1 2010-10-26 00:02:00 <Malouin_> Habs won 3-2, good thing
  2 2010-10-26 00:14:32 <noagendamarket> You cant charge back cash
  3 2010-10-26 00:14:35 <noagendamarket> lol
  4 2010-10-26 00:18:05 <bd_> noagendamarket: cash is a bit labor intensive
  5 2010-10-26 00:23:17 <noagendamarket> bd_ so is losing your paypal or cc account.
  6 2010-10-26 00:24:11 <noagendamarket> In Australia I can send someone a barcode and they pay at the post office.
  7 2010-10-26 00:32:00 <Malouin_> =)
  8 2010-10-26 00:32:36 <noagendamarket> no they dont have kangaroo deliveries either :)-
  9 2010-10-26 00:32:55 <Malouin_> what about koala? ;)
 10 2010-10-26 00:32:59 <noagendamarket> though they do have a pouch......
 11 2010-10-26 00:33:29 <noagendamarket> all they do is eat roots and leaves
 12 2010-10-26 00:33:37 <noagendamarket> lol
 13 2010-10-26 00:33:49 <Malouin_> I don't remember where i heard that, but it seem they are dangerous :o
 14 2010-10-26 00:34:33 <noagendamarket> yes they are
 15 2010-10-26 00:35:57 <Malouin_> talking bitcoin, what would be a reason for bitcoin to close with a community like this? I mean, I see so many people involve with project, it's crazy
 16 2010-10-26 00:36:23 <appamatto> probably being gradually beaten out by a better currency
 17 2010-10-26 00:36:47 <appamatto> I doubt it would implode to zero
 18 2010-10-26 00:37:32 <Malouin_> what is the bitcoin birthday by the way ?
 19 2010-10-26 00:37:34 <noagendamarket> well a fork might happen
 20 2010-10-26 00:37:45 <noagendamarket> such as an inflationary bitcoin
 21 2010-10-26 00:37:49 <jgarzik> if hash is broken or double-spends become possible in for intervals measured in milliseconds, bitcoin value could go to zero overnight
 22 2010-10-26 00:38:09 <Malouin_> Care to explain to some koala what is a fork and how it can affet bitcoin, pretty please ? :p
 23 2010-10-26 00:38:18 <noagendamarket> microsoft could start their own block chain...
 24 2010-10-26 00:38:24 <appamatto> I don't think inflationary bitcoin would necessarily be bad
 25 2010-10-26 00:38:31 <noagendamarket> neither do i
 26 2010-10-26 00:38:35 <jgarzik> +1
 27 2010-10-26 00:38:36 <appamatto> given that the inflation is known up front
 28 2010-10-26 00:38:37 <doublec> anyone could fork the source code, make small changes, and start their own alternative currency
 29 2010-10-26 00:38:48 <Malouin_> ahh nvm, i see now
 30 2010-10-26 00:38:53 <appamatto> doublec, doubt that would attract attention to rival bitcoin's
 31 2010-10-26 00:39:15 <doublec> no, but they may want a private currency for their own group of people for some reason
 32 2010-10-26 00:39:27 <appamatto> I don't think inflationary bitcoin is very good though, because it basically means that savings are taxed
 33 2010-10-26 00:39:30 <doublec> someone in the factor channel was interested in doing this for a game for example
 34 2010-10-26 00:39:32 <noagendamarket> people would spend the inflated btc and save the deflated one
 35 2010-10-26 00:39:44 <appamatto> I think it's better for transactions to cost money as they volume grows to exceed block sizes
 36 2010-10-26 00:40:28 <noagendamarket> wouldnt the inflation  tax just pay to run the network?
 37 2010-10-26 00:41:32 <appamatto> noagenda, I think that there will be block creation without needing inflation
 38 2010-10-26 00:41:50 <appamatto> in that case the network is paid for by transaction fees I guess
 39 2010-10-26 00:42:13 <jgarzik> which is bitcoin end state anyway
 40 2010-10-26 00:42:24 <appamatto> but in general the network generates an extreme amount of wealth
 41 2010-10-26 00:42:40 <appamatto> so there's no point in trying to "pay for it"
 42 2010-10-26 00:43:52 <appamatto> doublec, it would be interesting to analyze the case where there are two bitcoin networks with a floating exchange rate between eachother.  Does the larger pressure the smaller out?
 43 2010-10-26 00:44:05 <doublec> yes, it would be interesting
 44 2010-10-26 00:44:24 <doublec> would lots of networks with easy coin generation rates spring up
 45 2010-10-26 00:44:59 <appamatto> The smaller one is much more suceptible to attack: imagine the smaller one increases in value.  Some chunk of CPU from the larger will be tempted to join the smaller one as they will monopolize CPU there.
 46 2010-10-26 00:45:40 <doublec> good point
 47 2010-10-26 00:46:47 <appamatto> What additional properties would a competitor have?
 48 2010-10-26 00:46:50 <doublec> is there a memory leak in bitcoind? I notice the memory usage growing after a few days of running.
 49 2010-10-26 00:47:33 <doublec> appamatto, they could increase the total coin limit
 50 2010-10-26 00:47:50 <doublec> appamatto, allow payloads on transactions with fees for delivery
 51 2010-10-26 00:48:31 <doublec> do 'useful work' like find aliens or cure cancer as part of generation
 52 2010-10-26 00:48:33 <appamatto> payloads?
 53 2010-10-26 00:48:41 <doublec> encrypted messages
 54 2010-10-26 00:49:00 <doublec> someone asked about it on the forums recently
 55 2010-10-26 00:49:08 <appamatto> what are some applications of that?
 56 2010-10-26 00:49:29 <doublec> as part of the transaction payment you include details of the transaction (reference number, etc)
 57 2010-10-26 00:50:41 <appamatto> hate for someone to encode an embarassing jpeg in the block chain for the rest of human history
 58 2010-10-26 00:50:48 <doublec> a turn based game could have the user send their encrypted turn plus game state as part of the payment for the turn
 59 2010-10-26 00:50:52 <doublec> haha
 60 2010-10-26 00:51:18 <doublec> most use cases that I've heard for it are best solved with some for of out of band communication anyway
 61 2010-10-26 00:51:39 <appamatto> doublec, do you mean increasing 21M to some other number?
 62 2010-10-26 00:51:44 <doublec> appamatto, yes
 63 2010-10-26 00:52:34 <appamatto> Hmm, what would be the benefit?
 64 2010-10-26 00:52:41 <Teppy> Does the block chain scale with number of transactions, or with coins in circulation?
 65 2010-10-26 00:52:56 <appamatto> I'm actually worried that a plurality of clients will decide we need to inflate the currency at some point
 66 2010-10-26 00:53:03 <appamatto> Teppy, not really
 67 2010-10-26 00:53:11 <doublec> appamatto, I don't say they are good ideas - just things people have talked about changing or wanting to change
 68 2010-10-26 00:53:17 <appamatto> there is a maximum block size limit, and it's far below what would be required for a global currency
 69 2010-10-26 00:53:17 <doublec> appamatto, I don't know the reasons why
 70 2010-10-26 00:53:59 <appamatto> doublec, more frequent blocks would be nice
 71 2010-10-26 00:54:11 <appamatto> I remember when email first started and you would wait several minutes to get the email
 72 2010-10-26 00:54:42 <doublec> I remember having to write emails on paper, putting them in things called envelopes, putting those in a box, and waiting weeks for a reply.
 73 2010-10-26 00:54:43 <appamatto> I'm not sure why you had to wait.  But it seems like minutes per transaction is a long time
 74 2010-10-26 00:54:46 <Teppy> No, I mean does the number of blocks stored on your system scale with the number of transactions that have ever been done, network-wide? Or does it scale roughly with the number of blocks that have been generated?
 75 2010-10-26 00:54:52 <appamatto> doublec, I still do that
 76 2010-10-26 00:55:03 <doublec> hehe
 77 2010-10-26 00:55:11 <appamatto> Teppy, the number of blocks increases at a constant rate
 78 2010-10-26 00:55:29 <appamatto> and I believe blocks differ in size based on the number of transactions therein?
 79 2010-10-26 00:55:38 <Teppy> k
 80 2010-10-26 00:56:03 <appamatto> It seems like it wouldn't outpace harddrive sizes
 81 2010-10-26 00:56:25 <appamatto> also, you could imagine eventually that the block chain wouldn't be stored on every machine
 82 2010-10-26 00:56:42 <appamatto> sort of like the mybitcoin setup
 83 2010-10-26 00:57:12 <Malouin_> ArtForz: there buddy?
 84 2010-10-26 00:57:25 <jgarzik> blocks contain a number of transactions, and thus vary in size based on the sum of the sizes of each individual transaction.
 85 2010-10-26 00:57:54 <jgarzik> the larger the block, the more transaction fees increase.  small blocks are free.
 86 2010-10-26 00:58:38 <appamatto> I wonder if there will be some sort of checkpoint in the block chain
 87 2010-10-26 00:58:59 <appamatto> so that we "forget" early transactions and just take a snapshot of current balances
 88 2010-10-26 00:59:13 <jgarzik> appamatto: read up on the merkle tree
 89 2010-10-26 00:59:48 <appamatto> This isn't the case currently, no?
 90 2010-10-26 00:59:48 <ArtForz> except we don't really use a merkle tree for anything useful :/
 91 2010-10-26 00:59:55 <jgarzik> appamatto: you can mostly-forget early transactions, without needing something as strict as a snapshot of all account
 92 2010-10-26 01:00:20 <appamatto> jgarzik, but aren't the current balances only determined by analysis of the entire block chain?
 93 2010-10-26 01:00:36 <ArtForz> well, kinda
 94 2010-10-26 01:01:08 <ArtForz> once you are "certain" a transactions outputs are spent you can pretty much forget about it
 95 2010-10-26 01:01:17 <appamatto> I see
 96 2010-10-26 01:01:43 <appamatto> to forget a block you'd have to forget every transaction
 97 2010-10-26 01:02:19 <ArtForz> well, transactions only refer to their inputs TX hash, not to the block hash
 98 2010-10-26 01:02:53 <ArtForz> we could just forget all blocks before the last checkpoint (74000?) and only keep their unspent transactions around
 99 2010-10-26 01:03:33 <jgarzik> yep 74000 is the current magic number
100 2010-10-26 01:03:51 <jgarzik> current SVN won't generate if height is smaller than that
101 2010-10-26 01:04:14 <ArtForz> and the checkpoint of the block hash means any block before that is set in stone
102 2010-10-26 01:04:31 <appamatto> oh, I didn't know there was a checkpointing concept currently
103 2010-10-26 01:05:02 <ArtForz> so a alternate chain starting before that is by considered invalid
104 2010-10-26 01:05:34 <appamatto> Hmm, I suppose you don't have to store the entire block chain on every machine
105 2010-10-26 01:06:15 <ArtForz> of course you still need the full chain to verify if the list-of-old-transactions is actually what is in the block chain up to the checkpoint
106 2010-10-26 01:07:11 <jgarzik> I agree with the suggestion running around the forums that future bitcoin clients will run in two classes, leaf nodes and ultrapeer nodes (a la Gnutella).  leaf nodes can be simple tx submittor/watch-for-confirm clients, while ultrapeers behave as current nodes do now.
107 2010-10-26 01:07:22 <appamatto> Is there a motivation to have inputs be transactions versus addresses?
108 2010-10-26 01:07:28 <ArtForz> jgarzik: agree
109 2010-10-26 01:07:33 <Kiba> newbies.
110 2010-10-26 01:07:41 <appamatto> It seems like address inputs increase anonymity
111 2010-10-26 01:07:54 <ArtForz> appamotto: you can have several transactions with outputs pointing to the same address
112 2010-10-26 01:08:03 <Kiba> making the same kind of economic fallacy that the community have gotten over with long ago
113 2010-10-26 01:08:17 <ArtForz> so how would other clients know which of those you are referring to?
