1 2011-09-26 00:33:02 <nanotube> bx: sup
  2 2011-09-26 00:54:34 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 2c3cebd00f6f r125 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/test/RunLongPollOverloadClientTests.java: log change for lp overload test
  3 2011-09-26 00:54:35 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * a691eb1b5d0b r129 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/ (PoolServer.java servlet/AbstractJsonRpcServlet.java):
  4 2011-09-26 00:54:36 <CIA-101> poolserverj: result in the LP request being routed through the main handler and returning
  5 2011-09-26 00:54:37 <CIA-101> poolserverj: from the main handler and redirects to the LP handler if it's found.
  6 2011-09-26 01:41:04 <d33tah> sipa: you here?
  7 2011-09-26 01:45:15 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Daniel Folkinshteyn * r9162b2f1604a supybot-bitcoin-marketmonitor/OTCWebsite/ (index.php otcstyle.css): OTCWebsite: a bit of a layout change and a new sponsor
  8 2011-09-26 01:49:40 <d33tah> it's kinda sleepy in here.
  9 2011-09-26 01:49:49 <imsaguy> a bit
 10 2011-09-26 01:50:15 <d33tah> which might suggest  that most of people are normal europeans :p
 11 2011-09-26 01:50:47 <d33tah> imsaguy, you familiar with Bitcoin's ECDSA code by any chance?
 12 2011-09-26 01:50:52 <imsaguy> nope
 13 2011-09-26 01:50:58 <d33tah> crap.
 14 2011-09-26 01:51:09 <imsaguy> ive been learning the wot stuff in -otc
 15 2011-09-26 01:51:16 <d33tah> otc?
 16 2011-09-26 01:51:36 <imsaguy> person to person market exchange based off a web of trust
 17 2011-09-26 01:51:41 <imsaguy> #bitcoin-otc
 18 2011-09-26 01:51:54 <imsaguy> not a market, just a person to person exchange
 19 2011-09-26 01:52:59 <d33tah> why would someone prefer trust to a person prior to stuff like mtgox?
 20 2011-09-26 01:53:27 <imsaguy> in otc, you see a lot of other transactions besides fiat to bitcoin
 21 2011-09-26 01:53:43 <imsaguy> giftcards, paypal, etc
 22 2011-09-26 01:54:02 <d33tah> hm, that sounds reasonable
 23 2011-09-26 01:54:13 <d33tah> i thought mtgox allows paypal too, though
 24 2011-09-26 01:54:18 <gmaxwell> You can also sometimes get better deals due to market dynamics and the lack of mtgox fees.
 25 2011-09-26 01:54:19 <imsaguy> not that I know of
 26 2011-09-26 01:54:27 <gmaxwell> No, mtgox doesn't allow paypal.
 27 2011-09-26 01:54:36 <imsaguy> there's less time, because you don't have to transfer in and out
 28 2011-09-26 01:54:44 <imsaguy> so you can react quicker
 29 2011-09-26 01:54:54 <d33tah> interesting. never heard of it.
 30 2011-09-26 01:55:06 <d33tah> atm i'm far to getting my first bitcoin though
 31 2011-09-26 01:55:12 <d33tah> got like 0.1 BTC atm
 32 2011-09-26 01:55:15 <imsaguy> lol
 33 2011-09-26 01:55:20 <imsaguy> thats a start
 34 2011-09-26 01:55:30 <d33tah> i'm cpu mining, just because i'm too greedy to buy BTC :d
 35 2011-09-26 01:55:38 <imsaguy> no gpu?
 36 2011-09-26 01:55:46 <d33tah> no OCL GPU
 37 2011-09-26 01:56:00 <nanotube> d33tah: are you paying for electricity?
 38 2011-09-26 01:56:05 <d33tah> i once wondered if it was possible to use non-OCL GPU to mine bitcoins
 39 2011-09-26 01:56:11 <d33tah> nanotube: i shall let you guess
 40 2011-09-26 01:56:13 <d33tah> :d
 41 2011-09-26 01:56:23 <d33tah> i wouldn't be mining if i was
 42 2011-09-26 01:56:31 <nanotube> heh well, people have been known to spend a dollar to save a dime
 43 2011-09-26 01:56:37 <imsaguy> no u
 44 2011-09-26 01:56:40 <nanotube> so... never hurts to ask :)
 45 2011-09-26 01:56:48 <imsaguy> luke-jr has been quiet as of late
 46 2011-09-26 01:56:57 <d33tah> anyway
 47 2011-09-26 01:57:00 <d33tah> 05:56:05 < d33tah> i once wondered if it was possible to use non-OCL GPU to mine bitcoins
 48 2011-09-26 01:57:13 <imsaguy> once implies you no longer do
 49 2011-09-26 01:57:14 <nanotube> yes, and then what happened? :)
 50 2011-09-26 01:57:23 <gmaxwell> well, and who cares if you're spending $1 extra per month to leave a miner on some modest machine in order to make a few bitcents. It's not like thats going to break the bank.
 51 2011-09-26 01:57:24 <doublec> there are cuda miners
 52 2011-09-26 01:57:26 <d33tah> like, drawing particular shapes with GPU, then calculating their length or something
 53 2011-09-26 01:57:26 <luke-jr> working on brain/dream miner
 54 2011-09-26 01:57:51 <luke-jr> expected yield 1 petahash/sec
 55 2011-09-26 01:57:52 <imsaguy> there you are
 56 2011-09-26 01:58:11 <d33tah> anyway, luke-jr, you think it's possible to implement what i'm thinking?
 57 2011-09-26 01:58:20 <gmaxwell> Show me the person who only ever gets water at a restaurant because the soda is super overpriced and I'll show you a person who can properly criticize people for a little cpu mining. :)
 58 2011-09-26 01:58:21 <luke-jr> I don't read minds
 59 2011-09-26 01:58:26 <d33tah> i don't mean a huge increase, but any would be cool
 60 2011-09-26 01:58:35 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: um, everyone?
 61 2011-09-26 01:59:00 <gmaxwell> pshaw, fairly few people do that.
 62 2011-09-26 01:59:13 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: everyone I eat out with
 63 2011-09-26 01:59:19 <d33tah> so do I :d
 64 2011-09-26 01:59:21 <forrestv> i do that
 65 2011-09-26 01:59:25 <d33tah> haha
 66 2011-09-26 01:59:30 <d33tah> the channel suddenly got live
 67 2011-09-26 01:59:32 <luke-jr> of course, we don't drink soda either mostly
 68 2011-09-26 01:59:36 <gmaxwell> hah. Weirdos what the hell are you doing eating out if you care to optimize that much?
 69 2011-09-26 01:59:39 <d33tah> luke-jr, you familiar with Bitcoin's ECDSA?
 70 2011-09-26 01:59:48 <luke-jr> d33tah: no
 71 2011-09-26 01:59:51 <d33tah> shit
 72 2011-09-26 01:59:57 <d33tah> thanks for answer though
 73 2011-09-26 02:00:03 <nanotube> gmaxwell: i don't do soda generally. :P
 74 2011-09-26 02:00:11 <gmaxwell> d33tah: you shouldn't ask to ask questions on IRC, you should just ask.
 75 2011-09-26 02:00:31 <d33tah> hm
 76 2011-09-26 02:00:32 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: eating out is usually more of a short vacation
 77 2011-09-26 02:00:35 <gmaxwell> I'm sure as hell not going to commit myself to playing an openended ecdsa professor, but I might know the answer to a specific question. :)
 78 2011-09-26 02:00:50 <d33tah> i abandoned bitcoinbounties.org for now and i'm working on another project
 79 2011-09-26 02:01:54 <d33tah> in general, it's meant to secure your wallet by allowing you to put the private key on a dedicated chip - when there's a transaction, you are prompted for a password protecting the chip, then press the button on it, and the chip signs the transaction, without telling the potentially-compromised PC what the privkey is
 80 2011-09-26 02:02:11 <casascius> what kind of chip?
 81 2011-09-26 02:02:34 <d33tah> Arduino. already got a code from someone41 that could compile and would be a good start
 82 2011-09-26 02:02:49 <d33tah> the problem is I need some testing code that would tell me if the signatures are ok
 83 2011-09-26 02:03:17 <d33tah> i, with help of sipa, managed to extract all the parameters to ECDSA_sign() and printf them
 84 2011-09-26 02:03:23 <d33tah> now I need a working ECDSA_verify code
 85 2011-09-26 02:03:57 <d33tah> http://wklej.org/id/599540/ - that's what I got so far, don't bother to steal the privkey, it's testnet
 86 2011-09-26 02:04:01 <luke-jr> d33tah: useless unless it displays the total inputs
 87 2011-09-26 02:04:13 <luke-jr> d33tah: dude, let the crackers waste their time
 88 2011-09-26 02:04:15 <nanotube> and total outputs
 89 2011-09-26 02:04:23 <d33tah> luke-jr: i thought of it. it will.
 90 2011-09-26 02:04:27 <luke-jr> nanotube: no point to that
 91 2011-09-26 02:04:41 <luke-jr> nanotube: unless you're gonna display the full address of outputs too
 92 2011-09-26 02:04:54 <d33tah> PC can be compromised and show wrong numbers
 93 2011-09-26 02:05:10 <nanotube> luke-jr: really? so you're ok with "accidentally" sending your bitcoins to $wrongaddress, or sending $fraction to right address, and the rest to minerfees?
 94 2011-09-26 02:05:33 <nanotube> i'd prefer to see total inputs, output addresses, and associated amounts
 95 2011-09-26 02:05:37 <d33tah> but if it was forced to tell a total number of outputs and press a physical button on the chip adequate number of times, it could be safe
 96 2011-09-26 02:05:37 <luke-jr> nanotube: no, but that's a different level of security
 97 2011-09-26 02:05:49 <d33tah> i understand outputs, but why inputs?
 98 2011-09-26 02:05:49 <nanotube> right
 99 2011-09-26 02:05:56 <nanotube> so you know how much you're sending
100 2011-09-26 02:06:10 <luke-jr> d33tah: inputs is what it costs you. outputs are irrelevant unless you have some way to validate the output addresses
101 2011-09-26 02:06:16 <luke-jr> d33tah: which in general you don't
102 2011-09-26 02:06:24 <d33tah> well, validation would be an user confirmation
103 2011-09-26 02:06:28 <nanotube> otherwise... an attack could take 1000 of your btc, send 5btc to an address, then send the rest to nowhere.
104 2011-09-26 02:06:36 <luke-jr> also note inputs will be difficult, since it requires a full wallet :/
105 2011-09-26 02:06:38 <d33tah> valid point
106 2011-09-26 02:06:57 <luke-jr> or at least, it requires a copy of the previous txns
107 2011-09-26 02:07:04 <d33tah> anyway, i have an idea on how to protect it and now i need a working testing code
108 2011-09-26 02:07:09 <luke-jr> d33tah: the user has no way to validate the outputs
109 2011-09-26 02:07:34 <nanotube> why not? you can easily check to see if the address you're sending to is the one you meant to send to
110 2011-09-26 02:07:42 <d33tah> its number. when you send a transaction from A to B and are forced to confirm a transaction from A to B and C, you might suspect there's something evil going on.
