1 2011-12-15 00:04:10 <midnightmagic> sipa: I'm guessing he means a full record per fqdn in namecoin..
  2 2011-12-15 00:05:25 <jjjrmy> Guys. I'm a little depressed, I want to start a new project. Any ideas?
  3 2011-12-15 00:07:54 <tcatm> jjjrmy: advertising server for bitcoin ads
  4 2011-12-15 00:08:08 <jjjrmy> tcatm: Already working on that.
  5 2011-12-15 00:08:26 <tcatm> does it work?
  6 2011-12-15 00:08:36 <jjjrmy> tcatm: not yet, still in dev
  7 2011-12-15 00:08:59 <tcatm> finish it :)
  8 2011-12-15 00:09:24 <jjjrmy> tcatm: lol, okay.
  9 2011-12-15 01:01:50 <diki> cpu usage bug finally fixed
 10 2011-12-15 02:45:25 <t4banne> yo pepl =)
 11 2011-12-15 02:51:29 <jrmithdobbs> lianj: any ideas why my arrow keys wouldn't work on os x in the tmux : commandline/prompts but works fine in apps running inside of tmux and in tmux's copy buffer ;p
 12 2011-12-15 02:52:15 <jrmithdobbs> oh wait, nm, just figuredo ut it works fine on the locally installed tmux so must be some termcap funk on the openbsd box
 13 2011-12-15 04:04:29 <copumpkin> someone on the bitcoin subreddit asked a decent question
 14 2011-12-15 04:04:41 <copumpkin> about being able to provide links to bitcoin addresses
 15 2011-12-15 04:05:07 <copumpkin> might it make sense to further abuse URIs so we can write bitcoin://addresshere and have it open our client?
 16 2011-12-15 04:05:21 <copumpkin> different browsers/OSes would need to register handlers for those differently
 17 2011-12-15 04:05:33 <copumpkin> but it could be a decent standard to have
 18 2011-12-15 04:18:06 <helo> bitcoin://address instead of bitcoin:address ?
 19 2011-12-15 04:20:52 <luke-jr> copumpkin: um, we ALREADY have URI scheme
 20 2011-12-15 04:21:00 <copumpkin> oh?
 21 2011-12-15 04:21:04 <Herodes> Hi all! What's the testnet block count at currently ?
 22 2011-12-15 04:21:04 <luke-jr> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/URI_Scheme
 23 2011-12-15 04:21:34 <copumpkin> luke-jr: is it implemented anywhere?
 24 2011-12-15 04:21:46 <luke-jr> copumpkin: Spesmilo, some other clients I forget the name of
 25 2011-12-15 04:21:57 <copumpkin> cool
 26 2011-12-15 04:21:58 <luke-jr> copumpkin: Bitcoin-Qt 0.6 will have partial support
 27 2011-12-15 04:23:04 <copumpkin> even cooler
 28 2011-12-15 04:25:52 <Herodes> Hi guys, I'm googling it, but the blocexplorer is down for test net.
 29 2011-12-15 04:25:58 <Herodes> What is the current block count?
 30 2011-12-15 04:26:18 <Herodes> so I can avoid spamming the bitcoin chain. *g*
 31 2011-12-15 04:28:47 <Herodes> any substitutes for this ?
 32 2011-12-15 04:32:20 <luke-jr> Herodes: your own client
 33 2011-12-15 04:32:35 <Herodes> bitcoind getblockcount  <--- yeah, i figured it out
 34 2011-12-15 04:34:14 <Herodes> Well, it's at 42163 right now if I'm not mistaken.
 35 2011-12-15 04:44:30 <Herodes> Ok, I asked for 50 BTC from the bitcoin testnet faucet, how long should it take before I have those?
 36 2011-12-15 04:44:45 <Herodes> 50 BTC testnet coins that is
 37 2011-12-15 04:45:03 <luke-jr> shrug
 38 2011-12-15 04:45:07 <luke-jr> if you want 50, I'll give ya 51
 39 2011-12-15 04:46:29 <Herodes> the amount doesn't matter luke-jr.
 40 2011-12-15 04:46:38 <luke-jr> addr?
 41 2011-12-15 04:46:42 <Herodes> I just want to do some programming, and I do not want to spam the bitcoin block chain.
 42 2011-12-15 04:47:19 <Herodes> mjxKT6Ug3o9zY3WE9a5X5eHfrscQCUgn8A
 43 2011-12-15 04:48:06 <luke-jr> sent
 44 2011-12-15 04:48:14 <luke-jr> you'll probably need to make some blocks to confirm it
 45 2011-12-15 04:49:26 <Herodes> thanks.
 46 2011-12-15 04:51:21 <Herodes> Is it sufficient to to bitcoind -testnet -gen ? With a CPU ?
 47 2011-12-15 04:51:31 <luke-jr> unlikely
 48 2011-12-15 04:51:35 <luke-jr> testnet difficulty is pretty high
 49 2011-12-15 04:52:15 <Herodes> ok.
