1 2010-12-02 00:00:04 <nelisky> merchant doesn't need to have processor at all, right?
  2 2010-12-02 00:00:10 <nelisky> just an address
  3 2010-12-02 00:00:17 <jgarzik> (1) "payment-request: merchant=1234; payment-processor=http://mtgox.com/apiv1; amount=300; currency=BTC" or (2) "payment-request: bitcoin_addr=1abcd1234; amount=300; name='My Bitcoin Inc.'"
  4 2010-12-02 00:00:55 <jgarzik> (1) "payment-request: merchant=1234; name='My Bitcoin Inc.'; tx_id=1234bacd; payment-processor=http://mtgox.com/apiv1; amount=300; currency=BTC" or (2) "payment-request: bitcoin_addr=1abcd1234; amount=300; name='My Bitcoin Inc.'"
  5 2010-12-02 00:00:56 <nelisky> then the app contacts the payment processor for the user (or gateway to do that for it) and the payment is sent
  6 2010-12-02 00:01:05 <tcatm> The user has an account at mybitcoin and shop at mtgox. So the phone connects to mtgox and asks for an address to pay the shop. It could even transmit the label and add it to the shops transaction list.
  7 2010-12-02 00:02:15 <tcatm> Once the phone knows where to send the coins it asks the user for confirmation and instructs mybitcoin to send coins to address at mtgox.
  8 2010-12-02 00:02:45 <nelisky> what's txid in (1)?
  9 2010-12-02 00:03:17 <tcatm> Custom field I think. Something that'll appear in the shops account.
 10 2010-12-02 00:03:36 <nelisky> I like that
 11 2010-12-02 00:03:38 <nelisky> simple
 12 2010-12-02 00:04:08 <jgarzik> correct
 13 2010-12-02 00:04:24 <nelisky> so the app needs to pull bitcoin address from processor if not (2)
 14 2010-12-02 00:04:29 <jgarzik> correct
 15 2010-12-02 00:04:34 <nelisky> then feed that to it's own processor for payment
 16 2010-12-02 00:04:40 <nelisky> I feel an API being born
 17 2010-12-02 00:04:55 <nelisky> anyone taking notes? :)
 18 2010-12-02 00:04:58 <jgarzik> I'll start a forum post.
 19 2010-12-02 00:06:04 <nelisky> the app may know how to talk mtgox, but some "standard" api can be created so other processors can be added easily
 20 2010-12-02 00:06:11 <jgarzik> yep
 21 2010-12-02 00:06:23 <tcatm> Can the bitcoin wiki be used for drafting the API?
 22 2010-12-02 00:06:25 <nelisky> jgarzik: add an apiv field
 23 2010-12-02 00:06:37 <nelisky> api version
 24 2010-12-02 00:06:42 <jgarzik> tcatm: yes
 25 2010-12-02 00:06:56 <nelisky> like btc-1, or mtgox-1.5
 26 2010-12-02 00:07:03 <jgarzik> tcatm: could start with the page source of http://www.bitcoin.org/wiki/doku.php?id=bitcoins_draft_spec_0_0_1
 27 2010-12-02 00:07:16 <jgarzik> nelisky: yes.  I was just thinking the same thing.
 28 2010-12-02 00:07:35 <tcatm> There should only be one API.
 29 2010-12-02 00:07:45 <nelisky> yes, and one currency too
 30 2010-12-02 00:07:50 <nelisky> and a single OS
 31 2010-12-02 00:07:52 <nelisky> :p
 32 2010-12-02 00:07:55 <jgarzik> tcatm: disagree.  that's not reality.
 33 2010-12-02 00:08:30 <nelisky> if "SomeMajorProcessor" wants in, but has a well established API, I think we should be flexible
 34 2010-12-02 00:08:32 <brocktice> Isn't there already a uri on the forums?
 35 2010-12-02 00:08:39 <jgarzik> tcatm: a useful phone app will support multiple APIs... including existing APIs already deployed today.
 36 2010-12-02 00:08:49 <jgarzik> tcatm: you should define a preferred API, though
 37 2010-12-02 00:09:26 <nelisky> A simple web service needs to be created to render the QR code
 38 2010-12-02 00:09:30 <tcatm> At least a simple API that supports all essential features.
 39 2010-12-02 00:09:48 <jgarzik> if PayPal ever adds BTC as a currency, you will want to be able to support PayPal MassPay API.
 40 2010-12-02 00:09:56 <jgarzik> api=paypal in QR-code
 41 2010-12-02 00:10:27 <xelister> arent paypal jackasses?
 42 2010-12-02 00:10:29 <nelisky> jgarzik: we could even to automatic exchanges :)
 43 2010-12-02 00:10:36 <jgarzik> tcatm: yes, that's the "preferred API".  we can define "tcatm's payment request API" as the default API, when "api=" is missing from QR-code.
 44 2010-12-02 00:10:50 <jgarzik> the power of default
 45 2010-12-02 00:11:07 <nelisky> implicit knowledge...
 46 2010-12-02 00:11:27 <Kiba> adobe flash sucks!
 47 2010-12-02 00:11:46 <jgarzik> it's our QR-code spec.  as a new spec, we can declare that tcatm's API is the best.
 48 2010-12-02 00:11:52 <jgarzik> :)
 49 2010-12-02 00:12:40 <tcatm> So we need to create two specs: 1) QR code and 2) Payment/Phone API
 50 2010-12-02 00:14:32 <jgarzik> tcatm: correct
 51 2010-12-02 00:14:55 <nelisky> for 2) I'd start by leveraging what mtgox already provides
 52 2010-12-02 00:17:18 <jgarzik> phone app should support mtgox API, definitely.  but mtgox API need not be the "preferred API", set in stone for all eternity...
 53 2010-12-02 00:18:35 <tcatm> http://www.bitcoin.org/wiki/doku.php?id=phone_api
 54 2010-12-02 00:20:16 <Kiba> how many blocks were generated each day again?
 55 2010-12-02 00:20:46 <tcatm> 144
 56 2010-12-02 00:20:48 <brocktice> supposed to be 144 Ithink
 57 2010-12-02 00:20:51 <xelister> 24*6 ?
 58 2010-12-02 00:21:12 <brocktice> hasn't been that for a while though
 59 2010-12-02 00:21:20 <Kiba> so that 7200 bitcoins
 60 2010-12-02 00:21:28 <jgarzik> tcatm: cool!  editing QR-code section...
 61 2010-12-02 00:22:10 <jgarzik> tcatm: ah, page is locked for editing by you.  will wait. :)
 62 2010-12-02 00:23:14 <jgarzik> btcpayment-request: merchant=1234; name="My Bitcoin Inc."; tx_id=1234bacd; payment-processor=http://mtgox.com/apiv1; api=mtgox; amount=300; currency=BTC
 63 2010-12-02 00:23:52 <jgarzik> btcpayment-request: name="My Bitcoin Inc."; tx_id=1234bacd; amount=300; btcaddr=1LGpwDU5djqsR1X14Tcass3y9fULTzxJq3
 64 2010-12-02 00:24:16 <nelisky> and this needs not be limited to the phone app. Add QR code generation to the api and the merchant's POS software will use it too
 65 2010-12-02 00:24:23 <jgarzik> and unrelated to merchants, we need a singleton bitcoin address QR-code,
 66 2010-12-02 00:24:32 <jgarzik> bitcoin_address: 1LGpwDU5djqsR1X14Tcass3y9fULTzxJq3
 67 2010-12-02 00:24:38 <nelisky> jgarzik: I was writing just that, damn
 68 2010-12-02 00:24:45 <tcatm> done editing. added phone app features section
 69 2010-12-02 00:24:48 <jgarzik> so that mobile phone users may easily exchange BTC addr
 70 2010-12-02 00:24:52 <nelisky> yep
 71 2010-12-02 00:25:04 <nelisky> add an iphone app, put it in both app stores
 72 2010-12-02 00:25:20 <nelisky> and that is lots of visibility for bitcoins
 73 2010-12-02 00:25:47 <tcatm> Yes, it won't be limited to phones. Ideally also a desktop app will use it.
 74 2010-12-02 00:27:10 <nelisky> hmmm, but we can't have both parties run bcaddress directly
 75 2010-12-02 00:27:19 <nelisky> we need a volunteer processor for that
 76 2010-12-02 00:27:19 <tcatm> ?
 77 2010-12-02 00:27:28 <jgarzik> yes, nothing in QR-code or phone API spec _limits_ us to mobile phones.
 78 2010-12-02 00:27:33 <jgarzik> and that's good.
 79 2010-12-02 00:27:53 <nelisky> tcatm: send 50 from address 123123 to address adasd
 80 2010-12-02 00:27:56 <nelisky> now what?
 81 2010-12-02 00:28:20 <nelisky> the sender ALWAYS needs a processor
 82 2010-12-02 00:28:43 <nelisky> although I can get the app to talk to bitcoind if using a visible address :)
 83 2010-12-02 00:28:54 <tcatm> The phone will use the users processor to send bitcoins to adasd.
 84 2010-12-02 00:29:29 <nelisky> so the user always has to use a processor, check that
 85 2010-12-02 00:29:47 <tcatm> Yep.
 86 2010-12-02 00:29:53 <nelisky> I was thinking, two guys on the street, just bc addresses... but yeah, processor mandatory
 87 2010-12-02 00:30:04 <tcatm> It's basically a frontend to an online wallet.
 88 2010-12-02 00:30:08 <nelisky> again, it could talk to bitcoind directly, for advanced users
 89 2010-12-02 00:30:26 <nelisky> only over ssl, of course
 90 2010-12-02 00:30:41 <nelisky> ( that's working in bitcoind, right? )
 91 2010-12-02 00:31:18 <tcatm> That's where the proof-of-concept daemon will be handy. To glue a standard bitcoind to the phone.
 92 2010-12-02 00:31:19 <jgarzik> nelisky, tcatm: comments on http://www.bitcoin.org/wiki/doku.php?id=phone_api QR-codes?
 93 2010-12-02 00:31:53 <nelisky> tcatm: granted, but lets not focus on that just now :)
 94 2010-12-02 00:32:09 <nelisky> tcatm: and the jsonrpc over ssl to own bitcoind works as well
 95 2010-12-02 00:32:13 <nelisky> almost for free
 96 2010-12-02 00:32:27 <tcatm> jgarzik: What about fields that are either mandotary or optional?
 97 2010-12-02 00:32:52 <tcatm> So QR Code 2 is a more specific versoin of Code 3
 98 2010-12-02 00:33:00 <nelisky> on phone api, send to address, the address may also come from QR
 99 2010-12-02 00:33:21 <nelisky> not necessarily from a processor, right?
100 2010-12-02 00:33:36 <tcatm> right.
101 2010-12-02 00:33:37 <jgarzik> nelisky: that's "btcpayment-request1"
102 2010-12-02 00:34:01 <jgarzik> nelisky: the more generic "payment-request1" is where bitcoin address must be requested via API
103 2010-12-02 00:34:19 <nelisky> jgarzik: on qr code section, sure, was looking at phone api for a textual description
104 2010-12-02 00:34:57 <tcatm> nelisky: That's under App Features.
105 2010-12-02 00:35:07 <tcatm> The API will only know how to send coins to some address.
106 2010-12-02 00:35:20 <tcatm> And has a way to query a processor for an address to send to.
107 2010-12-02 00:35:49 <nelisky> tcatm: roger, sorry for being dense
108 2010-12-02 00:36:31 <nelisky> so we need to add that phone app stores auth for user
109 2010-12-02 00:36:35 <tcatm> I also have some paymentprocessor2paymentprocessor API in mind where processors can trust each other for faster confirmations...
110 2010-12-02 00:36:44 <nelisky> for multiple accounts / processors?
111 2010-12-02 00:36:50 <jgarzik> tcatm: that would be interesting
112 2010-12-02 00:37:11 <tcatm> But that's a different project ;)
113 2010-12-02 00:38:00 <tcatm> Still the API should support it so the processor really only returns whether a payment is confirmed or not.
114 2010-12-02 00:38:29 <nelisky> ackd vs confirmed
115 2010-12-02 00:38:29 <tcatm> nelisky: Yes. Multiple accounts at different processors should be possible.
116 2010-12-02 00:39:18 <nelisky> so how does the merchant trust the payment again?
