1 2011-07-15 00:00:09 <senseles> why would there be a 0.3.25 node?
  2 2011-07-15 00:00:27 <senseles> does it really matter ? with the different versions ?
  3 2011-07-15 00:01:19 <moa7> senseless: i don't know jgarzik asked
  4 2011-07-15 00:04:13 <senseles> i was just curious
  5 2011-07-15 00:14:59 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: I owe you nothing. kthx.
  6 2011-07-15 00:22:27 <jgarzik> denisx: yeah, our OSX buildmaster _and_ our forum overlord are both MIA for many days :(
  7 2011-07-15 00:22:37 <jgarzik> senseles: because 0.3.25 is in git
  8 2011-07-15 00:23:03 <jgarzik> luke-jr: do you have ipv6 split-out in a git branch anywhere?
  9 2011-07-15 00:23:14 <jgarzik> luke-jr: and did you ever test bitcoind + IPv6?  :)
 10 2011-07-15 00:23:18 <luke-jr> jgarzik: the IPv6 branch, still incomplete
 11 2011-07-15 00:23:28 <luke-jr> jgarzik: I got it to the point where IPv4 worked again
 12 2011-07-15 00:23:37 <jgarzik> heh
 13 2011-07-15 00:29:40 <luke-jr> jgarzik: funny how BlueMatt immediately jumps to blame me for block chain spam when the spam clearly had the fee set to cover the bitcoind defaults&
 14 2011-07-15 00:30:25 <luke-jr> (but NOT enough to cover Eligius's rules-- I wonder how it got by&)
 15 2011-07-15 00:30:57 <jgarzik> luke-jr: what, you're unaware of the "if <blah>, blame luke-jr" rule?
 16 2011-07-15 00:30:59 <jgarzik> ;-)
 17 2011-07-15 00:31:11 <luke-jr> no, I just knew of "when in doubt, kill luke-jr"
 18 2011-07-15 00:31:16 <luke-jr> but that's n/a here
 19 2011-07-15 00:31:23 <jgarzik> hehehe
 20 2011-07-15 00:31:43 <luke-jr> (mafia-ish games)
 21 2011-07-15 00:32:04 <luke-jr> jgarzik: any interest in supporting X-Roll-Ntime and noncerange in cpuminer? :D
 22 2011-07-15 00:32:48 <kika> do you guys think its legal for a business to accept anonymous customers?
 23 2011-07-15 00:32:54 <jgarzik> luke-jr: heh...  conman's cgminer is the main fork now
 24 2011-07-15 00:33:08 <luke-jr> cgminer? isn't that OpenCL?
 25 2011-07-15 00:33:15 <jgarzik> kika: depends on the business.  most American businesses accept anonymous customers (read: cash) every day
 26 2011-07-15 00:33:18 <luke-jr> kika: why not?
 27 2011-07-15 00:33:25 <jgarzik> luke-jr: "c" == cpu, "g" == gpu.  it does both.
 28 2011-07-15 00:33:25 <moa7> so with wallet encryption the private key(s) must be decrypted to sign a sendtx right?
 29 2011-07-15 00:33:33 <kika> jgarzik: so you mean cash is anonymous?
 30 2011-07-15 00:33:43 <jgarzik> kika: yes
 31 2011-07-15 00:33:44 <luke-jr> jgarzik: so that means you've passed the torch on that one?
 32 2011-07-15 00:33:46 <jgarzik> moa7: yes
 33 2011-07-15 00:33:51 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: I blamed you, in fact.
 34 2011-07-15 00:33:53 <kika> jgarzik: most of the business that accept cash need a signature to sign up for a contract btw
 35 2011-07-15 00:33:55 <jgarzik> luke-jr: I hope so yes
 36 2011-07-15 00:34:04 <kika> jgarzik: so thats not truly anonymous services
 37 2011-07-15 00:34:04 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: oh well, your problem
 38 2011-07-15 00:34:17 <jgarzik> kika: I don't sign a contract with the convenience store, when I pay cash for drinks
 39 2011-07-15 00:34:17 <moa7> at what point does that happen ... in mem. on disk, etc
 40 2011-07-15 00:34:22 <luke-jr> kika: what contract?
 41 2011-07-15 00:34:30 <jgarzik> kika: I don't sign a contract with wal-mart, when I buy an area rug with cash for my new house
 42 2011-07-15 00:34:37 <kika> luke-jr: like when you sign up with an ISP
 43 2011-07-15 00:34:43 <kika> luke-jr: and pay using cash
 44 2011-07-15 00:34:59 <luke-jr> kika: last ISP I signed up with didn't require a contract
 45 2011-07-15 00:35:00 <phantomcircuit> kika, i have literally never done that
 46 2011-07-15 00:35:03 <jgarzik> moa7: decryption is always memory-only, never on disk
 47 2011-07-15 00:35:03 <kika> jgarzik: wallmart will have you filmed on their cams btw
 48 2011-07-15 00:35:04 <phantomcircuit> in fact i dont think you cant
 49 2011-07-15 00:35:12 <jgarzik> kika: sure.  that's not a contract though.
 50 2011-07-15 00:35:13 <moa7> jgarzik: thnx
 51 2011-07-15 00:35:22 <luke-jr> jgarzik: not even swap?
 52 2011-07-15 00:35:28 <jgarzik> luke-jr: nope.  mlock.
 53 2011-07-15 00:35:31 <kika> jgarzik: but that makes you non anonymous customer
 54 2011-07-15 00:35:47 <phantomcircuit> jgarzik, the openssl contexts are mlocked also i presume?
 55 2011-07-15 00:35:50 <luke-jr> kika: Bitcoin is no more anonymous than that
 56 2011-07-15 00:35:50 <phantomcircuit> (hint hint)
 57 2011-07-15 00:36:02 <kika> i think bitcoin is truly anonymous
 58 2011-07-15 00:36:09 <kika> maybe im wrong
 59 2011-07-15 00:36:10 <moa7> jgarzik: any attempt to make sure the decrypted key leaves mem after signing is complete?
 60 2011-07-15 00:36:11 <luke-jr> kika: then you're not thinking straight
 61 2011-07-15 00:36:21 <jgarzik> kika: there are US laws in specific areas that require identity verification, but it is not universal
 62 2011-07-15 00:36:28 <jgarzik> kika: no, bitcoin is not anonymous
 63 2011-07-15 00:36:38 <kika> jgarzik: how come bitcoin is not anonymous?
 64 2011-07-15 00:36:40 <jgarzik> phantomcircuit: yep, know about that.  IIRC BlueMatt was going to replace openssl malloc
 65 2011-07-15 00:36:44 <kika> jgarzik: i think its really anonymous
 66 2011-07-15 00:36:49 <jgarzik> kika: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Anonymity
 67 2011-07-15 00:37:09 <jgarzik> kika: then you haven't read the wiki or examined the unencrypted protocol
 68 2011-07-15 00:37:22 <kika> jgarzik: ok let me read thats new
 69 2011-07-15 00:37:29 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: went along with you producing your own transaction with >1500 outputs including ones like 0.00000576
 70 2011-07-15 00:37:35 <phantomcircuit> jgarzik, replace the malloc? why all of the openssl contexts can be allocated on the stack...
