1 2012-02-09 00:01:02 <lianj> i have seen all 400 lines :P
  2 2012-02-09 00:01:14 <XMPPwocky> cool
  3 2012-02-09 00:01:50 <s3rk0n> what's an xmppwocky
  4 2012-02-09 00:02:36 <XMPPwocky> .g XMPP protocol
  5 2012-02-09 00:02:46 <gribble> Error: "g" is not a valid command.
  6 2012-02-09 00:02:46 <XMPPwocky> ;;g XMPP protocol
  7 2012-02-09 00:02:49 <XMPPwocky> meh
  8 2012-02-09 00:03:00 <XMPPwocky> XMPP protocol + wocky
  9 2012-02-09 00:03:15 <XMPPwocky> XMPP used to be called Jabber
 10 2012-02-09 00:03:16 <XMPPwocky> so
 11 2012-02-09 00:04:16 <Idiot___> i preferred aol im
 12 2012-02-09 00:10:36 <s3rk0n> thts dum
 13 2012-02-09 00:11:11 <s3rk0n> XMPPwocky: thts dum
 14 2012-02-09 00:16:24 <jamescarr> hey guys. I've been working through the API for one of my apps and was wondering something about bitcoind
 15 2012-02-09 00:16:41 <jamescarr> does bitcoind only show transactions that have happened on the server?
 16 2012-02-09 00:16:55 <jamescarr> or is there someway to view all the transactions for someone else's account?
 17 2012-02-09 00:23:05 <iz> jamescarr: all the transactions are stored in the blockchain.. you can look through the data locally using some sort of custom tool or use http://blockexplorer.com
 18 2012-02-09 00:24:07 <Graet> blockchain.info
 19 2012-02-09 00:45:04 <Idiot___> :P
 20 2012-02-09 00:57:28 <ThePiachu> I'm trying to install some dependencies for Bitcoin compiling on Mac and I'm having problems with miniupnpc - when I type "sudo port install", it gives me an error of "Error: Unable to execute port: could not read "/Users/appleii/Downloads/miniupnpc/Portfile": permission denied"
 21 2012-02-09 00:57:40 <ThePiachu> Any suggestions?
 22 2012-02-09 00:58:43 <Prattler> ThePiachu, in linux I just do compile with USE_UPNP= and it just skips it
 23 2012-02-09 00:59:01 <Prattler> unless.. you actually need it
 24 2012-02-09 00:59:31 <lianj> ThePiachu: how do you install things on your osx? macports, homebrew?
 25 2012-02-09 00:59:37 <lianj> (by hand)
 26 2012-02-09 01:01:07 <ThePiachu> thy usually come with a nice .dmg I guess. For Bitcoin stuff I was following the readme-qt from the github Bitcoin source
 27 2012-02-09 01:03:33 <lianj> hm `sudo port install boost db48 miniupnpc` should to it then
 28 2012-02-09 01:04:08 <lianj> looking for miniupnpc/Portfile in your download dir is strange though. and permission denied for root too :D
 29 2012-02-09 01:04:41 <ThePiachu> moved it there from my Dropbox, figured it might be mocking with it a bit...
 30 2012-02-09 01:06:22 <lianj> huh, did macports changed? you usually install macports, and it does fetch/configure and install staging for you
 31 2012-02-09 01:06:29 <lianj> -d
 32 2012-02-09 01:24:56 <ThePiachu> hmm, so the command for installing seems to work, everything compiles, thanks for the help!
 33 2012-02-09 03:24:20 <gmaxwell> It's pretty impressive how fast eligius regained hashrate after defeating the DOS.
 34 2012-02-09 03:46:37 <CRichard> hi
 35 2012-02-09 03:47:27 <CRichard> wondering if anyone thinks it might be a useful project to have a Bayeux (ajax push) server written to distribute the bitblock chain to lightweight/web clients
 36 2012-02-09 03:47:34 <CRichard> or if any such thing already exists for that matter?
 37 2012-02-09 04:39:06 <BlueMatt> FUCK DUKE!!!!
 38 2012-02-09 04:39:38 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: you've been in college for how long and you're already a SPORTSFAN"?
 39 2012-02-09 04:39:48 <BlueMatt> ofc
 40 2012-02-09 04:40:05 <BlueMatt> carolina is kinda known for that...
 41 2012-02-09 04:41:14 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: oh, eligius ddos disappeared?
 42 2012-02-09 04:43:19 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: No. It's been slayed.
 43 2012-02-09 04:43:46 <gmaxwell> (by directing the pool traffic to a place with a bigger pipe)
 44 2012-02-09 04:50:22 <BlueMatt> oh, ok
 45 2012-02-09 07:28:22 <CRichard> is the reference client licensed under MIT because satoshi released it originally under that license?
 46 2012-02-09 07:41:23 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: xanatos opened issue 811 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/811>
 47 2012-02-09 10:01:58 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: dooglus opened issue 812 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/812>
 48 2012-02-09 10:11:51 <Idiot___> hi ppl
 49 2012-02-09 12:31:49 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: dooglus opened pull request 813 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/813>
 50 2012-02-09 13:52:44 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: gavinandresen opened issue 815 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/815>
 51 2012-02-09 13:52:45 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: gavinandresen opened issue 814 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/814>
 52 2012-02-09 15:20:41 <copumpkin> are there plans in bitcoin-qt to let you micromanage which addresses you spend from and to?
 53 2012-02-09 15:21:04 <copumpkin> well, from
 54 2012-02-09 15:21:11 <copumpkin> since you should have good control over the to :)
 55 2012-02-09 15:43:54 <luke-jr> copumpkin: there's been a pullreq for a long time. one of the many that isn't being pulled for 0.6
 56 2012-02-09 15:44:03 <copumpkin> :(
 57 2012-02-09 15:45:44 <luke-jr> copumpkin: it's also not in next-test due to it needing rebasing
 58 2012-02-09 15:46:29 <gmaxwell> It's a pretty non-trivial change though.
 59 2012-02-09 15:46:40 <copumpkin> yeah
 60 2012-02-09 15:46:46 <imsaguy2> I was gonna say, I knew gmaxwell had some saved coins
 61 2012-02-09 15:47:06 <copumpkin> I just think an "advanced mode" for carefully managing your source addresses (and seeing what's on each of them) would be very helpful for more privacy-minded people
 62 2012-02-09 15:47:25 <imsaguy2> that and for better fee management
 63 2012-02-09 15:47:56 <copumpkin> it won't magically make you anonymous, but the ability to not associate addresses as sources would be a big help
 64 2012-02-09 15:48:21 <imsaguy2> yes, identical timestamped sends are a giveaway
 65 2012-02-09 15:48:38 <copumpkin> well, they're actually associated in the transaction
 66 2012-02-09 15:48:48 <copumpkin> it'll say there are multiple sources and they'll all be in your wallet
 67 2012-02-09 15:49:07 <gmaxwell> imsaguy2: I split out some addresses out of my wallet for that purpose.
 68 2012-02-09 15:49:12 <copumpkin> I don't think there's currently a way for that to happen without the keys being in the same wallet
 69 2012-02-09 15:49:44 <copumpkin> the 2/3 escrow accounts and stuff will complicate the notion of ownership I think
 70 2012-02-09 15:49:50 <copumpkin> but fine-grained control still seems important
 71 2012-02-09 15:50:03 <gmaxwell> copumpkin: It would also be good for the regular automatic coin selection to avoid mixing unconnected addresses where it can.
 72 2012-02-09 15:50:37 <gmaxwell> I'd like to implement that but first there needs to be code to measure the connectedness.
 73 2012-02-09 15:50:53 <copumpkin> yeah
 74 2012-02-09 15:51:15 <copumpkin> well, you could even arrange to never have multiple sources, it seems
 75 2012-02-09 15:51:18 <gmaxwell> one fundimental limit is that it can't tell all the times when they were connected it.
 76 2012-02-09 15:51:35 <gmaxwell> copumpkin: no, not really if you that you won't be able to spend all your coin.
 77 2012-02-09 15:51:44 <gmaxwell> (Especially since change is constantly being generated.
 78 2012-02-09 15:51:45 <gmaxwell> )
 79 2012-02-09 15:51:51 <copumpkin> oh, I don't mean about change
 80 2012-02-09 15:52:04 <copumpkin> well, I just meant generate an address, then take each of the sources you were going to use and make a txn to send to that address
 81 2012-02-09 15:52:08 <copumpkin> then spend from that address and keep the change
 82 2012-02-09 15:52:13 <copumpkin> you'd want to spread out the time a bit
 83 2012-02-09 15:52:20 <gmaxwell> ugh.
