1 2011-08-22 00:18:48 <coderrr> where'd gmaxwell disappear to ?
2 2011-08-22 00:22:11 <lfm> ;;seen gmaxwell
3 2011-08-22 00:22:12 <gribble> gmaxwell was last seen in #bitcoin-dev 1 week, 6 days, 7 hours, 9 minutes, and 2 seconds ago: <gmaxwell> quick, split the chain.
4 2011-08-22 00:23:04 <lfm> gone to the great bitbucket in the sky?
5 2011-08-22 01:06:05 <coderrr> lfm, did he get pwned for that doc release or something ?
6 2011-08-22 01:06:33 <jrmithdobbs> nah he's around
7 2011-08-22 01:06:36 <jrmithdobbs> just not in here
8 2011-08-22 01:06:42 <coderrr> ah cool
9 2011-08-22 01:06:49 <jrmithdobbs> 22:06 -!- idle : 0 days 4 hours 2 mins 38 secs [signon: Tue Aug 9 21:40:58 2011]
10 2011-08-22 01:43:43 <lfm> do we need to accept more than say 64 bits of extranonce?
11 2011-08-22 01:59:51 <asher^> has anyone noticed a big difference in cpu use when generating getwork between .23 and .24?
12 2011-08-22 03:07:16 <lfm> asher^ I havn't
13 2011-08-22 03:08:16 <asher^> hmm more testing needed
14 2011-08-22 03:38:02 <Rabbit67890> net split!!!!
15 2011-08-22 03:40:38 <asher^^> hmm, done some more tests with .23 vs .24 (both patched with 4diff) the .24 build uses much more cpu (30% vs 8%) and performs much worse (2.47 TH/s simulated vs 3.15 from 10 clients)
16 2011-08-22 03:40:52 <asher^^> i wonder if its some issue with the patches over the different versions, or something else
17 2011-08-22 03:43:43 <asher^> were there any changes in .24 that could account for this? or should i assume the patches are affecting it
18 2011-08-22 03:45:26 <Plasma-> I dont know much about the client, but I thought the mining stuff was deprecated
19 2011-08-22 03:45:36 <Plasma-> since CPU mining in the basic client was not very useful anymore?
20 2011-08-22 03:45:44 <Plasma-> (since it only did CPU)
21 2011-08-22 03:46:03 <nanotube> i think he's talking about getworks
22 2011-08-22 03:46:11 <asher^> yes getworks themselves
23 2011-08-22 03:46:45 <asher^> when i point 10 test units at bitcoind via pushpool i get much poorer performance on .24 than .23 (both with the same patches applied)
24 2011-08-22 03:46:53 <Matth1a3> plasma: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/466
25 2011-08-22 03:47:24 <asher^> maybe i need to build an unpatched .24 and see how it does :-|
26 2011-08-22 03:50:51 <Guest73327> hi, I would like to discuss an issue I resolved a couple hours ago
27 2011-08-22 03:51:38 <asher^> anyone know what boost/foreach.hpp (in net.h) does? it seems to be new in .24
28 2011-08-22 03:52:24 <Guest73327> the original problem was that the bitcoin client, for currently unknown reasons, decided to display twice the amount of bitcoins available. some tests were made, which confirmed that there was an error.
29 2011-08-22 03:54:34 <Guest73327> the problem that I recently resolved pertained to a transaction failure, caused what I hoped to be a result of insufficient funds (despite the balance the client displayed). however, after fixing the problem, it turned out that I more than enough money to complete the transaction (thus, I redid my transaction).
30 2011-08-22 03:55:16 <Guest73327> what information is needed to identify the cause of this glitch? I'm running the latest version of bitcoin.
31 2011-08-22 03:55:51 <nanotube> did you do anything unusual prior to the double-balance display occurrence?
32 2011-08-22 03:56:01 <nanotube> or were you just running the client and not doing anything like moving wallets around, etc ?
33 2011-08-22 03:56:53 <Guest73327> I did move my wallet between different OSes (as my main OS was broken), but this issue came up notably after the OS was recovered.
34 2011-08-22 03:56:59 <Guest73327> *as I recall
35 2011-08-22 03:58:06 <nanotube> hm well, stick around and see if anyone has any ideas. i'm going to sleep :) but the fact that you were "doing things" and moving wallet around suggests that maybe you did "something weird"
36 2011-08-22 03:59:54 <Guest73327> it's possible that something may have happened while moving the wallet around, but it seems to me that more damaged should have occurred if that was the case (not to mention that the issue might have occurred well after the OS was recovered and bitcoin was running).
37 2011-08-22 03:59:59 <Guest73327> *Goodnight.
38 2011-08-22 05:46:54 <asher^> anyone familiar with joelkatz's patches for bitcoin? (4diff)
39 2011-08-22 05:54:43 <shadders> anybody ever written a protobufs code generator plugin?
40 2011-08-22 05:55:30 <asher^> shadders mind if i pm you?
41 2011-08-22 05:55:50 <shadders> sure...
42 2011-08-22 05:56:43 <Guest73327> I'll be gone for a bit, and I'll read if anyone has any ideas when I get back.
43 2011-08-22 12:11:50 <spa> hi
44 2011-08-22 12:12:03 <spa> hi
45 2011-08-22 12:12:44 <spa> jk
46 2011-08-22 12:13:06 <lianj> spa: this is not how irc works. ask a question
47 2011-08-22 12:13:27 <spa> sorry...my child was pressign keys
48 2011-08-22 12:20:15 <Vladimir> bitcoin.org.uk daily roll:
49 2011-08-22 12:20:44 <gribble> Error: Dice can't have more than 100 sides.
50 2011-08-22 12:20:44 <Vladimir> ;;dice 1d108
51 2011-08-22 12:20:52 <gribble> 72
52 2011-08-22 12:20:52 <Vladimir> ;;dice 1d100
53 2011-08-22 12:21:20 <Vladimir> OzBitcoin
54 2011-08-22 12:48:15 <hochron> can I get the src for the bot in #bitcoin-market?
55 2011-08-22 12:49:41 <tcatm> hochron: telnet bitcoincharts.com 27007
56 2011-08-22 12:50:45 <hochron> ty
57 2011-08-22 13:00:48 <UukGoblin> tcatm, that's awesome! what's the T&Cs? can I use it for my stuff?
58 2011-08-22 13:00:58 <UukGoblin> so much less lag than amphipod :-]
59 2011-08-22 13:04:51 <luke-jr> UukGoblin: T&C have no legal binding if you don't explicitly agree to them. ;p
60 2011-08-22 13:05:09 <UukGoblin> true ;-]
61 2011-08-22 13:05:11 <luke-jr> therefore, since you can just connect, there are none (beyond the obvious stuff covered by laws)
62 2011-08-22 13:06:17 <tcatm> UukGoblin: the format might change, it might output invalid data (shouldn't happen that often anymore) and it might go down from time to time. I'm currently working on a realtime stream backend that will replace it soon (only important change will be that the client needs to do json handshaking).
63 2011-08-22 13:06:46 <UukGoblin> nice :-)
64 2011-08-22 13:06:58 <UukGoblin> that's good enough of course
65 2011-08-22 13:10:46 <ThomasV> are there people developing an implementation of a bitcoin wallet on a smart card ? I remember reading something about that but I can't find where
66 2011-08-22 13:34:16 <nanotube> ThomasV: if you find it, let me know. i'd be very curious. two-factor auth for wallets has been a hot topic at the conference.
67 2011-08-22 13:35:18 <ThomasV> nanotube: if I had time, I would do it myself. it should not be too difficult
68 2011-08-22 13:35:55 <ThomasV> and I would love to have such a solution
69 2011-08-22 13:40:22 <RandomMinds> nanotube: nice to have met you at the convention yesterday. I hadn't told you my handle, but I was the guy with the darker full beard
70 2011-08-22 13:40:30 <RandomMinds> I finally registered here
71 2011-08-22 13:41:32 <RandomMinds> I will be emailing gavin today... very excited to maybe start working on the testing suite
72 2011-08-22 13:41:51 <upb> That reminds me - one of the pool owners has been embedding religious messages in the blockchain recently (Catholic ones by the looks of it). Same guy that created Tonal Bitcoin.
73 2011-08-22 13:41:56 <upb> lol is this true luke-jr ?
74 2011-08-22 13:43:22 <luke-jr> upb: is that a quote?
75 2011-08-22 13:44:14 <upb> yes
76 2011-08-22 13:44:23 <luke-jr> link?
77 2011-08-22 13:44:35 <upb> http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3413928&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=424
78 2011-08-22 13:44:40 <upb> but is it true?:P
79 2011-08-22 13:44:47 <nanotube> RandomMinds: hey hey! :)
80 2011-08-22 13:45:06 <luke-jr> sure; namecoin people couldn't get their part of merged mining usable, so I'm testing the bitcoin end with prayers ;)
81 2011-08-22 13:45:33 <luke-jr> just the ordinary coinbase which Satoshi designed for political propaganda, not the txn spam some idiots are using to permanently pollute the block chain, mind you
82 2011-08-22 13:45:34 <lookdang> lol
83 2011-08-22 13:48:58 <ThomasV> upb: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=38674.0
84 2011-08-22 13:49:13 <ThomasV> I do not know why it was deleted
85 2011-08-22 13:49:15 <upb> loooool
86 2011-08-22 13:49:31 <ThomasV> luke-jr: was it true?