111 2011-09-26 02:07:43 <luke-jr> nanotube: how do you know where you meant to send?
112 2011-09-26 02:08:29 <luke-jr> nanotube: 99% of cases right now, the same computer you're sending from is the one telling you the target address
113 2011-09-26 02:08:38 <nanotube> luke-jr: good point :)
114 2011-09-26 02:09:00 <luke-jr> so totalInputAmount minus totalOutputsToMyOwnPrivkeys
115 2011-09-26 02:09:08 <luke-jr> is the most useful info
116 2011-09-26 02:09:15 <nanotube> i suppose that issue should be addressed as well, out of band validation of target addresses
117 2011-09-26 02:09:30 <d33tah> that's pretty creepy
118 2011-09-26 02:09:42 <d33tah> i just figured out a trojan could replace all addresses you see in your browser
119 2011-09-26 02:09:48 <nanotube> yes
120 2011-09-26 02:09:52 <nanotube> that's what luke was alluding to
121 2011-09-26 02:09:54 <d33tah> so wherever you send the cash to, it goes to the evil guy
122 2011-09-26 02:10:09 <d33tah> using images instead of text sounds like some solution
123 2011-09-26 02:10:20 <nanotube> trojan can change images too you know
124 2011-09-26 02:10:32 <d33tah> but basically, the computer is a bitch of the one who owned it :p
125 2011-09-26 02:10:33 <nanotube> if your computer is rooted, basically you cannot trust your eyes
126 2011-09-26 02:10:36 <nanotube> right
127 2011-09-26 02:10:38 <luke-jr> really, the best you can guarantee is that you're only sending <X> amount
128 2011-09-26 02:11:06 <luke-jr> if done right, you can get a hardware wallet usable on any bitcoin-enabled PC
129 2011-09-26 02:11:07 <nanotube> without sideband validation, indeed that seems correct.
130 2011-09-26 02:11:16 <d33tah> anyway, atm i'd just like to bring this project to this stage, later perhaps enhance it any more
131 2011-09-26 02:11:21 <d33tah> could anyone help me with ECDSA?
132 2011-09-26 02:11:29 <luke-jr> or, for example, plug it into the merchant's own payment system, and just approve the total
133 2011-09-26 02:11:46 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 7c71fc909944 r130 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/servlet/MgmtInterfaceServlet.java: - add threadDump method to mgmt interface
134 2011-09-26 02:13:32 <d33tah> i guess i'll need to wait for sipa guy then
135 2011-09-26 02:13:36 <casascius> you know what would make a great hardware wallet...with a screen and keypad and even a built in printer...
136 2011-09-26 02:13:49 <d33tah> sounds hardcore
137 2011-09-26 02:13:50 <casascius> for $50-$70...
138 2011-09-26 02:14:02 <casascius> the obsolete OMNI 3200 credit card machine on eBay
139 2011-09-26 02:14:42 <d33tah> the arduino itself is 35$
140 2011-09-26 02:14:59 <casascius> those credit card machines are available cheap because businesses upgrade to the latest
141 2011-09-26 02:15:07 <d33tah> hm!
142 2011-09-26 02:15:08 <casascius> and yet they are perfectly good hardware
143 2011-09-26 02:15:12 <d33tah> the arduino could use a VGA monitor
144 2011-09-26 02:15:27 <d33tah> then two buttons to just confirm or decline...
145 2011-09-26 02:16:01 <d33tah> ANYWAY
146 2011-09-26 02:16:05 <d33tah> i need the ECDSA code! :P
147 2011-09-26 02:16:55 <d33tah> gmaxwell: have you by any chance looked at the URL?
148 2011-09-26 02:31:14 <d33tah> i think i finally found a good irssi theme
149 2011-09-26 02:31:56 <d33tah> btw, when was the 0.4 released? like yesterday?
150 2011-09-26 02:33:33 <imsaguy> a few days ago
151 2011-09-26 02:34:42 <d33tah> i must have missed it
152 2011-09-26 02:34:47 <d33tah> is it finally qt?
153 2011-09-26 02:36:27 <d33tah> it looks like not
154 2011-09-26 02:36:46 <imsaguy> there was work/discussion on it
155 2011-09-26 02:36:52 <imsaguy> but I don't know the status
156 2011-09-26 02:38:12 <d33tah> that's a pity
157 2011-09-26 02:38:29 <d33tah> i really don't like wx
158 2011-09-26 02:38:53 <d33tah> i don't understand why it was chosen to be in guiminer aswell
159 2011-09-26 02:42:57 <Disposition> qt isn't planned for .4
160 2011-09-26 02:43:06 <d33tah> that's news for me
161 2011-09-26 02:43:10 <d33tah> when is it planned then?
162 2011-09-26 02:43:15 <Disposition> .5?
163 2011-09-26 02:43:21 <d33tah> or not? :P
164 2011-09-26 02:43:38 <Disposition> afiak there wasn't enough time to put qt for 0.4 release
165 2011-09-26 02:44:35 <d33tah> it's good it's at least planned
166 2011-09-26 02:44:55 <d33tah> just curious, why did you guys dismissed gtk?
167 2011-09-26 02:45:57 <c_k> .5 is planned to be released by the end of next month
168 2011-09-26 02:46:02 <d33tah> whoa!
169 2011-09-26 02:46:04 <d33tah> that's speed
170 2011-09-26 02:46:22 <d33tah> could somebody highlight me? i'm testing an irssi skin
171 2011-09-26 02:46:32 <c_k> d33tah: which skin?
172 2011-09-26 02:46:40 <d33tah> initrd
173 2011-09-26 02:46:58 <d33tah> and it just got screwed away after it burnt my eyes :p
174 2011-09-26 02:47:10 <d33tah> the highlight was in an evil yellow
175 2011-09-26 02:47:12 <d33tah> paaain. :p
176 2011-09-26 02:47:44 <imsaguy> make your own skin
177 2011-09-26 02:48:00 <Disposition> qt was a seperate branch anyways, when it's ported it'll just be merged
178 2011-09-26 02:48:10 <d33tah> that's what i'm planning if none of the 173 skins works
179 2011-09-26 02:48:24 <d33tah> the default one would be just about the dull but perfect
180 2011-09-26 02:48:26 <Disposition> :O you gonna manually test all of them? .-.
181 2011-09-26 02:48:30 <d33tah> if it wasn't for the color of my nick in the logs
182 2011-09-26 02:48:43 <d33tah> got some script that would do the job automatically for me?
183 2011-09-26 02:48:46 <Disposition> then why not just change the highlight and use the default one .-.
184 2011-09-26 02:48:58 <d33tah> i made one to downlaod them and list them, but got none to test them
185 2011-09-26 02:49:09 <d33tah> well, because i'm hoping to accidentally find something cooler
186 2011-09-26 02:50:27 <d33tah> now testing trakhel
187 2011-09-26 02:50:53 <d33tah> number 31 on my list :p
188 2011-09-26 02:52:18 <d33tah> hmmm
189 2011-09-26 02:52:30 <d33tah> since we're not talking of anything in particular right now
190 2011-09-26 02:52:51 <d33tah> how about you guys enter http://bitcoinbounties.org - my current project - and tell me what do you feel about it?
191 2011-09-26 02:54:29 <luke-jr> cute, cgminer and pushpool conflict ;)
192 2011-09-26 02:54:43 <luke-jr> d33tah: I feel it's abandoned
193 2011-09-26 02:54:46 <luke-jr> [00:00:50] <d33tah> i abandoned bitcoinbounties.org for now and i'm working on another project
194 2011-09-26 02:54:57 <d33tah> because of no feedback
195 2011-09-26 02:54:58 <luke-jr> :P
196 2011-09-26 02:55:14 <d33tah> if I had any attention at all, i could develop it
197 2011-09-26 02:55:40 <d33tah> it's cool you're reading my lines anyway :d
198 2011-09-26 03:12:42 <Disposition> d33tah: hire a web designer :3
199 2011-09-26 03:13:23 <Disposition> I think it might be nice to put up a project list for all the projects related to bitcoin, and people can fund it/donate to it accordingly.
200 2011-09-26 03:13:38 <Disposition> since the point of bitcoin is to make payments easy anyways
201 2011-09-26 03:14:05 <d33tah> Disposition: you mean, create bounties for people and let them know they are already there?
202 2011-09-26 03:14:19 <d33tah> and i wouldn't hire a web designer since it costs :p
203 2011-09-26 03:16:54 <d33tah> you think it wouldn't get any attention with this look?
204 2011-09-26 03:17:32 <Disposition> yes
205 2011-09-26 03:17:50 <Disposition> you either make something simple that looks pretty, or you make something looks simple with a lot of features
206 2011-09-26 03:18:12 <Disposition> e.g. blockexplorer
207 2011-09-26 03:18:19 <d33tah> okay
208 2011-09-26 03:18:27 <Disposition> d33tah: not exactly, about creating bounties
209 2011-09-26 03:18:31 <d33tah> so, it just can't be ugly?
210 2011-09-26 03:18:35 <d33tah> that ugly, i mean?
211 2011-09-26 03:18:49 <Disposition> d33tah: yeah.. I mean that's rather basic requirement imo
212 2011-09-26 03:19:06 <d33tah> http://173.0.53.16:81/
213 2011-09-26 03:19:08 <Disposition> i was leaning more towards the list projects so community becomes aware of it
214 2011-09-26 03:19:11 <d33tah> do you think that would do?
215 2011-09-26 03:19:12 <Disposition> so people can fund it
216 2011-09-26 03:19:22 <d33tah> oh, just list of projects?
217 2011-09-26 03:19:27 <d33tah> not bounties, just projects to donate?
218 2011-09-26 03:19:33 <Disposition> both.
219 2011-09-26 03:19:47 <Disposition> why can't they donate/add to existing bounties.
220 2011-09-26 03:19:54 <d33tah> they can
221 2011-09-26 03:19:57 <d33tah> they just need to register
222 2011-09-26 03:19:58 <Disposition> right.
223 2011-09-26 03:20:06 <d33tah> or even not, if they donate anonymously
224 2011-09-26 03:20:12 <d33tah> you can try to do it, just with testnet
225 2011-09-26 03:20:31 <Disposition> it looks better now, I just feel the boxes table is out of place
226 2011-09-26 03:20:37 <Disposition> since the rest of the design is more fluid
227 2011-09-26 03:20:43 <Disposition> the table looks edgy
228 2011-09-26 03:21:15 <d33tah> good point, never noticed it
229 2011-09-26 03:21:22 <d33tah> but, would it do, in your opinion?
230 2011-09-26 03:21:32 <Disposition> for now yeah.
231 2011-09-26 03:21:40 <Disposition> maybe ability to add a description page
232 2011-09-26 03:21:42 <Disposition> per project
233 2011-09-26 03:21:51 <Disposition> e.g. jquery pop-up or osmething
234 2011-09-26 03:22:06 <Disposition> or drop-down
235 2011-09-26 03:22:15 <d33tah> like - add a 'project' field, add your own projects that could gather donations, and each project can have its own description?
