1 2011-09-02 00:45:17 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Con Kolivas * r33c2eccbf848 cgminer/README: Update README.
  2 2011-09-02 00:45:19 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Con Kolivas * rdd78340c329b cgminer/NEWS: Update NEWS.
  3 2011-09-02 00:45:20 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Con Kolivas * r65707516d3c3 cgminer/configure.ac: With no c++ code there is no point showing CXXFLAGS.
  4 2011-09-02 00:45:21 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Con Kolivas * r690ab48736c2 cgminer/configure.ac: Bump version to 1.6.2.
  5 2011-09-02 03:20:05 <ThomasV> sgornick: did you see falkvinge's last article ?
  6 2011-09-02 03:20:27 <ThomasV> http://falkvinge.net/2011/08/25/days-of-reckoning-fast-approaching-for-banks/
  7 2011-09-02 03:24:46 <sgornick> ThomasV: No I haven't.  Will try to once I clear off my plate a couple things.  Thanks.
  8 2011-09-02 03:29:14 <SAC> Well there is an ill wind blowing through the bitcoin community. I tell the truth about what RealSolid was up to with the SolidCoin on the bitcointalk.org and all I get or my trouble is my login disabled. Now their normal reaction to these new forks is to kill them of as soon as possible but they must have so many of them coins left they all think they actually are going to get rich killing off bitcoin like you early adopters of bitcoin  supposed
  9 2011-09-02 03:30:12 <cacheson> ^ bizarre, reverse-psychology attempt to promote solidcoin?
 10 2011-09-02 03:31:02 <doublec> sac and realsolid are having a disagreement
 11 2011-09-02 03:31:14 <cacheson> doublec: yeah, I saw
 12 2011-09-02 03:31:27 <cacheson> SAC's approach is just a little... incoherent
 13 2011-09-02 03:31:47 <doublec> yes, it's a bit hard to follow.
 14 2011-09-02 03:32:23 <nanotube> what /is/ sac's approach?
 15 2011-09-02 03:33:22 <cacheson> nanotube: wall-of-text rambling, I guess
 16 2011-09-02 03:33:23 <doublec> as few punctuation and paragraphs as possible
 17 2011-09-02 03:33:39 <nanotube> haha i see. "punctuation is for weenies (tm)" :)
 18 2011-09-02 03:34:00 <copumpkin> link?
 19 2011-09-02 03:34:16 <doublec> copumpkin: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=40770.0
 20 2011-09-02 03:34:32 <cacheson> copumpkin: also, his message here just now
 21 2011-09-02 03:35:31 <doublec> I think he claims that realsolid and noagendamarket were manipulating the exchange price and causing him to lose money.
 22 2011-09-02 03:37:06 <kjj_AFK> I'm still having a hard time imagining people actually buying these other coins on exchanges
 23 2011-09-02 03:38:45 <cacheson> they're all taking longer to die than I expected
 24 2011-09-02 03:39:21 <cacheson> I guess Ixcoin and I0coin got a second wind from breaking and then being fixed
 25 2011-09-02 03:39:26 <kjj> yeah, but how?  I can totally see mining some coins on easy mode and selling them.
 26 2011-09-02 03:40:01 <kjj> but to sell them, someone else must buy, and I have a hard time imagining a real human being that dumb
 27 2011-09-02 03:40:18 <doublec> the buyers are hoping they can day trade their way to a profit
 28 2011-09-02 03:40:30 <doublec> or that it'll become "the one true chain"
 29 2011-09-02 03:40:33 <cacheson> kjj: I didn't have trouble believing people were dumb enough to buy
 30 2011-09-02 03:40:41 <cacheson> kjj: I just figured they'd go insolvent sooner
 31 2011-09-02 03:40:42 <doublec> making them an "early adopter" (tm)
 32 2011-09-02 03:41:02 <doublec> i0coin is still pretty dead
 33 2011-09-02 03:41:03 <cacheson> or at least get burned badly enough to scare them off
 34 2011-09-02 03:41:12 <doublec> ixcoin is following thanks to the network split
 35 2011-09-02 03:42:12 <cacheson> eh, they seem to be hanging around the prices that they started at
 36 2011-09-02 03:42:19 <cacheson> 001-002ish
 37 2011-09-02 03:46:14 <ThomasV> solidcoins are priced higher
 38 2011-09-02 03:46:25 <cacheson> ThomasV: yeah, I meant ix and i0
 39 2011-09-02 03:47:11 <ThomasV> but solidcoins are more recent, the supply is being inflated very fast
 40 2011-09-02 03:47:38 <ThomasV> without new demand its price should drop soon
 41 2011-09-02 03:48:36 <cacheson> I wonder if coinhunter is propping the price up all by himself?
 42 2011-09-02 03:48:51 <cacheson> he claimed that he's buying 12-15 btc worth per day or something
 43 2011-09-02 03:49:18 <ThomasV> I don't believe him
 44 2011-09-02 03:50:03 <cacheson> yeah, it crossed my mind that his "websites" probably don't exist
 45 2011-09-02 03:50:15 <ThomasV> don't exist ?
 46 2011-09-02 03:50:39 <cacheson> he said that the 12-15 btc per day is from websites that he runs
 47 2011-09-02 03:51:08 <cacheson> I was going to ask about them, but I figured he'd just ignore me
 48 2011-09-02 03:51:48 <ThomasV> he has the personality of a religious leader
 49 2011-09-02 03:52:17 <cacheson> ha, sounds about right
 50 2011-09-02 03:52:27 <ThomasV> but it might work; religion is what some people need, so he will probably find his niche
 51 2011-09-02 04:02:33 <HaltingState> SAC what did you post that they disabled your login?
 52 2011-09-02 04:04:08 <gmaxwell> HaltingState: considering that they won't disable your login if you post about using bitcoin to buy babies from russia to feed into a wood mulcher, it must have been pretty bad.
 53 2011-09-02 04:05:33 <andyroo> can somebody point me to some good crypto information about bitcoin's keypair generation?
 54 2011-09-02 04:05:43 <andyroo> like,         pkey = EC_KEY_new_by_curve_name(NID_secp256k1);
 55 2011-09-02 04:06:23 <andyroo> i am a mathematics major, so not afraid of technical information
 56 2011-09-02 04:06:32 <andyroo> just not terribly familiar with crypto
 57 2011-09-02 04:07:00 <cjdelisl1> it's plain old ecdsa
 58 2011-09-02 04:07:24 <theymos> secp256k1 is a strange curve, though.
 59 2011-09-02 04:07:38 <andyroo> why was it chosen? does it matter what curve i use?
 60 2011-09-02 04:07:48 <cjdelisl1> generate a random number, that's your private key ([x,y] coordinents)  point multiply it over the base point on the curve and you get your public key
 61 2011-09-02 04:08:12 <gmaxwell> andyroo: because the k curves have a special form that leads to higher performance and there was a big concern about performance.
 62 2011-09-02 04:08:29 <kjj> there are several good tutorials on elliptic curve on the net
 63 2011-09-02 04:11:09 <Matth1a3> can someone tell me how I would disable dnsseed and irc to test the seednode list?
 64 2011-09-02 04:13:09 <kjj> -noirc will turn off the IRC thing, but I don't think there is a switch for DNS
 65 2011-09-02 04:13:25 <Matth1a3> maybe I can block it's listening port?
 66 2011-09-02 04:13:50 <Matth1a3> its*
 67 2011-09-02 04:14:01 <kjj> block bitcoin's listening port, or DNSs?  the second one won't be easy
 68 2011-09-02 04:14:09 <Matth1a3> DNSs
 69 2011-09-02 04:14:19 <theymos> -nodnsseed.
 70 2011-09-02 04:15:12 <Matth1a3> awesome, thanks guys
 71 2011-09-02 05:20:16 <gjs278> ;;bc,stats
 72 2011-09-02 05:20:18 <gribble> Current Blocks: 143589 | Current Difficulty: 1777774.4820015 | Next Difficulty At Block: 145151 | Next Difficulty In: 1562 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 week, 3 days, 15 hours, 7 minutes, and 36 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1817064.53965830
 73 2011-09-02 05:51:28 <Matth1a3> can someone tell me how to build Berkeley DB in ubuntu?
 74 2011-09-02 05:52:14 <SomeoneWeird> ./configure && make && sudo make instal
 75 2011-09-02 05:52:15 <SomeoneWeird> l
 76 2011-09-02 05:52:16 <SomeoneWeird> :)
 77 2011-09-02 06:01:00 <Matth1a3> and do I need the miniupnp to build the 3.25 repo?
 78 2011-09-02 06:01:15 <SomeoneWeird> afaik yes
 79 2011-09-02 06:01:21 <Matth1a3> ok thanks
 80 2011-09-02 06:08:02 <Matth1a3> and for boost - I shouldn't use MPI?
 81 2011-09-02 06:08:22 <Matth1a3> sorry for the noob questions, haven't done this in a while
 82 2011-09-02 06:13:44 <Matth1a3> i promise to make an instructional video for the other noobs
 83 2011-09-02 06:21:59 <SomeoneWeird> no idea
 84 2011-09-02 06:35:51 <Matth1a3> so after all of that I try sudo make -f makefile.unix bitcoind and I get "net.cpp:48:15 pnodeLocalHost was declared extern and later static" @ net.h:476:15 and a similar error with net.cpp:51:15 hlistensocket
 85 2011-09-02 06:38:29 <SomeoneWeird> no idea, havn't compiled .25
 86 2011-09-02 07:55:07 <UukGoblin> ugh... http://pastebin.com/T8yND5n0 <- these 4 trades seem wrong...
 87 2011-09-02 07:55:19 <UukGoblin> same exchange rate, same amount, 4 different currencies?
 88 2011-09-02 07:55:58 <ThomasV> UukGoblin: yeah, the same problem is on bitcoincharts
 89 2011-09-02 07:56:18 <UukGoblin> ah, ok
 90 2011-09-02 07:56:53 <ThomasV> someone should tell b7 about it
 91 2011-09-02 09:11:19 <EskimoBob> Hi, can I export transactions to a file from a wallet? csv is fine
 92 2011-09-02 09:26:51 <SomeoneWeird> dunno, try with wallet tools or something
 93 2011-09-02 11:01:42 <gavinandresen> Good morning everybody.
