1 2011-05-26 00:01:38 <jeremid> blocks that fail the PoW test arent kept around as orphans are they?
  2 2011-05-26 00:14:09 <jeremid> yorphan
  3 2011-05-26 00:14:13 <jeremid> gotta run peace
  4 2011-05-26 00:20:02 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":9.33,"low":7.2161,"vol":66623,"buy":8.28,"sell":8.3,"last":8.3}}
  5 2011-05-26 00:20:02 <JFK911> ;;bc,mtgox
  6 2011-05-26 00:30:01 <jgarzik> oh, dog
  7 2011-05-26 00:30:10 <jgarzik> luke-jr has even infected https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/History with tonal
  8 2011-05-26 00:31:24 <jrmithdobbs> why do you hate tonal so much
  9 2011-05-26 00:31:25 <doublec> "Tonal Bitcoin units standardized"
 10 2011-05-26 00:34:24 <johnnympereira5> where would i find the current difficulty level?
 11 2011-05-26 00:36:23 <ninjaneo> ;;bc,diff
 12 2011-05-26 00:36:24 <gribble> 244139.48158254
 13 2011-05-26 00:38:39 <johnnympereira5> thanks! do you know if theres a specific website that shows that
 14 2011-05-26 00:38:48 <gribble> (bc,diff <an alias, 0 arguments>) -- Alias for "web fetch http://blockexplorer.com/q/getdifficulty".
 15 2011-05-26 00:38:48 <luke-jr> ;;help bc,diff
 16 2011-05-26 00:41:50 <jgarzik> jrmithdobbs: Tonal is a one man crusade, but you would never know that from reading the wiki.  Most people think tonal is quite irrelevant, myself included, making it the subject of April Fool's jokes and the like.  But when new users -- or reporters -- start reading this stuff and thinking tonal is important or relevant somehow, it makes one wish for a wiki editorial staff.
 17 2011-05-26 00:42:25 <lfm> hehe
 18 2011-05-26 00:42:38 <jgarzik> Note the date on Gavin's pull request:  http://forum.bitcoin.org/?topic=5276.0
 19 2011-05-26 00:42:52 <lfm> Ill donate 10 btc to a wiki editorial staff
 20 2011-05-26 00:46:13 <jgarzik> another howler from the wiki:
 21 2011-05-26 00:46:15 <jgarzik> April 28, 2011
 22 2011-05-26 00:46:25 <jgarzik> puddinpop did that long before April 2011
 23 2011-05-26 00:47:05 <lfm> it from a book from soewhere aroun 1855 or something where some engineer thinks we should all change over to base 16 and a bunch of related unit changes for length and area
 24 2011-05-26 00:47:26 <manveru> lol
 25 2011-05-26 00:47:31 <jgarzik> manveru: exactly
 26 2011-05-26 00:47:49 <lfm> oh ya, and a universal tonal currency
 27 2011-05-26 00:48:31 <lfm> so luke-jr figured bitcoin was just the thing to advance the tonal cause to the world
 28 2011-05-26 00:49:07 <manveru> :)
 29 2011-05-26 00:49:33 <luke-jr> jgarzik: nonsense
 30 2011-05-26 00:49:39 <lfm> luke-jr was so insistant and I was bored one day so I actually read the book. its just as much garbage as you think it is
 31 2011-05-26 00:50:04 <luke-jr> jgarzik: the puddinpop note is correct; I suggest someone fix that
 32 2011-05-26 00:50:10 <jrmithdobbs> lfm: i don't know i perused the book earlier and the guy makes some good points
 33 2011-05-26 00:50:21 <jrmithdobbs> lfm: and his points have only become more valid with the advent of computers tbqh
 34 2011-05-26 00:50:32 <manveru> what's wrong with base-10?
 35 2011-05-26 00:50:38 <lfm> jrmithdobbs: ya, and he glosses over some collosal blunders
 36 2011-05-26 00:50:38 <luke-jr> manveru: every base is base 10
 37 2011-05-26 00:51:06 <manveru> from WP it sounds more like tonal is base-16
 38 2011-05-26 00:51:19 <jrmithdobbs> i think adding glyphs for it is stupid and it should be represented by the more widely accept in this day and age 0x[0-f] hex representations
 39 2011-05-26 00:51:19 <luke-jr> manveru: only from the perspective of decimal
 40 2011-05-26 00:51:31 <jrmithdobbs> lfm: oh i didn't bother with the units of measure bits
 41 2011-05-26 00:51:49 <manveru> luke-jr: well, that's what 95% of the world uses nowadays
 42 2011-05-26 00:52:05 <lfm> well in tonal the base it uses is base 10 and the rest of the world uses base0a or some new character thats not on my keyboard
 43 2011-05-26 00:52:14 <luke-jr> lfm: 9 isn't on your keyboard?
 44 2011-05-26 00:52:15 <jrmithdobbs> manveru: it base-16 + a bunch of crazy crap
 45 2011-05-26 00:52:37 <lfm> base 9, oh ya tonal's 9 is our 10
 46 2011-05-26 00:52:53 <jrmithdobbs> the base16 portion really has a pretty defensible stance in our times
 47 2011-05-26 00:52:57 <lfm> he though redefining 9 was a good idea
 48 2011-05-26 00:53:00 <jrmithdobbs> the crazy measuring/units stuff not so much
 49 2011-05-26 00:53:10 <luke-jr> jrmithdobbs: nothing crazy about it
 50 2011-05-26 00:53:26 <jrmithdobbs> luke-jr: hey man, be happy with the halfassed backing i'm giving you on this
 51 2011-05-26 00:54:08 <lfm> he repeated points out that tonal would be good for a "craftsman's folding measuring rule" since they didnt have tape measures back then
 52 2011-05-26 00:54:14 <jrmithdobbs> there is definitely use, at least in academic settings, for people to learn base 16 (and base 6 and base2)
 53 2011-05-26 00:54:20 <luke-jr> it's not as ideal as dozenal's TGM, but it's logically consistent
 54 2011-05-26 00:54:48 <jrmithdobbs> and it really should be more prominent in modern curriculums
 55 2011-05-26 00:54:49 <luke-jr> lfm: that's just in regard to the length of the meter
 56 2011-05-26 00:54:52 <jrmithdobbs> that should be base8 obviously
 57 2011-05-26 00:55:00 <jrmithdobbs> base6 is pretty fuckin worthless
 58 2011-05-26 00:55:19 <manveru> unless you cut off 4 of your fingers
 59 2011-05-26 00:55:31 <luke-jr> jrmithdobbs: my curriculum covers tonal, dozenal, decimal, octal, and binary
 60 2011-05-26 00:55:47 <luke-jr> actually, base 6 is 2nd-ideal base for finger-counting
 61 2011-05-26 00:55:48 <jrmithdobbs> manveru: no that's a pretty bad misconception
 62 2011-05-26 00:55:51 <lfm> and he made a totally wrong argument about sines and cosines, mainly because he didn't have a computer to calculate them correctly
 63 2011-05-26 00:55:51 <luke-jr> each hand being a digit
 64 2011-05-26 00:56:10 <luke-jr> lfm: he approximated, cry a river
 65 2011-05-26 00:56:13 <jrmithdobbs> manveru: simple math is much easier in base2 reducable numbering systems
 66 2011-05-26 00:56:29 <lfm> no it was totally wrong, not even aproximatly right
 67 2011-05-26 00:56:37 <luke-jr> lfm: no it wasn't.
 68 2011-05-26 00:57:14 <lfm> luke we thats sure a convincing and logical argument tyhere luke. I calculated those sine tables and his agument is wrong
 69 2011-05-26 00:57:34 <luke-jr> lfm: I calculated them too, and while his figures weren't exact, his argument stood
 70 2011-05-26 00:57:38 <jrmithdobbs> link to page on google books
 71 2011-05-26 00:57:47 <luke-jr> http://books.google.com/books?id=aNYGAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover
 72 2011-05-26 00:57:56 <luke-jr> also, this discussion really belongs in #Tonal
 73 2011-05-26 00:57:57 <jrmithdobbs> i said page not the frontcover
 74 2011-05-26 00:58:02 <manveru> hm
 75 2011-05-26 00:58:04 <jrmithdobbs> as in, the page with the tables
 76 2011-05-26 00:58:16 <jrmithdobbs> and nm, not fuckin doin trig tonight, fuck that shit
 77 2011-05-26 00:58:17 <luke-jr> because at the end of the day, people who like decimal will use BTC, and people who like tonal will use TBC
 78 2011-05-26 00:58:23 <lfm> oh it was the log tables, not the sine tables
 79 2011-05-26 00:58:48 <manveru> dunno, i have a hard time believing a system that measures stuff in "bong" will ever gain widespread acceptance
 80 2011-05-26 00:58:51 <jlewis> who else uses tonal besides luke-jr? just curious
 81 2011-05-26 00:58:54 <jlewis> lol
 82 2011-05-26 00:59:14 <jrmithdobbs> jlewis: i'm sure there's some corner case academic circles
 83 2011-05-26 00:59:16 <luke-jr> jlewis: probably nobody *here*, because there's too many trolls to chase them away
 84 2011-05-26 00:59:17 <jrmithdobbs> but um
 85 2011-05-26 00:59:23 <jrmithdobbs> ya
 86 2011-05-26 00:59:27 <luke-jr> at least, I'm not going to invite them with the status quo
 87 2011-05-26 00:59:28 <jrmithdobbs> can't think of anything else
 88 2011-05-26 00:59:59 <jrmithdobbs> luke-jr: where do you teach anyways?
 89 2011-05-26 01:00:10 <luke-jr> jrmithdobbs: near Tampa
 90 2011-05-26 01:00:15 <jlewis> i can't imagine an academic circle that would be interested in using a nonstandard base system that is only talked about in that guy's one book
 91 2011-05-26 01:00:16 <bitcoiinTrder> hi
 92 2011-05-26 01:00:27 <jrmithdobbs> luke-jr: so not a uni or you would have said so
 93 2011-05-26 01:00:30 <bitcoiinTrder> my client isnt downloading the blocks
 94 2011-05-26 01:00:31 <jrmithdobbs> and named it
 95 2011-05-26 01:00:32 <bitcoiinTrder> :(
 96 2011-05-26 01:00:35 <luke-jr> jrmithdobbs: no, I don't respect unis
 97 2011-05-26 01:00:40 <lfm> luke-jr do you have the link to the book handy? I lost it, but I found my program to calculate the right tables.
 98 2011-05-26 01:00:48 <luke-jr> lfm: look about 25 lines up
 99 2011-05-26 01:00:49 <jrmithdobbs> luke-jr: what kind of institution do you teach at?