236 2011-09-26 03:22:16 <Disposition> like expand the <span>
237 2011-09-26 03:22:27 <Disposition> mhm
238 2011-09-26 03:22:49 <Disposition> or you can even list other projects that's not really affiliated with bitcoin bounties
239 2011-09-26 03:22:53 <Disposition> and point people to it
240 2011-09-26 03:23:06 <Disposition> so it would serve to the community as to what projects related to bitcoin is out there
241 2011-09-26 03:24:23 <d33tah> that's a shitload of work, actually
242 2011-09-26 03:24:27 <Disposition> lol.
243 2011-09-26 03:24:42 <d33tah> i wonder what could I do to make it user attractive as fast as possible
244 2011-09-26 03:24:54 <d33tah> see, i've been working on what you can currently see for like, 3 weeks
245 2011-09-26 03:25:14 <Disposition> well regardless I think you need a project description section
246 2011-09-26 03:25:16 <d33tah> i could work more, but i'd love to see it finally behave like a complete 'walking skeleton'
247 2011-09-26 03:25:19 <Disposition> so people know wtf the bounty is for
248 2011-09-26 03:25:25 <d33tah> wouldn't bounty description do?
249 2011-09-26 03:25:25 <Disposition> or event link to forum thread/websites
250 2011-09-26 03:25:35 <Disposition> yeah that would do
251 2011-09-26 03:25:37 <d33tah> oh, that's what I was thinking of actually
252 2011-09-26 03:25:44 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Con Kolivas * r21c2bc469fb0 cgminer/ (README main.c miner.h): Make it possible to set the intensity on a per-card basis, dynamic or static values.
253 2011-09-26 03:25:47 <d33tah> anyway, there is bounty description section now
254 2011-09-26 03:25:53 <d33tah> you can see it if you click on a bounty
255 2011-09-26 03:26:00 <d33tah> i invite you to try yourself :)
256 2011-09-26 03:26:06 <Disposition> imo you should make it all in one page :P
257 2011-09-26 03:26:09 <Disposition> via drop downs
258 2011-09-26 03:26:24 <d33tah> i'd need to see some mockup
259 2011-09-26 03:26:42 <d33tah> how about bubles when you hover over a project on the list?
260 2011-09-26 03:26:57 <d33tah> bubbles*
261 2011-09-26 03:27:09 <Disposition> like this http://jrd89.com/codecanyon/quickfaqs/
262 2011-09-26 03:28:09 <Disposition> put the donate button and submit or w/e all under it
263 2011-09-26 03:28:18 <d33tah> hm, on one hand, it could be cool
264 2011-09-26 03:28:28 <Disposition> I just tried to donate to one, first I'd click on the project -> the click donate -> then login/ see address
265 2011-09-26 03:28:30 <d33tah> on another, putting description there sounds risky
266 2011-09-26 03:28:31 <Disposition> that's too much :3
267 2011-09-26 03:28:50 <Disposition> why would it be risky?
268 2011-09-26 03:29:01 <d33tah> there's quite a lot of text there
269 2011-09-26 03:29:10 <Disposition> and? :3
270 2011-09-26 03:29:16 <Disposition> it's hidden
271 2011-09-26 03:29:19 <Disposition> unless click'd on
272 2011-09-26 03:29:22 <d33tah> or got no js
273 2011-09-26 03:30:26 <d33tah> anyway, the idea is cool
274 2011-09-26 03:30:32 <d33tah> but it doesn't sound like a killer feature to me
275 2011-09-26 03:30:47 <Disposition> it's much simplier than your site design now
276 2011-09-26 03:31:16 <d33tah> ok, and do you think it would magically make people like the site more?
277 2011-09-26 03:31:17 <Disposition> it's a list of bounties -> click to expand for desc and donate button -> repeat per bounty
278 2011-09-26 03:31:43 <Disposition> I just went through it, I need to click and load 3 pages to be able to donate
279 2011-09-26 03:31:48 <d33tah> i mean, i feel it's obviously lacking some serious feature since people are not willing to test
280 2011-09-26 03:31:48 <Disposition> it felt un-needed
281 2011-09-26 03:32:07 <d33tah> you are most definitely right about the donating
282 2011-09-26 03:32:09 <Disposition> if you want to keep it simple that would be the way to do it imo
283 2011-09-26 03:32:25 <Disposition> or hell you can put the donate on the first page in another cell
284 2011-09-26 03:32:33 <Disposition> and keep the description page as it is
285 2011-09-26 03:33:01 <d33tah> okay, it's on my TODO list
286 2011-09-26 03:33:02 <Disposition> less navigation the better
287 2011-09-26 03:33:39 <d33tah> would you use such website yourself?
288 2011-09-26 03:34:13 <Disposition> I think there might be more demands for projects who need donations than people want to add to bounties
289 2011-09-26 03:34:16 <Disposition> that's just me though
290 2011-09-26 03:34:25 <Disposition> but yeah I would use it
291 2011-09-26 03:34:42 <Disposition> would be nice to get a sense of what the community wants
292 2011-09-26 03:34:56 <d33tah> do you think testing it in testnet is ok?
293 2011-09-26 03:35:21 <Disposition> i don't see a problem with it
294 2011-09-26 03:35:25 <Disposition> are you holding on to the bounty atm?
295 2011-09-26 03:36:46 <d33tah> what do you mean?
296 2011-09-26 03:37:02 <Disposition> like the bounty, where's the bitcoins going to
297 2011-09-26 03:37:10 <Disposition> you are holding onto it yar?
298 2011-09-26 03:37:32 <Disposition> also draw some inspiration from this http://feature-request.jamesfairhurst.co.uk/
299 2011-09-26 03:37:36 <d33tah> you mean, do I control the accounts the money comes in to?
300 2011-09-26 03:37:57 <Disposition> d33tah: mhm
301 2011-09-26 03:38:10 <d33tah> yeah, I do
302 2011-09-26 03:38:16 <d33tah> the code is open though
303 2011-09-26 03:38:18 <Disposition> then use testnet for now.
304 2011-09-26 03:38:33 <d33tah> i wanted to keep the code opensource to convince users it's safe
305 2011-09-26 03:38:41 <Disposition> of course.
306 2011-09-26 03:38:43 <d33tah> obviously it's not safe now, because the code is crappy
307 2011-09-26 03:38:48 <Disposition> it doesn't mean you can't run with it
308 2011-09-26 03:38:57 <d33tah> but perhaps if they helped me fix the code...
309 2011-09-26 03:39:00 <d33tah> hm, yeah, right
310 2011-09-26 03:39:06 <d33tah> but then i'd get called a scammer right away
311 2011-09-26 03:39:18 <d33tah> i'm hoping the trust is a matter of time
312 2011-09-26 03:39:30 <Disposition> i personally don't want to deal with anyform of escrow
313 2011-09-26 03:39:54 <d33tah> they would see they can donate 0.01BTC and not lose it and it actually goes to the guy we meant it to, next time it might be 0.02BTC
314 2011-09-26 03:40:05 <d33tah> Disposition: they both have their cons and pros
315 2011-09-26 03:40:13 <Disposition> of course, hence I said personally.
316 2011-09-26 03:40:27 <d33tah> such a system is safer for the devs who get the bounties
317 2011-09-26 03:40:35 <d33tah> the problem is you are pretty much right
318 2011-09-26 03:41:12 <d33tah> i have no idea how to guarantee i'm not running away with the cash
319 2011-09-26 03:41:35 <Disposition> might want to wait until multi-sign becomes available
320 2011-09-26 03:41:42 <luke-jr> ;;bc,stats
321 2011-09-26 03:41:45 <gribble> Current Blocks: 146930 | Current Difficulty: 1755425.3203287 | Next Difficulty At Block: 147167 | Next Difficulty In: 237 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 day, 17 hours, 40 minutes, and 21 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1689539.48202579 | Estimated Percent Change: -3.75326922427
322 2011-09-26 03:42:06 <d33tah> how exactly would it work?
323 2011-09-26 03:42:10 <Disposition> because by then it becomes much more appealing to sign money to you
324 2011-09-26 03:42:50 <Disposition> then they can like say they'll put this much bounty in
325 2011-09-26 03:42:59 <Disposition> but don't need to pay until project is done
326 2011-09-26 03:43:22 <d33tah> hm
327 2011-09-26 03:43:27 <d33tah> how does multisign work?
328 2011-09-26 03:43:41 <Disposition> it would require two signatures as oppose to one in this case
329 2011-09-26 03:43:51 <Disposition> e.g. you + whoever is putting up the bounty
330 2011-09-26 03:44:03 <d33tah> so, let's say there are three groups
331 2011-09-26 03:44:17 <d33tah> the devs, who get the bounty, the users, who donate, and me, as an intermediary
332 2011-09-26 03:44:23 <Disposition> I mean the escrow 2 out of 3 key can always work.
333 2011-09-26 03:44:25 <Disposition> yeah
334 2011-09-26 03:44:28 <d33tah> the user sends me the money by giving one of the keys, right?
335 2011-09-26 03:44:42 <Disposition> that design might be better, HOWEVER it won't really work if the "dev" changes
336 2011-09-26 03:44:46 <Disposition> since anyone can claim the bounty
337 2011-09-26 03:45:02 <d33tah> is it me that has control who claims the bounty?
338 2011-09-26 03:45:04 <d33tah> or rather
339 2011-09-26 03:45:06 <d33tah> who gets it
340 2011-09-26 03:45:21 <Disposition> well that's part of the issue you have to solve if you want to run bitcoin bounty :P
341 2011-09-26 03:45:30 <d33tah> atm it's like this
342 2011-09-26 03:45:50 <d33tah> users collect the money to temporary accounts
343 2011-09-26 03:46:06 <d33tah> then the money is transferred to the winner by me
344 2011-09-26 03:46:26 <d33tah> i don't know how could multi-sign help here
345 2011-09-26 03:47:06 <Disposition> well multi-sign can put you and the donator on the tx
346 2011-09-26 03:47:11 <Disposition> so none of you have access to this money
347 2011-09-26 03:47:16 <Disposition> unless both of you release it
348 2011-09-26 03:47:26 <Disposition> so even if you "run with the moneyz"
349 2011-09-26 03:47:29 <Disposition> you can spend it
350 2011-09-26 03:47:31 <Disposition> can't*
351 2011-09-26 03:47:43 <d33tah> and it's locked?
352 2011-09-26 03:48:25 <Disposition> mmm, where's that gist
353 2011-09-26 03:48:46 <d33tah> i feel too sleepy to read technical gists
354 2011-09-26 03:49:22 <d33tah> anyway, if it's not both of us that release the money, it's locked, right?
355 2011-09-26 03:49:44 <Disposition> there we go https://gist.github.com/dba89537d352d591eb36
356 2011-09-26 03:49:49 <Disposition> d33tah: yar
357 2011-09-26 03:50:00 <d33tah> okay
358 2011-09-26 03:50:24 <Disposition> the problem is since anyone can claim the bounty
359 2011-09-26 03:50:29 <Disposition> this won't work as well as I imagined.
