1 2011-02-20 00:01:57 <TheKid> lunaphyte: what?
  2 2011-02-20 00:03:23 <lunaphyte> just offering up the name of a program which is useful in determining what files are, since it sounded like you might not be familiar with it.
  3 2011-02-20 00:05:35 <TheKid> ah, thanks
  4 2011-02-20 00:16:19 <Blitzboom> how does the key pool work?
  5 2011-02-20 00:16:38 <Blitzboom> 100 in the keypool and it randomly gives you one of them?
  6 2011-02-20 00:16:51 <tcatm> oldest first
  7 2011-02-20 00:17:34 <Blitzboom> why cant i generate the same adress as before then?
  8 2011-02-20 00:17:39 <Blitzboom> with an earlier wallet
  9 2011-02-20 00:18:07 <Blitzboom> wait, nvm. i guess it is the same
 10 2011-02-20 00:19:08 <Blitzboom> yup
 11 2011-02-20 00:19:24 <Blitzboom> thats cool
 12 2011-02-20 00:20:47 <Blitzboom> will there always be such a high variance in the time between blocks?
 13 2011-02-20 00:21:07 <Blitzboom> i guess thats how it must be
 14 2011-02-20 00:21:36 <nanotube> yes
 15 2011-02-20 00:21:45 <Blitzboom> because its a lottery
 16 2011-02-20 00:27:16 <grondilu> an other auction for a gold coin !!  http://www.biddingpond.com/item.php?id=312
 17 2011-02-20 00:28:02 <tcatm> Hm reminds me that I still have to make a golden bitcoin
 18 2011-02-20 00:29:54 <Blitzboom> didnt know of this site yet
 19 2011-02-20 00:29:56 <Blitzboom> cool
 20 2011-02-20 00:36:27 <validus> i was glad to see the gaming site on there that is awesome he does that
 21 2011-02-20 00:42:26 <bitcoiner> gaming site ?
 22 2011-02-20 00:55:42 <glassresistor> hey i lost my list of blocks
 23 2011-02-20 00:56:07 <glassresistor> anyone got a backup of all the blocks up to some recent time?
 24 2011-02-20 00:56:31 <glassresistor> i tried to use a blkindex but it said it had read errors
 25 2011-02-20 00:57:15 <jgarzik> luke-jr: what is a URL that will display an RPCv1 patch, diff'd versus mainline?  ie. the final patch that would be applied to bitcoin.
 26 2011-02-20 00:58:12 <glassresistor> i have an old one but it said it couldn't use it, i assume it a version problem
 27 2011-02-20 00:58:44 <luke-jr> jgarzik: I'm not sure how to do that on a web interface
 28 2011-02-20 00:59:13 <luke-jr> git fetch git://gitorious.org/bitcoin/spesmilo.git tonal && git diff -r b1a657a..FETCH_HEAD # I think
 29 2011-02-20 00:59:18 <luke-jr> err
 30 2011-02-20 00:59:23 <luke-jr> that's the wrong repo
 31 2011-02-20 00:59:48 <luke-jr> git fetch git://gitorious.org/bitcoin/bitcoin.git neutral && git diff -r b1a657a..FETCH_HEAD # I think
 32 2011-02-20 01:00:27 <glassresistor> is there a way to get bitcoind to connect through a local computer so itll dl the blocks quickly?
 33 2011-02-20 01:01:30 <citiz3n> i think you can sneakernet the block file over to a different system
 34 2011-02-20 01:01:49 <luke-jr> jgarzik: that work for you?
 35 2011-02-20 01:02:21 <jgarzik> luke-jr: if you want people to review it, you need an easy Web URL with the patch
 36 2011-02-20 01:02:59 <luke-jr> jgarzik: does GitHub do it? could you pull it somewhere there, and make a URI for it?
 37 2011-02-20 01:03:16 <glassresistor> seriously no one can send me there blkindex.dat file
 38 2011-02-20 01:03:31 <glassresistor> i don't want to wait like 10 hours to test my radeon uild
 39 2011-02-20 01:03:51 <bk128-Droid> Not me
 40 2011-02-20 01:04:05 <bk128-Droid> If I was on my laptop I could :)
 41 2011-02-20 01:04:50 <glassresistor> wish bitcoind let you connect through an ip, then it coul download from my laptop
 42 2011-02-20 01:05:26 <glassresistor> but for some reason when i copied the blk file it said it wasn't valid
 43 2011-02-20 01:05:46 <jgarzik> luke-jr: create a for-review branch, with just one commit ( git diff b1a657a..FETCH_HEAD )
 44 2011-02-20 01:05:57 <jgarzik> luke-jr: then your web stuff should work as-is
 45 2011-02-20 01:06:11 <luke-jr> jgarzik: someone might get tempted to merge that branch? :P
 46 2011-02-20 01:06:19 <jgarzik> luke-jr: you never know...
 47 2011-02-20 01:06:44 <jgarzik> luke-jr: a single commit will be the final form when merged into bitcoin anyway, so that needs to happen eventually.
 48 2011-02-20 01:07:02 <bk128-Droid> I had to copy 2 files for the blocks. The index and blk001.dat or something
 49 2011-02-20 01:07:08 <luke-jr> jgarzik: it shouldn't be, it should be a simple pull
 50 2011-02-20 01:07:36 <luke-jr> oh, you mean the merge commit?
 51 2011-02-20 01:08:09 <jgarzik> luke-jr: I mean the final, ready-to-be-merged form should be a single commit, which is then submitted as a pull request.  We don't want to import your entire devel history of this patch.
 52 2011-02-20 01:08:28 <jgarzik> luke-jr: as with the Linux kernel, that keeps the tree clean for bisection
 53 2011-02-20 01:08:37 <glassresistor> so how do i join a pool?
 54 2011-02-20 01:09:00 <jgarzik> glassresistor: read the instructions at http://mining.bitcoin.cz/
 55 2011-02-20 01:09:31 <luke-jr> jgarzik: that sounds like it defeats the entire point of a DVCS
 56 2011-02-20 01:12:19 <jgarzik> luke-jr: the original author of git disagrees
 57 2011-02-20 01:12:29 <soultcer> noooooo
 58 2011-02-20 01:12:34 <jgarzik> read Linus's many rants about bisection and a decent history :)
 59 2011-02-20 01:12:35 <glassresistor> jgarzik: that was helpful but how do i join them after i register is the what getwork is work?
 60 2011-02-20 01:12:35 <luke-jr> you could use Subversion to get the same functionality
 61 2011-02-20 01:12:51 <luke-jr> jgarzik: decent history != merge-only history
 62 2011-02-20 01:12:52 <jgarzik> glassresistor: I cannot parse that question
 63 2011-02-20 01:13:25 <soultcer> jgarzik: It is much better to submit multiple patches if you want your new stuff accepted into Linux
 64 2011-02-20 01:13:45 <soultcer> Each patch should change only small, logical blocks, so that it still stands for itself and is easy to review
 65 2011-02-20 01:13:59 <luke-jr> jgarzik: a decent history, should have each logical change as a commit
 66 2011-02-20 01:14:21 <soultcer> luke-jr: Couldn't have said it better!
 67 2011-02-20 01:14:30 <jgarzik> soultcer: not quite correct.  each change should be a logical BISECTABLE change; size has nothing to do with it.
 68 2011-02-20 01:14:57 <jgarzik> early devel history almost always includes crap that doesn't build
 69 2011-02-20 01:15:05 <jgarzik> we keep that stuff out of the Linux tree
 70 2011-02-20 01:15:34 <luke-jr> you shouldn't need to bisect merged tree commits, unless it was the merge that introduced the problem
 71 2011-02-20 01:15:52 <luke-jr> that would indicate a flaw in the bisect algorithm, IMO
 72 2011-02-20 01:16:37 <soultcer> jgarzik: I almost agree. It shouldn't be a BISECTABLE change, it should be a logical change (logical changes of course are bisectable)
 73 2011-02-20 01:16:50 <jgarzik> soultcer: for example, you don't merge kernel patch series like this:  commit A:  "raw driver draft; doesn't build"   commit B: "build fixes"  commit C: "more driver fixes"    You just merge the new driver.
 74 2011-02-20 01:17:19 <jgarzik> You don't merge the entire history (A/B/C)
 75 2011-02-20 01:17:19 <soultcer> jgarzik: But you don't see a commit called "Add completely new filesystem called ext4"
 76 2011-02-20 01:17:42 <soultcer> It
 77 2011-02-20 01:17:58 <soultcer> It's about having a nice stack of patches thath builds on each other
 78 2011-02-20 01:18:04 <jgarzik> soultcer: Incorrect; that is commit ac27a0ec112a089f1a5102bc8dffc79c8c815571
 79 2011-02-20 01:18:29 <luke-jr> s/don't/shouldn't
 80 2011-02-20 01:18:30 <jgarzik> soultcer: new code generally does not build unless it's all together in one patch!
 81 2011-02-20 01:18:51 <luke-jr> the first ext4 commit should be "Copied ext3 filesystem, and renamed it to ext4"
 82 2011-02-20 01:18:57 <jgarzik> it is
 83 2011-02-20 01:19:27 <Blitzboom> how long does the client wait if he cant confirm a transaction?
 84 2011-02-20 01:19:37 <Blitzboom> if it*
 85 2011-02-20 01:20:00 <tcatm> Blitzboom: 1 block + random interval upto 30 mins IIRC
 86 2011-02-20 01:20:25 <Blitzboom> what does it show if its definitely unconfirmed?
 87 2011-02-20 01:20:42 <jgarzik> wait...  until what?  until resending?  until giving up completely?
 88 2011-02-20 01:20:49 <tcatm> define "definitely unconfirmed"
 89 2011-02-20 01:20:58 <soultcer> jgarzik: The commit you mention proves my point. It is just the beginning of ext4 work by copying data from ext3
 90 2011-02-20 01:21:03 <soultcer> Which is a nice logical step
 91 2011-02-20 01:21:14 <soultcer> Hm, kind of like a transaction in a database
 92 2011-02-20 01:21:58 <luke-jr> RPCv1 is multiple logical steps
 93 2011-02-20 01:22:23 <luke-jr> first, add server support. then client support. then format amounts with a trailing ".0" to workaround buggy libraries on the other end
 94 2011-02-20 01:22:51 <luke-jr> (I think there's a few others in between, but they all compile and work)
 95 2011-02-20 01:23:21 <luke-jr> if it didn't compile, I'd be quickly doing a --amend :P
 96 2011-02-20 01:27:42 <jgarzik> soultcer: yes, it's a logical step...  that notably did not import a big long transaction history.  Importing foreign histories is something we make an -exception- for with new code.  We made an exception for btrfs, most recently.  But generally we do -not- import pre-initial-merge histories, for very good reasons.  It clutters the tree with crap.
 97 2011-02-20 01:27:43 <glassresistor> jgarzik: once i register my workers how do i tell me workers to send hashes to the pool
 98 2011-02-20 01:28:08 <jgarzik> glassresistor: set your username, password, hostname and port in your mining client
 99 2011-02-20 01:28:38 <bk128-Droid> glassresistor: look at the guide on the forum
100 2011-02-20 01:28:45 <soultcer> jgarzik: I totally agree on not importing developement history. But when you create a large patch do the kernel, you generally split it up into logical chunks, creating a full patchset
101 2011-02-20 01:29:03 <luke-jr> jgarzik: sounds like a problem with the tree display tool
102 2011-02-20 01:29:30 <Slix`> So.. when you connect to the bitcoin network, you first need the ip address of another node. What would that node be called? Bootstrap node? Initializer node? Uhh..
