1 2011-04-03 02:25:22 <LobsterMan> ;;bc,stats
  2 2011-04-03 02:25:26 <gribble> Current Blocks: 116422 | Current Difficulty: 68978.89245792 | Next Difficulty At Block: 116927 | Next Difficulty In: 505 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 2 days, 21 hours, 26 minutes, and 15 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 79767.13333209
  3 2011-04-03 02:38:27 <phantomcircuit> it's interesting that this entire place dies on the weekends
  4 2011-04-03 02:41:23 <[Tycho]> Oh, it's weekend already...
  5 2011-04-03 03:06:10 <jgarzik> wow, bitpenny shut down
  6 2011-04-03 03:06:58 <Kiba> what's bitpenny?
  7 2011-04-03 03:27:18 <lfm> bitpenny is another pool
  8 2011-04-03 03:35:16 <mrb_> bitpenny's model always seemed very vulnerable to me. In theory an attacker could create losses to the operator by submitting only proof-of-works that corresponding to a difficulty >= 1 but inferior to the difficulty of the Bitcoin network.
  9 2011-04-03 03:35:35 <[Tycho]> So they did.
 10 2011-04-03 03:36:06 <mrb_> yeah, some idiot probably exploited that.
 11 2011-04-03 03:36:21 <mrb_> just to prove his point.
 12 2011-04-03 03:36:31 <[Tycho]> It's strange that he had such hashrate available.
 13 2011-04-03 03:37:25 <[Tycho]> Sadly bitpenny's total speed is unknown.
 14 2011-04-03 03:37:46 <[Tycho]> I had no time to track it :)
 15 2011-04-03 03:38:02 <Kiba> never heard of bitpenny
 16 2011-04-03 03:38:15 <[Tycho]> It's a hidden pool.
 17 2011-04-03 03:38:16 <lfm> so has he admitted he's broke or just gone offline without explaining?
 18 2011-04-03 03:38:27 <mrb_> It is safe to say it was less than 100 Ghash/s.
 19 2011-04-03 03:38:33 <[Tycho]> He admitted it in a forum post.
 20 2011-04-03 03:39:04 <[Tycho]> mrb_, i would expect 10-40
 21 2011-04-03 03:39:38 <mrb_> What was OneFixt's commission? 3%?
 22 2011-04-03 03:40:07 <[Tycho]> 10%
 23 2011-04-03 03:40:39 <mrb_> so assuming bitpenny was 50 Ghash/s, an attacker only needs 5 Ghash/s to run in into the ground with the flaw I decribe above
 24 2011-04-03 03:41:23 <mrb_> since he would gain the equivalent of 5 Ghash/s of profits, but without ever causing bitpenny to solve a block
 25 2011-04-03 03:41:23 <[Tycho]> 5%, according to OneFixt's opinion
 26 2011-04-03 03:43:52 <OneFixt> 5% is enough to make variance quite dangerous
 27 2011-04-03 03:43:58 <OneFixt> and anything over 10% is, of course, deadly
 28 2011-04-03 05:52:24 <Stellar> ;;bc,estimate
 29 2011-04-03 05:52:26 <gribble> 79774.54140198
 30 2011-04-03 05:57:23 <midnightmagic> hooray for prolonged LR downtime.
 31 2011-04-03 05:58:19 <grbgout> lr?
 32 2011-04-03 06:00:56 <[Tycho]> Liberty Reserve ?
 33 2011-04-03 06:01:37 <FellowTraveler> hi all
 34 2011-04-03 06:02:09 <[Tycho]> Hello.
 35 2011-04-03 06:02:21 <grbgout> [Tycho]: ah, that makes sense, thanks.
 36 2011-04-03 06:33:51 <midnightmagic> [Tycho]: yes. it's very irritating.
 37 2011-04-03 08:14:51 <xelister> what miners are there?
 38 2011-04-03 08:14:53 <xelister> erm
 39 2011-04-03 08:14:56 <xelister> what pools are there
 40 2011-04-03 08:15:03 <xelister> slush, deepbit, and?
 41 2011-04-03 08:15:58 <xelister> which ones is best in easy fast payoffs?
 42 2011-04-03 08:16:16 <BlueMatt> bitcoinpool.com
 43 2011-04-03 08:16:23 <BlueMatt> dont know anything about it
 44 2011-04-03 08:16:29 <BlueMatt> Ive never used it but its on the list
 45 2011-04-03 08:18:15 <xelister> which list?
 46 2011-04-03 08:18:40 <gjs278> deepbit is the fastest that I've used if you want your coins right away. slush waits for block confirmations before they credit you.
