1 2011-12-08 00:00:34 <sipa> ok
  2 2011-12-08 00:01:07 <sipa> you give me a public key P (with corresponding private key p, with P = p*G)
  3 2011-12-08 00:01:17 <genjix> btw i was reading a cryptography book and the section on elliptic curve keys uses the example name 'Satomi'
  4 2011-12-08 00:01:22 <genjix> book is from 2001
  5 2011-12-08 00:01:39 <genjix> ok
  6 2011-12-08 00:01:39 <sipa> i generate an ephemeral private key q, with public key Q = q*G
  7 2011-12-08 00:02:05 <genjix> ohhhh
  8 2011-12-08 00:02:07 <genjix> nice
  9 2011-12-08 00:02:14 <sipa> i multiply q with P, and get Z = q*P = q*p*G
 10 2011-12-08 00:02:22 <genjix> Q + P = (q + p) * G
 11 2011-12-08 00:02:32 <sipa> that too, but that is reversible
 12 2011-12-08 00:02:34 <genjix> aha so multiplying is better
 13 2011-12-08 00:02:41 <sipa> division however, isn't
 14 2011-12-08 00:02:44 <rjk2> guys, mind your p's and q's
 15 2011-12-08 00:02:59 <genjix> :))
 16 2011-12-08 00:03:17 <genjix> super. ty for explaining
 17 2011-12-08 00:03:32 <sipa> now you multiply p with Q, and get p*Q = p*q*G = q*p*G = q*P = Z
 18 2011-12-08 00:04:13 <sipa> so you end up with the same key Z (which you can e.g. hash and use as seed for some other crypto primittive)
 19 2011-12-08 00:04:21 <genjix> yeah because multiplication is commutative
 20 2011-12-08 00:04:25 <sipa> and an attacker who has only seen P and Q cannot infer Z
 21 2011-12-08 00:04:39 <sipa> exactly
 22 2011-12-08 00:04:40 <genjix> that's nice
 23 2011-12-08 00:04:46 <sipa> that's ECDH
 24 2011-12-08 00:04:55 <genjix> and you could have many multiple private keys too
 25 2011-12-08 00:05:05 <genjix> aha great
 26 2011-12-08 00:05:24 <sipa> (ps: all i know about this comes from wikipedia)
 27 2011-12-08 00:09:37 <Mqrius> sipa: Q+P is reversible, but you still can't get q from that if you have p, or vice versa
 28 2011-12-08 00:09:57 <luke-jr> genjix: both Satomi and Satoshi are fairly common names
 29 2011-12-08 00:10:13 <genjix> Q+P is not reversible unless you know either one
 30 2011-12-08 00:10:54 <genjix> luke-jr: Pao-Chi, Gwen and Satomi
 31 2011-12-08 00:14:53 <genjix> aha ok i didnt know this before. but to start i find a big prime number and then all my integers are from 0 to p - 1
 32 2011-12-08 00:49:47 <slush1> genjix: hi, did you receive my email?
 33 2011-12-08 00:51:07 <genjix> hi slush1, yeah i did. we all like it and we're discussing in my group what to do
 34 2011-12-08 00:51:52 <slush1> genjix: great! I just wasn't sure if that email is correct. Feel free to respond anytime, it does not hurry.
 35 2011-12-08 01:11:10 <dhw> Json-RPC did not change with 0.5 did it?
 36 2011-12-08 01:21:00 <luke-jr> dhw: it did slightly, I think
 37 2011-12-08 01:21:04 <luke-jr> dhw: a few fixes
 38 2011-12-08 01:26:00 <dhw> is there any reason why a username/password would not log me in?
 39 2011-12-08 01:26:06 <dhw> is there a limit on the length for either or
 40 2011-12-08 01:28:21 <luke-jr> dhw: username cannot be null
 41 2011-12-08 01:28:33 <luke-jr> oh wait
 42 2011-12-08 01:28:35 <luke-jr> bitcoind you mean
 43 2011-12-08 01:28:46 <luke-jr> I don't think THAT changed.
 44 2011-12-08 01:28:51 <dhw> hrm
 45 2011-12-08 01:29:07 <dhw> must be a bad config
 46 2011-12-08 02:36:55 <lfm_> on the mswin version of bitcoin 0.5.0.1 when I hover over the green check mark i get ast received block was generated %n seconds ago" it doesnt fill in the number
 47 2011-12-08 02:43:30 <lfm_> the linux version seems to work right tho
 48 2011-12-08 02:44:13 <lfm_> on the mswin version of bitcoin 0.5.0.1 when I hover over the green check mark i get "Last received block was generated %n seconds ago" it doesnt fill in the number
 49 2011-12-08 03:05:03 <luke-jr> lfm_: what 0.5.0.1?
 50 2011-12-08 04:22:29 <Tril> ;;seen genjix
 51 2011-12-08 04:22:30 <gribble> genjix was last seen in #bitcoin-dev 3 hours, 31 minutes, and 22 seconds ago: <genjix> hi slush1, yeah i did. we all like it and we're discussing in my group what to do
 52 2011-12-08 04:24:53 <Tril> genjix: was looking at your btfeature project, do you know if anyone has an active site doing something like that?  collecting patch/code ideas and bitcoin donations and paying out?
 53 2011-12-08 05:17:17 <SomeoneWeird> https://www.soldierx.com/CryptographySteganography-Cracking-Contest-2011
 54 2011-12-08 08:38:36 <ExeciN> I am using the official bitcoin client for mac. I went to the options pane and I see the first option: "Start Bitcoin on window system startup"
 55 2011-12-08 08:39:43 <ExeciN> it should be windows instead of window and definitely not on a Mac/Linux computer
 56 2011-12-08 08:43:42 <gjs278> ;;bc,stats
 57 2011-12-08 08:43:46 <gribble> Current Blocks: 156598 | Current Difficulty: 1090715.6800513 | Next Difficulty At Block: 157247 | Next Difficulty In: 649 blocks | Next Difficulty In About: 4 days, 6 hours, 45 minutes, and 30 seconds | Next Difficulty Estimate: 1176278.80191243 | Estimated Percent Change: 7.84467697916
 58 2011-12-08 08:45:26 <[Tycho]> ExeciN: how did you see the options pane if you don't have window system ?