 94 2011-09-02 11:01:53 <UukGoblin> good afternoon :-)
 95 2011-09-02 11:02:29 <UukGoblin> someone should start an RFC to define some timezone-agnostic greetings
 96 2011-09-02 11:04:16 <edcba> in fact it is always morning on irc
 97 2011-09-02 11:04:27 <UukGoblin> edcba, proof?
 98 2011-09-02 11:04:39 <edcba> it's already some standard
 99 2011-09-02 11:04:43 <gavinandresen> I thought it was always 2AM on IRC
100 2011-09-02 11:04:45 <edcba> wait i have to find that again
101 2011-09-02 11:04:54 <gavinandresen> I guess that is morning
102 2011-09-02 11:05:08 <UukGoblin> "good 2am everybody"
103 2011-09-02 11:05:30 <gavinandresen> Anybody want to help me debug the bitcoin hard-coded-seed-node code?
104 2011-09-02 11:05:38 <edcba> http://www.total-knowledge.com/~ilya/mips/ugt.html
105 2011-09-02 11:05:47 <gavinandresen> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/484
106 2011-09-02 11:06:43 <UukGoblin> edcba, hahah, nice
107 2011-09-02 11:06:49 <UukGoblin> "Your ass will be laminated"
108 2011-09-02 11:07:49 <gavinandresen> Good morning (ugt) everyone
109 2011-09-02 11:08:52 <UukGoblin> the RFC doesn't mention what to use in the reply
110 2011-09-02 11:09:14 <rasengan> Morning Gavin
111 2011-09-02 11:09:19 <rasengan> :)
112 2011-09-02 11:09:24 <UukGoblin> I mean, if it was morning when I joined the channel, and I've been here for several weeks, is it like 6pm now, or more like 8pm?
113 2011-09-02 11:09:52 <UukGoblin> gavinandresen, what kind of testing do you want to do there?
114 2011-09-02 11:11:07 <gavinandresen> I'm hoping somebody more familiar with the bitcoin networking code than me, or somebody else who can read Satoshi-code, can help me figure out why it doesn't seem to be working for me.
115 2011-09-02 11:11:20 <gavinandresen> "it" being seeding via hard-coded pnSeed list
116 2011-09-02 11:11:26 <gavinandresen> (with an empty addr.dat)
117 2011-09-02 11:11:47 <UukGoblin> I tried upgrading to latest git + forrestv's getmemorypool today, but I rolled it back because I got a "*** glibc detected *** ./bitcoind: mall
118 2011-09-02 11:11:50 <UukGoblin> oc(): smallbin double linked list corrupted: 0x0000000005dad5a0 ***"
119 2011-09-02 11:12:10 <UukGoblin> gavinandresen, ah... I thought you were the main satoshi-reader here ;-]
120 2011-09-02 11:12:24 <gavinandresen> UukGoblin: always good to fly with a wing-man
121 2011-09-02 11:12:51 <gavinandresen> (and I try to ignore the networking stuff, but I keep getting sucked into it)
122 2011-09-02 11:13:20 <UukGoblin> there is something dodgy in the connection code indeed, I recall my friend having issues getting it to connect... starts up, gets one connection and a few blocks, then drops down to 0, sometimes goes up to 1 for a short period
123 2011-09-02 11:14:45 <UukGoblin> just a guess here, but the problem might be that the master node is dropping/refusing the connection
124 2011-09-02 11:15:21 <gavinandresen> Sure.  But picking the same seed every time is wrong...  question is what's the best way to fix it
125 2011-09-02 11:16:15 <Matth1a3> iterate? =P jk
126 2011-09-02 11:17:31 <gavinandresen> ... I THINK the code calls AddAddress with the seed-node addresses... and I THINK it chooses which node(s) to connect to based on a priority score that is the last time they were seen... so I think setting a random "last time seen" will have the effect I want
127 2011-09-02 11:18:44 <UukGoblin> sounds... ugly
128 2011-09-02 11:23:50 <Matth1a3> anyone care to help me get set up with a build environment to test these commits? maybe I shouldn't be trying it with Ubuntu?
129 2011-09-02 11:23:51 <Matth1a3> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=40899.msg498776#msg498776
130 2011-09-02 11:27:53 <gavinandresen> Matth1a3: did you try   'make clean'  ?
131 2011-09-02 11:29:50 <Matth1a3> gavinandresen: i just did, it returned - no rule to make target 'clean'. Stop.
132 2011-09-02 11:29:59 <gavinandresen> make -f makefile.unix clean
133 2011-09-02 11:31:26 <Matth1a3> so far so good. i wonder if commenting out those two definitions in net.h will mess me up though
134 2011-09-02 11:32:21 <Matth1a3> nvm same errors - just took longer
135 2011-09-02 11:32:53 <gavinandresen> you sure you're up-to-date with git head?
136 2011-09-02 11:34:49 <Matth1a3> ah nope, maybe that's why - i just downloaded the bitcoin-bitcoin v0.3.24rc3-0-ge94010b.zip
137 2011-09-02 11:36:39 <gavinandresen> ... downloaded from where?  that filename doesn't look familiar to me
138 2011-09-02 11:36:54 <Matth1a3> from github
139 2011-09-02 11:37:13 <Matth1a3> there is a button on the upper right that says downloads on the source tab
140 2011-09-02 11:38:08 <gavinandresen> I never poked that button on github.  Cool!
141 2011-09-02 11:38:43 <Matth1a3> haha, that explains why my builds never worked like a month ago when I was really confused and gave up
142 2011-09-02 11:39:11 <Matth1a3> i think some others might be running into the same... 'issue' - should I make a ticket?
143 2011-09-02 11:39:41 <gavinandresen> yes, please
144 2011-09-02 11:49:34 <SomeoneWeird> gavinandresen, Matth1a3 those downloads aren't normally up to date
145 2011-09-02 11:49:49 <SomeoneWeird> well, they are, but sometimes they lag behind
146 2011-09-02 11:50:15 <gavinandresen> If they don't work, we should figure out how to turn them off at github
147 2011-09-02 11:51:04 <gavinandresen> afk for a while
148 2011-09-02 11:51:08 <Matth1a3> turning them off encourages git anyways
149 2011-09-02 11:51:11 <Matth1a3> so i'm for lit
150 2011-09-02 11:51:13 <Matth1a3> it*
151 2011-09-02 12:12:05 <makomk> Hmmmmm. IXcoin appears to be broken in a really interesting way and I'm trying to figure out if it's applicable to Bitcoin.
152 2011-09-02 12:13:22 <makomk> Its creator has managed to fork the network into two non-communicating halves by changing pchMessageStart. The older half has a longer blockchain than the newer.
153 2011-09-02 12:14:05 <makomk> Despite the fact that the older half's longer blockchain is AFAICT considered valid by the newer client, I can't get it to propagate to the newer half.
154 2011-09-02 12:15:28 <phantomcircuit> makomk, that is adorable
155 2011-09-02 12:16:50 <SomeoneWeird> hahahaha
156 2011-09-02 12:22:54 <makomk> Oh, and the newer client definitely considers the longer blockchain valid.
157 2011-09-02 12:27:39 <Matth1a3> i don't understand why discussion of alternate clients is allowed in here - this is #bitcoin-dev...
158 2011-09-02 12:29:51 <Matth1a3> maybe we need #bitcoin-altdev for them, haha
159 2011-09-02 12:30:35 <Matth1a3> them as in the alternate clients, not the developers
160 2011-09-02 12:30:51 <makomk> I suspect whatever's happening might apply to Bitcoin under the right circumstances.
161 2011-09-02 12:32:18 <SomeoneWeird> yah
162 2011-09-02 12:32:26 <makomk> Just how special-cased is the inital block transfer?
163 2011-09-02 12:32:35 <SomeoneWeird> what makomk was discussing could affect bitcoin
164 2011-09-02 12:32:39 <SomeoneWeird> if im reading right
165 2011-09-02 12:34:28 <Matth1a3> what's your affiliation with ixcoin?
166 2011-09-02 12:35:48 <makomk> Don't have one, was just looking into it out of curiousity.
167 2011-09-02 12:36:27 <Matth1a3> sorry if I come off as rude, I kind of view alternate clients as a get rich quick scheme
168 2011-09-02 12:37:37 <makomk> Think of them as a demonstration of what not to do. For example, I0coin demonstrated the importance of correct synchronization in distributed systems by using time() in its difficulty calculation and failing completely.
169 2011-09-02 12:37:37 <UukGoblin> Matth1a3, attempts at that...
170 2011-09-02 12:37:44 <UukGoblin> I hope they don't actually get that rich ;-P
171 2011-09-02 12:38:38 <Matth1a3> haha
172 2011-09-02 12:40:23 <Matth1a3> the parallels of IXcoin are pretty funny though
173 2011-09-02 12:40:31 <Matth1a3> now that I'm looking at the site
174 2011-09-02 12:50:23 <wumpus> Matth1a3zzzz: you mean 'alternative block chains'.. there is nothing wrong with alternative clients for the main blockchain, and those are certainly not a get rick quick scheme :p
175 2011-09-02 12:53:57 <BitterTea> I don't think there's anything wrong with alternative blockchains in general
176 2011-09-02 12:54:04 <BitterTea> for instance, Namecoin
177 2011-09-02 12:54:15 <log0s> and alternative blockchains aren't necessarily get rich quick schemes, although i'd say all of them that we've seen so far (except for namecoin) were probably created for that purpose
178 2011-09-02 12:54:27 <gavinandresen> makomk: if you write a bridge node that relays with both the old and new messagestarts you'll probably get the longer, older block chain accepted
179 2011-09-02 12:55:31 <UukGoblin> I'm happy to accept alternative blockchains as long as merged mining is implemented :-]
180 2011-09-02 12:55:46 <UukGoblin> (or there is a way to tie them into the main blockchain via a transaction or something)
181 2011-09-02 12:56:14 <gavinandresen> makomk: ... although actually it seems like running an old node with the longer blockchain, then upgrading it, should broadcast the longer chain, too...
182 2011-09-02 12:56:27 <makomk> gavinandresen: that's what I'd have thought, but...
183 2011-09-02 12:57:05 <gavinandresen> makomk: they changed the difficulty calculation after a certain block, right?  That'll fork it
184 2011-09-02 12:57:19 <gavinandresen> (difficulty must match exactly, or you get a fork)
185 2011-09-02 12:57:48 <makomk> They will change the difficulty calculation after a certain block, but they haven't reached it yet.