87 2011-08-22 13:49:34 <upb> why catholic ones tho
88 2011-08-22 13:49:41 <upb> do the quran
89 2011-08-22 13:50:11 <luke-jr> ThomasV: the original thread, not really. it was full of FUD and trolling
90 2011-08-22 13:50:38 <ThomasV> luke-jr: is it true that you included prayers ?
91 2011-08-22 13:50:51 <luke-jr> ThomasV: I already answered that recently. Read backscroll.
92 2011-08-22 13:51:03 <luke-jr> kinda wish I had saved my final response to the troll thread
93 2011-08-22 13:51:07 <upb> damn would love to read that thread :D
94 2011-08-22 13:51:24 <upb> seems not to be on google cache
95 2011-08-22 13:51:49 <ThomasV> no, you said " I'm testing the bitcoin end with prayers" ; this is not really an answer to my question, because "testing" could man anything
96 2011-08-22 13:51:55 <ThomasV> s/man/mean
97 2011-08-22 13:52:38 <ThomasV> luke-jr: I am asking because I really would like to know what is going on here
98 2011-08-22 13:53:02 <gavinandresen> uh, oh, I feel a religious argument coming on....
99 2011-08-22 13:53:02 <luke-jr> ThomasV: merged mining involves embedding specific data in the coinbase of a bitcoin block
100 2011-08-22 13:53:11 <upb> ahahhaha
101 2011-08-22 13:53:15 <ThomasV> gavinandresen: not really
102 2011-08-22 13:53:26 <upb> There is no god but One God
103 2011-08-22 13:53:32 <luke-jr> ThomasV: the namecoin side producing said data doesn't work right yet, so I've been using prayers in its place :
104 2011-08-22 13:53:33 <upb> allahu akbar
105 2011-08-22 13:53:47 <ThomasV> I just want to know why this thread has been deleted
106 2011-08-22 13:54:21 <UukGoblin> I wonder if reduced randomness hurts crypto in any way...
107 2011-08-22 13:54:38 <upb> im not familiar with the merge mining rotocol really, but does it make the blockchain bigger?
108 2011-08-22 13:54:46 <UukGoblin> but that'd be pretty... severe if it did, I guess
109 2011-08-22 13:54:47 <upb> or is only a hash of a tree root included
110 2011-08-22 13:55:03 <ThomasV> is it because the thread contained something false ? (in which case 90% of threads should be deleted), or because someone considered that it would hurt bitcoin if this information is more widely available (conspiracy theories!!)
111 2011-08-22 13:55:25 <luke-jr> ThomasV: presumably because it was FUD+trolling
112 2011-08-22 13:55:34 <gavinandresen> upb: see https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Alternative_Chains
113 2011-08-22 13:55:57 <luke-jr> upb: none of this makes the blockchain any significantly bigger than it would otherwise be
114 2011-08-22 13:55:58 <upb> thx
115 2011-08-22 13:56:18 <luke-jr> upb: strictly speaking, the coinbases can be purged from block chains immediately
116 2011-08-22 13:56:25 <ThomasV> luke-jr: there's fud+trolling everywhere ; this censorship can only reinforce conspiracy theories
117 2011-08-22 13:56:48 <upb> hmmm
118 2011-08-22 13:56:56 <luke-jr> ThomasV: honestly, I've never had a big problem with the forums censoring trolling.
119 2011-08-22 13:56:58 <D0han> where can i see these emedded prayers?
120 2011-08-22 13:57:08 <luke-jr> D0han: strings ~/.bitcoin/blk0001.dat -n20
121 2011-08-22 13:57:31 <luke-jr> -n21 omits some of the transaction spam
122 2011-08-22 13:58:30 <JFK911> piece of shit wont get blocks
123 2011-08-22 13:58:53 <JFK911> going to downgrade back to 0.3.21 if it doesnt start working
124 2011-08-22 13:59:09 <upb> ok i see how it works
125 2011-08-22 13:59:50 <ThomasV> luke-jr: one could reasonably argue that they are not censoring trolling, but covering your ass
126 2011-08-22 14:00:03 <upb> so the haram prayers are only included in the alternative chain not the bitcoin blocks
127 2011-08-22 14:00:07 <luke-jr> ThomasV: not really
128 2011-08-22 14:00:15 <upb> which makes it safe to use insallah
129 2011-08-22 14:01:03 <upb> is this true?
130 2011-08-22 14:02:29 <upb> if instead of the hashes there are catholic prayers, a lot of people cannot use bitcoin anymore
131 2011-08-22 14:03:01 <luke-jr> nonsense
132 2011-08-22 14:03:03 <D0han> lol? why?
133 2011-08-22 14:03:22 <asher^> not compatible with muslim OS?
134 2011-08-22 14:03:47 <upb> yes
135 2011-08-22 14:04:11 <luke-jr> asher^: actually, muslims generally tolerate Christians so long as they aren't ex-Muslims
136 2011-08-22 14:04:24 <UukGoblin> hmm a bit unrelated question..: if a guy creates a private ssh key and makes it public on a website, asking people to connect to his server via ssh using said private key... does ssh encryption have any value then?
137 2011-08-22 14:04:29 <asher^> i was being facetious
138 2011-08-22 14:04:32 <D0han> luke-jr should include smth like 'hi mom!' ;D
139 2011-08-22 14:05:00 <UukGoblin> I mean, can a user decrypt ssh traffic if he has the client private key?
140 2011-08-22 14:05:08 <luke-jr> D0han: think of something more interesting and maybe :P
141 2011-08-22 14:05:12 <upb> no he cant UukGoblin
142 2011-08-22 14:05:21 <luke-jr> UukGoblin: client pkey, or user pkey?
143 2011-08-22 14:05:23 <upb> that key is only for authentication of the user
144 2011-08-22 14:05:35 <UukGoblin> luke-jr, the key that goes after ssh -i
145 2011-08-22 14:05:36 <D0han> luke-jr: you can greet all of us there ;P
146 2011-08-22 14:05:42 <luke-jr> UukGoblin: that's only used to authenticate
147 2011-08-22 14:05:53 <luke-jr> D0han: hmm& :>
148 2011-08-22 14:05:53 <UukGoblin> ah, ok
149 2011-08-22 14:06:27 <D0han> it would be nice to find 'D0han' after strings ~/.bitcoin/blk0001.dat
150 2011-08-22 14:06:28 <D0han> ;)
151 2011-08-22 14:06:29 <luke-jr> got about 80 chars& who gets in?
152 2011-08-22 14:06:48 <luke-jr> D0han: your /me is broken, try again
153 2011-08-22 14:06:54 <upb> to balance out the other prayers this should be included:
154 2011-08-22 14:07:01 <luke-jr> upb: no.
155 2011-08-22 14:07:02 <D0han> ;p
156 2011-08-22 14:07:19 <D0han> luke-jr: it was intended empyt /me
157 2011-08-22 14:07:28 <upb> '4G/ 'F D' 'DG 'D' 'DDG
158 2011-08-22 14:07:29 <luke-jr> D0han: apparently my client doesn't liek that
159 2011-08-22 14:09:35 <nanotube> luke-jr: go in order by forum/nickserv/otc registration age :P
160 2011-08-22 14:09:53 <luke-jr> too much work. make me a list :P
161 2011-08-22 14:10:03 <luke-jr> "Greets to Gavin, jgarzik, nanotube, &"?
162 2011-08-22 14:10:13 <ThomasV> ok, I added some bits to the forum thread
163 2011-08-22 14:10:56 <D0han> Greets to Gavin, jgarzik, nanotube, D0han by luke-jr
164 2011-08-22 14:10:57 <D0han> :>
165 2011-08-22 14:11:15 <upb> i dont see if the messages are in the same place as the extranonce etc - that they could be 'pruned' somehow
166 2011-08-22 14:11:18 <luke-jr> ThomasV: maybe it was the irony of it. censoring the forum thread calling for censoring of coinbases :P
167 2011-08-22 14:11:21 <upb> they are there for ever
168 2011-08-22 14:11:41 <luke-jr> upb: coinbases have no value beyond the initial verification
169 2011-08-22 14:11:51 <ThomasV> the thread was calling for censoring ?
170 2011-08-22 14:12:16 <luke-jr> ThomasV: more or less
171 2011-08-22 14:12:18 <upb> ahhhh true
172 2011-08-22 14:12:25 <upb> it is the coinbase transaction
173 2011-08-22 14:12:50 <ThomasV> IMO, deletion is intended to hide this whole story
174 2011-08-22 14:13:04 <upb> yep so the shahada must be also put there
175 2011-08-22 14:13:06 <luke-jr> ThomasV: that'd be fine if people didn't remember it
176 2011-08-22 14:13:10 <luke-jr> there is no story, really
177 2011-08-22 14:13:19 <ThomasV> let the streisand effect be with us!!!
