1 2011-01-09 00:00:11 <da2ce7> it is a inderpendant network. there is no connection to the real internet
  2 2011-01-09 00:00:49 <da2ce7> there are no freenet 'exit nodes'
  3 2011-01-09 00:00:53 <marioxcc> nevermind, I will read the docs
  4 2011-01-09 00:00:55 <marioxcc> tell me more about your idea
  5 2011-01-09 00:00:56 <marioxcc> why do you want to store the blocks in freenet instead of in all clients?
  6 2011-01-09 00:01:14 <marioxcc> and how do you know which freenet address the next block (or any other given one) is stored in?
  7 2011-01-09 00:02:19 <da2ce7> that is the hard part... we make specal 'lists' that cointain all the addresses to the blocks stored on freenet.  The bitcoin client then download's the blocks.
  8 2011-01-09 00:03:09 <da2ce7> when a new block is made, every client that is conencted to the real world and the freenet network insets the new block into freenet.
  9 2011-01-09 00:03:49 <da2ce7> the hard part is announcing it to the bitcoin clients that are only connected to freenet.
 10 2011-01-09 00:04:35 <da2ce7> the other part involves sending 'transactions' arround the freenet network, untill they reach a client that is conencted to the real world also
 11 2011-01-09 00:05:00 <marioxcc> i think you're going to get a complexity problem
 12 2011-01-09 00:05:06 <marioxcc> complex software is more error prone
 13 2011-01-09 00:05:18 <marioxcc> you can almost solve it splitting into layers
 14 2011-01-09 00:05:24 <marioxcc> but let's see
 15 2011-01-09 00:05:33 <marioxcc> exactly, what problem do your model addressesssess?
 16 2011-01-09 00:06:43 <da2ce7> storage of the block chain, annoymous connection to the bitcoin network.  Bitcoin over darknet.
 17 2011-01-09 00:07:51 <da2ce7> I suppose that the best way would be to have some 'trusted' block addresss list sites.
 18 2011-01-09 00:08:01 <da2ce7> then use FMS for transactions.
 19 2011-01-09 00:08:01 <luke-jr> what is the return code from 'sendfrom'?
 20 2011-01-09 00:08:06 <luke-jr> how can I see my transaction?>
 21 2011-01-09 00:08:14 <marioxcc> da2ce7: so in a higher abstraction level, it is to improove the resistance of the BTC network to censorship and to improove anonimity
 22 2011-01-09 00:08:15 <marioxcc> is that?
 23 2011-01-09 00:09:45 <marioxcc> oh, BTW
 24 2011-01-09 00:09:59 <da2ce7> well my long-term goal is to develop the infrastructure to do commerce  with anonymity
 25 2011-01-09 00:10:13 <marioxcc> it is alredy possible to do so
 26 2011-01-09 00:10:32 <marioxcc> just using the existing SOCKS interface and a trustworthy proxy (custom or tor)
 27 2011-01-09 00:10:36 <marioxcc> (for instance)
 28 2011-01-09 00:11:04 <marioxcc> i think for the project to be sucessfull you should define clearly a simple set of goals and then have any action justified
 29 2011-01-09 00:11:19 <marioxcc> some ideas may be great, but they may not fit there
 30 2011-01-09 00:11:38 <marioxcc> for instance, why do you want to store blocks in freenet instead of in each client HD?
 31 2011-01-09 00:11:47 <da2ce7> you need more than just bitcoin... you need a whole network of trusted peers, data sharing, communication, etc.
 32 2011-01-09 00:12:08 <marioxcc> trusted? well, no really
 33 2011-01-09 00:12:13 <da2ce7> a dark net is the natural model
 34 2011-01-09 00:12:41 <marioxcc> but you're lefting some questions unanswered
 35 2011-01-09 00:13:01 <da2ce7> no, your client will have the blocks on the HDD just as before.
 36 2011-01-09 00:13:01 <marioxcc> you will have to answer them, for yourself at least
 37 2011-01-09 00:13:21 <marioxcc> then why to duplicate data in freenet?
 38 2011-01-09 00:13:38 <da2ce7> why not?  It is a very good place to store data.
 39 2011-01-09 00:14:04 <luke-jr> http://blockexplorer.com/tx/f5c7e8ae481662ffd15fa28a7193b00e6a200c38627c9c5a02610f4d91ea316c#i595590
 40 2011-01-09 00:14:09 <da2ce7> it is a distiubuted file system
 41 2011-01-09 00:14:13 <luke-jr> where did my input go? -.-
 42 2011-01-09 00:14:19 <marioxcc> why not? -> because if there is no real justification for do so you just increase resource usage both by freenet contributors and those which will have to use it
 43 2011-01-09 00:14:58 <marioxcc> luke-jr: strange, are you using the default bitcoin client?
 44 2011-01-09 00:15:12 <luke-jr> no, I modified it to not round
 45 2011-01-09 00:15:20 <marioxcc> that may be the problem
 46 2011-01-09 00:15:44 <luke-jr> &
 47 2011-01-09 00:15:44 <marioxcc> well, those 0.02 are takenth as transaction fee
 48 2011-01-09 00:15:53 <luke-jr> there should be no fee
 49 2011-01-09 00:15:59 <luke-jr> I didn't authorize a fee
 50 2011-01-09 00:16:03 <marioxcc> luke-jr: you did
 51 2011-01-09 00:16:07 <nanotube> marioxcc: the idea is that even if the plain-net bitcoin network gets ddos'ed or banned by isps, it would still be able to run entirely on freenet.
 52 2011-01-09 00:16:10 <marioxcc> by not including a output=input
 53 2011-01-09 00:16:15 <marioxcc> output-input= free
 54 2011-01-09 00:16:24 <marioxcc> there is no explicit "fee" field AFAIK
 55 2011-01-09 00:16:27 <luke-jr> marioxcc: I didn't do that. -.-
 56 2011-01-09 00:16:52 <nanotube> marioxcc: that is correct. no fee field.
 57 2011-01-09 00:17:11 <marioxcc> luke-jr: check your client
 58 2011-01-09 00:17:21 <luke-jr> perhaps more importantly, 'sendfrom' took the moneys from the wrong account
 59 2011-01-09 00:17:35 <marioxcc> i think it is worth to remind you the computer don't does what we want it to do, it does what we tell it to do, which isn't always equal to the first :)
 60 2011-01-09 00:17:49 <marioxcc> there may be a bug on your modified version of the client, please check it
 61 2011-01-09 00:18:03 <marioxcc> nanotube: ok, thanks you for confiramtion :)
 62 2011-01-09 00:18:43 <marioxcc> regarding the freenet idea, it is useless by itself, i think, you need running nodes to have a bitcoin network
 63 2011-01-09 00:19:03 <marioxcc> if you have running nodes you can store data in them, then freenet becomes useless in this case, from my viewpoint
 64 2011-01-09 00:20:10 <da2ce7> you will always need to bootstrap new nodes, having all the data on freenet allows nodes to bootstrap without leaving the darknet.
 65 2011-01-09 00:20:20 <nanotube> right
 66 2011-01-09 00:20:27 <nanotube> i think it would be nice
 67 2011-01-09 00:20:32 <marioxcc> da2ce7: but you need to conect to live nodes, one way or another
 68 2011-01-09 00:20:38 <nanotube> though i'm not even a freenetter. :)
 69 2011-01-09 00:21:00 <marioxcc> freenet won't do that because as you said, it don't routes traffic
 70 2011-01-09 00:21:23 <nanotube> marioxcc: it does, afaik... but only within freenet
 71 2011-01-09 00:21:37 <marioxcc> nanotube: of course, I mean general purpose TCP trafic
 72 2011-01-09 00:21:40 <marioxcc> like tor for instance
 73 2011-01-09 00:21:59 <da2ce7> no, however there is nothing stopping new blocks being insterted very qickly into freenet.
 74 2011-01-09 00:22:35 <marioxcc> uh?
 75 2011-01-09 00:23:12 <marioxcc> all what you do by using freenet is to transfer some load (block transmission) from BitCoin nodes to freenet nodes.
 76 2011-01-09 00:23:56 <marioxcc> which I find to be a artifficial and avoidable load and dependency (read software dependency) on freenet
 77 2011-01-09 00:24:18 <da2ce7> well in essence yes, but this isn't bad thing.  all we are doing is placing data into the darknet.
 78 2011-01-09 00:24:34 <da2ce7> that is the entire purpose of a darknet.
 79 2011-01-09 00:24:40 <marioxcc> you didn't got the point...