 71 2011-07-15 00:38:30 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: bet my transactions all total far far less than DeepBit in a day
 72 2011-07-15 00:39:09 <gmaxwell> Proportional to mining power? .. Well, perhaps. But that doesn't mean you're not both stupid. :)
 73 2011-07-15 00:39:19 <phantomcircuit> doing it as a single transaction doesn't save very much effort
 74 2011-07-15 00:39:23 <jgarzik> phantomcircuit: just saying that covers some of what matters, not 100%.  I'm agreeing with you it's an as-yet-uncovered area :)
 75 2011-07-15 00:39:52 <phantomcircuit> jgarzik, well, as a clue gnupg threw out mlock and uses mlockall now
 76 2011-07-15 00:40:06 <jgarzik> yep
 77 2011-07-15 00:40:09 <phantomcircuit> finding all the instances of key leakage is... useless
 78 2011-07-15 00:40:24 <jgarzik> phantomcircuit: in a GUI mlockall quickly runs into process limits
 79 2011-07-15 00:40:26 <gmaxwell> mlockall has fun behaviores when you later run out of mlockable memory.
 80 2011-07-15 00:40:31 <jgarzik> indeed
 81 2011-07-15 00:40:33 <gmaxwell> (boom)
 82 2011-07-15 00:40:40 <phantomcircuit> yes SIGSEGV
 83 2011-07-15 00:40:42 <phantomcircuit> loverly
 84 2011-07-15 00:40:45 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: miners need to be paid
 85 2011-07-15 00:41:06 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: they can't actually spend that 0.00000576 btc most likely.
 86 2011-07-15 00:41:10 <luke-jr> jgarzik: GUI shouldn't ever touch keys ;)
 87 2011-07-15 00:41:24 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: nonsense
 88 2011-07-15 00:41:41 <gmaxwell> process seperation for the wallet backend.
 89 2011-07-15 00:45:37 <moa7> so after first encryption of a wallet what does it do to the previous unencrypted copy on the disk?
 90 2011-07-15 00:45:52 <jgarzik> moa7: intentionally corrupts it
 91 2011-07-15 00:45:53 <luke-jr> moa7: destroys it. probably insecurely.
 92 2011-07-15 00:46:01 <jgarzik> yep
 93 2011-07-15 00:46:01 <luke-jr> jgarzik: does it write over w/ random data first? :P
 94 2011-07-15 00:46:07 <jgarzik> nope
 95 2011-07-15 00:46:15 <moa7> specifically command, etc
 96 2011-07-15 00:46:27 <luke-jr> moa7: &
 97 2011-07-15 00:46:28 <denisx> this does not work on a COW fs
 98 2011-07-15 00:46:33 <denisx> like ZFS
 99 2011-07-15 00:46:36 <luke-jr> denisx: only so much a userland app can do
100 2011-07-15 00:46:46 <denisx> thats true
101 2011-07-15 00:46:58 <denisx> same with SSDs today
102 2011-07-15 00:47:08 <kika> so its legal to use anonymous coins?
103 2011-07-15 00:47:08 <luke-jr> jgarzik: happen to know-- does it mark the old keypool as "potentially compromised" and create a new only-encrypted one?
104 2011-07-15 00:47:20 <luke-jr> kika: cash is anonymous
105 2011-07-15 00:47:36 <luke-jr> bitcoin is not
106 2011-07-15 00:47:38 <jgarzik> luke-jr: no; corrupts wallet just enough that older versions will refuse to load it
107 2011-07-15 00:47:39 <jjjx> Wow. A lot of devs working on Bitcoin these days or what?
108 2011-07-15 00:47:44 <jjjx> I remember when this was a channel of 20 people.
109 2011-07-15 00:47:46 <jgarzik> jjjx: I wish...
110 2011-07-15 00:47:50 <gmaxwell> I cry for the world that people seem to automatically assume all kinds of random things that harm no one are illegal. :-/
111 2011-07-15 00:47:55 <luke-jr> jgarzik: it might be good to get those changed :P
112 2011-07-15 00:48:11 <jjjx> jgarzik: Spectator sport eh? :-)
113 2011-07-15 00:48:16 <luke-jr> jjjx: yes, though not all on the Satoshi client
114 2011-07-15 00:48:49 <moa7> sorry, are my questions not welcome?
115 2011-07-15 00:49:20 <jgarzik> kika: what are anonymous coins?
116 2011-07-15 00:49:27 <jgarzik> moa7: your questions are fine
117 2011-07-15 00:50:01 <kika> jgarzik: anonymous coins would be coins that arent able to be traced back to an identity
118 2011-07-15 00:50:15 <kika> jgarzik: like the coins of all the initial miners
119 2011-07-15 00:50:41 <kika> jgarzik: the coinbase tx doesnt identify anyone
120 2011-07-15 00:51:18 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: What did you think about the dyanmic block size limit stuff? Is there really a reason to allow blocks which are 10x larger than the average?
121 2011-07-15 00:51:21 <luke-jr> moa7: C software doesn't use commands, they just do things
122 2011-07-15 00:51:25 <kika> if i generate 50 btc by mining anonymously for example via toor then those 50 btc are truly anonymous
123 2011-07-15 00:51:29 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: yes
124 2011-07-15 00:51:30 <jjjx> I've heard wallet encryption is imminent.
125 2011-07-15 00:51:31 <jjjx> Hey can someone explain to me how the network is able to validate that I own coins -- and still maintain anonymity (supposing I am using Tor or something) -- when I change my sending address to mask it?
126 2011-07-15 00:51:38 <jjjx> How does the network know that I ever received them in the first place?
127 2011-07-15 00:51:53 <briareus> bitcoin.pdf
128 2011-07-15 00:51:56 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: if DeepBit decides to be a PITA and demand 1 BTC fee for everything, right now that won't hurt too much
129 2011-07-15 00:52:19 <luke-jr> jjjx: you can't change sending addresses
130 2011-07-15 00:52:23 <moa7> luke-jr : C just does things with the instruction commands IIRC
131 2011-07-15 00:52:50 <luke-jr> moa7: no, C is high-level, it isn't assembly
132 2011-07-15 00:53:02 <moa7> you are two layers above where things really get "done"
133 2011-07-15 00:53:19 <luke-jr> moa7: the point was that there are no "commands"
134 2011-07-15 00:53:25 <luke-jr> moa7: and if you want source, it's on GitHub
135 2011-07-15 00:53:35 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: it wouldn't be an issue either using a median operator, unless they have 50% (and perhaps they do) but in that case if they want to be jerks they can just refuse to extend anyone elses blocks.
136 2011-07-15 00:53:38 <moa7> thnx i knew that.
137 2011-07-15 00:53:52 <jjjx> luke-jr: Is that right? I thought you could generate an unlimited number of sending/receiving addresses...
138 2011-07-15 00:54:03 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: median might work, given enough sane logic; it's a slippery slope, though
139 2011-07-15 00:54:17 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: be sure you modify the mining part to actually not create such blocks, too
140 2011-07-15 00:54:27 <luke-jr> jjjx: only receiving
141 2011-07-15 00:55:14 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: also note that those spam transactions paid the *default fee*, but *not* the Eligius fee (which apparently has bugs in actual implementation)
142 2011-07-15 00:55:23 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: so it could have hit *any* miner
143 2011-07-15 00:56:42 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: Yea, earlier what I suggested was using N times the median of the last M (dunno good values yet)... And I'd suggested both soft and hard ways to impose the limit. Obviously you'd make the mining code also follow the same rules.