178 2011-08-22 14:13:21 <luke-jr> it's just one pool op trying to spread FUD against a competing pool
179 2011-08-22 14:13:33 <asher^> all pool owners should write one sentence of a fictional story. each pool owner gets to write the next part of the story :)
180 2011-08-22 14:13:42 <asher^> at least it will be something creative then :p
181 2011-08-22 14:13:43 <luke-jr> asher^: that'd be pretty fun
182 2011-08-22 14:13:55 <asher^> ya
183 2011-08-22 14:14:15 <ThomasV> luke-jr: I do not think so. I think that your including prayers in the blockchain is absolutely miserable
184 2011-08-22 14:14:42 <makomk> upb: the prayers are embedded in the bitcoin block chain. Permanentlu.
185 2011-08-22 14:14:46 <luke-jr> ThomasV: none of your business what I do.
186 2011-08-22 14:14:49 <luke-jr> makomk: no
187 2011-08-22 14:15:01 <upb> unless the client is made tu prune transatctions
188 2011-08-22 14:15:06 <ThomasV> luke-jr: perhaps ; but people have the right to know
189 2011-08-22 14:15:06 <upb> -t
190 2011-08-22 14:15:15 <makomk> upb: you can only prune whole transactions, not parts of transactions.
191 2011-08-22 14:15:20 <upb> yes
192 2011-08-22 14:15:27 <upb> i am so upset that typos are coming
193 2011-08-22 14:15:34 <upb> must consult the imam
194 2011-08-22 14:15:35 <luke-jr> ThomasV: they do know. long before the thread.
195 2011-08-22 14:15:37 <makomk> Even then, anyone that wants to know that the pools aren't screwing them over needs to have a copy of the prayers.
196 2011-08-22 14:15:47 <luke-jr> ThomasV: the problem is the spin trying to make it out to be a bad thing
197 2011-08-22 14:15:59 <ThomasV> luke-jr: I, for one, did not know before the thread
198 2011-08-22 14:16:05 <luke-jr> makomk: no, you can prune parts of txns
199 2011-08-22 14:16:16 <ThomasV> luke-jr: but it IS a bad thing
200 2011-08-22 14:16:19 <luke-jr> ThomasV: no, it isn't.
201 2011-08-22 14:16:34 <makomk> luke-jr: if memory serves me correctly, transactions are identified by their hash.
202 2011-08-22 14:16:34 <ThomasV> it is a terribly bad thing and you are too fucking arrogant to realize
203 2011-08-22 14:16:40 <luke-jr> if Satoshi can put political propaganda in, I can put positive religious prayer in. :P
204 2011-08-22 14:16:47 <luke-jr> makomk: so save the txn hash
205 2011-08-22 14:17:11 <asher^> who gives a shit? who even reads the block headers?
206 2011-08-22 14:17:13 <ThomasV> yes, but pool users should know about it
207 2011-08-22 14:17:14 <makomk> luke-jr: except that the only way of verifying that the hash matches the transaction is to have an unpruned copy.
208 2011-08-22 14:17:20 <nanotube> luke-jr: heh i was just jokingly suggesting an algorithm since you were looking for one. that said, otc registration age is easy - just sort the gpg reg table by id. :)
209 2011-08-22 14:17:26 <luke-jr> ThomasV: why? they're not involved.
210 2011-08-22 14:17:47 <ThomasV> they give you the power to do that
211 2011-08-22 14:17:50 <luke-jr> makomk: that applies for whole transactions too. you verify and then discard the excess
212 2011-08-22 14:17:53 <upb> it might've been a random article of that day
213 2011-08-22 14:17:58 <upb> not political propaganda
214 2011-08-22 14:18:06 <asher^> its like saying a business should inform all of its customers if the owner donates to a church
215 2011-08-22 14:18:09 <asher^> its garbage
216 2011-08-22 14:18:11 <luke-jr> ^
217 2011-08-22 14:18:11 <upb> but those false religion prayers serve no other purpose
218 2011-08-22 14:18:28 <imsaguy2> its slightly different asher
219 2011-08-22 14:18:42 <imsaguy2> its like a business should inform all of its employees if the owner donates to a church
220 2011-08-22 14:18:54 <asher^> imsaguy yeah, because donations to a church will have an effect, text in a block header that noone reads wont
221 2011-08-22 14:18:57 <ThomasV> no, it's not a donation
222 2011-08-22 14:19:18 <ThomasV> it's a message that is copied onto everybody's hard disk
223 2011-08-22 14:19:27 <asher^> why does this upset you guys?
224 2011-08-22 14:19:29 <imsaguy2> so is the child porn
225 2011-08-22 14:19:41 <giulio_> hi
226 2011-08-22 14:19:43 <upb> its like a business should inform its employees/customers that all the documents of the business have watermarked prayers in them
227 2011-08-22 14:19:47 <giulio_> i have a problem running bitcoind
228 2011-08-22 14:20:04 <giulio_> it doesn't start EXCEPTION: N5boost16exception_detail10clone_implINS0_19error_info_injectorINS_6system12system_errorEEEEE
229 2011-08-22 14:20:07 <giulio_> Address already in use
230 2011-08-22 14:20:10 <giulio_> bitcoin in ThreadRPCServer()
231 2011-08-22 14:20:16 <ThomasV> what upsets me is censorship from forum admins
232 2011-08-22 14:20:21 <luke-jr> ThomasV: prayers are at least as good as the other random data being copied otherwise
233 2011-08-22 14:20:22 <giulio_> i have already tried to dele all /root/.bitcoin folder but nothing changed
234 2011-08-22 14:20:33 <makomk> ThomasV: welcome to the Bitcoin forums.
235 2011-08-22 14:20:34 <upb> false prayers are not
236 2011-08-22 14:20:46 <upb> they are worse than random data
237 2011-08-22 14:20:48 <luke-jr> upb: they're not false, so np
238 2011-08-22 14:20:59 <upb> that depends o nthe point of view
239 2011-08-22 14:21:02 <luke-jr> no, it doesn't.
240 2011-08-22 14:21:04 <makomk> ThomasV: if you want to be able to refer to threads, keep a copy.
241 2011-08-22 14:21:06 <cjdelisle> hehe still on this
242 2011-08-22 14:21:14 <luke-jr> btw, does anyone have a copy?
243 2011-08-22 14:21:39 <cjdelisle> FWIW I think the prayers are funny because they make athiests mad :)
244 2011-08-22 14:22:01 <upb> correcting this situation is possible by making two things 1) put te shahada there 2) put the censored forum thread there
245 2011-08-22 14:22:05 <asher^> the amount of exposure these prayers have got by people biching about them is orders of magntude more than the exposure they got by just being there
246 2011-08-22 14:22:08 <imsaguy2> I just don't like any of that unnecessary stuff being included, prayers or otherwise
247 2011-08-22 14:22:10 <cjdelisle> Everyone could use a little broadening of their horizons
248 2011-08-22 14:22:36 <asher^> cjdelisle im atheist and they didnt make me mad
249 2011-08-22 14:22:48 <luke-jr> imsaguy2: "unnecessary" stuff is included by design of the block chain
250 2011-08-22 14:24:01 <makomk> cjdelisle: mostly it siou.
251 2011-08-22 14:24:17 <makomk> seems to have potential to annoy the religious, even.
252 2011-08-22 14:24:26 <asher^> sorry to change the topic to something related... but have any of you guys benchmarked .23 and .24 for getwork requests and found the older version a better performer?
253 2011-08-22 14:24:33 <cjdelisle> re spam transactions, I'm waiting for imortalizatweet.com - 140 characters, in the bitcoin blockchain, forever.
254 2011-08-22 14:24:39 <imsaguy2> asher^, you aren't the first to say that
255 2011-08-22 14:24:43 <luke-jr> asher^: I use .23 currently
256 2011-08-22 14:24:44 <imsaguy2> but I've not tested myself
257 2011-08-22 14:24:45 <ThomasV> I am an atheist, but I will welcome the first muslim prayer that makes it into the blockchain
258 2011-08-22 14:25:00 <asher^> i get a 6% better rate from .23
259 2011-08-22 14:25:02 <luke-jr> ThomasV: even if it's txn spam?
260 2011-08-22 14:25:05 <asher^> both using 4diff patches btw
261 2011-08-22 14:25:18 <ThomasV> luke-jr: coinbase
262 2011-08-22 14:25:30 <asher^> luke-jr is that because of this reason? or some other reason?
263 2011-08-22 14:25:51 <luke-jr> asher^: simply because I felt .24 was not yet tested enough
264 2011-08-22 14:25:59 <asher^> ok
265 2011-08-22 14:26:04 <cjdelisle> hmm TomCruseIsInTheCloset takes up exactly 22 characters...
266 2011-08-22 14:26:36 <asher^> luke is your code for inserting messages into the headers published anywhere btw?
267 2011-08-22 14:26:36 <imsaguy2> then add PoorKatieHolmesforhavingtocoverforhim
268 2011-08-22 14:26:48 <luke-jr> asher^: not presently.
269 2011-08-22 14:27:00 <asher^> ok
270 2011-08-22 14:27:26 <ThomasV> O God, have mercy on me, a sinner.
