1 2012-01-28 00:30:10 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Con Kolivas reorder * r4bf01f012f2f cgminer/adl.c: Fix potential overflow. http://tinyurl.com/7gpvqcv
  2 2012-01-28 00:55:14 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr * r45e0ef71e645 eloipool/ (bitcoin/node.py eloipool.py): Use JSON-RPC getmemorypool to submit blocks to upstream bitcoind http://tinyurl.com/7vfd855
  3 2012-01-28 00:55:15 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr * re685a83f3832 eloipool/jsonrpcserver.py: Warn at startup if midstate Python module is missing http://tinyurl.com/7vtz37l
  4 2012-01-28 00:55:16 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr * rdef9c32a231c eloipool/README: Document optional midstate dependency http://tinyurl.com/77m8xw8
  5 2012-01-28 00:55:18 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr * r1ba59e844a2e eloipool/bitcoin/node.py: Slap an ugly warning on bitcoin.node that it doesn't work reliably on mainnet http://tinyurl.com/6oqqz6a
  6 2012-01-28 01:05:05 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr * r91470cd238d5 eloipool/merklemaker.py: Warn when coinbase data overflows (max once every 5 minutes) http://tinyurl.com/7qsgwfo
  7 2012-01-28 01:05:09 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr * redb805e8f388 eloipool/merklemaker.py: merkleMaker: Add isOverflowed attribute for checking even during 5 minute window http://tinyurl.com/7rrbd4r
  8 2012-01-28 02:40:13 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr * r0da7320f102b eloipool/jsonrpcserver.py: Handle some invalid garbage on JSONRPC sockets more gracefully http://tinyurl.com/876nybs
  9 2012-01-28 03:33:59 <splatster> Is it at all reasonable for Bitcointalk to get Yubikey support?
 10 2012-01-28 03:35:57 <theymos> OpenID will probably be supported eventually, which will allow you to use Yubikey to authenticate.
 11 2012-01-28 03:36:14 <splatster> Ah ok
 12 2012-01-28 03:37:07 <splatster> Still haven't decided on wether you are going to split the new forum into sub-tasks?
 13 2012-01-28 03:37:14 <splatster> I would be glad to get involved
 14 2012-01-28 03:38:49 <theymos> At the end of January (the deadline for bids) I'm going to review alll bids for the entire project and see if any of them are acceptable. If not, I will split the job into sub-tasks.
 15 2012-01-28 03:39:16 <splatster> 4 days left
 16 2012-01-28 03:41:09 <luke-jr> theymos: how about reorganizing it nicely? :P
 17 2012-01-28 03:41:22 <luke-jr> theymos: ie, a subforum for each development project, pool, etc
 18 2012-01-28 03:41:22 <theymos> What do you mean?
 19 2012-01-28 03:41:27 <luke-jr> theymos: like Bitcoin Scene has
 20 2012-01-28 03:41:49 <k9quaint> one big forum, no captcha, no moderators
 21 2012-01-28 03:42:11 <luke-jr> theymos: so people don't feel like they have to make one 592835923 page long thread about cgminer and eligius
 22 2012-01-28 03:42:21 <luke-jr> theymos: and I can moderate the trolls in my subforum, etc
 23 2012-01-28 03:43:52 <splatster> luke-jr: sounds nice
 24 2012-01-28 03:45:28 <splatster> the 50 page long threads get really annoying really fast
 25 2012-01-28 03:46:13 <splatster> you could give casascius his own subform and all the pool ops their own and the websites their own and it would be nice and organized
 26 2012-01-28 03:46:43 <theymos> luke-jr: Well, that could even be done with the current software. I'm not sure whether strictly hierarchical organization will work well, though. Maybe tags would be better.
 27 2012-01-28 03:47:09 <luke-jr> theymos: maybe.
 28 2012-01-28 03:47:59 <luke-jr> but how often does a discussion span multiple topics? if they do, they should be separate threads :P
 29 2012-01-28 03:52:54 <theymos> Where things should be categorized is often subjective, which makes dealing with categorization annoying for readers (and moderators). Often things could belong in several categories, though they can only actually exist in one.
 30 2012-01-28 03:53:01 <Joric> theymos, have you seen http://ogrr.com ? they implemented 'feedback transfers' i got 1 btc from them, spent it already
 31 2012-01-28 03:53:42 <theymos> What's feedback transfers?
 32 2012-01-28 03:55:48 <Joric> you may fund someone's account using forum interface
 33 2012-01-28 03:56:59 <Joric> withdrawals are not automated though looks like admin checks them himself )
 34 2012-01-28 03:57:12 <theymos> Ah. That makes sense if the forum is already doing something with the money, though it seems no better than just publishing a donation address otherwise.
 35 2012-01-28 04:07:18 <shazooun> ok
 36 2012-01-28 04:09:43 <krysits> donate 4 midI file recovery [mode]
 37 2012-01-28 04:10:41 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Con Kolivas * r5af40de97ce6 cgminer/ADL_SDK/readme.txt: Update ADL SDK URL. http://tinyurl.com/7vy7abh
 38 2012-01-28 04:10:47 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Con Kolivas reorder * rf05e298e9bb8 cgminer/ADL_SDK/readme.txt: Update ADL SDK URL. http://tinyurl.com/7x95peo
 39 2012-01-28 04:20:40 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Con Kolivas reorder * r075ff6bf7a35 cgminer/bitforce.c: Merge branch 'master' into reorder http://tinyurl.com/7q5oxly
 40 2012-01-28 04:40:12 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Con Kolivas reorder * r310f55d0c95c cgminer/ocl.c: Merge branch 'master' into reorder http://tinyurl.com/6wwu6hp
 41 2012-01-28 05:20:12 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Con Kolivas reorder * r9566a9337265 cgminer/ocl.c: Merge branch 'master' into reorder http://tinyurl.com/7y2vedg
 42 2012-01-28 06:00:59 <shazooun> http://www.cs.rice.edu/Conferences/IPTPS02/107.pdf
 43 2012-01-28 06:01:07 <shazooun> Mnemosyne: Peer-to-Peer Steganographic Storage
 44 2012-01-28 06:21:46 <Joric> gmaxwell, neat idea!
 45 2012-01-28 06:21:49 <Joric> thank you
 46 2012-01-28 06:22:45 <gmaxwell> Joric: what.. combine the most inefficient storage system ever created with the second most inefficient?
 47 2012-01-28 06:23:21 <Joric> don't try to convince me, i made my choice :D
 48 2012-01-28 06:24:43 <Joric> did anyone see charts like size of the blockchain to time ?
 49 2012-01-28 06:25:10 <gmaxwell> I now understand why the concept of hell was invented. At some point you get tired of telling people why this or that is a terrible idea and you just give up and tell them they'll be tortured forever if they do it. simplifies things greatly.
 50 2012-01-28 06:26:39 <Joric> i just checked, june 2011 is somewhere in the first third of the blockchain
 51 2012-01-28 06:27:17 <Joric> it grows expo-somehow-nentially
 52 2012-01-28 06:27:18 <gmaxwell> Joric: third measured how?
 53 2012-01-28 06:28:16 <Joric> i'm writting blockchain reader in c, just checked for the first occurency of my vanity address it's on 33%
 54 2012-01-28 06:29:54 <Joric> didn't get to the merkle tree yet
 55 2012-01-28 06:30:19 <Joric> *occurence
 56 2012-01-28 06:30:28 <Joric> *rr
 57 2012-01-28 06:31:01 <Joric> i may check for the timestamp as well
 58 2012-01-28 06:38:09 <shazooun> limepime
 59 2012-01-28 06:41:19 <Joric> here http://pastebin.com/G4BjpQYY
 60 2012-01-28 06:41:59 <Joric> oh, i remember there is google charts
 61 2012-01-28 06:57:55 <Joric> something like this http://goo.gl/RT1eB
 62 2012-01-28 06:59:07 <Joric> oops wrong axis let me fix that
 63 2012-01-28 07:02:02 <Joric> http://goo.gl/kAYPK that's better
 64 2012-01-28 07:33:52 <Joric> wow didn't know google has this http://code.google.com/apis/ajax/playground/?type=visualization
 65 2012-01-28 07:34:12 <Joric> even candlesticks
 66 2012-01-28 07:34:57 <Joric> though candlesticks are way more primitive than annotated timeline
 67 2012-01-28 07:38:32 <CIA-97> DiabloMiner: Patrick McFarland master * r153db88 / src/main/java/com/diablominer/DiabloMiner/DiabloMiner.java : Added two names to the bfi_int whitelist, improved bad url detection (+5 more commits...) - http://git.io/AQhO3A https://github.com/Diablo-D3/DiabloMiner/commit/153db88b210a458d54a76e2f216e9d72dda330e2
 68 2012-01-28 07:39:44 <Joric> hehe extrapolation http://goo.gl/80CSr
 69 2012-01-28 08:04:30 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr master * r2bc4fd6 / (12 files in 4 dirs): Bitcoin-Qt signmessage GUI (pull request #582) - http://git.io/jxNShw https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/2bc4fd609ca00d5a5cb0b6b3eba5f35cb334b967
 70 2012-01-28 08:32:44 <Joric> anyway, this chart is pretty much accurate http://goo.gl/9XmgB
 71 2012-01-28 08:39:38 <Joric> in june 2011 it was 400 mb, now it's 900
 72 2012-01-28 08:52:24 <Diablo-D3> https://code.google.com/p/cityhash/
 73 2012-01-28 08:52:32 <Diablo-D3> fuck, another murmur competitor?
 74 2012-01-28 12:52:27 <lfm> theres a bunch of new coinbase txn that are losing their fees
 75 2012-01-28 13:42:16 <lfm> is there a new pool started jan 18 or 19?
 76 2012-01-28 13:48:02 <onelineproof> is the bitcoin 0.5.2 source now included in the binary release instead of it's own source release?
 77 2012-01-28 13:50:54 <Joric> last time i checked source was here
 78 2012-01-28 13:51:16 <onelineproof> ya it is, but thought maybe there would be a source only release
 79 2012-01-28 14:25:11 <CIA-97> bitcoin: p2k * rbc431f9425b8 ecoinpool/apps/ecoinpool/ (5 files in 2 dirs): Support for rollntime http://tinyurl.com/88e38le
 80 2012-01-28 14:25:13 <CIA-97> bitcoin: p2k * rf1d1555df264 ecoinpool/apps/ecoinpool/ (10 files in 2 dirs): X-Mining-Extensions submitold midstate http://tinyurl.com/7zucjmw
 81 2012-01-28 14:35:11 <CIA-97> bitcoin: p2k * rd29239aeb00c ecoinpool/apps/ecoinpool/src/ecoinpool_rpc.erl: Added cleanup code for connections http://tinyurl.com/84nx3oe
 82 2012-01-28 15:22:50 <roconnor> I don't suppose blockexplorer recognizes compressed keys
 83 2012-01-28 15:36:14 <etotheipi_> roconnor, fyi I think most Armory issues are fixed... please help test!
 84 2012-01-28 15:36:36 <etotheipi_> (I didn't expect it to take 2 weeks to fix the zero-conf transactions in Armory, but it's done)
 85 2012-01-28 15:36:38 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Gavin Andresen master * r68649be / src/main.cpp : CreateNewBlock was not adding in transaction fees. - http://git.io/iMRePQ https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/68649bef9395947f3a71e40daae053ca5c0aabca
 86 2012-01-28 15:37:09 <gavinandresen> lfm:  that's why you saw blocks missing fees in the reward.
