1 2011-05-13 00:00:30 <gmaxwell> Or if you want a widely tendered currency which isn't controlled by large banks and governments, but instead by a consensus protocol then you want bitcoin to be successful.
  2 2011-05-13 00:00:40 <gmaxwell> So those people aren't just going to "cash out"
  3 2011-05-13 00:01:18 <molecular> 7.25, the forbes effect
  4 2011-05-13 00:01:27 <gmaxwell> and if they were, they would have probably done so when it hit $1... considering that it was worth far less for a long time.
  5 2011-05-13 00:02:55 <molecular> hehe, bitcoin has doubled in one week, insane
  6 2011-05-13 00:07:36 <zecco> correction ... BTC now at $7.40
  7 2011-05-13 00:09:10 <zecco> gmaxwell: agreed!
  8 2011-05-13 00:11:10 <Diablo-D3> [Tycho]: uh, did you turn LP off?
  9 2011-05-13 00:13:19 <disq> is there any documentation on x-poll-ntime? (other than poclbm and pushpool sourcecode?)
 10 2011-05-13 00:15:25 <disq> s/poll/roll
 11 2011-05-13 00:21:19 <Raccoon> how do we convince Minecraft to use bitcoins
 12 2011-05-13 00:21:27 <Raccoon> so people can pay minecraft to buy/sell bitcoins
 13 2011-05-13 00:25:06 <CIA-103> DiabloMiner: Patrick McFarland master * r3a16dd9 / (4 files in 3 dirs):
 14 2011-05-13 00:28:07 <jgarzik> disq: bitcoin source code
 15 2011-05-13 00:33:41 <disq> jgarzik: thanks, i'll look it up tomorrow :)
 16 2011-05-13 00:51:35 <tyran37> how come I have transactions with 0/unconfirmed that aren't listed at the top in the bitcoin client
 17 2011-05-13 00:52:17 <ne0futur> check your OS system date ?
 18 2011-05-13 00:52:25 <ne0futur> sure you dont live in the past =?
 19 2011-05-13 00:52:28 <tyran37> no
 20 2011-05-13 00:53:33 <tyran37> so far it has always sorted by # of confirmations
 21 2011-05-13 00:53:51 <jrmithdobbs> luke-jr: ?
 22 2011-05-13 00:54:08 <luke-jr> jrmithdobbs: fixed
 23 2011-05-13 00:56:29 <jrmithdobbs> luke-jr: long poll thread isn't
 24 2011-05-13 00:56:38 <jrmithdobbs> luke-jr: err maybe it is nm
 25 2011-05-13 00:56:43 <jrmithdobbs> nope
 26 2011-05-13 00:56:56 <luke-jr> O.o
 27 2011-05-13 01:11:37 <jrmithdobbs> kitty loves her new sauna room
 28 2011-05-13 01:11:41 <jrmithdobbs> lol
 29 2011-05-13 01:11:49 <jrmithdobbs> can't get her out of there
 30 2011-05-13 01:12:04 <gmaxwell> next week. "< jrmithdobbs> help! my cat has been sucked into a fan"
 31 2011-05-13 01:12:51 <jrmithdobbs> nope my cases are closed
 32 2011-05-13 01:12:59 <jrmithdobbs> :)
 33 2011-05-13 01:16:18 <jargon> Who's wants to see the work I did on the bitcoin audit thus far?
 34 2011-05-13 01:16:36 <jargon> I'm back from Detox and am ready to audit additional source
 35 2011-05-13 01:18:24 <jrmithdobbs> audit of what precisely?
 36 2011-05-13 01:18:34 <jrmithdobbs> also, not confidence inspiring statement
 37 2011-05-13 01:19:30 <jargon> Github is retarded, it doesn't detect user zoom in-order to rescale borders
 38 2011-05-13 01:19:58 <jrmithdobbs> if that's your only complaint about github you have not used github enough
 39 2011-05-13 01:23:15 <doublec> jrmithdobbs: jargon is a troll who purports to 'audit' the code but really makes nonsensical statements with buzzwords and gibberish
 40 2011-05-13 01:23:24 <jrmithdobbs> oic
 41 2011-05-13 01:23:57 <doublec> although perhaps detox has helped
 42 2011-05-13 01:24:11 <jargon> Should I audit the JSON code first or the interpreter first?
 43 2011-05-13 01:24:21 <jargon> I don't see why it has both.
 44 2011-05-13 01:24:30 <doublec> apparently it hasn't
 45 2011-05-13 01:24:40 <jrmithdobbs> lol
 46 2011-05-13 01:26:12 <jargon> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/script.h
 47 2011-05-13 01:26:35 <jargon> SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY = 0x80
 48 2011-05-13 01:28:42 <alystair> SIGHASH_ANYONEBUTMEPAYS ?
 49 2011-05-13 01:28:45 <alystair> :D
 50 2011-05-13 01:34:12 <luke-jr> WTF WAS THAT
 51 2011-05-13 01:34:27 <Diablo-D3> what was what?
 52 2011-05-13 01:34:33 <luke-jr> ceb1a7fb57ef8b75ac59b56dd859d5cb3ab5c31168aa55eb3819cd5ddbd3d806
 53 2011-05-13 01:34:45 <Diablo-D3> it looks like a hash.
 54 2011-05-13 01:35:34 <luke-jr> a transaction
 55 2011-05-13 01:35:50 <Diablo-D3> whats rwong with it?
 56 2011-05-13 01:36:00 <luke-jr> it's all 0s
 57 2011-05-13 01:36:01 <_ape> any of you guys good with javascript? i'm trying to resize an iframe as its contents change (without onload)
 58 2011-05-13 01:36:11 <Diablo-D3> luke-jr: find it on blockexplorer
 59 2011-05-13 01:36:17 <luke-jr> Diablo-D3: it won't show until it's in a block
 60 2011-05-13 01:36:20 <Diablo-D3> oh
 61 2011-05-13 01:36:27 <alystair> and so... it begins
 62 2011-05-13 01:36:46 <luke-jr> alystair: is that you?
 63 2011-05-13 01:37:10 <luke-jr> another one: 9173744691ac25f3cd94f35d4fc0e0a2b9d1ab17b4fe562acc07660552f95518
 64 2011-05-13 01:37:15 <alystair> it's the wiper block my friends at MIT created, it's a distruptive hash that invalidates everyones wallets by corrupting every single sequence.. muahahaha
 65 2011-05-13 01:37:26 <alystair> jk
 66 2011-05-13 01:37:27 <luke-jr> o ok
 67 2011-05-13 01:37:29 <alystair> I have no clue
 68 2011-05-13 01:37:30 <luke-jr> good thing I sold all
 69 2011-05-13 01:37:33 <doublec> yeah those are odd
 70 2011-05-13 01:40:13 <luke-jr> it's not getting in any blocks
 71 2011-05-13 01:41:30 <luke-jr> http://bitcoincharts.com/bitcoin/ has it
 72 2011-05-13 01:42:09 <luke-jr> cute
 73 2011-05-13 01:42:32 <luke-jr> Eligius will include it :o
 74 2011-05-13 01:42:54 <draaglom> luke-jr I'm getting oddly large numbers of invalid blocks on your pool
 75 2011-05-13 01:43:23 <draaglom> *shares
 76 2011-05-13 01:43:30 <luke-jr> draaglom: maybe reconnect
 77 2011-05-13 01:43:38 <jargon> Anyone want on the auditing dev team for a hash-prediction patch?
 78 2011-05-13 01:43:38 <luke-jr> draaglom: where are you located?
 79 2011-05-13 01:43:50 <draaglom> UK
 80 2011-05-13 01:44:00 <jargon> Anyone want on the auditing dev team for a hash-prediction patch?
 81 2011-05-13 01:44:06 <jargon> sorry for the double post
 82 2011-05-13 01:44:53 <jargon> It is basically a means to measure divergence of hashes
 83 2011-05-13 01:45:24 <jargon> otherwise it will eventually go into a collided hash loop
 84 2011-05-13 01:45:33 <luke-jr> jargon: shut up
 85 2011-05-13 01:46:04 <jargon> You guys haven't put any thought into what would happen if there were a hash collision?
 86 2011-05-13 01:46:22 <luke-jr> jargon: shut up
 87 2011-05-13 01:46:28 <jargon> it would loop infinitely
 88 2011-05-13 01:46:50 <jargon> then blocks would come several trillion-trillion a day
 89 2011-05-13 01:47:09 <jargon> obviously bitcoin market would collapse
 90 2011-05-13 01:47:51 <doublec> hopefully jargon will collide with a hash someday
 91 2011-05-13 01:48:11 <Diablo-D3> [11:46:04] <jargon> You guys haven't put any thought into what would happen if there were a hash collision?
 92 2011-05-13 01:48:20 <Diablo-D3> well, for one, it'd prove sha256 is not secure
 93 2011-05-13 01:48:29 <Diablo-D3> other than that, nothing would meaningfully happen
 94 2011-05-13 01:48:53 <luke-jr> so
 95 2011-05-13 01:48:59 <luke-jr> should I let this & thing & through?
 96 2011-05-13 01:49:16 <Diablo-D3> so what is it, exactly?
 97 2011-05-13 01:49:32 <luke-jr> a block full of 0 BTC outputs
 98 2011-05-13 01:49:38 <luke-jr> only a 0.01 BTC fee
 99 2011-05-13 01:49:41 <Diablo-D3> could be a bitdns demo
100 2011-05-13 01:50:08 <doublec> I seem to recall someone suggesting 0 btc transactions on irc yesterday
101 2011-05-13 01:50:27 <luke-jr> doublec: well, they sent it
102 2011-05-13 01:51:11 <luke-jr> it's like 7 KB of data
103 2011-05-13 01:51:41 <Diablo-D3> when does the oversized tx fee start?
104 2011-05-13 01:51:42 <grbgout> doublec: what was the point behind the suggestion?
105 2011-05-13 01:52:08 <doublec> grbgout: encoding data in the transaction somehow
106 2011-05-13 01:52:16 <doublec> I'll see if I can find it
107 2011-05-13 01:58:03 <CIA-103> DiabloMiner: Patrick McFarland master * r9698d5b / src/main/java/com/diablominer/DiabloMiner/DiabloMiner.java : Fix >2^31 support - http://bit.ly/mcdsO1
108 2011-05-13 02:00:53 <nanotube> hey, i thought cia.vc was dead?
109 2011-05-13 02:07:59 <alystair> worst attempt at flooding ever?
110 2011-05-13 02:11:44 <luke-jr> lol
111 2011-05-13 02:15:52 <alystair> can he be banned for a few hours
112 2011-05-13 02:18:07 <JFK911> how about forever
113 2011-05-13 02:20:28 <luke-jr> http://blockexplorer.com/tx/ceb1a7fb57ef8b75ac59b56dd859d5cb3ab5c31168aa55eb3819cd5ddbd3d806
114 2011-05-13 02:21:42 <frub3nz> Anyone know how the PS3's client performs? I think I heard it's at about 21 Mhash/s.
115 2011-05-13 02:21:53 <Diablo-D3> frub3nz: might be less
116 2011-05-13 02:24:59 <nanotube> in that tx, there's data in the opchecksigs. first three outs are, when decoded to ascii: first three outs say this: =ybegin line=128 size=8776 name=bitcoin.jpg
117 2011-05-13 02:25:18 <jrmithdobbs> you know
118 2011-05-13 02:25:24 <nanotube> anyone care to grab the whole jpg and see what it is? :)
119 2011-05-13 02:25:32 <nanotube> i suspect it's the bitcoin logo, judging by the name... heh.