 80 2011-01-09 00:24:49 <marioxcc> :/
 81 2011-01-09 00:26:37 <dsg> marioxcc: Not every bitcoin client will be inserting into freenet. Probably very few people will run such clients. How does that negatively affect you if you decide not to do so?
 82 2011-01-09 00:26:57 <dsg> I don't think anyone has proposed adding freenet-depending code into mainline bitcoin.
 83 2011-01-09 00:27:29 <marioxcc> dsg: I don't mean that
 84 2011-01-09 00:27:43 <marioxcc> just there is no need and no benefit to use darknet to store blocks
 85 2011-01-09 00:27:48 <dsg> da2ce7, for what it's worth, I really like your idea. bitcoin blocks are a good fit for freenet, and it would give bitcoin a boost with freenetters :)
 86 2011-01-09 00:28:09 <marioxcc> that's what you have live nodes, and in the first place, you alredy connect to them, use them"
 87 2011-01-09 00:28:14 <da2ce7> when client A (who is connected to both freenet and tor), gets a new block from tor, it inserts that block into freenet.
 88 2011-01-09 00:28:30 <dsg> marioxcc: No need, sure. There is a benefit in adding a new, difficult-to-censor way to connect to the network.
 89 2011-01-09 00:28:46 <marioxcc> dsg: no, because you anyway have to connect to live nodes
 90 2011-01-09 00:29:02 <marioxcc> you don't delete the need to connect-to-live-nodes
 91 2011-01-09 00:29:10 <marioxcc> you just add the need to connect-to-freenet-nodes
 92 2011-01-09 00:29:12 <dsg> marioxcc: No, someone does. But not all freenet clients.
 93 2011-01-09 00:29:32 <marioxcc> yes, I undestand this is a separate system
 94 2011-01-09 00:29:55 <dsg> bitcoin is easily blocked
 95 2011-01-09 00:30:05 <dsg> freenet not so.
 96 2011-01-09 00:30:33 <marioxcc> ...
 97 2011-01-09 00:30:35 <marioxcc> there isn't worst deaf than the one don't wants to hear
 98 2011-01-09 00:30:40 <dsg> I do not think you understand :)
 99 2011-01-09 00:31:43 <dsg> But I see others have tried to explain to you already, so I won't bother.
100 2011-01-09 00:31:55 <marioxcc> nevermind, I alredy lost enought time trying to expose the uselessness of storing block in freenet network
101 2011-01-09 00:32:58 <marioxcc> just think by yourself: if you trade the need for bitcoin-node connectivity for bitcoin-node connectivity AND freenet-node connectivity, what's the gain
102 2011-01-09 00:33:00 <marioxcc> (don't tellme)
103 2011-01-09 00:41:07 <da2ce7> well cya guys, :)
104 2011-01-09 00:53:25 <Diablo-D3> man
105 2011-01-09 00:53:28 <Diablo-D3> fucking palin
106 2011-01-09 00:53:41 <Diablo-D3> I hope she goes to prison for the rest of her ugly little life
107 2011-01-09 00:53:55 <Diablo-D3> fucking whore
108 2011-01-09 00:54:08 <AAA_awright> ...
109 2011-01-09 00:54:39 <Diablo-D3> dude, she tried to have a congresswoman assassinated
110 2011-01-09 00:54:41 <AAA_awright> What was it this time? Did she go on a rampage and shoot a dozen people?
111 2011-01-09 00:54:57 <AAA_awright> Diablo-D3: When was this? I think I missed that story
112 2011-01-09 00:55:07 <Diablo-D3> AAA_awright: its funny you say a dozen
113 2011-01-09 00:55:12 <Diablo-D3> thats how many people were shot
114 2011-01-09 00:55:29 <Diablo-D3> http://www.boingboing.net/2011/01/08/congresswoman-gabrie.html
115 2011-01-09 00:55:42 <AAA_awright> Oh yeah that's right, it wasn't her it was someone COMPLETELY UNRELATED TO HER
116 2011-01-09 00:56:05 <Diablo-D3> AAA_awright: it was someone working for sarah palin and/or the tea party
117 2011-01-09 00:56:32 <Diablo-D3> sarah palin doesnt actually know how to fire a gun
118 2011-01-09 00:56:47 <Diablo-D3> so obviously she couldnt do it herself
119 2011-01-09 00:57:03 <AAA_awright> Funny because the reported videos he published sound just like that IRS bomber
120 2011-01-09 00:57:30 <Diablo-D3> AAA_awright: read boing boing's writeup
121 2011-01-09 00:57:54 <AAA_awright> Diablo-D3: What about it?
122 2011-01-09 00:58:29 <Diablo-D3> dont you think its a little coincidental?
123 2011-01-09 00:58:48 <AAA_awright> I saw her website during the campaign season
124 2011-01-09 00:58:50 <AAA_awright> No, not at all
125 2011-01-09 00:59:11 <AAA_awright> "In conclusion, reading the second United States constitution, I can't trust the current government because of the ratifications: the government is implying mind control and brainwash on the people by controlling grammar. No! I won't pay debt with a currency that's not backed by gold and silver! No! I won't trust in god!"
126 2011-01-09 00:59:13 <Diablo-D3> so its okay to name 20 people and put gun sights over their congressional districts?
127 2011-01-09 00:59:33 <Diablo-D3> AAA_awright: actually, that sounds EXACTLY like tea partiers
128 2011-01-09 00:59:58 <AAA_awright> Diablo-D3: The government is brainwashing us with grammar, gold, and god?
129 2011-01-09 01:00:39 <Diablo-D3> yes, look how nonsensical that sounds
130 2011-01-09 01:00:51 <Diablo-D3> thats clearly a tea partier at work
131 2011-01-09 01:00:59 <kiba> it's true that public schooling is not about educating the people
132 2011-01-09 01:01:02 <AAA_awright> Diablo-D3: I wasn't aware of the controversy when it was published six months ago... It sounds like people looking to blame people they disagree with
133 2011-01-09 01:01:05 <kiba> it's about control
134 2011-01-09 01:01:15 <AAA_awright> What is that called again? Some fallacy
135 2011-01-09 01:01:55 <alowm> ad hominem? attacking the person and not the argument
136 2011-01-09 01:02:11 <Diablo-D3> kiba: yes, and gabrielle giffords was controlled.
137 2011-01-09 01:02:44 <AAA_awright> She was on Fox News just yesterday saying how we need to cut Congress's salaries, in addition to the budget cuts
138 2011-01-09 01:02:56 <AAA_awright> If you're looking for an extremest to go shoot up, she wasn't it
139 2011-01-09 01:03:18 <kiba> Diablo-D3: obviously, that was not what I meant
140 2011-01-09 01:03:27 <kiba> it's not a conspricy that public schooling is not about education
141 2011-01-09 01:03:31 <AAA_awright> alowm: Yeah
142 2011-01-09 01:03:53 <alowm> kiba: look up "the six lesson schoolteacher" unless you are already familiar with it :)
143 2011-01-09 01:03:55 <kiba> what kind of idiots assume the worst?
144 2011-01-09 01:04:15 <Diablo-D3> Im sorry, but when I see sarah palin going after 20 democrats who backed up the american people when we needed it the most
145 2011-01-09 01:04:18 <kiba> alowm: I would say public schooling is a mythology
146 2011-01-09 01:04:23 <Diablo-D3> and one of them ends up dead shortly after the election
147 2011-01-09 01:04:34 <Diablo-D3> and shes from AZ, which is known for their tea party terrorism
148 2011-01-09 01:04:48 <alowm> she died? last i saw she was in the hospital and expected to recover
149 2011-01-09 01:04:52 <kiba> Diablo-D3: it far outside the norm
150 2011-01-09 01:05:07 <Diablo-D3> alowm: shes not dead, but that just means it was a botched job
151 2011-01-09 01:05:08 <kiba> for a politican to use assassination tool in American politic
152 2011-01-09 01:05:17 <Diablo-D3> alowm: usually a shot to the head from point blank == death
153 2011-01-09 01:05:18 <AAA_awright> Diablo-D3: I wouldn't quite call her a tea-partier, not by any means... blue-dog?
154 2011-01-09 01:05:26 <alowm> yeah, generally a headshot isn't intended to maim
155 2011-01-09 01:05:49 <Diablo-D3> they intended to send a clear message
156 2011-01-09 01:05:52 <kiba> we don't know why the shooter
157 2011-01-09 01:05:54 <Diablo-D3> help the american people, and you will die
158 2011-01-09 01:06:04 <kiba> did what they did
159 2011-01-09 01:06:06 <kiba> yet
160 2011-01-09 01:06:12 <kiba> Diablo-D3: there you go, jumping to conclusion
161 2011-01-09 01:06:27 <kiba> we still don't know what the fuck is going on
162 2011-01-09 01:06:29 <AAA_awright> Diablo-D3: Meet your congressman to express conserns, and you die?