103 2011-02-20 01:29:35 <jgarzik> luke-jr: no, it's lessons learned from the biggest git project in the world
104 2011-02-20 01:29:35 <luke-jr> and one reason Bazaar is nicer than Git ;)
105 2011-02-20 01:29:46 <jgarzik> luke-jr: people put crap in their trees, which cannot be bisected
106 2011-02-20 01:29:57 <luke-jr> jgarzik: again, it doesn't *need* to be bisected
107 2011-02-20 01:30:03 <luke-jr> unless it does. then you want it there.
108 2011-02-20 01:30:07 <jgarzik> luke-jr: then put it all in one freakin patch :)
109 2011-02-20 01:30:16 <glassresistor> jgarzik: oh so this onl works for gpu miners, i dont know of any cpu miners that do that
110 2011-02-20 01:30:23 <soultcer> jgarzik: But a patchset, where each patch stands for itself and is only 1000 lines of code changed it much easier to handle than one patch with 1 million lines of code changed
111 2011-02-20 01:30:24 <luke-jr> if it needs to be bisected, a giant "does everything" patch is a bigger pain
112 2011-02-20 01:30:42 <jgarzik> glassresistor: all miners except the built-in bitcoin miner accept username/password/host/port
113 2011-02-20 01:30:43 <luke-jr> merging only single patches, is what Subversion does best.
114 2011-02-20 01:31:19 <Slix`> :<
115 2011-02-20 01:31:19 <soultcer> Afaik Linus rejected single big patches before. They are just impossible to review and don't help bisecting at all.
116 2011-02-20 01:32:01 <jgarzik> soultcer: /changes/ to the kernel are split up.  New features are not.
117 2011-02-20 01:32:29 <jgarzik> or, you'll see change (4 lines), change (56 lines), new feature (10,000 lines)
118 2011-02-20 01:32:53 <jgarzik> soultcer: I think I have a little bit more experience dealing with Linus on this issue than you ;-)
119 2011-02-20 01:33:50 <soultcer> jgarzik: I don't doubt that you have. I think we are both trying to say the same thing, we are just phrasing it both so different that we think the other is saying the wrong thing
120 2011-02-20 01:34:23 <soultcer> Of course you can't split up new features, because either a feature is there and working or it is not
121 2011-02-20 01:34:32 <glassresistor> jgarzik: even bitcoind?
122 2011-02-20 01:34:47 <glassresistor> off the git clone
123 2011-02-20 01:35:23 <soultcer> But even if you add a new feature, my guess is that you will try to do it in small incremental patches, like with ext4, which was a patch series
124 2011-02-20 01:35:47 <luke-jr> the point is to split a big new feature up into multiple smaller features, and use 1 commit for each of those
125 2011-02-20 01:36:10 <soultcer> Of course, a commit that doesn't compile is not useful
126 2011-02-20 01:37:13 <luke-jr> jgarzik: 1 command is *so* hard&
127 2011-02-20 01:37:37 <luke-jr> anyone who doesn't already have a git repo, isn't going to understand the code anyway
128 2011-02-20 01:45:40 <xelister> As we all know, Pulse Audio sucks a fat donkey's dong.  I offer 10 usd (15 btc) to who ever shows me how to configure PA on Ubuntu so that it plays as many users at once correctly (low latency, no problems, selects normal audio not HDMI shit etc)
129 2011-02-20 01:46:46 <bk128-Droid> Wish
130 2011-02-20 01:46:46 <luke-jr> xelister: I'd personally suggest offering it for whoever shows you how to disable/remove that crap without breaking the rest of Ubuntu :P
131 2011-02-20 01:46:58 <bk128-Droid> Wish 10usd was 15btc
132 2011-02-20 01:47:08 <glassresistor> sweet got the radeon working
133 2011-02-20 01:47:15 <glassresistor> 110Mh/s woot
134 2011-02-20 01:47:18 <xelister> luke-jr: unfortunatelly it seems SDL based games can only use PA shit to play audio
135 2011-02-20 01:47:32 <bk128-Droid> Which one radeon?
136 2011-02-20 01:47:41 <glassresistor> 5750
137 2011-02-20 01:47:43 <bk128-Droid> Which radeon*
138 2011-02-20 01:47:48 <bk128-Droid> Cool
139 2011-02-20 01:47:48 <luke-jr> xelister: nonsense
140 2011-02-20 01:48:13 <luke-jr> xelister: SDL is older than PA
141 2011-02-20 01:48:15 <glassresistor> i bought and plan on returning it do get a 60XX, but wanted to make sure i got it working first
142 2011-02-20 01:48:34 <luke-jr> glassresistor: 60XX suck
143 2011-02-20 01:48:46 <glassresistor> luke-jr: what card do i want
144 2011-02-20 01:48:50 <bk128-Droid> For Bitcoin.
145 2011-02-20 01:48:50 <glassresistor> <300$
146 2011-02-20 01:48:53 <glassresistor> yeah
147 2011-02-20 01:49:02 <bk128-Droid> 5970
148 2011-02-20 01:49:04 <luke-jr> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mining_hardware_comparison
149 2011-02-20 01:49:10 <luke-jr> bk128-Droid: he said <$300
150 2011-02-20 01:49:28 <bk128-Droid> Oh.5870 are around $200 now
151 2011-02-20 01:49:30 <luke-jr> glassresistor: I'd go for 5870 or 5850
152 2011-02-20 01:49:48 <jgarzik> luke-jr: The principle is to make reviewing your code as easy as possible.  Bitching to potential reviewers about their laziness is quite counterproductive.  This is why Linus requests unified diff in pull requests ("unified" == all commits smushed together into a single diff).
153 2011-02-20 01:49:54 <tcatm> xelister: pulseaudio --system?
154 2011-02-20 01:50:05 <jgarzik> Make reviewing your code as easy as a single web click
155 2011-02-20 01:50:06 <luke-jr> jgarzik: um, no. unified diff is a FORMAT.
156 2011-02-20 01:50:14 <jgarzik> luke-jr: again, you are being too literal
157 2011-02-20 01:50:23 <luke-jr> jgarzik: git can easily display a diff from one tree to another
158 2011-02-20 01:50:34 <luke-jr> eg, that one-liner I posted
159 2011-02-20 01:50:47 <luke-jr> jgarzik: no, you're redefining terms with set meanings
160 2011-02-20 01:51:06 <xelister> tcatm: in such setup PA gladly proceeds to sucking the beformentioned dong, by giving me a latency of like 100-300 ms.  Also is likes to select my VIDEOcard as sound output.
161 2011-02-20 01:51:12 <luke-jr> "unified diff" is a diff file format that mixes + and - lines
162 2011-02-20 01:52:12 <jgarzik> I included a definition because my usage was different from the standard definition.  I can write "unified unified diff" if you really want to.
163 2011-02-20 01:52:15 <tcatm> xelister: what's your pulseaudio config?
164 2011-02-20 01:52:17 <xelister> + jgarzik gives up
165 2011-02-20 01:52:23 <xelister> no wait
166 2011-02-20 01:52:26 <jgarzik> hehe
167 2011-02-20 01:52:32 <xelister> @@ #btcoin-dev
168 2011-02-20 01:52:40 <xelister> - jgarzik gives up
169 2011-02-20 01:52:42 <xelister> + jgarzik stayes positive
170 2011-02-20 01:53:00 <luke-jr> jgarzik: 'combined' would work
171 2011-02-20 01:53:05 <xelister> tcatm: dunno.. the default one I suppose... plus tried enabled native plugin something.. didn't helped
172 2011-02-20 01:53:52 <xelister> there is too much fail in software world. Windows. Linux. Audio systems. Pulse audio. Radeon drivers.
173 2011-02-20 01:53:57 <jgarzik> reviewers need a combined, unified diff.  happy?  :)
174 2011-02-20 01:54:07 <tcatm> xelister: read the source (pulse audio really lacks good documentation and the defaults suck)
175 2011-02-20 01:54:20 <xelister> tcatm: that is exactly what I want to avoid
176 2011-02-20 01:54:22 <jgarzik> The overall point is to reduce barriers to reviewers as much as possible.  That's why git-hardy Linux kernel hackers post patches to a mailing list.  To get reviewed.
177 2011-02-20 01:54:25 <xelister> I want to play ,y fucking video game
178 2011-02-20 01:54:37 <xelister> not suck milion geek's dongs by reading their stupid documentation
179 2011-02-20 01:54:43 <xelister> as user I want to USE software not develop it :<
180 2011-02-20 01:54:44 <xelister> ;)\n261299
181 2011-02-20 01:55:15 <xelister> after whole day in software dev I would like things to Just Work ???
182 2011-02-20 01:56:09 <tcatm> well I tracked down a pa bug few weeks ago and at last the source told me why it just can't work properly (code assumes it can do things just because most drivers can do them, without good exception handling) :)
183 2011-02-20 01:57:16 <hwolf> I am interested in doing a mining pool, I have alot of reasources but new to bitcoin.  anybody have some experiance and want to chat?
184 2011-02-20 01:57:38 <tcatm> hwolf: sure, what kind of hardware do you have?
185 2011-02-20 01:58:05 <hwolf> I have 3 full cabinets in different parts of the usa, some ibm blade severers (full) and a bunch of dell servers etc
186 2011-02-20 01:58:17 <xelister> hwolf: in writting a pool?
187 2011-02-20 01:58:19 <hwolf> of course about 1/2 of it is being used, 1/2 idle
188 2011-02-20 01:58:27 <xelister> btw are there now existing open source pools?
189 2011-02-20 01:58:32 <tcatm> hwolf: with ATI GPUs?
190 2011-02-20 01:58:43 <TheKid> tcatm: I believe he means host a mining pool
191 2011-02-20 01:58:53 <jgarzik> xelister: there is open source pool software.  I don't know if anybody is running it in production.
192 2011-02-20 01:58:54 <hwolf> ah, no just have cpu power for hosting the pool
193 2011-02-20 01:59:05 <hwolf> but I am new,
194 2011-02-20 01:59:08 <xelister> jgarzik: you mean your pool?
195 2011-02-20 01:59:11 <xelister> url?
196 2011-02-20 01:59:24 <jgarzik> xelister: http://yyz.us/bitcoin/poold.py
197 2011-02-20 01:59:41 <xelister> hmm it works fine?
198 2011-02-20 01:59:52 <xelister> it tracks per-user "score" to divide payout?
199 2011-02-20 01:59:57 <jgarzik> xelister: yes
200 2011-02-20 02:00:31 <TheKid> hwolf: if you get a pool setup that has a nice interface, I'd surely join :)
201 2011-02-20 02:00:36 <jgarzik> woo!  My CPU miner won the lottery, and got a share in a short block.  Looking forward to that super-huge 0.06 BTC payout!
202 2011-02-20 02:00:52 <Kiba> hmm
203 2011-02-20 02:01:26 <jgarzik> slush's poll daily average reward has fallen quite a bit
204 2011-02-20 02:01:40 <jgarzik> over 50% decline
205 2011-02-20 02:02:58 <TheKid> jgarzik: two really long blocks today
206 2011-02-20 02:03:48 <xelister> jgarzik: is it doing payouts?   it deletes some part of the shares-credit it seems?
207 2011-02-20 02:21:58 <jgarzik> xelister: payouts are a separate script.  pool server just collects shares.  when a winning solution is found, shares are converted into credits.  credits are payable, but the payout is not done directly by the server.
208 2011-02-20 02:31:51 <necrodearia> Are there any experts on one or more programming languages (any language) that would be willing to volunteer their expertise and also to receive recurring profits from activity relating to the particular programming language?