 59 2011-12-08 08:47:04 <ExeciN> Bitcoin-Qt menu then Preferences... menu then I selected the main
 60 2011-12-08 08:47:26 <[Tycho]> It means that you have some windows system.
 61 2011-12-08 08:47:30 <ExeciN> I can confirm that I am using a mac and a mac binary
 62 2011-12-08 08:48:10 <ExeciN> no it means that the os detection algorithm it doen't work like it should
 63 2011-12-08 08:48:32 <genjix> Tril: no one was
 64 2011-12-08 08:49:48 <[Tycho]> ExeciN: I think that your mac has this one - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Window_System
 65 2011-12-08 08:50:18 <ExeciN> I am not really a developer (well I study to be one) but I can feedback what you ask in order to fix that
 66 2011-12-08 08:51:06 <[Tycho]> I'm running 0.4 on mac and this checkbox is disabled for me :)
 67 2011-12-08 08:51:08 <ExeciN> I don't know if bitcoin is make use of X11 but even if it is there should be a way to get the os signature
 68 2011-12-08 08:51:56 <ExeciN> I am on OSX Lion (10.7.2)
 69 2011-12-08 08:51:59 <[Tycho]> ExeciN: what I'm trying to say is that "Microsoft Windows" is not the only window system out there. Your mac has window system too, just not so microsoft.
 70 2011-12-08 08:54:31 <ExeciN> I confused Window System with Windows System
 71 2011-12-08 08:56:38 <[Tycho]> As I see, it says "window system" not starting with capital letter :)
 72 2011-12-08 09:31:36 <genjix> in an EC curve (the E part of the pubkey), what does order and cofactor mean?
 73 2011-12-08 09:32:39 <genjix> i see 2^m field, a, b, order and cofactor
 74 2011-12-08 09:35:02 <[Tycho]> What is acceptable integer range for using as private key ?
 75 2011-12-08 10:02:55 <Mqrius> genjix: bitcoin uses an Fp field, not an F2m field...?
 76 2011-12-08 10:03:38 <Mqrius> [Tycho]: 1 to Fp, not including Fp
 77 2011-12-08 10:04:03 <[Tycho]> What is Fp ?
 78 2011-12-08 10:04:30 <Mqrius> It's a parameter of the field bitcoin uses
 79 2011-12-08 10:04:52 <Mqrius> Don't know it by heart ;)
 80 2011-12-08 10:06:08 <Mqrius> (Basically, it's the number of pkints in the field)
 81 2011-12-08 10:06:49 <[Tycho]> But it's big ? :)
 82 2011-12-08 10:07:38 <Mqrius> Yes, quite :p
 83 2011-12-08 10:08:49 <[Tycho]> Not sure if real file is better than it's hash, but may be.
 84 2011-12-08 10:11:09 <Mqrius> tycho: FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFE FFFFFC2F
 85 2011-12-08 10:12:37 <[Tycho]> Ok, hash then :)
 86 2011-12-08 10:13:00 <Mqrius> hash may be better. dependent on the file, you may have a standard header reducing your keyspace
 87 2011-12-08 10:13:32 <Mqrius> But you could take the file MOD p
 88 2011-12-08 10:14:09 <Mqrius> So it could be done. But hash is better :)
 89 2011-12-08 10:16:13 <[Tycho]> Even more fun would be to use pictures as images.
 90 2011-12-08 10:16:37 <[Tycho]> Somehow normalized, so recompression wouldn't matter.
 91 2011-12-08 10:23:37 <sipa> Mqrius: Fp field indeed
 92 2011-12-08 10:23:59 <sipa> genjix: order is the number of points on the curve, basically
 93 2011-12-08 10:24:35 <sipa> genjix: cofactor is number of field elements divided by the number of curve elements iirc
 94 2011-12-08 10:25:08 <[Tycho]> Hello, sipa.
 95 2011-12-08 10:27:19 <sipa> hi [Tycho]
 96 2011-12-08 10:28:07 <[Tycho]> sipa: so you are against our proposal of human-readable bitcoin address version numbers ? :)
 97 2011-12-08 10:31:34 <sipa> [Tycho]: haven't looked at it, really
 98 2011-12-08 10:32:16 <sipa> (not yet)
 99 2011-12-08 10:41:17 <Mqrius> <[Tycho]> Even more fun would be to use pictures as images.
100 2011-12-08 10:41:31 <Mqrius> Yes, using pictures as images is an awesome time-honored tradition!
101 2011-12-08 10:42:43 <Mqrius> (On a more serious note: For calculating the key, the raw image could be used. Then you could store it as PNG or something for compression, but something calculating the key would just decompress it.)
102 2011-12-08 10:44:16 <[Tycho]> I was talking about some serious normalizing.
103 2011-12-08 10:44:44 <[Tycho]> So image resizing and compression wouldn't affect the key.
104 2011-12-08 10:46:18 <Mqrius> I don't know how to do such a thing. Then again, I do... but it depends heavily on automated tineye.com queries :D
105 2011-12-08 10:46:51 <[Tycho]> I can imagine different approaches.