 84 2012-02-09 15:52:22 <copumpkin> :)
 85 2012-02-09 15:53:01 <gmaxwell> Yea, I'm not of the opinion that we should have direct support for things that achieve greater privacy at the expense of usability or chain bloat.  ... but if we can have greater privacy for ~free... great.
 86 2012-02-09 15:53:16 <copumpkin> yeah, I agree
 87 2012-02-09 15:53:33 <copumpkin> especially the timing issues with the approach I suggested
 88 2012-02-09 15:53:43 <copumpkin> that seems unnecessary to load into the client
 89 2012-02-09 15:54:06 <copumpkin> there could be some dedicated "wallet jumbler" software that does stuff like that slowly over time
 90 2012-02-09 15:54:22 <copumpkin> and by "wallet jumbler", I mean "coin laundry" :)
 91 2012-02-09 15:54:55 <imsaguy2> whatcha trying to hide copumpkin? going rogue?
 92 2012-02-09 15:54:59 <copumpkin> lol no
 93 2012-02-09 15:55:04 <copumpkin> I'm the least anonymous guy ever
 94 2012-02-09 15:55:10 <copumpkin> just thought it'd be neat
 95 2012-02-09 15:55:13 <gmaxwell> sure. And I have pretty much negative interest in that. Especially since there are so many important usability things to do first.
 96 2012-02-09 15:55:34 <gmaxwell> copumpkin: heh. Neat would be having coin selection that made some effort to avoid fees.
 97 2012-02-09 15:55:40 <copumpkin> yeah
 98 2012-02-09 15:58:06 <gmaxwell> hm. a simple hack of a way of doing that would be to add initial select pass with the conf threshold set to min(14400,max(144/amount,6)).
 99 2012-02-09 15:58:25 <gmaxwell> That would only select among the coins where any mixture would be high priority.
100 2012-02-09 15:58:52 <gmaxwell> (or pretty close to that)
101 2012-02-09 15:59:31 <luke-jr> copumpkin: If I were writing a new GUI client from scratch, I'd display each output/coin as a variable-sized visual coin, and have money bags to put them in :D
102 2012-02-09 15:59:40 <copumpkin> lol
103 2012-02-09 15:59:44 <copumpkin> that'd be kind of cute, actually
104 2012-02-09 15:59:50 <luke-jr> then to spend, you take em out and melt them in a pot
105 2012-02-09 15:59:53 <copumpkin> to be able to have sub-"identities" within your wallet
106 2012-02-09 16:00:00 <copumpkin> where you don't mind about coins in a certain identity mingling as sources
107 2012-02-09 16:00:06 <imsaguy2> if the ui looked like that, I would stop using it.
108 2012-02-09 16:00:19 <copumpkin> but it should really avoid cross-identity source pollution
109 2012-02-09 16:00:19 <luke-jr> imsaguy2: not everyone has to use the same GUI
110 2012-02-09 16:00:34 <copumpkin> and if it does end up needing that, it could move coins across the identities
111 2012-02-09 16:00:39 <gmaxwell> I wouldn't use that gui, but it sounds like the sort of thing that would be useful to people.
112 2012-02-09 16:00:40 <imsaguy2> your right, but we shouldn't be focused on gui's for first graders
113 2012-02-09 16:00:51 <imsaguy2> you're*
114 2012-02-09 16:01:02 <luke-jr> imsaguy2: we don't all have the same goals ;)
115 2012-02-09 16:01:08 <luke-jr> my main audience *are* first graders
116 2012-02-09 16:01:17 <imsaguy2> blahblahblah*tonal*blahblahblah
117 2012-02-09 16:01:21 <copumpkin> lol
118 2012-02-09 16:01:28 <copumpkin> even apart from the coins and money bags
119 2012-02-09 16:01:38 <copumpkin> I think having the ability to split up your wallet would be cool
120 2012-02-09 16:01:43 <copumpkin> within the same UI
121 2012-02-09 16:01:48 <imsaguy2> copumpkin: you do in bitcoind
122 2012-02-09 16:01:54 <imsaguy2> the concept of accounts
123 2012-02-09 16:02:02 <imsaguy2> just teh gui doesn't present it well
124 2012-02-09 16:02:03 <copumpkin> ah, okay
125 2012-02-09 16:02:10 <imsaguy2> and by well, I mean at all
126 2012-02-09 16:02:19 <luke-jr> imsaguy2: no
127 2012-02-09 16:02:25 <luke-jr> accounts don't split up the wallet
128 2012-02-09 16:02:30 <luke-jr> it's pure abstraction
129 2012-02-09 16:02:41 <imsaguy2> that's the first step towards splitting
130 2012-02-09 16:02:48 <imsaguy2> letting users see differences
131 2012-02-09 16:03:05 <luke-jr> when you send 5 BTC, the coins used are not at all influenced by what account you're sending from
132 2012-02-09 16:03:17 <imsaguy2> two part problem
133 2012-02-09 16:03:27 <imsaguy2> the first is the abstraction, the second is the input selection
134 2012-02-09 16:03:34 <imsaguy2> everyone agrees teh selection arleady sucks
135 2012-02-09 16:03:38 <imsaguy2> already*
136 2012-02-09 16:04:41 <imsaguy2> hell, even having eht filters show a sum would be a plus
137 2012-02-09 16:05:45 <josephcp> if you want to split identities, write a script to juggle multiple wallet files and call it a day, you're not going to be able to do it reliably otherwise
138 2012-02-09 16:05:53 <josephcp> coin selection for average users sounds like a UI nightmare
139 2012-02-09 16:06:28 <imsaguy2> copumpkin did say 'advanced mode'
140 2012-02-09 16:06:50 <copumpkin> josephcp: I also think there are good abstractions that could be provided
141 2012-02-09 16:06:58 <copumpkin> to make it intuitive even for regular users
142 2012-02-09 16:07:17 <josephcp> no, i could understand arguing for it in RPC, but the potential for a user not knowing what they're doing and screwing up is guaranteed
143 2012-02-09 16:07:30 <copumpkin> but the main thing I'd want at first is just to be able to select sources
144 2012-02-09 16:07:44 <copumpkin> josephcp: what could you screw up?
145 2012-02-09 16:09:01 <imsaguy2> you have a toggle that alternates between auto select and manual select
146 2012-02-09 16:09:03 <josephcp> people aren't careful they'll send from the default address sooner or later
147 2012-02-09 16:09:11 <josephcp> default account
148 2012-02-09 16:09:18 <imsaguy2> the worst that can happen is they choose inefficient addresses
149 2012-02-09 16:09:23 <copumpkin> I mean, that kind of thing is trivial to warn against in the UI
150 2012-02-09 16:09:34 <copumpkin> I don't see why you're just rejecting the idea categorically
151 2012-02-09 16:09:43 <josephcp> they'll combine stuff sooner or later, the privacy gain from making it easy to split up coins is a lot smaller than you think
152 2012-02-09 16:09:53 <copumpkin> how so?
153 2012-02-09 16:09:56 <imsaguy2> you'd be surprised.
154 2012-02-09 16:09:58 <copumpkin> associating source addresses is huge
155 2012-02-09 16:10:00 <josephcp> whereas if it's physically hard from a UI perspective they won't screw up
156 2012-02-09 16:10:29 <josephcp> you're solving a UI problem, the end result is it's easier to mix up addresses
157 2012-02-09 16:10:34 <josephcp> creating a false sense of security
158 2012-02-09 16:10:38 <copumpkin> meh
159 2012-02-09 16:11:12 <josephcp> i would like an RPC call, but not for anonymization purposes...
160 2012-02-09 16:13:41 <cjd> if people globed together transactions using out-of-band communication, collecting together outputs then adding inputs with ANYONECANPAY, it would be pretty trickey figuring out who paid who
161 2012-02-09 16:14:12 <cjd> obviously if everyone used 1 in, 2 out transactions, it would be easy to take apart but other than that it would be a mess
162 2012-02-09 16:14:53 <cjd> but alas, anonymous payment tends to bring around the people with the wrong sort of intentions
163 2012-02-09 16:15:46 <copumpkin> do you think users' intentions should really be a concern of the developers?