271 2011-08-22 14:27:53 <imsaguy2> thanks for polluting the irc log ThomasV
272 2011-08-22 14:27:58 <imsaguy2> ;)
273 2011-08-22 14:28:00 <luke-jr> lol
274 2011-08-22 14:28:10 <ThomasV> O God, have mercy on me, a sinner.
275 2011-08-22 14:28:11 <ThomasV> O God, have mercy on me, a sinner.
276 2011-08-22 14:28:20 <imsaguy2> I don't care, it was a joke.
277 2011-08-22 14:28:29 <luke-jr> /ignore
278 2011-08-22 14:28:31 <ThomasV> malkovich
279 2011-08-22 14:28:36 <asher^> dont you know thats stored on people hard drives?!
280 2011-08-22 14:28:51 <imsaguy2> and available via google.com
281 2011-08-22 14:29:01 <ThomasV> yes
282 2011-08-22 14:29:23 <luke-jr> Microsoft should be required to tell all its employees about every easter egg in their software
283 2011-08-22 14:29:24 <luke-jr> :p
284 2011-08-22 14:29:38 <luke-jr> that's the best analogy IMO
285 2011-08-22 14:29:56 <cjdelisle> Actually at Microsoft, easter egg = fired.
286 2011-08-22 14:30:15 <imsaguy2> They've removed all the known easter eggs
287 2011-08-22 14:30:15 <luke-jr> cjdelisle: so every one of the many easter eggs has resulted in someone being fired?
288 2011-08-22 14:30:25 <imsaguy2> no, the culture has changed
289 2011-08-22 14:30:34 <imsaguy2> they're no longer acceptable
290 2011-08-22 14:30:41 <cjdelisle> "No undocumented features" because they sell software to governments.
291 2011-08-22 14:30:56 <luke-jr> lame
292 2011-08-22 14:31:06 <luke-jr> easter eggs were probably the best thing about MS crap
293 2011-08-22 14:31:07 <cjdelisle> So *everything* has some kind of (usually horrable and vague) documentation.
294 2011-08-22 14:31:08 <luke-jr> :p
295 2011-08-22 14:31:53 <cjdelisle> /** When you call this function some stuff happens. */
296 2011-08-22 14:38:12 <ThomasV> yay!!! theymos restored the thread :-)
297 2011-08-22 14:38:17 <luke-jr> link?
298 2011-08-22 14:38:43 <ThomasV> same as before
299 2011-08-22 14:39:28 <ThomasV> hmm, "Catholics do not believe in freedom of religion"
300 2011-08-22 14:40:06 <D0han> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=38007
301 2011-08-22 14:41:25 <ThomasV> hmm, "Why are there still no ASCII penises in the block chain?!"
302 2011-08-22 14:42:54 <gavinandresen> I hope the 'graffiti in the block chain' meme dies fairly quickly.
303 2011-08-22 14:43:35 <ThomasV> I'm afraid it's here to stay
304 2011-08-22 14:44:00 <b4epoche> gavinandresen: I have to give a TEDxPSU talk on bitcoin in a couple months. Can I use material from your CIA talk?
305 2011-08-22 14:44:20 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: how was the conference?
306 2011-08-22 14:46:22 <gavinandresen> b4epoche: yes, feel free to use whatever you like. I tried to be careful about putting image credits on my slides.
307 2011-08-22 14:46:49 <gavinandresen> luke-jr: conference was fantastic; exceeded my expectations
308 2011-08-22 14:47:18 <luke-jr> I was considering going, but didn't quite realize it was so soon
309 2011-08-22 14:48:03 <ThomasV> gavinandresen: are there some ongoing efforts to implement a wallet on a smart card ?
310 2011-08-22 14:48:19 <luke-jr> ThomasV: I'm pretty sure yes
311 2011-08-22 14:48:22 <gavinandresen> ThomasV: I don't know. Probably.
312 2011-08-22 14:48:41 <luke-jr> at least one person commenting on the Wallet Protocol page seems to be at least interested in doing t
313 2011-08-22 14:48:42 <luke-jr> it*
314 2011-08-22 14:48:50 <gavinandresen> ThomasV: ... just storing keying material on the card doesn't solve enough of the security problem to be worth it, in my opinion.
315 2011-08-22 14:48:55 <ThomasV> I would love to get in touch with whoever is doing it
316 2011-08-22 14:49:36 <mabus> what if somebody included cp in the blockchain?
317 2011-08-22 14:49:56 <ThomasV> gavinandresen: I am not talking about using someone else's device to read it
318 2011-08-22 14:51:58 <gavinandresen> mabus: there are a couple forums threads about that, it has been discussed to death in my opinion
319 2011-08-22 14:54:06 <nanotube> gavinandresen: well, a hw device that stores the private keys, and the user verification and signing actually happens on the device, would solve the trojan/keylogger problems. it would also do very well in combination with the multikey stuff. but even without, it'd go a long way.
320 2011-08-22 14:54:23 <ThomasV> what I would like to see is a deterministic wallet implemented on a smart card, and protected by pin code. to use it, I would plug a card reader on my computer, or I could use it in a smart phone, if the phone can hold 2 cards
321 2011-08-22 14:54:38 <gavinandresen> nanotube: yes, if the device can do display/txn confirmation that'd be way cool.
322 2011-08-22 14:54:51 <b4epoche> gavinandresen: thanks
323 2011-08-22 14:54:52 <ThomasV> deterministic means that you could lose the card without losing the money
324 2011-08-22 14:55:36 <luke-jr> except the cost of the device itself :P
325 2011-08-22 14:55:41 <ThomasV> nanotube: yes, smart cards are designed to protect against keyloggers and trojans
326 2011-08-22 14:55:50 <nanotube> gavinandresen: that's the only way to do it. otherwise you're still open to attacks on the data stream between computer and device.
327 2011-08-22 14:55:52 <ThomasV> luke-jr: it is cheap
328 2011-08-22 14:55:56 <luke-jr> it *does* need to display the amount you're sending though
329 2011-08-22 14:56:04 <luke-jr> which means some kind of LCD screen
330 2011-08-22 14:56:12 <ThomasV> no, your application would do that
331 2011-08-22 14:56:14 <nanotube> ThomasV: see above. data stream can be modified before it gets to the card.
332 2011-08-22 14:56:24 <luke-jr> ThomasV: so I display 1 BTC, and request the device send 100
333 2011-08-22 14:56:41 <nanotube> well, lcd screens are cheap these days :P
334 2011-08-22 14:56:48 <ThomasV> sure, but at some point you have to trust something
335 2011-08-22 14:57:03 <luke-jr> ThomasV: that's why my device would show the amount ;)
336 2011-08-22 14:57:03 <nanotube> ThomasV: why? if you do verification on device, you don't have to trust your computer.
337 2011-08-22 14:57:11 <luke-jr> trust only your own hardware
338 2011-08-22 14:57:21 <nanotube> if the goal is to be safe even on a compromised computer... you gotta go all the way.
339 2011-08-22 14:57:28 <gavinandresen> ... amount and last-four-digits of bitcoin address would work.
340 2011-08-22 14:57:47 <nanotube> gavinandresen: addresses are short enough that you can display all of it.
341 2011-08-22 14:57:54 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: that'd be useless
342 2011-08-22 14:57:56 <nanotube> even if you have to scroll right-left to see it all,
343 2011-08-22 14:58:01 <ThomasV> nanotube: but then why would you trust the smart card? it could be compromised too, whey you bought it
344 2011-08-22 14:58:09 <luke-jr> if the address were compromised, it only takes a few seconds to come up with an address using the same last-4
345 2011-08-22 14:58:22 <cjdelisle> Yea, the device needs a screen and approve/reject buttons. If you're going to do that then you might aswell add a qr code reader so you don't need to fool around with vulnerable protocols like bluetooth
346 2011-08-22 14:58:24 <ThomasV> the software flasing eprom could be compromised
347 2011-08-22 14:58:41 <nanotube> ThomasV: you gotta think about what attack vector you're protecting against. if the vector is "compromised compmuter", which is what i assume we're all talking about
348 2011-08-22 14:58:53 <nanotube> then your card needs to display info for confirmation.
349 2011-08-22 14:59:08 <nanotube> of course if you trust neither computer nor card, then you're not going to solve this with a card. :)
350 2011-08-22 14:59:19 <ThomasV> :-)
351 2011-08-22 14:59:42 <cjdelisle> it would be nice to have a handheld device with a card slot so you can pull the card out and store it in a safe place.
352 2011-08-22 14:59:57 <gavinandresen> luke-jr: right you are. Ok, last n-digits, where n is large enough that you'd notice if it was taking a long time....
353 2011-08-22 15:00:28 <nanotube> yea, but if you have the ability to display the whole thing... why bother restricting to n digits?
354 2011-08-22 15:00:45 <nanotube> if your screen can display n digits, it can also display the whole thing n digits at a time
355 2011-08-22 15:01:11 <makomk> Hmmmm. That's a thought... in theory I could implement a simple wallet on smart card.
356 2011-08-22 15:01:39 <gavinandresen> nanotube: usability testing might show that users are less likely to check if there are 37 characters rather than 5 or 6.