117 2010-12-02 00:39:49 <tcatm> Once the merchant's payment processor shows the incoming TX as confirmed.
118 2010-12-02 00:39:50 <nelisky> because we do it in person, I assume, no need to wait for confirmation
119 2010-12-02 00:40:12 <nelisky> tcatm: and that is always almost immediate?
120 2010-12-02 00:40:26 <nelisky> I never tried to understand how that worked
121 2010-12-02 00:40:26 <tcatm> Which can be immediately if both are using the same processor.
122 2010-12-02 00:40:37 <nelisky> the blocks and transactions sure
123 2010-12-02 00:40:43 <tcatm> I.e. processor can just use the move-json call to move bitcoins.
124 2010-12-02 00:41:01 <nelisky> tcatm: we can't assume or expect same processor
125 2010-12-02 00:41:38 <tcatm> Then the processor waits for a few confirmations.
126 2010-12-02 00:41:49 <nelisky> but we can give some feedback to the merchant via the user's processor
127 2010-12-02 00:42:37 <nelisky> without any confirmation, how does bitcoin currently receive the immediate transfer ack?
128 2010-12-02 00:42:42 <nelisky> the 0/unconfirmed?
129 2010-12-02 00:42:53 <MT`AwAy> via P2P
130 2010-12-02 00:42:56 <tcatm> TX spreading P2P.
131 2010-12-02 00:43:09 <MT`AwAy> however it will not know if the transaction is really valid or not
132 2010-12-02 00:43:13 <tcatm> The merchant should never have to trust the user.
133 2010-12-02 00:43:24 <MT`AwAy> until it is included in a block, then when that block gets confirmed
134 2010-12-02 00:43:43 <nelisky> can that tx carry any extra info?
135 2010-12-02 00:43:51 <tcatm> If multiple processors are involved they might communicate with each other to notify of TXs.
136 2010-12-02 00:43:52 <MT`AwAy> the only way is to have user & merchant use same gateway (merchants could support many gateways, or gateways could communicate)
137 2010-12-02 00:43:54 <nelisky> like a token given by the QR?
138 2010-12-02 00:43:59 <MT`AwAy> nelisky: it is possible, while currently unused
139 2010-12-02 00:44:26 <nelisky> that just goes to the gateway idea I was pushing before
140 2010-12-02 00:44:55 <nelisky> TX with transaction id generated by merchant would be enough in most low cost cases
141 2010-12-02 00:45:10 <nelisky> all others can wait for however many confirmations
142 2010-12-02 00:45:59 <nelisky> so although not used now, the API should provide a way to send that token, and use it to query the ack and confirmation number
143 2010-12-02 00:46:00 <MT`AwAy> with things like mtgox there's no need to wait for anything, provided the customer already had the required amount
144 2010-12-02 00:46:17 <nelisky> if user AND merchant are in mtgox, sure
145 2010-12-02 00:46:36 <MT`AwAy> or if user is in mtgox, merchant at xxx and xxx/mtgox has a transaction transmission agreement
146 2010-12-02 00:46:41 <nelisky> but we can't user that as the general case, we need to assume otherwise
147 2010-12-02 00:47:06 <nelisky> user is mtgox, merchant is just an address, who know what processor, if any?
148 2010-12-02 00:47:29 <nelisky> but if the TX message carries that token AND you saw the user snap the QR code
149 2010-12-02 00:47:33 <nelisky> I think you're safe
150 2010-12-02 00:47:35 <tcatm> My idea is like this: mybitcoin and mtgox trust each other. I'm using mybitcoin and sending coins to a merchant using mtgox. My phone will query mtgox for a address to send coins to. Then it will instruct mybitcoin to send coins to $address. It will also populate a field like dest_processor=mtgox. mybitcoin will then notify mtgox that there's going to be an transaction to $adress.
151 2010-12-02 00:47:53 <MT`AwAy> no
152 2010-12-02 00:47:55 <MT`AwAy> we can do better
153 2010-12-02 00:48:02 <MT`AwAy> mh
154 2010-12-02 00:48:49 <jgarzik> tcatm: lemme know when you're finished editing
155 2010-12-02 00:48:57 <MT`AwAy> well, transactions could be backed by "trust", ie transactions emitted by mtgox could include a tag (ie, emitter=mtgox), and then receiver would be able to query internally an mtgox api with transaction hash to confirm mtgox backs that transaction
156 2010-12-02 00:49:37 <MT`AwAy> this way there's no need for the phone to query mtgox
157 2010-12-02 00:49:52 <MT`AwAy> and it could be used in other contexts too
158 2010-12-02 00:50:00 <tcatm> jgarzik: oops sorry
159 2010-12-02 00:50:04 <MT`AwAy> (ie. the bitcoin client could auto-confirm transactions this way)
160 2010-12-02 00:50:57 <nelisky> right, the scope widens
161 2010-12-02 00:51:28 <nelisky> backing up a step, if mtgox detects own addresses, then we're golden for the initial phase
162 2010-12-02 00:51:45 <nelisky> a confirmation should rarely take more than 10 minutes
163 2010-12-02 00:52:10 <tcatm> Yes, the processor is supposed to detect own addresses.
164 2010-12-02 00:52:32 <nelisky> for larger amounts on the run (i.e. without being able to wait for confirmations) the merchant might demand a specific processor
165 2010-12-02 00:52:44 <tcatm> json-rpc validateaddress can do that already.
166 2010-12-02 00:52:54 <nelisky> maybe put that on the QR code? an optional 'allowed-merchants' field?
167 2010-12-02 00:53:10 <anarchyx> ;;bc,stats
168 2010-12-02 00:53:12 <gribble> Current Blocks: 94995 | Current Difficulty: 8078.19525793 | Next Difficulty At Block: 96767 | Next Difficulty In: 1772 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 3 days, 0 hours, 16 minutes, and 28 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 9929.30671278
169 2010-12-02 00:53:27 <anarchyx> O_o
170 2010-12-02 00:53:42 <tcatm> nelisky: Maybe in the future...
171 2010-12-02 00:54:38 <nelisky> now you'll make me grab the phone sooner... and I can't pay for it in bitcoins yet :)
172 2010-12-02 00:54:40 <tcatm> Could be an optional datafield fast-confirmation-required.
173 2010-12-02 00:54:58 <tcatm> Then the phone and processor will figure out if fast-confirmation is possible.
174 2010-12-02 00:55:18 <nelisky> hmmm
175 2010-12-02 00:55:32 <nelisky> for mtgox that would me 'is this address on your wallet?'
176 2010-12-02 00:55:36 <nelisky> sounds good
177 2010-12-02 00:57:24 <tcatm> If it's really important the merchants device and the phone will both communicate with their processor to make sure fast-confirmation under given conditions is possible.
178 2010-12-02 00:58:17 <anarchyx> but when you send someone BTC they get notified in seconds right?
179 2010-12-02 00:58:29 <anarchyx> the confirmation only happens on average 10 mins later
180 2010-12-02 00:58:33 <tcatm> Yep.
181 2010-12-02 00:58:37 <anarchyx> for small purchases this wouldnt be an issue
182 2010-12-02 00:58:44 <anarchyx> you dont wonna fake bitcoin someone out of a coffee
183 2010-12-02 00:58:52 <MT`AwAy> [10:58:18] <anarchyx> but when you send someone BTC they get notified in seconds right? <- sometimes
184 2010-12-02 00:59:12 <nelisky> should we ping this rodin person that created the android bitcoin app in http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=533.0
185 2010-12-02 00:59:13 <tcatm> We want to hide that from the users and still provide them with enough information to know when a payment is confirmed.
186 2010-12-02 00:59:14 <MT`AwAy> (well, most of the time for now, but there's no guarantee)
187 2010-12-02 00:59:14 <nelisky> ?
188 2010-12-02 00:59:27 <nelisky> already has the know how...
189 2010-12-02 01:00:25 <anarchyx> im just thinking that, the fewer persons involved, the better
190 2010-12-02 01:00:48 <anarchyx> they can go after gateways etc, but if i do a direct transaction with you, thats undestructable
191 2010-12-02 01:01:16 <anarchyx> so if i do a large purchase i dont mind waiting 10 mins
192 2010-12-02 01:01:33 <tcatm> Well at least until everyhing is specced out..
193 2010-12-02 01:01:35 <anarchyx> for coffee its not worth the counterfeiting
194 2010-12-02 01:02:07 <anarchyx> right
195 2010-12-02 01:02:57 <tcatm> A bit like satoshi worked on bitcoin a year before writing a single line of code... :)
196 2010-12-02 01:04:57 <AAA_awright> Why is http://bitcoin.org/ redirecting to http://www.bitcoin.org/ ?
197 2010-12-02 01:05:12 <AAA_awright> meh
198 2010-12-02 01:05:12 <kermit> bitcoin technologies might help make a p2p DNS http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/11/fed-up-with-icann-pirate-bay-cofounder-floats-p2p-dns-system.ars
199 2010-12-02 01:08:44 <AAA_awright> kermit: I've talked about a DNS system before... hard to do because you have to determine ownership somehow. What about a system where any number of people can claim http://google.com/ but a karma-based system of your friends determines the owner?
200 2010-12-02 01:09:01 <AAA_awright> And resolves to http://google.com.k9872358972/ or something
201 2010-12-02 01:09:30 <AAA_awright> Actually, the other way I talked about was first-come first-served ownership, and you develop a market
202 2010-12-02 01:10:10 <kermit> " because you have to determine ownership somehow. "  thats the key thing bitcoin does, though, thast why i mentioned it here.
203 2010-12-02 01:11:02 <AAA_awright> Bitcoin determines ownership of... what?
204 2010-12-02 01:11:14 <kermit> bitcoins
205 2010-12-02 01:11:32 <AAA_awright> Ah right, and it's not voted on... or is it?
206 2010-12-02 01:11:45 <AAA_awright> So how would you transfer this?
207 2010-12-02 01:11:52 <kermit> its a little over my head technically, but i know it works
208 2010-12-02 01:11:53 <AAA_awright> I mean hm
209 2010-12-02 01:11:57 <AAA_awright> Yeah yeah
210 2010-12-02 01:12:50 <AAA_awright> Domain names need to have a cost...
211 2010-12-02 01:12:54 <AAA_awright> That's the problem
212 2010-12-02 01:12:59 <AAA_awright> They are virtually free
213 2010-12-02 01:13:00 <MT`AwAy> and domain names need to be unique
214 2010-12-02 01:15:35 <xelister> AAA_awright: why not just auction
215 2010-12-02 01:15:42 <xelister> everyone claims sex.com
216 2010-12-02 01:15:55 <xelister> and then the person that gives the most after short auction time - wins
217 2010-12-02 01:16:00 <jgarzik> tcatm, nelisky: http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=2038.0
218 2010-12-02 01:16:08 <AAA_awright> xelister: Who gets it first?
219 2010-12-02 01:16:16 <xelister> the one that pays the most
220 2010-12-02 01:16:22 <AAA_awright> No, the money?
221 2010-12-02 01:16:34 <xelister> the money is distributed between generators
222 2010-12-02 01:16:41 <AAA_awright> Typically with property, you homestead. You simply use the land to own it
223 2010-12-02 01:17:02 <AAA_awright> What is the DNS equivalant?
224 2010-12-02 01:17:23 <xelister> if auction wins with cost X, then for next 30 days every generated blocks gets part of X as a bonus on top of normal 50
225 2010-12-02 01:18:44 <nelisky> jgarzik: nice, so now we can render that QR for all sites that accept bitcoins
226 2010-12-02 01:18:54 <AAA_awright> So a DNS system on top of Bitcoin?
227 2010-12-02 01:19:38 <xelister> and say, to prolong a domain, each year new auction is started, unless the current owner pays X*((100-year_passed)/100) to prolong it for next year
228 2010-12-02 01:20:00 <xelister> or say,  X*((10-years)/10)
229 2010-12-02 01:20:46 <jgarzik> nelisky: yep, bitcoin-address1 could be used right now
230 2010-12-02 01:21:10 <nelisky> so the phone app would be useful even without merchants
231 2010-12-02 01:21:28 <nelisky> and help getting 'regular joe' kind of users into this more easily
232 2010-12-02 01:22:08 <AAA_awright> xelister: So you can only rent domain names?