144 2011-07-15 00:57:04 <luke-jr> M needs to be at least a week. maybe 2
145 2011-07-15 00:57:26 <luke-jr> but I agree getting rid of the 1 MB max is needed ASAP
146 2011-07-15 00:57:37 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: yea, sorry about that, my brain hadn't caught up with MIN_RELAY_TX_FEE dropping. Though do you have the logic disabled that hikes the fees as the block gets bigger?
147 2011-07-15 00:57:58 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: it *should*, but like I said there's obviously a bug somewhere
148 2011-07-15 00:58:08 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: Eligius also boosts the fee when outputs look like data
149 2011-07-15 00:58:21 <jjjx> Am I reading this correctly? Are miners now in a position to be able to demand transaction fees to not fork the chain?
150 2011-07-15 00:58:26 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: so even if they paid the old 0.01 BTC per KB, Eligius should have still rejected it
151 2011-07-15 00:58:43 <luke-jr> jjjx: they always were
152 2011-07-15 00:58:47 <gmaxwell> Well your criteria is that the output is not zero value, right? which kinda sucks because at least zero value ouputs can be pruned.
153 2011-07-15 00:59:01 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: I prefer not to publish my criteria for spam detection
154 2011-07-15 00:59:22 <luke-jr> and outputs can't be pruned. only transactions can.
155 2011-07-15 00:59:29 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: So fair enough except for the fact that you happen to hold the prize for some of the crappiest spam mined. :)
156 2011-07-15 00:59:33 <jjjx> Wow... But what incentive could they have to do it? That forked chain would be worthless, wouldn't it?
157 2011-07-15 00:59:36 <luke-jr> so as long as there's one output at least 1 Satoshi, it's stuck in there
158 2011-07-15 00:59:52 <gmaxwell> A 200k block too.. that'll be great for encouraging people to get .24 deployed... ugh.
159 2011-07-15 00:59:56 <luke-jr> jjjx: who said they had an incentive?
160 2011-07-15 01:00:11 <luke-jr> jjjx: but DeepBit could fork, and sicne they have 50% of the hashpower, achieve 100% of the rewards
161 2011-07-15 01:00:24 <jjjx> luke-jr: Are they actually any signs that they might?
162 2011-07-15 01:00:27 <gmaxwell> hmph. why did my google just switch to german
163 2011-07-15 01:00:34 <jjjx> gmaxwell: Using Tor?
164 2011-07-15 01:00:38 <luke-jr> jjjx: afaik Eligius is still getting valid blocks regularly
165 2011-07-15 01:00:48 <gmaxwell> jjjx: yea, that was the first thing I checked!
166 2011-07-15 01:00:55 <jjjx> luke-jr: (I don't know what Eligius is)
167 2011-07-15 01:01:52 <kika> what if i setup a bitcoin ebay ?
168 2011-07-15 01:02:56 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: well, we don't know how much hash power deepbit has, bitcoin watch claims its about 40%, but that depends on self reports.
169 2011-07-15 01:05:02 <jjjx> Does Deepbit or its operators show any sign that they might actually do some kind of 'hostile takeover' ?
170 2011-07-15 01:06:01 <gmaxwell> jjjx: It doesn't really matter, even if they were perfect bonded-against-misdeeds angels someone could compromise their systems.
171 2011-07-15 01:06:26 <jjjx> I see
172 2011-07-15 01:06:37 <sacarlson> so now you have elected a new king and it is Deepbit, we must now all bow our heads to the king
173 2011-07-15 01:06:44 <jjjx> So the original Bitcoin design never accounted for the possibility of mining pools then?
174 2011-07-15 01:06:45 <denisx> jjjx: tell the truth, are you on deepbit? ;)
175 2011-07-15 01:06:57 <jjjx> denisx: No, I don't mine at all.
176 2011-07-15 01:07:08 <jjjx> denisx: Just an observer, like everyone else here apparently. :-)
177 2011-07-15 01:07:08 <moa7> good side effect of the recession is acceleration of open source projects ... linux distros ubuntu 11.04 and fedora 15 are kick ass compared to old days
178 2011-07-15 01:09:53 <jjjx> moa7: Weren't they always getting better? :-)
179 2011-07-15 01:10:07 <jjjx> What is Eligius, guys?
180 2011-07-15 01:12:27 <luke-jr> kika: BiddingPond?
181 2011-07-15 01:13:35 <luke-jr> jjjx: Eligius is my pool; http://eligius.st #Eligius
182 2011-07-15 01:13:44 <jjjx> Ahh...
183 2011-07-15 01:13:48 <moa7> jjjx: yeah, but right now they almost as good as proprietary stuff, never been that close imo
184 2011-07-15 01:13:57 <luke-jr> moa7: LOL
185 2011-07-15 01:14:05 <moa7> reliability, usability
186 2011-07-15 01:14:12 <kika> luke-jr: i see
187 2011-07-15 01:14:16 <luke-jr> moa7: they've been better than proprietary garbage for a long time
188 2011-07-15 01:14:26 <moa7> of course proprietary crap never had the flexibility
189 2011-07-15 01:14:35 <moa7> depends on your metric
190 2011-07-15 01:15:13 <moa7> front end stuff was what I was refferring to
191 2011-07-15 01:15:20 <kika> luke-jr: im more interested in create a bitcoin ad network
192 2011-07-15 01:15:26 <moa7> how long is it since devs had time to do that stuff on OSS?
193 2011-07-15 01:15:35 <kika> luke-jr: do you think i can get legal problems by running a bitcoin ad network?
194 2011-07-15 01:16:21 <jgarzik> jjjx: I don't think satoshi ever counted on mining pools being the dominant network force for bitcoin.  I think satoshi thought / hoped that most people would mine, and mining power would be greatly and widely distributed.
195 2011-07-15 01:16:24 <kika> luke-jr: for example if some of my publishers place ads from my network on their website next to their page that contains copyrighted content from someone else for example youtube
196 2011-07-15 01:16:24 <moa7> bitcoin is not illegal
197 2011-07-15 01:17:24 <unclemantis> i just did a wallet dump, which one is the private key that i would give for the other person to import and get money?
198 2011-07-15 01:17:47 <unclemantis> i see addr, reserve, sec and label
199 2011-07-15 01:18:06 <moa7> jgarzik: but the variance always was going to lead to pooling, in hindsight I suppose ...
200 2011-07-15 01:18:14 <denisx> maybe satoshi should have made the outcome smaller instead of the difficulty higher
201 2011-07-15 01:18:28 <jjjx> denisx: That's what I think.
202 2011-07-15 01:19:13 <moa7> the pools are made up of individual miners in the most part
203 2011-07-15 01:19:30 <moa7> it is just they are all routing through 1 or few bitcoind nodes
204 2011-07-15 01:19:39 <jgarzik> yep
205 2011-07-15 01:20:06 <moa7> so how's that p2p pool solution coming?
206 2011-07-15 01:21:42 <moa7> some kind of preferable pool solution that requires you to have a node up
207 2011-07-15 01:23:06 <luke-jr> moa7: it's inherently flawed
208 2011-07-15 01:23:33 <moa7> luke: what is?