120 2011-05-13 02:25:35 <nanotube> wonder if my guess is right.
121 2011-05-13 02:25:37 <jrmithdobbs> i know nano has no config files worth deleting. this is just satisfying to type every time though!: apt-get remove --purge nano
122 2011-05-13 02:29:41 <grbgout> jrmithdobbs: aw, but we lub nanotube!
123 2011-05-13 02:30:30 <jargon> OP_ROLL looks eroneous at a glance
124 2011-05-13 02:30:41 <jargon> erroneous*
125 2011-05-13 02:30:44 <JFK911> ;;bc,stats
126 2011-05-13 02:30:45 <gribble> Current Blocks: 123577 | Current Difficulty: 157426.20628986 | Next Difficulty At Block: 124991 | Next Difficulty In: 1414 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 0 days, 18 hours, 10 minutes, and 36 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 199423.41072400
127 2011-05-13 02:31:05 <jrmithdobbs> grbgout: lol, was unrelated
128 2011-05-13 02:31:09 <jargon> OP_ROLL looks at a glance like it doesn't actually ROR or ROL
129 2011-05-13 02:31:38 <jargon> It looks like it just shifts and trims one direction
130 2011-05-13 02:32:06 <jargon> I'm looking in script.h and script.cpp
131 2011-05-13 02:32:28 <jargon> line 371-375
132 2011-05-13 02:32:35 <jargon> in script.cpp
133 2011-05-13 02:33:44 <jargon> Would this cause adverse effects if truely coded into the scripting engine incorrectly?
134 2011-05-13 02:36:35 <jargon> wait,
135 2011-05-13 02:36:57 <jargon> is this a barrel shift or an endian flip?
136 2011-05-13 02:37:14 <jargon> or rather an addressing flip
137 2011-05-13 02:37:25 <doublec> it does what the stack effect says it does
138 2011-05-13 02:37:31 <doublec> (xn ... x2 x1 x0 n - ... x2 x1 x0 xn)
139 2011-05-13 02:38:49 <jargon> so it does ROL for an address range word aligned
140 2011-05-13 02:38:51 <jargon> ?
141 2011-05-13 02:39:03 <jargon> within the stack?
142 2011-05-13 02:39:49 <doublec> it removes the nth item from the stack, and pushes it on to the front of the stack
143 2011-05-13 02:40:08 <doublec> vs PICK which copies the nth item from the stack and pushes it on to the front of the stack
144 2011-05-13 02:41:25 <jargon> I see
145 2011-05-13 02:42:00 <doublec> jargon: see here http://ficl.sourceforge.net/dpans/dpans6.htm#6.2.2150
146 2011-05-13 02:42:12 <doublec> looks to be based on the ANSI Forth definition
147 2011-05-13 02:44:06 <jargon> I still don't understand how to do horizontal split between applications in Win7
148 2011-05-13 02:48:31 <Diablo-D3> huh interesting
149 2011-05-13 02:48:39 <Diablo-D3> hashkill's nvidia optimized kernel uses int4s
150 2011-05-13 02:49:22 <JFK911> horizontal split is c-x 3 isnt it
151 2011-05-13 02:52:16 <jimb0> nanotube: it is the bitcoin logo yyencoded, it spans two transactions
152 2011-05-13 02:53:34 <jimb0> nanotube: tx ceb1a7fb57ef8b75ac59b56dd859d5cb3ab5c31168aa55eb3819cd5ddbd3d806 and 9173744691ac25f3cd94f35d4fc0e0a2b9d1ab17b4fe562acc07660552f95518
153 2011-05-13 02:54:43 <vorlov> do u guys have 5870s or 5970s attached to PCI-Ex1 slots? does ubuntu discover them?
154 2011-05-13 02:54:47 <vorlov> is it working for mininig?
155 2011-05-13 03:01:11 <nanotube> jimb0: heh cute... know whodunit?
156 2011-05-13 03:01:57 <jimb0> no
157 2011-05-13 03:03:26 <nanotube> mmm
158 2011-05-13 03:03:41 <jrmithdobbs> ;;bc,calc 44000000
159 2011-05-13 03:03:43 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 44000000 Khps, given current difficulty of 157426.20628986 , is 4 hours, 16 minutes, and 6 seconds
160 2011-05-13 03:03:56 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 4400000 Khps, given current difficulty of 157426.20628986 , is 1 day, 18 hours, 41 minutes, and 8 seconds
161 2011-05-13 03:03:56 <jrmithdobbs> ;;bc,calc 4400000
162 2011-05-13 03:04:09 <jrmithdobbs> ;;bc,gen 4400000
163 2011-05-13 03:04:11 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 4400000 Khps, given current difficulty of 157426.20628986 , is 28.1125041305 BTC per day and 1.17135433877 BTC per hour.
164 2011-05-13 03:12:03 <Fnar> The 0.3.21 bitcoin client seems to be linked to libjpeg.so.62, but I've only got 8.0.2, any workarounds besides finding a .62 or compiling from source?
165 2011-05-13 03:12:47 <jrmithdobbs> Fnar: it builds in like 5 min
166 2011-05-13 03:12:52 <Diablo-D3> your distro probably still has 6b as well
167 2011-05-13 03:13:15 <Diablo-D3> 7/8 uses an incompatible API
168 2011-05-13 03:13:22 <Diablo-D3> Im not sure what in bitcoin uses libjpeg either
169 2011-05-13 03:16:48 <Fnar> Looked at compiling but wanted to avoid gathering all the right versions of stuff. My wx version seems to let it compile but then crap out at runtime. If it's not going to be compatile anyway I'll find a .62 then
170 2011-05-13 03:47:51 <vorlov> do you guys have a good recomendation of a computer that is at a good price that can handle 2x5970s?
171 2011-05-13 03:48:03 <vorlov> its just gonna be a headless miner... nothing too fency but was wondering if someone came across a good deal lately
172 2011-05-13 03:49:11 <jgarzik> vorlov: you have a source of additional 5970's?
173 2011-05-13 03:49:45 <vorlov> no i dont.... but id like to get a computer that can handle them
174 2011-05-13 03:49:57 <vorlov> is everybody taking those off the market like hot dogs?
175 2011-05-13 03:50:28 <noagendamarket> yes
176 2011-05-13 03:52:04 <vorlov> i figured as much since the prices seem insane
177 2011-05-13 03:52:15 <vorlov> but regardless... what do u guys use for computer to handle them
178 2011-05-13 03:52:29 <vorlov> whats a good price you manage to package together
179 2011-05-13 03:54:07 <gmaxwell> proper 5970 rig: http://bayimg.com/KAAeaaAdp
180 2011-05-13 03:55:53 <dissipate> can someone tell me what an ORPHAN BLOCK is?
181 2011-05-13 03:55:58 <dissipate> my client is receiving a lot of them
182 2011-05-13 03:56:36 <gmaxwell> Is your clock correct?
183 2011-05-13 03:57:06 <Raccoon> hmm
184 2011-05-13 03:57:15 <gmaxwell> An orphan block is a block which is not a member of the longest chain. It's a losing block that didn't end up contributing to the official transaction log.
185 2011-05-13 03:57:24 <Raccoon> with the bitcoin deflation model
186 2011-05-13 03:57:51 <Raccoon> wouldn't the cost of generating new blocks outweigh the transactions themselves
187 2011-05-13 03:58:01 <Raccoon> especially if transactions come to 0.001 BTC for a loaf of bread
188 2011-05-13 03:58:18 <gmaxwell> Raccoon: no because the difficulty will adjust and the cost of mining will go down.
189 2011-05-13 03:58:21 <Raccoon> with a transaction cost of 0.01 or 0.1 BTC just to record it
190 2011-05-13 03:58:25 <dissipate> gmaxwell, looks like there was a recent blockchain split
191 2011-05-13 03:58:40 <Raccoon> but you see
192 2011-05-13 03:58:48 <gmaxwell> (the aformentioned asics will make insane hash rates should be possible for not much money)
193 2011-05-13 03:58:55 <Raccoon> blocks are produced at a constant rate, and not on a rate of demand, right?
194 2011-05-13 04:00:49 <gmaxwell> Raccoon: the system adjusts the difficulty so you get 2016 per two weeks.
195 2011-05-13 04:00:50 <gmaxwell> Right now blocks can be up to 1mb which will store a couple thousand transactions. Though that might get lifted in the future.
196 2011-05-13 04:00:50 <Raccoon> doesn't that limit the number of potential transactions per day?
197 2011-05-13 04:00:51 <Raccoon> just considering things like micropayments here
198 2011-05-13 04:00:53 <dissipate> Raccoon, they are generated at a rate that is probabilistically determined by two factors: the aggregate hash rate of the network and the difficulty level.
199 2011-05-13 04:01:05 <gmaxwell> Bitcoin doesn't currently scale to high micropayment volume, it could be scaled in the future.
200 2011-05-13 04:01:18 <Raccoon> but not based on actual transaction economy
201 2011-05-13 04:01:42 <Raccoon> what if no transactions happen for 24 hours.  what are done with all the empty blocks?
202 2011-05-13 04:01:57 <gmaxwell> Hm?
203 2011-05-13 04:02:26 <Raccoon> each new block closes the previous right
204 2011-05-13 04:02:29 <gmaxwell> Also you can do transactions without waiting for a miner to confirm them, so long as they're small enough that you're not scared of a double-spend.
205 2011-05-13 04:02:45 <gmaxwell> Raccoon: no. The solution of a block closes the block itself.
206 2011-05-13 04:03:25 <gmaxwell> you solve a block with the transactions in it, which you continually add as you work.
207 2011-05-13 04:03:30 <Raccoon> so a block stays open until a solution is found
208 2011-05-13 04:03:40 <gmaxwell> Yes.
209 2011-05-13 04:03:58 <gmaxwell> And a miner can perform a DOS on the network by refusing to put transactions into his blocks at all.
210 2011-05-13 04:04:00 <Raccoon> and the transactions in it don't change the outcome hash of the block?
211 2011-05-13 04:04:10 <gmaxwell> They do. They're part of the block.
212 2011-05-13 04:04:31 <Raccoon> so how are miners constantly keeping up with new transactions while trying to computate a solution
213 2011-05-13 04:04:59 <gmaxwell> The nonce space is 32bits. A 320MH/s miner could only work on that for about 13 seconds before getting new work.
214 2011-05-13 04:05:07 <gmaxwell> The new work will be the hash of a new block.
215 2011-05-13 04:05:19 <gmaxwell> Which, presumably, includes newer transactions.
216 2011-05-13 04:05:49 <gmaxwell> You obviously don't have to stay right on the bleeding edge of the transaction log at all times.
217 2011-05-13 04:06:03 <Raccoon> well
218 2011-05-13 04:06:08 <Raccoon> which miner gets the win
219 2011-05-13 04:06:13 <gmaxwell> E.g. at minute six you solve a block generated at minute 4 with transacitons up to minute 4. Thats what you publish then.
220 2011-05-13 04:06:20 <Raccoon> the one with 15 or the one with 16 transactions in his block?
221 2011-05-13 04:06:44 <gmaxwell> Whichever one was first. The transactions aren't relevant. The network has a consensus timestamping.
222 2011-05-13 04:06:49 <gmaxwell> and more importantly:
223 2011-05-13 04:06:57 <Raccoon> and how does the rest of the network, with latency, cope with which transaction should be the first of the new block
224 2011-05-13 04:06:59 <gmaxwell> the one that becomes part of the longest chain by being extended wins.