360 2011-09-26 03:51:52 <d33tah> so the scenario changes to: user donates the 'not-released' money, i list it as a confirmed budget of the project, then there is a bounty solution, users vote to allow him to get the bounty, and the winner gets the money only after all of the multisign users agree to send it?
361 2011-09-26 03:52:32 <Disposition> yeah.
362 2011-09-26 03:52:52 <d33tah> so, the user has a choice to either never send the money and lose it or donate a project provided that he trusts me (and if he didn't like the bounty solution, at most he donated the wrong solution)
363 2011-09-26 03:53:02 <Disposition> "all" or w/e the multi-sign is lined up for
364 2011-09-26 03:53:07 <Disposition> like 3 out of 6 signatures
365 2011-09-26 03:53:08 <Disposition> or w/e
366 2011-09-26 03:53:17 <d33tah> i'd line it up for just the user and me
367 2011-09-26 03:53:22 <Disposition> d33tah: mhm.
368 2011-09-26 03:53:31 <d33tah> the more users there are, the more difficult it would be to get all the signatures
369 2011-09-26 03:53:40 <d33tah> and i have my own voting system already
370 2011-09-26 03:54:02 <Disposition> well it's not like it's gonna be one gaint tx
371 2011-09-26 03:54:05 <d33tah> you can see it on bitcoinbounties.org - it's waaay far from perfect, but it's a start
372 2011-09-26 03:54:08 <Disposition> each user will have their own multi-sign
373 2011-09-26 03:55:00 <Disposition> still, I regret suggesting it since the claim voting system overules this anyways
374 2011-09-26 03:55:41 <Disposition> but it's something to think about :)
375 2011-09-26 03:57:01 <d33tah> i think i like it
376 2011-09-26 03:57:15 <d33tah> it doesn't completely get overruled by claims
377 2011-09-26 03:57:37 <d33tah> btw, i couldn't find the word while i was coding (i'm not native english speaker), so i replaced it with 'commit'
378 2011-09-26 03:58:08 <d33tah> i guess that 'submit a commit' doesn't sound good, but it was the best i could think of back then
379 2011-09-26 03:58:50 <d33tah> what do you think?
380 2011-09-26 03:58:54 <Disposition> d33tah: yeah my english is not the greatest either :P
381 2011-09-26 03:59:15 <Disposition> commit sounds for to me though
382 2011-09-26 03:59:23 <d33tah> but you drew my attention to the word 'claim', which sounds better
383 2011-09-26 03:59:35 <d33tah> 'for' like 'good'? :P
384 2011-09-26 04:01:32 <Dagger3> "submit a commit" does sound pretty terrible, but it's hard to suggest an alternative without knowing what you're doing
385 2011-09-26 04:01:54 <Dagger3> (which I can't be bothered to work out, since I just got up and you've been talking for 2 hours :p)
386 2011-09-26 04:02:15 <d33tah> well, as I said, i couldn't find a word
387 2011-09-26 04:02:20 <Disposition> well claim is the act of reciving something
388 2011-09-26 04:02:26 <Disposition> bounty is the loot
389 2011-09-26 04:02:27 <d33tah> and i meant an activity of sending to the bounty system a solution to the bounty
390 2011-09-26 04:02:35 <Disposition> so you might as well say "add to bounty"
391 2011-09-26 04:02:44 <Disposition> oh
392 2011-09-26 04:02:46 <d33tah> which i would associate with donating
393 2011-09-26 04:02:48 <Disposition> then claim works fine.
394 2011-09-26 04:02:56 <d33tah> so, 'submit a claim'?
395 2011-09-26 04:03:00 <Disposition> no, lol
396 2011-09-26 04:03:02 <Disposition> claim the bounty
397 2011-09-26 04:03:06 <Disposition> or submit solution
398 2011-09-26 04:03:13 <d33tah> mkay
399 2011-09-26 04:03:18 <d33tah> then 'vote the solutions'?
400 2011-09-26 04:03:30 <d33tah> i have to grep my code to see in how many places did use the word 'commit'
401 2011-09-26 04:03:48 <d33tah> just to be sure, Dagger3, are you a native speaker?
402 2011-09-26 04:05:50 <Dagger3> I am, but like I said, I have no context
403 2011-09-26 04:06:50 <d33tah> Dagger3: is that not enough of a context for you?
404 2011-09-26 04:07:03 <d33tah> the stuff i just said once you told me you just got up?
405 2011-09-26 04:10:04 <Dagger3> ok, turning my brain on... when you say "sending to the bounty system a solution to the bounty", does that mean you then receive the bounty funds if your solution is valid?
406 2011-09-26 04:11:20 <d33tah> nope, it's not receiving it yet
407 2011-09-26 04:11:39 <d33tah> it's just sending a file
408 2011-09-26 04:11:52 <d33tah> that would be a solution to the problem stated in the bounty description
409 2011-09-26 04:11:59 <d33tah> once users like the solution, they would vote upon it
410 2011-09-26 04:12:27 <d33tah> and if it gets enough votes, the bounty is paid out and the solution is submitted for merging with the project's main tree
411 2011-09-26 04:12:40 <d33tah> where it would probably be rejected, but who cares anyway.
412 2011-09-26 04:14:27 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 3391984b45a7 r131 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/BlockChainTracker.java:
413 2011-09-26 04:14:28 <CIA-101> poolserverj: executor and preventing future long poll cycles.
414 2011-09-26 04:14:52 <d33tah> Dagger3: so, is the 'solution' the correct word?
415 2011-09-26 04:15:33 <diki> anyone have an idea why tor stopped working for me?
416 2011-09-26 04:15:52 <Dagger3> yeah, I think "Submit Solution" would be good
417 2011-09-26 04:16:08 <diki> last thing i did before it broke was click on 'use a new identity' after which it cant connect at all
418 2011-09-26 04:16:20 <diki> no peers no nothing
419 2011-09-26 04:16:25 <Dagger3> although it's a bit general... is this system designed specifically for source code changes to open-source projects?
420 2011-09-26 04:16:38 <d33tah> Dagger3: not 'submit a solution' ?
421 2011-09-26 04:16:39 <Dagger3> maybe "Submit Patch" might make more sense in that case
422 2011-09-26 04:17:03 <d33tah> Dagger3: well, mostly code, but it could be other contents
423 2011-09-26 04:17:15 <d33tah> patch. sounds cool.
424 2011-09-26 04:18:22 <Dagger3> (but if people might use the system for something other than patches, of course it'll end up being wrong in those cases. guess it'll depend on how common those uses are)
425 2011-09-26 04:18:37 <d33tah> hm, well
426 2011-09-26 04:19:38 <gmaxwell> hm.. xzing the blockchin and index makes it 63% of the uncompressed size... probably a fact useful for those downloads.
427 2011-09-26 04:19:55 <d33tah> let's say somebody puts up a bounty 'Do anything with Bitcoin logo so big that it will be seen from satellites and send a photo to win'
428 2011-09-26 04:20:04 <d33tah> then the patch word would be inappropriate
429 2011-09-26 04:20:33 <d33tah> gmaxwell: i wonder how much gain would there be if one used 7z with ultra brute settings
430 2011-09-26 04:20:41 <d33tah> it's not going to be me though.
431 2011-09-26 04:20:46 <Dagger3> regarding "a": "Submit a patch" is something you'd use for a button to start the process ("hm, I have a patch, and I'd like to put it up for voting"). once you've supplied the patch, and actually want to submit it, then you want a "Submit patch" button
432 2011-09-26 04:21:14 <gmaxwell> d33tah: xz is the same algorithm.
433 2011-09-26 04:21:29 <d33tah> like - submit a patch for the button, submit patch for a title of the next screen?
434 2011-09-26 04:21:38 <gmaxwell> I didn't bother cranking the level becaue it usually doesn't help much more.
435 2011-09-26 04:21:40 <d33tah> gmaxwell: but ultra-brute would make it a bigger dictionary
436 2011-09-26 04:22:06 <d33tah> i'm not a compression specialist but it helped me when i was insane enough to try compressing my whole backups
437 2011-09-26 04:22:36 <gmaxwell> d33tah: yes, it does make it bigger, but the degree of help depends a lot on the content.
438 2011-09-26 04:23:21 <d33tah> and since the context is mostly cryptologically-signed data, it could not help a lot
439 2011-09-26 04:23:26 <Dagger3> d33tah: hm... see, in the photo case, you'd probably want "Submit Proof", but then that doesn't work for patches
440 2011-09-26 04:23:42 <d33tah> but solution would be more versatile, right?
441 2011-09-26 04:27:16 <Dagger3> more generic, yeah, and it's definitely better than commit
442 2011-09-26 04:27:55 <Dagger3> but somebody else will probably come along in a bit and go "why didn't you use <x>" and we'll all slap our foreheads :/
443 2011-09-26 04:28:12 <d33tah> like i did yesterday
444 2011-09-26 04:28:39 <d33tah> i mean, dude, i've been learning english for like a half of my life
445 2011-09-26 04:28:55 <d33tah> and still there are such days :p
446 2011-09-26 04:29:18 <d33tah> i'm going for 'solution' then. will you review my github commit in a while?
447 2011-09-26 04:31:00 <d33tah> oh
448 2011-09-26 04:31:09 <d33tah> and i'm using 'submissions' in the database
449 2011-09-26 04:31:15 <d33tah> i think i'll change it to solutions too
450 2011-09-26 04:31:17 <d33tah> what do you think?
451 2011-09-26 04:31:25 <d33tah> it's good to have a native speaker to ask ;)
452 2011-09-26 04:32:40 <Dagger3> sure... link it in here and mention my name (although, warning: I may take a bit to notice... I'm IRCing behind VNC)
453 2011-09-26 04:33:25 <d33tah> Dagger3: your name being? Dagger3?
454 2011-09-26 04:34:03 <Dagger3> yeah, my current nickname, to trigger nickalert
455 2011-09-26 04:34:33 <d33tah> oh. here. sorry. again, i'm sleepy. i thought you wanted to be mentioned in the commit's description. fine ;)
456 2011-09-26 04:35:24 <Dagger3> oh, no, no need for that ;)
457 2011-09-26 04:36:43 <gmaxwell> d33tah: -9 gets it down to 59%, so not a huge improvement. it's 895918080 uncompressed, 565252852 with defaults, 529203192 with -9.  A custom format could do a _lot_ better though.
458 2011-09-26 04:37:12 <Dagger3> for the db... pass. guess it'd be more consistent if you change it
459 2011-09-26 04:37:22 <Dagger3> unless you later decide to change solution to something else :p
460 2011-09-26 04:37:41 <d33tah> i'm thinking of saving the commands that would do it for me ;D
461 2011-09-26 04:37:54 <d33tah> like this one:
462 2011-09-26 04:38:06 <d33tah> for file in `grep -il commit * -r`; do cp $file  "$file".bak  ; sed -i 's/commit/solution/g' "$file".bak; sed -i 's/Commit/Solution/g' "$file".bak; sed -i 's/COMMIT/SOLUTION/g' "$file".bak; sed -i 's/submission/solution/g' "$file".bak; mv -v "$file".bak "$file"; done
463 2011-09-26 04:38:18 <d33tah> i just have to make sure the code still works, i had to rename the files as well
464 2011-09-26 04:38:23 <d33tah> gmaxwell: yeah, i was thinking of it
465 2011-09-26 04:38:40 <d33tah> i just wonder how would that be done so the format really saved space
466 2011-09-26 04:39:16 <d33tah> don't you think it would be awesome to compress the block chain files?