 87 2012-01-28 15:38:26 <gavinandresen> yes, it does
 88 2012-01-28 15:38:34 <gavinandresen> ... fixing those now...
 89 2012-01-28 15:38:45 <Joric> gavinandresen, what do you think about the blockchain rally http://goo.gl/9XmgB
 90 2012-01-28 15:39:00 <gavinandresen> ask me later, busy right now
 91 2012-01-28 15:39:07 <Joric> could you extrapolate it to 2013-2014
 92 2012-01-28 15:52:54 <etotheipi_> hey Joric, you wannt help test Armory?  I'll send you another BTC to play with, as another donation :)
 93 2012-01-28 15:53:09 <etotheipi_> (which you get to keep if Armory doesn't lose it :))
 94 2012-01-28 15:55:17 <Joric> etotheipi_, new version?
 95 2012-01-28 15:55:37 <etotheipi_> yup, finally resolved all the stupid memory-pool issues
 96 2012-01-28 15:55:45 <splatster> etotheipi_: I would love to test Armory, but no OS X binary :(
 97 2012-01-28 15:55:48 <Joric> github?
 98 2012-01-28 15:55:55 <etotheipi_> I'm *finally* ready to think about alpha
 99 2012-01-28 15:56:03 <etotheipi_> splatster, I've got someone looking into that for me
100 2012-01-28 15:56:28 <etotheipi_> unfortunately, I have no OSX system to test it on
101 2012-01-28 15:56:33 <splatster> I do!
102 2012-01-28 15:56:52 <etotheipi_> splatster, I meant:  I probably need to do some work getting it to compile
103 2012-01-28 15:57:24 <Joric> i have osx too
104 2012-01-28 15:57:40 <Joric> wrote 12 games for the gayphone
105 2012-01-28 15:57:45 <etotheipi_> haha
106 2012-01-28 15:58:22 <Joric> didn't make a fortune
107 2012-01-28 15:58:51 <Joric> git clone git://github.com/etotheipi/BitcoinArmory.git
108 2012-01-28 15:59:16 <Joric> win7, i managed to launch it earlier, let me try
109 2012-01-28 15:59:34 <etotheipi_> Joric, make sure you switch to the qtdev branch
110 2012-01-28 15:59:55 <Joric> git checkout qtdev
111 2012-01-28 15:59:58 <etotheipi_> yup
112 2012-01-28 16:00:23 <etotheipi_> splatster, do you want to try to compile it?
113 2012-01-28 16:00:36 <splatster> I can give it a shot
114 2012-01-28 16:00:41 <etotheipi_> I do not expect anyone else to deal with it right now, but I'll send you 2 BTC if you succeed :)
115 2012-01-28 16:00:49 <splatster> ok cool
116 2012-01-28 16:01:23 <splatster> downloading repo
117 2012-01-28 16:01:52 <etotheipi_> (of course, you have to tell me what you did to get it to compile, though ;))
118 2012-01-28 16:02:28 <splatster> No, I thought I was going to compile it, show you a screenshot, and delete everything.
119 2012-01-28 16:02:56 <etotheipi_> splatster, that only gets you 1.5 BTC
120 2012-01-28 16:03:06 <Joric> preventive carpetbombing 1JoricCBkW8C5m7QUZMwoRz9rBCM6ZSy96
121 2012-01-28 16:06:09 <edcba> ;;bc,mtgox
122 2012-01-28 16:06:10 <gribble> {"ticker":{"high":5.74815,"low":5.23,"avg":5.478405447,"vwap":5.489213974,"vol":95030,"last_all":5.55008,"last_local":5.55008,"last":5.55008,"buy":5.55011,"sell":5.61668}}
123 2012-01-28 16:06:42 <splatster> I am running MacPorts to download the dependencies
124 2012-01-28 16:10:30 <Joric> hmm
125 2012-01-28 16:10:32 <etotheipi_> I don't know what that is, but it sounds cool
126 2012-01-28 16:10:58 <etotheipi_> I'll start taking notes :)
127 2012-01-28 16:11:06 <Joric> i forgot where i should get CppBlockUtils.py and _CppBlockUtils.pyd
128 2012-01-28 16:11:26 <etotheipi_> cd into cppBlockUtils and "make swig"
129 2012-01-28 16:11:38 <etotheipi_> (you're in linux, right?)
130 2012-01-28 16:11:43 <Joric> win7
131 2012-01-28 16:12:38 <Joric> trying to rebuild maybe wrong deps
132 2012-01-28 16:12:51 <Joric> shitload of warnings but compiled okay
133 2012-01-28 16:13:04 <etotheipi_> okay, since you're in Windows, you need to copy in the swigwin-2.0.4 folder
134 2012-01-28 16:13:07 <Joric> aha got it
135 2012-01-28 16:13:19 <Joric> error code from "Performing Pre-Build Event..."
136 2012-01-28 16:13:34 <etotheipi_> yeah, you're missing swig, I believe
137 2012-01-28 16:13:55 <etotheipi_> I wish I could distribute it for this purpose, but I'm pretty sure the license won't allow me
138 2012-01-28 16:13:56 <Joric> swigwin-2.0.4swig.exe
139 2012-01-28 16:14:06 <Joric> should have this aswell
140 2012-01-28 16:15:14 <etotheipi_> Joric, double-check this:  http://bitcoinarmory.com/index.php/building-armory-from-source
141 2012-01-28 16:15:38 <etotheipi_> but if you've run it before, you should be mostly setup... you just need swigwin-2.0.4 in your cppForSwig dir
142 2012-01-28 16:15:51 <Joric> yep
143 2012-01-28 16:17:37 <splatster> etotheipi_: It's being fussy cuz I'm running xcode 4.3 which doesn't have certain things like make preinstalled
144 2012-01-28 16:17:56 <etotheipi_> splatster, hmm... I wish I knew *anything* about osx
145 2012-01-28 16:18:08 <etotheipi_> that's why I'm paying people to help me with it
146 2012-01-28 16:18:36 <etotheipi_> what *do* you have ?
147 2012-01-28 16:19:01 <splatster> My only option would be to downgrade xcode which would make many of my projects unusable
148 2012-01-28 16:19:19 <etotheipi_> yeah, don't do that...
149 2012-01-28 16:22:13 <Joric> it's alive!
150 2012-01-28 16:22:16 <Joric> starting
151 2012-01-28 16:22:50 <Joric> win7 + msvc 2008 express + python 2.7
152 2012-01-28 16:26:14 <Joric> etotheipi_, http://goo.gl/9XmgB looks like in 2012 you won't be able to load it into ram )
153 2012-01-28 16:26:27 <etotheipi_> haha, Joric I know
154 2012-01-28 16:26:39 <etotheipi_> my first priority after alpha is non-full-RAM
155 2012-01-28 16:27:00 <Joric> if it continues - blockchain will be 12 gb in 2012 and 160 gb in 2013 )
156 2012-01-28 16:27:30 <splatster> Maybe it's time for a new genesis block?
157 2012-01-28 16:29:31 <Joric> what does it mean - Syncing 215uHkFHq ? )
158 2012-01-28 16:29:52 <Joric> must be the random wallet
159 2012-01-28 16:30:02 <etotheipi_> 215uHkFHq is the unique wallet ID
160 2012-01-28 16:30:20 <etotheipi_> it loads thew wallet, but then has to "sync" with the blockchain to find all the transactions
161 2012-01-28 16:32:04 <Joric> i wrote cpp loader for the blockchain, takes maybe 10 seconds to load it completely into the ram, didn't try indexing though )
162 2012-01-28 16:32:06 <etotheipi_> the issue is that I can't trust the user to create unique IDs/Names
163 2012-01-28 16:33:01 <etotheipi_> btw, I started this project in mid 2011... the blockchain was half the size at the time
164 2012-01-28 16:33:10 <etotheipi_> I didn't expect it would be so large by the time I got to the first release
165 2012-01-28 16:35:34 <Joric> okay it's compiled and loaded what's next
166 2012-01-28 16:35:43 <etotheipi_> are you running on the mainnet?
167 2012-01-28 16:35:55 <Joric> yes i suppose
168 2012-01-28 16:36:15 <etotheipi_> (you are if you you didn't use --testnet)
169 2012-01-28 16:36:30 <Joric> mainnet then
170 2012-01-28 16:37:05 <etotheipi_> okay, generate an address and I'll send you a BTC
171 2012-01-28 16:37:48 <etotheipi_> it sounds like you already have a wallet
172 2012-01-28 16:38:23 <etotheipi_> you can create a couple wallets, juggle money, sweep addresses, import vanitygen keys
173 2012-01-28 16:38:26 <Joric> i have a wallet, do you want me to generate a new address using armory?
174 2012-01-28 16:38:31 <etotheipi_> Joric, yes
175 2012-01-28 16:40:12 <Joric> 1 sec )
176 2012-01-28 16:40:26 <etotheipi_> if you're feeling ambitious, and unsure whether you want to actually use offlien-wallets: see the section "I'm Scared" here:  http://bitcoinarmory.com/index.php/using-offline-wallets-in-armory
177 2012-01-28 16:40:27 <Joric> i'm trying to screenshot it
178 2012-01-28 16:41:46 <Joric> that's how it looks http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/2783/screenshot2012012823403.jpg
179 2012-01-28 16:42:16 <etotheipi_> perfect, now just click on "Receive Bitcoins"
180 2012-01-28 16:42:18 <splatster> etotheipi_: I don't know if you have this, but you should allow the of paper wallets of which the keys are generated and immediately deleted after printing
181 2012-01-28 16:42:35 <splatster> allow the creation of*
182 2012-01-28 16:42:39 <etotheipi_> splatster, that pretty much exists
183 2012-01-28 16:42:53 <Joric> 1K7CVesRXGkwAbNKsKzWzCH12Kp7u64MJA
184 2012-01-28 16:42:56 <etotheipi_> oh, no it doesnt... whne you go to "delete" a wallet, it asks if you want to make a pepr backup before deleting
185 2012-01-28 16:43:22 <splatster> oh that's cool
186 2012-01-28 16:43:23 <etotheipi_> splatster, but there is no way, currently, to avoid having the wallet saved
187 2012-01-28 16:43:37 <etotheipi_> you could do it on an offline computer
188 2012-01-28 16:43:41 <splatster> but if you run it off a live CD then your set
189 2012-01-28 16:44:08 <Joric> http://img842.imageshack.us/img842/3893/screenshot2012012823431.jpg
190 2012-01-28 16:44:22 <etotheipi_> splatster... in the future I want to figure out, better, "ethereal" wallets
191 2012-01-28 16:44:40 <etotheipi_> kind of as you suggest.... you can plug in the paper-wallet code, and it will open it to be managed, without touchign the disk
192 2012-01-28 16:44:42 <Joric> the address is 1K7CVesRXGkwAbNKsKzWzCH12Kp7u64MJA
193 2012-01-28 16:45:41 <splatster> Make an ArmoryOS LiveCD
194 2012-01-28 16:46:04 <etotheipi_> splatster, what i've really focused on is the offline wallets
195 2012-01-28 16:46:18 <etotheipi_> I picked up a super cheap laptop with 512 MB of RAM, someone gave it to me for free at my work
196 2012-01-28 16:46:24 <etotheipi_> disabled the wifi
197 2012-01-28 16:46:37 <etotheipi_> then generated the wallet there... (printed via USB cable to printer)
198 2012-01-28 16:46:40 <Joric> etotheipi_, did you send anything? what else i can do
199 2012-01-28 16:46:46 <etotheipi_> Joric, I just sent 1 BTC
200 2012-01-28 16:46:56 <Joric> cool
201 2012-01-28 16:47:13 <Joric> now i wait!