106 2011-12-08 10:47:42 <SomeoneWeird> lol
107 2011-12-08 10:47:44 <SomeoneWeird> yeh
108 2011-12-08 10:47:50 <SomeoneWeird> or even using google Mqrius
109 2011-12-08 10:48:05 <Mqrius> Oh right, they can do it now too :)
110 2011-12-08 10:49:21 <SomeoneWeird> yep
111 2011-12-08 10:55:38 <genjix> ok thanks Mqrius and sipa
112 2011-12-08 11:03:52 <SomeoneWeird> anyone used the php fb api before? lol
113 2011-12-08 11:58:43 <SomeoneWeird> HipHop for PHP transforms PHP source code into highly optimized C++.
114 2011-12-08 11:58:44 <SomeoneWeird> wow
115 2011-12-08 11:59:56 <terrytibbs> SomeoneWeird: neat
116 2011-12-08 12:00:10 <SomeoneWeird> yeah it's pretty cool
117 2011-12-08 12:00:18 <SomeoneWeird> https://github.com/facebook/hiphop-php
118 2011-12-08 12:00:30 <SomeoneWeird> HEY cjdelisle I CODE C++ NOW
119 2011-12-08 12:02:17 <cjdelisle> o/
120 2011-12-08 12:08:20 <Mqrius> Google web toolkit turns Java into optimized javascript. 's not /that/ useful though.
121 2011-12-08 12:08:36 <SomeoneWeird> heh nice
122 2011-12-08 12:08:45 <SomeoneWeird> C# > Java > js
123 2011-12-08 12:09:04 <Mqrius> :P
124 2011-12-08 12:09:45 <cjdelisle> actually js is better than java for some things
125 2011-12-08 12:09:53 <cjdelisle> it's fully event based which java should have been
126 2011-12-08 12:12:40 <SomeoneWeird> true
127 2011-12-08 12:12:48 <SomeoneWeird> which is why i said java > js
128 2011-12-08 12:12:50 <SomeoneWeird> :P
129 2011-12-08 12:14:23 <Mqrius> SomeoneWeird: I think you may find most people interpret "java > js" as "java is better than js" ;)
130 2011-12-08 12:14:54 <SomeoneWeird> C# -> Java -> JS
131 2011-12-08 12:14:55 <SomeoneWeird> lol
132 2011-12-08 12:17:15 <SomeoneWeird> wonder if we can get facebook to start accepting bitcoin for fb credit
133 2011-12-08 12:17:17 <SomeoneWeird> that'd be big
134 2011-12-08 12:23:01 <SomeoneWeird> gah, facebook api is so shit hahah
135 2011-12-08 14:41:46 <aks> hi
136 2011-12-08 15:01:58 <chmod755> is there a bitcoin client in brainfuck?
137 2011-12-08 15:02:42 <tcatm> no :)
138 2011-12-08 15:25:32 <rjk2> write it ;)
139 2011-12-08 16:01:32 <[Tycho]> If I'll increase nonce not by one, but by 2 or 4 each time - will the resulting success rate be the same ? I think that it should be, but better to ask :)
140 2011-12-08 16:02:35 <copumpkin> I'd hope so :)
141 2011-12-08 16:02:53 <copumpkin> if not, you should publish a paper
142 2011-12-08 16:02:56 <UukGoblin> ;-]
143 2011-12-08 16:02:58 <[Tycho]> :)
144 2011-12-08 16:03:22 <UukGoblin> influence of odd and even numbers on sha256
145 2011-12-08 16:03:51 <UukGoblin> next time you'll check the paper, it'll say "collisions found!" ;-]
146 2011-12-08 16:04:12 <rjk2> use an RNG to determine hwo much to increment the nonce
147 2011-12-08 16:04:28 <rjk2> wooo
148 2011-12-08 16:04:34 <rjk2> density ftw
149 2011-12-08 16:04:53 <[Tycho]> Not yet sure to place chips on both sides.
150 2011-12-08 16:05:45 <rjk2> what kind of packaging are you thinking of having
151 2011-12-08 16:05:57 <rjk2> something with good heat dissipation i hope
152 2011-12-08 16:08:36 <[Tycho]> I'm thinking of QFP44, depending on how many cores they will fit on a single die.
153 2011-12-08 16:10:37 <[Tycho]> Saw some very stylish metal-ceramic QFP packages, but they are so expensive :(
154 2011-12-08 16:11:14 <rjk2> wonder what the best kind of PCB is for heat dissipation
155 2011-12-08 16:11:37 <rjk2> i would assume different types have different thermal properties
156 2011-12-08 16:13:16 <[Tycho]> Doesn't always matters.
157 2011-12-08 16:13:32 <[Tycho]> Even less for QFP, comparing to BGA.
158 2011-12-08 16:13:58 <[Tycho]> But if you are curious, aluminum PCBs do exist :)
159 2011-12-08 16:14:22 <rjk2> yeah, i always see the big fancy heatsinks etc on the top, and wonder why the damn chip doesn't just unsolder itself
160 2011-12-08 16:15:40 <[Tycho]> Solder melting point is much higher.
161 2011-12-08 16:16:03 <[Tycho]> Especially for rohs
162 2011-12-08 16:16:08 <rjk2> i suppose so yes
163 2011-12-08 16:16:50 <rjk2> i wonder how much better dissipation you could get by sandwiching the chip in a heatsink on both sides
164 2011-12-08 16:16:54 <[Tycho]> I never tried leadless alloys, but I don't think I'll like it :)
165 2011-12-08 16:17:33 <[Tycho]> rjk2: depends on the package. Usually chip is transferring heat to just one side at most.
166 2011-12-08 16:17:52 <rjk2> i see, so it is specifically designed to channel heat in one direction
167 2011-12-08 16:20:50 <[Tycho]> No. It's just more difficult to take heat from both sides of the chip.
168 2011-12-08 16:21:54 <rjk2> well yes, i figured that out, and i was just trying to figure out how much better it could be if you *were* able to draw heat from both sides.