100 2011-05-26 01:00:49 <luke-jr> brb
101 2011-05-26 01:00:50 <jlewis> additionally i don't see why you don't just use 0-9a-f like regular hex
102 2011-05-26 01:00:54 <luke-jr> jrmithdobbs: homeschool
103 2011-05-26 01:01:01 <jrmithdobbs> lfm: /lastlog google 1
104 2011-05-26 01:01:06 <jrmithdobbs> lfm: he just pasted it
105 2011-05-26 01:01:33 <jrmithdobbs> luke-jr: are your clients mostly religious zealots/fanatics?
106 2011-05-26 01:02:36 <jrmithdobbs> (trying to make your "metric hexadecimal is anti-christ" statements gel, whether you were kidding or actually serious is what I'm after ....)
107 2011-05-26 01:03:06 <jlewis> just gonna put this here http://dashjr.org/~luke-jr/education/tonal/calendar/
108 2011-05-26 01:03:20 <jlewis> >_>
109 2011-05-26 01:03:52 <jrmithdobbs> jlewis: question answered!
110 2011-05-26 01:04:21 <jlewis> yeaah
111 2011-05-26 01:04:37 <jrmithdobbs> i thought the comments were pretty funny until i now know they weren't jokes
112 2011-05-26 01:04:41 <jrmithdobbs> :(
113 2011-05-26 01:06:47 <luke-jr> jrmithdobbs: my children
114 2011-05-26 01:08:01 <lfm> page 27, he is incorrect. the most of those tonal numbers have infinite number of digits also
115 2011-05-26 01:08:09 <luke-jr> lfm: half != most
116 2011-05-26 01:08:59 <jrmithdobbs> 50% or 51%
117 2011-05-26 01:09:07 <lfm> 1/4 luke
118 2011-05-26 01:09:20 <lfm> 1/4 are finite
119 2011-05-26 01:09:34 <lfm> ie 4 out of 16 are finite in truth
120 2011-05-26 01:11:37 <lfm> oh 5 out of 16 I miscounted 1.0
121 2011-05-26 01:12:08 <lfm> so only 1, 2, 4, 8, and 16 are finite
122 2011-05-26 01:13:14 <lfm> exactly the same ones that are finite in decimal
123 2011-05-26 01:13:38 <luke-jr> uh no
124 2011-05-26 01:13:44 <luke-jr> in decimal, only 1 and 10 are finite
125 2011-05-26 01:14:16 <lfm> log to the base 16?
126 2011-05-26 01:14:23 <lfm> in decimal
127 2011-05-26 01:14:23 <luke-jr> decimal isn't base 16
128 2011-05-26 01:16:02 <lfm> ya well if you calculate in decimal a log base 16 the same ones will be finite as the in tonal
129 2011-05-26 01:16:45 <lfm> and it is a lot more than the 1 or 2 he claims
130 2011-05-26 01:18:00 <lfm> ie any plcae he shows 2 digits, is reall an infinite sequence of digits
131 2011-05-26 01:19:07 <lfm> in any case it is actually a minor error and forgivable due to his lack of computers to do it right.
132 2011-05-26 01:20:16 <lfm> and that he was an engineer, not a mathemetician. a mathemetician might have figured it out with a proof that those numbers would be irrational
133 2011-05-26 01:21:05 <luke-jr> 31% > 20%
134 2011-05-26 01:21:34 <lfm> he claims 1 or 2 and the correct number is 11?!
135 2011-05-26 01:23:02 <lfm> sorry I read it wrong he claims 1 or 2 where the correct answer is 1 or infinity
136 2011-05-26 01:26:42 <lfm> oh I see you want to compare logs base 10 in base 10 to logs base 16 in base 16? thats you 20% vs 31% eh? why not logs base 10 in base 16 to logs base 16 in base 10? its a nonsensical argument
137 2011-05-26 01:29:34 <CIA-102> bitcoin: Daniel Folkinshteyn * r70f6c07da0f4 supybot-bitcoin-marketmonitor/GPG/plugin.py: GPG: shorten challenge strings by 6 characters, to make 80-char terminals happy. http://tinyurl.com/3ek3pc9
138 2011-05-26 01:32:49 <lfm> or if you wanted a fair comparison you would use natural logs (log base e) where you would find no difference, they would all be irrational.
139 2011-05-26 01:33:29 <lfm> excpet 1.0 I spoze
140 2011-05-26 01:36:07 <Xenland> its probubly just my rig, but pushpool dosent work with the following: Local Sqlite3, Remote MySql, or Local MySql. I am able to connect all of these databases with ther native commandline. I've ran the "SELECT password FROM pool_worker USERNAME = xenland" and it came up with the password that i sent.
141 2011-05-26 01:36:41 <Xenland> but still poclbm returns Wrong username or password. ugh piss
142 2011-05-26 01:37:12 <Xenland> i'll pay $10 dwolla to anyone that can assist in helping me fix this
143 2011-05-26 01:37:14 <soultcer> Maybe the password is encrypted?
144 2011-05-26 01:37:16 <soultcer> Lemme take a look
145 2011-05-26 01:37:20 <lfm> it may be some other error really with the wrong error message
146 2011-05-26 01:37:46 <Xenland> lfm: I dont know what tho, i've scanned all neccesarry ports
147 2011-05-26 01:37:59 <Xenland> all open
148 2011-05-26 01:39:34 <soultcer> What database do you use?
149 2011-05-26 01:39:49 <Xenland> i tried MySql and Sqlite3 both different times
150 2011-05-26 01:40:06 <Xenland> but i would like to use MySql
151 2011-05-26 01:40:30 <Xenland> (better performance when i put up a web gui frontend)
152 2011-05-26 01:41:08 <soultcer> What is your stmt.pwdb set to?
153 2011-05-26 01:41:54 <Xenland> "stmt.pwdb" :"SELECT xenland_pushpool.password FROM pool_worker WHERE username = ?"
154 2011-05-26 01:42:13 <Xenland> actually for the localhost one it was this "stmt.pwdb" :"SELECT password FROM pool_worker WHERE username = ?"
155 2011-05-26 01:42:19 <doublec> does your username or password have a ':' in it?
156 2011-05-26 01:42:41 <Xenland> doublec: no, should it?
157 2011-05-26 01:42:48 <doublec> no it shouldn't
158 2011-05-26 01:43:01 <Xenland> you had me worried for a second there
159 2011-05-26 01:43:15 <Xenland> afk for a sec
160 2011-05-26 01:45:57 <Xenland> is this the wierdest thing or woot?
161 2011-05-26 01:55:14 <bobberb> What does is mean when "this transaction is over the size limit"
162 2011-05-26 01:57:12 <bobberb> What does is mean when "this transaction is over the size limit"
163 2011-05-26 01:57:52 <noagendamarket> you need to pay a fee
164 2011-05-26 01:58:07 <noagendamarket> bitcoin transactions have a size limit
165 2011-05-26 02:08:00 <justend> your poclbm how to set? your pushpool used 8337 port?
166 2011-05-26 02:14:33 <CIA-102> bitcoin: Daniel Folkinshteyn * r595ee3e5a335 supybot-bitcoin-marketmonitor/GPG/plugin.py: GPG: shorten the message yet more, since a rogue newline still happens when string is exactly 80chr on win. http://tinyurl.com/3qef4ea
167 2011-05-26 02:25:05 <tri5870s> anyone know how to fix the verification failed error?
168 2011-05-26 02:25:45 <jgarzik> tri5870s: -v
169 2011-05-26 02:27:08 <tri5870s> jgarzik: I'm already using -v
170 2011-05-26 02:32:00 <gjs278> turn off crossfire
171 2011-05-26 02:32:04 <gjs278> redo aticonfig --initial
172 2011-05-26 02:32:29 <gjs278> plug a monitor into the cards
173 2011-05-26 02:34:05 <tri5870s> gjs278: I'm not using crossfire, I'm using dummy plugs with windows 7
174 2011-05-26 02:34:27 <gjs278> thats all I've got
175 2011-05-26 02:34:46 <tri5870s> Is it possible to do redo aticonifg --initial with windows 7 guiminer?
176 2011-05-26 02:35:03 <gjs278> no
177 2011-05-26 02:35:08 <gjs278> that's linux only issue
178 2011-05-26 02:36:06 <tri5870s> isnt there a patch or script that restarts guiminer every 30 min?
179 2011-05-26 02:36:53 <tri5870s> i know its not ideal but its better than getting stuck
180 2011-05-26 02:44:20 <Ratt> blkmond doesn't seem to be notifying pushpoold of new blocks.  How can I go about figuring out why that would be?
181 2011-05-26 02:45:02 <jrmithdobbs> Ratt: make sure long polling is enabled in the config of pushpool and make sure the path to pushpool's pid file matchies in both the pushpool config and blkmond config
182 2011-05-26 02:45:20 <jrmithdobbs> Ratt: then make sure pushpool and blkmond are talking to the same bitcoind with the correct rpc user/pass
183 2011-05-26 02:46:01 <Ratt> Is there a config variable for blkmond to set the password?  It's not in the example file?
184 2011-05-26 02:47:33 <jrmithdobbs> my bad, blkmond watches on the bitcoin network connection
185 2011-05-26 02:47:38 <jrmithdobbs> not rpc
186 2011-05-26 02:47:52 <jrmithdobbs> the rest of that is valid though
187 2011-05-26 02:48:15 <Ratt> It all seems to be set properly... but blkmond just sits there doing nothing and I can't figure out why.
188 2011-05-26 02:48:21 <jrmithdobbs> Ratt: blkmond should be connecting to 8333 NOT 8332
189 2011-05-26 02:48:54 <Ratt> 8333 is which port?  I've moved bitcoind off of port 8332
190 2011-05-26 02:48:56 <jrmithdobbs> well ya, it doesn't do anything until a new block is seen fro bitcoind
191 2011-05-26 02:49:07 <jrmithdobbs> Ratt: the p2p port not the rpc port
192 2011-05-26 02:49:35 <jrmithdobbs> and why
193 2011-05-26 02:50:07 <Ratt> Well, I was looking at putting pushpool on bitcoinds port.  No particular specific reason.
194 2011-05-26 02:50:29 <jrmithdobbs> i wouldn't move the p2p port off of 8333
195 2011-05-26 02:52:10 <Ratt> I haven't explicitly configured any other port than rpcport= in the bitcoin.conf file
196 2011-05-26 02:53:09 <jrmithdobbs> well then make sure you're telling blkmond to connect to 8333
197 2011-05-26 02:55:14 <Ratt> Hmm, port 8333 isn't open.
198 2011-05-26 02:55:39 <jrmithdobbs> how are you starting bitcoind?