202 2012-01-28 16:47:17 <etotheipi_> Joric, try creating a couple wallets, creating/changing encryption passphrases
203 2012-01-28 16:47:25 <etotheipi_> moving money between wallets
204 2012-01-28 16:47:27 <Joric> okay
205 2012-01-28 16:47:30 <etotheipi_> sweeping private keys
206 2012-01-28 16:47:35 <etotheipi_> generate a vanitygen address, import it
207 2012-01-28 16:47:49 <etotheipi_> look at transaction properties (double click on the tx), or change comments
208 2012-01-28 16:48:00 <etotheipi_> these are all things I tested long ago, but may have broken since then
209 2012-01-28 16:48:34 <roconnor> etotheipi_: what is the commit of the version of Armory you want me to run.
210 2012-01-28 16:49:04 <etotheipi_> roconnor, 3914efd4e5f
211 2012-01-28 16:49:08 <Joric> saved private keys, just in case )
212 2012-01-28 16:49:09 <etotheipi_> it should be the latest commit to qtdev
213 2012-01-28 16:49:21 <roconnor> etotheipi_: btw, I've started getting hashlib fixed in nix; however I think you are right to run the C++ code instead for ripemd160 since there is no guarentee that it will be in hashlib.
214 2012-01-28 16:49:29 <Joric> it stutters a bit i have only 2 gb ram on this box
215 2012-01-28 16:49:33 <etotheipi_> roconnor, yeah, you helped me realize that
216 2012-01-28 16:50:03 <etotheipi_> Joric, that doesn't surprise me... however i found that it DOES work in linux under those conditions since the OS uses less RAM than windows
217 2012-01-28 16:50:12 <etotheipi_> but you can't run much else
218 2012-01-28 16:50:29 <etotheipi_> as I said, first priority is bringing the RAM req't down to "normal"
219 2012-01-28 16:51:29 <TuxBlackEdo> "print paper backup"
220 2012-01-28 16:51:46 <TuxBlackEdo> thats a pretty neat feature
221 2012-01-28 16:51:59 <TuxBlackEdo> that like the average person could use
222 2012-01-28 16:52:24 <etotheipi_> ...and I'm hoping the average user can re-import the paper backup, too :)
223 2012-01-28 16:53:04 <splatster> etotheipi_: I can try compiling and debugging armory on a vm
224 2012-01-28 16:53:12 <TuxBlackEdo> what a sweet client
225 2012-01-28 16:53:13 <Joric> etotheipi_, i got 1 btc
226 2012-01-28 16:53:32 <nonverba> if someone here knows getwork well there's BTC in it for you to help me get my script running :D
227 2012-01-28 16:53:41 <nonverba> takers?
228 2012-01-28 16:53:43 <splatster> etotheipi_: what kind of ram/cpu does it require and does it still need the satoshi client to run?
229 2012-01-28 16:53:46 <etotheipi_> splatster, don't go to too much trouble...
230 2012-01-28 16:54:13 <etotheipi_> splatster, at the moment, since it loads the whole blockchain, more than 2GB is preferred unless you're not running anything else
231 2012-01-28 16:54:18 <splatster> It would be an ubuntu VM, I can't do anything until apple fixes up xcode
232 2012-01-28 16:54:27 <etotheipi_> (not *preferred*, probably required)
233 2012-01-28 16:55:44 <etotheipi_> splatster, perhaps it would be possible, if I can ever find an OSX machine, to figure it out myself and pre-compile OSX binaries/packages...?
234 2012-01-28 16:56:15 <etotheipi_> I won't be able to get to it right away, but I *will* do it
235 2012-01-28 16:56:22 <Joric> i was thinking about the same in the reference client but updating patches to the current version is a pita
236 2012-01-28 16:56:28 <TuxBlackEdo> bitcoin devs really need to take the AOL approach: someone needs to make a company that gets people to use bitcoins in the same easy way that AOL used to get people on the internet
237 2012-01-28 16:56:42 <etotheipi_> 1000 free hours!
238 2012-01-28 16:56:47 <TuxBlackEdo> hehe
239 2012-01-28 16:56:55 <etotheipi_> 1000 free Satoshis!
240 2012-01-28 16:56:57 <TuxBlackEdo> without AOL there wouldn't be half as many internet users today (don't quote me on that)
241 2012-01-28 16:57:15 <TuxBlackEdo> don't even know how true that is actually
242 2012-01-28 16:57:42 <nonverba> if anyone wants to help with a script, there is some bounty in it... 2BTC for not a lot of time, just a little modification help
243 2012-01-28 16:58:00 <splatster> nonverba: what's needed?
244 2012-01-28 16:58:02 <Joric> etotheipi_, how does it work? why do you need satoshi's client?
245 2012-01-28 16:59:14 <nonverba> i'm adapting a tcl script to submit work, i need to make sure it's sending in the right format, currently it's getting all rejects
246 2012-01-28 16:59:25 <etotheipi_> Joric, it's because I didn't want to try reimplementing a full-verification node
247 2012-01-28 16:59:36 <etotheipi_> the networking is a pain in the ass to implement
248 2012-01-28 16:59:46 <etotheipi_> I will probably do it eventually, but I'll never get it "right"
249 2012-01-28 17:00:12 <roconnor> etotheipi_: what does sweep address do?
250 2012-01-28 17:00:14 <etotheipi_> for now, I can handle 100% of the networking by hiding behind the Satoshi client... which will do all the verification, tx/block forwarding, peer rejection, etc
251 2012-01-28 17:00:19 <Joric> etotheipi_, check out the glitches, something wrong with the layout
252 2012-01-28 17:00:20 <Joric> http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/7438/screenshot2012012823591.jpg
253 2012-01-28 17:00:30 <etotheipi_> roconnor, it moves all money from the addr to another addr
254 2012-01-28 17:01:05 <etotheipi_> Joric, yeah, I still haven't found out a robust way to do the tableview layouts/sizes in PyQt
255 2012-01-28 17:01:50 <etotheipi_> I probably should've designed the layouts on a small screen first...
256 2012-01-28 17:01:54 <Joric> looks like the list's width is fixed
257 2012-01-28 17:02:25 <Joric> the list won't resize at all
258 2012-01-28 17:02:27 <etotheipi_> I'll revisit this table in particular, because it was oneo f the first ones I made, and I definitely could do it right
259 2012-01-28 17:02:34 <etotheipi_> *better
260 2012-01-28 17:02:37 <roconnor> etotheipi_: http://hpaste.org/raw/57116
261 2012-01-28 17:02:45 <roconnor> is the error I get when I try to sweep address
262 2012-01-28 17:02:56 <etotheipi_> is the wallet encrypted?
263 2012-01-28 17:02:58 <roconnor> yes
264 2012-01-28 17:03:10 <etotheipi_> did it not ask you to unlock it?
265 2012-01-28 17:03:21 <roconnor> swee address under address information under wallet details
266 2012-01-28 17:03:24 <roconnor> no
267 2012-01-28 17:04:05 <etotheipi_> hmm... I just swept an address from one of my encrypted wallets and it asked for the passphrase
268 2012-01-28 17:04:26 <etotheipi_> are there any other errors printed before that?
269 2012-01-28 17:05:15 <roconnor> nope
270 2012-01-28 17:05:16 <etotheipi_> hehe, I could see how a ripemd160 error would cause that
271 2012-01-28 17:05:28 <roconnor> I still don't have ripemd160
272 2012-01-28 17:05:31 <roconnor> in python
273 2012-01-28 17:05:45 <etotheipi_> roconnor, that's fine... I thought I moved all the calls to the built-in C++ libraries
274 2012-01-28 17:06:08 <Joric> it's in the hashlib, idk why gavin used pycrypto for that
275 2012-01-28 17:06:57 <roconnor> Joric: its only in hashlib if python is built in the presence of openssl
276 2012-01-28 17:07:21 <roconnor> etotheipi_: how do I make a "watch-only" wallet?
277 2012-01-28 17:07:41 <etotheipi_> in the wallet properties, there's a button on the right for "Create Watching-Only Copy"
278 2012-01-28 17:09:14 <etotheipi_> or you can choose "remove/delete" and choose to delete only private keys (converting to watching-only)
279 2012-01-28 17:10:00 <Joric> i just tried paper copy ) oh my this is one big qr code, version 28 or something )
280 2012-01-28 17:10:05 <roconnor> how could I, for instance, turn my satoshi wallet into an armory watch-only wallet?
281 2012-01-28 17:10:31 <etotheipi_> right now, you can't
282 2012-01-28 17:11:14 <etotheipi_> I'm intentionally not implementing conversion utilities... because of issues that will occur when people import addresses into both Satoshi and Armory
283 2012-01-28 17:11:23 <roconnor> okay
284 2012-01-28 17:11:38 <etotheipi_> watching-only might be okay... but I don't have a way to to convert a non-Armory wallet into watching-only Armory
285 2012-01-28 17:12:16 <etotheipi_> Joric, I used the QR code that has 30% error correction
286 2012-01-28 17:13:05 <sipa> etotheipi_: is your determinstic wallet format "fixed" already?
287 2012-01-28 17:13:19 <etotheipi_> all these questions about where things are make me realize I need to implemenet all the menus
288 2012-01-28 17:13:24 <etotheipi_> sipa, what was I fixing?
289 2012-01-28 17:13:32 <etotheipi_> some format thing?  or deterministic calculation thing?
290 2012-01-28 17:13:45 <sipa> etotheipi_: not fixed as in repaired, fixed as in not changing anymore :)
291 2012-01-28 17:13:47 <etotheipi_> (sorry, I'm up to my eyeballs debugging quadruply-nested loops)
292 2012-01-28 17:14:16 <etotheipi_> sipa, the wallet format hasn't changed in a while, and I don't plan to
293 2012-01-28 17:14:17 <etotheipi_> http://bitcoinarmory.com/index.php/armory-wallet-files
294 2012-01-28 17:14:22 <sipa> ok
295 2012-01-28 17:14:24 <etotheipi_> but it is documented!
296 2012-01-28 17:14:49 <luke-jr> Armory is deterministic?
297 2012-01-28 17:14:51 <etotheipi_> however, I do need to update BIP 0010, and update the client to handle the updated tx packets for offline tx
298 2012-01-28 17:14:58 <etotheipi_> luke-jr, yes
299 2012-01-28 17:15:02 <luke-jr> cool
300 2012-01-28 17:15:05 <sipa> etotheipi_: maybe you were interested in a trick that is used in Ed25519: they use a 256-bit secret, but it is piped through SHA512 to derive two "independent" 256 secrets
301 2012-01-28 17:15:07 <etotheipi_> hence the print-paper-backup
302 2012-01-28 17:15:24 <luke-jr> sipa: any idea: if I delete the private keys in bdb, will bitcoind continue to work so long as I don't spend from it?