114 2010-10-26 01:08:51 <appamatto> ArtForz, well usually when I buy a burger it doesn't matter if I got the $ from work or found it on the street
115 2010-10-26 01:09:01 <appamatto> What matters is I have a certain amount of $
116 2010-10-26 01:09:34 <appamatto> Kiba, what are you talking about?
117 2010-10-26 01:10:00 <Kiba> the discussion of getting enough botnets to cheat
118 2010-10-26 01:10:13 <Kiba> a "bright idea"
119 2010-10-26 01:10:19 <ArtForz> cheating with a botnet is pretty hard now
120 2010-10-26 01:11:20 <ArtForz> your average desktop processor isnt exactly a high speed miner
121 2010-10-26 01:11:36 <jgarzik> that apply to the average desktop GPU as well?
122 2010-10-26 01:11:41 <ArtForz> nope
123 2010-10-26 01:12:04 <ArtForz> but how do you want to make use of GPUs in a botnet?
124 2010-10-26 01:12:13 <jgarzik> stuffing opencl into a bot would probably be annoyingly difficult, given the variation in Windows GPU drivers
125 2010-10-26 01:12:17 <ArtForz> yep
126 2010-10-26 01:12:31 <ArtForz> and afaik CUDA also requires special driver versions
127 2010-10-26 01:12:57 <ArtForz> making this work would be hard as hell
128 2010-10-26 01:13:27 <ArtForz> and also VERY noticable to people running zombies
129 2010-10-26 01:13:44 <jgarzik> bitcoin is quite susceptible to a bored millionaire though :)
130 2010-10-26 01:13:51 <ArtForz> yep
131 2010-10-26 01:14:14 <appamatto> you mean, buying btc?
132 2010-10-26 01:14:15 <jgarzik> which are, surprisingly, not -that- rare a beast.
133 2010-10-26 01:14:16 <Kiba> the total value of bitcoin is currently less than a million dollars
134 2010-10-26 01:14:21 <Kiba> not even a small country's GDP
135 2010-10-26 01:14:49 <ArtForz> I guess you could match the current network with about $30k in GPU nodes
136 2010-10-26 01:14:57 <appamatto> meh, they wouldn't be able to buy that many for less than a dollar each
137 2010-10-26 01:15:01 <jgarzik> buying btc? no. think of the GPU rigs a million dollars could buy.
138 2010-10-26 01:15:17 <Kiba> an MMO the size of EVE Online that adopted btc will make btc economy equavlient to a small country...
139 2010-10-26 01:15:43 <ArtForz> 15 grand buys you about 10Ghash/s including the rest of the systems
140 2010-10-26 01:16:00 <appamatto> I would think Zynga would be an example of a company that could benefit from btc
141 2010-10-26 01:16:28 <Malouin_> Art, do you consider upgrading your rig for generating more hash/s ?
142 2010-10-26 01:16:38 <Kiba> Zynga make addicting but terrible games
143 2010-10-26 01:17:06 <ArtForz> upgrading? not really
144 2010-10-26 01:17:15 <appamatto> let's say you spend $30k for half the blocks for 6 months.  Is there any chance of that paying off for you?
145 2010-10-26 01:17:26 <Malouin_> bad word. what about expending ?
146 2010-10-26 01:17:52 <ArtForz> yup.
147 2010-10-26 01:18:36 <ArtForz> not gonna get 68xx, but is 69xx is good value and efficiency I'll prolly add a bunch of those
148 2010-10-26 01:18:49 <jgarzik> I only claim it's easy to own the network.  You'll probably only do that for one of two reasons:  (1) you wish bitcoins to have value, and are therefore invested in its welfare, or (2) you wish bitcoins to lose their value
149 2010-10-26 01:19:43 <appamatto> are there any software advances that can be made?
150 2010-10-26 01:19:50 <appamatto> in terms of hash generation?
151 2010-10-26 01:19:51 <ArtForz> or (3) you want to generate 7200BTC/day and don't care about the temporary drop in value
152 2010-10-26 01:20:38 <jgarzik> if I personally 40x the network power tomorrow, surely it would exceed 7200BTC/day for at least a week?
153 2010-10-26 01:20:43 <doublec> Zynga might try to apply their patent to it
154 2010-10-26 01:21:05 <ArtForz> well, if you have just a bit >50% you can already monopolize mining
155 2010-10-26 01:22:04 <ArtForz> just ignore blocks found by other nodes
156 2010-10-26 01:22:13 <doublec> http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=GQXWAAAAEBAJ
157 2010-10-26 01:22:33 <ArtForz> yes
158 2010-10-26 01:22:36 <Kiba> I am suprised that socialist anarchists are interested in this projec
159 2010-10-26 01:23:17 <appamatto> Kiba, forum threads or it didn't happen :p
160 2010-10-26 01:23:18 <ArtForz> but by staying just a hair above 50% you can get 7200BTC/day for as long as you want...
161 2010-10-26 01:23:30 <jgarzik> yeah
162 2010-10-26 01:23:39 <Kiba> appamatto: though he was just a newbie poster..I think socialists tend to be driven away from the project
163 2010-10-26 01:24:08 <Kiba> err, from the community
164 2010-10-26 01:26:19 <ArtForz> *shrug*
165 2010-10-26 01:27:12 <Kiba> I think when the economy grow, the original character of the community is going to be dilluted to the point of mainstreaming
166 2010-10-26 01:27:22 <ArtForz> probably
167 2010-10-26 01:27:42 <ArtForz> but honestly I don't see that as a big problem
168 2010-10-26 01:28:22 <jgarzik> me either
169 2010-10-26 01:28:43 <ArtForz> imo the real fun will start when government agencies notice bitcoin
170 2010-10-26 01:29:06 <Kiba> why would it be fun?
171 2010-10-26 01:29:25 <nanotube> he means, "fun" probably. not fun.
172 2010-10-26 01:29:28 <appamatto> hopefully some smaller countries will embrace it
173 2010-10-26 01:29:33 <jgarzik> I'd like to see bitcoin become a real alternative currency, traded at professional forex shops, listed under cash balance at Charles Schwab, and all the other boring, stuffed shirt banker hoo-hah.
174 2010-10-26 01:29:44 <nanotube> heh yea that'd be nice
175 2010-10-26 01:29:46 <ArtForz> government trying to handle emerging new technology
176 2010-10-26 01:30:07 <appamatto> If there is any kind of adoption it seems like Satoshi will be the richest man in the world
177 2010-10-26 01:30:10 <ArtForz> usually the result is a tragicomic clusterfuck
178 2010-10-26 01:30:21 <nanotube> Kiba: were you the one who sent the kitty with bitcoin galore to bitcoinmedia? :)
179 2010-10-26 01:30:29 <Kiba> no
180 2010-10-26 01:30:33 <nanotube> mmmm
181 2010-10-26 01:30:45 <Kiba> we'll all be rich, but probably some of us will be in jail
182 2010-10-26 01:30:59 <nanotube> Kiba: what for? there's nothing illegal going on
183 2010-10-26 01:31:01 <jgarzik> I think the 21M limit makes bitcoins quite interesting, but IMO BTC-denominated prices might not behave as people expect, if BTC becomes truly popular
184 2010-10-26 01:31:03 <OneFixt> Why is there so much drama aobut this?
185 2010-10-26 01:31:13 <OneFixt> about*
186 2010-10-26 01:31:24 <ArtForz> about what?
187 2010-10-26 01:31:27 <jgarzik> that's why I think an ever-inflating currency would be another interesting experiment
188 2010-10-26 01:31:44 <nanotube> jgarzik: no need for that - we already have plenty of those :)
189 2010-10-26 01:31:50 <ArtForz> yep
190 2010-10-26 01:32:07 <Kiba> well, I'll remember this community as the best, really.
191 2010-10-26 01:32:09 <jgarzik> yes -- but the printing presses are controlled by human fiat rather than software fiat
192 2010-10-26 01:32:12 <OneFixt> A lot of fear-mongering from some people in the forums about where this will all end up.
193 2010-10-26 01:32:20 <OneFixt> People getting scared and scaring others.
194 2010-10-26 01:32:22 <Kiba> Everything I stand for, the community embodies. For that, I am grateful.
195 2010-10-26 01:32:26 <jgarzik> could easily code 1%/year inflation target into the software.
196 2010-10-26 01:32:27 <OneFixt> When all that we are doing is some math.
197 2010-10-26 01:32:33 <nanotube> yea, it's a great little community here. :)
198 2010-10-26 01:32:50 <dwdollar> I've embraced my paranoia.
199 2010-10-26 01:32:55 <ArtForz> well, because there's some really stupid laws in some places
200 2010-10-26 01:33:14 <appamatto> jgarzik, as soon as there is a rate people will want to adjust it
201 2010-10-26 01:33:14 <Teppy> People on the forums think I'm actually planning to start selling heroin by mail.
202 2010-10-26 01:33:30 <OneFixt> The only danger is us attracting trouble to ourselves.
203 2010-10-26 01:33:32 <Kiba> misunderstanding is a natural consequence of communication
204 2010-10-26 01:33:41 <OneFixt> So I would wish for such nonsense to not be allowed in the forums.
205 2010-10-26 01:33:45 <jgarzik> in the US, you get the IRS and FinCEN mad at you, once you exceed approx $1000/day/human without reporting various types of transactions.
206 2010-10-26 01:33:52 <nanotube> jgarzik: you could... but since the 1% inflation would still be quite a bit less than the rest of the world's fiat currencies... one would expect just as much flocking to that as to current bitcoin
207 2010-10-26 01:33:55 <appamatto> jgarzik but honestly I don't think the inflation rate really matters, since it's either going to be transaction fees or inflation that partially motivates block creation
208 2010-10-26 01:34:15 <ArtForz> yes, let's just ignore stuff like embargo laws, and they'll just magically go away
209 2010-10-26 01:34:17 <nanotube> jgarzik: with the associated "hoarding" (if that ever materializes) and all
210 2010-10-26 01:34:22 <OneFixt> jgarzik: Sure, that is why I will pay taxes on anything that I make with bitcoin.
211 2010-10-26 01:35:12 <Kiba> I am sure I could convert a few to anarchism before the community turned mainstream
212 2010-10-26 01:35:14 <nanotube> OneFixt: indeed. if even the mafia couldn't stand against the irs... better keep those guys happy.
213 2010-10-26 01:35:17 <Kiba> s/turned/turns
214 2010-10-26 01:38:16 <ArtForz> yup, don't piss off the tax man :P
215 2010-10-26 01:38:16 <jgarzik> or the PATRIOT Act man, here in the US.  :)
216 2010-10-26 01:38:16 <Kiba> The Bitcoin Mafia - libertarian entrepeneurs who grow out of practicing their craft in the early bitcoin economy.
217 2010-10-26 01:38:16 <OneFixt> We really shouldn't make any associations between this project and any sort of "mafia" or any words that may have negative connotations like "anarchy".
218 2010-10-26 01:38:17 <OneFixt> So let's be better.
219 2010-10-26 01:38:25 <OneFixt> Let's simply emphasise Trust and Transparency.
220 2010-10-26 01:38:28 <Kiba> OneFixt: well, people are going to ignore your advice
221 2010-10-26 01:38:37 <ArtForz> OneFixt: now who's paranoid?
222 2010-10-26 01:38:57 <Kiba> Diablo-D3 did the same thing. People ignore Diablo-D3.
223 2010-10-26 01:39:22 <ArtForz> btw, please prove you never sent bitcoins to terr'ists or evil cubans ;)
224 2010-10-26 01:40:47 <Kiba> who knows, maybe the dream of crypto-anarchists will become real?
225 2010-10-26 01:40:51 <Kiba> or not.
226 2010-10-26 01:40:56 <Kiba> I don't profess to know.
227 2010-10-26 01:41:39 <Kiba> but it's an opportunity to be part of a unique history
228 2010-10-26 01:42:32 <Diablo-D3> did the same what?