357 2011-08-22 15:02:21 <b4epoche> it could be like confirmations& show user first 6
358 2011-08-22 15:02:33 <nanotube> have a 'pro mode' which scrolls for you to see the whole address, and a 'dumb user mode' that doesn't scroll and only shows last n. i could live with that. :)
359 2011-08-22 15:02:34 <b4epoche> if they want to check further show next 6
360 2011-08-22 15:03:10 <luke-jr> better than displaying the address in base58 would be a graph like OpenSSH does lately
361 2011-08-22 15:03:13 <gavinandresen> (usability testing would also work out whether first 6 or last 6 or first and last 3 is easiest/best....)
362 2011-08-22 15:03:41 <gavinandresen> (or ascii art or.... there MUST already be research on all this, right?)
363 2011-08-22 15:03:50 <nanotube> there probably is. :)
364 2011-08-22 15:03:56 <b4epoche> those openssh graphs are stupid, imo
365 2011-08-22 15:04:20 <nanotube> having a small linear display that can scroll if needed, is a lot cheaper than having a large 2d display that can show you asciiart, though.
366 2011-08-22 15:05:02 <luke-jr> meh
367 2011-08-22 15:05:17 <luke-jr> I'm happy with keeping the wallet secure at home and accessing it remotely :P
368 2011-08-22 15:05:24 <luke-jr> with a trusted handheld PC
369 2011-08-22 15:06:23 <nanotube> anyway, i have a feeling we're painting the bikeshed now. i think we agree that amount and recipient should be displayed. the details of how they are displayed can be left for a later stage heh
370 2011-08-22 15:06:44 <cjdelisle> Actually the address is difficult to be sure of, if someone pasts an address in IRC, a trojan can just aswell recognize a "probable bitcoin address" and replace with it's own on the wire.
371 2011-08-22 15:07:23 <nanotube> cjdelisle: call the guy and have him read the address out to you.
372 2011-08-22 15:07:26 <cjdelisle> The really important part to get right is the amount, you don't want to be giving away your retirement when you think you're buying a bag of coffee.
373 2011-08-22 15:07:39 <thenightmare> I've seen the forum posts about other people with pushpool speweing out too many open files. They say raise ulimit on your VPS. I'm running dedicated hardware and ulimit was already set at unlimited. Any ideas?
374 2011-08-22 15:07:40 <b4epoche> these would be like pre-paid bitcoin cards?
375 2011-08-22 15:07:52 <ThomasV> nanotube: the terminator robot can fake his voice
376 2011-08-22 15:07:59 <nanotube> ThomasV: lol
377 2011-08-22 15:08:33 <luke-jr> thenightmare: ulimit -a
378 2011-08-22 15:08:43 <b4epoche> cjdelisle: but if you only loaded, say, $50 on the card before leaving you'd avoid that problem
379 2011-08-22 15:09:20 <cjdelisle> Yup, that's (IMO) why the ability to read smartcards is a critical feature.
380 2011-08-22 15:09:35 <thenightmare> luke-jr, do I want to increase all of those?
381 2011-08-22 15:09:59 <luke-jr> thenightmare: just open files
382 2011-08-22 15:10:11 <cjdelisle> thenightmare: you might want to google some about ulimit.
383 2011-08-22 15:10:15 <luke-jr> thenightmare: or better yet, just use Eligius ;)
384 2011-08-22 15:11:09 <thenightmare> What's a good number? And I'll go google ulimit right now. Thanks guys
385 2011-08-22 15:11:21 <gavinandresen> ... but I heard a rumor Eligius was putting dead kittens in the block chain.... :-)
386 2011-08-22 15:11:28 <cjdelisle> hehe
387 2011-08-22 15:12:23 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: no u
388 2011-08-22 15:12:26 <cjdelisle> mine with Luke, put prayer in chain, athiests umad
389 2011-08-22 15:12:27 <thenightmare> Dead kittens, that's a borderline no no. But at least better than prayers I guess.
390 2011-08-22 15:12:39 <luke-jr> cjdelisle: miners don't put prayers in the chain, I do.
391 2011-08-22 15:13:13 <ThomasV> guns don't kill people, I do
392 2011-08-22 15:13:20 <luke-jr> :P
393 2011-08-22 15:13:47 <ThomasV> well, my point is that without miners you would not be able to put prayers in the chain
394 2011-08-22 15:13:55 <copumpkin> we could put one name of god into every block
395 2011-08-22 15:14:06 <luke-jr> ThomasV: sure I would, I'd just have to resort to permanent txn spam ;)
396 2011-08-22 15:15:51 <ThomasV> copumpkin: like in the Nine Billion Names of God ?
397 2011-08-22 15:15:57 <copumpkin> yeah
398 2011-08-22 15:16:18 <b4epoche> In God We Trust
399 2011-08-22 15:16:27 <copumpkin> In God You Trust
400 2011-08-22 15:16:34 <b4epoche> fuck no
401 2011-08-22 15:16:52 <b4epoche> just saying, it's already on our stupid money
402 2011-08-22 15:16:58 <luke-jr> Trust In God, You!
403 2011-08-22 15:17:29 <copumpkin> oh yeah
404 2011-08-22 15:17:34 <copumpkin> we should slap that into bitcoin too
405 2011-08-22 15:17:35 <b4epoche> In Physics We Trust would be much better
406 2011-08-22 15:18:44 <ThomasV> ok, bbl
407 2011-08-22 15:18:56 <jtaylor> in ecdsa we trust is probably most appropriate
408 2011-08-22 15:19:18 <anddam> hi
409 2011-08-22 15:19:32 <luke-jr> jtaylor: no, SHA256
410 2011-08-22 15:19:50 <Eliel> ummh... both?
411 2011-08-22 15:19:56 <jtaylor> the sha can be replaced, ecdsa not?
412 2011-08-22 15:19:59 <luke-jr> Eliel: ECDSA is more viable to replace
413 2011-08-22 15:20:05 <cjdelisle> I'm not interested in religion nor mining but the thought of athiestic extremists coming to the realization that there are a significant number of people in the bitcoin community who are knowingly helping to put prayers into the chain just brings joy to my heart.
414 2011-08-22 15:20:47 <luke-jr> cjdelisle: miners don't help put prayers in, they help keep them temporary! :P
415 2011-08-22 15:20:58 <lianj> in mtgox we trust
416 2011-08-22 15:21:20 <jtaylor> what kind of prayers actually? tibetian prayer wheels?
417 2011-08-22 15:21:30 <RandomMinds> in math we trust
418 2011-08-22 15:21:35 <jtaylor> these actually kind og make sense to put in the blockchain ^^
419 2011-08-22 15:21:53 <cjdelisle> Well they could boycott and move to another pool but they AFAIK are not which is must be blowing a thousand little athiest minds.
420 2011-08-22 15:21:57 <jtaylor> dalai lama says it has an effect when they spin around on harddisks xD
421 2011-08-22 15:22:24 <b4epoche> what is the back story to this?
422 2011-08-22 15:22:31 <luke-jr> cjdelisle: my point is that even without the pool, I could send them as txn spam and then they would be permanent
423 2011-08-22 15:22:33 <asher^> cjdelisle you seem to have an odd view of atheists
424 2011-08-22 15:22:33 <jtaylor> http://dharma-haven.org/tibetan/prayer-wheel.htm
425 2011-08-22 15:22:53 <luke-jr> cjdelisle: therefore one can argue, that by "helping" put them in coinbases, the miners are in fact assisting keep them temporal
426 2011-08-22 15:23:07 <b4epoche> did some pool corrupt the chain with prayer?
427 2011-08-22 15:23:17 <lianj> 10k of ascii in the script stack of a transaction
428 2011-08-22 15:23:17 <luke-jr> b4epoche: it's not corrupt, no
429 2011-08-22 15:23:43 <b4epoche> luke-jr: corrupt in a meta-physical sense
430 2011-08-22 15:23:47 <luke-jr> b4epoche: it's not corrupt, no
431 2011-08-22 15:24:15 <cjdelisle> :D
432 2011-08-22 15:25:43 <luke-jr> b4epoche: spammer
433 2011-08-22 15:26:30 <cjdelisle> yea txn spam is just lame, anyone can do it
434 2011-08-22 15:27:16 <cjdelisle> coinbase spam only exists because a significant amount of the bitcoin community supports it, that's what makes it awesome
435 2011-08-22 15:27:29 <luke-jr> coinbase content isn't spam, it's by design
436 2011-08-22 15:53:05 <upb> luke-jr: is it catholic by design?
437 2011-08-22 16:00:02 <giulio> can anyone help me with this error?
438 2011-08-22 16:00:14 <giulio> EXCEPTION: N5boost16exception_detail10clone_implINS0_19error_info_injectorINS_6system12system_errorEEEEE
439 2011-08-22 16:00:17 <giulio> Address already in use
440 2011-08-22 16:00:19 <giulio> bitcoin in ThreadRPCServer()
441 2011-08-22 16:00:22 <giulio> terminate called after throwing an instance of 'boost::exception_detail::clone_impl<boost::exception_detail::error_info_injector<boost::system::system_error> >' what(): Address already in use
442 2011-08-22 16:00:38 <giulio> There isn't any other process using the configured port
443 2011-08-22 16:00:41 <giulio> and bitcoind isn't already running
444 2011-08-22 16:00:53 <giulio> i've also rebooted the machine but nothing changed
445 2011-08-22 16:10:20 <upb> ahahahahahha w t f
446 2011-08-22 16:10:21 <upb> 16:40 luke-jr the Crusades were good.
