03-07 23:02:11 agricocb has joined
1911 2013-03-07 23:03:07 Diablo-D3 has quit (Quit: do coders dream of sheep()?)
1912 2013-03-07 23:03:24 Diablo-D3 has joined
1913 2013-03-07 23:04:25 <petertodd> gmaxwell: Watching blockchain.info's scrolling transaction display is riduculous right now with all the DP's.
1914 2013-03-07 23:04:34 X-Scale has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1915 2013-03-07 23:05:00 <phantomcircuit> petertodd, DP?
1916 2013-03-07 23:05:03 eckey has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1917 2013-03-07 23:05:16 <petertodd> phantomcircuit: Dead puppies, you know, what's been making a stink in the blockchain.
1918 2013-03-07 23:05:36 one_zero has joined
1919 2013-03-07 23:05:39 <phantomcircuit> oh
1920 2013-03-07 23:08:10 one_zero has quit (Client Quit)
1921 2013-03-07 23:08:44 <phantomcircuit> hmm
1922 2013-03-07 23:08:52 <phantomcircuit> i want the http framework from django
1923 2013-03-07 23:08:55 <phantomcircuit> without anything else
1924 2013-03-07 23:08:58 <phantomcircuit> nuisance
1925 2013-03-07 23:09:24 Hasimir- has joined
1926 2013-03-07 23:09:40 defunctzombie is now known as defunctzombie_zz
1927 2013-03-07 23:10:26 <gmaxwell> petertodd: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=149656.msg1598012#msg1598012
1928 2013-03-07 23:11:07 Guest39295 has quit (Ping timeout: 264 seconds)
1929 2013-03-07 23:11:52 <petertodd> gmaxwell: Have you checked if any miners are implementing dust !IsStandard()?
1930 2013-03-07 23:12:03 one_zero has joined
1931 2013-03-07 23:19:16 Guest11382 has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1932 2013-03-07 23:19:20 eckey has joined
1933 2013-03-07 23:22:28 Guest11382 has joined
1934 2013-03-07 23:22:57 zrad has joined
1935 2013-03-07 23:23:41 BenderCoin has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1936 2013-03-07 23:23:47 ielo has joined
1937 2013-03-07 23:23:48 gdoteoff has quit (Quit: Bye)
1938 2013-03-07 23:23:57 TD has joined
1939 2013-03-07 23:24:08 gdoteoff has joined
1940 2013-03-07 23:24:17 BenderCoin has joined
1941 2013-03-07 23:24:29 CaptainBlaze has joined
1942 2013-03-07 23:25:04 BenderCoin has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1943 2013-03-07 23:25:25 gdoteofff has joined
1944 2013-03-07 23:27:05 aethero is now known as OWI
1945 2013-03-07 23:27:17 BenderCoin has joined
1946 2013-03-07 23:28:26 OWI is now known as aethero
1947 2013-03-07 23:28:27 gdoteoff has quit (Ping timeout: 245 seconds)
1948 2013-03-07 23:29:30 gdoteoff has joined
1949 2013-03-07 23:29:47 cheesepi has joined
1950 2013-03-07 23:30:06 gdoteofff has quit (Ping timeout: 260 seconds)
1951 2013-03-07 23:31:03 eckey has quit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
1952 2013-03-07 23:31:33 WeLoveCP has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1953 2013-03-07 23:33:28 rlifchitz has quit (Ping timeout: 256 seconds)
1954 2013-03-07 23:34:58 gdoteofff has joined
1955 2013-03-07 23:37:35 rdymac has joined
1956 2013-03-07 23:37:43 gdoteoff has quit (Ping timeout: 272 seconds)
1957 2013-03-07 23:38:34 <petertodd> When did the ref client switch to compressed pubkeys?
1958 2013-03-07 23:38:54 <sipa> 0.6
1959 2013-03-07 23:39:10 Mp5shooter has joined
1960 2013-03-07 23:39:52 <petertodd> Thanks
1961 2013-03-07 23:39:57 <petertodd> Looking at that high fee tx...
1962 2013-03-07 23:41:27 eckey has joined
1963 2013-03-07 23:46:09 rlifchitz has joined
1964 2013-03-07 23:47:56 Hashdog has quit (Remote host closed the connection)
1965 2013-03-07 23:52:02 TD has quit (Quit: TD)
1966 2013-03-07 23:53:27 <sipa> ;;genrate 700
1967 2013-03-07 23:53:28 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 700.0 Mhps, given difficulty of 4367876.00084, is 0.0805962809919 BTC per day and 0.00335817837466 BTC per hour.
1968 2013-03-07 23:54:32 brwyatt is now known as Away!~brwyatt@brwyatt.net|brwyatt
1969 2013-03-07 23:55:25 <petertodd> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=149577.msg1598142#msg1598142 <- findings
1970 2013-03-07 23:56:03 <Diablo-D3> sipa: a set of sha256 rounds is called a block, right?
1971 2013-03-07 23:56:11 <sipa> i think so, yes
1972 2013-03-07 23:57:44 tyn has joined
1973 2013-03-07 23:59:41 rdymac has quit (Ping timeout: 252 seconds)