1 2011-07-18 00:00:13 <BlueMatt> connection reset by peer means someone along the connection path sent a tcp rst
  2 2011-07-18 00:00:22 <BlueMatt> probably your local router or freenode somehwere
  3 2011-07-18 00:00:35 <BlueMatt> noway to know which w/o a packet dump on your router's wan interface
  4 2011-07-18 00:01:05 <sacarlson> BlueMatt: ok thanks, but some firewall at some point
  5 2011-07-18 00:01:30 <BlueMatt> could be your local tcp stack on your machine, but probably not
  6 2011-07-18 00:01:35 <BlueMatt> seriously it is really hard to tell
  7 2011-07-18 00:02:22 <sacarlson> BlueMatt: well It's not me it's what I see as someone else getting connected and disconected from an irc server
  8 2011-07-18 00:03:04 <sacarlson> BlueMatt: I connect fine to the same server irc
  9 2011-07-18 00:03:34 <gim> gmaxwell: probably you already know, but -dns is not related to seeding
 10 2011-07-18 00:04:02 <gim> so it sounds like it doesn't even exist
 11 2011-07-18 00:05:09 <BlueMatt> sacarlson: yea, well its probably some router somewhere, if you are looking at other people, likely their local firewall is rsting the connection for some misguided reason
 12 2011-07-18 00:06:02 <sacarlson> BlueMatt: ya I think it's a virtual server that they rented that the guy they rent from closed the port to this irc
 13 2011-07-18 00:06:18 <sacarlson> or never opended it
 14 2011-07-18 00:06:32 <BlueMatt> no, a rst means the connection was already there and a router decided to drop it
 15 2011-07-18 00:06:49 <BlueMatt> though rsts are also often used directly after the syn ack by a fw to block access to a service
 16 2011-07-18 00:07:00 <BlueMatt> but that is misguided and fairly rare
 17 2011-07-18 00:07:14 <BlueMatt> and you wouldnt be able to log in in the first place if that was the case
 18 2011-07-18 00:08:02 <sacarlson> BlueMatt: ya you must be right as his name apears then disapears so it must have handshaked
 19 2011-07-18 00:08:46 <BlueMatt> no, as I said if its a router sending after the syn ack, you cant handshake with the irc server only with its tcp stack
 20 2011-07-18 00:08:54 <BlueMatt> aka you wouldnt be able to login or join a channel
 21 2011-07-18 00:09:23 <BlueMatt> that said, rsts are also used by fws who do dpi and want to disconnect after a connection was established
 22 2011-07-18 00:09:32 <BlueMatt> so maybe their router doesnt want them to join the chan
 23 2011-07-18 00:09:40 <BlueMatt> but seriously these are all very, very, very rare scenarios
 24 2011-07-18 00:09:42 <gmaxwell> gim: durrr.
 25 2011-07-18 00:09:53 <BlueMatt> most likely, there is just some connection path issue and a router decides to rst the connection
 26 2011-07-18 00:12:03 <sacarlson> BlueMatt: no I think it was my misinterpritation on my part I see as I look at the time they had changed there ip address and then some resets a few times sorry
 27 2011-07-18 00:12:43 <BlueMatt> yes, a router might send a rst if it is changing ip and needs all connections to die so it can change
 28 2011-07-18 00:12:56 <BlueMatt> though I cant say Ive ever seen that, routers rarely know when they are about to change ips...
 29 2011-07-18 00:16:47 <xelister> BlueMatt: I found out that USA is not democratic, intersting talk @ #freenet
 30 2011-07-18 00:17:11 <BlueMatt> exciting, youll pardon me for not caring what you have to say on the matter...
 31 2011-07-18 00:17:17 <BlueMatt> it is 4am
 32 2011-07-18 00:17:23 <xelister> BlueMatt: btw need of free media in semi-democrati systems is also nice use case for freedom of speach in internet =)
 33 2011-07-18 00:17:51 <BlueMatt> I never said there is no use case for freenet, only that there currently isnt a realistic one and/or it is not being used for that
 34 2011-07-18 00:19:07 <xelister> are you implying we all hundrets of active users developing for freenet are using it for your "child porn"?
 35 2011-07-18 00:19:22 <BlueMatt> didnt say that either
 36 2011-07-18 00:19:27 <xelister> sir, you confused us with catholic church apparently =)
 37 2011-07-18 00:19:31 <xelister> or orphanages.
 38 2011-07-18 00:19:32 <BlueMatt> I said it currently isnt being used for something useful
 39 2011-07-18 00:19:55 <xelister> when last time you review any index of materials in freenet?
 40 2011-07-18 00:20:13 <xelister> books(35)  Blogs(174)
 41 2011-07-18 00:20:19 <xelister> Infos(102)
 42 2011-07-18 00:20:29 <xelister> frost first index (say, afk index)
 43 2011-07-18 00:20:59 <b4epoche> wtf is freenet?  some hangout for losers?
 44 2011-07-18 00:21:03 <xelister> actually all 3 main indexes basically ban evil porn, and have hundrets of pages
 45 2011-07-18 00:21:11 <gruez> Lolwut?
 46 2011-07-18 00:21:27 <xelister> b4epoche: http://freenetproject.org/ ||| http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freenet
 47 2011-07-18 00:23:21 <xelister> BlueMatt: it would be wise if you would consider refraining from talking before getting any clue =)  You ask me for other uses - then I respond: hundrets of pages and I in long time didn't see any page with "evil" porn (like cp)
 48 2011-07-18 00:23:44 <luke-jr> all porn is evil
 49 2011-07-18 00:24:03 <BlueMatt> xelister: well considering this is the first time you actually directly responded to that question...
 50 2011-07-18 00:24:04 <b4epoche> wtf is 'evil' porn?
 51 2011-07-18 00:24:05 <xelister> luke-jr: your gf sending you her sexuall photos too?
 52 2011-07-18 00:24:09 <xelister> b4epoche: like cp
 53 2011-07-18 00:24:16 <luke-jr> xelister: yes
 54 2011-07-18 00:24:40 <xelister> BlueMatt: it takes 5 minutes to  freenetproject.org  and then click on the first links you have bookmarked as starting point and notice hundrets of pages.
 55 2011-07-18 00:24:53 <xelister> luke-jr: trololo. Well whatever =) But you are weird...
 56 2011-07-18 00:24:58 <luke-jr> xelister: no u
 57 2011-07-18 00:25:34 <BlueMatt> xelister: in any case, paranoid people using freenet as a glorified discussion board does not quantify a good useage.  Its cool tech and would be really cool if, say, it were used by some political dissedent in china to get the word out.  Then Id really be all-in, but as it stands its really not used for anything useful
 58 2011-07-18 00:25:46 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: I dunno about ubuntu but Fedora compiles things with -fstack-protector via the RPM default cflags, not via changes to gcc.
 59 2011-07-18 00:25:55 <xelister> BlueMatt: political dissedents in china ARE using freenet, since like 8 years now.
 60 2011-07-18 00:26:09 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: I only say that because that is what someone else posted on that thread so...
 61 2011-07-18 00:26:17 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: I never did too much reading on that
 62 2011-07-18 00:26:17 <xelister> BlueMatt: but how can you know if you even obviously never visited freenet index.    Seriously get a clue please?
 63 2011-07-18 00:26:50 <BlueMatt> xelister: For some reason I kind of doubt that...in any case tor is still better for that...also its 430 Im going to bed
 64 2011-07-18 00:26:52 <gmaxwell> Yea, it's probably a bad assumption. I don't have an ubuntu box here to test, but I think that debian page I linked to in the thread has some example code you could try. (a file implementing a bug the stackprotector catches)
 65 2011-07-18 00:27:12 <xelister> BlueMatt: TOR is tottally blocked in chine since ~year.  GET A CLUEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE when you wake up :>  D:
 66 2011-07-18 00:27:36 <BlueMatt> xelister: and you think if freenet starts being used it wont be?
 67 2011-07-18 00:27:37 <xelister> all nodes, all bridges are dead in china. well it was to be expecterd.
 68 2011-07-18 00:27:39 <gmaxwell> xelister: Please don't be trolly. There are tens of thousands of tor users in china, they use bridge relays.
 69 2011-07-18 00:27:43 <xelister> BlueMatt: jesus christ
 70 2011-07-18 00:27:44 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: well if you have time, a good test and a pull request would be nice...
 71 2011-07-18 00:27:49 <xelister> BlueMatt: Freenet is ALREADY blocked in china for years
 72 2011-07-18 00:27:59 <BlueMatt> xelister> BlueMatt: political dissedents in china ARE using freenet, since like 8 years now.
 73 2011-07-18 00:28:05 <BlueMatt> now you are contradicting yourself
 74 2011-07-18 00:28:07 <BlueMatt> goodnight
 75 2011-07-18 00:28:11 <xelister> BlueMatt: not at all: Freenet works very good with totally darknet mode
 76 2011-07-18 00:28:26 <gmaxwell> Likewise, tor works well with dark bridges.
 77 2011-07-18 00:28:31 <xelister> so you can block all of Freenet nodes,  and yet people that have friends outside china can use freenet
 78 2011-07-18 00:28:42 <xelister> gmaxwell: no, they are harvested basically all since ~yaer
 79 2011-07-18 00:28:46 <gmaxwell> I'm running a good half dozen of them, all being actively used by people in china, none currently blocked.
 80 2011-07-18 00:29:08 <b4epoche> so who else uses freenet?  a bunch of paranoid freaks?
 81 2011-07-18 00:29:11 <gmaxwell> xelister: they harvested ones in the autodispatch list. The tor project stopped adding new bridges to the auto list due to the harvesting.
 82 2011-07-18 00:29:21 <xelister> gmaxwell: unless you have a friend outside that especially for you opens up a bridge. But Freenet always was about darknet, actually when it first started ~10 years ago it was only darknet.
 83 2011-07-18 00:29:25 <gmaxwell> Now they give blocks of exits to rights orginizations manually.
 84 2011-07-18 00:29:29 <xelister> gmaxwell: so in practice it seems to work out better
 85 2011-07-18 00:30:19 <xelister> bottom line: TOR and I2P always focused on opennet.  Freenet on darknet.  Therefore now Freenet is more unblockable
 86 2011-07-18 00:30:33 <gmaxwell> xelister: haha. No, freenet only went darknet with v7 (but that version was darknet only at start)
 87 2011-07-18 00:30:48 <cjdelisle> old joke re freetor2p, by the time the page loads everyone in the pictures will be over 18
 88 2011-07-18 00:30:49 <xelister> gmaxwell: was 0.5 not darknet? if not then ok, more like 5 years not 10
 89 2011-07-18 00:30:58 <xelister> cjdelisle: lol ;)
 90 2011-07-18 00:31:12 <gmaxwell> It basically killed freenet for several years until opennet support was readded.
 91 2011-07-18 00:31:20 <xelister> gmaxwell: but I was rather sure it later switched to the "new" idea of "also opennet and seedings". I will research
 92 2011-07-18 00:31:25 <xelister> ah ok.
 93 2011-07-18 00:31:44 <xelister> anyway only freenet can work without any networking
 94 2011-07-18 00:32:21 <cjdelisle> I had an idea earlier, suppose we got together and modded a bittorrent client so that it was aware when another client gave it bitcoin and it would unchoke the ones who paid first.
 95 2011-07-18 00:32:23 <gmaxwell> xelister: Yea, older versions were so trivally compromised by sybils (because of no onion routing) they went darknet only to prevent the sybils, but it basically killed the network because 99.99% of everyone was too lazy to get darkpeers, so they reintroducted opennet.
 96 2011-07-18 00:32:31 <xelister> because it is a storage not IP-wrapper, you can as last resort just take a hard-drive with part of Freenet and connect it say inside China or Egypt, even if all outside-of-China connections would be blocked totally
 97 2011-07-18 00:32:33 <gmaxwell> They've still not solved the sybil attack stuff on opennet.
 98 2011-07-18 00:32:50 <gmaxwell> Though they keep waving their arms saying they'll add onion routing to address that someday.
 99 2011-07-18 00:33:05 <gmaxwell> I don't blame them its hard. But regardless, it's not a silver bullet.
100 2011-07-18 00:33:11 <xelister> gmaxwell: yeap there is none
101 2011-07-18 00:33:25 <xelister> cool stuff there is some project aiming to combine i2p+tor+freenet sort of
102 2011-07-18 00:33:46 <xelister> also for secure bitcoin transport ( #btcfn project ) we want to support all 3 eventually
103 2011-07-18 00:34:02 <gmaxwell> It doesn't help that there is child porn on freenet like three/four clicks away from the index. Really discourages supporters in my own expirence.