199 2011-05-26 02:56:06 <Ratt> at the moment just ./bitcoind -testnet with ~/.bitcoin/bitcoin.conf as the config file I'm assuming.
200 2011-05-26 02:57:50 <jrmithdobbs> so besides rpcusername/rpcpassword/rpcport what are you putting in bitcoin.conf?
201 2011-05-26 02:58:16 <jrmithdobbs> and rpcallowip
202 2011-05-26 02:58:57 <jrmithdobbs> and does getinfo tell you you actually have any connections?
203 2011-05-26 02:59:18 <Ratt> I have only, server=1, rpcuser, rpcpassword and rpctimeout=3 in the bitcoin.conf file
204 2011-05-26 02:59:28 <Ratt> s/3/30/g
205 2011-05-26 02:59:40 <jrmithdobbs> no "nolisten"
206 2011-05-26 02:59:46 <jrmithdobbs> right?
207 2011-05-26 02:59:46 <Ratt> No
208 2011-05-26 02:59:59 <jrmithdobbs> so does getinfo actually tell you you have connections?
209 2011-05-26 03:02:39 <Ratt> Yeah, 9.  Just restarted the server
210 2011-05-26 03:04:06 <Ratt> Is testnet p2p on 18333?
211 2011-05-26 03:04:44 <Ratt> Yeah... I'm thinking that's the problem.
212 2011-05-26 03:04:54 <jrmithdobbs> ah
213 2011-05-26 03:05:02 <jrmithdobbs> ya that'll do it
214 2011-05-26 03:06:58 <Ratt> It sure is taking me a lot longer to generate a block on testnet than it should, according to the difficulty.  at 1 GH/s i should genete about a block a minute, but it's taking much longer.
215 2011-05-26 03:07:47 <Ratt> Sigh... blkmond closed for no reason now.
216 2011-05-26 03:09:41 <Ratt> When I start blkmond pointed at port 18883, in the bitcoind debug.log file, I get this: PROCESSMESSAGE MESSAGESTART NOT FOUND
217 2011-05-26 03:10:03 <Ratt> About 60 seconds later blkmond exits
218 2011-05-26 03:18:14 <Ratt> So should blkmond be pointed at 8332 or 8333?
219 2011-05-26 03:18:41 <jeremid> blkmaestro
220 2011-05-26 03:22:54 <sacarlson> with bitcointd getinfo   the line  "balance" : 0.21950000,  is the total of all account correct?
221 2011-05-26 03:23:31 <Ratt> Yes
222 2011-05-26 03:24:29 <sacarlson> Ratt: so with bitcoind listaccounts  how is it posible to have negitive accouts?  "107" : -5.00000000,
223 2011-05-26 03:25:16 <Ratt> I forget the reason that comes up... others have asked that though and there is an answer.
224 2011-05-26 03:25:18 <jgarzik> sacarlson: one account is +50 BTC, another account is -50 BTC
225 2011-05-26 03:25:35 <sacarlson> jgarzik: yes
226 2011-05-26 03:25:44 <jgarzik> sacarlson: it is easy to create by using 'sendtoaddress' rather than 'sendfrom' as is proper with accounts
227 2011-05-26 03:25:57 <jgarzik> sacarlson: mixing the two easily created negative balances
228 2011-05-26 03:26:00 <sacarlson> oh no there is just one -50
229 2011-05-26 03:27:32 <Ratt> jgarzik: Does blkmond work properly on testnet?
230 2011-05-26 03:27:58 <jgarzik> Ratt: dunno
231 2011-05-26 03:28:29 <Ratt> It is suppose to connect to 8332 or 8333?
232 2011-05-26 03:28:32 <sacarlson> jgarzik: so you can sendtoaddress a negitive number?
233 2011-05-26 03:29:27 <jgarzik> sacarlson: no.  my point was that using sendtoaddress just picks random coins from random accounts, because the interface does not support accounts
234 2011-05-26 03:30:07 <sacarlson> jgarzik: oh ok I think I get it
235 2011-05-26 03:31:12 <sacarlson> jgarzik: not that it make any difference since the accounts are kept in mysql but I'll change the sendtoaddress to a sendfrom just to make it clear when I check activity
236 2011-05-26 03:38:31 <_Maru_> sooo .... I got my radeon 5770 and i'm trying to install it on linux but i'm getting
237 2011-05-26 03:38:32 <_Maru_> pyopencl.LogicError: clGetPlatformIDs failed: invalid/unknown error code
238 2011-05-26 03:38:35 <_Maru_> any ideas?
239 2011-05-26 03:42:59 <jgarzik> _Maru_: install icd?
240 2011-05-26 03:43:32 <jgarzik> _Maru_: ran aticonfig --initial?  rebooted after all that is done?  X server running?
241 2011-05-26 03:44:17 <_Maru_> whats icd?
242 2011-05-26 03:44:25 <_Maru_> i did do aticonfig and rebooot
243 2011-05-26 03:44:50 <jgarzik> _Maru_: http://developer.amd.com/Downloads/icd-registration.tgz
244 2011-05-26 03:44:55 <jgarzik> _Maru_: untar into /
245 2011-05-26 03:44:57 <jgarzik> as root
246 2011-05-26 03:48:19 <sacarlson> jgarzik: cool I figured it out I had a 50 TNBTC deposit that ended up getting zero confirms and since my setting are that it deposits at 1 confirm I get a negitive or zero balance
247 2011-05-26 03:49:07 <sacarlson> jgarzik: I've since had other deposits after the 50 tnbtc that have cleared
248 2011-05-26 03:52:33 <Xenland> Soo ehh... Whats blkmond do?
249 2011-05-26 03:52:50 <Xenland> for pushpool
250 2011-05-26 03:54:50 <sacarlson> nope I havn't figured it out ignore last post
251 2011-05-26 03:56:10 <sacarlson> it seems the total deposits of incoming transactions don't total the end ballance as there are no withdraws and a total of 60 tnbtc deposits there seems there should be a positive ballance
252 2011-05-26 03:57:50 <sacarlson> maybe my moving the transactions from one account to another before confirmation make bitcoin deposit not get deposited?  must be some major bug in my software
253 2011-05-26 03:59:31 <sacarlson> thank god it's fake money
254 2011-05-26 04:05:45 <Xenland> Why is it that pushpool only lets me connect with my bitcoind conf file
255 2011-05-26 04:06:14 <Xenland> Heres a better question what port does pushpool listen on?
256 2011-05-26 04:09:58 <bytepimp> Added a new Bitcoin desktop wallpaper... http://carbonism.deviantart.com/#/d3h8rh4  enjoy!
257 2011-05-26 04:10:46 <diki> ;;bc,calc 427514
258 2011-05-26 04:10:48 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 427514 Khps, given current difficulty of 244139.48158254 , is 4 weeks, 0 days, 9 hours, 18 minutes, and 37 seconds
259 2011-05-26 04:10:55 <diki> ;;bc,calcd 427514
260 2011-05-26 04:10:56 <gribble> (bc,calcd <an alias, 2 arguments>) -- Alias for "echo The average time to generate a block at $1 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of $2, is [time elapsed [math calc 1/((2**224-1)/$2*$1*1000/2**256)]]".
261 2011-05-26 04:11:28 <diki> ;;bc,calcd 270000 427514
262 2011-05-26 04:11:28 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 270000 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 427514, is 11 weeks, 1 day, 17 hours, 3 minutes, and 7 seconds
263 2011-05-26 04:11:39 <diki> ;;bc,calcd 535000 427514
264 2011-05-26 04:11:39 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 535000 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 427514, is 5 weeks, 4 days, 17 hours, 21 minutes, and 12 seconds
265 2011-05-26 04:11:59 <diki> This is going to get very ugly...
266 2011-05-26 04:13:25 <diki> ;;bc,stats
267 2011-05-26 04:13:27 <gribble> Current Blocks: 126841 | Current Difficulty: 244139.48158254 | Next Difficulty At Block: 127007 | Next Difficulty In: 166 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 13 hours, 30 minutes, and 38 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 427514.25853632
268 2011-05-26 04:16:19 <Xenland> Why would pushpool report that clients are connecting but poclbm reports "Problems communicating with Bitcoin RPC
269 2011-05-26 04:16:54 <gribble> (bc,calcd <an alias, 2 arguments>) -- Alias for "echo The average time to generate a block at $1 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of $2, is [time elapsed [math calc 1/((2**224-1)/$2*$1*1000/2**256)]]".
270 2011-05-26 04:16:54 <Xenland> ;;bc,calcd 800000
271 2011-05-26 04:17:29 <Xenland> ;;bc,calcd 800000 444000
272 2011-05-26 04:17:30 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 800000 Khps, given the supplied difficulty of 444000, is 3 weeks, 6 days, 14 hours, 8 minutes, and 26 seconds
273 2011-05-26 04:18:22 <darbsllim> yowzers
274 2011-05-26 04:22:26 <Xenland> Yes! after litterally 18hours of getting pushpool to work i think i can finally make a front-end for everybody to enjoy. thanks for everyones efforts in assisting me in assisting everyone.
275 2011-05-26 04:22:42 <Xenland> Back to the lab
276 2011-05-26 04:31:46 <sacarlson> why would you have a minconf option for bitcoind sendfrom <fromaccount> <bitcoinaddress> <amount> <minconf>  what does minconf function as when you are sending money?
277 2011-05-26 04:42:00 <sacarlson> does any one have 50 tnBTC (testnet) or any amount would do that can be sent me at mj4SEumw4M8nianfBDT84zuEzQHmydR9TQ  seems faucet is backed up with request
278 2011-05-26 04:44:52 <diki> I sent 250btc to testnet faucet
279 2011-05-26 04:45:04 <diki> seems they were all used up
280 2011-05-26 04:46:30 <sacarlson> diki: oh thanks man
281 2011-05-26 04:48:26 <_Maru_> jgarzik: what do you do after you extract it to etc?
282 2011-05-26 04:50:25 <diki> @Maru: extract what?
283 2011-05-26 05:15:31 <diki> why doesnt mtgox allow you to see offers/requests if you dont have any funds on the site?
284 2011-05-26 05:16:45 <jrmithdobbs> since when
285 2011-05-26 05:17:04 <io_error> Works fine for me.
286 2011-05-26 05:17:04 <jrmithdobbs> wait, did you modify the firefox source of the browser you're using?
287 2011-05-26 05:17:13 <io_error> Don't even need to be logged in.
288 2011-05-26 05:17:13 <jrmithdobbs> got to start at the basic troubleshooting steps here with diki.
289 2011-05-26 05:17:32 <jrmithdobbs> diki: maybe cut and paste around a bit of the javascript engine?
