1 2010-12-31 00:00:23 <ArtForz> "throwing spahetti at the wall" seems to work best for buck, boost, buck-boost, flyback and SEPIC
  2 2010-12-31 00:07:41 <Diablo-D3> [07:41:31] <ArtForz> not easily
  3 2010-12-31 00:07:44 <Diablo-D3> [07:41:57] <ArtForz> to get at the damn screws you have to desolder the main transformer and the whole rectifier mosfet bank
  4 2010-12-31 00:07:47 <Diablo-D3> ffffffffffff
  5 2010-12-31 00:07:50 <Diablo-D3> thats bs
  6 2010-12-31 00:08:15 <marioxcc> i'm back
  7 2010-12-31 00:08:20 <ArtForz> well, either the mosfet bank or the output inductor
  8 2010-12-31 00:08:32 <marioxcc> sorry, I had to attend an issue
  9 2010-12-31 00:08:43 <ArtForz> and desoldering the mosfet bank is easier
 10 2010-12-31 00:11:35 <marioxcc> ArtForz: I have a 120-12V 1A transformer here
 11 2010-12-31 00:11:57 <Diablo-D3> who doesnt?
 12 2010-12-31 00:11:58 <marioxcc> I had the idea of building an inverter
 13 2010-12-31 00:12:08 <marioxcc> using PWM, but
 14 2010-12-31 00:12:12 <marioxcc> my question is:
 15 2010-12-31 00:12:14 <Diablo-D3> I have a shitload of 120v->something transformers of various voltages
 16 2010-12-31 00:12:21 <marioxcc> would this work with a standard transformer?
 17 2010-12-31 00:12:31 <ArtForz> yes, but not well
 18 2010-12-31 00:12:51 <marioxcc> Diablo-D3: i'm was not boasting
 19 2010-12-31 00:12:58 <ArtForz> 60Hz transfomers usually dont like square wave drive too well
 20 2010-12-31 00:14:25 <marioxcc> ArtForz: the inductance won't smooth the wave?
 21 2010-12-31 00:14:40 <ArtForz> no, because it's effectively short-circuited by the load
 22 2010-12-31 00:15:03 <ArtForz> just measure leakage inductance, it's not much
 23 2010-12-31 00:16:00 <marioxcc> ok
 24 2010-12-31 00:16:39 <ArtForz> but it's sure possible to do it
 25 2010-12-31 00:17:07 <ArtForz> the transformer will hum more than usual and only provide ~70% of rated power, but it'll work
 26 2010-12-31 00:17:42 <marioxcc> ok
 27 2010-12-31 00:17:52 <ArtForz> of course it's a lot more space efficient to just do DC-DC and then create square wave AC with a bridge
 28 2010-12-31 00:18:51 <marioxcc> how do you create a sin wave?
 29 2010-12-31 00:19:04 <ArtForz> thats... tricky
 30 2010-12-31 00:19:26 <ArtForz> usually PWM and LC smooting
 31 2010-12-31 00:19:29 <ArtForz> *smoothing
 32 2010-12-31 00:19:32 <marioxcc> ok
 33 2010-12-31 00:19:35 <marioxcc> what about inductive loads?
 34 2010-12-31 00:20:03 <ArtForz> what about them?
 35 2010-12-31 00:20:29 <ArtForz> like anything with a non-1 cos phi, they'll backfeed part of the time
 36 2010-12-31 00:20:38 <marioxcc> i suppose they increase the inductance factor
 37 2010-12-31 00:20:53 <marioxcc> can the filter deal with that?
 38 2010-12-31 00:21:00 <ArtForz> yep
 39 2010-12-31 00:21:33 <Kiba> da dyson sphere project
 40 2010-12-31 00:22:08 <afed> let's write a computer program that makes dyson spheres and use them as currency
 41 2010-12-31 00:22:29 <AAA_awright> There's not enough Bitcoins in existance to build that train of yours, Kiba
 42 2010-12-31 00:22:32 <ArtForz> build a dyson sphere, then we can have space subways!
 43 2010-12-31 00:23:47 <lfm> id be happy with a ringworld
 44 2010-12-31 00:23:59 <Kiba> a ringworld around the sun?
 45 2010-12-31 00:24:22 <Kiba> maybe I could build a ring around the earth first
 46 2010-12-31 00:24:24 <lfm> ya, slice of a dyson shere
 47 2010-12-31 00:24:44 <ArtForz> ringworld?
 48 2010-12-31 00:25:02 <ArtForz> lol
 49 2010-12-31 00:25:10 <afed> molly ringwald
 50 2010-12-31 00:25:23 <Kiba> a train network that spans the globe
 51 2010-12-31 00:25:59 <Kiba> the only problem is that some wars will collapse some of these train track
 52 2010-12-31 00:26:10 <Kiba> or earthquake, or any number of thing
 53 2010-12-31 00:26:21 <Kiba> that's why it's improtant to build a self-replicating train network
 54 2010-12-31 00:26:55 <ArtForz> just build a flying train network
 55 2010-12-31 00:27:14 <Kiba> that just make no sense
 56 2010-12-31 00:27:19 <ArtForz> why?
 57 2010-12-31 00:27:47 <Kiba> trains don't fly
 58 2010-12-31 00:27:53 <Kiba> maybe they levitates
 59 2010-12-31 00:27:58 <Kiba> but they don't fly
 60 2010-12-31 00:28:10 <ArtForz> no, the tracks fly
 61 2010-12-31 00:28:37 <ArtForz> well, actually they're suspended from vacuum balloons
 62 2010-12-31 00:28:53 <lfm> they can use aerodynamic effects
 63 2010-12-31 00:29:03 <Kiba> they're still vulnerable to missle launches
 64 2010-12-31 00:29:54 <lfm> what isnt
 65 2010-12-31 00:30:10 <marioxcc> Kiba: just as every other satelite
 66 2010-12-31 00:31:05 <Kiba> the first step is to defeat the tree hugging nonsense
 67 2010-12-31 00:31:16 <marioxcc> lol
 68 2010-12-31 00:31:28 <Kiba> then we can engineer the world to our liking
 69 2010-12-31 00:32:08 <Kiba> if you want nature, you can alway buy property and engineered nature
 70 2010-12-31 00:33:42 <lfm> kiba you read Ian M Banks? I can recomend him
 71 2010-12-31 00:34:27 <ArtForz> Imo the whole OMG save the planet! crap is illusion of grandeur
 72 2010-12-31 00:35:01 <lfm> not that pollution and such isnt a real problem sometimes
 73 2010-12-31 00:35:26 <ArtForz> yes, for humans, also for a bunch of plants or animals, for the planet? not really
 74 2010-12-31 00:35:39 <Kiba> lfm: no, but I read BLAME!
 75 2010-12-31 00:36:36 <Kiba> it have the most badass dyson sphere ever
 76 2010-12-31 00:36:53 <Kiba> the dyson sphere stretch to Jupiter's orbit
 77 2010-12-31 00:37:30 <Kiba> the only problem...
 78 2010-12-31 00:37:43 <Kiba> no nature to inhabit..and very rarely do you meet human beings
 79 2010-12-31 00:37:50 <Kiba> if you meet cyborgs, you're dead
 80 2010-12-31 00:37:53 <Kiba> unless you are one
 81 2010-12-31 00:39:27 <marioxcc> that happens when you read too much sci-fi books
 82 2010-12-31 00:40:07 <marioxcc> ok, now regarding the tesla beam energy gun...
 83 2010-12-31 00:40:08 <marioxcc> hehe
 84 2010-12-31 00:40:13 <lfm> Ian M banks novel titled "Matter" has a structure sounds symilar to the City
 85 2010-12-31 00:40:21 <Kiba> you mean
 86 2010-12-31 00:40:32 <Kiba> the graviton beam emitter?
 87 2010-12-31 00:40:48 <lfm> no, multi level shere world
 88 2010-12-31 00:40:55 <lfm> sphere
 89 2010-12-31 00:41:11 <marioxcc> what's really impressive when you saw it the first time is the tesla coil
 90 2010-12-31 00:41:15 <marioxcc> which is real
 91 2010-12-31 00:43:12 <ArtForz> yep
 92 2010-12-31 00:43:31 <ArtForz> also interesting to see 2 tesla coils tunded to the same freq used as a transformer
 93 2010-12-31 00:43:50 <marioxcc> how is that?
 94 2010-12-31 00:43:56 <ArtForz> *tuned
 95 2010-12-31 00:44:03 <marioxcc> ok
 96 2010-12-31 00:44:21 <ArtForz> well, pretty much same way RFID works, inductive coupling
 97 2010-12-31 00:45:06 <lfm> or the corless battery chargers?
 98 2010-12-31 00:45:11 <lfm> cordless
 99 2010-12-31 00:45:18 <marioxcc> ArtForz: interesting
100 2010-12-31 00:45:19 <ArtForz> not quite, those use near-field coupling
101 2010-12-31 00:45:32 <marioxcc> lfm: how corless are they?