 47 2011-04-03 08:18:41 <[Tycho]> bitcoinpool.com is special.
 48 2011-04-03 08:18:48 <BurtyB> lol
 49 2011-04-03 08:19:22 <gjs278> bitcoinpool is no fee, but the rate they solve doesn't seem like it would make enough compared to the consistency of the other two pools
 50 2011-04-03 08:19:53 <gjs278> especially when the difficulty rate is always rising, so getting your coins quickly makes all of the difference
 51 2011-04-03 08:20:07 <[Tycho]> Yesterday they banned all their users with "low efficiency" and locked their forum thread to prevent complains :)
 52 2011-04-03 08:20:51 <BlueMatt> ok yea maybe you dont want to use them
 53 2011-04-03 08:21:32 <BlueMatt> I prefer slush's pool as its not vulnerable to the pool-switch attack
 54 2011-04-03 08:21:44 <BlueMatt> dont know if anyone is actually exploiting that but...
 55 2011-04-03 08:22:26 <[Tycho]> Someone suspected that bitcoinpool suffered from this attack because their speed was jumping back and forth
 56 2011-04-03 08:23:13 <gjs278> considering their pool is like 13ghash one guy powering off his 5970's for a bit looks like a huge spill
 57 2011-04-03 08:23:23 <gjs278> oh wow 18 now
 58 2011-04-03 08:29:29 <[Tycho]> Yeah, it's jumping.
 59 2011-04-03 08:29:30 <nathan7> wow, I have 0.104 bitcoins reward o/
 60 2011-04-03 08:35:19 <xelister> nathan7: if you have hot sister I can arrange for 2 bitcoin reward :}
 61 2011-04-03 08:36:18 <[Tycho]> Hans ?
 62 2011-04-03 08:36:38 <xelister> Hans Solo
 63 2011-04-03 08:40:43 <NWTSPV> helping "hands" :-)
 64 2011-04-03 08:59:08 <nathan7> xelister: I'm an only child q=
 65 2011-04-03 09:12:58 <grbgout> BlueMatt: hey.  No dice on that UPS.  Turns out what I was 'remembering' was actually a surge protector, and not a UPS. Someone had brought it to me claiming they had found a ups, but it wasn't ;)  Seems my memory got garbled.
 66 2011-04-03 09:16:38 <Diablo-D3> lawlz
 67 2011-04-03 09:37:22 <nathan7> the leet minute
 68 2011-04-03 09:42:52 <xelister> yeap
 69 2011-04-03 09:43:54 <grbgout> ;;bc,gen 240770
 70 2011-04-03 09:43:57 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 240770 Khps, given current difficulty of 68978.89245792 , is 3.51083194531 BTC per day and 0.146284664388 BTC per hour.
 71 2011-04-03 09:45:58 <maikmerten> ;;bc,gen 70000
 72 2011-04-03 09:45:59 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 70000 Khps, given current difficulty of 68978.89245792 , is 1.02071784762 BTC per day and 0.0425299103175 BTC per hour.
 73 2011-04-03 09:46:25 <xelister> ;;bc,gen 580000
 74 2011-04-03 09:46:26 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 580000 Khps, given current difficulty of 68978.89245792 , is 8.45737645171 BTC per day and 0.352390685488 BTC per hour.
 75 2011-04-03 09:55:45 <mizerydearia> Are there any pixel artists around?\n380599
 76 2011-04-03 10:11:27 <mizerydearia> xelister, Actually...
 77 2011-04-03 10:11:35 <mizerydearia> I just messaged Khaaan about a commission
 78 2011-04-03 10:12:05 <mizerydearia> xelister, but basically I want a kind of icon representing 'styles' or themes'
 79 2011-04-03 10:12:22 <mizerydearia> "a small image (maybe 24x24) or max height 24px but with can vary a little bit.  An image representing "styles" or "themes"  maybe like a palette, paintbrush or spraycan or something"
 80 2011-04-03 10:12:32 <mizerydearia> preferably something matching an existing icon in style to appear similar and not look too much conflicting: http://witcoin.com/img/pot.png
 81 2011-04-03 10:12:51 <mizerydearia> "Clicking it will link to a kind of style/theme system for the site where users can create custom styles, vote on them accordingly, support them (e.g. offer donations, etc) and leave comments... as well as make use of each style for categories."