303 2012-01-28 17:15:51 <sipa> luke-jr: should work, but it's hard to have control over that, right?
304 2012-01-28 17:16:01 <sipa> luke-jr: i have a removeprivkey patch if you like
305 2012-01-28 17:16:10 <sipa> but it can mess up account balances
306 2012-01-28 17:17:16 <etotheipi_> sipa, what do I do with those two, 256-bit secrets?
307 2012-01-28 17:17:25 <sipa> etotheipi_: EC secret and chain code
308 2012-01-28 17:17:52 <etotheipi_> sipa, the reason for the random chain-code is to avoid someone using a simple private key and then colliding with others using the same private key
309 2012-01-28 17:17:52 <sipa> etotheipi_: it's not like you have 512-bit security anyway :)
310 2012-01-28 17:18:17 <roconnor> etotheipi_: I imported an external address with "import only" selected, but the listed balance is incorrectly listed as 0.
311 2012-01-28 17:18:18 <etotheipi_> s/private/root private/g
312 2012-01-28 17:18:32 <etotheipi_> roconnor, actually, close the wallet props, and reopen it
313 2012-01-28 17:18:35 <etotheipi_> that's somethign I have to fix
314 2012-01-28 17:18:46 <sipa> etotheipi_: i don't see the problem you're addressing with that
315 2012-01-28 17:19:04 <sipa> if someone generates the same (root key, chain code), the same problem exists, right?
316 2012-01-28 17:19:24 <luke-jr> sipa: well, I don't want to mess with listtxns
317 2012-01-28 17:19:28 <sipa> so you're hoping that because you have more input bits, people will be less likely to generate identical ones?
318 2012-01-28 17:19:31 <roconnor> etotheipi_: okay, restarting armory fixed it
319 2012-01-28 17:19:47 <Diablo-D3> you know what Im thinking?
320 2012-01-28 17:19:54 <Diablo-D3> we're going to see wheatley again
321 2012-01-28 17:19:56 <etotheipi_> sipa, it's not all that important at-the-moment, it was more there to accommodate a future where there might be issues with people using sha256('Satoshi Nakamoto') for their root key
322 2012-01-28 17:20:10 <etotheipi_> roconnor, you shouldn't have to restart Armory, only close the wallet properties and reopen
323 2012-01-28 17:20:16 <etotheipi_> if that's not true, I'll have to look into it
324 2012-01-28 17:20:36 <sipa> etotheipi_: imho that is not different from a future where people use [rootkey,chaincode ] = sha512("Satoshi Nakamoto")
325 2012-01-28 17:20:37 <roconnor> etotheipi_: I don't thikn closing the wallet properties was sufficent
326 2012-01-28 17:20:57 <etotheipi_> sipa... at the moment, you have to enter both, but I was planning at some point, to allow the user to enter one
327 2012-01-28 17:21:14 <sipa> etotheipi_: anyway, i don't mean to say you should change things, just wanted to let you know of a trick that reduced the required entropy without reducing security
328 2012-01-28 17:21:39 <etotheipi_> sipa, I completely understand, I just wanted to say that It was intentionally meant to provide extra entropy *in case* it was ever needed
329 2012-01-28 17:21:58 <etotheipi_> right now I don't think it's needed, but in the future I might decide I need it, and then I don't have to rewrite my wallet format
330 2012-01-28 17:22:19 <etotheipi_> I was even thinking I might change it to something like you suggest, so the user only needs the root key and chaincode will be deterministic
331 2012-01-28 17:23:02 <etotheipi_> and I can do that without changing the wallet format... just changing the way Armory calculates chaincode if oen is not supplied
332 2012-01-28 17:32:39 <nonverba> alright, BTC to whoever helps me make "Open-Source-FPGA-Bitcoin-Miner"s script *not* send data that all gets rejected.  pm me :) thanks!
333 2012-01-28 17:33:15 <roconnor> nonverba: is it okay if the script only pays me?
334 2012-01-28 17:34:04 <roconnor> etotheipi_: I restarted armory and sweeping still fails :(
335 2012-01-28 17:34:32 <etotheipi_> roconnor, I can't reproduce the issues you're seeing
336 2012-01-28 17:34:39 <roconnor> :(
337 2012-01-28 17:34:54 <etotheipi_> I'm trying tothink what would cause it...
338 2012-01-28 17:35:32 <luke-jr> nonverba: rather, get some support for extensions: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Getwork_support
339 2012-01-28 17:35:45 <etotheipi_> I just tried sending 10 BTC (testnet) to an imported address... deleting it... restarted armory and imported it into a diff wallet
340 2012-01-28 17:36:00 <etotheipi_> and to my surprise it actually showed up 10 BTC right away!
341 2012-01-28 17:36:37 <etotheipi_> oh, roconnor, this looks related
342 2012-01-28 17:36:54 <etotheipi_> I just realized, that both instances, it was supposed to pop up a password box
343 2012-01-28 17:37:09 <nonverba> i'm looking for someone to help me for pay because I have to work on other aspects of development that I'm not bad at :) i'm terrilbe with scripting
344 2012-01-28 17:37:35 <etotheipi_> for some reason, your password dialog is failing, and then the program skips right to the "can't do this while locked" error
345 2012-01-28 17:37:42 <lianj> what other part?
346 2012-01-28 17:38:10 <roconnor> etotheipi_: http://hpaste.org/raw/57118
347 2012-01-28 17:38:25 <roconnor> here is the error I get when I try to send some money
348 2012-01-28 17:38:28 <etotheipi_> roconnor, haha, someone else just gave me that error
349 2012-01-28 17:38:36 <etotheipi_> let me commit the fix for that
350 2012-01-28 17:38:44 <etotheipi_> (but it wasn't breaking their ability to send)
351 2012-01-28 17:38:46 <roconnor> etotheipi_: if only you had a type system ... :P
352 2012-01-28 17:39:16 <roconnor> etotheipi_: You're making me pretty happy I don't program in Python :D
353 2012-01-28 17:39:29 <etotheipi_> roconnor, you don't know what you're missing :)
354 2012-01-28 17:39:48 <roconnor> OTOH, I'd never even get a dialog box working in Haskell ^_^
355 2012-01-28 17:39:57 <lianj> ^^
356 2012-01-28 17:39:58 <etotheipi_> I spend all day in C++ at work... doing the client in python is abs delightful
357 2012-01-28 17:40:58 <Joric> i fucking hate c++ always fall back to c
358 2012-01-28 17:41:22 <lianj> yea
359 2012-01-28 17:42:02 <etotheipi_> I much prefer C++ over C... but I have enough experience with strongly-typed languages that I feel safe without the "handrails" around python
360 2012-01-28 17:42:18 <etotheipi_> I don't mind spending an hour fixing a type-issue problem... because I already saved 3 hours elsewhere
361 2012-01-28 17:42:36 <sipa> if you're going for a language that allows you to shoot in the foot, at least go all the way, and allow yourself to overload the assignment operator :)
362 2012-01-28 17:42:54 <etotheipi_> roconnor, I just pushed a fix to that error you referenced
363 2012-01-28 17:43:01 <etotheipi_> do a git pull (no need to recompile)
364 2012-01-28 17:43:28 <Joric> just wrote a blockchain parser in plain c, stuck at reindexing i guess i have to use hashmap/trees for that )
365 2012-01-28 17:44:03 <etotheipi_> data structures are my specialty
366 2012-01-28 17:44:30 <etotheipi_> I love figuring out how to organize massive amounts of data in the most efficient configuration using pointers, STL and homegrown structures...yes I'm sick :)
367 2012-01-28 17:44:34 <Joric> etotheipi_ probably wrote his own index on python )
368 2012-01-28 17:45:05 <Joric> why are you reading the whole blockchain into memory
369 2012-01-28 17:45:23 <etotheipi_> Joric, because my original goal was to create the absolute fastest blockchain scanner, EVER
370 2012-01-28 17:45:51 <Joric> get rid of python )
371 2012-01-28 17:46:06 <etotheipi_> then I eventually decided I could use it to write a client... I knew it would heavy, but didn't expect the blockchain to grow 2x before I got done with the first release
372 2012-01-28 17:46:22 <etotheipi_> Joric... the python is only for the top layer, all the super-fast blockchain stuff is in C++
373 2012-01-28 17:46:42 <lianj> "fastest blockchain scanner ever, only works why 10_000 blocks"
374 2012-01-28 17:47:13 <etotheipi_> and I don't think it's possible to get it any faster.... you'll notice whne you plug in a random address to sweep, it immediately shows it's balance
375 2012-01-28 17:48:06 <lianj> fast maybe, but is it not unusable already?
376 2012-01-28 17:48:15 <etotheipi_> lianj, shortly
377 2012-01-28 17:48:38 <Joric> that super fastest scanner - does it build an index of transactions?
378 2012-01-28 17:49:04 <etotheipi_> part of the startup procedure is simply processing all headers and txs into maps based on hash
379 2012-01-28 17:49:23 <etotheipi_> and only stores pointers to that data in global RAM, no copying is done except the initial RAM copy
380 2012-01-28 17:49:31 <etotheipi_> err.. HDD copy
381 2012-01-28 17:50:20 <etotheipi_> when I switch to non-full-RAM, I'll probably have to start creating/saving an index...
382 2012-01-28 17:50:39 <etotheipi_> although, sweeping an address from RAM still only takes about 10-20s, even if the entire blockchain is on disk
383 2012-01-28 17:51:14 <etotheipi_> err.. from cold boot, Armory will still pull out all unspent txOut for an address in 10-20s from disk
384 2012-01-28 17:51:30 <etotheipi_> okay, i'm talking too much :)  back to dev
385 2012-01-28 17:52:26 <etotheipi_> roconnor, let me know if that push fixed your sweeping issue... I'm curious why the unlock dialog doesn't work on your system
386 2012-01-28 18:01:48 <genjix> when will the blockchain be examined. is it still feb 1st?
387 2012-01-28 18:01:54 <genjix> or has the date been moved back?
388 2012-01-28 18:03:13 <BlueMatt> youd have to ask gavin, ie wait till monday
389 2012-01-28 18:03:25 <sipa> i believe the date will be pushed back
390 2012-01-28 18:04:01 <roconnor> etotheipi_: I had to unlock it twice, but sweeping seems to have worked
391 2012-01-28 18:04:19 <BlueMatt> or it will be examined on monday, and we will realize we are far short of 50% and check again later
392 2012-01-28 18:04:19 <etotheipi_> roconnor, that's an improvement!
393 2012-01-28 18:04:20 <genjix> k thanks
394 2012-01-28 18:06:05 <CIA-97> bitcoin: various checkhashverify * re413aa..2bc4fd bitcoind-personal/ (19 files in 5 dirs): (5 commits) http://tinyurl.com/7jsufre
395 2012-01-28 18:08:47 <roconnor> hmm
396 2012-01-28 18:09:00 <roconnor> etotheipi_: I getting some strange 0 confirmation transactions
397 2012-01-28 18:09:21 <etotheipi_> roconnor, how so?