447 2011-08-22 16:10:24 <upb> WTF
448 2011-08-22 16:10:49 <upb> really amazed by the logs referred by that thread
449 2011-08-22 16:10:50 <upb> !
450 2011-08-22 16:12:36 <luke-jr> upb: brainwashed?
451 2011-08-22 16:13:04 <makomk> Even some of the people that lead the Crusades were ashamed of them...
452 2011-08-22 16:14:18 <upb> yep luke-jr that would be the correct diagnosis :D
453 2011-08-22 16:15:30 <luke-jr> http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04543c.htm <-- some facts on the Crusades
454 2011-08-22 16:15:42 <gavinandresen> (don't feed the trolls, luke....)
455 2011-08-22 16:16:13 <gavinandresen> (not that I'm saying anybody here is a troll. On purpose.)
456 2011-08-22 16:16:39 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: linking the ignorant to facts won't feed them too much :P
457 2011-08-22 16:19:20 <upb> http://jewwatch.com/ <- more facts, proven 100% correct.
458 2011-08-22 16:19:59 <erus`> 50% correct 100% of the time
459 2011-08-22 16:20:45 <hugolp> giulio I just had the same issue
460 2011-08-22 16:20:50 <hugolp> and bitcoind was working this morning
461 2011-08-22 16:20:55 <hugolp> I have not changed anything
462 2011-08-22 16:21:02 <hugolp> anyone else is having problems with bitcoind?
463 2011-08-22 16:21:50 <hugolp> Im getting this: http://pastebin.com/qrMXbdLz
464 2011-08-22 16:24:34 <gavinandresen> giulio's problem was trying to use 8333 for the rpcport. 8333 is the bitcoin protocol port, 8332 is the default rpcport. He fixed it by using rpcport=8011
465 2011-08-22 16:26:24 <hugolp> its working now. No idea what happened.
466 2011-08-22 16:37:59 <mnass_> question: i have deleted my .bitocoin folder on my linux machine. backuped the wallet.dat before - then i restarted the client with --rescan ... are my old adresses still my adresses? i have several adresses placed in the net - does payments to this adresses still reach my wallet?
467 2011-08-22 16:39:17 <Eliel> mnass: assuming the backup is intact and you copied it into the new .bitcoin folder, it should work as before.
468 2011-08-22 16:39:40 <Eliel> mnass: as soon as the blockchain has downloaded itself again
469 2011-08-22 16:40:14 <mnass> Eliel, everything else works - but i only backed up the wallet dat - thought adresses may be stored in the addr.dat - wich i deleted
470 2011-08-22 16:40:37 <Eliel> wallet.dat has everything needed to access your bitcoins.
471 2011-08-22 16:40:47 <Eliel> you only need to backup wallet.dat
472 2011-08-22 16:40:49 <mnass> and older adresses too?
473 2011-08-22 16:41:21 <mnass> earlier generated adresses still point to my wallet?
474 2011-08-22 16:41:38 <Eliel> if they were generated with that wallet, then yes.
475 2011-08-22 16:41:58 <mnass> ok thanks Eliel
476 2011-08-22 16:42:07 <Eliel> but you've got it backwards. addresses don't point to wallet. The wallet contains the addresses.
477 2011-08-22 16:42:33 <mnass> ok - now ive get it ....
478 2011-08-22 16:43:21 <sirky> right, the actual coins are recorded in your address by every single person running the client
479 2011-08-22 16:43:54 <mnass> there was a bug after my comuter turned off due to overheating - ive got an error message when i tried to restart, therefor ive deleted the folder
480 2011-08-22 16:43:58 <sirky> the wallet.dat is basically the keyring to use those coins (very oversimplified)
481 2011-08-22 16:44:37 <mnass> someone german is needed to translate satoshis paper - its too difficoult for me to read it in english
482 2011-08-22 16:46:54 <mtrlt> it's better for you to learn english instead
483 2011-08-22 16:47:03 <mtrlt> :-)
484 2011-08-22 16:49:55 <yebyen> mnass: what part is difficult?
485 2011-08-22 16:50:33 <yebyen> the math is kind of heavy, and the section about proof-of-work
486 2011-08-22 16:50:45 <yebyen> but I think the whole paper is pretty good on comprehensibility
487 2011-08-22 16:50:54 <mnass> yebyen, didnt tried yet to read it, just downloaded ... but i think this very sophisticated things are hard to read
488 2011-08-22 16:51:21 <yebyen> have you used bitcoin for a while?
489 2011-08-22 16:51:30 <mnass> yes yebyen
490 2011-08-22 16:51:41 <yebyen> some experiments (figure out how to get unconfirmed transactions on a testnet) will help you understand :)
491 2011-08-22 16:56:49 <IO-afk> BlueMattBot
492 2011-08-22 16:56:51 <IO-afk> oh, bot
493 2011-08-22 17:04:37 <hugolp> How can you pass an optional parameter to a command of bitcoind?
494 2011-08-22 17:04:54 <hugolp> f.e: how can I pass minconf=3 to listreceivedbyaccount ?
495 2011-08-22 17:04:57 <jrmithdobbs> you put it on the commandline
496 2011-08-22 17:05:13 <gavinandresen> listreceivedbyaccount "foo" 3
497 2011-08-22 17:05:28 <gavinandresen> (if minconf is the second param, which I don't remember if it is)
498 2011-08-22 17:07:17 <hugolp> thanks
499 2011-08-22 17:26:23 <gyver> I may have found a bug (or misunderstood something about address management in the bitcoin client)
500 2011-08-22 17:27:01 <gyver> using wxbitcoin, I transferred from one client to the address displayed in the "Your Bitcoin Address" field
501 2011-08-22 17:27:04 <gyver> it worked
502 2011-08-22 17:27:48 <b4epoche> TruCoin?
503 2011-08-22 17:27:48 <gyver> today, I made a new transaction, using the same address and it didn't work (origin debited, destination doesn't see the tx)
504 2011-08-22 17:28:17 <gyver> b4epoche: actual BTC, not on testnet if I understood you
505 2011-08-22 17:28:37 <b4epoche> gyver: sorry that was unrelated
506 2011-08-22 17:28:46 <b4epoche> trucoin.com
507 2011-08-22 17:30:16 <gyver> can the private key for the address displayed in "Your Bitcoin Address" be dropped ?
508 2011-08-22 17:30:28 <gyver> is it expected ?
509 2011-08-22 17:30:54 <gyver> nevermind
510 2011-08-22 17:31:04 <gyver> it just took its sweet time
511 2011-08-22 17:31:20 <gyver> probably 15 minutes before reaching the other bitcoin client
512 2011-08-22 17:31:52 <gyver> was used to sub minute sync
513 2011-08-22 18:49:53 <RandomMinds> a
514 2011-08-22 18:50:01 <RandomMinds> oops
515 2011-08-22 19:20:12 <BlueMatt> ;;seen gavinandresen
516 2011-08-22 19:20:13 <gribble> gavinandresen was last seen in #bitcoin-dev 2 hours, 14 minutes, and 44 seconds ago: <gavinandresen> (if minconf is the second param, which I don't remember if it is)
517 2011-08-22 19:20:21 <BlueMatt> ;;seen jgarzik
518 2011-08-22 19:20:22 <gribble> jgarzik was last seen in #bitcoin-dev 3 days, 20 hours, 52 minutes, and 53 seconds ago: <jgarzik> next stop: Penn Station and bitconf
519 2011-08-22 20:20:07 <m03sizlak> anyone looking for a GREAT investment opportinity: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=38740.0
520 2011-08-22 20:21:11 <cjdelisle> getting rid of it?
521 2011-08-22 20:21:16 <cjdelisle> not enough players?
522 2011-08-22 20:22:22 <phantomcircuit> m03sizlak, what's your average daily volume
523 2011-08-22 20:22:36 <m03sizlak> its been kive 3 weeks
524 2011-08-22 20:22:40 <m03sizlak> its made 120 BTC
525 2011-08-22 20:22:43 <m03sizlak> *live
526 2011-08-22 20:22:49 <phedny_> m03sizlak: why do you want to sell?
527 2011-08-22 20:22:59 <m03sizlak> that 120BTC is 2.3% of the sum of all bets
528 2011-08-22 20:23:08 <m03sizlak> phedny_, i live in the US
529 2011-08-22 20:23:23 <phedny_> ah, I see :)
530 2011-08-22 20:23:37 <m03sizlak> maybe the next owner will too, i spoke to some layers who specialize in this kinda thing
531 2011-08-22 20:23:46 <m03sizlak> they described it as a legal gray area
532 2011-08-22 20:23:58 <phedny_> yeah, indeed
533 2011-08-22 20:24:00 <m03sizlak> saying that it MAY be in violation of the Federal Wire Act
534 2011-08-22 20:24:16 <m03sizlak> The U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the Wire Act prohibition on the transmission of wagers applies only to sports betting and not other types of online gambling.[2] The Supreme Court has not ruled on the meaning of the Federal Wire Act as it pertains to online gambling.
