1 2010-09-25 01:04:28 <second> hi
2 2010-09-25 01:06:11 <lfm> hello
3 2010-09-25 01:09:07 <second> where can I buy bitcoins ?
4 2010-09-25 01:09:28 <second> bitcoins that I can spend immediatly
5 2010-09-25 01:10:02 <Diablo-D3> second: btw, bitcoin requires a transaction to be verified before the recipient can use the coins
6 2010-09-25 01:10:25 <lfm> theres a few markets. look at http://www.bitcoin.org/trade
7 2010-09-25 01:10:27 <Diablo-D3> so "immediately" has a varying definition
8 2010-09-25 01:10:57 <theymos> Diablo-D3: Only generations need to be confirmed before you send them. You can send regular transactions with 0 confirmations.
9 2010-09-25 01:11:15 <Diablo-D3> theymos: er, relaly?
10 2010-09-25 01:11:22 <Diablo-D3> I thought it took the block to complete first
11 2010-09-25 01:11:29 <Diablo-D3> ie, ~10 minutes
12 2010-09-25 01:11:48 <lfm> ya, if they dont get confirmned then further dependant transactions wont get confirmed either
13 2010-09-25 01:12:02 <theymos> Diablo-D3: Nope. You should receive it immediately if you're connected to the network, and you can spend it right away.
14 2010-09-25 01:12:25 <Diablo-D3> thaaaat doesnt sound right
15 2010-09-25 01:12:47 <lfm> if you have any reason to doubt the source you should wait for confirmations but you dont have to
16 2010-09-25 01:13:59 <second> no I mean mt.gox makes you wait a month if you buy coins from them
17 2010-09-25 01:14:10 <second> I want to spend them as soon as I pay
18 2010-09-25 01:14:26 <lfm> you wait a month to make sure the paypal transaction doesnt get reversed on them
19 2010-09-25 01:15:34 <theymos> second: 7-day delivery is guaranteed through Bitcoin Market. 24-hour delivery is guaranteed through Bitcoin Store (though they only support e-currencies).
20 2010-09-25 01:16:28 <lfm> and if you send cash to https://www.bitcoin4cash.com/ you get the bitcoins as soon as the mail gets to him
21 2010-09-25 01:18:31 <lfm> we need someone to support visa for bitcoins I guess. maybe couldnt do the reverse to sell bitcoin tho
22 2010-09-25 01:20:30 <theymos> Diablo-D3: When someone sends a transaction, they broadcast the transaction (some signed text) to the network. If the recipient is listening, he'll receive and recognize this transaction within a few seconds. He can send bitcoins based on this transaction because almost everyone else in the network also has it. Those who don't have the older transaction won't include the new one in their blocks until they do.
23 2010-09-25 01:22:53 <Keefe> second, i'll sell you btc for cash-in-the-mail, but you have no reason to trust me
24 2010-09-25 02:03:46 <Kiba> hmm
25 2010-09-25 02:04:07 <Kiba> I guess I might as well add bitcoin support afterward as one of the payment option ;)
26 2010-09-25 02:21:18 <second> right now bitcoin-market is closed
27 2010-09-25 02:21:24 <second> does anyone know when it will open again ?
28 2010-09-25 02:21:39 <theymos> second: 8AM CST
29 2010-09-25 02:22:10 <Kiba> mtgox
30 2010-09-25 02:22:14 <Kiba> always open 24
31 2010-09-25 02:22:30 <second> and a one month waiting period
32 2010-09-25 02:22:42 <Kiba> that's a huge pain
33 2010-09-25 02:23:06 <jgarzik> buybitcoins.com if you have a credit card
34 2010-09-25 02:27:31 <second> nah
35 2010-09-25 02:27:45 <second> I'll wait till bitcoinmarket opens
36 2010-09-25 02:28:04 <second> I have a solution somewhat for the paypal
37 2010-09-25 02:28:05 <second> why don't they just send them as gifts ?
38 2010-09-25 02:28:16 <second> if you send a payment by gift it can't be disputed meaning no charge backs
39 2010-09-25 02:28:30 <second> the only thing is someone could claim to sell bitcoins and you'd be screwed
40 2010-09-25 02:28:42 <second> ... if they didn't give you the bitcoins that is
41 2010-09-25 02:28:53 <Kiba> mtgox might do better if they have a reputation system to work with
42 2010-09-25 02:29:06 <theymos> second: The sender can do a chargeback on their credit card, which PayPal will pass on to the recipient. PayPal is also notorious for closing accounts for no good reason.
43 2010-09-25 02:29:08 <Kiba> so instead of forcing every new users to wait for a month
44 2010-09-25 02:29:18 <Kiba> it would approve of only users that have X reputation
45 2010-09-25 02:30:00 <Kiba> for some reason, paypal is just unreponsive
46 2010-09-25 02:30:06 <Kiba> unresponsive
47 2010-09-25 02:31:01 <second> yeah I know of people who have had their accounts frozen by paypal for transfering funds
48 2010-09-25 02:31:19 <second> I sometimes wonder if they'll freeze mine because of how I transfer funds and how I use paypal
49 2010-09-25 02:31:36 <second> when I get sent money I like to immediatly send it off to the bank
50 2010-09-25 02:31:49 <second> I've heard stories of people who sent to much off to the bank as soon as they got it and had their account frozen
51 2010-09-25 02:32:04 <theymos> second: I've heard of them actually taking money out of linked bank accounts to "satisfy debts".
52 2010-09-25 02:32:17 <second> paypal is just supposed to be a middle man for me although I don't like it
53 2010-09-25 02:32:27 <second> satisfy debts ?