102 2010-12-31 00:45:43 <ArtForz> = 2 halves of a ferrite transformer seperated by a bit of plastic and air
103 2010-12-31 00:45:48 <marioxcc> lol
104 2010-12-31 00:46:13 <marioxcc> so i guess their cordlessness is limited to 2 mm
105 2010-12-31 00:46:19 <ArtForz> yep
106 2010-12-31 00:46:28 <marioxcc> marketing BS :(
107 2010-12-31 00:47:23 <ArtForz> the trick with tesla coils is that the 2ndary is essentially just a LC resonant circuit
108 2010-12-31 00:47:48 <lfm> well you dont plug your phone in strictly speaking, (actually I wouldnt want one either)
109 2010-12-31 00:47:52 <ArtForz> and if you have current flowing in several feet of air-cored coil, you get a HUGE magentic fringe field
110 2010-12-31 00:48:07 <ArtForz> put anything resonating at the same freq in the field, and it draws power from it
111 2010-12-31 00:48:23 <marioxcc> great :)
112 2010-12-31 00:48:30 <ArtForz> yep
113 2010-12-31 00:48:42 <ArtForz> seeing it demoed is... interesting
114 2010-12-31 00:49:08 <marioxcc> guess so
115 2010-12-31 00:49:33 <ArtForz> with a smallish tabletop coil you can get a few W over 10' no problem
116 2010-12-31 00:49:37 <ArtForz> well, 2 of em
117 2010-12-31 00:49:58 <marioxcc> ArtForz: 2?
118 2010-12-31 00:50:06 <ArtForz> one transmitter, one receiver
119 2010-12-31 00:50:09 <marioxcc> oh, sure
120 2010-12-31 00:50:37 <marioxcc> is that radio wave propagation or pure inductive coupling?
121 2010-12-31 00:50:57 <ArtForz> mostly inductive
122 2010-12-31 00:51:11 <marioxcc> ok
123 2010-12-31 00:51:28 <ArtForz> the interesting part is the magentic field doesn't seem to go down with distance cubed
124 2010-12-31 00:51:34 <ArtForz> *magnetic field strength
125 2010-12-31 00:51:37 <sipa> http://blockexplorer.com/address/1655orL9kVqVqCGMjGLogr11MFmeDBXw61
126 2010-12-31 00:51:45 <sipa> transactions with value=0 are legal?
127 2010-12-31 00:52:14 <marioxcc> ArtForz: wow, how do that works?
128 2010-12-31 00:52:26 <ArtForz> thats the weird part
129 2010-12-31 00:52:46 <ArtForz> it has something to do with the shape of the generated magnetic field
130 2010-12-31 00:52:59 <marioxcc> is like a directed antena?
131 2010-12-31 00:53:02 <ArtForz> yep
132 2010-12-31 00:54:02 <ArtForz> yo you get nearly no field outside the plane
133 2010-12-31 00:54:05 <ArtForz> *so
134 2010-12-31 00:54:13 <marioxcc> nice
135 2010-12-31 00:54:18 <marioxcc> i would love to make one
136 2010-12-31 00:54:59 <ArtForz> when you get further away, it goes more and more from H to E field
137 2010-12-31 00:56:00 <marioxcc> it's then a radio wave?
138 2010-12-31 00:56:04 <ArtForz> yep
139 2010-12-31 00:56:12 <marioxcc> nice
140 2010-12-31 00:57:01 <ArtForz> the physics are well understood but really very nonintuitive
141 2010-12-31 00:57:26 <ArtForz> yep, current code allows 0 value TX...
142 2010-12-31 00:57:54 <ArtForz> still incurs the 0.01 "microTX" fee
143 2010-12-31 00:58:19 <marioxcc> I'm studying calculus to undestand the related physics
144 2010-12-31 00:58:27 <marioxcc> just the elementary for now
145 2010-12-31 00:59:27 <lfm> siba looks like zero amounts are allowed if you pay fee
146 2010-12-31 00:59:31 <ArtForz> yep
147 2010-12-31 00:59:54 <marioxcc> what's the motivation to such transactions?
148 2010-12-31 01:00:07 <ArtForz> no clue
149 2010-12-31 01:00:21 <lfm> no idea. I spoze someone is just exploring limits
150 2010-12-31 01:00:32 <sipa> dang, now i need to adapt my coin tracer :)
151 2010-12-31 01:00:53 <ArtForz> nice thing is we can just forget the output
152 2010-12-31 01:00:56 <marioxcc> lfm: it's fine for me, someone just lost 0.01 BTC to a miner :)
153 2010-12-31 01:01:03 <lfm> zero is smaller then 0.01 so with a fee it goes thru
154 2010-12-31 01:01:12 <ArtForz> yep
155 2010-12-31 01:01:14 <ArtForz> you can't spend a 0-value TX
156 2010-12-31 01:01:25 <ArtForz> well, you can try, but no iner wil laccept it as it doesnt have enough fee
157 2010-12-31 01:01:28 <ArtForz> *miner
158 2010-12-31 01:01:43 <sipa> why do such small transactions need such (relatively) high fee?
159 2010-12-31 01:01:55 <lfm> even if combined with other inputs?
160 2010-12-31 01:02:04 <ArtForz> hurrm
161 2010-12-31 01:02:10 <ArtForz> actually that should work
162 2010-12-31 01:02:24 <sipa> the current client does not check for fees at all, right?
163 2010-12-31 01:02:25 <ArtForz> you can combine a 0-value with other inputs to make a normal TX
164 2010-12-31 01:02:36 <ArtForz> errr... it does
165 2010-12-31 01:02:40 <sipa> ok
166 2010-12-31 01:02:48 <sipa> i believe i read it didn't
167 2010-12-31 01:03:06 <ArtForz> http://bitcoin.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/bitcoin/trunk/main.cpp?r1=199&r2=198&pathrev=199
168 2010-12-31 01:03:15 <marioxcc> could a miner make blocks without including any transaction at all (other than generation)?
169 2010-12-31 01:03:16 <ArtForz> line 633
170 2010-12-31 01:03:21 <ArtForz> yep
171 2010-12-31 01:03:30 <lfm> sipa the idea was to try to reduce "dust" of transactions so small they are practically valueless
172 2010-12-31 01:04:04 <lfm> marioxcc they do that all the time
173 2010-12-31 01:04:16 <marioxcc> lfm: who does?
174 2010-12-31 01:04:21 <marioxcc> it would be very egocentrical
175 2010-12-31 01:04:25 <ArtForz> every miner
176 2010-12-31 01:04:40 <lfm> miners make blocks with only generation txn in them
177 2010-12-31 01:04:50 <sipa> marioxcc: the fee is decided by those who do transactions
178 2010-12-31 01:04:53 <ArtForz> if theres no TXs queued you mine for a gen-only block
179 2010-12-31 01:05:08 <sipa> the miner simple finds a nonce needed to combine some transactions into a block
180 2010-12-31 01:05:09 <marioxcc> oh, sure
181 2010-12-31 01:05:20 <lfm> marioxcc you kinda have to do it since some times there are no transactions being made
182 2010-12-31 01:05:55 <sipa> and a lot of blocks are indeed only a generation, without any transaction
183 2010-12-31 01:06:02 <marioxcc> ok
184 2010-12-31 01:06:16 <sipa> you could make that illegal, acutally i think
185 2010-12-31 01:06:24 <lfm> I presume you could only spend the zero amounts once
186 2010-12-31 01:06:35 <sipa> lfm: you can spend any transaction only once
187 2010-12-31 01:06:48 <marioxcc> sipa: why illegal?
188 2010-12-31 01:06:50 <ArtForz> so miner puts a 0.01btc tx-to-self in block, now what?
189 2010-12-31 01:07:11 <sipa> marioxcc: well, blocks are necessary for the network
190 2010-12-31 01:07:26 <sipa> but the necessity is a lot lower when there are no transactions to process
191 2010-12-31 01:07:33 <lfm> marioxcc and the system still needs time stamps saying "nothing happened here"
192 2010-12-31 01:07:48 <sipa> and miner is and stays a huge waste of power, only for the benefit of the network
193 2010-12-31 01:08:12 <marioxcc> ok
194 2010-12-31 01:08:15 <ArtForz> not exactly a huge waste of power
195 2010-12-31 01:08:27 <sipa> well, in global terms, not yet
196 2010-12-31 01:08:38 <lfm> sipa it is performing a service
197 2010-12-31 01:08:55 <sipa> yes of course it is
198 2010-12-31 01:09:09 <sipa> but that service is not really necessary when there are no transactions
199 2010-12-31 01:11:05 <lfm> well I spoze we dont really need any sort of money, we could all live on barter. it would be a pain to try to keep it fair and running smoothly
200 2010-12-31 01:11:16 <sipa> please
201 2010-12-31 01:12:20 <sipa> i'm just saying that it wouldn't harm much if mining was stopped if there are no transactions to process
202 2010-12-31 01:12:44 <ArtForz> yes it would
203 2010-12-31 01:12:47 <marioxcc> why?
204 2010-12-31 01:13:12 <lfm> so the bitcoin system is what it is. part of it is the regular creation of new btc, if you reduce that just cuz there are no other txn, its a different system an It might not be as attractive, I dont think it would work a smoothly
205 2010-12-31 01:13:18 <ArtForz> it allows someone to get a headstart for double-spends
206 2010-12-31 01:14:16 <marioxcc> ArtForz: how can the double-spender use the absence of blocks when there are no Tx?