164 2012-02-09 16:16:10 <copumpkin> beyond prioritizing feature work, it seems weird to try to actively discourage certain kinds of behavior unless they're technically detrimental
165 2012-02-09 16:16:57 <cjd> if bitcoin is seen as a criminal enterprise then it does hurt development
166 2012-02-09 16:17:47 <copumpkin> but I don't think any feature is inherently criminal
167 2012-02-09 16:18:00 <copumpkin> legitimate users can strive for anonymity or untraceable transactions as well
168 2012-02-09 16:18:06 <cjd> but it's a toss-up, sometimes anonymity is needed for completely valid reasons, which is why I bothered to mention the idea ;)
169 2012-02-09 16:18:15 <copumpkin> otherwise, it's basically applying the "if you have nothing to hide&" argument
170 2012-02-09 16:18:19 <copumpkin> which is kind of gross :P
171 2012-02-09 16:20:02 <luke-jr> copumpkin: hiding the source of funds is a crime (laundry), so that feature is inherently criminal
172 2012-02-09 16:20:13 <copumpkin> why?
173 2012-02-09 16:20:22 <luke-jr> I just said why
174 2012-02-09 16:20:50 <copumpkin> "Money laundering refers to the process of concealing the source of illegally obtained money."
175 2012-02-09 16:21:01 <luke-jr> not just illegally obtained
176 2012-02-09 16:21:11 <cjd> as developers, we have the power to shape reality, it's important that we use that power to make a reality where people are better off.
177 2012-02-09 16:23:57 <Idiot___> cjd: why not make it worse off?
178 2012-02-09 16:24:34 <josephcp> forewarning, Idiot___ is a troll
179 2012-02-09 16:24:42 <Varan> Is there a way to get historic trade data from Tradehill where you can also see if the trade is a buy or a sell?
180 2012-02-09 16:24:56 <Idiot___> no josephcp, Moron__ was a troll, but ive taken care of him ;)
181 2012-02-09 16:25:35 <cjd> hahaha
182 2012-02-09 16:26:22 <gmaxwell> 09:15 < copumpkin> do you think users' intentions should really be a concern of the developers?
183 2012-02-09 16:26:47 <gmaxwell> I don't want to waste my time writing or reviewing functionality which is mostly or exclusively useful for criminal purposes.
184 2012-02-09 16:26:56 <copumpkin> oh yeah
185 2012-02-09 16:26:59 <copumpkin> that's what I meant about prioritizing
186 2012-02-09 16:27:03 <gmaxwell> But I don't think thats generally relevant here. Privacy feaures are more important for non-criminals.
187 2012-02-09 16:27:06 <copumpkin> also legality isn't a universal thing
188 2012-02-09 16:27:13 <copumpkin> and yeah
189 2012-02-09 16:27:25 <gmaxwell> (criminals can presumably take care of themselves, or they won't stay criminals for long)
190 2012-02-09 16:27:26 <copumpkin> that's what I meant about the "if you have nothing to hide" type of argument
191 2012-02-09 16:29:41 <helo> with normal money there's a difference between hiding your identity from the general populace, and hiding your identity from law enforcement or government
192 2012-02-09 16:29:44 <helo> with bitcoin it's the same thing
193 2012-02-09 16:29:55 <gmaxwell> helo: No .. not quite.
194 2012-02-09 16:30:13 <gmaxwell> For example, in the former case you can freely use exchanges in the later case you can not.
195 2012-02-09 16:30:18 <Idiot___> im not really a criminal, but i dont like following laws
196 2012-02-09 16:30:29 <Idiot___> whats wrong with that?
197 2012-02-09 16:31:08 <gmaxwell> helo: likewise, the general public is not likely to be applying especially powerful analytic tools or massively monitoring the internet, so weaker measures are required.
198 2012-02-09 16:35:19 <helo> i guess i was overly broad... many of the same techniques for obfuscating bitcoin ownership apply to both
199 2012-02-09 16:36:04 <Idiot___> is it possible to get tor on a mobile phone?
200 2012-02-09 16:36:44 <helo> for example, if you ran a service where you held a lot of bitcoin at a particular address, you would have a lot of incentive to protect your identity as much as possible to deter thieves, many of which could use some of the same powerful analytical techniques as law enforcement
201 2012-02-09 16:37:30 <helo> so would using those techniques be considered money laundering, if they serve practical safety goals?
202 2012-02-09 16:39:18 <helo> with normal money systems balance information is not available in any way to the general public, so there is no obfuscation required in the name of safety
203 2012-02-09 16:39:34 <BTC_Bear> helo: Thank you, so many point to criminal activity when there are legitimate reasons. But the powers that be would rather send the innocent to jail rather than let anybody go. :(
204 2012-02-09 16:40:21 <wumpus> Idiot___: yes, at least for android
205 2012-02-09 16:40:23 <Idiot___> innocent people are in jail?
206 2012-02-09 16:41:18 <wumpus> https://www.torproject.org/docs/android.html.en
207 2012-02-09 16:42:07 <Idiot___> that seems sad
208 2012-02-09 16:42:17 <Idiot___> do you think one day bitcoins will help innocent people escape from jail?
209 2012-02-09 16:42:26 <ThomasV> Idiot___: you too are in jail
210 2012-02-09 16:42:37 <ThomasV> you just don't know it
211 2012-02-09 16:42:44 <Idiot___> ? How?
212 2012-02-09 16:42:50 <wumpus> we're all inside the panopticon
213 2012-02-09 16:45:38 <Idiot___> so if you had to commit one crime, what would it be?
214 2012-02-09 16:45:50 <NxTitle> copyright infringement
215 2012-02-09 16:45:55 <NxTitle> criminal
216 2012-02-09 16:45:57 <NxTitle> copyright infringement
217 2012-02-09 16:46:04 <Idiot___> anyone else?
218 2012-02-09 16:46:08 <NxTitle> because apparently criminal copyright infringement is a thing
219 2012-02-09 16:46:50 <helo> bitcoin will help innocent people get out of jail just as easily as guilty people, afaict
220 2012-02-09 16:49:07 <Idiot___> cool helo :)
221 2012-02-09 16:49:57 <Idiot___> whats the best strategy for getting out of jail helo?
222 2012-02-09 16:50:33 <NxTitle> hacksaw
223 2012-02-09 16:50:46 <NxTitle> unfortunately you can't usually bring those in with you
224 2012-02-09 16:52:33 <edcba> door key
225 2012-02-09 16:52:34 <helo> dunno, using money/bitcoin probably something involving bribes to security people
226 2012-02-09 16:52:59 <Idiot___> oh do you think that might be made easier with bitcoin?
227 2012-02-09 16:53:09 <Idiot___> because theres a few crimes i wanna commit and i dont wanna be stuck in a cell for too long
228 2012-02-09 16:53:10 <FROTUSCI> tell them you work at a bank
229 2012-02-09 16:53:17 <josephcp> can you move this to #bitcoin ?
230 2012-02-09 16:53:29 <nanotube> no don't. move this to #notbitcoin.
231 2012-02-09 16:53:30 <Idiot___> oh ok josephcp
232 2012-02-09 16:53:40 <josephcp> lol
233 2012-02-09 16:53:51 <BlueMatt> isnt there a #bitcoin-offtopic
234 2012-02-09 16:54:01 <UukGoblin> #bitcoin-otc. ;-)
235 2012-02-09 16:54:07 <UukGoblin> (sorry, couldn't stop it)
236 2012-02-09 16:54:25 <nanotube> ;;kban UukGoblin *wrath*
237 2012-02-09 16:54:26 <nanotube> :)
238 2012-02-09 16:54:41 <UukGoblin> ;-)
239 2012-02-09 16:54:59 <nanotube> BlueMatt: there is, actually
240 2012-02-09 18:22:42 <Diablo-D3> hey gmaxwell
241 2012-02-09 18:22:47 <Diablo-D3> how do I build bitcoin without pnp?
242 2012-02-09 18:23:44 <cjd> make -f makefile.unix USE_UPNP=
243 2012-02-09 18:23:46 <cjd> iirc
244 2012-02-09 18:23:50 <cjd> unless it changed...
245 2012-02-09 18:24:25 <Diablo-D3> why the hell does bitcoin use an obscure lib anyhow
246 2012-02-09 18:24:26 <Diablo-D3> its nuts
247 2012-02-09 18:26:01 <cjd> I used cmake for my project and used ExternalProject.cmake which allows the build process to download, build, and static link dependencies
248 2012-02-09 18:26:30 <cjd> very nice if people don't know how to ./configure && make && make install libevent2
249 2012-02-09 18:27:49 <Idiot___> why does diablo use an obscure head?
250 2012-02-09 18:28:03 <Idiot___> ohps
251 2012-02-09 18:30:16 <midnightmagic> unfortunately, USE_UPNP is right there in the makefile as USE_UPNP:=0 . You have to comment that out entirely to undefine USE_UPNP.
252 2012-02-09 18:30:55 <midnightmagic> (and thereby DROP that code entirely from the codebase.)