104 2011-07-18 00:34:15 <gmaxwell> Tor had the same problem with the onion wiki too.
105 2011-07-18 00:34:17 <xelister> gmaxwell: but this is idiotic FUD if you think about it
106 2011-07-18 00:34:23 <xelister> where is 100% of porn?
107 2011-07-18 00:34:27 <xelister> actually
108 2011-07-18 00:34:30 <xelister> where is 100% of child abuse?
109 2011-07-18 00:34:46 <xelister> where is 100% of child abuse happening? anyone?
110 2011-07-18 00:34:50 <JFK911> to children
111 2011-07-18 00:34:55 <JFK911> the solution is simple
112 2011-07-18 00:35:00 <cjdelisle> Actually no, that is very important, if people see it as a child abuse thing they will not want to help the network and/or develop the code.
113 2011-07-18 00:35:02 <JFK911> if we kill all the children there will be no more abuse
114 2011-07-18 00:35:08 <chinaskibit> Awesome
115 2011-07-18 00:35:09 <xelister> good point JFK911
116 2011-07-18 00:35:10 <gmaxwell> xelister: well _I_ stopped using freenet, even though I support its mission and continue to run a node without actually using it, simply because it's too easy to just stumble onto really rank child pron with it.
117 2011-07-18 00:35:38 <b4epoche> JFK911:  that's quite a Modest Proposal
118 2011-07-18 00:35:41 <xelister> gmaxwell: "stumble upon"? I didnt stumbple into any CP ever. Just do not subscribe groups withe like child-porn in name?? ;)
119 2011-07-18 00:36:03 <JFK911> b4epoche: well i really cant think any other common denominator for child abuse
120 2011-07-18 00:36:16 <JFK911> its pretty prevalent on this planet
121 2011-07-18 00:36:31 <gmaxwell> xelister: well, when I last used it  which was a long time ago, I admit, it was really easy.  You'd follow some link on some secondary index to "Dave's pics" and wham.
122 2011-07-18 00:36:45 <b4epoche> JFK911:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal
123 2011-07-18 00:37:07 <xelister> gmaxwell: now you see only what you want to see.  Good indexes. Categories. And boards (FMS, Freetalk soon, Sone - twitter like) all are based on webs of trust.  If someone you thought is cool suddenly posts like cp or goatse or shit into your group eng.bitcoin (yea, there is bitcoin group) then you just block him. Probably he will be blocked by others before you see his message too
124 2011-07-18 00:38:03 <xelister> gmaxwell: well then Im sorry for that experience. It is NOTHING like that. Since like a year+, dunno what was before. Consider re-trying :)  Super cool stuff nowdays is "Sone" - `Twitter` like freenet thing.  And FMS is the new boards.  Also Freetalk but it will be usable in ~month from now
125 2011-07-18 00:38:31 <xelister> b4epoche: yo you had some question to me earlier? was bussy
126 2011-07-18 00:39:45 <xelister> gmaxwell: I was at first also not happy about the existance of CP, but then I thought about it and come to simple conclusion
127 2011-07-18 00:39:52 <xelister> 100% of child ABUSE happens in real-life
128 2011-07-18 00:40:13 <xelister> orphanages. churches. most of India. Poor people. etc.
129 2011-07-18 00:40:34 <b4epoche> Kentucky
130 2011-07-18 00:41:14 <xelister> if anything will cause child ABUSE it will be bitcoin, not freenet.  With freenet some guys can fap to cp. whatever.  With Bitcoin people can actually ORDER and PAY someone to MAKE a new movie for them, e.g. kidnap a child and abuse it. Now that is scarry as shit.
131 2011-07-18 00:41:49 <cjdelisle> xelister: The problem is that if the network just has the reputation of being a CP haven, people will shy away from it and will not want to help it. Pedophiles ruin everything.
132 2011-07-18 00:41:53 <luke-jr> xelister: "it"
133 2011-07-18 00:41:55 <xelister> am I the only one thinking paying to make say a snuff movie is much scarrier then even dudes fapping to 20 years old the same picture or shit?
134 2011-07-18 00:42:16 <xelister> cjdelisle: it will happen to EVERY network
135 2011-07-18 00:42:31 <luke-jr> xelister: guess we need more regulation
136 2011-07-18 00:42:35 <cjdelisle> Yes, every anonymous mix network. It is unfortunate but true.
137 2011-07-18 00:42:37 <xelister> if FN would die then it would happen to tor (already does imo),  if tor dies then bittorrents and e-mule (already it was the case)
138 2011-07-18 00:42:43 <xelister> if e-mule does the internet
139 2011-07-18 00:42:50 <xelister> want stop CP - ban ALL INTERNET
140 2011-07-18 00:43:00 <gruez> Lol
141 2011-07-18 00:43:06 <cjdelisle> Bittorrent is not anonymous so it's not an issue.
142 2011-07-18 00:43:07 <luke-jr> s/ban/regulate
143 2011-07-18 00:43:08 <xelister> but then people will resolve to DVDs lol
144 2011-07-18 00:43:12 <xelister> so then ban EVERYTHING
145 2011-07-18 00:43:17 <luke-jr> s/ban/regulate
146 2011-07-18 00:43:23 <xelister> ok, ban all video recording equpiment...
147 2011-07-18 00:43:34 <xelister> but then people will instead actually pay to have "real life shows" I bet...
148 2011-07-18 00:43:39 <xelister> so only choice is to ban....?
149 2011-07-18 00:43:43 <b4epoche> let's just kill all the people caught with cp, eh?
150 2011-07-18 00:43:45 <luke-jr> it's simple: when someone is caught, throw em in jail for life
151 2011-07-18 00:43:50 <luke-jr> b4epoche: or that
152 2011-07-18 00:43:50 <xelister> to ban ..... ?   (0.01 btc for correct answer)
153 2011-07-18 00:43:55 <gim> ban the physics laws
154 2011-07-18 00:43:57 <luke-jr> b4epoche: but not just CP, all porn
155 2011-07-18 00:44:00 <xelister> gim: nope
156 2011-07-18 00:44:02 <cjdelisle> *shrug* do you want to understand the nature of the problem?
157 2011-07-18 00:44:08 <xelister> to ban the children. :}
158 2011-07-18 00:44:23 <b4epoche> luke-jr:  if that happens, the human race will die
159 2011-07-18 00:44:27 <luke-jr> b4epoche: nope
160 2011-07-18 00:44:27 <xelister> why not? everyone would be sterilized at birth. New children made in gov run agencies
161 2011-07-18 00:44:37 <luke-jr> b4epoche: just atheism
162 2011-07-18 00:44:39 <xelister> ban children -> and no more child abuse ever.
163 2011-07-18 00:44:56 <luke-jr> xelister: gov run agencies = child abuse
164 2011-07-18 00:44:57 <gruez> :/
165 2011-07-18 00:45:05 <xelister> luke-jr: yeap
166 2011-07-18 00:45:08 <xelister> as you can see
167 2011-07-18 00:45:12 <xelister> there is NOTHING that can prevent CP
168 2011-07-18 00:45:18 <xelister> well ok.  actually helping children
169 2011-07-18 00:45:20 <luke-jr> just punish it severely
170 2011-07-18 00:45:22 <xelister> reducing poverty
171 2011-07-18 00:45:37 <xelister> actually working sociall services, easy access to education
172 2011-07-18 00:45:44 <xelister> this could almost eliminate child abuse I hope.
173 2011-07-18 00:45:46 <cjdelisle> That's not the problem. It is a problem but it's not the problem facing FN.
174 2011-07-18 00:45:55 <xelister> not going after anonymous networks that allow people to speak freely
175 2011-07-18 00:46:17 <b4epoche> anonymity is killing society
176 2011-07-18 00:46:18 <xelister> cjdelisle: 100% of CP and child ABUSE happens in real-life. This is where efforst should be made.
177 2011-07-18 00:46:29 <cjdelisle> FN allows people to speak freely and anonymously without control so they act like jackasses.
178 2011-07-18 00:46:56 <xelister> b4epoche: in USA (democacy ;) guy records police overusing it's power. For that, he gets beaten by police and his phone confiscated. Lots of such stories.
179 2011-07-18 00:47:12 <xelister> cjdelisle: you can easly select who you want to listen, who to trust
180 2011-07-18 00:47:19 <luke-jr> xelister: I have those stories personally.
181 2011-07-18 00:47:24 <b4epoche> wow, this channel brings out the paranoids
182 2011-07-18 00:47:40 <xelister> b4epoche: sometimes people are crazy, sometimes just the world is.
183 2011-07-18 00:48:03 <xelister> luke-jr: what story is that?
184 2011-07-18 00:48:04 <b4epoche> some people deserve to be beaten by police
185 2011-07-18 00:48:20 <luke-jr> xelister: can't say, or I'll be abused again! ;)
186 2011-07-18 00:48:23 <cjdelisle> Tor same, people use tor to troll and spam. People use freenet/i2p/.onion to look at horrific pictures. Nobody wants to support this so these netwirks never gain traction.
187 2011-07-18 00:48:30 <xelister> b4epoche: people are beaten by police for recording police's corruption and overusing power etc.
188 2011-07-18 00:48:41 <xelister> cjdelisle: people use bitcoin do get high
189 2011-07-18 00:48:51 <xelister> and to ORDER actuall real-life child abuse
190 2011-07-18 00:48:54 <cjdelisle> Yea but getting high is not bad.
191 2011-07-18 00:49:06 <xelister> cjdelisle: it is according to laws
192 2011-07-18 00:49:15 <cjdelisle> Smoking doap is a personal decision and most people don't care how you decide.
193 2011-07-18 00:49:20 <b4epoche> xelister:  so, where you from and how old are you?
194 2011-07-18 00:49:21 <cjdelisle> *dope
195 2011-07-18 00:50:23 <xelister> b4epoche: how is that relevant
196 2011-07-18 00:50:34 <xelister> cjdelisle: well in usa you go to prison for that
197 2011-07-18 00:50:42 <b4epoche> it would likely explain a whole lot
198 2011-07-18 00:50:54 <cjdelisle> All I'm trying to tell you is why tor/i2p/fn cannot and will never gain any traction.
199 2011-07-18 00:51:19 <xelister> b4epoche: you start to sound like someone that has nothing to stay and would like to start some missguided ad hominem
200 2011-07-18 00:51:51 <xelister> cjdelisle: nowdays even developers of software are being arrested
201 2011-07-18 00:51:57 <b4epoche> okay, that says, I'm not a native English speaker...  and I'm guessing you're like what, 17?
202 2011-07-18 00:52:03 <cjdelisle> link?
203 2011-07-18 00:53:36 <xelister> cjdelisle: can't find it now in english.
204 2011-07-18 00:53:42 <xelister> cjdelisle: will soon.
205 2011-07-18 00:53:56 <cjdelisle> All I'm telling you is that for the average joe who has to decide between a tyranical government and supporting a network which is widely used by pedophiles who don't even hide what they do... Joe is going to side with the government.
206 2011-07-18 00:54:39 <cjdelisle> That is why those networks will never amount to anything, you don't have to like it, it's just the cold truth.
207 2011-07-18 00:54:40 <b4epoche> anything that's truly anonymous will always spiral into the gutter...
208 2011-07-18 00:54:40 <xelister> cjdelisle: the joe is idiot because in the end bad government that throws people in jail like say in china will harm his children more then some dude fapping off to 20 years old picture
209 2011-07-18 00:55:04 <pixglen> please help test my new bitcoin exchange -- RESTful JSON API -- http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=29057.0
210 2011-07-18 00:55:04 <xelister> cjdelisle: what will hurt your children more
211 2011-07-18 00:55:25 <xelister> 1) government that can arrest people for whatever like it happens in china and dissapear peoples by thousands etc etc
212 2011-07-18 00:55:36 <xelister> 2) some old guy fapping away in his basement
213 2011-07-18 00:55:47 <cjdelisle> I'm not taking a position on it, all I'm trying to do it help you understand that right or wrong, the opinion of John Q Public is the law.
214 2011-07-18 00:56:51 <xelister> is the actuall truth is (1) - throwing people in jails and murdering them - is worse then (2) someone fapping in his home to some old photo
215 2011-07-18 00:57:20 <xelister> then if people are allowing to make laws that lead them closer to the like-china hell... seem to be idiots.