186 2011-09-02 12:58:21 <makomk> (Also, difficulty matching is exact? Guess that's what sunk I0coin then...)
187 2011-09-02 12:59:03 <gavinandresen> Yes, nBits in the block header must match exactly.
188 2011-09-02 13:02:16 <wumpus> BitterTea: agreed, there is nothing wrong in principle with them, it's just this recent madness and things like s****coin and all the childishness around them that is extrememly annoying
189 2011-09-02 13:02:19 <makomk> Hmmmm. Looks like all the nodes in my addr.dat now have the newer blockchain, anyway. (Connecting a second, clean-slate node to the first one using -addnode may have done the trick.)
190 2011-09-02 13:06:09 <phantomcircuit> gavinandresen, the best solution is to run both networks in parallel and for newer clients to only accept transactions sent to both networks
191 2011-09-02 13:09:15 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Daniel Folkinshteyn master * rbca179e / src/net.cpp :
192 2011-09-02 13:09:15 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Update the list of seednodes.
193 2011-09-02 14:23:12 <gavinandresen> I wonder when the last time the hard-coded-seed-node was tested... it seems like it has been very broken for quite a while.
194 2011-09-02 14:23:44 <phantomcircuit> i fail to see the purpose of hard coded seed nodes
195 2011-09-02 14:23:59 <phantomcircuit> seems equally likely to get shut down as dns
196 2011-09-02 14:24:04 <phantomcircuit> maybe not
197 2011-09-02 14:24:15 <luke-jr> more likely
198 2011-09-02 14:24:22 <luke-jr> since IPs do change occasionally
199 2011-09-02 14:24:56 <phantomcircuit> i assume it's a static ip with a hosting provider
200 2011-09-02 14:25:00 <phantomcircuit> is it not?
201 2011-09-02 14:25:23 <luke-jr> even static IPs change every so often
202 2011-09-02 14:25:34 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Gavin Andresen master * rfb45259 / src/main.cpp : Do not try to download blockchain from 0.3.23 nodes - http://git.io/RZAvIA
203 2011-09-02 14:27:37 <kjj> I don't think that the hardcoded IP was ever intended as a way to fight a deliberate takedown, just as a last chance for a node that can't otherwise find a node to connect to
204 2011-09-02 14:27:39 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: the problem afaict is mostly that they run out of conn. slots, not really that they are dead (though a lot of them are)
205 2011-09-02 14:28:27 <kjj> and naturally, the problem isn't so much the nodes listed in the code today, as it is the nodes that were listed in the code a year ago
206 2011-09-02 14:28:30 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: why specifically 0.3.23, why not 0.3.20?-0.3.23?
207 2011-09-02 14:28:35 <BlueMatt> (the effected versions)
208 2011-09-02 14:29:31 <gavinandresen> I thought only 0.3.23 had the problem... did I misremember?
209 2011-09-02 14:30:28 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: no, Im pretty sure the problem effects all versions with the limit code in them
210 2011-09-02 14:30:36 <BlueMatt> which is something like 0.3.20-0.3.23 iirc
211 2011-09-02 14:38:09 <gavinandresen> BlueMatt: you have a better memory than I do
212 2011-09-02 14:38:13 <gavinandresen> (and you're right)
213 2011-09-02 14:38:15 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: yes, it was introduced in 9cbae
214 2011-09-02 14:38:22 <BlueMatt> oh, I just went back to check... :)
215 2011-09-02 14:38:34 <BlueMatt> anywho...
216 2011-09-02 14:39:35 <gavinandresen> I'll make it:                (pfrom->nVersion < 32000 || pfrom->nVersion >= 32400) &&
217 2011-09-02 14:39:46 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: what are the issues with disconnecting from seednodes?
218 2011-09-02 14:40:05 <BlueMatt> (I have a feeling keeping those connections and keeping people's connection slots full is not gonna be good)
219 2011-09-02 14:40:09 <gavinandresen> BlueMatt: ... you connect to a seed node, then start downloading blocks.
220 2011-09-02 14:40:35 <kjj> crap.  now I'm thinking of a node specailized to help with bootstrapping
221 2011-09-02 14:40:41 <gavinandresen> After you get 100 more messages, it would disconnect you, so you stop getting new blocks.  And it takes a long time before the code
222 2011-09-02 14:40:50 <gavinandresen> decides to connect to somebody else to get blocks
223 2011-09-02 14:41:07 <gavinandresen> (100 more addresses, not messages)
224 2011-09-02 14:41:58 <BlueMatt> well Im not so sure its worth the minute it takes to find more addresses if you keep the connection to seednodes open?
225 2011-09-02 14:42:57 <phantomcircuit> BlueMatt, add a node type
226 2011-09-02 14:43:11 <BlueMatt> that seems overkill here
227 2011-09-02 14:43:26 <gavinandresen> Seed nodes running out of slots might have been the other bug I fixed this morning-- looks like they were always tried in the same order on everybody's machine.
228 2011-09-02 14:43:57 <BlueMatt> well its not just seednodes, its everyone
229 2011-09-02 14:44:07 <gavinandresen> what is everyone?
230 2011-09-02 14:44:10 <BlueMatt> (incl dnsseed returns, etc)
231 2011-09-02 14:44:19 <BlueMatt> the number of connectable nodes is very low
232 2011-09-02 14:44:30 <BlueMatt> and afaik its mostly because many, many people have their conn. slots full
233 2011-09-02 14:44:46 <luke-jr> in theory, we need 1/8 of nodes with open ports, right?
234 2011-09-02 14:44:53 <gavinandresen> That's a different bug...
235 2011-09-02 14:45:00 <luke-jr> OR some mechanism to ask closed-port nodes to reverse-connect
236 2011-09-02 14:45:18 <BlueMatt> but keeping connection slots open to fallback nodes could make it worse
237 2011-09-02 14:45:42 <gavinandresen> I am seeing incoming connections from multiple nodes at either the same IP, or suspiciously-related-IPs
238 2011-09-02 14:45:48 <phantomcircuit> luke-jr, 14.625:1
239 2011-09-02 14:45:52 <luke-jr> what if when a client rejects a new connection, it broadcasts a "this IP wants to connect" message to its own peers?
240 2011-09-02 14:45:57 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: well that is something else that needs fixed
241 2011-09-02 14:46:00 <phantomcircuit> 6.9%
242 2011-09-02 14:46:05 <luke-jr> and those either connect to it, or rebroadcast?
243 2011-09-02 14:46:20 <gavinandresen> BlueMatt: yup
244 2011-09-02 14:46:22 <phantomcircuit> luke-jr, doesn't help
245 2011-09-02 14:46:30 <luke-jr> fine. just implement IPv6 :p
246 2011-09-02 14:46:36 <phantomcircuit> you want 8 peers you choose
247 2011-09-02 14:46:58 <phantomcircuit> or at least think you chose :P
248 2011-09-02 14:46:59 <luke-jr> everyone has IPv6 by now, in theroy
249 2011-09-02 14:47:13 <phantomcircuit> almost nobody has ipv6 in practice though
250 2011-09-02 14:47:25 <luke-jr> phantomcircuit: no?
251 2011-09-02 14:47:29 <luke-jr> every Windows 7 user is nobody?
252 2011-09-02 14:47:53 <phantomcircuit> lol
253 2011-09-02 14:48:08 <phantomcircuit> toredo servers get minimal traffic
254 2011-09-02 14:48:11 <BlueMatt> did we ever merge ipv6?
255 2011-09-02 14:48:25 <BlueMatt> no
256 2011-09-02 14:48:29 <BlueMatt> should we?
257 2011-09-02 14:48:37 <luke-jr> it might help
258 2011-09-02 14:48:42 <BlueMatt> though I suppose we are in feature freeze...
259 2011-09-02 14:48:45 <luke-jr> otoh, it might make the Teredo servers a target
260 2011-09-02 14:48:52 <gavinandresen> I want to get 0.4 out before merging more new features
261 2011-09-02 14:48:53 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: i mean after 0.4
262 2011-09-02 14:48:56 <BlueMatt> hmm...well I say ipv6 goes in as soon as 0.4.1
263 2011-09-02 14:49:09 <luke-jr> I thought the versioning was being fixed
264 2011-09-02 14:49:17 <luke-jr> as in, any new features after 0.4 are part of 0.5 :p
265 2011-09-02 14:49:18 <BlueMatt> to what?
266 2011-09-02 14:49:45 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: jgarzik is too adamantly against maintaining multiple branches
267 2011-09-02 14:49:54 <gavinandresen> me too
268 2011-09-02 14:49:54 <luke-jr> lame
269 2011-09-02 14:50:06 <luke-jr> the whole point of git is that it's easier to do that
270 2011-09-02 14:50:18 <gavinandresen> ... so maintain another branch...
271 2011-09-02 14:50:20 <BlueMatt> not really...
272 2011-09-02 14:51:30 <gavinandresen> If you're not willing to maintain another branch and keep it in sync with the next-release-branch, why would you expect jgarzik and I to?
273 2011-09-02 14:51:30 <luke-jr> anyhow, labelling 0.5+ right doesn't imply 0.4 has to be maintained
274 2011-09-02 14:51:51 <helo> git makes branching easier, but that doesn't mean it is a good idea
275 2011-09-02 14:51:55 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: there's no significant work in maintaining multiple branches if development is done properly
276 2011-09-02 14:52:10 <luke-jr> if it isn't done properly, then it's not practical for anyone to do
277 2011-09-02 14:52:24 <gavinandresen> Cool, go for it.  I'm busy with higher priority stuff.  Like debugging the networking code....
278 2011-09-02 14:52:56 <luke-jr> as in, fixing the bug where it was introduced
279 2011-09-02 14:53:37 <luke-jr> [12:38:16] <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: yes, it was introduced in 9cbae
280 2011-09-02 14:53:57 <luke-jr> ^ in that case, the bugfix should have had 9cbae as a parent, and been merged to the current version(s)
281 2011-09-02 14:54:11 <BlueMatt> who cares?
282 2011-09-02 14:56:17 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Gavin Andresen master * rec74e8a / src/main.cpp : Versions 0.3.20 THROUGH 0.3.23 have trouble with blockchain downloads; avoid them - http://git.io/WKGnWg
283 2011-09-02 14:56:26 <phantomcircuit> luke-jr, proper use of git? lol right
284 2011-09-02 14:57:00 <gavinandresen> I freely admit I'm a git newbie, best-practice suggestions welcome.