398 2012-01-28 18:10:07 <etotheipi_> roconnor, have you recompiled the SWIG module since you pulled today ?
399 2012-01-28 18:10:52 <etotheipi_> the stuff I committed in the last hour didn't require recompiling... but it needed a "make swig" from the cppForSWIG directory
400 2012-01-28 18:11:07 <etotheipi_> err.. needed that to grab the major update committed a couple hours ago
401 2012-01-28 18:11:08 <roconnor> etotheipi_: I recompile everything from scratch automatically
402 2012-01-28 18:11:48 <roconnor> in a sandboxed environment
403 2012-01-28 18:11:54 <roconnor> well, not quite sandboxed
404 2012-01-28 18:12:16 <etotheipi_> roconnor, okay... because "weird zero-conf transactions" sound like the exact problem I spent 5 hours in a debugger fixing last night and this morning
405 2012-01-28 18:12:23 <roconnor> ya it does
406 2012-01-28 18:13:12 <roconnor> I did a sweep
407 2012-01-28 18:13:29 <etotheipi_> well if you can isolate what kind of tx you did... possibly if you swept an address with zero-conf change outputs...?
408 2012-01-28 18:13:32 <roconnor> and it seems to have added a second incorrect transaction
409 2012-01-28 18:13:49 <roconnor> I'm trying to figureout what it is
410 2012-01-28 18:14:18 <etotheipi_> okay, I'm going to keep myself on the armory-dev channel, to avoid bloating this channel anymore with Armory discussion
411 2012-01-28 18:14:43 <nonverba> still nobody for fixing a mining helper script?  I'll make it worth your while...
412 2012-01-28 18:14:58 <etotheipi_> roconnor, please let me know if you figure out what it is
413 2012-01-28 18:15:17 <roconnor> etotheipi_: being able to cut and paste addresses from the transaction info box would be nice :D
414 2012-01-28 18:15:52 <etotheipi_> roconnor, that's on my list of "30 tiny polishing" updates before alpha-release
415 2012-01-28 18:15:55 <etotheipi_> :)
416 2012-01-28 18:16:10 <lfm> is there a new pool started jan 18 or 19?
417 2012-01-28 18:17:52 <etotheipi_> roconnor, are you still on testnet?
418 2012-01-28 18:17:59 <roconnor> etotheipi_: oh this ghost transaction is almost identical to the inital transaction I sent to my armory wallet that I seeded it with
419 2012-01-28 18:19:06 <etotheipi_> roconnor, how does the tx appear in the Satoshi client?
420 2012-01-28 18:19:30 <roconnor> ah that explains it
421 2012-01-28 18:19:41 <roconnor> I have two transactions in the satoshi client
422 2012-01-28 18:19:59 <etotheipi_> stuck?
423 2012-01-28 18:20:02 <roconnor> ya
424 2012-01-28 18:20:09 <etotheipi_> haha, not my problem!
425 2012-01-28 18:20:12 <roconnor> It was from my rogue relayer days
426 2012-01-28 18:20:19 <etotheipi_> oh wait it is.... I still have 8.2 BTC stuck in the Satoshi client, too
427 2012-01-28 18:20:28 <roconnor> well it isn't stuck
428 2012-01-28 18:20:37 <roconnor> it is an double spend transaction
429 2012-01-28 18:20:44 <etotheipi_> oh...
430 2012-01-28 18:20:53 <roconnor> you and satoshi both could benefit from hiding double spent transactions
431 2012-01-28 18:21:02 <roconnor> or droping them entirely
432 2012-01-28 18:21:03 <etotheipi_> roconnor, this is interesting
433 2012-01-28 18:21:16 <etotheipi_> while I'm using the Satoshi client, I'm expecting it to follow normal Satoshi client rules
434 2012-01-28 18:21:21 <etotheipi_> like not forwarding invalid transactions
435 2012-01-28 18:21:35 <etotheipi_> this is why I didn't bother doing any validation in Armory (yet)
436 2012-01-28 18:21:55 <etotheipi_> but if you have modified the Satoshi client, that might cause some problems
437 2012-01-28 18:22:24 <etotheipi_> I'm actually leaning towards trying to turn the satoshi networking engine into a permanent interface to the BTC network for me...
438 2012-01-28 18:22:49 <lfm> does anyone know who is putting out the blocks where they are dropping all the fees?
439 2012-01-28 18:23:18 <roconnor> IIUC satoshi will forward invalid transaction that it generates ... or something like that
440 2012-01-28 18:24:06 <BlueMatt> lfm: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/68649bef9395947f3a71e40daae053ca5c0aabca
441 2012-01-28 18:24:22 <etotheipi_> roconnor, but that's because it doesn't know they are invalid
442 2012-01-28 18:24:40 <etotheipi_> hence my case... I tried to send myself 8.2 BTC... but somehow the client generated an invalid tx
443 2012-01-28 18:24:58 <etotheipi_> now it just sits there with the TxOuts locked, at zero-conf.... re-broadcasting it every 30 min or so
444 2012-01-28 18:25:08 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr force_send * r8dfda4693a02 bitcoind-personal/src/ (bitcoinrpc.cpp main.cpp main.h noui.h wallet.cpp wallet.h): Don't automatically include fees via JSON-RPC, and (with undocumented -nosafefees option) allow forcing them to send with under the 'minimum' http://tinyurl.com/7ugvm3v
445 2012-01-28 18:25:10 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr force_send * r9e90948a5d44 bitcoind-personal/src/ (bitcoinrpc.cpp db.cpp init.cpp main.cpp main.h noui.h): Accept automatic fees up to new "maxtxfee" parameter http://tinyurl.com/73gn2cd
446 2012-01-28 18:25:11 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr force_send * r52380074ec58 bitcoind-personal/src/main.cpp: Accept any transaction (fee-free or even non-standard) from myself http://tinyurl.com/7f9ofeo
447 2012-01-28 18:25:12 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr force_send * r832a8260f2f5 bitcoind-personal/src/ (bitcoinrpc.cpp wallet.cpp wallet.h): Refactor maxtxfee and -nosafefees slightly to work together http://tinyurl.com/7xk6rc4
448 2012-01-28 18:25:32 <etotheipi_> which means Armory shows the zero-conf tx, too... I tried clearing the memory pool, but it just comes back
449 2012-01-28 18:26:58 <lfm> bleumatt: so it was standard bitcoind (still is) doing that?
450 2012-01-28 18:31:11 <BlueMatt> BlueMatt: lfm nfc I just saw the commit msg you will have to ask gavin or do some research as to when the bug was introduced
451 2012-01-28 18:32:12 <lfm> bluematt ok, I just noticed the odd blocks in the block chain. another 5 btc or so dropped in the bit bucket
452 2012-01-28 18:32:33 <BlueMatt> mmm
453 2012-01-28 18:33:12 <roconnor> lfm: how many coins are lost due to duplicate mining?
454 2012-01-28 18:33:16 <lfm> spread over 130+ blocks
455 2012-01-28 18:33:49 <lfm> rconner no way for me to find that out afain
456 2012-01-28 18:34:32 <lfm> afaik
457 2012-01-28 18:35:38 <etotheipi_> roconnor, I'm heading out for a bit... if you find anything else that looks like an Armory issue, please mention it on the #armory-dev channel
458 2012-01-28 18:36:04 <etotheipi_> I'm going to try to stop hijacking this channel with Armory discussion
459 2012-01-28 18:36:10 <lfm> rconner unless you mean the old pairs of identical coinbase txn, there has only ever been two pair so it was like 100btc
460 2012-01-28 18:36:12 <roconnor> etotheipi_: it isn't hijacking
461 2012-01-28 18:36:22 <roconnor> lfm: that is what I mean
462 2012-01-28 18:36:39 <roconnor> etotheipi_: armory is on-topic here AFAIU
463 2012-01-28 18:39:55 <etotheipi_> roconnor, how do you feel about (the concept of) picking out the networking engine of the Satoshi client, and using it as a "plugin" for third-party clients
464 2012-01-28 18:40:28 <etotheipi_> I'm starting to realize that I could spend months on networking, and not get it right... yet I'm find now that it's actually easy to just put the satoshi client between me and the network, and everything seems to work great
465 2012-01-28 18:40:30 <roconnor> I have no feelings about it
466 2012-01-28 18:40:38 <etotheipi_> plus it supports the network...
467 2012-01-28 18:41:01 <etotheipi_> it means that all Armory users still run full-veriifcation nodes
468 2012-01-28 18:41:07 <roconnor> my test program talks with localhost too
469 2012-01-28 18:41:19 <lfm> etotheipi_ isnt that essentially what is done by running bitcoind with alternative front ends
470 2012-01-28 18:41:31 <etotheipi_> lfm, I believe so
471 2012-01-28 18:42:07 <etotheipi_> up til now ,I feel like it's more of a hobbyist/script-kiddie kind of usage of the Satoshi client... but I'm wondering about basing a real client on that (i.e. Armory)
472 2012-01-28 18:43:04 <etotheipi_> I think gmaxwell is of the opinion that we should have more implementations of full-validation nodes... but I'm not seeing the benefit... especially when the devs seem to be so focused on security/networking fixes instead of upgrading the interface
473 2012-01-28 18:43:08 <lfm> ya, that should be fine. I think more alternatives are good to have
474 2012-01-28 18:51:37 <etotheipi_> so if I read the MIT license correctly, it looks like I can pick out pieces of the Satoshi client of include them in my software, even if I make it closed source, as long as I provide attribution
475 2012-01-28 18:52:38 <luke-jr> etotheipi_: you need to include the license text too
476 2012-01-28 18:53:19 <etotheipi_> luke-jr, how do you feel about third-party software using the "reference client" for this purpose?
477 2012-01-28 18:53:33 <etotheipi_> or do you believe there should be multiple implementations of full-validation?
478 2012-01-28 18:53:53 <luke-jr> etotheipi_: I strongly think we need more full-validation clients
479 2012-01-28 18:54:16 <luke-jr> ideally not reusing Satoshi code tho
480 2012-01-28 18:54:22 <lianj> :D
481 2012-01-28 18:54:28 <roconnor> etotheipi_: even if we should have more full-vaidation clients; it isn't your responsiblity to make them.
482 2012-01-28 18:54:50 <etotheipi_> luke-jr, I'm conflicted though... I'm a good person to do it, but I feel like I will spend many months implementing and testing
483 2012-01-28 18:55:04 <luke-jr> etotheipi_: probably.
484 2012-01-28 18:55:08 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr accept_nonstdtxn * rf772002158a0 bitcoind-personal/src/ (init.cpp main.cpp): -acceptnonstdtxn option to skip "non-standard transaction" checks http://tinyurl.com/8yaovao
485 2012-01-28 18:55:13 <roconnor> etotheipi_: making a fully validating client is a stupid amount of work :D
486 2012-01-28 18:55:16 <luke-jr> etotheipi_: in the end, you decide what you spend your time doing
487 2012-01-28 18:55:25 <luke-jr> roconnor: that's why you're doing it? :P
488 2012-01-28 18:55:32 <roconnor> yep
489 2012-01-28 18:56:10 <etotheipi_> hmph
490 2012-01-28 18:56:36 <roconnor> I'm still not done yet
491 2012-01-28 18:56:49 <etotheipi_> okay, I'll ponder this while I work on reduced-RAM-Armory
492 2012-01-28 18:57:08 <roconnor> I need to filter signatures out before verifictation, I don't think I handle OP_CODESEPARATOR right yet, and I have to disallow duplicate coinbase spending.