290 2011-05-26 06:01:33 <tippenein> any reason my bitcoin client won't connect?  I checked the bitcoin.conf file and restarted a few times.  running it on linux
291 2011-05-26 06:05:52 <stuhood> tippenein: i got into a similar place the other day& ended up deleting ~/.bitcoin/addr.dat and starting fresh
292 2011-05-26 06:06:24 <stuhood> &address wise
293 2011-05-26 06:06:38 <tippenein> i didn't delete anything, so that shouldn't be it
294 2011-05-26 06:07:06 <ArtForz> -addnode one of the fallback nodes
295 2011-05-26 06:08:12 <ArtForz> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Fallback_nodes
296 2011-05-26 06:08:33 <sacarlson> still seems to be no activity from the testnet faucet  anyone with 0.10 tnBTC laying around? mj4SEumw4M8nianfBDT84zuEzQHmydR9TQ
297 2011-05-26 06:09:01 <io_error> sacarlson: Didn't we go through this once before?
298 2011-05-26 06:09:21 <jaromil> io_error: are u j?
299 2011-05-26 06:09:27 <jaromil> gmoin everyone
300 2011-05-26 06:09:28 <io_error> /facepalm
301 2011-05-26 06:09:29 <sacarlson> io_error: yes and I'm still pending in the faucet
302 2011-05-26 06:10:03 <io_error> sacarlson: It wants a fee to send you 0.10 :P
303 2011-05-26 06:10:47 <io_error> sacarlson: Probably all the faucet transactions are going to sit and wait for some miner to pick them up
304 2011-05-26 06:11:05 <sacarlson> io_error: a fee? for testnet faucet?
305 2011-05-26 06:11:24 <io_error> sacarlson: It's those stupid new fee rules
306 2011-05-26 06:12:09 <sacarlson> io_error: so I have the new version running it should be set to minimum .0005 then
307 2011-05-26 06:12:18 <io_error> sacarlson: You run the faucet?
308 2011-05-26 06:12:42 <sacarlson> io_error: no I thought the fee came from the reciever
309 2011-05-26 06:12:46 <nzbitminerKIWI> Hey, I am new here. I have a few computers running with dual 6990HD's..
310 2011-05-26 06:12:48 <io_error> No, sender pays the fee
311 2011-05-26 06:12:52 <tippenein> hmmm... so I had to port forward 8333 to get it to connect
312 2011-05-26 06:12:55 <tippenein> that's new
313 2011-05-26 06:12:59 <stuhood> tippenein: i was suggesting that you try deleting your addr.dat: but listen to ArtForz, not me
314 2011-05-26 06:13:10 <io_error> tippenein: Just as well, yiou'll get better connectivity that way
315 2011-05-26 06:13:22 <nzbitminerKIWI> for one particular computer (not others on the network) they constantly go idle maybe like 1/3 of the time, theyre saying "job finished. warning idle", any suggestions? I can answer questions :) ty for help
316 2011-05-26 06:13:50 <io_error> It's past 4 am here, so someone please remind me, isn't tehre a channel for mining?
317 2011-05-26 06:13:50 <nzbitminerKIWI> on average they're performing about 50% as well as other workers with identicle cards
318 2011-05-26 06:13:57 <nzbitminerKIWI> sorry I am new here
319 2011-05-26 06:14:10 <io_error> <-- should be in bed
320 2011-05-26 06:14:33 <io_error> ah, yes there is #bitcoin-mining
321 2011-05-26 06:15:34 <io_error> sacarlson: Sent you 0.10 testnet, gawd knows when it'll ever confirm
322 2011-05-26 06:15:59 <sacarlson> io_error: cool I got it thanks
323 2011-05-26 06:17:29 <io_error> Oh look, somebody's mining on the tetnet
324 2011-05-26 06:19:55 <gjs278> what's the website to see bitcoin transactions waiting to be processed
325 2011-05-26 06:21:21 <ArtForz> http://bitcoincharts.com/bitcoin/ ?
326 2011-05-26 06:33:20 <gjs278> that would be it
327 2011-05-26 06:42:49 <sacarlson> can a bitcoind account be deleted?
328 2011-05-26 06:43:23 <sipa> no
329 2011-05-26 06:45:56 <sacarlson> sipa: I know an address can't be deleted but an account?
330 2011-05-26 06:47:06 <sipa> oh, accounts - sorry, yes
331 2011-05-26 06:47:19 <sacarlson> sipa what command is used to delete them?
332 2011-05-26 06:47:19 <sipa> not sure if it's implemented, but there's no problem technically
333 2011-05-26 06:47:49 <sacarlson> sipa: do I have to delete the db files just to delete the accounts?
334 2011-05-26 06:48:33 <sacarlson> in bitcoind
335 2011-05-26 06:48:41 <sipa> i don't think there is another way currently
336 2011-05-26 06:49:09 <sacarlson> sipa: ok it's an all or none deal I guess I will live with that
337 2011-05-26 06:51:32 <rli> ;;bc,stats
338 2011-05-26 06:51:34 <gribble> Current Blocks: 126872 | Current Difficulty: 244139.48158254 | Next Difficulty At Block: 127007 | Next Difficulty In: 135 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 10 hours, 52 minutes, and 30 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 428412.11707102
339 2011-05-26 06:54:58 <hybriz_> wow. dificulty was increasing in 2weeks now its hours lol
340 2011-05-26 06:55:14 <hybriz_> ;;bc,stats
341 2011-05-26 06:55:17 <gribble> Current Blocks: 126874 | Current Difficulty: 244139.48158254 | Next Difficulty At Block: 127007 | Next Difficulty In: 133 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 10 hours, 45 minutes, and 3 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 428493.09265899
342 2011-05-26 06:56:12 <edcba> ;;bc,mtgox
343 2011-05-26 06:56:14 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":9.33,"low":7.241,"vol":68521,"buy":8.2011,"sell":8.21,"last":8.2011}}
344 2011-05-26 06:59:04 <stuhood> is anyone in here familiar with berkeley db?
345 2011-05-26 07:00:22 <stuhood> it looks like the only way to disable fsync is "db_env"ironment wide
346 2011-05-26 07:00:26 <stuhood> which i assume would not fly
347 2011-05-26 07:01:50 <stuhood> without splitting the environments
348 2011-05-26 07:03:41 <eps1> ;;bc,stats
349 2011-05-26 07:03:43 <gribble> Current Blocks: 126876 | Current Difficulty: 244139.48158254 | Next Difficulty At Block: 127007 | Next Difficulty In: 131 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 10 hours, 35 minutes, and 21 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 428512.29754599
350 2011-05-26 07:03:46 <Alexees> can someone help me, on my gpu1 i got 300MH/s , on gpu2 only 10MH/s im using 5970
351 2011-05-26 07:03:47 <eps1> ;;bc,mtgox
352 2011-05-26 07:03:49 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":9.33,"low":7.241,"vol":68528,"buy":8.22,"sell":8.29,"last":8.22}}
353 2011-05-26 07:08:58 <gjs278> Alexees disable the crossfire
354 2011-05-26 07:09:50 <gjs278> if you're on linux, redo aticonfig --initial. if you're on windows, no idea
355 2011-05-26 07:10:31 <Alexees> im on windows =(
356 2011-05-26 07:22:35 <jindel> how is the next target agreed upon?  -is it picked (no more than a factor of 4 difference) by the node that solved the last block before the scheduled difficulty change?
357 2011-05-26 07:24:10 <sacarlson> i guess in the future to delete my -testnet accounts I should all the .bitcoin files excep the wallet.dat and the blkindex.dat file so I don't have to download all the block data again
358 2011-05-26 07:24:37 <sacarlson> delete all but wallet.dat and blkindex.dat
359 2011-05-26 07:25:16 <sacarlson> I forgot how long that takes
360 2011-05-26 07:25:38 <sipa> jindel: it is calculated by each node separately
361 2011-05-26 07:26:04 <sipa> jindel: and since they all start from exactly the same data (the block chain), they all end up with exactly the same result
362 2011-05-26 07:41:08 <FellowTraveler> hi all.
363 2011-05-26 07:42:54 <jaromil> FellowTraveler: hey man, tell us the good news :)
364 2011-05-26 07:43:47 <FellowTraveler> The good news is, we all have human rights.
365 2011-05-26 07:44:43 <sipa> and the bad news?
366 2011-05-26 07:45:26 <justend> www.mtgox.com down...
367 2011-05-26 07:45:35 <Namegduf> The people with guns don't seem to care.
368 2011-05-26 07:45:39 <Namegduf> Oh, that is bad news.
369 2011-05-26 07:45:58 <Namegduf> ...hmm, no, it's not down.
370 2011-05-26 07:46:36 <justend> not down? ddos?
371 2011-05-26 07:46:48 <Namegduf> Working fine here.
372 2011-05-26 07:46:53 <ArtForz> works fine here
373 2011-05-26 07:46:55 <tcatm> justend: try https://mtgox.com
374 2011-05-26 07:47:38 <justend> ... error page 205 (net::ERR_CERT_UNABLE_TO_CHECK_REVOCATION)
375 2011-05-26 07:48:04 <UukGoblin> FellowTraveler, not if someone's a suspected terrorist... then they don't
376 2011-05-26 07:48:08 <Namegduf> That error means your browser is trying to check whether the SSL cert is revoked
377 2011-05-26 07:48:24 <Namegduf> But can't connect to the SSL revocation-handling server
378 2011-05-26 07:48:32 <Namegduf> The problem is between it and that.
379 2011-05-26 07:48:36 <Namegduf> Are you on a restricted network?
380 2011-05-26 07:49:53 <justend> i clone chromium then open ie .....works fine now  -_-
381 2011-05-26 07:51:44 <Namegduf> Your Chromium setup is probably broken somehow.
382 2011-05-26 07:51:57 <Namegduf> Unfortunately I can't give any better advice.
383 2011-05-26 07:55:02 <justend> i will try fix it .thanks anyway
384 2011-05-26 08:09:44 <Ameoba_> Hi, I just downloaded the linux client for bitcoin, but it doesn't appear with the GUI like i'm expecting. Can someone lend me a hand getting started?
385 2011-05-26 08:15:26 <asyn_> Ameoba_: current client has some problems with ubuntu 11.04.
386 2011-05-26 08:16:20 <Alexees> anyone know how to disable crossfire on radeon 5970 + win xp ?
387 2011-05-26 08:16:32 <asyn_> Ameoba_: see http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=6299.0 for a solution
388 2011-05-26 08:44:23 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: sipa tcatm ping
389 2011-05-26 08:45:38 <tcatm> BlueMatt: pong
390 2011-05-26 08:46:27 <BlueMatt> tcatm: just wondered if there were enough people on to discuss the fee issue
391 2011-05-26 08:47:21 <tcatm> k
392 2011-05-26 08:49:33 <devon_hillard> how many GPU operations does it take to compute a hash? 5K?