285 2011-09-02 14:57:36 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: was fSeedUsed set in the case of dnsseed?
286 2011-09-02 14:58:03 <gavinandresen> BlueMatt: no
287 2011-09-02 14:58:58 <andyroo> what is the characteristic of GF(2^m)?
288 2011-09-02 14:59:03 <luke-jr> hmm, the link I had seems to have broken images now
289 2011-09-02 15:01:10 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: mmm, well ok, Im still not so sure its a good idea to drop those connections (maybe some better checking so that they will be dropped when new connections are made instead)
290 2011-09-02 15:01:22 <BlueMatt> s/drop/keep/
291 2011-09-02 15:01:38 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: seems to be a generic enough explanation: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Creating_a_version_control_repository#The_.22Daggy.22_Fix
292 2011-09-02 15:02:24 <gavinandresen> "unless of course a reorganization took place"
293 2011-09-02 15:02:29 <andyroo> gavinandresen: learn the rebase tool well, don't ever rebase something you've published
294 2011-09-02 15:02:41 <andyroo> and once you've got that, you can do whatever you want and undo it
295 2011-09-02 15:03:12 <andyroo> oh, and "git reflog" will give every commit HEAD has pointed to for the last couple months
296 2011-09-02 15:03:22 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: is that standard practice for git too, or just for svn or whatever?
297 2011-09-02 15:03:27 <andyroo> so if you really get lost, use that to roll back to a known good state
298 2011-09-02 15:03:42 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: aka does kernel do it?
299 2011-09-02 15:03:46 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: pretty much standard for DVCS, since it became possible
300 2011-09-02 15:03:53 <luke-jr> I don't know Linux kernel development much
301 2011-09-02 15:04:03 <luke-jr> it wasn't practical with CVS/Svn
302 2011-09-02 15:04:22 <gavinandresen> andyroo: thanks.  I actually knew that much, I'm not a total newbie (and did read a book about git, which I should read again so it sinks in more)
303 2011-09-02 15:04:27 <BlueMatt> well kernel is essentially the "official" "best-practices" thing for git...
304 2011-09-02 15:04:40 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: or just ask jgarzik when you need to ;)
305 2011-09-02 15:04:50 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: well, this is "best-practices" for development in general :p
306 2011-09-02 15:05:00 <BlueMatt> meh
307 2011-09-02 15:05:02 <jrmithdobbs> luke-jr: that'd require people to stop git push -f'ing every fucking branch
308 2011-09-02 15:05:04 <jrmithdobbs> luke-jr: ugh
309 2011-09-02 15:05:09 <andyroo> gavinandresen: book was progit? use git a bit before reading it again
310 2011-09-02 15:05:16 <andyroo> it'll make far more sense
311 2011-09-02 15:05:16 <luke-jr> jrmithdobbs: ?
312 2011-09-02 15:05:42 <jrmithdobbs> luke-jr: everything you're talking about. BlueMatt/sipa/jgarzick ... all of them, they push -f constantly to their branches breaking everything
313 2011-09-02 15:05:51 <jrmithdobbs> ;p
314 2011-09-02 15:05:56 <BlueMatt> jrmithdobbs: thats so stuff merges right
315 2011-09-02 15:06:00 <luke-jr> jrmithdobbs: me too, when I'm changing a commit :p
316 2011-09-02 15:06:09 <BlueMatt> if we didnt, stuff would hit merge conflicts all over the place
317 2011-09-02 15:06:15 <BlueMatt> (as the code is so intertwined)
318 2011-09-02 15:06:18 <jrmithdobbs> not if things were done right
319 2011-09-02 15:06:29 <luke-jr> jrmithdobbs: I'm talking strictly about bugfixes
320 2011-09-02 15:06:30 <BlueMatt> well that would require a code restructuring
321 2011-09-02 15:06:39 <luke-jr> features should be rebased when they need changes
322 2011-09-02 15:07:10 <andyroo> gavinandresen: NEVER do push -f; merge other's changes before rebasing, so all your pushes are fast-forwards
323 2011-09-02 15:07:19 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: whats left on the todo for 0.4?
324 2011-09-02 15:07:34 <andyroo> like so, for master: git fetch origin; git rebase master; git push origin master;
325 2011-09-02 15:07:35 <luke-jr> andyroo: that's for main trees only, not feature-branches :P
326 2011-09-02 15:07:50 <jrmithdobbs> andyroo: i've argued this so many times
327 2011-09-02 15:07:51 <luke-jr> O.o
328 2011-09-02 15:07:56 <BlueMatt> andyroo: no one does a push -f on master
329 2011-09-02 15:08:02 <andyroo> luke-jr: oh, okay.. on my project we keep feature-branches on our own remotes
330 2011-09-02 15:08:03 <BlueMatt> on feature branches, everyone does
331 2011-09-02 15:08:08 <BlueMatt> andyroo: as do we
332 2011-09-02 15:08:10 <andyroo> since there's usually one writer, many testers
333 2011-09-02 15:08:33 <BlueMatt> andyroo: we do the same, jrmithdobbs is complaining about push -fing on personal feature branches
334 2011-09-02 15:08:41 <gavinandresen> BlueMatt: bump the version number and write the release notes.  I wanted to get sipa's import/export privkey patch in, but I'd rather get 0.4 out sooner
335 2011-09-02 15:09:16 <jrmithdobbs> isn't .4 just wallet crypto without sipa's import/export?
336 2011-09-02 15:09:20 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: Im available to build all weekend (assuming Im sober...first football game of the season and monday off, so that might not be often...:)
337 2011-09-02 15:09:22 <gavinandresen> I'm probably forgetting something
338 2011-09-02 15:09:25 <jrmithdobbs> import/export was the useful feature supposed to be in .4
339 2011-09-02 15:09:47 <BlueMatt> jrmithdobbs: and a ton of smaller fixes
340 2011-09-02 15:10:11 <jrmithdobbs> i don't think it's worth pushing out without import/export
341 2011-09-02 15:10:34 <BlueMatt> jrmithdobbs: its worth pushing out for the many minor bugfixes in it
342 2011-09-02 15:11:02 <jrmithdobbs> BlueMatt: such as?
343 2011-09-02 15:11:12 <gavinandresen> jrmithdobbs: I don't want to pull import/export before this:  https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/195
344 2011-09-02 15:11:25 <gavinandresen> ... and both need a rebase and lots of testing
345 2011-09-02 15:11:40 <jrmithdobbs> i did quite extensive testing on import/export a while back
346 2011-09-02 15:11:47 <BlueMatt> jrmithdobbs: go look at git history...
347 2011-09-02 15:12:08 <luke-jr> I've also tested import
348 2011-09-02 15:12:24 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Jeff Garzik master * r712077a / (4 files in 4 dirs):
349 2011-09-02 15:12:57 <jrmithdobbs> gavinandresen: why don't you want to pull import/export without that conflict detect patch?
350 2011-09-02 15:13:06 <jrmithdobbs> gavinandresen: import/export does a complete rescan after import
351 2011-09-02 15:15:23 <gavinandresen> jrmithdobbs: because without the conflict detect I believe you can get into weird states where you have two wallets that both think they can spend coins that they can't.  I think.  I'd have to think about it harder than I want to right now
352 2011-09-02 15:15:47 <jrmithdobbs> gavinandresen: i was unable to create such a situation in my testing
353 2011-09-02 15:16:02 <jrmithdobbs> because of the complete rescan after import
354 2011-09-02 15:16:30 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: no, I'm pretty sure that was fixed a while ago
355 2011-09-02 15:16:35 <jrmithdobbs> it was
356 2011-09-02 15:16:54 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: the problem only arises, I think, if they're on different networks or disconnected when they spend
357 2011-09-02 15:17:09 <jrmithdobbs> which happens with or without import/export
358 2011-09-02 15:17:25 <jrmithdobbs> if you don't rescan
359 2011-09-02 15:17:42 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: ...then that means we're ready today for 0.4-rc1
360 2011-09-02 15:18:13 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: don't really need release notes IMO, just to start getting it out there for power user testing
361 2011-09-02 15:18:18 <gavinandresen> jgarzik: I think so
362 2011-09-02 15:18:53 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: -rc1 through final release is for wider public testing.  final code and doc details can be sorted out during that period, in parallel with wider testing.
363 2011-09-02 15:18:57 <jgarzik> IMO
364 2011-09-02 15:19:23 <gavinandresen> jgarzik:  Matt's worried about a change I made this morning RE: hard-coded seed nodes
365 2011-09-02 15:19:45 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: nod -- but I don't see that as being a -rc1 blocker
366 2011-09-02 15:19:57 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: it's a tiny detail most people will never see
367 2011-09-02 15:20:08 <BlueMatt> would technically be a regression so could be reverted during -rc phase?
368 2011-09-02 15:20:11 <gavinandresen> yup, that was my thinking.
369 2011-09-02 15:20:21 <BlueMatt> then Im down for pushing -rc1
370 2011-09-02 15:20:46 <BlueMatt> see what gmaxwell says about it
371 2011-09-02 15:21:06 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: yep, anything we don't like can be reverted during -rc1
372 2011-09-02 15:21:33 <jgarzik> that's the purpose of -rc window:  bug fixing, hammering out final details, slowing the churn and focusing people on making the release
373 2011-09-02 15:21:47 <jgarzik> focusing developers on bug fixing, focusing the community on testing, ...
374 2011-09-02 15:22:29 <BlueMatt> alright, Ill spin up the pre-build stuff (thanks devrandom for making the build take very little time after pre-build stuff is done)
375 2011-09-02 15:23:27 <gavinandresen> I'll bump version numbers (following doc/release-process.txt)
376 2011-09-02 15:23:44 <Optimo> gentlemen. have a wonderful weekend ;)
377 2011-09-02 15:24:25 <Optimo> (it's also labor day weekend in case you forgot)
378 2011-09-02 15:24:59 <BlueMatt> ahhh, kernel panic, wtf
379 2011-09-02 15:25:42 <luke-jr> jgarzik: any comments on "daggy fixes" and whether Linux development is used to it?
380 2011-09-02 15:26:21 <gjs278> the only kernel panics I get are due to xhci and usb3
381 2011-09-02 15:26:32 <luke-jr> gjs278: &
382 2011-09-02 15:27:47 <BlueMatt> gjs278: I typically never get kernel panics...
