1 2012-06-09 03:44:24 <RastaAssasin> Hello all quick question, I sent a transaction from my wallet over 4 hours ago client ver 0.6.2 and it has 0 confirmations and doesnt seem to have been broadcast through any nodes as the transaction ID has not shown up anywhere on blockchain.info my question is, how long does it take before a transaction is rejected aand is there anyway to force the client to rescan or rebroadcast a
  2 2012-06-09 03:46:05 <bonks> whats the txnid?
  3 2012-06-09 03:46:18 <RastaAssasin> 1c774ffb0d72b6c6bd737245330f4d477d551d42921650f0598334bc079e0875
  4 2012-06-09 03:47:51 <bonks> is your client synced 100%?
  5 2012-06-09 03:48:15 <RastaAssasin> yes 100%
  6 2012-06-09 03:48:29 <RastaAssasin> its very weird
  7 2012-06-09 03:48:48 <bonks> is it online?
  8 2012-06-09 03:48:54 <bonks> or blocked by a firewall
  9 2012-06-09 03:49:10 <RastaAssasin> yes it is
 10 2012-06-09 03:49:16 <bonks> how many nodes is it connected to
 11 2012-06-09 03:49:19 <RastaAssasin> connected to 8 peers
 12 2012-06-09 03:49:44 <RastaAssasin> and this has been the case for hours
 13 2012-06-09 03:49:51 <bonks> check the address
 14 2012-06-09 03:50:19 <RastaAssasin> the address i paid to does not show tttthe coins as being recieved
 15 2012-06-09 03:51:23 <RastaAssasin> is there a way to force a rescan or something ? as the transaction just seems stuck
 16 2012-06-09 03:52:28 <bonks> -rescan
 17 2012-06-09 03:52:44 <bonks> i dont know whats the problem, maybe someone else can chime in
 18 2012-06-09 03:52:48 <bonks> also this is interesting https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=7159.0
 19 2012-06-09 03:56:57 <RastaAssasin> ok thanks i will try deleting the block database
 20 2012-06-09 03:57:23 <RastaAssasin> gosh so i really have to go through that long download process to get all the blocks again to fix this ?
 21 2012-06-09 03:59:10 <Prattler> RastaAssasin, I'm not sure, but try to first delete only the addr.dat
 22 2012-06-09 03:59:16 <Prattler> of course, make a backup of everything
 23 2012-06-09 05:45:12 <bolapara> hi.  was going to ask in #bitcoin but it seems quite OT right now.  How safe is using the official ubuntu PPA vs. the standard client distribution?
 24 2012-06-09 05:45:36 <bolapara> Logically it seems to me that I'm putting the same amount of trust, just PPA vs. sourceforge.
 25 2012-06-09 05:46:57 <bolapara> but it seems a matter of: who can post code to SF and who can post to PPA.
 26 2012-06-09 05:47:18 <bolapara> and how secure is the SF vs. launchpad
 27 2012-06-09 05:48:10 <bolapara> and by 'safe', i mean trust that the client is of the officially released binaries.
 28 2012-06-09 05:52:23 <midnightmagic> interesting question.
 29 2012-06-09 05:53:01 <midnightmagic> which one do you consider to be more authoritative as a project?
 30 2012-06-09 05:57:40 <bolapara> not so sure.  SF as been around forever, but has had security incidents.  launchpad has not as far as i know, but with much shorter time in operation
 31 2012-06-09 05:58:20 <bolapara> obviously, ideally i would compile from source if I was *really* concerned.
 32 2012-06-09 05:58:39 <bolapara> but we are a society that leans towards more easy solutions :)
 33 2012-06-09 06:00:00 <Joric> sf was approving projects manually (i was waiting about a month in 2006 not sure about now)
 34 2012-06-09 06:01:04 <midnightmagic> bitcoin is signed by the devs: http://iweb.dl.sourceforge.net/project/bitcoin/Bitcoin/bitcoin-0.6.2/SHA256SUMS.asc
 35 2012-06-09 06:01:53 <midnightmagic> bolapara: so the question isn't whether you trust sourceforge: what I mean is, do you trust the bitcoin devs more than you trust the ubuntu org.
 36 2012-06-09 06:03:11 <midnightmagic> bolapara: It doesn't matter in the end..  basically, you can verify the binaries yourself, and where you can in fact do that, that is the most trustworthy.  Personally, I build from source, so I apologise for not being the best person to ask about it.
 37 2012-06-09 06:04:49 <bolapara> midnightmagic, PPA packages are signed as well, but fair point, I probably have the bitcoin devs already sig in my gpg
 38 2012-06-09 06:05:22 <midnightmagic> bolapara: are the PPA sigs from the same devs?