229 2010-10-26 01:47:07 <OneFixt> Diablo-D3: I was voicing my opinion that we shouldn't a) be paranoid and b) hurt Bitcoin by constantly associating it with illegal activity.
230 2010-10-26 01:52:58 <appamatto> the a-word is pretty bad
231 2010-10-26 01:53:04 <appamatto> use libertarian instead
232 2010-10-26 01:53:10 <appamatto> that's my take :)
233 2010-10-26 01:54:14 <OneFixt> Yeah, it's better.  It would be even better to leave political talk out of it completely - if the system is technologically sound, a sound economy will emerge from it automatically.
234 2010-10-26 01:55:02 <OneFixt> It's best to avoid making any enemies at all.
235 2010-10-26 01:55:12 <appamatto> I agree
236 2010-10-26 01:55:45 <appamatto> although I think most of the early adopters will be libertarians who have fantasized about this for years
237 2010-10-26 01:56:42 <appamatto> It's true, the system speaks for itself
238 2010-10-26 01:57:12 <appamatto> and it is very political in the sense that it has a firm position on currency issues that tend to be up to public policy
239 2010-10-26 01:57:27 <OneFixt> Yes, fantasizing ok when people do it in their heads, but now that we have a working system, it should be clear that the system is separate from the fantasies of any of its members.
240 2010-10-26 01:58:08 <OneFixt> In that sense yes, it is politically close to saying "Let's use gold, like we used to, but make it digital."
241 2010-10-26 01:58:39 <OneFixt> And that's a great topic for debate, does not invoke negativity, doesn't make enemies of most people whether they agree with the idea or not.
242 2010-10-26 02:01:28 <appamatto> It's kind of amazing to explain this system to others
243 2010-10-26 02:02:27 <appamatto> "We have a new currency.  What is being traded is proof of winning a digital lottery that occured about once every ten minutes from 2009 to 2014"
244 2010-10-26 02:02:45 <OneFixt> Lol, I like that.
245 2010-10-26 02:04:15 <appamatto> that will really start to be a funny explanation in a hundred years
246 2010-10-26 02:07:29 <boogiebomzh> i've got a problem startin bitcoin on sistem without X
247 2010-10-26 02:07:38 <boogiebomzh> tundra@debian:~$ ~/bitcoin-0.3.14/bin/32/bitcoind -? Segmentation fault tundra@debian:~$ ~/bitcoin-0.3.14/bin/32/bitcoin -? -bash: /home/tundra/bitcoin-0.3.14/bin/32/bitcoin: cannot execute binary file
248 2010-10-26 02:08:18 <Kiba> MtGox gone wild!
249 2010-10-26 02:08:20 <boogiebomzh> permissions is ok
250 2010-10-26 02:16:24 <ne0futur> boogiebomzh: sure you are 32 bits ? which CPU ?
251 2010-10-26 02:16:54 <ne0futur> I have problems to run bitcoind with ATOM CPUs
252 2010-10-26 02:17:34 <ne0futur> ( not easy you could try to strace the binary to see where is the segfault )
253 2010-10-26 02:18:43 <fedorared> Use gdb and get a trace.
254 2010-10-26 02:18:50 <boogiebomzh> Processor information
255 2010-10-26 02:28:56 <boogiebomzh> "/home/tundra/bitcoin-0.3.14/bin/32/bitcoin": not in executable format: File format not recognized
256 2010-10-26 02:39:48 <ne0futur> do you have /lib and/or /lib64 ?
257 2010-10-26 02:40:51 <fedorared> Run file on that bitcoin executable to see what type it is
258 2010-10-26 02:41:04 <fedorared> Then install gdb and run bitcoin in it to see the trace
259 2010-10-26 02:42:50 <ne0futur> you downloaded from the official website ?
260 2010-10-26 02:47:30 <boogiebomzh> i've got /lib
261 2010-10-26 02:48:00 <boogiebomzh> bitcoin is from official website
262 2010-10-26 02:49:36 <boogiebomzh> gdb ~/bitcoin-0.3.14/bin/32/bitcoind GNU gdb 6.8-debian Copyright (C) 2008 Free Software Foundation, Inc. License GPLv3+: GNU GPL version 3 or later <http://gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html> This is free software: you are free to change and redistribute it. There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law.  Type "show copying" and "show warranty" for details. This GDB was configured as "i486-linux-gnu"... "/home/tundra/bitcoin-0
263 2010-10-26 02:52:54 <fedorared> run then bt when it crashes
264 2010-10-26 02:54:20 <boogiebomzh> (gdb) bt No stack.
265 2010-10-26 02:56:44 <doublec> boogiebomzh, what's the result of: uname -a
266 2010-10-26 02:57:22 <boogiebomzh> Linux debian 2.6.26-2-686 #1 SMP Thu Sep 16 19:35:51 UTC 2010 i686 GNU/Linux
267 2010-10-26 02:57:59 <doublec> what about: file bitcoind
268 2010-10-26 02:59:25 <boogiebomzh> gdb result of bitcoin & bitcoind is same
269 2010-10-26 03:00:11 <boogiebomzh> file ~/bitcoin-0.3.14/bin/32/bitcoind /home/tundra/bitcoin-0.3.14/bin/32/bitcoind: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), stripped
270 2010-10-26 03:09:17 <ne0futur> pretty old kernel 2.6.26 you could have old libs not compatible with a dynamically linked binary ?
271 2010-10-26 03:09:30 <ne0futur> theres no fully static binary for bitcoin ?
272 2010-10-26 03:14:31 <boogiebomzh> should i do distr-upgrade?
273 2010-10-26 03:18:16 <boogiebomzh> no. i've got last upgrades already
274 2010-10-26 03:21:08 <ne0futur> dunno but 2.6.26-2 kernel is pretty old
275 2010-10-26 03:22:50 <doublec> try building from source?
276 2010-10-26 03:26:23 <ne0futur> strace could really help to see where the segfault occurs
277 2010-10-26 03:28:27 <fedorared> Better, a trace from gdb
278 2010-10-26 03:28:48 <fedorared> gdb bitcoind
279 2010-10-26 03:28:52 <fedorared> (gdb) run
280 2010-10-26 03:28:59 <fedorared> (gdb) bt
281 2010-10-26 03:29:58 <boogiebomzh> "/home/tundra/bitcoin-0.3.14/bin/32/bitcoind": not in executable format: File format not recognized (gdb) run Starting program: No executable file specified. Use the "file" or "exec-file" command. (gdb) bt No stack.
282 2010-10-26 03:31:59 <fedorared> Beats me how you're actually running it and getting a segfault
283 2010-10-26 03:32:35 <fedorared> Maybe you can find a core file to get the trace out of.
284 2010-10-26 03:32:45 <fedorared> Which will be the limit of my gdb knowledge
285 2010-10-26 03:34:09 <boogiebomzh> i'll try to upgrade kernel
286 2010-10-26 03:34:24 <fedorared> I doubt that's it but ok
287 2010-10-26 03:35:05 <ne0futur> i doubt it too
288 2010-10-26 03:35:08 <ne0futur> probably unrelated
289 2010-10-26 03:35:46 <ne0futur> (07:09) <  ne0futur> theres no fully static binary for bitcoin ?
290 2010-10-26 03:37:00 <fedorared> A segfault is likely either a pointer reference or memory corruption.
291 2010-10-26 03:37:21 <fedorared> I'd start on getting bitcoin to run in gdb with shared libs before bothering with that
292 2010-10-26 03:38:12 <ne0futur> can also be a bug in libc or another one :p
293 2010-10-26 03:38:21 <boogiebomzh> it can be memory corruption. pretty old pc
294 2010-10-26 03:38:47 <fedorared> I'm of the opinion that static binaries should be avoided on Linux because a strong packaging system exists for the libraries
295 2010-10-26 03:39:21 <boogiebomzh> can it be hardware problem?
296 2010-10-26 03:39:31 <fedorared> Yes
297 2010-10-26 03:39:53 <ne0futur> sure
298 2010-10-26 03:39:59 <ne0futur> memory or disk
299 2010-10-26 03:40:05 <fedorared> In which case booting into memtest to test would be a good idea
300 2010-10-26 03:40:15 <ne0futur> theres also memtester in userland
301 2010-10-26 03:40:17 <fedorared> If you can reliably reproduce it may not be hardware
302 2010-10-26 03:40:21 <ne0futur> memtester 1000 1
303 2010-10-26 03:41:05 <fedorared> I doubt in userland you can test as completely
304 2010-10-26 03:42:32 <doublec> boogiebomzh, does your machine support SSE? Maybe something with the SSE detection is causing the segfault.
305 2010-10-26 03:43:34 <boogiebomzh> flags           : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 mmx fxsr sse up
306 2010-10-26 04:18:06 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: wee, my opencl host compiles m0's kernel
307 2010-10-26 06:06:19 <joe_1> does anyone understand the balance sheet proposal
308 2010-10-26 06:06:29 <appamatto> link?
309 2010-10-26 06:06:51 <joe_1> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=505.0
310 2010-10-26 06:06:54 <bitbot> With "Balance sheets" most of the block chain can be forgotten.
311 2010-10-26 06:10:46 <appamatto> I had this idea too
312 2010-10-26 06:10:53 <appamatto> I'm just not sure it's really necessary
313 2010-10-26 06:12:10 <appamatto> It seems likely to me that only "supernodes" will be generating and maintain the block chain anyway
314 2010-10-26 06:12:17 <joe_1> ok
315 2010-10-26 06:12:20 <joe_1> thats what i thought too
316 2010-10-26 06:13:24 <appamatto> I am a little worried about transaction spam, though
317 2010-10-26 06:16:32 <joe_1> it will be fixed by transaction fees i think
318 2010-10-26 06:19:44 <edcba> appamatto: why not a lot of small nodes ?
319 2010-10-26 06:20:05 <appamatto> well, I don't think small nodes will generate
320 2010-10-26 06:20:25 <appamatto> because of the electricity costs
321 2010-10-26 06:21:17 <appamatto> If you're not generating then why not just connect to a server for your transactions?
322 2010-10-26 06:21:32 <appamatto> that way you aren't downloading blocks, storing blocks, etc.
323 2010-10-26 06:24:02 <appamatto> I'm thinking that most devices will be mobile at some point
324 2010-10-26 06:25:05 <edcba> appamatto: a lot of ppl may have some client running without knowing it does anything
325 2010-10-26 06:42:33 <lfm> I think full clients without generating will be able to run on mobile devices too soon
326 2010-10-26 09:39:28 <yebyen> hi, everybody
327 2010-10-26 09:40:04 <joe_1> hey
328 2010-10-26 09:46:21 <noagendamarket> hello
329 2010-10-26 09:46:39 <yebyen> pong
330 2010-10-26 09:48:33 <yebyen> so it looks like the longer a few clients work on a bitcoin cloud together, with not very many transactions going back and forth, they start to diverge block chains
331 2010-10-26 09:48:41 <yebyen> even though they're "in the room together"
332 2010-10-26 09:48:59 <yebyen> i have 3 clients all connected (one is apparently connected to both of the others)
333 2010-10-26 09:49:16 <yebyen> and they all have different block counts
334 2010-10-26 09:50:58 <joe_1> that sounds like a bug
335 2010-10-26 10:00:30 <edcba> yebyen: have they the same version ?
336 2010-10-26 10:10:56 <UukGoblin> fucking hell did the price go up
337 2010-10-26 10:29:13 <Malouin_> low at 0.111, hmmm
338 2010-10-26 10:32:57 <UukGoblin> looks like mt gox still doesn't support withdrawing of USD?