 82 2011-04-03 10:13:06 <mizerydearia> e.g. one user-generated style could be 4chan, another reddit, another /., etc
 83 2011-04-03 10:13:56 <mizerydearia> ugh, I misspelled it here too ^_^
 84 2011-04-03 10:13:59 <mizerydearia> s/with/width/
 85 2011-04-03 10:15:07 <mizerydearia> I was kinda hoping to find something symbolic to base an idea for a design off of, but I couldn't think of anything better than a palette or spraycan
 86 2011-04-03 10:15:22 <mizerydearia> or paintbrush
 87 2011-04-03 10:16:20 <mizerydearia> btw, I wonder if it would be interesting to establish competitor to 99designs.com using bitcoin, even though there is a huge community against 99designs
 88 2011-04-03 10:16:54 <mizerydearia> Perhaps soe competitor could establish a more fair implementation to compensate designers for their work.
 89 2011-04-03 10:17:13 <mizerydearia> soe?  sony online entertainment?   wtf?  Subliminal advertising?  How is that even possible? X_X
 90 2011-04-03 10:50:10 <CIA-96> bitcoin: genjix * rb826a5440d3d intersango/cron/bankd/parse_deposits.php: skip payments out. http://tinyurl.com/3jjpzyd
 91 2011-04-03 11:24:50 <da2ce7> g'day boys
 92 2011-04-03 11:42:32 <topi`> hi there. Anyone using the oclminer to mine? (it's OpenCL written in C)
 93 2011-04-03 11:43:37 <topi`> I just compiled it (on Snow leopard) and it seems to otherwise work OK, but I get status -36 from OpenCL (Invalid command queue)
 94 2011-04-03 12:22:13 <tcatm> topi`: I use it on Linux.
 95 2011-04-03 13:36:25 <jgarzik> rotfl.  bitcoinpool locked their own forum thread, to prevent complaints?
 96 2011-04-03 13:37:27 <JFK911> it worked
 97 2011-04-03 13:51:16 <topi`> tcatm: have you ever seen this status -36 from clEnqueueReadBuffer() ?
 98 2011-04-03 13:51:45 <tcatm> nope
 99 2011-04-03 13:52:19 <topi`> it basically says "invalid command queue", which might be the result of an illegal access from the GPU
100 2011-04-03 13:52:34 <tcatm> what GPU?
101 2011-04-03 13:52:41 <topi`> I even did export CL_LOG_ERRORS="stdout" to see what is happening
102 2011-04-03 13:53:02 <topi`> this is a nvidia 9400m on my macbook, but the osx pages say it supports OpenCL
103 2011-04-03 13:53:25 <tcatm> oh. No idea if it work son nvidia at all. Try an ATI 5970.
104 2011-04-03 13:53:50 <topi`> tcatm: also, Gavin Andresen submitted a patch for oclminer to compile under OSX
105 2011-04-03 13:53:57 <topi`> maybe it only works for him...
106 2011-04-03 13:54:43 <tcatm> I wrote oclminer with ATI hardware in mind. I think there are even macs with ATI GPUs.
107 2011-04-03 13:55:15 <topi`> might be, but currently I don't have much access to other hardware
108 2011-04-03 13:55:32 <topi`> I might have, if I still worked for the company ;)
109 2011-04-03 13:55:44 <topi`> but we live strange times now
110 2011-04-03 13:56:14 <grbgout> topi`: have you tried the poclbm GPU miner?
111 2011-04-03 13:56:30 <topi`> nope. sounds like it has way too many dependencies ;)
112 2011-04-03 13:59:35 <gasteve> so, what's the deal with FairUser and bitcoinpool?  I'm all in favor of people experimenting with alternative payout schemes and such, but every time someone tries to make some rational, technical argument to FairUser, he seems to fly off the handle and level personal insults at people (slush mainly)... and what's up with bitcoinpool being DDOSed?  if someone is doing that, they should knock it off...no matter how irrational FairUser is behaving
113 2011-04-03 14:13:59 <topi`> grbgout: I don't think it'll make a difference whether there's python or C code running the openCL commands, if the commands don't seem to operate on my gfx card...
114 2011-04-03 14:14:37 <topi`> and I have no idea if pyOpenCL is available for OSX
115 2011-04-03 14:15:26 <topi`> ok, found py26-pyopencl from macports.
116 2011-04-03 14:33:18 <jgarzik> gasteve: unfortunately it seems like every pool suffers DoS
117 2011-04-03 14:33:31 <jgarzik> gasteve: slush has suffered through a few
118 2011-04-03 14:34:21 <gasteve> people have nothing better to do?
119 2011-04-03 14:35:39 <jgarzik> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=5347.0
120 2011-04-03 14:35:47 <jgarzik> BitcoinPool.com open thread -- will not be locked
121 2011-04-03 14:35:48 <lianj> gasteve: its the internet :P
122 2011-04-03 14:38:10 <gasteve> in any case, it's hardly worth the time trying to have a dialog with FairUser ...hard to rationalize with irrational people
123 2011-04-03 14:39:05 <jgarzik> indeed
124 2011-04-03 14:40:14 <topi`> I am getting only 50-70% usage on my Graphics Processor with the poclbm, odd.