233 2010-12-02 01:23:22 <xelister> AAA_awright: yes
234 2010-12-02 01:23:28 <AAA_awright> Hmm
235 2010-12-02 01:23:36 <xelister> as it is in real world
236 2010-12-02 01:23:37 <AAA_awright> That would make it so no one could lose their private key
237 2010-12-02 01:23:40 <AAA_awright> No
238 2010-12-02 01:23:42 <tcatm> Are QR codes just an ASCII string?
239 2010-12-02 01:23:45 <AAA_awright> Real world is bad and not a free market
240 2010-12-02 01:23:56 <xelister> well... above seems to be a free market
241 2010-12-02 01:24:01 <AAA_awright> You can't "own" IP addresses which is why we have the shortage issue
242 2010-12-02 01:24:05 <AAA_awright> As I describe in http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=1884.0
243 2010-12-02 01:24:38 <AAA_awright> xelister: Have you seen that? That's something that would benefit the community even more than DDNS
244 2010-12-02 01:24:43 <AAA_awright> (I think)
245 2010-12-02 01:26:51 <xelister> AAA_awright: btw, generating own addresses is done by tor and freenet
246 2010-12-02 01:27:00 <xelister> but this are not user readable/nice ones
247 2010-12-02 01:27:26 <tcatm> jgarzik: Is there any encoding (like JSON or XML) we could use to specify what an QR code can contain?
248 2010-12-02 01:28:13 <jgarzik> tcatm: nothing standard, so I picked HTTP-like (RFC822-like) string
249 2010-12-02 01:28:21 <AAA_awright> xelister: Has anyone implemented IP on top of Freenet or Tor?
250 2010-12-02 01:28:31 <AAA_awright> Tor only implements TCP
251 2010-12-02 01:28:34 <jgarzik> tends to be slightly more compact than JSON.  much more compact than XML.
252 2010-12-02 01:28:37 <AAA_awright> And requires IP anyways
253 2010-12-02 01:29:00 <AAA_awright> Can someone implement IP over Tor, and implement Tor over Ethernet?
254 2010-12-02 01:29:12 <AAA_awright> So then we just use public keys as IP addresses?
255 2010-12-02 01:29:14 <tcatm> Yes, the format is okay. It's just that we should document it somewhere.
256 2010-12-02 01:29:41 <jgarzik> AAA_awright: something like your forum post would have higher latency, so I would look at larger messages and well defined message boundaries (something TCP lacks)
257 2010-12-02 01:29:57 <xelister> AAA_awright: freenet is storage network, so no.  i2p offers TCP tunnels.
258 2010-12-02 01:30:01 <jgarzik> tcatm: I'll look up the RFC reference
259 2010-12-02 01:30:08 <xelister> AAA_awright: you can tunnel any-IP inside TCP and send that over TOR I belie
260 2010-12-02 01:30:24 <AAA_awright> I think it's TCP only
261 2010-12-02 01:30:40 <xelister> yes, but you can /tunnel/ anything into TCP connection over TOR
262 2010-12-02 01:30:46 <AAA_awright> Why would this have higher latency?
263 2010-12-02 01:30:58 <AAA_awright> Routers would cache the fastest route (presumably)
264 2010-12-02 01:31:08 <AAA_awright> Who knows what algroithms they would use to find the best route
265 2010-12-02 01:31:24 <xelister> AAA_awright: you mean TOR over hidden-services?
266 2010-12-02 01:31:38 <AAA_awright> Uh... Similar to accessing a Tor hidden service yeah
267 2010-12-02 01:31:39 <xelister> I guess... perhaps why not
268 2010-12-02 01:31:57 <AAA_awright> I think it's Tor not TOR
269 2010-12-02 01:31:58 <xelister> so like, packet from=vxh2g3vas34b3sdf2.onion to=gihbe14er3tt3.onion ?
270 2010-12-02 01:32:09 <AAA_awright> xelister: Right
271 2010-12-02 01:32:10 <xelister> I guess it should work, ys
272 2010-12-02 01:32:12 <xelister> yes
273 2010-12-02 01:32:25 <xelister> ofcourse it would be slow (latencies around 15-30 ms probably)
274 2010-12-02 01:32:30 <xelister> 15-30 sec
275 2010-12-02 01:33:27 <xelister> ok but at some point it shoud be IP to be compatible with existing programs, firewalls etc
276 2010-12-02 01:33:29 <AAA_awright> Why so slow?
277 2010-12-02 01:33:44 <AAA_awright> You could implement a compatability layer
278 2010-12-02 01:33:46 <xelister> this is how Tor and i2p work. Freenet is slower. Lower speed is price of anonimity
279 2010-12-02 01:33:58 <tcatm> jgarzik: Why is bitcoin-address1: called pubkey and bitcoin_addr for btcpayment-request1?
280 2010-12-02 01:34:09 <AAA_awright> Perhaos you allocate a /120 IPv6 address and use the rest of the bytes to the public key hash
281 2010-12-02 01:34:22 <xelister> tor key is very long
282 2010-12-02 01:34:30 <xelister> longer then ipv6
283 2010-12-02 01:34:35 <AAA_awright> Using SHA1 would be 320 bits
284 2010-12-02 01:34:57 <AAA_awright> It would triple the length of an IPv6 header
285 2010-12-02 01:35:02 <xelister> ultimatelly it would become crackable
286 2010-12-02 01:35:06 <AAA_awright> How?
287 2010-12-02 01:35:11 <jgarzik> tcatm: bitcoin-address1 needs a key=value setup, in case someone wants to add "label=Jeff Garzik" or something.  I suppose one could have "bitcoin-address1: addr=1xxxxxx"
288 2010-12-02 01:35:11 <xelister> to generate key with same part of hash
289 2010-12-02 01:35:19 <jgarzik> but 'addr' seemed redundant
290 2010-12-02 01:35:30 <AAA_awright> xelister: You would never be able to see the contents of the message
291 2010-12-02 01:35:30 <xelister> if you want in the end to have ipv6 address as identification
292 2010-12-02 01:35:46 <xelister> AAA_awright: hmm well Im not sure
293 2010-12-02 01:35:54 <xelister> AAA_awright: but what would be the goal of all this?
294 2010-12-02 01:36:18 <AAA_awright> xelister: You encrypt using the public key, send to the hash of that public key, and only the holder of the private key can decrypt it
295 2010-12-02 01:36:25 <tcatm> jgarzik: What about merging bitcoin-address1 and btcpayment-request1 making name and amount optional?
296 2010-12-02 01:36:48 <AAA_awright> You have to retreive the public key first, but since you know the hash that can be done securely
297 2010-12-02 01:37:45 <xelister> AAA_awright: hmm well I guess, but then the attack could lead to DoS. generate 9 false hidden addresses with same hash as the victim, and the packets to victim will get lost 90% of the time
298 2010-12-02 01:38:04 <xelister> anyway, you could ask #tor :)
299 2010-12-02 01:38:09 <jgarzik> tcatm: it is possible.  but, btcpayment-request1 includes an implies action the phone should automatically take.  bitcoin-address1 likely implies a totally different action "store this business card in your rolodex file"
300 2010-12-02 01:38:11 <xelister> but Im not sure what would be point of all this
301 2010-12-02 01:38:30 <jgarzik> btcpayment-request1 is a command verb
302 2010-12-02 01:38:45 <jgarzik> s/implies/implied/
303 2010-12-02 01:39:06 <tcatm> Then it would be useful to include a name for bitcoin-address1.
304 2010-12-02 01:39:14 <tcatm> Making them even more similiar.
305 2010-12-02 01:39:27 <jgarzik> tcatm: I could change bitcoin_addr to pubkey, in btcpayment-request1
306 2010-12-02 01:39:28 <AAA_awright> xelister: That's a problem right now
307 2010-12-02 01:40:45 <xelister> AAA_awright: if this system you propose is just to replace ipv4, ipv6 and make them trully own-able by people, I think this is wrong tool for the job. Tor,i2p, will all have like x100 less speed and bandwidth then normal internet connection (broadband) and like x1000 less for server pipes (and these need own IPs the most)
308 2010-12-02 01:41:11 <jgarzik> tcatm: reload
309 2010-12-02 01:42:14 <xelister> AAA_awright: also tor/such networks are blocked in dictator ship ruled countries like China, parts of EU (uk,fr etc), and USA.  Slaves under government
310 2010-12-02 01:42:50 <tcatm> Hm. I have this "if btcpayment-request1 || bitcoin-address1; then confirmPayment(); fi" in mind, that I somehow don't like.
311 2010-12-02 01:45:24 <tcatm> Maybe have a field to mark an address as "one time use"? When it's not set the user can save the pubkey to an addressbook.
312 2010-12-02 01:46:12 <AAA_awright> xelister: No internet 4 u then
313 2010-12-02 01:46:14 <jgarzik> tcatm: btcpayment-request1 is requesting that the customer initiate payment.  bitcoin-address1 is requested addition to an address book.  two very different actions.
314 2010-12-02 01:46:24 <jgarzik> tcatm: btcpayment-request1 is bitcoin-address1 + more work
315 2010-12-02 01:47:14 <jgarzik> tcatm: by implication, btcpayment-request1 might be a one-time use address, and app should not store in address book by default
316 2010-12-02 01:48:44 <Foggymyst> Hot dog!
317 2010-12-02 01:48:55 <Foggymyst> I got my first 50 BTC after only 20 hours of processing
318 2010-12-02 01:49:10 <Foggymyst> That feels really cool.
319 2010-12-02 01:49:21 <jgarzik> tcatm: most merchant purchases are likely to be one-time use addresses (which is the recommended bitcoin client behavior too, I might add)
320 2010-12-02 01:49:44 <tcatm> I see your point... not really sure what's supposed to happen when two people want to exchange money using bitcoin-address1 (or would they use btcpayment-request1 without amount set?)?
321 2010-12-02 01:52:24 <jgarzik> tcatm: what happens in current bitcoin client?  you have an address book.  if you want to send coins to an address in the address book, there is a simple UI for that.
322 2010-12-02 01:53:24 <jgarzik> tcatm: why would two people want to exchange money, yet not know the amount?
323 2010-12-02 01:53:31 <jgarzik> s/why/how/
324 2010-12-02 01:54:29 <tcatm> The one sending the money would choose the amount.
325 2010-12-02 01:55:47 <jgarzik> tcatm: sounds like btcpayment-request1 without amount, as you noted
326 2010-12-02 01:56:06 <tcatm> Yes.
327 2010-12-02 01:56:32 <tcatm> So bitcoin-address1 is really only for bookmarking?
328 2010-12-02 01:58:18 <jgarzik> tcatm: address book or simple sharing of a bitcoin address, without any further implied action
329 2010-12-02 01:59:26 <jgarzik> tcatm: btcpayment-request1 tells the app to initiate a payment to that address, right now
330 2010-12-02 01:59:26 <tcatm> Hm... needs a bit more thinking. I fear users might not know how that those a different features and wonder why they can't bookmark an address.
331 2010-12-02 02:00:52 <jgarzik> tcatm: with one-time addresses being a common case, you don't want to bookmark by default, nor annoy users by prompting them "bookmark?  yes / no"
332 2010-12-02 02:03:29 <tcatm> Could we exclude bitcoin-address1 from the spec for now?
333 2010-12-02 02:05:06 <jgarzik> tcatm: if we exclude, then someone will add bookmarking to btcpayment-request1, creating the problem just described
334 2010-12-02 02:06:39 <tcatm> Okay...
335 2010-12-02 02:07:24 <xelister> Foggymyst: congrats, what card
336 2010-12-02 02:11:12 <Foggymyst> xelister: I think it was just luck.  Its a Nvidia GTX460
337 2010-12-02 02:11:27 <Foggymyst> xelister: 46Khps
338 2010-12-02 02:19:05 <bitplane> is there a page which properly describes the bitcoin system in layman's terms?
339 2010-12-02 02:20:42 <jgarzik> bitplane: I think xelister is working on something like that
340 2010-12-02 02:21:14 <jgarzik> bitplane: http://www.bitcoinme.com/ is meant as a starting point, though it's not really a straight explanation
341 2010-12-02 02:21:49 <andrew12> I love big bang theory
342 2010-12-02 02:23:58 <jgarzik> mention that on BitcoinMe.com and other places
343 2010-12-02 02:24:52 <sgornick> jgarzik: why not just #bitcoin ?