207 2010-12-31 01:14:40 <ArtForz> easy sceanrio: a 1/unconf double spend
208 2010-12-31 01:14:53 <ArtForz> netwrok just sits there with 0 transactions
209 2010-12-31 01:15:49 <ArtForz> put "real" tx in block, start mining, find block, put one more useless tx in the block after that, keep mining until you got 2 blocks, broadcast fake tx to network, wait for network to create a block, payee sees 127unconf, now broadcast your 2 blocks
210 2010-12-31 01:15:55 <lfm> and like art said, an idle miner would just make a dummy 0.,01 txn to itself so it could keep running
211 2010-12-31 01:17:04 <marioxcc> ArtForz: I think in such case one of the blocks will eventually take precedence
212 2010-12-31 01:17:14 <ArtForz> yes, the attackersd
213 2010-12-31 01:17:19 <ArtForz> because it has a block after it
214 2010-12-31 01:17:51 <marioxcc> hmm
215 2010-12-31 01:18:55 <lfm> if your a miner and you actually stop mining when there are no txn yo0u give up chances at "winning"
216 2010-12-31 01:21:36 <sipa> good points
217 2010-12-31 01:21:39 <sipa> http://sipa.be/static/bitcoin/spending.pdf
218 2010-12-31 01:22:05 <sipa> that's ThomasV's idea for a graph earlier today
219 2010-12-31 01:22:58 <sipa> it traces each bitcoin from generation to where it ends up, counting the number of transactions it's been in
220 2010-12-31 01:26:54 <lfm> I thot most were still at 1
221 2010-12-31 01:27:42 <sipa> 0 = never spent
222 2010-12-31 01:27:49 <sipa> and not shown on the graph
223 2010-12-31 01:27:58 <lfm> ok most are still zero then
224 2010-12-31 01:28:02 <sipa> yes
225 2010-12-31 01:29:07 <sipa> 2.54275853920655 million BTC to be precise
226 2010-12-31 01:29:12 <sipa> hey
227 2010-12-31 01:29:18 <sipa> that's not possible
228 2010-12-31 01:29:20 <marioxcc> ???
229 2010-12-31 01:29:45 <lfm> oh includes fees
230 2010-12-31 01:30:04 <sipa> still, i don't see how it's possible
231 2010-12-31 01:30:21 <lfm> when its a fee it gets reset and included in generation
232 2010-12-31 01:30:27 <sipa> no it's not
233 2010-12-31 01:30:39 <sipa> only the 50 BTC is counted as 0
234 2010-12-31 01:30:44 <sipa> the fee is traced as normal
235 2010-12-31 01:30:55 <lfm> otherwise it should be a multiple of 50 with zero txn
236 2010-12-31 01:31:06 <sipa> indeed, that's why it's not possible :)
237 2010-12-31 01:31:26 <lfm> must be a bug
238 2010-12-31 01:32:36 <lfm> and looks like you're rounding off with floating arithmetic to smaller than 1e8 bits per bitcoin
239 2010-12-31 01:33:01 <sipa> which is strange, since i'm using integers :)
240 2010-12-31 01:33:50 <lfm> oh million maybe not
241 2010-12-31 01:33:51 <sipa> (by multiplying the amounts with 1e8)
242 2010-12-31 01:34:21 <lfm> ya, the fraction is the right number of digits, sorry
243 2010-12-31 01:34:59 <lfm> btw I get number of unspent generated transactions: 51349
244 2010-12-31 01:35:48 <lfm> so 2.567450 million btc
245 2010-12-31 01:35:53 <sipa> indeed
246 2010-12-31 01:36:11 <joe_1> why in the world does the software make you wait for 100-200 transactions before you can spend generated coin?
247 2010-12-31 01:36:26 <ArtForz> to avoid invalidating transactions on chain splitas
248 2010-12-31 01:36:40 <sipa> 100 transactions is a *lot*
249 2010-12-31 01:36:55 <nanotube> 100blocks you mean
250 2010-12-31 01:36:58 <nanotube> and it's not a lot at all.
251 2010-12-31 01:36:59 <sipa> yes
252 2010-12-31 01:37:02 <nanotube> less than a day
253 2010-12-31 01:37:04 <sipa> that's enough for a bug to be found, exploited, detected, and fixed :)
254 2010-12-31 01:37:23 <nanotube> well, yes, that's the hope. :)
255 2010-12-31 01:37:25 <lfm> joe_1 generated txn have to be a little different cuz they dont have previous input values you can check
256 2010-12-31 01:37:33 <joe_1> but why only those transactions? i can spend a regular received transaction with 0 confirmations
257 2010-12-31 01:38:44 <ArtForz> because normal trasnactions dont just vanish into thin air twhen the chain they're in gets overtaken
258 2010-12-31 01:39:03 <joe_1> well, they go to someone else though.
259 2010-12-31 01:39:14 <ArtForz> yes
260 2010-12-31 01:39:18 <joe_1> let's say i receive 50 BTC in a regular transaction from somebody, then immediately spend it off to someone else.
261 2010-12-31 01:39:29 <lfm> joe_1 usually they will get re-issued the same
262 2010-12-31 01:39:34 <joe_1> chain gets overtaken, i lose all authority to have sent anything
263 2010-12-31 01:39:47 <ArtForz> yep, and all dependent trasnactionsa re now also invalid
264 2010-12-31 01:39:55 <ArtForz> = they never happened
265 2010-12-31 01:40:36 <sipa> the generated coins are the foundation on which all other transactions are built
266 2010-12-31 01:40:55 <marioxcc> what if you spend a just generated bitcoin block?
267 2010-12-31 01:40:58 <ArtForz> a normal transaction in the "losing" chain not depnding on coins generated in that chain fork will just get put into the main chain
268 2010-12-31 01:41:01 <ArtForz> you can't
269 2010-12-31 01:41:03 <marioxcc> before 100 blocks confirmation?
270 2010-12-31 01:41:07 <ArtForz> you can't
271 2010-12-31 01:41:10 <ArtForz> it's invalid
272 2010-12-31 01:41:10 <marioxcc> ArtForz: why?
273 2010-12-31 01:41:16 <sipa> marioxcc: other nodes in the network will not accept it
274 2010-12-31 01:41:22 <ArtForz> because the code says it's invalid
275 2010-12-31 01:41:29 <marioxcc> other miners you mean?
276 2010-12-31 01:41:30 <lfm> joe_1 most normal txn on a chain split will wind up the same in both chains, might be in different blocks even but the same txn
277 2010-12-31 01:41:35 <ArtForz> blocks containing such a beasty are also invalid
278 2010-12-31 01:41:51 <marioxcc> ok
279 2010-12-31 01:42:07 <sipa> marioxcc: to be technically correct, the miner code doesn't know anything, it just looks for hashes - but yes, the clients those miners are working for
280 2010-12-31 01:42:46 <marioxcc> ok
281 2010-12-31 01:44:00 <lfm> marioxcc back to blocks with no txn. it is even allowed in the protocol for miners to ignore txn like ones with no fees and generate empty blocks even when some txn are waiting
282 2010-12-31 01:44:32 <joe_1> ok, im starting to see how normal transactions would most likely wind up on both sides of a split where generated ones would not. however, isn't 100 blocks outrageously large of a wait?
283 2010-12-31 01:44:48 <sipa> it's less than a day
284 2010-12-31 01:44:51 <marioxcc> lfm: ok
285 2010-12-31 01:46:08 <lfm> joe_1 maybe but how long should it be. he miners are generally willing to wait for their money so just to make sure it is extra long
286 2010-12-31 01:47:00 <joe_1> 1 or 2 confirmations
287 2010-12-31 01:47:17 <joe_1> max 6
288 2010-12-31 01:47:34 <sipa> how many blocks did it take for that exploit with the overflow to get detected?
289 2010-12-31 01:48:07 <lfm> detected less than an hour, corrected several more hours
290 2010-12-31 01:48:58 <joe_1> ok
291 2010-12-31 01:50:54 <sipa> ArtForz: how many blocks do you find a day?
292 2010-12-31 01:52:07 <gribble> 28.8
293 2010-12-31 01:52:07 <lfm> ;;math calc 144*.2
294 2010-12-31 01:52:25 <sipa> ok ok, so ArtForz finds one every hour :)
295 2010-12-31 01:52:36 <joe_1> i dont know if art will admit to it, but we can probably calculate backwards because i believe he has about 15 to 20 radeon 5870s.
296 2010-12-31 01:52:36 <lfm> sipa est 25 - 30
297 2010-12-31 01:52:56 <sipa> 5870?
298 2010-12-31 01:52:59 <lfm> sipa ya thatd be average
299 2010-12-31 01:53:09 <sipa> still, i think most miners don't find more than one a day
300 2010-12-31 01:53:18 <Kiba> he's the richest bitcoiner alive, maybe
301 2010-12-31 01:53:40 <joe_1> so about 20 dollars an hour, which is 400+ per day
302 2010-12-31 01:53:44 <joe_1> yeah, he's retired.
303 2010-12-31 01:53:54 <lfm> kiba I suspect Satoshi may be richer cuz he was nearly alone for the first year
304 2010-12-31 01:54:04 <Kiba> lonely satoshi!
305 2010-12-31 01:54:30 <Kiba> if I can go back to time, I would have earned LOOOOOOOOOOOOT OF BITCOIN
306 2010-12-31 01:54:42 <Kiba> hindsight are 20/20
307 2010-12-31 01:54:51 <sipa> but if everybody could, you wouldn't
308 2010-12-31 01:54:58 <sipa> Kiba: no infinity/20 :)
309 2010-12-31 01:55:39 <lfm> hidesight wears rose colored glasses?
