1 2011-08-26 00:15:12 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Con Kolivas * r3567b69e5eaa cgminer/ (ocl.c phatk110817.cl poclbm110817.cl): Remove fragile source patching for bitalign, vectors et. al and simply pass it with the compiler options.
  2 2011-08-26 00:15:13 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Con Kolivas * r91a2e7012bda cgminer/util.c: Actually check the value returned for the x-roll-ntime extension to make sure it isn't saying N.
  3 2011-08-26 00:28:50 <sacarlson> sharky: I've seen that happen on testnet,  not sure how many blocks of confirms it had when I lost it
  4 2011-08-26 00:30:06 <sacarlson> isn't there a command that limits number of connections on bitcoin?  I'm now getting 80 that is way more that I need,  I want to set max at 8 - 10
  5 2011-08-26 00:31:37 <sharky> afair there is only the possibillity to define peers... by this you can limit it. but that means you'll need a list of reliable peers to keep them configured in a static way
  6 2011-08-26 00:32:02 <sharky> sounds uncool somehow.
  7 2011-08-26 00:32:36 <sacarlson> sharky: sounds like the easy solution then is just to go -nolisten then
  8 2011-08-26 00:37:28 <forrestv> sacarlson, maxconnections=32
  9 2011-08-26 00:37:29 <sacarlson> sharky: seem when I grep max * in the source I did find a config setting -maxconnections  that defaults to 125,  it's just not in the bitcoind -?
 10 2011-08-26 00:37:52 <sacarlson> forrestv: yes I found it thanks
 11 2011-08-26 00:38:23 <forrestv> sacarlson, though consider just leaving it - by running an open node you're helping maintain the health of the p2p network
 12 2011-08-26 00:38:31 <forrestv> bandwidth usage should be fairly low
 13 2011-08-26 00:39:34 <sacarlson> forrestv: I also run a ISP with this network and I note it taking too much of my resources
 14 2011-08-26 00:39:59 <sharky> sacarlson, forrestv: cool, learned one more / but anyway. i'll have a nap. it just killed/orphaned round about 60 of my blocks. good night!
 15 2011-08-26 00:41:07 <forrestv> ah, ok
 16 2011-08-26 02:40:11 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Con Kolivas * r882961..df1b9a cgminer/ (ChangeLog util.c NEWS configure.ac Makefile.am main.c README): (6 commits)
 17 2011-08-26 03:22:25 <devrandom> ;;later tell BlueMatt sorry, did not get a chance to look at the gitian stuff
 18 2011-08-26 03:22:26 <gribble> The operation succeeded.
 19 2011-08-26 03:40:01 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 81a854e3f90b r33 /src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/ (9 files in 4 dirs):
 20 2011-08-26 03:40:02 <CIA-101> poolserverj: them stopping. - need to add 'shutdownOnCriticalError' option then these errors
 21 2011-08-26 04:01:07 <cjdelisle> forrestv: I was looking at p2ppool on the wiki, I'm wondering why does it keep shares from before the last bitcoin block?
 22 2011-08-26 04:02:45 <cjdelisle> Also what happens if there are 10 transactions in the last share and I mine the next one, evicting a few of them, does my share get rejected? If it does then p2ppool can provide early confirmation for people who are too anxious to wait 10 minutes.
 23 2011-08-26 04:12:24 <luke-jr> cjdelisle: it's PPLNS. block boundaries mean nothing'
 24 2011-08-26 04:13:23 <cjdelisle> hmm
 25 2011-08-26 04:44:39 <lfm> ;;bc,stats
 26 2011-08-26 04:44:42 <gribble> Current Blocks: 142635 | Current Difficulty: 1805700.8361937 | Next Difficulty At Block: 143135 | Next Difficulty In: 500 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 3 days, 7 hours, 35 minutes, and 0 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1848536.71629746
 27 2011-08-26 05:25:51 <SomeoneWeird> Can someone help me port my bitcoin client off the main network plz?
 28 2011-08-26 05:26:03 <SomeoneWeird> And for the 500th time, no, im not making a new currency.
 29 2011-08-26 05:26:40 <cjdelisle> use multicoin?
 30 2011-08-26 05:27:00 <SomeoneWeird> trying
 31 2011-08-26 05:27:19 <SomeoneWeird> i've got a new genesis block but i can't get my client to work with the new code
 32 2011-08-26 05:38:03 <asher^> what are you doing with it SomeoneWeird?
 33 2011-08-26 05:38:29 <SomeoneWeird> asher^ trying to get something working but need a different blockchain
 34 2011-08-26 05:38:53 <asher^> what are you trying to get working?
 35 2011-08-26 05:39:15 <SomeoneWeird> im gunna try and do a poc
 36 2011-08-26 05:39:39 <asher^> poc?
 37 2011-08-26 05:39:48 <SomeoneWeird> proof of concept
 38 2011-08-26 05:54:13 <sharky> good morning coins and coinesses!
 39 2011-08-26 07:03:37 <Keefe> does the bitcoin network protocol have some sort of multi-message format? for example, multiple addr or inv in a single packet?
 40 2011-08-26 07:03:51 <Keefe> i'm trying to understand some stuff i captured with wireshark
 41 2011-08-26 07:05:04 <Keefe> unless i'm missing something, what i'm seeing with wireshark isn't explained here: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_specification
 42 2011-08-26 07:08:31 <tcatm> Keefe: IIRC it does support that
 43 2011-08-26 07:10:23 <Keefe> besides the source code, do you know of any documentation of that?
 44 2011-08-26 07:12:49 <tcatm> ArtForz's half-node has quite readable code
 45 2011-08-26 07:13:40 <tcatm> basically, msg_inv takes an array of CInv
 46 2011-08-26 07:20:47 <makomk> sharky: someone has been launching attacks on Testnet to orphan blocks after a large number of confirmations, apparently.
 47 2011-08-26 07:22:54 <sharky> wow! thank's for that info! hmm. is something known about how they achieve this and what counter measures can be taken?
 48 2011-08-26 07:23:44 <sharky> and: may i be of some help?
 49 2011-08-26 07:23:53 <makomk> Almost certainly brute force hashing power. Testnet doesn't have enough miners to be secure...
 50 2011-08-26 07:23:53 <wumpus> the testnet has very low difficulty, so  anyone with a large mining farm can pull it off
 51 2011-08-26 07:24:14 <wumpus> has been the case for very long.. the testnet sucks, it's better to use testnet in a box if you want to do reliable testing
 52 2011-08-26 07:24:16 <sharky> ah, ok. so just 'normal' betrayal -.-
 53 2011-08-26 07:24:37 <makomk> (It's one of the reasons the Bitcoin developers don't want anyone to use it for real transactions.)
 54 2011-08-26 07:26:21 <sharky> yeah, i just use it to check whether my payout logic works - and i saw the generated coins on my 'personal purse' bitcoin client before the attack. so it is fine for me (for today)
 55 2011-08-26 07:27:13 <sharky> cool. thanks for the info to you all. now the things make a little bit more sense. this saves my day :)
 56 2011-08-26 07:33:40 <gribble> I have 20 registered users with 24 registered hostmasks; 1 owner and 0 admins.