344 2010-12-02 02:24:57 <jgarzik> that works too
345 2010-12-02 02:25:32 <jgarzik> sgornick: looks like #bitcoin is already used by robots?
346 2010-12-02 02:27:08 <nelisky> hey andre12, seems like the very improbable case of 48h on the pick3 has already passed :)
347 2010-12-02 02:27:18 <nelisky> andrew12 ^^
348 2010-12-02 02:27:31 <nelisky> no winners yet
349 2010-12-02 02:27:35 <andrew12> yeah I noticed
350 2010-12-02 02:27:44 <sgornick> jgarzik: maybe #bitcoin-public  ?   Got the idea from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate#IRC_for_interactive_community_support
351 2010-12-02 02:28:01 <Kiba> web-irc on bitcoin.org!
352 2010-12-02 02:28:54 <sgornick> jgarzik: Though not much at all of that Fedora structure would apply at all to Bitcoin.  Like #bitcoin-women ?
353 2010-12-02 02:29:04 <bitplane> thanks jgarzik
354 2010-12-02 02:31:22 <CyanDynamo> bitcoin-support, bitcoin-help
355 2010-12-02 02:34:01 <bitplane> the bots dont make any noise do they? did anyone register #bitcoin?
356 2010-12-02 02:35:07 <sgornick> jgarzick: Naming convention kind of like the .org forums then?  So the five that I know of so far would be  #bitcoin-discussion #bitcoin-market  #bitcoin-dev #bitcoin-otc  #bitcoin-mining  (and #bitcoin too, but it is bot-only)   ?
357 2010-12-02 02:36:36 <ne0futur> /msg chanserv info #bitcoin
358 2010-12-02 02:36:50 <ne0futur> (04:36) -ChanServ(ChanServ@services.)- Channel #bitcoin is not registered.
359 2010-12-02 02:40:12 <bitplane> ask in #freenode if an IRC op can +o someone there so they can register it
360 2010-12-02 02:40:17 <bitplane> otherwise it will stay stale
361 2010-12-02 02:41:34 <kermit> if the owner of bitcoin.org contacts them, they will
362 2010-12-02 02:41:51 <bitplane> ;;bc,calc 67000
363 2010-12-02 02:41:51 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 67000 Khps, given current difficulty of 8078.19525793 , is 5 days, 23 hours, 50 minutes, and 44 seconds
364 2010-12-02 02:42:12 <bitplane> I don't think you'll need the owner, it's not like you're stealing a channel
365 2010-12-02 02:42:21 <bitplane> it's a dead channel anyway
366 2010-12-02 02:45:37 <Kiba> finally finished my accursed homework in which I make easy mistakes
367 2010-12-02 02:46:05 <bitplane> okay, I asked in #freenode and was told group registration is the way to go
368 2010-12-02 02:46:28 <bitplane> which means no chance of getting the channel, I've waited over 18 months to get ownership of #irrlicht
369 2010-12-02 02:46:56 <nanotube> bitplane: yea group reg is basically dead.
370 2010-12-02 02:47:56 <ne0futur> i filled the group registration form 3 years ago
371 2010-12-02 02:48:06 <nanotube> heh
372 2010-12-02 02:48:07 <ne0futur> for the first time, then I tried again 2 years ago
373 2010-12-02 02:48:15 <ne0futur> still not received even an email :p
374 2010-12-02 02:48:30 <nanotube> well, fwiw, i've created #bitcoin-discussion. to match the bitcoin-discussion google group i created yesterday while bitcoin.org was dead.
375 2010-12-02 02:48:49 <nanotube> feel free to join, and to shunt non-dev users over, in times of high dev-talk traffic.
376 2010-12-02 02:52:09 <Kiba> so we are approaching the world of no banks.
377 2010-12-02 02:52:18 <Kiba> neccesary to function
378 2010-12-02 03:27:31 <OneFixt> ;;bc,stats
379 2010-12-02 03:27:33 <gribble> Current Blocks: 95021 | Current Difficulty: 8078.19525793 | Next Difficulty At Block: 96767 | Next Difficulty In: 1746 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 2 days, 15 hours, 21 minutes, and 6 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 10160.95067981
380 2010-12-02 03:29:52 <nanotube> nice estimate...
381 2010-12-02 03:32:11 <Kiba> hmm
382 2010-12-02 03:32:18 <Kiba> what with the slow startup of bitcoin
383 2010-12-02 03:32:55 <nanotube> probably doing some db checking or something...
384 2010-12-02 03:35:57 <Kiba> awesome
385 2010-12-02 03:35:59 <Kiba> pool mining
386 2010-12-02 03:37:11 <doublec> Kiba, did you get the pool miner built?
387 2010-12-02 03:37:19 <Kiba> yes
388 2010-12-02 03:37:21 <Kiba> I did
389 2010-12-02 03:37:33 <Kiba> so how do I calculate the hashrate of the server?
390 2010-12-02 03:37:36 <doublec> great!
391 2010-12-02 03:37:44 <doublec> when you run the miner it prints it out periodically
392 2010-12-02 03:38:36 <doublec> look for 'Got message 10 from server' and the following lines
393 2010-12-02 03:38:48 <Kiba> yes
394 2010-12-02 03:38:49 <Kiba> I see
395 2010-12-02 03:39:13 <gribble> Error: "bc,calculate" is not a valid command.
396 2010-12-02 03:39:13 <Kiba> ;;bc,calculate 32155
397 2010-12-02 03:39:24 <Kiba> hmm
398 2010-12-02 03:40:59 <Kiba> ;;bc,calc 32155
399 2010-12-02 03:41:00 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 32155 Khps, given current difficulty of 8078.19525793 , is 1 week, 5 days, 11 hours, 43 minutes, and 30 seconds
400 2010-12-02 03:41:18 <Kiba> our hashrate is still pitiful. Lol.
401 2010-12-02 03:42:30 <doublec> yeah, needs more contributors
402 2010-12-02 03:52:08 <doublec> ;;bc,calc 100000
403 2010-12-02 03:52:09 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 100000 Khps, given current difficulty of 8078.19525793 , is 4 days, 0 hours, 22 minutes, and 35 seconds
404 2010-12-02 03:57:23 <CyanDynamo> ;;bc,calc 2000
405 2010-12-02 03:57:24 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 2000 Khps, given current difficulty of 8078.19525793 , is 28 weeks, 4 days, 18 hours, 49 minutes, and 52 seconds
406 2010-12-02 03:57:55 <nanotube> CyanDynamo: best join the pool with that hash rate, if you want to see some bitcoins any time soon. :)
407 2010-12-02 03:58:08 <CyanDynamo> haha, looks like it
408 2010-12-02 03:58:12 <CyanDynamo> how is that done?
409 2010-12-02 03:58:27 <nanotube> let me hunt up a linky
410 2010-12-02 03:58:36 <nanotube> http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz/bitcoin-pool/
411 2010-12-02 04:00:19 <CyanDynamo> oh, btw, what does the bitcoin client do with all those cycles? i've been too lazy to check out the site (it was down yesterday when i first decided to check out bitcoin) so ignore me if it's mentioned somehwere
412 2010-12-02 04:02:04 <nanotube> CyanDynamo: it basically does a lot of sha256 hashes
413 2010-12-02 04:02:27 <CyanDynamo> is there a purpose to that though?
414 2010-12-02 04:03:57 <nanotube> yes, to create the block chain, which is the mechanism of keeping track of and verifying transactions.
415 2010-12-02 04:03:58 <doublec> No great 'social purpose', no
416 2010-12-02 04:04:31 <gribble> Bitcoin website: http://bitcoin.org/
417 2010-12-02 04:04:31 <nanotube> CyanDynamo: for details, see the ,,(website) and the ,,(wiki) ...
418 2010-12-02 04:04:32 <gribble> Bitcoin website: http://bitcoin.org/wiki/
419 2010-12-02 04:05:07 <gribble> Bitcoin wiki: http://bitcoin.org/wiki/
420 2010-12-02 04:05:07 <nanotube> ;;wiki
421 2010-12-02 04:05:10 <nanotube> that's better.
422 2010-12-02 04:05:18 <CyanDynamo> handy bot you have there
423 2010-12-02 04:05:29 <nanotube> yep, it has a few tricks up its sleeve :)
424 2010-12-02 04:06:42 <doublec> ;bc,calc 36500
425 2010-12-02 04:06:46 <doublec> ;;bc,calc 36500
426 2010-12-02 04:06:47 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 36500 Khps, given current difficulty of 8078.19525793 , is 1 week, 4 days, 0 hours, 2 minutes, and 43 seconds
427 2010-12-02 04:08:19 <doublec> hopefully we can get the pool down to less than a week soon
428 2010-12-02 04:08:39 <Kiba> hmm, it's pain to all these stuff, doublec
429 2010-12-02 04:08:45 <gribble> No fancy GPU, and don't want to wait for months for a block gen? Join the mining pool! http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz/bitcoin-pool/
430 2010-12-02 04:08:45 <nanotube> doublec: for your convenience, you can now reference the ,,pool inline :)
431 2010-12-02 04:08:49 <Kiba> do you have a git repository that I can clone from?
432 2010-12-02 04:09:10 <doublec> Kiba, no but I'll set one up
433 2010-12-02 04:09:11 <nanotube> doublec: hehe ++ for git repository :P
434 2010-12-02 04:09:30 <doublec> I'll try to get it done later tonight
435 2010-12-02 04:10:10 <nanotube> doublec: any other useful factoids you think i should add to the bot?
436 2010-12-02 04:10:29 <doublec> do you have the bitcoin-discssion group in it?
437 2010-12-02 04:11:04 <gribble> To see a nice sortable web view of all factoids, click here: http://gribble.dreamhosters.com/viewfactoids.php?db=%23bitcoin-dev || To see a list of the most popular factoids, run !rank || To search factoids, run !factoids search <yoursearchterm>
438 2010-12-02 04:11:04 <nanotube> not yet. you can see all existing factoids on the web ,,facts
439 2010-12-02 04:11:13 <nanotube> i just started adding them
440 2010-12-02 04:13:07 <doublec> nice
441 2010-12-02 04:15:52 <nanotube> is there a wiki page collecting the various gpu clients (and set up instructions)?
442 2010-12-02 04:16:02 <CyanDynamo> hmm
443 2010-12-02 04:16:14 <CyanDynamo> if/when i mod my old xbox, i think i'll put this on it
444 2010-12-02 04:17:46 <nanotube> mm, i wonder what hashrate you can get out of an xbox...
445 2010-12-02 04:17:53 <nanotube> or a ps3, for that matter.
446 2010-12-02 04:18:59 <CyanDynamo> well, we'll have to wait
447 2010-12-02 04:19:04 <CyanDynamo> for that one
448 2010-12-02 04:19:22 <CyanDynamo> since sony decided to be a dick and remove otheros
449 2010-12-02 04:21:35 <nanotube> CyanDynamo: there are still ps3s out there with older firmware, which have otheros on.
450 2010-12-02 04:21:43 <nanotube> you can even buy them on ebay at a premium :)
451 2010-12-02 04:21:47 <CyanDynamo> nanotube: that's true.
452 2010-12-02 04:22:04 <CyanDynamo> i was actually thinking about getting a ps3 until sony removed it
453 2010-12-02 04:22:27 <nanotube> heh that'll show them.
454 2010-12-02 04:22:36 <nanotube> bastards.
455 2010-12-02 04:22:48 <CyanDynamo> and since i don't have the older consoles, i wanted to be able to play legacy titles
456 2010-12-02 04:22:56 <CyanDynamo> but they've dropped support for that
457 2010-12-02 04:22:56 <nanotube> wasn't there some class action suit planned for this? since they cripple the hardware ex-post, after people bought it?
458 2010-12-02 04:23:14 <CyanDynamo> yeah
459 2010-12-02 04:23:21 <CyanDynamo> i haven't read any news on it
460 2010-12-02 04:23:45 <nanotube> me neither. heh.
461 2010-12-02 04:23:55 <CyanDynamo> i suppose i shall check
462 2010-12-02 04:24:44 <CyanDynamo> but yeah, the only other buying point for me was bluray. and a couple exclusive titles. i'm not going to drop $400 on it for just that.