54 2010-09-25 02:32:37 <second> they shouldn't have that right
55 2010-09-25 02:32:43 <second> a company can't take money out of your bank because you owe them
56 2010-09-25 02:32:55 <second> they can't charge your credit card just because they have the card number and you owe them either
57 2010-09-25 02:36:46 <Kiba> I owe a credit card from paypal
58 2010-09-25 02:37:46 <second> ?
59 2010-09-25 02:37:56 <Kiba> I have a paypal credit card
60 2010-09-25 02:38:00 <second> oh
61 2010-09-25 02:38:05 <second> they keep offering me that
62 2010-09-25 02:38:07 <second> wait ...
63 2010-09-25 02:38:19 <second> so they can charge your card or what ?
64 2010-09-25 02:38:39 <Kiba> charge what? I used the credit card to buy stuff
65 2010-09-25 02:38:44 <Kiba> than pay it off with my balance
66 2010-09-25 02:38:54 <Kiba> so I can be a credit card deadbeat
67 2010-09-25 02:39:07 <Kiba> so I cost paypal money rather than the other usual around
68 2010-09-25 02:39:51 <theymos> Kiba: The merchant gives an additional few percent to PayPal. That's how credit card companies make money.
69 2010-09-25 02:52:47 <mizerydearia> How is it possible at mtgox.com for an ask for 50btc @ $0.06222 and a bid for 30btc @ $0.0622299 to coincide?
70 2010-09-25 02:54:20 <Kiba> percison cutoff
71 2010-09-25 02:55:29 <theymos> The bid is greater than the ask...
72 2010-09-25 02:56:44 <mizerydearia> It finally disappeared
73 2010-09-25 02:56:51 <Kiba> maybe it take time
74 2010-09-25 02:57:05 <Kiba> in any case
75 2010-09-25 02:57:15 <mizerydearia> ~4mins
76 2010-09-25 02:57:16 <Kiba> the price of bitcoin into paypal dollars is stubbornly stable
77 2010-09-25 02:57:42 <AAA_awright> Indeed
78 2010-09-25 02:57:59 <AAA_awright> How does it resolve a gap in the bid/ask again?
79 2010-09-25 02:58:12 <AAA_awright> How do the parties agree to a price?
80 2010-09-25 02:58:14 <Kiba> Indeed to what?
81 2010-09-25 02:59:22 <theymos> AAA_awright: A trade takes place when a bid is higher than an ask. If I ask for 0.01 and you bid 0.02, we will trade.
82 2010-09-25 02:59:42 <AAA_awright> Right, but how do the parties agree to a single price?
83 2010-09-25 03:00:02 <Kiba> parties don't decide. mtgox do.
84 2010-09-25 03:00:05 <AAA_awright> Price, that is, the exchange ratio? Or rather, the amount paid for the order?
85 2010-09-25 03:00:10 <mizerydearia> I believe if you actively bid higher than or equal to an ask, a trade will result. Same as if you actively ask lower or equal to than a bid
86 2010-09-25 03:00:11 <AAA_awright> And how does that happen?
87 2010-09-25 03:00:21 <mizerydearia> However, there seem to be some types of events that do not trigger a trade.
88 2010-09-25 03:01:06 <theymos> AAA_awright: At mtgox, the person who is "activating" the trade always gets the best rate. Opposite at BCM.
89 2010-09-25 03:01:25 <AAA_awright> Ah
90 2010-09-25 03:02:37 <mizerydearia> oi! bbp at mtgox alternating back and forth last hour
91 2010-09-25 03:06:08 <Kiba> somebody is wishing to sell 25000 bitcoin at .061
92 2010-09-25 03:06:45 <Kiba> that is some serious stability there
93 2010-09-25 03:07:00 <mizerydearia> ArtForz probably ^_^
94 2010-09-25 03:07:58 <theymos> Kiba: That's a bid.
95 2010-09-25 03:08:11 <Keefe> about to say
96 2010-09-25 03:08:13 <Kiba> yellow are sleling
97 2010-09-25 03:08:18 <Kiba> oh
98 2010-09-25 03:08:46 <bitbot> 1525
99 2010-09-25 03:08:46 <mizerydearia> ;math calc 25000 * 0.061
100 2010-09-25 03:09:29 <Kiba> that's a serious bet on the future of bitcoin
101 2010-09-25 03:10:51 <mizerydearia> humm, again
102 2010-09-25 03:10:57 <mizerydearia> a bid higher than ask
103 2010-09-25 03:11:10 <mizerydearia> http://nullvoid.org/bitcoin/marketmonitor.php
104 2010-09-25 03:12:50 <theymos> That's why I would never make a USD deposit into MtGox. I have no trust that it will exist in 30 days.
105 2010-09-25 03:13:15 <Keefe> great for selling btc though
106 2010-09-25 03:13:36 <mizerydearia> Keefe, If nobody makes us deposit then it would be impossible to sell ^_^
107 2010-09-25 03:13:59 <Kiba> 30 days mean there are only select group of buyers
108 2010-09-25 03:14:03 <Kiba> it's a downer policy
109 2010-09-25 03:14:40 <Keefe> i mean for small amounts at least. there has obviously been enough usd deposited in mtgox for me to be able to sell $100 worth of btc and withdraw the usd
110 2010-09-25 03:16:19 <theymos> Hopefully MtGox has all deposits on-hand. A "bank run" is likely for this kind of thing.
111 2010-09-25 03:16:44 <Kiba> mtgox doesn't make money from the exchange
112 2010-09-25 03:22:58 <theymos> USD-to-BTC sites should use USPS money orders. They're safe, irreversible, cheap, and usable internationally.
113 2010-09-25 03:23:21 <Kiba> it takes forever though
114 2010-09-25 03:24:28 <theymos> Kiba: Less than a week, usually. Better than waiting a month at MtGox or 7 days at BCM.