209 2011-02-20 02:31:55 <xelister> I see, cool
210 2011-02-20 02:32:09 <necrodearia> If so, please come to #witcoin and indicate which languages you consider yourself an expert on.
211 2011-02-20 02:32:41 <xelister> lolcode counts?
212 2011-02-20 02:33:21 <TheKid> necrodearia: does english count?
213 2011-02-20 02:34:40 <glassresistor> just order an 5850
214 2011-02-20 02:35:00 <TheKid> glassresistor: did you get the link I posted
215 2011-02-20 02:35:21 <TheKid> for the blkindex.dat
216 2011-02-20 02:35:36 <glassresistor> no sorry but i already got them downloaded thanks though
217 2011-02-20 02:36:21 <TheKid> ah okay
218 2011-02-20 02:45:56 <noagendamarket> TheKid only if you built a bitcoin app that promised to translate languages but actually steals a wallet lol
219 2011-02-20 02:46:40 <noagendamarket> this is why we need a third party code review site
220 2011-02-20 02:47:55 <TheKid> noagendamarket: I was going to do that
221 2011-02-20 02:48:10 <chaord> i've never built a c++ project from source before, I've cloned the github repo...what command do I run to build it?
222 2011-02-20 02:48:11 <TheKid> then I realized I'm not knowledgable enough, I don't think
223 2011-02-20 02:49:43 <noagendamarket> TheKid you could help us then :)
224 2011-02-20 02:49:44 <luke-jr> chaord: give up while you're ahead XD
225 2011-02-20 02:50:00 <noagendamarket> lol
226 2011-02-20 02:50:09 <TheKid> noagendamarket: I'd be glad to
227 2011-02-20 02:50:13 <chaord> luke-jr: yah...i don't really want to make a habbit out of it ;)
228 2011-02-20 02:50:33 <luke-jr> chaord: the wx BitCoin client is one of the most difficult programs to build
229 2011-02-20 02:50:37 <noagendamarket> TheKid come to #witcoin
230 2011-02-20 02:50:56 <chaord> hmm...well i only really need bitcoind to be built
231 2011-02-20 02:52:30 <chaord> ah, i'm an idiot...i didn't see there is a build-unix.txt in the repo
232 2011-02-20 02:58:19 <nanotube> chaord: 'make -f makefile.unix bitcoind'
233 2011-02-20 02:58:37 <chaord> yah...thanks ;) we'll see how it goes
234 2011-02-20 02:59:30 <nanotube> chaord: you need a bunch of boost dependencies, plus berkleydb
235 2011-02-20 03:08:16 <afed_> ;;bc,stats
236 2011-02-20 03:08:18 <gribble> Current Blocks: 109221 | Current Difficulty: 36459.88692508 | Next Difficulty At Block: 110879 | Next Difficulty In: 1658 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 2 days, 1 hour, 22 minutes, and 56 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 46480.11168468
237 2011-02-20 03:09:14 <hozer> can I start bitcoin with gui AND in server mode?
238 2011-02-20 03:10:07 <Lachesis> hozer, sure
239 2011-02-20 03:10:11 <Lachesis> bitcoin -server
240 2011-02-20 03:10:16 <Lachesis> ^^ run that command
241 2011-02-20 03:11:18 <hozer> bitcoin --server silently fails ;)
242 2011-02-20 03:11:23 <niftyzero1> ;;bc,stats
243 2011-02-20 03:11:25 <gribble> Current Blocks: 109223 | Current Difficulty: 36459.88692508 | Next Difficulty At Block: 110879 | Next Difficulty In: 1656 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 2 days, 0 hours, 12 minutes, and 0 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 46655.31589467
244 2011-02-20 03:11:48 <Lachesis> hozer, that's strange
245 2011-02-20 03:11:50 <hozer> does anything happen if you're working on a block and the difficulty changes?
246 2011-02-20 03:11:51 <Lachesis> platform?
247 2011-02-20 03:11:56 <hozer> linux debian
248 2011-02-20 03:12:00 <Lachesis> hozer, oh oh --server
249 2011-02-20 03:12:12 <Lachesis> yeah, bitcoin uses strange args
250 2011-02-20 03:12:26 <Lachesis> hozer, diff only changes when a block is found
251 2011-02-20 03:12:34 <Lachesis> and when a block is found, you give up and start trying to find the next one
252 2011-02-20 03:13:14 <hozer> thus pools provide an advantage?
253 2011-02-20 03:13:20 <Lachesis> hozer, how so?
254 2011-02-20 03:13:33 <Lachesis> keep in mind, you're not "making progress" towards a block
255 2011-02-20 03:13:40 <Lachesis> each hash has an equal chance to win
256 2011-02-20 03:14:25 <hozer> I'm trying to figure out what the downside of running miner(s) against my own bitcoind vs a pool server is
257 2011-02-20 03:14:37 <Lachesis> hozer, luck, basically
258 2011-02-20 03:14:45 <Lachesis> in a pool, you typically pay a small fee
259 2011-02-20 03:14:49 <citiz3n> that and not being able to tell if it's actually working
260 2011-02-20 03:14:50 <Lachesis> and get a lower variance in return
261 2011-02-20 03:14:58 <citiz3n> i was mining at a rate where i should have gotten a block every 10 hours
262 2011-02-20 03:15:05 <citiz3n> and in nearly 36 hours i did not discover anything
263 2011-02-20 03:15:11 <citiz3n> so it was very bad luck, or something was wrong
264 2011-02-20 03:15:14 <Lachesis> citiz3n, was there a problem?
265 2011-02-20 03:15:24 <Lachesis> also, when was this?
266 2011-02-20 03:15:33 <citiz3n> right before the difficulty change
267 2011-02-20 03:15:37 <citiz3n> the days leading up to the change
268 2011-02-20 03:15:58 <Lachesis> something like 3.2 GHz?
269 2011-02-20 03:16:02 <Lachesis> that's not bad
270 2011-02-20 03:16:06 <Lachesis> GH/s
271 2011-02-20 03:16:10 <citiz3n> yeah
272 2011-02-20 03:16:10 <Lachesis> wrong unit, sry
273 2011-02-20 03:16:24 <Lachesis> citiz3n, that's pretty strange
274 2011-02-20 03:18:21 <Lachesis> that's a <5% probability
275 2011-02-20 03:18:27 <Lachesis> i mean, bad luck happens, but that's really bad
276 2011-02-20 03:18:31 <Lachesis> did you switch to pooled?
277 2011-02-20 03:26:13 <citiz3n> yes i switched back to the pool
278 2011-02-20 03:26:43 <xelister> citiz3n: are you sure it was not mined
279 2011-02-20 03:26:56 <citiz3n> what was not mined?
280 2011-02-20 03:27:10 <xelister> the block when you runned without pool
281 2011-02-20 03:27:26 <citiz3n> doesn't it switch to a new block then
282 2011-02-20 03:27:45 <citiz3n> i was running the windows bitcoin.exe -server
283 2011-02-20 03:27:57 <citiz3n> and using m0mchil's miner to hook up to it
284 2011-02-20 03:28:44 <citiz3n> was i doing something wrong?
285 2011-02-20 03:28:59 <citiz3n> it was sitting there displaying a hashrate the whole time - on all of my miners
286 2011-02-20 03:30:14 <xelister> citiz3n: what miner are you using
287 2011-02-20 03:30:42 <xelister> citiz3n: you are using some GPU miner, right? what speed, 3200 MHash/sec ?
288 2011-02-20 03:31:08 <xelister> oh ok m0mchil's... yea it should work. perhaps just a really bad luck
289 2011-02-20 03:33:47 <niftyzero1> a 5% 3-day event will happen once every two months
290 2011-02-20 03:34:28 <Lachesis> i should really audit the miners
291 2011-02-20 03:34:33 <Lachesis> actually, nah
292 2011-02-20 03:34:35 <Lachesis> they work for the pool
293 2011-02-20 03:34:46 <Lachesis> probably not maliciously designed to waste hashes as heat :)
294 2011-02-20 03:35:01 <Lachesis> btw, i updated my calculator to allow you to set difficulty factor
295 2011-02-20 03:35:16 <citiz3n> nice
296 2011-02-20 03:35:20 <Lachesis> i've got a lot of work to do to catch up to bitcoin now days :)
297 2011-02-20 03:36:26 <nanotube> Lachesis: oh, you are the creator of the calculator eh? nice. :)
298 2011-02-20 03:36:45 <nanotube> you were the inspiration for the gribble calculator. :)
299 2011-02-20 03:38:06 <Lachesis> nanotube, ty ty
300 2011-02-20 03:38:21 <Lachesis> i stopped paying attention to bitcoins for a long time
301 2011-02-20 03:38:31 <Lachesis> now like 2/3 of my website is outdated / wrong
302 2011-02-20 03:38:44 <nanotube> hehe hope you didn't get rid of your old bitcoins. :)
303 2011-02-20 03:38:53 <Lachesis> oh my god, i had like 10k at one point
304 2011-02-20 03:38:58 <Lachesis> now i'm down to 500 or so
305 2011-02-20 03:39:53 <niftyzero1> is there a plot of difficulty over time anywhere?  preferably on a log scale?  feels like the doubling time just got shorter
306 2011-02-20 03:43:05 <nanotube> Lachesis: what happened?
307 2011-02-20 03:43:13 <nanotube> ;;whatis #bitcoin-otc netgraph
308 2011-02-20 03:43:14 <gribble> Graphs of historical network power: http://bitcoin.sipa.be/speed-lin.png (linear), http://bitcoin.sipa.be/speed.png (log)
309 2011-02-20 03:43:32 <nanotube> niftyzero1: --^
310 2011-02-20 03:44:14 <Lachesis> nanotube, i sold them during the first boom, mostly
311 2011-02-20 03:44:15 <Lachesis> i'm not unhappy
312 2011-02-20 03:44:28 <Lachesis> i bought $50 bucks worth and sold them for way more than that
313 2011-02-20 03:44:31 <Lachesis> like 1500 total over time
314 2011-02-20 03:44:32 <Lachesis> but still
315 2011-02-20 03:44:57 <nanotube> heh
316 2011-02-20 03:44:59 <nanotube> ic ;)
317 2011-02-20 03:47:20 <Blitzboom> new transactions i make are displayed as 0/not confirmed although they are confirmed
318 2011-02-20 03:47:24 <Blitzboom> why is that?
319 2011-02-20 03:47:39 <tcatm> ?
320 2011-02-20 03:48:11 <Blitzboom> when i delete blk0001 and blkindex, it gets back to normal
321 2011-02-20 03:48:20 <tcatm> Either they are confirmed or they are not. They can't be both assuming both clients have the same blockchain.
322 2011-02-20 03:48:58 <Blitzboom> i told you, they are confirmed. according to blockexplorer. and once i deleted blk*, it updated the confirmations
323 2011-02-20 03:49:58 <tcatm> So everything is fine?
324 2011-02-20 03:50:02 <Blitzboom> no
325 2011-02-20 03:50:09 <Blitzboom> i want it to update the confirmations
326 2011-02-20 03:50:17 <Blitzboom> without having to rescan all blocks
327 2011-02-20 03:50:44 <Blitzboom> but yeah, BTC-speaking, everything is fine
328 2011-02-20 03:51:02 <tcatm> So what happens is this? You make a transactions, blockexplorer show confirmations but your client isn't showing them?
329 2011-02-20 03:51:34 <Blitzboom> yes. it remains at 0 confirmations until i delete blk0001 and/or blkindex
330 2011-02-20 03:51:44 <Lachesis> what does the number returned by bitcoin after sending a transaction mean?
331 2011-02-20 03:51:56 <Lachesis> in rpc?