463 2010-12-02 04:26:48 <lfm> the old consoles still support PS2, the support that was dropped was for Linux
464 2010-12-02 04:28:18 <lfm> if you can find a older used ps3 it will still run ps2 games
465 2010-12-02 04:28:47 <nanotube> those probably go for $500 though. the old ones with ps2 and otheros support.
466 2010-12-02 04:28:55 <lfm> and theyre down from 400 to 300 now I think
467 2010-12-02 04:29:09 <nanotube> that's the new ones. without otheros or ps2
468 2010-12-02 04:29:26 <nanotube> but i dunno, check ebay to see :)
469 2010-12-02 04:29:28 <lfm> the used ones I think are cheaper than new still
470 2010-12-02 04:29:42 <CyanDynamo> well, psjailbreak can now downgrade to any firmware version
471 2010-12-02 04:31:11 <nanotube> lfm: heh, there's one on ebay with otheros, for 499. (and it doesn't even have ps2 compat).
472 2010-12-02 04:31:27 <lfm> can you put old otheros firmware on new ps3?
473 2010-12-02 04:31:28 <nanotube> so my guess is... if you want a ps3 with ps2 compat + otheros, you'd have to pay a pretty peny.
474 2010-12-02 04:31:38 <nanotube> not sure
475 2010-12-02 04:31:42 <nanotube> i don't even have a ps3 :D
476 2010-12-02 04:31:57 <nanotube> if it's possible it must take a lot of screwing around.
477 2010-12-02 04:32:28 <lfm> yup any jailbreak generally is a lot of screwing around
478 2010-12-02 04:33:36 <CyanDynamo> regarding the pool, do i have to stay connected to get coins when the block is finished or does it just look for my bitcoin address when it's all done?
479 2010-12-02 04:33:51 <doublec> CyanDynamo, you have to stay connected
480 2010-12-02 04:34:25 <CyanDynamo> really?
481 2010-12-02 04:34:28 <CyanDynamo> that sucks
482 2010-12-02 04:34:40 <CyanDynamo> so this is made for 24/7 stuff
483 2010-12-02 04:34:46 <doublec> maybe I'm misunderstanding you
484 2010-12-02 04:35:12 <CyanDynamo> i'm running this on my laptop. usually i reboot every few days.
485 2010-12-02 04:35:47 <doublec> when it generates a block it sends coins out to all those who contributed to that block
486 2010-12-02 04:35:57 <lfm> i'd think you would not need to be online at the exect time when the shares go out
487 2010-12-02 04:36:07 <doublec> so if you were connected and contribted to that block you'd get the coins
488 2010-12-02 04:36:35 <doublec> you don't need to have a bitcoin client connected to actually receive the coins
489 2010-12-02 04:36:42 <doublec> you'll get them next time you run bitcoin
490 2010-12-02 04:37:08 <lfm> you do need to stay connected to be activly contributing to the pool and gaining credit
491 2010-12-02 04:37:57 <CyanDynamo> ;;bc,calc 34000
492 2010-12-02 04:37:58 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 34000 Khps, given current difficulty of 8078.19525793 , is 1 week, 4 days, 19 hours, 27 minutes, and 38 seconds
493 2010-12-02 04:39:12 <lfm> ;;bc;calc 24500
494 2010-12-02 04:39:13 <gribble> Error: "bc;calc" is not a valid command.
495 2010-12-02 04:39:27 <lfm> ;;bc,calc 24500
496 2010-12-02 04:39:28 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 24500 Khps, given current difficulty of 8078.19525793 , is 2 weeks, 2 days, 9 hours, 22 minutes, and 26 seconds
497 2010-12-02 04:39:29 <donpdonp> ;;bc,calc 2000
498 2010-12-02 04:39:30 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 2000 Khps, given current difficulty of 8078.19525793 , is 28 weeks, 4 days, 18 hours, 49 minutes, and 52 seconds
499 2010-12-02 04:41:10 <lfm> donpdonp is almost like puddinpop scrambled
500 2010-12-02 04:42:16 <nanotube> haha almost. missing a 'u' and an 'i' :)
501 2010-12-02 04:42:32 <lfm> and a p
502 2010-12-02 04:42:34 <nanotube> and an extra o
503 2010-12-02 04:42:42 <nanotube> heh
504 2010-12-02 04:42:47 <lfm> 3 vs 2
505 2010-12-02 04:43:35 <lfm> so its not really very close
506 2010-12-02 04:43:44 <nanotube> haha yea. but 'kinda close' :)
507 2010-12-02 04:44:21 <gribble> 6
508 2010-12-02 04:44:21 <nanotube> ;;levenshtein donpdonp puddinpop
509 2010-12-02 04:44:26 <gribble> 9
510 2010-12-02 04:44:26 <nanotube> ;;levenshtein nanotube puddinpop
511 2010-12-02 04:44:32 <nanotube> lfm: closer than nanotube, at any rate :D
512 2010-12-02 04:44:46 <lfm> what is that!?
513 2010-12-02 04:45:11 <donpdonp> har. thanks that reminds me i have icecream in the freezer.
514 2010-12-02 04:45:30 <gribble> (levenshtein <string1> <string2>) -- Returns the levenshtein distance (also known as the "edit distance" between <string1> and <string2>)
515 2010-12-02 04:45:30 <nanotube> ;;help levenshtein
516 2010-12-02 04:45:43 <lfm> ok i see levenshtein is in wikipeadia
517 2010-12-02 04:45:44 <gribble> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levenshtein_distance | In information theory and computer science, the Levenshtein distance is a metric for measuring the amount of difference between two sequences (i.e. an edit ...
518 2010-12-02 04:45:44 <nanotube> see also ,,(wp levenshtein distance)
519 2010-12-02 04:45:58 <nanotube> yep :)
520 2010-12-02 04:47:05 <nanotube> donpdonp: how can that possibly remind you about icecream? do they sell levenshtein flavor where you're at? hehe
521 2010-12-02 04:47:57 <nanotube> mm, a bit of buying on mtgox...
522 2010-12-02 04:48:24 <lfm> pudding-pop is kinda like ice cream
523 2010-12-02 04:48:30 <nanotube> ah
524 2010-12-02 04:48:32 <nanotube> could be. :)
525 2010-12-02 04:48:46 <lfm> about as close as the spelling was
526 2010-12-02 04:48:53 <nanotube> haha
527 2010-12-02 04:49:12 <lfm> in that you find em both in a fredge
528 2010-12-02 04:49:17 <lfm> fridge
529 2010-12-02 04:49:30 <donpdonp> is that a dead body joke?
530 2010-12-02 04:49:49 <AAA_awright> For all the interest I got in IRC and the people telling me to post on the forums http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=2035.0 isn't getting much activity *poke**poke*
531 2010-12-02 04:50:35 <sgornick> AAA_awright: have a tl;dr version?
532 2010-12-02 04:50:49 <AAA_awright> It's rather advanced
533 2010-12-02 04:51:01 <AAA_awright> But I guess the first three paragraphs
534 2010-12-02 04:51:02 <sgornick> i was (half) kidding.
535 2010-12-02 04:51:15 <AAA_awright> Or even just the third paragraph
536 2010-12-02 04:51:27 <nanotube> sgornick: that /is/ a tldr version. you need an 'sr' version (short, read). :)
537 2010-12-02 04:55:35 <lfm> AAA_awright, I dont think I have time to properly evaluate it
538 2010-12-02 04:57:33 <lfm> AAA_awright, as a quick read suggests to me it might work but I cant tell since its probably as hard to understand and look for flaws as bitcoin is and I know how long it took me to get a handle on bitcoin (weeks or months)
539 2010-12-02 04:58:16 <AAA_awright> lfm: This would be a pretty major project, proving that it would still be mathematically hard and such
540 2010-12-02 04:58:24 <AAA_awright> Or that it even exists
541 2010-12-02 04:58:58 <AAA_awright> It's quite a number of conditions that make up the definition
542 2010-12-02 04:59:30 <lfm> and considering it might not have much advantage over bitcoin it seems not worth the effort. (I dont feel the bitcoin block chain is a problem really)
543 2010-12-02 04:59:39 <Lyspooner> ;;mtgox
544 2010-12-02 04:59:40 <gribble> Error: "mtgox" is not a valid command.
545 2010-12-02 04:59:45 <Lyspooner> ;;bc,stats
546 2010-12-02 04:59:48 <gribble> Current Blocks: 95033 | Current Difficulty: 8078.19525793 | Next Difficulty At Block: 96767 | Next Difficulty In: 1734 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 2 days, 13 hours, 43 minutes, and 56 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 10162.24894885
547 2010-12-02 04:59:50 <AAA_awright> I would say it's a blocker to becoming a mass payment system
548 2010-12-02 05:00:17 <Lyspooner> ;;bc,calc 32300
549 2010-12-02 05:00:18 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 32300 Khps, given current difficulty of 8078.19525793 , is 1 week, 5 days, 10 hours, 22 minutes, and 46 seconds
550 2010-12-02 05:02:36 <AAA_awright> I simply don't see how it scales, you must be able to ignore other transactions that do not involve you if you want to scale
551 2010-12-02 05:03:38 <lfm> AAA_awright, well if you consider something like mybitcoin.com could handle a LOT of small transactions without adding to the block chain at all! I can see how it can scale
552 2010-12-02 05:04:45 <AAA_awright> All I will say for certain is tha Bitcoin is in for some pretty major evolution that no one of us could have thought of individually
553 2010-12-02 05:05:08 <lfm> perhaps, thats always possible
554 2010-12-02 05:07:17 <lfm> ooo, mtgox "megachart"!
555 2010-12-02 05:14:18 <lfm> "one day" seems to show whole year
556 2010-12-02 05:35:20 <CyanDynamo> have you guys heard about dot-p2p?
557 2010-12-02 05:37:00 <lfm> I have not
558 2010-12-02 05:40:52 <CyanDynamo> http://torrentfreak.com/bittorrent-based-dns-to-counter-us-domain-seizures-101130/
559 2010-12-02 05:50:30 <AAA_awright> We've been talking about it all day and it's been on Slashdot
560 2010-12-02 06:01:19 <entel> cool idea
561 2010-12-02 06:01:26 <entel> doesnt seem like it will work
562 2010-12-02 06:08:28 <CyanDynamo> entel: why not?
563 2010-12-02 06:09:59 <entel> from what I read on the wiki it just didn't seem well planned out
564 2010-12-02 06:10:35 <entel> but i still think it's a good idea
565 2010-12-02 06:13:11 <lfm> so to use links to a .p2p address you have to run special dns software
566 2010-12-02 06:13:46 <lfm> or maybe link to a special dns server
567 2010-12-02 06:15:14 <jgarzik> p2p dns is a paradox.  you need a central authority to avoid people who would run automated domain grabs of the entire namespace, brand thieves (google.p2p -> malware, ebay.p2p -> malware, etc.), and other problems.  DNS is fundamentally a central registry, enumerating private property and limited resources.
568 2010-12-02 06:15:47 <jgarzik> you can decentralize the data service, but you still need someone to sign cryptographic keys
569 2010-12-02 06:17:31 <AAA_awright> jgarzik: That's what engineering is for
570 2010-12-02 06:17:43 <AAA_awright> You don't blindly take their word for it
571 2010-12-02 06:17:44 <lfm> jgarzik, so you think if they get their .p2p tld running it will quickly get poluted to those thing
572 2010-12-02 06:18:13 <jgarzik> AAA_awright: _whose_ word?
573 2010-12-02 06:18:18 <jgarzik> (rhetorical question...)
574 2010-12-02 06:18:49 <jgarzik> lfm: well, the dot-p2p folks already recognize these problems.  still an open question of what is a good implementation to solve all this.
575 2010-12-02 06:19:05 <AAA_awright> Right it's hard, but you have to trust someone
576 2010-12-02 06:19:12 <lfm> nope
577 2010-12-02 06:19:18 <lfm> dont trust anyone
578 2010-12-02 06:19:31 <AAA_awright> Well then you can never resolve a hostname
579 2010-12-02 06:19:39 <jgarzik> exactly :)  thus the paradox.