467 2011-09-26 04:39:21 <gmaxwell> well, 256mbytes of the uncompressed size is indexes that can be completely regenerated from the data. The indexes are also full of txn hashes, so they aren't super compressable.
468 2011-09-26 04:40:12 <d33tah> wait
469 2011-09-26 04:40:17 <d33tah> you compressed it to 256mb?
470 2011-09-26 04:40:21 <d33tah> down to that little?
471 2011-09-26 04:40:35 <gmaxwell> d33tah: thats the indexes.
472 2011-09-26 04:40:51 <d33tah> so, not the whole data?
473 2011-09-26 04:41:03 <gmaxwell> I gave the sizes above.
474 2011-09-26 04:41:36 <Dagger3> belated: <d33tah> like - submit a patch for the button, submit patch for a title of the next screen? <-- sounds ok to me. although, if you're using a wizard, I think the standard there is for the final button to just be the verb ("Submit"), since it's obvious what you're submitting from the context
475 2011-09-26 04:41:37 <gmaxwell> I'm pointing out that 256 mb of the uncompressed size is purely redundant and can be generated directly by the reciever.
476 2011-09-26 04:41:55 <gmaxwell> the compressed size of the blocks and the index file is 504MB.
477 2011-09-26 04:42:22 <Dagger3> which... is probably actually true even if you just use a single dialog box too
478 2011-09-26 04:43:06 <d33tah> well, i meant a button starting the process
479 2011-09-26 04:43:35 <d33tah> gmaxwell: so. it's around 900mb uncompressed, then 504mb compressed, out of which we could strip it by another 256mb of indexes, making it around 250mb, right?
480 2011-09-26 04:43:38 <Dagger3> bleh... I may be a native english speaker, but when you're designing UIs, you really want UI people. us programmers tend to get UI horribly wrong :/
481 2011-09-26 04:43:53 <d33tah> honestly
482 2011-09-26 04:43:59 <d33tah> i don't want to get perfect there
483 2011-09-26 04:44:02 <d33tah> good would be enough for me
484 2011-09-26 04:46:48 <gmaxwell> you suffer from heavy rounding.. 850 MB uncompressed not 900.. and the 256 MB of indexes are uncompressed. Obviously they are smaller compressed so the savings from the compressed side will be less.
485 2011-09-26 04:48:12 <d33tah> oh, right. you have a point.
486 2011-09-26 04:49:23 <d33tah> so, how much down could we get?
487 2011-09-26 04:49:29 <d33tah> more or less?
488 2011-09-26 04:54:11 <Dagger3> mm, I just got blk0001.dat down to 398 MB, and blkindex.dat down to 87 MB (= 485 MB total) with 7z + 3 GB of RAM
489 2011-09-26 04:54:43 <d33tah> best settings?
490 2011-09-26 04:54:48 <d33tah> i mean, ultra?
491 2011-09-26 04:55:49 <Dagger3> Ultra/LZMA/256 MB dictionary/64 wordsize
492 2011-09-26 04:56:08 <Dagger3> I have enough ram to try 512 MB dictonary if I close a few programs
493 2011-09-26 04:56:41 <d33tah> worst that can happen is intense swapping
494 2011-09-26 04:56:54 <conman> I should lrzip it for grins
495 2011-09-26 04:58:20 <d33tah> hey, never heard of it
496 2011-09-26 04:58:26 <conman> I wrote it
497 2011-09-26 04:58:37 <conman> http://freshmeat.net/projects/long-range-zip
498 2011-09-26 04:58:54 <d33tah> awesome
499 2011-09-26 04:59:04 <Dagger3> no it can't. no swap file :)
500 2011-09-26 04:59:05 <conman> if you have LOOOTS of time, try -z
501 2011-09-26 04:59:20 <d33tah> from what i understand, this means it looks for repetitions further than normal compression algorithms?
502 2011-09-26 04:59:29 <conman> yes, unlimited if you set -U option
503 2011-09-26 04:59:35 <conman> but that can take a while if you dont have much ram
504 2011-09-26 04:59:42 <d33tah> that's just plain awesome
505 2011-09-26 05:00:17 <d33tah> anyway, Dagger3, here's the commit: https://github.com/d33tah/bitcoin-bounties/commit/a8f3dec39697f9fcbfd7c8097fdf840fb71ed2c8
506 2011-09-26 05:00:39 <d33tah> i'd be grateful for reporting any spotted languages/english.php errors
507 2011-09-26 05:00:44 <conman> blk data tends not to repeat...
508 2011-09-26 05:01:11 <d33tah> somehow it compressed, didn't it?
509 2011-09-26 05:14:23 <Dagger3> d33tah: line 123, "if there will send his solutions" (not sure what it's meant to say: "if no solutions are submitted"?)
510 2011-09-26 05:15:01 <d33tah> hold on, i'll see the original
511 2011-09-26 05:15:29 <d33tah> oh
512 2011-09-26 05:15:37 <d33tah> you just helped me find this one
513 2011-09-26 05:15:52 <d33tah> i spotted it long ago and couldn't find again when I wanted to fix it
514 2011-09-26 05:16:29 <d33tah> i think i'll just change it to 'no solutions are submitted'. thanks a lot :)
515 2011-09-26 05:18:24 <Dagger3> line 134 and 664, should be no apostrophe after "solutions"
516 2011-09-26 05:19:01 <d33tah> mkay, got it
517 2011-09-26 05:20:15 <Dagger3> lines 683 and 687 seem to be roughly the same message, but worded differently... would probably make more sense for them to be consistent
518 2011-09-26 05:21:26 <Dagger3> and now I'm going to realize that I should probably go over the full file and not just the diff
519 2011-09-26 05:21:47 <d33tah> well, it'd be awesome
520 2011-09-26 05:22:04 <d33tah> and you're most definitely right about the two strings
521 2011-09-26 05:22:07 <d33tah> gonna merge them
522 2011-09-26 05:23:24 <d33tah> okay
523 2011-09-26 05:23:38 <d33tah> waiting for more of your comments before i commit it all, don't feel like spamming the github
524 2011-09-26 05:50:32 <Dagger3> d33tah: the easy stuff from the first quarter: https://p.6core.net/p/9gphoxfuszk631vq
525 2011-09-26 05:50:50 <Dagger3> (turns out I go quite slowly when I try to rephrase stuff >.>)
526 2011-09-26 05:50:55 <d33tah> Dagger3: thank you very much indeed :)
527 2011-09-26 05:52:15 <d33tah> hm, is advising the user to delete an email a bad practice?
528 2011-09-26 05:53:30 <d33tah> about 103 - you get only one vote
529 2011-09-26 05:53:40 <d33tah> so, no change there?
530 2011-09-26 05:54:55 <d33tah> i'm also not sure that removing the 'since generation time' is that bad
531 2011-09-26 05:55:32 <Dagger3> I'm not sure what other people think, but I associate that with those obnoxious 10-line disclaimers people add that say "if you weren't the recepient of this message, DELETE IMMEDIATELY AND SCRUB IT FROM YOUR BRAIN". also, people can decide to delete it themselves if they want to
532 2011-09-26 05:56:17 <d33tah> pretty right, i just wanted to warn them that it's the right thing to do, in case their e-mail gets hacked in the next 24 hours
533 2011-09-26 05:56:45 <d33tah> but perhaps you might be right, it's always good to avoid evil associations :p
534 2011-09-26 05:57:08 <Dagger3> 103, it's currently plural, so if you only get one vote it should be changed. maybe "Note that the weight of your vote is proportional" would be better
535 2011-09-26 05:58:10 <d33tah> oh, right, sounds really better
536 2011-09-26 05:58:45 <d33tah> and the 'since generation time'?
537 2011-09-26 06:02:21 <d33tah> why is that bad?
538 2011-09-26 06:03:39 <Dagger3> not sure how to explain it... but I think it's just needlessly wordy
539 2011-09-26 06:05:23 <d33tah> you mean that adding that is pretty much insignificant?
540 2011-09-26 06:06:01 <d33tah> i just thought of this poor fellow that finds a bug in my system that manifests by not confirming his link and all he has is this e-mail - i'd tell this guy as much as I could.
541 2011-09-26 06:06:36 <gmaxwell> Hey, so how did the solidcoin people manage to kill-switch their software?
542 2011-09-26 06:06:47 <gmaxwell> I don't see an obvious kill switch in the source.
543 2011-09-26 06:07:26 <d33tah> what kill switch would it be if it was obvious?
544 2011-09-26 06:07:48 <Dagger3> yeah, they just need to know that it'll stop working after 24 hours. "Keep in mind that confirmation links are only valid for 24 hours." is cleaner
545 2011-09-26 06:08:31 <d33tah> hell, you convinced me, i think
546 2011-09-26 06:08:39 <d33tah> and 'freely access the site'?
547 2011-09-26 06:09:49 <Dagger3> sounds silly to me ;)
548 2011-09-26 06:10:16 <d33tah> i wanted to note that all the registered-only locks turn off then
549 2011-09-26 06:10:34 <d33tah> but hell, an average bitcoin user doesn't use internet for the first time, doesn't he?
550 2011-09-26 06:11:30 <Dagger3> maybe "You now have full access to the website"?
551 2011-09-26 06:12:33 <d33tah> Your account is now confirmed. You may now use it to log in and have a full
552 2011-09-26 06:12:36 <d33tah> ?
553 2011-09-26 06:17:55 <d33tah> how about now?
554 2011-09-26 06:18:39 <Dagger3> I'm trying to avoid the "using it"/"use it" construction, which also sounds a bit silly to me
555 2011-09-26 06:20:24 <Dagger3> (disadvantage of being a native speaker, and not being a trained editor: I can tell when things sound off, but I don't know precisely what's wrong with it, or what's correct)
556 2011-09-26 06:21:03 <d33tah> hm
557 2011-09-26 06:21:05 <d33tah> how about
558 2011-09-26 06:21:17 <Dagger3> "Your account has been confirmed. You can now log in, and have full access to the site." (also avoids using "now" twice)
559 2011-09-26 06:21:44 <d33tah> hm
560 2011-09-26 06:22:05 <d33tah> isn't using comma before 'and' considered a mistake in English?
561 2011-09-26 06:22:11 <d33tah> it is in Polish
562 2011-09-26 06:23:08 <SomeoneWeird> yes i think so
563 2011-09-26 06:23:25 <Dagger3> depends on the sentence
564 2011-09-26 06:23:31 <d33tah> so, allowed there?
565 2011-09-26 06:23:54 <Dagger3> currently trying to work that out
566 2011-09-26 06:24:33 <SomeoneWeird> "You now have full access to the site, so login!"