383 2011-09-02 15:28:10 <andyroo> i haven't had any since rootless X came around
384 2011-09-02 15:28:10 <luke-jr> I only get kernel panics when I try to unbind the audio driver :/
385 2011-09-02 15:28:19 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: the process I followed during your remoting was basically to do all the bits of doc/release-process.txt except the actual builds, which I left to BlueMatt and/or sipa.  In particular I thought the generation of the -src.tar.gz tarball should be done directly by a dev, rather than gitian, so I did that part.  gitian produced all the other upload-able build targets.
386 2011-09-02 15:28:33 <gavinandresen> what is locale/eo/ ?
387 2011-09-02 15:28:41 <luke-jr> Esperanto?
388 2011-09-02 15:29:03 <gavinandresen> (asking because locale/eo/LC_MESSAGES/bitcoin.po:"Project-Id-Version: Bitcoin 0.3.22\n" )
389 2011-09-02 15:30:34 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: esperanto;  project-id-version is sorta "last updated since version blah" if you choose to use it.  each translation has its own style there, but I wouldn't update it, instead letting the translator update it if they wish.
390 2011-09-02 15:35:54 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Gavin Andresen master * r7464e64 / (7 files in 4 dirs): Bumped version numbers to 0.4.0rc1 - http://git.io/BD9Bew
391 2011-09-02 15:38:10 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: btw, did anyone ever merge my fixes?
392 2011-09-02 15:38:23 <luke-jr> or fix the generate-doesn't-show-account-names issue?
393 2011-09-02 15:38:27 <gavinandresen> I knew I was forgetting something....
394 2011-09-02 15:38:31 <vsrinivas> gavinandresen: before 0.4.0, would it be possible to look at / merge the patch on the mailing list that defines MSG_NOSIGNAL if not present?
395 2011-09-02 15:38:40 <vsrinivas> it enables bitcoin from master to build on OpenBSD.
396 2011-09-02 15:39:28 <BlueMatt> vsrinivas: I thought that was merged?
397 2011-09-02 15:39:41 <gavinandresen> vsrinivas luke-jr    :   pull requests at github make it much harder for stuff like that to slip between the cracks.  My email box is very full these days
398 2011-09-02 15:39:54 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: you know I don't tolerate GitHub's TOS ;P
399 2011-09-02 15:40:14 <gavinandresen> luke-jr:  I know, so recruit somebody to make a pull request for you
400 2011-09-02 15:40:14 <vsrinivas> BlueMatt: haven't seen that. DragonFly BSD support patches were, not this one...
401 2011-09-02 15:40:19 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: unwillingness to join GitHub is by far not an excuse
402 2011-09-02 15:40:34 <vsrinivas> sorry, didn't use github; thought patches to mailing list were okay.
403 2011-09-02 15:40:42 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: sorry, I don't have unlimited $ to commit to their unreasonable terms
404 2011-09-02 15:40:48 <BlueMatt> vsrinivas: they typically are...
405 2011-09-02 15:40:56 <gavinandresen> afk for a while, gotta eat lunch before a phone meeting....
406 2011-09-02 15:41:09 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: wanna make GitHub PULLs for some of mine? ;p
407 2011-09-02 15:42:18 <luke-jr> git://gitorious.org/~Luke-Jr/bitcoin/luke-jr-bitcoin.git base58_liberal_parsing bugfix_getwork_newblk_race rpc_keepalive bugfix_CreateThread_leak gitignore getwork_dedupe
408 2011-09-02 15:42:40 <luke-jr> maybe also txinfo
409 2011-09-02 15:45:57 <copumpkin> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=40934.0
410 2011-09-02 15:46:00 <copumpkin> that is fucked
411 2011-09-02 15:46:03 <copumpkin> anyone know what channel it was in?
412 2011-09-02 15:46:40 <luke-jr> phantomcircuit: you spammer! :P
413 2011-09-02 15:47:08 <BlueMatt> hahahaha
414 2011-09-02 15:47:14 <copumpkin> that Geebus guy is pissing me off almost more than BenDavis
415 2011-09-02 15:47:37 <phantomcircuit> luke-jr, ?
416 2011-09-02 15:47:54 <copumpkin> phantomcircuit: what channel was that?
417 2011-09-02 15:48:06 <phantomcircuit> bitcoinpool
418 2011-09-02 15:48:18 <phantomcircuit> im fairly certain the operator of bitcoinpool is the guys friend
419 2011-09-02 15:48:22 <luke-jr> phantomcircuit: 512 transactions is spam :P
420 2011-09-02 15:48:31 <phantomcircuit> luke-jr, oh lol
421 2011-09-02 15:48:36 <luke-jr> phantomcircuit: also, your statements are wrong AFAIK
422 2011-09-02 15:48:38 <phantomcircuit> yeah it cost like 1 BTC in fees to sent too
423 2011-09-02 15:48:45 <luke-jr> [04:52] <phantomcircuit> BenDavis, just an fyi spending funds which were erroneously sent to you is legally the same as simple theft
424 2011-09-02 15:49:06 <phantomcircuit> luke-jr, it is i can even tell you the relevant code in the oregon penal code
425 2011-09-02 15:49:15 <luke-jr> phantomcircuit: IANAL, but I'm pretty sure you have no legal obligation to return something you were sent
426 2011-09-02 15:49:32 <luke-jr> at least with tangible items, if someone sends you it accidentally, you can legally just keep it
427 2011-09-02 15:50:15 <luke-jr> Geebus is in Oregon?
428 2011-09-02 15:50:39 <phantomcircuit> yes
429 2011-09-02 15:50:48 <phantomcircuit> bitcoinpool.com is hosted on a residential ISP
430 2011-09-02 15:50:58 <luke-jr> I don't see him saying he spent them either, so I wouldn't be so quick to accuse him
431 2011-09-02 15:51:07 <phantomcircuit> he did spend them
432 2011-09-02 15:51:12 <phantomcircuit> he sold them on mtgox
433 2011-09-02 15:51:25 <phantomcircuit> luke-jr,  https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:vtmiMvqow4UJ:www.leg.state.or.us/ors/164.html+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=firefox-a
434 2011-09-02 15:51:37 <luke-jr> phantomcircuit: tl;dr
435 2011-09-02 15:51:41 <luke-jr> which part?
436 2011-09-02 15:51:41 <phantomcircuit> 164.015 ???Theft??? described. A person commits theft when, with intent to deprive another of property or to appropriate property to the person or to a third person, the person:
437 2011-09-02 15:51:42 <phantomcircuit> (2) Commits theft of property lost, mislaid or delivered by mistake as provided in ORS 164.065;
438 2011-09-02 15:52:02 <BlueMatt> phantomcircuit: you fucked up, get over it
439 2011-09-02 15:52:14 <copumpkin> o.O
440 2011-09-02 15:52:15 <phantomcircuit> BlueMatt, no
441 2011-09-02 15:52:49 <luke-jr> phantomcircuit: I concur with your interpretation.
442 2011-09-02 15:53:02 <copumpkin> it's common sense
443 2011-09-02 15:53:12 <luke-jr> 164.065 Theft of lost, mislaid property. A person who comes into control of property of another that the person knows or has good reason to know to have been lost, mislaid or delivered under a mistake as to the nature or amount of the property or the identity of the recipient, commits theft if, with intent to deprive the owner thereof, the person fails to take reasonable measures to restore the property to the owner. [1971 c.743
444 2011-09-02 15:53:13 <copumpkin> all this "bitcoin isn't a recognized currency and thus has no value" stuff people keep spewing is bullshit
445 2011-09-02 15:53:13 <luke-jr> ???126]
446 2011-09-02 15:53:14 <luke-jr> fwiw
447 2011-09-02 15:53:18 <copumpkin> if someone steals bitcoins, it's theft
448 2011-09-02 15:53:22 <copumpkin> it may not be currency, but it's still theft
449 2011-09-02 15:53:34 <BlueMatt> phantomcircuit: so you sent someone btc accidentally and you want him to return it?
450 2011-09-02 15:53:51 <copumpkin> BlueMatt: I'm amazed you think that's unreasaonble
451 2011-09-02 15:53:56 <phantomcircuit> BlueMatt, due to a technical error he was over paid
452 2011-09-02 15:54:05 <phantomcircuit> he knew where it came from
453 2011-09-02 15:54:08 <BlueMatt> legally, phantomcircuit is right, reasonably get over it
454 2011-09-02 15:54:08 <phantomcircuit> he knew it wasn't his
455 2011-09-02 15:54:18 <Diablo-D3> copumpkin: except Ive been saying that since day one
456 2011-09-02 15:54:20 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: 511 BTC is a lot
457 2011-09-02 15:54:22 <phantomcircuit> BlueMatt, no
458 2011-09-02 15:54:34 <phantomcircuit> im not going to just get over it
459 2011-09-02 15:54:43 <luke-jr> phantomcircuit: I presume you've talked to MagicalTux?
460 2011-09-02 15:54:48 <copumpkin> http://www.austinchronicle.com/columns/2005-12-02/315676/
461 2011-09-02 15:55:00 <copumpkin> and inform the sender that you reserve the right to keep the merchandise if they fail to respond in that time period.
462 2011-09-02 15:55:08 <copumpkin> "failing to notify the sender or the intended customer could make you liable for criminal or civil theft. Criminal theft can cost you fines and/or jail time, depending on the value of the property"
463 2011-09-02 15:55:11 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: 511 BTC is enough that it could warrant a lawsuit
464 2011-09-02 15:55:22 <copumpkin> that's some fairly substantial money
465 2011-09-02 15:55:28 <phantomcircuit> luke-jr, yes he wasn't able to help with stopping him but he does have records of where the funds went
466 2011-09-02 15:55:29 <copumpkin> if it were a handful of btc
467 2011-09-02 15:55:35 <copumpkin> or even the 20 btc I got scammed out of the other day
468 2011-09-02 15:55:37 <copumpkin> I'd say fuck it
469 2011-09-02 15:55:39 <BlueMatt> 4000$ for an exchange
470 2011-09-02 15:55:43 <BlueMatt> that should be nothing
471 2011-09-02 15:55:50 <copumpkin> BlueMatt: you're naive?