393 2011-05-26 08:49:55 <devon_hillard> if so, this puts the bitcoin network at somewhere near 20 petaflops
394 2011-05-26 08:50:12 <sipa> BlueMatt: i'm here
395 2011-05-26 08:50:33 <tcatm> devon_hillard: we're at ~50 petaflops
396 2011-05-26 08:50:34 <BlueMatt> well I suppose thats enough to get it going...maybe jgarzik will read his scrollback
397 2011-05-26 08:50:39 <ArtForz> tcatm: sure?
398 2011-05-26 08:50:48 <sipa> devon_hillard: computing a hash does not require any flop, so there is no meaningful definition of petaflops here
399 2011-05-26 08:50:51 <devon_hillard> well, peta-ops, no floating point
400 2011-05-26 08:51:00 <tcatm> ArtForz: according to the factor you posted in the forum
401 2011-05-26 08:51:13 <ArtForz> sipa: assume ati gpus, 1 intop = 2 SP FLOPs
402 2011-05-26 08:51:29 <ArtForz> for DP it gets kinda iffy
403 2011-05-26 08:51:41 <ArtForz> as only 58xx/59xx and 69xx have DP support at all
404 2011-05-26 08:52:01 <ArtForz> so you have to pull a % of lower-end cards out of your ass
405 2011-05-26 08:52:01 <sipa> yes, you can estimate how many SP flops the bitcoin network could do, if they all switched from mining to a floating-point based distributed computing project
406 2011-05-26 08:52:15 <sipa> but i mean: saying how many petaflop/s the bitcoin network does: zero
407 2011-05-26 08:52:21 <ArtForz> true
408 2011-05-26 08:52:31 <ArtForz> but plenty of INTOPS ;)
409 2011-05-26 08:52:39 <devon_hillard> so bitcoin is larger than the next 3-4 largest (public) distributed computing projects?
410 2011-05-26 08:52:44 <devon_hillard> put together
411 2011-05-26 08:52:57 <ArtForz> roughly... yep.
412 2011-05-26 08:53:02 <BlueMatt> either way: Im in favor of some odd combination of 2+3.  Use 0.0005 for relaying/mining, but 0.01 in outputs to send via gui, but also <0.01 txouts are still supposed to be charged fees, even though those can be 0.0005
413 2011-05-26 08:53:18 <BlueMatt> (if Im interpreting 2+3 correct)
414 2011-05-26 08:53:52 <ArtForz> exponential growth is awesome
415 2011-05-26 08:54:08 <sipa> and economic incentive works pretty nice too
416 2011-05-26 08:54:10 <tcatm> BlueMatt: 2+3? is there a forum thread with possible options?
417 2011-05-26 08:54:16 <sipa> tcatm: see my mail
418 2011-05-26 08:54:17 <BlueMatt> tcatm: email
419 2011-05-26 08:54:40 <devon_hillard> folding@home is 7petaflops and BOINC (which includes seti@home) another 5.5
420 2011-05-26 08:54:58 <ArtForz> but iirc for F@H that's DP FLOPS
421 2011-05-26 08:55:19 <sipa> to summarize: 1) switch to 0.0005 immediately 2) switch to 0.0005 for everything except created transactions with subcent outputs (they still need 0.01 fee) 3) do 0.01 for all creations but allow 0.0005 to be relayed/mined
422 2011-05-26 08:56:13 <ArtForz> 3 is the safest option
423 2011-05-26 08:56:15 <BlueMatt> sipa: wouldnt 2 cause the same issues as 1, in that txes with size >1kb wouldnt get relayed?
424 2011-05-26 08:56:40 <ArtForz> yep
425 2011-05-26 08:56:42 <BlueMatt> Im in favor of 3, keeping in mind that subcent txouts are still not to be accepted without fees
426 2011-05-26 08:56:42 <tcatm> I'd vote for 3 and switch to 0.0005 fees once most parts of the network allow smaller fees
427 2011-05-26 08:56:59 <ArtForz> thats the basic plan
428 2011-05-26 08:57:00 <sipa> BlueMatt: no, because the only relay-rule is that subcent-outputs *must* have a 0.01 fee
429 2011-05-26 08:57:03 <BlueMatt> (that seemed unclear in the email)
430 2011-05-26 08:57:16 <ArtForz> sipa: u sure?
431 2011-05-26 08:57:16 <sipa> for all other places it just changes priority (iirc)
432 2011-05-26 08:57:19 <BlueMatt> sipa: really, I thought relay also applied to kb size
433 2011-05-26 08:57:25 <sipa> hmmm
434 2011-05-26 08:57:29 <ArtForz> I'm pretty sure for forwarding also size/fee are checked
435 2011-05-26 08:57:30 <BlueMatt> but I could be very wrong
436 2011-05-26 08:57:33 <sipa> in that case, 3 is safest indeed
437 2011-05-26 08:57:40 <BlueMatt> needs checking
438 2011-05-26 08:57:58 <sipa> let's wait for gavin's opinion
439 2011-05-26 08:58:49 <BlueMatt> also, I installed this cppcheck tool and it doesnt show any of the errors this guy posted, except for the one in util.cpp, for which there is a pull req
440 2011-05-26 09:03:48 <SerajewelKS> wtf, all my testnet blocks orphaned again
441 2011-05-26 09:04:00 <BlueMatt> ha, someone doesnt like you
442 2011-05-26 09:04:31 <SerajewelKS> someone doesn't like testnet
443 2011-05-26 09:07:37 <anarchyx> ;;bc,stats
444 2011-05-26 09:07:39 <gribble> Current Blocks: 126919 | Current Difficulty: 244139.48158254 | Next Difficulty At Block: 127007 | Next Difficulty In: 88 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 6 hours, 56 minutes, and 32 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 433297.26797206
445 2011-05-26 09:09:18 <SerajewelKS> does blockexplorer mark orphaned blocks?
446 2011-05-26 09:09:31 <BlueMatt> just removes them and moves on
447 2011-05-26 09:09:34 <SerajewelKS> or do they just not show up anymore if i enter their ID?
448 2011-05-26 09:10:39 <SerajewelKS> because according to blockexplorer, my blocks are not orphaned
449 2011-05-26 09:11:01 <BlueMatt> then I suppose it just moves on and doesnt mark them
450 2011-05-26 09:11:01 <SerajewelKS> why does my client think they are
451 2011-05-26 09:12:10 <SerajewelKS> no, this is wrong.  something is messed up.
452 2011-05-26 09:12:32 <SerajewelKS> i have a generation txn 18a59078f012daf27650a13eb440fd76700c5474991b57878344593ef5751f2e
453 2011-05-26 09:12:47 <SerajewelKS> according to blockexplorer this was in block 20682
454 2011-05-26 09:12:59 <SerajewelKS> if i go back to the home page and search for block 20682, i see my transaction
455 2011-05-26 09:13:26 <SerajewelKS> and i am peered with blockexplorer
456 2011-05-26 09:13:54 <SerajewelKS> blockexplorer and my client agree on the number of blocks
457 2011-05-26 09:14:05 <SerajewelKS> i can't explain this
458 2011-05-26 09:14:56 <SerajewelKS> still "orphan"... this smells like a bug
459 2011-05-26 09:15:06 <sipa> rescan doesn't change the block database
460 2011-05-26 09:15:12 <SerajewelKS> i know
461 2011-05-26 09:15:13 <sipa> only finds missing wallet transactions
462 2011-05-26 09:15:17 <BlueMatt> use bitcointools to check the chain
463 2011-05-26 09:15:24 <SerajewelKS> but blockexplorer doesn't think my transaction is orphaned
464 2011-05-26 09:15:31 <sipa> BBE may be wrong :)
465 2011-05-26 09:15:55 <sipa> still, BBE may be wrong
466 2011-05-26 09:16:00 <ArtForz> BBE is wrong
467 2011-05-26 09:16:07 <SerajewelKS> O_o
468 2011-05-26 09:16:36 <sipa> ArtForz, BlueMatt: you're right, large transactions require a fee for relaying as well
469 2011-05-26 09:16:40 <ArtForz> last reorg made it completely crap itself
470 2011-05-26 09:16:58 <ArtForz> now it shows a weird mix of blocks from the prevbious and current longest chain
471 2011-05-26 09:17:13 <BlueMatt> sipa: so then everyone here agrees on #3?
472 2011-05-26 09:17:19 <BlueMatt> ArtForz: tcatm ?
473 2011-05-26 09:17:26 <SerajewelKS> ArtForz: huh.  maybe someone should tell jgarzik.
474 2011-05-26 09:17:35 <ArtForz> BlueMatt: yup
475 2011-05-26 09:17:40 <ArtForz> SerajewelKS: he knows it
476 2011-05-26 09:17:41 <BlueMatt> SerajewelKS: BBE is theymos
477 2011-05-26 09:17:47 <SerajewelKS> oh, right
478 2011-05-26 09:17:55 <ArtForz> blockexplorer doesnt deal with reorgs nicely without manual intervention
479 2011-05-26 09:18:10 <BlueMatt> though I thought he said yesterday that it had been upgrade (the testnet part, not mainnet) to work properly
480 2011-05-26 09:18:34 <ArtForz> doesnt look like it
481 2011-05-26 09:20:05 <sipa> BlueMatt: there's still another combination possible - use new minfee for creation, but still check it with GetMinFee using the old minfee
482 2011-05-26 09:20:19 <sipa> though there is hardly a difference
483 2011-05-26 09:20:23 <ArtForz> http://blockexplorer.com/testnet/block/0000000000781783d58ff3d6315688db39c42bf8abd7192bf2bc98c258e077e2
484 2011-05-26 09:20:32 <ArtForz> previous block -> no such block
485 2011-05-26 09:20:35 <sipa> except for people who manually enable a fee
486 2011-05-26 09:20:50 <sipa> so, i guess #3 is the way to go
487 2011-05-26 09:24:06 <BlueMatt> sipa: for a release in rc, Id say kiss all the way...#3 seems to solve it and its simple as possible IMHO
488 2011-05-26 09:24:18 <BlueMatt> for 0.4.0 the ui needs overhauled anyway
489 2011-05-26 09:30:21 <sipa> not only the gui
490 2011-05-26 09:30:38 <BlueMatt> well a ton of stuff...