225 2011-05-13 04:07:03 <Raccoon> since there are two competing winners
226 2011-05-13 04:07:13 <gmaxwell> Raccoon: the transactions are at the discretion of the miners.
227 2011-05-13 04:07:31 <Raccoon> yes, but in the end, that block becomes defacto
228 2011-05-13 04:07:32 <gmaxwell> They get feeds of transactions and they decide what to put into the blocks they mine and in what order.
229 2011-05-13 04:07:35 <gmaxwell> Yes.
230 2011-05-13 04:07:37 <Raccoon> i'm just curious how it's voted into stone
231 2011-05-13 04:07:52 <Raccoon> and how everyone else adjusts to that
232 2011-05-13 04:08:00 <Raccoon> disagreements, et al
233 2011-05-13 04:08:10 <Raccoon> "dude, i had that block solved ages ago!"
234 2011-05-13 04:08:16 <gmaxwell> Nodes pick the first solution to base their new work off. First is based off the network time, which is computed using some median stuff with exclusion based on recently solved block timestamps (I don't know the details there)
235 2011-05-13 04:08:37 <gmaxwell> Ultimately it's the longest chain that really determines the winner
236 2011-05-13 04:08:47 <gmaxwell> which means you need as much hashing power as most of the network to cheat.
237 2011-05-13 04:08:59 <Raccoon> and with netsplits?
238 2011-05-13 04:09:11 <Raccoon> you could end up with two halves of a network computing on merrily for a day or two
239 2011-05-13 04:09:15 <gmaxwell> Then you can end up with long orphaned chains that imploed on join.
240 2011-05-13 04:09:17 <Raccoon> oblivious to eachother
241 2011-05-13 04:09:25 <gmaxwell> And one, by chance, will end up longer than the other.
242 2011-05-13 04:09:29 <Raccoon> and all those transactions?
243 2011-05-13 04:09:34 <Raccoon> just get canceled?
244 2011-05-13 04:09:35 <gmaxwell> will get added back to the pool.
245 2011-05-13 04:09:40 <gmaxwell> to get reconfirmed
246 2011-05-13 04:09:52 <Raccoon> but they're already spending money they don't have anymore
247 2011-05-13 04:09:57 <Raccoon> money from new blocks they created
248 2011-05-13 04:10:03 <gmaxwell> yep, then the side that loses ... POOF. Void transaction.
249 2011-05-13 04:10:04 <Raccoon> that just got imploded
250 2011-05-13 04:10:22 <Raccoon> and there's no battle?
251 2011-05-13 04:10:36 <gmaxwell> this is why you wait for multiple confirmations when you care... or for many blocks to pass on the chain when you really care. This is alsowhy generated tx take 100 blocks to confirm.
252 2011-05-13 04:10:45 <gmaxwell> No battle. Longest chain wins.
253 2011-05-13 04:11:14 <gmaxwell> And this is why wasting all this energy on GPUs is a good thing: It makes it @#$@# hard to control the longest chain.
254 2011-05-13 04:11:15 <Raccoon> it just seems possible for some pretend splitted network to come along and implode legitimate chains that way
255 2011-05-13 04:11:42 <gmaxwell> You can only win by doing more hashing than the other side of the prospective split.
256 2011-05-13 04:11:48 <Raccoon> and legitimate clients would start destroying their own data
257 2011-05-13 04:12:17 <Raccoon> if you can purpously segment the network with DDOS
258 2011-05-13 04:12:32 <Raccoon> you can divide and take over those segments one by one
259 2011-05-13 04:12:35 <gmaxwell> The fact that splits lower the hashing power required to cause problems, is why I was babbling about linking bitcoin via ham radio the other day. :)
260 2011-05-13 04:12:36 <Raccoon> until you own them all
261 2011-05-13 04:13:20 <Raccoon> heh
262 2011-05-13 04:13:39 <Raccoon> another problem is that so much of the work is being actually done by so few
263 2011-05-13 04:13:43 <Raccoon> bit farms
264 2011-05-13 04:13:59 <gmaxwell> (and you totally could do it.. you need less than 300bps to forward blocks now, if you don't mind waiting a while to get them.)
265 2011-05-13 04:14:20 <gmaxwell> Raccoon: yes, that sucks.
266 2011-05-13 04:14:49 <gmaxwell> This is why many people have made noise about deepbit being too big. Though really 50% isn't the first danger point. It's the last.
267 2011-05-13 04:15:32 <gmaxwell> of course, when the gold rush ends and people mine because they care about the healt of the BC economy we'll probably see less care about varience reduction.
268 2011-05-13 04:15:59 <gmaxwell> s/healt/health s/varience/variance/
269 2011-05-13 04:33:53 <dissipate> gmaxwell, if deepbit got over 50% and someone took it over or the operator tried to do a takeover of bitcoin, the miners would jump ship.
270 2011-05-13 04:33:58 <dissipate> gmaxwell, i'm not too worried
271 2011-05-13 04:34:25 <gmaxwell> dissipate: The miners are not jumping ship when deepbit has a day long outage and charges the highest fee of all the pools.
272 2011-05-13 04:35:00 <gmaxwell> You're assuming that miners are paying attention, and that lots of them care alot about the health of the network. Might be true, data so far is inconclusive.
273 2011-05-13 04:35:29 <dissipate> gmaxwell, as soon as they found out, they would because the value of their coins would be at risk.
274 2011-05-13 04:35:40 <gmaxwell> I'm not even worried about 50% things get nasty when the network is lopsided. Partitioning becomes more likely, etc.
275 2011-05-13 04:35:41 <JFK911> what pools take less than deepbit?
276 2011-05-13 04:36:23 <gmaxwell> dissipate: that takes a while. An issue avoided by not having as much consolidation at pratically no cost.
277 2011-05-13 04:36:40 <JFK911> what's deepbit take from the 'proportional' mode
278 2011-05-13 04:36:48 <gmaxwell> 3%
279 2011-05-13 04:36:49 <JFK911> 5%? 10%? mystery?
280 2011-05-13 04:36:50 <JFK911> oh
281 2011-05-13 04:36:58 <DavidSJ> Will the block size limit be removed one day?
282 2011-05-13 04:36:59 <gmaxwell> JFK911: all of them?  The pools which are not infinitesmal/free are 2% I think.
283 2011-05-13 04:37:04 <JFK911> yea
284 2011-05-13 04:37:11 <dissipate> gmaxwell, if it was right at 51% and a takeover was attempted, only 2% would have to bail out
285 2011-05-13 04:37:13 <mtrlt> JFK911: eligius, btcguild...
286 2011-05-13 04:37:15 <gmaxwell> the PPS is 10% But thats sucker mode.
287 2011-05-13 04:37:23 <JFK911> haha
288 2011-05-13 04:38:00 <dissipate> gmaxwell, how well of an eye are you keeping on the block chain for spend reversals etc.?
289 2011-05-13 04:38:37 <gmaxwell> dissipate: you don't have to have 51% for bad things to happen. For example you lose n% of the transaction volume if a n% pool goes down. A pool with less than 50% can harm other pools by selectively not extending their blocks. For another example.
290 2011-05-13 04:39:20 <gmaxwell> A large pool can, with very modest cost, proxy getwork for a small pool, and filter out winning shares, making the other pool look like a fraud and cause them to fail.
291 2011-05-13 04:39:46 <JFK911> just not report the winning shares?
292 2011-05-13 04:39:49 <gmaxwell> dissipate: My contribution to monitoring is that I'm logging all the getwork I get from several pools.
293 2011-05-13 04:40:00 <JFK911> i didnt think you could steal shares from a pool
294 2011-05-13 04:40:08 <gmaxwell> You can't steal. You can filter out.
295 2011-05-13 04:40:37 <dissipate> gmaxwell, interesting. have any pools gone 'rogue' yet?
296 2011-05-13 04:40:39 <JFK911> im not sure how that would benefit the trickster
297 2011-05-13 04:40:47 <JFK911> unless it would just dry up the attacked pool
298 2011-05-13 04:41:07 <gmaxwell> JFK911: say I'm evil. I connect to smallpool.  Small pool is 5GH/s.  I add 5GH/s of capacity but I never return a winner.  I still get paid when they do happen to win, but they win far less than they should and the users conclude the pool is skimming.
299 2011-05-13 04:41:20 <dissipate> gmaxwell, a pool like deepbit could really mess up the network by just not including any transactions in its blocks.
300 2011-05-13 04:41:33 <JFK911> okay, but then you dont benefit at all from that 5Gh
301 2011-05-13 04:41:38 <gmaxwell> If you are a big pool you can use your own users to shut down any smaller pool.
302 2011-05-13 04:42:01 <gmaxwell> dissipate: there are already some miners who apparently don't include transactions.  Or at least, I can't explain some of the blocks otherwise.
303 2011-05-13 04:42:02 <JFK911> well i guess you do
304 2011-05-13 04:42:09 <JFK911> depending on how many solves you withhold
305 2011-05-13 04:42:11 <dissipate> gmaxwell, the smaller pool just has to cut off miners that deliver too few blocks outside of the statistical bounds
306 2011-05-13 04:42:17 <gmaxwell> 9 minutes since the last, plenty of tx at the time.. no transactions in the block..
307 2011-05-13 04:42:46 <gmaxwell> dissipate: winning shares are very unlikely. (I log my shares)  Plus they'd use proxies and a dozen ids.
308 2011-05-13 04:42:49 <dissipate> gmaxwell, yep, some of them have been doing it. it's a problem for the current phase with no tx fees.
309 2011-05-13 04:43:24 <dissipate> gmaxwell, i suppose it could be done!
310 2011-05-13 04:43:32 <gmaxwell> I don't know about any rouge pools. Some people have made accusations. I think they're crazy. The incentives are all there, and the situation is improved via more smaller pools.
311 2011-05-13 04:43:50 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: seems awful complex
312 2011-05-13 04:44:18 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: why not just ddos deepbit and fuck up the difficulty (and the txn generation rate)
313 2011-05-13 04:44:28 <jrmithdobbs> if you want to talk real and easy attacks
314 2011-05-13 04:44:39 <gmaxwell> jrmithdobbs: I mentioned outages before. Right.
315 2011-05-13 04:44:52 <gmaxwell> There is basically nothing but downsides to having a lot of consolidation.
316 2011-05-13 04:44:53 <noagendamarket> that would do it
317 2011-05-13 04:45:14 <jrmithdobbs> aye
318 2011-05-13 04:45:26 <gmaxwell> another thing that would help improve things is if mining software would automatically fall back to solo mode when the pool was down.
319 2011-05-13 04:45:32 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: that particular issue will sort itself once competing pools have similar features, though, honestly
320 2011-05-13 04:45:38 <gmaxwell> It would reduce attack incentives of all kinds.
321 2011-05-13 04:46:18 <jrmithdobbs> it'd still fuck the txn processing rate to some extant
322 2011-05-13 04:46:22 <jrmithdobbs> extent
323 2011-05-13 04:47:40 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: but ya, pools are nothing but trouble waiting to happen
324 2011-05-13 04:47:44 <jrmithdobbs> in general
325 2011-05-13 04:48:08 <jrmithdobbs> especially huge pools.