535 2011-08-22 20:24:38 <m03sizlak> so there is some risk, but you should be able to fly under the radar for quite some time
536 2011-08-22 20:40:27 <BlueMatt> ;;seen devrandom
537 2011-08-22 20:40:27 <gribble> devrandom was last seen in #bitcoin-dev 1 week, 1 day, 16 hours, 49 minutes, and 26 seconds ago: <devrandom> ;;later tell BlueMatt my latest commit does deterministic mingw executables, but there are still ~10 bytes changing on the nsis exe
538 2011-08-22 20:42:39 <BlueMatt> ;;later tell devrandom Would it be ok to change the output of the wx+boost gitian scripts to a tgz or zip directly instead of outputting the files and then zipping it manually? The multi-file stuff really only helps with debugging non-deterministic results, right?
539 2011-08-22 20:42:39 <gribble> The operation succeeded.
540 2011-08-22 21:06:01 <fabianhjr> I corrupted a wallet dat, looking at it with gedit, still wondering how to fix it or get the coins back. Can anyone help?
541 2011-08-22 21:08:05 <cjdelisle> fabianhjr: are you sure you corrupted it? did you press save?
542 2011-08-22 21:08:28 <fabianhjr> Not saved over it. Just you know I was messing with partitions and I accidentalled the whole drive.
543 2011-08-22 21:08:48 <cjdelisle> ahh so the whole thing is gone?
544 2011-08-22 21:09:10 <fabianhjr> No, I did a raw recovery and got back my wallet.dat sized 1 MB
545 2011-08-22 21:09:39 <fabianhjr> Though, the client doesn't want to load it.
546 2011-08-22 21:09:58 <BlueMatt> private keys have a large set of constant bytes, you are gonna want to look for those and reimport
547 2011-08-22 21:10:04 <BlueMatt> (to a new wallet.dat)
548 2011-08-22 21:10:18 <BlueMatt> also, have you tried looking at the wallet with bitcointools to see what the state of that wallet is?
549 2011-08-22 21:10:46 <fabianhjr> BlueMatt: will try bitcointools, I guess it is in github right?
550 2011-08-22 21:11:31 <Diablo-D3> [07:08:28] <fabianhjr> Not saved over it. Just you know I was messing with partitions and I accidentalled the whole drive.
551 2011-08-22 21:11:37 <Diablo-D3> this is why you make frequent backups
552 2011-08-22 21:11:49 <BlueMatt> gavin's github
553 2011-08-22 21:12:30 <BlueMatt> fabianhjr: this probably wont work too well with a partially missing wallet, but you might try reading: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=printpage;topic=11331.0
554 2011-08-22 21:12:57 <JFK911> oh no he accidentally the whole drive
555 2011-08-22 21:13:01 <JFK911> hard luck
556 2011-08-22 21:13:21 <fabianhjr> Diablo-D3: my backup went bad too, when I realized I accidentalled the whole thing my backup was rewritten. xD
557 2011-08-22 21:13:40 <fabianhjr> It was a logic error more than a physical one.
558 2011-08-22 21:13:56 <BlueMatt> you accidentally what your drive?
559 2011-08-22 21:14:28 <Diablo-D3> fabianhjr: ... nice.
560 2011-08-22 21:14:33 <Diablo-D3> blueMatt: the whole thing
561 2011-08-22 21:14:46 <BlueMatt> wiped the drive?
562 2011-08-22 21:14:59 <BlueMatt> repartitioned and lost the file table?
563 2011-08-22 21:15:05 <fabianhjr> No, more like wrote over the MBR and begining of the disk.
564 2011-08-22 21:15:18 <cjdelisle> ahh then scalple should get it out
565 2011-08-22 21:15:30 <BlueMatt> oh, so then your recovery stuff (if it was any good) should have easily gotten out the full uncorrupted wallet.dat
566 2011-08-22 21:16:11 <cjdelisle> yea actually IIRC you can spot the edges of an ext* partition and just rebuild it right from there
567 2011-08-22 21:16:29 <BlueMatt> yes, as with most partition types
568 2011-08-22 21:16:37 <BlueMatt> most of them have backups
569 2011-08-22 21:17:03 <makomk> fabianhjr: you might want to try https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=25091.0, though as BlueMatt said standard recovery tools should probably have worked.
570 2011-08-22 21:17:08 <fabianhjr> BlueMatt: yes, it even got the name of file, though I destroyed the directory structure
571 2011-08-22 21:17:26 <BlueMatt> ntfs, ext*, what?
572 2011-08-22 21:17:26 <fabianhjr> The issue is that maybe it got trimmed
573 2011-08-22 21:17:38 <fabianhjr> NTFS
574 2011-08-22 21:17:54 <fabianhjr> Let mwe check if there is a second wallet.dat along there. :P
575 2011-08-22 21:19:00 <BlueMatt> well worst case try makomk's tool
576 2011-08-22 21:19:26 <BlueMatt> makomk: your thing just searches for keys and dumps those to a wallet right?
577 2011-08-22 21:19:48 <BlueMatt> also, makomk is there src available for that thing?
578 2011-08-22 21:20:19 <BlueMatt> oh your own gitweb, I see it nvm
579 2011-08-22 21:20:41 <makomk> Yep, it searches for matching pairs of public and private keys and dumps them to a wallet.
580 2011-08-22 21:21:10 <makomk> (Also, I should probably make the link to the source code more obvious.)
581 2011-08-22 21:22:25 <fabianhjr> There are some ___.db.001 with the wallet too, what the hell are those?
582 2011-08-22 21:22:36 <BlueMatt> bdb logs
583 2011-08-22 21:22:53 <BlueMatt> try restoring those to database as well maybe?
584 2011-08-22 21:23:05 <fabianhjr> Can I get data of those or are they just logs?
585 2011-08-22 21:23:25 <fabianhjr> There is also an addr.dat
586 2011-08-22 21:23:43 <BlueMatt> addr.dat is a list of ips
587 2011-08-22 21:23:59 <BlueMatt> have you looked at bitcointools output yet?
588 2011-08-22 21:24:22 <fabianhjr> It says bitcoin is opened and can't lock file. :/.
589 2011-08-22 21:24:23 <fabianhjr> http://pastebin.com/qV68vARz
590 2011-08-22 21:24:32 <fabianhjr> ERROR:root:Couldn't open wallet.dat/main. Try quitting Bitcoin and running this again.
591 2011-08-22 21:24:36 <BlueMatt> remove the .lock?
592 2011-08-22 21:25:18 <fabianhjr> Still, it doesn't have it, that was of the recovery when I accidentall the whole thing
593 2011-08-22 21:25:32 <fabianhjr> Oh wait, there is a walletNEW.dat in there :P
594 2011-08-22 21:25:49 <BlueMatt> what does dbdump show
595 2011-08-22 21:26:03 <fabianhjr> Nothing 0_0
596 2011-08-22 21:26:36 <BlueMatt> no error?
597 2011-08-22 21:26:43 <fabianhjr> Nothing
598 2011-08-22 21:27:04 <fabianhjr> Oh, I got it, I think I must pass some args.
599 2011-08-22 21:27:30 <fabianhjr> Yes, --wallet dumps me several keys.
600 2011-08-22 21:27:53 <BlueMatt> what does bitcoin show when you try to open it?
601 2011-08-22 21:28:59 <fabianhjr> Balance of 0, wait, I will do it again because I first did a fixwallet.py
602 2011-08-22 21:29:27 <BlueMatt> so...your wallet isnt corrupted, wait for the chain to download then come back and see if your balance is right
603 2011-08-22 21:30:42 <fabianhjr> BlueMatt: wait, am I supposed to see all my publick keys in there?
604 2011-08-22 21:30:58 <fabianhjr> Also, I tried repeating the process and I am back again to the bitcoin is still open error.
605 2011-08-22 21:31:04 <BlueMatt> oh, ok
606 2011-08-22 21:32:36 <fabianhjr> Something weird is going on, I deleted everything on .bitcoin/ except the wallet.dat
607 2011-08-22 21:33:13 <fabianhjr> I run dbdump --wallet nothin, fixwallet.dat seems to create some temp files.
608 2011-08-22 21:34:23 <fabianhjr> BlueMatt: want to try it yourselve? This is getting a bit weird.
609 2011-08-22 21:34:30 <fabianhjr> yourself*
610 2011-08-22 21:34:39 <BlueMatt> ok, stop...first recover the wallet.dat file using whatever recovery thing you are using, copy *only* that to a new .bitcoin folder, does bitcoin give you errors?
611 2011-08-22 21:35:02 <fabianhjr> Yes, AppInit()
612 2011-08-22 21:35:21 <fabianhjr> EXCEPTION: 11DbException Db::open: Invalid argument bitcoin in AppInit()
613 2011-08-22 21:35:31 <BlueMatt> and the last time the bitcoin was closed was it closed cleanly?