169 2011-12-08 16:22:24 <rjk2> but it is probably not worth trying because it sounds complex and expensive
170 2011-12-08 16:27:43 <luke-jr> [Tycho]: poclbm with vectors enabled doesn't go 1-by-1
171 2011-12-08 16:27:47 <luke-jr> it jumps around like crazy
172 2011-12-08 16:28:06 <[Tycho]> Jumps in the nonce space ?
173 2011-12-08 16:29:08 <luke-jr> yes
174 2011-12-08 16:29:22 <[Tycho]> What for ?
175 2011-12-08 16:29:31 <luke-jr> no idea
176 2011-12-08 16:40:53 <TuxBlackEdo2> Is there a line of bash that I can use that keeps pinging something when it is down and if it is up it continues to the next line of code?
177 2011-12-08 16:52:18 <helo> Tuxavant: while ! ping -c 1 host; do sleep 10s; done
178 2011-12-08 16:52:24 <helo> err doh
179 2011-12-08 16:52:35 <helo> sorry for the rogue ping
180 2011-12-08 17:00:57 <makomk> [Tycho]: I'd be tempted to think about incrementing by one and fiddling with the high bits of the nonce instead, not because it's going to be any more efficient but because it might be easier to make the number of chips configurable that way.
181 2011-12-08 17:01:37 <[Tycho]> What's the difference between this and LSB ?
182 2011-12-08 17:03:42 <makomk> You should be able to set up a couple of registers with bits to AND and OR the nonce with and use those to set the number and values of the MSB at runtime, which I think would be harder with LSB
183 2011-12-08 17:06:09 <[Tycho]> No need to AND and OR, I can just replace those LSBs with hardwired ones if this function is enabled.
184 2011-12-08 17:07:03 <makomk> Hmmmm, I guess.
185 2011-12-08 19:53:59 <nanotube> january 3 - blockchain conception day.
186 2011-12-08 19:54:04 <nanotube> pass it on
187 2011-12-08 19:55:58 <BlueMatt> ?
188 2011-12-08 19:56:10 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: celebration for the blockchain anniversary
189 2011-12-08 19:56:17 <BlueMatt> mmm
190 2011-12-08 19:58:32 <nanotube> standard greeting for the day: happy bitcoin new year? merry blockchain? :)
191 2011-12-08 19:59:23 <luke-jr> Happy Anniversary!
192 2011-12-08 19:59:25 <luke-jr> <.<
193 2011-12-08 19:59:41 <_Fireball> nice
194 2011-12-08 20:01:30 <rjk2> if it supported MM, you could pay a pool by the hour to make blocks
195 2011-12-08 20:01:50 <luke-jr> & or we can just make blocks regularly.
196 2011-12-08 20:02:03 <luke-jr> but supporting MM on that end is not so simple
197 2011-12-08 20:02:03 <rjk2> when you are't paying the pool, then the block cease
198 2011-12-08 20:02:33 <rjk2> im just trying to figure out the regularity issue
199 2011-12-08 20:02:38 <BlueMatt> but we are paying the pool...
200 2011-12-08 20:02:39 <rjk2> or solve i mean
201 2011-12-08 20:02:54 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: not necessarily.
202 2011-12-08 20:03:23 <BlueMatt> if they never make blocks no, but why would we want to pay someone who never makes blocks?
203 2011-12-08 20:03:26 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: I've thought for a while, that testnet should generate to some publicly available private key by default
204 2011-12-08 20:03:48 <rjk2> that's an interesting concept
205 2011-12-08 20:03:55 <BlueMatt> who cares? testnet coins are easy to get
206 2011-12-08 20:04:15 <BlueMatt> and its better to make sure testnet is always as close to mainnet as possible
207 2011-12-08 20:04:49 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: not that easy.
208 2011-12-08 20:05:06 <luke-jr> and generating to a known address isn't deviating from mainnet really.
209 2011-12-08 20:05:10 <luke-jr> it's just a configuration thing
210 2011-12-08 20:05:12 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: https://testnet.freebitcoins.appspot.com/
211 2011-12-08 20:05:17 <BlueMatt> Id say thats pretty easy...
212 2011-12-08 20:05:22 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: someone stole all my testnet coins :/
213 2011-12-08 20:05:30 <BlueMatt> so get some more...
214 2011-12-08 20:06:00 <luke-jr> difficulty is too high now
215 2011-12-08 20:06:04 <luke-jr> and TNIAB works fine
216 2011-12-08 20:06:15 <BlueMatt> well thats what the jan 1 update is for
217 2011-12-08 20:06:29 <luke-jr> 3*
218 2011-12-08 20:06:46 <BlueMatt> I meant https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/686
219 2011-12-08 20:07:43 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: I'll back your suggestion to make it on the blockchain anniversary ;)
220 2011-12-08 20:08:11 <luke-jr> also, why isn't Gavin resetting the testnet genesis too? :/
221 2011-12-08 20:08:19 <BlueMatt> heh, well at the rate new releases roll out around here, the next release probably wont be till jan 3 anyway...
222 2011-12-08 20:08:22 <BlueMatt> gavin isnt
223 2011-12-08 20:08:27 <luke-jr> seems like a waste of space to download all the old blocks
224 2011-12-08 20:08:30 <BlueMatt> I dont think we should, I was suggesting that as a joke
225 2011-12-08 20:08:41 <BlueMatt> why should we?
226 2011-12-08 20:09:00 <BlueMatt> there is history there that is different from mainchain that can make bugs that otherwise wouldnt have been found appear
227 2011-12-08 20:09:01 <luke-jr> IMO, wumpus and gavin should pull all the ACKs, and maybe some next-test parts, and roll 0.6.0beta1 today :P
228 2011-12-08 20:09:03 <BlueMatt> so why remove that?