115 2010-09-25 03:40:42 <theymos> Idea: someone could set up a market with a series of "guaranteers". Guaranteers (semi-independant people/companies) would hold/send/receive a certain currency (PayPal USD, wire transfer in a certain currency, etc.). When placing an ask, you would state which guaranteers you'll accept and agree to their individual terms, fees, and risks. Bidders send money to a guaranteer that supports their currency. There might be compet
116 2010-09-25 03:48:25 <doublec> a service to transfer bitcoin to/from neteller or some other provider that has a debit/virtual debit card would be useful.
117 2010-09-25 03:48:48 <doublec> Nice to transfer bitcoins to that, buy with the virtual card from amazon, then tfer back, etc
118 2010-09-25 03:50:22 <doublec> neteller's merchant program is not as easy to get into as paypal's unfortunately. Looks like it needs a $1,000 USD deposit (or fee - not sure)
119 2010-09-25 03:57:48 <Kiba> so people
120 2010-09-25 03:57:53 <Kiba> I have launched a mininum viable product
121 2010-09-25 03:58:00 <Kiba> with all the crap and unpolished app it is
122 2010-09-25 03:58:07 <Kiba> http://www.soulplaying.com/
123 2010-09-25 03:58:26 <theymos> somethign
124 2010-09-25 04:01:21 <Kiba> so sign up and go to the non-obvious dashboard and give me feedback
125 2010-09-25 04:01:22 <Kiba> ?
126 2010-09-25 04:01:44 <theymos> ("somethign" is a misspelling on the home page, I mean.) Sign-up gives me "We're sorry, but something went wrong."
127 2010-09-25 04:05:28 <Kiba> ah damn.
128 2010-09-25 04:05:34 <Kiba> thanks for the feedback
129 2010-09-25 06:53:19 <Keefe> if difficulty were adjusted much more often, such as every 200 blocks, i think it'd vary too wildly even without a change in total processing power
130 2010-09-25 06:53:31 <Keefe> just due to randomness
131 2010-09-25 07:16:51 <AAA_awright> Keefe: Moving weighted average
132 2010-09-25 07:17:12 <Keefe> what about it?
133 2010-09-25 07:17:29 <AAA_awright> How could that cause unacceptable variation?
134 2010-09-25 07:17:49 <Keefe> where would most of the weight be?
135 2010-09-25 07:17:54 <Keefe> last how many blocks?
136 2010-09-25 07:18:18 <AAA_awright> 1/(x^2)
137 2010-09-25 07:19:07 <Keefe> so 99% of the weight would be on only the last 7 blocks or so?
138 2010-09-25 07:19:09 <AAA_awright> Probably still puts too much weight on old blocks but that wouldn't cause any difficulty changes
139 2010-09-25 07:19:26 <AAA_awright> You can vary how you calculate x
140 2010-09-25 07:19:41 <Keefe> choose something for purposes of discussion
141 2010-09-25 07:19:56 <Keefe> but my point is the more weight you give to recent blocks, the more variation
142 2010-09-25 07:20:02 <AAA_awright> 1/((x/40)^2)
143 2010-09-25 07:20:46 <Keefe> so the last 300 blocks or so would make 99% of the weight
144 2010-09-25 07:21:04 <Keefe> i first mentioned 200. 300's not much better
145 2010-09-25 07:21:27 <AAA_awright> Well make a minor adjustment to my math, the point still stands though?
146 2010-09-25 07:21:32 <Keefe> and if you choose a formula that gives most weight to the last 2000... well that's similar to what we have already
147 2010-09-25 07:21:56 <AAA_awright> How do you know there would be too much variation?
148 2010-09-25 07:22:15 <AAA_awright> mizerydearia: Was it you who did those calculations on block generation times?
149 2010-09-25 07:22:21 <Keefe> cause i've been watching my log from my custom miner...
150 2010-09-25 07:22:46 <Keefe> it logs when it would be a winner with diff=1
151 2010-09-25 07:23:00 <Keefe> so i can monitor it's stability
152 2010-09-25 07:23:03 <Keefe> its*
153 2010-09-25 07:23:55 <Keefe> despite a constant hash rate, the time taken to get 50 diff=1 hits varies quite a bit
154 2010-09-25 07:24:06 <Keefe> +-40% it seems
155 2010-09-25 07:24:33 <Keefe> to get 200 hits would of course have less variation, but i think still unacceptable
156 2010-09-25 14:01:36 <mizerydearia> AAA_awright, which calculations?/
157 2010-09-25 16:20:52 <grondilu> Hi, I've just learned about the existence of bitcoin, and it seems to be what I've been looking for for ages ! I'm about to read the White paper, because I want to know what exactly I'm dealing with. But I first wanted to write this here and share my enthusiasm before it vanishes ;)
158 2010-09-25 17:19:49 <grondilu> I've just red the bitcoin white paper : I have to say that's one of the smartest internet stuff I've ever red !
159 2010-09-25 17:20:19 <Keefe> grondilu, what aspect of bitcoin most interests you?
160 2010-09-25 17:20:30 <grondilu> the timestamp server concept is very cleaver.
161 2010-09-25 17:20:37 <grondilu> clever
162 2010-09-25 17:22:02 <grondilu> Well, I'm interested in free market and cryptography-oriented finance, and so far bitcoin seems to me to be the closest thing I've found to achieve free anonymous decentralized market tool.
163 2010-09-25 17:23:41 <grondilu> I'm also interested in anarcho-capitalism and crypto-anarchism, therefore such kind of tools is of much interest for me.