125 2011-04-03 14:40:43 <topi`> the chipset is using 6.2 watts of power, hence it is doing something more than just being idle :)
126 2011-04-03 14:55:48 <grbgout> ;;bc,wiki
127 2011-04-03 14:55:50 <gribble> https://bitcoin.it/ | Mar 24, 2011 ... Sourced from Wikipedia. Bitcoin is a digital currency created in 2009 by Satoshi Nakamoto. It is also the name of the open source software ...
128 2011-04-03 15:41:48 <Diablo-D3> hey topi`
129 2011-04-03 15:41:50 <Diablo-D3> try my miner
130 2011-04-03 16:04:09 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: any guesses on the chances of getting upnp merged?
131 2011-04-03 16:05:07 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: there seemed to be general agreement about merging it, defaulting to disabled
132 2011-04-03 16:05:30 <BlueMatt> ok, nice
133 2011-04-03 16:10:23 <lyspooner> ;;last tcatm
134 2011-04-03 16:10:24 <gribble> (last [--{from,in,on,with,without,regexp} <value>] [--nolimit]) -- Returns the last message matching the given criteria. --from requires a nick from whom the message came; --in requires a channel the message was sent to; --on requires a network the message was sent on; --with requires some string that had to be in the message; --regexp requires a regular expression the message must (1 more message)
135 2011-04-03 16:10:30 <gribble> tcatm was last seen in #bitcoin-dev 2 hours, 15 minutes, and 46 seconds ago: <tcatm> I wrote oclminer with ATI hardware in mind. I think there are even macs with ATI GPUs.
136 2011-04-03 16:10:30 <lyspooner> ;;seen tcatm
137 2011-04-03 16:29:08 <jgarzik> http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=5351.0
138 2011-04-03 16:29:19 <jgarzik> anyone around, willing to build test this for me?
139 2011-04-03 16:29:34 <jgarzik> my build machinery is a bit exotic, and doesn't use the standard makefiles
140 2011-04-03 16:29:51 <lfm> jgarzik: the 4way is still best on phenom isnt it?
141 2011-04-03 16:30:18 <jgarzik> lfm: should be better on newer AMD than standard, yes
142 2011-04-03 16:30:50 <jgarzik> lfm: but fastest on Phenom is either ufasoft's cpu miner, or mine w/ algo 4way
143 2011-04-03 16:30:59 <jgarzik> lfm: bitcoin's 4way is slower
144 2011-04-03 16:31:06 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: pulling, IMHO, this should fall under the "remove miner and leave reference implementation" where the "reference implementation" is the simplest to understand for people who need a "reference"
145 2011-04-03 16:31:15 <lfm> jgarzik: oh ok
146 2011-04-03 16:31:23 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: yes
147 2011-04-03 16:41:40 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: builds/appears to work fine with standard unix&mingw makefiles, bitcoin & bitcoind
148 2011-04-03 16:43:39 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: thanks much.  Up for a challenge?  :)  https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/142
149 2011-04-03 16:43:48 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: well except for the existing win32 bitcoind fails, but with that change it works fine
150 2011-04-03 16:44:48 <tcatm> jgarzik: how could a GUI user disable the miner after upgrading to a version with that patch?
151 2011-04-03 16:45:11 <jasonphd> jgarzik: to test a proof of work, you double hash256 the submitted data and make sure that the result is less than the target difficulty..... but what exactly do you double hash? it doesn't appear to be a double hash of the entire submitted data, but only the first 160 characters or so, and it appears you need to reverse/flip it first, but i can't find any documentation detailing the exact process.
152 2011-04-03 16:45:31 <jgarzik> tcatm: good point...
153 2011-04-03 16:45:47 <BlueMatt> so...always disable mining in gui?