310 2010-12-31 01:55:51 <ArtForz> 24 5970s, 22.something blocks/day
311 2010-12-31 01:56:55 <joe_1> plans to buy more gpu's?
312 2010-12-31 01:56:59 <ArtForz> nope
313 2010-12-31 01:57:22 <joe_1> plans to succeed bill gates as richest man in the world?
314 2010-12-31 01:57:29 <ArtForz> nope
315 2010-12-31 01:57:43 <sipa> 5 million BTC, the current amount in circulation
316 2010-12-31 01:58:07 <sipa> is 1.5 million $
317 2010-12-31 01:58:09 <joe_1> when the market pops 1 BTC will rise to just over a couple thousand dollars each
318 2010-12-31 01:58:37 <lfm> hehe whens that gonna happen joe?
319 2010-12-31 01:58:44 <sipa> the market may have people wanting to buy some BTC for 1$ maybe sometime in the future
320 2010-12-31 01:58:50 <joe_1> i would say 5 to 10 years
321 2010-12-31 01:59:04 <sipa> but do you think someone's ever going to want to buy *millions* of BTC for that price?
322 2010-12-31 01:59:13 <joe_1> look at it this way - it's doubled 6 times in the past few months (it was 0.005)
323 2010-12-31 01:59:24 <lfm> safe prediction, no one will remember the prediction that long
324 2010-12-31 02:00:16 <Kiba> boy, I hope I am right!
325 2010-12-31 02:00:31 <joe_1> the real driver of the price, however, is how much it is used in every day transactions; and, by extension, people's predicition of future level of use.
326 2010-12-31 02:01:04 <Kiba> is that so? .30 pitiful
327 2010-12-31 02:01:14 <EvanR> bill gates hasnt been the 'richest man' in a whole
328 2010-12-31 02:01:17 <EvanR> in a while
329 2010-12-31 02:01:27 <Kiba> I don't think he care
330 2010-12-31 02:01:33 <sipa> i hopse he doesn't
331 2010-12-31 02:01:40 <sipa> hope
332 2010-12-31 02:01:46 <lfm> been there done that
333 2010-12-31 02:02:00 <Kiba> for him, a million dollar is a rounding error
334 2010-12-31 02:02:10 <Kiba> dollars
335 2010-12-31 02:02:52 <lfm> i bet he watches every million pretty close
336 2010-12-31 02:03:43 <Kiba> rational philantrophy
337 2010-12-31 02:13:33 <joe_1> if bitcoin enjoys as much use as paypal does today, each bitcoin will be worth $710.
338 2010-12-31 02:15:33 <Kiba> and I'll be rich beyond my wildest dream?
339 2010-12-31 02:15:47 <Kiba> well
340 2010-12-31 02:15:57 <Kiba> I would have 171,820 if it come true
341 2010-12-31 02:16:15 <Kiba> USD
342 2010-12-31 02:16:23 <Kiba> that's a hell of saving
343 2010-12-31 02:16:55 <joe_1> yeah
344 2010-12-31 02:17:03 <tcatm> + we'd probably have good jobs at some bitcoin business.
345 2010-12-31 02:17:36 <Kiba> ridiclious saving rate
346 2010-12-31 02:18:02 <ArtForz> I'd have 21M
347 2010-12-31 02:18:21 <tcatm> I'd about 8M
348 2010-12-31 02:19:12 <Kiba> satoshi is probably a billionaire
349 2010-12-31 02:19:16 <Kiba> but of course
350 2010-12-31 02:19:24 <Kiba> our saving is dependent on us not spending
351 2010-12-31 02:20:17 <tcatm> Not billionaire, but close ;)
352 2010-12-31 02:21:26 <tcatm> I'd be happy with 1 USD/BTC for now
353 2010-12-31 02:22:24 <Kiba> that mean, I have 200 + dollars in saving
354 2010-12-31 02:22:26 <Kiba> phew!
355 2010-12-31 02:24:06 <newsham> paypal has marketting and vc w/ connections
356 2010-12-31 02:24:10 <Diablo-D3> if satoshi was really a billionare
357 2010-12-31 02:24:15 <Diablo-D3> he'd give me exactly 5 million
358 2010-12-31 02:24:17 <Diablo-D3> no more, no less
359 2010-12-31 02:24:34 <newsham> if false then diablo would give me 6billion
360 2010-12-31 02:24:43 <newsham> ex falso quod libet
361 2010-12-31 02:25:08 <Diablo-D3> that isnt it
362 2010-12-31 02:25:19 <Diablo-D3> I could dedicate my life to making bitcoin worth using
363 2010-12-31 02:30:16 <nanotube> Kiba: join an existing one... i'm sure one exists.
364 2010-12-31 02:31:32 <newsham> death would be a release after this travesty...
365 2010-12-31 02:32:52 <Kiba> nanotube: but they want to defeat death with far off technology
366 2010-12-31 02:33:11 <newsham> proof of work found
367 2010-12-31 02:34:47 <nanotube> woo
368 2010-12-31 02:36:03 <newsham> i should show that to my wife
369 2010-12-31 02:36:07 <newsham> she's always saying i dont do anything
370 2010-12-31 02:37:22 <nanotube> hahaha
371 2010-12-31 02:37:30 <nanotube> see right there, proof!
372 2010-12-31 02:37:33 <nanotube> yep
373 2010-12-31 02:37:46 <Kiba> show what to your life?
374 2010-12-31 02:38:18 <newsham> proof of work
375 2010-12-31 02:43:17 <joe_1> wont have to do any work once the market pops
376 2010-12-31 02:44:08 <joe_1> we'll all be rich
377 2010-12-31 02:44:14 <newsham> not me.
378 2010-12-31 02:44:29 <joe_1> have u been to the casino yet?
379 2010-12-31 02:44:34 <newsham> nope
380 2010-12-31 02:44:53 <joe_1> if u go to it you can multiply your coins really quick
381 2010-12-31 02:45:05 <newsham> multiply by 0.99?
382 2010-12-31 02:45:50 <nanotube> newsham: hahaha yea
383 2010-12-31 02:46:36 <Kiba> wouldn't multiplying by .99 make your bitcoin pile smaller?
384 2010-12-31 02:46:51 <newsham> kiba: thats what casinos do
385 2010-12-31 02:47:23 <newsham> thats how they build all those big hotels
386 2010-12-31 02:52:39 <marioxcc> of course
387 2010-12-31 02:52:54 <marioxcc> you loose in the long run
388 2010-12-31 02:53:22 <marioxcc> do anyone really expects to build a fortune in a casino?
389 2010-12-31 02:53:57 <Kiba> unless you're card counting
390 2010-12-31 02:55:08 <nanotube> in which case you get kicked out as soon as you start doing well.
391 2010-12-31 03:04:39 <newsham> people hae done well and not gotten kicked out in the past
392 2010-12-31 03:04:48 <newsham> also you can makemoney at prop bets and poker
393 2010-12-31 03:04:51 <newsham> the housetaking a cut
394 2010-12-31 03:06:18 <newsham> yah not my thing
395 2010-12-31 03:06:27 <newsham> i like to make money in teh computers
396 2010-12-31 03:08:00 <Kiba> me too
397 2010-12-31 03:30:14 <nanotube> how does one report spam on the forum? i don't see a nice pretty button to do that?
398 2010-12-31 03:32:11 <marioxcc> nanotube: why you don't just open a thread?
399 2010-12-31 03:32:51 <nanotube> well, i thought someone on here might tell me where. but i guess i will. :)
400 2010-12-31 03:33:01 <lfm> im sure the moderators will see it soon enuf, just ignore it
401 2010-12-31 03:36:03 <nanotube> still, would be nice if there was a way to report - it would be 'sooner'.
402 2010-12-31 03:36:28 <Kiba> nanotube: how about 5 votes than the spam is gone?
403 2010-12-31 03:38:42 <marioxcc> Kiba: spammers would then begin to delete legitimate messages
404 2010-12-31 03:38:46 <nanotube> no, just bring it to moderator attention.
405 2010-12-31 03:38:53 <nanotube> autodelete is a bad idea
406 2010-12-31 03:38:59 <ArtForz> yep
407 2010-12-31 03:38:59 <marioxcc> yes
408 2010-12-31 03:39:11 <ArtForz> just make it hide the post from current user and flag it to moderator for permanent deletification
409 2010-12-31 03:39:17 <nanotube> ya
410 2010-12-31 03:39:24 <marioxcc> Kiba: are you the forum administrator?
411 2010-12-31 03:40:12 <Kiba> No.
412 2010-12-31 03:40:39 <Kiba> marioxcc: spammer would have to learn the very special feature of deleting legit messages
413 2010-12-31 03:40:46 <Kiba> nanotube: just put it in a spam queue
414 2010-12-31 03:40:54 <Kiba> and ban any user abusing it
415 2010-12-31 03:42:39 <marioxcc> or move to a mailing list :)
416 2010-12-31 03:43:48 <Kiba> it might be better to have a
417 2010-12-31 03:43:55 <Kiba> a specialized forum
418 2010-12-31 03:43:58 <Kiba> fit to our need
419 2010-12-31 03:43:59 <Kiba> I don't know.