493 2012-01-28 18:57:37 <etotheipi_> btw, is anyone currently using testnet?  I'm mining right now, but would like to send my miner back to main-net
494 2012-01-28 18:57:56 <roconnor> etotheipi_: if I need mining on testnet I'll let gmaxwell know.
495 2012-01-28 18:58:03 <lianj> "filter signatures out before verifictation" ?
496 2012-01-28 18:58:54 <roconnor> // Drop the signature, since there's no way for a signature to sign itself
497 2012-01-28 18:58:55 <roconnor> scriptCode.FindAndDelete(CScript(vchSig));
498 2012-01-28 18:58:59 <roconnor> ^^ from script.cpp
499 2012-01-28 18:59:17 <etotheipi_> I never understood that, was it an error on the original description of OPCHECKSIG?
500 2012-01-28 18:59:45 <roconnor> etotheipi_: I presume it predates OP_CODESEPARATOR
501 2012-01-28 19:00:02 <roconnor> it isn't used in standard transactions
502 2012-01-28 19:00:11 <roconnor> I went out of my way to build a transaction on testnet that requires it
503 2012-01-28 19:00:21 <lianj> aw ok, i dont support OP_CODESEPARATOR too
504 2012-01-28 19:01:35 <roconnor> http://blockexplorer.com/testnet/tx/2a303a4a64da5bf6a44e6f4de98e13b8f4f6bbdba66d6f9168f2daf72d60610c#i288614
505 2012-01-28 19:01:51 <roconnor> ^^ this transaction requires drop signature support to validate
506 2012-01-28 19:02:03 <roconnor> hmm, I should make one for OP_CHECKMULTISIG too
507 2012-01-28 19:03:13 <roconnor> etotheipi_: actually I'd prefer you stop mining testnet to help lower difficulty :D
508 2012-01-28 19:03:47 <etotheipi_> roconnor, haha i just realized that, as I see how many blocks I just mined in the last 3 hrs
509 2012-01-28 19:04:18 <etotheipi_> I set agression to 2, but it's a 6950, so it was still producing them pretty fast
510 2012-01-28 19:05:59 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr accept_nonstdtxn * rc65713fb8cb4 bitcoind-personal/src/ (init.cpp main.cpp): -acceptnonstdtxn option to skip "non-standard transaction" checks http://tinyurl.com/7jacduh
511 2012-01-28 19:07:51 <gruez> what's the most painless way to build for windows?
512 2012-01-28 19:08:57 <BlueMatt> get ubuntu, install mingw
513 2012-01-28 19:09:06 <BlueMatt> or get ubuntu, run it in gitian
514 2012-01-28 19:09:17 <BlueMatt> dont even try to do it on windows
515 2012-01-28 19:09:58 <gruez> BlueMatt: linux can build for windows?
516 2012-01-28 19:10:05 <BlueMatt> yep
517 2012-01-28 19:10:08 <BlueMatt> cross compile
518 2012-01-28 19:10:19 <BlueMatt> the windows releases of bitcoin are built on ubuntu
519 2012-01-28 19:11:47 <graingert> "Bitcoin client 0.5.2 for windows runs OK (on Wine)!"
520 2012-01-28 19:12:04 <gruez> lol
521 2012-01-28 19:12:20 <gruez> I'm trying to build on windows, but i'm missing some headers
522 2012-01-28 19:12:22 <BlueMatt> meh, we have a linux build for a reason though...
523 2012-01-28 19:12:22 <gruez> inttypes.h
524 2012-01-28 19:12:31 <gruez> and unistd.h
525 2012-01-28 19:12:39 <graingert> that's the thing with game theory
526 2012-01-28 19:12:46 <graingert> it allways assumes rational self interest
527 2012-01-28 19:12:47 <gruez> is there a reason why they're missing from visual studio?
528 2012-01-28 19:13:02 <BlueMatt> seriously, get ubuntu
529 2012-01-28 19:13:19 <gruez> :(
530 2012-01-28 19:13:28 <graingert> it would be good to get it to build on wind
531 2012-01-28 19:13:38 <BlueMatt> its possible, some people have
532 2012-01-28 19:13:47 <BlueMatt> its just >9000x easier on ubuntu
533 2012-01-28 19:13:55 <gruez> gavin said:
534 2012-01-28 19:13:56 <gruez> We need more Windows developers, by the way; if you know a lot about developing in C++ on Windows and want to (for example) create a Visual Studio project or resurrect makefile.vc or fix the build instructions if they're not right that'd be spiffy.
535 2012-01-28 19:13:57 <BlueMatt> (I have before, just not on bitcoin-qt)
536 2012-01-28 19:14:08 <lfm> gruez unistd is the unix standard functions. they would be missing from visula studio cuz microsoft hates unix
537 2012-01-28 19:14:16 <BlueMatt> if you really want to, work at it its possible on windows
538 2012-01-28 19:14:19 <gruez> lfm: :/
539 2012-01-28 19:14:20 <BlueMatt> take a look on the forum
540 2012-01-28 19:14:26 <luke-jr> [15:12:47] <gruez> is there a reason why they're missing from visual studio? <-- cuz it sucks
541 2012-01-28 19:14:28 <BlueMatt> (you have to do mingw on windows)
542 2012-01-28 19:14:31 <gruez> i tried stealing the files from mingw
543 2012-01-28 19:14:39 <BlueMatt> get mingw+msys on windows
544 2012-01-28 19:14:47 <gruez> but it turns out that depends on some other shit from mingw
545 2012-01-28 19:14:48 <Joric> mingw is actually included into qt
546 2012-01-28 19:14:50 <gruez> so i gave up
547 2012-01-28 19:14:55 <Joric> i use qt's mingw
548 2012-01-28 19:14:56 <BlueMatt> so install qt creator
549 2012-01-28 19:15:01 <graingert> we going to port to qt5?
550 2012-01-28 19:15:08 <gruez> BlueMatt: i did
551 2012-01-28 19:15:10 <gruez> then i got this:
552 2012-01-28 19:15:11 <gruez> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=61543.msg718964;boardseen#new
553 2012-01-28 19:15:12 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr next-test * ra78110..9437c1 bitcoind-personal/ (22 files in 4 dirs): (11 commits) http://tinyurl.com/7vr93zh
554 2012-01-28 19:15:25 <gruez> that's after fixing the error with boost
555 2012-01-28 19:15:27 <lfm> also cuz microsoft hates any standard (like posix) that they cant control
556 2012-01-28 19:15:36 <gruez> what's with all the MS hate?
557 2012-01-28 19:15:49 <Joric> also it's much easier to copy all deps to mingw/lib/include rather than setting all paths
558 2012-01-28 19:15:50 <gruez> i've never seen this much MS hate, ever
559 2012-01-28 19:15:52 <BlueMatt> its much easier to code on linux
560 2012-01-28 19:15:59 <lfm> gruez its mutual
561 2012-01-28 19:16:34 <gruez> also, if i make a C# application
562 2012-01-28 19:16:37 <gruez> will it run on mono?
563 2012-01-28 19:16:46 <graingert> nope
564 2012-01-28 19:16:47 <lfm> gruez maybe
565 2012-01-28 19:16:51 <Joric> well, i have a few linuxes too, and a couple of macoses
566 2012-01-28 19:17:05 <gruez> graingert: then how can i make it run on mono?
567 2012-01-28 19:17:15 <gruez> it also uses a few dllimports
568 2012-01-28 19:17:21 <graingert> with great difficulty
569 2012-01-28 19:17:23 <gruez> so i guess i'm screwed?
570 2012-01-28 19:17:42 <Joric> sadly i can't check if bitcoin-qt supports BE machines i don't have one
571 2012-01-28 19:17:46 <gruez> uh, what about with wine?
572 2012-01-28 19:17:52 <lfm> gruez if you have bought into the ms crack then you may indeed be screwed
573 2012-01-28 19:18:05 <gruez> lfm: ms crack?
574 2012-01-28 19:18:15 <gruez> what crack
575 2012-01-28 19:18:31 <lfm> adictive ms lock in
576 2012-01-28 19:19:04 <k9quaint> there is no guessing
577 2012-01-28 19:19:07 <gruez> lfm: i do agree, visual studio is quite addictive
578 2012-01-28 19:19:11 <k9quaint> you are running windows, you are 100% screwed
579 2012-01-28 19:19:16 <gruez> tried QT creator
580 2012-01-28 19:19:22 <gruez> raqequit within 15 minutes
581 2012-01-28 19:19:39 <gruez> i wanted to edit the function of a button
582 2012-01-28 19:19:44 <gruez> double click, nothing
583 2012-01-28 19:20:05 <graingert> gruez: there is also monodevelop
584 2012-01-28 19:20:39 <gruez> so after i install ubuntu
585 2012-01-28 19:20:45 <gruez> what's the list of packages i should install?
586 2012-01-28 19:20:57 <nonverba> anyone in here interested in a few BTC to help me get the miner script for an FPGA miner working? currently 100% rejects...
587 2012-01-28 19:21:16 <Joric> which FPGA miner?
588 2012-01-28 19:22:14 <nonverba> progranism's
589 2012-01-28 19:22:30 <nonverba> not the spartan one taht people made *for* mining
590 2012-01-28 19:22:40 <nonverba> i'm using a Terasic dev board
591 2012-01-28 19:22:44 <nonverba> (Altera)
592 2012-01-28 19:25:57 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr * r53388c86ba4f eloipool/ (11 files in 2 dirs): License Eloipool under the AGPLv3 http://tinyurl.com/6qrnhjm
593 2012-01-28 19:26:00 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr * r732d325a9441 eloipool/ (11 files in 2 dirs): Merge branch 'AGPL' http://tinyurl.com/7v4gz4s
594 2012-01-28 19:26:01 <CIA-97> bitcoin: Luke Dashjr * r6254f0ddbae5 eloipool/README: Document name & license in README http://tinyurl.com/7b6lwla
595 2012-01-28 19:27:46 <nonverba> well, if anyone's interested pm me, i'll make it worth your while.  if it's something simple I'm missing even better, then it's fixed sooner, and I'll still pay :)
596 2012-01-28 19:47:46 <gmaxwell> Any idea how many total fees were burned by the bug?
597 2012-01-28 19:48:57 <BlueMatt> <lfm> bluematt ok, I just noticed the odd blocks in the block chain. another 5 btc or so dropped in the bit bucket
598 2012-01-28 19:49:09 <gmaxwell> Ah, missed that.
599 2012-01-28 19:49:24 <gmaxwell> I feel kinda stupid having lookeed at several of these blocks I even linked to one here that _I_ produced which was clearly burning fees.
600 2012-01-28 19:49:27 <gmaxwell> doh.
601 2012-01-28 19:50:03 <BlueMatt> thats such a common feeling around here its scary
602 2012-01-28 19:54:17 <luke-jr> bbl
603 2012-01-28 20:01:15 <occulta> hey
604 2012-01-28 20:01:25 <occulta> isnt this default?    paytxfee=0.00
605 2012-01-28 20:01:36 <gmaxwell> Yes.