567 2011-09-26 06:24:34 <SomeoneWeird> lol
568 2011-09-26 06:26:37 <lfm> comma before and is optional
569 2011-09-26 06:26:45 <Dagger3> http://www.getitwriteonline.com/archive/020204WhenCommaBfAnd.htm suggests *not*, because the second part doesn't have a subject (i.e. no "you")
570 2011-09-26 06:29:58 <Dagger3> the problem with removing it is that then the sentence becomes "You can now [log in and have full access] to the site", which sounds weird to me
571 2011-09-26 06:30:02 <gmaxwell> http://bitcoinstatus.rowit.co.uk/versionsMonth.png  < this graph is interesting are the .24 nodes free of daily cycling because they're always full and thus don't suffer from as much load dependant availablity as .23 nodes do?
572 2011-09-26 06:41:18 <d33tah> Your account has been confirmed. You can now log in, gaining full access to the site.
573 2011-09-26 06:41:21 <d33tah> ?
574 2011-09-26 06:41:34 <d33tah> sipa1024: you here?
575 2011-09-26 06:43:06 <sipa1024> d33tah: yes, what?
576 2011-09-26 06:43:32 <d33tah> i can finally show you the latest ECDSA verifying code that doesn't work
577 2011-09-26 06:44:01 <d33tah> http://wklej.org/id/599564/
578 2011-09-26 06:44:01 <lfm> hehe oh boy, just what Iv always wanted
579 2011-09-26 06:44:11 <d33tah> isn't it? :d
580 2011-09-26 06:46:26 <d33tah> sipa: mind helping me there?
581 2011-09-26 06:52:58 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * c5f071a8b8ff r132 /poolserverj-main/src/main/java/com/shadworld/poolserver/BlockChainTracker.java: - add shutdown check to lp dispatch timeout
582 2011-09-26 06:54:43 <epscy> ;;bc,stats
583 2011-09-26 06:54:46 <gribble> Current Blocks: 146956 | Current Difficulty: 1755425.3203287 | Next Difficulty At Block: 147167 | Next Difficulty In: 211 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 1 day, 13 hours, 2 minutes, and 32 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1696081.25580017 | Estimated Percent Change: -3.38060889528
584 2011-09-26 06:58:08 <d33tah> sipa: still there?: P
585 2011-09-26 07:09:39 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 19ad77328cee r134 /poolserverj-main/etc/lib/lib_non-maven/ (5 files): - lib updates
586 2011-09-26 07:17:07 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 2853489ae600 r136 /.hgtags: Removed tag 0.3.0.FINAL
587 2011-09-26 07:25:17 <d33tah> sipa: the problem with the code was that it didn't return 1 (valid signature) even though the signature was valid
588 2011-09-26 07:25:31 <sipa> d33tah: really?
589 2011-09-26 07:25:38 <d33tah> yeah
590 2011-09-26 07:25:43 <sipa> is that the problem, or the signature?
591 2011-09-26 07:25:46 <sipa> eh
592 2011-09-26 07:25:51 <sipa> the problem, or the symptom?
593 2011-09-26 07:25:57 <d33tah> well, rather a symptom
594 2011-09-26 07:26:20 <sipa> i've no idea what the problem is with your code
595 2011-09-26 07:26:28 <d33tah> sigh. :/
596 2011-09-26 07:26:41 <d33tah> i'm really dreaming of fixing it so I could go on
597 2011-09-26 07:26:48 <Dagger3> d33tah: easy stuff from the rest of the file: https://p.6core.net/p/p443zy1zetpd7jf
598 2011-09-26 07:27:09 <d33tah> Dagger3: thanks
599 2011-09-26 07:27:22 <d33tah> Your account has been confirmed. You can now log in, gaining full access to the site. - what do you think of that, Dagger3?
600 2011-09-26 07:31:07 <d33tah> Dagger3: i'm not sure if i should remove 'you entered'
601 2011-09-26 07:33:14 <Dagger3> I wasn't really sure on that either
602 2011-09-26 07:33:23 <Dagger3> I wonder how Windows phrases that message...
603 2011-09-26 07:33:41 <d33tah> i always remember it with 'you entered' :P
604 2011-09-26 07:35:06 <Dagger3> ok, apparently my server accepts one-character passwords now, even though it required alphanumeric + mixed-case when I installed it
605 2011-09-26 07:35:14 <d33tah> Dagger3: btw, you made me notice the reset password link should expire
606 2011-09-26 07:37:28 <d33tah> haha, it kept saying commit because it was spelt with 3 m
607 2011-09-26 07:38:02 <Dagger3> whoops, didn't even notice that :p
608 2011-09-26 07:39:30 <d33tah> and i can't really replace 'illegal data'
609 2011-09-26 07:39:38 <d33tah> i mostly meant its type
610 2011-09-26 07:43:44 <d33tah> about 612/627 - these are not redundant, i put them so I could show them when there is more than one error
611 2011-09-26 07:45:22 <d33tah> changes commited :)
612 2011-09-26 07:48:32 <Dagger3> o/
613 2011-09-26 07:48:44 <Dagger3> I have a few more, more awkward rephrasings too
614 2011-09-26 07:49:18 <Dagger3> (whenever my browser stops randomly freezing up...)
615 2011-09-26 07:50:42 <d33tah> feel free to point them out to me ;)
616 2011-09-26 07:51:17 <d33tah> it's never a bad time to learn some english
617 2011-09-26 07:59:03 <Dagger3> I think I need to ask some questions about the site... I'm looking at the message in line 87 right now
618 2011-09-26 08:00:03 <d33tah> latest commit?
619 2011-09-26 08:00:29 <Dagger3> I'm looking at dc870124
620 2011-09-26 08:00:42 <Dagger3> it says "donate a bounty" -- does that mean contribute to an existing bounty, or post a new one?
621 2011-09-26 08:00:50 <d33tah> contribute
622 2011-09-26 08:01:03 <d33tah> pretty much i guess i missed out a 'to'
623 2011-09-26 08:01:06 <d33tah> donate to a bounty
624 2011-09-26 08:02:12 <d33tah> i guess there is no such thing as 'donating a bounty', right?
625 2011-09-26 08:03:46 <Dagger3> I think you could perhaps say that, but it implies you're paying the entire bounty rather than a bit of it
626 2011-09-26 08:04:05 <d33tah> so, contribute instead of donate?
627 2011-09-26 08:04:15 <d33tah> contribute associates with solving to me
628 2011-09-26 08:06:15 <Dagger3> uh, ok, rephrase: saying "donate a bounty" implies you're paying all of it, whereas "donate to a bounty" implies you're paying part of it
629 2011-09-26 08:06:39 <Dagger3> however, I think "donating" to a bounty sounds weird, and "contributing" is better
630 2011-09-26 08:06:57 <d33tah> donating implies money. contributing implies patches aswell
631 2011-09-26 08:08:05 <Dagger3> however #2, I do see where you're coming from: it sounds like they're helping out with patches too. I guess the problem is that you're using "bounty" to mean both the "job listing" itself and the "monetary reward"
632 2011-09-26 08:08:40 <d33tah> i didn't know it was a monetary reward for quite a long time while coding
633 2011-09-26 08:08:51 <d33tah> it was later that i heard the phrase 'get the bounty'
634 2011-09-26 08:08:55 <d33tah> and it got me confused
635 2011-09-26 08:10:13 <Dagger3> thing is though, people who are contributing money are helping out just as much as the people writing the code: sure, they're not programmers, but they're still helping to get the problem fixed
636 2011-09-26 08:10:38 <d33tah> yeah, but one must know if he's going to donate or send the code
637 2011-09-26 08:11:08 <Dagger3> and I think "contributing" makes people feel more involved (and thus more likely to pay), whereas "donate" makes them feel a bit detached
638 2011-09-26 08:11:40 <Dagger3> see, this is why it's on my awkward pile
639 2011-09-26 08:16:02 <Dagger3> well, for the meantime, "about to donate to" works
640 2011-09-26 08:18:17 <d33tah> okay
641 2011-09-26 08:18:52 <Dagger3> the next sentence needs some work too... "whether to accept or not particular solutions", but I'm not sure what to
642 2011-09-26 08:20:00 <Dagger3> "This gives you the ability to vote on which solution to the bounty is accepted."?
643 2011-09-26 08:20:18 <Dagger3> (of course, now I've just introduced the concept of accepting bounty solutions)
644 2011-09-26 08:20:22 <lfm> according to bitcoin a year has 364.58333 days
645 2011-09-26 08:21:05 <d33tah> cool
646 2011-09-26 08:21:24 <d33tah> isn't it more or less the truth?
647 2011-09-26 08:22:08 <lfm> well if that is the same as 365.25 then ok ya
648 2011-09-26 08:23:11 <lfm> or is it 365.2475
649 2011-09-26 08:23:55 <lfm> plus or minuse a few leap seconds here and there
650 2011-09-26 08:23:59 <Dagger3> you might need to change some other lines elsewhere to be consistent with that though
651 2011-09-26 08:24:09 <Dagger3> (which might not be a bad thing, if that makes it clearer)
652 2011-09-26 08:25:41 <d33tah> oh, sorry Dagger3, i missed your msg
653 2011-09-26 08:25:58 <lfm> just cuz someone does some work for a bounty doesnt mean the other developers will put it in the standard code
654 2011-09-26 08:26:43 <d33tah> yeah, i mentioned that
655 2011-09-26 08:26:52 <d33tah> but it's ok to gather the code anyway
656 2011-09-26 08:27:03 <d33tah> just because it's not in the standard code doesn't mean it's not useful
657 2011-09-26 08:27:25 <lfm> it might have to exist as a patch
658 2011-09-26 08:27:33 <d33tah> or a fork
659 2011-09-26 08:33:38 <Dagger3> line 111 needs changing to match 88 now... "You will not have the ability to vote on the accepted solution; for more information, read <a>the rules</a>."
660 2011-09-26 08:34:49 <d33tah> okay
661 2011-09-26 08:37:35 <Dagger3> line 68: should that have ${domain} at the end, to match the similar message for password resets?
662 2011-09-26 08:38:42 <d33tah> yeah, the code was inconsistent there, i put it somewhere else, just fixed that
663 2011-09-26 08:38:52 <d33tah> ;)
664 2011-09-26 08:40:20 <Dagger3> line 72: this seems a bit brief, unless this message is combined with another one... maybe something like "To confirm your e-mail address, please visit the link in the e-mail we have just sent you." or "We have e-mailed you a confirmation link. Please visit it to confirm that your e-mail is valid."
665 2011-09-26 08:40:53 <d33tah> i was too lazy to write more there :P
666 2011-09-26 08:41:17 <d33tah> We have e-mailed you a confirmation link. Please visit it to confirm that your e-mail is valid and complete the registration process?
667 2011-09-26 08:41:39 <Dagger3> yeah, that's good
668 2011-09-26 08:42:05 <d33tah> k
669 2011-09-26 08:46:14 <Dagger3> back to those donate messages... line 100, "to this address" rather than "from this address"
670 2011-09-26 08:47:00 <d33tah> right
671 2011-09-26 08:47:31 <Dagger3> line 121... is it possible for a bounty to receive submitted solutions, but for none of them to be accepted?