229 2011-12-08 20:09:13 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: good point
230 2011-12-08 20:09:15 <BlueMatt> gavin isnt even here...
231 2011-12-08 20:09:40 <BlueMatt> see eg https://github.com/gavinandresen/bitcointools/pull/15
232 2011-12-08 20:10:11 <luke-jr> GG
233 2011-12-08 20:10:39 <BlueMatt> a testnet block broke something that mainnet didnt
234 2011-12-08 20:10:55 <luke-jr> o
235 2011-12-08 20:11:11 <luke-jr> I
236 2011-12-08 20:11:15 <luke-jr> ?+!
237 2011-12-08 20:11:17 <luke-jr> hmm
238 2011-12-08 20:11:20 <luke-jr> =
239 2011-12-08 20:11:22 <luke-jr> there we go
240 2011-12-08 20:11:23 <cjdelisle> thx
241 2011-12-08 20:11:29 <luke-jr> ???
242 2011-12-08 20:11:37 <luke-jr> ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???
243 2011-12-08 20:11:37 <wumpus> luke-jr: yes we should probably start pulling for next release
244 2011-12-08 20:11:44 <wumpus> lol unicode fun
245 2011-12-08 20:11:45 <BlueMatt> ...
246 2011-12-08 20:11:49 <luke-jr> wumpus: did you see my summary email?
247 2011-12-08 20:12:15 <wumpus> luke-jr: yes
248 2011-12-08 20:12:20 <luke-jr> 
249 2011-12-08 20:12:24 <BlueMatt> wumpus: Im not sure, I think gavin wanted to do a 0.5.1
250 2011-12-08 20:12:38 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: I'm prepared to do a 0.5.1 anyway.
251 2011-12-08 20:12:43 <wumpus> that's a next release right?
252 2011-12-08 20:12:50 <BlueMatt> wumpus: depends
253 2011-12-08 20:12:51 <luke-jr> I think he had decided to go ahead with 0.6, but not sure.
254 2011-12-08 20:12:54 <wumpus> ???????????
255 2011-12-08 20:13:11 <BlueMatt> wumpus: might be 0.5.1 if we just roll up bugfixes, 0.6 if we add a ton of stuff
256 2011-12-08 20:13:11 <ThomasV> ???un_ ???u1???Pe s???n??? no??? ??yP
257 2011-12-08 20:13:24 <wumpus> <
258 2011-12-08 20:13:38 <wumpus> I remember him talking about merging at least some of the qt pulls
259 2011-12-08 20:13:43 <Eliel> not both?
260 2011-12-08 20:13:50 <BlueMatt> wumpus: what do you think of https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/593 in its current state
261 2011-12-08 20:14:34 <wumpus> BlueMatt: the idea still scares me shitless, your implementation is OK though
262 2011-12-08 20:14:44 <luke-jr> wumpus: there's 2 Qt pulls in the ACK list for 0.6 IIRC
263 2011-12-08 20:14:58 <luke-jr> [Friday, December 02, 2011] [1:55:12 PM] <gavinandresen>        Anybody else have an opinion on a 0.5.1 versus going straight to a 0.6rc1 ?
264 2011-12-08 20:15:05 <BlueMatt> wumpus: people still have to verify it first, and the ability to use uris instead of copy-pasting is huge imo
265 2011-12-08 20:15:08 <wumpus> but the idea of direct browser->bitcoin client communications...
266 2011-12-08 20:15:30 <wumpus> I don't have so much trust in myself to have found all possible security pitfalls
267 2011-12-08 20:16:04 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: do you have KDE support btw?
268 2011-12-08 20:16:17 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: kde/gnome has to be done in the packages, not the binary
269 2011-12-08 20:16:25 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: as you have to register it...
270 2011-12-08 20:16:36 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: yes, and the pull req should do packages too&
271 2011-12-08 20:16:48 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: we dont have packages
272 2011-12-08 20:16:55 <luke-jr> since when?
273 2011-12-08 20:16:58 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: oh, actually thanks for reminding me, I need to add the debian stuff
274 2011-12-08 20:17:01 <BlueMatt> (we do have that
275 2011-12-08 20:17:02 <BlueMatt> )
276 2011-12-08 20:17:08 <BlueMatt> but we dont have kde packages
277 2011-12-08 20:17:31 <luke-jr> &
278 2011-12-08 20:17:33 <wumpus> luke-jr: yes at least the qrcode and capslock pulls, I've been testing them for a while and had no problems
279 2011-12-08 20:17:51 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: it's a simple matter of adding a .protocol file to the KDE service handler dir
280 2011-12-08 20:18:06 <luke-jr> wumpus: signmessage was ACK'd too :p
281 2011-12-08 20:18:20 <wumpus> yes
282 2011-12-08 20:18:53 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: other debian packages dont, so neither should we
283 2011-12-08 20:19:03 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: (afaik)
284 2011-12-08 20:19:09 <BlueMatt> s/afaik/afaict?
285 2011-12-08 20:19:12 <wumpus> but I haven't tested that one personally
286 2011-12-08 20:19:16 <BlueMatt> s|?|/|
287 2011-12-08 20:20:05 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: of course they do
288 2011-12-08 20:20:44 <BlueMatt> did anyone ever make a decision on the signmessage gui thing?
289 2011-12-08 20:21:07 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: Gavin ACK'd it in general; tab vs menu he didn't care about
290 2011-12-08 20:21:13 <luke-jr> people wanted menu, so I moved it there
291 2011-12-08 20:21:26 <BlueMatt> meh, fair enough
292 2011-12-08 20:22:00 <wumpus> well the biggest issue still open is how to select what key to sign with
293 2011-12-08 20:22:12 <wumpus> because it isn't associated with a specific transaction at the moment
294 2011-12-08 20:22:32 <luke-jr> wumpus: it works good enough for some, but not all, cases right now
295 2011-12-08 20:23:14 <wumpus> I guess we could merge it but it has to be made more user friendly imo
296 2011-12-08 20:23:35 <wumpus> currently it's mostly useful for devs playing around it seems
297 2011-12-08 20:24:46 <BlueMatt> thats what rpc is for, if its not user friendly it probably shouldnt be merged into the gui...