472 2011-09-02 15:55:53 <phantomcircuit> BlueMatt, we dont have any feels
473 2011-09-02 15:55:56 <phantomcircuit> fees*
474 2011-09-02 15:55:59 <copumpkin> the only exchanges that make any money here are mtgox and tradehill
475 2011-09-02 15:56:10 <BlueMatt> ah, well than thats your fault...
476 2011-09-02 15:56:15 <phantomcircuit> ...
477 2011-09-02 15:56:17 <copumpkin> wtf
478 2011-09-02 15:56:44 <BlueMatt> you dont make money, great running charity is good for bitcoin, thanks
479 2011-09-02 15:56:54 <luke-jr> phantomcircuit: did you threaten to sue, and mention that legal costs may double his liability?
480 2011-09-02 15:57:10 <phantomcircuit> luke-jr, he clearly has no intention to give them back
481 2011-09-02 15:57:27 <phantomcircuit> he's under the mistaken impression that since they are bitcoins he cannot be liable
482 2011-09-02 15:57:45 <luke-jr> phantomcircuit: bet he'd chicken out if he got a letter from a lawyer
483 2011-09-02 15:57:46 <copumpkin> phantomcircuit: do you know his identity at all?
484 2011-09-02 15:57:55 <phantomcircuit> i know who he is exactly
485 2011-09-02 15:57:56 <copumpkin> is BenDavis a real name?
486 2011-09-02 15:57:57 <copumpkin> ah
487 2011-09-02 15:58:02 <copumpkin> then I say set a legal precedent :P
488 2011-09-02 15:58:10 <copumpkin> it'd shut the pseudolawyers up around here
489 2011-09-02 15:58:14 <luke-jr> ^
490 2011-09-02 15:58:22 <phantomcircuit> im going to give him another few hours before contacting local police
491 2011-09-02 15:58:27 <luke-jr> if you know he has the funds to pay up, skip the threat and sue :P
492 2011-09-02 15:58:35 <BlueMatt> legally you can sue him, realistically, you coded the site wrong which is your fault, whether the law disagrees or now
493 2011-09-02 15:58:41 <phantomcircuit> i was giving him a chance
494 2011-09-02 15:58:51 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: the legal precedence is worth the lawsuit IMO
495 2011-09-02 15:59:02 <cjdelisle> +1
496 2011-09-02 15:59:03 <phantomcircuit> he's chosen to be unreasonable
497 2011-09-02 15:59:08 <luke-jr> legal precedence at a theft's expense = nice
498 2011-09-02 15:59:18 <luke-jr> theif's*
499 2011-09-02 15:59:35 <BlueMatt> unreasonable? if someone accidentally sends you bitcoin because you cant code, thats not stealing by my definition
500 2011-09-02 15:59:55 <pumpkin> I really preferred BlueMatt before reading this conversation. Pity I can't unread
501 2011-09-02 16:00:39 <luke-jr> copumpkin_: would you really prefer to remain ignorant anyway?
502 2011-09-02 16:01:01 <copumpkin_> no, I just wish he hadn't turned out to be like this :P
503 2011-09-02 16:01:06 <BlueMatt> morally, yea he should send it back, but if he chooses not to, thats still your fault, you sent him money
504 2011-09-02 16:01:16 <cjdelisle> Realisticly, telling the police is a coin toss. They might care, they might not. Shopping around for a lawyer is probably a much better deal.
505 2011-09-02 16:01:46 <luke-jr> cjdelisle: worst case they don't care, and you get a lawyer then?
506 2011-09-02 16:01:59 <cjdelisle> makes enough sense
507 2011-09-02 16:03:08 <BlueMatt> also, I have no sympathy here, people always complaining about mtgox's poor coding get whats coming if they miscode
508 2011-09-02 16:03:57 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: I'm sure MtGox will be pursuing legal action when/if they find the thief
509 2011-09-02 16:04:11 <BlueMatt> quite possibly, I have no illusions that most people would here
510 2011-09-02 16:05:27 <phantomcircuit> BlueMatt, <phantomcircuit> [13:28:40] MagicalTux, lol i think i'll be a little bit easier on everybody else from now on....
511 2011-09-02 16:05:30 <phantomcircuit> BlueMatt, kthx
512 2011-09-02 16:06:18 <BlueMatt> phantomcircuit: wrt what?
513 2011-09-02 16:08:11 <phantomcircuit> BlueMatt, from a little while ago
514 2011-09-02 16:08:21 <BlueMatt> phantomcircuit: he said that wrt what?
515 2011-09-02 16:08:47 <phantomcircuit> i said that
516 2011-09-02 16:09:59 <BlueMatt> phantomcircuit: he said that wrt your miscoding?
517 2011-09-02 16:10:10 <phantomcircuit> facepalm
518 2011-09-02 16:10:27 <jgarzik> facepalm of the day:  p2pool does not include transactions in the blocks it builds
519 2011-09-02 16:10:38 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: what?
520 2011-09-02 16:10:39 <phantomcircuit> BlueMatt, i said that too him
521 2011-09-02 16:10:51 <BlueMatt> phantomcircuit: Im sorry, I cant read
522 2011-09-02 16:11:00 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: p2pool works on a coinbase, and that's it.  -never- are any user created transactions included in p2pool's generated blocks.
523 2011-09-02 16:11:19 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: ...wow
524 2011-09-02 16:11:25 <vsrinivas> hrm, really? wow.
525 2011-09-02 16:11:27 <BlueMatt> phantomcircuit: well fair enough
526 2011-09-02 16:13:06 <luke-jr> wtf
527 2011-09-02 16:13:35 <midnightmagic> phantomcircuit: wow dude what channel was that log in?
528 2011-09-02 16:14:08 <luke-jr> jgarzik: I guess the only thing worse would be accepting the fee'd transactions and discarding the fees entirely
529 2011-09-02 16:14:32 <phantomcircuit> midnightmagic, what?
530 2011-09-02 16:14:40 <phantomcircuit> oh
531 2011-09-02 16:14:43 <phantomcircuit> #bitcoinpool
532 2011-09-02 16:15:10 <midnightmagic> is that a real pool? he is an owner or sysop of that pool?
533 2011-09-02 16:15:11 <phantomcircuit> the operator of which geebus appears to be affiliated with this bendavis guy although he denies it
534 2011-09-02 16:15:27 <phantomcircuit> bendavis was +o in there at some point
535 2011-09-02 16:15:58 <cjdelisle> I would say that phantom was negligent and in cases involving negligence where the victim suffers embarassement and damage to reputation, this is probably just. Note that USA v. Spitler & Auernheimer disagrees. In this case there is significant losses of a fungibal asset which is much more serious than mere reputational damage.
536 2011-09-02 16:16:47 <phantomcircuit> cjdelisle, i have no doubt that we are in the right legally
537 2011-09-02 16:16:49 <phantomcircuit> none
538 2011-09-02 16:17:30 <cjdelisle> Unfortunately your name not being AT&T may limit the FBI's interest in the matter since they are busy protecting their own reputation against Anonymous.
539 2011-09-02 16:17:52 <midnightmagic> amazing.. just amazing. honestly i am of the opinion that it is straight up theft..
540 2011-09-02 16:20:55 <midnightmagic> it is clear some people might still be sore about the way you arrived in here many months ago (mocking satoshi's bad code)
541 2011-09-02 16:21:41 <phantomcircuit> midnightmagic, yeah well
542 2011-09-02 16:21:46 <phantomcircuit> call it like i see it
543 2011-09-02 16:22:04 <midnightmagic> i just have one suggestion for you phantomcircuit: no more threats of physical violence or barratry
544 2011-09-02 16:22:19 <phantomcircuit> i made no threat
545 2011-09-02 16:22:29 <phantomcircuit> *none*
546 2011-09-02 16:23:00 <midnightmagic> you were talking about showing up at his door. there's an implied threat there, especially when you're talking about dude's kids
547 2011-09-02 16:23:33 <midnightmagic> that's not cool. always leave someone's kids out of it real or not.
548 2011-09-02 16:23:47 <phantomcircuit> i merely was making it clear i knew who he was
549 2011-09-02 16:23:59 <phantomcircuit> there's like 50 ben johnson's in that part of oregon
550 2011-09-02 16:24:36 <phantomcircuit> if i was threatening him i would have made that very explicit
551 2011-09-02 16:25:00 <midnightmagic> just saying judge's don't like to rule in favour of people who say stuff like that
552 2011-09-02 16:25:32 <midnightmagic> anyway i hope you get your btc back, that's a damn raw deal man
553 2011-09-02 16:26:41 <midnightmagic> and i'll tell you one thing, i'll never do any business with anyone who has admitted they'd keep the coins after a mistake like that
554 2011-09-02 16:28:48 <makomk> jgarzik: including transactions in blocks is quite expensive from what I can tell; I'd imagine that skipping them makes mining a lot more efficient.
555 2011-09-02 16:29:05 <jgarzik> makomk: define "expensive"?
556 2011-09-02 16:29:08 <phantomcircuit> lold
557 2011-09-02 16:29:18 <jgarzik> makomk: I'm not sure you know how mining works
558 2011-09-02 16:29:25 <makomk> Requires quite a lot of computation.
559 2011-09-02 16:29:38 <jgarzik> makomk: computation is the same regardless of block size, in the mining process
560 2011-09-02 16:29:52 <jgarzik> makomk: miners mine 80-byte block header, over and over again
561 2011-09-02 16:29:54 <luke-jr> makomk: it's not that bad
562 2011-09-02 16:30:01 <makomk> jgarzik: *in the mining process*, which is GPU accelerated.
563 2011-09-02 16:30:09 <vsrinivas> remember what is being hashed in mining;
564 2011-09-02 16:30:11 <jgarzik> makomk: read what I just wrote
565 2011-09-02 16:30:21 <luke-jr> makomk: the one time it matters-- when prevblock changes-- there are generally no transactions to include
566 2011-09-02 16:31:36 <makomk> If I remember how p2pool works correctly, it essentially creates a difficulty-1 blockchain of some kind of its own?
567 2011-09-02 16:32:18 <luke-jr> makomk: no
568 2011-09-02 16:33:12 <luke-jr> if anyone wants, I'd appreciate reviews of http://luke.dashjr.org/programs/bitcoin/w/pushpool/luke-jr.git/commitdiff/491a232178a3de087b4d516d1050cb4d4dca1835
569 2011-09-02 16:33:39 <makomk> I'm pretty sure I'm right; every time a miner in the p2pool pool creates a share every other miner has to start work on a new block.