606 2012-01-28 20:02:30 <occulta> so if i dont put that in .conf, that is the value?   does that mean it can set the fee to 0.005 ?
607 2012-01-28 20:06:38 <graingert> we should really have the md5sum of the apps on the download page
608 2012-01-28 20:07:14 <BlueMatt> thats worth...nothing
609 2012-01-28 20:07:31 <graingert> obv they need to be signed
610 2012-01-28 20:07:41 <graingert> perhaps the sha then :p
611 2012-01-28 20:07:44 <BlueMatt> still worth nothing if its md5
612 2012-01-28 20:07:51 <BlueMatt> signed sha would be worth something
613 2012-01-28 20:11:52 <graingert> signed sha is probably neccessary
614 2012-01-28 20:12:08 <graingert> I don't know why it isn't included on the release notes
615 2012-01-28 20:13:00 <roconnor> gmaxwell: what's the bug?
616 2012-01-28 20:13:02 <BlueMatt> gavin does publish them, but yea they should be more available
617 2012-01-28 20:14:39 <graingert> this page should have them for each release
618 2012-01-28 20:14:42 <graingert> http://bitcoin.org/releases/2012/01/09/v0.5.2.html
619 2012-01-28 20:15:18 <BlueMatt> bitcoin.org is opensource
620 2012-01-28 20:15:28 <BlueMatt> feel free to pull request the changes
621 2012-01-28 20:16:16 <gmaxwell> roconnor: aliasing a local variable preventing an accumuliator from accumulating, probably as a result of code copy and past.
622 2012-01-28 20:16:27 <roconnor> is it BIP 16 related?
623 2012-01-28 20:17:15 <gmaxwell> It was probably introduced as a result of good practice (copying acceptance code between block generation and validation) in BIP16 development,  but it's not bip16 related.
624 2012-01-28 20:17:48 <gmaxwell> s/past/paste/
625 2012-01-28 20:18:12 <roconnor> >_>
626 2012-01-28 20:18:46 <BlueMatt> this would never have happened if we deprecated getwork ;)
627 2012-01-28 20:19:26 <graingert> BlueMatt: I can't send a pull request to include a signature I can't create
628 2012-01-28 20:19:36 <BlueMatt> gavin publishes the sigs, they are out there
629 2012-01-28 20:20:36 <graingert> do you have a link?
630 2012-01-28 20:20:49 <BlueMatt> on the forum release announcements
631 2012-01-28 20:20:59 <BlueMatt> dont have a link, sorry
632 2012-01-28 20:21:12 <splatster> Will bitcoin-qt version 0.6 be ready for a release candidate any time soon?
633 2012-01-28 20:21:34 <BlueMatt> heh
634 2012-01-28 20:24:21 <graingert> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.org/issues/15
635 2012-01-28 20:24:25 <graingert> tadare
636 2012-01-28 20:25:42 <BlueMatt> fair enough
637 2012-01-28 20:26:11 <graingert> I could only find version 0.4 though
638 2012-01-28 20:26:21 <BlueMatt> hmm, well maybe gavin forgot once of twice
639 2012-01-28 20:26:33 <BlueMatt> we'll see what happens
640 2012-01-28 20:27:11 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: graingert opened issue 15 on bitcoin/bitcoin.org <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.org/issues/15>
641 2012-01-28 20:29:04 <occulta> my question about paytxfee
642 2012-01-28 20:29:21 <occulta> do i need to set it to 0.0000000 for no fees?
643 2012-01-28 20:29:29 <occulta> default seems to charge 0.005
644 2012-01-28 20:30:02 <BlueMatt> ;;bc,wiki "Transaction Fees"
645 2012-01-28 20:30:03 <gribble> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_fees | Dec 24, 2011 ... Transaction fees may be included with any transfer of bitcoins from one address to another. At the moment, many transactions are typically ...
646 2012-01-28 20:30:17 <BlueMatt> occulta: read that, it should answer all your questions :)
647 2012-01-28 20:31:14 <occulta> no not really :P
648 2012-01-28 20:31:20 <occulta> i thought minimum fee was 0.00000000
649 2012-01-28 20:31:25 <occulta> nothing
650 2012-01-28 20:31:29 <genjix> gmaxwell, roconnor: i'm putting this out tomorrow if you want to give some thoughts on this: http://privatepaste.com/c8b40edb00
651 2012-01-28 20:31:35 <occulta> also that wiki is very old, relating to client 0.3 *
652 2012-01-28 20:31:39 <BlueMatt> "minimum TX fee for new transactions reduced to 0.0005 BTC."
653 2012-01-28 20:31:43 <BlueMatt> its still true
654 2012-01-28 20:31:48 <genjix> whether it captures the entirety of the EVAL, P2SH, CHV discussion
655 2012-01-28 20:32:08 <gmaxwell> genjix: ugh. that makes me feel sick. Representing it as a vote is simply misleading.
656 2012-01-28 20:32:18 <gmaxwell> It's not that kind of 'vote'.
657 2012-01-28 20:32:38 <genjix> what would you call it then?
658 2012-01-28 20:32:53 <gmaxwell> I give up.
659 2012-01-28 20:32:58 <genjix> it basically is, and this is informing the voters to ensure they make a better decision
660 2012-01-28 20:33:01 <gmaxwell> This process is all broken.
661 2012-01-28 20:33:08 <gmaxwell> No, it's pissing all over the walls.
662 2012-01-28 20:34:05 <gmaxwell> genjix: The reason for the coinbase tags is _NOT_ to conduct a vote (if it were, I suppose the software would also tally the result) but simply because there needs to be a hash power measurement because the new rules are only safe if the majority of all future hashpower enforces them.
663 2012-01-28 20:34:55 <gmaxwell> genjix: there is also no way this is going active on Feb 15th now. So the representation of that is creating false urgency. Though I suppose its up to gavin to announce moving that back.
664 2012-01-28 20:35:13 <gmaxwell> genjix: you're also characterizing this as gavin vs luke, which is a complete load of rubbish.
665 2012-01-28 20:35:36 <Joric> are there any pure-python parsers for berkeley db? my google skills are failing me
666 2012-01-28 20:35:53 <Joric> or at least format documentation
667 2012-01-28 20:36:09 <BlueMatt> bdb parsers are impossibly hard to find
668 2012-01-28 20:36:16 <genjix> i asked for feedback to write a better article and you're simply attacking me
669 2012-01-28 20:36:19 <Joric> yeah )
670 2012-01-28 20:36:20 <BlueMatt> there may be a bdb wrapper
671 2012-01-28 20:36:23 <genjix> Joric: pybsbdb
672 2012-01-28 20:36:32 <Joric> want to get rid of bsddb dependency, gae doesn't have it
673 2012-01-28 20:36:36 <genjix> it is a good bdb wrapper
674 2012-01-28 20:36:43 <BlueMatt> genjix: his feedback is that there should be no article
675 2012-01-28 20:36:52 <BlueMatt> (and I agree)
676 2012-01-28 20:37:21 <genjix> yes let the mere users fester in ignorance
677 2012-01-28 20:37:24 <gmaxwell> genjix: sorry. This whole "dispute" thing has basically pushed my interest in contributing to bitcoin technically negative.
678 2012-01-28 20:37:40 <Joric> etotheipi_, do you need pure python bdb parser aswell?
679 2012-01-28 20:37:55 <genjix> i'm only trying to inform people how bitcoin works (if you look at my past articles)
680 2012-01-28 20:38:03 <gmaxwell> And I'm irate because I feel like I've invested time in something that now has net negative return (it stresses me out). I shouldn't be taking that out on you.
681 2012-01-28 20:38:10 <Diablo-D3> [04:35:13] <gmaxwell> genjix: you're also characterizing this as gavin vs luke, which is a complete load of rubbish.
682 2012-01-28 20:38:12 <Diablo-D3> yes really
683 2012-01-28 20:38:19 <Diablo-D3> because if there was some sort of cage match between the two
684 2012-01-28 20:38:25 <Diablo-D3> gavin would be going in dry.
685 2012-01-28 20:38:50 <gmaxwell> genjix: explaining what the P2SH stuff does is fantastic. People seemed to like it when I explained it in #bitcoin-mining the other day.
686 2012-01-28 20:38:52 <BlueMatt> (as its irrelevant)
687 2012-01-28 20:39:27 <gmaxwell> genjix: inviting people into taking positions over technical minutia which they won't be qualified to really have an opinion on without a lot more understanding than you can put into the article... meh.
688 2012-01-28 20:40:05 <BlueMatt> esp when their opinion wont have any effect on the outcome aside from making the pissing match bigger
689 2012-01-28 20:40:22 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: exactly.
690 2012-01-28 20:40:23 <BlueMatt> (kinda doubt any will switch pools)
691 2012-01-28 20:41:04 <gmaxwell> The solution to this needs to be consensus of the interested and compentent. Not a bigger dispute decided by whomever can convince more people to come to their side.
692 2012-01-28 20:41:09 <genjix> i'd rather people have a say in the matter even if it makes life tougher for developers to explain their decisions.
693 2012-01-28 20:41:18 <gmaxwell> The latter case has no winners.
694 2012-01-28 20:41:31 <genjix> these kinds of decisions should always be deliberately difficult and hard
695 2012-01-28 20:41:41 <BlueMatt> what?
696 2012-01-28 20:41:52 <BlueMatt> we should make all of our decisions harder?
697 2012-01-28 20:42:08 <genjix> no big decisions to the protocol or system
698 2012-01-28 20:42:22 <genjix> implementation decisions - fine.
699 2012-01-28 20:42:41 <BlueMatt> but we should make the big decisions harder on ourselves?
700 2012-01-28 20:42:49 <gmaxwell> genjix: So what, some statemen with a prominant website gets people all upset over their half understandings of some technical details and they go against the decisions of the people who are actually spending time to work on the software? You know what the outcome of that is? The people working on it _leave_, and the only people left to make additions are the people who are either too clueless or lazy to contribute now, and luke.
701 2012-01-28 20:43:02 <BlueMatt> by making the decisions into huge pissing matches where politics takes on more importance than technical arguments?
702 2012-01-28 20:43:20 <genjix> umm hello?
703 2012-01-28 20:43:41 <genjix> it's already that way
704 2012-01-28 20:43:50 <gmaxwell> genjix: when we had the discussion about what would become BIP16 the discussion ended without anyone objecting to that decision. (except luke, who'd left early)
705 2012-01-28 20:44:30 <genjix> sure. but i feel a bit apprehensive about telling our users this is how it will be, you have no say and then giving them the finger
706 2012-01-28 20:44:46 <BlueMatt> if they feel like really getting involved, great
707 2012-01-28 20:44:55 <BlueMatt> they can come in here and chat, and post on the forum
708 2012-01-28 20:45:08 <BlueMatt> s/forum/mailing list/
709 2012-01-28 20:45:15 <gmaxwell> genjix: your article is also full of factual errors. For example, the maximum recusion depth was always part of OP_EVAL. roconnor's important contribution was realizing that the implementation was buggy and the limit didn't work.
710 2012-01-28 20:45:19 <BlueMatt> (freudian slip)
711 2012-01-28 20:45:58 <gmaxwell> genjix: I don't think any user would be opposed to P2SH as it is when I explained it in bitcoin-mining the other day people were very excited about it.