209 2011-07-15 01:23:46 <luke-jr> moa7: p2p pool
210 2011-07-15 01:24:08 <unclemantis> with a walletdump, which key is the private key?
211 2011-07-15 01:25:03 <moa7> maybe, the p2p net is already there, bitcoin, how to pool with others such that you run a node and split proceeds? (and is better than deepbit)
212 2011-07-15 01:27:05 <jgarzik> I trust deepbit's [Tycho] more than a lot of these fly-by-night operators
213 2011-07-15 01:27:17 <jgarzik> just wish the pool wasn't so big, though.  a single compromise or FSB visit...
214 2011-07-15 01:27:44 <unclemantis> "addr": "1JfQJPVKy6fxxxxxxxxxxbzxuEZ88d9Frw", "sec": "5KTXhkuzaBGjq1PQsVxxxxxxxxxxG11SsP6MfmD1HkJc7w6sAuQ" is the public/private key pair?
215 2011-07-15 01:29:06 <moa7> actually the more it shakes out the more bitcoin is looking like a settlement clearing system like interbank market e.g.
216 2011-07-15 01:29:44 <denisx> jgarzik: fly-by-night sounds like btcguild ;)
217 2011-07-15 01:30:05 <moa7> high security, fidelity, integrity
218 2011-07-15 01:30:40 <moa7> high vol. instantaneous, anonymous transactions processing could be another layer feeding into bitcoin
219 2011-07-15 01:31:06 <unclemantis> man i just love being ignored. :)
220 2011-07-15 01:31:53 <moa7> uncle: looks feasible ... without seeing the exact numbers
221 2011-07-15 01:32:10 <denisx> lolz, there is another pools which simply has copied the pollpidfile patch and gets the last block and not the new one ;)
222 2011-07-15 01:32:57 <unclemantis> i am looking at the bitbills.com site and I just ran a python script on my wallet, so just wondering if it is pulling out the same keys that would be needed to create my own bitbill
223 2011-07-15 01:37:51 <moa7> uncle: bitlottos has posted script doing this on forums also, discussion there is probably useful.
224 2011-07-15 01:38:38 <jgarzik> moa7: RE "settlement clearing system"  <<-- EXACTLY
225 2011-07-15 01:39:14 <jgarzik> moa7: it is presumed by many that a future bitcoin (if successful) will involve a secondary layer that can handle higher volumes, microtransactions, etc.
226 2011-07-15 01:39:28 <jgarzik> moa7: bitcoin will be the highly secure lower layer
227 2011-07-15 01:39:28 <moa7> uncle:  there is this also https://github.com/joric/pywallet
228 2011-07-15 01:39:52 <moa7> jgarzik: do you think this is what 'satoshi' had in mind?
229 2011-07-15 01:40:20 <jgarzik> moa7: probably.  satoshi always acknowledged that bitcoin was -not- built for microtransactions
230 2011-07-15 01:40:25 <moa7> seems convenient given the parlous state of our current interbank clearing system
231 2011-07-15 01:40:57 <moa7> so condensation of mining power is probably not such a big deal in that scenario
232 2011-07-15 01:43:04 <kika> jgarzik: coinbase coins are truly anonymous, right?
233 2011-07-15 01:43:24 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Dawid Spiechowicz master * r494fc9a / locale/pl/LC_MESSAGES/bitcoin.po : added polish wallet encryption messages - http://bit.ly/qKvWZI https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/494fc9a85752f3025b59376e71769ec0ab62b93b
234 2011-07-15 01:43:25 <CIA-103> bitcoin: Jeff Garzik master * r5b0fc31 / locale/pl/LC_MESSAGES/bitcoin.po : Merge pull request #414 from spiechu/polish-translation ... https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/5b0fc31b1c3d25039262ae2043474b35c14bd30b
235 2011-07-15 01:43:55 <jgarzik> kika: no
236 2011-07-15 01:43:59 <moa7> as an interbank clearing system it is actually rather rapid, compared with 24, 48 hour or over weekend of current systems
237 2011-07-15 01:44:05 <unclemantis> i am playing around with the public keys and blockexplorer and my balance doesn't match
238 2011-07-15 01:44:06 <jgarzik> moa7: yep ;-)
239 2011-07-15 01:44:21 <jgarzik> moa7: way faster than the "legacy" banking systems in use... and IMHO more secure
240 2011-07-15 01:44:29 <jgarzik> moa7: you would be surprised how -insecure- modern, major banks are
241 2011-07-15 01:44:48 <kika> jgarzik: why? if i create a random address and login to deepbit using toor and place my random address there as withdrawal address and i withdraw from deepbit my coins earned by mining, then those coins are anonymous i think
242 2011-07-15 01:44:49 <moa7> have some idea
243 2011-07-15 01:45:01 <Fat-Albert> citibanks big hack
244 2011-07-15 01:45:07 <Fat-Albert> doesnt get much bigger
245 2011-07-15 01:46:38 <unclemantis> so entering a public address alone will not give me the balance of that wallet. that sucks. how do i find out the blance through blockexplorer?
246 2011-07-15 01:47:06 <moa7> uncle: might find some help here https://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=24546.msg334053#msg334053
247 2011-07-15 01:47:16 <unclemantis> appreciated :)
248 2011-07-15 01:47:34 <moa7> uncle: and here http://www.bitlotto.com/botg0.1.1.tar.gz
249 2011-07-15 01:48:17 <moa7> uncle: not regards blockexplorer questin
250 2011-07-15 01:49:36 <unclemantis> so i am not getting the private keys by default right now, i need to hack it
251 2011-07-15 01:49:41 <unclemantis> correct?
252 2011-07-15 02:01:49 <jgarzik> hum
253 2011-07-15 02:02:01 <jgarzik> I wonder if I can get a [legal] copy of OSX for free somewhere?
254 2011-07-15 02:02:04 <jgarzik> to run in a VM
255 2011-07-15 02:02:34 <Diablo-D3> no
256 2011-07-15 02:02:35 <Diablo-D3> not only that
257 2011-07-15 02:02:40 <Diablo-D3> you have to use the server edition
258 2011-07-15 02:02:44 <IO-> apple doesn't even allow that, i think
259 2011-07-15 02:03:03 <Fat-Albert> yeah, only if its on an apple machine
260 2011-07-15 02:03:05 <IO-> but then again, they dont even use product keys for OSX
261 2011-07-15 02:03:07 <Fat-Albert> gotta drink the koolaid
262 2011-07-15 02:03:27 <Diablo-D3> IO-: no
263 2011-07-15 02:03:30 <Diablo-D3> apple ONLY allows that
264 2011-07-15 02:03:33 <IO-> get an NZB
265 2011-07-15 02:03:45 <jgarzik> c.f. "legal"
266 2011-07-15 02:03:48 <Diablo-D3> and it took a LOT of bullshit for the virtualbox guys to actually let apple let them do it officially
267 2011-07-15 02:03:57 <IO-> then to go the apple store and buy a box
268 2011-07-15 02:04:07 <Diablo-D3> and the sever edition is like $500 or some shit
269 2011-07-15 02:04:15 <Diablo-D3> and its nearly identical to normal osx
270 2011-07-15 02:04:18 <jgarzik> if it's going to be building bitcoin officially, it damn sure is -not- going to be warez
271 2011-07-15 02:04:26 <IO-> oh
272 2011-07-15 02:04:29 <unclemantis> the value in "sec" is 51 characters and they all start with the number 5. I did a wallet dump using joric-pywallet-5452b8f>pywallet.py on my wallet where I am using windows client 0.3.23-beta. Is THIS the priate key or do i need to complile and run sipa's version from https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/220
273 2011-07-15 02:05:03 <BlueMattBot> Project Bitcoin-Test build #9: STILL FAILING in 14 sec: http://www.bluematt.me/jenkins/job/Bitcoin-Test/9/
274 2011-07-15 02:05:03 <IO-> better off getting a used apple laptop with OSX and doing it all that way, cheaper then a legal copy of OSX server
275 2011-07-15 02:05:04 <BlueMattBot> spiechu: added polish wallet encryption messages
276 2011-07-15 02:05:10 <Zagitta> jgarzik: there are plenty of clean p2p places, just don't use a public tracker and you'll be fine
277 2011-07-15 02:06:55 <jgarzik> Zagitta: no, that's not legal
278 2011-07-15 02:06:57 <IO-> i wish there was an inexpensive automated HTTP load testing service
279 2011-07-15 02:07:30 <IO-> anyone know any botnet masters that wanna get paid in BTC for easy work?