253 2012-02-09 18:33:24 <Diablo-D3> In file included from protocol.cpp:7:0:
254 2012-02-09 18:33:25 <Diablo-D3> util.h:760:8: error: 'uint32_t' does not name a type
255 2012-02-09 18:33:26 <Diablo-D3> derp srsly?
256 2012-02-09 18:35:23 <cjd> find ./ -name '*.h' -exec grep 'stdint.h' {} ; -print
257 2012-02-09 18:36:26 <Diablo-D3> this is on uclibc, btw
258 2012-02-09 18:36:59 <Diablo-D3> #define __STDC_LIMIT_MACROS // to enable UINT64_MAX from stdint.h
259 2012-02-09 18:37:49 <cjd> hahaha
260 2012-02-09 18:37:58 <cjd> headers doesn't have stdint.h in it
261 2012-02-09 18:38:04 <cjd> sounds like a pull request
262 2012-02-09 18:38:22 <Diablo-D3> Im not using git, Im using 0.5.2 release =P
263 2012-02-09 18:38:26 <Idiot___> i pulled diablos mom last night ;)
264 2012-02-09 18:38:48 <Diablo-D3> I might as well perform that locally, just a sec
265 2012-02-09 18:40:15 <Idiot___> she had very good mouth skills ;)
266 2012-02-09 18:41:09 <Diablo-D3> cjd: did you know I have not previously fork bitcoin on github?
267 2012-02-09 18:41:11 <Diablo-D3> this surprises me
268 2012-02-09 18:41:57 <Idiot___> no its true :)
269 2012-02-09 18:42:28 <cjd> heh
270 2012-02-09 18:45:07 <Diablo-D3> huh
271 2012-02-09 18:45:09 <Diablo-D3> cjd: this is weird
272 2012-02-09 18:45:20 <Diablo-D3> adding that doesnt fix it
273 2012-02-09 18:45:47 <cjd> I gather util.h pulls in headers.h
274 2012-02-09 18:45:50 <cjd> correct?
275 2012-02-09 18:46:07 <Diablo-D3> oh goddamnit
276 2012-02-09 18:46:08 <Diablo-D3> it doesnt.
277 2012-02-09 18:46:33 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: no, you don't
278 2012-02-09 18:46:37 <Diablo-D3> protocol.c is include protocol.h and util.h...
279 2012-02-09 18:46:42 <gmaxwell> make bitcoind USE_UPNP= works fine
280 2012-02-09 18:47:07 <Diablo-D3> protocol.h is serialize.h string uint256.h....
281 2012-02-09 18:47:22 <gmaxwell> damnit.
282 2012-02-09 18:47:25 <Diablo-D3> serialize.h is nothing useful
283 2012-02-09 18:47:39 <Diablo-D3> and uint256.h is nothing useful
284 2012-02-09 18:47:47 <cjd> make sure util.h #includes headers.h
285 2012-02-09 18:47:56 <Diablo-D3> yeah I should
286 2012-02-09 18:48:09 <cjd> haha midnightmagic decided to paste debug.log to irc again :P
287 2012-02-09 18:48:48 <Diablo-D3> cjd: THATS A BAD IDEA
288 2012-02-09 18:49:08 <Diablo-D3> it goes apeshit on c++ bullshit
289 2012-02-09 18:49:19 <Diablo-D3> I can just add stdint.h
290 2012-02-09 18:51:59 <Diablo-D3> ffs
291 2012-02-09 18:52:04 <Diablo-D3> this is the fucking shittiest code ever
292 2012-02-09 18:52:27 <Diablo-D3> bitcoinrpc.cpp: In function 'json_spirit::Value getmemorypool(const Array&, bool)':
293 2012-02-09 18:52:29 <Diablo-D3> bitcoinrpc.cpp:1771:30: error: expected primary-expression before '(' token
294 2012-02-09 18:52:31 <Diablo-D3> bitcoinrpc.cpp:1771:40: error: reference to 'int64_t' is ambiguous
295 2012-02-09 18:52:33 <Diablo-D3> /usr/include/sys/types.h:198:1: error: candidates are: typedef long int int64_t
296 2012-02-09 18:52:35 <Diablo-D3> /usr/include/boost/cstdint.hpp:308:50: error:                 typedef boost::long_long_type boost::int64_t
297 2012-02-09 18:52:38 <Diablo-D3> make: *** [obj/nogui/bitcoinrpc.o] Error 1
298 2012-02-09 18:52:41 <Idiot___> flooder
299 2012-02-09 18:53:37 <cjd> boost?
300 2012-02-09 18:53:42 <cjd> why do you have to suck?
301 2012-02-09 18:54:09 <Diablo-D3> I have boost installed, so I dont think its that
302 2012-02-09 18:55:27 <cjd> typedef boost::long_long_type  boost::int64_t <-- that's what I was referring to
303 2012-02-09 18:56:16 <Diablo-D3> fucking c++
304 2012-02-09 18:56:49 <cjd> hmm
305 2012-02-09 18:56:59 <cjd> where is cstdint.hpp pulled in?
306 2012-02-09 18:57:18 <cjd> try adding that to headers.h instead of stdint.h
307 2012-02-09 18:57:56 <cjd> C++ ~ attack of the computer science graduates
308 2012-02-09 18:58:39 <XMPPwocky> C++: At least it's not Java!
309 2012-02-09 18:59:07 <cjd> maintainability, portibility and performance be damned, we want it to *look* nice
310 2012-02-09 18:59:56 <savage> Hey, does the nonce always start at 0 when mining?
311 2012-02-09 19:00:10 <XMPPwocky> IBitcoinBlockHasherFactory
312 2012-02-09 19:00:13 <XMPPwocky> savage: nope
313 2012-02-09 19:00:17 <XMPPwocky> that'd be stupid
314 2012-02-09 19:00:34 <savage> yeah I thought it was weird..
315 2012-02-09 19:00:49 <savage> it says so on this page: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Block_hashing_algorithm
316 2012-02-09 19:00:53 <XMPPwocky> if the nonce starts at zero, your miner is dumb.
317 2012-02-09 19:01:50 <savage> How often should I imagine the merkle root is updated on a miner?
318 2012-02-09 19:02:23 <XMPPwocky> savage: presumably, whenever a new TX is accepted
319 2012-02-09 19:02:42 <savage> so how often would that be in practice?
320 2012-02-09 19:03:02 <XMPPwocky> look in blockexplorer
321 2012-02-09 19:03:33 <Diablo-D3> c++ was designed by people too stupid to use c.
322 2012-02-09 19:04:31 <lianj> and java by their childs
323 2012-02-09 19:04:42 <Diablo-D3> lianj: you know
324 2012-02-09 19:04:43 <savage> wow only 50 transactions in a block?
325 2012-02-09 19:04:44 <Diablo-D3> I dont get that
326 2012-02-09 19:04:52 <Diablo-D3> why do people keep saying java and C++ is related
327 2012-02-09 19:04:54 <Diablo-D3> they're not
328 2012-02-09 19:05:33 <Diablo-D3> json/json_spirit_value.h:#include <boost/cstdint.hpp>
329 2012-02-09 19:05:34 <Diablo-D3> huh.
330 2012-02-09 19:07:51 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: are you fixed now?
331 2012-02-09 19:07:56 <gmaxwell> 11:46 < gmaxwell> midnightmagic: no, you don't
332 2012-02-09 19:07:59 <gmaxwell> 11:46 < gmaxwell> make bitcoind USE_UPNP= works fine
333 2012-02-09 19:08:06 <lianj> Diablo-D3: related by awkwardness
334 2012-02-09 19:08:16 <Diablo-D3> heh
335 2012-02-09 19:08:17 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: and is documented clearly in doc/build-unix.txt
336 2012-02-09 19:08:45 <JimRogers> savage
337 2012-02-09 19:08:53 <midnightmagic> gmaxwell: Fixed as in my momentary attempt to run multiple clients behind my idiotic shitty bouncer?
338 2012-02-09 19:09:30 <savage> So let me get this straight... each time a block is found in the longest chain, or a new TX is accepted, the miner's block header changes?
339 2012-02-09 19:09:41 <savage> And the nonce is just random?
340 2012-02-09 19:10:01 <savage> yes JimRogers ?
341 2012-02-09 19:10:55 <Diablo-D3> cjd: no, adding that to headers.h doesnt fix it
342 2012-02-09 19:11:37 <cjd> you removed stdint.h?
343 2012-02-09 19:14:14 <gmaxwell> savage: its whatever it wants it to be. It doesn't matter what it is.
344 2012-02-09 19:14:20 <Diablo-D3> I love how main.cpp isnt the last file compiled
345 2012-02-09 19:14:41 <cjd> because it depends on everything else?