298 2011-12-08 20:24:52 <luke-jr> wumpus: it's used in production already.
299 2011-12-08 20:25:09 <wumpus> well it is useful for some diehard users, according to luke-jr
300 2011-12-08 20:25:16 <luke-jr> not diehard
301 2011-12-08 20:25:20 <mother_> is using an untrusted blockchain backup with -rescan safe?
302 2011-12-08 20:25:30 <BlueMatt> s/used in production/used in luke's pool/
303 2011-12-08 20:25:32 <luke-jr> it's useful for proving you own an address, but not so useful for specific transactions yet
304 2011-12-08 20:26:32 <wumpus> so in that case the workflow would be
305 2011-12-08 20:26:48 <wumpus> site gives a text to sign -> user copies and signs it -> copies it back to site?
306 2011-12-08 20:26:56 <luke-jr> yes
307 2011-12-08 20:27:33 <wumpus> and then you've proven you own the address... then what? in the UI, you don't control the sending address
308 2011-12-08 20:28:58 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: most debian packages Ive seen add the relevant .desktop handler to usr/share/applications and dont touch anything kde specific
309 2011-12-08 20:29:10 <wumpus> you're using it to log in?
310 2011-12-08 20:29:24 <BlueMatt> it should probably have the option to sign using an address or a specific tx's address
311 2011-12-08 20:29:28 <luke-jr> http://packages.debian.org/search?searchon=contents&keywords=protocol&mode=path&suite=stable&arch=any
312 2011-12-08 20:29:48 <luke-jr> wumpus: more or less
313 2011-12-08 20:30:01 <BlueMatt> ie select tx or address as signer
314 2011-12-08 20:30:15 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: I see almost entirely kde packages adding to /usr/share/kde4/services
315 2011-12-08 20:30:28 <wumpus> yes it should probably be a context menu option for transactions
316 2011-12-08 20:30:35 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: I see another service dir
317 2011-12-08 20:30:48 <wumpus> and for receiving addresses
318 2011-12-08 20:30:54 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: same for /usr/share/services
319 2011-12-08 20:31:17 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: when iceweasel adds its protocol handler, then I think bitcoin should
320 2011-12-08 20:31:46 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: but when the vast majority of non-kde apps dont, I dont see why we should...
321 2011-12-08 20:32:31 <mother_> is using an untrusted blockchain backup with the rescan option safe?
322 2011-12-08 20:32:45 <BlueMatt> its not like the kde market is so small no one would complain, are you sure kde doesnt read from the .desktop gnome files
323 2011-12-08 20:33:41 <BlueMatt> mother_: its not gonna make you lose coins, but it might show weirdness
324 2011-12-08 20:33:56 <BlueMatt> mother_: might want to backup wallet pre-rescan so that you can go back to it
325 2011-12-08 20:37:06 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: most non-kde apps don't *have* protocols
326 2011-12-08 20:38:01 <luke-jr> lastfm and mumble do
327 2011-12-08 20:38:50 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: why doesnt eg iceweasel have a protocol file?
328 2011-12-08 20:39:12 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: because Firefox does everything using its proprietary registry-clone
329 2011-12-08 20:39:52 <luke-jr> good luck supporting that
330 2011-12-08 20:41:41 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: ok why doesnt chromium have a kde protocol file?
331 2011-12-08 20:41:57 <luke-jr> nfc
332 2011-12-08 20:42:05 <luke-jr> cuz Google sucks ;D
333 2011-12-08 20:42:13 <BlueMatt> chromium != google...
334 2011-12-08 20:42:40 <BlueMatt> why do all the many, many browsers on http://packages.debian.org/wheezy/web/ not have one?
335 2011-12-08 20:43:32 <BlueMatt> in fact even a browser which calls itself "KDE web browser based on WebKit" doesnt have one: http://packages.debian.org/wheezy/web/rekonq
336 2011-12-08 20:43:32 <luke-jr> browsers *wouldn't* have them in the first place
337 2011-12-08 20:43:37 <luke-jr> browsers would *use* them
338 2011-12-08 20:43:48 <luke-jr> and rekonq *does*
339 2011-12-08 20:43:50 <BlueMatt> they would have to register http
340 2011-12-08 20:43:54 <luke-jr> no
341 2011-12-08 20:44:04 <BlueMatt> why not?
342 2011-12-08 20:44:21 <luke-jr> because KDE doesn't handle http as a protocol
343 2011-12-08 20:44:37 <luke-jr> it gets the HEAD and launches apps based on Content-Type
344 2011-12-08 20:44:46 <luke-jr> ie, text/html
345 2011-12-08 20:48:24 <BlueMatt> ok, so what about kmail, why no protocol for mailto?
346 2011-12-08 20:48:43 <luke-jr> I didn't design KDE.
347 2011-12-08 20:49:13 <BlueMatt> afaict the vast majority of packages that have protocols associated with them do not provide a .protocol for kde...
348 2011-12-08 20:49:26 <luke-jr> KDE special-cases: Email Client, Embedded Text Editor, File Manager, Instant Messenger, Terminal Emulator, Web Browser, and Window Manager
349 2011-12-08 20:49:32 <BlueMatt> if you wannt write one, Ill put it in...
350 2011-12-08 20:49:46 <BlueMatt> but I dont feel like looking up the spec and putting one together, testing it, etc
351 2011-12-08 20:50:04 <luke-jr> bitcoin-qt <URI> ?