164 2010-09-25 17:24:03 <jgarzik> grondilu: http://www.bitcoin.org/wiki/doku.php?id=anonymity
165 2010-09-25 17:27:46 <grondilu> "However, if any of the addresses in a transaction's past or future can be tied to an actual identity [...]" Well, this seems to be a reasonable risk, I think.
166 2010-09-25 17:36:08 <Keefe> the times on mtgox's site are all eastern usa time, right?
167 2010-09-25 17:39:28 <redMBA> Keefe, they appear to match the client
168 2010-09-25 17:40:09 <Keefe> like using geoip to guess what timezone the web browser is in?
169 2010-09-25 17:41:08 <redMBA> my guess is the javascript library just uses the date() functinos
170 2010-09-25 17:41:21 <redMBA> doubt it takes geo-ip
171 2010-09-25 17:41:52 <Keefe> where are you located?
172 2010-09-25 17:43:51 <redMBA> west coast
173 2010-09-25 17:46:29 <Keefe> same here
174 2010-09-25 17:46:57 <redMBA> so do the dates show your computer time?
175 2010-09-25 17:47:22 <Keefe> doesn't seem to, but i'm looking for proof...
176 2010-09-25 17:48:02 <Keefe> going to check my paypal account and compare with the account history page at mtgox
177 2010-09-25 17:48:21 <redMBA> ah, I was talking about the graph, not sure about account history
178 2010-09-25 17:48:58 <Keefe> true, they could use different timezones on different pages :(
179 2010-09-25 17:51:02 <Keefe> account history is ET
180 2010-09-25 18:10:46 <Keefe> looks like i lost 50 btc by sending twice to the same mtgox-provided address
181 2010-09-25 18:11:37 <Keefe> 9 hours ago, so it would have been applied to my balance by now
182 2010-09-25 18:14:20 <Keefe> i got a unique address from the "add bitcoins" form, saying i'd be sending 50 btc, then i sent 50 to that address, then 50 more an hour later to the same address. only 50 was added to my account
183 2010-09-25 18:15:11 <lfm> they may be waiting for confirmations, how long ago was it?
184 2010-09-25 18:15:17 <Keefe> 9 hours agi
185 2010-09-25 18:15:19 <Keefe> ago*
186 2010-09-25 18:15:52 <lfm> well sounds like you have a complaint, do they have a contact email?
187 2010-09-25 18:16:16 <Keefe> hopefully mtgox doesn't discard the private keys as soon as the first transfer to an address is processed
188 2010-09-25 18:17:35 <Keefe> they do have a contact email, and i will be emailing them about this. but i think it's important that problems like this are also public
189 2010-09-25 18:18:46 <Keefe> if this is how the system is intentionally designed, then they need to show a clear warning to their customers that the address is to be used only once
190 2010-09-25 18:28:59 <AAA_awright> Shouldn't the transaction have failed then?
191 2010-09-25 18:29:49 <Keefe> why?
192 2010-09-25 18:29:50 <lfm> AAA_awright, nope, so long as the addrees is correctly formatted, you can send to it
193 2010-09-25 18:30:14 <Keefe> if the recipient has lost/discarded the priv key for that address, the btc is gone forever
194 2010-09-25 18:30:32 <lfm> there is no way currently to expire an address like that
195 2010-09-25 18:32:02 <AAA_awright> BitCoin needs to implement synchronous transfers
196 2010-09-25 18:32:30 <Keefe> how do you define completion of a transfer?
197 2010-09-25 18:32:38 <lfm> well there is the ip address transactions but people dont like them either
198 2010-09-25 18:32:50 <AAA_awright> Not just the IP transfer
199 2010-09-25 18:33:03 <AAA_awright> Keefe: Not rejected by the payee server
200 2010-09-25 18:33:09 <lfm> AAA_awright, what do you mean then?
201 2010-09-25 18:33:17 <AAA_awright> That is, explicitly accepted by the server
202 2010-09-25 18:33:39 <lfm> and how is that different from the ipaddress transfer?
203 2010-09-25 18:33:52 <AAA_awright> Payable to a server specified by it's public key fingerprint, like how Tor does, instead of an IP or DNS address
204 2010-09-25 18:34:15 <Keefe> that's how it is now
205 2010-09-25 18:34:46 <AAA_awright> You can either pay to an address which involves connecting to no server, or you can pay to an IP, was that recently changed?
206 2010-09-25 18:35:16 <Keefe> i'm saying that paying to an address is paying to a public key like you just mentioned
207 2010-09-25 18:35:37 <lfm> AAA_awright, seems like you would need to connect to the receiver and that would mean and ip address
208 2010-09-25 18:35:42 <Keefe> how do you propose to standardize feedback from recipients?
209 2010-09-25 18:36:07 <AAA_awright> Keefe: No it's not, if you pay to a public key, no one can impersinate the server
210 2010-09-25 18:36:18 <AAA_awright> *impersonate the server
211 2010-09-25 18:36:45 <lfm> so you would need the bitcoin address AND the ip address?
212 2010-09-25 18:36:51 <AAA_awright> Are you familiar with how a Tor hidden server works?
213 2010-09-25 18:36:51 <Keefe> when you send btc to a bitcoin address, nobody but the holder of the corresponding priv key can receive it
214 2010-09-25 18:36:57 <lfm> no
215 2010-09-25 18:37:10 <Keefe> no
216 2010-09-25 18:37:33 <AAA_awright> Keefe: But that's not synchronous, you never communicate to the payee to determine if the payment is acceptable
217 2010-09-25 18:37:40 <lfm> does tor use central authorities?
218 2010-09-25 18:37:52 <Keefe> i know it's not synchronous
219 2010-09-25 18:38:15 <Keefe> but how do you propose to standardize feedback from recipients so as to make a sync transfer?