280 2011-07-15 02:07:42 <Zagitta> jgarzik: obviously not, but i thought you were refering to the risk of it being infected
281 2011-07-15 02:08:06 <jgarzik> No, I was referring to -not- breaking the law.  :)
282 2011-07-15 02:08:14 <unclemantis> topic is not private keys tonight, that is for sure ;)
283 2011-07-15 02:09:18 <Zagitta> jgarzik: technically it's not breaking the law, copy right infringement is a civil offense :)
284 2011-07-15 02:09:37 <IO-> tell that to the FBI sweeps they did back in 2004
285 2011-07-15 02:11:25 <Zagitta> IO-: never heard of those, got a link?
286 2011-07-15 02:12:13 <IO-> http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/FBI%27s_covert_%22Operation_Site_Down%22_targets_top_international_warez_and_piracy_sites
287 2011-07-15 02:12:26 <IO-> there where like ~4 sweeps, lots of arrests
288 2011-07-15 02:12:31 <IO-> jail time for some
289 2011-07-15 02:12:44 <IO-> most that got busted got a couple of years of probation
290 2011-07-15 02:13:04 <IO-> Bushs' henchman Ashcroft was the AG
291 2011-07-15 02:13:10 <IO-> he was just a grunt for the MPAA/RIAA
292 2011-07-15 02:13:22 <IO-> i'm trying to remember the other op names
293 2011-07-15 02:13:43 <IO-> there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Fastlink
294 2011-07-15 02:15:00 <Zagitta> IO-: I'm pretty sure all those were busted for selling the software in one way or another
295 2011-07-15 02:15:05 <IO-> no
296 2011-07-15 02:15:18 <IO-> all where siteop's or affils
297 2011-07-15 02:15:25 <IO-> zero topsites at that
298 2011-07-15 02:15:53 <Zagitta> IO-: they could have had subscription fees
299 2011-07-15 02:16:01 <IO-> these guys just ran invite only ftp servers
300 2011-07-15 02:16:35 <IO-> all scene members in some respect
301 2011-07-15 02:16:50 <IO-> the warez scene bans you if you sell anything in any way
302 2011-07-15 02:17:18 <IO-> this was before torrents where popular
303 2011-07-15 02:17:35 <Zagitta> IO-: hmm okay, turns out i was wrong then... at least about the US law then, in Denmark it's strictly speaking not illigal
304 2011-07-15 02:17:36 <IO-> back then you had to know someone that knew someone that could get you an account, which was usually a ratio account to start
305 2011-07-15 02:17:46 <IO-> the US is retarded
306 2011-07-15 02:18:09 <IO-> here people have gone to jail for harming the MPAA's hypothetical income
307 2011-07-15 02:18:24 <IO-> but only when republicans where in charge
308 2011-07-15 02:19:14 <Zagitta> It's mostly just a question about capitalism being flawed because of the human nature
309 2011-07-15 02:19:42 <Fat-Albert> as is every other human endeavor
310 2011-07-15 02:19:56 <Fat-Albert> little circular there :P
311 2011-07-15 02:20:07 <Zagitta> Touch??
312 2011-07-15 02:20:34 <IO-> its more complicated then that here. we have fundament flaws like corps are legal people. lobbyiests give legal bribes. $$$ corps write their own laws for bribed congressmen
313 2011-07-15 02:21:06 <unclemantis> i have confirmed that i have the actual private key and public key pairs with no modifications nessasary
314 2011-07-15 02:21:11 <IO-> our own currency and national pledge is unconstitutional
315 2011-07-15 02:21:11 <unclemantis> you may continue
316 2011-07-15 02:21:42 <Zagitta> IO-: which boils down to human greed aka the flawed nature of mankind :)
317 2011-07-15 02:22:02 <upb> unclemantis: yeah too bad you censored 7.5 bytes of hte private key instead of 4
318 2011-07-15 02:22:15 <IO-> if it was simple human greed all other countries would be in the same sad state
319 2011-07-15 02:22:22 <unclemantis> upb what do you mean?
320 2011-07-15 02:22:25 <IO-> Denmark is a nice place though, at least compared
321 2011-07-15 02:22:32 <upb> 7.5 is too much to bruteforce :)
322 2011-07-15 02:22:38 <Zagitta> IO-: not all places have the same political system so no
323 2011-07-15 02:22:46 <unclemantis> upb :P not stupid :)
324 2011-07-15 02:23:25 <unclemantis> so if i import ONE private key do i have access to the entire balance?
325 2011-07-15 02:23:31 <Fat-Albert> is there an official term for wallets that are lost, forgotten, or destroyed?
326 2011-07-15 02:23:39 <unclemantis> or do i have to import all of them?
327 2011-07-15 02:23:44 <upb> unclemantis: the entire balance of that address yes
328 2011-07-15 02:23:56 <unclemantis> of the ADDRESS. OK
329 2011-07-15 02:24:13 <unclemantis> so then I need to back up all the keys then
330 2011-07-15 02:24:14 <Zagitta> IO-: Denmark sucks hard in other aspects though... 50% taxes for example and 25% taxes on all goods
331 2011-07-15 02:24:28 <IO-> wow
332 2011-07-15 02:24:30 <unclemantis> Fat-Albert same thing that happens to gifts cards
333 2011-07-15 02:25:09 <IO-> we have about 35% taxes if your not rich and about 10% sales tax where i live. we are also so terribly poor people without health care just die and our education is ranked like 40 of 50
334 2011-07-15 02:25:13 <Zagitta> obviously income taxes are dependant on your income but for rich people it's around 50%
335 2011-07-15 02:26:20 <upb> i would imagine the rich people dont take their income as salary :)
336 2011-07-15 02:26:47 <Zagitta> IO-: there's another aspect to the other end of the scala though, for example how would you feel about having to pay for the bum down the street's healthcare when he does nothing every day but drink?