332 2011-02-20 03:52:20 <tcatm> Does it show the correct blocknumber in statusbar/getinfo?
333 2011-02-20 03:52:30 <Blitzboom> ;;bc,stats
334 2011-02-20 03:52:32 <gribble> Current Blocks: 109228 | Current Difficulty: 36459.88692508 | Next Difficulty At Block: 110879 | Next Difficulty In: 1651 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 1 day, 23 hours, 5 minutes, and 19 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 46722.81975131
335 2011-02-20 03:52:39 <Blitzboom> hmm. no
336 2011-02-20 03:52:40 <tcatm> Lachesis: It's the transaction ID (hash of the TX)
337 2011-02-20 03:52:44 <Blitzboom> 109227 here
338 2011-02-20 03:52:55 <Lachesis> tcatm, cool
339 2011-02-20 03:52:56 <Blitzboom> 8 connections
340 2011-02-20 03:53:02 <Blitzboom> should load faster &
341 2011-02-20 03:53:24 <tcatm> Lachesis: You can use it for 1) blockexplorer, 2) #bitcoin-monitor and 3) RPC gettransaction
342 2011-02-20 03:53:34 <Blitzboom> block 109228 was created ten minutes ago, tcatm
343 2011-02-20 03:53:46 <tcatm> Blitzboom: Indeed. 0.3.20?
344 2011-02-20 03:53:56 <Blitzboom> .19
345 2011-02-20 03:54:04 <Blitzboom> should i update?
346 2011-02-20 03:54:21 <tcatm> Hm. Let's watch for the next block and see what happens when your client receives the broadcast. Can you tail -f debug.log?
347 2011-02-20 03:54:53 <Lachesis> i hope my miner makes the next block :)
348 2011-02-20 03:55:26 <Blitzboom> tail?
349 2011-02-20 03:55:40 <Lachesis> Blitzboom, platform?
350 2011-02-20 03:55:47 <Blitzboom> win 7
351 2011-02-20 03:55:52 <Lachesis> ahh then no he can't tcatm
352 2011-02-20 03:55:54 <Lachesis> :)
353 2011-02-20 03:55:58 <Blitzboom> ok
354 2011-02-20 03:56:38 <Lachesis> can you move debug.log somewhere without borking the client?
355 2011-02-20 03:56:47 <Lachesis> i dunno if it uses locking on windows
356 2011-02-20 03:56:49 <tcatm> Open debug.log in a texteditor after the next block appears
357 2011-02-20 03:57:30 <Blitzboom> i could just copy it
358 2011-02-20 03:57:30 <Lachesis> how do you read the #bitcoin-monitor output?
359 2011-02-20 03:57:43 <Lachesis> Blitzboom, the idea was to make it empty
360 2011-02-20 03:57:55 <Blitzboom> ah ok
361 2011-02-20 03:58:07 <tcatm> TX {payee amount}... TXid
362 2011-02-20 03:58:13 <Blitzboom> cant move without closing the client
363 2011-02-20 03:58:18 <Lachesis> tcatm, ty
364 2011-02-20 03:58:45 <Lachesis> tcatm, where is that bot hosted?
365 2011-02-20 03:58:51 <tcatm> linode
366 2011-02-20 03:58:52 <Lachesis> and is the code avail?
367 2011-02-20 03:58:59 <Lachesis> i'd like to make one that tweets
368 2011-02-20 03:59:15 <tcatm> https://github.com/tcatm/supybot-BTCMonitor
369 2011-02-20 03:59:26 <Blitzboom> should i exit the client and move debug.log?
370 2011-02-20 03:59:43 <tcatm> Blitzboom: no need
371 2011-02-20 03:59:52 <Lachesis> ty
372 2011-02-20 04:00:03 <Blitzboom> thought you needed the log
373 2011-02-20 04:00:29 <tcatm> Actually it might be more useful to have the whole file in case your client is really doing something wrong...
374 2011-02-20 04:00:39 <Blitzboom> ok, ill copy it
375 2011-02-20 04:00:52 <tcatm> Okay, but still wait for the next block (and maybe 2..5 minutes more) so we have a reference
376 2011-02-20 04:06:31 <Blitzboom> is dropbox down? oO cant sync
377 2011-02-20 04:07:19 <Blitzboom> tcatm: https://privatepaste.com/a5d0428b32
378 2011-02-20 04:08:35 <Blitzboom> ok, update:
379 2011-02-20 04:08:44 <Blitzboom> its updated to 109229 blocks
380 2011-02-20 04:08:49 <Blitzboom> but still no confirmation
381 2011-02-20 04:09:09 <Blitzboom> why doesnt it show it as confirmed?
382 2011-02-20 04:10:28 <tcatm> Oh wait. There's something wrong. Is it still at 0?
383 2011-02-20 04:10:34 <Blitzboom> yes
384 2011-02-20 04:11:24 <tcatm> Running low on disk space?
385 2011-02-20 04:11:40 <Blitzboom> 9 GB left oon my os-drive
386 2011-02-20 04:11:43 <Blitzboom> so no
387 2011-02-20 04:11:44 <tcatm> Deleted blk* while bitcoin was running?
388 2011-02-20 04:12:00 <Blitzboom> i did that once, yes
389 2011-02-20 04:12:00 <Lachesis> http://twitter.com/#!/bitcoinmonitor
390 2011-02-20 04:12:03 <Blitzboom> but not now
391 2011-02-20 04:12:14 <Blitzboom> if i delete it, it shows the right confirmations
392 2011-02-20 04:12:33 <tcatm> Lachesis: can you post the raw block? :)
393 2011-02-20 04:13:03 <Blitzboom> so what do i need to do?
394 2011-02-20 04:13:07 <tcatm> So it could be used for actually loading the blockchain
395 2011-02-20 04:13:20 <Blitzboom> its at block 109232 now
396 2011-02-20 04:13:29 <Blitzboom> so somethings wrong
397 2011-02-20 04:13:33 <Lachesis> tcatm, in 140 chars? no :)
398 2011-02-20 04:14:01 <tcatm> stop bitcoin, backup your wallet, remove all datafiles of bitcoin, install 0.3.20, restore wallet.dat and start bitcoin
399 2011-02-20 04:14:18 <Blitzboom> where do i get 0.3.2 for windows?
400 2011-02-20 04:14:49 <tcatm> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=3473.0
401 2011-02-20 04:14:54 <Blitzboom> thx
402 2011-02-20 04:15:19 <Blitzboom> whate are the __db-files?
403 2011-02-20 04:15:23 <tcatm> Looks like the blk files got out of sync.
404 2011-02-20 04:15:45 <tcatm> I think some kind of bdb journals. You can delete them.
405 2011-02-20 04:16:00 <sneak> hi
406 2011-02-20 04:16:30 <tcatm> Lachesis: strip the mirc color codes :P
407 2011-02-20 04:16:39 <Lachesis> tcatm, good call
408 2011-02-20 04:16:55 <Lachesis> x0309,01 and x03?
409 2011-02-20 04:16:59 <tcatm> yep
410 2011-02-20 04:17:57 <tcatm> Can you include links to blockexplorer?
411 2011-02-20 04:18:16 <tcatm> http://blockexplorer.com/block/$BLOCK
412 2011-02-20 04:18:35 <tcatm> and http://http://blockexplorer.com/tx/$TXID
413 2011-02-20 04:19:26 <Lachesis> hmm
414 2011-02-20 04:19:44 <Lachesis> twitter char limit is 140
415 2011-02-20 04:19:49 <Lachesis> so i need to make shorter links
416 2011-02-20 04:20:00 <Lachesis> goo.gl has an api
417 2011-02-20 04:20:24 <Blitzboom> bitcoin is now RC?
418 2011-02-20 04:20:27 <tcatm> Should be fine as long as you don't duplicate the ID
419 2011-02-20 04:20:40 <tcatm> Blitzboom: RC for 0.3.20
420 2011-02-20 04:20:55 <Blitzboom> RC for a beta?
421 2011-02-20 04:21:12 <tcatm> yep
422 2011-02-20 04:21:16 <Blitzboom> haha. okay
423 2011-02-20 04:21:55 <Lachesis> $TXID is the long id?
424 2011-02-20 04:21:59 <tcatm> yep
425 2011-02-20 04:23:28 <Lachesis> darn
426 2011-02-20 04:23:37 <Lachesis> url shortening api is a myth
427 2011-02-20 04:23:42 <Lachesis> and the script i found is borked
428 2011-02-20 04:24:00 <nanotube> Lachesis: what's the point of stuffing the stream of bitcoin blocks/tx into twitter? :)
429 2011-02-20 04:24:01 <tcatm> IIRC bbe has a builtin shortener
430 2011-02-20 04:24:37 <tcatm> nanotube: same as -monitor :)
431 2011-02-20 04:24:50 <tcatm> easier to watch than tail -f debug.log
432 2011-02-20 04:25:32 <nanotube> tcatm: well... it won't be same as -monitor, if all it is is a bunch of goo.gl urls.
433 2011-02-20 04:27:01 <tcatm> Would be cooler if whole TX/blocks could be included
434 2011-02-20 04:27:17 <Lachesis> nanotube, the idea is to post everything monitor posts, even if it costs two tweets at a time
435 2011-02-20 04:28:23 <tcatm> Make a seperate website if twitter is to stupid for more than 140 bytes :)
436 2011-02-20 04:29:01 <nanotube> tcatm: right :)
437 2011-02-20 04:29:25 <tcatm> Have a list of tx that are to be included into the next block and visually move them into the block once it is found.
438 2011-02-20 04:29:41 <nanotube> Lachesis: mmm well some tx are large enough that you'd need 20 tweets.
439 2011-02-20 04:30:15 <Lachesis> nanotube, hrm
440 2011-02-20 04:30:27 <ntosme2> set up an rss feed somewhere, who needs twitter
441 2011-02-20 04:30:32 <Lachesis> nanotube, oh well :)
442 2011-02-20 04:31:00 <nanotube> Lachesis: well, give it a try... let's see what happens :)
443 2011-02-20 04:32:49 <Lachesis> http://twitter.com/#!/bitcoinmonitor
444 2011-02-20 04:32:54 <Lachesis> url is wrong somehow?
445 2011-02-20 04:33:13 <Lachesis> http://blockexplorer.com/tx/110822014327269495173010257475928106782319715197217891069524926029689128016147 ?
446 2011-02-20 04:33:23 <tcatm> looks like decimal
447 2011-02-20 04:33:26 <tcatm> should be hex
448 2011-02-20 04:33:30 <Lachesis> oh k
449 2011-02-20 04:33:41 <Lachesis> how many digits?
450 2011-02-20 04:33:42 <Lachesis> 64?
451 2011-02-20 04:34:02 <Lachesis> somebody send someone else some money :)
452 2011-02-20 04:35:04 <Lachesis> much better!
453 2011-02-20 04:35:21 <Lachesis> i wonder if twitter will rate limit me
454 2011-02-20 04:35:32 <Lachesis> ought to look that up, no? :)
455 2011-02-20 04:35:38 <nanotube> haha
456 2011-02-20 04:35:48 <nanotube> if not, you can always set up a laconica feed
457 2011-02-20 04:36:07 <tcatm> I'd guess twitter is used to much higher load than a few bitcoin transactions ;)
458 2011-02-20 04:36:24 <Lachesis> hrm they only allow something like 350 calls per person per hour
459 2011-02-20 04:36:33 <nanotube> probably... but they may not want their entire load to come from just a few users :)
460 2011-02-20 04:36:56 <Lachesis> laconica?
461 2011-02-20 04:37:23 <gribble> http://status.net/ | Open source microblogging application, aiming to be an alternative to Twitter. Provides hosting services, a list of existing servers using this software, ...