339 2010-10-26 10:39:08 <Malouin_> not yet nop
340 2010-10-26 10:40:49 <Malouin_> This is the update :
341 2010-10-26 10:40:53 <Malouin_> "You can now send and receive BTC and USD from other Mt Gox users. This means that people wanting to get USD into Mt Gox just need to find people that want to get USD out of Mt Gox and then trade USD by whatever method they can agree on (Paypal, LR, AlertPAy, Cash etc)"
342 2010-10-26 10:41:54 <UukGoblin> uhm
343 2010-10-26 10:42:01 <UukGoblin> but you can get money into mt gox using liqpay
344 2010-10-26 10:43:06 <UukGoblin> so people who want to get money in there via some automated way don't have any incentive to search for people who want to get money out of it
345 2010-10-26 10:44:59 <OneFixt> The incentive is you can get a better rate if you find people who will give you one.
346 2010-10-26 10:45:57 <UukGoblin> better rate on trading dollars for dollars?
347 2010-10-26 10:46:02 <OneFixt> Yep.
348 2010-10-26 10:46:16 <OneFixt> If someone really wants to get their MtG dollars out.
349 2010-10-26 10:49:57 <yebyen> it seems like the opposite of the system's advantages
350 2010-10-26 10:50:02 <yebyen> to require you to go out and find other users
351 2010-10-26 10:50:23 <yebyen> it should be able to do that matchmaking automatically, like bitcoinmarket, except then it loses the advantage over bitcoinmarket
352 2010-10-26 10:51:18 <UukGoblin> sending money directly to people's bank accounts shouldn't be that hard...
353 2010-10-26 10:51:33 <bd_> sending is easy. receiving is the problem
354 2010-10-26 10:51:41 <bd_> and the problem here is the receiving end was retroactively stopped
355 2010-10-26 10:51:52 <bd_> so they never got the money in the first place
356 2010-10-26 10:52:04 <UukGoblin> well receiving (on mt. gox's side) is solved by using liqpay
357 2010-10-26 10:52:37 <bd_> doesn't fix the problem that there's funds frozen in paypal
358 2010-10-26 10:52:47 <bd_> so there's not enough money to go around
359 2010-10-26 11:39:23 <yebyen> well that's lucky
360 2010-10-26 12:07:59 <gavinandresen> Good morning everybody within six time zones of me...
361 2010-10-26 12:08:39 <gavinandresen> Somebody reported that they triggered a double send by poking the Send button in the GUI twice-- anybody know who that was or can find the Forum thread?
362 2010-10-26 12:21:44 <Teppy> Anyone here able to test the Dragon's Tale Linux install? Need someone that has never been in DT and has never installed A Tale in the Desert.
363 2010-10-26 12:22:34 <Teppy> http://www.dragons.tl
364 2010-10-26 12:22:51 <twobitcoins> gavinandresen: http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=1528.msg18009#msg18009
365 2010-10-26 12:22:55 <bitbot> Version 0.3.14 : lzsaver: Feature request for 0.3.14.1.  I don't know how it happened, but I just clicked Send button twice. And I made two transactions instead of one. Send button should be disabled if I click it and enabled again if Send Coins form appeared...  I really do not know why Payment Sent window did not protect me.
366 2010-10-26 12:23:19 <gavinandresen> twobitcoins:  Thanks!
367 2010-10-26 13:35:02 <Malouin_> What would be the best argument to tell to someone, when you talk about bitcoin, who say : But I don't understand.. you generate bitcoin, so with your computer, you generate cash... how come this have a value
368 2010-10-26 13:35:31 <bonsaikitten> "you need to believe harder"
369 2010-10-26 13:35:38 <Malouin_> I try to explain it to my gf, seem hard to her to understand the concept of "making money" by generating bitcoin
370 2010-10-26 13:35:39 <bonsaikitten> at least that's what we are told for "real" money :)
371 2010-10-26 13:35:45 <Malouin_> hehehe
372 2010-10-26 13:35:50 <Kiba> it is a currency! It have similiar properties of real currency!
373 2010-10-26 13:36:55 <Kiba> Malouin_: yeah, bitcoin is tough to explain
374 2010-10-26 13:37:13 <bonsaikitten> I hit a similar barrier explaining open source
375 2010-10-26 13:37:25 <bonsaikitten> "what's your motivation for giving away the product?!"
376 2010-10-26 13:37:25 <Malouin_> yeah
377 2010-10-26 13:38:11 <Kiba> MOTIVATION? I AIN'T GIVING AWAY THE PRODUCT
378 2010-10-26 13:38:25 <Kiba> I am giving you my trade serect! That's all!
379 2010-10-26 13:38:32 <Kiba> secret*
380 2010-10-26 13:38:51 <Kiba> 3 words.
381 2010-10-26 13:38:55 <Kiba> Fame. Glory. Profit.
382 2010-10-26 13:39:01 <Malouin_> ;)
383 2010-10-26 13:39:09 <Malouin_> I think difficulty raise approx each week right?
384 2010-10-26 13:39:22 <Kiba> as long generation continues to increase
385 2010-10-26 13:39:45 <Kiba> If you want to be famous, you give away your books
386 2010-10-26 13:41:41 <Kiba> but authors want to make money!
387 2010-10-26 13:41:57 <Kiba> but without fame, how can you make money?
388 2010-10-26 13:42:02 <Kiba> you're obscure!
389 2010-10-26 13:42:08 <Kiba> nobody will buy books from you!
390 2010-10-26 13:58:17 <dwdollar> Generation is just a way to distribute the currency, not "print" wealth.
391 2010-10-26 13:58:53 <dwdollar> Although it has that affect.
392 2010-10-26 13:59:53 <altamic> is there a reason for there is no build for macosx for v0.3.14?
393 2010-10-26 14:00:49 <Kiba> dwdollar: maybe you should start posting dev log for your market?
394 2010-10-26 14:03:15 <dwdollar> Kiba:  I tried that with the blog for awhile, but I got lazy.
395 2010-10-26 14:03:40 <dwdollar> I'd like to have an early working version of the new website in two weeks.
396 2010-10-26 14:04:23 <dwdollar> I'll make that announcement here.:)
397 2010-10-26 14:16:43 <nathan7> la la
398 2010-10-26 14:16:59 <nathan7> WHERE THE FUCK HAVE MY OPS GONE? D:
399 2010-10-26 14:18:45 <nanotube> /op nathan7  :)
400 2010-10-26 14:18:48 <nanotube> heh
401 2010-10-26 14:18:54 <nathan7> :<
402 2010-10-26 14:18:58 <Kiba> WTF?
403 2010-10-26 14:19:09 <nathan7> bloody freenode and their bloody netsplits
404 2010-10-26 14:19:26 <Kiba> let mount a rebellion against the freenode cabal!
405 2010-10-26 14:19:37 <Kiba> and establish a free Freenode republic!
406 2010-10-26 14:19:44 <nathan7> free'd node
407 2010-10-26 14:20:06 <nanotube> nathan7: why in such a hurry to get ops, anyway? planning on kicking someone? :P
408 2010-10-26 14:20:32 <nathan7> nanotube: no, but I feel important with ops
409 2010-10-26 14:20:39 <nathan7> I like feeling important
410 2010-10-26 14:20:44 <nanotube> haha ic
411 2010-10-26 14:21:06 <nanotube> well in that case, feel free to op me when you get ops. i want some important feelings too :P
412 2010-10-26 14:21:18 <Kiba> MUHAHAHA I have 12.9 bitcoins!
413 2010-10-26 14:21:22 <nanotube> Netsniper: there's never going to be that many bitcoins :P
414 2010-10-26 14:22:07 <Netsniper> there's never going to be liberty and prosperity either :(
415 2010-10-26 14:26:14 <nanotube> well, maybe not all in one ocean... but they do occur in puddles and pockets here and there. :)
416 2010-10-26 14:27:02 <MacRohard> woah. theoretically i have over $7500 of bitcoins now heh.
417 2010-10-26 14:29:28 <Netsniper> MacRohard: buy me a pizza
418 2010-10-26 14:42:08 <nanotube> MacRohard: wow, nice :)
419 2010-10-26 14:42:24 <nanotube> i only have like $150 worth
420 2010-10-26 14:53:59 <Teppy> Anyone around willing to test the Linux install of the Dragon's Tale client? I will give 10 BTC :)
421 2010-10-26 14:54:21 <Teppy> PM me
422 2010-10-26 14:56:51 <nanotube> Teppy: well, i tested it some time ago hehe but my machine was dog slow with it.
423 2010-10-26 14:57:03 <nanotube> so i'm probably not the best candidate.
424 2010-10-26 14:57:18 <Teppy> I know - I need someone that hasn't installed the client before, but thanks.
425 2010-10-26 14:59:36 <Malouin_> I supose your wealth is based on a price of 0.10c ?
426 2010-10-26 14:59:55 <Malouin_> Oh, and hi btw =D
427 2010-10-26 15:05:09 <nanotube> Malouin_: yea, that's the price i'm using for the rough estimate. makes things nice and easy, just shift the decimal point. :)
428 2010-10-26 15:05:27 <nanotube> and hi to you too :)
429 2010-10-26 15:38:03 <Diablo-D3> http://techcrunch.com/2010/10/26/wepay-ice-paypal/
430 2010-10-26 15:38:10 <Diablo-D3> OHOHOHOHOHOHOOOO
431 2010-10-26 15:39:58 <nanotube> yea baby! hehe
432 2010-10-26 15:40:05 <nanotube> anyone here used wepay? is it actually any good?
433 2010-10-26 15:40:14 <nanotube> maybe our $marketsites should accept it?
434 2010-10-26 15:40:23 <Diablo-D3> I am considering it now
435 2010-10-26 15:40:25 <Diablo-D3> because
436 2010-10-26 15:40:31 <Diablo-D3> anyone with balls like that
437 2010-10-26 15:40:34 <Diablo-D3> I like
438 2010-10-26 15:40:53 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: around?
439 2010-10-26 15:42:41 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: right - but did you see the bit at the end of the article, that paypal used to have balls just like wepay now does? :)
440 2010-10-26 15:42:56 <Diablo-D3> they had the wrong kind of balls
441 2010-10-26 15:43:01 <Diablo-D3> they thought they could steal from their customers
442 2010-10-26 15:43:23 <bitquux> they _can_ steal from their customers
443 2010-10-26 15:43:45 <nanotube> haha well, /now/ that's the kind of balls they have. back when they were starting out, they were in the "intrepid startup" position...
444 2010-10-26 15:43:47 <nanotube> bitquux: haha yea
445 2010-10-26 15:44:34 <Kiba> today, I learn that sitting is unhealthy
446 2010-10-26 15:44:56 <nanotube> after all these years of sitting! what have i been doing to myself!
447 2010-10-26 15:45:13 <Kiba> apperantly, it doesn't matter how much exercise you get
448 2010-10-26 15:45:22 <Kiba> it won't offset the badness of sitting too much
449 2010-10-26 15:45:24 <Kiba> so stand
450 2010-10-26 15:46:07 <Kiba> I am getting rid of my chair!
451 2010-10-26 15:46:12 <Kiba> and I already run barefoot
452 2010-10-26 15:47:06 <Diablo-D3> bitquux: yes, they CAN go out of buisness, I agree
453 2010-10-26 15:47:53 <bitquux> barefoot is the way to go, Kiba
454 2010-10-26 15:48:07 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: http://xkcd.com/325/ (see title text)
455 2010-10-26 15:48:14 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: that's what paypal is doing.
456 2010-10-26 15:48:31 <bitquux> classic
457 2010-10-26 15:49:22 <bitquux> too true, nanotube
458 2010-10-26 15:52:28 <Kiba> we need some competition!
459 2010-10-26 15:52:39 <Kiba> and force paypal to stop stealing customers' money!
460 2010-10-26 15:53:00 <Diablo-D3> I agree with kiba
461 2010-10-26 15:54:42 <nanotube> everyone agrees with kiba :)
462 2010-10-26 15:54:49 <nanotube> (at least on this particular point)
463 2010-10-26 15:54:50 <jgarzik> I wish the forum software had a 'like' or 'recommend' button on each post
464 2010-10-26 15:55:10 <nanotube> jgarzik: and then? you could filter the comments like slashot's? :)
465 2010-10-26 15:55:47 <jgarzik> nanotube: sometimes it's nice to skim just the highlights
466 2010-10-26 15:56:31 <nanotube> mm yea
467 2010-10-26 15:56:43 <nanotube> well you can push a feature request to the smf guys, i guess.