326 2011-05-13 04:48:21 <jrmithdobbs> what if deepbit suddenly dropped all txns without a fee for instance
327 2011-05-13 04:48:31 <jrmithdobbs> 40% of blocks will now drop all fee-less txns
328 2011-05-13 04:48:57 <JFK911> luke's doing that
329 2011-05-13 04:49:07 <gmaxwell> that would grind everything to a halt  because there are already tx getting hung up on low priority unconfirmed contributors.
330 2011-05-13 04:49:20 <jrmithdobbs> in general it's not a horrible thing, seeing as fees are supposed to be the real incentive
331 2011-05-13 04:49:51 <gmaxwell> Luke's fee floor is pretty reasonable too. It infinitesmal. It's just painful until the clients support the desired behavior...
332 2011-05-13 04:49:56 <jrmithdobbs> but ya, it hurts first time user experience and such
333 2011-05-13 04:49:59 <gmaxwell> and until the dependency issue is worked out.
334 2011-05-13 04:50:36 <JFK911> gmaxwell: right i thought he was demanding .01 btc because most people cant send less than that
335 2011-05-13 04:51:07 <gmaxwell> JFK911: nah, 0.00004096 BTC per 512 bytes
336 2011-05-13 04:52:12 <jrmithdobbs> but take that to the next extreme
337 2011-05-13 04:52:18 <jrmithdobbs> what if deepbit just stops including txns
338 2011-05-13 04:52:27 <jrmithdobbs> big enough the money lost wont matter
339 2011-05-13 04:52:54 <jrmithdobbs> [Tycho]: and i'm not picking on you in particular, you're just 40%+ of cycles on the network
340 2011-05-13 04:53:52 <gmaxwell> jrmithdobbs: http://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?topic=7361.msg108052#msg108052
341 2011-05-13 04:54:11 <jrmithdobbs> it took me about 2 minutes on first code read to figure out how to drop feeless txns and another 5 how to drop all txns (these were some of my first thoughts of bad things happening and I was looking for how it was handled, haha)
342 2011-05-13 04:56:25 <JFK911> lets ddos deepbit by giving it bad answers
343 2011-05-13 04:56:37 <JFK911> how many bad answers do you think it can handle per second
344 2011-05-13 04:56:47 <wumpus> nothing good will come of ddossing each other
345 2011-05-13 04:56:52 <gmaxwell> wumpus: Indeed.
346 2011-05-13 04:57:04 <gmaxwell> And deepbit appears to be a great service run by dediated people.
347 2011-05-13 04:57:21 <gmaxwell> It the poster child for big pools, but its a good pool as far as I can tell.
348 2011-05-13 04:58:10 <gmaxwell> At current difficulty you only need about 40-50GH/s so that you're almost certantly getting paid every day.
349 2011-05-13 04:58:21 <wumpus> it'd be better to just try to influence people to switch pools, by telling them about the problem
350 2011-05-13 04:58:28 <gmaxwell> I don't personally see a need for pools to be an order of magnitude bigger than that.
351 2011-05-13 04:59:20 <jrmithdobbs> wumpus: noone's suggesting it actually be done but these are all valid fears as far as I can tell
352 2011-05-13 05:00:35 <jrmithdobbs> wumpus: noone thought anyone would be dropping fee-less txns this early, for instance and that's definitely happening (I'm ok with this tbqh)
353 2011-05-13 05:00:59 <wumpus> yes I agree it's a valid fear, just that DDOS is not a solution, it will only start a 'war' at the expense of people simply using bitcoin to do business :)
354 2011-05-13 05:01:27 <jrmithdobbs> wumpus: also, the idea of not including ANY txns on purpose seems to kind of counterintuitive to the whole concept of bitcoin ... yet it's happening
355 2011-05-13 05:01:29 <wumpus> I hadn't expected that either
356 2011-05-13 05:01:52 <wumpus> yes that sounds pretty destructive, but is deepbit doing that?
357 2011-05-13 05:01:57 <jrmithdobbs> no
358 2011-05-13 05:01:58 <gmaxwell> No.
359 2011-05-13 05:02:14 <wumpus> right, good
360 2011-05-13 05:02:21 <gmaxwell> The blocks doing that are never seen addresses that don't appear to spend any of it.
361 2011-05-13 05:02:33 <jrmithdobbs> aye
362 2011-05-13 05:02:52 <wumpus> hm just some misfit with a lot of hashing power
363 2011-05-13 05:03:08 <gmaxwell> I don't know _why_ anyone would do that. Other than writing their own software and being lazy. The small computation needed to setup the blocks is actually paid for by tx fees.
364 2011-05-13 05:03:09 <jrmithdobbs> i'd be willing to bet it's several, not one
365 2011-05-13 05:03:31 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: oh i see the logic behind it
366 2011-05-13 05:03:37 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: it's not particularly sound though
367 2011-05-13 05:04:00 <wumpus> apart from disrupting the network I can't think of any reason either
368 2011-05-13 05:04:08 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: don't process the txns, submit the finished block quicker, beat anyone else who happened to win the hash lottery to the punch
369 2011-05-13 05:04:15 <jrmithdobbs> it's miniscule
370 2011-05-13 05:04:18 <gmaxwell> I went to look at the code to see how timestamping worked to see if you got an advantage from that...
371 2011-05-13 05:04:25 <jrmithdobbs> but it IS a slight advantage
372 2011-05-13 05:04:28 <gmaxwell> I don't think you really do.. the timestamp is on the initial recv
373 2011-05-13 05:04:49 <gmaxwell> But it's likely I didn't get the whole picture.
374 2011-05-13 05:04:59 <jrmithdobbs> i haven't read much of the netcode at this point
375 2011-05-13 05:05:17 <jrmithdobbs> but that is probably their thinking, whether true or not
376 2011-05-13 05:05:24 <gmaxwell> Fair enough.
377 2011-05-13 05:05:39 <gmaxwell> if you wrote a bunch of custom code you can also start computing faste.
378 2011-05-13 05:05:42 <gmaxwell> er faster.
379 2011-05-13 05:05:52 <JFK911> ;;bc,stats
380 2011-05-13 05:05:54 <gmaxwell> Validate nothing, take the last block's has and _run_
381 2011-05-13 05:05:55 <gribble> Current Blocks: 123602 | Current Difficulty: 157426.20628986 | Next Difficulty At Block: 124991 | Next Difficulty In: 1389 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 0 days, 12 hours, 57 minutes, and 21 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 201743.02580726
382 2011-05-13 05:06:14 <Raccoon> what happens if someone comes in way-way-late with a better hashed block?  i thought the spoils go to the lower hash, not the earliest timestamp
383 2011-05-13 05:06:43 <Raccoon> and which clients determine difficulty?
384 2011-05-13 05:06:44 <wumpus> can't the client be changed to reject such blocks? they don't really serve a purpose in the network, after all
385 2011-05-13 05:06:53 <Raccoon> which one client seeds the rest?
386 2011-05-13 05:07:01 <gmaxwell> It's distributed.
387 2011-05-13 05:07:02 <jrmithdobbs> wumpus: sometimes there actually ARENT any txns though
388 2011-05-13 05:07:17 <Raccoon> all distributed networks start with a single hive mind, somewhere
389 2011-05-13 05:07:18 <gmaxwell> The difficulty uses the timestamps on span of 2016 blocks.
390 2011-05-13 05:07:19 <jrmithdobbs> not often but it does happen
391 2011-05-13 05:07:20 <Raccoon> a spark
392 2011-05-13 05:07:34 <gmaxwell> wumpus: you can generate a bogus tx ..pay yourself.
393 2011-05-13 05:07:41 <jrmithdobbs> that too
394 2011-05-13 05:07:47 <wumpus> true, it'd need some logic beyond simply checking the block for emptiness
395 2011-05-13 05:08:02 <jrmithdobbs> wumpus: but you can't tell if they're paying themselves
396 2011-05-13 05:08:03 <gmaxwell> wumpus: I thought about this and gave up pretty quickly.
397 2011-05-13 05:08:06 <jrmithdobbs> that's the point
398 2011-05-13 05:08:09 <jrmithdobbs> of bitcoin
399 2011-05-13 05:08:17 <gmaxwell> you can tell if you've seen another TX...
400 2011-05-13 05:08:18 <wumpus> the transactions will have to come from the unconfirmed transactions
401 2011-05-13 05:08:22 <jgarzik> that also presumes clients will accept and relay said block.  if a majority of -clients- like a longer chain, an evil miner has an uphill battle
402 2011-05-13 05:08:42 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: but if you're hoarding in this fashion you're going to use a new address and hoard until people forget
403 2011-05-13 05:08:45 <jrmithdobbs> or try to
404 2011-05-13 05:08:46 <Raccoon> when will a miner choose to accept or reject a tx
405 2011-05-13 05:09:06 <Raccoon> who's to say whether a flood of transactions are legitimate or spam?
406 2011-05-13 05:09:11 <gmaxwell> My best thought along those lines was that miners could simply agree to not extend blocks that lacked too many of the TX in their own views...
407 2011-05-13 05:09:24 <bd_> Raccoon: too many transactions just means ones with a higher transaction fee will get priority...
408 2011-05-13 05:09:27 <gmaxwell> but that seemed ugly and begged for really bad additional behavior.
409 2011-05-13 05:09:28 <jrmithdobbs> no that's a horrible solution
410 2011-05-13 05:09:46 <Raccoon> bd_: and the many thousands with no tx fee will never confirm?
411 2011-05-13 05:09:58 <Raccoon> someone spams a million tx with 0.00001 fee
412 2011-05-13 05:10:00 <jrmithdobbs> ya that could be abused more than the original issue you're trying to adress
413 2011-05-13 05:10:06 <Raccoon> right now most are fee-less
414 2011-05-13 05:10:46 <gmaxwell> jrmithdobbs: right, my conclusion too. "Lets teach them to conspire to exclude people and give them software tools for it!"
415 2011-05-13 05:10:48 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: eg, spam a bunch of tiny ass txns
416 2011-05-13 05:10:51 <wumpus> btw, it seems that currently lacking is a way to cancel transactions that are unconfirmed but are unlikely to ever make it into the block chain.. am I right?
417 2011-05-13 05:10:59 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: bam, noone ever gets a block
418 2011-05-13 05:11:01 <JFK911> ;;bc,gen 150000
419 2011-05-13 05:11:02 <bd_> Raccoon: They'll make it through eventually.
420 2011-05-13 05:11:04 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 150000 Khps, given current difficulty of 157426.20628986 , is 0.95838082263 BTC per day and 0.0399325342762 BTC per hour.
421 2011-05-13 05:11:05 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 150000 Khps, given current difficulty of 157426.20628986 , is 7 weeks, 3 days, 4 hours, 6 minutes, and 42 seconds
422 2011-05-13 05:11:05 <JFK911> ;;bc,calc 150000
423 2011-05-13 05:11:12 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 150000 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 201000, is 9 weeks, 3 days, 14 hours, 40 minutes, and 56 seconds
424 2011-05-13 05:11:12 <JFK911> ;;bc,calcd 150000 201000
425 2011-05-13 05:11:18 <jrmithdobbs> wumpus: yes
426 2011-05-13 05:11:22 <gmaxwell> jmpespxoreax: even better, spam a bunch of real users with tiny txn and their fee transactions will currently get hung up on the unconfirmed spam when they spend it.
427 2011-05-13 05:11:26 <bd_> Raccoon: it's just that when the block exceeds certain size limits, high-fee txns are prioritized _for that block_. It gets reset the next time aroud
428 2011-05-13 05:11:28 <wumpus> so they will hang around foreve?