 57 2011-08-26 07:33:40 <MobiusL> ;;stats
 58 2011-08-26 07:34:18 <MobiusL> ;;help
 59 2011-08-26 07:34:19 <gribble> The bot responds when you start a line with the ! character. A good starting point for exploring the bot is the !facts command. You can also visit the bot's website for a list of help topics and documentation: http://gribble.sourceforge.net/
 60 2011-08-26 07:34:32 <gribble> ?, about, action, add, alert, alias, announce, announce add, announce list, announce remove, any, aol, apply, apropos, asks, at, auth, author, azn, ban add, ban list, ban remove, base, bashorg, bc,24hprc, bc,avgprc, bc,bcm, bc,bitpenny, bc,blocks, bc,btceur, bc,btcgbp, bc,btcguild, bc,btcrub, bc,btcto, bc,calc, bc,calcd, bc,channels, bc,convert, bc,deepbit, bc,diff, bc,diffchange, (9 more messages)
 61 2011-08-26 07:34:32 <MobiusL> ;;commands
 62 2011-08-26 07:34:44 <gribble> bc,eligius, bc,estimate, bc,exchb, bc,fx, bc,gen, bc,gend, bc,help, bc,hextarget, bc,interval, bc,mtgox, bc,mtgoxask, bc,mtgoxbid, bc,mtgoxlast, bc,nethash, bc,nexttarget, bc,ozcoin, bc,p2pool, bc,p2pooldiff, bc,p2poolnmc, bc,price, bc,prob, bc,probd, bc,slushpool, bc,spotestimate, bc,stats, bc,swepool, bc,timetonext, bc,totalbc, bc,tradehill, bc,wiki, bc,xau, bids, binary, blockmonitor, (8 more messages)
 63 2011-08-26 07:34:44 <MobiusL> ;;more
 64 2011-08-26 07:34:57 <gribble> bold, book, bot, botsnack, boturl, botweb, buy, cache, calc, call, cand, capabilities, capability add, capability list, capability remove, capability set, capability setdefault, capability unset, capitalize, ceq, change, changekey, changename, channel, channeldb, channels, channelstats, cheer, chr, cif, clearq, cmd, coin, collect, color, colorize, command, commands, concat, config, (7 more messages)
 65 2011-08-26 07:34:57 <MobiusL> ;;more
 66 2011-08-26 07:35:08 <MobiusL> ;;bc,stats
 67 2011-08-26 07:35:11 <gribble> Current Blocks: 142657 | Current Difficulty: 1805700.8361937 | Next Difficulty At Block: 143135 | Next Difficulty In: 478 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 3 days, 3 hours, 1 minute, and 10 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1855756.41721717
 68 2011-08-26 07:35:31 <MobiusL> ;;bc,eligius
 69 2011-08-26 07:35:32 <gribble> Forget the snack, just send me some bitcoins at 1MgD6rah5zUgEGYZnNmdpnXMaDR3itKYzU :)
 70 2011-08-26 07:35:32 <UukGoblin> ;;botsnack
 71 2011-08-26 07:35:33 <gribble> 346288896.518
 72 2011-08-26 07:35:48 <UukGoblin> heh
 73 2011-08-26 07:35:51 <Keefe> thanks tcatm. one other question. i've been running this wireshark cap for quite a while, 76 min, and saw only one "block" msg. but my client is working on catching up with the last 10k blocks or so. shouldn't i see many "block" msgs on the wire, or is a different msg used for old blocks?
 74 2011-08-26 07:40:59 <tcatm> Keefe: I *think* you should see more "block" msgs but I'm not sure.
 75 2011-08-26 07:43:13 <lfm> ;;bc,blocks
 76 2011-08-26 07:43:14 <gribble> 142657
 77 2011-08-26 07:43:52 <BitManiac> ;;bc,prob
 78 2011-08-26 07:43:53 <gribble> (bc,prob <an alias, at least 1 argument>) -- Alias for "math calc 1-exp(-$1*1000 * [seconds $*] / (2**32* [bc,diff]))".
 79 2011-08-26 07:43:53 <lfm> Keefe: how many connections do you have?
 80 2011-08-26 07:44:03 <Keefe> 8
 81 2011-08-26 07:44:08 <lfm> k
 82 2011-08-26 07:44:20 <Keefe> and yes i am getting blocks, very slowly
 83 2011-08-26 07:44:34 <Keefe> i think i've been running for a few hours and have only received 1k
 84 2011-08-26 07:44:57 <Keefe> that prompted me to fire up wireshark and try to understand why
 85 2011-08-26 07:45:04 <Keefe> i'm using v0.3.23
 86 2011-08-26 07:45:11 <lfm> ok ya, the last blocks are slower partly cuz they are bigger bllocks with more transactions in each block
 87 2011-08-26 07:45:24 <lfm> Keefe: also 0.3.24 is faster
 88 2011-08-26 07:45:34 <Keefe> i've heard that cpu and disk io is the bottleneck, but i'm not seeing that
 89 2011-08-26 07:45:55 <lfm> there are some bugs in 0.3.23 that make the download slower
 90 2011-08-26 07:46:02 <Keefe> probably less than 2% cpu
 91 2011-08-26 07:46:40 <Keefe> mmk, i'll upgrade now
 92 2011-08-26 07:46:41 <asher^> i recently built both, .23 took about 3 hours, .24 took about 5 mins
 93 2011-08-26 07:46:49 <Keefe> nice
 94 2011-08-26 07:47:20 <asher^> and both got the chain via lan, so it wasnt a bandwidth or connection issue
 95 2011-08-26 07:47:38 <lfm> ya , by lan should be faster anyway
 96 2011-08-26 07:48:45 <Joric> why the price falls? $9.6 already
 97 2011-08-26 07:49:09 <lfm> generally cuz someone is selling off a bunch of btc
 98 2011-08-26 07:49:43 <lfm> ;;bc,mtgox
 99 2011-08-26 07:49:44 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":10.78,"low":9.1,"avg":9.818821873,"vwap":9.863979056,"vol":59140,"last":9.74,"buy":9.67,"sell":9.74}}
100 2011-08-26 08:04:25 <marf_away> hello
101 2011-08-26 08:04:31 <lfm> hi
102 2011-08-26 08:04:32 <marf_away> 50 minits wthout block...
103 2011-08-26 08:04:43 <lfm> ;;bc,blocks
104 2011-08-26 08:04:44 <gribble> 142657
105 2011-08-26 08:04:53 <marf_away> why cant we introduce something like in solidcoin to bitcoin?
106 2011-08-26 08:05:08 <lfm> then it wouldnt be bitcoin
107 2011-08-26 08:05:10 <marf_away> why is it bad?
108 2011-08-26 08:05:29 <marf_away> s it unsave?
109 2011-08-26 08:05:50 <lfm> its math, solidcoin isnt really better
110 2011-08-26 08:06:09 <marf_away> but it feels fater
111 2011-08-26 08:06:11 <marf_away> faster
112 2011-08-26 08:06:23 <lfm> ya feeling arnt math either
113 2011-08-26 08:06:39 <UukGoblin> "constant transaction fees" "so it's easier to predict"?! duude
114 2011-08-26 08:06:40 <marf_away> the normal user dont considers math, he fells
115 2011-08-26 08:06:48 <marf_away> i dont want thaht
116 2011-08-26 08:06:52 <marf_away> i want 3 minit blocks
117 2011-08-26 08:07:01 <marf_away> and upwards max 10%
118 2011-08-26 08:07:06 <UukGoblin> I want 10 minute blocks
119 2011-08-26 08:07:08 <marf_away> and down *0.25
120 2011-08-26 08:07:23 <marf_away> why?
121 2011-08-26 08:07:24 <noagendamarket> just use solidcoin
122 2011-08-26 08:07:28 <lfm> marf_away: go buy solidcoin then but dont come crying to us when you get scammed
123 2011-08-26 08:07:38 <UukGoblin> marf_away, because in the future, I might not be able to cope with latency with 3 minute blocks
124 2011-08-26 08:07:44 <marf_away> no i think bitcoin can be improved
125 2011-08-26 08:08:01 <marf_away> than in future change it again ;D
126 2011-08-26 08:08:04 <lfm> you and 1000s of other people who prefer feelings to math
127 2011-08-26 08:08:22 <marf_away> we are the users, we are the kings
128 2011-08-26 08:08:32 <lfm> so go use solidcoin
129 2011-08-26 08:08:40 <tcatm> a 3 minute block is only about 1/3 as good as a 10 minute block and we already know that a 10 minute block is pretty unreliable
130 2011-08-26 08:08:59 <marf_away> people dont to care it seems
131 2011-08-26 08:09:02 <UukGoblin> "unreliable"?
132 2011-08-26 08:09:16 <wumpus> people care as soon as they get exploited
133 2011-08-26 08:09:22 <Blitzboom> i think the mybitcoin users cared :D
134 2011-08-26 08:09:28 <tcatm> UukGoblin: 1-block forks/splits are common
135 2011-08-26 08:09:30 <lfm> marf_away: its why bitcoin recomends you wait for 6 blocks. wed recomend you wait for 18 blocks on solidcoin
136 2011-08-26 08:09:53 <marf_away> ok
137 2011-08-26 08:09:57 <marf_away> no 3 minit blocks
138 2011-08-26 08:10:07 <marf_away> what about a faste difficulty adaption?
139 2011-08-26 08:10:08 <UukGoblin> tcatm, ah, that's because our internets are slow
140 2011-08-26 08:10:41 <lfm> partly internets and partly disk drives
141 2011-08-26 08:11:07 <marf_away> 1 houre without block
142 2011-08-26 08:11:14 <tcatm> I'd like to see good double spend detection instead of faster blocks
143 2011-08-26 08:11:15 <marf_away> useability = 0
144 2011-08-26 08:11:39 <lfm> marf_away: thats odd, seems like lots of people use bitcoin.
145 2011-08-26 08:11:40 <UukGoblin> tcatm, is current double spend detection bad?