346 2012-02-09 19:14:51 <Diablo-D3> because its tradition
347 2012-02-09 19:15:04 <Diablo-D3> and yes, I made sure, stdint.h isnt in headers.h, yours is
348 2012-02-09 19:15:06 <Diablo-D3> still doesnt work
349 2012-02-09 19:15:29 <savage> gmaxwell: so it wouldn't matter if it always started at 0 then, true?
350 2012-02-09 19:15:45 <gmaxwell> savage: most RPC miners do start it at zero, in fact.
351 2012-02-09 19:15:55 <Diablo-D3> DM starts at 0
352 2012-02-09 19:16:21 <Diablo-D3> goddamn fucking boost, it can suck my dick
353 2012-02-09 19:16:39 <gmaxwell> savage: Why are you asking?
354 2012-02-09 19:16:53 <savage> I'm just trying to understand bitcoin a little better :)
355 2012-02-09 19:17:15 <gmaxwell> savage: ah, I asked because I'm trying to make sure you're not suffering any of several related common misconceptions in this area.
356 2012-02-09 19:17:15 <savage> but I understand now.. it can always start at 0 because each person has a unique merkle root
357 2012-02-09 19:17:37 <gmaxwell> savage: Correct. Their root will be different by virtue of paying to themselves, if for no other reason.
358 2012-02-09 19:17:49 <Diablo-D3> savage: an average GPU can complete the entire nonce range in about 15-20 seconds.
359 2012-02-09 19:18:06 <savage> Wow !
360 2012-02-09 19:18:15 <Diablo-D3> mhash = million hashes per second
361 2012-02-09 19:18:40 <Diablo-D3> hash is a 32 bit int, which is 4 billion something
362 2012-02-09 19:18:42 <savage> so then you change the timestamp and try again?
363 2012-02-09 19:18:43 <midnightmagic> gmaxwell: ah, it's not an override in makefile.unix.. so the cli arg takes precedence. I was temporarily under the illusion that you could set a shell var that way, and it wouldn't show up as an argv..
364 2012-02-09 19:18:44 <Diablo-D3> er, nonce is
365 2012-02-09 19:18:48 <gmaxwell> 2^32h / 350mh/s = 12 seconds.
366 2012-02-09 19:19:01 <Diablo-D3> savage: if you rollntime you can change the time field
367 2012-02-09 19:19:04 <savage> if no other new information has reached you by then
368 2012-02-09 19:19:11 <savage> yeah exactly
369 2012-02-09 19:19:16 <Diablo-D3> not all pools support it
370 2012-02-09 19:19:36 <gmaxwell> savage: normally you change it as the time changes. You may also change it to expand the space available to you to avoid recalculating the root.
371 2012-02-09 19:20:15 <savage> yeah so the nonce can just keep wrapping around, it never even has to reset to 0...
372 2012-02-09 19:20:23 <gmaxwell> with remote rpc miners they can't recalculate the hash tree.. so to get more work once they've done the whole nonce range their only options are to fudge the time or contact the server.
373 2012-02-09 19:20:30 <Diablo-D3> it can wrap around, but it doesnt matter
374 2012-02-09 19:20:39 <Diablo-D3> reseting to 0 makes early getwork fetch due to saturation easier
375 2012-02-09 19:20:42 <savage> since it just doesn't matter, as long as you don't do the same exact block header twice
376 2012-02-09 19:21:12 <gmaxwell> Right. Though you can't make the time too far off or your block won't be accepted.
377 2012-02-09 19:21:19 <Diablo-D3> Ive actually been considering counting backwards
378 2012-02-09 19:21:23 <gmaxwell> You can only go 2 hours into the future. (actually somewhat less)
379 2012-02-09 19:21:29 <gmaxwell> Diablo-D3: thats really dangerous. Do not do that.
380 2012-02-09 19:21:38 <Diablo-D3> what, the nonce?
381 2012-02-09 19:21:43 <savage> and I guess the first transaction in the block will always be there due to transaction fees, even if generation reward eventually reaches 0
382 2012-02-09 19:21:45 <gmaxwell> oh the nonce, I thought you meant time.
383 2012-02-09 19:21:47 <gmaxwell> nonce is fine.
384 2012-02-09 19:21:54 <Diablo-D3> oh hell no, time backwards usually ends up with paradoxes.
385 2012-02-09 19:22:16 <gmaxwell> savage: yes. And you can add extra randomness to it this is how pools give distinct work to seperate users even though all pay the same place.
386 2012-02-09 19:22:29 <gmaxwell> 'randomness' .. well just a counter in the coinbase txn.
387 2012-02-09 19:24:30 <savage> very interesting
388 2012-02-09 19:24:39 <Diablo-D3> welp, I guess I wont be running bitcoin on my vps.
389 2012-02-09 19:26:06 <savage> so how does the transaction-creator know what the transaction fee will be?
390 2012-02-09 19:26:31 <gmaxwell> savage: (fwiw, a _lot_ of people make the mistake of thinking that they've lost effort when a new block arrives and makes you change things in the header)
391 2012-02-09 19:26:37 <midnightmagic> gmaxwell: refresh my memory: two getwork coming in within a microsecond of one another will have different outputs by virtue of.. what?
392 2012-02-09 19:26:53 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: extranonce incrementing.
393 2012-02-09 19:26:59 <midnightmagic> right!
394 2012-02-09 19:27:04 <midnightmagic> right..  thanks.
395 2012-02-09 19:27:28 <gmaxwell> savage: They know by virtue of nodes implementing similar rules today.
396 2012-02-09 19:27:50 <gmaxwell> savage: which is not very useful, but its workable at the moment because txn fees are really only used for anti-ddos purposes.
397 2012-02-09 19:28:07 <gmaxwell> Average fees per block are only 0.02 or so.
398 2012-02-09 19:28:42 <savage> i see... but in theory it could be anything?
399 2012-02-09 19:28:50 <gmaxwell> (basically txn's which can't be objectively distinguished from a ddos attack won't be forwarded without a fee, and your own node applies the same test before making a transaction)
400 2012-02-09 19:28:51 <savage> or is there a treshold in what fees the network will accept?
401 2012-02-09 19:29:08 <gmaxwell> savage: not as a rule of the protocol, there is just a norm in the existing software.
402 2012-02-09 19:29:19 <midnightmagic> I saw fees upwards of 18BTC a few hundred blocks ago
403 2012-02-09 19:29:32 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: yes, there are some people doing funny things from time to time.
404 2012-02-09 19:30:16 <savage> the lost effort mistake is a mistake because...?
405 2012-02-09 19:30:24 <gmaxwell> Either broken custom software, user error with the tx fee dialog ("1,000"), moronic attempts at money laundering, or intentionally very generous option settings.
406 2012-02-09 19:30:53 <savage> every block header is equally likely to be a good solution, whether the nonce changes or another part of it?
407 2012-02-09 19:31:04 <gmaxwell> savage: because mining is independantly likely to succeed. Doesn't matter what fields you change.
408 2012-02-09 19:31:08 <gmaxwell> right.
409 2012-02-09 19:31:10 <savage> yeah ok
410 2012-02-09 19:31:42 <savage> you are very helpful, thanks :)
411 2012-02-09 19:32:08 <gmaxwell> yea, a lot of people think they're searching a meaningfully finite space (it isn't) and that they are sure to find a solution if they search enough of it (they aren't), and that changing blocks changes the space they're looking in (not really) invalidating their prior work (there was nothing conserved in the first place).
412 2012-02-09 19:32:52 <cjd> haha
413 2012-02-09 19:32:53 <savage> yes I can see how that would be hard to comprehend if you are not familiar with hash functions
414 2012-02-09 19:33:16 <gmaxwell> we use confusing words like "search" sometimes.
415 2012-02-09 19:33:30 <Diablo-D3> search isnt confusing
416 2012-02-09 19:33:50 <Diablo-D3> its the word find that most people have problems with
417 2012-02-09 19:34:00 <savage> how many bytes is the block header?
418 2012-02-09 19:34:03 <gmaxwell> savage: 80.
419 2012-02-09 19:34:13 <Diablo-D3> find is a concurrent state along side search
420 2012-02-09 19:34:36 <midnightmagic> It's the idea of a keyspace or a cipher bruteforce that people are confusing with a hash target.
421 2012-02-09 19:34:38 <Diablo-D3> one can find things without searching, and searching can both either not end in a find or not end with a find
422 2012-02-09 19:35:11 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: the hash is not a permutation.