491 2011-05-26 09:33:16 <sacarlson> what file in .bitcoin dir contains the blocks that are downloaded on the first time run?  is it blkindex.dat or blk0001.dat
492 2011-05-26 09:34:10 <BlueMatt> both
493 2011-05-26 09:34:12 <BlueMatt> one is an index
494 2011-05-26 09:35:34 <sacarlson> BlueMatt so I can't just copy one of them I need them both ok
495 2011-05-26 09:35:46 <BlueMatt> y
496 2011-05-26 09:35:51 <BlueMatt> es
497 2011-05-26 09:42:33 <BlueMatt> lfm: ping
498 2011-05-26 09:47:19 <anarchyx> ;;bc,stats
499 2011-05-26 09:47:21 <gribble> Current Blocks: 126925 | Current Difficulty: 244139.48158254 | Next Difficulty At Block: 127007 | Next Difficulty In: 82 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 6 hours, 26 minutes, and 46 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 433528.25460588
500 2011-05-26 09:53:43 <BlueMatt> is there a way to give me access to tag bugs on github without commit access?
501 2011-05-26 09:53:53 <BlueMatt> tag, close and the like
502 2011-05-26 09:54:09 <BlueMatt> this bug list needs serious spring cleaning
503 2011-05-26 10:04:32 <sacarlson> seems confirms are coming in quick on testnet now like 3 in one minit
504 2011-05-26 10:04:58 <sacarlson> maybe I'm just getting older and times moving faster?
505 2011-05-26 10:05:40 <FunkyPenguin> hi if possible could someone advise on how to fix a packaging issue please?
506 2011-05-26 10:06:35 <FunkyPenguin> im trying to package bitcoin for openSUSE, atm im getting http://paste.opensuse.org/32446658
507 2011-05-26 10:06:58 <BlueMatt> FunkyPenguin: cd src first
508 2011-05-26 10:12:47 <SerajewelKS> sacarlson: someone is mining testnet really fast it seems and causing reorgs a lot
509 2011-05-26 10:13:18 <sacarlson> reorgs?
510 2011-05-26 10:13:36 <SerajewelKS> forking the block chain, causing the network to have to decide on one
511 2011-05-26 10:14:09 <sacarlson> SerajewelKS: oh maybe that's the problem I had in my exchange then that has ended up with negitive numbers
512 2011-05-26 10:14:21 <SerajewelKS> sacarlson: probably
513 2011-05-26 10:14:44 <FunkyPenguin> BlueMatt: the issue is there is nothing in src/obj
514 2011-05-26 10:14:52 <sacarlson> SerajewelKS: I'm still not sure at this point if I have a bug or what
515 2011-05-26 10:15:07 <BlueMatt> FunkyPenguin: no the issue is you arent cd'd to src
516 2011-05-26 10:15:17 <SerajewelKS> sacarlson: someone probably traded generated coins that were later orphaned
517 2011-05-26 10:15:23 <BlueMatt> make will put something in obj/ not src/obj
518 2011-05-26 10:15:28 <da2ce7> SerajewelKS, if you want I can join the testnet with tor... that will create some rorgs
519 2011-05-26 10:15:32 <SerajewelKS> sacarlson: i mined 1100 bitcoins on testnet one weekend and a reorg later caused them all to go away
520 2011-05-26 10:15:50 <SerajewelKS> da2ce7: someone else is causing enough reorgs already, thanks
521 2011-05-26 10:16:08 <da2ce7> good testing :)
522 2011-05-26 10:16:10 <SerajewelKS> like 200+ block reorgs
523 2011-05-26 10:16:19 <sacarlson> SerajewelKS: so that's what happens when you have an underpowered network?
524 2011-05-26 10:16:25 <SerajewelKS> it's not good when you need coins to test with and all your mined coins go away
525 2011-05-26 10:16:48 <da2ce7> lol
526 2011-05-26 10:16:49 <SerajewelKS> sacarlson: it's what happens when someone with more than 50% of the network hashing strength intentionally forks the network and then rejoins it later
527 2011-05-26 10:17:11 <SerajewelKS> sacarlson: all the blocks that everyone else worked on get superceded
528 2011-05-26 10:17:52 <da2ce7> so your blocks 'dissapear' in the client, or go back down to 120 conf's/
529 2011-05-26 10:18:05 <da2ce7> I guees they will complelty dissapear.
530 2011-05-26 10:18:19 <SerajewelKS> they go away
531 2011-05-26 10:18:24 <sacarlson> SerajewelKS: so maybe I need to manualy add more of those check points at closer periods of time
532 2011-05-26 10:18:49 <SerajewelKS> sacarlson: more "check points" won't really help much when the network yanks back coins that were mined
533 2011-05-26 10:18:56 <da2ce7> SerajewelKS, what happens to the transactions based upon those blocks?
534 2011-05-26 10:19:04 <SerajewelKS> da2ce7: upon the generated coins?
535 2011-05-26 10:19:15 <da2ce7> yeah... after the rorg
536 2011-05-26 10:19:19 <SerajewelKS> da2ce7: they become invalid and go away
537 2011-05-26 10:19:35 <da2ce7> ah... even if they have mixed in good coins?
538 2011-05-26 10:19:42 <SerajewelKS> yes
539 2011-05-26 10:19:57 <SerajewelKS> if any input in a transaction becomes invalid as part of a reorg, the entire transaction becomes invalid
540 2011-05-26 10:20:29 <sacarlson> SerajewelKS: what if all the coins had already been mined?
541 2011-05-26 10:20:43 <SerajewelKS> sacarlson: the longer chain will still supercede the old one
542 2011-05-26 10:21:00 <sacarlson> SerajewelKS: ya that sound correct
543 2011-05-26 10:21:25 <SerajewelKS> sacarlson: the only way to "fix" the problem you're having would be to require that coins have existed for a lot more than 120 blocks before you accept them
544 2011-05-26 10:21:31 <SerajewelKS> sacarlson: and even that's not 100% bulletproof
545 2011-05-26 10:21:44 <SerajewelKS> this is why one malicious entity having 50% of the network strength is bad
546 2011-05-26 10:22:06 <SerajewelKS> not only can they out-hash the network but they can effectively prevent anyone else from generating blocks, simply by refusing to accept their blocks
547 2011-05-26 10:22:14 <da2ce7> the hash rate is going up fast enougth. :)
548 2011-05-26 10:22:19 <SerajewelKS> they build their own chain in isolation
549 2011-05-26 10:22:20 <sacarlson> SerajewelKS: well all my coins in weeds were created in the first 10 blocks and now I'm at block 2000
550 2011-05-26 10:22:22 <da2ce7> ;;bc,stats
551 2011-05-26 10:22:24 <gribble> Current Blocks: 126929 | Current Difficulty: 244139.48158254 | Next Difficulty At Block: 127007 | Next Difficulty In: 78 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 6 hours, 9 minutes, and 12 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 433251.16846752
552 2011-05-26 10:22:24 <SerajewelKS> then reconnect to the rest of the network
553 2011-05-26 10:22:30 <SerajewelKS> boom, transactions get reverted
554 2011-05-26 10:22:54 <SerajewelKS> (transactions based upon new coins)
555 2011-05-26 10:23:09 <sacarlson> SerajewelKS: I"m wondering if those would have the same problem but I think they can only cancel orders that happend after they took over the net
556 2011-05-26 10:23:28 <SerajewelKS> sacarlson: they are free to fork the block chain from whatever point they want
557 2011-05-26 10:23:51 <da2ce7> lol
558 2011-05-26 10:23:57 <SerajewelKS> sacarlson: with a sufficiently strong rig, they could cause a reorg from block 0
559 2011-05-26 10:24:26 <SerajewelKS> they would effectively reboot the network
560 2011-05-26 10:24:32 <da2ce7> SerajewelKS, nope hardcoded chain locks.
561 2011-05-26 10:24:54 <SerajewelKS> da2ce7: at what point?
562 2011-05-26 10:24:55 <da2ce7> in the client... you could do a rebbot from the last lock that was widely accepted.
563 2011-05-26 10:25:06 <SerajewelKS> what does "widely accepted" mean?
564 2011-05-26 10:25:12 <sacarlson> SerajewelKS: so it takes a week or 2 before the net see's it needs to raise difficulty before they need more power break it?
565 2011-05-26 10:25:20 <SerajewelKS> how does your client know when a block is "widely accepted?"
566 2011-05-26 10:25:39 <da2ce7> umm... cannot remeber when the last on was put into the code.. satoshi put them in to stop an attacker from killing all the old coins.
567 2011-05-26 10:25:39 <zirpu> ;;bc,calc 264000
568 2011-05-26 10:25:40 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 264000 Khps, given current difficulty of 244139.48158254 , is 6 weeks, 3 days, 23 hours, 17 minutes, and 40 seconds
569 2011-05-26 10:25:41 <SerajewelKS> sacarlson: it takes 2016 blocks
570 2011-05-26 10:25:53 <SerajewelKS> da2ce7: even on testnet?
571 2011-05-26 10:25:58 <da2ce7> not on testnet
572 2011-05-26 10:26:06 <SerajewelKS> then my point remains ;)
573 2011-05-26 10:26:19 <SerajewelKS> testnet could be rebooted easily by tycho
574 2011-05-26 10:26:27 <da2ce7> but testnet coins are not worth anything.
575 2011-05-26 10:26:40 <sacarlson> da2ce7: I added only one of the "check points" I think is the term into my Weeds chain
576 2011-05-26 10:26:42 <SerajewelKS> if they weren't worth anything, nobody would mine them
577 2011-05-26 10:27:12 <da2ce7> lol they have value for testing.
578 2011-05-26 10:27:14 <da2ce7> :P
579 2011-05-26 10:27:29 <SerajewelKS> exactly
580 2011-05-26 10:27:31 <da2ce7> I guess that is a utility value.
581 2011-05-26 10:28:47 <da2ce7> checks every hour or so
582 2011-05-26 10:29:01 <SerajewelKS> bbl
583 2011-05-26 10:37:38 <FunkyPenguin> BlueMatt: any ideas on how to fix http://paste.opensuse.org/28245889?
584 2011-05-26 10:39:01 <BlueMatt> FunkyPenguin: you are missing libdb++, read build-unix.txt in doc
585 2011-05-26 10:40:44 <BlueMatt> FunkyPenguin: are you just packaging this for yourself, or to share?
586 2011-05-26 10:41:36 <FunkyPenguin> BlueMatt: the intention is to share it with the openSUSE community
587 2011-05-26 10:42:12 <BlueMatt> FunkyPenguin: maybe you want to learn a bit more about building in general first?
588 2011-05-26 10:43:02 <FunkyPenguin> BlueMatt: well i've done a bit of packaging in the past etc, but it's been a wee while :)
589 2011-05-26 10:44:04 <FunkyPenguin> there is no  bui build-unix.txt in doc just README  README_windows.txt
590 2011-05-26 10:44:47 <BlueMatt> yes there is
591 2011-05-26 10:44:47 <ersi> Funk it up
592 2011-05-26 10:45:07 <BlueMatt> what are you building from?