163 2011-01-09 01:06:41 <Diablo-D3> AAA_awright: they were just in the way
164 2011-01-09 01:06:52 <Diablo-D3> and some of those people were her staff too, btw
165 2011-01-09 01:07:04 <Diablo-D3> and to a tea partier "well, thats the same thing, auyp"
166 2011-01-09 01:07:09 <AAA_awright> Diablo-D3: If you just want to take out a person that's the wrong way to do it... He was suicidal, if anything
167 2011-01-09 01:07:29 <Diablo-D3> AAA_awright: shooting someone in the head is usually the most effective way of killing someone
168 2011-01-09 01:07:45 <kiba> he probably spray and shoot
169 2011-01-09 01:07:49 <kiba> he hit 15 other people
170 2011-01-09 01:07:51 <AAA_awright> Diablo-D3: You don't then proceed to fire 18 rounds in 6 seconds
171 2011-01-09 01:08:12 <Diablo-D3> of course, gotta make it look like a crazy man
172 2011-01-09 01:08:26 <Diablo-D3> I wonder if he was paid enough to make it worth it
173 2011-01-09 01:08:32 <kiba> we still don't know what this "crazy man" did
174 2011-01-09 01:08:36 <kiba> err
175 2011-01-09 01:08:37 <kiba> motive
176 2011-01-09 01:08:47 <alowm> you don't need to pay someone if they're doing it for idealogical reasons
177 2011-01-09 01:08:54 <kiba> very little information is avaiable beside the usual political bashing
178 2011-01-09 01:08:55 <Diablo-D3> kiba: I dont particularly trust the meida on this
179 2011-01-09 01:09:03 <alowm> they guy could just as well have shot up an abortion clinic
180 2011-01-09 01:09:08 <Diablo-D3> no one is reporting on the palin connection
181 2011-01-09 01:09:10 <alowm> that*
182 2011-01-09 01:09:10 <noagendamarket> what are they saying about ti?
183 2011-01-09 01:09:20 <AAA_awright> Diablo-D3: WHAT PALIN CONNECTION
184 2011-01-09 01:09:30 <luke-jr> argh, more $ wasted
185 2011-01-09 01:09:42 <luke-jr> which the stupid client would let me test w/o actually doing it
186 2011-01-09 01:10:04 <Diablo-D3> AAA_awright: PALIN WANTED GIFFORDS "REMOVED" FROM CONGRESS
187 2011-01-09 01:10:10 <kiba> I see Padlin connection
188 2011-01-09 01:10:11 <AAA_awright> Forget Palin, what about Obama, Bush, and Pelosi!?! They clearly caused this too, because without them, we wouldn't have people worried about the government!
189 2011-01-09 01:10:13 <kiba> what utter bulshit
190 2011-01-09 01:10:19 <kiba> s/bulshit/bullshit
191 2011-01-09 01:10:29 <AAA_awright> There would be no government to complain about!
192 2011-01-09 01:10:35 <Diablo-D3> AAA_awright: actually, lets drop the first and the last there
193 2011-01-09 01:10:36 <AAA_awright> But NO, No one is reporting on that
194 2011-01-09 01:10:41 <Diablo-D3> AAA_awright: YES WHAT ABOUT NUSH
195 2011-01-09 01:10:44 <Diablo-D3> BUSH
196 2011-01-09 01:10:49 <Diablo-D3> the guy is a fucking criminal
197 2011-01-09 01:10:53 <Diablo-D3> why wasnt it him getting shot
198 2011-01-09 01:11:02 <Diablo-D3> hes the one that tried to pull is NWO shit
199 2011-01-09 01:11:04 <Diablo-D3> *his
200 2011-01-09 01:11:17 <Diablo-D3> the NWO shit will NEVER work
201 2011-01-09 01:11:25 <Diablo-D3> Bush and his ilk will never be the kings of the world
202 2011-01-09 01:11:28 <Diablo-D3> why the fuck do they bother
203 2011-01-09 01:11:29 <AAA_awright> ...And Obama isn't?
204 2011-01-09 01:11:33 <AAA_awright> Or what
205 2011-01-09 01:11:38 <noagendamarket> its probably going to brign in gun laws
206 2011-01-09 01:11:40 <Diablo-D3> Obama is being lead around by his dick by Congress
207 2011-01-09 01:11:51 <Diablo-D3> noagendamarket: yes, which the people must resist
208 2011-01-09 01:12:01 <noagendamarket> not if it keeps happening
209 2011-01-09 01:12:04 <AAA_awright> I mean talk about New World Order, you have an actual White House FILLED with revolutionaries
210 2011-01-09 01:12:15 <AAA_awright> Who ACTUALLY LITERALLY BOMBED GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS
211 2011-01-09 01:12:19 <kermit> ##politics
212 2011-01-09 01:12:22 <Diablo-D3> AAA_awright: bullshit
213 2011-01-09 01:12:25 <noagendamarket> all al quaeda would have to do is a couple of mass shootinfgs
214 2011-01-09 01:12:29 <kiba> can people discuss this more rational
215 2011-01-09 01:12:33 <kiba> ly>
216 2011-01-09 01:12:38 <noagendamarket> then watch what happens
217 2011-01-09 01:12:50 <kiba> one nutjob can cause a massacre
218 2011-01-09 01:12:52 <AAA_awright> kermit: ##politico the troll-free politics channel
219 2011-01-09 01:12:52 <Diablo-D3> noagendamarket: it just means every single person able to carry a gun should be armed at all times
220 2011-01-09 01:13:00 <kiba> I don't see how Al Queada can't do the same
221 2011-01-09 01:13:03 <kiba> but obviously
222 2011-01-09 01:13:03 <noagendamarket> they only had to fly two planes half well
223 2011-01-09 01:13:18 <noagendamarket> to cause an over reaction
224 2011-01-09 01:13:34 <kiba> Al Queada like "daring" plans
225 2011-01-09 01:13:49 <kermit> AAA_awright: if thats true, then i stand by my suggestion for the discusssion at hand :
226 2011-01-09 01:13:53 <AAA_awright> Also, unless someone wants to start talking about BitCoin I would say it's open season, short of crapflooding
227 2011-01-09 01:13:58 <kiba> mass shooting is a great way to take a hundred of people out
228 2011-01-09 01:14:21 <noagendamarket> yes and then they brin g in bodyscanners at the local mall
229 2011-01-09 01:14:30 <kiba> noagendamarket: which does nothing
230 2011-01-09 01:14:31 <noagendamarket> at football fields
231 2011-01-09 01:14:33 <kiba> just shoot the guard
232 2011-01-09 01:14:36 <kiba> shoot the guard...
233 2011-01-09 01:14:43 <noagendamarket> thats not the point
234 2011-01-09 01:14:48 <noagendamarket> its theater
235 2011-01-09 01:14:58 <kiba> security theater
236 2011-01-09 01:15:14 <alowm> an article mentioned that the dhs wants to add body scanners to buses, subways, etc.
237 2011-01-09 01:15:20 <noagendamarket> How many people the guy shot had guns?
238 2011-01-09 01:15:29 <kiba> we're scared of a terrorist attack more than a car accident, which is the leading cause of death for people under 45
239 2011-01-09 01:15:30 <noagendamarket> I bet none did
240 2011-01-09 01:15:58 <kiba> alowm: you can simply blow up the bus
241 2011-01-09 01:16:10 <noagendamarket> thats how they disarmed australians
242 2011-01-09 01:16:13 <kiba> blowing up bombs seem to be rather hard though
243 2011-01-09 01:16:17 <noagendamarket> one guy shot 31 people
244 2011-01-09 01:16:22 <noagendamarket> now no one can have them
245 2011-01-09 01:16:24 <kiba> of which have no gun?
246 2011-01-09 01:16:42 <noagendamarket> yes
247 2011-01-09 01:16:45 <alowm> you can add as many layers of "security" and checkpoints as you want, there will always be a large grouping of people to attack outside the "secure" area
248 2011-01-09 01:17:11 <kiba> real security had to be done like an intelligence gathering operation
249 2011-01-09 01:17:13 <noagendamarket> just do a suicide bomb at the checkpoint
250 2011-01-09 01:17:23 <noagendamarket> after all thats where all the people are waiyting
251 2011-01-09 01:17:34 <noagendamarket> its a choke point
252 2011-01-09 01:17:58 <noagendamarket> why get on the p[lanme at all?