216 2011-07-18 00:57:30 <senseles> what?
217 2011-07-18 00:57:33 <senseles> i missed something
218 2011-07-18 00:57:35 <b4epoche> cjdelisle:  he's hopeless...  just let time prove you're correct
219 2011-07-18 00:57:55 <cjdelisle> It doesn't matter what I think, it doesn't matter what you think, it only matters what the average person thinks.
220 2011-07-18 00:58:04 <senseles> the tried to use the pedophile arguement before
221 2011-07-18 00:58:04 <xelister> b4epoche: ad hominem so soon? try using arguments
222 2011-07-18 00:58:09 <senseles> to completely regulate and shut down the web
223 2011-07-18 00:58:12 <senseles> it didn't work
224 2011-07-18 00:58:52 <b4epoche> xelister:  you don't seem to understand anyone's argument...  so it's pointless.
225 2011-07-18 00:58:54 <xelister> senseles: who did?  anyway this argument IS in fact use now in Australia, to completly regulate their internet. And it "works". By blocking moslty sites that have nothing to do with CP, but like politician opposition sites and so on
226 2011-07-18 00:59:03 <senseles> Oh, australia? you guys are fucked
227 2011-07-18 00:59:12 <senseles> Australia is so hopeless for internet freedom
228 2011-07-18 00:59:21 <senseles> It's as bad as china
229 2011-07-18 00:59:24 <xelister> yeap
230 2011-07-18 01:00:06 <xelister> b4epoche: your argument that "anything that's truly anonymous will always spiral into the gutter..." is PROVEN wrong by the facts
231 2011-07-18 01:00:10 <b4epoche> maybe they'll at least have a carbon tax soon
232 2011-07-18 01:00:12 <cjdelisle> Alternatively you might consider building a network which is anonymous enough that massive data harvesting is not feasable but routing out real bad guys is. That is something that the public would be on board with.
233 2011-07-18 01:00:31 <xelister> cjdelisle: routing out why? to stop them from doing what? fapping?
234 2011-07-18 01:00:46 <b4epoche> xelister:  that can't be proven wrong you idiot...  it's too vague
235 2011-07-18 01:00:50 <nanotube> how is all this -dev material?
236 2011-07-18 01:01:06 <b4epoche> howdy nanotube
237 2011-07-18 01:01:10 <nanotube> heya b4epoche :)
238 2011-07-18 01:01:22 <senseles> I find it funny though
239 2011-07-18 01:01:33 <senseles> the AUD is almost parity with USD
240 2011-07-18 01:01:35 <cjdelisle> Well, heh it's -dev material but perhaps not #bitcoin-dev material as much as it is #anon-mix-net-dev materisl ;)
241 2011-07-18 01:01:36 <xelister> nanotube: how should bitcoin project relate to other anonymous networking, how should it use it. And is it good or bad
242 2011-07-18 01:01:41 <senseles> yet you guys still have to pay 10-20% more for a video game
243 2011-07-18 01:01:45 <b4epoche> just fun arguing...  I like to keep my argumentative skills sharp with people who don't understand anything
244 2011-07-18 01:01:51 <senseles> then ontop of that the government requires a cut down version of the game
245 2011-07-18 01:01:54 <senseles> with all the gore removed
246 2011-07-18 01:01:55 <senseles> lol.
247 2011-07-18 01:02:29 <xelister> b4epoche: well you are not following facts
248 2011-07-18 01:02:33 <senseles> instead of bullets your gun shoots butterflys at the enemy ~
249 2011-07-18 01:02:52 <xelister> b4epoche: fact: if you use freenet normally. e.g. do not search it for CP, you will not find there CP
250 2011-07-18 01:02:53 <b4epoche> if 'gore' makes things fun then you're fucked up
251 2011-07-18 01:03:07 <senseles> im supposed to be killing zombies
252 2011-07-18 01:03:16 <cjdelisle> yea, everyone agrees that Gore is boring.
253 2011-07-18 01:03:18 <senseles> there should be gore, and lots of it
254 2011-07-18 01:03:30 <b4epoche> nanotube:  how's your summer going?
255 2011-07-18 01:03:30 <cjdelisle> no, we really need less Gore
256 2011-07-18 01:03:31 <xelister> b4epoche: another fact, anonymous chats and sites are heaving excelent level of discussion. The good boards. There are also boards that talk about bitcoin, 4chan and whatever. YOU choose what you listen to.
257 2011-07-18 01:05:54 <nanotube> b4epoche: nothing exciting. :)
258 2011-07-18 01:05:58 <cjdelisle> Idea: Suppose we integrated bitcoin into a bittorrent engine so that people could pay to leech and seedboxes would get paid to seed?
259 2011-07-18 01:07:06 <xelister> cjdelisle: what if people use it to get cp?  say fn was destroyed and all cp is on torrents.
260 2011-07-18 01:07:27 <cjdelisle> xelister: won't happen because bittorrent is not anonymous
261 2011-07-18 01:07:53 <cjdelisle> and even if it does, people understand that *we* are not responsable because we are not protecting their identity.
262 2011-07-18 01:08:00 <RenaKunisaki> dammit does gribble really need to highlight me every time I reconnect
263 2011-07-18 01:08:07 <xelister> cjdelisle: it is quite anon when used correctly
264 2011-07-18 01:08:27 <cjdelisle> bittorrent isn't.. ip address.
265 2011-07-18 01:08:45 <xelister> shell. vpn. etc.
266 2011-07-18 01:08:51 <xelister> even without tor and i2p
267 2011-07-18 01:09:06 <cjdelisle> dead horse is dead
268 2011-07-18 01:09:38 <cjdelisle> I'm interested in this because it would create a million or so more owners of btc, that would help stabilize the price.
269 2011-07-18 01:10:11 <xelister> that easly get traded and arrested because btc is tracable. btw wonder when this happens to SR
270 2011-07-18 01:10:16 <cjdelisle> Like a stimulus package except not just printing borrowed money.
271 2011-07-18 01:11:01 <cjdelisle> Nobody cares about bittorrent, it is socially acceptable to download movies for your own education.
272 2011-07-18 01:12:49 <cjdelisle> It would probably drive the cost of a transaction through the roof because of the block size limit
273 2011-07-18 01:13:30 <xelister> new uses for btc are a very good idea, cjdelisle
274 2011-07-18 01:14:46 <cjdelisle> thx. I still don't know how the chain would handle an onslaught of tiny transactions. It must be documented somewhere, God forbid I have to read the code.
275 2011-07-18 01:15:52 <xelister> you could use some payments system
276 2011-07-18 01:16:02 <cjdelisle> centralization is :(
277 2011-07-18 01:17:23 <eianpsego> Likely a atupid question - is there a way to get something akin to javadocs from the current source code?
278 2011-07-18 01:17:28 <eianpsego> stupid*
279 2011-07-18 01:20:21 <gmaxwell> xelister: the internet is part of real life too. Somehow drawing some crazy line between "real life" and "the internet" is a very warped perspective.
280 2011-07-18 01:21:03 <nanotube> fwiw, i think getting bitcoin 'compatible' with existing anonymizing networks is a good idea. never hurts to have that option "just in case"
281 2011-07-18 01:22:55 <nanotube> cjdelisle: bitcoin won't handle millions of 'microtransactions'. the fees will make them too expensive in short order.
282 2011-07-18 01:23:08 <xelister> gmaxwell: I ment that if politicians would be REALLY about protecting children,  they would do better education. Reduce poverty. Reduse child abuse in schools. Make laws to have every child in orphanage access to 3 consultants weekly and free to report any abuse, and hold staff accountable with jailtime
283 2011-07-18 01:23:55 <xelister> gmaxwell: if instead politicians go after destroying freedom of speach because "there are also dudes fapping off to old pictures!!111" then children safety is not their primary concern or reason
284 2011-07-18 01:24:06 <cjdelisle> thanks nano
285 2011-07-18 01:24:15 <nanotube> xelister: of course it's not, getting reelected is. that's how it works.
286 2011-07-18 01:24:16 <cjdelisle> that means some kind of alternate chain :(
287 2011-07-18 01:24:28 <nanotube> cjdelisle: yes... or using some kind of middleman transaction processor
288 2011-07-18 01:24:35 <xelister> heaving said all above, for long time in freenet you do NOT stumble into cp - unless you seek it.  So fell free to retry anytime, it takes 5 minutes  and duded @ #freenet will help - or poke me
289 2011-07-18 01:24:45 <cjdelisle> centralization doesn't work, esp. with bittorrent ;)
290 2011-07-18 01:24:59 <nanotube> haha well, i mean something like mybitcoin
291 2011-07-18 01:25:03 <xelister> cjdelisle: solution could be payments to small hubs of peers and they micropay eachother
292 2011-07-18 01:25:17 <xelister> yea like amny small mybitcoins between accounts or clusters of peers
293 2011-07-18 01:25:32 <luke-jr> nanotube: s/mybitcoin/MtGox
294 2011-07-18 01:25:34 <xelister> or, OT-like system.
295 2011-07-18 01:25:35 <xelister> OT
296 2011-07-18 01:25:44 <nanotube> luke-jr: yea, same picture :)
297 2011-07-18 01:25:45 <xelister> OT - Open Transactions - like bitcoin but backed up by anything, instant transactions. Higher anonimity
298 2011-07-18 01:25:54 <luke-jr> nanotube: except MtGox doesn't have bugs that result in stolen funds :P
299 2011-07-18 01:25:59 <xelister> also there is ripple system, it could be backed up by bitcoins
300 2011-07-18 01:26:03 <gmaxwell> nanotube: it's not correct to say "the fees will make it too expensive" since that has a simple answer "reduce the fees", the reason bitcoin isn't a micropayment system is because it's a broadcast everywhere system.
301 2011-07-18 01:26:16 <nanotube> luke-jr: /me has stayed away from mybitcoin... so dunno anything abou tit
302 2011-07-18 01:26:45 <cjdelisle> I don't think anyont here knows about tit
303 2011-07-18 01:27:02 <gmaxwell> Ripple in a backed by bitcoin mode could be a reasonable micropayment system.
304 2011-07-18 01:27:14 <luke-jr> I know people don't get their payouts from my pool and assume it's my fault
305 2011-07-18 01:30:53 <Zagitta> speaking of that luke
306 2011-07-18 01:31:10 <Zagitta> you really should make the warning in the thread in big letters and red font :p
307 2011-07-18 01:32:18 <sacarlson> how many confirms are needed in bitcoind before recieved funds can be sent?
308 2011-07-18 01:33:51 <gmaxwell> Zero.
309 2011-07-18 01:34:15 <xelister> gmaxwell: it can they rquire bigger txfee?
310 2011-07-18 01:34:43 <gmaxwell> xelister: It'll have a priority of zero, which is less than 510,000 so it will ask for a 0.0005 fee.
311 2011-07-18 01:34:59 <eianpsego> Is there some type of intermediary documentation between the bitcoin paper and the source code?  I think I need a design sketch of these classes...
312 2011-07-18 01:35:17 <gmaxwell> eianpsego: come on, the whole client is 20kloc. Read the source.
313 2011-07-18 01:36:16 <eianpsego> gmaxwell, I've done a bunch of dev work in Java - is there something like javadocs for C++
314 2011-07-18 01:36:25 <xelister> gmaxwell: btw, this calculation stems should be listed in the json error when too small tx fee imo, informative :)
315 2011-07-18 01:36:32 <eianpsego> gmaxwell, do most people just grep through this stuff?
316 2011-07-18 01:36:37 <xelister> eianpsego: yea there are.. google it
317 2011-07-18 01:36:49 <xelister> eianpsego: grapping throu bitcoin source works overall
318 2011-07-18 01:37:08 <cjdelisle> I wish I could transfer btc to an alt chain and back without having to trust someone :(
319 2011-07-18 01:37:17 <eianpsego> xelister - thanks
320 2011-07-18 01:39:16 <cjdelisle> you could do an exchange by making the alt chain not complete it's transaction until the main chain has completed it's but that's an exchange which the other tokens won't be on parody :/
321 2011-07-18 01:40:11 <gmaxwell> cjdelisle: you could just escrow on both sides.
322 2011-07-18 01:40:22 <cjdelisle> mm re trust someone
323 2011-07-18 01:40:36 <gmaxwell> No, blockchain escrow.