672 2011-09-26 08:49:02 <d33tah> if nobody votes, they all have 0%, so they will never win
673 2011-09-26 08:54:02 <Dagger3> so does the bounty automatically get closed after a year like that, or is the "your donation will returned after a year" just so that you don't hold on to annonymous donations for too long?
674 2011-09-26 08:54:23 <d33tah> well, it's not implemented, someday i hope it will :p
675 2011-09-26 08:55:06 <d33tah> although now that i'm thinking of it, i'm not sure there's any need to return donations. how do you think?
676 2011-09-26 08:55:11 <d33tah> what do you think*?
677 2011-09-26 08:58:27 <Dagger3> hm... well, if you're calling them "donations", it does certainly sound like you won't get them back
678 2011-09-26 08:59:10 <Dagger3> but I think I'd be a bit annoyed if an unsolved problem lead to you taking all the bounty money... then you'd have an incentive to make sure as few problems are solved as possible
679 2011-09-26 08:59:46 <d33tah> you're right.
680 2011-09-26 09:04:30 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 6302db321186 r137 / (23 files in 11 dirs): Merge with 9d761c91177694749f2e4a4ff36895aaebf7c525
681 2011-09-26 09:04:31 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 6a42143c30c5 r141 /.hgtags: Added tag 0.3.0.FINAL for changeset 21105fc36c8b
682 2011-09-26 09:04:32 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * 80bef582af6c r144 /.hgtags: Merge with d3561900bb9b472482c25890eefda0c09060eeb8
683 2011-09-26 09:04:33 <CIA-101> poolserverj: shadders * f56e5c7ecc9b r145 /: Starting 'merged mining2' branch
684 2011-09-26 09:06:22 <Dagger3> so yeah, my point was going to be that line 121 should say "The donation you send will be returned to you after a year if no solutions are accepted for it in that time.", or "if no solutions are submitted for it [in that time]", depending on what actually happens
685 2011-09-26 09:07:04 <d33tah> well, in that time.
686 2011-09-26 09:07:16 <d33tah> in exactly the year from donation
687 2011-09-26 09:12:27 <Dagger3> for the sentence following that (line 123), "in your name" -> "on your behalf" avoids using "in" twice
688 2011-09-26 09:13:16 <Dagger3> and I'm left wondering which solution it'll vote for. all of them? the first one submitted? or the one with most of the votes otherwise?
689 2011-09-26 09:14:04 <d33tah> it's actually excluded from voting
690 2011-09-26 09:14:16 <d33tah> but yes, it raises questions
691 2011-09-26 09:16:58 <Dagger3> perhaps ", and you will be unable to vote on which solution is accepted. If you wish to do so, sign in below:"?
692 2011-09-26 09:18:01 <d33tah> but it's already said on the beginning
693 2011-09-26 09:18:33 <Dagger3> ah, true
694 2011-09-26 09:19:59 <d33tah> btw, did you test the system? how do you like it?
695 2011-09-26 09:20:11 <Dagger3> how about omitting the "automatically vote" sentence, and saying "If you want to be able to vote, or to withdraw your donation sooner, sign in below:"?
696 2011-09-26 09:23:00 <Dagger3> haven't done that... is it hosted somewhere?
697 2011-09-26 09:24:21 <d33tah> yeah, bitcoinbounties.org
698 2011-09-26 09:24:29 <d33tah> no theme yet, there's unofficial one though
699 2011-09-26 09:24:49 <d33tah> can't merge it until its owner officially confirms me he's done working on it and he releases it under GPL
700 2011-09-26 09:25:21 <d33tah> why 'sooner', not in the future?
701 2011-09-26 09:26:24 <Dagger3> I was thinking "sooner than a year", but I suppose it could be later than one too
702 2011-09-26 09:30:05 <Dagger3> could say "or to choose when to withdraw your donation" or "or to withdraw your donation at a different date"
703 2011-09-26 09:34:46 <d33tah> If you want to be able to vote, or to be able to withdraw your donation in the future, sign in below:
704 2011-09-26 09:34:49 <d33tah> ?
705 2011-09-26 09:36:34 <d33tah> afk, gonna grab a bite
706 2011-09-26 09:38:19 <Dagger3> that makes it sound like you must sign in if you ever want it back, even though you could get it back by waiting for one year
707 2011-09-26 09:46:36 <d33tah> Dagger3: i have no idea then :P
708 2011-09-26 10:01:36 <Dagger3> mm... well, moving on then :P
709 2011-09-26 10:03:55 <Dagger3> line 328 "donate to '%s'", line 332/336 need "to"
710 2011-09-26 10:04:44 <Dagger3> line 340 I think should be either "bounty list" or "list of bounties"
711 2011-09-26 10:05:56 <d33tah> thanks, fixed both
712 2011-09-26 10:10:51 <Dagger3> line 624: I think you might need to consider your security policy carefully... it looks like you prevent files named *.php, to prevent the php file from being executed
713 2011-09-26 10:11:49 <Dagger3> but you also need to think about, say, *.pl to prevent someone running a perl script, or *.html to prevent them from uploading a webpage with nasty javascript
714 2011-09-26 10:12:32 <Dagger3> and in general I don't think a blacklist is a great plan, unless you're confident you can think of everything or clean up properly if you can't
715 2011-09-26 10:13:59 <d33tah> so, what do you advise? just archives?
716 2011-09-26 10:16:53 <Dagger3> I'm not really sure what the right solution is (and it's out of scope for me here, but I thought I'd mention it anyway -- there's been enough security flaws in bitcoin websites recently) -- maybe force all downloads to be zip files, and automatically wrap anything else in a zip file... or perhaps you can use a wrapper .php script to serve files, and make sure all non-.zip(/jpg/etc) files
717 2011-09-26 10:17:50 <d33tah> zipping sounds a good solution for me
718 2011-09-26 10:17:57 <d33tah> i just thought of pretty much the same
719 2011-09-26 10:18:06 <d33tah> the problem is i'm lacking motivation to do it all
720 2011-09-26 10:18:23 <d33tah> i've drawn hardly any attention so far
721 2011-09-26 10:20:33 <Dagger3> it's bit of a pain though if someone submits a single *.diff file, which could safely be displayed in the browser
722 2011-09-26 10:20:57 <Dagger3> yeah, getting people to actually use the site is going to be your big problem
723 2011-09-26 10:21:29 <d33tah> i'd be fine with small donations at the beggining
724 2011-09-26 10:21:40 <Dagger3> and there's always going to be people on the forums accusing you of stealing funds (or not stealing funds _yet_, but ready to do so as soon as you have lots)
725 2011-09-26 10:21:45 <d33tah> but it look like hardly anybody even looked at it
726 2011-09-26 10:31:19 <Dagger3> ok, what's left... line 140, reword a bit... "Your submission to bounty number %s on ${domain} has been accepted by voters, and you have won the %s BTC reward. To receive it, please visit the following link and enter the Bitcoin address to transfer it to."?
727 2011-09-26 10:32:14 <d33tah> voters => users?
728 2011-09-26 10:32:24 <d33tah> why contribution=>submission?
729 2011-09-26 10:32:38 <luke-jr> voters IMO would be weighed of people who submit BTC toward the bounty
730 2011-09-26 10:32:57 <d33tah> voters or the voters?
731 2011-09-26 10:33:09 <luke-jr> d33tah: probably need a way to vote the reward get split among people
732 2011-09-26 10:33:50 <d33tah> luke-jr: you sure it's a good idea?
733 2011-09-26 10:34:12 <luke-jr> ?
734 2011-09-26 10:34:38 <d33tah> i mean, wouldn't it be better to promote only the best submission?
735 2011-09-26 10:34:39 <Dagger3> contribution could be confused with a monetary contribution
736 2011-09-26 10:34:55 <luke-jr> d33tah: what if the best submission is a combination of two peoples' work?
737 2011-09-26 10:35:05 <luke-jr> also, cap the vote at 10% per person
738 2011-09-26 10:35:22 <luke-jr> ie, someone who pays 50% of the bounty shouldn't get to make the whole decision
739 2011-09-26 10:35:29 <luke-jr> otherwise it's too easy to exploiit
740 2011-09-26 10:35:31 <d33tah> oh, been wondering on how to do it
741 2011-09-26 10:35:35 <d33tah> you think 10% is safe?
742 2011-09-26 10:35:51 <luke-jr> dunno
743 2011-09-26 10:35:59 <luke-jr> probably need someone good with math to figure out
744 2011-09-26 10:36:04 <luke-jr> or perhaps sociology
745 2011-09-26 10:36:11 <d33tah> it would take 5 people to overrule it
746 2011-09-26 10:36:19 <luke-jr> or 5 fake accounts? :/
747 2011-09-26 10:36:23 <d33tah> that's right.
748 2011-09-26 10:36:43 <mtrlt> the one with the money makes the decision makes sense
749 2011-09-26 10:36:44 <Dagger3> ugh, here's a problem: it would take five bitcoin addresses, which are trivial to make and annonymous :/
750 2011-09-26 10:37:02 <luke-jr> at least weighing reduces the chance of a million 0.000001 BTC voters
751 2011-09-26 10:37:04 <d33tah> i don't know how to calculate it, but i'd like to minimize the potential gain a cheater would get to 0.01BTC
752 2011-09-26 10:37:23 <luke-jr> hmm
753 2011-09-26 10:37:27 <d33tah> on my TODO list is a manual moderation
754 2011-09-26 10:37:29 <luke-jr> math+sociology is almost psychohistory
755 2011-09-26 10:37:30 <luke-jr> :D
756 2011-09-26 10:38:41 <Dagger3> in particular, a person could contribute 1000 BTC (split up into multiple accounts as appropriate), submit a BS solution and vote themselves as the best choice, thus getting their 1000 BTC back plus any other contributions
757 2011-09-26 10:38:49 <edcba> ;;bc,mtgox
758 2011-09-26 10:38:49 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":5.47127,"low":4.93,"avg":5.266483994,"vwap":5.218319881,"vol":24261,"last":5.05,"buy":5.04728,"sell":5.05}}
759 2011-09-26 10:39:09 <d33tah> Dagger3: minus the fees
760 2011-09-26 10:39:31 <d33tah> i settled 1% for myself
761 2011-09-26 10:40:27 <luke-jr> maybe require more than 50% consensus
762 2011-09-26 10:40:50 <d33tah> it's 30% right now
763 2011-09-26 10:40:54 <luke-jr> &
764 2011-09-26 10:41:00 <luke-jr> 30% isn't even a majority
765 2011-09-26 10:41:01 <d33tah> but the more it is, the harder it's to collect the consensus
766 2011-09-26 10:41:11 <luke-jr> let people change their votes
767 2011-09-26 10:41:14 <d33tah> yeah, but when there are, say, ten solutions....
768 2011-09-26 10:41:16 <d33tah> i did
769 2011-09-26 10:41:34 <luke-jr> when everyone's voted, eliminate the least-popular option and email the people who voted it
770 2011-09-26 10:41:45 <lupine_85> yes, maybe you should look at a different voting system to FPTP
771 2011-09-26 10:41:53 <Gekz> score voting
772 2011-09-26 10:41:54 <luke-jr> actually, better yet, allow people to vote for a list of preferences
773 2011-09-26 10:41:56 <d33tah> FPTP?