253 2011-01-09 01:18:06 <kiba> it's DARING
254 2011-01-09 01:18:22 <kiba> terrorist theater
255 2011-01-09 01:18:51 <kiba> haha, we can blow up your most guarded transportation system
256 2011-01-09 01:18:58 <kiba> and crash them into building
257 2011-01-09 01:19:00 <noagendamarket> how come all the supposed terrorist keep showing up alive?
258 2011-01-09 01:19:22 <kiba> hmm?
259 2011-01-09 01:20:38 <kiba> well
260 2011-01-09 01:20:44 <kiba> all I am going to say
261 2011-01-09 01:20:57 <kiba> there's going to be another intelligence failure, and US will suffer an attack
262 2011-01-09 01:21:16 <noagendamarket> probably a cyber attack
263 2011-01-09 01:21:18 <kiba> and all the TSA security measure will be moot if they used the planes again
264 2011-01-09 01:21:57 <kiba> if you have a cop on there who can use force...maybe it will be stopped
265 2011-01-09 01:21:59 <kiba> who know
266 2011-01-09 01:22:04 <kiba> err
267 2011-01-09 01:22:11 <kiba> I don't think passenger is going to be passive
268 2011-01-09 01:22:12 <kiba> anymore
269 2011-01-09 01:22:16 <kiba> they're going to be aggressive
270 2011-01-09 01:22:30 <alowm> the only changes that have increased security since sept. 11 are strengthening the cockpit doors and the fact that passengers will attempt to stop hijackers now
271 2011-01-09 01:22:46 <alowm> because they know they're not going to land at an airfield and be ransomed, they're going to die
272 2011-01-09 01:23:18 <alowm> the days of leila khaled are over
273 2011-01-09 01:23:19 <kiba> yeah
274 2011-01-09 01:23:28 <kiba> that's the biggest security measure you have right there
275 2011-01-09 01:23:46 <kiba> it ain't going to be a cakewalk anymore
276 2011-01-09 01:23:47 <alowm> my goal is to abscond from this country before it's made illegal
277 2011-01-09 01:24:02 <kiba> forget all the TSA security measure
278 2011-01-09 01:24:26 <luke-jr> abscond?
279 2011-01-09 01:24:55 <alowm> ehh... fancy word for departing quickly and secretly
280 2011-01-09 01:25:00 <luke-jr> where to?
281 2011-01-09 01:25:01 <alowm> with minimal fuss :)
282 2011-01-09 01:25:05 <luke-jr> everywhere else is already worse
283 2011-01-09 01:25:14 <kiba> off to some island
284 2011-01-09 01:25:25 <luke-jr> lol sure
285 2011-01-09 01:25:32 <luke-jr> like there's unclaimed islands still
286 2011-01-09 01:25:34 <alowm> probably a top five country on the human development index
287 2011-01-09 01:25:47 <luke-jr> alowm: already worse
288 2011-01-09 01:25:57 <luke-jr> maybe someday we'll make it into space
289 2011-01-09 01:26:03 <luke-jr> lots of room to hide out there for a while
290 2011-01-09 01:26:19 <alowm> how is a country like denmark/sweden/norway worse than the US? O_o
291 2011-01-09 01:26:26 <kiba> and then we will have our first interstellar war!
292 2011-01-09 01:26:27 <alowm> unless you're a conservative, etc.
293 2011-01-09 01:26:28 <luke-jr> MUCH worse
294 2011-01-09 01:26:42 <luke-jr> alowm: um, yes. liberalism is the problem
295 2011-01-09 01:26:59 <alowm> can you give an example?
296 2011-01-09 01:27:05 <alowm> i've been doing research and not seen too many cons
297 2011-01-09 01:27:15 <luke-jr> alowm: & everything the US is heading toward?
298 2011-01-09 01:27:20 <kiba> liberalism, conservatism?
299 2011-01-09 01:27:26 <kiba> naw,
300 2011-01-09 01:27:28 <luke-jr> everything all those other countries have already fallen into?
301 2011-01-09 01:27:31 <kiba> they're both statist idealogy
302 2011-01-09 01:27:36 <noagendamarket> new zealand
303 2011-01-09 01:27:38 <noagendamarket> lol
304 2011-01-09 01:27:44 <alowm> i don't see scandinavian really heading towards serfdom
305 2011-01-09 01:27:45 <luke-jr> IIRC NZ is one of the worst
306 2011-01-09 01:27:50 <alowm> -n
307 2011-01-09 01:28:01 <luke-jr> serfdom would be an improvement
308 2011-01-09 01:28:14 <alowm> serfs paid less taxes than the US middle class currently do
309 2011-01-09 01:29:01 <noagendamarket> becoma amish
310 2011-01-09 01:29:16 <luke-jr> alowm: every nation except the USA and some Islamic country, have done away with parental rights
311 2011-01-09 01:29:26 <marioxcc> oh, no, still discussing politics?
312 2011-01-09 01:29:30 <luke-jr> noagendamarket: no, that's a heretical sect
313 2011-01-09 01:29:38 <alowm> luke-jr: parental rights?
314 2011-01-09 01:29:42 <marioxcc> sect?
315 2011-01-09 01:29:51 <luke-jr> alowm: yes
316 2011-01-09 01:30:14 <luke-jr> the father's supreme unquestionable authority over how he raises his children
317 2011-01-09 01:30:28 <alowm> ahh, ok, that doesn't affect me directly
318 2011-01-09 01:30:39 <marioxcc> could you please use ##politics or private messages?
319 2011-01-09 01:31:09 <luke-jr> how about #BitCoin-Politics?
320 2011-01-09 01:31:13 <luke-jr> how about #BitCoin-Politics ?
321 2011-01-09 01:31:20 <alowm> noagendamarket: have you seen amish rollerblading? :)
322 2011-01-09 01:31:39 <marioxcc> luke-jr: fine, as long as it isn't there
323 2011-01-09 01:32:23 <noagendamarket> alown no
324 2011-01-09 01:32:33 <alowm> google it, it's quite entertaining
325 2011-01-09 01:33:30 <marioxcc> back on topic
326 2011-01-09 01:33:30 <noagendamarket> do they put rollerbaldes on their horses?
327 2011-01-09 01:33:31 <marioxcc> luke-jr: how is that patch going?
328 2011-01-09 01:33:43 <luke-jr> marioxcc: eating away at my limited funds 9
329 2011-01-09 01:33:51 <luke-jr> putting huge tx fees on my tests
330 2011-01-09 01:34:06 <marioxcc> luke-jr: oh
331 2011-01-09 01:34:15 <marioxcc> luke-jr: tellme your direction I will send you some
332 2011-01-09 01:34:27 <luke-jr> direction? O.o
333 2011-01-09 01:34:31 <marioxcc> sorry
334 2011-01-09 01:34:32 <marioxcc> address
335 2011-01-09 01:34:46 <marioxcc> they're the same on spanish, my native language and sometimes I get confussed
336 2011-01-09 01:34:52 <luke-jr> hehe, dunno while I have bitcoind in debugger XD
337 2011-01-09 01:35:06 <marioxcc> then how did you enter bitcoins?
338 2011-01-09 01:35:14 <luke-jr> ?
339 2011-01-09 01:35:19 <marioxcc> what're you spending?
340 2011-01-09 01:35:24 <luke-jr> I'm stepping through bitcoind right now
341 2011-01-09 01:35:27 <marioxcc> bitcoins from your address
342 2011-01-09 01:35:41 <luke-jr> about 0.02 BTC wasted so far
343 2011-01-09 01:35:46 <marioxcc> not so much really
344 2011-01-09 01:35:52 <luke-jr> it's a lot for me :P
345 2011-01-09 01:36:04 <luke-jr> that's like a day of mining
346 2011-01-09 01:36:10 <marioxcc> lol
347 2011-01-09 01:36:14 <theymos> What are you trying to do?
348 2011-01-09 01:36:29 <marioxcc> luke-jr: what I mean is I can send you 1 BTC for you to expertiment for, if you need that
349 2011-01-09 01:36:49 <luke-jr> marioxcc: sure, gimme a few mins to finish this round of debugging
350 2011-01-09 01:36:54 <marioxcc> yeah
351 2011-01-09 01:37:02 <luke-jr> theymos: send non-rounded tx
352 2011-01-09 01:37:10 <luke-jr> theymos: so like 0.01234567 BTC
353 2011-01-09 01:37:18 <marioxcc> yeah
354 2011-01-09 01:37:40 <theymos> luke-jr: Oh. You need to disable the sub-cent automatic fee thing. Search for "CENT" in SelectCoins.