324 2011-07-18 01:40:57 <cjdelisle> please elaborate?
325 2011-07-18 01:41:45 <cjdelisle> or is this something that I should be RTFMing?
326 2011-07-18 01:42:02 <gmaxwell> cjdelisle: https://github.com/groffer/bitcoin/commit/dc2dfbab6a0f75070fc3b962da4eb2967e9659df
327 2011-07-18 01:43:24 <cjdelisle> wow, I will have to read over that carefully, it looks pretty complex, like secret sharing type algo.
328 2011-07-18 01:43:52 <gmaxwell> ...
329 2011-07-18 01:43:58 <gmaxwell> It's not complex.
330 2011-07-18 01:45:58 <Zagitta> gmaxwell: that is a brilliant system
331 2011-07-18 01:46:13 <gmaxwell> It's part of the original bitcoin design, it just hasn't had a UI.
332 2011-07-18 01:46:50 <cjdelisle> ahh, now I see why it works. I thought it was hacked into the system somehow.
333 2011-07-18 01:47:17 <Zagitta> Sathosis was a brilliant man/women then
334 2011-07-18 01:47:50 <gmaxwell> This is by far not the most clever thing a transaction can do, though perhaps it's the most useful clever thing.
335 2011-07-18 01:48:30 <cjdelisle> I am very interested, safe interblockchain transfers while maintaining parody is a massive killer app, it removes almost all backward compatability concerns. With that we can literally do anything.
336 2011-07-18 01:49:13 <cjdelisle> well... we can't change the rate of generation, that's about it though
337 2011-07-18 01:49:31 <cjdelisle> bbiab
338 2011-07-18 01:49:50 <gmaxwell> Not sure what you consider competing chains an asset they're a liability. but whatever.
339 2011-07-18 01:52:07 <Zagitta> I wonder if DRM could be attatched to transactions
340 2011-07-18 01:52:45 <Zagitta> that way people would be able to transfer their rights to that piece of music without being able to multiply it
341 2011-07-18 02:00:21 <senseles> i dont see why drm is necessary
342 2011-07-18 02:00:24 <senseles> i pay for my stuff
343 2011-07-18 02:00:29 <gmaxwell> Zagitta: you'd want to use a bound alternative blockchain for that, but sure.
344 2011-07-18 02:00:32 <gmaxwell> "deedchain"
345 2011-07-18 02:00:33 <senseles> i dont share it
346 2011-07-18 02:00:45 <senseles> i dont see why i should be restricted because of what other users are doing :/
347 2011-07-18 02:01:06 <Zagitta> i agree senseles but it just crossed my mind
348 2011-07-18 02:01:17 <gmaxwell> senseles: well, what if there was an advisory drm system that only warned you "hey, looks like you're about to break the law. Are you sure? [abort] [go ahead] [transfer deed]"?
349 2011-07-18 02:01:21 <Zagitta> sound like a better idea gmaxwell
350 2011-07-18 02:01:35 <senseles> still, it's just going to cause more issues
351 2011-07-18 02:01:43 <senseles> everytime i heard DRM i think back to that one news story i read
352 2011-07-18 02:01:53 <senseles> where a company was giving out the crack for the program because the DRM was so screwed up
353 2011-07-18 02:02:01 <senseles> i cant remember what game it was....
354 2011-07-18 02:02:03 <senseles> bioshock?
355 2011-07-18 02:02:11 <Zagitta> that was battlefield something i think
356 2011-07-18 02:02:35 <gmaxwell> I dunno, personally I think that providing user friendly DRM (e.g. ones that just warned you about the rules) would do a lot to remove excuses for nasty user unfriendly DRM. ::shrugs:: kinda OT for here though, beyond the fact that you could use a bitcoin like blockchain to handle ownership transfers.
357 2011-07-18 02:03:24 <Zagitta> the reason i talked about transfer of DRM is that used game sales for example are an important part of console games
358 2011-07-18 02:04:10 <senseles> couldnt someone just modify their program to say "hey ive got ownership of this"
359 2011-07-18 02:04:17 <senseles> where is the authority that is going to verify that ownership?
360 2011-07-18 02:04:32 <senseles> you still have to download the content from a central source
361 2011-07-18 02:05:00 <senseles> if the content is p2p bitcoin style wouldnt every user would have the data on their system already
362 2011-07-18 02:05:04 <senseles> like the transaction log?
363 2011-07-18 02:05:11 <senseles> i just dont see how it can be secure
364 2011-07-18 02:05:15 <Zagitta> haven't figured that part out yet
365 2011-07-18 02:05:36 <senseles> i think the best thing is to just tell artistis to stop the expensive cocain habbits
366 2011-07-18 02:05:37 <gmaxwell> senseles: Yes, you can always modify programs to ignore restrictions.
367 2011-07-18 02:05:40 <senseles> and to get a real job
368 2011-07-18 02:05:47 <gmaxwell> But thats true of all DRM systems.
369 2011-07-18 02:05:59 <gmaxwell> senseles: You don't have to have all the data for a bitcoin like system.
370 2011-07-18 02:06:01 <senseles> artist is short of "lazy son of a bitch who doesnt want to get a job or do something constructive"
371 2011-07-18 02:06:17 <Zagitta> and programmers who program games are?
372 2011-07-18 02:06:24 <cjdelisle> re competing chains, the reason is because the existing chain can't support millions of micropayment transfers and perhaps a new chain could be built which worked differently in that regard. I realize though that without an alt cryptocoin (which I don't want), the alt chain would not be able to be supported by traditioal mining.
373 2011-07-18 02:06:34 <senseles> programmers are also lazy
374 2011-07-18 02:06:39 <senseles> im one, so i can attest to that
375 2011-07-18 02:07:17 <Zagitta> lazy but with a "real" job yet they're also artists in a sense thus violating your stupid argument
376 2011-07-18 02:07:24 <senseles> in regards to art it's just unreasonable to think that you can keep your work secure
377 2011-07-18 02:07:34 <senseles> if someone can hear it, they can play it themselves
378 2011-07-18 02:07:39 <senseles> if someone can see it, they can recreate it themselves
379 2011-07-18 02:07:48 <gmaxwell> cjdelisle: the whole bitcoin security model can't support micropayments. It's not something a simple altchain can solve.
380 2011-07-18 02:08:22 <copumpkin> cause they would flood it?
381 2011-07-18 02:08:24 <gmaxwell> cjdelisle: You should see the ripple + bitcoin thread on the forum. In that there is discussions about a method that could be used for fast transactions and micropayments.
382 2011-07-18 02:08:26 <Zagitta> senseles: i agree to a certain degree but that doesn't mean you should make it easy to recreate
383 2011-07-18 02:08:41 <gmaxwell> copumpkin: yes, because the security depends on txn being globally visible.
384 2011-07-18 02:08:47 <copumpkin> yeah
385 2011-07-18 02:08:57 <gmaxwell> cjdelisle: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=28565
386 2011-07-18 02:09:07 <senseles> it just seems to me that they spend billions of $
387 2011-07-18 02:09:15 <senseles> to protect a program or video from 1 user
388 2011-07-18 02:09:25 <senseles> who takes that video/game and puts it online
389 2011-07-18 02:09:40 <gmaxwell> The idea there is that you use a secondary network that secures promises to pay in a manner which involves (semi-)trusted parties (unlike bitcoin which is zero trust), and then you periodically settle back to bitcoin.
390 2011-07-18 02:09:40 <senseles> IMO it'd be easier to go after distribution and release groups
391 2011-07-18 02:10:18 <senseles> find where the group hangs on IRC, log their ips, file a civil trial against them
392 2011-07-18 02:10:21 <Zagitta> senseles: come to think of it, some smart CEO of a company recently said that piracy is only the sympthoms of a problem
393 2011-07-18 02:10:45 <senseles> ya, everyone wants something for free
394 2011-07-18 02:10:52 <senseles> that symptom has been around since the creation of our race
395 2011-07-18 02:11:07 <senseles> steal someone else's fruit or climb the tree to get your own
396 2011-07-18 02:11:09 <cjdelisle> gmaxwell: interesting, I have to read it.
397 2011-07-18 02:11:09 <senseles> no brainer
398 2011-07-18 02:11:22 <senseles> er problem*
399 2011-07-18 02:12:10 <Zagitta> senseles: well that too but what he said is that the reason a lot of people pirate is because there's no easy system in place where you can get movies on release as you can with pirated movies
400 2011-07-18 02:12:30 <senseles> ah, he was saying that because they restrict it to theaters only?
401 2011-07-18 02:12:43 <senseles> theaters are going to go the way of newspapers ..
402 2011-07-18 02:12:56 <gmaxwell> cjdelisle: e.g. [bank 1] trusts me for up to 1btc, you trust [bank 2] upto 10 btc, the two banks trust each other for up to 100 btc.  So I want to pay you 0.5 btc _now_, so I promise to pay [bank 1] which promises to pay [bank 2] which promises to pay you. If I renig, then it's only bank 1 that gets screwed. Every once in a while, everyone trues up their standing balance in bitcoin. So you might only have one bitcoin TXN per week from each pa
403 2011-07-18 02:13:10 <Zagitta> and because there's no easy online renting system wich has a big selection of movies
404 2011-07-18 02:13:17 <gmaxwell> cjdelisle: and with ripple the "banks" could just be frinds who trust each other, ripple finds paths through the system.
405 2011-07-18 02:13:28 <cjdelisle> ahh very good
406 2011-07-18 02:14:02 <gmaxwell> and if parties move btc back and forth often (like bank 1 and bank 2 might) then there may never be a btc transaction between them at all.
407 2011-07-18 02:14:23 <gmaxwell> (because they are constantly equalizing their debts with other debts)
408 2011-07-18 02:15:04 <Zagitta> senseles: also look at itunes, there's a reason their online music store is so popular, easy access to lots of music
409 2011-07-18 02:15:57 <cjdelisle> haha how soon we invent the line of credit :P
410 2011-07-18 02:16:48 <gmaxwell> cjdelisle: indeed, but you can do neat stuff like make sure that all credit is backed by a bitcoin transaction.
411 2011-07-18 02:17:21 <cjdelisle> indeed and there is really no reason why nodes need not settle up every 10 minutes
412 2011-07-18 02:17:58 <cjdelisle> and that would indeed solve my bittorrent usecase
413 2011-07-18 02:18:08 <gmaxwell> cjdelisle: e.g. if bank 1 doesn't trust me much, then it can demand that when I ask it to pay bank 2 that I provide it with evidence of willingness to pay in the form of a bitcoin transaction paying it with an nlocktime set in the future (a post dated check, if you will). If my balance with the bank changes I can update the transaction.
414 2011-07-18 02:18:51 <gmaxwell> cjdelisle: well, settling too fast doesn't suppress enough blockchain activity. But sure, people can choose the right settlement time based on their trust and the bitcoin fees.
415 2011-07-18 02:19:02 <cjdelisle> you can do post dated transactions?!
416 2011-07-18 02:19:22 <gmaxwell> Yes, nLockTime you can set the earliest point in time that a transaction can be mined.
417 2011-07-18 02:19:44 <gmaxwell> (you can't set a latest one, because of some unfortunate security interactions)
418 2011-07-18 02:21:43 <gmaxwell> So yea, with the ripple processing I was talking about you can even have it so that all promises to pay are actually backed by bitcoin transactions but normally those transactions are not released to the blockchain, they just keep getting updated from time to time to reflect the new balance.
419 2011-07-18 02:22:29 <cjdelisle> ahh I see
420 2011-07-18 02:23:40 <cjdelisle> erm, if Alice owes Bob 10$ and Bob owes Charlie 10$ can Bob just tell Alice to pay Charlie?
421 2011-07-18 02:24:49 <gmaxwell> I don't think thats how ripple is currently designed. Dunno if it could be made to do that. Part of the core idea in the design is that if anyone cheats the only person who gets screwed is that party who trusted the cheater.
422 2011-07-18 02:24:50 <senseles> itunes needs to be replaced
423 2011-07-18 02:24:54 <senseles> i use to buy stuff off itunes
424 2011-07-18 02:24:57 <senseles> but their database is comprimised
425 2011-07-18 02:25:05 <senseles> my account had like 1000$ of fraud charges on it for apps and crap
426 2011-07-18 02:26:23 <senseles> and i know that it wasnt my computer with a virus or something
427 2011-07-18 02:26:39 <senseles> as; if someone did hack my system there are tons of more valuable things on here than my itunes acct
428 2011-07-18 02:26:47 <senseles> heh
429 2011-07-18 02:26:54 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, that's an interesting twist on normal ripple which fails because you can never actually redeem the original ripple
430 2011-07-18 02:26:57 <gmaxwell> Yea, that whole thread on the forum caused me to have a better impression of ripple.