146 2011-08-26 08:11:53 <tcatm> UukGoblin: IIRC there's none built into the client
147 2011-08-26 08:12:02 <marf_away> more would use it if it were more userfrendly
148 2011-08-26 08:12:21 <lfm> double spend protection is ok, not the same as double spend detection
149 2011-08-26 08:12:39 <marf_away> well devs a said my opinion, iam sure many others think so too, keep it in mind
150 2011-08-26 08:12:41 <UukGoblin> tcatm, I don't understand... the whole idea of the bitcoin client is to prevent double-spending, right?
151 2011-08-26 08:12:50 <lfm> marf_away: we answered you. now, do you have anything new to say?
152 2011-08-26 08:13:08 <UukGoblin> oh, protection vs detection... hm
153 2011-08-26 08:13:12 <marf_away> no
154 2011-08-26 08:13:12 <tcatm> UukGoblin: yes, but it takes time. It would be great if we could detect double spends earlier
155 2011-08-26 08:13:25 <UukGoblin> right, I see
156 2011-08-26 08:13:47 <lfm> UukGoblin: ya like actually spit out that txn has a double spend decteded and this one has been honered
157 2011-08-26 08:14:38 <UukGoblin> I'd like to have an easier option of intentional double-spend fee-increase txn
158 2011-08-26 08:14:58 <lfm> UukGoblin: like a txn override?
159 2011-08-26 08:15:02 <UukGoblin> yeah
160 2011-08-26 08:15:04 <tcatm> I wonder if the (dead) subscription/channel code in net.cpp could be used to broadcast information about double spends
161 2011-08-26 08:15:49 <lfm> tcatm: I have a post mortem pgm that looks for evidence of double spend attempts in the block chain records
162 2011-08-26 08:16:08 <tcatm> lfm: interesting
163 2011-08-26 08:16:22 <lfm> tcatm: its not really tested yet cuz I cant find any examples
164 2011-08-26 08:16:44 <tcatm> how does it detect them?
165 2011-08-26 08:17:00 <tcatm> there were some double spend attempts but only one transaction made it into the chain
166 2011-08-26 08:17:16 <lfm> it would only see one if  both txn got into different forks of the block chain.
167 2011-08-26 08:17:36 <lfm> tcatm ya I prolly ownt see most
168 2011-08-26 08:17:42 <lfm> wont
169 2011-08-26 08:18:47 <lfm> there might be evidence in the debug.log too , im not sure
170 2011-08-26 08:21:05 <lfm> perhaps we could make a system to produce a whole bunch of double spend attempts to see what tools will detect them
171 2011-08-26 08:21:29 <tcatm> we could do that on testnet
172 2011-08-26 08:23:22 <lfm> make a whole bunch of wallets with 0.01 in each and duplicate them then syncronously try to spend them from two places
173 2011-08-26 08:44:01 <kfj98w2398492834> is this a logged channel?
174 2011-08-26 08:45:30 <SomeoneWeird> yes
175 2011-08-26 08:49:30 <UukGoblin> I log all channels I'm on...
176 2011-08-26 08:49:46 <lfm> kfj98w2398492834: why you ask?
177 2011-08-26 09:45:37 <SomeoneWeird> Anyone around that can run me through on how to compile the client on win?
178 2011-08-26 10:13:48 <baz_> anyone here implemented mtgox api client in Java? I find the authentication quite confusing, haven't done this kind of signing in java before
179 2011-08-26 10:43:33 <Cory> doublec your exchange's down. :(
180 2011-08-26 10:45:18 <doublec> Cory: which exchange
181 2011-08-26 10:45:43 <Cory> Looks like it's working now, but people were complaining about the SC exchange.
182 2011-08-26 10:45:54 <doublec> looks up to me
183 2011-08-26 10:46:01 <SomeoneWeird> lol
184 2011-08-26 10:46:07 <Cory> Yup, about 10 minutes ago I guess it was down. :P
185 2011-08-26 10:58:14 <Cory> I bet you're aware of the order book, doublec.
186 2011-08-26 11:41:05 <b4epoche> is there a conversion (I know it would be very rough) flops to hash/s?
187 2011-08-26 11:41:47 <b4epoche> I'm just trying to get a rough estimate of how many hashes/s a supercomputer might be able to perform
188 2011-08-26 11:42:06 <Zoiah> b4epoche: no.
189 2011-08-26 11:42:19 <kjj> you can find various figures around, but they are all meaningless
190 2011-08-26 11:42:20 <Zoiah> b4epoche: this is dependant on the instructionset.
191 2011-08-26 11:42:30 <SomeoneWeird> b4epoche, the answer is not very many
192 2011-08-26 11:42:46 <kjj> the problem is that hashing isn't done in floating point
193 2011-08-26 11:42:50 <b4epoche> I know it's going to be very rough and processor dependent, etc...
194 2011-08-26 11:42:56 <b4epoche> kjj:  I know
195 2011-08-26 11:43:14 <b4epoche> this is not something that needs to be very accurate
196 2011-08-26 11:43:25 <kjj> what people usually do is look at the hashing rate of a CPU, and then look at how many FLOPS it could do if it was doing them
197 2011-08-26 11:44:02 <kjj> but that is nonsense from start to finish, and it gets worse when you compare something like the global hash rate to the ratio for some particular CPU
198 2011-08-26 11:44:39 <Zoiah> b4epoche: the difference can massive. Just look at the performance between ATi and NVIDIA even though the FLOPS is not too differing.
199 2011-08-26 11:45:14 <b4epoche> hmm&  maybe instead of making a comparison to supercomputers I can make comparisons to number of GPUs
200 2011-08-26 11:45:33 <SomeoneWeird> would be better/easier
201 2011-08-26 11:45:44 <b4epoche> I'm just trying to demonstrate how hard it would be overrun block chain
202 2011-08-26 11:45:56 <SomeoneWeird> hard
203 2011-08-26 11:46:12 <b4epoche> yes, that's pretty obvious
204 2011-08-26 11:46:39 <Zoiah> b4epoche: Radeon 6970, theorectical GFLOPS: 2703. Hashing: 375. ~7GFLOP per Mhash
205 2011-08-26 11:47:37 <Zoiah> b4epoche: GTX 580, theoretical GFLOPS: 1581. Hashing: 140. ~11GLOP per Mhash.
206 2011-08-26 11:48:31 <Zoiah> b4epoche: Core i7 2600k. GFLOPS: 108. Hashing: 4. ~27GFLOP per Mhash.
207 2011-08-26 11:48:44 <b4epoche> I was trying to get a very rough estimate of the hash rate of a 8 TFLOPS supercomputer (current fastest)
208 2011-08-26 11:49:15 <b4epoche> oops 8 PetaFLOPS
209 2011-08-26 11:49:18 <Zoiah> Yeah.
210 2011-08-26 11:49:21 <Zoiah> I figured. ;)
211 2011-08-26 11:49:59 <kjj> it still doesn't make sense.  CPUs aren't atomic things, they have parts
212 2011-08-26 11:50:00 <Zoiah> If it's as efficient as the Core i7, 8000000 / 27 = 296296Mhash/s
213 2011-08-26 11:51:10 <b4epoche> kjj:  I know it doesn't make sense but it should be an order of magnitude estimate
214 2011-08-26 11:51:12 <kjj> the integer unit and the floating point unit are totally different things.  this is obscured by the fact that they aren't sold as distinct packages
215 2011-08-26 11:51:33 <Zoiah> http://bitcoin.sipa.be/
216 2011-08-26 11:51:53 <b4epoche> 68544 SPARC64 VIIIfx CPUs
217 2011-08-26 11:52:18 <Zoiah> Network is currently doing 150Thash/s.
218 2011-08-26 11:52:26 <kjj> 15, not 150
219 2011-08-26 11:52:35 <Zoiah> Right, sorry, 15Thash/s
220 2011-08-26 11:52:58 <Zoiah> The supercomputer would be doing 0.296Thash/s
221 2011-08-26 11:53:16 <b4epoche> yep...
222 2011-08-26 11:53:28 <kjj> if you want this to be meaningful at all, you need to look at the CPUs, and find the performance of their integer units
223 2011-08-26 11:53:35 <Zoiah> But the assumptions could be way off.
224 2011-08-26 11:54:11 <b4epoche> ^^ is the cpu the in that supercomputer
225 2011-08-26 11:54:33 <Zoiah> Doesn't seem to be any performance figures for mining on Sparc.
226 2011-08-26 11:54:41 <b4epoche> okay&  gotta go teach class.  ttyl.
227 2011-08-26 11:54:43 <Zoiah> Ttyl.