355 2011-01-09 01:37:53 <luke-jr> theymos: I'm not sending sub-cent values though :
356 2011-01-09 01:38:11 <theymos> The change is probably sub-cent, though.
357 2011-01-09 01:38:24 <luke-jr> oh, I see :/
358 2011-01-09 01:38:30 <luke-jr> why can't it Input the exact amount?
359 2011-01-09 01:38:50 <theymos> You can only redeem an entire previous output.
360 2011-01-09 01:38:51 <xelister> in networking terms, what do we need to send to some bitcoin address? distribute "inv" command, and then distribute (on request) "tx" command?  http://www.bitcoin.org/wiki/doku.php?id=network
361 2011-01-09 01:39:43 <theymos> xelister: Right. (After you create the transaction correctly.)
362 2011-01-09 01:39:48 <marioxcc> xelister: the first one in the day, congrats
363 2011-01-09 01:41:01 <xelister> to make the proper "inv" + "tx" commands, what do we need exactly?
364 2011-01-09 01:41:09 <marioxcc> what will happen if you send some coins above the account balance?
365 2011-01-09 01:41:12 <xelister> bitcoin address of recipient is needed
366 2011-01-09 01:41:15 <xelister> bitcoin address of recipient is /given/
367 2011-01-09 01:41:25 <xelister> what else?  do we need to find out, like, his pubkey or something?
368 2011-01-09 01:41:54 <xelister> and do we need to know previous blocks (either headers or entire blocks) to make payment (inv+tx) ?
369 2011-01-09 01:43:12 <theymos> xelister: No blocks. You only need the transactions you're redeeming and the hash160 of the address you're sending to (contained in the BC address). Then you need to sign all of this with the public key specified in the transactions you're redeeming.
370 2011-01-09 01:44:44 <xelister> so to send, basically no information needs to be downloaded from network, actually sending can be done without ever downloading from network (assuming I have proper wallet with valid BTCs in it)?
371 2011-01-09 01:45:23 <luke-jr> hmm
372 2011-01-09 01:45:26 <theymos> xelister: Yes, but you can't receive without having at least the block headers.
373 2011-01-09 01:45:28 <luke-jr> so JSON-RPC API sucks
374 2011-01-09 01:46:13 <luke-jr> it's too high-level and the implementation too dumb
375 2011-01-09 01:46:17 <marioxcc> lol
376 2011-01-09 01:46:25 <luke-jr> it's losing BTC for me just because it isn't smart on splitting it without a fee
377 2011-01-09 01:46:34 <alowm> which language are you using?
378 2011-01-09 01:46:34 <marioxcc> yeah
379 2011-01-09 01:46:37 <marioxcc> so we agree in the bitcoin client sucks?
380 2011-01-09 01:46:47 <marioxcc> alowm: the language bitcoin is written in
381 2011-01-09 01:46:48 <luke-jr> not just the client, but the core impl
382 2011-01-09 01:46:54 <marioxcc> what other?
383 2011-01-09 01:47:05 <marioxcc> luke-jr: well, by client I mean the thing in src/
384 2011-01-09 01:47:26 <luke-jr> marioxcc: 1HQuB7hhm8fxCEW3Wy5MdFfXGxqWSZAa6a
385 2011-01-09 01:47:28 <alowm> marioxcc: oh, when luke-jr mentioned an API i assumed he wasn't working with the actual client but rather another language
386 2011-01-09 01:47:41 <alowm> sorry
387 2011-01-09 01:47:59 <luke-jr> alowm: the core 'client' is JSON-RPC
388 2011-01-09 01:48:12 <alowm> gotcha
389 2011-01-09 01:48:33 <luke-jr> so it sounds like I need to do this the hard way
390 2011-01-09 01:48:53 <luke-jr> first, combine multiple old-outputs into a single large output to avoid lame fees
391 2011-01-09 01:48:56 <marioxcc> luke-jr: just sent 1.50 BTC
392 2011-01-09 01:48:58 <luke-jr> then split that large input
393 2011-01-09 01:49:02 <luke-jr> marioxcc: thx
394 2011-01-09 01:49:08 <theymos> luke-jr: In the case of http://blockexplorer.com/t/AKDH4hX3A1 , your send amount left sub-cent change. Bitcoin had no choice but to throw that away. If it hadn't have done that, your transaction would have been stuck in limbo forever.
395 2011-01-09 01:49:14 <marioxcc> you're welcome
396 2011-01-09 01:49:42 <luke-jr> theymos: no, it could have combined the input with more balances first
397 2011-01-09 01:49:57 <luke-jr> theymos: and then split that larger input up into >cent change
398 2011-01-09 01:51:06 <luke-jr> theymos: right?
399 2011-01-09 01:51:50 <theymos> Right. Sub-cent transactions are forbidden, however, and you'll eventually end up with sub-cent amounts when you break 0.01234567 from a whole amount.
400 2011-01-09 01:52:14 <luke-jr> theymos: not necessarily
401 2011-01-09 01:52:14 <marioxcc> theymos: why?
402 2011-01-09 01:52:19 <marioxcc> they accumulate
403 2011-01-09 01:52:45 <theymos> They accumulate, but what's the chance of getting the exact amount to complete it?
404 2011-01-09 01:53:00 <marioxcc> theymos: it don't needs to be exact
405 2011-01-09 01:53:06 <marioxcc> is same as slush pool
406 2011-01-09 01:53:13 <marioxcc> the threshold is 0.01
407 2011-01-09 01:53:34 <luke-jr> so long as I actually only spend a minimum of 1 WTBC, it should be fine in theory
408 2011-01-09 01:53:34 <marioxcc> while it is less than that, it just accumulates
409 2011-01-09 01:54:05 <luke-jr> theymos: likely, if the sub-cent amounts are part of TBC
410 2011-01-09 01:54:06 <marioxcc> also, why are < 0.01 transactions forbidden?
411 2011-01-09 01:54:11 <marioxcc> is that hardcoded in the network?
412 2011-01-09 01:54:15 <marioxcc> i think not
413 2011-01-09 01:54:32 <luke-jr> marioxcc: most block generators merely won't accept the transaction unless you pay a tx fee of 0.01 BTC
414 2011-01-09 01:54:42 <theymos> More intelligent coin selection would be great (manual selection, too), but this is not an easy change by any means.
415 2011-01-09 01:54:45 <luke-jr> marioxcc: which means if some people start to accept them, it's a matter of time
416 2011-01-09 01:55:14 <theymos> Generators will probably never accept all eight decimals of precision.
417 2011-01-09 01:55:22 <luke-jr> theymos: the original core sucks. hopefully it can be replaced with a smarter one :
418 2011-01-09 01:55:31 <luke-jr> the core API should be more low-level than this
419 2011-01-09 01:55:34 <marioxcc> luke-jr: I see
420 2011-01-09 01:55:43 <Cusipzzz> luke-jr: feel free to write your own
421 2011-01-09 01:55:48 <marioxcc> <luke-jr> the core API should be more low-level than this <- how low-level?
422 2011-01-09 01:55:50 <luke-jr> Cusipzzz: not trivial
423 2011-01-09 01:55:56 <marioxcc> you mean non-JSON?
424 2011-01-09 01:55:59 <luke-jr> marioxcc: it should allow me to write my own transactions :P
425 2011-01-09 01:56:04 <marioxcc> oh yeah
426 2011-01-09 01:56:15 <marioxcc> we will have to rewrite this
427 2011-01-09 01:56:16 <luke-jr> rather than me give it a # and it tries to guess everything and spend fees w/o my permission
428 2011-01-09 01:56:30 <marioxcc> yeah
429 2011-01-09 01:56:34 <marioxcc> i got it
430 2011-01-09 01:59:11 <marioxcc> split?
431 2011-01-09 01:59:16 <luke-jr> yeah
432 2011-01-09 01:59:25 <marioxcc> i don't get it, what do you mean?
433 2011-01-09 02:00:04 <luke-jr> input:1,50000000 + (output:0,01048576) * 142
434 2011-01-09 02:00:21 <luke-jr> right now, I have a single 1.5 BTC coin from you
435 2011-01-09 02:01:02 <marioxcc> so what do you want to do?
436 2011-01-09 02:01:23 <luke-jr> turn it into 142 coins, each 1 WTBC large
437 2011-01-09 02:01:28 <luke-jr> (last one slightly larger)
438 2011-01-09 02:01:46 <theymos> You can have 142 outputs in a transaction, though this is forbidden by generators.
439 2011-01-09 02:01:57 <luke-jr> theymos: why?