431 2011-07-18 02:26:57 <senseles> (plus, i didnt find anything when scanning)
432 2011-07-18 02:26:58 <gmaxwell> Useless on its own, but perhaps useful as a fast transaction processing front end on bitcoin.
433 2011-07-18 02:27:02 <senseles> i dont understand why someone would want to pass around debt
434 2011-07-18 02:27:10 <senseles> the whole idea of ripple seems kind of backwards
435 2011-07-18 02:27:20 <senseles> if people need money; then what they really need is a job
436 2011-07-18 02:27:33 <gmaxwell> senseles: because passing around assets is less efficient, even with bitcoin.
437 2011-07-18 02:27:42 <senseles> how so?
438 2011-07-18 02:27:54 <senseles> debt is traded the same way currency is
439 2011-07-18 02:28:06 <phantomcircuit> not really
440 2011-07-18 02:28:29 <gmaxwell> senseles: because every transaction must be visible to the whole world to prevent double spending, so there are scalablity limits. Also, it takes a long time to confirm transactions.
441 2011-07-18 02:28:29 <senseles> so i guess this last economic crisis didnt happen?
442 2011-07-18 02:28:35 <gmaxwell> Debt is naturally locally scoped.
443 2011-07-18 02:28:48 <gmaxwell> When I own you money, the rest of the world doesn't need to know anything about it.
444 2011-07-18 02:29:04 <senseles> they do
445 2011-07-18 02:29:06 <senseles> and they should
446 2011-07-18 02:29:11 <phantomcircuit> they dont
447 2011-07-18 02:29:14 <phantomcircuit> and they shouldn't
448 2011-07-18 02:29:18 <senseles> hence why equifax and the other 3 exchanges are so popular
449 2011-07-18 02:29:33 <phantomcircuit> ahah
450 2011-07-18 02:29:34 <senseles> what would stop an individual from getting loans from multiple sources
451 2011-07-18 02:29:37 <senseles> and not paying back any of them?
452 2011-07-18 02:29:46 <senseles> you need a risk assessment
453 2011-07-18 02:29:57 <gmaxwell> There is a difference between unbounded debt culture and rapidly settled private debt.
454 2011-07-18 02:30:01 <phantomcircuit> the credit unions are popular but are statistically ineffective
455 2011-07-18 02:30:07 <senseles> imagine before the advent of the internet
456 2011-07-18 02:30:16 <senseles> you had the same problems with physical currency
457 2011-07-18 02:30:19 <senseles> a user could go to NY cash a check
458 2011-07-18 02:30:28 <cjdelisle> If Charlie goes "hey Bob, I been lookin for you, pay up! put it in wallet # X" Then instead of paying Bob says "Alice, where my money! Put it in Wallet # X" then Alice says "ok Bob, it's incoming from wallet # Y" and Bob says "Ok Charlie it's incoming from wallet # Y" then you can mitm a debt payment.
459 2011-07-18 02:30:28 <senseles> go to LA the next day and cash a second check on the same funds
460 2011-07-18 02:30:35 <gmaxwell> senseles: we had telecheck _long_ before the internet.
461 2011-07-18 02:30:39 <senseles> the same thing applies to debt, if a user is in NY they get a loan, fly to LA, get another loan
462 2011-07-18 02:31:00 <senseles> i dont see why its a bad thing for everything to be visible
463 2011-07-18 02:31:04 <phantomcircuit> uh you can do that still
464 2011-07-18 02:31:12 <senseles> no you cant
465 2011-07-18 02:31:20 <phantomcircuit> go write a ton of bad checks
466 2011-07-18 02:31:20 <senseles> because the first loan shows up on your credit report
467 2011-07-18 02:31:27 <senseles> so the second bank isnt very likely to give you another loan
468 2011-07-18 02:31:39 <senseles> most places either instantly cash checks
469 2011-07-18 02:31:41 <cjdelisle> The problem with that, as with Ripple as a whole is that when things get too far leveraged, one person misses their payment and the whole financal system implodes.
470 2011-07-18 02:31:44 <phantomcircuit> senseles, the banks are actually *terrible* at sharing information accurately
471 2011-07-18 02:31:46 <senseles> or one release funds until the check clears
472 2011-07-18 02:31:50 <gmaxwell> speaking of that, I haven't pulled my credit report in a long time.  Time to see if my identity has been stolen.
473 2011-07-18 02:32:12 <gmaxwell> cjdelisle: yes, that was one of the criticisms I made against it before. But thats resolved by rapid settlement.
474 2011-07-18 02:32:21 <phantomcircuit> senseles, it is literally impossible to instantly clear a check currently, you're talking 2-5 days minimum and over 30 days for guaranteed clear
475 2011-07-18 02:32:30 <gmaxwell> (and by making transactions which are backed with the ability to pay)
476 2011-07-18 02:32:33 <phantomcircuit> it's why those silly 419 scams are so effective
477 2011-07-18 02:32:55 <cjdelisle> gmaxwell: I see. Also it would be helpful to have a real metric of how badly leveraged people actually are.
478 2011-07-18 02:33:00 <senseles> that just makes an arguement against the current banking system
479 2011-07-18 02:33:05 <senseles> not against the idea of sharing information
480 2011-07-18 02:33:25 <gmaxwell> You misunderstood what I was saying about broadcast.
481 2011-07-18 02:33:38 <gmaxwell> I'm not making some moral argument against sharing information.
482 2011-07-18 02:33:48 <gmaxwell> I'm making a technical point: Broadcast networks have limited scalablity.
483 2011-07-18 02:33:57 <cjdelisle> ^OSPF
484 2011-07-18 02:34:44 <gmaxwell> And no one has any OSPF areas with more than 1000 nodes and about 10k LSAs, thats why thing like stub areas exist.
485 2011-07-18 02:34:44 <senseles> someone needs to make a bitcoin plastic card
486 2011-07-18 02:34:59 <senseles> chip on it containing your key then just swipe it :/
487 2011-07-18 02:35:53 <senseles> i guess thats not very secure if you lose your wallet; because you literally lose your wallet. heh.
488 2011-07-18 02:36:09 <gmaxwell> Tricker than you think, what you've described doesn't work by itself.
489 2011-07-18 02:36:27 <gmaxwell> E.g. what happens when the swipe device simply saves your key?
490 2011-07-18 02:36:34 <senseles> ya, not secure :/
491 2011-07-18 02:36:55 <gmaxwell> or if its a smartcard that does the signing itself, why doesn't the swipe device try to simply spend all your money when you think you're buying 0.01 btc sodapop.
492 2011-07-18 02:37:41 <cjdelisle> cell phone app
493 2011-07-18 02:38:52 <cjdelisle> I still see a problem with ripple, namely when you trust a bank, you can't see how many other people trust that bank so while they can prove their assets, you can't see their liabilities.
494 2011-07-18 02:39:15 <cjdelisle> And as we all know, banks love to get in over their heads ;)
495 2011-07-18 02:41:31 <gmaxwell> cjdelisle: solved by not trusting much and settling often.
496 2011-07-18 02:41:55 <gmaxwell> If you want to buy a car, you'd do the btc transaction directly. But recall, we were talking about microtransactions.
497 2011-07-18 02:42:09 <cjdelisle> Yea but the problem is you might do everything right but if most of the biggest banks don't, everyone gets burned.
498 2011-07-18 02:42:29 <senseles> then your currency devalues from 55 pesos per 1$
499 2011-07-18 02:42:31 <gmaxwell> Burned for their microtransactions.
500 2011-07-18 02:42:33 <senseles> to 42 pesos per 1$
501 2011-07-18 02:42:41 <cjdelisle> mm true
502 2011-07-18 02:43:09 <senseles> its starting to get expensive to live in even a third world country when trying to survive on USD
503 2011-07-18 02:47:11 <senseles> kind of sick, i just paid more for electricit than i do my rent ..
504 2011-07-18 02:47:19 <senseles> 15,000 pesos for rent .. 16,000 pesos of electricity
505 2011-07-18 02:47:48 <ToTameALand> how much do you pay per kWh?
506 2011-07-18 02:47:58 <senseles> i think its like 8 pesos
507 2011-07-18 02:48:02 <senseles> at 42/1$
508 2011-07-18 02:48:16 <senseles> about 0.19KWH
509 2011-07-18 02:49:03 <senseles> they dont believe in central aircondition here; or insulation
510 2011-07-18 02:49:10 <senseles> which is where all of it goes
511 2011-07-18 02:49:26 <senseles> (powering little window unit aircoins)
512 2011-07-18 02:51:14 <ToTameALand> thats 0.13eur/KWh if Im not mistaken, not very cheap
513 2011-07-18 02:54:12 <senseles> not at all
514 2011-07-18 02:54:22 <senseles> too bad foreigners arent allowed to own more than 40% of a business here
515 2011-07-18 02:54:31 <senseles> it'd be a great place to put up solar or wind for a great ROI
516 2011-07-18 02:54:53 <ToTameALand> why wait for foreigners, mexicans should do it
517 2011-07-18 02:55:06 <senseles> im in the philippines :p
518 2011-07-18 02:55:18 <ToTameALand> then why are we talking about pesos :)
519 2011-07-18 02:55:24 <senseles> because thats the currency
520 2011-07-18 02:55:26 <senseles> philippine peso
521 2011-07-18 02:55:31 <ToTameALand> ah doh
522 2011-07-18 02:56:20 <senseles> they also have this interesting geological feature called the san juanico straight
523 2011-07-18 02:56:24 <ToTameALand> oh well, let me rephrase that then, philipinese should do it
524 2011-07-18 02:56:32 <senseles> where the pacific ocean is forced to funnel in one direction 24/7
525 2011-07-18 02:56:39 <senseles> great spot for some sort of underwater turbines
526 2011-07-18 02:59:31 <ToTameALand> when solar reaches 50% or more efficiency, that will do it
527 2011-07-18 03:01:42 <ToTameALand> it wont take long, we are the most advanced species in the planet for a reason!
528 2011-07-18 03:03:01 <senseles> that's not saying much
529 2011-07-18 03:03:33 <eureka^> i really gotta turn highlights off in this channel
530 2011-07-18 03:03:44 <eureka^> you guys talk about solar power a lot
531 2011-07-18 03:03:51 <ToTameALand> hehe
532 2011-07-18 03:04:35 <senseles> bitcoins right now with a large gpu cluster would be a good way to turn expenses into additional cash
533 2011-07-18 03:04:47 <senseles> even at 0.06$KWH
534 2011-07-18 03:05:00 <senseles> it'd be a great way to get rid of biogas without needing a grid synchronized generator
535 2011-07-18 03:06:03 <ToTameALand> buy solar panels with the profit
536 2011-07-18 03:06:57 <senseles> it's not stable enough for computers without being grid tied
537 2011-07-18 03:07:03 <senseles> unless you want to spend a small fortune in batteries
538 2011-07-18 03:08:22 <ToTameALand> we're installing a 10kW grid tied system on our house in a few months, cant wait
539 2011-07-18 03:09:19 <ToTameALand> lead acid batteries do suck a bit
540 2011-07-18 03:09:45 <ToTameALand> but what can u do.. its the best we've got atm
541 2011-07-18 03:09:56 <Zarutian> senseles: why not?  just have a big capacitor and a system to turn gpus on and off when there is power and when there is less power.
542 2011-07-18 03:10:25 <senseles> the idea is to take that 37$ a month i spend on electricity and reduce it or eliminate it
543 2011-07-18 03:10:32 <senseles> would want the systems to be running 24/7 still
544 2011-07-18 03:10:40 <Zarutian> (the capacitor is to give the system a small window to spin gpus down)
545 2011-07-18 03:11:50 <ToTameALand> that would be a big capacitor, possibly a flux capacitor!
546 2011-07-18 03:25:32 <gmax-canary> Warning: Canary node has new valgrind reports, see https://people.xiph.org/~greg/canary.log.txt and https://people.xiph.org/~greg/canary.debug.log.gz
547 2011-07-18 03:25:42 <gmaxwell> Cool. Okay, so that works.