 39 2012-06-09 06:05:30 <midnightmagic> if so, then there's no difference i guess.
 40 2012-06-09 06:06:03 <bolapara> dont think so.  "Matt Corallo"?
 41 2012-06-09 06:06:12 <midnightmagic> that's bluematt
 42 2012-06-09 06:06:27 <bolapara> ahh
 43 2012-06-09 06:06:49 <midnightmagic> so..  PPA is okay if that's the signature. out of curiosity, how did you determine that was the signing signature for the PPA?
 44 2012-06-09 06:07:41 <midnightmagic> i guess the only remaining question is whether the key is actually valid. if you can satisfy yourself that bluematt's sig is the one that signed the PPA, and that bluematt here is a real dev, and isn't an evil mastermind, than you're set. :)
 45 2012-06-09 06:08:26 <bolapara> hm.  he's uploading them.  https://launchpad.net/~bitcoin/+archive/bitcoin  but it seems possible the 'team' can sign?
 46 2012-06-09 06:08:42 <bolapara> midnightmagic, yeah
 47 2012-06-09 06:15:14 <bolapara> midnightmagic, thanks for talking it over with me.
 48 2012-06-09 06:15:31 <midnightmagic> signing key is "Launchpad PPA for Bitcoin"
 49 2012-06-09 06:15:42 <midnightmagic> so..  i have no idea who controls that.
 50 2012-06-09 06:16:36 <midnightmagic> bolapara: no problem. basically, you've gone to more trouble than probably 99% of your fellow bitcoiners, to validate the origin. i would say you are now more informed than basically most of all other bitcoiners. IMO you are therefore safer.
 51 2012-06-09 06:16:43 <bolapara> matt seems to be the 'owner' of the project, whatever that means to launchpad :)
 52 2012-06-09 06:17:11 <midnightmagic> he's just a peon, Gavin is the lead dev.
 53 2012-06-09 06:17:15 <midnightmagic> er..  no offense matt.
 54 2012-06-09 06:17:23 <midnightmagic> maybe peon isn't the best word.
 55 2012-06-09 06:17:26 <bolapara> ha
 56 2012-06-09 06:18:14 <midnightmagic> in my defence, i haven't had much sleep and my son is very sick. :)
 57 2012-06-09 08:26:03 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: Diapolo opened pull request 1433 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1433>
 58 2012-06-09 09:31:55 <BlueMatt> midnightmagic: bolapara launchpad controls the key that does the actual signing, but thats just because they do the builds (I just upload source and they build)
 59 2012-06-09 09:32:36 <BlueMatt> I just do the ppa because no one else stepped up to do it, so...
 60 2012-06-09 09:32:48 <BlueMatt> not like gavin has time
 61 2012-06-09 10:04:09 <xorgate> suppose i wish to make a program that periodically sends a few coins to an address, how would i go about this? where to start, take the source from the bitcoin app and modify?
 62 2012-06-09 10:06:11 <sipa> while true; do sleep 86400; ./bitcoind sendtoaddress amount <address>; done
 63 2012-06-09 10:07:42 <Diablo-D3> heh
 64 2012-06-09 10:15:53 <xorgate> alright ;) suppose i wish my prog to send an email to myself when i receive bitcoins, how can i detect this?
 65 2012-06-09 11:43:49 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: Diapolo opened pull request 1434 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1434>
 66 2012-06-09 13:16:14 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: TheBlueMatt opened pull request 1435 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1435>
 67 2012-06-09 14:01:54 <AlexWaters> anyone know why I have a receiving address showing in my transactions list, but it is not in my address book? I am also missing some transactions sent to this address. running 0.6.2 recently updated from a .4 release in windows 7 x64
 68 2012-06-09 14:02:18 <AlexWaters> i have wallet backups, just confused
 69 2012-06-09 14:02:56 <sipa> well you can do sends to your change addresses, which do not show up in the receive addresses list
 70 2012-06-09 14:03:49 <AlexWaters> weird that only some of the transactions have been going through
 71 2012-06-09 14:04:05 <sipa> does BBE see them?
 72 2012-06-09 14:31:30 <luke-jr> sipa: btw, http://luke.dashjr.org/programs/bitcoin/files/charts/bestblocks.html
 73 2012-06-09 14:43:48 <sipa> BBE accepts any substring of the block hash as search query?
 74 2012-06-09 14:51:21 <BlueMatt> sipa: does it?
 75 2012-06-09 14:55:24 <luke-jr> sipa: yes
 76 2012-06-09 14:57:21 <amtran> sipa: how are your difficulty measurements calculated
 77 2012-06-09 14:59:48 <amtran> i didnt realize you made those charts until now :)
 78 2012-06-09 15:03:10 <xorgate> what does that piechart show? how different parts of the network disagree?