228 2011-08-26 11:54:57 <Rozz> hmmz
229 2011-08-26 11:55:03 <b4epoche> yea, I was surprised.  Didn't know anyone was still using that architecture
230 2011-08-26 11:55:09 <Zoiah> sun fire v120 (sun4u), sparcv9 650 MHz - 109.6 Khash/s
231 2011-08-26 11:55:10 <Zoiah> sun netra t2000 (sun4v), sparcv9 1.2 GHz - 117.4 Khash/s (strange)
232 2011-08-26 11:56:21 <Zoiah> Sparc architecture seems to be horrible for hashing.
233 2011-08-26 11:56:58 <kjj> the CPUs picked for HPC are usually picked for their floating point performance.
234 2011-08-26 11:57:15 <Zoiah> Let's assume it scales linearly with MHz with the best case Sparc.
235 2011-08-26 11:58:01 <Zoiah> So that's be 327Khash per Sparc core.
236 2011-08-26 11:58:33 <Zoiah> 68544 SPARC CPUs, 548352 SPARC core.
237 2011-08-26 11:59:02 <Zoiah> 179311104 Khash/sec
238 2011-08-26 11:59:05 <kjj> as far as I know, the last superscalar integer development outside of ATI was Intel's MMX.  after that, it has all been floating point.
239 2011-08-26 11:59:05 <Zoiah> 179 Ghash/sec
240 2011-08-26 11:59:07 <Zoiah> That's actually not too far off based on the FLOP/Hash ratio.
241 2011-08-26 12:00:10 <Zoiah> Either way, wouldn't dent the mining graph.
242 2011-08-26 12:45:42 <SomeoneWeird> Anyone around that can run me through on how to compile the client on win?
243 2011-08-26 12:52:54 <abragin> SomeoneWeird - with GUI, or commandline version?
244 2011-08-26 12:53:03 <SomeoneWeird> gui
245 2011-08-26 12:53:19 <abragin> a bit harder due to QT (iirc)
246 2011-08-26 12:53:22 <abragin> I compiled only cui
247 2011-08-26 12:53:40 <abragin> and it was rather straightforward, you just need to get/build all dependances
248 2011-08-26 12:53:42 <SomeoneWeird> well, daemon would suffice for now but in the longrun i'd like gui compiled aswell
249 2011-08-26 12:53:52 <SomeoneWeird> heh
250 2011-08-26 12:54:02 <SomeoneWeird> did you follow a tut or something?
251 2011-08-26 12:54:26 <abragin> nope, alas there were no tutorial, so just try-and-error
252 2011-08-26 12:54:34 <SomeoneWeird> >.<
253 2011-08-26 12:54:36 <SomeoneWeird> ok
254 2011-08-26 12:55:24 <abragin> well, I created a vc project for that
255 2011-08-26 12:55:32 <abragin> visual studio I mean
256 2011-08-26 12:56:45 <abragin> additional lib dirs: D:BitCoinLibsoost_1_43_0in.v2libsfilesystemuildmsvc-10.0debuglink-static\threading-multi;D:BitCoinLibsoost_1_43_0in.v2libssystemuildmsvc-10.0debuglink-static\threading-multi;D:BitCoinLibsoost_1_43_0in.v2libs\threaduildmsvc-10.0debuglink-static\threading-multi;D:BitCoinLibsoost_1_43_0in.v2libsdate_timeuildmsvc-10.0deb
257 2011-08-26 12:57:11 <abragin> you may see what libs are used from that
258 2011-08-26 12:58:43 <SomeoneWeird> hrm ok thanks
259 2011-08-26 13:38:06 <forrestv> cjdelisle, no, the share won't be rejected. included transactions aren't checked against anything
260 2011-08-26 13:38:22 <cjdelisle> thanks
261 2011-08-26 13:55:11 <skraps> help get SSL options for everyone for free on pastebin like this page on face book http://pastebin.com/f4e0diQP
262 2011-08-26 13:58:25 <UukGoblin> does someone keep historical trade data of all exchanges (like the real-time one provided by bitcoincharts)?
263 2011-08-26 13:59:25 <tcatm> bitcoincharts does
264 2011-08-26 16:47:49 <UukGoblin> heh, "create your own altchain" option in bitcoin would be nice
265 2011-08-26 16:48:25 <UukGoblin> you just enter some values in a special config file, like the coin-per-block, avg-time-to-find-block, etc - and bam! you've got your own altchain
266 2011-08-26 16:48:47 <UukGoblin> it'd perhaps show people how silly ixcoin and the like are
267 2011-08-26 16:57:30 <UukGoblin> 195650 <+amphipod> Aug26 18:57:48 b7           1.6200 @     8.60       USD
268 2011-08-26 16:57:49 <UukGoblin> heh, looks like b7's clock (or something) is about a minute in the future
269 2011-08-26 16:58:02 <UukGoblin> more
270 2011-08-26 17:04:16 <iocor> is it the case that you can reverse a wallet public key from an address?
271 2011-08-26 17:04:49 <tcatm> iocor: not without breaking the hashing function
272 2011-08-26 17:05:03 <btcserve> what is the best service (easy to configure and secure) to host bitcoind along with a python json-rpc app?
273 2011-08-26 17:05:25 <tcatm> btcserve: IIRC there is none yet. maybe you should start one?
274 2011-08-26 17:05:45 <btcserve> drat
275 2011-08-26 17:06:18 <zamgo> also add to your list:   'best secure service'
276 2011-08-26 17:06:23 <zamgo> also, none yet
277 2011-08-26 17:06:27 <btcserve> is there a hardened vm image i could use with a cloud service?
278 2011-08-26 17:07:49 <tcatm> setting up that vm is easy. coming up with a good backup plan is not that easy
279 2011-08-26 17:08:51 <zamgo> and that's why poland has 1 less exchange
280 2011-08-26 17:10:41 <btcserve> backup plan in case it gets hacked?
281 2011-08-26 17:35:43 <gribble> BlueMattBot was last seen in #bitcoin-dev 1 day, 19 hours, 15 minutes, and 10 seconds ago: <BlueMattBot> phantomcircuit: yummy! I just love penis!
282 2011-08-26 17:35:43 <imsaguy> ;;seen BlueMattBot
283 2011-08-26 17:37:45 <imsaguy> heh
284 2011-08-26 17:37:56 <imsaguy> I don't even remember what I had told gribble to tell BlueMatt
285 2011-08-26 18:00:09 <CIA-101> bitcoinjs/bitcoinjs-lib: Stefan Thomas master * r1df76fd / (4 files in 2 dirs): Add tests. - http://git.io/W6Ce9g
286 2011-08-26 18:00:11 <CIA-101> bitcoinjs/bitcoinjs-lib: Stefan Thomas master * r0f42456 / src/ecdsa.js :
287 2011-08-26 18:00:12 <CIA-101> bitcoinjs/bitcoinjs-lib: Added validate().
288 2011-08-26 18:00:13 <CIA-101> bitcoinjs/bitcoinjs-lib: Factored out new functions serializeSig and parseSig. - http://git.io/Z-DyEg
289 2011-08-26 18:36:47 <lfm> ;bc,mtgox
290 2011-08-26 18:41:49 <imsaguy> lfm, two ;;
291 2011-08-26 19:23:48 <Eliel> ... oh wait, it's a kernel patch... :P
292 2011-08-26 19:24:00 <Eliel> well, could be used if it ends up in the mainstream kernel :)
293 2011-08-26 19:24:06 <nanotube> Eliel: once you're worrying about people reading your data off ram... you're better off just going with multi-factor auth.
294 2011-08-26 19:32:19 <Eliel> I was wondering, for wallet backups, if it might be useful format to contain only keys (and perhaps 99% random unused keys mixed in with the real ones in random order) encrypted with a passphrase.
295 2011-08-26 19:32:31 <Eliel> keys as in private keys
296 2011-08-26 19:32:59 <Eliel> the idea is to be very much pain in the ass, if not impossible to brute force.
297 2011-08-26 19:33:52 <Eliel> if there's no predictable data in the file, the only way to check if a key is valid is to see if the it's public address has any bitcoins.
298 2011-08-26 19:36:11 <imsaguy> Eliel, so then how does the client know which are the keys to use?
299 2011-08-26 19:36:35 <imsaguy> whatever method you use to indicate to the client is the same way someone could extract them
300 2011-08-26 19:36:49 <Eliel> imsaguy: it's a backup, you're suppose to know the passphrase.
301 2011-08-26 19:37:08 <Eliel> so the client then checks all of them.