 50 2011-12-15 13:31:11 <batouzo> multibit - anyone knows how to contact author? or get sources?
 51 2011-12-15 14:15:44 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: ping
 52 2011-12-15 14:16:47 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: pong
 53 2011-12-15 14:17:17 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: Is there a summary of all the thought that's been put into deterministic wallets/keys somewhere?
 54 2011-12-15 14:17:37 <TD> is there an alert being broadcast on the testnet?
 55 2011-12-15 14:17:47 <gavinandresen> ... I'm specifically thinking about ByteCoin's A&B|C stuff...
 56 2011-12-15 14:18:00 <gavinandresen> TD:  there were two, but they should have both expired yesterday
 57 2011-12-15 14:19:32 <TD> ah ok
 58 2011-12-15 14:19:41 <TD> darn. i was about to implement parsing/verifying of alert messages :)
 59 2011-12-15 14:19:42 <gmaxwell> There are a lot of scattered bits here and there, but I'm not aware of any broad writeups.  I'm also not sure I follow ByteCoin's concern: If you're remembering C is rembering the details required to find the public parts of A&B really that much of a big barrier?
 60 2011-12-15 14:20:03 <lianj> TD: hehe me too
 61 2011-12-15 14:20:04 <TD> gavinandresen: would you consider establishing a longer lived alert?
 62 2011-12-15 14:20:05 <gavinandresen> I don't think so (I'm writing a reply to his latest post now)
 63 2011-12-15 14:20:41 <gavinandresen> TD: well... unfortunately the testnet doesn't have a separate CAlert signing key from main net....
 64 2011-12-15 14:21:09 <gavinandresen> ... so SOMEBODY (cough gmaxwell cough) could broadcast it on the main net
 65 2011-12-15 14:21:09 <TD> oh, i see. so the concern is that it might get "migrated" by somebody?
 66 2011-12-15 14:21:10 <gmaxwell> (obviously you can use one of the determinstic schemes to generate A ... B is less clear.  B could just be a well known service pubkey * A.
 67 2011-12-15 14:21:13 <gmaxwell> )
 68 2011-12-15 14:21:19 <lianj> gavinandresen: haha
 69 2011-12-15 14:22:04 <gavinandresen> TD:  you want to test CAlert handling?
 70 2011-12-15 14:22:11 <TD> gavinandresen: could you send me a signed alert privately so i can broadcast it on a testnet-in-a-box? i guess there is some tool that sends the message?
 71 2011-12-15 14:22:14 <TD> well implement it :)
 72 2011-12-15 14:22:20 <TD> might as well knock off that simple todo list item
 73 2011-12-15 14:22:27 <helo> gmaxwell: i enjoyed your storj post :D
 74 2011-12-15 14:23:02 <gavinandresen> TD: I think it would be easier (and better) for me to just create a separate testnet signing key.
 75 2011-12-15 14:23:12 <TD> that works too
 76 2011-12-15 14:23:19 <gavinandresen> ... hmmm... and then figure out whether or not to make that public....
 77 2011-12-15 14:23:21 <TD> gmaxwell: StorJ went down quite well inside google, for what it's worth :)
 78 2011-12-15 14:23:45 <[Tycho]> Hello
 79 2011-12-15 14:24:06 <gmaxwell> ha. I'm not surprised that Google attracts the kind of folks who consider that possibility exciting.
 80 2011-12-15 14:27:37 <Eliel> gavinandresen: how about allow the person using testnet in a box to easily create a key for that?
 81 2011-12-15 14:27:46 <TD> hmm, alerts are more complicated than i thought
 82 2011-12-15 14:27:52 <TD> gavinandresen: do you have a tool that creates them?
 83 2011-12-15 14:29:50 <gavinandresen> TD: It is typical Satoshi:  I've got a sendalert.cpp that, when compiled into bitcoin, sends an alert.
 84 2011-12-15 14:31:02 <gavinandresen> ... and a different alert means modify/recompile/re-run
 85 2011-12-15 14:31:05 <TD> haha
 86 2011-12-15 14:32:17 <sipa> I expected no less :)
 87 2011-12-15 14:32:51 <gavinandresen> I'll be working on the testnet difficulty code later today, I'll generate a separate testnet alert key.
 88 2011-12-15 14:33:38 <TD> fixed testnet diff coming up?
 89 2011-12-15 14:34:13 <gavinandresen> I've got a pull request pending that needs some tweaks-- it'll be "fixed after 20 minutes"
 90 2011-12-15 14:35:11 <gavinandresen> See https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=50223.0
 91 2011-12-15 14:47:48 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: please let me know if I'm being an idiot here:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=54416.msg651187#msg651187
 92 2011-12-15 15:25:46 <TD> gavinandresen: could you provide a redacted version of the sendalert.cpp file somewhere?