462 2011-02-20 04:37:23 <nanotube> ;;sl laconica
463 2011-02-20 04:37:32 <nanotube> mm i guess they call it statusnet now :)
464 2011-02-20 04:37:35 <Lachesis> woah woah what's that?!
465 2011-02-20 04:37:39 <Lachesis> ;;sl alloscomp
466 2011-02-20 04:37:40 <gribble> http://www.alloscomp.com/ | I considered retiring Alloscomp, but I've made this domain name a part of both my online and offline identities. As such, I've decided to merely reorganize ...
467 2011-02-20 04:37:45 <Lachesis> that is awesome
468 2011-02-20 04:38:02 <nanotube> :)
469 2011-02-20 04:39:04 <Lachesis> so 4 tweets a minute will kill my limit unforetunately
470 2011-02-20 04:39:10 <Lachesis> i ought to set my own thingy up
471 2011-02-20 04:39:31 <nanotube> set laconica^Wstatusnet on your host
472 2011-02-20 04:39:41 <Lachesis> easy?
473 2011-02-20 04:39:42 <nanotube> or maybe statusnet gives you accounts on theirs, too. dunno.
474 2011-02-20 04:39:45 <nanotube> heh
475 2011-02-20 04:39:53 <nanotube> probably as easy as any other foss webapp ;)
476 2011-02-20 04:40:00 <Lachesis> apparently identi.ca doesn't have a rate limit
477 2011-02-20 04:40:02 <Lachesis> so i'll just do that
478 2011-02-20 04:40:09 <Lachesis> it's also a twitter compatible api
479 2011-02-20 04:40:32 <nanotube> ah cool, and they use statusnet
480 2011-02-20 04:57:57 <niftyzero1> nanotube - thanks for the graphs
481 2011-02-20 05:01:19 <niftyzero1> hm... looks like ~20 days for each doubling, ~60 days for 10x
482 2011-02-20 05:01:22 <niftyzero1> very impressive
483 2011-02-20 05:02:01 <niftyzero1> 1000x in 6 months
484 2011-02-20 05:10:07 <nanotube> niftyzero1: np :)
485 2011-02-20 05:16:45 <Lachesis> alright, apparently posting statuses isn't rate limited?
486 2011-02-20 05:16:53 <Lachesis> so i'll just let that go for now then
487 2011-02-20 05:17:01 <Lachesis> anyway, i'm beat - - turning in
488 2011-02-20 05:34:22 <jgarzik> we need people ready and qualified to act as bitcoin consultants
489 2011-02-20 05:34:28 <jgarzik> bitcoin support
490 2011-02-20 05:38:57 <niftyzero1> jgarzik - for what kind of audience?  tech?  general?
491 2011-02-20 05:39:50 <TheKid> jgarzik: consultants in what way
492 2011-02-20 05:39:55 <TheKid> I might be interested ;)
493 2011-02-20 05:41:44 <sethsethseth> hey guys im having trouble getting two 5970's working with all gpu cores
494 2011-02-20 05:41:51 <sethsethseth> do i need to run linux to do it?
495 2011-02-20 05:43:15 <TheKid> I've heard mumblings that that might be the case
496 2011-02-20 05:43:22 <TheKid> but I don't think it's true
497 2011-02-20 05:43:29 <TheKid> what trouble are you having?
498 2011-02-20 05:43:38 <sethsethseth> i cant get it to list all the cores
499 2011-02-20 05:44:56 <TheKid> is it in crossfire?
500 2011-02-20 05:45:19 <sethsethseth> ya im trying all kinds of configurations
501 2011-02-20 05:45:29 <sethsethseth> i took off the crossfire bridge now
502 2011-02-20 05:45:49 <sethsethseth> so its not crossfire
503 2011-02-20 05:45:50 <jgarzik> devrandom, TheKid: read http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=266.msg51753#msg51753 and my reply
504 2011-02-20 05:46:04 <jgarzik> some geeks that can answer questions about bitcoin
505 2011-02-20 05:46:28 <jgarzik> offer basic software support ("my PC is chewing away at 100% CPU but I get nothing!")
506 2011-02-20 05:48:47 <devrandom> seems like several people on this channel are able to answer these types of questions... are you thinking about providing a pay consulting service?
507 2011-02-20 05:49:51 <devrandom> s/pay/for pay/
508 2011-02-20 05:50:35 <TheKid> I'd be willing to be hired into a consulting service, but not organize it
509 2011-02-20 05:51:10 <jgarzik> devrandom: I want nothing to do with it, organizationally or operationally :)
510 2011-02-20 05:51:30 <jgarzik> But for bitcoin to thrive, we need support orgs
511 2011-02-20 05:51:46 <devrandom> definitely agree
512 2011-02-20 05:51:51 <TheKid> jgarzik: find someone who'd be willing to lead, and I'm a willing employee
513 2011-02-20 05:52:00 <jgarzik> there should be a "Bitcoin Support" section of https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Trade
514 2011-02-20 05:52:02 <jgarzik> with qualified, known individuals / orgs
515 2011-02-20 05:54:14 <devrandom> jgarzik - I might know some people that would be interested
516 2011-02-20 05:54:26 <devrandom> let me ask around
517 2011-02-20 05:56:23 <devrandom> any progress with https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/55 ?
518 2011-02-20 05:56:31 <docl> jgarzik: most people needing support would be traders, not miners, one would think.
519 2011-02-20 05:57:04 <jgarzik> docl: the guy at the link talks about hiring web developers
520 2011-02-20 05:57:18 <Diablo-D3> HENSHIN!
521 2011-02-20 05:57:30 <jgarzik> Bitcoin Support Inc should be able to hook any business up to bitcoin payments, or troubleshoot a bitcoin install
522 2011-02-20 05:58:47 <devrandom> probably should have a strong focus on security too
523 2011-02-20 05:59:52 <jgarzik> agreed
524 2011-02-20 06:01:14 <docl> Step 4: Hire better SYSADMIN's.??? They should be able to answer these  basic questions and offer basic support, or not install software that  neither you or they understand. <- win
525 2011-02-20 06:08:04 <nanotube> jgarzik: amendment to your post: step 1: do not post your question to an unrelated existing thread. :)
526 2011-02-20 06:10:18 <jgarzik> WANTED: Bitcoin tech support organization
527 2011-02-20 06:21:15 <mmagic> someone like TimeMoney is not worth supporting.
528 2011-02-20 06:21:48 <mmagic> not yet. soon, but not yet.
529 2011-02-20 06:25:10 <nanotube> mmagic: well gotta start somewhere
530 2011-02-20 06:26:32 <mmagic> time and effort of high-ability bitcoiners is better spent building infrastructure, not hand-holding people with strong senses of entitlement.
531 2011-02-20 06:29:27 <mmagic> "It's on the scale of worrying about passing through your chair." - http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=266.msg7092#msg7092
532 2011-02-20 06:29:30 <mmagic> ha ha..!
533 2011-02-20 06:32:03 <nanotube> hehe nice
534 2011-02-20 06:33:09 <Diablo-D3> idspispdod!
535 2011-02-20 06:34:57 <mmagic> idspispopd :)
536 2011-02-20 06:35:18 <mmagic> and doom had no vertical movement!
537 2011-02-20 06:36:00 <lfm> halt and catch fire
538 2011-02-20 06:38:18 <JFK911> sign exchange
539 2011-02-20 06:41:31 <devrandom> has any thought been given to changing the proof-of-work to be less amenable to GPU/hardware acceleration?  e.g. by mixing in a large lookup table?
540 2011-02-20 06:43:04 <jgarzik> devrandom: we've avoided incompatible changes to the basics
541 2011-02-20 06:43:36 <lfm> devrandom: you would have to convince a majority of the compute power existing that it was a good idea. that majority IS the gpu users
542 2011-02-20 06:43:47 <Diablo-D3> mmagic: I typoed
543 2011-02-20 06:43:48 <jgarzik> devrandom: plenty of comments and desires in that direction, though it seems ultimately not a productive use of time to work on that area of the problem
544 2011-02-20 06:43:51 <Diablo-D3> iddqd
545 2011-02-20 06:44:04 <jgarzik> lfm: or do your own fork
546 2011-02-20 06:44:10 <jgarzik> and hope to win people over
547 2011-02-20 06:44:25 <lfm> jgarzik: ya, like tonal
548 2011-02-20 06:45:00 <jgarzik> ;-)
549 2011-02-20 06:45:10 <devrandom> I'm somewhat concerned about a resourceful adversary could gain > 90% of network hash capacity
550 2011-02-20 06:45:52 <lfm> devrandom: yup you are
551 2011-02-20 06:45:54 <mmagic> tonal! i demand immediately that you add in the option, "-sammich" which will cause bitcoind, when connected to an appropriate microcontroller, to activate a kitchen robot to make me a sandwich!
552 2011-02-20 06:46:29 <lfm> magic hehe yup we'll get right on that
553 2011-02-20 06:47:11 <devrandom> lfm - it's somewhat likely to happen through ASICs
554 2011-02-20 06:47:13 <mmagic> lfm: i have some patches here which will lead in that glorious direction. i demand you apply them immediately to -stable.
555 2011-02-20 06:47:26 <mmagic> devrandom: no it's not.
556 2011-02-20 06:47:29 <mmagic> not yet anyway.
557 2011-02-20 06:47:52 <devrandom> how about a year from now?
558 2011-02-20 06:48:43 <mmagic> the cost of a proper ASIC is close to the cost of the entire network, and the only thing whoever that is, would gain, would be the destruction of trust in the network, and therefore the network itself. so the person loses their investment or has to convert it to cracking other hashes to pay for itself.
559 2011-02-20 06:49:00 <lfm> magic you are dismissing the probability that the super-secret labs of that giant organization which shall remain nameless is working on this right now and is about to take over bitcoin and the rest of the world shortly thereafter
560 2011-02-20 06:49:12 <mmagic> cost of the entire network: "worth" of all bitcoins in existence if you were to multiple current mtfgox prices with the number of bitcoins in existence.
561 2011-02-20 06:49:16 <Diablo-D3> mmagic: you do realize that ArtForz has already produced a run of chips?
562 2011-02-20 06:49:26 <mmagic> lfm: f'ing A batman.. :)
563 2011-02-20 06:51:00 <mmagic> Diablo-D3: that are approximately as expensive, per-chip, as a full 5870 and within a year will be overtaken by advancing commodity hardware? are you trying to tell me that a private run of structured ASIC can compete with the economies of scale of the largest consumer semiconductor companies on the planet? :)
564 2011-02-20 06:51:07 <devrandom> I'm thinking about an attack from someone that stands to gain from the downfall of the network
565 2011-02-20 06:51:21 <mmagic> devrandom: such as?
566 2011-02-20 06:51:44 <lfm> devrandom: so was I
567 2011-02-20 06:52:01 <devrandom> e.g. someone that has bets against the currency... short sellers and such
568 2011-02-20 06:52:19 <mmagic> devrandom: and who would front the coins for a currency-wide short sell?
569 2011-02-20 06:52:43 <lfm> devrandom: I dont think there is enuf value in the whole bitcoin system to justify such a project
570 2011-02-20 06:53:10 <devrandom> lfm - not currently, true
571 2011-02-20 06:53:21 <mmagic> i'm not sure anyone fronts coins for short-sells right now.
572 2011-02-20 06:53:26 <lfm> ok so we do not currently need to worry about it
573 2011-02-20 06:53:29 <mmagic> maybe privately i guess.
574 2011-02-20 06:53:58 <devrandom> I guess the question is - what multiplier can a hardware solution get over a GPU?