429 2011-05-13 05:11:35 <Raccoon> bd_ not if you are always pushing the theshhold of maximum transactions that can be recorded in the availble constant blocks being mined
430 2011-05-13 05:11:45 <bd_> Raccoon: Yep. At that point transaction fees become mandatory
431 2011-05-13 05:11:53 <bd_> This is by design.
432 2011-05-13 05:12:02 <wumpus> or are unprocessed transactions dropped after a while?
433 2011-05-13 05:12:08 <Raccoon> but where is the design push to mandate fees
434 2011-05-13 05:12:13 <Raccoon> clients are ill equipped?
435 2011-05-13 05:12:22 <JFK911> ;;bc,mtgox
436 2011-05-13 05:12:23 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":7.4,"low":5.22,"vol":45448,"buy":7.1037,"sell":7.11,"last":7.103}}
437 2011-05-13 05:12:27 <gmaxwell> Raccoon: I thought the next version was changing fee behavior?
438 2011-05-13 05:12:33 <Raccoon> i dunno
439 2011-05-13 05:12:40 <bd_> Raccoon: clients are ill-equipped because it hasn't happened yet, and seems unlikely for a while. It's not too difficult - basically you'd resubmit a txn with the same sources but a higher fee
440 2011-05-13 05:12:45 <bd_> One of the two txns will win
441 2011-05-13 05:13:00 <Raccoon> what if both do
442 2011-05-13 05:13:06 <gmaxwell> they can't, same source.
443 2011-05-13 05:13:08 <jrmithdobbs> they can't because of the double spending logic
444 2011-05-13 05:13:13 <jrmithdobbs> aye
445 2011-05-13 05:13:16 <Raccoon> what of a netsplit
446 2011-05-13 05:13:22 <gmaxwell> then one side eventually loses.
447 2011-05-13 05:13:25 <jrmithdobbs> longest block wins on rejoin
448 2011-05-13 05:13:34 <Raccoon> not highest fee?
449 2011-05-13 05:13:44 <gmaxwell> No. Longest chain.
450 2011-05-13 05:13:46 <jrmithdobbs> there's enough nodes that a netsplit is infeasible at this point though
451 2011-05-13 05:13:47 <Raccoon> and who collects the fees
452 2011-05-13 05:13:50 <jrmithdobbs> err ya chain
453 2011-05-13 05:14:19 <Raccoon> someone really should create some powerpoint-like illustrations
454 2011-05-13 05:14:24 <Raccoon> flow charts, graphics
455 2011-05-13 05:14:25 <Raccoon> :)
456 2011-05-13 05:14:31 <jrmithdobbs> it's all on the wiki
457 2011-05-13 05:14:39 <gmaxwell> jrmithdobbs: might be trivial: you assume big pools are well run. ;) For all we know a single screwed up firewall rule would put random-pool in its own universe with its miners. :)
458 2011-05-13 05:15:14 <Raccoon> and what if a netsplit lasts longer than 100 chains
459 2011-05-13 05:15:18 <gmaxwell> Doesn't matter in any case, the system resolves splits.
460 2011-05-13 05:15:22 <Raccoon> it rejoins a week later
461 2011-05-13 05:15:40 <Raccoon> you can't just redo a week worth of work
462 2011-05-13 05:18:30 <Raccoon> i also think at some point it'd be nice if block history became archived in some torrent form
463 2011-05-13 05:18:49 <Raccoon> completely static, read only.
464 2011-05-13 05:19:06 <Raccoon> non-destructable regardless of splits-joins-attacks
465 2011-05-13 05:19:29 <Herodes> Anyone here had graphical user interface behaving a bit odd when compiling the bitcoin client under windows 7? Esp. the adress bok and the send coins icons/menu selections have remains from other programs/itself when resized or moved? Any ideas as to what may cause this?
466 2011-05-13 05:19:58 <Raccoon> that's called the hall-of-mirrors effect.
467 2011-05-13 05:20:19 <Raccoon> it's the result of a failure to paint/refresh a region
468 2011-05-13 05:20:31 <Herodes> Ah, I didn't know that. I am very new to this. Just set up the environment today, which took a long time, and then made some slight changes to the stock client, just to check things out.
469 2011-05-13 05:20:52 <Herodes> Raccoon: Yes, that describes the problem very well.
470 2011-05-13 05:20:55 <Raccoon> i'm speaking of computer science theory and what you're experiencing
471 2011-05-13 05:21:06 <Raccoon> i know nothing of why the client is doing it specifically
472 2011-05-13 05:21:08 <Herodes> Exactly.
473 2011-05-13 05:21:49 <Herodes> Yes, I understand.
474 2011-05-13 05:22:48 <Herodes> the officially compiled client does not have this issue. Only the client that I have compiled.
475 2011-05-13 05:23:20 <Herodes> I have altered iu.cpp, but only with things that have to do with logic, nothing that has to do with displaying the UI.
476 2011-05-13 05:23:42 <Herodes> I will try do compile the source unaltered to see if the problem is still there for me.
477 2011-05-13 05:23:43 <Raccoon> i'm guessing for some reason the client is not getting WM_PAINT messages, or the paint region is not updated as you resize, which can also be from a number of higher level problems
478 2011-05-13 05:24:37 <Raccoon> it could even be something like ascii/unicode or 32/64 bit structures
479 2011-05-13 05:27:15 <Herodes> aha, okay.. I am not compiling the original source, to see if that will work well. If it does I will know that the reason for the hall-of-mirrors effect are because of my changes.
480 2011-05-13 05:27:20 <Herodes> I am now
481 2011-05-13 05:27:23 <Herodes> not not
482 2011-05-13 05:27:26 <Herodes> *tired*
483 2011-05-13 05:27:27 <Herodes> :\n533375
484 2011-05-13 05:28:01 <Raccoon> does the source give any compile instructions?
485 2011-05-13 05:28:15 <Herodes> make -f makefile.mingw
486 2011-05-13 05:28:25 <Herodes> and the source has instructions as well, but these did not work.
487 2011-05-13 05:28:35 <Herodes> what worked is the post here:
488 2011-05-13 05:28:36 <Herodes> https://www.bitcoin.org/smf/index.php?action=printpage;topic=5851.0
489 2011-05-13 05:29:07 <Herodes> I tried to follow the instructions that came with the source, but these seems to be not updated.
490 2011-05-13 05:30:42 <Herodes> Nah, it's the same problem without my alterations. Actally now I compiled the client, and the terminal window that' sin the background is repainted in the entire manu-region.
491 2011-05-13 05:31:20 <topi`> Raccoon: it's a nice idea, to archive the block chain
492 2011-05-13 05:31:40 <Herodes> IT's no big deal for me at the moment though, but there was a dude at the forum who wanted sound support in the client, so I compiled it in for him, but then there is this issue with hall-of-mirros effect.
493 2011-05-13 05:31:54 <topi`> Raccoon: we could do such a thing, that the block chain is frozen and everybody on this channel signs the block chain (if notices no tampering) with their GPG key.
494 2011-05-13 05:32:12 <topi`> Raccoon: do you think it would be good enough?
495 2011-05-13 05:32:14 <Raccoon> however it's done
496 2011-05-13 05:32:41 <Raccoon> the idea though that i find troubling is that a group of clients will start eating its young if it things a chain looks better
497 2011-05-13 05:32:46 <Raccoon> even if that chain is from 2 years ago?
498 2011-05-13 05:32:52 <topi`> you need to *sign* it, otherwise it can be manipulated and then it doesn't reflect history
499 2011-05-13 05:33:02 <Raccoon> and is it safe guarded to make sure that chain is mended correctly?
500 2011-05-13 05:33:40 <topi`> well, the historical chain would be interesting at least for historians if nothing else :D
501 2011-05-13 05:33:56 <Raccoon> but all clients have that history
502 2011-05-13 05:34:00 <Raccoon> and it's not read-only
503 2011-05-13 05:34:06 <topi`> they do, and that's a problem ;)
504 2011-05-13 05:34:08 <Raccoon> a bad apple can start causing shit
505 2011-05-13 05:34:26 <Raccoon> a client claiming to have 50,000 other clients in agreement
506 2011-05-13 05:34:41 <topi`> well. I can put my block-chain into GIT now. but then i'm the only one who trusts that chain to be correct :)
507 2011-05-13 05:35:57 <Raccoon> isn't history necessary though
508 2011-05-13 05:36:16 <Raccoon> if someone wants to spend BTC they have in a 2 year old account?
509 2011-05-13 05:36:50 <topi`> now, I committed the block chain to my personal GIT :)
510 2011-05-13 05:37:11 <Raccoon> GIT?
511 2011-05-13 05:37:19 <topi`> it's a revision control system
512 2011-05-13 05:42:23 <gmaxwell> Raccoon: these claims all must be backed up by having to _enormous_ amounts of hashing work.
513 2011-05-13 05:43:30 <gmaxwell> You're worried about an attack that requires as much hashing as the whole bitcoin network for a sustained amount of time. We're talking about a half million in equipment right now and growing.
514 2011-05-13 05:44:53 <ArtForz> that estimate is awfully low
515 2011-05-13 05:45:15 <jrmithdobbs> it is
516 2011-05-13 05:45:20 <gmaxwell> I was being conservative. 3600*150 basically the cheapest unit of hashing power plus no support costs.
517 2011-05-13 05:45:23 <jrmithdobbs> to rent it on ec2 is billions an hour
518 2011-05-13 05:45:26 <jrmithdobbs> for instance
519 2011-05-13 05:45:35 <ArtForz> just the GPUs are more than that
520 2011-05-13 05:46:09 <jrmithdobbs> and that's assuming ec2 even had the capacity to spin up such a request
521 2011-05-13 05:46:12 <jrmithdobbs> (they don't)
522 2011-05-13 05:47:26 <gmaxwell> okay 1402 GH/ .320MH (5850 at retail right now, ignoring that they're sold out) * 150 = 657150 (the network grew since last week!). It's totally awful and unrealistic, but it's ignoring the possiblity of getting some kind of bulk discount.
523 2011-05-13 05:47:47 <mesees> where can i find my wallet in windows?
524 2011-05-13 05:47:48 <ArtForz> 1.5Th/s is ~4000 6970s
525 2011-05-13 05:48:26 <jrmithdobbs> mesees: %APPDATA%itcoin
526 2011-05-13 05:48:37 <jrmithdobbs> i think that's the var
527 2011-05-13 05:48:48 <jrmithdobbs> maybe %APPSUPPORT%
528 2011-05-13 05:49:13 <gmaxwell> ArtForz: regardless, we're in violent agreement about the point that matters, I think.
529 2011-05-13 05:49:26 <ArtForz> assuming you can get em in bulk for $250, thats roughly a million in GPUs
530 2011-05-13 05:50:00 <jrmithdobbs> without even considering the power and ac just to turn them on
531 2011-05-13 05:50:09 <jrmithdobbs> and the labor involved in packing them in shit
532 2011-05-13 05:50:16 <ArtForz> yep
533 2011-05-13 05:50:29 <jrmithdobbs> painfully aware of the latter, heh
534 2011-05-13 05:50:35 <ArtForz> rest of the hardware and assembly, about 2M... and you still need a facility with enough power and cooling
535 2011-05-13 05:50:53 <jrmithdobbs> no you'd need multiple facilities
536 2011-05-13 05:50:54 <gmaxwell> plus dealing with failures...