423 2012-02-09 19:35:18 <gmaxwell> (er, I was agreeing there)
424 2012-02-09 19:35:21 <midnightmagic> :)
425 2012-02-09 19:35:25 <gmaxwell> (somehow the "yea," got dropped)
426 2012-02-09 19:35:31 <Diablo-D3> yet people smoke joints
427 2012-02-09 19:35:39 <midnightmagic> Maybe you have a KVM like mine. Never buy Aten. :(
428 2012-02-09 19:35:41 <Diablo-D3> so an iteration maybe?
429 2012-02-09 19:35:48 <savage> but 80 bits is a finite space, right?
430 2012-02-09 19:36:01 <cjd> byte != bit
431 2012-02-09 19:36:02 <gmaxwell> savage: 80 bytes not bits.
432 2012-02-09 19:36:03 <Diablo-D3> 80 bytes
433 2012-02-09 19:36:12 <gmaxwell> And it's technically finite, but it's not meaningfully finite.
434 2012-02-09 19:36:12 <savage> oh right :)
435 2012-02-09 19:36:30 <Diablo-D3> the entire search space for every block ever: 2**256.
436 2012-02-09 19:36:38 <Diablo-D3> and even thats wrong
437 2012-02-09 19:36:40 <Diablo-D3> its bigger
438 2012-02-09 19:36:45 <gmaxwell> It's like I tell you there is a needle located someplace in the whole universe with equal probability. You search half your living room and then I teleport you to china. Have you lost any effort? :)
439 2012-02-09 19:37:04 <savage> Haha that's a great way to put it :)
440 2012-02-09 19:37:08 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: DUDE WE NEED TO GET CHINA TO MINE
441 2012-02-09 19:37:18 <Diablo-D3> o/
442 2012-02-09 19:37:25 <savage> although I suspect mining would be easier in Korea
443 2012-02-09 19:37:33 <savage> due to cultural acceptance
444 2012-02-09 19:37:36 <midnightmagic> It's near the possibility range of extremely unlikely things happening.. like suddenly sinking down through the chair you're sitting on and stuff.
445 2012-02-09 19:37:50 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic: dude, Ive heard some drugs can do that
446 2012-02-09 19:37:59 <midnightmagic> Diablo-D3: I wouldn't know!
447 2012-02-09 19:38:14 <midnightmagic> Diablo-D3: But.. which ones?
448 2012-02-09 19:38:25 <Diablo-D3> lets try ALL the drugs o/
449 2012-02-09 19:38:33 <midnightmagic> Together then!
450 2012-02-09 19:38:45 <savage> It's funny you mention that... because bitcoin has enabled places like Silk Road to exist
451 2012-02-09 19:39:00 <Diablo-D3> aaaand we all race to the silkroad punchline
452 2012-02-09 19:39:06 <midnightmagic> sweet.
453 2012-02-09 19:39:20 <savage> I didnt realize :p
454 2012-02-09 19:39:25 <savage> but I can imagine it gets old
455 2012-02-09 19:39:30 <midnightmagic> savage: Cash is similarly effective. Send your cash in the mail, buy drugs, same thing, only less traceable.
456 2012-02-09 19:39:48 <midnightmagic> savage: It's the other possibilities that are worse.
457 2012-02-09 19:39:56 <midnightmagic> savage: Things that haven't come online yet..
458 2012-02-09 19:40:03 <savage> I don't see SR as a terrible place at all
459 2012-02-09 19:40:16 <midnightmagic> savage: The fact that it uses bitcoin is terrible.
460 2012-02-09 19:40:34 <savage> I can see how it is for bitcoin...
461 2012-02-09 19:40:45 <midnightmagic> Yes, apologies: that's how I meant it.
462 2012-02-09 19:42:14 <savage> But I agree TOR+Bitcoin are very powerful... almost TOO powerful. The sky is literally the limit, and governments can't do a thing. It's unprecedented...
463 2012-02-09 19:42:18 <savage> But I digress
464 2012-02-09 19:42:29 <Diablo-D3> okay, lets say Im the government
465 2012-02-09 19:42:29 <midnightmagic> *Some* things Bitcoin might enable are truly frightening. It's only through mere lack of imagination that those Washington, D.C. cretins haven't seized on us like wolves yet.
466 2012-02-09 19:42:40 <gmaxwell> okay we're off topic for #bitcoin-dev now.
467 2012-02-09 19:42:41 <Diablo-D3> tor didnt help you there.
468 2012-02-09 19:42:43 <midnightmagic> That's not true that governments can do nothing.
469 2012-02-09 19:43:03 <gmaxwell> take the government vs bitcoin debate to #bitcoin. ;0
470 2012-02-09 19:43:22 <midnightmagic> :P
471 2012-02-09 19:43:27 <savage> So why is the key space 2**256?
472 2012-02-09 19:44:05 <gmaxwell> savage: well, there are internal bottlenecks (e.g. the width of the hash function's state)
473 2012-02-09 19:45:00 <savage> Yeah so 80 bytes is 640 bits, but some fields are limited
474 2012-02-09 19:45:27 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic: fuck it
475 2012-02-09 19:45:29 <Diablo-D3> porn is king
476 2012-02-09 19:45:38 <midnightmagic> lol
477 2012-02-09 19:46:37 <savage> Version number, difficulty field, timestamp... those are 96 bits total but probably with much less then 2**96 possible values.
478 2012-02-09 19:46:58 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: my goal is (1) encourage more bitcoin talk in #bitcoin, (2) keep debates which will be more social/political than directly technical away from here.
479 2012-02-09 19:47:24 <gmaxwell> savage: you control the 256 bit hash root. And you can control at least 100 bytes of data going into that hash.
480 2012-02-09 19:47:46 <smoothie> savage, just ask it in #bitcoin
481 2012-02-09 19:47:57 <midnightmagic> gmaxwell: #bitcoin is a cesspool.. intelligent discussion is difficult there.
482 2012-02-09 19:48:05 <Diablo-D3> its /b/.
483 2012-02-09 19:48:15 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: Yes, we don't fix that by having intelligent discussion everywhere else.
484 2012-02-09 19:48:39 <smoothie> lol Diablo-D3, I'm sure that want intelligent...
485 2012-02-09 19:48:40 <gmaxwell> And I'll gladly kick people who disrupting an active bitcoin conversation with offtopic stuff.
486 2012-02-09 19:48:46 <Diablo-D3> smoothie: right over your head.
487 2012-02-09 19:49:24 <midnightmagic> gmaxwell: I think bitcoin-related discussion, as long as it is civil, should be okay here. As soon as it starts getting heated.. boot. But the problems in #bitcoin are not really solveable without locking it down the way we did #bitcoin-otc.
488 2012-02-09 19:49:55 <smoothie> isn't this dev?
489 2012-02-09 19:50:02 <smoothie> not discussion?
490 2012-02-09 19:50:17 <midnightmagic> check /topic, and -dev histories.
491 2012-02-09 19:50:28 <midnightmagic> devs talk politics in here all the time.
492 2012-02-09 19:50:32 <BlueMatt> topc: "Bitcoin Development" " Main support/discussion chan #bitcoin | Commitstream: #bitcoin-commits | Public channe"
493 2012-02-09 19:50:47 <midnightmagic> " All related discussions are welcome. "
494 2012-02-09 19:50:56 <smoothie> Main support/discussion chan #bitcoin
495 2012-02-09 19:51:10 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: we have, at times, real problems talking about near term pratical technical things of consequence because of speculation about things legal/economic/political without technical impact.
496 2012-02-09 19:51:12 <midnightmagic> "Main". As in, for plebes and average jack-offs.
497 2012-02-09 19:51:35 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: If I were convinced that I had to take a flamethrower to #bitcoin I would.
498 2012-02-09 19:51:53 <smoothie> the ban hammer?
499 2012-02-09 19:52:01 <savage> I feel like I'm in #bitcoin-irc-policies
500 2012-02-09 19:52:14 <midnightmagic> Meh, whatever. -dev is where clueful discussion happens. I wouldn't send people back to the pits when there's nothing else happening in -dev.
501 2012-02-09 19:52:16 <gmaxwell> sorry, we have a bitcoin-dev-meta but midnightmagic isn't in there.
502 2012-02-09 19:52:33 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: the most active people in here are also in #bitcoin.
503 2012-02-09 19:52:40 <gmaxwell> (including myself, bluematt, and sipa)
504 2012-02-09 19:53:56 <BlueMatt> heh, its been a while since virtually every file on https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/master/src had  the same most recent commit
505 2012-02-09 19:53:57 <midnightmagic> gmaxwell: We are interrupted in clue+ discussions there by plebes and regular jack-offs. I don't know about you, but there's only so many times I can explain to someone what a hash is in a day. I don't know how Diablo-D3 does it. :-(
506 2012-02-09 19:54:11 <Diablo-D3> I dont.