420 2010-12-31 03:44:14 <marioxcc> well, other day we talked a bit about the issue
421 2010-12-31 03:44:20 <marioxcc> i think it was with nanotube or ArtForz
422 2010-12-31 03:44:33 <nanotube> marioxcc: it was me
423 2010-12-31 03:44:39 <marioxcc> ok
424 2010-12-31 03:44:41 <nanotube> anyway, i made this thread: http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=2545.0
425 2010-12-31 03:44:42 <bitbot> Combating forum spam
426 2010-12-31 03:45:13 <marioxcc> Kiba: in few words: a mailing list offers a uniform machine friendly interface
427 2010-12-31 03:45:26 <marioxcc> which can be fit to user and community needs
428 2010-12-31 03:45:35 <marioxcc> there are even forum gateways to mailing lists
429 2010-12-31 03:45:51 <marioxcc> that isn't possible with forums, because they offer a static web interface that can't be changed
430 2010-12-31 03:45:57 <marioxcc> nor easily parsed
431 2010-12-31 03:46:14 <marioxcc> (at least it isn't efficient because of HTML formatting and other BS)
432 2010-12-31 03:59:59 <nanotube> marioxcc: make a post on the forum with the suggestion. :)
433 2010-12-31 04:00:29 <Kiba> time to retire to the bed for the night
434 2010-12-31 04:01:10 <marioxcc> good night
435 2010-12-31 04:01:41 <marioxcc> nanotube: not worth the effort :)
436 2010-12-31 04:02:00 <marioxcc> ArtForz: have you programmed a FPGA using a free software suite?
437 2010-12-31 04:04:43 <nanotube> marioxcc: haha
438 2010-12-31 04:05:27 <marioxcc> nanotube: haha the above question or the above statement?
439 2010-12-31 04:09:26 <ArtForz> yea
440 2010-12-31 04:10:04 <marioxcc> ArtForz: could you linkme to a starting point?
441 2010-12-31 04:10:49 <marioxcc> i don't have anything in mind to build, just want to know
442 2010-12-31 04:12:32 <ArtForz> for jtag downloading, xc3sprog, for synthesis... there really isnt much good foss for that
443 2010-12-31 04:16:14 <marioxcc> ArtForz: ok, thanks
444 2010-12-31 04:28:03 <nanotube> marioxcc: for the 'not worth the effort' :)
445 2010-12-31 04:32:27 <ArtForz> problem is, writing a decent synthesis toolchain is HARD
446 2010-12-31 04:33:25 <ArtForz> and the synthesis tools for affordable FPGAs are free(beer)
447 2010-12-31 04:33:52 <marioxcc> no, i mean free as in freedom
448 2010-12-31 04:34:03 <ArtForz> yes, but thats why no one bothers
449 2010-12-31 04:36:54 <marioxcc> wait, mfgs?
450 2010-12-31 04:37:00 <ArtForz> manufacturers
451 2010-12-31 04:37:22 <marioxcc> ok
452 2010-12-31 04:37:39 <ArtForz> you also need timing info to have any hope of getting any kind of automated placement going, and thats even harder to come by
453 2010-12-31 04:38:06 <marioxcc> yeah
454 2010-12-31 04:39:08 <ArtForz> though I wonder if timing data is actually copyrightable
455 2010-12-31 04:39:23 <marioxcc> probably not, but they won't tell you
456 2010-12-31 04:39:36 <ArtForz> well, their tools do
457 2010-12-31 04:39:55 <marioxcc> do you mean propagation dealy, rise/fall time and the like?
458 2010-12-31 04:40:02 <ArtForz> yep
459 2010-12-31 04:40:36 <ArtForz> synthesize + PAR some random design, dump timing for all paths, disassemble bitstream, figure out which path has how much delay with simple linear equations
460 2010-12-31 04:40:59 <marioxcc> oh, reverse engineering
461 2010-12-31 04:41:00 <ArtForz> use placement constraints to force it to use paths you dont know yet
462 2010-12-31 04:41:03 <ArtForz> not quite
463 2010-12-31 04:41:06 <nanotube> hey, anyone have firefox4 handy?
464 2010-12-31 04:41:24 <marioxcc> nanotube: iceweasel 3.0.6 here
465 2010-12-31 04:41:46 <ArtForz> we're just using official timing report output
466 2010-12-31 04:41:49 <nanotube> marioxcc: isn't that a little old... not even 3.6 ?
467 2010-12-31 04:41:54 <marioxcc> ArtForz: ok
468 2010-12-31 04:41:59 <marioxcc> nanotube: no, why should I?
469 2010-12-31 04:42:23 <marioxcc> the most advanced thing I do use is javascript for the sites with menus which require it
470 2010-12-31 04:42:49 <nanotube> marioxcc: i bet there are a bunc hof security fixes between 3.0.6 and 3.6.13...
471 2010-12-31 04:43:12 <marioxcc> nanotube: ???of what kind?
472 2010-12-31 04:43:29 <marioxcc> any code injection hole around?
473 2010-12-31 04:43:41 <marioxcc> password retrival?
474 2010-12-31 04:43:54 <ArtForz> so I guess we *could* get enough info to have a "good enough" understanding of delays, required setup/hold times, max clocks, ... by just black-box REing the vendor tools
475 2010-12-31 04:44:41 <nanotube> marioxcc: look at the release notes... http://www.mozilla.org/security/known-vulnerabilities/firefox30.html#firefox3.0.7  (and scroll up)
476 2010-12-31 04:44:47 <nanotube> note that ff3.0 is not even supported anymore
477 2010-12-31 04:44:51 <marioxcc> ArtForz: what about code uploading?
478 2010-12-31 04:44:59 <ArtForz> thats the easiest part
479 2010-12-31 04:45:05 <marioxcc> oh, lol
480 2010-12-31 04:45:11 <ArtForz> xc3sprog does that
481 2010-12-31 04:45:28 <nanotube> marioxcc: there's more for ff3.5: http://www.mozilla.org/security/known-vulnerabilities/firefox35.html#firefox3.5.6
482 2010-12-31 04:45:50 <ArtForz> also supports a fuckton of programming cables and devices from various vendors, yeha, the name is kinda misleading
483 2010-12-31 04:46:12 <marioxcc> ok, i see
484 2010-12-31 04:46:13 <nanotube> marioxcc: and more for firefox 3.6: http://www.mozilla.org/security/known-vulnerabilities/firefox36.html
485 2010-12-31 04:46:30 <marioxcc> ArtForz: so what's the hardest part or limiting factor to free toolchains?
486 2010-12-31 04:46:36 <nanotube> marioxcc: so basically... with all that, there are probably dozens of known security issues with 3.0.6
487 2010-12-31 04:47:19 <marioxcc> nanotube: i'm not really concerned about
488 2010-12-31 04:47:21 <ArtForz> HDL->physical LUT/FF/... synthesis and Place&Route on that
489 2010-12-31 04:47:45 <ArtForz> really the latter part, even the vendor tools have a very hard time doing a good job at it
490 2010-12-31 04:47:48 <nanotube> marioxcc: i'm not going to go through all of them myself, but there are a bunch of critical-level security fixes... which probably include 'arbitrary code execution'
491 2010-12-31 04:48:21 <ArtForz> probably because the nuber of possible placement/routing variations for any given design is just astronomical
492 2010-12-31 04:48:22 <marioxcc> nanotube: i will check that later, i really dobut the sites I see would ever attempt to crack their users
493 2010-12-31 04:48:38 <marioxcc> ArtForz: ok, i undestand
494 2010-12-31 04:49:14 <marioxcc> but if the proprietary tools have somewhat adressed the problem...
495 2010-12-31 04:49:15 <marioxcc> :)
496 2010-12-31 04:49:48 <nanotube> marioxcc: sites can be compromised, malicious code injected.
497 2010-12-31 04:50:12 <nanotube> hey, it's your choice, just giving you the information.
498 2010-12-31 04:50:25 <marioxcc> nanotube: I appreciate very much you care about my security
499 2010-12-31 04:50:44 <marioxcc> but even if my user home is completely destroyed i will just bring up that dayly rsync
500 2010-12-31 04:51:03 <nanotube> what if your bank account passwords are stolen?
501 2010-12-31 04:51:12 <marioxcc> nanotube: i have none
502 2010-12-31 04:51:12 <nanotube> no daily rsync will save you then
503 2010-12-31 04:51:31 <marioxcc> and the really personal information is encrypted
504 2010-12-31 04:51:49 <marioxcc> gpg-encrypted, not filesystem encryption
505 2010-12-31 04:51:50 <nanotube> your irc account password, your email password, etc. no amount of encryption will save you from a keylogger.
506 2010-12-31 04:52:02 <nanotube> your gpg private key and password can be stolen just as well
507 2010-12-31 04:52:14 <marioxcc> nanotube: gpg private key is encrypted
508 2010-12-31 04:52:19 <nanotube> with what?
509 2010-12-31 04:52:21 <nanotube> your password?
510 2010-12-31 04:52:28 <nanotube> which can be stolen with the aforementioned keylogger?
511 2010-12-31 04:52:46 <marioxcc> yeah, supposing they somehow manage to really run such keylogger
512 2010-12-31 04:52:53 <marioxcc> i'm not running windows, hey!