468 2010-10-26 16:08:04 <brocktice> Hi all, quick question on recieving bitcoins.
469 2010-10-26 16:08:21 <brocktice> I want to accept bitcoins for a product I make, but I can't figure out how to tell who sends them to me.
470 2010-10-26 16:08:37 <brocktice> Do I have to use a separate receive address for each payer?
471 2010-10-26 16:08:44 <nameless> |brocktice: you would have to generate a new receiving address for each transaction
472 2010-10-26 16:09:01 <brocktice> argh, that's a bit cumbersome.
473 2010-10-26 16:10:19 <jgarzik> brocktice: use mybitcoin.com's HTML form-based interface, IMO.  it's similar to the shopping cart interfaces from Liberty Reserve, Pecunix, GlobalDigitalPay, ...
474 2010-10-26 16:10:38 <brocktice> Thanks
475 2010-10-26 16:10:47 <brocktice> I think for now I'll just have people email me and I'll send them an address back.
476 2010-10-26 16:11:05 <brocktice> I doubt I'll have much volume. If I do, I'll put in the effort to automate it.
477 2010-10-26 16:11:25 <bitquux> That seems to be the standard approach at this point.
478 2010-10-26 16:12:33 <bitquux> Are there any other wallet services like mybitcoin.com?
479 2010-10-26 16:13:14 <theymos> bitquux: MtGox, Vekja. The later has no merchant interface that I am aware of.
480 2010-10-26 16:14:33 <bitquux> Ooh. I didn't think of MtGox as a wallet service, but I guess the shoe fits.
481 2010-10-26 16:15:15 <jgarzik> quite a few of these minor bitcoin services offer de facto wallet services.  bitcoin lottery is another.
482 2010-10-26 16:15:25 <brocktice> Well, there we go. Curious to see if I get any takers.
483 2010-10-26 16:16:34 <jgarzik> brocktice: since bitcoin's quite new, you are faced with the chicken/egg problem:  you need people with bitcoins, in order to sell to people with bitcoins.  But people won't obtain bitcoins unless there are a wide range of products and services available in exchange for bitcoins.
484 2010-10-26 16:16:53 <brocktice> Sure, I know. No problem for me to add myself as a provider though.
485 2010-10-26 16:16:53 <mtgox> anyone willing to help me test accepting Liberty Reserve?
486 2010-10-26 16:17:08 <jgarzik> mtgox: me me me :)
487 2010-10-26 16:17:19 <brocktice> I already sell the product on Amazon.com, I'm just offering to take bitcoin instead.
488 2010-10-26 16:17:25 <brocktice> Or in addition, rather.
489 2010-10-26 16:17:54 <jgarzik> brocktice: great!
490 2010-10-26 16:18:03 <brocktice> I wonder what percentage of BitCoin use is currently for currency exchange/speculation vs. purchases of goods and services.
491 2010-10-26 16:18:11 <brocktice> Seems most of my use falls into the former category.
492 2010-10-26 16:18:14 <brocktice> If not all of my use.
493 2010-10-26 16:35:25 <MacRohard> 100:1
494 2010-10-26 16:35:29 <MacRohard> at least ;)
495 2010-10-26 16:36:30 <MacRohard> need more people selling stuff on biddingbond etc
496 2010-10-26 16:36:44 <brocktice> I listed a server on bitlist a while ago
497 2010-10-26 16:36:46 <brocktice> no takers yet
498 2010-10-26 16:36:56 <brocktice> I should probably lower the price given the way the exchange rate is going
499 2010-10-26 16:37:35 <brocktice> Been thinking about digging into the anonymous services, just for the heck of it
500 2010-10-26 16:37:42 <brocktice> But I haven't had the time to really investigate.
501 2010-10-26 16:37:58 <brocktice> If I'm going to go to those lengths, it needs to be done correctly, and there are lots of ways to screw it up.
502 2010-10-26 16:39:36 <MacRohard> yea.. you really need a new laptop or something
503 2010-10-26 16:39:53 <MacRohard> and never use it to do anything you'd do from your other computer
504 2010-10-26 16:40:06 <brocktice> Plus everything has to go through TOR, yadda yadda
505 2010-10-26 16:40:22 <brocktice> a VMware instance would probably be good enough.
506 2010-10-26 16:40:22 <MacRohard> yea.. but that's less important
507 2010-10-26 16:40:30 <MacRohard> eh. i dunno.
508 2010-10-26 16:43:07 <jgarzik> with that new laptop, add a MAC address scrambling problem (easy on Linux, but more difficult on Windows where you blend in better with the crowd)
509 2010-10-26 16:43:35 <jgarzik> never forget that OS and version can usually be determined from simple passive packet observation (even of encrypted packets)
510 2010-10-26 16:45:19 <bitquux> are we shooting for anonymous or untraceable?
511 2010-10-26 16:46:35 <brocktice> I'll show my ignorance and admit that I'm not sure of the difference.
512 2010-10-26 16:46:43 <brocktice> You mean, untraceable to my 'real-world' self?
513 2010-10-26 16:47:04 <brocktice> vs. anonymous meaning unable to distinguish between bouts of activity?
514 2010-10-26 16:51:01 <edcba> hmm
515 2010-10-26 16:51:23 <bitquux> I probably would have assigned them the other way around. These things do matter for not being able to connect different bouts of activity. I guess I was suggesting that for personal anonymity, "a linux box somewhere in the world" is as good as "a windows box somewhere in the world."
516 2010-10-26 16:51:58 <edcba> we need a client being able to force which address will give bitcoin
517 2010-10-26 16:52:59 <bitquux> is there even an address associated with the sender?
518 2010-10-26 16:53:20 <edcba> or suppose i want all transfers made to my website verifiable
519 2010-10-26 16:53:26 <nanotube> bitquux: yes, since every coin 'belongs' to a key
520 2010-10-26 16:53:27 <edcba> (by everyone)
521 2010-10-26 16:53:30 <edcba> how should i do ?
522 2010-10-26 16:53:40 <bitquux> but a key is different from an address, no?
523 2010-10-26 16:53:47 <nanotube> an address is a hash of a key
524 2010-10-26 16:54:08 <bitquux> gotcha
525 2010-10-26 16:54:37 <nanotube> edcba: well, either you publish a list of addresses that belong to your website... or use just one published address for incoming transfers....
526 2010-10-26 16:54:46 <nanotube> if i understand correctly what you're asking, at least
527 2010-10-26 16:55:20 <bitquux> or a new address for each incoming transfer so you can tell who is who (you can label them appropriately)
528 2010-10-26 16:55:33 <edcba> imagine my website is 10 first ppl sending me money win big prize
529 2010-10-26 16:55:48 <edcba> how someone could verify that ?
530 2010-10-26 16:56:28 <edcba> will they have to trust me ?
531 2010-10-26 16:56:29 <bitquux> to clarify, you mean how can a participant verify the first 10 you claim is legit?
532 2010-10-26 16:56:47 <edcba> yes
533 2010-10-26 16:58:31 <theymos> edcba: You could send back to one of the "from" addresses (hidden in Bitcoin). This would be verifiable by looking at the block chain.
534 2010-10-26 16:59:14 <theymos> Someone could see that 10 people sent to your address (and the order), and that you sent to those 10 people.
535 2010-10-26 16:59:39 <jgarzik> <gribble> BCM|   NEW TRD|PPUSD                  1000 @ $0.1400
536 2010-10-26 16:59:42 <bitquux> is that practical?
537 2010-10-26 17:00:04 <theymos> bitquux: Easy. Anyone could do it.
538 2010-10-26 17:00:09 <edcba> anyway i could also win those 10 first prizes...
539 2010-10-26 17:00:23 <edcba> damn :)
540 2010-10-26 17:00:35 <jgarzik> market prices on BCM are following mtgox.  color me surprised.
541 2010-10-26 17:00:43 <jgarzik> I guess it's just high demand.
542 2010-10-26 17:00:53 <edcba> who needs those bitcoins ?
543 2010-10-26 17:01:00 <edcba> speculators ?
544 2010-10-26 17:01:04 <theymos> I am also extremely surprised. I thought this was a bubble, but it's looking stable.
545 2010-10-26 17:01:13 <Kiba> must have heard the news on negative interest rate loan and inflationary policy of the federal reserve
546 2010-10-26 17:01:22 <edcba> haha
547 2010-10-26 17:01:33 <brocktice> I have advice from good authority that major inflation is coming.
548 2010-10-26 17:01:45 <Kiba> jackass bankers
549 2010-10-26 17:01:47 <brocktice> I'm not putting all my assets in bitcoin, but a little experimental nest-egg is good.
550 2010-10-26 17:01:53 <brocktice> So I've been helping drive it up.
551 2010-10-26 17:02:15 <brocktice> If I were really sure I'd buy a lot more.
552 2010-10-26 17:02:22 <edcba> i wouldn't invest in bitcoins as long as there is no real service associated to them
553 2010-10-26 17:02:40 <edcba> i mean some real useful one :)*
554 2010-10-26 17:02:41 <brocktice> Oh wow someone just bought 1000@0.14
555 2010-10-26 17:02:57 <brocktice> It's an asset with a fixed maximum rate of inflation.
556 2010-10-26 17:03:17 <brocktice> Just look at precious metals.
557 2010-10-26 17:04:19 <bitquux> jgarzik, what do you think needs to happen to maintain that after the initial-interest period?
558 2010-10-26 17:04:23 <Kiba> the exchange volume for bitcoins have not explode yet
559 2010-10-26 17:04:23 <Teppy> Has there been some recent press? Things do seem to be heating up.
560 2010-10-26 17:04:27 <nanotube> heh yea... bubble city in gold, it seems... but with everyone expecting crazy inflation a few years down the road... it seems that it will stay up there
561 2010-10-26 17:04:40 <edcba> but having a value just by the vertue to exist for an immaterial coin, it's a bit too much for me :)
562 2010-10-26 17:04:43 <brocktice> Teppy: Intrest-protected bonds just sold like crazy
563 2010-10-26 17:05:09 <jgarzik> bitbot: what edcba said... real products and services
564 2010-10-26 17:05:10 <Kiba> government faggots not learning their lessons
565 2010-10-26 17:05:16 <jgarzik> s/bitbot/bitquux/
566 2010-10-26 17:05:22 <brocktice> I don't buy it 100%, but I'm told the US gov't has been printing money like never before.
567 2010-10-26 17:05:28 <brocktice> And it's going to come back to bite us soon.
568 2010-10-26 17:05:52 <brocktice> If the bitcoin exchange rate drops precipitously, I'm out a little money in the short term.
569 2010-10-26 17:05:54 <Kiba> trusting money to government is like trusting a kid with a credit card
570 2010-10-26 17:06:07 <jgarzik> <gribble> BCM|   NEW BID|PPUSD                  1000 @ $0.1350
571 2010-10-26 17:06:13 <Kiba> ;mtgox
572 2010-10-26 17:06:14 <bitbot> Kiba: Mt. Gox: Last(0.165) High(0.19) Low(0.13) BestSellPrice(0.15) BestBuyPrice(0.165) Volume(25677)
573 2010-10-26 17:06:14 <nanotube> like trusting a pedophile with your children? :) heh
574 2010-10-26 17:06:22 <brocktice> I just wish I'd gotten in on the ground floor like some of you guys.
575 2010-10-26 17:06:31 <brocktice> Man, hundreds of free bitcoins to be had.
576 2010-10-26 17:06:36 <nanotube> brocktice: haha yea same here
577 2010-10-26 17:06:40 <brocktice> Now worth some 10-15c each.