614 2011-08-22 21:36:14 <fabianhjr> Not sure about that, I just installed it in a livecd and it created a default wallet.dat then I closed it and overwrote.
615 2011-08-22 21:36:30 <fabianhjr> I already copied the recovered wallet.dat everywhere.
616 2011-08-22 21:36:53 <BlueMatt> no, clear the whole .bitcoin folder on the live cd
617 2011-08-22 21:36:55 <BlueMatt> just delete it
618 2011-08-22 21:37:07 <BlueMatt> then make a new EMPTY folder and copy ONLY wallet.dat there
619 2011-08-22 21:38:07 <BlueMatt> i have to go anyway...
620 2011-08-22 21:38:17 <fabianhjr> Ok, and I run it?
621 2011-08-22 21:38:18 <BlueMatt> try following the guide and then that other tool
622 2011-08-22 21:41:11 <SomeoneWeirdTAFE> mmm, getting
623 2011-08-22 21:41:12 <SomeoneWeirdTAFE> ui.cpp:1183: error: class wxString has no member named ToStdString
624 2011-08-22 21:41:22 <SomeoneWeirdTAFE> when trying to compile bitcoin, anyone got any ideas?
625 2011-08-22 21:41:27 <RealSolid> yes
626 2011-08-22 21:41:34 <RealSolid> you need a newer wxwidgets
627 2011-08-22 21:41:35 <fabianhjr> makomk: hey, I am looking at the docs, though I already have a recovered wallet.dat, how do I proceed?
628 2011-08-22 21:41:37 <RealSolid> 2.9. at least
629 2011-08-22 21:41:45 <SomeoneWeirdTAFE> it is 2.9 grr
630 2011-08-22 21:41:53 <RealSolid> 2.9.1 is what i used
631 2011-08-22 21:41:56 <RealSolid> there is a 2.9.2 though
632 2011-08-22 21:42:01 <SomeoneWeirdTAFE> ok thx
633 2011-08-22 21:42:12 <RealSolid> building your own chain?
634 2011-08-22 21:42:16 <makomk> fabianhjr: depends if your recovered wallet.dat is any good...
635 2011-08-22 21:42:40 <fabianhjr> makomk: well, it is a 1MB, though bitcointools or bitcoin won't open it.
636 2011-08-22 21:43:01 <SomeoneWeirdTAFE> nah im compiling bitcoin with patches RealSolid
637 2011-08-22 21:43:11 <makomk> You're running from a Linux live CD already right?
638 2011-08-22 21:43:25 <fabianhjr> yes
639 2011-08-22 21:43:49 <fabianhjr> though, the fisical drive was delivered to a professional data recovery center.
640 2011-08-22 21:45:06 <makomk> You can try downloading and making my tool executable using the instructions on that post, but when you come to run it do ./wallet_recover <name of old wallet> recovered-wallet-2.dat
641 2011-08-22 21:45:39 <makomk> Ah. Not all data recovery centers are competent, especially when it comes to niche things like bitcoin.
642 2011-08-22 21:45:40 <fabianhjr> Oh, ok and I just drop the recovered wallet in the same dir.
643 2011-08-22 21:46:00 <fabianhjr> makomk: I asked for a raw recovery in to an external HDD that I just bought for backups. xD
644 2011-08-22 21:46:34 <SomeoneWeirdTAFE> lol
645 2011-08-22 21:46:35 <fabianhjr> So basically they do an img of the drive then work on the img they have and leave my hdd and an img in the recovery drive untouched.
646 2011-08-22 21:46:39 <makomk> Then you copy the recovered-wallet-2.dat that creates to your .bitcoin and rename it to wallet.dat
647 2011-08-22 21:47:34 <makomk> Raw recovery? What happened exactly, some kind of hardware failure?
648 2011-08-22 21:50:21 <fabianhjr> makomk: I shitted all over the MBR
649 2011-08-22 21:50:53 <fabianhjr> I was in an attitude of "fucking hdds and formats, how do they work?"
650 2011-08-22 21:51:49 <cjdelisle> and you found out
651 2011-08-22 21:52:00 <cjdelisle> they eat your wallet and go nom nom nom
652 2011-08-22 21:52:57 <fabianhjr> cjdelisle: :/ yeah, along 150 BTC.
653 2011-08-22 21:53:00 <SomeoneWeirdTAFE> lawl
654 2011-08-22 21:53:03 <SomeoneWeirdTAFE> oh dam :S
655 2011-08-22 21:53:11 <fabianhjr> Done - 0 keys recovered, 0 failed/bogus!
656 2011-08-22 21:53:26 <fabianhjr> UI think I am passing the arguments wrong
657 2011-08-22 21:53:34 <makomk> Oh?
658 2011-08-22 21:53:36 <fabianhjr> No, I am not
659 2011-08-22 21:54:00 <makomk> OK. That means your wallet.dat probably doesn't actually have any keys in, I think.
660 2011-08-22 21:54:11 <fabianhjr> makomk: so the other part was just doing /dev/sda and leaving it over night?
661 2011-08-22 21:54:25 <fabianhjr> (It is a 1TB drive after all)
662 2011-08-22 21:54:43 <makomk> fabianhjr: or whichever drive your wallet.dat was on, yeah,.
663 2011-08-22 21:55:35 <fabianhjr> Damn, I also recovered some __db.00x files, are these any good?
664 2011-08-22 21:55:46 <fabianhjr> addr.dat?
665 2011-08-22 21:55:51 <makomk> Probably not much use in my opinion.
666 2011-08-22 21:56:58 <fabianhjr> makomk: if I send you all the files with a possible 150 BTC grab, would you at least send the half back?(75 BTC * 12 USD = some cash)
667 2011-08-22 21:57:13 <makomk> addr.dat is just IP addresses and I haven't been able to find any recoverable keys in __db.00x files...
668 2011-08-22 21:57:50 <fabianhjr> i got an hex explorer and could swer I saw a name "key" -> more data in there.
669 2011-08-22 21:58:07 <makomk> In which one? That sounds promising.
670 2011-08-22 21:58:13 <fabianhjr> wallet.dat
671 2011-08-22 21:58:20 <SomeoneWeirdTAFE> hex?
672 2011-08-22 21:58:23 <SomeoneWeirdTAFE> meh
673 2011-08-22 21:58:28 <fabianhjr> Hexzadecimal viewr
674 2011-08-22 21:58:32 <makomk> OK. That's interesting.
675 2011-08-22 21:58:32 <SomeoneWeirdTAFE> i know what hex is ...
676 2011-08-22 21:58:52 <SomeoneWeirdTAFE> what you using to try and recover?
677 2011-08-22 21:59:47 <fabianhjr> http://www.cgsecurity.org suit + the recovery center send me the same files, though with a filename.
678 2011-08-22 22:00:17 <makomk> keyA by any chance?
679 2011-08-22 22:00:24 <fabianhjr> makomk: also, I see a lot of \00 in there.
680 2011-08-22 22:00:32 <fabianhjr> makomk: no, no single keyA
681 2011-08-22 22:00:34 <makomk> Lots of \00 is normal.
682 2011-08-22 22:00:46 <fabianhjr> Wait, I will do a second search just to be sure
683 2011-08-22 22:00:46 <makomk> OK. That's very interesting.
684 2011-08-22 22:01:24 <fabianhjr> makomk: I am using gedit, though I am not sure it is the best for the job.
685 2011-08-22 22:01:36 <fabianhjr> Also, it takes a shitload to load.
686 2011-08-22 22:04:39 <makomk> fabianhjr: try "hexdump -C <filename> | less" at the command line...
687 2011-08-22 22:05:49 <fabianhjr> Wow, how does this works?
688 2011-08-22 22:06:07 <fabianhjr> 00000000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 |................| * 000ec000
689 2011-08-22 22:06:13 <fabianhjr> Tha is the output
690 2011-08-22 22:06:25 <SomeoneWeirdTAFE> thats hex
691 2011-08-22 22:06:38 <makomk> Yeah, hex and text on the right.
692 2011-08-22 22:06:57 <makomk> Type "/keyA" followed by enter.
693 2011-08-22 22:07:21 <fabianhjr> Not found ):
694 2011-08-22 22:07:35 <makomk> "/key" and enter?
695 2011-08-22 22:07:42 <SomeoneWeirdTAFE> "hexdump -C <file> | grep "/key" | less"
696 2011-08-22 22:08:09 <makomk> SomeoneWeirdTAFE: "grep key", even.
697 2011-08-22 22:08:27 <SomeoneWeirdTAFE> mhm
698 2011-08-22 22:09:19 <fabianhjr> Nothing, though gedit can see it. :.
699 2011-08-22 22:09:30 <SomeoneWeirdTAFE> screenie of gedit plz
700 2011-08-22 22:10:17 <cjdelisle> gedit can only read utf8 which the wallet file is not
701 2011-08-22 22:10:24 <cjdelisle> so I think you're looking in the wrong place
702 2011-08-22 22:10:41 <someone42> SomeoneWeirdTAFE: that may not work if "keyA" occurs across a 16-byte boundary
703 2011-08-22 22:10:56 <SomeoneWeirdTAFE> i know, was worth a shot though