513 2010-12-31 04:52:59 <ArtForz> actually with a properly implemented system, installing said keylogger is impossible
514 2010-12-31 04:53:02 <nanotube> "arbitrary code execution" == "they can run anything they want"
515 2010-12-31 04:53:17 <marioxcc> nanotube: no, they can't
516 2010-12-31 04:53:28 <marioxcc> that's what user permissions are for
517 2010-12-31 04:53:32 <nanotube> well, anything your user can
518 2010-12-31 04:53:45 <nanotube> unless you run your browser as a separate user
519 2010-12-31 04:53:51 <marioxcc> no, i don't
520 2010-12-31 04:54:48 <nanotube> well then
521 2010-12-31 04:54:56 <marioxcc> but i really, really dobut they will 1) compromise one of the sites I do use 2) install such code in my computer somehow by browser bugs 3) make the software run and retrive meaningfull data 4) atack ME, insead of the another 1000's of visitors of such web site
522 2010-12-31 04:55:14 <nanotube> yes, i really doubt that as well
523 2010-12-31 04:55:28 <nanotube> but that's no reason you should deliberately run a browser with known security holes.
524 2010-12-31 04:55:34 <marioxcc> and as ArtForz says, installing a keylogger on a properly configured system is a hypotetical case
525 2010-12-31 04:55:52 <marioxcc> nanotube: well, isn't that I chosed to run this specific version
526 2010-12-31 04:56:00 <marioxcc> this is the one that comes with debian
527 2010-12-31 04:56:36 <nanotube> hey, i mean, if you are really attached to 3.0.6 for some reason, up to you. i'm giving you the info, and my suggestion. :)
528 2010-12-31 04:56:38 <ArtForz> TPM was actually a good idea, before intel got all tivoy with it
529 2010-12-31 04:57:06 <marioxcc> nanotube: i'm not bound to it, just i don't want to update
530 2010-12-31 04:57:12 <nanotube> ArtForz: don't tell me that you deliberatly run old unsupported browser, just because it is unlikely you'd be targeted? :P
531 2010-12-31 04:57:16 <ArtForz> nope
532 2010-12-31 04:57:24 <nanotube> well, good. :)
533 2010-12-31 04:57:36 <marioxcc> <ArtForz> TPM was actually a good idea, before intel got all tivoy with it <- what's that?
534 2010-12-31 04:57:54 <ArtForz> what? TPM?
535 2010-12-31 04:58:11 <marioxcc> TPM, tivoy
536 2010-12-31 04:58:20 <ArtForz> TPM, Trusted Platform Module, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Platform_Module
537 2010-12-31 04:58:49 <ArtForz> tivoy = tivo-like, only device manufacturer has the root key capable of signing a bootloader
538 2010-12-31 04:59:29 <marioxcc> ok, i didn't recognized the word
539 2010-12-31 04:59:38 <marioxcc> i'm used to see "tivoization" instead :)
540 2010-12-31 04:59:47 <marioxcc> yeah, the GPL 3 deals with that
541 2010-12-31 04:59:57 <ArtForz> with TPM you can do proper chain-of-trust booting
542 2010-12-31 05:00:04 <lfm> "tivo"y
543 2010-12-31 05:00:10 <marioxcc> lfm: yeah
544 2010-12-31 05:00:44 <ArtForz> so each piece of code checks that whatever it loads is signed by a key signed by a key utimately signed by your own personal root key
545 2010-12-31 05:01:33 <mizerydearia> marioxcc, Can you tell me if http://witcoin.com/ask looks okay in iceweasel 3.0.6?
546 2010-12-31 05:01:36 <afed> more like
547 2010-12-31 05:01:37 <marioxcc> yes
548 2010-12-31 05:01:38 <afed> microsoft's key
549 2010-12-31 05:01:40 <afed> or dell's key
550 2010-12-31 05:01:42 <afed> or the MPAA's key
551 2010-12-31 05:01:44 <ArtForz> exactly
552 2010-12-31 05:02:08 <lfm> ya like wouldnt microsoft like to sell the right to run programs on windows
553 2010-12-31 05:02:09 <ArtForz> which is where the "until they got all tivoy" part comes in
554 2010-12-31 05:02:11 <marioxcc> mizerydearia: it does
555 2010-12-31 05:02:35 <ArtForz> in the orig spec the user (or site admin) had the ultimate root key
556 2010-12-31 05:02:52 <marioxcc> yes, it is a good techlology
557 2010-12-31 05:02:54 <marioxcc> but has bad uses
558 2010-12-31 05:02:57 <ArtForz> yep
559 2010-12-31 05:03:03 <ArtForz> but it also has good uses
560 2010-12-31 05:03:03 <marioxcc> like almost everything
561 2010-12-31 05:04:03 <marioxcc> people which don't cares about will end loosing all their privacy and freedom regarding computers
562 2010-12-31 05:04:10 <marioxcc> free software always will prevail for people which values it
563 2010-12-31 05:04:33 <ArtForz> yeah, but TPM done properly and FOSS fit together nicely
564 2010-12-31 05:04:50 <marioxcc> sure
565 2010-12-31 05:04:52 <mizerydearia> marioxcc, thanks ^_^
566 2010-12-31 05:05:10 <marioxcc> mizerydearia: np :)
567 2010-12-31 05:05:28 <marioxcc> ultimately, how much these slaving applications of technology will suceed is bound to how much people is going to accept it
568 2010-12-31 05:05:47 <marioxcc> i mean where the manufacturer has the key
569 2010-12-31 05:06:03 <marioxcc> when the user has the key is of course, a good security improovement
570 2010-12-31 05:06:08 <marioxcc> i agree
571 2010-12-31 05:06:42 <ArtForz> people generally dont seem to care until it bites them in the ass
572 2010-12-31 05:07:03 <ArtForz> and then they forget about it 2 weeks after
573 2010-12-31 05:07:12 <marioxcc> yes
574 2010-12-31 05:07:44 <marioxcc> that also affect us
575 2010-12-31 05:08:03 <marioxcc> because manufacturers then know they can make "technology" as proprietary as they want
576 2010-12-31 05:08:08 <marioxcc> and people will still buy it
577 2010-12-31 05:09:40 <marioxcc> it was very nice to chat with you
578 2010-12-31 05:09:47 <marioxcc> now it's 12:09
579 2010-12-31 05:09:50 <marioxcc> (midnight)
580 2010-12-31 05:09:52 <marioxcc> and i'm going to bed
581 2010-12-31 05:09:59 <marioxcc> good night
582 2010-12-31 05:10:09 <nanotube> marioxcc: gn
583 2010-12-31 05:10:10 <marioxcc> oh, and thanks for all information ArtForz :)
584 2010-12-31 05:10:17 <nanotube> it's 0109 here heh
585 2010-12-31 05:10:30 <marioxcc> where do you live in?
586 2010-12-31 05:10:53 <marioxcc> somewhere in the east US?
587 2010-12-31 05:11:08 <nanotube> yes
588 2010-12-31 05:17:20 <mizerydearia> It appears the number parameter for "listaccounts" method does not function properly.  Is it just me or do others notice the same?
589 2010-12-31 05:19:12 <AnonymousUser> So I just learned about BitCoin today, and I'm very interested.  I'd like to get involved.  First - How do I generate a "paper bitcoin"?  Is this possible?  I've read that if someone gets access to your wallet.dat, they have all your bitcoins, but what I want to give someone a bitcoin that is in my wallet so that they can "trade" it to themself.  How can I do that?
590 2010-12-31 05:19:50 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: please clarify what you mean... you can just send them a coin as usual, via the bitcoin client...
591 2010-12-31 05:20:04 <AnonymousUser> Well... here's what I want to do...
592 2010-12-31 05:21:08 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: um, why dont you just send them the coin?
593 2010-12-31 05:21:12 <AnonymousUser> I want to post an image on Reddit that says "here is 0.1 btc.  The first person who trades this to themself has ownership of this bitcoin" and I want it to contain all the info needed so that they have control over the bitcoin
594 2010-12-31 05:21:32 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: thats easy: you send it to them via bitcoin
595 2010-12-31 05:21:36 <AnonymousUser> I want to give an anonymous person a bitcoin.
596 2010-12-31 05:21:46 <AnonymousUser> But what if I don't want to know who I'm sending it to?
597 2010-12-31 05:21:48 <Diablo-D3> you cant take a coin out of your wallet and then hand it to someone
598 2010-12-31 05:21:56 <Diablo-D3> the system knows you have it
599 2010-12-31 05:21:59 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: well, you can post your keypair
600 2010-12-31 05:22:19 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: the anonymous person getting it can generate a used once address
601 2010-12-31 05:22:20 <nanotube> first person to grab the keypair, and generate a transaction to some other address owned by him, gets the coin.
602 2010-12-31 05:22:22 <mizerydearia> btw listaccounts method comes from https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin
603 2010-12-31 05:22:33 <mizerydearia> I shall ask gavin
604 2010-12-31 05:22:35 <Diablo-D3> nanotube: which clients CAN reject such transactions
605 2010-12-31 05:22:41 <Diablo-D3> nanotube: since it never cleared the chain
606 2010-12-31 05:22:43 <mizerydearia> Does gavin visit irc occasionally anymore?