507 2012-02-09 19:54:15 <Diablo-D3> Im not the nice guy you think I am
508 2012-02-09 19:54:18 <savage> :)
509 2012-02-09 19:54:23 <savage> Yeah he shot me :\n2846571
510 2012-02-09 19:54:51 <BlueMatt> hes a java dev for christ sake
511 2012-02-09 19:55:03 <Diablo-D3> one java program and everyone thinks Im a java dev
512 2012-02-09 19:55:11 <BlueMatt> ok, java lover
513 2012-02-09 19:55:16 <Diablo-D3> 15 years of C damnit! Ive written shit that'd blow your mind!
514 2012-02-09 19:55:36 <Diablo-D3> java lover? still inaccurate
515 2012-02-09 19:55:36 <savage> I can see how that would... change.. someone.
516 2012-02-09 19:55:39 <Diablo-D3> I like java as a language
517 2012-02-09 19:55:41 <BlueMatt> my point was more along the lines that you love and voraciously defend java
518 2012-02-09 19:55:44 <Diablo-D3> I fucking hate the community
519 2012-02-09 19:55:55 <Diablo-D3> DM is my first and last Java program
520 2012-02-09 19:56:22 <BlueMatt> damn
521 2012-02-09 19:56:39 <Diablo-D3> Ill defend Java against obvious bullshit
522 2012-02-09 19:56:55 <Diablo-D3> like, people keep repeating the myth that java is slow
523 2012-02-09 19:57:17 <Diablo-D3> if java was so slow, why can I write heavy math code that is just as fast in java as it is in C
524 2012-02-09 19:57:34 <Diablo-D3> java is a lot of things, but slow isnt one of them
525 2012-02-09 19:57:40 <savage> What about the myth that Java windowing libraries suck?
526 2012-02-09 19:57:49 <BlueMatt> myth?
527 2012-02-09 19:57:51 <savage> ;)
528 2012-02-09 19:57:52 <Diablo-D3> savage: ALL ui toolkits suck.
529 2012-02-09 19:58:00 <BlueMatt> ok, now that is true
530 2012-02-09 19:58:01 <Diablo-D3> name one that doesnt
531 2012-02-09 19:58:04 <Diablo-D3> seriously
532 2012-02-09 19:58:26 <savage> For simple Windows only programs C# does a hell of a job...
533 2012-02-09 19:58:31 <Diablo-D3> no it doesnt.
534 2012-02-09 19:58:38 <BlueMatt> who writes windows-only programs?
535 2012-02-09 19:58:43 <Diablo-D3> and C# is just a variant of Java anyhow
536 2012-02-09 19:58:48 <BlueMatt> s/who/what decent dev/
537 2012-02-09 19:58:53 <savage> Agreed Diablo-D3
538 2012-02-09 19:58:55 <Diablo-D3> and it really sucks you cant run C# on the JVM
539 2012-02-09 19:59:05 <Diablo-D3> both .net's vm and mono are fucking piles of shit
540 2012-02-09 19:59:18 <Diablo-D3> and it doesnt help microsoft refuses to stand down with their patent warchest
541 2012-02-09 19:59:26 <Diablo-D3> C# could have actually been decent, Microsoft killed it
542 2012-02-09 19:59:26 <savage> But I wrote some Windows programs in C# and it was much less painful than in Java.
543 2012-02-09 19:59:30 <Diablo-D3> same way Oracle is trying to kill Java
544 2012-02-09 19:59:42 <Diablo-D3> savage: then you're doing it extra wrong
545 2012-02-09 19:59:55 <midnightmagic> Diablo-D3: You're a big squishie at heart. And you might swear a lot and call people faggots, but you're as far as I can tell the oldest #bitcoin*'er to still be explaining stuff in great detail to newbs.
546 2012-02-09 20:00:11 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic: /me shrugs
547 2012-02-09 20:00:11 <midnightmagic> at least.. in the volume you are.
548 2012-02-09 20:00:40 <Diablo-D3> savage: java is exceedingly easy to dev in, it may have not always been that way, but it is that way now
549 2012-02-09 20:00:42 <savage> You can't seriously pick Swing/AWT over C# which makes things actually look decent!
550 2012-02-09 20:00:52 <gmaxwell> 12:55 < Diablo-D3> 15 years of C damnit! Ive written shit that'd blow your mind!
551 2012-02-09 20:00:54 <savage> I agree, I love Java for that.
552 2012-02-09 20:00:58 <gmaxwell> "I've C-een things you people wouldn't believe. Negative arrays offset into the redzone... I watched pointers glitter in the dark near realloced linked lists. All those moments will be lost in time... segments in the stack frame... Time to return"
553 2012-02-09 20:01:04 <Diablo-D3> no, but I can use eclipse's SWT
554 2012-02-09 20:01:12 <Diablo-D3> which wraps native toolkits
555 2012-02-09 20:01:35 <midnightmagic> Diablo-D3: What IDE do you use, if any/
556 2012-02-09 20:01:54 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic: meh, I tried eclipse for about a year
557 2012-02-09 20:01:59 <Diablo-D3> its just still not as good as vim
558 2012-02-09 20:02:03 <ageis> <3 vim
559 2012-02-09 20:02:12 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: lawlz
560 2012-02-09 20:02:13 <smoothie> vim for programming that?
561 2012-02-09 20:02:19 <smoothie> lawl
562 2012-02-09 20:02:35 <BlueMatt> gmaxwell: heh
563 2012-02-09 20:02:44 <savage> Have you ever used SWT?
564 2012-02-09 20:02:47 <Diablo-D3> savage: and its not like swing is ugly
565 2012-02-09 20:02:49 <Diablo-D3> its just non-native
566 2012-02-09 20:02:53 <Diablo-D3> it has its own unique look
567 2012-02-09 20:03:04 <BlueMatt> github slow/downish for anyone else
568 2012-02-09 20:03:15 <Diablo-D3> bluematt: nein
569 2012-02-09 20:03:19 <BlueMatt> :(
570 2012-02-09 20:03:32 <smoothie> nein!
571 2012-02-09 20:03:41 <Diablo-D3> savage: Ive used SWT
572 2012-02-09 20:03:44 <BlueMatt> heh, chrome restart and it works
573 2012-02-09 20:03:46 <BlueMatt> wtf chrome?
574 2012-02-09 20:03:48 <Diablo-D3> I dont care for how you have to package it though
575 2012-02-09 20:04:09 <Diablo-D3> you cant ship the binary blobs for each of the platforms in the same zip
576 2012-02-09 20:04:16 <savage> I'm interested to see how it would hold up against C#, esp on different windows versions...
577 2012-02-09 20:04:21 <Diablo-D3> (which is why eclipse, a 100% java program, has OS specific zips)
578 2012-02-09 20:04:33 <Diablo-D3> savage: it works on windowses c# doesnt
579 2012-02-09 20:05:22 <savage> Of all the major languages I like C++ the least
580 2012-02-09 20:05:39 <Diablo-D3> C++ is at the top of my shitlist
581 2012-02-09 20:05:49 <Diablo-D3> then C#, then crap like ruby and python
582 2012-02-09 20:05:59 <savage> C++ templates make me sick to my stomach
583 2012-02-09 20:06:10 <midnightmagic> I like C++, but I would like it more if I understood the guts of it as well as I do C.
584 2012-02-09 20:06:22 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic: thats largely the problem
585 2012-02-09 20:06:41 <savage> I'm not a huge python fan but it has its purposes
586 2012-02-09 20:06:52 <Diablo-D3> C++ is the only language that has a spec interpretation committee
587 2012-02-09 20:06:52 <midnightmagic> Sometimes there are interactions between weird language constructs that.. make no sense to me whatsoever, and require so much testing to get to the bottom of, that by the end of it, my own tests confuse me.
588 2012-02-09 20:07:05 <midnightmagic> awesome, really?
589 2012-02-09 20:07:07 <Diablo-D3> infact, there is no such thing as a fully compliant c++ compiler
590 2012-02-09 20:07:10 <Diablo-D3> it just doesnt exist
591 2012-02-09 20:07:14 <savage> Very useful in penetration testing and 'hacking', python
592 2012-02-09 20:07:17 <midnightmagic> that's..  scary.
593 2012-02-09 20:07:23 <Diablo-D3> even gcc, in its eternal shitastic glory, cant handle it all
594 2012-02-09 20:07:49 <Diablo-D3> it should be impossible to write shit that can cause your compiler to output legitimately interpreted code and still be wrong.
595 2012-02-09 20:07:58 <Diablo-D3> C++ is the only language where this can happen regularly
596 2012-02-09 20:08:07 <midnightmagic> g++ was late to the c++ "standard" compiler game anyway..