337 2011-07-15 02:27:05 <IO-> well since I can't afford a proper HTTP stress test i'll IRC from the web farm and piss off a bunch of romanians on IRC
338 2011-07-15 02:27:06 <IO-> that'll work
339 2011-07-15 02:27:21 <Zagitta> haha
340 2011-07-15 02:27:35 <IO-> might ddos my ISP down
341 2011-07-15 02:28:00 <upb> for stress testing http ab is fine
342 2011-07-15 02:28:17 <IO-> i have to stress test the LB also though, so i need a ton of remote clients
343 2011-07-15 02:28:29 <IO-> not just a couple of shells or even 100 shells
344 2011-07-15 02:28:36 <upb> aha
345 2011-07-15 02:28:56 <IO-> so - back to pissing off .ro
346 2011-07-15 02:29:03 <IO-> that's free and effective
347 2011-07-15 02:29:04 <upb> they would just fill your pipe tho
348 2011-07-15 02:29:11 <Fat-Albert> unclemantis: whats that?
349 2011-07-15 02:29:14 <upb> woulnt really test your lb
350 2011-07-15 02:29:18 <Zagitta> back to topic: this endianess thing is confusing the heck out of me because i for the life of me can't find a way to do it propperly in c#
351 2011-07-15 02:30:22 <IO-> Abell (a.k.a. "joebob") pled guilty to conspiracy to commit copyright infringement on February 28, 2005. He was sentenced to 15 months in prison, 400 hours of community service and two years probation.[1] The case is 5:04-cr-00681
352 2011-07-15 02:30:48 <upb> IO-: what about setting one of your boxes infront of the lb and hitting with ab from different ips ?
353 2011-07-15 02:31:02 <unclemantis> Fat-Albert they just disafreakinpear
354 2011-07-15 02:31:10 <IO-> ... thats a good idea
355 2011-07-15 02:31:11 <IO-> wow
356 2011-07-15 02:31:14 <unclemantis> what happens when you loose a dollar in a fire? same thing
357 2011-07-15 02:31:22 <IO-> i can alias a whole /24 on it
358 2011-07-15 02:31:27 <Fat-Albert> right, was wondering if there was a term for it
359 2011-07-15 02:31:42 <Fat-Albert> like, stores call loss to theft, etc "spoilage"
360 2011-07-15 02:31:42 <IO-> and i can max the gig eth easy to
361 2011-07-15 02:33:06 <upb> yep
362 2011-07-15 02:33:14 <IO-> thanks for the great idea!
363 2011-07-15 02:33:35 <IO-> ab [ -A auth-username:password ] [ -c concurrency ] [http://]hostname[:port]/path
364 2011-07-15 02:34:23 <IO-> can't specify source IP though
365 2011-07-15 02:34:24 <upb> doesnt seem to support binding to specific ips tho
366 2011-07-15 02:34:39 <upb> have to patch it or find smth else:)
367 2011-07-15 02:34:48 <IO-> it's always somethin
368 2011-07-15 02:35:14 <IO-> i'm putting a server in front of the LB right now
369 2011-07-15 02:35:14 <unclemantis> Fat-Albert i would call it LOST
370 2011-07-15 02:35:24 <IO-> i'll find somethin
371 2011-07-15 02:35:30 <IO-> even php+curl if need be
372 2011-07-15 02:35:57 <upb> maybe jmeter supports it
373 2011-07-15 02:36:07 <unclemantis> had to do some digging to find the public/private key pair that held the balance of my test wallet! found it though!!!
374 2011-07-15 02:36:22 <unclemantis> my 0.05000001btc is not lost afterall!
375 2011-07-15 02:36:42 <Fat-Albert> economists usually have specific terms, so when you're searching and learning about something, it helps knowing the lingo
376 2011-07-15 02:36:56 <Fat-Albert> and, good - that's 7$ lol
377 2011-07-15 02:37:03 <Fat-Albert> err, .70, nm
378 2011-07-15 02:37:22 <unclemantis> .70 is .70
379 2011-07-15 02:42:52 <Zagitta> no wonder this is so confusing
380 2011-07-15 02:44:32 <Zagitta> the endianess of BigInteger is the opposite so i have to convert twice -.-
381 2011-07-15 02:51:05 <IO-> N=2
382 2011-07-15 02:51:06 <IO-> N=$(expr $N + 1)
383 2011-07-15 02:51:07 <IO-> done
384 2011-07-15 02:51:09 <IO-> this'll be fun
385 2011-07-15 02:59:03 <unclemantis> would be neat to get a public and private key pair ingraved on a bar of silver :) very ironic
386 2011-07-15 02:59:39 <unclemantis> or have it engraved under my wedding band LOL
387 2011-07-15 03:06:52 <BlueMattBot> Project Bitcoin-Sanitytest build #57: SUCCESS in 1 hr 2 min: http://www.bluematt.me/jenkins/job/Bitcoin-Sanitytest/57/
388 2011-07-15 03:40:39 <unclemantis> so folks don't know your total balance!
389 2011-07-15 03:49:42 <diki> ;;bc,stats
390 2011-07-15 03:49:45 <gribble> Current Blocks: 136345 | Current Difficulty: 1563027.9961162 | Next Difficulty At Block: 137087 | Next Difficulty In: 742 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 4 days, 19 hours, 12 minutes, and 58 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1649818.06234375
391 2011-07-15 04:36:59 <lfm> ls
392 2011-07-15 04:38:19 <forrestv> contrib  COPYING  doc  locale  README  README.md  share  src
393 2011-07-15 04:38:34 <lfm> rm *
394 2011-07-15 04:39:06 <lfm> rm -r *
395 2011-07-15 04:39:40 <forrestv> wtf, you just destroyed my branch i was working on :(
396 2011-07-15 04:39:47 <lfm> oh sorry
397 2011-07-15 04:40:35 <unclemantis> LOL
398 2011-07-15 05:13:55 <pixglen> building bitcoind on an amazon micro instance ... painful...
399 2011-07-15 05:19:40 <Zagitta> pixglen: just wait untill you have to start downloading the block chain
400 2011-07-15 05:19:54 <pixglen> *ouch*
401 2011-07-15 05:20:11 <forrestv> i tried compiling on an NSLU2
402 2011-07-15 05:20:14 <Zagitta> took 24 hours afaik
403 2011-07-15 05:20:17 <forrestv> tiny embedded network storage thing
404 2011-07-15 05:20:21 <pixglen> hey i just wanted somewhere i could put up my exchange API for testing
405 2011-07-15 05:20:22 <forrestv> took a week
406 2011-07-15 05:20:35 <Zagitta> holy crap forrestv
407 2011-07-15 05:20:37 <pixglen> s'pose i could compile on a centos vm and try uploading that
408 2011-07-15 05:20:55 <Zagitta> pixglen: should be perfectly fine
409 2011-07-15 05:21:18 <pixglen> hopefully testnet doesn't hv too many blocks in the block chain
410 2011-07-15 05:21:24 <Zagitta> or change the instance type to the big one for an hour or so
411 2011-07-15 05:22:15 <pixglen> um, yeah it errors on compiling rpc -- internal error -- so trying -param ggc-min-expand=0 --param ggc-min-heapsize=8192 to keep mem to a minimum, and it's taking a loooooong time
412 2011-07-15 05:23:56 <Zagitta> forrestv: if i try running my pool software against the "testnet in a box" would that happen to interfer with the H != 0 check? because my share checker keeps erroring at that check although bitcoind accepts it :s
413 2011-07-15 05:24:16 <forrestv> Zagitta, yep
414 2011-07-15 05:24:44 <forrestv> Zagitta, the testnet-in-a-box has difficulty .125, which is target 0xffff * 2**211
415 2011-07-15 05:25:07 <Zagitta> forrestv: aha thanks and whew haha
416 2011-07-15 05:25:22 <forrestv> H being ... 7
417 2011-07-15 05:25:48 <forrestv> H <= 7
418 2011-07-15 05:26:06 <Zagitta> hmm i'm not sure it gives 7 though
419 2011-07-15 05:26:20 <forrestv> due to byte swapping it might be something else
420 2011-07-15 05:26:22 <Diablo-D3> you mean almost 7
421 2011-07-15 05:27:24 <Zagitta> well on the top of my head remember the last share being H = 3k something
422 2011-07-15 05:28:15 <Zagitta> easy enough to check, hang on...