580 2010-12-02 06:19:46 <entel> lol
581 2010-12-02 06:19:49 <AAA_awright> lfm: That's a way to do it too I guess
582 2010-12-02 06:19:53 <AAA_awright> Only use IP addresses
583 2010-12-02 06:19:58 <entel> jgarzik raises some good points
584 2010-12-02 06:19:58 <lfm> assume resolved hostnames are bad. just use bad names
585 2010-12-02 06:20:01 <AAA_awright> But IP addresses change!
586 2010-12-02 06:20:26 <AAA_awright> In which case you go for this http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=1884.0
587 2010-12-02 06:20:38 <AAA_awright> end-to-end encrypted, fully distributed Internet protocol
588 2010-12-02 06:20:44 <jgarzik> you cannot own a piece of namespace, without some higher authority agreeing that you own it.  ie. who is to say jgarzik, and not Google, Inc. owns the keypair for google.p2p?  And what if that changes tomorrow?
589 2010-12-02 06:21:01 <AAA_awright> How about this
590 2010-12-02 06:21:09 <AAA_awright> You need to be signaled that it changed
591 2010-12-02 06:21:18 <lfm> if I want to override goole.com in my /etc/hosts file, I can
592 2010-12-02 06:21:21 <AAA_awright> So, when a domain name expires, you must wait one year before it becomes usable again
593 2010-12-02 06:21:35 <Foggymyst> Does anyone run a pooled miner in here?
594 2010-12-02 06:21:43 <AAA_awright> How about this
595 2010-12-02 06:21:57 <AAA_awright> You have a DNS system like right now right
596 2010-12-02 06:21:59 <AAA_awright> kinda
597 2010-12-02 06:22:18 <AAA_awright> hmm
598 2010-12-02 06:22:54 <AAA_awright> Yeah
599 2010-12-02 06:23:25 <lfm> yup, I have a dns system like now, right
600 2010-12-02 06:23:27 <AAA_awright> So however allocation works, once addresses are allocated
601 2010-12-02 06:23:41 <AAA_awright> You maintain them with the private key they are owned with, you prove ownership with your private key
602 2010-12-02 06:23:51 <AAA_awright> Every six months or so a new table is created
603 2010-12-02 06:24:03 <AAA_awright> And you can allocate from that future table only if you hold the private key
604 2010-12-02 06:24:08 <AAA_awright> And one ahead of it
605 2010-12-02 06:24:13 <AAA_awright> So one year
606 2010-12-02 06:24:21 <AAA_awright> If you lose the private key it becomes available in a year
607 2010-12-02 06:24:40 <AAA_awright> Or you can let someone else own it, by signing their bid on ownership
608 2010-12-02 06:25:05 <lfm> so the only 10 letter name left after six months is lsdkjhgfu.com if you want something shorter you have to wait a year
609 2010-12-02 06:25:19 <AAA_awright> Now why not have multiple tables?
610 2010-12-02 06:25:28 <AAA_awright> Then you have to ask multiple providers and see if they agree
611 2010-12-02 06:25:38 <jgarzik> the only thing I can come up with is a bitcoin-like system that produces a defined set of namespace every block (a.p2p - f.p2p in block #0, aa.p2p - az.p2p in block #9, etc.).  the miner who solves the block gets that piece of namespace.
612 2010-12-02 06:25:41 <AAA_awright> One might auction their names off
613 2010-12-02 06:25:54 <AAA_awright> But they would be trusted, in essence, with allocating names
614 2010-12-02 06:25:57 <jgarzik> then the free market takes over
615 2010-12-02 06:26:00 <AAA_awright> Not providing them, just allocating
616 2010-12-02 06:26:01 <AAA_awright> Right
617 2010-12-02 06:26:02 <jgarzik> miners sell domains they mine, etc.
618 2010-12-02 06:26:19 <AAA_awright> Hopefully it would be engineered so you can't mine them and destroy them forever
619 2010-12-02 06:26:30 <AAA_awright> There would be some cost depending on how popular the name is
620 2010-12-02 06:26:35 <lfm> wave magic wand, solves all problems
621 2010-12-02 06:26:36 <AAA_awright> What was the most expensive domain name
622 2010-12-02 06:26:44 <AAA_awright> Selling would work the same
623 2010-12-02 06:26:46 <AAA_awright> Right
624 2010-12-02 06:27:10 <AAA_awright> jobs.com or something stupid
625 2010-12-02 06:27:20 <lfm> if all else fails, make the obvious move (from a chess player design I once saw)
626 2010-12-02 06:28:44 <AAA_awright> There would definitely need to be some network of companies or something that would allocate the domains
627 2010-12-02 06:29:07 <AAA_awright> And they can sell their trust
628 2010-12-02 06:29:19 <lfm> I dont trust filthy capitalist monopolies
629 2010-12-02 06:29:38 <AAA_awright> Well how else do you do it?
630 2010-12-02 06:30:21 <lfm> let current broken system flail on
631 2010-12-02 06:30:58 <lfm> rather than replacing it with an different broken system at great effort and expense
632 2010-12-02 06:36:20 <lfm> seems like some more miners coming online again since this diff change that maybe backed off for the last diff change
633 2010-12-02 06:37:08 <lfm> it looks like difficulty is certainly headed for over 10k
634 2010-12-02 07:01:33 <CyanDynamo> ;;bc,calc 61744
635 2010-12-02 07:01:34 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 61744 Khps, given current difficulty of 8078.19525793 , is 6 days, 12 hours, 5 minutes, and 26 seconds
636 2010-12-02 07:34:53 <CyanDynamo> ;;bc,stats
637 2010-12-02 07:34:55 <gribble> Current Blocks: 95055 | Current Difficulty: 8078.19525793 | Next Difficulty At Block: 96767 | Next Difficulty In: 1712 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 2 days, 8 hours, 38 minutes, and 37 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 10260.59830570
638 2010-12-02 07:51:42 <xelister> damn. is it possible Diablo's miner is loosing coins?
639 2010-12-02 07:51:56 <xelister> I created 2 blocks in last 12 hours
640 2010-12-02 07:52:03 <xelister> non of them are visible in the bitcoin client
641 2010-12-02 07:53:11 <xelister> how to see coins that I almost generated with a block, but that turned out to be not accepted in the 20 hours period and therefore killed?
642 2010-12-02 07:53:14 <xelister> is this noted anywhere
643 2010-12-02 08:29:51 <btcex> <xelister> I created 2 blocks in last 12 hours
644 2010-12-02 08:30:06 <btcex> blocks accepted only after 150 confirmations
645 2010-12-02 08:31:42 <xelister> btcex: I know, but this blocks are gone
646 2010-12-02 08:31:53 <xelister> there are not shown, as usually, as new block awaiting for confirmation
647 2010-12-02 08:31:56 <xelister> they are just totally gone
648 2010-12-02 08:32:17 <xelister> also, how debug.log should show founding of new block?  is debug.log rotated?  I cant see any trace of that
649 2010-12-02 08:38:25 <OneFixt> ;;bc,stats
650 2010-12-02 08:38:28 <gribble> Current Blocks: 95065 | Current Difficulty: 8078.19525793 | Next Difficulty At Block: 96767 | Next Difficulty In: 1702 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 2 days, 5 hours, 32 minutes, and 29 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 10343.50309589
651 2010-12-02 08:43:35 <btcex> anyone try GPU mining pool?
652 2010-12-02 08:47:18 <DreadKnight> are there are debs for linux/ubuntu?
653 2010-12-02 08:49:36 <TheAncientGoat> DreadKnight: Just use the linux download, it should work
654 2010-12-02 08:49:40 <TheAncientGoat> No compilation needed
655 2010-12-02 08:51:10 <DreadKnight> TheAncientGoat, ok xD
656 2010-12-02 08:52:07 <xelister> btcex: what card you have?
657 2010-12-02 08:52:44 <btcex> I do not have card, x11 + vesa on old laptop
658 2010-12-02 08:54:28 <btcex> oops, not vesa, SiS
659 2010-12-02 08:54:35 <btcex> without 3d acceleration
660 2010-12-02 08:57:00 <xelister> ...
661 2010-12-02 09:00:07 <doublec> Foggymyst, yes I run a pooled miner
662 2010-12-02 09:00:23 <doublec> 90 clients connected to the pooled server so far
663 2010-12-02 09:00:43 <doublec> 70000 khash/s
664 2010-12-02 09:00:49 <doublec> ;;bc,calc 70000
665 2010-12-02 09:00:50 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 70000 Khps, given current difficulty of 8078.19525793 , is 5 days, 17 hours, 40 minutes, and 51 seconds
666 2010-12-02 09:00:52 <xelister> doublec: money is shared proportionally to speed?
667 2010-12-02 09:01:02 <doublec> xelister, yes
668 2010-12-02 09:01:37 <doublec> ,,pool for more info
669 2010-12-02 09:01:38 <gribble> No fancy GPU, and don't want to wait for months for a block gen? Join the mining pool! http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz/bitcoin-pool/
670 2010-12-02 09:02:06 <DreadKnight> no way to delete a bitcoin address?
671 2010-12-02 09:09:19 <CyanDynamo> DreadKnight: why would you want to?
672 2010-12-02 09:10:02 <DreadKnight> CyanDynamo, it starts up with 13, hehe
673 2010-12-02 09:10:27 <CyanDynamo> >.>
674 2010-12-02 09:10:28 <CyanDynamo> lol
675 2010-12-02 09:10:47 <CyanDynamo> just use a different address
676 2010-12-02 09:11:10 <DreadKnight> did that.... but if I made addresses... they keep stacking up; it's a bit weird :)
677 2010-12-02 09:44:36 <sktrdie> Ok, what the hell is Bitcoin?
678 2010-12-02 09:52:32 <TheAncientGoat> sktrdie: http://www.bitcoinme.com/
679 2010-12-02 09:52:43 <sktrdie> but the site makes it seem as though you can "generate" bitcoins out of nothing... that's weird.
680 2010-12-02 09:52:46 <sktrdie> I still don't understand how can there be no central resources... who converts bitcoins to money?
681 2010-12-02 09:55:12 <btcex> sktrdie: FFFUUU!111
682 2010-12-02 09:55:43 <btcex> every hour I receive email about this. every. hour.
683 2010-12-02 09:57:12 <TheAncientGoat> sktrdie: No one converts bitcoins to money
684 2010-12-02 09:57:16 <TheAncientGoat> You trade them for money
685 2010-12-02 09:57:21 <btcex> sktrdie: mtgox.com and btcex.com converts bitcoin to money
686 2010-12-02 09:57:23 <TheAncientGoat> Anyone can trade
687 2010-12-02 09:57:36 <TheAncientGoat> btcex: That's not accurate, imo
688 2010-12-02 09:57:53 <btcex> TheAncientGoat:  No one converts  USD to JPY, you trade them for JPY
689 2010-12-02 09:58:31 <CyanDynamo> trade is a transaction where values are assessed
690 2010-12-02 09:58:50 <CyanDynamo> nobody establishes a value for any currency
691 2010-12-02 09:59:10 <CyanDynamo> it's determined by it's value in the market
692 2010-12-02 09:59:59 <CyanDynamo> not to mention, dollar bills are generated outof nothing, too.
693 2010-12-02 10:00:12 <DreadKnight> btcex, then probably you should put that info on the homepage :D
694 2010-12-02 10:00:24 <CyanDynamo> i'm pretty sure it is
695 2010-12-02 10:00:30 <CyanDynamo> bitcoin is just difficult to understand
696 2010-12-02 10:00:50 <TheAncientGoat> Aren't all commodities' values determined in the market?
697 2010-12-02 10:00:54 <btcex> DreadKnight: I was hoping that people who come to the exchange are able to use it :)
698 2010-12-02 10:00:59 <DreadKnight> bitcoin is very nerdish, it's normal for people to ask questions
699 2010-12-02 10:01:25 <DreadKnight> oh well
700 2010-12-02 10:01:27 <CyanDynamo> currency is a commodity, technically. it's a middle-man, a store of value.
701 2010-12-02 10:02:12 <DreadKnight> omg, I have 0.05, IM RICH!
702 2010-12-02 10:03:02 <CyanDynamo> ME TOO
703 2010-12-02 10:03:24 <CyanDynamo> isn't that a penny's worth?