440 2011-01-09 02:02:15 <marioxcc> too big i think
441 2011-01-09 02:02:19 <marioxcc> limit is 500 Kb
442 2011-01-09 02:02:29 <luke-jr> 1000 bytes I think
443 2011-01-09 02:02:33 <theymos> The maximum number of outputs is 2, which is the most Bitcoin will send normally.
444 2011-01-09 02:02:36 <luke-jr> but then I just need multiple tx
445 2011-01-09 02:02:46 <luke-jr> theymos: where is that stupid limit? -.-
446 2011-01-09 02:02:56 <marioxcc> luke-jr: but what do you want it to be "splited"?
447 2011-01-09 02:03:01 <luke-jr> ?
448 2011-01-09 02:03:09 <marioxcc> <luke-jr> turn it into 142 coins, each 1 WTBC large
449 2011-01-09 02:03:27 <marioxcc> just think you have 142 WTBC
450 2011-01-09 02:03:34 <theymos> luke-jr: Line 633 of my main.cpp: if (GetSigOpCount() > 2 || nSize < 100)
451 2011-01-09 02:03:44 <luke-jr> marioxcc: experimental :P
452 2011-01-09 02:04:18 <marioxcc> luke-jr: ok, just clarifying: the client just sends what is need on each transaction, you don't have to split anything
453 2011-01-09 02:04:27 <marioxcc> it is done automatically
454 2011-01-09 02:04:38 <luke-jr> marioxcc: no
455 2011-01-09 02:04:52 <luke-jr> the client can only send exact amounts it has received
456 2011-01-09 02:05:10 <luke-jr> to send any other amount, it needs to split
457 2011-01-09 02:05:16 <luke-jr> or combine
458 2011-01-09 02:05:16 <marioxcc> luke-jr: i mean that
459 2011-01-09 02:05:21 <marioxcc> splitting is done automatically
460 2011-01-09 02:05:39 <luke-jr> marioxcc: but not ideally
461 2011-01-09 02:05:41 <luke-jr> hence my lost BTC
462 2011-01-09 02:06:24 <marioxcc> luke-jr: no, they has been lost because the output has been rounded
463 2011-01-09 02:06:37 <marioxcc> not "lost", just a miner operator haves them now
464 2011-01-09 02:07:14 <theymos> It's not really "rounded". When Bitcoin sees that it is about to send a change that is less than 0.01, it throws the amount away instead.
465 2011-01-09 02:07:46 <luke-jr> theymos: my version currently adds the change, then adds a fee 9
466 2011-01-09 02:08:00 <marioxcc> uh
467 2011-01-09 02:08:14 <marioxcc> luke-jr: any repository set up to see changes?
468 2011-01-09 02:08:24 <luke-jr> marioxcc: not atm, I'll push in a min
469 2011-01-09 02:08:40 <luke-jr> probably reverting that one though
470 2011-01-09 02:09:34 <marioxcc> ok
471 2011-01-09 02:10:33 <sgornick> FWIW: http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html
472 2011-01-09 02:10:34 <theymos> luke-jr: Why do you add the change first? Doesn't that have the exact same result?
473 2011-01-09 02:10:49 <luke-jr> theymos: no, it's more expensive XD
474 2011-01-09 02:11:28 <sgornick> nanotube, tcatm, theymos (?): ^^  ???Python wins the TIOBE Programming Language [biggest gainer] Award of 2010!
475 2011-01-09 02:14:14 <marioxcc> 

476 2011-01-09 02:16:55 <luke-jr> ok, I forged a 1 WTBC transaction with gdb
477 2011-01-09 02:17:02 <luke-jr> let's see if it gets into a block :D
478 2011-01-09 02:17:05 <luke-jr> (no tx fee)
479 2011-01-09 02:17:35 <marioxcc> let's see
480 2011-01-09 02:17:37 <luke-jr> "balance" : 4.80234567,
481 2011-01-09 02:17:43 <luke-jr> something tells me I'll never get that fixed :P
482 2011-01-09 02:18:16 <theymos> Did you modify RPC for more precision? I thought it rounded the balance.
483 2011-01-09 02:18:26 <luke-jr> theymos: it rounded inputs
484 2011-01-09 02:18:34 <marioxcc> i don't undestand why they use Json in the first place
485 2011-01-09 02:18:43 <marioxcc> a simple SMTP-like protocol will do
486 2011-01-09 02:19:32 <marioxcc> SEND 1HF4qGy3FX6JYzz64jexvcZaAJJf6ZRPsy 1
487 2011-01-09 02:19:39 <marioxcc> can it be simpler?
488 2011-01-09 02:20:18 <soultcer> Jsonrpc is a simple RPC, trust me
489 2011-01-09 02:20:21 <soultcer> Ever head of SOAP?
490 2011-01-09 02:20:28 <theymos> I think JSON-RPC is easier to implement for web sites.
491 2011-01-09 02:20:36 <marioxcc> web sites?
492 2011-01-09 02:20:45 <marioxcc> hey, this is a local program
493 2011-01-09 02:20:54 <luke-jr> marioxcc: &
494 2011-01-09 02:21:33 <theymos> JSON-RPC was implemented just so that websites like MtGox could function easily. The command-line interface to it was an afterthought.
495 2011-01-09 02:21:37 <luke-jr> bzr branch lp:~luke-jr/+junk/bitcoin-tonal
496 2011-01-09 02:21:54 <marioxcc> do you like GIT?
497 2011-01-09 02:22:00 <luke-jr> shrug
498 2011-01-09 02:22:06 <luke-jr> slightly more than bzr
499 2011-01-09 02:22:14 <luke-jr> but bitcoin official is svn
500 2011-01-09 02:22:17 <luke-jr> and bzr works better with svn
501 2011-01-09 02:22:36 <marioxcc> there is a git svn command
502 2011-01-09 02:22:45 <luke-jr> that's nice, I don't like such
503 2011-01-09 02:22:48 <luke-jr> bzr works with svn transparently
504 2011-01-09 02:22:52 <luke-jr> I don't have to know it's svn
505 2011-01-09 02:23:04 <luke-jr> it's treated the same as any other bzr repo
506 2011-01-09 02:23:31 <marioxcc> oh well, I guess that's why BZR is popular
507 2011-01-09 02:23:38 <luke-jr> :
508 2011-01-09 02:23:39 <marioxcc> it seems so simple to use
509 2011-01-09 02:23:42 <luke-jr> yeah
510 2011-01-09 02:23:51 <luke-jr> bzr supports basically all the same commands as subversion
511 2011-01-09 02:24:00 <luke-jr> while also supporting more complex use like git
512 2011-01-09 02:24:10 <marioxcc> however, being transparent with an incompatible thing like SVN can't lead to a good end :)
513 2011-01-09 02:24:16 <luke-jr> it's not incompatible
514 2011-01-09 02:24:35 <luke-jr> bzr can pull and push from/to svn like any other branches
515 2011-01-09 02:24:47 <marioxcc> oh, sure, repository as branch
516 2011-01-09 02:24:53 <luke-jr> although admittedly some metadata is lost bzr-side
517 2011-01-09 02:24:53 <marioxcc> I didn't every liked that
518 2011-01-09 02:25:02 <marioxcc> *ever
519 2011-01-09 02:25:11 <luke-jr> git forces me to have a single working tree 9
520 2011-01-09 02:25:17 <marioxcc> no, it don't
521 2011-01-09 02:25:33 <marioxcc> also, it is easier that way
522 2011-01-09 02:25:37 <luke-jr> not really
523 2011-01-09 02:25:40 <marioxcc> branches are everyday things in git
524 2011-01-09 02:25:54 <marioxcc> using a single working tree is only more comfortable with proper tools
525 2011-01-09 02:26:23 <marioxcc> you can anyway
526 2011-01-09 02:26:26 <luke-jr> no, because then when you change branches everything needs to be recompiled every time
527 2011-01-09 02:26:30 <marioxcc> clone a local repository
528 2011-01-09 02:26:53 <luke-jr> branches are more pain-free with bzr
529 2011-01-09 02:26:57 <marioxcc> luke-jr: not everything, only what have changed, but that's only true if you switch branches
530 2011-01-09 02:27:02 <luke-jr> I make branches for each and every feature or bugfix
531 2011-01-09 02:27:09 <marioxcc> I do too
532 2011-01-09 02:27:16 <xelister> theymos: ok, and to receive payments, and verify them, I need block headers - so I need to receive inv and then send out getheaders and receive headers?
533 2011-01-09 02:27:25 <marioxcc> and I have no problem really
534 2011-01-09 02:27:56 <marioxcc> still no block, hmm
535 2011-01-09 02:28:16 <xelister> and last, if I want to also generate/mine, then I need receive inv, send out getdata or getblocks and receive block?