220 2010-09-25 18:38:17 <AAA_awright> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tor_(anonymity_network)#Hidden_services
221 2010-09-25 18:39:02 <lfm> I think tor does use central autorites to look up addresses
222 2010-09-25 18:42:53 <AAA_awright> lfm: No central servers
223 2010-09-25 18:43:23 <AAA_awright> Keefe: You offer to make a payment, if the server likes it, then you make the payment, if not, then you don't.
224 2010-09-25 18:45:04 <lfm> AAA_awright, ok so the server sends an "accept" message back to you? what happens if the "accept" message gets lost?
225 2010-09-25 18:46:28 <AAA_awright> Then the payment never gets made and the connection never closes...
226 2010-09-25 18:46:52 <lfm> but the receiver got the payment AND accepted it! How does it know?
227 2010-09-25 18:46:56 <AAA_awright> I mean seriously, we have TCP for this stuff
228 2010-09-25 18:47:16 <lfm> TCP is IP ADDRESES again, you said thats no good!
229 2010-09-25 18:47:42 <AAA_awright> That doesn't follow
230 2010-09-25 18:48:10 <AAA_awright> Of course you are connecting to the server, you are identifying the server by fingerprint not IP however
231 2010-09-25 18:48:32 <lfm> you arnt thinking it thru! you need to define the protocol. If its a tcp connection, thats JUST LIKE THE CURRENT IP ADDRESS then
232 2010-09-25 18:49:24 <lfm> so you are saying you need the bitcoin address (public key) AND the ip address?
233 2010-09-25 18:49:39 <AAA_awright> lfm: No. You IDENTIFY the server by its public key fingerprint. The connection is made via TCP and encrypted with that public key. Thus, there is no way to impersonate the server.
234 2010-09-25 18:50:19 <AAA_awright> lfm: How does Tor connect to a hidden node? It uses all TCP, yet manages to keep the end IP hidden?
235 2010-09-25 18:50:26 <soultcer> AAA_awright: But then you can suddenly match IP addresses to key fingerprints, which is bad
236 2010-09-25 18:50:36 <lfm> I don't know tor, its not tcp really
237 2010-09-25 18:50:53 <AAA_awright> soultcer: For Tor, maybe, why is knowing the IP of the server bad?
238 2010-09-25 18:51:15 <AAA_awright> lfm: Yes, it's all TCP. Tor cannot pass any other type of message, other than TCP.
239 2010-09-25 18:51:20 <lfm> soultcer, I dont think AAA_awright cares about annonymity any more
240 2010-09-25 18:51:21 <soultcer> Yeah, because it breaks the barrier between "public key fingerprint" and "identity"
241 2010-09-25 18:51:40 <lfm> tor is a wole new protocl on top of tcp
242 2010-09-25 18:52:25 <AAA_awright> soultcer: The connection is encrypted, no one has any use for the encrypted messages but the intended recipient, the recipient who has that particular public key that you are paying to. I guess I'm not following
243 2010-09-25 18:53:12 <AAA_awright> lfm: My point is you still get the SYN/ACK messages and all the other transmissions control messages passed to the end server
244 2010-09-25 18:53:54 <lfm> AAA_awright, sounds like a whole new net separate from bitcoin then
245 2010-09-25 18:54:04 <AAA_awright> With Tor you are both are sending a TCP message directly to the server, and ensuring that it is that server with that public key fingerprint that is getting them
246 2010-09-25 18:54:30 <AAA_awright> lfm: This is basic SSL, really now?
247 2010-09-25 18:54:50 <lfm> ya but bitcoin isnt ssl
248 2010-09-25 18:55:09 <AAA_awright> I'm not talking about what Bitcoin is RIGHT NOW!
249 2010-09-25 18:55:13 <AAA_awright> >_<
250 2010-09-25 18:56:02 <lfm> ya, you are proposing a whole new system. throw out the anyonymity and use point to point connections
251 2010-09-25 18:57:04 <AAA_awright> It's not that complex of an idea. What about a whole new system?
252 2010-09-25 18:57:36 <lfm> AAA_awright, perhaps its too siple
253 2010-09-25 18:57:45 <lfm> simple
254 2010-09-25 18:58:03 <AAA_awright> Perhaps you pay to bitcoin://public-key@host/(message to server, like an account number)
255 2010-09-25 18:58:23 <AAA_awright> Without a public-key, or the wrong public-key, the SSL connection fails
256 2010-09-25 18:59:19 <lfm> solving a problem that is not that much of a problem. when you want to make a payment, get a new address and send it. works for almost everyone.
257 2010-09-25 19:00:57 <AAA_awright> But again there is no way to tell if that payment is acceptable to the server or not, so if it's bad it has to be refunded
258 2010-09-25 19:01:35 <AAA_awright> Currently there is no way I know of to refund/void a payment like that, except sending an equal amount to the sender
259 2010-09-25 19:02:10 <lfm> I suspect that could still be a problem with your idea. people accidently pay twice, you have to refund one
260 2010-09-25 19:02:47 <AAA_awright> The server would reject a payment it's not expecting, especially if this is an E-commerce application
261 2010-09-25 19:03:39 <lfm> so they acciedntly order twice
262 2010-09-25 19:04:53 <AAA_awright> The whole point is so both sides can negotiate payment. Maybe this is where the client is told how much to pay. You connect to the server with an Order ID, the server says "That's 500BTC" and you confirm that and make the payment, the same way the current IP payment works but over SSL, with the public key provided in the URI.
263 2010-09-25 19:05:18 <lfm> AAA_awright, no matter what protocol, even tcp if the connect is lost at exactly the wrong moment you cannot be sure if the transaction was completed or not on at least one end or the other
264 2010-09-25 19:05:58 <AAA_awright> lfm: Again, how does TCP handle this? If the server gets the payment and you never know it, you still get your product in the mail
265 2010-09-25 19:06:39 <AAA_awright> Those are technical issues ALREADY present in BitCoin, it's nothing new
266 2010-09-25 19:06:42 <lfm> tcp says, if the connect is lost at the point where you have sent the ack , you cant be certain if the receiver got it.