302 2011-08-26 19:37:18 <Eliel> for the given passphrase.
303 2011-08-26 19:37:51 <makomk> Eliel: it'd end in people thinking the backup was bad and they'd lost all their bitcoins because they typo'd the passphrase...
304 2011-08-26 19:38:36 <Eliel> makomk: only if they're not warned of how easy that's to do. (ie, if the UI design is bad)
305 2011-08-26 19:38:47 <ThomasV> nanotube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bc7Z6pCvRO0
306 2011-08-26 19:39:09 <makomk> I'm not sure how many users would pay attention to such a warning.
307 2011-08-26 19:39:32 <Eliel> makomk: even when it's their money at stake? seriously?
308 2011-08-26 19:39:42 <makomk> Seriously.
309 2011-08-26 19:39:49 <mtrlt> Eliel: yes.
310 2011-08-26 19:39:56 <mtrlt> they don't understand that they actually do own their money
311 2011-08-26 19:40:02 <mtrlt> and there's no-one to help if they screw up
312 2011-08-26 19:41:11 <Eliel> well, the recovery process could have a check at the end that notes the possibility in the same message that says 0BTC found.
313 2011-08-26 19:41:19 <makomk> Mostly because it's unexpected behaviour; most stuff tells users when they've entered their password wrong.
314 2011-08-26 19:41:26 <makomk> That could work... maybe.
315 2011-08-26 19:42:50 <Eliel> well, with bitcoins, people are going to have to wise up to there actually not being others to help if they do screw up :P
316 2011-08-26 19:43:31 <mtrlt> it'll take time
317 2011-08-26 19:44:14 <b4epoche_> OT but interesting:  http://www.businessweek.com/technology/how-software-is-harming-science-engineering-08252011.html
318 2011-08-26 19:46:38 <Eliel> b4epoche_: I'm laughing out loud here reading that article :D
319 2011-08-26 19:47:59 <Eliel> well, he's got some points there but I think he misunderstands the point he was criticizing.
320 2011-08-26 19:48:35 <Eliel> software is going to be a part of virtually any advancement on any other field.
321 2011-08-26 19:48:38 <b4epoche_> which you think is what?
322 2011-08-26 19:49:01 <nanotube> ThomasV: nice :)
323 2011-08-26 19:49:12 <b4epoche_> like, like an advance in welding
324 2011-08-26 19:49:42 <Eliel> b4epoche_: very likely to involve software somehow.
325 2011-08-26 19:49:54 <Eliel> if not in actual practical use, in the design.
326 2011-08-26 19:50:03 <Eliel> and testing
327 2011-08-26 19:50:04 <b4epoche_> and any advance is very likely to involve welding ;-)
328 2011-08-26 19:51:14 <nanotube> welding is taking over the world!
329 2011-08-26 19:51:22 <Eliel> basically, the writer of this article you linked to misunderstands the "poised to take over broad swathes of the economy"
330 2011-08-26 19:51:26 <b4epoche_> it's a dirty job that no one wants
331 2011-08-26 19:51:34 <ThomasV> nanotube: it has display + pin number + rfid
332 2011-08-26 19:52:07 <nanotube> neat.
333 2011-08-26 19:52:26 <ThomasV> nanotube: http://www.smartdisplayer.com/page_01_a.html#05
334 2011-08-26 19:52:52 <ThomasV> I love it
335 2011-08-26 19:53:01 <Eliel> b4epoche_: it doesn't mean software will be in the flashlights. It just means there will be software in everything. Hence, very profitable to be in software.
336 2011-08-26 19:53:15 <nanotube> ThomasV: cool, so are you going to make these for bitcoin? :)
337 2011-08-26 19:53:33 <ThomasV> nanotube: maybe; I need to check if the chip can do ecdsa
338 2011-08-26 19:53:47 <nanotube> mm
339 2011-08-26 19:53:55 <b4epoche_> but I think it's going to be very not-profitable to be in software, unless you live in India or China
340 2011-08-26 19:54:22 <sytse> wallet.cpp line 803:     if (nTotalLower == nTargetValue || nTotalLower == nTargetValue + CENT)
341 2011-08-26 19:54:45 <sytse> shouldn't that be, (nTotalLower >= nTargetValue || nTotalLower <= nTargetValue + CENT)?
342 2011-08-26 19:55:29 <Eliel> b4epoche_: I don't think you realize the magnitude of difference between the average programmer and even just good programmers.
343 2011-08-26 19:55:30 <ThomasV> nanotube: the problem with rfid is that merchants do not have readers ; they typically have smart card readers for cards with chip
344 2011-08-26 19:56:06 <ThomasV> (where you insert the card)
345 2011-08-26 19:56:07 <b4epoche_> eliel:  and there aren't good programmers amoung the 1 billion Indians?
346 2011-08-26 19:56:08 <nanotube> the other problem with rfid is that it leaks data, doesn't it? (I.e., anyone can ninja-read your rfid?)
347 2011-08-26 19:56:15 <Eliel> pushing everything to india/china means you get average programmers cheap
348 2011-08-26 19:56:30 <Eliel> because there's just too much demand for programmers from there.
349 2011-08-26 19:56:30 <ThomasV> nanotube: no, not if you confirm with pin on your card
350 2011-08-26 19:56:42 <Eliel> there's the occasional good one of course.
351 2011-08-26 19:56:45 <Eliel> but not enough
352 2011-08-26 19:57:10 <ThomasV> these cards have a keypad and a display
353 2011-08-26 19:57:19 <nanotube> mmm
354 2011-08-26 19:57:21 <b4epoche_> but that's the problem&  most innovations just need average programmers
355 2011-08-26 19:57:56 <b4epoche_> the software in my refrigerator need not be written by a good programmer
356 2011-08-26 19:58:12 <Eliel> b4epoche_: it's not what you can build with average programmers vs good programmers. You can usually get the job done even with average programmers too.
357 2011-08-26 19:58:28 <Eliel> good programmers get the same job done faster and with less bugs
358 2011-08-26 19:58:54 <sytse> b4epoche_: that day is 1970
359 2011-08-26 19:58:58 <mtrlt> um what is it viewed as currently?
360 2011-08-26 19:59:04 <ThomasV> I do not know how much they cost, though
361 2011-08-26 19:59:16 <sytse> mtrlt: as something you pick some losers from the street for
362 2011-08-26 19:59:21 <sytse> mtrlt: as long as they do what you tell them to
363 2011-08-26 19:59:39 <mtrlt> i've not seen that attitude in practice :P
364 2011-08-26 19:59:41 <sytse> because IT projects fail anyway, everybody knows that, that's nobody's fault right?
365 2011-08-26 19:59:49 <b4epoche_> i.e. a trade instead of a profession
366 2011-08-26 19:59:51 <mtrlt> but it might very well exist
367 2011-08-26 19:59:54 <Eliel> b4epoche_: basically, it'll be cheaper to pay a few good programmers the money a dozen average ones would need and get a better result, faster.
368 2011-08-26 20:00:22 <sytse> Eliel: yes, but tell that to a manager
369 2011-08-26 20:00:40 <Eliel> sytse: managers will learn, eventually.
370 2011-08-26 20:03:39 <Eliel> anyway, the number of managers that realize that is not too high but they exist.
371 2011-08-26 20:05:19 <b4epoche_> but more on-topic&  I think bitcoin is (could be) a counter example of an innovation build entirely from software
372 2011-08-26 20:07:48 <sytse> b4epoche_: nah, I'm still young and relatively uninitiated in the world of business
373 2011-08-26 20:08:20 <sytse> 26 yo
374 2011-08-26 20:14:23 <imsaguy> sytse, as many as you can
375 2011-08-26 20:14:28 <imsaguy> they'll be worth something someday
376 2011-08-26 20:14:46 <sytse> maybe keep it a clean number, like 100
377 2011-08-26 20:15:24 <sytse> imsaguy: do you really think so? :)
378 2011-08-26 20:16:22 <imsaguy> yeah
379 2011-08-26 20:16:30 <imsaguy> kinda like an unused quarter
380 2011-08-26 20:16:52 <sytse> I'd only be able to sell them for more than the normal price if I kept them off my tax returns though I suppose, which would entail never selling them anywhere but on the black market
381 2011-08-26 20:16:56 <sytse> which is risky
382 2011-08-26 20:17:52 <BitManiac> just file the taxes man
383 2011-08-26 20:17:56 <BitManiac> better in the long run
384 2011-08-26 20:17:57 <sytse> exactly
385 2011-08-26 20:18:01 <sytse> I will
386 2011-08-26 20:18:28 <sytse> imsaguy: or do you think some dumb people will actually be willing to pay more for a clean 50 BTC because they think it makes them look cool?