536 2011-01-09 02:28:22 <xelister> theymos: ^
537 2011-01-09 02:29:26 <luke-jr> "comment" : "sending 1 u00E1u00B5u0097TBC"
538 2011-01-09 02:29:29 <luke-jr> this is a bug.
539 2011-01-09 02:29:43 <luke-jr> xE1xB5x97 would be correct
540 2011-01-09 02:29:56 <luke-jr> but if it's going to try to decode Unicode, it should do it right! :P
541 2011-01-09 02:30:25 <marioxcc> lol
542 2011-01-09 02:30:30 <luke-jr> u1D57
543 2011-01-09 02:31:03 <luke-jr> or are these comments on the network at all?
544 2011-01-09 02:33:08 <marioxcc> i think they're only supported for IP transactions
545 2011-01-09 02:33:17 <luke-jr> wtf are those
546 2011-01-09 02:33:34 <marioxcc> you can pay to an IP
547 2011-01-09 02:33:54 <marioxcc> see
548 2011-01-09 02:33:58 <marioxcc> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/IP_Transactions
549 2011-01-09 02:36:05 <marioxcc> i find this function useless, but well
550 2011-01-09 02:36:53 <marioxcc> luke-jr: i can't clone it
551 2011-01-09 02:36:55 <marioxcc> no ssh acess
552 2011-01-09 02:37:00 <luke-jr> &
553 2011-01-09 02:37:02 <luke-jr> no ssh needed
554 2011-01-09 02:37:38 <marioxcc> marioxcc@Q6600-0:~/ppd$ bzr branch lp:~luke-jr/+junk/bitcoin-tonal
555 2011-01-09 02:37:39 <marioxcc> Setting ssh/sftp usernames for launchpad.net.
556 2011-01-09 02:37:54 <theymos> xelister: Additional as-yet-unimplemented network stuff is necessary to use just headers all the time. Right now you can download headers for all blocks that you're sure you didn't get a payment in, and then you have to download full blocks after that. You can discard the blocks after processing them into Merkle trees. Getting headers is just getheaders+headers. Getting blocks is getblocks+inv+block.
557 2011-01-09 02:37:59 <luke-jr> marioxcc: did you misconfigure bzr?
558 2011-01-09 02:38:13 <marioxcc> no that i remember of
559 2011-01-09 02:38:28 <luke-jr> bzr launchpad-login
560 2011-01-09 02:38:45 <marioxcc> marioxcc
561 2011-01-09 02:38:50 <marioxcc> i used to have an account
562 2011-01-09 02:38:56 <luke-jr> used to?
563 2011-01-09 02:39:09 <marioxcc> probably it is delete dnow
564 2011-01-09 02:39:14 <marioxcc> why?
565 2011-01-09 02:39:16 <xelister> theymos: is it documented more then on that page  http://www.bitcoin.org/wiki/doku.php?id=network
566 2011-01-09 02:39:20 <marioxcc> isn't there anonymous access?
567 2011-01-09 02:39:32 <luke-jr> if you want to deconfigure it, delete hte launchpad_username line from ~/.bazaar/bazaar.conf
568 2011-01-09 02:39:41 <luke-jr> if it's configured w/ a username it tries to use it
569 2011-01-09 02:39:49 <marioxcc> ok
570 2011-01-09 02:39:58 <marioxcc> dumb
571 2011-01-09 02:40:00 <marioxcc> well, not it works
572 2011-01-09 02:40:44 <luke-jr> marioxcc: qmake && nice make && ./bitcoind
573 2011-01-09 02:40:45 <theymos> xelister: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_specification tries to go into more detail, but it has mostly the same info.
574 2011-01-09 02:40:50 <marioxcc> ok, i don't knwo how to handle this really
575 2011-01-09 02:40:52 <luke-jr> (make sure you stop old one first, if you actually want to run it)
576 2011-01-09 02:40:56 <marioxcc> (bazaar)
577 2011-01-09 02:41:00 <luke-jr> ?
578 2011-01-09 02:41:15 <marioxcc> i want to start something like gitk
579 2011-01-09 02:41:16 <luke-jr> if it works, you have a dir named bitcoin-tonal
580 2011-01-09 02:41:20 <marioxcc> or magit
581 2011-01-09 02:41:24 <marioxcc> yes, I have it
582 2011-01-09 02:41:25 <luke-jr> cd there, qmake and make
583 2011-01-09 02:42:45 <luke-jr> bzr log | less
584 2011-01-09 02:42:58 <luke-jr> bzr diff -c <revno> | less
585 2011-01-09 02:43:04 <marioxcc> thanks for your help, but that's far from the gitk functionality
586 2011-01-09 02:43:27 <marioxcc> I will read about bazaar later, thanks
587 2011-01-09 02:43:36 <marioxcc> the important thing is i have the code
588 2011-01-09 02:43:41 <luke-jr> ?
589 2011-01-09 02:43:47 <luke-jr> what functionality are you looking for?
590 2011-01-09 02:43:57 <marioxcc> haven't you used gitk?
591 2011-01-09 02:44:00 <luke-jr> no
592 2011-01-09 02:44:02 <marioxcc> i'm looking for that
593 2011-01-09 02:44:10 <marioxcc> it shows a graph of revisions
594 2011-01-09 02:44:14 <luke-jr> oh
595 2011-01-09 02:44:18 <luke-jr> qbzr does that
596 2011-01-09 02:44:19 <marioxcc> and you can click them
597 2011-01-09 02:44:21 <marioxcc> then get the diff
598 2011-01-09 02:44:52 <marioxcc> let's see
599 2011-01-09 02:45:13 <marioxcc> hmm, i don't have it installed
600 2011-01-09 02:45:25 <marioxcc> nevermind, i don't want to bother you with my noob bazaar question
601 2011-01-09 02:45:29 <marioxcc> *questions
602 2011-01-09 02:45:36 <luke-jr> I usually just use CLI
603 2011-01-09 02:46:08 <marioxcc> i'm more used to magit
604 2011-01-09 02:46:20 <marioxcc> it has a gitk-like log
605 2011-01-09 02:46:22 <luke-jr> if you install qbzr, the command to see that stuff is: bzr qlog
606 2011-01-09 02:46:42 <marioxcc> hmm, maybe later
607 2011-01-09 02:46:48 <marioxcc> it is a bit late just now
608 2011-01-09 02:46:53 <marioxcc> (today)
609 2011-01-09 02:47:11 <marioxcc> oh, i'm talking with incoherency
610 2011-01-09 02:47:12 <marioxcc> lol
611 2011-01-09 02:47:21 <marioxcc> i need a rest
612 2011-01-09 02:52:04 <marioxcc> i'm back
613 2011-01-09 02:53:30 <luke-jr> wtf
614 2011-01-09 02:53:33 <luke-jr> some rest
615 2011-01-09 02:54:58 <marioxcc> still better than nothing :)
616 2011-01-09 03:32:18 <luke-jr> w00t
617 2011-01-09 03:32:19 <luke-jr> http://blockexplorer.com/tx/487c2edc5787964be0656b40c1efb5227dc59972608c086d882125e404385653
618 2011-01-09 03:40:15 <nanotube> luke-jr: there's a bitcoin repo on github...
619 2011-01-09 03:40:24 <nanotube> you'd have an easier time of it maybe if you just cloned that...
620 2011-01-09 03:54:16 <luke-jr> nanotube: bzr works fine
621 2011-01-09 03:55:44 <nanotube> luke-jr: i'm sure it does. you just said that you liked git better, and only went with bzr because of the svn interconnect... so i was giving you an option to use git where you don't need the svn
622 2011-01-09 03:56:02 <nanotube> but yes, bzr is a fine scm. :)
623 2011-01-09 04:03:10 <fabianhjr> Hi, sup?
624 2011-01-09 04:04:08 <fabianhjr> slush: congratulations 15 GHashes/sec! Now we generate each hour or less. :)
625 2011-01-09 04:04:10 <lfm> hi
626 2011-01-09 04:04:27 <Diablo-D3> we're not past art yet
627 2011-01-09 04:05:07 <fabianhjr> noagendamarket: do you own the bitcoinmedia twitter account?