352 2011-12-08 20:50:09 <BlueMatt> yea
353 2011-12-08 20:50:16 <BlueMatt> bitcoin-qt bitcoin:Address
354 2011-12-08 20:50:27 <BlueMatt> or bitcoin-qt bitcoin://Address (for compatibility)
355 2011-12-08 20:50:40 <luke-jr> http://paste.pocoo.org/show/518122/
356 2011-12-08 20:50:58 <BlueMatt> Icon=bitcoin works?
357 2011-12-08 20:51:03 <luke-jr> /usr/share/kde4/services/bitcoin-qt.protocol
358 2011-12-08 20:51:10 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: works for spesmilo, at least
359 2011-12-08 20:51:24 <luke-jr> I guess it depends what filename you install the icon with
360 2011-12-08 20:51:25 <BlueMatt> Icon=bitcoin does what, there is no icon named bitcoin anywhere
361 2011-12-08 20:51:35 <luke-jr> why not?
362 2011-12-08 20:51:36 <BlueMatt> and where does it look for icons?
363 2011-12-08 20:51:41 <BlueMatt> its bitcoin-qt
364 2011-12-08 20:51:42 <luke-jr> you need one for the appmenu icon too
365 2011-12-08 20:51:49 <luke-jr> ok, so change it to that
366 2011-12-08 20:51:57 <BlueMatt> actaully, no its bitcoin80.xpm
367 2011-12-08 20:52:00 <BlueMatt> does kde support xpm?
368 2011-12-08 20:52:16 <BlueMatt> and does it search in /usr/share/pixmaps/
369 2011-12-08 20:52:26 <luke-jr> should
370 2011-12-08 20:52:57 <luke-jr> I think
371 2011-12-08 20:53:05 <luke-jr> Spesmilo uses/usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32/apps/bitcoin.png
372 2011-12-08 20:53:20 <luke-jr> which is where icons are SUPPOSED to be
373 2011-12-08 20:53:59 <BlueMatt> well whatever app I used as a base happened to use /usr/share/pixmaps
374 2011-12-08 20:54:05 <BlueMatt> and I see most of my apps are using it as well
375 2011-12-08 20:54:31 <BlueMatt> well maybe half/half
376 2011-12-08 20:56:42 <BlueMatt> anyway, the icon used is 80x80 and there is no 80x80 folder in /usr/share/icons/hicolor on my system
377 2011-12-08 20:57:02 <luke-jr> &
378 2011-12-08 20:57:10 <luke-jr> surely we have a proper icon somewhere
379 2011-12-08 20:57:15 <BlueMatt> hey, thats the icon I had
380 2011-12-08 20:57:35 <BlueMatt> and Im not gonna go around searching a ton and rendering icons to make them a specific size
381 2011-12-08 20:57:48 <BlueMatt> if you feel like it, please do
382 2011-12-08 20:58:47 <luke-jr> better no icon than no protocol
383 2011-12-08 20:59:39 <BlueMatt> better fix both the one or neither
384 2011-12-08 21:00:05 <BlueMatt> also Im lazy and working on other stuff atm, if you fix them Ill put it in the pull req
385 2011-12-08 21:29:05 <ageis> i put the icon for my bitcoin app in there myself
386 2011-12-08 22:14:09 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: just take out the icon line if you don't want to install an icon in the standard place
387 2011-12-08 22:18:49 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: meh, whatever I added your file (sans Icon)
388 2011-12-08 23:06:14 <t3a> hi
389 2011-12-08 23:13:33 <BlueMatt> hello
390 2011-12-08 23:36:12 <luke-jr> I think I've come to the conclusion that signmessage is not (currently) usable for verifying individual transactions
391 2011-12-08 23:37:15 <gmaxwell> ... Why is this news to you?
392 2011-12-08 23:37:20 <luke-jr> and implementing it is non-trivial, as the core code has NO INTERNALS to check the 'from' address of a transaction
393 2011-12-08 23:37:40 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: I was thinking we could just standardize on "txid:" prefix to messages
394 2011-12-08 23:37:51 <gmaxwell> The user has no understanding of their from addresses in any case for all they know the froms could be change addresses they've never seen before.
395 2011-12-08 23:37:57 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: problem is, then people will trust it even if txid didn't have the signing address as an input&
396 2011-12-08 23:38:35 <gmaxwell> hm. perhaps signmessage could actually take a txid as the 'from' and then autoselect an input used in that txn?
397 2011-12-08 23:38:46 <gmaxwell> then likewise for verify?
398 2011-12-08 23:38:49 <luke-jr> so to extend signmessage (let alone GUI) to cover the transaction case, requires internals to get 'from' address
399 2011-12-08 23:39:02 <gmaxwell> No, see what I just suggested ^
400 2011-12-08 23:39:05 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: there is no way to get from input CScript to address
401 2011-12-08 23:39:25 <gmaxwell> It wouldn't take much code.
402 2011-12-08 23:40:37 <luke-jr> want to write it? :P
403 2011-12-08 23:40:48 <gmaxwell> In January!
404 2011-12-08 23:40:57 <luke-jr> >.>
405 2011-12-08 23:42:51 <gmaxwell> A fundimental problem is that the 'from' may not even have an 'address'.
406 2011-12-08 23:43:27 <gmaxwell> E.g. what happens when someone has some inputs in their wallet that are weird hash locked/escrow/whatever.  The nature of those transactions should be irrelevant to who they ultimately spend them to.
407 2011-12-08 23:50:14 <doublec> why?
408 2011-12-08 23:50:46 <BlueMatt> because there really arent any reasons why you should where there arent better alternatives
409 2011-12-08 23:51:42 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: true. so rather, transaction sigs should be based on the keys actually signing the txn rather than input scripts
410 2011-12-08 23:51:45 <lianj> if i read this right, in current bitcoin are there only to types of tx scripts allowed?