423 2011-07-15 05:29:01 <Zagitta> H = 824326182
424 2011-07-15 05:29:03 <Zagitta> :<
425 2011-07-15 05:29:26 <Diablo-D3> Zagitta: thats still H == 0
426 2011-07-15 05:29:33 <Diablo-D3> theres just a few shortened steps in there
427 2011-07-15 05:29:56 <Zagitta> whut?
428 2011-07-15 05:30:02 <forrestv> yeah... what?
429 2011-07-15 05:30:25 <Zagitta> although i think it's the wrong share that was in my ctrl-c cache
430 2011-07-15 05:31:05 <Diablo-D3> its 0xA41F32E7
431 2011-07-15 05:31:22 <Diablo-D3> but basically, the final step is something like H += some value, then if H==0
432 2011-07-15 05:31:27 <Diablo-D3> why bother having the add at all
433 2011-07-15 05:31:51 <Diablo-D3> just subtract that value from 0, and you get 0xA41F32E7
434 2011-07-15 05:34:01 <Zagitta> 1) the other share was already reversed
435 2011-07-15 05:34:29 <Zagitta> 2) can't say i followed you on all of that Diablo-D3... i don't do the hashing myself
436 2011-07-15 05:34:49 <Zagitta> 3) this is for pool share checking not miner share checking, just in case you thought otherwise :9
437 2011-07-15 05:35:07 <Diablo-D3> Zagitta: er
438 2011-07-15 05:35:15 <Diablo-D3> if its checking it, it still has to solve it
439 2011-07-15 05:36:02 <Zagitta> well yeah but i since miners already skip some checks i thought you were talking about another shortcut
440 2011-07-15 05:36:06 <Zagitta> but nvm that
441 2011-07-15 05:36:29 <Zagitta> i've got another share: 00000001bfb3c18140c1f9aaf35162b0843a0304abedf48fb4a9669f43462b83000000004453a58136f150b4861e02f77c92be7e95e895bd14e5725288bca2b8f3f7a33d4e1fed071d07fff82f02cb4 (lots of 0's here ofc)
442 2011-07-15 05:36:47 <Zagitta> H = 1799712367 on that one
443 2011-07-15 05:37:08 <Diablo-D3> uh no
444 2011-07-15 05:37:15 <Diablo-D3> H is clearly 0 on that
445 2011-07-15 05:38:55 <Zagitta> oh well... I guess i'll write some code to grab a few hundred raw blocks from blockexplorer and see if i get H != 0 on any of those
446 2011-07-15 05:46:36 <forrestv> Zagitta, H is the first 32 bits of the hash...
447 2011-07-15 05:46:52 <forrestv> Zagitta, what language are you using?
448 2011-07-15 05:46:57 <Zagitta> C#
449 2011-07-15 05:47:17 <mtrlt> look at the last 32 bits too, in case someone's got it backwards :p
450 2011-07-15 05:47:19 <forrestv> ah... i have (what i believe is) a really nice python implementation of the bitcoin data structures
451 2011-07-15 05:47:37 <mtrlt> because it's actually not the first 32 bits, bitcoin just reverts the hash
452 2011-07-15 05:48:10 <Zagitta> currently i'm converting the last 4 bytes of the hash into an int32 and then checking H != 0
453 2011-07-15 05:48:41 <mtrlt> have you checked that your hash function works correctly
454 2011-07-15 05:48:42 <Zagitta> if i check for the first 4 bytes H = 1119614264
455 2011-07-15 05:48:46 <Zagitta> on the share i posted previously
456 2011-07-15 05:48:50 <Zagitta> it does
457 2011-07-15 05:48:54 <Zagitta> i didn't implement it myself
458 2011-07-15 05:49:02 <Zagitta> it's the .net one
459 2011-07-15 05:49:21 <forrestv> check some block's hashes against the actual hash (via blockexplorer)
460 2011-07-15 05:49:25 <mtrlt> did you check it or are you just assuming it works because it's included in the language :P
461 2011-07-15 05:49:52 <Zagitta> and if i use the block from the example at: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Block_hashing_algorithm i end up with the correct hash
462 2011-07-15 05:49:59 <mtrlt> ah
463 2011-07-15 05:50:02 <mtrlt> that's good, then :P
464 2011-07-15 05:50:12 <Zagitta> no shit sherlock ;P
465 2011-07-15 05:50:20 <mtrlt> yep
466 2011-07-15 05:50:56 <Zagitta> but yes forrestv, i'm currently writting some small debugging code to download and construct block headers from blockexplorer
467 2011-07-15 05:51:07 <Zagitta> that i can run through my share checker
468 2011-07-15 06:01:06 <Zagitta> forrestv: did you have that python script? (just in case)
469 2011-07-15 06:11:15 <forrestv> Zagitta, it's at svn://forre.st/p2pool . to get a block hash, you'd do something like .. p2pool.bitcoin.data.block_header_type.hash256(dict(version=1, previous_block=0x..., merkle_root=0x..., timestamp=..., target=..., nonce=...))
470 2011-07-15 06:12:05 <forrestv> and it'd give you an integer. you could get H by doing that_hash//(2**224)
471 2011-07-15 06:12:19 <forrestv> or that_hash >> 224 ;P
472 2011-07-15 06:13:36 <Zagitta> forrestv: thanks :) i'll take a look at it if my code ends up failing at the blocks from blockexplorer :)
473 2011-07-15 06:20:22 <CheapScotsman> For mining with two cards in GUIMiner, does one need to set two separate tabs or just one?
474 2011-07-15 06:20:49 <Zagitta> separate afaik
475 2011-07-15 06:20:59 <Zagitta> there's a total stats page or something though
476 2011-07-15 06:21:27 <CheapScotsman> Does that eat up twice as much CPU resources? The windows bug is already eating up 50+% of both my cores
477 2011-07-15 06:21:55 <Zagitta> go into process manager and set affinity to only one of your cores
478 2011-07-15 06:22:21 <CheapScotsman> I'm mainly worried about heat issues, as I have an Athlon x2 FX chip that runs hot on idle
479 2011-07-15 06:22:39 <Zagitta> forrestv: if the nonce is so short for a block that the block header hex isn't 160 chars long you just append 0's on the end right?