774 2011-09-26 10:42:02 <luke-jr> ie, order the solutions by which they think is best
775 2011-09-26 10:42:03 <gmaxwell> first past the post.
776 2011-09-26 10:42:04 <lupine_85> full PR isn't that difficult to implement :p
777 2011-09-26 10:42:10 <lupine_85> or there's range voting
778 2011-09-26 10:42:15 <gmaxwell> what are you electing?
779 2011-09-26 10:42:23 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: bounty winners
780 2011-09-26 10:42:36 <lupine_85> better, allow the person who issues the proposal to decide the winning conditions
781 2011-09-26 10:42:47 <gmaxwell> is there only a single winner or many?
782 2011-09-26 10:42:56 <luke-jr> lupine_85: the voting is on who meets those conditions the best
783 2011-09-26 10:43:10 <gmaxwell> then you probably want a condorcet method if there is a single winner.
784 2011-09-26 10:43:10 <lupine_85> people can then take that into account when deciding whether to support a particular bounty or not
785 2011-09-26 10:43:21 <gmaxwell> I'm fond of https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Schulze_method
786 2011-09-26 10:44:13 <luke-jr> also need to consider the possibility of some large funder losing their password or getting killed
787 2011-09-26 10:44:25 <luke-jr> ie, remove them from the vote if they take too long
788 2011-09-26 10:44:47 <d33tah> yeah, i thought of it too
789 2011-09-26 10:44:54 <d33tah> damnit
790 2011-09-26 10:45:07 <d33tah> couldn't you guys post all the ideas in the project thread on bitcointalk.org?
791 2011-09-26 10:45:13 <d33tah> it'd be really easier to discuss it there
792 2011-09-26 10:45:19 <d33tah> i wish i drew so much attention there
793 2011-09-26 10:45:22 <lupine_85> no, IRC is best for discussion :)
794 2011-09-26 10:45:36 <lupine_85> you get more attention because the barrier for entry into the discussion is much lower
795 2011-09-26 10:46:00 <luke-jr> summarize IRC on the forum later and ask if you missed anything
796 2011-09-26 10:46:12 <d33tah> would you guys mind if I posted the whole discussion?
797 2011-09-26 10:47:08 <lupine_85> I don't care, but the forum owners might
798 2011-09-26 10:47:14 <lupine_85> or they might not
799 2011-09-26 10:49:15 <d33tah> is there any bot around that records this channel?
800 2011-09-26 10:50:39 <d33tah> afk
801 2011-09-26 10:52:02 <Graet> Public channel logs: bit.ly/iPFi3X
802 2011-09-26 10:52:03 <luke-jr> d33tah: this channel is publicly logged
803 2011-09-26 11:02:47 <edcba> that's copyright infrigement !
804 2011-09-26 11:03:52 <edcba> also privacy violation
805 2011-09-26 11:04:14 <sipa> it is announced in the topic and welcome message
806 2011-09-26 11:04:18 <sipa> i think that suffices
807 2011-09-26 11:05:15 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Gavin Andresen master * rf7f2a36 / (156 files in 14 dirs):
808 2011-09-26 11:05:35 <edcba> what if i joinned the chan before the topic was set ? :)
809 2011-09-26 11:05:49 <sipa> o/ bitcoin-qt o/
810 2011-09-26 11:05:58 <gmaxwell> Then you would have seen it being set.
811 2011-09-26 11:06:06 <gmaxwell> oh has the merge fest begun?
812 2011-09-26 11:06:11 <edcba> indeed
813 2011-09-26 11:06:12 <gavinandresen> yup
814 2011-09-26 11:06:19 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Gavin Andresen master * r17e2c24 / (9 files in 2 dirs):
815 2011-09-26 11:06:49 <sipa> gavinandresen: not sure how soon you were planning to merge key import/export, but i plan to rebase and make a few changes to the wallet export/import function still
816 2011-09-26 11:07:04 <edcba> anyway i find that quite lousy to publish irc conversations
817 2011-09-26 11:07:22 <edcba> except on bash.org of course
818 2011-09-26 11:07:25 <gavinandresen> sipa:  I'll merge as soon as you say it is ready and has had some sanity testing
819 2011-09-26 11:07:37 <sipa> yeah, i'll ask alex to do some testing too
820 2011-09-26 11:09:49 <gmaxwell> I did some basic abusive testing against an old version, but it's been a while.
821 2011-09-26 11:10:08 <sipa> i don't think too much changed
822 2011-09-26 11:10:33 <sipa> i'm pretty confident about key import/export, but wallet import/export may have some untested cornercases still
823 2011-09-26 11:13:01 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Gavin Andresen master * r5df25e7 / (doc/build-unix.txt src/makefile.unix):
824 2011-09-26 11:16:05 <CIA-101> libbitcoin: genjix * rb34764a57965 /include/bitcoin/types.hpp: BUGFIX: hexlify segfault with zero-size argument
825 2011-09-26 11:16:07 <CIA-101> libbitcoin: genjix * r621dc7e1270c / (12 files in 7 dirs): AcceptBlock()
826 2011-09-26 11:17:26 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Gavin Andresen master * r6b8a5ab / (5 files in 4 dirs): Bump version to 0.4.1 - http://git.io/5YzHrA
827 2011-09-26 11:21:16 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Gavin Andresen master * rb14bd4d / src/main.cpp : Skip verifying transaction signatures during initial block-chain download - http://git.io/MxmkAg
828 2011-09-26 11:27:19 <AlexWaters> sipa: my main goal for this week is to test #220 and Qt
829 2011-09-26 11:28:30 <AlexWaters> and maybe 524
830 2011-09-26 11:34:37 <sipa> AlexWaters: i'll write a README on wallet import/export, to explain the intended behaviour (especially with exportwallet which has quite a few options)
831 2011-09-26 11:36:00 <sipa> (and i believe an update to #195 will be necessary if #220 is merged)
832 2011-09-26 11:37:36 <AlexWaters> sipa: cool. i will look at that, thank you
833 2011-09-26 11:37:59 <sipa> but too much has changed, i'll need to rewrite it
834 2011-09-26 11:38:34 <AlexWaters> sipa: it's the oldest pull on my list of things to test asap
835 2011-09-26 11:38:59 <sipa> i'll close #195 myself as outdated
836 2011-09-26 11:51:39 <casascius> I think I might be familiar with one oddball case with key import
837 2011-09-26 11:52:08 <casascius> with key import, if you import an address you have already sent funds to, the funds don't seem to show up in the balance right away
838 2011-09-26 11:52:39 <casascius> the funds are there and you can spend them, and seems rescan brings them in (not entirely sure, since I thought import also does a rescan)
839 2011-09-26 11:53:08 <sipa> casascius: is that still true in recent versions?
840 2011-09-26 11:53:13 <sipa> if so, you've found a bug
841 2011-09-26 11:53:29 <casascius> was that known to be true in the past and it's been fixed?  this was not a recent version I have been doing most of this with.
842 2011-09-26 11:53:44 <sipa> i had a report of that a few months ago, which i believed i fixed
843 2011-09-26 11:53:49 <sipa> but i was never able to reproduce it myself
844 2011-09-26 11:53:52 <sipa> so i'm not sure
845 2011-09-26 11:54:12 <casascius> in the past (before I got compiling working) i just used the binary that had been distributed by bitbills on their website
846 2011-09-26 11:54:23 <casascius> and it's probably old enough to still have tons of bugs that are since fixed
847 2011-09-26 11:54:23 <sipa> that's *very* old :)
848 2011-09-26 11:54:57 <sipa> anyway, it won't be rescan that brings it in (import already does a rescan indeed), but just restarting (the wallet caches balances to prevent recalculation, and import should reset those caches)
849 2011-09-26 11:55:56 <casascius> That sounds consistent with how I figured it worked.  And in that case, the balance recalculation is probably the step that fixed it (without respect to the -rescan I had put on the command line)
850 2011-09-26 11:56:39 <sipa> i'm not talking about the total balance btw, just the per-wallet-tx balances
851 2011-09-26 11:58:35 <casascius> for the future, i think my plans on what i will do with my "minikey" patch are as follows: remove all sha256 minikeys, support only PBKDF2 minikeys with three iteration choices (4096, 32768, 131072, and a fourth "invalid" choice to compel someone generating one to not just leave it to chance), and then also support
852 2011-09-26 11:58:48 <casascius> hexadecimal and base36 for QR codes (formulated exactly like base58, but just with 36 symbols)
853 2011-09-26 11:59:18 <casascius> *262144 instead of 131072
854 2011-09-26 11:59:20 <sipa> you're better off with decimal and base36 if you aim for QR
855 2011-09-26 12:00:34 <casascius> hexadecimal wouldn't be intended for qr...it would more be intended for people who have the hex of the private key (e.g. a script that calls openssl etc.)
856 2011-09-26 12:00:56 <casascius> (otherwise they have to convert it to base 58 which doesn't seem to serve any useful purpose)
857 2011-09-26 12:01:18 <casascius> Mainly for developers, not for users
858 2011-09-26 12:01:58 <casascius> Unless there is an objection to putting that in
859 2011-09-26 12:10:10 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Gavin Andresen master * r565c477 / (28 files in 3 dirs):
860 2011-09-26 12:10:11 <CIA-101> bitcoin: Remove wxWidgets
861 2011-09-26 12:14:03 <sipa> casascius: agree, hex may be useful in that sense
862 2011-09-26 12:14:26 <sipa> casascius: PEM-encoded key import/export may be useful too, but i'm not sure that should go in mainline
863 2011-09-26 12:15:35 <casascius> sipa: agreed, i'd keep it out.  I am thinking casascius coins (the sha256 variety) should be redeemed with a separate redeemer app... I am sold on the need to not encourage less secure methodology in case they become popular non-best choices
864 2011-09-26 12:16:05 <casascius> if someone has pem, they could probably just use a script referencing openssl to break out the hex, and pipe that onto the command line
865 2011-09-26 12:16:58 <casascius> or at the very least, wait for someone to give a good use case for distributing priv keys with pem (it seems awfully inconvenient)
866 2011-09-26 12:18:10 <sipa> they're close to a kb in side, i think
867 2011-09-26 12:19:01 <phantomcircuit> pem compresses well usually
868 2011-09-26 12:23:45 <sipa> see https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4448.msg73443#msg73443
869 2011-09-26 12:24:27 <sipa> 720 bytes for a private key
870 2011-09-26 12:25:32 <phantomcircuit> yeah now gzip that
871 2011-09-26 12:25:58 <sipa> oh you mean afterwards, sure
872 2011-09-26 12:26:05 <sipa> it'll compress a factor 2-3 i suppose
873 2011-09-26 12:28:19 <gmaxwell> A lot of these private key uses cases really cry out for a import mode that instantly spends any funds to hit that address.
874 2011-09-26 12:46:04 <sipa> casascius: i just rebased showwallet branch, and made a small change
875 2011-09-26 12:46:19 <sipa> i believe the bug should now be fixed