267 2010-09-25 19:07:03 <lfm> so you havent solved the problem then either
268 2010-09-25 19:07:33 <AAA_awright> That's technical implementation detail, and it's nothing Bitcoin already doesn't have to deal with
269 2010-09-25 19:07:51 <lfm> so you havnt solved the problem, why change?
270 2010-09-25 19:08:15 <AAA_awright> Huh?
271 2010-09-25 19:08:41 <AAA_awright> lfm: What problem do you think I'm solving here?
272 2010-09-25 19:08:53 <lfm> if you sent the transaction and the receiver sends an ack but you dont get it you cant know if the transaction went thru
273 2010-09-25 19:09:47 <lfm> you want certainty when there is none
274 2010-09-25 19:11:14 <lfm> you might just as well use the current system
275 2010-09-25 19:11:21 <AAA_awright> lfm: That's again, technical detail. If the server get's the payment, it got the payment, period
276 2010-09-25 19:11:30 <AAA_awright> It's not going to accept a second payment for the same Order ID
277 2010-09-25 19:12:08 <AAA_awright> If it's malicious it might, but that's no worse than the current system
278 2010-09-25 19:13:33 <AAA_awright> If it gets and verifies the payment of 500BTC or whatever, order complete, doesn't matter what the client thinks. Next time the client gets to communicate with the server, it finds out "order complete" no big deal
279 2010-09-25 19:14:17 <AAA_awright> If that computer suddenly falls off the face of the earth and communicating with the server ever again is impossible you have larger problmes
280 2010-09-25 19:14:37 <AAA_awright> (And even then, the order was successful)
281 2010-09-25 19:15:42 <lfm> maybe. just not clear it better than just issue a refund if you have to
282 2010-09-25 19:16:38 <lfm> AAA_awright, the old addage good enough is the enemy of better, good enough gets a head start and betetr may never get a chance
283 2010-09-25 19:24:13 <mizerydearia> Perhaps there is a kind of conflict amongst the community in which some prefer to establish Bitcoin in a way that traditional forms of money/payment do not or cannot account for whilst also preventing or frowning upon efforts that implement usage of Bitcoin in a way that is similar to traditional monies.
284 2010-09-25 19:28:10 <lfm> well I also get a little tired of people taking one look and saying A) this is BAD it should never be allowed or B) this is great, just I think it should be changed totally like this ... or C) you might have some good ideas but it will never work cuz ... I prefer to just look at it as it is and firgure out how and when its best to use it.
285 2010-09-25 19:30:16 <mizerydearia> Even businesses that rely on us dollars to function, come and go, some succeed, some fail
286 2010-09-25 19:30:33 <mizerydearia> businesses/ideas
287 2010-09-25 19:31:29 <mizerydearia> The more ideas that are pursued the more opportunity for the evolution of industries to occur or for recognization as to how something can be done better or even realization as to better opportunities.
288 2010-09-25 19:31:48 <mizerydearia> s/as to/of/
289 2010-09-25 19:32:10 <lfm> and while bitcoin may not be perfect for any number of cases, it is working in its current for for some people and expecting everyone else to change to accomodate your idea seems a bit ... um wrong
290 2010-09-25 19:33:01 <mizerydearia> Not necessarily wrong
291 2010-09-25 19:33:04 <mizerydearia> undesired maybe
292 2010-09-25 19:33:44 <lfm> selfish? c0onceited? sortsighted?
293 2010-09-25 19:33:48 <ArtForz> I dont see the problem really
294 2010-09-25 19:33:58 <mizerydearia> e.g. some people do waste their time pursuing idiotic ideas, however, usually in the perception of others based on varying levels of intelligence, creativity, etc.
295 2010-09-25 19:34:08 <mizerydearia> But even idiotic ideas can lead to brilliance
296 2010-09-25 19:34:30 <lfm> yes, Art, you are one of the people I was refering to that seems to be getting along with the system quite well as it currently is.
297 2010-09-25 19:35:25 <ArtForz> BCM doesn't have that problem, each account gets a permanent address to send to on creation and that was that
298 2010-09-25 19:36:15 <lfm> basically AAA_awright saw a problem, someone payed twice cuz they wern't sure the first try worked right, and was trying to fix it. Thats legitimate thing to try to do.
299 2010-09-25 19:37:07 <Keefe> has anyone else lost btc due to the way mtgox appears to handle addresses?
300 2010-09-25 19:37:34 <ArtForz> well, if bitcoin had a better way to "just list all transfers to one of my addrs since X" implementing a simple DB to link generated addr -> account would be a lot easier
301 2010-09-25 19:37:42 <Keefe> could this just be a fluke and usually this doesn't result is lost btc?
302 2010-09-25 19:37:53 <Keefe> in*
303 2010-09-25 19:38:25 <lfm> ArtForz, I think I could create an external program to do that, just reads the blk0001 file
304 2010-09-25 19:38:36 <ArtForz> I'm not too sure, but I guess listbyaddr for every single addr one of your uses ever got just takes way too much calls
305 2010-09-25 19:40:07 <lfm> lfm it might be kinda slow! grin
306 2010-09-25 19:40:45 <Keefe> but this wasn't the first time i sent twice to a mtgox address
307 2010-09-25 19:40:50 <mizerydearia> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?action=profile;u=489;sa=showPosts
308 2010-09-25 19:40:57 <mizerydearia> You can see that mtgox's participate in the community has been lacking
309 2010-09-25 19:41:01 <lfm> Keefe, just dont do that!