411 2011-12-08 23:51:56 <lianj> s/to/two/
412 2011-12-08 23:52:06 <BlueMatt> lianj: sounds right
413 2011-12-08 23:52:06 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: now the question becomes, can one see that two sigs are the same key?
414 2011-12-08 23:52:11 <gmaxwell> lianj: Defined "allowed"?
415 2011-12-08 23:52:14 <BlueMatt> lianj: send-to-pubkey and send-to-address
416 2011-12-08 23:52:26 <lianj> because of people messing to much with useless scripts?
417 2011-12-08 23:52:29 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: send-to-script is now live
418 2011-12-08 23:52:31 <BlueMatt> well by default wont be mined or forwarded, but all will be accepted in blocks
419 2011-12-08 23:52:36 <gmaxwell> lianj: Other kinds can be validly placed in the blockchain.
420 2011-12-08 23:52:39 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: in release versions?
421 2011-12-08 23:52:44 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: no
422 2011-12-08 23:52:48 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: but that's irrelevant
423 2011-12-08 23:52:54 <gmaxwell> And other kinds will be mined by some nodes, relayed by some nodes.. but they aren't by default.
424 2011-12-08 23:52:57 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: so its live only on your pool, that means nothing
425 2011-12-08 23:53:03 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: are there any in main blockchain?
426 2011-12-08 23:53:04 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: it means it's usable.
427 2011-12-08 23:53:07 <gmaxwell> Agreed with luke-jr that it's irrelevant.
428 2011-12-08 23:53:29 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: luke-jr is correct, mainline is irrelevant there _none_ of the large miners run mainline.
429 2011-12-08 23:53:58 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: true, but my point is more that that particular feature probably wont be in many pools until its in mainline
430 2011-12-08 23:54:09 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: that's false
431 2011-12-08 23:54:11 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: and since its only on one pool and more importantly wont be forwarded, its not really "live"
432 2011-12-08 23:54:12 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: Thats not true.
433 2011-12-08 23:54:13 <lianj> so we went from script with many possibilities, to whitelist some of them (just two atm) and add more in times to come (like mulisig) ?
434 2011-12-08 23:54:25 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: well atleast merged into git
435 2011-12-08 23:54:31 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: that's false
436 2011-12-08 23:54:40 <luke-jr> most pools will merge/patch it in by hand
437 2011-12-08 23:54:44 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: what pool will include it before its merged?
438 2011-12-08 23:54:48 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: gavin has been working pool by pool on this.
439 2011-12-08 23:55:00 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: yes, they will merge it by hand, but they wont merge it until its in git mainline
440 2011-12-08 23:55:02 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: Eligius, Deepbit, and slush IIRC
441 2011-12-08 23:55:06 <luke-jr> yes, we will
442 2011-12-08 23:55:11 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: have it already?
443 2011-12-08 23:55:13 <gmaxwell> (including porting to patch to specific versions)
444 2011-12-08 23:55:13 <luke-jr> mainline will only get the final stage OP_EVAL
445 2011-12-08 23:55:22 <luke-jr> pools will need to enable it before then
446 2011-12-08 23:55:31 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: IIRC Tycho was working on it
447 2011-12-08 23:55:38 <BlueMatt> anyway, needs to be forwarded first...
448 2011-12-08 23:55:43 <BlueMatt> which it currently isnt...
449 2011-12-08 23:55:52 <luke-jr> or keepnode eligius
450 2011-12-08 23:55:54 <BlueMatt> so I would argue its not live even if pools accept it
451 2011-12-08 23:55:54 <luke-jr> :P
452 2011-12-08 23:56:16 <gmaxwell> lianj: in any case, it really depends on what you mean by allowed. There are three relevant criteria:  can it exist in the chain, will it be forwarded, and will it be mined.
453 2011-12-08 23:57:10 <gmaxwell> lianj: The answer is Yes for the first for all valid scripts, Mostly-No for the second for all but two, and Mostly-yes for the third if you don't mind waiting for the few pools that will accept them.
454 2011-12-08 23:57:27 <luke-jr> sipa: do you think you could design a spec for signmessage mode B that uses txnid instead of address?
455 2011-12-08 23:57:41 <BlueMatt> can I ask why pools will mine on a chain with OP_EVAL before clients will accept those blocks, seems...backwards?
456 2011-12-08 23:57:57 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: all clients today will accept those blocks
457 2011-12-08 23:58:08 <BlueMatt> when was OP_EVAL acceptance merged?
458 2011-12-08 23:58:11 <lianj> ok thanks. thats what i thought
459 2011-12-08 23:58:20 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: OP_EVAL is backward compatible for everyone except miners.
460 2011-12-08 23:58:24 <gmaxwell> 16:57 <@BlueMatt> can I ask why pools will mine on a chain with OP_EVAL before clients will accept those blocks, seems...backwards?
461 2011-12-08 23:58:25 <BlueMatt> mmm, its OP_NOP
462 2011-12-08 23:58:27 <gmaxwell> !
463 2011-12-08 23:58:40 <BlueMatt> hey, I never bothered to follow any of the multisig stuff
464 2011-12-08 23:59:13 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: and pools are accepting it early in part so we can do the majority hashpower 'vote' to prove it viable before actually including it.
465 2011-12-08 23:59:16 <BlueMatt> it started to be discussed right when I had absolutely no time to follow bitcoin so if it was multisig, I ignored it so that I could atleast deal with build and gitian stuff...
466 2011-12-08 23:59:32 <BlueMatt> well now that I understand that it will be accepted, I get it
467 2011-12-08 23:59:33 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: every miner with this patch adds a OP_EVAL to their coinbase to signify support.