575 2011-02-20 06:54:22 <mmagic> devrandom: ONLY in terms of power consumption, and for some, power consumption is not an issue.
576 2011-02-20 06:55:30 <mmagic> Art will need to refresh his structured asic regularly to keep from being overtaken by advancing GPU/APU..
577 2011-02-20 06:55:33 <devrandom> if the multiplier is large, a small investment in hw could be enough to damage the credibility of the network
578 2011-02-20 06:55:48 <lfm> exactly and it seems for many miners power consumption is not an issue, either they are subsidized by parents or their dorm or apartment landlord or the "waste" heat is actually used
579 2011-02-20 06:56:04 <devrandom> so his asic is only a small improvement over GPU?
580 2011-02-20 06:56:58 <lfm> devrandom: small relatively ya
581 2011-02-20 06:57:12 <mmagic> devrandom: which would render the currency valueless, and i still haven't heard why you think someone would spend the .. half million or so required to do that. nobody spends $500k just to destroy something else unless in the end it nets them more. rich people don't think like that.
582 2011-02-20 06:57:29 <mmagic> devrandom: it consumes about 1/6 the power (by the occasional estimate Art lets out)
583 2011-02-20 06:57:33 <nanotube> mmagic: rich governments think like that. because it's not their money. :)
584 2011-02-20 06:57:55 <mmagic> each chip apparently does 300Mhash, and beyond initial design and infrastructure phase, will cost raw about $300/per.
585 2011-02-20 06:57:56 <devrandom> how about if China thinks that bitcoin is a threat to them?
586 2011-02-20 06:58:12 <lfm> mmagic: 200
587 2011-02-20 06:58:21 <mmagic> nanotube: virtual currencies exist all over the place; and taxpayers won't stand for a half million dollars to engage in malicious behaviour.
588 2011-02-20 06:58:53 <devrandom> not all governments are controlled by taxpayers
589 2011-02-20 06:59:08 <mmagic> devrandom: describe a plausible reason why china would think a $5m set of hashes would be a threat to a country with 1.3b people and oneo f the largest marketplaces in the world.
590 2011-02-20 06:59:13 <lfm> dev ya, like egypt?
591 2011-02-20 06:59:31 <devrandom> a year from now, bitcoin could be at $5B
592 2011-02-20 06:59:55 <lfm> devrandom a year from now china could be democratic
593 2011-02-20 07:00:05 <mmagic> devrandom: and at that point, the power of the mining put into the network would be so great that it would require a proportionally more massive attack strategy.
594 2011-02-20 07:00:20 <nanotube> mmagic: hahaha taxpayers eh? they 'stand' for orders of magnitude greater expenses, to engage in much shittier behavior.
595 2011-02-20 07:00:35 <nanotube> the half million won't even show up on the radar, it's just a rounding error in the trillion dollar annual govt budget.
596 2011-02-20 07:00:36 <mmagic> mmagic: that has nothing to do with a virtual currency which is not illegal.
597 2011-02-20 07:00:42 <devrandom> my point is that if a hw solution is 50x better with a $10M investment, China could do it
598 2011-02-20 07:00:54 <nanotube> mmagic: not to mention that they could just add a million to nsa's budget to do it, and nobody knows why.
599 2011-02-20 07:01:04 <mmagic> lots of people could do it. but they won't. there's no point.
600 2011-02-20 07:01:19 <mmagic> fuck, art could do it with two or three other larger miners.
601 2011-02-20 07:01:40 <devrandom> art has no incentive...
602 2011-02-20 07:02:16 <mmagic> you still haven't described any incentives china/US/NSA/snowpeople have.
603 2011-02-20 07:02:44 <lfm> devrandom: art could be visited by "men in black" and forced to do it
604 2011-02-20 07:03:25 <mmagic> nanotube: government isn't nearly the capricious, organized malicious attack vessel that people think it is. :)
605 2011-02-20 07:03:44 <devrandom> so lets say a year from now, bitcoin is at $5B
606 2011-02-20 07:03:56 <devrandom> and $1B is held by chinese citizens
607 2011-02-20 07:04:07 <mmagic> devrandom: that three base-10 orders of magnitude bigger than it is right now.
608 2011-02-20 07:04:28 <mmagic> devrandom: and this is a hypothetical with no (as far as I can tell) basis in reality.
609 2011-02-20 07:04:58 <Syke> how would you ever determine the citizen status of all bitcoin addresses?
610 2011-02-20 07:05:07 <mmagic> also a good point,.
611 2011-02-20 07:05:30 <devrandom> you could guesstimate based on activity of people that don't cover their tracks
612 2011-02-20 07:05:46 <lfm> devrandom: so if bitcoin is worth $5 billion then I suspect difficulty would be correspondingly hogh
613 2011-02-20 07:06:00 <nanotube> mmagic: you'd be surprised. :)
614 2011-02-20 07:06:31 <devrandom> lfm - true, but it is still a concern if a hw accelerated solution has a large performance multiplier
615 2011-02-20 07:06:37 <mmagic> nanotube: not rally. the capricious stuff is typically undertaken by individuals and not organizations as a whole.
616 2011-02-20 07:06:53 <nanotube> mmagic: it is not /the only/ thing that government is. but it is certainly capable of being an organized malicious attack vessel.
617 2011-02-20 07:07:08 <mmagic> nanotube: for example a sheriff took one of his deputies and attempted to literally steal the contents of my family's store one year.
618 2011-02-20 07:07:19 <lfm> devrandom: the investment to dominate bitcoin would be correspondingly high
619 2011-02-20 07:07:20 <sethsethseth> i missed the part where you said why a hardware implementation would be able produce 90% of the network hash
620 2011-02-20 07:07:29 <devrandom> mmagic - http://bitcoin.sipa.be/speed.png
621 2011-02-20 07:07:32 <nanotube> mmagic: capricious is not in question here - once bitcoin is used to "buy drugs", or used as the required payoff in a kidnapping scheme... it won't take capriciousness to whip the public into a frenzy.
622 2011-02-20 07:07:50 <devrandom> the value of bitcoin will track difficulty
623 2011-02-20 07:07:59 <devrandom> difficulty is doubling every 20 days
624 2011-02-20 07:08:05 <mmagic> nanotube: occasionally, but they don't make a habit of being an attack vessel unless something is a clear threat to them. and bitcoin is not a threat. bartering isn't a thread. WoW gold isn't a threat. EVE:Online ISK isn't a threat. neither are linden dollars.
625 2011-02-20 07:08:11 <lfm> sethsethseth: he is postulating some government agency with deep pockets will want to destroy bitcoin
626 2011-02-20 07:08:16 <prax> that makes no sense devrandom
627 2011-02-20 07:08:45 <devrandom> difficulty is doubling every 20-30 days
628 2011-02-20 07:08:55 <nanotube> mmagic: see: alcohol prohibition. see: war on drugs. see: war on teenagers sexting.
629 2011-02-20 07:09:10 <sethsethseth> and is everyone agreeing that it is possible to build a hardware solution for 500k that beats everyone?
630 2011-02-20 07:09:26 <nanotube> shit that isn't a threat, but that lets govt officials 'look good', will be done.
631 2011-02-20 07:09:29 <devrandom> the increase in difficulty is a reliable measure of adoption
632 2011-02-20 07:09:30 <prax> maybe it has tracked difficulty but clearly there are other factors in bitcoin's value..
633 2011-02-20 07:09:58 <prax> sort of but again more to it
634 2011-02-20 07:10:12 <mmagic> nanotube: it's already being used to buy drugs. all it is is another kind of cash. lots of people have carloads of cash they don't declare. and if the government sees a bunch of assets suddenly show up at someone's door that they didn't obtain legally, they investigate. same mechanism, same way to prosecute, same penalties.
635 2011-02-20 07:10:31 <prax> Artforz' setup would be an example of a technological improvement rather than a wholesale change in number of adopters
636 2011-02-20 07:10:32 <lfm> 500k bucks today, a year from now if bitcoin value is 2000 times greater then the cost to dominate (or ruin) bitcoin will be corespondingly high
637 2011-02-20 07:10:33 <devrandom> mtgox has a pretty short doubling time too
638 2011-02-20 07:11:06 <prax> and anyhow the value has to do with the actual exchanges of the bitcoins, not only difficulty
639 2011-02-20 07:11:09 <nanotube> mmagic: it's still too small to be on the radar. i'm not trying to fud-monger... but i think it's not unlikely that some time down the road, /some/ govt will want to ban and/or attack bitcoin.
640 2011-02-20 07:12:20 <devrandom> prax - I'm not saying that it's *based* on difficulty, I am saying that difficulty is an indicator of adoption
641 2011-02-20 07:12:22 <mmagic> nanotube: i'm pretty sure the most that will happen is the traffic will be ordered filtered.
642 2011-02-20 07:12:50 <mmagic> nanotube: and the governments will remind people that income tax avoidance is a crime.
643 2011-02-20 07:12:52 <nanotube> mmagic: well, let's hope you're right. and let's further hope that by that time bitcoin traffic will be ssl'ed, and freenet/i2p capable. ;)
644 2011-02-20 07:12:56 <devrandom> prax - it's definitely the case that long-term value has to come from creating a thriving economy
645 2011-02-20 07:13:11 <mmagic> nanotube: pretty sure it's already in i2p isn't it?
646 2011-02-20 07:13:36 <prax> okay then, has tracked
647 2011-02-20 07:13:42 <nanotube> mmagic: not yet, it seems that it'd take some coding to get it i2p-ing. presumably some i2p people are thinking/working on it.
648 2011-02-20 07:13:53 <prax> because a big part of the exchange activity is mining and speculation
649 2011-02-20 07:13:54 <nanotube> mmagic: and xelister and johnyh seem to be working on the freenet side
650 2011-02-20 07:14:01 <nanotube> tor of course is already possible.
651 2011-02-20 07:14:04 <prax> just wanted to clear that up =)
652 2011-02-20 07:14:13 <devrandom> sure
653 2011-02-20 07:14:57 <mmagic> nanotube: hrm. all they need is an i2p outproxy tunnel to a pre-existing node. i'm 95% certain nodes are already running in i2p.
654 2011-02-20 07:15:44 <devrandom> I guess my full scenario - total currency gets to $5B, hw solution is 50x more efficient, $500M in existing mining capital, $20M in attack hw trumps the network
655 2011-02-20 07:15:51 <nanotube> mmagic: well, dunno i haven't really kept up with the i2p folks. there's an i2p gateway on #bitcoin-discussion, if you're interested, ask around there. :) (or if you're interested in running an i2p node)
656 2011-02-20 07:16:22 <mmagic> devrandom: i'm pretty sure that scenario is flawed in its estimates.
657 2011-02-20 07:16:38 <devrandom> I'm hoping the 50x figure is wrong
658 2011-02-20 07:17:11 <sethsethseth> ya why would it be 50x
659 2011-02-20 07:17:30 <devrandom> because GPUs are somewhat general purpose
660 2011-02-20 07:17:31 <Syke> yes, 50x advances in hw capabilities is highly unlikely
661 2011-02-20 07:17:55 <mmagic> they're barely able to build a 5x efficiency in power consumption with maxwell..
662 2011-02-20 07:18:23 <devrandom> so the power consumption and gate usage of a hw solution might be much lower compared to the GPU
663 2011-02-20 07:18:26 <prax> what about those new 50-core chips or whatever?