310 2010-09-25 19:41:02 <ArtForz> the cheap way would be to just save the addr->account info and have a way to tell the system "oops, sent to this old addr"
311 2010-09-25 19:41:21 <mizerydearia> mtgox did make an appearance in IRC a week or so ago but also suggested they didn't want to frequent IRC due to addiction/distraction
312 2010-09-25 19:41:36 <Keefe> 10 days ago, i sent 100 btc, then 50 more, to the same mtgox address, and both got credited to my acct
313 2010-09-25 19:41:36 <mizerydearia> Additionally the website hasn't seen any improvements in a long while.
314 2010-09-25 19:41:39 <lfm> cant blame him for that
315 2010-09-25 19:41:59 <Keefe> 58 min apart
316 2010-09-25 19:42:01 <mizerydearia> Also, no response to jgarzik's server that was written for bitcoinmarket and mtgox to use.
317 2010-09-25 19:42:07 <lfm> cant blame him for (the fear of addiction thing)
318 2010-09-25 19:42:32 <Keefe> yesterday's double-send was 65 min apart
319 2010-09-25 19:42:39 <mizerydearia> Perhaps a kind of competitor would be useful to help incentivize mtgox to take action on improving his website service
320 2010-09-25 19:43:08 <ArtForz> hrrrm... maybe something like a push API for bitcoin?
321 2010-09-25 19:43:15 <Keefe> the risk of dealing with paypal is probably wht discourages competition
322 2010-09-25 19:43:21 <lfm> well bcm is his competition
323 2010-09-25 19:43:26 <mizerydearia> Not really
324 2010-09-25 19:43:34 <mizerydearia> bcm isn't automated
325 2010-09-25 19:43:48 <ArtForz> huH?
326 2010-09-25 19:43:50 <Keefe> the hours limit at bcm is a deal-killer
327 2010-09-25 19:43:52 <mizerydearia> Additionalyl bcm doesn't possess usd funds
328 2010-09-25 19:43:57 <lfm> its still his competition
329 2010-09-25 19:44:02 <melasek> Hi ! I'm from poland and I want help with translate www.bitcoin.org in my language
330 2010-09-25 19:44:10 <mizerydearia> hello melasek
331 2010-09-25 19:44:11 <Keefe> if only bcm operated 24/7, i'd be much more likely to use it
332 2010-09-25 19:44:26 <ArtForz> bcm is pretty much automated except for refunds
333 2010-09-25 19:44:26 <melasek> Bitcoin is realy good idea !
334 2010-09-25 19:44:31 <ArtForz> just the sellers and buyers arent
335 2010-09-25 19:44:51 <mizerydearia> Everyone let's turn to melasek and acknowledge his/her interest in translating to Polish ^_^
336 2010-09-25 19:44:57 <Keefe> if it's automated, wth do they limit trades to a third of the day?
337 2010-09-25 19:45:16 <ArtForz> no clue
338 2010-09-25 19:45:21 <lfm> melasek, yes we here I think all agree it is a good idea
339 2010-09-25 19:46:02 <ArtForz> but I'm pretty sure normal trading is automated
340 2010-09-25 19:47:13 <melasek> hehe my computer works about 2 week and does't generate any coins :) 4120 khash/s
341 2010-09-25 19:47:37 <lfm> melasek, I think that is within realm of probability
342 2010-09-25 19:47:39 <Keefe> not too surprising
343 2010-09-25 19:47:39 <mizerydearia> ;khash 4120
344 2010-09-25 19:47:40 <bitbot> mizerydearia: ProbabilityPerSecond(0.00000104514046402652590792114600) Chances: Avg(11d 1:46:49) 25%(3d 4:27:36) 50%(7d 16:13:29) 75%(15d 8:26:59) 95%(33d 4:12:24) 99%(50d 23:57:49)
345 2010-09-25 19:48:36 <lfm> melasek, so 25% of people who ran computer like yours would go 15 days or more
346 2010-09-25 19:48:50 <ArtForz> yep
347 2010-09-25 19:48:57 <melasek> I undersdand
348 2010-09-25 19:49:34 <lfm> melasek, you have version 0.3.12?
349 2010-09-25 19:49:51 <melasek> How is propability to break a system bitcoin by big-bad people ?
350 2010-09-25 19:50:00 <mizerydearia> like the big bad wolf?
351 2010-09-25 19:50:10 <melasek> I have version 3.12 beta
352 2010-09-25 19:50:58 <lfm> melasek, they would need to match the computing power of all the computers currently doing bitcoin. It is possible but we think they will not bother.
353 2010-09-25 19:51:11 <melasek> Have U see a movie "money as a debt" ? it's look like 'bitcoins' is ideal money !!
354 2010-09-25 19:51:18 <lfm> melasek, 3.12 is good
355 2010-09-25 19:51:46 <lfm> melasek, never heard of that movie
356 2010-09-25 19:52:22 <mizerydearia> If Bitcoin can be considered an ideal money then in that sense there is potential for Bitcoins to be used as alternative for already existing industries and in the case that top businesses of those industries do not accept Bitcoin then new businesses/organizations can establish themselves.
357 2010-09-25 19:52:25 <melasek> ok here is link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5PUB6zWnuo
358 2010-09-25 19:53:15 <ArtForz> btw, we're currently averaging about 10Ghash/sec total
359 2010-09-25 19:54:35 <melasek> and here is good document about a monetary system in the USA "the money masters" almost 3h 35m http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-515319560256183936#
360 2010-09-25 19:54:38 <ArtForz> no bad considering pre-/. it was <100Mh/s
361 2010-09-25 19:56:13 <lfm> melasek, that's like about 2427 computers like yours
362 2010-09-25 19:59:28 <melasek> If a tell 'monetary system called 'bitcoin is protectet by mathematics' - I'm right ???