704 2010-12-02 10:03:30 <DreadKnight> I think so
705 2010-12-02 10:04:34 <sktrdie> it's hard for me to understand how this digital data has become valuable as money
706 2010-12-02 10:04:42 <btcex> Does anyone can help write the explanation texts of the exchange in English?
707 2010-12-02 10:05:33 <btcex> sktrdie: Why cash are valuable?
708 2010-12-02 10:06:46 <sktrdie> btcex: you mean actual money? dunno it's the law... my country decides... it sucks but that's what it is.
709 2010-12-02 10:07:07 <btcex> yes.What is country?
710 2010-12-02 10:07:57 <sktrdie> Italy
711 2010-12-02 10:08:02 <btcex> :)
712 2010-12-02 10:08:13 <btcex> I mean what is goverment?
713 2010-12-02 10:08:22 <btcex> (or State?)
714 2010-12-02 10:08:34 <sktrdie> EURO
715 2010-12-02 10:09:09 <btcex> wait, I need consultation with google translate :)
716 2010-12-02 10:09:49 <sktrdie> What is your question?
717 2010-12-02 10:10:10 <TheAncientGoat> sktrdie: Why is it valuable? Because people believe it is valuable
718 2010-12-02 10:10:11 <btcex> What is Sovereign state?
719 2010-12-02 10:10:21 <btcex> sktrdie: questen for you
720 2010-12-02 10:10:33 <btcex> sktrdie: question for you
721 2010-12-02 10:10:56 <sktrdie> TheAncientGoat: sure, that's the low-level idea. But in reality it's valuable because it's the law. My gov decides it is valuable...
722 2010-12-02 10:11:16 <btcex> sktrdie: yes, but what is goverment?
723 2010-12-02 10:11:16 <sktrdie> Not everything I buy is digital
724 2010-12-02 10:11:44 <sktrdie> If my super-market (the most important thing i need money for) takes my government money - i use that.
725 2010-12-02 10:11:45 <btcex> government = sum (citizens), yes?
726 2010-12-02 10:12:24 <TheAncientGoat> sktrdie: It's the market that decides the value though.
727 2010-12-02 10:12:41 <btcex> sktrdie: That is, the citizens have delegated to their representatives (the government) are some functions, such as the monetary system.
728 2010-12-02 10:12:42 <sktrdie> sure exactly
729 2010-12-02 10:12:47 <TheAncientGoat> The government just controls it's issuing
730 2010-12-02 10:12:54 <TheAncientGoat> its, bleh
731 2010-12-02 10:13:02 <sktrdie> i agree.
732 2010-12-02 10:13:31 <altamic> sktrdie: bitcoin minimizes the impact of market manipulation by parasitical component of market economy
733 2010-12-02 10:13:44 <btcex> sktrdie: bitcoin creates monetary system directly\n71936
734 2010-12-02 10:14:02 <sktrdie> how long has it been working for?
735 2010-12-02 10:14:10 <sktrdie> and at what point will my super-market start using it? :D
736 2010-12-02 10:14:14 <TheAncientGoat> sktrdie: Currencies can rise or fall due to governmental decisions
737 2010-12-02 10:14:19 <btcex> sktrdie: then what is the difference between cash and bitcoin?
738 2010-12-02 10:14:28 <altamic> strdie: I am from sicily
739 2010-12-02 10:14:37 <btcex> no difference
740 2010-12-02 10:14:43 <TheAncientGoat> Look at collapsed currencies like the zim dollar or ones from history
741 2010-12-02 10:14:47 <sktrdie> btcex: that cash is valuable in my market... bitcoin it's just a number that a very small part of the market has adapted.
742 2010-12-02 10:15:13 <btcex> sktrdie: how valuable is the Japanese yen in your market?
743 2010-12-02 10:15:27 <btcex> sktrdie: how valuable the Japanese yen in your market?
744 2010-12-02 10:15:39 <sktrdie> it is, conversion exists.
745 2010-12-02 10:16:25 <btcex> sktrdie: bitcoin also have exchanges
746 2010-12-02 10:16:29 <btcex> for EUR
747 2010-12-02 10:16:38 <sktrdie> but bitcoin doesn't have a market
748 2010-12-02 10:16:43 <sktrdie> at least not yet
749 2010-12-02 10:16:55 <sktrdie> the Japanese currency has a market... so does the Euro
750 2010-12-02 10:17:00 <altamic> we are here to build it
751 2010-12-02 10:17:02 <btcex> sktrdie: mtgox.com
752 2010-12-02 10:17:03 <btcex> ?
753 2010-12-02 10:17:19 <btcex> market is small. while small
754 2010-12-02 10:17:30 <sktrdie> Yes, I totally understand the building process... i'm just stating the current facts - answers to btcex questions.
755 2010-12-02 10:18:29 <sktrdie> so where is my currency stored? on paypal it's stored on their servers... what's the difference here?
756 2010-12-02 10:18:39 <btcex> sktrdie: bitcoin value for you is the same as the Thai baht :) they have value for you, but you prefer EUR
757 2010-12-02 10:19:00 <[Noodles]> its in your wallet, keep it safe
758 2010-12-02 10:19:20 <sktrdie> What's a *wallet* for bitcoin?
759 2010-12-02 10:19:30 <btcex> sktrdie: wallet.dat file
760 2010-12-02 10:19:31 <sktrdie> your hard-drive? or a key?
761 2010-12-02 10:19:37 <[Noodles]> it's a file in your data-directory
762 2010-12-02 10:19:37 <sktrdie> just 1 file?
763 2010-12-02 10:19:42 <[Noodles]> yes
764 2010-12-02 10:19:51 <btcex> sktrdie: secret keys storage
765 2010-12-02 10:19:59 <sktrdie> and the validation happens where? who stores the amount of money I have?
766 2010-12-02 10:20:18 <sktrdie> it can't be just one file and that's it... people would reverse-engineer it and make fake money.
767 2010-12-02 10:20:26 <sktrdie> or just increase their wallet as much as they want.
768 2010-12-02 10:20:27 <[Noodles]> the blocks store transactions and validate them
769 2010-12-02 10:20:41 <sktrdie> so data is validates between all the peers in the network?
770 2010-12-02 10:20:45 <sktrdie> *validated.
771 2010-12-02 10:20:47 <[Noodles]> yes
772 2010-12-02 10:20:51 <btcex> sktrdie: by presence of secret keys you confirm that the money is yours
773 2010-12-02 10:21:08 <sktrdie> hrm interesting.
774 2010-12-02 10:21:24 <btcex> sktrdie: you ask questions from the faq
775 2010-12-02 10:22:00 <sktrdie> you should provide a higher - level faq... starting out explanation of the system with Blocks and Peers it's quite user-unfriendly.
776 2010-12-02 10:22:52 <btcex> sktrdie: http://www.bitcoin.org/wiki/doku.php ?
777 2010-12-02 10:24:23 <sktrdie> The question is whether people will trust software and peers to store their money.
778 2010-12-02 10:24:49 <sktrdie> In real life you still have assurance of your bank (which of course could also fail, but your money is assured and people feel safe)
779 2010-12-02 10:25:14 <[Noodles]> in reallife, you have to trust your bank, in bitcoin you dont have to trust anyone
780 2010-12-02 10:25:21 <sktrdie> With this system I'm doubtful, there may be tons of concept flaws with my money floating around and not having anyone to blame when my money is gone :|
781 2010-12-02 10:25:47 <[Noodles]> not to mention you pay your bank
782 2010-12-02 10:26:00 <btcex> sktrdie: your bank can forge signatures and documents )
783 2010-12-02 10:26:15 <sktrdie> my money is still assured.
784 2010-12-02 10:26:22 <altamic> sktrdie: ahaha
785 2010-12-02 10:26:37 <altamic> this is want they like you to believe
786 2010-12-02 10:26:51 <btcex> sktrdie: I prefer to call the bitcoin a 'digital cash'
787 2010-12-02 10:27:11 <btcex> Then these issues are eliminated.
788 2010-12-02 10:27:48 <sktrdie> altamic: how do you feel safe? do you completely understand the low-bit specifications of this Bitcoin system? How can you feel safe with your money being validated by other peers. What do you do when a Concept flaw arrives - and trust me, software is the last certain thing in your life.
789 2010-12-02 10:28:09 <altamic> concept flaw? I've still not found it
790 2010-12-02 10:28:24 <sktrdie> Software = bugs, it's inevitable.
791 2010-12-02 10:28:57 <sktrdie> If paypal has a bug, I still have their assurance.
792 2010-12-02 10:29:11 <altamic> please do yourself a favour read bitcoin.pdf
793 2010-12-02 10:29:22 <altamic> and get into the code
794 2010-12-02 10:29:37 <sktrdie> altamic: If you provide a link to this pdf, I would be happy to
795 2010-12-02 10:30:01 <altamic> http://lmgtfy.com/
796 2010-12-02 10:30:17 <sktrdie> altamic: if you want every user to get into the code, i'm not sure you will be very successful with building a market for this.
797 2010-12-02 10:30:37 <altamic> http://lmgtfy.com/?q=bitcoin+pdf
798 2010-12-02 10:31:05 <TheAncientGoat> altamic: :\n72005
799 2010-12-02 10:32:24 <[Noodles]> i'm not into the code and trust it anyway more than i would with any bank
800 2010-12-02 10:32:52 <Keefe> total network power is around 80 ghps now :)
801 2010-12-02 10:33:05 <altamic> the system is based on a con
802 2010-12-02 10:33:05 <sktrdie> [Noodles]: you trust the community too much then - software is flawed, that's a fact.
803 2010-12-02 10:33:32 <[Noodles]> its not the community that i trust, its the concept
804 2010-12-02 10:33:37 <btcex> sktrdie: Do you use online banking?
805 2010-12-02 10:33:43 <btcex> sktrdie: what OS do you use?
806 2010-12-02 10:34:06 <btcex> Are you sure that these programs are no contain errors?
807 2010-12-02 10:34:16 <sktrdie> sending bits around will always involve errors. when the errors occurs and your money is on the line, you'll start not trusting the concept so much.
808 2010-12-02 10:34:31 <sktrdie> btcex: i use online banking such as paypal, yes i do.
809 2010-12-02 10:34:46 <btcex> sktrdie: you know about november SSL bug, for example?
810 2010-12-02 10:34:57 <[Noodles]> and do you use software to use paypal? ^.^
811 2010-12-02 10:35:00 <sktrdie> i don't, my money is assured by the organization.
812 2010-12-02 10:35:15 <[Noodles]> so you trust that organization
813 2010-12-02 10:35:17 <sktrdie> and the organization is no point to fail - i wouldn't use it otherwise.
814 2010-12-02 10:35:20 <sktrdie> [Noodles]: yes i do.
815 2010-12-02 10:35:22 <btcex> sktrdie: The less you know you sleep tight
816 2010-12-02 10:35:37 <[Noodles]> and you pay for that trust with any single transaction
817 2010-12-02 10:36:08 <sktrdie> I understand, but I still have that one central place I can call when there's an issue.
818 2010-12-02 10:36:29 <btcex> sktrdie: and the= answer that everything is in order
819 2010-12-02 10:36:31 <sktrdie> With bicoin, I can't have this assurance.
820 2010-12-02 10:36:37 <btcex> sktrdie: and the= answer that everything is ?II2
821 2010-12-02 10:36:40 <[Noodles]> and what about paypay-fraudsters? do you trust them too?
822 2010-12-02 10:36:41 <btcex> sktrdie: and the= answer that everything is good
823 2010-12-02 10:36:46 <[Noodles]> *paypal
824 2010-12-02 10:36:56 <btcex> sorry, language switch issue
825 2010-12-02 10:37:30 <TheAncientGoat> He has a point guys
826 2010-12-02 10:37:50 <btcex> mankind has been forced to rely on software
827 2010-12-02 10:37:50 <TheAncientGoat> sktrdie: What is needed is a bitcoin bank, which can assure your bitcoins
828 2010-12-02 10:38:21 <[Noodles]> with bitcoin, YOU are your own bank
829 2010-12-02 10:38:47 <TheAncientGoat> [Noodles]: Sure, but then I rely on the software completely
830 2010-12-02 10:38:50 <altamic> TheAncientGoat: davout is working on it
831 2010-12-02 10:38:57 <TheAncientGoat> And if the software fails, I'm screwed
832 2010-12-02 10:39:06 <[Noodles]> like you rely on paypals software
833 2010-12-02 10:39:21 <btcex> TheAncientGoat: Yes, he needs a bank, where he would be able to come and stand in line, mocked and write a complaint. With pen!