548 2011-07-18 03:25:57 <gmaxwell> If it goes nuts and spams the channel, don't hesitate to kick it (it won't rejoin on its own)
549 2011-07-18 03:26:13 <gmaxwell> though it shouldn't be able to do that.
550 2011-07-18 03:26:54 <gmaxwell> The output there is some bdb crap that happens at startup, I've had a node running for a while with no valgrind noise at all, so it shouldn't be chatty.
551 2011-07-18 03:28:22 <doublec> nice
552 2011-07-18 03:28:53 <gmaxwell> :) Later I'll add some support for logging other concerning events, like deep reorgs.
553 2011-07-18 03:30:04 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: very nice!
554 2011-07-18 03:30:42 <gmaxwell> I also need to add code to have it periodically move to new versions of bitcoin... right now I have to do it manually because I need to patch the makefile to build bitcoin on my system.
555 2011-07-18 03:32:30 <senseles> you could just use my static bins
556 2011-07-18 03:32:32 <senseles> :/
557 2011-07-18 03:32:41 <gmaxwell> ...
558 2011-07-18 03:32:56 <senseles> ive been posting them on the forum
559 2011-07-18 03:33:16 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: do you post node/version counts anywhere?
560 2011-07-18 03:34:10 <gmaxwell> senseles: Thats not going to do me a lot of good. I need openssl compiled with -DPURIFY=1 or it's going to be an endless wall of valgrind errors, two, I need it with debugging symbols for the valgrind output to be reasonable.
561 2011-07-18 03:34:36 <senseles> ah
562 2011-07-18 03:34:38 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: Nope. Well, right now I only have what my node observes, and it ends up being a frenzy of .21 nodes for some reason.
563 2011-07-18 03:34:48 <gmaxwell> But I doubt its representative.
564 2011-07-18 04:05:21 <gmax-canary> Warning: Canary node has new valgrind reports, see https://people.xiph.org/~greg/canary.log.txt and https://people.xiph.org/~greg/canary.debug.log.gz
565 2011-07-18 04:14:14 <gmaxwell> K. I think thats the last of the valgrind notices that my other node has output so far.
566 2011-07-18 04:29:06 <accel_> ladeies and gentlemen
567 2011-07-18 04:29:09 <accel_> what happens to bitcoin
568 2011-07-18 04:29:15 <accel_> if ther internetz everz goez downz?
569 2011-07-18 04:29:27 <senseles> hope that some people put up free to use cubesats
570 2011-07-18 04:29:41 <senseles> i want my own cube sat :(
571 2011-07-18 04:29:46 <accel_> can the bitcoin block discovery every 10 minutes
572 2011-07-18 04:29:52 <accel_> run over cube sats, whatever they mayb e?
573 2011-07-18 04:30:03 <senseles> it's a 50,000$ satellite
574 2011-07-18 04:30:12 <senseles> 100,000$ including launch
575 2011-07-18 04:30:21 <accel_> so that's like what, 5K btc?
576 2011-07-18 04:30:35 <senseles> i meant, for intercommunication between users
577 2011-07-18 04:30:46 <accel_> waht's the maintenance fee for one of these suckers?
578 2011-07-18 04:30:53 <senseles> after launching it? nothing
579 2011-07-18 04:31:08 <accel_> wont' it eventually get out of orbit?
580 2011-07-18 04:31:09 <senseles> it'll eventually fall back to earth or not depending on its orbit and speed
581 2011-07-18 04:32:08 <accel_> can you launch cube sats without gov approval?
582 2011-07-18 04:32:24 <accel_> at 10cm cube, is it small enough
583 2011-07-18 04:32:30 <accel_> that govs won't send nukes after them?
584 2011-07-18 04:32:36 <senseles> they reason it's so cheap is you're using extra payload space on another launch
585 2011-07-18 04:32:45 <[Tycho]> 100 000 is way too much for 10 cm cube
586 2011-07-18 04:34:06 <cjdelisle> 02:36 < accel_> if ther internetz everz goez downz? <-- what happens to the world economy?
587 2011-07-18 04:34:13 <cjdelisle> everything is gone
588 2011-07-18 04:34:24 <cjdelisle> it's like asking what happens if there's an all out nuclear war
589 2011-07-18 04:34:42 <senseles> i guess we'll go back to bartering food and women
590 2011-07-18 04:34:49 <accel_> no no, I mean what happens to bitcoin protocol
591 2011-07-18 04:36:00 <cjdelisle> not much but that is an end of world scenario so btc isn't really your biggest concern.
592 2011-07-18 04:54:50 <molecular> can anyone help me with this compile error: "util.cpp:869: error: conversion from const wxChar* to non-scalar type std::string requested"?
593 2011-07-18 05:08:50 <senseles> someone gave bitcoins to asicminer :/
594 2011-07-18 05:09:43 <mtrlt> those are ooold txs, at least nobody's given the 15BTC :P
595 2011-07-18 05:09:44 <gmaxwell> Hey luke-jr  can you make your isstandard check reject transactions with multisig?  It looks like there is a bug in it, but if it ends up in the block chain then the bug won't be fixable.
596 2011-07-18 05:10:25 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: it isn't fixable period.
597 2011-07-18 05:10:31 <luke-jr> and IsStandard is never called
598 2011-07-18 05:10:43 <senseles> apparently they lowered it to 5btc lol http://asicminer.net/?p=58
599 2011-07-18 05:11:01 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: Er, there are no transactions using it in the blockchain now.
600 2011-07-18 05:11:21 <gmaxwell> If it's fixed and widely deployed in the fixed form before any such transaction is spent, then its a non-issue.
601 2011-07-18 05:11:39 <gmaxwell> Most miners would reject such a txn as non-standard right now in any case.
602 2011-07-18 05:12:02 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: anyone can add it at any time, including after a "bug" gets fixed
603 2011-07-18 05:14:36 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: I'm not clear on what you're saying. There is only an issue if someone spends one of these broken txn. If it gets mined, fixed clients will reject any chain segment containing that spend.
604 2011-07-18 05:15:12 <gmaxwell> So it can be fixed fine so long as no txn spending from one of those txn shows up in the chain before most miners / other nodes have upgraded.
605 2011-07-18 05:15:19 <xelister> Hollywood demands to brake the internet
606 2011-07-18 05:15:20 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: fixing it will allow anyone to create a blockchain fork *even after it's "fixed"*
607 2011-07-18 05:15:26 <xelister> Namecoin will be illegal tool soon
608 2011-07-18 05:15:39 <xelister> arresting namecoin developers anyone?
609 2011-07-18 05:15:45 <xelister> oh secdns will be illegall too
610 2011-07-18 05:15:49 <xelister> http://politics.slashdot.org/story/11/07/18/0153204/Security-Consultants-Warn-About-PROTECT-IP-Act
611 2011-07-18 05:16:28 <luke-jr> night
612 2011-07-18 05:16:40 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: yes, though only old unupgraded clients. ::shrugs::
613 2011-07-18 05:16:53 <gmaxwell> I guess you're right.
614 2011-07-18 05:17:28 <gmaxwell> senseles: wtf, those specs are entirely unattractive.
615 2011-07-18 05:18:06 <gmaxwell> They look more like FPGA performance specs than actual ASIC mining.
616 2011-07-18 05:19:17 <gmaxwell> If they were making a scam you'd think they'd actually make their scam product attractive.
617 2011-07-18 05:19:54 <xelister> looks scammish
618 2011-07-18 05:20:39 <[Tycho]> "<senseles> someone gave bitcoins to asicminer :/" - is this bad ?
619 2011-07-18 05:23:37 <gmaxwell> [Tycho]: well, it's probably a scam.
620 2011-07-18 05:25:05 <senseles> ya, it's definitely a scam i was just commenting that someone actually gave them btc
621 2011-07-18 05:25:27 <gmaxwell> well, perhaps they gave themselves the coin.
622 2011-07-18 05:25:59 <xelister> although, the technology as described there is possible or not? (only, that it is more like FPGA not ASIC)?
623 2011-07-18 05:26:04 <senseles> While you're here since you seem to know a lot about FPGA did you see my post about the artix 7?
624 2011-07-18 05:26:27 <gmaxwell> senseles: I commented in one of the other channels I think? I didn't see the post yet.
625 2011-07-18 05:26:51 <gmaxwell> My comment was that the 22nm xilinx stuff won't be shipping in quantity until god-knows-when.
626 2011-07-18 05:26:52 <senseles> im trying to find out the pricing for XC7A350T
627 2011-07-18 05:26:55 <senseles> ah
628 2011-07-18 05:27:14 <senseles> this is 28nm (i dont know if that makes a difference, older tech?)
629 2011-07-18 05:27:23 <gmaxwell> Yes.. someone in IRC was saying it could even do 200MH, and I also pointed out that art managed that on S6-LX150.
630 2011-07-18 05:27:46 <gmaxwell> (well, ~190MH/s)
631 2011-07-18 05:28:10 <xelister> sometimes it is scarry a bit
632 2011-07-18 05:28:25 <xelister> milions of specialized hardware designed only to burn electricity and money ;)
633 2011-07-18 05:28:37 <gmaxwell> xelister: it's rather slow for an asic implementation. Rather cheap for a fpga impementation that fast. Sure, its possible to build things like they are claiming.
634 2011-07-18 05:28:44 <xelister> well to make new money, but still, is it not most un-green currency by design
635 2011-07-18 05:29:03 <xelister> * it is the most un-green
636 2011-07-18 05:29:18 <senseles> wait, someone has a XC7A350T and is only getting 200mhash/s?
637 2011-07-18 05:29:27 <senseles> i thought 200mhash/s was the spartan 6?
638 2011-07-18 05:29:52 <gribble> ArtForz was last seen in #bitcoin-dev 4 weeks, 5 days, 9 hours, 13 minutes, and 36 seconds ago: <ArtForz> eternal beta. hah, satoshi is secretly a google employee!
639 2011-07-18 05:29:52 <jgarzik> ;;seen ArtForz
640 2011-07-18 05:30:18 <gmaxwell> senseles: someone did a timing analysis, I guess.
641 2011-07-18 05:30:38 <gmaxwell> xelister: not so, cash for example is very very ungreen.
642 2011-07-18 05:30:50 <gmaxwell> xelister: it's just that all the costs related to it are externalized and hidden.
643 2011-07-18 05:31:13 <senseles> not only does it produce wastes from processing
644 2011-07-18 05:31:16 <gmaxwell> xelister: consider all the costs of shipping it around, making it, destroying it securely, validating that its not counterfeted, chasing counterfeters, etc.
645 2011-07-18 05:31:19 <senseles> but it also cuts down the trees that recycle the wastes :/
646 2011-07-18 05:31:37 <xelister> jgarzik: he was killed for telling the truth
647 2011-07-18 05:31:49 <gmaxwell> Toxic inks, cotton plants killing soil (in the case of the USD which is cotton cloth IIRC)...
648 2011-07-18 05:31:58 <xelister> wait, jgarzik is mad I noticed his usafagginess
649 2011-07-18 05:32:12 <xelister> gribble: echo jgarzik: he was killed for telling the truth
650 2011-07-18 05:32:24 <xelister> worked in PM.... this bot is no fun =)
651 2011-07-18 05:32:28 <xelister> ;;echo jgarzik: he was killed for telling the truth
652 2011-07-18 05:32:29 <gribble> jgarzik: he was killed for telling the truth
653 2011-07-18 05:32:55 <abishai> Im working on a hybrid biological-quantum processor, quark powered through an inversion engine and a flux capacitor acting as buffer, expecting to get ~600 Gigacrashes/s
654 2011-07-18 05:33:15 <Matth1a3> nice
655 2011-07-18 05:33:17 <xelister> gmaxwell: yea I can consider it... but the power-burn-race is infinie basically
656 2011-07-18 05:33:35 <xelister> abishai: use it to attack pubkey tx directly =)
657 2011-07-18 05:34:40 <abishai> but tha wouldnt be polite!
658 2011-07-18 05:34:40 <senseles> abishai: and you only need 15 BTC to complete it? you'll send me a prototype if i give you my BTC now? :p
659 2011-07-18 05:35:03 <senseles> thats not a bad idea though
660 2011-07-18 05:35:11 <senseles> i wonder if you could grow rat brain cells to process hashes
661 2011-07-18 05:35:15 <senseles> no electric at all
662 2011-07-18 05:35:23 <senseles> just feed them some brain juices
663 2011-07-18 05:35:36 <abishai> neural networks are _terrible_ at math
664 2011-07-18 05:35:42 <senseles> oh :(
665 2011-07-18 05:35:51 <abishai> just like our brains
666 2011-07-18 05:36:09 <senseles> i wonder if there are savants in the rat population
667 2011-07-18 05:36:38 <gmaxwell> senseles: well, not in normal lab rats.