593 2011-05-26 10:45:08 <BlueMatt> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/master/doc
594 2011-05-26 10:45:15 <BlueMatt> current shows build-unix.txt
595 2011-05-26 10:46:19 <FunkyPenguin> BlueMatt: building from the tar.gz that's available
596 2011-05-26 10:46:34 <BlueMatt> that says nothing, where did you get the tar?
597 2011-05-26 10:47:22 <BlueMatt> plus if you are building for packaging, you should be building a stable release, not git
598 2011-05-26 10:47:31 <BlueMatt> 0.3.21
599 2011-05-26 10:48:33 <FunkyPenguin> BlueMatt: exact;y why im using the tar.gz from http://sourceforge.net/projects/bitcoin/files/Bitcoin/bitcoin-0.3.21/bitcoin-0.3.21-linux.tar.gz/download
600 2011-05-26 10:48:53 <BlueMatt> huh? 0.3.21 didnt have an src dir
601 2011-05-26 10:49:16 <BlueMatt> oh, ha, you are building from the dir...
602 2011-05-26 10:49:45 <BlueMatt> build-unix.txt is just in the main dir then
603 2011-05-26 10:49:51 <BlueMatt> (src == main dir)
604 2011-05-26 10:50:45 <FunkyPenguin> ah ok
605 2011-05-26 10:51:25 <BlueMatt> does the binary not work, that you have to build yourself?
606 2011-05-26 10:52:06 <zirpu> ;;bc,calc 268000
607 2011-05-26 10:52:07 <gribble> The average time to generate a block at 268000 Khps, given current difficulty of 244139.48158254 , is 6 weeks, 3 days, 6 hours, 49 minutes, and 38 seconds
608 2011-05-26 10:52:13 <zirpu> ;;bc,gen 268000
609 2011-05-26 10:52:14 <gribble> The expected generation output, at 268000 Khps, given current difficulty of 244139.48158254 , is 1.10413114769 BTC per day and 0.0460054644871 BTC per hour.
610 2011-05-26 10:55:47 <FunkyPenguin> BlueMatt: the binary does, but i saw somewhere that you were going to drop the linux binary build and get the distros to package it
611 2011-05-26 10:56:04 <BlueMatt> FunkyPenguin: no, not really true
612 2011-05-26 10:56:18 <BlueMatt> the plan is a bit more...complicated than that
613 2011-05-26 10:56:20 <FunkyPenguin> oh and our db seems to be missing the c++ bindings atm
614 2011-05-26 10:56:52 <davex__> Why would bitcoin getaddressesbyaccount "" return an error code -1?
615 2011-05-26 10:57:07 <davex__> there should always be an account named "", right?
616 2011-05-26 10:57:29 <BlueMatt> jgarzik wants to see all linux builds gone, but it will (I hope) probably end up a bit more like this: the distros we can get it in, we will (well those who have packagers who are trusted), the rest, there will be a generic build that should work for most distros...
617 2011-05-26 10:57:52 <jaromil> speaking of packaged stuff
618 2011-05-26 10:57:57 <zirpu> anyone used bitcoinrigs.com ?  mining rig rental service.
619 2011-05-26 10:58:12 <jaromil> i've been going forward and after autotools and python bindings
620 2011-05-26 10:58:23 <jaromil> was very easy to package (also to test autotools)
621 2011-05-26 10:58:30 <BlueMatt> the problem with bitcoin, is it needs even more trust than the average package, so regular anyone-can-become-maintainer policy just doesnt really apply...
622 2011-05-26 10:58:46 <jaromil> so now you can try ubuntu packages here https://launchpad.net/~jaromil/+archive/bitcoin
623 2011-05-26 10:58:54 <jaromil> its called freecoin to not overlap with bitcoin
624 2011-05-26 10:59:02 <BlueMatt> jaromil: what is that now?
625 2011-05-26 10:59:02 <jaromil> that is following the policy bluematt is explaining
626 2011-05-26 10:59:03 <davex__> fuck
627 2011-05-26 10:59:29 <BlueMatt> jaromil: so that is...what ubuntu spesmilo package?
628 2011-05-26 10:59:32 <jaromil> again i'm available to merge things with the necessary patience when you think is the time
629 2011-05-26 10:59:40 <jaromil> BlueMatt: no, not yet. just the daemon
630 2011-05-26 10:59:44 <jaromil> not for noobs, yet
631 2011-05-26 10:59:49 <BlueMatt> so its...daemon + waht?
632 2011-05-26 10:59:56 <jaromil> just daemon
633 2011-05-26 11:00:03 <jaromil> we are testing it
634 2011-05-26 11:00:07 <BlueMatt> I thought you said patches?
635 2011-05-26 11:00:08 <jaromil> because it has some modifications
636 2011-05-26 11:00:11 <jaromil> yes
637 2011-05-26 11:00:14 <BlueMatt> like?
638 2011-05-26 11:00:20 <jaromil> http://gitorious.org/freecoin
639 2011-05-26 11:00:30 <BlueMatt> that isnt really helpful...
640 2011-05-26 11:00:32 <jaromil> weed, rpcstr, bitnom
641 2011-05-26 11:00:43 <BlueMatt> oh...what is rpcstr?
642 2011-05-26 11:00:52 <io-> if you need any asp legacy code worked on atlas does nothing but legacy asp code work all day long every day for the man (and dongs)
643 2011-05-26 11:00:52 <jaromil> from our tests its fully compatible with bitcoin legacy
644 2011-05-26 11:01:02 <BlueMatt> lol bitcoin legacy
645 2011-05-26 11:01:02 <io-> if you need any asp legacy code worked on atlas does nothing but legacy asp code work all day long every day for the man (and dongs)
646 2011-05-26 11:01:12 <BlueMatt> you realize your patches will never get merged?
647 2011-05-26 11:01:15 <jaromil> how can we call the main trunk? :)
648 2011-05-26 11:01:16 <doublec> lol legacy bots
649 2011-05-26 11:01:16 <io-> if you need any asp legacy code worked on atlas does nothing but legacy asp code work all day long every day for the man (and dongs)
650 2011-05-26 11:01:24 <jaromil> BlueMatt: these are not my patches
651 2011-05-26 11:01:33 <jaromil> my pull request so far is just autotools
652 2011-05-26 11:01:42 <BlueMatt> jaromil: either way, they will never make it into mainline bitcoin...
653 2011-05-26 11:01:45 <BlueMatt> but what is rpcstr?
654 2011-05-26 11:01:45 <doublec> what is the rpcstr patch?
655 2011-05-26 11:01:46 <jaromil> freecoin is my maintainance policy, not my collection of patches
656 2011-05-26 11:02:02 <jaromil> i'm not advocating them into mainline bitcoin
657 2011-05-26 11:02:09 <ersi> io-: what the fuck are you on about
658 2011-05-26 11:02:10 <jaromil> that why i give it another name, to make it clear is different
659 2011-05-26 11:02:14 <BlueMatt> also, pushing freecoin to people who come to the "bitcoin consultancy" is just stupid as shit
660 2011-05-26 11:02:34 <BlueMatt> kinda ruins the idea of "bitcoin consultancy"
661 2011-05-26 11:02:35 <jaromil> we are not pushing freecoin to ... as you say
662 2011-05-26 11:02:42 <jaromil> its an experiment
663 2011-05-26 11:02:46 <jaromil> we need experiemnts
664 2011-05-26 11:02:49 <BlueMatt> to what goal?
665 2011-05-26 11:02:50 <jaromil> i think you are getting paranoid
666 2011-05-26 11:03:02 <BlueMatt> no, I just see it as wasted effort
667 2011-05-26 11:03:19 <jaromil> don't worry, is not your effort :)
668 2011-05-26 11:03:25 <jaromil> to the goal of overcoming this stuff http://culubas.blogspot.com/2011/05/timejacking-bitcoin_802.html
669 2011-05-26 11:03:28 <BlueMatt> lol, what is the goal anyway?
670 2011-05-26 11:03:29 <jaromil> and to make the core better
671 2011-05-26 11:03:31 <doublec> well if mainline doesn't accept patches people are interested in, what else are they supposed to do?
672 2011-05-26 11:03:38 <jaromil> we are also rewriting it, but it takes time
673 2011-05-26 11:03:59 <BlueMatt> doublec: no, what they are doing is just adding random stuff that has no use except as an experiment (so far)
674 2011-05-26 11:04:46 <jaromil> i can tell bitcoin consultancy has some high profile skills and some developers ATM feel frustrated by the lenghty and conservative bitcoin maintainance process
675 2011-05-26 11:05:03 <jaromil> i'm doing my best to mitigate this situation, maintaining a more liberal version
676 2011-05-26 11:05:09 <jaromil> and, as you see, keeping clear contact here
677 2011-05-26 11:05:11 <BlueMatt> jaromil: ok, so what exactly does the stuff like namecoin and whatnot have to do with timejacking/other stuff
678 2011-05-26 11:05:23 <jaromil> i can well understand what are the things bitcoin like to evaluate and what are not
679 2011-05-26 11:05:40 <BlueMatt> jaromil: sorry, I dont know of any devs who feel frustrated by conservative dev process here...
680 2011-05-26 11:05:41 <jaromil> timejacking is an issue phantom has been busy for a while now
681 2011-05-26 11:05:58 <BlueMatt> hm, timejacking is interesting...
682 2011-05-26 11:06:00 <FunkyPenguin> BlueMatt: would you consider using something like the Open Build Service? which provides rpms/debs for most major distros?
683 2011-05-26 11:06:02 <jaromil> BlueMatt: lets live that aside for gossip, i think noone has serious frustration
684 2011-05-26 11:06:08 <sipa> what is timejacking?
685 2011-05-26 11:06:12 <BlueMatt> FunkyPenguin: Im planning a ppa already...
686 2011-05-26 11:06:29 <jaromil> sipa: this is an overview that was written down, fwd by jeremid  http://culubas.blogspot.com/2011/05/timejacking-bitcoin_802.html
687 2011-05-26 11:06:38 <BlueMatt> jaromil: fair enough, anyway I hope people understand why software like bitcoin _has_ to be conservative
688 2011-05-26 11:06:39 <jaromil> however i've seen phantom playing with that already
689 2011-05-26 11:06:49 <BlueMatt> its financial software, you move to quick and you make mistakes
690 2011-05-26 11:06:50 <jaromil> its a way to DOS and to slow down miners, basically
691 2011-05-26 11:07:00 <BlueMatt> and for financial software, that is unacceptable
692 2011-05-26 11:07:04 <jaromil> BlueMatt: i understand, yes
693 2011-05-26 11:07:10 <BlueMatt> sipa: variation on sybilish
694 2011-05-26 11:07:26 <BlueMatt> what does the bitcoin consultancy do anyway?