570 2011-09-02 16:33:48 <upb> lol @ fuckup
571 2011-09-02 16:34:46 <luke-jr> makomk: you don't work on blocks
572 2011-09-02 16:34:49 <luke-jr> makomk: you find them
573 2011-09-02 16:34:59 <luke-jr> makomk: you're checking a "new block" millions of times every second
574 2011-09-02 16:36:25 <makomk> luke-jr: you know what I mean; every time a miner in p2pool finds a share, the other miners have to generate a new merkle tree and start looking for a valid share based on that tree.
575 2011-09-02 16:37:07 <luke-jr> makomk: afaik it tolerates a delay in updating
576 2011-09-02 16:37:12 <luke-jr> so it has no practical problem
577 2011-09-02 16:37:17 <luke-jr> p2pool's real problems are different :p
578 2011-09-02 16:37:23 <gmaxwell> updating the coinbase is dirt cheap.
579 2011-09-02 16:37:42 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: it could be cheaper. :p
580 2011-09-02 16:37:48 <makomk> gmaxwell: really? Last time I looked the client appeared to recompute the entire Merkle tree every time.
581 2011-09-02 16:37:50 <luke-jr> but it doesn't matter here
582 2011-09-02 16:38:05 <gmaxwell> makomk: which is dirt cheap, and it doesn't have to do that.
583 2011-09-02 16:38:13 <gmaxwell> There is no time limit on it.
584 2011-09-02 16:38:49 <gmaxwell> You could keep a GPU going with a PDP-11 so long as the miner fetched one work unit ahead
585 2011-09-02 16:39:05 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: generating new merkle trees is slow enough to take seconds making LP work
586 2011-09-02 16:39:08 <makomk> You'd get a lot of stales doing that.
587 2011-09-02 16:39:17 <gmaxwell> makomk: no you wouldn't.
588 2011-09-02 16:39:18 <luke-jr> makomk: no, because the old ones aren't stale
589 2011-09-02 16:39:38 <makomk> Ah, p2pool doesn't have stale shares then?
590 2011-09-02 16:40:10 <forrestv> makomk, p2pool does have stale shares
591 2011-09-02 16:40:22 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: I've long suspected there is some interesting bug there. I can do something like 1M SHA256/s with plain basic C code, there is no reason the tree update should take as long as it does.
592 2011-09-02 16:40:37 <forrestv> and you're right - the coinbase transaction and merkle tree is recomputed upon every new share
593 2011-09-02 16:41:54 <forrestv> jgarzik, 'p2pool does not include transactions in the blocks it builds' was true four days ago, but no longer is
594 2011-09-02 16:42:21 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: my approach has been to avoid getwork altogheter :P
595 2011-09-02 16:42:39 <jgarzik> forrestv: and that change is deployed to all participants?
596 2011-09-02 16:43:10 <forrestv> jgarzik, only the ones that have upgraded and patched their bitcoind
597 2011-09-02 16:43:15 <forrestv> which is the majority of the hashpower on p2pool
598 2011-09-02 16:44:07 <andyroo> what linker flags do i need for i2d_ECPrivateKey and friends?
599 2011-09-02 16:49:22 <wtfman> hey, my pool is still at block 143667, but blockexplorer.com is already at 143770
600 2011-09-02 16:49:42 <wtfman> what can that issue be? oO
601 2011-09-02 16:50:54 <kinlo> you're not patient enough?
602 2011-09-02 16:51:07 <kinlo> it can take 10-20 min for just a few 100 blocks to come in
603 2011-09-02 16:57:09 <jgarzik> forrestv: if blocks are truly including transactions, then yes, that resolves my objection
604 2011-09-02 17:14:03 <lfm> wtfman: What version bitcoin(d) do you have? how many connections do you have?
605 2011-09-02 17:15:47 <lfm> ;;bc,blocks
606 2011-09-02 17:15:48 <gribble> 143672
607 2011-09-02 17:15:48 <wtfman> version 0.3.24 with ~140 connections
608 2011-09-02 17:16:12 <lfm> wtfman block explorer lied to you?
609 2011-09-02 17:16:23 <wtfman> no :>
610 2011-09-02 17:16:27 <lfm> ok
611 2011-09-02 17:16:31 <wtfman> i dont know. my server somehow lost track
612 2011-09-02 17:16:44 <lfm> how long has it been lost?
613 2011-09-02 17:16:55 <wtfman> only a couple of mins till i noticed
614 2011-09-02 17:17:05 <wtfman> also ppl had connection issues, but not all
615 2011-09-02 17:17:28 <lfm> if it isnt straightened out in 30 min then do a restart, if that doesnt fix it then worry
616 2011-09-02 17:17:45 <wtfman> i restarted already, now it works again, but lets see for how long
617 2011-09-02 17:17:48 <gavinandresen> I'm thinking this:  http://pastebin.com/ZfcT7jV2    ... might be a really good idea.  Makes downloading the block-chain up to the last checkpoint much, much faster
618 2011-09-02 17:17:53 <wtfman> maybe it couldnt handle the load .. not sure
619 2011-09-02 17:18:40 <lfm> wtfman: Ya I had torouble with about 150 connections too. I started using -maxconnect 50
620 2011-09-02 17:19:02 <lfm> -maxconnections=50
621 2011-09-02 18:06:45 <copumpkin> phantomcircuit: any news from the asshole?
622 2011-09-02 18:06:58 <phantomcircuit> none
623 2011-09-02 18:07:13 <phantomcircuit> also it's labor day so i doubt contacting the police at this time will have any effect
624 2011-09-02 18:07:55 <ThomasV> copumpkin: who's that ?
625 2011-09-02 18:12:39 <phantomcircuit> copumpkin, he finally realized i had friended him with a fake account and posted on his wall
626 2011-09-02 18:12:52 <copumpkin> lol nice
627 2011-09-02 18:12:56 <copumpkin> what'd you post?
628 2011-09-02 18:13:15 <copumpkin> does he have a twitter account?
629 2011-09-02 18:13:29 <copumpkin> we could try shaming him there
630 2011-09-02 18:13:29 <phantomcircuit> he had posted that he legally earned 4000$ in 15 minutes
631 2011-09-02 18:13:34 <phantomcircuit> i made it clear that he had not
632 2011-09-02 18:13:46 <copumpkin> wow
633 2011-09-02 18:13:49 <copumpkin> so he openly admits it
634 2011-09-02 18:13:49 <phantomcircuit> yeah trying to shame him
635 2011-09-02 18:13:54 <phantomcircuit> i doubt it'll work though
636 2011-09-02 18:13:58 <copumpkin> any twitter?
637 2011-09-02 18:14:04 <phantomcircuit> not one that he uses
638 2011-09-02 18:14:09 <phantomcircuit> yeah he thinks it's legal because it's bitcoins
639 2011-09-02 18:14:12 <phantomcircuit> he's delusional
640 2011-09-02 18:14:58 <copumpkin> the fact that he had ops in the channel
641 2011-09-02 18:15:03 <copumpkin> probably meant that he was friends with the other ashsole
642 2011-09-02 18:15:13 <gmaxwell> Whats the story here?
643 2011-09-02 18:15:27 <copumpkin> gmaxwell: phantomcircuit accidentally sent 511 coins to this guy, who ran off and sold them all
644 2011-09-02 18:15:32 <copumpkin> and then preached about how it was legal to do that
645 2011-09-02 18:15:37 <gmaxwell> 0_o
646 2011-09-02 18:15:45 <gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: how'd you manage that?
647 2011-09-02 18:15:51 <phantomcircuit> broken script
648 2011-09-02 18:16:05 <copumpkin> phantomcircuit: you could get mtgox to bail you out :)
649 2011-09-02 18:16:42 <phantomcircuit> actually he tried to help but couldn't
650 2011-09-02 18:16:47 <phantomcircuit> well he helped some
651 2011-09-02 18:16:48 <gmaxwell> well you certantly should tell the relevant exchanges that you intend to take legal action against the asshole, see if they'll freeze the account.
652 2011-09-02 18:16:59 <phantomcircuit> the guy definitely sold them using mtgox and send them out via dwolla
653 2011-09-02 18:17:05 <copumpkin> his name is Ben Davis?
654 2011-09-02 18:17:12 <phantomcircuit> his name is ben johnson
655 2011-09-02 18:17:22 <phantomcircuit> possibly by marriage??
656 2011-09-02 18:17:25 <gmaxwell> Where does he live?
657 2011-09-02 18:17:28 <phantomcircuit> oregon
658 2011-09-02 18:17:52 <copumpkin> I guess you should avoid giving out all the info you have about him in public
659 2011-09-02 18:18:00 <copumpkin> but I'd be curious to see it in private
660 2011-09-02 18:18:04 <copumpkin> :P
661 2011-09-02 18:18:24 <gmaxwell> If it wasn't >3000 mi away I'd offer to go knock on his door.
662 2011-09-02 18:18:47 <phantomcircuit> i wouldn't suggest that either way
663 2011-09-02 18:18:57 <phantomcircuit> he has 2 handguns and a .22 mp5
664 2011-09-02 18:18:59 <copumpkin> yeah, you don't want him turning around and saying you're harassing him
665 2011-09-02 18:19:02 <copumpkin> lol wtf
666 2011-09-02 18:19:02 <phantomcircuit> and is clearly irrational
667 2011-09-02 18:19:46 <copumpkin> was the pseudolegal bullshit op dude in the log the guy who runs the pool?
668 2011-09-02 18:20:10 <copumpkin> Geebus
669 2011-09-02 18:20:11 <copumpkin> I guess so
670 2011-09-02 18:20:12 <phantomcircuit> yes
671 2011-09-02 18:20:18 <gmaxwell> I didn't think rifels were legal in oregon.
672 2011-09-02 18:22:25 <copumpkin> does he have an OTC account?
673 2011-09-02 18:22:43 <b4epoche> contact the bitcoin police ;-)
674 2011-09-02 18:23:02 <b4epoche> they seem to be a crack team of investigators
675 2011-09-02 18:28:01 <gmaxwell> note: crack team and crack headed team are not the same thing.