537 2011-05-13 05:50:56 <jrmithdobbs> just to manage cooling
538 2011-05-13 05:51:08 <ArtForz> roughly one megawatt
539 2011-05-13 05:51:19 <wumpus> could a botnet do it? it'd get around all the trouble of buying and installing the hardware
540 2011-05-13 05:51:26 <gmaxwell> 1.6MW? yea, thats a whole last-gen facility and then some on its own.
541 2011-05-13 05:51:34 <jrmithdobbs> wumpus: you'd have to selectively target your botnet at gpu-heavy machines
542 2011-05-13 05:51:39 <jrmithdobbs> to aquire, i mean
543 2011-05-13 05:51:43 <gmaxwell> okay, you could get it into a single facility. But it would be most of it.
544 2011-05-13 05:51:49 <wumpus> just use people's GPUs, enough gamers around ,maybe make it sinstall with some fake game or add-on
545 2011-05-13 05:52:04 <ArtForz> a botnet could work, but it probably won't live long
546 2011-05-13 05:52:05 <gmaxwell> wumpus: attack by the deveopers of minecraft.
547 2011-05-13 05:52:05 <jrmithdobbs> gmaxwell: i don't think you could cool it one facility
548 2011-05-13 05:52:27 <wumpus> it'd also be very distributed and hard to block in that case
549 2011-05-13 05:52:41 <wumpus> lol gmaxwell
550 2011-05-13 05:52:44 <retinal> wow
551 2011-05-13 05:52:46 <retinal> minecraft
552 2011-05-13 05:52:48 <retinal> that's genius
553 2011-05-13 05:53:05 <jrmithdobbs> ya but to get enough to take over the the network... i still don't know that that would do it
554 2011-05-13 05:53:07 <gmaxwell> You think thats genius.
555 2011-05-13 05:53:16 <jrmithdobbs> even gamers often lag 2-3 gens behind on gpus
556 2011-05-13 05:53:18 <gmaxwell> Dude. This time next year browsers will be shipping webcl.
557 2011-05-13 05:53:21 <jrmithdobbs> which would be worthless for this.
558 2011-05-13 05:53:23 <gmaxwell> Your viagra spam will be mining.
559 2011-05-13 05:53:34 <ArtForz> jrmithdobbs: yup
560 2011-05-13 05:53:39 <ArtForz> well, not really worthless
561 2011-05-13 05:53:47 <jrmithdobbs> close enough
562 2011-05-13 05:53:49 <ArtForz> if it's not your own power, who cares about efficiency
563 2011-05-13 05:53:52 <jrmithdobbs> and people would notice their power bill spikes
564 2011-05-13 05:53:55 <wumpus> not worthless, it's also the quantity that counts
565 2011-05-13 05:54:01 <jrmithdobbs> enough people would, at least
566 2011-05-13 05:54:09 <gmaxwell> 20million semimodern CPU cores would do a lot... :)
567 2011-05-13 05:54:13 <wumpus> they'd notice that their pc makes a lot more sound :p
568 2011-05-13 05:54:19 <ArtForz> yep
569 2011-05-13 05:54:32 <ArtForz> you can't use more than 10% or so without fan noise getting obvious
570 2011-05-13 05:54:48 <jrmithdobbs> aye and ratelimited mining defeats the purpose
571 2011-05-13 05:54:59 <gmaxwell> sure, but multiply 2MH/s * 20m... you have some headroom.
572 2011-05-13 05:55:01 <wumpus> by the time they see the power bills it's too late for them
573 2011-05-13 05:55:44 <wumpus> but the sheer quantity is scary, even though the nodes would be weak on average
574 2011-05-13 05:55:47 <gmaxwell> I don't know if thats actually possible... perhaps a multimillion host botnet has a lot of slow systems. It's not entirely crazy however.
575 2011-05-13 05:55:56 <ArtForz> a large % of zombies nowadays are crappy notebooks
576 2011-05-13 05:56:06 <jrmithdobbs> aye
577 2011-05-13 05:56:08 <gmaxwell> OMG it's on FIRE!
578 2011-05-13 05:56:28 <gmaxwell> "new 'mining' worm causes computer fires. Motivation not yet understood."
579 2011-05-13 05:56:28 <jrmithdobbs> i think the network is big enough to make most such attacks infeasible at this point
580 2011-05-13 05:56:28 <wumpus> anyway, a botnet owner would probably just mine and cash in, instead of sabotaging the network, so yeah...
581 2011-05-13 05:56:31 <jrmithdobbs> now
582 2011-05-13 05:56:33 <jrmithdobbs> not to be the downer
583 2011-05-13 05:56:37 <wumpus> because it's less conspicious as well
584 2011-05-13 05:56:45 <jrmithdobbs> this all assumes we're talking people without resources.
585 2011-05-13 05:56:52 <ArtForz> gmaxwell: lol, now that'd be funny
586 2011-05-13 05:56:58 <jrmithdobbs> what happens if goldman's decides they want to kill it?
587 2011-05-13 05:57:03 <wumpus> lol :)
588 2011-05-13 05:57:07 <jrmithdobbs> that cost is a drop in the fuckin bucket.
589 2011-05-13 05:57:10 <jrmithdobbs> wumpus: not a joke.
590 2011-05-13 05:57:24 <gmaxwell> $1m $5m .. whatever it's not a big investment for the right kind of org.
591 2011-05-13 05:58:04 <ArtForz> yup
592 2011-05-13 05:58:11 <gmaxwell> Protection against that? $1m spent on an advertisment campaign and lobbying would do more damage than ANY technical attack.
593 2011-05-13 05:58:12 <jrmithdobbs> that's the single biggest risk right now.
594 2011-05-13 05:58:28 <ArtForz> yep
595 2011-05-13 05:58:30 <jrmithdobbs> yup.
596 2011-05-13 05:58:36 <ArtForz> technical attacks are rather unlikely
597 2011-05-13 05:59:01 <ArtForz> probably cheaper to buy a few laws in the long term
598 2011-05-13 05:59:08 <wumpus> but technical attacks would be most dangerous as they affect the network globally
599 2011-05-13 05:59:25 <gmaxwell> ...
600 2011-05-13 05:59:31 <gmaxwell> The world is a small place now.
601 2011-05-13 05:59:38 <wumpus> even if the US would be perfectly bitcoin-proof, there would be lots of other people who can trade with it
602 2011-05-13 05:59:51 <gmaxwell> Nothing that matters is free of the laws of most of the major countries.
603 2011-05-13 06:00:09 <gmaxwell> wumpus: even if allowing bitcoin puts you on a US trade naughty list? Not likely.
604 2011-05-13 06:00:12 <wumpus> and I think that's pretty unlikely if you see how lousy they are in curtailing other p2p
605 2011-05-13 06:00:21 <jrmithdobbs> seriously
606 2011-05-13 06:00:24 <wumpus> well look at online poker for example
607 2011-05-13 06:00:27 <gmaxwell> I don't think that kind of hard legal attack is likely, but don't underestimate it's power.
608 2011-05-13 06:00:37 <ArtForz> well, preventing rogue miners in a bitcoin-like system should be possible
609 2011-05-13 06:01:00 <jrmithdobbs> one bill from the US congress and agreement in the eu (bitcoins evil only for drugs guns and kp!) and that'd kill it globally pretty quick
610 2011-05-13 06:01:02 <gmaxwell> If bitcoin is to be a currency and not just a crappy money laundering thing then it _must_ not be only an underground thing.
611 2011-05-13 06:01:27 <jrmithdobbs> technically
612 2011-05-13 06:01:39 <jrmithdobbs> the us gov reserves the right to issue currency
613 2011-05-13 06:01:41 <wumpus> it might start as an underground thing
614 2011-05-13 06:01:57 <jrmithdobbs> keep that in mind when saying things like "that kind of hard legal attack is[n't] likely"
615 2011-05-13 06:02:38 <jrmithdobbs> wumpus: you're not getting it.
616 2011-05-13 06:02:47 <jrmithdobbs> wumpus: it doesn't relate to p2p
617 2011-05-13 06:02:54 <jrmithdobbs> wumpus: it's not a technical problem
618 2011-05-13 06:02:56 <wumpus> well likely or not there isn't anything you can do about it is there
619 2011-05-13 06:03:16 <jrmithdobbs> wumpus: us gov says it's illegal, now you have to commit tax fraud to use this currency. no more legit companies getting involved.
620 2011-05-13 06:03:30 <jrmithdobbs> wumpus: etc
621 2011-05-13 06:03:34 <wumpus> so?
622 2011-05-13 06:03:45 <wumpus> people can still use them to trade even without legit companies getting involved
623 2011-05-13 06:03:51 <ArtForz> so that reduces the usefulness a lot
624 2011-05-13 06:03:56 <sipa> that would be bad for bitcoin indeed
625 2011-05-13 06:03:59 <jrmithdobbs> wumpus: for what?
626 2011-05-13 06:04:07 <jrmithdobbs> wumpus: drugs, laundering, kp, and guns.
627 2011-05-13 06:04:21 <jrmithdobbs> wumpus: reinforcing the ban that happened in the first place. causing it to spread globally
628 2011-05-13 06:04:23 <ArtForz> you forgot offshore gambling *g*
629 2011-05-13 06:04:26 <sipa> that'd make bitcoin an outlaw currency
630 2011-05-13 06:04:47 <sipa> but facebook credits aren't illegal, it seems
631 2011-05-13 06:04:51 <sipa> why would bitcoin be?
632 2011-05-13 06:04:52 <gmaxwell> When you outlaw bitcoin only outlaws will have bitcoin!
633 2011-05-13 06:04:55 <gmaxwell> oh wait...
634 2011-05-13 06:05:13 <wumpus> jrmithdobbs: but what is your point? what do you want to do against it?
635 2011-05-13 06:05:26 <jrmithdobbs> wumpus: my point is just that it's a real risk
636 2011-05-13 06:05:30 <wumpus> they can make it very difficult to use cryptocurrencies in the short term, that's right
637 2011-05-13 06:05:55 <jrmithdobbs> they can make it illegal within their borders for merchants to accept it
638 2011-05-13 06:06:02 <jrmithdobbs> 03:04 < gmaxwell> When you outlaw bitcoin only outlaws will have bitcoin!
639 2011-05-13 06:06:11 <jrmithdobbs> then it becomes just like marijuana prohibition
640 2011-05-13 06:06:34 <jrmithdobbs> there was never a good reason originally except for racism and ignorance but since it's a crime now the criminal element is mixed up in it and that's their excuse for keeping it that way
641 2011-05-13 06:06:36 <wumpus> which kind of doesn't work either
642 2011-05-13 06:06:38 <jeremias> it's just numbers on my hard drive, how can they outlaw that
643 2011-05-13 06:07:05 <gmaxwell> great. I wouldn't have a lot of use for a few kilos of MJ in my basement.... likewise I wouldn't have a lot of use for outlaw bitcoin.
644 2011-05-13 06:07:27 <wumpus> well then sell your coins
645 2011-05-13 06:07:52 <jrmithdobbs> wumpus: dismissing these fears is pretty harmful really
646 2011-05-13 06:07:55 <wumpus> someone else might have use for them :)
647 2011-05-13 06:08:19 <ArtForz> well, it's not like you can do anything about it
648 2011-05-13 06:08:21 <wumpus> so acknowledging them is useful?
649 2011-05-13 06:08:26 <wumpus> what use is fear at all?