695 2011-05-26 11:07:28 <jaromil> mostly not because is financial, but because is a network
696 2011-05-26 11:07:41 <jaromil> BlueMatt: its setting up
697 2011-05-26 11:07:54 <BlueMatt> last I heard, they were in talks with some south african cell carier for them to fork and make their own bitcoin
698 2011-05-26 11:08:00 <BlueMatt> carrier*
699 2011-05-26 11:08:08 <sipa> there are people who feel bitcoin mainline has been introducing too many features and is becoming unstable
700 2011-05-26 11:08:41 <ArtForz> yes, that "poison block" will speerate the node form the rest of the network
701 2011-05-26 11:08:54 <ArtForz> for ... about 50 minutes
702 2011-05-26 11:09:08 <ArtForz> after that it'll happily acce4pt the block because it's now in the acceptable time range
703 2011-05-26 11:09:17 <jaromil> yes AFAIK is not critical
704 2011-05-26 11:09:36 <BlueMatt> anyway, doesnt the client reject outlier timestamps/shouldnt it?
705 2011-05-26 11:09:44 <ArtForz> and as the blocks after that one are not mined by the attacker... it'll accepot those as well as its 70 min offset wont cause problems with blocks with correct timestamps
706 2011-05-26 11:10:24 <Namegduf> It looks like that's what it exploits; gets timestamps set far enough apart that it can issue a block that everyone else will accept
707 2011-05-26 11:10:28 <Namegduf> But the target node will reject
708 2011-05-26 11:10:30 <BlueMatt> meh, probably wrong, but doesnt mean it cant confuse peers, which shouldnt be allowed
709 2011-05-26 11:10:32 <Namegduf> Which is clever.
710 2011-05-26 11:10:34 <ArtForz> current client limits to 70 min
711 2011-05-26 11:10:49 <ArtForz> which is a tad too much
712 2011-05-26 11:10:57 <BlueMatt> anyway, not a critical attack by any means
713 2011-05-26 11:11:00 <Namegduf> Yeah
714 2011-05-26 11:11:17 <Namegduf> You need to consistently generate blocks and it involves tricking time across the entire network.
715 2011-05-26 11:11:20 <Namegduf> Which seems sort of hard.
716 2011-05-26 11:12:19 <BlueMatt> jaromil: so the full list of stuff in that branch is just weeds + (what is strrpc?) + bitnom?
717 2011-05-26 11:12:23 <BlueMatt> + autotools
718 2011-05-26 11:12:42 <ArtForz> well, you only need about 20% of total network (and enough sybil nodes to "pull time") to keep your victim nodes on your chain
719 2011-05-26 11:12:57 <jaromil> + removal of wx
720 2011-05-26 11:13:06 <BlueMatt> so...just bitcoind?
721 2011-05-26 11:13:08 <ArtForz> and wtf? using ntp introduces a central point of failure?
722 2011-05-26 11:13:18 <jaromil> strrpc is use of strings rather than floats in rpc
723 2011-05-26 11:13:23 <doublec> ah right
724 2011-05-26 11:13:24 <BlueMatt> ah
725 2011-05-26 11:13:31 <ArtForz> since when is ntp centralized?
726 2011-05-26 11:13:32 <BlueMatt> now that I can agree with...
727 2011-05-26 11:13:36 <doublec> me too
728 2011-05-26 11:13:44 <jaromil> i wasn't really enthusiastic about it
729 2011-05-26 11:13:50 <jaromil> because it breaks compat with other clients
730 2011-05-26 11:13:55 <BlueMatt> I'd like to see some kind of change in that direction...but it needs to be backward compat
731 2011-05-26 11:13:55 <jaromil> unless they are modified for it
732 2011-05-26 11:13:58 <sipa> exactly
733 2011-05-26 11:14:01 <jaromil> but well most devs seems to like it
734 2011-05-26 11:14:06 <doublec> they should introduce a new rpc call for it
735 2011-05-26 11:14:09 <ersi> Bahaha
736 2011-05-26 11:14:14 <doublec> that people can migrate to
737 2011-05-26 11:14:16 <jaromil> new rpc call is a good idea imho
738 2011-05-26 11:14:17 <sipa> amounts should always have been strings or ints, but changing it now is hard
739 2011-05-26 11:14:21 <BlueMatt> I like it, but so many people just go crazy and say "AHHH" and say kill backward compat
740 2011-05-26 11:14:47 <BlueMatt> anyway, it could be added in a backward compat way, just takes work...
741 2011-05-26 11:15:05 <jaromil> one more rpc call, would be very good if someone can make such a pull req
742 2011-05-26 11:15:30 <BlueMatt> no just an extra bool param on each function which returns a balance
743 2011-05-26 11:15:38 <BlueMatt> defaulting to false
744 2011-05-26 11:15:56 <jaromil> better
745 2011-05-26 11:17:28 <Namegduf> BlueMatt: It makes me sad that so few protocols include capability negotiation when first created. :(
746 2011-05-26 11:17:47 <BlueMatt> well, too late now...
747 2011-05-26 11:17:54 <Namegduf> Sadly so.
748 2011-05-26 11:18:35 <Namegduf> Compared to many I have relatively little involved, but even I'm really happy that what's handling my money is designed with care.
749 2011-05-26 11:19:47 <jaromil> don't get me wrong, again i appreciate current bitcoin maintainership is very cautious and conservative
750 2011-05-26 11:20:27 <jaromil> with freecoin i've taken care of *changing the name* and avoiding clashes
751 2011-05-26 11:20:33 <jaromil> i think an experimental branch doesn't hurts
752 2011-05-26 11:20:52 <TheKid_> Hmm
753 2011-05-26 11:21:11 <BlueMatt> fair enough, I intended to do something similar, though not quite sooo radical, but Ive left it fall by the wayside to do more important things
754 2011-05-26 11:21:14 <TheKid_> my clearcoin account hasn't released funds despite me telling it to release
755 2011-05-26 11:21:18 <TheKid_> any idea what's up?
756 2011-05-26 11:21:45 <Namegduf> If you're sure you told it, maybe it's just not been received by the destination yet?
757 2011-05-26 11:23:45 <jaromil> also with freecoin we'll have some pull requests ready and well tested in the near future, for instance the swig python bindings one is there now
758 2011-05-26 11:23:55 <jaromil> i think it can interest people here
759 2011-05-26 11:24:02 <jaromil> also considering it doesn't changes the code
760 2011-05-26 11:24:10 <BlueMatt> what does that give people?
761 2011-05-26 11:24:15 <BlueMatt> (that rpc cant?)
762 2011-05-26 11:24:33 <jaromil> call directly any function inside the code, making it a library
763 2011-05-26 11:24:41 <BlueMatt> yea...
764 2011-05-26 11:24:47 <BlueMatt> no
765 2011-05-26 11:24:52 <jaromil> i've heard many people asking for a library
766 2011-05-26 11:25:08 <jaromil> well, not any
767 2011-05-26 11:25:14 <BlueMatt> that doesnt make it a library, that offers a simple method to hook inside code people shouldnt be touching
768 2011-05-26 11:25:35 <BlueMatt> I agree libbitcoin would be helpful, but that is the wrong approach
769 2011-05-26 11:25:52 <sipa> i like the idea of turning it into a library, and providing hooks and bindings with other languages
770 2011-05-26 11:25:54 <BlueMatt> a proper lib is needed, not just a here, call whatever you want however you want...
771 2011-05-26 11:26:00 <SerajewelKS> a library would be a good thing, if it were properly encapsulated
772 2011-05-26 11:26:05 <sipa> exactly
773 2011-05-26 11:26:27 <BlueMatt> especially when the code's locks and stuff get so complicated in terms of where they are made, and around what they need to be made
774 2011-05-26 11:26:46 <jaromil> i understand that
775 2011-05-26 11:26:59 <jaromil> well consider right now the things exposed are just AppInit*
776 2011-05-26 11:27:14 <jaromil> i'm not digging further than that, can be decided
777 2011-05-26 11:27:20 <jaromil> what i'd love to have is doxygen comments
778 2011-05-26 11:27:27 <jaromil> on headers that should be exposed
779 2011-05-26 11:27:31 <sipa> agree
780 2011-05-26 11:27:48 <sipa> once there are headers to be exported
781 2011-05-26 11:27:50 <jaromil> because they'll go directly into python documentation (pod) with some slapping
782 2011-05-26 11:28:15 <jaromil> so plz go doxygen if u have any time to dump into it your understanding of bitcoin so far
783 2011-05-26 11:28:51 <sipa> first step is cleaning up the dependencies between the code, and nicely defining the responsibilities of each layer
784 2011-05-26 11:28:56 <BlueMatt> well the biggest thing which needs decided is what needs to be available...frankly rpc with some additional patches is all you need access to
785 2011-05-26 11:29:14 <BlueMatt> (getblock and such)
786 2011-05-26 11:29:22 <sipa> for certain applications, sure
787 2011-05-26 11:29:35 <BlueMatt> what else do you really need?
788 2011-05-26 11:29:59 <sipa> need? nothing
789 2011-05-26 11:30:11 <SerajewelKS> maybe you want to be able to import/export wallet keys
790 2011-05-26 11:30:12 <sipa> but if a clean a powerful api exists, i'm sure it will help innovation
791 2011-05-26 11:30:19 <BlueMatt> true
792 2011-05-26 11:30:19 <sipa> SerajewelKS: done :)
793 2011-05-26 11:30:35 <BlueMatt> first...thin client...then lib
794 2011-05-26 11:30:35 <SerajewelKS> whenever someone says something like "you should never need more than these X functions" my immediate response is "and you can see the future?"
795 2011-05-26 11:30:40 <sacarlson> p2p escrow would be nice but I'm not sure lib access will make it any easer to acheave
796 2011-05-26 11:31:01 <BlueMatt> yes that would, you could get more access to scripts
797 2011-05-26 11:31:17 <jaromil> access to scripts are a big issue i understand
798 2011-05-26 11:31:22 <jaromil> is
799 2011-05-26 11:31:36 <sipa> there is a nice example - people who want to experiment with alternative scripts (even just on testnet for now), would benefit from an api that exposes creation of arbitrary transactions
800 2011-05-26 11:32:06 <sipa> and you could create a RPC that allows you to send a binary dump of an arbitrary tx
801 2011-05-26 11:32:19 <sipa> but that means the creator would need to duplicate all the tx serialization code