628 2011-01-09 04:05:53 <noagendamarket> fabianhjr yes
629 2011-01-09 04:05:54 <nanotube> ;;bc,poolstats
630 2011-01-09 04:05:55 <gribble> {"hashes_ps": 13688473472, "shares": 29248, "active_workers": 264, "round_duration": "2:32:57", "round_started": "2011-01-09 02:32:57", "getwork_ps": 81}
631 2011-01-09 04:06:06 <nanotube> not quite 15... but nice :)
632 2011-01-09 04:06:50 <fabianhjr> noagendamarket: you might want to disable the crawler/spider/bot. It is catching some bad links such as warez and other undesirable stuff. :/
633 2011-01-09 04:07:27 <noagendamarket> hmm I just use twitterfeed and google news
634 2011-01-09 04:15:26 <fabianhjr> Good night. D: my mother is angry again.
635 2011-01-09 04:49:03 <sgornick> Any guess why this transaction wouldn't appear in block explorer hours later?  1MCwBbhNGp5hRm5rC1Aims2YFRe2SXPYKt  2 BTCs sent to the address given for EFF donate page, using MyBitcoin.  Email confirmation: http://pastebin.com/U5hwEFYg
636 2011-01-09 05:18:25 <nanotube> sgornick: hmm, no idea. send them an email and ask. :)
637 2011-01-09 06:20:09 <newsham> why are some protocol timestamp fields 32bits and some 64bits?
638 2011-01-09 06:20:17 <newsham> and what happens in 2038? :)
639 2011-01-09 06:22:36 <kartofeln> is there a version field in the protocol?
640 2011-01-09 06:28:57 <newsham> there is
641 2011-01-09 06:29:18 <newsham> hmm. does the std bitcoin client let you include messages in transactions?
642 2011-01-09 06:29:29 <tcatm> no
643 2011-01-09 06:29:48 <newsham> the protocol itself allows the possibility
644 2011-01-09 06:29:54 <newsham> it would be a useful feature.
645 2011-01-09 06:30:19 <tcatm> the address is the message
646 2011-01-09 06:30:27 <freetx> I believe messages are only supported on 'ip transactions'
647 2011-01-09 06:30:52 <newsham> "It's possible to add arbitrary data to any transaction by just adding some data along with OP_DROP (or ommitting OP_DROP and allowing the value to sit on the stack unused)."
648 2011-01-09 06:30:56 <Diablo-D3> yes, its only on ip transactions
649 2011-01-09 06:31:01 <Diablo-D3> and PLEASE dont use ip transactions
650 2011-01-09 06:31:19 <Diablo-D3> its something that should have never been included in thei protocol
651 2011-01-09 06:31:26 <freetx> moreover, all messages would be completely public
652 2011-01-09 06:31:34 <Diablo-D3> btw, all messages in the chain are public
653 2011-01-09 06:31:50 <kartofeln> I'm not even how one *would* use IP transaction in a not-completely-contrived scenario.
654 2011-01-09 06:32:22 <Diablo-D3> send 50btc to newegg.com
655 2011-01-09 06:32:23 <Diablo-D3> ding.
656 2011-01-09 06:32:59 <newsham> public messages could be very useful.
657 2011-01-09 06:33:12 <Diablo-D3> https://failblog.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/6ae56459-2456-4b08-9a05-c5ad49698491.jpg
658 2011-01-09 06:33:14 <kartofeln> ah.. sounds like it would benefit from being replaced by a dns extension that'd return a bitcoin address for a specific record type.
659 2011-01-09 06:34:13 <Diablo-D3> yup
660 2011-01-09 06:34:17 <Diablo-D3> it'd be much better
661 2011-01-09 06:34:30 <newsham> for example, if you sent a specific message to me with payment, and i sent a 0.01btc payment in return that said "ack transaction number", it would be on public record that the two of use agreed to some message with some payment.
662 2011-01-09 06:34:37 <newsham> that is a useful feature in some situations
663 2011-01-09 06:34:46 <newsham> s/use/us/
664 2011-01-09 06:35:32 <freetx> but couldn't that be done outside the protocol....just post that series on your website
665 2011-01-09 06:35:50 <kartofeln> if it's in the block chain, it's pretty much cast in stone though.
666 2011-01-09 06:35:53 <newsham> are there any open source bitcoin implementations in language other than C/C++?
667 2011-01-09 06:36:18 <newsham> freetxt: it wouldnt be bound to the payment, nor would it be guaranteed by the cpu power behind the hash chain.
668 2011-01-09 06:36:25 <kartofeln> could be good for contracts.. sign your message with pgp when you include it, other party signs it too, provides payment.
669 2011-01-09 06:36:29 <newsham> also the protocol already supports the ability.. its just not in the client
670 2011-01-09 06:36:58 <freetx> good point, but the side effects of messages is going to be a huge increase in database size
671 2011-01-09 06:37:24 <kartofeln> trim the merkle tree?
672 2011-01-09 06:37:28 <newsham> 0.01 exchanges could parasitically use the bitcoin block chain for publishing information w/ good guarantees
673 2011-01-09 06:37:29 <kartofeln> when is that supposed to happen anhow?
674 2011-01-09 06:37:45 <newsham> freetx: right, but i can do that already... possible attack point on btc?
675 2011-01-09 06:37:52 <newsham> tons of small tx's with huge scripts...
676 2011-01-09 06:38:49 <newsham> basically the block chain is a unspoofable way to publish information bound to a time (or at least an ordering).
677 2011-01-09 06:39:03 <newsham> and its used for one purpose (eliminate double spending0 but could easily be hijacked for other uses
678 2011-01-09 06:41:46 <freetx> yes, it would eventually devolve into people sending .01 btc back and forth, using bitcoin protocol as unspoofable chat method
679 2011-01-09 06:42:15 <newsham> so lets do it! ;-)
680 2011-01-09 06:42:45 <newsham> whats the purpose for a powerful scripting engine in the protocol, btw?
681 2011-01-09 06:44:21 <newsham> is that to allow for transaction fees ?
682 2011-01-09 06:46:38 <newsham> "bit-twitter"? :)
683 2011-01-09 06:47:31 <freetx> Ha. at least people would need to pay to announce what they had for breakfast to the rest of the non-interested world
684 2011-01-09 06:48:01 <kartofeln> they could be paying themselves :-/
685 2011-01-09 06:48:57 <freetx> yes, in which case BTC would grind to a halt via American Idol fans.
686 2011-01-09 06:49:13 <newsham> is there a separate test bitcoin network?  or is the same infrastructure used for both test and non-test stuff?
687 2011-01-09 06:49:30 <kartofeln> would it? do we have an idea of the scale of tx/seq BTC could handle?
688 2011-01-09 06:49:42 <kartofeln> probably as a function of the current active node count.
689 2011-01-09 06:49:48 <newsham> is there a current limit to number of TX's per block?  if so, there's a natural rate limit to bittwitter
690 2011-01-09 06:49:55 <newsham> (and a DoS attack I guess)
691 2011-01-09 06:50:16 <newsham> i guess since the net is based on cpu voting, the majority of clients could just be reprogrammed to reject the messages
692 2011-01-09 06:50:37 <kartofeln> but what if they didn't? how much would be too much?
693 2011-01-09 06:50:43 <newsham> also TX fees could mitigate
694 2011-01-09 06:51:12 <newsham> if there's spamming of TXs, you could just reject messages that didnt have enough tx fee
695 2011-01-09 06:51:25 <newsham> at soem point spamming would be too expensive
696 2011-01-09 06:51:27 <kartofeln> newsham: there's a -testnet switch on the bitcoin client that may or may not enable a separate test bitcoin network.
697 2011-01-09 06:51:38 <kartofeln> I think it does, but I'm not positive.
698 2011-01-09 06:51:48 <newsham> kart: ahh.  do you knwo if it uses the same pool of hosts or if it uses a diff one?
699 2011-01-09 06:52:05 <kartofeln> I think you end up with a pool of whoever else started their clients with -testnet.
700 2011-01-09 06:52:26 <kartofeln> aka a tiny tiny pool, in all likelihood.
701 2011-01-09 06:52:47 <kartofeln> https://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=363.0
702 2011-01-09 06:52:50 <bitbot> TEST network, for experimental development and hacking
703 2011-01-09 06:54:50 <kartofeln> hmm. I think I'm going to go generate a million bitcoins on the test network. that'll sooth my nerves.
704 2011-01-09 06:55:07 <newsham> hmmm soon test net will be the new bittwitter! :)
705 2011-01-09 07:25:02 <xelister> we can have few blocks that are number 2020 at same time?
706 2011-01-09 07:25:17 <xelister> and then each block is identified by hash (what hash exactly?)
707 2011-01-09 07:25:35 <xelister> and after some time we make decission which blocks-chain is the longest and throw out other blocks?
708 2011-01-09 07:33:26 <samfisher> Hi. Is someone in here playing with forex, stock exchanges etc?