387 2011-08-26 20:18:39 <BitManiac> dumb people will pay for anything
388 2011-08-26 20:18:43 <sytse> heh
389 2011-08-26 20:18:44 <sytse> that's true
390 2011-08-26 20:18:48 <sytse> even bitcoins
391 2011-08-26 20:18:49 <sytse> *ahem*
392 2011-08-26 20:18:50 <sytse> wait
393 2011-08-26 20:18:52 <sytse> I didn't say that
394 2011-08-26 20:18:57 <BitManiac> I saw someone on bitcointalk the other day
395 2011-08-26 20:18:58 <sytse> ;-)
396 2011-08-26 20:19:15 <BitManiac> offering 1.15BTC for any bitcoins that were mined on his son's birthday
397 2011-08-26 20:19:19 <sytse> rofl
398 2011-08-26 20:19:27 <BitManiac> because he wants to keep them for him when he grows up
399 2011-08-26 20:19:34 <BitManiac> most retarded shit I ever heard
400 2011-08-26 20:19:49 <BitManiac> "here you go son, a 256 bit hash key"
401 2011-08-26 20:19:54 <BitManiac> "happy birthday!!!"
402 2011-08-26 20:20:09 <sytse> a 256 bit hash key that might be worth $100000 by then btw
403 2011-08-26 20:20:13 <BitManiac> yeah
404 2011-08-26 20:20:16 <BitManiac> or 0.01c
405 2011-08-26 20:20:22 <sytse> sure
406 2011-08-26 20:20:40 <BitManiac> something like 75% of all bitcoins are hoarded
407 2011-08-26 20:21:05 <BitManiac> for them to escalate in value that much they need to start flowing around a little more
408 2011-08-26 20:21:09 <BitManiac> or a LOT more
409 2011-08-26 20:21:27 <sytse> it would need to become a common thing
410 2011-08-26 20:21:30 <sytse> not as common as gold
411 2011-08-26 20:21:32 <sytse> but still common
412 2011-08-26 20:22:34 <lfm> BitManiac: are you haveing trouble buying as many bitcoin as you would like to buy?
413 2011-08-26 20:23:06 <BitManiac> no
414 2011-08-26 20:23:09 <imsaguy> sytse, the thing about selling 'clean' btc is
415 2011-08-26 20:23:10 <BitManiac> Britcoin is back up :)
416 2011-08-26 20:23:16 <imsaguy> once you transfer it, its not clean anymore
417 2011-08-26 20:23:20 <imsaguy> there's a transaction :p
418 2011-08-26 20:23:20 <sytse> imsaguy: yep
419 2011-08-26 20:23:23 <sytse> I know
420 2011-08-26 20:23:32 <imsaguy> so buying a clean bitcoin to be cool wouldn't hold
421 2011-08-26 20:23:45 <imsaguy> but someone might
422 2011-08-26 20:24:36 <pigeons> you can trade the private key, but how do you know the seller didn't keep a copy?
423 2011-08-26 20:25:10 <log0s> you can have a miner put your bitcoin address in the coingen tx instead of their own
424 2011-08-26 20:25:34 <pigeons> i think the more transactions the coin has been involved would be "cooler" than none
425 2011-08-26 20:25:36 <log0s> i think luke-jr has done that for people before, and charged a premium
426 2011-08-26 20:26:10 <Eliel> yes, and any fees paid on transactions become "clean" BTC as well.
427 2011-08-26 20:26:34 <imsaguy> well
428 2011-08-26 20:26:40 <Eliel> they're basically mixed in with the generated BTC in the block.
429 2011-08-26 20:26:42 <imsaguy> to say coin is a bit deceptive
430 2011-08-26 20:26:54 <imsaguy> because they are split and merged all the time
431 2011-08-26 20:27:03 <imsaguy> so its hard to say which is which after the first merge
432 2011-08-26 20:27:24 <Eliel> imsaguy: there are no coins, really :P only transactions :)
433 2011-08-26 20:27:55 <Eliel> so, it's just handy to use the word "coin" for a single outpoint, be it whatever size it is.
434 2011-08-26 20:28:30 <lfm> ya, and trnsactions dont really have datestamps, only the block headers have datestamps
435 2011-08-26 20:28:59 <imsaguy> so to say you have a 'coin' with many transactions really doesn't mean anything
436 2011-08-26 20:35:03 <sytse> BitManiac: hmmm, btw, the total number of bitcoins will be 21 million, so if bitcoin were to become 1/1000th as interesting as gold (ie, if the total amount of bitcoins were worth 1/1000th of the total amount of gold), 1 BTC would be worth $500
437 2011-08-26 20:35:20 <sytse> so $100000 per BTC would be ridiculous indeed
438 2011-08-26 20:36:47 <b4epoche_> sytse:  use the amount of USD in circulation...
439 2011-08-26 20:36:59 <b4epoche_> the numbers get pretty ridiculous
440 2011-08-26 20:38:05 <sytse> of course, but that's only ever going to happen if bitcoin manages to become a common payment method
441 2011-08-26 20:40:53 <sytse> which I hold to be fairly unlikely
442 2011-08-26 20:42:02 <nanotube> if it remains cheaper to accept than credit cards, it is imo quite likely. since easy pnp merchant solutions will inevitably develop.
443 2011-08-26 20:42:21 <b4epoche_> but even if you take a very small percentage it's still surprisingly high
444 2011-08-26 20:42:49 <nanotube> well, credit cards take about 3%
445 2011-08-26 20:43:03 <b4epoche_> nanotube:  that wasn't for you
446 2011-08-26 20:43:05 <nanotube> plus there's the expected loss of P(chargeback)*avg(chargebackamount)
447 2011-08-26 20:43:17 <b4epoche_> yea, cc do take about 3%
448 2011-08-26 20:43:23 <nanotube> ah :)
449 2011-08-26 20:43:53 <nanotube> bitcoin automagically eliminates the latter, and as long as the processor takes less than 3%, bitcoin remains financially attractive.
450 2011-08-26 20:44:00 <b4epoche_> but I was talking about (usd in circulation)/(21M btc)*(small fraction) = (big number)
451 2011-08-26 20:44:10 <nanotube> though i wonder if a processor is not required by law to allow buyers to chargeback....
452 2011-08-26 20:44:29 <nanotube> (prob depends on jurisdiction...)
453 2011-08-26 20:44:40 <nanotube> b4epoche_: aah ic what you meant by small percentage ;)
454 2011-08-26 20:44:47 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Gavin Andresen master * r829e217 / (4 files in 2 dirs): CHECKMULTISIG unit tests. - http://git.io/lr3rnA
455 2011-08-26 20:44:55 <nanotube> ooo multisig!
456 2011-08-26 20:46:01 <b4epoche_> seems fundamentally flawed to have them but so many laws are
457 2011-08-26 20:46:21 <nanotube> well, it's not really flawed... ultimately, /someone/ has to bear the risk of fraud.
458 2011-08-26 20:46:45 <phantomcircuit> b4epoche, it's supposed to be consumer protection, but that fails to take account of p2p business
459 2011-08-26 20:47:01 <b4epoche_> nanotube:  that's not what I'm talking about
460 2011-08-26 20:47:17 <b4epoche_> paying with a cc should be no different than paying with cash
461 2011-08-26 20:47:39 <b4epoche_> if you want you're money back you go beat the shit out of the dude that sold you crap and take it back
462 2011-08-26 20:47:40 <lfm> why
463 2011-08-26 20:47:52 <nanotube> paying with a cc frequently happens over large distances
464 2011-08-26 20:48:09 <nanotube> will you take a trip to texas to beat up a guy who failed to ship you a $30 doodad?
465 2011-08-26 20:48:39 <phantomcircuit> worse the guy in texas could charge you $50
466 2011-08-26 20:48:44 <nanotube> lol
467 2011-08-26 20:48:44 <phantomcircuit> and then send it to you
468 2011-08-26 20:48:45 <b4epoche_> well, no, but in Tx I'm sure someone close by would take $10 to do the job for me
469 2011-08-26 20:49:02 <phantomcircuit> credit cards are just stupidly designed
470 2011-08-26 20:49:08 <phantomcircuit> they trust everybody in the entire system
471 2011-08-26 20:49:19 <lfm> do you put the $10 on your cc?
472 2011-08-26 20:49:20 <nanotube> it is not unreasonable to suggest, that most individuals would find it a negative-EV proposition to expend resources to pursue a small fraud
473 2011-08-26 20:49:29 <nanotube> while a fraudster will find in profitable to conduct a lot of them
474 2011-08-26 20:49:45 <nanotube> so putting the risk on the business discourages seller-fraud.