834 2010-12-02 10:39:21 <[Noodles]> wheres the difference?
835 2010-12-02 10:39:23 <btcex> :)
836 2010-12-02 10:39:23 <sktrdie> if paypal software screws up, I can call them up.
837 2010-12-02 10:39:46 <TheAncientGoat> Exactly
838 2010-12-02 10:40:44 <btcex> sktrdie: for what?
839 2010-12-02 10:40:48 <TheAncientGoat> Paypal is an organization, and if they lose my money I can hold them accountable
840 2010-12-02 10:41:08 <TheAncientGoat> No one is accountable here, other than the third party services
841 2010-12-02 10:41:54 <btcex> sktrdie: if your bitcoin wallet will be broken you can call to me. :)
842 2010-12-02 10:42:20 <btcex> with same result
843 2010-12-02 10:42:31 <[Noodles]> just send me all your coins, i'll keep them safe, promise ^.^
844 2010-12-02 10:42:48 <TheAncientGoat> sktrdie: But you should also see here that accountability can be provided through third party services
845 2010-12-02 10:43:52 <larsig_> someone want to do a phone call for bitcoins? contact me
846 2010-12-02 10:44:36 <[Noodles]> phone-sex for bitcoins? o.0
847 2010-12-02 10:44:55 <xelister> TheAncientGoat: paypal will fuck you over if they loose your money - and you can then suck theirs managers board's collective disk
848 2010-12-02 10:44:58 <xelister> TheAncientGoat: paypal will fuck you over if they loose your money - and you can then suck theirs managers board's collective dick
849 2010-12-02 10:46:04 <TheAncientGoat> xelister: And look at the bad publicity it has got them
850 2010-12-02 10:46:09 <larsig_> i need to call my phone company to activate my phone
851 2010-12-02 10:47:03 <xelister> TheAncientGoat: none, they dont give a fuck
852 2010-12-02 10:47:47 <btcex> sktrdie: Theoretically possible that your money from the account will disappear as a result of a failure and nothing you can prove. So it makes no difference with bitcoin. (Also bitcoin client software is easier than Paypal software.)
853 2010-12-02 10:48:04 <btcex> sktrdie: From paypal account*
854 2010-12-02 10:48:37 <xelister> larsig_: well sounds interesting... but better if someone from same country does it :)
855 2010-12-02 10:48:41 <TheAncientGoat> xelister: BS, how did you dinf out about it? What about all the competing services that use paypal's behaviour as a reason to use their alternative service
856 2010-12-02 10:48:51 <TheAncientGoat> find*
857 2010-12-02 10:49:03 <xelister> TheAncientGoat: they dont give rats ass, and you are a living proove
858 2010-12-02 10:49:20 <daveparrish> If I have bitcoin.conf setup, how can I use username and password on the commandline using bitcoind?
859 2010-12-02 10:49:22 <TheAncientGoat> xelister: I don't use their service
860 2010-12-02 10:49:35 <TheAncientGoat> Because of the bad publicity they have
861 2010-12-02 10:49:41 <xelister> it seems paypal fucked over some guy frozing his account "because", he lost thousands, and what bad publicity? none: you didnt heared about this incident, and I even can't google that article now
862 2010-12-02 10:50:07 <TheAncientGoat> I have heard about multiple times paypal has frozen accounts
863 2010-12-02 10:50:13 <xelister> daveparrish: no need to use it.  it is needed for miner and so on
864 2010-12-02 10:50:14 <TheAncientGoat> it's over the internet every couple of weeks
865 2010-12-02 10:51:28 <TheAncientGoat> xelister: Anyhow, no use in arguing with you, seeing as you supposedly know all the information I am exposed to and not, as well as the services I use and don't
866 2010-12-02 10:51:57 <btcex> daveparrish:  username and password used automatically by bitcoin CLI binary
867 2010-12-02 10:52:14 <btcex> or by chrome bitcoin plug-in
868 2010-12-02 10:52:35 <[Noodles]> daveparrish: if you'v user/pass in the bitcoin.conf, you just need to start "bitcoind -server" (can also set server=1 in the bitcoin.conf), it's just (remote) miners that need the user/pass
869 2010-12-02 10:53:35 <[Noodles]> other other stuff besides miners that connect to JSON
870 2010-12-02 10:53:40 <[Noodles]> *or
871 2010-12-02 10:55:01 <[Noodles]> here's a sample bitcoin.conf, showing all options http://www.bitcoin.org/wiki/doku.php?id=running_bitcoin
872 2010-12-02 10:57:09 <daveparrish> I see, I was changing the bitcoin.conf password while bitcoind was running.  That was giving me an error when I tried to run any command afterwords.
873 2010-12-02 11:12:06 <xelister> U.S. Army medic has been sentenced to nine months in prison after pleading guilty to shooting at unarmed farmers in Afghanistan.
874 2010-12-02 11:14:04 <OneFixt> ;;bc,stats
875 2010-12-02 11:14:07 <gribble> Current Blocks: 95084 | Current Difficulty: 8078.19525793 | Next Difficulty At Block: 96767 | Next Difficulty In: 1683 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 2 days, 3 hours, 1 minute, and 7 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 10345.84521105
876 2010-12-02 11:19:48 <btcex> xelister: http://i.neoseeker.com/n/0/tf2_medic_thumb.jpg
877 2010-12-02 11:32:19 <xelister> btcex: yeah. god bless usa, where medics murder civilians ;)
878 2010-12-02 11:32:45 <btcex> It's been therapeutic bullets
879 2010-12-02 12:16:41 <OneFixt> ;;bc,stats
880 2010-12-02 12:16:44 <gribble> Current Blocks: 95093 | Current Difficulty: 8078.19525793 | Next Difficulty At Block: 96767 | Next Difficulty In: 1674 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 2 days, 2 hours, 27 minutes, and 20 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 10317.04130754
881 2010-12-02 12:27:29 <bencoder> price going back up, nice
882 2010-12-02 12:36:44 <Kiba> ;;bc,calc 66000
883 2010-12-02 12:36:45 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 66000 Khps, given current difficulty of 8078.19525793 , is 6 days, 2 hours, 1 minute, and 30 seconds
884 2010-12-02 12:37:03 <Kiba> at this rate, we will only generate a block every six days!
885 2010-12-02 12:37:28 <btcex> we need GPU pooled mining
886 2010-12-02 12:39:56 <xelister> pooled mining sounds like a fraud to me ;)
887 2010-12-02 12:40:12 <xelister> we may need smaller blocks, like ever 2 minutes a x5 easier block
888 2010-12-02 12:41:57 <btcex> xelister: disagree. difficulty will be highter and then will need less and less smaller blocks
889 2010-12-02 12:42:14 <btcex> pooled mining is a great idea
890 2010-12-02 12:47:00 <xelister> btcex: yea greate idea
891 2010-12-02 12:47:08 <xelister> btcex: ok join my pooling server
892 2010-12-02 12:47:15 <xelister> I will not keep the winning hash for myself or anything <_<
893 2010-12-02 12:47:49 <btcex> xelister: http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz/bitcoin-pool/ I am use server from this doc
894 2010-12-02 12:48:20 <btcex> my khash/s as 533
895 2010-12-02 12:48:22 <btcex> :)
896 2010-12-02 12:54:52 <Kiba> ;;bc,calc 70000
897 2010-12-02 12:54:53 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 70000 Khps, given current difficulty of 8078.19525793 , is 5 days, 17 hours, 40 minutes, and 51 seconds
898 2010-12-02 12:54:58 <Kiba> yay!
899 2010-12-02 12:57:45 <Kiba> we finally have a ball chance in hell of generating a bitcoin block!
900 2010-12-02 12:59:04 <bill__> is the difficulty still going up consistently?
901 2010-12-02 13:14:01 <darrob> hi, i just started playing around with bc. i installed bitcoind and downloaded the blockchain. on the bitcoin faucet website it says i would get some bitcoins after doing so, but getbalance still shows 0. does this not work when using tor or something?
902 2010-12-02 13:14:43 <pankkake> generating bitcoins is very slow
903 2010-12-02 13:17:59 <darrob> pankkake: was that directed at me? i understand that and i don't even plan on generating. i was referring to what it says on http://freebitcoins.appspot.com/.
904 2010-12-02 13:18:17 <pankkake> oh
905 2010-12-02 13:18:37 <pankkake> yeah you should receive that quickly, if you don't something is not working
906 2010-12-02 13:18:47 <darrob> i was hoping for a cent (or something) to send around
907 2010-12-02 13:19:41 <btcex> darrob: provide your address and I send 0.05 for you
908 2010-12-02 13:20:50 <xelister> darrob: did it said your IP was already used? if not, check ballance again
909 2010-12-02 13:21:02 <gavinandresen> darrob:  how many blocks did you download?
910 2010-12-02 13:21:45 <nelisky> andrew12: I WIN!!!
911 2010-12-02 13:22:23 <nelisky> andrew12: but because I'm also the house, new pick3 in http://taabl.datlatec.com/details?pick=3.95066 primed with my winnings ;) If you are feeling inclined to try again.
912 2010-12-02 13:24:06 <darrob> xelister: yes, the website states that because i access it through Tor. if new installations also get those coins by IP, that would explain why it doesn't work.
913 2010-12-02 13:24:24 <btcex> Promotion: National Radio Show Interview about Bitcoin
914 2010-12-02 13:24:49 <btcex> National Radio Show is an internet radio or radiowawes radio?
915 2010-12-02 13:27:04 <darrob> btcex: wonderful, thank you. i'm still struggling with (my understanding of) accounts and addresses using bitcoind. it seems a little more clear using the gui. i'll get back to you. :)
916 2010-12-02 13:27:59 <gavinandresen> darrob: send me an email  (gavinandresen@gmail.com) if your faucet coins don't show up eventually (I'm the Faucet guy).
917 2010-12-02 13:29:25 <btcex> gavinandresen: I would like just typing its address on freebitcoins.appspot.com :)
918 2010-12-02 13:29:28 <nanotube> ;;bc,stats
919 2010-12-02 13:29:30 <gribble> Current Blocks: 95099 | Current Difficulty: 8078.19525793 | Next Difficulty At Block: 96767 | Next Difficulty In: 1668 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 2 days, 1 hour, 28 minutes, and 49 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 10326.16958867
920 2010-12-02 13:29:32 <btcex> his*
921 2010-12-02 13:29:47 <grondilu> Hi, bitcoin is using a copy of the "JSON spirit" project.  It is not packaged in debian.  Any chance the program could use a more standard lib ?
922 2010-12-02 13:30:17 <gavinandresen> grondilu:  bitcoin includes the source of JSON spirit
923 2010-12-02 13:30:31 <gavinandresen> grondilu:  It is just ten or so .cpp/.h files
924 2010-12-02 13:31:13 <gavinandresen> grondilu: or, to answer your question directly:  No.
925 2010-12-02 13:31:13 <grondilu> yeah indeed, but it's not OK for debian packaging, I've been told.
926 2010-12-02 13:31:26 <grondilu> ok
927 2010-12-02 13:31:27 <xelister> darrob: why not just access it directly?
928 2010-12-02 13:31:54 <btcex> grondilu: also need to ask to pack into debian script jsonawk
929 2010-12-02 13:32:10 <btcex> (or awkjson, I forgot its name)
930 2010-12-02 13:32:26 <darrob> gavinandresen: oh good to know. :) i'll do that sometime. thanks.
931 2010-12-02 13:32:28 <xelister> well and get wx2.9
932 2010-12-02 13:32:32 <btcex> it is very usable for working with bitcoin CLI from scripts
933 2010-12-02 13:32:35 <xelister> that is a problem since 2.9 is beta
934 2010-12-02 13:33:06 <grondilu> wx2.9 is not a problem.  We could package only bitcoind
935 2010-12-02 13:35:48 <btcex> https://www.arin.net/announcements/2010/20101130.html IPv4 address blocks pool is empty - only seven /8s remaining in IANA free pool of IPv4 addresses,