 79 2012-06-09 15:05:00 <luke-jr> xorgate: a lot more stuck nodes than is healthy
 80 2012-06-09 15:07:46 <xorgate> so 7839 nodes are uptodate, and ~3000 are somehow not updating? how does this happen?
 81 2012-06-09 15:08:40 <sipa> luke-jr: that's very worrying
 82 2012-06-09 15:09:01 <luke-jr> xorgate: wish we knew
 83 2012-06-09 15:09:06 <sipa> especially since we don't know why, and can't reproduce
 84 2012-06-09 15:09:21 <luke-jr> it seems to be approximately the same ratio of versions as the whole network though, so it's probably not a regression
 85 2012-06-09 15:09:34 <amtran> do you have historical data on this
 86 2012-06-09 15:09:34 <[Tycho]> What pie chart ?
 87 2012-06-09 15:09:39 <luke-jr> http://luke.dashjr.org/programs/bitcoin/files/charts/bestblocks.html
 88 2012-06-09 15:09:41 <[Tycho]> *which
 89 2012-06-09 15:09:43 <luke-jr> amtran: no
 90 2012-06-09 15:09:54 <luke-jr> sipa: are you keeping historical seed info btw?
 91 2012-06-09 15:09:58 <luke-jr> might be handy someday
 92 2012-06-09 15:10:04 <amtran> could it be the result of churn? (new users join/part)
 93 2012-06-09 15:10:54 <sipa> luke-jr: yes, but not very useful stats
 94 2012-06-09 15:19:18 <matt2011> sipa: what estimation algorithm do you use for your charts? has there ever been any discussion of using them on the test net to replace the current difficulty calculation?
 95 2012-06-09 15:21:31 <sipa> matt2011: my algorithm is way too unstable to be used as difficulty calculation
 96 2012-06-09 15:23:05 <sipa> and changing it on realnet requires a hardfork anyway
 97 2012-06-09 15:24:43 <matt2011> im not really interested in changing the realnet yet but i think it would be useful to have a testnet to look into improving difficulty
 98 2012-06-09 15:25:29 <matt2011> do you use FIR to calculate your moving average
 99 2012-06-09 15:27:18 <BlueMatt> testnet is designed to be as similar to mainnet with only differences useful for testing, I would argue that doesnt make it more useful for testing
100 2012-06-09 15:28:48 <matt2011> if someone wrote a patch it wouldnt be tested? for a limited time?
101 2012-06-09 15:31:50 <sipa> matt2011: i use an exponentially decaying average over time (which can be considered an IIR) to calculate averages of block-finding-speed (weighted by difficulty) and average age of recent blocks, and feed those to a maximum likelyhood estimator that estimates average and growth rate for an assumed poisson-like process with exponentially changing rate
102 2012-06-09 15:32:46 <sipa> assuming the actual hash rate is a function of the form A*exp(B*t), it will give a very accurate estimation of A and B
103 2012-06-09 15:34:08 <sipa> but the hashrate that results from this calculation is effectively an extrapolation (it uses data from the past to guess the current speed)
104 2012-06-09 15:34:20 <sipa> which makes it inappriopriate as a difficulty function
105 2012-06-09 15:36:51 <matt2011> thank you sipa. i wonder if this is a better area to prove a new difficulty algorithm than in the bitcoin client itself.
106 2012-06-09 15:40:56 <BlueMatt> why do we need a new diff algorithm?
107 2012-06-09 15:41:18 <BlueMatt> dumb averages may not be perfect, but Id say we are far from needing a new one
108 2012-06-09 15:45:27 <sipa> indeed
109 2012-06-09 15:46:18 <sipa> the perfect is the enemy of the good
110 2012-06-09 15:46:55 <sipa> if we'd design bitcoin today i sure as hell wouldn't use the same difficulty changing algorithm as satoshi chose, but there is not by any means reason to change it now
111 2012-06-09 15:51:35 <matt2011> i doubt very seriously bitcoin will look anything like the client satoshi designed 5 years from now.
112 2012-06-09 15:52:53 <matt2011> satoshis difficulty target had one goal and one goal alone -- 2016 blocks every two weeks. if you want to know how good it is you have to measure it only on that metric (and i havent seen anybody doing that)
113 2012-06-09 15:53:27 <BlueMatt> I actually do think bitcoin will look very similar to that of today in 5 years
114 2012-06-09 15:53:41 <BlueMatt> Unless something serious happen, I doubt a hardfork will occur
115 2012-06-09 15:53:49 <BlueMatt> and that prevents us from doing anything crazy
116 2012-06-09 16:00:22 <BlueMatt> anyway, bbl