650 2011-05-13 06:08:36 <jrmithdobbs> ArtForz: except convince legit merchants to get in on it
651 2011-05-13 06:08:42 <wumpus> as ArtForzsays what do you want to do about it
652 2011-05-13 06:08:48 <gmaxwell> In any case. I don't think anyone has said that bitcoin can be totally stopped. My view is that it can be very seriously disrupted / reduced in value. I don't know how likely this is, I doubt it by the time someone with the power to do it really notices it may be too hard.... but it's a risk.
653 2011-05-13 06:08:54 <jrmithdobbs> ArtForz: and convince them to do the marketing legwork
654 2011-05-13 06:09:13 <gmaxwell> And convince people doing shady crap to at least keep it quiet if not cut it out.
655 2011-05-13 06:09:46 <wumpus> yeah I agree on that
656 2011-05-13 06:09:55 <gmaxwell> Prepare good material for the counter arguments. Gather support from respectable people and orgs.
657 2011-05-13 06:10:03 <ArtForz> well, I'm pretty sure a large entity could severely damage bitcoin with enough resources and lobbying
658 2011-05-13 06:10:05 <gmaxwell> Find new applications which can't be done without bitcoin.
659 2011-05-13 06:10:22 <molecular> I think the more legit businesses use bitcoin, the harder it will be to illegalize it... so maybe that answers the question what we can do about it (proactively)?
660 2011-05-13 06:10:30 <jrmithdobbs> find some datacenters willing to colo the space heaters
661 2011-05-13 06:10:32 <jrmithdobbs> etc
662 2011-05-13 06:10:43 <jrmithdobbs> ;P
663 2011-05-13 06:10:51 <gmaxwell> Convince the teenage children of politicians to use it, since they'll inevitably translate the technology for them.
664 2011-05-13 06:11:13 <jeremias> lol I bet they are already using them, for silk road
665 2011-05-13 06:11:14 <molecular> gmaxwell, hey, good point, target children, lol
666 2011-05-13 06:11:39 <gmaxwell> Whoever did the weusecoins video I think it's pretty darn good btw.
667 2011-05-13 06:12:10 <gmaxwell> I showed it to a friend and all his initial questions after seeing it were good ones.
668 2011-05-13 06:12:13 <jrmithdobbs> molecular: works for every other industry
669 2011-05-13 06:12:24 <molecular> hehe, and in retrospect, they got payed for it pretty damn well, too
670 2011-05-13 06:12:37 <jrmithdobbs> if they held especially
671 2011-05-13 06:12:57 <molecular> jrmithdobbs, I'm sure they did. they said they will use it for more to follow
672 2011-05-13 06:13:25 <molecular> jrmithdobbs, I think even to put up a new bounty
673 2011-05-13 06:13:32 <molecular> jrmithdobbs, so they probably held
674 2011-05-13 06:18:47 <Diablo-D3> lol
675 2011-05-13 06:18:54 <Diablo-D3> I have created an awesome bug
676 2011-05-13 06:18:59 <Diablo-D3> my hash meter says 1ghz
677 2011-05-13 06:19:00 <Diablo-D3> er
678 2011-05-13 06:19:03 <Diablo-D3> 1gh
679 2011-05-13 06:19:22 <molecular> is it a bug in hasmeter or somewhere else?
680 2011-05-13 06:19:27 <Diablo-D3> somewhere else
681 2011-05-13 06:19:40 <molecular> so it's not hashing correctly?
682 2011-05-13 06:19:47 <Diablo-D3> I God hope so.
683 2011-05-13 06:20:10 <Diablo-D3> Im hard benchmarking to find out
684 2011-05-13 06:20:14 <molecular> well, otherwise you would've created one hell of shortcut by accident
685 2011-05-13 06:20:29 <Diablo-D3> its creating valid pool shares, btw
686 2011-05-13 06:20:42 <jrmithdobbs> Diablo-D3: if you bump the difficulty in 10 minutes you'll know ;P
687 2011-05-13 06:21:08 <gmaxwell> just generate diff 1 shares, validate them on the cpu, and time them.
688 2011-05-13 06:21:09 <molecular> Diablo-D3, you say again to me "diff1-solutions per second doesn't tell you anything" ;)
689 2011-05-13 06:21:19 <Diablo-D3> molecular: it doesnt
690 2011-05-13 06:21:27 <ArtForz> molecular: over enough time, it does
691 2011-05-13 06:21:38 <Diablo-D3> the math is approximately 45/mhash*75 minutes for 50.
692 2011-05-13 06:21:39 <gmaxwell> inverse the mean time between samples is the maximum likelyhold estimation of the rate.
693 2011-05-13 06:21:54 <ArtForz> yep
694 2011-05-13 06:22:08 <ArtForz> you just need a lot of samples to get a useful stddev
695 2011-05-13 06:22:26 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: a 5850 doing 1ghash would be impossible, right?
696 2011-05-13 06:22:30 <ArtForz> yes
697 2011-05-13 06:22:38 <jrmithdobbs> lol
698 2011-05-13 06:22:50 <jrmithdobbs> 280-310 max
699 2011-05-13 06:22:54 <jrmithdobbs> oc'ed
700 2011-05-13 06:23:03 <ArtForz> unless you changed the laws of physics or mathematics, ain't gonna happen
701 2011-05-13 06:23:09 <gmaxwell> Diablo-D3: 281474976710656/(65535*avg_seconds_between_d1)=h/s
702 2011-05-13 06:23:29 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: I like mine better
703 2011-05-13 06:23:34 <gmaxwell> Mine is actually right.
704 2011-05-13 06:23:40 <ArtForz> gmaxwell: for H==0 it's a lot simpler
705 2011-05-13 06:24:07 <Diablo-D3> its coming up on 50.
706 2011-05-13 06:25:00 <ne0futur> http://www.google.com/trends?q=bitcoin
707 2011-05-13 06:25:38 <ArtForz> gmaxwell: and yours is not 100% correct either
708 2011-05-13 06:25:52 <ArtForz> it's be correct for hash < target
709 2011-05-13 06:25:56 <ArtForz> not for hash <= target
710 2011-05-13 06:26:06 <gmaxwell> aww. off by one!
711 2011-05-13 06:26:11 <gmaxwell> foiled again.
712 2011-05-13 06:26:15 <ArtForz> yeah
713 2011-05-13 06:27:03 <Diablo-D3> 50
714 2011-05-13 06:27:10 <Diablo-D3> [5/13/11 4:26:59 AM] Block 50 found on Cypress (#1)
715 2011-05-13 06:27:22 <Diablo-D3> [5/13/11 4:13:10 AM] Block 1 found on Cypress (#1)
716 2011-05-13 06:27:23 <ArtForz> took me a while to understand why bitcoin has a +1 in it's "calculate "length" of block for best chain calc" formula
717 2011-05-13 06:27:25 <Diablo-D3> thats about... 300.
718 2011-05-13 06:27:27 <Diablo-D3> Goddamnit.
719 2011-05-13 06:28:22 <ArtForz> lol
720 2011-05-13 06:28:32 <dissipate> ArtForz, are you a bitcoin millionaire yet with these prices? :D
721 2011-05-13 06:28:44 <ArtForz> ... not quite
722 2011-05-13 06:28:48 <jrmithdobbs> haha
723 2011-05-13 06:28:53 <dissipate> hot damn!
724 2011-05-13 06:28:58 <sethsethseth____> close....
725 2011-05-13 06:29:00 <gmaxwell> The market isn't liquid enough for anyone to be much of a millionaire! :)
726 2011-05-13 06:29:11 <dissipate> https://www.bitcoin4cash.com/ has sold out completely
727 2011-05-13 06:29:15 <ArtForz> about half a mil
728 2011-05-13 06:29:21 <dissipate> the frenzy is in full swing
729 2011-05-13 06:29:35 <dissipate> sweeeeeeet!
730 2011-05-13 06:29:39 <ArtForz> at 7.60, that is
731 2011-05-13 06:29:43 <sethsethseth____> i think you could sell half a mil and only drop the price 2 or 3 $ if you did it right
732 2011-05-13 06:29:44 <dissipate> a well deserve half mil no doubt. :D
733 2011-05-13 06:30:23 <Diablo-D3> AHAAA
734 2011-05-13 06:30:26 <ArtForz> though I suspect the moment someone drops 10kbtc or so we're back down to < $5
735 2011-05-13 06:30:28 <Diablo-D3> found the bug I hope
736 2011-05-13 06:31:00 <dissipate> ArtForz, you could crash the market no doubt. :D  please do so i can snap up more for cheap!
737 2011-05-13 06:31:16 <Diablo-D3> ahh this is more like it
738 2011-05-13 06:31:19 <Diablo-D3> 78mhash
739 2011-05-13 06:42:55 <comboy> somebody cash out please, this is insanity ;p
740 2011-05-13 06:43:18 <jrmithdobbs> ArtForz: just dump it and then buy it all back at the reduced price ;P
741 2011-05-13 06:43:24 <Diablo-D3> lol
742 2011-05-13 06:43:31 <Diablo-D3> no lets see if we can get to $10
743 2011-05-13 06:45:06 <molecular> noone in his right mind would cash out more than he needs to at this point
744 2011-05-13 06:48:03 <gjs278> I'm already even now so I don't care
745 2011-05-13 06:49:05 <molecular> you're even in the sense that "if you _would_ sell now" or did you actually get your USD/EUR out already?
746 2011-05-13 06:50:58 <mtrlt> i'd be even even if $/BTC is 0
747 2011-05-13 06:51:21 <gjs278> no I've got my money
748 2011-05-13 06:51:32 <gjs278> I sold 50 coins today at 5.75 and that was it
749 2011-05-13 06:51:42 <gjs278> I've got 52 more in my wallet but I'm already $2 over
750 2011-05-13 06:52:21 <gjs278> this is factoring in all costs including the money it would cost to run the cards for the rest of may electric wise
751 2011-05-13 06:52:40 <gjs278> every last case fan or heatsink I've bought due to this project has been covered
752 2011-05-13 06:52:56 <Raccoon> just throw your computer in the fridge
753 2011-05-13 06:53:01 <jrmithdobbs> this shit's crazy
754 2011-05-13 06:53:04 <Raccoon> you don't need food
755 2011-05-13 06:53:13 <gjs278> we have an extra fridge downstairs
756 2011-05-13 06:53:19 <gjs278> so fuck it, computer goes in fridge now
757 2011-05-13 06:53:24 <Raccoon> lol
758 2011-05-13 06:53:32 <jrmithdobbs> lol
759 2011-05-13 06:53:50 <gjs278> http://img859.imageshack.us/img859/7488/screenshotdq.png these are my temps at the moment
760 2011-05-13 06:53:51 <manveru> bad idea :P
761 2011-05-13 06:54:04 <comboy> molecular: noon in his right mind would cash out more than he needs now? Not sure about it, everybody sure is positive, but if somebody bigger cashes out bubble may burst a bit (not saying it's all bubble in general, but some corrections should be happening even with fast growth)
762 2011-05-13 06:54:20 <gjs278> I was afraid $6 was the bubble end
763 2011-05-13 06:54:40 <gjs278> so I just got rid of enough to make myself even so I can hold onto these 52+ coins until the end of time
764 2011-05-13 06:55:09 <Raccoon> back down to 7.55
765 2011-05-13 06:55:40 <Diablo-D3> lol
766 2011-05-13 06:55:47 <nathan7> lala
767 2011-05-13 06:55:55 <nathan7> I'm rich
768 2011-05-13 06:56:08 <nathan7> I own more in bitcoins than in euros
769 2011-05-13 06:56:15 <mtrlt> lol
770 2011-05-13 06:56:30 <manveru> likewise... and i only have 50 btc :P
771 2011-05-13 06:56:52 <nathan7> I had 700 once, and I sold them for $47, back in the day D:
772 2011-05-13 06:56:58 <nathan7> I'm still sad abou tthat
773 2011-05-13 06:57:00 <manveru> ^^;
774 2011-05-13 06:57:05 <mtrlt> -_-
775 2011-05-13 06:57:11 <nathan7> 700 * 7.5501 U.S. dollars = 3 712.20763 Euros
776 2011-05-13 06:57:15 <nathan7> O_O
777 2011-05-13 06:57:22 <nathan7> someone shoot me
778 2011-05-13 06:57:34 <mtrlt> yay
779 2011-05-13 06:57:43 <mtrlt> wat
780 2011-05-13 06:57:49 <mtrlt> :0
781 2011-05-13 06:57:52 <nathan7> actually I'm made out of nanobots
782 2011-05-13 06:58:02 <mtrlt> lol
783 2011-05-13 06:58:13 <manveru> and they eat bullets for breakfast?