607 2010-12-31 05:22:49 <Diablo-D3> gavin is on irc periodically
608 2010-12-31 05:22:50 <mizerydearia> Ah, yes he does.
609 2010-12-31 05:22:51 <AnonymousUser> yes, exactly.  Does that work?
610 2010-12-31 05:23:03 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: what do you mean? you pull an address out of your own wallet, which has a valid bitcoin balance in it.
611 2010-12-31 05:23:16 <Diablo-D3> nanotube: if I hand someone the address, yes, then thats fine
612 2010-12-31 05:23:26 <Diablo-D3> I just cant manually move a coin from one address to another
613 2010-12-31 05:23:27 <nanotube> that seems to be exactly what he wants to do.
614 2010-12-31 05:23:37 <AnonymousUser> i don't want to know who gets it
615 2010-12-31 05:23:38 <nanotube> hand out an address
616 2010-12-31 05:23:49 <AnonymousUser> i want to hand someone a piece of paper that gives them control over the bitcoin
617 2010-12-31 05:23:52 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: you can still know the address that gets it... by using block explorer.
618 2010-12-31 05:23:59 <nanotube> (later, after they send)
619 2010-12-31 05:24:03 <AnonymousUser> ok.  i suspected that
620 2010-12-31 05:24:04 <nanotube> but you won't know who it is
621 2010-12-31 05:24:06 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: even if someone gives you an address to send to, you dont know who they are
622 2010-12-31 05:24:23 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: well, you can associate that address with their email address, though. so you know /something/ about them.
623 2010-12-31 05:24:34 <AnonymousUser> Diablo-D3: Sorry, what I mean is... I want to give someone a bitcoin without having to know their address
624 2010-12-31 05:24:35 <Diablo-D3> nanotube: no, they can send it to me with a use once email address
625 2010-12-31 05:24:37 <nanotube> with the 'post key somewhere', you know nothing but the eventual recipient address.
626 2010-12-31 05:24:46 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: cant do it without subverting the system
627 2010-12-31 05:25:00 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: the whole entire point of the system is to protect the transactional integrity of the money supply
628 2010-12-31 05:25:01 <AnonymousUser> i don't care if i eventually learn their address, but I don't want to know it ahead of time
629 2010-12-31 05:25:13 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: well, then you can do it via the posting of the keypair, as i said.
630 2010-12-31 05:25:30 <Diablo-D3> handing someone the keypair of an address is pretty much handing them a wallet.dat that contains one address, effectively
631 2010-12-31 05:25:33 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: though the tools to extract and import keypairs don't exist yet.
632 2010-12-31 05:25:37 <AnonymousUser> ok, so how to i generate a keypair?
633 2010-12-31 05:25:38 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: right
634 2010-12-31 05:25:39 <lfm> anonymous user: the thing is you can hand them a key but they can never be sure you havnt kept a copy
635 2010-12-31 05:25:44 <AnonymousUser> right
636 2010-12-31 05:25:55 <nanotube> lfm: that's why they have to spend the coin to their own address when they get it.
637 2010-12-31 05:25:58 <AnonymousUser> i'd have a copy, but as soon as they'd trade it to themself, my copy would no longer exist
638 2010-12-31 05:26:03 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: right
639 2010-12-31 05:26:17 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: dead dropping coins isnt part of the system yet
640 2010-12-31 05:26:18 <lfm> so just send it to them why not?
641 2010-12-31 05:26:19 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: easiest is to generate a new wallet... send a coin to the wallet... then post that wallet somewhere.
642 2010-12-31 05:26:28 <Diablo-D3> yeah what nanotube said
643 2010-12-31 05:26:36 <Diablo-D3> then they could just send it to themselves with another client
644 2010-12-31 05:26:40 <AnonymousUser> @nanotube: thanks.  that's what i thought.  is this easy to do?
645 2010-12-31 05:27:07 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: yes
646 2010-12-31 05:27:17 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: create address on another client, send coins to it, wait until that client accepts the transaction, then shut it down and send the wallet.dat somewhere
647 2010-12-31 05:27:28 <lfm> just seems like you could just send them the btc the regular way
648 2010-12-31 05:27:41 <nanotube> lfm: for some reason, he wants to 'dead drop' the btc...
649 2010-12-31 05:28:26 <lfm> for no reason id say
650 2010-12-31 05:28:35 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: not even another client necessarily... you could close your client, start it again with a different -datadir argument... that'd generate a new wallet. you take note of the address... shut it down... then start again with a new datadir.
651 2010-12-31 05:28:45 <Diablo-D3> nanotube: dont want ot accidently grab your own transaction
652 2010-12-31 05:28:57 <Diablo-D3> since you have to create the address on your wallet.dat your way
653 2010-12-31 05:29:10 <AnonymousUser> like i said, I want to post an image on Reddit that is valued at... say 1 btc
654 2010-12-31 05:29:13 <Diablo-D3> you need a second client to do it transactionally safe
655 2010-12-31 05:29:16 <AnonymousUser> and see what happens
656 2010-12-31 05:29:47 <AnonymousUser> and i want to be able to generate an image that a merchant could scan to grab a payment quickly
657 2010-12-31 05:30:09 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: thats already been heavily discussed
658 2010-12-31 05:30:20 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: i don't get where the problem would be... close client, start with -datadir=dir2, which generates wallet2. close client, start -datadir=dir1, generate a transaction to send to wallet2. once confirmations come in, you know your wallet2 contains the coin.
659 2010-12-31 05:30:22 <lfm> regular payments arnt quick enuf? I dont get it
660 2010-12-31 05:30:28 <Diablo-D3> nanotube: thats two clients.
661 2010-12-31 05:30:47 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: one client, running at different times with different datadirs.
662 2010-12-31 05:30:49 <AnonymousUser> the current ways seems to require me to know the person i want to pay's account number
663 2010-12-31 05:30:55 <nanotube> but i guess... that's semantics. effectively two clients. :)
664 2010-12-31 05:31:04 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: you dont directly need to
665 2010-12-31 05:31:11 <lfm> just their address, you dont need to know them
666 2010-12-31 05:31:16 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: someone proposed a system that would work with cell phones
667 2010-12-31 05:31:17 <AnonymousUser> i need to actually have access to my wallet at the time that i give them the money
668 2010-12-31 05:31:24 <AnonymousUser> sorry, *address*
669 2010-12-31 05:32:15 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: walk up to the vendor, take a picture of their QR code (which would also encode the transaction amount), press send, and then bam
670 2010-12-31 05:32:19 <lfm> btc works now with any browser including cell phones via services such as mybitcoin.com
671 2010-12-31 05:32:49 <AnonymousUser> but what if i don't have access to my cellphone for some reason.  of course the payee needs to have access to his wallet, but i want to make sure that i don't need access to mine to pay
672 2010-12-31 05:33:16 <Diablo-D3> the payee wouldnt need access to his wallet
673 2010-12-31 05:33:31 <Diablo-D3> neither side would actually
674 2010-12-31 05:33:38 <lfm> and if youre electricity is off you cant see in the dark, big deal, keep your phone with you!
675 2010-12-31 05:33:57 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: how do you pay with credit card if you dont have it on you?
676 2010-12-31 05:34:00 <Diablo-D3> its the same thing
677 2010-12-31 05:34:09 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: only as long as the payee trusts the payer not to whip out his client and spend the coin on the key he just gave to the payee
678 2010-12-31 05:34:17 <Diablo-D3> nanotube: not true
679 2010-12-31 05:34:31 <Diablo-D3> anyone can check the chain for transactions
680 2010-12-31 05:34:33 <AnonymousUser> but i don't need to have access to the internet to give someone a USD
681 2010-12-31 05:34:38 <Diablo-D3> they know their own address
682 2010-12-31 05:34:49 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: yes, but USD are not secure
683 2010-12-31 05:34:57 <lfm> so use us$ when you have no phone
684 2010-12-31 05:34:59 <nanotube> Diablo-D3: i mean, in the case where you walk up to the guy, and hand him a bitcoin wallet.
685 2010-12-31 05:35:06 <AnonymousUser> of course, but i want btc to be just as easy to use
686 2010-12-31 05:35:15 <Diablo-D3> the government itself can and does double spend USD in an analog way
687 2010-12-31 05:35:25 <AnonymousUser> anyway, it seems that i just need to give someone a wallet.dat
688 2010-12-31 05:35:33 <lfm> and I want my face on the 50BTC note
689 2010-12-31 05:35:57 <AnonymousUser> and then they need to send the money to themself before i spend it elsewhere
690 2010-12-31 05:36:28 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: yes... you can, but there are trust issues involved. (a) payee needs to verify presence of coins in the wallet. he'd have to use blockexplorer, or load the wallet in his client. and (b) needs to know that you won't spend the coin yourself, before he has a chance to use it
691 2010-12-31 05:36:35 <lfm> just sounds like a solution looking for a problem, a waste of effort
692 2010-12-31 05:36:51 <AnonymousUser> gah, i already told you what i intend to do with this
693 2010-12-31 05:37:02 <AnonymousUser> i intend to post a picture on the internet worth Money
694 2010-12-31 05:37:09 <AnonymousUser> so that someone can claim it
695 2010-12-31 05:37:15 <lfm> and if you tried to pay me that way Id laugh in your face
696 2010-12-31 05:37:22 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: how would the actual picture be worth money? would you put it in a zip archive together with a wallet.dat?