664 2011-02-20 07:18:50 <Syke> good GPUs now are basically 1600-cores
665 2011-02-20 07:19:00 <devrandom> I'm not so worried about parallelism - GPUs will track that
666 2011-02-20 07:19:00 <prax> oh okay that is CPUs anyhow
667 2011-02-20 07:19:52 <devrandom> more worried about GPUs being not as efficient as optimized circuits
668 2011-02-20 07:20:10 <mmagic> devrandom: your attack method needs some additional thought. I recommend you flesh it out, do some science and mathematics to calculate specifically what it would take to overpower the network, take into account growth trends, and so on, and then sell your attack paper to someone to wants it.
669 2011-02-20 07:20:26 <brunner> Of those of you whom are in the US, is anyone NOT near one of the following banks? Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Chase, US Bank, PNC
670 2011-02-20 07:20:47 <nevezen> I am. So?
671 2011-02-20 07:20:56 <prax> 3/5 near me
672 2011-02-20 07:21:09 <JFK911> I deposited a check for 600 BTC into the computer-brained BofA ATM.
673 2011-02-20 07:21:16 <JFK911> It credited me $600
674 2011-02-20 07:21:40 <brunner> nevezen: you are or aren't near one of those?
675 2011-02-20 07:21:53 <nevezen> yes. why?
676 2011-02-20 07:22:04 <mmagic> ha ha ha
677 2011-02-20 07:23:30 <prax> any of you ever use an android emulator on pc?
678 2011-02-20 07:23:46 <devrandom> mmagic - are you encouraging me to subvert bitcoin?
679 2011-02-20 07:23:47 <Syke> prax, yes
680 2011-02-20 07:24:07 <brunner> nevezen: just curious.
681 2011-02-20 07:24:22 <prax> can I just basically install it and use it as a phone -the calls?
682 2011-02-20 07:24:29 <prax> install apps and such
683 2011-02-20 07:24:35 <Syke> yup
684 2011-02-20 07:24:39 <prax> k cool
685 2011-02-20 07:24:52 <mmagic> devrandom: I am.
686 2011-02-20 07:25:04 <devrandom> okay, just wanted to make sure
687 2011-02-20 07:25:34 <Syke> you probably can't make actual phone calls to the regular phone network
688 2011-02-20 07:25:40 <welterde> nanotube: it probably won't change much in comparision to now..
689 2011-02-20 07:25:49 <prax> yeah I got that from the page I found
690 2011-02-20 07:25:54 <nevezen> tbh, I still think the idea of bitcoin a bit of a conundrum.
691 2011-02-20 07:25:54 <prax> don't care about that
692 2011-02-20 07:26:01 <nanotube> welterde: it == what?
693 2011-02-20 07:26:04 <prax> just installing an app to process credit card payments
694 2011-02-20 07:26:17 <Syke> but yeah, .apk's that can be installed on devices can be installed on the emulator
695 2011-02-20 07:26:17 <welterde> nanotube: the situation with i2p
696 2011-02-20 07:26:21 <mmagic> devrandom: if you went a step further, and designed and built a proof-of-concept, i'm pretty sure you could get a lot of people to buy the base hardware to support you while you shopped your idea out to foreign governments.
697 2011-02-20 07:26:47 <nanotube> welterde: what exactly is the situation with i2p now? i haven't been keeping up.
698 2011-02-20 07:27:05 <welterde> nanotube: you manually create tunnels and use -connect 127.0.0.1 or something like that..
699 2011-02-20 07:27:31 <nevezen> for example, if you were to sell goods for bitcoin, you'd want to convert the coins back to real currency right?
700 2011-02-20 07:27:36 <mmagic> I am now 99% certain people on the i2p network are already using bitcoin through i2p.
701 2011-02-20 07:27:40 <nanotube> ah. but how to bridge between i2p and regular net? or do you only connect to specific nodes over i2p?
702 2011-02-20 07:28:20 <welterde> nanotube: some people would have to run it in a regular manner and point an server tunnel at their local bitcoin port
703 2011-02-20 07:28:32 <nanotube> ah mm ic
704 2011-02-20 07:30:37 <mmagic> if nodes forward transactions, is it possible even for a 10-20-connection client to know where a tx originated from?
705 2011-02-20 07:31:17 <mmagic> and, if not, then the relaying nature of the network, it seems to me, would afford a level of indirection for i2p-located clients
706 2011-02-20 07:32:39 <brunner> why would anyone use i2p instead of Tor?
707 2011-02-20 07:33:10 <lfm> why not
708 2011-02-20 07:34:40 <mmagic> i2p is easier to use, and better in many respects.
709 2011-02-20 07:35:09 <welterde> brunner: depends on what you want to do.. if you want to access services on the normal internet anonymously.. tor is the right tool for you probably.. if you want to use network-internal services i2p is better suited than tor's hidden services
710 2011-02-20 07:38:10 <brunner> how so?
711 2011-02-20 07:40:03 <nanotube> brunner: i guess you get to google 'i2p vs tor' :)
712 2011-02-20 07:44:18 <bk128> http://lmgtfy.com/?q=i2p+vs+tor
713 2011-02-20 08:16:23 <bk128> Diablo-D3: do you always install the nonfree java?
714 2011-02-20 08:19:29 <Diablo-D3> bk128: I install both.
715 2011-02-20 08:19:43 <bk128> what does your miner run better with?
716 2011-02-20 08:19:48 <Diablo-D3> doesnt matter
717 2011-02-20 08:19:51 <Diablo-D3> its the same code.
718 2011-02-20 08:19:52 <bk128> okay.
719 2011-02-20 08:20:02 <Diablo-D3> sun ships a version of openjdk now
720 2011-02-20 09:14:46 <necrodearia> Who wants to volunteer to manage "code review?" category?
721 2011-02-20 09:15:06 <necrodearia> s/?"/"/
722 2011-02-20 09:15:12 <necrodearia> s/?"/"/
723 2011-02-20 09:16:52 <necrodearia> anyone?
724 2011-02-20 09:16:57 <ducki2p> I would if you have no other takers
725 2011-02-20 09:18:16 <necrodearia> created
726 2011-02-20 09:18:22 <necrodearia> grats ducki2p
727 2011-02-20 09:18:46 <ducki2p> nice one
728 2011-02-20 09:18:52 <noagendamarket> 0_0
729 2011-02-20 09:19:51 <ducki2p> muahahaha
730 2011-02-20 09:22:43 <necrodearia> http://witticisms.witcoin.com/p/8/Soourceforge-is-compromised doesn't fit in witticisms.  Where does it belong?
731 2011-02-20 09:23:38 <ducki2p> news
732 2011-02-20 09:23:49 <necrodearia> news category is not postable
733 2011-02-20 09:23:53 <necrodearia> parent categories aren't postable
734 2011-02-20 09:23:56 <ducki2p> specifically tech news
735 2011-02-20 09:23:56 <necrodearia> only subcategories
736 2011-02-20 09:23:59 <necrodearia> kk
737 2011-02-20 09:24:56 <necrodearia> Who would like to volunteer for news -> technology?
738 2011-02-20 09:25:35 <Diablo-D3> http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/VeryDemotivational/~3/4Ki1nKUk45I/
739 2011-02-20 09:26:21 <necrodearia> hah
740 2011-02-20 09:28:41 <necrodearia> Is everyone in the world sleeping?
741 2011-02-20 09:29:06 <necrodearia> Diablo-D3, Would you like to volunteer for tech news?
742 2011-02-20 09:30:14 <necrodearia> As a volunteer you are forced to accept a distribution of profits from all posts, replies and upvotes that occur within the category.
743 2011-02-20 09:32:05 <noagendamarket> I can do tech news .  Since I posted the sourceforge story and a tech podcast junkie :)
744 2011-02-20 09:32:22 <noagendamarket> tech news and agorism lol
745 2011-02-20 09:33:59 <necrodearia> noagendamarket, mmkay
746 2011-02-20 09:43:48 <cosurgi> 18 blocks in last 60 minutes. crazy
747 2011-02-20 09:43:56 <Diablo-D3> http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BHVG/~3/pdBGf_f-L34/
748 2011-02-20 09:43:59 <Diablo-D3> SON OF A BITCH
749 2011-02-20 09:44:09 <Diablo-D3> WAAAAAAAAAAGH
750 2011-02-20 09:48:03 <sipa> easy
751 2011-02-20 11:00:42 <cosurgi> , look at this table:
752 2011-02-20 11:00:56 <cosurgi> http://www.corsair.com/hx850w.html
753 2011-02-20 11:01:28 <cosurgi> can you tell me - to which "DC OUTPUT" those 6 PCI-E Connectors are connected?
754 2011-02-20 11:02:32 <Diablo-D3> huh?
755 2011-02-20 11:02:35 <Diablo-D3> its a single rail
756 2011-02-20 11:02:59 <cosurgi> obviously I don't understand something :)
757 2011-02-20 11:03:49 <cosurgi> three GPUs, connected to those "6 PCI-E Connectors" draw 3*188=564W,
758 2011-02-20 11:04:11 <cosurgi> hmm.. but mobo gives some too, about 75W.
759 2011-02-20 11:04:47 <cosurgi> I've seen a config option in my mobo - how much PCIex16 can give, and by default it's 75W.
760 2011-02-20 11:04:59 <cosurgi> so those 6 connectors give 3*(188-75)=339 W
761 2011-02-20 11:06:15 <cosurgi> so the row in table "MAX COMBINED WATTAGE" says that...: if GPUs use +5V outputs, they can give max 150W, while three GPUs need 339W.
762 2011-02-20 11:06:19 <cosurgi> Where I made a mistake?
763 2011-02-20 11:06:36 <cosurgi> I think, I may be wrong, that +12V (840W) goes to mobo.
764 2011-02-20 11:07:08 <cosurgi> brb
765 2011-02-20 11:08:41 <Diablo-D3> cosurgi: you're not making sense
766 2011-02-20 11:08:45 <Diablo-D3> its a single rail.
767 2011-02-20 11:09:02 <Diablo-D3> and how would the gpus get 5v?
768 2011-02-20 11:09:12 <Diablo-D3> they dont use power off the mobo, the pci-e pins are 12v only
769 2011-02-20 11:13:22 <lfm> osme power come in pcie slot
770 2011-02-20 11:19:45 <cosurgi> ok. so PCI-E are 12v. good to know. I thought that 4pin HDD molex are 5v.
771 2011-02-20 11:22:51 <[Tycho]> HDD molex is 5+12
772 2011-02-20 11:23:24 <[Tycho]> GPUs use power from both PSU connectors and PCIe connector.
773 2011-02-20 11:24:10 <cosurgi> ok, so those 2*molex -> 1*PCI-E cables are using only 12v part of HDD connector?
774 2011-02-20 11:24:43 <[Tycho]> Yes.
775 2011-02-20 11:25:05 <[Tycho]> You can see yellow and black wires there.
776 2011-02-20 11:25:09 <[Tycho]> Red ones are +5
777 2011-02-20 11:25:16 <cosurgi> yes. ok.
778 2011-02-20 11:25:52 <Diablo-D3> cosurgi: molex are 5+12
779 2011-02-20 11:25:55 <Diablo-D3> [Tycho]: and no
780 2011-02-20 11:26:01 <Diablo-D3> gpus really dont use mobo power
781 2011-02-20 11:26:09 <[Tycho]> They do.
782 2011-02-20 11:26:18 <Diablo-D3> they dont.
783 2011-02-20 11:26:19 <Diablo-D3> only if they need 5v and shit
784 2011-02-20 11:26:22 <cosurgi> good to know :)
785 2011-02-20 11:26:24 <BlueMatt> They technically do, but almost nothing
786 2011-02-20 11:26:25 <cosurgi> mobo can give only 5v ?