597 2012-02-09 20:08:13 <savage> Try to write a program in C or Java that will send custom crafted network packets... it won't be pretty.
598 2012-02-09 20:08:24 <Diablo-D3> savage: you can do it in C easily
599 2012-02-09 20:08:26 <savage> In Python it is a couple of easy lines
600 2012-02-09 20:08:29 <Diablo-D3> you just need to be root
601 2012-02-09 20:08:33 <gmaxwell> savage: it's quite straight forward in C.
602 2012-02-09 20:09:05 <savage> I tried to do some network stuff in C once, but it was not very pleasant
603 2012-02-09 20:09:06 <midnightmagic> C custom packets is trivial.
604 2012-02-09 20:09:19 <Diablo-D3> savage: you just suck at C
605 2012-02-09 20:09:27 <smoothie> what about in brainfuck? (or whatever it was called)
606 2012-02-09 20:09:33 <midnightmagic> savage: sockets programming in C is a lot easier if you have the Stevenson books handy..
607 2012-02-09 20:09:52 <savage> That is also true Diablo-D3
608 2012-02-09 20:10:15 <savage> But I spent the same amount of effort with python and scapy, and I was able to do anything I could imagine easily
609 2012-02-09 20:10:21 <Diablo-D3> sockets programming in C is a lot easier if you understand the damned header
610 2012-02-09 20:10:40 <savage> So I'm sure I could do it in ASM too, but I just suck at ASM :(
611 2012-02-09 20:10:52 <Diablo-D3> you cant usefully do it in asm
612 2012-02-09 20:11:02 <smoothie> what about other languages?
613 2012-02-09 20:11:04 <midnightmagic> savage: Pay no attention to his insults. He's like the Panda from Kung-Fu Panda. If you hug him he goes "aw shucks" and everything. :)
614 2012-02-09 20:11:12 <pusle> F#
615 2012-02-09 20:11:22 <Diablo-D3> you'll have to do standard system calls, which is largely a pita in assembly
616 2012-02-09 20:11:22 <savage> No offense taken
617 2012-02-09 20:11:33 <Diablo-D3> btw, why the fuck did microsoft name f# _f_#?
618 2012-02-09 20:11:56 <savage> My point is just that you can say Python is shit, but there is a reason it is the #1 network security language
619 2012-02-09 20:12:02 <Diablo-D3> its objective caml.
620 2012-02-09 20:12:26 <Diablo-D3> for languages that start with f, a language whos name does not contain f does not jump to the top of the list
621 2012-02-09 20:12:28 <smoothie> lol Obj C
622 2012-02-09 20:12:38 <Diablo-D3> smoothie: no
623 2012-02-09 20:12:45 <Diablo-D3> objc is objective c
624 2012-02-09 20:12:49 <Diablo-D3> ocaml is ocaml
625 2012-02-09 20:13:11 <midnightmagic> ocaml rules, esp. now their licensing terms are fixed.
626 2012-02-09 20:13:45 <Diablo-D3> ocaml is an impure functional language
627 2012-02-09 20:13:54 <Diablo-D3> its off in the lisp/haskell side of the bizzaroverse
628 2012-02-09 20:14:06 <gmaxwell> The fftw codelet generator stuff is all ocaml .. kinda mindblowing code.
629 2012-02-09 20:14:39 <savage> I did a project once where we had to optimize TeX
630 2012-02-09 20:14:41 <gmaxwell> Complicated special purpose searches over algebraic simplifications of an input.. in like three lines of code.
631 2012-02-09 20:14:44 <savage> talk about mindblowing code...
632 2012-02-09 20:14:53 <mod6> heh
633 2012-02-09 20:14:54 <midnightmagic> OCaml makes my heart soar like an eagle..
634 2012-02-09 20:14:59 <Diablo-D3> gmaxwell: jesus fuck
635 2012-02-09 20:15:00 <savage> (The project failed)
636 2012-02-09 20:15:19 <Diablo-D3> >optimize TeX
637 2012-02-09 20:15:21 <Diablo-D3> >Tex
638 2012-02-09 20:15:40 <Diablo-D3> >optimize code _written by donald motherfucking knuth_
639 2012-02-09 20:15:45 <Diablo-D3> damn fucking straight it failed
640 2012-02-09 20:15:45 <gmaxwell> midnightmagic: an eagle... piloting a blimp?
641 2012-02-09 20:16:15 <savage> It was a retarded proposition to start with... we did get the points by writing a report about WHY it failed
642 2012-02-09 20:16:44 <Diablo-D3> savage: yeah see
643 2012-02-09 20:16:51 <smoothie> like an eagle, piloting a blimp.
644 2012-02-09 20:16:57 <Diablo-D3> in programming, its not the journey that matters
645 2012-02-09 20:17:04 <savage> I had no idea at the time... I was a Donald Knuth virgin
646 2012-02-09 20:17:12 <gmaxwell> Diablo-D3: TeX is written in some crazy language called WEB which is like a crazy version of pascal... which is machine translated into C.
647 2012-02-09 20:17:25 <Diablo-D3> its understanding why your family died of dysentery while fording the river that mattered
648 2012-02-09 20:17:53 <savage> Now I have an open-source beard and I visit bitcoin IRC channels
649 2012-02-09 20:17:58 <savage> Oh how things have changed...
650 2012-02-09 20:18:27 <Diablo-D3> unix beard, damnit, its called a unix beard
651 2012-02-09 20:19:22 <mod6> :D
652 2012-02-09 20:19:40 <savage> I heard a rumor today about TOR and shipping companies.
653 2012-02-09 20:20:06 <midnightmagic> gmaxwell: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KEueJnsu80
654 2012-02-09 20:20:19 <savage> The rumor was that using TOR to access the track-and-trace page of a package will increase the risk of it being inspected/ceased
655 2012-02-09 20:20:30 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic: FUCK YEAH
656 2012-02-09 20:20:38 <Diablo-D3> savage: OH REALLY
657 2012-02-09 20:20:43 <savage> Pretty cool rumor, I wonder if its true
658 2012-02-09 20:20:51 <Diablo-D3> I HOPE ITS TRUE
659 2012-02-09 20:20:58 <Diablo-D3> TIME TO DDOS THE UPS WEBSITE!
660 2012-02-09 20:21:16 <Diablo-D3> Im in ur tracking site, randomly generating viable tracking numbers
661 2012-02-09 20:21:25 <savage> Haha :p
662 2012-02-09 20:21:50 <savage> It is not entirely unplausible
663 2012-02-09 20:22:40 <savage> and generating viable tracking numbers would probably be infeasible
664 2012-02-09 20:22:44 <Diablo-D3> midnightmagic: thats the old trailer
665 2012-02-09 20:22:52 <Diablo-D3> savage: nope, totally feasable
666 2012-02-09 20:23:05 <Diablo-D3> they start with a semi-known string and progress sequentually
667 2012-02-09 20:23:17 <Diablo-D3> as far as I can tell, they do not contain any hashed elements of WHAT is is tracking
668 2012-02-09 20:23:50 <savage> That would be interesting to figure out...
669 2012-02-09 20:24:20 <savage> It would involve sending a lot of packages from a lot of places to a lot of places
670 2012-02-09 20:24:27 <savage> RLDDOS!
671 2012-02-09 20:26:06 <Diablo-D3> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Py_IndUbcxc
672 2012-02-09 20:26:18 <iz> savage: http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/21224/Calculating-the-UPS-Tracking-Number-Check-Digit
673 2012-02-09 20:27:04 <Diablo-D3> iz: GLORIOUS
674 2012-02-09 20:27:55 <savage> hahaha that's class
675 2012-02-09 20:28:07 <savage> This movie... seriously
676 2012-02-09 20:28:18 <Diablo-D3> Ive been waiting YEARS for thi
677 2012-02-09 20:28:20 <Diablo-D3> *this
678 2012-02-09 20:28:31 <savage> I suppose there is only a finite amount of different movies you can make before you enter the realm of ridiculous
679 2012-02-09 20:28:41 <savage> I'm afraid we've reached that point...
680 2012-02-09 20:30:42 <savage> Same category: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EjQZaLO9ao
681 2012-02-09 20:38:11 <midnightmagic> Diablo-D3: :)  http://www.ironsky.net/site/press/videos/
682 2012-02-09 20:39:09 <Diablo-D3> >motion poster
683 2012-02-09 20:39:10 <Diablo-D3> wat
684 2012-02-09 20:48:42 <midnightmagic> http://www.wreckamovie.com/tasks/show/2431  you can record a voice and get it into the movie