697 2010-12-31 05:37:24 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: that'd be very difficult
698 2010-12-31 05:37:38 <Diablo-D3> nanotube: no, he'd just hide the wallet.dat in the image
699 2010-12-31 05:37:43 <Diablo-D3> its a common technique
700 2010-12-31 05:37:44 <nanotube> steganography?
701 2010-12-31 05:37:48 <Diablo-D3> sure
702 2010-12-31 05:37:55 <Diablo-D3> or just storing it after the image
703 2010-12-31 05:38:00 <AnonymousUser> or just a barcode that links to a file...
704 2010-12-31 05:38:06 <nanotube> right
705 2010-12-31 05:38:10 <nanotube> well, could work
706 2010-12-31 05:38:21 <nanotube> let us know when you post it... so we can try claiming the bitcoin :)
707 2010-12-31 05:38:28 <AnonymousUser> hahaha, no chance
708 2010-12-31 05:38:50 <AnonymousUser> a wallet is first claim... gets it
709 2010-12-31 05:38:52 <nanotube> aw... so that means we'd have to monitor reddit for keyword bitcoin? :)
710 2010-12-31 05:39:11 <AnonymousUser> well, i have 0.05 btc in my wallet right now.  i need to buy some first
711 2010-12-31 05:39:37 <lfm> 0.05 seems about what the idea is worth
712 2010-12-31 05:39:41 <nanotube> hehe, i see you have partaken of the generosity of the faucet. :)
713 2010-12-31 05:40:05 <nanotube> lfm: he basically wants to give away some bitcoin... to a random passerby. what's wrong with that?
714 2010-12-31 05:40:35 <nanotube> kinda like throwing a dollar bill on the sidewalk
715 2010-12-31 05:41:15 <AnonymousUser> speaking of buying, there seems to be only one place i can buy btc on credit, and it seems to be down.  is there any other way i can buy some online?
716 2010-12-31 05:41:31 <lfm> nanotube just the arrogance of him that his way is the only way suitable for his wonderfull gift
717 2010-12-31 05:41:41 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: mtgox.com, bitcoin4cash.com, #bitcoin-otc channel.
718 2010-12-31 05:41:49 <AnonymousUser> well, is there anyother way to do it?
719 2010-12-31 05:42:04 <AnonymousUser> how can you do the equivalent of throwing a dollar bill on the ground?
720 2010-12-31 05:42:09 <lfm> ya, ask for a btc address to send the gift to
721 2010-12-31 05:42:23 <nanotube> lfm: he just wants to give it a try for fun. yes it seems pointless... but it's amusing. :)
722 2010-12-31 05:42:52 <nanotube> lfm: at least... i can speak for myself and say that i'm amused. ;)
723 2010-12-31 05:43:22 <lfm> fine I guess I am the only one thinks its a waste of effort
724 2010-12-31 05:43:24 <AnonymousUser> :( but i don't want to be involved after i post the link.  i'm a theoretical physicist.  i want to test a concept, and my concept is "giving a lucky person an image worth money"
725 2010-12-31 05:44:53 <AnonymousUser> plus, it gives me the opportunity to print a bitcoin "bill" that can be used once and only once.  i think that's pretty cool
726 2010-12-31 05:44:54 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: sure, have at it, and let know how it goes. :)
727 2010-12-31 05:45:14 <Diablo-D3> yeah see
728 2010-12-31 05:45:20 <Diablo-D3> the bitcoin bill is the hardest part
729 2010-12-31 05:45:33 <Diablo-D3> you'd need a tool built into the client to take the address keypair
730 2010-12-31 05:45:58 <AnonymousUser> ideally, i'd like a smartphone app that'd scan the bill and transfer it to your wallet
731 2010-12-31 05:46:03 <Diablo-D3> and I dont particularly want to see that
732 2010-12-31 05:46:06 <AnonymousUser> but small steps
733 2010-12-31 05:46:07 <Diablo-D3> because it breaks the system
734 2010-12-31 05:46:16 <AnonymousUser> how does it "break" the system?
735 2010-12-31 05:46:19 <Diablo-D3> I cant tell if the bill you handed me is valid
736 2010-12-31 05:46:25 <AnonymousUser> right, of course
737 2010-12-31 05:46:29 <Diablo-D3> you can hand me the bill and then immediately double spend it
738 2010-12-31 05:47:10 <AnonymousUser> no, i can't double spend it.  i can spend it once.  the person i give the bill to needs to trust that i won't spend it before he's able to
739 2010-12-31 05:47:27 <Diablo-D3> but see
740 2010-12-31 05:47:29 <Diablo-D3> thats the problem
741 2010-12-31 05:47:38 <Diablo-D3> bitcoin doesnt allow trust.
742 2010-12-31 05:47:52 <AnonymousUser> i'd be decieving someone if i didn't let them know that was how the bill worked
743 2010-12-31 05:47:55 <Diablo-D3> this is why every client has the full history of every single transaction ever
744 2010-12-31 05:47:56 <nanotube> AnonymousUser: double spend means - you 'spend' it once when giving it to a person (possibly in exchange for goods)... and then spend it again before he has a chance to transfer.
745 2010-12-31 05:48:23 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: bitcoin, as it stands, works
746 2010-12-31 05:48:35 <Diablo-D3> subverting it only breaks the system
747 2010-12-31 05:48:48 <Diablo-D3> as a bitcoin user, I would never accept coins except through the transaction system
748 2010-12-31 05:48:48 <ianm_> it could be printed by a parent to give to a kid to buy from a store that has a device to check its validity..?  (that's the best I've come up with)
749 2010-12-31 05:49:04 <Diablo-D3> ianm_: no, the parent would just send it to the kid through bitcoin
750 2010-12-31 05:49:20 <Diablo-D3> its already done through kid oriented refillable cash cards
751 2010-12-31 05:49:22 <ianm_> Diablo-D3: doesn't that assume the kid has a device?
752 2010-12-31 05:49:30 <lfm> ianm_ not if I am the shopkeeper
753 2010-12-31 05:49:33 <Diablo-D3> kids have devices when parents dont
754 2010-12-31 05:49:55 <Diablo-D3> even young kids have some sort of device on them with net access
755 2010-12-31 05:50:08 <Diablo-D3> cell phones, iSomethings, DSes, PSPs, etc
756 2010-12-31 05:50:19 <ianm_> Diablo-D3: in a few places in the world, yes
757 2010-12-31 05:50:29 <AnonymousUser> the thing is, if i don't make this, someone else will.  it's something possible with the design of the system, at worst, a flaw that could allow someone to take advantage of people's misunderstanding of how the system works
758 2010-12-31 05:50:29 <Diablo-D3> more so outside of the US than inside it
759 2010-12-31 05:50:47 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: no, it introduces trust into a system where none should eixst
760 2010-12-31 05:51:17 <Diablo-D3> vendors dont even trust you when you hand them large denomination bills
761 2010-12-31 05:51:22 <Diablo-D3> how many do the marker test
762 2010-12-31 05:51:31 <Diablo-D3> trust is expensive.
763 2010-12-31 05:51:47 <AnonymousUser> but if the person i give the bill to has the ability to immediately transfer a bill to his wallet, then the transaction is complete
764 2010-12-31 05:51:52 <ArtForz> yeah, it doesnt really act like cash
765 2010-12-31 05:51:56 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: no.
766 2010-12-31 05:52:09 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: the transaction is complete when it appeares in a chain block
767 2010-12-31 05:52:19 <ArtForz> and I doubt it can be coaxed to do so
768 2010-12-31 05:52:31 <AnonymousUser> a problem only appears when he doesn't have the ability to immediately verify and spend the bill
769 2010-12-31 05:52:47 <ArtForz> immediatly verify = transmit TX, wait for at least X confirms
770 2010-12-31 05:52:59 <ianm_> lfm: as the shopkeeper, couldn't you scan the paper, which takes the wallet, and sends the bitcoins to your wallet?
771 2010-12-31 05:53:00 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: "a problem only appears when you're not using bitcoin correctly"
772 2010-12-31 05:53:10 <Diablo-D3> ianm_: no you cant
773 2010-12-31 05:53:16 <Diablo-D3> ianm_: because you dont know if the coins are valid
774 2010-12-31 05:53:26 <Diablo-D3> you have to take the wallet and send to yourself and see of the tx takes.
775 2010-12-31 05:53:33 <ArtForz> yep
776 2010-12-31 05:53:36 <ianm_> Diablo-D3: and then you know?
777 2010-12-31 05:53:39 <AnonymousUser> Diablo: but couldn't the shopkeeper verify quickly if the bill is valid?
778 2010-12-31 05:53:40 <Diablo-D3> and then you know.
779 2010-12-31 05:53:46 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: no.
780 2010-12-31 05:53:54 <ianm_> why no?
781 2010-12-31 05:54:06 <Diablo-D3> AnonymousUser: as a shopkeeper, I have no clue if the coins have not been removed from the wallet in the past ten minutes
782 2010-12-31 05:54:31 <AnonymousUser> ok, so the shopkeeper scans the bill and doesn't give me the goods until the payment is transferred to his wallet
783 2010-12-31 05:54:31 <ianm_> Diablo-D3: could you not take the bill and immediately "take the wallet and send to yourself and see of the tx takes"