363 2010-09-25 20:02:02 <lfm> melasek, yes, branch of math called cryptography. I guess you could say that
364 2010-09-25 20:02:23 <melasek> great !! :)
365 2010-09-25 20:04:55 <melasek> In this sytem nobody can create money of nothing ?? (any goverment and any bank )
366 2010-09-25 20:05:41 <redMBA> hehe, I wouldn't go that far
367 2010-09-25 20:06:27 <lfm> melasek, if you look at it everyone creates money out of "nothing" in bitcoin, just run your computer
368 2010-09-25 20:06:55 <lfm> if you computer is running anyway, bitcoin is nearly free.
369 2010-09-25 20:07:02 <redMBA> malasek: I think you mean increase the money supply
370 2010-09-25 20:07:36 <melasek> If I buy bitcoins now it will be profit in the future ? ;>
371 2010-09-25 20:08:03 <lfm> no single entity has a right to print money like with national currrencies
372 2010-09-25 20:08:27 <lfm> melasek, no one can garantee future prices
373 2010-09-25 20:08:43 <redMBA> lfm, I can... for a fee :)
374 2010-09-25 20:09:14 <lfm> redMBA, oh! what's your rates?
375 2010-09-25 20:09:30 <bitbot> 5.0 5.0 4.9
376 2010-09-25 20:09:57 <redMBA> I'm working that out now
377 2010-09-25 20:10:08 <lfm> is that current mbox? they've gone down actually
378 2010-09-25 20:10:30 <melasek> U are declaring war a global economy ;) and it's good !
379 2010-09-25 20:10:43 <melasek> sorry bitcoind declaring war
380 2010-09-25 20:11:02 <lfm> melasek, well we hope to keep our heads down a little longer (most of us)
381 2010-09-25 20:12:03 <lfm> currently bitcoin still has to work WITH other currencies
382 2010-09-25 20:12:41 <melasek> If system is realy protected with mathematics and it coudn't be backed by any goverment then coud be hot :D
383 2010-09-25 20:13:26 <melasek> sorry, my english is weak .. :(
384 2010-09-25 20:14:43 <lfm> Yes, we have discussed what authorities reaction would be to a significant bitcoin economy but there have been no signs of any action yet.
385 2010-09-25 20:16:24 <melasek> If bitcoins grows then could be HOT :(
386 2010-09-25 20:18:07 <lfm> could be, yes
387 2010-09-25 20:19:05 <mizerydearia> could be hot or cool
388 2010-09-25 20:20:13 <lfm> I think they will just try to ignore it as long as they can and hope it just goes away.
389 2010-09-25 20:21:16 <lfm> or pretend to ignore it even if they monitor it closely secretly
390 2010-09-25 20:24:02 <redMBA> at the low market cap, its not much of a concern
391 2010-09-25 22:07:32 <Kiba> hey hey hey folks
392 2010-09-25 22:47:55 <second> in bitcoinmarket how do I purchase bitcoins ?
393 2010-09-25 22:48:40 <theymos> second: Place a buy order equal to an ask.
394 2010-09-25 22:48:48 <second> oh
395 2010-09-25 22:51:27 <second> are the previous ask values valid ?
396 2010-09-25 22:52:29 <second> what is the cheapest way to get bitcoins (besides making them) ?
397 2010-09-25 22:54:06 <theymos> second: If you wanted to buy BTC for PayPalUSD, you would place a bid for 1000 @ 0.0635. You'll have to raise the price per bitcoin if you want more than 1000, since the lowest ask is only for 1000.
398 2010-09-25 22:55:00 <second> lowest ask is 100
399 2010-09-25 22:55:45 <theymos> second: Look at ask #3037.
400 2010-09-25 22:56:29 <theymos> Possibly you are not sorting the charts by price. You can click the different column headers to sort by them.
401 2010-09-25 22:56:54 <second> 2189
402 2010-09-25 22:57:05 <second> theymos: I sorted them
403 2010-09-25 22:57:12 <second> I was asking if the older ones were valid
404 2010-09-25 22:58:11 <theymos> second: Are you looking at https://www.bitcoinmarket.com/home/markets/ ? That ask is not the lowest.
405 2010-09-25 23:02:09 <second> the total is :P
406 2010-09-25 23:02:17 <second> I'm just wanting to try bitcoin out atm
407 2010-09-25 23:02:26 <second> looking to get about 100 bitcoins
408 2010-09-25 23:02:57 <theymos> "Lowest" means "price", not "total".
409 2010-09-25 23:08:41 <theymos> A trade takes place whenever the "price" of an ask and a bid match. So if you want to buy immediately, you need to make a bid with a price that matches the price of an ask.
410 2010-09-25 23:10:17 <kencausey> or is lower
411 2010-09-25 23:10:23 <kencausey> err, higher oops
412 2010-09-25 23:10:54 <kencausey> oh, bcm, I could be wrong
413 2010-09-25 23:11:00 <kencausey> ;estimate
414 2010-09-25 23:11:03 <bitbot> kencausey: LastDiff(6d 23:04:57 ago) ExpBlocks(1002) ActualBlocks(1411) TrgNewDiffDate(2010/10/03 02:04:07 GMT) EstNewDiffDate(2010/09/29 00:47:30 GMT) EstNewDiff(1292.47450372)
415 2010-09-25 23:11:13 <theymos> kencausey: That's right. But there's an ask for 1000, so there'd be no point in doing that when buying 100.
416 2010-09-25 23:11:41 <kencausey> I really shouldn't have butted in since I didn't bother to read and understand the context. ;)