668 2011-07-18 05:37:02 <senseles> (like the people who have weird brain structure where numbers are colors, or that guy that can read PI out from memory to a billion decimal points)
669 2011-07-18 05:37:05 <gmaxwell> Lab rats are genetically identical. I get spam from time to time offering to sell me ones with customized dna.
670 2011-07-18 05:37:32 <gmaxwell> (e.g. ones where certian cell types fluoresce)
671 2011-07-18 05:38:20 <senseles> could a neural network be structured in the same way as an ASIC?
672 2011-07-18 05:38:23 <senseles> couldnt*
673 2011-07-18 05:38:42 <xelister> gmaxwell: btw did you noticed how x2 I have now valid point about we-need-freenet-or-alike ?
674 2011-07-18 05:39:02 <gmaxwell> xelister: ?
675 2011-07-18 05:39:08 <gmaxwell> Who is we?
676 2011-07-18 05:39:18 <xelister> gmaxwell: namecoin is [soon will be] illegal. developers can be arrested
677 2011-07-18 05:39:28 <gmaxwell> The world? I agree, and have long agreed, that the world needs freenet.
678 2011-07-18 05:39:29 <xelister> ...so developers should hide
679 2011-07-18 05:39:39 <gmaxwell> Your claim that namecoin will be illegal is nonsense.
680 2011-07-18 05:39:47 <xelister> gmaxwell: 2) we need to avoid this stupid and stupider by day censorships shit
681 2011-07-18 05:39:51 <gmaxwell> Go look at the proposed law. It doesn't make namecoin illegal.
682 2011-07-18 05:40:15 <xelister> gmaxwell: are you sure namecoin based custom DNSes will be legal while dnssec will be illigal?
683 2011-07-18 05:40:16 <gmaxwell> Spreading hysteria just makes people with legit concerns look like nutbags.
684 2011-07-18 05:40:40 <xelister> yeah I ment more the actuall indended use of namecoins with custom DNS servers, not just the "mining and trading them"
685 2011-07-18 05:41:09 <gmaxwell> It doesn't make dnssec illegial either. Though the law may be interperted in a way that would make ISPs _break_ dnssec.
686 2011-07-18 05:41:32 <senseles> what law is this?
687 2011-07-18 05:41:51 <lfm> to the ones spreding the hysteria the legit concerns are indistinguishable from the hysteria
688 2011-07-18 05:42:07 <xelister> gmaxwell: ok. but then combined with laws that "tools to allow avoiding Secure-IP/etc are illegal"
689 2011-07-18 05:42:23 <xelister> senseles: http://politics.slashdot.org/story/11/07/18/0153204/Security-Consultants-Warn-About-PROTECT-IP-Act
690 2011-07-18 05:42:28 <gmaxwell> There isn't any law like that.
691 2011-07-18 05:42:32 <gmaxwell> See the actual text: http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-s968/text
692 2011-07-18 05:42:47 <gmaxwell> Not that it isn't a crap law which should be opposed, of course.
693 2011-07-18 05:43:00 <xelister> gmaxwell: developer in France was already in fact arrested for "writting tool that can be used to avoi [some copyright shit] - the tool was dvd backup thingy or alike"
694 2011-07-18 05:43:39 <gmaxwell> But really, "omg namecoin is illegial" is garbage and it just makes sane people tune out. Which sucks because we need their support to oppose laws like this.
695 2011-07-18 05:44:23 <xelister> gmaxwell: I am sorry but it seems this crazy "namecon will be illegal, devels will be arrested!!11"  is... TRUTH, in our fucked up world.  Again, FR developer was already arrested for writting dvd-backup. crazy world eh?
696 2011-07-18 05:44:48 <senseles> wow that sucks
697 2011-07-18 05:45:02 <xelister> I should find that article about fr developer again. Afair it was only in Fr at first.
698 2011-07-18 05:45:26 <dsockwell> xelister: you mean decss back in 1999?
699 2011-07-18 05:45:28 <xelister> btw I found about this on #freenet afair.  Also this is reason why freenet developer(s) in franch have to stop developing it
700 2011-07-18 05:45:36 <senseles> next thing you know they'll force all of the ISPs to route all port 53 requests to the ISPs name server
701 2011-07-18 05:45:37 <gmaxwell> well, france is screwey. They recently fined an org $25,000 for removing spam from wikipedia.
702 2011-07-18 05:45:39 <xelister> dsockwell: no. This is a fresh news
703 2011-07-18 05:45:48 <xelister> gmaxwell: oh yea that too
704 2011-07-18 05:45:53 <senseles> thats what they do in china, it doesnt matter waht name server you try to use the ISP will spit back invalid IP numbers
705 2011-07-18 05:46:03 <senseles> but you can still connect to the IP of one of the facebookw ebservers and see the content
706 2011-07-18 05:46:26 <senseles> really hope that doesnt pass
707 2011-07-18 05:46:35 <senseles> or, i hope it does
708 2011-07-18 05:46:40 <senseles> since i run a vpn service
709 2011-07-18 05:47:09 <lfm> the old millenium copyright law that made it illegal to try to bypass copy protection wouldnt really apply to bypassing dns censorship. It seems thats what they are worried about
710 2011-07-18 05:47:30 <xelister> senseles: perhaps it will increase people's interest in Freenet too :)  Which is ultimate solution to most such problems imo
711 2011-07-18 05:48:06 <senseles> dmca was/is a horrible law
712 2011-07-18 05:48:09 <gmaxwell> lfm: it wouldn't apply to that at all... right.
713 2011-07-18 05:48:24 <xelister> not sure if FR laws would not
714 2011-07-18 05:48:27 <xelister> although
715 2011-07-18 05:48:29 <xelister> rise hand
716 2011-07-18 05:48:33 <senseles> FR is 3 strikes and your out
717 2011-07-18 05:48:42 <xelister> who think they will not pass a law to also outlaw avoiding censorship?
718 2011-07-18 05:48:45 <xelister> :}
719 2011-07-18 05:48:46 <gmaxwell> There are some parts of the DMCA which are good and helpful. The fact that service providers get ironclad immunity has been very helpful for free speech on the internet.
720 2011-07-18 05:48:47 <senseles> which sucks because all the french people who want to torrent buy my vpn and then use a USA server like dip shits
721 2011-07-18 05:49:08 <gmaxwell> Without it ISPs would be even _more_ trigger happy about taking down content, as they'd have potentially millions in liablity.
722 2011-07-18 05:49:10 <xelister> also, avoiding censorship of anit-copyright sites is aiding anti-copyright, MAFIAA can claim
723 2011-07-18 05:49:18 <gmaxwell> Sites like youtube could never have existed in the first place without it.
724 2011-07-18 05:49:37 <senseles> at softlayer, if im offending and I dont remove the content or dispute the dmca they will down my server in 48 hours
725 2011-07-18 05:49:38 <xelister> senseles: FR have really high Freenet use too
726 2011-07-18 05:50:00 <lfm> senseles: what part sucks about you getting lots of customers from france?
727 2011-07-18 05:50:25 <senseles> #1 they're all using torrent flooding the server with 10s of thousands of 1pps connections
728 2011-07-18 05:50:38 <xelister> IT already started banning/outlawing VPNs/proxies.
729 2011-07-18 05:50:41 <senseles> #2 they use USA servers which means I've got to deal with DMCA complains and terminate them
730 2011-07-18 05:50:41 <xelister> itally
731 2011-07-18 05:50:50 <gmaxwell> senseles: right, which is how the law sets things up. Without the DMCA, as soon as someone told softlayer you were infringing they'd instantly pull you down, because they'd be liable for the infringement. DMCA fixes that.
732 2011-07-18 05:51:39 <senseles> how is it possible to make a VPN illegal?
733 2011-07-18 05:51:41 <gmaxwell> senseles: Tell softlayer that you're a service provider, get your contact information listed with the copyright office, handle the DMCA compaints yourself: pass them on to the users to have them file disputes.
734 2011-07-18 05:51:41 <senseles> thats absurd
735 2011-07-18 05:52:10 <senseles> i was considering doing that i was reading online
736 2011-07-18 05:52:12 <gmaxwell> oh I was crossing messages between senseles and xelister, obviously that means that its past bedtime. Night.
737 2011-07-18 05:52:19 <senseles> I just dont see that my volume is worthwhile to do all of that
738 2011-07-18 05:52:27 <senseles> cya
739 2011-07-18 05:52:28 <xelister> gmaxwell: night =)
740 2011-07-18 05:54:56 <senseles> i guess italy is going to have a hard time adopting ipv6
741 2011-07-18 05:55:12 <senseles> considering IPSec is fundamental in its design
742 2011-07-18 05:55:43 <gmaxwell> senseles: IPSec isn't actually fundimental in IPv6 in any meaningful way.
743 2011-07-18 05:56:16 <senseles> for point to point security?
744 2011-07-18 05:57:33 <gmaxwell> It's not actually being used by, well, anyone. No one has manged to get interoperable, interworking opportunistic IPsec working... severely limits its usage.
745 2011-07-18 05:58:17 <gmaxwell> IPSec, unfortunately, has the wrong design for securing the internet.
746 2011-07-18 05:59:11 <gmaxwell> You can't do authentication at the network layer, because the network layer knows nothing of the apropriate kind of authentication. And IPsec's design doesn't let the authentication happen anywhere else.
747 2011-07-18 05:59:46 <gmaxwell> http://tcpcrypt.org/ < has the right design,  but who knows if it will be successful.
748 2011-07-18 06:00:16 <senseles> Well thats dumb
749 2011-07-18 06:00:30 <senseles> isnt the whole point of ipv6 ipsec for network layer encryption
750 2011-07-18 06:00:36 <moa7> gmaxwell: thnx 4 the insight re: ipsec.
751 2011-07-18 06:01:04 <senseles> Why would it be in the design if it's not possible?
752 2011-07-18 06:02:25 <gmaxwell> Encryption at the network layer works great.
753 2011-07-18 06:02:45 <gmaxwell> But encryption without authentication doesn't provide security (trivally vulnerable to mitm)
754 2011-07-18 06:03:00 <senseles> oh, i see what you're saying
755 2011-07-18 06:03:13 <senseles> so without the implementation of dedicated keys it's pointless
756 2011-07-18 06:03:21 <gmaxwell> This is why IPSEC doesn't actually secure the internet generally, because in practice you end up having to preconfigure the keying material.
757 2011-07-18 06:03:28 <gmaxwell> Right.
758 2011-07-18 06:03:45 <xelister> gmaxwell: what, ipsec does not have authentication mechanisms?
759 2011-07-18 06:05:12 <senseles> it does
760 2011-07-18 06:05:15 <senseles> certificates and PSK
761 2011-07-18 06:05:21 <gmaxwell> xelister: sure it does, but they aren't generally useful because they're at the network layer, and the network layer is blind to what you need to know for authentication.
762 2011-07-18 06:05:45 <xelister> hm
763 2011-07-18 06:06:06 <senseles> i guess thats kind of what the use of quantum entangled keys is for
764 2011-07-18 06:06:15 <senseles> or would be a good use of that technology
765 2011-07-18 06:06:48 <gmaxwell> Well, what TCPcrypt does is pretty smart:  It always encrypts everything, but then just provides the hooks so that higher layers can authenticate the encrypted session.
766 2011-07-18 06:07:03 <senseles> either way i cant see how they could force everyone in italy to not use ipsec considering it is a vpn in of itself
767 2011-07-18 06:07:16 <senseles> government, businesses, schools, etc
768 2011-07-18 06:07:31 <senseles> almost every organization of any real size has some sort of vpn
769 2011-07-18 06:47:19 <prof7bit> is there a link to any credible news article or other credible source for this Italy thing? Because I don't believe it.