480 2011-07-15 06:22:54 <forrestv> Zagitta, erm
481 2011-07-15 06:23:06 <forrestv> pack the nonce as a 32 bit little endian integer
482 2011-07-15 06:23:30 <Zagitta> that's not my problem
483 2011-07-15 06:23:32 <forrestv> to answer your question, yes
484 2011-07-15 06:23:41 <Zagitta> look at http://blockexplorer.com/rawblock/000000000000026adebee547717795b0a7fe97070c886694bec73963f781eaf6
485 2011-07-15 06:23:52 <Zagitta> the nonce is stored as an int
486 2011-07-15 06:23:57 <mtrlt> little endian uint.
487 2011-07-15 06:24:04 <mtrlt> 32
488 2011-07-15 06:24:33 <forrestv> the nonce is 68622458
489 2011-07-15 06:24:34 <Zagitta> erh that might be the error then
490 2011-07-15 06:25:12 <mtrlt> which is 0x0417187A, so, 7A181704 in little-endian order.
491 2011-07-15 06:25:57 <Zagitta> hmm
492 2011-07-15 06:26:13 <Zagitta> the .net hex converter gives me 417187a
493 2011-07-15 06:26:21 <mtrlt> well that's what i said?
494 2011-07-15 06:27:17 <Zagitta> i know the 0 infront is meaningless but i've got a feeling it's what makes my raw string pulled from blockexplorer 1 char too short
495 2011-07-15 06:27:45 <mtrlt> wat
496 2011-07-15 06:28:39 <Zagitta> yep that was the problem
497 2011-07-15 06:28:44 <Zagitta> now H == 0 for that block
498 2011-07-15 06:29:03 <Zagitta> bloody c#
499 2011-07-15 06:30:37 <mtrlt> that's why i love C++
500 2011-07-15 06:30:50 <mtrlt> don't have to convert everything to strings if i want to manipulate binary data
501 2011-07-15 06:31:35 <Zagitta> well neither do i
502 2011-07-15 06:31:47 <Zagitta> it's just more of an issue when it comes from a string
503 2011-07-15 06:33:06 <mtrlt> i don't understand how you can have that kinda problem :P
504 2011-07-15 06:33:20 <mtrlt> in the raw block from blockexplorer, the nonce is a decimal number
505 2011-07-15 06:33:39 <mtrlt> just read that into a uint32, everything's done :P
506 2011-07-15 06:33:55 <Zagitta> the header hex recieved from miners is one long string
507 2011-07-15 06:34:06 <mtrlt> yea
508 2011-07-15 06:34:12 <mtrlt> but it's of fixed length
509 2011-07-15 06:34:24 <Zagitta> yeah yeah that's not an issue
510 2011-07-15 06:34:53 <Zagitta> first i tried converting it to a byte array directly and then swapping around as required by the whole endianess thing
511 2011-07-15 06:35:00 <Zagitta> but i never managed to get it working
512 2011-07-15 06:35:04 <mtrlt> :p
513 2011-07-15 06:35:54 <Zagitta> so i had to resort to swapping the individual hex parts in the string
514 2011-07-15 06:36:09 <Zagitta> which is a horrible solution
515 2011-07-15 06:36:12 <mtrlt> :D
516 2011-07-15 06:36:28 <Zagitta> but after not having been able to make the other thing work for 3 days straight i just gave up
517 2011-07-15 06:36:31 <Zagitta> at least for now
518 2011-07-15 06:37:23 <Zagitta> i've got the hex2bin part done in the fast way though
519 2011-07-15 06:37:35 <Zagitta> thanks to google that is :p
520 2011-07-15 06:42:00 <CheapScotsman> Does running one core at 100% 24/7 cause much risk of failure/overheating?
521 2011-07-15 06:43:12 <Zagitta> why would the answer be any different from running a gfx at 100% 24/7?
522 2011-07-15 06:43:54 <Zagitta> as long as you have sufficient cooling there's no need to worry
523 2011-07-15 06:44:22 <CheapScotsman> Because I know that GPUs burn out quite quickly at 100% fan speed/OCd heavily
524 2011-07-15 06:44:28 <CheapScotsman> But I am entirely unfamiliar with CPUs
525 2011-07-15 06:44:57 <Zagitta> a chip is still a chip
526 2011-07-15 06:45:35 <Zagitta> the only way they're different is how the transistors are arranged
527 2011-07-15 06:47:11 <midnightmagic> CPUs are a little more resistant to failure imo.
528 2011-07-15 06:47:15 <Zagitta> also the most of the time the gpu chip itself doesn't die, it's most likely to be one of the other components on the card like the voltage regulators or capasitors
529 2011-07-15 06:47:21 <midnightmagic> too much important stuff is riding on them.
530 2011-07-15 06:47:47 <CheapScotsman> Midnight that certainly seems my experience with GPUs vs CPUs, but then again I know nothing of transistor arrangement.
531 2011-07-15 06:48:03 <Zagitta> thing is
532 2011-07-15 06:48:06 <CheapScotsman> I have never had a CPU die on me
533 2011-07-15 06:48:16 <Zagitta> you rarely throw 200-300 watt through a CPU
534 2011-07-15 06:49:04 <CheapScotsman> I miss the good old days when OpenCL would use 0% CPU for me....damn windows errors
535 2011-07-15 06:49:37 <Zagitta> why not just install ubuntu and follow the guides on the forum?
536 2011-07-15 06:49:54 <midnightmagic> yes, i've personally watched three video cards fry themselves, and in all cases the onboard caps just exploded.
537 2011-07-15 06:50:24 <midnightmagic> i even took usb microscope pics of one of them, you can see the holes and everything
538 2011-07-15 06:50:35 <CheapScotsman> Zagitta: I am almost ready to set up my second build which I do intend to use linux with, but for this one it seems too much of a hassle for a week of use.
539 2011-07-15 06:50:48 <CheapScotsman> Also I use this comp for Word and so on
540 2011-07-15 06:51:18 <CheapScotsman> midnightmagic: sounds traumatic
541 2011-07-15 06:52:22 <midnightmagic> they were cheap geforce $40 pieces of crap, i wasn't surprised at all.
542 2011-07-15 06:52:28 <midnightmagic> least they didn't take out my computer with them
543 2011-07-15 06:53:04 <CheapScotsman> Yes that is a bonus. I'm currently concerned that my PSU may do that
544 2011-07-15 06:53:16 <Zagitta> ah yeah i don't have linux on my desktop either but i don on my mining rig
545 2011-07-15 06:53:38 <CheapScotsman> I just slapped the second card in and between powering two cards and an overloaded CPU my PSU is quite hot to the touch
546 2011-07-15 06:54:11 <Zagitta> you should check how many amps the 12v line can deliver
547 2011-07-15 06:55:22 <CheapScotsman> Zag is that on the "output distribution list?"
548 2011-07-15 06:55:31 <CheapScotsman> It's a 700W PSU bbut it is generally known to be a POS
549 2011-07-15 06:56:13 <Zagitta> erhh i think so
550 2011-07-15 06:56:45 <Zagitta> not sure what you mean but it usually says on the side of the psu
551 2011-07-15 06:57:13 <CheapScotsman> It has four listed on that list: Device, CPU1, PCIE1/CPU2, MB Accessory and PCIE-1
552 2011-07-15 06:57:42 <Zagitta> where are you see that? in software?
553 2011-07-15 06:57:49 <CheapScotsman> on the side of the PSU
554 2011-07-15 06:57:55 <Zagitta> o _O
555 2011-07-15 06:58:09 <CheapScotsman> Ill get a link