578 2010-10-26 17:06:40 <jgarzik> thousands
579 2010-10-26 17:06:41 <nanotube> i'm a fairly recent arrival here
580 2010-10-26 17:06:44 <Teppy> Once we get the credit card thing worked out, I'm hoping Dragon's Tale creates some actual (non-speculative) demand.
581 2010-10-26 17:06:54 <Kiba> yeah baby!
582 2010-10-26 17:06:59 <brocktice> I bought most of mine when it was about US$0.06/bitcoin
583 2010-10-26 17:07:02 <Teppy> Was hoping for that yesterday, but maybe today, we'll see.
584 2010-10-26 17:07:05 <Kiba> bitcoin economy's the size of a small nation here we come!
585 2010-10-26 17:07:08 <nanotube> inasmuch as a gambling game is non-speculative hehe
586 2010-10-26 17:07:18 <Teppy> It's entertainment.
587 2010-10-26 17:07:32 <brocktice> I also figure this is an easy way to learn speculation hands-on
588 2010-10-26 17:07:41 <nanotube> Teppy: yea, just thought it was amusing to note :)
589 2010-10-26 17:07:42 <brocktice> without paying big bankers for every exchange.
590 2010-10-26 17:07:49 <Kiba> I guess it will become easier for me to sell my bitcoins for dollars and buy cheap capitals for the bitcoin economy
591 2010-10-26 17:07:50 <brocktice> op, naptime for the kiddo is over, back later
592 2010-10-26 17:08:07 <jgarzik> brocktice: heh, my 8-mo just headed for a snap this second
593 2010-10-26 17:08:18 <Teppy> Beetle Derby game is getting there - the critters crawl around now, don't step on each other.
594 2010-10-26 17:10:19 <Teppy> Yep. We need some stuff that's actual demand.
595 2010-10-26 17:10:33 <Teppy> How would the arcade work?
596 2010-10-26 17:10:46 <Kiba> Teppy: games would be really hard to beat until you buy upgrades
597 2010-10-26 17:10:51 <nanotube> send btc using your smartphone?
598 2010-10-26 17:11:01 <Kiba> and almost everything is a game
599 2010-10-26 17:11:24 <Teppy> Bitcoins are excellent for small transactions like that.
600 2010-10-26 17:11:41 <Kiba> say, if you want a job as a taxi man, you rent a car using sheep cans, and you can transport other players for cash
601 2010-10-26 17:11:51 <Kiba> sheep cans is the currency of kibabase.com
602 2010-10-26 17:12:16 <Kiba> basically, all the players are some kind of wolf avatar
603 2010-10-26 17:12:59 <Kiba> wolves who are really enterprising can breed and care for a herd of sheeps
604 2010-10-26 17:13:37 <Kiba> the superstore is where you buy upgrades, but you must also rush your chart to the right place in the right asile to get the items you want before the price increase
605 2010-10-26 17:15:15 <Kiba> so yeah, everything in my arcade is a game
606 2010-10-26 17:16:21 <Kiba> and there will be an abundance of entrepeneural activities for wolfkinds
607 2010-10-26 17:19:36 <edcba> nanotube: what do you want ? :)
608 2010-10-26 17:23:18 <nanotube> edcba: heh good question... i pretty much have everything i want. :) my online purchases are pretty much random one-off items that i happen to need... e.g., most recently, i bought http://www.pexsupply.com/Honeywell-AM102C-US-1-1-Union-Sweat-Mixing-Valve-80-120F
609 2010-10-26 17:23:29 <nanotube> but i don't anticipate needing another one of those for many years to come
610 2010-10-26 17:23:52 <nanotube> so... i'm not really waiting for anything in particular. :)
611 2010-10-26 17:23:54 <Kiba> standing while coding seem to be rather hard
612 2010-10-26 17:24:12 <nanotube> Kiba: ooh that reminds me. can you link me to the source on that sitting/standing bit?
613 2010-10-26 17:24:19 <jgarzik> bitcoin's killer app will wind up being some nifty web app that uses BTC for micropayments
614 2010-10-26 17:24:41 <nanotube> yea i think micropayments is the real competitive advantage to btc
615 2010-10-26 17:25:01 <edcba> Kiba: ask him bitcoins first
616 2010-10-26 17:25:14 <nanotube> hah
617 2010-10-26 17:25:25 <genjix> ok this is fucking ridiculous
618 2010-10-26 17:25:28 <Kiba> hmm
619 2010-10-26 17:25:35 <genjix> $1 = 6.5 btc
620 2010-10-26 17:25:43 <genjix> yesterday it was 9 btc
621 2010-10-26 17:25:44 <MacRohard> maybe a bitcoin mobile app store
622 2010-10-26 17:25:51 <genjix> a few days ago 15 btc
623 2010-10-26 17:25:58 <MacRohard> not exactly micropayments tho'
624 2010-10-26 17:26:09 <Netsniper> maybe an oatmeal cookie
625 2010-10-26 17:26:19 <nanotube> genjix: hehe yea
626 2010-10-26 17:26:38 <edcba> nanotube: 0.1 BTC for the link "Why your desk job is slowly killing you" to 1pbxUKKb7GWPRZkRWkxb1MPovzHBZS1RD
627 2010-10-26 17:26:53 <jgarzik> yeah, BTC has been going up like a rocket against all the currencies (mtgox, ppusd, lrusd, pecunix)
628 2010-10-26 17:27:23 <Kiba> the source code for mbc is hard to decode.
629 2010-10-26 17:27:27 <Kiba> PHP uglyness
630 2010-10-26 17:27:32 <genjix> there will be a bubble if people are investing in bitcoin
631 2010-10-26 17:27:43 <genjix> for the sake of investing
632 2010-10-26 17:27:50 <genjix> and it wont be good for bitcoin
633 2010-10-26 17:27:52 <nanotube> edcba: i /could/ just google it... :)
634 2010-10-26 17:27:59 <edcba> damn fail again
635 2010-10-26 17:28:03 <MacRohard> genjix, it's hard for it to burst if there is no naked short selling by operators of pooled credit accounts
636 2010-10-26 17:28:21 <MacRohard> the only one with significant pooled bitcoins is mtgox
637 2010-10-26 17:28:33 <genjix> hmm
638 2010-10-26 17:28:50 <genjix> still this kind of deflation cant be sustainable?
639 2010-10-26 17:29:04 <nanotube> MacRohard: well, if demand dries up, it'll 'burst'
640 2010-10-26 17:29:24 <genjix> its worrying for all people wanting to setup services around bitcoin
641 2010-10-26 17:29:39 <MacRohard> nanotube, it still requiers actual people to start selling their coins.. if they just forget about them then that will not drive down the price
642 2010-10-26 17:29:45 <Kiba> people who setup services around bitcoin ensure that price won't drop like crazy?
643 2010-10-26 17:30:10 <MacRohard> nanotube, without the resoruces of a pooled account available to traders to short with most likely most peopel will not sell their coins
644 2010-10-26 17:30:13 <genjix> Kiba: what do you mean?
645 2010-10-26 17:30:53 <Netsniper> utility theory
646 2010-10-26 17:31:08 <genjix> throw some random words out
647 2010-10-26 17:31:23 <genjix> what about utility theory? whats that to do with currency?
648 2010-10-26 17:31:23 <Netsniper> no thats exactly what is being refered to
649 2010-10-26 17:31:58 <genjix> utility theory is how much the rate of increase of value changes respective to items psychologically
650 2010-10-26 17:32:52 <genjix> like if you buy a washing machine for $400 then you wont be bothered by $10 + or -
651 2010-10-26 17:33:09 <nanotube> MacRohard: you assume that everyone that isn't buying will want to hold on to the coins.
652 2010-10-26 17:33:12 <Netsniper> i'd call that price elasticity
653 2010-10-26 17:33:16 <genjix> but if you buy a cartoon of milk for $2 then you might drive across town to save $3
654 2010-10-26 17:33:39 <MacRohard> nanotube, it's hard to see what would suddenly cause everyone to start selling when they haven't been before
655 2010-10-26 17:34:00 <MacRohard> nanotube, usually what happens on todays markets is massive naked short selling
656 2010-10-26 17:34:02 <nanotube> it only takes a relatively small overage in the number of people wanting to sell vs buy, for price to start moving down - and once it starts moves down, people rush to try to sell before it tanks too much... and you have a nice stampede.
657 2010-10-26 17:34:16 <genjix> utility theory attempts to measure that numerically so that several mathematical paradoxes (that seem absurd to us) actually follow our behaviour
658 2010-10-26 17:34:34 <genjix> nanotube: yep thats what I was meaning
659 2010-10-26 17:34:43 <genjix> and then bitcoin suffers as a whole
660 2010-10-26 17:34:44 <MacRohard> nanotube, that's a fine theory.. but it's kindof BS.. the price changes are all caused by traders with access to the pools of client resources
661 2010-10-26 17:35:09 <MacRohard> nanotube, in the current bitcoin environment there aren't really any large pools of client resoruces to abuse in that way to get a stampede going
662 2010-10-26 17:35:12 <nanotube> MacRohard: there are none of those in bitcoin, i think. and price still changes... so i dunno what you're talking about.
663 2010-10-26 17:35:32 <genjix> MacRohard: I'm not sure I believe that totally
664 2010-10-26 17:35:38 <genjix> there will always be price swings
665 2010-10-26 17:35:45 <genjix> the smaller ones are more common
666 2010-10-26 17:35:55 <genjix> the larger ones decrease in probability exponentially
667 2010-10-26 17:35:56 <nanotube> MacRohard: anyway... sure naked shorts may make it more likely, but doesn't mean that their absence means that significant price declines are impossible
668 2010-10-26 17:36:06 <genjix> but given enough time they will happen
669 2010-10-26 17:36:13 <jgarzik> Kiba: did you play around with the 'merchant tools' link creator?
670 2010-10-26 17:36:27 <genjix> and when they do, they are self re-enforcing feedback systems
671 2010-10-26 17:36:31 <MacRohard> nanotube, it actually might - especially coupled with the deflationary nature of bitcoins
672 2010-10-26 17:37:25 <genjix> having bitcoins gain 30% value every day is unsustainable
673 2010-10-26 17:37:33 <jgarzik> sure
674 2010-10-26 17:37:36 <genjix> you cant get value from nothing
675 2010-10-26 17:38:00 <MacRohard> the value depends on how many people are using the bitcoin economy
676 2010-10-26 17:38:05 <jgarzik> anybody in the bitcoin economy should assume, though, that bitcoin value will be highly volatile for some time.
677 2010-10-26 17:38:06 <Kiba> jgarzik: no
678 2010-10-26 17:38:14 <MacRohard> if the userbase declines for some reason that might result in a decrease in price
679 2010-10-26 17:38:20 <Kiba> to be honest, I don't know...
680 2010-10-26 17:38:27 <jgarzik> Kiba: it's a better reference than the PHP
681 2010-10-26 17:38:32 <Kiba> what the code is about...
682 2010-10-26 17:38:47 <jgarzik> Kiba: it posts an HTML form, as I wrote on the forums and here in IRC
683 2010-10-26 17:39:37 <jgarzik> Kiba: it helps if you look at Liberty Reserve or Pecunix SCI, to understand the concepts of payment-success-URL, payment-status-URL, etc.
684 2010-10-26 17:40:47 <Kiba> mkay
685 2010-10-26 17:40:57 <jgarzik> the mybitcoin PHP is bloody awful.  Tons of lines of code, and the "real" magic is hidden in a single line of code, where it builds an HTTP GET query.
686 2010-10-26 17:41:55 <jgarzik> Kiba: so... your task is to generate an HTML form on your website.  User clicks submit, and is transferred over to mybitcoin for payment completion.  when complete, mybitcoin sends your website an HTML query, and also, sends the user back to the success-URL you specified.