 93 2011-12-15 15:26:07 <gavinandresen> TD: sure
 94 2011-12-15 15:30:22 <gavinandresen> TD: https://gist.github.com/1481736
 95 2011-12-15 15:34:17 <gavinandresen> Speaking of alerts... there is limited space in the 0.4.0 status bar for the alert message. I still think broadcasting an alert when 0.5.1 is final (tomorrow maybe?) is a good idea, anybody have opinions on proposed message:   "WALLET ENCRYPTION INSECURE: ver.0.5.1 available"
 96 2011-12-15 15:34:55 <edcba> pff
 97 2011-12-15 15:35:17 <edcba> if someone can read your wallet file doesn't matter if encrypted i guess
 98 2011-12-15 15:35:44 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: hmm, it would be better if announcements could be locked to specific versions ;)
 99 2011-12-15 15:35:54 <gavinandresen> luke-jr: it is
100 2011-12-15 15:35:59 <luke-jr> oh, nice
101 2011-12-15 15:36:01 <gavinandresen> err, they are....
102 2011-12-15 15:36:50 <gavinandresen> There were two alerts on testnet yesterday:  one for version 0.4.0 (only), and one for 0.5.*
103 2011-12-15 15:38:51 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: I expect that will cause a lot of confusion from people who don't know about wallet encryption... but I don't have any suggestions to improve it. The fact that it will be limited to 0.4 is helpful at least.
104 2011-12-15 15:39:21 <gavinandresen> edcba: I'm worried about 'encrypted' backups being stolen
105 2011-12-15 15:39:50 <gmaxwell> gavinandresen: when the next release is published can you place the hashes and signatures somewhere more visible on the website? at least one person has complained for each of the last several releases.
106 2011-12-15 15:40:34 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: I was reading the Apache Foundation's suggestions for code signing yesterday... I could create detached signatures for each of the executables
107 2011-12-15 15:40:46 <gavinandresen> err, each of the downloads....
108 2011-12-15 15:42:07 <gmaxwell> I think that would be fine, so long as it was reasonably visible. Most people won't usefully check them anyways.
109 2011-12-15 15:42:39 <gmaxwell> On the point, you should get your gpg key signed by some people so that people who haven't met you can get some evidence that your key is yours. :)
110 2011-12-15 15:43:11 <gavinandresen> According to the Apache folks, I should generate a new key, too...
111 2011-12-15 15:43:26 <gavinandresen> (current key is 1024-bit RSA)
112 2011-12-15 15:44:00 <gavinandresen> Today's a good day to do that (it's my birthday!)
113 2011-12-15 15:44:11 <gmaxwell> ah. thats hair splitting, I think, but it doesn't appear that you have a lot invested in that key... so sure. And happy birthday!
114 2011-12-15 15:45:21 <copumpkin> gavinandresen: happy birthday!
115 2011-12-15 15:45:23 <rasengan> Happy Birthday :-)
116 2011-12-15 15:45:47 <gavinandresen> gmaxwell: I agree it is hair-splitting, but if I'm going to go to the effort of asking people to sign, I might as well generate a slightly-more-secure key.
117 2011-12-15 15:47:00 <luke-jr> pub  1024D/D53E9583  created: 2002-06-06  expires: 2012-06-09  usage: SC
118 2011-12-15 15:47:17 <luke-jr> my key will be 10 years old soon :P
119 2011-12-15 15:49:04 <gmaxwell> pub   1024D/B0413BFA 1999-11-27
120 2011-12-15 15:49:12 <gmaxwell> I have an older one someplace.
121 2011-12-15 15:49:37 <gmaxwell> Nothing magical happened when mine turned 10.
122 2011-12-15 15:50:33 <gavinandresen> You don't get presents from the gpg fairy every year?
123 2011-12-15 15:50:46 <gavinandresen> I thought if you put your key under your pillow.....
124 2011-12-15 15:51:32 <copumpkin> won't the key start rebelling in a couple of years, gmaxwell?
125 2011-12-15 16:02:58 <TD> gavinandresen: beautiful :)
126 2011-12-15 16:03:57 <luke-jr> copumpkin: rebellion is a "teenager" thing mainly, a result of trying to extend childhood into adult years :P
127 2011-12-15 16:04:33 <luke-jr> copumpkin: FYI, "teenagers" didn't exist >500 years ago.
128 2011-12-15 16:04:42 <copumpkin> I know this :)
129 2011-12-15 16:08:53 <Diablo-D3> 500 years ago they were called married men
130 2011-12-15 16:08:57 <Diablo-D3> and/or slaves
131 2011-12-15 16:16:15 <sipa> gavinandresen: happy birthday!
132 2011-12-15 16:18:54 <gavinandresen> Thanks for the happy birthdays, everybody.
133 2011-12-15 16:20:00 <sipa> luke-jr: nonetheless, i believe even the romans complained about "the young generation" :)