784 2011-05-13 06:58:23 <nathan7> I actually assimilate them
785 2011-05-13 06:59:14 <manveru> same thing
786 2011-05-13 06:59:35 <nathan7> resistance is futile
787 2011-05-13 06:59:44 <manveru> meh, i wish coinpal didn't shut down
788 2011-05-13 07:00:12 <manveru> no way to buy any btc anymore
789 2011-05-13 07:00:15 <nathan7> hmm
790 2011-05-13 07:01:48 <krekbwoy> is there any stats on which gpu performs the best mining wise?
791 2011-05-13 07:01:58 <manveru> in the wiki
792 2011-05-13 07:02:02 <mosi> work|https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mining_hardware_comparison
793 2011-05-13 07:02:12 <krekbwoy> thnx
794 2011-05-13 07:02:22 <manveru> of course it's all lies to make you buy inferior hardware :)
795 2011-05-13 07:05:07 <mtrlt> how to get the total amount of btc in existence from gribble?
796 2011-05-13 07:05:12 <mtrlt> ;;bc,total
797 2011-05-13 07:05:14 <gribble> Error: "bc,total" is not a valid command.
798 2011-05-13 07:06:09 <nathan7> bitcoincharts has it
799 2011-05-13 07:06:45 <mtrlt> hm true
800 2011-05-13 07:07:13 <mtrlt> and of course i could do [bc,blocks]*50 ..
801 2011-05-13 07:08:00 <sipa> +1
802 2011-05-13 07:08:09 <sipa> block 0 also introduced 50 BTC
803 2011-05-13 07:08:27 <krekbwoy> manveru: so you mean that 5xxx series scores so high?
804 2011-05-13 07:09:29 <nathan7> ???32.58 million worth of bitcoins in existence.. whoa
805 2011-05-13 07:09:41 <mtrlt> yep
806 2011-05-13 07:09:43 <nathan7> hmm, physics test
807 2011-05-13 07:09:52 <sipa> nathan7: no
808 2011-05-13 07:09:58 <sipa> that's a pointless number
809 2011-05-13 07:10:29 <sipa> we don't know how much has been lost, and trying to sell or buy a significant part of it would make prices move very quickly
810 2011-05-13 07:12:58 <jaromil> gmoin
811 2011-05-13 07:13:23 <jaromil> oh, btc is at 7 dolla. jeez
812 2011-05-13 07:13:39 <sipa> 7.7...
813 2011-05-13 07:13:45 <jaromil> love that number
814 2011-05-13 07:13:52 <jaromil> wish i could buy SC2 with it lol
815 2011-05-13 07:17:54 <Diablo-D3> whahaha
816 2011-05-13 07:17:56 <Diablo-D3> this is cool
817 2011-05-13 07:18:35 <Diablo-D3> I may have eaked out another 2 mhash
818 2011-05-13 07:26:24 <sethsethseth> lol this is so great, i just had these clowns write a patch to make a sound file play when i recieve/generate coins
819 2011-05-13 07:26:37 <sethsethseth> looking for a good jackpot sound
820 2011-05-13 07:29:31 <gribble> Error: "bg,gen" is not a valid command.
821 2011-05-13 07:29:31 <thedrs> ;;bg,gen 360000
822 2011-05-13 07:29:37 <thedrs> ;;bc,gen 360000
823 2011-05-13 07:29:38 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 360000 Khps, given current difficulty of 157426.20628986 , is 2.30011397431 BTC per day and 0.095838082263 BTC per hour.
824 2011-05-13 07:29:54 <thedrs> ;;bc,stats
825 2011-05-13 07:29:55 <gribble> Current Blocks: 123628 | Current Difficulty: 157426.20628986 | Next Difficulty At Block: 124991 | Next Difficulty In: 1363 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 0 days, 7 hours, 40 minutes, and 32 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 203702.95552418
826 2011-05-13 07:30:50 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":7.99,"low":5.3511,"vol":51386,"buy":7.6001,"sell":7.69,"last":7.6012}}
827 2011-05-13 07:30:50 <thedrs> ;;bc,mtgox
828 2011-05-13 07:36:05 <jaromil> sethsethseth: hateful. seen breakning bad E13 S2 (last second season)?
829 2011-05-13 07:37:15 <UukGoblin> hahah
830 2011-05-13 07:37:35 <UukGoblin> where walter jr opened this shitty website to help his father? ;-]
831 2011-05-13 07:38:12 <jaromil> yea
832 2011-05-13 07:38:32 <jaromil> and mr white just wanted to CRUSH his computer lol
833 2011-05-13 07:38:47 <UukGoblin> that was srsly one of the ugliest sites I've seen in a while ;-]
834 2011-05-13 07:38:58 <UukGoblin> yellow comic sans on green background
835 2011-05-13 07:39:01 <jaromil> ahahahahah like geocities
836 2011-05-13 07:39:04 <UukGoblin> yeah
837 2011-05-13 07:39:11 <sipa> with <marquee> ?
838 2011-05-13 07:39:14 <UukGoblin> yeah
839 2011-05-13 07:39:18 <molecular> well, for _some_ reason, it attracted quite some funds later ;)
840 2011-05-13 07:39:26 <UukGoblin> heh
841 2011-05-13 07:39:43 <molecular> I'll use that style on my pages, too. godda be something about it
842 2011-05-13 07:40:18 <UukGoblin> who needs meth when we have bitcoins
843 2011-05-13 07:41:01 <jaromil> meth addicts and the cop friends that can cook it :)
844 2011-05-13 07:41:21 <jaromil> so that we can keep paying taxes to have more cops chase kids on da street
845 2011-05-13 07:42:41 <jaromil> anyway BrBa is an awesome series
846 2011-05-13 07:45:09 <redwizard_kde> hi...
847 2011-05-13 07:46:13 <topi`> jaromil: I want to buy one Milkymist board, do you know how to get them?
848 2011-05-13 07:46:23 <topi`> sebastien had two yesterday ;) I should have asked him
849 2011-05-13 07:46:54 <redwizard_kde> having some trouble getting bitcoin to work on kubuntu, anyone know the easiest way? i've downloaded the tar and i cant figure out how to run the gui(bin/32/bitcoin)
850 2011-05-13 07:47:07 <jaromil> they had them for sale yesterday
851 2011-05-13 07:47:15 <topi`> jaromil: damn! I missed it :(
852 2011-05-13 07:47:17 <jaromil> now he is driving south i think
853 2011-05-13 07:47:29 <topi`> yes, if he has woken up :)
854 2011-05-13 07:47:34 <jaromil> i think so
855 2011-05-13 07:48:32 <jaromil> here is the online shop http://hackable-devices.org/search/products/?criteria=milkymist
856 2011-05-13 07:48:33 <topi`> ArtForz: what are the concrete limitations on FPGA clock rates? if I e.g. synthesize a fully pipelined SHA256 block, is the limiting factor the exact propagation of clock signal?
857 2011-05-13 07:49:05 <sipa> redwizard_kde: ironic, since it was built on an ubuntu system as well
858 2011-05-13 07:52:14 <CIA-103> DiabloMiner: Patrick McFarland master * re1c7429 / (2 files in 2 dirs): Added multiple vector widths, -v now requires a number - http://bit.ly/iioT41
859 2011-05-13 07:53:57 <topi`> jaromil: the price in the shop is unfortunately a bit high :/
860 2011-05-13 07:54:02 <redwizard_kde> sipa: just cant seem to make it run
861 2011-05-13 07:54:07 <topi`> I guess it could go down if they start producing more volume
862 2011-05-13 07:55:35 <nathan7> Hi wizardy
863 2011-05-13 07:55:40 <redwizard_kde> is there a "package" for bitcoin?
864 2011-05-13 07:55:47 <redwizard_kde> i.e. sudo apt-get install bitcoin
865 2011-05-13 07:55:55 <UukGoblin> redwizard_kde, yes
866 2011-05-13 07:55:56 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: jesus, I think I've squeezed every last ounce of power I can
867 2011-05-13 07:55:57 <topi`> redwizard_kde: why not compile it yourself :)
868 2011-05-13 07:55:59 <nathan7> There is? Nice.
869 2011-05-13 07:56:00 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: without going to bfi
870 2011-05-13 07:56:05 <redwizard_kde> hi nathan7, trying to pursuade it to work on this machine
871 2011-05-13 07:56:07 <sipa> redwizard_kde: which version of bitcoin?
872 2011-05-13 07:56:08 <topi`> redwizard_kde: take the source with autotools support, and off you go
873 2011-05-13 07:56:17 <UukGoblin> redwizard_kde, there's http://packages.debian.org/source/sid/bitcoin but I think it's CLI only
874 2011-05-13 07:56:19 <topi`> autoreconf -i && ./configure
875 2011-05-13 07:56:22 <redwizard_kde> topi`: some things in linux are still not obvious to me
876 2011-05-13 07:56:33 <topi`> redwizard_kde: oh, you can just follow instructions
877 2011-05-13 07:56:37 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz, UukGoblin: around 275 /w -v 4 -w 128 on radeon 5850 @ 765.
878 2011-05-13 07:56:45 <Diablo-D3> if I go any faster, it might explode.
879 2011-05-13 07:56:56 <UukGoblin> Diablo-D3, bfi_int!
880 2011-05-13 07:57:01 <UukGoblin> you know you want it ;-]
881 2011-05-13 07:57:06 <Diablo-D3> not tonight
882 2011-05-13 07:57:15 <Diablo-D3> and I shouldnt have been screwing around with the shit I was
883 2011-05-13 07:57:48 <redwizard_kde> ok i have the source in the tar i downloaded
884 2011-05-13 07:58:14 <redwizard_kde> no build options for linux in the linux tar...
885 2011-05-13 07:58:16 <redwizard_kde> >.<
886 2011-05-13 07:58:55 <Diablo-D3> ArtForz: is 275 close to the absolute maximum your kernel can go without bfi?
887 2011-05-13 07:59:00 <UukGoblin> nathan7, just how many bitcoins have you got? ;-]
888 2011-05-13 07:59:01 <redwizard_kde> pretty sure i shouldn't be using makefile.unix >.>
889 2011-05-13 07:59:17 <nathan7> UukGoblin: 20
890 2011-05-13 07:59:21 <nathan7> and a little more
891 2011-05-13 07:59:27 <UukGoblin> srsly?
892 2011-05-13 07:59:28 <nathan7> midnightmagic gave me coins once, and I kept them