687 2010-10-26 17:42:39 <Diablo-D3> man
688 2010-10-26 17:42:46 <Diablo-D3> I wonder if btc can really take off
689 2010-10-26 17:43:07 <jgarzik> Kiba: The Liberty Reserve graphic illustrates the mybitcoin.com order flow: https://www.libertyreserve.com/en/help/sciguide#howsciworks
690 2010-10-26 17:43:44 <joe_1> who runs mybitcoin
691 2010-10-26 17:45:02 <jgarzik> mysterious peeps registered in Nevis
692 2010-10-26 17:45:23 <Kiba> what is Nevis?
693 2010-10-26 17:45:29 <jgarzik> what is google?
694 2010-10-26 17:46:02 <edcba> jeopardy ?
695 2010-10-26 17:46:34 <Kiba> DOUBLE JEOPARDY
696 2010-10-26 17:46:42 <joe_1> theyv been running late on answering emails
697 2010-10-26 17:47:00 <jgarzik> I usually get a 24h turnaround on MBC emails
698 2010-10-26 17:47:09 <jgarzik> slow, but not too slow
699 2010-10-26 17:49:06 <joe_1> i'll wait another day i'm on day 5 with no response
700 2010-10-26 17:50:02 <jgarzik> ouch
701 2010-10-26 17:50:14 <jgarzik> MBC definitely needs some competition
702 2010-10-26 17:50:31 <Kiba> all the services and businesses need competition
703 2010-10-26 17:50:38 <joe_1> tryin to give them a break cause they offer a good service and trying to stay anonymous and all
704 2010-10-26 17:51:43 <joe_1> if i bought a domain how would i anonymously take possession of it?
705 2010-10-26 17:53:06 <MacRohard> maybe pay him for a contract to operate the domain for you
706 2010-10-26 17:53:33 <theymos> joe_1: Use http://www.privacyshark.com/
707 2010-10-26 17:55:04 <joe_1> nice
708 2010-10-26 17:55:55 <joe_1> unfortunately i need port 80 forwarding because my site can only be hosted on high port numbers
709 2010-10-26 17:59:01 <MacRohard> i might be able to help you there.
710 2010-10-26 18:00:08 <nanotube> joe_1: what site are you working on? :)
711 2010-10-26 18:00:31 <joe_1> cashcow.no-ip.org
712 2010-10-26 18:01:31 <joe_1> that redirects to my IP address on port 10619, but i want it to be a domain name and not redirect to a different port and IP address
713 2010-10-26 18:02:08 <theymos> Wouldn't that require proxying all trafic through something on port 80?
714 2010-10-26 18:02:38 <edcba> http://techcrunch.com/2010/10/26/paypal-unveils-micropayments-for-digital-goods-facebook-signs-up/
715 2010-10-26 18:02:43 <joe_1> yeah, it might
716 2010-10-26 18:06:09 <nanotube> edcba: Pricing is set at 5 percent plus 5 cents for purchases under $12... so much for 'cheap microtransactions'...
717 2010-10-26 18:06:24 <nanotube> 10% fee to send $1
718 2010-10-26 18:07:03 <nanotube> good for bitcoin, i guess :)
719 2010-10-26 18:07:46 <nanotube> if they'd made it like 1% for any transaction regardless of size, they'd seriously erode bitcoin's competitive advantage. as it is... no threat
720 2010-10-26 18:08:04 <nanotube> competitive advantage wrt micropayments, that is
721 2010-10-26 18:10:35 <genjix> look at this sicko
722 2010-10-26 18:10:37 <genjix> http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/6359/displaygraphgw.png
723 2010-10-26 18:10:48 <genjix> he plays 100 tables of $1 sngs all day long everyday
724 2010-10-26 18:11:07 <genjix> he's -$1500 profit for the year but up 32k in rakeback
725 2010-10-26 18:11:20 <genjix> $1 sngs... 800k games
726 2010-10-26 18:11:22 <genjix> wtf
727 2010-10-26 18:11:33 <Teppy> Poker?
728 2010-10-26 18:11:40 <genjix> ofc
729 2010-10-26 18:11:59 <Teppy> What is ofc?
730 2010-10-26 18:12:10 <genjix> pokerstars sent a rep to his house to observe him since everyone thought he is a bot
731 2010-10-26 18:12:14 <genjix> = of course
732 2010-10-26 18:12:48 <nanotube> ;;sl poker rakeback
733 2010-10-26 18:12:49 <genjix> but he's a real dude. he says he doesnt play the $5 ones since he "runs really bad and gets coolered"
734 2010-10-26 18:12:49 <gribble> http://www.rakeback.com/ | World's largest rakeback provider guarantees bigger profits to online poker players. Daily Rake Tracking and rakeback paid directly to your poker account.
735 2010-10-26 18:13:28 <genjix> how hilarious is that though? :D
736 2010-10-26 18:13:40 <joe_1> he did worse in the second half of the year
737 2010-10-26 18:14:10 <genjix> yeah he played one $86 game which he lost and then since then he's been losing (mad tilt?)
738 2010-10-26 18:14:37 <genjix> he's playing 100 tables at once, all hours of the day
739 2010-10-26 18:14:45 <joe_1> unbelievable
740 2010-10-26 18:14:51 <genjix> probably pissing in a bottle and eating nutrient bars
741 2010-10-26 18:14:59 <genjix> kicking himself to stay awake
742 2010-10-26 18:15:18 <genjix> and hes a terrible player :p
743 2010-10-26 18:18:08 <genjix> June 1 2010 to July 27 2010:
744 2010-10-26 18:20:03 <ElectRo`> 1.75 games a min :|
745 2010-10-26 18:22:22 <genjix> http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showpost.php?p=21718088&postcount=801
746 2010-10-26 18:22:30 <genjix> his volume is INCREASING
747 2010-10-26 18:22:54 <genjix> - worlds largest grinder is playing more tables
748 2010-10-26 18:23:07 <genjix> - plays lowest easiest games for $1
749 2010-10-26 18:23:20 <genjix> - loser but makes money on rakeback
750 2010-10-26 18:23:38 <genjix> -human
751 2010-10-26 18:25:28 <genjix> How many sick people are there in this weird world....
752 2010-10-26 18:25:32 <ElectRo`> how do you fold aa kk
753 2010-10-26 18:25:49 <ElectRo`> does he not look at whats dealt
754 2010-10-26 18:25:53 <genjix> because you're playing 100+ tables of poker at once and misclick
755 2010-10-26 18:26:17 <genjix> all fucking day long
756 2010-10-26 18:26:20 <genjix> everyday
757 2010-10-26 18:29:14 <jgarzik> <gribble> BCM|   NEW TRD|PPUSD                  1000 @ $0.1500
758 2010-10-26 18:30:57 <Malouin_> wow hehe
759 2010-10-26 19:02:14 <Kiba> ;mtgox
760 2010-10-26 19:02:15 <bitbot> Kiba: Mt. Gox: Last(0.169) High(0.19) Low(0.132) BestSellPrice(0.1503) BestBuyPrice(0.169) Volume(24758)
761 2010-10-26 19:12:52 <hippich> it isn't possible to withdraw USD directly from mtgox right now, right?
762 2010-10-26 19:13:19 <jgarzik> hippich: not really
763 2010-10-26 19:13:31 <jgarzik> hippich: occasionally you can find a trade with someone wanting to deposit USD
764 2010-10-26 19:13:39 <jgarzik> hippich: I've done two such trades 1:1
765 2010-10-26 19:14:06 <hippich> yeah. but this is not really withdrawing from mtgox. i wonder how it happens that bitcoins exchange rate constantly raising then.
766 2010-10-26 19:14:22 <hippich> ah..
767 2010-10-26 19:14:37 <hippich> well.. make sense. since now one can't withdraw usd, they want to get bitcoins )))
768 2010-10-26 19:14:57 <jgarzik> <shrug> from the standpoint of my counterparties, they are withdrawing
769 2010-10-26 19:15:16 <jgarzik> their USD balance decreases, and their PayPal balance increases :)
770 2010-10-26 19:15:25 <hippich> =))
771 2010-10-26 19:15:44 <hippich> but technically, now new curency emerged - mtgoxUSD =))
772 2010-10-26 19:15:54 <jgarzik> for the next 180 days, yes
773 2010-10-26 19:16:32 <jgarzik> hippich: mtgox mentioned in here yesterday that he was working on adding LRUSD
774 2010-10-26 19:16:56 <hippich> LR is not so mainstream as PP. but at least something =)
775 2010-10-26 19:20:57 <theymos> Can anyone explain what BuildMerkleTree() does? It seems to be doing something other than just taking all of the transaction hashes and hashing them.
776 2010-10-26 19:30:16 <ArtForz> it builds a merkle tree (= hash tree) of transactions
777 2010-10-26 19:30:36 <ArtForz> it's a bit weird
778 2010-10-26 19:30:50 <Teppy> I can explain what they're useful for if that's what you're after.
779 2010-10-26 19:31:21 <ArtForz> the trick is it repeats the lat item to get no the next multiple of 2
780 2010-10-26 19:31:29 <ArtForz> and it always does double-sha256
781 2010-10-26 19:33:37 <ArtForz> calling sha256(sha256(x)) hash(x), single transaction is hash(tx)
782 2010-10-26 19:33:55 <ArtForz> 2 transactions: hash(hash(tx0) . hash(tx1)), still completely normal
783 2010-10-26 19:34:18 <ArtForz> with 3 it starts to look a bit different
784 2010-10-26 19:34:26 <ArtForz> hash(hash(hash(tx0) . hash(tx1)) . hash(hash(tx2) . hash(tx2)))
785 2010-10-26 19:35:04 <ArtForz> with 4 it looks like a normal hash tree again
786 2010-10-26 19:36:28 <ArtForz> 5 is funny
787 2010-10-26 19:36:35 <ArtForz> hash(hash(hash(hash(tx0) . hash(tx1)) . hash(hash(tx2) . hash(tx3))) . hash(hash(hash(tx4) . hash(tx4)) . hash(hash(tx4) . hash(tx4))))
788 2010-10-26 19:37:53 <ArtForz> basic algo is simple: given a list of transactions, create a list of hash(tx)
789 2010-10-26 19:38:32 <gavinandresen> So a 128-transaction-block would be:   (KIDDING, JUST KIDDING.. that'd be hash-o-rama)
790 2010-10-26 19:38:58 <ArtForz> notice tx4 is basically duplicated 4 times
791 2010-10-26 19:39:41 <gavinandresen> Good thing bitcoin is really good at hashing.
792 2010-10-26 19:40:01 <theymos> So it creates a tree with two hashes on each branch?
793 2010-10-26 19:41:32 <ArtForz> yes
794 2010-10-26 19:41:43 <theymos> What's the point of that?
795 2010-10-26 19:41:52 <ArtForz> easier to implement in a loop
796 2010-10-26 19:42:49 <theymos> Would it not be easier and just as effective to derive the Merkle root directly from all of the transactions?
797 2010-10-26 19:43:05 <Teppy> And O(log n) hash computations instead of O(n) where n is the number of duplicated hashes.
798 2010-10-26 19:43:29 <ArtForz> for the current implementation, we could just do hash(tx1 . tx2 . tx3 ...) and have the same thing
799 2010-10-26 19:43:45 <ArtForz> the merkle tree isn't used for anything except creating a hash of transactions in a block
800 2010-10-26 19:44:07 <theymos> Is it necessary for simplified payment verification?
801 2010-10-26 19:44:13 <ArtForz> nothing refers to the merkle tree hashes
802 2010-10-26 19:44:34 <ArtForz> transactions refer to their input TXs by hash(tx)
803 2010-10-26 19:45:56 <Teppy> I suspect this is for a future optimization: If you have two block chains and you're trying to figure out where they diverge, compare their root hashes to quickly determine if they diverge. If they do, then compare their left children's hashes to determine if the divergence is in the first 50% of the chains,...
804 2010-10-26 19:46:23 <ArtForz> the core merkle hash is implemented in what looks like a tail-recursion-converted-to-loop
805 2010-10-26 19:46:24 <Teppy> If the left children match, then recurse into the right children.