712 2012-01-28 20:46:24 <gmaxwell> genjix: the reason to oppose it is just the risk of unknown bugs a very important concern, but not one that causual users are qualified to reason about, unfortunately.
713 2012-01-28 20:47:16 <gmaxwell> genjix: if you think this needs to be delayed in order to address that, then great but where is the plan that converts extra time into extra software quality?
714 2012-01-28 20:47:30 <genjix> i dont have a viewpoint on this.
715 2012-01-28 20:47:49 <genjix> if p2sh, chv or none comes along then i'll implement them.
716 2012-01-28 20:47:50 <BlueMatt> so why are you encouraging others to make one?
717 2012-01-28 20:48:14 <genjix> my experience is in software architecture not protocols, so i'm not commenting
718 2012-01-28 20:48:42 <genjix> BlueMatt: because i like people to have choice and freedom
719 2012-01-28 20:48:59 <genjix> it is not harmful to give people choice or information
720 2012-01-28 20:49:00 <BlueMatt> they do, if they actually want to come and reason about the issues, there is always someone here to discuss with
721 2012-01-28 20:49:06 <BlueMatt> but they dont have choice
722 2012-01-28 20:49:32 <BlueMatt> and unless they all switch to p2pool overnight, they wont get one
723 2012-01-28 20:50:46 <gmaxwell> genjix: there can't be choice and freedom without understanding. People don't bother even switching pools when their pools cost them money.
724 2012-01-28 20:51:25 <genjix> my worry is someday bitcoin becomes corrupted. see this extra scrutiny as an opportunity to build a culture of openness
725 2012-01-28 20:51:31 <genjix> it is not at all bad.
726 2012-01-28 20:51:36 <tcatm> it's not so much about having a choice but discovering "the best" way to implement more complex transactions types...
727 2012-01-28 20:51:38 <gmaxwell> genjix: if you're concerned about the ecosystem why aren't you out there figuring out why people are paying 110%-115% PPS for secret mining projects? and telling the people who are contributing who don't currently know where their hash power is going.
728 2012-01-28 20:52:02 <genjix> gmaxwell: i am writing an article on that
729 2012-01-28 20:52:10 <gmaxwell> Oh. :)
730 2012-01-28 20:52:19 <roconnor> genjix: s/Both BIP 0017 and BIP 0018 are/Both BIP 0016 and BIP 0017 are/
731 2012-01-28 20:52:27 <genjix> but i have never mined a block so a lot of this is news to me.
732 2012-01-28 20:52:53 <roconnor> PPS?
733 2012-01-28 20:52:55 <genjix> like proportional mining being a scam and understanding the various statistical measures.
734 2012-01-28 20:53:01 <genjix> pay per share
735 2012-01-28 20:53:01 <gmaxwell> roconnor: pay per share.
736 2012-01-28 20:53:34 <genjix> thanks roconnor
737 2012-01-28 20:53:56 <gmaxwell> roconnor: people are being given a signficant premium on mining above the expected rewards, with ~zero payout variance.
738 2012-01-28 20:54:31 <roconnor> gmaxwell: paid it bitcoin?
739 2012-01-28 20:54:33 <roconnor> *in
740 2012-01-28 20:54:45 <gmaxwell> roconnor: yes. If it were paid in USD it would be completely sensible.
741 2012-01-28 20:54:58 <gmaxwell> roconnor: paid in bitcoin daily too.
742 2012-01-28 20:55:01 <roconnor> that doesn't sound sustainable
743 2012-01-28 20:55:38 <gmaxwell> roconnor: if it were being used to promote a new mining pool, for example, it would also be sensible... but this is for private projects with no published hash rates, so it doesn't have promotional value.
744 2012-01-28 20:56:02 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: link?
745 2012-01-28 20:56:27 <gmaxwell> My best theory is that they're doing something useful with merged mining, next best is that they've got some idiot money laundering scheme (e.g. give miners dirty silkroad coins), worst outcome is that it's for some idiot attack. :(
746 2012-01-28 20:57:10 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=54467.0
747 2012-01-28 20:57:16 <gmaxwell> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=61117.0
748 2012-01-28 20:57:34 <gmaxwell> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=55819.0 (A meta service to aggregate these offers into a bidding market)
749 2012-01-28 20:57:39 <gmaxwell> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=61570.0
750 2012-01-28 20:58:03 <BlueMatt> now thats just weird
751 2012-01-28 20:58:03 <gmaxwell> There are more... there are at least a half dozen people doing this all of a sudden.
752 2012-01-28 20:58:53 <roconnor> gmaxwell: I don't really see how it could be used to launder money
753 2012-01-28 20:59:04 <gmaxwell> roconnor: I said idiot for a reason! :)
754 2012-01-28 20:59:13 <roconnor> ah
755 2012-01-28 20:59:18 <BTC_Bear> gmaxwell: quick question as to this:
756 2012-01-28 20:59:20 <BTC_Bear> the checkpoints are there to keep from overtaking the blockchain, or at least it is a side benefit. gmaxwell would know more than I. But I believe, I am correct.
757 2012-01-28 21:00:02 <roconnor> BTC_Bear: it is there to stop DOS attacks by sending you long but low work chains.
758 2012-01-28 21:00:09 <gmaxwell> BTC_Bear: nah, not really the checkpoints do that as a side effect but they're so far back that you couldn't realistically overtake even with a good multiple of the hash power for a short window.
759 2012-01-28 21:00:12 <CIA-97> bitcoin: jedi95 * rec8af03cfdf7 Phoenix-Miner/minerutil/RPCProtocol.py: Fixed expire= for X-Roll-Ntime http://tinyurl.com/7xwchtb
760 2012-01-28 21:00:21 <BTC_Bear> thanx
761 2012-01-28 21:00:25 <gmaxwell> what roconnor said, they avoid some stupid DOS attacks.
762 2012-01-28 21:00:29 <JFK911> where can I get 115%
763 2012-01-28 21:01:15 <gmaxwell> I guess the risk of a new checkpoint being set does discourage someone from working in secret on a very long overtaking fork, but thats also some speculative side benefit.
764 2012-01-28 21:01:57 <BlueMatt> as a sidenote, we need a new checkpoint for 0.6
765 2012-01-28 21:02:02 <BlueMatt> s/for/before/
766 2012-01-28 21:06:23 <roconnor> genjix: gavin knew about the looping behaviour in OP_EVAL well before december.
767 2012-01-28 21:06:57 <genjix> roconnor: i've corrected that
768 2012-01-28 21:06:57 <roconnor> genjix: the maximum iteration code was there from the beginning
769 2012-01-28 21:07:40 <occulta> there is a min TX fee?
770 2012-01-28 21:07:52 <occulta> so how is that 'free' ?
771 2012-01-28 21:08:05 <roconnor> occulta: not really; the miners decide whether to accept a transaction for mining or not
772 2012-01-28 21:08:13 <roconnor> some will do it for free
773 2012-01-28 21:09:07 <occulta> huh
774 2012-01-28 21:09:15 <occulta> miners set the fees?
775 2012-01-28 21:09:31 <occulta> so what happens when all blocks are mined?
776 2012-01-28 21:09:45 <roconnor> then the miners only get fees
777 2012-01-28 21:09:51 <gmaxwell> occulta: All blocks are never mined. You're misunderstanding what mining means.
778 2012-01-28 21:09:59 <occulta> yes i am
779 2012-01-28 21:10:10 <occulta> i was thinking about this the other day
780 2012-01-28 21:10:14 <occulta> but still, free transaction means no fee
781 2012-01-28 21:10:19 <occulta> how can you sugar coat this?
782 2012-01-28 21:10:33 <Joric> wow a pool with 115% payout )
783 2012-01-28 21:10:51 <roconnor> occulta: bitcoin is usually advertised as low-fee rather than no-fee
784 2012-01-28 21:11:05 <gmaxwell> occulta: Mining is the process of adding blocks to bitcoin's distributed transaction log. As a side effect and a way of introducting coins, the system gives the miner some newly created coins, they also recieve fees. The amount of newly created coins goes down geometrically over time.
785 2012-01-28 21:11:09 <roconnor> (though I don't know how honest that is)
786 2012-01-28 21:11:10 <occulta> na, i see no fees in wikis and suxch
787 2012-01-28 21:11:12 <occulta> so why is there fees again?
788 2012-01-28 21:11:27 <occulta> yes i understand that
789 2012-01-28 21:11:34 <occulta> so what happens when they are all mined?
790 2012-01-28 21:11:41 <gmaxwell> When all what are mined/
791 2012-01-28 21:11:43 <gmaxwell> ?
792 2012-01-28 21:11:44 <occulta> i was under the impression there is a limit
793 2012-01-28 21:11:54 <gmaxwell> There isn't a limit to the number of blocks. The blocks go on forever.
794 2012-01-28 21:11:54 <occulta> coins/blocks?
795 2012-01-28 21:11:55 <roconnor> blocks are produced at an average of once every 10 minutes forever.
796 2012-01-28 21:12:09 <roconnor> there is a limit to the number of coins distriubted
797 2012-01-28 21:12:10 <occulta> says who roconnor? doesnt that depend if people are mining ?
798 2012-01-28 21:12:13 <BlueMatt> occulta: anywhere that says bitcoin is no-fee is wrong
799 2012-01-28 21:12:25 <gmaxwell> The limit of 21million arises as the consequence of the geometric decline. We'd have it even if the newly created coins were never zero.
800 2012-01-28 21:12:29 <occulta> who is going to mine, when there are no coins left exactly ?
801 2012-01-28 21:12:36 <roconnor> as time goes on the number of new coins distributed in blocks dwindles to 0, but the blocks keep coming.
802 2012-01-28 21:12:45 <occulta> who would mine these?
803 2012-01-28 21:12:48 <roconnor> occulta: miners get the transaction fees
804 2012-01-28 21:12:49 <BlueMatt> occulta: people who are getting fees
805 2012-01-28 21:12:53 <occulta> im guessing no transactions can happen wthout blocks
806 2012-01-28 21:12:57 <occulta> ah wow thats stupid
807 2012-01-28 21:13:00 <occulta> i missed this.
808 2012-01-28 21:13:01 <occulta> lol
809 2012-01-28 21:13:03 <occulta> !
810 2012-01-28 21:13:11 <occulta> so in 140 years
811 2012-01-28 21:13:14 <occulta> people will be charging 1btc for a transaction
812 2012-01-28 21:13:16 <occulta> sweet
813 2012-01-28 21:13:20 <roconnor> possibly
814 2012-01-28 21:13:27 <occulta> man thats stupid
815 2012-01-28 21:13:29 <occulta> like an early PP
816 2012-01-28 21:13:32 <roconnor> it's hard to say for sure
817 2012-01-28 21:13:41 <gmaxwell> occulta: 1 BTC sounds super unlikely if bitcoin were still used 140 years from now.
818 2012-01-28 21:13:47 <BlueMatt> there is another argument that fees spiral downwards to 0
819 2012-01-28 21:13:57 <roconnor> right
820 2012-01-28 21:14:05 <occulta> so why can i pay 0 fee with my client ?
821 2012-01-28 21:14:10 <occulta> rather
822 2012-01-28 21:14:24 <occulta> the default for paytxfee is 0.00