475 2011-08-26 20:50:30 <b4epoche_> when I was getting a business set up to accept credit cards (many years ago) I was informed that restaurants had high fees because a lot of patrons would chargeback the 'meal' if they didn't like it
476 2011-08-26 20:50:35 <nanotube> it encourages buyer-fraud, on the other hand. however, since in case of seller-fraud, you end up with liquid cash, while in case of buyer-fraud you end up with $doodad... large-scale buyer fraud is generally less likely, and less profitable.
477 2011-08-26 20:50:50 <nanotube> yea, buyer fraud.
478 2011-08-26 20:50:53 <lfm> suposedly they also do it to "encourage" the retailers to check signatures and stuff too, never worked tho
479 2011-08-26 20:51:30 <nanotube> anyway, not that i support chargebacks :) but just saying that there's a logic to it.
480 2011-08-26 20:52:06 <b4epoche_> http://ag.ca.gov/consumers/general/credit_card_chargeback_rights.php
481 2011-08-26 20:52:06 <nanotube> in the world of paying by bitcoin over the internet, i'd certainly want to at least use escrow, before i deal with a random business i haven't dealt with before.
482 2011-08-26 20:52:28 <luke-jr> b4epoche_: you mean high prices?
483 2011-08-26 20:52:35 <sytse> b4epoche_: so the weird thing is, bitcoin price is so ridiculously high at the moment, that the total amount of bitcoins is still worth more than 1/200000'th of the total US money stock (according to the 'M2' measure of http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h6/hist/h6hist7.htm )
484 2011-08-26 20:52:37 <nanotube> i.e., how do i know if bitmunchies will send me the chips, or just take my coins? well, every bitcoiner knows about bitmunchies. but once we get to the point when we have 100s of thousands of little businesses?
485 2011-08-26 20:52:56 <luke-jr> sytse: erm, Bitcoin prices are ridiculously *low*
486 2011-08-26 20:53:06 <b4epoche_> luke-jr, sytse :  eh?
487 2011-08-26 20:53:09 <luke-jr> who is starting this "high" FUD?
488 2011-08-26 20:53:17 <sytse> me
489 2011-08-26 20:53:33 <b4epoche_> luke-jr:  read the discussion carefully
490 2011-08-26 20:54:35 <nanotube> sytse: 5e-6 is a pretty small fraction of anything :P
491 2011-08-26 20:54:41 <sytse> luke-jr: well, maybe my point is just that the average bitcoin user is much richer than the average US citizen
492 2011-08-26 20:54:53 <luke-jr> sytse: that should be obvious
493 2011-08-26 20:54:59 <luke-jr> sytse: Bitcoin requires internet
494 2011-08-26 20:55:05 <sytse> lol
495 2011-08-26 20:55:14 <lfm> sytse: if the price is too low no one will want to mine and the whole thing will fall apart
496 2011-08-26 20:55:16 <nanotube> and a computer, and spare cash to risk on a startup currency
497 2011-08-26 20:55:21 <luke-jr> ^
498 2011-08-26 20:55:22 <sytse> lfm: true
499 2011-08-26 20:55:25 <sytse> lfm: well
500 2011-08-26 20:55:39 <sytse> lfm: *less* people will want to mine
501 2011-08-26 20:55:46 <sytse> because when less people mine
502 2011-08-26 20:55:48 <sytse> they get more money
503 2011-08-26 20:55:51 <b4epoche_> weird:  see #2 under "However, unlike billing errors, you must meet four additional conditions:" on that web site I posted
504 2011-08-26 20:56:25 <sytse> so the amount of miners should naturally follow the value of bitcoins
505 2011-08-26 20:56:39 <cjdelisle> I find it interesting that if every miner was using mrb's whitepixel setup (which is really efficient) then the amount of money in hardware would be around 20 million USD
506 2011-08-26 20:56:47 <b4epoche_> sytse:  kinda&  but what else you gonna do with that mining rig?
507 2011-08-26 20:57:00 <sytse> cjdelisle: whut? Really?
508 2011-08-26 20:57:23 <b4epoche_> link to mrb's whitepixel setup?
509 2011-08-26 20:57:31 <sytse> b4epoche_: well, it's like farming: when there are too many, ultimately competition is going to be so tough that some people have to drop out, and it will hurt them
510 2011-08-26 20:57:37 <sytse> but that's economy
511 2011-08-26 20:57:57 <b4epoche_> sytse:  what?
512 2011-08-26 20:58:11 <b4epoche_> why you telling me that?
513 2011-08-26 20:58:14 <nanotube> sytse: also, consider that if the 'average bitcoin user' has maybe 100btc or so... he's not really "much richer" than everyone else in the devolped world.
514 2011-08-26 20:58:18 <sytse> too much supply => prices too low
515 2011-08-26 20:58:36 <luke-jr> nanotube: he said average, not median
516 2011-08-26 20:58:55 <cjdelisle> hangon I have a paste somewhere with all the math
517 2011-08-26 20:58:58 <nanotube> which is not unlikely, there are 7million coins... maybe 50k-100k "users"...
518 2011-08-26 20:59:30 <sytse> so a million dollars per user
519 2011-08-26 20:59:32 <nanotube> luke-jr: meh, not that relevant to the overall point.
520 2011-08-26 20:59:40 <nanotube> sytse: no, 7mil / 100k is 70
521 2011-08-26 20:59:44 <nanotube> 70 coins is ... 700 bucks
522 2011-08-26 20:59:51 <sytse> uh indeed
523 2011-08-26 20:59:55 <sytse> a thousand coins per user
524 2011-08-26 20:59:59 <sytse> *dollars
525 2011-08-26 21:00:03 <sytse> I'm not thinking straight =]
526 2011-08-26 21:00:33 <luke-jr> average American probably has less :P
527 2011-08-26 21:00:33 <nanotube> i wish i had a million dollars... haha
528 2011-08-26 21:00:40 <sytse> luke-jr: rofl
529 2011-08-26 21:00:50 <nanotube> hehe, once you net out the debt, possibly so
530 2011-08-26 21:00:51 <sytse> nanotube: yeah, me too..
531 2011-08-26 21:01:23 <luke-jr> most Americans live paycheck to paycheck, I think
532 2011-08-26 21:01:49 <BitManiac> taking credit card is a lot more espensive than 3%
533 2011-08-26 21:01:58 <BitManiac> 3% is just transaction fees
534 2011-08-26 21:02:02 <nanotube> so iow, the current bitcoin price is "in the realm of reasonable" at worst, or quite undervalued at best. imo.
535 2011-08-26 21:02:16 <nanotube> luke-jr: what paycheck? :P
536 2011-08-26 21:02:19 <BitManiac> you've also got to have an account with a merchant bank
537 2011-08-26 21:02:26 <BitManiac> then there's chargeback costs
538 2011-08-26 21:02:34 <BitManiac> and if you want to avoid those, fraud prevention costs
539 2011-08-26 21:02:35 <sytse> but I doubt there are 50k bitcoin users with at least as many bitcoins as they have money in their bank accounts plus savings accounts
540 2011-08-26 21:02:43 <b4epoche_> http://www.visualeconomics.com/the-value-of-united-states-currency-in-circulation/
541 2011-08-26 21:02:43 <sytse> plus cash
542 2011-08-26 21:02:47 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":9.889,"low":7.642,"avg":8.890382398,"vwap":8.684594559,"vol":82906,"last":8,"buy":7.999,"sell":8}}
543 2011-08-26 21:02:53 <BitManiac> it's more like between 5-10%, depending on the size of the compant
544 2011-08-26 21:02:54 <BitManiac> y
545 2011-08-26 21:03:27 <BitManiac> it's also a complete PITA to administer a payment gateway
546 2011-08-26 21:03:28 <nanotube> sytse: well, chances are people with bitcoins tend to have rather more spare cash than those without, on average.
547 2011-08-26 21:03:35 <BitManiac> so most companies outsource their checkout
548 2011-08-26 21:03:37 <b4epoche_> BitManiac:  yes, it does add up
549 2011-08-26 21:03:38 <BitManiac> so have to pay for that too
550 2011-08-26 21:03:38 <nanotube> BitManiac: well, that's good news for bitcoin :)
551 2011-08-26 21:03:59 <BitManiac> sure
552 2011-08-26 21:04:03 <b4epoche_> BitManiac:  and it is a PITA even without a gateway
553 2011-08-26 21:04:04 <sytse> so my point was, not many people or businesses have a significant amount of their liquid or semi-liquid (savings account) currency in bitcoins
554 2011-08-26 21:04:48 <sytse> which makes me wonder how bitcoins could really be worth $8
555 2011-08-26 21:05:01 <sytse> it's extremely hard to make a comparison though
556 2011-08-26 21:05:02 <BitManiac> same as how a peice of gold is worth $1800
557 2011-08-26 21:05:08 <BitManiac> people are prepared to pay it
558 2011-08-26 21:05:12 <nanotube> sytse: oh, that's clearly due to speculative activity, pricing in expectations for the future.