770 2011-07-18 06:47:44 <cuddlefish> what italy thing
771 2011-07-18 06:48:07 <prof7bit> that they are banning VPNs
772 2011-07-18 06:49:18 <cuddlefish> wut
773 2011-07-18 06:50:44 <doublec> prof7bit: I think the speculation is "....if they continue down this path they might block vpn's"
774 2011-07-18 06:50:53 <doublec> eg: http://torrentfreak.com/italy-censors-proxy-that-bypasses-btjunkie-and-pirate-bay-block-110716/
775 2011-07-18 06:51:03 <doublec> "Following this logic they will also have to censor thousands of other proxy sites and ban all VPN services"
776 2011-07-18 06:51:17 <doublec> so I don't think they are banning VPN's
777 2011-07-18 06:51:49 <prof7bit> so the problem is they are banning websites
778 2011-07-18 06:52:10 <prof7bit> the root of the problem
779 2011-07-18 06:52:32 <prof7bit> s/banning/censoring
780 2011-07-18 06:56:19 <gmaxwell> doublec: common computer dweep misunderstanding of law/politics... this idea that the law/politics must meet some level of consistency.
781 2011-07-18 06:56:38 <gmaxwell> "X is almost the same as Y, if they block one instance of X they must ban all of Y!!!!"
782 2011-07-18 06:56:46 <doublec> gmaxwell: yep :)
783 2011-07-18 06:59:06 <cuddlefish> amiller: I am disappoint.
784 2011-07-18 06:59:16 <cuddlefish> amiller: in your python-ecdsa fork
785 2011-07-18 06:59:21 <cuddlefish> you left this gem in
786 2011-07-18 07:00:00 <amiller> lol
787 2011-07-18 07:00:03 <cuddlefish> so, to see how many bytes a number takes up
788 2011-07-18 07:00:12 <cuddlefish> we: turn it into hex with string formatting
789 2011-07-18 07:00:16 <amiller> first convert to hex then count the digits
790 2011-07-18 07:00:19 <cuddlefish> yeah
791 2011-07-18 07:00:27 <amiller> well it's a performance enhancement
792 2011-07-18 07:00:27 <cuddlefish> math.ceil(math.log(order, 255))
793 2011-07-18 07:00:29 <amiller> over my usual method
794 2011-07-18 07:00:29 <upb> much easier than dealing with those damn logs
795 2011-07-18 07:00:36 <amiller> which is to make a http get to google's calculator
796 2011-07-18 07:00:42 <doublec> hehe
797 2011-07-18 07:00:44 <upb> LOL
798 2011-07-18 07:01:00 <cuddlefish> amiller: also, which curve does Bitcoin use
799 2011-07-18 07:01:04 <cuddlefish> NIST256p?
800 2011-07-18 07:02:50 <amiller> NID_secp256k1
801 2011-07-18 07:02:58 <amiller> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/key.h#L91
802 2011-07-18 07:03:12 <cuddlefish> amiller: okay, do you have that in python-ecdsa format?
803 2011-07-18 07:03:43 <amiller> nope, just the nist curves
804 2011-07-18 07:03:51 <amiller> a glaring omission huh
805 2011-07-18 07:03:59 <cuddlefish> yeah, I'll try to implement it
806 2011-07-18 07:04:06 <cuddlefish> and probably leak private keys somehow <<
807 2011-07-18 07:04:15 <amiller> lol
808 2011-07-18 07:04:32 <amiller> do you know the mega64 video that parodies river city ransom
809 2011-07-18 07:04:35 <cjdelisle> just don't use the
810 2011-07-18 07:04:42 <cjdelisle> same random number every time
811 2011-07-18 07:04:48 <amiller> where the guy whenever he comes in contact with someone goes 'uhh' and then drops a whole bunch of coins
812 2011-07-18 07:05:01 <amiller> http://www.mega64.com/rcr.htm
813 2011-07-18 07:05:10 <amiller> i think about that whenever i think about losing bitcoins
814 2011-07-18 07:05:12 <amiller> spilling keys
815 2011-07-18 07:05:16 <amiller> anyway
816 2011-07-18 07:05:26 <amiller> i haven't done anything with the python-ecdsa
817 2011-07-18 07:05:45 <amiller> brian warner hangs out in #tahoe-lafs
818 2011-07-18 07:05:57 <amiller> would probably be interested if you added to it
819 2011-07-18 07:06:12 <cuddlefish> satoshi, y u no use industry standards
820 2011-07-18 07:08:44 <MagicalTux> anyone here knows what the "Error: Transaction creation failed" error means (in sendtoaddress)
821 2011-07-18 07:09:44 <MagicalTux> (followed by two spaces)
822 2011-07-18 07:10:07 <gmaxwell> MagicalTux: after you mentioned it in #mtgox I glanced at the code, and it appears to be the error produced if a send fails for any reasons which isn't insufficient balance. Perhaps someone here can suggest whatever condition that might be.
823 2011-07-18 07:10:22 <gmaxwell> oh, followed by two spaces?
824 2011-07-18 07:10:29 <MagicalTux> when CreateTransaction() returns false
825 2011-07-18 07:10:43 <doublec> MagicalTux: I get that with namecoin when I try to send large amounts
826 2011-07-18 07:10:43 <MagicalTux> gmaxwell: strError = _("Error: Transaction creation failed  ");
827 2011-07-18 07:10:51 <doublec> MagicalTux: and it needs to pull from tons of addresses
828 2011-07-18 07:11:03 <MagicalTux> doublec: ok I see
829 2011-07-18 07:11:11 <doublec> MagicalTux: so I have to do lots of smaller transfers
830 2011-07-18 07:11:24 <MagicalTux> maybe we should do that bitcoin can merge really small transactions
831 2011-07-18 07:11:46 <cuddlefish> mega-transaction
832 2011-07-18 07:12:01 <cuddlefish> everyone gets a satoshi
833 2011-07-18 07:12:07 <gmaxwell> Yea, thats also a stupid catchall error.
834 2011-07-18 07:12:56 <MagicalTux> sending one satoshi to every known bitcoin address would cost a total of 0.015 bitcoin
835 2011-07-18 07:13:06 <MagicalTux> (~1.5 million known bitcoin address on this world)
836 2011-07-18 07:13:27 <gmaxwell> Are you trying to send zero or a negative value (looking at conditions where CreateTransaction returns false)
837 2011-07-18 07:13:35 <doublec> every now and then I 'defragment' the namecoin pool and exchange wallets to avoid the error by sending to one address and then sending back
838 2011-07-18 07:14:09 <gmaxwell> also,
839 2011-07-18 07:14:10 <gmaxwell> return false;
840 2011-07-18 07:15:12 <gmaxwell> or SelectCoins fails, or SignSignature fails. I dunno why either of those would fail.
841 2011-07-18 07:16:38 <MagicalTux> doublec: it fails with 50 BTC
842 2011-07-18 07:17:09 <doublec> MagicalTux: that does seem to be a bit small to trigger it for the reasons I was getting
843 2011-07-18 07:17:23 <MagicalTux> now fails with 20 BTC
844 2011-07-18 07:17:37 <MagicalTux> 10 BTC...
845 2011-07-18 07:17:58 <MagicalTux> oh
846 2011-07-18 07:18:02 <MagicalTux> had to send as 8 BTC
847 2011-07-18 07:18:33 <doublec> have a look a the transaction when it appears on block explorer and see if it has a large number of inputs
848 2011-07-18 07:18:36 <MagicalTux> http://www.bitcoinmonitor.com/ <- am I the only one who gets scientology ads on the bitcoin monitor ?
849 2011-07-18 07:18:46 <MagicalTux> (and bitcoin monitor which doesn't work)
850 2011-07-18 07:19:26 <MagicalTux> b96a37e480b803117304267edc756afdd8db04c1af64263dd885893021a6dd50 <- the 8 BTC tx
851 2011-07-18 07:20:03 <MagicalTux> with a 0.0275 btc fee
852 2011-07-18 07:20:17 <doublec> there's a few transactions with lots of inputs here: http://www.bitcoincharts.com/bitcoin/
853 2011-07-18 07:20:26 <cuddlefish> amiller: Oh yay
854 2011-07-18 07:20:56 <MagicalTux> doublec: probably mine
855 2011-07-18 07:23:12 <gmaxwell> hmph. not on the bitcoincharts list yet.
856 2011-07-18 07:23:46 <gmaxwell> My node has heard it
857 2011-07-18 07:23:47 <gmaxwell> got inventory from 132.177.40.98:62890 : tx b96a37e480b803117304  new
858 2011-07-18 07:24:16 <doublec> mines got it too
859 2011-07-18 07:24:35 <gmaxwell> and I'm relaying it.
860 2011-07-18 07:24:59 <gmaxwell> I wonder if bitcoincharts is still not displaying txn that don't meet the old fee rules?
861 2011-07-18 07:24:59 <MagicalTux> it'll be there eventually
862 2011-07-18 07:25:23 <MagicalTux> that transaction was generated with 0.3.24
863 2011-07-18 07:26:05 <gmaxwell> tcatm: What bitcoind is backing the bitcoincharts/bitcoin output?
864 2011-07-18 07:26:10 <gmaxwell> (version, I mean)
865 2011-07-18 07:27:41 <tcatm> gmaxwell: 0.3.21-beta
866 2011-07-18 07:27:52 <gmaxwell> ah. Then I guess so.
867 2011-07-18 07:28:04 <MagicalTux> good thing bitcoin monitor is down, people would run crazy right now
868 2011-07-18 07:28:10 <doublec> haha
869 2011-07-18 07:28:14 <gmaxwell> tcatm: because of that you're probably not showing txn which meet the newer fee rules but not the old ones.
870 2011-07-18 07:29:42 <gmaxwell> tcatm: thats bad because "look at bitcoincharts" is the #1 answer to people who are worried about where their TXN has gone. :)
871 2011-07-18 07:29:59 <MagicalTux> who's going to make the next huge block with huge amount of fees?
872 2011-07-18 07:31:22 <gmaxwell> MagicalTux: hehe. 100 BTC over and over again to your pot of gold account...
873 2011-07-18 07:31:34 <tcatm> gmaxwell: already downloading new binary. I didn't notice it was that old
874 2011-07-18 07:32:20 <MagicalTux> I wonder what's the size of that 8 btc trx
875 2011-07-18 07:32:24 <MagicalTux> and block is still not coming
876 2011-07-18 07:32:26 <gmaxwell> tcatm: sorry, I would have nagged before but I thought you'd upgraded already. :)
877 2011-07-18 07:33:19 <doublec> blocks always take ages when your watching
878 2011-07-18 07:33:31 <MagicalTux> like boiling water
879 2011-07-18 07:33:46 <gmaxwell> hm. I wish there was an RPC to output txn from the memory poool.
880 2011-07-18 07:33:47 <moa7> esp. on namecoin
881 2011-07-18 07:33:58 <doublec> gavinandresen: yes that'd be great
882 2011-07-18 07:34:08 <doublec> erm, gmaxwell, I mean
883 2011-07-18 07:34:37 <doublec> moa7: blocks on namecoin take ages anyway :)
884 2011-07-18 07:34:54 <moa7> yeah ... bad joke.
885 2011-07-18 07:35:33 <gmaxwell> I'm not sure why gettransaction is limited to your wallet in any case.
886 2011-07-18 07:40:10 <CIA-103> bitcoinjs/node-bitcoin-p2p: Stefan Thomas master * r2005bbc / lib/blockchainmanager.js : Fixed block chain download timeout. - http://bit.ly/oNFw7A https://github.com/bitcoinjs/node-bitcoin-p2p/commit/2005bbc44147699ded5003dc0fc7266406470b14
887 2011-07-18 07:40:30 <justmoon> gmaxwell, implemented - thanks for the suggestion
888 2011-07-18 07:40:47 <gmaxwell> justmoon: pull request?
889 2011-07-18 07:40:53 <gmaxwell> :)
890 2011-07-18 07:41:08 <justmoon> gmaxwell, would be a bit hard to merge, bitcoinjs is written in javascript
891 2011-07-18 07:41:29 <gmaxwell> ah! :)
892 2011-07-18 07:41:32 <justmoon> ;)
893 2011-07-18 07:41:48 <doublec> justmoon: don't you listen to bruce eckel? JavaScript is an abomination!
894 2011-07-18 07:41:57 <justmoon> doublec, who is bruce eckel?
895 2011-07-18 07:42:02 <gmaxwell> Somehow I'm not feeling the magic right now.
896 2011-07-18 07:42:15 <doublec> justmoon: I like that answer. relatively well known programming language book author.
897 2011-07-18 07:42:37 <justmoon> doublec, well I'm the author of numerous pieces of software :)
898 2011-07-18 07:42:46 <doublec> :)