806 2010-10-26 19:46:45 <ArtForz> *shrug*
807 2010-10-26 19:48:23 <ArtForz> anyways, it works about like this:
808 2010-10-26 19:48:25 <ArtForz> if(len(hashlist) == 1): return hashlist[0]
809 2010-10-26 19:48:26 <ArtForz> if(len(hashlist) % 2): duplicate last item in hashlist
810 2010-10-26 19:50:24 <ArtForz> why the "duplicate last item" before the 2-to-1 ... no clue
811 2010-10-26 19:51:22 <ArtForz> would've been more efficient to just copy the last item when # of items is odd = moving the leaf up one level
812 2010-10-26 19:51:50 <mtgox> anyone willing to help me test accepting Liberty Reserve?
813 2010-10-26 19:52:08 <theymos> ArtForz: I think I get it. Thanks!
814 2010-10-26 19:53:37 <ArtForz> mtgox: sure
815 2010-10-26 19:55:37 <mtgox> ArtForz: thanks jgarzik got me first though
816 2010-10-26 19:55:47 <ArtForz> okay
817 2010-10-26 19:57:13 <Teppy> ArtForz: If you'd like to help with some testing, I'm trying to see if the Linux install of Dragon's Tale works on a system that hasn't had ATITD installed on it.
818 2010-10-26 19:57:29 <Teppy> I'll even give a few BTC to play with :)
819 2010-10-26 20:02:58 <warner> theymos: the reason for the merkle tree is to let you verify a specific element of the set without having to also have all other members of the set
820 2010-10-26 20:03:49 <warner> suppose you have a copy of all the block headers, and you can see how they chain together into the current block, but you haven't bothered to store all the old transactions themselves
821 2010-10-26 20:04:01 <warner> and I've got a txn that I want you to believe
822 2010-10-26 20:04:37 <warner> I could give you the whole block that the txn was published in, you can hash the block, see that it matches a specific block header (which you already know), and then you accept it
823 2010-10-26 20:04:49 <warner> but what if that block had a million txns?
824 2010-10-26 20:05:44 <warner> with the merkle tree, what I do is give you the one txn that we care about, and the hash of its sibling, and the hash of our parent's sibling, etc, up to the hash just below the root. That gives you enough nodes of the tree to compute the root hash and verify it against the one in the block header that you already have.
825 2010-10-26 20:06:20 <warner> I call those hashes the "merkle chain" or the "uncle chain", since if you think of it like a family tree, you're grabbing the brother, the uncle, the grand-uncle, etc
826 2010-10-26 20:06:54 <warner> this lets you prove the validity of a single node with ln2(N) hashes instead of N hashes
827 2010-10-26 20:09:29 <theymos> I see. I thought that simple clients would store all of the transaction hashes, in which case a complex tree doesn't give any benefit. It makes sense when you do it like that, though. Thanks.
828 2010-10-26 20:10:42 <warner> yeah, the important thing is to define the protocol to tolerate stuff like that: if the block header were defined as a flat hash of the txns, then everybody would have to store all txns to verify any of them (forever)
829 2010-10-26 20:11:42 <warner> with the merkle tree, it changes into a question of code-simplicity and performance: it allows future versions to be implemented differently (storing less data) without causing compatibility problems
830 2010-10-26 20:13:31 <ArtForz> nope you wouldnt
831 2010-10-26 20:13:50 <ArtForz> when you get a block, you verify if the header hash matches the hash of the contained TX
832 2010-10-26 20:14:06 <ArtForz> if yes, store the header and the transactions
833 2010-10-26 20:14:57 <ArtForz> transactions refer to their inputs by transaction hash, so you *need* to keep a map of (tx hash) -> tx for all unspent tx around
834 2010-10-26 20:15:47 <warner> how about this: "if it were defined as a flat hash, then when Alice has a txn that she claims is part of the global chain, and Bob has a list of block headers but not any transactions, Alice would have to send N hashes to Bob, instead of ln2(N) hashes for the merkle tree" ?
835 2010-10-26 20:16:07 <warner> it doesn't help Bob decide whether the txn is double-spent or not, I agree
836 2010-10-26 20:16:26 <ArtForz> yep
837 2010-10-26 20:18:09 <warner> there's no way to accomplish that without tracking all the txns yourself
838 2010-10-26 20:19:04 <ArtForz> yeah, and it still doesn't explain why we're using hash-trees ugly cousin
839 2010-10-26 20:19:41 <ArtForz> aka the 'lets just duplicate the last item until we have a power-of-2 to get a nice and balanced hash tree' tree
840 2010-10-26 20:21:25 <ArtForz> if you have 5 items, your tree should look like (((1 2) (3 4)) 5), not (((1 2) (3 4)) ((5 5) (5 5)))
841 2010-10-26 20:22:06 <warner> oh, interesting
842 2010-10-26 20:22:45 <warner> merkle trees are almost always powers-of-2
843 2010-10-26 20:22:52 <warner> it makes the implementation simpler and more consistent
844 2010-10-26 20:23:09 <ArtForz> well, a unbalanced tree wouldnt be slower
845 2010-10-26 20:23:09 <warner> although usually you fill in some dummy leaf value rather than duplicating the last item
846 2010-10-26 20:23:16 <ArtForz> actually saves a few hashes
847 2010-10-26 20:23:45 <warner> it's save a few hashes sometimes. I think the rule about which "uncle nodes" you need to provide to validate any given leaf would get pretty complex
848 2010-10-26 20:23:59 <ArtForz> not really
849 2010-10-26 20:24:34 <warner> let's see, the total number of nodes in the tree is 2*(ceil_power_of_2(N))
850 2010-10-26 20:25:12 <warner> so the worst-case situation is where N=2^k+1, like say 1025 leaves
851 2010-10-26 20:25:18 <ArtForz> yep
852 2010-10-26 20:25:26 <warner> 1024 leaves -> 2048 hashes. 1025 leaves -> 4096 hashes.
853 2010-10-26 20:25:56 <ArtForz> don't forget each hash is actually double-sha256 :P
854 2010-10-26 20:26:14 <ArtForz> but yeah
855 2010-10-26 20:26:17 <warner> hm. for Tahoe we always use balanced trees, and I never even considered trying to speed things up by defining an unbalanced one
856 2010-10-26 20:26:51 <warner> the time spent hashing is a really tiny fraction of our overall processing time.. I think we measured it at like half a percent.
857 2010-10-26 20:27:15 <warner> and it scales linearly with the size of the file or tree
858 2010-10-26 20:27:25 <ArtForz> but yeah, worst case we do nearly 2x the "necessary" # of hashes
859 2010-10-26 20:28:08 <ArtForz> I think for this stuff we use ossl sha256
860 2010-10-26 20:28:28 <warner> yeah, I think so too
861 2010-10-26 20:29:26 <ArtForz> hrrrm... I have to think about a simple algo to determine which sibling/uncle/... hashes we need to send for a unbalanced merkle tree
862 2010-10-26 20:31:43 <warner> for reference, http://github.com/warner/tahoe-lafs/blob/master/src/allmydata/hashtree.py#L128 is how we do it in tahoe
863 2010-10-26 20:32:10 <warner> that code is heavily biased for readability over speed, though
864 2010-10-26 20:37:35 <ArtForz> btw, blew up a PSU again
865 2010-10-26 20:38:02 <bitquux> bugger
866 2010-10-26 20:38:39 <ArtForz> $180 1kW unit, ~750W load, ran fine for 5 weeks, *bang*
867 2010-10-26 20:39:02 <ArtForz> complete with sparks and puff of smoke
868 2010-10-26 20:39:18 <ArtForz> aka 'it's dead, jim'
869 2010-10-26 20:40:42 <ArtForz> my guess is the transistor in the PFC stage shorted out
870 2010-10-26 20:41:13 <ArtForz> as its line input is a dead short now
871 2010-10-26 20:41:15 <Malouin_> your 80 plus gold 1kw psu ?
872 2010-10-26 20:41:21 <ArtForz> nope
873 2010-10-26 20:42:13 <ArtForz> super flower amazon 1000W
874 2010-10-26 20:42:36 <Malouin_> ok
875 2010-10-26 20:42:56 <Malouin_> I ordered a silverstone 1200kw strider 2 days ago
876 2010-10-26 20:43:04 <ArtForz> seems to have dropped a bit in price recently
877 2010-10-26 20:43:44 <ArtForz> really weird
878 2010-10-26 20:44:03 <Malouin_> that explain why, lol
879 2010-10-26 20:44:14 <Malouin_> mt
880 2010-10-26 20:44:23 <Malouin_> ncix had a rebate of 50$ this week
881 2010-10-26 20:44:30 <ArtForz> really weird
882 2010-10-26 20:44:33 <Malouin_> on those
883 2010-10-26 20:44:37 <ArtForz> I test my PSUs by loading em to 100% for several hours
884 2010-10-26 20:45:40 <ArtForz> survived that just fine, didn't even run really hot, output voltages and ripple fine
885 2010-10-26 20:45:54 <Malouin_> weird
886 2010-10-26 20:45:57 <ArtForz> yep
887 2010-10-26 20:46:25 <ArtForz> works for a few weeks loaded to 750W, then just goes *bang* and throws the breaker
888 2010-10-26 20:46:55 <ArtForz> so I guess either crappy solder joint or bad component
889 2010-10-26 20:47:02 <ArtForz> anyways, RMA time
890 2010-10-26 20:47:18 <Malouin_> did you check if it happened to other buyer ?
891 2010-10-26 20:47:30 <ArtForz> I searched a bit, found nothing
892 2010-10-26 20:47:44 <Malouin_> really* weird
893 2010-10-26 20:48:02 <ArtForz> well, I guess most people don't load their PSUs to 750W or so 24/7 ...
894 2010-10-26 20:48:17 <Malouin_> hehehe
895 2010-10-26 20:48:31 <Malouin_> Thats why i will put my main computer and 2 radeon 5970 on the silverstone 1.2kw. I know it's maybe too much, but the mainboard is an asus p6t6 revolution WS, 12gb of ram, 2 harddisk. I prefer to be safe.
896 2010-10-26 20:48:43 <ArtForz> yeah
897 2010-10-26 20:49:01 <ArtForz> thats the reason I use a 1kW PSU for 2 5970s
898 2010-10-26 20:49:29 <ArtForz> figured 70-75% load shouldnt be a problem with a decent PSU
899 2010-10-26 20:49:43 <Malouin_> yeah
900 2010-10-26 20:50:07 <jgarzik> mtgox: saw your post on the forums
901 2010-10-26 20:50:23 <jgarzik> mtgox: does this credit the USD balance?  or do we trade USD<->LRUSD?
902 2010-10-26 20:54:28 <theymos> So a simple client would receive entire blocks, search them for sent or received transactions, and then throw everything except the header away?
903 2010-10-26 20:57:08 <ArtForz> yup
904 2010-10-26 20:57:49 <theymos> Thanks.
905 2010-10-26 21:01:34 <Malouin_> Art, are we many to use the gpu client?  I mean I know some, but they seem limited to use 1 card, mostly the 5850.
906 2010-10-26 21:02:45 <jgarzik> mtgox: transfers from LR return to a web page "looking for something?" still
907 2010-10-26 21:09:00 <MacRohard> 1 US dollar is worth 6.66 BTC.
908 2010-10-26 21:09:59 <jgarzik> mtgox: MIA: $100 LR deposit
909 2010-10-26 21:11:46 <ArtForz> Malouin_: not sure
910 2010-10-26 21:12:41 <ArtForz> I guess so, the network seems to be doing ~25GH/s average currently
911 2010-10-26 21:13:06 <Malouin_> Yup
912 2010-10-26 21:13:11 <Kiba> hmm
913 2010-10-26 21:13:21 <Kiba> mtgox gave up?
914 2010-10-26 21:13:30 <ArtForz> gave up?