559 2011-08-26 21:05:26 <nanotube> it's not due to sitting in float accounts of various businesses
560 2011-08-26 21:05:50 <BitManiac> yeah you're treating bitcoin like a Fiat currency
561 2011-08-26 21:05:59 <BitManiac> there is no dollar reserve backing it up
562 2011-08-26 21:06:01 <BitManiac> it is what it is
563 2011-08-26 21:06:15 <sytse> BitManiac: oh, and of course stocks plus everything else material (like houses) people own and plan to sell one day is worth lots more than the total circulation
564 2011-08-26 21:06:35 <BitManiac> sure
565 2011-08-26 21:06:44 <sytse> so that would mean the total bitcoin value is manageable to keep up by the economy, because houses and stocks do so as well
566 2011-08-26 21:06:48 <BitManiac> "worth" is only an idea someone has in their head
567 2011-08-26 21:06:50 <BitManiac> it's meaningless really
568 2011-08-26 21:06:54 <BitManiac> when you break it down
569 2011-08-26 21:06:59 <nanotube> sytse: anyway.... feel free to borrow some coins and short them, or buy some put options, if you want to put your money where your mouth is. :)
570 2011-08-26 21:07:01 <BitManiac> we've just become lazy in our thinking
571 2011-08-26 21:07:06 <sytse> nanotube: nah
572 2011-08-26 21:07:13 <BitManiac> conditioned by the banks and corporations to assume that prices are prices
573 2011-08-26 21:07:19 <sytse> nanotube: I think over the next 6 months, prices will rise above $20 again
574 2011-08-26 21:07:31 <BitManiac> and they only change a tiny amount, not worth worrying about really
575 2011-08-26 21:07:31 <nanotube> mm :)
576 2011-08-26 21:07:42 <BitManiac> but actually
577 2011-08-26 21:07:50 <BitManiac> when gas prices can rise 200% in a few years
578 2011-08-26 21:07:56 <BitManiac> people start to question the value of money
579 2011-08-26 21:08:19 <sytse> nanotube: because of all the fancy new things bitcoin businesses are planning to introduce over the next few months
580 2011-08-26 21:08:29 <nanotube> heh
581 2011-08-26 21:08:36 <lfm> gas prices rise 20% in 2 minutes
582 2011-08-26 21:08:46 <BitManiac> yeah
583 2011-08-26 21:08:53 <BitManiac> price of crude goes up: gas goes up
584 2011-08-26 21:09:01 <BitManiac> price of crude stays the same: gas goes up
585 2011-08-26 21:09:07 <BitManiac> price of crude goes down: gas goes up
586 2011-08-26 21:09:10 <BitManiac> nice one.
587 2011-08-26 21:09:16 <BitManiac> thanks, big oil companies! :D
588 2011-08-26 21:09:29 <BitManiac> without you I'd have far too much spare money just sitting around
589 2011-08-26 21:09:32 <BitManiac> making me sad
590 2011-08-26 21:09:36 <BitManiac> thanks for heling me spend it
591 2011-08-26 21:09:40 <sytse> (but according to both btctrading.wordpress.com and bitcoinwatch.com, the current bearish trend is not set to change at all in the short term, which I would agree with, so I guess we'll see it drop below $5 within the next few weeks)
592 2011-08-26 21:10:05 <BitManiac> neither of those websites can see the future
593 2011-08-26 21:10:12 <BitManiac> you can spend your life sitting looking at graphs
594 2011-08-26 21:10:17 <sytse> BitManiac: btw, gas prices rose less where I live
595 2011-08-26 21:10:24 <BitManiac> you have as much chance as guessing the market as anyone else
596 2011-08-26 21:10:31 <sytse> because the taxes are phenomenal here
597 2011-08-26 21:11:13 <BitManiac> sweden?
598 2011-08-26 21:12:04 <sytse> the netherlands
599 2011-08-26 21:12:17 <BitManiac> fair one
600 2011-08-26 21:12:30 <BitManiac> nobody pays more for gas in europe than us in the UK though I don't think
601 2011-08-26 21:12:54 <BitManiac> we have 85% tax rate or something stupid like that
602 2011-08-26 21:15:59 <sytse> BitManiac: I pay ??? 1.60 per liter, which is $8.781/gal
603 2011-08-26 21:16:03 <sytse> oh
604 2011-08-26 21:16:05 <sytse> UK
605 2011-08-26 21:16:35 <sytse> ???1.417/l
606 2011-08-26 21:16:43 <sytse> is what I'd pay BitManiac
607 2011-08-26 21:16:51 <sytse> here across the street anyway
608 2011-08-26 21:17:38 <sytse> ahem
609 2011-08-26 21:17:47 <sytse> ridiculous indeed, when I look back at the prices in 2008
610 2011-08-26 21:17:55 <sytse> (I didn't have a car back then)
611 2011-08-26 21:42:35 <cjdelisle> sytse: http://bitcoinanalisys.pastebay.com/136608
612 2011-08-26 21:43:20 <cjdelisle> 20,035,650 dollars worth of mining equipment
613 2011-08-26 21:44:03 <cjdelisle> 18,450 kilowatts and each minted coin requires 18,450 / 300 or 61.5 kilowatthours
614 2011-08-26 21:44:27 <luke-jr> on average*
615 2011-08-26 21:44:48 <cjdelisle> yea, those are all bastardavrigizations
616 2011-08-26 21:44:51 <phantomcircuit> cjdelisle, shockingly the profit involed in mining has dropped to almost nothing
617 2011-08-26 21:44:55 <phantomcircuit> who would have guessed
618 2011-08-26 21:45:09 <cjdelisle> I never got in to mining because I predicted this
619 2011-08-26 21:45:26 <sytse> cjdelisle: damn
620 2011-08-26 21:45:33 <cjdelisle> need a wpa for btc site
621 2011-08-26 21:45:45 <cjdelisle> so people can mine something else...
622 2011-08-26 21:46:23 <cjdelisle> not necessarily wpa, there are pharmapsutical companies, financials, etc who might have raw data they want crunched on an opencl army
623 2011-08-26 21:47:56 <cjdelisle> eventially all mining will be done by botnets and mining rigs will generally be unprofitable
624 2011-08-26 21:48:36 <cjdelisle> also botnets are the other ? factor, how much of that $20M is involuntary?
625 2011-08-26 21:54:21 <sytse> one thing won't *ever* change: the amount of electricity spent on maintaining the bitcoin network will always be around (or maybe a little lower, but not much) the current spot price of the average amount of bitcoins awarded in fees plus generated coins (the latter of which will eventually taper off completely) in the same time unit
626 2011-08-26 21:56:19 <sytse> what will change is that eventually gpu mining will cease, and specialised companies with high-performance fpga or maybe even asic hardware will take over; whenever a more efficient technology arises to generate hashes, any less efficient technology will become unprofitable
627 2011-08-26 21:59:58 <sytse> well, that's again exactly the same as farming
628 2011-08-26 22:01:08 <sytse> farming with the efficiency of farming 20 years ago doesn't happen anymore because that would drive you bankrupt
629 2011-08-26 22:01:32 <cjdelisle> yea unless you develop a niche market, organic etc.
630 2011-08-26 22:03:11 <sytse> of course
631 2011-08-26 22:03:19 <sytse> bitcoin is simpler
632 2011-08-26 22:05:22 <sytse> what's interesting though, is that with farming, location is everything; that's the reason inefficient farming in third world countries can still exist
633 2011-08-26 22:06:03 <sytse> with bitcoins it would be the opposite: mining would only take place in the location in the world where electricity is cheapest, because location doesn't matter for getting the 'produce' somewhere
634 2011-08-26 22:06:15 <cjdelisle> good point
635 2011-08-26 22:06:33 <sytse> ultimately it will become infeasible to generate bitcoins in a first world country
636 2011-08-26 22:06:41 <cjdelisle> I heard england subsidises their mines :P
637 2011-08-26 22:07:16 <sytse> which would also mean that only *large* corporations could turn any profit at all from bitcoin mining