154 2011-04-03 16:46:04 <lfm> jasonphd: yes the block header is just the first 80 mbytes of the getwork data
155 2011-04-03 16:46:24 <tcatm> I'd say move the setting to the options dialog and rename it
156 2011-04-03 16:46:43 <lfm> jasonphd: it is padded for those stripped down sha256 routines that dont do their own padding
157 2011-04-03 16:47:04 <jgarzik> tcatm: I'd rather just disable at startup, if (GUI && wallet_generation_enabled)
158 2011-04-03 16:47:20 <lfm> 80 bytes, not 80 mbytes
159 2011-04-03 16:47:27 <jgarzik> tcatm: command line can re-enable, if they wish
160 2011-04-03 16:47:32 <tcatm> jgarzik: sounds good, too
161 2011-04-03 16:47:46 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: yep
162 2011-04-03 16:47:51 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: unless command line says otherwise
163 2011-04-03 16:47:55 <BlueMatt> more like if (GUI && wallet_generation_enabled && !-gen=1)
164 2011-04-03 16:48:01 <BlueMatt> oh 1 sec too late on that one
165 2011-04-03 16:48:21 <jasonphd> lfm: but you don't just take those first 80 bytes (160 characters) and double sha-256 hash them... you have to do something to them before the hash (flip them? reverse them? something?) what are those middle steps?
166 2011-04-03 16:48:50 <BlueMatt> since when is 80 bytes 160 chars?
167 2011-04-03 16:48:50 <jgarzik> jasonphd: there are no docs.  at this level, you _really_ need to be reading bitcoin source code, and understanding exactly what is being hashed.
168 2011-04-03 16:48:58 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: 160 hex chars
169 2011-04-03 16:49:03 <BlueMatt> oh
170 2011-04-03 16:49:41 <lfm> jasonphd: I dont think you flip them if you are using a standard sha256 routine. you may have to flip the sha256 output tho, both between the two calls and after the second call
171 2011-04-03 16:50:22 <lfm> BlueMatt: 80 bytes is 160 chars when it is hex coded
172 2011-04-03 16:50:32 <BlueMatt> lfm: read jgarzik's last msg
173 2011-04-03 16:50:48 <sipa> quite sure there is no flipping in between the two sha256 rounds
174 2011-04-03 16:50:58 <sipa> just keep the order of bytes from the output in the input
175 2011-04-03 16:51:07 <jgarzik> lfm: I believe he's looking at checkwork() in http://yyz.us/bitcoin/poold.py  which is indeed the standard sha256.  However, you need to byte/word reverse, if you are going to build python 256-bit integer, to test "hash < target"
176 2011-04-03 16:51:11 <sipa> there is some strange byte-swapping afterwards though
177 2011-04-03 16:51:16 <jgarzik> yep
178 2011-04-03 16:51:29 <jgarzik> 
179 2011-04-03 16:51:31 <jgarzik> 
180 2011-04-03 16:51:33 <jgarzik> 
181 2011-04-03 16:51:35 <jgarzik> 
182 2011-04-03 16:51:37 <jgarzik> 
183 2011-04-03 16:52:02 <tcatm> you can feed the output of the first sha256() into the second. just add the constants.
184 2011-04-03 16:52:15 <lfm> jgarzik: ya ok, you treat that 256 bit result as a little endian extended int for compare
185 2011-04-03 16:52:44 <jasonphd> jgarzik: yes that's the code i'm looking at... you take the first 80 bytes... run your mysterious to me "bufreverse" routine, then double hash it..... i can't figure out what exactly that routine is doing... i'm trying to translate it to another language (php)
186 2011-04-03 16:53:03 <lfm> tcatm: if you use standard sha256 calls the lib adds the padding so you should not pass the padding
187 2011-04-03 16:53:15 <jgarzik> jasonphd: bufreverse calls bytereverse.  bytereverse performs a byte swap on a 32-bit integer.
188 2011-04-03 16:53:27 <jgarzik> jasonphd: wordreverse swaps the 32-bit words inside a 256-bit integer.
189 2011-04-03 16:53:55 <phantomcircuit> jgarzik, wtf is that shit
190 2011-04-03 16:54:03 <jgarzik> phantomcircuit: be->le
191 2011-04-03 16:54:15 <phantomcircuit> jgarzik, no i mean the code you pasted
192 2011-04-03 16:54:21 <phantomcircuit> hash1_o
193 2011-04-03 16:54:22 <phantomcircuit> wtf
194 2011-04-03 16:54:28 <lfm> jasonphd: the buf reverse should be internal to the sha256 routine if you can find a standard library for sha256
195 2011-04-03 16:54:44 <jgarzik> phantomcircuit: _o distinguishes the hash object, from the hash data
196 2011-04-03 16:54:52 <jgarzik> phantomcircuit: hash data lacks _o suffix
197 2011-04-03 16:55:04 <phantomcircuit> oh wow using .update
198 2011-04-03 16:55:06 <phantomcircuit> classy
199 2011-04-03 16:55:26 <phantomcircuit> hash = hashlib.sha256(data).digest()
200 2011-04-03 16:55:32 <jgarzik> phantomcircuit: hey, it was my very first python program :)