787 2011-02-20 11:26:48 <da2ce7> ;;bc,stats
788 2011-02-20 11:26:50 <gribble> Current Blocks: 109297 | Current Difficulty: 36459.88692508 | Next Difficulty At Block: 110879 | Next Difficulty In: 1582 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 1 day, 8 hours, 23 minutes, and 12 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 48127.00171445
789 2011-02-20 11:26:57 <da2ce7> ;;bc,mtgox
790 2011-02-20 11:26:58 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":0.9697,"low":0.83,"vol":9550,"buy":0.86,"sell":0.8975,"last":0.8954}}
791 2011-02-20 11:28:02 <cosurgi> hmm... but there are extra pin with 12v, just to connect to mobo.
792 2011-02-20 11:28:07 <cosurgi> *pins.
793 2011-02-20 11:28:23 <[Tycho]> It's additional power for CPU
794 2011-02-20 11:28:46 <sipa> graphic cards use mobo power
795 2011-02-20 11:28:48 <sipa> gpu's don't
796 2011-02-20 11:29:16 <cosurgi> sipa: and the difference is...? Maybe fans on graphics cards are powered from mobo?
797 2011-02-20 11:29:29 <cosurgi> fan is not GPU, but it belongs to graphic card
798 2011-02-20 11:29:43 <lfm> some small gpu dont use extra pcie power connects
799 2011-02-20 11:29:46 <[Tycho]> Oh, yes, i was talking about cards.
800 2011-02-20 11:30:32 <sipa> a 5970 draws 75W + 150W from pcie connectors, and 75W from mobo
801 2011-02-20 11:30:36 <cosurgi> so it means that GPUs get power from PCI-E connectors, but fans get power from mobo?
802 2011-02-20 11:30:42 <sipa> not only fans
803 2011-02-20 11:30:49 <sipa> i suppose
804 2011-02-20 11:31:00 <cosurgi> and other extra circuitry.
805 2011-02-20 11:31:01 <sipa> memory or other chips maybe too?
806 2011-02-20 11:31:18 <sipa> not sure how they decouple the circuits though
807 2011-02-20 11:31:50 <cosurgi> hmm... but graphic card draws 5v or 12v from mobo?
808 2011-02-20 11:31:59 <[Tycho]> PCIe connector (idle/load): 1.1 / 3.7 Amp (PCIe max: 6.25)
809 2011-02-20 11:32:00 <[Tycho]> Total (idle/load): 4.2 / 21.8 Amp (PCIe max: 25.0)
810 2011-02-20 11:32:13 <[Tycho]> It's for single 5970
811 2011-02-20 11:32:27 <lfm> they have to decouple since it would start fires if you forgot the side plugs
812 2011-02-20 11:32:40 <sipa> i know they have to decouple
813 2011-02-20 11:32:44 <sipa> i just don't see how they do that
814 2011-02-20 11:33:10 <cosurgi> [Tycho]: how did you get this stats? Can I see some similar stats in debian?
815 2011-02-20 11:33:25 <bd_> sipa: Power down bits of the GPU core if there's no power from the side plug?
816 2011-02-20 11:33:46 <bd_> Cut power entirely to the GPU core if the side plug drops while running?
817 2011-02-20 11:33:46 <[Tycho]> It's not software metering, it's by clamp ampermeter :)
818 2011-02-20 11:33:56 <cosurgi> oh :)
819 2011-02-20 11:34:13 <[Tycho]> Here is it - http://blog.zorinaq.com/?e=42
820 2011-02-20 11:35:02 <sipa> bd_: i mean: if the gpu's are powered through connectors, and other chips powered from mobo, how do they prevent current leaking through the circuitry from mobo to connector?
821 2011-02-20 11:36:13 <[Tycho]> sipa, power is regulated anyway from 12 to 1-3 v, so regulating circuit may just not start if not all power lines are provided.
822 2011-02-20 11:38:43 <Diablo-D3> [07:30:32] <sipa> a 5970 draws 75W + 150W from pcie connectors, and 75W from mobo
823 2011-02-20 11:38:53 <Diablo-D3> but it has 2 8 pin connectors
824 2011-02-20 11:39:51 <[Tycho]> No, it has one 8 pin and one 6 pin.
825 2011-02-20 11:42:40 <[Tycho]> Why bitcoind on FreeBSD doesn't wants to open 8332 port ? Running with -server parameter and bitcoin.conf is present.
826 2011-02-20 11:43:30 <ducki2p> any error?
827 2011-02-20 11:45:21 <[Tycho]> No errors.
828 2011-02-20 11:45:33 <edcba> isn't the port taken ?
829 2011-02-20 11:47:00 <[Tycho]> No.
830 2011-02-20 11:49:06 <Diablo-D3> [Tycho]: feh, whatever
831 2011-02-20 11:49:17 <Diablo-D3> cards shouldnt be pulling off the pci-e slot anyhow
832 2011-02-20 11:50:16 <[Tycho]> Why ?
833 2011-02-20 12:00:14 <BlueMatt> What would people recommend for a remote gui client which connects to an rpc server?
834 2011-02-20 12:00:35 <Diablo-D3> BlueMatt: there isnt one
835 2011-02-20 12:00:43 <Diablo-D3> [Tycho]: because.
836 2011-02-20 12:00:52 <BlueMatt> I saw one a couple days ago in python iirc
837 2011-02-20 12:01:03 <BlueMatt> cant remember what it was called
838 2011-02-20 12:01:05 <tcatm> BlueMatt: js-remote :P
839 2011-02-20 12:01:43 <BlueMatt> There was a gui one someone here mentioned a couple days ago
840 2011-02-20 12:04:10 <tcatm> spesmilo?
841 2011-02-20 12:04:15 <BlueMatt> that was it
842 2011-02-20 12:04:31 <BlueMatt> anyone used it?
843 2011-02-20 12:05:53 <tcatm> useable but unstable last I tried
844 2011-02-20 12:09:27 <lzsaver> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=3451.0 this? :)
845 2011-02-20 12:10:30 <BlueMatt> yea, though I was looking at the github atm
846 2011-02-20 12:11:03 <BlueMatt> Really cool idea in any case, think Ill try it
847 2011-02-20 12:13:19 <lzsaver> as I know you can just use bitcoin -rpcconnect=IP to use bitcoin as a rpc client. but it does not work to me...
848 2011-02-20 12:13:55 <BlueMatt> although I dont mind cli, it would be nice to have a gui remote as well
849 2011-02-20 12:14:13 <tcatm> js-remote works well
850 2011-02-20 12:14:27 <lzsaver> BlueMatt, I know - I did not say bitcoinD
851 2011-02-20 12:14:28 <BlueMatt> might set that up as well then
852 2011-02-20 12:14:45 <BlueMatt> lzsaver bitcoin -rpcconnect is still cli
853 2011-02-20 12:14:51 <lzsaver> oh, ok
854 2011-02-20 12:14:52 <BlueMatt> it just connects to bitcoind or bitcoin -server
855 2011-02-20 12:15:01 <lzsaver> I will know
856 2011-02-20 12:15:21 <nathan7> la la LA LA LA la la LA LA
857 2011-02-20 12:15:56 <lzsaver> also bitcoind sendtoaddress IP does not work yet :(
858 2011-02-20 12:16:35 <tcatm> you shouldn't use sendto IP
859 2011-02-20 12:17:01 <Jeroenz0r> it's disabled on default
860 2011-02-20 12:17:07 <Jeroenz0r> because it's unsecure
861 2011-02-20 12:17:34 <lzsaver> tcatm, why?
862 2011-02-20 12:17:43 <lzsaver> Jero, can I enable it?
863 2011-02-20 12:17:46 <tcatm> insecure and obsolete
864 2011-02-20 12:17:53 <BlueMatt> man in the middle attacks could easily steal the funds
865 2011-02-20 12:18:12 <lzsaver> okay
866 2011-02-20 12:18:17 <BlueMatt> by changing the btc address which the funds will be sent to
867 2011-02-20 12:20:51 <BlueMatt> at tcatm makes js-remote, no wonder he loves it so much
868 2011-02-20 13:22:57 <noagendamarket> is everyone asleep or just stunned into silence with the last difficulty increase ?
869 2011-02-20 13:24:21 <sipa> both
870 2011-02-20 13:25:27 <LtBrenton> ;;bc,calc 44026
871 2011-02-20 13:25:28 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 44026 Khps, given current difficulty of 36459.88692508 , is 5 weeks, 6 days, 4 hours, and 53 seconds
872 2011-02-20 13:27:51 <[Tycho]> No.
873 2011-02-20 13:29:17 <xelister> guys what do you think of buying BTC @ 0.80
874 2011-02-20 13:30:01 <xelister> the things is that we agree now, but the coins are sent (at agreed price) 1 month from now
875 2011-02-20 13:30:05 <BlueMatt> xelister: can you find a seller @.8?
876 2011-02-20 13:30:15 <xelister> yes
877 2011-02-20 13:30:34 <BlueMatt> then yea, there are buyers on mtg @.85
878 2011-02-20 13:30:37 <LtBrenton> xelister: so basically a call option?
879 2011-02-20 13:31:11 <xelister> LtBrenton: yeap
880 2011-02-20 13:31:36 <BlueMatt> if you can find a seller who will agree to that, Id do it
881 2011-02-20 13:32:31 <BlueMatt> but seriously, anyone agreeing to a that is not particularly smart
882 2011-02-20 13:33:15 <LtBrenton> BlueMatt, that's trading for ya :p
883 2011-02-20 13:33:15 <xelister> why not?
884 2011-02-20 13:33:39 <xelister> its like ordering gold.. it anyway takes now month or more to deliver often
885 2011-02-20 13:33:42 <BlueMatt> the common consensus is that the price will rise
886 2011-02-20 13:34:15 <LtBrenton> BlueMatt, I rush-sold 100 coins at 0.85 a week or so ago, I needed the money within hours
887 2011-02-20 13:34:57 <BlueMatt> Yes, but not many people would buy for .8 in a month
888 2011-02-20 13:35:11 <BlueMatt> if the prices are up, then its a great deal for xelister, but for the seller...not so much
889 2011-02-20 13:35:23 <LtBrenton> BlueMatt, then the seller is obviously going on different logic
890 2011-02-20 13:35:33 <LtBrenton> a trade is never a good deal for both sides :p
891 2011-02-20 13:35:38 <BlueMatt> this is true
892 2011-02-20 13:35:41 <BlueMatt> but its a risk thing
893 2011-02-20 13:35:48 <sipa> of course it is
894 2011-02-20 13:35:48 <xelister> well here
895 2011-02-20 13:35:50 <BlueMatt> I might agree to sell @1
896 2011-02-20 13:35:52 <sipa> if you have money
897 2011-02-20 13:35:55 <sipa> and i have bread
898 2011-02-20 13:36:03 <BlueMatt> bc it might go up to that, or might not make as high
899 2011-02-20 13:36:13 <sipa> and you're hungry
900 2011-02-20 13:36:14 <LtBrenton> sipa: we're talking specifically commods/fx here :P
901 2011-02-20 13:36:15 <xelister> the seller wants to be obsolutelly sure he will sell not lower then at say 0.85 or some other price, the coins that he will produce in next month
902 2011-02-20 13:36:21 <BlueMatt> thus I might come out on top, or the buyer might
903 2011-02-20 13:36:55 <BlueMatt> Yes, but if most people think the price will rise, someone else would offer a higher price
904 2011-02-20 13:37:02 <BlueMatt> and he should also look for one
905 2011-02-20 13:51:35 <[Tycho]> Wow, you just invented futures contracts :)
906 2011-02-20 13:52:48 <BlueMatt> There is a tutorial for them on -otc's wiki
907 2011-02-20 13:53:15 <BlueMatt> They are very important for businesses who might consider accepting btc