676 2011-09-02 18:28:25 <copumpkin> I wish I could help somehow
677 2011-09-02 18:28:37 <copumpkin> this thing almost pisses me off more than the guy who scammed me
678 2011-09-02 18:30:52 <luke-jr> 0.4rc1 got a tgz yet?
679 2011-09-02 18:31:05 <phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, i dont believe so
680 2011-09-02 18:31:29 <copumpkin> we definitely need baseball bats for btc hire
681 2011-09-02 18:32:03 <phantomcircuit> no no
682 2011-09-02 18:32:17 <copumpkin> :)
683 2011-09-02 18:32:21 <copumpkin> I know, I know
684 2011-09-02 18:32:23 <phantomcircuit> the only harm that should come to this asshole is hard time
685 2011-09-02 18:32:32 <b4epoche> maybe a DDoS bat?
686 2011-09-02 18:32:41 <helo> heh
687 2011-09-02 18:32:47 <copumpkin> I don't think vigilantism is a good idea, really :P
688 2011-09-02 18:32:54 <copumpkin> especially if you do have his real identity
689 2011-09-02 18:32:57 <phantomcircuit> interesting
690 2011-09-02 18:32:59 <b4epoche> where's that botnet dude when you need him?
691 2011-09-02 18:32:59 <copumpkin> just send the real law after him
692 2011-09-02 18:33:01 <phantomcircuit> he posted
693 2011-09-02 18:33:06 <copumpkin> oh?
694 2011-09-02 18:33:21 <phantomcircuit> "FAKE!!!!!!" on this fake facebook profiles wall
695 2011-09-02 18:33:27 <phantomcircuit> and has since deleted it
696 2011-09-02 18:33:38 <copumpkin> lol
697 2011-09-02 18:33:44 <phantomcircuit> maybe one of his more intelligent friends warned him that what he's doing actually is a crime
698 2011-09-02 18:33:51 <copumpkin> he sounds like a really bright dude
699 2011-09-02 18:34:09 <copumpkin> phantomcircuit: are you in the US?
700 2011-09-02 18:34:18 <phantomcircuit> not at the moment
701 2011-09-02 18:34:22 <copumpkin> it might be more of a pain to report a crime from outside
702 2011-09-02 18:34:26 <copumpkin> ah
703 2011-09-02 18:34:26 <phantomcircuit> it's going to massively complicate reporting it
704 2011-09-02 18:34:29 <phantomcircuit> yeah
705 2011-09-02 18:34:37 <b4epoche> http://gawker.com/5836484/police-now-consulting-urban-dictionary-to-get-inside-heads-of-perps-who-want-to-murk-them
706 2011-09-02 18:34:43 <kjj> honestly, it looks like the guy that got the coins could be facing jail time if the pool operator calls the local cops
707 2011-09-02 18:34:50 <b4epoche> is he that stupid?
708 2011-09-02 18:34:53 <copumpkin> kjj: the pool operator won't
709 2011-09-02 18:34:58 <copumpkin> did you see his crap?
710 2011-09-02 18:35:01 <copumpkin> I think they might be friends
711 2011-09-02 18:35:03 <luke-jr> kjj: that would be a good precedent
712 2011-09-02 18:35:10 <luke-jr> copumpkin: it doesn't have to be the poolop
713 2011-09-02 18:35:16 <copumpkin> oh I know
714 2011-09-02 18:35:18 <kjj> the internet lawyers have silly ideas
715 2011-09-02 18:35:22 <copumpkin> I just meant that the pool operator won't do it
716 2011-09-02 18:35:32 <copumpkin> because he's got some rather questionable legal opinions himself
717 2011-09-02 18:35:57 <kjj> the courts really don't care what was stolen.  they just care that it was
718 2011-09-02 18:36:30 <kjj> the county attorney would argue that it was a bank error, which you can't keep.  the defense would argue that it was unsolicited mail, which you can
719 2011-09-02 18:36:44 <copumpkin> you could steal a random piece of paraphernalia that has zero market value but deep sentimental value to the victim
720 2011-09-02 18:36:48 <copumpkin> it's still a crime :)
721 2011-09-02 18:36:59 <b4epoche> haven't police investigated Second Life, et al. thefts?
722 2011-09-02 18:37:00 <kjj> I'm pretty sure that a judge or jury would call it a bank error, and not junk mail
723 2011-09-02 18:37:24 <copumpkin> even as far as erroneous mail goes
724 2011-09-02 18:37:27 <phantomcircuit> copumpkin, yes but not a serious one
725 2011-09-02 18:37:29 <copumpkin> you're not screwed
726 2011-09-02 18:37:49 <copumpkin> I linked an article earlier that explained what happens if you accidentally mail something to the wrong person
727 2011-09-02 18:37:50 <phantomcircuit> sentimental value is explicitly not countable in court
728 2011-09-02 18:38:34 <copumpkin> that still doesn't mean you get to go stealing my whole collection of women's panties
729 2011-09-02 18:38:43 <copumpkin> oh, whoops
730 2011-09-02 18:38:45 <copumpkin> did I say that?
731 2011-09-02 18:38:47 <kjj> keep in mind that this isn't something with sentimental value, it is an ownership interest in an asset with an exchange value of over $4,000
732 2011-09-02 18:39:31 <kjj> in most places, that is felony grand theft, complete with state prison, loss of civil rights, etc
733 2011-09-02 18:39:31 <phantomcircuit> kjj, precisely
734 2011-09-02 18:39:33 <lfm> kjj bitcoins?
735 2011-09-02 18:40:05 <phantomcircuit> according to my obviously non lawyer opinion the sentencing guidelines for this crime is minimum 30 months
736 2011-09-02 18:40:36 <kjj> if I was the recipient, I would send it back, like yesterday.  having a local deputy show up at your door for it would mean a very bad day
737 2011-09-02 18:40:47 <phantomcircuit> i gave him the benefit of the doubt (in emails sent previously)
738 2011-09-02 18:40:53 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: jgarzik: 0.4 source.tar.gz?
739 2011-09-02 18:40:53 <phantomcircuit> i even told him it was a crime
740 2011-09-02 18:41:04 <phantomcircuit> but he clearly has no interest in returning it
741 2011-09-02 18:41:13 <phantomcircuit> so i think it's time to throw the book at him
742 2011-09-02 18:41:16 <kjj> oh, and it totally looks like the pool operator was acting like a tool.  doesn't matter much if it hits court, but still
743 2011-09-02 18:41:17 <phantomcircuit> (not literally)
744 2011-09-02 18:41:46 <phantomcircuit> kjj, the ip of bitcoinpool.com traces back to the same area as ben johnson's
745 2011-09-02 18:44:40 <copumpkin> phantomcircuit: how did BenDavis even get ops?
746 2011-09-02 18:44:53 <kjj> I really don't like it that every fuckup in bitcoin is now assumed to be a scam
747 2011-09-02 18:45:15 <phantomcircuit> copumpkin, im not sure he had them when i joined
748 2011-09-02 18:46:17 <kjj> you know what's really funny?  the pool operator doesn't need to pursue it.  the state has an interest in prosecuting grand theft that doesn't depend on whether or not the victim wants justice
749 2011-09-02 18:50:31 <phantomcircuit> kjj, funds were not stolen from the pool operator
750 2011-09-02 18:50:40 <phantomcircuit> kjj, but from me and company
751 2011-09-02 18:50:57 <phantomcircuit> he was merely commenting on past experience (which i suspect was actualyl a series of lies)
752 2011-09-02 18:51:01 <kjj> I'll be honest, I haven't been following it in detail
753 2011-09-02 18:51:39 <kjj> but if you know where he lives, and have reasonably good evidence that he had them in his wallet at some time, make the call
754 2011-09-02 18:52:37 <kjj> unless the local PD is really tiny, they will have an investigator that does computer stuff, or they are part of a multijurisdiction group that includes one
755 2011-09-02 18:52:42 <wtfman> Geebus has 500 bitcoins?
756 2011-09-02 18:54:10 <phantomcircuit> kjj, i would but it's labor day weekend and i seriously doubt they would give a shit
757 2011-09-02 18:54:23 <kjj> oh, yeah.  not today.  Tuesday
758 2011-09-02 18:54:28 <phantomcircuit> but i definitely will be doing so
759 2011-09-02 18:54:46 <wtfman> Geebus runs bitcoinpool.com
760 2011-09-02 18:55:03 <phantomcircuit> yes he does
761 2011-09-02 18:55:17 <wtfman> that fits to my opinion about that pool :p
762 2011-09-02 18:55:37 <kjj> today, you are trying to get your WOW gold back and no one cares.  on Tuesday, it is felony grand theft.
763 2011-09-02 18:55:48 <kjj> in their eyes, anyway
764 2011-09-02 18:56:19 <phantomcircuit> kjj, pretty much
765 2011-09-02 18:56:26 <copumpkin> anyone in #bitcoinpool?
766 2011-09-02 18:56:48 <phantomcircuit> yes
767 2011-09-02 18:56:56 <phantomcircuit> 34 users
768 2011-09-02 18:56:57 <phantomcircuit> and me
769 2011-09-02 18:57:05 <phantomcircuit> in disguise
770 2011-09-02 18:57:06 <phantomcircuit> ish
771 2011-09-02 18:58:03 <wtfman> now in it too
772 2011-09-02 18:59:05 <wtfman> i think geebus is also a girl
773 2011-09-02 18:59:39 <phantomcircuit> oh
774 2011-09-02 18:59:43 <copumpkin> geebus is also from portland
775 2011-09-02 18:59:45 <phantomcircuit> i bet i know who it is too
776 2011-09-02 18:59:46 <copumpkin> or their IP is
777 2011-09-02 19:00:01 <wtfman> the ops are married or something, or a couple
778 2011-09-02 19:00:03 <phantomcircuit> one of his friends sent threatening private messages on facebook
779 2011-09-02 19:00:12 <copumpkin> oh?
780 2011-09-02 19:00:14 <phantomcircuit> yeah
781 2011-09-02 19:00:15 <copumpkin> you should save those
782 2011-09-02 19:00:18 <wtfman> they have the pool running at home broadband connection
783 2011-09-02 19:00:19 <copumpkin> and report them to facebook
784 2011-09-02 19:00:20 <phantomcircuit> let me find the screenshot
785 2011-09-02 19:00:34 <kjj> yeah, save them.  but don't get dragged into it
786 2011-09-02 19:00:50 <copumpkin> wtfman: what makes you think it's a female, by the way?